Q: After nine years of war with FIDE, how do you feel about the approach of the end?
A: I was confident, that some solution would be found, because at some moment I felt the readiness of all sides to go for concessions for the sake of the greater goal. The potential of chess is such, what everyone will eventually gain – here I must agree with Ilyumzhinov. No one lost: each side made concessions, but as a result the gain will prove to be bigger. Probably, this is the disease of any professional sport – conflict of professionals with the federation. In my combat actions against FIDE, there were memorable moments, but as a whole, any war ends with a signing of a peace agreement. I would say that some chapter of my life can be closed now – the war began before my thirtieth birthday, and, if everything goes normally, I hope to complete this cycle before I turn 40.
I will try to complete it with grace – by returning the title.
Q: In any peaceful agreement the most important factor is confidence of those agreeing with each other. Can you say that you trust your partners in the negotiations?
A: It seems to me that the extreme interest of all sides in this process is the main element here. Furthermore, the entire process has long ago left the peace of the office – very rapidly it became of wide public interest. Today the entire world will know about the agreement. Furthermore, there were too many people in the room, who understand, that besides the text on the paper some specific understandings were reached. I will repeat myself; I don’t see any of the sides interested in undermining the agreements, although it is necessary to understand that when this quantity of interests is implicated, any coarseness is possible.
It goes without saying, Bessel’s negotiations with FIDE will not be cloudless; it goes without saying, many problems will be raised. However, I feel everyone’s positive attitude, which should solve practical problems – both from FIDE’s part and from the side of Bessel Kok. I cannot speak for Kramnik, but all sides have good will, based on concrete personal interests. It is now best to work on them together as one team.
Anand was quoted by Leontxo Garcia in El Pais saying that “I do not want to play in the Candidates because I am against Kasparov having the privilege of facing Ponomariov directly”.
Via Arvind Aaron of the Hindu there was a further press release from Anand on May 6th 2002.
“This is in reply to the various persons of the press who have been wondering GM Viswanathan Anand’s stand on the current status of the Unification.
For the record Anand was not present at the 6th May meeting. The reasons for the same are that the deal was already made even before all parties came to a common ground to discuss these matters. Secret and not so secret meetings were taking place before and during the Eurotel Trophy.
On the day Anand won the Eurotel trophy, GM Yasser Seirawan explained to Anand that the solution had already been reached. Kasparov would get his rematch entirely on the terms that he has so long been waiting for.
It was indeed surprising that this was presented as a solution for the chess world. Therefore seeing that the meeting was just a formality Anand declined to attend the same.
FIDE did not even consult it’s top players who by virtue of doing well in their Championship cycles do not get an opportunity to be part of the unification plan.
Anand hopes that the Unification would at least ensure a just cycle in the year 2004. Speaking on his immediate plans Anand said “In the next two years, I will have more time to spend in India. In this period I do hope to work with the present crop of young Indian talent. It has been my intention to start an academy. This may be the best time to lay the foundation for that. My focus will be my chess and I hope at least in the larger picture chess will benefit from this plan.”
Boris Gelfand Comments on May 10, 2002: “First of all I think it is very important to return to structure of World Championship we had till 1993 (with qualification tournament, candidate’s matches or tournament, World championship match). I think that structure proposed from 2nd cycle and further is basically good and also can be supported by absolute majority of players. Concerning first the unification cycle the big drawback is that great players like Anand, Ivanchuk, Grischuk, Svidler and others don’t have a chance to take part in it. I believe, more goodwill was necessary from all parties included to solve this problem. I hope that other important subjects which were omitted from final version of signed documents will be included in agreement between FIDE and Bessel Kok such as the establishment of an elected GM Steering Committee, Health and Benefit Fund etc. Also I believe that it is important to standardise time-controls. For instance have a 7-hour control with increment or without – to be discussed (and supported by majority of leading players) for classical chess, 25 min +10 sec for active chess and time control for blitz tournament (5 min per game or 4+2 sec). It is important in my opinion to stop Fide experiments with time controls (even last year it was changed twice – what can we expect in years to come?)”
