Author: Albert Silver
Date: 18:21:27 11/10/04
Go up one level in this thread
>>>>>On November 09, 2004 at 23:24:20, Peter Darin wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>He is running away.
>>>>>
>>>>>From what?
>>>>>Tony
>>>>
>>>>from playing Kasparov of course whom he is afraid to play.
>>>
>>>I don't know what makes you think Kramnik is afraid to play Kasparov. After all
>>>he beat Kasparov for the title. There is no evidence that he is afraid. There is
>>>evidence that Kasparov does not want to play Kramnik. He declined to play in the
>>>Dortmund qualifier. He went back to fide. If Kasparov wanted to play Kramnik so
>>>bad he would have played in Dortmund. I think many people don't understand that
>>>Kramnik is trying to reform chess. Kasparov instigated the mess we have now. I
>>>too would like to see them play, but Kasparov should have to qualify.
>>>Regards,
>>>Tony
>>
>>I'm afraid I have to side with Peter on this one. Kramnik has been beaten by
>>Kasparov since the title for one thing, and he also recently decided he would
>>not play the superfinal against Kasparov despite the agreement that the winner
>>of both matches would play to unify the titles. I don't think Kramnik is trying
>>to reform anything at all and never heard one single word on his part suggesting
>>that was his intention. Alekhine, move over, you've got company.
>>
>> Albert
>
>Hello Albert
>Kramnik did not say he wouldn't play Kasparov. He said he had no commitment to
>play Kasparov. He agreed to the Prague agreement yes, but that said he would
>play the winner of Kasparov-Ponomariov. There will be no such match.
No doubt Kramnik has lawyers capable of saying the same thing, but it's still
bunk. Ponomariov was to play Kasparov as he was the official FIDE World
Champion, and not because he was Ponomariov. He then made things quite
impossible so the match could not take place. Now there is a new FIDE World
Champion who will correctly continue the process initiated and Kramnik has found
a very convenient loophole.
>Kramnik has
>said in NIC that he wants reform in chess. He also supports the ACP who want to
>reform chess, so his intentions are clear.
Reform should start by clarifying the state of the World CHampionship title,
which has ceased being clear for the past years. When there is finally a
possibility to close the rift, his reform desires are nowhere to be found.
>Kasparov's intentions are anything
>but clear. He insisted that there be no rematch clause for his match with
>Kramnik. Now he complains about not getting a rematch. I don't take Kasparov
>seriously anymore. He is interested in politics and writing but not chess so
>much. He plays very few games a year. Thus he is still the highest rated player
>but not the strongest. Based on results Kramnik and Anand are playing better.
Anand is certainly showing great results, but Kramnik ?? Aside from barely
retaining the title by virtue of drawing the match (a truly bad rule), I'm not
sure what these best-player-in-the-world results of his you are referring to. As
to Kasparov's supposed weakness, I think he will shine in the upcoming Russian
championship, and Kramnik fears that he will lose the strength of his bargaining
position if he comes up short. I remember after the results in the mid 90s when
Kasparov seemed to lose some steam then as well, and people were quick to
announce his impending downfall.
>I think the Kramnik-Leko match was more competitive than the Kasparov-Kramnik
>match. Now Kasparov is 4 years older and weaker. This is why he doesnt want to
>have to qualify. He might not make it.
>Regards
>Tony
That reason you just gave is absurd, and I honestly don't believe you think
that. The reason I think he doesn't want to go through a long drawn-out process
is simply because he doesn't think he should need to. Whether or not that's
right is another story, but I believe that to be correct. I think he still has a
few years ahead of him to be number one, unless someone forces him out of the
spot, but I agree that one shouldn't be able to sit on one's laurels for 3 years
as the current rating system allows. There should be a required minimum per
year.
Albert
This page took 0.01 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.