After the 9th game we were depressed. Losing two games in a row was not the main problem – it was quality of play what disturbed us. And one could not think of any idea how to increase it. A very hard moment! It is a miracle that Vladimir managed to reverse the situation.
Even if we forget about Topalov’s blunder in the 10th game, one could see that Vladimir played it in different mood. Vladimir played well. Objectively the game was close to a draw, but Black needed demonstrating significant accuracy, and Topalov was not even close. Compared to the two previous games, the 10th game was diametrically opposite. However, it gave rise to new problems: how to play the last two games, what strategy should be selected? The tension was extremely high until the very end.
You spent so much times together – seven healthy men, each one with their own habits and maybe eccentricities. I cannot believe such isolated life went completely smoothly… For me this was a first experience. We all have different tempers, and there was almost no time to go out. But I was pleasantly surprised that the atmosphere was almost ideal. There was not a single case of anybody raising his voice! And at the same time the tension was electrifying. All those filth from the other side only made us more united. One can say, we believed in miracle, and the miracle happened.
The match is over. Could you comment actions of the Bulgarian delegation? It is obvious that all these protests were arranged in advance. Each protest was a part of a well-defined plot. In my opinion, this was the only responsibility of some members of Topalov’s team, otherwise it is hard to understand what else they did. Their aim was to make psychological impact on Kramnik.
Everybody knows that Kramnik unlike some other players does not need to hate the opponent to play well. It is known that Botvinnik could not play normally if he had no reasons to dislike his opponent. When he was losing to Tal – and Tal was such an outstanding person that nobody could hate him – he suffered from inability to find any reasons for aversion. And then he found it: ‘Yes, Tal is a very nice guy, but his uncle…’ SoMikhailMoiseevichfoundtheemotionheneeded.
Vladimir does not need it. His own comfort is more important for him. Our opponents figured it too well, and developed their campaign until it was unbearable for any sane person. They got what they wanted in some way: free point and extra White, not mentioning psychological situation. So the Bulgarian delegation made a good job, one has to admit it.
But their methods?! So what? I guess they thought any methods are usable in a title match. However, in the end the justice prevailed!
Topalov is an outstanding player. Should we count him as accessory if this dirty campaign? Danailov’s role as well as role of some other members of the delegation is clear for me, but what about Topalov’s role? My own opinion is that all members of a team are equally responsible for individual actions of each team member. Being in shoes of Topalov’s seconds, I’d feel highly uncomfortable. I was lucky being in a team that never made me blushing! Never!
As for Topalov, maybe he did not participate in it directly. But nobody prevented him from expressing his own opinion, if he had one, especially if it was opposite to Danailov’s. Nobody prevented him from saying: ‘Enough!’ But he did not do anything. I am not a man who wants to win at all costs. I am sure Kramnik is also similar to me in this sense. So Danailov’s actions primarily hit his player. Thousands of chess fans admired Topalov’s brilliant style. And it is difficult for me to believe that the number of his fans will not start decreasing now. These people supported not Danailov, but Topalov. And whom they can support now?
The match is over, all could expect quietness and forgiveness, maybe new plan for the future but…new waves of attack made by Danilov came from Ukraine…
What could Kramnik do in the toilet? Everything, everything to receive any information. There was neither video, nor audio control. It is abnormal to spend two hours during each game in the rest room and toilet. Kramnik has said that he drinks a lot of water during the game, but he is lying. On the video recording it could be seen that in five hours Kramnik only drunk half a glass of water. Then he said that he likes to walk and used the toilet space for that purpose. But then why did he close the door every time? If you are walking up and down, it is logical to open the door, not close it.
But the most disturbing was, that, after leaving the toilet, Kramnik immediately made very strong computer moves. He always made his mistakes whilst sitting at the board. This occured when Veselin replied immediately and Kramnik could not escape to the toilet. Therefore in the second game he overlooked checkmate in two moves: this problem he had to solve alone at the board.
How did your team obtain the video recordings of the challenger? The video recording of the rest rooms was made according to the contract with the organizers. When we saw the strange behavior of Kramnik, we officially, in writing, requested the organizing committee to supply the video film and we received it in an official way.
The appeal committee decided to respond to the protest of the Bulgarian delegation by closing the individual toilets of the participants and to providing one general toilet. Why did such decision not satisy you? Because the rest rooms were not closed as well, and the video records were not given to journalists. However even such a decision, with the wisdom of Solomon, was not good enough for Kramnik. The next day the President of FIDE dismissed two members of the appeal committee Makropoulos and Azmaiparashvili (according the official version they submitted their resignations). So we got the impression that without his toilet Kramnik can not play.
Why did Topalov lose? Because it is impossible to win against someone who is making, in each game, 80 percent computer moves. Nowadays the average rating of Fritz 10 is about 3200. Playing 80 percent of his moves in conformity with those of this program, Kramnik played at a strength of about 2900-3000, much better than Kasparov and Fischer. Importantly, Topalov with 2813 points, has been for more than a year the leader of the world rating list, so, the result 6-6 in the main games, and 2.5 -1.5 in the time-break is, in my opinion, very successful for Veselin, taking into account against whom he played.
