The Polgar Sisters Training or Genius

Batsford Chess Library
THE POLGAR SISTERS

Training or Genius?
Cathy Forbes
An Owl Book
Henry Holt and Company
New York
Copyright © 1992 by Cathy Forbes
All rights reserved, including the right to reproduce
this book or portions thereof in any form.
First published in the United States in 1992 by
Henry Holt and Company, Inc., 115 West 18th Street,
New York, New York 10011.
Originally published in Great Britain in 1992 by
B. T. Batsford Ltd.
Library of Congress Catalog Card Number: 92-54268
ISBN 0-8050-2426-3 (An Owl Book: pbk.)
Henry Holt books are available at special discounts

for bulk purchases for sales promotions, premiums,
fund-raising, or educational use. Special editions
or book excerpts can also be created to specification.
For details contact: Special Sales Director,

Henry Holt and Company, Inc., 115 West 18th Street,
New York, New York 10011.
First American Edition-1992
Printed in the United Kingdom

Recognizing the importance of preserving
the written word, Henry Holt and Company, Inc.,
by policy, prints all of its first editions
on acid-free paper.oo
10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1
Advisor: R.D. Keene GM, OBE

Technical Editor: Andrew Kinsman
Contents
Bibliography 6
Preface 7
Acknowledgements 8
Introduction 9
Part One: Background 11
1 The Polgar Experiment 13

2 Women in Chess - Can They Play as Well as Men? 17
3 The Polgar Method 24
Part Two: The Games and Careers of the Polgar Sisters 31
4 Early Years 33
5 The First World Title 37
6 A Staple Diet of Chess 42
7 Grounded ! 46
8 Chess in the West 52
9 The 'Circus' Goes Down Under 67
10 The Female 'Game of the Century' 77
11 Kraarshed . .
. 94
12 Thessaloniki Olympiad 1988 - Gold ! 106
13 Hastings 1988/9 - Judith Strikes 113
14 Rome 1989 - Super Sofia 120
15 Amsterdam OHRA 1989 - "Polgarmania Conquers Holland 133
16 The Road to Haifa 139
17 From Wij k aan Zee to Wisconsin 146
18 Amsterdam OHRA 1990 - Grandmasters Fed to the Wolf 153
19 Novi Sad Olympiad 1990 Gold again
- 156
20 1991 and Beyond - Fischer's Record Falls! 162
Index 178
Bibliography
Books
Nevelj Zsenit! - Laszlo Polgar (Interart)
De Polgar Zusters Ed van Eeden (Nijgh & van Ditmar)
-
Polgar-Dosszie Tamas Karpati (Magyar Eszperanto Sz6vetseg)

-
Women In Chess - John Graham (McFarland)

Total Chess - David Spanier (Abacus)
BCO 2 - Kasparov/Keene (Batsford)
Encyclopaedia of Chess Openings (5 vols) - Matanovic (ed.) ( Sahovski
Informator)
The Holocaust: The Jewish Tragedy - Martin Gilbert (Collins)
Conversations with Concentration Camp Survivors Anton Gill (Grafton)
-
Chess Magazines
Pergamon Chess Die Schachwoche

British Chess Magazine Echess
New In Chess Chess Life
Magyar Sakkelet Inside Chess
Bulgarian Chess Magazine Informator
Europa-Rocha Jaque
Newspapers and Periodicals
The Times London Evening Standard

The Guardian The Spectator
Daily Mirror New York Times
The Daily Telegraph International Herald Tribune
Daily Express The Observer
The Independent
Other Sources
British Newspaper Library Wade/Batsford Library

Preface
The Hungarian spellings of the three Polgar sisters names are Zsuzsa,
Zsofia and Judit, freq uently abbreviated to the diminutives Zsuzsi,
Zsofi and Jutka. For the benefit of the English-speaking readership the
girls' names are rendered in this book as Susan, Sofia and Judith, which
is really a matter of taste; it should be pointed out, however, that
Zsuzsa Polgar now 'officially' refers to herself in the Western form,
Susan.
So far no book has been published in English that has dealt
comprehensively with the games and careers of the Polgar sisters. Even
those works published outside the UK have failed to do the subject(s)
justice, particularly in terms of collating and annotating the chess. It
is easy to be daunted by the size of the task - the Polgars have, over
a twelve year period, played literally thousands of games, hundreds of
which are publishable.
Giving an insight into the lifestyle and personalities of such young
people is a sensitive and delicate matter. Of course, much information
is available in the form of interviews and so forth; but to rely solely
on this sort of 'official' material is not to give a complete picture.
I have approached the task by selecting as a base one hundred
important games - from which the final selection were culled - that
give a chronological overview of the sisters' chess careers. These, with
explanatory narrative, form the second part of the book whilst the first
part consists of general background information and a discussion of
the issues raised by the 'Polgar Experiment'.
Notes to the games come from various sources, and are frequently
based on analysis by the Polgar sisters themselves. Some notes,
however, originated from other masters and Grandmasters; additions,
amendments and amplifications have also been made by the author. It
has not been practicable to acknowledge all the sources on a game by
game basis, but all source publications are acknowledged in the
bibliography.
Cathy Forbes
London, 1992
Acknowledgements
This is the part I dreaded, because I fear errors and omissions are
inevitable. However, a stab must be made at showing my appreciation
for the invaluable assistance, support, encouragement and friendship I
have been privileged to receive in writing this book. So here goes, with
heartfelt thanks to the following:
Ray and Annette Keene, to whom lowe this and so many other
opportunities; Bob Wade who painstakingly supplied most of my
research material; Erika Sziva who translated much of this; Tamas
Halasz, Byron Jacobs, Michael Basman, Johann van Mil, Jonathan
Speelman, John Nunn, Malena Griffiths, David Norwood, Susan
Arkell, Tony Kosten, Gyonghi Kosten, and William Watson; Jan
Timman for all those invaluable issues of New In Chess; and not least,
Peter Kemmis Betty and Andrew Kinsman at Batsford for their
support, and patience!
The front cover photograph was kindly supplied by Maxwell
Macmillan Chess and the back cover photograph of Judith Polgar by
Mark Huta. Back cover photograph of Cathy Forbes © The Sunday
Telegraph, 1989.
Introduction
This is the story of three young Hungarian girls who have taken the
chess world by storm. All three achieved Grandmaster results in their
teens. All three have won international competitions ahead of male
professionals twice their age. The youngest, by the age of fourteen, had
broken every record in sight and become a favoured heir(ess) to
Kasparov's world title. They are sisters. Their names are Susan, Sofia
and Judith Polgar.
Part One: Background
1 The Polgar Experiment
The story begins in 1 965 when Klara Alberger, a strikingly attractive

woman of Russian extraction, met Laszlo Polgar in Budapest. Klara
had been brought up in the village of Tiszjaulak in the Carpathian
mountains, a Hungarian speaking part of the Soviet Union; Laszlo's
early years were spent in Gyongyos, in Hungary.
Both were teachers, Laszlo specialising in psychology and Klara in
languages. It does not seem to have been love at first sight, as such.
Klara's subsequent comment on their first meeting was that she had
met "an interesting man . . . but I don't think I could ever marry him."
What initially grabbed Klara's attention, it seems, was what the
"interesting man" had to say. He had remarked at their first meeting
that he wanted six children (not necessarily by Klara!) and went on to
expound his fairly unorthodox pedagogical theories. If this sounds like
jargon, what it means in simple terms is that Laszlo believed 'geniuses',
like Mozart, or in modern times, Ruth Lawrence (a child mathematician
who went to Oxford at 1 2 and graduated at 1 4) or Alicia Witt (a
prodigy who spoke and read fluently in earliest infancy and wrote six
novels by the age of five), are not so much born as made, and that he
knew a systematic method of making them.
After their first meeting, Klara and Laszlo corresponded for two
years. At first their letters consisted of a rather unromantic exchange
of pedagogical ideas, but after about a year and a half Klara began to
think Laszlo might be the man for her and he sent his first love letter.
Apparently this contained much plagiarised poetry and a proposal of
marriage.
Few women can have experienced as part of their courtship the
suggestion that their future children should form the subject of a
scientific educational experiment. But that was exactly what the quiet,
intense-looking Laszlo proposed, and Miss Alberger was not put off -
although her parents, it seems, had their misgivings. Perhaps Klara
had a spirit of adventure. They were married on 20th April 1 967, whilst
Laszlo was on army leave. Their first child, Susan, duly appeared on
1 9th April 1 969. Sofia followed on 2nd November 1 974 and Judith on
23rd July 1 976.
The Theory
Laszlo Polgar's authoritative work, published in Hungary, is titled
'Bring Up Genius!' (Nevelj Zsenit!). He believes there is no such thing
as innate genius, and that the extent of a child's achievement is
determined largely by educational methods (i.e. environmental factors).
Of course, the idea that prodigious achievement is the result of
environment rather than genes is not new. The so-called 'hereditarian
versus environmentalist' debate has raged in socio-psychological circles
for decades. Whilst it is commonly accepted that each individual is a
product both of inherited and environmental attributes, the dispute
continues over the relative input of each factor. Are we 70% parents,
30% surroundings/circumstance? Or vice versa? The invisible and
intangible subject of the argument - the human personality - is unlikely
to resolve the argument by revealing all its mysteries. One advantage,
though, in having one's own children as subjects is greater control over
external variables.
Why Three Chess Players?

To validate any experiment, controls are required. Of course, the fact
that Mr and Mrs Polgar produced three daughters may be to some
extent a random sequence of events. However, there is no doubt that
to establish cause and effect in any experiment, more than one subject
is needed. If there had been only one Polgar prodigy, this would not
exclude the possibility that the child was a genetically-determined
exception or - as other geniuses have tended to be unkindly called -
a freak. When three extreme high achievers appear in the same family,
however, the odds against genetic accident multiply into the realms of
impossibility.
Another useful control is uniformity of subject matter. If, instead of
three chess players, there had been a musician, an artist and a chess
player, this would introduce an additional variable. Besides, achievement
in some disciplines is easier to measure than in others. Of course, family
resources are also significant in this respect; Klara Polgar has remarked
that to provide an assortment of specialities would have been impossible
in practical terms. And chess is cheaper to organise than music lessons.
Why Chess?
Chess, unlike most other intellectual disciplines, is one in which a
person's level of attainment can be measured with considerable exact
ness using the international rating system devised by Professor Arpad
Elo. This system is based on clearly defined results - wins, draws and
losses. It is thus a less arbitrary method of evaluating performance
than that of traditional academic awards in any other subject except,
The Polgar Experiment J5
perhaps, mathematics. It should be stressed, therefore, that chess as a

specific activity is not central to the experiment; it is rather the chosen
medium through which the girls' 'brainquakes' could register on the
Richter scale.
'Flaws' in the Theory?
Those claiming that the Polgar sisters do not prove anything of

universal relevance might say things along the following lines:
a) Laszlo and Klara Polgar, both being teachers of clearly above
average abilities, have produced three children genetically far above
the average as their 'raw material' i.e. their methods would not work
as well, or at all, with children less inherently bright. Or perhaps:
b) They are merely accelerating the rate of their childrens' develop
ment; the girls might well have a ceiling on their potential which will
simply be reached earlier than if they had been traditionally educated.
The Jewish Inheritance

Like so many Eastern European Jews, the Polgar sisters' great
grandparents perished in the Nazi holocaust. Laszlo Polgar's grand
parents were among the estimated 437,000 Jews from occupied Hungary
who did not return from Auschwitz. His mother survived the camp,
but with what mental scars can only be imagined. There were obvious
physical signs of trauma: the young woman's hair had turned white.
Fifty years on, the Polgars still live in the shadow of anti-Semitism
which, despite the six million deaths in the camps, continues to blight
much of the world. Sadly, and ironically, it is those countries whose
Jewish populations suffered most - Poland, Hungary and the Soviet
Union - in which old prejudices and repression still thrive most
strongly. When Dominic Lawson, editor of The Spectator, visited the
Polgars at their flat in Budapest, fourteen-year-old Sofia showed him
a swastika carved inside the lift of their apartment block.
In 1 956, Laszlo's parents divorced. His mother emigrated to the
West with his younger sister, leaving him to live with his father, who
gave him a strong religious upbringing. For a long time Laszlo wanted
to become a rabbi. Then, influenced as a student by the materialistic
ideas of one of his teachers, he became a convinced atheist, but he
obviously retained a strong sense of Jewish identity.
Laszlo was particularly interested in the work of the Hungarian
geneticist Endre Czeizel, who had done statistical research into the
success of the Jews as a group. Czeizel discovered, for instance, that
the Jewish people, estimated at fifty million worldwide, a tiny fraction
of the world's population of around four billion, are 'disproportionately'
represented among, for instance, Nobel Prizewinners, at 30% .
It could also b e significant that s o many o f th <: twentieth century's
most brilliant minds (Trotsky, Freud, Einstein . . . ) were of Jewish origin.

Then, obviously enough, there is the chess connection: of the thirteen
official World Champions, five (Steinitz, Lasker, Botvinnik and Smys
lov, and Tal) were Jewish, while another two (Fischer and Kasparov)
had one Jewish parent.
What this suggests, of course, is not some superstitious magical
quality about Judaism that propels its children toward success; rather
that certain of its ideas and cultural features contribute towards
providing intellectual stimulus. Tradition, hard work, a disciplined
routine and shared identity appear to be some of these. Laszlo
determined to give his own children such an environment. The 'new
ingredient' was his conviction that the distractions and diversification
of conventional schooling retarded a child's development.
On the face of it, to be Jewish in a communist Eastern Bloc state
should not be an advantage, given the tendency of such regimes to
persecute racial and religious minorities, particularly Jews. The Soviet
Union has produced a number of defecting Jewish or part-Jewish
chess players who suffered from various forms of institutionalised
discrimination. Examples include Viktor Korchnoi (now of Switzer
land), Boris Gulko and wife Anna Aksharumova (now of the USA),
and AlIa Kushnir and Lev Psakhis (both now of Israel). The conflicts
between the Polgar family and the Hungarian Chess Federation in the
mid-eighties seem like an echo of these other struggles.
But in practice adversity often stiffens resolve. Totalitarian states
and their official bodies are on a collision course with individualists
like Laszlo and Klara Polgar. Their defiant insistence on going their
own way is underpinned by the intellectual traditions of their culture.
Indeed, in the face of bigotry the Polgars show the resilience typical of
a community that has defended its traditions through centuries of
persecution. All three daughters wear the Star of David round their
necks, a show of pride in their race and a tribute to their murdered
ancestors.
The Polgar family, then, can be seen as symbolic of the Jewish
emphasis on achieving excellence, not just for its own sake but as part
of a Talmudic tradition of contributing to the development of civilisation
and pushing back the frontiers of human knowledge.
So what can the world hope to learn from the Polgar experiment?
a) Human potential is grossly underestimated.
b) Specific educative methods can help realise this potential.
c) Females can play chess as well any man.
It is this last point which we shall address in the next chapter.
2 Women In Chess - Can They
Play As Well As Men?
All right, I'm biased! The unashamedly feminist arguments that I would
like to use to answer this question would require an entire book in
themselves. As this book is not intended to be a feminist tract,
traditionalist dissenters will have to be referred to the learned works
of the 'professional' feminists of the twentieth century, such as Simone
de Beauvoir, Betty Friedan, Germaine Greer, Juliet Mitchell, Kate
Millett, Angela Carter etc. Once grounded in such 'right-on' literature,
it is not hard to understand the relationship between female under
achievement and the position of women in our wider society and
culture.
Women have always played chess. In mediaeval times, aristocratic
ladies were sometimes taught the game to better enable them to
entertain their husbands. Whether they were encouraged, or indeed
allowed, to beat them is not clear.
Even in modern times, strong women players can be remarkably
reticent about competing with their husbands. For example, Britain's
top woman player, Susan Arkell, was asked whether she wanted to
become a stronger player than her husband, Keith. At the time, she
virtually dismissed the possibility out of hand whilst remarking,
revealingly, "anyway, how could a man still be a man after being beaten
(regularly) by his wife?" As yet, none of the Polgar sisters has married.
We can only await the results of this logical continuation of the
'experiment' with bated breath.
Back to history: in the last century, there were many recorded
instances of women in Britain, for example, playing match and
correspondence chess, but often their entry to male-only clubs was
barred. The fashionable medical theory of the day held that intellectual
strain damaged women's reproductive capacity, rendering them 'useless'
and 'hysterical'.
In the inter-war years, women's chess was dominated by Vera
Menchik-Stevenson, the most famous daughter of Hastings Chess Club
(who, it should be pointed out, had the benefit of having the famous
Hungarian master Geza Maroczy as a coach). She competed at men's
18 Women in Chess
Grandmaster level and her victims included World Champion Max

Euwe, plus famous masters Reshevsky, Alexander, Yates, Colle, Sultan
Khan . . .
No other really remarkable woman player emerged until the 1 960s,
when Nona Gaprindashvili won the Women's World Championship,
retaining the title for 1 6 years. Her greatest success amongst men was
at Lone Pine in 1 977, when she shared first place in a star-studded
field of Grandmasters and International Masters. 'Gap', as she is
popularly known, is still active at the highest level of women's chess
and continues to hold her own against strong male opposition. She
won, for instance, the strong mixed Brussels OHRA event in 1 987,
ahead of the eighteen-year-old Susan Polgar.
Gaprindashvili was overtaken in 1 978 by fellow Georgian Maya
Chiburdanidze, some twenty years younger. Maya boasts two major
victories in 'men's' Grandmaster events: Delhi 1 984; and Banja Luka
1 985. In 1 990, 'Chib' and 'Gap' were the only two women to have been
awarded the 'Men's' International Grandmaster title. No woman has
yet broken through to the world's top 50 on the FIDE (Federation
Internationale Des Echecs) rating list. Only a handful of women
have even achieved tournament results (norms) towards the title of
International Master. Of this handful, three are - of course - the Polgar
sisters.
When considering these statistics, it should be borne in mind that
whilst the quantity of women in international competition has increased
enormously over the past fifteen years, they are still massively outnum
bered by men. Statistically speaking, this is very hard to quantify
precisely. However, if you want a starting point you can compare
numbers on the respective men's and women's FIDE rating lists, and
you get a male-female ratio of something like eight to one. But the
most typical illustration of the masculine nature of the chess 'scene' is
simply to visit any open chess tournament. Almost always, the number
of female participants may be counted on the fingers of one hand.
Many 'learned' articles, such as David Spanier's "Women are
Checkmated" ( The Times, 7th August 1 984) have been devoted to the
investigation of pseudo-scientific reasons for women's supposed inferior
ability at chess. The so-called 'visual-spatial' theory, in particular, has
received a great deal of attention.
According to Arthur Jensen's Bias in Mental Testing, women perform
worse than men in tests measuring 'visual-spatial' skills. Spanier then
goes on to classify chess as a 'visual-spatial' game, and to infer that
women are thus doomed to be weaker.
Laszlo Polgar is contemptuous of such theories which, he asserts,
are founded on prejudice. He quotes Bela Bartok: "Apply equal
standards, please. Women ought to be free to do the same things as
men, or men ought not to be free to do the things women aren't
supposed to do."
Women in Chess 19
The author is happy to j oin Mr Polgar in rubbishing sexist theories.

Let's pick a few specific holes:
a) Inferior performance does not point conclusively to inferior ability.
The alternative explanation is under-achievement due to inequality of
opportunity. In chess, the scarcity of women points rather more
obviously to the latter rather than the former line of reasoning.
However, the instigators of the kind of research under discussion are
operating from the starting point that women are weaker at chess per
se, and then trying to find out why.
b) To classify a complex intellectual pursuit, chess, as a 'visual-spatial'
skill is a gross over-simplification. For a start, many strong players are
blind! The Polgar sisters, in common with many top-class chess players,
are also highly proficient in blindfold chess. I believe it is much more
reasonable to compare chess with linguistics as a skill (see the Polgar
Method, below). In addition, skill at chess involves such intangibles as
creativity and intuition (traditionally, 'feminine' virtues!) as well as
the colder, male-associated qualities: logic, strategy, aggression, and
calculation (but who hasn't heard of a 'calculating woman'?).
c) The definitions in these tests seem pretty arbitrary. What, exactly,
is a 'visual-spatial' skill? Frankly, this seems as dubious a method of
proving an innate difference between male and female chess players as
the now largely discredited IQ test was as a yardstick for measuring
human intelligence. The traditional IQ test rests largely on academic
criteria biased in terms of socio-economic class. Tests designed to
explain the gap in performance between men and women in whatever
field (especially when the subjects are socially conditioned adults) rest
on the denial of social realities and their impact on the nurture of
human beings from earliest infancy: in short, on a sexist assumption.
d) It seems self-evident that the careers to date of the Polgar sisters
clearly demonstrate theories which limit the chess-playing ability of
women to be nonsense. However, although the Polgar sisters represent
the most striking and meteoric prospect for women in chess, tournament
victories by women over and ahead of Grandmasters were not unknown
before, j ust largely unremarked.
Susan Arkell's reaction (see above) touches raw nerves in the feminist
chess school. For the conflict she perceives between her role as a wife
and her aspirations for success in her chosen sport reflects only too
well the continuing inequality of 'post-feminist' society. In theory, and
in practice, women have made great strides towards emancipation in
every sphere of life over the past hundred years, and this general
progress has been reflected in their increasing participation and growing
strength as chess players.
And yet, and yet . . . the perception of many women, not only in
chess, alas, is that if they become too successful, they won 1t be loved
as human beings. Instead, they will be feared as aggressive Amazons,
and otherwise denigrated. "Am I to think of my sweet and delicate girl
20 Women in Chess
as a competitor?" wrote Sigmund Freud to his fiancee. The threat is

obvious: if you compete with us, we won't love/marry you.
So women who attempt to compete with men must overcome not
only social and cultural inequalities, but two of the most damaging
secondary symptoms these disadvantages produce. The first of these
can be called the 'motivation gap.'
The Motivation Gap

Men have no cultural qualms about being motivated by the prospect
of success in competition. They are never told that this is wrong, or
unnatural, or that women won't love them if they are aggressive and
victorious. Quite the reverse, in fact! Men are never told that marriage
and procreation is the apotheosis of their existence. It is something
that they will probably get round to - en passant, as it were - when
they have time.
Consider the effect of a man saying something like: "I don't really
care so much about becoming a champion. If the right woman came
along, I'd happily give it all up because 1 j ust want to be a good
husband and father". At the very least, this sounds strange. Most men
(and women) would probably dismiss such a male as a complete wimp
and laugh him out of court. But if you have a woman saying the same
thing, substituing "man" for "woman" and "wife and mother" for
"husband and father", this sounds quite 'normal', doesn't it?
Then again, there are self-limiting aims, like 'women's prizes' and
'women's titles' to confuse and distract women in chess. A brief example
from a recent British Junior (mixed V- 1 O) Championship: going into
the last round a girl, Ayesha Nathoo, was in with a chance for a share
of the overall title. But for this she needed a win, whereas a draw would
secure the illusory 'success' of the 'girls' title. Why take the risk of
losing? Ayesha opted for a draw.
The Polgar sisters themselves have shown, at different stages in their
careers, signs of similar confusion. Contrary to their much-vaunted
principles, they have shown themselves willing to participate in relatively
weak women-only and j unior competitions when the financial incentives
were attractive enough. The point is that, had they been male, such
inducements - given for crude publicity purposes alone - would not
have been offered.
So there is always the danger that female players, due to their
continuing curiosity value, will be sidetracked from the 'main chance'
by short-term gain - even when their prognosis for challenging for the
overall world title is as healthy as that of the Polgar sisters.
So to sum up, the motivational path for men in chess is not cluttered
as it is for women. They know they must work harder to attract
opportunities, and they are not distracted by hollow sexist honours
masquerading as real achievement. And, most importantly, the single-
Women in Chess 21
minded male pursuers of the highest honours are not troubled by the
self-doubt that their ambition is unworthy, unnatural or unmanly.
The Self-Fulfilling Prophecy
As we have seen, men are the majority group in chess and in common
with other male-dominated sports women attempting to 'crash the
party' often encounter outright hostility. After all, one of the reasons
men enjoy golf, squash, shooting, etc. and (until women became more
ubiquitous at it) chess, is the male ambience. For some, the very
attraction of a masculine sport is the chance to get away from women
wives, children, mothers and girlfriends can be comfortably banished
through the escapism of the golf course, the locker room, or the
tournament hall.
Now I'm not suggesting that all male chess players are woman
haters and/or repressed homosexuals, but judging from some of the
attitudes one encounters one could be forgiven for forming this
impression. The most harmful and insidious of these is the reaction
when women lose at chess. Instead of the comradely comfort and
support which men tend to give to one another at such times, male
witnesses don't trouble to conceal their satisfaction and relief when a
woman does not do well. "What do you expect? You're j ust not very
strong," is a typical reaction.
Encouraged by the misogyny of their elders, boys treat girl players
with studied contempt. In one international tournament in England, a
boy staged a public bet with his friends that he could still beat his girl
opponent if he moved his king on the second move.
For some years Queen's File, the official organ of the British Women's
Chess Association, ran a column entitled 'Bare Bishop', which collated
various patronising/male chauvinist comments of the sort that acted
as a deterrent for women in chess. One typical question from a male
organiser to Australian International and qualified FIDE arbiter Louise
McDonald was "Are you with one of the players?"
The collective flavour of male attitudes to women as chess players
could be summarised thus: "We do not expect you to win, and we
certainly won't like you any better if by some chance you do. You are
trespassing on our territory, and if a girl makes an odd number in the
tournament, it would be much more convenient if she just made the
tea."
The underlying message hammered home to girl players over and
over again is: "you're not very good and you never will be." Those
men conveying this attitude do so because they do not want women
to succeed. It is a pity that women so often choose to abandon the
fight in the face of this sort of hostility and lack of encouragement,
but the attitude of women who ask "who needs it?" is perfectly
understandable. Who can blame them? "You're not very good." When
22 Women in Chess
the lie is loud enough, even the victims begin to believe it. The history
of white prej udice against blacks, for example, has amply demonstrated
this. And so it is also with men against women. When the prevailing
attitude is negative, the prej udice becomes the self-fulfilling prophecy.
The following section attempts to illustrate the origins of women's
apprehension and the size of their task by giving some sample attitudes.
What Men (and Women) have said about Women in Chess
Nigel Short (Aged 1 4, 1 980) "Women will never be great chess players.
They j ust don't have the killer instinct."
Bobby Fischer: "I could give any woman in the world a piece and a
move; to Gaprindashvili even, a k night."
Mikhail Tal (apropos Fischer, above): "Fischer is Fischer, but a knight
is a knight!"
GM William Lombardy (USA): "Women play worse because they are
more interested in men than in chess."
GM David Norwood (Publicity Director, British Chess Federation,
and sometime opponent of the Polgar sisters): "What we need are lots
of girls who aren't as good as us, who'll treat us with the proper respect
and reverence" (August 1 990).
Gary Kasparov: "Women have a different psychology . . . chess requires
great physical strength" (April 1 989).
GM Larry Evans (USA): "Women play worse because they have no
subconscious urge to kill their father."
Laszlo Polgar ( 1 985): "Our eldest daughter is fifteen years old and an
International Master amongst men. If she were a boy, she would be
hailed as a genius and given all support (trainers and tournaments) so
that she could further develop her capabilities."
Mayor of Plymouth to the author, British Championship 1 989: "You're
too pretty to play chess!" (Thanks - but no thanks!).
Novi Sad Olympiad Bulletin, November 1 990: "Women's chess? It sure
took a lot of men to make it work!"
GM Lajos Portisch (Hungary): "Of course, I'm impressed that the
Polgar sisters are so talented. But a woman champion of the world?
That would be against nature."
WGM Milunka Lazarevic (Yugoslavia): "We play worse chess, basket
ball, tennis etc., because we have the job of bringing into the world all
those clever men who do it better."
GM Nona Gaprindashvili: "There is a physiological disadvantage.
They (women) can play well for a short stretch of time, say two or
three tournaments and compete with men successfully. But if they have
to play the whole World Championship cycle they will not prove strong
enough in a physiological sense."
Susan Polgar ( 1 985): "In chess, women can have the same results as
Women in Chess 23
men. It is not a physical sport, like swimming. When children study

arithmetic, they do not learn separately. I would prefer that there be
no women's titles. It is not important to be a women's Grandmaster.
I am more happy to be a man International M aster."
1M Pia Cram ling (Sweden): "Men and women should play in the same
events. In Sweden we no longer have a women's championship. I prefer
to play among the masters."
Women's World Champion WGM Xie Jun (China), when asked to
explain women's inferior results: "Women get married!"
Susan Polgar ( 1 985): "When men lose against me, they always have a
headache . . . or things of that kind. I have never beaten a completely
healthy man!"
3 The Polgar Method
The Polgar sisters did not go to school, except to sit examinations; the
Polgar parent-teachers educated their children at home, causing long
running battles with the Hungarian authorities. Laszlo paid for private
tuition in certain subjects.
In curricular terms, the plan was to specialise in a particular field,
other subjects being fitted in on a much lesser time allocation. The
reasoning behind this was that specialisation, allowing a high degree
of excellence in one area, will also drag up all-round performance. To
put it another way, if a child can be brilliant at one thing, he/she is
likely to be good at anything else they are taught.
Susan, who, as the first child, was inevitably the 'prototype model',
learned to play chess at the age of four. Between the ages of four and
six, she also showed an aptitude for maths, but was told by her father
that she would have to choose between the two. As an amateur chess
player, Laszlo Polgar was able to provide his eldest daughter with
some opposition until she was about nine years old. Thereafter, his
extensive library of approximately five thousand books still proved
useful.
It was a natural progression that first Sofia and then Judith would
follow their older sibling into the mysteries of chess. At first, they were
not permitted to enter the room to disturb Susan when she was
analysing. They were told that they could only join her when they had
learned to play chess: a deft ploy to whet such youthful appetites!
Having chosen chess, Susan, and later her sisters, became in effect
full-time students of the game. Eight to ten hours a day would be
devoted to the study of its various aspects: opening theory, endgames,
speed chess, and blindfold chess. At the age of six, Sofia and Judith
could play without sight of a board - with clocks!
As soon as they could reach the pieces, the children were enrolled
in an adult chess club, MTK (Budapest). In time, professional trainers
were acquired. Masters would also regularly visit the Polgar household
to play 'blitz' (speed chess) with the girls. Over the years, the sisters
have been trained by such players as Pal Benko, Laszlo Szabo, Ivan
The Polgar Method 25
Farago, Milorad Knezevic, Tibor Florian, Levente Lengyel, Peter

Lukacs and Peter Szekely. Latterly, their chief mentor has been Laszlo
Hazai.
Laszlo Polgar explains his objectives thus: "Our aim is to help the
capabilities of our children unfold up to the maximum level and we
hope (why shouldn't we?) that this process will go on until their
capabilities are fully developed around the age of, say, 25 to 30 years."
The Polgar Method - Discuss!
In a sense, the Polgar method seems like a new adaptation of a well

established concept - the use of individualistic teaching to improve
attainment. It is interesting, for example, that intensive one-to-one
training techniques have also been applied in Hungary in a remedial
context: the development of radical therapy for cerebral palsy at the
now famous Peto Institute. It has also been acknowledged for some
time that the same principle holds true for children with learning
difficulties, particularly Downs Syndrome. The two common factors
appear to be resources (trained and motivated adults) and extreme
patience.
Another related example of 'prodigy methodology' which I can recall
from my younger television years is the Japanese 'Suzuki' method of
teaching random three-year-olds to play the violin. I remember a
roomful of cute little Yehudi Menuhins marching in a circle with
their specially made pint-sized instruments as the 82-year-old teacher
explained the essential element of his approach: "repetition."
Although the logic may have seemed dubious, the Polgar sisters do
appear to bear out one hypothesis: specialisation in chess has not
proved detrimental to their progress in other academic subjects, where
their examination marks are consistently above the average. Perhaps
not surprisingly, they are proficient in languages: Magyar, Russian,
Esperanto, Dutch, English, French, Spanish and Bulgarian.
I say not surprisingly, because chess - a skill acquired while the
Polgar sisters were still at a formative stage of speech development -
is a language. Chess and speech function on a common principle:
recognition and co-ordination of patterns within a structured frame
work, conveying meaning and values. This doesn't seem illogical when
one remembers that computing - in many ways a sister science to
chess - also refers to its programming systems as languages.
More surprisingly, perhaps, the sisters are aces at table tennis - a
physical sport. One is tempted to speculate that Mrs Polgar (by all
indications a caring mother) was concerned to safeguard the girls from
the effects of too sedentary a lifestyle, and thus ensured that they had
some physical outlet roughly equating to a normal schoolgirl quota of
PE. Be that as it may, there is no doubt that the girls are almost as
competitive at table tennis as at chess. Were they born competitive, or
26 The Polgar Method
was it their early chess training that established this frame of mind?
That a school system (essentially, mass-produced education) cannot
provide sufficient stimulation to realise the maximum potential of an
individual child seems evident. But this conclusion, even if true, begs
the question: should children be raised as geniuses, j ust because they
can be?
Unfortunately, this question gives rise to no clear answer, only trees
of related queries. In the end, we get bogged down in muddy, impassable
paths through relatively unexplored ethical thickets.
Do the advantages of being raised as a genius outweigh the possible
medium to long term social disadvantages of not having been educated
with others of one's own age group? How far does 'genius' education
cut the wunderkind off from ordinary people? Is it good preparation
for the 'school of life' - the 'real world'? Are geniuses more, or less,
likely to be happy and fulfilled than normal folk?
One of the benefits cannot be denied - hard cash. There is no doubt
that the fame of the Polgar sisters has also brought fortune and an
obvious rise in living standards; highly significant to any family
accustomed to the austerities of an Eastern bloc economy. Another
plus factor is that the girls appear, unlike many 'wonder children' to
be happy, well-adj usted and nice-mannered. Organiser Stewart Reuben,
writing in the British Chess Magazine, says: "experimentation with
children strikes a chilling note [but] Sofia is the best possible advertise
ment to allay our fears . . . an attractive socially mature girl . . .
"
Laszlo Polgar, in defence of his experiment, writes: "Our children

are happy children. They have a real childhood as what they are
building is not a castle of sand but the castle of knowledge. They live
and experience the idea propounded by Tarrasch: 'Intellectual activity
is perhaps the greatest pleasure of life; chess is one of the forms of
intellectual activity.' ''
And, not surprisingly, he is impressively impervious to criticism:
"Regrettably the quiet of our home is all too often disturbed by tactless
good- or ill-will, by the criticism of people competent or incompetent,
by intrigues - sometimes even in the press - which distort the facts
and reinforce prej udices . . .
"
On the other hand, the sisters' apparent well-being may be due to

the presence of special factors in their particular case: bonding between
siblings, and a close, protective mother. In other words, the Polgar
sisters may have 'turned out well' in spite of their father's methods, not
because of them.
Whatever the rights and wrongs of the Polgar experiment in abstract
moral terms, the sisters as individuals must be regarded as relatively
fortunate. They have each other - and they are, at least, obviously
bright.
What, however, of the parents infected with 'genius mania' who are
convinced that Laszlo Polgar's methods will work on their children,
too? Not all children are fast learners. But try telling an ambitious
parent that their pride and joy is not a genius! As Dominic Lawson
commented: "Parents should be building well-rounded human beings.
You have to be careful not to let this rather narrow pursuit dominate.
One reason why Fischer . . . became a recluse . . . was that from an early
age [he] thought only about chess. Then once you've achieved whatever
goal it is, you have nothing to fall back on intellectually and life is
pointless. Or worse, how much more distressing it is if it turns out that
you're not talented at all! It puts an extraordinary pressure on children
when their parents evidently want something. Children have enough
sense of fear and inferiority on their own account without feeling that
they are destroying the hopes of their parents by failing."
Once again, an ancient theme revisited: parent-driven wish fulfilment
and vicarious gratification through the achievements of heirs. As close
to immortality, perhaps, as the progenitor can hope to come. Therein
lies the danger: what of the children who disappoint their parents'
hopes?
Laszlo Polgar: "I don't give a recipe, only a way of looking at things.
1 don't want to persuade anybody to bring up a genius, 1 j ust wanted
to show that it was possible. I don't call upon or encourage anybody;
people must decide what they want to do. 1 j ust hand over my
pedagogical methods and lead people along the road I have already
trodden, with the certainty that one can bring up a genius and that it's
worthwhile, because one makes thus a happy person." (Cover, Nevelj
Zsenit!).
Another observation: by and large, the parents of 'geniuses' are not
geniuses themselves. They are usually (necessarily, if you think about
it) of above average ability, and must have certain features in common:
boundless energy, organisational enthusiasm, and obsessional motiv
ation.
Those interested in investigating the above theme further are referred
to the published work of another 'chess parent', New York j ournalist
Fred Waitzkin. His book Searching for Bobby Fischer chronicles his
attempt to propel his son Josh towards the highest chess honours. The
book was extensively reviewed, but the most pointed comment came
from another paternally-driven prodigy, Nigel Short. Comparing Fred
Waitzkin with his own father, Nigel remarked: "What they share is a
passion for sport equalled only by their lack of aptitude."
The similarity of these two fathers to Laszlo Polgar is unmistakable.
None of the three excel at their offspring's chosen vocation. All three
crave or have craved success for their children. And all three have
written books about them! (David Short's opus is entitled Nigel Short:
Chess Prodigy).
A further criticism that can be made of the Polgar method is that
intensive training is neither a new nor a particularly laudable method
of producing extraordinary levels of performance� either in human
beings or in animals. Chimpanzees can be taught to speak, circus

animals to perform all manner of amazing tricks, and children to win
chess tournaments at the age of four. Two things are certain in each
case: in real terms, the subjects are in no position to give or refuse
consent to the process, and would never perform the given feats
uncoached. Is it accidental that articles frequently refer to The Polgar
Circus'?
Still, it should be noted that criticism of the genius syndrome leaves
critics open to the charge of jealousy. Success - or, as Hungarian GM
Portisch expressed it with reference to the Polgars, doing something
original - breeds envy and hostility. The Polgars are, by most people's
standards, hugely successful. And, after all, critics of genius have
something in common with genius-raising parents: they are rarely
geniuses themselves.
Nonetheless, both sides of the argument deserve to be aired. All too
often, commentary on the Polgar phenomenon has tended to be one
sided in one direction or another: either grossly sycophantic, or oozing
sour grapes.
Other Geniuses
It is more or less a cliche that geniuses often have short, unhappy lives.
Certainly, this was often true in the past, but it is possible that
modern attitudes can lessen the pressures on gifted children. Recurrent
psychological problems, however, run like a common thread through
the case histories: isolation, early disillusionment, and a lack of
continuing goals. It is not all one-sided though, so a 'mixed bag' of
examples is given below as 'food for thought'.
a) The Cellist: Jacqueline Du Pre
A real 'horror story'. From the age of ten onwards, she was so isolated
that, as she once sorrowfully told journalist Catherine Stott in later
life, she felt that her only friend had been her cello. She talked to the
instrument incessantly as though it were human, unable to communicate
with other children because she had been made to feel so apart. She
was tragically struck down by multiple sclerosis in her mid-twenties.
b) The Mathematician ( 1 ): Ruth Lawrence

Ruth Lawrence was educated at home by her father, who dedicated
his life to her 'success'. She became Britain's youngest undergraduate
at twelve, and graduated from Oxford at fourteen. She was thus
deprived of the companionship of children her own age. She did not
socialise much at University, apart from becoming active in the Young
Conservatives' Association.
c) The Mathematician (2): John Adams
John Adams' parents are both mathematicians, but unlike Ruth

Lawrence he attends a normal school. He read at two, solved algebraic
problems at three and made the Guinness Book of Records with his
maths '0' Level at eight. He works with his own age group at school
in all subjects apart from mathematics. His mother calls him "a sports
mad, normal healthy lad . . . certainly not a swot."
d) The Youngest Graduate: Adragon De Mello
This child, who became the world's youngest university graduate at

the age of 1 1 , was placed in a foster home after his father's arrest on
a charge of 'child endangerment'. The father had made an apparent
suicide pact with his son.
Tragic Geniuses of the Past

The poet Thomas Chatterton, immortalised by Wordsworth as "the
marvellous boy" took poison at the age of 1 8. Wolff and Schumann
went mad. Mozart, Schubert, Keats, Shelley and Byron all died young.
Pianists Glenn Gould and John Ogdon suffered psychiatric illness.
Other Chess Geniuses

World Championship chess has produced more than its share of 'head
cases'. Steinitz, the first World Champion, was reputed to hold regular
conversations with the Almighty. Alekhine, the eccentric cat-loving
genius, was a philandering alcoholic with unpleasant Nazi associations.
The most famous 'case' of all must be the American prodigy Bobby
Fischer, who gave up competitive chess after sensationally snatching
the world chess crown from the Soviets in 1 972. By the age of 30 he
was a recluse. He changed his name and reputedly developed extreme
anti-Semitic views, despite having a Jewish mother.
More recently, the chess prodigy most closely rivalling the fame of
the Pol gars is the sixteen-year-old ex-Soviet, Gata Kamsky, at the time
of writing ranked eighth in the world. Accompanied everywhere by his
obsessive father, Rustam Kamsky, he has no known friends and studies
chess fourteen hours a day with the declared aim of dethroning
Kasparov. Gata's American sponsor, James Cayne, discontinued his
support after Rustam struck Gata during a public engagement.
Other chess parents, if less overtly coercive, remain ' influential
well into the adulthood of their offspring. Maya Chiburdanidze, the
former Women's World Champion, continues at the age of thirty to
be accompanied to Olympiads by her 'biggest fan',. her mother.
World Champion Gary Kasparov's mother, Klara Kasparova, is

also reputed to wield enormous psychological influence. These two
champions, however, show a different pattern of development from the
Polgars. Kasparov learnt chess at a 'normal' age (six) and developed
impressively but not spectacularly, largely under his own steam. He
only really stormed the chess world in late adolescence, becoming a
Grandmaster at 1 7. From thence he has, by common consent, continu
ally progressed.
By contrast, the Polgar sisters have crammed more chess into
childhood than many Grandmasters pack into a lifetime. One by one
they hit chess headlines before even reaching their teens. After such an
early explosion, with its hype and hopes, will they continue to progress
or will they burn out?
Some Things People have said about the Polgar Sisters
Gary Kasparov: "They are j ust like trained dogs."

