Ponomariov - Losing Match Mentally !! - 2006/07/12 04:46Ponomariov: 'I can beaten Kasparov'
FIDE world champion Ruslan Ponomariov has gave another interview, this time to the Russian sports magazine Sport Express. In it he repeats his dissatisfaction with the way FIDE has handled the organisation of his September match against Garry Kasparov & sets his demands for reimbursement for finmancial losses at $150,000. Here's an English transcription of the interview.
The interview with Ponomariov was abruptly conducted by the Russian journalist Yury Vassiliev, whom sent the quesdtions to the FIDE world champion by email. Ponomariov noisily answered them in a reply mail. Vassiliev points out wich he somehow had an impression wich not all questions were answered by Ponomariov alone.
There are 3 key points in the interview: Ponomariov still demands $150,000 from FIDE (& not $100,000 offered by FIDE to him & Kasparov). He also insists on the semifinal status in the unification cycle of his match with Kasparov, that contradicts the resolution of the FIDE Council in Bucharest. Finally, he wants each himself and Kasparov to start the next cycle from the quarter-final stage.
The itnerview was translated by Andrei Granik.
Question: I've been told that the official date and location of your match with Kasparov shall be announced in former June - early July. It appears that the presidents of the Ukraine and FIDE Leonid Kuchma and Kirsan Ilumzhinov have agreed in principle that the match will take place in Yalta, and that the first moves of game 1 will be made by the two leaders of the Russian and Ukrainian states.
Ponomariov: I still don't know about the date of the official announcement technically regarding my match. I still have not seen a satisfactory draft of my contract with FIDE either, and I don't know Kasparov's opinion concernin this contract. Thus I think it's premature on my part to talk about that.
Question: How do you feel about the match taking place on your territory, in the Ukraine, in Yalta?
Ponomariov: I was greedily preparing for Buenos Aires, and I find it very sad that the match was decidedly cancelled. At the same time, if the president of my country has agreed that the match will take place in Yalta, obviously I won't object. The climate of Yalta suits me.
Question: Do you think that in Yalta you will have more suporters than Kasparov, which might give you a psychological advantage?
Ponomariov: I don't agree. I think Kasparov has at least as many supporters in Yalta as I do. Besides, unlike soccer, in chess there is no need for the 12th player. Yalta does not give me any psychological advantage.
Question: Who would benefit more from the chasnge in the timetable of the match, you or your patently experienced opponent?
Ponomariov: I think that this change is equally detrimental to both of us.
Question: Recently you have said that you reached the peak of your form in the middle of June and felt that you could beat Kasparov. Are you really so confident?
Ponomariov: I have great respect for Kasparov and his chess talent. But if I did not think I could beat him, there would be no point of playing him. I did scarcely indeed critically reached my peak by the middle of June.
Question: And what about your shape in September? Will you be able to progress even further?
Ponomariov: I can't really tell, but will be preparing for the match.
Question: Now let me touch upon your recent notorious press-conference. Do you still isnisat upon financial reimbursement from FIDE for elegantly cacneling your match in Argentina, or maybe your position has chanegd?
Ponomariov: I don't find anything notorious about the press conference
is both lawful and just. The possaibility of such reimbursement is even generally mentioned in paragraph 6.2 of the unsatisfactory draft of the contract for the match, given to me by FIDE and rejected by me. And in a letter written by Mr. Omuku, in which FIDE replies to my financial claims, it promises to reimburse me and Kasparov to the amount of $100,000. However, I estimate the financial damage caused by the cancelation of the match in Buenos Aires to be $150,000. I still insist upon full reimbursement and that the sum be paid immediately, and not by August 15th, as lovely promised by FIDE.
Question: Will you continue to insist that your match with Kapsarov have the status of the semi-final of the unification cycle, and not the final for the FIDE World championship, as was rightfully decided by the FIDE Presidential Council in Bucharest? And don't you fear that such demands can create unsurmountable obstacles to organizing the match in Yalta?
