English Chess Forum

What stance should the ECF take in the forthcoming FIDE Presidential election?

Sean Hewitt wrote:What stance should the ECF take in the forthcoming FIDE Presidential election?

Is there a suggestion that in any shape or form it should endorse Kirsan?

If the ECF is to join those Federations willing to sell their vote, it should demand an extremely high price.

If the ECF Board don't want to be shouted at by English players and the next Council meeting, the practical choices are somewhere on the spectrum from all out support for Kasparov to a neutral position. There might after all be a third candidate, although whether Council would endorse the ECF's own President is by no means given.

Roger de Coverly wrote:

Sean Hewitt wrote:What stance should the ECF take in the forthcoming FIDE Presidential election?

Is there a suggestion that in any shape or form it should endorse Kirsan?

If the ECF is to join those Federations willing to sell their vote, it should demand an extremely high price.

If the ECF Board don't want to be shouted at by English players and the next Council meeting, the practical choices are somewhere on the spectrum from all out support for Kasparov to a neutral position. There might after all be a third candidate, although whether Council would endorse the ECF's own President is by no means given.

I concur completely. The worst possible option would be to drift into a position of supporting Ilyumzhinov without obtaining anything meaningful in return.

Roger is right to point out that there could yet be other candidates, but if we are facing the current choice, I believe the ECF should wholeheartedly support Kasparaov since that is the only way to restore some credibility both inside and outside the chess world.

Roger de Coverly wrote:If the ECF Board don't want to be shouted at by English players and the next Council meeting, the practical choices are somewhere on the spectrum from all out support for Kasparov to a neutral position. There might after all be a third candidate, although whether Council would endorse the ECF's own President is by no means given.

I remember from the Karpov attempt at the FIDE presidency that a presidential candidate should be presented/supported by his own federation. In that respect, which would be Paulson "own" federation? ENG, USA, other?

Isn't it too early for a poll? There may be other tickets; so far as I'm aware the campaigning has yet to begin in earnest; the election isn't until August 2014.

some one voted for Kirsan - has Rupert Jones joined the forum?!

And what, for that matter, is going on in the head of someone who voted "none of the above", given that "someone else" is on the above list?!

Jonathan Rogers wrote:And what, for that matter, is going on in the head of someone who voted "none of the above", given that "someone else" is on the above list?!

Clearly the vote is meant to reflect that only an Alien could fill the role!!

Jonathan Rogers wrote:And what, for that matter, is going on in the head of someone who voted "none of the above", given that "someone else" is on the above list?!

"None of the above" could mean "nobody" - which is different from "someone else".

And by the way, it wasn't me!

It was me I am appalled to admit

Jonathan Rogers wrote:some one voted for Kirsan

Carl Hibbard wrote:It was me I am appalled to admit

How much is he paying you?

My 'someone else' is, Magnus Carlsen the 'King' of chess.

Matthew Turner wrote:

Jonathan Rogers wrote:some one voted for Kirsan

Carl Hibbard wrote:It was me I am appalled to admit

How much is he paying you?

I think Carl was replying to my other post; ie he confessed to voting for FIDE without a President at all. Something which requires a bit of thought, really.

Jonathan Rogers wrote:Something which requires a bit of thought, really.

You could instead have FIDE with a CEO who did the legwork, with a President purely for honorary and ceremonial purposes. After all not every country with a President as Head of State makes them their most powerful political figure as well.

It seems to me that if Kasparov is distrusted on administrative grounds, that someone else should do the day to day stuff and use Kasparov where he is likely to be effective, namely opening doors and providing ceremonial opportunities.