< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 35 OF 35 ·
|Sep-28-06|| ||Swapmeet: Why don't they just stick a porto-potty in the playing area and get this over with?|
|Sep-28-06|| ||setebos: Kramnik is suffering from polyuria due to extreme anxiety. I hope he keeps well hydrated by taking lots of fluids.|
|Sep-28-06|| ||nutepuicumine: however... the games goes on ! if Topalov will win the 5th game.. then everythning's changed !|
|Sep-28-06|| ||CoryLetain: At first I thought the accusation was a joke, but over 50 times to the bathroom? Even if the game was twice as long and Kramnik had a medical problem, I would still think 50 times to the bathroom is kind of strange. It would also be very annoying to have your competition stand up and leave after every move. Even if Kramnik isn't cheating, they should apply rules for going to bathroom.|
|Sep-28-06|| ||markofthemushroom: Are they parting COMPLETELY with their mobile phones before the games?|
Shredder has a mobile phone version and has a feature that allows games to be played against shredder 10 and it also has an online chess opening database.
|Sep-28-06|| ||savagerules: Check under the lid of the tank for
something, that's where they taped up
the gun in the Godfather movie. Maybe
they taped up a little computer.
|Sep-29-06|| ||nutepuicumine: lol lol.. do you really believe that kramnik needs to cheat to win ??? i don't think so... kramnik and topalov.. they are both very very strong players.. may be we can say they are the best. i can't believe that anyone of them needs a mobile phone.. to win a game...
let's be serious !|
|Sep-29-06|| ||Honza Cervenka: <CoryLetain: At first I thought the accusation was a joke, but over 50 times to the bathroom? Even if the game was twice as long and Kramnik had a medical problem, I would still think 50 times to the bathroom is kind of strange. It would also be very annoying to have your competition stand up and leave after every move. Even if Kramnik isn't cheating, they should apply rules for going to bathroom.> Firstly, it is not strange at all. I would say that vast majority of players is not sitting in their chair and waiting for opponent's move all the time during the game. And many of them stand up and go away after almost every move. I am usually going to the bathroom ten times or more during a game just to wash my hands, face and neck with a bit of cold water to keep myself fresh and/or simply to occupy myself with something during the time when my opponent is thinking. It helps to relax nerves as well as body during the game which can last some six hours. Secondly, to base any allegations of cheating on frequency of bathroom visits is just stupid. In fact, once or twice in critical position would be sufficient. There is absolutely no need to consult the comp for 50 (or 25 if Danailov counts every visit twice as he evidently did in his letter of complain) times during a game.|
|Sep-29-06|| ||babywizard: <ughaibu><Topalov winning tournaments is irrelevant to the question of the relative strength of Kramnik and Topalov, unless Topalov is winning those tournaments in which Kramnik also plays.>|
I think so far we can say from the games that Topalov is clearly a little stronger than Kramnik.
|Sep-29-06|| ||babywizard: 32.f3 preventing the bishop sortie looks better, imo.|
|Sep-29-06|| ||jessicafischerqueen: Toiletgate? Give me a freaking break. We know FOR CERTAIN that Kram doesn't have Fritz taped behind the toilet like Michael Corleone's gun-- DID FRITZ TELL KRAM TO MOVE BISHOP TAKES QUEENED PAWN IN GAME TWO? For cripes sakes he's not cheating. Obviously.|
|Sep-29-06|| ||Open Defence: funny thing is that in the critical positions the computers were not giving us the best move.. it was only after running them for a fair bit of time that they correlated the moves played..|
|Sep-30-06|| ||VinnyRoo2002: babywizard, are you living in a bizarro world? How can Topalov be the stronger player in this particular match and be down 2 points. From the games, Kramnik is certainly the better player since he has the most points. Losing winning positions is still a loss, and when the situations are reversed Kramnik is not turning winning games into losses. The facts speak for themselves.|
|Sep-05-07|| ||acirce: After 22..Ne4:
click for larger view
<Here my opponent offered a draw, the second surprise in two moves! After the game he said the position was dead even, so he did not want to waste time, as he wanted to watch a Champions’ League soccer match. According to Bareev’s evaluation White has a pleasant advantage and this is also the opinion of all the computer engines I consulted. And now that we know that even Fritz 10, by no means the best computer program, is clearly better than Kramnik, I would say my opponent’s assessment of the position as a dead draw is quite wrong. And there is another ethical question: whether it is right to offer a draw with the black pieces when leading +2 in the score and in an inferior position. But I guess we should not look for moral values in people that do not have them.>
-- Veselin Topalov
|Sep-05-07|| ||KamikazeAttack: <And there is another ethical question: whether it is right to offer a draw with the black pieces when leading +2 in the score and in an inferior position. But I guess we should not look for moral values in people that do not have them.>|
What an odious, repugnant human being.
