Culture
Why Guardiola, Maresca and Salah love chess: Space, patterns and 'controlling the centre'
Follow live coverage of Chelsea vs Manchester City in the Premier League today
What do Pep Guardiola and Enzo Maresca have in common?
Coaches wedded to a certain style of football? Midfielders who became managers? Worked together at Manchester City? Bald? All of these things are true, but that’s not the answer we have on the card.
The answer we’re looking for? Chess.
Both men, who meet at Stamford Bridge this afternoon, are keen proponents of the idea that football can learn plenty from chess, and they as coaches can take valuable lessons from it too.
After leaving Barcelona in 2012, Guardiola took a sabbatical and travelled to New York, where he met with Garry Kasparov, the Russian grandmaster. He has also studied the methods of the world’s top-ranked chess player, Magnus Carlsen.
“You have no idea how similar the two things are,” Guardiola said in Pep Confidential, Marti Perarnau’s book about his first season at Bayern Munich. “There was one thing Carlsen said that I loved. He said that it doesn’t matter if he has to make some sacrifices at the start of the game because he knows he is strongest in the latter stages. It got me thinking and I must learn how I can apply it to football.”
- Want to stay up to date with the best news and features as the PL season kicks off? Sign up (for free) to The Athletic FC newsletter
Maresca dedicated large tracts of his 7,000-word coaching thesis, written for his diploma at the Italian coaching school Coverciano, to chess. “A coach can only benefit from acquiring the mind of a good chess player,” Maresca wrote. “I concluded that playing chess can train the mind of a coach. The fundamental element of chess is the logic that leads a player to understand and thus predict the opponents’ moves.”
Maresca also highlighted the two games’ tactical similarities. “The chess board is like a football pitch that can be divided into three channels — a central one and two external ones. In football as in chess, an inside game can be more interesting as it’s the quickest and most direct towards goal or the king.”
The similarities in how space is used also came up in an interview with Carlsen and Guardiola. “In chess and football, the important thing is to control the middle,” Carlsen said as Guardiola looked on, rapt. “If you control the middle, you control the pitch or the board. Another thing is that in chess, you attack on one side, so you overload, and then you switch so you have an advantage on the other side. In terms of space, it’s remarkably similar.”
https://t.co/YJ6z1TzEGC pic.twitter.com/FGoU6mn02M
— Jon Mackenzie (@Jon_Mackenzie) December 12, 2023
Most people reading this piece will know why ‘controlling the middle’ is important in football, but an explanation in chess might be worth making. “Each of the pieces moves differently, but nearly all of them are better in the centre,” Gawain Jones, a grandmaster who recently won his third British Championship, tells The Athletic.
“It’s one of the first maxims you are taught: get your pieces out and control the centre squares, and starve your opponent of space and they’re hemmed in at the sides. The knights are referred to as ‘octopuses’ because they can move to eight squares, whereas if they’re at the side they can only go to three or four.”
In his book Football and Chess: Tactics, Strategy, Beauty, Adam Wells draws further parallels. “At the most fundamental level,” Wells writes, “football and chess involve using space effectively and getting the timing right to break down an opponent’s defence while preventing them from breaking down yours.
“And that’s it. There are very few limiting rules. There are no complicated scoring systems or procedures of play that have to be followed. It is clear cut: you must capture pieces or score goals while staying within the confines of the board or pitch.’
The list of football coaches and managers who apply chess to their profession is lengthy. During the European Championship this summer, Switzerland coach Murat Yakin was asked about a match being a ‘poker game’, to which he responded that he doesn’t like poker because too much depends on what hand you are given, and that he prefers chess.
“There are certainly parallels when it comes to tactics,” he told magazine Schweizer Illustrierte before the tournament. “I explain simple (chess) moves to my daughters: which steps they can make with which piece, how they have to think ahead and how to safeguard their tactics. If I set a strategy for the team, I have to be able to explain easily what I mean exactly.”
Rafa Benitez is a keen — and very competitive — player, which fits with the perception of a manager who doesn’t so much see 11 human beings running around on a football pitch, more 11 pieces that he emotionlessly shifts.
Maybe the most enthusiastic chess player in football management is former Barcelona and Villarreal coach Quique Setien, who used to compete in tournaments. At one point, he was so highly rated that, according to an interview with the Spanish newspaper Marca, he could have represented “51 of the countries at the Chess Olympiad”.
“As many as you wish to find,” he told Marca when asked about the similarities between football and chess. “You can be an offensive player, but you always need to control what’s going on in your camp, without leaving pieces unattended, in a synchronised way. The same happens in football when you have a coordinated team, in which all the players are connecting.”
