When you have children, you always teach your children to look at both sides of the street before crossing the intersection. It is the same in chess. You should always look at both the opponent’s plan as well as your own plan. Otherwise, you cannot get the whole picture.
I will explain my opinion about this mess one last time and then I will move on. Please do not put words in my mouth and please do not assume. You are more than welcome to agree or disagree with me. That is what that makes things exciting and that is why I allow people to blog freely. But there is no room for rude and detestable comments toward me or any other blogger. If this continues, I will have no choice but to start deleting obnoxious posts. We have kids following this blog and there is no room for this.
As I emphatically stated many times before, I have no favorite. I am not rooting for either player. I have no stake in this match at all. I just want to see good fighting chess and I would like to see the World Championship title unified after 13 long years. Enough damages have been done to chess and this title for too long already!
My goal is to promote the game I love in a professional and dignified manner. That is why I devote many hours every day to bring you the news, commentaries, puzzles, reports, advices, etc. for free. I even refuse to have commercial links on this blog because I want it to be purely about this great game.
Now let’s talk about what happened. I know people from both Kramnik and Topalov’s camp. I know many good friends of both Kramnik and Topalov. In fact, I have known both of them for a long time. The stories I heard from both sides are 180 degrees from each other. Both sides really believe in their positions. So who is lying? Who is telling the truth?
I looked at the actions from both sides. This is what I see. It didn’t start here. I see the mess starting out right after San Luis. Somebody made wild accusations of Topalov. Danailov would not sit still and allow his client to be unfairly attacked. So he fired back and as we all know, Danailov can really fire back!
Then came the issue of which title is more legitimate? FIDE World Champion or Classical World Champion? Why? Because it means that a great deal of money is one the line. Both titles have flaws. Some do not recognize one because it was a hand picked match with no qualifying system. Some do not recognize the other one because it was a tournament and not a match. Again, more division!
There was a lot of posturing going on between the two camps as well as FIDE. That did not help. Many things were said and they were obviously not forgotten. So the bad blood grew deeper. Offers were made and rejected. Things went up and down like the tides. And finally came the World Championship match in Elista! Everything is at stake! Both sides wanted to gain every possible little advantage!
As history has shown us, there were often “incidents” and “tactics” to gain that edge during World Championship matches. It could be trying to annoy your opponent to trying to psych yourself up. Some players need to be angry to play the best chess (the perfect example would be John McEnroe or Jimmy Connors in tennis). Some need to be totally calmed and relaxed to play good chess.
I am not in Elista. I do not know each and every little detail. I know what my sources are telling me and they are so contrasting.
That is why I cannot and will not pass judgment or take sides unless I know the full facts. Below are some of the points that I believe contributed to the whole fiasco:
1. It was a blunder for Topalov to accept to play the match in Elista, a bad move. It used to be that World Championship Matches are supposed to be played in neutral countries.
2. I think it was a blunder for Kramnik to sign this contract as it was written. I do not know why he would sign a contract with the following provisions if he feels that FIDE is on Topalov’s side and he would not get fair justice, especially when Topalov is the FIDE World Champion.
3. 17. 1 The written decision of the Appeals Committee arising from any dispute in respect of these regulations shall be final.
3. 23. 1 At any time in the course of the application of these regulations, any grounds that are not covered or any unforeseen event shall be referred to the Presidential Board or the President of FIDE, for final decision.
3. It was wrong for the appeals committee to accept the protest if it was filed late (according to Kramnik).
4. It was wrong for the appeals committee to make a decision without consulting Kramnik (according to Kramnik).
5. The tone and language of Danailov’s letters went too far. It was totally unprofessional. The most outrageous point was about the refusal to shake hands.
6. Kramnik could have immediately offered to have the other team inspect his restroom to avoid any possible doubt. A better explanation could have been given.
7. Carsten Hensel should not have demanded for an apology from Danailov and left the issue of no handshake alone. There was no need to get into this war of words while Kramnik was leading 3-1. He should have let the world make judgment on Danailov. There was no need to insist on this.
8. Topalov should have salvaged the mess by insisting on continuing the match with the 3-1 score after the bathroom issue was resolved. This would have been the honorable and right thing to do.
The professional chess community is very small. Many of us know each other very well. I have been in chess for over 30 years. I have quite a few good friends. Sometimes we work with one person and this person may later work with our future opponents. It happens.
I looked at the information provided to me by some of these people. These were not things I read somewhere else. How would I know who is right or who is wrong? In this case, it was he said, he said. Both sides believe they were right. I do not want to contribute to this mess. But when I read the information, I personally believe that if all sides would have had mutual respect for each other and everyone would have remained calm and cool, this mess would not have escalated this far. It is very unfortunate that things have gone so badly.
For those of you who want me to hunt for Topalov or Kramnik’s head, I cannot do that. The sport I love has suffered too much already for too many years. I do not believe in these unprofessional open letters pointing fingers at each other. I believe in professionals sitting down and discussing, debating and resolving issues in a professional manner.
I have been called every name in the book because I choose to be above it. I have been insulted countless times because I do not believe in the “gotcha” method. If you do not like what I stand for then you have choice not to read what I have to say.
I spend hours and hours every day communicating with the fans because I believe this is sorely needed in this sport. I do not get pay for this. Can you name another chess professional who make this kind of commitment every single day without getting paid a penny for it? But because there is such a gap between the professionals and the fans, I want to close that gap. As the saying in the movie “Field of Dreams” goes: “”If you build it, he will come!”
I cannot make all my colleagues to what I do. But if I believe in what I do, I will take the lead and I can only hope that others will follow. Since I started this blog, many other titled players have started their own blogs. That is what I want to see. I want to see professionals doing things to help chess. Without the fans, there would be no professional players. And therefore don’t complain about no money in chess if you are not willing to do things to help popularize this game.
The chess world waited 13 years to unify the title. Let people root for which ever player they want! I want to see the best player win. I will sit back and enjoy the next six games. I hope you will too.
And by the way, if you want to see the TV clip of the beginning of game 6 courtesy of Dutch TV, click here.
You have no reason to offer an explanation, but thank you anyway for an excellent one!
BTW,Garry had a great Letter to the Editor in the Wall Street Journal today. I only have access to the paper edition. Needless to say he is not impressed with the leadership in Chess these days.
“Then came the issue of which title is more legitimate? FIDE World Champion or Classical World Champion?”
Quite so. For example, Lasker, Capablanca, Alekine, Tal, Fischer, Kasparov, Kramnik.
Or Alexander Khalifman, Ruslan Ponomariov, Rustam Kasimdzhanov, Veselin Topalov.
How hard to decide.
Yep, and thanks for your work on the blog. You’ve become my favorite chess player because of your honest and even-handed manner.
wow tom chivers, what a great argument! nobody has put it in such a clear and concise way before, that really sheds some new light on the issue so we all thank you for your invaluable input that helped clear all confusion in the chess world for the past 13 years. I believe now that Tom Chivers has voiced his eloquent opinion, there is no need for a WC match, since his statement serves a lot more than a unification match to present us with the real undisputed chess crown.
Sincerely yours,
Anonymous
Ms. Polgar, thank you for your judicious and eloquent post. You are a cool head at a hot moment. many blessings to you. I will send GM Seirawan a copy of this link, if he had not seen it already. Thank you. David K Seattle
Susan,
You are doing more for chess than Topalov and Kramnik put together. This blog is the best site for chess on the web. Your hard work is appreciated and your fans value you.
I have agreed with your position in this from the beginning, because it is reasonable and reflects what I think myself.
You have explained yourself clearly every time. Only those who will not understand insist in twisting your words.
