Latest Updates:
Poll
Poll closed Question: NEW POLL! Who will win the Candidates?
bars   pie
*** This poll has now closed ***


Boris Gelfand    
  6 (17.1%)
Gata Kamsky    
  5 (14.3%)
Vladimir Kramnik    
  21 (60.0%)
Alexander Grischuk    
  3 (8.6%)




Total votes: 35
« Created by: Smyslov_Fan on: 05/11/11 at 02:56:26 »
Page Index Toggle Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 19
Topic Tools
Very Hot Topic (More than 25 Replies) Candidate matches 2011 for WC 2012 (Read 80463 times)
Vulpes
YaBB Newbies
*
Offline


~ Magic

Posts: 43
Joined: 04/05/11
Re: Candidate matches 2011 for WC 2012
Reply #283 - 06/03/11 at 12:21:38
Post Tools
Smyslov_Fan wrote on 06/01/11 at 16:43:30:
Take a look at how Topalov won the San Luis title. He did it without beating Anand, who came in second. [..]

The point isn't what score the bunnies would finish with, the point is that the tournament winner could win without proving his superiority over the runner-up. In a match, that isn't a problem.


That's why I'd propose a mix of both.. but I'm not sure whether or not that is actually feasible given the extra cost etc
  

- Iron Tigran #1
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
snits
Full Member
***
Offline



Posts: 103
Location: Phoenix
Joined: 12/29/06
Gender: Male
Re: Candidate matches 2011 for WC 2012
Reply #282 - 06/02/11 at 20:02:12
Post Tools
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Keano
God Member
*****
Offline


Money doesn't talk, it
swears.

Posts: 2915
Location: Toulouse
Joined: 05/25/05
Gender: Male
Re: Candidate matches 2011 for WC 2012
Reply #281 - 06/02/11 at 19:29:01
Post Tools
The San Luis tournament was great for chess and Topalovs performance was more impressive for me than any of the subsequent matches. Perhaps the old match system will have to be replaced? Personally I liked it but only if it was decent long matches, the short matches, even 12 games are a bit of a joke in my view. Now we have GMs complaining they are not getting enough money (shudder the thought that they might waste their time trying to be world champion) a tournament system might be the simplest.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Willempie
God Member
*****
Offline


I love ChessPublishing
.com!

Posts: 4312
Location: Holland
Joined: 01/07/05
Re: Candidate matches 2011 for WC 2012
Reply #280 - 06/02/11 at 18:34:59
Post Tools
Smyslov_Fan wrote on 06/02/11 at 13:44:56:
No. Birmingham won a tournament. Just as Nakamura won a tournament. The prize for that tournament wasn't "champ of England". The Barclay's Premier League regular season trophy is generally considered far more prestigious because it shows dominance over an entire season. They are different tournaments with different levels of interest and commitment.

Birmingham are deserving Carling Cup (League Cup) winners because they won their tournament.  The reason most of the top teams did relatively poorly in this tournament was they put relatively little stock in it. That doesn't make them League Champions or "champs of England". (Btw, it's England and Wales.)

Football does play-offs well, especially the Champions League. They have a round-robin in the early rounds and then a home-and-home series where the tie-break is away goals. This format won't work for chess.

The final is a bit more random, but it's played on a neutral field with plenty of "regulation" time before there are overtime and penalties.

In chess, there is no "neutral" color, and the Kazan tournament didn't give the players enough regulation time to determine the outcome.

Well I disagree a little (football is set up in such a way that any play off competition is favouring the favourrites), I wont go into that too much. Btw I know about all the UK idiocies (fielding seperate football teams, while combining on the olympics) Wink
I just wanted to point out: You complain that a tournament isnt good enough to decide a challenger, now that you have a play-off system and now the matches are too short. I personally think a set of long matches is just as fair or unfair, I certainly havent heard any real argument why it would be better.

NOTE: Edited to correct the format. ~SF
« Last Edit: 06/02/11 at 22:48:56 by Smyslov_Fan »  

If nothing else works, a total pig-headed unwillingness to look facts in the face will see us through.
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Smyslov_Fan
God Member
Correspondence fan
*****
Offline


Progress depends on the
unreasonable man. ~GBS

Posts: 6902
Joined: 06/15/05
Re: Candidate matches 2011 for WC 2012
Reply #279 - 06/02/11 at 13:44:56
Post Tools
Willempie wrote on 06/02/11 at 08:25:36:
Quote:
In almost every top-flight tournament there are bunnies to be killed. Sure, the bunnies would destroy almost anyone who didn't make it.

