Need Support for our cause to save the confused Chess World!

[mythoskaos]

Greetings. My name is Daniel Austin and I am here as an emissary of http://www.chesscorner.com/, an acclaimed chess website founded by a London Primary School teacher. Recently, in it’s forum, I announced that I was trying to enlist support for a campaign to sort out the imperfections that have arisen in the world of chess politics over the last few years. Some enlisted their support almost immediately, but not as many as truly expected. We felt the need to extend the knowledge of our cause to this forum.
Our aims are quite simple: to establish a group that can and will fight for change within the world of chess. This is a something we are well aware people believe in. However, there is a big difference between believing in something and actually helping out. This has been our experience at Chess Corner, with only 5 people lending their support out of about 500 people who have seen the thread, including myself and the person who started this whole thing. Thus we have started to spread our wings and contact other organisations and forums relating to chess to see what emerges. I believe that here at www.chesskit.com is the perfect place to look for help for such a cause.
Techniques we use could include but would by no means be limited to e-mailing and petitioning individuals, groups and/or organisations, e-mailing important individuals, setting up stands at tournaments, etc. I am very open to suggestions.
If anyone has any comments they would like to make, suggestions as to how we could/should move forward, criticisms of what we are doing, or best of all, your support for our cause, then please contact me. There are 3 ways of doing this: here, on this thread; Private Message; and e-mail, at danielaus@msn.com if you want to contact me directly, or addyboy@chessfan.net if you wish to contact Adam Lewis, our Editor and strong supporter. I will reply to all correspondence as soon as I possibly can, generally within a week. I would ask that those sending me e-mails include the word “Chess” in the subject so I know it isn’t Spam.
This campaign is for anyone who is willing to help. It may be enough to contact people/groups who may be interested in helping us out, it may be something more. Any help, no matter what the form, is beneficial to us. I am a 16-year-old student and yet am doing all that I can. Adam is also a student, which limits our funds and effectively restricts us to online activities for the moment. This is why we need your support. This cause means a lot to a lot of people, but without your support we will accomplish nothing. So please, contact me as soon as possible. We are not looking for donations at present but we are looking to create a website for our group and domain names cost cash we don’t have. But that’s looking ahead. Right now we need numbers, so anyone who can help, please do help. Like I said earlier, it can be anyone. As a side note, if anyone knows someone who might be interested in something like this and would be kind enough to give me contact details I would be eternally grateful.
By the way, if anyone is interested in reading the thread form which this campaign originated, the link is http://www.chesscorner.com/phpBB/index/ From there go to the "Chess Chat" forum and from there to the "Chess World In Shambles" thread. It is one page one of Chess Chat, usually somewhere near the top. This is not necessary, but it would be wise due to the fact that most of the discussions take place at chesscorner.com.
-Daniel Austin

[arosar]

Greetings to you too! I had a bit of a poke around your forum mate and that thread in particular and, My God, you people write a lot!!

Now, I got a problem with attention - I got a really short attention span. I'm more attentive to bullet points like in powerpoint and that. See, I'm having a bit of problem exactly what your beef is. I can see you say, 'imperfections' in chess politics. But can you tell me what these imperfections are?

AR

[Bill Gletsos]

Now, I got a problem with attention - I got a really short attention span.

You also have a problem following fairly straightforward instructions.

[Rincewind]

You also have a problem following fairly straightforward instructions.

Not to mention keeping posts on topic.

[mythoskaos]

I want to first apologize for my inactivity. My computer has been suffering major problems and I cannot seem to fix it. I am at a different computer now, so I am able to type this message. There are many imperfections in the FIDE organization, and in the chess world today. Kasparov has been world champion far longer than he should, not because he isn't a fantastic player, but because no one will play him! The only oponents that wont run away from a high rated player is a computer. Any other games the players are playing for money, and the sponsership for chess games is terrible. Kramnik and Leko were supposed to play, but the money fell through and Kramnik bailed. Kasparov and Ponomariov wont be playing their match anytime soon due to this faulty organization. Beyond the money, there is nothing being done in to unify the chess world. There are hundreds of random tournaments and hundreds more being champions of this or that country, or claiming to be champions of this or that country. Beyond the professional level, this seeps down to the grassroot hobby chess players or chess enthusiests. Chess in school is a rather large issue. It is proven that chess helps children with logic, memorization, thinking through things, and even greatly decreases the chances of Alzheimer disease. Not to mention that chess clubs should be implemented more into schools so that those who do want to play chess have place to go and meet others.
So here is what we believe is wrong with the chess world today

