Carlsen Drops Out of WC Cycle!

The WC cycle proposed by FIDE lasts way too long. Also, whoever manages to get into the final vs the champion is gone to be worn out by the all of the opponents he would have to face to get there.

offtopic: Does anyone know what's happening with Morozevich lately?

How long before his next stab at WC if he misses this cycle?

I thought currently the cycle is 3 years ?

2007 - "FIDE Presidential Board has approved the introduction of a new Grand Prix series initiated by Global Chess as part of the new World Championship Cycle. The Grand Prix series will span a period of two years with one tournament every year in America, Asia and Europe.

Following initial research carried out with a number of countries and sponsors, there is a high degree of interest in the introduction of such a series of tournaments, traditionally referred to as a Grand Prix series, whereby players acquire ranking points and the player with the highest cumulative points is proclaimed GP Winner at the end of a season.

In the new cycle, the winner of the Grand Prix would challenge the winner of the World Cup in an eight game match and the eventual winner of this match would then face the World Champion in a twelve game match for the world title. Global Chess will be responsible for locating sponsors and together with FIDE finding organising cities, who would be interested in any respective parts of the Grand Prix."

He's just dropped to #2 for November: 

(source. www.fide.com)

On the live rating he is already first though.

Defeating the reigning world champion in a comprehensive head-to-head match is in my view really necessary to legitimately succeed him. In the past, WC matches were not on a regular compulsory basis and many were excluded from the title (Lasker's and Alekhine's reigns come to mind), but nowadays a champion can't escape challengers, so that's not an argument. Deciding the next challenger by a tournament instead of a series of matches, as Carlsen proposes, is fine, but the current champion should certainly be able to defend his title. I don't know why Carlsen has problems with this, other than that match play might not be his strong point and he is afraid of Anand's experience. I think it's a sad waste of talent to drop out of this cycle while he could have a shot at becoming one of the youngest world champions ever and find it cowardly.

Do you care to bring some arguments for your statements?

IMO one can get more attention if hes trying to work on a case, and trying to get support from other top players, then if he acts like a spoiled brat.

So far I haven't seen that any of top seeded players support him, why would FIDE listen to him now?

If he could get support from (lets say) 50% of top 100 players(it can be other number, this is just for a sake of discussion), then it would be a different story.

But, AFAIK, he didn't even get a supporting letter from his own federation, so do we really have to say more?

Another great post at chessintranslation includes the thoughts of Gelfand, Kramnik and Aronian about Carlsen's decision. It's towards the end of the post. None agree with him.

http://www.chessintranslation.com/2010/11/ilya-odessky-returns-in-style/

That info effectively seals the fate of Carlsen's Jerome gambit.

I think we should flip a coin

Maybe you're right, but the fact that you have to wait three years to reach the final makes the cycle a very tedious process. I don't think a player as young as Carlsen will have the necessary patience.

After all he WILL be an old man of 23 next time. 

I think Carlssen's desicion is very reasonable. Firstly, I think his idea of disigning a WC competition that more accuratly rewards the best player, is good and fair. Secondly, Magnus' desicion is seemingly based on what favors him. As a top player you must act according to your understanding of what is best for your career. He can't make desicions based on what fans see as most amusing, all the time.

I belive this desicion can help Carlsen stay at the top of the rating list, as well as increasing the rating gap. Also, this might very well lead to a reconsideration by FIDE. Reconsideration is always a good thing, as it can terminate possibly bad traditions.

Right, and Nadal should demand that Wimbledon be played on clay.

The correct approach is to become WC and THEN demand conditions.

 That worked really well for Fischer ! 

The traditional approach, anyway.

No no no, once you've got yours then you try to screw everybody else over.

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?