Which Candidate Should the ECF Support in the FIDE Presidential Election? (Take 2)

The very latest International round up of English news.

Which Candidate Should the ECF Support in the FIDE Presidential Election?

Poll ended at Mon Oct 01, 2018 8:05 am

Arkady Dvorkovich
5
11%
Georgios Makropoulos
9
20%
Nigel Short
22
48%
None of the Above
10
22%
 
Total votes: 46

Gavin Hughes
Posts: 39
Joined: Sun Jul 23, 2017 11:36 pm

Re: Which Candidate Should the ECF Support in the FIDE Presidential Election? (Take 2)

Post by Gavin Hughes » Sun Jul 15, 2018 11:18 pm

Looking at the number of federations supporting which candidates and the current situation i think the money is on Makro to win. Though the support can change at voting it would be a bit of a u-turn. Good news for English chess that has the potential of either Nigel winning or if Makro wins then Malcolm wins.

TimWall
Posts: 23
Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2018 12:23 pm

Re: Which Candidate Should the ECF Support in the FIDE Presidential Election? (Take 2)

Post by TimWall » Tue Jul 17, 2018 1:33 pm

As one of the few people (perhaps) in English chess who has met all three of the FIDE Presidential candidates, I can say that I support Malcolm Pein’s position of trying to reform FIDE from within - on this occasion.
Even though I have a tremendous admiration for Nigel Short and his achievements as a player, I don’t think that he’s cut out for the world of FIDE politics. Sadly, I also agree with the view that his public comments on women in chess mean that in that vital area for the development of the game, he would not be the ideal candidate.
Arkadiy Dvorkovich is a very presentable and reasonable face of the Kremlin, inasmuch as there is one these days, but he has long been a servant of the Russian government and cannot be expected to do anything that contradicts the Kremlin’s interests. (By the way, don’t assume that everyone in Russian chess fully supports the Kremlin’s choice. However, they may not feel brave enough to dissent publicly.)
Which brings us to Makropoulos, who in my view does share a lot of the responsibility for the way that FIDE has been run under Ilyumzhinov for these two decades plus. Let’s be clear: If Malcolm Pein were not on this ticket, there would be no point whatsoever in voting for Makro.
They key question is, ‘Can Malcolm achieve meaningful reforms, as one honest person within a pretty dubious team?’ I believe he can give it a good shot, and that if anyone can do it, he can. But we have to be honest with ourselves that his gambit may not succeed, and that if he is blocked bureaucratically he will have to resign and go public with the reasons why.
Reforming FIDE is a huge job, but I believe that Malcolm is ambitious enough, and pragmatic enough, to work with various interests and maybe get the job done. Pretty doesn’t come into it, but Malcolm will have to keep his banner spotlessly clean if he wants to win in 2022.
Getting the message out there, that Malcolm has a radically different agenda to Makro’s, and that this step is a necessary one if FIDE is to survive at all, is very important. Nigel’s campaign, while deserving respect for the criticisms he shares with Malcolm of the Kirsan regime, has no chance of success, mainly because of the way Kirsan, the Kremlin & Makro (a pretty unholy trinity) have used their ‘administrative resources’ to rig FIDE’s elections over the years.
Can the executor of Krsan’s reign be used to end the corrupt system? It’s a tall order, perhaps, but it’s the only strategy that seems to stand any chance of success.
If Malcolm is sidelined within Makro’s team, he will have no choice to to resign and stand against Makro or his allies in 2022. If Dvorkovich wins somehow - and this cannot be ruled out, due to the deep-seated corruption within many national federations’ officials - it may then be time to consider a wholly new body to run world chess.
At this point, I think it’s fair to say that Malcolm’s campaign is virtually the last chance to save FIDE. Working for radical reform has to be better than a schism: Just look what happened when Nigel and Garry K went their own way in 1993 - that paved the way for Kirsan and his rotten system to take over. Chess may not survive another disaster like that, so despite the very reasonable reservations, the ECF has to support not Short or Makro, but Malcolm’s attempt at reform.

Roger de Coverly
Posts: 17388
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 2:51 pm

Re: Which Candidate Should the ECF Support in the FIDE Presidential Election? (Take 2)

Post by Roger de Coverly » Tue Jul 17, 2018 1:53 pm

TimWall wrote:
Tue Jul 17, 2018 1:33 pm
- that paved the way for Kirsan and his rotten system to take over
Surely Kirsan just inherited the Campomanes system for winning FIDE elections? Butter up the official or officials of smaller Federations leaving the larger Federations, those representing a majority of players powerless.

