Danny Rensch Talks 'Dark Squares': Cults, Mental Health, Hans Niemann, & More

By now you've probably heard that Chess.com Chief Chess Officer Danny Rensch just released his new memoir, Dark Squares: How Chess Saved My Life. He insists: "This is not a chess book." And indeed, well more than half of the material deals with his abusive upbringing by a cult leader.

Danny had almost no autonomy to question the teachings of its figurehead. Often, he went hungry; he could be scolded for merely asking to go to McDonald's. He was passed around from family to family, with his surname changing with the seasons. But then he turned the tables: with his chess success first being used as a prop to give the cult leader more clout, Danny eventually used the game to escape Tonto Village in Arizona and go on to lead the biggest chess company in history.

Chess.com caught up with Danny for an in-depth and personal interview to hear more about his recollection of these painful memories, how he moved on, and where he is today.

Chess.com: Well, it's my pleasure to be joined by International Master Danny Rensch, my longtime friend, my boss for a long time, and his new memoir, Dark Squares: How Chess Saved My Life, will come out by the time that you hear this interview. Danny, thanks for joining.

DR: Thanks for having me, man.

Chess.com: We've got so much to talk about not just because of our personal history, but because of how much I learned now that I've spent dozens of late nights with you having all kinds of what I consider deep conversations, and after reading your book I realized I only knew about ten percent of the real you. This book is, in a word, revelatory, but let's start out with the title. How did chess save your life?

DR: It took some perspective to recognize how chess saved my life, but with time and with awareness of what it was that I was raised in, it took me many years to even acknowledge the group for being a cult, let alone having cultish tendencies. And then years of traveling the world and developing relationships and sort of having the seeds planted of different views and different things that could be in life and different ways of seeing things.

Chess ultimately gave me perspective in two very important ways. And in some ways it gave me the perspective of what could be outside of the collective. But it also gave me a lot of perspective about some of the good things that the communal living [provided] that I could take with me if I wanted to, given that there were a lot of things that happened when the community, the collective that I was raised in, began to fall apart. I think having perspective in more ways than one about both the good and the bad ultimately allowed me to rebuild and save my marriage, which ultimately I would say was first and foremost the most important thing to to keep life together. So I've said before, but I'm trying not to repeat an answer I just gave. And respectfully, I've had a few interviews where people have asked that.

But I will say this because I do think it's a good answer as well, which is that chess is education. And I think education is the most important thing for people in their worldview and their understanding of others. And ultimately, when you are educated, which is not just the academics, when you see other ways of thinking, other ways of being experienced, cultures, and you're able to take this with you, it has the power to transform your own perspective and your own life. And even though I didn't realize it as a young person, that chess was giving me an education, it was. And ultimately that education, for both the good and the bad, that I was raised in, helped to save my life and my family and put me on a different path.

And even though I didn't realize it as a young person, that chess was giving me an education, it was.

Chess.com: Yeah, and you mentioned cult and marriage. In fact, readers of your book might be surprised to learn that it's only after about 200 pages before even the first mention of Chess.com. Probably three quarters of this book is about you before the world knew you as Danny Rensch. There's so much about your childhood and frankly how messed up it was. Are you worried at all that the chess world will think differently of you or actually maybe are you looking forward to them knowing the real you for the first time?

DR: I'm looking forward to it. It's only a process I've been looking forward to in regards to the chess world, to be honest. There's been a lot of other big feelings, big things that I've reflected on. I won't lie that the last four years have been quite an ordeal.

I would say that it's hard to say that reviewing something is more difficult than the lived experience. But in some ways, when you're in a lived experience, you don't know any better, especially when you're a kid. And so you're doing the best you can to get the most out of your circumstances and dealing with the crazy stuff that comes with it every step of the way. But with time and with a different view, you look back and go, my God, that's really hard.

That's why I have anxiety. That's why I was depressed. That's why I get panic attacks, right? And so when I was looking at all of this through another lens, which wasn't just the work I had done on my own mental health for years, but through the idea of writing a book, it was incredibly difficult. But when it came to the chess world, one of the reasons I wrote the book was for the chess world because I had spent so many years living two different lives. And while I would say that it wasn't something I hid, it definitely wasn't something I'd led with, right? For a lot of reasons, right?

I had spent so many years living two different lives.

I think, first and foremost, because I was still making sense of it myself. Secondly, because it's not the easiest thing to start a conversation and say I was raised in a group who talked to a dead guy through a transmedium for years. And also that everything that came with that led to a really wild journey that in some ways got me here. That's not really like an easy thing to say for people, right? Because it's kind of crazy.

But now with it being out there, I'm looking forward to, if you want to say, my full authentic self being known. And it was a super important reason I did it, because whatever is next for chess and Chess.com or my place in it, I didn't want to continue going forward without being able to have all of me and all of the things that I feel make up for who I am, whether it's Chief Chess Officer or just husband of one, father of four, just all of the worlds being together in a way that I never had that opportunity before.

Maybe because it all went by so fast, maybe because I wasn't ready, maybe because I never had anyone give me the advice to write a book, I don't know. But I was committed to the idea of doing this in a really like just fully honest way for that reason, because I wanted the chess world to kind of know that this is a story, I guess. This is my story.

