| Is Kramnik back in top form? | |
| Yes, he is back at his peak form | |
| Not quite, but he is near his best | |
| No, his best was when he beat Kasparov | |
| He is even better than before | |
| pollcode.com free polls | |
Chess Daily News from Susan Polgar
- About Us
- Chess Improvement
- Chess Puzzles
- Chess Research
- College Chess
- General News
- Home
- Major Tournaments
- News
- Polgar Events
- Privacy Policy
- Scholastic Chess
- SPICE / Webster
- Susan’s Personal Blog
- Track your order
- USA Chess
- Videos
- Women’s Chess
- Contact Us
- Daily News
- My Account
- Terms & Conditions
- Privacy Policy
Kramnik is best. He’s just unlucky against Anand.
The question that should be asked is there anyone who beat Kramnik for the World Championship with Kramnik as the defending Champion? Well, well we see the big problem here now and the illigtimacy that plagues chess.
Let us stop these insinuations about the legitamacy of the World Champion’s title. Kramnik’s victory over Topalov should have put all that to rest. Anand is the World Champion and a worthy one. Kramnik was the World Champion and might be again but , for now, it is Anand.
How come “Who could possibly make such a sweeping judgement from just 5 games???” isn’t one of the choices?
The question that should be asked is there anyone who beat Kramnik for the World Championship with Kramnik as the defending Champion? Well, well we see the big problem here now and the illigtimacy that plagues chess.
LOL. That’s too funny. The illegitimacy (spelling) problem is history. Your argument is self contradictory, and requires arguing that he both was and wasn’t champion at the same time. If we agree on the common sense notion that he either was or he wasn’t, but not both, then the problem disappears.
1) If Kramnik was world champion during his match with Anand, then yes, he lost a world championship match as champion and so is not champion now.
2) If Kramnik was not world champion when he played Anand, then again, he is not world champion now.
We get the same answer both ways.
Huh? Who is this “Kramnik”?
I am hoping you are in a better position to say than I am.
Anon: 4:02:00 PM
I am liking your logic. Therefore we should not call Anand the World Champion, either, as he never won the Championship in a Match against a sitting World Champion. If Kramnik was not the recognized World Champion so Anand should not be either. If Kramnik was the incogneato World Champion then Anand should be called the Incogneato World Champion also not the World Champion.
Whoever this Kramnik worshipper is has lost all sense of thinking. The chess world has moved on and the winner of the match between Anand and Kramnik was to be crowned World Champion. Anand won and so he is the WC. Imagine like it is the first ever world championship.
If Kramnik is that good he should prove it by beating Anand in a match setting. Till such time learn to live with the reality that Anand is THE WORLD CHAMPION.
as usual kramnik fans do not see any sense, they are totally blind. kramnik has proved to be flash in the pan and is one of the weekest world champions. Anand has beaten him mercilessly and was using just him as a foot ball. the same so called kramnik, who defeated the invincible kasparov, now lost pathetically to anand, then we do ask who is better, it is simply proved, kramnik is far far below anand, infact we should not compare these two.
These Ruski’s just can’t handle it. Their old domination of the World chess championships is history. Of course Bobby punctured them nice and proper.Sure there will again be a Russian (Ukrainian,Armenian etc etc) World Champion in the future,once Carlsen decides enough is enough!
But for now Anand reigns!
Perhaps Anand might find it difficult to handle the Topailov/Rybka combination next year!
“Kramnik is best.He’s just unlucky against Anand.:
Sure,when he wins he is God & when he loses he is unlucky!
The whole notion of World Chess Champion is so a couple of old guy can rake in lots of money while ‘organizing’ the whole cycle, hoping to convince the people who have to cough up the money for their houses that what they do is ‘absolutely vital to the survival of chess as a sport’. Ratings and tournaments is what it’s all about!
Anon’s reasoning is plain silly, but even if we take his primary asumption that “you can only lose the title by losing a title match as the defending champion”, Kramnik is still not the world champion. By that (silly) reasoning he never was a world champion, same as Kasparov and Karpov before him!
By that stupid logic, Fischer was champion from 1972 onwards. Then when he was already terminally ill there was a tournament with all best players on the world (minus Topalov) and the winner was who? You guessed it – it was Anand, with Kramnik coming in 2nd. Then Fischer died and the two “best players” played a match for the title, which Anand clearly won.
Everything I wrote is beyond stupid, but you can twist it every way you like, you still get the same answer: ANAND IS WORLD CHAMPION!
For everyone’s information, Kramnik was never a legitimate challenger of Kasparov. In 1998 Alexei Shirov was invited to play a match against Kramnik to determine Kasparov’s challenger. Shirov defeated Kramnik with two wins, no losses, and seven draws, but Kasparov played Kramnik instead in 2000.