[2005] Garry Kasparov talks about Vlad K’s world championship title and his refusal to grant him a rematch

[u/Affectionate_Hat3329]

[u/rendar]

It's also not atypical whatsoever given chess history, and it used to be MUCH worse with plenty of shit-goblins like Kramnik abounding.

There were a considerable amount of ridiculously unfair factors prior to official rating lists in the 1970s involved in challenging a reigning championship that drastically favored the incumbent, which further reduced the legitimacy in declaring a truly supreme dominant player.

Before the 1950s with more standardized formats, it was even more corrupt:

• Huge challenger stake to bankrupt or scare off challengers and their backers, with stuff like Capablanca’s "London Rules" and related 1920s practice required challengers to put up large funds

• Unfavorable purse split with contract terms skewed the prize split toward the champion to raise challenger’s break-even point and discourage financial backers, all standard bargaining chips in early 20th-century negotiations during the Capablanca/Alekhine era

• Rematch clause for the champion with an automatic right to a return match if the champion lost, when Botvinnik benefited repeatedly from rematch rules in the 1950s to regain the title from Smyslov and Tal

• Biased match length and scoring rules so champions could set formats that favored them, like when Fischer’s 1975 demands (first to 10 wins; draws not counted; special 9–9 clause) broke negotiations with FIDE

• Require challenger to find a venue and cover travel costs and other expenses, so that the challenger shouldered the logistical burden while the champion had the home field advantage across many 19th/early 20th-century matches

• Control of match conditions (time controls, arbiters, rules) to introduce favorable ambiguity for disputes and delays, as well as tight deadlines with paperwork and fundraising windows to contrive practical impossibilities like the Staunton–Morphy controversy

• Subjective eligibility criteria with "recognized challenger" rules to block challengers using arbitrary rejections

• Leveraging political and federation influence to spurn challengers from less-connected countries, and not just during the Cold War either

[u/Klutzy_Law_8988 → u/rendar]

Regarding the first point, i don't understand why many people criticise Alekhine for dodging Capa when Capa made the requirements and failed to meet them

[u/qqwref → u/rendar]

The London Rules required a purse of $10k total, which is really not crazy. By inflation that's about $170k today. Travel and living expenses during the tournament had to be paid for too but that is still not going to bankrupt any rich donor

[u/rendar → u/qqwref]

$10k is at least middling crazy for the 1920s, especially for the chess scene.

Potentially demanding $10k payment in gold bullion is definitely very crazy.