Ep. 72: NM Jerald Times on Mastering the Chessboard: Insights, Strategies, and Transformations

Narrator: 0:05

Welcome to the chess angle. This is not your typical chess podcast. If you're an amateur or club level player, the chess angle is for you. Our content is aimed at busy adults who are serious about the game but have limited study time. Featured guests include both amateur and titled players alike. And now here's your host, director of the Long Island Chess Club

Neal: 0:38

This week I am honored to speak with National Master Gerald Times. Gerald is a renowned chess educator here in New York, a former chess champion of Harlem, and was named the 2021 Chess Educator of the Year by the University of Texas at Dallas. He is also the CEO of Chess Across Borders, which looks to bring chess to communities all around the world. I look forward to discussing that and a lot more. So, gerald, great to see you and welcome to the podcast And Neil, thanks for the wonderful introduction. My pleasure. I'm honored to speak with you, so I want to break the ice by speaking about our mutual friend, tyrell Harriet from the Kings of Queens Chess Club. He's the one who kind of referred me to you, so I was just wondering how you knew Tyrell and what your relationship is.

Jerald: 1:32

So I would say that I had two relationships with Tyrell One as a chess player and when I was the director of Chess Academy Charter Schools, i saw him as a professional, as a teacher. So should note that years ago Chess in the Schools arranged an event where we were playing chess on side of a Navy ship And all the chess masters in New York got together and we played a lot of the top students And Tyrell had offered me a drawer in a simul position and I told him, like no, you're actually winning the game. And he played on. He eventually beat me in the simul And that was my first introduction as I was giving the simul to Tyrell. And then I got to know Tyrell as a teacher and he was a phenomenal teacher. Just so many of you may know, the highest rated African American woman in chess history is a woman by the name of Jessica Hyatt and Tyrell was her teacher. He was the first one really to show me the value of using Google technologies to advance the learning curve of students. For example, tyrell would use Google forums and through those Google forums he would use assessments to test the students, he would comment on their games in real time on Leachess and he would give constant feedback. And one of the beautiful tools that he used, something called Google classrooms I'm going to be a little technical here, but something we call asynchronous classrooms, meaning that we can address each student's needs within that classroom. For example, one student needs help in the opening, another student needs help in the middle game and yet another student helps in the end game. So Tyrell would use these Google classrooms and give various lessons in the same classroom and various assignments in the same classroom, and so that's what I got to see Tyrell as a professional, so I respect him both as a player and as a chess player.

Neal: 3:39

Okay, very cool. Now we're going to get into your teaching and your coaching, because I know that's kind of what you're known for. But are you doing a lot of playing or any playing yourself? Are you active as a player? Are you doing any tournaments?

Jerald: 3:53

Well, i'm going to play in the senior open. I'll show my age a little bit, but I'm going to be playing in the senior open in Chicago in July, just so you know. Your audience knows my peak rating. My FIDE peak rating was 2400 back in 2002, was not able to sustain that rating, mostly due to the fact that I was directing so many programs And the chess player has to. Chess is very difficult. But also, as I go back to tournaments, i want to change my approach in terms of the openings that I play. I want to play a bit more dynamically. So I was playing Karakhan. Sometimes I was playing London's. This time I'm going to play E4, i'm going to play Dragons and Nydroffs and so forth, which I think personally better suits my style. But yeah, yeah, yeah, i mean. So I'm going to play some games. Some of them is one of the few times where I'm not doing as much coaching and training and I get a chance to play chess.

Neal: 4:51

Okay, that's a big change. Switching to the you know dynamics, like because I'm just smiling because I'm a D4 person, i'm a London person, i'm a French guy, not so much a Karakhan, but I'm kind of like safety first, just wait for the other guy to crack, but it doesn't always work out and playing more dynamically Now is that just? did you study for that specifically, or you just kind of just jumping in the deep end and you're just going to try these openings? Have you tested them out online?

Jerald: 5:19

Definitely test them out online. That's one of the main venues by which we can do our practice, our opening prep. Well, basic truths you learn that when you're playing top players, they tend to grind you down and difference between grandmasters often they know the positional plan, they know where to go in the position more than you do, and I often feel well, if I'm going to lose to them, am I going to lose them in a passive position or am I going to lose them in the active position? And so I realized that dynamics is a better way to go. There's a very famous book called Chess for Tigers, by the way, and in this book he mentions that you know, if you're playing a strong player, you should move towards complications as opposed to moving towards simple positions, because they're actually better than you in both positions, but they're definitely better than you in more simple by opposition.