If the Kazan Candidates had been played as a round robin, Mamedyarov would have been a bunny. Possibly Kamsky, Radjabov and Topalov also would have been bunnies.

The point isn't what score the bunnies would finish with, the point is that the tournament winner could win without proving his superiority over the runner-up. In a match, that isn't a problem.

I really dont see the argument. By this logic Birmingham City would have been the rightful champ of England as they won all their fixtures in the League cup, while ManU became champ by beating up a lot of the little teams.

No. Birmingham won a tournament. Just as Nakamura won a tournament. The prize for that tournament wasn't "champ of England". The Barclay's Premier League regular season trophy is generally considered far more prestigious because it shows dominance over an entire season. They are different tournaments with different levels of interest and commitment.

Birmingham are deserving Carling Cup (League Cup) winners because they won their tournament.  The reason most of the top teams did relatively poorly in this tournament was they put relatively little stock in it. That doesn't make them League Champions or "champs of England". (Btw, it's England and Wales.)

Football does play-offs well, especially the Champions League. They have a round-robin in the early rounds and then a home-and-home series where the tie-break is away goals. This format won't work for chess.

The final is a bit more random, but it's played on a neutral field with plenty of "regulation" time before there are overtime and penalties.

In chess, there is no "neutral" color, and the Kazan tournament didn't give the players enough regulation time to determine the outcome.

Quote:
To me, FIDE has to choose one format and stick with it. If the current one is that format, then so be it. On the other hand I am still fan of western countries leaving FIDE (and FIFA), but that is for other reasons.


I too like the idea of FIDE being consistent. But I recognise that a foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of the mediocre mind. Once FIDE finds a way to fund slightly longer candidates' matches, then I am all in favor of them being consistent. Trust them to become consistent when the system they choose is an obvious, abject failure.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
MNb
God Member
*****
Offline


Rudolf Spielmann forever

Posts: 10756
Location: Moengo
Joined: 01/05/04
Gender: Male
Re: Candidate matches 2011 for WC 2012
Reply #278 - 06/02/11 at 10:31:46
Post Tools
Willempie wrote on 06/02/11 at 08:25:36:
To me, FIDE has to choose one format and stick with it.

That would be for the first time in the history of chess.
  

The book had the effect good books usually have: it made the stupids more stupid, the intelligent more intelligent and the other thousands of readers remained unchanged.
GC Lichtenberg
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Willempie
God Member
*****
Offline


I love ChessPublishing
.com!

Posts: 4312
Location: Holland
Joined: 01/07/05
Re: Candidate matches 2011 for WC 2012
Reply #277 - 06/02/11 at 08:25:36
Post Tools
Smyslov_Fan wrote on 06/01/11 at 16:43:30:
Take a look at how Topalov won the San Luis title. He did it without beating Anand, who came in second.

That is one way to look at it. You could also say he started with 6.5/7 and then went on cruise control. I found this performance much more convincing than the latest couple of real matches.
Quote:
In almost every top-flight tournament there are bunnies to be killed. Sure, the bunnies would destroy almost anyone who didn't make it.

If the Kazan Candidates had been played as a round robin, Mamedyarov would have been a bunny. Possibly Kamsky, Radjabov and Topalov also would have been bunnies.

The point isn't what score the bunnies would finish with, the point is that the tournament winner could win without proving his superiority over the runner-up. In a match, that isn't a problem.

I really dont see the argument. By this logic Birmingham City would have been the rightful champ of England as they won all their fixtures in the League cup, while ManU became champ by beating up a lot of the little teams.
To me the main reason top players favour matches is money and that the longer a match is, the less chance of an "accident".

To me, FIDE has to choose one format and stick with it. If the current one is that format, then so be it. On the other hand I am still fan of western countries leaving FIDE (and FIFA), but that is for other reasons.
  

If nothing else works, a total pig-headed unwillingness to look facts in the face will see us through.
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Stigma
God Member
*****
Offline


There is a crack in everything.

