Reports | July 22, 2007 17:00

[lang_nl]Interview met GM Pavel Tregubov[/lang_nl][lang_en]Interview with GM Pavel Tregubov[/lang_en]

[lang_nl]Meteen na de laatste ronde van het Kampioenschap van Parijs, precies een week geleden, interviewde ik GM en president van de ACP, Pavel Tregubov. Hij was zojuist gedeeld eerste ge?ɬ´indigd en vertelt over zijn schaakcarri?ɬ®re maar vooral over de Association of Chess Professionals en hun mening wat betreft de FIDE WK-cyclus.[/lang_nl][lang_en]Right after the last round of the Parish Championship had finished, I interviewed GM and President of the ACP, Pavel Tregubov. He had just finished shared first and talks about his chess and especially about the Association of Chess Professionals and its view on the FIDE world championship cycle.[/lang_en]

[lang_nl]

[/lang_nl][lang_en]

[/lang_en]

OK, Mr. Tregubov, congratulations with your shared victory in the Paris Championship.

Thank you very much.

Actually you were leading the tournament for a long time, what happened in this tournament. Can you describe your tournament a little bit?

Well, I was very tired in the last half of the tournament so I played really badly. I had a lot of luck to share first place finally.

OK, because I think you started with five wins I think?

Yes, well, the first part of the tournament I did quite well, I'm quite satisfied about my result and even on the quality of the games. But beginning from round 6 it was a disaster for me. I played, well, I was really tired.

Well, OK, four draws isn't?¢‚Ǩ¬¶ is decent I think.

Well, I was completely lost in a couple of games so?¢‚Ǩ¬¶

All right. Actually you are the President of the Association of Chess Professionals. How do you combine this with chess by the way, with playing chess?

It's very difficult. Very difficult. Nowadays I play less than before, because this sort of activity takes all my time actually, and my results are not improving [laughs] since I became President.

When was this?

Two years already, well OK actually I was working for the ACP even before and well?¢‚Ǩ¬¶ it started four years ago already so?¢‚Ǩ¬¶ OK, even in the beginning it was quite difficult and now it's getting more and more difficult but OK?¢‚Ǩ¬¶ I'll see. It's nice to know that I'm still able to win a tournament.

Yes, that's good. Actually the chess world seems to be more difficult, more complicated all the time so maybe this Association of Chess Professionals has some interesting tasks?¢‚Ǩ¬¶ What do you think are your main goals for the near future with the Association?

Well, it's still the same, protect the players' rights, in all type of situations. We're trying to develop our dialogue with FIDE which is crucially important and besides we'll try to develop our ACP tour, a tournament circuit created by the ACP. We managed to organize our first ACP World Rapid Cup last year this year, in the beginning of this year, and we'll continue looking for other sponsors to develop the circuit. Maybe our next aim will be to create this super circuit for the best players of the season. Well, I mean instead of one single tournament perhaps some series of tournaments and the end of the season. But OK, we should work hard to get there in the middle-future.

Since I haven't seen yet an official statement by the ACP on the new FIDE cycle, can you explain a little bit what is your opinion of the new cycle, with Mexico, and then the match with Topalov?¢‚Ǩ¬¶ and Kramnik?¢‚Ǩ¬¶

OK. The whole system seems to me quite logical but the problem is that Mr Topalov has got a lot of advantages according to this solution. I mean?¢‚Ǩ¬¶ OK, it was clear it was not fair to push him out of the whole circle but the current solution is?¢‚Ǩ¬¶ well the current decision doesn't seem fair to other top players because he is not even top rated anymore. Why, for example, Topalov should get more privileges than Anand? It seems a little bit strange. And?¢‚Ǩ¬¶ yes, it's true you didn't get any official statement on this matter yet. We're waiting for the players, top players' opinions on this matter. Then we'll see what we should do.

"Why, for example, Topalov should get more privileges than Anand? It seems a little bit strange."

At the moment you're speaking with players?

We sent a letter, asking for their opinions, and we're waiting for their replies.

And could you share maybe some opinions already, or?¢‚Ǩ¬¶?

Not really, not really.

Do you know maybe the general opinion of the players who are going to Mexico?

No, that's why, it's mostly the players of Mexico to whom we have sent our letter and we're waiting for their replies so. I would like to share some opinion but they're not official so I would like not to talk about it. Let's wait for the official statements of top players. It's crucially important in this situation.

Another new development is actually the new company called Global Chess. They have big plans, they will be organizing Grand Prix tournaments and these sound a little bit like the tournaments you're doing and planning to do with ACP. So is there already some contact between ACP and Global Chess, and to what extend are these plans similar?

There is current, technical let's say, contact with Global Chess but not on this matter yet, not yet. I'm looking for possibilities to see these guys but?¢‚Ǩ¬¶ maybe I will see them this summer and we will have the possibility to discuss the matter but at the moment I don't have any idea what this grand prix system should be, so I cannot say anything. Yes but in principle it should be something like, the whole idea, some tournaments with a final stinch.

And then of course we have the World Cup cycle by FIDE, and at some point all these cycles have to converge I guess to get the strongest player and finally players who will play for a world championship. What do you think, actually, should this result in a tournament or in a match for the world championship?

Well actually I can give you my own opinion but it's not me and even not the players who decide on this matter normally, because the crucial point is: what is better covered by the media, the match or the tournament? I don't know the answer. If the sponsor know, it's up to them to choose, actually. My opinion is that the tournament is OK for me, but the whole tradition of chess is in favour of a match. And a lot of top players support match: Kramnik, Leko?¢‚Ǩ¬¶ Aronian in his recent interview said that he's for match so?¢‚Ǩ¬¶ OK.

Allright, thank you very much.

You're welcome.

Peter Doggers's picture
Author: Peter Doggers

Founder and editor-in-chief of ChessVibes.com, 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.

Chess.com

Comments

Co Buysman's picture

The interview with GM Pavel Tregubov was very interesting, especially the last part. But in my view it's not the media who have the 'crucial point' in hands. It must be the chessworld itself.
In the great chess history the matches for the worldtitle were very special. But I think the matches Garry Kasparov played were the last of 'these good old times'. In modern times there must be a modern formula and in my opinion the best thing to do is create a tournament for the worldtitle once in every four years. Like in other great sports. In this tournament eight players should play with white and black against each other, so there will be fourteen rounds. The worldchampion has the right to defend his worldtitle and is one of the eight players. Zonal en interzonal tournaments must bring the other seven players.
For a lot of people in the world it's still not clear who is the worldchampion chess at this moment. And that's a pity. So, it's important to create a clear, modern formula for the next thirty or forty years. Then, in 2048, time has changed again and the chessworld has to think about the best formula for the next future.

Felix's picture

Yes, I know, but they never use such big letters?! Maybe it's only my impression, if you think it's ok...
Btw., I noticed that the font is displayed bigger in Opera than in Firefox... I think this is a problem with the "size=..." , again, I would use style="font-size: 16pt" to avoid such problems.

peter's picture

Exactly, jan!

jan's picture

that's not strange, that's sort of a "teaser" for the people who scan the interview before totally reading it (and most people do that: ssanning some stuff to see whether their is something in interesting, perhaps it would have been the perfect title for the article :-)). Official news-sites use it all the time

Felix's picture

Nice and interesting interview, but don't you think the
?¢‚Ǩ?ìWhy, for example, Topalov should get more privileges than Anand? It seems a little bit strange.?¢‚Ǩ? text should be in smaller letters? :)
I do this with e.g. style="font-size: 16pt", with this you can edit the font size much more natural (of course you could also use e.g. size=5 instead of size=6...).

Latest articles