*Faulty Orginaztion - President of FIDE is running his organization into the ground for financial reasons. The status of FIDE is based on how good the President's company in Moscow is doing. If he has a bad month, so does FIDE. If he has a good month, FIDE rejoices. This is no way to run an organization.

*Financial problems - no sponsers will give money for prizes in chess matches. Due to this, many plays will not play.

*No unified championship - There is at least one or two championships for most individual countries in the world. This is not necessarily a bad thing, but there is no unified world champion (under one unfied federation)

*Too many federations - There are way too many federations. There is of course FIDE, the USCF, the PCA, ACP, CAP,APC (no Im not making these up), and so many more that I cant even count. While im not saying strip all these federations away, I believe that there should be a Chess Union -- one unified chess federation that watches all of the others, lists the datas, sets up matches, and can have one unified championship underneath it.

These problems are very large, and need to be fixed. Our campaign, CRIC (Campaign for the Reunification of Internation Chess) feels that with enough support, eventually backing strength and money, we can at least start something going that will bring about change. How do you go about this, and if we succeed, what will it accomplish? I will again list in a bullet manner

"PLAN"

*We first plan to post the uniform post that first posted at any and every chess forum we can find to try and gather support.

*At the same time that we are doing this, a website is being made. This website will be the HUD of CRIC. Discussions, memberlist, newsletters, news, and eventually donations will be carried on this website, including all information about our campaign and what we hope to accomplish

*After this is accomplished, and we begin to get support from chess players, we plan to try and get support from professional chess players, and try to push our ideas through different websites (ie, chess.fm).

*Once enough support (and money perhaps) is gathered, we will to seriously send our petitions and emails to FIDE and other organizations that include our ideas and our problems with theirs. Comprimises should be possible.

*Build from there. If all works perfectly, we can help create a new chess organization. One single organization to watch over the rest.

*We do not plan to be the organization. Only a guide for how that organization is to be built.

*After it is in working order, we plan to become, form, or again help guide a Chess Union. The Union will watch over the new international organization and keep it in check. The union will speak for all chess players, grassroot and professional. It will work towards making chess classes available or required in schools, more chess clubs in schools, or just simply state/city chess clubs. Chess games on television, chess endorsements, and the well being of the chess players

This is our current plan. The results?

"The Results"

*Televised chess. On its own station or on ESPN

*More games - with more endorsments and money, more will play

*One unfied champion - while titles such as Russian champion, American champion, and Australian champions may still exist, there will be one unfied champion in which to decide the world champion. It would be more organized than just picking the top ranked. Systems would be developed to select the champions of each country, and them against eachother

*More chess clubs in every country

*Chess in school

*More respect for chess

These are problems that need to be solved, and results that I think we all want. Im not asking any of you to donate money, to work at all, I just want your support. you support is the lifeflow for this whole campaign. So please, show your love for the world of chess and send me an email at danielaus@msn.com, or post it here, saying that you lend your support. (if you do lend your support, please supply your email address, and name.)
Thank you
-Daniel Austin

[Kevin Bonham]

I'm not sure what's more "confused", the Chess World or this post.

Kasparov has been world champion far longer than he should, not because he isn't a fantastic player, but because no one will play him!

Kasparov is not world champion by any formalised reckoning and there are no shortage of people who would be glad to have a shot at him for the right money.

Kramnik and Leko were supposed to play, but the money fell through and Kramnik bailed.

They're playing this September-October, aren't they?

Kasparov and Ponomariov wont be playing their match anytime soon due to this faulty organization.

Who cares? Pono is fairly irrelevant. There is another FIDE Fake World Championship knockout coming up, which Pono isn't even going to play in apparently and then his status will be nil.