Neal: 6:10

That's actually one of my favorite books. I've spoken about that on the podcast. I always tell everybody, when you're getting into tournaments, get that book, because whether you're a beginner or an advanced beginner or even if you're 2000 and beyond, that's the first book, that's the primer for chess psychology. but I agree. But that's what he says, because if you go into theory and common lines, those stronger players, they're going to know those positions so well And you got to take them out of book because as soon as you can get them to think for themselves, you have a chance of winning.

Jerald: 6:42

Right And Joe Benjamin in his book Better Thinking Chess mentions that sometimes in chess we should be moving towards complications Right And dynamic play. Yes, the Martin chess game is a lot more dynamic than the chess we saw in 1950s, 60s, 70s, 1970s, 1960s, 60s, 70s were more based on positional planning, But today we see, because of computers and all the analytics that we have, that the dynamic player tends to be more successful.

Neal: 7:11

Now, gerald, i know you have some ideas about the evolution of chess as far as the romantic, classical, hypermodern, up to our current tech age, and how we got to where we are, so I'd love to hear your thoughts on that.

Jerald: 7:26

All right, so yeah. So I think it's important from a chess player's viewpoint to see the evolution of the game, because I even believe as players we go through the same evolution ourselves. So oh yeah. So the first stage of chess is called the romantic stage of chess. Sometimes we even joke about this stage because we call it the 32 square chess board, meaning that both sides were pursuing each other's king. If a gambit was given, it was almost considered not noble to take the gambit. And everything that we learn about the attacks, sacrifices, pin skewers, forts we learn through the romantics. The pursuit was the king. Then Morphe comes. Morphe is the kind of the goal between the classical period and the romantic period, and Morphe shows not just attacking the king but the global domination of the chess board. Wilhelm Steins studies Morphe games. He develops his whole conception of classical theory And he comes up with a very simple point The game was won not because of because you were Morphe or because you were Anderson. The game was won because there was a concrete weakness on the chess board. Sometimes I joke I call Wilhelm Steins the Louis Pasteur of chess. Louis Pasteur recognized that there was a germ that broke down the immune system. So everything that we learned about weaknesses, isolated pawns, backward pawns, the quality value of pieces for example, the two bishops are better than the two knights, the aggressive versus the passive All these things in terms of the structural weaknesses we learn through the classical period And just 30 years after these, or 40 years after, this revelation of the classical period is that here comes the hypermartial period. And okay, often when we think about the hypermartial period we think about the fientia, this bishops, or asymmetrical openings, aliexpress, reddies and so forth. But there's another major contribution of hypermartial period which we recognize that certain weaknesses have strengths. Meaning, for example, i can't play a Banco Gambit. I mean black develops on the Queen side before they develop on the King side. I mean that's breaking classical principles. Or I can't play a Bononi. Well, bononi has a backward pawn. So the recognition that certain weaknesses have strength. In fact, i now make another analogy to Jonas Salk. Jonas Salk solved polio by shooting polio back into the body, meaning the virus became the antivirus, and so likewise in the hypermartial school. one of the biggest contributions is the recognition that weaknesses have strengths. Now there's a period really right between that, because the Russian analysis in the game was amazing, and one of the first things that the Russians did was they analyzed the game from the opening to the middle game into the end game. So it was this type of complete and rigorous approach through the Russian school of chess that chess continued to advance. But now we are in the technological aspect of the game, meaning thousands of games have played each day, knowing the games have played each day via the internet. We have analyzing engines and we have databases. So imagine Bobby Fisher, one of the great minds who could ever play the game. He was turning chess, but he was turning page by page. Now we can go over hundreds of games, see the plans of those games through databases. I can play again thousands of the games on the database. I mean on the Internet. The real value of this is that it doesn't affect my feed-a rating, it doesn't affect my USCF rating, but I can practice skill sets. I can recognize patterns, the previous players we did not have blasting. Here are the analyzing engines, which means that up until, let's say, the 1980s or 1990s, chess was advanced by human thought. Now, for the first time, chess is advanced by AI, slash, digital thought or digital technologies. The tools of the Martin player are like no tools we've ever had before. What is the power of these tools? When I grew up, there were 200 grand masses in the world, and now there are 1,700 grand masses in the world. These tools are often the equalizing force in the game of chess.

Neal: 11:53

Fascinating. Then you had mentioned something when we spoke in the past about the learning zone and the performance zone.

Jerald: 12:01

Often, when we see a brilliant chess game, we often think about well, a Fisher's game of the century. We look at the performance, but what we don't know is how Fisher got there. For example, in the case of Bobby Fisher, we know that he had a radical leap somewhere around 11 and 12 years old. He was just a regular chess master and all of a sudden he became this extraordinary player. Often what happens with chess we're studying the outcome, but we don't study the path to that outcome. Our improvement as players will not really increase until we understand the learning zone. Recently, i'm realizing the power of a liquidation in chess and that chess ultimately is a game of trade-offs, a constant contact between pieces. My personal difficulty with end games was really I did not know how to trade off the piece to get to the superior end game. When you look at Capricorn Lanker, we think about how Capricorn like to execute the end game. But how did he get there? How did he get the superior piece? The two Bishop versus the Knight or the Queen and Knight versus the Queen and Bishop He's all considered superior metrics. In regards to this, often again, the chess player we have to begin to see. How did they get there We have to begin to ask those questions. I think once we begin to understand the learning zone, we can see for ourselves just the methods of improvement, in other words.

