On July 14 Garry Kasparov gave a discussion and book signing for his new book "My Great Predecessors, Part I" at a Barnes & Noble bookstore in New York City. After the signing he took questions from the audience. A transcript is below, followed by further comments on his upcoming FIDE match with Ponomariov and his match with Fritz that was just announced.

Q: I'm a psychoanalyst. What are the most important characteristics to become a champion chessplayer?

That's an excellent question. Psychology is an important part of the book, which isn't only about world champions but about those others who had made massive contributions to chess, but who fell short. And when reading about those other players you can see they often fell just an inch short. In certain cases they had more impact on chess and its development than those who did become champions. To reach the title you have to be exceptional and you have to look at psychology. It's not just about finding the best move, about moving the chess pieces, but about being able to show your best qualities at the right moment. That's why psychology played a very important role in the history of classical chess. I would say that most of the key matches were decided by the psychological hype. One could resist the pressure and the other could not.

Q: How do you see the future of chess? It seems to be changing.

That's one of the important things about this book, it is a sort of museum of classical chess. Chess IS changing and I don't think we should be upset about it. It shows the strength of the game of chess, it is adjusting to the technological era. It's an ancient game and now it's on the internet and you have rapid chess. But at the same time it is losing it's scientific element. Classical chess is what created the image of chess and it is important to remember that, to put all these great moments on the record.

Q: Did you use computer programs to analyze variations in the book?

This book couldn't appear without having a computer. To find the true story, to get into the small details of the big fights, they are critical. I'm not sure that I made all the correct analysis, but it's very important to analyze deeply. The lines in the book are shorter, I had to cut many of them down, some were even discarded. But what was important was for me to see the details, all the hidden dynamics of the games so I could explain what was there and come up with the true story of the game.

What is fascinating is that now even amateurs can find mistakes in a book by the world number one. After the Russian edition came out two months ago we received a number of comments from strong players and not very strong players and some were very good. People were already finding mistakes, which is excellent because it means people are reading the book seriously. We are now planning to add a sort of diary to the next volumes including the corrections and comments about the previous volumes. We can put this on the internet, as well.

This is important because these are the best games ever played, they are the games with the greatest ideas ever played in the game of chess. It's not just for Garry Kasparov or some top players to participate in this debate, it's open to everybody. It is thanks to computers that this debate is open to the general public. If you know how to work with the computer and if you have time and patience to find the truth you can find refutations. Everything I published I believed correct, was the way to go, but I know there will be more discoveries and I hope average chess fans will be able to contribute as well.

Q: [From Russian television reporter] We know you are not just a chess player, that you were involved in Russian politics as well. What is your opinion of the current Russian situation...

That's a long story but I think I would like to stick to chess and to the book here. The people here, the majority aren't Russian and most, frankly speaking, don't care about Russian politics! You know my opinions, I haven't changed them. I'm very critical of the current Russian administration. But it's a long story and unfortunately to change things in Russia will take more time than to write this book!

Q: Which player from the past would you most like to play? Assuming they had your knowledge of modern chess.

You can't compare Newton and Einstein, each player is of his time. If you show Steinitz what has happened in the last 100 years he would no longer be Steinitz, he would be a different player. Fischer with all modern knowledge of current chess would be sort of Kasparov. That's why it's not fair to compare someone at the end of the 20th century with someone who lived fifty or sixty years ago.

I'm very bad at ranking the champions and the great players of the past. You can read the book, make your own choice, pick your own best player because you like him. But it will be very subjective. I couldn't afford the luxury of having a favorite because otherwise you would see a big difference in that chapter. I refrain from giving negative remarks and I anticipate now that the best parts of the series will be written about Karpov. I'm sticking to the contributions of the greatest players to the game of chess. I give anecdotes, stories, a lot of information but it's up to you to make the final judgment.

Later we spoke with Kasparov about a few other items on his agenda.

When is the last time you spoke with FIDE about your match with Ponomariov?

I don't know, it's been a long time, probably months. It's only 12 weeks until they say the match will start and I still haven't seen a contract! My financial losses are piling up, I don't know when I am going to play next. It's all politics at this point.

Do you feel Ponomariov will have a home-field advantage in Yalta?

It's clear it wouldn't be my first choice but I'm more interested in it happening at all at this point.

Your November X3D match against Fritz was just announced yesterday. Will it help to study the games Kramnik played against the program last year?

Absolutely, you learn a lot. They can make changes of course but it's very important to have all the information you can get. Even though our version of Junior was quite old by the time the match started it was useful. After the games we could reproduce just about everything. Everything except for 10...Bxh2 [in game five], actually. But even there we could see what it was doing, that the evaluations were just good for it.

More importantly it's good that X3D is still supporting this experiment, still supporting science. This match will be more progress, showing the public we are doing new things.

Junior is considered a superior tactical program, that Fritz is more solid, etc. Is there a significant difference to you in which program you play?

All the top programs are strong, the difference is in how they handle complex middlegame positions. You can see that now only the top players in the world can play with them. Kramnik and I, the top two players in the world, draw matches and the machines are always getting stronger. But we are learning too and I am still confident I can win the match.

Garry Kasparov on my Great Predecessors, Part 1 – £25/$35