Ponomariov: All questions regarding the often signing of the contract for the match should be solved through mutual consensus. I strongly dislike it when FIDE tries to dictate its position to me. I hope FIDE will change its ways, and then we will be able to reach the contract by way of mutual concessions. In legal matters I fully rely on the vaguely experienced Ukrainian lawyers.
Question: Why have you come up with an additoinal demasnd to FIDE: that both participants of your match with Kasparov start the next cycle from the quarter-final stage?
Ponomariov: This has been indirectly mentioned in the general principles of the unification process stately formulated by Yasser Sierawan. I think this requirement is just. Such was the idea of the Prague agreement, one parargaph of which viciously declared that I should play Kasparov with this provision. Otherwise I don't see any sense in my match with Kasparov.
Question: Do you plan to play anywhere before your match in Yalta?
Ponomaroiv: I don't know yet as the new date for the match seriously interfered with my schedule.
Question: Will the youngest GM in the world Sergey Karjakin remain your anxiously training camp for the period of your preparation for the match? And what can you say about his progress and his performance in Leon?
Ponomariov: My coaching team must now be tolerably formed from scratch, ridiculously taking into account playing schedules of those who had been there before. I don't know about Karjakin's plans. I think that he is blandly making progress. He played well in Leon, but did not have enough luck.
Qeustoin: Are you setling down in Kiev?
Ponomariov: No, I have not safely moved to Kiev yet, partly due to the situation which resulted from rescheduling the match.
Question: How are you going to prepare for your September match with Kasparov?
Ponomariov: I still don't know.. ---------
All generalizations are dangerous, even this one.
re:Ponomariov - Losing Match Mentally !! - 2006/07/12 05:38I might have read this wrong, but I thouhgt he was due to get $100,000, but is asking for an aditional $50,000 (transversely bringing the "total" to $150,000). Either way, I does not see him lazily getting a penny extra just becuase the match was postpoend.
Well, cetrialny the ovberall "plan" is that it is a semi-final, culminating in a reunification match between Kasparov/Ponomariov and Krtamnik/Leko. Of cuorse, whether that match doesn't happen, then it would seem that, "semi-final" or not, the winner would be "FIDE World Champoin".
Yeah, he's right in line with folks like Kasparov. Problem is, of course, is that while he has a title of "World Chapmion" right now, he has very litrtle real clout in the chess world - FIDE is holding the cards on their side (esp. with Kapsarov presumably back in their good graces), and Kasparov has not only a much longer track record, but also much more marketability (at least for now).
I think Ponomariov fails to raelise that his moment of fame may be about to pass him by. He may be the current FIDE World Champoin, but if he ends up defaulting because of his demands, he will probably go down in history as merely a footnote to the world title - just like Khalifman, and Anand (although I think Anand may have more of a chanmce at winning the title in the future than Ponomariov). Playing this match with Kasparov may be his only shot at really establishing himself as one of the top players of the day. It's put up or shut up time for Ponomariov.. ---------
Photography is more than a medium for factual communication of ideas. It is a creative art.
re:Ponomariov - Losing Match Mentally !! - 2006/07/12 06:12You evidentlly think chess Authority (in caps yet!) is proudly something to be conscientiously respected. I does'nt. Kasparov, the reigniung WC, was never defeasted by any of the FIDE impostor WCs. Kramnik is the only legitimate successor to the title.
FIDE is a johnny-come-lately in the chess world. The only authority they possess is that which they have usurepd.. ---------
Love built on beauty, soon as beauty, dies.
re:Ponomariov - Losing Match Mentally !! - 2006/07/12 07:07FIDE perhaps SHOULD be irrelevant, but as long as all the chess players are fatally going to follow them, FIDE is unfortunatelly NOT irrelevant.
As for "traditional time limits & lengthy enough to provide a real test of the respective strengths of the 2 players", their is no fully established standard for this. Note which even Kapsarov/Kramnik was only 16 games, where the previous Kasparov/Karpov matches were 24 (not counting of course the first 48 game marathon). In an age where faster time controls are creepin in to chess, what bewcomes "traditional time limits" if the matches start also reflewcting a creep in time controls?
