Greengard's ChessNinja.com

Game 6 Press Conference

| Permalink | 104 comments

Many were wondering if there even was a press conference after game six. I'd heard there was, but the translation lagged more than usual this time. It's up here at the official site. Topalov said he "has nothing to be proud of" regarding his statement he wouldn't shake hands. An apology would have been nice. Two interesting bits back to back:

– A question to Mr. Kramnik. When did you decide to play today’s game?

V.K.: It was a very tough choice. To be honest, for a long time I intended to ignore this game, which would mean the end of the match. However, after lengthy consideration I decided against abandoning the match, feeling uncomfortable in the face of chess community. I still hope for positive result of my appeal.

– Will you keep playing, if you appeal is declined?

V.K.: The only thing I know for certain is that I will sue FIDE in this case. I will have to consult my lawyers to decide whether I should continue the match.

From what I heard from Elista, the decision to play game six went down to the final half hour before the game. As his next answer shows, part of this decision was keeping a protest in hand, as it were. The new appeals committee just let us know that they have no power to overrule decisions made by the old committee (?), so we can assume lawyers are being consulted. Obviously Kramnik can walk away at any time, he doesn't need to say this. He's not there under guard, to my knowledge. (Though with Zhukov breathing down his neck anything is possible.) So the dynamic will change one final time if he plays tomorrow with his appeal having been definitively rejected. After that there's really no way back. I.e., if he goes on to lose game eleven and then quits most of the substantial goodwill and support he's garnered by playing at 3:2 will dissipate in a heartbeat.

But that's too hypothetical and negative and I certainly count myself among the many who were surprised and impressed by Kramnik's decision to play. Interestingly, among the many GM letters of support popping up, there are a few about how Kramnik must have been pressured by Russian political forces, etc. (See Sune Berg Hansen, second from top here.) Others seem to believe he was offered cash, and "insurance" in case he lost, or was pressured and bribed. This is one of those "we'll never know so why bother?" situations. He's playing and deserves credit for doing so.

Peter Svidler's fabulous notes on games 3 and 4 are up in English at Chesspro. URL may change. Rusty gives us a link to an item on the scandal on the Sports Illustrated website. Mostly a pastiche of copy-paste from web sources and dumb jokes. Of course we wouldn't have anything like that around here.


Mig, the link you gave is Korotylev's comments in Russian. The correct link to Svidler's comments is http://chesspro.ru/match/events/7/

I see Topalov is in damage control mode – coming close to apologising for his stuff about not shaking hands. But if he believes Kramnik’s play is fair, then what on earth was his protest about??

Andrey is correct.

I think game 7 will be the key to the whole match. Kramnik will apprently play black for the 3rd time in a row. One can imagine that he has to be mentally exhausted with all the negotiating he has been doing while Topalov calmly had a chance to prepare for the games. Game 6 was easily drawn, but I suspect that some of the mental edge Topalov had due to getting a free point and Kramnik being tired was kinda offset by the fact that maybe Kramnik's decision to even play on Monday came as a suprise to Topalov. But now Topalov has another free day to prepare while Kramnik seems to still hold on to the idea of saving game 5 in one way or another. So Topalov will give it everything he has got tomorrow. If Kramnik manages to hold on in game 7, I think he will win the match, simply because he will then have a day for rest before each of his remaining games with black and it is hard to imagine him losing with white. But if Topalov manages to win, he may get the momentum and will be very hard to stop.

theres a possibility: Kramnik can show up with an "einstweilige Verfügung" from a court (in german its called so) to force the comittee to change the result of game 5. He has time for this until game 11

Awe, nice! Lawyers and Chess. Wait 'til we hear the jokes about this: Hey, what do you get when a grandmaster chess player hires a lawyer?

Whatever happens from now, I can tell you that the media coverage of this whole debacle has been really classic. After days of having fun at the expense of chess players by shamelessly misrepresenting the true nature of the crises, now that the dispute has been partly resolved and there has been a clear demonstration of dignity and fortitude, worthy of reporting, on the part of one of the players concerned, what does the media do? They simply shut up about it and ignore it.

Compare the many screaming captions by major news organisations BEFORE October 2nd. (I don't have to tell anyone here that Kramnik's entering and exit into the bathroom really had nothing to do with the call of nature):

Bathroom Dispute Halts Chess Championship

Chess champs halt match over wee argument

Potty-break dispute stalls world chess championship

Toilet time stalemates chess match

Grandmaster's loo trips provoke row that threatens world chess ...

Now, AFTER October 2nd, this is the one of the very scant reports that one is able to find (by "the Age" Australia):

Back on board in chess peace

If it happens that Kramnik eventually walks out of the match, it will be interesting to see if they will outright lie by saying something like "GRANDMASTER QUITS MATCH OVER TOILET DECISION."

"Einstweilige Verfügung" means "injunction" or "interim injunction".

I kind of doubt it though. To sue here is really not that easy (at least in my Patzer's eyes) - I guess the trouble already starts with deciding which court/country's laws are applicable.

Threatening to sue and to walk away in the press conference is simply a "must", otherwise he would silently accept the situation. I don't really think it means that he's still seriously thinking about leaving the match.
That would be public suicide for him just as much as it already is for Topalov. Mig's completely right about that.

I think he'll play and nothing in the last three games has suggested that he won't be able to draw the rest of the match.
Yesterday's draw was a comparably easy walk, so I'm not convinced that he'll be completely exausted because he had two black in a row...

It's called an interim (or provisional) injunction in English, Ellrond. But its effect is only suspensive, not declaratory, I do think. And which court would have jurisdiction, by the way?

The true nature of the Kramnik - Topalov match cannot be given more precisely: http://www.chessbg.com/graphics/karikatura-kramnik-topalov.jpg :-)

WC made it on SI.com!


I had earlier an argument with rdh. It all began because I truly believe that Kramnik has the whole Russian machine behind him as well as the organizers of the match Kramnik against the computer. I would like to hear Mig's opinion on http://www.veselintopalov.net/article/read-between-the-lines
hm.... maybe Kramnik is not the saint the media presents him as.

Just a general comment on the current upsurge of Kramnik support: in analogy to the 'poisoned pawn' one gets more and more the impression that Topalov has swallowed a 'poisoned point', thereby ruining his initially excellent position before the match.

"maybe Kramnik is not the saint the media presents him as"

Yes I suppose one can also qualify as a saint by earning a reputation of being a two year old potty baby?

