Mtel Masters Begins

Mig, I never understood the rules completely. You mean it really has to be a *forced* repetition? In what sense? Just that you can't stop repeating without getting worse? Is the arbiter going to decide that by a glance at the position?

I like that nickname: "Mr. Plus Two". LOL

I am sure Anand got a boost from Kasparov's retirement. In his last interview, Kramnik was almost generous at moments... he has to be happy!I wish somebody had some inside info about this.

It is Kramnik's sad fate to be Mr. Plus Two, less popular than Anand, perpetually out of form, and, incidentally, picked to win the year's strongest tournament.

The comment about draws on the tournament website is as follows:

"Draw-offers will be allowed only through the Chief-Arbiter in three cases: a triple-repetition of the position, a perpetual check and in theoretically drawn positions."

yes, I weep too when thinking of his fate. Poor misunderstood duckie who just wants to paint. I personally cordially dislike him for his hypocrisy, nothing else. Getting religion on qualifiers after he was safely past the bar, and then avoiding the one rematch that would have ignited Chess as a sport in the world.

Somehow people still manage to portray Kramnik's sticking to a signed agreement instead of giving Kasparov a rematch in birthday present as the worst of all crimes. It's amazing.

I agree that early draws are boring for fans, but can you really stop players from making repetitive moves to end a game? Seems to me if the players agree, it only takes three moves.

I have a feeling that Kramnik will play some decent chess in this tournament... either him, Topalov or Anannd will win it.

"Somehow people still manage to portray Kramnik's sticking to a signed agreement instead of giving Kasparov a rematch in birthday present as the worst of all crimes."

Worst of all crimes? No. But it's hard to avoid the conclusion that Kramnik was doing all he could to avoid facing Kasparov again. Just a few months ago, he backpedaled on playing the winner of a Kasparov-Kasimdzhanov match, because it was not literally what the Prague Agreement said.

Yet, he is now apparently willing to play the winner of the Argentina tournament, which is *also* not what Prague said. Conveniently, Kasparov is now out of the picture, which is exactly what he seems to have wanted.

I don't think significant constituency has said that he should have offered Kasparov a straight rematch. Kasparov probably could have made an automatic rematch part of the agreement for their 2000 match, but foolishly he did not do so. It is his own fault.

Kramnik certainly is hypocritical about insisting on a traditional qualifying cycle, considering that he was hand-picked to play Kasparov in the first place. He is clearly not interested in giving anyone the same kind of "gift" that he himself was given.

He was handpicked because Shirov didn't get his match and this was the only way you *could* get a match in this situation. The conditions were that afterwards a qualifier would be put in place and things go back to normal. What's the problem? I mean except the fact that Kasparov suddenly changed his mind completely and started talking about the moral duty to throw this agreement on the dustbin?

Kramnik never ruled out to play the Kasparov-Kasimdzhanov winner. In fact he stated very clearly that he WOULD BE READY to play anyone FIDE produced from their side. Look at interviews like http://www.chesspro.ru/events/kramnik.shtml Just as today he IS READY to play the San Luis winner. Just that he had no obligations to do so since FIDE had ignored their part of Prague. Completely ignored. Signed it and forgot about it the next day. Kramnik is entirely consistent, but you wouldn't notice if you only look at his misrepresented statements.

the problem acirce is that afterwards, Kramnik who now occupies Kasparov's spot, was not willing to give anyboody else the same chance that he himself was offered, even though that was the only way you *could* get a match, to use your own terms. And please avoid hyperbole, its not the worst crime in the world, but nobody said it was in the first place.

Kramnik's "hypocrisy" as regards a qualifier looks quite different when one considers the thought-experiment of an opposite situation: what if the ACP had staged a WC match between Kramnik and Topalov, despite Leko's victory over the latter in the Dortmund final? Would this GK-style handout earn Kramnik the kudos from his lusty haters on this forum? I don't think so.

So then it may be just possible that a sector of chess fans are willing to overlook GK's arbitrary choice in '00 in favor of condemning the player who finally brought him down, often at the cost of elementary logic, ie "the one rematch that would have ignited Chess as a sport in the world".

hey, nice professional website for M-tel Masters, was pleasantly surprised. One of the best chess related sites I've seen. Going by the schedule, the players must be downing a few Martinis just about now.. shaken, not stirred..

