A Chess forum. ChessBanter

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.

Go Back   Home » ChessBanter forum » Chess Newsgroups » rec.games.chess.politics (Chess Politics)
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

August 1st, 2003 - 200 Words by Lev Khariton



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old August 1st 03, 06:00 PM
tomic
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default August 1st, 2003 - 200 Words by Lev Khariton

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?




  #2  
Old August 1st 03, 10:32 PM
Liam Too
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default August 1st, 2003 - 200 Words by Lev Khariton

"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
  #3  
Old August 1st 03, 10:42 PM
Briarroot
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default August 1st, 2003 - 200 Words by Lev Khariton

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!
  #4  
Old August 2nd 03, 01:29 AM
FredH.
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default August 1st, 2003 - 200 Words by Lev Khariton

"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.
  #5  
Old August 2nd 03, 09:39 AM
Kym
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default August 1st, 2003 - 200 Words by Lev Khariton


"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.


  #6  
Old August 3rd 03, 08:56 AM
tomic
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default August 1st, 2003 - 200 Words by Lev Khariton and My Great Predecessors

"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



  #7  
Old August 3rd 03, 08:54 PM
Briarroot
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default August 1st, 2003 - 200 Words by Lev Khariton and My GreatPredecessors

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.
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Orwell or Botvinnik?- 200 Words by Lev Khariton tomic rec.games.chess.politics (Chess Politics) 9 August 29th 03 09:44 PM
200 Words by Lev Khariton - “My Chess Predecessors” tomic rec.games.chess.politics (Chess Politics) 26 July 27th 03 08:26 AM
200 Words by Lev Khariton Nick rec.games.chess.politics (Chess Politics) 0 July 17th 03 02:39 AM
A FLASHBACK WITHOUT REGRETS - by Lev Khariton tomic rec.games.chess.politics (Chess Politics) 1 July 15th 03 11:54 PM
July 1st, 2003 - 200 Words by Lev Khariton tomic rec.games.chess.politics (Chess Politics) 2 July 1st 03 07:47 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 11:50 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 2.4.0
Copyright ©2004-2017 ChessBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.