Borussia Dortmund coach Mathias Kolodziej is watched by staff and players (Alexandre Simoes/Borussia Dortmund/Getty Images)
Perhaps slightly more surprising is the number of footballers who swear by chess.
Mohamed Salah told Sky Sports in 2023 that he was “addicted” and is rated at around 1,400, which, according to Chess.com, puts him somewhere between ‘decent’ and ‘proficient’. Salah mostly plays online, with a username that is his actual name with a bunch of numbers after it: he said he enjoys messing with people who ask him if he actually is Mohamed Salah.
Christian Pulisic almost seems to play as much chess as he does football: for him it’s partly an emotional connection, having been taught the game by his grandfather (he has a tattoo of a queen on his arm, with Mate, his grandfather’s name, beneath it), and partly a distraction because he started playing again regularly during the Covid-19 pandemic.
“It’s an incredible game that can help you with a lot of things, like problem-solving or seeing different patterns,” Pulisic told the Daily Mail in 2021. “I’m not saying it directly correlates to me being a better footballer but it’s certainly better than staring at a screen, gaming. It can really help you to stay sharp in your head — you have to think very quickly.”
New Barcelona midfielder Dani Olmo believes chess can inform his use of space. “On the pitch, I try to think about every movement,” he told Sky Sports, “not just to move left because the ball is going left. I am always trying to find the best solutions when I have the ball and when I do not have the ball. Either for me or the team-mate, to create space for other guys or even for myself.”
This tallies with something Jones tells The Athletic. “Chess tactics tend to focus on pattern recognition,” he says, “recognising that there is something not quite right with the opposition’s tactics.”
For Anthony Gordon and Trent Alexander-Arnold, chess is more akin to brain training. “Chess is a life skill because it applies to everything,” Gordon told the BBC this year. “It’s a very peaceful game. It gets my brain working, which I love.”
Alexander-Arnold played Carlsen in a game arranged by sponsors in 2018: predictably he was routed in 17 moves, but you don’t have to be able to compete with the best player in the world to benefit. “It helps with concentration,” Alexander-Arnold said. “Because it takes a lot of concentration throughout both games to really focus on what your opponent is doing and how they’re trying to attack and hurt you. I think you can take notes from both of them and use them in each other’s games.”
The Liverpool defender isn’t the only player who has faced Carlsen, himself an almost obsessive football fan who, for a while, topped the world rankings in Fantasy Premier League. Pulisic, Martin Odegaard and former Real Madrid midfielder Esteban Granero are among those who have faced Carlsen.
Magnus Carlsen, chess champion, FPL master (Koen Suyk/ANP/AFP/Getty Images)
Others just use it to pass the time: Harry Kane took up chess after watching Netflix drama The Queen’s Gambit and has continued at Bayern Munich, playing against team-mates Joshua Kimmich and Kingsley Coman. “I use chess to switch off,” Kane told GQ. “It’s such a mental game. You have to focus on every moment, every move.”
During Euro 2024, the Netherlands squad travelled around Germany by train and on these long journeys, Bart Verbruggen and defender Stefan de Vrij would set up a board and play a game or two.
Chess also has a firm place in the language of football, but perhaps erroneously. When a match is likened to ‘a game of chess’, it’s normally a cypher for ‘this game is slow and boring’.
A more generous interpretation would describe a very controlled, cagey match, which fits the perception of chess. Jones argues that chess is a much more reactive game than that, which strengthens the link between it and football. “It’s much more chaotic than we would like to think,” he says. “It’s good to have a long-term plan, but you can’t just stick to it: it’s all about adapting your plan to what your opponent is doing. From that perspective, it’s much more like a team sport. You have to be reactive.”
Players or coaches are often said to be thinking three or four moves ahead, but that’s a misnomer. “I don’t think it’s that practical,” says Jones. “It’s more about thinking one move ahead. It’s just about making the right move. There’s always the idea of balancing your plan and your opponent’s. There will be some calculation involved, but chess is understood as a much more dry, mathematical game than it actually is.”
There are reasons to be sceptical about the influence of chess on football. The obvious difference is footballers are sentient while chess pieces are not: a chess player can have a plan and enact it while only worrying about their opponent, whereas a football coach has to rely on 11 independent human beings doing as they’re told.
But even if the realistic influence is relatively thin, there are ‘marginal gains’ that explain why coaches are so keen on chess. Someone like Guardiola will do or study almost anything if they think it will give them even the smallest advantage. “He does it with anyone who can contribute any small idea to continue progressing,” Marti Perarnau, Guardiola’s biographer, told the Spanish journalist Kike Marin about the manager’s meetings with Carlsen.
