Is there any way to save
the Reunification Championship?

Is there any way to save the Reunification Championship?

by Mikhail Golubev
16 January 2003

It's strange that the reason for the conflict between Ruslan Ponomariov
and FIDE is obscured by arguments regarding time control and FIDE World
Champion Ponomariov's privilege of retaining his title in the event of
a drawn match versus Garry Kasparov. I don't know whether FIDE hoped to 
"manage" the opinion of its champion through the assistance of third
parties, or if FIDE just did not succeed in showing sufficient respect
to the 18-year old World Champion.

From the very beginning (Spring 2002), FIDE erred in keeping Ponomariov 
away from negotiations regarding reunification. Their second mistake
involved their participation in preparations for the upcoming Kasparov
vs Computer match. These errors almost deprived the chess world of a 
chance to reach an agreement, over which it has agonized for some time. 
As a consequence, the interests of the strongest remaining players were 
ignored.

As long ago as 2001, the FIDE President (in his speech broadcast 
worldwide by the mass media) promised whomever would become the 16th 
FIDE World Champion (Ponomariov subsequently won this title) a match 
between the strongest human versus strongest computer program. So 
unification had the purpose of consolidating the two world champions 
and the highest rated player into one unification world championship 
cycle. But how can this process be done while treating all parties 
fairly?

Naturally, Garry Kasparov, the most famous and highest rated chess 
player in the world, has every right to expect the highest fee in any 
unofficial match. But ethically, FIDE should not show favoritism in the 
match negotiation process. Therefore it's astonishing that FIDE 
supported Kasparov's match demands. Worse yet, the FIDE President is 
Kasparov's compatriot, and thus should have avoided any hint of double 
standards regarding these negotiations.


It is possible to excuse a great deal, including the state of euphoria 
which possibly engulfed FIDE after they had managed to come to a 
peaceful agreement with Garry Kasparov. After all, he was until then, 
their long standing opponent. Perhaps this euphoria made FIDE forget 
about their own FIDE champion.

But should Ponomariov agree to restrict his interests if FIDE fails to 
respect its leading chess players? Certainly, that's up to the FIDE 
World Champion to decide. In any case, it is clear that FIDE's 
persistence and Ponomariov's resistance leave no chance to hope that 
the contract signed by Ponomariov, under incredible pressure, will have 
anything to do with the spirit of the chess world unification. Other 
options, such as a proclamation of Kasparov as a World Champion without 
any match, or announcement of Kasparov's match versus another opponent, 
are similarly disastrous. So is there any chance for saving the 
reunification championship in spite of it all?

After the FIDE Congress (Autumn 2002, in Bled) Ruslan Ponomariov 
insisted upon the privilege to retain his title in the event of a drawn 
match versus Kasparov. This accords with chess traditions and gives 
Ponomariov the same privilege that Classical World Champion, Kramnik, 
has in his parallel match versus Leko. Ponomariov also stated that his 
match with Kasparov should be played with the new FIDE time control, 
used in his victorious 2001/2002 FIDE World Championship. His request 
follows chess traditions and common sense, but it contradicts FIDE's 
strategic goal to return to classical time controls. However, FIDE 
rejected the demands of their World Champion, so the situation creates 
the impression of an absolute deadlock.

However, there probably is a simple solution to this mess, perhaps even 
several. But any solution must consider the reality of the current 
situation, without any radical actions, such as Ponomariov's 
disqualification or revision of the schedule for the Kasparov vs 
Computer match.

If FIDE truly supports the Reunification World Championship with 
classical time controls, rather than giving Garry Kasparov the 
Championship title in the quickest possible time, then there should be 
no obstacles blocking Ponomariov from retaining his title of FIDE World 
Champion. He should retain that title regardless of the outcome of his 
semi-final unification match. That's because this match should not have 
the status of FIDE World Championship until the final unification match 
has been played. If Ponomariov is defeated by Kasparov, then Ponomariov 
will lose his title only after the final unification match process is 
completed (including a return to classical controls). In short, he will 
then lose his title only when the new FIDE World Champion is announced.

However, if it is impossible to arrange a chess world reunification 
final match with classical time controls between the winners of the 
Ponomariov-Kasparov and Kramnik-Leko matches, then FIDE should return 
to championships with the FIDE time control. Yes, this is the time for 
FIDE to take responsibility for declaring what will happen after the 
Ponomariov-Kasparov match, including consideration of the possibility 
that the winner of the Kramnik-Leko match may refuse to play in the 
reunification final match. In this case, Ponomariov will not lose his 
title (with all its consequent rights and privileges), regardless of 
the result of his match against Garry Kasparov with classical time 
control. This seems reasonable because Ponomariov won his championship 
title with FIDE time controls, so he shouldn't lose his title until the 
transfer to classical time control is fully completed.

One may argue that a Ponomariov-Kasparov match without a World 
Championship status is senseless. However, quite the opposite is true. 
A Ponomariov-Kasparov match makes no sense if it is arranged other than 
as a semi-final unification match. This is because it is unprecedented 
to grant the highest rated player a right to play against the World 
Champion without unification of all championship claims.

Therefore, the sponsors must exhibit special care when selecting a 
title for this official match, in case it is does not become a FIDE 
World Championship. Thus it's necessary to concentrate upon the words 
"unification" and "classical", but not on the word "semi-final". If it 
becomes impossible to generate sponsor interest under such conditions, 
then the winner of the Kasparov-Ponomariov match can be awarded a 
special "intermediary" title, for instance, FIDE Classical Chess World 
Champion. This title will be independent of Ponomariov's current title. 
Therefore, either Garry Kasparov or Ruslan Ponomariov can win this 
intermediary title (potentially Ponomariov could hold both titles of 
World Champion simultaneously).

It should be clearly stipulated that the present intermediary 
titleholder (FIDE Classical Chess World Champion) will not earn 
advancement within FIDE if the final reunification match against the 
Kramnik-Leko match winner fails to occur within the predetermined 
period of time. In this case FIDE has to return to a FIDE World 
Championship with a FIDE time control (and the intermediary title 
should be automatically dissolved after the first championship of that 
kind).

If the final reunification championship with the winner of the 
Kramnik-Leko match occurs, then the intermediary title (FIDE Classical 
Chess World Champion) should be dissolved in favor of the title of FIDE 
World Champion, which currently belongs to Ukrainian Grandmaster Ruslan 
Ponomariov.

I have not discussed my suggestions yet with any of the supposed 
participants of the reunification championship or their official 
representatives. My solution may seem artificial, but the whole 
unification process is artificial. Instead we must resist the 
temptation to destroy rather than to build.

Since this conflict has already reached the public stage, now is the 
time for independent chess experts, who care about the future of the 
World Championship, to express their opinions. Perhaps somebody will 
offer a better solution. If so, I will be happy if their solution is 
successful. Regardless, the legitimate interests of all parties must be 
met. Instead, a reunification championship cycle where the status of 
the current champion is diminished, lays a foundation for future 
disunity within the chess world.


Edited by Stephen Ham, USA