I don't think there is a thing like overconfidence in chess. It's always better to be too confident than too reluctant.
Not winning a tournament is not an option for me, unless it's no longer theoretically possible - then of course winning becomes impossible. But up to that point, not winning is just not an option.
Contrary to many young Colleagues, I do believe that it makes sense to study the Classics.
It's easy for me to get along with chess players. Even though we are all very different, we have chess in common.
I honestly don't read that much. Obviously I read chess books - in terms of favorites, Kasparov's 'My Great Predecessors' is pretty good.
I get more upset at losing at other things than chess. I always get upset when I lose at Monopoly.
Maybe if I didn't have the talent in chess I'd find the talent in something else. The only thing I know is that I have talent in chess, and I'm satisfied with that.
The Nanjing games are homework by Garry Kasparov and me, [...] Today's game was provided by Garry.
I am not some sort of freak. I might be very good at chess but I'm just a normal person.
I learnt an enormous amount, but there came a point where I found there was too much stress. It was no fun any more. Outside of the chessboard I avoid conflict, so I thought this wasn't worth it.
Right now I'm really happy with how things are going with my chess career, so I'm not thinking of doing anything else.
My father, a fine chess player himself, has been a massive influence throughout my life.
I played like a child!
