![]() |
| If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|||||||
| Tags: forfeits, game, huge, kramnik, news |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
|
|
| Ads |
|
#2
|
|||
|
|||
|
Brief details he http://www.rookhouse.com/forum/viewforum.php?f=16
Well, I predict this will be the end of the match. Kramnik wanted to play Game 5 today and will no doubt walk out if the forfeit is upheld. Meanwhile, I assume Topalov would walk if the forfeit was not upheld (the 1972 Fischer-Spassky match sets the precedence that not showing up results in a forfeit). Sad... John |
|
#3
|
|||
|
|||
|
Absence of Kramnik took place after organizers prevented Kramnik to use the
bathroom during the game! "John A Swartz" wrote in message ... Brief details he http://www.rookhouse.com/forum/viewforum.php?f=16 Well, I predict this will be the end of the match. Kramnik wanted to play Game 5 today and will no doubt walk out if the forfeit is upheld. Meanwhile, I assume Topalov would walk if the forfeit was not upheld (the 1972 Fischer-Spassky match sets the precedence that not showing up results in a forfeit). Sad... John |
|
#4
|
|||
|
|||
|
I'm not arguing over who is right or wrong - just saying that I think
both sides have been given justification to walk at this point. By the way, Kramnik refused to play game 5 due to the ruling, but don't forget that Topalov's team was also protesting the "one bathroom" decision - they wanted the assistant arbiter to accompany them when they go to the bathroom: http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=3373 John PS: So, if the match ends without result, will Kasparov come out of retirement to claim the title? Mike wrote: Absence of Kramnik took place after organizers prevented Kramnik to use the bathroom during the game! "John A Swartz" wrote in message ... Brief details he http://www.rookhouse.com/forum/viewforum.php?f=16 Well, I predict this will be the end of the match. Kramnik wanted to play Game 5 today and will no doubt walk out if the forfeit is upheld. Meanwhile, I assume Topalov would walk if the forfeit was not upheld (the 1972 Fischer-Spassky match sets the precedence that not showing up results in a forfeit). Sad... John |
|
#5
|
|||
|
|||
|
Can you explain Topalov's justification to walk? It looks like after
Kramnik was proven the superior player, Topalov made ridiculous and unsubstantiated claims that Kramnik was what... using Fritz?!... in the bathroom and wants someone accompanying Kramnik whenever he uses the toilet. I imagine that would be embarassing, as Kramnik has diarrhea. Kramnik wants his own bathroom, as he had since the beginning of the match. If the players and respective bathrooms are inspected prior to each game by both teams for hidden equipment and to ensure they're shielded from radio reception, I don't see any real reason for Topalov to believe Kramnik is cheating. It seems like the arbitrators could have found some reasonable way to settle this--if they had wanted to--instead of giving Topalov a forfeit win. Argh!! It was an exciting match. I think it's over now... the world knows Kramnik is better, but Kirsan wants to keep Topalov. John A Swartz wrote: I'm not arguing over who is right or wrong - just saying that I think both sides have been given justification to walk at this point. By the way, Kramnik refused to play game 5 due to the ruling, but don't forget that Topalov's team was also protesting the "one bathroom" decision - they wanted the assistant arbiter to accompany them when they go to the bathroom: http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=3373 John PS: So, if the match ends without result, will Kasparov come out of retirement to claim the title? Mike wrote: Absence of Kramnik took place after organizers prevented Kramnik to use the bathroom during the game! "John A Swartz" wrote in message ... Brief details he http://www.rookhouse.com/forum/viewforum.php?f=16 Well, I predict this will be the end of the match. Kramnik wanted to play Game 5 today and will no doubt walk out if the forfeit is upheld. Meanwhile, I assume Topalov would walk if the forfeit was not upheld (the 1972 Fischer-Spassky match sets the precedence that not showing up results in a forfeit). Sad... John |
|
#6
|
|||
|
|||
|
A graceful math has reached such a disgraceful condition in the hands of
incompetent organizers. wrote in message oups.com... It seems like the arbitrators could have found some reasonable way to settle this--if they had wanted to--instead of giving Topalov a forfeit win. Argh!! It was an exciting match. I think it's over now... the world knows Kramnik is better, but Kirsan wants to keep Topalov. |
