Anand!

9/13 for Anand and Topolav. He's going to get to 2800+ hopefully now!

What a finish, if only Leko had beaten Topolav 🙁

Originally posted by RahimK
9/13 for Anand and Topolav. He's going to get to 2800+ hopefully now!

What a finish, if only Leko had beaten Topolav 🙁

... or if Topalov had beaten Leko. 🙂 Anand won on tie breaks.

And if only Magnus Carlsen hadn't messed up his game against Motylev in round 11... They both finished with 9 points, Motylev winning on tie breaks.

Originally posted by Nordlys
... or if Topalov had beaten Leko. 🙂 Anand won on tie breaks.

And if only Magnus Carlsen hadn't messed up his game against Motylev in round 11... They both finished with 9 points, Motylev winning on tie breaks.

if Leko had beaten Topalov 🙂 🙂

Originally posted by RahimK
9/13 for Anand and Topolav. He's going to get to 2800+ hopefully now!

What a finish, if only Leko had beaten Topolav 🙁

Topalov! FIDE 2005 World Champion! Yee Haw!!!

Originally posted by powershaker
Topalov! FIDE 2005 World Champion! Yee Haw!!!

Hush, this is Anand's time for some glory.

Topolav vs Anand would be a great match. I like them both but I like Anand from a long time ago that's why I like him more.

Originally posted by RahimK
Hush, this is Anand's time for some glory.

Topolav vs Anand would be a great match. I like them both but I like Anand from a long time ago that's why I like him more.

It is a shame, though, that we have no undisputed number 1 - and no one yet capable of assuming Kasparov's mantle.

Originally posted by dottewell
It is a shame, though, that we have no undisputed number 1 - and no one yet capable of assuming Kasparov's mantle.

Why does there have to be an undisputed number 1?

Originally posted by Nordlys
Why does there have to be an undisputed number 1?

There's just has to be. Just look at all the confusing and arguing going on because of the 2 seperate championship titles. The fide and the world championship one.

Originally posted by RahimK
There's just has to be. Just look at all the confusing and arguing going on because of the 2 seperate championship titles. The fide and the world championship one.

Exactly. In another era, having two or three players vying for a unified title would have been exciting. Now it just adds to the confusion for the general public.

Kasparov will continue to cast a huge shadow over the game as long as people think (rightly at the moment) he is still the strongest player in the world.

This situation is not good for the wider public perception of chess. If you'd asked the man on the street who the world champion was during Fisher's reign, or Kasparov's, he might well have known.

No chance of that now.

Originally posted by RahimK
There's just has to be. Just look at all the confusing and arguing going on because of the 2 seperate championship titles. The fide and the world championship one.

Yes, I agree that's very unfortunate. There should be one title. But I wouldn't mind if there were two people who had the same chances of getting it.

If there were one title we still wouldn't have an undisputed WC. Look at Greece winning the European Championship.

If you have a tournament with the winner becomming WC then you can always have a dark horse becomming WC. That's a lot less of an undisputed champion than two at the top with one of them being WC.

I think it will be very unlikely that there will ever be someone that will dominate chess like Kasparov and Fischer did. Chess has become much too competitive and serious. It could happen, but only when chess becomes less populair. I once heard that China has 120 million piano players. There could be 120 million chinese chess players within 20 years.