| |
Main
Date: 28 Sep 2006 14:09:36
From: EJAY
Subject: Topalov threatens to abandon Match
|
Topalov's team is accusing Kramnik of excessive use of the bathroom
(a.k.a Cheating).Seems to me in Game 2 it was Topalov who missed the
mating attack.Sounds like sour grapes to me (if the account is
accurate).www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp.newsid=3370.
|
|
| |
Date: 04 Oct 2006 06:26:50
From: Taylor Kingston
Subject: Re: Kramnik a No-Show (was: Topalov threatens to abandon Match)
|
[email protected] wrote:
> The plot thickens. 15 minutes before game 7, Topalov / Danailov accused
> Kramnik of cheating using Fritz 9, with... evidence I think most chess
> players would call ludicrous. It seems like the shady duo are willing
> to use any dirty tricks they can to win, not content at having already
> snatched one unearned point.
>
> http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=3401
>
Of course, Danailov did not bother to check how closely Topalov's
moves adhere to Fritz9 recommendations. I would bet the correspondence
is also around 75% or more.
|
| | |
Date: 04 Oct 2006 15:53:16
From: David Richerby
Subject: Re: Kramnik a No-Show (was: Topalov threatens to abandon Match)
|
Taylor Kingston <[email protected] > wrote:
> Of course, Danailov did not bother to check how closely Topalov's
> moves adhere to Fritz9 recommendations. I would bet the
> correspondence is also around 75% or more.
Of course it is. Plenty of the moves are forced, anyway.
Dave.
--
David Richerby Flammable Pickled Composer (TM):
www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~davidr/ it's like a pupil of Beethoven but
it's preserved in vinegar and it burns
really easily!
|
| |
Date: 04 Oct 2006 06:23:24
From: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Topalov threatens to abandon Match)
|
FINKEL AT WORLDCHESSNETWORK.COM
Here is what I think of this circus:
It's pretty obvious that Danailov's protest was just meant to put some
kind of psychological pressure on Kramnik. Being unable to change to
course of the match on the chess board Topalov's team decided to use
some dirty tricks hoping it would affect Kramnik's play. Not an
uncommon thing is the history of WC matches I should say! Unfortunately
(or may be fortunately) they succeeded! Well, according to game six
Kramnik is still in control, but he is in control when the score is
3=2E5- 2.5 in his favor, while it could've (and should've) been 4-2.
There were absolutely no reasons to suspect that Kramnik was getting
any kind of assistance: the games just speak for themselves. There is
no need to say anything else to justify Kramnik.
On the other hand, Kramnik's reaction to the decision of the Appeal
Committee - as stupid and outrageous as it was - wasn't very wise to
put it mild. I'd put a blame for it on his manager, who proved to be
rather incompetent in legal procedures. As a result Kramnik was just
robbed for a full point. In other words, Danailov and company achieved
much more than they hoped for - with a generous help from Kramnik
himself!
Fortunately, the match is back on track. More important, if Kramnik
eventually ends up a winner, he'll enjoy an overall support and a
recognition he couldn't have dreamed of before the beginning of the
match. There is another scenario of course - Topalov wins few more
games on the way and keeps the title. Well... Let's hope it's not going
to happen!
There is one good thing about this incident after all - chess is on
the news! =CDt's not exactly a kind of publicity we hoped for, but the
way I see it - bad publicity is better than none, so ''well done''
Silvio!
Best regards,
Alex Finkel
[email protected] wrote:
> EVIDENCE? WE DON'T NEED NO STINKIN' EVIDENCE
>
> If Topalov can't win on the board, he wanta to win off the board.
> Now we know why there's a parapsychologist is on his team.
>
> [email protected] wrote:
>
> >The plot thickens. 15 minutes before game 7, Topalov / Danailov accused
> Kramnik of cheating using Fritz 9, with... evidence I think most chess
> players would call ludicrous. It seems like the shady duo are willing
> to use any dirty tricks they can to win, not content at having already
> snatched one unearned point.>
>
> The new appeals committee rejected Kramnik's complaint on the
> grounds that they can only address issues after game six.
>=20
> Nice.
|
| |
Date: 04 Oct 2006 06:01:04
From: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Kramnik a No-Show (was: Topalov threatens to abandon Match)
|
EVIDENCE? WE DON'T NEED NO STINKIN' EVIDENCE
If Topalov can't win on the board, he wanta to win off the board.
Now we know why there's a parapsychologist is on his team.
[email protected] wrote:
>The plot thickens. 15 minutes before game 7, Topalov / Danailov accused
Kramnik of cheating using Fritz 9, with... evidence I think most chess
players would call ludicrous. It seems like the shady duo are willing
to use any dirty tricks they can to win, not content at having already
snatched one unearned point. >
The new appeals committee rejected Kramnik's complaint on the
grounds that they can only address issues after game six.
Nice.
|
| |
Date: 04 Oct 2006 05:50:47
From: Larry Tapper
Subject: Re: Kramnik a No-Show (was: Topalov threatens to abandon Match)
|
[email protected] wrote:
> The plot thickens. 15 minutes before game 7, Topalov / Danailov accused
> Kramnik of cheating using Fritz 9, with... evidence I think most chess
> players would call ludicrous.
Right, it's not exactly a stunning revelation that Kramnik should agree
with Fritz 9 about 80% of the time.
Though it's hardly necessary in this case, it might be interesting to
collect baseline statistics for various top GMs --- for example,
someone could take a major tournament like Corus or Dortmund and
compare Fritz's choices with those of the GMs.
I suspect that if such a study were done, we'd see some variance that
could be attributed to individual style. IIRC, years ago someone like
Tiviakov commented that it was amazing what good results Karpov got in
spite of the fact that his moves were so often second best. If that was
true, it seems to me that some of this could be explained by Karpov's
preference for a small but clear positional advantage over a possible
tactical knockout that's not so clear.
LT
> It seems like the shady duo are willing
> to use any dirty tricks they can to win, not content at having already
> snatched one unearned point.
>
> http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=3401
>
> ---
> likesforests
> http://likesforests.blogspot.com/
>
>
> David Richerby wrote:
> > Ange1o DePa1ma <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > My point is that this is a serious match for serious money. To
> > > minimize the opportunity for irregularity (no pun intended), or
> > > grounds for claiming that unethical behavior has occurred, the
> > > players should be required to stay visible at all times except when
> > > they're going to the bathroom.
> >
> > But they are! Well, they're visible to the arbiter at all times
> > except when going to the bathroom. The break rooms are under video
> > surveillance. The issues here are
> >
> > 1) Kramnik was going to the bathroom an awful lot;
> > 2) somebody gave the surveillance tapes to Topalov's team, who had
> > no right to see them.
> >
> >
> > > In fact the players should *want*, to the best of their abilities,
> > > to dispel such notions.
> >
> > There are competing effects here. Sure, Kramnik doesn't want to look
> > suspect but he also wants to walk around during the games.
> > Furthermore, Kramnik's behaviour obviously wasn't suspect to the
> > arbiter because, if it was, I'm sure that Mr Gijssen would have had a
> > quiet word with him to say, ``Look, Vladimir. I'm sure there's
> > nothing untoward going on but it does look a bit dodgy the way you
> > keep going into the bathroom.''
> >
> >
> > > The notion that 20- 30-something men require a "rest room" during a
> > > six hour game is ridiculous.
> >
> > As I've said, many players like to walk around while they're
> > thinking. It would be potentially distracting to do this in front of
> > the opponent (I recall Short complaining that Kasparov was ching up
> > and down the stage during one of their games) so it's much better for
> > them to have a separate room provided. Also, it means they have
> > somewhere to go to get drinks and snacks, again without distracting
> > the opponent.
> >
> >
> > > By the way, I'm the world's biggest "chess walker," but my games are
> > > inconsequential.
> >
> > On the other hand, one could argue that *you* should spend all your
> > time at the board because the tournaments you play at do not have
> > significant measures in place to stop you cheating away from the
> > board. Since the organizers of this match have gone to great trouble
> > to prevent cheating (surveillance of the break rooms, equipment to
> > stop communications to the bathrooms, extensive searches, metal
> > detectors and so on), Kramnik should be allowed to spend as much time
> > as he wants wherever he wants.
> >
> >
> > Dave.
> >
> > --
> > David Richerby Technicolor Spoon (TM): it's like a
> > www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~davidr/ piece of cutlery but it's in realistic
> > colour!
|
| | |
Date: 04 Oct 2006 22:11:32
From: Antonio Torrecillas
Subject: Re: Kramnik a No-Show
|
En/na Larry Tapper ha escrit:
> Right, it's not exactly a stunning revelation that Kramnik should agree
> with Fritz 9 about 80% of the time.
>
> Though it's hardly necessary in this case, it might be interesting to
> collect baseline statistics for various top GMs --- for example,
> someone could take a major tournament like Corus or Dortmund and
> compare Fritz's choices with those of the GMs.
>
> I suspect that if such a study were done, we'd see some variance that
> could be attributed to individual style. IIRC, years ago someone like
> Tiviakov commented that it was amazing what good results Karpov got in
> spite of the fact that his moves were so often second best. If that was
> true, it seems to me that some of this could be explained by Karpov's
> preference for a small but clear positional advantage over a possible
> tactical knockout that's not so clear.
>
> LT
In some cases many of us can have a coincidence of 100% with any top
engine: imagine a game versus a very inferior player where the best move
is always to take the piece "in prise".
I think to do an study like that, some aspects must be considered:
- Difference of level of both players ... (In unbalanced games it can be
easier to find best moves thanks to the mistakes made by the opponent)
- Type of position ... (there is very difference between a positional
game and a tactical one)
- Quantity of similar moves in all moves ... (in many positions 1st
rated move can have a little difference wuth 2nd or 3rd ones, ... in
others maybe there are many forced moves))
- etc
AT
|
| | | |
Date: 05 Oct 2006 10:53:01
From: John A Swartz
Subject: Re: Kramnik a No-Show
|
>> Right, it's not exactly a stunning revelation that Kramnik should agree
>> with Fritz 9 about 80% of the time.
>>
>> Though it's hardly necessary in this case, it might be interesting to
>> collect baseline statistics for various top GMs --- for example,
>> someone could take a major tournament like Corus or Dortmund and
>> compare Fritz's choices with those of the GMs.
How about we start with Topalov's moves in this match? How many of his
moves agree with Fritz?
|
| |
Date: 04 Oct 2006 04:52:13
From: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Kramnik a No-Show (was: Topalov threatens to abandon Match)
|
The plot thickens. 15 minutes before game 7, Topalov / Danailov accused
Kramnik of cheating using Fritz 9, with... evidence I think most chess
players would call ludicrous. It seems like the shady duo are willing
to use any dirty tricks they can to win, not content at having already
snatched one unearned point.
http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=3401
---
likesforests
http://likesforests.blogspot.com/
David Richerby wrote:
> Ange1o DePa1ma <[email protected]> wrote:
> > My point is that this is a serious match for serious money. To
> > minimize the opportunity for irregularity (no pun intended), or
> > grounds for claiming that unethical behavior has occurred, the
> > players should be required to stay visible at all times except when
> > they're going to the bathroom.
>
> But they are! Well, they're visible to the arbiter at all times
> except when going to the bathroom. The break rooms are under video
> surveillance. The issues here are
>
> 1) Kramnik was going to the bathroom an awful lot;
> 2) somebody gave the surveillance tapes to Topalov's team, who had
> no right to see them.
>
>
> > In fact the players should *want*, to the best of their abilities,
> > to dispel such notions.
>
> There are competing effects here. Sure, Kramnik doesn't want to look
> suspect but he also wants to walk around during the games.
> Furthermore, Kramnik's behaviour obviously wasn't suspect to the
> arbiter because, if it was, I'm sure that Mr Gijssen would have had a
> quiet word with him to say, ``Look, Vladimir. I'm sure there's
> nothing untoward going on but it does look a bit dodgy the way you
> keep going into the bathroom.''
>
>
> > The notion that 20- 30-something men require a "rest room" during a
> > six hour game is ridiculous.
>
> As I've said, many players like to walk around while they're
> thinking. It would be potentially distracting to do this in front of
> the opponent (I recall Short complaining that Kasparov was ching up
> and down the stage during one of their games) so it's much better for
> them to have a separate room provided. Also, it means they have
> somewhere to go to get drinks and snacks, again without distracting
> the opponent.
>
>
> > By the way, I'm the world's biggest "chess walker," but my games are
> > inconsequential.
>
> On the other hand, one could argue that *you* should spend all your
> time at the board because the tournaments you play at do not have
> significant measures in place to stop you cheating away from the
> board. Since the organizers of this match have gone to great trouble
> to prevent cheating (surveillance of the break rooms, equipment to
> stop communications to the bathrooms, extensive searches, metal
> detectors and so on), Kramnik should be allowed to spend as much time
> as he wants wherever he wants.
>
>
> Dave.
>
> --
> David Richerby Technicolor Spoon (TM): it's like a
> www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~davidr/ piece of cutlery but it's in realistic
> colour!
|
| |
Date: 04 Oct 2006 04:20:24
From: samsloan
Subject: Re: Kramnik a No-Show (was: Topalov threatens to abandon Match)
|
David Richerby wrote:
>
> Since the organizers of this match have gone to great trouble
> to prevent cheating (surveillance of the break rooms, equipment to
> stop communications to the bathrooms, extensive searches, metal
> detectors and so on), Kramnik should be allowed to spend as much time
> as he wants wherever he wants.
>
>
> Dave.
