Крамник - Топалов: что пишут?

Саша, ссылка не работает.

"Не царское это дело", словом.
Забавно, что отмена результата матча "прямого бакинского парня" с Корчным не удостоилась чести быть упомянутой.

Симпатичный отчет о шестой партии. Мне понравилось...

http://www.sportreport.ru/content/view/5297/8/

Кентлер:
http://www.e3e5.com/petersburg/news/item.html?2214

Фраза оттуда:

По поводу выделенного глагола уже даже и шутить не хочется...

На блоге Сьюзен (Жужи) Полгар имеется полный текст письма Макропулоса. Цитирую:

We spoke to President Kirsan Ilyumzhinov before taking a decision regarding the appeal of Topalov?s team and the FIDE President himself proposed to close the toilets in the restrooms.

Думаю, понятно и без перевода.

Пожалуй, самый непредвзятый (на мой вкус) анализ ситуации выполнил Марк Кроуфорд в только что появившемся The Week in Chess 621. После некоторых колебаний я решил запостить этот длинный английский текст (к сожалению, нет времени на перевод).

Two press releases and official complaints were released by Silvio Danailov Topalov's manager: First press release 28th September and Second press release 29th September complaining about Kramnik's frequent absense from the board in his rest room and in particular the number of times Kramnik visited the toilet during the game. In between the two press releases was an appeals committee decision to close the toilets in the rest room and make another available which could only be used at the request of the arbiter. In his second press release Danailov said that were considering withdrawing from the match over the issue and Topalov would be removing normal relations between the players and not shaking hands or doing joint press conferences with Kramnik. Whilst journalists were busy making light of the situation "toiletgate" and so forth in fact this was obviously not about toilets at all.

There are two things it was about. Firstly it was about changing the dynamic of the match for a player who had gone down to an early 2-0 deficit an attempt to intensify the struggle off the board to change things on it. Chess matches are about power both on and off the board. Here by using the appeals committee Topalov and his team were trying to change his routine. It been seen before, will be seen again, its not nice, its not big, its not clever, but this kind of gamesmanship is something you have to stand up to and find a way of reacting to. In physical sports you might see a particularly strong tackle on the edge of the rules just to ask the question are you up for this?

The second thing this was about was far darker and I believe its something that has to stop right now before it kills chess. Its about the spurious allegations which in certain quarters (read the bulletin boards I'm told) say that Topalov received computer assistance in winning the title in San Luis, also in the Linares half of that super tournament and in MTel (but not apparently in Wijk aan Zee where his play was just the same). There is no evidence at all for this, no evidence that computer cheating takes place at the elite level, if players start mistrusting each other to this extent normal tournaments will become a misery. The security measures against this kind of cheating for this match were unprecidented. I'm pretty sure Topalov was hurt by these allegations (which Kramnik has had no part) so to virtually in so many words accuse Kramnik of cheating by going into the toilet area where there are no cameras (and confirming that's what they really meant by the refusal of the handshake) was both low and he knows it was wrong. It was also deviously clever, maybe even more so than orginally designed.

Of the two motivations I guess it was a whole lot of the first and just a little of the second that were going through the Topalov camp's mind. I doubt they really seriously thought he was cheating, but who knows they might find something out about Kramnik's recent health problems and perhaps upset him enough to play weaker. I really doubt it was possible to predict what actually happened.

Its a strange part of this match that both players feel like they're on foreign soil. Topalov because he IS on foreign soil and Kramnik because he perceives Topalov as FIDE's preferred winner. Can't be both true. In addition Georgios Makropoulos and in particular Zurab Azmaiparashvili were perceived as favouring Topalov in this match. I honestly don't think FIDE mind who wins this match, the story is they're going to pass the whole of their professional operation over to Bessel Kok after this match at FIDE President Kirsan Ilyumzhinov's instance.

