Kasparov vs Ilyumzhinov: the FIDE Presidency battle begins

The very latest International round up of English news.
Lewis Martin
Posts: 296
Joined: Wed May 28, 2014 11:45 am

Re: Kasparov vs Ilyumzhinov: the FIDE Presidency battle begi

Post by Lewis Martin » Mon Aug 11, 2014 4:30 pm

Well, the difference is greater than 36, so the extra countries didn't matter in the end, if you assumed that they all voted for Kirsan.

Controversial I guess, but one country one vote doesn't really work. America's vote with regards to representing their larger number of chess players surely outweigh the smaller numbers in countries like Togo.

Will anything ever change? Have to wait quite a few years before we have a new one. Surely it doesn't have to be a strong Grandmaster chess player?

Having said that, I wonder who on earth would want to challenge Kirsan for the next election? I know it has been two candidates quite a lot in the past, but surely there could be a case for more choices/candidates. I'd prefer it if it was not always Kirsan vs A N Other.

Roger de Coverly
Posts: 21301
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 2:51 pm

Re: Kasparov vs Ilyumzhinov: the FIDE Presidency battle begi

Post by Roger de Coverly » Mon Aug 11, 2014 4:39 pm

Lewis Martin wrote: Having said that, I wonder who on earth would want to challenge Kirsan for the next election?
I'm not sure anyone would, given they would have run a gauntlet of dubious practices, bribery and hate websites. Given that FIDE , or the President at least has become in part an instrument of Russian foreign policy, perhaps the best hope that he isn't President for Life is that Putin dismisses him. Federations with a majority of the world's players could potentially set up a rival international body, but that wouldn't have credibility unless Russia, India and China were on board.

David Sedgwick
Posts: 5249
Joined: Mon Apr 09, 2007 5:56 pm
Location: Croydon
Contact:

Re: Kasparov vs Ilyumzhinov: the FIDE Presidency battle begi

Post by David Sedgwick » Mon Aug 11, 2014 4:49 pm

Mick Norris wrote:Reports earlier were 174 votes available in total, so presumably 3 abstentions/disputed/not accepted
The Ugandan delegate, previously missing, turned up just as the voting was concluding. He also held the proxy for - wait for it - Gabon.

After some debate he was allowed to vote and he cast the Ugandan vote. He declined to exercise the Gabonese proxy, arguably a quite principled action.

Hence the final total was 175. 4 votes were rejected as spoiled by the scrutineers, so 110 to 61 with 4 invalid.

In 2010 3 votes were rejected, so 95 to 55 with 3 invalid.

Chris Rice
Posts: 3417
Joined: Thu Nov 08, 2012 5:17 am

Re: Kasparov vs Ilyumzhinov: the FIDE Presidency battle begi

Post by Chris Rice » Mon Aug 11, 2014 5:01 pm

OK we all know the standard protocol by now. KI offers a VP position to the loser which I believe he did and the loser suddenly is inspired to work for FIDE. Let's see if GK accepts the inevitable which we all knew was going to happen a year ago.

User avatar
Matt Mackenzie
Posts: 5205
Joined: Tue Mar 31, 2009 11:51 pm
Location: Millom, Cumbria

Re: Kasparov vs Ilyumzhinov: the FIDE Presidency battle begi

Post by Matt Mackenzie » Mon Aug 11, 2014 5:04 pm

Lewis Martin wrote:Well, the difference is greater than 36, so the extra countries didn't matter in the end, if you assumed that they all voted for Kirsan.

Controversial I guess, but one country one vote doesn't really work. America's vote with regards to representing their larger number of chess players surely outweigh the smaller numbers in countries like Togo
A familiar refrain at times like this - but many other sporting federations (not least football) are run on an OMOV basis and seem to manage. The problem here is the way Kirsan has cynically used the smaller countries as a vote bank to give legitimacy to his dubious "projects".

Still, even some of his cheerleaders admitted that Gazza was a deeply flawed "alternative". We could just have swapped one set of problems for another :?
"Set up your attacks so that when the fire is out, it isn't out!" (H N Pillsbury)

Mick Norris
Posts: 10329
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2007 10:12 am
Location: Bolton, Greater Manchester

Re: Kasparov vs Ilyumzhinov: the FIDE Presidency battle begi

Post by Mick Norris » Mon Aug 11, 2014 5:08 pm

David Sedgwick wrote:
Mick Norris wrote:Reports earlier were 174 votes available in total, so presumably 3 abstentions/disputed/not accepted
The Ugandan delegate, previously missing, turned up just as the voting was concluding. He also held the proxy for - wait for it - Gabon.

After some debate he was allowed to vote and he cast the Ugandan vote. He declined to exercise the Gabonese proxy, arguably a quite principled action.

Hence the final total was 175. 4 votes were rejected as spoiled by the scrutineers, so 110 to 61 with 4 invalid.

In 2010 3 votes were rejected, so 95 to 55 with 3 invalid.
David

Thanks for that, nice to see Gabon making a sort of appearance :lol:
Any postings on here represent my personal views

Roger de Coverly
Posts: 21301
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 2:51 pm

Re: Kasparov vs Ilyumzhinov: the FIDE Presidency battle begi

Post by Roger de Coverly » Mon Aug 11, 2014 5:12 pm

Chris Rice wrote: KI offers a VP position to the loser which I believe he did and the loser suddenly is inspired to work for FIDE.
Karpov declined, did he not? Leong and Sand were bought off in 2002 without even going through the motions of an election. It took them eleven years to rejoin the opposition.

