I have very high opinion of Alex. I consider him my friend. He is one of the nicest Grandmasters and a very honorable one. I have worked with Alex on a number of occasions. He was my teammate in the USA vs. Russia match and he participated in the 2006 NY City Mayor’s Cup, the highest rated RR event in the United States. Alex also worked with Karpov for the Times Square Rapid Match where he defeated Kasparov. Alex and A. Zatonskih are the only 2 players in history to win both Ukrainian and US Championships.
Again, I was not in Elista so I have no idea what went on. That is why I decided to stay neutral. But the descriptions of the event from ChessBase / Russian media were quite contrasting to what I heard from other direct sources.
So which side is right? As I have said many times before, both players, their managers and FIDE could have resolved this mess in a much more dignified way. It is inexcusable that the situation went way out of hands. That does not mean that I condone the language, actions or behavior of Danailov during and after the match. No professional person should ever behave that way, even if he thinks he was right.
It is silly to have definitive opinions based on what what the media says. We will probably never know the whole truth in Elista. But what I find interesting is honorable Grandmasters who were IN Elista such as Illescas, Vallejo Pons and Onischuk have very contrasting views of what happened. They did not get the information from the tabloids. They WERE THERE! So why such a big contrast?
A few days ago, GM Miguel Illescas, Kramnik’s second, defended Kramnik on Chess.fm. He offered many good and interesting points. I report, you decide. Here are some of the words from Alex Onischuk:
I will not describe the scandal all over again, most of the facts are known. After coming back to the US and reading some reviews and talking about the issue with my colleagues, I realized that I’m one of the not so many supporters of Topalov in this conflict.
In this article I don’t want to argue about who was wrong and who was right. Time will show. I just want to say something that I know for sure, what I felt and I saw from inside and not from reading the Russian press or the ChessBase articles.
1. Nobody in our team considered the match situation catastrophic, not when the score was 0:2 and not when it was 1:3. In fact, we all believed that Topalov had great chances to win the match. Why not? It’s well known that Topalov plays better toward the end. His performance in Linares and Sophia proves it. Physically he is much stronger than Kramnik.
2. The manager of Topalov, Silvio Danailov sincerely believed that Kramnik’s behavior was suspicious and he suspected him of using outside help, so his protests had a purpose to stop whatever it could be and not just to disturb Kramnik.
3. Topalov is a great fighter and he has never wanted the match to be stopped. All he wanted was fair play.
Source: USCF Website. The rest of article by Alex can be read there.
“All he wanted is to play fair.”
And win a game by forfeit?
Thanks for the nice and frank words, Alex. That is a refreshment from all the stench coming from Elista and ChessBase. Cheaters shouldn’t be tolerated, even when there is a shade of doubt. In Kramnik’s case, it was obvious and more than highly suspicious.
Well said Alex Onischuk
Topalov did not get fair play…
Utter rubbish.
@lantonov: für Menschen wie Du einer bist, empfinde ich aufrichtiges Mitleid – mehr leider nicht!
(sei froh, dass ich keine griechischen buchstaben verwendet habe …)
by the way – do you know Mr. GM Onishuk personally – or why do you call him by his first name?
sincerly …
Anon sais..Utter rubbish.
“i may not agree with what you are saying, but i will defend to the death your right to say it”..
@hoddy – the “coriolis force” – e.g. forcing whirl winds to move counter clockwise on the south half of the earth – may have disturbed your comprehension. does it or don’t?
it would be the only explanatory exculpation for your postings here in this “onischuk” blog theme…
dear god …
– the us americans have never entered the moon
– an alien starship crashed at rockwell
– only 5% of all germans have been real nazis
– the cia is responsible for 9/11
– topalov lost to kramnik by unfair playing conditions …
everything just the same …
PIPE DREAMS
^^
hahahaha your good Vohly
Although I disagree with Onischuk, I really like his reminder that the media is very often biased. I still remain much more on Kramnik’s side than Topalov’s, but with the understanding that we will never know the whole story. Thanks Susan for posting this.
I once had my opponent leave the board for 40 minutes at a critical phase in the opening. He then returned and played it perfectly.
Do I have any proof that this player cheated? No. Was I suspicious? Who on earth wouldn’t be?
That game didn’t matter all that much – there were no money or titles at stake. Had it been a decisive game for, say, a sizeable sum of money, I can guarantee that I would have reacted in some way.
