This is a press release by the Bulgaria Chess Federation, published by our friends at chessbase.com
Position of the Bulgarian Chess Federation
The forthcoming tournament for world championship in Mexico starting on 11th September 2007 represents the end of one cycle that extends over the period after the tournament in San Luis (Argentina). As it is well known, Veselin Topalov became World Champion there. Considering the great interest in the world he accepted to play a match with Vladimir Kramnik in Elista even though he was not obliged to do so. Moreover, Veselin Topalov agreed that the loser of that match would not be allowed to play in Mexico because, according to FIDE regulations, adopted on 10th January 2006, every former World Champion or a chess-player with a coefficient over 2700 could, under certain conditions, challenge the World Champion to a match.
On the basis of this position, the Bulgarian party asked for a new match for the world title and provided the required amount of two million US dollars for the purpose. The arguments FIDE submitted against playing a match for the world title, for which all requirements were met, were not convincing. Arguments of the kind that the bank guarantees were from a bank FIDE doesn’t recognize and later on that the time was short for organizing and performing such a match demonstrated that FIDE would compromise its own decisions lead by interests that may differ from those of chess. In order to substantiate its position, in the meantime FIDE approved a new system for electing the World Champion, which goes contrary to the rules, because the regulations may not be modified within one cycle. In this way, Veselin Topalov was definitely deprived of the possibility to take part in the competitions for the world title.
A new system for organizing the world championships should be adopted only after a thorough discussion with the participation of a maximum number of national federations; this new system has to be voted on a FIDE congress and to come into effect during the following cycle. Any other action and decision is a breach of democracy, it is intended to favor certain interests and doesn’t contribute to the development of the chess game.
The Bulgarian Chess Federation believes that with its last actions FIDE shows a bias attitude toward Veselin Topalov – one of the strongest chess players in the world. Depriving him of the possibility to participate in the competitions for world championship substantiates this belief.
Since Veselin Topalov was not allowed to play with V. Kramnik in 2007, it is most evident that he should be permitted to take part in the World Championship tournament in Mexico. In this way an injustice will be remedied – at least in part – and FIDE will prove that the world chess interests are its priority and that the World Champion should be elected in a competition between the best chess players in the world. Any argumentation for the non-admission of V. Topalov is deprived of any logic. The second, the third and the forth players from St. Louis will play there but the first one will not! The second in the world ranking list, the chess player who won seven super-tournaments during the last two years will not be allowed to play there! Why? Only because FIDE has changed its system in the meantime?!
We suggest a FIDE resolution is passed for nine participants to play in the tournament in Mexico. The organizers have no objections and they will be happy because Veselin Topalov is very popular not only in Mexico but in the whole of Latin America as well.
29 May 2007, Sofia
BULGARIAN CHESS FEDERATION
Stefan Sergiev, PhD.
President
Topalov is stewing in his own juices, and playing the victim. If he wanted to play in Mexico City, he should not have, overconfidently, agreed that the loser of Elista should be out of Mexico City.
And if he wanted a rematch before Mexico City, he should not have ducked the first match as long as he did. The funding was there for a unification match right after San Luis. Topalov expressed initial interest:
http://chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=2684
Then reversed himself a week later:
http://chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=2693
and spent the next 6 months hiding from Kramnik. Had he had a little more courage at the beginning, the first match could have been played in April 2006, leaving plenty of time for a second match before Mexico City. As a result of his evasion tactics, they ended up playing in October for a half million dollars less than was originally available.
Topalov dug the pit, now he’s lying in it. If his signed word means anything at all, he’s out of Mexico City.
This can not come to pass.
Firstly, Topalov signed a contract to the effect that he should be excluded should he lose to Kramnik. He has no basis with which to say now that the conract was unfair.
Secondly, why should he simply be granted a spot? He would have to qualify through the candidates matches and that is too late.
I say good riddance. Topalov is a black mark upon the good game of chess.
