English Chess Forum

They say that one definition of idiocy is to keep repeating the same behaviour,
achieving the same negative results.
 
4 times more than qualifies for this honour.

Neto, Kok, Karpov, and now Kasparov have all lost by 2:1 margins.
It has never been close.

Coincidentally the number 4 also represents the number of times that Garry Kasparov has tried to either take over Fide, or to destroy Fide, over the past couple of decades;
1993) PCA
2010) Karpov / Kasparov ticket
2010-2014) CAS case costing Fide around $1.3 million dollars, just in legal fees
2014) Kasparov ticket

Away from the chessboard Kasparov has shown himself to be a one-man wrecking ball that would make even Miley Cyrus blush.

Remember the GMA, PCA, WCA (ask Shirov), Brain Games etc?
Or Kasparov’s last-minute deal with Campomanes in 1994, enabling the incumbent’s defeat of Bachar Kouatly?
Kasparov has history of burning sponsors around the world, the Deep Blue / IBM / Intel example being the most high profile.

His involvement in Russian politics follows a similar pattern, and partly explains why his global standing as a politician in both chess globally, and also in Russia, is at an all time low.

Over the past couple of decades the ECF and the English Chess Media have become more toxic and very anti-Fide, and destructively so. Our standing and influence in world chess has been consistently downgraded, through petulance; and has minimised our creative input into the global chess progress which is taking place.

Some still dream of Empire, whilst others would prefer drone strikes to impose their world view.

The reality is that we have becoming something of a worldwide joke, an anachronism, firmly rooted in our past, throwing the rattle out of the pram whenever things don’t go our way. And always conveniently forgetting that Fide operates as a global democracy – one nation, one vote.

The reality is that England has always punched well above its weight within Fide, and worldwide chess development historically, through individuals such as Bob Wade, Nigel Freeman, Stewart Reuben, Jana Bellin, David Jarrett, Rupert Jones etc.

These individuals have earned great capital & kudos over the years for our nation, which is being frittered away over the past couple of decades through petulance.

I’m almost embarrassed to admit that prior to this recent election I was strongly pro-Kasparov. But then I began to dig a little deeper, asked a few questions, and was surprised to learn about; private Learjet, million dollar offers to Ignatius Leong and alleged attempts to make Andrew Paulson change sides, Kasparov flying this Learjet around the globe alienating potential voters and alleged disruption against established federations, this time in Africa which sounds very similar to four years ago in Central and South America. This is one of the reasons why the Americas rejected Kasparov wholesale this time around.

The same qualities that made Kasparov such a formidable chess player and World Champion – destroying opponents – have not served him well in his political career.
Remember that this is the same Kasparov that tried to have his own Women’s Team (Russia), defending champions, thrown out of the recent Olympiad in Norway.

Perhaps Ilyumzhinov’s best campaign strategy, in hindsight, would have been to have given Kasparov his entire campaigning budget, enabling Kasparov to visit more nations, further alienating potential voters.

Kasparov’s financial backer must rue the day that he chose to put his resources behind Kasparov, in both cash and in kind, since Kasparov was never really in the race.

That capital could have been invested beneficially instead, to advance and improve chess both nationally and globally. Think of the true cost of the Learjet, and the extensive advertising budget in Tromso (posters, branded car, sales people etc.)

Our choice as a nation is simple – to fully engage with the rest of the world and advance our interests, or to retreat back into our shell whilst the rest of the world moves ahead.

Christopher Dunworth
IO, IA & FM.
Founder of the 4NCL
National Trainer

Go on then Chris, the 4NCL Board has been asking people for advice as to for whom it should vote as FIDE Delegate ...

Christopher Dunworth wrote:– to fully engage with the rest of the world and advance our interests,

But what are "our" interests? Are they to support the FIDE President in his evident belief that zero time defaults should be extended to all forms of chess?

