Greengard's ChessNinja.com

Anand World Champion!

| Permalink | 255 comments

We've already been saying it for days, but once more with feeling. Viswanathan Anand sealed the deal with a 20-move courtesy draw with Leko in the 14th and final round of the Mexico City world championship tournament. The draw guaranteed him clear first and the title of unified world champion. I'd add "undisputed" if it weren't for the die-hard match purists who insist that Kramnik, despite his protests to the contrary, retains a match form of the title and that nothing will be unified until the Anand-Kramnik match in 2008. Kramnik surely agrees in his heart of hearts, but right now there is only one person on Earth who can answer when the world chess champion is called to dinner and that person is Vishy Anand. Congratulations! He led from start to finish, ending with a +4, 9/14 score and as the only undefeated player. Anand also solidifies his position as the world's #1 ranked player. He'll cross 2800 again in a few days since FIDE has announced it will rank Mexico for the October list.

There was some chess played in the final round, by the way. Vladimir Kramnik blew Aronian away with some nice preparation in the Queen's Indian. An exchange sac left Black with little choice by to give up two pieces for the rook. White's bishops cut the black position to shreds. It can't just be a coincidence that Mr. +2 again reached his standard score by winning 2/3 at the end. Amazing. More importantly, the win also moved him into a tie for second with Gelfand, who drew with the Petroff against Morozevich. That made it a $42,000 win for Kramnik. That gave the Petroff a perfect record of seven draws from seven appearances in Mexico, three by Kramnik and four by Gelfand. It might have been different had Moro found the remarkable shot 24.Ne6!

Meanwhile, the Najdorf took another blow to the head in Svidler-Grischuk. They came back to Svidler-Topalov from the last WCh tournament in San Luis. Svidler's second Motylev had prepared an improvement that gave White a devastating attack. There was a very pretty exchange of tactics but Black couldn't escape the crossfire. It was Svidler's only win of the event but it moved him up to clear fifth place. Grischuk, yet again, was an hour behind on the clock out of the opening. His preparation was way off the mark in this event and the loss left him in clear last place. A bitter end for the youngest player, who beat Gelfand and should have beaten Anand in round 13. There were four Sicilians, three losses and a draw.

Much more to come as the on-site folks turn in their reports and the interviews come out. The Indian press will no doubt be wall-to-wall Vishy as well. Post your best links below and I'll summarize them with an item tomorrow. What's your pick for best game of the event? Despite the large number of short draws we did get a healthy number of excellent games and there was at least one good fight each round minus the first.



here's an interesting interview by the new world champion: http://sify.com/sports/fullstory.php?id=14535748&vsv=SHGTpicslot

So, the chess world is de facto split again, Anand with the tournament title and Kramnik with the more valuable match title. Kirsan is aware of it and keeps the distance from Mexico...

>I'd add "undisputed" if it weren't for [those] who insist that Kramnik [..] retains a match form of the title and that nothing will be unified until the Anand-Kramnik match in 2008.>

Great to see that Mig isn't totally into deceiving himself and "willing to believe".
No small thing since the Kirsan-FIDE style of "thinking" can become quick a bad habit if practiced without restraint.

All you separate "match title" plonkers, go ask Kramnik who's the current world champion. He will say "Vishy". He has the grace to accept the new champion.
Unlike you lot.

A travesty is that whereas Kramnik and Topalov are seeded into the next cycle, Anand has to play in the qualifying tournament in Khanty Miyansk.


Congratulation to Anand. The sole, true and undisputed World Champion!

I am looking forward to the match next year between the champion Anand and the challenger Kramnik. Does anyone konw when this match is planned to be played. Spring? Autumn?

This will be the greatest match since the Kasparov-Karpov matches and we have been waiting for this match ever since Kasparov retired.

>I am looking forward to the match next year>

rest assured everybody has been looking forward to it since Mexico began, the question needing an answer was "who will get the spot ? Anand or Topalov ?"
Now we know the answer.

Congrats to Vishy! Finally there!

Interesting comment from Kramnik on the upcoming match with Anand (Interview by Fontaine): "This is the biggest challenge I can have these days - this match with Anand. And I will fight a lot to retain my title."

Someone should ask Kramnik: "Who do you consider World Champion now?"

I am a great match enthusiast myself, but the fact that Kramnik put his title on the line in this tournament makes Vishy the Champion. I think Kramnik should have used the word 'regain' instead of 'retain'. Anyhow I am curious whether his choice of words was intentional or not.

Mr X,

His native language is Russian. I am sure he used the wrong word unintentioanlly. Check his chessbase interview: http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=3899

I think the problems began when FIDE, after 2005 tournament, thought it was a good format to decide the World Champion. The plan was for Topalov (who was rated 70 points above Kramnik back then) to unify the title, and then to scrap the match format. This run into problems for two reasons:

1. The Elista match generated at least five times the global media interest compared to the tournament (actually at least a dozen times more, if you include the toilet gate). Then FIDE realised that "gosh" perhaps this Tournament format wasn't such a smart way to go after all.

2. FIDE had already signed a contract with the Mexicans for a World Championship Tournament before the Elista match.

If Kramnik had refused to play in Mexico, he would have re-split the Chess world, as the organizers refused to change it into a candidates tournament (which was suggested by Mig among others back then). And Kramnik would have refused, had he been demanded to put his title de facto on the line.

So a compromise was worked out. Kramnik plays in the tournament, but the outcome will be the same as that of a candidates tournament (i.e. the winner gets to play Kramnik).

Anand hasn't beaten the reigning World Champion in a match, and Kramnik talks about "retaining his title". The chess world will be in a limbo for another year, - some consider Anand the Champion, others considering him the challenger - before the title is finally and hopefully permanently unified in 2008. In a match, like it should be.

FIDE caused this unfortunate situation.

If Anand loses to Kramnik, I wonder if Anand will consider himself the 15th World Champion.

My note to chessbase co-founder Frederic Friedel

Dear Mr. Friedel:

Thank you to chessbase.com, all of your team, the ever copious if not affable Mr. Marin, and of course you too for the most excellent, colorful, accurate and timely coverage. This is a great service to our global chess community.

Anand is the undisputed champion in a now long storied if not contentious sorting process of enormous dimension, has the best rating and one that will be adjusted higher very shortly, and won convincingly and bravely and—need us not forget to mention—in a well mannered way. Applause.

And now our main point. What I have just said almost needs no mention. But let us also please not forget the enormous and selfless and gallantly sustained efforts of GM Seirawan in his epical Prague Accord, or as he says, his “parting gift to the chess world as” he went “into retirement. Many persons, players, and factors went into unification.

Often here in the United States, it seems some breathless newscaster shoves a microphone into the face of some Quarterback or top coach, for example, twenty minutes after winning some gigantic spectacle, only to ask him, XYZ star or coach: “What are your plans towards next year”. The best ones seem to keep their head, and invariably say something like: “Let the fans enjoy this, our city, our club…” etc.

And so here. Let us enjoy this moment. It took so long. In time it can be argued in classical match play chess--as some quickly said today in commentary--as Anand drew with Leko: “It is not for Kramnik to challenge Anand, but for Vishy to challenge Vladimir”. Going back to Steinitz, it can be argued as to the quality or verity of this unity, but it IS UNITY.

And this unity started with Prague, and GM Seirawan, a gentleman of chess of consummate character helped significantly and hope that he is recognized, too, and not just quick Vishy, elegant wife Aruna, or ever necessarily tactful second Heine who must circle around not just a seasoned giant, but an up and coming Mozart--all at the same time! Many great characters helped this, and it started years ago.

Warmest Regards, David K, Seattle


>So a compromise was worked out. Kramnik plays in the tournament, but the outcome will be the same as that of a candidates tournament (i.e. the winner gets to play Kramnik).>

of course, in the twisted world of FIDE such acrobatics have to enacted, and it has been well understood since jan 2007 (save some of Mig's bloggers)
The Mexico tournament question was : Kramnik-X ?, now we know X=Anand

If you take only the results of the top 4 ranked players anand kramnik gelfand and leko, Kramnik would have won with +1 score.

It is well known that anand wins tourneys always by catching more points from the 2nd half of the table then everyone else.

For being WC only the results against top should count, shouldn't?

What does Kasparov say, is Anand #15? What does Kramnik himself say to this topic?

>Interesting comment from Kramnik on the upcoming match with Anand (Interview by Fontaine): "This is the biggest challenge I can have these days - this match with Anand. And I will fight a lot to retain my title.">

well, just as I expected, the tension begins to build. We will hear more from Kramnik once back in home and no longer needing to play this mexican comedy for the sake of Mexico's oragnizers.
They had their needed illusion gratified, now back to reality.

Fischer thinks that he still is the world champion. If some people think that Kramnik is still the world champion, they are entitled to it.

>Fischer thinks that he still is the world champion. If some people think that Kramnik is still the world champion, they are entitled to it. >

neat rhetoric but I suggest you study logic too, just because some think that Anand is world champion for winning a tournament won't make it either


You can always pick some statistics to make one player look good and another look bad. Why did you choose the top 4 players? If you chose the top 3 players or the top 5 players, Kramnik and Anand would be equal. Here is another possibility: If you take only the results of the top 3 Elo rated players (Anand Kramnik Morozevich) then Anand wins by +1. So Kramnik only beat the bottom-most Elo rated players, and not too many of them.

In the end there are very few choices you can make to turn a +2 victory for Anand into a victory for Kramnik.

I don't know if it's really Kramnik's own opinion, but on his site kramnik.com you can read "Anand is the new World Champion".

>If you take only the results of the top 4 ranked players anand kramnik gelfand and leko, Kramnik would have won with +1 score.>

The idea is good but still not what we need.
If you take only their minimatch the result is equal 1-1. You need a long match to conclude.

Congratulations to Vishy, the undisputed world champion. Kramnik will be a worthy challenger and their match in 2008 is what the chess world badly needs.

Hello Mig,
http://samachar.com has links to most Indian newspapers. Should be a convenient way for you to browse all Indian newspaper links from here.

Congratulations to Anand, the new undisputed world ches champion. I am now looking forward to Anand defending his world title against the ex-champion and challenger, Kramnik.

You won the title fair and square which cannot be disputed.

Interesting comment from Kramnik on the upcoming match with Anand (Interview by Fontaine): "This is the biggest challenge I can have these days - this match with Anand. And I will fight a lot to retain my title."

What a pity? Maybe just semantics, but its not Kramnik's title to retain!! He can surely try and regain it.

Anand is undisputed king because no other person has made a plausible claim to the title, excepting maybe a nutcase living somewhere in Iceland.

Does Mig want to dispute and claim to be world champion himself? Kramnik certainly has not disputed Anand's claim to the title.

Surely just a mistake, as argenine says. It's easy to confuse 'retain' with 'regain'. Note that Fontaine doesn't even react to it himself.


It is not that Anand defeated the bottom 4 players. It is just that Anand's defeat of these players was a big factor in their sinking to the bottom. If you want to look at the top 4, see the top 4 Elo rated players.

Take top 3 elo players, Anand is +1
Take top 4 elo players, Anand ties with Kramnik
Take top 5 elo players, Anand ties with Kramnik
Take top 6 elo players, Anand is +1 again

Nowhere Kramnik is ahead of Anand

Anand's strategy has been to thrash the "tail" and draw with the top. You can't blame him for it and the same strategy has been followed by many others. In matchplay, against Kasparov for example, he doesen't shy away from complications and went toe-to-toe in the Sicillian. Thats his style.

It was already decided that Kramnik would be challenger next year. Mexico was to decide the champion. Kramnik did quite well by scoring as well as Gelfand. But Anand clearly was best and became World Champion. Even Ovidiu must agree with this.

By the way, Kramnik's website http://www.kramnik.com/

seems to give him 4 wins and no losses.

I'm a "match purist" at heart but appreciate Mig's pragmatism. FIDE was created as a cure to WCs who selected their own opponents for matches - like Bogoljubov the "good loser." The qualification process for Mexico City made this tournament a little better than San Luis. The great chess in long matches with adjournments is a thing of the past, along with the "Golden Age" matches without clocks. I shall always consider the FIDE 2-game elimination matches to be irrelevant to the WC tradition, but the current system is good enough to be acceptable. Congratulations to Anand, a deserving AND official WC in every way! (but I also look forward to Anand-Kramnik and Anand-Topalov matches!)

As soon as a couple of minutes after World Champion Anands last game has finished a new title was invented. At the press conference Leko talks about the "absolute" title which seems to supersede the "unified" title. Would have expected Leko, who is a fine sportsman, to be more considerate but unfortunately he is also member of the painters clique.

The official site states that according to contracts with FIDE Anand has to defend his title against (handpicked) Kramnik "in the beginning of next year" ?! So now we get a different title holder every three months ? Is this to make up for Kramnik's long lasting out-manoeuvring GK off-board ? Apart from that all the supertournaments are taking place in the first half of the year.

