Kramnik to sue for game 5? It was played. In fa...

...............

"Blather update: ......... But game 5 was played, and legally so. Kramnik was a few meters away watching his flag fall..................




.....Blather update 2: Some are making arguments of the legality of the appeals committee's decision. But this has little to do with the correctness of the forfeit or the permanence of that result. It is a de facto situation because under the conditions that were then in effect as applied by the match officials, the clock was started. That's the point. The players have an obligation to play, not say, "There may or may not be legal issues we may eventually discover, so I'm going to sit out until a bunch of lawyers decide." This is why we have match officials and appeals committees......


http://susanpolgar.blogspot.com/2006_10_01_susanpolgar_archive.html

It seems that Kramnik wanted to have his cake and eat it.
I hope that Topalov wins the playoff, at least he tries not to play boring chess and I am fed up with Kramnik's typical Soviet attitude, sometimes his conduct during this match verged on taking the piss
🙂

Originally posted by Turfmoor
It seems that Kramnik wanted to have his cake and eat it.
I hope that Topalov wins the playoff, at least he tries not to play boring chess and I am fed up with Kramnik's typical Soviet attitude, sometimes his conduct during this match verged on taking the piss
🙂

Originally posted by Turfmoor
It seems that Kramnik wanted to have his cake and eat it.
I hope that Topalov wins the playoff, at least he tries not to play boring chess and I am fed up with Kramnik's typical Soviet attitude, sometimes his conduct during this match verged on taking the piss
🙂

Originally posted by Los Angeles
...............

"Blather update: ......... But game 5 was played, and legally so. Kramnik was a few meters away watching his flag fall..................




.....Blather update 2: Some are making arguments of the legality of the appeals committee's decision. But this has little to do with the correctness of the forfeit or the permanence of that r ...[text shortened]... mittees......


http://susanpolgar.blogspot.com/2006_10_01_susanpolgar_archive.html[/b]

Originally posted by Turfmoor
It seems that Kramnik wanted to have his cake and eat it.
I hope that Topalov wins the playoff, at least he tries not to play boring chess and I am fed up with Kramnik's typical Soviet attitude, sometimes his conduct during this match verged on taking the piss
🙂

Originally posted by stevetodd
Topolov has proved himself someone just lacking class as a person by trying to adopt gutter tactics to put his opponent off, I hope he doesn't win but even if he does win, he will NEVER be respected by the entire chess community as a person, gentleman or indeed a man! (which of course he is not)

Originally posted by Los Angeles
I would recomend you to visit 50 times the bathroom before you come and post here.

Originally posted by Los Angeles
I would recomend you to visit 50 times the bathroom before you come and post here.

more or less Everybody in the international chess community supports Kramnik, he might have been better advised to play game 5 under protest than be defaulted and play the rest of the match under protest, but that game was ''played'' under different conditions than those agreed in the pre-match contracts and should not count.
There is no comparison with Fischer's default, because he was seaking a change in the agreed playing conditions, Kramnik was merely insisting on the match continuing under the agreed playing conditions, rather than under new conditions, unilaterally in favour of his opponent.