They didn't really play 12 games though. They both were going for draws to minimize risk. Game 12 is the best example where neither player tried to play an actual game.
Isnt it crazy to decide Classical Chess champion by Rapid games?
Sort:
They both knew the format going in. Had there been additional classic games after the 12th game to decide the championship , Carlsen would have taken advantage of white in game 12 and won outright,avoiding any other play. He played to his strength. Very well I might add.
If Sergey won on Carlsen's birthday ,would it have still been rigged?
Is a decision based on limited tournament length. Keep going classical and risk is 12 draws in a row in playoff, or didn't rent the spot for tournament for extra week and moving to different location gives someone an edge, or one players mom gets sick and after 30 days of draws guy says I need a break to look after mom.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Penalty_shootout some sports use similar methods to limit game length.
Nov 30, 2016
0
#8
davidsheep wrote:
one players mom gets sick and after 30 days of draws guy says I need a break to look after mom.
I'm sure this is the exact reason they do 12 games...
Nov 30, 2016
0
#9
Firstly, there is no such thing as "Classical Chess Championship", it's just called world chess championship. So it's fair to expect the "world chess champion" to be good at all formats of the game. They both were equally good at classical, so the better player in rapid wins the title.
Nov 30, 2016
0
#10
APG817 wrote:
nimzomalaysian wrote:
Firstly, there is no such thing as "Classical Chess Championship", it's just called world chess championship. So it's fair to expect the "world chess champion" to be good at all formats of the game. They both were equally good at classical, so the better player in rapid wins the title.
Do you truly believe they are equally good at Classical ? I think there are discrepancies between the two which would be revealed over a larger sample size, maybe 30 games or so.
I really don't think we saw the 'best' of either player throughout the 12 classical games.
Obviously not. But in this tournament, yes.
30 games would be a little too much, these are not engines playing like the ones in TCEC, these are humans who get tired after a game that lasts for 6 hours. Moreover 1 classical game takes an entire day, put a rest day in between, you have the match go on for 2 months. What if the result is 15-15 even after these 30 games? You need to draw the line somewhere.
Isnt it crazy to decide Classical Chess champion by Rapid games?
NO.
Nimzomalaysian has a great point though!
IMO after the 12th game there should be continued classical games but in a sudden death format. The pressure will kill the players but the fans will enjoy!
No body want another karpov vs kasperov story...
parag1 wrote:
We have Classical tournaments, and also have Rapid and Blitz tournaments. These are different animals. How can we decide Classical championship by playing rapid or blitz???
Does not feel right or fair somehow.
Statistically from this championship, what did we understand? Just that Magnus is better at rapid! (I am sure he is best classic player today. But was not so, at the time of championship)
It's not as if this is unusual though, of the last seven title matches three were decided in rapid tiebreak, and another by Topalov avoiding rapid tiebreak at all costs in the 2010 match.
Dec 1, 2016
0
#16
Yes its crazy to decide classicsl WCC by speed chess. I prefer an extrs deciding lsst classical game where the chsllenger must beat the reigning WCC. to snatch the title.
Dec 1, 2016
0
#17
Kitteh-vs-Predator wrote:
No, but they have said their souls are corrupted.
nobody said FIDE are geniuses.
In a new WCC match format that I recently proposed, the need for rapid and/or blitz games is avoided without resulting in a potentially endless match or a completely unnecessary advantage for one of the players. Anyone interested can see that here: https://www.chess.com/forum/view/general/proposal-of-new-wcc-match-format
We have Classical tournaments, and also have Rapid and Blitz tournaments. These are different animals. How can we decide Classical championship by playing rapid or blitz???
Does not feel right or fair somehow.
Statistically from this championship, what did we understand? Just that Magnus is better at rapid! (I am sure he is best classic player today. But was not so, at the time of championship)