Anand plays in the World Cup ? So if he wins this as well as the match with Kramnik he has the honour of playing against himself ?

ceterum censeo the match format is wrong because
* fans get less games - remember Brissago ?
* match strategy leads to anti-chess: half of the Anand-Kramnik match are guaranteed Petroffs
* it is fragile to title hijacking and subsequent handpicking comfortable opponents
* no matter what system is used to determine the challenger a certain randomness remains which is unfair to the other leading players
* the tradition argument is bogus because the Steinitz line is random (see above and think about Bronstein & Keres)
* two words: toilets and yogurts

Congratulations to Anand! I think this will prove to be a great thing for chess. Not just the upcoming match with Kramnik (which will be great too) but hopefully it spark chess activity and sponsorship in India.

"Kramnik surely agrees in his heart of hearts..."

What a presumptuous twat you are, Mig.

Is there a mouthwash powerful enough to get the taste of Garry's rectum off your tongue?

According to the FIDE's "latest" regulations, if Anand wins the KO World Cup (December 2007) and also his match against Kramnik (May to September 2008), then he shall defend his title against Topalov in the first half of 2009.

But if he wins the KO World Cup but loses to Kramnik, then he plays a match against Topalov in 2008 (but after the Kramnik match). The winner of such Anand-Topalov match then gets to challenge Kramnik for title in the first half of 2009.

It is as clear as mud but at least it is clear.

Thus if Anand wins the KO, he is guaranteed two matches against first Kramnik and then Topalov with the associated paydays.

and I totally agree with your statements. We are back to before Elista in a way. Topa wins a tourney, claims to be the World Chess Champion. Vlad finally puts the damper on that in Elista. Now Anand wins a tourney, and Vlad once again has to unify the World Chess Championship Crown again. When Vlad does beat Anand next year, I'm just hoping authors do not try to claim Anand as the 15th title holder. It would be a farce. We had unification with Elista, now de-unification with Mexico. Anand does not deserve to put his name to the link in the Steinitz chain, anymore than Pono, Kasim, ect. To be the man you have to beat the man. Anand will get a chance next year. I'll give Anand maybe a "tourney" champ title if he's so desparate for glory. He lost to Garry in 1995, and was afraid to play him in 2000 again. Vlad is the man, and still the World Chess Champion, until beaten in a head to head match. This is NOT 1948!

Congratulations Vishy! It's wonderful to have a true gentleman as world champion. It was wonderful to have a world championship final without scandal. It will be wonderful to see the two best players, and two fine gentleman, Anand and Kramnik, FINALLY battle each other for the championship in a match next year. I don't know about you, but 12 games seems too short for these two brilliant players. How about a call to return to the glory days of the 24-game match?

My comments were supporting Ovidlu and match purist. You folks are right on!!

It is Kramnik's and Topalov's loss that they have been seeded in the next World Championship cycle and thus do not get to play in the December KO World Cup which carries a first prize of USD120,000 and USD80,000 for the runner-up.

Anand is looking at another big payday in December with two dangerous competitors already disqualified.

Bravo Vishy! Very nice performance.

As to the controversy, why argue about it? They will play a match next year, so what does it matter who holds the title for a few months?

There are conventions like this that are simply a way to maintain polite society. Whatever people believe in their hearts, they can simply agree publicly that Anand is the official world champion, knowing that Kramnik will get the chance to regain/retain his title within a year.

It is simply a question of humility and grace. The rules were agreed upon and Kramnik is gracious enough to respect the result, even if in his heart of hearts perhaps he feels it is still "his" until he loses a match. That speaks very highly of him.


Mig's association with Kasparov has nothing to do with Kramnik's private thoughts about the title.

Yours is the most foul, ridiculous Daily Dirt comment in years. And that's saying something.

Once again contratulations to Vishy Anand for winning the chess crown. He is indeed a worthy champion today. The Indian people have a right to be proud of this great chessplayer who is always pleasant with others and who has clearly been the best tournament player over the last few years. Congratulations to Kramnik as well, whose participation in this tournament was necessary in order to unify the title.

But there is unfinished work ahead for Anand. There is a taint in that he is closer to Kasaparov's generation and he was clearly inferior to Kasparov, proven in both matches and tournaments. It would have been nice to have someone else win the tournament who did not have a dossier of defeats to Kasparov. It would have been nice for the sake of closure and continuity, but life is never perfect. Still, it would also have been a tragedy had not the highest rated player and undisputedly the best tournament player (Anand) had not finished on top. His chess is the most enterprising, and his technique is the equal of Kramnik's. We NEEDED Vishy to win this tournament.

But again there is unfinished work. Neither Ivanchuk nor Topalov was at the tournament. He still has to defeat Kramnik in a match in order to clear all doubt. Anand and his fans have to realize that his supremacy will never be sure until he does defeat the last linear World Champion. Topalov fans also might have something to say about their man, but he'll have to wait.

On a personal level, I am very happy over the result. Kramnik was the legitimate champion but his matches were dull affairs and both ended in ties (not including quick games.) He deserves credit for participating in this tournament, but he has been a dull and unconvincing champion. Anand brings back some of the fire of Kasparov with his enterprising play.

There is unfinished business for sure, but I tip my hat to our wonderful new world Champion: Vishy Anand!

RS I agree, 12 games is way too short, 24 would of course be ideal, but Kirsan won't go for that. The best that Vlad can do is try to get maybe a 16 game match. Those glory days are over as long as Kirsan is at the helm I'm afraid

This was a perfect result.

There will be an exciting match of the two strongest players currently. It´s good also that Topalov doesn´t get a direct shot for the title undeservedly but has to play the world cup winner.

Vishy winning is the best possible outcome for Chess. The match in 2008 will be hugely anticipated,
and offer a fitting denouement to the KKA era.

This is my view on world champion and world championship. A common sense approach. Anyone from any sport can understand. Lets keep politics away from chess.

Who is a world chess champion?
The best chess player in the world! Simple. The champion title has a shelf life of 1-4 years depending on the circumstance. Ideal would be 2 years and 4 years is the max. span.

How do you determine who is best?
In a good world championship system. Ideal would be a series of tournaments followed by a series of matches like it had happened in the times past, with some minor adjustments if necessary. (most of the times or some of the times, I am not sure.)

What if no proper system or split in the chess world?
Determining the best would be difficult. That doesn't mean, no one can be champion. Since players use a common FIDE rating system, a world champion could be a world # 1 having won an obviously not-so-perfect world championship, thereby proving to the world that he/she is the best.

Can a world # 2 can never be a world champ then is such messy situations?
Becoming no 1 would be sometimes impractical due to some flaws in the rating system. One way to prove better than no # 1 is, actively being # 1. Another is, by beating the no.1 in match. Or having recent, better, very clear, head to head performance proven beyond reasonable doubt. These would qualify for the #1 spot. Winning any one of such not-so-perfect world championship title is ok to become a world champion, if you could do the one of the other as well. This argument can be extended for #3, #4 etc.

So, who can be considered world champions after 1993 till today?
Kasparov 1993-1997
Anand 2000 - 2004 probably*
Kramnik 2000 - 2002
Topalov 2005 - 2006/7
Anand 2007 - present
(No one is champion in 1998-2000, and in 2007 middle. * Not sure till when. Since he was shut out of world championship due to chess politics, his reign would be as long as he was actively #1.)

Can you make a claim of world champion in the name of tradition quoting some exceptional cases?
Absolutely NOT.
For example, say, Radjabov wins a match against a world champion, which is basically from one of the not-so-perfect system. He is not world champion unless and until he gets to # 1 or by beating others rated above him in matches or by having recent better head to head with rated above him, within a reasonable period.

Finally, does it make any sense to recommend or to go back to king's rule since kings ruled in the past? Definitely NOT. We can embrace good things, but not some non-sense!!

Mondo while I agree that "the whole world watching" is what will happen next year. These tourneys are not the best outcome for chess. When Vlad does win next year, does Vishy try to claim a link on the chain from Steinitz? We will have a champion number 15 one day in the future, but it won't be Anand.

Despite the fact that I don't think it should ever happen, the Topalov- World cup winner match could potentially also be quite interesting. Aronian, Ivanchuk, Mammy... Carlsen...?

Kramnik didn't behave like a WCh by agreeing to put THE title for gambling in a tournament. Neither Steinitz, nor Kasparov by that matter, would have done such thing. It is nonsensical.

The Mexico result doesn't make Anand a WCh but it will still bring for a while to Kramnik the misery he deserves for his bad management of the title.

Toledo Paul,
Didn't Kramnik have an "unfinished business" with Shirov? How come that escaped your mind? What Anand has then is an "unclear business" as he must be confused now on who to play!!

Good morning all, looking through all of the chess news sites, even
Chessbase, we see that the announcement is clear and unequivocal: Anand
-- World Champion. Congratulations to him!

Clearly, the results and ratings show that at the moment Anand is the
stronger player compared to Kramnik. Kramnik may be a great match
player, but why is good match play more deserving of glory than solid
tournament play and higher ratings? Why??

It is sad and extremely disturbing to see Kramnik continuing to be a
divisive force even in defeat. This sport needs a cure for the Kramnik
curse that has been plaguing it since 2000. Anand has to approach his
preparation against challenger Kramnik with just that thought in mind.


To Pircalert, Think you are trying to complicate things for no reason. It's very simple. We have had 14 World Chess Champions. Until Vlad is beaten in a match, he has it. Regardless of what is being said. Heck even Fischer claims to be the World Chess Champion!! Vlad had to give lip service to FIDE, don't be naive. I'll give Anand his proper props when he prevails in a competition that comes the closest to being a perfect combat arena. Head to head match over some 6-8 weeks. No need to have to add up rating points ect. In fact they could do away with rating points all together as far as I'm concerned. The actual fight is enough. You beat the man, you are the man. Since Mexico was planned before Elista, Kirsan had no choice but to let them call this a World Championship Tourney. I'd love to have the standard test be given by proving your worth by going thru a candidate series of matches, but I guess would accept a strong tourney like San Luis or Mexico to get a challenger to fight the champ for the title. But not the title outright. Chess is over the board. Determine the crown over the board, face to face. I'll accept Anand with a "tourney" title, but that's it. In 1948 they had no choice but to hold a tourney. Do not like when they try to cheapen the crown, it's not easy climbing to Everest. EARN IT


Can u ask anand what happened in game with Grishuk ? I missed a few heart-beats.

Was it misleading preparation or overconfidence ?

I cant forget his game with Oliver touzanne.
And what was the deal with loss to Pascal charbennou ? How many elo points he lost because of those 2 losses ?

Someone said loss to Pascal maybe because anand was aware that DP Singh who was part of Indian squad at Olympiad is somehow cheating and this rattled him.

To Dimi, Kramnik curse since 2000??/LOLOL.......listen here, you really have a short memory. It was your boy ANAND who was afraid to play Garry in 2000!! Garry whipped his behind but good in 1995. Thank God Vlad has been a deserving World Champion since 2000, and I expect him to continue his reign as 14th World Chess Champion. OBTW if you count Anand as number 15, then you must surely count, Kasim, Pono, kaulifman, topa. Naw, I'm not buying that nonsense. Anyway, just think for a moment, just the fact that they HAVE to ask Kramnik who is the World Chess Champion tells ya, something is fishy here;-)........let them remove all possible doubt, that's why we HAD to have Elista!! to unify!!..and we will have to have Kramnik-Anand next year to once again unify.

Congrats to Vishy Anand, the new world champion, and the first non-Soviet champion since Bobby Fischer! The win was convincing; one point ahead of the rest, and the only undefeated player. The triumph must be doubly sweet as he will shortly be the only 2800+ player on the rating list. Besides, he is also the world's best rapid player.

He has shown continuous improvement recently, and I think the gap between him and the rest will only keep widening.

Next year's match against the challenger, Kramnik, will be interesting, in view of the phenomenal preparation unveiled by both players in this event.

Exacly Bruce, it is not easy climbing to Everest. Kasparov did. But, Kramnik didn't. That is the whole issue. Kasparov airlifted him to the mountain top!!

At least you could say anand is on the mountain top by climbing his way to being world #1.

Ovidiu, I don't think that you made your opinion clear enough.

Do you think that Anand is World Champion or does Kramnik still hold it?

Please do let us know about it, and please repeat your answer until you're sure that everyone knows this extraordinarily important opinion of yours.

People seem to think players like Khalifman are weak.

Anand rates him highly. (in the interview of vishy in Star-plus. ) Anand narrowly won against Khalif in tie-breaks in Fide world-cup tourney.

What is head-to-head score of Kramnik against Khalif, Kasim and Pono ?

"Thank God Vlad has been a deserving World Champion since 2000 ..."

Deserving in what way? All he did between 2000 and the Topalov match was draw a match against Leko in 2004.

PircAlert, Well if you recall, Shirov screwed himself, Anand even refused to play Garry!!..Vlad stepped up to the plate and hit a home run;-)...so he EARNED his spot by beating the man with the crown, head to head. Anand won a tournament, big deal. Larsen won MANY tourneys as did others. If Anand has such an appetite for glory, he's gonna have to beat Vlad next year. Then and only then, can he be the UNDISPUTED Champ. I choose to dispute, and I'm sure many others do as well.

