RTILLSON.MERRILL@DEC-MARLBORO@sri-unix.UUCP (08/15/83)
From: Brad Merrill <RTILLSON.MERRILL at DEC-MARLBORO> It's very hard to be sympathetic to the plea from the Soviet Chess Federation, when they orchestrated a last minute dramatic protest instead of filing an intent of non-participation due to "inadequate" conditions. It seems more fair that an international body such as FIDE should be the sole arbitrator of World Championship locations and schedules, just to insure their own jurisdiction. The chess playing world should not be subject to any national groups wishes. There are considerations and courtesies but it seems that all such formal procedures were followed. I disagree with using ANY sport for political purpose or protest. /Brad --------
ditzel@ssc-vax.UUCP (Charles L Ditzel) (08/17/83)
I agree that FIDE should be the organizing body. How realistic is it to not have FIDE be amenable to the wishes of a national federation (i.e. the U.S or USSR) or to the PLAYER's wishes? Not very. Fischer alone proved this time and again. In Fischer's case FIDE was dealing with an individual personality and Fischer won virtually on every count! The point is not that the Soviets are now paradoxically on the same side Fischer was on, it is that FIDE *has* to listen to the players and the player' national federation. Politics is a reality in the sport/chess world. I think a little commonsense pays off. Saying that one wishes politics or political pressure would vanish is like saying "i wish there were no more wars". Whether it is Bobby running around saying he wants to play Spasski in a small ping pong room behind the main theater or its Kasparov or his federation not wanting to play in Pasadena, it's all the same. Maybe it is not ideal but these things happen all the time in the sports and chess worlds. The idea is to have people that have a sense of compromise and know when to draw the line as the organizers.