Author: Steve
Date: 21:50:05 03/18/00
Go up one level in this thread
On March 18, 2000 at 12:51:33, Jay Rinde wrote: [snip] >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. Well said. Pretending that Khalifman belongs in the pantheon with Kasparov, Karpov, Fischer, Botvinnik, Alekhine, and the other REAL world champions is not only silly, but demeans and trivializes the title that they worked so hard to earn.
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.