Is a new match possible? Very soon we will make an official proposal for a rematch in Sofia, in March-April of the next year. According to the rules of FIDE, every chess player with a rating higher than 2700, can challenge the World Champion to a match for a title. For this purpose the challenger should pay to the Champion one million dollars (net), 20 percent of this amount to FIDE and to provide organizational costs. In this case, the World Champion cannot refuse, otherwise he will lose his crown. But I am not a big optimist, and I am sure that Kramnik will refuse. He is hardly likely to play in the near future outside of Russia and Germany, where he has a strong support. And FIDE cannot force him. Nowadays, this organization is very weak and dominated by the Russian chess federation, with its President, Vice-Premier of Russia Alexander Zhukov, who is the main Patron of Kramnik.
I know that chess fans in Kalmykia received you very warmly. What were the conditions like at the match? Like a war. A huge amount of police, military, army, FSB (ex KGB). Ostensibly protection, but actually it was obvious that there is one aim: to return to Russia the chess crown at any cost. In the words of the famous Russian song: ” We will not spare any price!”
It took two days to Carsten Hensel to answer those allegations and the next day interview of Topalov published by Gert Ligterink in the Dutch newspaper de Volkskrant with an open letter realeased in all chess media.
…The Gert Ligterink’s interview with Veselin Topalov, contains a number of quotes and statements by Grandmaster Veselin Topalov which are not in accordance with the facts.
Topalov: “I underestimated the reaction of my body. It’s not so strange that it relaxed after the intense concentration of the match in Elista. Should I not have come here to play? That did not occur to me for one moment. I have never ever breached a signed contract. I am not Kramnik. How often has he withdrawn with vague complaints of fatigue? This spring he withdrew from the tournament in Monaco immediately after he had signed the contract for the match against me.”
Vladimir Kramnik has never, in the course of his career, broken a contract. The reason for his not participating in the tournaments in Corus 2006 and Monaco 2006 were medical. Everything was done in close contact and agreement with the organisers, who were presented with the relevant medical certificates at early dates. The contracts were dissolved in amicable agreement by both parties. It is furthermore wrong to claim that Kramnik cancelled his participation in the Monaco tournament after signing the world championship contract. The world championship contract was signed in April 2006, while the release from the Monaco contract came in February 2006.
Topalov: “After the fourth game my manager asked to see the surveillance tapes in order to find out exactly how my opponent was spending his time in the restroom. He saw that Kramnik visited the toilet very frequently, and so we became suspicious. Naturally this is suspicious behaviour. The toilet was the only area that was not covered by the surveillance cameras.”
Because of this remark we are now publishing a report by Mr Valery Bovaev, Chairman of the Executive Committee in Elista. From this report it is possible to tell exactly who played what role in the release and viewing of the video recordings, which infringe on the personal rights of Vladimir Kramnik. It becomes clear that the video recordings were not requested only after the fourth game, but already some days before.
Topalov: “The Appeals Committee agreed to lock up the toilets in the restrooms. Kramnik reacted like an injured innocent. Contract this and contract that, how dare they insult me. It is always the same with him. He breaks the rules continuously, but heaven forbid his own rights should be touched. That Kramnik did not show up for the fifth game was his own fault. He thought he could get away with anything. I would have preferred to play the game and see our protest comprehensively addressed. Instead I got one free point. But Kramnik got his way in all the other points. He could do anything he wanted in his restroom, and the Appeals Committee was dismissed.
The consequence was that starting from the sixth game I no longer knew whom I was playing against. Kramnik had been quite vulnerable in the past year, but in this match he hardly made any tactical mistakes. I began to have doubts. Was Kramnik my opponent or was it Kramnik assisted by a computer? In order to keep him at the board as much as possible I started playing very quickly. Too quickly sometimes. The blunder which caused me lose the ninth game was the result of a decision I had taken too quickly.”
Mr Topalov still owes us an answer with regard to precisely which rules Vladimir Kramnik is supposed to have broken. What occurred was quite the opposite. Incidentally, because of the breach of contract by the Appeals Committee of FIDE, game five, in a judicial sense, was never played. So the result of the classical chess match is 6:5 in favour of Vladimir Kramnik.
The doubts expressed by Mr. Topalov are nothing but a pitiful excuse in connection with a major sporting defeat. It is especially inconsistent when you consider that all the measures taken to prevent possible manipulations (the glass wall and light curtain, the prevention of any kind of electronic signals in the playing zone, the resting rooms and the toilets, the physical search and examination of the players and all the rooms before the start of each game) were initiated by the Kramnik team. Before the start of game one Topalov’s team did practically nothing to ensure this kind of security. It is a fact that the organisation took all necessary measures to prevent any kind of manipulation from the outset. The further intensification of the controls during the match were welcomed by Kramnik and in some cases demanded by him. In Elista new standards were set which can be regarded as an example for professional chess in the future.
