Meet the "Henderson One"
Chess Journalist John Henderson unexpectedly found himself centre-stage at the Kasparov-Kramnik match when he was ejected and banned from the premises by the BrainGames Network, the organizers of the contest. Henderson has received widespread international support after the incident from outraged colleagues and readers. He gave the following e-interview to Mind Sports Zine editor Jonathan Tisdall.
Photo: Jon Levitt
Q: Could you give us a brief history of your background as a journalist?
A: I was born on August 18th 1961 in Glasgow, much to the surprise of my parents – they were expecting a new carpet at the time! Like most people of a certain age (you know what I mean, Jonathan?), I got caught up in the chess bug thanks to a little match that took place in Reykjavik in 1972 between a Russian and some American.
I have an elder brother who is seven years my senior. Being very competitive, I couldn't compete with him on a physical level (still have the bruises to prove it!). He reluctantly taught me how to play the game (Why not? He saw it as yet another thing he could beat me at.), and, throughout the match, I improved rapidly. Unfortunately for him, by the time Bobby Fischer was pronounced world champion on September 1 1972, we played our last ever game. The minute I beat him he swore never to play me again – and this stands to this day!
I really got into journalism late in life after a political career with the Labour Party in Britain. They discovered that I had a knack of writing good press releases and organising photo opportunities for future MP's and government ministers (even a couple for our PM, Tony Blair!). After working seven years non-stop for the Labour Party, I decided (or rather my doctor!) that I had to leave as I was physically and emotionally drained after their defeat in the 1992 General Election.
Having never played chess (or even looked at a chess book - even a Ray Keene title!) in that period, I decided that I really wanted to get back among the scene. Malcolm Pein took me under his wing at this stage and taught me everything he knows (the first thing I learned was never to work for him again!).
I started writing articles for his magazine, Chess Monthly, and also deputising for him occasionally in the Daily Telegraph, when the poor guy needed a break from the monotonous strain of his daily column (he'd been doing it for seven years without a rest – the column, that is!).
I kinda got lucky after that and approached the Deputy Editor of Scotland's national newspaper, The Scotsman, about writing a daily chess column. The rest, as they say, is history. They gave me the job.
Q: Many of us only know your writing from the web, and your irreverent persona. Is this your usual tone, or does the material in the Scotsman and for CNN vary?
A: Well, here's the thing. Ever since Mig deserted the happy family here at TWIC (he gave some excuse to Malcolm Pein that Kasparov Chess were ACTUALLY going to pay him a salary! I mean, I ask you? His reason for leaving was that he wanted paid!), we needed to fill a void ... and I was used to plug it!
If anyone's ever read my daily column in the Scotsman, they'd soon see that it is totally different to what I write on the web. There are many reasons for this; the main one being I have more space on the web to expand and be creative (or, in reality, just warble on a bit as the whisky bites in) alongside the pictures for a bit of colour behind the scenes.
As for CNN? Well, it was a one-off gig – they approached me to cover the event for them, which like the Scotsman, I did straight-laced.
Now this is the thing that gets me about Braingames. If I were in their shoes, I'd have decided that 2 out of 3 ain't bad and left it like that. Unfortunately, it was not to be – they thought they could come in heavy-handed and control everything. The rest, yet again, is history.
Q: What is CNN doing about your expulsion? One would have thought they could leverage something with their weight. Any official reaction from them, Scotsman, etc.?
A: As for the Scotsman and CNN, there's not much they can do. At the end of the day this match is privately run with no governing body. If Braingames want to evict journalists out of the press room they can do that – but look at the price! The sad reality now is that, due to some unprofessional PR handling before and during the match, they have really, really bad relations with the press.
I don't think it even crossed their tiny little minds that most of the journalists in the press room are friends who travel the world together to bring the chess news into your home. They didn't realise this. Consequently, when they offended one journalist, they offended all the others.
As for the Scotsman and CNN, they believe my version of events thanks to the overwhelming evidence that was provided to them by my fellow journalists, whom I would like to thank publicly here.
Q: Have you ever had any complaints, or memorable reactions (pro/con) to your columns before? Since you do like to poke fun, this might have happened before?
A: That's the funny thing. I've never experienced this sort of reaction before – everyone has taken it in good heart. I even said some very funny things about the Germans during the recent Frankfurt tournament – they loved it! You, know, it's not that easy to write the way I do on the Internet at TWIC. Sometimes the humour works, sometimes it doesn't. When it does, it's great. When it doesn't, hmmm ...
Q: Trying to be as ... neutral ... as humanly possible, what was your opinion of the conditions for the BGN WCh? We don't have that many on-the-spot reactions, though noted Spanish chess journalist Leontxo Garcia hinted that it was worthy of criticism. But I have nothing from someone who is both a first-hand source and ... verbal.
A: Yes, Leontxo, as usual, was correct (he's an old hand at this game!). From my arrival on the day of game two (remember, I flew in from sunny Seattle – oh, how I wish I was back there!), I got this "bad vibe" around the press room – we all expected that something would happen at some stage during the match to one of the journalists. We could see where the organisers were going wrong, and tried to offer our advice, which unfortunately wasn't taken.