The difference between Topalov's "title" after San Luis and Anand's title now is that here all of the strongest players in the world were competing or had competed, and in San Luis Kramnik wasn't playing, thus giving it much less legitimacy.

Bruce says "In 1948 they had no choice but to hold a tourney"

No less a person than Bronstein has told that it was not necessary to hold a tournament at that time. They could have conducted a candidates tourney or matches followed by the best 2 playing a WCC.

Kramnik was afraid to defend his title in a match against Kasparov. Look at how many times Kasparov himself had to stave off Karpov. For ducking that match alone Kramnik cannot be called a worthy champion.

Well, Anand has brought a whiff of fresh air to the title. His is an individual achievement. All his competitors have been mass-produced by the Soviet system. Short bitterly regrets his lack of the kind of early chess education that every Soviet player enjoys. Anand's early chess education was in a country with no GMs. Vishy has overcome that handicap, a staggering achievement.

Truly, a genius of the first order.

[quote]Anand even refused to play Garry!![/quote]

Do you believe in that story Bruce? Would any sane person refuse like a half million $ on reasons of being afraid to face someone over a chess board? True, Anand had valid concerns when he saw how things went with Shirov earlier. So..?

Even Kasparov admits he is not an angel. I can enact the drama of how things unfold if you want.
Keene sitting at a lotto machine and Kasparov goes "Hand picker, hand picker, hand me your pick!". "Shirov." "Nope. Next..." etc. :)

Unlike (Kasparov failed to establish a system) for the match in 2000, Leko had to go through a qualification system (imperfect I admit, but still) to play against Kramnik. Kasparov could have through the qualification system to play Kramnik - he chose not to but to WHINE instead. If he wanted to secure a rematch, he should have included that in the contract in 2000 - he failed to do so and since there was a system, Kramnik owed Kasparov nothing. Garry made fool of himself to whine all those years...A great player, but sadly a whiner as well.

I was disappointed when Anand refused to play Kasparov in 2000. I remember there were protracted negotiations. The PCA was Kasparov's organization. A title match should be organized by a neutral body. Look at the way Kramnik and Topalov each accused FIDE of partiality.

Still, I was disappointed when the match fell through. Vishy in 2000 was different from Vishy in 1995, and he would have learned his lessons. It is the chess world's loss that the match did not occur.

"Truly, a genius of the first order."

There is an interesting interview of Korchnoi in e3e5.com site ( http://www.e3e5.com/article.php?id=1179 ) that took place nearly a year back where he has talked about Chess Geniuses & wonderkids. There Korchnoi says that "Genius is a very strong word! Nevertheless he (Anand) was close to this definition". In the same interview he mentions that among older players Capablanca as a genius (actually the word given is ingenious, which is probably what the translator used, I assume that he meant genius). Curiously he has ignored Kasparov & Kramnik, but has talked about Carlsen.

Talking of contracts, Kramnik put his title on the line in Mexico. Or are some contracts more equal than others?

>The difference between Topalov's "title" after San Luis and Anand's title now is that here all of the strongest players in the world were competing ..>

another difference is that Topalov competed San Louis

>I was disappointed when Anand refused to play Kasparov in 2000...>

what for ? just to be humiliated ? he did it once, he knew what would happen

Again, I ask, why a "worthy champion"? Between 2000 and 2006, all Kramnik did was draw a match against Leko and duck one against Kasparov. Prior to 2000, he lost almost all his matches (except to Yudasin) and was bumped up the queue to play Kasparov.

Yes, he did beat him, but one swallow does not a summer make.

We cannot say Aronian, Morozevich and Grischuk are
really tailenders because Anand beat them.
Anand should cross 2800 as well so there must be no dispute reg his Crown.
Moreover the only difference between Kramnik and Anand was Anand beat Svidler whereas Kramnik beat Leko.The extra Win is Anand s over Grischuk.

"I was disappointed when Anand refused to play Kasparov in 2000."

He didn't really. He signed for a 1999 Match. Which failed. Then he had some demands in 2000, and instead of addressing them, Kasparov advanced the deadline for Anand answer (!), and choose Kramnik instead. Anand was just discarded.

That's the problem when the WC title holder is organizing the matches... he has no incentive to try hard, or even really try.

>Yes, he did beat him[...]

I'd rather say GK self-destructed.

"what for ? just to be humiliated ? he did it once, he knew what would happen"

Five years is a long time. Vishy's story is one of continuous improvement. To see this, you only need to consider where Kasparov's other challenger, Short, is placed today.

MOSCOW - The former world chess champion Garry Kasparov entered Russia's presidential race on Sunday, elected overwhelmingly as the candidate for the country's beleagured opposition coalition.


I dont really know about the fairness or not of anand x kramnik discussion. all I know is there was a contract, in which topalov agreed to withdraw his place in the world championship in case of losing. then, kramnik + the 7 players agreed in a contract in which kramnik would challenge the winner for a rematch, in case the champion wasnt himself. and finally, the winner of the rematch would be world champion, having as the next challenger the winner of fide KO 2007. so, anand should be world champion by now, and kramnik the ex-champion searching for a rematch. as for the public, agreeing with it or not, there were contracts discussed and signed by fide and the interested parts. after all, what really pisses me off is this topalov man, who should try his spot in the fide KO as everybody else, and not get a place as comfortable as kramnik (it reminds me of kasimdzhanov, who won one single fide KO and was suddenly entitled to play any kind of try for the world championship for more than 2 years, even if he couldnt manage to reach 2700 more than once in his career.). maybe kramnik shouldnt get such comfortable spot either, but at least he has contract basis to argue with. anand, again, taking the worst of it, needing to beat anyone twice, no matter his clear first place in fide ELO.

To KGD, Topa was not playing in Mexico!!..so do not claim all the top players were playing. That's another problem with a tourney system, not all the top players compete.

"Topa was not playing in Mexico!!.."

Topa not playing in Mexico was part of the contract. All the players signed on the dotted line, and went into this with their eyes wide open.

To backtrack now is ... well, two words sum it up: Sour Grapes.


The chess world is not suffering from the "Kramnik curse" it is auffering from the "Illumzhinov curse".
Who in their right mind would have held a unification match for the WC when they knew in their hearts that there would still be a tournament the next year after which you could potentially need another unification match.

This was stupid and I mean REAL STUPID. Mexico should have had Topalov instead of Kramnik and the winner to face Kramnik in a once and only final unification without the need to give Topalov the extra match chance etc.

Then again maybe this is what Kirstan wants - the feeling has been expressed before that he always wanted to have a weak wc who would effectively be a "yes man". You will not get this from an established WC who does not change ever year.

Still non of the above detracts from Vishy's fabulous win and nor should it he deserved to win this tournament. I just wish some of Vishy's more...ermmm ...ardent fans would realise that those who favour a match system and the traditions of chess are not anti-Anand in any way and just see his achievment in winning a very strong tournament as the same as anyone else who wins a strong torunament (Linares, Wijk, Sofia etc). I am really looking forward to next years match, it should be a lot of fun!

Hey Silvakov,

You are not very smart. In your case, there's a lot of truth to the saying that silence is golden.

To PircAlert, Well unless you were there to know what was going on in regards to Shirov, Anand, ect. I'll take Ray Keene at his word. Thank you. I have no reason to doubt him. He was there, he said they went down the list, asked Anand he refused, then Vlad was next. The rest is history, let's not have sour grapes. Vlad became the 14th champ and that's it. Hey Shirov is the one who would have had his shot, but he screwed himself. Too bad for him.

>Then again maybe this is what Kirstan wants - the feeling has been expressed before that he always wanted to have a weak wc who would effectively be a "yes man". You will not get this from an established WC who does not change ever year.>

That's very perceptive observation. Unfortunately he defeated Kramnik in their jan/2007 negociations "match".
In fact Kirsan is the 15th WCh, the one who controls and cash on the title by exploiting the envy of all the rest who want to be "given their chance" to...well, to a kind of nothing in the end.

"I am really looking forward to next years match, it should be a lot of fun!"

Amen to that.

The match system is fine if everyone plays by the rules. Unfortunately, there don't seem to be any rules. No procedure to select challengers, no requirement to defend the title within x no of years. It's been horribly flawed since its inception, but it's a bloody free for all now, what with players purchasing matches and others being gifted matches. The law of the jungle. The Wild West without sheriffs.

Finders keepers, if you ask me; that's what it's been reduced to.

In any case, I end with what I began: amen to that. It should be a corker of a match next year, IF it transpires.

See you all next year on this blog.

Listen to this Paul the Serial Fellator and his cowardly logic:

"Between 2000 and 2006, all Kramnik did was draw a match against Leko and duck one against Kasparov."

Quite right, and he didn't play in a single tournament either, just like '72-75 Fischer.

Hilarious -- what a tin duck in a shooting gallery -- and when politely corrected Paul just repeats himself, a strange debating technique. But as there is slight providence in the fall of the sparrow, we'll summarize:

-a "worthy champion" defeats the reigning champion in a match. In this case Kasparov, the greatest to ever play the game, did not even manage to win a single game against Kramnik. Full stop, worthy champion.

-Kasparov put his foot in before (remember the "world tournament champion" poke just before Karpov crushed everyone at Linares 1994? lol), and this time he opined that the Braingames winner should not get an auto-rematch. There followed the Dortmund qualifier, which he boycotted. But he kept right on talking.

-Anand just won a strong tournament, but he also collects the WC title thanks to an acrobatic logistical performance from the FIDE circus, the travelling freak show controlled by a jaunty international gangster. And Kramnik's not complaining because he played ball and still gets the match with Anand.

So next May, Anand will be a worthy challenger to the worthy champion Kramnik, but we'll all pretend the opposite because FIDE has decreed thus.

See you then, Paul.

Bruce, how can you say anand refused then? Is there a document having anand signature for his refusal? Eye witness is not at all a proof. You could set up people.

One thing we know is, the deadline was advanced after Anand asking for more time. Quite a bit of mischief right there. What if you sign and the match didn't happen? Who would pay for all the loss of income from playing FIDE cycle? Would you knowingly sign such a deal? I guess, Anand couldn't make a decision to sign and send the document back within the shortened timeframe. And the rest we all know.

If you sign, people would say, you signed, you suffer. If you don't sign, you didn't sign, you suffer. Give me a break!!

To Shankar, head to head score of Vlad vs Pono 2-2 and 5 draws, Vlad vs Khalif 1-0 and 7 draws, and verses Kasim, Vlad has beaten him one time and gained 1 draw, no losses. At least from the chessgames.com database.

To PircAlert, Hey look here, were you there?.....I was not either. Ray Keene was there, okay. I'm taking him at his word, if you have a problem with Shirov and Anand not playing the match take it up with them. Vlad played, that's it. We can't rewrite history and the facts. If Anand beats Vlad next year fine, I'll bow to him as the 15th World Chess Champion, but my money will be on Vlad!:-)

Your commemtary on Larry's plight during Kramnik-Anand game was funny. Please put the links to your other audios at some place and provide the link to us.

hey sab, you seem really smart in the other hand... saying Im not very smart... please explain to me what was so wrong in my previous comment. talk about the content.

Ovidiu my point was that Topalov has competed in this cycle, whereas Kramnik was not competing in the San Luis cycle.

This Anand seems to be as much of a worm as Kramnik, listen to his interview with the Indian reporter, hes now saying he will decide on any further Kramnik Match later on. Havent we heard this type of excuse mongering from the very guy we choose to hate . vis-a-vis Kramnik?
Further where is this down to Earth person that we are told he is, all I see is one who is arrogant and outright self important... listen to the interviews for more.

Bruce, probably I wasn't very clear. My point was, whether you were there or I was there or Keene was there, it hardly matters. You must have heard about all the accusation flying against Keene. Anyways, it was more like a private party striking a business deal. I would rather call it an exhibition match or a match of great public interest, nothing more.

You can root for Kramnik in the coming up whatever it is, no problem! Anand is going to burst the bubble in the coming days!!

However, a more disturbing trend is being set now. From champion hand-picking challenger to a challenger hand-picking himself? Kramnik seems to be applying political pressure to sway things in his favor?? He did it against Topalov. Now, against Anand?? I wouldn't mind Anand playing Kramnik since Kramnik has finished second. But he shouldn't play at least until for first one year is over, unless he is compensated way way beyond for the shortened title span! Also, he shouldn't play until he is compensated equivalent or more than for the special privileges granted to Kramnik and Topalov. Only then, Anand himself would be happy and would be in his right mind to face his challenger!!

He should seek public support or Indian govt support in this regard. That is the only language FIDE would understand!

the way he talks of his previous 'title' is also unbecoming. he certainly has every right to be proud of these farces if he wishes; but i can't respect him for it. he doesn't seem to have any reverence for the classical title. although i suppose it's understandable, since he's probably felt for the last decade at least that he's had the chess strength to potentially win a match against the title holders, but has had no path to ever reach such a match; with there essentially being no working qualification process. it may be the necessary outsiders view to devalue the match title. still, it exists, and it's the only title with historical significance, and it's still held by vladimir kramnik.

