That according to the Bulgarian news agency and a few folks in FIDE. The news release gives April 5-24 as the dates for the 12-game world championship match, but FIDE says that's not official yet. No bank guarantee, but the Bulgarian government apparently gave its word instead. Not sure what the players and the other bids from Turkey and Singapore might say about that. Not that they have any say in Ilyumzhinov World, of course. Rules, schmules. In olden days a player could practically veto playing a match in his opponent's home country. That was stupid. Professionals need to play where the money is; beggars can't be choosers. As any boxing fan knows, the challenger's home town is usually eager to host a bout and see their man take the crown.
Corus just announced it's full A and B fields. The former includes Anand but not Topalov. Unlike the efficient Dutch, Linares is always seat of its pants with invites and announcements. It is supposed to split with a site in the Arab Emirates this year, likely Dubai or Abu Dhabi. It seems a little unlikely either Topalov or Anand would play there so close the start of their match. But Bilbao didn't hurt Anand against Kramnik last year, that's for sure.
Early betting line on the match? We haven't seen all that much of either player this year. Anand will play at the Tal Memorial in a few weeks, along with every other member of the top ten except for Topalov and Radjabov (and plus Svidler and Ponomariov). He hasn't played a classical tournament since Linares, where he finished fourth.
Let me do some copy paste here from the ninja message board..
What a shame! I think Indians think only in terms of tangible benefits. India missed a Golden opportunity. If not the president of Indian chess federation, sports board should have taken it up. Olympic Gold medel winning Indian shooter had to spend a couple million euros to get there. Luckily he had his father to sponsor him. But Anand is already there. It shouldn't be that costly as hosting olympics or something. You just simply cannot let go an opportunity like this to show case your talent to the world community! It pays back in many ways!! Anand should pick up a phone and call Rahul Gandhi I think! They can easily divert a small amount from searching water on the moon!!
Btw, 2008-09 Indian sports budget was $280 million! I don't know how that compares to other countries sports budget though.
Okay now to ensure proper neutral fool-proof playing conditions, Anand should put a face and object to this first and see what happens! As long as the fund is acceptable, FIDE should first strieve to conduct the match in a neutral venue like Fischel pointed out.
I would like to draw the attention of Mig and others to my message board post signature at this time.
"Men make counterfeit money; in many more cases, money makes counterfeit men (read world champions!)"
One interesting detail is that the Singapore bid - a chance for a neutral venue in a well run city (and to promote chess in Asia) - was for 1.6 million, meaning that FIDE chose Sofia only for an extra 400,000 euros prize fund, or 80,000 for their coffers. Though that leaves aside the question of bank guarantees/politicians' promises...
Remember that Kamsky-Topalov was delayed over false pretenses several months and it ended up being the Bulgarians the only ones to fulfill their promises ...
Apart from the money (IMO half a millon is quite a big difference given the world crisis) FIDE might be considering their last experience.
Yes, but should Singapore be blamed for what happened prior to the Topalov-Kamsky match? First, Kamsky's ex-manager Chernenko was a dubious figure; second, that match was inherently less attractive for sponsors. So your comparison may well be (intentionally?) misleading.
Of course half a million is a big difference, crisis or no crisis. But for several people, it would have been preferable to have the Anand-Topalov match on neutral ground - even accepting a lower prize fund. FIDE decided otherwise, two (not mutually exclusive) reasons can be named:
1) FIDE is greedy
2) Bulgaria has strong connections to FIDE [I am not making this up, it was proudly mentioned by Chessdom].
Finally, in chess as well as in the financial world, past achievements are no guarantee for future results. I know you don't like me presenting simple and undeniable facts, but: Argentina and Mexico succeeded in organizing WCh tournaments. Subsequently, both countries didn't manage to put up the Grand Slam events they promised or announced. I concede that now Bulgaria is very likely to deliver, given the huge national interest in Topalov.
¨Yes, but should Singapore be blamed for what happened prior to the Topalov-Kamsky match? ¨
Who is blaming Singapore? Quotes please.
¨Finally, in chess as well as in the financial world, past achievements are no guarantee for future results.¨
Again , Who said or imply that? Quotes please.
You do realize that past achievements are seriously taken into consideration for such things like hosting events or credit benefits , don´t you?
¨ Argentina and Mexico succeeded in organizing WCh tournaments. Subsequently, both countries didn't manage to put up the Grand Slam events they promised or announced.¨
I don´t recall Argentina announcing or promising to host a Slam event (don´t know about Mexico).
In fact you asked me recently if there were any hints of that ...
¨I know you don't like me presenting simple and undeniable facts, but:¨
If you start a phrase with such a statement , don´t complain afterwards if people call you stupid .
The Topalov - Kamsky went very well in Sophia, without complaint from Kamsky.
I think the next match will be handled seriously by the Bulgarian organizers, too.
Let's not forget Anand is no fool. He knows the related matters much, much better than anybody here on this blog. He will demand strict regulations in everything concerning security and fair play.
The playing venue will be under strict surveillance, and an observer will escort Topalov to the toilet every time he needs to pee during the game. The rest of the arrangement (hotels, transport, etc) will be transparent for the public to follow. For sure the Bulgarian authorities don’t want a scandal to follow them the next 20 years.
"FIDE chose Sofia only for an extra 400,000 euros prize fund"
Yes, but it was after all 400,000 euros extra and not surprising that they picked Bulgaria. Bonn was more Kramnik's home ground than Anand's and the latter did well anyway, while Topalov didn't play well in spite of winning against Kamsky in Bulgaria. Hard to predict what the playing venue will mean in practice, but I don't expect any scandals.
"The Topalov - Kamsky went very well in Sophia, without complaint from Kamsky."
Of course it wasn't on the scale of Elista, but as I remember it Kamsky and his manager had complaints and Danailov attacked the Kamsky team in the run-up to the match. Plus the silliness of showing "How Topalov was robbed in Elista" in the press centre, and so on. So it went ok, but "very well" is pushing it. The venue, live broadcast, press coverage and other technical details were average at best). And as I said before, we never really got to see what Danailov had up his sleeve if Topalov went behind.
Of course I'm not surprised by FIDE's choice, and as Anand tends to go along with their whims I'd guess the match will go ahead. It's just a shame for chess that Danailov and Borisov and co. are going to be in charge of what should be the flagship event for chess.
"Bonn was more Kramnik's home ground than Anand's and the latter did well anyway"
Are you seriously comparing that to playing against Topalov in Sofia? Bonn wasn't anyone's "home ground" at all - they were both glad to play in Germany, and Kramnik doesn't have any particular Bonn connection. Kramnik presumably had a psychological advantage in being closer to the organizers, which would have been the case in Hanoi or Ankara or Stockholm as well.
But simply making this into an issue about general "home ground advantage" is missing the point completely.
As long as it isn't against the rules for the countries of the players to arrange matches Bulgaria should be allowed to host a match if their bid is the highest just like India were allowed to bid. Anand had 4-2 against Kamsky in India but lost anyway while he did better in the match arranged by Kramnik's sponsor, and Kamsky played better against Topalov in Sofia than he has at any other location. But how the venue will affect things will be easier to say half a year from now.
Anand said during Toiletgate that the perception of cheating (in Topalov's mind) could be difficult for him, independent of whether or not there was cheating going on. Wonder how he will deal with it here.
I read a report sometime ago where the author was saying that he had friends in the intelligence community who told him that it was easy to cheat in chess with minimal risk of being detected, and that there were too many ways to do this. Assuming that Danailov has access to the Bulgarian secret service (or secret police), it will not be easy for Anand to avoid the niggling fear that there is something happening, especially if he falls behind or faces some unusually computer-like play from Topalov.
Interesting....
Yes, they certainly do have that right, unfortunately. Now Anand must insist that FIDE does everything in their power to ensure fair conditions and that similar tricks to the ones Topalov pulled in Elista won't be rewarded this time.
I'd have preferred to see the match in India actually, it's a pity that there seems to be so little interest from sponsors there.
Even though Anand frequently is seen wearing a "NIIT" logo.
Only 12 games again and nobody says anything about it ??!!!!
I will boycott this event
"I read a report sometime ago where the author was saying that he had friends in the intelligence community who told him that it was easy to cheat in chess with minimal risk of being detected, and that there were too many ways to do this."
I read a report somewhere that it was easy to change copper into gold, with minimial risk to ones mental health. However I can't tell you where this report is or give you any proof. But be warned, it is possible, so put your money in plastics.
Hey d_tal, are you telling me that with the connivance of officials and the use of highly sophisticated gadgets, cheating is impossible?
Is it possible for Danailov & Co. to team up with their secret service to assist Topalov during the games? How can FIDE/Anand absolutely ensure there's no cheating? How can they be certain the system is foolproof. That lingering thought can affect your play.
If the CIA wanted to help an American player and was seriously interested in doing so, especially on American soil, do you think it would be impossible for them to do so?
No its not impossible. Its also not impossible that alien lifeforms are among us, but it hasnt been proved yet. Get the point?
"No its not impossible. Its also not impossible that alien lifeforms are among us, but it hasnt been proved yet. Get the point?"
Actually, aliens are old news in the chess world
=:-D
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kirsan_Ilyumzhinov
Aha! So Topalov is an alien. This explains everything.
Tweve games? I say:
1) First player to win 5 games.
