Re: "Kasparov Retails Title on a Draw": Does this headline do

On Apr 21, 1:05 am, "parrthe...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
" <parrthe...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> THIS CRAZY WORLD OF CHESS BY GM LARRY EVANS (page 14)
>
> Kasparov gave two reasons for
> sticking
> with this system at a symposium we both attended in Madrid:
>
> 1. Since he had to overcome draw odds when he was the underdog, he
> saw no reason why the challenger shouldn=92t have to vault the same
> obstacle.
>
> 2. Organizers must have a definite budget and solid dates when they
> book a playing hall, which isn=92t possible in an open-ended match.
>
> Kasparov=92s argument makes sense, yet Fischer=92s point is still valid.
> Only wins should count. This way, a champion can=92t cling to the title
> by
> playing for draws.

And this explains why the format remains.  Someone gets to be
champion, no way are they going to lower the bar in any way for the
challenger.  So, it looks like it is now stuck.   And this explains
why things are the way they are now.  Perhaps a reigning champion
retiring would end up allowing for changes.  Perhaps FIDE, etc...
could say that, the moment the reigning champion is dethroned, new
rules will be in effect.  Perhaps combine both.

But, so long as people think the current approach with the reigning
champion maintaining their title on a draw is in effect is ok, then I
doubt there will be any changes.  I am sure there is also
rationalizing it, so that people don't have to look towards change.

- Rich