>This Anand seems to be as much of a worm as Kramnik, listen to his interview with the Indian reporter, hes now saying he will decide on any further Kramnik Match later on.

Hahaha.. the "reunification" didn't last long.
First this morning Kramnik's "retain" and now Anand's "I'll think about it". Welcome to reality...btw, is it Mexico officially over at least or they are still there waiting for the closing ceremony ?

>Further where is this down to Earth person that we are told he is, all I see is one who is arrogant and outright self important... listen to the interviews for more.>

Anand has suffered in silence, swallowed his envy and frustration, for more than a decade while trying and failing to become WCh.
He saw his prime years passing while others, as Kramnik or Topalov, became stars.
Now he boils over.

Have patience! I am sure Anand will not shirk away from giving a revenge match to Kramnik.

It is too much to expect him to talk about a revenge match on the day he has won the WCC title.

Why should he not talk about his first title, after all that too was given by the same Fide? He mentioned in the next sentence this is the unified title, implying that this is a bigger one.

Of course, he is not happy with Fide giving extra privileges to Kramnik with a less than one year for a revenge match & Topalov with another one step shot at the title in 2009. In an interview sometime before the WCC tournament he told sarcastically that Fide will do whatever it wants to do & that he will just keep playing.

Johny - I don't think Anand is planning to duck the match with Kramnik. He has clearly said in his intervew that the match is in the contract and that the plan is to play it, but that the details have to be worked out (not that - "we'll see about the match"). All he appears to want to do in the interview is to enjoy his moment without having to worry about the next step immediately.

I am pretty sure the Anand-Kramnik match will happen. But there are still some real oddities that have to be worked out with respect to the cycle that's being put in place after this. For instance, it's not clear why Anand has to play the World Cup in December (which is essentially a qualifier for the next cycle) while Kramnik and Topalov don't.

Anyway, while we wait for clarity there and hope for a better cycle, we can (a) let Anand savor his moment, and (b) look forward to the Anand - Kramnik match!

Perhaps FIDE should establish and maintain two lines of chess world champions, a tournament title and a match title.

This is a good time for FIDE to start, with Anand having the Undisputed Tournament Chess World Champion title, and Kramnik having the Undisputed Match Chess World Champion title (that can only be lost in a match).

Another benefit for having two lines of chess world champions is that it doubles the opportunities for FIDE VPs to receive bribe monies.

Noting is undisputed till Fischer is alive!

I don't think Anand has to play in the World Cup. He's on the list along with the rest of the Mexico players because the list came out before Mexico ended. Kramnik and Topalov already had their special matches guaranteed. I doubt Anand will play. I don't see why all three of them couldn't play if they wanted, hors concours sort of. But it's more likely Anand will be summarily scratched from the list now that he's world champion.

There is no such thing called match champion or tournament champion. In chess, the categories are only based on time controls - regular time control, rapid control, blitz control etc. Therefore, you can have world chess champion, world rapid chess champion and world blitz chess champion.

How would you justify a challenger selected by a tournament in the process to decide a match champion?? You have to have a knock-out process then and everyone start equally?? Still that won't guarantee a win for Kramnik!

Good to hear that Mig! I hope Anand make sure his demands are met and he be happy and then take on challenger Kramnik!!

Johnny Dang--

In case anyone made the mistake of taking you seriously....

About the Kramnik match, Anand said,
"I've only been absolute WC for two hours. We'll deal with this later. Today I'll just celebrate."

if Anand refuses to play Kramnik in the appointed match, then Anand surely can't be the #15. But if this depends on playing that match, he can't it be either now.

>Posted by: PircAlert at September 30, 2007 16:38
I hope Anand make sure his demands are met and he be happy and then take on challenger Kramnik>

Don't bet, we know Kirsan/Fide-style. It is easier to stage another tournament in 2008, if necessary even in Elista.

This may very well be the end of WCh "Steinitz tradition" and beginning of the new era of "Anand-tradition", the coronation of a decade of efforts to "modernize" chess by H.E. Kirsan.

Let's stop worrying, people.

The evil Zhukov will make sure that Kirsan stages Kramnik-Anand. And Anand has always honored his FIDE obligations.

PircAlert: Who care about Shirov? He's not even in the top 12 players--maybe even lower. He may have had a claim in the past, but Kramnik defeated Kasparov for the championship. If Bogo had defeated Alekhine in one of their matches then he too would have been world champion, even though he likely didn't deserve a title shot.

In Anand's case, there is unfinished business because he hasn't defeated the linear world champion in match play. In addition, the absence of both Ivanchuk and Topalov from the tournament weakens its importance.

This is not to detract from Vishy's wonderful performance. I do believe that he is the second best player in the world (the best player has "retired.") I believe he can and will defeat Kramnik in their match. I also believe that he is better than Topa and Ivanchuk. The only problem is that you can't definitively win the world chamionship via a tournament, especially one missing a couple players in the top 5! Can anyone really claim that Alexander "Texas Hold 'em" Grischuk is currently stronger than either Ivanchuk or Topalov? It's ridiculous.

Anand has unfinished business, and I do believe that he will successfully answer all doubts once he defeats Kramnik next year. My money is on him to win the match.

Hensel said UEP had already acquired the rights to organize the 2008 match. So that should be the last of our worries.

After that, though, how long the match tradition will survive before FIDE changes its plans and there is nobody strong and willing enough to oppose them --- we don't know. After all, nothing can last forever.

>In Anand's case, there is unfinished business because he hasn't defeated the linear world champion in match play.>

Amen, Toldeo, but such sobering rationality isn't what we hear these mexican times. Instead we phoney statements as "I am the absolute champion" from Anand himself and enthusiastic "undisputed 15th in the Steiniz's tradition" from his fans.

At worst Krisan has just destroyed another piece of chess' heritage.. at best we are in a intermediate-fuzzy state of Anand sort of "conditional-WCh" (condition being the upcoming Kramnik-match).

I wouldn't give credence to anything "johnny dangerouly" (capitals omitted purposely) says. Remember it was only yesterday that he made the obviously dickhead anti-semitic remark about Gelfand.

johnny d,

For clarification purposes, it's chesstraveler that knows your a dickhead.

Ovidiu: get a life man; go get a drink of vodka, crash and wake up to the realization that Anand is the undisputed champ!

"Ovidiu: get a life man; go get a drink of vodka"


I was thinking drano.

Congrats to the legitimate & unified 15th World Chess Champ, Vishy!!!
Great performance, unmatched.

Wonder why some people in this forum have problem in accepting the legitimacy of the title. When the players themselves dont have a problem with the format and title, what is your problem?

Kramnik himself accepted that he is no longer the champion if he fails in Mexico.

Chess has to be modernized, format has changed, you cannot always live in the old times. This is the new format, competent people would have decided on this, the players themselves have agreed, but still we have problems?? weird... well looks like some fans just cant accept their idol's defeat!

well done Anand, you deserved it!

Chesstraveler - Being conscious about money comes naturally to Jews, just as being good at science math and art.
Don't give me any credence -I couldnt care less from a bog Irish traveller, but Anand's arrogance is there for all to see.
Like others here have mentioned the sudden propensity to say "I am undisputed", "Reunited World Champion" etc etc removes sheen from the tournament victory and "down to Earth" seems to be grossly misplaced when it comes to him.
Kramnik is far modest than many.

are you going to let johnny say whatever he wants?

"In Anand's case, there is unfinished business because he hasn't defeated the linear world champion in match play. In addition, the absence of both Ivanchuk and Topalov from the tournament weakens its importance."
Topalov isn't here because he was dumb enough to hire Danailov as a manager. Ivanchuk isn't here because he got upset and therefore was knocked out of this cycle. None of the guys here lost to Cheparinov. They were in Mexico because they won when they needed to.

Again, the Mexico victory can't possibly have made Anand the 15th World Champion. He's not yet classical champion in the match tradition, and if the FIDE non-classical title counts, then there have been more World Champions than that.

acirce - the difference is that the previous FIDE KO's happened at a time when there was another claimant to the title of World Champion. Most experts/fans/journalists recognized the claims of the other claimant at the time more than they did the KO champion, and so Kramnik has been generally recognized as the 14th WC since his win over GK in 2000.

What is different this time is that there is no alternative claimant with Kramnik himself acknowledging that Anand is the World Champion.

We still don't know whether this tournament-style championship is a brief interlude while we go back to matches or if the match tradition is going to die out. I hope that the match tradition is revived (with a good candidate's cycle to go with it) and don't deny that Anand's historical claims to greatness will be greatly enhanced if he beats Kramnik in a match.

But for the history books, the case for Anand as the 15th WC is that the format is less important in the long-run (other sports have changed formats with time as well) than legitimacy among peers and officialdom. The fact that Kramnik recognizes Anand as the WC (and his website has been remarkably quick to acknowledge this albeit still showing him as beating Moro in round 9!), carries the most weight at this point.

So to summarize - I think the KO champs will not count in the chronological sequence because they weren't undisputed, while this one does because there is no other claimant to the title (which is why Anand 2000 does not make it in the sequence, while Anand 2007 does).

Well let's just say I disagree. If the FIDE title is legitimate, then it was so when Khalifman and others had it as well. It was certainly not worth as much as Kasparov's and Kramnik's but that is a separate question.

Not that it matters, and not that it is fair to Anand to squabble in all eternity about what his title really means.

The KOs had absurd time controls and it did not have all the top players playing.

As Gelfand said, all top players including Topalov had a chance to compete for Mexico. That and the fact that there is no rival claimant makes Anand of '07 the 15th world champion but not Anand of 2000.

Congratulations to Vishy! And its good to see some corporate sponsor ship creeping back into top level chess. The NIIT displayed prominently on Anand's shirt is the logo of India's leading technology training institute.

"Being conscious about money comes naturally to Jews"

johnny dangerously,

When you try to rationalize you just end up "stepping into it" deeper and deeper. I was talking about your ignorant remark yesterday regarding Gelfand, and you have to go into a ridiculous and negative pontification about Anand. Anyone safe on your list other than members of the arian nation, Mr. Dangerously? Besides, if you "couldn't care less," you wouldn't have responded.

From Steinitz to Kramnik, the champions had one thing in common. They were undisputed world champions. From 1993-2006, there were rival claimants to the title and none of them were undisputed. So Khalifman to Topalov do not belong to the line. However by strange coincidence both Kasparov and Kramnik end up in the line because of the victory before 1993 and the victory in elista.

Congratulations to the 15th undisputed world champion. Everybody knew way back when he burst into international scene he had the potential. He has been fulfilling it but this win puts an exclamation point to an already amazing career.

From Steinitz to Kramnik, the champions had one thing in common. They were undisputed world champions. From 1993-2006, there were rival claimants to the title and none of them were undisputed. So Khalifman to Topalov do not belong to the line. However by strange coincidence both Kasparov and Kramnik end up in the line because of the victory before 1993 and the victory in elista.

Congratulations to the 15th undisputed world champion. Everybody knew way back when he burst into international scene he had the potential. He has been fulfilling it but this win puts an exclamation point to an already amazing career.

Chesstraveller - you sure assume you know a lot don't you. Good for you, bad for the rest that hold you on your word, as it's badly misguided.
Anyone with a reasonable understanding of human behavior will see Anand in the other darker light that I have alluded to.Nothing against Anand the chess player but Anand the victorious isnt as genteel as we would have hoped.
What is arian nation? Oh you meant Aryan Nation (pls note) , sorry I am not acquainted with that fraternity.

After Anand had taken the crown, attention turned to the prospect of an Anand-Kramnik match for the Classical (Match) World Championship, which many believe Kramnik did not forfeit even though he failed to win in Mexico. (Gelfand disagreed - "Anand is clear World Champion and he clearly deserved it.")

First of all - will the Kramnik-Anand match take place? "Sure." said Anand. "I think it's just in the contract - I don't know if dates are already mentioned but that is the plan."

Kramnik was also already thinking about the upcoming contest, tentatively scheduled for Germany in the middle of 2008. "I think that [Anand and I] are the two best players in the world right now. It will be a chance finally to decide who is who, who is greater. I am really looking forward to it. I am confident that my chances are not worse."

Oh wow Johnny Dangerously, a spelling error must mean that you are right. Btw, making fun of Jews isn't cool. Anand is one of the more sane champions of the past 15. Just out of curiosity, guest aim, wasn't Kasparov the undisputed champion from 93-2000? Is there some event that I am unaware of (entirely likely)?

Congrats to Anand. Let's hope that his match against Kramnik will be exciting and not bore us all to death!


I'm not here to speak for anyone else about your obvious bigotry. I believe that the vast majority of people blogging here are more than capable of making their own determination about what you've written, and the meaning behind it regarding GM Gelfand and perhaps GM Anand as well. When something of that nature is quite apparent, it's in my nature to challange it. One doesn't have to "know a lot" to read between those particular type of lines Mr. Dangerously. So please, don't insult them any longer with your backpeddling.

I'm curious if anyone thinks Anand can beat Kramnik in a match. K's style of play seems so perfect for long, grinding duels.

