FIDE President Kirsan Ilyumzhinov accepted the proposal of the Chief Arbiter of the World Chess Championship Match Topalov-Kramnik Mr. Geurt Gijssen to postpone the Game of today. In his Letter to the players, the FIDE President calls the players to discuss the actual situation and solve the problems.
Chess Daily News from Susan Polgar
Finally a wise decision!
Kirsan and FIDE are in a very bad situation. They can save the match only by admitting to have made bad decisions. Are they ready for it?
I can imagine that there is a reasonable solution to the disagreement of playing conditions but I can’t imagine what could be a reasonable solution to the problem of the point Topalov won in “game” 5. Topalov has good grounds to insist keeping it. On the other hand Kramnik has at least equally good grounds to claim a new game.
“Kirsan and FIDE are in a very bad situation.”
Kramnik and Topalov are in a very bad situation.
I do not see a single mistake made by FIDE’s president regarding this latest crisis. Maybe he will make a mistake, maybe he has made many in other subjects. But this crisis is to be blamed on Topalov’s delay of more than 2 hours in presenting the complaint, Kramnik’s refusal to play without a toiled and the Arbiters error in accepting the complaint after 2 hours.
FIDE’s error, IMO, was having bathrooms with a window.
Of course it is a good idea to delay game 6; but why the heck did Gijssen not impose this delay before the start of game 5??
Now it is too little too late.
The moment Gijssen decided to start Kramnik’s clock for game 5, the rest of this match was likely to be aborted.
*** WHY IS ARBITER’S GAME 5 DECISION GOING UNQUESTIONED? ***
In these web blogs almost nothing is being questioned about the crucial choices made by the arbiter.
I would like more info before arriving at judgment for myself on this matter. But the questions need to be raised. It is not disrespectful to the arbiter to discuss and consider his crucial decisions.
An argument can be made that Gijssen should never have started the clock for game 5. Instead Gijssen should have removed the clock from the playing room. Yes this was an option open to Gijssen as the arbiter, for consider…
According to 2003 “Fifth” edition of the USCF Official Rules of Chess book, the FIDE Laws of Chess say…
[Preface, page 316] “The Laws of Chess cannot cover all possible situations that may arise during a game, nor can they regulate all administrative questions. … The Laws assume that arbiters have the competence, sound judgment, and absolute objectivity.”
[13.2, page 339] “The arbiter shall act in the best interest of the competition. He should ensure that a good playing environment is maintained and that the players are not disturbed.”
Was Gijssen’s decision to start Kramnik’s clock really “in the best interest of the competition”? On the surface at least, it seems the opposite is true.
Starting the game 5 clock was the most harmful thing that could have been done to this WCC competition.
Kramnik was deeply disturbed by the environment change, as Gijssen obviously knew.
Had Gijssen simply taken away the clock and refused to start game 5 until a settlement could be negotiated, the chess world would not have to suffer this mess which has now escalated beyond repair.
*** ONE CRUMMY COMPROMISE IDEA ***
Just a quick thought for a compromise:
Could Topalov be given 1/2 point in exchange for agreeing to replay game 5?
Gene Milener
http://CastleLong.com/