Kramnik Will Play Mexico

Only love could explain Qh7 mate.

I wonder, are there any other sources besides Vasiliev as quoted by chesspro? Curiously, the Sport Express, Vasiliev's primary employer, has nothing at all on the story.

In an interview that was broadcast yesterday on the Moscow Echo radio, Kramnik did not mention Mexico at all and at the same he was very eloquent about the importance of the long matches tradition. Lautier, another interview participant, on the contrary, did mention Mexico a few times and said that the situation with the tournament was not at all clear; and the idea of the Mexico winner then playing Kramnik in a match (ACP apparently "officially" requested FIDE about that) is being under consideration.

A link to the interview transcript: http://echo.msk.ru/programs/sport/48153/

Can not say that the text strikes me as extremely credible, though. Korchnoi's name, for instance, is misspelled in an unimaginably horrible way. And then, of course, it was yesterday - a long time ago. Vasiliev's brief note at chesspro could conceivably be a response to that (just a guess.)

Vasiliev has been Kirsan's mouthpiece for a while now. I'd still like to see a quote from Kramnik, but I have almost no doubt that it is accurate at least from the standpoint of reflecting Ilyumzhinov's thoughts. Of course he's come out with premature statements before.

> Of course he's come out with premature statements before.>

Let's hope it is wishful thinking from Kirsan. If Kramnik yields he dissolves the title, he undoes what Steinitz did. Kirsan seems to have made his mind to destroy all chess before he leaves it for good.

..bah..bah..chessbase.com has put an article with the same info.

well, after all is not that a great loss as it seems. Fortunately the title has been passed just in time to DF-10. We will look forward for the incoming Rybka 2.2 vs. DF-10 supermatch.

Chessbase provides no new information, it is just a translation of the note we saw at chesspro. Let us wait for a word from Kramnik himself before jumping to conclusions.

Well, as other fans have already said, I'd prefer Kramnik to simply forfeit Mexico, regardless of any 'negotiations in the background'.

This would probably force FIDE to let Topalov play for highest rating reasons. Mexico would then be a tournament of losers, and the winner would not obtain public recognition.

In case Topalov does not play, Mexico would be very much degraded by the absence of the highest rated player and the World Champion, and the winner would not obtain public recognition.

Kramnik would still get public recognition as the champion in the Steinitz bloodline.

It looks like FIDE has shot itself in the foot again.

after finally unifying the title, the first thing FIDE does is kill off 125 or so years of tradition...

The world title is owned by the public, BTW, since public recognition is the one and only true value behind the world title.

The world title is not owned by FIDE, FIDE is merely (mis)managing the world title.

Supposedly, FIDE does this (mis)managing on behalf of the public, but that does not even appear to be the case since Campomanes' days when FIDE became autistic.

FIDE killed the match tradition starting in 1997 with the first KO, at least from a FIDE perspective. If they didn't kill it then they can't kill it now. Kramnik, on the other hand, can, or at least put it into a coma. But wasting away playing politics and not playing chess in the name of tradition is a burden he clearly doesn't want anymore and I don't blame him for that.

As for zero's public recognition, what public? Mainstream press? How many mentions of Steinitz did they make during Elista? They don't know and they don't care. They go with what ever is put in front of them each time out and take it at face value, reading the official press releases, if that. If he sat out Mexico City Kramnik would only slightly more attention than he got during San Luis - almost none with the occasional mention of another champion somewhere. They'd mention he declined to defend his title. It would hardly be FIDE stripping Fischer in 75 and even less than the 1993 schism because he doesn't have Kasparov's name recognition.

The chess community cares about tradition, although even we are split into fragments. Sponsors and mainstream media don't care a whit. I believe big matches can bring in more of both than tournaments, but it's not directly related to Steinitz. A new match in 2009 will get similar coverage whether or not Kramnik, Anand, or Topalov is there as defending champion. (Or even if the champ is dumped in the semis.)

