FIDE: Which Way Forward?
Fédération Internationale des Échecs (FIDE) is gearing up for a pivotal election this fall involving the Presidency of its body. Kirsan Ilyumzhinov will attempt to defend his position as the incumbent President. Also vying for the position will be former World Champion Anatoly Karpov.
The Candidates
Karpov announced his candidacy earlier this month and stated that is was necessary to “restore order”. Karpov had entered the race for Presidency in 2006, but later withdrew. In a 2006 interview, Karpov gave his view on the race.
“Well I personally think that Ilyumzhinov’s chances for success are close to 100% today. The major reason is that Bessel Kok only looks at chess from the point of view of the professional chess players. But Chess Federation incorporates much more than this. And professional chess is only tiny part of entire range of events and activities which take place the World of Chess.”
President Kirsan IlyumzhnovPhoto by FIDE.com.
Karpov’s prophetic comments were on point as Ilyumzhinov secured the support of 96 federations while Bessel Kok languished at 54. Kok got the backing of several powerful federations and the Association of Chess Players, but was unable to stage a coherent campaign to win wide appeal. Karpov will make sure he does not repeat the same mistake. On the other hand, Ilyumzhinov will attempt to solidify his base.
Karpov has always maintained his contact with the chess world. These days he primarily participates in exhibitions since he was unable to maintain the standard that made him one of the greatest players in history. Ilyumzhinov will be credited with unifying the World Championship for the first time since Garry Kasparov bolted FIDE.
GM Anatoly Karpov, 12th World Champion
After Kasparov’s abdication and formation of a rival body, the chess world was set in a tailspin that would last for more than a decade. After several controversial changes in the cycle, Viswanthan Anand unified the title by winning the closed tournament in Mexico and then successfully defended his title against Vladimir Kramnik.
Kramnik has been very critical about the way the championship cycle was conducted and has given an implicit endorsement of Karpov. While he stated that he is not against Ilyumzhinov, he made note that some of the best administrators for chess have been professional players. Kramnik mentioned Max Euwe as an example. Ilyumzhinov should have some concern since Karpov is a “favorite son” of Russia.
The Voting
During the 2006 election campaign, there was a lot of discussion about the democratic voting system of FIDE where each federation gets a vote. Many advocated that the votes be determined by size of federation to negate the power of smaller federations which are in the majority.
It is thought that smaller federations, despite paying the same fees and having the same member obligations, should not have equal number of votes because they have fewer players and little influence. However, that would merely consolidate power in the hands of a few wealthy federations and evolve into a chess oligarchy.
It is also assumed that smaller federations do not have the political savvy to make objective decisions to chose the best candidate. There are notions that smaller nations are swayed by small favors and cajoling. It is hopeful that none of the candidates will adopt this condescending mentality by sending emissaries around the globe with sets and clocks hoping to sway the vote.
Delegates of FIDE General Assembly
at 2008 Chess Olympiad
2010: A Chess Odessey
So which way forward for FIDE? What must the candidate face in garnering the support of the membership body? Kirsan Ilyumzhinov has been FIDE President since 1995 and it is not clear what his platform will be. He certainly has a number of questions to answer due to many unpopular decisions he has made with respect to sponsorship, championship cycle and FIDE rules.
One legacy will be that he endured the fractured World Championship and was able to unite the crown on his watch. He was able to hold major tournaments on each continent and saw the growth of chess in developing countries and the rise of several young players. He was President during a new “chess boom”. Here are some issues I see that may be part of a platform:
- chess grants for aspiring IMs, GMs (must apply),
- better support for developing federations,
- better securing of sponsorship which will come with a more aggressive marketing plan,
- better marketing support for federations,
- more transparency on FIDE changes,
- uniform internet sites for each federation at FIDE.com with e-commerce functionality,
- better diplomacy with federations.
Regardless of the respective platforms, this will be a contested race. Ilyumzhinov will begin making inroads and marketing to his base. He will face a challenge in getting the support of the elite nations, many of which contain players disgruntled with many of the conditions for the professional ranks.
Karpov may go in with very specific targets of Ilyumzhinov’s mistakes while he will have to convince constituents that his lack of administrative experience will be buttressed by a strong team. It will be important to see who he chooses as a running mate.
These next few months will be crucial in setting the tone for what will be an important election for the future of international chess. There may be other candidates lurking. Nevertheless… may the best team win!
Does Karpov have any realistic chances? Hasn’t Kirsan entrenched himself deep in FIDE? Is there any point even running against Kirsan?
Daim,
You underestimate how susceptible to ‘offers’ African feds may be. As you can now see Kirsan has garnered critical support from all the Key players – Turkish Fed, Asian Fed, African fed. Kirsan has already won the election. FIDE elections are not about principles and what is right etc. It is all about how an incumbent can manipulate susceptible feds and bank the votes.
I am of the opinion African chess has two very different faces to it. One is the face of the African officials and the other is the face of the African players. I believe what the African officials do and practice is not what the African players want in general. Unfortunately because they have the power the African officials win the day and the rest of the world thinks this is the true face of African chess when it is not. I may be wrong, but this is how my eyes see it.
Until the day comes when African players call the shots in these matters, the status-quo will remain.
I am of the opinion that Kirsan has already won the elections. Plus the Turkish fed (yazici is running mate) idea of now sponsoring or helping to sponsor African feds with this big youth programme means Kirsan has probably also won the 2014 elections….
I have looked at developments in FIFA in order to analyse Organisations of this size.It seems that there will always a cabal of influential voices which favour a few nations. Look at the Champion’s League in Europe, dominated by a few clubs. Every African player desires to play in this competition. The worlds of football and chess are centred in Europe so it is not a true World organisation.