Like anyone who is good at anything, Guardiola and other football managers take inspiration and influence from many different sources, but that so many elite figures look to chess tells you the strength of its influence.
“If we’re the ones initiating the action, as opposed to simply reacting, then we’ll control the flow of the game,” Guardiola says in Perarnau’s book Pep Guardiola: The Evolution when describing similarities between chess and football. “The opponents then have to react to what we do, which automatically means a limited choice of options. It makes them more predictable.
“It’s a cycle: you take control, show that you have the upper hand and then you slam home your advantage… this is what it means to eclipse the opposition.”
GO DEEPER
How Pep Guardiola takes inspiration from other sports
Culture
Annotating the Judge’s Decision in the Case of Liam Conejo Ramos, a 5-Year-Old Detained by ICE
One of the many unsettling images to emerge from the recent ICE surge in Minneapolis was that of 5-year-old Liam Conejo Ramos, in his blue bunny hat, standing in the January cold with the hand of a federal officer gripping his Spider-Man backpack.
Liam and his father, Adrian Conejo Arias, an asylum seeker from Ecuador, were taken from Minnesota to Texas and held at a detention facility outside San Antonio. Lawyers working on their behalf filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus, an ancient judicial principle forbidding the government from holding anyone in custody without providing a legally tenable reason for doing so. On Saturday, Fred Biery, a federal judge in Texas’ Western District, granted their petition, freeing them.
That’s the boilerplate. But Judge Biery’s decision — which has gotten a lot of attention in legal circles and beyond — is much more than a dry specimen of judicial reasoning. It’s a passionate, erudite and at times mischievous piece of prose.
That may not have surprised some Texas court watchers. Judge Biery, who was appointed to the federal bench by President Bill Clinton in 1994, is known for his wit and writerly flair. His judicial order in a 2013 case involving San Antonio strip clubs is famous for its literary allusions (“to bare, or not to bare”) and its cheeky double entendres. A 2023 profile in San Antonio Lawyer magazine called him “a judge with a little extra to say.”
The extra in this case transforms what might have been a routine decision into a thorough scourging of the Trump administration’s approach to governance. This text isn’t much longer than one of Mr. Trump’s Truth Social posts. In fewer than 500 words, Judge Biery marshals literature, history, folk wisdom and Scripture to challenge the theory of executive power that has defined Trump’s second presidency.
It’s worth looking at how he does it.
OPINION AND ORDER OF THE COURT
Before the Court is the petition of asylum seeker Adrian Conejo Arias and his five-year-old son for protection of the Great Writ of habeas corpus. They seek nothing more than some modicum of due process and the rule of law. The government has responded.
He starts by juxtaposing the grandeur of habeas corpus with the modesty of the father and son’s claims, implying that what makes the writ “Great” is precisely its ability to protect the basic right of ordinary people not to be locked up arbitrarily. It does this by requiring that the government either provide reasons for holding them in custody or else let them go.
Judge Biery’s footnote directing readers to Blackstone’s commentaries and Magna Carta may be intended to give a remedial lesson to members of the administration. His larger point, though, is that to flout the guarantee of habeas corpus — as he insists the current deportation policy has done — is to threaten the integrity of the American constitutional order itself.
The case has its genesis in the ill-conceived and incompetently-implemented government pursuit of daily deportation quotas, apparently even if it requires traumatizing children. This Court and others regularly send undocumented people to prison and orders them deported but do so by proper legal procedures.
He calls attention to the grandiosity and sloppiness of the administration’s position while suggesting that its overreach reflects a more sinister intention.
Apparent also is the government’s ignorance of an American historical document called the Declaration of Independence. Thirty-three-year-old Thomas Jefferson enumerated grievances against a would-be authoritarian king over our nascent nation. Among others were:
1. “He has sent hither Swarms of Officers to harass our People.”
2. “He has excited domestic Insurrection among us.”
3. “For quartering large Bodies of Armed Troops among us.”
4. “He has kept among us, in Times of Peace, Standing Armies without the consent of our Legislatures.”
As the 250th birthday of American independence approaches, the president is being cast as King George III. The federal government’s indifference to habeas claims places it on the wrong side of the historical divide between individual liberty and unchecked state power, and thus at odds with the founding documents of the Republic.
“We the people” are hearing echos of that history.
And then there is that pesky inconvenience called the Fourth Amendment:
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and persons or things to be seized.
U.S. CONST. amend. IV.
Civics lesson to the government: Administrative warrants issued by the executive branch to itself do not pass probable cause muster.
In constitutional terms, the judge finds that the administration has defied the Fourth Amendment and disregarded the separation of powers.
