Sweden is now a regulated market, which means that as a player you can only play at casinos with a license. See all regulated casinos in Sweden by Mr casinova.
Sergey Galitsky - Russian Self-Made Billionaire on Business & Chess
Written by Administrator
Thursday, 20 January 2011
Sergey Galitsky, founder of a large retail chain "Magnit". Considered to be the #1 self-made businessman in Russia.
Net worth in 2010 - $2.9 billion (#342 in the world, #28 in Russia according to Forbes)
Oleg Tinkov:
Tell me, what about your schoolmates and kids from your yard. Why have you become an enterpreneur, while most of them didn't. Why and where do you think this change has happened?
Sergey Galitsky:
A few things. I have been thinking about it a little from time to time. I didn't have any special talents. I don't know - hanging out in the street, playing soccer. I was born in near Sochi, all we did was play soccer and snooker. How did I study - well, I guess without 3s (C - Pogonina.com), but I wouldn't call myself a great student. I think that in business, especially in the one I am in, logic is extremely important. If you develop this quality - logical thinking - this by itself will become a serious foundation for your future activities. Other qualities are also required - you must adore what you are doing, stay extremely focused. To motivate yourself every day...when you can't eat two breakfasts, but have earned enough...you need to find a way to motivate yourself. However, I believe that logic is the core. Why am I talking about it? In grades 7-8 (about 14-15 years old - Pogonina.com), when I have done with my soccer career, I have started studying - occasionally - chess. By the way, I have been doing rather well. In two years I have become a candidate master, champion of Sochi and so on - and I have realized that I started thinking differently. I suddenly felt that the school courses are of no use. Logic is a must-have not only for businessmen, but it was a very important foundation for my future. Modern education - I have a lot of concerns about it. It is basically based on pure cramming up, which is a stupid thing to do in the XXI century. We are studying great amounts of information that can be found within two minutes on the Internet. Is this rational? Of course, basic knowledge in all areas is required. But courses that help people in the real life should also be introduced. I think that logic is something needed by everyone. Chess, by the way, is a very good game model of logic. It seems to me that logic became a stepping stone for all my future activities.
In my recent articles I have touched upon such intricate matters as material imbalances and initiative. Today I would like to share with you annotations to a baffling game of mine played at the Russian Superfinal against GM Tatiana Kosintseva (the chess fight made it to November top-10 best games in the world according to ChessPro). Also, to make the story more challenging, you will be offered a few critical positions to solve on your own.
A closed position with some space advantage for White has occurred (pay attention to the c4-d5-e4 triangle). The b4-c5-d6-e5 chain is relatively vulnerable since the b4 pawn cant support it. Whites plan is to transfer the knight to d3, where it will be menacing Blacks position and then, depending on the situation, play in the center and on the queenside (a3, double the rooks along the a-file), or in the center and on the kingside (f4); or try both. Blacks mobility is rather limited, and the main idea is to play f5 at some point and play on the kingside. The setup is a bit passive, but very solid and safe.
White has positionally sacrificed a whole piece for the pawn. Nonetheless, the d6 pawn is a pain in the neck for Black, and Tatianas pieces get shoved back to the 8th rank. The c5, e5, and b4 pawns are easy targets, and the White army is just about to take advantage of the open files. Sounds great, but how should White play?
26.d7 [Better is 26.Na4] 26...Bb7 27.Bxc5 Be7?What should white now do about the dark-squared bishop?
Following the principles of keeping the initiative, I should have sought ways to increase the pressure. White basically has two options Ba7 and Na4. In the first case the bishop is retreating from the scene and imitating a threat of capturing the Black rook (which actually helps Black improve coordination). Meanwhile, the White knight is out of the game, so I should have brought it into play.
After making a mistake, White is on the ropes, and there is just one way to prolong the fight sacrifice a rook. It is remarkable that a single pawn on d6 is keeping the whole Black army at bay, but even the brave hero cant be saving the world for too long!
34.Rxd4! the only chance 34...exd4 35.Qxd4 Bc6 36.Rd1 Qf4 37.Nc3 Bxd7? 38.Nd5 Qg5
Once again, White needs to find the only correct move 39.Nxe7 [39.Nxf6?] 39...Bxh3 40.g3 Bg4?! 41.Re1 Bf3 42.Bd1 Bxd1 43.Rxd1 Rae8?
A tactical idea saves White. Moreover, it even leads to an advantage. Black is in trouble after c6.
After the sacrifice the game became extremely complicated. White had more opportunities, but at some point my imprecise play led to a tough position. However, by that time my opponent has spent lots of energy and time on the defense, and couldnt seize the initiative. Generally speaking, positional sacrifices are risky. If one doesnt play actively enough, she/he may lose. Keep that in mind, but dont be afraid of taking justified risks!