Keep going. Let’s move one.
Roberto
Dear Susan,
This is the most sensible post. Thank you for not swaying in the heat of the battle and remaining calm.
You’re a true ambassador of chess!
K.R.
Susan,
I want you to know that I deeply appreciate your efforts, whether on Playchess, or here on your blog (which is a primary news source for me regarding this match), and for the sport of chess in general.
Regards,
Gil E
Btw, are you as indecisive and uncertain on the chess board as you are about this issue? If so, you’ll never make your mark in positions when committal decisions must be made for and against men. Getting the whole picture is one thing; sometimes you must attack a part of it, however much it goes against the stereotype of peace-maker personality.
Susan, you will not enjoy this comment. I am sorry, but I really wish to speak out here.
So let me first ask you, when you write, “Both sides really believe in their positions”, how do you know? Even Karpov – totally deceptive as a person, writer and player, most poker faced of all faces – does not believe Topalov believes what he says in the slightest, at all. Why should I prefer your view over that of not only such an expert on this kind of thing, but the twelth World Chess Champion too?
Moving on. Re:
“I looked at actions from both sides. This is what I see. It didn’t start here. I see the mess starting out right after San Luis. Somebody made wild accusations of Topalov. Danailov would not sit still and allow his client to be unfairly attacked. So he fired back and as we all know, Danailov can really fire back!”
You mean Kramnik accused Topalov of cheating in San Luis? If so, you imply something libelous. Or else you imply Danailov is firing back totally randomly. Libelous again, just in a different direction.
What else?
“1. It was a blunder for Topalov to accept to play the match in Elista, a bad move. It used to be that World Championship Matches are supposed to be played in neutral countries.”
Quite. He chose to play in Elista where every official is in his favour. Now the whole world hates him, because he exploited this by lodging an appeal that lead to the conclusion that: ‘the initial position is a win for black if the opponent has strolled in and out of a toilet several times in the games before.’
Re:
“2. I think it was a blunder for Kramnik to sign this contract as it was written. I do not know why he would sign a contract with the following provisions if he feels that FIDE is on Topalov’s side and he would not get fair justice, especially when Topalov is the FIDE World Champion.”
I agree. Kramnik should tear up his contract and leave Elista, declare himself World Champion and seek future opponents under the umbrella of a different organisation. Almost everyone in the chess world would support him.
3 – obviously.
4 – so wrong this minor wrong hardly registers.
Re 6. You obviously have never had . . . ok that is obvious.
“7. Carsten Hensel” has been incredibly mild-mannered and restrained. If I were him, I would have punched Topalov in the computer chip by now, a lot, and hospitalisingly hard.
“8.” Quite.
Re: “Both sides believe they were right.”
In that case, Topalov believes Kramnik has been cheating. From which it follows, he should have alerted the security services secretly. That way they could have monitored Kramnik and then disqualified him. But he told the press at the same time as everyone else. When logic calls contradiction, perceiption sees a liar.
* * *
Susan, I would enjoy seeing you make a decision. Either Topalov believes the above and is mad, or Kramnik is a cheat, or Topalov is lying and therefore a coward trying to escape.
You must logically prefer one of these possibilities: (1) Topalov mad (2) Kramnik cheat (3) Topalov immoral. What else? There are no others.
Btw, re:
“I have been called every name in the book because I choose to be above it.”
Not so. You choose to be below it, by avoiding principled and logical argument. I don’t care whose side you are on, because anyway everyone is on Kramnik’s side, bar a few freaks and some nationality-blinded Bulgarians. Although, I am glad you still keep up a really good read of a blog.
BRAVO!!! Again, GM Susan Polgar for President of FIDE!
Your Grace and Dignity has raised the bar so high that NoOne will ever reach it with the gravity we have here.
A Thought from a Great Quote: “I cannot hear what you say because what you DO speaks so loudly.” The epitome of GM Susan Polgar. Let them that have ears listen. And to quote Sting: “If we could only listen as well as we hear.”
Vernon Howard said, “The Truer The Fewer.” How True. Susan, you are a Rare One InDeed.
Unify The Title? “Uni” means “One”. Hence my screen name “OneSong@aol.com” OneSong means UniVerse. Humpback Whales sing the same song. The first time a BILLION of us Being Humans sang OneSong was “All You Need Is Love”. Think about it. Our Royal Game deserves so much more respect.
Susan Polgar is our Voice in the Wilderness of Greed and Ego. Let us embrace the Eloquence and move forward as ONE. Not just in Chess, but as A HUMANITY. Otherwise, all of us parish for the Great Acronym: W.A.R.= We Are Right. Namaste My Fellow Chesstic Friends…
where was that picture taken at! the one with kasparov, did u know he was my idol and that when he retired chess became void.
ok first of all hi susan, im sorry if im not to enthusiastic but this schism has created a schism within me, i trully believe the was going to be a reunification for the chess title, but i forgot i was thinking utopically, and i suggest to y dear susy to remember we´re at the real world not at thomas more utopic world.
I hope that for some obnoxious anonymous we the true chess fans dont loose either like weve already lost with this match, cause even if it continues it wont be the same…
like a saying goes in war and love everything is allowed, even in a WCC its happening and y cant blame either side for trying it, whether on purpose or not, its part of a deal, a dirty one, but its not the first time its happened and i belive sadly enough that it wont be the last time eithr, its human nature to destroy its kindred men.
Susan is the true QUEEN of chess
i dontwant to add more dirt to the swamp but y cant help being dragged along it, its a universe with the law of attractions a…
if topalovs team accused kramnk of a cheater well they better be careful because in game one, after hearing the rumors of topalov cheating at s luis one could think it so (although i dont believe so, of them two actually), If topalov
is a fighter (in and out of the chessboard), why in game one being able to settle for a draw push along the game to far, and when in a moment he had the opportunity to push it more, he hesitated and lost the position and eventually the game,
By the way this happens to chess attackers, when thy see that their chess attack isnt fructificating they loose the nerve and get kramnik, but here is the erre, my humble opinion, y should risk it all or not play risky at all but sound and save like karpov, capablanca , etc
you cant pick a system and go against it (unless a real necessity, yeah im contradicting myself its hard to explain), but if u remember the game 1 and y analysis dear susy, apart from a coulple of obvious blunders, he started playing erraticly just like computers do, without logic, and only computers do that, specially on a difficult or lost position, and i y understand computers mind can detect it, that s what topalov did, how can u explain it! (thats why he was accsed of cheater by some), it was somewhere along the middle of fe line that topalov made the blunder, but his true blunder was betray his style in the middle of the game (gamble), he gambled for not drawing so why didnt he go for f2!!!!, it was his best shot, or gun like u say, he lost his nerve and lost.
whten i write i deviate my own thoughts sorry thats why im not a writer or a professional chess player either in that matter, je. im too pitiful.
Tom C — you know better than to blog when you are drunk. Sober up and start again in the morning.
Susan,
The only thing I will add to your commentary which I agree for the most part is this:
– Both Topalov and Kirsan tried to negotiate the score. Kramnik should have accepted a compromise such as play two extra games.
– It was a mistake on Kramnik’s part to not take that offer earlier.
But both Kirsan and Topalov tried.
It is still possible for both parties to negotiate the score and get an extended match as compromise.
Haha. Mike D, you are probably in this case right! Good night.
the loo issueÑ
last comment.
