Change or Die
Posted: Fri Feb 18, 2011 2:30 am
No one can say that Silvio Danailov is uncontroversial.
Chess Should Either Change or Die
Chess Should Either Change or Die
I recall during the 3rd M-Tel Masters tournament you told me something that stuck in my mind for a long time: “Chess should either change, or die. There’s no third option”. Now, as President of the European Chess Union, the ball’s in your court. How, in your opinion, should chess change so as not to die?
A few things need to change. Firstly, Sofia Rules should finally be introduced into all tournaments, so there are none of the 14-move draws we’ve seen in a series of events. And if there’s a deliberate three-fold repetition in a position where it’s still possible to fight, the arbiter should penalise the players with a zero on the score table. Secondly, the football points system used in Bilbao and London – three points for a win, one point for a draw – should be introduced everywhere. And finally, we need to reduce the time control. A game should last no longer than four hours. The 30 seconds a move increment (and any increment in general!) should be abandoned. That’s essentially deprived fans of the enthralling spectacle of time trouble.
In addition, all tournaments need to be placed on a commercial footing. We can’t allow all sorts of sites to steal the text of games or “pictures” from the organisers, who’ve spent money on all that. All of us: organisers, players, trainers and journalists should realise that chess, in order to survive and develop in the world as it is nowadays, has to be stricter and more professional.