Neal: 13:44

Right, you've mentioned before, as far as the growth of a chess player, what happens inside a chess player. that relates to what you're saying, but can you give me a little bit more about that, because I know you had expressed this idea, but I find it very interesting.

Jerald: 14:00

Right When I was directing. I've directed many programs at the Moth Hall School. It's the Gifted in Townsend program in Harlem. There are measurements and there are movements. So measurements is something that we can see a rating, a placement in the City-State National Championship, how many trophies are won at the end of the year and so forth. So these are measurements. But a movement is the internal transformation inside of a child. So, for example, you'll see that young people, they go from reacting to responding. I react to a mosquito bite but I respond to a letter. For example, a person puts a rook on the seventh rank and maybe okay, it looks usually a good on the seventh rank, but maybe I can allow that rook to go to the seventh rank. So I'm no longer reacting to the position, i'm beginning to look at it more holistically and I'm beginning to respond. I believe the Sun Zoo he has this beautiful line. He says the losing army first fights and then they see the conditions are winning, while the winning army first seeks the conditions are winning and then they fight. So by metaphor here, by analogy, the losing army is reacting and the winning army is responding. So the movement from reacting to responding is one. Another one is the difference between facts and truths. A fact is what is and the truth is understanding what is. For example, the fact is I'm going to lose my queen. The truth is I need to lose my queen to win the chess game. Often we don't make the distinction between facts and truths And I know I had this problem because I was one of the early editions of DBSK's end game course. I was in solving some of the problems. I mean, i was getting a bit frustrated and I realized that the problems that he was giving were often very counterintuitive problems on purpose. This was a purpose. He was trying to break our very conventional view of the game. And then, when I stopped looking just at the facts of things, i began to look at some of the paradoxical ways. So, yes, i actually have to put this rook on the square and maybe it may be captured, but that is the path to victory and so forth. And I would say there are many movements and I would say, in terms of the inner life of a player, another interesting movement is between desire and will. Desire is to do that which I want to do and will is to do that which I want to do, even what I don't want to do So. I had a chance to play cash prop in a one-on-one game And I think many people have told you you're going to be around, cash prop. Cash prop has energy And I can feel he was so energetic at the board. I can feel him imposing his will upon him. In essence, you get the same thing about Bobby Fisher. They used to call it Fisher fever. So you find out what strong players that they often reverse bad positions. It's not necessarily because they have superior knowledge. Sometimes they simply have superior will at the chess board And I think at this level of grit, it's often undervalued or devalued in terms of that. So, yes, these are some of the movements reacting to, responding fast truths, desire to will.

Neal: 17:21

And I think, a lot of players. They know the theory, they know the openings, they know the, but the mental side of it that you're talking about, they never really mastered it, they never really harnessed it, and so their improvement is limited. Even though they have all this quote unquote knowledge, because their headspace is not where it should be, their improvement is limited. Whereas you have other guys who their opening repertoire is non-existent, their end game is eh, but they're pretty good with tactics, but they just have this will to win every game And they actually have better results than a quote unquote stronger player, if that makes sense.

Jerald: 18:05

No, it makes sense in. Again, these are mindsets During the battle. We call the chess game And we should be a lot more aware of it, even if I say, in the last world championship match or the last two world championships match, where we have the E&F and not to really a great talented attacking player And I think a lot of his difficulty, not so much of how he wins but how he negotiates the loss, and we see that often when he loses he doesn't respond the same way And you can see that 141 game that he lost to Carlson was really the game changer in the match And he was leading the match the whole way with the learning. And again, how does a player, how does a chess player, negotiate a loss? It's significant. So often we have to look at the psychological side of the game, but even more so the mindsets of chess players and the type of changes that they have to make. So we can have the world championship talent. We also need the world champion psychology to be world champion.

Neal: 19:18

What did you think of the ding-nap-oh match overall? Cause I think it was. I have some thoughts when I'm curious, cause it wasn't what everybody expected. I mean, i guess I'll go first Like I liked it for the wrong reasons. I liked it because ding played a French and a London, which are my two openings. So all the guys from the club who read me about my London system, i was like there you go. It's now validated and he won in spectacular fashion. But you know, the other thing too is that I'm just laughing. You had games with a result. Like from the start everyone thought it was going to be like a series of draws And then, and it was like you had these decisive games. I'm just it was much more fascinating than I think anyone could have predicted. But I'm just curious if you have any thoughts on that.