People need to realize we are starting from scratch with this now. Past matches had politics in play, and/or big names. Thinking millions of dollars will again rain down "just because" is silly. We don't even know our capabilities right now because so much is new or bad. We again have a unified title but Kramnik isn't very well known. We have twits who know nothing of commercial sponsorship in charge of FIDE but they are showing signs of life. (Kok wants a contract and control; we'll see if he gets either.)

Yes, we are starting a new era so all the more reason to start it right. And if the first thing that is done is kill off the 120 year old title - it is not a great start.

And I am not so sure there will be matches in the next cycle. FIDE may toy with the idea of matches and the idea of transferring some control to Kok so that it is easier for Kramnik and traditionalists to look the other way NOW. But there is nothing to stop Kirsan from saying "Nah, I decided against matches. Sorry" in a couple of years. There will be no classical champion anymore, the top GMs will be against the matches because matches give good chances only to the best 2 or 3 players, and the fans will be too bored with the tournament championships to care and those who will still care will not be able to do anything, because there will be neither the champion, nor the title nor the infrastructure to challenge FIDE. That's how I see it. I don't see it as a one time concession to FIDE/Mexico organizers at all.

There is a proverb about liing down with dogs and waking up with fleas. I am afraid that if the Kramnik lies down with Kirsan, we will have a very unsanitary situation in a couple of years.

Bravo RussianBear, I agree completely.

>

No, really, we're not. We're human beings with memories, cultures, traditions, and histories. While you may think that chess has a fragile prestige in the minds of public, Mig, there's hardly an educated Western human being alive for whom chess doesn't mean something very basic -- whether or not they can play the game, whether they follow the matches, or pay for tickets.

What FIDE threatens to subvert -- and seems completely to misunderstand -- is precisely that sense. Fortunately, our collective memory is robust; FIDE too -- or its crackpot stewards -- will pass.

Sorry, the beginning of my post is in reference to Mig's comment:

"People need to realize we are starting from scratch with this now."

Theorist, well put indeed!

Thanks for the link to the radio interview, dz. Kramnik does mention Mexico there, though, so it makes the other stories more credible:

Interviewer: As far as I understood from what Kirsan Ilumzhinov has come out with the present system is such that - 16 candidates play a tournament in Spring, and in the Autumn in Mexico the best four also play with you. But you say that you want to play not a tournament but a match with one of the candidates, right?

Kramnik: It's not a matter of what I want. In principle I can also play a tournament, if I think that's better for the long-term future of chess. I'm not talking now specifically about the forthcoming cycle for the World Championship, I'm trying to take things on a larger scale, and I'd like there to be, for the next 10 years, some sort of well-designed system for choosing the world champion which would end in a match.

I think its good news that Kramnik has agreed to play which is in the spirit of what was expected of him in return for the opportunity of reunifying the title.

The tournament format will produce a champion in a classical format and will be easy to report unlike the knockout.

Of course the match tradition is something I would like to see return but at the moment we need a championship which can take place. Its all the more disappointing to see the proposals that FIDE have been coming up with.

Its also by no means impossible that Kramnik can't defend his title in the tournament format. He has his share of first places both in Linares and Dortmund, he's just been less successful at Wijk aan Zee.

There is absolutely no reason why matches can't return at some point in the future and indeed there is this clause where matches can take place on a challenge basis. They should definitely be longer than the 12 games of Topalov - Kramnik.

All of this is under the control of FIDE an organisation I'm not at all confident in. If its passed to a commercial arm of FIDE run by Bessel Kok he may be able to restore the match format by making a case for it financially.

As in another thread we can all say we want this, or want that, but for me this is at least acceptable and should be given a try. I think it will produce very acceptable and recognised champions in a format that should be easy to finance. It may get us through the next few years and a possible (although I'm not that hopeful) change to a different FIDE regime.

My respect for Kramnik just went up a notch.

Whether Kramnik does or does not play at Corus, Linares, or Mexico (and whether he wins or does not) is irrelevant to the Steinitz title. Take a deep breath, and try to stay calm, Ovidiu.

The traditionalists' only legitimate concern is that Kramnik play a long-match with a worthy challenger within 2-3 years of Elista; ideally with the high scorer in Mexico.

There's every reason to believe this will take place.
--Kramnik appears content.
--Kirsan controls chess and Russia controls Kirsan.

