A system better than the current World Championship system

Best system ever. I just thought of this system. The world championship should consist of the top 20 grandmaster players. However, the top 5 are shoe ins and cannot be challenged by anyone, but those ranked 6-9 can be challenged. Here is where it gets a little bit complicated, #10 can only challenge 6-9 twice, so that specific number 10 has only two challenges. So say GM #10 loses both challenges than he automatically drops into the pool of the #10-19's, so the new 10 would be the determined by match play between 11-19 with the winner being the new #10 and having two challenges. Now GM #20 has two challenges to crack the top 19 if he fails then he drops into a the pool between 21-30  in which the same rules apply. However, if a #10 or #20 beat anyone in their  challenges, then the defeated opponent becomes the the new 10 and 20 and gets a rematch and one challenge to face anyone else in the upper limit.

(for example GM #10 loses rematch has to use his challenge on another opponent in that limit.) So if GM old#10 beats Gm#6 now Gm#6--> Gm new #10 and Gm old #10 is GM#6 ( yes leapfrogging everybody else, which doesnt really matter). So they have a rematch and Gm #10 loses so he must no use his challenege on GM#7,8 or 9. )

The ranking  to determine  GM #21 and above will be how it currently is. 

Challenges are only valid for a month. therefore a ggame should be played amongst each echelon once a month. To prevent #20 for holding out all year. 

Pros and cons of the system will be much appreciated

Does anybody have any insight all this, since there has been many compliants aboout the current format

Pros: Don't know.

Cons: It's ridiculously ridiculous. How are spectators supposed to follow this or anyone supposed to coordinate it?

Are you serious brah. I just coordinated most of it in a minute in my mind. Cannot you not see the examples. Even some setup as what the UFC currently has in terms of setting up events can be used in this. Can you imagine a challenge match play . You know how much interest that will gather. Your favourite can climb five spots or drop  spots. It would be divine, think about the sponsorships for the challenges. Which will only build momentum for the world champsionship. This is just a simplisitic model which can easily be fine tuned brah

you determine the top 20 based on how they are determined now. Then at the beginning of the new season, the top 20 of the previous season will the new top 20 for the beginning of this format.( you couldnt gather that). Then the same ranking for the top 21 would be the same way it is determined now.

ooo it makes sense now scott and doduobird

So Karjakin calls up Nakamura in the middle of the night:

"Dude, get to Russia, I want to use my second challenge!"

Here's something simpler. Take 24 top ranked players and divide them into two groups of twelve. Each group goes through an 11-round round robin to determine top two players in each group. In the semis, group A winner plays a 12 game match against group B runner up. Likewise, group B winner plays a match against group A runner up. In the final, a 24 game match is played to determine the overall winner.

The one I thought was best were zonals sending a few top players from each zone to an interzonal (the big international ones where all the participants were either champions of their countries or finished near the top in huge and very strong chess areas). Then the top finishers got seeded into an 8 player elimination bracket where they then played to best of 10 or 12 game matches. They kept eliminating each other until one was left. The winner of all that was the Challenger to the world champion. It really does pick the best Challenger and wasn't complicated for the public to understand.

too simple brah. That format wouldnt put chess on the map. Here's the thing say i am a young gm tearing through the ranks with my system they can get top 10 easy within a few months of great player. Your system not so much

because it allows more competition, while concurrently allowing the top players to increase their reptoire by only studying and analzying opponent games. So, everybody will want to get into the the top 20.

It IS ridiculous. I presume that GMs #5-2 all have the right to challenge the #1. If they time it right, we could have a new world champ every week, never mind the chaos and the hundreds of thousands of miles in intercontinental flights being logged up by GMs #6-20. Guaranteed to keep the public interest at boiling point.

hence the top 19 are nearly a shrew it. The rank becomes imperative in terms of match ups. But, it still has a NCAA march madness approach where anyone can be eliminated. That is a con right there it is hard to crack the top 20, but i dont think complacency from the top GMS is a problem.

And they will setup the match it will obviously not been right when the challenge is used. Come on this is simple. It would be a big event covered by the chess governing bodies. Think of the sponsorships 

"Accidental champions" such as Khalifman or Ponomariov didn't put chess on the map. More likely made a mockery of the WCC title.

The phrase is shoe-in, not shrew in or shrew it.

No too restrictive, i can see some manipulation in that system and also some discrimination by zone. 

Brilliant short term analysis if i do say so myself. I want to thank you guys for challenging me. Keep trying to find cons

And can you stop calling us "brah"? I for one am neither Hawaiian nor a (RL-) surfer, my chess pieces get wet.

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=brah