Ive already said that each party had the right to use all legal or illegal resources to outbeat their opponent in or out of the board, wheater nice or not, its a life issue, other wise, why didnt bush pardon the september attacks on world trade center.
chess is war not just a game, thats why girls drop out of chess sooner than boys, its kkill or die,
i know it should be a game only and a sport of gentleman, but if that was so, well lets wake up,, we not living in the victorian ages of the 18’19th century, our heritage is blood , war and hate.
too bad it has also contaminated the chess world, so unpopular as it is, this certainly doesnt help, but susy remember this, money is a big creaver and for money people do many unexpected things, if theirs fide rats along the comittee )someone said it=, dont u think they would smell profit even at the expenses of chess players like my respects to these two titans GM, and if monkeys like !·$$forgot his namne,, cant shine out of their own image, well they still other just to get noticed or be the protaonists, that happens everywhere, like in a soccer match, theirs referees who want to be noticed and wreck a match just fro that, its the same here,
money, fame, fortune , envy you name it, its a WCC not just an informal game at the park or with you friends, ive forgot pride aussi, this isnt just about reuniting the chess world thers more to it but my capacity wont let me see the whole picture, besides i belong to a totally different world of yours, i think ive scr.,, up in giving my opinions, maybe its not ethical, but since this is a chess forum in a way ive tried to give my humble opinion in the most gentlemen way i can and if ive offended anyone im trully sorry but
you cant please the whole world susy and chess fans, its a jungle out here, hope the rest of the match gives us at least another exiting game 2, alhtough im not sure whats going to happen, if i were kramnik or even topalov _(not anymore topy) i wouldnt be to happy to play on , probably my anger or distractions would make me loose the atch with huge blunders, if that happens one of the two would have wone just like the 5th match.
i have to go, two points to consider, aprt from poor karmaniks illness:
its no fun to play against an empty chair,
sometimes its best to get out of the scenario and think clearly in your head what the best continaution can be and come back to play, ive done that is it wrong, its a World Cahmpionship Title gentleman dont forget that.
bye, and susan dont take to personal the insults to your person, although not agreeing with y sometimes cant be considered an insult, remember there are many freaks and obnoxious people out ther, take the comment who it come from otherwise youll never manage to be happy , its turff and hard byt we only have one life on this planet, right!!!1
with regards always, jb.
sorry back again i forgot what i wanted t finish with but tks to my memory ive remembered.
Susy your entitled to be on topalovs side, its your blog y can do anything u want, you more than a good person to allow manby rude or contradictory comments to y person, so lets move on as u say, keeep it going , dont let others spoil your great blog, and you can have a favourite, why not, everyone does.
bye.
thks for the amuzing and entertaniny news at NYbrooks , wish i could go to that massive park tournements, when is it!
when they say a game is played say by time limit of 1 hour or 30 minutes and with a 2, 5 increment for each move, what do they mean, i dont understand, does it mean that they give each move 5 seconds more or depending how much y think or the rival they add or substract that time,
sry if not explain properly,
take care bye and enjoy the match
this 6th game was played very quick i presume?? after all the mess..
Given your circumstances, I totally agree with you and your position, Susan, that the issue of Game 5 legitimacy is between Kramnik (and his group) and Topalov (and his group), as well as Ilyumzhinov (and his group).
Hopefully, when all this mess clears, Ilyumzhinov will see that he cannot find Kramnik innocent of all charges (which he did), and then dismiss the original FIDE Appeals Committee, and finally make it up to Kramnik by awarding a point to Topalov.
And that’s just the facts, leaving all the he said, he said posturing and rumoring aside.
Garry Kasparov..comments are very intersting…ended by saying he only hopes that the match will be decided in the last game
Oh yes, and having run a blog myself, I certainly understand and appreciate the amount of time you must be pouring into it. Please remember to take a break from it occasionally or it will run you, I promise (words of experience). 🙂
–Bryan C.
Susan, thanks for the post. I agree with all but one point – the call for diplomacy at all times. Seems to me at some point one is justified to get really mad. I am glad the age of duels is over, or Kramnik and Topalov would be shooting each other instead of playing chess.
Russian journalists Vasiliev (www.sport-express.ru) and Surov (www.sportreport.ru)write that during a press conference Topalov admitted that he got carried away with the “no handshakes” statement. And he did show up to the press conference with Kramnik.
FIDE has shown itself incapable of dealing with any obstacles. Ilumzhinov said to Vasiliev and Surov that he’d prefer to return the score to 3:1 in order to avoid future controversy, but after his legal advisers said that Topalov would be able to sue for millions, he changed his mind and made his decision known to the public before Kramnik was notified. How is it possible that at every point decisions are dictated by those who are perceived as more bullyish and dangerous?
Susan,
Excellent post.
Chess players, regardless of their playing strength, love the game. I don’t quite know what it is, but one chess player does not have to tell another how much s/he loves the game. Truth and integrity also seem to be part and parcel of a chess player.
In tournaments big and small, with strong titled players, non-titled players, and amateurs, the interesting thing to notice is how everyone respects everyone else — regardless of language barriers and other such obstacles.
The only place where this code is broken (time and time again) is at the World Championship level.
I like Topalov’s game. However, now I hope he loses. Good luck Kramnik.
Keep the posts coming, Susan.
Ms. Polgar – I very much enjoyed reading your latest posting and I must say it is very well reasoned and lacking in any bias. I do not understand why people insist on attacking the messenger and not the message. I guess it is because they know they have no basis for an arguement against you, so they resort to name calling.
I am a chess hobbiest and have been in love with the game since 1972 (also an interesting year in chess history). As a 12 year old boy, I followed the Fischer v. Spassky chess championships and have followed all of the world championships over the years. I am teaching my 8 year old son to play chess and he has joined a chess club at his school. He is following the championships along with me and loves to try to predict the moves of the participants. His insight is often refreshing in its simplicity.
I was very happy to see the championship resume today and hope, like you, that the rest of the battles are played out on the board.
Keep up the great work and I look forward to following your postings throughout the tournament. You are a great proponent of the game we all love so much and I appreciate the spirit and energy you bring to the promotion of the game of chess.
Susan,
Thank you so much for this blog and all the work you do to introduce people to chess. I appreciate your efforts and hope that you will not let some rude posters change your style. These people feel anonymous online and would not(at least I hope not) ever treat another person so poorly face to face as they do online.
I am tired of the whole mess & don’t care who is to blame. I just want to see some good chess played and the chess title reunified.
I look forward to more of your commentary on the games.
What sanctimonious drivel from Tom Chivers. Kramnik started this by giving at LEAST an appearance of cheating, and making it clear he does not care.
Topalov is not in friendly territory controlled by Kirsan. He is in hostile territory (Russia) controlled by Russian authorities.
I think Kramnik is not acting on principle, it is all a crocodile tear act which he controlled from the beginning.
Now whatever he does (hides in the toilet and forfeits games) and whatever the score, the likes of Tom Chivers will think Kramnik is the winner.
Susan is right to be even-handed on this, and to give blame to both sides where she sees it it due.
Thanks Susan.
Perhaps one of the kings will soon play 1.e4 and we can shift the debate to which first move is best.
James
I most definitely disagree with “tom_chivers” who demands that you take a side, more specifically his preferred side, in this foodfight. It’s not necessary to take a side at all, and as a blog-owner you can probably get more interesting discussion on your board if you don’t. That is in everyone’s interest.
Furthermore if you express an opinion, it will be based on the facts you know. Perhaps some of those facts are things you don’t want to say publicly, things that you have been told off the record. That’s the impression I get. So if you really don’t know who is right, of course you have to say that!
My own personal perspective on it is that cheating is a very serious possibility that cannot be dismissed with “well you can’t prove it”. Nobody could prove it because there’s no monitoring of the bathroom. This is not a criminal court, and “innocent til proven guilty” does not apply.