Yes, you are right, mishanp, I just searched for "Mexico" and so missed that spot. Actually, that makes it more Kramnikesque, doesn't it? I would say, it makes perfect sense for our venerable word champion to cover all bases at once. Promising everything and nothing at the same time. Let's still wait for his further statements (equally illuminating, I am sure.)

This is just the continuation of the process of the destruction of chess' culture that Kirsan started years ago. And he did it so on many fronts, no point to remember people here all the idiocies that his guy has come with over years.

This not any "new era", rubbish, we are deluding ourselves or deluding others for the sake of our momentary investments ( as, sadly, Mig does nowdays because of his paycheck with the Mexico organizers).

However in this instance it is mainly Kramnik's responsiblity. Now he is to blame even if he acts under pressure. Kramnik is a fine player but he lacks the stamina to battle uncompromising for what he has got. He doesn't have the character of a champ.

Ovidiu,

You incorrectly associate wild accusations, tantrums and buffoonery with "championship character". By that standard Danailov has the most character of anyone.

Kramnik has the good sense to do his fighting behind the scenes so that no one (Kirsan, the Mexicans) will be publicly embarrassed.

Kramnik will play the Mexico tournament. Then he'll play a long match with Mexico's high scorer. That'll probably satisfy 99% of the chess world. Would that satisfy you?

(Why do I get the feeling that unless and until Topalov becomes WCC, NOTHING will make you happy?)

It's a sad day - well, actually I can't see anything other than more drivel from Ilyumzhinov, but when Kramnik does agree to play it'll be a sad day - but I think we all knew Kramnik would play Mexico if he'd contracted to. Let's just hope he wins or if not him at least someone sensible - which I suppose means Anand.

Mildly interesting article on chessbase by some statistician describing some (reasonably obvious) simulations which demonstrate why tournaments don't produce sensible world champions.

http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=3528

Also an interview of Tigran Nalbandian (the Armenian national coach and one-time Kramnik aide) about Kramnik among other things, at chesscafe. He says that the top players all know who is really the strongest (ie Kramnik) and that Aronian will be the one to dethrone him. Not sure how he’d know what, say, Anand thinks, but interesting enough.

http://www.chesscafe.com/misha/misha.htm

Chessbase suggested that if one of the sixteen candidates dropped out, Topalov would be appointed to take his place.

What are the odds that Danailov will buy off one of the sixteen?

I still hope that Kramnik, taking part in the Mexico competition, will put at stake only the FIDE title (which indeed belongs to FIDE).
The classical World chess champion title, instead, should remain to Kramnik until he is defeated in a match...

or at least I hope so...

rdh wrote

>It's a sad day - well, actually I can't see anything other than more drivel from Ilyumzhinov, but when Kramnik does agree to play it'll be a sad day - >

for once we are in agreement, rdh.

We don't know what pressures are exerted on Kramnik. There may be more than we assume since Kirsan is well connected and desperately needs Kramnik to play in Mexico so as to have that freaking tournament really an WCC or the sponsors will feel frauded.

The consequences of Kramnik's decision will run deep. After making chess a blitz "ping-pong" sport the undoing of this another key piece of the chess' tradition will take out the motivation that attracted and kept within new fans. Just remember Cap D'Angle and all those kids dreaming to become WCh. They grew up reading on Alekhine and Fischer and so on.

It is said that dreams are cheap but just try to take them away and you will see what happens.

the best solution is the fluffy plan outlined in the Kamsky Writes to FIDE thread. this would be good for all parties, the sponsors, and the fans. hooray!

I'd like to urge every chess fan to post his/her support for the world title match tradition on the Kramnik's Fan Forum at http://www.kramnik.com/eng/forum/messages.aspx?thread=2&n=335

I'd like to urge every chess fan to post his/her protest against the Mexico City "WC" tournament on the FIDE forum at
http://forum.fide.com/viewforum.php?f=5&sid=fca8720e687ffc9ef0cb31651167b870

Mig,

What is up with Kasparov and that TRIPE he wrote in the new issue of New In Chess? Sounded nothing more than sour grapes from him - is he truly still pissed about losing to Kramnik? Is he still frustrated over hi inability to handle Kramnik's match strategy? And, does this agreement about Mexico not make Kasparov look like a complete idiot based on his comments in the article about how Kramnik 'skirts' the rules, etc., etc.?

