Kasparov's other family
Staunton
November 5 2000 UNITED STATES
Kasparov set to revive fight for daughter
Adam Nathan
HE may have lost his world chess title in London last week, but Garry
Kasparov's family believes he is preparing for a more personal battle -
renewing the legal fight to win custody of his seven-year-old daughter,
Polina.
His former wife, Masha, also fears he will take up the cudgels again, now he
has relinquished the crown. "It is very much possible that he will try again
to gain custody," said a relative of Masha. "We are watching things day by
day. I hope we are wrong."
Many chess pundits were baffled by Kasparov's sometimes feeble play against
his challenger, Vladimir Kramnik, and speculated that he was being
distracted by personal problems. Kasparov admitted as much towards the end
of the match. The custody battle could easily have been the factor that was
disturbing his concentration.
Raymond Keene, the Sunday Times chess correspondent, said: "It was
effectively capitulation in the final games. I would love to know what was
going through his mind."
Kasparov, 37, withdrew from a custody action over Polina in America last
year after questions were raised over his tax affairs, but now friends of
Masha believe he may announce his intention to persuade the courts to allow
him to live with his daughter when he gives a press conference today.
Kasparov lost a match to the computer Deep Blue three years ago, but had
been unbeaten by a human since winning the world title in 1985. He was said
to have earned millions of dollars from IBM and Altavista, an internet
company, from the Deep Blue match in 1997, and this led to the inquiries
into his tax affairs last year.
Masha's family denied reports that she receives Ł28,000 a month alimony from
Kasparov but prevented him from seeing his daughter. "Garry Kasparov pays
$3,000 [about Ł2,000] a month child support, which was decided by the
Russian courts," said one of Masha's relatives, speaking from her home in
New Jersey.
Ricardo Calvo, a former business partner of Kasparov, also claimed that
Kasparov's mother Klara, nicknamed Aďda because of her operatic temperament,
wanted to renew the fight for Polina. He described her as a "borderline
neurotic", who wields control over her son. Calvo, who worked with Kasparov
from 1985 to 1991 and spoke on Masha's behalf in last year's custody battle,
said that Klara, 65, had seemed to exert a baleful influence over Kasparov
during the recent world championship match. He also said it would be
dishonest for Kasparov to blame his defeat on personal problems: "Garry will
be lying to himself and to chess fans if he blames the custody issue."
Kasparov's marriage to Masha ended in 1993, soon after his defeat of the
Briton Nigel Short in London and Polina's birth in Helsinki. Masha, who now
teaches English to Russian immigrants, married an American in 1996 and hopes
to become naturalised in the spring, reducing the chances of Kasparov
winning custody.
Kasparov has also remarried and has a son, Vadik, 4, who lives with him in
Moscow. Polina is already showing talent as a chess player.
http://www.sunday-times.co.uk/news/pages/sti/2000/11/05/stifgnusa03002.html
X
laundry out of ordinary circulation. Anyone who has seen Garry with his mother
knows that this isn't a healthy relationship for Garry, not quite a Kamsky deal,
but close enough. The fatherless son ruled by a neurotic mother, each clinging
equally hard to the apron strings well into his adult life. It just isn't
right. With Garry's fall from the Summit, I think more and more of this stuff
is going to come out.
Akorps
That's a good line :-)
Since I can hardly think of anyone I ever
met who doesn't qualify as fully neurotic,
that's almost like a positive recommendation :-)
(like in politics, if the worst you can dig up
on someone is a DUI 25 years ago for one
too many beers, while the incumbent has
been misbehavin in the Oval Office with his
Cuban cigars ...)
Whatever happened to Elian Gonzalves
anyway?
Oh well, back to chess. Be interesting to
see Kramnik do battle with whatever the
top of the line computer program is these
daze ...
Mig
http://www.kasparovchess.com/serve/templates/folders/show.asp?p_docID=12425&p_docLang=EN
Mig
>Masha's family denied reports that she receives £28,000 a month alimony from
>Kasparov but prevented him from seeing his daughter. "Garry Kasparov pays
>$3,000 [about £2,000] a month child support, which was decided by the
>Russian courts," said one of Masha's relatives, speaking from her home in
>New Jersey.
>
>Ricardo Calvo, a former business partner of Kasparov, also claimed that
>Kasparov's mother Klara, nicknamed Aïda because of her operatic temperament,
Baldomero Garcia
clear to me that
a) someone was just looking to write some garbage about Kasparov.
Whether true or not (and it looks like it's not), it was meant to harm
Kasparov's image.
b) Kasparov's response was adequate in some portions, but in others, I
think he took some cheap shots at his ex-wife. Some of the details
were unnecessary (like the first class tickets, or offering to pay for
a private school, etc.), since they didn't prove or disprove anything
said in the original article.
c) The match against Kramnik was lost at the board. Apparently these
issues with his daughter have been going on for several years now, so,
it's not a new issue and couldn't have been a greater distractor than
it would have been in the years past.
I think Kasparov's personal life is best left alone and we should
concentrate on the chess portion of it.
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
Staunton
"Mig" <m...@spam.me.not.kcnewyork.com> wrote in message
news:3a0797e4...@news.newsguy.com...
> Bollocks.
>
>
http://www.kasparovchess.com/serve/templates/folders/show.asp?p_docID=
12425&p_docLang=EN
>
> Mig
>
[Background: Toward the end of the Kasparov-Kramnik match rumors were
flying about why Kasparov, the prohibitive pre-match favorite, was
playing so poorly. As usual, when the pot is stirred some scum rises
to the top, and several hostile and patently false stories were
printed. Unsurprisingly, some came from long-time critics of Kasparov.
