Magnus Carlsen is an embarrassment

Alekhine toyed with Capa for a decade, not giving him a rematch as payback for Capa's having done something similar to him previously. Fischer won the title and quit. It is not that Magnus is no good, it's that he isn't fully living up to his name (Magnus means great), which disappoints slightly (irrespective of one's chess rating, of course).

(Chess has become more and more "political" over time. Fischer had no respect for Karpov or Kasparov because of the things they had to do to be on top. Fabio and Magnus play the needful game off the board but at least Fabio makes some reference to "the powers that be." It is only natural for Maggie to want to remain champion of the world, it's only human. We would honor him, though, if he continued to show the fighting spirit he did in the past instead of acting like an old man already at what, 26? Unless you count Morphy's losing it, I think that's another world record.... Advance apologies for speaking so brashly here, I didn't realize I'd become such a hero-worshipper. I guess it's only natural now that /It's a hard world to get a break in /All the good things have been taken.)

And let's not forget Nakamura's 9-move draw at Millionaire Chess. Wonder what stockfish would have made of that.  

https://chess24.com/en/read/news/nakamura-wins-playoff-after-draw-controversy

While I too agree that a longer match would be nice, let me point out one thing.

Magnus is the defending champion.  He's defending.  He doesn't have to prove anything.  He just has to stop Fabi from beating him.  Fabi is the one who has to beat him, and who has to prove that he's better.  If Fabi is capable of beating Magnus, which he is not, then he deserves the title.  But Magnus has the title.  Fabi has to wrest it from him by force.  

Magnus is the defending champion, thus he merely defends.  This isn't a tournament.  This isn't a battle.  It's a siege.  And Fabi's attacks were insufficient.  Now that the siege is over, Fabi's camp is about to be sacked.

And I say this as a patriotic American.  Magnus is completely within his rights.  I'm sure he doesn't like the way things have turned out, and he's clearly not satisfied with his play.  But he's not going to charge out of his castle and attack the enemy.  Why risk it?

You people are very sensitive.

The thing is that Magnus could have played on without any real risk, and to quote Bent Larsen: 'It's not important whether you're winning or not. The important thing is that you have winning chances.'

I personally think it's sad that the format is such that a player goes into his last two games with the tie-breakers in mind - let's not forget that Carlsen did the same against Karjakin in 2016. Hopefully they abolish the tie-breaks after this in favour of prorogation one game at time until there's a winner.

Remember that this is only a game. Be respectful especially when you're not physically in front of the person you are insulting.

When your at the top, people will hate on you. That's what they're supposed to do.

OH OH OH look at me! Look at me! I'm going to trash talk someone on the internet to make me feel better about myself.

Big words, low self-esteem. 

This whole thing is a fake drama and fake news. 

Carlsen agreed to a draw in a slightly better position, big whoop. Earlier in the match he pushed clear draws to the maximum in the hopes Caruana would make a mistake. 

He wasn't feeling it today, he fancies his chances in the tie-breaker, maybe he had a headache. 

That's the problem with mind games as spectator sports - you can't see what people are thinking. You can only infer based on their moves. And to be able to spectate reasonably in chess you need to be within a few hundred points of their rating, with Carlsen that removes 99.9% of registered FIDE players.  So we end up with this sort of thing in a desperate attempt to dramatize it. 

^Basically what Uhohspaghettio1 said.

" but if  it is true then Magnus obviously deserves a lifetime FIDE ban similar to the 1919 Black Sox scandal"

I'm sure you're just a bit over-excited, but that is an absolutely ridiculous statement. Did Magnus conspire to throw the match? No. Did he conspire to throw game 12? No. Did he have a winning position in game 12? No.  He had an advantage. Period.

Magnus made the decision that he had a better chance of winning in the tie breaks than by trying to convert his advantage in game 12. In other words, he took what he felt was his very best chance of winning the match and retaining the world championship.  If you do your best to win, according to the rules of the contest, I can't seen any basis for an ethical complaint

During the live broadcast other top 10 players were surprised, and Kasparov tweeted that it was a sign of weakness. He was ahead on position and the clock. He had good winning chances and almost no losing chances.

But I agree that in general the outcry from patzers is silly. What matters is keeping the title, the methods don't have to be pretty.

>But I agree that in general the outcry from patzers is silly. <

Why? Those "patzers" as you patronizingly call them are the people who watch the games, pay the dues, and keep organized chess alive.  You want just grandmasters making comments? Well, most of them thought the draw offer was pretty bogus too. 

I'm not sure why you think this is all "silly" when clearly a lot of players, from Kasparov and Kramnik all the way down to us poor little patzers have a problem with it. 

Maybe what's silly is your own inability to acknowledge the issue, and be so dismissive of those who do.

800 rated chess.com members make topics like Carlsen should be ashamed, and he's not a proper world champion, and such. They're the ones who "have a problem with it."

Kasparov doesn't "have a problem with it." He merely tweeted that before he thought Carlsen was favored in the tie breaks, and now he's reevaluating... he didn't even say he thought Caruana was now favored, he just said it's worth considering that Carlsen may be having some problems with his nerves.

As world championship matches go, this one was not remarkable except perhaps for producing games of higher quality than those that came before it. Matches in the past have had crazy antics, blunders, and yes, some were even drawn at the end. People who "have a problem with it" seem to be interested only in entertainment and have no knowledge of chess history.

So I see them as trite, shallow, and ignorant... that's why I'm dismissive.

We-sic- don't want a WC  playing and maybe winning the WC again in a playoff. Then rather Caruana although I can't stand his face. 

agreed

>So I see them as trite, shallow, and ignorant... that's why I'm dismissive.< . 

What a nice person you are. At least you aren't any of these things, right? 

Agree Stiggling, good post.

If even Kasparov isn't being outspoken about it then you know it's not a big deal. Firstly Kasparov has every motive to downplay his successor, and secondly Kasparov has a long history of criticism of players who take draws rather than push for the win, to the point of personal attacks sometimes. Kasparov is always a fan of "swashbuckling" aggressive chess, if he's not giving his condemnation of it you can be sure that there is no lack of spirit or safe play from Carlsen.  

I mean, as silly as it is in the first place to expect professional players in one of the most lucrative and important matches of their lives to sacrifice some of their chances for winning in order to be more entertaining or appear more "brave"... even that didn't happen here to any great extent. 

I'll save the niceties for when I'm having tea with grandma. If you don't mind, I'll treat you and e.g. the OP like adults. If I think you're dumb I'll say so. If you disagree and think I'm dumb you're free to let me know as well

This is funny watching americans cry just grow up magnus can do whatever he wants if its not illegal this is the format Magnus just play w it thats what  a champion would do

Don't both players have to agree to have a game drawn, not just one ?