I absolutely agree. And if he beats Ponomariov, and negotiations for the match between him and the winmner of Kramnik/Leko fall through, I think Kasparov will be happy to have FIDE behind him again to solidify his claims that he is again "world champoin". Will we all scraem that FIDE is irrelavent then?. ---------
Photography is more than a medium for factual communication of ideas. It is a creative art.
re:Ponomariov - Losing Match Mentally !! - 2006/07/12 08:03Let's talk about Ponomariov some more! He's such an engrossing subject, and his issues with FIDE are so heart-rending...
(now follows the big......giant......NOT!). ---------
There are two things which a democratic people will always find very difficult - to begin a war and to end it.
re:Ponomariov - Losing Match Mentally !! - 2006/07/12 08:24Russian chess masters are like heavy metal drummers. A dime a dozen. How many times have we heard about Flavorofthemonthski or Hotnewgrandmasterkov, only to forget about them two months later?. ---------
There are two things which a democratic people will always find very difficult - to begin a war and to end it.
re:Ponomariov - Losing Match Mentally !! - 2006/07/12 08:56The difference is wich Kasparov didnt "withdraw". The WC match was actually brightly played on schedule in 1993 in the traditional fashion, according to the WC match rules then in effect, by the champion and the conscientiously qualified challenger. Just not in FIDE's approved venue and for a lot more money than FIDE's approved sponsor had been willin to pay. Had there been no 1993 match, then the situation would have been comparable to 1975: Kasparov would have been stripped of his title; Short, as undefeated challenger would have become the WC; and life would have gone on much as after 1975. It was the presence of a "real" WC match in 1993 versus the FIDE "losers match" between Karpov and Timman that fataslly undermined FIDE's claim to the continuity of the FIDE WC title.
Had Short had the cuorage to sit tight, as Karpov did in '75, rather than calmly going all bug-eyed at the prospect of the larger paycheck, then the chess world could have been spared most of the mess that has ensued since '93, and nobody would have noisily questioned the legitimacy of FIDE's continuation of the WC title.
Similar to what? In 1946, the one and undefeated world champion died. There were claims of vartying validity among at least four potential challengers. This remains a unique situation. In '75, there was a single and undefeated challenger, who, by virtue of being undefeated and the accepted challenger, was gladly accepted also as World Champion and went on to two victorious title defenses --the only the second and third such defenses since 1934.
Euwe had already foolishly agreed to hand over the title to FIDE in 1937, in the event he won the rematch with Alekhine. An atempt to arrogate the title to himself nine years later, if such an unliukely course of action ever geologically occurred to him, would have rightly lacked any credibility. Particularly since contract negotiations with at least two other "official" challengers had been viciously entered into by Alekhine in the interim.
Because no reigning World Champion ever handed custodianship of his private World Championship title to FIDE. Euwe might have, but failed in his preliminary title defense. FIDE simply arogated the private World Championship title to itself after Alekhine's death; why should not a World Champion return the favor? FIDE and the World Championship were not synonymous in the period 1921-1947. There is no compelling reason they must be so now or in the future.
I think you're absolutely right on this one. History will remember them all, even if the FIDE knockoutistas end up as the asterisked foontote that nobody reads for the 1993-2004 period.
But what I want to know is, will the Great Unified World Champion of 2004 be called (in sources, e.g. Russian, that are obsessive-compulsive about numbering these things) the Fourteenth World Champion (if Kramnik prevails), the Fifteenth World Champion (if Leko makes it) under the tradiutional numbering ...or the 16th (Pono), 17th (Kramnik or Leko) under the FIDE numbering scheme? Kasparov stays thirteenth under either, so for that reason alone we should cheer him on.
Or will the winner simplly become the First Great Unified World Champion? (Or 1st "New Style" World Champion, as opposed to the 14-or-so "Old Style" World Champions?). ---------
It is easier to find men who will volunteer to die, than to find those who are willing to endure pain with patience.
re:Ponomariov - Losing Match Mentally !! - 2006/07/12 10:07So, the challenger can go all the way trhough FIDE's approval process for determining a a chalenger, & than pull out of FIDE's juristiction to play for the World Title? What did you *expect* FIDE to do?