Posts: 3265
Joined: 11/07/06
Gender: Male
Re: Candidate matches 2011 for WC 2012
Reply #276 - 06/02/11 at 08:08:09
Post Tools
trw wrote on 06/02/11 at 04:56:19:
you're thinking a goichberg style swiss event that has no appearance fee. This phenomenon is a US only style event. In the real world, there is an appearance fee with little to no prizes.


There often is. But I don't know how big appearance fees are usually offered to GMs. Often an organizer will decide that only the first 5 or 10 (say) who ask about appearance fees will get it.

I still think $500 per game sounds too high when you think of how many 9 rd swisses are played every month around Europe, in rich and poor countries alike, and how many GMs there are (more than 1000). The title isn't as exclusive as it was 30 years ago.
  

Improvement begins at the edge of your comfort zone. -Jonathan Rowson
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
trw
YaBB Moderator
*****
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 1413
Joined: 05/06/08
Gender: Male
Re: Candidate matches 2011 for WC 2012
Reply #275 - 06/02/11 at 04:56:19
Post Tools
Stigma wrote on 06/01/11 at 22:44:42:
trw wrote on 06/01/11 at 18:36:59:
before we jump on Kramnik's right to more prize money maybe we should look at things from unbiased perspective.

At the candidates they made $7,500 per game.
At the proposed double the length candidates they would make $3,750 a game.
An average GM for an average 9 rd swiss will make $500 a game.
At Tata, a top flight gm will make $770 a game.


The part I don't get is the one on "average" GMs in "average" 9 rd swisses. The average GM today is probably around 2500-2550. Put 10 of them in a Swiss with lots of amateurs. and if it's a well-funded tournament maybe the winner walks away with as much as 4500$. Some of them will go home empty-handed, unless they got an appearance fee.

I'm inclined to think $100 per game is closer to the truth.


you're thinking a goichberg style swiss event that has no appearance fee. This phenomenon is a US only style event. In the real world, there is an appearance fee with little to no prizes.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Stigma
God Member
*****
Offline


There is a crack in everything.

Posts: 3265
Joined: 11/07/06
Gender: Male
Re: Candidate matches 2011 for WC 2012
Reply #274 - 06/01/11 at 22:44:42
Post Tools
trw wrote on 06/01/11 at 18:36:59:
before we jump on Kramnik's right to more prize money maybe we should look at things from unbiased perspective.

At the candidates they made $7,500 per game.
At the proposed double the length candidates they would make $3,750 a game.
An average GM for an average 9 rd swiss will make $500 a game.
At Tata, a top flight gm will make $770 a game.


The part I don't get is the one on "average" GMs in "average" 9 rd swisses. The average GM today is probably around 2500-2550. Put 10 of them in a Swiss with lots of amateurs. and if it's a well-funded tournament maybe the winner walks away with as much as 4500$. Some of them will go home empty-handed, unless they got an appearance fee.

I'm inclined to think $100 per game is closer to the truth.
  

Improvement begins at the edge of your comfort zone. -Jonathan Rowson
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
trw
YaBB Moderator
*****
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 1413
Joined: 05/06/08
Gender: Male
Re: Candidate matches 2011 for WC 2012
Reply #273 - 06/01/11 at 18:36:59
Post Tools
before we jump on Kramnik's right to more prize money maybe we should look at things from unbiased perspective.

At the candidates they made $7,500 per game.
At the proposed double the length candidates they would make $3,750 a game.
An average GM for an average 9 rd swiss will make $500 a game.
At Tata, a top flight gm will make $770 a game.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
mangler
Full Member
***
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 174
Location: Orlando
Joined: 10/30/06
Gender: Male
Re: Candidate matches 2011 for WC 2012
Reply #272 - 06/01/11 at 17:35:16
Post Tools
gwnn wrote on 06/01/11 at 15:08:21:
Are there really bunnies out there?

Topalov, Kamsky, Mamedyarov, Grischuk, Kramnik, Gelfand, Radjabov and Aronian all looked very strong and there wasn't much between them (granted, maybe the short matches contributed to this impression). Of course, all is relative, but I don't think there would be anyone who'd have got anything worse than, say, -4 in a double round robin.


