Interview with Vincent Keymer - I still need to work on a few weaknesses

In this first part of an interview conducted by Holger Hank for Deutsche Welle, Keymer talks about Gukesh as the new world champion, the demanding nature of modern (computer-assisted) preparation, and the specific areas in which he wants to keep improving.

“I had the impression Ding hardly prepared for the entire match.”

You decided not to play the World Rapid and Blitz Championships in New York at the turn of the year. How do you feel about that choice now?
2024 was very intense for me—even helping Gukesh during the World Championship took a lot of energy. The Christmas holidays offered little time to prepare for upcoming tournaments like Wijk aan Zee. If I had also gone to New York, I would have arrived at my next events feeling drained. I don’t regret the decision at all.

You’re now in the world’s top 20 and firmly established on the international chess scene. How would you sum up 2024?
It was mixed. I played a few events while I was sick—at the Chess Olympiad in Budapest, for instance, I spent the first four rounds with a fever of nearly 39°C and nosebleeds, which inevitably affected my performance. And that was right after winning a strong tournament in Polanica-Zdrój, where I started with five wins in the first six rounds—a great boost.

Overall, I worked a lot in 2024—both on Gukesh’s preparation and my own development. I’m hoping to capitalize on that in 2025. Being in the top 20 is good, but I want to aim higher. I still have several weaknesses to address.

Which specific areas do you want to improve?
It comes down to a number of smaller details. I keep asking myself what’s missing from my game compared to other young players—especially the Indian talents. Part of it may stem from how I trained as a kid: I was already playing strong tournaments but had to juggle schoolwork, so Peter Leko and I focused on building a basic repertoire to stay out of immediate trouble in the opening. Today I might lack the broader range that helps in actively fighting for wins, especially against slightly lower-rated opponents.

I have decent intuition for where to place my pieces, but in more chaotic positions, I sometimes struggle with deeply accurate calculation. So I need to fine-tune many little things—just doing a handful of daily tactics won’t cut it (laughs).

“Gukesh’s game relies on calculation; mine leans more on intuition.”

During the match Gukesh vs. Ding Liren, observers noted how heavily Gukesh depends on calculating variations. Is there really a big difference between Asian ‘calculation-oriented’ and European ‘intuition-oriented’ players?
There’s some truth to it. Gukesh’s approach is more calculation-based than mine. Of course, you need both—humans can’t calculate everything, so strong intuition helps you zero in on the best moves faster. Over time, I expect our styles will grow somewhat closer.

What was it like working on Gukesh’s team when his style differs from yours?
As a second, my primary job was helping with opening preparation. I contributed my own ideas, but final decisions rested with Gukesh and his chief coach. We had already outlined the directions we wanted to explore before the match began.

“We used powerful, but standard PCs—enough for a World Championship.”

Did you rely on any supercomputers for your analysis?
No, we just used the high-performance machines we normally work with. These days, that’s plenty—even for a World Championship match.

What was your impression of Ding’s preparation?
To be a bit blunt, it looked as if Ding didn’t have a fully cohesive match plan. There were some minor ideas, but not the hallmarks of months of meticulous work.

Many were surprised that Ding opened with the French Defense right from Game 1. Were you as well?
We had it on our radar, but more as a third option. The bigger surprise was that Ding stuck with it even after Game 1. Gukesh lost that initial game, and psychologically, that can make it tougher to revisit the same line.

Why do you think you struggled to break his French Defense?
Losing that first game was a major factor. We’d had a strong idea involving 3.Nc3 prepared about two weeks beforehand, which Gukesh finally used in Game 13. But it’s hard to go back to a variation that already led to a loss.

Magnus Carlsen’s main trainer, Peter-Heine Nielsen, once said that any innovation in a World Championship match generally only works for a single game. Do you agree?
When you’re White, that tends to hold true. Objectively, perfect play leads to a draw most of the time, so you have to come up with small twists to unsettle your opponent practically. Repeating the exact same line in a subsequent game usually isn’t the path to an advantage. With Black, it’s different: you mostly just want to equalize, so returning to a previously used line is possible—if you’re prepared for your opponent’s improvements.