User avatar
Christopher Kreuzer
Posts: 7072
Joined: Fri Aug 06, 2010 2:34 am
Location: London

Re: Which Candidate Should the ECF Support in the FIDE Presidential Election? (Take 2)

Post by Christopher Kreuzer » Tue Jul 17, 2018 2:10 pm

TimWall wrote:
Tue Jul 17, 2018 1:33 pm
At this point, I think it’s fair to say that Malcolm’s campaign is virtually the last chance to save FIDE. Working for radical reform has to be better than a schism: Just look what happened when Nigel and Garry K went their own way in 1993 - that paved the way for Kirsan and his rotten system to take over. Chess may not survive another disaster like that, so despite the very reasonable reservations, the ECF has to support not Short or Makro, but Malcolm’s attempt at reform.
Why would chess (just at the international level, or in a wider sense?) "not survive another disaster like that"? I am sure Nick Faulks will say better than I can what the positives are about FIDE as it currently exists. I agree that change is needed, but why is radical reform better than slower reform or a schism? Why would FIDE be beyond saving if Dvorkovich was elected or Makro elected and Malcolm sidelined? Someone mentioned the example of Seb Coe and the IAAF. Sometimes huge international organisations work best without a leading figure driving them forward (FIFA, IOC, UN, NATO, I am stretching things a bit here, as FIDE is several magnitudes smaller than these organisations).

TimWall
Posts: 23
Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2018 12:23 pm

Re: Which Candidate Should the ECF Support in the FIDE Presidential Election? (Take 2)

Post by TimWall » Tue Jul 17, 2018 3:24 pm

I may have sounded a little too apocalyptic about the perspectives for FIDE if Malcolm is unsuccessful in working through the Makro team.
However, I think both Malcolm and Nigel in their generally excellent ‘Perpetual Chess Podcast’ interviews pointed out that any Kremlin-led FIDE is going to potentially have big problems avoiding bank accounts being frozen etc, due to US Treasury sanctions.
In a wider sense, the Kirsan era was particularly blighted by allegations of money-laundering and associations with dictators such as Hussein, Gaddafi & Assad - virtually ensuring that FIDE would not get commercial sponsorship except from Russia.
If Makro & his team ‘sidelined’ Malcolm and went back to working with the Kremlin (a Zombie Kirsan regime, if you like) then again I think the same danger arises.
Maybe I am being a little alarmist, but on the other hand I think FIDE’s status as a legitimate body for world chess is at some risk if the Kremlin is pulling the strings after October 3.

User avatar
Christopher Kreuzer
Posts: 7072
Joined: Fri Aug 06, 2010 2:34 am
Location: London

Re: Which Candidate Should the ECF Support in the FIDE Presidential Election? (Take 2)

Post by Christopher Kreuzer » Tue Jul 17, 2018 3:31 pm

TimWall wrote:
Tue Jul 17, 2018 3:24 pm
Maybe I am being a little alarmist, but on the other hand I think FIDE’s status as a legitimate body for world chess is at some risk if the Kremlin is pulling the strings after October 3.
Was the Kremlin not pulling the strings before, or is there more of a push for 'soft power' now?

TimWall
Posts: 23
Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2018 12:23 pm

Re: Which Candidate Should the ECF Support in the FIDE Presidential Election? (Take 2)

Post by TimWall » Tue Jul 17, 2018 3:39 pm

When Makro and the rest of the presidential board revolted against Kirsan, that presumably meant that Kremlin influence was far less.

TimWall
Posts: 23
Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2018 12:23 pm

Re: Which Candidate Should the ECF Support in the FIDE Presidential Election? (Take 2)

Post by TimWall » Tue Jul 17, 2018 3:45 pm

If the events of the last couple of days are anything to go by, the Kremlin’s idea of ‘soft power’ now consists of having its own ‘Siberian Candidate’ in the White House... The words ‘soft’ and ‘power’ don’t really go together in the Russian political lexicon.