Roger de Coverly wrote:

Christopher Dunworth wrote:– to fully engage with the rest of the world and advance our interests,

But what are "our" interests? Are they to support the FIDE President in his evident belief that zero time defaults should be extended to all forms of chess?

I am guessing that there are more subtle and more fruitful ways of opposing him than the methods employed so far, which have done little good and have generally just meant that our arbiters are crossed off the list for international events by way of retaliation. That, I think, is the kind of point Chris is trying to make.

Of course if one takes this view there is a risk that things may instead deteriorate even further - now that a well known journalist will be the ECF President and may be invited to write more in the mainstream press about FIDE.

Roger de Coverly wrote: But what are "our" interests? Are they to support the FIDE President in his evident belief that zero time defaults should be extended to all forms of chess?

You would find yourselves in a small and despised minority. So yes, such a position might suit some elements within the ECF rather well.

NickFaulks wrote: You would find yourselves in a small and despised minority.

Presumably including the author of this material on the Kirsan election site.
http://fidefirst.com/?p=3553 (Myth Six)

More intriguing is why Chris seems to have copied a long post from another site directly on to this one, a strange thing to do. I wonder if he'd care to explain what he's up to?

Christopher Dunworth wrote: Over the past couple of decades the ECF and the English Chess Media have become more toxic and very anti-Fide, and destructively so.

Are you perhaps thinking of Malcolm's editorial in the September 2014 Chess and for that matter this rather excellent cartoon?

https://twitter.com/TelegraphChess/stat ... 16/photo/1

It's not exactly Gillray, is it?

Roger de Coverly wrote:
Presumably including the author of this material on the Kirsan election site.

Indeed. I have no idea who wrote that, and you are the only person I have come across who had nothing better to do than to read it. Kirsan's personal views on chess below the top level can safely be ignored.

Christopher Dunworth wrote:conveniently forgetting that Fide operates as a global democracy

I was unable to stifle a laugh whilst reading this line.

NickFaulks wrote: Kirsan's personal views on chess below the top level can safely be ignored.

The experience of the past twenty years would suggest otherwise. Why are there zero default times and proposals of four hour playing sessions as compulsory for FIDE events? That's to say nothing of suggestions that blitz and Rapidplay World Championships might be more important than standard play.

Roger de Coverly wrote:
The experience of the past twenty years would suggest otherwise.

On the contrary, you make my point very well. After twenty years, all you can point to are "proposals" and "suggestions". If the authoritarian jackboot had really come down, would you not expect some of these to be in place by now?

The sole possible exception is zero tolerance in top FIDE events, but the view of the professional players, as expressed through the ACP, is that they are content with that. They take their professional status seriously and if the sponsors want them to turn up in time for the start of the game, that is what they will do. The only remaining battlefield is the Olympiad, where amateur teams are unhappy, particularly if they are billeted at some distance from the playing hall.

NickFaulks wrote:If the authoritarian jackboot had really come down, would you not expect some of these to be in place by now?

You don't then think that opposition from Federations somewhat larger in terms of player count than many of the voting membership had something to do with this? If you are constantly having to fight off dubious ideas, that does somewhat exhaust political capital. Kirsan apologists are invited to make their case and it seems they are now doing so. There are three candidates for the post of FIDE Delegate. Are any of them prepared to out themselves as Kirsan admirers or apologists?

Bottom line question. Forget Kasparov. If there was another FIDE election in the near future between Kirsan and someone else, who do you support?

Roger de Coverly wrote: Bottom line question. Forget Kasparov. If there was another FIDE election in the near future between Kirsan and someone else, who do you support?

What an extraordinary question! In order to be considered for Delegate, you must be willing to put aside any notion of contemplating who might be the best candidate for FIDE President, and instead commit your support in advance to a "challenger to be named".

On a more serious level, our leaders have in recent years asked us to accept that any opponent of Gaddafi or Assad could only be an improvement. How's that working?