Whether you believe Topalov to be the devil or not, he does have a point: You’re supposed to sit at the table when you think about your moves, not be off somewhere where noone can see you. Who is going to pay to see two empty chairs, with players walking swiftly to the table to make their move before retreating hastily back to their rest rooms? It’s silly at best, suspicious at worst.
I disagree with Alex because I compare a true gentleman Spassky how he reacted when he received a forfeit win immediately after and the next day vs the way Topalov acted immediately afterwards and the next week! Spassky did not like it and did his best to play the match with Fischer. Topalov and his manager were beaming after receiving the forfeit win and also realizing they had upset Kramnik, something Spassky did not want to do to Fischer. They both lost the matches, but Spassky with dignity and grace, Topalov with no shame, no class and crybaby actions and words. Topalov had a right to issue the complaint but his actions afterwards have been shameful. It does not matter if Alex was there or we read about it in internet and other news sources, to condone criminal unethical behavoir is just wrong. This speaks volumes on Onishuk’s moral fiber or lack there of. Fact remains, in over the board chess, Topalov lost both matches to a superior opponent, Kramnik who defeated Kasparov also and is the true World Champion in lineage from Steinitz to Fischer, Karpov and Kasparov. Topalov just does not belong with those heralded Chess Kings yet. I hope he learns from his mistakes made off the board and stops associating with his manager who is damaging his chess professional reputation and resumes a pure just ethical moral chess career. These modern players could learn from Morphy how to behave towards your opponents both during and after the game.
Please cut the crap! Thank you.
Kramnik won the title, Topalov lost. Even with a free point he lost. Even with these dirty match tactics he lost. So it’s time to move on for the Topalov team!
Kramnik is the one and only World Champion of Chess! And he deserves this. Does the Topalov-side really believe he cheated with a computer!?!? You must all be kidding!!
i think we should forget Elista, and move on, life aint estatic u know.
Disgraceful comments from Onischuk.
I’m glad Onischuk spoke out. ChessBase obviously lied to protect Kramnik since they have a match with Kramnik soon. Of course the Russian media would protect Kramnik as well. Kramnik is one of the most unethical person in chess.
Now it has been confirmed. Kramnik cheated and behave badly during the match. How sad! He’ll never play in Mexico because no one will protect him there.
I don’t agree with everything Alex said. But I have to agree that Kramnik’s behavior was very suspicious. No one will ever play a match against him in the future without the bathroom provision. He won’t be allowed to do as he wishes again.
How can you guys still take sides in this matter??? Both Topalov AND Kramnik behaved like utter fools and disgraced the image of our beloved game. They were being paid huge amounts of sponsor money and what did they do in return? No one of them is a good sportsman (remember Spassky).
It is truly sad that some of the best players in the world are such .ssholes.
Blah! Can’t we just stick to the facts? Topalov lost the match, both over the board (twice!) and aside. If his position was really misrepresented in the press he should blame (and probably sack) his manager. And of course FIDE which, as usual, fucked up really good.
From the simple fact that Topalov was the champion backed by FIDE and that all his buddies were there, I conclude that he got very fair play. Kramnik on the other hand was (and probably still is) an outsider to FIDE. Most FIDE people obviously have prefered Topalov as the unified champion, everything would have been easier then: no problems about the status of Mexico 2007, the already agreed match against Radjabov could be played, and, most importantly, they would have prooved, that the guy picked by FIDE as world champion is (of course!) the real guy.
Kramnik will never play in Mexico City. He only plays in settings where he can do whatever he wants. No real organizer would put up with his crap. His match against Leko was a complete fix! His first match against Fritz was also fixed. Everyone knows that. That’s why chessbase works hard to protect Kramnik.
Well I am glad to see that Onischuk put his words as good as possible to maintain his own reputation. If he were to say one word against Topalov he would never be hired again. He would be a total traitor to his team.
Even if he was a member who plotted the entire thing against Kramnik he has to do the best he can to support his team position.
Personally I believe if he was really there and really believed in Topalov’s position he would have much more to say and come on much stronger than what he did say.
My reading of the statement only confirms that Topalov was wrong and Kramnik was correct.
And apparently from what is said I guess this helps explain Susan’s shameless support of Topalov and her friend Onischuk.
Hopefully Topalov will simply disappear from the chess scene and we can go back to playing honest chess again.
It was certainly not Onischuk’s fault to be stuck in such a terrible position. I am glad to see is a loyal team member. and I hope he never works for Topalov again.