GM John Fedorowicz: "They're smart kids."
GM Lajos Portisch: " . . . child exploitation . . . "
William Hartston (of Judith Polgar): "a monster . . . a killer."
GM David Norwood (of Judith Polgar): "vicious . . . "
William Hartston (of Sofia Polgar): "I'm in love with a thirteen-year
old girl."
John Graham (in Women In Chess): "Susan Polgar has a mind of her
own."
Harold Schonberg (in the New York Times): "Susan Polgar has a mind
of her own."
Erika Sziva, H ungarian Women's I nternational M aster: "Susan Polgar
is like a parrot. She j ust gives her father's views all the time. 'My father
says this, my father says that . . .' ''
Laszlo Polgar says that his are ordinary children, with one difference:
they have been taught how to think. One comment of Klara's smacks
of more mundane pragmatism: "Can you imagine the relief it gives a
mother when her child amuses herself quietly for hours on end?"
Part Two: The Games
and Careers of the
Polgar Sisters
4 Early Years
At the age of four and a half, in 1 973, Susan Polgar won the Budapest
Schoolchildren's (Under- I I ) Championship with a tOO% score. Photo
graphs of her playing at that age show a tiny tot overshadowed by the
huge chessboard and its looming pieces. One wonders how she
conducted a kingside attack ! Of course, in later years many more such
photos would appear as her younger sisters began to play, but at the
time her feat caused a local sensation.
Not everyone was thrilled, however. Some people questioned whether
a little girl of four should not be playing with dolls. The sexism of this
response obscured the validity of the 'value of childhood' argument:
namely, whether competitive chess is appropriate 'child's play' for such
a young child.
We next hear of Susan as a ten-year-old. In May 1 979 she came first
in the Budapest Schools' Championship, in the older children's section.
Her four-year-old sister Sofia, at that time attending Russian-speaking
nursery school, made her debut in the same event, in the Under-tO
section. Sofia came third, causing quite a stir.
In August 1 979, Susan won the eleven-player semi-final qualifier for
the Hungarian Women's Championship final, with 7t/tO. She was
undefeated. The main Hungarian chess magazine, Magyar Sakkelet,
describes her manner as "confident" and her result as "great and
unprecedented." In the reports from these years, there is no hint of the
clashes with the establishment that were to surface in the mid- 1 980s.
Probably exhausted from this effort, the ten-year-old had a bad
result in her next event, the 7th Balaton Kupa Cup in September 1 979.
However, her growing reputation can be j udged from the following
comment in Magyar Sakkelet: "The surprise is not that Hoffman lost
the throne, but that Susan Polgar came last!"
Susan then played in the final of the H ungarian Women's Champion
ship in November 1 979. By now a first category player (in Soviet terms)
or approximately 1 80 BCF (2040 Elo), she finished seventh, beating
the tournament winner. Her score of 7/ 1 3 earned her the title of
Hungarian Woman Master and she broke Nigel Short's record as the
youngest player to qualify for a FIDE rating. She was personally
34 Early Years
congratulated by the then Hungarian premier, Janos Kadar - a chess

fan.
None of this may sound astonishing to us now, but to put the result
in perspective: Hungary is a strong chess playing nation, and at the
time such precocity in a female was virtually unheard of.
Let's start with an early miniature by the nine-year-old Susan:
Pataky-Susan Polgar Black now inaugurates a combi

Budapest 1978 nation which might be obvious to
From's Gambit a master, but is pretty spectacular
for a nine-year-old!
1 f4 eS 10 "iV xh2
2 fxeS 11 l hh2 gxh 2
White accepts the challenge 12 lZ)xc6 h l ("iV )
offered by Black's first move and 13 �e2 "iV hS +
enters the sharp From's Gambit. 14 �f2 "iV fS +
It is normally considered more IS �gl .td 7
prudent to transpose to the King's 16 "iV d4 .txc6
Gambit with 2 e4. 17 "iV xh8
2 d6 White tries to fight back but
3 lZ)f3 dxeS his hopeless lack of development
4 lZ)xeS .td6 proves terminal.
S lZ)f3 gS 17 0-0-0
6 c3 18 "iV g7 .teS
Known to be bad. White must 19 g4 .th2+
try 6 d4 or 6 g3, to deal with the 0-1
impending threat of . . . g4 and . . . And here is the game that
"iV h4+. White's chosen course of earned Susan Polgar her first title:
play is not equal to this prophylac
tic task. Susan Polgar-Mate
6 g4 Hungarian Women 's
7 "iV a4 + lZ)c6 Championship,
8 lZ)d4 "iV h4+ Budapest 1 9 79
9 �dl g3 Modern Defence
10 e3 (1)
1 e4 g6
1
2 d4 .tg7
B
3 lZ)f3 d6
4 .tc4 lZ)f6
S eS dxeS
6 lZ)xeS 0-0
7 0-0 lZ)bd7
8 f4 e6?
White's play has been somewhat
optimistic, but here Black misses
an opportunity to prove this. 8
Early Years 35
. . . c5!, challenging in the centre, 3

would be much more pointed than B
this feeble response.
9 lLlc3 lLl b6
10 .i.b3 lLlfd5
11 lLle4 f6
12 lLlf3 � h8
13 c4 lLle7
14 .i.e3 lLlc6
15 "ifd2 (2)
Here is an early example of

2 young Susan defeating strong
B
male opposition:
Susan Polgar-Kiss (FM)

Budapest 1 980
King's Indian Defence
1 d4 lLlf6
2 c4 g6
3 lLlc3 .i.g7
4 e4 d6
15 e5? 5 f3 0-0
Black's position is already bad, 6 .i.e3 e5
but this move hastens her demise 7 d5 lLl h5
by opening the centre for White's 8 "iVd2 f5
better developed forces. Perhaps 9 0-0-0 lLld7
1 5 . . . a5, aiming for queenside 10 .i.d3 lLlc5
counterplay, was a better idea. Misguided; in these King's
16 fxe5 fxe5 Indian positions Black must stick
17 d5 .i.f5 to a coherent kingside strategy. In
1 7 . . . lLle7 would be answered order to further his initiative on
by 1 8 .i.g5. this side of the board he should
18 lLlc5 lLle7 have continued 10 . . . lLldf6.
19 lLlxb7 "iV c8 11 .i.c2 a5
20 lLlc5 lLld7 12 b3 lLla6
21 lLlxd7 "if xd7 A blatant admission of planless
22 .i.c5 lHd8 ness. The knight has taken three
23 :t ae1 e4 moves to get to a square it could
24 lLlg5 lLlc8 have got to in one; there was also
25 g4! (3) no need to quit c5 until ejected.
1 -0 13 a3 f4
This looks wrong. Black should
Black will not last long after 25 have kept the tension in the centre.
. . . .i.xg4 26 :t f7 "iVe8 27 :t xe4. 14 .i,f2 g5
36 Early Years
15 tZl ge2 g4 24 .i.xb5

Inconsistent; Black should be 25 .i.xb5 h4
playing on the queenside, not 26 h3 g3
opening the kingside. 27 .i.gl "ifd8
16 ll hel "ifg5 28 c6 tZl g5
17 �b2 tZlf6 29 �a2 "ifc8
18 tZlc1 h5 30 n bl .i.f6
19 tZld3 tZl h7 31 tZlb2 �f7
20 b4! (4) 32 �f1 �e7
33 tZlc4
4
The white pawn chain acts like
B
a boa constrictor. Black can only
writhe in White's iron grip as the
noose tightens.
33 a4
34 J:l. b7 �d8 (5)
5
W
Mature positional judgement

from the eleven-year-old, realising
that opening the queenside will be
to her benefit despite her king's
presence there.
20 b6
21 bxa5 bxa5
22 .i.a4 tZlb8
23 c5 �a6 35 �b6! cxb6
24 tZlb5 36 tZl xb6
Remarkably, the white king is 'Goodbye, Queenie.'
now safe on the queenside. 1 -0
5 The First World Title
In late 1 980, Susan Polgar gave the first hint of the shape of things to
come when, at the age of eleven, she won a strong mixed j unior
tournament in Budapest. Reports of the event expressed surprise that
she had chosen this event in preference to 'proving herself' in the
context of the Hungarian Women's Championship, with which it
clashed. Surprise, because Susan would have been hot favourite to win
the women's title. But she was obviously developing a taste for 'real'
success. One of the boys she left behind was Tibor Tolnai, who went
on to become a Grandmaster.
1 9 8 1 was the year of twelve-year-old Susan's first major international
excursions. First she played in the European Girls' Under-20 Cham
pionship in Poland. Easily the youngest competitor, she finished fifth.
She lost only one game, to the tournament winner. A snap victory from
this event:
Meyer-Susan Polgar White's opening play has been
European Girls ' U-20 excessively passive, allowing Black
Championship, uninhibited development. White
Poland 1981 now drifts along, hoping for
French Defence exchanges.
14 "We2 "W f6
1 e4 e6 15 .te5 ..-f5
2 d4 d5 16 .td4 .te7
3 ttJd2 e5 Susan avoids exchanging pieces
4 ttJ gf3 ttJf6 in order to pursue the attack.
5 exd5 exd5 Black has an initiative here typical
6 e3 .te7 for this type of French Defence,
7 dxe5 .txe5 but the kill now comes with amaz
8 .te2 0-0 ing speed.
9 0-0 ttJe4 17 h3 .txf3
10 ttJ b3 .tb6 18 .txf3 ..-f4
11 .tf4 ttJe6 19 lI fel? (6)
12 ttJbd4 .tg4 White had to play 1 9 1:[ fd 1 , but
13 ttJ xe6 bxe6 then 19 . . . "Wh2+ followed by . . .
l:t fe8 is very strong for Black. 19 �d2!

0- 1
6
B
In the 1 980s, the Polgar family frequently played chess in the

Bulgarian town of Targoviste. Here is an impressive victory (against a
strong male player) from an early visit:
Susan Polgar-Cirakov 7
Targoviste 1981 W
Dutch Defence
1 d4 f5
2 c4 �f6
3 �f3 g6
4 g3 .i. g7
5 .i.g2 0-0
6 0-0 d6
7 �c3 c6
The youthful Susan seizes her
8 d5 e5 tactical opportunity. She confid
9 dxe6 .i.xe6
ently sacrifices in the knowledge
10 -.. d 3 �a6
that her kingside attack will be
11 �g5 -.. e7
overwhelming.
Not 1 1 . �c5 1 2 �xe6 �xd3?
. . 16 �cxe4! .i. xa l
1 3 �xd8 �xc l 14 �xb7, winning 17 � xh7 fxe4
for White. This type of position If instead 1 7 . . . lith7, 1 8 �g5 +
favours White as Black's pieces are litg8 1 9 �xe6 is hopeless for
unco-ordinated and his kingside is Black.
weak.
12 .i.f4 J:l. ad8 18 �xf8 litxf8
13 l:t fd l �e8 19 J:I. xal .i. xc4
14 'it'e3 �c5 20 .i.g5 �f6
15 b4 �e4 (7) 21 -.. d4 1 -0
The First World Title 39
In August 1 98 1 , Susan Polgar visited Britain for the first time.

She came to Westergate in Sussex for the World Girls' Under- 1 6
Championship, coming as the hot favourite of the 3 2 participants. I
was part of the ten-strong 'home' girls' contingent and I remember
how awed we all were to read in the Championship programme that
she had been coached from the age of four. What chance would anyone
else have?
Susan stayed with her mother and grandparents in the same
accomodation as the rest of us. She was well-developed and quite tall
for her age, with long dark hair and a pleasant smile. We were under
the impression that she didn't speak much English, but maybe it was
j ust that none of us really knew how to approach her. We spent most
of our time playing silly pranks amongst ourselves, while she got on
with the job of winning convincingly with 6/7 (two draws, with De
Greef of the Netherlands and Shabazz of the USA). She received as
her trophy an extremely unusual and attractive engraved glass bowl.
In congratulating her, I suggested she might like to keep some goldfish
in it. This elicited some laughter, but whether this was polite or not I
do not know.
On her way to victory she defeated WGM-to-be Susan Walker (now
M rs Arkell) and the girl who was at that time regarded as the most
talented British prospect, Teresa Needham:
Needham-Susan Polgar ising Black's weakened queenside

World Girls ' U-16 pawns.
Championship, 13 0-0
Westergate 1981 14 0-0 l:t bS
Sicilian Sveshnikov 15 J:[ ad l "iF d7
16 lHel
1 e4 c5 A typical Sicilian Sveshnikov
2 .!t:lf3 .!t:lc6 position, where Black has active
3 d4 cxd4 piece play and attacking chances
4 .!t:l xd4 .!t:lf6 as compensation for a suspect
5 .!t:lc3 e5 pawn structure.
6 .!t:ldb5 d6 16 f4
7 .i.g5 a6 17 .!t:lc2 � h8
8 .i.xf6 gxf6 18 h3 : g8
9 .!t:la3 b5 19 �h2 .!t:le7
10 .!t:ld5 f5 20 .!t:lxe7 'li' xe7
11 .i.d3 .i.e6 21 .!t:lb4
12 c3 .i.g7 Underestimating the danger of
13 'li'e2 Black's looming threats against
1 3 'li' h 5 0-0 1 4 0-0 f4 1 5 lUd i is her king, White sallies forth in
more normal, when White reserves search of queenside booty.
the option of .!t:lc2 and a4 pressur- Although unattractive, l:t g i fol-
lowed by tDe I and tDf3 was a 8

possible defensive option. B
21 1W h4
22 tD xa6 .i.h6
23 l:t h l (8)
A desperate attempt to cope
with Black's threat of . . . l:t xg2 + .
But . . .
23 .i.xh3!
0-1
24 gxh3 loses nicely to 24 . . . f3
followed by . . . Af4 + .
Despite this defeat, Teresa went on to become the first British girl
junior to defeat a Grandmaster when she beat Janos Flesch in the
Lloyds Bank M asters in 1 982. However, since becoming a bus driver,
marrying a fellow bus driver, and giving birth to a son, she has not
played serious competitive chess. She retains an 'inactive' FIDE rating
of 2250.
The latter part of 1 98 1 saw Susan make a quantum leap forward.
She played in the Hungarian Open Championship for the first time,
achieving the creditable score of 6/ 1 3. Then came the transition from
junior to senior success in women's chess when she won a strong
Women's Grandmaster tournament in Varna, Bulgaria with 9/ 1 1 .
Something of the nationalistic bias of local chess reporting was revealed
to me as I searched the Bulgarian magazines for an historic game. I
found only one - a loss, to the local heroine, Voiska!
Susan Polgar's next visit to English shores was in the Autumn of
1 982, when she competed in the annual Lloyds Bank M asters. This
was not one of her successes. Her score of 3/9 could only be regarded
as one of those setbacks that is an inevitable feature of the learning
process. At the age of thirteen, Susan became (for what it is worth!) a
Woman International Master and, more importantly, a Hungarian
Master (the 'male' title).
Meanwhile, young Sofia was coming along well. She had more or
less followed in big sister Susan's footsteps by winning the Hungarian
Schoolchildren's Championship at the age of five. Here is one of her
precocious efforts:
Sofia Polgar-Kontra 4 d4 exd4

Budapest 1982 5 tDxd4 .i.d7
Spanish Opening 6 tDc3 tDxd4
7 Axd7 + ... xd7
1 e4 e5 8 "' xd4 tDe7
2 tDf3 tDc6 9 .i.e3 tDc6
3 .i. b5 d6 10 ... d2 .i.e7
The First World Title 41
11 f4 a6 ior event in Teteven, Bulgaria.

12 0-0-0 0-0-0 Susan, having finished third in
13 .l:[ hel .l:[ he8 1 98 1 , came a more mediocre ninth
14 tDdS (9) in 1 982, but it was little Sofi who
stole the show. She drew particular
9
attention because she only moved
B when standing up, as she could
not reach the pieces.
Sofia Polgar-Nikolov
Simul over ten boards,
Targoviste 1 982
/0
W
White stands somewhat better

due to a spatial advantage and
central control. Sofia's last move,
however, sets a sneaky trap into
which Black obligingly falls head-
long. Had Black spotted the
danger, 14 . tDb8 was the appro-
. .
priate antidote to White's poison-

ous threat.
14 .i.f8?
IS .i. b6! tDe7 1 .l:[ xg7! tD bd7
16 tD xe7 1We6 2 .l:[ xd7 1W xg7
17 tD xe8 1Wxb6 3 1W xf6 1W xf6
18 tD xd6 + q" bS 4 .i.xf6 + q"g8
19 tDe4 .l:[ xd2 S .l:[ d l lUe8
20 tDxb6 .l:[ xd l + 6 .l:[ gl + �f8
21 l::t xdl 1 -0 7 J:t g7 bS
In August 1 982, Susan and sev- 8 .l:[ xh7 q"e8
en-year-old Sofia played in a j un- 9 .i.xbS + 1 -0
6 A Staple Diet of Chess
1 983 was Susan Polgar's watershed year. Having j ust turned fourteen,
she was the only woman participant in the sixth Utasellato all-play
all masters tournament in Budapest. She scored 7/ 1 3 and recorded her
fourth(!) norm for the men's FIDE Master (FM) title. It was remarked
that she never seemed to get into time trouble, such was her extensive
knowledge of opening theory. Here is one of her wins from this event:
Susan Polgar-S. Kovacevic (FM) 17 h6

Budapest 1 983 1 7 . . . 'WIe7 looks better.
Benoni 18 f4 lDh7
19 lDc4 'WIe7?
1 d4 lDf6 Better was 19 . . . .i.xc3 20 bxc3
2 c4 e6 lDdf6, though Black is in diffic
3 lDf3 c5 ulties after 2 1 e5 lDxd5 22 lDd2!
4 d5 exd5 dxe5 23 fxe5, with .1:1 ad 1 to follow.
5 cxd5 d6 20 .!:t ael .i.d4
6 lDc3 g6 21 'WId3 .i.xe3 +
7 .i.f4 a6 22 : xe3 �g7
8 a4 .i.g7 23 e5 dxe5
9 e4 .i.g4 24 fxe5 (1 1)
10 .i.e2 0-0
11 0-0 .I:1 e8
11 .i.xf3!? is an interesting
possibility here. II
B
12 lDd2 .i.xe2
13 l he2 lDh5
14 .i.e3 lDd7
15 g4 lDhf6
16 h3 : b8
17 a5
Not 1 7 f4? b5 1 8 axb5 axb5 1 9
lDxb5 lDxe4 20 lDxe4 .!:t xe4 2 1
lDxd6? 1:txe3!
A Staple Diet of Chess 43
White now enjoys a 'dream' 24 • • .1:1. f8 25 lLle2 " g5 26 lLlf4 b5

Benoni position - central domin 27 axb6 lLl xb6 28 lLld6 c4 29 1Wd4
ation, attacking prospects against 1o>g8 30 e6 fxe6 31 dxe6 lLlc8 32
the black king, and the cramped e7 lLlxe7 33 1W xc4+ 1o>h8 34 .:. xe7!
black forces made to fight with .:. xf4 35 1Wc3+ 1W f6 36 1:1. xf4 .. xc3
their backs to the wall. 37 bxc3 1o>g8 38 1:I. e8 + 1:I. xe8 39
lLl xe8 1 -0
The real breakthrough, however, came in August 1 983 at the

Hungarian International Open in Kecskemet. Susan's score of 7t/l l
was enough for her first 1 M norm. She was the first Hungarian woman,
the youngest-ever female and one of only a handful of chess players of
either sex to perform at this level at such an early age. Magyar Sakkelet
marked the occasion with a photo of a cheerful-looking, strong-featured
Susan, long hair parted in the middle, full lips, and wholesome white
teeth.
Hausner (IM)-Susan Polgar 14 exf5 b5 (12)

Hungarian Open Continuing with the plan of dis
Championship, mantling White's centre. If now 1 5
Kecskemet 1 983 cxb5, 1 5 . . . d5 would leave Black
King's Indian Defence in complete control. White's reply
is an attempt to maintain some
1 d4 lLlf6 central influence.
2 c4 g6
3 lLlc3 .i.. g7 12
4 e4 d6 W
5 f4
The Four Pawns Attack, a bru
tal approach to the King's Indian
more frequently seen in club chess.
In this game Black counters with
an idea of Kasparov's.
5 0-0
6 lLlf3 c5
7 d5 e6
8 dxe6 fxe6 15 b3
9 .i.. d 3 lLlc6 Christiansen tried 1 5 �e3
10 0-0 lLld4 against Kasparov at the 1 982
11 lLlg5 e5 Moscow Interzonal, but quickly
This is Kasparov's idea. It fell into a bad position after 1 5 . . .
adheres to the classical rule of bxc4 1 6 .i.. x c4 + �h8 due to
meeting an assault on the wing Black's central domiriation.
with a central counter-thrust. 15 i.. b7
12 f5 h6 16 lLlf2 d5!
13 lLlh3 gxf5 17 cxd5 c4!
44 A Staple Diet of Chess
Susan continues energetically. 22 lLlxe4?

18 bxc4 bxc4 After this White's position falls
19 �e4 apart. The best chance was 22
If 1 9 .i. xc4, 1 9 . . . l:!. c8 20 lIid3 .i.xh6 when after 22 . . . lLlxf5 23
lIic7 must be winning for Black. �xg7 lLlxg7 24 lIi xe4 lIid4 25
19 lLl xd5 l:!. ad I ! White is worse but can fight
20 lZlxd5 .i.xd5 on.
21 'ili' g4 .i.xe4 (J 3) 22 lLl xf5!
23 .i.a3
13 If 23 l:!. xf5 l:!. xf5 24 lIi xf5 lIid4+
W and 25 . . . lIi xa l .
23 lIid4 +
24 c,t>hl lLle3
25 lIie6 + c,t>h7
26 .i. xf8 J:l. xf8!
27 .!:l fel lIi xe4
28 lIih3 lIid4!
29 l:t ad lLlg4
0-1
Susan's other results in this event included wins against International

Masters Orso and Varasdy, plus a draw with Black against the strong
East German G M, Wolfgang Uhlmann. She finished ahead of Uhlmann
and also ahead of GMs Westerinen and Forintos.
Eight-year-old Sofia also made an impression in Kecskemet. Well
wrapped-up in a fluffy anorak and woolly hat, she gave an open-air
simul to children, watched by a large crowd of bemused, frowning
adults. One has to recall the feats of the prodigious Sammy Reshevsky
for a comparable act, although it is worth noting here that extreme
precocity in little girls at chess was not unknown before the birth of
the Polgars. A West German girl born in 1 960 by the name of Jutta
Hempel had given simultaneous displays at the age of five. She gave
up chess at eighteen.
To get a glimpse of the staple chess diet of the Polgar sisters at this
time, one has to read the fine print. Details of their early chess activity
are scarce and one gets the impression that much of it went unreported.
But in mid- 1 983 a typical event, the H anko Elemer Memorial Blitz
tourney, is reported, and it is recorded simply that Susan and Sofia
Polgar played.
The influence of blitz (five-minute) chess on the chess development
of the Polgars is highly significant. Their strenuous programme of blitz
play included, for example, a 24-hour marathon. Nevelj Zsenit! helpfully
illustrates this with photos of three knackered-looking youngsters.
As their fame grew they became well-known, not only as formidable
blitz opponents, but for their remarkable tactical ability. There is much
evidence that extensive speed chess improves the general sight of
A Staple Diet of Chess 45
the board, speed and intuition of calculation. This furnishes some

explanation as to why they rarely run short of time on the clock - that,
and their studied book knowledge.
Not j ust straightforward games, but blindfold games played with
clocks, and even blindfold simultaneous displays(!) were part of the
mental exercise regime provided by Laszlo Polgar. One of the most
illuminating illustrations in Nevelj Zsenit! shows Judith and Sofia
playing blitz with their backs to the board as Laszlo presides.
Capablanca, who also learned chess at four, was famed for his
blindfold prowess. It's worth remembering, however, that at least one
former World Champion doesn't share this enthusiasm. Karpov, when
asked why he didn't give more blindfold simuls, replied: "It's very tiring,
bad for the head, and there's not a great deal of point to it."
The latter part of 1 983 saw an encouraging victory for Susan in the
Szentendre Blitz tourney (equal first with GM Vogt, ahead of several
IMs) but also a minor setback at the Budapest Spartacus Club Open
at Balatonberenyi, where she did not play successfully but her fighting
spirit was nonetheless admired. She played the longest game of the
tournament, lasting 1 3t hours, against the East German, Mohring. In
the context of marathon efforts like this it is not surprising that the
progress line of Susan Polgar, like that of most juniors, tended to
zigzag rather than soar upwards. Chess is a tiring game.
7 Grounded!
In the Spring of 1 984, a number of European masters visited the

Polgars in Budapest and were treated to a display of the girls' blitz
and blindfold prowess. 1M Johann van Mil, then blitz champion of
Holland, lost to seven-year-old Judith. Nine-year-old Sofia defeated
the East German, Gauglitz, rated 2340, and Judith beat Herman
Grooten - both in blindfold games. The sisters chatted throughout,
commenting, of Grooten, "he is taking too long - shall we use a clock?"
Gauglitz-Sofia Polgar 14
Blindfold Game, B
Budapest 1984
1 d4 lZlf6
2 c4 g6
3 lZlf3 i.. g7
4 g3 0-0
5 i.. g 2 d6
6 0-0 lZl bd7
7 lZlc3 e5
8 e4 c6 13 lZl xe4
9 h3 "if b6 14 b4 "ife5
10 J:!. bl 15 lZlf3 "fie7
Gauglitz gets his move order 16 J:!. e l f5
confused; he had originally inte 17 lZld2 lZldf6?
nded 1 0 J:!. e l . Missing the opportunity to
10 J:!. d8 unpin the queen with 1 7 . . . "iff7
1 0 . . . J:!. e8 is normal here. 1 8 lZlxe4 fxe4 1 9 "if xe4 lZlf6.
11 ... c2? exd4 18 f3 "iff7
12 lZla4 ... a5 19 fxe4 fxe4
13 lZl xd4 (14) 20 lZlxe4 lZl xe4
This is where Gauglitz had 21 J:!. xe4 i.. f5
wanted a rook on e l ! "Oh, a small mistake; I'll j ust
Grounded! 47
have to concentrate properly Black has chosen the solid Sicil

now" - Gauglitz. ian Scheveningen system, a good
22 g4 .i.xe4 choice against youthful aggres
23 .i.xe4 .i.d4 + sion, awaiting developments from
24 c;tg2 d5 behind stalwart fortifications.
25 cxd5 cxd5 11 'it'g3 'tWc7
26 .H3 .l:!. f8 12 f5
27 'tWd3 (15) Grooten thinks Judith's 1 2th
move is anti-positional as it gives
Black the e5-square.
15 12 c;th8
B 13 fxe6 fxe6
14 .l:!. ad l tLle5
15 iLf4 b5
16 iLxe5 dxe5
17 tLlf3 b4 (16)
16
W
27 .l:!. ae8
28 .td2 .I:!. e3!!
"I am lost!" exclaimed the bewil
dered East German, "It's hope
less."
29 'tW xd4 'tW xf3+
30 c;tgl .l:!. e2
0-1
18 tLlxe5!?
Judith Polgar-Grooten (FM) An opportunistic tactical shot,
Blindfold Game, threatening to win the black queen
Budapest 1984 with tLlg6+ or tLlf7 + .
Sicilian Scheveningen 18 'it'c5 +
Best for Black here i s 1 8 . . .
1 e4 c5 'it' a 7 + , which would not leave his
2 tLlf3 e6 queen exposed after White's ensu
3 d4 cxd4 ing combinative flurry.
4 tLl xd4 · tLlf6 19 �hl bxc3
5 tLlc3 d6 Judith thinks for the first time.
6 .b2 iLe7 Now comes an incredible combi
7 0-0 0-0 nation from the blindfold seven
8 .i.e3 tLlc6 year-old:
9 f4 .td7 20 :t xf6!! .i.xf6
10 'tW e l a6 21 0xd7 'tW b6??
48 Grounded!
At once, an excited shriek of relief for Grooten; by now his head

laughter from Judith's chair. was spinning. When blindfold, it
22 lU xb6 1 -0 is particularly difficult to visualise
Perhaps this blunder came as a knights moving backwards.
At around this time, The Guardian correspondent Leonard Barden,

the West's prophetic talent-spotter who had predicted the world
crown for the eleven-year-old Kasparov, received a startling piece of
intelligence about the third Polgar sister: Seven-year-old Judith, it was
said, had beaten Yugoslavian Grandmaster Damljanovic in a blitz
game. I remember a conversation with him in the early eighties in
which I was excited about the prospect of Susan Polgar as a possible
first female contender for the 'men's' World Championship. He muttered
something about "J udith Polgar" and I didn't know what he was
talking about. It took a while before it became generally known in the
West that Susan Polgar had sisters!
Another 'early Judith':
Judith Polgar-Szendrei 10 g4 e5
Budapest 1984 11 lUf5 lUe5
Sicilian Najdorf 12 lUxe7 + "fII xe7
13 g5 lUfd7
1 e4 e5 14 f5 a5?
2 lUf3 d6 15 lUd5 "fII d8
3 d4 exd4 16 J:t g l b6
4 lU xd4 a6 17 J:t g4 lU xb3
5 lUe3 lUf6 18 axb3 lUe5 (1 7)
6 ..te4 Judith, showing the aggression
Fischer's favourite move, which that has typified her play ever
he used in his heyday to destroy since, single-mindedly pursues her
Grandmaster opposition. Coinci kingside attack. Black's position
dence? Hardly . . . Judith, like has been beyond salvation for
Bobby, has also used the unusual some time.
King's (Bishop's) Gambit. Both
have direct styles with the white
pieces. If the sisters have chosen a
role model, they couldn't be much 17
W
more ambitious!
6 e6
7 ..tb3 iLe7
8 f4 0-0
9 'ili f3 lU bd7
9 . . .lUc6, challenging in the
centre and leaving the d7-square
vacant for the king's knight, looks
more to the point.
Grounded! 49
19 lLlf6 + ! gxf6 21 . . . � g8 (the only defence to

20 gxf6 + �h8 � g7 and 'ifxh7 mate) allows the
21 'if h3 1 -0 spectacular finish 22 'iII xh7 + !
<t>h7 2 3 � h4 mate.
Susan played a number of international tournaments in 1 984

including the Elekes Dezso Memorial (Budapest) in May (6t; 1 1 ). Her
performance in Lipsce in East Germany was criticised because of her
apparent difficulty in finishing off weaker players. Her endgame
technique, however, won praise.
In the summer of 1 984, the entire Polgar family visited Targoviste.
Susan came second with 7/9 in a 24-player Open tournament. Seven
year-old Judith and nine-year old Sofia played in a special mixed j unior
international tournament. Sofia came third with 61/9. That Judith,
sensationally, took first place there is no doubt. The only puzzling
feature of this astonishing success is that, whilst Laszlo Polgar reports
Judith achieving a 1 00% score, the Hungarian chess 'organ' Magyar
Sakkelet, reports that she scored 81/9 - albeit, it must be said, a minor
detail indeed!
In future years, reports of the Polgar sisters' successes, at first
astonishing, began in time to sound like a litany - repetitive and
predictable. And in print, in the chess and non-chess media, the
repetitive refrain, symbolised by the stark numeric scores, was that and
only that - success. But from the mid-eighties unofficial whisperings
and rumours began to sound a more disturbing note.
It was claimed, for instance, by players who observed the children
playing in competitive situations that their consistently high perform
ance rate owed much to a cruder 'pedagogical' motivant than those
didactically expounded by Laszlo Polgar: namely, fear. "Fear of losing,"
said one Hungarian player, "is a great motivator. I myself always play
my best when I am terrified of losing."
Significantly, the young Maya Chiburdanidze was beaten by her
elder sister when she lost a game, thereby instilling into the girl a well
founded aversion to defeat at the chessboard.
Their father, it is said, is angry when the girls do not do well. And
when you consider that in a sense his entire life's work, in the final
analysis, stands or falls on the achievements of his daughters, this is
not such a surprising thought.
In the July 1 984 FIDE rating list, fifteen-year-old Susan Polgar
appeared as the world's top rated female player with 2405, ahead of
Women's World Champion Maya Chiburdanidze on 2375. Two more
tournaments in Bulgaria in 1 984 were sufficient to furnish Susan Polgar
with the two further norms she needed for the title of I nternational
Master: she came third at Varna, and equal first at the Alen-Mak
International Open. She was awarded the title at the age of fifteen, at
the 5 5th FIDE Congress at the Thessaloniki Ol � mpiad in November
50 Grounded!
1 984. "Susan Polgar makes history!" exclaimed the caption to her

photograph in Magyar Sakkelet. In this picture, her Star of David
pendant is clearly visible outside her striped sweater; and her hair has
been cut short.
What was not mentioned was Susan Polgar's non-participation in
the 1 984 Women's Olympiad, and the reason for it: neither her father
nor her mother were permitted by the Hungarian Chess Federation to
travel with her. Thus the Hungarian women's team, minus its highest
rated player, finished sixth. To shed a little light on the divisions Susan
Polgar's career progress caused in the Hungarian chess establishment
it's worth taking time out to consider a few of the personalities involved.
U ntil 1 989, the President of the Hungarian Chess Federation was
Sandor Szerenyi, an orthodox communist of the old school. He also
was no feminist: "Mr Polgar only wants his girls to play with the boys!"
complained Szerenyi in comically broken English at the FIDE Congress
in Manila in 1 983. Whether as a result of the ensuing mirth or from
common sense the FIDE delegates fortunately defeated Szerenyi's
proposal that FIDE ban or otherwise punish the Polgars for refusing
to conform.
From 1 929 until 1 93 1 Szerenyi was, in fact, General Secretary of the
H ungarian Communist Party. Thus it will be appreciated that in
H ungary,' as in other Eastern Bloc countries and the Soviet Union,
sport and politics were (and, despite recent political upheavals, still are)
closely intertwined.
Chess in these countries is unquestionably classified as a professional
sport, unlike the prevailing attitude of leisured, amiable amateurishness
that has traditionally characterised the competitive chess activity of
the West. For H ungary's chess masters, male and female, chess was a
very serious business. They played league chess as salaried sports
officials, employed by clubs as players and coaches. Their livelihoods
depended, not j ust on their chess reputations, but on keeping on the
right side of the authorities. Thus it is not surprising that certain players
found it advantageous to cultivate personal links with powerful people
like Szerenyi, who was a personal friend of the Premier, Janos Kadar.
Hungarian GM Gyula Sax wrote a long letter to New In Chess in
1 990, after the retirement of Szerenyi. In it he alleged close links
between GM Portisch, Szerenyi and Kadar. Implicit, also, was the
suggestion that Portisch's assumed position as H ungarian No. 1 owed
much to these links and the denial of playing opportunities to his rivals.
Another player of the 'old guard' reputedly close to Szerenyi was the
veteran woman player, Zsusza Veroci. The jealously, fear for livelihood
etc., felt by her and other H ungarian woman players in the wake of
Susan Polgar's meteoric ascent may safely be deduced. Imagine the
wrath then, when Susan Polgar declined to compete in the 'Super
Hungarian Women's Championship' that had been designed to give
Veroci the chance to challenge the supremacy of the upstart Polgar!
Grounded! 51
Professional jealousy apart, there was strong resentment from players

accustomed to toeing the line that the rule-breaking Polgars should
receive any 'special treatment'. If any other player, it was reasoned,
broke the rules, declined the 'correct' tournament invitations etc., that
player would expect to be penalized. Why should Susan Polgar be a
special case?
On the other hand, it is reasonable to assume that the attitude of
the Hungarian establishment, as distinct from Hungary's established
players, was more ambivalent. An outstanding sportsperson, however
troublesome, has public relations and propaganda uses - as indeed the
Polgar sisters, in the fullness of time, proved. Such international
successes as the Polgars, for instance, might be used by a repressive
regime to provide nationalistic headlines in times of domestic crisis.
It is against this background that we can understand, not only Susan
Polgar's 'punishment', i.e. her three-year 'grounding' inside the Eastern
,.Bloc between 1 982 and 1 985, but the fact, seemingly inexplicable at
the time, that she was let out again.
8 Chess in the West
In the Spring of 1 985, Susan and Sofia Polgar, accompanied by their

mother, Klara, visited the United States for the prestigious New York
Open. Sofia played in the amateur section, whilst it was Susan's first
visit to the West for three years. The Western chess world began to
learn something of the 'inside story' of Susan Polgar's conflict with the
Hungarian authorities when she gave her first interview to the Western
press.
Revealing herself as a maturing, articulate young woman with well
developed views and few illusions, she told The New York Times that
for the past three years she had not been permitted to travel outside
the Eastern Bloc because:
"They (the Hungarian Chess Federation) are angry at me because I
will not play in women's tournaments, and because I entered some of
the male tournaments without permission, so they have disciplined
me:" She was, she said, surprised that she had been permitted to come
to New York.
Susan explained that, despite having received the men's International
Master title, she had not yet been awarded the title of Woman
Grandmaster, despite having fulfilled the required norm 1 1 (!) times -
something to do with the H ungarian Chess Federation omitting to
conduct the necessary reporting and administration via FIDE. "The
HCF does not like me."
Her main point was that since only a handful of women in the world
could provide her with opposition, the only logical opponents for her
were strong male players. "I insist on playing in strong tournaments,"
she said. It seems incredible now that at this time, only a few years
ago, the question of women being allowed to play against men was still
a hotly-debated issue. She opined that the traditional lifestyle for
married women limited the opportunities of women to excel at chess.
Asked if she would like to get married and have children, she replied,
after reflection, "well, later."
'Chessically speaking', the New York Open of 1 9 8 5 was a success
for Susan Polgar. It was, she said, the strongest tournament she had
Chess in the West 53
played in to date. She scored 51/9, finished ahead of many strong

International Masters, drew with US Grandmaster Lombardy and beat
the Philippine Grandmaster Eugenio Torre after the latter suffered
what looks like a fatal attack of over-confidence, resulting in a careless
oversight.
Torre (GM)-Susan Polgar White would also be better after

New York Open 1985 1 3 W b3.
Torre Attack 13 dxe4
14 i.xe4 ttJf6
1 d4 ttJf6 15 i. xc6 bxc6
2 ttJf3 e6 16 ttJa4
3 i.g5 c5 After 1 6 ttJe5, Black could suc
4 c3 cxd4 cessfully bid for some freedom
Also possible for Black is 4 . . . with 1 6 . . . c5.
i.e7 5 i.xf6 gxf6; but perhaps 16 .i.d7
most logical for Black is 4 . . . W' b6, 17 ttJe5
attempting to exploit the absence 1 7 ttJc5 would also have kept
of White's queen's bishop from the Black tied up.
queenside. 17 J:!. fb8 (18)
5 cxd4 d5 This is Black's only chance to
More confrontational was 5 . . . offer resistance.
W' b6! 6 W' b 3 ttJe4 7 .i.f4 ttJc6 8
e3 .i.b4+ 9 ttJbd2 g5 1 0 .i.xg5
18
i.xd2 + ! as in Sangla-Karpov, W
USSR Team Ch 1 968; the idea
then is 1 1 ttJ xd2 'Wa5 1 2 W' c2 ttJ xd2
winning for Black.
6 ttJc3 ttJc6
The position now resembles an
exchange Slav (with White's
bishop on g5 instead of f4), where
Black always suffers a little
because of his light-squared
bishop being locked inside the
pawn chain. 18 ttJ xc6??
7 e3 i.e7 Torre commits an appalling
8 i.d3 0-0 blunder.
9 0-0 a6?! 18 W'e8
10 :l c l 19 ttJ xb8 .i. xa4
N o w White h a s a much more 20 b3 .i.b5
comfortable position. 21 ttJ xa6
10 h6 White would still stand worse
11 .i.h4 ttJd7!? after the possibly stronger 2 1 a4
12 .i. xe7 W' xe7 .i.xfl 22 ttJc6 .i.xg2 23 �xg2.
13 e4! 21 J:!. xa6
54 Chess in the West
22 l:t el l ha2 3 tLlc3 J.b4

23 l:t a l l::t xal 4 a3 J. xc3 +
24 'it' xa l 'it' b8! 5 bxc3 d6
25 f3 6 e3 e5
If 25 'ifa5, Black had 25 . . . tLlg4 ! 7 J.d3 c5
26 g3 J.c6. 8 tLle2 b6
25 'it'f4 9 0-0 tLlc6
26 �hl tLld5 10 e4 0-0
27 'it' b2 tLl b4! 11 d5 tLla5
28 'iff2 tLld3 12 tLlg3 tLle8
29 'ife3 'ifc7 13 l:!. a2 J.a6
30 J:t a l 'ifc2 14 'ife2 'it'd7
31 h3 J.c6 15 a4
32 l:t a6 J.d5 An important move to prevent
33 J:t b6 f5! (19) Black from playing . . . 'it' a4, win
The winning move. ning the front white c-pawn.
White now stands clearly better,
19 having chances to advance on the
W kingside whilst Black has no real
prospect of counterplay.
15 f6
16 J.e3 g6
17 J.h6 l:t f7
18 h4 tLlg7
19 f4 �h8
20 h5 l:I. g8
21 hxg6 hxg6
22 f5!
34 l:I. xe6 J. xe6 35 'it' xe6 + �h8 A well-timed breakthrough.
'
36 'it' d6 'it'et + 37 �h2 'iff4 + 38 Black's response is sheer desper
'if xf4 tLlxf4 39 g4 �g8 40 b4 tLld5 ation, but 22 . . . g5 runs into 23
41 b5 f4 42 � g2 �f7 43 �f2 �f2 tLle8 24 J:I. h 1 and Black is
�e6 44 �e1 tLl b6 45 c;t>d2 �d5 helpless against the doubling of
46 �c3 g5 0-1 the white rooks on the h-file.
22 tLlh5
Another excellent game from 23 tLl xh5 gxh5
Susan: 24 'it' xh5 l:t h7
25 l:t f3 J. xc4
Susan Polgar-Remlinger (FM) 26 J.xc4 tLl xc4
New York Open 1 985 27 l:!. h3 tLla5
Nimzo-Indian Defence 28 . g3 'ife8? (20)
This loses quickly to the ensuing
1 d4 tLlf6 sequence but Black's task was
2 c4 e6 pretty thankless in any case.
20 29 .tg7 + ! � xg7 30 'fII xh7 + �f8

W 31 :t ah2 'fII f7 32 'fII xf7 + � xf7 33
l:t h7 + J:!. g7 34 l:t h8 J:!. xg3 + 35
�f2 l:t g8 36 l:t 2h7 + J:!. g7 37
J:!. xg7 + � xg7 38 l:[ a8 � h6 39
l:t xa7 � g5 40 �f3 ttJc4 41 l:[ g7 +
� h5 4 2 l:t g6 ttJb2 4 3 l:t xf6 ttJ xa4
44 l:t xd6 b5 45 l:t a6 1 -0
Ten-year-old Sofia scored 5t/8 in the Amateur Section. Susan was

not impressed with this performance; given that Sofia was stronger
than she had been at the same age, "she (Sofia) did not do too well."
The next game is given mainly however, instead makes a decisive

for historical interest: mistake, after which ten-year-old
Sofia never allows him the ghost
of a chance.
Sofia Polgar-Hirsch
10 0-0
New York Open 1 985
11 ttJd4 .i.c8
King's Gambit
12 0-0-0 :t e8
13 l:[ e l f5
1 e4 e5
14 g4
2 f4 d5
Methodically undermining the
3 exd5 e4
knight on e4 as well as opening
4 d3 ttJf6
the g-file for active regicidal oper
5 dxe4 ttJ xe4
ations.
6 ttJf3 .i.c5
14 'it' f6
7 'fII e2 .i.f5
15 gxf5 ttJd6
8 ttJc3 'fII e7
16 ttJe6 ttJxf5
9 .i.e3 .i. xe3
17 'it'f2 .i. xe6
10 'it' xe3 (21)
18 dxe6 ttJe7
19 .l:l. gJ ttJ bc6
21
B
20 .i.c4 l:t ad8
21 f5 :t d4
22 ttJe4 'it'h6+
23 �bl �h8
24 .i.d3 l:t f8
25 ttJg5 'it'f6
26 'it' g3 h6
27 ttJe4 (22)
White has steadily exploited her
'
material advantage . Black's
Now after 10 . ttJ xc3 1 1
. . attempt to lash out now simply
'it' xe7 + �xe7 1 2 bxc3 White is leaves him a piece down in the
slightly better in the ending. Black, endgame.
22
27 . . . ttJ xf5 28 ttJxf6 ttJ xg3 29 ttJh7
B
.:. fd8 30 l hg3 J:t xd3 31 .:. xd3
.:. xd3 32 cxd3 ttJe7 33 ttJf8 r,tg8
34 ttJg6 ttJc8 35 e7 ttJd6 36 e8('it')+
ttJ xe8 37 J:t xe8 + r,tf7 38 l:I. e7 +
'itxg6 3 9 .:. xc7 r,tf6 4 0 J:t xb7 as
41 J:t a7 g5 42 J:t xa5 1 -0
Following New York, Susan lost a short match against British GM