He should stick to politics. His 'chess' writing is beginning to really suck, especially when he interweaves it with his personal bias towards the players he is writing about, along with his lousy backhanded compliments.

My opinion.

The world title heritage will now read as follows:

Anatoly Karpov 1975-1985
Garry Kasparov 1985-2000
Vladimir Kramnik 2000-2006*
(*Kramnik abandons his claim to world title by signiing to play FIDE's World Champion Topalov. As part of agreement, the unified title was to be held up for grabs at FIDE's 2007 round-robin tournament in Mexico City.)
Somebody 2007-

Nobody ever lists France as having been soccer world champion between 1998 and 2002 or Germany between 1974 and 1978.
The list reads:
West Germany 1974
Argentina 1978
Italy 1982
etc.
In tennis, for Wimbledon one says:
Sampras 1997
Sampras 1998
Sampras 1999
Sampras 2000
Ivanisevic 2001
Krajicek 2002
Federer 2003
Federer 2004
Federer 2005
Federer 2006
Nobody lists it as Federer 2003-present or Sampras as 1998-2000, unless they are trying to save space and time.
In sports in which champion has no defending rights the title becomes an annual or semi-annual or whatever tournament. The champion stops being a champion in any sort of meaningful way right after winning it.
That's because the only thing that makes a championship championship is that the winner is considered a champion until somebody else surpasses him in competition. Such is the case in boxing and mixed martial arts.

>In sports in which champion has no defending rights the title becomes an annual or semi-annual or whatever tournament. The champion stops being a champion in any sort of meaningful way right after winning it.>

yes Yuriy, we have got this point since yesterday evening.

It will all be over when Kramnik says publicly that he has agreed to play Mexico for "WCC".

Strange how this long "world chess champion" issue is now coming to an end, who would have believed ?

another possibility is that in few years somebody, say Carlsen, becomes the dominant player, wins all in sight as Kasparov once, and he will want to revive the title.
He will then have to challange and defeat Kramnik for this in a separate from FIDE (privately funded) match.

The real WCh. title is actually suspended now indefinitely. This is again a Kirsan-solution to the problem. Nothing is really solved, no "cycle" set in place, the issue is simply erased.

But, however, this is still a fraud and the winner of Mexico 2007 will not be recognized as a champion in the real sense of the word.

Well, wallet based polemic on who the 'public' is, etc. is not going to convince anyone.

Just look right here in this forum, with chess fans all dejected, talking about sending open letters in support of the match tradition, etc.

Ovidiu,

I have not made a post on this subject nor do I see a post that closely resembles mine.

SE is not talking about this because they are publishing the big interview next week.

All the artilce really says is "Kirsan says Kramnik agreed to play". Which was also the case as of April of this past year. Since the Topalov match, Kramnik has made no statements indicating he will play and a few suggesting he would rather not. In that he was backed by Zhukov who probably has the power to get Kirsan to do things his way.

All problems are solved if Kramnik plays and wins (just like in Elista 2006)

Andrew Brett: I don't know if it is fair to keep asking Kramnik to solve all problems in chess politics by playing and winning.

Seems to me that Kramnik has behaved incredibly well. It would have been great to offer Kasparov a rematch, but would Kasparov have offered Kramnik one? Since Kramnik has been champion he resisted the temptation to put things on hold after the dirty tricks campaign by Topalov, playing under Fide's specifications; played a match with a computer he was almost sure to lose (and performed incredibly creditably); and now he puts it all at stake in a tournament he has to win to retain the title. Brave and unselfish indeed.

I will miss the match system too, but it seems to me Kramnik is doing his best to make the best of the situation, and not just working to his own benefit. Good for him. I was never a particular Kramnik fan before the Topalov match, but since then he has earned my respect. I have no idea how he could have handled things better; who does? Maybe he is simply rather more mature than most chess pros.

