Is it a disaster if Anand wins the candidates tournament?

Sort:
Avatar of jesterville

Funding is always a big problem with chess. But with Carlsen as WCC we may see many purse strings ease, since the boy wonder is clearly more marketable. I would imagine that Norway would be under heavy pressure to support the next WCC Match.

Avatar of Polar_Bear

It is rather consequence than the cause. The problem is that sportsmen, players and other showmen are generally overpaid.

To play such chess match you need comfortable place, chessboard, pieces and clocks. No need for sponsors. No need to waste millions of dollars to pay players, seconds, arbiters, journalists, broadcast commentators, assistants, physicians, masseurs and whores.

Avatar of Pacifique

When Gelfand won the Candidate matches in 2011, they complained about Candidate matches.

When Carlsen won the Candidate tournament in 2013, they praised Candidate tournament.

When Anand is going to win the Candidate tournament in 2014, World championship system became bad again...

Avatar of Rumo75
Pacifique hat geschrieben:

When Gelfand won the Candidate matches in 2011, they complained about Candidate matches.

When Carlsen won the Candidate tournament in 2013, they praised Candidate tournament.

When Anand is going to win the Candidate tournament in 2014, World championship system became bad again...

The problem in 2011 wasn't candidates matches. The problem was that they were limited to two games. Candidates 2011 was basically a rapid knock-out tournament.

Avatar of rooperi

I guess the problem is that Carlsen is too good. It's easy to fall into the trap of thinking the Candidates are a bunch of patzers compared to him.

Avatar of jesterville

I think Kasparov was in the same position. In his case, after winning WCC he went on to win every tornament he played in for the next eight (8) years.

Avatar of Polar_Bear

Kasparov had formidable opponent: Karpov.

Sooner or later Carlsen must find such opponent. But the question is who will it be. Anand is old a bit.

Avatar of Pacifique
Rumo75 wrote:
Pacifique hat geschrieben:

When Gelfand won the Candidate matches in 2011, they complained about Candidate matches.

When Carlsen won the Candidate tournament in 2013, they praised Candidate tournament.

When Anand is going to win the Candidate tournament in 2014, World championship system became bad again...

The problem in 2011 wasn't candidates matches. The problem was that they were limited to two games. Candidates 2011 was basically a rapid knock-out tournament.

It`s simply not true. They were limited to 4 games and the final match was limited to 6 games.

Avatar of Rumo75
Pacifique hat geschrieben:
Rumo75 wrote:
Pacifique hat geschrieben:

When Gelfand won the Candidate matches in 2011, they complained about Candidate matches.

When Carlsen won the Candidate tournament in 2013, they praised Candidate tournament.

When Anand is going to win the Candidate tournament in 2014, World championship system became bad again...

The problem in 2011 wasn't candidates matches. The problem was that they were limited to two games. Candidates 2011 was basically a rapid knock-out tournament.

It`s simply not true. They were limited to 4 games and the final match was limited to 6 games.

My mistake. Anyway the number matches proved to be too short. 

Avatar of David210

what happened to kramnik and aronian this tournament where it really matered? wierd.

Avatar of IpswichMatt
rooperi wrote:

I guess the problem is that Carlsen is too good. It's easy to fall into the trap of thinking the Candidates are a bunch of patzers compared to him.

Yet Magnus only just won the Candidates last year - both he and Kramnik finished with 8.5 points. I looks as if Anand will win more convincingly unless something dramatic happens.

It'll be interesting to see the odds for Anand-Carlsen 2, might be worth a punt on Anand if the bookies favour Carlsen heavily.

Avatar of Pacifique
Rumo75 wrote:
Pacifique hat geschrieben:
Rumo75 wrote:
Pacifique hat geschrieben:

When Gelfand won the Candidate matches in 2011, they complained about Candidate matches.

When Carlsen won the Candidate tournament in 2013, they praised Candidate tournament.

When Anand is going to win the Candidate tournament in 2014, World championship system became bad again...

The problem in 2011 wasn't candidates matches. The problem was that they were limited to two games. Candidates 2011 was basically a rapid knock-out tournament.

It`s simply not true. They were limited to 4 games and the final match was limited to 6 games.

My mistake. Anyway the number matches proved to be too short. 

Anyway - the main problem for most "chess fans" was Gelfand, winning these matches.

Avatar of fabelhaft

"the main problem for most "chess fans" was Gelfand, winning these matches"

The main problem was that these minimatch knockout events often are won by outsiders, not only Gelfand but previously also Kasimdzhanov, Khalifman and Ponomariov. Double round robin Candidates and World Championships have usually been won by the favourite, since the format is much better.