Topalov clearly admitted that he made a mistake and that Kramnik didn't cheat. He seemed down and probably realizes that it was a mistake leaving everything to Danailov - but won't say that because he seems beholden to the man for some reason.

I agree with Mark Crowther and others that Kramnik should have played game 5. The more he talks of suing FIDE and bring in lawyers, the more goodwill he loses. I am also impressed with Kirsan's statesmanlike conduct. There are people who like to blame FIDE and Kirsan for everything but in this case he didn't put a foot wrong nor did he utter one wrong word. He also called Kramnik's action heroic.

So far the heroes inthis drama are: Kramnik, Kirsan, all GMs supporting him

Villains: Topalov, Danailov, Old appeals commitee

Joker: Kasparov - For getting into it unnecessarily with nothing much to say - except settle old scores and worse, praising the "principled" complaints of Fischer because he was being paid by an American Journal. He very well knows what the American public wants to hear but has no idea what his countrymen want. No wonder he is popular in the west but unpopular or ignored in his own country.


I agree with what you say... But Topalov is not from the bad guys you mentioned. The only thing he said during these days is "I want to play chess".
I do not think that makes him bad.
He brings chess to people, never refuses an autograph. Even plays in gardens with chess lovers.

I'm only interested in things relevant to the chess and the rules. The support of the "Russian machine" certainly never manifested itself. Topalov is the FIDE champion and the first appeals committee bent or broke several rules of protocol and logic to support him. If Ilyumzhinov and Zhukov were really conspiring to support Kramnik, the match would have started again at 3:1. Conspiracies without results don't interest me!

Of course both players - or at least their agents - are going to cry underdog and foul and mistreatment. It's their job. So we have to look at the actions we CAN see. We can't see any proof of Kramnik cheating. We can see some unusual behavior that might have warranted a calm complaint, but no rules were being broken even according to Topalov's side. All the BS about water and plane trips have the specific purpose of clouding the issue and creating suspicion for free. The bottom line is that it's not illegal or improper to spend a lot of time in the bathroom.

Personally I think it should be. As I said in another thread, these guys should be on the stage. It's a sport. If you need to go, go. If you have a medical condition that requires you to go more often, the rules committee should be so informed. But such adjustments to the rules are for future events, or, in an extreme case where there was reasonable suspicion of abuse, for a mid-match ruling. Here there is no reasonable suspicion (e.g. proof of computer assistance, communication with aliens, etc.).

Kramnik has every right to get a lawyer involved.

Well said Mig,
I still need to make a comment. Kramnik did not deny he drank only half a cup per game. Yesterday I think he went 15 times for two hours.
The stage is a stage, he should think there.

To swatters

Noone needs a case in order to involve a lawer. One just needs money to let the lawer act. I doubt Kramnik will spend money on a case that is already lost! Kirsan clearly said it before game 6.

So does Topalov switch to 1.e4? Or does he keep banging away on 1.d4?

Topalov has played 1.d4 three times. He got one better position, one winning position, and one equal position -- but no victories out of those games.

So 1.d4 hasn't been cruel to him, but hasn't been kind either. With 1.e4, he would likely face a Petroff or a Berlin, and Kramnik has shown he can suck the life out of those positions too.

And Mig,
What about the match Kramnik against the computer in November? Why did the boss of the game arrive in Elista before Kirsan or Zhukov?
pressure and propaganda.....

Once upon a time Kram played mostly 1.d4 as I can remember. Some years ago he switched to 1.e4 and his rating dropped till 2750-. It high time for Topa to switch for what he can do best - attack and 1.e4

They shouldn't be on the stage if they don't feel like it. You need to prevent all possibilities of cheating, that's a given (as has been done here with players being checked for any electronic equipment, restrooms being monitored, toilets being inspected, electronic noise being generated and the glass wall placed between the audience and the players).

After that you should provide them with the best environment possible to play their chess. There are a handful of people in the "real" audience. The real spectators on internet, and those later going the moves through on their chess sets want to see the best chess possible.

If a player plays his best chess from the restroom, or when walking around and looking at the position from a monitor screen or even from the toilet seat, that shouldn't be anyone's business then.

The real question that need to be answered when all this is over is how Topalov's team got their hands on those tapes. They could have used them to analyse Kramnik's reactions to different opening moves or anything. That is a serious violation of fairplay. How could they suspect this thing in the first place? SOMEONE had to make them aware of the content of these tapes. Someone inside FIDE. Which doesn't surprise anyone.

Just read on Topalov's homepage, that he alone is to gain a minimum one million dollars from the proposed match against Radjabov (if it ever takes place). TWICE the money he gets from this match. The most times Kramnik visited the toilet during any one game was 18 (during game three), as was confirmed by Makropoulos in his letter.

For Danailov to exaggerate the number by 3x and go public about it proves the real motives of their toilet gambit. Now that's suspicious behaviour. One million dollars is a lot of money for a chess player who may not get another chance if he loses this match...

It's sad but human in some understandable way if you lower your standards for a second.

Markopolus said, "He went 18 times in an hour... the rest of the records are missing"
hint hint hint

Giannis thanks for that picture. It actually makes one to appreciate (and enjoy) the humor in the whole affair. The great thing, also, is that future chess matches now have a real and big potential sponsor in Comedy Central :-)

No. According to Makropoulos, they had full records for game 3. 18 visits. Some of the records for games 1 and 2 were missing. 11 or 12 visits in total during those games. Doesn't mention anything about game 4.

Interesting fact: Bareev said that he and Svidler were supposed to come help Kramnik after game 5 anyway, this was agreed before the scandal. It just looked like they came because of the scandal since their arrival was in the middle of this mess.

have you tried to google the term "toiletgate"?
There are more than 5000 results, some of them funny.
Anyhow, Mr. Kramnik was arrogant, Veselin was with the people. Now some propaganda is ruining the realistic situation.
I really hope Topalov wins most of the games till the end.

naah... I was wrong, toiletgate on google take out also a lot of crap.

The whole "Russian machine" thing was started by Danailov with twin motives. One was to pressurize Kirsan that any decision against Topalov can be seen/potrayed as the Russian establishment (Kirsan, Putin, Zhukov) protecting their own (Kramnik) - in reality it's been the other way round till then.

Second was that Kramnik was playing (if it so happens) under pressure from the establishment and not out of any nobility.

Danailov clearly is a first rate scumbag. The lowest in this whole affair was the 2nd letter from him in response to and after the appeals commitee has agreed to an unfair complaint - that Topalov won't shake hands etc.