Mr Benn

@ Mark Crowther: a match is far easier to report on than a tournament. In fact, who won the world championship match is THE easiest thing to report on.

>Since the Topalov match, Kramnik has made no statements indicating he will play and a few suggesting he would rather not. In that he was backed by Zhukov who probably has the power to get Kirsan to do things his way.>

Yuriy, yes I knew these. That's why the last "news" is an (unpleasant) surprise. He seemed well backed for defending his (and chess fans) interests.

Something must have changed in the balance of forces there in the mean time. Kirsan must get Kramnik to play (and save his fancy, "3rd world" again, enterprise) and maybe he has secured some political support which eventually weakened Kramnik/Zukhow position in these negociations.

We will have to wait it out until Kramnik says something but he hasn't yet so I suspect it is true. One would have expected him to react fast and send a refutation it to the chessbase website if the news had been disinformation.

> Sez Ilyumzhinov.

'Nuff said.

> Year-end wedding bells are reported.

A young woman like that sure could put a young man off his chess game . . . perhaps permanently . . . hubba hubba! ;)

What is Kramnik's alternative to playing in the Mexico tournament? Hasn't FIDE tied up all the top players?

If Kramnik goes back out into the cold maybe Kirsan would simply ignore him. Then Kramnik would have to hunt up a sponsor for, what, Kramnik-Ivanchuk? Radjabov? Mamedyarov? Navara?

For those urging Kramnik to "fight", he's no doubt already done his fighting behind the scenes, using any available political leverage. Why take such a fight public when Kirsan's the boss and the public has no power or influence over his decision?

What news? That Kirsan is saying Kramnik will play? And that there is still no statement to that effect from Kramnik? Please. That's not news, that's restatement of old, made by a known Kirsan shill. And on Tuesday, Kramnik gave a radio interview in which he again stated that his aim is a match and that he has signed no contract obligating him to play in Mexico.
http://echo.msk.ru/programs/sport/48153/

Had Illyumzhinov statement been made about Kasparov, Shirov or Kamsky, we would have heard a refutation by now. Kramnik however is not as much about communicating with the fans--he is a much more private individual. Or maybe he just doesn't feel the need to refute same old crap, that others are anxiously scooping up.

The situation is no different from how things were last week. The blurb on ChessPro doesn't even say that Kirsan announced that there has been a change and Kramnik finally agreed. It says that according to Kirsan, Kramnik is under agreement to play in Mexico. Translation: Kirsan believes Kramnik is legally obligated to play is Mexico.

Until Kramnik publicly agrees, the only news is the huff being raised about this on the Internet.

@ greg: I would not be so pessimistic, considering that Kirsan would not like it to be remembered so badly by posterity, he believes in reincarnation

@ Yuriy: good point! The recent match proposal and the recent interview on Mexico may well be coordinated and timed actions by two Kirsan shills

I view this as a great opportunity for Kramnik. If he wins in Mexico it would be quite an emphatic achievement.

Yuriy Kleyner, nice link!

That's globalization for you: Moscow radio station does an interview with Kramnik and Joel Lautier and Lautier is the one who comes to their Moscow studio while Kramnik calls in from France.

I will probably do a translation of this later in the day.

I do not see Kramnik winning Mexico. He will make draw draw draw draw, and thus will finish 4th out of 8. Well, I so much do not like his style, that I think that 4th place will be a success for him.

Russianbear, thanks, but the credit should go to dz. He posted the link above--I just repasted it. What's said in that interview deserves a lot more attention than Vasilyev shilling Mexico.

Yuriy, Russianbear,

I am glad that you guys found the radio interview noteworthy. So did I as well as other people who discussed it at some length earlier in this very thread.

Right :)

And the credit actually goes to e3e5.com where I discovered that interview.

Too many egos chasing after too little money. Kramnik's decision to play in Mexico--if confirmed--can be construed as either a selfish or selfless act. It is the 2nd major concession that he has made to Kirsan, along with agreeing to continue with the Topalov match, despite the forfeit loss in Game #5. Personally, I have to respect the decision of Kramnik to settle things "over the board", even if he was only convinced to do so with "under the table" cash.

