I don't care much for Kramnik's Chess Tactics on or off the board, but I do agree with him about the underlined comments.
Kramnik on the final candidates tournament
"It is pretty clear that in the new system there are two people who are gaining a lot of advantages. They are Topalov and Kamsky. First of all there is this match between the two of them, which actually should never have happened – it was basically created out of nothing. Now the loser of this match is getting a chance to play, without qualification, in the final stage of the next world championship. That is quite a serious privilege. You can speculate yourself why this was done. I really don’t know.
The only thing which I can personally say – I mean it is concerning my personal position in the cycle – is that I am very unhappy, to put it mildly, with the situation that the loser of the Topalov-Kamsky match is inside the final stage of the qualification, and I, as the loser of my parallel match with Anand, am not. I believe that is totally unfair. I would like you not to misunderstand: I am not asking for any privileges. The only thing I am asking for and insisting on is that I must have exactly the same rights as the loser of that match. If the winners have the same rights I do not understand why one loser has much less rights than the other. This is something that has absolutely no logical explanation. The only thing I can understand is that there are certain powers inside FIDE who simply do not want to see me in the cycle. Unfortunately I have to draw this conclusion, because I do not have any other explanation.
So finally my decision is very simple: I am ready to start at ANY stage of the world championship, but I strongly believe that I have to start at exactly the same stage as the loser of Kamsky-Topalov,whether it is the Candidates tournament or the World Cup. If this will not be changed I will not play any qualification for this event, even if it would mean missing the cycle. For me it is pretty insulting to have to qualify for the honour of meeting the loser of Kamsky-Topalov. It is simply not fair. I am ready to qualify if this loser also has to qualify, but if not, then I am out. Okay, I still have chances to get into the final candidates tournament, as number one by rating, or as a nominee of the organiser, if the organiser chooses me. If not I will simply miss the cycle."
"Good decisions come from experience, and experience comes from bad decisions."
__________________________________________________________________
Ted Summers
AdminX wrote:I don't care much for Kramnik's Chess Tactics on or off the board, but I do agree with him about the underlined comments.
Kramnik on the final candidates tournament
"It is pretty clear that in the new system there are two people who are gaining a lot of advantages. They are Topalov and Kamsky. First of all there is this match between the two of them, which actually should never have happened – it was basically created out of nothing. Now the loser of this match is getting a chance to play, without qualification, in the final stage of the next world championship. That is quite a serious privilege. You can speculate yourself why this was done. I really don’t know.
The only thing which I can personally say – I mean it is concerning my personal position in the cycle – is that I am very unhappy, to put it mildly, with the situation that the loser of the Topalov-Kamsky match is inside the final stage of the qualification, and I, as the loser of my parallel match with Anand, am not. I believe that is totally unfair. I would like you not to misunderstand: I am not asking for any privileges. The only thing I am asking for and insisting on is that I must have exactly the same rights as the loser of that match. If the winners have the same rights I do not understand why one loser has much less rights than the other. This is something that has absolutely no logical explanation. The only thing I can understand is that there are certain powers inside FIDE who simply do not want to see me in the cycle. Unfortunately I have to draw this conclusion, because I do not have any other explanation.
So finally my decision is very simple: I am ready to start at ANY stage of the world championship, but I strongly believe that I have to start at exactly the same stage as the loser of Kamsky-Topalov,whether it is the Candidates tournament or the World Cup. If this will not be changed I will not play any qualification for this event, even if it would mean missing the cycle. For me it is pretty insulting to have to qualify for the honour of meeting the loser of Kamsky-Topalov. It is simply not fair. I am ready to qualify if this loser also has to qualify, but if not, then I am out. Okay, I still have chances to get into the final candidates tournament, as number one by rating, or as a nominee of the organiser, if the organiser chooses me. If not I will simply miss the cycle."
I'm sure he is quick to forget. That was not right then just as this is not right either. As I stated above, "I don't care much for Kramnik's Chess Tactics on or off the board".
"Good decisions come from experience, and experience comes from bad decisions."
__________________________________________________________________
Ted Summers
As I stated above, "I don't care much for Kramnik's Chess Tactics on or off the board".
Well, has Topalov behaved better off the board, so to speak? I don't think so.
--Jon
No, Topalov has not behaved any better. Still when it comes to FIDE, I agree with Kramnik on this issue.
"Good decisions come from experience, and experience comes from bad decisions."
__________________________________________________________________
Ted Summers
One murder does not justify another one. Shirov is dead and Kramnik also now. There is no need to resurrect Shirov, but also to Kramnik.
If the FIDE gives privileges to the loser of the encounter between Kamsky and Topalov and this is unfair, then we must remove these rights but not give rights to others unfairly.