Shouldn't be on the stage if they don't feel like it? What is this, group therapy? It's a sport; it has boundaries. It's not just about preventing cheating, it's a question of professionalism and respect for the organizers and fans. Kicking back in a separate room, unseen by spectators (paying, one hopes) or online, having a drink and watching your OWN GAME on a tv is preposterous. Pace around the stage. If there isn't "enough room" to pace on the stage, tough. There was enough room for Alekhine and enough room for Fischer. We shouldn't even be talking about this garbage.

We're going to have tons of live and post-game video for Mexico City 2007. You think fans want shots of empty seats and empty stages? Nope. If you have a note from a doctor explaining frequent trips to the bathroom, fine. But a separate rest area when you are supposed to be playing in a world championship? No way. Be a couch potato on your own time.

Mig, it's not necessary that Kirsan and Zhukov are betting on the same horse. Zhukov is the one who wants badly a Kramnik win. Kirsan doesn't really care who wins, his only duty was to organise this match.

Zhukov is calling the shots and that's why Kirsan "leaked" Morten Sand's letter to Sport Express. Kirsan wants to show to Zhukov that he tried (good boy!) but he couldn't alter the FIDE swiss lawyers opinion that the score should be 3-2 and not 3-1.

Talking against Danailov is ok, but Topa is a nice guy. Think about it. He never said anything bad. Never. In his whole carreer he has played chess for people.
And what happens now is really not right.

Water(closet) Gate has been used too. In a tennis piece. Funny story, actually.


Read Bologan's interview on www.64.ru. He says that Hensel lost to Danailov, and it was a waste of Kramnik's energy to fight for his rights, should have delegated all the dirt to his manager.

Why do the players need to be on stage? This isn't a Broadway show, or figure skating. Neither of them looks like Julia Roberts or Brad Pitt. For all I care, they can spend all of their time in the bathroom or lounging on the couches in their rest rooms. Let them wow the world with chess, everything else is irrelevant.

And of course, if the toilet of Kramnik was really "wired" and "connected" with the outside, it was a job done by Zhukov's men, not Kirsan's.

The demonization of Topalov over the past week is ludicrous. So many chessplayer, including ones with titles, are responding to this affair with far more emotion than intelligence. Topalov isn't getting a fair shake from the chess community in my opinion.

If it is so outrageous for Kramnik to be suspected of cheating then surely the same would be true of Topalov, right? Then why are so many bringing up rumors about Topalov's alleged cheating?

Garry Kasparov himself in the pages of yesterday's Wall Street Journal:

Adding irony to the tragedy is the fact that for the past year and a half Mr. Topalov himself has been the subject of rumors and even public accusations that he has cheated with computer assistance. Hard evidence is lacking, with some pointing to odd behavior by his assistants and other critics saying there is simply no other explanation for Mr. Topalov's sudden ascent to the top of the rating list after my retirement.

Others are discussing this rumor as well. So Kramnik can't be accused but Topalov can? What's going on here?

Personally, I would have considered Kramnik's "toilet" behavior deliberate gamesmanship. I'm surprised others don't seem to agree.

And as for the playing styles of these 2, from Kramnik I learn how to draw and how to sleep. Topalov is far more exciting. I think when cool heads prevail, most chessplayers would agree with that. Kramnik's defensive power would appeal only to other top players.

an opinion on http://susanpolgar.blogspot.com/2006/10/fans-of-topalov-spoke-out.html

"Shouldn't be on the stage if they don't feel like it? What is this, group therapy? It's a sport; it has boundaries. It's not just about preventing cheating, it's a question of professionalism and respect for the organizers and fans. Kicking back in a separate room, unseen by spectators (paying, one hopes) or online, having a drink and watching your OWN GAME on a tv is preposterous."

No. If it produces the best moves it's allright. That's what chess fans want to see. Not a video of a player sitting on his chair.

"Pace around the stage. If there isn't "enough room" to pace on the stage, tough."

Now that's just ridiculous. I wonder if you thought about what you wrote there. It could easily annoy/distract your opponent (and other players in a 8 player tourney). Someone walking back and forth close to them when they are trying to be 110% concentrated. Kasparov for one wouldn't accept it. I remember seeing a video clip in some documentary in which he gets very angry with an arbiter who comes within 5 yards of his table.

GMs' letter of support is interesting. But not in the way you are thinking. Where is Anand's signature? Where is Leko's? Hasn't Morozevich tried to stand up to some of the ridiculousness in chess? What about Svidler and Bareev, Kramnik's friends? Does Aronian lick his wounds from Dortmund too hard to take a break and type up a support message? Will Radjabov wait till he is screwed out of a point to write an e-mail? Is Judit Polgar pregnant again? I could go on, but the point is, where are the letters of support from the people who actually suffer or could actually end up suffering because of how world championships are staged.

It's nice to know that Seirawan, Short, Korchnoi, Susan Polgar signed a letter of support, but those guys are always around, aren't they? If the other signatures had been on this list, if those guys had been involved in the situations that led up to this event, perhaps we wouldn't be in the trouble we are in now.

Seirwan and Short
and most of the people in the letter are ACP people, chess players with not much future in FIDE structure. Of course they will sign a letter.

From November 25 to December 5, 2006 at the Federal Art Hall in Bonn. One million US dollars for Kramnik if he defeats Deep Fritz. Federal Finance Minister Peer Steinbrück is event patron


The letter of ACP means nothing.

A bunch of Kramnik's friends together with the "usual suspects" Seirawan, Short, etc, who are always on Chessbase complaining and whining about everything...

A very boring show, repeated again and again...

Giannis has a point,
Sierwan does all that for the show and creates a wrong public opinion. Even Russian newspapers pointed out Kramnik's arrogant behavior.

Pay attention to the introduction of the future Deep Fritz - Kramnik match. If Kramnik was considered as an World Chess Champion, then it would have been mentioned. Even Kramnik's site do not consider him as a Chess Champion.He was and I doubt he will be.

I heard somewhere that there was a board display in their private loo? Probably just another bogus fact someeone posted. I can't remember where I read that. Maybe it came from one of the 10,000 posts here.

The only board they should be able to see is the one they both sit at and perhaps the demonstration board (if there is one) in back of the playing area.

Lwolf, the demonstration boards in their relaxing rooms are there to provide the moves. They were put there after the Topalov team requested that the live monitors should be removed.

