Carlsen Drops Out of WC Cycle!

So far we have heard comments from GMs Gelfand, Kramnik, and Aronian...none in agreement with Carlsen's point of view. I wonder what is Anand's perspective, and which GMs make up the group that Carlsen refers to in his letter? 

Do you have some arguments, or its just a fan's view of the what actually happened?

Anand must be really pissed off about Fischer still holding the title.

Yes, sentence  "I therefore resign my FIDE world chess champion title" can be quite a confusing one, and subject to various interpretations.

I guess FIDE never found out where he resigned it. "Where is this damn title, he must have resigned it somewhere!"

Poor Karpov, he kept looking and looking... Fischer must be a real genius.

See #169.

Anand is the one who benefits from the current format; ergo, he is the one Carlsen is attacking.  It's smart of him not to comment, since he really can't come off as anything but preserving his own self-interest.  The views of his peers -- who don't benefit from the format -- are more pertinent to the discussion.

One thing is certain : Anand's "credentials" cannot be questioned since he is the ONLY player to ever win the world championship in 3 different formats.

There were other great tournament players who didnt do well in matches and thus never became world champion and maybe Carlsen is worried that he may be the same ?  E Geller comes strongly to mind.......  T Petrosian likely never would have been a WC if it had been decided by tournaments and not match play.

Well, WC is not something current champion own(like a piece of land), it is a intellectual property of the organization(or its legal successor) that established it . You did not produce an argument that Ficsher owned it (as a property), your argument that it was like that since Steinitz are "hasty generalization" fallacy and doesn't actually prove anything. And even if it had been a Fischer's property, there is a formal letter where Fischer resigned. So I don't think that anyone can produce a legally valid explanation that Ficsher still held the title after formal resignation.

Of course, one can establish another organization and held a championship for that title, in boxing you have various organizations with several world champions.

The system that saw the title as being the personal posession of the world's champion was proven inefficient in Capablanca / Alekhine day. Capablanca demanded that any potential challenger must collect a considerable amount of money to 'qualify' to play the match, and most of the money would go to the champion even in the event that he was defeated. Alekhine won the title from Capablanca on those terms and later demanded the same terms from Capablanca for a rematch, which Capablanca was apparently unable or unwilling to meet. Alekhine also twice chose Bogoljubov as the challenger, while many didn't think that Bogoljubov's playing strength justified this choice. The Fide stepped in to improve the situation, and since then the title was no longer seen as being the personal posession of the champion.

The difference between the Classical World Championship Title and the FIDE World Championship Title require a little historical explanation.  I suggest the following three brief reads:

http://www.chessgames.com/wcc.html

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

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Chess_Championship_2006

Here's the thing: yeah Carlsen isn't proving himself by winning the world championship, but, deep down many people will probably think he's the best player anyway. I'm not saying right now, but if he gets to say 2850, I doubt people would deny that he would be the best player in the world, whether or not he's world champion. Some people may be annoyed at him for being this lazy, but nevertheless what can you really do about this loophole? The WC certainly has its own subtleties, but if he was 2850, he would be too much above the rest to not be generally thought to be the best, even if unofficially.

I don't think it's that carlsen is necessarily lazy, but I think he's for one trying to make an ambitious move to complement his annoyance of FIDE's policy, which could be interpreted as arrogant, which I'm sure it is in some ways, but I think he's also legitmately bothered by the way the cycle works and would rather wait for the next one. Yeah perferably he would want to be listened to, but I don't think he's completely unwilling to play in a WC in the future.

But again, although we can get mad at him for not trying to prove himself as a WC, at the same time you wouldn't be able to argue who's best if Carlsen gets up too much higher. As of now we're not at all sure, but like I said perhaps around 2850 is when we'd start to maybe think that.

Even if he got to 50 points higher than Anand the argument could only be that he is seemingly better in tournament play, not that he is a better player overall. History of chess has known a number of players who were very strong in tournaments but not so successful in matches, so until he proves himself in match format there isn't a convincing argument. It is both traditional and seems pretty logical that the question of "who is the world's champion" should be decided by head-to-head encounters between the realistic candidates for that title and not by counting scores against weaker opposition.

Your point is very logical Atos, but 50 points is monstrous at the top level and to get there you'd probably have to do pretty damn well against the wc and candidates who would be likely to be participating in those strong tournaments, not just beating weaker players.

FIDE has finally responded to Carlsen's letter. The full statement can be viewed in the "News Column".

I dunno I think that would be cool

The extract from the FIDE answer really says it all:

"As a matter of principle, FIDE cannot change its regulations upon the wish of a single player, even if this player is the World Champion or the No.1 or No.2 of the world ratings."

Someone is lonely at the top, or near the top actually.

Tournament play is different from match play. In match play one has to prepare much harder, and also prepare specifically to play the opponent.

My belief is that while Carlsen is a superb tournament player, he is not a great match player. According to the seedings he would have play Kramnik in the second round, and probably would have lost that match. Even if he did get past Kramnik, he would next have to play Topalov, and the odds are that he would likely lose that match too.

It appears that the prospect of having to beat all of Kramnik, Topalov and Anand in matches seemed too daunting for Carlsen. Hence his preference for a tournament where he already has shown his strength.

Basically Carlsen hasn't proven himself as yet to be a great match player, and it appears that he is afraid to put himself through that test. Historically the world champion has been determined by match play, and that is how it is likely to continue. Previous attempts at having tournaments to decide champions (early 2000s) have produced "champions" that no one remembers anymore.

Jay

I do understand Carlsen, but that Champ had the same issues in becoming the Champ. He too walked that road. Despite Carlsen being a great talent, I do think he is a bit young to do this. Not enough weight in the scale. And if he keeps doing that, in 60 years Carlsen will be remembered as "that dude that could have become the best, but didn't". First win the title. When you have won the title, you can put some real weight in the scale.