Chess.com: It was brutally honest. I'm going to ask you a question I don't think anybody's asked you. Which of the world's top 20 players do you think is going to be the first to read your book?

DR: That's a great question. That is a great question. I'd love to say Magnus, because he's about to have a baby, and he's got some time on his hands, and he should have some time on his hands at home supporting Ella, best to both Magnus and Ella. Hikaru's next, so maybe Magnus and Hikaru will give it a listen, given that.

Chess.com: Who really wants to know you, Danny?

DR: And the fact that they all travel so much and the fact that there's an audible available If they don't read the book, it's like, come on, guys, we've been doing this forever. So let's clip and ship this as a short by itself and tell them they better read the book. So hopefully, Magnus and Hikaru read it. But if you're making me pick one, I don't know, maybe Fabi? Maybe Fabi will read it first? We'll see, we'll see, I don't know.

Chess.com: We'll find out. Now you did mention that you got into chess because of the movie Searching for Bobby Fischer. So many kids got into the game in the 90s because of the movie. But specifically about the movie, Josh wanted to please everybody. He wanted to please his father and his coach played by Ben Kingsley. Did that remind you of how much you wanted to please your cult leader, your biological father, every member of the collective?

DR: Yes, that's a really accurate parallel to draw. I would say that, unlike the ending for Josh in terms of his father kind of coming to recognize, you know, what was the right and or wrong path forward in regards to what he wanted for his son, there were much different dynamics that I was dealing with in regards to the collective and the spiritual mission that was wrapped up in the idea of me becoming a great chess player. And then, of course, you know, the fact that I lost my relationship with my mom because of it, all of those things. Probably put us on a path where reconciliation without acknowledgement was not going to have the same ending.

I think all kids, to some degree, want to please their parents. There's many. I have that with my own kids. And you see that dynamic. Then in some unspoken ways and sometimes overtly spoken ways, kids sort of get kudos or they appreciate acknowledgement.

But as a parent, you have to be very careful to not reward the outcome more than the process. Because you don't want your kids thinking that their only value is achievement, and I deal with that all the time, and you want them to value the things that get you there, hard work, perseverance, self-reflection. So as a parent, I navigate that now. But at the same time, there's no way to change that kids are trying to figure out who they are by pushing and pulling and going up against the edges of these things, and it's your job as a healthy parent to kind of help guide them in terms of what you reward and acknowledge versus what you don't.

And so I think any kid, to some degree, probably has some level of, I'm really good at something. I love the attention that I'm getting from dad, whether it's Josh Waitzkin or Danny Rensch, right? I think it's up to the parent to then provide the healthy balance of, "Hey, you are not only this and/or this is good, but only because it's a reflection of all your hard work and because of these other things you do, right?" And that's a difficult thing. I guess you've unasked for parenting advice along with answering the question that there's there's 100 percent accurate parallels to draw there. Unfortunately, depending on what you're in, it's up for the parents to manage that in a healthy way. 

Chess.com: Good answer. Now, when you were in the collective, you guys had a school in Tonto Village (Northern Arizona), the Shelby School. You guys won a bunch of national titles and stuff. And it reminded me of the Title I schools I taught at in New York City. It is precisely because the kids I taught had nothing else to do that they could train with chess five days a week. It was actually a competitive advantage, their relative poverty. Did you also draw that parallel with modern day? You've worked with a lot of schools and you see this, but did the Shelby School have an advantage because it was in an area that didn't even have reliable internet access?

DR: 100 percent, 100 percent. It was a unique situation, right, not only did they have the unique advantage of being disadvantaged, meaning there was nothing else to do, not a lot of other options, but also you had someone who was in charge of people's lives in a high-demand, high-control group cult, depending on the different variations of how people refer to these things.

There's no denying that the mission that people were bought in on, combined with the influence and power of the leaders, in particular Steven Kamp, who really loved chess, created a very special opportunity for this group of kids to get very good at chess very, very fast. And there's absolutely no denying that what we did in a vacuum, in a very short window, that three-to-five year window was unprecedented.

And yeah, that's one of the weird things in life where you look back and go, sometimes something that objectively now you would say was not OK, ended up being a good thing for other reasons and/or helped create something kind of fascinating. For sure, we all were lucky, for those of us who love chess to have that opportunity, even if ultimately there were other things that came with that in the long run. 

For sure, we all were lucky, for those of us who love chess to have that opportunity, even if ultimately there were other things that came with that in the long run.

Chess.com: Did any of those other Shelby team members go on to teach chess as a career or do you know for a fact that some of them are playing on Chess.com today? Are they still active in the game?

DR: You know, it's funny, I'm not in touch with all of them. I know that they all taught chess, or not all. I have different friends that I grew up with who continued into high school with me. [FM] Pieta Garrett was one that became, he was probably the second-best player to come from that core group of kids in the collective. Pete was what we called him, even though his name is Pieta. Pee-a-tah, but his name was, we called him Pete.

