Darkmoon wrote:I'm not sure I fully understand Mr. Kasparov issue playing someone whose game was " being assisted by a 2200 player". Mr. Kasparov, per wiki at his peak was -a 2851 player!
He could be assisting the 2200 player - seemingly- without breaking into a sweat. But! In the youtube video he was mopping his brow!
Personally, I think he was out of shape in the performance department and didn't realize just out how much out of shape he was when it came to the "concentration department" !
I just don't believe him to be the kind of guy who will readily admit to this kind of embarrassment
It must also be remembered that Kasparov has a history of doing things his own way!
Take for example this episode Re: Kasparov touch-move controversy
During her match [Judit Polgar] with Kasparov in the fifth round, the World Champion changed his mind after taking his hand off a piece, and moved the piece to a different square.[86][87] According to chess rules, once a player has released a piece, he cannot make a different move, so Kasparov should have been required to play his original move. Polgár said she did not challenge this because "I was playing the World Champion and didn't want to cause unpleasantness during my first invitation to such an important event. I was also afraid that if my complaint was overruled I would be penalized on the clock when we were in time pressure." She was unaware at the time that the re-move was caught on tape by a television crew the videotape showed that Kasparov's fingers were free of the knight for about a quarter of a second: The tournament director was criticised for not forfeiting Kasparov when the videotape evidence was made available to him.
In other words, he just doesn't like losing if he can help it, and if he can figure out a workable excuse on the fly ...
Edit:
Deep Blue!? This is who he is! This is one of his foibles.
However, that may be it does not negate the fact-obviously! that he is one of the greatest chess players of all time- if not the greatest.
We all know Kasparov's history and your assessment of Kasparov's strength at the time is based solely on your opinion and isn't relevant to whether Kasparov was right to call this matter to everyone's attention.
He was right to do so. The rules are clear. He won his case.
Darkmoon wrote:I'm not sure I fully understand Mr. Kasparov issue playing someone whose game was " being assisted by a 2200 player". Mr. Kasparov, per wiki at his peak was -a 2851 player!
He could be assisting the 2200 player - seemingly- without breaking into a sweat. But! In the youtube video he was mopping his brow!
Personally, I think he was out of shape in the performance department and didn't realize just out how much out of shape he was when it came to the "concentration department" !
I just don't believe him to be the kind of guy who will readily admit to this kind of embarrassment
It must also be remembered that Kasparov has a history of doing things his own way!
Take for example this episode Re: Kasparov touch-move controversy
During her match [Judit Polgar] with Kasparov in the fifth round, the World Champion changed his mind after taking his hand off a piece, and moved the piece to a different square.[86][87] According to chess rules, once a player has released a piece, he cannot make a different move, so Kasparov should have been required to play his original move. Polgár said she did not challenge this because "I was playing the World Champion and didn't want to cause unpleasantness during my first invitation to such an important event. I was also afraid that if my complaint was overruled I would be penalized on the clock when we were in time pressure." She was unaware at the time that the re-move was caught on tape by a television crew the videotape showed that Kasparov's fingers were free of the knight for about a quarter of a second: The tournament director was criticised for not forfeiting Kasparov when the videotape evidence was made available to him.
In other words, he just doesn't like losing if he can help it, and if he can figure out a workable excuse on the fly ...
Edit:
Deep Blue!? This is who he is! This is one of his foibles.
However, that may be it does not negate the fact-obviously! that he is one of the greatest chess players of all time- if not the greatest.
Kasparov today after stopping to be a professional player is maybe at the level of 2600 and not at the level of 2851 and I do not think that he does not know it.
The playing strength is also clearly weaker when you play a simultan because you use clearly less time per move so I guess that the playing strength of kasparov when he plays a simultan is not more than 2200 or 2300 and it is obvious for him that he can lose against 2200 assuming that he does not know who are the 2200 players and does not use more time against them.
I see nothing special in the fact that kasparov does not like losing.
Many chess players do not like losing and many chess players could behave the same against judit polgar in case that they found that they made a mistake and left the knight in the wrong square.(I believe that more than 10% of the chess players will do the same actions that kasparov made and I read about worse cases when a player made a bad move and press the clock when his opponent was not near the board and after pressing the clock the player decided to change his bad move to a different move.
Only people who do not know the chess rules can criticise the tournament director for not forfeiting Kasparov because videotape is something that
the chess rules forbid to use as an evidence in chess.
Last year I also had an incident. In a blitz game we both had five seconds left on the clock. Then he promoted his pawn but did not change it into a queen. After that I moved my king and he claimed an illegal move for his pawn on the eight row could capture my king. But I said how do I know you did not promote your pawn into a knight ? I lost the game for other people said that my position was totally lost. But why would that matter for most important was time.
Henk wrote:Last year I also had an incident. In a blitz game we both had five seconds left on the clock. Then he promoted his pawn but did not change it into a queen. After that I moved my king and he claimed an illegal move for his pawn on the eight row could capture my king. But I said how do I know you did not promote your pawn into a knight ? I lost the game for other people said that my position was totally lost. But why would that matter for most important was time.