To be fair, Eric Schiller was the only one who could see - and sense - the bad feeling within the press corps. He did try on a few occasions to negotiate with the Braingames CEO, Suzanne Martin, but to no avail – she, despite knowing nothing about chess or the internet, knew better.
Q: I remember when title matches used to attract literally hundreds of journalists. I hear things are different this time - can you expand?
A: Yes, Jonathan, you've hit the nail on the head! You've been around the press room at world title matches in the past, and you know how a world title match between two titans can bring out the top journalists and feature writers.
For some reason, and I can't quite make up my mind whether this was deliberate or just pure incompetence, this area was ignored by Braingames. I don't think that Ray Keene's tirade at the BBC at the press conference before the start of the match helped any, either.
Q: Any other interesting nuggets from your time on the scene? I don't know how much one can know or say about the frictions between the BGN and Pein, the LCC, Kramnik and yourself, but what you can would be very interesting. Also there may be other little morsels you could impart?
A: If there were anyone with any brains in the Braingames organisation, they'd be dangerous! I can't tell you of anything with regard to any possible legal action between BGN and Malcolm Pein – you need to ask him about that. However, it did cramp my style to a certain extent: I first of all had to send the articles to our esteemed legal firm of Dowey, Skrewum & Howe – they would immediately make changes to my analysis!
With regard to Kramnik, no idea. However, I found it distasteful that the Chairman of Braingames, Sir Jeremy Hanley, could come into the press room and start waving Kramnik's contract about in full view of a room full of journalists. That's just not on!
It's understood that the contracts have indeed been badly written - I have it on good authority that it wasn't even a lawyer who wrote it! It was written by one of the Braingame directors, Don Morris.
Q: Do you have any idea what Kasparov is on about when he says he will reveal the dark off-the-board reason for his swift draw in game 7?
A: Well, ever since the "great sandwich stealing" incident at Wijk aan Zee, Garry and I have had this wonderful working relationship. Just look what happens to him on the day after he discovered what happened to me! But seriously, I've no idea what happened to Garry.
I heard from within the Kasparov camp that, had there been a provision for a time-out, Garry would have taken it that day. I get this feeling that something isn't quite right in Garry's personal life. No evidence, just a hunch. He's stated that he'd make his reasons known after the event. That's only right - let's leave it there for now.
He first of all has to concentrate on the job at hand in trying to defend his title against a very determined challenger. I really hope the players weren't affected by what happened. This was the one thing that Braingames got right: two of the strongest players in the world playing for the World Championship. Great chess.
Q: I couldn't help thinking that "Knuckles", as you called the security guard who ejected you, looked quite a kind man, despite his bulk. Comments?
A: As I said in the infamous Free The Henderson One article: Nice guy, really, he's joining me for tea next week!
Q: How is fame and notoriety?
A: Ask my agent!
Q: That cap you are wearing in photos with what looks like an S - is that Scotsman regalia?
A: Hell, No! That "S" is none other than the Seattle Mariners! Unbelievably for a Scotsman living in Edinburgh, I'm a big baseball fan. Through the night here during the season we see about two live games a week. Now, during the World Series, we see all the seven games (barring, of course, another Yankee sweep!).
I was a big M's fan even before Yasser Seirawan invited me to Seattle recently for the US Championships. As you can see from the reports, they were a bit biased towards a baseball slant. One of my most memorable moments from Seattle was going to Safeco Field to see two games: beating the Texas Rangers and the Chicago White Sox.
The cap has to be worn at all times to cover a recent critical medical condition – a receding hairline!
Q: One of my sources says that Kramnik plans to offer the FIDE 2000 champion a unification match - heard this? If so, any details or reactions? (Actually reacting can of course happen even if this is both news to you and rubbish, I am just asking about things my old pals mutter).
Certainly a question that's doing the rumour mill amongst all the journalists in London! As you would expect, there's nothing coming from the Kramnik camp - rightly so, their only interest is getting on with the job in hand and keeping a diplomatic silence.
However, I can impart one piece of interesting information. Stewart Reuben (member of the FIDE World Championship committee and Chairman of the FIDE Organising committee), popped in to see me yesterday and went on the record before leaving for the Olympiad. He stated that, the minute Kramnik has won the match, Stewart would call a meeting in Istanbul of the relevant FIDE committee members to recommend that they make overtures towards Kramnik for a reconciliation match.
He said he would advise them of the following: the match would take place in December 2001, with Kramnik (being able to dictate most of the terms for the match), facing the winner of the forthcoming FIDE World Championship. FIDE would be hoping, of course, for a mouth-watering prospect of Kramnik vs. Anand.
Of course, that's only Stewart talking. But there's definitely activity going on behind the scene. However, we'll need to see what Kramnik decides! As for my view? I think it's definitely on the cards - unlike Kasparov, Kramnik doesn't have the same pulling power for sponsors for a private match a la Intel and Braingames. Interesting days!
|