He was the second-best player on the team. He and I were a part of winning the couple of high school national championships. I actually don't know what he's up to now. He and I do not stay in touch. I know he taught chess for a while. I have a younger brother, Tiger, who got to about 1900 level and taught chess in schools. And there were some others that kind of dabbled in and out of teaching chess. Mark, Mark Moore, Gary Moore's son also, was very active teaching in schools and a very good teacher, very good at connecting with kids.

But I guess it's funny, because I would say that I write in the book and have talked about the game became both mentor and tormentor for me because of what happened with my family and all those relationships, even though none of them had the exact same experience and they weren't taken from their parents in the same way. I would say that because of the pressure that was on us and because of the weird ways that the collective ultimately imploded on itself, I would bet that each of them probably has some version of how they lost their love and/or chess became hard after those magical early years where we were achieving something incredible that it was probably hard to continue to stick with it.

So I don't know. I actually don't know if they're active on Chess.com. I have admin access so I could probably find out if they are, but I'm not going to do that. But I do know that a lot of players that knew me and knew us in high school and junior high and played in and out, a lot of them are in and out of the chess community and some of them very active on Chess.com. Sometimes I play some of them like randomly, just blitz pairing. So I'm fascinated to see how people feel and what the reaction is to the book by those in the chess community who knew me and knew us growing up.

Chess.com: And for those who don't understand why you have all these half brothers and such, you really do need to read the book because your chess life and your upbringing are constantly coexisting. And in fact, me and Danny, you know, we had similar upbringings. I'm a little bit older than you. You were closer to Nakamura in age, but just to give you some examples, we both played Supernationals 1 [Knoxville, TN, 1997]. Shelby, I think won the national title that year. I was the number-two seed in the high school. Let's not talk about the rest of my tournament! Now, Danny, you almost won high school nationals when you were 14—I was the chief TD in your section when, if it wasn't for a draw to (future GM) Irina Krush, you would have won!

DR: That was in Charlotte, that's right. My gosh, that's right.

Chess.com: And then just one more, in 2004, you beat [GM Alex] Lenderman to win the high school nationals, I believe. And I was coaching Lenderman at the time. So even my path with yours has been inextricably linked. I, for one, viewed those spring nationals as the highlight of my year. Did you also feel like everything built up to that spring national championship when you were a kid?

DR: For sure, and what's funny is I didn't think about it as whether it was the highlight of my year. But to hear you kind of say it back and to appreciate, regardless of the difficult circumstances, kind of the trauma of the collective and all the crazy, as you said, crazy shit that's in the book that people should read, regardless of that, when it came to why we were committed to the idea of playing great chess, there was no event that sort of brought that all together or was the climax better than the national championships, right? As an elementary player and the junior high and then high school, like those events were just special because especially once we got on the road and we were with our teammates and we weren't, you know, dealing with whatever was going on at home, there was something magical about those experiences, right? You're literally trying to win a national championship and place your name in the record books regardless of anything else going on.

[Ed: We weren't able to source those childhood games against Krush or Lenderman, so we're going to add another game Danny played against a future-GM here, a name Chess.com fans are likely to know.]

And so, yeah, those events were special, and obviously we had a decent amount of success. What's funny is when you're in it, all you remember is the games you lose. And that's where every chess player is kind of the same because I appreciate you reminding me, I almost won high school nationals as a junior high player. But I remember failing. I remember that that tournament didn't go well and that I came home with all of this like, I was so close. So it's just funny chess players focus on things that don't go well way more than they do things that go well. But yeah, I can say I have almost nothing but fond memories of playing in those events.

 I can say I have almost nothing but fond memories of playing in those events.

Chess.com: Well, just to draw one more comparison, you got into the game because of a spring nationals that Josh Waitzkin played and later made into a movie. And then you once had a spring nationals where you drew in the last round, which by the way, is what happened in real life—Josh did not win in the final round. He made a draw. You finished one [nationals] 6.5/7. You were a little disappointed that you didn't win that game. But, you know, now you've got this memoir. Who knows? Maybe it could become a movie. Are you prepared to maybe be the next Josh Waitzkin? If your story blows up as much as we think it might and inspire literally tens of thousands of kids like Josh did.

DR: That's funny. I mean, there will only be one Josh Waitzkin, only one Searching for Bobby Fischer. That said, I appreciate the question. We've actually, we've had a lot of interest for both movies and potential miniseries and those things. And so we'll see.

I mean, there will only be one Josh Waitzkin, only one Searching for Bobby Fischer.

I'm not sure whether, when we will be ready. This has been a really wild few years. I spent so much, I put so much effort in and I was very thoughtful in terms of how the characters came across, even those who would be objective bad guys, like my goal to share this story with kindness and to be thoughtful despite really crazy stuff. I wouldn't want that ruined in a movie. So I've kind of made the commitment to myself that if and when the time comes for a movie or something bigger for the book that I would want to be involved in it.

Right now I'm involved at Chess.com. I'm pretty busy with you and the chess world is freaking crazy, right, so I'm saying that it is true we have a lot of interest in movies and series and, who knows, that could be really fun. And if there's a really great way to tell this story that inspires others on an even bigger scale than a book—because we know most people watch things, they don't read things, that's just the truth—then I am open to that idea. But I'll have to have some say so because I don't want any characters like my mom or anybody else ruined. And there will only be one Josh Waitzkin always of course. But anyway go ahead.

