Aryeh Davidoff: At www.pakchess.com in Un-Leash Lev Khariton puts
under his crtical and humorous microscope Yevgeni Gik's pro-Kasparov
stance.

Kasparov and Kramnik - Are They "Material Boys"?

Last week I read in New York's Russian paper "V Novom Svete" ("In the
New World") Yevgeni Gik's article "How Kramnik Avoids Kasparov". Gik
has a reputation of, possibly, the most prolific chess author of
modern times. He has authored more than one hundred books, most of
them clear-cut compilations, full of old stories, anecdotes and all
sort of banalities. Often he was writing with Karpov, or rather
ghost-writing Karpov. In recent times he has been dabbling in stories
about Fischer, Kasparov, Kramnik mixing gossip and hearsay to satisfy
very cheap tastes. I will allow myself to make some quotes here to
elaborate on some totally absurd concepts of Gik's approach to the
current situation on the chess throne.

"Whose fault, - asks Gik, - was it that Kasparov and Shirov did not
play their match in 1998? Probably, some stubborn sponsors who did not
want to give their money. I am sure that Kasparov was experiencing
great discomfort over the whole thing. It is for this reason that
finally he decided to play a title match with Kramnik".

Obviously, it was Kasparov's fault! I should remind the readers that
it was Kasparov who organized the World Chess Council that was in
charge of organizing his championship matches, Within the framework of
this association Kramnik and Shirov played a match and the winner
Shirov obtained the right to challenge Kasparov. As the founder of WCC
Kasparov was obliged to organize his own match, whether he found
sponsors or not. It was his material responsibility, to begin with!
Besides, Kasparov had a moral responsibility to play a match against
Shirov. Ironically, Shirov did not even receive the prize money for
his victory against Kramnik. What is more, Kramnik who had lost the
match got his share of the prize fund. I presume that both Kasparov as
the founder of WWC and Kramnik, as the loser of the qualification
match still owe Shirov the money for that match! If Kasparov and
Kramnik were gentlemen, they would have paid their debt to Shirov a
long time ago!
The bottom line, however, is that Kasparov did not want to play a
match with Shirov knowing that he would not get any money for this
match. I should also remind all chess fans that Kasparov's
predecessors (his favorite word!) Botvinnik, Smyslov, Tal and others
played their title matches, excuse my American phrase, for peanuts.
Doubtless, Kasparov loves chess no less than these champions, but
obviously he loves money more! It is also difficult to suspect that
Kasparov, as Gik asserts, was feeling any discomfort over the unplayed
match with Shirov. Those who do not agree with me, can read some pages
from Alexander Nikitin's, Kasparov's chess teacher and second, book on
the 13th World Champion. To cite Nikitin:"Garri learnt too early in
his life how to behave with the powers that be. He knew what to tell
them to win their favors – regardless of his own thoughts and
feelings. The life philosophy and mentality of the Soviet people
crippled by their social system and ideology destroyed Kasparov as
well. As a young man he gets to know cynicism, treachery of the
communist rulers. All this adds meanness and cruelty to his character.
To accept their rules and laws he accepts "double standards" as Karpov
had done before him…"

Please, read and re-read these words! Nikitin did more than anyone
else for Kasparov's chess triumphs. Without exaggeration, I can say
that Kasparov would have never molded as a chess player without
Nikitin, who put all his heart, soul and chess erudition in the young
boy. I find the above-cited words more than revealing to understand
Kasparov's personality. So, I am sure Kasparov never felt, in this
case, any compassion towards Shirov. Gik is quite an intelligent man,
but can we understand his conclusion: "It is for this reason that
finally he decided to play a title match with Kramnik".? So because he
was suffering on account of the unplayed match with Shirov, he decided
to play with Kramnik? Kramnik who had lost to Shirov?!

Another quote from Gik:"Certainly, Garri was overconfident ruling out
any shade of his fiasco in London. He should have thought about a
return match with Kramnik in case of his loss". May be, Gik forgot how
Kasparov condemned Karpov for his right to play a return-match. I do
not think that Kasparov had simply forgotten to include the clause
about a return-match in case of his loss to Kramnik. To begin with, he
was really overconfident that he would defeat Kramnik. But more
importantly, he knew that after his attacks on Karpov's privilege to
play "returns" the chess world would not accept any champion playing
return-matches!