Check out San Luis 2005, the tournament that made Topalov the/a world champion. Out of 14 rounds, Polgar finished with 4.5, Adams and Kasim with 5.5. While none are bunnies, they were definitely the weaker ones in that tournament compared to Topalov, Anand, Svidler and Moro. Even more revealing is Leko's performance. He finished 5th with 6.5, but scored only 2 out of 8 against the top 4 in the field. Makes you wonder how the event would have turned out if he had won the first game vs Topalov (he had a winning position). Leko was one of the favorites to win San Luis; his loss in rd 1 really hurt him, it propelled Topalov, and forced Leko to overpress in other games in an effort to catch up.  Final comment on bunnies. Often that is only revealed after the tournament, when you see who was really off form.

In San Luis, Anand and Topalov drew their 2 games. One of the main differences in their scores was that Anand lost 2 games, including 1 to Kasim, while Topalov lost none. So the world championship was decided by who scored best vs the lower half of the field. Do you really want the world championship determined by a third party (even a very strong 3rd party, no offense to the outstanding GM's intended), rather than the 2 best players going head to head?

I also recall the Candidates tournaments 1959 and 1962 with Paul Keres. I recall Tal and Petrosian both beat him out, and the key difference was not head to head games, but their results vs a certain American kid named Bobby.

That's why I think the world championship needs to be decided by matches, and not a tournament. Sofia rules would help, longer matches would help, a more combative opening repertoire with black would especially help Kramnik (and many others), but I think you guys hit the nail on the head. Not enough $ to pay for the organization of longer matches, not just prize money.

I am happy for Gelfand. He took his chances and deserved to win. Always liked him.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Pantu
Ex Member
*



Re: Candidate matches 2011 for WC 2012
Reply #271 - 06/01/11 at 17:20:24
Post Tools
Smyslov_Fan wrote on 06/01/11 at 13:44:05:
I'm still opposed to the Sophia rule, but perhaps not allowing a draw before the 25th move would make some sense.

But what would happen in cases of a three-fold repetition at move 15?  Could the players just shuffle the pieces back and forth for 10 moves ( or 15 or 25 moves) before agreeing to the draw?

I'm still opposed to the Sophia rule. The players should be free to decide how to play their own game. Longer matches will make Grischuk's strategy in this Candidates' tournament much too risky to be worth trying.


FIDE introduced a rule in the 1960s banning agreed draws under 30 moves.  The result was a large increase in the frequency of forced draws in the openings, before FIDE dropped it as unworkable.  Those who do not study history are destined to repeat it, etc etc.

BTW, anyone else noticed that if all the participants played these 4 game "matches" against all the others, and we added up their total points to find the winner, we'd have the old style candidates as played in 1948-1962?

Collusion between players is a higher risk than even double round robins though.  Or at least allegations of collusion...
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Smyslov_Fan
God Member
Correspondence fan
*****
Offline


Progress depends on the
unreasonable man. ~GBS

Posts: 6902
Joined: 06/15/05
Re: Candidate matches 2011 for WC 2012
Reply #270 - 06/01/11 at 16:43:30
Post Tools
gwnn wrote on 06/01/11 at 15:08:21:
Are there really bunnies out there?

Topalov, Kamsky, Mamedyarov, Grischuk, Kramnik, Gelfand, Radjabov and Aronian all looked very strong and there wasn't much between them (granted, maybe the short matches contributed to this impression). Of course, all is relative, but I don't think there would be anyone who'd have got anything worse than, say, -4 in a double round robin.


Take a look at how Topalov won the San Luis title. He did it without beating Anand, who came in second.

In almost every top-flight tournament there are bunnies to be killed. Sure, the bunnies would destroy almost anyone who didn't make it.

If the Kazan Candidates had been played as a round robin, Mamedyarov would have been a bunny. Possibly Kamsky, Radjabov and Topalov also would have been bunnies.

The point isn't what score the bunnies would finish with, the point is that the tournament winner could win without proving his superiority over the runner-up. In a match, that isn't a problem.

  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
trw
YaBB Moderator
*****
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 1413
Joined: 05/06/08
Gender: Male
Re: Candidate matches 2011 for WC 2012
Reply #269 - 06/01/11 at 15:54:16
Post Tools
Dink Heckler wrote on 06/01/11 at 15:37:20:
So there's no money for a longer match, and little chance of attracting sponsors due to the desultory nature of the chess produced by the current format...that's some catch, that Catch-22....

Grin Grin Grin
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Page Index Toggle Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 19
Topic Tools
Bookmarks: del.icio.us Digg Facebook Google Google+ Linked in reddit StumbleUpon Twitter Yahoo