Topalov put up a screen to provide comfort to Kramnik’s side that he’s not getting outside help, but I don’t see that he has provided a similar level of reassurance to Topalov’s side now. As I outlined in a different thread, based on what I have heard, it would be possible to use “stealth-bomber” technology or even plastic to diffuse metal detector signals and smuggle in a chess computer in clothing. Then if the bathroom’s not monitored, it can be used there. Also the jamming can probably be pierced by a digital (not analog) signal, so someone in the bathroom could have receive messages (like, your next move is …) on a small screen.
I am not saying that Kramnik is cheating. I cannot be sure. Obviously, I can’t get evidence that could tell me one way or the other. But Kramnik was reported to have made strings of many moves that agreed with someone’s Rybka computer in a prior game. And in this game, his 15 … Bc5-b4 (it was either move 15 or 18) and 23 … Bb4-c5 seem computer-like to me. A human would probably have decided to swap those bishops or not, rather than first avoiding the exchange then forcing it, each time spending a move to do so. The position didn’t change a great deal between the two moves. I asked on this blog for someone to explain in human terms why one might do this and got no answer, for what it’s worth.
I hate to say these things about such a wonderful chessplayer. But I think it’s objective, though unpleasant.
“Michael C.M.
said…
(…) Garry had a great Letter to the Editor in the Wall Street Journal today. I only have access to the paper edition.”
You mean this article:
http://www.opinionjournal.com/extra/?id=110009029
I was neutral at the beginning, but now I’m rooting for Kramnik. He should not have had to forfeit that point.
Re: Tom Chivers rant.
My dear sir, you are obviously an intelligent human being with a great capacity for logic and debate. However, your ill-advised and apparent anger toward Ms. Polgar holds no water, for you fail to grasp the greater purpose in her stance.
To sum it up, if just a few of the individuals (ex. Dainalov/Kirsan/Hansel) operated under the same philosophy as Ms. Pogar, we would have seen a game five. But, since finger pointing is the name of the game we have the disaster at present. Realize that if the leadership in Kalmykia was half as rational and diplomatic as the example set by Ms. Polgar, the entire mess could have and would have been avoided.
As for your lashing out (setting Ms. Polgar BELOW curses and childrens vulgarity), I put your comments on a level similar if not identical that of Dainalov’s currently well, immature status.
Remember she said she’d give it a go once she had the facts. Is that logical enough for you sir?
Susan,
you may be interested in this article containing the letter of Morten Sand, FIDE legal advisor, to Kirsan Ilyumzhinov:
http://www.sport-express.ru/art.shtml?128422
Susan,
I agree with you points. Thanks for you good work. You are my number one chess player. You deserve much of our supports.
Hello Susan.
Thank you very much for your efforts teaching us another things more important than chess.
“Win with grace, lose with dignity” That phrase is what we need not only in chess but in our life.
Thank you from spain.
Carlos
I wonder why Susan never mentions that the playing conditions have been agreed on in a contract before the match.
Topalov could have complained BEFORE ths start. Therefore the quoting of the passage that supports Topalov “At any time in the course of the application of these regulations, any grounds that are not covered “. is invalid because the playing regulations have been covered in acontract and any change is a breach ot this contract.
Dear Susan,
From the point of view of an amateur internet audience
I should add the following ninth point into your list of contributing this fiasco:
There is a black spot in the ancient practices to prevent doping in chess:
There may exist available modern mini-sized equipment that can be in your pocket. If you are allowed to enter between strategically decisive moves out of video sight, you can simply take a chip from your pocket, put it into your ear for some seconds, and listen to what Fritz or your team says. Then you choose your move.
In the next tournaments this kind of opportunity to doping must be prevented beforehand in the signed rules without anybody to be felt insulted and acted like Kramnik now did.
If this opportunity already has been prevented efficiently, please invite somebody to describe it thoroughly in order to misunderstanding by us amateurs.
Yours sincerely,
harrastaja
Hi Susan and thank you for this blog!
I would like to say that I do agree with you, but let remind all the people that this mess was initiated by the Topalov’s team. They clearly accused Kramnik to cheat using computer assistance. Was it a kind of revenge? Did Kramnik say something about Topalov performances, especially in San Luiz (like Morozevitch did)? Because I find these accusations very serious.
If the aim of Kramnik going to the toilet very often was to psychologically destabilizing Topalov (as you said it happened many time in the history of WCC) I find the Topalov reaction disproportional!!
How can he listen his manager to behave like this? Is he not aware that his behaving will put discredit on him for ever? Imagine he wins the title because of this “extra” point of game 5, do you think he won’t be ashamed? I think he won’t if we look back at their attitude (Topalov and Danailov) after having won (at least) a point.
I was not a big fan of Kramnik (before) because of his “defensive” play and of course I was really enjoying the tremendous chess played by Topalov, especially during the last past 2 years, but I have to say that this event in Elista made me change my mind 180 degres! And according to what I read or witnessed in playchess for example, I am not the only one.
I would like to add finally (and I am done) that I admire Kramnik behavior to have played that game 6. I think it’s “chevaleresque” and dignified of a great champion.
hello:
I think you make excesive enphasis in the appeals comitte.And you always put the number off the rule 3.17 etc. But when using mr kramnik appeals rule , you expose it always like is his opinion,you dont put the number off the rule.But is and important rule.That says that the appeals comitee,can received the protest ONLY UNTIL 2 hours after the end off the game. AND RESOLVED IN 2 HOURS IF POSSIBLE.And you now that any person that is accuse,have be informed and have a chance to defense himself,but not to find 2 hours before the game,the batroom close and all the changes off topalov desires.Nobody can play an important game,that way,,,,that is not justice,is parcial,action.The game should have been pospose,like they did with the 6.
If the appeals comitee, recived the protest out off time, the next day (rest day),it is not LEGAL.So they dont have to do nothing,axcept ot be refused.Anything they write is ilegal,and any actuation,like closing the batroom,changing it,monitors,off,etc are ilegal actions,and must be cancelled, and can´t be considered the final resolution off the protest…And in consecuence,game 5 must start at the same conditions,before all the incompetent (because they ignored this rule,…),comitee actions.You can´t do all does ilegals moves , and give a point for forfait.
The batroom use was not REGULATED,the numbers off time you can go ….so it IS NOT,in the regulations,comitee juridisction,iff you read carefully that rule that you like and allways number AND WRITE it. MAYBE IT IS ON THE fide president,juridisction.AND THEY SHOULD HAVE SEND HIM THE NEW ,unrule protest.
If you are,with suspiciuos idea,tell the arbriter,to inspect,the bath,or investigated.But dont accused,to the news paper,to the comitee,and awaring that iff they dont admited it,they may leave the macht.And done it for sure,because THEY decided not to shake hands,or press conference together.AND WANT THE POINT OFF THE FIFTH GAME.(GUILTY…NOT SUSPICIUOS).Finally the batroom are open,the incompetent comitee is over,but they got the point,off the fifth game,that is what they wanted, WIN OUT OFF THE BOARD,WHAT THEY CANT ON IT. topolov,should be ashamed,but future money is the only thing that count,for that team. But i glad that mr kramnik,is a gentleman and decide to play,under protest,because this people where looking for another forfeit,and a championship by forfeit,they care.they wnat thwe title at any prize.
Oops sorry for my drunk rant last night. The criticisms of it certain people left in reply are for the most part correct (especially those of bdp) and now I’m not in the mood to argue over details anyhow.
It just irritates the hell out of me that for his lies and disgrace, Topalov was rewarded with a point and seems chuffed to bits with it. But that is of course not this blog’s fault.