John Nunn 2-0. Even such a bald statement is an indication of the
progress, Susan represented for women in chess; ten years previously,
no Grandmaster would have considered a serious match against a
woman player.
1 9 8 5 was a very busy year for Susan. Having been let out of Hungary
to play in the West, she seemed determined to capitalise on the
opportunity. She dashed from tournament to tournament (Amsterdam,
Baden-Baden, Dortmund, Manhattan, Trencianske Teplice etc. - nine
in all) leaving a trail of Grandmaster victims in her wake. This is not
to mention her normal 'club' commitments as a team member at MTK
Budapest, where she played in the same team as GM Portisch. For the
first time, the international chess media (Informator, New In Chess,
etc.) began to publish her annotated games.
Here is an impressive victory 6 bxc3 f5
over Australian Grandmaster-to 6 . . . ttJf6 would lead to the well
be Ian Rogers from the summer known Samisch variation of the
Amsterdam OHRA tournament: Nimzo-Indian Defence. Rogers is,
however, known for his original
approach to opening play and
Susan Polgar-Rogers (1M) doesn't disappoint here.
Amsterdam 1 985 7 f3
English Defence 7 'if h4 +
A surprise for Susan who had
1 d4 e6 been expecting 7 . . . ttJf6.
2 c4 b6 8 g3 'if h5
A variation favoured by GM 9 .i.g2 ttJf6
Tony Miles. 10 ttJ h3 ttJc6
3 ttJc3 .i.b4 11 ttJf4 'if f7
4 e3 12 e4 0-0-0
Susan prefers to avoid the sharp Probably a better try for Black
position arising after 4 e4 .i.b7. was 12 . . . 0-0.
4 .i.b7 13 0-0
5 a3!? .i. xc3 + Black has held up White's
queenside advance for the moment sent on the part of the players, not
and maintains strong pressure best. Black should probably have
against the perennially weak front opted for 'mixing' things with a
white c-pawn. White, on the other bit of sacrificial play, e.g. 20 . . .
hand, has central dictatorship and ttJce2 + 2 1 J:[ xe2 J.. x f3 with a very
long-term attacking prospects unclear position.
against the black king. 21 "it' b4 f4!?
13 gS?! 21 . . . ttJcS? 22 ttJxcS bxcS 23
The preferable alternative, 1 3 . . . "it' xcS ttJb3 24 "*, b4 ttJxa l 2S l:t b2
.i.a6 1 4 "*,a4 ttJaS I S ttJd3 d6, was d6 26 "it' xb7 + �d7 27 exd6 is
unclear. good for White, and 21 . . . J.. c 6?
14 ttJd3 l:t hg8 allows White to win with 22 J.. e 3.
IS cS! hS 22 "iV xa4 "it' fS
16 eS 23 "*, d l fxg3
Passing up the following possi 24 hxg3 l:t df8
bility to cunningly coax a fatal 2S ttJel "*, xeS
error from Black: 1 6 cxb6 axb6 1 7 26 J.. b2 cS
c4 ttJxd4? 1 8 ttJeS winning a piece. 27 J.. x d4 cxd4
Objectively, however, there is 28 J:[ bl h4
nothing wrong with the text move. The alternative was 28 . . . "iV xg3
16 ttJdS but then White is also doing well
If 1 6 . . . ttJh7 or 1 6 . . . ttJe8 then after 29 "it' xd4.
1 7 cxb6 axb6 1 8 c4, intending cS. 29 J:[ xb6 hxg3
17 cxb6 axb6 30 It e2 (24)
18 c4 ttJc3
19 "ilt' e l ttJ xd4 (23)
24
8
23
W
30 "it'cS?
Probably the decisive error.
20 l:t f2! Necessary was 30 . . . "it' h8, but
20 J.. e 3 was bad due to 20 . . . even so White enj oys the better
ttJce2 + 2 1 � h l h4, which would chances after 3 1 : xb7 �xb7 32
be to Black's advantage. "iV a4.
20 ttJa4?! 31 :'&S "iV a7
Played after twenty-five min 32 l:t eb2 J.. c6
utes' thought but, by mutual con- 33 l:t b6 eS
34 'if b3 ri;c7 37 f4 + ri;c7

35 c5 ':' a8? 38 1W b6 + ! 'if xb6
35 . . . ':' g6 was objectively 39 cxb6 + ri; b8
better, although Black would in 40 .i.xa8 gxf4
all probability still be 'gone'. 41 .i.d5 ':' e8
36 .Ihc6 + ! ri;xc6 42 l:t b5 e4
36 . . . dxc6 is met by 37 'iff7 + . 43 l:t a5 f3
44 ':' a8 + mate.
Baden-Baden (West Germany) July/August 1 985, was a Category 9

event containing eight Grandmasters. In this field, Susan's score of
6/1 3 was very creditable. She beat Grandmasters Florin Gheorghiu
and I van Farago, and GM-to-be Stefan Kindermann.
Baden-Baden July/August 1 98 5
I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 II 1 2 1 3 14 Total
I Smejkal GM 2565 . , 0 1 " , 1 1 , , 1 1
1 9
2 E. Geller GM 2520 , • -% I , 1 , I , I I 1 ,
, 8,
3 Kindermann 1M 2480 1 ' . ' 1 1 1 0 0 0 , 1 1
1 8
4 Quinteros GM 2525 0 0 , . , 0 1 , 1 , 1 1 1
1 8
5 Gheorghiu GM 25 1 5 , , , , • 0 , 0 I , I , I
I 71
6 Farago G M 25 1 0 , ! 0 I I • ! 0 0 1 ! I 1
! 7
7 Timoschenko GM 2475 , , 0 0 , ! • ! , ! I I I
! 7
8 Susan Polgar 1 M 2430 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 . 1 -% , 0 0
, 6
9 Mrdja FM 2425 o , I 0 0 I , 1 • ! 0 ! I
0 S1
10 Witt 2295 1 0 1 1 -% 0 , 1 1 . 0 1 0
! S
II Bastian FM 2375 , 0 , 0 0 1 0 ! I I . 0 0
I S
12 Pachman GM 24 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 I 1 1 I • !
1 S
13 Jansen 2295 o 1 0 0 0 1 0 I 0 1 I 1 • I S
14 Ermenkov G M 2520 0 1 0 0 0 1 , , 1 1 0 , 0 . 4,
Average FIDE rating 245 3 (Category 9) GM norm - 9 1
Susan Polgar-Gheorghiu 12 a3
Baden-Baden 1 985 Due to the rigidly blocked cen
King's Indian Defence tre, both players adopt a non
committal approach, delaying the
1 d4 lLIf6 decision as to which wing to castle
2 c4 c5 on, j ockeying for optimum piece
3 d5 d6 placement and opting for cautious
4 lLIc3 g6 structural pawn manoeuvres.
5 e4 .i. g7 12 'if f8
6 f3 e5 13 'ifc2 .i.h6
7 .i.g5 h6 14 .i.f2 .i.g5
8 .i.e3 h5 15 b4 b6
9 1Wd2 a6 16 .:. bl 1Wh6? (25)
10 .i.d3 'ife7 Black has the right idea but the
11 lLIge2 lLI bd7 wrong move order. In view of
White's reply, . . . 'ifh6 should have 32 lDe2 .l: b6

been prepared with 16 . . . h4. 33 lDd4 .l:[ ab8
34 .l: a2 a4
25 35 lDc6 + .i.xc6
W 36 dxc6 a3
37 <i;d4 <i;d8
38 .i.c4 .l:[ xc6 (26)
26
W
17 h4! .i.e3
18 .i. xe3 'it' xe3
19 f4
The black queen has been
sucked into White's position and "No game was ever won by
can be rescued only at ruinous resigning." Gheorghiu, the crafty
material cost. Romanian veteran, has clearly
19 cxb4 taken this advice on board. Still
20 axb4 b5 playing for tricks, he spies that 39
21 c5 lD xc5 .l: xa3?? allows 39 . . . .l: xc4+ 40
22 bxc5 lD g4 <i;xc4 .l: c8 + 41 <i; xb4 .l: b8 +
23 lDdl "' xc5 Hope springs eternal i n a Grand
24 .l:[ c l 'it' xc2 master's breast.
25 .I: xc2 .i.d7 39 .i. xf7 <i;d7 40 .i.d5 .l:[ c5 4 1
26 J:l b2 exf4 .I: f 2 .I: bb5 4 2 .i.c4 <i;c6 43
27 lDxf4 <i;e7 .i.xb5 + c;t xb5 44 .l:[ f8 .l:[ c4 + 45
28 ..t>d2 .l:[ hb8 <i;d3 .l:[ c3 + 46 <i;d2 a2 47 .l:[ b8 +
Although Black is, of course, ""c5 48 .l:[ a l : g3 49 .l:[ c 1 + <i;d4
objectively lost (a piece for two 50 .l:[ xb4 + ""e5 5 1 .l:[ a l l hg2+
pawns down) he hopes to create 52 <i;e3 .l:[ g3 + 53 <i;f2 .l: h3 54
technical difficulties based on "" g2 .l:[ xh4 55 .l:[ xa2 d5 56 .l:[ a6
advancing his passed pawns, and .l:[ g4 + 57 <ot;>f2 dxe4 58 .l:[ b5 +
indeed, stubbornly prolongs the <i;d4 5 9 J:t d6 + ""c4 60 J:l e5 h4
struggle for another forty moves. 61 ""e3 .l:[ g3+ 62 <i;f4 g5 + 63
29 lDe3 lD xe3 .l:[ xg5 .l:[ xg5 64 <i; xg5 e3 65 <ot;>xh4
30 <i; xe3 a5 e2 66 .l:[ e6 �d3 67 ""g3 <i;d2 68
31 : hbl b4 <i;f2 1 -0
Susan, probably suffering from 'chess fatigue', did not · distinguish
herself in the Category 10 event (average rating 248 1 ) in Manhattan in
October 1 985 - 2t/9! She did, however, beat very strong GM-to-be
John Fedorowicz:
Susan Polgar-Fedorowiez (1M) 27

Manhattan 1 985 B
1 d4 � f6
2 e4 g6
3 �e3 Ag7
4 e4 d6
5 f4
A characteristically aggressive
'Polgarian' approach.
5 0-0
6 � f3 e5 White turns her attention to the
7 d5 e6 black queenside weaknesses.
8 Ae2 exd5 19 e4
9 exd5 .i.g4 20 �dl � e5
10 0-0 .i.xf3 21 Axe5 dxe5
Committal. More flexible would 22 �f2 Ad4
be 10 . . . � bd7, when play could 23 �hl hxg5
continue 1 1 �d2 .i.xe2 12 1IF xe2 24 hxg5 �g7
l:I. e8 1 3 'iff3 1IFe7 1 4 a4 c4 1 5 � h l 25 � h3 'it'd7
�c5 with unclear play, a s i n Peev 26 �g2 f6?! (28)
Tseshkovsky, Albena 1 97 1 . An understandable attempt to
11 Axf3 �bd7 break White's stranglehold, but
12 a4 a6 this move involves a serious weak
13 .i.e3 l:I. e8 ening of the black king's position,
With hindsight, much of Black's upon which Susan promptly
subsequent hardship can be traced pounces.
to this move, which robs his king's
knight of a normal retreat square. 28
The immediate . . . l:I. b8, getting on W
with organising queenside co un
terplay, was perhaps more accur
ate.
14 .i.f2 l:I. b8
15 g4 h6
16 h4 b5
17 g5 � h7
18 axb5 axb5
19 1IF e2 (2 7)
White's kingside pawn advances
were made not with intent to 27 l:I. a6! fxg5
launch a direct mating attack, but 28 .I:l. fa l gxf4
rather with the idea of disrupting 29 � xf4 � f8
the co-ordination of Black's forces. 30 Ag4 1IFe7
Now that this has been achieved, 31 l:I. a7 l:I. b7
32 d6 Wf7 34 J:t xb7 Wxf4

33 d7 .!:t d8 35 :l a8 1 -0
At Trencianske Teplice, in Czechoslovakia, Susan was invited to

play in a very strong Category 9 men's international (average rating
2452) and scored her most exciting result of the year. She came fourth,
ahead of G Ms Smejkal, Lechtynsky, Plachetka . . . and she scored 3/4(!)
against the Czech men's Olympiad team (Smejkal, Plachetka, Ftacnik,
Mokry). Here is one of those victories:
Plachetka (GM)-Susan Polgar 18 cxd4 f6

Trencianske Teplice 1 985 19 tZlg4 f5
Torre Attack 20 tZle5 dxe4
21 fxe4 fxe4
I d4 tZl f6 22 tZl xe4 tZl xe4
2 tZlf3 g6 23 �xe4 � xe4
3 �g5 �g7 24 'W! xe4 tZl f6
4 tZl bd2 d5 25 'W!e2
5 e3 0-0 Black meets the alternative, 25
6 �d3 c5 'W! c6 with 25 tZld5 26 .!:t ac 1
7 c3 b6 �h6!
Of the alternative seventh 25 tZld5
moves for Black, 7 . . . cxd4?! is 26 tZlf3 (29)
dubious, but interesting is 7 . . .
tZlfd7 8 0-0 tZlc6 9 :l b I , as in 29
Plachetka-Schmidt as the same B
event.
8 We2 �b7
9 0-0 tZle4!
10 �f4 tZld7
II .!:t fd l tZldf6
12 h3?! e6
13 a4 as
14 �h2 tZld6
IS tZle5
White's plan is to play f3 and 26 �h6!!
e4, gaining space in the centre. The best move of the game.
Black must now come up with a 27 .!:t e1 :l ac8
challenging response and Susan 28 'W! xe6 + ?
rises to the occasion, regrouping White should resist the temp
her forces and striking back along tation to 'cut and run' for an
the f-file. ending a pawn to the good, and
IS 'W!e7 instead prevent Black's bishop
16 f3 tZl fe8 invading on e3 with the pre
17 e4 cxd4 cautionary 2S .!:t a3 !
28 'it' xe6 30
29 l::t xe6 l::t e2 B
Intending 30 . . . lLl e3 .
30 l:t ae1
The only move.
30 l:t xb2
31 l::t 6e2 l::t xe2
32 l::t xe2 J.e3 +
33 cto>fl (30)
If 33 cto>h l , Black has 3 3
l::t c8, intending 34 . . . l::t c4.
33 J.xd4
34 l:t d2 lLle3 +
35 cto>e2 J.e5 40 J.e5 cto>f7
36 g4 l::t e8 41 J.e7 l::t a3
37 cto>d3 lLl xg4 42 cto>b5 l::t b3+
38 hxg4 l::t e3 + 43 cto>e6 l::t b4
39 cto>e4 l::t xf3 0-1
By the end of 1 985, the chess world was getting accustomed to

the sight of sixteen-year-old Susan Polgar holding her own against
Grandmasters. Even so, her score of 61/1 3 in the Category 9 Brussels
OHRA tournament in December 1 985 was an impressive achievement,
as the tournament table shows. She scored 21 out of 3 against the
English contingent, beating Speelman and Hodgson, and drawing with
Nunn.
Susan Polgar-Speelman (GM) Also possible is 6 a3 bxa3 7

Brussels OHRA 1 985 l:t xa3 b6 8 lLlc3 J.b7 9 e3 0-0
Bogo-Indian Defence 1 0 J.d3 d5, as in Christiansen
Timman, Linares 1 985.
1 d4 lLlf6 6 b6
2 c4 e6 7 J.g2 J.b7
3 lLlf3 J.b4+ 8 0-0 0-0
4 J.d2 e5 9 lLl bd2 d6
This weird-looking move had 10 l:t el lLl bd7!?
become popular around the time 11 'it' b3 a5
this game was played and is con 12 e4 e5
sistent with Speelman's liking for 13 'it'd3 l::t e8
strategically complex positions. As 14 lLlh4 lLlf8?
a trade-off for Black's doubled This allows White time to re
pawns, the white Queen's knight is route his knight to e3 where it
excluded from c3. ogles the strategically important
5 J. xb4 cxb4 d5-square. 14 . . . g6, preventing
6 g3 lLlf5, might have been advisable.
15 lLlf5 g6 41 l:I. b5 l:t e2 42 l:t xa5 ':' xe4 (32)

16 lLle3 lLle6
17 dxe5 lLle5? (3 1)
Jonathan Speelman is one of 32
the world's most creative Grand- W
masters, but here the enthusiastic

vegetarian bites off more than he
can chew. More palatable was 1 7
. . . dxe5, when 1 8 "it" xd8 l:t axd8
limits White's advantage to
manageable proportions.
31
B
White is a clear outside passed

pawn up, but what makes this win
technically easy is the fact that
White's bishop is far stronger than
the black knight.
43 : a7 lLle3
44 �f2 l:I. d4
45 �e3 : d8
46 a4 lLldl +
1 8 "it" xd6 lLlfd7 1 9 f4 : e6 20 1Vd4 47 �e2 lLle3 +
lLl xe5 21 "it" xd8 + : xd8 22 lLld5 48 �f1 l:I. d3
lLled3 23 l:I. ebl lLla4 24 a3! b3 25 49 ..te6 l:I. d l +
lLl xb3 lLldxb2 26 lLld4 l:I. ee8 27 e5 50 �f2 l:I. d2 +
�f8 28 : ct lLle5 29 lLl b5 lLlb3 51 �e3 .:. d6
30 lLld6 ':' xd6 3 1 exd6 ..t xd5 32 52 l:I. e7 � h6
..t xd5 lLlxal 33 : xa l l:t d8 34 53 a5 f5
.:. bl lLla4 35 ..te6 lLle3 36 l:I. xb6 54 a6 lLldl +
: xd6 37 l:I. b8 + � g7 38 ..tf3 55 �e2 lLle3 +
l:I. d3 39 �g2 l:I. d2 + 40 �f1 lLla4 56 �f2 1 -0
The entire family came t o Brussels, where they gave an interview to

New In Chess magazine. Laszlo spoke proudly about the achievements
of all his daughters. Only Fischer, he pointed out, had played as well
as Susan at the age of sixteen. Nine-year-old Judith had won a master
class blitz tournament with a 1 00 % score. Sofia had come third in a
rapid-play tournament in Yugoslavia amongst masters and Grand
masters. Susan, it seemed, was still having problems with the Hungarian
Chess Federation; she now had twenty norms for the Wo'man Grand
master title, which she had still not received due to her results not
being passed on to FIDE. She had also not been granted permission
to play for a club in the West, which she wanted to do. On a lighter
note, she revealed some Western influences, probably as a result of her
travels: music by Lionel Richie and Abba. (More recently, it has been
rumoured that her favourite film is Dirty Dancing, which she has seen
three times).
In Brussels, the Western chess world got its first real glimpse of the
younger Polgars. A photo of a smiling, chubby-cheeked Judith with
the precocious shoulder-bag that was to become the sartorial trademark
of the sisters was accompanied by a characteristic anecdote. She
(blindfold) had won a couple of blitz games with a restaurateur friend
of the family (not blindfold) - a strong amateur. The family ate lunch
in the restaurant afterwards, Judith remarking to the restaurant boss
that she liked the food very much. He answered: "Yes, you can play
chess, and I can cook." Judith riposted: "And blindfold as well?"
Sofia revealed an enthusiasm for composing problems. Here is a
mate in two by her:
33
W
Solution: 1 <;tg6
Another favoured fatherly anecdote was the discovery by Laszlo of
Sofia, late at night, sitting in the lavatory with a chessboard on her
knees, busily composing. "Why won't you leave the chess pieces alone?"
asked Laszlo. "Daddy, the chess pieces won't leave me alone", replied
the little girl.
It was remarked that the two younger girls seemed unable to sit still
at the board for long periods of time, but frequently dashed off between
moves to play tag and have fun together. Susan commented: "Of course,
I was like that too. At that age you only play for the fun of it."
Laszlo Polgar, at that time, had this to say about the girls' chess
ambitions (or his ambitions for them): "The highest attainable goal is,
of course, the (men's) World Championship, but that is not absolutely
necessary, as long as they keep on playing very well. We do not want
to turn the whole thing into a circus, but they should be able to build
up a good career. Successes yield money, and with that money we can
pay for a good coach."
One question and answer struck me: Asked if she has had a happy
childhood, Susan answered whole-heartedly: "Yes". Perhaps all the
Polgar sisters are happy, perhaps they are half-happy, perhaps some
times they are unhappy - no-one really knows - but it makes no sense
to ask children living with, and in the control of, parents such a
question. It may be worth asking, retrospectively, of independent adults
at some future date, but at Brussels in 1 985, the question seemed rather
pointless. '
As a parting shot, Laszlo demonstrated a game to illustrate his eldest
daughter's prowess, which is one of Susan's best-known victories.
Susan Polgar-P. Hardicsay (FM) 13 l:t e l ! i.d4

Hungarian Team Tournament, Hardicsay had previously
Budapest 1985 assessed this position as good for
Benoni Defence Black. Susan, according to Laszlo,
smiled as she pulled a home
1 d4 lZl f6 grown novelty out of the hat.
2 c4 c5 14 l:t c2 lZl xf2
3 d5 e6 15 J:!. xf2 .t xf2 +
4 lZlc3 exd5 16 q;, xf2 .tg4
5 cxd5 d6 17 .tb5 + ! !
6 lZlf3 g6 Susan jettisons her extra piece
7 .H4 a6 in order to entomb the black king
8 e4 .i.. g7 in the corner of the board.
8 . . . b5, preventing 9 W' a4 + , is 17 axb5
the alternative. A possible con 18 l:t el + q;, f8
tinuation then is 9 W'e2 lZlh5 l O 19 .th6+ '>1;>g8
.t g 5 f6 1 1 i.e3 lZld 7 1 2 g4 lZlg7 20 l:t e7 .td7 (35)
13 h4 with a highly unclear pos
ition, as in Petursson- Portisch,
Reykjavik 1 988.
35
9 ... a4+ .td7
W
10 W' b3 .tg4
11 W' xb7 .t xf3
12 W' xa8 lZl xe4 (34)
34
W
21 W' xb8 .W' xb8

22 lZle4 1 -0
Beautiful!
Asked about her playing style, Susan declined to be one-dimension

alised as a tactician. She said: "I have a style of my own. It is difficult
to define it in words. 1 believe that the best style is a universal one,
tactical and positional at the same time . . . 1 don't have one favourite
player in particular. 1 admire many players - Kasparov, Karpov,
Portisch - and 1 analyse their games."
Susan revealed that she had twice been presented with the novel The
Queen 's Gambit by Walter Tevis, in which the young girl heroine
becomes World Chess Champion, and was asked whether she cherished
similar ambitions. "That will be terribly hard, of course, but theoretically
it is always possible. There are not so many players who were better
at my age than 1 am. I'll try it in any case. Why not?"
9 The ' Circus' Goes Down Under
The year kicked off with what more enthusiastic Polgar-watchers would
have described as a so-so showing for Susan with 5/9 in the Vienna
Open in January 1 986. However, Albena, Bulgaria, was another
spectacular success for her, winning the International Open with 7t;9,
a full point clear of Zaitchik (USSR) and other GMs. She was unbeaten.
Susan Polgar-Spiridonov (G M) storm. His last move is an attempt

A lbena 1 986 to provide retreat space for his
Nimzo-Indian Defence knight on e7.
15 a4 tLleg8
1 d4 tLl f6 16 .U4 a5
2 e4 e6 17 -.f3 J:t a6
3 tLle3 .tb4 18 J:t ae 1 .td7
4 a3 .txe3 + 19 .te2 "jIe7
5 bxe3 e5 20 J:t xe8 + .txe8
6 e3 tLle6 21 J:t el J:t a8
7 tLle2 d6 22 tLlfl J:[ d8
Another and possibly superior 23 g4 tLld7
way to develop was 7 0-0 8 tLl g3
. . . 24 "jIg3 tLl b6
b6, after which Black's structure is 25 tLld2 tLlf6 (36)
more compact.
8 tLlg3 e5
9 .td3 0-0
h6 36
10 0-0
W
11 d5 tLle7
12 f4 exf4
13 exf4 J:t e8
14 f5 �f8
This position is already disas
trous for Black. He has no pro
spect of counterplay and is
reduced to bracing himself for
White's approaching kingside
68 The 'Circus ' Goes Down Under
Susan has completely outplayed 30 �xg5 'ii' c 8

the strong Bulgarian and spots her 31 h3
chance to break down his defences. Eliminating any possibility of
Now the real beauty of the counterplay by depriving Black of
advance 26 g5 is that 26 . . . lLlh5 the resource . . . 'ii' g4 + . He now
is answered by 27 gxh6!! lLlxg3 28 has no real defence against the
h7, winning at once. plan of 32 �xf6 gxf6 33 �h7.
26 g5 hxg5 31 lLle4
27 'ii' h3 lLl bd7 32 lLl xe4 f6
28 'ii' h8 + lLlg8 33 lLlxf6 1 -0
29 f6 lLldxf6
In April 1 986, Susan and Sofia Polgar returned to New York for the
New York Open, this time accompanied by nine-year-old Judith. It
was this event that truly established the trio as a fearsome threesome
for the first time. Susan, 1 6, playing in the master tournament, scored
519 (the co-winners, GMs Smejkal and Sax, scored 7/9) missing the
Grandmaster norm by j ust half a point. Eleven-year-old Sofia was co
winner of the Class-A section with 7/8. But in the end it was Judith's
outright win in the unrated section with 7!/8 that was the biggest
crowd puller.
"Chess Player, 1 0, Can Win With Her Eyes Closed," declared the
banner headline in the International Herald Tribune. (In fact, Judith
was three months short of her tenth birthday). The article described
Judith as "a small, serious-looking child . . . face impassive, occasionally
darting quick looks at her opponent." Her play was described as "solid
and accurate, a testimony to the thorough training she has received."
"It's discipline," said a tournament arbiter, " . . . not only talent . . . these
three sisters work at chess. They are at it sometimes eight, nine hours
a day."
At this time, Judith spoke no English so Klara translated the
nine-year-old's response to the question "Is your aim to be World
Champion?" - "I will try."
Later interviews reveal a persistent reticence from all the Polgar
sisters when the media tries to put their individual personalities, as
opposed to their chess prowess, under the microscope. They seem much
more relaxed in what they see as a pure chess context, i.e. playing
chess. Here, in their realm of expertise, they are at home.
Thus, it was only when the New York Times journalist, having lost
against a blindfold Judith, made a 'chessy' quip, that the youngster
smiled. She enquired through her mother why her opponent had first
offered a draw, and then, having been rebuffed, resigned; he replied
"because I was a pawn down in an inferior position!" As was also
evident from earlier encounters, the young Judith took a truly childish
pleasure in winning at chess. Pleasure and - given the reward of
approval - perhaps relief as well?
The 'Circus ' Goes Down Under 69
On her way to her near GM-result in New York, Susan Polgar

chalked up a number of impressive victories. Here is one of them:
Pein-Susan Polgar 14 .i.e2 ':' e8

New York Open 1986 15 a3 .i.e5
Queen's Gambit Accepted 16 .i.xe5 + lll xe5
17 .i.xe4
1 d4 d5 Black's better co-ordinated
2 e4 dxe4 forces and cramping pawn on c4
3 lll f3 e5 were proving too much for White
4 lll e3 lll f6 to tolerate. He tries to break the
5 e4 exd4 bind with this combination, but
6 1If xd4 1If xd4 just ends up material down. Per
7 lll xd4 e5 haps more stoic was 17 lll d 6.
8 lll d b5 (3 7) 17 .i. xe4
18 lll d 6 lll b3 +
19 �e2 J:!. ae5
37
20 lll xe8 + J:!. xe8
B
21 �bl b5
22 l:l hel c;t;e6
23 J:!. e3 lll d 4
24 f4 exf4
25 J:!. ee l �e5
26 lll d5 .i.b3
27 J:!. d2 .i.e2 +
28 �a2 lll xe4
29 lll xf4 .i.b3 +
30 �bl .i.e2 +
8 �d8! 31 �a2 b4 (38)
Prior to this game, this variation
was considered very dangerous for 38
Black but Susan's calm king move W
turns this assessment on its head.
9 .i.e3
9 .i. xc4 a6 10 lll a3 b5 1 1 .i.d5
J:!. a7 12 lll c 2 b4 1 3 lll a4 .i.d7
leaves Black with a tremendous
endgame. After the text, Black has
a small endgame advantage which
she methodically nurses to victory.
9 .i.e6
10 .i. xa7 lll bd7
11 .i.e3 .i. b4 Susan presses remorselessly for
12 f3 ':' a5 ward, totally unimpressed by
13 0-0-0 �e7 Pein's typically energetic but futile
thrashing around in search of 32 ttJd3 + �f5

counterplay. White is now com 33 g4 + � g5
pletely impotent in the face of 34 h4 + � xh4
Black's advance. 35 l:I. xe4 b3 +
0-1
One of the Hungarian Chess Federation's PR coups of 1 986 was to

ban Susan Polgar's participation in the World Junior Championship
in Norway on the grounds that "the event is normally for the male
sex."
In May 1 986, the girl not considered fit to compete with boys for
the world title was nonetheless permitted to play in the 40th H ungarian
Closed Championship in Budapest. Never before in Hungary had a
woman contested the final stage of this championship. Her result -
equal second, undefeated (!), with 9/1 5 - caused the biggest sensation
yet in her career.
Hungarian Championship April/May 1 986

1 Farago GM 10
2= Hazai 1M 9
Susan Polgar 1M 9
4 G roszpeter GM 8!
5 A. Schneider 1M 8
1 6 Players.
Average FIDE rating 243 5 (Category 8)
Magyar Sakkelet commented: "It does not necessarily mean that she
will win the (men's) World Championship title, but it proves that a
seventeen-year-old girl can definitely play chess. If she continues to
improve at this rate, it will not be long before she is a Grandmaster."
Previously, according to Magyar Sakkelet, the right of a woman to
play in the Closed Championship has been widely questioned. Now,
however, Susan Polgar was unquestionably vindicated. Of her style:
"She plays cautiously, but she is quite tactical and finds nice combi
nations in middlegames. She sometimes seems uncertain if she finds
herself in unfamiliar positions."
An accompanying photo of Susan shows her sporting a "Just Say
No!" badge apparently obtained in the US as part of an anti-drugs
campaign. However, news of this had apparently not reached Hungary
as the caption-writer seemed to think the slogan might be something
to do with an uncompromising attitude towards draws.
The Hungarian Championship counted as a selection event for the
Zonal stage of the Men's World Championship, and Susan's result was
sufficient to qualify for one of Hungary's six places. In the end, Susan
did not participate in the Zonal, but the fact that she had qualified
moved Istvan Bilek to opine that Susan Polgar could, indeed, become
in due time a challenger for the overall world title.
Here is Susan's best game from this event:
Perenyi (IM)-Susan Polgar

39
Hungarian Championship, B
Budapest 1986
Sicilian Sveshnikov
1 e4 c5
2 tLlf3 tLlc6
3 d4 cxd4
4 tLl xd4 tLlf6
5 tLlc3 e5
6 tLldb5 d6
7 .i.e3 a6
8 tLla3 l:t b8 the kingside. This odd rook
9 tLld5 tLl xd5 manoeuvre is an attempt to com
10 exd5 tLle7 plicate, but in practice merely pro
11 .i.c4 vides another target for the on
This looks rather strange. White coming black forces.
has a queenside pawn majority 20 h6
and one would expect him to start 21 .i.f1 e4
it rolling with 1 1 c4. The bishop 22 c4 a5
merely gets in the way on c4 as well 23 c5 dxc5
as being an exposed, potentially 24 .i.c4 "it' d6
tempo-losing, target. 25 .i. xa5 b6
11 tLlf5 26 .i.d2
12 .i.d2 .i.e7 This allows Black to obtain a
13 0-0 0-0 classic 'good knight v bad bishop'
14 n el .i.g5 position so he might have done
Thematically preparing to better to attempt to avoid this
exchange off White's most useful with 26 .i.c3, although Black's
minor piece and making space for initiative is already pronounced
the deployment of the black forces and she could also play 26 . . . .i.f6.
on the kingside. 26 .i.xd2
15 .i.f1 .i.d7 27 "it' xd2 tLlg6
16 tLlc4 .i.b5 28 "it'c3 tLle5
17 a4 .i. xc4 29 l:t g3 l:t be8
18 .i.xc4 tLl h4 30 b3 � h8
19 l:t a3 f5 31 ..t h l (40)
20 n h3 (39) White is reduced to helpless
White has played the opening onlooking as black crashes
and early middlegame in lack through on the kingside.
lustre fashion and faces an 31 f4
impending attack from Black on 32 l:t h3 ttJg4
33 �gl e3
40
B
34 fxe3 lll xe3
35 'ii' d 2 l:l e5
36 l H3 'ii' g6
37 l:t e2 'ii' bl +
38 'ii' e l 'it'xel +
39 l:t xel lll xc4
0-1
Opinion was divided among Hungarian male professionals about

the extent of Susan Polgar's 'talent' as distinct from her apparent
playing strength. To what extent this controversy can be attributed to
crude male chauvinism is unclear, but it was around this time that
leading Hungarian GM Andras Adorjan began to emerge as a critic
of the Polgars.
In an article in Magyar Sakkelet, Adorjan compared Susan's talent
unfavourably with that of various World Champions (Kasparov,
Fischer, Tal, Spassky, etc.) and said that it did not matter what gender
the title holder was, provided they were truly talented. Adorjan cited
Susan's weaker results (Baden-Baden 1 985, Manhattan 1 985) and
harped about the large amounts of cash he claimed the Polgars were
making. "They say their programme includes the overall World
Championship, but this is j ust propaganda designed to make more
money".
Adorjan referred for support to a newspaper article on a similar
theme by fellow Hungarian GM Zoltan Ribli and illustrated his low
opinion of Susan Polgar's talent with the following game. "I can't recall
one of them (Fischer, Petrosian, Kasparov, etc.) ever losing a game like
this!"
exchanges on c3 without provoca-

Susan Polgar-Sosonko (GM) tion; hence this move loses time.
Hungary 1986 Recommended instead is 7 e3 0-0
Queen's Gambit Declined 8 l:t c 1 c6 9 .td3 with a small
advantage.
1 d4 lll f6 7 .i. xc3 +
2 c4 e6 8 bxc3 c5
3 lll f3 d5 9 e3 0-0
4 lll c3 .i.b4 10 cxd5 exd5
5 .i.g5 h6 11 .i.e2 .i.e6
6 .i.xf6 'ii' xf6 12 lll e5
7 a3 This premature aggression
Dubious, as Black often backfires due to White's lack of
development. What was wrong 41

with just sensibly castling? B
12 lZld7
13 f4 lZlxe5
14 dxe5 W' g6
15 g4? (41)
Lacking any sense of danger,
Susan goes for a wildly optimistic
pawn thrust. Again, castling or
even 15 .i.f3 - anything else was
safer.
15 f5 18 .i.f5
16 J:t gl fxg4 19 "it' d I h5
17 .i.xg4 l:t ad8 20 h3 hxg4
18 W' b l ?? 21 hxg4 .i.e4
A hideous blunder. Necessary 22 W' b3 .i.c2
was 1 8 .i.xe6 + "it'xe6+ 1 9 "it' g4. 0-1
And to cap the insult, Adorjan patronisingly advised Susan to play

for a world title match with Chiburdanidze and, by implication,
relinquish serious aspirations on the men's turf. (I personally became
aware of the animosity between the Polgars and Adorjan at the closing
party discotheque at the Thessaloniki Olympiad in 1 988 when Judith
admonished me: "How can you dance with that terrible man?").
Susan Polgar clearly had a more optimistic view than GM Adorjan
of her own prospects. On hearing that an ambitious rising Hungarian
girl player, Ildiko Madl, wanted to play a match with her, she reportedly
commented: "That is like me wanting to play a match with Kasparov!"
Five Grandmasters and thirteen International Masters showed up
in Copenhagen for the Politiken Cup in June 1 986. Missing first place
by half a point, Susan scored 6-!-/9 behind the leading group of Smyslov,
Chernin, Pigusov and Cserna. Judith and Sofia scored 4-!-/8 and 4/8
respectively in their section.
Then, at the World Junior Championships in San Juan, Puerto Rico
in the summer of 1 986, eleven-year-old Sofia and ten-year-old Judith
shared 2nd-3rd places in the World Under- 1 4 championship for boys
(behind fourteen-year-old Joel Lautier, the Frenchman who later went
on to win the overall World Junior Championship) and 1 st-2nd place
for the girls' title.
Sofia then went on to score another success in Teteven, Bulgaria
where she won a Woman Grandmaster tournament. Sofia and Judith
were thus showing themselves to be clearly stronger than Susan had
been at a similar age, by about 200 rating points on the FIDE rating
scale (i.e. their playing strength was clearly c. 2300, as compared with
c. 2 1 00 for Susan at age twelve).
Susan Polgar's next international event was the slightly unusual
'Cap-Gemini Thermatoernooi' in Utrecht. Using selected openings

crucial to current master practice, including some variations involving
K asparov match games, top-class titled players were pitted against
club players. Results ran largely according to ratings in the end, with
Susan scoring J�/5 behind GM Hort in her group.
In 1 986, Susan Polgar was tenth in the race for the award of the
women's chess 'Oscar', with 1 47 votes. And it was at the end of 1 986
that FIDE decided that the teenage Susan Polgar's position at the
head of the women's rating list was unfair. Her female rivals, ran the
argument, had missed out on the chance to compete with her for the
honour. They by and large toed the line and played in women's
tournaments, whilst Susan was upping her rating with a a steady diet
of male Grandmasters. The solution was simple: award all women
players a rating increase - a free present of 1 00 points. All female
players, that is, except Susan Polgar!
This flagrantly discriminatory measure robbed Susan Polgar of top
spot in the rankings, although she never slipped out of the top four.
The fairness of the measure is debatable, and its effect on all FIDE
ratings was certainly inflationary; but one can understand that it must
have been irritating to Chiburdanidze, the holder of the World
Championship title, for example, to see someone ranked above her
with whom she had never contested a match!
Polgar does seem to have had a galvanising effect on both Chiburdan
idze and Gaprindashvili, not to mention having revitalised, by example,
a whole generation of Soviet women's chess. In order to keep pace
with her and thus maintain their position as privileged sportspeople,
they were forced to test themselves against strong male players. Whereas
before they might have been content to rest upon their laurels, they
now had an incentive to sharpen themselves with tough competition.
At the end of 1 986, the entire Polgar family visited Adelaide for the
Australian Open. A cartoon accompanying the report of the event in
New In Chess magazine depicts Susan as a female circus trainer
cracking a whip - perhaps the substitution of her father might have
been more appropriate. In any event, the sisters caused a predictable
local sensation. Susan played a good tournament, scoring 8/ 1 1 . The
star of the show, though, was undoubtedly ten-year-old Judith, with
7 1 / 1 1 . In round 4, GM Dj uric narrowly escaped with his life after
Judith turned down the chance to put a second pawn in the bag. He
then managed to swindle his way to the expected result; thus Judith
j ust missed the chance to become the youngest person to defeat a
Grandmaster in over-the-board international combat. Undaunted,
however, shc went on to beat the Rumanian 1M, Drimer, in round
nine.
Judith Polgar-Drimer (1M) queen forays.