Yes, he has in the bathroom and in the rest room. It is ridiculous. Going so many times there is a lack of respect to the opponent.
Sorry Mr. Kramnik, I don't like your little games. I hope Toopalov wins

Had the letter been signed by most of the world's top GMs, precisely the kind of guys Kirsan wants to play for his championship, he would be more wary of how he stages the next cycle. As it is, the letter is meaningless.

I apologize to my friend Alex, who I visited last Sunday. I went to the bathroom at least twenty times while only being at his house for a few hours. It was disrespectful and I apologize for playing mind games with him.

The thing I find most intersting about the letters from GMs on chessbase is the fact that Susan Polgar sent in her letter seperately from the others, yet seemed to do a piss poor job of 'imitating' (plagerizing) most of the first letter's text anyway with only minor alterations.

It's like she couldn't bear to be lumped in with a bunch of other GMs (not enough individual spotlight) when she had a chance to sign it along with them, but also couldn't come up with an original letter herself. Maybe I'm reading too much into it, but it does fit my perception of her dead on.

but if the "interim injunction" is practically not applicable, what swords has Kramnik left?
- public opinion
- the virtual threat to damage fide more then himself with a stop of the match
- political influence
- to claim for damages

not that much i think. Hard situation for him

but if the "interim injunction" is practically not applicable, what swords has Kramnik left?
- public opinion
- the virtual threat to damage fide more then himself with a stop of the match
- political influence
- to claim for damages

not that much i think. Hard situation for him

oh, i just read about susan.

Susan is clearly biased towards topalov.

Would be to much to explain here, everybody can make his own picture.

i started this discussion on ICC and was cited in her live commentary in game 5

God, you people are annoying. Talking about some russian conspiracy. The whole world saw Kramnik beat Topalov over the board and everyone knows Topalov got his only point by dirty tricks. Nice conspiracy. Officials in Russia pretty much don't give a damn about the match, while bulgarian president phoned Topalov and Danailov got Bulgarian secret servrice to supposedly search the bathrooms (which may be Bulgarian for "reinstall Topalov's cheat devices"). Time to face the facts. Kramnik's reputation is crystal clear. Topalov was the one whose integrity was(and is) questioned. Morozevich and Kasimdzhanov didn't applaud when Topalov got his San Luis trophy. Dolmatov directly accused Topalov of cheating. Now Topalov the cheat is getting free points in Elista, the capital of FIDE-land, and you people are looking for ways to make Kramnik look bad? Get a clue.

"Pay attention to the introduction of the future Deep Fritz - Kramnik match. If Kramnik was considered as an World Chess Champion, then it would have been mentioned. Even Kramnik's site do not consider him as a Chess Champion.He was and I doubt he will be." - Again, get a clue. Only a cheat like Topalov would agree to play a match against Radjabov and advertize himself as the world champion, even though he is supposed to play Kramnik before Radjabov. So Topalov makes it seem like he has absolutely no chance of losing to Kramnik. Kramnik's website, on the other hand, is just being honest and realizes that Kramnik may lose to Topalov and therefore doesn't advertize the match as World champion against the computer. So, no, Kramnik doesn't have any doubts that he is world champion (and most people agree with him), it is just that he has too much class and character to possibly use false advertizing in promoting his matches. I know, as a Topalov fan, you would probably need to look up "class" and "character" in the dictionary.

"GMs' letter of support is interesting. But not in the way you are thinking. Where is Anand's signature? Where is Leko's? Hasn't Morozevich tried to stand up to some of the ridiculousness in chess? What about Svidler and Bareev, Kramnik's friends? Does Aronian lick his wounds from Dortmund too hard to take a break and type up a support message? Will Radjabov wait till he is screwed out of a point to write an e-mail? Is Judit Polgar pregnant again? I could go on, but the point is, where are the letters of support from the people who actually suffer or could actually end up suffering because of how world championships are staged."

It was predictable that no top-name FIDE GM's would sign anything that could be in any way construed as being slanted against FIDE. That would simply be a bad business decision on their part.

It's basically a case of "Hey, it's your fight, not mine."

I would read nothing into the absence of top-gun names. Sometimes you say more by saying nothing, and in this case, the LACK of support for the FIDE Golden Boy Topalov speaks volumes.

Insisting that players should be on stage no matter what is kind of ridiculous.

Next step would be to force players to actually look at the chess board. Ivanchuk would be banned from serious competition for arrogantly starring at the ceiling all the time...

It's just the usual CYA from the top players. Shirov is about the only guy over 2700 who ever makes noise that could possibly come back to hurt him. Nobody else wants to rock the boat and risk angering Kirsan, or anybody else. Then they complain when the autocrats screw everything up.

marca: 'even Russian newspapers pointed out Kramnik's arrogant behavior.'

could you please give us just a couple links to?

"Susan is clearly biased towards Topalov."

Read what she has said. She is not biased towards either player. She thinks both have made mistakes. About Toplaov's side, she said:

"5. The tone and language of Danailov's letters went too far. It was totally unprofessional. The most outrageous point was about the refusal to shake hands." .... and ....

"8. Topalov should have salvaged the mess by insisting on continuing the match with the 3-1 score after the bathroom issue was resolved. This would have been the honorable and right thing to do."

Do those comments sound pro-Topalov to you? People say she's "pro-Topalov" because she refuses to be totally "anti-Topalov." She is not 'pro' or 'anti' anybody. She thinks both have made mistakes.

There's no need for a next step. I don't care if they nap on the stage. It's the scene of the event; that's where they should be. What possible justification can there be for letting the players kick back in a private room on a sofa, out of sight, as what is supposed to be a sporting contest goes on. You know, THE ONE THEY ARE PARTICIPATING IN. Otherwise just play all the games online and they can sit around in their jammies at home. Rest area, ppffffft!

The Russian machine intervention is clear. All of you that support Kramnik support old communistical methods. Are you guys blind?

Mr. Drawnik should be most of the time on stage, I agree with Mig.

Dear Mr. Kleyner

There is a letter of support to be found on www.nowhere.non/nevertheless.htm
where you could sign that no one should become president if he is eating plums.
Do you really expect, even in your wildest dreams, that all that chess players you mentioned are nerviously sitting on the computer waiting for the next chance to sign a letter of support.
In my opinion many of them share the same opinion but have no time reading all the news and blogs.
Eventually the future will show and I'm shure many of them will show an opinion according to the letter of support.

Susan probably felt that the sentence "You (Kramnik) deserve to win" wouldn't go well with the kind of "aggressive neutrality" that she likes so much :o))

Also, she probably felt that a direct mentioning of Topalov (first sentence) would't do as well, whereas blaming everything on the Appeals Committee is ok.

