Q: But we can talk about the results.
A: They managed to reach some positive outcomes. They organized some sort of FIDE Championship. One may disagree with the system of this championship, but this presents a real opportunity for many players to earn good money. However, there are many flaws in this system. It is too early to draw final conclusions. I think we drew up and signed the open letter exactly because the present situation is very unstable and critical. It is a turning point. If FIDE pursues its unacceptable ideas, it will result in a split of the chess world. It won’t be something like FIDE/Kasparov opposition, it will be a more serious, final split. Many leading chess players and organizers will find themselves in polar opposition to FIDE. On the other hand, the cooperation with Octagon is FIDE’s strong point. If common sense prevails in the leadership of this organization, it is OK to deal with FIDE. It is a question of personal dislikes or ambitions, it is about quite rational things.
Q: Have you discussed a possible course of action with Karpov and Kasparov?
A: Not yet. I want to note, that in my understanding this letter is not an attempt to cause harm to FIDE.
Q: But the bottom line: is this letter an obvious attempt to put pressure on FIDE?
A: I have just one wish: the chess community and outsiders should know about serious problems that exist in chess. Unfortunately, not many people (just a narrow circle of professionals and advanced chess fans) are aware of them. FIDE quite often distorts the real picture. This organization still enjoys popular support and confidence. The aim of this letter is to influence public opinion first of all. If the public understanding of the problems reaches a higher level, it is quite possible FIDE will change something. In any case, neither abolishing FIDE not weakening the position of this organization are in my agenda. I just want this organization to consult the chess players.
Q: What does it mean in a practical sense? Organization of a round table, a series of consultations, or something else?
A: It can be everything. The simplest step would be to conduct democratic voting among the top one or two hundred chess players. The matters of such a caliber as a world championship, change of the time control, have to be decided this way. Let the majority win.
Q: Do you think this democratic way is efficient enough for solving the problems of the chess world?
A: It is not about efficiency. I don’t know, for example, what the result of voting on the formula of the world championship will be. I am sure that the overwhelming majority of the first twenty would support a traditional format. It is quite clear that many from the bottom of the first hundred will vote for the knock-out system, which favors them.
Q: In other words, you will be outvoted.
A: It is not that obvious, but even so, at least, the democratic principle won’t be violated. If I am outvoted on this issue, I will hardly take part in the FIDE championship. I will try to create an alternative cycle. However, at the present time FIDE does not consult us, or pretends not to.
Q: Kasparov has been recalling the GMA congress in Murcia, in which his ideas of reform (most of which have been adopted) were overruled by a slim margin of voters. Does that not mean that the majority is often inert and short-sighted?
A: Certainly, there is inertness. Most of the top hundred players do not want to change anything. I think this is normal. Expressing an opinion is quite a different matter.
Q: Well, the majority expressed their position.
A: It means that was the way it should have been. If the majority is for reducing time control, go ahead, change it. I might not play with such a time control, but it will be a democratic way of solving the problem. I just want to add on this matter, that the proponents of reducing the time control will not stop. I have no doubt that if tournaments with shorter time control become standard, then in three years we will play 25-minute games in the best case scenario.
Q: You have just mentioned that if the proponents of reducing the time control win, you will try to organize an alternative cycle. How realistic are these plans?
A: I am already working on doing so. I still hope that FIDE will change its mind. If that doesn’t happen, there are at least four organizations that have expressed an interest in organizing a cycle. I am not going to reveal any names, since it is impossible to work with all four of them. Besides, the negotiations require a lot of time.
Q: Traditionally, world champions have always been remarkable figures of political life in Russia. Do you perceive yourself as a public figure in the Russian political arena?
A: Personally, I don’t. I don’t like politics, and have no desire to getting involved in it. Maybe some people treat me as a political figure, but I am trying to be closer to chess matters. However, I am ready to express my opinion if I am asked for it. If you call that public activity, I am ready to be a public figure.
On September 13, 2001 an interview of Garry Kasparov under the title: “My negotiations with FIDE” was published on Kasparovchess website.
Garry Kasparov: Everybody knows that the FIDE president Kirsan Ilyumzhinov loves to indulge in wishful thinking. But his report at the General Assembly of the last FIDE Congress goes beyond all limits. It’s nothing else than shameless boasting. Take for example his trumpeting about including chess in the Olympics. According to him all major issues were already agreed upon, and that it’s just a matter of time. However last summer it became clear that Ilyumzhinov’s project had proved a complete flop: the FIDE president seems to have forgotten about his previous plans and promises regarding the 112th IOC session in Moscow, where – as we all know – not a word was said about chess. Now all he can do is put the best face on it.
But what I’m most interested in is of course Ilyumzhinov’s pretentious statements concerning the relations between FIDE and me. To avoid accusing the FIDE president of intentionally falsifying facts I will say that all the facts are turned upside down. All claims about Emmanuel Omuku supposedly having negotiations with me are simply absurd. To make things clear I’ll describe here all the attempts that FIDE made in order to contact me after the London match.