" Look at interviews like http://www.chesspro.ru/events/kramnik.shtml"
Well, I have taken a look, thank you for the reference. Kramnik does indeed mention that "in principle", he is prepared to play the winner of Kasparov - Kasimdzhanov.

However, a few paragraphs above that, when asked directly "if Kasp - Kasim takes place and Ilyumzinov announces a match between you (Kramnik) and the Kasp - Kasim winner, will you play?", Kramnik responds: "Who cares who announces what? Prague is dead, we need to start from scratch." And so on...

True, Kramnik never declared explicitly: "I will never play Kasparov again", he is not that dumb. However, this particular interview (as well as a few others) presents a strong case that ducking Kasparov was indeed his objective.

And of course, his latest turnaround in the chessbase interview ("No reason to change the Prague agreement at his stage") only confirms that conclusion. Prague was dead as long as Kasparov was around. Once he retired it got resurrected at once. Must have been Harry Potter's contribuiton to reunification.

Prague IS dead, everyone knows that, and I am 100% sure Kramnik hasn't changed his mind. He's talking about trying to keep its spirit alive as long as there remains hope. That's the reason he decided to give FIDE what is probably their last chance. It's hard to know what his exact words were too since those were in Russian.

The chesspro interview was indeed in Russian and if it is "hard (for you? -dz) to know what his exact words were", what was your point in quoting it?

The chessbase interview is in English - is it any more accessible? In there, Kramnik cites the Prague agreement as his rationale to agree to play the winner of the proposed FIDE tournament in Argentina.

I was talking about the recent Chessbase article. That interview was conducted in Russian and nuances may disappear in translations.

The spirit of Prague:
--FIDE sets up a credible WC cycle.
--FIDE stages a match between Kasparov and the FIDE champ.
--Kramnik and Leko play for the classical title.
--The classical champ plays the FIDE champ in a unification match.

Kramnik has never ruled out playing a unification match if FIDE sets up a credible WC cycle. Kramnik has always ruled out playing a unification match prior to FIDE's setting up a credible cycle.

But we've been over this ground countless times. Let's give it a rest and enjoy the Sofia tournament.

"Let's give it a rest and enjoy the Sofia tournament."

Excellent idea, greg.

greg koster: "It is Kramnik's sad fate to be Mr. Plus Two, less popular than Anand, perpetually out of form, and, incidentally, picked to win the year's strongest tournament." - I thought this was funny. Indian star is very popular with fans and he has the best rating and the best overall recent tournament record. But when it comes to actually picking the winner, oe has to go with the ever declining Mr Plus-Two. I guess my comments to the Daily Dirt on Kramnik's interview convinced Mig to some extent.

Marc Shepherd: "He is clearly not interested in giving anyone the same kind of "gift" that he himself was given." - Well, is Kramnik supporting a more democratic and fair system worse than if he handpicked someone else? Yes, Kramnik is not about to give the same chance to someone as he himself has gotten. But by the virtue of giving a chance to one person, the champion would take away chances from multiple other superGMs who all deserve to play in the world championship cycle. So Kramnik isn't really taking the chances away from people, he is giving them all a chance to play for the title that Kasparov usurped. It is hard for me to believe that this principled position of his is used to make him out to be the bad guy. Kramnik slayed the usurper in the BGN 2000 match and the chess world breathed the sigh of relief. Then Kramnik went to great length to get the title unified. He made the biggest concessions in Prague. He filfilled his end of Prague. If the unification hasn't happened yet, it is due to no fault of his. At least he organized a cycle and played Leko, who was the rightful challenger. I don't get why some consider Kramnik to be the bad guy. You may not like him (who does?), but at least the guy is trying to bring in fair and good system of world championships, which he should be given credit for.

Hah, convinced me. No ego problems for you. I explained my reasoning. Kramnik doesn't have to be in form to score +2.

What cycle did Kramnik organize? I must have missed it. Looked like the annual Dortmund tournament to me.

