There is now a follow-up at ChessBase with some clarifications on a mild misattribution and more from Short, as well some reader letters. I’m a little mystified at all the “ChessBase bias against Topalov” guff people are coughing up because they chose to reprint the Süddeutsche Zeitung article. I know fans will be fans, and jihadis don’t care why something negative about their hero is being said. But it would have been bizarre to ignore something like that appearing in a major paper. Another factor is that it wasn’t much of a shock for the CB guys, who, like me and most other people on the circuit, had been talking about and in some cases seeing similar behavior for quite a while. In sum, while there is no proof of Topalov receiving signals, not reprinting that story would have been inconceivable, if not irresponsible. Imagine the Miami Herald reporting allegations that Peyton Manning is taking steroids and American football websites ignoring it because they had no proof. Hell, it has never been proven that Barry Bonds ever took steroids but it’s been the biggest story in baseball for years. News about news is news. The fan bias test is simple: imagine the exact same story coming out but replace the name “Veselin Topalov” with “Vladimir Kramnik” or “Garry Kasparov” and be very honest with yourself about what your reaction would be.
Love him or hate him, Mig always tries to call things as he sees it. Do you agree with Mig on this issue?