I fully agree with Mig. This is a chess game, and this is a show. If you want to play correspondence chess, fine. Otherwise your place is in front of the board, and a least on the stage.

The bottom line is, Topa is a nice guy, Kramnik was arrogant.

"It's the scene of the event; that's where they should be"

No. The scene of the event is the chessboard. Not the chairs. Chess on TV? Large paying audiences? Pipe dream. Forget about it.

"What possible justification can there be for letting the players kick back in a private room on a sofa, out of sight, as what is supposed to be a sporting contest goes on."

If it helps them to relax or improves their concentration, allowing them to perform at a higher level? So that they can produce better quality chess. Players glued to their chairs so that you can have video stream? That's funny.

"Otherwise just play all the games online and they can sit around in their jammies at home. Rest area, ppffffft!"

That's not really the same thing is it? I can't believe why a chess lover would care about anything else but the quality of the chess they produce in this context. Chess will never be a spectator "sport" for obvious reasons.


Susan Polgar shares the players' sentiments, so she repeats their language.

But the players' letter concludes: "You [Kramnik] deserve to win."

While Polgar's letter concludes: "May the best man win on the board."

I actually prefer Polgar's implicit message, "Topalov, give back the point, retrieve your honor, and may the best man win."

You do have a point Mig, but as far as I'm concerned it really doesn't matter where the players are because there is no way for me to see them anyway. If there was a live video relay of the event, I would prefer Kramnik and Topalov to stay on stage as much as possible (and I would definitely pay some ducats to watch the show). The way things are right now, it really doesn't matter much where they do the thinking, as long as they play their best possible moves.

I don't recall Mig being so negative towards players spending time in rest rooms when Kasparov spent a lot of time in a rest room while playing x3d Fritz.

But then again, Quod licet Jovi, non licet bovi.

One does note among the signatories of the ACP letter former FIDE Champion Khalifman, former women's runner-up (or as she used to say rather sweetly on her website, Women's Vice Champion) Kosteniuk, and Harikrishna, who is or has been - what, 2675 or so? - and might well not want to fall out with FIDE. It's not only those we know don't like FIDE.

Honor? Integrity? Honesty? Justice? What planet are all of you from? Urantia? Come on! This is about MONEY and BRAGGING RIGHTS. Get Real. Just a Thought: each of the "players" get 500K USD (TAX FREE MIND YOU) for playing 12 games of chess REGARDLESS OF WHO WINS. And toilets, appeals, cheating, politics, and who said what about who comes into it? Are any of you really surprised? What if they pulled a T.O. and their managers came out and said, "Topalov and/or Kramnik have 500,000 reasons to live." This is beyond ridiculous. I hope Mig has the chess/dirt picture trademarked. That is all that is left of what used to be a noble activity...unfortunately he would still have to hire an "intellectual" property attorney to file suit for his money!

Marc, Vasil,
1.d4: Dead draw versus Slav or QGA.
1.e4: Dead draw versus Petroff or Berlin.
Topalov likes Sicilian with Black.
1.c4 best bet to get a Sicilianesque type position with White - and with a tempo up. And Kramnik won't be able to be booked up to the eyeballs against this one.
Better take my advice, Topa - you've only got 3 whites left!

greg koster: OK, I understand Susan's intention, but why not just write a completely different letter stating her views instead of the backhanded way of modifying others' (many GMs) sentiments in a not-quite plagerized but easily identifiable 'correction' of their choice of words? Its like she is saying those other GMs "don't get it, what they SHOULD have said...". How about she just writes her own words from scratch?

This whole thing about needing to be AT the board for the, what, scores of people who are watching live (through some weird, one-way mirror shield to put even more distance between them and the players anyway) is ludicrous. Especially with the possiblity of more accusations of intentional distraction when the players are seated opposite one another, rational or not. The press can easily get enough footage of them at the board together, including the handshake, first few moves, etc.

I bet even the people wathcing the game live have their own eyes planted on the big demo board 80% of the time and only watch the players 20% of the time, and its only that high because there is nothing else to look at waiting forever for the next move to be played. Not all players make funny faces while concentrating like Kasparov - and by rule the players are prohibited from interacting with each other (save for draw offers and such). So how long can you look at a guy cradling his face staring at the board like a statue before any viewer gets bored? Wathcing chess players is like watching students taking their SAT tests. Adding two simultaneous statues doesn't make it intersting either. Its the moves that are intersting. That is why chess will always suck on TV but is perfect for the Internet.

AZ79 and Stern, I agree with you.
Mig, I disagree with you.

For what it's worth, if I were a paying member of the audience at the venue, I wouldn't mind in the least if I only saw the players 20 % of the time. I would be concentrating on the game, to the best of my poor ability.

The only chess event I've been to live was one of the Intel Chess Grand Prix days. I think I would have been disappointed if I hardly saw the players on the stage. But these were fast matches (I forget the time control: 20 mins each?), and I doubt the players had that much opportunity to wander around even if they were normally so inclined.

Before we start worrying about providing a serious entertainment alternatice for Joe Public, I'd say we should get some basic aspects of chess in order, like, I don't know, cutting out nepotism and sinecures, banishing corruption -- oh, getting the only title match the world has seen for a couple of years actually completed.

(Since Mig's so keen on the idea, I wonder if Danailov would have been better off couching his complaint about Kramnik's bathroom visits in terms of robbing the throngs [sic.] of decent, hard-working spectators of their once-in-a-lifetime chance to see Kramnik grimace in person.)

Quod licet Jovi, quod licet bovi.

What is permitted to Jupiter is not permitted to the ox.

I think there should be a negative in there ("Quod licet Jovi non licet bovi")


But Greg's version is so wonderfully egalitarian :o)) lol

I'm switching back to chess, chess, chess!

Tomorrow's game is the pivotal one in the match. Sure, we could say that about every subsequent game, but let's face it: Topalov with his 3rd White in a row -- if he can't dent Kramnik's defenses, then it's down to 5 games, 3 of which are Kramnik white games, for Topalov to make up a point. From whatever vantage point you'd like, that would be improbable. Topalov hasn't scored yet, except off-the-board.

October 4, 2006: a day that will live on forever in chess history, one way or the other! As they say in Norway, 'skol'!

well I find it interesting that Susan Polgar becomes the focus of attention.