What is he doing to bring in a fair system, or any system? What has he done, period? Just saying no to FIDE and doing nothing was half-right when it was keeping the classical title away from the KO fate. But now there's not even that and he's just doing nothing.

Explain to us how a player can fight for Kramnik's title now. Popping up and saying you'll play the winner of an already-announced tournament isn't organization and it's not giving the world's GMs a shot at the title. Mr. Democracy indeed.

"Hah, convinced me. No ego problems for you. I explained my reasoning. Kramnik doesn't have to be in form to score +2." - If you convinced yourself, more power to you. It is just that you sounded a lot like what I said in the comments on Kramnik's interview.

"What cycle did Kramnik organize? I must have missed it. Looked like the annual Dortmund tournament to me." - The annual Dortmund tournament usually doesn't have to produce a clear winner. Anyway, it WAS Dortmund tournament, so what? Does that really matter, if all the top players in the world had the chance to play for the world championship for the first time in a long time. Since 1995, the top chessplayers's aspirations of getting a chance to play for the world championships were dependant on Kasparov's whims. "I want to play a match with you. No not you, the Indian guy next to you. Oh, he doesn't want to play? Then bring in the tall and pale Russian kid". Or something like that. Yes, Dortmund was pretty much the annual Dotmund. But at least Kramnik gave everyone the chance to play.

"What is he doing to bring in a fair system, or any system? What has he done, period? "- Well, signing Prague was one thing, and it was a big thing, too. How many Prague agreements has Kasparov signed when he was the world champion? Oh that's right, he was the guy who started this whole mess. Kramnik also had that Dortmund qualifier and stuck with his promise even though there was initially little sponsor interest. Kramnik didn't say "A match with Leko doesn't seem to be wanted by sponsors, so screw Leko". In similar situation Kasparov screwed Shirov. Thirdly, now Kramnik is ready to play the Argentine winner if FIDE guarantees good and fair cycle. Those three things I mentioned are big things. They show Kramnik definitely desires fair cycle and unity of the chess world.

"Just saying no to FIDE and doing nothing was half-right when it was keeping the classical title away from the KO fate. But now there's not even that and he's just doing nothing." - Well, he just defednded his title. What makes you think FIDE is suddenly the apostles of classical chess. Can you say you are absolutely sure that FIDE won't cancel the classical tradition as soon as they get their hands on the classical title. It is very likely. Anand can win the FIDE "championship" tournament". Let's say he then plays Kramnik and wins (just for arguments sake). Anand seems to be very pro-FIDE guy and do you think if FIDE says to him "you are no longer the champion. Classical line is canceled and it is now KO lotteries from now on. But hey, you will be seeded into semifinal in the next FIDE KO" - if FIDE says that to him, you really think he will fight for classical title the way Kramnik would? So it all may be just a part of FIDE's master plan to make KOs the only game in town.

"Explain to us how a player can fight for Kramnik's title now. Popping up and saying you'll play the winner of an already-announced tournament isn't organization and it's not giving the world's GMs a shot at the title. Mr. Democracy indeed." - granted, a Dortmund-like qualifier isn't the ideal of fairness. But even that is better than hand picking people like Kasparov did. Using a regular tournament like Dortmund as a candidates tournament actually does make sense, since many top players play in Dortmund anyway, so they don't have to think twice about fitting candidates tourney into their schedule. But why do you say that Dortmund-like qualifier isn't giving GMs a chance to play for the world title.? Doesn't make sense to me, since this is exactly what Dortmund 2002 did - it gave the participants a chance to play for the world championship, and as such it was a much better step than Kasparov hand picking opponents.