You could win the game simply by stopping the clock after he promoted his pawn without replacing it.
Promoting a pawn without replacing it by the piece that you want is an illegal move.
The rules of blitz say that a player lose by making an illegal move assuming the opponent stop the clock and claim a win.
Unfortunately instead of stopping the clock and claiming a win you made an illegal move by yourself because it is illegal to move in an illegal position so you lost the game after your opponent claimed a win.
Henk wrote:Last year I also had an incident. In a blitz game we both had five seconds left on the clock. Then he promoted his pawn but did not change it into a queen. After that I moved my king and he claimed an illegal move for his pawn on the eight row could capture my king. But I said how do I know you did not promote your pawn into a knight ? I lost the game for other people said that my position was totally lost. But why would that matter for most important was time.
You could win the game simply by stopping the clock after he promoted his pawn without replacing it.
Promoting a pawn without replacing it by the piece that you want is an illegal move.
The rules of blitz say that a player lose by making an illegal move assuming the opponent stop the clock and claim a win.
Unfortunately instead of stopping the clock and claiming a win you made an illegal move by yourself because it is illegal to move in an illegal position so you lost the game after your opponent claimed a win.
Ok, clear. I think he did not change the pawn into a queen for there was no queen. He already had one, but he had no time to get a rook and put it upside down.
Henk wrote:Last year I also had an incident. In a blitz game we both had five seconds left on the clock. Then he promoted his pawn but did not change it into a queen. After that I moved my king and he claimed an illegal move for his pawn on the eight row could capture my king. But I said how do I know you did not promote your pawn into a knight ? I lost the game for other people said that my position was totally lost. But why would that matter for most important was time.
You could win the game simply by stopping the clock after he promoted his pawn without replacing it.
Promoting a pawn without replacing it by the piece that you want is an illegal move.
The rules of blitz say that a player lose by making an illegal move assuming the opponent stop the clock and claim a win.
Unfortunately instead of stopping the clock and claiming a win you made an illegal move by yourself because it is illegal to move in an illegal position so you lost the game after your opponent claimed a win.
Hi, can you provide the URL link that supports what you are claiming. Thanks
Darkmoon wrote:I'm not sure I fully understand Mr. Kasparov issue playing someone whose game was " being assisted by a 2200 player". Mr. Kasparov, per wiki at his peak was -a 2851 player!
He could be assisting the 2200 player - seemingly- without breaking into a sweat. But! In the youtube video he was mopping his brow!
Personally, I think he was out of shape in the performance department and didn't realize just out how much out of shape he was when it came to the "concentration department" !
I just don't believe him to be the kind of guy who will readily admit to this kind of embarrassment
It must also be remembered that Kasparov has a history of doing things his own way!
Take for example this episode Re: Kasparov touch-move controversy
During her match [Judit Polgar] with Kasparov in the fifth round, the World Champion changed his mind after taking his hand off a piece, and moved the piece to a different square.[86][87] According to chess rules, once a player has released a piece, he cannot make a different move, so Kasparov should have been required to play his original move. Polgár said she did not challenge this because "I was playing the World Champion and didn't want to cause unpleasantness during my first invitation to such an important event. I was also afraid that if my complaint was overruled I would be penalized on the clock when we were in time pressure." She was unaware at the time that the re-move was caught on tape by a television crew the videotape showed that Kasparov's fingers were free of the knight for about a quarter of a second: The tournament director was criticised for not forfeiting Kasparov when the videotape evidence was made available to him.
In other words, he just doesn't like losing if he can help it, and if he can figure out a workable excuse on the fly ...
Edit:
Deep Blue!? This is who he is! This is one of his foibles.
However, that may be it does not negate the fact-obviously! that he is one of the greatest chess players of all time- if not the greatest.
I think the issue is different than what you suspect. I've played a number of simuls over the years, and I would generally either know the opponents or if there was someone playing I did not know, I would chat with him for a minute or two. Because knowing the skill level of your opponent is an important piece of information. I was never more than a mid-2200 USCF player, but I still "played my opponent". If I knew he was a 1400 player I would play much more aggressively, with the intent of getting the easy games out of the way so that I could spend more time with the 1800-1900 players. I would not raise a stink about it, but I would certainly prefer to know what was what...
+1, im completely sympathetic to kasparovs sentiment; it makes perfect sense to me. the fact that he states it with his characteristic bombasity is a treat for me but i can see how it would turn off others
Your explanation makes sense and I believe Kasparov was attempting to make the same point. But he was really stressed in doing it. He was beside himself. He broke out in less of a sweat in World Chess Championship matchs!
He is out of shape and found himself over extended. He was stretched and stressed. You put it right -too much of a stink.
For for the worlds greatest chess master - he could have behaved less over the top with his complaint ! I was waiting for him to have a cardiac arrest.