This guy is the toilet.
|Sep-05-07|| ||KamikazeAttack: How time flies hey?
One year already.
Will this message board ever see so venomous a campaign against player like we saw until Elista?
Kramnik defeated Topalov and every single one of those hateful jarheads.
Question is: where are they now? LMAOOO
|Sep-05-07|| ||acirce: <What an odious, repugnant human being.|
This guy is the toilet.>
Yes. And just when I thought the EC ruling would shut him up for a bit, of course this book arrives to rehash every ugly detail of his accusations, insinuations and insults.
It appears to stop <just> short of actually saying in plain words "Kramnik cheated", so he will probably be able to keep avoiding justice.
|Sep-05-07|| ||Petrosianic: <It appears to stop <just> short of actually saying in plain words "Kramnik cheated", so he will probably be able to keep avoiding justice.>|
Are you sure about that? It may not have to contain a direct accusation to constitute a "serious similar breach against the FIDE Code of Ethics... within the next twelve months." (And of course, Short was warned for just an insult). Character assasination even without a direct accusation might serve to bring the 1 year ban down on him.
Hard to say. It might be considered an English translation of a book already released, or it might be something new. The book wasn't mentioned in the last complaint, was it? Maybe as long as it was only in Bulgarian, they didn't care.
|Sep-05-07|| ||acirce: <Are you sure about that? It may not have to contain a direct accusation to constitute a "serious similar breach against the FIDE Code of Ethics... within the next twelve months.">|
No, I'm not sure. It's a guess. By a 'similar' breach to what he was reprimanded for (which was mainly the direct cheating accusations he made in the Bellon interview) I assume it will have to be pretty serious indeed. But they didn't exactly specify, of course.
I haven't read the book and the reviews might always be misleading (kind of doubt it though). But I note that Topalov is curiously eager for a co-author to distance himself from the content! From the ChessCafe interview:
<HR: Certain passages in the book treat the cheating accusations almost as established facts. Do you think this is at all fair or proper? How would you feel if such unproven charges were aimed at you?
VT: I am responsible only for the introduction and the annotated games in the book.>
And on a very related note the Ethics Commission mentioned this in their ruling:
<Even Mr. Silvio Danailov cooperated with the EC. During the telephone conference he did not deny having written the 4th October 2006 press release, but he specified that he “never accused Mr. Kramnik of cheating”. He was asked if he had not expressed this opinion on other occasions, for instance in relationship to the book “The Toilet War”, written by Zhivko Ginchev; he answered “no”, adding that he had no responsibility for any allegation of cheating against Kramnik in this book and that any responsibility for any such allegation against Kramnik lay with the author.>
|Sep-05-07|| ||Petrosianic: Yeah, I think the chances of the EC giving him any meaningful punishment are pretty slim no matter what he does. The Guilty verdict is more than I expected.|
I'm just thinking theoretically. This just gets funnier and funnier. First he tries to distance himself from his own interview comments, now from comments in books that have his name on the cover as co-author.
I just looked up the word "weasel" in the dictionary and there it had Topalov's picture.
In Danailov's case, he may actually be right. As a member of Topalov's delegation, it's with Topalov, not Danailov, that the buck would theoretically stop if it ever stopped.
|Sep-17-08|| ||Cactus: If you looked up 'Huge Liar' in the dictionary, you wouldn't find it, because it's two words. But nonetheless, Topalov is a 'Huge Liar'. :)|
|Sep-18-08|| ||shintaro go: <Cactus> What dictionary are you using? Mine says Topalov = CRAPWEASEL.|
|Sep-20-08|| ||Hector Maluy: And mine says Topalov = THE BEST.
So I guess that we have different dictionaries.
|May-13-09|| ||Demadone: Excuse me guys, I need to visit the toilet. Oh, it has cameras in it. No Kibitzing there.|
|Apr-28-11|| ||Ulhumbrus: This is one of the most interesting games of the match.|
This game brings to mind the game Averbakh vs Gligoric, 1953. One of Bronstein's comments on the position after 14 Rd2 is <It is hard to believe that Black does not yield his d pawn during the next ten moves>
After 35 Qd3+ Topalov threatens to advance his pawn centre by e4. Kramnik finds one resource after another to prevent the advance until Topalov finally abandons the plan a dozen moves later and agrees to a draw later.
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 35 OF 35 ·