Mig

This is unfair, Kramnik did organize a cycle and played the winner. Anand wanted to keep FIDE money so he did not play and Kasparov who demanded a rematch also skipped. Way before the tournament was started everyone knew it was a qualifier and the participants [except Lutz] were picked using the average of FIDE rating list and PCA rating list. Another point to mention after PCA failed what did Kasparov? Beside all this one should wait to see what happens, he has announced his desire to play with the winner of San Luis in order to unify. If this does not happen then he said:

"I will start discussing proposals with interested partners, in order to defend my title in accordance with the classical line of the World Chess Championship"

If Kasparov and his running dog cronies had put in place a qualifying system anytime from 1993-00, no one would be so quick to believe the worst of Kramnik. But that didn't happen because Kasparov was looking out for Kasparov, so after his handpicking expedition backfired it was left to his successor to determine a way to reunite with FIDE. So perhaps a pyrrhic victory for Kramnik, but nonetheless a victory over the strongest chessplayer in history.

In the meantime Kramnik has defended his title and reiterated his willingness to play a unification match down the road. Hardly "just doing nothing", but as long as Rad Vlad remains on the chess throne he will be a moving target for nattering nabobs who aren't fit to lick the bottom of his paint-spattered boots.

The site http://www.mtelmasters.com is one of the best tournament sites I've ever seen. Nice to see a well done site promoting a chess tourn.!

Mig

Is this event rated or not? Some people argue because of the draw rule FIDE might discard it in the rating computation.

Clubfoot, interesting definition of "doing." That word implies action. He's hardly a moving target. He's been sitting since beating Kasparov. "Indicating willingness" is not doing. Playing the winner of Dortmund is not organizing a cycle. If you're happy with a classical world champion who plays the winner of an annual invitational, you are welcome to him. I'm not, and most others would also like to see a system with qualifiers and even candidates matches.

Btw, Kasparov did organize a qualifying system. Giant interzonals, candidates matches, and a final match against Anand. Plus a few million in prize money for rapid events and opens along the way.

What FIDE rule are people quoting to say the Mtel might not be rated? As long as they don't mess with the time control there's nothing to do about it to my knowledge. Regulating draw offers by coercion (or by incentive) isn't illegal. There might be some broad interpretation about interference that could be tried, I suppose. Maybe someone will complain to FIDE about not rating it if they are forced to play out a game and lose a position they said was a draw. Hard to imagine though.

Yes, let's keep waiting and waiting for Kramnik to do something. So if by the end of the year FIDE doesn't drop a gift-wrapped challenger in his lap, which they have said they have no interest in doing, he will think about starting to plan for the contingency of a future possibility of taking preliminary steps toward developing an outline for discussing proposals. Wow, I guess the title's in good hands.

And stop saying Kramnik organized a cycle. That would mean he 1) organized something and 2) that something was a cycle. 0 for 2. He played the winner of a closed invitational that was already scheduled. Cycles are open and, by definition, involve more than one event.

The Dortmund tournament had to have a clear winner last year, so I guess it was a qualifier? Bizarre.

You guys don't seem to understand that doing means organizing and raising money. What did Kramnik do based on Prague? It never happened. Not his fault, but it never happened. He did as much based on signing in Prague as I did, and he lost as much. Squat. He was forced to sign in Prague and then because of FIDE's idiocy, never had to do anything. Acting like it was a big deal is silly.

Factually incorrect, off-topic garbage about Kasparov screwing Shirov duly ignored. (If Anand wins San Luis and says he'll play Kramnik for two million minimum, which can't be raised, so Kramnik plays the second-place finisher for the money that can be raised, would he be screwing Anand? Just asking.) I'm still not clear why Kasparov keeps coming up in this discussion. He's retired. Seek therapy. "Yeah but Kasparov..." isn't the answer to the world's problems. I'm saying what I think Kramnik needs to be doing and you're answering with what Kasparov did? Who cares if you think playing the winner of Dortmund is better than taking the top player from the rating list. (Interesting to call that hand-picked, btw.) It's still not a cycle.

Why credit FIDE with the power to destroy the classical chess title? Or anyone? If Kramnik decided his next title defense would be a four-game rapid match, would that end the world? It would ruin HIS title, but as long as there are people willing to organize a classical cycle we can have a classical champion. If FIDE and/or its champion reneges on its plans, others can organize. That's just another good reason why Kramnik shouldn't be sitting on his thumbs right now hoping FIDE will give him a nice Christmas present. Any sponsors and organizers he can drum up now aren't going to vanish if it's the unified title. It's not like FIDE has a good track record of finding match sponsors.

