The Evaluation Bar, with WGM Jovana Erić

Good evening and welcome to the first installment of The Evaluation Bar, a blog series where I interview chess players in a relaxing environment. This was inspired by a whimsical blog I wrote two years ago, where I came up with 52 questions that I would like to ask a Grandmaster.

For this interview series, I have decided to adapt some of these questions, as well as create a few with the specific guest in mind. And with that out of the way, and without further ado, I would like to welcome my first guest, the wonderful WGM Jovana Erić to The Evaluation Bar!

Jovana Erić

Jovana Erić (@jolie92 on chess.com) is a Serbian chess player who holds the Woman Grandmaster (WGM) title, and is a certified FIDE Trainer (FT). She has participated in five European Championships and five Olympiads as a member of the Serbian national team. She is also the author of Chess Through My Eyes: Life Lessons Hidden in 64 Squares, along with two instructional guides: The Anatomy of Chess and Chess Mindset Journal.

Outside of chess, Jovana holds a master’s degree in biology from the University of Belgrade. I learnt all of this and more on Wikipedia, and as we know, only the most famous (and infamous) people have a Wikipedia page. I look forward to discovering which one she is.

Firstly, I have always been curious to know the why in every aspect of life, so I must ask, why did you begin playing chess?

This is something I often asked myself, especially after a bad tournament! Jokes aside, I really liked the game in the sense that I loved sitting down and thinking for a long time about moves or positions. I really enjoy intelligent stuff, but if it borders on being mechanical or overly theoretical, I’m not going to engage at all. This was a live process of engaging with the pieces and figuring out how the game works.

Still, chess is the best game you can learn, and I’m forever grateful that my family introduced me to it, as it helped my brain development tremendously. I also traveled a lot thanks to chess tournaments and visited places I’d probably never have thought of otherwise. Like in 2008, when I was 16 years old and went to Vung Tau in Vietnam. Epic trip, and so far the farthest place I’ve traveled to.

However, on the flip side, spending a fair share of my time playing competitively, meant that I found myself never enjoying it, because it broke the illusions I had about who people are and how I behave in such altered circumstances. Chess as a game and chess as a competition are two completely different things, and once you turn what you love into a competitive field, it distorts it. I’m much more of a light spirit and not a win at all costs type of person. I prefer different kinds of adventures more than chasing a win over someone on a wooden chessboard. Calm over storm, please.

I completely understand the feeling. When I was a baker, I wouldn't eat baked goods. Nowadays, devouring cakes and pastries is almost a hobby of mine! But I digress, I am curious to ask, what in particular was the main reason the illusion was broken for you?

Competitions revolve around winning, so the high that comes with it can become very addictive, which lends itself to people who already have addictive personalities. While on the other side, those who aren't as self-absorbed sometimes lose who they are when they stay in this competitive environment. In time, the experiences I had at chess tournaments highlighted to me that even champions are just regular people, with greater opportunities. 

I have an inkling that many people have felt the same as you and appreciate you sharing this. Now that I have asked the why, I would love to know the answer to a question that's plagued mankind for over a millennia... What is chess?

I have always seen chess as art. Yes, it’s also an intellectual pursuit, but to me it has a more artistic nature. Not just because of great combinations, but also because of its strategic motifs. Repositioning a piece, as well as precision and tempo in the endgame, carry the artistic quality that leaves you in awe when you spot such solutions.

That's a wonderful description. To me, art is the fight against order and is at its best when representing a beautiful chaos. This also describes chess. Your abilities depict classical realism, while mine would be more akin to abstract expressionism, to put it lightly. Speaking of abstract, what is your opinion of F. Random chess (Chess960)?

It is certainly the next good step to keep the game alive until it appears in a different form. I haven’t really played it over the board, but it seems like a very interesting intermediate solution for still keeping humans in the game.

It definitely is a fun variant. I noticed you seemingly suggesting that chess will eventually need a more long term solution. Is this partly because you believe chess will be solved?

Yes, it will, but chess won’t cease to exist. I’m sure there will be different forms of chess created, with added pieces and increased complexity, so the game will survive, just not necessarily in the form it exists in now.

Considering that with today’s engines you can analyze positions all the way to checkmate, it can start to feel like there’s less point in engaging in the same way, because where is the creativity and human thinking in that? I’m not a fan of engine-assisted preparation, but it is a reality, so at some point chess will have to transform.