>
> --
> David Richerby Technicolor Spoon (TM): it's like a
> www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~davidr/ piece of cutlery but it's in realistic
> colour!
Is this true???
As far as I am aware, there have been no searches, metal detectors or
anything like that.
In short, there is nothing to stop Kramnik from carrying around a
pocket fritz or a cell phone during his long visits to the rest room.
Sam Sloan
|
| | |
Date: 04 Oct 2006 15:51:42
From: David Richerby
Subject: Re: Kramnik a No-Show (was: Topalov threatens to abandon Match)
|
samsloan <[email protected] > wrote:
> David Richerby wrote:
>> Since the organizers of this match have gone to great trouble
>> to prevent cheating (surveillance of the break rooms, equipment to
>> stop communications to the bathrooms, extensive searches, metal
>> detectors and so on), Kramnik should be allowed to spend as much time
>> as he wants wherever he wants.
>
> Is this true???
Yes. Read the articles at chessbase.com . I'm getting RSI from
posting the URLs so many times.
Dave.
--
David Richerby Disposable Salted Toy (TM): it's like
www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~davidr/ a fun child's toy but it's covered in
salt and you never have to clean it!
|
| |
Date: 02 Oct 2006 16:07:54
From: Rob
Subject: Re: Kramnik a No-Show (was: Topalov threatens to abandon Match)
|
Mike Murray wrote:
> On Mon, 02 Oct 2006 15:34:26 -0700, Mike Murray
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >On 2 Oct 2006 15:01:43 -0700, "Rob" <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> >>
> >>Mike Murray wrote:
> >>> On 2 Oct 2006 13:23:04 -0700, "Rob" <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> >>> >Are there specific rules for how many times one is permitted to attend
> >>> >the facilities during a match?
> >
> >>> No.
> >
> >>Isn't that what Topolov is complaining about?
> >
> >No. He was complaining that the bathroom was unmonitored. His
> >manager's mention of the fifty times implied that Kramnik must have
> >had reasons other than a nature call for going in there, since nobody
> >need to go to the bathroom that often. He asked for a public
> >monitored bathroom. He didn't ask for restrictions on K's potty
> >calls.
>
>
> I should have said "shared monitored bathroom".
So he was implying that Kramnik was cheating? Thats sad.
|
| |
Date: 02 Oct 2006 15:01:43
From: Rob
Subject: Re: Kramnik a No-Show (was: Topalov threatens to abandon Match)
|
Mike Murray wrote:
> On 2 Oct 2006 13:23:04 -0700, "Rob" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
> >Are there specific rules for how many times one is permitted to attend
> >the facilities during a match?
>
> No.
Isn't that what Topolov is complaining about?
|
| | |
Date: 02 Oct 2006 15:34:26
From: Mike Murray
Subject: Re: Kramnik a No-Show (was: Topalov threatens to abandon Match)
|
On 2 Oct 2006 15:01:43 -0700, "Rob" <[email protected] > wrote:
>
>Mike Murray wrote:
>> On 2 Oct 2006 13:23:04 -0700, "Rob" <[email protected]> wrote:
>> >Are there specific rules for how many times one is permitted to attend
>> >the facilities during a match?
>> No.
>Isn't that what Topolov is complaining about?
No. He was complaining that the bathroom was unmonitored. His
manager's mention of the fifty times implied that Kramnik must have
had reasons other than a nature call for going in there, since nobody
need to go to the bathroom that often. He asked for a public
monitored bathroom. He didn't ask for restrictions on K's potty
calls.
|
| | | |
Date: 02 Oct 2006 15:36:10
From: Mike Murray
Subject: Re: Kramnik a No-Show (was: Topalov threatens to abandon Match)
|
On Mon, 02 Oct 2006 15:34:26 -0700, Mike Murray
<[email protected] > wrote:
>On 2 Oct 2006 15:01:43 -0700, "Rob" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>
>>Mike Murray wrote:
>>> On 2 Oct 2006 13:23:04 -0700, "Rob" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>> >Are there specific rules for how many times one is permitted to attend
>>> >the facilities during a match?
>
>>> No.
>
>>Isn't that what Topolov is complaining about?
>
>No. He was complaining that the bathroom was unmonitored. His
>manager's mention of the fifty times implied that Kramnik must have
>had reasons other than a nature call for going in there, since nobody
>need to go to the bathroom that often. He asked for a public
>monitored bathroom. He didn't ask for restrictions on K's potty
>calls.
I should have said "shared monitored bathroom".
|
| |
Date: 02 Oct 2006 13:23:04
From: Rob
Subject: Re: Kramnik a No-Show (was: Topalov threatens to abandon Match)
|
Ange1o DePa1ma wrote:
> "David Richerby" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:2hs*[email protected]...
> > Ange1o DePa1ma <[email protected]> wrote:
> >> I think the notion of a private "rest room" is ludicrous. When do
> >> these prima donnas find the time to relax in their own private
> >> lounge during a game?
> >
> > It's quite common for the players to spend much of their time during
> > the game in the break room. They're not necessarily relaxing but,
> > rather, thinking in an alternative venue.
> >
> >
> >> For $40,000 per game they should required to be at the board or on
> >> stage the entire time
> >
> > Why?
> >
> >
> >> And Topo is absolutely correct about the 50 bathroom trips.
> >
> > Actually, he isn't. FIDE have said that the number was exaggerated by
> > the Topalov team.
> >
> > But then, it's clear that you're just spouting off without bothering
> > to find out the facts.
> >
> >
> > Dave.
>
> I don't understand the sudden hostility to me, but here goes.
>
> First of all nobody knows "the facts" except for the principal parties, all
> of them have an incentive to lie, and in the case of FIDE a long history of
> doing so. Second, Topalov is way over the top with this accusation and how
> he made it. Third, the organizers have provided an out of view location for
> the players, which Kramnik has a right to use at his discretion.
>
> That being said, Kramnik's behavior is surely at least odd. Many retail
> outlets consider putting merchandize into your pocket to be shoplifting,
> even if you have no intention of stealing and are simply having difficulty
> holding all your items. Similarly, a chess player at the highest levels
> should bend over backwards to eliminate any suspicion that he is doing
> something illegal or unethical. (This idea, by the way, is written into the
> canon of contract bridge, a game at which cheating is easy as child's play).
> Staying away from the board for long periods of time, out of site, in a
> private room (that happens to contain a toilet) is not cheating by any
> stretch of the imagination. But it is far easier to cheat when nobody is
> watching you, isn't it?
>
> As for his reasons, who knows? Kramnik might be nervous or suffering from
> anxiety, which he satisfies by pacing. It's more than a little odd, however,
> that he should satisfy this compulsion by walking into and out of the
> bathroom 50 times (or 25 times) during a game (as opposed to between the
> board and rest room). If he has some medical or psychological problem that
> compels him to visit the bathroom he should tell his opponent.
>
> None of this justifies how Topalov dealt with this "problem," but then again
> we don't know he didn't complain privately and did not receive satisfaction.
Are there specific rules for how many times one is permitted to attend
the facilities during a match?
|
| | |
Date: 03 Oct 2006 02:09:57
From: Ange1o DePa1ma
Subject: Re: Kramnik a No-Show (was: Topalov threatens to abandon Match)
|
"Rob" <[email protected] > wrote
> Are there specific rules for how many times one is permitted to attend
> the facilities during a match?
I have not read the conditions of contest. My guess is the # of toilet
visits is not written in them explicitly.
|
| | |
Date: 02 Oct 2006 14:32:08
From: Mike Murray
Subject: Re: Kramnik a No-Show (was: Topalov threatens to abandon Match)
|
On 2 Oct 2006 13:23:04 -0700, "Rob" <[email protected] > wrote:
>Are there specific rules for how many times one is permitted to attend
>the facilities during a match?
No.
|
| |
Date: 01 Oct 2006 18:46:33
From: Nick
Subject: Re: Kramnik a No-Show (was: Topalov threatens to abandon Match)
|
Nick wrote:
> [email protected] wrote:
> > Nick wrote:
> > > "Likesforests" has a record of dishonestly distorting
> > > what I have written and of writing lies to attack me.
> > >
> > > Please read the rec.games.chess.misc thread
>
> Of course, 'likesforests' has snipped the part where
> I identified the thread with *more evidence* of the
> abusive and dishonest conduct of 'likesforests'.
>
> It's the RGCM thread 'endgame books' (September 2006).
>
> Why does 'likesforests' apparently prefer that
> people not read that evidence for themselves?
>
> > You've given up on your position
>
> That's another falsehood by 'likesforests'.
>
> Earlier I have pointed out that 'likesforests' has
> misunderstood or misrepresented my position.
>
> When 'likesforests' sets up a 'strawman' (as he
> has done before) and attributes it to me as my
> alleged position in order to attack it, I have the
> right to point out that's what 'likesforests' is doing.
>
> > and shifted to attacking me
>
> Please note that I was responding to a post
> by 'likesforests' in which he attacked me in
> offensive terms. I have the right to point out
> that 'likesforests' has a record of abusive and
> dishonest conduct in rec.games.chess.*.
>
> > --typical of a troll.
>
> 'Likesforests' believes in his 'proof by name-calling'.
>
> > I suspect the facts, links, and quotations prove too much.
>
> That's more nonsense by 'likesforests'.
>
> "You (Nick) feel only masters are entitled to opinions here."
> --'likesforests' (10 September 2006)
>
> That's a *lie* by 'likesforests', who cannot cite
> anything close to a quotation by me about it.
>
> > Wlod had the right idea. I'll skip the rest of this and any replies.
> > --- likesforests
>
> How many more dishonest distortions and lies
> will 'likesforests' write in order to attack me?
Based on what he has written in this thread, 'likesforests'
evidently believes that the match's *location*, which is in
Russia, must be biased against Kramnik, a Russian.
As he has done previously, "likesforests" may continue to
write his insults and lies to attack me personally, but that's
far from convincing me that the match's *location* must be
biased against Kramnik.
For the record, I did *not* write anything in this thread
about FIDE officials being biased or unbiased against
Kramnik. I do suspect that some FIDE officials are
biased against Kramnik, but I believe that such bias
would be independent of the match's location.
I doubt that simply moving the match to another
location would have resolved all the difficulties if
the same (biased) officials were still involved.
In short, it's *not* the location (contrary to what
'likesforests' believes), it's some of the people
who are responsible for the match's difficulties.
--Nick
|
| |
Date: 01 Oct 2006 18:30:29
From: Nick
Subject: Re: Kramnik a No-Show (was: Topalov threatens to abandon Match)
|
[email protected] wrote:
> Nick wrote:
> > "Likesforests" has a record of dishonestly distorting
> > what I have written and of writing lies to attack me.
> >
> > Please read the rec.games.chess.misc thread
Of course, 'likesforests' has snipped the part where
I identified the thread with *more evidence* of the
abusive and dishonest conduct of 'likesforests'.
It's the RGCM thread 'endgame books' (September 2006).
Why does 'likesforests' apparently prefer that
people not read that evidence for themselves?
> You've given up on your position
That's another falsehood by 'likesforests'.
Earlier I have pointed out that 'likesforests' has
misunderstood or misrepresented my position.
When 'likesforests' sets up a 'strawman' (as he
has done before) and attributes it to me as my
alleged position in order to attack it, I have the
right to point out that's what 'likesforests' is doing.
> and shifted to attacking me
Please note that I was responding to a post
by 'likesforests' in which he attacked me in
offensive terms. I have the right to point out
that 'likesforests' has a record of abusive and
dishonest conduct in rec.games.chess.*.
> --typical of a troll.
'Likesforests' believes in his 'proof by name-calling'.
> I suspect the facts, links, and quotations prove too much.
That's more nonsense by 'likesforests'.
"You (Nick) feel only masters are entitled to opinions here."
--'likesforests' (10 September 2006)
That's a *lie* by 'likesforests', who cannot cite
anything close to a quotation by me about it.
> Wlod had the right idea. I'll skip the rest of this and any replies.
> --- likesforests
How many more dishonest distortions and lies
will 'likesforests' write in order to attack me?
--Nick
|
| |
Date: 01 Oct 2006 17:17:54
From: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Kramnik a No-Show (was: Topalov threatens to abandon Match)
|
Nick wrote:
> "Likesforests" has a record of dishonestly distorting
> what I have written and of writing lies to attack me.
> Please read the rec.games.chess.misc thread
You've given up on your position and shifted to attacking me--typical
of a troll. I suspect the facts, links, and quotations prove too much.
Wlod had the right idea. I'll skip the rest of this and any replies.
--- likesforests
|
| |
Dave (from the UK) wrote:
> But it seems almost inevitable that there would then be arguments about
> the neutrality of the attendant(s).
It looks like they've resolved the toilet issue, but Kirsan Ilyumzhinov
insists on granting the forfeit point to Topalov.
> > It appears both teams are at the negotiating table. I still have some
> > hope there will be a match for us to watch... let's see!
>
> Let's hope it's resolved.
As long as Topalov and Kramnik are in Elista, there's a chance.
--- likesforests
|
| |
Date: 01 Oct 2006 16:49:09
From: Nick
Subject: Re: Kramnik a No-Show (was: Topalov threatens to abandon Match)
|
"Likesforests" has a record of dishonestly distorting
what I have written and of writing lies to attack me.
Please read the rec.games.chess.misc thread
'endgame books' (September 2006) for evidence of
the abusive and dishonest conduct of 'likesforests'.
"You (Nick) feel only masters are entitled to opinions here."