Topalov and Kramnik signed a legally binding contract where the loser of the match between them would not be able to participate in the rest of this world championship cycle.
Is Topalov now saying that this contract should not stand? Bizarre…anyone else think this has the stink of Danailov?
And if what I heard is correct, Topalov’s camp is the side that pushed this clause! As the first post said, he’s stewing in his own juices. Live with it and stop whining.
In the contract the signed was also clear that the loser (provided he had above 2700) could challenge again the champion if he found the money.
Topalov did and he was refused.
Also, by the regulations of FIDE the challenger (2700 or above) has to find money. Then the loser of the match takes the position of the challenger in the new circle.
The ONLY reason Topalov is not playing is because Kramnik “didn’t bother” to say that he wants to play in the new circle (candidates match) before the Elista match. This was not up to Topalov.. If he had then the loser of the match (however that would be) would come in the candidate’s matches…
Having said all this, I still find it unlikely and a bit unfair to get a direct position at Mexico. But I also find unfair that Kramnik will get a match if he loses…
It is a shame Topalov is barred from playing in the WC Candidates matches. He does deserve it, after all. He’s the second highest-rated player in the world right now! Elista was a shame, but so was that ridiculous contract they had to sign.
To use a boxing analogy: imagine if, after the Ali vs. Frazier fight(which Frazier won), Ali was not granted a rematch (thankfully he was, and he won). This would have been absurd. After all, just because a contender has one bad day (or match) does not mean he should be cast aside.
This contract was basically a display of machismo, and all it ended up doing was to prevent a dynamic, crowd-pleasing chess artist from contributing more exciting games to the chess world.
P.S. I do not approve of Topalov’s actions during his match with Kramnik, but there is no denying that Topalov is a talented player who deserves another shot at the title. As far as anyone is concerned, he never cheated either. If it hasn’t been proven, he deserves the benefit of the doubt. Besides, all the (negative)publicity he has received lately would certainly scare him out of cheating in the future.
James L.
From purely finding the best chessplayer, as normally is the aim of a World Championship, excluding Topalov is ridiculous. The contract was ridiculous and bad for chess. It would be a good contract to break from a purely chessic point of view. The system should not be so winny lilly, with everybody but the top placed player of San Luis still in the cycle. Absurd.
I do not see anywhere that Topalov himself is ‘demanding’ to play at Elista. As far as I can see this letter comes from the Bulgarian Chess Federation (BCF).
Of course, there is a link between the two but I do not think Topalov -or Danailov in that respect- is in charge of the BCF.
I do agree that Topalov signed a contract and is legally binded to obey. Next time he will be able to participate as he most likely will.
Gr.
Roel
>>It is a shame Topalov is barred from playing in the WC Candidates matches.>>
That’s a ridiculous statement. For one thing, he doesn’t even *want* to play in the Candidates Matches. He wants to vault past them and get a free spot in Mexico, despite having been eliminated over the board. It would be kind of like Anand getting eliminated in one round of the World Cup, and demanding to advance to the next round anyway on the grounds that he was such a good player. But neither Anand nor anyone else would be tacky enough to do such a thing. Only Danailov.
If he wants to earn another title shot, he needs to either play in the World Cup in November, or hope very hard that Kramnik wins Mexico and in so doing hands him a free title shot.
>>That’s a ridiculous statement. For one thing, he doesn’t even *want* to play in the Candidates Matches.>>
He may not want to play in the candidates matches, but he probably doesn’t want to be excluded from the cycle either. Why not compromise and say “Okay Topalov, you can play, but you need to work your way up by playing in the matches.” Anyway, it is too late for that now, as the matches have begun. Topalov got screwed, and apparently Ilyumzhinov has reaped all the benefits.
All of the Bulgarian arguments fall flat for the same reason: they’re criticizing things they already agreed to without complaint.
