The Chess Mind

In this press release on the aftermath of the failed reunification offer by UEP, Carsten Hensel (Vladimir Kramnik's manager) responds to the claims made by FIDE Deputy President Makropoulos and especially the Topalov/Danailov team. The paragraph most relevant to the points we've been discussing on this blog runs as follows:

It is remarkable that Mr Danailov, in his statement of 16.11.2005, declares that he does not recognise any champion other than Mr Topalov. It is possible that the use of the title “GM Kramnik” in the statement of Mr Makropolous indicates a similar view on the part of FIDE. We would like to point out that in Prague FIDE recognised Vladimir Kramnik as the Classical Chess World Champion. This remains the current situation – also from a legal point of view. The same applies to Mr Toplaov [sic], who participated in the Dortmound [sic] Candidates Toournament [sic] in 2002 and signed a contract to play a match against Classical Chess World Champion Kramnik in case of a victory in this tournament. Even in May 2005 Topalov’s manager signed up Vladimir Kramnik as the Classical Chess World Champion to play in the Mtel Masters in Sofia. Immediately after Topalov’s victory in San Luis Mr Danailov, when discussing the prospect of a match, referred to Vladimir Kramnik as the Classical Chess World Champion in an interview (quote: “He is, in spite of everything, the successor of the Classical Chess World Title. Kramnik defeated Kasparov and defended his title in the match against Leko”). Until a few days ago the status of Vladimir Kramnik was never cast into doubt by Mr Danailov, not even in the negotiations with UEP. It is quite unclear to me what reasons have led to this sudden change of opinion.

Typos aside, it's a strong letter (click on the link above to read the whole thing and to investigate its internal links), calling the Topalov/Danailov team on their selective amnesia. Again, I hope this is all just posturing before the parties do the right thing, but one never knows.

See here and here. The first document, from the Topalov team, is simply maddening - especially in its first reason for rejecting Kramnik's match offer:

1. [1] We do not recognise Mr. Kramnik as a champion. [2] The World Champion’s title belongs by law to FIDE and, after his refusal to participate in the official World Championship in San Luis, Mr. Kramnik automatically lost his right to be designated the World Champion. [3] However, by the looks of it, he has decided to seize the title for the rest of his life. [4] Let us remember that he’s only 7th in the World Ranking list, scoring quite mediocre results recently. [5] At the same time, in addition to being the official World Champion, Veselin Topalov is Number 1 in the World Ranking List of 1 January 2006. [Sentence numbers added.]

It's like shooting fish in a barrel, but let's critique this anyway, just for fun.

Let's start with [2]. Appropriately enough, it is plagued with two serious problems. First, what "law" is this that conferred ownership of the World Championship title on FIDE? Did FIDE fail to sue the PCA in 1993 and 1995, BrainGames in 2000 and Dannemann in 2004 - all claiming to run world chess championships - solely out of the goodness of their organizational hearts? And what about the Accoona "World Championship" in New York earlier this year?

Worse still, [2] is at least implicitly self-contradictory. The suggestion at least seems to be that Kramnik had the right to be called "World Champion" prior to San Luis, even though Kramnik's title had nothing at all to do with FIDE. Go figure.

Now let's briefly consider the peerless thinking displayed by [3]. It's strange that Danailov would blame Kramnik for trying to possess the World Championship title for the rest of his life. For one thing, Kramnik doesn't have a title - doesn't Danailov remember his previous sentence? Second, should we infer from this that Topalov's aim is to lose the title as quickly as possible?

Let's be charitable and assume Topalov's manager really means to say that Kramnik is going to try to keep what the latter wrongly thinks is his title, without bothering to defend it, for as long as he possibly can. That's at least coherent, but is it plausible? Hardly. It was just one year ago that Kramnik defended his title, and it has been Kramnik, not Topalov, who has been pursuing the unification match.

Finally, sentence [4] is true but not obviously relevant (and partially addressed by yours truly in an earlier post), while [5] is also irrelevant and - I think - false. My understanding is that Kasparov won't drop off the rating list until he has been inactive for an entire year, and that doesn't occur until March.

I'm sure this is a P.R. attempt to seize the high ground in future negotiations for the title, but it would be better, in view, if the participants and organizations stopped trying to emulate pro boxing and wrestling. If I'm Topalov, I want to show the world that I'm the champion, period. It would increase his stature, please the chess world, do wonders for his legacy and raise the prestige of the game by dissolving the factions. And as an added bonus, he gets a nice payday and the chance to cash in by beating up on Kramnik, the merely 7th-ranked player with the mediocre results.