Australian Open, 16 ... d8
Adelaide 1986/7 17 .tc4 .te7
Sicilian Four Knights 18 0-0 .tgS
19 bS axbS
1 e4 cS 20 n xbS 0-0
2 tLlf3 e6 21 .td3 .txe3
3 d4 cxd4 22 fxe3 ... gS
4 tLl xd4 tLlf6 23 n xb7 n b8
S tLlc3 tLlc6 24 ::I. xb8 tLl xb8
6 tLldbS d6 2S .tbS
7 .tf4 eS After a nondescript opening
8 .b3 and middlegame White has
Highly unusual. White norm- emerged with an extra pawn. If
ally continues with 8 .i.g5 and Black now attempts to regain this
after 8 . . . a6 9 tLla3 b5 a normal with 25 . . . .txd5 26 "'xd5 ... xe3 +
Sicilian Sveshnikov position is 27 � h l the black knight on b8 is
reached. unlikely ever to see the light of
8 a6 day. Therefore White is allowed
9 tLla3 .te6 to consolidate her advantage.
10 tLlc4 n b8 2S tLld7
11 tLl b6 tLl g4 26 .t xd7 .txd7
12 tLl bdS tLl xe3 27 ... d2 .tc6
13 tLlxe3 ... b6 28 n bl hS
14 n bl n c8 29 n b6 n c8
IS tLlcdS "' as + 30 ... c3 .tb7
16 b4 (42) 31 ... d3 .tc6
32 tLlb4
Despite winning the black pawn
42
on d6, this allows Black to activate
B
his pieces and gain some counter
play, whereas 32 c4 would have
kept him completely bottled up.
32 .td7
33 ::I. xd6 .th3
34 ... d2 l:[ c4
3S c3 ::I. xe4
36 �hl .te6
37 tLlc2 .txa2
38 ... d3 fS
This forces the black queen back 39 "if a6 .tc4
home as 1 6 . . . ... xa2 loses to 1 7 40 ... c8 + �h7
.tc4 ... a3 1 8 n b3 ... a2 1 9 tLlc3, 41 n d8 ... f6
·
snaring 'Her Greedy Majesty'. 42 n f8 ... e6

This demonstrates the well-known 43 ... d8 f4
riskiness of materialistic early 44 h3 (43)
in trying to prevent this nightmare

43
B
scenario, Black hops panic
stricken from frying pan into fur
nace.
44 . . . ,.p g6 45 h4 ,.ph7 46 .l:l. h8 +
,.pg6 4 7 "it' g5 + ,.pf7 4 8 "it' xh5 +
,.pf6 49 l H8 + ,.pe7 50 l:t e8 +
1;>d6 51 l he6 + .ixe6 5 2 "it'd 1 +
,.pe7 53 "it'f3 .1:1. a4 54 "it' b7 + ,.pf6
55 exf4 J:[ xf4 56 g3 .I: f1 + 57 ,.pg2
.l:l. c1 58 ttJe3 .l:l. xc3 59 "it'f3 + ,.pg6
60 "it'e4 + ,.pf6 61 g4 .l:l. c5 62 "it' b4
.l:l. c8
Now, 44 . . . fxe3 runs into 45 And, finally, Black resigned.
"it'g5! which attacks the weak black "A completely baffling game,"
kingside whilst simultaneously remarked New In Chess, "Drimer
reintroducing the white knight certainly does not play like a 2380
into the action (ttJxe3). However, 1M."
Talismans, mascots and charms of various kinds are well-known in

high-level chess competition and in Adelaide the Polgar sisters showed
no immunity from this superstition. They were 'seconded' at the board
by three small model lions which, according to Polgar pere, gave the
sisters leonine courage.
Local player Alex Sykes was determined to counter-attack and for
his game against Judith was accompanied by a giant model rhinoceros.
When it was discreetly suggested to Sykes that the magnitude of his
toy represented something of an over-reaction, he showed the depth of
his game preparation by substituting a smaller, but more lethal-looking,
crocodile. In the end, though, no zoological reinforcements could
compensate for Sykes' deficient chess ability and he was duly devoured.
10 The Female ' Game of the
Century'
Hard on the heels of Adelaide, Susan Polgar played a match with the
leading young French player, Olivier Renet. She lost by the narrowest
possible margin - 3t to 2t . Again, this event clearly emphasised that
she was taken very seriously by leading male players. And it also
showed that it was becoming harder for her to continue 'upsetting'
them. Forewarned is forearmed: if male opponents had ever gifted
Susan Polgar points by taking her lightly, they no longer did so - no
matter what disparaging remarks they might have to make about her
talent. Thus Susan managed only 3t/9 in her next Category 10 GM
event at Cannes in February 1 987.
Surely no other player, certainly not one so young, can have played
in as many Grandmaster tournaments in such a short career as did
Susan Polgar. Of course, it has been the fiery baptism of playing one
Grandmaster after another that has honed her positional sense. It is
this expertise, combined with tactical ability, that ultimately makes a
Grandmaster. But it took years of perseverance for Susan to convert
one of these dozens of opportunities into a Grandmaster norm.
March of 1 987 saw a setback for middle sister Sofia which, with
hindsight, seems highly significant. Playing in the Budapest Open
Championship, the twelve-year-old started well, beating the strong
Russian, Chernikov - her first victory over an International Master:
Chernikov (IM)-Sofia Polgar 5 d3 dxe4

Budapest Open 1 98 7 6 dxe4 'iW xdl +
Closed Sicilian 7 ..ti>xdl e5
Opening the diagonal for the
1 e4 c5 light-squared bishop on c8, and
2 g3 tll c6 blockading the white e-pawn,
3 .tg2 e6 thereby restricting the scope of the
4 f4?! bishop on g2.
4 d3 is normal, followed by 4 . . . 8 tll c3
d5 5 tll d 2
. White tries to plant a knight on
4 d5 the outpost <1:5, but better was 8
78 The Female 'Game of the Century '
c3, creating a flight square for the move such as .i.g2 (to free the
white king and keeping the black knight on g l ) runs into . . . lLlxf5 !
knight out of d4. 19 n g8
8 .i.g4+ 20 g4 h5
9 .i.f3 0-0-0 + Smashing open the white
10 .i.d2 lLlf6 defences.
Threatening . . . lLld4. Black 21 ..tel
already stands better. Not 2 1 gxh5?? n xg l + 22 l hg l
11 h3 .i.e6 lLlxf3, winning. Now, however,
Rather than exchange bishops White loses an important pawn.
on f3, Black prefers to go for play 21 hxg4
along the d-file. 22 hxg4 lLlxf3
12 f5 .i.c4 23 lLlxf3 ll xg4
13 b3 .i.a6 24 n el .l:!. d3 (44)
14 lLld5
It might have been sensible for 44
White to force the exchange of W
light-squared bishops now with

14 .i.e2; due to White's pawn
structure, his bishop is the inferior
piece.
14 lLld4
15 c4 b5
Sofia breaks the d-file open.
This is much stronger than 1 5 . . .
lLlxf3 1 6 lLlxf3 lLlxe4 1 7 lLlxe5
lLlxg3? 1 8 ll g l , with good play for White is totally lost; the black
White. pieces swarm all over him.
16 cxb5 .i.xb5 25 lLlh2 J:l. g2
17 lLlxf6 26 lLlf1 J:l. gl
Unfortunate, but 1 7 lLlc3 (to 27 J.b4 J:l. d4
defend e4) would have been an 28 n xd4 exd4
swered by 1 7 . .i.d3.
. . 29 .i.d2 J.d6
17 gxf6 Black now threatens 30 . . . .i. b5
18 nel .i.c6 winning material.
19 n c4 30 a4 .i.b7
White has problems developing 31 ndl .i.xe4
his kingside. A natural-looking 0- 1
She followed up with victories over ex-Romanian Champion Grun

berg and Hungarian 1M Kallai. Thus, with two rounds to play, Sofia
needed only half a point for her first International Master norm.
Then, disaster struck. Unfortunately Sofia, an uncompromisingly
sharp player, did not want, or did not know how, to play for a draw.
In the penultimate round she played her favourite King's Gambit, and
lost. Apparently undaunted, she played very sharply in the final round -
The Female 'Game of the Century ' 79
and, lucklessly, lost again, finishing on 5/9. Having started so well, to

come so close to such an important milestone - an 1M norm - and
fail to score the necessary half point from two games must have been
a crushing and traumatic disappointment.
Chess, as older, hardened, professionals know only too well, can be
a heartbreaking game. Would it be surprising if a twelve-year-old
cracked under the pressure she must have felt to achieve so much so
soon? And would it be surprising if a twelve-year-old, after so much
mental and emotional energy expended over nine gruelling rounds
without the glory of success to show for it, began to wonder whether
chess was really worth the total dedication demanded of her?
Despite attempts at reassurance from elder sister Susan and her
parents, Sofia's self-confidence, and hence her playing strength, suffered
for a long time. For most of 1 987 and 1 988 she appeared to make little
progress, falling well behind both her sisters in the rankings. Rightly
or wrongly, she gained the reputation for being the most impulsive and
careless of the trio, prone to blunders, and having the least liking, or
natural aptitude for, chess of the three.
Erika Sziva reported overhearing Susan and Judith at one tourna
ment, in a conversation in the ladies' toilet, despairing of their sister:
"Sofia is losing again! She's not like us; she doesn't care about chess."
In April of 1 987 it was back to New York for the Polgar sisters.
Susan again competed in the Grandmaster section but this time it was
definitely her little sisters - cuddly toys and all - who were stealing the
show. This time one had a lion, the other a bear. "That little teddy just
blew me away", sighed FM Charles Hertan.
Judith and Sofia were playing in the Under-2400 Section among
eighteen International Masters, eighteen FIDE Masters and ninety
one National Masters. Judith scored 5/8, while Sofia's victory against
International Master Elliott Winslow won the first brilliancy prize.
Sofia Polgar-Winslow (1M) 10 .te3 ..- b7

New York Open 11 'ii' g3 .td7
(Under 2400) 1 98 7 In Tisdall-Browne, Lone Pine
Sicilian Najdorf 1 976, the game was equal after 1 1
. . . 0-0 1 2 .th6 lLle8 1 3 ::t ad l .td7
1 e4 c5 2 lLlf3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4 lLl xd4 14 a3 lLlc6 1 5 .tg5 .txg5 1 6 'ii' xg5
lLlf6 5 lLlc3 a6 6 .tc4 e6 7 .tb3 lLlxd4 17 II xd4 .tc6 1 8 II e 1 a5.
b5 8 0-0 .te7 12 lLlf5!
Black could snatch a hot pawn A similar sacrifice occurred in
here with 8 . . . b4, at the risk of Azmaiparashvili-Novikov, USSR
falling behind in development, e.g. 1 986, with the sole difference that
9 lLla4 lLl xe4 10 f4 g6 1 1 f5 gxf5 1 2 Black's queen's knight, instead of
lLl xf5 and White has a dangerous the queen's bishop, was on d7.
ImtIatIve; Fischer-Tal, Candi That game continued 12 . . . exf5
dates 1 959. 1 3 'ii' xg7 .l:t f8 1 4 lLld5! lLlxd5 (if 1 4
9 ..-f3 ..- b6 . . . fxe4, White'has a powerful bind
after I S ll:Jxe7 <li;xe7 1 6 ,i,gS dS 45

17 J:t ad l ) IS �xdS 'ii' b8 16 J:t ae l W
..t b 7 when White should have
continued with 1 7 .ih6 f4 1 8
.txf4 ll:JeS 1 9 'it' xh7, when he has
three pawns for the piece in an
unclear position. Instead White
tried 1 7 .igS, whereafter Black
went on to win after 1 7 . . . ..txgS
18 it' xgS f4 ! 19 "ii xf4 ll:JeS.
12 exfS
13 'it' xg7 J:t f8
14 A gS! 19 "ii gS!
This move is stronger than in This very visual move con
the game quoted above due to the demns Black to painful strangu
absence of a friendly fellow horse lation.
on d7 to reinforce the beleaguered 19 ..te6?
steed on f6. Losing at once. Black could
14 ll:J xe4 have resisted more manfully with
Black would face a relentless 19 . . . �d8 20 ll:J xe4+ rtlc7 2 1
attack after 1 4 . . . ll:JhS I S it'xh7 ll:Jf6, but i n the end his diseased
.txgS 16 it'xhS .tf6 17 exfS. pawn structure would have would
15 Axe7 rtlxe7 have killed him anyway.
16 ll:JdS+ �e8 20 ll:Jxe4 + f6
17 J:l. ael ll:Jc6 21 ll:Jxf6 1 -0
The trouble with 1 7 . . . Ae6 is "A very bright performance",
that it is met with 1 8 ll:Jf6 + rJile7 commented National Master
19 .ixe6 <li;xe6 20 ll:Jxe4, followed Larry Tamarkin in Chess Life, "for
by 21 " xf8. a 1 2-year-old or, in fact, for an
18 ll:Jf6 + �e7 (45) any-year-old."
Next stop for Susan Polgar was Bilbao, Spain in June 1 987. This
Category 1 2 event was a super-tournament against the world's best.
Susan Polgar distinguished herself by beating Ljubojevic:
Susan Polgar-Ljubojevic (GM) Typically unorthodox opening

Bilbao 1 98 7 play from the fiery 'Lj ubo', which
Old Indian Defence Susan handles coolly. It is now
believed by some experts that sys
1 d4 ll:Jf6 tems with . . . d6 and . . . .tg4 for
2 ll:Jf3 d6 Black are more solid with . . . e6
3 g3 ..tg4 rather than . . . eS.
4 .tg2 ll:J bd7 8 h3 ..txf3
5 c4 eS 9 exf3 exd4
6 ll:Jc3 c6 10 l hd4 it' b6
7 0-0 .ie7 11 'ii' d 2 0-0
12 b3 lZlc5 21 . . . 'iWc8 22 J:t e3 J:t de7 23 J:t del

13 .:t el J:t fe8 'iWc7 24 f4 f6 25 -.f2 J:t e6 26 -.f3
14 .tb2 as �h8 27 �hl �g8 28 h4 �h8
15 .ta3 .tf8 29 .th3 .:t 6e7 30 h5 J:t f7 31 .if5
16 lZle4 lZlfxe4 : d8 32 .:t d l .te7 33 J:t e2 J:t ff8
17 fxe4 J:t ad8 34 .:t h2 .:t fe8 35 .1:1. hd2 lZld7 36
18 .tb2 -'c7 .tb2 lZlf8 37 h6
19 .l:l. ad l .:t d7 After a prolonged manoeuvring
20 .tc3 b6 phase, White decides it's time for
21 � h 2 (46) the final push. Black's position
soon collapses under the crossfire
46
of White's two bishops.
B
37 g6
38 .th3 � g8
39 g4 lZle6
40 g5 lZlc5
41 gxf6 .tf8 (4 7)
47
W
After the early complications

the position has simplified into a
clear advantage for White, consist
ing of:
a) two bishops;
b) extra space;
c) mobile kingside pawns.
Nevertheless, Black's position is
very solid and it is most instructive 42 f7 + � xf7
to observe how easily Susan for 43 f5 � g8
mulates and executes a winning 44 fxg6 hxg6
plan against a world-class Grand 45 'iWf6 �h7
master of Ljubojevic's stature. 46 l:t g2 1 -0
Bilbao June 1 987

2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 0 Total
I Karpov GM 27 1 0 * ! 1
-,: ! I 1
-,: I I 7
2 Andersson GM 2600 ! * ! ! ! I ! 61
3 Chiburdanidze GM 2530 ! 1 * I ! 1 ! 5�
4 Lj ubojevic GM 2620 1 -1 0 * 0 ! I 51
5 Susan Polgar 1M 2495 0 ! ! I * ! 0 1
I 41
6 A. Sokolov GM 2645 ! 0 ! 1 ! * ! 1 � 41
7 IIIescas 1M 2505 0 t -1 0 I 1
-,: * ! 0 4
8 Ochoa 1M 2430 0 0 ! 0 1
-,: 1 l * 4
9 J. L. Fernandez GM 2450 0 0 1 0 � 1 I 0 * 3
10 Izeta 1M 2380 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 * 1
2
Average FIDE rating 2537 (Category 1 2) GM norm - 5!

Susan finished on fifty per cent, equal with world no. 4 Alexei
Sokolov. She failed, however, to demonstrate superiority over the
incumbent of the women's chess throne, Chiburdanidze. 'Chib' finished
a full point clear of Polgar, and their game - the first encounter between
the two women - was a nervous draw.
Biel, in Switzerland, staged two major events in July. One of them
was a Category 1 3 super-Grandmaster tournament, in which Susan
Polgar had a tough time. She was the only non-Grandmaster in the
event, and tied for last place with GM Eric Lobron. She scored two
victories in this illustrious field: one against Lobron; the other against
former New Zealander, Murray Chandler, now of Great Britain.
Lobron (GM)-Susan Polgar 18 l hf4 .l:!. e2

Biel 198 7 19 .l:!. d l (48)
English Opening
1 tDf3 tDf6 48
W
2 c4 e6
3 g3 d5
4 b3 c5
5 Ag2 tDc6
6 0-0 J.. e7
7 e3 d4
Heading for a reversed Benoni
structure. At first sight it is surpris
ing that Black should want to
play such a sharp system a tempo
down; but the discerning analyst White has played far too insip
will note that White's 4 b3 will idly and Black has taken full
now be somewhat redundant. advantage of this. Showing fine
8 exd4 cxd4 technique, she now ruthlessly
9 d3 tDd7 exploits her advantage. Lobron,
10 J.. a3 a5 meanwhile, exhausts his allotted
11 .i.xe7 -W xe7 time in a vain attempt to escape
12 tDbd2 0-0 her clutches.
13 a3 tDc5 19 g5
14 W'e2 e5 20 .l:l. f2 J.. g4
15 tDel .l:l. e8 21 J.. f3 l hf2
16 f4 22 � xf2 Axf3
Suspect; White opens the e-file 23 tDdxf3 g4
in a position where Black is better 24 tDd2 .l:!. e8
placed to exploit it. 25 tDe4 tDxe4 +
16 exf4 26 dxe4 .l:l. xe4
17 W' xe7 l he7 27 tDd3 .l:l. e3
28 b4 f6 White lost on time, but he had,

Black sensibly declines the in forensic parlance, been dead for
exchange 28 . axb4 29 axb4 as
. . some time.
this would make the a-file avail
able for the white rook at some
Susan Polgar-Chandler (GM)
later date. Instead she prepares . . .
Biel 1 98 7
lLle5 to break White's blockade of
Queen's Pawn Opening
d3.
29 b5 lLle5
1 d4 lLlf6
30 lLlc5 : f3 +
2 lLlf3 e6
31 <;te2 b6
3 ..tf4 c5
32 lLla4 d3+
4 e3 "ilt" b6
33 <;td2 lLl xc4 +
5 lLlc3 lLla6
34 �c3 lLl xa3
6 a3 .i.e7
35 lLlxb6 lLl xb5 +
7 lLle5 cxd4
36 <;tc4 lLld6+
8 exd4 "ilt"d8 (50)
37 ""d5 lLlf7
38 lLlc4 lLle5
39 lLl xe5 fxe5
40 <;txe5 a4 50
41 J:t d2 a3 W
42 J:t a2 � g7
43 ""e4 h5 (49)
49
W
9 .i. xa6!
Such a capture would normally
be slightly risky as it concedes the
two bishops and an open b-file.
Susan has, however, looked more
If now 44 J:t xa3, Black wins deeply into the position and
with 44 . . . d2 45 n a t J:t f2 when appreciated that in this instance
White's h- and g-pawns will ulti Black's counterplay is illusory.
mately be plucked. 9 bxa6
44 ""d4 �h6 45 ""e4 <;t g6 46 10 "ilt" f3 d5
1: g2 <;tg5 47 J:t a2 h4 48 .I: g2 hxg3 11 lLlc6 "ilt" b6
49 hxg3 a2 50 J:t xa2 : xg3 51 1: h2 12 lLlxe7 �xe7
n f3 52 J:t a2 <;th4 53 J:t h2 + <;tg3 13 0-0-0 "ilt"c6
54 J:t a2 n f2 55 J:t a3 .l: f4 + 56 14 "ilt" g3 J:t g8
<;te5 n f3 57 .l: a2 J:t e3 + 0-1 15 .i.g5 .i.d7
16 J:t hel h6 J:!. b2 54 l hf6 + 'ith7 55 .:I. xf7 +

17 .i.xf6 + gxf6 'ith6 56 J:t f6 + 'ith7 57 'itd4 1 -0
IS 'iff3 J:t aeS Susan also escaped Houdini-
19 .!t::l x d5 + 'itfS like from the following positon in
20 .!t::l e3 'if xf3 her other game against Chandler:
21 gxf3 J:!. g5
22 h4 J:t h5
Chandler (GM)-Susan Polgar
23 J:!. h l .i.e6
Biel 1987
24 .:I. h3 (51)
52
51 B
B
Position after 53 �e6

Relegating the rook to this pass
ive post looks strange, but now all The position is technically winning
White's weaknesses are protected for White who must nonetheless
and Susan slowly but inexorably be careful not to leave himself with
proceeds to realise her extra pawn. bishop and wrong rook's pawn
24 . . . r:i;e7 25 f4 .i.e4 26 b3 J:!. b5 with the black king having access
27 'itb2 a5 2S a4 J:!. b4 29 J:!. d2 to h8 (where White cannot win
'itfS 30 J:!. g3 h5 3 1 'ita3 J:!. e3 32 due to stalemate). Not surpris
'itb2 J:!. eS 33 .l: gl J:!. e7 34 J:!. el ingly, Susan tried:
J:!. eS 35 J:!. c1 J:!. e7 36 ..ta2 J:!. e3 37 53 .!t::l h6
:t el .:I. e7 3S 'it a3 l:t e3 39 J:!. gl ·. . reasoning that two h-pawns are
.i.h7 40 ..tb2 l:t eS 41 f5 no better than one. To the amaze
Black has fought to maintain ment of one and all, Chandler
a blockade on White's queenside played:
pawns but this well-timed break 54 gxh6 + ??
through rips the board open and ·. . presumably reckoning only
exposes Black's weakened pawn with 54 . . . 'itxh6 55 'itf6 'ith5 56
structure in all its naked horror. 'itg7, when White wins. However,
41 . . . � xf5 42 .!t::l xf5 exf5 43 J:!. g3 54 r:i;hS
J:!. dS 44 e3 J:!. b7 45 J:!. f3 J:!. dbS 46 ·. . left Chandler red-faced. Black's
e4 J:!. b4 47 ..te2 'itg7 4S J:!. dd3 king cannot now be dislodged
..tg6 49 J:!. g3 + 'ith6 50 J:!. df3 J:!. dS from the corner and peace broke
51 d5 J:!. eS 52 :t xf5 .:I. e2 + 53 'itd3 out a few moves later.
Biel also hosted the Credit Suisse World Mixed, a double-round all
play-all team match between six masters and six equally-ranked
women from as many countries. One idea behind this event was to test
the validity of FIDE's l OO-point women's rating increase. In the event,
the male team won the series 44-28. Only Pia Cramling, with 7t/ 1 2,
made a plus score for the women, which simply goes to indicate the
obvious: FIDE's gratuitous award had indeed been inflationary.
Judith Polgar was included in the female team on the strength of
her rating of 2355 on the July 1 987 list - 1 7th in the women's rankings
at the age of 1 0. Her score of 5t/ 1 2 was, at least, close to her expected
score based on her published rating which was, of course, easily the
highest rating for her age, boy or girl, of all time. Her score was, it
should be pointed out, augmented by two suspiciously short draws
against Swiss GM Nemet. However, she celebrated her eleventh
birthday with wins against FMs Landenbergue, and Costa (whom she
beat twice); her 'cave woman' style in the following victory making one
wonder why such a girl would need to bother with quick draws.
Costa (FM)-Judith Polgar 53

Biel 1 98 7 B
English Opening
1 d4 llJf6
2 c4 c5
3 llJf3 cxd4
4 llJ xd4 e5
5 llJ b5 d5
6 cxd5 ..ic5
A lively gambit (of course, not 11 llJ xf2!!
6 . . . llJ xd5? 7 it' xd5 "tIt' xd5 8 llJc7 + ) 12 �xf2 fxe3 +
for active piece play. White's 13 ..tel l H2
simplest response is 7 e3; instead, 14 J:l. gl ... f8
the unwary Costa allows Judith 15 it'd3 llJ a6
an early attack on f2, executed Judith's sacrificial elan is all the
with great verve. more impressive for the versatile
7 llJ 5c3 0-0 way in which she switches from
8 g3 llJ g4 violence to calm development as
9 e3 f5 dictated by the requirements of
10 ..ig2 f4 the moment. Such a superb
11 h3 (53) appreciation of the dynamics of
This is one squandered tempo the position is normally only
too many, and Judith proceeds to found in much older and experi
rip open White's position with a enced masters.
terrific sacrificial sequence. 16 a3 · ..if5
17 .te4 .t xe4
54
18 'ilt' xe4 .td4! (54) W
Freeing the c5-square for the
knight to join the attack . Despite
being a piece to the good White
has no defence to Black's plan.
19 .t xe3 lLlc5
20 .t xd4 exd4
21 'ilt' xd4 : e8 +
22 ..t d l "' f3 +
0- 1
The Guardian correspondent, Leonard Barden, not normally given

to rhapsody, called this game "the female version of Fischer's Game
of the Century."
The third Brussels OHRA tournament at the end of 1 987 was
originally conceived as an 'unofficial clash' between Chiburdanidze and
Susan Polgar for the women's world title. The idea was to invite the
six highest rated women in the world for a double-round robin
tournament. The Soviet Chess Federation, however, refused to send
Chiburdanidze to play under such conditions and she herself was not
keen on the idea of a 'duel of truth' between herself and the young
Hungarian. "It would be unfair to the other players who try to qualify
in the cycle." Then (dismissively?): "for myself, I would not mind playing
such a match, but I would rather play a really strong opponent.
Preferably someone above 2600." Such a match, explained 'Chib',
would have a healthy effect on her FIDE rating.
In the end, the OHRA Insurance Group settled for a change of plan.
Instead of a women's tournament, they settled for a confrontation
between the four strongest women players in the world and an opposing
male 'team' of four players of comparable strength. The women's team:
Chiburdanidze, Gaprindashvili, Cramling and Susan Polgar, faced
GMs Max Dlugy and Eric Lobron, and IMs William Watson and Luc
Winants. The members of each team would meet all members of the
other team twice. Thus none of the women - and in particular, Polgar
and Chiburdanidze - would have to play each other.
In the event, the result of the tournament turned out to be something
of an anti-climax from Susan's point of view. The individual tournament
was won by Nona Gaprindashvili with 5/8, ahead of Maya Chiburdan
idze on 4! /8. All the men scored fifty per cent, 4/8. Polgar and Cramling
finished on minus one and minus two respectively. Thus, as in
Bilbao, the World Champion had clearly out-performed Susan Polgar.
Although she apparently liked the idea of a match with Chiburdanidze,
Susan had no inclination to progress through the time-consuming
Women's World Championship qualifying cycles (Interzonal, Candida
tes' matches etc.) and clearly this was not her main ambition: "I j ust
want to have the Grandmaster title, increase my Elo, play better chess
and see what happens," she said.
This is Susan's best game from Brussels 1 987:
Winants (IM)-Susan Polgar 10 .i.xc3+

Brussels OHRA 1987 11 bxc3 It:\f6
Czech Benoni 12 i.e2 J:r g8
White's only prospect for
1 d4 c5 counterplay lies in the break g2-
2 d5 e5 g4, but Susan puts a stop to this
3 c4 idea.
3 It:\c3 is preferred by some 13 g3 Wa5
theoretical sources. 14 'W b3 It:\ bd7
3 d6 15 It:\h3 It:\b6
4 e4 g6 16 It:\f2 i.d7
Two other moves are possible: 17 It:\ d l
4 . . . .i.e7, intending . . . .i.g5, or If White persists in attempting
4 . . . It:\e7, intending . . . It:\g6. to prepare g4 with 1 7 l:[ g l , Black's
5 It:\c3 .i.g7 response 1 7 . . . J:r e8 1 8 h3 h5 will
6 .i.e2 f5! leave the white pawn on g3 weak.
There is no time for 6 . . . It:\e7 17 .i.a4
because of 7 g4 ! f5 8 exf5 gxf5 9 18 1!fa3 1!fa6
.i.g5 0-0 1 0 'Wd2 fxg4 1 1 h3, which 19 It:\ b2 i.e8 (55)
gave White a strong attack in
Rajna- Forgacs, Hungary 1 982.
55
7 exf5 gxf5
W
8 .i.h5+ �f8
9 f4
A new move, but probably
inferior to 9 It:\f3 .i.f6 when White
has two possibilities:
a) 10 g4?! e4 1 1 It:\g l It:\d7 12 gxf5
.i.xc3 + 1 3 bxc3 It:\e5 when Black
stood well in Bagirov-Razuvaev,
USSR 1 977; or
b) 10 h4 h6 1 1 g4 e4 1 2 It:\d2 .i.xc3
1 3 bxc3 It:\d7 14 gxf5 It:\gf6 1 5 It:\f1 20 1!fb3
draw agreed, Gheorghiu--Radu The ending after 20 W xa6 bxa6
lov, Warsaw Zonal 1 979. 21 a4?! a5 would also be in Black's
9 e4 favour.
10 .i.e3? 20 .i.a4
A positional error, allowing When she played 1 9 . . . .i.e8
Black to exchange on c3 and force Susan had intended to continue
White to recapture with the pawn. with 20 . . . .i.h5, but this turned
Better, therefore, was 1 0 .i.d2. out to be not as good as it had
looked: 2 1 J.xh5 lD xh5 22 a4! This leads to a lost endgame. If,

'it'a5 23 'it' b 5 ! and it is White who on the other hand, White had j ust
is better. waited passively, the break
21 lD xa4 through . . . h5-h4 was coming
If 2 1 'it' a3, Black had planned sooner or later.
21 . . . n c8, activating the reserves. 30 axb6
21 'it' xa4 31 .lhb6 lDe8
22 <;t;>d2 .l:l. e8 3 1 . . . .l:l. d7 would have been a
23 'it' xa4 lD xa4 blunder due to 32 j,xc5!
24 l:t hbl l:t e7 32 J.f2
25 l:l b5 lD b6 If 32 J.xh5 .l:t h7 33 J.xe8
White had threatened 26 .l:l. a5. l:t xh2+ 34 <;t;> c 1 <;t;>xe8 35 l:t xd6
26 a4 h5 l:t xg3 36 J. xc5 l:t f3 wins for Black.
27 a5 lDe8 32 : h8
28 n abl b6 33 J.fl l:t hh7
29 axb6 34 J.h3 : hf7
If White had declined to cap 35 l:t b8 n a7
ture, the situation after 29 . . . n gg7 36 l:t b3 <;t;>e7
would have come to much the 37 ..tfl lDf6
same. If 29 a6, Black has the very 38 h3 n f8
strong reply 29 . . . h4 ! 39 ..te2 q;,d7
29 lDxb6 (56) 40 l:t b6 l:t e8
Black defends the pawn on c5
56
W
and aims to exchange a pair of
rooks with . . . l:t c7-b7.
4 1 J.dl l:t ee7 42 j,e2 <;t;>e7 43
<;t;>c1 l:t eb7 44 .l:t xb7 + l:t xb7 45
J.dl l:t a7 46 <;t;>b2 n a8 47 h4
<;t;>f7 48 J.e2 <;t;>g6 49 .i.e3 <;t;>h6
50 i.f2 l:t b8 + 51 <;t;>e2 lDd7 52
J.e1 lD b6 53 <;t;>c1 lDa4 54 i.dl
lD b2 55 J.e2 lDd3+ 56 ..t xd3
exd3 57 <;t;>d2 l:t bl 58 i.f2 l:t b2 +
30 .l:t xb6? 59 � e l 0-1
Susan was definitely overshadowed in Brussels by the conspicuous

presence of her younger sisters in the Masters Trophy Open Tourna
ment ('Open' here, as often elsewhere, is a misleading usage as in fact
the tournament was a strong, closed invitation Swiss). Both girls
defeated Grandmasters in equal combat in this event - their first in
serious competition. In the first round, Sofia defeated the amiable
British G M Glenn FIear:
Sofia Polgar-Flear (GM) 1 e4 e5

Brussels OHRA B 1 98 7 2 f4
King's Gambit Sofia's and Judith's favourite
weapon, the King's Gambit. This 57

opening was very popular in the B
last century, but fell largely into
disuse in modern Grandmaster
chess until it was 'reinvented' by
the younger Polgars. One reason
modern players often fight shy of
this gambit is that many of its
main lines lead to frighteningly
sharp and complex positions.
2 .i.c5
3 tLlf3 d6
4 c3 tLlf6 13 J:t e l +
5 fxe5 dxe5 A slight inaccuracy according
6 d4 exd4 to Sofia who suggests instead 1 3
Against Judith in round two, 'It' a4 + c6 1 4 'il b4 preventing the
Sharif tried 6 . . . .i.b6, but after 7 development of Black's bishop.
tLl xe5 0-0 8 .i.g5 c5 9 dxc5 'It' x d 1 + 13 .i.e6
1 0 �xd 1 .i.xc5 1 1 .i.xf6 gxf6 1 2 14 'ila4+ c6
tLlf3 f5 1 3 .i.d3 fxe4 1 4 .i.xe4, Not, of course, the blunder 1 4
White was a pawn up and won . . . tLld7? which loses instantly to
after 43 moves. 1 5 'It' xd7 + ! Neither would 14 . . .
7 cxd4 .i.b4+ tLlc6 have been the answer to
8 Ad2 'ile7 Black's problems, due to 1 5 l:t e3
More natural, according to 'ilf5 1 6 J:te5 'It'f4 1 7 g3 'It' g4 1 8 h3!
thirteen-year-old Sofia's re 'ilxh3 1 9 d5, winning for White.
searches, is 8 . . . .i.xd2 + 9 tLl bxd2 15 'il b4 tLld7
0-0 10 .i.d3 c5, as in Spielmann F aute de mieux, Black decides
Van Scheltinga, Amsterdam 1 938. to return material.
9 .i.d3 16 'il xb7
A novelty. The Encyclopaedia of Surprisingly, there is actually no
Chess Openings (ECO) gives 9 e5 way to continue attacking after 1 6
tLld5 10 tLlc3 with a slight advan tLlc4 0-0-0 1 7 tLld6+ �c7.
tage for White. 16 0-0
9 tLlxe4 17 'It' xc6 l:t ab8
10 .i.xe4 'It' xe4 + 18 b3
11 �f2 .i.xd2 White is clearly in the driving
12 tLlbxd2 (57) seat.
12 'ild3 18 tLlf6
The queen has nothing better 19 <;t>gl J:t fc8
to do, e.g. 1 2 . . . 'il f5 (or 1 2 . . . 20 'ild6 J:t b6
'ild5) 1 3 l:t e 1 + .i.e6 loses to 1 4 l:te5 21 'ilf4 J:t c2
followed by 15 d5; alternatively 22 J:t adl tLld5
12 . . . 'il c6 1 3 J:t c 1 gives White 23 'ilh4 J:t b8
tremendous play for the sacrificed 24 tLle4 'It' a6
pawn. 25 tLle �5
Also playable was the solid 25 36 .l: xd3 .l: d5

a4, keeping the advantage. 37 �f2 �f7
25 .i.f5 (58) 38 �e3 c;te6
39 .l: e3 .!:I. b5
40 �e4 �d6
58
41 1:tf3 (59)
W
59
B
26 l:[ e5?!
Not the best place for the rook
and besides, 26 tZl xf7! is probably
even better: 26 . . . -. g6 (if 26 . . . 41
� xf7 27 -.h5 + ) 27 tZl7g5 h6 28 An alternative line leads to
-'g3 with excellent winning zugzwang for Black: 4 1 . . . J:t b7 42
chances for White. .I: g3! l:t b5 43 .I: c3! a6 (Black has
26 .i.g6 no other useful move) 44 .!:I. f3 J:t b7
27 "*' g3 45 J:t g3 .l: b5 46 J:t c3 a5 47 .!:I. f3
Not 27 l:[ xd5? "*, e2! .l: b7 48 J:t g3 J:t b5 49 .l: c3 and
27 .l: d8 now Black is compelled to move,
28 tZl h4 f6 whereafter White has .l: c5.
29 J:t e6 -' xa2 42 .!:I. e3!
30 J:t d6 Threatening c;td3-c4.
Sadly the pretty 30 tZlxg6 hxg6 42 �d6
3 1 "*,d6 does not work, as Black 43 �f3 J:t b4
can reply 3 1 . . . %:t ccs. 44 c;tg4 l:t xd4 +
30 l:t ee8 45 � xg5
31 tZl xg6 hxg6 Starting to gobble the g-pawns.
32 "*, h3 45 l:t d2
32 tZle6 %:t xd6 3 3 -' xd6 would 46 .l: g3
have allowed Black to hang on The rest, as Sofia says in the
with 33 . . . "*, xb3. annotator's favourite cliche, is
32 fxg5 technique.
33 J:t xd5 "*,e2 46 . . . �e7 47 � xg6 �f8 48
34 l:t xd8 + l:t xd8 �h7 .l: d4 49 .l: f3 + �e8 50 h3
35 "*,d3 "*, xd3 g5 51 �g6 g4 52 J:t e3 + �f8 53
A voiding the exchange of h4 a5 54 h5 .I: b4 55 �g5 �g8 56
queens was no more hopeful for .l: e5 .l: xb3 57 .l: xa5 g3 58 �h4
Black. 1 -0
Despite this humiliation, it must be pointed out that Flear showed

admirable resilience, declaring his intention to make good his loss by
winning the tournament, which he duly did equal with Piket and
Rajkovic. Sofia, however, seemed to find difficulty recovering from
losses (age and experience tends to iron this out) and did not maintain
her first-round form.
Eleven-year-old Judith started well. In the first two rounds she beat
Kool and 1M Sharif. Then in the third round she despatched Israeli
Grandmaster Lev Gutman:
Judith Polgar-Gutman (GM) 60

Brussels OHRA B 198 7 B
Sicilian Scheveningen
1 e4 e5
2 tLlf3 d6
3 d4 exd4
4 tLlxd4 tLlf6
5 tLle3 e6
6 J.e2 J. e7
7 0-0 0-0
8 f4 a6 16 .i.e7
9 J.e3 'ike7 On 1 6 . . . � h8 there follows 1 7
10 a4 tLle6 tLlxf6 tLlxf6 1 8 fxeS tLld7 1 9 J.d3,
11 .el tLld7 or 17 . . . gxf6 18 fS !, both lines
New. The known theoretical giving White a strong initiative.
alternatives are 1 1 . . . J.d7 or 1 1 17 f5 exf5
. . . tLlxd4. 18 J.h6 g6
12 'ik g3 J.f6 19 l hf5
13 ':' adl .:. b8 1 9 J.xf8 �xf8 would have
If 1 3 . . . tLlxd4 1 4 J.xd4 been good for Black.
J.xd4+ I S ':' xd4 .b6 1 6 .e3 19 .:. b4
.xb2 17 ':' xd6 . xc2 18 .:. b l After 1 9 . . . ':' e8 20 ':' xf7! wins
White i s winning, while 1 6 . . . eS immediately, and 19 . . . .:. d8 20
1 7 .:. d3 . xe3 + 1 8 ':' xe3 exf4 1 9 J.c4 is also very strong for White .
.:. d3 leaves White with a clear 20 J.d3 f6
advantage. 20 . . . J:t d8 would have been
14 tLl xe6 answered by 21 J:t dfl ! but not,
This move starts a razor-sharp however, 21 c3? ':' xa4 22 b3 . b6 +
attack by means of a pawn sacri followed b y 23 • xb3.
. . .
fice. 21 .:. dfl

14 bxe6 Black would have had compen
15 e5 dxe5 sation after 21 J.xfS . b6 + ! (not
16 tLle4 (60) 21 . . . �xfS 22 tLlgS! .b6+ 23
The threat is 1 7 ':' xd7 and 1 8 .:. f2 winning for White) 22 .:. f2
tLlxf6 + . tLl xfS with . . . fS. to follow.
21 l:[ xe4 27 "if h4 lZlf4

22 .i. xf8 'iP xf8 28 "if h8 + .i.g8
23 .i. xe4 gxf5 28 . . . cj;f7 might have been
24 .i.xf5 lZl b6 better, but then Judith had 29 h4
25 .i. xh7! (61) up her sleeve.
29 l:[ d l lZle6
It is possible that Black did not
61 find the best defence, but the poor
B chap was in serious time trouble.
30 'it> hI .i.d8
31 .i.f5
Judith confesses to a slight inac
curacy; she says 3 1 c3 would have
been better.
31 lZld4
32 .i.h3 'lff7
33 c3 "if b3
34 "if h6 + 'it>e7
35 .!:t O lZle6
25 .i.e6 36 "if xf6 + <.pd6
Judith had it all worked out: 25 37 .i. xe6 1 -0
. . . .i.c5 + 26 <.Phi "if xh7 27 An impressive attacking game
l:[ xf6 + <.pe8 28 'lf xe5 + 'lfe7 29 from the 'smallest and deadliest'
'lf xe7 + <.pxe7 30 l:[ xc6 promises Polgar, who must be the youngest
good winning chances for White. player ever to publish her own
26 .i.e4 lZld5 analysis.
Gutman may have been Judith's first Grandmaster victim at the

two-hour time limit, but before Brussels she had already tasted GM
blood in serious blitz matches. The English Grandmaster John Nunn,
for instance, had visited Budapest for a play-off match with Portisch,
and whilst there had played a speed match with Judith. To his
amazement he lost the first three games! Then the canny 'Doctor' Nunn
changed his approach, avoiding early tactical melees and exchanging
queens as quickly as possible. Concentrated play and ruthless testing
of the young girl's not yet fully developed positional/endgame skills
allowed Nunn to pull back to win 6-4.
American ex-Russian GM Max Dlugy, no mean blitz player, was
also caught unawares by Judith, this time in Brussels. He lost a blitz
match against her 4-6. Feeling compelled to salvage his Grandmasterly
reputation, he then determinedly avenged himself 9- 1 in a return
encounter.
Unfortunately, Judith's run in the Brussels Open was too good to
last and was brought to an abrupt end when she was annihilated by
the talented young Dutch 1M Jeroen Piket in round four. Like Sofia,
she seemed discouraged for a while but bounced back later, drawing
with Fedorowicz. Her loss to Pergericht in the last round meant she
would still have to wait a little while before becoming the youngest
chess player ever to achieve an International Master norm.
Leonard Barden gave a clear verdict on Judith's progress in 1 987 in
The Guardian : "It is clear that she is the best eleven-year-old of either
sex in the entire history of chess - specifically, her performances are
superior to Capablanca, Reshevsky, and Nigel Short, till now the three
all-time best eleven-year-olds . . . this young Hungarian girl has the
potential to achieve the highest limits of men's chess, perhaps even to
be a genuine rival for Gary Kasparov around the year 2000."
11 Kraarshed . . .
The Polgar sisters visited Iceland twice in 1 988. The first visit was in
March for the strong Icelandair Open in Reykjavik. Judith impressed
with this victory over 1M Jonathan Tisdall, Speelman's second:
Tisdall (IM)-Judith Polgar Black was threatening to trap

Reykjavik 1988 the white bishop with . . . f6.
Sicilian Scheveningen 16 lZl g3
17 fxe6 .i.xe6
1 lZlf3 e5 18 l:t hg l lZl xe2
2 e4 e6 19 'ihe2 lZle5
3 d4 exd4 20 lZld5 .i.xd5
4 lZl xd4 lZlf6 21 exd5 file7
5 lZle3 d6 22 l:t d4
6 g4 h6 White is trying to play actively,
7 g5 but the black position offers
A double-edged continuation, nothing to 'bite' on. Additionally,
which grants White swift develop- the black knight on e5 is much
ment at the cost of a weakened more actively posted than its
pawn structure. The opening of counterpart on b3.
the h-file for a black rook is 22 .i.e7
also a drawback and here Judith 23 l:t b4 .i. xg5
exploits this avenue to the full. 24 hxg5 �a8
7 hxg5 25 a4 .I:l h3
8 .i. xg5 lZle6 26 .I:l e4 .I:l eh8
9 h4 a6 27 a5 .I:l h2
10 1Wd2 fil b6 28 .I:l g2 .I:l h l +
11 lZl b3 .i.d7 The invasion commences.
12 0-0-0 0-0-0 29 �a2 fild7
13 f4 �b8 30 lZld2 .I:l 8h4
14 .i.e2 .I:l e8 31 lZlf3 lZl xf3
15 �bl lZlh5 32 fil xf3 l:t I h3
16 f5 33 fil e2 (62)
Kraarshed . . . 95
62
33 "ii' a4 + !
B
A sublime coup d e grace. White
is mated in an amusing rook
pincer movement after 34 J:t xa4
l ha4 + 35 � b l J:t h l + .
0-1
Just as the British chess scene was reeling from the shock defeat of
Tis', news came through from the New York Open that Judith, eleven,
had made her first International Master norm. This just when English
chess was basking in the glory of our 'golden boy' Matthew Sadler
achieving the same distinction at the age of thirteen. M atthew's record
lasted only days before it was cruelly shattered by the unstoppable
Judith.
Meanwhile, Susan Polgar had once again come within striking
distance of her first Grandmaster norm in a Category 8 event in
Wellington, New Zealand. In any case, her shared fourth place behind
Spassky, Chandler and Gufeld must count as a strong performance.
Rogers (GM)-Susan Polgar 12 "ii' b3 + d5

Wellington 1 988 Necessary in order to retreat
Spanish Opening the black king into the corner.
13 �xf4 � g8
1 e4 e5 14 tll d 2 b6
2 tll f3 tll c6 15 J:t ae1 �e6
3 �b5 g6 16 �g5 'it'd7
4 c3 a6 17 "ii' a4 a5
5 .i.c4 �g7 18 �hl J:t e8
6 d4 d6 19 b3 h6
7 0-0 tll ge7 20 �xe7 tll xe7
8 tll g5 0-0 21 "ii' xd7 � xd7
9 f4 exf4 22 exd5 tll x d5
10 tll x f7 23 J:t xe8 + � xe8 (63)
White attempts to break Black White's unsubtle battery has
down by brute force. Susan is now ended in an ignominious fiasco.
forced to find accurate defensive Black's two latently powerful bish-
moves in the face of this blunt ops now come into ' their own,
onslaught. raking the diagonals to wreak
10 J:t xf7 havoc amongst White's weakened
11 �xf7 + �xf7 queenside pawns.
96 Kraarshed . . .
63
24 c4 lLl b4 25 a3 lLlc2 26 d5 lLlxa3
W 27 lLle4 a4 28 bxa4 .i.xa4 29 c5
bxc5 30 lLl xc5 ,t,b5 3 1 l:I. f3 lLlc2
32 lLle6 lLld4 33 l:I. a3 lLl xe6 34 dxe6
.i.f8 35 l:I. a8 r:j;g7 36 .I:[ b8 .i.c6
37 l:t bl .i.d5 38 l:I. el .i.e7 39 .l:!. c 1
c5 4 0 .l:[ el c 4 41 .l:[ fl .i. xe6 42
.l:!. el r:j;f7 0-1
The Polgar sisters returned to Iceland in June 1 988 for the Egilsstadir
International. Sofia Polgar won the Open event with the impressive
score of 8!/9. Judith and Susan tied for first place in the Category 7
Grandmaster invitation event with 6t/9. ahead of GMs Jim Plaskett
and Helgi Olafsson. This was Judith's second International Master
norm (she over-fulfilled it by one whole point!) and she was easily the
youngest player ever to have won an event of this class.
Judith Polgar-H. Olafsson (GM) 64

Egilsstadir International 1988 B
Sicilian Najdorf
1 e4 c5
2 lLlf3 d6
3 d4 cxd4
4 lLl xd4 lLlf6
5 lLlc3 a6
6 .i.c4
Once again we see Judith's pet
variation: 6 .i.c4 against the queen are confined to the back
Najdorf. rank. Nevertheless, Black's struc
6 e6 ture is very resilient and White
7 .i.b3 b5 must find a way to keep a grip on
8 0-0 .i.e7 the initiative before Black succeeds
9 'if f3 'ifc7 in untying himself.
10 'if g3 lLlc6 15 .i.d8
11 .i.e3 0-0 16 a5!
12 lLl xc6 'if xc6 An excellent move threatening
13 .i. h6 lLle8 1 7 .i.a4 and forcing Black into
14 a4 b4 further contortions.
15 lLld5 (64) 16 'if b7
Judith has conducted the game 17 .i.d2 exd5
in typically aggressive fashion so 18 .i. xd5 'il a7
far; all the black pieces except his 19 .i. xa8 'il xa8
Kraarshed . . . 97
20 e5 36 .,phI 'lW c5
Adhering to the principle that 37 :l e I It:lc7
the player with the rooks should 38 l hf8 + "it' xf8
attempt to open lines for them. 39 "it' xf8 + .,p xf8
Again, Judith strikes while the iron 40 :t c t It:l b5
is hot, allowing Black's dishevelled 41 :l c6 .,pe7
forces no time to organise a 42 l ha6 It:lc7
defence. 43 :t b6 J.. d5
20 dxe5 44 a6 (65)
21 .i. xb4 f6
65
22 l Hd l .i.e6 B
23 .i.xf8 .,p xf8
24 'lWd3 �e7
25 'lW xh7 "it'c6
26 h4 It:ld6
27 :l d3 "it' xc2
28 :l adl e4
29 J:!. 3d2 "it'c5
30 "it' h8 + .,pf7
31 J:!. d4 .i.f8
32 b4 'lWe5 Knights are notoriously
33 b5 inefficient at dealing with passed
Gangway! Judith demonstrates rook's pawns and this position is
that Black's 'blockade' of b5 is no exception. White now wins by
more apparent than real. If 33 . . . effectively playing with an extra
axb5 the White a-pawn will be too exchange on the kingside.
hot to handle whereas the text 44 . . . .,pd7 45 a7 It:la8 46 :l b8
allows White's rooks to bore .,pe6 47 �h2 �f5 48 J:t b5 .,pe5
deeply into Black's guts. 49 g4 .,pe6 50 .,pg3 .i.hl 51 .,pf4
33 e3 .i.g2 52 g5 fxg5 + 53 l hg5 .i.hl
34 fxe3 It:lxb5 54 :l xg7 �f6 55 J:t gl .i.d5 56 h5
35 :l d8 'lW xe3 + It:lc7 1 -0
Not to be outdone, Susan, 1 9, now proceeded to register her first
GM norm at Royan, in France.
Royan June/July 1 988
2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 0 Total
I Korchnoi GM 2595 * � 1 ! 1 7
2 Susan Polgar 1M 2490 1 * 1 1
"2" 1 1 1
"2" ! 6
3 M urey GM 2545 ! 0 * 0 1 1 1 1 6
1
4 Pfleger GM 2490 1
z ! 1 * 1 1
"2" "2" ! 51
5 Renet 1M 2440 0 ! 0 ! * 1 1
"2" 1 1 51
6 M i ralles 1M 2405 t ! 0 1 0 * 0 1 1 4
7 Kouatly 1M 2440 0 0 0 0 ! *
t 1 4
8 Kharitonov 1M 2550 0 ! 1 t 0 1
"2" 0 * t 3t
9 Santo Roman 1M 2360 0 0 0 ! 0 0 t 1 * 2
10 Andruet 1M 2450 0 0 t 0 0 0 0 * It
Average FIDE rating 2476 (Category 1 0) GM norm - 6
98 Kraarshed . . .
Second behind former world title challenger Korchnoi - not bad!

