Greengard's ChessNinja.com

Elista Aftermath

| Permalink | 248 comments

The final press conference is at the official site here. Apart from a surreal question about the delight of chess fans coming from the rapid chess final, it's standard uplifting fare. I'm glad Kramnik stuck up for the classical control. I wish they would say who asked each question. Just about everyone I saw mention it was rather horrified by ending a WCh event in rapid chess. (There has been talk in the comments of a "classical armageddon game" tiebreaker. The players offer and counteroffer how much time black has until one accepts the other's offer. Has this been tried?) It is true the quality of the rapid games was high, very high for stretches, but I believe these fellows are supposed to be good.

Kramnik's money quote: "We are planning to get drunk with my friends today!" [Disappointingly, I'm told this is better translated as "have a drink with"] Topalov has a new interview here at Topalov.net. There is also a statement from Danailov that says they will try to put a rematch together via FIDE's recent "title for sale" challenge rule. It's a usual attempt to keep some positive spin going. I'd make a crack here about Kramnik and rematches, but nowadays it seems that FIDE sells them at reasonable prices... Unfortunately, we also get this nugget from him, "Expect a whole book on the events in Elista where the scandal with the toilet will be explained in details." Sad.

A nice video clip of a Russian news report on the map has been posted here. The comments to the final item on the match include other video and coverage links. The news has hit all the wires, many with long stories. For those of you keeping track, according to Google News in English and Spanish, it's around five times the mainstream mentions after the end of San Luis. (Which had 112 stories after one week. Yes, I write these things down.) That's the combined power of unification, scandal, and a long(ish), dramatic match.

I updated the ChessMexico website to replace Topalov's player page with Kramnik's. Only later did I notice you can't rename pages so the URL still says Topalov. Probably have to create a new page and delete the old one. Or maybe I should just hide the Topalov page in case he gets his rematch?


As I said, wow!
I would love to see a new match. Danailov is obviously nuts, but I love the style of Topalov and I will be happy to see some of his games.

I think I'm in the right forum here. What Topalov and Danailov say is really the "daily dirt".

Topalov and his manager continue to disgrace chess and do not deserve a rematch. Is it too much for Topa to admit that he lost the match fairly? The man got a free point just for having his manager raise a hubbub and played an extra game as white to boot. In the rapid games, where understanding of the game is far more important than having a crack team of analysts, Kramnik clearly outclassed Topalov. The man needs to graciously accept that his manager's dirty tricks did not work and step aside.

Before Danailov's antics, many would probably have been clamoring for Topalov to get a chance at regaining the crown via either a rematch or a seat in Mexico City. This sentiment, of course, has been flushed away. Tell me nothing about loving the style of a player, because real players can appreciate Petrosian as much as they appreciate Tal. Instead, speak to me about appreciating a respect for the game, something that Topalov evidently no longer has.

Perhaps a goot time to change manager?
Danailov is really ruining Topalov's image. Not so long ago, everyone recognized him as "the player of the year", "Kasparov's successor", and now, look where he is! And it's NOT because he lost the match, but because the way his manager tried to retains it...

Speaking by telephone from his room in Elista, the capital of the Russian republic Kalmykia and the site of the match, Mr. Kramnik said yesterday that he understood Mr. Topalov had been under a lot of pressure during the match, but that he believed that Mr. Topalov and his manager, Silvio Danailov, who filed the protests, had gone too far.

“In any world championship, there is a lot of pressure, and people act differently sometimes,” Mr. Kramnik said. “It doesn’t mean that you have to go under certain standards of ethical actions.”

“There was no theoretical possibility to have any kind of help from computers,” Mr. Kramnik said. “We were checked with metal detectors. Our restrooms were checked. There was not a single chance. The main purpose of all these actions was to disturb me.”

As for his opponent, Mr. Kramnik said, “I have definite admiration for the way he plays.”

He also said that he did not hold a grudge against Mr. Topalov.

“I am not the guy who keeps such things too long,” Mr. Kramnik said. “I am rather an easy person in general. For me, it would be enough if he does not do such things again.”


little typing error in the last sentence of the Kram profile. It's "City", not "CIty".

danailov, before and after
LMAO :-)

The situation is ridiculous to the max.

It is not that Topalov has a manager who has hired
for doing some tasks and whom he pays and thus whom he commands, it is that Danailov has a "boy" called Topa. It is just as in box or in horse races where the managers run the show and continously try to discover and own new "talents" to make money with.

This was Kramnik-Danailov match.

Hopefully, in a couple of years, Carlsen will be ready to challenge the World Champion. He combines Kramnik's sportsmanship with Topalov's attacking spirit, and is his own man (he hasn't even had a couch the last couple of years).


From his comments that I just read on ChessBase, it sounds like he has said just that - that he was happy with the way he played, but Kramnik took full advantage of his chances. He certainly said that the bathroom stuff had nothing to do with him winning or losing, and that it didn't distract him at all.

He did make some passing comments in response to a question about "Toiletgate" before referring people to Danailov for all the details (even saying that he didn't know all the details himself). Which to me sounds like someone who may not be comfortable with all this, but wants to say just enough not to throw his manager (and friend?) under the bus.

Of course, it could also easily be that he just wants to let Danailov handle it so he can keep his hands clean. None of us are in Topalov's head and know exactly what's going on.

Argh, I really have to remember how NOT to structure quotes when replying here. :) The comment I was replying to: "is it too much for Topa to admit that he lost the match fairly?"

English translation is not correct. Kramnikm said "get a drink with friends", not "get drunk" ;-)

That's from the BBC. Where's the Russian version?

Carlsen plays this way because he is young
and has not yet suffered defeats and disappointments in life.
Kramnik too played attacking chess when he was under 20, look for instance at his game with Nunn at his first Olympiad.

Carlsen may change a lot in the next few years after he will meet with increasingly strong resistance in his quest to become WCC.

Such is life.It sucks and then you blunder a rook or a mate in 2.

Mig wrote: "That's from the BBC. Where's the Russian version?"
Here it is - on the official match site (http://www.worldchess2006.com/main.asp?id=1143):

"Сейчас надо отойти от поединка, а конкретно сегодня – выпить со всей командой и людьми, которые поддерживали меня в Элисте."

Mig: are you really sure that now is a good time to promote the Mexico Wch website? Well: Anand, Svidler and Morozevich will play in any case. Who else? Kramnik did not answer clearly so far. And what about the candidates matches? If would be useful to make some website for the candidates matches, as I think.

Oh, young Magnus has had his fair share of debacles, often on account of blunders. And it's surely wrong to say that playing style is a function of age.

>Such is life. It sucks and then you blunder a rook or a mate in 2.

Nifty aphorism! ;-)

First off, the website is not just for the tournament. It will be covering dozens of tournaments in Mexico and other promotional activities to generate interest. Note that the name of the site is chessmexico, not just the championship. Another reason for the early launch is to begin to test systems and train staff for the big event.

Kramnik is now a qualified player as the defending world champion. If he later says he's not playing, we'll take him out.

The site will be covering the candidates closely. In my eyes it should be the official site of the candidates matches. We are in touch with FIDE about them and the site will cover them very closely as part of the "road to the championship" coverage in general.

> are you really sure that now is a good time to promote the Mexico Wch website?

IMHO yes, this was the moment when everybody was interested in chess because of the WCC match.
Mig seized the moment.

"The ladder of success is best climbed by stepping on the rungs of opportunity". Ayn Rand

And yes, of course we wanted to get the URL out there to take advantage of all the traffic for the Elista match.

Hi all,

Was not the most interesting of the chessbase report, that Top&Dai said that FIDE will change the rules soon again? Wjat a surprise? ;-)



"Four players in the chess World Championship in Mexico City qualified by finishing in the top half of the last event, held in 2005 in San Luis, Argentina. They are the reigning champion, Veselin Topalov, plus Viswanathan Anand, Peter Svidler, and Alexander Morozevich."

Lasker never played Schlechter again - by good reasons i suppose - so - why should Kramnik play Topalov again?

Way to go, Topanailov, old scum, hopefully you'll not share Carl Schlechter's fate...

And Mexico... nice girls and music there and a lot of Actec and Cortez and Alamo stuff - but a round robin for WCCh - to be honest - i do not see it (of course im not a fortuneteller of the calibers Kirsan uses to consult!)


Keep the good stuff coming.

Sorry if my post is a little OT, but many asked in the last days which where the ELO variations of the two players after this match.
I was curious too, so I used the ELO calculator on FIDE site:
And the winner (of course) is...
Kramnik, who earned 15 elo points (15,3 to be precise), 14 points before the 'toiletgate' (if we consider that his ELO before 1st October was 2743) with the score of 3-1, and 1,3 points after the toiletgate (his ELO beeing 2750 and the score 3-4).
So the new ELO of the two players should now be:
Kramnik 2765
Topalov 2798
I would finally point out (it is never mentioned) that Kramnik's ELO lacks of the points he should have been awarded by beating Kasparov in the 2000 match.
FIDE never considered that match valid for ELO variations. Curious ah?

I didn't know that, Roberto!
I suppose it would have boosted Kramnik's rating by about 30 points?


So what's Kramnik's rating (and Kasparov's) if you figure in the missing games?

--Does this mean that Kasparov was not the world's (real) #1 when he retired?

Are you sure FIDE did not count the Kasparov-Kramnik match? Kramnik's ELO had grown over 2800 after the match. I thought, the win was a major part of this growth.

>Lasker never played Schlechter again - by good >reasons i suppose - so - why should Kramnik play >Topalov again?

I do not see Kramnik accepting to play Topa again after all that has happened any time soon.
And also because of what happened he will always seem to have a good reason (excuse) to say "No!".

But this will create problems in the next 5 years.We are only at the beginning of them.

Topa is a great fighter (likely because he suffers from an hyperactive thyroid, look at his eyes and you will recognize the signs of Basedow's exophtalmia) and he will recover fast from this disaster.
And, just as Korchnoi once, such characters are prone to have a long career on the the top and thus the issue of a rematch is here to stay, or at least to stay until Kramnik loses to a "Carlsen" and a hopefully wiser Topa will get his second chance.

The internet, where fact-checking goes to die in a graveyard of gullibility.

It's not true, they just didn't rate the match in time for the January 2001 list because, so they said, the official results had not been sent in on time. But the match was included on the April list, as if obvious if you look at their rating behavior. Kasparov lost around 20 points, London offset by his Linares win. Kramnik gained 30 points and reached 2802.

Exophthalmia. And where's the goitre?

Yes, you're right Mig, just checked myself.
Anyway Kramnik won with that match about 21 points (and same amount lost Kasparov).

By the way, as the Elo system tend to 'automatically' correct late events in favor of most recent ones, also in the case of 21 points missing the next games played would have caused a major increment (in case you win) or a minor loss (in case you loss).

But about the last match, now Topa in under 2800, and dunno if he gets the opportunity to raise back over that mark, considering the way he continues to behave... ;-)

Topalov is playing in Essent 20-28 October, against Mamaedyarov, Polgar and Sokolov.

In Essent, Topalov will even ask Judith's baby's diaper to be checked with metal detector.

On armageddon games: It would be really cool if the players started out standing next to the table, and the arbiter just starts black's clock.
Whoever punches the clock first gets to play white starting immediately, the other gets black at draw odds and what's left of black's time.

Danailov is completely disgusting. Not only he destroys the image and reputation of a great player but also he causes some collateral damage to the game itself by insisting to popularize in the whole world the worst aspects of a world championship. Definitely a bad loser of a low moral standard.
As far as Topalov is concerned, he is so sad..He is supposed to be a professional, an elite player, an ambassador of chess. And he even hasnt an opinion!! All the time he answers: " As my manager said..", "My manager would decide..",he even said about the scandal " this is the job of my manager, i do not know all the details."..........Veselin should i remind you than you are an adult and not a dependent child?

2 comments: 1) Mig, if everyone you read about was horrified that it ended with a rapid play-off, let's be thankful it didn't go to a 6-5 Armageddon game...I was really worried about that.

2) I also am looking forward to the coming of Carlsen, and from what I have seen, I think that he could end up as one of the three best ever along with Kasparov and Fischer, but only time will tell. Of course, Carlsen is so young if we have bathroom antics like we just had, I suspect they will be more like "PottyGate". Just paying homage to his young age with a little kidding of course.

the next scenario
1-FIDE decide to imply topalov in mexico wc caz the winner of san luis should be there
2-kramnik states that world title should determined in a match and such tournaments should decide the challenger besides FIDE broke the contract by implying topalov
3-kramnik refuse to play in mexico and demand to play the winner in amatch
4- FIDE refuses to change the identity of mexico tournament to candidate tournament and decide it is just the legtimate world championship
5-Fide strip kramnik of his tite
6-Anand win mexico wc
7-kramnik claim he is still the wc caz he didnt defeated in a match
8-Yasser Seirawan call for reunfication match between classical champion kramnik and FIDE champion Anand
9-Anand says" unification what unification i never thought of it even in the 2000 ,iam not idiot like Toplaov"
10-in the year 2040 FIDE president kisan say in press conference "Today is a histoic day of our sport after monthes of negoiations and 33 year of schism it will a unification match in Benin between classical champion Alexander shorismov and Fide champion Shawn Alfred "

Nice post, polgy. My money is on Shawn Alfred since he invented a new move in the Slav with 34.Qh1!N. A move that even Fritz 29.3 did not see.

good as carlsen is, there's nothing to suggest that he'll make it to the Kasp/Kram/Fischer world champion leve. I have in mind examples like Radjabov who looked (and still looks) so good but somehow stopped improving. Then there's people like Leko and Anand who lack the character required to be WC.

it would be awesome if carlsen really does take the world by storm, but don't think it's a foregone conclusion.