On a positive note, the improvements seen in China, India, Vietnam and the Philipines show what can be achieved with selfless organisers. The Egyptians have shown progress in developing chess. However costs of travel and materials as well as accomodation stand in the way of a player’s development. FIDE rated tournaments are crucial for development and therefore FIDE arbiters and organisers are important. This is where FIDE is failing. It looks at player development alone.Infra structural and organisational development must parallel player development. The ease with which European teenagers reach a certain rating shows how abundant FIDE tournaments are crucial for development. There are no First Saturday toutnaments in Cape Town South Africa or Bridgetown Barbados or Bermuda.
This is where FIDE can make a difference. FIFA has helped numerous African football federations in substanstial ways. Lets see FIDE do the same for chess. We all know the benefits of chess are huge.
Hi Daaim,
This is off subject, but GM Simutowe is playing in the Philadelphia Open, March 30 – April 4. Pictures to follow.
Very interesting article and analysis! Just a remark – I wasn’t at the ACP Board that time, but as far as I know, the Association of Chess Professionals was neutral during 2006 elections and didn’t support any of the candidates.
Hello Daaim,
I have quietly been following your coverage of the upcoming FIDE elections and I thought that some of your comments over the last few days or so cannot go without being challenged.
You indicate that you do not recall Karpov ever taking a position on the ONE VOTE ONE NATION policy.
I draw your attention to an interview that Karpov gave to Alexander Roshal during the run up to the 2006 FIDE elections.
In response to Roshal’s question QUOTE “What do you think about the forthcoming elections?” UNQUOTE
Karpov responded thus QUOTE “According to FIDE regulations, only FIDE delegates representing the National federations can officially participate in the elections and take decisions of other precise issues at the FIDE General Assembly. One country-one vote, despite the number and level (I mean Grandmasters) of the chess players. I always thought it would be good to set up a “security council” Those federations whose best chess players are more likely related to the fight for the World Champion title should be given greater importance” UNQUOTE
One does not need to be a rocket scientist to interpret the meaning of the foregoing exchange. The “Security Council” model obviously implies a VETO element which means negating the full effect of “one country-one vote” aspect of the current FIDE policy.
When asked about his withdrawal from the candidacy of the 2006 FIDE elections, Karpov responded as follows:-
QUOTE “I also feel the need to bring clarity after some omissions and different interpretation of my position. It has been always my opinion that the Chess World needs to be considerably improved. I have been always seeking for the ways for it. That is why I am grateful to the American and French initiative and support of different countries that advised me to participate in 2006 FIDE elections. That is why I met another candidate, eastern top manager Bessel Kok to find out how common our opinions are. It turned out that they may differ” UNQUOTE
Has the aforementioned situation changed? I believe that readers are entitled to know if Karpov is running at the behest of the Americans and French once again.
Whilst I do not presume to know the background to the bric-bats in the Ali Yazici-Anatoly Karpov relationship (or lack of), it is worth noting that Yazici has also been the target of an acid tongue from Karpov albeit four years ago.
When asked if his withdrawal from the 2006 FIDE Presidential candidacy was to make way for Bessel Kok; Karpov said QUOTE “No! I have never thought like this. Besides, it would mean that I should also have to support his team which includes for instance such odious personality as Ali Yazici”
The full interview can be viewed on the following link:
https://www.chessfidelity.com/elections.php?txt_id=146
Let me state that I have the greatest respect for Anatoly Karpov as a legendary player. During my playing days I remember how his handling of both sides of the Ruy Lopez really encouraged me to take up the challenge of trying to master the Spanish as one of my tournament weapons.
I am however doubtful if Anatoly Karpov will really be the master of a KARPOV FIDE PRESIDENCY. In any event he still has not recanted his stated views regarding a “FIDE SECURITY COUNCIL”
When you have Mr Leon Battesti , Vice-President of the French Chess Federation (who are nominating Karpov) reiterating Karpov’s previously stated position in the following extract:-
QUOTE “The FIDE elections will take place with an Electoral College of 143 voting members. That’s one federation one vote – like, unfortunately, most sports federations. Thus 50 countries in the Electoral College will have an average of 28 players each – some of them only 1 to 5 – and will weigh as heavily as Germany’s one vote for 13,782 players or Russia’s one vote for 12,423.
That all federations should be represented is a right. But that such huge disparities should be accepted is an affront to democratic principles. In fact, as we have already understood, this alibi for equal rights only serves to maintain a system of control by federations that have no real existence, and that have delegates who go to the Olympiads sometimes as the only member, invited, most often, by the incumbent President.” UNQUOTE.
One does not need to read between any lines when the message is quite clear.
Protestations by Karpov’s people that Mr. Battesti is simply expressing his personal views sound quite hollow; especially when taken with Karpov’s long stated views.
I also believe that your previous comments do not give credit to what Ali Yazici has achieved in Turkish chess. Whilst Ali may not be everyone’s favourite chess administrator, his achievements since becoming President of the Turkish Chess Federation are to be admired. You only need to attend a few of the various youth tournaments hosted by Turkey to appreciate how far Ali has brought chess in his homeland.
For the record, Ali stated his candidacy for the Presidency of the European Chess Union long before the battle lines were drawn between Anatoly Karpov and Kirsan Ilyumzhinov for the FIDE Presidency.
Hence I am surprised when you state that Ali was a surprise omission from the Kirsan ticket.
All in all we are headed for an interesting campaign.
I wish that as we campaign we all appreciate that we all belong to one family.
LEWIS NCUBE
FIDE VICE PRESIDENT