Alexei Shirov comments on May 10 2002: “I was not present at the Prague meeting but on 5th of May I still sent a fax to Bessel Kok with my proposal. Until now I don’t even know whether my fax was read at all.
In my proposal (written unfortunately in a big hurry) I stated that the only way to make a fair World Championship system is to abolish the privileges of Kasparov, Kramnik and Ponomariov and make the competition of 16 players, so the most of big names would be included. The future cycles should also consist of 16 players, fourteen of them qualifying from a big swiss tournament and the World champion, as well as the highest rated player, added to the qualifiers.
Of course, my proposal was unrealistic because Kasparov and Kramnik are not exactly the people that would give up their benefits in exchange of justice. But now we have got the cycle without Anand and Ivanchuk, the latter completely betrayed by FIDE, and we have a full uncertainty about the future cycles. I am afraid that the future system will not be announced until the results of this cycle are known. In the last three official World championships nobody had privileges and the rules were clear. Now it’s lost and nothing for the future championships is secured.
I understand that Ilyumzhinov could no longer pay the World Championships from his pocket but the moral bankruptcy (and I can’t find other words for FIDE right now) is sometimes even more drastic than the financial bankruptcy. I believe that the only chance for players (and I am talking first of all about the players who refused to either sign the document or attend the Prague meeting at all) to regain some optimism is to make and publish a fair system for the future World Championships before Dortmund starts.”
Alexander Khalfiman comments on May 12, 2002:
Q: Good or bad thing?
A: That’s a bit rhetoric question. In fact the reunification was a vital necessity for the chess world and to have one World Championship and one Undisputed World Champion is great aim. However, the way it was done in Prague is, in my opinion, no reunification at all. The World Championship where only 11 players can take part is not unifying but just an act of discrimination. Many players are out till 2005 just by definition and that’s really bad. When somebody says that this way was the only one to reach the reunification it’s still not a reason to do it this way. There were many other versions of reunification suggested and supported by many respected professionals and I find it incredibly strange that in Prague no word was said about it just as Bessel Kok’s proposal was the one and only.
Q: Kasparov’s position in the FIDE cycle and non-participation of Ivanchuk and Anand?
A: Considering Kasparov’s undoubted position No1 in world’s ranking and his fantastic tournament results there were enough reasons to seed him to some special position. Actually many other suggestions were also quite favourable for him and nobody offered that he would start from Round 1 in big k.o. tournament. However, all Kasparov’s successes are not enough reason to exclude many strong players from the World Championship. This group, of course, includes Anand and Ivanchuk but is not just limited to them. So, in my opinion, just adding both grandmasters (somehow) to the existing format wouldn’t solve the problem at all. Excluding players like Grischuk, Svidler, Karpov, Dreev, Lautier etc. from the World Championship is just unfair. Maybe they must start from some qualifying stage but they must have right to compete there – it’s the only fair solution.
Q: What do you expect of the 2nd cycle?
A: Well I still hope that Bessel Kok’s plan will be revised somehow and the Reunification cycle will be more inclusive. As a matter of fact, the document signed in Prague contains only the words “FIDE supports THE PRINCIPLES of unity plan presented by Bessel Kok”. So it’s just about principles – the plan itself is not supported yet, at least formally. At the same time, FIDE vice-president Mr.Makroupolos publicly stated then that “FIDE will do the best to find the fairest format and to include all the best players in the World Championship cycle”. So let’s wait. However, I’m really worried that if the plan by Bessel Kok will work and in 2003 the chess world will have the FIDE World Championship cycle consisting of 2(!) players then the future World Championship would be organised for some limited top group again. Of course, it’s unfair but now we’re dangerously close to this “bright” future.
Vesselin Topalov commented “I guess any agreement was better than nothing. Kasparov got all he wanted and I believe now Anand and Ivanchuk are the big losers. As always chessplayers were not united….”
ChessBase interviewed also Anatoly Karpov on the subject:
Q: What is your opinion on the decisions taken in Prague?