And I hope that Susan will return her blog to some common sense and leave all this behind her. I am sick and tired of reading Susan trying to convince people that Topalov’s abuse was justified. Topalov was not justified. Susan you are dead wrong. Stop arguing with the world. You are not going to be right when you are wrong.
The comments from Onischul clearly show the disgraceful nature of Kramnik. FIDE should ban Kramnik from going to the bathroom 50 times each game in the future. Then he’ll be 2700 where he belongs.
this comment is in no way related to me..hoddy
Hoddie said…
Kramnik will never play in Mexico City. He only plays in settings where he can do whatever he wants. No real organizer would put up with his crap. His match against Leko was a complete fix! His first match against Fritz was also fixed. Everyone knows that. That’s why chessbase works hard to protect Kramnik.
Saturday, November 11, 2006 2:11:39 PM
One anon said:
I am sick and tired of reading Susan trying to convince people that Topalov’s abuse was justified.
Susan is totally correct about the matter. I will copy here what I wrote in another entry in this blog:
————————-
gabor (I) said…
As I stated already, I am glad that the match was finished, I am glad somebody won and now we have a unified world champion. Kramnik deserved it, he defeated Kasparov, he defeated Leko (well, tied), he defeated Topalov. Having said that……….
Cheating became a theoretical possibility in chess, far more so than ever in the past. Miniature communication devices exist, computers capable of high level chess analysis exist. As long as it is a theoretical possibility, nobody should get INSULTED by the suspicion of cheating. It is just as silly, if somebody would get insulted boarding an airplane and having his luggage x-rayed. ON top of it Kramnik did display an unusual pattern of behavior.
So, whether he cheated or not, it was unreasonable to become insulted. He is an intelligent person, he knows very well that yes, it is possible. He is an intelligent person, he knows that it is not unreasonable to become suspicious him going to the bathroom 18 times during a single chess game.
(I add to it now: as a practicing physician, I can assure anyone, that only a very ill person goes to the bathroom 18 times in a 4-8 hours period of time. So ill, that such person would not be able to play world champion level chess)
If I was in his place,I would have offered to be searched for any electronic device, check the bathroom before the game, after the game and then leave me alone.
What would have been the big deal?
Gabor
Ps: so the most suspicious was not so much going to the bathroom so many times, but his reaction to the complaint.
Wednesday, November 08, 2006 10:54:15 PM
“But what I find interesting is honorable Grandmasters who were IN Elista such as Illescas, Vallejo Pons and Onischuk have very contrasting views of what happened. They did not get the information from the tabloids. They WERE THERE! So why such a big contrast?
Uh, because they were working for different teams? No, can’t be that easy can it?
Good old Dr.Gabor…Susans Guardian Angel..always fair with good sense of balance
At first I thought that the initiative of Danailov before game 5 was pure gamesmanship. But I remember a scientific investigation of good chess players with the heading “Paranoid thrill seekers”. Good chess players seems to be a bit paranoid 🙂 It is good for your chess to think that your opponent is out to get you, helps the prohylaxis thinking 🙂 That could to some extent explain the behavior of both Topalov and Kramnik in the situation.
Kramnik clearly behaved suspiciously. Gabor was right. Why was he so insulted? If he was innocent, he could have said go ahead and check all you want. I can’t support Kramnik’s behavior. Kramnik will also likely bail from Mexico City and hijack the WC title again. What a coward!
Hi,
thanks Alex for professional point of view.
The behaviour of Kramnik and reaction to closing toilettes was very suspicious.
The way he got the title was not very clear, he lost to Shirov in eliminations but was playing versus Kasparov because Shirov was unable to collect the sponsors in time, Kramnik did.
The match K-K should not had happened because Kramnik had not won eliminations but because of money he played.
There is no other solutions as finishing with dictating the rules of competitions by champion.
Hope that professional players will have enough solidarity to run SL 2007 as the WCC championship.
Rgds
Kramnik has NO morals. If he did, he wouldn’t have played against Kasparov in 2000. He didn’t earn it. He cheated Shirov. Kramnik has always been about Kramnik and no one else. He has done nothing for chess since he defeated Kasparov. Topalov has done much more for chess than Kramnik.
How can anyone condone Kramnik’s behavior? Danailov only did what he did because of Kramnik.
A truly held belief does not by itself justify disgraceful behavior. The belief has to be reasonable.
Kramnik spent time in a room that was well searched before each game. That does not provide good reason to conclude Kramnik could likely be cheating.