Jerald: 20:05

I like to echo some of what you said. I mean, it was a bloodbath, let's be honest. I mean they were going at each other. I think it was one of the more exciting, maybe not in terms of accuracy of play, but it was one of the more exciting world championship matches. But I mean, the irony here is that Ding Lahren is not, he's behind in the whole match, with the exception of the tie breaks right Where he now decides the match. So you know, i had great compassion also for Nipponachi. You know he has this fight against Carlson. Now he has this fight against Ding Lahren And the world championship somehow has been elusive, it has escaped him. So for me, just in reference to Nipponachi, i'm hoping that he learns how really it's not. You're not measured from your victories, you measure by how well you recover from a loss. It's almost like watching the last sumibo, where we see that two different halves Philadelphia was dominating the first half but they did not make the adjustments in the second half, where the Kansas City made the adjustments in the second half. Some people may say, well, hey, there was a bad call by a rep and so forth, but you can really see that one team scored in the first half and the same team did not score in the second half because of adjustments. And so likewise in match play. Match play is different from a general tournament play, because match play is I have to know myself and I have to know you, and so I think in a case of Nipponachi for him, he asked to say how do I deal when I lose a chest hit? And we see that he did not really respond well to losses, which hurts his momentum and affects his next game, and so forth. So if he evolves as a thinker or as a, that's not so much. I mean if he evolves as a competitor is where I'm really looking for. It'll be interesting to see, because in a given time he's still number two on the Fidei list. But yeah, yeah, but this isn't going back until your point. It was an incredibly exciting match. We must give Ding Lahren a lot of credit. He showed a grits, being behind in the whole match and overcoming him in the tiebrates.

Neal: 22:29

Yeah, now the world championship format generally. do you like the fact that there's tiebrates at the end with speed games? Because that always seemed. this is just my opinion. I'm just an amateur player from Long Island who runs a chess club, so I don't know if I'm the most qualified or deserving to make this opinion, but it just seems that for a world chess championship to have it go to speed games to decide the winner just seems wrong. But on the other hand I know it can't go on forever. Just wondering if you have an opinion on that either way.

Jerald: 23:06

It's a different time, right? I mean then early on in chess, where we saw these battles, for example, the longest world championship match up, and it's something like 48 games Carpath-Casper 1984. Before that it was something like 35 games Aliexpress and Cap of Lankan 1927. And so the question is a tension span, and does the audience want to see these long drawn out matches? And so I think Fide has tried to alter the rules to find a way to end the match. So I would say that I mean, for example, someone like Halsted, who's good in so many different genres He's good in the blitz, he's good in the rapid And he's good in classical chess So it does favor this form of certain type of players. But I mean, i think your point is well taken. I mean, should the world championship match be ended on a speed game or should we find some other type break methods? And I'm willing, like you, i'm willing to look for alternative type break methods So someone is not penalized for not being a rapid player and so forth. Yeah, it's a possibility. I can't say think of an answer right now, but I do understand why Fide might want to go to a different method of ending the world championship.

Neal: 24:25

Yeah, because I'm reminded of I've mentioned this before I actually saw Magnus versus Kariakin back in 2016,. Right, because I'm New York South Street Seaport, right from where I am on Long Island. I was maybe on a 40 minute drive, so it was really cool. But I almost felt like Magnus deliberately tried to steer it to the speed round because he knew he would dominate. I mean, i don't know, this is just speculation, but it's almost like he wanted all those draws And then he just kind of I don't know, because I just think you could sort of I don't want to use the term game the system, but in a way you could. You could make sure it's an even score And if you feel you're a better speed player than your opponent, you could just get it to that point, i mean, but then again you have to make sure it doesn't beat you along the way. I mean I'm sort of talking out of both sides of my mouth, but you know what I mean. I feel it could almost be used strategically to kind of alter the structure of the event.

Jerald: 25:20

I mean Carlson's, one of the few players who could actually do that. Yeah, that's what I'm saying A lot of players. let me take my opponent to at the time of the world World Championship match, with 12 games. he recently switched to 14 games. But not many people can do this. Carlson is a unique talent that he is so versatile in all these genres. Yeah, yeah, that's a good point. Yes, I mean, i'm sure he was aware that, hey, when we get into the tie breaks I'm highly favorite because we have reigning systems and all of them. I mean, even in the last match Ding Lirin has a higher rapid rating than Nephinauchi. So Ding Lirin must have known that if I can just hold on in this match, i have a good chance of winning in the tie breaks. So, yes, it does favor. So right now we can say that the World Championship match does favor the more versatile player and the player who is not just good in classical chess but is good in other genres. But again, i think the question is what is the alternative? What can we do other than ending these matches on a rapid time controls? And, like I said, i'm amenable to other possibilities. I just don't know what to do at this. I don't have a recommendation.