I'd be thrilled if FIDE lets the winner of San Luis play Kramnik for the classical title. That is the best possible outcome in my opinion. That doesn't mean we sit around and hope that it happens. Better to prepare for the worst. This is FIDE, after all.

Can it get any better than this? No draws in this Cat xx, one hour into tournament, Anand has just Sacrificed his Queen for 2 pieces.

Terribly interesting game hopefully Topalov can hold onto his advantage and win,somebody suggested that Anands 17 Bd3 was a blunder-seems absurdly unlikely but he did once lose in 6 moves with a piece blunder so there is just an outside possibility.

17.Bd3 is what I thought before Anand played it. So it ought to be a blunder! I was thinking about a Knight sac on e4 for 2 pawns to open the center and to have a go at the king, using superior development. It was a pretty interesting game. Topa was a toad unlucky, though.

Srikanth why are you calling Topalov a toad.. heh
Was he a tad unlucky actually? Thought Anand played very well, as did Topa of course.. a game worthy of World nos 2 and 3..
Also awesome game by Kramnik, powerful stuff. Looks like the top seeds are all in decent form..!

Mig,
Can you please remind us where is the qualifying system created by Garry?
One time event is not a system, sorry.
The only force able to organize a real system is FIDE. But when they ignore player's interests, this system wouldn't stay long.
Kramnik is on his way to nowhere, he is not able to organize a real cycle in classical meaning. But until FIDE creates a system where his rights are worth his place, they wouldn't succeed, either. By including Kramnik into some unification event, like match vs. FIDE Champion will show FIDE respect to players, including their own Champions. And FIDE is in need of this after what they did to Pono, Kasim, jewish players, etc.

Actually we can worry about Kramnik, even though he won an easy game. He missed a simple shot on move 21 that would have made the win quite a bit easier. No doubt he'll find out about it... which may convince him he is "bad form". And once he is convinced he is bad form, out comes count "drawnik".

I'm sick of all that anti-Kramnik comments. He didn't do anything, didn't organize cycle...
But tell me, please, when he should have done that? Last year, maybe? When Kasparov was waiting for a match with Kasim? That would be fair and nice...
Kasparov, Anand, Topalov, Leko - maybe they play better chess now. Kramnik is losing ranking points, others are gainig. So what? WC doesnt have to be the highest ranked player. He can be boring, crazy, antisemitic, painter or whatever. We don't have to like him. I don't like him. But for me he is WC. If FIDE produces his own classical WC, then maybe I will change my mind. Or we would have 2 champions and real reason to unify something.

The other guy wants a quick draw? No prob. Just call Azmaiparashvili, and he will kick the heck out'o him :)

The problem with that, santiago, is then the Spanish police would kick the heck out of Azmai :-)

I have been looking at the MTel site for the past couple of days and am starting to wonder how much of this event is a Topalov oriented venture. I understand that he is the homecountry darling and all, but the listing of his odds when they are not the highest or not the lowest seems kind of odd, not very sportslike. I wonder if Hilary Swank agrees.

Topalov's people are running a great tournament. Cut'em some slack!

Mig:

I don't know whether anyone will read this, since I didn't respond to this earlier, but ehre goes anyway:

"Yes, let's keep waiting and waiting for Kramnik to do something. So if by the end of the year FIDE doesn't drop a gift-wrapped challenger in his lap, which they have said they have no interest in doing, he will think about starting to plan for the contingency of a future possibility of taking preliminary steps toward developing an outline for discussing proposals. Wow, I guess the title's in good hands." - Why is it wrong for Kramnik to expect FIDE to find a challenger to him. Finding challenger for the reigning champion was FIDE's job for over 40 years. And why would Kramnik not wait for it - FIDE did promose it, and it is in the spirit of Prague agreements

"And stop saying Kramnik organized a cycle. That would mean he 1) organized something and 2) that something was a cycle. 0 for 2. He played the winner of a closed invitational that was already scheduled. Cycles are open and, by definition, involve more than one event." - It wasn't scheduled. I believe it was rescheduled to produce a lone winner. And even if one was to accept a notion that cycle has to be more than one event, Kramnik's cycle did have more than one event: Dortmund 2002 and Brissago 2004.