Beyond the money, there is nothing being done in to unify the chess world. There are hundreds of random tournaments and hundreds more being champions of this or that country, or claiming to be champions of this or that country.

There have always been national championships. Can you name countries where multiple players are claiming to be national champions at present - can't think of too many offhand.

*One unfied champion - while titles such as Russian champion, American champion, and Australian champions may still exist, there will be one unfied champion in which to decide the world champion. It would be more organized than just picking the top ranked. Systems would be developed to select the champions of each country, and them against eachother

But why? Say a country has the first two players in the world, why shouldn't those two players be in the final stage of the world title?

[Garvinator]

Who cares? Pono is fairly irrelevant. There is another FIDE Fake World Championship knockout coming up, which Pono isn't even going to play in apparently and then his status will be nil.

the current situation for the classical world championship is. kramnik and leko are to play later this year. kasparov will be playing the winner of the fide knockout championship to be held in libya/malta.

Then the winner of these two matches will meet each other to determine the classical world champion.

After the classical champion has been determined, the cycle returns, in theory, to the old three year format.

[Garvinator]

Say a country has the first two players in the world, why shouldn't those two players be in the final stage of the world title?

the idea of a criteria restricing a country to a certain number of places for the classical world championship was abolished during the soviet era of domination in the 60's. the soviets had many of the top players, but were restricted to say 5 players in the candidates round robin. this rule was seen as ridiculous and was changed.

[eclectic]

the current situation for the classical world championship is. kramnik and leko are to play later this year. kasparov will be playing the winner of the fide knockout championship to be held in libya/malta.

Then the winner of these two matches will meet each other to determine the classical world champion.

After the classical champion has been determined, the cycle returns, in theory, to the old three year format.

and what about the format for the match between ilyumzhimov and kamsky ?



(sorry)



eclectic

[Garvinator]

and what about the format for the match between ilyumzhimov and kamsky ?



(sorry)



eclectic

never happen

[Ian Rout]

the idea of a criteria restricing a country to a certain number of places for the classical world championship was abolished during the soviet era of domination in the 60's. the soviets had many of the top players, but were restricted to say 5 players in the candidates round robin. this rule was seen as ridiculous and was changed.

Many of the top Soviet players of the era were not Russian (Keres, Petrosian, Tal, Bronstein, Stein (I think), Geller ...) so unless the USSR gets back together that set of circumstances is unlikely to recur.

Maybe in thirty years India or China might get seven places in the Candidates series.

[arosar]

Thanks very much for your post mythoskaos. Now I understand you are a young bloke with plenty of zeal and idealism. All power to you. As for meself, well, I'm a bit pessimistic. Since I will never be other than a weekend warrior - I'm quite happy to remain a merry bystander. See, I keep comin' to this question: what's in it for me?

Though I wish to add a refinement to your ideas. How's about you discard the whole idea of a world chess champ altogether?

AR

[addyboy]

Greetings. My name is Adam Lewis, and I am the editor of the uniform post, as well as the co-organiser of CRIC. I have a few responses to some of the comments placed here, and may I being by saying that I am delighted by the fact that people have commented, albeit not wholly positively. Still, at least we now have a basis for discussion, and a chance to expand upon our aims.

I will admit that it is true that the Kramnik-Leko match is on, and also that Kramnik never bailed (I have the interview in which he says that he would pay for the match himself if wholly necessary, sorry Daniel!). It is also true that there is a FIDE knockout tournament soon. But then this is exactly the sort of thing that we wish to abolish! These tournaments, as has been said, have no credibility. I have no problem with them happening, but I do have a problem with them being called “world championship” matches, because blatantly they are not. We wish to have a singular word championship, recognised by all concerned, as we had in the past (i.e., pre-Fischer/Kasparov. No disrespect intended to either of them, but objectively speaking they were the ones who started it all by breaking off.)