Avatar of Pacifique
fabelhaft wrote:

"the main problem for most "chess fans" was Gelfand, winning these matches"

The main problem was that these minimatch knockout events often are won by outsiders, not only Gelfand but previously also Kasimdzhanov, Khalifman and Ponomariov. Double round robin Candidates and World Championships have usually been won by the favourite, since the format is much better.

Calling Gelfand "outsider" is your ignorance, like your inability to see difference between Candidates matches 2011 and "knock-out world championships".

Avatar of fabelhaft
Pacifique wrote:
fabelhaft wrote:

"the main problem for most "chess fans" was Gelfand, winning these matches"

The main problem was that these minimatch knockout events often are won by outsiders, not only Gelfand but previously also Kasimdzhanov, Khalifman and Ponomariov. Double round robin Candidates and World Championships have usually been won by the favourite, since the format is much better.

Calling Gelfand "outsider" is your ignorance, like your inability to see difference between Candidates matches 2011 and "knock-out world championships".

Almost all these "matches" in 2011 were decided in rapid and blitz since they were so short, which is what no favourite wants. Gelfand was an outsider, as was Khalifman, Kasimdzhanov and Ponomariov that all won sequential minimatch knockouts. Some difference compared to the round robin Candidates / World Championships that were won by players like Botvinnik, Smyslov, Tal, Petrosian, Topalov, Anand and Carlsen.

Avatar of Pacifique
fabelhaft wrote:
Pacifique wrote:
fabelhaft wrote:

"the main problem for most "chess fans" was Gelfand, winning these matches"

The main problem was that these minimatch knockout events often are won by outsiders, not only Gelfand but previously also Kasimdzhanov, Khalifman and Ponomariov. Double round robin Candidates and World Championships have usually been won by the favourite, since the format is much better.

Calling Gelfand "outsider" is your ignorance, like your inability to see difference between Candidates matches 2011 and "knock-out world championships".

Almost all these "matches" in 2011 were decided in rapid and blitz since they were so short, which is what no favourite wants. Gelfand was an outsider, as was Khalifman, Kasimdzhanov and Ponomariov that all won sequential minimatch knockouts. Some difference compared to the round robin Candidates / World Championships that were won by players like Botvinnik, Smyslov, Tal, Petrosian, Topalov, Anand and Carlsen.

Gelfand won 2 of his 3 matches without rapid/blitz.

You should be dumb to call "outsider" player who won World cup 2009 and shared 2nd-3rd place in World Chess Championship 2007.

Avatar of chessBBQ

Kramnik shouln't let him play the position he likes.Get out of theory,play an equal position,grind him!

Avatar of SmyslovFan

Pacifique, I have no qualms whatsoever with Gelfand winning the Candidates' tournament. I did have a huge problem with the short matches and Grischuk's strategy of drawing every game, even as white, in order to reach the rapid play-offs. If the matches had been even two games longer each, Grischuk's strategy wouldn't have been so effective. 

But all that is beside the point. You and I may be able to tell the difference between the horrible knockout tournaments and the current system, but the chess playing public just sees some fish that Carlsen carved up and won't tune in. The average chess fan isn't +2000, he's ~1500. That's who the sponsors are looking at. 

You and I will watch any world championship match. But the only way Carlsen-Anand II will get any press is if Anand pulls a stunning upset and keeps it close. I think that is unlikely, and I think few sponsors will be willing to bet that it's close. 

Avatar of BigChessEnthusiast

Kramnik vs Svidler, a sad day for Vlad: http://goo.gl/hzMPjG

Avatar of Pacifique
SmyslovFan wrote:

Pacifique, I have no qualms whatsoever with Gelfand winning the Candidates' tournament. I did have a huge problem with the short matches and Grischuk's strategy of drawing every game, even as white, in order to reach the rapid play-offs. If the matches had been even two games longer each, Grischuk's strategy wouldn't have been so effective. 

But all that is beside the point. You and I may be able to tell the difference between the horrible knockout tournaments and the current system, but the chess playing public just sees some fish that Carlsen carved up and won't tune in. The average chess fan isn't +2000, he's ~1500. That's who the sponsors are looking at. 

You and I will watch any world championship match. But the only way Carlsen-Anand II will get any press is if Anand pulls a stunning upset and keeps it close. I think that is unlikely, and I think few sponsors will be willing to bet that it's close. 

It`s too obvious that chess playing public blame the system when their favorite is unable to win - they started to whine when it became clear that Anand has the best chances to win.

I dont think this is the reason to make the system more favorable for particular players.