|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 487 OF 487 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
| Apr-26-13 | | Jim Bartle: Excellent cartoon. Really nails the excessive Carlsen hype. |
 |
Apr-26-13
 | | HeMateMe: I love the cartoon. Is the mini Hulk supposed to be Anand? Also, who is the player in diapers? It's not Ivanchuk, is it? |
|
Apr-26-13
 | | Bureaucrat: HMM, it is Kramnik's little son using a "Super-Magnus" toy to beat up on a green Anand toy. |
|
Apr-26-13
 | | Absentee: "Well done! Love, Garry" next to the #2 trophy was a touch of class. |
|
| Apr-26-13 | | toktorook: <who is the player in diapers?> They should all be wearing pampers. |
|
Apr-26-13
| | HeMateMe: Oh, I see. The baby is *holding* the Thor toy. I thought the baby in diapers looked familiar. I guess a Kramnik fan might see the cartoon as rude, but its all in fun. Harmless. |
|
Apr-26-13
 | | tpstar: <They should all be wearing pampers.> A clever comment! You should do that more often, Brother. Cute cartoon. |
|
Apr-27-13
 | | parmetd: Bobby the match is 2013 not 2014
--
also all the cries in corruption belong to the last wc match. India placed a superior bid to Moscow and Moscow won anyways with the consolation prize being given to India as a first option to move in the next bid cycle. They used their legal first option to move and exercised that right for the match. If Carlson is upset, he should have complained back at the last round of negotiations. |
|
| Apr-27-13 | | Lambda: <If Carlson is upset, he should have complained back at the last round of negotiations.> For Carlsen to complain about the hosting of the Anand-Gelfand match would have been a touch presumptuous. |
|
Apr-27-13
 | | Joshka: <Bobby Fiske> Fischer-Spassky 1992 5 million dollars. Looks like FIDE has not done such a good job in creating interest in chess since they determined that Fischer was no longer useful for them;-) |
|
| Apr-30-13 | | Troller: <Joshka: <Bobby Fiske> Fischer-Spassky 1992 5 million dollars. > Considering where that money came from, I would not worry too much. In fact as an amateur I don't have demand for large prize funds for the elite players, rather the opposite. Still, it is an interesting comparison; I remember similar comparisons at the time, where Karpov and Timman were also playing for the FIDE title. |
|
| May-05-13 | | solskytz: I'm now reading in Kevin Spraggett's blog, that it may well happen, that FIDE will award the match to Kramnik (against Anand) if Carlsen refuses to play in Chennai without due bidding process. This will be a test of personal integrity for Kramnik. He should stand behind Carlsen and say "I lost the candidates fair and square (though on tie breaks only). It's Carlsen who should play the match, not me". Will FIDE really award the match to Kramnik?
And would Kramnik then prove himself to be "the class act" that many people here think he is? This is yet to be seen. |
|
May-05-13
 | | jamesmaskell: I dont mind Chennai as a hosting city but the rules were three months after the Gelfand match and it was reported that India did not act during that period. Thus it should be a fresh bidding process. |
|
May-05-13
 | | SetNoEscapeOn: <solskytz>
That will never happen, but if I did I certainly don't see it as a matter of integrity. All things considered, Kramnik had a much greater ethical obligation to step aside in 2000. In the end common sense prevailed, as it would in your scenario. |
|
May-05-13
 | | keypusher: <SetNoEscapeOn: <solskytz> That will never happen, but if I did I certainly don't see it as a matter of integrity. All things considered, Kramnik had a much greater ethical obligation to step aside in 2000.> Agree. Carlsen should play in Chennai. If he refuses, I wouldn't blame Kramnik for stepping in. Pre-tiebreak, he tied Carlsen for first, for crying out loud. |
|
| May-05-13 | | BadKnight: should carlsen step out, half of the match should take place in paris, in kramnik's house; another half in madrid, in anand's house. |
|
| May-05-13 | | sovesveis: Has either Carlsen or his manager said anything suggesting that he is considering boycotting the match? If they were to, they would probably done it already putting pressure on FIDE. |
|
| May-05-13 | | solskytz: <SetNoEscapeOn> 2013 isn't 2000, and the situation Kramnik is now facing isn't altogether similar to the one from the past. In 2000 Kramnik was clearly a deserving challenger, head and shoulders over Shirov, and especially as concerns their respective records against kasparov. Many things could have been said to justify his participation in a match, which otherwise, could not (in all probabilities) be sponsored. This case is different in many senses as Carlsen is the man who should be playing this match, and the correct process for selection of venue should be the one undertaken. Any player pushing himself into this cycle, will look exactly like karpov looked as the FIDE "champion" in 1993. Strong as he was, this title detracted from his glory rather than increase it. In case FIDE keeps acting "kuku", it will be Kramnik's hour to show class. I hope other players will show it too (I know I can count on Gelfand). I kind of wwonder why we haven't heard Anand's voice on this - but I'm sure he'll speak out before too long. |
|
| May-05-13 | | solskytz: Only a united front of top chess players, each agreeing to put fear and greed aside (for some this being easier than for some others, quite possibly), will force the hand of FIDE to act with anything resembling ethics on this. |
|
| May-05-13 | | Jim Bartle: "In 2000 Kramnik was clearly a deserving challenger, head and shoulders over Shirov..." Except Shirov had just defeated Kramnik in a match, and decisively. |
|
| May-05-13 | | solskytz: I feel that this act from FIDE, not respecting due procedures and trying to close shady deals behind the players' back, is an act of disrespect to both chess and top players. Somebody needs to stand up and say "No!". This has to be chess players themselves. If they will not respect themselves, their positions and their own profession - some corrupt guys will always rise and degrade what they are doing. I believe tbat somebody, somewhere, is taking this kind of twisted pleasure, in corrupting the situation in such a blatant way. Carlsen doesn't want to give such people such pleasures, and I think he's right. |
|
| May-05-13 | | solskytz: As I say, this isn't 2000. We won't correct the evils of the past. |
|
| May-05-13 | | Jim Bartle: I'm not asking that, but to say that Kramnik was clearly "head and shoulders" over Shirov when Shirov had just beaten him 2-0 in a ten-game match is deceptive. |
|
| May-05-13 | | solskytz: Thanks for pointing that out, Jim. |
|
May-05-13
 | | Check It Out: The question is how stubborn Carlsen and his team will be in the face of a determined FIDE. Spraggett's headline <FIDE MEETING CALLS CARLSEN'S BLUFF!> is provocative enough: http://kevinspraggett.blogspot.com/
But how far will Carlsen push the line?
He has a mega-load of chess clout but Ilyumzhinov knows how to play hardball with the best dictatorial tyrants. Will he risk it all? That seems unlikely now that he's made it this far. He's published an official protest and that is a good thing to have on file in any event. Afterall, rumor has it FIDE is trying to pull off a backroom deal as a favor to India considering Moscow swept the rug out from under them leading up to the Anand - Gelfand match. |
|
|
|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 487 OF 487 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