Quick question: Does Kramnik speak English? If so, how well?

Maybe Ivantchuk is able to fight for the World title. Carlsen? I don't know. He plays too fast.

About the bidding for black in an armageddon game, we tried it twice in the NY Masters when we held a tiebreak game to determine the champion. The players were really confused, but it's not really very complicated and I believe it's clearly the most fair system in an Armageddon game. I don't believe it should be constant bidding back and forth but instead one written bid. (If both players bid the same amount, just flip a coin)

Ellsworth, Kramnik's English is excellent.
Greg, why not just let them bid once more?

Kramnik speaks English quite well with a predictably limited range of vocabulary. No trouble at all in interviews and such.

Greg, why would you have bids from each player? Couldn't it just be one player bids and the other picks which color to play? The old, "one sibling cuts the cake the other picks which slice he wants."

Kramnik speaks English just fine, as I recall. I typed in his comments for him for a live chat about a 5-minute match he had with Kaspy once, in Moscow. Hi, Mig!

Here y'go - just what you've wanted to see.

Silvio Danailov photos, "before" and "after".


btw, there was an interesting moment during the final after match press-conference: a reporter from online magazine (Ilya Odessky) has asked a question to Ilumzhinov (not Kramnik --sic!) who was sitting next to Kramnik: "has mr Ilumzhinoff had to support a Topalov's team on the match because of that Kramnik's statement which he made before the math where Kramnik expresses no desire to take part in the unification process?"

just after Kirsan has mumbled his politcorrect BS answer, Kramnik immediately took a mic and added that he never did such a statement and is curious about Odessky's sources.

the funny thing is that fragment of the world champion's first press conference has never appeared in the press-release on the official site. unfortunately, I did not manage to record a full press-conference while it's been translated on the cable TV (NTV+).

to: Ellsworth Toohey -- you can hear him at the press-conferences, for example http://worldchess2006.com/download/wcc_pc_5.mp3 and others.

Geneven! Wassup? Still in San Diego? Send me an email about how life's treating you.

Vishy Anand proves that his German is not only excellent but also... very colourful:

„Wir brauchen keine Überwachung in der Toilette und diese ganze Scheiße. Wir Schachspieler sind noch zivilisiert.“

"We do not need monitoring in the toilet and this whole sh**. We chess players are still civilized."

Greg, when was that done, out of curiosity? I thought I'd invented the idea but perhaps I'm just the Wallace to your Darwin :-) I'm glad to see it's actually been done anyway!

Greg is right, you don't need back-and-forth, you just have a sealed-bid auction. My idea [1A] was that the winner gets it at the loser's offer (pretty much like eBay if you're familiar with it): A bids 60%, B bids 70%, so A gets black at 70% of white's time. (And B can't complain because B has in essence argued that a 70% discount is fair when making his/her own bid.) You could also do it [1B] that the winner gets it at the winner's offer (60%). Another idea would be to split the difference [1C] and make the final discount the average of the winner's and loser's offers (65%). I think these are all fair.* The obvious advantage of [1A] is that the times are more equal in [1A] and it might make for better chess.

Mig, your proposal [2] that A selects the discount and B then chooses color is also fair; it works out to be exactly equivalent to the winner getting Black at the winner's own offer [1B].


* The three ideas lead to slightly different bidding strategies though. From each player's point of view, a 'fair' discount is the point where his/her own chances of victory are the same with either color: that is, P(win)white = P(win)black + P(draw)black. But suppose I believe that the opponent's judgment of how the outcome probabilities vary with the discount differs from my own? If I take my own judgment of the opponent's judgment into account then I might be justified in bidding higher or lower than the discount that I think is 'fair', and the choices among [1A-C] should have some significance. This is actually a somewhat interesting problem which I haven't fully worked out. But I think that all three are fair in the sense that the player with the more accurate judgment does better.

REMATCH?? so even if K offers T a rematch and say T wins, then T offers K a rematch and so on.. untill someone wins two in a row? what is this supposed to be - deuce in table tannis?

Mig: why is hard to change title of the page? just curious.. can't you just change what is between the title tags?

I think Topalov is in Denialov if he thinks he deserves a match without qualifying.

Regarding the details of Armageddon Chess:

I agree with Greg S. that bidding back and forth is Not the best approach (for determining the amount of time that will be given to Black).

I also think "sealed" bids, one from each player, is a bad idea.

Most of all I agree with Mig G. that only ONE player should make the time bid. Immediately after the bid is made, the other player gets to choose whether he wants to play as White or Black. That compels the bidding player to bid an amount fair to both players.
Some people call this technique for fairness a "pie" style of rule. I like pie rules (or Mig used the term 'cake' instead of 'pie').

A coin flip could determine which player makes the time bid.

...From earlier postings...
I don't believe it should be constant bidding back and forth but instead one written bid. (If both players bid the same amount, just flip a coin)

Posted by: Greg Shahade at October 15, 2006 16:55

Greg, why would you have bids from each player? Couldn't it just be one player bids and the other picks which color to play? The old, "one sibling cuts the cake the other picks which slice he wants."

Posted by: Mig at October 15, 2006 17:09

Gene Milener

On Monday there will be a big press-conference with Kramnik in Moscow.

{Danailov & Priklopil ... separated at birth?


Posted by: Chess Player at October 15, 2006 19:54 }

Wow, that's uncanny Chess Player.

I think Kramink should not take part to the Mexico tournament in Mexico.
He should play the winner of that tournament instead.
In this way Topalov will have his place back in it and there will be a NEW reunification match between the still Classical World Chess Champion Kramnik and the new FIDE world chess champion (if FIDE doesn't want to call him just challenger...)

I think Kramink should not take part to the Mexico tournament in Mexico.
He should play the winner of that tournament instead.
In this way Topalov will have his place back in it and there will be a NEW reunification match between the still Classical World Chess Champion Kramnik and the new FIDE world chess champion (if FIDE doesn't want to call him just challenger...)


After quite a number of games at level 2844, what's Kramnik ratings, and what's Topalov after all these games with 2702 performance?

I find it incomprehensible that the winner isn't contractually obliged to defend his title in Mexico. How could this have been allowed to happen?

We have a number of players who have contracts to play for the world title in Mexico City or to play a challengers series to get there yet apparently it isn't cast iron that the champion has to be there. What kind of unification is this?

On the point of matches. Its proved impossible to get sponsors for candidates matches and this world title match, sure matches might be the best system but I think we first have to think about a world championship taking place at all.


Are you sure that the winner is not contractually obliged to defend his title in Mexico ? If so, Ilzhyuminov is a bigger idiot than I thought ?

I am disgusted by Topolov's press release. March 2007? I am sorry, but let's let the paint dry on the trophy TOP! Grow up. You lost. You lost and hurrah you lost. I hope Kramnik hides his title till death. Fide or their lackeys deserve nothing.

Well no I'm not sure there isn't an obligation.

But according to an interview with Kramnik neither is he and Carsten Hensel has fudged the issue with comments he's made. They obviously think there is some room for doubt at least.

Topa is behaving like a kid. Even Carlesn would have shown more maturity after a match loss!

Anyway, any insider information about the Candidates matched for the next WC cycle?


What about the doping test? Are the results there already?

What happens if Kramnik has taken Doping?

Might be possible, because he will not be adjusted to the regulations for doping for physical sports, and even in a nose medicine there might be doping

Am I the only one who thinks Armageddon of any kind is positively a last resort? The rapidplay playoffs were superb. The only thing I’d say is that if it’s 2-2 they should do it again the next day.

I can’t see a guy winning it by moving quicker and holding the draw. Doesn’t seem right to me.

Mark Crowther writes:

"It's proved impossible to get sponsors for ... this world title match".

You are forgetting that Kramnik had found sponsors for a match, but Topalov declined. Apparently, FIDE wanted to have more control over the match organization (and we all know how well that worked...), so Kirsan Ilyumzhinov ended up paying for everything himself.

I hope that the match tradition can be preserved, not by a new split but rather by a consensus among a majority of top players and acknowledged by FIDE. The winner of Mexico could be named the "Tournament World Champion" and automatically become the next challenger of the current "Match World Champion".

I see Danailov says that any ex-champion is allowed by FIDE’s rules to challenge if he can raise the boodle. I wonder if Kasparov is even a little bit tempted. I hadn’t realised ex-champions had this right; I thought it was only active 2700 players.

Great photos on chessbase of the two players after the match sitting through what must have been some absolutely balls-aching displays of Kalmykian folk dancing at the closing ceremony. It’s difficult to imagine a more fitting punishment for Topalov, really, although of the two Kramnik looks the more disgusted. Presumably he was also the more hungover, mind.

I just don't believe that it's impossible to find sponsors for a world championship match. As severin stated Kramnik already did it (twice if you count the Leko match) and Radjabov also did it. So possible sponsors were found for no less than 2 matches within a year. The major problem is that FIDE is generally perceived as a corrupt organisation with a corrupt leader, which is why they have trouble finding anyone wanting to do business with them. Also, I don't think Kirsan actually want's outside sponsors. I think he likes being the 'saviour' who puts up the money for the big matches when it looks bleakest, so he probably doesn't try very hard.
There is money out there for chess (admittedly not a lot, but it's there) but it takes an honest and trustworthy organisation/person to bring it forth.

One more thought: the title of World Champion had so much prestige in the past because it was a steep hill to climb. The qualification tournaments, candidate matches and, finally, the world championship match itself made sure that only the best would prevail.

Make this hill less steep and you automatically diminish the prestige of the title.

Kramnik would be quite a fool to accept playing in Mexico and I don't see him doing such mistake.

It is quite obvious that these WCC matches are the highest that chess can reach, that only thing that really matters, the rest is "chess tourism".

Do you remember the 1927 Capa-Alehin match or the 1925(?) New York tournament that produced Alehin as challanger ? Was the world as (if at all) excited of Topalov's St. Louis as it has been of Elista-WCC ?

Kramnik accepting playing in Mexico for WC would be self shooting in the foot, would be misusing what he has got for the sake of well being of others (Kirsan, Zurab, Makro, Danailov gangster-cartel).

Why should he do it ? Masochism ?
Not his style. There will be another big Kranik-"X" match in 2008 with the "X" being winner of Mexico 2007 or some other credible challanger.

FIDE keeps trying to get in control of the most precious cow to milk it big but somehow this goes against nature.

They should be happy if they can produce an worthy, credible, challanager and thus put some moral pressure on the W-Champ to play him [so as to maintain his informal public recognition] and only in this way to get some "share" in the glory and money of an WCC match.

Bravo Kasparov for undoing the big mistake of 1925 (when FIDE was created) and of 1948 when they eventually got what they were yearning for :
the control of the WCC title and the replacement of true greatness in chess with political manouvering.

The champion owns the title and, because of this, it is his right to do with it whatever he wishes.
End of "moral" arguments.

"Lasker never played Schlechter again - by good reasons i suppose - so - why should Kramnik play Topalov again?"

Money, of course. If Topalov really can raise a $1.5 million prize fund, I have to think Kramnik would be tempted. Why shouldn't he? There aren't many events with that kind of payoff, and I doubt Kramnik is afraid of Topalov at the board.

the Tournament Performance Rating of Topalov was a dismal 2702 while Kramnik had a nice 2844 performance over the 11 played classical games.

the net change in overall rating is 15.9 points or 16 points. this puts Topalov down below 2800.

Topalov 2613-16=2797
Kramnik 2750+16=2766

Anand is at 2779

so the top 3 players come closer together.

I did not do this calculation. I read about it elsewhere from people who are good at these calculations. I am sure the calculation is either right on or very close to what Fide will eventurally report. Of course there is plenty of time for both players to play more games before the January Rating List comes out.

It should be -14.9 and +14.9 respectively. Of course this kind of stuff is always unfair. A healthy Kramnik is obviously underrated at 2750 and having to play a whole match against him (even if "only" 11 games) affects your rating in a misleading way. Even discounting how and why Kramnik's rating fell, perhaps there should be separate match and tournament ratings as these are quite different things.