How did you handle time management in the match?
Gukesh would blitz out all the moves he had prepared, which was intentional to avoid time trouble. Ding’s time management, on the other hand, was quite unusual. After the first six games, we were just relieved we weren’t behind, because a few games could have easily swung his way.

What did you personally learn from working with Gukesh?
On a concrete level, I studied lines that might appear in a World Championship match, so I had to be extremely thorough. That’s a different level of precision compared to routine home preparation. And I got to see how a match plays out behind the scenes.

Interview with Vincent Keymer (Part II)

“In Freestyle chess, once you’re worse, everything collapses.”

Vincent Keymer heads into 2025 on a high and will soon compete in the renowned Tata Steel tournament. In this second part of his conversation with Deutsche Welle, Keymer discusses the future of openings, Fischer Random (“Freestyle”) chess, and the support available for top-level players in Germany.

“The younger generation doesn’t want easy draws, which is great for the game.”

How are you preparing for Wijk aan Zee?
I assume some of my opponents will be at least as well-prepared as Ding. I’m holding my preparation to the same standard, though my team is obviously smaller than in a World Championship. The quality has to remain high.

People say opening theory has been ‘analyzed to death.’ What’s your take?
It once seemed everything was dissected down to the bone, but now the focus is shifting to side lines, creative experiments, and more unusual ideas. The new generation—including me—doesn’t want to settle for safe draws, so both players tend to take risks, making games more dynamic and entertaining. On the flip side, if a 2650-rated player is perfectly prepared to force a draw with Black, even the top elites will have a tough time breaking them down.

At what point in a game do you really start thinking on your own?
It’s when I move away from memorized lines and the position becomes less clear. I’ll ask myself, “What do I actually know here? Do I want to take the risk my opponent is steering towards?” I might recognize a position from my files, but even a slight tweak in move order can throw you off.

“Classical chess still has its allure.”

Some argue that the future lies in faster time controls. How do you see it?
Faster formats can be a lot of fun for fans—there’s more action. But classical chess is still widely played, and most top players (apart from Carlsen, who sometimes opts out) participate. It doesn’t feel to me like it has run its course. Yes, extended streaks of draws can be frustrating, but that’s partly due to powerful computer assistance making it easier to neutralize an advantage.

“Fischer Random forces more improvisation.”

Fischer Random (or ‘Freestyle’) is drawing more attention. Does it benefit ‘calculator’ types or more intuitive players?
I get the feeling it’s a bit more intuitive, because the unpredictable starting positions break standard patterns. What I find fascinating is how quickly things can collapse if you land in a worse position—it’s much harder to defend. That’s an intriguing factor and perhaps its biggest draw.

Won’t a new theory inevitably develop for Fischer Random as well?
Of course. As top tournaments happen, people will start digging deep into how best to handle certain starting setups. But it’s still very new territory.

“The German Chess Federation doesn’t have huge resources, but things are improving.”

National coach Jan Gustafsson said the next two years are crucial for your development. Do you agree?
Yes—I’m gradually losing that ‘kid advantage’ (laughs). Some players hit their peak at 25, others even later. Certainly, this upcoming period is huge for me.

You narrowly missed qualifying for the Candidates Tournament last time. What’s your plan now?
I’ll be playing in the World Cup and the Grand Swiss, and I’m also looking at other ways to qualify through the FIDE circuit. If it helps rack up important points, I’m open to playing in open tournaments, too.

How do you view the support for top players in Germany?
It’s getting better. I’ve had a long-standing sponsor, Grenke, and now significant support from Jan Henric Buettner—both of which I really appreciate. However, the German Chess Federation has limited funds and has actually cut back on the budget for elite players. We do get some training camps and have Jan Gustafsson as our national coach, but if you compare it to continuous funding in other sports, it’s still insufficient. And for other German GMs who don’t have comparable backing, it’s even tougher to build something stable.

(Based on interviews for Deutsche Welle. Photo credits: Niki Riga/ECU, Vincent Keymer’s Instagram, Tata Steel Chess, ChessBase India.)