Well said. During this years candidates tournament, at times it felt to me like I was watching a competition about who could memorise their engines lines better. Speaking of human thinking, I have wondered whether skilled chess players also have the ability to explain chess to an average chess player. Would you say that you do?

This is a good question for my students! I think I became much better at explaining chess once I started coaching. Just by playing, you don’t really get that deeper understanding of chess, because you’re so immersed in recognizing patterns, calculating variations, and making good decisions. You don’t really have much time to stop and elaborate with the ability to be like "Aha, my bishop is a bit clunky on this square, let’s reposition it to a better diagonal". You may notice these things during the game, but under specific time constraints they don’t come from such clear reasoning.

When you have all the time in the world, you can solve every problem and find the most optimal solutions through deeper reasoning. But if you have to rush because your time is limited, everything changes, and you end up thinking ''Why did I play that move?''. Once you start teaching, it opens completely new horizons and you discover the real depth you were overlooking all this time, because the focus before was mostly on memorization, speed, and results.

I second this. While teaching, I often think to myself "I wish I had given myself this same advice years ago". I wonder, what is the best chess advice you can give?

My advice is to play chess over the board and not online so much. The latter should be more for entertainment, while the first one develops real chess skills, your focus, visualization, and thinking patterns much better because you have to engage more than just randomly moving the mouse on your laptop and trying to flag your opponent.

Online chess teaches a kind of speed that sometimes resembles addiction, while sitting over the board, actually thinking, and physically moving the pieces develops your thought process better. And chess is all about thinking and making good decisions.

Noted. However, as chess.com is reading this, I will assure them that I will continue to predominantly play online. At least now I have an excuse as to why I haven't improved much, so thank you. Also, I noticed that you are a published author!

I am! I wrote Chess Through My Eyes originally for my publishing friends in South Korea. They are a small group of young people trying to popularize chess there, who read my blogs and decided to reach out. They also translated my guides for their market. Actually, today they officially published the Korean translation of my main book!

I decided to publish it in English through Amazon, because there aren't many chess publishing houses that also accept books outside the traditional scope, like highly technical books or books only from top players about their lives. Honestly, I am proud of it conceptually, as I created the whole idea and structured it to be relatable, as well as connecting it to life.

I am a person who loves trying to make sense of things, connect the dots, and search for deeper meaning. This was my attempt to do that by bridging chess and life. The main purpose was to challenge the views around competition, which I see as constantly training the muscles to combat and wage wars.

That's amazing to hear. And I know the feeling about not fitting in with the traditional scope, as I've written a children's story involving chess which I love, yet doesn't fit the 'norm'. You mentioned the best advice you can give, which leads me to wonder, what was the worst chess advice you were given?

Perhaps this is not the best fit for the question, but the first thing that came to my mind was the idea that I should only be playing chess with women because I am a woman. While my gender is quite obvious, I can’t say there was ever any real logic behind the first part of that advice. I have heard plenty of ridiculous and sexist, well-intentioned advice almost throughout my entire chess career. Because of this, I never really felt welcomed in the competitive chess space, especially in open tournaments when I was much younger.

That is horrible, and yet, sadly many women have come forward and shared similar experiences of belittlement and harassment during their chess careers.

Then there's the constant debates about whether women’s titles should exist. I don’t think they are necessary, but women themselves didn’t make those decisions, so I’m not sure why this topic is constantly redirected toward us. Nobody really asked what we wanted or whether those titles represent something meaningful to us personally.

Then may I please ask, what would you want?

I personally don’t see much wrong with them. A title is a title. Who cares? I’m not sure why there’s so much toxicity and drama around this topic every few months whenever people feel the need to spice things up. The decision was made a long time ago, women didn’t participate in making it, and yet somehow we end up being blamed for why it exists in the first place. It's very ridiculous. You don’t really see people complaining so harshly about Arena Masters, or about titles below FM, or about veterans and kids getting conditions, special prizes, and so on. Yet, somehow it becomes much more dramatic when a woman enters the picture. Also, I didn’t see obtaining these titles as limiting for women, as they participate more and more in open tournaments, trying to aim for more.

