Will Carlsen accept early draw offers from Anand?

Then Anand-Gelfand was about as pure a match as possible, soiled only by the two decisive games.

i do not bleeve so - no sirree

It wasn't at all exciting for the spectators. At one point there were 17 consecutive draws many of which were 16-moves long before they were agreed upon as draws. That was probably the most dragged out World Championship match, with both players scared to attack each other. If the organizers didn't abandon that series it might have gone on for a few more months, who knows.

Any system that isn't a zero sum game leads to collusion.  For example, in a double RR equally matched players might agree to both lose a game to the other for fear of having two draws occur.

Let's say there are 8 players in a double RR tournament (such as the past Candidates Tournament), with each player facing the other seven players twice for a total of 14 rounds.

If two equally matched players face each other, the expected result would be two draws, or 0.5+0.5 = 1 point for each player.

These two players could arrange to win and lose one game each, so that each player gets 3+0 = 3 points for each player. This wouldn't work with normal scoring, because trading wins would only give 1+0 = 1 point, the same for prearranging two draws.

In case anyone is affected, the times stated on the schedule from Post #5 are incorrect; the games will start at 09.30 GMT.

Additionally, this would have exactly zero influence on the "desire to win" in a 1 vs 1 match like the one we are discussing.

I think that one of Carlsen's weak sides, if a player that is rated 70 points higher than #2 can be said to have one, is that he sometimes goes Topalov-on-a-bad-day in a drawish position. I.e. now and then he refuses to accept that a game will be drawn and tries to unbalance the position to his own detriment. At the same time this unbalancing probably results in more wins than losses, so the question is if it's really much of a problem.

Nahid: the 3-1-0 idea in chess has been around for several years already.

There is no such thing as an early draw vs Carlsen.

Unless you consider move 60 "early" Magnus sure does.

This just does not work in a match. It might work in tournaments, but there are risks of collusion. See previous posts.

Additionally, thinking draws are boring chess is a deep misunderstanding.

http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=1338514

Boring draws!

Savage wrote:

FrenchTutor wrote:

The players didn't want to terminate the match, it was the organizers... 

.

Which plater??

.

.

Kasparov was furious, because his hot streak was cut short.

Karpov was furious, because he lost his commanding 5-3 lead.

You would think such a silly decision would hsve made at least one camp happy. But no, FIDE managed to find a way to tick off everybody.

.

Let's just say that one of the players didn't seem to mind at all...

What about this:

If a player offers a draw, and ends up losing the game after it was rejected, his opponent scores 2 points instead of one.

That way, draws will only be offered in dead drawn positions.

That would be insane...

I'm with Scottrf, SmyslovFan, and Irontiger in favoring letting the players decide when to end the game, and in keeping the scoring as it has been.

It will be interesting to see whether Carlsen's match strategy differs in significant ways from his tournament strategy. Will he seek to gain an opening advantage? Will he offer or accept a draw before lone kings stand naked?

That game was amazing, never saw it before.  

Actually, you can fiddle with the scoring as long as you want, there will be no change for a match, except if you declare draws to be worth 0 to both players (which has the huge inconvenient of a possibly endless match). So it would be pointless to change the scoring, again, in a match context.

The 30-move-without-draw rule is fairly stupid, though.

For tournaments, I do not know whether the 3-1-0 would be efficient to avoid draws, but again it is not clear that it should be an objective. If anyone here is an organiser with some experience...

I find 3-1-0 an interesting chess variant. But it must be understood as a variant.

1984 was an important test of Fischer's proposal. I wonder how 1975 would have gone if FIDE had agreed then, and Fischer would have then elected to stop moving the goalposts with new demands.

What I don't understand is why the match is only 12 games.  That's the length of candidates' matches in 1972, where the championship match was best of 24.  Best of 12 with draws counting 1/2 point is historically a short match for a world championship