--'likesforests' (10 September 2006)
That's a *lie* by 'likesforests', who cannot cite
anything close to a quotation by me.
[email protected] wrote:
As usual, much of the context was snipped by
'likesforests'.
> Nick wrote:
'Likesforests' has snipped my quotation of Susan Polgar,
in which she criticises some people for 'making judgment
based on 'partial information and political spins'.
> > Of course, many writers in rec.games.chess.* may
> > be expected to jump to passionately held conclusions
> > 'based on partial information and political spins'.
>
> Now I remember, your condescending manner is one of the
> reasons I had classified you as a troll and ignored your posts! :-)
Again, 'likesforests' has a record of dishonestly distorting
what I have written and writing lies to attack me.
> > > > I agree, that wasn't wise. He should've insisted on a neutral
> > > > location with neutral arbitrators, and turned down the match
> > > > if that wasn't possible.
> >
> > Evidently, 'likesforests' believes that the match's location (in
> > Russia) is not 'neutral' and must be biased against Kramnik,
> > a Russian.
'Likesforests' has *not* disputed that he believes that the
match's location in Russia must be biased against Kramnik,
a Russian.
> > > Topalov is a Bulgarian. Kramnik is a Russian citizen, who's
> > > playing a match in Russia. The FIDE President is a Russian
> > > citizen, who's known to be connected with powerful Russians.
> >
> > What exactly would 'likesforests' regard as a 'neutral location' for
> > a match between Kramnik, a Russian, and Topalov, a Bulgarian?
>
> [A cut and paste of my previous response.
That's another falsehood by 'likesforests'.
In contrast to 'likesforests', who routinely snips out-of-context
what I have written, I have snipped nothing written by 'likesforests'
in the post(s) to which I have responded.
When I wrote my earlier post, I responded to the latest
post(s) in this thread by 'likesforests' that were *then*
available on my newsreader. I lack a time machine
to help me read what 'likesforests' may post later.
> You may be trolling, but it's possible someone else
> might wonder about these same questions.]
>
> Topalov is FIDE's "champion".
>
> FIDE's president, Kirsan Ilyumzhinov is president of the Republic of
> Kalmykia, where the match is being held. He's the ultimate authority
> for match decisions.
As FIDE's president, Kirsan Ilyumzhinov presumably would remain 'the
ultimate authority for match decisions' *wherever* the match was held.
> The appeals committee consists of Makrpoulos, FIDE's Deputy President;
> Azmaiparashvili, a close personal friend of Topalov's manager; and FM
> Jorge Vega, a supporter of Kirsan Ilyumzhinov who appears beside him in
> photographs. And we have their first decision, which Kramnik has shown
> violated the letter of their contract. In Seirawan's words: "The
> Appeals Committee made a clearly erroneous decision." According to
> Nunn, it's "A selection which can hardly inspire confidence in the
> impartiality of the Appeals Committee. Nor are the members of the
> Appeals Committee especially qualified."
"Likesforests" has misunderstood or misrepresented my position.
I dispute the evident conclusion by 'likesforests' that the match's
location in Russia *must* be biased against Kramnik, a Russian.
I did *not* write that I believe that FIDE has been completely
right in its decisions about this match. I did *not* write that
I believe that Kramnik should *not* have some understandable
concerns and grievances about FIDE's (un)fairness toward him.
I regard the match's location and the composition of the
match's Appeals Committee as *independent issues*.
I can think of no intrinsic reason why the members of the
match's Appeal Committee *must* have been different
*if* the match had been held elsewhere.
In contrast to 'likesforests', evidently, I doubt that the
match's location would make that much difference with
regard to the ongoing problems of this match. It's some
of the people involved with the match, *not* so much the
location, that are responsible for the ongoing problems.
In any case, as I have read now, the matchs' Appeals
Committee's members have been replaced.
> > Susan Polgar should *not* be misrepresented
>
> Her exact words were, "He claims that the Appeals Committee is biased
> toward Topalov and they are friends with Topalov... why would he sign
> a contract with this provision?" Now no intepretation is necessary.
For the record, 'likesforests' mentioned Susan Polgar *after* he
had cited a list of links intended to support his evident opinion of
"Kramnik is completely right; Topalov and FIDE are completely
wrong". What "likesforests" did may have given some innocent
readers the false impression that Susan Polgar agrees with the
"Kramnik is completely right; Topalov and FIDE are completely
wrong" position. In fact, Susan Polgar disagrees with that position.
> If readers want more, they can Google her blog for more context.
At her blog, Susan Polgar has made it clear enough that she's
*not* taking the side of Kramnik, Topalov, or FIDE, and that she
believes that Kramnik, Topalov, and FIDE all have made errors.
*If* (much contrary-to-fact) "likesforests" were a far more
scrupulously honest and fair writer, then he would have
made it clearer that Susan Polgar has *not* taken the
same side (Kramnik's) in this matter that 'likesforests',
evidently, has taken completely.
--Nick
|
| |
Date: 01 Oct 2006 07:18:49
From: jr
Subject: Re: Topalov threatens to abandon Match
|
My guess is Kirsan is desperate to save face and see
to it that this match reaches a successful conclusion.
If he offers to double the purse to $2 million, would Kramnik
agree to extending the match by four games? He's going
to beat Topalov anyway.
[email protected] wrote:
> FROM THE WEEK IN CHESS
>
> <Latest, many of the issues have been solved but the issue of the score
> clearly has not. - No game Sunday. Mig reports "I was just told that a
> Russian report says Ilyumzhinov offered 3-1 but playing the match to 16
> games and Kramnik said no. Then 3-1 and 14 games and Kramnik said no.
> Interesting idea that hadn't occured to me. Kramnik is being supported
> in this by Zhukov, Russian federation prez.">
>
> Clearly Kramnik has no intention of rewarding Topalov for his smear
> by extending the match from 12 to 14 or 16 games, even though it
> was too short from the start. Team Topalov is desperate.
>
> GM Larry Evans once quipped: "Chess? What's that? Why even
> bother playing any match at all? Why not just let the FIDE General
> Assembly vote on who will be the next world champion?"
>
>
> [email protected] wrote:
> > WHATEVER HAPPENS....
> >
> > Neither player will emerge with his reputation intact, but Topalov.
> > will probably suffer more because of his unproven allegations and
> > refusal to shake hands. If Topalov insists on keeping the ill-gotten
> > point that he gained by forfeit, Kramnik won't continue.
> >
> > Now that the appeals committee has resigned, there is hope
> > that Ilyumzhinov will find a way to reverse the forfeit in game
> > five and steer the match to a successful conclusion.
> >
> > No matter what happens, sponsors will shy away from FIDE.
> >
> > Ange1o DePa1ma wrote:
> > > Despite his two wins, Kramnik was playing shitty. Then Topo got pissed.
> > > You'd think a rest day would have solved this mystery though, since this
> > > dispute entails a rest room. I read somewhere that Kramnik refuses to deal
> > > with ths issue. He spent all day yesterday on the potty wiping himself.
> > >
> > > Leave it to FIDE to flush this opportunity for reunification down the
> > > toilet.
|
| |
Date: 01 Oct 2006 07:05:12
From: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Topalov threatens to abandon Match
|
FROM THE WEEK IN CHESS
<Latest, many of the issues have been solved but the issue of the score
clearly has not. - No game Sunday. Mig reports "I was just told that a
Russian report says Ilyumzhinov offered 3-1 but playing the match to 16
games and Kramnik said no. Then 3-1 and 14 games and Kramnik said no.
Interesting idea that hadn't occured to me. Kramnik is being supported
in this by Zhukov, Russian federation prez." >
Clearly Kramnik has no intention of rewarding Topalov for his smear
by extending the match from 12 to 14 or 16 games, even though it
was too short from the start. Team Topalov is desperate.
GM Larry Evans once quipped: "Chess? What's that? Why even
bother playing any match at all? Why not just let the FIDE General
Assembly vote on who will be the next world champion?"
[email protected] wrote:
> WHATEVER HAPPENS....
>
> Neither player will emerge with his reputation intact, but Topalov.
> will probably suffer more because of his unproven allegations and
> refusal to shake hands. If Topalov insists on keeping the ill-gotten
> point that he gained by forfeit, Kramnik won't continue.
>
> Now that the appeals committee has resigned, there is hope
> that Ilyumzhinov will find a way to reverse the forfeit in game
> five and steer the match to a successful conclusion.
>
> No matter what happens, sponsors will shy away from FIDE.
>
> Ange1o DePa1ma wrote:
> > Despite his two wins, Kramnik was playing shitty. Then Topo got pissed.
> > You'd think a rest day would have solved this mystery though, since this
> > dispute entails a rest room. I read somewhere that Kramnik refuses to deal
> > with ths issue. He spent all day yesterday on the potty wiping himself.
> >
> > Leave it to FIDE to flush this opportunity for reunification down the
> > toilet.
|
| |
Date: 01 Oct 2006 04:35:31
From: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Topalov threatens to abandon Match
|
WHATEVER HAPPENS....
Neither player will emerge with his reputation intact, but Topalov.
will probably suffer more because of his unproven allegations and
refusal to shake hands. If Topalov insists on keeping the ill-gotten
point that he gained by forfeit, Kramnik won't continue.
Now that the appeals committee has resigned, there is hope
that Ilyumzhinov will find a way to reverse the forfeit in game
five and steer the match to a successful conclusion.
No matter what happens, sponsors will shy away from FIDE.
Ange1o DePa1ma wrote:
> Despite his two wins, Kramnik was playing shitty. Then Topo got pissed.
> You'd think a rest day would have solved this mystery though, since this
> dispute entails a rest room. I read somewhere that Kramnik refuses to deal
> with ths issue. He spent all day yesterday on the potty wiping himself.
>
> Leave it to FIDE to flush this opportunity for reunification down the
> toilet.
|
| |
Date: 30 Sep 2006 23:11:10
From:
Subject: Re: Kramnik (world champion) - Topalov: Game 5/6 postponed
|
[email protected] wrote:
> Dave (from the UK) wrote:
>
> > It's postponed (not canceled) according to that link.
> > Dave (from the UK)
> >
>
> Let's hope that Kramnik wont cave win and accept to go on from 3-2. He
> has less to lose if he quits. He is the legitimate champion after all.
>
I don't think this is quite enough. By now, Kramnik should accept at
least 4 more defaults and start with the score of 3-7.
In fact, he should be banned from chess altogether for having a
diarrhea.
>
> At any rate, even if all returns to normal, Topalov has achieved his
> goal of he too eventually "scoring".
>
The only way he can score.
>
> Otherwise the match was going toward his defeat so he had "to do
> something", anything, to break and alter the unfavourable course of
> events.
> Even in the best case scenario Kramink will suffer from this incident.
>
Yep. So has chess. So has Topalov's reputation. From now on, the whole
World will be rooting for him ot lose to everybody. He is going to be
hated 100 times more than Karpov has ever been.
>
> Topa wants to become champ no matter how. He is acting on the principle
> that all will be forgotten afterwards if he wins.
> Who remembers nowdays that G.W.Bush won his presidency by a very narrow
> gin ?
>
Except that Bush gets paid, while from now on, tournament organizers
will try not to invite Topalov for fear that he will destroy their
tournament the way he has destroyed this match.
In fact, as Ilymzhinov has pointed out today, Topalov has
singlehandedly ruined the financial reputation of FIDE. In fact,
according to Ilymzhinov, he has received a call from Mexico, the site
of next year's World Championship. They don't want to hold it anymore
and to pay $1 mil to FIDE for it, for fear that one of the 8 players
there may a pull another "topalov" and bankcrupt them.
|
| |
Date: 30 Sep 2006 22:51:57
From:
Subject: Re: Topalov threatens (not funny anymore)
|
g4 wrote:
> "jr" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> > *Toplalov should be ashamed" (Mig)
> >
> > The fact that Topalov was happy to receive such a point
> > by forfeit -- instead of refusing to accept it -- tells us all
> > we need to know about his sporting standards.
> >
>
> Does jr have a similar opinion about Boris Spassky accepting the forfeit
> in round 2 of his title match with Fischer?
>
I do.
>
> Deos jr have any qualms about players receiving forfeits as stipulated by the
> rulebook?
>
I do.
But I agree with your analogy: Topalov is to Kramnik as Spassky was to
Fischer. The only way either one of them can win is by forfeit.
|
| | |
Date: 02 Oct 2006 14:57:08
From: David Richerby
Subject: Re: Topalov threatens (not funny anymore)
|
<[email protected] > wrote:
> But I agree with your analogy: Topalov is to Kramnik as Spassky was
> to Fischer. The only way either one of them can win is by forfeit.
That would explain why, up to and including 1972, Spassky had a
+5-7=13 record against Fischer, not including the forfeit.
Dave.
--
David Richerby Expensive Drink (TM): it's like a
www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~davidr/ refreshing juice beverage but it'll
break the bank!
|
| |
Date: 30 Sep 2006 22:47:35
From:
Subject: Re: Topalov threatens to abandon Match
|
Shingen wrote:
> EJAY wrote:
> > Topalov's team is accusing Kramnik of excessive use of the bathroom
> > (a.k.a Cheating).Seems to me in Game 2 it was Topalov who missed the
> > mating attack.Sounds like sour grapes to me (if the account is
> > accurate).www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp.newsid=3370.
>
> It is a pity to see such a historic match between two worthy players
> devolve to a charade of petty accusations. I blame Danilov for
> inserting himself as a factor in this match by trying to find some
> excuse for Topalov!