One wonders whether allowing Qh7# was a factor that influenced Kramnik's apparent change of heart. After giving up a Mate in 1, might he feel psychologically inoculated against further failure in the Mexico tournament? He must know that his reputation reached a high water mark after beating Topalov, and winning the undisputed (well, except by Danailov ;-) World Chess title. His legacy is secure, in that sense.

At the time of the WC match with Topalov, it was speculated that Kirsan gave additional money to Kramnik, as an "emolient" to mitigate the ramifications of Kramnik's sacrifice. It is possible that Kirsan has established a precedent with Kramnik, and now they have a "modus vivendi". Kramnik is a rational person, and realizes the value of getting money in the bank now, rather than speculating of future prospects.

Unless somebody with access to a lot more money than Kirsan enters the chess scene, then the "Steinitz tradition" is, if not dead, then in suspended hibernation. Things can only change if Kirsan is ousted from FIDE (and somebody both competent and honest takes over), or if a rival, better funded, chess organization is founded.

Having miserably failed Russian in college and relying on reading between the lines of an online translation where GM Kramnik says things like "at the given moment we have one champion of peace [_mir_]," seems to me what he's saying is OK, fine, I'll play in Mexico City next time, but let's get this right for the next next time meaning a match rather than a tournament . . . _sto_?

> Things can only change if . . . somebody both competent and honest takes over . . .

Me, I'm not holding my breath waiting for the second coming of Max Euwe . . .

mir=world, not just peace :)

Im still hoping the interview is fake or he was missunderstand or missquoted.

Off topic: For those who prefer statistics to calculus or God forbid, physics; there's an interesting article on Chessbase News about the importance of risk in tournament play. Nothing new as far as what we already know intuitively, but while reading it I couldn't help thinking of the upcoming WC in Mexico and Kramnik's chances in that tournament environment.

You know, it was underlined before in the "Kamsky's letter" thread, but I think it deserves to be underlined again: the "traditional championship in the Steinitz line", whose supposed death people are bewailing here, is the same thing under another name as the "illegitimate advantage to the current title holder, seeding him directly into the final match", which Kamsky is attacking and of which a lot of GMs don't think very highly!

From the piece (http://chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=3528):

``. . . the utility of a draw changes as a tournament progresses. As an extreme example, suppose [aggressive] Player A leads by a half point over [drawish] player Q going into the last round of a major tournament, and both are well clear of the rest of the field. Then a draw is as good as a win for A, but is worthless to Q. To maximize their chances, they'd both better be willing to do a role reversal!

``Finally, it is not a simple dichotomy between positional and tactical styles. Although they are correlated with high and low draw frequencies, they are not the same thing. Familiar tactical positions may lead to more draws than novel positional situations. Moreover, some positions demand tactics, others demand an emphasis on strategic considerations. Trying to force a square peg into a round hole is not the best approach. As Sun Tzu said, the best style is no style – you must be able to fluidly adapt to the circumstances.''

Unfortunately along with no style I also have no game . . . ;)

chesspro.ru reports of an official proposal for match Kramnik -Topalov in April 2007:

http://www.chesspro.ru/_events/2006/danailov.html

Seems too much of an coincidence that these two events (Topalov's challenge and Kramniks's "agreement" to play in Mexico) are announced almost on the same day... perhaps some ploy is going on :)

That may be a response to Kramnik's stating more than once that he never received an official request from Topalov for a rematch.

Well, one may recall that one of the most notable achievements of Kramnik's career (at least, post-2000) was his refusal to grant a rematch to another chess palyer. I think it would not be too difficult to predict his reaction this time around, something like: "remind me, who is this Topalov guy again?"

Has Danailov found sponsorship or is bluffing ?
$1M for champ and $ 0.5 M for challanger..not bad.

Can't wait to hear Ovidiu tell us how important it will be to have a Kramnik-Topalov match leading into a meaningless Mexico tournament and the death of the classical title.

Oops. He was too fast for me.