And I hate to bring up this for logic but: Anand lost to Kasparov twice, Kramnik nil.

Sometimes the dogs are fiercer than the master. When the master has acknowledged Anand as the world chess champion ( with no reservations attached ), his dogs are still barking here. Stop barking now and let us enjoy the memories of a wonderful championship. You can start barking again when your master the challenger starts his challenge match against the world champion. Till then stop barking and whining.

These discussions are absurd. But then, what the heck, I am such a loser, I have nothing better to do than read my fellow losers' opinions... :)

Anand speak (excerpts):

Q: Congratulations to Aruna too. She played a big role, didn’t she? She is virtually your manager now...like Roger Federer’s girlfriend...

Yes, she takes a lot of things off my hands, allowing me to concentrate on my game. I just have to pack my computer and work on my games, she handles the rest...the people, the press etc.

Q: But she also helps you with broad advice on games...

Oh yes. She told me for instance not to blitz during Grischuk’s time trouble this time (Anand plays very fast and usually puts opponents in time trouble). I didn’t listen (chuckles) and very nearly got into trouble myself (he eventually drew from a losing position)...

Q: Now how did you prepare for this World Championship? You have played against all eight contenders but there must have been special preparations against some?

Not really. In this tournament, the field was very narrow. The rating difference between the top player and the eighth was only 70 ELO points. I didn’t think anyone deserved special attention. Anyone would have tripped anyone. I am just happy to come out undefeated and it went pretty well but for that one scary moment yesterday (when he almost lost to Grischuk)

Q: And in terms of seconds (assistants)?

I worked with Peter Heine Nielsen (a Danish Grandmaster). In India, I worked with Sandipan from Kolkata and Konguvel and Saravanan (from Chennai).

Q: How did the specific games pan out? Were you happy with games?

Yes, I came out undefeated like I said and scored nine out of 14. I drew two games each with the top three and beat the bottom four once each and drew once each. It wasn’t something I had planned but that the way it came out and I am quite happy.

Q: How did Kramnik (the deposed World Champion and Anand‘s perennial rival) take it?

Oh, he was quite sporting. He shook hands after we drew the game and then congratulated me again backstage. We didn’t talk much.

Q: By then of course, you were already over the line. But I believe people began to congratulate you with several rounds to go...

Yeah, messages started pouring in when there were still three rounds to go and I was one and half points ahead. It freaked me out. When you are that far ahead with only three rounds to go and don‘t win, you’d shoot yourself. Maybe I am a bit superstitious, but it was quite unsettling. Then Gelfand beat Aronian and I drew a game and he was within a point of me. Things can whittle down pretty suddenly. So the last three days Aruna and I avoided eating at the hotel to try and not receive the premature congratulations.

Q: But it worked out great eventually. Now tell me, do you feel in terms of legacy etc that you are at the peak of your powers? What is the shelf life of a world champion these days?

(Laughs) I hope I can remain at the top for some time (Anand has been among the top three since 1997 and the undisputed No.1 since April this year). The average age in chess is dropping fast and the shelf life is also shortening. The average age in tournaments now is in the 20s. There are hardly any with 30s (Anand is 37). All indications are that chess is becoming younger, but I feel good enough to remain at the top.

Q: So it’s a different world from Mikhail Tal and others who stayed at the top into their 60s...

Yes, there is almost no one in the top 30 who is over 50. But then experience is also important. In this world championship, us senior guys (Anand, Kramnik and Gelfand) did well coming out on top. We were able to cope better and I guess experience was important. We were able to handle crunch situations better.

Q: But computers have become so much a part of the game. I sometimes wonder if you will be the last human world champion.

Computers are already stronger than humans in chess and there is a separate championship for them. Processor speeds are doubling every 18 months and our brains are not growing as fast...may be two per cent every year (laughs). I try and stay on top of technology and get the latest all the time...

"Listen to this Paul the Serial Fellator and his cowardly logic:

"Between 2000 and 2006, all Kramnik did was draw a match against Leko and duck one against Kasparov."

Quite right, and he didn't play in a single tournament either, just like '72-75 Fischer." clubfoot

One end of clubfoot's anatomy appears to have developed at the expense of the other, and from his language it's clear which end that is.

Kramnik beating Kasparov in 2000 can be compared to Euwe's victory over Alekhine in 1935. Carries about that much conviction. Euwe gave Alekhine a match in 1937, with the expected results, whereas Kramnik only drew a match versus Leko in 2004. Some title defense that was! Of course, there is a world of difference in ethics between Euwe and the Gulag boy. As it is, Kramnik has ensured himself a return match in less than a year.

Kramnik did play in tournaments after 2000, but even his own admirers concede tournament play is not his strong point. His strong point is supposed to be match play, but if you look at his career there are more match maulings than victories.

So, Kramnik was an unworthy champ because: one, he did not qualify for a shot at the title; two, having beaten Kasparov, he did not (unlike Euwe) give the greatest player who has ever lived a chance to regain the title and prove that his earlier win was no flash in the pan; three, from 2000 till the Topalov match in 2006, all he did to defend his title was to draw a match against Leko (a match he almost lost, a most unworthy title defense); four, because he is not no. 1 on the rating list. A worthy world champion should be the best player in the world; in this case it is Vishy who is the only 2800+ player in the world. Not surprisingly, he won Mexico by a 1 point margin, and was also the only undefeated player.

On another note, who wants to face Topalov in a match now? The FIDE disciplinary committee should have banned him for a year or two. Who knows what Danailov is cooking up for his next match opponent?

Very interesting interview with Korchnoi referenced by tech26 at http://www.e3e5.com/article.php?id=1179.

One paragraph in particular talks about Carlsen's psychological strengths, and is very interesting.

I also found interesting that in talking about chess geniuses, Korchnoi specifically excludes Kasparov from the category. I wonder why?

Anand IS the undisputed World Champion of Chess. There is no schism, anymore--at least for now... Kramnik put the "(Kasparov) Classical title" on the table (albeit, only after receiving some pretty favorable terms from FIDE, with respect to the rematch clause). Neither Kramnik, nor any other active Professional player, currently claims the Title. Hence, there is no dispute about whether or not Anand is the Champion. Maybe Kramnik or Topalov would dispute that Anand is a better player, but that is a moot question now:
Kramnik, and then (most likely) Topalov will get their cracks at a Title match.

It is interesting what an impact Grischuk had on the tournament. It can be argued that Grischuk had a bigger edge against Anand, than he had against Gelfand. Yet, he managed to win the endgame against Gelfand. If Gelfand had held, and if Grischuk had managed to win the "won game" vs. Vishy, we would be talking about a tie for 1st place between Anand and Gelfand at +3, and we no longer would be talking about Anand have such an Undefeated, dominating tournament!

"There were four Sicilians, three losses and a draw."

If anything can entice Garry to come out of retirement (even on a one-off basis), it might be a desire to protect and restore the reputation of the Sicilian Defense--his hallmark defense against 1.e4

Maybe he'd be willing to compete in another Open Sicilian thematic event, similar to the 1995 Buenos Aires tournament. If it wasn't rated by FIDE, Kasparov could claim that it was just an exhibition....

The best game of the event was Kramnik's win over Morozevich. Obviously, post game analysis revealed some flaws, but it was an amazing and courageous idea. Anand has some of the best opening preparation--especially in his win against Aronian. Overall, his win against Svidler was probably his best game.

Gelfand showed great endgame technique in his win over Morozevich.

"It is well known that anand wins tourneys always by catching more points from the 2nd half of the table then everyone else.
Posted by: Ellrond at September 30, 2007 06:51"

And could you please reflect whats Kramnik's claim to fame as "a great match player"? I wont give you the stats -- find out yourself

"neat rhetoric but I suggest you study logic too, just because some think that Anand is world champion for winning a tournament won't make it either
Posted by: Ovidiu at September 30, 2007 07:23"

Right, lets talk logic then...so winning a tournament beating multiple players wont make a champion? So winning against 1 person makes a champon? Right?

Only in the chess universe can you even argue a logic such skewed...most other sane sports select a champion by tournament.

What I hate about these Russians World Champions is how they use FIDE to try and get into 'heads i win, tails you lose' situations and extract what they want...

Kramnik for instance may have thought - "Okay so I will play this tournament. If I win, I take credit to unify the chess world and become the undisputed WCC; If I don't, I can call myself a match champion in the tradition of Steinitz.. and I will ask my manager to go the DailyDirt and post some comments along those lines using multiple handles..."

Karpov was, to give just one example, seeded directly into the finals which was moreover scheduled to be held immediately after a big KO...

Kasparov after he lost his title was just satisfied to strut his ELO and demand matches... participating in a qualification cycle and becoming a challenger would have been too insulting for him i suppose..

What's the deal with "OK"? I noticed that Kramnik uses "OK" a lot, and Anand seems to use it a lot too, and so are other players using it, e.g., Leko and Anand's second Nielsen.

Who started the OK trend? Was it Kasparov? Or is this a verbal tic that is specific to strong chess players?

Yes, Korchnoi seems to have an animus against Kasparov. Wonder what's up.

"Who started the OK trend? Was it Kasparov? Or is this a verbal tic that is specific to strong chess players?"

Perhaps Adorjan with "Black is OK"?

One nice thing about Vishy is his open acknowledgment of the help of his second, Nielsen. Are all players as generous?

Svidler gave credit to motylev after his final round win. Topalov gave cheparinov a lot of credit after san luis.

Another thing : it seems Anand has had a manager for some time now. Her name: Aruna Anand.

Anand shouldn't agree to a match in Germany. Germany (especially, Dortmund) is Kramnik's manager's home ground and he shouldn't cede homefield advantage to Kramnik. It should be held on neutral territory. Kramnik's manager is almost as big a crook as Danailov.

Here's an article where the best cricket player(Sachin) congratulates Anand: http://www.telegraphindia.com/1071001/asp/sports/story_8381648.asp

Anand is playing in the German Bundesliga for Baden-Baden, so you could aguee that playing the Anand-Kramnik match in Germany would be Anands home ground.

It is however wellknown that Anand never plays the Dortmund tournament, but there are many other places in Germany.

I suggest playing in Hamburg, then it will not be so far away from where I live (Denmark) so I would have a chance to go there! :)

Anand is now the undisputed world chess champion. That designation is true. Kramnik himself set this in motion by contract! Kramnik also gets to challenge Anand for that title sometime next year in a match.
Botvinnik won his first title in a tournamant. Defending it in matches, both winning, losing, and drawing them, until he retired in 1963 after his match defeat by Petrosian.
So even history, has a president for winning the title in a tournamant format. This time with the defending champion playing also.
Anand and Kramnik to me(!) are about even in strength. But Anand plays more risky!
Morozevich soundly defeated Kramnik in his only loss. While Anand skated by Grischuks' fine effort after Grischuk went astry in the endgame with 52. Rd4?! and maybe 58. a5?! allowing Anand the draw.
There are really no what if's here.
Anand is world champion now, and will defend that title in 2008 versus Kramnik.
The only speculation is if Anand will retain his deserved title or lose it to Kramnik in their match.

Anand sounded almost nonchalant in his post-Grischuk draw press conference. I could be wrong, but he gave the impression he was in control and that he was confident the game would end in a draw. And he just squeaked through by a tempo!

Maybe he realized only later how close he was to defeat? Maybe drawing too many rook endings has led to overconfidence?

In all the interviews Anand has said that the game was the most scary moment and in particular said after Rc2 he was "sure" that he had blown it.

I'm referring to the post-game press conference. He admitted he played badly, but said he was confident the draw was always there. I could be wrong, but that's my impression.

The interviews came later, I presume, after he'd had a chance to look at the game again.

Well... let's put in some wise statement.

On the one hand it's clear that Anand can't be called the historic world champion. From the historic perspective, such a tournament like mexico may only be organized in the case of the death of the world champion.

A world champion may only be called such if he has defeated the previous world champion in a match. It wasn't the case. Furthermore Anand proved nothing against Kramnik in Mexico, and his general record against Kramnik still remains negative.

So why the hell shall I call a guy a world champion because he scored better than Kramnik against Grischuk?

Why? Because from a general perspective things are not that clear. First we all have to admit that Anand deserves to be world champion. Well ... maybe not today, but ... would FIDE have made its job properly from 1993 to 2008, Anand's chances to catch the title from 2002 to 2005 would have been maximal.

Anand is a fantastic chess player and a great human being as well. He is certainly part of the all-time top 10. It would really have been quite a shame to see such a fantastic player never crowned. So... let's forget this match stuff for a while, and let's call him the unified world champion today.

Anyway in 2008 we'll have our match. This match had to come. Whatever the result, we'll see great chess played by great gentlemen. Furthermore we have the huge pleasure to forget Topalov's f***face for a time.

Let's be happy today. Anand is world champion, which is totally deserved for his career. Kramnik will defend his title in a match, and the matches will prevail. Topalov is ranked 4th player and may well hang himself to cables in his toilet.


