 Navishi, you told us that the last Swiss that you played was in 1993, why this come back into this format, what was this journey like? It's not like I was opposed to playing Swiss events, it's just that somehow for many many years around Robbins were the only attractive events around, but recently a couple of attractive Swiss events have come up, so and you can see already that many participants open to playing, so it's not like I had some fundamental objection, it's just that's the way it turned out. Yeah, this is quite interesting because for a long time we did not have the top elite players participating in Swiss Open, but like you said there's almost like this movement where they're playing suddenly in this format. Now does that only have to do with the fact that you've got these new attractive events or is it also something of like a challenge or you know because you're playing amongst each other most of the time and it's like a comfort zone, but then do you miss the unpredictability or the challenge of it, does that have anything to do with it? Probably people are curious for a new experience, they're looking forward to something like that, but mostly it's because there are nice new attractive Swiss that you can choose from. And do you see this becoming something of a trend with more and more people participating in such tournaments? Yes, I think that trend is well established, what will happen is if the Swiss tournaments get well established and maybe one or two more join in then they'll just become a regular part of the calendar. And what about you personally for you, do you see any challenges after not playing in this format for so many years, do you personally feel any challenges of coming back to this? I'm not obsessing about the format too much, I mean I'll go there, play a game, try to play a good game and in the end it's only about how well you play, whether it's around Robin or Swiss or a knockout or whatever. It really comes down to how well you play, but of course there are features of a Swiss tournament. A lot of people will post very high scores and so it's a different kind of vibe to around Robin and so I'll definitely have to make some adjustments. You won the World Juniors in 87 in 1987 and got your grandmaster title then. So you've kind of been at the top of the chess level and seen the whole transition of the game starting from almost a time when the computers did not exist, going through that phase, computers becoming strong, also chess becoming younger, and you've maintained your level at the very, very top amongst all these phases. So how was the journey adapting yourself to all these changes and what was your feeling about this? Well, it's a gradual process first of all, so you just adapt at every stage to whatever is necessary. The most important thing is to be willing to learn and willing to change methods even your favourite ones, I mean if you like doing things a certain way but there's a new way of doing things you have to force yourself to learn. But I also find that interesting about chess, it keeps the game interesting. Every time there's a new way of doing things you discover a lot about yourself, what chess, otherwise it would get boring. So I must say if you have that attitude then it helps you adapt to these changes. Keeping things interesting after all these years in the game, what gives you motivation to continue to be playing at this level at the top and keeping your energy going and after doing everything and achieving pretty much everything? I enjoy playing chess and which is the only reason to go on. You can't do it, you can't talk yourself into it. You must enjoy playing chess and I still do, I still want to play and I want to see how it goes. When that's the case then you simply look forward to tournaments. After knowing so much about the game how do you still work on it, what is it left to learn? I think people confuse knowledge and proficiency at chess board. So you can win a game but it doesn't mean you understood everything that happened very well. I mean if you keep analyzing something you will find that there are many things that you missed but maybe your opponent missed a lot of stuff as well and that compensated you won the game. So there are people who are ridiculously good at playing chess but it doesn't mean that they know everything about the game. So the game has so many levels and so many layers that you'll always find new things to learn and as you learn new stuff it expands your vision everywhere. It's funny like maybe 10, 15 years ago we started having just the early introduction of computers and strong engines into the game. People started to say well is it going to be a draw again and so on but we are finding out that just in fact far from going that direction is becoming more interesting and it seems that there's a hell of a lot more to discover. That's what I mean. Things you didn't know just appear suddenly in front of you and you think oh my god I believe the opposite for so many years. I based my entire approach to the game on something and now it turns out you can do it just differently. I never thought of this move. I never thought of that move. Computers have shown that chess is so incredibly deep. Of course annoying that they are so strong but in a way it's helpful as well. You have the strongest player in the world ready to sit in your room and work for you anytime. That kind of helps. Players can keep surprising you and when it stops doing that then maybe it's time to worry about the game but right now it just seems so incredibly interesting.