Page 1 of 1

Report on the 80th FIDE Congress Executive Board 2009

Posted: Sat Feb 13, 2010 11:56 am
by benedgell
http://www.englishchess.org.uk/wp-conte ... ss2009.doc

"A proposal by the Presidential Board that players who fail to appear at the start of a game, not only lose the game by default, but also give them a penalty of € 500 (a second time € 1.000 and a third time € 2.000) met a lot of opposition and was taken back. Possibly it will return next year in the General Assembly."

"The World Chess Championship Cycle 2009 – 2011 will not include Grand Prix series. The final match will – as now planned – be staged in London, before the Olympic Games."

Re: Report on the 80th FIDE Congress Executive Board 2009

Posted: Sat Feb 13, 2010 12:30 pm
by Mike Truran
More proof (if any is needed) that FIDE's Presidential Board consists of a bunch of anti-chess muppets. The sooner we're shot of these incompetent venal dickheads the better.

Re: Report on the 80th FIDE Congress Executive Board 2009

Posted: Sat Feb 13, 2010 3:52 pm
by Jonathan Rogers
Well, the second para sounds good ...?

Richly deserved too.

Re: Report on the 80th FIDE Congress Executive Board 2009

Posted: Sun Feb 14, 2010 7:37 pm
by Alex Holowczak
benedgell wrote: "The World Chess Championship Cycle 2009 – 2011 will not include Grand Prix series.
Don't understand this. The next line says:
FIDE Congress press release wrote:The venue of the Candidates matches will - for 50% - be Azerbaijan. It is not possible to stage them all there, because Aronian (Armenia) cannot play there because of political differences.
If the Grand Prix series is not included, then Aronian won't qualify, surely?

Re: Report on the 80th FIDE Congress Executive Board 2009

Posted: Sun Feb 14, 2010 7:47 pm
by Richard Bates
Is the World Championship in London REALLY a serious prospect? I can't see the Prime Minister of the UK guaranteeing the prizefund somehow...

One could also foresee rather a lot of unwelcome (to FIDE) press coverage - since there must be a reasonable possibility of a reopening of many of the allegations that surrounded the early years of Ilyumizhanov's Presidency?