|
|||||
|
|
|||||
|
Chessville
Advertise to Single insert:
|
December, 2003
An Interview With GM Joel Lautier, a Founding Member of the Association of Chess Professionals
After reading the interview, join the conversation at the
Chessville Forum, or
write to us directly. Chessville: Do you have any introductory statement you'd like to make? Anything by way of introduction to our readers? GM Lautier: I'd like to state the obvious: the professional chess world is currently in a complete mess. Matches for the reunification have been announced and cancelled several times over the past year by the FIDE President Kirsan Ilyumzhinov. The final result looks like a joke: the official FIDE World Champion, Ruslan Ponomariov, is now offered a spot in the first round of a knockout tournament to be held in Spring, while his challenger, Garry Kasparov, has somehow taken his place since he will only play the final match against the winner of the knockout tournament. Not even in the troubled boxing world do you see such an absurd situation where the current champion has to qualify to gain the right to meet his "challenger"! I'm certain that Kasparov himself finds that situation a little strange, to say the least. The list of failures by the FIDE management in the last years is truly amazing: first the considerable reduction in prizes in the World Championship knockout tournaments (from five to three million dollars), now the complete standstill of the World Championship cycle since January 2002. There has also been the much criticized speeding up of the classical time control, which has severely damaged the quality of the games, without adding any TV (or any other media, for that matter) coverage to our tournaments, although this was allegedly the idea. The appearance and increase in number of official tournaments where players are forced to stay in one given hotel and pay more than regular tourists (I believe this practice was first "rehearsed" in various FIDE youth tournaments), the cancellation of the FIDE rapid Grand Prix in 2002 where only two of the scheduled five tournaments took place, the list goes on and on. This intolerable situation, where we can see our sport crumble to pieces with every traditional tournament that disappears and the media interest in our game dwindling dramatically, has prompted us to act and create a new organization, the Association of Chess Professionals. Chessville: For the benefit of those readers not yet familiar with the Association of Chess Professionals, can you please tell us briefly what the ACP is? GM Lautier: The Association of Chess Professionals (ACP) is a not-for-profit international organization which operates under the French law and was set up in Paris in September 2003. There are five official founding members (as required by the French law) and these are Vladimir Kramnik, Almira Skripchenko, Pavel Tregubov, Yannick Pelletier and myself. The initial impulse was given by the open letter which Igor Glek published over the Internet prior to the European Individual Championship held in June 2003 in Silivri (Turkey), where he stressed the abnormally high hotel rates that players had to pay to attend the tournament. These prohibitive conditions were actually the reason why I refused to take part, I had already seen for myself how poor the conditions had been in a previous European Championship held in Macedonia in 2001. The project of the ACP itself was born out of a large protest movement during the European Championship in Turkey. The vast majority of players present at that event were clearly unhappy with the unfair conditions whereby they were forced to pay exaggerated room rates to have a right to participate in an official event counting for the World Championship. They felt they were held hostage by the tournament management (in that particular case the ECU which acted as FIDE's representative) since the only way to fight for the chess world title was to take part in that event. On one of the rest days, more than 150 players, led by Igor Glek, Almira Skripchenko and Pavel Tregubov, decided to form a new association that would look after their interests. This eventually became the ACP. Chessville: What are the goals of the ACP? In the best of all possible worlds, what will the success of the ACP look like? GM Lautier: The ACP has one simple goal: to transform chess, which in effect is still an amateur sport, into a professional one. Chess is a game practiced and followed by millions of fans all over the world, yet it has remained to this day unable to capitalize on this huge potential. We would like to emulate the successes of golf and tennis, namely to set up a circuit of well run professional tournaments all linked together as in a chain. To this end, we will explore two different avenues: linking the existing tournaments worldwide and creating our own new events. We want to establish a calendar of tournaments well in advance so professional players can prepare accordingly. We want to create a valuable commercial product so that organizers, journalists, media people and others living from chess can do their jobs properly and actually benefit from it. It does look like a daunting task, especially since we are only at the beginning, but we'll try very hard to get there. This is the greater picture we shall aim at, but in the meantime, we will look after the rights of our members when these are clearly ignored. I refer, for instance, to the current format of the European Individual Championship, the constant change of rules in official FIDE events, the failure of some organizers to pay the players, in full and in time, and other similar issues. And I'd like to remind everyone that we shouldn't forget about women's chess too. This part of our game has a tremendous appeal that few organizers seem to notice, although it is quite obvious to any chess fan. I am certain that if a poll was conducted, it would reveal that both Judit Polgar and Alexandra Kosteniuk would be in the top five most popular chess players. To that effect, two members out of nine will be women in the future Board of the ACP. Chessville: What has the support of players like Kramnik, Anand, Adams, etc. meant to the ACP so far? GM Lautier: The first step, in our short existence, has been to obtain the support of the top chess players. We currently have more than 130 members (that number keeps growing) of which most are grandmasters, and at the very top, nine out of the best twelve in the world according to the latest ranking list have joined our ranks. It is important that the best players participate actively by sharing their ideas, especially since most of their suggestions, and sometimes requests, have repeatedly been met with remarkable indifference from FIDE. Chessville: Kasparov is not currently listed as a member, nor is Shirov. How important is it to have the support and participation of all the players at the very top, and of Kasparov in particular?
