On Apr 21, 1:05 am, " wrote:

When Kasparov finally dethroned Karpov in 1986, he promptly struck
a blow for chess justice by voluntarily renouncing the rematch clause.

This /sounds/ good, but who really decided such
issues, the world champion, or FIDE?


The format for future title matches
returned to the best-of-24 games with draws counting.
In 1987 he barely saved his title against Karpov on a
12-12 tie. Kasparov gave two reasons for sticking
with this system at a symposium we both attended in
Madrid:

1. Since he had to overcome draw odds when he was the underdog, he
saw no reason why the challenger shouldn’t have to vault the same
obstacle.

The infamous "two wrongs make a right" fallacy.


2. Organizers must have a definite budget and solid dates when they
book a playing hall, which isn’t possible in an open-ended match.

Change of subject ploy.


Kasparov’s argument makes sense

Wrong.


yet Fischer’s point is still valid.
Only wins should count.

More of same.


I expect a decent case /could be/ made, if only
these amateurs were to be fired, and replaced
by trained professionals, who would not make
such simple and transparent errors in thinking.


-- help bot