If you don’t like the rules, then you have to protest before the game. This should be common sense. You can’t just play and imagine you’re entitled to a do-over if you don’t like the results.
This is exactly the way they tried to short-change Anand out of the #1 spot. For years and years, they approved of rating Linares on the April List. Only when they didn’t like the results did it suddenly and retroactively become unfair.
It’s not just Topalov. Seems a lot of people in Bulgaria are doing their very best to give the country a bad name these days.
“To use a boxing analogy: imagine if, after the Ali vs. Frazier fight(which Frazier won), Ali was not granted a rematch (thankfully he was, and he won). This would have been absurd. After all, just because a contender has one bad day (or match) does not mean he should be cast aside.”
Eh…I think your memory may be failing you here James. Frazier beat Ali in Madison Square Garden in ’71 to retain the heavyweight crown. He then lost the title to George Forman in Kingston Jamaica in ’73. So when Ali fought him the second time he was no longer the Champ. Ali won the title in 74 from Forman (the Rumble in the Jungle Kinshasa Zaire).
I can understand Topalov’s frustration but FIDE seem unwilling to allow Mexico to become a candidates tournament by replacing Kramnik with Topa and allowing the winner to challenge VK for his WC. I dont think FIDE can really bend the rules just to allow Topa in. What about Mamedyarov, Radjabov, Ivanchuk, Navara etc none of whom is in the cycle but all of whom are rated higher than Gurevich, Malakov, Bareev, Rublevsky?
It seems to me that the old Zonal, Interzonal, Candidates matches followed by a long (min 24 slow game, WC retains in the event of a draw) WC match is the best way to do things. Everyone gets a shot (even I could win the WC – no laughing please!) and each player could only blame themselves if they lost.
I’m not just being nostalgic here. The above system worked really well until Fischer messed it up with his unlimited match leading to the 84/85 debacle.
Its funny but I can still remember some of the games from Baguio ’78, and the great KK matches. I think 6 games is too short for even the candidates matches – if you go behind you could find it impossible to catch up in such a short space of time. Look at J Polgar – in theory she should beat Bareev (and I still think she probably will) but in a 6 game match first strike is too important.
As to the prospect of deciding a WC match by BLITZ!!!! Don’t get me started – DISGRACE!
Sorry for the rant, I’ll be quiet now
>>It’s not just Topalov. Seems a lot of people in Bulgaria are doing their very best to give the country a bad name these days.
To slander and abuse a whole country anonymously is very bad indeed.
“Bulgaria: Let Topalov play in Mexico City
That is a silly request. How would it be even possible? Extending the field to 9 players would radically change the schedule, would add 16 extra games to play, so it is out of the question. Second possibility is that someone would voluntarily step aside and let Topalov play. Why would anyone do that?
Was this really some request from a reliable source? I have a hard time to believe it.
——————
On general principles I agree that the second best in the world should play. But that pesky contract he signed…..well… he singed it.
Worse yet, according to the current setup, either the winner of Mexico (if not Kramnik) plays Kramnik for the title, or if Kramnik wins, Topalov gets a free shot at the title against Kramnik.
In fact, Topalov would decrease his chances by playing in Mexico. Why? Simple. He would have to win Mexico to play Kramnik next year. If he loses and Kramnik wins, surely he could no longer claim that additional to playing in Mexico, he would still get a crack at Kramnik in 2008. But then, who would Kramnik play against if he wins?
So, no matter from what angle I am looking at all this, Topalov shouldn’t play in Mexico, if for no other reason, that would further mess up the otherwise shaky turnover to the planned new system.
He should play from some purist standpoint, but he should not play from all practical standpoints.
Gabor
>>
That is a silly request. How would it be even possible? Extending the field to 9 players would radically change the schedule, would add 16 extra games to play, so it is out of the question.
>>
From an *organizational* standpoint, it’s similar to Reshevsky and the 1948 US Championship.
