SPRAGGETT ON CHESS
Three rounds to go before the 28th edition of one of Europe’s most prestigious opens comes to a close. There is a big group of 10 players tied with 5 points out of 6 games and then another group of 12 players (yours truly included) a half point back at 4.5 points. If someone is to win this tournament outright, then today is the time to start!
Here are the round 7 pairings
Alexander Ipatov (born 1993)
I had a short but sharp game with the Ukrainian youngster Alexander Ipatov. My opponent played very originally and after about 15 moves the game seemed balanced, but very sharp and complicated. I then misplayed my chances on the Kingside and Ipatov simply ignored my threats and built up a strong bind on the Queenside. Just when it seemed that I was in trouble, I found a sharp tactic that seemed to force the game into a drawn Rook and Pawn ending.
I spoke briefly with Alexander. He is a very talented player! Alex has recently changed federations to Spain, but maintains Ukrainian nationality. (FIDE has facilitated players changing federations in recent years). Apparently he is not happy with how the Ukrainian federation is run, and it often does not send representatives to the world youth championships, claiming financial distress (what federation does not claim this?). Alexander feels that the Spanish federation will treat him with the respect that he deserves.
I feel that Alex has a bright future in chess. The game is given at the bottom of this post.
As usual, the tournament is excellently run and the readers can follow the live games at the link given above, as well as much more information about the tournament. Here is a short selection of photos taken by the tournament photographer
Cori (Peru) vs Bruzon (Cuba)
Eva Baekelant (Belgium)
Isobel Sanders (England)
Diana da Rocha (Andorra)
A.M. Hamdouchi (France)
”What have I done??”
__________________________________________________________________________FIDE ELECTIONS EMBARRASSING CANADA ?
Yesterday on this blog I discussed the position of Brazilian grandmaster Geovani Vescovi with regards to the Ilyumzhinov vs Karpov presidential campaigns and how he felt the Brazilian chess federation should vote in September (they are currently committed to vote for Ilyumzhinov). I brought up the example of the Canadian Chess Federation’s dilemma in this election race.
Yesterday on the CMA message board (http://www.chesstalk.com/
) Jean Sasseville wondered what the CFC’s position was, and if it has not already been taken, then when will it be made? Virtually all of the America’s have already publically declared their stance (for example, the USA voted unanimously months ago to support Karpov’s candidacy).
Jean concluded: ”Seriously, my suggestion is that CFC should set a deadline (like August 15) and ask the governors to vote.A timely decision is better than a late decision. With no decision, I am afraid that Canada does not look good on the international scene.”
Bob Armstrong, self-appointed spokesperson for the CFC Executive, did his best to obfuscate the CFC’s position.
OBFUSCATE: To make so confused or opaque as to be difficult to perceive or understandI am certain that my readers will get a big kick out of Bob’s efforts:________________________________________________________________________
”’Let’s get the record straight here………Hal Bond has been very clear that he prefers not to express an opinion, and to get direction from the governors ( who passed the ball to the CFC executive to tell Hal how to vote)…he felt he needed to declare a conflict of interest here…
Hal stated that if he publicly came out and supported Ilymzhinov, he would appear to be merely protecting his own future FIDE arbitering interests – in other words, he felt he needed to declare a conflict of interest here, and not vote as a governor publicly on who to support. It is also likely true that he would prefer to avoid publicly declaring for Karpov, where it appears Karpov is doomed to defeat, since there might be retribution from Ilyumzhinov against him in future…..
The position was put that CFC should do the ” right “‘ thing – but what that was was not clear to all. There were legitimate arguments for supporting both sides it seemed, and the governors were clearly divided among Karpov, Ilyumzhinov and abstain………and it had nothing to do with Hal’s FIDE arbiter position.
I am certain that the more astute of my readers will notice the contradiction when Bob writes at the beginning that Hal Bond stated at the AGM that he is in a position of conflict of interest (an IA) —and at the end when Bob emphasizes that this (dilemma-ed) has nothing to do with his IA position!
Equally hilarious is that Bob could write with a straight face that the CFC wants to do the ‘right’ thing but it is not clear what that is! What happened to doing the ‘responsible’ thing?
In anycase, I think that Jean hits the nail on the head when he mentions that the longer the CFC delays in making a decision, Canada’s reputation will risk being harmed.
It is clear that Hal Bond wants his cake and eat it too: he wants to be FIDE representative of Canada and at the same time continue to represent his own personal interests in FIDE. He openly acknowledges that there is a conflict of interest. But as long as he does not step down as either IA or FIDE representative of Canada, the international embarrassment that Canada finds itself faced with will continue.
It appears to most of those removed from having direct interests in the FIDE election–and that is everyone except the CFC politicos–that there is no real problem here. Canada, as a member of FIDE, has a responsibility to faithfully representing the Canadian chess community’s interests—and that the CFC can not distinguish between this and personal interests.
SPRAGGETT ON CHESS