The fact that the Topalov team allowed themselves to be carried away and use their very close connections to highly-placed FIDE officials to damage Vladimir Kramnik is an act of unsporting behaviour the likes of which have never before been seen in the world of chess. This is true in connection with
- the public release of the private video recordings, which represent an infringement on his personal rights,
- the illegal forfeit of game five after FIDE had broken its contract, and
- the indirect accusations and allegations of cheating and the consequent damage to the reputation of Vladimir Kramnik.
The PR disaster that followed for the Topalov team was the result of unprofessional behaviour and an underestimation of the intelligence of the public, as well as the clear sporting defeat. This can only be seen as a victory of justice. The acceptance of defeat in by Mr. Topalov is, from my point of view, the only reasonable sentence in his interview.
When Danilov informed FIDE about the right of Topalov to call for a ‘Revenge match’ to be organized in March 2007 with a prize fund of 1,700,000 US$, Topalov continued with his accusation of cheating. On December 12, 2006 an interview of Topalov was published in the Spanish daily ABC. (Later both Topalov and Danilov denied the content of the interview…)
How was the encounter with Kramnik? Very tense, although objectively speaking I dominated the majority of it.
What happened before the fifth game? We got the videos of what Kramnik was doing between every move. He was going to the bathroom many times and his behavior was very suspicious.
They accuse you of trying to disturb him because he was winning? We never wanted to stop the match. There were clear indications of cheating. You look at that tape and it puts the fear into you. It’s not just how many times he went to the bathroom, but how he went. Many times he came out, came to the board and moved instantly.
He alleges health problems… That’s a lie. I drank more than he did and didn’t go to the bathroom so often. We protested, but the committee, which had sided with us, was fired.
They say it’s inconceivable that the rival team had access to private video? They also saw my video. They followed my every step and everyone who was with me. And if he’s not doing anything wrong, what’s the problem?
Illescas said you exaggerated, and lied, about the number of times Kramnik went to the bathroom? I don’t know how many times he went. My team only saw the tapes once and then they disappeared.
Maybe they were based on approximations? When they inspected the bathrooms they found a network cable hidden in the stucco ceiling.
That never came out. We kept it quiet for many reasons.
Was it a mistake to keep it quiet? We couldn’t say anything. It was a very tense situation. If we announced it the match would have been cancelled and I wanted to play and to win the money. What’s more, there were threats.
Made by whom? Anonymous at the start, but they closed the airport. It’s easy to talk here, but when you’re in Russia you think about how you’re going to get out. Walking? And forget about the money of course. So we shut up and continued the match.
Did you notice anything at the board? There you’re focused. The problem for Illescas is that he didn’t know what was going on either because Kramnik didn’t say anything to anyone on his team.
So he got outside help? Yes. They were Russians, but not from the chess world.
So his team is innocent? I think so. They aren’t involved; that’s why they doubt and deny everything.
Did he get help from the KGB? The trick is that no professional [player] was implicated and those who told him the moves were fans or from the KGB. If you gave Illescas that job they’d crush me.
Have you spoken with Kramnik? The Kremlin will never admit they poisoned that Russian spy, which seems obvious, or that Kramnik cheated.
Did you feel in physical danger? Yes, and I don’t think I’ll ever go back there.
In Kalmykia there was anti-doping control, yes? They gave us one test, but the laboratory was in Moscow.
Do you believe that Kramnik continued cheating after the scandal was unleashed? Personally I think yes, and that the new method was better.
Also in the tiebreak games? There they had a foolproof system. In the fourth game, when he already had me beat, Kramnik made a move that would only occur to a computer. He also had the right to a rest day, but even though he was sick he didn’t take it. If you’re going to have moves passed to you, best to play as soon as possible. But they did it better than the shoddy job with the cables.
If that’s all true, what is going to happen in the future when computers are even stronger? If things continue this way, with the technology the Russians have, Kramnik will be invincible in a match.
There’s no way to stop it? Before the tiebreak, when a member of my team checked him..
.. for electronics? Yes, with a scanner. The guy was visibly shaking. I think he had something on his body and he was worried it would be discovered. I know that’s my personal opinion, which is just a guess. The definitive proof for me is the cable.
But in the second game you wiped him off the board, although later you failed to finish him off. It was precisely because he played like a computer. He kept capturing pieces very quickly, with total calm, when my attack was very dangerous. I couldn’t believe it. If you look at the position with a computer it loves black, although it’s lost, until it’s too late. How could he be so confident?
Before the match did you suspect anything like this? We had it in mind and we thought, well, in the worst case we’ll get the money. The problem was that we found out. If you don’t discover it you just play chess. But if you find out it wrecks you. You can’t sleep and you spin yourself in circles.
On January 19, 2007 Silvio Danailov sent to FIDE financial guarantee certified by the Bulbank UniCredit Group for a sum of two million dollars to cover a proposed challenge match between former FIDE world champion Veselin Topalov and the current unified world champion Vladimir Kramnik. From its quaterly board meeting held in Antalya on January 28, 2007, the FIDE Presidential Board rejected the challenge bid by Veselin Topalov to play against Vladimir Kramnik in the coming months. The time constraints made it impossible to stage such a prestigious event in a form that it warrents.