Mick Norris
Posts: 10329
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2007 10:12 am
Location: Bolton, Greater Manchester

Re: Kasparov vs Ilyumzhinov: the FIDE Presidency battle begi

Post by Mick Norris » Mon Aug 11, 2014 5:55 pm

Chris Rice wrote:OK we all know the standard protocol by now. KI offers a VP position to the loser which I believe he did and the loser suddenly is inspired to work for FIDE. Let's see if GK accepts the inevitable which we all knew was going to happen a year ago.
OK, but maybe it is a good idea to try and change FIDE from the inside? The last 3 elections have shown how not to beat Kirsan

You may well disagree with much of what Andrew Paulson says, but at least worth listening to his view about how to get Kirsan to go
Any postings on here represent my personal views

Roger de Coverly
Posts: 21301
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 2:51 pm

Re: Kasparov vs Ilyumzhinov: the FIDE Presidency battle begi

Post by Roger de Coverly » Mon Aug 11, 2014 5:59 pm

Mick Norris wrote: OK, but maybe it is a good idea to try and change FIDE from the inside? The last 3 elections have shown how not to beat Kirsan
We did at least get elections, which is more than Leong and Sand achieved in 2002. It makes it clear to Kirsan that not everyone loves him.

He was interviewed today by Danny King, still defending zero default times.

Jonathan Bryant
Posts: 3452
Joined: Sun May 11, 2008 3:54 pm

Re: Kasparov vs Ilyumzhinov: the FIDE Presidency battle begi

Post by Jonathan Bryant » Mon Aug 11, 2014 6:19 pm

Matt Mackenzie wrote:... many other sporting federations (not least football) are run on an OMOV basis and seem to manage....

A measure of just how jiggered FIDE is: it is possible to propose FIFA as an improvement.

Lewis Martin
Posts: 296
Joined: Wed May 28, 2014 11:45 am

Re: Kasparov vs Ilyumzhinov: the FIDE Presidency battle begi

Post by Lewis Martin » Mon Aug 11, 2014 6:23 pm

Jonathan Bryant wrote:
Matt Mackenzie wrote:... many other sporting federations (not least football) are run on an OMOV basis and seem to manage....

A measure of just how jiggered FIDE is: it is possible to propose FIFA as an improvement.
:lol:

User avatar
Matt Mackenzie
Posts: 5205
Joined: Tue Mar 31, 2009 11:51 pm
Location: Millom, Cumbria

Re: Kasparov vs Ilyumzhinov: the FIDE Presidency battle begi

Post by Matt Mackenzie » Mon Aug 11, 2014 7:11 pm

Jonathan Bryant wrote:
Matt Mackenzie wrote:... many other sporting federations (not least football) are run on an OMOV basis and seem to manage....

A measure of just how jiggered FIDE is: it is possible to propose FIFA as an improvement.
Well yes, don't think that I am unaware of that irony :D

My real point, though, is that blaming OMOV is barking up the wrong tree.
"Set up your attacks so that when the fire is out, it isn't out!" (H N Pillsbury)

Mick Norris
Posts: 10329
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2007 10:12 am
Location: Bolton, Greater Manchester

Re: Kasparov vs Ilyumzhinov: the FIDE Presidency battle begi

Post by Mick Norris » Mon Aug 11, 2014 8:15 pm

Matt Mackenzie wrote:My real point, though, is that blaming OMOV is barking up the wrong tree.
Indeed, the question for the federations that think FIDE has the wrong system, is how good is their own system?

In the case of the ECF, time would better be spent sorting our own system out i.e. reforming Council, changing the voting power to reflect a Membership system rather than Game Fee leaving influence in the hands of organisations

If you do insist on trying to change FIDE, then you need to speak to those like Rupert Jones and Nick Faulkes who have some idea of how it works, even if you don't like their views

The ECF backed Kasparov and Danailov, and they both lost - maybe we should threaten to back Kirsan and Azmai next time :wink:
Any postings on here represent my personal views


Chris Rice
Posts: 3417
Joined: Thu Nov 08, 2012 5:17 am

Re: Kasparov vs Ilyumzhinov: the FIDE Presidency battle begi

Post by Chris Rice » Tue Aug 12, 2014 6:21 am

Chess.com with an excellent report of the farce that went on yesterday.

http://www.chess.com/news/breaking-ilyu ... tions-4528

Clearly the electoral system is vulnerable to manipulation and so whether or not the election was free and fair, which is unlikely, its always going to be perceived that it was corrupt. But very much like the British electoral system if you are the dominant parties in a first past the post system as Labour and the Conservatives have been then what would be your motivation of going to a different electoral system where you would be at a disadvantage? That's what Illyumzhinov would argue I guess.

Even if you did get some buy-in for electoral change the incumbent would always get a major say in which alternative electoral system was used and Illyumzhinov would naturally choose one that benefited him the most while proclaiming that he's doing his bit on reforming FIDE.
Illyumzhinov may not be there much longer, but even if that's true, what's to stop him putting one of his cronies in place with the same tried and trusted electoral campaign model?
Tbh I can't see any light at the end of this particular tunnel.

Post Reply