And, indeed, in the Moscow Echo radio interview Kramnik makes his views on the subject of rematches abundantly clear. Nothing that we haven't heard before, though: "rematches officially canceled in 1963", "the only one since that time is Karpov - Kasparov because due a particular complicated situation", "many other strong players besides Topalov might wish to play a match", and so on and so forth...

And again he states right there, that so far all that was just empty talk, nothing specific. That is why Danailov's decided to send his missive, I suppose.

Good to know that the issue with WCC isn't the lack of sponsorship as Mig has tried to convince people here.

I think there is a solution that should make everyone happy.

The world championship cycle, in whatever format they finally decide on, should culminate in a tournament that serves two purposes. One is that the winner of the tournament would officially be crowned World Tournament Champion (For fairness they could now recognize the past 'FIDE Champs' as World Tournament Champions). Two is that the winner would become the challenger to the Classical World Champion (or World Match Champion if you prefer). Only two people should be allowed to seed directly into the tournament- the loser of the last Classical WC match and (if he/she chooses to compete for the tournament title) the Classical World Champion. If the Classical champ wins then the 2nd place finisher is the challenger for the Classical match. There should never again be automatic rematches for losing champions.

The benefits of this are obvious. Sponsors would be much more willing to put more money into the final tournament if it has a world title awarded in the event, and this means more money for the competitors who make it that far. It also means that the pro players have two titles to compete for in each cycle. It solves the problem of what to do with the FIDE champs who are not truly world champions in the classical sense. It would also solve the Mexico contract issue, because Kramnik woiuld play; a world title would be at stake, but the classical match title would be preserved. I don't see any downside personally.

"In tennis, for Wimbledon one says:
Sampras 1997
Sampras 1998
Sampras 1999
Sampras 2000
Ivanisevic 2001
Krajicek 2002
Federer 2003
Federer 2004
Federer 2005
Federer 2006"

Yuriy, a somewhat more popular version of the Wimbledon history would have "Krajicek 1996" and "Hewitt 2002" entries. Not disputing your point, just nitpicking...

Whoops--that's what happens when you make long lists whose exact nature is not particularly relevant to your subject. What a load of bulk.

kramnik,as usual,will full everyone.he will avoid playing and do whatever to keep stolen title.do not trust anything he say. he and his french friends make numerous posts here to confuse us.
alex.

kramnik,as usual,will full everyone.he will avoid playing and do whatever to keep stolen title.do not trust anything he say. he and his french friends make numerous posts here to confuse us.
alex.

S-E published Kirsan interview today. As I suspected, "Kramnik will play Mexico" is based on nothing but Kirsan's wishful thinking and previous statements. Here is the extent of his comment in the interview:

"Vasilyev: The question which excites all the chess fans, will the world champion, Vladimir Kramnik, play in Mexico?"

Kirsan: And I don't understand why this question even came up! Vladimir never said anywhere that he won't participate in the "Tournament of Eight" in Mexico. When we talked in Bonn during the opening of his match with Deep Fritz, I understood that as world champion he is concerned about two things: that there be an orderly world championship cycle and that it end in a championship match. Our reforms are in accord with his desires."

I sent an e-mail to Mig about that interview yesterday night but apparently he is not interested.

Kirsan also proposes a new twist: KO World Cup (odd years) and WC match (even years.) Kirsan's mood is similar to New England weather: if you don't like it, wait for a few minutes...

An English translation of the interview is now available at chessbase.

dz,

That's not new: this is the proposal FIDE had on their site for about two weeks now and was discussed here: http://www.chessninja.com/dailydirt/2006/12/new_fide_wch_cycle_proposal.htm

Yes, you are right, somehow missed that thread (and the whole subject in its entirety)...

In fact, Kirsan had been talking about that at least two weeks before the "proposal" was published.

I have tried to post a pro-match posting on the FIDE forum since Thursday last week, but no such luck. Apparently, FIDE practices censorhip. Anyone has similar experience?

Fairly similar, although my impression was that they merely practise incompetent website design (as you'd expect, of course).

give me some link to play free chess on line or to down load and play chess please..Thanks ..
WBRGDS. Saeed