The question has been raised as to national championships. I am fully in favour of these, and have never seen them as contradictory to the world championship. There is something pleasing about being able to say with authority who the best player in the world is. As for the role of national championships in deciding this, one option is to use them as qualifiers of sorts. This appears to have provoked a knee-jerk reaction in some, who feel this would not give countries with multiple geniuses (and this includes my own, with John Nunn, Michael Adams, Nigel Short of course and Luke McShane all being supreme talents) sufficient opportunity to make use of these players (if you will forgive my phrasing). However, they will still get this opportunity, only that they may have to play their fellow countrymen earlier than with just now, but considering that they would invariably have to play each other anyway, the problem is scarcely as serious as has been made out.

With regard Kasparov not playing anyone my personal opinion is that he will not be at the top of the rankings for much longer. He only plays really at Olympiads and at the three “super tournaments” (Linares, Corus, Dortmund) and spends the rest of his time writing books. He is past his prime and will soon stop playing altogether. Many would play him (myself included!) but he is the one saying no.

I also note the comment “what’s in it for me?” My response is that I would like to see us, if possible, help to promote chess. There is a lot to praise about the game (sport?) and I would like to see us do that. This should in turn increase sponsorship, but money is not my only concern (let us ignore on this one the fact that I am a Capitalist).

For example, I believe we should promote its developmental benefits in schools etc, promoting the benefits Daniel suggested. We could also target different audiences with different aspects of the game, e.g., the fact that chess is like war could entice young boys, its elegance could appeal to young girls, studies might attract puzzle enthusiasts, and so on, so forth. These are only ideas, and I welcome any commentary. My email address is addyboy@chessfan.net. I address all comments within a week (usually) and please include the word chess somewhere within the subject so I know its not Spam. I look forward to hearing your replies. Oh, and one more thing: LONG LIVE THE ROYAL GAME!!!

[Kevin Bonham]

It is also true that there is a FIDE knockout tournament soon. But then this is exactly the sort of thing that we wish to abolish! These tournaments, as has been said, have no credibility. I have no problem with them happening, but I do have a problem with them being called “world championship” matches, because blatantly they are not.

If you're talking about the FIDE event I agree with you. However if the planned cycle goes ahead I certainly intend to regard the eventual winner of the match between the winner of (Kramnik-Leko) and (Kasparov-next FFWC) as the World Champion.

As for the role of national championships in deciding this, one option is to use them as qualifiers of sorts. This appears to have provoked a knee-jerk reaction in some, who feel this would not give countries with multiple geniuses (and this includes my own, with John Nunn, Michael Adams, Nigel Short of course and Luke McShane all being supreme talents) sufficient opportunity to make use of these players (if you will forgive my phrasing). However, they will still get this opportunity, only that they may have to play their fellow countrymen earlier than with just now, but considering that they would invariably have to play each other anyway, the problem is scarcely as serious as has been made out.

You're brushing it aside a bit lightly there. If one country has the best two players in the world they may well meet in their national champs, but it will probably just be one game, it won't be a lengthy match. Then one of them will win and quite likely that one will finish up in the final against an opponent who is not an especially serious threat, resulting in a dud match. How are you going to market this to the punters? Better to make it as likely as practically possible that #1 plays #2 in the final.

With regard Kasparov not playing anyone my personal opinion is that he will not be at the top of the rankings for much longer. He only plays really at Olympiads and at the three “super tournaments” (Linares, Corus, Dortmund) and spends the rest of his time writing books. He is past his prime and will soon stop playing altogether.

Well, let's seee. I don't think his activity level at present is unacceptable at all, I mean it would be nice if Fischer had played that many games in any of the years after first winning the title.

For example, I believe we should promote its developmental benefits in schools etc, promoting the benefits Daniel suggested. We could also target different audiences with different aspects of the game, e.g., the fact that chess is like war could entice young boys, its elegance could appeal to young girls, studies might attract puzzle enthusiasts, and so on, so forth.

This is more wheel-reinvention. There are people who spend their lives working out what works in marketing chess to school audiences, why not ask them what works instead of trying to work it out for yourself from first principles?

[Brian_Jones]

Gee - these blokes like long posts! Like arosar I have a short attention span!
BTW Amiel, last week I heard about a famous bloke called rosario who was doing good things in 1896 - are you related to him?