The story made Yahoo front page. Note that this can be somewhat of a dubius honor, as so did Lorena Bobbit after she sliced off her husband’s crown jewels and tossed them in the garbage some time ago.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20061002/od_nm/russia_chess_dc
Susan are you going to end your many feuds with USCF. Are you going to be gracious and lose with dignity your complaints about contracts that were awarded to others.
You have supported Topalov and continue to support Topalov. You need to admit that. it is obvious to me. I have read all the blogs on the internet. spent hundreds of hours on this.
Now you show a picture of you with Kasparov. Is that a signal of your prestige in the chess community.
Have you read what Kasparov is saying about this mess. He is correct. He takes a much different stand than you.
So now you have pictures of you with Karpov and with Kasparov. Both of them see this clearly. You still hang on to your wrong views.
Your mind is clouded by your hatred for Kramnik and your desire to see Topalov be the Champion. this is all acceptable if you will simply tell the truth. tell your readers of your bias. Everyone sees it. You keep trying to justify it by hiding your bias.
Please post what Kasparov has said and then tell us why he is wrong and you are right. then follow up with another blast at the USCF and how they wronged you in their contracts.
You tell Kramnik to go on and accept the decisions handed down. Well USCF has handed down some decisions to you. You need to accept those decisions. stop your diatribe against them for years now. let it go Susan. for the sake of Chess be the friend of USCF and all their people like Sam Sloan.
come on Susan for the sake of chess just sit down at the board and play the game. NO more complaints from you.
Remember what to teach all your children. no matter what happens just play the game. no matter how often they abuse you, just play the game. let them continue to abuse you every game. but just sit there and play for the sake of the game. Remember ONLY the game matters not the person’s dignity. forget your dignity. that is subservient to the GAME. I am sure you are good for the children. you teach them that the game is more important than their dignity.
Well with your attitude of never being wrong. and teaching to accept abuse. You can go teach other children but not my children.
yes I want my children to learn that they are not always right and they need to learn that also.
I am very very disappointed in you Susan.
Now The Independent in the UK speaks out on this matter:
http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/this_britain/article1784485.ece
Wouldn’t you just know it? Hollywood has already produced a movie about this match, starring FIDE President Ilyumzhinov, Danailov, and Topalov:
http://movies.yahoo.com/movie/1809266692/info
Susan its a joy to read your wise calm words. Please ignore the insults and continue with you way.
Shahar
Israel
well said, Susan, and thank you for the great work you do daily on the internet
Garry Kasparov..comments are very intersting…ended by saying he only hopes that the match will be decided in the last game
I guess that in no match further games are played after the match is decided. So, the last game decides every match always and everywhere.
Susan, you’re a great person and chess player, not to mention being an exemplary ambassodor of the game. However, I wonder if it is exaclty because of this that you are refusing to (publicly?) give your position on the matter. Put yourself first in Topalov’s shoes. Would you have lodged the too-many-bathroom-visits-must-be-cheating complaint, and refused to shake hands thereafter, and even threaten to quit? Would you have happily embrassed the free point? Or if you were in Kramnik’s position, would you have swallowed your pride and cast a deaf ear to your opponent’s cheating allegations, allowing precautions to be taken against you such that you don’t continue to “cheat”? For the love of the game, would you just stand by and do nothing as the contract you signed was edited without your consent?
Sometimes, if not always, one’s got to see what’s right and say it. That’s how our children will learn. Both parties can’t be right, even if they think they are. It’s up to people like you, Nnun, Seirawan to point this out. If you don’t stand for something, you will fall for everything.
Many thanks for your the interesting blog, it’s always my first stop, even before chessbase!
– Steven –
As history has shown us, there were often “incidents” and “tactics” to gain that edge during World Championship matches.
Others wrong doing, is no excuse!
The lack on sportmanship in Team Topalov, has shocked most the chess fans.
In the 2000 Kasparov-Kramnik match, it was a similar toilet issue, which was solved in a very different manner. GM Ray Keen has given his insight on it at chessgames.
Even to a former Topalov fan, like myself, first letter from Team Topalov should never have been published, this broke FIDE Code of Ethics.
The tone of the letter, wasn’t the worst at all, but it’s intent, namely to put Kramnik off-balance, after Topalov had blown it over the board.
As an active bridge player, it’s shocking to see how unprofessional a top chess event like this are orginized. In case of a protest, it’s unheard of that an Appeals Committee take a decision without consulting the other side.
Allowing a party to file unjustified protests of implied cheating, is to me lack of fair play at the least, and cheating itself at the worst.
If Topalov win this match, it proves nothing.
madame Polgar
it is the first time that i read your blog.
Thanks very much for your site… it is really a fine blog.
Your opinions about the match Topalov Kramnik are always cleaver.
Dear Susan,
even so I still think you are biased towards Topalov I must say that I admire your effort to take a neutral stance.
That is not easy because as you said you have known a lot of people involved in this mess for a long time.
And it is only human to feel more sympathy towards some people than others.
And from your past we all know that you also had your issues with complaints, feeling betrayed by a chess organisation (US).
Also i dare to say that there is not much love lost between you and Mr. Kramnik.
All this makes it very hard for you to be really neutral.
BUT.. I must give you a lot of credit because I honestly believe you are trying really hard to put your personal feelings aside on this.
And your signed letter towards Kramnik is great gesture after your first blog post were clearly biased towards Topalovs team.
And finally and most importantly you deserve a lot, really a lot of credit for keeping this blog open and commercial free.
You even answer to some really insulting anonymous posts here and sign everything with your good name.
I think some posters should not forget that you give them the opportunity to get heard on this very popular blog and should tame their language.
That should not mean that everybody has to agree with you or is not allowed to take a side in this.
By the way , I am on Kramniks side.
Chris
Are you explaining yourself because you are Susan Polgar? There are millions of chess fans out there who support blindly one player or the other and nobody requires them to explain why.Those who insult you do so because you have the heart to air your views(something most GMs shy away from).Me think you’ve done more good for chess by speaking out than if you had just shut up(which is what many people want!!)Do your thing, and let the bashers bash…they’ll aways,whether you support Jack,Nunn, or NONE!!!
Dear Susan,
There was an statement on your blog by Makropoulos. I can’t find it anymore. Have you removed it?
I think it was important because it showed explicitely that Danailov had lied from the beginning about the content of the tapes. Makropoulos was saying the following: “In the video recording which we got hold of, Kramnik visited the toilet 25 times. In the third game the number is 18. In the first two games, in one hour and a half – 11 or 12 times.”
He was also stating clearly that the only complete video recording they had was the third game, in which Kramnik went in the bathroom 18 times. This is 3 times less than what Danailov told in his complaint. It shows quite clearly that Danailov blatantly lied about the content of the videos to give the false impression that Kramnik was cheating.
I have not found this important statement by Makropoulos anywhere else but on your blog. It would be great if you could either put it back or give us a web link where to find it.
Sincerely yours,
Guillaume
Georgios Makropoulos:
” I would like to inform you of the decision of the Appeals Committee and the efforts of the Organisers and FIDE undertaken in order to provide ideal conditions for both teams.
Before the match we had long negotiations with Messrs. Hensel and Danailov. We thought that we managed to provide best conditions. After the arrival of the participants, new requirements were tabled, which fulfilled to the satisfaction of both delegations.
Both sides have undertaken considerable efforts in order to exclude any possibility of using any external assistance to the players. I would like to say that FIDE is not sharing any fears regarding use of external assistance during the games, but our opinion here is not important – we should meet the players halfway, in order them to feel comfortably at the board and not to be afraid for fair play.
This was exactly the reason why the glass screen appeared on the stage following the request of Mr. Hensel. It is not included in the contract, but we satisfied the request of Mr. Hensel. It is possible that the other side felt hurt, but no decisions of FIDE could satisfy both teams in 100%.