But as acquaintances of the Polgars were wont to say: "If you think
this one's good, wait till the little one grows up!"
Here is one of Susan's three victories from Royan:
Murey (GM)-Susan Polgar file and sitting targets on c7 and

Royan 1 988 e5. The exchange of a pair of
Dutch Defence knights also favours White as
Black's potential for kingside
1 e4 f5 counterplay is limited by this
2 d4 lLlf6 reduction of forces.
3 lLlf3 g6 16 g4 h5
4 lLle3 �g7 17 h3 lLld6
5 e3 18 J:t act J:t f7
Yasha M urey is a fabulously 19 �f2 �d7
creative Grandmaster who 20 �a5 J:t e8
specialises in off-beat opening 21 J:t e2 �e8
variations. Here, for example, 5 g3 22 lHct �f6
is the standard approach against 23 �b4 n b8
the Leningrad Dutch, but Yasha 24 �g2
prefers to throw opponents on White has built up an attractive
their own resources by taking position but in the next phase
them 'out of the book'. appears to lose the thread. Susan
5 0-0 does not miss her chance and uses
6 �d3 d6 the opportunity to turn the tide in
7 0-0 lLle6 her favour.
8 d5 lLle5 24 J:t h7
Open to criticism with the bene 25 �a5 J:t e8
fit of hindsight, as after the 26 lLle3 "it'd7
exchange on e5 White is able to 27 lLl d l �d8
limit the scope of Black's bishop 28 lLlf2 "it' g7
on g7. Perhaps better was the 29 "it' a3 "it' h6
more creative 8 . . lLl b4, intending
.
30 �e3 lLlf7
to follow up with . . . c6. 31 �f1 hxg4
9 lLlxe5 dxe5 32 hxg4 e5! (66)
10 f3 e6
66
11 "it' b3 �h8
W
12 e4 exd5
13 exd5 f4
14 �d2 g5
15 lLle2 lLle8
White's opening strategy has
paid off. He has obtained an excel
lent King's Indian position with
promising piece activity on the
queenside, use of the half-open c-
Kraarshed . . . 99
All of a sudden, wouldn't you 37 J:t xc6 bxc6

rather be Black? 3S <io>e2 J:t h2
33 dxc6 J:t xc6 39 �d4 .td7
34 'W xa7 "iV h2 40 i.c4 i. xg4
35 'W bS "iV g3 41 fxg4 f3 +
36 �xe5 + �gS 0-1
As if to clinch the anti-sexist argument, Judith now took time out

to win the officially-named "Boys' Under- 1 2 World Championship" in
Timisoara, Romania, undefeated, with 9/ 1 1 . She beat 36 boys. This
piece of history apparently took a while to register with the international
chess media. Amusingly, in annotating this game, the English chess
journalist Bernard Cafferty seemed rather confused: "here is a game from
her (Judith's) victory in the World Under- 1 2 Girls' (sic) Championship in
Romania . . . "
Judith Polgar-Hausrath consistently to open the g-file"

World U-12 Championship, - Cafferty.
Timisoara, Romania 1988 IS J:t abl �c6
Caro-Kann Defence 19 "iVe3 .i.eS
20 g4 �d6
1 e4 c6 21 J:t g l .i.xe5
2 d4 d5 22 .txe5 lll d7
3 exd5 cxd5 23 �f4 f6
4 �d3 lll c6 24 .txh6! (6 7)
5 c3 lll f6
6 .tf4 e6
7 lll f3 .i.e7
67
S 0-0 0-0
B
9 lll bd2 "iV b6
"The source of all her (sic) trou
bles," says Cafferty. The black
queen now blocks Black's main
source of play - the minority
attack of the queenside pawns.
10 "iVc2 i.d7
11 lll e5 h6
12 lll d f3 J:t acS
13 "iVd2 J:t fdS
14 J:t fel ..uS
15 �hl lll xe5 Play could now have gone 24
16 lll xe5 .tb5 . . . gxh6 25 "iV xh6 lll f8 26 g5 f5 27
17 �c2 .teS g6 e5 28 �xf5 with a strong attack
"Planless play by the German for White, but instead Black goes
girl (sic), whereas Judith plays out with a whimper.
100 Kraarshed . . .
24 e5 29 .i.xd8 exf2
25 g5 g6 30 1:!. g2 1:!. xd8
26 gxf6 "ii xf6 31 .i. xg6 .i. xg6
27 .i.g5 exd4 32 l hg6 + ..t> h7
28 .i.xf6 dxe3 33 J:t g2 1 -0
Sofia had a rather harder time of things in the 'Boys" Under- 1 4

event, managing only 61-/ 1 1 . Gata Kamsky came second behind the
winner, Liss of Israel.
Next, the sisters played in the World Rapid (Active) Chess Champion
ships in Mazatlan, Mexico. Sofia won the Under-20 section, and also
beat GMs Larsen and Henley among the adults. Judith won the Under-
1 6 section and defeated GMs Djuric, Bisguier and Ivanov in the adult
section, coming twelfth on tie-break.
In August 1 988, the sisters played in France, in the Bagneux Open.
Susan scored 7!j9, Sofia 61-/9, and Judith became the youngest player
in history to secure the International Master title when she clinched
her third and final norm with 6/9. As if to stress the point, she then
proceeded to win an international tournament in Bulgaria with 1 2/ 1 5,
unbeaten, and overfulfilling the 1 M norm by two points.
In the wake of these new feats, the Polgars rapidly became the hottest
property in chess. Chess computer manufacturers began beating a path
to their door, bidding to secure the girls' endorsements for their
products. Chess entrepreneurs began offering huge sums to sign them
up. Higher and higher went the appearance fees. Organisers began
falling over themselves to ensure the media draw of the sisters'
participation.
In October 1 988 the Polgar sisters pulled crowds on opposite sides
of the world. Susan played in the incredibly strong Bicentennial World
Junior Championships in Adelaide:
World Junior Championships, Adelaide September/October 1 988

1= Lautier FM 9
Ivanchuk 1M 9
Serper 9
Gelfand 1M 9
5= Wahls FM 81
Akopian 81
Hellers 1M 81
8 Susan Polgar 1M 8
9= L . B. Hansen 1M 8
Piket 1M 8
Manor 1M 8
Wolff 1M 8
Also: Rachels 7 ! , Adams 7, Norwood 6 �
1 3 rounds, 52 players
Kraarshed . . . 101
Her score of 8/ 1 3 in this field represented a very creditable perform

ance. Susan's game against the promising Soviet Grigory Serper won
a special prize:
Susan Polgar-Serper 68
World Junior Championship, B
Adelaide 1 988
Griinfeld Defence
1 d4 lOf6
2 c4 c6
3 lOc3 d5
4 e3 g6
5 lOf3 .tg7
6 .i.d3 0-0
This cocktail of the Griinfeld much. White now has the pleasant
and Slav Defences was originally choice between advancing on the
mixed by the German world title queenside with b4-b5 or instigat-
challenger Karl Schlechter in the ing a kingside attack. Black is
early years of this century. It is reduced to near-paralysis and can
extremely solid but rather lacking only suffer in silence, virtually bed-
in 'oomph'. ridden on the back ranks.
7 0-0 .i.g4 22 f6
8 h3 .i.xf3 23 lOf3 'f1. e7
9 'it' xf3 e6 24 'f1. ft lOc7
10 'f1. d l lO bd7 25 b4 a6
11 b3 lOb6 26 'it' h2 lOe8
12 .i.b2 lOc8 27 'f1. adl lOc7
13 lOe2 lOd6 28 h4 f5
Black has prevented White's 29 g5 h5
intended central expansion with 30 gxh6 .i. xh6
e4, but Susan finds another way 31 h5 l:l g7
to mount pressure. Susan handles 32 �f2 gxh5
such thematic classical positions 33 'it' xh5 'f1. f6
with impressive ease. 34 lOe5 (69)
14 lO g3 'it'a5
15 'it' e2 'f1. ad8 69
16 'it'c2 'f1. d7 B
17 a4 'it'd8
18 lOft lOh5
19 c5 lOc8
20 g4 lOf6
21 f4 lOe8
22 lOh2 (68)
Black's contorted knight
manoeuvres have not achieved
102 Kraarshed . . .
It is rather ironic that Black's 34 !De7

earlier attempts to control the e4- 35 J:l. gl !De8
square with his knights led 36 i.c3 !Dc7
nowhere, whereas now the 37 J:l. x g7 + J. xg 7
invasion of the white knight on e5 38 J:l. gl "iV e8
signals the beginning of the end 39 1W g5 J:l. f7
for Black. 40 i.e2 1 -0
Meanwhile, in London, Merchant Bankers Duncan Lawrie decided

to sponsor an International Mixed Challenge at the Eccleston Hotel,
Victoria. Twelve-year-old Judith dominated the event:
Duncan Laurie World Mixed Challenge October 1 988

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 0 Total
I Judith Polgar FM 2365 • 1 1 1 1 1 1 7
2 Hennigan 2295 0 • ! 1 0 1 1 1 1 6
3 Kraidman G M 2405 ! 1 • 1 1 ! 1
1 ! 1 6
4 Sofia Polgar FM 2345 1 0 1
1 • ! 0 ! 1 ! 41
5 Susan Arkell WIM 2355 0 0 0 • ! ! I 0 1 4
6 Keith Arkell 1 M 2430 0 0 0 1 1 • 1 1 4
7 Dunnington 2280 0 0 1
z 1 ! 1
1 • ! 0 1 4
8 Jana Bellin WGM 2300 ! ! 1 t 0 1 1 • 0 1 31
9 Westerinen GM 2395 ! 0 0 0 1 0 1 • 0 31
1 0 Sheila Jackson WIM 2245 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 1
1 • 2!
Average FIDE rating 2345 (Category 6) 1M norm - 6
Judith, Sofia and Klara were greeted by an explosion of publicity:

"Success for Chess Prodigy", announced Leonard Barden in The
Guardian.
"Chess Prodigy scores her finest victory," Bill Hartston informed his
readers in the Independent. This, Hartston pointed out, was Judith's
fourth such victory in nine months. Bill also monopolised more column
inches with a full-length feature headed "Saying Checkmate to Chess
Sexists", despite the fact that he'd never before been noted for feminist
sympathies.
"Sisters show no mercy," declared Raymond Keene in The Times.
"Charmer of 12 who changes all her checks into cash" was the Daily
Express's description of Judith.
"Queen of the Castles" The Times.
-
Dominic Lawson of The Spectator had a field day. " . . . her mother
read a book or knitted, looking for all the world like Madame Lafarge
at the foot of the guillotine. Little Judith told me she thought she would
be ready to put Gary Kasparov's head in a tumbril in about three
years' time. Place your bets now . . . "
A front-page report in The Times by Brian James went even further.
Under the heading: "Queen's gambit poses threat to kings of chess",
the non-specialist reporter gushed: "The game awaits the inevitable
Kraarshed . . . 103
clash for the title of World Champion between Miss Polgar and
Kasparov. It could even happen within the next year." This excessively
optimistic timescale was probably occasioned by confusion; a couple
of exhibition games between Gary Kasparov and Judith Polgar had
been mooted at the time.
Judith was memorably described. "She has 'killer' eyes," alleged an
unnerved Dominic Lawson, "the irises are a grey so dark they are
almost indistinguishable from the pupils. Set against her long red hair,
the effect is striking." Sofia, according to Lawson in a later article, was
"slender, flirtatious, with dark hair with which she plays between
moves." The sisters were also interviewed on BBC television.
The actual chess was almost completely buried beneath a ton of
hype. However, apart from a diplomatic draw between themselves (the
usual outcome in competitive encounters within the family) both sisters
played some fine chess. Here Judith defeats the then World Under- I 8
Champion, Michael Hennigan of M uswell Hill:
Judith Polgar-Hennigan 13 .i.xf4 exf4

London (Duncan Lawrie) 1 988 14 Wd2 ttJe6
Pirc Defence 15 W xf4
Judith calmly and confidently
1 e4 g6 establishes kingside supremacy,
2 d4 .i.g7 braving whatever consequences
3 ttJe3 d6 may befall her weakened dark
4 f4 ttJf6 squares.
5 ttJf3 e5 15 W b6 +
6 dxe5 'iWa5 16 We3 W xb2
7 .i.d3 W xe5 17 ttJd5 ttJ b4
8 We2 0-0 18 ttJxb4 W xb4
9 .i.e3 W a5 19 .l:!. abl 'iW a5
10 h3 20 g4 b6
The start of an unconventional 21 g5 .l:!. e8
and provocative plan where White 22 f6 (70)
delays castling to prevent the irri
tating . . . .i.g4, exchanging off
70
the useful white knight on £3, a
B
potential attacker. Black is lured
into drastic counter-measures.
10 ttJ h5
11 �f2
This ugly-looking move is
necessary to prevent equine
intrusion on g3.
11 e5
12 f5 ttJf4
104 Kraarshed . . .
Now Black is swamped. 9 .txf6 gxf6

22 . . . AfS 23 "iV f4 d5 24 e5 .tc5 + 10 f4 iLlg4
2 5 �g3 .t a 6 2 6 h 4 "iV a3 2 7 l:t bd l 11 iLlf3 .th6
l:t ad8 2 8 h 5 l:t d7 29 hxg6 fxg6 30 12 iLld4 "iW xe2 +
.txa6 "iV xa6 31 "iV g4 "iVe2 32 :t d2 13 .txe2 iLle3 (71)
.tf2 + 33 �g2 "iVe4 1 -0
Black lost on time.
71
In GM Raymond Keene's
W
opinion, it was Sofia who played
the most brilliant game of the
tournament:
Sofia Polgar-Westerinen (GM)

London (Duncan Lawrie) 1988
Nimzowitsch Defence
1 e4 iLlc6
2 iLlc3 iLlf6
3 d4 e6 It is rare to see a Grandmaster
4 d5 exd5 suffering with such an atrocious
This incautious capture is the wreck of a position. Despite being
root cause of all Black's future nominally a pawn ahead, Black's
troubles. The former Finnish pawns are so mangled that White
Champion should simply have will inevitably clean up once her
played 4 . . . iLle5 without opening mobilisation is complete.
the e-file. 14 g3 �d8
5 exd5 iLle5 15 c,t>d2 l:t e8
6 "iVe2 "iWe7 16 .td3 b6
Obligatory, in order to avoid 17 l:t hel iLlg4
losing a piece. Any other move 18 l:t xe8 + c,t>xe8
loses to f4, netting the pinned 19 .tf5 iLle5
black knight. White's next move As consolation Black is at least
underlines just how unpleasant able to return his knight to the
Black's life has already become. centre, due to the pin along the
At minimal material cost, Sofia h6-c 1 diagonal. Naturally, 19 . . .
shatters her opponent's central iLlxh2 would have lost instantly to
pawn structure and cripples his 20 .l:l. h l .
development. 20 iLl cbS �f8
7 d6 cxd6 21 : el .tb7
8 Ag5 "iVe6 22 iLl xd6 iLlf3 +
Black is forced into another 23 iLl xf3 .t xf3
contortion to prevent the crusher 24 .txh7 .l:l. d8
iLld5; but now the Hungarian teen 25 Ad3 .tg4 (72)
ager can inflict still more hideous At last, White is material ahead,
damage on Black's pawn for and Black will be helpless to pre
mation. vent further losses.
Kraarshed . . . 105
72
31 b5 axb5
W 32 cxb5 .i.f3
33 .i.xd7 f5 +
This brief outburst of activity is
a mirage. Sofia finishes off her
reeling adversary with a few swift
blows.
34 <oti>c4 .i.b2
35 .i.c6 J:[ d8
36 lZl b7 J:l. d4 +
37 'it>b3 1 -0
26 �c3 .i.g7 A remarkably sophisticated per
27 .if5 .i.f3 formance for a thirteen-year-old,
28 ..tt d4 .i.c6 conducted, according to Raymond
29 c4 J:l. a8 Keene, "in the grand style of Cap a
30 b4 a6 blanca."
Of one hapless opponent in this tournament, Judith produced the

following soliloquy which is regarded to this day as her most classically
characteristic quote: "He made a mistake, so I kraarshed him."
Bill Hartston, in the grip, as he said, of a growing infatuation with
Sofia Polgar (by common consent the prettiest of the three sisters) took
them out to see the musical, Chess. I was privileged to be of the party
and this was the first time I had met Klara Polgar and her younger
daughters. She very civilly introduced herself and them to me, a most
tactful way of finding out who on earth I was. I can't blame her, as
my presence at the tournament was, to put it delicately, tangential; due
to timewasting emotional distractions, typical of my generation of
female chess players, I was not playing in the tournament, nor
participating in any useful chess activity at that time.
Naturally I was goggling with fascinated curiosity and found it very
difficult to relate to them as the normal and friendly young girls I
rationally knew them to be, because I was frankly awed by their media
generated aura of exceptional genius and keenly aware of my inferiority
as a chess player. In an effort to be helpful, I provided a running
commentary at the theatre in case their English wasn't completely
equal to following the action; but I suspect I need not have bothered!
I found Judith the most striking of the two. She had indeed, as Bill
Hartston had observed, a slightly imperious demeanour that seemed
to owe much to the self-confidence that must have come from her
success. When I affected a cigarette at the closing reception of the
tournament, she ostentatiously waved the wafting smoke away with an
exaggerated look of pious disapproval.
The Duncan Lawrie tournament had been intended to serve partly
as a 'warm-up' for the Thessaloniki Olympiad in November. I went as
part of the England women's team and was thus able to see the sisters
in action for Hungary - in the women's team.
12 Thessaloniki Olympiad 1 988 -
Gold!
"Zsuzsa! J utka! Zsofi! Ildi!" screamed the front cover of Magyar Sakkelet
in the wake of the 28th Olympiad in Greece, November/December 1 988.
Hungary had gone for gold, and won.
The Hungarian women's team consisted of the three Polgar sisters -
representing their country in the Olympiad for the first time, plus Ildiko
Madl. The board order was Susan 1, Judith 2, Madl 3 and Sofia 4. At
first there had been talk of a play-off between Sofia and WGMs Veroci
and Ivanka for the fourth spot, but this was dropped. Madl had to put
up with being referred to as 'the fourth Polgar.' The Hungarians had
to put up with 'their' team being consistently referred to as 'Polgaria'.
Obviously the participation of the Polgar sisters in the Women's
Olympiad represented a reversal of their avowed avoidance of women
only events and the explanation is threefold:
The first reason is nationalistic pressure. Clearly the prospect of
capturing the gold medals from the powerful Soviet team had captivated
the imagination of the H ungarian public and the H ungarian chess
establishment alike. As Klara later said of the sisters' performance in
Thessaloniki: "The Olympiad was everything for the Hungarians. My
husband and I didn't look upon this result as the greatest success for
our daughters, but for the general public it was something special."
Another factor may have been that there was no real possibility of
any of the girls being picked for the H ungarian men's team on the
basis of their results at that time. So there was, at least, no real dilemma
of principle on that score in 1 988.
And, of course, there was money. In the end it was reported that
such was the enthusiasm of the Hungarian Chess Federation for the
gold medals that they were prepared to offer previously unheard-of
financial inducements to make the relatively weak competition more
attractive to the Polgars.
By this time, it should be pointed out, both Laszlo and Klara had
long given up their regular jobs to devote themselves to their daughters'
chess careers. It was Klara, in the main, who fulfilled the roles of carer
and chaperone, whilst Laszlo managed the business side of things. Thus
it was that Laszlo has become most closely identified with the
Thessaloniki 1988 107
negotiation of the Polgars' appearance 'packages' of recent years.

In the event, the sisters did not disappoint, although the event was
far from being a one-sided affair . Thessaloniki 1 988 was the strongest
and most dramatic women's Olympiad ever. It soon developed into a
'two-filly race' between Hungary and the Soviets in which the lead
fluctuated and outside events had a strong impact on the chess.
The first of these was news of the tragic death of Bela Perenyi,
euphemistically described as a 'close friend' of third board Ildiko Madl.
This had a depressing effect on the Hungarian camp; Madl had to be
rested for a few rounds, Sofia Polgar was in poor form and after ten
rounds Hungary was one and a half points behind the Soviets. Despite
the absence of Gaprindashvili (who had scored 1 0/ 1 0 in the previous
Olympiad in Dubai) it looked as though the experience of the Soviet
team would tell in their favour. After all, their board two, world title
challenger Elena Akhmilovskaya, was doing splendidly for them with
81/9 . . .
Round 1 1 - no Akhmilovskaya! The biggest story ever to hit an
Olympiad broke. The Soviet board two had married the American
team captain, 1M John Donaldson, eloped with him, and defected to
the United States!
This extraordinary event was a major blow to Soviet hopes of the
gold medal. Had Akhmilovskaya delayed her romantic flight for a few
more rounds, it is more than possible that ' Polgaria' would have been
trounced. As it was, news had leaked out of the Donaldsons' wedding
in Greece and John and Elena feared her departure would be obstructed
by the Soviet authorities if they got word of what had happened.
Therefore both felt compelled to leave their teams in the lurch.
Now the Hungarians seized their chance, drawing level with the
Soviet Union by the end of the penultimate round. So all depended on
the fourteenth and final round of matches. In a tense and nail-biting
situation the Soviets could only manage a draw against the surprising
Dutch team. Hungary, however, was not having things all its own way
against Sweden. Judith won, taking her personal score to 1 2t / 1 3, but
M adl could only draw. Susan was struggling, a pawn down, against
Pia Cramling and it looked as though calculators would be required
to work out the tie-break. In the event Susan fought back to hold the
draw and so Hungary came home by half a point.
Individual performances: Judith's performance won the overall
individual gold medal for the best rating performance (2694!) of the
women's Olympiad. The only draw she conceded was when she was
unable to force a win despite being an exchange up in an endgame
against Soviet Irina Levitina. Judith picked up another gold medal for
the best performance on Board 2. Susan Polgar won the bronze medal
for third best performance on Board 1 with 1 0t / 1 4 (Gold - Cramling
[Sweden] 1 2t / 1 4; Silver - Lematschko [Switzerland] 9 t / 1 2).
Some important games from the Thessaloniki � lympiad:
J08 Thessaloniki 1988
Klimova-Richterova (WGM) 21 .i.d3 "it" h4

Susan Polgar 22 h3
Thessaloniki Olympiad 1988 The bishop is still immune - 22
Sicilian Sveshnikov hxg3 fxg3 23 l:Hd 1 lLlf4 24 .te4
"it"h2+ 25 �f1 .th3 ! and Black
1 e4 c5 crashes through.
2 lLlf3 lLlc6 22 "it" g5
3 d4 cxd4 23 lLlc6 lLl h4
4 lLl xd4 lLlf6 24 �hl lLlxg2
5 lLlc3 e5 25 "it" xg2 "it" h4
6 lLldb5 d6 26 �gl i.. x h3
7 .i.e3 a6 27 "it" h l lH6! (73)
8 lLla3 .!:t b8
9 lLld5 lLlxd5 73
10 exd5 lLle7 W
11 .i.c4
The Czech no. 1 makes a mis
take similar in principle to that
made by Perenyi against Susan
two years before. Here, as then,
the bold prelate thinks again and
retreats three moves later.
11 lLlg6
12 0-0 .i.e7
13 "it" d2 0-0 The final black piece joins the
14 .i.e2 f5 attack. The white queenside pieces
15 f3 f4 flounder like beached whales,
16 i.. a 7 .!:t a8 enticed into the quagmire of
17 .i.f2 .i.h4 Black's queenside; Black, mean
18 lLlc4 b5 while, completes the kingside dis
19 i. b6 "it"f6 section.
20 lLla5 .i.g3! 28 .i.d8 .!:t xd8
White's demonstration on the 29 lLl xd8 .!:t h6
queenside has reaped little reward, 30 lLle6 "it"e7!
whereas Black has been building 0- 1
up methodically on the opposite A beautiful finish. The queen
wing. This pseudo bishop offer is switches to the g t -a7 diagonal
the culmination of her play. The with murderous effect. "A forcing
bishop cannot be accepted: 2 1 attack," commented Britain's
hxg3 fxg3 2 2 .!:t fe t "it"h4 2 3 �f1 Woman Grandmaster Susan
"it" h l + 24 .tgl .i.h3! 25 .i.d t Arkell, "carried out with great
lLlh4 is devastating. accuracy."
Judith impressively defeated the talented Chinese girl who went on,
three years later, to defeat Maya Chiburdanidze for the world title:
Thessaloniki 1988 109
Xie Jun-Judith Polgar The position here is a good exam

Thessaloniki Olympiad 1988 ple of this principle in action. After
Sicilian Paulsen 1 8 . . . 'iW xc2 1 9 lDf2 threatening
J:[ ac l , White is fully in control.
1 e4 e5 The text move maintains the
2 lDf3 e6 initiative and prevents the afore
3 d4 exd4 mentioned knight move by eyeing
4 lDxd4 lDe6 up the f4-pawn.
5 lDe3 'iWe7 19 h3 J:[ ah8
6 .te2 a6 20 ,.pgl g5
7 0-0 lDf6 21 fxg5 .t xe4
8 ,.p h I lD xd4 22 'iWf2 (75)
9 'iW xd4 .te5
10 -.. d3 h5
11 f4 lDg4 75
12 'iW g3 b5 (74) B
74
W
22 f5!
Brilliant! Black sacrifices a
pawn with check, but in return
completes the unveiling of lines in
front of White's king, begun with
An enterprising pawn sacrifice her imaginative opening play.
to open the h-file and the bishops' 23 gxf6 + �f7 24 'iWe3 .txg2
diagonals in front of the white 25 'iW g5 11 4h7 26 <ot> xg2 J:[ g8 27
king. Instead of accepting, White 'iW xg8 + <ot>xg8 28 lDe3 -"e6 + 29
could also play more cautiously ,.pg3 'iWd6+ 30 lU4 J:[ xh3 + 31
with 1 3 e5 .tb7 14 .tD. ,.pxh3 -.. xf4 32 lDg4 e5 33 J:[ gl
13 .t xg4 hxg4 �f7 34 l1 g2 'iWf3 + 35 <ot>h2 d6
14 'iW xg4 .tb7 36 J:[ g3 'iWf4 37 e3 bxe3 38 bxe3
15 'iWe2 b4 'iWd2+ 39 �h3 'iW xa2 40 J:[ f3 'iWd2
16 lD d l �e7 41 �h4 e4 42 J:[ e3 'iW g2 43 r;t;>g5
17 .te3 .txe3 �e6 44 e4 as 45 �f4 "ilt' fl + 46
18 'iW xe3 J:[ h4 ,.pxe4 1W xe4 + 47 �f3 + �f5 48
When one has sacrificed J:[ e5 + �g6 49 J:[ e7 'iWd3 + 50
material, it is often a mistake to �f4 'iWf5 + 51 �g3 <;f;>h5 52 J:[ g7
play singlemindedly to regain it. a4 53 J:[ g8 'iW 43 + 0-1
1 10 Thessaloniki 1988
Polihroniade (WGM) 77
Judith Polgar B
Thessaloniki Olympiad 1988
Sicilian Paulsen
1 e4 e5
2 lLlf3 e6
3 d4 exd4
4 lLlxd4 lLle6
5 lLle3 "We7
6 ..te2 a6
7 f4 lLlxd4 leaves Black on top.
Also possible is 7 . . . b5. 17 lLlg4
8 "W xd4 b5 18 l:t xe3?
9 ..te3 ..tb7 White's only, but decisive, mis
10 0-0-0 l:t e8 take. Unclear was 1 8 "W d4 O-O! 1 9
11 l:t d2 lLlf6 ..txc8 "W xa2 20 l:t xc3 "Wa l + 2 1
12 .H3 "W a5! (76) �d2 "W xh l , while 1 8 "Wg3 "W b5 1 9
.i.xc8 "Wxb2+ 20 � d l "it' b l + 2 1
76 �e2 "W xc2 + 2 2 � e l "it' b l + 23
W we2 would have been a draw by
perpetual check.
18 lLlxe3
19 l:t xe8 + �e7
20 l:t xh8 "W xa2
Black is winning despite White's
nominal material advantage
because of the lack of co-ordi
nation in White's scattered army
and the vulnerability of her king.
A theoretical novelty and an 21 g3
improvement on lines previously Desperately trying to hang on
tried for Black at Grandmaster by protecting the rook on h I with
level. the bishop. 21 l:t e 1 loses to 2 1 . . .
13 e5 lLlc4.
Not 1 3 a3? ..txa3! 21 lLle4
13 .i.e5 22 �dl "W b l +
14 "W d3 ..txe3 23 <i;e2 "W xe2 +
15 "W xe3 b4 24 <i;f3
16 .i.xb7 24 o;Pfl is also losing after 24 . . .
Not 1 6 exf6? bxc3 1 7 bxc3 "W xa2 "W c l + followed by 25 . . . "W x b2 + .
and Black is winning. 24 "W b3+
16 bxe3 25 <i;g4 lLle3 +
17 l:t d3 (77) 26 �h4 "Wxb7
If White tries 1 7 ..txc8 then 1 7 27 l:t gl "W xb2
. . . cxd2+ 1 8 "W xd2 "W xa2 also 0- 1
Thessaloniki 1 988 111
Akhsharumova (WIM) 78
Susan Polgar W
Thessaloniki Olympiad 1988
Dutch Defence
1 d4 f5
2 tLlc3 d5
3 .i.f4 tLlf6
4 e3 c6
5 .i.d3 g6
6 tLlf3 .i.g7
7 tLle2 25 'iPfl
7 h4!? would have been an inter- Black's continuous threats have
esting try here. prevented White from capturing
7 .i.e6 the knight on e4, which remains
8 c3 tLl bd7 taboo now, e.g. 25 .i.xe4 fxe4
9 h3 tLle4 26 "it'f2 J:t afS - the prospect of
10 "it'c2 h6 opening the f-file for Black is
11 J.e5 unthinkable.
1 1 h4!?, leading to an unclear 25 tLlg3 +
position, was better. 26 <;tf2 J:t af8
11 tLl xe5 27 .i.e2 tLle4 +
12 tLl xe5 J.xe5 28 <;tfl J:t g3
13 dxe5 "it'c7 Now 29 .af3 loses to 29
14 tLlf4 : xf3 + ! 30 gxf3 tLld2 + ! So White
Although this move looks natu resigned.
ral, White's best continuation here
was 1 4 f4 after which the game is Judith Polgar-Angelova (WIM)
equal. What follows j ust improves Thessaloniki Olympiad 1 988
Black's position, ridding her of her Sicilian Defence
worst piece and coordinating her
forces. 1 e4 c5
14 �f7 2 tLlf3 tLlc6
15 tLl xe6 'it> xe6 3 .ab5 g6
16 f4 "it' b6 4 0-0 .i.g7
17 "it'c1 tLlg3 5 c3 e5
18 : gl g5 6 d4
19 ..t;>f2 gxf4 The Polgars seem to love sacri
20 �f3 tLle4 (78) ficing pawns in the opening. This
21 �xf4 is another dangerous offering from
Of course not 2 1 exf4?? "it'f2 Judith, e.g. 6 . . . exd4 7 cxd4 cxd4
mate! S e5, cramping Black by inhibiting
21 "it'c7 the natural development of her
22 'it>f3 "it' xe5 king's knight on f6. Obviously the
23 'it>e2 : hg8 pawn is taboo due to the potential
24 "it'e1 "it' h2 pin on the e-�le.
1 12 Thessaloniki 1 988
6 exd4 Displaying smooth economy of

7 cxd4 iZl xd4 firepower with an elegant piece
8 iZl xd4 cxd4 sacrifice. Black gobbles at the bait
9 eS but is soon unerringly impaled.
9 iZle7 14 .i. xc3
10 J.. gS 0-0 IS bxc3 'it' xbS
Black is understandably anxi 16 'it' h6 'it'fS (80)
ous to get her king to safety but
now White regains her pawn and 80
keeps the initiative thanks to the W
vulnerability of Black's dark
squares.
11 'it' xd4 iZlc6
12 'it' h4 'it' b6
13 iZlc3 .i. xeS
14 n ae l ! (79)
79
B
Allowing a spectacular finale,

but there was no defence, e.g. 1 6
. . . f5 1 7 .tf6! n xf6 1 8 n e8 + .
17 'it' xf8 + ! 1 -0
This game won not only the brilliancy prize at Thessaloniki, but
also a special award of £500 as a result of a vote from the readers of
Pergamon Chess magazine. Some comments:
GM David Norwood: "Such a beautiful, romantic miniature (the
game, not the player!) is obviously a delight . . . true, the position cries
out for 1 7 'it' xf8 + , but still I had to applaud."
1M Jonathan Levitt: "A very spectacular miniature from the Mozart
of chess . . .
"
Paul Lamford (Editor, Pergamon Chess): "The panel preferred Judith

Polgar's spectacular finish . . . but would they have done so if they had
known that the entire game appears on page 44 of The Anti-Sicilian 3
.i.b5 ( + ) [by Razuvayev and M atsukevitch (Batsford)], with a note
to White's 1 6th move: 'Threatening 1 7 'it' xf8 + '? Anyway, the readers
liked it and Judith picks up £500 for her erudition or imagination -
which, we cannot say."
13 Hastings 1 988 /9 -
Judith Strikes
Just after Christmas 1 988, Klara brought Judith to England for the
Hastings Challengers. Judith, who has a close sibling bond with Sofia,
was missing her sister who had been left behind in Budapest, but was
nonetheless able to score her most famous tournament victory yet.
She played some truly impressive games, losing only once against
Grandmaster James 'Kamikaze' Plaskett - arguably one of few Grand
masters more aggressive than she. In the first round she beat the
English player David Wood. Then in Round 2 an unfortunate American
got eaten for breakfast:
Rowley (FM)-Judith Polgar ously placed, and can only be

Hastings Challengers 1 988/9 rescued on pain of seriously weak
Sicilian Paulsen ening the white pawn structure.
16 f4 .i.c6
1 e4 c5 17 lLld5
2 lLlf3 e6 Ultimately, this fails to aid
3 d4 cxd4 White's cause, but 1 7 fxe5 J.. x e5
4 lLlxd4 lLlc6 was no more appetizing.
5 lLlc3 "jic7 17 J:!. xd6
6 g3 lLlf6 18 fxe5 .i.xe5
7 .i.g2 d6 19 lLle7 + <i;f8
8 0-0 .i.d7 20 lLl xc6 bxc6
9 J:!. e l J.. e7 21 "ji h5
10 lLldb5 "ji b8 White attempts to stir up com
11 a4 0-0 plications but it is a remarkable
12 .H4 lLle5 fact that the cool-headed twelve
13 �g5 a6 year-old was always in complete
14 �xf6 �xf6 control. The rest of the game is
15 lLlxd6 J:!. d8 essentially a lengthy forced tactical
At first glance it looks as though sequence with the writing on the
White has won a safe pawn, but wall for White.
appearances are deceptive. In fact, 21 'ii' xb2
the white knight on d6 is precari- 22 "it'.xh7 "ji b6 +
1 14 Hastings 1988/9
23 �hl �xal (8 1) 30 'if b2+ c;t g6

31 �e4 + f5
32 �xf5 + exf5
81
33 .!:!. e6 + c;t h7
W
34 'ifc1 .!:!. d2
0-1
Another crunch:
Judith Polgar-S. Singh

Hastings Challengers 1 988/9
Sicilian Scheveningen
24 e5 1 e4 e5
The first point is that the white 2 lUf3 d6
queen would be amusingly 3 d4 exd4
trapped after 24 'if h 8 + <t;e7 25 4 lUxd4 lUf6
'if xa8 .!:!. d8. 5 lUe3 e6
24 �xe5! 6 .i.e2 a6
M uch better than 24 . . . .!:!. dd8 7 0-0 .i.e7
when White, although an ex 8 f4 0-0
change down after 25 .!:!. xa 1 , could 9 .i.e3 'ife7
continue to offer resistance. 10 a4 lUe6
25 'if h8+ <t;e7 11 'ifel lUxd4
26 'if xa8 i.xg3! (82) 12 .i.xd4 e5
Strictly speaking, the accuracy
of White's opening play has left
82
W
something to be desired; Black's
last move should equalise comfor
tably. The point is that 1 3 fxe5
dxe5 14 'iWg3 is met by 1 4 . . .
�c5. So really White should have
preferred 1 1 � h I .
13 �e3 exf4
14 .!:!. xf4 .i.e6
15 .i.d4 lUd7
16 lUd5 �xd5
17 exd5 lUe5 (83)
Another finesse which had to be The black knight never
foreseen: now, if the bishop is not accomplishes much from this out
captured, White will be two pawns post, and indeed is soon compelled
down without a glimmer of hope. to retreat. Probably better, with
27 hxg3 .!:!. d8 hindsight, was 1 7 . . . .i.f6 to chal
28 a5 'iff2 lenge the potent white bishop on
29 'if b7 + <t;f6 d4.
Hastings 1 988/9 1 15
83
29 '�hd5
w 30 'iW xc8 + tt:\e8
31 'iWd7 1 -0
Here Judith blasts one of the

family trainers off the board:
Judith Polgar-Szekely (1M)

Hastings Challengers 1 988/9
Sicilian Najdorf
18 c4 f5 1 e4 c5
19 'iW c3 l:t ae8 2 tt:\f3 d6
20 l:!. a fl g6 3 d4 cxd4
21 c5 tt:\d7 4 tt:\ xd4 tt:\f6
22 c6 .U6 5 tt:\c3 a6
23 �xf6 tt:\xf6 6 �.c4 e6
24 .tf3 bxc6 7 .tb3 J.. e 7
25 d x c6 d5 8 f4 0-0
26 l:t b4 l:t e6 9 'iW f3 tt:\c6
27 l:t e l l:t c8 (84) 10 J.. e3 'ilc7
11 f5 tt:\ xd4
12 A xd4 b5
84
13 a3 l:t b8
w
14 g4 b4
15
g5 tt:\ d7?
This natural-looking retreat
(not 1 5 . . . bxc3? 16 gxf6 when
Black's kingside will be shredded)
is in fact a serious mistake. Black
should have opted instead for 1 5
. . . tt:\eS.
1 6 f6 bxc3 (85)
Probably Black was blissfully

unaware of his impending doom. 85
W
When Judith's executions come,
they are so clean and swift that
they would not disgrace any self
respecting slaughterhouse.
28 l:t b7 'iW xc6
29 J.. xd5!
The end. 29 . . tt:\xd5 30 'iW g7 is
.
mate; or 29 . . . 'iW xc3 30 i.xe6 +

and 3 1 l:t xc3.
116 Hastings 1 988/9
17 fxg7! 35 � xf3 �xd4

Black almost certainly over 36 J:t g2 h6
looked this. After 1 7 fxe7 J:t e8 1 8 37 a4 �d5
0-0 J:t xe7, Black would have little 38 J:t c2 1 -0
to fear. The luckless Glenn Flear,
17 lLle5 apparently an easy mark for
Black is obliged to surrender women chess players, fell victim
the exchange as 1 7 . . . J:t e8 1 8 0-0 to a Polgar for the second time:
lLle5 1 9 �xe5 � xg5 20 j.xc3 is
hopeless. However, with a whole
exchange less the outcome is not Judith Polgar-Flear (GM)
in doubt, anyway. Hastings Challengers 1 988/9
18 gxf8( W' ) + 'it;> xf8 King's Gambit
19 W' xc3 W' xc3 +
20 �xc3 .i.xg5 1 e4 e5
21 J:t d 1 <i;e7 2 f4 exf4
22 �a5 J:t b7 3 J.. c4 lLlf6
23 <i;e2 lLlg6 4 d3 d5
24 h4 �f6 5 exd5 lLlxd5
25 h5 lLle5 6 lLlf3 lLl b6
26 �b4 J:t b6 7 ..tb3 .td6
27 J:t hg 1 .tb7 8 W'e2+ 'iII e7
28 ..i.a5 J:t xb3 9 lLlc3 �g4
29 cxb3 .txe4 White's opening looks like a
30 .i.b4 ..td5 (86) rather lukewarm version of the
King's Gambit, but Judith finds a
way to force a small but definite
86
W
endgame advantage.
10 'it' xe7 + � xe7
11 lLle4 �xf3
12 gxf3 lLlc6
13 lLl xd6 cxd6
14 ..txf4 lLld4
15 �f2 lLlxb3
16 axb3 a6
17 J:t a5
An unusual but effective deploy
ment of the rook, stopping the
Now Judith ruthlessly hastens black knight from coming to d5
Black's demise by sacrificing one and also preventing the advance
of her surplus exchanges, simplify of Black's d-pawn due to �c7 -
ing the position. all in all a nice economical way of
31 J:t xd5 exd5 tying Black up.
32 ..tc3 �e6 17 �d7
33 b4 d4 18 b4 l:t he8
34 .i.xd4 lLlf3 19 c4 J:l. e6
Hastings 1988/9 117
20 b5 axb5 The knockout punch. Black's

