Translated material
Mat-rewind
The unification match for the FIDE World Classical Chess Championship title between Russian Vladimir Kramnik and Bulgarian Veselin Topalov did not bode well for morals in the world chess kingdom almost from the very beginning. After an unsuccessful start (two defeats in four games), Topalov’s manager Silvio Danailov, known for his, frankly, bad character, accused Kramnik of visiting the toilet too often during games where the Russian, according to the Bulgarian side, consulted with his seconds. Kramnik did not go to the fifth game in protest against the restrictions on visiting the toilet, and he was declared a technical defeat, which almost led to the early termination of the match. When, after painful negotiations with the participation of FIDE President Kirsan Ilyumzhinov, the match continued and ended with the victory of Kramnik, whose chances were rated lower before the match, the scandal did not end.
At first, Kramnik, in one of his interviews, according to journalists, called his opponent “a strong player, but a very bad person.” Then Topalov publicly accused Kramnik of playing unfairly and that the Russian won... with the help of the special services. In response, the Russian's manager Carsten Hansel said that he would file a complaint with the FIDE Ethics Commission. And Topalov’s manager Silvio Danailov immediately interpreted this intention of the opposing side as an attempt to disrupt the rematch. According to FIDE regulations, the world champion is obliged to play such a match, and Mr. Danailov had already made a fuss and was going to organize a rematch on “his own field” for Topalov - in Sofia.
In other sports, situations also occur when losers at major tournaments do not admit their defeat. The most memorable incident happened at the last Summer Olympics in Athens, where the South Korean delegation, not without reason, believed that their gymnast had been robbed of the all-around victory, undeservedly giving it to an American. Of course, it was not possible to “replay” the results of the competition, despite the official protest of the Korean delegation. But in gymnastics, at least, the protesters had quite clear arguments: there are strict judging criteria, and according to these criteria, the American clearly lost to the South Korean athlete in the last exercise, and the judges ignored this. In chess, you can’t find fault with the judge; all you have to do is find fault with your opponent.
It is clear that the world championships using the knockout system, which Kirsan Ilyumzhinov introduced, are fundamentally different from the classic matches for the world title. It is clear that either these two types of championships need to be considered almost different types of chess (and world championships with shortened move control are the third type), or we need to settle on one formula for determining the world champion. But the very essence of chess, where by definition extreme individualism reigns, allows great grandmasters to exercise rights and flout any regulations. After all, money is given not for a sport, but for a specific chess genius meeting another chess genius. By the way, in this sense, it is not surprising why chess, in terms of scandalousness, is so reminiscent of professional boxing, where the individual talent of the athlete, together with the cunning of the promoters, also decides everything.
However, if professional boxing is a fairly massive spectacle, and therefore can afford to have world champions in six or seven versions, such discord is simply destructive for elite chess. The uncontrollability of the strongest players and their managers can lead to the fact that chess will cease to exist as a sport altogether, degenerating into some kind of commercial intellectual entertainment. But if the sporting hierarchy disappears in chess, there will be no incentives left for players. Of course, you can organize sessions of simultaneous games of chess geniuses with the public, turning chess players into touring artists, but this will be a completely different type of spectacle.
So endless scandals at the highest level of chess destroy the very essence of the great game.