Upgrade to Chess.com Premium!

The Women's World Chess Championship of 2012


  • 22 months ago · Quote · #181

    Conflagration_Planet

    I posted in it so you would see it. A joke that's not funny.

  • 22 months ago · Quote · #182

    trysts

    Everyone I picked has lost, johyoudell. After the next three tie-break matches are decided, I'll probably jinx two more innocent peopleLaughing

  • 22 months ago · Quote · #183

    trysts

    Thanks woodshover:)

  • 22 months ago · Quote · #184

    trysts

    The Monster has me blockedLaughing

  • 22 months ago · Quote · #185

    Conflagration_Planet

    Is he right?

  • 22 months ago · Quote · #186

    trysts

    Conflagration_Planet wrote:

    Is he right?

    About the tournament being a joke to him? It's his opinion. I find it highly entertaining, myself. An 1800 played Yifan Hou in the first round, but that's because they limited the number of women from strong chess playing countries like China and Russia in order to be more globally represented. 

  • 22 months ago · Quote · #187

    Conflagration_Planet

    Oh.

  • 22 months ago · Quote · #188

    bullregard

    I'm not excited about the format of the tournament. Too much randomness because of the short matches.  Why do they make the gals play this way?

  • 22 months ago · Quote · #189

    bullregard

    ... or maybe I'm just p*ssed because I was rooting for Lahno Cry

  • 22 months ago · Quote · #190

    trysts

    bullregard wrote:

     

     

    I'm not excited about the format of the tournament. Too much randomness because of the short matches.  Why do they make the gals play this way?

    One of the commentators at the WWCC website, Alexandr Khalifman, actually won the world chess championship in 1999 using the same format(w/ more players). He was quoted at the time: "Rating systems work perfectly for players who play only in round robin closed events. I think most of them are overrated. Organizers invite same people over and over because they have the same rating and their rating stays high". 

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FIDE_World_Chess_Championship_1999

    The Khalifman quote is here:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexander_Khalifman

  • 22 months ago · Quote · #191

    pdela

    where is the monster?

  • 22 months ago · Quote · #192

    SmyslovFan

    I guess FIDE never learns. There was a World Championship for men with a similar format, and the results were equally random.

    If the goal is to create a different champion every cycle, this is a good way to achieve that goal.

    I always thought the goal of a world championship is to crown the best player. This system doesn't do that.

  • 22 months ago · Quote · #194

    SmyslovFan

    In tennis, there is no single world champion. There are Grand Slam events, and a highest rated player, but not a world championship the way there is in chess.

  • 22 months ago · Quote · #197

    SmyslovFan

    This is what Jeff Sonas, the statistician, wrote:

    Well, what's wrong with the knockout format? Easy: with so many participants, and so little time, there is just not enough room to identify the single strongest player in the field. It is very easy for the strongest player to falter in one game and suddenly become eliminated. We expect that an effective championship cycle will allow the strongest player (whoever that might be) a real chance to demonstrate their superiority by winning the cycle, and this clearly isn't the case when a minus-one score over a stretch of two games can eliminate you from the whole cycle, however much success you had in the previous games during the tournament.

    Thus a knockout tournament should not be the final championship event, merely a preliminary qualifying event. ...

    http://www.chess.co.uk/twic/sonas010704.html

  • 22 months ago · Quote · #198

    Scottrf

    The difference with tennis is that the best players have a much higher winning percentage.

  • 22 months ago · Quote · #199

    CalamityChristie

    there aren't many draws in tennis

  • 22 months ago · Quote · #200

    CalamityChristie

    Conflagration_Planet wrote:

    I believe it was Monster with no name.

    you shouldn't really take seriously what is written by a monster that hasn't got a name, checkmating skills, logic, plus way too many other things to list.


Back to Top

Post your reply: