Reports | August 16, 2010 22:35

Danailov: 'Are we going to murder ECU with political dependence?'

Danailov: 'Are we going to murder ECU with political dependence?'"What I see are two of the candidates becoming victims of political games, tying themselves and the future of European chess with the choice of one or another personality for FIDE President", says Silvio Danailov in his official statement for running for President of the European Chess Union (ECU) which was sent to chess media this morning.

Are we going to murder ECU with political dependence?

By Silvio Danailov , Candidate for ECU President

The elections for European Chess Union President are dawning upon us. The intentions of the candidates and their teams in the campaigns are now clear. What is also clear is that the faith of the European chess will depend on in which hands we will decide to surrender it.

Now, just days before the final dash, is the right time for us to stop and rethink what has been said and done by the candidates for the Presidential position. To have a sober judgment on whether they are offering real things or soap bubbles, whether they are capable of fulfilling their promises and, of the very most importance, whether they are telling the truth.

Regretfully, the facts are very disturbing. What I see are two of the candidates becoming victims of political games, tying themselves and the future of European chess with the choice of one or another personality for FIDE President. As to clarify, Mr. Ali Nihat Yazici does not keep his relationship with Mr. Kirsan Ilyumzhinov secret and neither does Mr.Robert von Weizsa?cker with the other candidate for FIDE Presidency - Mr. Anatoly Karpov.

Is this what we want – political equilibrists, puppets on strings, whose decisions and actions will follow third party interests, remaining deaf to the actual needs of the European federations? Is this what we want - the faith of the ECU to be decided not by the European federations, but by FIDE clerks? Apart from being contrary to common sense, an eventual choice of one of the two politically dependent candidates is in full dissonance with the characteristic of the EU geopolitical emancipation – Europe to solve its problems not under the command of, but with the cooperation of the other world factors.

The pre-election outwitting is at its peak. Candidates are giving their pre-election promises – one is offering to the European federations 300 thousand dollars a year, another is proposing to cover travelling expenses for FIDE Executive Board and General Assembly. There is a catch - please notice that this will happen if and only if after winning the ECU Presidency the corresponding partner of theirs is elected for FIDE President. But what if the candidate for FIDE President in question is not elected? There is no plan B!

Upon us is the moment for an important and responsible decision – what person do we want for President of our organization? Political equilibrists, who are experienced only in giving beautiful promises, who once elected will begin to explain beautifully why they cannot fulfill their campaign promises? Or an independent candidate and a businessman with professional team, who will turn the ECU in a working and profitable organization, without putting its future at stake depending on political games and pretty lies.

I am convinced that you, just like I, want to have a strong and independent ECU, belonging to the European federations. That is why I appeal to you to be extremely careful in your choice because the future of European chess in the coming four years will depend on it.
Will we murder ECU with political dependence? Together we can change the chess politics, together we can eliminate the strictly political factor and walk towards an independent European Chess Union. European Chess Union which will closely cooperate with FIDE for the benefit of chess stakeholders as a self-sufficient partner, not as a subordinate or dependent.

Share |
Peter Doggers's picture
Author: Peter Doggers

Founder and editor-in-chief of, Peter is responsible for most of the chess news and tournament reports. Often visiting top events, he also provides photos and videos for the site. He's a 1.e4 player himself, likes Thai food and the Stones.


ZeroCool's picture

Well, maybe most of the people do not like Danailov, so what?

The most important question here is who could be able to do much for Chess in Europe as ECU President?

The questionmarks Danailov did set are great, but he misses at least one point:

The ECU candidate Weizäcker may has only be "created" in order to get the preparation done to exchange him by another current member of the board by the german chess federation's election 2011.

We do not have to guess whom I am talking about, don't we?
Well - beside of the basic level of chess activities (club level, where chess is mostly promoted by hard work) since 2009 this guy is member of the board within ALL other existing levels of chess organizations in Germany (FOUR out of 5).

Weizäcker himself does not have a clue what's going on here (within ECU and in Germany itself).

Good luck Danailov!

Henk de Jager's picture

Danailov´s track record speaks for itself. He is not to be trusted. He is a manipulative, power hungry burocrat whose first concern is most likely not the bright or not future of European chess, but his own agenda, wallet and ambitions.

