mercredi 2 avril 2008


Dear friend Fernando Arrabal...Please post these letters at your web site... Is planning to visit Europe, Lausanne...Best regards

To: Kirsan Ilyumzhinov, FIDE President April 1, 2008

and Georgios Makropoulos, FIDE Deputy President ;


Responding to the FIDE letter of March 28, 2008, regarding the semi-final World Chess Championship Kamsky - Topalov match, FIDE claims that it will provide among other things for:

a) fairness concerning treatment of both players in respect of organisational issues,

b) equal playing conditions,

c) anti-cheating measures.

However, without a list of specific measures that FIDE is planning to undertake the fundamental rights of the players FIDE’s statements are just empty promises. In as much, GM Kamsky’s personal experience at the 1996 World Chess Championship Kamsky – Karpov match organized in Elista, Russia the homeland of then Russian champion Karpov, shows that FIDE was not able to provide neither fairness, equality nor anti-cheating measures. Since the 1996 World Chess Championship match where a newly elected FIDE president Ilyumzhinov was assisted by Mr. Makropoulos, no radical changes has occured within FIDE to address the faireness and impartiality. The recent 'Toilet War’ at the 2006 Topalov-Kramnik World Championship match is a perfect example of FIDE’s inability to handle these issues.

Mr. Makropoulos offers numerous examples from other sports that are irrelevant and selfserving. However, the other chess championship matches that he refers to though played in "not neutral" countries had attractive prize funds over a Million dollars each, contrasted to a nominal prize fund offered by Topalov’s side. Further the soccer team does not need advice on how to play against its oponent when players run to the bathroom during a game unlike a chess player who is definitely able and tempted to use some extra help. Do you recall the scandal with the American Embassy building in Moscow that had electronic devises implanted by Russians?

Mr. Makropoulos is trying to tell us why GM Kamsky should not be concerned with playing in Bulgaria, GM Topalov’s homeland where GM Topalov has support from his sponsors, fans, and other followers that worship their chess herro. Does FIDE realy believe that any FIDE Supervisor or an Appeals Committee can protect GM Kamsky’s rights from being violated? The answer is clear – it is an impossible task. Under these circumstances and while FIDE has the means and resources to organize the match in a ‘neutral country’ FIDE’s insistence on Bulgaria as the place for the Kamsky - Topalov match is improper.

Furthermore FIDE’s denial of an extension of the bid deadline requested by GM Kamsky and the United States Chess Federation is an unreasonable and wrong decision.

Early in 2007 Topalov’s manager Silvio Danailov, who is also a personal friend of Mr. Makropoulos, was instrumental in securing a spot for GM Topalov at the 2008 World Championship as a challenger for the 2007 World Cup Winner. Thus GM Topalov had more than 1.5 years from the time he lost his title to GM Kramnik in 2006 to prepare his proposal for FIDE that had an arbitrary minimal prize fund of $150,000 and an unfair venue, Bulgaria. These conditions would be objected by any other winner of the 2007 World Cup.

To make conditions even more unfair, the Bulgarian side reserved the unilateral right to match any bid made from the US or Russia for two months. Thus these two countries are eliminated from a short list of potential chess sponsors, as no American or Russian sponsor will have a desire to waste his valuable time and money and go thru the trouble of making a bid just to learn that the other side has a guaranteed right to bid-over. That is being an intentional and well planned joint act by FIDE and Bulgarian side in violation of the rights of GM Kamsky. Since FIDE went as far as to bend its rules in Topalov’s favor it would not stop now to preserve a fair and impartial chess game. Accordingly Mr. Makropoulos’s attempts to convince GM Kamsky that FIDE will preserve the fair chess game in Bulgaria are totaly unrealistic.

While trying to find a sponsor for the match, from late December of 2007 thru present, GM Kamsky for 3 months was fully engaged with FIDE in a correspondence exchange and has been preoccupied and diverted from his normal chess preparations. However, FIDE still did not provide any requested information regarding the Minutes for FIDE Presidential Board meetings, the contract for the Kramnik-Anand match and the proposal/contract made by GM Topalov to FIDE. That seems to be the usual practice by FIDE which was polished over many years while prior World Champions including GM Ponomariev, GM Kasimdzhanov, GM Khalifman engaged in months-long negotiations over a reunification match with GM Kasparov where negotiations were all abolished due to unfair contractual terms and/or broken financial promises. Note that GM Ponomariev, GM Kasimdzhanov, GM Khalifman did not have a re-match opportunity after the loss of a championship title unlike GM Topalov and GM Kramnik. Accordingly if FIDE was able to create numerous special rules and procedures to accommodate both GM Topalov and GM Kramnik then it can and should change its procedures to accommodate GM Kamsky’s reasonable requests as well.

The semi-final World Chess Championship Topalov- Kamsky match is a fundamental milestone for the American challenger for the World Chess Championship title. GM Kamsky’s outstanding result at the 2007 World Cup was a culmination of years of hard work and preparations that enable him to qualify for the 2008 World Championship by competing with hundreds of top GM’s. For the second time in GM Kamsky’s chess career since 1996, FIDE and its leadership: Mr. Ilyumzhinov, Mr. Makropoulos and Mr. Campomanes are trying to destroy GM Kamsky’s chess career and purpose in life by creating an irresolvable conflict over the World Championship match. It appears that FIDE does not fully understand the gravity of the situation. While having numerous alternatives FIDE escalates the situation that may require courts intervention to protect GM Kamsky’s rights.