– – – – –
The Appeals Committee members were the people most responsible for causing the Elista fiasco.
By giving Topalov’s formal accusation more weight than it deserved, they put everyone else in no-win situations; including Kramnik, Kirsan, and Gijssen.
Gene Milener
http://CastleLong.com/
Susan this story seems to support Kramnik. What is missing is the fact that Onischuk slept through the entire happening. and then after the fact, after the game, Onischuk has no idea what could have happened. it indicates that there was never a discussion of Kramnik in the bathroom with them before game 5 was forfeit.
Had there really been a feeling that kramnik was cheating then everyone on the team would have been talking about it BEFORE game 5 was to start. but no one except Topalov and Danailov apparently knew about the problem before Game 5 was forfeit.
This indicates that it was a set up.
Onischuk’s statement that “after” the forfeit that Danailov really believed that there was a problem is simply an indication that Danailov told a good story.
I am not totally convinced that Danailov did this purposefully in a terrible way.
Had the total team been talking about this after all the games or certainly after game 4, then Onischuk would have told us what was discussed before game 5. But he indicates that he had no clue about any of this before the game 5 forfeit.
I want to thank you for bringing out the truth that Topalov is 100% guilty and Kramnik is totally innocent. of course my clear thinking is needed. but I am glad to contribute to the truth.
sorry there is a typo.
I am not totally convinced that Danailov did this purposefully in a terrible way.
should read
I am now totally that Danailov did this purposefully in a terrible way.
{sorry for the typo mistake.}
Gabor wrote:
“(I add to it now: as a practicing physician, I can assure anyone, that only a very ill person goes to the bathroom 18 times in a 4-8 hours period of time. So ill, that such person would not be able to play world champion level chess)”
Although I am not a physician, I must respectfully but strongly disagree with such a generalization.
For the last 25 years, ever since junior high school, I’ve had the problem of needing to use the restroom every 15-20 minutes during high stress periods that require a great deal of thinking. That has included chess tournaments with 6-hour games, studying for finals, and being close to deadlines as a professional computer programmer.
Yet, I’ve only been in excellent health the entire time. True, during such periods I drink several pints of water, but I’m always drinking water when I work (never coffee or tea or soda). But when the stressful situation ends, so does the constant need to go to the restroom.
Whether the behavior is psychological or physiological, I don’t know. But frankly, given the addictive ways other people deal with stress, my habits never bothered me.
I’m not saying that my situation is similar to Kramnik’s. I’m only saying that the generalization above that I must be “very ill” certainly doesn’t apply to me.
I must admit that the whole situation in Elista makes me not want to return to competitive chess. In the rare times when I need to think for more than 15 minutes for a move, sometimes I have to walk away and take a bathroom break. When I started competing as a kid 25 years ago, there were no pocket computers, and as I rule I never spoke to anyone during tournament games, and so my behavior raised no suspicion. Now, I dread the day that I do the same thing, through no fault of my own, and people start accusing me. Frankly, the joy of competition isn’t worth going through something like that.
you say Topalov s phisically much stronger than Kramnik.
I would say that s psichologically also much stronger than world champ; and he plays also better chess than world champ.
That s the reason he lost the tiebreak…
Kramnik obviously acted in a very suspicious manner in the whole story, showing arrogant “primadonna” reactions to absolutely legitimate calls for courtesy and clarity from the opposition:
1.First, when he had his suspicions and requiring a screen between players and audience, Topalov agreed. Then when in his own turn Topalov required explanation to his opponent strange time-offs in a non-surveillance area and suggested reasonable arrangements to prevent further suspicions, Kramnik called for “privacy” and “breach of the contract” and “change of the conditions”. Obvious double standards?
2.After it turned out that, before the games, the rest rooms had been visited by external people, unknown and un-solicited, Topalov had every moral right and every practical reason to require explanation (and changes) regarding the unusual behaviour of his opponent. However Kramnik reacted as if he was some schoolboy caught to smoke in the classroom, started protesting his innocence and refused to explain (even in private to his opponent!). Thus, Kramnik (intentionally?) left impressions that “there was something” and further fuelled the fears of his opponent. Calculated arrogance?
Sure, this sad incident should be prevented in future. More attention should be applied in the preparation of championship matches and tournaments to eliminate any possible fears from any computer-aided play and less absence of the players from the chessboard.