Actually days after the original decision Georgios Makropoulos was quoted on Susan Polgar's blog. (http://susanpolgar.blogspot.com/2006/10/both-chess-kings-go-missing-from-board.html) and the decision didn't seem that outrageous. It was more of an attempt to keep Topalov happy and not upset Kramnik too much sort of compromise. A flawed compromise because the appeal was filed at the wrong time and the playing conditions for each player were in black and white in contracts. Flawed mainly because it didn't really recognise that the complaint wasn't about toilets at all. The appointment of the appeals committee seems to have become an extra way of earning some money. Karpov pointed out that in his day there was a long appointments proceedure and many candidates until they found the best, strongest and most acceptable candidates to both players. I initially believed the decision was biased (I have some issues with some of its members), now I honestly think its they didn't realise the implications (and to be fair I think you have to be really good at your job to realise this). Their job is to be a buffer for petty power plays of the opponents who are both strong personalities under great stress. They were not up to this job.

Kramnik's reaction was to go ballistic. He felt that the appeals committee decision was completely outside the agreements for the match (he was dead right) and insulting (it was intended to be) and that he was fully entitled not to play until the decision to reopen the toilets was made which under the regulations was inevitable. He felt to give in even for a game would be to grant Topalov a huge boost. However this is where I think he was wrong. By not playing a game (technically he was there in the rest room waiting for the toilets to be opened and a restoration of the agreed playing conditions) you break one of the most serious rules. I've never seen a situation in any sport where refusing to take the field works, the most common thing that happens is that you lose the point/ match/ game that you're playing, you may occasionally get it returned but its you that are begging for it and you're turned into the bad guy. Its a golden rule of sport, you always turn up and play whatever the provocation. And its a good rule too because the public have a right to expect people to turn up and play as they've turned up to watch and any disputes that are around become ten times harder to fix.

FIDE President Kirsan Ilyumzhinov returned from affairs of state (a regional meeting with Putin) came back to bang some heads together, get rid of the appeals committee and bring some new ones in, he produced some statesmenlike comments (hell don't you hate it when that happens, I really don't like the guy but....) dealt with the non-issue of the toilets but was faced with the golden rule. Kramnik had defaulted a game, he tried to get round, it under it over it, extend the match but keep the score but under the rules of the competition Kramnik didn't even appeal against his default within the two hours required under the rules. When Topalov wouldn't give the point back he had absolutely no choice, it was game on, on Monday, and be there you two! Kramnik kept us all waiting until less than an hour before play started he announced he was to Plays on in game 6 under protest.. Ilyumzhinov thanked them for their wise decision.

The majority of the chess public have generally supported Kramnik and abused Topalov and his manager Danailov for stealing a point. I'd say I admire Kramnik's principals and his chess, but I just don't feel quite as harshly towards Topalov as many think I should be, I didn't like what he and his team did but he is giving this title match all he's got. Kramnik's decision to play on has been extremely well received, not least by me, and I'm sure he's now the popular favourite. I really hope for a spicey match over the board and hope the defaulted point doesn't make a controversial difference. Kramnik has made it clear that he'll be revisiting that point, possibly legally later, but he's taken on board the golden rule, you always turn up and play.

Пресс-конференция после шестой партии

? Вопрос президенту ФИДЕ. Кирсан Николаевич: когда будет разбираться апелляция Крамника и можете ли вы озвучить новый состав апелляционного комитета?

К.И.: Вчера был сформирован новый состав Апелляционного комитета. В него вошел президент Европейского шахматного союза Борис Кутин, международный арбитр из Азербайджана Фаик Гасанов и континентальный президент по Латинской Америке господин Хорхе Вега. Мы получили апелляцию в 14.30, и она сейчас процедурно оформляется.

Решение Апелляционного Комитета на Апелляцию г-на Крамника

Мы приняли во внимание ваши аргументы, однако мы хотели бы подчеркнуть, что назначение нового Апелляционного Комитета не означает, что его члены имеют право и полномочие пересматривать любое решение, принятое прежним составом Апелляционного Комитета, которое является окончательным.

Pika,
В интервью Данаилов заявил, что теперь не только комнаты отдыха, но и сами туалеты будут под видео наблюдением. Вы на месте не знаете - это действительно так?