Since FIDE and not the Bulgarian Federation is in charge of the Topalov- Kamsky match it has the ability to amicably resolve any issue by organizing the match in a neutral country with a respectable prize fund of about 300,000 Euro which is 20% of the FIDE dues received from the Kramnik-Anand match with an advertised prize fund of 1.5 Million Euro. The Bulgarian side can contribute its $150,000 to the total prize fund. This is a realistic approach to the venue and prize fund problem and a better alternative to the existing playing conditions.

GM Kamsky is planning to work with FIDE regarding organizational issues of the Topalov- Kamsky match in a neutral country. Frankly it is unclear why Topalov insists on Bulgaria as the venue for this match especially if he is planning to play a fair chess game. Accordingly GM Topalov who became the challenger to the 2007 World Cup winner thru a FIDE nomination, bypassing a formal qualification process, should agree to play anywhere. I believe that FIDE is powerful enough to convince GM Topalov to voluntarily agree to the change of venue for the Topalov- Kamsky match.

It is clear that there are many alternatives available to FIDE to sponsor and organize this event in a country other than Bulgaria and that Gata Kamsky should not be denied an opportunity to play GM Topalov or be forced to accept the contract terms against his fundamental rights. FIDE must act to avoid violations of fair sportsmanship before the match so that chess fans can enjoy the game and FIDE can maintain its image.

I look forward from hearing from you before the deadline of April 11, 2008.

As always you can contact me directly at


Bella Kamskaya, Esq.

Counsel for Gata Kamsky


GM Kamsky respectfully requests that minutes from March 2008 FIDE Presidential Board meeting in Istanbul, minutes from December 2007 FIDE Presidential Board meeting, the contract for the Kramnik-Anand match and the proposal/contract made by GM Topalov to FIDE together with a schedule of upcoming Presidential Board meetings be provided.

A comment regarding the 2009 World Chess Championship. Currently out of 4 potential candidates for the championship GMs Kramnik, Topalov, and Anand have refused to participate in qualification process via Grand-Prix. Each believes that he will be the champion however unless the runner-ups are ready to play in the 2009 Khanty-Mansiysk they will be out of 2009 championship cycle. How is FIDE prepared to handle this situation? Does FIDE plan to change its rules as it did in 2007-2008 to accommodate GM Topalov and Kramnik?

Your official response is hereby respectfully requested.


From: FIDE World Chess Federation []
Sent: Friday, March 28, 2008 9:11 AM
Cc:;;;; Bulgaria CF;;;;
Subject: Kamsky - Topalov match 2008

Dear chess friends,

The FIDE Presidential Board confirmed in Istanbul that the bidding procedure for the Challengers Match 2008 continues as announced, without any other changes. FIDE is looking forward to receiving alternative offers for this match by the deadline of 11 April.

The FIDE Presidential board has also confirmed the qualifying procedure if any of the two participants fail to participate:

I.) if GM Kamsky refuses to participate, GM Shirov will be asked to participate as the runner-up of the World Cup; if GM Shirov also refuses, GM Topalov will automatically qualify for the World Championship match 2009.

II.) if GM Topalov refuses to participate, GM Kamsky will automatically qualify for the World Championship match 2009.

After the bidding procedure, both players (GM Kamsky and GM Topalov) will be requested to confirm their participation by returning their signed undertaking within 20 days after they receive it, in electronic form, from the FIDE Secretariat. The limited time available until the match is held means that no further extension of deadline will be given.

Concerning some important organisational issues of the Kamsky - Topalov match, I am proposing the following:

1.) As in the Anand - Kramnik match, a member of the FIDE Presidential Board will be appointed as FIDE Supervisor by the President and he will be above the Organising Committee in all issues involving:

a) fairness concerning treatment of both players in respect of organisational issues,

b) equal playing conditions

c) anti-cheating measures

d) fair publicity of both players through the event's press office

The Organising Committee has to follow the orders of the FIDE Supervisor in all issues involving the above aspects before and during the match. Any decision of the FIDE Supervisor can be appealed by one of the players ONLY to the Appeals Committee.

If the match is organised in a "neutral" country, the FIDE President will appoint the Supervisor unless both parties agree to a certain member of the FIDE board. If the match is organised in Bulgaria, the side of GM Kamsky will appoint a member of the FIDE Presidential Board as Supervisor. The same applies for GM Topalov if the match is organised in the United States.

2.) The Appeals Committee will consistof FIDE board members, appointed by the FIDE President. Each player will have the right to exclude 2 (two) FIDE board members before the FIDE President makes his decision. Personally, I do not intend to be a member of the Appeals Committee, although there is a provision in the regulations, and the FIDE President will appoint another member in my place.

3.) The2 arbiters of the match will be selected by FIDE after both players receive a list with 3 candidates and each player proposes 2 of them.

4.) There is no provision in the regulations about private rest rooms or private toilets. Therefore, my suggestion is that no player shall ask for such treatment which might create more problems than it solves.

It will be appreciated if we receive your comments concerning all the above within the next 10 days. The pure organisational issues can be discussed from now as they are not affected by the location of the venue.

Best regards,

Georgios Makropoulos

FIDE Deputy President

4 commentaires:

lefobserver a dit…


(^oo^) bad girl (^oo^) a dit…

Good good good......

Jorge a dit…

Hello friend: it wanted invitarte that you visit blog that I am making with my students of second year of the secondary one on the DISCRIMINATION.
arduous and interesting Subject.
Surely it will be of your affability.
We invited to you that you read what pleases of him and makes an opinion on he himself.
Its contribution will be valuable.
In blog it will find a translator of the page in several languages if he needs it.
A hug from Argentina.

Anastácio Soberbo a dit…

Hello, I like the blog.
My name is!
Sorry not write more, but my English is bad writing.
A hug from Portugal