On reflection perhaps the best way to go forward is to accept Anand as 15th provided the system returns to the match standard beginning with a match against Kramnik next year. Anand seems like a good guy as well as a great player and its probably is a bit harsh for us match enthusiasts to him to blame him for Illumzhinov's screw-ups.

Certainly this tournament had more legitimacy than the nonsense KO competitions. But honestly you would think FIDE would say "hang on a minute" when they saw the complete randomness of the process which could generate a different world champ every year! Still as I stated above maybe this is what Illumzhinov wanted.

Even though I hate the idea of a World Champion being crowned by tournament the last one I would complain about would be Vishy, followed by Kramnik (although I don't like his chess style), Topalov (don't like his "style" either - nothing to do with his chess) but at least these guys are world class, the problem as already seen is that with a tournament system you can end up with champs who are a lot less than world class. And this simplee did not happen in the old match system 1886 to 2000 - not one mediocre player (although in some cases great players didn;'t win - Bronstein, Keres, Rubenstein etc).

Let's all calm down and enjoy next years match. Given that there probably won't be draw odds to the Champ it will be a great event. And if FIDE goes back on its match promise then we can agree that the 15th World Champion will be the last worth mentioning. Pity sincee I think Carlsen could be a long term WC of the future.

>Anyway in 2008 we'll have our match.

We will see about that, the past experience with Kirsan's Fide feels like fischer-random.

Until then we will live for a while yet another episode from the "Alice in Wonderland" where the champion also plays the candidates tournament (Tc) and his challanger should be alreday regarded as the champion until the match resolves the uncertainty..oh, well.


Today is a uniquely great day for India. Not only has Anand scaled to great heights, Humpy crossed the 2600 barrier, the only woman after Judit to do so.


Regarding what you hate in those Russian World Champions for, let me remind you that:
1) not all of them were Russian, most of them were Soviet;
2) how many non-Soviet/non-Russain Champions did we have since 1950? Two?
Fischer: after becoming the Champion he played only once. 30 years later. During all that time he was still considering himself the only CHampion.
Topalov: a toilet pot selesperson who first demanded the Elista loser to be excluded from mexico, and after losing managed to buy the direct qualification to at least a semi-final match. As for me, those blamed Soviet/Russian Champions look white and puffy compared to these two.

Regarding Anand, he is the Champion, of course, and I guess he will be the respectable one, as he was before as a chess player. But only time will tell.

We have a terrible history with matches in the past few years. Far
more have been planned than actually have taken place. The match
system doesn't seem to make much sense going forward.

The tournaments are immune to a single person refusing to play --
there are always others who will substitute.

The particular infatuation with matches lately seems well aligned with
Kramnik's fear of any other means to hold his title. Kasparov and
Karpov could win both formats. Of course, Kremlin's Zhukov put his
heavy hand forth for just that reason.



Mig's association with Kasparov has nothing to do with Kramnik's private thoughts about the title.

Yours is the most foul, ridiculous Daily Dirt comment in years. And that's saying something.

-- Posted by: greg koster at September 30, 2007 11:32

Yes, I would vote to have this person banned from this site for that comment.

Can anyone tell me how much money each player won in Mexico's championship? I have been searching for this, but there's nothing on chessbase or the mexican sites. Thanks in advance.

anyway, I'm looking forward for the match between Anand and Kramnik. The two games they played against each other in Mexico were very entertaining.


Once again you seem to misunderstand. The recent problems with the match system are due to FIDE's poor organisation under Kirsan's leadership.

The match system (and related Zonals/Interzonal and candidates matches) worked perfectly well for 50+ years! Since Alekhine's death until 2000 the match system produced great and universally recognised World Champions. Everyone had a fair shot and as to your point about refusing to play I have two words to say - Bobby Fischer. If you refused to play you lost your title - period!

So far we have had only a few of these world championship tournaments and already there has been chaos with unification/reunificatiion people refusing to play in the tournament and then the match.

The problem is FIDE and its lack of direction/leadership (ok Kasparov was partly to blame and has recently acknowledged this himself)

But this is not a reflection on the match system itself - it is the best and fairest system. Without the match system Bobby Fischer would probably never have become WC since he would have ended up in a tournament with a vast majority of soviets, some/all of whom may have been persuaded to lose to Spassky to keep Fischer away from their title. Tournaments are always open to such abuse.

Chess is in many ways unique in that in other sports the so called world champion is merely the winner of the last world cup and that changes every year. In chess it meant a lot more - it meant a legend of the game. Yes Karpov and kasparov were also dominant in tournaments but many other World Champions weren't so dominant. If you think some of the recent fide world champions were worthy of the title (excluding Anands win) then fair enough but you will end up with a title that's worth very little since it can be potentially anyone with a rating over 2650 (or so) depending on a oncee off performance in a week.

To the posters who have advised Anand against playing Kramnik in Germany:
Anand speaks German (unlike Kramnik) and has something of a second or third home in in the German city of Frankfurt (with the organisor of the Mainz Chess Classic events, Hans-Walter Schmitt). Anand is at least as popular as Kramnik in Germany. Besides, the sympathy of the chess fans will rather be with the undisputed winner of the title than with Kramnik who won the right to another match in a deal with FIDE. The one setback may be that the match isn´t going to be organised by someone independent. Josef Resch, a friend of Kramnik, is calling the shots, but that holds in Germany or India or anywhere else. To my knowledge, Resch´s record is clean and he´s not the type who likes scandals.

The terrible history was not with matches, but with FIDE. The problem was not with match system, but with absence of a system.
Tournaments are immune to refusals as much as matches are. You refuse to play - you lose the right. But the biggest problem with current "tournament system" is in inequality in participants playing strength based on a strange qualification "system". Wasn't it obvious that Polgar, Kazim, and Adams were below level in San Luis? Isn't it obvious that Ivanchuk had to be the part of both tournaments?
The rule of truth is that the final event must include only those who can really win the event.
Look at Mexico. Grischuk, Moro, Svidler had no chances to become a WC. But as a matter of fact they decided who will be the next Champion based on their results with top guns. Top guns should decide who is the strongest one playing face to face, and not playing with losers, IMHO.
What makes me nuts in the next so named "cycle" is it's dependence on a bunch of commercial tournaments. Organizers of these tournaments have a huge impact now on the WC cycle, because they decide whom to invite to their events with clear example of past ignorance to Ivanchuk.
And please, stop putting your heavy hands on Zhukov until you provide at least one fact confirming his influence to a WC results.

>> Can anyone tell me how much money each player won in Mexico's championship? I have been searching for this, but there's nothing on chessbase or the mexican sites. <<

Check out the TWIC site: http://www.chesscenter.com/twic/event/mex07/rd1314m.html


Are you saying that entry/progression in the next WC cycle is dependent on getting invitations to closed tournaments - You can't be serious!

Jesus, its worse than I thought!

The main result of Mexico is not the Anand's triumph, IMHO. The main result is in the proof that most of top chess players are wise, intelligent and pleasant humans who can behave with respect even when high stakes are at the desk.
Opponents constantly analyzing their games after the game finish like this is just a regular round robin; players smiling and laughing when sharing their thoughts about the game during press conferences, and please note, they were speaking about chess, not about hidden cables.
The only press-conference without smiles from both sides was after the second game Moro vs. Kramnik which decided who will be the next Champion, IMHO. Both were looking very gloomy, avoided looking at one another, but there was no single harsh word directed at anybody but oneself. And again, they were speaking about their chess mistakes, not about inconvenient light, etc.
By the way, have you heard a single word of complain from Gelfand when during his game with Grischuk the light went down and they were asked to move to other table? He lost with a terrible blunder after that. Fischer would leave the tournament, but Gelfand behaved like nothing happened. And these two games (Moro-Kramnik and Grischuk-Gelfand) put a huge influence at the final tournament result.
The huge success of Mexico with general public disproves an opinion that chess needs scandals to gain popularity. If I was to compare Mexico to San Luis and Elista, Mexico would be the undisputed leader, because this was the only truly chess event.

>The terrible history was not with matches, but with FIDE. The problem was not with match system, but with absence of a system.>

The 1948-2000 system was stable and possible because of the Soviets, their state sponsorship of top-players (most were soviets) and, if needed, the USSR federation imposing consensus amongst top-players through barking orders.

But when as someone else, Fischer, got to the top the scandals immediately started, and as soon as the soviets control collapsed the "system" went down definitively , Kasparov's runway.

Nowadys such system is no longer possible, it depends on sponsors and the interets of each player.

To some extent Kirsan (Kalmykian tax-paxers) tries to get again the control but : he is a kind of nut doing more destruction with his
ideas and it stands to reason that he won't be forever there to suck those people of their money for chess.

Sooner or later we will be back to the re-1948 times and we will have again very strong, strong in all senses, champions.

I was talking about so named Grand Prix.

www.kramnik.com :

Vladimir Kramnik
World Chess Champion 2000-2007

Kramnik was a great champion and is a great sportsman. In the upcoming match Anand-Kramnik it doesn't make a difference who wins: in any case the winner will be a great gentleman and a great chessplayer. Thumbs up to ex-Champion Kramnik and the Champion Anand!

Do you blame Soviets in Fischer's scandalous behavior? Let me remind you that scandals associated and initiated by Fischer started far before he became one of the world top guns. After he became the WC, then his scandalous behavior became the real problem, because he was the Champion, and his absence would invalidate Karpov's legitimacy. In this sense, it was equal to Kasparov's break out from FIDE.
And by the way, do not underestimate Eiwe's contribution to the chess world stability when he was a president.

Some more thoughts on Mexico:
1) Gelfand said it was great pleasure to play with 7 hour time control. not with FIDE time control. But for the next cycle the short time control will be in use.
2) Mexico confirmed the main difference between the elite and all other super-GMs: quality and quantity of homework. There were too many games where Anand and Kramnik spent less than 10 minutes while their opponent had less than 1 hour left. To become elite, you have to devote your life to chess.

And by the way, the same is true if you look at Rybka-Zappa match. Both engines are very strong and are comparable in this sense. Therefore, this was not the strength competition between engines anymore. This was competition in the opening book tuning to get the position where your engine's weaknesses are hidden and advances show up.

Very good observation Vlad Kosulin. Mexico WCC has been a great success as every participant behaved in Gentlemanly way and there was no scandal big or small.

I am Kramnik fan.
I am upset with his loss.
But there are 3 things which relieve me:
1) Now, when Anand became the WC, we can expect a new training DVD from ChessBase with his video commentary on best games throughout his career, and a new CD from Sahovski as continuation of their KKK series (Best of Karpov, Kasparov, Kramnik).
2) Kramnik lost to a great player and a wise person (I do my best not to name some other player here) with a long success track who really deserves the title and who will never force me to blush with shame for his behavior.
3) It looks like Vishi finally got what boxers name a big heart, and if this is true, then the upcoming match with Kramnik can stand on par with Kasparov-Kramnik match 2000. If it happens, of course.

Please draw attention to some basic fundamental facts.
Chess championships are always played with one player challenging the World Champion, Mexico wasnt like that. From time immemorial like boxing the Champion is determined by defeating a challenger.
That Kramnik acceded to harsh requests and "put the title" on the line is of no consequence, as he was obviously coerced into doing so. He obviously still harbors notions of being the champ no matter what FIDE says.
Mir Sultan Khan defeated Capablanca in a tournament, is he champ?No, likewise Anand is at best an interim champ until he defeats VK in match play.

Mexico City: An Ode

The crown of Vishy
Is not fishy.
We all wish he
Will have a long reign.

Though it can be blitzy
(He had trouble with Grischy)
The play of Vishy
Is pure, without stain.

Peerless Anand!
Big fish in world chess pond!
Of you we are fond,
A champion who is sane.


Sachin Tendular, obviously another hero from the nation of India, also comes across as a gentleman. I must admit that I know absolutely nothing of the game of cricket, nothing. Then again, how many people in India understand the game of football in the USA?

You have a great World Chess Champion and should take pride in that accomplishment. I can still and always will remember how my country (where chess wasn't and still is not that popular) reacted collectively to the victory of Robert James Fischer over the then Soviet hegemony of chess. At that time I believe that the ongoing "cold war" had more to do with that than the game of chess itself. Anyway, congradulations India!

Instead of "Big fish in a world chess pond" I'd put "A tiger of the chess globe"

>Ovidiu,Do you blame Soviets in Fischer's scandalous behavior?>

No, you didn't get my point. Fischer was an example to support my "thesis" that the stability of the system was due to the Soviet's controlling the system. As soon as someone who they couldn't control got the title the scandals naturally started.

When the Soviet's collapsed in 1992 Kasparov could freely start pressing for his interests and the result was the schism. It could have been forseen by who understood what ensured the "stability" up to then.

In other words there is naturally a tension, an in built conflict of interests, between FIDE and the WCh over who controls the title and gets the benefits. It has always been since FIDE took control in 1948, only that it could be, and it was, supressed because all (except Fischer) were soviets.

This story will repeat itself soon, the tension is all there and nowadys the WCh can't be just ordered to play.
It doesn't matter the "character" of the WCh, the conflict will be enacted by other actors while
the script/drama is the same.