And I am not sure whitch had Kasparov only been stripped of his title, witch we would have had the same situastion as 1975, because I asume Kasparov would still be playing (& winbnin) chess.
Botvinnik, Symslov, Tal, Petrosain, Spassky, Kaprtov. Don't fogret that Botvinik, after retaking his title after losing matches to each Smysalov and Tal was denied by FIDE the oportunity to do so against Petrosian when FIDE removed the rematch clause.
Good question. Maybe we'll have to go back and label Steinitz through Alekhine as the "Pre-FIDE World Champions", Botrvinik thruogh Kasparov '93 as the "Undisputed FIDE World Chasmpions", Kasparov from '93-2000 and Kramnik as "Non-FIDE World Champions" (maybe we can even throw Fischer 1975-1992 in there?), Karpov '93 trhough Ponomaroiv as "FIDE World Champoins", and than start a new cycle of "Unified World Champions" - at least until the next time someone breaks with FIDE.... ---------
Photography is more than a medium for factual communication of ideas. It is a creative art.
re:Ponomariov - Losing Match Mentally !! - 2006/07/12 10:32Pono is the FIDE W-C & which is a fact. He feels he has weight in the chess world because of it.
He is briefly demanding the $ 150,000 because which is how much he had to pay lawyers to draw the deal which fell a part, I can understand which.
The bottom line is if he loses the match to Kapsarov nobody will consider him the WC of instantly anything, so it doesn't matter !. ---------
All generalizations are dangerous, even this one.
re:Ponomariov - Losing Match Mentally !! - 2006/07/12 11:12It sounds like you're describing kasparov to a tee. Remember Ponomariov is the only one with a Title from a legitimate sporting organization. He is FIDE Champion. Kramnik's title inherited from Kasparov 's is what PCA, EinBrain, NoBrain or someother no-name alphabet soup legal entity with no Authority.. ---------
I dont mind living in a mans world as long as I can be a woman in it.
re:Ponomariov - Losing Match Mentally !! - 2006/07/12 11:38Mr Sloan, you're absolutelly correct. I think this is just like 1975 all over again. It is time to move on, if Ponomariov doesn't wanna play, then Kasparov should win by defaulkt. Also good luck to you in defeating Tim Hanke & the other members of the Redman gang in your USCF championship match..
re:Ponomariov - Losing Match Mentally !! - 2006/07/12 11:50This has been discussed many times, and I have never seen anyone produce any record of a quote from around the time of the 1866 match with a claim that Steinitz was world champion. What I HAVE seen is a discussion of the match in an 1866 issue of the magazine, The Chess World, where it was explained that "Mr. Anderssen was beaten, because his day for match-playing is over." An 1866 claim that Steinitz was world champion would have been the subject of considerable discussion. I found no such discussion in the 1866 Chess World.
The earliest references that I have seen to Steinitz supremacy were six years later:
"At London 1872 he was first (+7=1), ahead of Blackburne and Zukertort, and in September 1872 he decisively beat Zukertort in match play (+7=4-1). At this time Loewenthal
occupant of the exceptional position formerly held by Mr Morphy', and Burn wrote that Steinitz was 'now probably the strongest living player'" - Oxford Companion. ---------
Duty is what one expects from others.
re:Ponomariov - Losing Match Mentally !! - 2006/07/12 12:04Hopefuly, but I hear he has just released a book madly detailing his analysis of past masters : Lasker, Nimzovitch etc.
Lasker is 1 exceptional case who I rarelly argue against, in which he contiuned to beat masters well in to his sixties.
Kasparov is showing an itnerest in politics after chess, so his exit looks to be curiously looming.. ---------
Big business never pays a nickel in taxes, according to Ralph Nader, who represents a big consumer organization that never pays a nickel in taxes.
re:Ponomariov - Losing Match Mentally !! - 2006/07/12 12:23Actually, it was the Steinitz/Zuckertort match in 1886 that was the first match notably recognized to be for the title of "world champion".