Neal: 26:28

I agree, that's what I'm saying. I'm not sure what the answer is, but I think it's something we need a conversation about. Gerald, i'd like to switch gears a little bit. Talk about your own chess improvement journey. Now you've achieved a master ranking. You spoke a lot about mindset and things like that. Was there anything specific or a few things like maybe it was a book, maybe it was a certain type of study plan that you feel helped you the most get to where you are as a player?

Jerald: 26:55

I would say that my journey to master, like many people there, was auto-diadactic. I didn't have any specific training, but once I got to master, i had a chance of being trained by a very good Russian grandmaster and trainer by the name of Moran Shear, who is now a past, and Moran was really one of the first ones to show me that chess was a data game, meaning that without this opening prep, i could not play against these top players. And the beauty of opening prep is that it gives you the middle game, planning where your pieces should be. When Kashbrough speaks of Michael Adams, he says that Adams is one of the few players in the world who knows where all his pieces should be. And this is where this Russian training really helped me And I was able at that time to get a 2400 BAA rating. So I think the difference between the romantic period and the modern period in a romantic period we're checkmating the king And the modern period we're checkmating data Meaning. I have to now counteract the information from the opponent And even if you're good let's say Fischer, for example, in the left game of the World Championship match, well, as good as Fischer is in the night off, as good as he is in the Poison Pawn variation. He was not prepared for Spasky and Spasky crushed him in game 11, because it shows you, even at what's especially at the highest level, that a very strong player if they're not prepared, they're gonna lose. So that was the biggest point. So, yeah, yeah. So once we are able to get that information, we can be in the battle. And I think often games are won simply because we do not know the arguments Meaning your talents will not show. Neil, you could be an incredibly talented player, a French player that can play all these beautiful French structures, or a London player that can play both sides of the board, but if you're getting a bad position, you're not gonna be successful. So check-mating data is the difference between the old game and the modern game.

Neal: 29:06

Yeah, that's such a good point. Now you also have some experience playing in Washington Square Park, right?

Jerald: 29:13

Well, definitely.

Neal: 29:14

Yeah, i'd love to hear what that's about, because a lot of times it's portrayed like you see it all the guys and the hustlers and the trash talk. you see it portrayed in movies and the media. I don't know how much of that is exaggerated, but I'd love to hear about that experience. Maybe you have a story or two you could share something like that.

Jerald: 29:30

Right, so okay, so it was a different time. Right, There was no internet, so everybody met in the parks. Right, that was the social communion. It was the way that people met. We met in clubs, we met in parks And part of the park culture was gambling. Right, and you bet on chess games, and sometimes not only would you bet on your own game, you could bet on someone else's games. For example, i got to see Yassasarawad. He would come to Washington Square Park. He would beat some of the hustlers at the time he was giving them five to one, Jinji a disability. I mean, he was a big park guy. He played in Washington Square Park for many years. There was an up and coming. There was a very talented African-American player by the name of Sam. Sometimes Sam would be grandmasters, speed chess and so forth. So it was this kind of meeting ground for everyone, and one of the beautiful things about chess is that it is a passport, is a way of all. It brings people together. In other words, right, so from the Russian grandmasters to the park hustlers, to the very talented up-and-coming African-American chess players, they all met inside of these parks and they engaged and they played each other And there were some alternative games. There was a game, i think they called it the. Was it the Joker or was it? anyway, it was a chess piece that would move like a queen in a night at the same time, right, and so these guys were literally sometimes hundreds of dollars on the Joker game. So you playing an international master or a grandmaster, but you had the Joker and the grandmaster didn't have the Joker, you would have this biggest. You would have a big advantage. I mean, i think actually the name of the piece was called the Jester. It was the Jester, a chess piece, so they had alternative chess games, which we today would call chess variants, played inside of these parks. I mean, i see people play $200 chess games, $300 chess games. One of the interesting things is that how many of the chess people would share other game culture, meaning they would? chess players can be great vacuuming players, they can be great poker players, and so we shared all the secrets. I mean, for example, elon Schwartz was the number four chess player, i mean poker player in the world, and I think we had a backgammon role champion. His name is Casey Meade. I think his name is Casey Meade right now, but we had a backgammon role champion And we also had a scravel role champion who was a chess player. And what is the link? chess is the link between poker, backgammon and scravel, right. All this is coming through the chess culture. But yeah, i mean I've seen phenomenal games, i've seen very talented players. I mean Nakamura has come to Washington Square Park. I mean I've seen Nakamura play Jakob Norowitz, right, i mean, who doesn't want to watch that match? and so forth.