Chess.com: OK, well, I'm not going to ask you the stock question of: "Who you want to play you?" Obviously, we know it's Chris Helmsworth with Jude Law being your safety! But I have to ask you, you just mentioned this in passing in the book. How close were you to actually being named Rooker Rensch?

DR: I, you know, it's, my God, you are the first person to ask me that. You, you, so, yeah.

Chesscom: Well, Rooker, you're a chess player.

DR: I don't know because I wasn't in charge of my own life. Quick background: When I was taken to live with a new family early on, while changing my last name from Gordon to Wrench, real OG members of the chess community will know that the first couple years where I was an All-American chess player, I was Daniel, Danny Gordon, not Danny Rensch. Then my name changed. And so when they were changing my name, there was this idea of changing my first name. I don't know. We'd have to ask people who probably don't want to do interviews on how close they were to changing my first name. But Rooker would have fit in well with Levy Rozman. Like "The Rooker," I don't even know. What a world that would have been if my first name was changed. Thank God. Thank God it wasn't.

Chess.com: Somebody is probably going to YouTube right now to reserve the channel "Rooker Rensch" as a troll channel. Now, you described in the book your very complicated nature of the man (future GM) Igor Ivanov, one of your most important coaches, maybe the most important in your childhood. He was not the perfect person by any means, but we can't escape the fact that he had a large impact on your chess. I've got a funny Igor Ivanov story where he wrote a poem about rhyming butterflies during a tournament game he played against me. But I want to hear what is the memory you draw on the most to remember him fondly because he is a person that was full of very graphic stories? So maybe you could think of a good one for us?

DR: You know, to remember Igor fondly, think of the times in the double-wide trailer that we, meaning the collective we, Steven Kamp [the leader of the cult] bought for him when he moved to the community to be the chess coach. When he was, like rare moments where you would catch him sort of at peace and happy with whatever the decisions were that got him here. I say this as like he was playing the piano and singing loudly. 

And again those who do get the audio version of my book they will hear me singing in Igor's voice which, he's the only voice I did in my book. Everyone else I maintained, while I may have changed tone. But Igor I imitated and did my best so I can't wait to hear what you think about it when you hear that Mike.

But you know he was a larger-than-life character, right? Everyone would say that, that he was just, he presented even bigger than he was. He was a big guy, but he also presented even bigger than he was in the way he carried himself. And when he was in a good mood, his smile was infectious. And so for me, those moments of remembering him just kind of enjoying that we were in the village together doing some chess and he's drunk and we're hanging out and he's playing "Jesus Christ Superstar" and singing every word to every song. And that is like the Igor I remember, where we were, we were having fun.

And I could tell a lot of other stories, but I will leave that at that. Because that was a probably unique—kids in the village got to see that side of Igor. I would almost imagine like, imagine like a one-man band. Like he was trying to put on a show, like singing and playing the piano, like he was just jovial in a way that that I don't think the rest of the world got to see so much.

Chess.com: Yeah, we miss people like him. Now we have something else in common after Igor. We actually shared the same chess coach, FIDE Master Will Wharton, who moved from North Carolina back to his native Arizona. And he worked with you in your late teenage years. Now to me, Will represented, he taught me about a non-conformist lifestyle, about lots of different cuisines and bands. And he came to my house with no shoes on, but he may have actually been a voice of, I don't know, normalcy in your life. We had very different upbringings, but what did Will teach you about chess or about life?

DR: Well, shout out to Will. Will was a very calming presence. And I think his personality was, as you said, the yin and the yang. He was a bit of an opposite type of just presence and energy that we had dealt with. Very different than Igor. I don't even know if Will ever drank. Will was not an alcoholic nor abusive. I don't know that I've ever heard Will say an unkind word about anything, not even any being, anything. Will is just, he was a very, very gentle, a gentle presence for us.

As far as the chess goes, we worked a lot on openings with Will. At the time, you know, we were strong players, speaking for me and Pieta both. We probably spent the most time with Will. And we were strong enough where like, you know, so many people spend too much time on openings. That's right. I'm calling out all the chess community who's watching this because they feel like it's something they can control when in reality they should be working on endgames or pattern recognition.

We were good enough by the time Will came into our life. I mean, I was already almost 2400. I might have even been a stronger player than Will in some ways already. Pieta wasn't too far behind me. And so when you get to that level, focusing on openings actually makes sense, right? Because you're good enough to convert. And so I remember spending a lot of time with Will. I know that he spent a ton of time on the French Poisoned Pawn variation with Pieta. So that was the chess. But as far as the presence goes, he was just a very calm person.

And unfortunately, those adolescent 16, 17 years old years of my life were very trimmed down in the book. I had a lot of things to fit in. So Will was actually in the original manuscript, but didn't make the final cut. We kind of cut down a lot of that stuff. So shout out to Will and the Fitch Academy team in those years.

Chess.com: Yeah, Will's a great guy and a correction, he did binge spicy food. So he did have a weakness, but we all have one.

