Author: walter irvin
Date: 08:37:49 11/03/00
Go up one level in this thread
On November 03, 2000 at 09:17:06, Mogens Larsen wrote: >On November 03, 2000 at 08:29:25, José Carlos wrote: > >> Kramnik won Kasparov; Shirov won Kramnik. So Shirov has more right to be >>called world champion than Kramnik, but it's still absurd. What about Anand? and >>the rest of strong players in the world?. That match means nothing but a match. >>Ok, Kramnik won a match to Kasparov: nothing more, nothing less. >> In my opinion, there's no world title nowadays. But that's another story... >> >> Just my opinion. >> >> José C. > >I agree with your opinions entirely, José. We have a rating list (BGN) champion >(Kramnik) and a FIDE champion (Khalifman), a couple of disgruntled champions >(Karpov and Fischer) and someone who feel cheated (Shirov). If you add a handful >of strong GM's that didn't get a chance, we have utter confusion. So you're >right, there isn't any unanimous World Champion. Take your pick, there's a >champion for everyone :o). > >Mogens. i still considder deep blue the world champion ,to me kasparov had no title to give away .
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.