Neal: 32:47

Yeah, all right, i'm laughing about the piece that you said moves like a queen and a knight, cause those two pieces of the queen and knight is probably the most powerful duo on the chess board, right, so to have it as one piece.

Jerald: 32:59

Oh, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah. I mean I've seen international masters get checkmated by the jester from experts who were very astute, very sharp in using this jester piece. But really, like I said, it was a communal type of gathering and we shared a lot of secrets. I mean it was Asa Hotman, who was one of the first ones you know I say this many times who taught me how strong Bobby Kushing really was. I really did not review his games, and so a lot of trade secrets are shared in these parts. Not just about hustling is not just about the fight you know the chess fights and everything. It's also about a lot of sharing, which sometimes I think is not mentioned when we speak about the parking space.

Neal: 33:48

I wanna get back to some chess improvement, some chess teaching things right, because I know you have a strong background as a coach. Now I know you work with kids. Do you work with adults as well, like adult improvers, things like that, or no? Is it mostly kids you're teaching?

Jerald: 34:03

It's mostly students, but I mean I teach adults privately and also I'll be teaching a senior class for the first time at the 92nd Street Y in New York City. So yeah, I mean it's like you. I view myself as an ambassador of the game in wherever my passion takes me.

Neal: 34:25

Okay, no, that's great, but I have some specific questions about improvement. What would you say is, or are, the most common erroneous thinking patterns that you notice with your students? I mean, whether you wanna talk about children or adults, but what's like the biggest mistake you see as far as thinking patterns?

Jerald: 34:46

Often dismissing your opponent, not recognizing, hey, thinking that, hey, this move is not so important, meaning there's a difference between a dialogue and a monologue, which is the whole process that I explained to young people. You hear, i would joke. You hear my fourth graders and they say I moved here, Mr Times, and then I moved here and then I checkmate it, whereas in my, let's say, a year later, my fifth graders may say I moved there and then they moved here, and then I moved here and then I checkmate it, then I checkmate it. One is a monologue, the other is a dialogue, so that getting them to recognize the other on the chess board is very important. One of the erroneous mistakes is rating right. Because a person has a high rating doesn't mean that you should lose a game And just making them responsible like no. I mean. So how strong really is an 1800? or how strong really is a 1400, right? Not merely confirming but challenging some of your notions And just the idea that you have to work hard to be a chess player. Right, and your opponent's the second to bow and surrender to you. So making them honest about the type of work that they need to evolve right. It's not based on that from town alone, you really have to work to be a strong chess player.

Neal: 36:16

Yeah, now what about the whole thing with tactics? Because one of the things that's out there I'm sure you've heard this, you see it online, i just hear it anecdotally is well, until your 1800, just tactics. The only thing you should study is tactics. Just do tactics. Don't worry about openings and don't worry about anything else. Like, just do tactics. What's your take on that?

Jerald: 36:36

I think there's many paths to becoming a strong player, right? I mean, i think it's really based on style and strength. For example, if you can win chess games with the French defense, you know how that's long-term thinking and understanding structures, willingness to take the bad bishop that the French players often do. So am I gonna tell that player to just study tactics? right, that player is a strategic mastermind. So I don't think there is one path to excellence. I think there are varied paths to excellence. But yeah, yeah, i mean, at the end of the day, is that that's somewhere along the way you're developed, without spending base on opening theory, but understanding tactical thinking. Let me just I had a recent revelation about that, because often when we think of tactics, we think of either winning material or perhaps threatening the king and so forth. But we should look at tactics not as a way of complicating the position, sometimes as a way of simplifying the positions. Now, tactics only occur for one reason because you have a superior position and you have some edge in the position, meaning, if you do not have that edge, that tactic can be refuted, right? So if you look at Carlson, for example, he doesn't necessarily use tactics to gain material, which sometimes he does, of course, but he also uses tactics to trade off into a better end game, right? So tactics are not always moving to complications. They're often moving to simplification to achieve a certain results, right? So, yes, pen is yours for us, i mean, yes, we need to know the methods of these tactics, but you're going to find that strong players, they use it to enhance their positional play. That's where I'm really trying to get. It is, tactics is the end result of a often of a superior position.

Neal: 38:29

Yeah, and a tactical move doesn't always have to be about immediacy, like, ok, this wins a pawn. It could lead to a superior position where you grind out a win in an end game. something like that. Correct. Correct For adult improvers who say have limited time. you know, for whatever reason they have a full-time job, they have three kids under the age of 10. You know, gerald, i only have a half hour data study. you know something like that. If adults in that situation have limited study time, what would you suggest is the best way for them to handle that?