"You guys don't seem to understand that doing means organizing and raising money. What did Kramnik do based on Prague? It never happened. Not his fault, but it never happened. He did as much based on signing in Prague as I did, and he lost as much. Squat. He was forced to sign in Prague and then because of FIDE's idiocy, never had to do anything. Acting like it was a big deal is silly." - What did Kramnik do based on Prague? Well, he played a match with Leko. So he fulfilled his part of the agreement. Just because FIDE failed to fulfill its part doesn't mean that Kramnik didn't do anything towards unification. The fact that Kramnik signed Prague agreements was definitely a step towards unification. And fulfilling his part of Prague was another step.

"Factually incorrect, off-topic garbage about Kasparov screwing Shirov duly ignored. (If Anand wins San Luis and says he'll play Kramnik for two million minimum, which can't be raised, so Kramnik plays the second-place finisher for the money that can be raised, would he be screwing Anand? Just asking.) I'm still not clear why Kasparov keeps coming up in this discussion. He's retired. Seek therapy. "Yeah but Kasparov..." isn't the answer to the world's problems. I'm saying what I think Kramnik needs to be doing and you're answering with what Kasparov did? Who cares if you think playing the winner of Dortmund is better than taking the top player from the rating list. (Interesting to call that hand-picked, btw.) It's still not a cycle." - Sorry, but it is not garbage and it is not offtopic. You ask to explain what Kramnik did towards unification BUT without mentioning Kasparov? That is ridiculous. That's like saying - "explain why starts keep moving away from one another BUT without mentioning Big Bang". It is impossible to avoid mentioning Kasparov, especially when talking to you. You say Kramnik didn't do squat towars unification. And you are just being told that is was Kasparov who did absolutely nothing towards unification, and Kramnik has done much more in a few years than Kasparov done in a loger period. That is just a fact of life.

"Why credit FIDE with the power to destroy the classical chess title? Or anyone? If Kramnik decided his next title defense would be a four-game rapid match, would that end the world? It would ruin HIS title, but as long as there are people willing to organize a classical cycle we can have a classical champion. If FIDE and/or its champion reneges on its plans, others can organize. That's just another good reason why Kramnik shouldn't be sitting on his thumbs right now hoping FIDE will give him a nice Christmas present. Any sponsors and organizers he can drum up now aren't going to vanish if it's the unified title. It's not like FIDE has a good track record of finding match sponsors." - Yes, if Kramnik started playing 4 game matches and claimed they were legitimate WC matches, he would not be taken seriously. But I think it is politics. Kramnik can not go looking for sponsors of non-FIDE events as that would be a sign that he declares the war on FIDE and everyone will use that against him. I think he wants FIDE to say either "Yes, we want to unify under conditions similar to Prague" or "No, screw you, its a war". If he started looking for sponsors now and organizing things, it would be taken the wrong way and FIDE would likely declare him to be the main obstacle to unification or something like that.

"I'd be thrilled if FIDE lets the winner of San Luis play Kramnik for the classical title. That is the best possible outcome in my opinion. That doesn't mean we sit around and hope that it happens. Better to prepare for the worst. This is FIDE, after all."

The interlinear quoting is terrible, please just speak for yourself. It's easier to understand and saves a huge amount of space. The original is right above anyway. I can't even find what I'm supposed to be reading!

Your answer to criticism of Kramnik with criticism of Kasparov makes no sense. None. This has been the usual technique. "YeahbutKasparov.." Do two wrongs make a right? I say Kramnik has done nothing and your answer is that Kasparov did nothing? So that makes it okay? I don't understand. Either Kramnik should do something (my opinion) or he should do nothing (apparently your opinion). Kasparov doesn't need to be there either way. Kramnik has been the classical champion for five years! Kramnik. Vladimir Borisovich Kramnik. Kramnik, Vladimir. Kramnik Kramnik Kramnik.

Kramnik.

[Just to break that rule: By they way, Kasparov and the PCA brought in millions of dollars for the players and set up interzonals, candidates matches, and a final. That's called doing something. He wasn't trying to unify when he was the champion, he was trying to set up an alternative, which he did, for a while.]