When the match started, we have received a declaration from the team of Topalov with the request to get acquainted with the video recording from the restrooms. The Organisers provided all the materials, and based on these materials the team of Topalov produced an appeal, where they noted that Kramnik visits the toilet in his restroom with an unusual frequency.
They requested to close the toilets and restrooms and also provide the accredited journalists with the video recordings. At the yesterday’s meeting of the Appeals Committee we watched all the video recordings. Only the third game was recorded in full. There are recordings of one hour and a half from the first and second games and there is a blank of one hour and a half in the recording of the fourth game. We have found out that the team of Topalov exaggerated the number of Kramnik’s visits to the toilet.
However, the numbers are still unusually high. In the video recording which we got hold of, Kramnik visited the toilet 25 times. In the third game the number is 18. In the first two games, in one hour and a half – 11 or 12 times.
I would like to reiterate that we have no connection between the number of the visits to the toilet and possible use of some external help. We have requsted Mr. Hensel to comment on these numbers and received the explanation to the tune that Vladimir uses the toilet space for walking. According to the opinion of the Appeals Committee, this explanation is unsatisfactory, as Kramnik was staying each time 1 or 2 minutes in the toilet.
Once again I repeat, for us the most important thing is for the both players to feel protected from the use of the external help by their respective opponent. For the first time we are facing such strong suspicions from both sides. I think here there is some partial fault of the journalists who were actively speculating on this topic before the World Championship. Of course when you read on a regular basis about this, that it is so easy to cheat, you start to get worried.
We spoke to President Kirsan Ilyumzhinov before taking a decision regarding the appeal of Topalov’s team and the FIDE President himself proposed to close the toilets in the restrooms.
The other points in the appeal of Mr. Topalov were declined by us. It is resolved not to close the restrooms – they are equipped by the video cameras and are well watched by the Chief Arbiter. It was not in our authority to provide the journalists with video recording, as we thought that this is a violation of the player’s right for privacy.
Further to this, we received open letters from both sides. I would like to share my opinion with you. According to the contract, FIDE shall provide both players with a restroom and a toilet. It is obvious for us that the contract is not binding us to provide the toilet in the restroom, otherwise the sentence would read “a restroom with a toilet”. Therefore, the appeal of Mr. Hensel regarding this point of the contract are groundless.
I think this will be a terrible mistake if this match would remain in the sports history as the match stopped because of the toilets… It is bad for FIDE, bad for Kalmykia, bad for the Russian Chess Federation and its President Mr. Zhukov who made efforts to organize this great match and it is just terrible for chess. I hereby strongly request both players to continue the match.”
Susan,
Thanks for your excelent,very informative site!!
I will like to voice my opinion about how chess games results are score.
In my veiw this sistem needs to be reveiw.
It is inadecvate for modern chess and it is not ecourege a lot for an agresive, straitfourght attaking game wich by the way make the beauty of the chess game.
Too many draws are plaguing this beatiful game becouse there is not incenive,for an attaking game.
Therefore I will like that the scoring chess sistem to be updated.
My sugestions are:
a) 1 point for win
0. 75 for a draw with blak
0.25 for a draw with white
b) 2 points for a win with black
1 point for a win with white
same for the rest as in a).
or
c) a footboll/soccer sistem.
3 points for a win regardes
color.
I point for a draw regardes
color.
or somthing similar in the above ideea.
I think that a new scoring sistem in chess is long due and is the only way to save the game we all love for failing in obscurity and give it instend a new meaning and a fear go.
Thanks
I think Makropoulos gave a reasonable explanation for the first decision of the Appeals Committee. I particularly note this:
“We have requsted Mr. Hensel to comment on these numbers and received the explanation to the tune that Vladimir uses the toilet space for walking. According to the opinion of the Appeals Committee, this explanation is unsatisfactory, as Kramnik was staying each time 1 or 2 minutes in the toilet.”
Now if Mr Hensel had given an honest answer, the insident could have been avoided. It is likely that Kramnik needs these visits for his health condition, and Mr Hensel should have said so, instead of some white lie. Then the decision of the Appeals Committee could have been different.
I am really provoked by all the distinguished GMs and Bessel Kok who all say categorically that the decision of the Appeals Committee was wrong. That could be the case, but that is by no means clear. I think the decision was OK. (Susan, thanks for pointing to the contract for the match.)
Yeah, trying to move on, but have not managed to get this off my mind yet …
From Kasparov’s article you can see why I don’t respect Kramnik.
FOR A PERIOD OF 5 YEARS SINCE HE TOOK THE TITLE FROM KASPAROV IN 2000. ,HE WAS DOING EVERYTHING TO AVOID THE REMATCH WITH HIM .
What do you think why?
Kasparov told not once that he deserves a rematch and could bring sponsors anytime he wanted.
But *great* Vlady didn’t even want to hear about..Chicken.
Althought I don’t have opinion about Topalov and his manager (except that Danilov’s behaviour is like mafia lawyer),I prefer Topalov.
Not becouse I want Topa to WIN,but becouse I want Kramnik to LOOSE.
And let us pressume hidden chess set or anything like that is nonexistent.
How would you feel were you Topalov and your opponent spends more time in rest room and toilet than at the chess table in front of you?
Sorry ,but I would feel insulted and that my oponent shows utter disrespect in that manner.
Much worse than experiencing a cigarete smoke pooffing in my face from him.
Dear Susan,
In 1984 I was rooting for Karpov. He was my chess idol (still is). When the Karpov-Kasparov match was aborted after Kasparov had won two games in a row, it took me over 10 years before I could admit even to myself that the abortion was made only to save Karpov. Deep inside I knew from the beginning that it was so, but still I couldn’t say it “out loud” even to myself. I was so upset that he wasn’t able to outplay Kasparov on the board. I so much more like Karpov’s playing style than Kasparov’s.
Great job in sorting through this mess, Susan. BTW, there is a funny article in the Metro section of today’s New York Times. In addition to Dylan McClain’s report on yesterday’s game, there is a piece called “Rooks, Pawns and King-Sized Mind Games” about one of the regulars at the Washington Square Park chess tables. The image of Mr. Kramnick having to use the public urinals in Washington Square Park instead of his private bath room in Elista had me laughing out loud.
Dear Susan Polgar,
Thank you for sharing your thoughts and feelings with us.
I respect the time you spend (unpaid!) and the
opportunity that you give us to learn thru your blog.
Let me point out something that is missing in your summary of the crisis.
It is the most important fact, the one that nobody questions at all.
Moreover, it was confirmed by officials and even by media.
GM Kramnik visited his private toilet excessive number of times
(more than 50) in game 4 and this was the pattern for all four games.
Speaking of unethical we shouldn’t forget this.
We all understand the amount of respect to the opponent that
is shown with such a behavior. Explanations here are not needed, please.
What else was GM Topalov supposed to do but to file a protest.
Note: Sorry, Tom Chivers, but 50 is a lot more than “several times”.
Yes, we can only dream of GM Kramnik offering an apology
in the very beginning and not answering by new attacks.
This was one way of resolving issues in a professional manner.
Yes, you’re right that chess is only a part of the whole story.
Money and politics can destroy anything.
But I want to simplify things here. In the end this is just a competition.
There are many other sports and numerous examples of well organized ones.
Should I mention football and the World Cup?
I can only imagine what it takes to organize events like that.
To keep things simple all the sports are driven by rules
and no mater if a player likes the arbiter/referee or not
he has to respect their decision and keep playing.
In sports there is no such thing as a toilet break.
Players can have one only while the game is suspended.