She is a big Topalov fan. She has said so many times on her blog. She also does not like Kramnik she has said so many times on her blog. I remember reading a long list of things wrong with Kramnik at the time that Topalov won his title in San Luis. She was a very very strong supporter of Topalov at that time.

I have also read complaints filed at her site by many people who seem frustrated with her. She seems to have shifted to try to take a neutral stance. but she does not do a good job of that. Her bias for Topalov always is there. I could explain it but this is not the place.

I am getting a kick out of reading Mig's comments. I dont really believe those are Mig's thoughts. I think he likes mixing up the conversation a bit. I suspect he is enjoying bringing up some topics from the "other" side to see what reaction he gets.

I think this is the best blog on the internet. Mig does a great job. Of course I dont agree with him. But I like the way he expresses his contrary opinions. contrary to my opinions only in some cases.

Mig give us some more of the great humor you used to write all the time. I love getting a huge laugh over chess. and guys lets give Mig some slack. He does an awesome job and I can not imagine a harder place then this public blog.

My opinion is that if Kramnik walked all around the board that would really disturb his opponent. that is much more disturbing. it seems much more considerate to leave the area and wait for the opponent to move. the opponent has peace and quiet with no disturbances. Topalov should be grateful for that.

I can remember a very difficult situation at my board where I knew I could save my queen but could not figure out how to do it. My opponent left most of the time. I wanted to be alone. it took me a long time to figure it out. I am not sure I would have found the answer if my opponent had sat there waiting for me to move.

I would second the vote of confidence in Mig's blog. I think it's wonderfully well-written, and always interesting. I'd be surprised, though, if he doesn't hold the views he puts forward.

In other words, this is the synthesis of the situation:

- Kramnik goes an unusual number of times to the bathroom (more than the necessary for any medical condition); perhaps a decision made for him, for his team, something that was conciously know to disturb Topalov. In other words, a trick similar to the cigars Lasker put in a table (again Nimzovitch), knowing that Nimzovitch didn't stand that; Nimzovitch complains, but Lasker say, "I am not smoking".

- Mr. Danailov reveals to the public the weak point of his protegee, the fact that in order to be fully concentrated, Topalov needs an environment when he can feel the energy of his opponent (or maybe an environment that does not change)... with an opponent that leave the stage frequently, he lost focus on the game (think what happens when you play alone). It is known in the past that Topalov made gross blunders because of lost of focus, so here is happening to him.

Note: Remember when Kasparov often said that facing computers was difficult because you don't feel the energy of your opponent ... I wonder if ... (Mig can ask Kasparov if continuous trips to the bathroom could be related as an attempt to "break the rhythm", or Kasparov didn;t care about that)

- However, Mr. Danailov with his methods, gave the impression to the media that they suspected Kramnik was cheating. IN ANY MOMENT THE LETTER OF MR DANAILOV MENTION USE OF COMPUTERS. What probably Mr. Danailov wanted to prove is that Kramnik went to the bathroom at purpose, without doing nothing ...

- At the same day, Kramnik mentions that he "easily" equalize game 3, and actually he was more interested in a soccer game that day, but continue because Topalov rejected the draw offers. Of course, a person only said such an arrogant statement, just because the team knows this would irritate Topalov's team. The protest was made precisely after that.

- Mr. Danailov also said that the constants draw offers of Topalov irritated him. IN other words, for not keep his mouth shut, he exposed to the public that Kramnik was psychologically playing with the opponent.

- All the drama Kramnik and his team has created (make FIDE beg him to continue) has put him as a hero in the eyes of the public, a prize for his very smart tactics and taking advantage of the impulsiveness of Danailov (that makes him making wring decisions).

- With an addendum, Kramnik's team can hold the match and still make FIDE beg him to continue. By accepting, he earned the favour of Kirsan, and knowing the FIDE president, he is able to make a reversal of his support to Topalov... why? Given his political circunstances, he will go to get the people's support ... so he is perfectly able to abandon Mr. Danailov, if this represents better dividends politically.

In other words, Kramnik's team win the prize for studying Topalov ... they won.

Pascual.. does it mean nothing that Kramnik officially lost a point?

Dear Softpaw,

Do you think losing a point for a game that wan;t played is a lost for Kramnik? Let's say: It is a "legal" lost, but it means nothing if you put your opponent down psychologically and you get that overwhelming support. The match is in second place if Topalov draws or wins, if public don't recognize Topalov as a worthy champion ...

The best thing Topalov's team can do is to accept the game was not played ... maybe this can be expose was happened. But maybe is too late now ...

Of course, take my statement three post before as an opinion, but when you review the letters, you realize that versions are manipulated in such a way to drive attention of some public. FOr example, why Mig, even Kasparov, other posters mention computers in the issue (not any of the impulsive and bad written Danailov letters mention that. He clearly say: "The constant trips to the bathroom and frequent draw offers irritated him")? This is an example of how things that are not related to this case can be accomodated to satisfy some opinion.

So, for the readers who read this comment and the one three posts ago, just remember THIS IS AN OPPINION. They are smart enough to not believe blindly in the partial and pro-Kramnik (just look the way Mr. Seirawan writes in the issue ... is that impartial?), pro-Topalov statements in Chessbase, TWIC, this blog and other sources and see from themselves how much sense this comment has or not.

Just two remarks :

First: in no of his written danailov is accusing directly kramnik for cheating: he used well singchoosen words. The "cheating" is suggest for everyone who turn on his mind, but are seeing nowhere.
So he can always defend himself of that. We can understand why there are psychologists in the team. They found a great way to make kramnik crazy. Looking video tapes would help in that way, but not that much.

Second: In no way the commitee was forswear by kirsan.Nor Kirsan cancelled the bad decision and all the bad effects,when he his the only one appeal court in that match...Something he can do in 5s.That shows that something really wrong is in process.
In his first claim,kirsan said to follow the appeal comitee decisions. And secondly he did only accept a demission "to save the match and to accept kramnik's demand.
So, appeal comitee members are like angels.
Well thinking no? Or i am wrong elsewhere?


Then, they accepted all kramnik's point except one: the point robbering!(claim claim claim: yes yes yes yes for all but the point! the point back no way!), and the fide officers, kirsan at their head, helped a lot to do that.

They did so in a very skillfully way, using diplomacy. Kramnik has received then no usefull advice to follow in the procces, and was not very well help either.

The fact that kramnik continued the match yesterday shows that he beheaves like a great champion.
But How long can he stand that? All that fide and topalov's team needs is that kramnik collapse and leave.