User avatar
JustinHorton
Posts: 5693
Joined: Mon Aug 04, 2008 10:06 am
Location: Somewhere you're not

Re: Which Candidate Should the ECF Support in the FIDE Presidential Election? (Take 2)

Post by JustinHorton » Wed Jul 18, 2018 7:56 am

No prizes for this risible Telegraph piece
Last edited by JustinHorton on Wed Jul 18, 2018 9:28 am, edited 1 time in total.
"Do you play chess?"
"Yes, but I prefer a game with a better chance of cheating."

lostontime.blogspot.com

TimWall
Posts: 23
Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2018 12:23 pm

Re: Which Candidate Should the ECF Support in the FIDE Presidential Election? (Take 2)

Post by TimWall » Wed Jul 18, 2018 8:08 am

JustinHorton wrote:
Wed Jul 18, 2018 7:56 am
No prizes for this rusible Telegraph piece
Yes, pretty risible. (They even used a photo of Fischer from 1992. instead of 1972). This whole article took the non-chess playing journalist 1-2 hours max, including the phone call to Ilya Merenzon.

NickFaulks
Posts: 4522
Joined: Sat Jan 02, 2010 1:28 pm

Re: Which Candidate Should the ECF Support in the FIDE Presidential Election? (Take 2)

Post by NickFaulks » Wed Jul 18, 2018 8:19 am

JustinHorton wrote:
Wed Jul 18, 2018 7:56 am
No prizes for this rusible Telegraph piece
Indeed, even by normal standards this is a particularly idiotic piece. It's not often you see Ilya Merenzon presented as the face of all that is good about FIDE.

Kevin Thurlow
Posts: 2554
Joined: Wed Apr 30, 2008 12:28 pm

Re: Which Candidate Should the ECF Support in the FIDE Presidential Election? (Take 2)

Post by Kevin Thurlow » Wed Jul 18, 2018 9:38 am

Unfortunately the new Telegraph doesn't seem to employ many journalists, just a few people trawling the internet to find pieces of interest.

User avatar
JustinHorton
Posts: 5693
Joined: Mon Aug 04, 2008 10:06 am
Location: Somewhere you're not

Re: Which Candidate Should the ECF Support in the FIDE Presidential Election? (Take 2)

Post by JustinHorton » Wed Jul 18, 2018 10:39 am

Well it does employ two journalists who are chessplayers, one of whom is its chess correspondent and the other of whom regularly writes chess stories for the paper.

Curiously though neither of them have eritten this particular story, which the Telegraph just happens to have picked on and in which the Telegraph just happens to have omitted to mention that their own correspondent has a substantial involvement.
"Do you play chess?"
"Yes, but I prefer a game with a better chance of cheating."

lostontime.blogspot.com

Roger de Coverly
Posts: 17388
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 2:51 pm

Re: Which Candidate Should the ECF Support in the FIDE Presidential Election? (Take 2)

Post by Roger de Coverly » Wed Jul 18, 2018 11:28 am

Roger de Coverly wrote:
Fri Jul 13, 2018 6:18 pm
NickFaulks wrote:
Fri Jul 13, 2018 5:27 pm
Does anyone know what he's on about?
.....

... Kirsan or perhaps FIDE offered finance to run a couple of Norm tournaments. Whether these tournaments ever materialised isn't known. Presumably they never took place.
It appears they got $ 20,000 out of $ 80,000. Whether it's "bribery" is semantics, but it seems they exchanged their vote for financial support to the Canadian Federation or its constituents.

https://forum.chesstalk.com/forum/chess ... ions/page2

Roger Lancaster
Posts: 486
Joined: Tue Mar 17, 2015 2:44 pm

Re: Which Candidate Should the ECF Support in the FIDE Presidential Election? (Take 2)

Post by Roger Lancaster » Wed Jul 18, 2018 12:31 pm

JustinHorton wrote:
Wed Jul 18, 2018 10:39 am
Well it does employ two journalists who are chessplayers, one of whom is its chess correspondent and the other of whom regularly writes chess stories for the paper.

Curiously though neither of them have eritten this particular story, which the Telegraph just happens to have picked on and in which the Telegraph just happens to have omitted to mention that their own correspondent has a substantial involvement.
I can't speak for the way daily newspapers are organised these days but, long ago when I was more familiar with the set-ups, "journalists" (meaning National Union of Journalists members, with a near-monopoly on "news" items) lived a totally separate existence to specialist contributors such as gardening/bridge/chess correspondents. I suspect that little has changed, in which case it's unreasonable to blame Malcolm.

Post Reply