Do you agree or disagree with Zhdanov’s analysis? Is it flawed logic or is he right on?
Saturday, Feb 09, 2013 | 01:23 AM IST
Devangshu Datta | New Delhi February 09, 2013 Last Updated at 00:16 IST
In the latest rating list, Carlsen is 2872 with Kramnik 2810, and then Aronian 2809. Anand is at no.6 with 2780 behind Radjabov (2793) and Karjakin (2786). Harikrishna has hit 2705 while Sasikiran is on 2677. In the women’s list, Humpy is no:3 with 2597 behind Judit Polgar (2690) and Hou Yifan (2617). There are five other Indians in the top 100, namely Harika, Tania Sachdev, Mary Ann Gomes, Eesha Karavade, Vijayalakshmi.
Peter Zhdanov has also tried to estimate earnings in terms of prize money and appearance fees (ignoring endorsement income) in 2012. Chess appearance fees are rarely disclosed. The German Bundesliga and the Russian Team championships both pay handsomely, again at negotiable rates.
As Zhdanov points out, this system indicates an inability to attract clean high-end sponsorship where fees would have to be transparently disclosed. Anand and Gelfand top the list. Third is Carlsen, then Aronian, Karjakin, Caruana, Nakamura, Kramnik, Grischuk, and surprisingly, Dmitry Andrekin. Anand cleared over $2 million, while Andreikin is estimated to have crossed $150,000.
The structure is actually more transparent in opens where appearance fees aren’t paid. The strong Gibraltar Open saw four players tied for first with 8 points from 10 games. There was a rapid play off. Maxime Vachier Lagrave lost to Nigel Short and Sandipan Chanda (who gains 22 Elo for this result) lost to Nikita Vituigov. Vituigov then beat Short in a thriller where triple repetition occurred. But due to an anomaly in the rules, Short couldn’t claim. The tie for 5-13 included Ivanchuk, Adams, Navarra and also included Zhao Xue, who held Ivanchuk in the last round to win the women’s prize.
Source: http://www.business-standard.com
His logic is completely flawed.