Author: Jay Rinde
Date: 09:51:33 03/18/00
Go up one level in this thread
On March 18, 2000 at 11:59:25, Lawrence S. Tamarkin wrote: >Oh, the other thing I wanted to get across is that irregardless of what we think >of the Fide World Chess Championship, Khalifman is the one and very deserving >current owner of this title, and we should give him great respect for obtaining >it. I just think that we should now acknowledge the existance of a different >kind of title, which Kasparov should deservedly be awarded because of his total >dominance of the game for the last 2 decades. For lack of a better name, I >think BIG GIANT HEAD fits him prety well. If we could get a tie in to the tv >show, and mention from William Shatner on Price-line.com, it would be all the >better for the chess world:) > >Larry T. Back in the old days before TV ratings, a champion had to lose his title in the ring. In those days there were eight divisions. Today with all the different federations there are at least 64. And each federation claims its own champ. But that doesn't make is so. And so in chess. We all know that Kasparov is the champion. If we are to accept some arbitrary title holder that FIDE wants to crown, that's fine. But Karpov is/was the FIDE champion. He wasn't defeated in the ring. FIDE decided to have a tournament each year to decide the champ. Like the NCAA tournament. Every one has a chance, and luck plays a hand. The best player may not win. And you are only a champion for a year and may not be able to defended it face to face. A farce. KASPAROV WON THE TITLE OVER THE BOARD!!! That's how you are supposed to win it. Anything else is just silly. And for some one to say that a player that hasn't played for about 30 years should be champion is absurd. Finis.
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.