Who do you think deserves to win the Candidates Tournament?

And the winner of the Candidates Tournament is? Who deserves it?

If two or more players are tied for first place by points, they are ranked by

1. the number of points scored in games between tied players
2. the number of wins in their games
3. their Neustadtl score

Carllllllsen!!

Its not a question of 'deserving' it, I can sense the implication that somehow if Kramnik wins its a terrible thing for chess. Well, you have to play the games, nobody in these days hands you a World Championship match just because you can raise the money, you have to prove that you are worthy. Thats what the Candidates tournament is set up to prove...

Yes, Stephen, I am following World Championships since Botwinnik and Smyslov and always everybody and each national chess-alliance had comments as to the system used.   Let's be happy with the Candidates Tournament, your last word is right, "to prove" , so not: "deserving".

( ... and now somebody can complain about Caruana and Nakumara, not competing, see the relevant forum, some days ago ... )

Who has been more consistant all year playing chess?

Or lately been playing out of this world on another level compared to everybody in the tournament.

Ivanchuk!

Just because he's such a wierdo.

Kramnik.

His overall performance in the tournament has been better than Carlsen's.

Would you like to see the Butcher fall and the Baker win?

Alexei Shirov, because he was once challenger, but that match did not take place. Instead Kramnik played. Now is it the time to settle things if Kramnik will win this tournament. Let Shirov play!

Vladimir Kramnik

Kramnik! :)

Magnus. I don't care about Kramnik's "better" performance in this tournament, Magnus deserves to play for the title with his performance this year.

Whoever wins, be it Carlsen or Kramnik.

I think Carlsen would be a better win for chess. Definitely generate more publicity and hopefully more interest from a younger age group. No disrespect to Kramnik, but I think only the chess world would be interested if he wins.

Slow positional squeezes are beautiful to some players.  I think they're more beautiful than some insipid tactical combination.  Maybe because houdini's score doesn't jump around people don't get excited (or more likely they don't understand and get bored while watching), but I like this kind of chess.  Not that I understand this level of play, but this type of chess is how I aspire to play.  So speak for yourself and others, and remember beauty is in the eye of the beholder.

As for who is more deserving I don't think I can say who has played better.  Kramnik has missed chances in several games that petered out to draws (or nearly did).  So he hasn't been perfect himself.  Both Kramnik and Carlsen seem to be consistent and professional.  Whoever wins after today will deserve it I think.

I think Kramnik deserves the win far more tha Carlsen.  Carlsen may be the best player but he is a punk-ass kid at times and definitely full of himself.

I was happy that he lost to Vassily Ivanchuk. Carlsen needs to learn how to be humble before he will ever be truly great. I think he has the potential to be 2900, but his attitude is holding him back.

Carlsens seems to be everyones pick to win it. If he does will it be better for the chess all around? I would like to see Carlsen play a match game. Kramnik had his chance.

This is exactly why some people don't like him I think.  Because he's young.  They feel like he hasn't paid his dues.  It has nothing to do with his chess (but really it should only have to do with his chess right?)

If you've been following the tournament RIbEyeRichards, you'll know that if anyone is acting like a punk ass kid it's Ivanchuk... eccentric as usual so I guess people just give him a pass by now.  Carlsen has been mature and well composed from what I've seen.

I've watched most of the commentary and interviews. Carlsen restrains himself from being an out-right ass at times. Its not that he is young, its that people have been telling him he farts roses since he could walk. That messes with your ego. I would say his attitude correlates to his age, but that his age is not the cause of his attitude.

My claim though is his age is the cause of your (and other's) attitude(s)

Assuming he's arrogant and people suck up to him you'd like to see him knocked down a peg.  Not that this has anything to do with who is deserving to win.  And not that you actually know anything about him.

I'm not singling you out either.  There are many who feel this way, and ignore his chess and the fact they don't know him in the first place.