A lot of rumors have been flying around regarding the negotiation between FIDE President Ilyumzhinov and the two teams. One of the most popular rumors is there were two proposals:
1. Score would remain 3-1 but the match would extend to 16 games instead of 12. Kramnik rejected this idea.
2. Score would remain 3-1 but the match would extend to 14 games instead of 12. Kramnik also rejected this idea.
There is no official confirmation to this rumor out of Elista. But it seems that the remaining sticking point is the score and how to properly handle this delicate situation.
I am glad that talks are ongoing and there is hope for the continuation of the match. Topalov has stated that he wants to play on. Let’s hope things can be worked out.
Chess Daily News from Susan Polgar
Dear Susan,
Could you inform us of the source(s) of these rumors?
As a FIDE representative Kirsan could easily make Topalov to accept score 3-1 by force i.e. with some kind of ultimatum. Without a FIDE title Topalov would be left without anything. Abandoning the match would be for Topalov much harder than for Kramnik. Kirsan does not have same kind of influence over Kramnik who in any case would be left with Classical Chess World Championship. This might turn the favour over to Kramnik’s side. Who knows.
If there was a procedural error in the handling of the rest room dispute and in the failure to allow Kramnik to formally protest without having his clock run down then I believe the present result of game 5 should be annulled.
The resignation of the appeals committee is obviously proof that their decision over the initial appeal was wrong.
Not only did they accept an appeal made outside the pre arranged rules, but they made a dreadful mistake with their response to it.
It is my suspicion that Kirsan would have forced the resignation due to the massive amount of indignation shown by the chess world in places like this.
This means that any change of playing conditions is due to an illegal and incorrect judgement by the now disgraced appeals committee.
In these cicumstances it is correct that Kramnik should not be required to accept any change in playing conditions.
The idea of lengthening the match, which would inevitably suit the player without the debilitating medical condition, is obviously unjust.
Kramnik has done nothing wrong here, he accepted, like Topalov, a set of match conditions. His decision to not play game five due to an illegal change in those conditions was entirely justified.
If he has rejected any attempt to gain some advantage by the Topalov team from this mess, he is perfectly within his rights to do so.
1. Zinedine Zidane should be in the Appeals Committee.
2. Arbiters should be replaced with soccer arbiters, who never make a mistake, and even when they do, it can’t be overruled.
3. The players should be allowed to move the pieces on the demo boards in their rest rooms.
“This means that any change of playing conditions is due to an illegal and incorrect judgement by the now disgraced appeals committee.”
This is less a disgrace, if at all, then Kramnik and Topalov not seeing a mate in three in game two.
Unbelievable that Danailov tries still to negotiate!
Bessel Kok’s analysis is striking:
http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=3387tcmwsq
I do not think the appeals committee made a mistake.
They are making a compromise so the match can move on.
Hopefully both players will likewise make a compromise.
I am impressed with Kirsan’s handling of this situation. He has his priorities right which is how to continue the match.
There is a difference.
Clearly it is unfair to continue the match without some penalty to Kramnik for not playing game 5 as scheduled. I’m sure that explains the “rumors” of an extended match schedule.
Kirsan can’t make Topalov do anything. He’ll walk just as easily as Kramnik.
I agree the resignation of the Appeals Committee is a compromise more than anything else.
Kramnik needs to understand he made a grave error in not playing, and he needs to pay a price for that. It’s time for him to stop crying and making ridiculous demands and start behaving like a champion. He wants everything his way and that’s not a fair solution.
Kramnik was entitled not to play under conditions that were changed unilaterally.
Bessel Kok has expressed an opinion to that effect on chessbase, and I would say a huge majority of observers would agree with him.
He suggests that the arbiter was wrong to start game 5, due to the incorrect actions of the appeals committee.
If the conditions of the match change, then the contract says both players have to agree. In fact, Kramnik was not even consulted!
Therefore Kramnik was entitled under the conditions of the match agreed by both sides, not to play.
“Kramnik needs to understand he made a grave error in not playing, and he needs to pay a price for that. It’s time for him to stop crying and making ridiculous demands and start behaving like a champion. He wants everything his way and that’s not a fair solution.”
Kramnik has not made any ridiculous demands, he was always willing to play the match under the conditions agreed by BOTH teams.
To say that he wants things his way suggests that he did something wrong. Even the appeals committee did not say that he did, so why do you?
The ridiculous behavior in this comes from Danailov and his pals on the appeals committee.
They have now thankfully gone, so hopefully some common sense can prevail.
For chess sakes!
Carefully inspect Kramnik’s and Topalov’s suits and shoes for hidden chess sets (if there is any) and let the match continue.
Hillarious.
If I were the president of FIDE I would address the players as follows: The forfeit of game #5 will be nullified. The match will continue per the contracts agreed upon prior to the match’s start.
If either or both player(s)refuses to make their first move in any game that player(s) will be stripped of their title and will recieve no money. Legally I can only take away Mr. Topalov’s title. As far as Mr.Kramnik is concerned I would merely ask him to consider to do what is in the best interest of the sport of chess. The chess fans want one champion. They may prefer one of you over the other
but they insist there be one and only one champion.
Mr.Kramnik as I stated earlier I can’t compel you to finish the match. You may keep your title and you may defend it as you see fit,but part of your legacy will be that you could’ve ended the schism of titles but chose not to. Obviously this would pertain to any successors who acted similarly.
If the match reaches its’ intended result the winner will be known simply as THE WORLD CHESS CHAMPION.
Nothing more and nothing less.
The fans & history are watching. Let’s not disappoint them.