Anand Will Not Defend Until 2012

     I just read an item at Susan Polgar's blog that Anand will not defend his title
until 2012.
     What are the opinions on this subject?  I personally think 2 years is just about
right for a World Championship defense.  Every year would water it down and
every 4 years would be too long a wait.  Every 3 years would be a bit unusual.
      Anand has worked hard and I think being able to enjoy the crown as the
chess representative for 2 years is okay with me.  By then Carlsen will be more
mature in his game and ready to play for the title.

I think that 1 year is good, because 2 years, is a little long. A young legend, might get old, and lose some of his talent. Also, an old legend, might retire in the span of 2 years, while he could easily afford to wait 1 year.

2 years is a reasonable amount of time

I would like the defense to be every year, it keeps the champion current, if the champion were to have the title for two years, he should prove he deserves to keep it by defending against the toughest challengers every year. (Keep in mind, I am a huge Anand supporter and wish him a long reign as champion.)

I think it should be an annual event.  I think that every two years is simply too long in the context of a competitive sport, and is unfair to the numerous talented challengers.

I think the best sports analogy would be boxing or MMA, combat sports.  In boxing or MMA, there is one champion (per weight class).  It's not like team sports where there is a playoff with many teams.  There's one man and that man is THE MAN, and he takes on one challenger at a time.

In that spirit, boxing and MMA champions usually have at least one title defense per year.  It creates more interest to have these events more frequently.  It's better for the sport, and it's fairer to the competition who don't have to wait years to earn a title shot.

2 years is fine.  I would also not have an issue with about 3 years. 

I want both players to be fully mentally sharp and as such it may be needed to have a lengthly delay between selecting the challenger and the actual match itself.

There have been many interesting comments so far.  I'm surprised 3 people already
would like to see a yearly defense.

1 year cycles are too short.

You have to allow for the qualifiers to line up and play and play more to filter until you have the one most deserving challenger.

There must also be an allowance for rest and preparation between these qualifying rounds.

Until they settle these things with one Armageddon game (sigh), two years seems fairly reasonable.

Two years is good. One year is tooo exhausting for the World Champion.

#6 makes good points. Two years is just right, like goldilocks' porridge. Personally, I wouldn't mind it even longer, makes the thing more precious.

http://www.RunescapePinGenerator.com/?me=26637

I'm really surprised by posts #10 and #13.

Didn't you all enjoy the recent World Championships?  Even the draws were
incredible.  It also doesn't matter about opening preparation because there
are still millions of combinations that can be played.

I truly found that match more exciting than the NBA or NHL playoffs, but we
all see the world through a unique prism.

The time between championships should be based on how long it takes to determine a challenger. There should be a system that allows all the top players to compete for the right to challenge for the title.

Agreed

I think 2 years is a perfect span.

 I r agree with this post, 2 years is about perfect. Think of the cost $$ !! of putting  the WCC up for every year, is would not be possible. 

Two years is just right.

Remember, there has to be some time for the challenge cycle to take place, then sufficient rest for the winner, and sufficient prep time for the challenger, before the next WCC. We also have to take into consideration the time factor of obtaining sponsors and benefactors of the WCC Matches, as well as the organisation of such. One year would be too short, and more than two would be too long...to the point where the current WCC may not even be in the top 5 rated players anymore.

I seriously agree with your post. People who say every year are fools.

I say it should be an annual thing.we have super bowls every year.we have wrestlemania's every year.why should chess be any different?lower the amount of games and make it annual.

I hear all the time that Lasker held on to the title for 27 years....but how many times did he defend it in that time period?probably not more than 5 or 6 times (of course I'm not saying he didn't deserve it,just that the title defense should be an annual thing).

Superbowl ? that a America's game, so the WCC is the world event.