12 games for world championship?!

what would be better for wcc a 12 game match or 24 game match.. I personally don't think 12 games is nearly enough

I know Kasparov complained of unlimited matches. I myself will never know if 12 is enough or 24 is too much.

unlimited matches is a horrid Idea.. basically allowed Kasparov to force draws and cost karpov winning their first wcc match

but 12 games seems far too few

i think 24 is good... it makes the match more heroic in my eyes.

i saw GM. You Hifan (CHN.) Started in Gibraltar (10 rounds) the day after she finished 13 rounds in Wijk aan zee !!! RESPECT :))

if she can do it the World Champion can do it.

You know what's interesting is the world champion may be in a position to comission a change in the number of games for the world championship. I just feel it's a little unfair for the challenger who has to go through a gauntlet of matches before even playing for the title. The finale seems short, but the road to get there takes a lifetime. I wouldn't know since I'm not in their shoes what seems fair for the players, and I myself will never know.

I wouldn't exactly call it a gauntlet of matches ... it's a single tournament with14 rounds, taking place many months before the title match. And don't forget that the title holder has also been through that in order to gain his title in the first place; so why shouldn't the same condition be imposed on the aspirants? The same applies to "takes a lifetime to get there" - true for both sides!

I always thought that 16 games would be appropriate.

I agree 💯%. Heroic is a good way to describe it.. definitely gives it more of an epic feel... boo 12 games

coincidentally, I was thinking of that lifetime it takes while playing the Magnus app yesterday. I had just gotten over feeling great about winning age 9 yrs 4 months, and it had been a real challenge for the longest time. I started reminiscing about my life at age 9, and realizing that at that age that chess was not even something I would learn about for several years. I started thinking of something I saw on TV a few years back, when Magnus was a child giving stimulus. I started thinking about the many years it took Magnus to get to where he is today. His whole entire life he was destined to be World Champion. His journey started from when he first learned to play at 5. From then until now has taken a lifetime. For me this seems so deserving of an accomplishment. I think it's great that he achieved the success he has; its inspiring. I thought I would share my thought on how a kid can go from being a kid, and later be hailed as the best in the world. Even for him it took his entire life to achieve something so many can only dream about.

The players themselves aren't interested in 24 game matches.

We had 24 games between Carlsen and Anand. 24 games was fine when we had interesting matches but if it is one sided then it just becomes boring.

The match shouldn't be neither too long nor too short, the outcome of the match to a large extent is decided in its first part, then a player who gets an advantage tries to save it, but his opponent prepares a decisive attempt in a critical moment, so some part of the match may consist of boring draws, especially in a long match. Players are just people and in a longer match games will become less qualitative. On the other hand in a shorter match they will tend to play more cautiously as the stakes in every game will be higher. I believe that the balance of those factors is somewhere between 12 - 16 games.

What I don't like in the 12-game match is the change of colors in the middle, because it's pretty much in favour of a player starting with black: the very first game is usually being played carefully, but two white games in the middle is a big deal.

A 12 game match for the world title is too short. It should be 20 or 24.