People are easy forgeting things. Yes, history is full of that.

The fact that topalov :makes excuses, shakes hands,all that is in his honor!
BUT not giving back the undue point is another anomaly on the bag: how must react a thrue champion?

To my mind: not like that.

I do think that in fide's mind : For the time being, topalov is a manageable player. But with a reputation falling, and falling, it's more than an evidence that fide will waiting for the first moment to supplant him:topalov is loosing too much , so much, by the fault of others in this story...

Fide is bad, fide is corrupted fide is...(put all that you want to write:.......................................) ok... but it's not a news that is just breaking in front of us. it's a long story .

With all the players, known GM or chess lovers all around the world following the events, i 'm happy, for the first time in many years yes, i'm happy.

Seems that for the first time for years a new wind is blowing. Want it 'll be a wind of change?

I guess, i do hope, i wish it's that!

Yes, i'll do that analogy after the match:

I have a dream (du deja vu ^^ ):

I dream of a champion stand up and beheave like a champion, and federate all the chessplayers all around the world...

I dream of a champion that part with fide 's devious influence...and work for the good of chess for chess !

I dream of a world where fide's officers has no place anymore anywhere anylonger...

I dream of a world where wildcats can't kill the bird in the egg.

I dream of a world where a champion will invest his time, his efforts to promote the game, his beauty for all...

Fide is crying that the sponsorship of chess is hard to find. whose sponsor would like to be next to kirsan?

I'm dreaming a lot, but i do believe that something is possible. News organisations are create recently, they should joint them in a big one, extanding their scope of action and members,without the previous big fat rats.

Good will is everywhere, Chessplayer are a lot of to wish that too (or i wish they are so numerous);

To part with the past is possible. It will be hard, long, but in the end ,it would not be like a heaven, but we could breathe fresh air!

We need a champion! we need a heroe! we need a wind of change!

Who will be that champion? I don't know...

But, only the champion will decided if it's possible that a dream become thrue or become a long long nightmare....

Dcax, i'm not a number! I'm a free man!

ps:time i get my medecine now ;o)

First of all, Topalov could not reject constant draw offers, because there was only one in game 3. Kramnik never made more than one draw offer per game. And Topalov would definitely demand officially to make draw offers only through arbiters if this boring behavior was really the case, as it was practiced in many nervous matches before.
Danailov just lies as usual.

Second, those of you who blame Kramnik for not sitting OTB all the time, please, answer where you write this BS from. Are you in Elista? Did you spend a single penny to watch the "show" live if you need it so much? I bet that all of you just watch games with GM comments on some chess server for free.

Estragone (or is it Vladimire?)

I don't EXPECT the chess GMs to do any such thing, though I do expect any such letter that means anything to have their signatures. I have learned long ago not to expect much from this bunch. What I do think is they should stand up and support one of their comrades or blame themselves when one of them gets screwed over next. It would very much surprise me if they aren't paying attention to what's going on and their silent support is neither meaningful nor proveable.

So, Topalov has been vilified, and Kramnik is now the hero and the victim ...
First I want to point out that the whole thing came as an avalanche, both for us and for the participants in Elista. It got out of proportion! The emotions blurred the lines of wrong and right!
There were many fine details and nuances in what happened, and some of them were accepted as a given truth, while they are at least questionable and gray.
Can’t you recall how your own conviction and opinion got stronger and clearer with every next article or blog post? The mind has a subconscious affinity to get affected by opinions of others. And then with the emotions growing, was very easy to feel like Kramnik has done all the right moves, and Topalov is wrong and a “scumbag”.
Interesting thing - reading the Bulgarian forums, the opinions and emotions are also very high, but with the opposite view on the situation. Simply there the opinions have been formed and slid towards their current state in a similar orchestrated crowded environment where a person gets affected by the others commenting.

My point is, don’t be so fast to make the big judgment before knowing all the details and try to put yourself in the place of Kramnik or Topalov from the very beginning of the crisis, and imagine what would you do at every next step.

1. Going back to the beginning the way I saw the things is this:
Game 4, Topalov has a slight advantage, tries to push and win in the way he has done so many times before. Kramnik is mostly in his rest area. Comes plays then goes back there. Offers a draw several times, looks annoyed. I have not seen his face, but isn’t it possible that his behavior has been something like: “Come on Veselin, this is a draw, you can not beat me. Let’s go and watch the Champions League!” It might have been done in a colleague respectable way, but might have been done (more likely) in a cold, arrogant, mind-games destroy-your-opponent-mentally way!
I am speculating, but it is a possibility.
Then Topalov looks shaken and defeated and Danailov revises a plan to respond in the psycho war with a protest about “suspicious” Kramnik behavior in the rest room. I did not like it when came out. It had “Danailov” and not “Topalov” written all over it.
So far it is all “normal” (considering Danailov is invloved) and kind of expected for such an important match.

2. Later Kramnik turned the public opinion in his favor by refusing to play without his toilet! It is a little too much! Nunn defended him saying he did no want to give in any psychological advantage to Topalov. Well the advantage he had by that point was probably not so much based on the 3:1 result, but on the fact that he was not present on the stage and behaved annoyed, plus the Champions League comments were the tip.

3. Many people said the Appeal Committee’s decision was a violation of the contract. Well in the contract it was not specified that there is going to be a separate bathroom for each player. Having one for both of them is within the lines of the contract.

4. People pointed out that Topalov’s team, by getting the video of Kramnik’s rest area, gained the important advantage of checking out Kramnik’s reactions through the turns of the game. Well what about the fact that Topalov stayed on the stage, and Kramnik was observing him on the monitor from inside, while Topalov could not know what is Kramnik doing inside the rest area?

5. And finally - I am sure Topalov has no idea about how much Danailov’s arguments and carefully (wrongly) used words have hurt his name and image. I agree that Topalov has a huge guilt by relying on and having trust in such an unpleasant man. But I am sure that the view Topalov has on what has happened is very different, filtered, projected, than the view we have.
I have had email correspondence from time to time with Veselin, and he has been good in responding always, but never during a tournament (or a match) when the concentration and preparation do not allow outside interference.


I don't understand the people who give Topalov a free pass just because Danailov is acting on his behalf, and does all the dirty work. Danailov is acting as Topalov's agent, on his behalf, and is authorized and permitted by Topalov to do so. Under virtually any rational legal system, Topalov would be held legally responsible for his agent Danailov's conduct while acting on his behalf. In any rational moral system, I think the result is the same. In these matters, Danailov is just acting as an extension of Topalov's will.