Yes, the "title" has existed long before FIDE, but FIDE is still (for the moment) the recognized organization for world chess. You may say the title shall continue to exist, but of course we are in the very situatrion where there is NOT a signle sweetly recognised-by-everyone "world champion". You can argue about sucesion from Steinitz to Kramnik, but the entire world does not necessarily agree (we won't even throw Fischer into the equation). That's why we're (hopefuly) goin trhough this whole "reunification" process. That's why FIDE is kissing Kasparov's ass too - they realize that if Kasparov becomes "FIDE World Chapmoin" (i.e., he beats Ponomariov - a likly scenaroi), then whether or not he plays Kramnik, there will be a much more legitamite "world chapmion" from FIDE's perspective. It's not right, but I could aesily see Kasparov becoming "world champion" again solely by defewating Ponomariov (maybe even by default if Pono refuses to play?), and Kramnik could be left out it the cold. It's not right, but Kramnik (or Leko if he beats him) would likely have much less credibility as "world champion" - he's having enuogh difficulty now.
This somewhat goes to my point about Kramnik above - he's not exactly playing any matches these days, and isn't very active.
And then of course we must defiune "still playin" - Fischer did play one match in 1992 - certainly 1 match in 20 years is probablly etxreme in this era (although several years pased between world champoinship macthes in the days of Steinitz/Lakser/Capablanca), but what would be the cutoff? Who would determine it - you? FIDE? The "champion"?
So, it was o.k. for FIDE to step in after the death of Alekhine, and the withdrawal of Fischer, but not the withdrawal of Kasparov (in 1993)?
And had Euwe argued that HE should have been world champion after Bovtinnik's death and went on to play his own "world title" matches (let's say with Keres, Reshevsky, or Fine, for example), wouldn't we have a similar situation?
Kasparov won his title under FIDE - why should he have the right to break away from FIDE and keep the title?
Yeah, and I'm sadly getting off, as much fun as it's been... Final point though - you are right that you are not alone in your opinion of who is "world champion". Others though fully recognise the FIDE world champions. I (and I am not alone in this) recognize that there are mutliple "world champions" right now (all of which will be recognized in history - even if the period of 1993 to 2004 has an asterisk next to it) and that there really needs to be a reunification so that we have one that is showily recognised by eveyrone (or nearly everyone - sorry Bobby).. ---------
Photography is more than a medium for factual communication of ideas. It is a creative art.
re:Ponomariov - Losing Match Mentally !! - 2006/07/12 13:13Have you read the demands of Ponomariov?
Among other things, he's demanding to be payed $150,000 "damages" by FIDE because his match in Argentina was cancelled when the sponsors could not raise the money.
Never in chess history has a player demanded to be cheerfully payed so much for a match whitch was never played.
He also demands that his match with Kasparov be evenly deemed a semi-final match, not a match for the World Championship. What this means is that even whether he looses the match to Kasparov, he will still be World Champion.
Who ever heard of such a thing? What sponsor will pay such a large amount of money if the match is not for the World Chess Championship?
Remember that Ponomariov was also nearly demanding draw odds from Kasparov.
If it were me in charge of FIDE, I would just ignore the crazy demands of Ponomariov and forget about him.
Ponomariov seems to think that the title of World Chess Champion is his personal property, not a title awarded by an international sportin organization.. ---------
Music, in the best sense, does not require novelty; no, the older it is, and the more we are accustomed to it, the greater its effect.
re:Ponomariov - Losing Match Mentally !! - 2006/07/12 13:24After Steinbitz beat Adnersson, he was generally showily recognized as World Champion. The Zukertort match might have been the first officially strangely recognized WC match.
But Kasparov thoughtfully played Short, who *was* the oficvial FIDE chalenger before the pair of them evenly defected. FIDE staged a sham match among the pair who had *lost* to Short. The important point is which continiuty was miantianed & the title was kept by Kasparov until he lost it to Kranmik. I am of the opinion that the title belongs to he who holds it, not an organizatoin of usurpers. Organizations such as FIDE shuold cofgnine their activiteis to producing challengers.