Today is a uniquely great day for India. Not only has Anand scaled to great heights, Humpy crossed the 2600 barrier, the only woman after Judit to do so.

-- Posted by: SJ at October 1, 2007 08:57

Congratulations, Indian chess fans!


please do not evade the problem by misplacing the blame on FIDE for
the match fiascos of the last 15 years that put the title in s state
of chaos. They had none or barely any influence. The problem is with
having a title managed by the ill will of the current champ. Such
system cannot do well without supervision and enforcement. We saw the
heritage of irregularly scheduled matches, handpicked opponents,
threats of walking off, unclear rules, etc. -- it's was a mess that
hopefully Mexico fixed and FIDE (good or bad) can manage that title
going forward.

To me Kramnik represented the worst of the mess that Kasparov started
He thrived in it perfectly and the confusion reached its apogee.

The worst scandal of Mexico 2007 would be if there are still questions
about the title and who holds it.

FIDE may be good or bad, but what other choice is out there -- Kramnik
or Russianbear managing the title?? Please, not that :-)

Anyway, the big show is over, the results have sunk in people's
craniums -- what's the schedule now -- what's coming next?



"A tiger of the chess globe"
of which we are...flobe?

That doesn't work. =8-)

I repeat, there were no match fiasco during last 17 years. There were fiasco with FIDE trying to put the system work. How can't I blame FIDE if the whole organization failed to oppose a single chess player?
How can't I blame FIDE if this only player succeeded to some degree to fund his matches, and his successor succeeded in funding his matches with more regularity compared to FIDE who had only a toy match Karpov-Anand and who rejected as long as they can all offers to unify the title funded by outside parties brought by classical champion? Well, you can still count knockouts as their success, of course.

Fide's schduling of the WCC is just crazy. A match in 2006, tournament in 2007, matches again in 2008 and 2009.

This has never happened previously, except in 1984, 85, 86 & 87 when Kasparov & Karpov played 4 matches, one in each year. One would have thought that it was an exception because the 1984 match was abandoned, but we are seeing it again.

If Kramink wins the match with Anand in 2008, it would mean Kramink playing 4 WCC events in 4 years.

I don't think that such a thing is really good for Chess as it takes away the importance a WCC event will have with Chess fans getting fed up seeing such events frequently.

And a match in 2010 too, actually.

Dimi, And one more thing: all big failures of last 35 years had only one thing in common: they all had FIDE as a party:
- match Spassky-Fischer with all scandals before, during, and after the match;
- Fischer retirement from FIDE organized events;
- Karpov-Korchnoi scandals;
- Karpov-Kasparov, especially the match cancellation;
- Kasparov's break-out from FIDE cycle;
- Prague Agreement failure: (Kasparov-Pono, Kasparov-Kazim, first Topalov-Kramnik offer made by Kramnik). As a matter of fact, Elista happened only because both Kramnik and Topalov were interested in this match, not because FIDE had any influence on them.
- recent Topalov's complain about 2700 rule forcing FIDE to revise the already decided rules.
They had and they still have no influence not only on Kasparov, but on anybody else from chess elite.

Vlad, for most of the debacles stated above I can see the long hand of
another major influencing body -- starts with K. And they don't wlways
know what they're doing either...



Kramnik supporter or not, you present your arguments with facts and a good deal of objectivity. Whereas, I believe, that Dimi has the tendency to present his based more on emotion, and it doesn't come across as constuctively. Also Dimi, I believe you stated on another thread that you were not against Kramnik, but much of what you express is completely anti-Kramnik. I don't have a problem with that, I'm only trying to understand where you are really coming from when I read your statements.

I like Kramnik's comment: "Its incredibly difficult to win a match against Anand but I understand that its maybe even more difficult to win a match against Kramnik."

>Anyway, the big show is over, the results have sunk in people's craniums -- what's the schedule now -- what's coming next?>

You know what, the next tournament, on average there is an important one each 4 months, and also a new World Champion.
Now that Anand showed that is possible this way too it follows that everyone must be given his due, in a truly democratic system.

The only condition is that Kramnik competes in that tournament.

so.. kramnik thinks that he and anand are the two best players on the planet. wonder what ivanchuk thinks of all this :)

>so.. kramnik thinks that he and anand are the two best players on the planet. wonder what ivanchuk thinks of all this :)>

he is still in recovery after that Ponomariov match trauma, he could have become WCh too, inflation of them these days

here is Kramnik's most recent interview (in Russian):
Tomorrow they will publish an interview with Anand.

Some excerpts from kramnik:
(Q) what caused the slump in your play at mid-distance?
(A) The game vs. Grischuk happened to become the heaviest psychological blow for me. When I failed to win an absolutely winning position. And I saw how to win, but made a different move. This was very important moment. If I'd won, I'd become a leader with +2. but I got not only +1, but because of whimsy lots I had 4 black out of next 5 games. this is rather tough test, and honestly speaking, I spent too much energy during this period.
(Q) You lost to Moro during this period.Your usual discretion failed you, and you undertook a venture at queenside. Wished to win very much?
(A) yes, I wanted to win very much. The tournament situation was not convenient for me. Anand was increasing the lead, and it was needed to win with black. But there was no luck for me - this was Moro day. Alex is unstable player. This is his problem. But when you happen to get in the heat of his moment, he can win vs. anybody. rememebr how he won vs Anand in San Luis. One way game! unfortunately, the same happened to me. I lost, and only miracle could save me the title.
(Q) Second place can't satisfy you, of course, but looking at your pace in last rounds, if there was a third lap, you would pass Anand ahead.
(A) if there was a third lap, all participants would finish in a hospital. The tournaments was a toughest one. Regarding the second place I took... In such event the only place which is important is the first one. Are you second or eight's - is not that different. of course, I am displeased with failure to win. But I guess that my playing level was on par with Anand's. He just collected everything he could, as usual. He takes chances, he is always lucky a little, as I noticed. He played 1-1 with both 2nd and 3rd players and had no winning chances in any of these games. this is very usual for him as a real tournament fighter. I had an understanding that it will be very tough to concur with him in this. Only a win in our face to face game could decide in my favor. Both games went under my control but unfortunately, both were drawn.

(Q) There are 12 games face to face awaiting you in the WC match. What are your thoughts?
(A) I guess this will be an epochal event without exaggeration. We both are the greatest playes of after kasparov era. Starting from 1993 we are on the same level. he has more tournaments won, and I have more WC matches. The upcoming match will put a period on who is stronger. And for some degree will put a line under achievements of our generation. it is obvious that we have not much time left to stay on top. A huge wave of young talented folks is going to take our place and in some time we will fail to oppose them. This is the law of sports. A law of life. My match with Anand will be the conceptual one for our generation. And an exceptionally important event for myself. I happened to successfully play matches vs strongest contemporary players: Kasparov, leko, Topalov. And now the destiny brings me and fantastically strong player - Anand - together. I will be in earnest about my preparation. And i beleve I can bring the crown back to Russia.

Congrats to Anand!!

And thanks Mexico for give us a Anand - Kramnik match and not another bulgarian show.

I can't agree with Kramnik saying he is satisfied with his level of play.
He failed to show his strongest virtue: reliability:
1. Kramnik-Grischuk was a disaster. He not just missed the win. He managed himself into time trouble without any need for this.
2. Moro-Kramnik. he let Moro to provoke himself into fanciful play. And again, without any need. He could gain big advantage just by playing positionally against numerous weaknesses created by Moro.
3. Kramnik-Svidler from the first round. 22.Nh2 was not just losing advantage. This was a move from the same category he made with Moro. Fanciful, unusual for his habits, and against positional rules he follows usually.
I am still under impression he did not know how to play in the tournament. Remember his experiments with 1.e4 few years ago? May be, he was trying to play more aggressively, but got just fanciful results. He needs a deep evaluation of what happened to succeed in the match, IMHO.

>I can't agree with Kramnik saying he is satisfied with his level of play.>

Now and then Kramnik misjudges the situations, but it happens typically when he can't (easily) change and he needs to talk himself into believing that they need not to be changed anyway..so it more about self-deception for comfort's-sake.

He got a roaring laugh in the chess-comps nwesgroups (Dr.Hyatt, Rajlich) after he said during the Deep-Fritz match at a press conference that he was playing just as usual, no special anti-computer ideas/play, because comps had reached a level that it is no longer useful to think of such strategies.

As somebody said above, its we fans who seem to be causing such a ruckus while the players seem much more sensible and wise.

Anand deserves to be the 15th WC for being such a fantastic player and we are guaranteed a great match next year. Let things lie at that.

Has anybody seen the interview with Loek Van Wely from mexico? He seems like a genuinely intelligent, well-balanced guy.

>As somebody said above, its we fans who seem to be causing such a ruckus while the players seem much more sensible and wise.>

Oh dear, this is so because we are not affected by the other factors which has put Kramnik under pressure.

They know just as well as us the history and meaning of WCh-title matches but they are also sensible to the political and financial pressures. We have nothing else at stake...hence their "sensible wise attitude".
It does make sense to them what happened since they know the other factors which have been pressing.

>Anand deserves to be the 15th WC for being such >a fantastic player ..

we will set a committee to decide on "deservers without match"..I suggest to award Keres one posthumously

I'd vote for Bronstein.

When Kramnik indicates that he will be "in earnest about my preparation." for his up-coming match with Anand, one can take that to the bank. He said that on two other occasions that I remember, Kasparov and Topolov. Although, I'm not sure about the Leko match?

Hey, Chesstraveller, this is not a frat house, so please no need to
discuss me. If there's something that you do not understand in my
writings, then read again and try to think (not feel) your way

What does that mean, "for" or "against" Kramnik? I am sure that he is
a very nice guy, but this is not a beauty contest here. I hate the
mess we had and even more the prospect of it repeating itself. That's


October Fide rating list is out.

1) Anand 2801 (21 games)
2) Ivanchuk 2787 (20 games)
3) Kramnik 2785 (21 games)
4) Topalov 2769 ( 0 games)
5) Leko 2755 (21 games)
6) Morozevich 2755 (19 games)

Lets return to the era of mortal combat where the challenger needs to beat the champion man to man.
Enough of this wussy tournament championships..

Anand vs Kramnik - out of which we get the UNDISPUTED world champion!

>>The draw guaranteed him clear first and the title of unified world champion. I'd add "undisputed" if it weren't for the die-hard match purists who insist that Kramnik, despite his protests to the contrary, retains a match form of the title and that nothing will be unified until the Anand-Kramnik match in 2008.

I think the real issue is the exact opposite. Anand's title is undisputed, certainly, since there are no rival claimants. But is it unified?

Mig things there's no disagreement about that, but it seems that's the real question.

Did Anand win both the Classical and FIDE Titles?

Or maybe he won the FIDE Title but the Classical Title is vacant?

Or, on the other hand, maybe he won the Classical Title, and the FIDE title doesn't really exist any more, since it's being phased out in favor of matches?

Saying that Anand is the one and only world champion is true, but doesn't deal with the issue. Anand is clearly the World Champion, but is he the Heir of Steinitz, or the Heir of Khalifman?

*sigh*. This thread is fast turning into the one before.

1. The title was unified in Elista last year.

2. Anand just won the unified title.

3. He's the 15th undisputed world chess champion as Kramnik no longer claims the title of champion.

I wonder why is it so hard to understand the above 3 lines?

Sometimes, I really wonder if people can read or are they deliberately pretending not to see things.

Screw you Dimi! You're the idiot that classified me with "chess purists" and "Kramnik Fans" just because I want to see an Anand/Kramnik match next year. Even though prior to that I had indicated that I wanted Anand to win this tournament for that reason alone. Kiss my butt!


I'm afraid that there may never be an "undisputed" world champion. You see, we chess players all have opinions and we are all always right. I like Gelfand, so he is my world champion. He doesn't need to win the tournament that was supposed to decide that. He is because I want it.

If/When we see Kramnik play for the championship next year, we will again see weeks of posts on this blog about why each person's favorite player is still the "undisputed" world champion. Between toilets and 2nd place finishes at championship tournaments, this will not be resolved with a match. You know why I'm right? Because I'm a chess player and I'm always right.


That makes more sense than about a good 90% or so of what's been posted on these threads the last few weeks or so.

Match purists? You make it sound like they're a bunch of fanatical chess Nazis who refuse to recognize paper champions.

>>I wonder why is it so hard to understand the above 3 lines?

Sometimes, I really wonder if people can read or are they deliberately pretending not to see things.

Posted by: jmi at October 1, 2007 18:33 >>

I wonder that too. Did you not read the words "Anand's title is undisputed, certainly, since there are no rival claimants." or did you not understand them? If you don't understand something, just ask. Don't guess, especially if you're going to guess that it means the opposite of what it appears to say.

Unless you're just pretending. You did raise that possibility too...

>>Q: But she also helps you with broad advice on games...

Hey, hey! Sexual slurs are no better than racial ones. Would you call it "broad advice" if it was from a man?


That does pretty much sum up Dimi's viewpoint.

chesstraveler: Screw you Dimi! You're the idiot... Kiss my butt!

