Larger Excerpts from the Topalov Interview
...are available here. Does Topalov really believe he's in a different class than Kramnik? If we had nothing to go on but 2005, then okay, but unless the 30-year old Kramnik is in his death throes, then the 30-year old Topalov is speaking out of his euphoria.
There's more I'm inclined to say, but I'll report only my strong impression that Topalov has no desire to risk his title. He'll defend it when he needs to, but I suspect that even if Kramnik were 60 points higher - as has been the case for most of their careers - he'd find a different reason to avoid a title match.
So, given Topalov's statement(s), the immediate prospects for reunification are just over, unless (1) FIDE President Kirsan Iljumzhinov forces it, or (2) the players' ratings even up and public pressure makes Topalov's stand impossible to maintain.
Another opportunity for the chess world has been lost; on now to other topics.
There's more I'm inclined to say, but I'll report only my strong impression that Topalov has no desire to risk his title. He'll defend it when he needs to, but I suspect that even if Kramnik were 60 points higher - as has been the case for most of their careers - he'd find a different reason to avoid a title match.
So, given Topalov's statement(s), the immediate prospects for reunification are just over, unless (1) FIDE President Kirsan Iljumzhinov forces it, or (2) the players' ratings even up and public pressure makes Topalov's stand impossible to maintain.
Another opportunity for the chess world has been lost; on now to other topics.
Posted by Dennis Monokroussos on
Saturday October 22, 2005 at 3:27am
We now have a situation akin to boxing with several champions for different organisations. Until we have a strong FIDE that gains the respect of the players, I suspect there will be two champions for the foreseeable future.
The question is: does it really matter? It may be nice to have one champion, but this way we may have more high level chess and plenty of intrigue and specualtion to fill the pages of the magazines.
By the way - I found the tournasment a far more interesting method for deciding the Champion than a match. There is more variety, and it prevents players choosing opening repetoires just to counter one apponent. What do you think?
I suggest a tournament every two years consisting of the reigning champion(s), the five or six highest rated players, with one or two spots to be filled by a qualifying competition (A swiss system event with a good number of rounds open to all).
Well, I can dream, can't I?
a. Kasparov will come out of retirement
b. Kramnik will get his big pay cheque - and he might even win which will strengthen his position and cement his place in chess history
c. Topalov and FIDE will be mighty upset.
What if Kasparov wins? I am so hoping Kramnik challenges Kasparov, I really want to see this rematch, Kasparov deserves it so badly. I'm convinced Kasparov would destroy Kramnik in a rematch.
So what would happen is Kasparov wins the rematch? I could forsee an extremely exciting Kasparov vs Topalov match to unify the title, and no matter who wins in this match it would benefit everyone, Kasparov and Topalov would be guaranteed big bucks, and finally we would have unity, something that can not be achieved with Kramnik.
There has been some conjecture that Topalov's recent, extreme comments are more a negotiating ploy than anything else. I hope so; in any case, if they don't play, then the question is whether Kramnik and the ACP can arrange a new cycle. If they can, then the current mess continues indefinitely; if not, and if Kramnik's bad form continues, then the FIDE title will come to look more legitimate, as long as they don't revert to the old K.O. semi-lottery.
These "torunament champions" are weak and that is what FIDE wants even though its bad for chess. Kramnik either needs concessions that his title will not be forfeited in a future "Tournament championship" or he should take hsi title(the only one with real value) and do his own thing.