That is called the fox guarding the henhouse. The Constitution requires an independent judicial officer.
A barnyard metaphor puts the matter in plainer language: Because executive authority has the potential to be predatory, it needs to be checked by the judiciary branch. Judge Biery might also be sending a sly message to his colleagues on the U.S. Supreme Court, who have looked favorably on many of Mr. Trump’s expansive claims of executive branch power.
Accordingly, the Court finds that the Constitution of these United States trumps this administration’s detention of petitioner Adrian Conejo Arias and his minor son, L.C.R. The Great Writ and release from detention are GRANTED pursuant to the attached Judgment.
The language in which the judge renders his decision also sends a message, in this case to the president himself. Capitalization is a hallmark of Mr. Trump’s style, as it is of American legalese. The paragraph granting the petition bristles with uppercase nouns, which makes it all the more striking that the president’s name, otherwise absent from the ruling, is rendered in lowercase, as a card-table verb.
This may be a subtextual swipe at the president’s ego, but it’s consistent with the decision’s fundamental argument, which is that the president — any president — is ultimately smaller than the law.
Observing human behavior confirms that for some among us, the perfidious lust for unbridled power and the imposition of cruelty in its quest know no bounds and are bereft of human decency. And the rule of law be damned.
For Judge Biery, the case involves procedure, and morality too. When he allows himself to express his disapproval — to write judgmentally, rather than judicially — he is in effect arguing that these principles can’t be separated. Due process and human decency are two sides of the same coin.
Ultimately, Petitioners may, because of the arcane United States immigration system, return to their home country, involuntarily or by self-deportation. But that result should occur through a more orderly and humane policy than currently in place.
Philadelphia, September 17, 1787: “Well, Dr. Franklin, what do we have?” “A republic, if you can keep it.”
With a judicial finger in the constitutional dike,
It is so ORDERED.
Benjamin Franklin famously (and perhaps apocryphally) pointed out the fragility of orderly self-government, while the Dutch boy immortalized in the 19th-century novel “Hans Brinker, or the Silver Skates” did what he could to protect his neighbors from the fury of the unchecked sea.
That Judge Biery puts himself in their company suggests that he sees this decision less as a final judgment than as a warning.
SIGNED this 31st day of January, 2026.
FRED BIERY
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Credit: Bystander
After his cautionary conclusion, the judge still has something extra to say, something that shifts the focus away from the rational, secular domain of jurisprudence.
Below his signature, he attaches the widely seen photograph of Liam. Underneath that — after an eloquently anonymous photo credit — are references to two verses from the New Testament. The judge doesn’t quote them, but they speak for him all the same.
Matthew 19:14
The Matthew verse — “But Jesus said, Suffer little children, and forbid them not, to come unto me: For of such is the kingdom of heaven” — is a well-known statement of compassion and care.
John 11:35
So, in its way, is John 11:35, the shortest verse in the English Bible. It is often quoted when things are so terrible that all other words fail:
“Jesus wept.”
Culture
Try This Quiz on Mysteries Set in American Small Towns
A strong sense of place can deeply influence a story, and in some cases, the setting can even feel like a character itself. This week’s literary geography quiz highlights thriller and mystery novels set in towns around the United States. (Even if you don’t know the book, each question offers a clue about the state.) To play, just make your selection in the multiple-choice list and the correct answer will be revealed. At the end of the quiz, you’ll find links to the books if you’d like to do further reading.
Culture
Try This Quiz on Oscar-Winning Adaptations of Popular Books
Welcome to Great Adaptations, the Book Review’s regular multiple-choice quiz about works that have gone on to find new life as movies, television shows, theatrical productions — or even books. With the Academy Award nominations announced last week, this week’s challenge celebrates past Oscar-winning films that were based on books. Just tap or click your answers to the five questions below. And scroll down after you finish the last question for links to the books and their filmed versions.
-
Indiana2 days ago13-year-old rider dies following incident at northwest Indiana BMX park
-
Massachusetts3 days agoTV star fisherman, crew all presumed dead after boat sinks off Massachusetts coast
-
Tennessee4 days agoUPDATE: Ohio woman charged in shooting death of West TN deputy
-
Pennsylvania1 week agoRare ‘avalanche’ blocks Pennsylvania road during major snowstorm
-
Movie Reviews1 week agoVikram Prabhu’s Sirai Telugu Dubbed OTT Movie Review and Rating
-
Indiana2 days ago13-year-old boy dies in BMX accident, officials, Steel Wheels BMX says
-
Culture1 week agoTry This Quiz on Oscar-Winning Adaptations of Popular Books
-
Austin, TX5 days ago
TEA is on board with almost all of Austin ISD’s turnaround plans