05/18/2004
Why do we want to
abandon the Prague agreement now? Back in late 2003, I saw no hope.
Now we have dates scheduled for Kramnik vs. Leko and for the FIDE
knockout tournament in Tripoli. I see no reason to change course now.
I am confused by Yasser Seirawan, one of the fathers of Prague,
proposing that Kasparov step down as the challenger to the winner of Fide
Knockout. Why should Kasparov
be penalized by Ponomariov’s poor
decision?
Also, the players refusing to play in Tripoli, because Kasparov is
automatically seeded in the reunification, couldn’t beat Kasparov
anyway. Kasparov is
needed for the changing of the guard. He has dominated for 20 years and is
only one match removed from the REAL TITLE, which he defended numerous
times against the best in the world.
In 1975, chess did not have a proper changing of the guard. However
the world championship process and Anatoly Karpov saved the chess world.
Yasser is absolutely correct when he claims the
FIDE Knockout process is one of the worst methods for choosing a
champion. Yasser calls it a lottery process. After reunification, Fide
needs to return to the system that produced: Spassky, Fischer, Karpov,
Kasparov.
As far as
Yasser’s call for another 1948 style championship tournament consisting
of Kasparov and the previous winners of the FIDE Knockout, his proposal is
very unfair. Why do past FIDE
Knock out winners deserve special consideration? Only two of the players
are worthy of world championship contention (Anand, Kasparov). Instead of
having a tournament with Karpov (top 22), Khalifman (top 32) and
Ponomariov (top 10) , why not include Topalov (top 5), Svidler (top 6),
Morozevich (top 7). These players are a lot more deserving of
consideration in such a tournament. Lets
not forget the 1948 World Championship tournament included 5 of the best
players in the world. I would
much rather see Kasparov vs. Anand in a 12 game match, that could be
another Ali vs. Frasier two. There is precedence for such a match.
In 1978 Bobby Fischer refused his right, as a true ex world
champion, to be seeded in the 1978 world championship cycle. Fide stayed
the course by selecting Bobby Fischer’s predecessor, Boris Spassky.
Should Tripoli fall through, FIDE is well within its rights to
select
Anand as Ponomariov’s replacement. Kasparov brings great value into
the reunification process. For the good of the reunification, Kasparov
should only be eliminated via match play. This is the only way
Kasparov’s value can be passed to another player.
Lets not allow Ponomariov’s
poor decision-making to throw reunification off course. The Chess
World needs to make better use of the Internet and get back to the glory
days of the World Championship, when both champion and challenger were forged
into steel by the process. What’s wrong with going back to the old
style world championship process? I
really would like to know.
|