Oh, perhaps you're right. Kramnik went into the match with 2743, not 2750.

I did not like the playoff method. I think a much fairer arrangement is to keep playing the rapid games either until one player wins a game or one player wins a 2 game set.

The first set can be simply 2 games or 4 games or whatever, then after that they continue with 2 game sets. they can play 4 or 6 games per day. It will obviously not take forever. it will avoid the super fast 5 minute games and the armageddon game. it will keep a better dignity to the match. this is suppose to be a slow classical time champion. going to 5 minute games is silly.

to really cut it short one might consider a 2 or 4 game rapid match followed by rapid games with sudden death. first game winner ends the match. I really believe this is better than going to 5 minute games.

One big problem with 5 minute games was announced only during game 4 of the tiebreaks. it was announced that the 5 minute games would not be transmitted because they were too fast to transmit. that is totally not acceptable. the fans were going to be shut out of the live games. no way is that going to be accepted by fans who sat through 3 weeks of chess and scandal and then be shut out of seeing the moves played.

Mig what do you know about the situation if the games went to 5 minutes. My understanding is that the 5 minute games were not going to be transmitted.

You have to have matches to have match ratings. We had four matches in this decade, five if you include the Topalov-Leko after Dortmund Candidates. That means that aside from Kramnik nobody played more than one match and he played three, very different ones. Sure, we have an occasional friendly like Topalov-Iosepianu.

Interestingly, back when we did have full candidates match tournaments, the men who dominated tourneys generally also won those: Kasparov, Karpov, Fischer, etc. Spassky was not dominating tournaments in late 60s but he was in the top crowd, which was also the case in his match results. During the era that Kasparov dominated, the men who had second-best results in tournaments, ie first Karpov and then Anand also won the second-most matches. Short I think was mostly in second to fourth crowd in tourneys and also didn't do as well in matches.

And what about Kramnik? Aside from 2000 London, match results suggest he is slightly better than Topalov and about the same as Leko. While Topalov had an exceptional year in 2005 and Kramnik was ill in 2005, the rest of results we have seen are largely consistent with this as well.

Kramnik on Mexico and contractual obligations (the interview mentioned by Mark Crowther):
"Ja ne znaju..."

After his showing in the ECC (5/6 TPR 2916) Morozevich is also going above 2760+.

"You have to have matches to have match ratings." Yes indeed, there should be more matches. :-) I would enjoy matches like Kramnik-Anand or whatever even if they were not for the title. Nothing wrong with tournaments but I don't see why the whole season must be filled with them and then the occasional match just every other year...

"Even discounting how and why Kramnik's rating fell, perhaps there should be separate match and tournament ratings as these are quite different things."

There aren't enough matches to justify a separate rating list just for them. A chess game is a chess game. All games at long time controls should count equally.

Is there any statistically significant evidence that strength in matches is different from strength in tournaments? The Elista match certainly doesn't prove that. Kramnik's victory was entirely consistent with his lifetime plus score vs. Topalov.

Anyone seen the famous toilet in question on sale at Ebay yet? A good way for FIDE to raise funds for the rematch...

Mig the website looks great.

However I will be really ticked off if Kramnik puts this title up in a stupid tournament. I think he would be crazy to do anything other than say "I have had enough of FIDE."

Now is the time to see if he can't work through the acp and get a decent candidates *match* cycle that culminates in a WC *match* going. FIDE has no binding agreements with anyone since they have already breached what they originally set forth.

Kramnik had private sponsorship for his match with Topalov. (more than what they ultimately agreed to) FIDE was not *required* to be involved. Now Kramnik has Topalovs title so there shouldn't be an issue with moeny. Finally we will get private sponsorship. Now is the time to do this or there will never be another chance to save the title from FIDE's tournaments championship.

I'm glad the title is unified but I see no reason to continue to associate with Kirsan and company. In fact, I think it would be a terrible mistake to continue down that path!


Roughly speaking, not really, except for a few players who had particurlarly good/bad cycles, match-wise, such as Short in 92, Spassky's several candidates victories, Larsen and Geller's respective blowouts. One of the most informative Jeff Sonas posts on here can be seen in http://www.chessninja.com/dailydirt/2006/06/

If you search for Bronstein or Pillsbury in the page, you will find it.

Niceforkinmove, the ACP has not yet shown that it can organize an event on this scale. Kramnik therefore needs to work within FIDE, because there's no other option right now.

It remains unclear what happens if Kramnik does not come to Mexico. Does FIDE declare the title vacant? There is certainly a precedent for that. Perhaps he could skip the tournament, and then round up sponsorship for a match against the Mexico winner. Under FIDE rules, apparently he would play as a nominal "challenger," though of course most of us would still view him as the reigning classical champion.

Ideally, FIDE would recognize the Mexico tournament as the qualifying event for Kramnik's next challenger. But the sponsors in Mexico think they're hosting a World Championship, and they probably have the right to pull the plug if it just turns into a qualifying tournament.

The amount of goodwill Kramnik has received from winning this match is really incredible (and well deserved). Before this match many would have rated him lower than petrosian. Now who knows. certainly top 10 champion material. (Yes of course such comparisons aren't/cannot be scientific, but are still reasonably fun to think about.)

1st idea : Kramnik will never play in Mexico.
- Reason one : he didn't play in San Luis when he was only "classical" world champion, so why would he play now that he is unified world champion?
- Reason two : since 2000 he did everything that he could to keep alive the match tradition, so why would he change his position today, when his position is stronger than ever?
- Reason three : why would he play chess for one chance out of three or for to win 300000 dollars when in a match he'll have 100% of chances to make a lot more?

Kramnik will certainly negociate with Kirsan, and the WC in Mexico will become a "super challenger" tournament. Kramnik won't sue against FIDE, he certainly won't play against Radjabov, neither will he accept a rematch in march 2007 (how about next week?).

The FIDE will probably need to change the "world cup", which costs too much money to a less expensive IZ format. Right now, the world cup, then the qualifier matches + top rated players, all this ending up in a supertournament of eight players, then a WC match, involves too big expenses. One million and a half dollars for the world cup, one million dollars for the supertournament, one million dollars for the match, and still some dollars for the candidate matches, all this will be quite a lot on the lon run for the honnest kalmykian worker...

Big money has to be distributed on the match. Kramnik's february 2005 offer, Radjabov offer, Danailov's offer for a rematch, all this proves that organizing those matches shouldn't prove too hard. Organizing them in a big mediatic city should make it much better for chess mediatic coverage. New York, Mexico, Moscow, London, Paris, Madrid, Berlin... Then, giving up less money for the candidate final tournament, and giving reasonable prizes for the World Cup contenders would certainly make it much easier to handle for the FIDE.

In your first paragraph the second sentence does not follow from the first.

Kramnik now has both titles. So what could or, could not, be done before does not necessarilly apply to what can be done now.

The facts are:

Kramnik had private sponsorship for a prize fund of about 1.4 million when he was going to play Topalov. FIDE was *not* required. Even if Kramnik says take the .4 million ($400,000) to go for the candidates matches and I will play a final match for the remaining 1 million, that would be a much better solution than teaming up with Kirsan's corrupt and incompetent crew.

Chess will be much much better off. It would be tremendously foolish to push for Kirsan to take over control of this title. If someone promotes that, I have to wonder where his head was at for the last 10 years.

If I had to bet I would bet things go down along the lines spelled out by Ruslan. However I hope they don't. I would prefer Kramnik and the rest of the top players simply say enough is enough with Kirsan and organize a great cycle themselves with legitimate private sponsors like Kramnik had for his first proposal to Topalov.

I dno't get it. If Kramnik doesn't play in Mexico, then will the World Championship be split again, between him and the winner of Mexico?

Kramnik was supposed to have had a Moscow press conference this morning. Anyone have any news of that?

I am against short term gain for long term pain.

If the view of Mexico as a Tournament WC is the wrong thing to do, which is the view that I subscribe to, then don't do it.

Consider Mexico a candidates tournament. And if the sponsors run away, well, then they have salvaged their money which would have been spent for doing the wrong thing anyway.

Do the right thing from a long term perspective. Keep the match tradition alive as it has been for well over a century. Kramnik has now amassed enough support to salvage the match tradition.

(Even sore loser Topalov/Danailov wants to take advantage of the match tradition, in addition to Radjabov. Whether they are trying to take advantage of the match tradition in a proper or improper way is a different issue)

Go, Kramnik, go! Keep the match tradition alive! As the custodian of the match tradition you owe its continuation to the entire Steinitz lineage and to chess fans all around the world! Don't get distracted by the incompetent thugs at FIDE who cannot find sponsors for WC matches!

"Kramnik now has both titles. So what could or, could not, be done before does not necessarilly apply to what can be done now."

As far as I know, Kramnik is not saying he has two titles.

"The facts are:

"Kramnik had private sponsorship for a prize fund of about 1.4 million when he was going to play Topalov. FIDE was *not* required."

Yes, but the most notable thing is that the privately sponsored match did not happen. Matches that don't happen, don't count.

"It would be tremendously foolish to push for Kirsan to take over control of this title."

Too late. He has already done so.

Lets just see what Kramnik's rivals say when they get locked out again for another x years whilst this is sorted out. Anand supported Kramnik but lets see what he says when his world title shot which he says he's looking forward to is cancelled or downgraded. Personally I think the people who should have a say are the top 20 and two or three other juniors who are clearly going to make it. They're the ones who are directly affected. If they say OK I'm fine with that.

Another San Luis style tournament (precident 1948 by the way) would be OK by me, a match would be OK also. But just to cancel things from under the other players seems to me to be grossly unfair. They've been mucked about enough over the last decade or so.

From a new interview with Kramnik (in Russian):
1) Why the team was changed:
Bareev spends much time with his chess school, he couldn't fully commit his efforts to the match;
Svidler is more about e4, but the match strategy was built around d4, therefore he did not fit the openings chosen;
2) I was surprised Topalov did not try e4;
3) Slav now is the most tough and the most popular opening if you fight for initiative as Black;
4) regarding novelties:
Topalov and me take different approach to what can be considered as a novelty. Topalov tries to surprise with a new continuation, novelty is an idea fix for him. May be, this can bring him advantage, especially the psycho one, vs. other opponents, but not with me. Topalov believes that if he have shown a novelty first, this gives him an advantage. But if the novely is of mediocre quality, I am not afraid, and I can solve it OTB. I use a different approach, more fundamental. Topalov jumps from variation to variation to surptise me, but his novelties were mostly of mediocre quality and did not surpise me.
5) Game 5 novelty was also not strong, I could see how to play, and still can't understand why I chose b7-b5-b4. This was just not my day. If I managed to concentrate properly, Topalov would be glad if he could survive the game.
6) Toiletgate.
The reason why Vlad himself was involved to the discussion instead of Hensel: all the communication happened to be taken in Russian, and Hensel does not speak Russian.
Kramnik was affected by the conflict; he knew what Danailov is about, before the match, but he did not expect so shameless violations of contract and of ethics. Team Topalov was interested in cancelling the match, not the team Kramnik;
7) Game 5: he was forced not to play the game, because it was clear that this is just beginning of the war, and provocations wouldn't stop. He could play game 5, could use the ladies room, but was afraid of sharing the room with Topalov, because there was a chance of some provocation like computer chip being put stealthily, because the team Topalov could go as far as possible in their efforts;
8) tie-break game 4: Topalov was very nervous during this game;
9) future plans:
Regareding the WC tournament plans, he can't give an exact answer yet. He needs to re-read the contract to refresh the memory about obligations taken in detail (because it was mostly taken care by Hensel), and to talk to Kirsan first, because it is not clear what is happening with the cycle (candidat matches postponed, etc.). We'll hear the answer, but he needs time to make the decision.


Sorry for my poor English, I tried my best :-)

This interview is not from the press-conference. It was taken by Yuri Vasiliev in Elista on Sunday.
The press-conference materials will be published tomorrow.

Regarding security measures:
1) The player scanning included even shoes (as in airports) (from interview with Kramnik);
2) The building where they were playing is the egovernmant building with technical security measures implemented during the construction, to prevent any information exchange between the building and the outside world except controlled media (wired phone lines, etc.) These measures can't be restricted or disabled for some parts of the building (from interview with Elista high rank government security officer).

By the way, the current unclear cycle status and any possible future changes, like candidate matches being reformatted to a tournament, could be a good excuse for Vlad from playing in the FIDE WC tournament while holding the title. At least, I would give my voice for this.
If I was Kirsan, I'd be very afraid of modifying the cycle now.

It is impossible to call Mexico qualifier, because the organizers did not give 1.3 millions $ for holding the qualifier and they will disagree strongly, even if FIDE change their minds.

Kramnik if he fails to appear in Mexico not only he loses the title but he is legally prosecuted (unless this is for medical reasons).