Forget about this issue. The next thing is to not repeat it. Both Topolov team, Kramnik personally and Chess player(and team members) cannot repeat this behaviour.
Kramnik is now the World unified champion. but he is not the World best active player. He must prove it openly. If Kramnik refuses to defend his Fide WChamp then that is a discrace. He can’t just play a match every once in 4 years and then expect people to believe he is the best player in the planet even if he do not behave so oddly.(if he did not play Topolov when do you think he will defend his title 2008??)
I also urge Topolov be in part of the final and include one more wild card involving the like of Ivanchuk, Karpov, Khalifman, other high ranking player and Women Champ and Vice Champ.
So the Wchamp in Mexico will be a 10 players involving.
Kramnik, Topolov, Anand, Swindler, Moro, and plus 4 Qualifier and one more wildcard.
The winner of this tournament will be the World Champ. He will be the Fide OPEN World Champion and gets to fight the Classical Match Champion the next(or 2) year. Then the Classical Match Champion gets to fight and participate in The World Open Championship the next(or 2) year. Then You will truely have a Unify world Champion who is the Linear Classical World Champ and also The Universal Open World Champ. (off course they you may have 2 Wchamp at the same time).
So right now Kramnik is the unified World Champion although he won the Fide Champion not in an open event. So he need to defend it next year. and then he can defend his classical the next two-three years.
You can also have for odd years, The worlds or grand Prix Champ in Blitz(5-10) and rapid(30-60).
Classical Chess beat FIDE chess even with a free point, period.
there were no free point, loss on time !
Danke Alex für die Wahrheit! Eigentlich bin ich weder für Kramnik oder Topalov, aber als vernünftig denkende Person kann ich nur eins sagen: Die offizielle Erklärung, er geht spazieren, war lächerlich. Die Reaktion von Kramnik hat NUR bestätigt, dass er etwas vertuscht oder Psychokrieg führt. Falls er “sauber” wäre, hätte er nur gelächelt und die gemeinsame Toilette benutzt. In Brissago hatte er keine eigene Toilette und das hat ihm nicht gestört, wieso plötzlich diese Reaktion?
My English is not the best, but … Thanks Alex for the truth! I’m not fen of Topalov or Kramnik, but I’ll can think normal and so I can say: the official statement, Kramnik uses the WC for walk is suspicious. More suspicious is his reaction. If he was “clean”, he would say: “Ok, we use the same WC”. In Brissago, Switzerland, Kramnik didn’t have his own toilette, why this reaction now?
D. Alder, Switzerland
All three points are not convincing.
1’When you are in a team, of course you act like you are not desperate, at least on the surface. If you are the player, you don’t want others to know how desperate you are. If you are others, you are not that desperate yourself and you are not suppose to infuence the player in a bad way. So basically Onischuk didn’t say anything with point 1.
2’Danialov have been acting like a clown. Who knows what was his real thoughts. He can always acts. You just can’t read one man’s mind from the surface.
3’Maybe Topalov does want to play in fair situation. That makes sense. However, he is also a man of strong emothion, which could hurt his judgement in nervous strain. He may have some illusion. And his behaviour of not giving up the forfeit point is not helping to prove his desirability of fairplay, also not helping to prove he was not desperate in the situation of 0:2/1:3.
Btw, where is the words of Illescas, Vallejo Pons? Recently there is a research on a computer base about all the world champions’ play. It is quite interesting and seems in accord with the style of this blog. But Susan seems never notice it. I hope this is not because some of its conclusion favours Mr. Kramnik.
“You’re supposed to sit at the table when you think about your moves, not be off somewhere where noone can see you.”
Is that so, has FIDE changed the rules?
If they do change the rules, so one has to sit at the board for x% of the time, then so be it..till then…
“Kramnik has NO morals. If he did, he wouldn’t have played against Kasparov in 2000.”
Thought they couldn’t get sponsors re Kasparov-Shirov? What’s Shirov’s problem got to do with him?
There’s still no proof that Kramnik had assistance.
Indeed, he won the match in the rapidplay component – despite having lost a point with the forfeit.
“But the descriptions of the event from ChessBase / Russian media were quite contrasting to what I heard from other direct sources.”
Don’t understand the dig at Chessbase…what about TWIC? Or any of the other websites except this blog? Most GMs seem to support Kramnik’s position…
Kramnik won. The other geezer lost. End of.
Kramnik behaviour was suspicious and it was obvious fouls to his Partner.