Reshevsky wasn’t eliminated, he simply refused to play because of a disagreement over appearance fees, so the situations are dissimilar in that respect.
But after Ulvestad was selected to replace him, Reshevsky changed his mind and announced that he would play after all, with no appearance fee. By that time it was too late. Putting him in would have meant adding another round to the tournament, getting hotel accommodations for all the players for an extra day or two, shuffling all the travel arrangements. In short, it didn’t happen.
>>
Second possibility is that someone would voluntarily step aside and let Topalov play. Why would anyone do that?
>>
To find a parallel there, we can look to the Fischer 1970 situation. Fischer was eliminated from the 1970 Interzonal, but Benko stepped aside and gave him his place.
Why would Benko do that? Well, apart from the desire to have an American World Champion, there was also the fact that the USCF had once done a similar favor for him. Benko had failed to qualify for the 1964 Interzonal, but Bisguier didn’t particularly want his slot, so a Benko-Bisguier match was arranged, with the Interzonal shot up for grabs as the prize. Benko went to Amsterdam, Bisguier didn’t.
So it’s possible that through a series of calling in of favors, somebody might voluntarily give up their spot. But there’s one thing that isn’t as well remembered about that incident. It wasn’t just Benko handing his spot to Fischer. All the other guys who had played in the 1969 US Championship also had to step aside. with Benko dropping out, the spot defaulted to Lombardy next, as the next highest finisher in the Zonal. He had to also say that he didn’t want it, as did also Evans, Zuckerman, Mednis, the Byrne brothers, Bisguier, Saidy, and Burger. Only after all those people had stepped aside, could the USCF exercise its discretionary powers and give the spot to Fischer.
So if, say, Morozevich dropped out of Mexico City, the spot wouldn’t just jump to Topalov automatically. It would legitimately belong to one of the losers in the Candidates.
This is similar to what happened in 1977. Fischer was seeded into the Candidates as the ex-World Champion, but didn’t play. The spot went to the highest finisher from the last Candidates. Korchnoi, loser of the final, was already seeded. Next in line were the losers of the semi-finals; Petrosian and Spassky. Since Petrosian had already qualified from the next interzonal, and Spassky hadn’t, Fischer’s spot went to Spassky. If Spassky had refused, it would have gone next to one of the Quarterfinal losers who hadn’t already qualified (Robert Byrne being the only one).
So, only if all of the losing Candidates stepped aside, could the spot be given to Topalov. Very unlikely.
Slightly more likely might be the possibility of Topalov challenging someone to a match (similar to the Benko-Bisguier match) to try to win their spot from them. If he could come up with enough money, someone might possibly be willing to take the risk.
I would say that there is something in the Bulgarian letter. Players who took places 2,3 and 4 in San Louis got seeded in Mexico without any further obligations. Also, FIDE promised the right to rechallenge if specified money are guaranteed, and failed to.
Reasonable compromise could be to add Topalov as 9th player in Mexico, but at the same time revoke his right to play match against Kramnik if Kramnik wins.
>>
I would say that there is something in the Bulgarian letter. Players who took places 2,3 and 4 in San Louis got seeded in Mexico without any further obligations.
>>
All the people who played in San Luis knew that the winner was contractually required to play a Unification Match with Kramnik.
Granted, at the time there seemed to be a significant possibility that FIDE would default on the Prague Agreement and blow the whole thing off, but that was never a certainty.
The idea that the loser should be out of the cycle entirely does seem harsh, but my recollection is that that rule was added at Danailov’s own behest. He was so confident of victory that he wanted to knock Kramnik out of the cycle entirely with a Topalov victory. It would have been more reasonable to have both players guaranteed a spot in Mexico no matter what, but at the time, Team Topalov didn’t want that.
>>
Also, FIDE promised the right to rechallenge if specified money are guaranteed, and failed to.
>>
They never promised anyone a rematch within 3 months. Nobody’s ever gotten a rematch that quickly. Usually they take place a year later.