>
By me, Danilov has perfect looks to play mid-level gangsters in the
mafia movies. How such a man can understand chess is beyond me.
>
> By the same token, I wish that Kramnik did not have
> to use the bathroom so many times!
>
Agree.
>
> Two down with eight to go! It looks bad for Topalov, Kramnik is more
> than capable for playing the remaining games for a draw. Snuffing out
> any imbalance that Topalov would want to create.
>
But Kramnik's nerves are unhinged now. He has spent the last 2-3 days
fighting this case on his own, while Topalov is resting, preparing, and
lets the mafia guy Danilov and his FIDE buddies do all the bidding for
him.
|
| |
Date: 30 Sep 2006 22:43:15
From:
Subject: Re: Topalov threatens to abandon Match
|
Johnny T wrote:
> EJAY wrote:
> > Topalov's team is accusing Kramnik of excessive use of the bathroom
> > (a.k.a Cheating).Seems to me in Game 2 it was Topalov who missed the
> > mating attack.Sounds like sour grapes to me (if the account is
> > accurate).www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp.newsid=3370.
> >
> 50 times to the bathroom in a single game? 50 TIMES?!? Everygame?
>
What if he has bladder problems? I hear his health is pretty pousy.
>
> These are different times, and that is an abusive number.
>
Is it number one or number two or both?
>
> The Topalov
> contingencies are excessive, but a good starting point.
>
I think it is a masterful move to unhinge Kramnik's weak nerves. If you
can't beat the man at the chess board - do the Karpov on them.
|
| |
Date: 30 Sep 2006 22:27:50
From: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Kramnik a No-Show (was: Topalov threatens to abandon Match)
|
N. Silver wrote:
> [email protected]:
>
> > Ron pointed out that visiting the restroom so often
> > looks suspicious--even if there are no computers
> > or radios in there. I agree. It would have been
> > entirely reasonable for the FIDE committee to delay
> > the match to work out a compromise ammenable to
> > both players.
>
> If Kramnik were unwilling to accept a compromise such
> as the one suggested by Sierwan; i.e., having a bathroom
> attendant, that would point to his guilt.
Hi Silver,
I agree that Yasser Seirawan's proposal is a practical compromise (and
it would not reflect well on the side that rejects it):
>>> Yasser Seirawan's Proposal >>>
* Firstly, since separate bathrooms were agreed to by all parties, they
should be reinstated with immediate effect.
* Secondly, to assuage any suspicions of unfair behavior, the bathrooms
should have an attendant at hand during play.
* Thirdly, Game Five should be rescheduled and played tomorrow,
Saturday, September 30, 2006 at the usual time.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
It appears both teams are at the negotiating table. I still have some
hope there will be a match for us to watch... let's see!
|
| | |
Date: 01 Oct 2006 07:20:50
From: Dave (from the UK)
Subject: Re: Kramnik a No-Show
|
[email protected] wrote:
>>If Kramnik were unwilling to accept a compromise such
>>as the one suggested by Sierwan; i.e., having a bathroom
>>attendant, that would point to his guilt.
>
>
> Hi Silver,
>
> I agree that Yasser Seirawan's proposal is a practical compromise (and
> it would not reflect well on the side that rejects it):
But it seems almost inevitable that there would then be arguments about
the neutrality of the attendant(s).
>>>>Yasser Seirawan's Proposal >>>
>
> * Firstly, since separate bathrooms were agreed to by all parties, they
> should be reinstated with immediate effect.
> * Secondly, to assuage any suspicions of unfair behavior, the bathrooms
> should have an attendant at hand during play.
> * Thirdly, Game Five should be rescheduled and played tomorrow,
> Saturday, September 30, 2006 at the usual time.
>
>
> It appears both teams are at the negotiating table. I still have some
> hope there will be a match for us to watch... let's see!
Let's hope it's resolved.
--
Dave (from the UK)
Please note my email address changes periodically to avoid spam.
It is always of the form: [email protected]
Hitting reply will work for a few months only - later set it manually.
http://witm.sourceforge.net/ (Web based Mathematica front end)
|
| |
Date: 30 Sep 2006 17:12:10
From: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Kramnik a No-Show (was: Topalov threatens to abandon Match)
|
Nick wrote:
> Of course, many writers in rec.games.chess.* may
> be expected to jump to passionately held conclusions
> 'based on partial information and political spins'.
Now I remember, your condescending manner is one of the reasons I had
classified you as a troll and ignored your posts! :-)
> > > I agree, that wasn't wise. He should've insisted on a neutral
> > > location with neutral arbitrators, and turned down the match
> > > if that wasn't possible.
>
> Evidently, 'likesforests' believes that the match's location (in
> Russia) is not 'neutral' and must be biased against Kramnik,
> a Russian.
>
> > Topalov is a Bulgarian. Kramnik is a Russian citizen, who's
> > playing a match in Russia. The FIDE President is a Russian
> > citizen, who's known to be connected with powerful Russians.
>
> What exactly would 'likesforests' regard as a 'neutral location' for
> a match between Kramnik, a Russian, and Topalov, a Bulgarian?
>
> --Nick
[A cut and paste of my previous response. You may be trolling, but it's
possible someone else might wonder about these same questions.]
Topalov is FIDE's "champion".
FIDE's president, Kirsan Ilyumzhinov is president of the Republic of
Kalmykia, where the match is being held. He's the ultimate authority
for match decisions.
The appeals committee consists of Makrpoulos, FIDE's Deputy President;
Azmaiparashvili, a close personal friend of Topalov's manager; and FM
Jorge Vega, a supporter of Kirsan Ilyumzhinov who appears beside him in
photographs. And we have their first decision, which Kramnik has shown
violated the letter of their contract. In Seirawan's words: "The
Appeals Committee made a clearly erroneous decision." According to
Nunn, it's "A selection which can hardly inspire confidence in the
impartiality of the Appeals Committee. Nor are the members of the
Appeals Committee especially qualified."
> Susan Polgar should *not* be misrepresented
Her exact words were, "He claims that the Appeals Committee is biased
toward Topalov and they are friends with Topalov... why would he sign a
contract with this provision?" Now no intepretation is necessary. If
readers want more, they can Google her blog for more context.
|
| |
Date: 30 Sep 2006 16:59:55
From: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Kramnik a No-Show (was: Topalov threatens to abandon Match)
|
Nick wrote:
> Topalov is a Bulgarian. Kramnik is a Russian citizen, who's
> playing a match in Russia. The FIDE President is a Russian
> citizen, who's known to be connected with powerful Russians.
Topalov is FIDE's "champion".
FIDE's president, Kirsan Ilyumzhinov is president of the Republic of
Kalmykia, where the match is being held. He's the ultimate authority
for match decisions.
The appeals committee consists of Makrpoulos, FIDE's Deputy President;
Azmaiparashvili, a close personal friend of Topalov's manager; and FM
Jorge Vega, a supporter of Kirsan Ilyumzhinov who appears beside him in
photographs. And we have their first decision, which Kramnik has shown
violated the letter of their contract. In Seirawan's words: "The
Appeals Committee made a clearly erroneous decision." According to
Nunn, it's "A selection which can hardly inspire confidence in the
impartiality of the Appeals Committee. Nor are the members of the
Appeals Committee especially qualified."
> Susan Polgar should *not* be misrepresented
Her exact words were, "He claims that the Appeals Committee is biased
toward Topalov and they are friends with Topalov... why would he sign a
contract with this provision?" Now no intepretation is necessary. If
readers want more, they can Google her blog for more context.
|
| |
Date: 30 Sep 2006 16:07:26
From: Wlodzimierz Holsztynski (Wlod)
Subject: Re: Kramnik a No-Show (was: Topalov threatens to abandon Match)
|
Nick wrote:
> Topalov is a Bulgarian. Kramnik is a Russian citizen, who's
> playing a match in Russia. The FIDE President is a Russian
> citizen, who's known to be connected with powerful Russians.
>
> --Nick
Hey guys, the village idiot Null Boobaki is back,
proving again his brainlessness. Hey, Null, no
need for more proofs, relax. Others know a bit
more than to rely on your primitive nationalistic
notions. Not everybody is prejudiced like you,
the rgc* village trolling idiot.
Wlod
|
| |
Date: 30 Sep 2006 15:55:10
From: Nick
Subject: Re: Kramnik a No-Show (was: Topalov threatens to abandon Match)
|
Nick wrote:
> [email protected] wrote:
> > N. Silver wrote:
> > > Mike Murray wrote:
> > > > Fifty was supposed to be an exaggeration.
> > > > I haven't seen the "official" number, but
> > > > Kramnik is supposed to have some medical
> > > > problem. Add in caffeine and nerves and...
> > >
> > > Maybe Topalov was grasping at straws, initially,
> > > but now Occam's razor applies. To get at the truth
> > > stick with the simplest explanation.
> >
> > The simplest explanation is that Topalov is a poor sport who wants to
> > win at any cost, and the FIDE committee is corrupt. You say you are an
> > outsider. Perhaps, consider reading some of the documents the rest of
> > us have before forming a decision.
> >
> > Analysis by two impartial, well-respected GMs:
> > http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=3382
> > http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=3379
> >
> > Argument that FIDE / Topalov violated the spirit of the match:
> > http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=3374
> >
> > Argument that FIDE violated the legal contract of the match:
> > http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=3378
> >
> > Evidence Topalov was happy to "win" this way:
> > http://www.chessbase.com/news/2006/elista/savinov20.jpg
> > "Topalov happy to receive the full point for game five"
> >
> > Evidence that Topalov exaggerated his case:
> > http://www.worldchess2006.com/main.asp?hid=1002
> >
> > Evidence that questions the FIDE president's integrity:
> > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Larisa_Yudina
> >
> > Kramnik is known for his ability to draw (tie) games.. He had already
> > scored 2 wins and 2 draws against Topalov, so it was unlikely Topalov
> > would have been able to win the match. His play was not perfect... and
> > the bathrooms were checked by arbitrators and represenatives of both
> > players before each game to ensure there were no hidden computers or
> > way to transmit radio signals from the restrooms.
> >
> > Susan Polgar questioned why Kramnik accepted to
> > play FIDE's favorite in FIDE-land with FIDE arbitrators.
>
> Susan Polgar should *not* be misrepresented (if that's
> how someone might construe it) as on Kramnik's side
> against Topalov and/or FIDE.
>
> "I cannot take the side of Kramnik, Topalov, or FIDE.
> I believe all sides committed errors in this process."
> --Susan Polgar
"I will not take sides for the sake of doing it and I will not
point fingers at anyone if I do not know all sides of the story.
I am not there. Most of us are not there. *Making judgment
based on partial information and political spins will not help
this matter.*" (emphasis in her original text)
--Susan Polgar
Of course, many writers in rec.games.chess.* may
be expected to jump to passionately held conclusions
'based on partial information and political spins'.
> > I agree, that wasn't wise. He should've insisted on a neutral
> > location with neutral arbitrators, and turned down the match
> > if that wasn't possible.
Evidently, 'likesforests' believes that the match's location (in
Russia) is not 'neutral' and must be biased against Kramnik,
a Russian.
> Topalov is a Bulgarian. Kramnik is a Russian citizen, who's
> playing a match in Russia. The FIDE President is a Russian
> citizen, who's known to be connected with powerful Russians.
What exactly would 'likesforests' regard as a 'neutral location' for
a match between Kramnik, a Russian, and Topalov, a Bulgarian?
--Nick
> > Ron pointed out that visiting the restroom so often looks
> > suspicious--even if there are no computers or radios in there. I agree.
> > It would have been entirely reasonable for the FIDE committee to delay
> > the match to work out a compromise ammenable to both players.
|
| | |
Date: 30 Sep 2006 19:49:43
From: Mike Murray
Subject: Re: Kramnik a No-Show (was: Topalov threatens to abandon Match)
|
On 30 Sep 2006 15:55:10 -0700, "Nick" <[email protected] >
wrote:
>Evidently, 'likesforests' believes that the match's location (in
>Russia) is not 'neutral' and must be biased against Kramnik,
>a Russian.
>> Topalov is a Bulgarian. Kramnik is a Russian citizen, who's
>> playing a match in Russia. The FIDE President is a Russian
>> citizen, who's known to be connected with powerful Russians.
>What exactly would 'likesforests' regard as a 'neutral location' for
>a match between Kramnik, a Russian, and Topalov, a Bulgarian?
>--Nick
Nick's question implies national citizenship to be the most important
affiliation in terms of a "neutral location". But organization,
religion, corporate affiliation, age, gender, etc., may outweigh
citizenship in any particular race for favoritism. In this particular
case, it's reasonable to assume that one buying into Kirsan's vision
of FIDE would be preferred to one who merely salutes the same flag.
|
| |
Date: 30 Sep 2006 15:37:35
From: Nick
Subject: Re: Kramnik a No-Show (was: Topalov threatens to abandon Match)
|
[email protected] wrote:
> N. Silver wrote:
> > Mike Murray wrote:
> > > Fifty was supposed to be an exaggeration.
> > > I haven't seen the "official" number, but
> > > Kramnik is supposed to have some medical
> > > problem. Add in caffeine and nerves and...
> >
> > Maybe Topalov was grasping at straws, initially,
> > but now Occam's razor applies. To get at the truth
> > stick with the simplest explanation.
>
> The simplest explanation is that Topalov is a poor sport who wants to
> win at any cost, and the FIDE committee is corrupt. You say you are an
> outsider. Perhaps, consider reading some of the documents the rest of
> us have before forming a decision.