Kramnik did play a match against Leko. It's not as if he wasn't trying to set up a match before Prague anyway. My point is that he lost nothing, so making him out to the the Holy Martyr of Prague is silly. When it looked like he was going to have to play the winner of Kasparov-Kasimdzhanov, Prague was dead to Kramnik. Now that he might face the San Luis winner, he has resurrected it. FIDE didn't say they'd find a challenger, any challenger. Prague, as Kramnik pointed out back when it was dead to him, was about the winner of Ponomariov-Kasparov. Then it was Kasimdzhanov-Kasparov, at least vaguely similar to the original. Now there are seven other players involved who didn't sign anything and are being told by FIDE that they are playing for a world championship. I know FIDE screwed up Prague. Okay, let's move on to now, 2005, and next year. FIDE has released plans for a full classical cycle.

You are saying Kramnik can't look for sponsors other than FIDE sponsors? That should be easy because THERE AREN'T ANY FIDE SPONSORS. Solved. Danneman was a FIDE sponsor? If Kramnik finds sponsors he will have a much better chance of getting his match. Money talks, BS walks. FIDE doesn't give a bleep about Kramnik's title. They made a courtesy invitation to San Luis and it was rejected. But if he shows up with MONEY, they will listen. If he can put together MONEY for a match against the San Luis winner, they will listen. The reason he can't wait for FIDE is because FIDE isn't going to come to him. He has to do something. It's all about money. If FIDE thinks Kramnik is necessary to get money for their event, they will come to him. That doesn't seem to be the case.

I agree that Kramnik playing the San Luis winner is the best possibility for the chess world. But FIDE isn't going to do it solo. They aren't going to hand Kramnik a challenger and a match on a plate. Who knows, maybe one will pop up like magic, you never know. But it would certainly help if he were out there trying to make it happen. Instead he gives the impression that he'll be content to again play the Dortmund winner while FIDE is organizing a serious legit cycle. That will be great, but it will deepen the schism and I'd rather have Kramnik involved in unification than just forgotten.

In 2002 FIDE wanted Kasparov on board and Kasparov wanted a shot at Kramnik. FIDE couldn't have cared less about Kramnik even back then and several times demanded that he be excluded from Prague, especially when he balked at signing. They (we say "they" but it's really just Ilyumzhinov, we know) really don't care unless Kramnik means money to them.

I WANT Kramnik involved, which is why I say he needs to get busy finding someone to back what will basically be a naked challenge to the FIDE champion to come out of San Luis. That unless FIDE opens a dialogue with him, which is also much more likely if he has some sponsors.

Mig just read your post thank you I had some misunderstandings concerning your position about the whole unification process which is now clear. I do agree with you on most parts [except some minor technicalities :P] But the whole thing is clear "if Kramnik can not organize a cycle then its over." But I guess the biggest difference between us is that you believe he wont manage to do this, well I think he will make it. Give him time, at least 6 months, [end of 2005 when we know who the FIDE WCH is] finding sponsors is a though job.

Okay, Mig, FIDE doesn't want unification. (if they wanted, they'd
have stated it somewhere in their Announcement and "cared" about
Kramnik)

Why Kramnik should/must/have-to want unification? (and seek sponsors for
something FIDE doesn't want and offer them money on top that?)

What about bugging FIDE for not wanting unification? ("caring" about
World Champion V B Kramnik, Kramnik. Kramnik.Kramnik.Kramnik.?)

Poetic justice expected today for saying arrogantly 'a painter paints'..

And tomorrow, -for doing nothing for finding sponsorship for Unification.

The day after tomorrow, -for saying he won't play Kasim-Kasp winner
unless there was a further WC cycle..

For defeating Kasp and not giving a re-match? - 5 losses in 15 moves,
and 10 blunders in winning positions.

--This Kramnik is a naughty boy who deserves a lot of poetic justice..

Topalov is the best,Kramnik can not stop him!!!
Only Anand is able to beat him!
Anand-Topalov ,one of them will win the M-tel tournament.
koy