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

Rich Hutnik <richardhutnik@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> "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't have to vault the same
>> obstacle.
>>
>> 2. Organizers must have a definite budget and solid dates when they
>> book a playing hall, which isn't possible in an open-ended match.
>>
>> Kasparov's argument makes sense, yet Fischer's point is still valid.
>> Only wins should count. This way, a champion can't 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.

I think you need to read up on the history of the champion****p -- you
seem to be overlooking an awful lot of basic points, here.

Up to 1948, the world champion****p was, essentially, the property of
the champion.  He could set his own rules and do whatever he wanted.
For example, Capablanca and Alekhine were never able to agree terms
for a rematch after Alekhine won the title; Alekhine instead played
and won matches against the weaker Bogoljubow.

From 1948, the champion****p was run by FIDE.  While the champion has a
certain weight in arguing for the terms he wants, ultimately, FIDE has
the final say.  For example, Fischer wanted the 1975 match to be
played as first to ten wins but FIDE said no and he refused to play
the match, forfeiting the title in the process.

In 1993, Kasparov (the then FIDE champion) and Short (the then FIDE
challenger) became annoyed enough with FIDE's handling of the match
arrangements that they decided to run the match themselves, outside
FIDE.  This created a parallel `personal property' champion****p that
stayed in Kasparov's hands until he was beaten by Kramnik in 2000.
Meanwhile, FIDE continued to organize their own champion****p,
initially in the form of challenger-vs-champion matches, then as a
knock-out tournament and, more recently, as a round-robin tournament
contested by the top players.  FIDE did not recognize Kasparov or
Kramnik as world champion.

I believe that Kasparov's comments refer to the period 1993-2000 when
he was effectively able to set terms for world champion****p matches.


Dave.

-- 
David Richerby                             Crystal Lead Widget (TM): it's
like
www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~davidr/        a thingy that weighs a ton but
it's
                                           completely transparent!