The judge has not reacted to the Kramniks draw proposals, where he was.
His place was at the table of the players not at his own table.
Kramnik have been going to the toilette.
He can not live without WC ?
May be it is his place WC ?
So we have ‘toilette’ champion.
What a shame to the chess.
——
“You’re supposed to sit at the table when you think about your moves, not be off somewhere where noone can see you.”
Is that so, has FIDE changed the rules?
If they do change the rules, so one has to sit at the board for x% of the time, then so be it..till then…
——
While the laws of the game do not demand you to sit at the table while working out your moves, it’s simply the common etiquette. By not sitting at the table, you’re creating a situation, giving your opponent reason to wonder what’s going on and maybe suspect you of cheating. It’s a mind game, provoking your opponent to react in a fashion that may not benefit him.
The thinly veiled accusations hurt our game, and we would all be better off without it, but I believe Topalov’s reaction was more natural and human than most people here give him credit for. Noone’s immune to the immense psychological pressure of such a match, except those who follow it from thousands of miles away.
@vohaul,
Please, save your compassion. You may need it when you get older.
Danailov flush away Topalov into Kramnik’s toilet.
Fair play goes the same way.
Chess is a board game.
It is unfortunate, that Kramnik’s behavior was so unusual. His frequent trips to the toilet are not normal. Or is this normal for Kramnik to leave the board so frequently?
Perhaps he should have called for a doctor, if he was ill?
Questioning, unusual behavior was appropriate by Topalov’s team. No harm was done to Kramnik. However, Kramnik used poor judgement by forfeiting a game. Shame on him.
Kramnik played exceptional chess and won, congratulations to him. He is the undisputed World Champion.
>>
lantonov said…
Thanks for the nice and frank words, Alex. That is a refreshment from all the stench coming from Elista and ChessBase.
>>
It’s dishonest to attack people when you can’t figure out what it is they did wrong. Having faith that they did something wrong isn’t enough.
That’s why you, Lyudmil Antonov, are so often used as argument for Kramnik, and cited as evidence of how vacuous Topalov supporters are. Topalov’s case is so weak that nobody can support him except by telling vague, non-specific lies about his enemies.
I’m sure Kramnik would like to thank you for your support, Lyudmil. Keep discrediting Topalov for us. 🙂
Gadzooks, even Topalov’s own entourage doesn’t support him! He says that the complaint was sincere, but even he isn’t willing to come out and endorse the behavior of publicly accusing your opponent.
Of course he can’t, it’s an explicit violation of FIDE Ethics Rules. Give him a little credit for not even pretending to support it.
Of course what does this mean? If Topalov had genuine suspicions at the time, and has them still, then was he lying in the Game 6 press conference when he said that he just over-reacted, had no more suspicions, and that his continued participation in the match proved he had no suspicions?
“hoddy said…
Well said Alex Onischuk
Topalov did not get fair play…”
Except Onischuk didn’t say that. Topalov said it, without evidence, which is why the world hates him now. Onischuk wasn’t that foolish.
>Mimemi said…
The comments from Onischul clearly show the disgraceful nature of Kramnik.
>
LOL, you must not have read them then, because they don’t say any such thing. All they say is that Topalov’s team believed he could come back from 0-2 (Duh), and that the complaint was sincere, not an attempt to bust up the match.
He doesn’t say that Kramnik cheated, nor does he defend Topalov’s clear-cut violation of FIDE Ethics rules. Sorry.
>>FIDE should ban Kramnik from going to the bathroom 50 times each game in the future. Then he’ll be 2700 where he belongs.
>>
Onischuk doesn’t say any of that. But okay, let’s play it your way. If it’s okay to agree with someone about things they haven’t said, then I agree with you that Topalov is totally in the wrong.
Haha, a nice laugh at that anonymous. He might be Kramnik thanking me. You are welcome, boy. And cut down a little on cheating, will you? 🙂
>>
lantonov said…
Haha, a nice laugh at that anonymous. He might be Kramnik thanking me. You are welcome, boy. And cut down a little on cheating, will you? 🙂
>>
Yes, and thank you for admitting that Topalov is wrong. Every time you attack his accusers rather than defend him, you admit that he can’t be deefended. In future I will cite you as an example of a Topalov fan who admits his guilt. Have a nice day.
Wow, what a twisted Jesuit logic! So when you attack the accusers of Kramnik you attack Kramnik himself. Nice trap for you! Go back to study Loiola’s book.