GM Lautier: Kasparov is undoubtedly an important figure in the chess world from a media standpoint, therefore his participation in the ACP would obviously give it greater weight. He has been approached by some of our members in Crete where the European Club Cup was held. His answer has been that he follows the Association's development with interest but awaits concrete results before deciding whether or not to join the new organization. It's a very normal attitude, especially considering that he still is of the main protagonists in the current FIDE cycle. When the time comes and we have a clearly established project to propose, we might approach him again. Other top players such as Shirov, Leko and Gelfand have preferred to wait before committing themselves, but if we prove successful they will probably join as well. Chessville: From the member listings at your website, it seems that most (>90%) of the ACP's members come from Europe. Is there a particular reason for this, and is ACP working actively to broaden its member base so that it becomes truly worldwide, i.e. by adding more players from Asia and the Americas? GM Lautier: The reason for this disparity is quite simple: most of our members have joined the association as a result of direct talks with the first members of the ACP, so far known as the Initiative Group. Since these talks were usually held in tournaments all over Europe (there are simply fewer events on the other continents), most of the adherents turned out to be Europeans. As the ACP becomes better known, we expect more members from the other continents. Chessville: Most, if not all, of the currently listed ACP members appear to be chess players, yet membership in the ACP is also open to others, such as organizers and journalists. How important is it to enlist the support of these other members of the chess community, and what can the ACP do to help recruit them? GM Lautier: This is an important question. Indeed, it has always been our wish that membership should not be limited to chess players only, like the GMA in former days. Hence the name we chose, Association of Chess Professionals and not Association of Chess Players. Besides the obvious resemblance with the ATP, the Association of Tennis Professionals, which represents an inspiring model for us, we wanted to emphasize the fact that all actors of the professional chess stage are important. Players, organizers, arbiters, journalists, chess programmers, et al are all part of the same play and have common interests. Therefore, our doors are open to untitled players or non-players, the only restriction being that non-players have to explain who they are and what their link to chess is, with the ACP Board then deciding to register them or not. Since eventually members will vote on decisions affecting chess professionals, we want to avoid having relative strangers to the game enter our association. In tournaments we aim to organize, the needs of the press will be an important issue for us, since widespread and positive publicity is vital to any sponsor and is the "raison d'être" of his commitment to a chess tournament. Chessville: What brought things to the point where professional players felt the need to organize themselves in this way? GM Lautier: I have described the existing disorder in the chess world as well as the circumstances that led to the birth of the ACP in my answers to the first and second questions respectively. I would only like to add that part of the support to the ACP is a result of the immense disappointment from numerous players at how things have taken a turn for the worse in recent years. In some cases, the support proceeds from disillusionment rather than sheer enthusiasm, something to the effect of: "Hey, we haven't got much to lose anymore, let's give it a try". Chess players are very individualistic people by nature, but their professional condition has degraded to such an extent lately that they are now more willing than ever to unite forces and work on improving things. Chessville: Is the ACP just another GMA or PCA? Why will the ACP succeed where those organizations have failed? GM Lautier: Actually, both the GMA and the PCA have had some measure of success before they ceased to exist. They have proved at least that chess had the power to attract important corporate sponsorship, such as SWIFT for the GMA and Intel for the PCA. Both organizing bodies had different stories, these have been well documented and there isn't much point in delving in them once again. There is, however, a common feature that acted as a detonator when they both collapsed: the fact that Garry Kasparov left both organizations at some point. Since he was the driving force behind both associations which he used as weapons in his long fight with FIDE, they quickly fell apart when he was no longer captain of the ship. In the GMA's case, he left because he disagreed with the board's "peace" proposal to FIDE, and with the PCA, his wish to collaborate with IBM in order to play Deep Blue eventually provoked a clash with the title sponsor, Intel. It was Kasparov's merit (and other people's who worked with him, but he was the main figure) that he managed to secure these sponsorships in the first place, but both organizations were too dependent on his participation. As you know, this is not the case with the ACP since Garry is not even a member, so if we fail, it will be for another reason! In principle, a proper sporting organization should treat all players equally, and although it does its best to secure the participation of the more important players, the latter should not dictate their conditions. When Sampras or Agassi were dominating world tennis, they still took part in all events stipulated in contracts they had signed with the ATP. We will probably start in a more modest way than the PCA or GMA, but on a sounder basis, I believe. Chessville: The current charter says, in part, "Article 2 - Purpose: The association's purpose is the protection of professional chess players' rights, the practice and promotion of chess worldwide, in particular through the organization of chess tournaments