Gik cites Kramnik's phrase: "I am sure that Kasparov admires me".
Obviously, Kramnik went over the top, but personally I am sure that he
meant "Kasparov admires my new approach to the game, my chess style
etc". Gik understands this "admiration" only as "Kasparov admires my
results". A very narrow-minded interpretation of Kramnik's words!

"It is difficult to imagine any of the World Champions, including
Kasparov, admiring anyone except themselves", - continues Gik.

Very strange! Gik knew very well Tal, Spassky, Petrosian. They were
always nice to other players, they appreciated their games.I remember
Tal always had a word of praise for any chess player when he saw a
beautiful move, a nice combination etc.

It should be added here that Gik, like www.worldchessrating.ru,
Kasparov's most loyal bastion, defends Kasparov with all fervor -
tooth and nail! At the afore-mentioned site the editors even asked
their readers to answer such questions: how often does Kasparov admire
Kramnik? Once a day? Once a week? All the time, etc.? I do not find
such questions humorous at all; it shows only the editors' disrespect
towards themselves and chess!

I remember how three years ago after Kramnik defeated Kasparov intheir
match in London, many people maintained that the whole match was
rigged by the BrainsGames. I remember the correspondence between chess
fans at Bulletin Board of The ChessCafe. Frankly, at that time I
defended both grandmasters. I could not admit that their match was a
sold-our farce. Apparently, Kramnik's victory was more than
convincing. Kasparov could not win a single game out of 15
ecncounters! Nevertheless, I wrote an open letter to Kramnik, posted
at www.pakchess.com
and www.kasparovclub.ru requesting Kramnik to give his "predecessor"
a fair chance. However, the chess champions today do not walk on
clouds. Like Madonna is nicknamed "Material Girl", they could be
rightly called "Material Boys"! So much they are in love with money.
However, I cannot accept Gik's rationale:"In the last year and a half
Kramnik has been referring to his match with Leko, the match that
exists only on paper. There are no sponsors, and nobody knows about
the terms of this virtual match. In this situation Kasparov's words
that the whole idea of the Kramnik-Leko match was Kramnik's "scam" are
absolutely grounded. Kramnik simply wanted to avoid another match with
Kasparov".To begin with, Kasparov was invited to participate in the
candidates' tournament, and Leko deserved his victory. And why call
the unplayed match between Leko and Kramnik virtual? It is no more
virtual then the unplayed match between Ponomariov and Kasparov and
far less virtual than all Kasparov's matches with computers! Besides,
I don't see any reason why Kramnik who has always played well with
Kasparov should avoid another match with him. I am sure that if he
sees a good prize purse, he will willingly play with Kasparov.

To crown his absurdities, Gik finalizes his article with another
laughable nugget:" Chess, as distinct from other fields of human
endeavor, has objective criteria. We can put in doubt even
Shakespeare's genius, but we can not doubt the chess power of a
grandmaster with a 2850 Elo rating!"

Probably, some chess fans reading Gik's "revelations" cannot check
with the FIDE latest rating-list, but Kasparov's rating today is much
below 2850! Suffice it to mention that in the last 18 months he had a
poor performance in the Russia –Rest of the World match, he lost a
match in New York to Karpov, he drew two matches with Fritz, he failed
to win Linares, he lost to Khuzman in the European Team Championship
after a terrible blunder… May be, to quote Spassky, his future is
already in his past? As to Shakespeare, he was an unrated writer, so
he can hardly be compared with Kasparov. However, let us wait and see
whether anyone would remember Kasparov in the year 2600! Shakespeare
will be still waiting for him then!

"Aryeh Davidoff" wrote in message
om...
Aryeh Davidoff: At www.pakchess.com in Un-Leash Lev Khariton puts
under his crtical and humorous microscope Yevgeni Gik's pro-Kasparov
stance.

Kasparov and Kramnik - Are They "Material Boys"?



My short comment : it`s always bad when players themselves have to organize
chess events. So that`s why GMA or PCA collapsed and Leko, Ponomariov and
Shirov were ruled out of the WCC matches. Even governments of Ukraine and
Hungary didn`t prevent the collapse of the matches. For sure we should blame
FIDE for its ineffectiveness.

On the other hand I believe that the new chess organization ACP, that was
created by professional players shortly after European Championships in
Turkey, has all chances to improve playing conditions for all chess players
and to attract new sponsors to chess competition.

Double regards,
Jerzy