In case they decide to remove the harsh W so people stop being upset about women in chess, I still think the WGM title is stronger than FM on the path toward obtaining it, because it requires not only reaching a 2300 rating like FM, but also earning three WGM norms with 2400-level tournament performances. That already puts it closer to the IM norm prerequisite of a 2450 performance rating.

So honestly, I can suggest that the WGM title simply be transformed into Rockstar Master (RM) if there’s such insistence. I’d gladly swap for that solution.

Very well articulated. From now on, you're an RM to me. Over the years, I have heard many titled players speak about developing an imposter syndrome, so I would love to know, do you feel like a Woman Grandmaster / Rockstar Master?

For me, these titles don’t represent much in the sense that they define my peak or that I can’t go beyond them. They simply show how far I managed to climb before deciding to follow other directions in life.

As someone who spent a lot of time in a sporting environment, it’s pretty obvious to me that the right environment, resources, and support are necessary for any major accomplishment. Because of that, I’m not really biased toward anyone’s innate genius, since I don’t believe success works that way. I believe much more in what I witnessed firsthand.

That's a very grounded outlook. As a Brilliant segue, is there a game you wish you had seen firsthand?

It would definitely be Bobby Fischer’s game against Donald Byrne!

He played this game with the black pieces when he was just 13 years old and delivered a marvelous queen sacrifice. Even the move like 11...Na4!! that preceded it is just amazing to spot.
I’m generally more impressed by how people played in the pre-computer era, because nowadays you sometimes don’t know whether something amazing was found over the board or it was just a home-prep.

I mean, it is dubbed as The Game of the Century for a reason! That's a great shoutout. With your many years in chess, I would love to know if you have a fun fact that most people haven‘t heard about.

I’m not sure how many people are acquainted with the fact that the second book ever printed in English, published in the 1470s, was about chess. Though I’m skeptical about how accurate historical findings really are, this still sounds quite fascinating to me, especially because chess was used as a metaphor for society, which is also a shared passion that the author, William Caxton, and I definitely have in common.

I never knew this! That really is a fun fact. I once dreamed that I was at Ian Nepomniachtchi's mother's house, and when I saw Ian, he wanted to talk about anything but chess. It begs the question, have you had any weird chess dreams?

Honestly, I’ve never had any weird dreams about chess, or at least I can’t recall any such nightmares. Usually it was the opposite. If the result was bad or something really went wrong, like letting a completely 'winning' position slip away, that would keep me awake all night. Also, I don’t really remember my dreams very well, so who knows what was hiding somewhere in my subconscious.

Well in that case, if any dream ever surfaces that happens to involve Ian Nepomniachtchi or his mama, please say hi from me. Continuing on, have you ever used a chess related pick-up line, or has anyone ever used one on you?

I certainly haven’t, because as someone who spent so much time in that field, it would even sound a bit lame. I also don’t recall anything specific someone tried on me, but many chess players’ safe zone when approaching is to invite you to a game of chess that turns into a long blitz game night. I still prefer real conversations and something a bit funnier in my spare time.

Yeah, that does sound lame *frantically deletes folder filled with chess related pick-up lines*. You stated that you prefer something funnier. Are there any jokes you enjoy that you would like to share?

I can’t know how this will land for others, but I love two ideas connected to the same shared theme.

Q: What is a piece that attacks both players equally?

A: The clock!

--

There are two games in blitz...

One is chess, the other is surviving long enough to play chess.

It's about time you made those. Get it? Anyway, speaking of time, I have one last question for you. If you could be any piece in chess, which piece would you be and why?

If you asked me at any earlier point, I would have always said the queen, because I see her as the strongest piece and I enjoy her vast range of movement, which resonates with my personality and dynamic chess style.

But now, I also appreciate pawns much more. Really, without them, not a single chess game would exist or even be able to start in its current form. Pawn breaks, pawn marches, and even promotion are something truly unique, so I have great appreciation for those who bravely step forward first and don’t hide.

That's a wonderful note to end on. Thank you so much for your time.

You're very welcome. It was lovely chatting with you.

Final Notes

This whole interview was such a pleasure to be a part of. Two years ago, I was coming up with questions I never thought would be answered. To now have the opportunity to sit down with a Rockstar Master is beyond incredible.

Thank you all for popping in. If you want more interviews like this in the future, please let me know in the comments. And with that, I hope you had an amazing time at The Evaluation Bar! Until next time, have a beautiful night.