FIDE World Championship - Magnus Carlsen vs Ian Nepomniactchi

Just like I said

I like the idea of 6-12 months before the match, have players over 2750 FIDE vote on which openings and variations to disallow.

Even the most dim-witted individual who holds an advanced degree in hyperbolic topology can draw on command with a petroff or berlin, but force them to play something sharp and there will be decisive games.

Oh, I see

Hikaru (and others) have suggested that the players play the rapid tiebreaker game(s) before the classical match.

This way, it's known who will win in the case of all draws, so the classical games will be filled with more attempts at decisive games.

Caruana, meanwhile, suggested that they go back to a tournament format, instead of a match format, so that the winner of the tournament is declared the World Champion.

I guess those are more practical ideas.

I like that idea 

24 games.

Playing tiebreaks before the classical match is indeed better.

But I still think that giving draw odds to the defending champion makes a lot of sense.

Here's a novel idea. Have multiple double round robin tournaments where only half the players advance. When you get down to 2 players, the player with more wins overall has draw odds.

(Also at any stage, if there is a tie, then the player with more wins over the entire series of tournaments is favored)

Here's another suggestion: accelerating time formats, so the games start at classical time controls then get (say) 20% faster every game (or two games), with a fixed number of games to play. If done in pairs of games, the player to get white first could be randomly chosen every time (just an option).

Hmm, but I wouldn't want the time to degenerate too low. Maybe add that after a win, the next round of 2 games resets at, say, 20% less time than the first 2 games. That would allow for more long games.

Yep, that was kind of my point, any drastic rule change will change the strategy totally, makes it more complex if you can play for winning strategies other than checkmate, like playing for a stalemate when you are ahead on points, or adding the strategy of playing to outpoint the other player at the end of the game when a non-mating piece configuration is reached....it would cut down on draws. Conversely the opponent would have to be aware of these new strategies. I suppose another simple way to change the rules favoring less draws would simply be to get rid of the draw by agreement, but this may not do much but bore the audience in games that are clearly drawn.

Time control is I think ok in this event.

Here's an idea . If the classical portion is drawn why not play two/four games of chess 960 with classical time controls ? I don't think so the players can approach perfection in that format with any amount of preparation they put in 

mmm

what is this about

We need more draws. More and more draws, please. Chess players are highly interested in watching games that'll be finished by a draw agreement in 99.99999999999% cases.
It is very intriguing to watch games, drawn by such chess giants.  
Draws, draws, draws, draws, draws, draws, draws.

Imagine you're Magnus.

You're competing to retain the title of Champion of the World.

You're also in a position to win 1.4 million dollars, if you win the match.

With every move, you frown, fidget, and scowl at all the possibilities you can see, and you play the moves that you believe are the strongest - the ones that provide the most possible benefits, with the least amount of risk.

Move after move, you continue in this way, attempting to improve your position little by little, while attempting to worsen your opponents'.

You are playing your game, the way you always have: you're a constrictor, who takes small positional advantages from your opponent, and nurses them, relentlessly, into endgame victories.

You're playing powerful, world-class chess.

But your opponent is well-prepped. His team of seconds have given him an arsenal of engine-tested lines. For every move of yours, he has an equally strong response.

Game after game, you both wrestle to a draw.

It's exhausting. Difficult. You struggle to find improvements in the games, in post-game analysis.

Fortunately, after glancing at the chess.com forums, you decide to change your approach. Perhaps all the spectators are right. Maybe there are too many draws!

Perhaps you should take more risks. Play more aggressive. Be less safe. Mix things up a little!

So you go into the next game with a new plan: throw caution to the wind. You're the world #1, after all! What's there to be afraid of?

Headlines in the following days:

WORLD CHAMPION SELF-DESTRUCTS, AS A NEW CHAMPION IS CROWNED. NEPO EXPRESSES CONFUSION OVER CARLSEN'S SUDDENLY HORRIBLE MOVES.

lmfaooo