A: In general I believe it is positive for chess. In the end everyone realised that the split in the chess world was absolutely negative – for us, the sponsors, for chess in general. So I was glad to hear the speeches in Prague, where I attended the meetings for the first two hours. The reunification was necessary for sure, everybody should have recognised this many years ago. The details of the plan, that is another story. The split lasted ten years, which is a long time. It produced many complications which we have to consider. All the plans which were proposed at the moment came from outside FIDE. Bessel Kok, Kasparov, Kramnik, the Dortmund people, all of them made proposals, which FIDE simply accepted. Probably – for sure – Ilyumzhinov had preliminary negotiations. We know that he signed something with Kasparov, but in the detail plan they must protect the interests of the federations and the players. But at the moment all the plans that were proposed came from the outside, so the interests of FIDE and the players who supported FIDE are not defended. Only one player comes from the FIDE side, Ruslan Ponomariov, the current world champion. But in the last ten years FIDE had four world champions, and Anand and Ivanchuk refused to play in Dortmund, in the interest of FIDE. They were loyal to FIDE and were defending it.
Q: So what don’t you like about the plan?
A: I don’t know if Kasparov and Kramnik can still claim they are world champions. For Kasparov that is of course completely unclear, because he played a match with Kramnik, which they called a world championship match, and lost it. Kasparov was very successful in tournaments, but still he lost the match for the title, so he cannot call himself the current world champion until he beats Kramnik. But he is the most successful tournament player in the last years, so I think he has certain rights. If you want to accept the winner of a competition as the only world champion Kasparov has to be in. If you throw in Kramnik and Ponomariov then everything is clear.
Q: Are you saying they should have a reunification with just these three players?
A: Yes, whatever system, just play against each other without anybody else.
Q: That would be a solution?
A: Let me say it like this: it would not create additional problems. It would unify the title. But if you accept the Dortmund tournament as some kind of a qualification for Kramnik it becomes much more difficult.
Q: So what exactly do you propose? What would you do if you were in charge of everything and had to take a decision today?
A: I haven’t thought about it very deeply, and I can see the problems. It is not so easy to give advice immediately. There must be solutions, but it is not easy. I think maybe in the new situation the Dortmund people should reconsider what to do: keep Dortmund as a candidate tournament for Kramnik, or reorganise it with the other players.
Q: You are talking about Anand and Ivanchuk?
A: Yes, and Khalifman and myself.
Q: Were you consulted in Prague or about the Unity Plan?
A: I just took part in the meeting during the first two hours, that’s all.
Q: How do you get on with Ilyumzhinov these days? He used to be a very close friend of yours.
A: Ilyumzhinov? You think the matter in Lucerne in the Olympic court was between friends?
Q: Please refresh our memories.
A: FIDE just stole one year of my championship. They reduced the cycle from two years to one year. So we had to go to court in Lucerne.
Q: And since then you have not been on good terms?
A: Why since then? If we had been on good terms before then they wouldn’t have done it. Actually I’m talking about the leadership of FIDE. I was supporting FIDE all the time, so my problems were not with the organisation but with the leadership.
Q: Do you feel bitter towards FIDE?
A: It is difficult to say. First I must meet the people, speak with them, understand what exactly they did in Prague. When I left Prague I was satisfied with the situation. At that moment everything looked okay. But now I must examine the documents and talk to the people, after that I can make my position clear.
Vladimir Kramink finally came up with a statement one month later:
“Less than one month after signing the Prague agreement I find it necessary to clarify my position in order to avoid misunderstandings and to comment on certain statements made during the last few days.
1. I reaffirm my intention to fulfill the agreement made in Prague on 6th May supporting the idea of reunification to be achieved after both the Einstein Classical World Chess Championship Match and a FIDE World Chess Championship.
2.I again declare my willingness, under reasonable conditions, to participate in a reunification match as described in the Prague agreement which would be against the winner of a possible FIDE cycle (or against the winner of the proposed match between Ruslan Ponomariov vs Gary Kasparov) provided that I am successful in my own World Championship Match.