This gets talked about this a lot in your book and your major ear issues. And do you feel like now maybe that they're a blessing in disguise because they caused you to step back from the tournament scene and focus a little bit more on where the chess ecosystem was going and how chess was going to have a role on the internet? Do you look back now as the ear issues being something that actually helped make you the career that you've been so successful at today?

DR: Yeah, I don't think there's any other way to view it, right? And it's certainly maybe not a healthier one because you are where you are. So the healthiest thing you can do is choose to believe that everything that happened was the best thing that could have happened. That is my mindset and one that I've really embraced where and wherever possible.

That said, you know, it was obviously devastating at the time to really kind of hit the wall and recognize that there was just no world where my playing career could continue as it was. But yeah, I didn't realize that that's what was happening. But in hindsight, I had been put on a path, or I had fallen into a lane where I had no choice but to spend more time online. And I was literally bedridden on Vicodin, you know, which led to some other issues as well in hindsight. Knowing that I was I was doped up and in and out of being under the knife and surgery for basically two years.

And yeah, in hindsight, I was being educated again on where the world was going and what the Internet could do for chess and also learned that I had missed out on the domain name Chess.com. So I was doing everything I could to buy competitors for Chess.com, not knowing what was ahead that I would that I would ultimately meet my co-founders, Erik [Allebest] and Jay [Severson]. But yeah, I mean, it wasn't something I realized was happening, but in hindsight was absolutely the best possible thing that could have happened. And how weird that is, right?

Chess.com: OK, so during that time with all of your ear issues, you were buying this URL and that URL hoping that it'll become a home run. I did not do this prior to the interview, but if I go to chessface.com right now—your answer to chess and Facebook—what would I see?

DR: Honestly, I think you've probably seen empty domain hosting because I held on to them longer than I should have, even long after there were any dreams of being a Chess.com competitor. I was an equity holder and a co-founder, but I held on to them just in case. At some point I realized that was just bleeding Go Daddy renewal money, just over and over again, and at some point I let them go.

You know, as I shared, I sold the valuable one back to Erik. If you go to chesscoaching.com, you are rerouted to Chess.com/coaches. [Ed: You are indeed rerouted, but it is back to Chess.com's home page.] But I'm pretty sure I let go of all the rest of them, including some ones that are good, if anyone's looking for them. I think I also had chessstars.com with a "z". Anyway, there were interesting ones, but I ended up just being like, they're all gone. I pulled the Band-Aid off.

Chess.com: I know this story well, but when you first met Erik and Jay, they bought Chess.com mostly for the social aspects. They didn't view actual chess games as being really inherent to the site. When you heard this, obviously, coming from the chess world, what was your reaction?

DR: I mean, on the one hand, I understood. Because I think that for so many people, for all of us, to some degree, we can kind of only see what's possible based on what we've seen other people do, right? It's very hard to be like a transformative thinker and see elements to be an alchemist when you really don't really know what's possible. So saying you wanted to be the Myspace of chess wasn't a bad thing, right? Myspace was freaking huge, right? Everyone wanted to be friends with Tom, right? So they were kind of acknowledging that there was a very large community, even though later it became the butt of every joke about, they just thought it was the Myspace of chess.

 ... they just thought it was the Myspace of chess.

So I understood what they wanted. At the same time, again, I had a really unique experience because I was a failed chess professional, child prodigy, dealing with all my own self-shame issues wrapped around the fact that there was no serious chess online. There was no real way for a—the word "creator" just came out of my mouth, Mike. It didn't exist then, let alone like "influencer," right? So I couldn't, we couldn't say the thing into being that we didn't understand, but I knew that there were so many more ways to view what chess could be online than what they were thinking, right?

The social network for a global community. OK, that's very cool. But for the chess professionals who lacked resources and lacked ways to reach large audiences, I was very loud and I said it in all the ways that they could listen. Luckily I didn't piss them off too much to completely get rid of me. But yeah, I saw that it was limited even if I was crazy to see it was limited because I couldn't speak into existence what I didn't know. But I knew. I knew there was something there and we immediately came together at the very least where we could, in our ideals, which is we both, we all wanted something different for chess, right? And so from that perspective, our ideals were immediately aligned even if we didn't fully agree on every one of the priorities that were going to get us there.

Chess.com: Now, do you think that growing up poor and in a communist-like theory of property ownership gave you extra motivation to be both an early entrepreneur and to be financially successful later in life?

DR: I don't know. I don't know that that was something that drove me. Honestly, because, you know, as people will see when they read the book, and I'm wondering whether you were surprised by this or not, but I was still living in the collective really right up until Covid hit. And even there's a very complicated story of why and what had happened over the years that would allow me to do such a thing. And we can get into that.

But I would say that I was very happy living in a cabin in Tonto Village, Arizona with my wife and four kids, making just around $100,000 a year, which was more than enough that I would ever need. And the idea that we would, even as the collective dispersed or imploded and fell apart, that we would be there for the people who we grew up with to some degree, I was still trying to save the baby within the bathwater. I was still trying to pull the good versus the bad. And I didn't view any aspect of what I was doing within the chess world as, like, a financially-driven outcome.

I was still living in the collective really right up until Covid hit. 

