Are you the best? Shut up, play, win it ALL, be a WC and only THEN you can make your own terms...
Carlsen Drops Out of WC Cycle!
Sort:
I can understand Carlsen's concern. Makes sense to me.
"Why should one player have one out of two tickets to the final to the detriment of all remaining players in the world? Imagine that the winner of the 2010 Football World Cup would be directly qualified to the 2014 World Cup final while all the rest of the teams would have to fight for the other spot."
This analogy of his does not make sense to me with regard to chess :(
ChessMarkstheSpot wrote:
Sounds like Kasparov all over again with his PCA stint that he had several years back. I guess he learned a little more from Kaspy. The apple doesn't fall far from the tree it seems.
-Mark
Well, Kasparov should have hinted from his experience that Carlsen's move would carry much more weight had he been a World Champion already.
Carlsen makes a reasonable point, but the attitude is way too pubescent. Can he grow a full beard yet?, that would give him some credibility.
Let's see, does the current system fit the situation ? On one side we have Anand who has been at or near the top for many years, and has won many matches against top-level players, including two of the current principal contenders (Kramnik and Topalov.) On the other side, we have Karlsen who has not played almost any longer matches against top-level opponents. The system requires Karlsen to prove himself in several matches before he gets a shot to play against Anand. Seems perfectly reasonable.
Karlsson will never be good enough to be world champion anyway
I actually like his idea, of a big round-robin tournament with the world's top 10 (Anand included). If you think about it, the current system has a couple of drawbacks:
1. Anand, taking time off to prepare to meet his challenger, has played on 2 or 3 tournaments this year; this is surely a huge loss for the chess community.
2. IMO, matches aren't as exciting as tournaments because there are generally an insane amount of draws, and the games are usually won before they start (opening preparation). That isn't exciting chess!
3. The matches take place all over the world over a long period, and there's often dispute over the terms of the match (no one needs reminding of the 2010 debacle, with arguements over draw offers and the volcano going off and all that).
A tournament would allow the chess community an event everyone would be following; can you imagine how cool live coverage of the world's strongest tournament ever would be?
Personally I prefer the old school approach... for whatever that's worth.
Reb wrote:
I prefer matches myself to determine the champ and not tournaments. Tournaments have produced some very weak "champions" . Perhaps Carlsen just doesnt like his chances in matches with the likes of Topalov, Aronian, Kramnik and Anand ? I think the champion should have perks that others don't enjoy and not having to play in the candidates is one of them.......
I very much agree with all of this.
Except the bit about the perks... :)
Spiffe wrote:
Carlsen is a nobody in the grand scheme of chess history, and he overestimates his position. Once he's been the clear #1 for an extended period -- like 10 years -- then maybe I'd give some weight to his input on the WC cycle. For the time being, he won't be missed.
excuse me, but wth does this have to do with ANYTHING?! I clearly see his point, as I once saw Kasparovs, that one guy being WC is automatically granted the final spot next championship - is just not fair to anyone. And off course this is a major sacrifice of him to do this, champion or not.
0_o-CheCKsTer wrote:
Spiffe wrote:
Carlsen is a nobody in the grand scheme of chess history, and he overestimates his position. Once he's been the clear #1 for an extended period -- like 10 years -- then maybe I'd give some weight to his input on the WC cycle. For the time being, he won't be missed.
excuse me, but wth does this have to do with ANYTHING?! I clearly see his point, as I once saw Kasparovs, that one guy being WC is automatically granted the final spot next championship - is just not fair to anyone. And off course this is a major sacrifice of him to do this, champion or not.
If he had won the title and proposed this type of change, only then it would be a "major sacrifice". Now it's just a poor attempt at bypassing the head to head battles with the top guns.
With regards to the current WC making it to the final - either he is one of the two strongest players in the world, or he isn't. If he is, then he deserves to be in the final. If he is not, then the challenger that makes it through to the final should beat him and become WC anyway...where is the problem here?
Annand won it this way, Topalov did not seem to mind. I remember the comment from the WCC that the time is running out on older players, well maybe not for a year or so...
It may seem harsh that you have to win a tournament while the champ is preparing for you, but he won it this way so it is unfair to him to have the match any other way.
Magnus is just a cry-baby. I never liked the lad anyhow. Good riddens to bad rubbish.
A WC tournament is very problematic IMO. It opens up the whole who's-throwing-points-to-who can of worms. The last thing we need is tainted World Champions with endless whinging and whining about Russians ganging up on so and so which is inevitable... etc.
The only thing that would distinguish a world championship tourney from a super tourny like Linares would be the accusations of cheating.
Matches are traditional, and putting the world champ on a special pedestal from which he must be knocked is dramatic. World championship matches focus attention like nothing else. And I think having a reigning world champ who must be dethroned is appropriate for a game so concerned with kings!
(@Reb -- Botvinnik and Karpov were not weak champions if that is what you were implying... Euwe, the weakest champion, was arrived at the traditional way.)
We'd need asterisks next to WC names indicating they didn't defeat the reigning champion.
The candidates selection cycle is not perfect as stated in the letter, but this doesnt seem to be enough reason to withdraw. Why didnt any top players complained and boycot the process followed when FIDE started it? Why now?
Whether you face topa, anand, aronian or whoever in the final WCC Match, you still must be able to beat any of them if you want to become WC. And it is not as if Carlsen isnt given a chance to prove himself.
It might not be the right decision to pull out, but Magnus complaint is correct.
The time a contender spends in the WC cycle, the champion can spend preparing to beat the 2 or 3 people who might become the contender.
Having to prepare against only 2 or 3 is a big advantage.
Yes, the champion should get to defend his title over 10+ matches, but no reason they should all be against the same opponent. A tournament where the field is slowly whittled down to 8, 4 and then 2 would be great drama and a real test of the champion's skill against the form player.
Carlsen is a nobody in the grand scheme of chess history, and he overestimates his position. Once he's been the clear #1 for an extended period -- like 10 years -- then maybe I'd give some weight to his input on the WC cycle. For the time being, he won't be missed.