21 J:!. xb5 ot>c6 overworked pieces have no sens
22 J:t c1 J:!. a2 (87) ible way to protect the lynch-pin
knight on d7 so Flear strikes out
with a desperate king foray in
87 search of the white rook on b3.
W Unfortunately for him this un
shackles the white d-pawn whose
bid for coronation finally decides
the outcome.
28 �c4
29 J:!. c3 + �b4
30 J:t c2 ot>b3
31 J:!. d2 J:!. a7
32 d5 b5
33 d6 J:!. f5
34 l:t d3+ �c2
23 J:!. b3! 35 J:!. c3 + c;t> xb2
Judith shows a profound under 36 J:!. c7 1 -0
standing of the subtleties of the
position. It would simply not Judith also disposed of Britain's
occur to most players to retreat only notable prodigy in her age
the white rook from its active post range:
on b5, but her move is designed
to facilitate the advance d4, rolling Judith Polgar-Sadler
her queenside majority forward. Hastings Challengers 1988/9
After this fine move, Black is Sicilian Kan
driven back in confusion.
23 ltJd7 1 e4 c5
24 d4 J:!. f6 2 ltJf3 e6
25 .t.. g3 b6 3 d4 cxd4
26 J:!. et d5 4 ltJ xd4 a6
27 cxd5 + � xd5 5 .t.. d3 ltJf6
28 J:!. e7 (88) 6 0-0 d6
7 .t.. e3 .t.. e7
8 c4 0-0
88 9 ltJc3 'II c7
B 10 J:!. c 1 ltJ bd7
11 b3 b6
12 f3 .t.. b7
13 'II e t J:!. fe8
14 "it'f2 : ac8
15 J:!. fdl .i. f8
16 .t.. f1
These 'hedgehog' positions are
rather prickly' (a possible ety-
1 18 Hastings 1 988/9
mology for an appellation of 34 �c3 -;w g6

otherwise obscure origin. Another In this 'Punch-up of the Prodi
master suggests it's because Black gies' Sadler declines to repeat
curls up in a ball and hibernates) moves and elects to slog on,
and they are a great recipe for despite the fact that the position
time-trouble due to the slow and does not fully j ustify this competi
wary manoeuvring and jockeying tive attitude. If anything, White is
for position that ensues. a little better.
16 i.a8 35 l:t h l l:t b7
17 g4 g6 36 l:t cgl �d8
18 lll d e2 -;w b7 37 lll c 1 l:t f8
19 g5 lll h 5 38 lll d 3 lll xd3 +
20 lll g3 lll g7 39 �xd3 e5
21 h4 l:t b8 40 c5! (90)
22 �e2 f5 (89)
90
B
89
W
The culmination of Judith's

strategy. This leads to the activ
ation of the entire white position
An unusual freeing bid for this and Black's weaknesses eventually
type of position which weakens prove indefensible.
the a2-g8 diagonal for which Black 40 bxc5
ultimately suffers. Perhaps Black 41 �c4 + <t;; g 7
would do better to sit tight and 42 'ili h6 + 'ili xh6
prepare one of the more standard 43 l:t xh6 .i.e7
advances, . . . bS or . . . dS. 44 l:t ghl l:t h8
23 h5 gxh5 45 g6 i.g5
24 -;w h2 h4 46 l:t xh7 + l:t xh7
25 -;W xh4 lll e5 47 l:t xh7 + �xg6
26 lll h5 lll xh5 48 l:t xb7 .t xb7
27 -;W xh5 -;W g7 49 i.xa5
28 �d4 f4 The a-pawn is now irresistible.
29 �f2 �c6 49 �h5
30 a4 �e7 50 �c7 �c8
31 lll a 2 a5 51 a5 � h4
32 �c3 l:t bd8 52 a6 d5
33 i.d4 l:t b8 53 a7 1 -0
Hastings 1 988/9 1 19
Final Placings: 1 Judith Polgar 8/ 1 0; 2 Sadler 7! 1 1 0; 3 = McDonald

Plaskett, Lima, Wojtkiewicz, K. Arkell 7/ 1 0; 8= Suba, Gufeld, G. Flear
. . . 1 02 players.
Judith and her mother were not enchanted with the rather cold
and old-fashioned conditions at the Queen's Hotel in Hastings, but
nonetheless were hospitable enough to receive me there while Judith
showed me a couple of these masterpieces. One noticeable feature of
her analysis was her constant theoretical references, mostly to the
Encyclopaedia of Chess Openings (ECO). Study materials were spread
around the room, indicating a mature, professional approach. It was
then that I began to gain an insight into the different factors that
enable the Polgars to play chess at such a high level despite their
extreme youth. M uch misconception (in my opinion) surrounds their
play. For instance, organiser Stewart Reuben thought Judith's talent
was "extremely raw . . . likely to come unstuck against mature Grandma
sters."
In my view, there is nothing raw about the chess capabilities of any
of the Polgars, because they have something in common with the older
professionals against whom they compete: years of systematic book
learning. Realistically, it is simply not possible to succeed consistently
at high level chess without this. The 'study principle' applies not only
to learning opening variations but, surprising though this may seem,
to tactics as well. It would be mistaken to believe that tactical ability
is purely intuitive, or the result of native ability, or talent - call it what
you will; tactical 'intuition' in chess is in fact based on the recognition
of familiar patterns and geometrical motifs. This recognition comes
from various sources: endgame manuals, tactical treatises, and playing
through endless master games. That is not to say that the make-up of
the individual personality has no bearing, and indeed Judith's success
clearly owes much to her particular qualities. She has been called a
'natural games player'. She has the most consistently aggressive style
of the three. She also shows the most obvious determination to win.
But talent? When you realise that these girls work methodically on
their chess for eight hours a day, where does programming end and
talent begin? Laszlo Polgar has stated often enough that "there is
no such thing as 'talent'." He has explained Judith's superlative
performances by saying that she is the hardest-working of his daughters.
14 Rome 1 989 - "Super Sofia"
Judith had grabbed all the headlines in 1 988, and in the January rating
list of 1 989 made the chess world gasp: twelve-year-old Judith Polgar,
at 2555 (an increase of almost 200 points in six months), was the highest
rated woman player in the world. She had also broken through into
the world's overall top 1 00. The Polgar sisters started the year with a
six-board match against 'Young France' at Aubervilliers on January
27th. Judith beat Apicella, Susan beat Koch, but Sofia lost to Chabanon.
There was no indication here of the surprise middle sister Sofia was
about to unleash.
" 'Least talented' sister Sofia astounds the chess world", announced
one English newspaper. "Super Sofia!" exclaimed the cover of New In
Chess. "Third Polgar sister lashes out in Rome!"
It wasn't j ust that the fourteen-year-old had won the 'Regione Lazio'
Rome Open in February 1 989. It wasn't even the fact that she won
with 8! /9, two points clear of the field. What was astonishing was that
the field contained five Grandmasters. Not only did Sofia beat four of
them; she overstepped the International Master norm by 3t points and
the Grandmaster norm by 1 -!- points!
Sofia started off calmly enough with victories over two unrated
players, Rabczevsky from Poland and Cardinal from Italy. Cardinal
gave Sofia an encouraging initial dose of luck when he helpfully self
mated. Conveniently, Sofia had on-site adjournment assistance from
Judith and Susan which finished off Soviet GM Palatnik and Italian
1M D'Amore after Sofia had managed to obtain winning positions by
move 40. Next, Sofia impressively defeated Soviet GM Alex Chernin
and in Round Six polished off Anglo-R umanian GM Suba nicely in
an attacking Sicilian game. Round Seven saw off FM Mrdja in another
double-edged Sicilian. In the penultimate round Sofia looked to be in
a dubious position against another Soviet GM, Razuvayev, but
somehow fought back and won after 83 moves. Peace finally broke out
when she decided to let Soviet GM Dolmatov off with a draw in the
last round.
The Soviet Grandmasters could hardly bear to look when Sofia went
up to collect her trophy and 5 million lira first prize. There had, indeed,
Rome 1 989 121
been rumours that they had threatened to withdraw on the pretext

that there had been irregularities in the pairing system - rather, one
supposes, than having to explain to the Soviet Chess Federation how
a fourteen-year-old girl had beaten them all! Staggered experts began
to argue about Sofia's tournament performance rating (TPR). Was it
2879 (based on all 9 opponents, which included two unrated players)
or was it 2930 (based on 6J./7 against opposition with an average rating
of 2500? Sofia Polgar's official rating in Rome was 2295. She was
ranked 36th on the women's list and not even in the top thousand
players in the world. The odds against such an occurrence must be
billions to one.
Either way, it had to be the most astonishing performance ever by
a fourteen-year-old, and, arguably, the best performance in an open
tournament by anybody ever. Where Sofia had previously been written
off as being "prone to careless blunders", "no genius at the game" etc.,
people now began to ask if she might, after all, be the most gifted of
the three. Perhaps all she required was a dose of motivation, and then
she could make it look easy?!
Sofia was more pragmatic. "It was only one result. I am still behind
my sisters, but perhaps I can catch up," was her modest comment.
Rome February 1 989 Sofia Polgar-Palatnik (GM)

I Sofia Polgar FM 2295 81 Rome Open 1 989
2= Chernin GM 2580 61 Alekhine's Defence
Dolmatov GM 2580 61
Wojtk iewicz 1M 2460 6! 1 e4 It:\ f6
Levitt 1M 2495 61 2 e5 It:\d5
6= Razuvayev GM 2550 6 d4
3 d6
Suba GM 25 1 5 6
4 It:\f3 �g4
Dragojlovic FM 2320 6
Isoeliani 1M 2480 6
5 �e2 e6
Braga 1M 2455 6 6 0-0 .i.e 7
II Palatnik GM 2470 5� 7 c4 It:\ b6
M rdja FM 2405 51 8 It:\c 3
D'Amore 1M 2425 5! Sometimes White inserts 8 h3
9 rounds, 66 players .i.h5 as a preliminary.
8 0-0
Sofia Polgar
9 .i.e3 d5
I Rabczevsky 2200 10 c5 .i.xf3
2 Cardinal 2200
11 gxf3 It:\c8
3 Palatnik GM 2470
12 f4 It:\c6
4 D'Amore 1M 2425
5 Chernin GM 2580 13 J:t bl .i. h4
6 Suba GM 25 1 5 1 3 . . . .i.xc5 i s tricky, but after
7 M rdja FM 2405 14 dxc5 d4 1 5 It:\e4 dxe3 1 6 fxe3
8 Razuvayev GM 2550 "it' xd l 1 7 l:r.fxd 1 It:\ 8e7 1 8 �f2
9 Dolmatov GM 2580 1
2 White stands better.
8-!/9 14 �hl It:\8e7
122 Rome 1 989
15 i.d3 g6 91
A typical position for this vari W
ation of the Alekhine. White has
two bishops and more space, but
Black is very solid and the weak
nesses in White's pawn formation
give Black long-term prospects.
Note also the following continu
ation: 1 5 . . . ttJf5 16 .i.xf5 exf5 1 7
'iff3! ttJe7 1 8 'iW h 3, utilising the
vacant h3 square, which Sofia also
exploits in the game. plications. Necessary was 37 . . .
16 'if g4 ttJf5 ttJxd6 3 8 J:!. xd6 with a complex
17 i.xf5 exf5 struggle in prospect.
IS 'if f3 ttJe7 3S e6 f6
19 'iW h3 ttJcS 39 e7 'ifeS
20 J:!. gl �hS 40 'if fS ttJd5 (92)
21 b4 a6
22 a4 c6 92
23 b5 W
An impetuous decision. It was
more accurate to prepare this push
with 23 J:!. b3 when Black would
have to struggle for counter
chances.
23 axb5
24 axb5 .l:l. a3
25 J:!. gc1 Ae7
26 b6 i.xc5
27 dxc5 d4 41 J:!. xd5!
2S J:!. d l .l:l. xc3 Transposing into a winning
29 'if h6 J:!. xc5 endgame as 41 . . . cxd5 is met by
30 i.xd4 J:!. d5 42 'ifxf6 + J:!. g7 43 'iff8 + .
White has played rather over 41 J:!. xfS
exuberantly. She had intended 3 1 42 exfS( 'i' ) + 'if xfS
J:!. b 3 but only now noticed the 43 i. xfS cxd5
simple defence 3 1 . . . J:!. g8 32 .l:!. h3 44 �f3 �gS
J:!. g7. 45 i.b4 g5
31 c;tg2 ttJe7 46 <J;>e3 <J;>f7
32 i.c5 J:!. eS 47 �d4 �g6
33 J:!. dc1 J:!. d3 4S i.e7 h6
34 i.d6 ttJcS 49 �xd5 c;t h5
35 J:!. d l J:!. xd l 50 i. xf6 <J;>g4
36 J:!. xd l J:!. gS 51 fxg5 hxg5
37 .l:!. d3 ttJ xb6? (91) 52 �e5 b5
Black loses his way in the com- 53 i.e7 1 -0
Rome 1 989 123
Sofia Polgar-Chernin (GM) .i.xd5 20 exd5 are both hopeless

Rome Open 1 989 for Black.
Sicilian Paulsen 20 lLl xe6 g6
21 lLl xd8 1 hd8
1 e4 e5 22 exd5 l:t xe2
2 lLlf3 e6 23 J:l. ab l .i. h4
3 d4 exd4 24 'fiI h3 .i.e8
4 lLl xd4 lLle6 25 .i.g4 .i. xg4
5 lLle3 'fiIe7 26 'fiI xg4 lLl xb3
6 .i.e2 lLlf6 27 g3 .i.e7
7 0-0 .i.e7 28 f5 a5? (94)
8 .i.e3 0-0
9 f4 d6
94
10 �hl a6
W
11 'fiIel lLla5
Either 1 1 . . . lLlxd4 12 .i.xd4 b5
or 1 1 . . . .td7 would be more
logical.
12 'fiI g3 lLle4
13 ..tel b5
14 a3 'fiI b6
15 l:t d l .i.b7
16 b3 lLla5
17 .i.f3 l:t ae8
18 .i.b2 rt fd8? (93) Black has managed to drum up
some counterplay but now makes
93
a miscalculation. 28 . . . 'fiId7 would
W
ha ve kept him in the game.
29 fxg6 hxg6
30 'fiI h3 l:t xb2
What Black probably had not
seen was that after 30 . . . ..tf6 3 1
.i.xf6 'fiI xf6 3 2 l:l xb3 the white
rook defends the f3-square.
31 l:t xb2 a4
32 : f2 lLle5
33 : dfl f5
34 g4 lLle4
This move is a blunder but it 35 l:t g2 ..tf6
requires a sharp tactical eye to 1 -0
spot the punishment. The poten
tial queen and bishop battery Sofia Polgar-Suba (G M)
against g7 provide the hint of what Rome Open 1 989
is to come. Sicilian Scheveningen
19 lLld5! lLlxd5
1 9 . . . exd5 20 lLlf5 and 1 9 . . . 1 e4 . e5
124 Rome 1989
2 ltJf3 d6 .i.xf8 and lW h6. This handicap

3 d4 ltJf6 limits his ability to create queen-
4 ltJe3 exd4 side counterplay.
5 ltJ xd4 e6 22 � eb8
6 .i.e2 a6 23 .i.g4 lW b6 + ?
7 0-0 .i.e7 A serious mistake. He should
8 .i.e3 lWe7 have played 23 . . . � xb2 24 � f3
9 f4 0-0 lWb6+ 25 � h 1 � xd2 with coun-
10 lWei b5 ter-chances. After the text, his
II a3 .i.b7 kingside becomes a morgue.
12 .i.f3 ltJ bd7 24 �h l lW xb2
13 lW g3 ltJe5 25 .i. xd7 .i.xd7
14 f5 e5 26 .i.h6 d5
15 ltJ b3 ltJa4 27 .i. xf8 lW xd2
16 ltJ xa4 bxa4 28 � ad l lWe3
17 ltJ d 2 (95) 29 � del lWd2
30 .i.h6 lWa5
31 exd5 J:l. e8 (96)
95
B
96
W
The doubled a-pawns should

not concern Black unduly. He is 32 .i.e3
more than compensated here by Unfortunately, Sofia overlooks
the open lines he has acquired, but the immediate and attractive con
must now be careful not to get clusion 32 .i.f8! However, this
carried away with 1 7 . . . "ii' xc2, oversight does not affect the final
when 1 8 � ac 1 lWd3 1 9 .i.h6 ltJe8 decision.
20 � c7! would be the painful 32 �h8
consequence. 33 .i.h6 "ii' e5
17 : fe8 34 � e4 �g8
18 e4 .i.e6 35 .i.g7 1 -0
19 .i.h6 .i.f8
20 .i. g5 ltJd7 Mrdja (FM)-Sofia Polgar
21 f6 g6 Rome Open 1989
22 lW h4 Sicilian Paulsen
Black must be constantly on
guard against the threat of .i.h6, I e4 e5
Rome 1 989 125
2 tLlf3 e6 97
3 d4 cxd4 W
4 tLlxd4 tLle6
5 tLlc3 'We7
6 f4 a6
7 Ae3 b5
8 tLlb3 d6
9 ..td3 tLlf6
10 1Iff3 .i.b7
11 0-0 .i.e7
12 1If h3 h5
The Polgar sisters revel in this as they look. They are, in fact,
unusual plan of attacking on the strangely dislocated from the body
kingside in the Sicilian Defence, of their army. Where is the white
normally White's prerogative. A queen? Her back is to the wall on
double-edged struggle now ensues; the h-file, a powerful ruler present
White adopts the queenside ing a prominent target for the
counterplay role normally played oncoming mob of rebellious black
by Black, and each side charges pawns.
towards the other's castled king White now sacrifices an
with all guns blazing. exchange in an attempt to buy
13 r;t h l tLl g4 some breathing space in further
14 .i.gl g5 complications, but Sofia sees her
15 .i.e2 0-0-0 way through the thicket to a
16 a4 b4 clearly winning endgame.
17 tLl b5 1Ifd7 27 l he4 "il xe4 28 .i.d3 g4 29
18 tLl5d4 tLl xd4 .i.xe4 gxh3 30 .i. xe7 tLl xe4 31
19 ..t xd4 e5 .i.xd8 l:!. xd8 32 gxh3 f4 33 r;tg2
Now Black gets a firm grip on tLlg5 34 r;tf2 e4 35 �e2 tLl xh3 36
the initiative. tLlc5 .l:l. e8 37 tLld7 + r;te7 38 tLlf6
20 fxe5 dxe5 .l:l. e5 39 .l:l. dl tjole6 40 .l:l. d8 f3 +
21 ..te5 .i. xe4 0-1
22 1If g3 f5
23 A xa6+ �b8 Razuvayev (GM)-Sofia Polgar
24 .i.b5 h4 Rome Open 1 989
25 "il h3 1If b7 English Opening
26 l:!. ael tLlf6 (9 7)
Prima facie evidence would 1 e4 e5
seem to indicate that White's king 2 tLlf3 tLle6
is safer than Black's, but closer 3 tLle3 g6
scrutiny of all the circumstances Despite having been played by
reveals otherwise. For despite the Fischer, this move suffers from
Black monarch's complete lack a questionable reputation, which
of pawn cover, the white minor this game - result notwithstand
pieces looming belligerently in ing - does nothing to enhance. Its
front of him are not as dangerous drawback is t �e invitation it gives
126 Rome 1 989
White to advance in the centre looking plan would have been to

using the black knight on c6 as concentrate on tying Black down
target practice. to the defence of the fettered e-
4 e3 d6 pawn, whilst slowly mustering his
5 d4 exd4 ground forces on the queenside
6 exd4 .i.g4 for a well-timed land offensive .
7 .i.e2 .i.g7 Instead, he throws caution to the
8 0-0 tLl h6 wind with what was intended to
9 d5 .i. xf3 be a lightning mating strike on the
10 .i.xf3 tLle5 kingside, but ends up looking like
II .i.e2 tLlf5 the Charge of the Light Brigade -
12 J.. d 2 tLld4 overextended and overreached.
13 %:t el 0-0 The patient, compact black forces
14 .i.fl a6 then come round by the back way
15 tLle4 lt e8 and calmly clean up.
16 .i.e3 tLlf5 19 tLld7
17 b3 'fiIe7 20 J.. h 3 .i.xe3
18 lt c 1 b6 21 lt xe3 tLlg7
19 g 3 (98) 22 'fiId2 'fiI b7
23 'fiI h6 tLlf8
24 tLlg5 b5
98
25 ': ee3 bxe4
B
26 bxe4 'fiIe7
27 lt e4 tLl h5
28 lt h4 tLlf6
29 tLlf3 %:t ab8
30 tLld4 lt b2 (99)
99
W
"What happened to Razuvay

ev's advantage?" asked English
1M Jonathan Levitt. For in this
position White clearly holds all
the trump cards: space advantage,
weak black pawn on the half-open
e-file, and the latent potential of
his queenside pawn maj ority. But
this is also a critical position where
White had to make long-term stra With this invasion Black j usti
tegic choices to press home his fies her queenside play and com
campaign, and over the next few pletes the reversal of White's for
moves he loses his way. tunes. Thanks to Black's carefully
A conservative but effective- judged defences, White's kingside
Rome 1989 127
attack has run up against a brick 1 00

wall and he must now beat a hasty W
retreat.
31 wet 'iV b6 32 a4 l:t a2 33 'iVc3
g5 34 J:l h6 lbg6 35 .i.f5 l:t xa4 36
h4 'iV b4 37 wet W xc4 38 hxg5
'iV xet 39 l:t xe t l:t xd4 40 gxf6 exf6
41 .i.d7 J:t e2 42 l: h5 l:t e5 43 J:t h l
l: dxd5 4 4 �g2 .l:l. d2 4 5 l: hd l
l: ee2 46 l: xd2 l:t xd2 4 7 : a l lbe5
48 .i.f5 lbc4 49 �f3 a5 (l00)
Thanks to her well-calculated
knight manoeuvre, Black has pre and the rest is easy: 0- 1 after 86
served her three-pawn advantage moves.
In March 1 989, the 1 988 World Chess Oscars were awarded. This
institution was founded for men in 1 967 and women in 1 982. Forty
international chess journalists assembled in Barcelona to cast their
votes and the clear winner of the Women's Oscar was Judith Polgar
with 5 1 9 votes, ahead of World Champion Maya Chiburdanidze (3 72)
and her sister Susan (338).
In April it was the New York Open once more revisited. Sofia Polgar
registered her second 1M norm. Judith took the opportunity of their
first encounter to trounce the newly-defected Soviet wunderkind Gata
Kamsky.
Kamsky-Judith Polgar offensive in the centre. Of course,

New York Open 1 989 this concept is well-known, but
Torre Attack Kamsky, motivated to win, was
clearly prepared to accept a risk
1 d4 lbf6 of this sort. Besides, the actual
2 lbf3 g6 execution of the central movement
3 .i.g5 .i.g7 by Black requires expertise and
4 lb bd2 d5 good form.
5 e3 0-0 10 lbd7
6 c3 b6 11 l:t gl a6
7 .i.d3 .i.b7 12 .i.c2 We8
8 We2 lbe4 13 lbxe4 dxe4
9 .i.h4 c5 14 lbd2 cxd4
10 g4 15 exd4 e5
Ambitious, but the potentially 16 d5 .i. xd5
weakening effect of this bold 17 lb xe4 lbc5
advance is obvious. Classic chess 18 a3 'iVc6
teaching holds that an over- 19 f3 l:t ac8
optimistic sortie on the wing is 20 0-0-0 .i. xe4
best avenged with a counter- 21 fxe4 .i.f6
1 28 Rome 1 989
22 .H2 lie7 101

23 l:t gfl �a4 B
Black's queenside attack, like a
lusty newborn infant, grows
stronger and more strident with
every move, whilst White's king-
side baby is stillborn, and scarce
ever got beyond a twinkle in
Gata's eye.
24 lie1 b5
25 J. xa4 bxa4
26 :t d5 l:t b8
27 : f3 l:t b3 40 c,;.e2 "it' b5
28 l:t f2 l:t fb8 41 l:t xf6 l:t d8
29 "it' f3 "it' e6 42 l:t ff3 "it'c4
30 W' d 1 "it' b6 This precise move forces the win
31 "it' f3 f6 of the e- and g-pawns after which
32 "it'e2 (101) the rest is just mopping up.
32 .i. xa3 43 lHe3 l:t xd3 44 l:t xd3 "it' xe4 +
33 bxa3 l:t b1 + 45 l:t e3 "ii'x g4 + 46 c,;.f2 "it' h4 + 47
34 c,;.d2 : b2 + c,;.g2 "iWc4 4 8 J. c 1 "it' d 5 + 4 9 c;f;>f2
35 c;f;>d3 l:t xe2 "iW h 1 50 l:!. e1 W' xh2+ 51 c;f;>e3
36 c,;. xe2 "it' b 1 "it'c2 5 2 J. d 2 e 4 5 3 l:t e2 "it'd3+ 54
37 l:t d3 W'a2+ c,;.f2 h5 55 c;f;>eI "it' g3 + 56 c,;.fl
38 lid2 "iWc4 h4 57 .i.e3 h3 58 J.gI "' f3 + 59
39 c,;.e3 "iWc5 + c;f;> e 1 "it" xc3 + 0-1
In an interview nearly two years after the game, Gata Kamsky

denied that he had been thrashed by his father for being thrashed by
Judith Polgar.
12 � xc5 .i. xc5 (102)
Sofia Polgar-Frias (1M)
New York Open 1 989 102
Sicilian Paulsen W
1 e4 c5
2 � f3 e6
3 d4 cxd4
4 � xd4 a6
5 �c3 "it'c7
6 J.e2 b5
7 f4 b4
8 �a4 J.b7
9 J.f3 �f6 This game is a cautionary les
10 e5 �e4 son. This opening requires a deli
11 .i.e3 �c5 cate and sensitive touch, especially
Rome 1 989 129
against a Polgar sister! A single 16 'it' xg2

slip can land the unwary venturer 17 l UI .l:t c8
into the nightmare of a tactical 18 'it'e2 l he2 +
quicksand. Careless moves cost 19 � xe2 liJ b6
pawns, and games! 20 l:I. fc l liJc4
13 liJxe6! dxe6 21 .i.xb4 liJxb2
14 .i.xb7 'it' xb7 22 c4 liJa4
15 .i.xc5 liJd7 23 l:I. ab l l:I. b8
16 .td6 24 c5 0-0
Now this bishop becomes a 25 c6 l::tfc8
Frankenstein's monster, terroris- 26 c7 .l:t b5
ing the black neighbourhood. His 27 .l:l. d l l:I. d5
king's rook, in particular, may 28 .l:t xd5 exd5
never dare enter the game. 29 .i.a5 1 -0
In 1 989 Dominic Lawson, editor of The Spectator and a strong

amateur chess player, entered into negotiations with Laszlo Polgar to
write a book about his daughters. To this end, he stayed with the
family in Budapest and observed the girls at close quarters.
Judith and Sofia beat him blindfold at chess. He then sought his
revenge at table-tennis, reasoning that news of his fourth place in a
tournament in the Club Med in Mauritius had probably not reached
them. However: "Sofia and Judith took it in turns to humiliate me.
Laszlo just stood by and smiled. But when his girls played against one
another his extraordinary control over them became clear. He would
mutter something almost inaudibly in Hungarian and the children
would play only forehands. After a few minutes I heard another muffled
word and the girls switched to backhand."
Lawson also reported a more disquieting incident which clearly
showed up the Polgars' disinclination to be upstaged by other females.
The sisters had accepted invitations to play in Manchester in the Park
Hall international tournament, sponsored by Granada Leisure and
organised by GM Raymond Keene. Susan, however, telephoned Keene
in April, shortly before the tournament was due to start. She had heard
that ex-Soviet eloper/defector Elena Akhmilovskaya-Donaldson had
also been invited - and she did not like this idea at all.
"Either Akhmilovskaya is left out of the tournament or we don't
play," Susan told Keene. When Keene protested, Susan conferred with
her father, then said, "OK, we will play, but only if you double our
fee." Neither Keene nor Granada Leisure were having any of that
either, so the Polgar sisters did not come to Manchester. In the event,
Elena Akhmilovskaya withdrew at the last minute for domestic reasons.
Why, though, had the Polgar sisters objected to playing in a
tournament with Akhmilovskaya? Well, they had played in the New
York Open a week before their withdrawal from Manchester. And who
had finished equal with the younger two sisters, ap, d ahead of Susan?
130 Rome 1 989
Why, none other than Elena Akhmilovskaya!

In the end, despite writing a number of sizeable features about them,
Dominic Lawson did not write a book on the Polgar sisters. He gave
as the reason Laszlo Polgar's "rather East European approach to
contracts."
Sofia Polgar "came down to earth" according to Pergamon Chess,
in the 1 3th Benidorm Open, April-May 1 989. She scored 6/9 and had
to settle for the 'women's prize'. 8!19 is a tough standard to maintain!
If Benidorm was an anti-climax for Sofia, her younger sister was
having an even ruder awakening in Salamanca. Despite a single victory
over the tournament winner, Manuel Rivas, nothing went right for
Judith. A glance at the tournament cross-table reveals the worst result
of Judith's short but meteoric career:
Salamanca April 1 989

2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 0 1 1 1 2 Total
1
Rivas GM 2505 * 1- ! 1 11 2: 1 0 71
2 Georgadze GM 25 1 0 1 * 1 1 11 ! 1 -1 1 71
3 K udrin GM 2550 ! -1 * !1 -1 1 ! 1 71
4 Susan Polgar 1M 25 1 0 -1 -1 1 * 0 1- ! 1 1 1
2 7
5 de la Villa 1M 2430 0 0 1
2: 1 * 1 1 -1 :1 1 6
6 Lima 2385 1 1 1 1 ! * ! 0 1 J 1 6
7 Sanz 1M 2420 1 1 0 ! 1 ,;1 1
2· * 0 1 1 51
8 Franco 1M 2490 -1 0 0 0 0 1 1 * 1 I
2: 51
9 M. Gomez 1M 2460 0 0 1 0 1 1 1 0 * 2:I 0 31
10 Sion FM 23 1 5 0 0 0 0 ! :1 1 :1 ! * 0 1 31
11 Gild Garcia 1M 2430 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 * I 31
12 Judith Polgar 1M 2555 ! ! ! 2:1 0 0 0 0 0 0 * 3
Average FIDE rating 2463 (Category 9) GM norm - 8
Even her customary tactical flair seemed to be missing:
Judith Polgar-M. Gomez (1M)

Salamanca 1 989
103
W
Rome 1 989 131
In this position Judith tried . . .

1 .i.xg7 l hel +
2 ..t;h2
. . . but this failed spectacularly after . . .
2 .i. xg7
3 h6 "it" f4 !
. . . and Judith resigned. 3 . . . "it"g4 ! would have won as well.
Susan's performance in this Category 9 event looked consistent and
creditable, but fell short of the sought-after Grandmaster norm.
But perseverance seldom goes unrewarded. In June 1 989 Susan
Polgar won a Grandmaster event at Leon in Spain, registering her
second Grandmaster norm. Scores were: Susan Polgar and Jozef Pinter
(both Hungary) 8/ 1 1 ; Miguel Illescas (Spain) 7} (all the top three were
unbeaten); Manuel Rivas (Spain) 6t . Sofia Polgar finished on 4/ 1 l . For
once, necessity dictated that one Polgar sister must defeat another.
Susan Polgar-Sofia Polgar 21 lLlg5 b5

Leon 1989 22 .i.h3! (104)
Reti Opening
1 04
1 lLlf3 lLlf6 B
2 g3 g6
3 b3 .i.g7
4 .i.b2 0-0
5 .i.g2 d6
6 d4 e5
7 dxe5 lLlg4
8 h3 lLl xe5
9 lLl xe5 .i. xe5
10 .i.xe5 dxe5
11 "it" xd8 J:!. xd8
12 lLld2 c6 Black must have overlooked
13 0-0-0 .i.e6 this move. The point is that if 22
14 lLle4 lLla6 . . . .i.xh3, White wins with 23
The position is symmetrical and lLlxf7 + and 24 lLlxd8. White was
looks completely level but Susan better before, but now thanks to
sees a way to play for the initiative a single unguarded move by her
based on the slight weakness of younger sibling the rest is simple
the black kingside. for Susan.
15 g4 h6 22 . . . J:!. f8 23 lLlxe6 fxe6 24 .i. xe6
16 h4 � g7 J:!. xf2 25 .i.xd5 cxd5 26 J:!. xd5
17 g5 lLlb4 J:!. c8 27 J:!. c 1 a6 28 J:!. xe5 J:!. h2 29
18 ..t;b2 lLld5 J:!. e6 J:!. xh4 30 J:!. gl J:!. g8 31 J:!. xa6
19 e3 b6 J:[ e4 32 J:!. h l + ..t;g5 33 J:!. a5 J:!. xe3
20 gxh6 + � xh6 34 J:!. xb5 + �f6 35 J:!. f1 + 1 -0
132 Rome 1989
Gata Kamsky, meanwhile, reminded the chess world that the Polgars
were not its only prodigies when the newly defected fourteen-year-old
won the Continental Open in Buffalo, besting a field of 1 45.
15 Amsterdam OHRA 1 989
"Polgarmania Conquers
Holland"
Amsterdam OH RA, July 1 989 saw Holland writhing in the grip of a

new disease - ' Polgaritis.' The Dutch media went crazy - and no
wonder. In their midst was a girl, j ust turning thirteen, heading for a
feat unprecedented in chess history - her first Grandmaster norm.
Amsterdam B Ju ly/August 1 989

1= Azmaiparashvili GM 2575 61 Mohr GM 2485 41
Psakhis GM 2565 6! Am. Rodriguez GM 2505 41
3= Gelfand 1M 2590 6 Sosonko GM 2540 41
Judith Polgar 1M 2555 6 Vanheste FM 24 1 0 41
5= Illescas GM 25 1 0 51 18= Garcia Callejo 2300 4
Nij boer 1M 2475 51 M ednis GM 2430 4
Van der Sterren 1M 25 1 5 51 Ree GM 2460 4
8= Finegold FM 2375 5 21 Visser FM 2335 31
L. B. Hansen 1M 2525 5 22= Cifuentes 1M 2470 3
Van Wely 2320 5 Douven 1M 2475 3
11= Bagirov G M 2475 41 Kuijf 1M 2530 3
Blatny 1M 2470 41 Peelen FM 2385 3
H ulak FM 2550 41 26 Crisan FM 23 1 5 1�
"Polgarmania Conquers Holland" was the headline in New In Chess.

Her manner was described thus: "At the board she would look at her
opponent's face as if she was thinking, 'Have you not seen it yet? You
have to play that move!' "
After each game she would smilingly rattle off variation after
calculated variation, much to the embarrassment and discomfiture of
her fully-grown male opponents.
Judith was besieged by demands for interviews but was not particu
larly forthcoming, and expressed dislike of cameras and media attention
in general. She did, however, give an interview to New In Chess.
For the first time, the chess world learned at first hand the details
of the sisters' daily routine: rising at six a.m., going to play table tennis
for two to three hours, followed by six to eight hours a day of chess.
Clearly, much had changed for the Polgars since 'gold' in Thessa-
134 Amsterdam 1 989
loniki. Judith explained, laughing: "Yeah, everybody now wants to help

us who before were against us. (In mock flattering tone) 'Oh yes, you
are very nice . . . ' "
Judith gave a number of hints about internal rivalries within the
Hungarian chess scene. Before Thessaloniki, claimed Klara, the sisters'
successes were hardly reported in the press, but, said Judith "if Madl
had (a success), then it would be very big, on the front page." The
leading Hungarian Grandmasters, apparently, were resistant to being
recruited as trainers. "They don't want to teach us, because they see
us as rivals. They are afraid a bit."
Judith denied any jealousies in the family, particularly in the context
of her results overshadowing those of Susan. "No, she is happy when
I make good results or if Sofia does."
She was not particularly interested in playing for the Women's World
Championship, saying (of Chiburdanidze):
"Everybody is saying 'why don't you beat her, no problem' but
then I would have to go through the qualifications [Interzonal and
Candidates' tournament/matches] and that takes too much time . . . "
It is hard to blame the Polgar sisters for feeling that to go through
a gruelling elimination cycle against much lower-rated players for the
privilege of playing another lower-rated woman player was, perhaps,
infra dig.
She responded modestly to speculation about her prospects for the
'real' world title. "I'm still very far away from the World Championship
. . . of course, everybody wants to be World Champion. We'll try, but
if I say 'yes, I will be World Champion' . . . there's not much sense in
that."
Judith was asked about her concentration at the board. She had, she
explained, played very quickly as a youngster, running about between
moves and so forth, until she was about ten. By then her father was
insisting she take things more seriously. "Before every game my father
would say: (here Judith imitated a fatherly commanding tone) 'You
have to sit down and concentrate. Think and don't play for five
minutes'."
We also learned that the Polgar sisters were, as celebrities, beginning
to mix routinely with the rich and famous. As honoured Hungarian
sports people, they had met George Bush at a reception in Budapest;
and that Sofia had met the Prince and Princess of Wales.
Judith started the Amsterdam OHRA tournament with 3/3 until she
was stopped by the talented young Soviet, Boris Gelfand. She made,
according to New In Chess, "respectable Grandmasters look like
children again." Judith 'kicked off' against Dutchman Hans Ree:
Amsterdam 1 989 135
Judith Polgar-Ree (GM) 22 .i.xe7 'ifa7+

Amsterdam OHRA B 1 989 23 'if;> h l �h3
Sicilian Scheveningen 24 'iff3 1 -0
1 e4 c5
2 �f3 e6
3 d4 cxd4 Nijboer (IM)-J udith Polgar
4 � xd4 �f6 Amsterdam OHRA B 1 989
5 �c3 d6 Sicilian Paulsen
6 �e2 .i.e7
7 0-0 0-0 1 e4 c5
8 .i.e3 a6 2 �f3 e6
9 f4 'ifc7 3 d4 cxd4
10 g4 .!:!. e8 4 � xd4 �c6
11 g5 � fd7 5 �c3 'ifc7
12 .i.h5 g6 6 �e2 a6
13 �g4 �c6? (105) 7 0-0 � f6
8 'if;> h l � xd4
9 'if xd4 �c5
105 10 Wd3 h5
W 11 f4 �g4
12 �dl b5
13 a4 b4
14 c4 �b7
15 a5 0-0-0
16 �e3 � xe3
17 �xe3 g5 (106)
1 06
w
Another case of Black getting
careless in a Sicilian Defence, in
variably fatal against Miss J. Pol
gar. What Ree should have played
was 1 3 . �f8, a safety precaution
. .
against the sacrificial fireworks in

which he is swiftly charred to a
crisp.
14 � xe6 fxe6
15 .i. xe6 + 'if;> h8
16 �d5 'if b8 When the Polgars have White,
17 .i.f7 .l:U8 �c4 against the Sicilian is their
18 .i.d4+ �de5 trademark. As Black; their hall
19 � xe7 � xe7 mark is this aggressive interpret
20 fxe5 dxe5 ation of the Taimanov Sicilian,
21 �c5 'if;>g7 involving queenside castling and
136 Amsterdam 1989
a no-holds-barred kings ide pawn and hit one of Black's attackers.

advance. Nijboer joins the list of 23 lDg4 was another try.
victims of this thematic carnage. 23 hxg3
IS fxg5 "it'e5 24 "it' xd6 l hh2 +
19 .U3 "if xg5 25 'itgl gxf2 +
20 lDdl "ife5 26 l:t xf2 .l:l. gS +
21 lDf2 .id6 27 .ig2 .l:l. h5
22 g3 h4 2S l:t e l "it' hS
23 c5 29 l:t xf7 .l:l. xg2 +
Basically, Black's attack is 30 'it xg2 "it' gS +
quicker than White's, so it is a 31 "it' g3 .i xe4 +
very hard job to decide whether 32 ..t>f2 "if xf7 +
and how to defend. The text is an 33 'ite3 .ic6
attempt to drum up counterplay 0-1
Judith was the only player to inflict defeat on the tournament winner,
Zurab Azmaiparashvili. This game won the prize for the best game of
the day and, later, the overall Best Game of the Tournament prizes.
Judith dominated the 'best game prizegiving' at Amsterdam, winning
five of the available best game prizes!
Judith Polgar and most belligerent continuation.