You know, I thought chess deserved better. I thought that chess, and still believe that chess, is the best game in the world and is fantastic for people for more reasons than I can even list. And I was so excited at every benchmark we hit when we developed a new feature like Puzzle Rush or when we saw someone like Levy Rozman or Hikaru, you know, becoming a star. But I really mean that. There was no financially-driven motivations for us. And what happened overnight during the pandemic and then the "Queen's Gambit" and the things to this day has been its own level of just insane to even consider. It wasn't what we thought was going to happen. And it wasn't something that was driving me, honestly.

Chess.com: OK. I can't help but draw parallels, though, with the Danny that I knew and the Danny that I just learned about from reading the book. And one thing I was thinking about is there's much talk of food in the book, or more specifically lack thereof. You ate a ton of McDonald's and Taco Bell because of the price point. And you also did a lot of swimming to get away from your stresses in the world. You were able to hold your breath for four minutes. Now I know you're really into CrossFit, which weirdly didn't make a single page of the book. But it feels to me like CrossFit is a natural reaction to both those things. You can't swim as much, so it's a de-stressor without going underwater and hurting your ears. But it's also reaction to how unhealthily you ate while you were a kid. Is this an actual parallel you can agree with?

DR: Yeah, I think probably true and also and I also I think exercise, whether it was CrossFit or something else, in hindsight would probably have been something that once I found I got really into. A lot of people know that CrossFit people they never stop talking about CrossFit so I'm super proud that it didn't make it in the book because I did not proselytize via the Church of CrossFit.

But yeah, in hindsight what I needed as a very type-A individual was a much healthier outlet than what I had, which again growing up, you know food was status. Food was the thing that you look for fulfillment. And then as I became an adult and different parts of the collective were no longer financially merged, and we had our own money, I probably wasn't taking very good care of myself or eating very well. And I say probably that's just the truth—I wasn't—and then when you add to that that I was going through a lot of very real depression and anxiety. Both in terms of reviewing my life but then losing my mom very quickly in the way that I did, I was not doing well.

And so not eating well, not exercising was a hundred percent the path that I was on. But it didn't mean whatever the thing is in me that is good, even if it came from traumatic reasons of being in survival, the part of me that is a very hardworking, very driven, very passionate individual, needed a healthier outlet than I had. And when I found CrossFit and when I found exercise, I'm not surprised in hindsight that the brain of Danny went all-in, you know what I mean? So yes, I definitely feel like It changed my life and probably was definitely the flip side of what was needed for me to be in a healthier spot.

Chess.com: Well, you mentioned yourself being type A, but actually in the book you call yourself OCD. And we've shared some hotel rooms before, Danny, where you actually take all of the papers in the hotel room and you put them immediately in a drawer. By the way, I've adopted this. I think it's genius.

DR: Thanks for outing me on that, yes!

Chess.com: I'm telling you I've learned from you. I do it now. But now comes the question that all chess players want to know when you sit down: Do you turn your knights facing each other, facing outward, or facing the opponent, because this is what everybody has to know?

DR: It's funny, I face them to the right, both to the right. I go like this, and I don't know why. I think I had this sort of linear way that my OCD came about. Brain space is the most valuable thing for me. So not even how it's shaped, but brain space. And so was like white on the right, and I changed my knights, whether I'm Black or White.

I mean, to the hotel room, I think the reason I do it, even as my OCD lessened with time and through the work I did on myself, I don't like being in spaces where there are unnecessary things to look at, to read, consider. Like my brain is like, I don't have the space for this, right? And so part of me goes into a hotel room and I take away everything that is the crap they're putting on us and I stack it and I put it in a drawer and it's out of our brain for the next week, right? You've seen me do that. And I think that maybe the idea of turning my knights to the right is the same way. I'm just trying to free up brain space as quickly as I can.

Chess.com: That makes sense. Now we would be remiss if we did not mention your wife, Shauna, who's in the book a lot. She turned your life around. You also showed a lot of chutzpah by picking her over the cult's pick. They wanted you to be with somebody else. They'd actually predetermined that [you marry someone else] and you went against their wishes. You chose true love, but your rating also shot up when you chose Shauna. Do you think that she improved your chess? Basically what I'm asking is, do you think chess players have a muse?

DR: That's interesting. I think chess players need things and/or have things, they should look for things that calm their brain and allow them to focus on what they can control versus being scattered in ways where I think the best chess players all have a little bit of short-term memory loss. They don't beat themselves up for mistakes. They focus on the moment, they are present and mindful. And they are driven and, like, when you talk to a guy like Magnus you see like such a healthy individual where his ability to be present, to focus on the moment, to not let his nerves get the best of him because nothing outside of his control is within his brain space, that is where I think a lot of elite athletes would call "the zone" whatever that is. Your ability to focus and execute at an incredibly high level whereas like when you've got baggage and you've got damage it's hard to forget your mistakes or to be in the moment.

And so for whatever that was with Shauna, even though we got together very young, she was 100 percent, you know, a muse for me, and did everything that brought me everything I needed in regards to allowing me at least for a very short time to forget my demons. Obviously, as I share in the book, my demons would surface a lot in our marriage and ultimately would take a lot of work to get through things. And she stuck by me and it helped me and in more ways than I can recount. Yes, I think that chess players benefit from things that allow them to focus on what matters. And Shauna definitely did that for me.