>
> Analysis by two impartial, well-respected GMs:
> http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=3382
> http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=3379
>
> Argument that FIDE / Topalov violated the spirit of the match:
> http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=3374
>
> Argument that FIDE violated the legal contract of the match:
> http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=3378
>
> Evidence Topalov was happy to "win" this way:
> http://www.chessbase.com/news/2006/elista/savinov20.jpg
> "Topalov happy to receive the full point for game five"
>
> Evidence that Topalov exaggerated his case:
> http://www.worldchess2006.com/main.asp?hid=1002
>
> Evidence that questions the FIDE president's integrity:
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Larisa_Yudina
>
> Kramnik is known for his ability to draw (tie) games.. He had already
> scored 2 wins and 2 draws against Topalov, so it was unlikely Topalov
> would have been able to win the match. His play was not perfect... and
> the bathrooms were checked by arbitrators and represenatives of both
> players before each game to ensure there were no hidden computers or
> way to transmit radio signals from the restrooms.
>
> Susan Polgar questioned why Kramnik accepted to
> play FIDE's favorite in FIDE-land with FIDE arbitrators.
Susan Polgar should *not* be misrepresented (if that's
how someone might construe it) as on Kramnik's side
against Topalov and/or FIDE.
"I cannot take the side of Kramnik, Topalov, or FIDE.
I believe all sides committed errors in this process."
--Susan Polgar
> I agree, that wasn't wise. He should've insisted on a neutral
> location with neutral arbitrators, and turned down the match
> if that wasn't possible.
Topalov is a Bulgarian. Kramnik is a Russian citizen, who's
playing a match in Russia. The FIDE President is a Russian
citizen, who's known to be connected with powerful Russians.
--Nick
> Ron pointed out that visiting the restroom so often looks
> suspicious--even if there are no computers or radios in there. I agree.
> It would have been entirely reasonable for the FIDE committee to delay
> the match to work out a compromise ammenable to both players.
|
| |
Date: 30 Sep 2006 15:29:53
From: Wlodzimierz Holsztynski (Wlod)
Subject: Re: Kramnik a No-Show (was: Topalov threatens to abandon Match)
|
Ange1o DePa1ma wrote:
> I drink a huge coffee during my games.
> Maybe I'll go 2-3 times, mostly out
> of nerves, and I'm 20+ years older
> than these guys. Fifty bathroom trips
> means there is some non-physiologic
> reason for going. Or the player is very,
> very sick.
Yes, old man, you should be a role model for infants.
You and your prostate and your extremal sense of
humor form a pattern for everybody to follow. Just
allow for exceptions.
Wlod
|
| |
Date: 30 Sep 2006 15:02:23
From:
Subject: Re: Kramnik a No-Show (was: Topalov threatens to abandon Match)
|
>
> Susan Polgar questioned why Kramnik accepted to play FIDE's favorite in
> FIDE-land with FIDE arbitrators. I agree, that wasn't wise. He
> should've insisted on a neutral location with neutral arbitrators, and
> turned down the match if that wasn't possible.
>
yes, that was Kramnik's BIG mistake, now he evetually gets the point of
Kasparov's attacks on FIDE and Kasparov's struggle for PCA in the 90s.
> It would have been entirely reasonable for the FIDE committee to delay
> the match to work out a compromise ammenable to both players.
you dont see the point here, it was the FIDE committee who gave
Danailov the tapes
even if it was not allowed to be seen by anyone else but the arbiter
....and it was the committe who was happy to satisfy Topa's demands
without trying first to reach a compromise with Kramnik.
had they been trying to act in good faith and trying to negociate first
behind the closed doors the whole psychology behind Topa's toilet
gambit would have not reached its target...as GM John Nunn recently
pointed out the idea is to impose your demands on your opponent ( your
"will")....Kramnik of course realizes that giving in now would mean
pyschological defeat and sticks with his position.
If he blinks he is, psychologically, lost.
It would be his second BIG mistake.
Topa is a piece of shit who tries to stop an unfavourable (for him)
course of events.
He knows that Kramnik does not cheat but he concluded that would lose
the match if everything stayed the same.
|
| |
Date: 30 Sep 2006 14:10:08
From: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Kramnik a No-Show (was: Topalov threatens to abandon Match)
|
N. Silver wrote:
> Mike Murray wrote:
>
> > Fifty was supposed to be an exaggeration.
> > I haven't seen the "official" number, but
> > Kramnik is supposed to have some medical
> > problem. Add in caffeine and nerves and...
>
> Maybe Topalov was grasping at straws, initially,
> but now Occam's razor applies. To get at the truth
> stick with the simplest explanation.
The simplest explanation is that Topalov is a poor sport who wants to
win at any cost, and the FIDE committee is corrupt. You say you are an
outsider. Perhaps, consider reading some of the documents the rest of
us have before forming a decision.
Analysis by two impartial, well-respected GMs:
http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=3382
http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=3379
Argument that FIDE / Topalov violated the spirit of the match:
http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=3374
Argument that FIDE violated the legal contract of the match:
http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=3378
Evidence Topalov was happy to "win" this way:
http://www.chessbase.com/news/2006/elista/savinov20.jpg
"Topalov happy to receive the full point for game five"
Evidence that Topalov exaggerated his case:
http://www.worldchess2006.com/main.asp?hid=1002
Evidence that questions the FIDE president's integrity:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Larisa_Yudina
Kramnik is known for his ability to draw (tie) games.. He had already
scored 2 wins and 2 draws against Topalov, so it was unlikely Topalov
would have been able to win the match. His play was not perfect... and
the bathrooms were checked by arbitrators and represenatives of both
players before each game to ensure there were no hidden computers or
way to transmit radio signals from the restrooms.
Susan Polgar questioned why Kramnik accepted to play FIDE's favorite in
FIDE-land with FIDE arbitrators. I agree, that wasn't wise. He
should've insisted on a neutral location with neutral arbitrators, and
turned down the match if that wasn't possible.
Ron pointed out that visiting the restroom so often looks
suspicious--even if there are no computers or radios in there. I agree.
It would have been entirely reasonable for the FIDE committee to delay
the match to work out a compromise ammenable to both players.
|
| | |
Date: 01 Oct 2006 03:37:39
From: N. Silver
Subject: Re: Kramnik a No-Show (was: Topalov threatens to abandon Match)
|
[email protected]:
> Ron pointed out that visiting the restroom so often
> looks suspicious--even if there are no computers
> or radios in there. I agree. It would have been
> entirely reasonable for the FIDE committee to delay
> the match to work out a compromise ammenable to
> both players.
If Kramnik were unwilling to accept a compromise such
as the one suggested by Sierwan; i.e., having a bathroom
attendant, that would point to his guilt.
|
| |
Date: 30 Sep 2006 08:04:46
From: Taylor Kingston
Subject: Re: Kirsan's bullshit / Re: Kramnik (world champion) - Topalov: Game 5/6 postponed
|
[email protected] wrote:
> Wlodzimierz Holsztynski (Wlod) wrote:
> > Topalov is FIDE's boy. No wonder that
> > Kirsan & FIDE stand behind Topa.
> >....One of the players lost twice.
> > But that's not a reason to impose the will
> > of one player on the other, and suddenly
> > to change the playing environment, is it?
>
> No, sure, read John Nunn analysis of the situation :
>
> http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=3382
I was waiting to learn all the relevant facts before forming my own
opinion on this business, but now that we have heard from Seirawan and
Nunn, GMs respected as much for their integrity as their playing
strength, the situation seems pretty clear. The actions of FIDE and the
Topalov team (a distinction without a difference?) are completely out
of order, and Kramnik is playing against a stacked deck.
|
| |
Date: 30 Sep 2006 07:42:54
From: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Kirsan's bullshit / Re: Kramnik (world champion) - Topalov: Game 5/6 postponed
|
LARRY EVANS ON FIDE IN 1988!
FIDE politicians care more about power games than chess games. But now
their dirty little secret is out, and people are beginning to wonder
why we need all those huge international congresses where FIDE hotshots
attend lavish cocktail parties in fancy hotel suites, like worms in the
bacon, while real players struggle so hard.
People might wonder why we need anything more than a chess board and a
chess set. Oh yeah, a computerized rating system in an office somewhere
to keep track of who is better than whom. Gee, what kind of subversive
talk is that?
People who believe that playing good chess is more important than
playing FIDE politics don't need a world body to change an occasional
rule. We know what the rules are. All we need is a few good men tried
and true like Dr.Elo to settle disputes as they arise.
When chess is infested with power brokers, anything is possible, any
rule can be broken. Excellence becomes a secondary consideration. As
Nikolai Krogius told a young Kasparov, "We already have a world
champion. We don't need another one."
Long after FIDE has vanished, the games of great players will still be
remembered and enjoyed. One Fischer is worth a thousand Campos. One
Kasparov can excite the masses and make them wonder why a dull game
like chess holds so many of us in its thrall. Ordinary people might
discover what a great game chess really is and why a few fools fight so
passionately to keep it clean.
http://wcn.tentonhammer.com/modules.php?op=modload&name=News&file=article&sid=589&mode=thread&order=0&thold=0
Wlodzimierz Holsztynski (Wlod) wrote:
> [email protected] wrote:
>
> > No, sure, read John Nunn analysis of the situation :
> >
> > http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=3382
> >
> > John Nunn: 'It's about imposing your will on the opponent'
>
>
> Thank you. All this is so obvious.
>
> > Topa must win so as FIDE to get
> > eventually the control of the coveted title.
>
> Kirsan, the whole FIDE+USCF,
> and now Topalov too, why not,
> should be locked in the same
> one and only one toilet bowl
> for the next thirty years; and let
> Campo use it (with no flashing
> provision).
>
> *****
>
> Regards,
>
> Wlod
|
| |
Date: 30 Sep 2006 07:08:03
From: Wlodzimierz Holsztynski (Wlod)
Subject: Re: Kirsan's bullshit / Re: Kramnik (world champion) - Topalov: Game 5/6 postponed
|
[email protected] wrote:
> No, sure, read John Nunn analysis of the situation :
>
> http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=3382
>
> John Nunn: 'It's about imposing your will on the opponent'
Thank you. All this is so obvious.
> Topa must win so as FIDE to get
> eventually the control of the coveted title.
Kirsan, the whole FIDE+USCF,
and now Topalov too, why not,
should be locked in the same
one and only one toilet bowl
for the next thirty years; and let
Campo use it (with no flashing
provision).
*****
Regards,
Wlod
|
| |
Date: 30 Sep 2006 06:25:03
From:
Subject: Re: Kirsan's bullshit / Re: Kramnik (world champion) - Topalov: Game 5/6 postponed
|
Wlodzimierz Holsztynski (Wlod) wrote:
> Topalov is FIDE's boy. No wonder that
> Kirsan & FIDE stand behind Topa.
>....One of the players lost twice.
> But that's not a reason to impose the will
> of one player on the other, and suddenly
> to change the playing environment, is it?
No, sure, read John Nunn analysis of the situation :
http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=3382
John Nunn: 'It's about imposing your will on the opponent'
Topa must win so as FIDE to get eventually the control of the coveted
title.
They were sure they would but Kramnik turned their forecast on its head
so now they have to win "somehow-anyhow".
|
| |
Date: 30 Sep 2006 06:05:40
From: Wlodzimierz Holsztynski (Wlod)
Subject: Kirsan's bullshit / Re: Kramnik (world champion) - Topalov: Game 5/6 postponed
|
[email protected] wrote:
> The game is officially cancelled for today, see
> http://www.worldchess2006.com/main.asp.
Topalov is FIDE's boy. No wonder that
Kirsan & FIDE stand behind Topa.
Here's what Kirsan mumbled:
"Yesterday and today I keep receiving telephone
> calls from the representatives of those companies,
> which I attract for sponsoring of the chess
> competitions. They are asking me: "How come,
> the two most intelligent chess players cannot
> share a toilet with each other? So no sense for
> us to interfere, with our millions...."
The fate of chess financial health depends
on sharing a toilet. That's how tragic it is.
There were certain conditions during
the first 4 days of the match. And they
were fine. One of the players lost twice.
But that's not a reason to impose the will
of one player on the other, and suddenly
to change the playing environment, is it?
Wlod
What next?
|
| | |
Date: 30 Sep 2006 20:15:13
From: N. Silver
Subject: Re: Kirsan's bullshit / Re: Kramnik (world champion) - Topalov: Game 5/6 postponed
|
Wlodzimierz Holsztynski wrote:
> There were certain conditions during
> the first 4 days of the match. And they
> were fine. One of the players lost twice.
> But that's not a reason to impose the will
> of one player on the other, and suddenly
> to change the playing environment, is it?
With all due respect, sir, you are in denial.
The truth is obvious to an outsider like myself.
|
| |
Date: 30 Sep 2006 04:52:54
From:
Subject: Re: Kramnik (world champion) - Topalov: Game 5/6 postponed
|
Dave (from the UK) wrote:
> It's postponed (not canceled) according to that link.
> Dave (from the UK)
>
Let's hope that Kramnik wont cave win and accept to go on from 3-2. He
has less to lose if he quits. He is the legitimate champion after all.
At any rate, even if all returns to normal, Topalov has achieved his
goal of he too eventually "scoring".
Otherwise the match was going toward his defeat so he had "to do
something", anything, to break and alter the unfavourable course of
events.
Even in the best case scenario Kramink will suffer from this incident.
Topa wants to become champ no matter how. He is acting on the principle
that all will be forgotten afterwards if he wins.