3.Contrary to some statements and reports which have misinterpreted the Prague agreement I did not give up the title of Classical Chess World Champion which is based on 116 years of chess history and which is also respected in the Prague agreement. My match against the winner of the Candidates Tournament in Dortmund will be a Classical World Championship Final and not a semifinal. I made some concessions at Prague which have never been made by a Classical World Champion before in order to support the unification process. These were; accepting Ruslan Ponomariov as a Chess World Champion and therefore giving up draw odds from the unification match onward and giving up my right to be seeded automatically into the finals of future cycles.
4.Einstein Group and I are ready for unification as described in the Prague agreement. However, I am fully aware that it will be not easy for any proposed new organisation in professional chess to raise the necessary sponsorship and to develop a business plan acceptable to FIDE. According to the agreement made in Prague the pre-unification Einstein events are to be excluded from the business plan. My partner – Einstein Group plc London – is responsible for the staging of these events and for securing the budgets. Einstein Group will organise the Dortmund Candidates Tournament (6 to 21 July 2002) and the resulting title match between myself and the winner of the Dortmund qualifier in April/May 2003. Therefore our side clearly relieves the proposed new organisation of these costs and responsibilities.
5.I hope that the FIDE cycle will be more inclusive than currently proposed and consist of more than one match between Ruslan Ponomariov and Gary Kasparov. A solution which included more players would be better suited to the principles FIDE has followed in recent years. This is in principle my opinion but I also understand that this decision is not in my responsibility. Furthermore I support the proposal to found a Grandmaster Steering Committee to be elected in a democratic way as a part of a professional management body.
6.Statements which were made during the Moscow press conference on 30 May 2002 about financial problems in Dortmund are groundless. This can be seen clearly from the press release of the Einstein Group dated 31 May 2002. The same I would like to say about statements that I would be an obstacle to the unification process. Such statements made during the above mentioned Moscow press conference and before are incorrect. I believe that such comments are not helpful to the unification movement. Rather these are the real obstacles in raising the necessary global sponsorships. I would like to express the hope that all sides will be more cautious in their future statements. It is clear that endeavors to realize unification will be only successful if all sides will be able to fulfill their promises in this process. Therefore I believe it is time to start with the agreed steps in a constructive and fair way which will be then for the sake of the Chess World.
Moscow, 3 June 2002 Vladimir Kramnik Classical Chess World Champion
Few days after his open letter Kramnik was interview by F. Friedel for ChessBase
Q: Is the final result of the Prague unity agreement what you wanted?
A: For my part yes. From Einstein’s point of view there was less necessity to do anything, it was just a matter of good will. I thought we need some reunification. It would be good for chess, and nobody would lose from it. It is a chance – not more than that. The current situation is simply hopeless. It’s not because of me, it’s not my fault that it happened, but I’m trying to do something to normalise things. Believe me or not, this was my only intention, my only interest. Because from Einstein’s point of view everything was fine anyway.
Q: Is your main interest to unify the chess world or simplify the formula?
A: The main aim is to reunify. Of course under certain conditions, which are from my point of view: classical time controls; a clear system of the world championship cycle; and permanent, once and for ever, well at least for two or three cycles. We would have a very clear situation, like from the fifties to 1985. That was my main interest, to have a normal system, a normal structure, a normal professional organisation. Bessel Kok more or less guaranteed all of this. He took on a lot of responsibilities, but he is an experienced man and I believe that he will do it.
Q: There were complaints by a lot of people that Anand and Ivanchuk were not included in the reunification cycle.
A: Not only them, but also other chess players who are at a level where they should play in a world championship cycle. But it was a long story and the basic point of negotiation in Prague, because I was happy with all the other points. In this point I am not satisfied, because I believe that if we start some completely new process, a revolution in the world of chess, then we should try to involve all players, everyone who is strong enough. Not just Anand and Ivanchuk, but also Karpov, Girschuk, Khalifman, Svidler, players from the top twenty. You need to put them into the process. But it is the responsibility of FIDE, and unfortunately they were not listening much to the players and not listening much to me. They said very clearly to me in Prague, okay here is your cycle and here is our cycle and we do it the way we want to. I could not insist, because at the moment it really isn’t my cycle. It is a parallel cycle which has unification at the end. I did not like the idea that many players would be out of the cycle, but it was a difficult choice for me.