The first attempt was in April when Omuku contacted me and said we should meet. I immediately referred him to my agent Owen Williams. If my agent decided that there was anything substantial behind Omuku’s offer – then I would be ready to meet with him. This contact produced no results because Omuku – as much as he tried – failed to come up with anything more than the usual, ‘It’s time for Kasparov to come back to the united family of FIDE’. But I still have a different opinion about this.
A couple of weeks later their side in the ‘negotiations’ was reinforced by Octagon, a marketing company, which cooperates with FIDE. They started a more serious conversation with me that had a chance to bring some positive results. People from Octagon claimed they had contacted Kramnik as well. They wanted to organize a triple match-tournament between Kasparov, Kramnik and Anand. Our conversation was quite long. I made it absolutely clear for them that the only possible position that I can hold in my negotiations with FIDE is declared in the well known ‘3 K Letter.’
Let me remind you of the three main points of the letter: First, FIDE has to recognize Kramnik as a legitimate World Champion, or, to be more precise, they have to recognize the whole line of historical title succession. Second, they have to apply only the classical time control for all the games at the final stage of the World Championship. Third, they need to change the whole format of the event and forget about the crazy KO lottery system. Our negotiations with Octagon ended in nothing because the FIDE conditions, which Octagon was authorized to communicate to us, openly ignored all the issues mentioned in the ‘3K Letter.’ I’m not sure if the nature of their talks with Kramnik was exactly the same, but I suspect that the outcome of their meeting was very similar to ours.
At the end of August I got another phone call from Omuku, who said we should urgently meet. My answer was still the same: contact Williams, and if he tells me you have anything new – then I’ll listen to what you have to say. Omuku talked to Williams. All we heard was the same old stuff. Owen even started writing him a letter but in the end sent just a short reply. The real negotiations with FIDE must resolve a great number of issues because without them openly admitting that we are right, and considering the problems discussed in our letter, we don’t see any point in starting a conversation with them. Moreover, I told Omuku (and I will hold to this principle in the future) that I will consider only those offers that are also made to Kramnik. Otherwise all this makes no sense, because I believe that the only legitimate World Champion today is Vladimir Kramnik. Thus our conversation finished.
After this some things happened that I was not going to discuss, but now I consider it my duty to talk about them openly – though without unnecessarily mentioning the name of a very famous and respected Russian man who was used by Ilyumzhinov in his hoax. One of the people involved in this was Zurab Azmaiparashvili, who can confirm all I’m going to say. Zurab was one of those who called me from the FIDE Congress and offered a very considerable sum of money if I refused to participate in the Botvinnik Memorial in favor of the FIDE World Championship. Naturally our conversation immediately ended. I told Zurab that I couldn’t even discuss this. There are principles that everybody must stick to, and negotiations are possible only under this condition. Theoretically, these principles are already becoming more and more popular because the chess world has longed for unification for quite a long time. But unification will never happen under the condition that we should give in to FIDE and Ilyumzhinov. The cornerstone of any negotiations – if they ever take place – should be preserving the traditional format that saw the crowning of the fourteen world chess champions. I will repeat – I was not even going to mention this event because in my understanding nothing actually happened. But Ilyumzhinov so impudently distorted the facts that I had to speak up. If I have to, I can give the name of the person I mentioned, who unfortunately fell victim of this shady transaction.
I’m not very well aware of the details concerning the situation around the upcoming FIDE World Championship in Moscow, but if there’s as much truth in Ilyumzhinov’s words about his contacts with Putin and the Russian and Moscow governments as in his words about ‘negotiations’ between Kasparov and FIDE – then I must presume he’s on the verge of bankruptcy and disaster.”
At the congress in Halkidiki the FIDE Executive Board has resolved to introduce two new time controls: 1h 15m for 40 moves + 15m for the rest + 30s per move; and 1h 30m + 30s. The circular letter states: “Upon the request of many players the FIDE President has approved the request of the Organising Committee for the 2001/2002 World Chess Championships on the introduction of the variant of the new time control of all the moves in 1 hour 30 minutes with an incremental time of 30 seconds per move from move one.”
FIDE also announce that random doping control will be preceded during the next world championship in Moscow.
A month before the event former World Chess Champion Anatoly Karpov announced that he shall join the World Championship organized by FIDE starting 25th November at the Kremlin in Moscow.
“The time is right for me to make a comeback”, Karpov said. “I celebrated my 50th birthday this year with close to 2000 guests at the Bolshoi Theatre and many of my friends encouraged me to make this move. My recent victory at the Najdorf Memorial Cup in Buenos Aires has inspired me to seek the title again”, he said. Another reason was the change of the World Chess Championship cycle rhythm from 1 year to 2 years.”
Karpov said that the World Championship being held in Moscow would enable him to give to his beloved Russia his best. “I brought the title back to Russia from the West in 1975. Now in 2001 I feel it is my duty to wrest the crown from the East and take it back to Mother Russia.”
The defending champion Viswanathan Anand of India won the title last year when the World Championship was held in New Delhi and Teheran. “Anand had the home court advantage then. Now I shall have the edge since the World Championship is in Russia,” Karpov added.