FIDE and Chess.com

In these days we see an attack by chess.com against FIDE, showing how corrupt they are.

Honestly I find the polemics ridicolous, because there is NO alternative. If I want to become a titled player I need to pass from FIDE or a federation affiliated with FIDE.

But, I don't care to belong to FIDE, as long as I can get my own title.

So why chess.com doesn't adopt a good anti-cheating software, and begin to organize serious tournaments?

I believe that there is where the money is. Because in the next 5 months, I will spend at least 250-300 dollars in entry fees, while chess.com will not get anything. But maybe chess.com staff is worthier to spend the money to than FIDE.

And I don't care to give my money to FIDE or chess.com as long as there is a serious federation.

Any thoughts?

            You've been here a month and a half. If you have some serious suggestions to improve the site for Eric, please fell free to opine.

May I know why you don't consider it serious the suggestion of taking over FIDE?

After all they already organize the death matches and pay at least 1000 dollars to the players involved.

            Yeah; apples & oranges; FIDE is a legislative body that governs the professional activities of chess. chess.com is primarily a web site that helps educate players. FIDE is much older than chess.com  Fide decides when games will be played. chess.com can give you a game 24/7 on a world wide basis instantly. 

       Welcomw to the human race. I'm 58 yrs old, and fell stupid a lot.

I thought it was interesting that Chess.com pointed out the following material : http://www.chess.com/news/deal-between-paulson--ilymzhinov-revealed-in-yet-another-leaked-document-6252

On one hand they can claim to be an unbaised media source. After all, FIDE should be accountable to it's fans and members, and to avoid corruption. The two entities could get by without each other but, can benefit from each other. Even if it is mutual use at this point, expect the relationship to continue. Money has a way of healing wounds.  For the sake of chess itself, they should work together. Unfortunately, money and power make people forget things like their love of chess or righteousness. It is a double edged sword that if they want to profit from one another, are going to have to swallow.

I agree whole heartedly that chess.com should invest in state of the art cheat detection software and screen their members carefully, charging a fee for everyone who can pay to be at a, members only site.

They could be like another FIDE. If you ask me, that is going to be the future of chess. Eventually every player who plays on line will be watched so closely from a statistical p.o.v. that cheating will be next to impossible to get away with. I believe the problem can be squeezed down to a few hundred point range, below master level and even sand bagging will be next to impossible to pull off. I think eventually, given enough evidence, even the most slippery of the worms can be fingered out. I think the initial screening and fees will go a long way to ward off much of the BS.

         nameeno1had;  well said; "Money has a way of healing wounds"

So if I understand you well, all the universities in the world, that are now online, and do provide degrees should close immediately, because in reality they are web sites?

In my opinion chess.com can be both, and for your information now FIDE is also trying to enter into the online gaming world, obviously they are quite late. I also don't see why chess.com cannot keep all the legislative papers made up to now by FIDE for ruling over chess, and eventually make a more swift and customer oriented business.

Again, this year I will likely spend 250-500 dollars in entry fees in tournaments, if someone gives me a better service than USCF and FIDE, why not?

        How much money will it take to heal the wound between chess.com, and Henry Despres??

        Your opening statement; "an attact on FIDE, showing how corrupt they are". Wasn't Kasparov doing that years before chess.com existed??  Maybe Eric doesn't want to own a corrupt organisation.

Can u provide a link to a thread/ webpage concerning this topic?

I am going to recommend that discussion doesn't take place here in open forum. If you want to poke fun at that one in private, have it...

huh? i think eric does want to own a CORRUPT organisation 

         You don't care to give your money to FIDE. You don't care to give your money to chess.com. Is the USCF out of possibility also??

you are a little vauge in who you are talking too, but the answer is i game my money to chess.com then stole(edit: borrowed) it back

EDIT: oops, i wasn't supposed to say that 

        To post #4; "the suggestion to consider it serious of taking over FIDE"?. I agree with Macer; can you provide some documentation of this??  Eric doesn't consult with posters to obtain his desires. Many people know that chess.com recently purchased chessvibes. Maybe FIDE is not for sale. Are The Barbarians At The Gate??

no, only hired mercenaries

I wonder if i'm alone in not knowing what the hell this thread is about.

        The OP's argument, caught my attention, but he doesn't seem to have any facts to back up his allegations, except to be a non-paying complainer.

It seems you really have no clue of what you are talking about, and honestly I don't understand why you don't stop trolling, if you don't know anything about the chess world.

Here the link: http://www.chess.com/news/deal-between-paulson--ilymzhinov-revealed-in-yet-another-leaked-document-6252

http://www.chess.com/news/leaked-contract-between-kasparov-and-leong-transparancy-vs-ethics-9707