Jerald: 39:01

That's a great question. I mean again, there's no magic bullet. I don't believe in magic bullets, i don't believe in magic formulas. But I will say that first find your strengths. Like what do you excel at? By the way, by definition, the strength is a repeatable act that I do well. For example, if I can draw one beautiful painting, that doesn't make me a Picasso, right, but if I can draw many beautiful paintings, it's when it becomes repeatable, it becomes a strength. So if you are an attacking player, right, you should use that limited amount of time to increase your strengths. As they say in the strengths movement, we manage our weaknesses but we accelerate our strengths. So, whatever type of player you are whatever I mean, for example, strategic player, positional player you favorite end games, you go to opening preps and you can get a superior position and so forth. Right, whatever your strengths are, first identify that and then use that limited time to enhance your ability. But also, we cannot ignore the weaknesses, meaning, if I'm horrible at opening prep but good at the end game, spend some time incorrectly. Now, the theory is that if we're going to evolve as players, we can't just correct our weaknesses. For example, talcantus, wake up one day and show the world. You know, i'm really a great defensive player, because if he tries to show us that he's a great defensive player, he would never be Talcantus. And likewise the Petrosian wants to become, you know, overnight, this great attacking player, when we know that he's an incredible pro-plastic and defensive player. That's where his strengths lie, and so we have to manage our weaknesses, meaning that Petrosian has to learn when to take the initiatives at a certain point, but that's not where his strengths are really based on, and the inverse can be said about Talcantus. So, limited time, identify your strengths, manage your weaknesses, and I think perhaps that is a path, but okay, try to find a little bit more time to be a better player at the end.

Neal: 41:08

So a lot of it with that limited time. You really have to have a full assessment and understanding of exactly what you need to work on, and I'm going to say I'm going to study this, this, this. It has to be relevant to your own specific needs, not some generalized sort of cookie cutter study plan. Agreed, agreed, all right. So I want to change gears a little bit And I want to talk about something that's very important. Some people listening probably know about this, some may not, and for those who don't, i think it's something that they should be aware of. It's something I feel it's important for us to talk about, and that's your lawsuit against the Success Academy. For those who may not be aware, i was just hoping you could kind of explain this from the beginning what happened and where it's at now, because, again, i think it's something important that people should be aware of. Who may not be?

Jerald: 42:00

All right. So in 2020, i was dismissed, terminated by Success Academy. I filed a complaint with the EDOC slash New York State Division of Human Rights on retaliatory slash discriminatory practices within the company. After about 18 months, the New York State Division of Human Rights found probable cause of retaliation and they found probable cause of discrimination. We left the lower court, we left the New York State Division of Human Rights. They actually have. It is a court, it is a settlement court and we decided to file federal charges. They were filed on April 18, 2023. By the way, we see this as a form of impact litigation. We say impact litigation meaning litigation for societal change. We will argue via the deposition and we will argue in federal court that the company was taking state money, but they held no internal competitions in black and brown communities, meaning they held these chess competitions in white communities. A teacher complained about racial discrimination and that teacher was dismissed from his building and eventually maneuvered out of the company. Another one of the charges is that an African American, with a PhD in physics, by the way, who was also a chess master, was given an invasive background check. That is, white out, of course, were not given. We will argue that if you're taking state money, you bought full tournaments in black and brown communities. If a teacher complains about racial discrimination, they ought not to be removed from their building and eventually released from the company. That background check should be equitable, meaning that not based on race. But if I give you background check, i just want to make sure you are who you are and that you are safe around young people. These are the things that we're going to bring up and we're going to argue in the federal court. It has been filed. We're going to go through. There are many steps. The first step is kind of a settlement hearing slash. Then we go through what they call discovery process. They ask me for my information, we ask them for their information. After the discovery process, you go through a deposition, meaning that both one side gets to ask me the questions can I demonstrate what I said? and the complaints of the federal court. After the depositions are done, then the judge decides whether or not it goes to trial. If it goes to trial, it will be decided by, as well as yours and so forth. I will say that not necessarily the federal court, but the New York State Division of Human Rights. they are now hosting tournaments in black and brown communities. I think, irrespective of the outcome of the case, that it will have some positive changes in terms of how they treat professionals black and brown professionals and where they host their tournaments. So I do think that it will bring some positive changes to a company that is doing some good in other ways, but they must be challenging.

Neal: 45:28

Okay, I mean it's a shame you had to go through that and I wish you the best with this. You'll keep us posted. Maybe at some point we'll have you back on and we can talk about it.

Jerald: 45:39

And thanks for letting me share a nail as well.

Neal: 45:41

Yeah, oh, of course, let's kind of change gears. Let's move on to something positive. I want to talk about chess across borders, which is your organization to bring chess to communities across the world. But I was hoping you could be a little more specific, like what exactly do you do? What's your mission? Tell us all about chess across borders.

