200 Words
by Lev Khariton


August 1st, 2003
I love chess history, but I think that right now we have to discuss
something far more important things than the parentage (that is, who his
father was) of Bobby Fischer. With September 18 looming on the horizon, the
beginning of the Ponomariov – Kasparov match in Yalta, I would like to ask
the chess world some questions. Chess history is being made today, isn’t it?

1.Is there any hope that Ponomariov will defeat Kasparov ? If that happens,
this victory will be an event of historic importance. But what if it does
not happen?

2. If Kasparov wins, I think that he will alienate himself completely from
the chess world, there will be no talk about the reunification of the chess
world, and chess history will be totally in Kasparov’s hands. In other
words, it will be a never-ending stand-off! Do chess fans agree with me, and
if so, do they like such a disastrous prospect?

3. Possibly, chess fans do not know that today’s situation in world chess
roots back to the year 1993 when Kasparov entered the conspiracy with
Raymond Keene and Nigel Short to destroy the FIDE and the well-functioning
system of World Championship qualification?

So, can anyone give a more or less plausible explanation why Kasparov now,
10 years later, has deserved the right to play a world title match under the
auspices of FIDE?

Isn’t it more logical and fair to organize today, may be in Yalta, a
match-tournament of Kramnik, Ponomariov, Leko and Anand (true, where is
Anand ?). Another question: how will Kasparov consider himself world
Champion if he lost a full-fledged match to Kramnik in 2000? Would not he
look like Karpov when the latter defeated Timman in a farce of the match in
1993 and “returned” the chess crown?

4.Returning to Iraq. Long before the start of the US invasion of Iraq,
Kasparov joined those hawks who were whipping the anti-Iraqi hysteria. Now
that it is clear that the war in Iraq is in full swing, and remembering
Kasparov’s call for the swift and immediate destruction of this country, do
chess players believe that morally he deserves the right to play for the
most prestigious – morally! – title in world chess?

Everyone has the right to ask and answer the questions I have posed here. We
are living in a free and democratic world, aren’t we?

"tomic" wrote in message ...
200 Words
by Lev Khariton


August 1st, 2003
I love chess history, but I think that right now we have to discuss
something far more important things than the parentage (that is, who his
father was) of Bobby Fischer.

IMHO, the most pressing issue right now is to quell the rumours and
the lies about the true parentage of Bobby. The rest of your story is
very important as well, indeed!

Lance Smith

tomic wrote:

200 Words
by Lev Khariton

1.Is there any hope that Ponomariov will defeat Kasparov ?

Very little.

If that happens,
this victory will be an event of historic importance. But what if it does
not happen?

Then Kasparov will go on to play (we hope!) the victor in the
Kramnik-Leko match.


2. If Kasparov wins, I think that he will alienate himself completely from
the chess world, there will be no talk about the reunification of the chess
world, and chess history will be totally in Kasparov’s hands. In other
words, it will be a never-ending stand-off! Do chess fans agree with me, and
if so, do they like such a disastrous prospect?

Your opinion is 100% bull****. Let the best man win, regardless
of who *your* favorite may be.


3. Possibly, chess fans do not know that today’s situation in world chess
roots back to the year 1993 when Kasparov entered the conspiracy with
Raymond Keene and Nigel Short to destroy the FIDE and the well-functioning
system of World Championship qualification?

Yeah, we know. Get over it already.


So, can anyone give a more or less plausible explanation why Kasparov now,
10 years later, has deserved the right to play a world title match under the
auspices of FIDE?

It's possible that Kasparov is still the strongest player
in the world. He deserves a rematch with Kramnik, and if
this is the only way to get it, then why not?


Isn’t it more logical and fair to organize today, may be in Yalta, a
match-tournament of Kramnik, Ponomariov, Leko and Anand (true, where is
Anand ?).

Anand has shown repeatedly that he's not quite up to Kasparov's
level.


Another question: how will Kasparov consider himself world
Champion if he lost a full-fledged match to Kramnik in 2000? Would not he
look like Karpov when the latter defeated Timman in a farce of the match in
1993 and “returned” the chess crown?

Well, presumably he will play the winner of the Kramnik-Leko
match. Is that still on?


4.Returning to Iraq. Long before the start of the US invasion of Iraq,
Kasparov joined those hawks who were whipping the anti-Iraqi hysteria. Now
that it is clear that the war in Iraq is in full swing, and remembering
Kasparov’s call for the swift and immediate destruction of this country, do
chess players believe that morally he deserves the right to play for the
most prestigious – morally! – title in world chess?

Your opinion is 100% bull****. I don't care if Kasparov is
politically naive, or not. He should focus on his chess games,
and so should we.


Everyone has the right to ask and answer the questions I have posed here. We
are living in a free and democratic world, aren’t we?

Anyone may ask any question they can formulate. Everyone else
has the right to point at them and snicker!

"tomic" wrote in message ...
200 Words
by Lev Khariton

Everyone has the right to ask and answer the questions I have posed here. We
are living in a free and democratic world, aren?t we?

Absolutely we are. After all this is Usenet, where people should be
free to post their opinions on chess issues, as you have here. I
consider your words to be on a par with many other posts here.
Opinionated, politically motivated, often thinly disguised political
rants. Not that that's a bad thing, mind you, just that I don't
consider Mr. Khariton's words to have any more are less value than
anyone else's, including my own.

Regards,
Fred.

"tomic" wrote in message ...
4.Returning to Iraq. Long before the start of the US invasion of Iraq,
Kasparov joined those hawks who were whipping the anti-Iraqi hysteria. Now
that it is clear that the war in Iraq is in full swing, and remembering
Kasparov’s call for the swift and immediate destruction of this country, do
chess players believe that morally he deserves the right to play for the
most prestigious – morally! – title in world chess?