2) You must win at least two games more than your opponent.
3) No limit on the number of games.
12 games are a lot. I think 8 games would be ok.
12 games is twice less games that Capablanca-Lasker , nearly three times less than Alekhine Capablanca , and more than four times times less than Kasparov-Karpov .
12 games is defintely not enough , most people i spoke to at the club today were disappointed , it was already a mistake to play so few games in the match Kramnik-Topalov which was decided in blitz ( a great pity IMHO , regardless of the result ) .
It makes the title less prestigious (imagine Wimbledon final played in only one set , how undisputable would be the title .. ) or the result less credible , and the match potentially less entertaining (less risks and thus less creative play , potentially less decisive games ) . But more importantly , it disappoints the majority of people who expected a format at the height of the event , a "WORLD Championshio MATCH " . 20 games is the bare minimum for such an event , otherwise next time just play it on blitz through the ICC , will save even more money and time if that's the concern .
20 games like in Fischer-Spassky or Botvinnik-Tal in 1960 would be very much welcome IMHO , the way i see it , it is the minimum number of games to give a worthy and undisputable World champion whilst leaving room for the players to test and express themselves fully over the course of the match .
20 games like in Fischer-Spassky or Botvinnik-Tal in 1960 would be very much welcome IMHO , the way i see it , it is the minimum number of games to give a worthy and undisputable World champion whilst leaving room for the players to test and express themselves fully over the course of the match .
Actually, if I remember correctly, before (and maybe even during?!) Karpov's matches the number of games was 24, not 20; however, if someone attained 12 1/2 (e.g., Fischer after 21 games, I believe) the match then stopped. I think it may have been some time during Kasparov's reign that the number of games per match changed; I'm sure someone here can supply that info...
Yeah. Kasparov-Short 1993 was still best of 24. After that, matches successively shortened: Kasparov-Anand 1995 was best of 20. (Anand said that they might as well make it best of 12!) Then Kasparov-Kramnik 2000 was best of 16, Kramnik-Lékó 2004 best of 14, Kramnik-Topalov best of 12, and there we are still...
the real test of all these statements of neutrality, surveillance, guarantees of fair play etc will be only after Anand wins the first game.
its a real shame that no one from India put the money up, instead we get to watch stupid Twenty20 matches between Somerset and New South Wales...in Hyderabad. go figure.
The first 12 members of this Bundesliga team would make a strong 12 player tournament I'd like to see.
1. OSC Baden-Baden
1 Anand, Viswanathan GM IND 2788
2 Carlsen, Magnus GM NOR 2772
3 Svidler, Peter GM RUS 2739
4 Shirov, Alexei GM ESP 2732
5 Bacrot, Etienne GM FRA 2721
6 Movsesian, Sergej GM SVK 2716
7 Adams, Michael GM ENG 2699
8 Naiditsch, Arkadij GM GER 2697
9 Vallejo Pons, Francisco GM ESP 2693
10 Nielsen, Peter-Heine GM DEN 2680
11 Nisipeanu, Liviu-Dieter GM ROU 2675
12 Caruana, Fabiano GM ITA 2670
"...three million euro on organising the event and a further two million euro in prize money..."
3 + 2 = 5
"The match will be played on April 5-25, 2010."
Will be, not may be.
http://www.sofiaecho.com/2009/10/16/801109_sofia-to-host-world-chess-crown-showdown-in-april-2010
I don't know if this Vasiliev article means that Baku was given the Candidates in 2010 and London the title match in 2012. As Google Translate puts it:
"Approved application Baku to hold matches applicants autumn of 2010 the first and accepted the application of London to hold the next world championship match in 2012."
http://www.sport-express.ru/newspaper/2009-10-17/7_3/
If I were Anand, why would I care if there were aliens amongst us or not, but I'd certainly be concerned about Topalov & Co.'s ability to use sophisticated means to cheat and try to nip such a move at the bud.
And what, pray, are the "unsophisticated" methods of cheating these days? Violet yoghurts? Dead flies in lights? Maybe a pocket Fritz lodged in a certain body cavity, assisted by a suitable lubricant (any suggestions)?
"If the CIA wanted to help an American player and was seriously interested in doing so, especially on American soil, do you think it would be impossible for them to do so?"
Yes. They cannot spare the agents from alien-freezing activities in Area 51.
24 games.
Why not make it a best-of-8? Why not just flip a coin?
Hey's it's FIDE folks. You really believe anything they say? I've got $$$ says it won't be April and it won't be Sophia. Anand hasn't even spoken to this yet.
Yes he did.
http://www.chessvibes.com/reports/fide-accepts-bid-anand-topalov-in-sofia/#more-17345
I don´t know about April, but its going to be in Sofia , deal with it.
C'mon, folks. Twelve games is not a coin flip. I'd like to see 20 or 24 games too, but I don't have the money to sponsor such a match. Anyone who does should contact FIDE immediately; I suspect that the bidding can be reopened. In the meantime, we should be happy with what we did get: a match with a double digit number of games rather than a knockout tournament (or nothing at all).
There is no bank guarantee from Bulgaria and yet FIDE awarded the match to Topalov (sorry, Bulgaria). Apparently , the bids from Turkey and Singapore had bank guarantees for smaller amounts. So, what happens if this match goes kaput like the latter part of the Grand Prix or many of the matches like Kasparov- Kasim, Kasparov-Ponomariov etc.
Additionally, the Topailov team may try dirty tricks like bugging Anand's team's rooms or food poisoning his seconds. I wish Anand wouldn't agree to play in Bulgaria. The fear of cheating might be more dangerous than the actuality of cheating itself.
"Additionally, the Topailov team may try dirty tricks like bugging Anand's team's rooms or food poisoning his seconds. "
The last time I heard a chess player being accused of food poisoning was young Kamsky accusing Kasparov-who gave the following response:
"I don't pay much attention to what he says because he should be put under psychiatric observation".
C'mon guys. Topa and Danailov behaved in a nasty amd unethical fashion v Kramnik but let's keep it real.
Anand is in!
http://susanpolgar.blogspot.com/2009/10/anand-consents-to-play-in-sofia.html
¨Apparently , the bids from Turkey and Singapore had bank guarantees for smaller amounts.¨
Would you mind to back up your statement?
Because officialy this is what really happened:
¨There were two other World Championship bids, from Turkey and Singapore, but for lower sums. These bids were withdrawn when the details of the Bulgarian bid had been presented. In the vote of the Congress the world championship was awarded to Sofia, by unanimous decision. ¨
As you can read here:
http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=5840
It doesn't contradict what I said.Turkey and Singapore had bank guarantees for smaller amounts. Bulgaria didn't have a bank guarantee only a letter of support from the head of state for a larger amount. So, it is irregularity on part of FIDE to induce Turkey and Singapore to withdraw their bids and give it to Bulgaria.
Anyway, my point is Anand shouldn't play in Bulgaria where the match is not expected to be neutral.
What I liked about Topalov when he was World Champion was the fact that he tried to be as present as possible! Just judging by the way he represented chess in public he definitely beats Anand and Kramnik who are/were not that much around at all!
Now you are saying that they were induced to retire they offers?
Please ,give us some links supporting your nonesense...
That ´s what i meant when i said that the match being in Sofia would be so much fun , all the Topa haters are filling the air with lies and filthy speculations.
I wonder what would they do if during a WCH match their opponent went to the bathroom 40 or 50 times per game , i´m sure they´d just offer him more toilet paper.
Wanna blame someone? , ask the government of India about the reasons for not placing a bid for this match ...
Someone posted that their sport budget is about 240 millons per year , and we all saw lots of parades when Vishy was crowned...
One cannot blame the Bulgarians for having money and supporting their hero , it is also ridiculous to blame FIDE for accepting the best offer ...
This time people should choose something or someone else to blame .
Me , i´ll blame it on the rain ,like Milli Vanilli use to say.
:)
It's sad that a country couldn't spend a lot of money to stop such nonsense. India, shame on you. If the Toppies are to cheat is not their fault, but rather yours, for not getting a penny more than what they (may) offer. You will be severely judged by chess history.
Well Alez , the match being in India is not any better than being in Bulgaria . Both solutions are bad since the match "should " be in neutral territory .
Also , it's very personal but , i know India is a rapidly growing country and all that , however i have a friend who went there recently , and the poverty there is appalling , more than 800 millions people with barely anything to live , so in a way , it's not a bad thing that they keep those 5 millions euros for better things although i know the money would come from private funds , nothing forbids India's billionaire to spend their money more constructively than organizing chess games , 5 millions euros can help dozens of villages where there is starvation and so many suicides as a consequence .
The cheating accusations on Topalov lack some class IMHO , i was rooting for Kramnik in 2007 and was disgusted by the tricks Danailov used , but Topalov is a great chess professional and worthy number 1 in the rating list , plays remarkably well and his style is very daring and entertaining (never gives up , take risks and is creative ) , since Kasparov retired few players can match his energy and ability to win games consistently. . His behaviour has always been correct apart from Elista , so i don't think it's appropriate to depict him like a cheat
in 2006 not 2007*
As if Bulgaria is an elite country and is overflowing with milk and honey! I am pretty sure if the Bulgarian people were given a vote, they would prefer not to spend it on chess as well. And we should remember that Bulgaria has not provided a bank guarantee as yet only a letter of support from the head of state. So, the Bulgarian offer could go the way of the apocryphal Grand Prix events in Karlovy Vary or Qatar.
