Originally posted by enrico20maybe they should just let all chess players to vote...I have the feeling that a Carlsen system for WCh would get by far most of the votes...
Not in the least surprised by this bit of news. Carlsen wants to protect his inflated rating and doesn't want a drubbing in the candidate matches.
Major good changes in history require sacrifices...may Carlsen be sacrificed for a good cause.
Originally posted by Maxacre42I agree with you.
I think it's cowardly, the current system makes being the world champion extremely prestigious and that's how it should be. If it were a regular tournament, we would have a new champion every year and it wouldn't be a big deal. Just another tournament win.
Chess isn't soccer! soccer is a team sport where the world cup team roster changes every 4 year ...[text shortened]... one battle. His ego is starting to swell, I hope we're not seeing his downfall already.
Originally posted by vipiuI don't know who is Carlsen's advisor in this matter. You cannot change the system from the "outside". Look at the history of all the classical chess champions and see how they defended their title. Does Carlsen want to be hand-picked for the final?
maybe they should just let all chess players to vote...I have the feeling that a Carlsen system for WCh would get by far most of the votes...
Major good changes in history require sacrifices...may Carlsen be sacrificed for a good cause.
Originally posted by randolphYou are a magnificent idiot, (no a classical idiot) not the least for not knowing what a rhetorical question is. Chess is not football, look at the way the classical world chess championship cycle has been held since the days of Steinitz.
Pretty sure he just said that he wanted nobody to be hand-picked. You are really a magnificent troll.
Originally posted by Maxacre42the current system makes being the world champion best of two guys. it's laughable. it's like those dozens of private american fighting associations claiming their champions are WORLD champions, when in reality they're competing against 10-15 guys at best. MMA is a prime example of this absolute nonsense. which makes them something less than county champions. good fighters, yes. world champions, not even close.
I think it's cowardly, the current system makes being the world champion extremely prestigious and that's how it should be. If it were a regular tournament, we would have a new champion every year and it wouldn't be a big deal. Just another tournament win.
Chess isn't soccer! soccer is a team sport where the world cup team roster changes every 4 year ...[text shortened]... one battle. His ego is starting to swell, I hope we're not seeing his downfall already.
when the game is rigged, the only way to win is to refuse playing.
and another thing: I really must wonder how some guys here are so fast to blame fischer's sins on carlsen. IF he some day makes outlandish claims of being the real world champion even without playing, you'll have a legitimate reason to complain. there's absolutely no sign of that. so far, he's taking a surprisingly mature stand in favour of a better democratic system, against everyone's selfish wishes of acting out their favourite fairy tale. if he doesnt want to play, that's that. it's his decision, and we have no saying on the matter.
1 edit
Originally posted by vipiuI think that's exactly what's going on. you said it much better than my long-winded rant.
maybe they should just let all chess players to vote...I have the feeling that a Carlsen system for WCh would get by far most of the votes...
Major good changes in history require sacrifices...may Carlsen be sacrificed for a good cause.
1 edit
I can understand Carlsen's reason's for not competing, but he is clearly the best player in the world right now. He would have a great chance of winning this cycle and becoming World Champion. By not competing he risks the chance of never becoming WC.
This in turn risks the chance of being ass whiped by Korchnoi, for taking his mantle of being the best player never to win the WC!
I Think VK would kick MC's ass!
2 edits
Originally posted by vipiuOf course the WC system would win if chess players were voting!!! They all want the opportunity to be world champion after all and anyone could win the ''cup'' with some luck, making the chess players salivate over the possibility of being the next world champion. Do you think it would be fair if Etienne Bacrot won the world championship? Would he really be the best in the world and THE man to beat? Hell no, but he could win it. The title wouldn't mean anything, just bragging rights for a year. The best team in the world is maybe half the time the one who ends up winning the world cup.
maybe they should just let all chess players to vote...I have the feeling that a Carlsen system for WCh would get by far most of the votes...
Major good changes in history require sacrifices...may Carlsen be sacrificed for a good cause.
At Woodworm: Yes I understand how the champion in the UFC shouldn't be called the ''best in the world''. Other organizations exists in those kinds of
sports. In chess, there is only really FIDE, so the best in FIDE really is the best in the world. There's no problem there.
I'm not saying the current system is perfect and I don't agree with all the advantages the World champion has, but if they could fix that and ease on the hardcorness of the method to pick the challenger, the system would be fine. Taking a system from team sports really is the worst way to go. The only other option would be a scoring system based on tournament performances, like F1 Racing with the world champion being crowned at the end of the year. Advantages would be that great players would be forced to play very frequently and also, the best player in the world should win it almost everytime, while everyone gets a fair shot at the beggining. The disadvantage is the lack of a thrilling single event to watch.
I propose a mixture of the two, where the top scoring player - F1 style -(or the 2nd if the top guy is the champ) at the end of the year is the one who gets to challenge the world champion. That sounds good to me! Nothing too complicated and players don't have to go out of their way in that grueling road to challenge the champ.
I agree with Maxacre42, chess has a long tradition of champions and challengers. I am one of those people who think this is a great thing, a yearly tournament where the wordl champion is decided is not appealing to me, it will just be another tournament.
That's not to say Carlsen has a point in that the system is unclear and maybe not entirely fair, but comparing it to football is rediculous in my view! I would have had much more respect for Carlsen if he played the candidates and remained a critic of the system without giving up. I think it is both a brilliant career move and a grave mistake...