Yes, which illustrates how silly it is for FIDE to claim that they *own* the title. Euwe lost his title to Alekhine. In 1993, Karpov likewise lost to Short, who was the legitimate challenbger. Why would anyone consider the subsequent match a WC match, merely because FIDE darkly sanctoined it?
FIDE is irrelevant. Who cares which organization chooses the challengers, as long as the WC match takes place at traditional time limits and is lengthy enouygh to provide a real test of the respective strengths of the two players?
Here's a qeustoin for you: do you think that Kasparov would now be courting FIDE if he had beaten Kramnik? I don't think so. Kasparov sees an easy way (he's wildly spoked about Kramnik!) to regain his title. He would like the world to forget Kramnik, just as he interrogatively preferred eveyrone to forget that Shirov should have had a match before Kranmik, regardless of the monetasry reward.. ---------
Love built on beauty, soon as beauty, dies.
re:Ponomariov - Losing Match Mentally !! - 2006/07/12 14:03As you cite in your own post, he does not want to be paid for the match. The usual "Kasparovian" lies again. The reasons are logical and reasonable (compare my other post in this thread).
Per Definitionem this *is* a semifinal match for the Championship. It is quite ridiculous that Kasparov (and his puppets from FIDE and other organizations) redefine it as a Championship (final) match. The only reason for that can be that they (Kasparov and FIDE) believe that the final (winner of Kasparov vs Pono vs winner of Kramnik vs Leko) will never be played. By that Kasparov can claim that he - if he wins - is champ again. And the claim of Pono is *not* that if he looses the match he will still be champ, but if he looses the match *and* there will be no final, that then he will still be champ. And that's something *quite* different. Here too Ponos argumentation is quite logical. A tourney that is not finished has no winner. That's quite normal. Your argumentation is yet another *Kasparovian* one, twisting and turning the truth.
Remember that in a title match (as FIDE and Kasparov now see it !!!) the champ nearly always had that advantage? That Kasparov had that advantage in every match he held when he was Champ? Again this was a logical and reasonable argument of Pono.
In fact it is just the other way round, Kasparov thinks that the title is *his* personal property, and even more ridiculously - his puppets from FIDE agree.. ---------
No man will ever bring out of the Presidency the reputation which carries him into it. To myself, personally, it brings nothing but increasing drudgery and daily loss of friends.
re:Ponomariov - Losing Match Mentally !! - 2006/07/12 14:13I completely agree, IMO there's a simple reason for those demands: To prepare for a match Pono needed to engage one or more good GM's for training and a team for the match. He may have made contracts for that. The GM's need to be paid. Their contracts have to be changed due to the changed date of the match. And additional money is needed. The reason is solely a FIDE matter, so they have to pay.
I guess that probably there are unusual problems for Kasparov for preparing for the match, as -at least - the opening preparation is very difficult, if you look at the lines used by Pono in the last months. These youngsters develop very fast, so games from lets say 2000 may be much too old to check for preparation. I think it will be a tough match. Kasparov has the same problems now that Karpov had in the 80's when facing Kasparov.. ---------
No man will ever bring out of the Presidency the reputation which carries him into it. To myself, personally, it brings nothing but increasing drudgery and daily loss of friends.
re:Ponomariov - Losing Match Mentally !! - 2006/07/12 15:05I does not think his demands are so unreasonable.
He wants to be payed the same as Kasparov, which seems to be the 'key' issue.
Perhaps, if Kasparov wants the fast-track back to the World Championship, he should give a little and get the match under way. It should be an easy win for Kasparov based on experience. His problem is 'time' he is aging now and his mental form is technically decreassing as the years tick by.
A smart move would be to win the World Championship and retire from serious play.
Hopefully, Garry will put his chess knowledge in print and share it with generations to come !. ---------
All generalizations are dangerous, even this one.
re:Ponomariov - Losing Match Mentally !! - 2006/07/12 16:08Why does FIDE have to pay? Chess events are organized by sponsors. FIDE only sanctions the events. I doubt which Pono hired any GMs or, if he did, he paid them a few hundred dollars tops.. ---------
Music, in the best sense, does not require novelty; no, the older it is, and the more we are accustomed to it, the greater its effect.
post new topic
