4 responses to “Kramnik: “Kasparov took that sporting defeat as a declaration of war””

  1. Once again, thank you very much for the translation. Looking forward to more and more translations of Kramnik interviews!

  2. Great site, keep up the good work Mishanp!

  3. Excellent!! Great interview. I love Kramnik interviews because he’s so honest and transparent. He’s right about Kasparov. Kasparov denied himself the only chance he had to regain his title when he declined to play in the Dortmund Candidates’ tournament. In my opinion, had he decided to play in that tournament he would’ve been the clear favorite to win it (since Kramnik wasn’t playing) just like he was in any other tournament he played in at the time. All he had to do was to win Dortmund and play Kramnik in a second WC match.

    So Kasparov, after losing in London, chose to do exactly the opposite of what was on the contract he’d drawn up: not to play in the candidates tournament and claim a right for a rematch (?!). Then, to top it all off, he went set out on a mission to convince everybody that Kramnik’s value had lost its value and what mattered the most was to win the supertournaments. That obviously does not make sense. WC matches and supertournaments are two very differnt things.

    And last but not least, Kasparov also failed to follow the contract’s points that said he had to play the winner of the Kramnik-Shirov match. Kasparov has a history of not caring about the contracts and just act as if they didn’t mean anything.

  4. Great stuff, Mishanp.

Leave a Reply