I`ve read the news on TWIC about planned FIdE Champs :

http://www.chesscenter.com/twic/twic.html#news185

or in Russian :

http://www.sport-express.ru/art.shtml?81747

What do you think about organizing FIdE WCC in Libya ?

Regards,
Jerzy

I think the FIDE has completely lost its credibility. They set up a
knockout tournament to play Gary Kasparov, and claim its a Worl
Championship??? New Flash: Gary lost the world champion title to
Kramnik 3 years ago. FIDE decided they have a personality conflict
with the last guy they called WORLD CHAMPION so he is out and they go
for the biggest celebrity in chess to be the champ.
This so obviously political it sickens me. Those idiots are killing
chess as far as I am concerned. Why don't thesse morons suck it up
and admit their knockout champions are a sham. Develop a realy
candidates match like the 60s and 70s and have the winner play
Kramnik!! Yes its that easy.


"Jerzy" wrote in message ...
I`ve read the news on TWIC about planned FIdE Champs :

http://www.chesscenter.com/twic/twic.html#news185

or in Russian :

http://www.sport-express.ru/art.shtml?81747

What do you think about organizing FIdE WCC in Libya ?

Regards,
Jerzy

joe mccarron wrote:
I think the FIDE has completely lost its credibility. They set up
a knockout tournament to play Gary Kasparov, and claim its a World
Championship??? New Flash: Gary lost the world champion title to
Kramnik 3 years ago.

I've always assumed that this is because, to have a match against Kramnik
would legitimize the alternative World Championship but they can safely
have a match of their champion against Kasparov because he is the highest-
rated player in the world.


Dave.

--
David Richerby Carnivorous Vomit (TM): it's like a
www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~davidr/ pile of puke but it eats flesh!

David Richerby wrote in message ...
joe mccarron wrote:
I think the FIDE has completely lost its credibility. They set up
a knockout tournament to play Gary Kasparov, and claim its a World
Championship??? New Flash: Gary lost the world champion title to
Kramnik 3 years ago.

I've always assumed that this is because, to have a match against Kramnik
would legitimize the alternative World Championship but they can safely
have a match of their champion against Kasparov because he is the highest-
rated player in the world.


Dave.

Highest rated player does not mean the best chess player in the world.
But I do see your point about the ratings and there are problems with
that line of thinking. For example Pono won their championship but
they say "we'll hes out we will pick a guy who broke away from us in
the first place, and if asked will admit that he lost the world champ
title, and give have him play at the very end. This resolution does
not leave them or thir "championship" with a shred of credibility.
Are they playign for the "Kasparov cup"or the world title? There are
three alternatives that would be somewhat credible:
1)Have Pono play the winner of the knock out since they crowned him
champ last time they had this silly event they claimed was a world
championship.
2)have Kramnik play the winner of the knock out since the
world(Including Kasparov) recognizes him as the real world champ title
holder anyway.
3)Don't have anyone automatically seeded into the final and force
everyone to go through the system.

On 29 Feb 2004 20:27:07 -0800, (joe mccarron)
wrote:

3)Don't have anyone automatically seeded into the final and force
everyone to go through the system.

I think that's the best idea. Sort of like the tournament to get
Alekine's successor, but more players could be involved.

Replace you know what by j to email

"Jud McCranie" wrote in message
...
On 29 Feb 2004 20:27:07 -0800, (joe mccarron)
wrote:

3)Don't have anyone automatically seeded into the final and force
everyone to go through the system.

I think that's the best idea. Sort of like the tournament to get
Alekine's successor, but more players could be involved.


Yes, probably it would be the best solution taking into account the fair
play rules but FIdE seems to be a little bit away from such an honest
solution and paradoxically Kasparov and Kramnik lose the most being in
favour like e.g. Karpov in his match in Switzerland against Anand. I mean
they lose a little bit of their credibility and legitimacy.

Regards,
Jerzy