I think that chess players benefit from things that allow them to focus on what matters. And Shauna definitely did that for me.

Chess.com: As we already mentioned, about three-quarters of the book is about your childhood. It's not until page 260 that the real in-depth discussion of your time at Chess.com begins. And I'm just curious if you enjoyed writing more about your childhood, which involved a lot of digging up a lot of deep dark memories, or did you enjoy more writing about your time at Chess.com?

DR: The initial manuscript we submitted to Hachette (the publisher) was 230,000 words. For those who don't know what that means, that is a "Lord of the Rings" trilogy. Three books, like I'm not kidding. So take that in for a second. The book that people are reading, the book that you read, Mike, is about 120,000 words. So we cut more than 100,000 words in terms of what was written.

There was a lot more about my time at Chess.com. There was even a lot more about the more recent years in terms of where we see the game going and our relationship with the expectations of investors and media. And I was describing as best I could, like how I feel about that and kind of being careful what you ask for. What is the Chinese proverb? "May you live in interesting times and all your wishes come true." Right. The part of me that has felt just so overwhelmed and scared about what we're doing with the game. So a lot of that was in there. And we, obviously I, think that comes through a little bit, but we cut a ton of that.

We also cut the high school years as I said with Will Wharton. We also cut some, just to be real, some of the darker, more traumatic stuff with my dad and Steven Kamp. Those who might say that my dad and Steven Kamp come across as a bit of the bad guys, that actually wasn't necessarily my view. I think everything in the book is the truth. But I'm also not there to get into like every detail that I didn't feel was necessary to help describe what mattered to my being, and my heart on my journey, right?

So I'm telling you this, like there was a lot there and maybe someday if the book is a hit, people will get the extended edition. Where's the 230,000 words? And so there may be more that is shared. I'll also just use that question to expand a little bit on the collective for those who want to know. I think that for many people who grew up in the circumstances that I did and have their own story to share.

My book is not the closing of a chapter. It's the beginning of a new conversation. And I expect there's going to be a lot of things that come out of this book. And there are different people with different experiences. And I hope that if in some way my going first and being willing to name it for what it was, to name the abuse that happened and name the collective for what it was, may provide some sort of help or solace or courage for those who want to tell their story.

 My book is not the closing of a chapter. It's the beginning of a new conversation. 

But their story is not mine. So there's a lot there. There's also a lot that already comes from the book. I think we did a good job of keeping to the path of what ultimately helped us understand my story as it related to the building of Chess.com. But for those who want that, maybe Erik and I will write a book called "Light Squares" together. Maybe we'll do a sequel and share all the other stuff about Chess.com that wasn't in there for those who want that.

Chess.com: Great. Now moving on a little bit to the final chapters where you talk about cheating scandals, before we get to The Cheating Scandal in capital letters. I can say that I've seen you deal with kid cheaters a lot because we've been on the same emails together from a lot of kids that have been accused over the years, especially with my time at ChessKid. And I've seen you write some of the most perfectly-worded, most emotionally-understanding letters to parents. And I'm wondering if the collective taught you that sort of empathy or were they even a hindrance and you had to overcome their teachings to learn that sort of emotional intelligence?

DR: I think it was actually a little bit of both. As I share in the book, what I got from the collective, I think, was I built muscles at an early age to be thoughtful in my communication, to tell my truth, right? To express in an articulate manner that people could listen to when you are in really heavy dynamics of like a Lord of the Flies type of scenario and you're like fighting for your life in a group. Where your expression of your feelings might actually help you look better or not based on what was going on. I learned how to deal with some heavy shit at a young age.

And my ability to express myself, tell the truth in an articulate manner, for sure influenced my later being. That said, I also think, and some empathy skills there too, it wasn't all just like, you know, heavy shit, like learning how to think about how other people feel was a big part of that collective dynamic when it was done well. Not every process was done well. "Process" is a word we used about the group discussions. Not every process went well, but there was a lot of interesting stuff there that I think could be said was good.

At the same time, I learned to sort of pound my chest and to like stand up on a podium and grab the conch, if you will, the Lord of the Flies reference, and speak my truth in a way that I think also in my early years hurt me and was seen as arrogance and would have me sort of dealing with tough stuff by trying to overwhelm someone with my expression versus create space for them to share their view. And when you create a space for understanding, whether it's with a parent who's dealing with a really tough conversation about their kid cheating or even with the kid, I found with time how much more powerful communicating with tact versus being right was the goal.

I found with time how much more powerful communicating with tact versus being right was the goal.

Communicating with tact is an appreciation for someone's ability to hear what you're saying and with an understanding and a space for them to share back, versus "I'm right and you gotta do what I say" kind of thing. And even in a world of cheating, I think that people can learn from that.

And so I would say it both influenced and then it took me making some big mistakes to appreciate that my goal was actually to connect with someone and create space for them to respond. And that was the best way to get a confession and actually to do right by the situation versus being really right and holding a hard line. Now, there's going to be some who hear this and say, no, the fact that you did that allowed cheating to exist for too long. And I understand that there are views on that. But I stand by that we, especially when it comes to dealing with young people, have done the right thing by a community who's been learning how to deal with an overwhelming amount of technology, with AI and computers being better than humans. And we've done our best to kind of navigate that. So yeah, those are the skills I learned. And as you said, they've come across in email form at times. And yeah, there been a lot of explosive scandals behind the scenes. Not even the one you're about to ask the people know about.

