In chess, as in life, a man is his own most dangerous opponent.
No fantasy, however rich, no technique, however masterly, no penetration into the psychology of the opponent, however deep, can make a chess game a work of art, if these qualities do not lead to the main goal - the search for truth.
Despite the development of chess theory, there is much that remains secret and unexplored in chess.
I have frequently stated that I regard chess as an art form, where creativity prevails over other factors.
In my opinion, the style of a player should not be formed under the influence of any single great master.
My study of chess was accompanied by a strong attraction to music, and it was probably thanks to this that from childhood I became accustomed to thinking of chess as an art, for all the science and sport involved in it.
My fascination for studies proved highly beneficial, it assisted the development of my aesthetic understanding of chess, and improved my endgame play.
The Ruy Lopez occupied a constant place in my opening repertoire. In it is reflected the classical interpretation of the problem of the centre.
The first chess book that I read was Dufresne's self-tutor, published with Lasker's Common Sense in Chess as an appendix.
A considerable role in the forming of my style was played by an early attraction to study composition.
