No Sponsers for Kasparov-Shirov. Let a Shirov vs Anand match decide Kasparov's challenger.
Phil Leone
title. Shirov was robbed and It does not appear that Shirov will get to play
Kasparov for the title. I propose this, Shirov vs Anand to determine the
challenger to Kasparov. If Shirov wins no one can question his chances
againest Kasparov. Though its unfair that Alexey would have to win matches
againest the world 2 and 3 to play Kasparov at least the chess public would
get another high quality match. But If I were Shirov I get it in writing.
Remco Gerlich
was too low. Matches have a "market value" these days, and apparently it
isn't easy to find a sponsor who pays enough.
Shirov v Anand would have the same problem, and if Shirov wins, Shirov v
Kasparov would still have it. For Kasparov v Anand, on the other hand,
it would be easy to find a sponsor in India (but I believe Kasparov
refuses to play there, because of personal security fears).
The situation isn't simple, Kasparov isn't denying Shirov a match, but
Shirov seems to be asking too much.
--
Remco Gerlich scarblac at dds dot nl
i45.5yul4...@chi.com
wrote:
>Shirov did get a chance, but *he* turned it down because the prize money
>was too low. Matches have a "market value" these days, and apparently it
>isn't easy to find a sponsor who pays enough.
>
>Shirov v Anand would have the same problem,
Shirov v Anand has the problem that Anand has refused to compete for a
non-FIDE title.
Hot2day924
>>was too low. Matches have a "market value" these days, and apparently it
>>isn't easy to find a sponsor who pays enough.
>>
As the challenger if Shirov feels he truely can beat Kasparov, he should take
whatever money is offered, beat the champ, then HE can dictate the
terms...let's see him win first and make demands later
Ron Moskovitz
Remco Gerlich <scar...@dds.nl> wrote:
>Shirov did get a chance, but *he* turned it down because the prize money
>was too low. Matches have a "market value" these days, and apparently it
>isn't easy to find a sponsor who pays enough.
Uh, this was a report which I believe Shirov denied.
Let's not pass it off as fact just yet.
Besides which, Shirov agreed to play for a certain amout of money; even if
he was then offered less, I'd say he's on reasonably solid footing if he
wants to demand what he originally agreed to.
Remco Gerlich
>In article <76cuup$52c$1...@info.service.rug.nl>,
>Remco Gerlich <scar...@dds.nl> wrote:
>
>>Shirov did get a chance, but *he* turned it down because the prize money
>>was too low. Matches have a "market value" these days, and apparently it
>>isn't easy to find a sponsor who pays enough.
>
> Uh, this was a report which I believe Shirov denied.
>
> Let's not pass it off as fact just yet.
>
> Besides which, Shirov agreed to play for a certain amout of money; even if
>he was then offered less, I'd say he's on reasonably solid footing if he
>wants to demand what he originally agreed to.
>
Yes, but I don't think Kasparov has a duty to pay that prize money
himself, and if noone else wants to pay it...
I still don't understand why the original Rentero deal didn't work.
Wasn't there a contract?
anti...@spam.demon.co.uk
> Shirov v Anand has the problem that Anand has refused to compete for a
> non-FIDE title.
So does that mean he would turn down an offer to go against Kasparov.
Somehow I think not.
--
Adios Amigo
Carl Tillotson
Lancashire Chess Association
homepage: http://www.lancashirechess.demon.co.uk/
Virtual Access 4.50 build 266 (32-bit)
Using Win95
i45.5yul4...@chi.com
>In article <368a44cb...@news1.sympatico.ca>, wrote:
>
>> Shirov v Anand has the problem that Anand has refused to compete for a
>> non-FIDE title.
>
>So does that mean he would turn down an offer to go against Kasparov.
>Somehow I think not.
You are incorrect. He is a man of much integrity.
anti...@spam.demon.co.uk
> You are incorrect. He is a man of much integrity.
If he was such a fellow, why did he play against Kasparov in 1995?
Easy, he wanted two bites of the cherry. Nothing wrong in that. If he
was so concerned about staying in the FIDE ranks he shouldn't have
played against Kasparov.
Ron Moskovitz
<anti...@spam.demon.co.uk > wrote:
>In article <368a44cb...@news1.sympatico.ca>, wrote:
>
>> Shirov v Anand has the problem that Anand has refused to compete for a
>> non-FIDE title.
>
>So does that mean he would turn down an offer to go against Kasparov.
>Somehow I think not.
Well, you may have noticed that he already did, by declining to participate
in the offerd match with Kramnik.
If you read his book, you'll note that he really didn't enjoy the way
his last match with Kasparov was organized. I think that may have left
a sour taste in his mouth which he's not to thrilled about repeating.
i45.5yul4...@chi.com
>In article <368c0f7...@news1.sympatico.ca>, wrote:
>
>> You are incorrect. He is a man of much integrity.
>
>If he was such a fellow, why did he play against Kasparov in 1995?
You don't understand. Anand agreed not to compete for a non-fide title
when he participated in the speed chess tournament for the fide title.
That was after 1995.
Mig
of bitterness in recapping his loss to Alekhine in the return WC
match. The loser is always going to find problems with the
organization and the incumbent champion is always going to have more
pull and influence with the organizers, just the way of the world.
When both challenger and champion were Soviets most of this acrimony
was swept under the communist carpet, but not anymore.
Anand's recent, and current, disregard for meeting Kaspy in a match
have more to do with his distaste for playing politics and his
financial independence. I believe you could call it taking the high
road. You could also call it taking the path of least resistance. Both
views have their grains of truth, no doubt.
saludos, Mig
On Sat, 2 Jan 1999 17:59:21 GMT, rm...@netcom.com (Ron Moskovitz)
wrote:
___________________
NEW STUFF: DECEMBER 4! Chess Madness, at the ChessBase web site!
More fun than you've ever had with your hand on your mouse.
http://www.chessbase.com
-- Check out Mig on Chess, tournament reports, analysis,
and chess humor at The Week In Chess by Mark Crowther.
** MONSTER EXCLUSIVE SERIES OF UP CLOSE ARTICLES ON WORLD
CHAMPION GARRY KASPAROV UP NOW!!! **
http://www.chesscenter.com/twic/twic.html
Sponsored by the London Chess Centre [sic]
-- Checkmate 101 at the CheckMate Software
site! Improve your game, crush your opponents, and lose weight fast.
http://www.checksoft.com
------------------
Michael "Mig" Greengard * Remove SBLOCK to e-mail me *
Tonek Jansen
: Shirov did get a chance, but *he* turned it down because the prize money
: was too low. Matches have a "market value" these days, and apparently it
: isn't easy to find a sponsor who pays enough.
As this originates from Kasparov, I was curious to what Shirov had to
say about it. According to the latest New in Chess Shirov did not turn
down the offer, but he and Kasparov could not agree on how to divide the
prize money between winner and loser.
Tonek Jansen
anti...@spam.demon.co.uk
> You don't understand. Anand agreed not to compete for a non-fide title
> when he participated in the speed chess tournament for the fide title.
> That was after 1995.
Surely a man with *true integrity* wouldn't have played Kasparov in the
first place.
One cannot make an argument that "Anand won't play Kasparov for his
title, hence the title is not valid", if the only thing stopping the
player is a "contractual arrangement" he undertook which because of his
'integrity' stops him from doing so.