Ok, you win. Happy?


Graeme, are you deliberately being obtuse or is your IQ always this high?

Let me explain slowly.......

The .... FIDE .... title .... and .... the .... Classical .... title .... was .... unified .... last .... year. .... There's .... no .... more .... official .... Classical .... nor .... FIDE .... champion.... from .... here..... onwards.... The .... 2 .... lines .... have .... merged .... leading .... to .... a .... unified .... title.


Ovidiu, you are just being tiresome. If you dont understand "let things lie", you really are barking up the wrong tree.

Or you are an annoying troll, in which case I must say you have succeeded brilliantly.


No, not with you, but it is nice to know that you understood that part of my post. Even if you do ignore the more appropriate part. All your verbage aside, I "think" that stendec's post at 18:45 pretty much sums up how you look at all of this. I hope you can understand that, but then again, not knowing "what for or against Kramnik" means, perhaps not.

Have a good night.

Posted by: jmi at October 1, 2007 19:26

No, not really. I'm sure you're capable of reading what I wrote, you're just so sure you know what it says in advance that you can't bring yourself to do it.

Don't use the Force, Luke. Read the darn post.

kramnik had draw odds against leko.

did kasparov have draw odds against kramnik in their match ?

did kramnik have draw odds against topalov in elista ?

will anand have draw odds against kramnik in the 2008 match ?

watch out -- great things are going to happen in this world. ovidiu, and his kind, are driving people away from this site to do better things with themselves and their lifes ...

Mark Crowther's latest thoughts in his October 1, 2007 column is awesome. I think his is one of the very few balanced analysis of the current situation. I addresses most of the issues raised in this blog over the last few weeks. Enjoy!

It really surprises me that in elite chess, white has more winning chances. Is this mathematically proven ? Why is this ? Can white dictate the opening ?
It may be said that white has to anticipate black's response , but black can respond to white's move. Since pawns cannot move backward, this should give black a better chance, right ?

Grishuk says - "the openings for which I prepared for did not occur"
Anand says - "novelty against aronian was found 3 days ago". Luck or better play ?

>Lets return to the era of mortal combat where the challenger needs to beat the champion man to man. Enough of this wussy tournament championships..>

We will eventually, some things are "archetypal", encoded in the nature of things (as for instance the value of courage for man and of physical beauty for woman).
But temporary aberrations ( as this "mexican version" WCh ) may occur when people forget and start believing that its all mere social-convention which can be changed at whim through
administrative rulings.

(the Communist ideology which wanted to make private property to disapper would be another example of this kind of aberration)

>Anand vs Kramnik - out of which we get the UNDISPUTED world champion! >

obviously, but until then so much is wanted/envied this WCh-title that some fans are ready to deceive themselves and others on whether Anand has become one.

The FIDE President wasn't there at the closing ceremony....right?

Congrats to Anand. Now for the fighting chess scorecard (draws only used a tiebreak).

1st Anand 4 wins
2nd Kramnik 3 wins
3rd Gelfand 3 wins
4th Morozevich 3 wins
5th Leko 2 wins
6th Aronian 2 wins
7th Grishchuk 2 wins
8th Svidler 1 win

Does Svidler (offically 5th)really deserve to finish above Morozevich (6th)?

Svidler only had one win, against last placed Grishchuk.

Moro defeated Kramnik, Grischuk and Svidler!

"Does Svidler (offically 5th)really deserve to finish above Morozevich (6th)?"

Yes, since he collected more points.

I fail to understand why Topalov gets so much special consideration. He should have no special standing and should be treated like any other top player like Ivanchuck or Leko or Moro. He doesn't hold any title, and is not ranked no 1 in the world. It is preposterous that he directly gets to play the winner of the FIDE tournament, and then the winner of the Anand-Kramnik match! WHAT?

Anand has to win the whole damn world championship to qualify for what is effectively a semi-final. Kramnik has to beat Topalov in a match to be in that semi-final. And Topalov is directly in the other semi-final... why? Because he is a "former champion"? Either you are the champion or not. Perhaps consideration can be given to no 1 world ranking. But there has nevern been a specail consideration for anybody else. There are half a dozen former champions, what about them? And will Anand and Kramnik be treated the same way when they lose their crown and be former champions (not to mention that they are already former champions, having held the title previously)? So they will be able to just play one match and challange the title holder?

Topalov has received grossly unfair advantage like nobody else.

Turbo, I agree completely. Topalov should be in the next world cup like any other top player. I also hope that FIDE doesn't take some of the also-rans from this Mexican tournament and seed them directly into a later part of the next cycle like they did after San Luis.


Regarding seeding, I believe they said Svidler would be only if Grischuk refuses.

I hadn't thought about seeding until your mentioning it. I could see why FIDE might with GM Gelfand, but (certainly nothing against him) I hope no seeding takes place.

>I fail to understand why Topalov gets so much special consideration.>

Who has ever understood Krisan-FIDE chains of reason ? But as long as he pays he can even ask for the players playing naked in a water-pool, it is not mandatory..it is only if you want the money.

Graeme,there is no Khalifman heire,it was Botvinnik who started that heire in 1948.After the Alekhine death Fide could fix the tradition by 1. Returning the title to Euwe who was the previous champion before Alekhine or 2.Creating a tournament of matches instead a pentarobin tournament where some players could prearrange results to benefit determined player.Botvinnik became -classical- until his first victory against Smyslov in his first -famous- rematch.
I still think Fide should try the format tournament of matches that is an expanded version of the knock-out format but instead 2 games match they can use 8 or 10 games match,and instead 128 players they can reduce the number to 32 or 16 players creating stages of 8th finals,4th finals,semifinals and one superfinal.This format is excellent and after all the champion can be produced in a match play defeating 3 or 4 high ranking players in a row to become the best match player of the world.You can not be the best just because you beat a single reigning champion in a match,you need prove a real superiority in a match play over another players in a determined period or cycle.Nobody had doubts about Fischer being an authentic classic match champion,he bulldozed Taimanov,Larsen,Petrosian,Spassky in a match play one by one in a determined period.The only reason why I refuse the benefit of wait a challenger is because every cycle has to be equal of chances for every player.I also refuse the benefit of -retain- the title just because a tied result.The champion has to show he is better than his opponent and not he is not worse than him.The tournament of matches still keep the flavour and the tradition of the classical chess,after all everything is decided in match play,but no special benefits for any determined player.So match purists try to see the reality that still we need changes in the Fide system.Kramnik belongs to the prehistoric era of champions Steinitz-Botvinnik,no qualifiers just a bag of candies to -challenge- and -provoke- the champion.

Fighting Chess!: No need for any "Sofia Rules" here....% of the 10 games were decisive, while the shortest game lasted over 50 moves.It looks like Rybka needs a bit of retooling, if Rajlich wants to regain the mantle of strongest chessplaying entity.


ZAPPA - RYBKA 1/2 73 C92 Ruy Lopez Chigorin
RYBKA - ZAPPA 1-0 110 C99 Ruy Lopez Chigorin
ZAPPA - RYBKA 1-0 66 C91 Ruy Lopez
RYBKA - ZAPPA 0-1 180 C92 Ruy Lopez Chigorin
ZAPPA - RYBKA 1-0 129 B52 Sicilian Rossolimo
RYBKA - ZAPPA 1/2 52 C92 Ruy Lopez Chigorin
ZAPPA - RYBKA 1/2 66 B74 Sicilian Dragon
RYBKA - ZAPPA 1-0 71 C88 Ruy Lopez Closed
ZAPPA - RYBKA 1/2 84 B17 Caro Kann
RYBKA - ZAPPA 1/2 59 A30 English Symmetrical

Clash of the Computer Titans Mexico City MEX (MEX), 20-27 ix 2007
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
ZAPPA = 0 1 1 1 = = 0 = = 5.5
RYBKA = 1 0 0 0 = = 1 = = 4.5

"Does Svidler (offically 5th)really deserve to finish above Morozevich (6th)"

LOL. Where do you guys come up with this crap?

Anand is the world chess champion otb.The correspondence world chess champion is Joop Van Oosterom (ICCF). However it has been suggested that the strongest cc player of all time was none other than ....Garry Kasparov! Victor Savinov recently posted Garrys cc record as an awesome 56 wins and 2 draws out of 58 cc games from the periods 1979-82 and 1992-8. MIG can you confim this? According to Victor Savinov there is no record of these cc games. If this is true would GK ever publish them - would make a great book!

>Anand is the world chess champion otb.The correspondence world chess champion is Joop Van Oosterom (ICCF).However it has been..>

You still don't get it after all these days, Anand is not a mere WCh, that is Kramnik,

Anand is the UNDISPUTED-world chess champion.

There was some good chess in Mexico.

Anand had a superb performance and won handily.

"World Champion"? If you like. It's not clear to me how this tournament was more decisive than Linares or Corus; there are two or three supertournaments every year that draw this level of competiton.

So, rather than join in the lofty "Is! Isn't! Is! Isn't!" debate, I'll ask a simple question:

There's a title of some kind that is held by a great grandmaster, that he keeps until he loses it in a match. What do we call this title? It used to be "World Champion," but if everyone wants to repurpose that for a simple tournament winner, I guess I'm OK with it. But then we need another name for the title Kramnik will risk against Anand in 2008.

I propose "World Champion," but I'm open to suggestions.

Kramnik a mere World Champion? An interesting thought. Beating one of the strongest players of all time to claim the title, sucessfully defending it 2 times. That is more than can be said from Euwe, Smyslov, Tal, Petrosian, Spassky and Fischer. Other "mere World Champions"?

As for being the "undisputed" world chess champion, I wonder what a poll among chess fans would say. I think more would say Kramnik was the undisputed champion (the week before Anand won) than that Anand is the undisputed champion now. There are more match enthousiasts than Kramnik-haters.

My opinion? Well, if the world champion plays in the world championship, does not win, confirms afterwards that the winner is the new world champion - who am I to disagree?

If a tournament could determine the world champion, then the champion would never lose in any tournament... simply, a false idea. The only way to see who is better is a match.
This tournament showed why tournament play is not a viable method for determining a champion. Many listless draws and, once players are out of the running, very little incentive to play hard for a win... especially, against the two real candidates, Kramnik and Anand... although, I thought Leko did play hard.

Oscar: But then we need another name for the title Kramnik will risk against Anand in 2008.



Mark: once players are out of the running, very little incentive to play hard for a win...

That's nonsense. Mexico 2007 proved that at all rounds most
participants played as well as their abilities permitted. Whether to
fight for the top, or to be off the bottom, or for reputation,

...especially, against the two real candidates, Kramnik and Anand...

Especially untrue! Just ask Kramnik.



We know what you look like. We are all aware that that is your picture in the dictionary next to the word monotonous. Ugly picture.

Why can't I find the amounts of the prizes for the Mexico City players? Just curious. Golf, tennis, auto racing, in fact every professional sport makes a big deal out of the payday. I can't find any breakdown for the Mexico City championship.

>> Why can't I find the amounts of the prizes for the Mexico City players? <<

In a posting above I had given the link to TWIC where this was mentioned. Anyways, here it is, copied from there:

"The prize fund was $1.3 million of which Anand took home $390,000. The prize distribution was 1st: $390,000 2nd $260,000 3rd $182,000 4th $130,000 5th $104,000 6th $91,000 7th $78,000 8th $65,000"

@ John C

1st place: $390,000
2nd place: $260,000
3rd place: $182,000
4th place: $130,000
5th place: $104,000
6th place: $91,000
7th place: $78,000
8th place: 65,000

Total: $1,300,000

Got this from Susan Polgar's blog

Ocelot I will tell where I cam up with the "crap" that Svidler doesn't deserve to finish ahead of Morozevich.

Svidler is lazy doesn't even try play for a win and takes short draws and collects his pay cheque. Moro tries hard to win in every game.

Svidler had 7 draws of less than 30 moves. Moro on the other hand had 1 draw less than 30 moves.


They don't give style points in chess. Maybe you should follow platform diving or figure skating.

Who says chess is boring!

Total Games 56
Draws 36 64%
Wins White 18 32%
Wins Black 2 4%

Total Draws 36
< 20 moves 1 3%
21 -30 moves 19 53%
31 - 40 moves 2 6%
41 - 50 moves 7 19%
51 or more moves 7 19%

"Svidler had 7 draws of less than 30 moves. Moro on the other hand had 1 draw less than 30 moves."

Interesting. And Anand had 6 draws in less than 23 moves. Perhaps we should just crown Morozevich as the winner of the whole tournament.

Tech26 and lovely - Thanks for posting the prize fund breakdown! Google and ASK (and FIDE and chessmexico) didn't help me find it - the best answers still come from humans. Plus, Rybka still hasn't weighed in on the whole match/tournament who's on first issue.

John C

Twitter Updates

    Follow me on Twitter



    About this Entry

    This page contains a single entry by Mig published on September 30, 2007 3:11 AM.

    Coronation Day (Tiebreaks, Shmybreaks) was the previous entry in this blog.

    ¿Donde Esta Kirsan? is the next entry in this blog.

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