Chess.com: Yeah, in fact, we learned a lot, not about the 2022 incident as much as the first time you caught GM Hans [Niemann] cheating and you went down the rabbit hole and explained in very particular terms your conversations with him were, again, you showed a lot of understanding and empathy. In hindsight, knowing what you know now, would you have been a little bit more stern and harsh and frankly, I don't know if "fatherly" is the right word with him, knowing what you know now.

DR: Yes, probably I would have. And I think that would have also been the best thing for Hans. That's not even me saying that from the perspective of throwing shade at Hans. I think that it is difficult when you're dealing with this stuff. In hindsight, I also potentially should have demanded to speak to Hans' dad or mom. Like honestly, I could have handled that situation maybe a little differently. It's an interesting balance of how you navigate that stuff, especially with a very mature, at least outward-facing individual like Hans, who was already streaming and doing a lot of stuff to be and or trying to build his own brand, right?

And so, I did the best I could with that situation. I probably would have handled some of the finer details a little bit differently to set up some different boundaries. That said, I think I still would have leaned kindness and trusting the individual to find their way and you have to kind of let everybody do that in life. And so I probably still would have leaned the way I did, but I could have handled some things, as I share in the book there, maybe a little bit more directly.

Chess.com: There's an hour conversation there. I'm gonna let readers read the book to hear all about it. Just a few more questions though. Is the brash Hans Niemann the real Hans Niemann or is it a character that he's playing do you think?

DR: That's a really good question for Hans. I don't know. I don't know. I think probably the answer to both is we are all things that we present, right? And we all have the potential to be both our own best and worst enemy. And I personally think that if handled appropriately and with respect and kindness and ethically, I don't think there's anything wrong with having a big personality and showing bravado.

And frankly I like that part of Hans, that he's willing to speak his mind and say some things that ruffle some feathers. I think the chess world could use more of that. And so I actually appreciate Hans's ability and willingness to speak his mind and I also empathize that he went to hell and back during the ride of the cheating scandal. That said, I will say that as someone who knows Hans better than Hans would like people to know, that I know Hans. That's the truth. There's undeniably parts of that that I feel are a front or a fake and actually not who he really is. And for whatever reasons that he wants to project certain parts of his of his bravado or things that he's continued to perpetuate, that's kind of up to him. But I don't think there's anything wrong with the big personality as long as it's fully honest and kind. And I think finding that balance is something that Hans will continue to do in his life.

I will say that as someone who knows Hans better than Hans would like people to know, that I know Hans. That's the truth.

Chess.com: And bringing all things back to today, do you have, maybe it's better to say, did you create the best chess job in the world?

DR: Maybe the most stressful chess job in the world. You've seen the gray hairs, Mike! You've known me dude. It's happening fast. It's happening fast here, man.

Chess.com: I know, not speaking to your hair, I know behind the scenes how hard you work and how stressful it is and I don't want any part of it.

DR: I am so grateful for my life and I feel fortunate to be in the position that I am to some degree. I will not lie that as you said, whatever it is, power and responsibility, whatever it is, people say that in a way that's like, dismissive or whatever, but the truth is if you really take the time to know someone and if you knew them also before things happened that they didn't ask for, it's really, really wild. So, yes, it is very stressful at times. But look at where the chess world has come and consider how good the game is for people. It's hard for me to have regrets about where we sit and what we've done.

Chess.com: What if I asked you to give it all up, but you become a 2800 overnight, what would you say?

DR: I think I'll stick right here.

Chess.com: OK, well, final question Danny. And you know, I've got to put in a movie reference to end things because that's how we roll when we talk together. You're now married with four kids. You're the honorary co-founder of a billion-dollar company, and you're arguably one of the most important stewards for the world's greatest game that ever existed. But in the beginning of the book, you talk about playing in darkened ponds that were actually septic tank dumping grounds. So to quote Shawshank Redemption: Did you crawl through a river of shit and come out clean on the other side?

DR: Man, you know it took a lot of being hosed down in the yard! You know we had to wash ourselves off and share baths in the collective. So eventually I guess I did I did shake the septic off of me and I miss the days of being able to run through a pile of shit and not care or know that it was a pile of shit. But that's what perspective does for you. So I love the reference— shout out to Shawshank Redemption. They don't make them like that anymore.

Chess.com: No, they don't. And hopefully you're not swimming in darkened pools anymore. I know you're not. You've done well by the chess community and you've been a great boss for 12 years. So anyway, for those people wondering what could we be talking about, you just have to read the book because, as I said, there's elements of your childhood, most of your childhood, I knew nothing about it, it is gripping and it's amazing to see how you've overcome a lot of that and the life you've built. So thank you, Danny, for joining me.

DR: Thank you, Mike.

Chess.com: Dark Squares: How Chess Saved My Life. It'll be available by the time you hear this interview, so go buy it now and we'll talk soon.