It is not about Topalov, I know Topalov will not act against anybody like he did against Kramnik. At that time I think he felt he was tricked into playing an undeserving candidate. Anyway, this is all about World Championship and FIDE and conducting a WCh in a non-neutral venue.
Should money be the primary criteria or neutrality be the primary criteria in deciding a venue for FIDE? What is the FIDE committee now doing in all this?
What measures are being taken by FIDE to protect player interests in a non-neutral or opponent friendly venue against phone tapping, access into computers and player databases, bribing a second to collect information etc.?
What measures are in place to monitor players during the games in progress?
What is the procedure in place for reporting - confidential or otherwise - of any suspicious activities so that things will not escalate into the open to a toilet-gate level?
What is the composition of the committee that looks into issues? Do they have at least one person with a good report from each of the player country?
It is world chess federation's responsibility to address issues like this for players to have a peace of mind to play and to focus only on chess and chess alone! Not only that, it is to defend the defenseless players and their career who might have had genuine reasons to suspect foul play somewhere down the line because of unaddressed issues like this which they were unable to bottle it for too long to face the ire of chess fans.
Did you find proof for your statements ?
I thought so.
Hey chessplayer:
Please provide the links supportig this two statements from your part:
¨Turkey and Singapore had bank guarantees for smaller amounts.¨
¨So, it is irregularity on part of FIDE to induce Turkey and Singapore to withdraw their bids and give it to Bulgaria.¨
Thx.
Some people always demand proof of statements made by others when they never offer any proof of what they say themselves.
"As if Bulgaria is an elite country and is overflowing with milk and honey!"
Here i agree with you Chessplayer , it's really a pity that no western country is ready to invest in this major chess event . But my point is that both Bulgaria and India are not neutral country , so they shouldn't host the event IMHO
I also find excessive the prize fund for a sport that generate little attention in the mainstream media and general public . I'm critical of FIDE to accept the Bulgarian bid , i don't know what happened exactly with the Singapore and Turkey bid , but it would have been a good solution , i hope politics did not influenced this although it seems likely .
Well , Anand accepted it anyway , but he didn't really have the choice apparently , if he refused , he would have been criticzed by some and he could have lost his title
Remember the U.S. government has developed technology more advanced than what the public is exposed to now, technology that will not see the light of day for years to come. So if some U.S. politician passionate about chess (like the Bulgarian Prime Minister) decides to secretly assist an American player, using more sophisticated technology, you don't think he'd be able to do it?
The U.S. is already developing (has developed) NanoBots disguised as insects to spy on others (eavesdrop, provide visual feed - nano cameras). Who is to say that such a device can't be used to transmit moves to players. Like a fly buzzing around the room could actually be a NanoBot relaying moves to the player.
Well , in that case you should do like im doing now and ask them for proof of their lies , Luke.
Defending a lier is new all time low for you , im not surprised though.
I retract my self , this is not just going to be fun , this is paradise.
That'll be no problem, we just get Kirsan to stand behind the players and tell the fly to buzz off.
Else we pay an expert to swat the swarms at the doorway.
Chortle.
Again, this is not something that needs to be resorted to on every move. Only during key moves. For example, a player can develop a hand signal to notify his team that he/she doesn't know what to do in a particular position and then get up to use the restroom. The team consults Rybka and relays the solution using the fly/NanoBot which buzzes into the restroom. Who can stop this? This is the future of cheating in chess, poker etc.
http://www.thepriceofrice.com/2008/11/bug-sized-spies-us-develops-tiny-flying.html
"The U.S. is already developing (has developed) NanoBots disguised as insects to spy on others"
The article says that the scientists "...plan to start by developing a bird-sized robot as soon as 2015, followed by the insect-sized models by 2030."
plan...the U.S. "planned" to have a satellite based missile defense system about 20 years ago.
Did you just not read the article carefully?
It's neat to see two Americans playing in Wijk, one each in the A and B groups! I wonder if that's happened before.
Screw the article! Why would the U.S. officially reveal its arsenal and the kind of technology it is using for espionage purposes. Just because something is developed now, doesn't automatically mean it will be mass produced for the public to use. The U.S. may simply say they're still developing, even though in reality they may have already developed and been using such technology. Normally, unless other countries have the same technological know-how vis-a-vis a particular gadget/technology, it wouldn't be prudent to mass produce it, but would be more prudent to use it for espionage purposes. Only once the technology has leaked from one country to another through the latter's own spy network, then would it make sense to commercialize it.
Lack of reading comprehension is very tedious for the therein gifted.
I feel bad about letting a player play in his home country. But let's keep this one in mind if a future WCh disagrees to play in Oslo...
I feel ok about (only) 12 games, but please let the WCh keep the title at 6-6 instead of blitzing it out.
We can always dream of longer matches, but those days are gone, and noone of the stakeholders have any interest in going back. Just the fans. Lets just hope the number will stay in two digits.
Kind of puts a new light on those dead flies in Reykjavik...
12 is far too short, and the missing bank guarantee is curious, but I'm happy they are playing at all.
Sofia is the logical choice: They come up with the money, they get the match. If I followed the news correctly, the other venues didn't have bank guarantees either.
I appreciate the creative energy of the sophisticated conspiratorial plots, but if you involve high-tech gadgets, government politicians and the secret service, how would you make plausible nobody talks about it? These plot lines only work well in far-away pocket dictatorships.
And Bulgaria isn't one? At least the chess establishment appears to be...
"involve high-tech gadgets, government politicians and the secret service, how would you make plausible nobody talks about it?These plot lines only work well in far-away pocket dictatorships."
Watergate, anyone?
Far away from where, exactly?
What's with all this moronic yabbering about Topalov cheating? Topalov is not a cheater.
You guys sound silly. Worse than silly...stupid and demented. Sick, twisted, paranoid. Insane. A bunch of weak losers.
So you want proof that intelligence-grade communications devices exist that go far beyond the capability of usual civilian methods to detect ? I hope not. More likely, assuming you are reasonable, you want proof that Danailov and his government buddies are using them.
The point is to not have to worry about proof for the second: hence, have a match organized on neutral territory by a neutral organization. With Bulgarian national pride and a huge prize fund at stake, when you know that Danialov is well-connected to the government (he brags about it), it does not take a high degree of paranoia to imagine that at crunch time, if necessary, a little help will be available at critical moments. Topalov does not need more than one or two instances of subtle guidance at critical moments to be able to be confident of beating Anand.
And even that thought can mess with Anand's brain, unless he plans to employ ex-CIA agents to sniff out the playing area.
"it does not take a high degree of paranoia to imagine that at crunch time, if necessary, a little help will be available at critical moments."
Yes it does. There is not a shred of evidence that Topalov cheats. And you also assume that the Bulgarian government will assist him in a highly publicized match.
These are large allegations, you are presenting them as if they were to be assumed by any rational person- in fact they merely reflect your own prejudice.
I counted 4 morons in this thread who stated or suggested that Topalov will cheat. Topalov is not a cheater. However, the 4 morons are clearly morons.
I think in an ongoing game, both players with a dousin variants in their head, everything very complicated, not much time left before time controle, -in this kind of situation (were it would be helpful to have some more time to analyze) it's IMPOSSIBLE to pass on any useful information. Any "hint" or signal would just create confusion. Was it ment for this possison or before last move was done? But what about (8th move variant, what to do then, etc, etc). It's quite clear these super-GMs are best on their own. By the way, they play 55-60% Rybka moves without any help. Also Topalov's style, is to play slightly inferior Rybka-moves, maybe more agressive/risk taking.
In positions where help is needed, the players need long time analyzes. A short signal would prove useless, or even worse, just make him more confused.
Moves which CAN be communicated (and understood) are limited to simple and easy-to-understand moves. However such moves, the players find on their own. Without risking disqalification with no prize money or no honour left for the rest of their lives.
During the games, you can forget about cheating or receiving signals from outside. Eventually what CAN be done is spionage (hidden microphones) on what the other team is prepairing. However there are many anti-bug devices available. Rooms can also be screened, etc. This is done even in regular boardrooms inside bigger corparations.
Watergate? - My point exactly. You know how it ended.
> Far away from where, exactly?
Far away from political opponents, a checkbook, a website you don't control.
Far away from a website?
Topalov is not a cheater. He is a very strong player, extremely strong. I enjoy watching his games and have learned a lot from them. Topalov has also shown that he is very unethical, possibly the result of psychiatric problems.
Anand will squash him like a soft grape. And that will be the end of Topalov.
All things considered -- it will probably put more pressure on
Topalov when playing in Sofia. He was shaky against Gata. I think
Topalov plays best as far away from Sofia as they can send
him... Argentina, China, anywhere but Sofia... Even at those
MTels he won, there where early losses until he settled. This may
work very much in Anand's favor. Had he played in India the pushy
local journalists there would have driven him crazy with
incessant interviews, while in Sofia he will have more time to
concentrate on the game. Seeing how well Anand trumped Kramnik in
Bonn (which was clearly and by far Kramnik’s "homeland") shows us
that he plays well when less of a person of "local" attention. Of
course, these are all conjectures…
D.