Even if he ignores this, he will be unable to find any player to have as a chalenger for his matches, because now UNLIKE before, most players have contracts with FIDE that they cannot participate in any other world championship. Recall that the reason Anand did not play with Kramnik back in 1998 to qualify to play with Kasparov for exactly this reason. He had contract with FiDE. Now all the participants of Saint Luis and all those that played in the World Cup have contracts.

"Game 5 novelity was also not strong, I could see how to play and still can't understand why I chose b7-b5-b4."

@Kosulin This was game 9 ;)

You are right, the game 5 novelty was much stronger, it should be chosen as Chess Informant novelty of the year :-)

From Susan Polgar blog:

This was sent by Dr. Gabor (a Hungarian American physician from Kentucky). He is known as Gabor on her blog.

Vlad Kosulin,

Many thanks!

> I'm told this is better translated as "have a drink with"

In Russia (so I'm told) there is no practical difference between "have a drink with" and "get drunk with."

Thanks you very much for the info Vlad Kosulin.

I am glad he is taking some time to view the current situation with fresh eyes.


Matches don't happen for reasons. The first Kramnik Topalov match did not happen because of Kirsan/Makropolos and/or because of Topalov. Those reasons are gone. If you look at the numerous other busted matches, in recent history, you will see FIDE was a major if not the sole cause as well.

Say what you want about Kramnik but its hard to say he does not want to play matches. He was always the one pushing for this match to take place. He was also the one who had to push to get it done. Topalov and FIDE were always quick to to end it. Even with Leko he accepted a bit less than one million ot get the match going.

Kirsan lost the control he had. We can simply disagree on this. But IMO *now* more than any other time in recent history we can leave Kirsan(and hsi constant attempts to kill chess) behind.

I agree with Mark Crowther on everythign except the legitimacy of a tournament championships. You can have a tournamnt like in 1948 if Kramnik dies while holdign the title, otherwise its not legitimate.

I do not think Kramnik should just cancel without consulting the top players. I think he shoudl do the opposite. I think he should consult them and and try to see if they can all reach decent solution that does not depend on the everchanging whims of Kirsan.

I don't think this should take long. I think they can all for example say lets do the original plan proposed by FIDE (the one they proposed before San Luis which had a world champ final match) That was a decent cycle until Kirsan started changing it every month.

So I do agree that the top players should be consulted more and almost exclusively. But I would further say that they should consider the fans. If you want chess to be a truly professional sport, you need peopple interested in the events.

This is a widespread urban legend :-)
Believe me, the cause is, when most aliens participate in drink parties with Russians, they get drunk while Russinas still have a drink. But with proper training some aliens can survive and look like native Russians ;-)

For about $5 (including shipping from Bulgaria) you can, on ebay, buy photo-postcards of the match. Games 1-8 are available. Game 5 shows Top sitting alone at the board.

The first report from today's press-conference is here in Russian:


If anybody would like to take the pains to translate it... :) The most important point - Kramnik is very much in favour of WC matches rather than tournaments, so it doesn't look like he is going to Mexico in autumn 2007. Also, he doesn't seem to have the slightest intention to play new match with Topalov.


I'm trying to run it word-by-word through an online Russian-to-English translating engine. So far I've picked up "cyst" and "concubine."

>Kirsan lost the control he had. We can simply >disagree on this. But IMO *now* more than any >other time in recent history we can leave >Kirsan(and hsi constant attempts to kill chess) >behind.

I beg to differ. The situation is as such that Kirsan, and anyone who will follow him, will always enjoy power.

The reason is simple : envy combined with the belief that other people main business is to offer you chances.

The pack of top grandmasters who want that "somehow" the reigning WCC to be forced to give them too a chance to glory in their lifetime will always side with and support FIDE's attempt to control.

Even Kasparov after he lost his title "forgot" all his principles and the strong, and right, things that he said about Kirsan and FIDE and joined their ranks hoping that somehow Kramnik will be "caught" and obliged to give him a rematch.

Seems like other than Kramnik and his manager, Zhukov and other Russian chess Federation officials were present, as well as the Chief Arbiter of the Elista match. The 7th World champion Smyslov was also present. It was held in Central Chessplayers House named after Botvinnik.

First Zhukov congradulated Kramnik and then the congratulatory notes from Spassky and Karpov were read.(Nothing from Kasparov - the only other Soviet/Russian former World champ??)

I'm trying to run it word-by-word through an online Russian-to-English translating engine. So far I've picked up "cyst" and "concubine."

zis russian lenguidge iz veri hard :)

Kramnik seems to be in favour of matches and, perhaps even more importantly, this position seems to have the backing of Alexander Zhukov.
Kramnik also says that Topalov deserves to play in Mexico.

Running one sentence through a translation engine:

Kramnik: We begin with a pure leaf. Because, where we shall move, the future of a chess will depend. But I shall not go into detail yet. It is assured, that we with FIDE shall find common language.

Greg, just run it through babelfish (google is your friend) that works just fine. It's not James Joyce, but understandable.

Interesting what he says about Game 5...

Can't we all wait for 3-4 years for another WC match? If you have a match every year it will loose its glory. I agree with Ruslan's reasoning very much on this matter. Kramnik should not play in Mexico at all. It will be nice if they want to call Mexico event something else.

Excerpts from the Moscow press-conference with Kramnik:
(Q) What would you say about the idea voiced by Alex Roshal of letting Topalov to play in the match-tournament to choose the challenegr to play in the match with you?
(Kramnik) Danailov has shown himself from not the best side, but Topalov as a chess playes deserves to participate in the match-tournamentt, the winner of which will play with me. The old formula with some modifications has proven to be the most successful. Chess save their high profile thanks to WC matches. Ask anybody on a street what they know about chess, and thay will say Karpov-Kasparov, Spassky-Fischer, etc.
(Zhukov) Throwing away matches is a violence! If we choose a new Champion annually nobody will rememeber who is the CHampion.
(Kramnik) We start fresh. WHere we start from will decide the future of chess. This is too early for details. I am positive, we'll find common ground with FIDE

(Q) Topalov is goping for re-match...
(Kramnik) I did not think about this yet. I have another challenges at the moment. I feel responsibility to build a new working WC cycle. Regarding re-match... Today - Topalov, tomorrow - may be, Anand. Topalov wants a revenge, Leko - also... This is not the proper time for such endless soap operas. Because it would be against sports spirit to accept Topalov and ignore others who desire so.
(Hensel) Video tapes were held by team Topalov for 4 days and were observed in presence of the Appeal Committee... Regarding Danailov, this should not happen with chess again.
(Kramnik) Players can't participate in choosing memebers of the Appeals Committee in accordance to the FIDE Charter.

(Vlad Kosulin) Well, with so clear support form Zhukov, I doubt Kirsan can escape. But I hope this is not the beginning of a new era of Russinn politics using FIDE as a tool.

Sorry for misspellings... ;-)

Thanks, Vlad, for the cultural note. I'd be happy to stipulate that a drunken Russian could probably beat any number of non-Russians who had taken a drink, whether across the 64 squares or otherwise. ;)

Me, I'm chuffed about this latest WC match, whenever I whip out 1. d4 from now on my opponents are bound to think "here comes the next World Champion." :D

The first question was:

"Roshal mentioned the idea of allowing Topalov to play in the Mexico tournament, the winner of which will then play for the World championship. how do you feel about it?"

Kramnik: "The Elista match was not Topalov's manager Silvio Danailov's shining moment, but Topalov the chess player without a doubt deserves a spot in this tournament. This idea makes sense. I think the old formula, with minor corrections, was the most successfull compared to all others. The reason chess is what it is is because of the world championship matches. Ask a person on the street what does he/she know about chess. They will probably say "Kasparov-Karpov match, Spassky-Fischer, and so on ...". This is what I strongly believe in."

Zhukov: "To move away from that is simply criminal. If you are to have a new champion every year, noone will ever remember who the champion is".

Kramnik: "We are going to start from square 1. The future of chess will depend on what we do. I am not going to go into details at this point. I am sure we will find common ground with FIDE".

The next question was for the chief arbiter:

"What did you think of the match?"

Gijssen(sp?): "Well, it was, of course, a shorter match than Karpov-Kasparov, but it was the most difficult match in my career".

Kramnik: (smiling) "mine, too".


"Yesterday there was information that Topalov suggested a rematch."

Kramnik: "I haven't thought about it yet. I only learned about it today when I was in a car. I have other things to worry about now. I have to build a consistent and clear system for deciding World championship. As for the challenge... Today it is Topalov, tomorrow it may be Anand. Topalov wants a rematch. So does Leko. But now is not a good time for such things( and those may continue forever) because it is unsportsmanlike to ignore other people."

Drunk Russians prefer to beat under the table, and OTB ;-)

I meant, "not OTB" ;-)

Vlad Kosulin thank you again. And thank Zhukov!

I am sorry to read Kramnik is sure he will reach a deal with FIDE. I think the world championship would be much better off without kirsan.

Personally I do not even think the challenger shoudl be decided by a single tournament. The challenger should be decided by candidates matches.

Thanks guys!

Interesting what he says about Game 5...

(Q) How did you restore yourself after the 5th game?

(Kramnik) Not immediately. Several games after it I played below my level. The situation, when 3-4 days one doesn't know, if one will be playing again, destroys your rythm. Well, that's a lesson for the future. If something similar will happen again, I think, I'll be able to resist. In this case, my refusal to play the 5th game was sort of a desperate gesture. I realised that the AK in one-sided and will satisfy any requests of the opposite side. It was clear that they wouldn't stop at it. My decision was rather emotional. I was disgusted with the video records story. Topalov refused to shake my had before the game. It all came together, and the press-release was the last straw. When I came to the game, the toilet was locked. I didn't think of the consequences. But now I would like to forget that scandal because apart from it, there were many positive moments.

>so it doesn't look like he is going to Mexico in autumn 2007

lol, so much about "reunification" and peace between WCC and FIDE...
plus ca change, plus c'est la meme chose.

Kranik had not said "common ground with Kirsan", he said "with FIDE". "Can you hear me now? Good!" ;-)

It's not James Joyce, but understandable.

James Joyce is understandable?!

Thank you very much for your translations!

I wasn't sure there was a difference between FIDE and Kirsan. But I admit I am not that familiar with the politics involved.

Kirsan certainly did change his tune from his first response of "I hereby inform you of my full trust in the members of the Match Appeals Committee and their latest decision taken in respect of the appeal of Topalov’s team dated 28 September 2006", to having them all removed and a new committee appointed! What caused this change, I don't know. I do *not* believe it was because Kirsan had any interest in continuing the match himself. So I do think others are influencing him, but probably from outside FIDE.

Kramnik seems seriously drunk. Is that the reason he goes so often to the bathroom? He does not only dope himself there, he drinks vodka! A true Russian.
With the fantastic support of Kremlin

THe effective message of RC5??


"Topalov refused to shake my had before the game."

What game?

Seriously...... Russian domination in chess has never ended until Topalov. That is the only reason they hate him. A whole country is playing against one player? Poor Topa. People, open your eyes, the method of the cold war still exist. They will do whatever they want with chess. I do not see any good future for it with Zhukov-Kramnik-Kirsan mafia involved. Well, Kirsan is just a pawn, but what can he do? Eltsin and Putin put him on the position, he should follow them.

>>Oh, perhaps you're right. Kramnik went into the match with 2743, not 2750.

No, his published rating was 2743, his actual rating was 2750.

Yeah! Topalov never refused a handshake!!!!!
Kramnik is drunk, he did not got a refusal for a handshake and he certanly does not know rule 6.2, he can choose the appeals committee!!!!
Kramnik, Kremlin forgot to tell you this?

I saw only a few people supporting Topa after the scandal. Now when it starts smelling of Kremlin from Kramnik's loo, I can see more people opening their eyes.
Go Topa! You are not alone

>>Seriously...... Russian domination in chess has never ended until Topalov. That is the only reason they hate him.

Why do non-Russians hate him, then? So far we haven't seen a single GM come out in support of Topalov's conduct.

And ignoring for the moment the fact that Topalov was never even World Champion, it doesn't explain why they hated him, but not Anand when he held the (worthless) FIDE title. Your explanation doesn't explain much.

People, open your eyes, the method of the cold war still exist. They will do whatever they want with chess. I do not see any good future for it with Zhukov-Kramnik-Kirsan mafia involved.
Well, Kirsan is just a pawn, but what can he do?

Well, he can break the rules in Topalov's favor, and give him a free point. You REALLY didn't think this out, did you?

"People, open your eyes! Even though FIDE broke the rules for Topalov, and the Appeals Committee resigned in disgrace over their favoritism for him, Topalov was actually, somehow, really the victim here, in ways I can't begin to explain, but I hope you'll just take it on blind faith because you heard it from an anonymous guy on the internet!!"

LOL. This speech of yours needs a little punching up. Write up another draft and run it by us again later.