Sure, it is as simple as that.
All of the rest is politics and emotions.
Thanks for reading it.
Nikolai Pilafov
Thanks Nikolai for your post. That was one of the positions of the Topalov’s camp. I do not really think Kramnik did it on purpose but a better explanation or offer to have his restroom fully inspected by the other side may have helped end the fiasco. But there were too many little things from all sides that contributed to the big problem.
Best wishes,
Susan Polgar
http://www.SusanPolgar.com
Nikolai Pilafov
To the rest of the world, 25 is not more than 50! 🙂
Why do people keep on telling this lie, and why don’t S. Polgar correct it?
OTOH, it was unehtical of Team Topalov to view those video tapes, and how they got access is them, is beond my understanding.
The number of times Kramnik visited the toilet, should never have been an issue.
Kramnik didn’t win the two first games because of unhuman play, and Team Topalov knows that.
Regards
Tor
Susan, it’s interesting you believe Kramnik should share details of what he does in his toilet, and don’t see that as private.
Would you share the details of what you do in a toilet, for the whole world to see?
Well, you have a blog! So lead by example please and tell everything to us all!
Dear Susan,
What a prompt reply! I’m impressed by your commitment.
You’re making this blogspot a truly open and very informative place.
Just for the record, I don’t belong to any camp.
I’m a normal chess fan who wants to see the better player win.
I don’t take any position for a very obvious reason.
We don’t know all the facts and we can only see what we’re shown.
Posting open letters can be very useful when it contains more facts are less emotions.
Sure, feelings are important but in this situation they are just not convincing me.
That’s why I repeated some pure (and undisputed) facts in my post above.
I was glad I could contribute and (maybe) help those who were deep into their emotions.
BTW, I wonder what GM Kramnik’s pattern for visiting the toilet
was during their last game (#six). Maybe he’s learnt something out of it.
Respectfully
Nikolai Pilafov
Hi,
I just wanted to say that this episode has changed the way i see Kramnik, and i think the way many people look at him.
There were a lot of great figures as world chess champions…persons i admire not just for the chess but for all their lives..people like Capablanca and other myths.
I believe everybody thought of Kramnik as the true world champion..even the people who dont really admit it…after all he beat Kasparov..not much more to say.
But i think until now he was seen as a bit of a gray champion…someone not very exciting or of great interest out or even in the board. By agreeing to play with the score of 3-2 after all that has gone on i think he has shown us some great character and is begining to grow to the stature os some of his “great predecessors”.
Last but not least i would like to thank Susan Polgar for this great blog for the true lovers of chess.
Keep up the good work 🙂
Nikolai Pilafov, you are wrong.
There is no evidence whatsoever that Kramnik visited his private toilet ‘more than 50 times in game 4’, and there is on the contrary evidence that it was NOT the pattern for all four games (the only complete record shows 18
times in game 3). The only place where Kramnik did visit his toilet 50 times is in Danailov’s complaint.
I still don’t understand why Susan removed Makropoulos’ statement where this is stated clearly, and I don’t understand at all why she tacitely accepts the 50 times as a fact (quote, ‘I do not really think Kramnik did it on purpose’).
Susan, I completely support your wise position in this conflict. I agree that we cannot know every aspects of what happened in Elista, and that as such we should be very careful before condemning either side. However, I don’t think taking Danailov’s statements for granted is helping in any way. Having this kind of unchallenged statements in the headlines was very bad for chess.
Guillaume.
Guillaume,
No statement has been removed. All of them are still there in the comments section of some of the posts.
Best wishes,
Susan Polgar
http://www.SusanPolgar.com
[“There is no evidence whatsoever that Kramnik visited his private toilet ‘more than 50 times in game 4”]
_____________________________
Ok,it was just 49 times (let’s not exaggerate).
But seriously,I’m enough of this toilet crap .Like everybody else ,I want to see some fine and atomic chess on the board(From both players).
To me ,it’s clear like a bright day, that Kramnik wanted to irritate his oponent in this way.
I believe it was mostly his psyhological tactics.
In effect he took a bad blow back from Danilov and Topalov’s camp with even higher consequences than the stolen point:I think Kramnik might not be in as good psyhological shape as before the match (or after game #2).
What do you think Zsuzsa?
Dear Nikolai Pilafov,
It seems that the practises and arrangements to ensure fair play are in a poorly developed stage in the Chess Championship events. Especially taking into account what the modern communication technology can offer.
Would you, Nikolai, support my proposal:
FIDE officially makes within few days the following decision: Both players during the the World Champioship chess game are all the time under video surveillance by the the committee named by FIDE and approved by both players. This surveillance reaches also the toilet facilities, but is not public for anybody else than the named committee.
This decision can be introduced and presented to the assembly of FIDE by GM Serawan.
This official decision will be normal practise in next World Championship tournament, not in this one.
This means that neither player can loose his nerves and refuse to play because of this normal procedure.
Of course these two players in this tournament can voluntarily accept this official rule stipulated by FIDE and valid from the beginning of the next World Champioship tournament. But it would be completely voluntary.
You seem to have good relations to Susan Polgar, but she may be in a position, not to comment this proposal.
Yours
Lauri Koskinen
My bad, I thought Makropoulos’ statement was in one of your own posts, and not as a comment. I guess it was just a trick of the light.
Guillaume.
Guillaume,
I don’t mean to hurt your feelings but facts can be easily shared by posing links
For example: Official or Trusted source
I suggest you support your comments in a similar way.
Lauri Koskinen,
How did you get such an idea?
I have no relations to Susan and I appreciate her work the way most people here do.
Your suggestion about video surveillance has its merits.
I agree that World Championship is a public event and privacy shouldn’t be as big a concern.
Of course, this should only apply during actual games.
There is one small problem that you might have overlooked.
You are assuming that players will respect “the named committee” and obey their decisions.
How will you tolerate players who will ask the committee to resign?
Yours
Nikolai Pilafov
nikolai,
I didn’t see any such links in your comments, but I agree with you, facts can be easily shared by posing links.
This is exactly why I was disturbed to see that Makropoulos’ statement had disappeared from Susan’s blog, because it was refered to by comments on Mig Greengards’s blog on the 2nd of october, and on the 3rd someone mentioned that it had disappeared from Susan’s blog.
Here is a link:
http://www.chessninja.com/dailydirt/2006/10/kramniktopalov_g6.htm
There the following comments can be found:
——————————–
We know Danailov lied. Susan Polgar has put on her blog as statement by Makropoulos where he says about this issue: “In the video recording which we got hold of, Kramnik visited the toilet 25 times. In the third game the number is 18. In the first two games, in one hour and a half – 11 or 12 times.”
[…]
Posted by: cadlag at October 2, 2006 13:56
——————————–
I associate myself wholeheartedly with the remarks of cadlag.
[…]
The number of visits mentioned by the loathsome Danailov is, like so much that has emanated from the fallen Topalov’s camp, simply a concoction, a fabrication, a lie.
[…]
Posted by: shane at October 2, 2006 14:30
———————————
Susan Polgar tacitly removed the Makropoulos interview from her blog. Too self-incriminating?
Posted by: zero@ego.com at October 3, 2006 00:01
———————————
How can a link to Danailov’s exagerration to the FIDE Appeals Committe be cognized as an “Official or Trusted” source? Danailov is the whole instigator in this crap (no pun intended), it was his exagerrations that led to the “50 or so visits” remark. After careful scrutiny of the tapes the number of visits is more on the order of a dozen.
Amateurs, all amateurs
[“Susan Polgar has put on her blog as statement by Makropoulos where he says about this issue: “In the video recording which we got hold of, Kramnik visited the toilet 25 times. In the third game the number is 18. In the first two games, in one hour and a half – 11 or 12 times.”]