It's quite possible that Anand was among those San Luis participants who suspected Topalov of cheating. According to Nigel Short, who was there and talked to the participants, a majority of Topalov's opponents believed he was cheating, something I have certainly never heard of in any other tournament... and we have from many other sources that at least some at least suspected it. And after that, there have been more things to make you think, even if there is no concrete evidence - Topalov proving beyond doubt in Elista that he would stop at nothing to achieve his goals, and all the reports about signaling-like behaviour from Danailov.
A couple of statements Anand has made in interviews are possible to interpret in this fashion, if you read between the lines. Such as:
"Rechnen Sie mit einer schmutzigen WM? Vor kurzem sorgte Wesselin Topalow mit der Toiletten-Affäre für Aufsehen. Davor hielten sich lange Gerüchte, der Bulgare hätte bei seinem WM-Sieg mit Computer-Hilfe betrogen.
Es ist schwierig, Beweise auf den Tisch zu legen. Prinzipiell begrüße ich alle Maßnahmen wie verzögerte Internet-Übertragungen der Partien, die Betrug erschweren. Der Mehrzahl meiner Kollegen vertraue ich." http://www.taz.de/index.php?id=start&art=3142&id=sport-artikel&cHash=b1287667a6
("Do you count on a dirty World Championship? Recently Veselin Topalov created a fuss with the toilet affair. Before that there has long lingered rumours about the Bulgarian using computer help to cheat when winning the World Championship.
It's difficult to put proof on the table. In principle, I welcome all measures, such as delaying Internet transmission of the games, to make cheating more difficult. But I trust the majority of my collegues.")
"Bonn (which was clearly and by far Kramnik’s "homeland")"
Again, how was that more of Kramnik's "homeland" than Anand's? They both much enjoy playing in Germany. As for familiarity, Kramnik has Dortmund, and Anand has Mainz and the Bundesliga. Anand even speaks German, which I don't think Kramnik does. OK, Kramnik had already played a short match against Fritz in Bonn, but I don't see what difference that makes.
The Candidates will be in Baku and a "neutral" country since Aronian refuses to play in Baku, but Azerbaijan will still (of course) have their nominee. If Radjabov stays second in the Grand Prix that will mean two or three Azerbaijani players in the Candidates (depending on who wins the World Cup). Gashimov and Mamedyarov will both play Radjabov in the last GP event, and how hard they will press to win those games may be affected by the fact that they by beating Radjabov could minimise their own chances to play the Candidates.
One difference with previous "final decisions" is that it now suddenly no longer is decided how long (or short) the matches will be so it is just to wait and see, and another change is that the Azeri players may be seeded into different halves. The Candidates could also be moved to 2011 instead of 2010.
http://www.extratime.az/article.php?aid=8927
http://translate.google.com/translate?js=y&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.extratime.az%2Farticle.php%3Faid%3D8927&sl=ru&tl=en&history_state0=
Bobby Fiske: see point 4 in this article referring to a Kasparov-Anand game. A yes-or-no sign about a critical move is all that is needed...
for d_tal, who challenged me to tell him which report I was referring to, see point 6 in the same article. indeed, this is the one i was referring to, just took me a while to find it again.
sorry, *this* article:
http://www.chessbase.com/columns/column.asp?pid=190
It looks as though the tailenders of Group A will be gasping for air by the second round.
My prediction:
Karjakin is the odd man in. Leinier Dominguez Perez will go -3 with three losses and a line of draws. Carlsen will go +6 (but will somehow only manage a draw against van Wely) and Anand +4. Ivanchuk will tie Anand with +4 and Short will score +1. Leko, Kramnik, and Shirov will go +3. An incredible field. Watch for Nakamura to finish at the bottom
Very interesting article, thanks.
Acirce, trolling again I see? Dragging up those old half baked accusations again? Those "I am not winning therefore Topalov must be cheating" flavoured complaints; of course, so convincing. And how do you know that Topalov "beyond doubt" did anything he could to win in Elista? And have you seen that ridiculous "signalling" video yourself? I did and all I saw was a man fidgeting around. Man the problem with the internet is that any moron can say anything without the fear of legal action. In your case, I hope, JUST hope that the boot is on the other foot some day. Some moron should accuse you of something that ruins your reputation and continues to make scurrilous and completely unproven allegations just for the fun of it.
Ok, so acirce, what exactly are you trying to say? That Anand
doubts Topalov and he will feel disadvantaged to play in Sofia?
That Topalov is a likely cheater, too? If that was the case then
I'd have expected from Anand to come forth with a statement
earlier. Did he do so?
D.
It's especially annoying when people say- the evidence is unconvincing, BUT there MUST be something in it, otherwise the matter would never have arisen. The man is either innocent or guilty- if you think he's guilty at least spare us the innuendo and say it outright. Otherwise don't bring up the subject.
Do you mean the video published on Kommersant? Of course it doesn't prove anything - it was not intended to.
There are a lot of spectacular tournament results, but very few of them lead to several of the losing participants actually expressing suspicions...much less a majority, if Short is right. Btw, I slightly misrepresented Short above, saying "According to Nigel Short, who was there and talked to the participants, a majority of Topalov's opponents believed he was cheating". He has said a majority of participants, which could be read as at least five. I am not aware of any particular reason to think he was cheating, but I wonder where those suspicions come from. Especially in the light of later developments, I simply don't see it as rational as ignore it.
That there is some reason to suspect that Anand suspects Topalov. And, by implication, that if that is true, he might feel more comfortable than otherwise in playing in the home country of his opponent.
???
LESS comfortable...
You mean Nigel Short , the one who seated at the table with the Bulgarians to give then luck until the last round just to send his exclusive reports to chessbase?
You mean Nigel Short, the one who happened to have a camara ready and shooting when a disgusted opponent wouldn't shake his hand?
My question is> Why wouldn't he say that DURING San Luis? Why later?
I was in San Luis , i saw Topalov and Morozevich , and the rest of the guys , i saw Leko doing interviews in a completely frustrated mood , there were no hints of something dirty going on ... just a couple of bad losers around .
Spare us the bs , you need something better that Nigel Short for people to believe it.
It is really amazing to see how hypocrite people can be sometimes.
There is also an understandable reason for Anand to publicly hint out his suspicion if that is what he did. It is a way to pressurize the federation to put proper measures in place. If you keep quiet nothing will happen. Because to prove "beyond doubt", you suspect first, then collect evidence, and then put the evidences together and prove. The evidence collection part is something a player cannot do by himself alone. Help from organisers (placing anti-cheating devices), federation (policies like second cannot talk to outside world during games and two weeks prior other than to a few family members??) and if necessary from government (investigation) is required. For instance, your opponent managed to get your second on to his payroll. How would you possibly detect? You can only suspect.
I think FIDE should have players trustable, confidential reporting (hotline?) and feedback mechanism. And if there is a breaching of trust from the Federation, the player should have the final option to go public also.
"You mean Nigel Short , the one who seated at the table with the Bulgarians to give then luck until the last round just to send his exclusive reports to chessbase?"
Yes.
"You mean Nigel Short, the one who happened to have a camara ready and shooting when a disgusted opponent wouldn't shake his hand?"
No, that's probably another Short..
"My question is> Why wouldn't he say that DURING San Luis? Why later?"
Not sure about his real reasons, of course, but in his own words, he didn't call for an inquiry until "allegations started to appear in the public realm" and further grounds for starting an investigation had showed up. Would it really have been responsible to mention it during the tournament?
On chessgames.com, he quoted these reasons: "the seriousness of the subject, the unparallelled private suspicions of so many players, the testimony of Martin Breutigam in the Sueddeutsche Zeitung, plus the inconclusive but potentially important video evidence of a Dutch amateur, lead me to the believe that there are sufficient grounds for thoroughly investigating the case."
"the inconclusive but potentially important video evidence of a Dutch amateur"
That's exactly the kind of crap I was referring to above.
Acirce,
It's interesting that you twist what Nigel Short said about these lurid insinuations but ignore the actual comments of Peter Svidler and Peter Leko.
Cheshire Cat is right. The freedom of expression conferred by internet anonymity unfortunately allows freedom from logic, commonsense and fairness. It allows bitter clowns like van Breutigam and Evgeny Bareev and many other nobodies to add conjecture to innate paranoia and propagate this poisonous seed.
By the way, it is not new that bitter rivals accuse a chess player on a hot streak of cheating. Lasker (''execrable cigars''), Rubinstein (''witchcraft''), Tal(''hypnotic gaze'') have all been similarly accused of unsporting behaviour. And more recently, Bobby Fischer declared that 'every game or every match' ever played by Karpov and Kasparov were fixed. I recall Valery Salov also made similar insinuations about Kasparov and sadly, Karpov about Mikhail Gurevich.
Earlier today, I counted 4 morons in this thread who stated or suggested that Topalov will cheat.
The count is now up to 5.
What comments am I ignoring and what makes you think I am ignoring them just because I don't mention them? There are a lot of things I haven't mentioned in this thread, you know..
I don't know if you're referring to me but I am not anonymous just because I don't use my name as my handle.
But if I'm so free from logic, commonsense and fairness, please add some.
"it is not new that bitter rivals accuse a chess player on a hot streak of cheating." Certainly not. But it is new that the majority of participants in a high-level tournament believe that the winner was cheating. If you think Short is exaggerating for some reason, it is still very, very unusual that several of the participants suspect it. That some single disgruntled and jealous loser starts accusing his opponent certainly happens.