Everyone has the right to ask and answer the questions I have posed here. We
are living in a free and democratic world, aren’t we?

Hmmm. Always the politics with the sport. Alekhine, Fischer, Kasparov etc. all have less than desirable political
views, but this does not change their chess playing ability. As much as I don't like their politics (or not) people
have (should have) the right to say what they think. True democracy and freedom allows diverse views. Personally I'm
glad Hussein and co are out of Iraq, but what has this to do with chess? Didly squat! Unless someone has committed a
crime (theft, murder, etc) then ignore their politics. Now speaking of FIDE and its 'illustrious' president there are
unanswered allegations (innocent until *proven* guilty) - but that is out of scope.

Speculating that the highest rated player in the world, some how should not be part of the reunifiocation of the world
title, is crazy! Making assertions that Kasp. *may* hijack the process is also unhelpful.

1.Is there any hope that Ponomariov will defeat Kasparov ?

If he knows the Center Counter, it shouldn't be a problem!

If that happens,
this victory will be an event of historic importance. But what if it does
not happen?

Importance to whose history?


2. If Kasparov wins, I think that he will alienate himself completely from
the chess world, there will be no talk about the reunification of the chess
world, and chess history will be totally in Kasparov’s hands. In other
words, it will be a never-ending stand-off! Do chess fans agree with me, and
if so, do they like such a disastrous prospect?

Kasparov is the #1 ranked player in the world.

A champion who ducks him should lose his title.

Then Kasparov should have to play a simul against 100 experts and beat them all
in order to retain it.





3. Possibly, chess fans do not know that today’s situation in world chess
roots back to the year 1993 when Kasparov entered the conspiracy with
Raymond Keene and Nigel Short to destroy the FIDE and the well-functioning
system of World Championship qualification?

So, can anyone give a more or less plausible explanation why Kasparov now,
10 years later, has deserved the right to play a world title match under the
auspices of FIDE?

Isn’t it more logical and fair to organize today, may be in Yalta, a
match-tournament of Kramnik, Ponomariov, Leko and Anand (true, where is
Anand ?). Another question: how will Kasparov consider himself world
Champion if he lost a full-fledged match to Kramnik in 2000? Would not he
look like Karpov when the latter defeated Timman in a farce of the match in
1993 and “returned� the chess crown?

4.Returning to Iraq. Long before the start of the US invasion of Iraq,
Kasparov joined those hawks who were whipping the anti-Iraqi hysteria. Now
that it is clear that the war in Iraq is in full swing, and remembering
Kasparov’s call for the swift and immediate destruction of this country, do
chess players believe that morally he deserves the right to play for the
most prestigious – morally! – title in world chess?

Everyone has the right to ask and answer the questions I have posed here. We
are living in a free and democratic world, aren’t we?

"Kym" wrote in message
...

Speculating that the highest rated player in the world, some how should
not be part of the reunifiocation of the world
title, is crazy! Making assertions that Kasp. *may* hijack the process is
also unhelpful.

Why you missed important point in Mr. Khariton's text:

----
3. Possibly, chess fans do not know that today's situation in world chess
roots back to the year 1993 when Kasparov entered the conspiracy with
Raymond Keene and Nigel Short to destroy the FIDE and the well-functioning
system of World Championship qualification?
----

So, that's reunification is opposite process of Kasparov's doings in 1993.
He divided chess world and FIDE tries to remedy system. He has no moral
rights to play.

By the way, I have read Interview with Garry Kasparov, Part 2, by Hanon W.
Russell ( about the first of a planned three-volume series and it is
entitled Garry Kasparov on My Great Predecessors).
Kasparov's answers are worst and less cogent than in Part 1. It seems that
somebody wrote this unfinished book, without bibliography-(Jerzy would
say-plagiarism), not only Plisetsky. Have you read very subjective
statements about Capablanca?

I cite Kasparov:

Yeah, I think Alekhine, I know this comment, and I think Alekhine was right
to some degree. It's not. Capablanca was a great endgame player, but
Alekhine found that Capablanca never had an appetite for precision. So that'
s why. it happened in the middlegame, it happened in the endgame, more often
in the endgame, that he just, you know, sleeps. So he could win with
second-rate moves, so why to bother, why to step up the pressure on your own
brains. And Alekhine found it, he found a lot of inaccuracies. So that's why
he came up with the right conclusion that under pressure Capablanca may
collapse. And that happened in the match in game 27.
-------
I think we should definitely. one game from his match against Capablanca, it
's either game. mistakes. but either game 11 or game 21. So it's. I'm not
even looking for the precise quality, but it's about Alekhine beating
Capablanca with black in the match, in a world championship match.
---------------------------------------------------------
I have read that one of the English GM, who is very productive chess writer
"wrote more books than he had read". I wonder, if Kasparov read this book
which "he wrote"? That book is some type of "chess hodge - podge," which is
not digestible.

Goran Tomic

tomic wrote:

"Kym" wrote in message
...

Speculating that the highest rated player in the world, some how should
not be part of the reunifiocation of the world
title, is crazy! Making assertions that Kasp. *may* hijack the process is
also unhelpful.

Why you missed important point in Mr. Khariton's text:

----
3. Possibly, chess fans do not know that today's situation in world chess
roots back to the year 1993 when Kasparov entered the conspiracy with
Raymond Keene and Nigel Short to destroy the FIDE and the well-functioning
system of World Championship qualification?
----

So, that's reunification is opposite process of Kasparov's doings in 1993.
He divided chess world and FIDE tries to remedy system. He has no moral
rights to play.

One might more easily argue that it was FIDE itself that divided the
chess world in 1993 by staging a match between the two losing
Candidates,
Karpov and Timman, and calling that match the World Championship.
It's long passed time for FIDE to remedy their mistake.