And I told Kramnik to be carefull about consuming too much fruit…That guy just doesn’t seem to listen.
Thanks Guillaume,
This is much better. Now, I’m surprised you refer us to the comments section.
I’m sorry but we can’t be sure if cadlag is sharing facts with us.
Even if we assume so, then “11 or 12 times for 1.5 hours” can easily make more
than 40 for the duration of a game.
You keep repeating your claim that something disappeared from Susan’s blog
so I want to provide you with this permanent link:
Decision of the Appeals Committee to the appeal of Mr. Danailov
Maybe you were referring to this section:
In the appeal there is an exaggeration of the number of times that Mr. Kramnik visited the toilet.
Despite there being an unusual number of visits, this is insufficient on its own to come to a conclusion.
And maybe you stopped reading after the “exaggeration” part.
If not, then you could see that even if the actual number of visits is 40 the issue remains the same.
That’s why an Appeals Committee was there to decide based on more accurate counting.
Nikolai Pilafov
Thanks Nikolai,
No, this is not the statement I was refering to. This one has been on Chessbase for a while now, and I’ve read it with care as well. No, The full statement by Makropoulos I was refering to was on Susan’s blog. Check the comment right after my first commnent, it gives the full statement again (posted by ‘gm’ on Tuesday, October 03, 2006 8:13:10 AM).
Could you read it and tell me again what you think?
What childish logic:
“I’m sorry but we can’t be sure if cadlag is sharing facts with us.
Even if we assume so, then “11 or 12 times for 1.5 hours” can easily make more than 40 for the duration of a game.”
Child, here is the flaw in your reasoning: You have no evidence, such as video or sworn official eyewitness, to your claim that Kramnik visited the toilet “more than 40 for the duration of the game.” By your lack of logic, we can pick any number of visits we wish. So, why do you stop at 40? Do you believe that 40 visits is more believable than say, 400 visits?
Obviously, your lack of verifiable fact in your claim destroys your credibility.
Perhaps you have a new system of counting, as well. Don’t tell me you are using base 2 or base 3 counting, and not base 10?
Well, Susan, though I really can’t agree with you on points 6. and 7. , I’m glad you’re gradually shifting your stance to the sensible side.
Keep going! I think you’re a good girl after all!
Oh confused minds…
This is exactly why there is WAR in this world:
(1) Different people believe they are the only ones that are right and despise other’s points of view.
(2) People don’t have the ability to control their emotions and REACT either with words or actions.
How many examples of the two situations above we are seeing these days from all types of characters! – the people in Kalmykia, GMs and commentators, and also the commentators of this blog – either anonymous or not!
It takes at least two to start conflicts.
Anyone can try to start a conflict with you – it is up to you if you allow him/her or not!
As I said SO MANY times before – it’s your choice if you want to behave like a gentleman or not. You are not obliged to, though it will be nice if you do. The same applies to the others! In this case, two top-level chess players. Even though chess has a reputation to be a sport for gentlemen – behaving like one is still optional!
It is true that many “little mistakes” were made from each side – as well as the people speaking about this mess. No matter what team A or B did, did the other have to feel offended? NO. Absolutely. You can feel disappointed because you thought the other was a gentleman but now you saw he is not.. then? so what? I will just keep playing and respect what I have signed.
People talk about “offended dignity”, “he started”, “should have”, “shouldn’t have”… WRONG! these are all judgements. Why don’t you just let the dog bark and keep walking? No need to bark back, or start threatening, or start giving explanations… DON’T MAKE THE SNOWBALL GROW!
Just to give a very simple example. Right since the beginning with the first open letter from Danailov. Should the Committe had disregarded the letter, was Topalov going to quit the match? I would have loved to see what he would do in that case. If he did, then fine, Kramnik would have been declared champion and Topalov wouldn’t have one single reason to sue anyone (as he had no evidence of anything and it was he who was breaking the agreement by leaving).
The same for Kramnik. The Committee blantly erred and gave that decision. Didn’t he have facts to show he was being injusticed? Didn’t he show those facts later? Why not since the beginning? It was easy, just pointing out where his contractual rights were being violated, stay calm and play under protest – everything he did afterwards! But no, he simple fell into the trap and broke the agreement. And the snowball continued growing. Also, he could have allowed the inspection of his toilet to prove nothing was wrong? Yes, he could, but he didn’t have to. Again, that would have been NICE (chevaleresque) but it was optional.
So I disagree with “should have done this or that” as much as I disagree with actions lead by emotions and irrational thinking. Don’t expect others to be gentlemen and don’t blame them if they are not. They are on their right. Topalov didn’t want to shake hands? WHATEVER! He didn’t sign a contract and get paid to shake hands! Was that desirable? Of course it is, and very much so, specially in chess. But if he doesn’t want to, it is rather his problem than anyone else. Everyone has their pyschological reasons to proceed in one or another way.
Simple, people. ALWAYS be calm and cool. Proceed legally and be based on facts. Don’t give explanations unless absolutely necessary, don’t feel offended, do your stuff and do it well. Don’t expect anything from anyone (outside of those you love, of course, which is a separate conversation)unless they are legally or contractually obliged to. And finally, let the dogs bark as much as they want.
Again, it takes at least 2 to start a conflict and it is so easy to contribute a situation to get worse, which is what happened here.
Think about other examples in the world. The Palestinian-Israel conflict is such a big snowball because of REACTIONS and each side believes they are the ones right. The muslim’s protest against the Pope (who I personally don’t like) because of what he read in public days ago and after feeling offended (the same for the charicatures of their prophet). THEY opted to feel offended and THEY REACTED the way they did, including religious insults to Catholicism and the occidental world. What if these ones react? Simple: chain of reaction and more conflict.
Conflicts CAN be avoided.
Personally, I try to be a gentleman with others. But as soon as I see they are not being reciprocal, I don’t stop and cry or complain – why would I? It’s their right. I simply continue doing my stuff and stop being a gentleman with that person as well. Of course I continue being as polite and formal as necessary, especially in business, but limiting myself to what I have to do and always being based on facts. It works so well.
Emotions? again, only for the ones you love. The rest normally don’t deserve that and even less your stress or frustration. They say “open your heart only to those who live in it”… how true.
Susan, congratulations once again and thanks for such a wonderful job. Just one suggestion if you allow me to – no longer respond to the ones posting insults or stupid comments. Let them bark. They don’t deserve your time. No need to explain anything. You are certainly so much higher than those pseudo-chess fans.
Best wishes,
Renzo – IncaKing @ ICC
Hello. I am Just a Blogger. I was for a very short period a chess journalist and have met briefly with Topalov, Kramnik and Danailov on different occasions. I have seen how they behave at different chess tournaments and I would just like to get the following off my chest.
1)I know all three people to be gentlemanly, generous and tremendous sportsmen.
2) Kramnik really, really, really, likes to walk, albeit between moves, between games, in his spare time, whatever. His physical stature is inmense and many hours spent bending his body OTB is for him highly unconfortable, much more so than people of lesser height.
3) Neither Topalov nor Kramnik are capable of cheating, both have a tremendous sense of fair play.
4) I am astounded at how the whole Toilet affair has gotten out of hand and I feel sure that if all managers, chess politicians, organisers, press, and the like were taken put of the picture then Kramnik and Topalov would just shake hands, have a laugh together and get on with what they most enjoy i.e. playing chess OTB.
thank you susan for allowing me to get that out there. Your BLOG and other work for our great sport is heartening. I hope our Sport, one day, develops into something worthy of your efforts.