I completely agree with acirce. There is no solid proof that topalov (+danailov) is/are cheating, but there are quite some dubious things around them. I know there are quite some players who have a big suspicion that topalov is cheating, f.e. morozevich.. who after San Luis refuses to shake hands, and during San Luis offered a draw with white within 10 moves because he was convinced topalov was cheating and didnt want to play. And yes, Anand was one of the others..
Thanks, Lars. Not so much for agreeing with me as for understanding my position at all ;-)
I know Morozevich is likely to be one of those who suspected or believed Topalov to have been cheating (though as far as I know he has never said so openly - and, if memory serves, his official reason for the early draw offer was that he felt sick). How do you know, or what specifically makes you think, Anand was among the others?
For all my dislike of cheating allegations offered without convincing proof... I really think it's bordering on comical for anyone to act outraged on behalf of Topalov. After Elista!??
You can say, for example, that it's weak circumstantial evidence that people have observed Danailov possibly signalling to Topalov after constantly leaving and checking his phone... but at least it's a perfectly plausible means of cheating. Danailov accused Kramnik of going to the bathroom, climbing on a chair and somehow magically connecting to an internet cable despite having passed through a metal detector... Why anyone would think a man who'd say something like that would be above cheating is beyond me. I don't think he did in San Louis, for what it's worth, but it's hardly beyond the bounds of possibility.
haha, I knew that question would come..
I have some sources close to Vishy. However, they told me this in confidence and I am sure they would not appreciate it if I would disclose them since this is a sensitive matter. So, you have to believe me on my word. Sounds weak, I know. And the topalov-fanboys will (probably) attack me for not giving solid proof, but anyway..
I don't know how much concerns he had, but I know there was at least some suspicion. I thought it was worth mentioning!
I understand that, thanks anyway. As I already said, I wouldn't be surprised if it were true.
Here is another comment, from an ACP interview -- seeming very much to refer to San Luis and later "incidents", although it could be coincidental:
"5. Do you consider the possibility of cheating at high-level tournaments as a serious problem? What measures would you suggest to introduce to reduce such a possibility?
More than cheating. The thought that someone could cheat is more serious. Seconds should be prohibited from going on stage or into the player's area before the game. They should also not be allowed to enter the playing hall and leave and re enter during a game. It is actually a bit strange to police people. But in today's time where a mobile phone is more than enough to cheat we need to take these steps. Delay in transmission is one step." http://www.chess-players.org/eng/news/viewarticle.html?id=633
Precisely.
And I would like to stress that I think most cheating accusations, present or historical, are based on nonsense - like indeed Topailov's against Kramnik, or Mamedyarov's against Kurnosov's, or Kasparov's against the Deep Blue team, or various wild conspiracy theories about KGB forcing Botvinnik's opponents to lose. However, not every case is the same - they have to be treated individually. People legitimately discuss Curaçao 1962 despite the lack of conclusive evidence. Despite my general contempt of stories about the evil Commies plotting, I think there is enough to that particular case to make it reasonable to take the charges, in one version or another, seriously.
Now unless there is *very* strong evidence against someone, maybe out of respect the matter shouldn't be discussed openly. But that dilemma doesn't occur regarding Topalov, since he doesn't deserve that kind of respect in the first place.
Thanks for the Chessbase link. A very interesting article.
But the article points out that cheating during a live game involves at least 2 obstacles:
1. The moves must be transmitted without delay to an outside spot.
2. Since there will be (likely) only a one-way comunication of simple signals, the operation must involve one or several persons (seconds) who knows how their players thinks.
In the Anand - Kramnik match there was a 30min relay delay. Also I think if several people are involved in a setup like this, the truth will come out sooner or later.
BTW,the author of the article states in 5.:
"Cheating with the computer has, to the best of my knowledge, thus far not been attempted at top levels in chess."
You are wrong and missinformed , Moro refused to shake hands with Topa after Elista , not after San Luis .
You also need to remember he is Russian and offering early draws is an insult patented by Spasky long time before San Luis.
Take it ease with Acirce , he is conducting a very serious investigation here,and surely he has proof of all that crap .
[quote]In the Anand - Kramnik match there was a 30min relay delay. Also I think if several people are involved in a setup like this, the truth will come out sooner or later.[unquote]
I doubt. It will be a criminal case. The person who comes out with the truth (must be one among the several to have proof) has to face prison sentence first before he sees others face the same fate.
Poor Topalov. The number of morons who think he cheats continues to increase.
I agree with acirce about Topalov's ability to cheat and the possibility that he has done so in the past.
Seems a bit suspicious to me that he has won every event that his been blessed by Danailov the very first time they were organized, not to mention the accusations of help received from Danailov during San Luis. San Luis, M-Tel, Bilbao, match with Kamsky.
Even the world championship in Sofia will be a first for them :)
A clarification on San Luis, as far as I know, it was not Morozevich himself who made the accusations but his friend IM Barsky, in a series of articles in the Russian press.
Russian-speaking folks can check up on this - it is speculated that Topalov's Elista antics were partly triggered by his anger at the whisper campaign around San Luis.
"You are wrong and missinformed , Moro refused to shake hands with Topa after Elista , not after San Luis ."
You are right about this for once. It was only after Elista.
If I recall, Barsky didn't make any outright accusations, but it may well have seemed that he was strongly implying it.
I don't know if he wrote several articles. I knew about one that I think was the one mainly talked about. However, I can't find it now. It used to be at http://prosports.ru/index.ipj?clsid=3795239278-6953-16397-191&method=getArticle&id=73936&rubric_id=39361
Aronian refuses to play in Azerbaijan Candidates tournament. So, a neutral venue will be found for him.
http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=5844
I don't see why by the same yardstick Anand cant refuse to play in Bulgaria to play in a neutral venue.
Luke, count your morons name them one by one! ;)
Topalov is a nice person! So nothing against Topalov. I would have raised all of these points even if Anand had to play a different person.
I sincerely hope both Anand and Topalov get the best ever environment conditions for this match to bring out their very very best!!
Apparently he is less worried about being cheated than Luke´s morons...
BTW , how about your LIES? Would you at lest admit them?
There are so many morons everywhere.
"Topalov is a nice person!"
Ugh.
Danailov's response to Barsky's article (I agree it was only one) is here: http://www.chesspro.ru/match/before/2/
He names Kazhimdzanov and Morozevich as the "anonymous sources" from San Louis, though Kazhimdzanov responds briefly and amusingly here: http://www.chesspro.ru/match/before/3/
Danailov claims that Morozevich attacked Topalov because he was embarrassed that his 11th move draw offer was made public. Kazhimdzahov points out that Danailov offered him a draw twice before the game with Topalov in the 13th round even started.
There's a general review of the claim here: http://www.chesspro.ru/match/before/1/
Barsky in his reporting from the match in Elista claims that the topic of Topalov cheating was raised before his article and he was just asked to provide an analysis for and against (and that he didn't express the views of anyone else): http://www.e3e5.com/article.php?id=638 I also couldn't find a working link to the original article.
ok appears to be a nice person.
p.s. just thinking about that Danailov comment - surely if Morozevich offers a draw on move 11 then he knows that Topalov might accept. So it's illogical to think that "revealing" the draw offer could upset Morozevich. It would have been revealed instantly if Topalov had agreed (and anyway, draw offers aren't generally well-kept secrets). So the suggestion above that Morozevich suspected Topalov of cheating would at least make some sense...
Anyway, no more raking up very old dirt for me for a while...
And another question is what happened to the popular claim that the switch to an 8-player candidates event was part of a big plan to get Kramnik back into the cycle? "Everyone knew" that UEP or Russia was going to organize the match and give Kramnik the wildcard.. As it is he could still lose the rating spot if he plays badly in Moscow and London or if somebody else (like Gelfand) has a great run.
That is because India and Bulgaria aren't at war...not yet anyway :-P
If Topalov was from Pakistan then FIDE would have had to do something like what you mentioned.
For a million euros i would play in any war-torn country ruled by a dictator.
If you offer a short draw to someone it may also imply that you are afraid of his play ,if the guy refuses and outplay you it usually means that he was right.
The rest is just sore grapes , from the very same person who claimed that Kasparov knows nothing about chess even though he could never beat him...
It is funny to see you spoiling this thread with unfounded acusations , you usually complain when someone brings conspiracy on Kramnik , but anyway ,i guess the next world championship is just too painfull for Kramnik´s fans.
GM and chess journalist Ian Rogers conducted an informal poll with about ten top GM's in February 2007, with one of them being 100% sure Topalov and Danailov were cheating, two of them being sure they were not, and the rest answering with "varying degrees of 'maybe'".
Rogers himself agreed that the accusations had to be taken seriously, and said "both sides" had tough questions to answer. (i.e. Why was Danailov acting so oddly? But why would they use him as a medium, instead of somebody more anonymous?)
Given this, I have an alternative theory that they wanted it to _look_ like they may be cheating, to mess with the minds of Topalov's opponents. This neatly answers the question why so many people would think he was cheating if he wasn't, and may be more probable than actual cheating.
http://www.schack.se/tfs/tfs_02_2007_sample.pdf for anyone who understands Swedish :)
That's not me, and will you please change your handle. Thanks.
This is getting even better , Mr Holmes.