Azmaiparashvili (G M) 11 lD bd7
Amsterdam OHRA B 1989 12 g4 d5
Pirc Defence 13 exd5 e4! (10 7)
I e4 d6 107
2 d4 g6 W
3 lDc3 .ig7
4 f4 lDf6
5 lDf3 c5
6 dxc5
Another popular choice is 6
.ib5 + .
6 "it'a5
7 .id3 "it' xc5
S "it'e2 0-0
9 .ie3 "ifa5 Black astutely opens up the
10 h3!? diagonal for his kingside fianchet
Normal is 1 0 0-0 after which toed bishop as well as opening the
Black plays 10 . . . .ig4. Black e-line and improving his queenside
now reacts quickly. access.
10 e5 14 lD xe4 "it' xa2
11 O-O-O!? 15 lDc3 "it' a l +
And as usual, Judith can be 16 c;t>d2 "if xb2
relied upon to opt for the sharpest · 17 .id4 "if b4
Amsterdam 1 989 137
18 %:t bl 'ii' a5
1 08
19 %:t al 'jI c7? W
Better was 1 9 . 'ii' d 8, because
. .
now after White's next move Black

is forced to retreat and lose a
valuable tempo.
20 lLle5 'ii' d8
21 "ilff3 J:t e8
22 %:t he1 lLl b6
23 :l a5 lLlfd7
24 d6 lLl xe5
25 fxe5 .i.e6
26 J:l. c5 lW g5+
27 .i.e3 ... d8 Black's last chance was Korch
28 lLle4! noi's incredible concoction 32 . . .
Typically, Judith spurns the .i.f5 !?!?!? making a complete mess

chance to draw with 28 .i.d4 of the position. Now Black col
"'g5 + etc, going for the jugular lapses utterly.
instead. 33 .i. xe5 J:t xe5
28 lLld7 34 lLlf6 + .i. xf6
29 .i.g5 'ii' b6 35 lW xd4 J:t xe1
30 J:l. b5 'ii' d 4 36 lW xc4 %:t ae8
31 ... f4 lLl xe5 37 d7 .i.g5 +
32 .i.f6 .i.c4? (l08) 1-0
The Yugoslav GM Huhk is well known for h i s prowess a s a blitz

tactician, but here he was no match for Judith with the white pieces:
Judith Polgar-Hulak (GM) 14 .i. xd4 .i.c6

Amsterdam OHRA B 1 989 15 .i.d3 %:t ab8
Sicilian Paulsen 16 e5 lLle8
17 f5 (109)
1 e4 c5
2 lLlf3 e6
3 d4 cxd4
109
4 lLl xd4 lLlc6
B
5 lLlc3 ... c7
6 .i.e2 a6
7 0-0 lLl f6
8 .i.e3 .i.e7
9 f4 d6
10 ... el .i.d7
11 "' g3 0-0
12 %:t ae1 b5
13 a3 lLl xd4
138 Amsterdam 1989
Judith has a tremendous 'feel' I lO

for the initiative. Many weaker W
players would play similar moves,
but for more superficial reasons.
Judith intuits that the mobility of
her pieces on the kingside will
guarantee her lasting pressure.
17 exf5
18 J::t xf5 dxe5
19 'ili h3 h6
20 .i.xe5 'ili a7 + ?
Recommended instead was 20 30 'ili xe5 1:[ b7
.i.d6. 31 �gl
21 r,thl .i.d6 Two rooks is usually good value
22 1:[ g5 for a queen but here White has
After this, Black's response is an enduring initiative based on
forced because 22 . . ..i.xe5 23 Black's exposed king and unco
'ili xh6 g6 24 1:[ h5! leads to mate. ordinated forces. White's last
22 'it' f2 move eliminates all back rank
23 l Hl 'ili xfl + tricks and leaves Black with insol
24 .i.xfl hxg5 uble problems.
25 .i.d3 f5 31 . . . 1:[ bf7 32 g4 g6 33 'ili b8 +
26 .i.xf5 .i.xe5 (1 10) r,te7 3 4 lDd5 + .i.xd5 35 'ili e5 +
27 'it'h7+ r,tf7 r,td8 3 6 'ili xd5 + r,tc7 37 'ilic5+
28 'ili g6 + r,te7 r,tb8 38 'it' b6 + 1:[ b7 39 'ilid8+
29 'ili e6 + r,td8 �a7 40 .i.xg6 1 -0
'Polgarmania' was not about to leave Holland. The 'Three Degrees',

as the Polgars were dubbed, had agreed to play for the Dutch club
HSG as part of a sponsorship deal with the club's patron, Mr Van
Oosterom. Dutch chess columnist Leon Pliester stuck his neck out to
make a prediction. "Here in Amsterdam we have met the future World
Champion!"
16 The Road to Haifa
Vejstrup 1 989
Sofia Polgar had registered a third 1M norm in the Berlin Summer

Open in August 1 989, but it was the Politiken Cup in Vejstrup,
Denmark in September that furnished her with the required 'all-play
all' closed result that would clinch her International Master title. All
three sisters played in the tournament which was dubbed the 'Polgar
festival.' Judith missed her second Grandmaster norm by half a point.
Vejstrup September 1 989

2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 0 Total
C. Hansen GM 2550 * 1
2 ! 1 61
2 I. Rogers GM 2470 * 1 0 51
3 Judith Polgar 1M 2555 1
2 * 0 5!
4 Susan Polgar 1M 2520 1
2 0 * 1
2 5
5 Sofia Polgar FM 2335 0 0 * 0 41
2
6 1 4
L. B. Hansen 1M 2520 2 0 1 * 0
4
7 Schandorff 1M 2455 1 0 0 0 1
2 *
8 M ortensen 1M 2475 0 1 0 0 0 1 * 4
2
9 Schussler GM 2540 0 1 0 1
2 1 0 0 * 31
10 Hoi 1M 25 1 0 0 0 0 0 * 21
Average F I D E rating 2493 (Category 1 0) GM norm - 6, 1M norm - 4 1
Mortensen (IM)-Sofia Polgar 7 .tg2 lLle6

Vejstrup 1 989 8 0-0 �e7
Sicilian Scheveningen 9 lLlb3 0-0
10 f4 b5
1 e4 e5 This move has two points, one
2 lLlf3 e6 shallow, the other more profound.
3 d4 exd4 Firstly, 1 1 lLlxb5 is impossible due
4 lLlxd4 lLlf6 to 1 1 . . 'iW b6 + . Secondly, White
.
5 lLle3 'iW e7 is now obliged to advance prema-

6 g3 d6 turely in the centre and his e-
.
140 The Road To H ai/a
pawn becomes exposed on the Judith entertained the crowd

battlefield. with a particularly splendid finish
11 e5 dxe5 in this game:
12 fxe5 'iW b6 +
13 c,t> h l lZld7
14 a4 b4
Judith Polgar-L. Hansen
15 a5 'iWa6
Vejstrup 1 989
16 lZle4 lZlcxe5 (111)
/ 12
W
//1
W
Position after 25 . . . l:t ad8

The weak pawn falls. White now
wins the exchange but his joy, if 26 .rt d l .!:t e4
indeed he felt any, must have been 27 .rt d3 .!:t el +
short-lived as the shortcomings of 28 <t>h2 'iW xf2
his kingside compel him to return 29 .rt f3 'ii' gl +
the favour in short order, after 30 <t>g3 g6
which his position remains much 31 'ii' xh6 .!:t e2
the worse for wear. 32 � h4 'ii' xg2
17 lZlf6 + lZlxf6
18 � xa8 .!:t d8
19 'ii' e l �b7 + /13
20 � xb7 'ii' xb7 + w
21 �gl lZlf3 +
22 .rt xf3 'ii' x f3
23 �e3 a6
24 'ii' f 2 l1 d l +
25 .rt xd l 'iW xd l +
26 'ii' n 'ii' x c2
27 'iW xa6 'ii' xb3
28 'iWa8+ �f8
29 � b6 'iW d l +
30 �g2 'iWd5+
0-1 33 'iWg7 + ! 1 -0
The Road to Haifa 14 J
Despite the drugs war in Columbia, due to which the British Chess
Federation sent no representatives, Susan Polgar represented Hungary
in the World Junior Championship in Tunja in August 1 989. She did
not do particularly well by her standards, scoring 7t/ 1 3.
Young England v Young Hungary

London once more hosted the Polgar family early in November 1 989
at the Barbican Centre. A speed match between the sisters and three
young English male hopefuls had been sponsored by International
Bullion as part of the Barbican's 'Britain Salutes Hungary' Festival.
The match was dubbed 'Young England v Young H ungary.' 'Young
England' consisted of the talented youngsters Norwood, Conquest and
Adams.
David Norwood entertainingly reported:
"My first tactical ploy had been to buy each Polgar a bunch of
flowers in order to soften them up. Like most of my tactics that day,
it sadly backfired. In Round One, I was 'kraarshed' by the vicious little
Judith":
Norwood (GM)-Judith Polgar

1 14
International Bullion Challenge, W
London 1 989
English Opening
1 g3 e5
2 �g2 lZle6
3 e4 g6
4 lZle3 �g7
5 e3 e5
6 lZlge2 lZl ge7
7 d3 0-0
8 0-0 d6
9 .l:l. bl �e6 a2, and also threatening . . . �d7.
10 lZld5 1:[ b8 14 'lWd7
11 lZlec3 a6 15 b3 lZle7
12 "iW a4?! b5! (1 14) 16 �b2 d5
Judith's keen eye for a tactical 17 exd5 lZlxd5
opportunity does not let her down. 18 lZle4 1:[ fe8
13 lZl xe7 + "iW xe7 19 d4
14 lW d l White attempts . to break
An abject retreat but 1 4 cxb5 Judith's half-Nelson but she skil
axb5 1 5 lZlxb5 looks singularly fully maintains her armlock
unattractive for White after the around the neck of White's pos
response 1 5 . . . lZl b4 hitting d3 and ition.
142 The Road To Haifa
19 exd4 I 15
20 exd4 c4 B
21 tt:lc5 'it'd6
22 .l:[ c 1 ? (J 15)
A blunder by the canny charmer
from Bolton which loses by force.
His scarcely promising alternative
was 22 tt:l xe6 'it'xe6 when Black
has things all her own way.
22 . . . c3! 23 �xc3 tt:l xc3 24 .I:[ xc3
'it' xd4 25 tt:l xe6 if xc3 26 tt:lf4 if b2
27 tt:ld5 J:[ e8 28 tt:l b4 .l:[ bd8 29 if f3
'it'c3 30 tt:l xa6 b4 31 if b7 .U8 32
.i.d5 .l:[ e7 33 w b5 .l:[ e5 34 J:t d l
.l:[ dxd5 35 l hd5 if e l + 0- 1
Norwood continued: " . . . we had decided to make the Gents the

official team room, a wise choice as it was the only Polgar-free area in
the building. So, back to the Gents for a team talk . . . 'if they want to
play rough . . . ' "
The girls were tired, having come straight from Holland where they
had played the day before. So by the end of the first day's play they
trailed 7t-4t and 'our lads' needed only two out of six for victory.
The Pol gars, however, were resourceful. Judith made a date with
Norwood for breakfast the following morning, to which he automat
ically agreed, not taking this social initiative seriously and having no
intention of keeping the appointment. The dashing Young England
team then proceeded to prepare for the next day's encounter by
going to the cinema, drinking and carousing the night away until
approximately 5 a.m. The Polgar sisters, as will be seen, take their
preparation rather more seriously.
Norwood was woken in his hotel room what seemed like five minutes
later by what he first took to be a fire alarm and gradually realised
was a ringing phone. When he answered, a young girl's voice reproached
him: "You promised me breakfast!" Groaning, David had no choice
but to stagger down for his cornflakes. Not surprisingly, he and his
team-mates were somewhat the worse for wear and only managed 1 tJ6.
The Pol gars, having thus come back to tie the match at 9-9, were
declared the moral victors and awarded the trophy.
Norwood affectionately recalled: "Before we left, the girls came to
find us and said they had a present for us. They looked like the nicest
three girls you could ever hope to meet in Sunday School. They
solemnly handed us the three Chess Base computer printouts of all our
games that they had used to prepare against us. And each one was
signed 'with love from all the Polgar sisters!'."
The Road to Haifa 143
Haifa
In the European Team Championships held in Haifa, Israel in
November 1 989, Susan and Judith Polgar made history by playing in
the H ungarian men's team. H ungary did not do brilliantly, but the
girls made a worthy 'debut': Judith scored 4/8 on board 2 and Susan
51/9 on board 3.
Michael Adams and Judith Polgar, both tipped as potential world
title contenders, had crossed swords in London earlier that same
month. This duel of strength had ended in an honourable 1 - 1 draw.
Haifa saw the second clash in a month between these two feted
prodigies:
Judith Polgar-Adams (GM) 17 J.. x e7 'fII xe7

European Team Championship, 18 'fII d 3 c6
Haifa 1 989 19 'fII a6 ..ta8
French Defence 20 'fII xc6 + 'fII b7
21 'fII xe6 l:t c8
1 e4 e6 22 g3 l:t xc3
2 d4 d5 23 12J xd5 l:t xc2
3 12Jc3 J.. b4 24 12Je3 l:t b2
4 e5 'it'd7 25 'fII xf5 a4
5 a3 J.. xc3 + 26 e6 a3 (1 16)
6 bxc3 b6
7 'fII g4 f5
1 16
8 'fII g3 J.. a 6
w
9 J.. xa6 12J xa6
10 12Je2 0-0-0
11 12Jf4
1 1 a4 ..tb7 1 2 0-0 'fII f 7 1 3 c4 !
12J e7 1 4 �g5 dxc4 1 5 'fII c3 gave
White a strong initiative in
Fischer-Bisguier, USA Ch. 1 957/8.
11 12J b8
12 a4 12Jc6
13 a5
Setting up a sharp exchange The black a-pawn looks very
sacrifice which, while not clearly dangerous, but Judith manages
winning, puts Black under a lot of to keep it under control whilst
pressure in the ensuing complica preparing the advance of her own
tions and which he is unable to central pawns. The remaining
solve in the time available. moves are hard to fathom, and
13 12J xa5 have the whiff of a time-scramble
14 l:t xa5 bxa5 about them.
15 0-0 ..tb8 27 'fII a5 a2 28 d5 l:t e8 29 '1tg2
16 .i.a3 12Je7 l:t b5 30 'fll a3 l% b3 31 'fII a5 l:t b5 32
144 The Road To Haifa
'ifa3 J:t b6 33 '>P g l J:t a6 34 'it'c3 20 tDa2 a5

J:t c8 35 'ili'e5 'it' b5 36 J:t a l J:t a3 37 21 b3 fxe4
e7 J:t a6 38 'it' f5 'it'e8 39 'ife4 J:t a4 22 fxe4 n f4 (1 l 7)
40 'it'e6 l% b8 41 d6 'it'c6 42 'ii' d 5
'it' xd5 43 tDxd5 1 -0 Il7
W
Susan Polgar-Liberzon (GM)
European Team Championship,
Haifa 1989
1 d4 tDf6
2 e4 g6
3 tDc3 .i.g7
4 e4 d6
5 f3 0-0
6 �e3 e5 This attempted exchange sacri
7 d5 c6 fice is poisoned bait which Susan
8 'it'd2 cxd5 prudently declines. Had she bitten,
9 cxd5 tDh5 the bishop on g7 would have
10 .i.d3 tDf4 turned out to be more than she
A familiar manoeuvre for Black could chew.
in the King's Indian. White of 23 n hn 'it' f8
course refrains from capturing on 24 .i.d2 'it' f6
f4 because the opening of the long 25 .i.e3 a4
diagonal for Black's dark squared 26 tDb4 axb3
bishop would be more than adequ 27 '>Pb2
ate compensation for the pawn. Susan remains in control
11 0-0-0 tDxd3 + throughout a finely played pos
12 'it' xd3 f5 itional performance, executed with
13 tD ge2 a6 deceptively simple elegance.
14 '>Pbl b5 27 . . • .i.g4 28 J:t de l J:l. f8 29 l% xf4
15 a3 tDd7 'it' xf4 30 h3 'ii' f 2+ 31 '>Pxb3 .i.d7
16 tD c l tDc5 32 J:t e2 'it'a7 33 tDc6 "iW b6 34 .i.b4
17 'ii' c 2 �d7 .i.xc6 35 dxe6 'if xc6 36 l% c2 'it' b7
18 tDd3 tDxd3 37 'it' xd6 � h8 38 'ifd5 'ii' xd5 + 39
19 'it' xd3 'it' b8 exd5 n d8 40 .i.e7 1 -0
Judith rarely disappoints a crowd in search of excitement. In this

game her explosive tactics light up the board like a fourth of July
fireworks display:
Greenfeld (IM)-Judith Polgar 1 d4 tDf6

European Team Championship, 2 e4 c5
Haifa 1989 3 d5 b5
Benko Gambit 4 tDf3 g6
The Road to Haifa 145
5 exb5 a6 1:[ e2 25 b3 :t b2 26 "ifd6 .txd5 27

6 ltJe3 axb5 "if xd5 "if b6 28 ltJd4 1We7 29 h4?
7 d6 .i.g7 (l 1 9)
8 e4 0-0
9 e5 ltJ g4
10 .i.g5 (l 18) IJ9
B
I J8
B
White had looked to be doing

well and about to tighten the
10 ltJ xe5!! screw, but his last move is a dis
11 .i.xe7 :l. e8!! astrous blunder.
Amazing! If 1 2 Axd8, 1 2 29 . . . :t d2 30 l:t el :t xd4 31 "if f7
ltJ xf3 i s mate. :t xh4 32 g3 l:t e4 33 :t d l "ife2 34
1 2 .txb5 ltJee6 1 3 0-0 ltJ xe7 1 4 "if xd7 "if xb3 35 �g2 :t e5 36 :t d6
dxe7 l he7 1 5 "ifd5 1:[ a5 1 6 "if xe5 1Wbl 37 "if f7 f4 38 :t d7 f3 + 39
ltJa6 17 1We4 ltJe7 18 a4 ltJ xb5 1 9 "if xf3 "if xb5 40 "if f7 "ife6+ 0- 1
axb5 :t xa l 2 0 :t xal .i.b7 21 "if f4 "Very tricky, these Pol gars,"
h6 22 h3 �h7 23 :t dl f5 24 ltJd5 commented 1M Nigel Davies.
17 From Wijk aan Zee to
Wisconsin
According to English 1 M Andrew Martin, the Polgar sisters did not

do much in Wijk aan Zee in January 1 990 .. . . . except rake in an
enormous appearance fee. Naturally I do not begrudge them the money;
the parents are charming and all the girls are very nice. However, none
of the Dutch IMs participating in the Master Reserve Group (the next
group down) received any appearance money whatsoever, which was
an absolute disgrace . . . "
Wijk aan Zee January 1 990

2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 I I 1 2 Total
I Fedorowicz GM 2560 • � 1 9 I I 1
2 Hellers GM 2525 ! * 0 I I 21 71 0
3 Winants 1M 2455 1
2 0 * 1
,;
1
2 0 I 1 6! 1 1
l
4 Judith Polgar 1M 2550 0 I } * 0 J ! 61 1 ,; 1
1
5 Brenninkmeijer 1M 2475 1
2 0 1
,; I * 1
2 0 0 i I 6
6 Van der Sterren GM 25 1 5 0 0 I 0 1
2 * 1
,; 0 ·11 I 5}
7 Susan Polgar 1M 2500 1
2 0 0 1
2 I �1 * ! 0 I 21 51
8 Sofia Polgar 1M 24 1 0 0 0 ! I 1 21 * 0 0 1 5
9 Damljanovic GM 2535 0 � 0 0 21 I * 1 0 �1 5
10 Peelen FM 2380 0 0 1
,;
1
2 0 0 0 * 0 4
11 De Jong FM 2350 0 0 0 � 0 0 �1 21 0 * 1 3
12 Van Wely 245 5 0 0 1
l 0 0 0 0 0 i * 21
Average FIDE rating 2475 (Category 9) G M norm - 8
Despite their performance failing to astonish, the sisters did play

some memorable games. Judith won fine games against Hellers and
Van der Sterren, while Sofia delighted the crowd with a true ' Polgar
spectacular' against the Dutch Junior Champion, Loek van Wely.
From Wijk aan Zee to Wisconsin 147
Judith Polgar b3 20 � b l or 19 . . . bxc3 20 bxc3

van der Sterren (GM) when White retains an edge.
Wijk aan Zee B 1 990 19 b4
Spanish Opening If 1 9 dxc6? "iVc7 20 b4 tLle6!
19 tLla6
1 e4 e5 20 dxc6 "iVc7
2 tLlf3 tLlc6 21 Ab3! "iV xc6
3 �b5 a6 22 �d5 "iV xc3
4 �a4 tLlf6 23 �e3! .. c7
5 0-0 �e7 24 "el ! �b7
6 J:[ el b5 Black cannot avoid the necess
7 .ib3 d6 ity of surrendering the exchange.
8 c3 0-0 If 24 . . . .. xc I 25 J:[ exc l (threaten
9 h3 tLld7 ing 26 ': xc8) 25 . . . tLlxb4 26 �a7
10 d4 .H6 tLlxd5 27 �xb8; or 26 . . . .: b7 27
The other main line is 1 0 . . . J:[ xc8 wins; or if 24 . . . "iVd7, then
tLl b6. 25 "iVa3 and Black has difficulties
11 a4 : b8 finding a move.
This is more popular than 1 1 25 �a7 �xd5
. . . � b7, e.g. 1 2 axb5 axb5 1 3 26 "iV xc7 tLl xc7
l ha8 "iV xa8 1 4 d5 tLle7 1 5 tLla3 27 �xb8 J:[ xb8
�a6 16 tLlh2 with a slight advan 28 exd5 tLl xd5
tage to White, as in Anand-Speel 29 J:[ ad l tLlxb4
man, Thessaloniki Olympiad 30 J:[ xd6 tLlc2
1 988. 31 J:[ e2! (120)
12 axb5 axb5
13 d5 tLle7
14 tLlbd2 1 20
A novelty; the theory rec B
ommends 1 4 tLla3.
14 tLlg6
If 1 4 . . . c6, then 1 5 dxc6 tLlxc6
( 1 5 . . . tLlc5? 1 6 �d5!) 1 6 tLlfl tLlc5
1 7 �d5 tLle7 1 8 tLle3 is a little
better for White; or 1 4 . . . tLlc5 1 5
�c2 c6 1 6 b4 tLla6 1 7 dxc6 tLlxc6
1 8 tLlfl , is similarly to the slight
plus of the first player. However,
1 4 . . . b4!? or 1 4 . . . tLlc5 1 5 �c2
b4 can also be considered. A very important nuance. If 3 1
15 tLln tLl h4 : e l ? tLld4 3 2 tLlxd4 exd4 3 3 J:[ b6
1 5 . . . tLlf4 is interesting. l:!. d8 34 J:[ xb5 d3 35 .: d l d2 and,
16 tLl l h2 tLlxf3+ with the black pawn on the second
17 tLlxf3 tLlc5 rank, the win is much more diffi
18 .ic2 c6?! cult for White than in the game, if
Preferable was 1 8 . . . b4 19 �e3 it is possible a � all.
148 From Wijk aan Zee to Wisconsin
31 llId4 46 J:[ aa7 rJ;g8 47 l:t d7 and White

32 1lI xd4 exd4 wins - but why bother?
33 l:t b6 l:t d8
34 l:t xb5 g6
Sofia Polgar-van Wely
Black's problems lie in the
Wijk aan Zee B 1 990
weakness of his back rank. If 34
Pirc Defence
. . . d3 35 l:t d2 ..i.c3 36 l:t xd3 wins;
if he makes a 'hole' with 35 . . . h6 1 e4 d6
or 35 . . . g6 then 36 l:t b3! wins the 2 d4 llI f6
pawn. 3 llI c3 g6
35 l:t d2 4 f4 ..i. g7
To stop 35 . . . d3. 5 llIf3 c5
35 h5 6 dxc5 "it'a5
If Black had opted for a passive 7 ..i.d3 "it' xc5
set-up with . . . rJ;g7, . . . l:t f8, and 8 "it'e2 0-0
pawn on h6, then White would 9 ..i.e3 "it' a5
put both her rooks on the seventh 10 h3
rank (b7 and d7), push her pawns This move is Judith's speciality.
to g4 and f4, and put her king on 10 e5
g3. Then h4, and g5 would be the If Black plays 1 0 . . . llIh5
winning plan. immediately, White has 1 1 rJ;f2
36 g3 rJ; g7 with the idea of 1 2 g4 with good
37 J:[ b7 l:t d5 attacking possibilities, as we saw
38 rJ;f1 l:t d8 in Judith Polgar- Hennigan, Dun
39 �e2 J:t e8+ can Lawrie Challenge, London
40 �d3 l:t e5 1 988.
41 J:t a2 l:t f5 II 0-0-0 llIh5?!
42 h4 The solid 1 1 . . . llI bd7 is a better
At this point, Paul van der move; White then continued 1 2 g4
Sterren confided to a friend that in Judith Polgar-Azmaiparash
he believed the position to be a viIi, Amsterdam OHRA B 1 989.
draw. 12 f5!
42 � g8? Leaving the rook on h I for a
This loses immediately, but the strong attack.
black position is hopeless anyway, 12 llIg3
e.g. 42 . . . g5 43 hxg5 ..i.xg5 44 Black takes up the challenge. If
�e4 l:t f6 45 f4 ..i.h6 46 l:t h2 1 2 . . . gxf5 1 3 exf5 ( 1 3 llIg5 llIg3
winning. 14 "it'B f4 !) and after 1 3 . . . llIg3
43 l:t a8 + � g7 14 "it" e l llIxh l 1 5 "it' h4 White has
44 f4 1-0 sufficient compensation for the
Black is caught in a devilish, exchange.
and total, zugzwang (or 'V olks 13 "it" e l llI x h l
wagen' as so many trendy players 14 g 4 ! (121)
prefer to call it nowadays). He 14 gxf5?!
could have prolonged the agony Possibly a better try is 1 4 . . . d5,
with 44 . . . ..i.xh4 45 gxh4 J:t xf4 although after 15 llIxd5 "it" xe 1 1 6
16 .i.c4
121
B
Threatening 1 7 .i.g5.
16 �h8
17 .!D g5 .i.h6 (122)
If 1 7 . . . f6, 1 8 .!Dxh7 wins for
White.
122
W
l he l .!Dc6 ( 1 6 . . . .!Dd7? 1 7 .!Dc7;

or 1 6 . . . .!Dg3 17 f6 wins) 1 7 f6 ( 1 7
.l:l. xh l l:t d8) 1 7 . . . .i.h8 1 8 .l:l. xh l
.i.e6 1 9 g5, i t i s hard to see how
the the h8-bishop will come back
into play.
15 gxf5 'iVd8 18 'iVh4 .i.xg5
Despite being a whole rook up If 1 8 . . . 'iVf6 1 9 l:t g t with the
at the moment, Black has no threat of 20 .!D xf7 + l:t xf7 2 1
defence, e.g. 15 . . . .!Dd7 16 'if h4 'iV xf6 + l:[ xf6 2 2 .l:l. g8 mate .
.i.f6 1 7 .l:l. g l + �h8 1 8 .i.g5 'iVd8 19 .i.xg5 f6
19 .!Dd5 winning; or 15 . . . f6 1 6 20 .i.h6 .!Dd7
.i.c4+ � h 8 1 7 .!Dh4, with the 21 l:t gl 'fi e7
lethal threat of 1 8 .!Dg6. 22 'fi g4 1 -0
Gary Kasparov - not, it should be stressed, a committed feminist -

had this to say about the Polgars' appearance fees:
" . . . women, this is the Polgar problem. They are spoiling the
professional chess world with their conditions. If the organisers provide
such great conditions for potential talent this is very bad for professional
chess. Everything should have an objective value (author's italics). In a
professional chess world you wouldn't give somebody more than he
deserves . . . you can offer one sister more than you offer Korchnoi and
nobody cares and this is very bad . . . "
At Stara Zagora in February 1 990, Susan Polgar narrowly failed to

become the first woman to qualify from the 'Zonal' to the 'Interzonal'
stage of the 'men's' World Championship.
Susan Polgar-Hracek 3 e3 b6
Stara Zagora (Zonal) 1 990 4 .i. d3 .i. b7
Queen's Indian Defence 5 0-0 c5
6 c4 .i.e7
1 d4 .!Df6 7 .!D c3 cxd4
2 .!D f3 e6 8 exd4 d6
150 From Wijk aan Zee to Wisconsin
9 d5 e5 Not surprisingly, Black fails to

10 ttJg5 ttJbd7 find the best defence, 1 3 . . . 'ii cS.
11 f4 g6?! Thereafter, all the analysis is good
12 f5 h6? (123) for White, as illustrated by this
Oh dear, oh dear. Black's weak sample line: 14 'iV a4 g5 1 6 ttJb5
ening pawn moves have set him fxe6 16 fxe6 ttJc5 17 ttJ xd6 + c;t;>fS
up for the sacrificial fireworks to IS ttJxcS ttJxa4 19 ttJxe7 c;t;>xe7 20
which he now succumbs. �c2 ttJc5 2 1 b4 ttJa6 22 a3 .I:[ acS
23 �b3, intending to follow up
1 23 with � b2, when White has the
W upper hand. However, no game
of chess is ever won without a
mistake, and lovers of chess com
binations owe a debt of gratitude
to the perpetrators of such under
standable gaffes.
14 fxe6 ttJf8
15 'iVa4+ ttJ6d7
16 c5 �c8
17 exd7 + � xd7
13 ttJe6! fxe6? 18 c6 1-0
Dortmund, in April 1 990, was remarkable only in that Susan missed,

by half a point, another GM norm, thanks to a last round loss to
Chernin in the Grandmaster 'A' section. In the 'B' Group Judith scored
6/ 1 1 and Sofia 4/ 1 1 .
Here, 'Azmai' (a former winner of the high-powered Lioyds Bank
Masters 'super-swiss') again has the ill-fortune to encounter a Polgar
sister in a mean mood:
Susan Polgar A subtle, but powerful, novelty.

Azmaiparashvili (GM) The normal move for White here
Dortmund 1 990 was 1 0 0-0-0+ , but Susan's flex
Modern Defence ible, non-committal move is a
handy prophylaxis against the
1 d4 d6 potentially irritating . . . ttJg4.
2 ttJf3 g6 Meanwhile, Black must decide
3 c4 �g7 where to put his pieces in the face
4 ttJc3 e5 of the gathering storm of White's
5 e4 ttJc6 aggression - not an easy task.
6 �g5 f6 10 �e6
7 �e3 ttJh6 11 0-0-0 + 'itc8
8 dxe5 dxe5 12 g4 ttJf7
9 'iVxd8 + 'itxd8 13 .!:[ g l b6
10 h3 14 c5 'itb7
15 tt:\d5 J:t ad8 (124) A winning sacrificial incision.

28 cxb5
29 J:t xb5 + �c7
1 24
30 J:t a6 J:t d l
w
31 J:t ba5 tt:\d8
32 �c2 J:t h l
33 b5 J:t xh3
34 tt:\d2 h5
35 gxh5 gxh5
36 tt:\c4 tt:\ b7
37 J:t a l .H8
38 J:t c6 + �b8 (125)
16 .i.a6+
A nice, flashy tactic, not decis 125
W
ive, but disquieting if you are on
the receiving end!
16 � b8
17 a3 .i.c8
18 .i.xc8 � xc8
19 b4 b5
20 a4 a6
21 axb5 axb5
22 �b2 � b7
23 �b3 tt:\ b8?
This, however, is probably the
losing move. Black might have got And now, for her next trick . . .
more joy from 23 . . . J:t he8. 39 J:t a8 + !
24 1:I. a l tt:\c6 Susan flicks i n a final 'tic-tac'.
25 tt:\c3 tt:\a7 39 � xa8
26 J:t a5 c6 40 J:t xc8 + �a7
27 J:t gal tt:\c8 41 c6+ J:t xe3
28 tt:\xb5! 42 fxe3 1 -0
Sofia continued to hurtle earthwards at the World Under- 1 6 Cham

pionship in Singapore in June, where she scored 6J/ 1 1 . Judith and
Sofia had a better result in the Debrecen Open in June-July with 7/9,
although Susan came joint last in the Grandmaster group. Again, the
sisters were having a busy time.
Judith hardly paused for breath before setting off for Wisconsin
where she celebrated her fourteenth birthday by winning the 'Boy's'
Under- 1 4 World Championship with 9/ 1 1 . However, her victory owed
something to one of her boy rivals making a trivial mistake in the last
round; had the boy won, he would have taken the title on tie-break.
Here, however, is a nice finish from Wisconsin:
152 From Wij k aan Zee to Wisconsin
Judith Polgar-Mathe
World U-14 Championship,
Wisconsin 1 990
1 26
W
Position after 26 . . . g6
27 ..- xf7 + ! 1 -0
Because of 27 . . . ..- xf7 28 l hf7 <lo>xf7 29 .i.c4+ and mate next
move, or 28 . . . .i.d5 29 : d7 .i.f7 30 l:t xf7 with the same idea.
18 Amsterdam 1 990 -
Grandmasters Fed to the Wolf
In August 1 990, Judith Polgar scored her most impressive tournament

victory, in her second OHRA tournament at Amsterdam. On this
occasion, the epidemic of 'Polgaritis' that had characterised the previous
year's tournament was not so evident. As New In Chess commented:
"She is less and less goggled at as the charming young girl who tends
to embarrass older men with attacking virtuosity and increasingly
accepted as the strong player she simply is."
In 1 989, she had scored her first GM norm in this event. In 1 990, it
was ironic that her score of 6/9 technically failed to qualify for a GM
norm, by half a point. But she shared first place with Soviet GM
Vladimir Tukmakov - not bad for a fourteen-year-old!
Susan and Sofia had to be content with background placings this
time - Susan with 4-!/9 and Sofia 2t/9.
Amsterdam B July/August 1 990

1= Tukmakov GM 2520 Susan Polgar 1M 25 1 0 41
Judith Polgar 1M 2540 Psakhis GM 2575 41
3= Anand GM 26 1 0 Van Reinsdijk 1M 2440 4!
Brenninkmeijer 1M 25 1 0 16= Kuijf 1M 2445 4
Fedorowicz GM 2565 Visser FM 2340 4
C. Hansen GM 2560 18= Bertholee 2360 31
Hellers GM 2520 Nij boer 1M 2485 31
Uhlmann GM 2505 Van Wely 2400 31
9= J. Piket GM 2495 21 = Daam FM 2270 3
Serper 1M 2485 M artens 2325 3
Stohl 1M 2525 M. Piket FM 2350 3
12= Dorfman GM 2580 24 Sofia Polgar 1M 2425 2-1
The fortunes of good-humoured American Grandmaster John

Fedorowicz against the Polgar sisters have been pretty variable. In the
previous round of this tournament he had defeated Susan and was on
plus three, so he was looking forward to his secon� consecutive Polgar.
154 Amsterdam 1 990
Judith Polgar-Fedorowicz (GM)

Amsterdam OHRA B 1 990
Sicilian Sozin
1 e4 c5
2 lll f3 d6
3 d4 cxd4
4 lll xd4 lll f6
5 lll c 3 lll c6
6 �c4 W b6
7 lll b3 e6
8 �e3 .c7
9 1i'e2 a6
� otally inept handling of the open
Ing phase of the game, 'the Bronx
10 .i.d3 b5
Bomber' loses control and self
11 f4 .i.e7
destructs. Had he kept a grip on
12 a4?!
himself with 21 . . . lll xe3 22 .xe3
Objectively superior is 1 2 0-0
lll d7, he would have enj oyed a
but Judith wants to push he ;
substantial advantage due to the
pawns on the kingside, so prefers
hopelessly tangled situation of
not to castle there.
White's minor pieces.
12 b4
22 lll xe4!
13 lll b l?!
One pretty way for Black to lose
Fedorowicz criticised Judith's
�eployment of the pieces, giving
now was 22 . . . lll xe3 23 .i.xf7 + !
�xf7 24 1i' h 5 + �e6 2 5 lll g 5 +
Instead 12 lll d l , which leaves the
�xf6 26 .f7+ �xg5 27 � hg l +
d2-square free for the b3-knight.
e5
�h4 28 1i' f2 + �h5 29 .e2+
13 . . •
�h4 30 1i' xe3.

14 f5 .i.b7
22 lll 7b6
15 lll l d2 lll b8
23 .i.xb6 lll xb6
16 g4
24 lll a 5 lll xc4
In many of Judith's games the
25 lll xc4 .i.h6+
thrust g4 is a call to arms on
26 rj;>bl �f8
the kingside, heralding a swift and
27 l:t hg1 b3
brutal mating attack. Here it is an
28 cxb3 1 -0
attempt to complicate, given that
she can't prevent . . . d5 which "Easy come, easy go," com
mented the easy-going New York
ought to do her some damage.
er.
16 ... d5
17 g5 dxe4
18 .i.c4 lll d 5 Judith Polgar-Uhlmann (GM)
19 f6 gxf6 A msterdam OHRA B 1990
20 gxf6 .i.f8 French Defence
21 0-0-0 (/27)
21 lll d7?? I e4 e6
Lulled into a false sense of secur 2 d4 d5
ity by what he sees as Judith's 3 lll c 3 � b4
Amsterdam 155
4 e5 0,e7 IS f4! dxc3

5 a3 .i. xc3 + 19 g4! 'iil e7
6 bxc3 c5 20 Ad3 'it'eS
7 'it' g4 0-0 The only move.
S Ad3 f5 21 0,g6 .i.d7
9 exf6 l hf6 22 g5 J:l. f7
10 .i.g5 J:l. f7 23 gxh6 gxh6
11 'it' h5 h6 24 'it;hl
12 .i.g6 l HS Now White is winning, and
13 0,f3 0, bc6 despite a couple of minor inaccur-
14 0-0 'it'c7 acies which slow her progress to
15 iLxe7 'iil xe7 victory, the final outcome is never
16 J:t ael 'it'f6?! in doubt.
Probably better was 1 6 . . . cxd4 24 0,e7
1 7 cxd4 'it' xa3 1 8 lLd3 0,e7 1 9 25 .l:[ g l 0, f5
0,e5, when matters are less than 26 0,e7 + 'itfS
clear. 27 0,xf5 l:!. f6
17 0,e5! (128) 2S 'it'g4 'it' f7
29 0,d6 .l:[ xf4
30 0,xf7 .l:[ xg4
1 28
31 J:t xg4 (129)
B
129
B
It must have come as quite a

shock to Uhlmann, one of the
world's leading exponents of the 31 'itxf7
French Defence, to be taken apart 32 J:t h4?!
so confidently by a young girl in Rather quicker was 32 J:t fl +
his pet opening. 'it;e7 3 3 :t g7 + 'it;d6 34 J:t h7.
17 cxd4?! 32 . . . J:t hS 33 'itg2 'itf6 34 :t h5
Now Uhlmann would have <i;e7 35 'itf2 �d6 36 J:t e3 .i.eS
done better to remove the annoy 37 :t he5 l:!. fS + 3S 'it;el J:t f6 39
ing beast from e5 once and for all :t e2 .i.c6 40 J:t 5e3 d4 41 l:!. g3 e5
and agree to suffer with a slight 42 J:t g6 J:t xg6 43 lLxg6 b5 44
minus after 1 7 . . . 0,xe5 1 8 dxe5 .i.e4 .i.d5 45 .i. xd5 � xd5 46
'it'e7 1 9 f4 lLd7 20 g4 lLe8 21 f5. J:t f2 as 47 J:t fS b4 4S axb4 axb4
Now Judith comes to get him on 49 J:t cS h5 50 'ite2 h4 51 :t c7 h3
the kingside. 52 .l:[ cS e4 53 :t c7 1 -0
19 Novi Sad Olympiad 1 990 -
Gold Again
As a warm-up before the 1 990 Olympiad in Novi Sad, Yugoslavia,

the sisters won matches against the Greek and Yugoslavian men's
teams. Intense speculation surrounded the question of whether this
time one or more of the sisters would be on the men's Hungarian team
in the Olympiad.
Just before we left for Yugoslavia, rumours reached the English
teams of an incredible-sounding deal: for a large sum of money, the
Polgars had again agreed to play again in the women's team. Obviously,
Hungary wanted to retain its gold medals! But what seemed hardly
believable was the arrangement that Madl (this time as fourth board)
was not to play unless Sofia Polgar's score fell below 70 % . This
sounded not only like very poor team strategy, a petty attempt to keep
all credit for the medals 'in the family', but an insult to Ildiko Madl,
one of the strongest woman players in the world.
Regarding poor team strategy, it should be explained for the benefit
of those unfamiliar with the format of chess Olympiads that the event
is an extremely exhausting one spread over a whole month, involving
long games and frequent adjournment sessions. That is an important
reason behind the concept of having a reserve. Normally the reserve
is not there simply to substitute in the event of illness, but as a fully
participating member of the team, which plays in rotation to ensure
each of its players gets a rest.
In this Olympiad the Polgars certainly did not have things all their
own way. In many ways they were in an unenviable position. They
were on a hiding to nothing, under immense pressure to smash the
opposition, and their reputations were at stake. Their opponents,
particularly the Soviets, were determined not to be as co-operative as
they had been in Thessaloniki - and everyone was gunning for them.
They must already have been having their doubts about staking so
much on a women's event when they lost 2- 1 to the Soviets in Round
Four. Sofia lost to Galliamova and Judith to Gaprindashvili. Susan at
least managed to save the family honour by defeating the World
Champion:
Novi Sad 1 990 157
Chiburdanidze-Susan Polgar
130
Novi Sad Olympiad 1990 B
Sicilian Defence
1 e4 e5
2 tlIf3 tlIe6
3 .tb5 g6
4 0-0 .tg7
5 :t el e5
The other main line is 5 . . . tlIf6.
6 e3 tlIge7
7 b4?!
If Black accepts this sacrifice from the main theatre of action.
White gets very good compen 17 f5!
sation, but Black is not obliged to 18 exf5 gxf5
receive the proffered gift and the 19 .td2 tlIg6
refusal leaves White's position 20 tlIe3 tlIee7
looking dubious. A more solid 21 w b3 .td7
alternative was 7 d4. The bishop heads for the h l -a8
7 d6 diagonal.
White gets very good compen 22 h3 .te6
sation after 7 . cxb4 8 d4 bxc3 9
. . 23 tlIh2 tlIf4
d5. 24 l:t bd l Wd6
8 bxe5 dxe5 Marshalling another heavy
9 d3 piece to join the fray.
9 .ta3 b6 10 d4 exd4 1 1 cxd4 25 f3 -.. g6
0-0 would activate Black's dark 26 �hl tlIed5
squared bishop on the long diag 27 tlIhn tlIxe3
onal. 28 tlIxe3 W g3?! (131)
9 a6
10 .ta4 0-0
131
11 .te3 -.. d6
W
12 .te2
Preparing 1 3 tlI bd2.
12 h6
13 WeI �h7
14 tlI bd2 b6
15 tlIe4 We7
16 l:t bl l:t bS
1 6 . . . b5 would have been a
mistake; after 1 7 tlIcd2, intending
tlIb3 and -.. a 3, the black pawn on
c5 is in trouble. "A typical mistake," admitted
17 -.. a3? (130) Susan. With her opponent having
A serious misplacement of the only one minute left to complete
monarch, who remains cut off twelve moves, she now gives in to
158 Novi Sad 1 990
the temptation to play to win on 8 c4 0-0-0

the clock. She gives 28 . . . ll'l xg2! 9 c5
winning, e.g. 29 ll'lxg2 .i.xf3 30 Not 9 cxd5 .i.d6 with good play
l:. g l "iWg3; or 29 l:. g l .i.xf3 30 for Black. The text robs Black's
l:. xg2 f4 3 1 �h2 .i.xg2 32 ll'lxg2 bishop of its best square.
"iWg3. 9 g5
29 l:. f1 10 ll'lc3 .i.g7
Defending against 29 . . . ll'l xh3, 11 ll'le2 (132)
but nonetheless . . .
29 ll'l xh3! 132
30 d4 B
If 30 gxh3, 30 . . . 1W xh3 + 3 1
� g l "iWg3 + 32 � h l 1:tf6 should
be decisive for Black. 30 .i.e l "iWg5
might have given better practical
chances, according to Susan.
30 ll'lf4
31 Ael "iW g5
32 d5 .i.d7
33 .i. b I ?! ll'le2
34 ll'l g4 e4 Theory assesses this position as
35 ll'lh2 .i.e5 unclear, having thus far followed
36 l:. f2 'ilf g3 Jansa- Bednarski, Decin 1 977.
37 f4 �xf4 White's I I th move looks logical
38 l:. xf4 "iWxf4 to support d4, but perhaps I I g3
0- 1 is more useful when after I I . . .
'ilfh3 1 2 ll'lxe4 dxe4 1 3 Axe4 �g4

Judith Polgar White can choose between 1 4 'ilf b3
Gaprindashvili (GM) or 1 4 �f3 with a good game.
Nov; Sad Olympiad 1990 Perhaps Judith was worried about
Petroff's Defence the drawish 1 1 . . . "iW g4.
11 l:. he8
1 e4 e5 12 'iliel ll'lf6
2 ll'lf3 ll'lf6 13 'ilfd2 ll'le4
Gaprindashvili's choice of Black has shown a willingness
opening would seem to indicate to repeat the position, but Judith
that she would have been happy will have none of it. I nstead she
with a draw. goes for an opposite-sides-of-the
3 d4 ll'l xe4 board attacking scrap; the only
4 �d3 d5 trouble is, Black's attack turns out
5 ll'l xe5 ll'ld7 to be quicker than White's.
6 ll'l xd7 .i.xd7 14 "iWa5 ..t; b8
7 0-0 "iW h4 15 f3?
With this move Black prepares 1 5 a4 or 1 5 b4, getting on with
to castle long and restrains l:. e I the attack, seem more to the point.
by White. Whi te's fifteenth and sixteenth
Novi Sad 1 990 159
moves look like a miscalculated 133

attempt to hold up Black's attack W
before pressing on to the black
king. In fact, these moves are
weakening, and underestimate
Black's tactical resources.
15 ttJf6
16 g3 'it' h5
17 a4 ttJg4!
A bolt from the blue.
18 fxg4 .i. xg4
19 ttJf4
1 9 ttJc3 loses nicely to 1 9
.i.xd4 + 20 l H2 i.xf2 + 2 1 <li>xf2 26 ... c2 ... h3 +
'iW xh2+ 22 <li>f1 .i. h 3 + , or if 20 27 <li>hl J:t xg3
�g2 then 20 . . . i.h3 + 21 <li>h l 28 cxb7 .i. xb7
J:t e l ! ! 29 J:t xf7 J:t c8
19 � xd4 + 30 i.b5
20 <li>g2 gxf4 Poor Judith can't even try the
21 i.xf4 i.e5 (133) obvious 20 J:t xh7 due to 30 . . .
Defending c7, willing to swap d4+ 3 1 .i.e4 "'xh7!
pieces into an ending with a pawn 30 d4+
in the bank. 31 .i.c6 J:t c3!
22 c6 i.c8 0-1
23 'it' b4 i.d6 If 32 bxc3 i.xc6 + 33 � g l
24 'it'b3 i.xf4 J:t g8 + 3 4 <li>f2 "'e3 + 35 <li> f 1 J:t g l
25 J:t xf4 J:t e3! mate.
In the event, it was third board Sofia who performed the best of the
three (incidentally, she completely routed the author in Hungary v
England - in all honesty I feel this must be mentioned !) and it was the
top two whose form was disappointing - they conceded draw after
draw. Indeed, with three rounds to go it looked as though the gold
medals had been lost - Hungary was I ! points adrift of the Soviets.
Belatedly, Madl was wheeled out to play two games, both of which
she won.
In the end, the Polgars were lucky. The Soviets only drew with
Czechoslovakia in the penultimate round, whereas Hungary were able
to beat a weakened Argentinian team 3-0 (the Argentine top player
Amura, who was on for a board prize, was being rested in order to
ensure no hole was made in her percentage score).
Going into the last round, the two favourites were neck and neck:
an echo of Thessaloniki two years before. This time, however, both
teams won their final matches 3-0. A tie-break ! For hours, it was not
clear who would win. Under the 'Bucholz' tie-break system the result
depends on the performance of the respective �pposition. The men's
160 Novi Sad 1 990
competition has for some time been bedevilled by the same absurdities
that inevitably follow: for what the Bucholz system means in practice
is that the highest international honours in team chess end up hanging
on the last-round games of weak and/or unrated players. In the
Thessaloniki Men's Olympiad, for example, the silver medal position
turned on the last round performance of the Faroe Islands.
Therefore, everyone rushed down to the lower boards to see how
Mongolia was getting on against Spain, while anxious looks were also
being cast over Uruguay-Bolivia. In the end, it was only Mongolia's
victory against Spain that ruined the Soviet Bucholz score.
So, by a hair's breadth, it was gold again for the Polgar sisters. But
such a very close call underlines the unwisdom of being persuaded for
material reasons to compete in segregated tournaments against low
rated opposition. Despite the fact that the Polgar sisters again swept
the individual medals, in terms of what Polgar fans had come to expect,
Judith's performance, in particular, suffers under close scrutiny. In fact,
her score of 1 0/ 1 3 would have been even less had a young Greek lady
capitalised on a golden opportunity:
Judith Polgar-Botsari (WIM) A deft attempt to further com