Here, I'll give you a hand. In the next draft of your speech, focus on trying to articulate exactly what it was you think happened to Topalov. The whole "he must be right because he comes from a smaller country" angle is kind of lamebrained. Remember, he lost two matches here. A Handicap match where he got an extra White and his opponent had three blacks in a row, and then he turned around and lost another Rapids match.

This was unfair to him because... Try to complete that sentence in some kind of coherent way. "This was unfair to him because... Russia is big", is moronic.

Incidentally, Topalov himself claims to have no objection whatsoever to the venue. Was he lying?

>>I saw only a few people supporting Topa after the scandal. Now when it starts smelling of Kremlin from Kramnik's loo, I can see more people opening their eyes.
Go Topa! You are not alone
Posted by: elitsa at October 16

You know, Topalov is the most hated man in the chess world now, not because he just lost two matches, but because of his bad sportsmanship. You seem to be trying to make sure that nobody forgets how badly he behaved.

Are you sure you're not really a Kramnik fan? Come clean now.

It is so easy too see
Kremlin->new chess order

Zhukov, Putin, Kirsan....... I am afraid.

Yeah! Look what Putin said a month ago!

"Having these facts a question may rise. Being born in Russian teritory and having in mind his close conections with Boris Eltsin and afterwards Vladimir Putin, is Kirsan Ilyumzhinov the right one to host the event?"

"The event already has deep repercusion on several levels of society. It is not a surprise that the event is closely watched by the government of Russia. A month ago president Vladimir Putin met with Kirsan Ilyumzhinov. They had a long talk where Putin assured the match is considered of high importance and all necessary assistance will be provided, but at the same time the president expressed his desire Russia to be on the driving position of the chess car."

Yeah, it is from Topalov's website, but it seems that they felt what Kremlin is preparing. Think about it, everybody knew what support Karpov received. I think that is the reason Kasparov does not take sides, he knows the inside story.
Think about it.

When Kramnik is referring to the refused handshake, anyone with any understanding of the English language can see that he's referring to what Danailov had said before game 5. How this point escaped anyone who is not looking to hate the man is beyond me.

As far as a whole country against one man, I should say that Topalov has a whole country behind him, complete with a horde of "famous Bulgarian grandmasters" concocted by the corrupt Bulgarian government to lend him moral support for his transgressions against the sport. Danailov is a crook, and so is Topalov. Real chess champions prefer to win their matches by playing chess.

I have no doubt that Russia wants to hold the crown more than anything, but Topalov is not Fischer either in play, stature, or martyrdom. He and his manager lodged complaints that were completely unfounded, and all of the support for Kramnik came from the recognition that Danailov was trying to win the match away from the board in lieu of the actual battle. To argue that FIDE was on Kramnik's side is absurd in the face of what Kramnik had to overcome to win this match. The FIDE officials were clearly on the side of Topalov, and it was Kramnik who was the man fighting the system.

I put it wrong... just the last part is Putin, that is what I meant. But you get my point.

With such supporters, elitsa, he can hardly fail.

for those trying to understand the new rating for kramnik and topalov. I will give my opinion. but I am definitely not an expert. just a chess fan with an opinion.

the match started in September. then while the match was in progress the October Rating List was published Oct 1.

at the start of the Match the players would have their July rating used. topalov did not play any games from july to Oct so his rating stayed the same. Kramnik's rating went from 2743 to 2750 July to Oct.

so for rating the games, fide will use the rating at the start of the tournaments. thus 2743 for Kramnik. and he will gain 15.9 points. but it will be added to his actual rating which is 2750.

the implication is that when the rating change is calculated, the equation uses 2743. However, if the equation had used 2750, then kramnik would only have gained 14.9 points. So Kramnik gains one extra point because of circumstances.

elitsa=(tommy)+(a very bad day)-(30 IQ points)

"When Kramnik is referring to the refused handshake, anyone with any understanding of the English language can see that he's referring to what Danailov had said before game 5. How this point escaped anyone who is not looking to hate the man is beyond me."

Yeah, I know I am one of the worst Kramnik haters around here, but for a moment I forgot about that other press release and I thought perhaps there was a case of an actual refusal to shake hands. Thanks though.

I have seen two things Milton, the way Topalov behaves in public and the way Russian propaganda machine acts. I have nothing against Kramnik. I just can't accept cold war methods and politics mix up with chess.

I would have thought that Kasparov, as a PCA player, would be the most enthusiastic supporter of Kramnik... But he is not! He knows the rotten system in his country, he knows how he had to play against both Karpov and Russia soo many games.
Now history repeats.
I am afraid for the future of chess.

You can call me Charley, elitsa.
I have seen both Topalov and Kramnik in public before this gigantic mess. Perfect gentlemen, both of them.
And I will give you this: I am still (call me naive) willing to believe that Topalov, somewhere deep inside, is still that modest, unassuming, and somehow charming, person I experienced.
The change I do not ascribe to the Russian propaganda machine, it is completely due to the man he has had the misfortune to call his friend for so many years.

Cold War? My goodness. Kramnik is the epitome of restraint in his comments on what may well have been the hardest days of his career. He is making a molehill out of a potential mountain.
I admire him for that almost more than I admire his chess (and I DO admire his chess - I can appreciate Petrosian AND Tal, just to let you all know!).

Again: All this makes me very, very sad.
And yes, elitsa, Topalov is a true genius.

I truly believe they are both nice people.. I do not like Zhukov and Putin in the whole story. I reminds me of communism and we do not want that propaganda in chess.
The only thing Topalov said during the scandal was "I want the match to continue. I want to play chess"... Danailov said a lot. But that is his job.
I do not know. Let's hope we have serious unification. But also let's look deeper into the story, not just the shameful press releases.

Topalov could have forced Kramnik to resign the tiebreak at gunpoint and we would still have people posting pro-topalov messages here.

hi elitsa

why do you try to talk to people that hadnt any idea of what happened?

they never hear your words, they dont knew anything about this match except info Chessbase fed them

may be in this info logic suffers -- but who cares
people do preffer to think with mithologemes:
Topa is bad guy Kramnik is good guy Danailov is evil devil we support right guys we're on the right side we're good

you and your words can not change this

People who like to think things about themselves see what is the truth

regards from Plovdiv

Kramnik is a phenomenally well-balanced man, minding his business, and minding it well.

He appears to be on good terms with most all the top players; sharing a manager with his 2004 opponent, Leko; recruiting his friends Svidler and Bareev as seconds and advisors.

Three days after Elista he praised Topalov's play, and deflected most of the blame onto Danailov and Topalov's team. Nor had he any hard words for Kirsan. And he's minded his own business politically as well, neither kissing up nor burning bridges.

His lifestyle is paying off for him. Throughout an incredibily stressful situation in Elista Kramnik's ill-at-ease opponent continually blundered, while he, himself, remained relaxed and confident.

And now, at crunch time, entering into negotiations with Kirsan about the future of chess, Kramnik finds himself with a great deal of leverage.

--Russian leaders won't hesitate to "put in a good word" for with Kirsan for their new national hero
--The entire chess world supports Kramnik
--Kramnik-on-his-own would have little trouble finding a WCC sponsor, little trouble carrying the classical championship banner into a fourth WCC match.

Kirsan will work out a deal with Kramnik for a long-match defense of his classical title within FIDE.

Topa agreed all demands Kramnik had -- the wall, mineseekers, 12 games -- to clean up suspicions of the opponent about possibility of computer aided cheating
when Kramnik was out of the zone of controlling and Topalov team has questions about this highly unusual behaviour Kramnik bevame very nervous: he denied to explain his behaviour in first games and didnt play 5th game. Noone stop him from reaching the chess board.
When in 2000 match Kasparov asked for toilet control Kramnik agreed with smile. Why now he reacted in this way? Answer me before accusing me.
And now they telling me that Topa and Danailov are nuts?? People, open your eyes, use the logic.
Think, people, think :)
Ask the first question, do not forget it -- who made the match so nervous? Who OVER-reacted?
It was Kramnik who was trying to distract his opponent with his unusual and arrogant behaviour over the board proposing draws few times in succession in weaker position.

Well, here is some reasonable thought by thenewone. Plovdiv is a nice city, I had a friend that visited and said it has a nice old center and a modern part and it is very green:)
Well, back to the point. Topalov did agree to everything. And they agreed to an important rule. 6-6 did not mean victory for the champion, as it has been until now.
Yes, Kramnik over reacted, not his manager. Kramnik almost locked himself in the toilet. But he knew Zhukov and Putin and Kirsan will run for him. That is what Mig said, and he is right.

Ten minutes have gone by and elista hasn't posted. Can someone check in on him?


I said what I had to say. Although a book on Russian propaganda will be a nice reading for you.
I have to go, i will be around these days supporting Veselin Topalov and his participation in Essent.

Gosh, am I happy to read what Kramnik said at the Moscow interview earlier today.


Go, Kramnik, go! Dunk their muzzles into their own mess to hit that common ground! Don't try to reform FIDE from the inside! They are irreformable!

zero@ego ?
Is your real name Bassel Kok?

I've tired of Elitsa's conspiracy theories. Yes, Russia has pulled dirty tricks, but it is indisputable that Topalov and his backers were far dirtier this time around. Elitsa, if you insist on bringing accusations against Kramnik, do not just throw out loose questions and hope that people select the one conclusion that fits your disposition. I am a researcher by profession, and science does not look kindly upon arguments made without evidence. Topalov is blacklisted because there was no evidence to support Danailov's accusations (and clear arguments against it, such as the blunder in game 2).

Let's welcome a couple of drunk Bulgarian chess lovers;-)
They hate Russians, vodka, Putin, Cold War, communists, etc, etc, but they have got palinka and chess. Life is butiful, folks!

"It was Kramnik who was trying to distract his opponent with his unusual and arrogant behaviour over the board proposing draws few times in succession in weaker position."

Those are the words of Danailov and no one else. Why should we trust him? Don't fall under bulgarian propaganda.

"6-6 did not mean victory for the champion, as it has been until now."

Both were champions, there was no challenger.

Kramnik behaved very well during the entire event and I can only admire his great personality.

"It was Kramnik who was trying to distract his opponent with his unusual and arrogant behaviour over the board proposing draws few times in succession in weaker position."

This is almost certainly untrue. But if Kramnik did indeed offer draws more often than Topalov wished, a word to the arbiter would have sufficed.
And as to "arrogant behaviour" - well, words fail me.

Dammit, are you really trying to make me hate Topalov? I so much don't want to.

Ok. I translated the whole thing. I tried to convey what was being said, in words that would have the same or similar meaning to an English speaker rather than exact words, which might have different connotations. Enjoy, guys:

On 16th of October, at 6 PM in the Central House of Chessplayers named after M.M. Botvinnik a press conference took place, for the now Absolute World Champion Vladimir Kramnik, in which also took part President of the Russian Chess Federation, Vice Premier of the government of Russia Alexander Zhukov, head of Expert Direction of the Russian Federation's President's Administration Arkadiy Dvorkovich, 7th World Chess Champion Vasiliy Smyslov, Honorary President of Russian Chess Federation Andrey Selivanov, Vice-President of Russian Chess Federation Valeriy Zubov, Acting Director of Russian Chess Federation Alexander Bach, Chief Arbiter of the match for world championship Geurt Gijssen, Kramnik's manager Carsten Henzel. The press-conference was conducted by the chief editor of "64" Alexander Roshal.

[main photo caption: Selivanov, Smyslov, Henzel, Bach, Dvorkovich, Kramnik, Zhukov, Roshal, Gijssen]

Alexander Zhukov congratulated Vladimir Kramnik with his victory, stressing that "his success is not just a success of a remarkable chess player, but a rescue of the entire chess world and of course, a huge success for Russian chess. Chess without a real champion are incomplete. Now we finally have a world champion, in whose championship nobody has a right to doubt. The match took place in very difficult circumstances...There was a moment when Topalov was ahead. But ultimately both competitive and creative victory belonged to Kramnik."

After this the general director of "Chess Week" read congratulations from the main editor of "Chess Week," 10th world champion, Boris Spassky, and the referent (sorry, no clue what that is) of Anatoliy Karpov--congratulations from the 12th world champion.

The first question for the absolute world champion was this: "Alexander Roshal expressed an idea of letting Topalov into the match-tournament, the winner which would get the title shot for your championship. What do you think of this idea?"

Kramnik: "Topalov's manager, Silvio Danailov didn't behave himself in the best manner during the match, but Topalov, as a chess player, undoubtedly deserves to be allowed to participate in this tournament. Roshal's idea is quite good. I must add that I believe that the old formula, with some corrections, was the most successful one compared with all current ones. And chess keeps its high status, precisely because of the world championship matches. Ask any person on the street what they know about chess. They will answer: Karpov-Kasparov, Fischer-Spassky...and so on...And I am firmly in favor of this position.

Zhukov: "To abandon the idea of a final match is simply criminal. If they will create a new champion every year they will not remember who the best one is."