The surprising part was how low they were willing to go as they
concocted wild stories about relations between Kasparov, his ex-wife
Maria, and his daughter Polina that were published by the undiscerning
British press. -ed.]
Did you write this? If so, I think you are obliged to list all the
hostile and patently false stories mentioned. Furthermore, name the
long-time critics of Kasparov (ie. 'scum') who are responsible.
Then feel free to report them to: http://www.pcc.org.uk/
Kasparov writes:
"Maria and I were married in Moscow in 1989 and Polina was born in
April,
1993. At the end of 1993 we separated and in June of 1995 we were
divorced. "
In Hans Ree's Human Comedy, pg.9 we read:
"Kasparov's marriage was dissolved very quickly, and his wife told a
newspaper that she was going in hiding because she was afraid of her
husband."
Is Ree scum too?
Mig
scandal-mongers. Nor do I take orders from anonymous Usenet pinheads.
I didn't think Garry should respond to such crap. Typical that it was
published without the barest minimum of fact-checking by the paper,
but that would ruin all the fun. As far as I can tell the 'standards'
of the British press are well known.
Hans Ree, whom I had the pleasure of meeting for the first time in
London, is entitled to his opinion, of course. Custody cases and
divorces bring out the worst in all concerned, I don't expect
Kasparov's case would be much different on either side. Go back to
your National Enquirer and Sun.
Mig
Isofarro
wrote:
> As far as I can tell the 'standards'
>of the British press are well known.
"Standards" in the British press? I must have missed something there.
Most British papers consistently fail to reach any sort of readable
standard. The only good they provide is wrappers for fish and chips.
Iso.
--
alt.html QuickStart: http://rock13.com/webhelp/usenet/newbie.txt
HTML FAQ: http://www.htmlhelp.com/faq/html/
WebDesign FAQ: http://www.vortex-webdesign.com/help/faq.htm
Jukka's Usenet guide: http://www.hut.fi/u/jkorpela/usenet/
Recommended Hosting: http://www.affordablehost.com
Staunton
> Eh? Sorry, I'm not obliged to provide free publicity for
> scandal-mongers.
I will take it then that you are responsible (for want of a better word)
for said introduction.
> Nor do I take orders from anonymous Usenet pinheads.
We know who you take orders from.
> I didn't think Garry should respond to such crap. Typical that it was
> published without the barest minimum of fact-checking by the paper,
> but that would ruin all the fun.
Sorry, you were running off at the mouth about concocted ie. invented
stories by unnamed 'long-time Kasparov critics'.
I called your bluff. You folded. It's as simple as that.
> As far as I can tell the 'standards'
> of the British press are well known.
Your opinions of Britain are of no importance.
>
> Hans Ree, whom I had the pleasure of meeting for the first time in
> London, is entitled to his opinion, of course. Custody cases and
> divorces bring out the worst in all concerned, I don't expect
> Kasparov's case would be much different on either side. Go back to
> your National Enquirer and Sun.
>
What opinion of Ree would that be? The claim is that Maria told a
newspaper that she was frightened of Garry. Perhaps this is what she
means when she talks of it being too dangerous to return to Russia.
Maria was always too good for him! She of aristocratic Russian stock.
He, from a long line of sand-dwellers.
Mig
How charming. I stop by every few weeks and this is the best this
place can come up with? You just can't get good trolls these days. I
should have known better than to bother trying to shed some light when
it's more fun watching the trolls flail around in the dark hoping to
hit a nerve.
There was no bluff to call. Do your own homework, trollboy. Or are
even the English papers over your head? I suppose if you believe
everything they say you would also believe everything both sides in a
divorce case say. Leave it to a Staunton to throw mud like a coward,
but at least the original wasn't anonymous.
Mig
On Sat, 11 Nov 2000 16:40:18 -0000, "Staunton"
<howard_...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>"Mig" <m...@spam.me.not.kcnewyork.com> wrote in message
>news:3a0ce012...@news.newsguy.com...
>> Eh? Sorry, I'm not obliged to provide free publicity for
>> scandal-mongers.
>
>I will take it then that you are responsible (for want of a better word)
>for said introduction.
>
>> Nor do I take orders from anonymous Usenet pinheads.
>
>We know who you take orders from.
>
>> I didn't think Garry should respond to such crap. Typical that it was
>> published without the barest minimum of fact-checking by the paper,
>> but that would ruin all the fun.
>
>Sorry, you were running off at the mouth about concocted ie. invented
>stories by unnamed 'long-time Kasparov critics'.
>I called your bluff. You folded. It's as simple as that.
>
>> As far as I can tell the 'standards'
>> of the British press are well known.
>
>Your opinions of Britain are of no importance.
>
>>
>> Hans Ree, whom I had the pleasure of meeting for the first time in
>> London, is entitled to his opinion, of course. Custody cases and
>> divorces bring out the worst in all concerned, I don't expect
>> Kasparov's case would be much different on either side. Go back to
>> your National Enquirer and Sun.
>>
>
X
edgy r.g.c.m posts have dropped down a few notches, mirroring the fall in the
quality of his net articles. It is sad really, one of "us" gets ahead a
little, but slowly but surely he becomes one of "them," and now spends his
time hurling not clever Usenet insults, getting himself into sticky
questions, leaving almost all of his prior self behind. Those in the know
have seen it happen over and over, Garry's approach to things are contagious
to those who work with him.