Who remembers nowdays that G.W.Bush won his presidency by a very narrow
gin ?
|
| | |
Date: 02 Oct 2006 15:07:43
From: David Richerby
Subject: Re: Kramnik (world champion) - Topalov: Game 5/6 postponed
|
<[email protected] > wrote:
> Who remembers nowdays that G.W.Bush won his presidency by a very
> narrow gin ?
*Lots* of people. Not least, everyone who voted for Gore in 2000
(which is a greater number of people than voted for Bush, remember).
Dave.
--
David Richerby Moistened Pointy-Haired Shack (TM):
www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~davidr/ it's like a house in the woods that's
completely clueless but it's moist!
|
| |
Date: 30 Sep 2006 03:25:02
From: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Kramnik (world champion) - Topalov: Game 5/6 postponed
|
Wlodzimierz Holsztynski (Wlod) wrote:
> Ange1o DePa1ma wrote:
> > Despite his two wins, Kramnik was playing shitty.
>
> Yeah, right. Its Kramnik 3 : Topalov 1.
> This is a chess match and not a theoretical
> research or a beauty contest. It's 3:1.
> Two wins for Kramnik and none for Topalov.
>
> Topalov can't win over the board, hence
> he tries to use any unfair way to avoid defeat
> after talking BIG before. Now when it's time to
> play, he prefers to talk again.
The game is officially cancelled for today, see
http://www.worldchess2006.com/main.asp.
|
| | |
Date: 30 Sep 2006 12:32:36
From: Dave (from the UK)
Subject: Re: Kramnik (world champion) - Topalov: Game 5/6 postponed
|
[email protected] wrote:
> The game is officially cancelled for today, see
> http://www.worldchess2006.com/main.asp.
It's postponed (not canceled) according to that link.
--
Dave (from the UK)
Please note my email address changes periodically to avoid spam.
It is always of the form: [email protected]
Hitting reply will work for a few months only - later set it manually.
http://witm.sourceforge.net/ (Web based Mathematica front end)
|
| |
Date: 30 Sep 2006 02:30:32
From: Wlodzimierz Holsztynski (Wlod)
Subject: Re: Topalov threatens (not funny anymore)
|
g4 wrote:
> "jr" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>
> Does jr have a similar opinion about Boris
> Spassky accepting the forfeit in round 2 of
> his title match with Fischer?
>
> Deos jr have any qualms about players
> receiving forfeits as stipulated by the
> rulebook?
What a boobakily idiotic logic!
(You even sound like that idiot).
Wlod
|
| |
Date: 29 Sep 2006 14:04:05
From:
Subject: Re: Topalov threatens (not funny anymore)
|
jr wrote:
> *Toplalov should be ashamed" (Mig)
>
> The fact that Topalov was happy to receive such a point
> by forfeit -- instead of refusing to accept it -- tells us all
> we need to know about his sporting standards.
>
You can see his picture with the scoresheet in the hand at
chessbase.com.
What a big smile on his face ! I have won ! I have won !
Miserable guy.
|
| |
Date: 29 Sep 2006 13:52:54
From: jr
Subject: Re: Topalov threatens (not funny anymore)
|
*Toplalov should be ashamed" (Mig)
The fact that Topalov was happy to receive such a point
by forfeit -- instead of refusing to accept it -- tells us all
we need to know about his sporting standards.
[email protected] wrote:
> FROM MIG GREENGARD'S DAILY DIRT
>
> September 29, 2006
> Taking the Piss (BladderGate 2)
>
> Well, this isn't funny anymore. Today's game five has been cancelled .
> Is Topalov out of his mind? Are all chessplayers insane? I've always
> joked that it seems the moment someone wins a world title, any world
> title, they either go into the witness protection program start
> behaving like a pharaoh.
>
> So now we have the old "won't shake hands" trick. What, Topalov is
> worried that Kramnik doesn't wash his hands in all those trips to the
> bathroom? No seriously, this is ridiculous. FIDE responded to Topalov's
> appeal, saying Danailov's claims of Kramnik's bathroom usage were
> exaggerated, if "unusual" in quantity. The appeals committee decided
> that the players' private bathrooms should be closed and they should
> share one. Kramnik's team protested , although the item in they quote
> from the rules doesn't say the players get a private bathroom. The rest
> of it is aggro and distraction about favoritism that don't seem
> relevant to the original complaint.
>
> So as it stands, it's Kramnik who didn't show up today to play and the
> official site lists him as having forfeited game five on time. I'm
> disgusted. This sort of mind-game BS has a long history in big matches,
> of course. Protests, counter-protests, the besmirched honor of suddenly
> virginal tyrs. What a joke. Topalov should be ashamed. I predict it
> will continue tomorrow with no forfeit. Wishful thinking?
|
| | |
Date: 29 Sep 2006 20:40:08
From: g4
Subject: Re: Topalov threatens (not funny anymore)
|
"jr" <[email protected] > wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> *Toplalov should be ashamed" (Mig)
>
> The fact that Topalov was happy to receive such a point
> by forfeit -- instead of refusing to accept it -- tells us all
> we need to know about his sporting standards.
>
Does jr have a similar opinion about Boris Spassky accepting the forfeit
in round 2 of his title match with Fischer?
Deos jr have any qualms about players receiving forfeits as stipulated by the
rulebook?
|
| |
Date: 29 Sep 2006 11:20:27
From: Rob
Subject: Re: Kramnik a No-Show (was: Topalov threatens to abandon Match)
|
Ange1o DePa1ma wrote:
> <[email protected]> wrote
>
> > Wlodzimierz Holsztynski (Wlod) wrote:
> >> Topalov is responsible for the actions
> >> of his team on his behalf. Thus he is
> >> the 100% guilty party. Loser.
> >>
> >> Wlod
> >
> > Agreed Wold.
> >
> > Miserable behavior from Topa.
> >
> > Kramnik would do good if he were to decide to walk out.
>
> That would be a huge mistake, as both he and his opponent would be left
> holding their respective colostomy bags.
Makes one wonder if there can ever be an honest world championship
conducted with FIDE in charge now?
|
| | |
Date: 29 Sep 2006 19:38:12
From: Mike Murray
Subject: Re: Kramnik a No-Show (was: Topalov threatens to abandon Match)
|
On 29 Sep 2006 11:20:27 -0700, "Rob" <[email protected] > wrote:
>Makes one wonder if there can ever be an honest world championship
>conducted with FIDE in charge now?
Unfortunately, it may make little difference whether FIDE is in charge
or not. With serious money at stake, the opportunities for electronic
cheating at chess seem about equal to the opportunities for chemical /
biological cheating in the physical sports. It's a lot more serious
than some clown with headphones and a big hat.
Who can solve the problem of effectively monitoring for cheating while
preserving the dignity of the players and the quality of the game?
Fast time controls? World Championship chess at 3 minutes a game?
Referees watching closely while the World Champion or the challenger
tinkles? Nahhh.
|
| | | |
Date: 30 Sep 2006 08:52:49
From: Ange1o DePa1ma
Subject: Re: Kramnik a No-Show (was: Topalov threatens to abandon Match)
|
I think the notion of a private "rest room" is ludicrous. When do these
prima donnas find the time to relax in their own private lounge during a
game? For $40,000 per game they should required to be at the board or on
stage the entire time, except for trips to a monitored bathroom. And Topo is
absolutely correct about the 50 bathroom trips. If the game in question
lasted 4 hours, that's one trip to the john every 6 minutes. Are these two
players grown men or children?
"Mike Murray" <[email protected] > wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On 29 Sep 2006 11:20:27 -0700, "Rob" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>Makes one wonder if there can ever be an honest world championship
>>conducted with FIDE in charge now?
>
> Unfortunately, it may make little difference whether FIDE is in charge
> or not. With serious money at stake, the opportunities for electronic
> cheating at chess seem about equal to the opportunities for chemical /
> biological cheating in the physical sports. It's a lot more serious
> than some clown with headphones and a big hat.
>
> Who can solve the problem of effectively monitoring for cheating while
> preserving the dignity of the players and the quality of the game?
> Fast time controls? World Championship chess at 3 minutes a game?
> Referees watching closely while the World Champion or the challenger
> tinkles? Nahhh.
|
| | | | |
Date: 02 Oct 2006 15:12:50
From: David Richerby
Subject: Re: Kramnik a No-Show (was: Topalov threatens to abandon Match)
|
Ange1o DePa1ma <[email protected] > wrote:
> I think the notion of a private "rest room" is ludicrous. When do
> these prima donnas find the time to relax in their own private
> lounge during a game?
It's quite common for the players to spend much of their time during
the game in the break room. They're not necessarily relaxing but,
rather, thinking in an alternative venue.
> For $40,000 per game they should required to be at the board or on
> stage the entire time
Why?
> And Topo is absolutely correct about the 50 bathroom trips.
Actually, he isn't. FIDE have said that the number was exaggerated by
the Topalov team.
But then, it's clear that you're just spouting off without bothering
to find out the facts.
Dave.
--
David Richerby Salted Slimy Beer (TM): it's like a
www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~davidr/ refreshing lager but it's covered in
goo and covered in salt!
|
| | | | | |
Date: 02 Oct 2006 14:44:09
From: Ange1o DePa1ma
Subject: Re: Kramnik a No-Show (was: Topalov threatens to abandon Match)
|
"David Richerby" <[email protected] > wrote in message
news:2hs*[email protected]...
> Ange1o DePa1ma <[email protected]> wrote:
>> I think the notion of a private "rest room" is ludicrous. When do
>> these prima donnas find the time to relax in their own private
>> lounge during a game?
>
> It's quite common for the players to spend much of their time during
> the game in the break room. They're not necessarily relaxing but,
> rather, thinking in an alternative venue.
>
>
>> For $40,000 per game they should required to be at the board or on
>> stage the entire time
>
> Why?
>
>
>> And Topo is absolutely correct about the 50 bathroom trips.
>
> Actually, he isn't. FIDE have said that the number was exaggerated by
> the Topalov team.
>
> But then, it's clear that you're just spouting off without bothering
> to find out the facts.
>
>
> Dave.
I don't understand the sudden hostility to me, but here goes.
First of all nobody knows "the facts" except for the principal parties, all
of them have an incentive to lie, and in the case of FIDE a long history of
doing so. Second, Topalov is way over the top with this accusation and how
he made it. Third, the organizers have provided an out of view location for
the players, which Kramnik has a right to use at his discretion.
That being said, Kramnik's behavior is surely at least odd. Many retail
outlets consider putting merchandize into your pocket to be shoplifting,
even if you have no intention of stealing and are simply having difficulty
holding all your items. Similarly, a chess player at the highest levels
should bend over backwards to eliminate any suspicion that he is doing
something illegal or unethical. (This idea, by the way, is written into the
canon of contract bridge, a game at which cheating is easy as child's play).
Staying away from the board for long periods of time, out of site, in a
private room (that happens to contain a toilet) is not cheating by any
stretch of the imagination. But it is far easier to cheat when nobody is
watching you, isn't it?
As for his reasons, who knows? Kramnik might be nervous or suffering from
anxiety, which he satisfies by pacing. It's more than a little odd, however,
that he should satisfy this compulsion by walking into and out of the
bathroom 50 times (or 25 times) during a game (as opposed to between the
board and rest room). If he has some medical or psychological problem that
compels him to visit the bathroom he should tell his opponent.
None of this justifies how Topalov dealt with this "problem," but then again
we don't know he didn't complain privately and did not receive satisfaction.
|
| | | | | | |
Date: 03 Oct 2006 13:47:29
From: David Richerby
Subject: Re: Kramnik a No-Show (was: Topalov threatens to abandon Match)
|
Ange1o DePa1ma <[email protected] > wrote:
> David Richerby <[email protected]> wrote:
>> But then, it's clear that you're just spouting off without
>> bothering to find out the facts.
>
> I don't understand the sudden hostility to me, but here goes.
I was being hostile because you were unaware that players commonly
spend time away from the board in big matches, repeated the ``fifty
times'' claim that has been demonstrated to be false and made the
unjustified claim that being paid lots of money means you should sit
at the board all the time. I probably over-reacted -- sorry.
> First of all nobody knows "the facts" except for the principal
> parties, all of them have an incentive to lie, and in the case of
> FIDE a long history of doing so.
Yes, but the principal parties have an incentive to lie in almost any
dispute. Kramnik's made too many blunders to be cheating.
> Second, Topalov is way over the top with this accusation and how he
> made it. Third, the organizers have provided an out of view
> location for the players, which Kramnik has a right to use at his
> discretion.
Agreed on both counts.
> That being said, Kramnik's behavior is surely at least odd.
Not necessarily. It all depends on things we don't know. If, for
example, he's walking into the bathroom, turning round and walking
straight out again, it's pretty clear that he has no time to cheat,
unless he has a computer in there running analysis and is just popping
in to see what move it's recommending at the moment. Obviously, he
doesn't have such a computer as somebody would have found it by now.
> Staying away from the board for long periods of time, out of site,
> in a private room (that happens to contain a toilet) is not cheating
> by any stretch of the imagination.
Note that there is CCTV surveillance of the break room. So Kramnik is
being watched at all times, except when he is in the bathroom. We
don't know that he's spending large amounts of time in the bathroom;
only that he visits it often.
> But it is far easier to cheat when nobody is watching you, isn't it?
Of course.
> As for his reasons, who knows? Kramnik might be nervous or suffering
> from anxiety, which he satisfies by pacing. It's more than a little
> odd, however, that he should satisfy this compulsion by walking into
> and out of the bathroom 50 times (or 25 times) during a game (as
> opposed to between the board and rest room).