Kramnik: "We begin with a fresh page. What we write on it will determine the future of chess. But for now I will not go into detail. I am sure we will find a common language."

The next question was for the Chief Arbiter: "Your opinion of the match?"

Gijssen: "This match was of course shorter than the battle between Karpov and Kasparov, but I have not had a more difficult match in my career."

Kramnik *smiling*: "Me neither."

Gijssen: "The negotiations with both sides were difficult. And I was ecstatic when Vladimir said that he was willing to continue the match. To be honest, during the entire match I felt like I was simply the referee and didn't think about the results and only in the last game of the tiebreak did I finally recognize that I was a working a world championship match."

Gijssen immediately received the next question: "Why did you start the clock during the fifth game when Kramnik didn't show up?"

Gijssen: "There are Regulations of the match and chess rules. The decission of the Appellations Committee, whether it be right or wrong, is not subject to discussion and is to be considered final for the arbiter."

--There already yesterday appeared information that Topalov is offering a rematch.

Kramnik: "Haven't thought about that yet. I just learned about this earlier while I was in the car. I have other worries now. It is necessary to build a clear and precise world championship cycle. As far as a challenge...Today--Topalov..tomorrow may be Anand. Topalov wants a rematch. Leko too. But now is not a very good time for these kind of series, which may become eternal. Also, I don't want to ignore others, besides Topalov, that's simply not sportsmanlike."

The next quesiton was for Kramnik's manager--about his dealings with Danailov.

Henzel: "We had to battle not only Danailov, but their entire team. All the videotapes for four days were in the hands of team Topalov and were viewed in the presence of the Appellations committee. This was not the first strike from their side. This was their fourth protest--and all with only one goal, to break Kramnik's concentration and get under his skin. The cup ran over when they got into our private affairs. They had to be stopped, otherwise they never would on their own. And our entire team, together with Kramnik fought to the last. About Danailov I can say one thing: the likes of this never happened in chess before.

A representative of the Russian weekly "Arguments and Facts" asked Zhukov: "Any thoughts about awarding Kramnik, like in the Soviet era?"

Zhukov: "I had thoughts...but not like in the Soviet era."

There was a question of whether Kramnik wants to get his diploma. (college)

Kramnik: "I don't think higher education is a goal in itself. Chess has gotten much younger. To really complete college education while playing in tournaments is impossible. So, while my chess career goes on, I doubt it will happen. But I am learning on my own...have been since childhood, and consider that to be a good form of education.

--How did you recover after the fifth game?

Kramnik: "Well, I couldn't recover right away. Several games after that I played below my level. But that's not the only reason for what happened. I bore this normally. But a situation when for 3-4 days you don't know if you are going to play further, knocks you off your game. This is a lesson for the future. I think if it happens again it won't knock me off my rhythm. But in this situation my refusal to come out for game 5 was a sign of despair on my part. I understood that the Appellations committee was prejudiced and would satisfy any demands of the opposite side. It was obvious that they won't stop at this. My decision was more emotional. What happened with the videotapes really upset me. Also, Topalov was accusing me of something and refusing to shake my hand. All of this piled on and the press release was the last straw. I went to play, and the bathroom is closed. I didn't even think about consequences. But now I want to forget this scandal soon, because there were also many positive moments.

--How did it happen that the Appellations committee consist almost entirely of Topalov partisans?

Kramnik: "I wouldn't have agreed ot such a composition but according to FIDE regulations--this is the only question that's not subject to discussion between participants. We agree on the Arbiter but not on the committee."

--During the match you were interested in soccer...

Kramnik: "I always watch the Champions League when our teams are playing as well as games of Russia's soccer team. That was nothing out of the ordinary for me."

And here is what Vice-President of RCF Valeriy Zubov, responsible for women's chess said: "Happiness is one for all Russians. But there is a separate thought: now our girls have to take first."

To our Bulgarian posters:

Why do you say Russians were biased against Topalov? Let's be honest. You say there is some sort of Putin-Zhukov-Kirsan mafia. But let's look at the facts. Unlike your claims, ther facts are these:

It was KRAMNIK, not Topalov, who was the world champion prior to Elista - it was he who was the only one who held a title of any value. It was Kramnik who agreed to play without draw odds. It was TOPALOV who got all the favors from the supposedly pro-Kramnik "Russian mafia". Topalov got a free point, an extra game with white. Not only did Kramnik not have draw odds at 6:6, he had to go +1 to even get to tie-breaks. It was Topalov's Team that started the dirty play. It was them who accused the opponent of cheating. It was them who got "Russian mafia" to invade Kramnik's privacy and provide Topalov with very valuable tapes where Topalov and his people could watch Kramnik's reaction in his restroom to what was going on in the game.

So, to summarize: Topalov got a free point, an extra game with white and surveillance videos from Kramnik's restroom. This is supposed to be a proof of Russian mafia's evil hand in this match.

Let me ask you this: if Topalov getting a free point, an extra game with white and surveillance videos from Kramnik's restroom constitutes your idea of match organizers favoring Kramnik, what would match organizers have to do if they were to be neutral? Would Topalov get 3 free points and play all his remaining games with white and would he also get surveillance videos made in Kramnik's hotel room? Would that be fair?

Topalov is a disgrace to the game and the posters here who have the nerve to accuse match organizers of being pro-Kramnik are a disgrace, too. Face the facts: if there is such a thing as Kremlin or "Russian" chess mafia, that mafia sure did it best to help Topalov in every way possible. If there was a conspiracy, facts sure sure it was anti-Kramnik. And congrats to Kramnik for beating not only his desease, but also Topalov and pro-Topalov's mafia. He truly deserves to be the champion, unlike a certain bulgarian who has neither chess skills, nor the character to become one.

Indeed, the Elista mafia comprises Danailov, Makropoulos, Azmaiparashvili, and Kirsan. And I am not even Russian

Thanks Yuriy for the translation. More matches like this, and we will be perfect in Russian.

Many thanks, Yuriy.

Nicely done, bear.

The latest soapie of the never ending soap opera http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=3433

Time to establish the International Chess Federation under Bessel Kok and his supporting countries. Establish a WC cycle as outlined by Kramnik. Don't prolong 11 years of Kirsan chaos

Speaking of propaganda:

Topalov website seems to just offer a translation of what 64.ru had, but with an interesting twist:

On 64.ru, the question(or rather, the statement) is:

"You were interested in soccer during the match...".

But instead, the following question appears in http://www.veselintopalov.net/article/kramnik-gives-important-press-conference :

"During the match you said you were interested in the Champions League more than the games themselves?".

Hmm. Chessbase cited veselintopalov.net. Interesting, to say the least.

I was intending to include this quote from the article (well, actually the entire article): "“We are not going to deny attempts to negotiate with Vladimir Kramnik concerning holding a contender’s match between Teymur Radjabov and him”, Azad Rahimov, Azerbaijan`s Youth and Sports Minister exclusively told Trend commenting the possibility on organizing a match between the Azerbaijani grand master and the FIDE Champion.

An agreement between the Azerbaijani Sports Ministry and their Bulgarian counterparts on holding a match between Teymur Radjabov and Veselin Topalov, who was a possessor of the chess crown till recently, was signed in the spring this year. However, the Bulgarian gross master lost it as a result of the recent match with Vladimir Kramnik of Russia, and due to that, the preliminary agreement with Bulgarians has lost its force.

“It is too early to say anything concrete in this regard today, but I think it will be very difficult to come to an agreement with Russians. Moreover, he gained this crown in a very tense struggle”, pointed out Mr. Rahimov."

Actually. let me give both the question and the answer:


Q: "You were interested in soccer during the match..."
A: "I always watch the Champions League when our teams play, as well as the matches of our national team. This time was no exception."

veselintopalov.net (and chessbase.com, which copied that cite):

Q: "During the match you said you were interested in the Champions League more than the games themselves? "
A: "True, whenever there is Champions League and a Russian team plays, I watch the games. This time was no exception. "

I like it how Bulgarian translation introduces the notion that Kramnik cares about soccer more than chess, and how Kramnik seems to agree with that.

Also, I read an interview Topalov gave to russian Sport Express newspaper right after his loo, and he seemed to be trying to do some sort of damage control by making it seem like Kramnik was interested in soccer more than chess and by positioning himself as a righteous defender of chess. And now this.

I wish Chessbase would hire me to translate these things, instead of relying on the people who invented Toiletgate and World championship cheating accusations :)

Okay, read it again :-)

I remember the incident very well. It was after Game 4, where Topalov threw all he had at Kramnik and Kramnik said it wasn't much, then said he wanted to watch the Champions League in the final part of the game more. The new press-conference is a statement on Kramnik's part that he always follows the Champions League events. This is the difference between an appropriate psychological blow: "My opponent's attack wasn't much. I wanted to see how my team was doing in soccer." and inappropriate attack: "I accuse my opponent of cheating, even though there is little evidence to support it."

Nice, Mig :)

http://www.sportreport.ru/ has a very interesting interview with Danailov:

But after seeing their disclaimers, I don't feel like translating it :)

Russianbear - does he really say that he and Topalov is one and the same person?

Yep, looks like it.

Susan Polgar is stealing content from the Chessbase site without giving a linking. Her copy of the interview is the one from chessbase, not from the Topalov site. You can see they edited it and she did copy it and take the photo. Nice to have a site with doing no work for it. Maybe they do not sue her because she is famous?


Babelfish translation of Danailov:

But here is is one paragraph of your second open letter, on the contrary, it is very remarkable. In it it is indicated that in the case of continuing the match of topalov "it will abstain from the handshake with Mr. Kramnik to the beginning of parties and not it will participate in the joint press conferences with it". You did actually write this on behalf Of topalova or from your?
Danailov: What difference?

This principally.
D: We are one and the same person. Everything.

But you two different persons.
D: We - one command.

Command is one, but man two.
D: 4 not I will repeat.

But I want to refine
D: And refine not I will be! Danailov and Topalov - one and the same person. Give the following question.


Yeah, at a couple of places in the interview he says just that.

Then you estimate chess component of entire match. How to you the game of under wardship?

D: Topalov it played better, always it re-played rival. And this all they saw. New ideas proceeded only from it. Veselin generally creatively conducted match simply lustrously. But it lost due to the fateful errors, and also because Kramnik protected well. Russian generally nothing showed, except the skill of protection, on this and crept out.

Ok, ok, I'll thatnslate that one piece. But I hope Mig will cover my ass (And anonimity) when (if) Russian mafia or - worse- Russian law enforcement comes after me.

-This number, as it turns out was greatly exagerrated by you. Georgius Makropulos said that in one game Kramnik went to the bathroom 18 times and in the other - 25 times. It is a considerable difference, don't you think?
-No, he didn't say that. (Makropulos said exactly that in a press conference - Evgeniy Surov, the interviewer). He just reduced the number. But he only did that so that Kramnik would not be put into an uncomfortable situation. But it really was 50 times. Ask for the tape and see.
-Thanks, but, frankly, that would not be very interesting to me. But there is another paragraph in your open letter that is quite remarkable. It says that in case the match continues, Topalov will "refrain from shaking hands with Mr. Kramnik before the games and would not take part in joint press conferences with him". Did you write it on behalf of Topalov or on your own behalf?
-What difference does it make?
-It is important.
-We are one and the same person . That's all.
-Yeah, but you are two different people.
-We are one team.
-One team, but two people.
-I am not going to repeat...
-But I want to clarify...
-And I won't clarify! Topalov and Kramnik is one and the same person. Ask the next question.

Material published by Sport Report may be reproduced only with a clear hyper-link to www.sportreport.ru.

As the comment to the "we are one and the same person" statement - in Russian, the word person can mean "legal entity" - pretty much like it can in English.

You mean "Topalov and Danailov are one" I assume?

Either that or George Lucas was the match organizer.

I saw a movie like that...

Is Danialov "Master" or "Blaster?"

oops, in the last line it was supposed to be "Danailov and Topalov are the same person", not Topalov and Kramnik, of course. Gee, maybe I shouldn't be translating these things while at work.

From interview with Kirsan taken on Sunday (before the Kramnik's press-conference):
(Q) The candidate matches, which, as I understand, are planned to be realigned to a tournament, and the Mexico tournament will be held as expected?
(A) This is not under discussion. The candidates tournament will be held in April in Elista or in Turkey.

We all know this has been discussed during the last presidential board in September, but this is first time I hear about the tournament as a final decision.

Weird, I thought he had clarified matches just a week ago. Turkey is sounding more likely than Elista now, btw. Kirsan is "considering" what sounds like a good offer. Not sure what he's considering...