|
#7
|
|||
|
|||
|
Mike wrote:
A graceful math has reached such a disgraceful condition in the hands of incompetent organizers. You can't put all the blame with the organizers. They wouldn't have done anything if Topalov's team hadn't been prepared to gamble $5,000 on a complaint that Kramnik spends too much time in the toilet. That's not exactly exemplary behaviour. Dave. -- David Richerby Erotic Flower (TM): it's like a flower www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~davidr/ but it's genuinely erotic! |
|
#8
|
|||
|
|||
|
Topalov's justification to walk would be if they overturn the Game 5
forfeit. Note - I'm not saying I would agree or disagree with that decision, but again the Fischer/Spassky match of 1972 set a precendent: Fischer had a dispute about the match and did not show up for Game 2. He forfeited that game, and while he did continue the match, the forfeit of Game 2 was not overturned. Therefore, if the Game 5 forfeit of the current match is overturned, I expect that Topalov would consider this "unfair" and pull out. Pure speculation on my part of couse... John Can you explain Topalov's justification to walk? It looks like after Kramnik was proven the superior player, Topalov made ridiculous and unsubstantiated claims that Kramnik was what... using Fritz?!... in the bathroom and wants someone accompanying Kramnik whenever he uses the toilet. I imagine that would be embarassing, as Kramnik has diarrhea. Kramnik wants his own bathroom, as he had since the beginning of the match. If the players and respective bathrooms are inspected prior to each game by both teams for hidden equipment and to ensure they're shielded from radio reception, I don't see any real reason for Topalov to believe Kramnik is cheating. It seems like the arbitrators could have found some reasonable way to settle this--if they had wanted to--instead of giving Topalov a forfeit win. Argh!! It was an exciting match. I think it's over now... the world knows Kramnik is better, but Kirsan wants to keep Topalov. John A Swartz wrote: I'm not arguing over who is right or wrong - just saying that I think both sides have been given justification to walk at this point. By the way, Kramnik refused to play game 5 due to the ruling, but don't forget that Topalov's team was also protesting the "one bathroom" decision - they wanted the assistant arbiter to accompany them when they go to the bathroom: http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=3373 John PS: So, if the match ends without result, will Kasparov come out of retirement to claim the title? Mike wrote: Absence of Kramnik took place after organizers prevented Kramnik to use the bathroom during the game! "John A Swartz" wrote in message ... Brief details he http://www.rookhouse.com/forum/viewforum.php?f=16 Well, I predict this will be the end of the match. Kramnik wanted to play Game 5 today and will no doubt walk out if the forfeit is upheld. Meanwhile, I assume Topalov would walk if the forfeit was not upheld (the 1972 Fischer-Spassky match sets the precedence that not showing up results in a forfeit). Sad... John |
|
#9
|
|||
|
|||
|
They can install some electronic device in toilets so if a user tries to use
a cell phone or mobile Fritz it sounds huge alarms like hell all over the tournament area! "David Richerby" wrote in message ... Mike wrote: A graceful math has reached such a disgraceful condition in the hands of incompetent organizers. You can't put all the blame with the organizers. They wouldn't have done anything if Topalov's team hadn't been prepared to gamble $5,000 on a complaint that Kramnik spends too much time in the toilet. That's not exactly exemplary behaviour. Dave. -- David Richerby Erotic Flower (TM): it's like a flower www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~davidr/ but it's genuinely erotic! |
|
#10
|
|||
|
|||
|
|
|
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| Kramnik Internet Simul | Duncan Oxley | rec.games.chess.politics (Chess Politics) | 2 | July 31st 06 12:43 PM |
| Kramnik Internet Simul | Duncan Oxley | rec.games.chess.misc (Chess General) | 2 | July 31st 06 12:43 PM |
| Chess game improved further with double pawns | Sanny | rec.games.chess.computer (Computer Chess) | 0 | June 20th 06 06:52 AM |
| Keene reviews Kingston (part 1) | parrthenon@cs.com | rec.games.chess.politics (Chess Politics) | 443 | June 11th 06 09:30 AM |
| Keene reviews Kingston (part 1) | parrthenon@cs.com | rec.games.chess.misc (Chess General) | 445 | June 11th 06 09:30 AM |