It's a bit unfair that in every tournament Carlsen plays in, all the other players are obliged to play against a field with a higher average rating than Carlsen is -- only Carlsen always gets to play against lower-rated players.
I have to agree with post #2 on this. When Carlsen loses he will lose more points than when he wins.
Anyone who knows anything about chess tournaments knows that being the #1 seed really sucks! It's very easy to lose rating points.
This unjustice can be easily resolved: Fix the tournament rules, so that every player has to play against himself as well... now every player is playing against the same opponent average.
Pure genius, no?
That did not occur to me at all, and it absolutely would eliminate the unfairness. I'll get started on an online petition to present to FIDE.
Signed.
It is not just Carlsen himself. "He" didn't cause this advantage you view as unfair (if it is, ok. That's not what I am saying). there is a big problem with FIDE rules and competitions in general. Because they designed bad rules one player shouldn't be singled out or blamed.
I would argue there are other huge problems with FIDE such as how the president of FIDE gets re-elected over Karpov or Kasparov, is Putin's close friend, and that he openly claims he was abducted by aliens who told him they gave humans chess.
I don't think the OP understands the meaning of the words he is using. Carlsen became the highest rated player by beating everyone else, so he naturally gets to always play lower rated opponents. But there is nothing unfair about it, since he became highest rated by sheer merit. In fact, he enjoys the ultimate fair advantage.
(Actually, I'm sure the OP understands all this and is just having a little fun.)
:)
I would argue there are other huge problems with FIDE such as how the president of FIDE gets re-elected over Karpov or Kasparov, is Putin's close friend, and that he openly claims he was abducted by aliens who told him they gave humans chess.
And why would Kasparov or Karpov necessarily be a better choice?
"why would Kasparov or Karpov necessarily be a better choice?"
Because it's never good when someone sits on a position for life and already has been on it for 20 years, and Karpov and Kasparov know a bit more about chess?
And maybe also because Kirsan keeps saying things that make his agenda clear, as when he said in the press conference before the last Candidates how important it was that one of the Russian participants won the event and went on to beat Carlsen. The head of FIDE shouldn't be so openly partial.
I'm afraid I dont understand what you are saying. If Magnus Carlsen is the highest rated player in THE WORLD how could he play anyone that has a higher rating. If you are number one it means that you are the best. How could you be better than the best? To clarify I'm saying that Carlsen is the highest rated player in the world, meaning NO ONE has a higher rating than him. So how could he play somebody with a lower rating?
Maybe the OP would like top players only play highly capable computer chess?
I'm afraid I dont understand what you are saying. If Magnus Carlsen is the highest rated player in THE WORLD how could he play anyone that has a higher rating. If you are number one it means that you are the best. How could you be better than the best? To clarify I'm saying that Carlsen is the highest rated player in the world, meaning NO ONE has a higher rating than him. So how could he play somebody with a lower rating?
I am not arguing that specificallky Karpov or Kasparov would necessarily be better choices. In fact I wish it was someone who is not Russian again.
Although Kasparov or Karpov being the president of FIDE would definitely provide a better public image and a known personality. Both, Karpov and Kasparov are able speakers and a personable.
Almost no one outside of the chess world, and probably within the chess world knows of Kirsan Ilymzhinov. That is one.
Second, and more important, reason is that this man has been accused by many player for the way he ran FIDE and his top down authoritarian control of the organization. Not only that, but he has show more than once that he is self serving. He always attempts to bring chess olympiads to his home state Kalmykia (part of Russia). There are so many better places to have tournaments at around Asia, Europe, and America. Russia already has way too much attention from FIDE. I am not talking about many Russians being in the top 100 players list, but Russia being chosen for various sporting events, including the Chess Olympiad.
Add to that the fact that this Kirsan Ilymzhinov is apparently a politician and a businessment who uses his position of FIDE presidency for his own publicity.
It also does not help that he was elected, and then re-elected twice, for no apparent reasons except that he is reportedly a billionaire of Russia and gives his own money to different clubs and venues. In a way, that is like bribing. ALthough I would not be surprised real bribing actually happens in FIDE.
I wouldn't be surprised Vladimir "Huilo" Putin has some influence in this guy's being re-elected thus indirectly influencing FIDE. It's all suspicious and makes the organization look secretive and shady.
Sapient+phren: I knew chess players have humour...yesss!