From interview with Topalov:
(Q) At some moment, Kasparov got his fingers burned by Kramnik, a challenger whom he was not forced to choose. You had a negative score vs. Kramnik, and his style is inconvenient for you. Why did you agree to play?
(A) First of all, I needed money, and in the second place - it does not matter who challenges you, the true champion should beat anybody, be this Kramnik or somebody else, instead of choosing: I will play with this one, the other one is dangerous, I am not going to play with him.
(Q) Was your preparation seriously taken?
(A) Yes. I guess, my shape was not the best, and not the worst. So, regular.
(Q) The match could proceed differently if you did not lose in the first game which had be a draw
(A) I could force draw anytime
(Q) Why did you decide to continue? Danailov said, that Kramnik's draw offer balled you up.
(A) When I rejected Kramnik's offer, I had a big advantage. I think, technically it was very hard for white. I played right, but went to extremes. This is my weakness: run away, and forget about danger of loss.
(Q) And you loss in second game is just inconceivable. You missed mate in 3, and missed few other winning opportunities. And lost. What happened?
(A) I decided it is over too early. Huge time advantage, irresistible attack (already took on g6) - well, he should resign now. But he still resists. ANd at some point this started irritate me. The fact that the game continues, was irrtating (sorrowful laughing)
(Q) Not only thought the game is over. Valieho noted that the game should finish in a couple of minutes. But it went through, and you lost
(A) Yes, I missed one easy winning chance, one complicated, and one - supercomplicated.
(Q) In your interview to Bulgarian paper "Trud"{ you said that you were ready to cry when recollecting this losses
(A) Wrong translation. I have never wanted to cry during the match. I found I am not inferior to the opponent OTB. I overplayed him in an equal position in first game, but fell for and lost it. I had to win in the second game, but relaxed too early. I had a feeling that the match is not over yet. I just had to concentrate properly.
(Q) In game 3 your position was really difficult
(A) I'd say, this was a single game which could be won by Vladimir without my blunders. It was very important to survive in game 3. If I lost, my postion would become very tough, but I rescued the game. The opponent lost the win.
(Q) And after the there was game 4 where you sacrificed the pawn h2, got a promising position, but could not materialize.
(A) Yes, visually white were nice: center control, knighs, strong fileds... But I did not manage to make it.
(Q) Toiletgate. Were you abreast of your manager decision to file the appeal, or Danailov was holding you away of negative emotions?
(A) I was kept up. I was sure the appeal if truly legitimate. If restrooms are being closely monitored, it is natural to be suspicious if your opponent frequently tries to hide in the bathroom. What's the sense of these cameras, if there is a bathroom where the opponent can do whatever, and nobody can watch this. When, after 9 hours of tape examination, the appeals committee agreed on our protest, and decided to lock private toilets, this was the right decision. But the committee was repleced, and nothing changed. And we agreed to all petitions of our opponent! He asked for a rest day after the lots drawing, he asked for the glass wall, which was not mentioned in the contract. He wanted to use mine-detectors instead of metal detector, and we accepted this while we were told this is not safe. We agreed to the color switch in the middle, which never happened before. And when we asked to prevent suspicions why the opponent all the time hides form cameras in the toilet, and the appeals committed agreed,this was too much. And the decision to close private toilet rooms was suffering not only for Kramnik, but for me, also.
(Q) WHen during game 5 you were sitting OTB alone, did you seer your opponent?
(A) Yes, he was in his reast area. I still do not get why he did not play. May be, if the Appeals committee made decision favorable for him, he'd play. I'd also like to have the appeals committee taking only decisions favorable to you.
(Q) In San Luis, where you got the title, your play was brilliant, and here you made terrible blunders. Why?
(A) I made blunders in San Luis, also, but in winning positions, and my opponents were favored by a draw. Here, when I blundered, I lost the game.
(Q) Do you know that after San Luis some of your collogues rumored that you won because of computer assistance during games?
(A) Yes, and this is why I agreed to play here, and accepted all demands of team Kramnik, all these cameras, mine-detectors. I said "O.K.!" And when the appeals committee agreed that 25 toilet visits per game is not something regular, what did Vlad, who was not rumored about? He said, "This is my privacy!"
I did everything to prove my wins were fair, accepted all their jammers, screening... All I wanted was the same to be applied to my opponent. Unfortunately, this was not the case.
(Q) Even when you both were sitting on stage, you both made moves corrlating with main computer lines...
(A) I do not state that Kramnik can't make a series of moves from main line of Fritz 9. I jus twanted the match to be clean not only for me, but for him, also. You know, after the appeals committee was dismissed, memebers of our team were banned from looking over the tapes of Kramnik's behavior in his reast area. So, instead of improving they made the case even worst. No need for comments.
(Q) Are you disappointed with what happened in Elista?
(A) The title itself is not important for me. I am satisfied by showing how the title match should look like. When Kramnik and Leko made those draws in 15 moves, smiled one another and said "What an interesting, tense match", it was funny and sad. FIDE in principle should forbid such behavior in professional chess. Kramnik was not against such behavior here, but I forced him to play! When he offered a draw in game 4 at move 20 approximately, and then during press-conference saidf he was thinking about the Champions League more, I considered this not just as personal insult, but as insult ot all chess lovers
(Q) Are you very distressed by the title loss?
(A) I have to repeat, the title itself is nothing for me. If I continue to win in tournaments and be No.1 in ratings, it is of no importance at all that the title belongs to Kramnik. If continues to make his usual +2 and take No.3 in rating, everybody will see what a champion he is.
(Q) So, you are not upset by passing the title to a good person?
(A) Now Kramnik has to prove he conforms to the title. I hope, he will play next year.
(Q) Where
(A) He is under contractual obligation to play in Mexico
(Q) What if he rejects?
(A) This is his problem. And FIDE.
(Q) Whre do you plan to play?
(A) In Holland, in WaZ, may be somewhere between...
(Q) Will you participate in the title cycle?
(A) I don't know. I did not discuss this yet. I had no intention to lose the match. Now I have to discuss this.
(Q) You were a Bulgaria favorite, and now get to know the loss bitterness
(A) Bulgarians loved me before San Luis. It is pleasure when the homeland people love you, when the Preident, the sports department, sponsors help you. It seems like I am the only representative of individual sports discipline to get such support.
(Q) Do you feel like people believed in you, but you let them down?
(A) No, I do not feel shame for the match!


Referring to Vlad Kosulin's translation of the Topalov interview in the above (Thanks VK!) Topalov was completely clueless at the time about his fall from grace in the eyes of the world.

Topalov was (and likely still is) also completely clueless about the meaning of the words 'privacy' and 'invasion of privacy' when he watched the Kramnik videos.

It's very remarkable that from the way he says things, it will seem to me that his cluelessness is apparently based on good faith (!!!) which points at him not really having a rounded personality at the age of 31.

For example, apart from everything else, Topalov would not really be welcome in my home as he would watch me changing clothes like my dog does, only that he is not dog, but a human being.

Thanks Vlad!

Ilyumzhinov seems to make clear that Kramnik has an agreement with FIDE to play in Mexico. And that any changes in World Championship format will take place only after 2007: http://www.sport-express.ru/art.shtml?129147

Can anyone provide an accurate translation from Russian?

See my note above. Kirsan already made changes to the current cycle (replace candidat matches with tournament). This could be considered as a good excuse by Kramnik to deny Mexico obligations.

How can such an excuse be ever used legally by Kramnik? The Candidates format doesn't affect at all Kramnik's status in the cycle.

We did not see his contract. We also can only assume which documents regulate the cycle. Knowing Kirsan, and reading documents published on FIDE web site, I am positive that all these private documents are also written in very poor and unclear manner, using fuzzy formulas, and allow multiple interpretations. But I assume that if the qualification principle changes, you can reject your participation, because the Mexico tournament itself is an inseparable part of the WC cycle. If one part was voluntarily changed without your agreement, you can demand revision of your obligations.

Agree with Vlad Kosulin on ambiguity and sufficiency of FIDE documents. FIDE lawyer Morton Sand is either an incompetent lawyer or a very good one who can write legal documents that can be interpreted according to the needs of any political situation that may pop up in the future.

For example, there are no timing provisions in the 2700 rule as any halfway decent write up of any regulation would provide. So, FIDE could authorize either a rematch the next day or FIDE could authorize a rematch only in 10 years, according to FIDE's political needs. This rule is either written by an incompetent lawyer or a very good one who 'forgot' to put a timing provision in that rule.

For right of for wrong, the exact same ambiguities and insufficiencies also give Kramnik legal room for pursuing his views of a WC match and the cycle leading thereto.

IMHO, it will come down to a power struggle (outside legalities) between Kramnik and FIDE.

I hope that Zhukov sees the Kirsan chaos first hand now and decides to do something about it through Kramnik and people like Bessel Kok.

It did not cross anyone’s mind that the whole "toilet scandal" could be very well provoked by the Kramnik camp. I tend to agree that nothing unusual or suspicious was going on toilet premises, but repetitive walk-in/walk-outs could have been aimed to get impetuous Topa off the balance in order to retain match initiative and push him to the edge of the cliff. We should not underestimate the quality of psychological work prepared by both camps. So, well-groomed provocation? Considering that all repetitive visits abruptly stopped, than could be...We will find out soon.


Pray tell: how could this have been meant as provocation toward Topalov if the Topalov camp was never supposed to have any idea that Kramnik was in and out of the bathroom so often?

Stop being naive, Merv. The problem is that the opponents should sit against each other for the most of the game and not hide somewhere else, that's their job. If you prefer to hide from the viewers and your opponents, you may switch to correspondence chess. And I personally saw nothing wrong with using common lavatory facilities for both players since those facilities were not ajacent to the player's private rooms. Can you imagine the match Lasker - Capablanca where participants would play behind the curtains?

You can email him at http://www.ponomariov.com/

and find out.


There is nothing in your comments to suggest that I was being naive. What refutation have you given to my question? If I'm trying to draw the attention of a particular young lady, will I stand where I don't expect her to see me? Conspiracy theories tend to be full of holes, and yet the believers fill in the blanks with chimeras and wonder why the rest of us still see a fragmented terrain.

It's not the players' job to do anything but make their own moves on the board. Getting up and leaving the board is perfectly fine. In fact, it's the reason that a rest area is provided.

Your suspicions are your right to hold, but you have no reason whatsoever to chastise those of us who question the gaps in logic inherent in a "Kramnik was cheating" argument. When you have legitimate facts to present in support of your case and legitimate arguments against the counter-view, feel free to lay them on the table so that we may discuss them as intellectuals.

!!! He just won't stop!

From a Netherlander on chessgames.com:

"Dutch newspaper "Algemeen Dagblad" has an excerpt of a full interview with Topalov that will be printed tomorrow. In it, printed in the sports section of the newspaper, he beyond any reasonable doubt claims that Kramnik was cheating, although he has no proof to back it up. A translation of the crucial part:

"Veselin Topalov, present this week at Hoogeveen for a four-man double round robin, hopes he will get a return match with Kramnik soon. ....... Topalov still hasn't gotten over his loss in the crazy WC-match earlier this moth. The Bulgarian lost his title in the tiebreaks, in Russian Elista.

Topalov and his manager made a connection between Kramnik and possible cheating. The Russian grandmaster was supposd to have visited the bathroom a remarkable number of times, reason enough for the Bulgarian to file a complaint. After the fifth game of the match was forfeited by Kramnik, the event was finally resumed, with fatal consequences for Topalov.

He says:

"During one game Kramnik visited his restroom for 2,5 hours, of which he spent 35 minutes in the bathroom area. I've known him since 1989 but I had never noticed that he had such a weak bladder. He certainly didn't have one during the doping tests before the match. It took him half an hour to complete it."

Thus, Topalov thinks Kramnik was secretly being fed with information "I do not have any proof, but he was just playing too good", (the Bulgarian stated)

Topalov will meet his rival at the Corus tournament this january, where six top-ten players will participate from 12-28 january.

TOMORROW: exclusive interview with Veselin Topalov will feature in AD (algemeen dagblad) Sportwereld."

Unbelievable. Is it possible that Topalov is such a jerk? Maybe there is an outside chance that it is a case of Dutch newspaper misquoting him? I mean, it doesn't make sense: he thinks Kramnik has cheated and yet he is trying to get a rematch. You would think that if he really thought Kramnik was a cheater, he would avoid matches with him. And as for Kramnik playing too well, as far as I remember, Kramnik was anything but error free in his first 4 games, and Topalov knows this as well as anyone in the world. This is so stupid I find it hard to believe it is accurate, it looks like a bit too much for a guy like Topalov.

Topalov is a sore loser in great pain

Portion of Topalov interview in De Volkskrant newspaper 10/26/06 (babelfish trans.)

"The consequence was that I no longer knew as from the sixth party against who I played. Kramnik were last year vulnerable, but in these match he went wrong hardly tactical. I started doubt. Were Kramnik my antagonist or were the Kramnik, assisted by a computer? To keep him as much as possible to the bord, started I on purpose rapidly play. Too fast sometimes. The blunder as a result of which I lost the ninth party, the consequence of a decision had been too rapidly taken.