OF course it's not you. the handles are different . who are you to ask me to change my handle ? you change yours.
"If you offer a short draw to someone it may also imply that you are afraid of his play".
Sure, or that it's a psychological ploy (another option Danailov gave). The explanation about Morozevich being upset that the draw offer was revealed to the Russian press still doesn't make much sense, though.
"It is funny to see you spoiling this thread with unfounded acusations"
Well, I did post a link to a very long article by Danailov, I suppose. And another article saying that there was no clear case against Topalov. And Kazhimdzanov merely pointing out the Danailov's accusations against him were false. And Barsky NOT accusing Topalov of cheating. How could I be so inflammatory!?
"i guess the next world championship is just too painfull for Kramnik´s fans".
What a weird comment. It should be fun. I don't even know who I want to win - in chess terms Topalov is the easiest for any challenger to beat :)
My point of view: I do not accuse Topalov of cheating, but I do accuse him (or rather "team Topalov") of dirty tricks and psychological warfare. This goes without saying for Elista. But also:
- Danailov's behavior at Corus, which could be interpreted as giving signals to Topalov during games, was IMO provocative and deliberately + intentionally suspicious. Subsequently, he could accuse others of cheating accusations against Topalov.
- The Topalov-Kamsky match was not as "clean" as some people claim. What about putting Bulgarian guys on the hotel floor occupied by Kamsky's team "to guarantee their security"? Team Kamsky didn't ask for such 'favors', and the security guys even stayed after it was clear that they weren't welcome. Maybe Kamsky's reaction was paranoid (playing loud music all the time for fear that Bulgarians could overhear their conversations), but provoking the other one's paranoia could well be part of a plan.
For the match in Sofia, obviously "plan B" (if there is one) would only be executed "in case of need". Then the issue is, how would the organizers react. We have two conflicting statements:
"Neutrality would be guaranteed" (message to the World?)
"Stefan Sergiev ... sent clear messages which side he will strongly support" (this was on Chessdom, message to Topalov fans but other people can also read this webpage - it isn't password-protected ,:) )
Nothing wrong with Sergiev (from the Bulgarian Chess federation) openly supporting Topalov. But then, he shouldn't be involved in organizing the match, simple as that.
Now Topalov fans will come up with predictable reactions, maybe our blog clown Luke will include me on his list of morons, I don't care.
BTW: I agree with acirce that Germany was sort of home ground for both Anand and Kramnik - coincidentally (most probably really just a coincidence), Bonn is about halfway between Dortmund and Mainz. Similarly, Spain might be the best place for an Anand-Topalov match as it is both players' home away from home. Too bad that they only had money for a nostalgic match between two (semi-)retired former world champions ... .
Well you just predicted that Argentina woulnd´t make it to the World Cup , so is goog to have you on the other side.
BTW What happened to Ireland ? :)
goog:good
If UEP had been the organizer, Kramnik would have got the wildcard. But negotiations between UEP and FIDE broke down.
http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=5424
If Azerbaijan is the organizer , Radjabov, Gashimov or Mamedyarov will get the wildcard.
You LIE to all and then continue to post like nothing happened, what is your problem ?
What were you thinking , that nobody would check?
LIER.
Go on, Manu, point out where I "predicted" that :) You can post a link to Short having hired someone to film the "non-handshake" with Cheparinov while you're at it.
The Republic of Ireland finished qualifying unbeaten and are now in a play-off (they finished behind Italy), though when it comes to football I support England. Don't worry, I have no illusions of historical greatness :)
I never stated that Short hired someone , is just a bit odd that a camera was there at that paricular moment , don´t you think?
Easy with the soccer thing, i was just teasing you , of course you would choose England to support , who wouldn´t?
"I never stated that Short hired someone , is just a bit odd that a camera was there at that paricular moment , don´t you think?"
Well it seems to be posted at Youtube by Chessdom.com, so perhaps you should ask the Bulgarians :) Perhaps they wanted to film Short being humiliated and it all went awry. Though seeing as the Danailov/Short feud was discussed before the game you wouldn't really need to be a genius to assume that it might be interesting to film.
By the way, you said: "You mean Nigel Short, the one who happened to have a camara ready and shooting when a disgusted opponent wouldn't shake his hand?" So if he didn't hire someone you mean Short was the camera operator himself!? You might want to find some evidence before you accuse others of lies or idle speculation...
"Now Topalov fans will come up with predictable reactions, maybe our blog clown Luke will include me on his list of morons, I don't care."
Good that you don't care. You've already proven yourself time and time again. I was beginning to wonder where you were.
Anyway, enough's enough. The morons have showed themselves, and even the pompous professor has been flushed out from hiding.
Does Topalov cheat? No.
Is Topalov a weasel creep? Yes.
Is Topalov a very strong player? Yes.
Will Anand squash him like a bug? Yes.
I wouldn't.
IMO that was a set up , i said it many times , in fact the camera was on Cheparinov´s back and out of his sight , and the whole pathetic attitude of Nigel to run to the arbiter and claim about a dubious law (the game was forfeited and then replayed...)can make anyone assume that Nigel had this prepared from before , anticipating Ivan ´s reaction.
But still there is a big difference between arguing that, and what chessplayer did.
If your bias is so big that prevents you from noticing that , then i am afraid i wont talk to you anymore ,you disgust me even more than the lier.
lier : LIAR
¨So if he didn't hire someone you mean Short was the camera operator himself!? ¨
No , genius , he could have asked the camera to register the moment or someone else could .
Like i said , the next world championship is jut too painfull for Kramnik´s fans , no doubt about that.
Four consecutive posts by Manu. He wins.
Manu, it's besides the point whether Short had planned his forfeit claim or not. The only question is whether, as you claim, he'd arranged the filming. Or rather, the only question is whether you have the slightest evidence for that. And, just thinking about it, why would you need a video? The arbiter and witnesses were there, and at worst the arbiter would simply have to ask Cheparinov what happened. The only person the video could embarrass would be Short.
So if you don't have any evidence then it's just the sort of baseless comment you're always whining about when Topalov is the target (hey, you even accused me of "spoiling this thread with false accusations").
Re: chessplayer - I must admit I hadn't paid much attention to your little feud. Looking at it now chessplayer just seems to have got the wrong end of the stick with the info, missing the fact that Singapore and Turkey also failed to provide bank guarantees (why exactly couldn't Bulgaria provide a bank guarantee, by the way!?). He should admit the error, but seeing as I've seen Russian reports mentioned Hong Kong, not Singapore, and Bulgarian reports claiming a total of 5 million euros I think I can accept some confusion.
"False accusations" should be "unfounded accusations".
Chesshire cat - I know. I certainly didn't "choose" to support England, I just grew up there.
Saying that he has the cameras ready not necesary means that he was in charge of the cameras , but that he arranged the whole act or prepared for it.
Please go play with the other liar , i had it with your idiotic bias.
Ah, ok, so "Short, the one who happened to have a camera ready and shooting" actually has nothing to do with having a camera ready and shooting. I've got you :) A pedant might point out that even in that Orwellian interpretation of the English language you still wouldn't actually have evidence of premeditation, but I'll just say "good night". Good night!
This has been very educational for Manu. He has learned how to spell "liar", which now will become his favorite word. Expect to see it in every one of his posts. I can imagine him right now dancing in front of his mirror singing "liar, liar, liar...they are all liars!"
I learned a lot indeed , some people don´t have any problem defending a person who brings missinformation and lies to the table as long as he is on the same side of their idiotic conspyracy theories.
Manu - You are wrong. Deal with it.
I m not sure what you mean , but Anand did spoke about it when you were claiming the contrary , so i guess you were wrong .
Nothing wrong about being wrong , noyb.
Regarding the comments on length of match and rapid/blitz playoffs... can FIDE please at least remove the Armageddon game from the playing rules? Don't they remember the controversies of last year? They could, at the very least, play pairs of increment-blitz games until there is a result.
How dare you come here with an on-topic commentary ?
We are here to discuss how Topalov cheated in San Luis , or how Morozevich ´s draws offer means that he always knew it.
You can talk about how i accused poor Nigel of setting his non-handshake with Cheparinov , or about the technology the Bulgarians will use to cheat against Anand.
You can even lie about how the bid procedure went , as long as you attack Topalov everything goes.
But never ever come here with thoughtful suggestions about how the WCH sould be.
You are right of course , the crown should not be decided by an Armageddon game.
Ok, in that case Anand should have said something -- like that he will not play in Sofia for whatever reasons. Early on. But he did not. So, that shows what Anand is thinking far better than all of your tens of messages on this thread.
D.
P.S. Of course, I know that some of you will start to insinuate this or that, but that's Ok -- you know, this whole subject is so tired now that I do not even find it irritating anymore. Just silly.
Nor in 12 games.
I´d love to see a 20 but i think that´s a very difficult battle to win.
I totally agree.
Kudos to Anand for once again winning the negotiations battle. Now Topalov will be heavily stressed to ascend to victory for his Government. Heavy leva fines, or maybe even de facto gulags could await his defeat. In reality, this, in effect, swaps the tags of champion and challenger, placing the stress solely on Topalov, to defend the honor of his fatherland. Back in the 70s, Correspondence Champion Purdy argued that of course the champion should be granted a mathematical edge due to ardor of this big stress, and here that would be doubled, or even trebled. But we won't be seeing FIDE give Topalov a re-match clause (on neutral ground), I daresay.