Emmannuel's picture

He just brought 10 millions to chess, organized five high-class tournaments and a world chamionship with extremely large dotations, he turned a promising 18-years old champion into a superstrong grandmaster, while prof von. i-dont-know-what is just unable to bring any penny to his national team. While Yacizi is maybe not so bad, but he's just not so good !

Emmannuel's picture

So that is completely true, his record speaks for itself (and for "himself" ^^)

Thomas's picture

At the start of his campaign, Danailov said there's no need for him to run for FIDE president as he's perfectly happy with the current one. Makes sense from his perspective: Ilyumzhinov gave Topalov a free point in Elista, a shortcut to the next WCh match and two matches in his home country.

Then it looked like Karpov might win the FIDE elections, and Danailov tried to get on good terms with him inviting him to the Sofia WCh match.

Then both candidates disappointed him, wanting to move the candidates event to Kazan or Kiev rather than Sofia ... .

Now Danailov sells himself as being independent. Call this flexible or opportunistic, either way it takes guts to consider it an asset in the election campaign.

Corinne's picture

Yown . . . zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

liverseck's picture

Danailov is very untrustworthy

Fadirah's picture

I think Danailov is right when he is speaking about puppets in strings :)

If you analize deeply, just this 2 guys are puppets and only looking who will winn FIDE elections: what they can bring to European Chess? Ali Yazici is declaring he will bring all nations to play European Championship and like following UEFA, but this is bullshit! how you can unrated chessplayers from several small countries compare with great players? system 1 contrey 1 vote is perfectly working during elections because every nations decerved to have a voice, but what does it mean proff sport - this is a competition for Best European playersa nd nothing to do with politic!

And German candidate is speaking about millions of $...on behalfe KARPOV!!! He is a son of former President of Germany, great countrey and can't bring to his federation which he is serving any Euro...shame!!!


I am a chess lover from Malaysia :)

Teplitz's picture

Why is the job of FIDE President such a bitterly fought campaign? All these accusations of lies, corruption and murder etc...whats the big attraction? Does Mr President get a huge salary, an official residence and a lear jet? it the girls, the power, the machismo???

Running for the Presidency of the United States seems tame in comparison.

gg's picture

"He is not to be trusted. He is a manipulative, power hungry burocrat whose first concern is most likely not the bright or not future of European chess, but his own agenda, wallet and ambitions."

Sounds above average for a chess politician :)

test's picture

I have never seen a news story where the ECU acts as a union on behalf of the players. So why does the chess world need them anyway?

Arne Moll's picture

@test: apart from a union, what about a separate ECU rating? Or ECU rules of chess? Danailov is not proposing any of those either, so it's indeed questionable what exactly the ECU is good for.

Apart from that, I don't really see what's wrong with supporting a FIDE presidential candidate. If ECU is really the independent body Danailov says it should be, then why would this matter at all?

Alexander's picture

Danailov's successes are of course very real and palpable, but they are mostly due to his political connections in Bulgaria. In fact, I don't see other reasons for his presidency than his ability to squeeze a million of two out of Bulgarian government and corporations. So I don't know why he should consider himself any less political than the other candidates.

Besides the point, ECU is probably good for 1. financing European Championship 2. financing European Team Championship 3. financing chess bureaucrats.

Someone's picture

Danailov looks like in no man's land.

Paul's picture

Danilov a ---deleted--- you shouldn't give him any publicity.

ChessGirl's picture

@ Arne. I don´t know which of the candidates is more appropriate, but I think Danailov might have a point if what he says is true. That is, if candidate A offers a budget for the ECU but this budget depends on the fact that his respective candidate for FIDE president wins the elections, what does candidate A have to offer if his respective FIDE candidate doesn´t win? Candidates for ECU presidency should have an independent program to offer, one that they can guarantee independently of who becomes FIDE president. Other than that, I´m not especially against ECU candidates supporting one particular FIDE candidate.

Arne Moll's picture

@ChessGirl: Fair enough, but independence is really impossible in this game, don't you think? For instance, suppose according to this principle we separate Danailov from the Bulgarian businesspeople supporting him, or from the Bulgarian government - what's left of him? Not much, I'd say.

Zagreb 1959's picture


Tired of all this Danailov bashing here. We know you don't like Toiletgate. No need to repeat it over and over again.

john's picture

has danailov done more good than bad for chess? i think despite Toiletgate the answer must be yes. He knows how to get matches/ tournies and money into chess.

Latest articles