I accept that I have lost the match. But the taferelen in Elista haunt still by my head. at night I dream of Kramnik. I dream that he has accepted the offer of revanchematch in Sofia. Or that I make a long walk with him in Moscow, whereupon we together chique visit nightclub. Foreigner is only that we are the only two visitors.

Very, very odd interview.

He repeats Danialov's Kramnik-bashing. On the other hand, he "dreams" of being friendly with Kramnik and visiting a night club with him!!

There is now an English translation up at http://susanpolgar.blogspot.com/2006/10/interview-with-topalov-by-gert.html

"Never did I breach a signed contract. I am not Kramnik. How often didn't he withdraw with vague symptoms of fatigue? This spring he immediately withdrew from the tournament in Monaco after he signed the contract for the match against me."

"When the Appeals Committee agreed with us and gave orders to close the toilets in the restrooms Kramnik reacted as if completely innocent. 'Contract obligations this and contract obligations that. How dare they so insult me.' ''It's always the same with him. He breaks the rules himself frequently, but heaven forbid when his rights are at stake."

"The consequence of all this was that from the sixth game onwards I no longer knew against whom I was playing. Kramnik had been vulnerable the year before, but in this match he hardly made tactical mistakes. I began to have doubts. Was Kramnik my opponent or was it Kramnik assisted by a computer? To keep him playing at the board as much as possible I purposely started playing fast. Too fast sometimes. The blunder which made me lose the ninth game was the consequence of a decision taken too fast."

Comments are superfluous.

I doubt that any of this bothers Kramnik. He probably feels sorry for poor, silly Topalov.

I am seriously beginning to worry about Topalov. "I do not have any proof, but he was just playing too good." This from the man who scored 6.5/7 in the first half of San Luis?
Wonderful game he played today, of course. "Just too good" for someone with a TPR of 1940 after the first two rounds, I could quite ridiculously say.

And I agree with Greg. Kramnik must be shaking his head in disbelief.

The Essent web site offers a video that starts with the words (in Dutch, but I doubt I am wrong): "Grand masters, but small bladders."

Enough said.


His every interview is weirder than the next one. I mean, Topalov himself is weird. Noone knows anything about him, noone knows anything about his private life, he keeps a very low profile, he doesn't annotate his games. He has this strange relationship with Danailov. And now he has dreams about Kramnik? I don't know what to think. Though perhaps if he mentions in his next interview that he saw a banana in a dream, I am going to start arriving at some conclusions.

But anyway - Topalov does sound like a sore loser who has been broken.

It is kinda funny how Topalov interviews kinda correspond to 5 stages of grief. Topalov's FIDE title was very important for him, so he treats its loss like he would a death of a loved one - by going through these stages (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Five_stages_of_grief):

1) Denial
2) Anger
3) Bargaining
4) Depression
5) Acceptance

First he was denying he even cared about the title in some interviews. Him being angry at Kramnik was the theme in others. I guess asking for rematch is his version of bargaining. I wonder if depression is around the corner.

Yeah, for Topalov grand masters must have grand bladders

Come on guys , leave him alone ! He must be a wreck after losing in Elista. No need to analyze every word of his in every interview.

Be grateful that we have a strong attacking top class player.

Sorry, dirtbag, but not much analysis is necessary here. He is obliquely accusing Kramnik of cheating.
And that is despicable.

Anyone who has followed my comments over the last few weeks will know that I am in awe of Topalov's achievements on the board, and that I respected him as a player and a human being; and also that I am extremely sad that I am finding this ever harder to do.

France critizes FIDE (English press release follows German header)


The French are banned by FIDE to organise world events after the scandalous World Youth Championships they held in Belfort last year. The playing hall in mid July had no air-conditioning and the players were staying in dormitories with rats and no water. And they still have the nerve to complain...


FIDE properly bashed the French about the World Youth Championship.

And when Etienne Bacrot skipped tournaments to prepare for a Candidates match that never took place, the French properly bashed FIDE about "a long list of cancelled, aborted or distorted matches and tournaments."


Applying "five stages of grief" analysis to recent defeated world champions:

--Little public grief.

--Denial. I'm still the champ.
--Anger. Karpov's a cheater.

--Denial. Writes books about the Kasparov matches without mentioning that he lost them.
--Anger. Kasparov is a dirty rat.
--Bargaining. I was the best, regardless.

Kasparov (still working through stages 2-5)
--Denial. Maybe it was "fortuitous." I beat him in Astana!
--Anger. Kramnik is bad for chess. Kramnik wouldn't give me a rematch. Kramnik's last match was lousy.
--Bargaining. World championships don't mean anything, only rating means anything.
--Depression. I'm just a big rock in the road. Maybe things will go better if I just get out of the way.
--Acceptance. I was outprepared.

--Denial. He cheated.
--Anger. The dirty rotten cheater!
--Bargaining. People don't understand the real truth. I'll nail him in a rematch.
--Depression. Not yet.
--Acceptance. Still a dream. Maybe Vlad and I can hit the Moscow nightclubs. Just the two of us.

very funny Greg, really. Except its a little incomplete, really think Kramnik should figure in there, but he should have the five stages ina different order.
-- Anger. I won the WC fair and square, it does NOT matter that I should never have played Gary in the first place. I won didnt I??
-- Denial. No it does NOT matter that I didnt qualify and didnt give a rematch, and have lousy tournament results. I am the WC, and by golly will remain so until I die.
-- Bargaining. Maybe I really should try and win a few tourneys, try "attacking chess" whatever that is. Hey it worked for Leko once didnt it??
-- Depression. No it doesnt work. WHY do people play anything other than matches? In a match I could win with anybody. No wait a minute, I have lost a few matches as well. Omigawd, what's happening to me??
-- Acceptance. YES, it worked, Gary retired, I dont have to play him anymore and I got a match against Topalov! I am GOOD!

There is one mistake in the French Federation's statement bashing FIDE. The appeals committee was accepted by both the players. This is not to say that I am supporting the decision of the Appeals committee.

"The appeals committee was accepted by both the players."

It was? I haven't seen anything that indicates that the players could influence its composition or protest against it. When did Kramnik say he accepted it?

Or Topalov, for that matter.


How will Kramnik react when he joins the ranks of the defeated champions? He seems quite philosophical. Through any adversity he stays in balance. He'll probably react less like Fischer, Karpov, Kasparov and Topalov, and more like Spassky. He doesn't own the title, he just borrowed it.

But after he's won his fourth or fifth WCC match, and STILL reads that he lost some matches in the nineties, plays too conservatively, and didn't "really" beat Kasparov, he'll probably blow up and come gunning for you. Wise move on your part to stay anonymous, d.


Kramnik and Topalov signed the match contract. As part of the contract, it is known who the organizing committee is , who constitutes the Appeals committee , who is the arbiter, what are the playing conditions etc.

When they signed the match contract, they implicitly accepted the playing conditions, composition of the appeals committee.

My opinion:

Kramnik made a mistake in agreeing to the composition of the appeals committee. Kramnik made a mistake by not showing up for the 5th game. Topalov made a mistake by agreeing to a match in Elista under the stewardship of Zhukov.

So you have seen the contract? I thought they signed it long ago. I would have guessed that the members of the Appeals Committee were appointed later.

haha! Poor old Greg. Listen son, go on ebay and try to buy a sense of humour. Then shop around for a sense of objectivity, and top it up with an antidote to blind hero worship with Kramnik in the subject line.

I have not seen the contract. Neither have you. It is my understanding that the appeals committee , arbiter etc. cannot be decided without the consent of the two players.

I thought Kramnik said the arbiter was mutually approved in advance but that he had no control over who was on the appeals committee. That was in an interview commment. It's true that it is standard for them to be listed on the contract, however, as confirmed by Kasparov. From the post-match press conference:

-- How did it happen that the appeals committee consisted almost entirely of Topalov partisans?

Kramnik: "I wouldn't have agreed ot such a composition but according to FIDE regulations -- this is the only question that's not subject to discussion between participants. We agree on the arbiter but not on the committee."

I dunno about those regulations or the accuracy of this statement. It's likely they didn't ASK the players about the appeals committee, but if they are listed on the contract it's up to him to protest about it before he signs it, as with any other aspect of the contract. So the question is still pertinent, were the committee members listed on the contract?

The regulations of the Topalov-Kramnik match: http://www.worldchess2006.com/main.asp?id=903

At 3.17.1 it says that "The President or his Deputy shall be Chairman of the Appeals Committee. There shall be two (2) other members all from different Federations. No member of the Appeals Committee can be from the federation of either player."

So Makropoulos, as Deputy President, was ex-officio the chairman (Kirsan represents the Russian federation). The other two members, Vega and Azmaiparasvili, is not clear how they got appointed. But I agree with Mig, Kramnik should have protested before the match started and not only when a decision wasn't to his favour...

The Elista match has exposed Hensel as a blundering doofus of a manager. And Klara has been out of a job for 18 months. Kramnik's new manager should be...KLARA!

During Kasparov's "beauty prize" tantrum she was running around telling people to stop taking pictures. At the IBM match she got in Joel Benjamin's face. In London she stared down Jeff Sonas. In Elista she'd have marched into that Appeals Committee meeting, grabbed those clowns by the ears, and knocked their sorry heads together.

Out with Hensel! In with Klara!

Gee, Klara sounds like fun. I wonder what were the dynamics of Kasparov-Kamsky games with two of all-star chess parents: Klara and Rustam.

Speaking of Hensel, his lack of knowledge of Russian turned out to be a handicap in Elista, so Kramnik had to do the negotiations with Kirsan and Danailov- something that would normally be handled by the manager. I think Kramnik better do something about - either get Henzel some Russian textbooks or get a Russian speaking manager next time.

From the seconds' interview, it appears that during the rest-room controversy/Game 5 forfeit NO ONE IN KRAMNIK'S CAMP READ THE MATCH REGULATIONS!! What kind of a manager is THAT?

Kramnik's team miscalculated really badly. They accepted the "so-called biased " Appeals committee. They didn't log the protest in time. They forfeited game 5.

They blamed their incompetence on the machinations of Topalov's team and the western press led by Chessbase and Seirawan dutifully projected Kramnik as a martyr and Topalov and his team as the villains.

Well, just because Kramnik's team miscalculated doesn't mean that Topalov wasn't a jerk in Elista. Even if one agree that team Kramnik made a mistake of not protesting the result of game 5 (even though it was obvious they WERE protesting, they just didn't file the official protest), what does it change? Topalov got a free point AND Kramnik lost a game with white. In 12 games those two were huge factors, that's like forfeiting 2 of your games with white in a 24 game match. And yet Kramnik won anyway. I bet the fact that Topalov lost even with a free point and an extra white is what makes the loss all the more painful. Chessbase and Seirawan are irrelevant when one faces the fact that Kramnik turned out to be the superior player in Elista.

Nobody is denying the fact that Kramnik won and Topalov lost.

My point is that the Seirawan and the western press made Topalov and Danailov look like villains whereas Kramnik was made to look like a martyr. There is a lot of blame to be shared on both the sides- one of the reasons being the incompetence of Kramnik's teams. But, yet, Topalov's reputation has got besmirched:- when he had a legitimate complaint -Kramnik was spending too much time in the rest area - there could be a possibility of cheating.

He got an extra point : because Kramnik didn't show up on time and was forfeited.

dirtbag, noone disputes the fact that Kramnik was forfeited, either.

It is a bit too much to say that it was Seirawan and the western press that were responsible for the fact that Topalov and Danailov looked bad. It is kinda like saying that USSR and Western media are responsible for the fact that Hitler got a bad reputation.

A lot of people wanted Kramnik to win because they felt that the chess world championship should actually be decided by playing chess, not by appeals and forfeits. Kramnik didn't do anything wrong according to the contract, so Topalov's complaint was not legitimate. It is none of Topalov's business how much time Kramnik spent in his rest area. Stupid press releases that team Topalov resorted to when the match situation was extremely bad and Topalov's happiness over a point that was not earned in a chess game, but by taking advanges of Danailov's FIDE connections and by using Kramnik's deasease - that is what got public mad at Topalov. Seirawan and chessbase have nothing to do with it.

Topalov on his Essent participation: "I have never ever breached a signed contract. I am not Kramnik."

Topalov on Kramnik defending his contractual rights: "Contract this and contract that..."

Yes, I noticed that too, acirce.

That Kramnik is such a hypocrite :)

The Guardian presents a reminder and a few new interesting insights about Kirsan: http://observer.guardian.co.uk/osm/story/0,,1931027,00.html

=> the article is long
=> both the chess and the non-chess aspects are ultimately depressing (perhaps the warning here is not required?)

Twitter Updates

    Follow me on Twitter



    About this Entry

    This page contains a single entry by Mig published on October 14, 2006 8:20 PM.

    KKRRRRrrrrrramnik Wins! was the previous entry in this blog.

    Democracy on Deadline is the next entry in this blog.

    Find recent content on the main index or look in the archives to find all content.