Novi Sad Olympiad 1990 plicate an already complex pos
ition.
134 26 fxe5?
B Judith does not believe her.
There was no real threat before,
but now there certainly is.
26 "ii' xe5?
Perhaps Botsari could not
believe her luck! Crushing was 26
. . . .i.e3 + ! 27 <li>g2 "ii' xe5 28 J:t xe2
"ii' e4 + 29 <li>h3 "it" g4 + 30 <li>g2
"ii' x e2 3 1 <li>h3 l:t h4 + .
27 .I:l xe2 "ii' xe2
25 �h6!? 28 "ii' xd5 + 1 -0
Final Standings: 1 Hungary 35; 2 USSR 35 (on tie-break); 3 China

29; 4 Bulgaria 26; 5 Yugoslavia A 25; 6 USA 24.5; 7 England 24 . . . 64
teams.
Top Individual Scores: Board 1 Susan Polgar I l t / 1 4; Board 2 Judith
Polgar 1 0/ 1 3; Board 3 Sofia Polgar 1 1 t / 1 3; Board 4 (and Individual
Gold Medal) Ketevan Arakhamia (USSR) 1 2/ 1 2. Individual Silver:
Sofia Polgar; Individual Bronze, Susan Polgar.
In Novi Sad, the FIDE Commission on women's chess met on
one of the rest days. Among those present were the author, Maya
Chiburdanidze and Mr and Mrs Polgar. An item high on the agenda
for discussion was the possibility of arranging an 'unofficial' world title
Novi Sad 1 990 161
match between 'Chib' and - which Polgar? Chib giggled at the prospect
of having to take on all three of them, one after another. Those present
at the commission seemed most keen on the idea of persuading the
Polgars to compete in the official Women's World Championship cycle
by seeding them directly into a shortened round-robin Candidates'
tournament. The Polgar parents indicated that they were probably not
interested; only an instant match, with the glory, official or unofficial,
of proving supremacy over the title incumbent was worth their while.
Thus it was that in the Candidates tournament of 1 99 1 , the Polgar
sisters did not take up their places.
The Pol gars sensibly got back onto the Grandmaster circuit after
Novi Sad, playing in a Category 1 1 all-play-all event in New Delhi,
India, in December 1 990. Here, however, Susan and Judith were treated
to the frustration of missing the GM norm by half a point, whilst rival
prodigy Gata Kamsky tied for first place. Scores in New Delhi: 1 -2
Viswanathan Anand (India) and Gata Kamsky (USA) 8/ 1 1 ; 3-4 Judith
and Susan Polgar 61/ 1 1 . Sofia scored 5/ 1 1 , together with GM Chernin
of the USSR.
20 1 991 and Beyond -
Fischer's Record falls!
Judith Polgar still topped the women's rating list in January 1 99 1 , with
2540 - but down 15 points on January 1 989! Susan, also static on
25 1 0, remained ahead of Chiburdanidze on 2485.
Finally, after seven years of hard slog, Susan Polgar made the
transition from Master to Grandmaster when she gained her third and
final norm at Pamplona in January 1 99 1 . A Spanish photograph shows
a smiling (relieved?) Susan with the caption "EI Gran Maestro Susan
Polgar."
Pamplona January 1 99 1
2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Total
Yudasin GM 26 1 5 * � 0 1 t 61
2 Korchnoi GM 2630 ! * ! 0 I 6
3 Susan Polgar 1M 25 1 0 1 * ! 5-!-
4 IIIescas GM 2535 0 1 * 0 � 41
5 Romero 1M 2475 � 0 } * 0 o 4!
6 Novikov 1M 2575 0 ! } ! 0 * 0 4}
7 Judith Polgar 1M 2540 0 0 ! 1 1 0 * 0 4t
8 M. Gomez 1M 24 1 5 0 � J 0 0 1 * 0 0 3
9 De la Villa 1M 2475 0 0 � 1 0 0 * 0 3
10 Todorcevic GM 2540 � 0 0 i 0 0 0 * 3
Average FIDE rating 253 1 (Category 1 2) GM norm - 5 !
Susan beat the tournament winner, Soviet Leonid Yudasin:
Yudasin (GM)-Susan Polgar 5 dxc5 'ilt' xc5

Pamplona 1 991 5 . . . 'ilt' xd l +, sacrificing a pawn,
Sicilian Defence is also possible.
6 �e3
1 e4 c5 According to ECO, 6 lDa3 e5 7
2 c3 d5 lDb5 'ilt'e7 8 .i.e3 a6 9 .i.c5 'ilt' xc5
3 exd5 'ilt' xd5 10 lDc7 + rJile7 1 1 lDxa8 lDf6 1 2
4 d4 lDc6 'ilt'b3 b 5 i s unclear.
4 . . . e6 is more usual. 6 ... a5
Fischer 's Record Falls! 163
7 ltJf3 With the dual threats of . . . ltJfS

ECO gives 7 b4 'fII c7 8 ltJa3 ltJf6 and . . . 'fII dS.
9 ltJbS 'fII b8 1 0 ltJf3 ltJg4 as equal. 21 .i.e5 ltJf5
7 ltJf6 22 -.. f2 (135)
8 .i.c4 e6
9 0-0 .i.e7 135
10 ltJd4 B
Perhaps more logical is 1 0

ltJ bd2.
10 .i.d7
11 ltJd2 ltJ xd4
12 .i.xd4 .i.c6
With the idea of responding to
ltJb3 with . . . 'fII g S, gaining a tempo
by threatening mate on g2.
13 J:t el 0-0 22 ltJ h4!!
14 ltJ b3 'fII g5
White is now forced to comple
15 g3
tely surrender control of the light
Safer is the tame retreat I S .i.f1 , squares.
but Yudasin was more ambitious. 23 .i.e2
His idea is to play f4, gaining 23 gxh4? is answered by 23 . . .
space. �xh4, when White can't defend
15 .!l ad8
against . . . 'fII g4 + , e.g. 24 'iII e2 Af3
16 f4 'iV h6
etc.
17 'iVe2 ltJf3 +
23
Now White seems to be doing 24 �xf3 Axf3
well with threats of ltJaS and 25 J:t xd8 .!l xd8
.i.xa7. But . . . 26 h3
17 ltJe4! No better is 26 ltJd4 .i.b7 when
Excellent counter-attacking White must defend against the
play. Not 17 . . . b6? 1 8 .i.xe6 ! ; or threat of . . . f6, e.g. 27 fS f6 28
1 7 . . . a6 1 8 ltJaS. ltJxe6 fxeS 29 ltJxd8 .i.cS !
18 'fII e3 26 .i.b7
Not 1 8 .i.xa7? ltJxg3 1 9 hxg3 27 �h2 .!l d3
'fII h l + 20 q;f2 'fII g2 + 21 �e3 Activating the rook and pre-
'fII xg3 +, winning. venting g4.
18 b6 28 .i.d4 'Wd5
Keeping a grip on the a8-h 1 29 'fII e2 .H6
diagonal. 30 .!l gl
19 .!l adl The position after 30 ..txf6 gxf6
Black now gives a Grand is very unpleasant for White.
masterly display of the exploit 30 .i.xd4
ation of a long diagonal. 31 ltJxd4 'fII e4
19 ltJd6 32 'fII xe4 ..txe4
20 �d3 -.. h5 33 .!l e I
1 64 Fischer 's Record Falls!
If 33 tZ:lb3 a5! 34 a4 .i.d5, win- 37 l:t d3

ning because of 35 . . . J:[ d2 + . 38 J:[ (2 g5
33 (5 39 (xg5 hxg5
34 g4 'it; (7 40 h4 (4 +
35 J:[ e2 l:t d l 41 'it;g2 gxh4
36 <;t> g3 h6 0-1
37 tZ:l(3? White is in Zugzwang; nor is
The decisive error, in a position there a defence to 42 . . . h 3 + .
already very difficult for White.
Judith Polgar scored 4!-/9 i n Pamplona.
On 1 5th February 1 99 1 the three sisters took on 1 02 men at the

Marriott Hotel in Vienna. The event, which some players would call
a 'monster' simul, was sponsored jointly by the Hungarian firm
Mineralkontor, the Austrian daily newspaper Die Presse and the
distributors of the Mephisto chess computers. Chess as a spectacle, e.g.
blitz or simultaneous displays, is often generously sponsored and indeed
conceived as a suitable commercial PR vehicle by sponsors themselves.
On the other hand, organisers of 'serious' chess tournaments with less
immediate visual appeal often struggle to find backers.
Scores in the Vienna simul were as follows:
Susan: +27 -4 = 3
Sofia: + 24 - 5 = 5
Judith: + 1 9 - 8(!) = 7
Judith's surprising harvest o f defeats included a n ironic loss t o modern
microchip technology and a coup for one of her sponsors, her non
human opponent rejoicing in the name of Mephisto Polgar.
Aruba, a small island in the Dutch Antilles, was the attractive
Caribbean location arranged for a test of the two younger sisters'
strength in March 1 99 1 . A wealthy Dutch businessman, Joop van
Oosterom (patron of the H SG Hilversum chess club for whom the
sisters play professional league games) had arranged the matches Judith
against GM Polugaevsky and Sofia against G M Sosonko.
All eyes were on the Judith-Polugaevsky, for 'Polu' is a former world
title Candidate. After losing the first game, experience came back to
triumph over youth by five points to three. Judith did not win another
game in the match. Sofia was doing better against the Soviet emigre
Sosonko when unfortunately the 'Dutchman' was forced to abandon
the match at three-all due to illness.
Meanwhile, Susan was struggling in a Category 12 GM tournament
in San Francisco where she was third from last with 5/1 1 . Like a
bomber pilot permitting herself no respite between missions, she was
immediately off on another raid and back to form again in the San
Sebastian Open at the end of the month, tying for first with six others
on 7/9. Judith scored 61 19.
From Spain, all three sisters went on to Yugoslavia for a Scheveningen

system match against three strong male players. The match format
meant that each sister played two games against each man and vice
versa in a series of one-hour games. The first half of the match was
played in Portoroz, the second in Nova Gorica. The strongest of the
male trio was Soviet GM Alexander Khalifman, rated 2640. He,
however, managed only a fifty per cent score against the girls whilst
his team-mates, 1M Ennio Arlandi (Italy) and 1 M Aljosa Grosar
( Yugoslavia) were clobbered, scoring 1 1 /6 and 1/6 respectively. Susan
scored 41/6, Sofia and Judith 4.
Early May 1 99 1 saw yet another near-miss for Judith in her bid for
a second GM norm. In the last round of the Category 1 4 SKA
Mephisto tournament in M unich, she needed only to draw with White
in the last round. Her opponent, however, was Soviet G M Alexander
Belyavsky.
Judith Polgar-Belyavsky (GM) the advanced pawn, or sacrifice it

Munich 1 991 in pursuit of her attack?
Judith must have known how
critical the next few moves would
136
W
be. To everyone's surprise, she
opted for a third continuation,
sacrificing a knight in an attempt
to destroy Black's defensive pawn
structure. How many other top
players would have chosen this
course?
21 lZlfS!?
The natural move here is 2 1
J:L ad 1 , removing the rook from
the vulnerable long diagonal and
Position after 20 . . . J.. g 7 pressurising the central knight.
However, 21 . . . c5 is hard to meet
Belyavsky had surprised Judith as White could not have relished
in the opening with a new move playing 22 1W b2 to defend the
in the Breyer System, one of his e-pawn. Perhaps 22 1W h4 or 22
favourite defences to the Ruy 1W g4 would have allowed White to
Lopez (or Spanish). Although generate active play for the pawn.
Judith has managed to activate 21 gxfS
her pieces, which now point men 22 J.. xfS J:L e6!
acingly towards the black king, Black mobilises his rook in the
she is nonetheless left with a defence and breaks the pin on
chronically weak e-pawn. Clearly, his knight on d7, secure in the
an important decision has to be knowledge that the eventual cap
made: should she play to defend ture of the rook wi11 leave him well
166 Fischer 's Record Falls!
placed, with two minor pieces for Black has now achieved a winning
rook and pawn. position since White is powerless
23 -. g4 to prevent the gradual advance of
This must have been Judith's the black army; Judith's rooks
idea when she sacrificed the have no useful function.
knight, but it is much less powerful 32 .l:l. ed l -. g7
now. 33 -.e4 .l:l. e8
23 lDf8 34 g3 lDf6
24 lDd4 e5 35 -'e2 "fie7
25 .l:l. ac 1 We7 36 .1:1. 0 �h8
26 lD xe6 fxe6 37 -'e3 .tg7
27 .tbl .l:l. e8 38 -.d2 lDd5
28 -' g3 39 �h2 .td4
Belyavsky suggests that 28 .l:l. e4 40 "fi d3 lDf6
is the only way to keep White's 41 -'e2 .l:l. g8
attack alive. 42 n xd4 exd4
28 lDg6 0-1
29 h4 lDxe5! It is difficult for even the most
30 .t h6 lDf3+ battle-seasoned of players to cope
31 W xf3 .txh6 with such critical last-round
Having weathered the storm, defeats.
Munich May 1 99 1
2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 1 1 1 2 1 3 1 4 Total
1 Christiansen GM 2590 * 1
z
1
7: 1 ! 1 1
2 ! 1 1 1 91
2 Belyavsky GM 2 540 1 * 1 1
7: ! 0 ! 1 1 1 1 0 8
1 1
3 Hertneck 1M 2535 0 0 * 2 1 1 2 1 ! ! 8
1 1 1 1 1
4 H u bner GM 2620 ! 7: 7: * 2 7: 7: 0 ! ! 1 1 1 8
5 Gelfand GM 2700 0 ! ! * 0 1 1
2 1 1 .l2 1 ! 1 8
6 Nunn GM 2600 0 1
2 0 1 * 1
2
1
2 -1 1 0 7!
7 Anand GM 2635 ! 1 0 1
z 0 0 * 0 ! 1 1 t 7
8 Judith Polgar 1M 2540 0 0 0 1 1
·z
1
7: * 0 1 12 0 1 61
9 Hort GM 2540 1
·1
1
2
1
1 0 J 1
7: * 0 ! ! 2
1
6
10 Lobron GM 2545 2
1
0 0 1
7: 0 0 0 0 1 * 1 1 1 S!
11 Susan Polgar 1M 25 1 0 2
1
0 ! 0 ! 0 0 1
2
1
2 0 * -1 s
12 Yudasin GM 2645 1
2 0 ! 0 0 1
2 0 1 1
2 0 0 * 1 S
1
13 Kindermann GM 25 1 5 0 ! 1 0 t 0 1
2 0 ! 7: 0 0 * 7:1 3!
14 Wahls GM 2560 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 1 * 31
Average FIDE rating 2584 (Category 1 4) G M norm - 7
Sofia was not playing alongside her sisters in M unich, but she had
been sent to a Category 9 tournament in Rimavska Sobota in
Czechoslovakia, presumably to chase a GM norm. If so, she missed
by three points. Her next try was in Budapest in June 1 99 1 , in a
Category 8 tournament. This time she was closer, missing by two
points - but she did come equal second.
In September Susan had a setback in Polanica Zdroj, Poland, where
as in San Francisco she finished third from bottom with 5/ 1 1 . This

Category 1 1 tournament was won by the promising young French
Grandmaster Joel Lautier, aged eighteen. He also defeated Susan with
the black pieces in their individual game.
Next followed a remarkable success for Susan in the 'Brother'
tournament in Brno, Czechoslovakia. 'Brother', incidentally, was not
some mysterious fraternity but the sponsoring computer firm! Amaz
ingly, this ten player Category 1 3 all-play-all event resulted in a six(!)
way tie for first place, all the winners scoring only 5/9 ('plus one').
Susan was declared overall winner on tie-break; Judith scored fifty per
cent in this close-fought contest.
Brno September/October 1 99 1
2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 0 Total
1 1
Susan Polgar GM 2535 * 0 1 1 1 1 1 .l
2 :; :; 5
1
2 Shirov GM 2610 1 * 0 1 ! 1 0 1 -,: 5
3 Mokry GM 2525 0 * � 0 1
:; 1 5
1 1 1
4 Epishin GM 26 1 5 0 .l
2 ! * -,: :; -,: 5
5 I. Rogers GM 2565 ! � 1 0 * � l 5
1
6 Dautov GM 2595 0 0 2 * 1 1 5
7 Stohl GM 2555 1
:; 1 1 0 * ! 41
8 J udith Polgar 1M 2550 1 � 0 ! * 41
9 M u rshed GM 25 1 0 0 1
-,:
1
:;
1
:; ! 1 0 * 3!
10 Biinsch GM 2560 1
:; 0 0 0 0 ! � 1
-,: * 21
Average FIDE rating 2562 (Category 1 3) GM norm - 5!
For Judith, the long-awaited breakthrough in her lengthy and

arduous quest for the precious second G M norm came in the Karl
Schlechter Memorial Tournament in Vienna, held in October 1 99 1 .
She owed something to good fortune. I n her first game, against
countryman GM Zoltan Ribli, she was lucky not to lose. Fortunately
for Judith, he overpressed in pursuit of victory, enabling her to turn
the tables. Judith's most important win was with Black against Soviet
GM Vladimir Epishin, which left her needing only a draw as White in
the last round:
Epishin (GM)-Judith Polgar 8 d5 lLle7

Vienna 1991 9 lLld2 a5
King's Indian Defence This highly fashionable vari
ation of the King's Indian Defence
1 d4 lLlf6 has featured regularly in Judith's
2 c4 g6 recent games. It leads to the sort
3 lLlc3 �g7 of highly complex middlegame
4 e4 d6 which suits her down to the
5 lLlf3 0-0 ground, but the next ten moves
6 �e2 e5 simply follow opening theory!
7 0-0 lLlc6 10 .l:l. bl lLld7
168 Fischer 's Record Falls!
11 a3 f5 24 � c7 fails to 24 . . . i.e3 + 25
12 b4 �h8 � h l �g4 ! when the black queen
13 f3 axb4 is immune due to 26 l:t xd7 �f2 +
14 axb4 �g8 27 � g l �d3 + 28 c;t;> h l � xe 1 .
15 Ve2 �gf6 23 i.xc1
16 �b5 � h5 24 l:t xc1 �f4 (138)
17 g3 �df6
18 e5 i.d7 1 38
19 l:t b3 i.h6 w
Only a few days after this game
was played, Kasparov chose the
speculative piece sacrifice 19 . . .
� xg3 in this position against
Karpov at Tilburg (perhaps Gary
ordered the score of this game to
be faxed over to him?). Thus we
see Judith exploring new frontiers
with the world's foremost theo-
reticians, who regularly cite her 25 �g5 � xe2 +
games as source material. 26 l he2 i.g4
20 l:t e3 fxe4 27 Ve4 �e8
21 fxe4 i.h3 28 l:t n l:t xn +
22 l:t el Vd7 (13 7) 29 v xn c;t;>g8
Three weeks before this game, 30 h3 h6
Judith had opted for 22 . . . dxc5 31 e6 bxe6
here against the same opponent. 32 dxe6 Ve7
The players now continue the 33 hxg4 hxg5
theoretical debate using different 34 l:t f3 d5 (139)
arguments.
139
W
35 exd5 V xb4
36 d6 � xd6
23 �f3 37 �xd6 exd6
This seems to allow Black a 38 l:t f6 V b3
strong attack based on her queen's 39 �h2 �g7
newly-acquired access to g4. How- 40 l1 xd6 l:t h8 +
ever, the obvious try 23 cxd6 cxd6 0-1
Her last round opponent was English Grandmaster John Nunn - a

highly logical and rational mathematician not to be melted by feminine
wiles. Surely it is not possible that a fluttering of pubescent eyelashes
persuaded him to forgo combat? For he admitted: "I did not put up a
big fight to stop her."
Vienna October 1 99 1
2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 0 Total
1 Christiansen GM 2600 * 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 7!
2 Epishin GM 26 1 5 1 * 0 1 1 0 1 1 6
3 Judith Polgar 1M 2550 0 1 * 1 1 0 1 1 1 S1
4 Ribli GM 2595 t ! 0 * 1 1 1 1
2" 1 S1
5 Nunn GM 2610 0 0 1 1 * J 1 1 S1
6 M okry GM 2525 0 1 1 0 1 * 0 ! 1 S
7 Kindermann GM 2500 0 0 0 ! 0 1 * 1 ! 4
8 Brestian 1M 2475 ! 0 ! ! 0 1 0 * 0 0 2
9 Fauland 1M 2475 0 0 ! 0 0 0 0 * ! 2
10 Schroll FM 2370 0 0 0 0 0 0 ! ! * 2
Average FIDE rating 253 1 (Category 1 2) GM norm - 5,
Suddenly, the race was on. Judith had less than three months in
which to acquire her third and final norm for the Grandmaster title if
she was to beat Bobby Fischer's 3 3-year record and become the
youngest Grandmaster of all time.
The Hungarian Closed Championship was held shortly before
Christmas of 1 99 1 . Judith Polgar competed for the first time. What
was she thinking with only weeks left in which to become the youngest
Grandmaster ever? Would this be her last chance? And what strong
company! She faced no fewer than nine Grandmasters, including her
own eldest sister. The field included three former world title Candidates:
Sax, Portisch, and the old family foe Adorjan. The acid test had arrived:
could Judith Polgar deliver the goods on the big occasion?
The last round was played on Friday 20th December. So far, things
could hardly have gone better. Judith needed only a draw to secure
her title and break the record. But a win would make her - Hungarian
Champion! What a dilemma! She had the black pieces. To play for a
win is always risky, even with the nominal advantage of the first move.
But with Black, who starts at a disadvantage, the risk is even greater.
Would she play solidly? Or would she be unable to resist the itch in
her fingers to push forward and seize the crown?
Tolnai (GM)-Judith Polgar 13 eS lLld7

Hungarian Closed Championship, 14 <li>bl lLlc4
Budapest 1991 IS .tel 0-0-0
Sicilian Paulsen 16 h4 lLlcS
17 b3
1 e4 cS A misguided attempt to evict
2 lLlf3 e6 black knight from c4, which only
3 d4 cxd4 succeeds in weakening his queen
4 lLl xd4 a6 side and permitting the horse yet
S lLlc3 -.c7 deeper infiltration.
Judith must already have been 17 lLla3+
delighted to reach the familiar pos 18 <li>al f6!
ition of the Paulsen Sicilian, one An excellent move which opens
of her pet lines, as we saw in up the entire board in Black's
her games against Xie Jun and favour.
Polihroniade (Thessaloniki 1 988) 19 c3 fxeS
and Nijboer (Amsterdam 1 989). 20 fxeS lLlc4! (141)
6 f4 bS An amusing tactical finesse
7 .td3 .tb7 which must have left White suffer
8 -. f3 lLlf6 ing. There follows a sequence of
9 .te3 lLlc6 exchanges which leave Black with
10 0-0-0 a powerful passed d-pawn.
Tolnai opts for an aggressive
formation, hoping his lead in
development and spatial plus will 141
W
pay off. Black's counterplay lies
in her prospects for queenside
play and pressure against White's
centre.
10 b4
11 lLlce2 lLlaS
12 g4 dS (140)
A typical central counter-shot
against White's kingside belliger
ence.
2 1 lLlxe6 lLlxeS 22 -'g3 lLl xe6 23
140
.US <li>b8 24 .t xe6 bxc3 2S lLl xc3
W
d4 26 J:t hfl .tb4 27 lLla4 n he8 28
.tfS .tc6 29 .tb2 g6 30 .tbl
.t xa4 3 1 bxa4 .tc3
Judith simplifies into a winning
endgame.
33 .t xc3 -' xc3 + 33 -' xc3 dxc3
34 .1:. e l J:t c8 3S n f4 J:t cS 36 n b4 +
<li>a7 37 .l:. b3 .l:. ec8 3 8 .te4 l:t 8c7
39 n cbl lLlc6 40 .t xc6 n Sxc6 4 1
Fischer 's Record Falls! 1 71
l:t b4 l:t c4 42 a3 l:t xb4 43 axb4 So, aged 1 5 years, 4 months and
l:t c4 (142) 44 h5 a5 45 hxg6 hxg6 28 days, Judith Polgar became the
46 <;pa2 l:t xb4 47 l:t gl g5 48 <;pa3 youngest ever chess Grandmaster,
<;Pb6 and White resigned. beating the record set by former
World Champion Bobby Fischer
1 42
on 1 0th October 1 958 when he
W
qualified from the Portoroz Inter
zonal to the Candidates tourna
ment, aged 1 5 years, six months
and one day. Judith, for good
measure, also became the first
female ever to win a national chess
championship.
Hungarian Closed Championship, Budapest December 1 99 1

Judith Polgar IM 6 6 Portisch GM 41
2= Sax GM 51 7 Lukacs GM 4
Adorjan GM 51 8= Tolnai GM 3!
4= Susan Polgar GM 5 Groszpeter GM 31
Jo. H orvath GM 5 10 Farago GM 3
Average FIDE rating 2527 (Category 1 2) GM norm - 51
The Polgar Sisters - Future Prospects

Of course, the story of the Polgar sisters continues. As a biographical
subject they are, in fact, a nightmare: they are constantly playing chess,
achieving more historic results, and so they are classic 'moving targets'.
As GM Raymond Keene put it to me when it was first suggested that
I should write this book: "These girls aren't getting any younger. If I
were you I'd hurry up and write a book as fast as you can."
Where will they go from here? It would be foolish to make concrete
predictions, but I will try to assess the current situation and prospects
for each sister in turn.
Susan
At the age of 22, Susan Polgar is now a Grandmaster. Although she

is only the third woman ever to achieve this, in absolute terms this is
nothing amazing. It took Susan seventeen years in total, from the time
she first learnt chess, to attain the Grandmaster title (roughly the same
as for an average GM). Kasparov was already World Champion at
this age. Given that Susan was originally tipped as � potential challenger
for the world title, early prognostications now seem a trifle optimistic.
It should also be remembered that the Grandmaster title did not
come easily for Susan. On the contrary, she chased it for seven years,
in dozens of competitions, after becoming an 1M in 1 984. And she, like
her sisters, has never had to do anything other than play chess. She
has not had to go to school, university or to work in a normal job. So
what can we infer from this? Is she a potential World Champion?
Frankly, I don't think so. It seems obvious to me that Susan Polgar
is no more and no less than a pleasant young woman of normal-to
above-average intelligence who has been intensively trained. She is
studious, hard working and motivated, and has acquired vast experience
of the game over years of play against top-class Grandmasters.
I expect Susan will continue to play chess at a high level for the
foreseeable future but I will be surprised if she improves substantially
beyond her present strength. She has, after all, played at a pretty
steady level for some years now and the technical acquisition of the
Grandmaster title does not of itself indicate a quantum leap in chess
strength.
On a personal level, too, factors outside of chess may play a pivotal
role. Susan is very close to her mother, Klara, who has described her
as "an ideal daughter." Nonetheless, sex has a way of rearing its ugly
head in these situations. Susan Polgar is a normal young woman and
in interviews her parents have indicated that, of course, sexuality is a
normal part of life - provided it is handled 'rationally'. However,
children and parents often don't see eye to eye on these matters.
It was rumoured, for instance, that Susan had run off with one of
her trainers and threatened to marry him. Mum and Dad were not
amused. More recently, Susan has been romantically linked with Soviet
world title Candidate, Grandmaster Boris Gelfand. It is probable that
the two first became friendly at the World Junior Championships in
Adelaide two years ago. Gelfand - a young man with prospects -
would probably be regarded more favourably as a prospective son-in
law.
Despite the fact that she now lives 'separately' from her parents
(albeit in the same building), the hold of the family unit on Susan, and,
in particular, her father's influence, remains very strong. In Novi Sad,
for instance, Laszlo entered the analysis room and told Susan to come
away with him. When the 2 1 -year-old explained that she was in the
middle of analysing and would come in five minutes, Laszlo took her
by the ear, according to eyewitnesses, and dragged her away.
Professor George Utterworth, a psychology teacher at Stirling
University, gave a sceptical viewpoint on hot-housed prodigies that
has a ring of relevance to the case of Susan Polgar. "You can't make
a silk purse out of a sow's ear," he says, going on to warn of the
common phenomenon of the creative exhaustion of such prodigies in
adult life: "It seems that many achieve satisfactory adult lives but they
don't continue to be prodigious. Once people acquire families and

financial problems you have to be pretty good at chess to make a living
from it."
I have a feeling that if Susan marries and has children her motivations
may become more domestically orientated, following in her mother's
footsteps. This is not a sexist assumption - just a personal hunch.
Sofia
Sofia, at 1 7, is an International Master with one Grandmaster norm.

Since Rome 1 989 she has not produced any similarly amazing results
(although her Olympiad performance in Novi Sad was good) and one
is tempted to speculate that in a sense Rome was a lucky one-off. She
is still regarded as the weakest of the sisters, and certainly the one with
the least motivation or inclination for the game. This impression is
strengthened in particular by the sensational rumour that hit the chess
world in 1 990: Sofia had rebelled. She had wanted to stop playing
chess - at least, for a while.
Laszlo, so ran the story, had responded with displeasure. Under
pressure, Sofia, despite clearly desiring greater freedom from what must
have sometimes felt like a stifling, chess-dominated regime, gave in and
continued to play chess. She had, however, discussed with a leading
Grandmaster and his wife the possibility of staying with them for a
time, presumably to remove herself from an overheated domestic
situation, for a 'cooling-off period. In the end this did not happen, but
the fact that Sofia was known to have contemplated it is highly
significant. It is not that this episode indicates a lack of love for chess
per se (any chess player's feelings towards the game can stray towards
ambivalence), but what does come across clearly is a child needing a
break from a circus in full swing.
Sofia is the most fashion-conscious, linguistically able and socially
enthusiastic of the sisters. She likes a party. When she came to London
with her mother in December 1 989 for a televised game with Kasparov
(he won easily) a party was held in chess organizer Malena Griffiths'
Covent Garden flat.
When Klara indicated that it would soon be time to leave, Sofia was
clearly reluctant to go. "She is only fifteen, and she wants to stay out
all night!" complained Klara to Grandmaster Jan Timman, who then
attempted to intercede on behalf of all the young men present who
were disappointed at the prospect of her departure: "Don't worry. I
was always out all night when I was that age." Klara: "But she's a
girl!" The sensual-looking Timman tried to reassure her: "So what?
She is in good company here." Klara had heard enough. Sofia was
promptly removed.
Perhaps Sofia is biding her time in the hope of being rescued by a
knight in shining armour? There should be no shortage of offers. Before
her sixteenth birthday she had already won the heart of a young
American player, Alex Sherzer. He not only moved to Budapest to be
near her, he learned Hungarian from scratch to impress her!
Judith
Judith, when aged 1 2, had declared that when she was rich she wanted
"a castle, and five servants, minimum." From her conversation, Judith
is clearly motivated by financial reward. Both younger sisters, indeed,
enjoy going shopping with their winnings - especially "when our father
is not looking."
Of the three sisters, it is Judith who, by common consent, has the
potential to become World Champion. At the age of 1 2, she was the
highest rated woman player of all time, and the strongest twelve-year
old ever. But at the time of this book's first draft - early 1 99 1 - it was
far from clear when, or indeed whether, she would achieve her full
potential as a chess player. Of course, the consensus was that it was
only a matter of time before she would become a Grandmaster; but
she had made little or no progress in the two years following her
historic first GM norm in Amsterdam 1 989. Her rating had remained
much the same, and her rapid acquisition of the Grandmaster title,
widely predicted, had not yet materialised. In Pamplona, where Susan
gained her final Grandmaster norm, Judith finished behind her sister
with 50% .
A s Leonard Barden put it i n The Guardian i n April 1 99 1 :
"Judith herself still has only one G M norm, achieved at Amsterdam
nearly two years ago. Her play shows enormous talent but her rating,
strengths and weaknesses are much the same as when she was aged
1 2. Give her a tactical position with the white pieces, and she handles
it brilliantly; but she is less effective with Black or on the defensive."
"Still, any criticism is relative. It means that whereas Judith would
have defeated any other twelve-year-old in chess history, she would
now be second favourite in a mythical match against Bobby Fischer,
aged 14 years, nine months."
Why this stagnation? I would attribute it to an absence of a single
minded aim in terms of chess progression on the part of the Polgars,
who over the two years in question showed increasing willingness to
play for money and publicity rather than in events that would provide
top-class practice. As examples of this tendency one need look no further
than Judith's skin-of-teeth win in the World Under- 1 4 Championship in
Wisconsin, where she outranked the opposition by 200 Elo points, or
the last Women's Olympiad in Novi Sad.
Of course, the Polgars may have reasoned that there was no harm
in occasionally taking 'time-out' to beat relatively weak opposition,
but in practice this is something that male j uniors in an equivalent
situation will not tend to do. There are good practical and psychological
reasons for promising j uniors not to continually put themselves on the

line in this way. They are on a hiding to nothing; the extreme pressure
of the situation leads to poor play and demoralising defeats; and, most
importantly, there is no way that playing relatively weak opponents
can enhance one's understanding of chess. In short, such events are a
complete waste of time.
Gata Kamsky's tournament routine seemed to indicate more cer
tainty of what he (and/or his father) desire : to get to the very top. He
won, for example, a top-class Grandmaster tournament - the 1 990
Interpolis at Tilburg - and, in choosing the events in which he will
play, his primary aim is strong practice.
In terms of what Laszlo and Susan Polgar previously said about
women's events, the Novi Sad Olympiad was a complete U-turn. There
was no possible j ustification for Judith playing in such a competition,
other than financial; the effect of her indifferent form against relatively
weak opposition must have been depressing in the short term.
There seemed to be a danger that those who had hoped for a
convincing demonstration of equal feminine potential in 'the' intellectual
sport might be disappointed in their dream of seeing a woman as
overall champion of the world. I believed at that time that the standstill
in Judith Polgar's progress over those two years was no real tragedy,
and very probably represented only a temporary setback on her path
to the highest chess honours. In any case, whether or not she becomes
World Champion is a matter of interest, but not one that anyone
should lose much sleep over.
The lull in her progress can, however, be seen as a comment on the
disadvantage that being female in a masculine sport can still constitute.
After all, had Judith been a boy she would not have been given so
many commercial incentives to 'lose her way'. As matters stand, the
mere fact of her gender causes her presence in any chess event to be
news. Therefore, she can be sold to the highest bidder; but a male
equivalent would only be 'news' if, like Kamsky, he won a strong
Grandmaster tournament.
No boy with Judith's potential would have bothered demonstrating
his superiority in his age-group twice, as Judith did in Wisconsin; it
would not have been news. But for Judith it was a routine publicity
stunt. Publicity means sponsorship and higher appearance fees, and
endorsed chess computers with names like Mephisto Polgar. (By which
electronic relation Judith was defeated in the giant simul iQ Vienna of
February 1 99 1 , as we saw earlier.)
"Judith Polgar could still be World Champion - if she wants to. But
she will have to want it very badly, because the competition is extremely
fierce. Her opponents on the path to the title are highly motivated
young men, who have no 'easy way out' on the basis of being pretty
young females who are good camera fodder. The only way for her to
aspire to the world title is a consistent diet of to p Grandmaster chess.
Two years ago, Judith expressed a preference for avoiding Category

1 5 or 1 6 tournaments, on the grounds that she 'did not like to lose so
much'. That might have been sensible for a twelve-year-old, but now
it is the only way forward for her." Such was my assessment of Judith
Polgar's chess career to date in May 1 99 1 , and I stand by its substance.
In the year that followed, she seems to have largely put timewasting
PR exercises behind her and resumed her ascent up the greasy pole.
The concluding events of 1 99 1 proved that it would have been very
foolish to underrate the competitive drive of the youngest Polgar sister.
Temporary plateaux in progress are common among improving j uniors,
and she clearly has no wish to be written off as a serious prospect for
the world title. The key to her sudden sprint for the line (two GM
norms, in October and December 1 99 1 ) lies, I believe, in having a clear
goal to aim for (Fischer's record). Nothing stimulates effort like
a deadline (ask my editor!). Becoming the world's youngest-ever
Grandmaster was not j ust a goal, but a sporting necessity. If she hadn't
made it (and she managed it by only a few weeks), the stream of
superlatives would have been dammed. Fischer, to many, was the
greatest chess player ever. Judith Polgar's chronological triumph over
the immortal Bobby ensures that she can continue to expect the backing
and marketing due to the greatest chess prodigy of all time.
Conclusion?
The Polgar sisters will never be poor. Fifty per cent of the money they
earn is kept by their parents for living expenses, and no doubt as the
brains and childcare behind the enterprise that has become known as
'Polgar Incorporated' they are entitled to benefit from their children's
success. The other half goes to the sisters. With the money they have
earned they have now bought three additional apartments in the same
block as the original family flat - one for each of the three sisters.
Because of chess, they will always have at least a career option that
affords a comfortable living. The life of the professional chess player
has its attractions: foreign travel; thousands of friends of different
languages and cultures; a good social scene, but it has its disadvantages
too: always being on the move; difficulties combining international
chess with family life, and so on. It is also a rather surreal and sheltered
existence, because the chess world is essentially an inward-looking,
abstract and closed community. People who do nothing but play chess
can have a rather narrow view of the world.
But do the Polgar sisters have a real choice? When I asked Judith
if there was anything else in life she might like to do as a career, she
replied, as though amazed by the question: "what else can I do?"
In van Eeden's book De Polgar Zusters, the children are referred to
as 'chess machines'. The book's cover depicted the sisters in a uniform
pose, faces hidden in their hands, and the sub-title of the book is 'The
Creation of Three Chess Geniuses'. The implication is obvious: like it
or not, these children are and always will be their parents' 'creatures'.
Of course, we are all a product of our parents to a greater or lesser
extent, but perhaps having two psychological experimenters as parents
represents a manipulative extreme.
Are they exploited? Dominic Lawson, who stayed with the family in
Budapest, gives this view:
"I don't think they suffer. Exploitation has the connotation of
someone else's suffering. It doesn't seem to me - how can 1 tell? - they
don't seem to hate him (their father). They seem to like what has
happened partly through his extraordinary efforts, but things may
change as a result of puberty . . .
"
"He (Laszlo) is certainly mad about money. He gets as much out of

it as he possibly can, but on the other hand it's like the Barnum and
Bailey circus - when the kid's there, you've got to flog it. He might
realise that if they're the same strength in ten years' time they'll be
worth no more on the open market than any other player of similar
strength. From a purely commercial point of view he may be quite
right but obviously there's a very unedifying side to all of this. However,
1 can't say they seem to be suffering . . .
"
Success breeds self-confidence, and the Polgar sisters are confident.

Their many accomplishments deserve to be admired. 1 respect and
envy - yes, envy - their achievements, and have sometimes wondered
whether 1 could have wished to have been brought up in the same
disciplined way, with the opportunities this would have afforded. On
reflection, 1 honestly believe 1 would not - my lazy freedom has always
been so dear to me! But then, what do 1 know?
To be a genius is something special. Perhaps it feels really marvellous
to be a chess genius. Perhaps it's a lifelong ego-trip. Perhaps it will
give the Polgar sisters a special buzz to wake, every day of their lives,
to the experience of genius. 1 hope so. 1 wish them well.
Whatever the future holds for the Polgar sisters, it should be bright -
such nice girls will never be without friends.
Index of Openings
Alekhine's Defence 121

Benko Gambit 1 44
Benoni Defence 42, 65, 87
Bogo-Indian Defence 62
Caro-Kann Defence 99
Dutch Defence 38, 98, 1 1 1
English Defence 56
English Opening 82, 85, 1 25, 1 4 1
French Defence 3 7 , 1 43, 1 54
From's Gambit 34
Griinfeld Defence 101
King's Gambit 55, 88, 1 1 6
King's Indian Defence 35, 43, 46, 58, 60, 1 67
Modern Defence 34, 1 50
Nimzo-Indian Defence 54, 67
Nimzowitsch Defence 1 04
Old Indian Defence 80
Petroff's Defence 1 58
Pirc Defence 1 03, 1 36, 1 48
Queen's Gambit Accepted 69
Queen's Gambit Declined 72
Queen's Indian Defence 1 49
Queen's Pawn Opening 83
Reti Opening 131
Sicilian : Four Knights 75
Kan 117
Najdorf 48, 79, 96, 1 1 5
Paulsen 1 09, 1 1 0, 1 1 3, 1 23, 1 24, 1 28, 1 3 5, 1 37,
1 70
Scheveningen 47, 9 1 , 94, 1 1 4, 1 23, 1 3 5, 1 39
Sozin 1 54
Sveshnikov 39, 7 1 , 1 08
Other 77, I l l , 1 57, 1 62
Spanish Opening (Ruy Lopez) 40, 95, 1 47
Torre Attack 53, 6 1 , 1 27

The Polgar Sisters Training or Genius

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

The Polgar Sisters Training or Genius

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

The Polgar Sisters Training or Genius

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

What is the book about?

What is the book about?

What is the debate around the Polgar sisters' upbringing?

What is the debate around the Polgar sisters' upbringing?

Batsford Chess Library

THE POLGAR SISTERS

Library of Congress Catalog Card Number: 92-54268

ISBN 0-8050-2426-3 (An Owl Book: pbk.)

Henry Holt books are available at special discounts

For details contact: Special Sales Director,

First American Edition-1992

Printed in the United Kingdom

Advisor: R.D. Keene GM, OBE

Part One: Background 11

1 The Polgar Experiment 13

Part Two: The Games and Careers of the Polgar Sisters 31

Polgar-Dosszie Tamas Karpati (Magyar Eszperanto Sz6vetseg)

Women In Chess - John Graham (McFarland)

Pergamon Chess Die Schachwoche

Newspapers and Periodicals

The Times London Evening Standard

British Newspaper Library Wade/Batsford Library

The story begins in 1 965 when Klara Alberger, a strikingly attractive

Why Three Chess Players?

perhaps, mathematics. It should be stressed, therefore, that chess as a

'Flaws' in the Theory?

Those claiming that the Polgar sisters do not prove anything of

The Jewish Inheritance

most brilliant minds (Trotsky, Freud, Einstein . . . ) were of Jewish origin.

Grandmaster level and her victims included World Champion Max

The author is happy to j oin Mr Polgar in rubbishing sexist theories.

as a competitor?" wrote Sigmund Freud to his fiancee. The threat is

The Motivation Gap

The Self-Fulfilling Prophecy

What Men (and Women) have said about Women in Chess

men. It is not a physical sport, like swimming. When children study

Farago, Milorad Knezevic, Tibor Florian, Levente Lengyel, Peter

The Polgar Method - Discuss!

In a sense, the Polgar method seems like a new adaptation of a well­

Laszlo Polgar, in defence of his experiment, writes: "Our children

On the other hand, the sisters' apparent well-being may be due to

beings or in animals. Chimpanzees can be taught to speak, circus

a) The Cellist: Jacqueline Du Pre

b) The Mathematician ( 1 ): Ruth Lawrence

c) The Mathematician (2): John Adams

John Adams' parents are both mathematicians, but unlike Ruth

d) The Youngest Graduate: Adragon De Mello

This child, who became the world's youngest university graduate at

Tragic Geniuses of the Past

Other Chess Geniuses

World Champion Gary Kasparov's mother, Klara Kasparova, is

Some Things People have said about the Polgar Sisters

Gary Kasparov: "They are j ust like trained dogs."

congratulated by the then Hungarian premier, Janos Kadar - a chess

Pataky-Susan Polgar Black now inaugurates a combi­

. . . c5!, challenging in the centre, 3

Here is an early example of

Susan Polgar-Kiss (FM)

15 tZl ge2 g4 24 .i.xb5

Mature positional judgement

In a sense, the Polgar method seems like a new adaptation of a well

Pataky-Susan Polgar Black now inaugurates a combi

have to concentrate properly Black has chosen the solid Sicil

Asked about her playing style, Susan declined to be one-dimension

She followed up with victories over ex-Romanian Champion Grun