The reason for the high price fund this year was partially due to the fact that the past world championships were exciting bethanks to players like Topalov, but also Anand Kramnik was very exciting ... 
but as already stated by Kasparov, the fact alone that not the 2 best players in the world are fighting for the world championship renders this match less valueable ...
there are many interesting football games going on in 2nd and 3rd leagues, but you don't care for them, you rather want to see a less interesting football game in the 1st league, because you want to see the best teams.
Anand and Gelfand are 2nd league compared to Carlsen, Aronian and Kramnik ... and I don't wanna watch 2nd league

I agree  the issue is indeed the lack of fighting. It is not about the choice of openings. It not about swash buckling attacking chess or lack thereof. It is  prematurely draws when there was a fight that still could be waged. Consider the last game as the epitome of it all. 

And again, I don't blame Gelfand. I expect him to be defensive and cautious. Let's face it, for him, the fact that he did not get blown out and lasted the full 12 games is in victory of sorts for him. Anand refused to  fight and I lay the blame on him and he deserves to lose his title. He showed in this match that he does not deserve to carry the mantle of World Champion.

Hi All

You are a sponser right!

7 out of 12 games in the match were drawn in fewer than 30 moves 5 fewer than 26 moves!

I think the audiences watching the games have been short changed as have the chess public at large and indeed the sponsers. Too much credit has been given to the players but as they say actions (see above) speak louder than words.

I say again if you have many more matches like this at Classical time controls I think sponsers will not be prepared to pay several million dollars to pay for it. In turn the sponsers will begin to look elsewhere and the drip down effect could in the long term sound the death knell of all but a few professional chess players. No top players must take there responsibilities seriously. If you have two top football teams who do nothing to win the game what do you think the reaction will be from everybody!

OK let's get positive. I am looking forward to the Rapid games. Maybe one of the players will take a risk? But GM Ian Rogers made a somewhat terse comment. Ater the 4 games of Rapid play are drawn we move onto the blitz! or something like that.   

Akita

There was a good quote, I think it either came out of Fischer or Kramnik (I would bet Kramnik), saying more or less that when a player becomes the world champ there is a tendency to change his style and become much more cautious (I suppose his openings change to predominantly fit into match play, he may be afraid to lose the title and other psychological factors, avoids to reveal his preparation in tournaments, getting tired by constantly battling at the highest level, etc.).

Food for thought..

Hi All

The bottom line has to be what the sponsers think. If you do not want large sums of money devoted to chess then play as many Anand-Gelfand matches as you like. I see it as a duty of the Chess professional to entertain otherwise there will be no money to pay for professional Chess! If they can't do that then they should at least show some fighting spirit. 

Akita

In this match, the players were in a conflict of playing attractive chess (which I'm sure both players want to) and "rational" chess (playing for result). It was rational for both players to play the way they did: Anand hoping to be better in rapid / blitz / Armaggeddon games, Gelfand hoping for a lucky shot. (The same conflict arose in the candidate's matches last year for all of the players.) It's hard to blame a player to play what he might consider as rationally best.

The solution seems obvious to me: Take them out of this conflict! Having draw odds from the beginning - by a pre-match tiebreak, by draw odds for the defender, by tossing a coin or by investigating the shape and colour of a dead goat's intestines - would just rule it out.

Best regards,

Zwischenzugzwang

Exactly, thinking about it perhaps it is a vindication of Gelfand's strategy and preparation that Anand hasn't felt confident enough to play attacking chess against him, he is aware of course that it could rebound and maybe this has made him over-cautious.

yes, please enough about it being the finalists' "duty" to provide interesting games - this is complete nonsense. 

If you find yourself in a World Championship, are you going to a) try to entertain the audience or b) do whatever it takes to try to win.  This is an obvious truth.

As Antillian pointed out very eloquently, Anand has failed to do either (and so has Gelfand as well to a certain extent), and with a match that is too short the games we have had are the natural result.