New Super League Tournaments announced

[Roger de Coverly]

Apparently the London Chess Classic, Stavanger and St Loius are going to form an elite tournament group, with Jakarta joining in 2016 or 2017.

Reported by chess24 based on an announcement by a Norwegian journalist in Baden Baden (where Carlsen is currently playing) and an offhand comment by Topalov in Gibraltar.

https://chess24.com/en/read/news

Confirmed by Malcolm

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/ches ... -year.html

Next year implies 2016, but what of the 2015 events?

The Norwegian version
http://www.dagbladet.no/2015/02/03/spor ... /37512999/

I think I have auto translate switched on, otherwise I think that was in Norwegian.

[Jonathan Bryant]

Obvious good news for absolutely everybody in chess (except FIDE).

It’s really rather impressive how the LCC has continued to reinvent itself.

[Brian Towers]

Obvious good news for absolutely everybody in chess (except FIDE).

In what way is it bad or neutral for FIDE?
Are the events not going to be FIDE rated?

I thought FIDE's primary aim was the promotion of chess?
From the FIDE web site -

The purpose and aim of FIDE are the diffusion and development of chess among all nations of the world, as well as the raising of the level of chess culture and knowledge on a sporting, scientific, creative, educational and cultural basis. FIDE supports a close international cooperation of the chess devotees in all fields of chess activity, thereby also aiming to improve friendly harmony among all peoples of the world.

How do these tournaments go against that?

[Roger de Coverly]

In what way is it bad or neutral for FIDE?

It appears the tournaments are organised in conjunction with Kasparov whom many of the FIDE establishment regard as the Great Satan. In some respects FIDE or the FIDE President act as an adjunct to the Russian Foreign Office and I imagine we are all aware of the relationship between Kasparov and the Russian political leaders.
http://www.fide.com/component/content/a ... dents.html

It will be competing with FIDE's own attempt to organise and publicise a similar series.
http://grandprix.fide.com/

[Paolo Casaschi]

It will be competing with FIDE's own attempt to organise and publicise a similar series.
http://grandprix.fide.com/

I just hope the new "super league" will not use the term "grand prix" in their name...

[Roger de Coverly]

I just hope the new "super league" will not use the term "grand prix" in their name...

https://chess24.com/en/read/news/stavan ... den-league

Ian Rogers called it a "Golden League", Malcolm Pein a "new Grand Prix".

[Brian Towers]

In what way is it bad or neutral for FIDE?

It appears the tournaments are organised in conjunction with Kasparov whom many of the FIDE establishment regard as the Great Satan. In some respects FIDE or the FIDE President act as an adjunct to the Russian Foreign Office and I imagine we are all aware of the relationship between Kasparov and the Russian political leaders.
http://www.fide.com/component/content/a ... dents.html

I think you, and probably many others, are conflating the Federation with some of its senior officers. I would argue that these tournaments, to be run under FIDE rules, and any new cash are good for world chess and so good for FIDE.

It will be competing with FIDE's own attempt to organise and publicise a similar series.
http://grandprix.fide.com/

You know, if I saw large numbers, or even small numbers, of top players facing burnout because of the heavy burden of all the top class competitions they were obliged to play in, say in the same way as cricketers, then I could understand this. The simple fact of the matter is that the burdens and rewards of top chess players are puny in comparison with top cricketers who, themselves, are a long way down the sporting pecking order.

If Kasparov has got together the money to finance this and FIDE (even if it is via the pockets of various Russian republics) has done the same for its competitions, then good luck to both of them. It can only be good for chess and therefore good for the body which controls world chess, FIDE.

[Paolo Casaschi]

I just hope the new "super league" will not use the term "grand prix" in their name...

https://chess24.com/en/read/news/stavan ... den-league

Ian Rogers called it a "Golden League", Malcolm Pein a "new Grand Prix".

It looks like they announced an half baked plan; after Topalov mentioned the initiative during the Gibraltar masterclass they had to announce something but it does not looks like all details are set, including the name. In my opinion, using the "grand prix" term in the name would look confusing and unnecessarily confrontational.