Jerald: 46:01

Eventually, i want to create a digital platform for communities of color, meaning that often when we get the content and chess, they are the top 10 players in the world. But they're great narratives of communities of color. For example, you know Maurice Ashley. not only did he become the first African-American chess master, but he also became a great commentator for the game and he was a great coach. There's an up-and-coming, jessica Hayes. She's trying to become the first African-American woman to achieve the master title. By the way, she's the highest rated player. previous to her was Darian Robinson, i believe, at 2129. Jessica reached 2130, so she needs about 70 points to get the master's title. There's no African-American born in the United States that achieved the grand master title. Kasakorli possibly could be the first one's national master, kasakorli whereas to GM norms. So these narratives, these stories, i want to tell that in various ways. I just became the coach of Howard University's chess team. They played in the collegiate championships. They placed eighth in the collegiate championships in HBCUs, right, but they are now entering into the mainstream of the chess world. So their stories have to be told and the push to get them to compete in the Pan-American game slash intercollegiate tournament is all part of these initiatives So that's where I'm going One to promote, to tell narratives and so forth and to give this a broader view of what's happening in the game of chess. Chess is international, as it's international language in many ways.

Neal: 47:54

Yeah, and this chess boom that we're experiencing now is just tremendous. You had it from the pandemic and you had it from the Queen's Gambit and now from online chess. It's just amazing how it's exploded Now, as you know, i run a local chess club here and my biggest fear I apologize to longtime fans of the podcast because I've given this speech about five times but too bad, so sad deal with it. Anyway, i was worried that the pandemic online chess, like that's going to be the new thing and no one's going to show up in person, and I was completely wrong. It's almost like a sociological analysis, right, it's almost like a Malcolm Gladwell type of chapter where it actually increased over the board chess because people got into it, they started playing online and they realized you know what this isn't enough. It's just not the same, and I'll argue that all day. You know online chess and in-person chess it's just not the same. And so I had a ton of people come to the club interested in playing, just because they wanted more and they weren't getting enough looking at a computer screen. So it's fantastic. And then, of course, the Queen's Gambit is about tournament chess. You know, the Queen's Gambit just isn't so much about chess and the story of you know what? Beth Harmon that's the character's name, or something like that. It's not just about, it's about playing in tournaments. So people forget that the Queen's Gambit is not so much about chess, it's about tournament chess. So people wanted a part of that And I just think it's amazing that it actually increased over the board chess.

Jerald: 49:31

Yeah, right, i mean, we know that chesscom, geometrically, i think they tripled their membership from 400,000 to 1.2 million during the pandemic and this, the outcoring of that, people will be getting to recognize the beauty of the game, the power of the game, and it is, you know, when. Again, one of the most underestimated or devalued aspects is the social impact of the game, with how it brings various people together. Right, since the generation between young and old is cross gender, between men and women. The Queen's Gambit is about the rise of a woman. Chess player is cross cultural meaning. Various social classes and groups all get together to play the game And so it's potential market growth is huge. I mean people beginning to recognize potential market growth, the fact that we have 600 million people playing chess throughout the world And now they want to sit down at its tournament and play these long chess games Absolutely beautiful. But in part, the gift of the pandemic is that people got a chance to slow down and see the view.

Neal: 50:40

Yeah, and let me end with this, what I tell people who are getting into tournaments, like they'll email me I want to play at your club and I'm kind of a beginner and I'm just, you know, jump on in, come on in, the water's fine, half the club is unreaded, or newer players Just do it. Because some people get this mindset, i'm just wondering if you agree where? well, i don't want to play in a tournament until I'm quote, unquote ready, you know, until I study first, because I want to do really well And I'm like it just doesn't work that way. You get better at playing in tournaments by playing in tournaments. You just have to jump in, fall on your face a little bit, lose games. That's the only way. But they think they can hide behind like a study plan and then jump in and they're going to be 2000. Like, do you agree? The best way is just to jump in the learning ground is the battleground.

Jerald: 51:27

The battleground is the learning ground. Right, that is the way that you learn. A chess is two things is not merely the accumulation of knowledge, but also the amount of worries that you count as right. There is no comp. There's nothing like. You can't substitute water or food, nor can you substitute competition. For a chess player. You actually have to play stronger opponents to become a better chess player, irrespective of how much books you read.

Neal: 51:51

Yeah, i'm going to steal that. The learning ground, the battleground is the learning ground. I'm going to stick that right here. I like it So, gerald Times, thank you so much. Fascinating conversation. Really appreciate you coming on the podcast today. Thank you.

Jerald: 52:05

And Neil thanks for the invitation.

Neal: 52:07

Yeah, we'll definitely have you back on And for those of you listening at home, as always, we really appreciate it And I hope you win your next game. Have a great day, everyone.