Graz roots
Raymond Keene
Korchnoi was certainly treated shabbily when the Soviets reinstated Dr Zukhar in the fourth row of the auditorium for game 32 of the World Championship, but it is difficult to agree that this warrants a legal case to enforce continuation of the match. Nevertheless, Korchnoi has instituted proceedings against Fide and the preliminary hearing is set for 7 March in Amsterdam. To some. Korchnoi's action will look like an inability to admit that one can play badly and that the opponent can play well. Furthermore. Korchnoi's conduct during the match was open to criticism, as a result of his association with the Ananda Margi who had been convicted of attempted murder.
The Fide Bureau, led by Icelander Fridrik Olafsson, is the real power behind the World Chess Federation and his body convened in Graz over 3-6 February to discuss the Korchnoi affair in preparation for 7 March. They conceded that Zukhar's presence represented a potential disturbance for game 32, but were not convinced that he constituted an actual disturbance, since Korchnoi did not personally protest about it during the course of the game. The Bureau also struck back at Korchnoi by accepting a counter-protest from Campomanes (the match organiser) which heavily criticised the challenger's behaviour during the contest. As I feared they would. Korchnoi's gurus have levitated home to roost.
The Graz meeting did go some way towards answering Korchnoi's complaints by establishing a Commission to reshape regulations for future world championships. The Commission, which will meet in Amsterdam early in April, consists of Olafsson, Campomanes, a representative of the world champion and myself. I shall discuss my plans for the meeting in my next article, Whatever Korchnoi's standing with the Fide mandarins he continues, understandably, to be popular with the press, and has just won the 1978 Oscar awarded by chess journalists. His latest publicity exploit has been an interview in L'Express, where he claims to have introduced an entirely new opening for game 32. but lost because of a 'leak' by his supporters. I suppose that is a novel excuse to add to Zukhar. but the following effort from 1964 casts doubt on the newness of his opening. Incidentally, Tal won the tournament and this was his only loss, what's more,to a tail-ender, which adds weight to the thesis that it was Korchnoi's opening that was at fault, and not mythical 'leaks' or evil parapsychologists.
Previous page