Furthermore, Sofia additionally means that Anand has no incentive not to cheat, as he can easily claim that the mendacious Bulgars simply planted the evidence. This gives him the huge psychological edge, even if he chooses not to cheat. Avoiding the tropics in Singapore has got to be an acclimization plus for him also, as air conditioning is superior there as to Bulgaria. And if the bank guarantees don't happen, Topalov is all to blame. A win all-around for the Indian, who at worst will get a match on his own conditions.
The Azerbaijan/Armenian scuffle over the next Candidates (matches?) could also work to exclude Topalov yet again. Wouldn't surprise me if the usual suspects were behind this.
"Most chess tournaments pass without incident or even a suggestion of an incident. In 27 years as a professional player I have only ever once been present at a tournament where the majority of participants believed the eventual winner to have cheated - the World Chess Championship San Luis 2005.
I know all the players personally and, believe me, these are not people who generally cast aspersions on others either in public or in private. As I say, I also came to the conclusion that cheating was possible quite independently. These were the factors which influenced my decision to call for an inquiry."
--Nigel Short (on his Chessgames page)
"I became aware of the allegations towards the end of the tournament when some of the players expressed their views to me privately. Indeed the thought that something might have been going on had already occurred to me independently.
I can no longer remember the exact circumstances or timing of events, but as I recall I only wrote or spoke about this subject when allegations started to appear in the public realm - hence the wait.
Please note, I called for an inquiry to determine the truth. The entire event was filmed on TV, so it ought to have have been possible to either dismiss or support the claims. Either way chess would have been the winner.
Danailov/Topalov/Cheparinov would have you believe that I accused them of cheating. This certainly not the case. Indeed Danailov published an e-mail of mine stating quite clearly that I had never accused them of cheating. Yet the Bulgarian camp has subsequently deliberately distorted this vital point when it has suited them."
----Nigel Short (on his Chessgames page)
Since we are talking about fiction , i would like to recomend everybody ¨Whatever Works ¨ by Woody Allen , amazingly beatiful movie which happens to contain some very funny scenes of chess.
Just like the previous comment.
Looking at the rules, I see the Armageddon game now has an increment - 3 seconds per move after move 60. That at least is an improvement, because it stops games being decide by piece shuffling which, as happened (at least) twice last year in high profile events. I've never seen Armageddon games with an increment before. (I myself suggested it some time last year, though I'm sure the change wasn't because of me).
But still, pairs of blitz games has to be preferable, even if they go late into the night. A pair of blitz games, even with the required 10 minutes break between games, is still under ah hour.
Ideally there wouldn't be blitz tie breaks at all. But like shortened (12 game) matches, a single day for tie breaks is a reality these days, thanks to tight schedules and sponsors' demands.
The increment is indeed a little better , i didn´t know about that.
It will be a great match , Topalov as local will be under tons of pressure IMO.
Nigel is a good guy with a freakish side that is masked only when he plays good Chess. Something that he should do more often. During the periods in between he shows all kinds of lapses of character.
D.
"If UEP had been the organizer, Kramnik would have got the wildcard. But negotiations between UEP and FIDE broke down."
First - you don't know that Kramnik would have got their wildcard. Second - my point exactly! Of course negotiations can break down. If you set out on a grand plan with the very point of granting Kramnik a spot in the cycle, you would probably make sure he actually got it? The idea, according to the conspiracy theory, was that it was already decided beforehand that the UEP (or Russia) would organize it. But, as with so many other conspiracy theories, reality did not conform.
Armageddon with increments???
Makes no sense at all, except for the fact that this is how FIDE works. Patching lunacy with idiocy.
@Bobby Fiske:
who wrote:
>"BTW,the author of the article states in 5.:
>Cheating with the computer has, to the best of
>my knowledge, thus far not been attempted at top
>levels in chess."
The article was written in the year 2000 :)
To my mind no player should be accused of cheating without far better evidence than the suspicions of five frustrated championship aspirants. I'm not sure it even matters that the accusers "are not people who generally cast aspersions on others either in public or in private." Lots of people do things for the first time, independently and en masse, and majorities are wrong as often as they are right. I just think the burden of proof in a case like this has to be especially high.
Anand needs to make sure his room and that of his team members isn't bugged by the Bulgarian secret service/Topalov-Danailov. He needs to ensure this on a daily basis, so that the cleaning staff do not deliberately bug his room. He also needs to ensure that communication over computers with his team isn't subject to interception by hackers employed by the Bulgarian brigade.
He also needs to ensure that his floor doesn't have any other occupants that are likely to create a nuisance.
Playing in Bulgaria increases your overall workload, and occupies your mind with things other than chess. It's just too much headache. Seems like a bad choice to me.
Of course these threats can also exist in other countries, but the likelihood is reduced.
Bugs, flies, as a madman once said, buzz buzz.
Better to be safe than to be sorry eh? Chesshire Cat you seem like someone who can easily be taken for a ride.
I strongly hope Vishy Anand will read your advice and take you in the squad for the match in Sofia. Maybe then you'll find that this is not the worst place in the world and that you can touch the culture many more ancient and great than brainwashed culture.
Well yes, Vaseline. Two beers does it, actually.
Btw, I will give 10 CC points to whoever gets the reference in the above post.
You take it for granted that Topa and co are hell bent on winning by illicit means. Now, their behaviour with Kramnik was pretty shameful, but bugging etc is a step up. Would you mind producing some hard evidence instead of tarnishing Topa and Bulgaria alike with your accusations?
Topalov/Danailov's past antics and statements are enough to be cautious about them. It doesn't matter what they will actually end up doing, but the very thought that they might be upto something is disconcerting enough, like Anand once said and it simply results in a diversion of resources towards trying to neutralize such tactics, leaving you less of these resources to focus on chess.
San Luis, Elista, Corus, Topalov winning Danailov organized events the first time - M-Tel, Bilbao, match with Kamsky. Danailov's own admission about his cosy relationship with the Bulgarian top brass, the Bulgarian Prime Minister's own shady past and him not guaranteeing neutrality in his letter to the FIDE President and comments from certain Bulgarian organizers indicating their bias towards Topalov (it's one thing to support your own countryman, that goes without saying, it's another to explicitly say this - especially as a member of the organizing committee).
I think all the above combined are enough to unsettle any player and distract him from his game. It'd be a lot more easier on Anand to play at a neutral venue.
Did you see the letter from Borissov posted on ChessBase. It doesn't appear that the Bulgarian government is making the guarantee for the prize fund but only the Organizing Committee. And the delay of 2 months due to technical difficulties? - must be BIG technical difficulties.
That letter and four bucks will get you a Venti Latte at Starbucks.
Until now, I thought perhaps I was biased by my personal dislike for Topalov, after the Kramnik match. But for FIDE to break their own regulations and turn down a bank guarantee from Singapore (!) in favor of a meaningless piece of paper from Bulgaria (!!), is indefensible.
And as an Indian, I'm disappointed that Anand agrees to (historically) unfavorable terms, time after time.
¨But for FIDE to break their own regulations and turn down a bank guarantee from Singapore (!) in favor of a meaningless piece of paper from Bulgaria (!!), is indefensible.¨
Is that true? Where did you read that Singapure had bank guarantees?
Please give us a link, because so far the official explanation was this:
¨There were two other World Championship bids, from Turkey and Singapore, but for lower sums. These bids were withdrawn when the details of the Bulgarian bid had been presented. In the vote of the Congress the world championship was awarded to Sofia, by unanimous decision. ¨
http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=5840
I´ll give you the benefit of the doubt like i did with chessplayer (who was making things up at the time), but please , in case what you state is false be king enough to tell us.
king enough: kind enough
I thought you were being cute with "king enough." Sigh.
And? Where is your source?
Like i said, i ´d like to believe you , and FIDE would really have to explain his choice if what you say is true...
Sigh.
How to cheat at chess, transmitting only one bit of information (a true or false) per move: "Did the opponent just blunder?"
http://kenta.blogspot.com/2009/10/ruptwqra-how-to-cheat-at-chess.html
How to cheat at chess, transmitting only one bit of information (a true or false) per move: "Did the opponent just blunder?"
http://kenta.blogspot.com/2009/10/ruptwqra-how-to-cheat-at-chess.html
"Indian Grandmaster (GM) Vishwanatan Anand has agreed to face GM Veselin Topalov in a Sofia-held World Champion Match. Had he not, he would have lost automatically." - quoted in chessbase from another news report.
This report is stupid as you can see and I don't know why Chessbase is quoting it. There is a Bulgarian bias and the neutrality is gone already. I think India media should take up a cue and publish a counter report saying..
"Had Anand not showed any sort of consent to play in Bulgaria, the non-bank guaranteed bid from Bulgaria would have been thrown in a trach can!"
The venue is not neutral, how can Anand lose his title automatically for not agreeing to play there?
"The venue is not neutral, how can Anand lose his title automatically for not agreeing to play there?"
There is nothing in the rules saying that the venue should be neutral. The rules say that if Anand refuses to play the match, he will be replaced by Kramnik. If India had won the bidding and Topalov had refused to play there he would have been replaced by Kamsky. I wonder what would have happened if Anand actually had refused though, it wouldn't have been a very popular decision to give Topalov the title just like that, so FIDE would probably have come up with some way to save face.
