My slightly abridged letter was published in Chess Today - issue ct
142(1291). Friday May 21, 2004.
|
Chess Today abridged version
Full
version
|
I going to respond to some of the counter arguments
|
Chess Today:
|
Hangin's take :
|
Chess Today:- Kasparov was not declared the winner of the Ponomariov-Kasparov match, that match was cancelled! And Ponomariov was not disqualified, he is still (according to FIDE) the World Champion! So, the system when the champion has to start from stage 1, when the challenger (no matter how great a player he is!) is seeded into the final, is out of this world
|
Hangin's take: The match was cancelled because Ponomariov refused to
sign the contract to play in it. Ponomariov has changed his demands on
numerous occasions. First it was the time control issue, then it
became the I want to keep my title until the reunification is complete.
Now it's I want to play from round one in a knockout tournament. If the Kasparov vs. Ponomariov
match was ok, why isn't the Kasparov vs. New FIDE Knockout winner ok
? All true world champions, upon losing their titles, have had
either automatic rematch clauses or were seeded into the candidate process
of the next championship cycle.
|
Chess Today:
|
- We are not talking about just a sporting event. It's about the process that chess uses to determine the best player. The goal of a world championship event is to find the best classical chess player in the world. A player who can be measured up against the former champions such as :Steinitz, Lasker, Capablanca, Alekhine, Euwe, Botvinnik, Smyslov, Tal, Petrosian, Spassky, Fischer, Karpov, Kasparov, Kramnik. The last three FIDE knockouts have only produced one player worthy of consideration of being placed with the group above. The problems with FIDE knockout are numerous. Yasser Seirawan said it best, the FIDE knockout is one of the worst processes for choosing a world champion. Yasser calls it a lottery system. He's right. It's a blitz crazed, grab bag process, that only produces Shampions, that's right - SHAMPIONS. This process has no business being used to determine who is best at classical chess. When chess professionals support this process, they only devaluate their sport and themselves as athletes. Chess needs to go back to the glory days of world championships, when champion and challenger were both forged into steel by the process. Kasparov became a champion back in 1985. Kasparov's road to the title was much harder than Ponomariov's road to his title. Professional chess players should not stand for this. These players should also ask them self, how do I measure up against the FIDE Knockout Champions? If dozens can claim, hey I'm better, then we have serious problems. Chess should not devaluate it's rich tradition, it will only cheapen the sport. Chess players don't have to like their champions, but they should be proud of them or at least respect their abilities. |