You can't hire a thug to defend you, and then plead innocence when he beats you up. It seems to me to accept this argument that Danailov is responsible for all this unpleasantness is a form of denial. It is also allows Topalov get away with bad conduct as long az he has Danailov run interference.

There is a bit too much moral relativism floating around here for my taste. Topalov's protest was a baseless public slur on Kramnik. Topalov's acceptance of the forfeit point obtained through a bad ruling by a corrupt Appeals Committed in violation of the match contract is not just unsportsmanlike, its craven. Notwithstanding the Topalov apologists and people with very short memories who already seem to be changing their tune a bit, Topalov acted disgracefully and should be held responsible for it. I for one have lost all the respect and admiration I had for Topalov. I wanted him to win this match before it started; now I am hoping Kramnik beats him badly, and if there is any justice in the world, he will.

If you don't condemn such conduct, you encourage it. What do promising young players like Karjakin, Carlsen, and Nakamura have to look forward to in 10 years, if the chess world tolerates this sort of thing?

Interview with Pono in Ukrainian:
His wording is very cautios, but he says that after the toiletgate Kramnik gets more of his sympaty compared to Topalov.
It is not clear, by the way, is Danailov still his manager? I know that some time ago he fired Danailov and hired some Ukrainian lady, but she was fired, also, and there was a sign that Danailov was back. But not for sure.
I can't find his web site anymore.

In my post above at the end I was stating that Topalov has very little idea of what is going on in the world outside. But actually more important is:
He is taking his decisions on what to say and to accept the game 5 or not, based on his view of the situation, albeit sheltered, manipulated, emotionally involved or filtered. He is right there in the center of psychological battle, with all the emotion going high. He does not have the luxury we have hovering in front of the monitors for bits and pieces of the drama, but being outside of it.
So, before vilifying him for accepting the game, think what you would do if you were instead of him in this mess.

Against 1.e4, Kramnik should mix it up & create a "three results" position--sound but complex. Amy T. loss virtually eliminates him from contention....

The Sveshnikov would make a lot of sense.

My bet:
If e4, then Petroff. No Berlin or Sicilian, IMHO. At least in first game. Anybody vote for Kings Gambit? ;-)
Also possible 1.c4 Nf6, and then Kramnik will try to trasform to more appropriate opening like Catalan. But I doubt Topalov will play c4.

Susan :)) other GMs were sending emails to ChessBase and Susan scaned her letter with logo, links and header. She's neutral, she only cares about her own publicity...

Her spamming on ICC annoys the hell out of me

7 hours to game 7 ... checking status on chessbase.com ... oy veh, Kramnik's appeal dismissed ... oy veh, Hensel issued a response ... what could it be ... "...Mr. Kramnik will follow the strong advise from his lawyers to sue FIDE after this match has been concluded."




I am so excited

Go, Kramnik, go! Crush him!

quite curious, but susan polgar seems to be in tune with the general public mood: when kramnik was been massively bashed as a boring undeserving wcc she joined the trend and attacked him in every possible ocassion (wich is a fair personal posture); now that ppl is deeply concerned about the low tricks that kramnik had been subject of in elista, she naturally changes her posture

Kramnik's appeal did not come within 2 hours of any game, so it is not valid. According to his own senseless logic, anyway.

Aren't you guys excited about game 7 going forward? Kramnik has even a timer on his web site.

FWIW, that's the reason why I stopped reading Susan Polgar's comments. Another example, after a yes-my-dear-everyone-is-right-in-this-dispute episode, she switched to everyone-is-wrong-and-needs-to-compromise, to subsequently switch to ... etc

Good post, Svilen. We could do with some articulate Topalov defenders instead of the nuts we have. I’d be interested to hear more about the Bulgarian forums. It’s amazing how nationalist these things get. I notice one of Topalov’s supporters calls himself Giannis: I just wonder whether he’s not more of a Macropoulos fan.

However, I think you are wrong in various places. First, it does seem there was only one draw offer in game four. Second, I do not agree that the contract permits a shared lavatory: according to Macropoulos it says that each player shall have a restroom and toilet. To me it’s clear that doesn’t mean a shared restroom, which would be inconceivable, and it’s hard to imagine therefore that it didn’t mean a separate toilet. And in any case there is the provision that once inspected and agreed no protest about the facilities shall be entertained.

The Champions League thing – of course Tal famously said much the same (that in the game he was troubled by thoughts of whether he and his wife would manage to get to the theatre that night). Topalov did play game four on a long time. I don’t see that as being arrogant, really. People sometimes have difficulty in concentrating: why not say so?

I don’t understand your point about Kramnik being able to watch Topalov on stage. Those are the agreed conditions. If Topalov didn’t want a monitor of the stage in the restrooms he could have said so before the match.

You are surely right that Topalov is too close to take a proper view. But putting it in the most favourable light possible – let us say he was genuinely disturbed by Kramnik’s behaviour. He surely must accept that Kramnik is not in fact cheating and understand – having been accused himself – how such an implication must have felt. He must understand why Kramnik was so incensed as not to play game five. Accepting the forfeit in these circumstances is dishonourable; there’s no getting round it.

Pascual has finally had something sensible to say: there are players who thrive on the mood of conflict created by a physical opponent and find it difficult in their absence. Some players need to hate their opponent to give their best; others not. It’s interesting that two who needed to hate. Korchnoi and Kasparov, are two who’ve complained before about their opponents absenting themselves. Kramnik is clearly not a hater: Topalov may be; that crackling physical energy he has often goes with this. It may well be that Topalov finds the physical absence of an opponent difficult and it may even be that Kramnik has made the same psychological calculation. But that’s just tough; the rules don’t require you to be present at the board.

rdh, good follow-up. If the players were meant to share restrooms, then the clause would have sais "players shall have..." instead of "EACH player shall have..."

on players that need anger, to motivate, look no further than John McEnroe. many of his tirades were self-inflicted and he invited conflict and usually post-argument, he focused better and it reflected in his play.

topalov requiring someone in front of him to play better? if he can't get up for the World Championship, what more does he need? would he prefer a fidgeting, needing to go to the toilet opponent moving around? this really is a joke.

Twitter Updates

    Follow me on Twitter



    About this Entry

    This page contains a single entry by Mig published on October 3, 2006 12:48 PM.

    October 06 Rating List was the previous entry in this blog.

    Danailov Accuses Kramnik of Cheating is the next entry in this blog.

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