Kramnik would have refused too naturally. a LOL situation.
Hmm "technical difficulties". Don't know why it is that this seems familiar.
The letter from Borissov:
http://letters.chessdom.com/topalov-anand-bank-guarantee
Take note of this part>
" In case our bid is approved i personally guarantee the budget of three million euro for the match and a truck full of candies to cure all the bitterness that this match is producing on Kramnik's fans all over the world."
Of course the part about Kramnik's fans was invented by Manu ... . But the latest Chessdom piece contains other odd quotes from Danailov:
>"We would have been happy if India had presented a better bid. We would have played there, or even the match could take place in both countries, splitting it 50 / 50. However, India had a lot of time and did not present a bid, it's a pity! India is a large market and Anand is their idol."<
[This follows up on earlier stuff on Chessdom stating that "our friends from FIDE said that they depend on us, as India wouldn't be up to the task of organizing the match" ...]
>"The fact that the Prime Minister is the head of the organizing committee for the WCC match is a guarantee for fair play". <
[Hmmm, why are explicit guarantees for fair play needed in the first place? And people outside of Bulgaria might disagree concerning _this_ prime minister as a guarantee for fair play ... .]
In India, there's no way that the Government could release the funds required for a chess match. There is simply no provision in the Sports Ministry Budgets for something like this title match structure. (Pity but there isn't).
All major Indian sports events have a heavy dose of private sponsorship including the athletics and Olympic stuff.
Any chess match in India would have to be private sector sponsored to a great extent, about 90% if not 100% for something this size (ballpark US 5 million Budget). For comparison, govt. tends to release around $10k-$20k equivalent for major chess tournaments like the recent Open at Calcutta.
Not so easy to arrange this kind of funding in a recession. Plus, the Indian Chess Federation doesn't have the commercial connections (or the nous either) to raise this sort of funding even if it was there to be tapped.
Note that there's a revenue model for the high profile sports events in India like cricket, where the big cash is bet by Indian corporates. Most of the IPL cricket teams are actually making quite a bit of money on the basis of gates, merchandise and TV fees. They may still be running at losses, but there is at least some cash flowing in.
No such thing as a revenue model for chess in India unfortunately and not so easy to even see how one could be created.
Bulgaria OTOH has a fiat government so, no problems committing the cash, regardless if it's there or it is taken off some other Budget.
-I think the venue is acceptable.
-It's OK with 12 games and blitz games.
-Including blitz games and rest days it will almost be a 3 week long chess event, which is long enough for most people.
-Probably the best man will win.
If not, there will be another match in 2012. And another in 2014, 2016, etc.
Anand, Topalov, Aronian, Carlsen or maybe some other player will win one year, but may not be able to defend the title next time. Etc.
What's the big deal. I mean, we are not voting for the next pope.
Apart from the WC cycle, there will be plenty superstrong tournaments to win and Elo-records to break. There is an attractive chess life outside of the WC.
But because of all preparations, the regeining Word Champion is not able to perform at his best in regular tournaments. First he plays sub-level before the match. Then he takes a long rest after the match. So, he is down for almost a year because he has to play a WC match every second year.
Indeed Deadevil, unfortunately I don't think that there is a (significant and reliable) revenue model for chess anywhere in the world; otherwise this situation would not exist. CREAM.
As an Anand fan, I did not dream of the match being in Bulgaria, but Mig is right- if we want to wait around for ideal conditions, we might as well give up the entire notion of having world championship matches. And 1 million euros (Anand's share?) strikes me as a very appropriate reward for defeating Kramnik last year. Of course Topalov is getting the same thing for losing to Kramnik and beating Kamsky (who is not even one of the top 34 players in the world on the current live list)- but "whatever."
Still, I am concerned about a few things, such as the composition of the appeals committee. It is always easier to direct negative feelings at an individual, but we should remember that without the blatantly unfair decisions made by the match officials in Elista, Danailov's ploy would have merely remained the cheap, desperate attempt to disturb Kramnik that it was.
So I think Anand needs to finally use the respect he has earned by being so accommodating over the years and take a firm stand on this issue: no FIDE cronies, no Bulgarian state officials can serve in any official capacity whatsoever this match. Instead, all members of the appeals committee (and other important positions that I don't know about) should require approval by both players, with an effort made to nominate well respected chess luminaries like Seirawan and Spassky. It would be difficult for them deny such a demand and still expect people to believe in this "guarantee of neutrality."
"So, he is down for almost a year because he has to play a WC match every second year."
Often largely true. That's one reason why I favour a WC match every third year, the way it used to be. Seems like the perfect interval to me. And then there certainly shouldn't be a problem to have matches longer than 12 games. Unfortunately, nobody with a say (players, FIDE, organizers, sponsors) seems to call for significantly longer matches nowadays. Even Kramnik, the biggest and most outspoken match proponent among top players, doesn't want more than 12-16.
IM Stefan Loeffler (on http://schach.twoday.net - in German) has an original take on the match.
First he provides evidence that a home advantage can turn into a disadvantage:
"1994 against Kamsky in Sanghi Nagar, Anand himself gave away a two point lead and eventually lost, because during the match he couldn't escape from journalists, organizers and spectators."
And then:
"As his [Topalov's] manager Danailov substantially contributed to securing government money for the match, he will probably also be involved in the organization. Therefore it would be a fine move by the Bulgarians to include a friend/person of trust of Anand in an important (and paid) position within the committee. The telephone number of Hans-Walter Schmitt [organizer of the Mainz rapid event] is .... "
The Bulgarian Prime-Minister just released the letter saying he "personally" guarantees Euro3M.
I don't know the rules of Bulgarian way of writting a letter, but usually the addressant is stated at the very beginning of the text and not where 'P.S.' can be found, isn't it?
Then, the first paragraph: "Unfortunately, attributable to technical reasons, we cannot present the bank guarantee..." actually means "Our first messenger to this FIDE Congress, who had a written bank guarantee, accidentally stepped on a landmine when crossing the Greek border, and we are not able to get a duplicate of that document."
Moving on, "...I personally gurantee..." actually should be read as "I swear to God, on my children's heads and on my ancestors' graves that this money will be ready. If not, what you gonna do? Come after me, in Bulgaria?? What you can take from me, huh? My bank accounts are in Switzerland, the companies I own actually are on my relatives' names, even my villa belongs to a charity organization."
Then, "...we will be ready to transfer the money and to sign the contract with FIDE in two months from now, no later than 10 Dec. of this year" can be 'translated' as
"we need this time to actually raise the money, because we could not use the funds received from European Union for modernization of our very pollutant nuclear plant of Kozlodoui, on Danube river, and for which we had the bank guarantee. Our traditional method of 're-ditributing' the funds didn't work this time, so we had to fire the border patrols on the Greek border (since the Greeks already planted landmines all over on their side), but still is not enough. We need this time delay to: a) finalize the expulsion of the remaining 1.5 million Turkish population, and transfer the funds for health care of these people directly to the match budget; b) 'convince' Topalov that his share from the prize fund will not be greater than 1,000 euros, the rest being divided between the president of Bulgaria, the prime-minister, the minister of internal affairs and our front man, S. Danailov (we are still negotiating among us the percentages); c) to perfect the system of signals used to transmit almost simultaneously the choices of Rybka, Fritz, Deep Junior, Schredder AND Hydra, so Topalov will have an easier task this time, and will secure the world champion once and for all.
We have a back-up solution, in case that our brigades from Somalian coast cannot 'catch' anything of value: almost 90% of the retired Bulgarians will 'donate' their pensions for October and November to the match fund."
And finally, "thank you very much for your understanding". Yes, we've understood.
That's good news, we'll see some amazing chess from Hydra.
Oh, I forgot:
Disclaimer: In the precedently posted text, any resemblance with reality and real persons is purely coincidental.
Rats.
pb, isn't that something for FIDE to decide whether Anand would lose the crown or not, and not for Bulgaria or the reporter to decide? The particular comment is uncalled for. That is why I'm making a similar statement for them to understand. The rule is to start fresh bidding when there is no bank guarantee. Apparently the reporter wants FIDE to be lenient to their side but not towards Anand! You see my point?
noescapeon,
seirawan?? haha. you gotto be kidding. Do you really want Anand to go sight seeing during the game hours?? How about putting Carlsen's father? He is an honorable man. Oh I'm missing Carlsen's help to Anand! Anand's friendship with Carlsen goes way back so someone should tell Kasparov to take a break until this Wch match is over!
I said like Seirawan and Spassky; it doesn't have to be them specifically, if either side objects. I certainly wouldn't expect either to start babbling about Carlsen and his father like you did, but then again with Danailov you never know.
"...Anand needs to finally use the respect he has earned by being so accommodating over the years and take a firm stand on this issue: no FIDE cronies, no Bulgarian state officials can serve in any official capacity whatsoever this match. Instead, all members of the appeals committee (and other important positions that I don't know about) should require approval by both players..."
A very sensible post!
Please, FIDE, give us a World Championship match worthy of the name -- and untainted by unsportsmanlike or corrupt distractions.
I had got a dream to start my own commerce, nevertheless I did not earn enough of money to do it. Thank God my close fellow suggested to use the credit loans. Therefore I used the collateral loan and made real my dream.