[Roger de Coverly]

It can only be good for chess and therefore good for the body which controls world chess, FIDE.

What's good for chess and what FIDE thinks is good for chess are by no means the same thing. With the possibility for this new series to be seen as an alternative world championship, pressure being brought to bear on potential players not to take part is moderately likely.

[Jonathan Bryant]

I just hope the new "super league" will not use the term "grand prix" in their name...

It doesn’t matter what you call it, a "Grand Prix" is exactly what it is. And a total embarrassment for FIDE which has allowed a leadership to continue driving the game headlong into inconsequence. FIDE not able to generate a series of top level tournaments anywhere other than a very small part of the world, and yet clearly it is possible.

Also worth remembering that the London Chess Classic was originally set up as a dry run for a World Chess Championship match. MP eventually decided he couldn’t work with FIDE - IIRC the final straw was demands for extra payments to be made to certain individuals - and went his own way. Now he’s leaving FIDE behind.

And what are FIDE up to while this series is being organised. Only the most very very important meaningful things ...

http://www.ecforum.org.uk/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=7169

[Paolo Casaschi]

Also worth remembering that the London Chess Classic was originally set up as a dry run for a World Chess Championship match. MP eventually decided he couldn’t work with FIDE - IIRC the final straw was demands for extra payments to be made to certain individuals - and went his own way. Now he’s leaving FIDE behind.

Where does all this come from? MP leaving FIDE behind? For all we know, there's a bunch of tournaments that come together in order to get a bit more marketing visibility (similarly to what has been done in the past without much success); most of those tournaments are existing tournaments, run following FIDE rules and its rating system; as far as we know from the info so far, they are likely to continue following FIDE rules and rating system (even selecting participants based on that raring system). How does that qualify for "leaving FIDE behind"?

That's why, if you run two similar programs next to each other, please do not call them with the same name... there's plenty of names to chose from...

[Roger de Coverly]

How does that qualify for "leaving FIDE behind"?

Agon, on behalf of FIDE, ran a Grand Prix in London. The initiative to partner with St Louis and Stavenger would seem to rule out any future sharing with the continuing Agon series.

[Paolo Casaschi]

How does that qualify for "leaving FIDE behind"?

Agon, on behalf of FIDE, ran a Grand Prix in London. The initiative to partner with St Louis and Stavenger would seem to rule out any future sharing with the continuing Agon series.

You are mixing things up. The previous post was talking about MP (and LCC) "leaving FIDE behind". MP had nothing to do with the London GP and Candidates. There's no clear indication that the LCC will have in the future any less to do with FIDE... still using FIDE rules and ratings...

[Roger de Coverly]

There's no clear indication that the LCC will have in the future any less to do with FIDE... still using FIDE rules and ratings...

I would expect it to maintain its existing position, to have as little as possible to do with FIDE.

[Jonathan Bryant]

Where does all this come from? MP leaving FIDE behind?

The answer to that came in the part of my post that you didn’t quote.


The London Grand Prix tournament was originally supposed to be in the Urals and only transferred to London in unclear circumstances. As far as in-person spectators are concerned it might as well have been played in Russia anyway.

Even if we count that event, there has been a conspicuous imbalance in the location of the grand prix tournaments. Compare the series of tournaments in the late 1980s - Spain, Belgium, France, Sweden, Iceland, Holland - to FIDE’s recent circuit, for example.

It is in that sense - the organisation of it’s major events in what we used to call "the West" - that FIDE is being left behind.

I was talking about the Grand Prix specifically, but I accept the Candidates’ was a fine tournament on the board. Various issues off the board, though, as I recall. Spectator numbers disappointing, for instance.

I think perhaps you misunderstood my post. I wasn’t saying Malcolm Pein was breaking away from FIDE. Rather, "leaving them behind" in terms of him and others being able to do things that FIDE can’t accomplish themselves.