and other chess events." What are these "rights", exactly? GM Lautier: By "rights" we mean, in the first place, the strict application of signed contracts between players and organizers. This means, for instance, that players should not be handed bouncing checks, such as was the case in the FIDE World Championship in Las Vegas in 1999 and in some other private tournaments as well. Another case in point: most players taking part in FIDE competitions could not help but notice that the contracts they receive from FIDE never bear any signature from FIDE. The players are asked to sign their copies of the contract and then never receive FIDE's copy of the contract with the organization's signature on it. In case of breach of contract from the part of FIDE, the players have no legal recourse, whereas if a player doesn't comply with the terms of the contract, FIDE can comfortably sign the contract before assigning the player in court. However, by "rights" we also have in mind broader notions, namely those of sporting equity and proper playing rules. This means the ACP will contest FIDE's further attempts at reducing the classical time control in most tournaments, since repeated polls, initiated by FIDE but never taken into account, have proven that a large majority of professional players are against the current 90 minutes duration for the whole game. Chessville: What steps do you envision the ACP taking to protect those rights? GM Lautier: It will depend on the nature of the problem at hand. In the case of controversial rules and other similar topics, the ACP will issue recommendations that will reflect the opinion of a majority of their members. It will state its case clearly through the press and media and attempt to have a constructive dialogue with FIDE. In cases of serious rights infringements, however, the ACP will envision much more forceful recourses. One of the advantages of belonging to the same organization is that players can be represented in a sports court by a single lawyer hired by the ACP. When our financial resources allow it, we will certainly consider going to court when basic players' rights are disregarded, such as was the case in the last European Individual Championship. Chessville: What leverage will the ACP have, if any, in dealing with organizers, FIDE, National Federations, etc.? GM Lautier: The ACP is not an abstract concept, it is a group of top professional players that have agreed to stand together under one flag. Therefore, when federations or organizers enter into a conflict with one of its members, they will have to deal with the rest of them as well! If an organizer is known to treat players in a highly unethical manner in his tournament, we will warn all our members accordingly. In some extreme cases, we might even issue an official boycott to such organizers. As for dishonest or faulty organizers who fail to comply with their financial obligations, we shall apply measures mentioned in the answer to the previous question: take them to court if we deem it necessary. But let's not scare off organizers unnecessarily, most of them do an excellent job and our goal, quite the contrary, will be to help them enhance their tournaments. Chessville: A matter that has occupied the minds of chess players worldwide in the past ten years is the world title reunification efforts that seem sadly stranded at the moment. Do you have an opinion on what an ideal world championship should look like? Does the ACP have an official view? GM Lautier: Certainly, the collapse of the single FIDE world championship title as it existed until 1993 dealt a heavy blow to the attractiveness of our sport. The ongoing uncertainty about what is to be considered the legitimate championship title has repelled many potential sponsors and will continue to do so until the chess world solves that problem. Chess has not achieved such a stature that it can afford holding rival championships, the whole thing was bound to collapse and now we find ourselves in a situation where simply no championship is held any more, let alone two or three. In a matter of days, the new Board of the ACP will be announced once the voting is over. It will start working on establishing its own circuit of tournaments. Let me stress, however, that it doesn't intend to take over the FIDE world championship. It will be the ACP Series of tournaments, and if in the course of time it supersedes the FIDE championship in terms of prize-fund and publicity, then so be it. We will not enter into a feud with FIDE over rights to the title of "World Champion", we've seen enough of this mess already. We'll have our own chain of events named after the association, something no one can take away from us. Chessville: GM Igor Glek, in an interview with GM Golubev on August 7th, indicated that the ACP was in touch with the Grandmaster Committee, which Yasser Seirawan was involved with. Is that still an active relationship, and how can those two organizations co-exist? Can the ACP and they find ways to work together? GM Lautier: The Grandmaster Committee, which was created at the initiative of Yasser Seirawan at the time of his active collaboration with FIDE (right after the Prague agreement of May 2002), has unfortunately not been able to implement any of its intended plans, mostly due to FIDE's appalling inertia. It is now in a more or less dormant state and has little bearing on important issues at the moment. I was part of that Committee myself, but I resigned my post as soon as I joined the ACP. If the Committee will be re-enacted in the future and represent FIDE's voice of reason, as was intended at first, then certainly the Committee and the ACP could cooperate. But I don't really see this happening, especially since FIDE has created yet another commission called the "World Championship Committee" and composed of only three members, Messrs. Azmaiparashvili, Makropoulos and Gelfer. FIDE has made it clear that these very people are in charge of their matters, thus the Grandmaster Committee has lost any remaining influence. Chessville: Regarding relations with FIDE; What do you think the future role of FIDE will