It's not so odd. Pacing around near the board could be distracting to
Topalov. I often feel the need to have a bit of a stretch or clear my
head during a game (OK, only a couple of times per game) and I always
do this away from the board precisely to avoid distracting my opponent.
> None of this justifies how Topalov dealt with this "problem," but
> then again we don't know he didn't complain privately and did not
> receive satisfaction.
Agreed on both counts.
Dave.
--
David Richerby Poisonous Tool (TM): it's like a
www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~davidr/ handy household tool but it'll kill
you in seconds!
|
| | | | | | | |
Date: 03 Oct 2006 09:16:38
From: Ange1o DePa1ma
Subject: Re: Kramnik a No-Show (was: Topalov threatens to abandon Match)
|
My point is that this is a serious match for serious money. To minimize the
opportunity for irregularity (no pun intended), or grounds for claiming that
unethical behavior has occurred, the players should be required to stay
visible at all times except when they're going to the bathroom. In fact the
players should *want*, to the best of their abilities, to dispel such
notions. The notion that 20- 30-something men require a "rest room" during a
six hour game is ridiculous. They hardly have the time for a nap.
By the way, I'm the world's biggest "chess walker," but my games are
inconsequential.
"David Richerby" <[email protected] > wrote in message
news:zbg*[email protected]...
> Ange1o DePa1ma <[email protected]> wrote:
>> David Richerby <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> But then, it's clear that you're just spouting off without
>>> bothering to find out the facts.
>>
>> I don't understand the sudden hostility to me, but here goes.
>
> I was being hostile because you were unaware that players commonly
> spend time away from the board in big matches, repeated the ``fifty
> times'' claim that has been demonstrated to be false and made the
> unjustified claim that being paid lots of money means you should sit
> at the board all the time. I probably over-reacted -- sorry.
>
>
>> First of all nobody knows "the facts" except for the principal
>> parties, all of them have an incentive to lie, and in the case of
>> FIDE a long history of doing so.
>
> Yes, but the principal parties have an incentive to lie in almost any
> dispute. Kramnik's made too many blunders to be cheating.
>
>
>> Second, Topalov is way over the top with this accusation and how he
>> made it. Third, the organizers have provided an out of view
>> location for the players, which Kramnik has a right to use at his
>> discretion.
>
> Agreed on both counts.
>
>
>> That being said, Kramnik's behavior is surely at least odd.
>
> Not necessarily. It all depends on things we don't know. If, for
> example, he's walking into the bathroom, turning round and walking
> straight out again, it's pretty clear that he has no time to cheat,
> unless he has a computer in there running analysis and is just popping
> in to see what move it's recommending at the moment. Obviously, he
> doesn't have such a computer as somebody would have found it by now.
>
>
>> Staying away from the board for long periods of time, out of site,
>> in a private room (that happens to contain a toilet) is not cheating
>> by any stretch of the imagination.
>
> Note that there is CCTV surveillance of the break room. So Kramnik is
> being watched at all times, except when he is in the bathroom. We
> don't know that he's spending large amounts of time in the bathroom;
> only that he visits it often.
>
>
>> But it is far easier to cheat when nobody is watching you, isn't it?
>
> Of course.
>
>
>> As for his reasons, who knows? Kramnik might be nervous or suffering
>> from anxiety, which he satisfies by pacing. It's more than a little
>> odd, however, that he should satisfy this compulsion by walking into
>> and out of the bathroom 50 times (or 25 times) during a game (as
>> opposed to between the board and rest room).
>
> It's not so odd. Pacing around near the board could be distracting to
> Topalov. I often feel the need to have a bit of a stretch or clear my
> head during a game (OK, only a couple of times per game) and I always
> do this away from the board precisely to avoid distracting my opponent.
>
>
>
>> None of this justifies how Topalov dealt with this "problem," but
>> then again we don't know he didn't complain privately and did not
>> receive satisfaction.
>
> Agreed on both counts.
>
>
> Dave.
>
> --
> David Richerby Poisonous Tool (TM): it's like
> a
> www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~davidr/ handy household tool but it'll
> kill
> you in seconds!
|
| | | | | | | | |
Date: 04 Oct 2006 11:11:53
From: David Richerby
Subject: Re: Kramnik a No-Show (was: Topalov threatens to abandon Match)
|
Ange1o DePa1ma <[email protected] > wrote:
> My point is that this is a serious match for serious money. To
> minimize the opportunity for irregularity (no pun intended), or
> grounds for claiming that unethical behavior has occurred, the
> players should be required to stay visible at all times except when
> they're going to the bathroom.
But they are! Well, they're visible to the arbiter at all times
except when going to the bathroom. The break rooms are under video
surveillance. The issues here are
1) Kramnik was going to the bathroom an awful lot;
2) somebody gave the surveillance tapes to Topalov's team, who had
no right to see them.
> In fact the players should *want*, to the best of their abilities,
> to dispel such notions.
There are competing effects here. Sure, Kramnik doesn't want to look
suspect but he also wants to walk around during the games.
Furthermore, Kramnik's behaviour obviously wasn't suspect to the
arbiter because, if it was, I'm sure that Mr Gijssen would have had a
quiet word with him to say, ``Look, Vladimir. I'm sure there's
nothing untoward going on but it does look a bit dodgy the way you
keep going into the bathroom.''
> The notion that 20- 30-something men require a "rest room" during a
> six hour game is ridiculous.
As I've said, many players like to walk around while they're
thinking. It would be potentially distracting to do this in front of
the opponent (I recall Short complaining that Kasparov was ching up
and down the stage during one of their games) so it's much better for
them to have a separate room provided. Also, it means they have
somewhere to go to get drinks and snacks, again without distracting
the opponent.
> By the way, I'm the world's biggest "chess walker," but my games are
> inconsequential.
On the other hand, one could argue that *you* should spend all your
time at the board because the tournaments you play at do not have
significant measures in place to stop you cheating away from the
board. Since the organizers of this match have gone to great trouble
to prevent cheating (surveillance of the break rooms, equipment to
stop communications to the bathrooms, extensive searches, metal
detectors and so on), Kramnik should be allowed to spend as much time
as he wants wherever he wants.
Dave.
--
David Richerby Technicolor Spoon (TM): it's like a
www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~davidr/ piece of cutlery but it's in realistic
colour!
|
| | | | |
Date: 30 Sep 2006 08:42:09
From: Mike Murray
Subject: Re: Kramnik a No-Show (was: Topalov threatens to abandon Match)
|
On Sat, 30 Sep 2006 08:52:49 -0400, "Ange1o DePa1ma"
<[email protected] > wrote:
>. For $40,000 per game they should required to be at the board or on
>stage the entire time, except for trips to a monitored bathroom.
How closely monitored? Check out what the addicts and jocks are able
to buy to beat the urine tests. Is he tending to business or
inspecting the tiny display on a miniaturized, flesh-colored,
anatomically correct computer? And a retreat to a stall once or twice
a game doesn't seem totally unreasonable -- oh, there are no
stalls....
>And Topo is
>absolutely correct about the 50 bathroom trips. If the game in question
>lasted 4 hours, that's one trip to the john every 6 minutes. Are these two
>players grown men or children?
Fifty was supposed to be an exaggeration. I haven't seen the
"official" number, but Kramnik is supposed to have some medical
problem. Add in caffeine and nerves and...
|
| | | | | |
Date: 30 Sep 2006 17:08:10
From: Ange1o DePa1ma
Subject: Re: Kramnik a No-Show (was: Topalov threatens to abandon Match)
|
I drink a huge coffee during my games. Maybe I'll go 2-3 times, mostly out
of nerves, and I'm 20+ years older than these guys. Fifty bathroom trips
means there is some non-physiologic reason for going. Or the player is very,
very sick.
"Mike Murray" <[email protected] > wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On Sat, 30 Sep 2006 08:52:49 -0400, "Ange1o DePa1ma"
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>. For $40,000 per game they should required to be at the board or on
>>stage the entire time, except for trips to a monitored bathroom.
>
> How closely monitored? Check out what the addicts and jocks are able
> to buy to beat the urine tests. Is he tending to business or
> inspecting the tiny display on a miniaturized, flesh-colored,
> anatomically correct computer? And a retreat to a stall once or twice
> a game doesn't seem totally unreasonable -- oh, there are no
> stalls....
>
>>And Topo is
>>absolutely correct about the 50 bathroom trips. If the game in question
>>lasted 4 hours, that's one trip to the john every 6 minutes. Are these two
>>players grown men or children?
>
> Fifty was supposed to be an exaggeration. I haven't seen the
> "official" number, but Kramnik is supposed to have some medical
> problem. Add in caffeine and nerves and...
|
| | | | | | |
Date: 02 Oct 2006 15:21:40
From: David Richerby
Subject: Re: Kramnik a No-Show (was: Topalov threatens to abandon Match)
|
Ange1o DePa1ma <[email protected] > wrote:
> I drink a huge coffee during my games. Maybe I'll go 2-3 times,
> mostly out of nerves, and I'm 20+ years older than these guys. Fifty
> bathroom trips means there is some non-physiologic reason for
> going.
Kramnik's explanation of why he visits the bathroom so often during
the games was posted to the ChessBase website at least thirty hours
before your post. The link has been posted here several times but
here it is again.
http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=3374
Perhaps you'd like to read it and contribute something other than
noise?
Dave.
--
David Richerby Carnivorous Sumerian Gnome (TM): it's
www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~davidr/ like a smiling garden ornament that's
really old but it eats flesh!
|
| | | | | |
Date: 30 Sep 2006 20:26:36
From: N. Silver
Subject: Re: Kramnik a No-Show (was: Topalov threatens to abandon Match)
|
Mike Murray wrote:
> Fifty was supposed to be an exaggeration.
> I haven't seen the "official" number, but
> Kramnik is supposed to have some medical
> problem. Add in caffeine and nerves and...
Maybe Topalov was grasping at straws, initially,
but now Occam's razor applies. To get at the truth
stick with the simplest explanation.
|
| |
Date: 29 Sep 2006 08:28:20
From:
Subject: Re: Kramnik a No-Show (was: Topalov threatens to abandon Match)
|
Wlodzimierz Holsztynski (Wlod) wrote:
> Topalov is responsible for the actions
> of his team on his behalf. Thus he is
> the 100% guilty party. Loser.
>
> Wlod
Agreed Wold.
Miserable behavior from Topa.
On the other hand Kramnik gets what he deserves for placing himself at
the mercy of Ilyuzimov, Makropoulous and Azmaiparashivli. They are a
team of thugs who make good company with balkanic characters as Danilov
and Topalov but not with Carsten, Illescases and Kramnik.
When Leko-Kramnik was played in Germany there were tensions but no such
uncivilized, cheap and miserable behavior.
Kramnik would do good if he were to decide to walk out.
|
| | |
Date: 29 Sep 2006 11:46:02
From: Ange1o DePa1ma
Subject: Re: Kramnik a No-Show (was: Topalov threatens to abandon Match)
|
<[email protected] > wrote
> Wlodzimierz Holsztynski (Wlod) wrote:
>> Topalov is responsible for the actions
>> of his team on his behalf. Thus he is
>> the 100% guilty party. Loser.
>>
>> Wlod
>
> Agreed Wold.
>
> Miserable behavior from Topa.
>
> Kramnik would do good if he were to decide to walk out.
That would be a huge mistake, as both he and his opponent would be left
holding their respective colostomy bags.
|
| | | |
Date: 01 Oct 2006 19:03:59
From: Nick
Subject: Re: Kramnik a No-Show (was: Topalov threatens to abandon Match)
|
Mike Murray wrote:
> "Nick" <[email protected]> wrote:
> > Evidently, 'likesforests' believes that the match's location (in
> > Russia) is not 'neutral' and must be biased against Kramnik,
> > a Russian.
> >
> > Topalov is a Bulgarian. Kramnik is a Russian citizen, who's
> > playing a match in Russia. The FIDE President is a Russian
> > citizen, who's known to be connected with powerful Russians.
> >
> > What exactly would 'likesforests' regard as a 'neutral location' for
> > a match between Kramnik, a Russian, and Topalov, a Bulgarian?
>
> Nick's question implies national citizenship to be the most
> important affiliation in terms of a "neutral location".
I am (narrowly) disputing the evident position of 'likesforests'
that the match's *location*, which is in Russia, must be biased
against Kramnik, a Russian. I am *not necessarily* disputing
some criticisms of FIDE officials with regard to this match.
> But organization, religion, corporate affiliation, age, gender, etc., may
> outweigh citizenship in any particular race for favoritism. In this particular
> case, it's reasonable to assume that one buying into Kirsan's vision
> of FIDE would be preferred to one who merely salutes the same flag.
I did *not* earlier write any comments about FIDE officials being
partial toward Kramnik or Topalov. I regard the match's location
and the composition of the match's appeals committee as
*independent issues*. There's no instrinsic reason to believe
that *if* the match had begun in (name your favourite site), then
the appeals committee must have begun with different members.
I do suspect that some FIDE officials are biased against Kramnik.
I believe that Kramnik had understandable concerns about the
neutrality of the match's appeals committee. But I also believe
that this issue is independent of the match's *location*.
For whatever it's worth, I am unconvinced that Vladimir Putin
(who's supposedly the FIDE president's 'friend') would clearly
prefer that Kramnik, a Russian, lose to Topalov, a Bulgarian.