The 6 month rule is also something added last year. If you’ll recall, the original plan was for the Topalov-Radjabov match to take place in April 2007 (i.e. within 6 months of Mexico City).
>>
Reasonable compromise could be to add Topalov as 9th player in Mexico, but at the same time revoke his right to play match against Kramnik if Kramnik wins.
>>
If Kramnik agreed to that, it might work, but it doesn’t seem likely.
It’s more likely that he’d agree to give up his own spot to Topalov in exchange for turning Mexico into a Candidates Tournament, and deciding the world championship with a match, the way it should be done, but the problem with that is the resistance that the Mexico City organizers would put up. They signed for a championship tournament, not a Candidates Tournament.
Now, a possible compromise might be to re-split the titles temporarily, back into FIDE and Classical titles, and decide the FIDE title only at Mexico, with the winner of that title obligated to re-unify the titles later in a match with Kramnik. Mexico couldn’t complain about that, since they only contracted for a tournament for the FIDE championship, not the Unified Title (which FIDE didn’t control when the contracts were signed). this would require Kramnik to temporarily give up his claim on the FIDE half of the title in exchange for bypassing Mexico, but it would probably make the most people happy.
First of all, the contracts were signed BEFORE the Elista match with Kramnik. The loser of that match would NOT participate in Mexico 2007.
So there’s no changing that! He signed the contract!
Secondly, why play chess with 9 players? We have 4 boards already (8 players) so why insert a bye then? 9 players is uneven, u know?…
The format of 8 players is good! Keep this!
Topalov or his federation are now questioning the contract they signed earlier…
These guys are amazing…
There is NO way they can be included in Mexico! Please don’t try to put the chessworld on its head again! (cause that seems what they try to achieve)
Greets fro Belgium,
Theo
In my opinion Kramnik should not be participating in this farce! This is not a World Championship, it is a tournament sanctioned by FIDE calling itself World Championship. Topalov, Anand, Ponomariov, etc are not World Champion’s in chess in the same league as Kramnik Kasparov, Karpov, Fischer, etc. That being said, I feel Topalov should be playing in this tournament and the winner plays Kramnik a match for the World Championsip.
what do you mean anand isnt as good as karpov, kasparov or drawnik. anand is very clever and a great player. dont insult him like that. topalov is also a great player. the only way for topalov to enter mexico is to have drawnik drop out since the qualifying tournament has already started and how do you eliminate one of the four qualifiers.
Stupid contracts and silly excuses.
Let him play!
…silly rumor mongering, anyway
>>wolverine2121 said…
what do you mean anand isnt as good as karpov, kasparov or drawnik. anand is very clever and a great player. dont insult him like that.>>
Somebody has no sense of his own hypocrisy. But just to set you straight, making fun of somebody’s name is an insult. Saying that they’re not as good as Kasparov isn’t.
L. Antonov said…
To slander and abuse a whole country anonymously is very bad indeed. >>
Don’t be ridiculous, Lyudmil. None of the people who are making Bulgaria look bad are anonymous. Topalov isn’t anonymous. Danailov isn’t anonymous. Stefan Sergiev isn’t anonymous. N. Iordonov of Topsport, who left not only Kramnik, but also Anand and Aronian off the Top 10 list on his Oscar ballot, to try to improve Topalov’s chances, he’s not anonymous. Even you. Remember how bad you made the country look last fall when you pretty much ignored the issues and just personally attacked anyone who didn’t like Topalov? Every time you did it you made a special point of saying that you weren’t doing it anonymously, so it was okay.
Oh, you are the same mud-slinger, are you? So you are not anonymous anymore. Just continuing your evil campaign on a greater scale.
And yes, all those people, Topalov, Danailov, Sergiev, Iordanov, myself, have faces and positions to stand on.
You don’t. You hide in the slime and throw it at people (and now at countries) in the hope that no one can catch you.