be? Do you see a need for reform of FIDE, and if so what specifically should occur with respect to reforming FIDE? GM Lautier: FIDE has every reason to exist, it federates all the national federations and coordinates, or at least is supposed to, various actions to develop chess worldwide. There are areas where FIDE is necessary and where an organization like the ACP lacks the depth to act in an efficient manner. I'm thinking about developing school programs dedicated to chess, interacting with other international sporting bodies, etc. At the moment, however, FIDE is not functioning properly, to put it mildly. Its president has spent millions of dollars but unfortunately to no avail, the mess is greater than ever and even absolute top players like Kasparov or Kramnik play very few games, simply because there are not enough tournaments any longer. Kirsan Ilyumzhinov has certainly earned the gratitude of many players for giving them opportunities for a good income, however, he has been unable to build a self-supporting and lasting structure. The day he stops signing the checks, FIDE immediately goes bankrupt. I think that even in the controversial days of Campomanes, FIDE's financial situation was not that critical. Even though many players have benefited from Ilyumzhinov's generosity, it still isn't right that an international sporting organization should depend on the personal wealth of its president. FIDE definitely needs to be reformed, it should hire a professional staff of corporate sponsor seekers, sports marketing specialists and the like. The collaboration with Octagon was a step in the right direction but alas, it was quickly retraced. Chessville: How will the ACP promote chess? GM Lautier: If we succeed in establishing our own circuit of tournaments, we will pay particular attention to our relationships with the media and the press. A sponsor should get his money's worth in terms of exposure and advertisement, this preoccupation will be uppermost in our minds. Top players playing in worthy environments, such as theatre stages or luxury hotels for example, should project a positive image of themselves. They should be well dressed, agree to press conferences, make a serious effort to promote the game. How can we expect to arouse massive interest in our game if we stay away from the journalists and don't give spectators the desire to find out more about our game? Chess is too complicated a game to attract large crowds by virtue of its sole existence, we need to reach out for the public and explain them why our game is unique and worth devoting its time to. We have many specific ideas on how to develop the game's attractiveness but we hope to implement them in our events, it is as yet a little premature to discuss them in detail. Chessville: Other sports benefit far more from corporate sponsorships than chess seems to do. As a chess professional, you would probably like to see this change. What could be done to attract more money to support the royal game? GM Lautier: In addition to a sponsored professional circuit of tournaments, which I have already discussed at length, the ACP will research what can be done in terms of defending the players' copyrights to their games. It is hard not to agree with Grandmaster Evgeny Sveshnikov, when he points out how unfair it is when chess organizers, writers and other players use the fruits of his analysis and work shown in his games to earn money without paying him any tribute. This obviously holds true for any strong player's games published without asking his permission, when his ideas and discoveries become public property. This state of affairs is not quite normal in my view, for a well-played game involves an act of creation that is valued by other people. Hence, like any value, it should have a price. There are other areas where chess can generate serious amounts of money, namely Internet chess which grows more popular every day. These will be addressed by the ACP as well. Chessville: Chess in your country has made impressive progress in recent years with lots of talented new players. No doubt, the sponsorship and dedication of Mme Nahed Ojjeh to promote chess has played a role. Has the success of French players meant an increase in media attention for the game? Do you feel that the ACP and the chess world in general can derive any ideas from the "French model"? GM Lautier: In a recent interview to the Russian magazine "64" I emphasized the fact that the "French chess boom" was mainly due to Mrs Nahed Ojjeh's strong support of chess in my country. There are other active and competent organizers in French chess, among whom Leo Battesti, the organizer of the Bastia rapid tournament in Corsica, particularly stands out. However, one can't really speak of a breakthrough in the mainstream media as yet, except for Corsica, but that's only a small part of France. The fact that France for the first time has three native players in the top fifty players in the world (myself, Bacrot and Fressinet) is also attracting many more young players to chess than before. Nevertheless, the French Chess Federation, although not as abysmally incompetent as FIDE, still isn't making the most of this favourable situation. Their motto, to me, still reads as "too little, too late". Chessville: What would like to say to those chess professionals who have not yet joined the ACP? GM Lautier: I definitely hope that all the ideas I have exposed previously have convinced them that we will not sit still and wait for things to happen. We welcome all the players and chess related professionals who wish to join us, any support or suggestion will be particularly appreciated. Finally, to all those who have joined us right from the first year, we express our gratitude and will promise to do our best to not let them down. Chessville: Is there anything else you would
like to add to our conversation? Chessville: Thank you very much GM Lautier
for sharing your thoughts with our readers, and best of luck to you and to
the Association of Chess Professionals! Opinions? Join the conversation at the Chessville Forum, or write to us directly.
|
The
|
|||
|
|||||