--Nick
|
| |
Date: 29 Sep 2006 07:47:50
From: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Topalov threatens (not funny anymore)
|
FROM MIG GREENGARD'S DAILY DIRT
September 29, 2006
Taking the Piss (BladderGate 2)
Well, this isn't funny anymore. Today's game five has been cancelled .
Is Topalov out of his mind? Are all chessplayers insane? I've always
joked that it seems the moment someone wins a world title, any world
title, they either go into the witness protection program start
behaving like a pharaoh.
So now we have the old "won't shake hands" trick. What, Topalov is
worried that Kramnik doesn't wash his hands in all those trips to the
bathroom? No seriously, this is ridiculous. FIDE responded to Topalov's
appeal, saying Danailov's claims of Kramnik's bathroom usage were
exaggerated, if "unusual" in quantity. The appeals committee decided
that the players' private bathrooms should be closed and they should
share one. Kramnik's team protested , although the item in they quote
from the rules doesn't say the players get a private bathroom. The rest
of it is aggro and distraction about favoritism that don't seem
relevant to the original complaint.
So as it stands, it's Kramnik who didn't show up today to play and the
official site lists him as having forfeited game five on time. I'm
disgusted. This sort of mind-game BS has a long history in big matches,
of course. Protests, counter-protests, the besmirched honor of suddenly
virginal tyrs. What a joke. Topalov should be ashamed. I predict it
will continue tomorrow with no forfeit. Wishful thinking?
|
| |
Date: 29 Sep 2006 07:42:48
From: Matt Nemmers
Subject: Re: Topalov threatens to abandon Match
|
Ange1o DePa1ma wrote:
> Despite his two wins, Kramnik was playing shitty. Then Topo got pissed.
> You'd think a rest day would have solved this mystery though, since this
> dispute entails a rest room. I read somewhere that Kramnik refuses to deal
> with ths issue. He spent all day yesterday on the potty wiping himself.
>
> Leave it to FIDE to flush this opportunity for reunification down the
> toilet.
Potty mouth.
|
| | |
Date: 29 Sep 2006 21:52:41
From: Chess One
Subject: Re: Topalov threatens to abandon Match
|
"Matt Nemmers" <[email protected] > wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Ange1o DePa1ma wrote:
>> Despite his two wins, Kramnik was playing shitty. Then Topo got pissed.
>> You'd think a rest day would have solved this mystery though, since this
>> dispute entails a rest room. I read somewhere that Kramnik refuses to
>> deal
>> with ths issue. He spent all day yesterday on the potty wiping himself.
>>
>> Leave it to FIDE to flush this opportunity for reunification down the
>> toilet.
>
> Potty mouth.
But entirely apt.
PI
>
|
| |
Date: 29 Sep 2006 06:43:35
From: Wlodzimierz Holsztynski (Wlod)
Subject: Re: Topalov threatens to abandon Match
|
David Richerby wrote:
> Wlodzimierz Holsztynski (Wlod) <[email protected]> wrote:
> > It's quite possible that Kramnik has a medical condition which
> > forces him to use bathroom often.
>
> It's quite possible that Kramnik has already explained himself. It's
> quite possible that this exaplanation appears on the web. It's quite
> possible that the URL is
>
> http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=3374
I have read it BEFORE I've written what
I have written.
> It's quite possible, therefore, that speculation is not necessary.
>
>
> Dave.
You are under impression
that you are so sophisticated.
Let me double it in your support:
you are "so-so sophisticated".
Wlod
|
| |
Date: 29 Sep 2006 06:31:09
From: Wlodzimierz Holsztynski (Wlod)
Subject: Re: Kramnik a No-Show (was: Topalov threatens to abandon Match)
|
Taylor Kingston wrote:
> It's not Topalov who's now threatening to walk,
> it's Kramnik. He refused to play game 5 today,
> in protest against the "single-toilet" ruling:
>
> http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=3375
And Kramnik is 100% right.
Why should he use the same toilet,
when there was an agreement for two.
Why should he be exposed to Topalov's
gases? or wait for him Veselin in a line?
For all we know, and we don't need to
know more, Kramnik may have
a medical problem which makes this whole
situation very uncomfortable to him; he
should not have to face this kind of
UNNECESSARY, totally uncalled for
complications. It's sick on the Topalov's
team part, and on FIDE's part it is
stupid to allow such an issue at all.
This pseudo-issue had no right to take off.
Now it became a real obstacle to the match.
Topalov is responsible for the actions
of his team on his behalf. Thus he is
the 100% guilty party. Loser.
The sad thing is that it is impossible to
undo such wrongdoing. Topalov has
spoiled this match irreversibly.
Wlod
|
| |
Date: 29 Sep 2006 06:17:12
From: Taylor Kingston
Subject: Kramnik a No-Show (was: Topalov threatens to abandon Match)
|
It's not Topalov who's now threatening to walk, it's Kramnik. He
refused to play game 5 today, in protest against the "single-toilet"
ruling:
http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=3375
EJAY wrote:
> Topalov's team is accusing Kramnik of excessive use of the bathroom
> (a.k.a Cheating).Seems to me in Game 2 it was Topalov who missed the
> mating attack.Sounds like sour grapes to me (if the account is
> accurate).www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp.newsid=3370.
|
| |
Date: 29 Sep 2006 06:10:42
From: Wlodzimierz Holsztynski (Wlod)
Subject: Re: Topalov threatens to abandon Match
|
Ange1o DePa1ma wrote:
> Despite his two wins, Kramnik was playing shitty.
Yeah, right. Its Kramnik 3 : Topalov 1.
This is a chess match and not a theoretical
research or a beauty contest. It's 3:1.
Two wins for Kramnik and none for Topalov.
Topalov can't win over the board, hence
he tries to use any unfair way to avoid defeat
after talking BIG before. Now when it's time to
play, he prefers to talk again.
********
It's quite possible that Kramnik has
a medical condition which forces him
to use bathroom often. That would make
his chess playing more difficult. It seems that
his upbringing makes it highly uncomfortable
to talk about such issues, especially in public.
It's undignified. It is even possible that he
simply avoids telling people that he has a
certain medical condition. He has his right
to privacy which should be respected.
Wlod
|
| | |
Date: 29 Sep 2006 14:30:42
From: David Richerby
Subject: Re: Topalov threatens to abandon Match
|
Wlodzimierz Holsztynski (Wlod) <[email protected] > wrote:
> It's quite possible that Kramnik has a medical condition which
> forces him to use bathroom often.
It's quite possible that Kramnik has already explained himself. It's
quite possible that this exaplanation appears on the web. It's quite
possible that the URL is
http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=3374
It's quite possible, therefore, that speculation is not necessary.
Dave.
--
David Richerby Expensive Mexi-Whisky (TM): it's like
www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~davidr/ a single-malt whisky that comes from
Mexico but it'll break the bank!
|
| |
Date: 29 Sep 2006 08:46:26
From: Ange1o DePa1ma
Subject: Re: Topalov threatens to abandon Match
|
I propose they re-start the match and allow cheating.
Under the new rules, both players will sit on toilet bowls for the duration
of the game. Each one may have Pocket Fritz in their possession as well.
After a move is called in (by cell phone, of course) the arbiter will go
that player's bathroom and flush twice.
|
| | |
Date: 29 Sep 2006 11:20:55
From: Ange1o DePa1ma
Subject: News flash
|
"Ange1o DePa1ma" <[email protected] > wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>I propose they re-start the match and allow cheating.
>
> Under the new rules, both players will sit on toilet bowls for the
> duration of the game. Each one may have Pocket Fritz in their possession
> as well. After a move is called in (by cell phone, of course) the arbiter
> will go that player's bathroom and flush twice.
This just in...
I just read on the CB site that the arbiter for the WC match has been
replaced by the Tidy Bowl Man. FIDE President Kirsan, who had been in
conference with Putin, flew back to Elista and had scoresheets printed on
Scott Tissue. Topalov immediately protested, demanding Bounty (The Quicker
Picker-Upper) instead.
I think this is a ploy by Topalov to unsettle Krapnik ... I mean Kramnik.
Evidently, Vaseline ... I mean Veselin had spent the last few weeks before
the match in intense theoretical preparation, studying mostly sacrificial
motifs along the h-file. Team Topalov, which dubbed this strategy
"Preparation-H, were unaware that match conditions required Tucks Pads be
worn at all times. Since Kalmykian food contains very little roughage, both
players could use some regular help with their bleeding piles.
When asked if he would defy the FIDE prohibition against flushing the used
pads Kramnik replied, "Depends. I hesitate to answer right now because I
just can't contain myself."
Then there is the standoff regarding reading material in the player
bathrooms. Kramnik insisted on "Krapski v CCCR" while Topalov demanded the
Bulgarian-language "Illustrated Anals of the Baltic Proctologic
Association." Unfortunately, both camps were bound by the decision of Kirsan
Ilyumzhinov to stock the magazine bins with catalogs from Bed, Bath, and
Beyond.
You might ask, why should these players prostate themselves on Kirsan's
altar? The answer: $500,000 buys a lot of suppositories in the former Soviet
Union and Iron Curtain countries.
|
| |
Date: 29 Sep 2006 08:42:49
From: Ange1o DePa1ma
Subject: Re: Topalov threatens to abandon Match
|
Despite his two wins, Kramnik was playing shitty. Then Topo got pissed.
You'd think a rest day would have solved this mystery though, since this
dispute entails a rest room. I read somewhere that Kramnik refuses to deal
with ths issue. He spent all day yesterday on the potty wiping himself.
Leave it to FIDE to flush this opportunity for reunification down the
toilet.
|
| | |
Date: 29 Sep 2006 18:54:50
From: LSD
Subject: Re: Topalov threatens to abandon Match
|
At the approximate date and time Fri, 29 Sep 2006 08:42:49 -0400,
someone posting as "Ange1o DePa1ma" <[email protected] >
posted:
>Leave it to FIDE to flush this opportunity for reunification down the
>toilet.
OMG that stinks!
|
| | | |
Date: 29 Sep 2006 22:17:14
From: Ange1o DePa1ma
Subject: Re: Topalov threatens to abandon Match
|
"LSD" <[email protected] > wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> At the approximate date and time Fri, 29 Sep 2006 08:42:49 -0400,
> someone posting as "Ange1o DePa1ma" <[email protected]>
> posted:
>
>
>>Leave it to FIDE to flush this opportunity for reunification down the
>>toilet.
>
> OMG that stinks!
It's nice to know that someone who reads this newsgroup is interested in
something other than Larry Parr's hemorrhoids, Sam Sloan's criminal record,
the Phil Innes pledge, or the identities of various phony posters. There was
a time my silly post would have generated a string of 30 responses. I get
more reaction these days on alt.cellular.verizon than I do here.
|
| |
Date: 29 Sep 2006 05:28:30
From: Wlodzimierz Holsztynski (Wlod)
Subject: Re: Topalov threatens to abandon Match
|
That Topalov, what a loser.
Wlod
|
| |
Date: 28 Sep 2006 18:09:51
From: Shingen
Subject: Re: Topalov threatens to abandon Match
|
EJAY wrote:
> Topalov's team is accusing Kramnik of excessive use of the bathroom
> (a.k.a Cheating).Seems to me in Game 2 it was Topalov who missed the
> mating attack.Sounds like sour grapes to me (if the account is
> accurate).www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp.newsid=3370.
It is a pity to see such a historic match between two worthy players
devolve to a charade of petty accusations. I blame Danilov for
inserting himself as a factor in this match by trying to find some
excuse for Topalov! By the same token, I wish that Kramnik did not have
to use the bathroom so many times!
Two down with eight to go! It looks bad for Topalov, Kramnik is more
than capable for playing the remaining games for a draw. Snuffing out
any imbalance that Topalov would want to create.
|
| |
Date: 28 Sep 2006 14:41:01
From: Johnny T
Subject: Re: Topalov threatens to abandon Match
|
EJAY wrote:
> Topalov's team is accusing Kramnik of excessive use of the bathroom
> (a.k.a Cheating).Seems to me in Game 2 it was Topalov who missed the
> mating attack.Sounds like sour grapes to me (if the account is
> accurate).www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp.newsid=3370.
>
50 times to the bathroom in a single game? 50 TIMES?!? Everygame?
These are different times, and that is an abusive number. The Topalov
contingencies are excessive, but a good starting point.
|
| | |
Date: 29 Sep 2006 00:43:15
From: Mike
Subject: Re: Topalov threatens to abandon Match
|
Kramnik team confirmed today that Kramnik have had Diarrhea since beginning
of the World matches.!
"Johnny T" <[email protected] > wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> EJAY wrote:
>> Topalov's team is accusing Kramnik of excessive use of the bathroom
>> (a.k.a Cheating).Seems to me in Game 2 it was Topalov who missed the
>> mating attack.Sounds like sour grapes to me (if the account is
>> accurate).www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp.newsid=3370.
>>
> 50 times to the bathroom in a single game? 50 TIMES?!? Everygame?
>
> These are different times, and that is an abusive number. The Topalov
> contingencies are excessive, but a good starting point.
|
| | | |
Date: 30 Sep 2006 00:18:22
From: Ray Johnstone
Subject: Re: Topalov threatens to abandon Match
|
On Fri, 29 Sep 2006 00:43:15 GMT, "Mike" <[email protected] > wrote:
>Kramnik team confirmed today that Kramnik have had Diarrhea since beginning
>of the World matches.!
A consequence of no smoking? See:
http://members.iinet.net.au/~ray/2consequences.html
and
http://members.iinet.net.au/~ray/bmj.jpg
[email protected]
www.iinet.com.au/~ray
|
|
