Why was Kasparov entitled to a rematch? Ex-champions haven't had rights to a rematch since Botvinnik - Tal 1961, with two exceptions: Karpov got a rematch in 1986 because he was leading the 1984 match when it was stopped, and Kramnik got a rematch with Anand in 2008 because he lost his title the year before in a tournament, not a match. While in both cases the rationale for the exception was undoubtedly controversial, at least it was there.

Keano wrote on 02/02/13 at 20:24:00:

The fault lies with FIDE for Kasparov not having an opportunity to concretely EARN a challenge re-match against WCChamp Kramnik.

A properly run FIDE would never have suffered the split away from FIDE by then WCChamp Kasparov. That split badly disrupted all candidates' cycles etc for many years.

FIDE continued on lacking the competence to re-unify with the WCChamp title for many years.

One major source of ineptitude with FIDE is FIDE's constitutional clauses that give every tiny country the same voting power as large countries that are heavily into chess.
Another is FIDE's top man Kirsan I.

Shifting all the blame onto Kramnik is emotional, not logical.
Kramnik is the WCChamp who reunited the WCChamp title with FIDE, which has since created an overall situation that is better than the situation after Kasparov dis-unified the WCC and FIDE.
There is nothing to "forgive" Kramnik for.

Speaking of Aronian, I guess he might have been showing a sense of humor today in the Bundesliga:  1. c4 c5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Nc3 Nf6 4. e3 e6 5. d4 d5 6. a3 a6 7. dc Bxc5 8. b4.  Here his opponent (Hrant Melkumyan) deviated from Rotlewi-Rubinstein with 8...Ba7, and the game was eventually drawn.

I think it depends what Anand wants. My impression is that he's looking for a way to get out. I think deep down he won't be that motivated to beat Carlsen, whereas I don't think he could bear the idea of losing to Gelfand; Bob's a good player and all, but not one fit to be number 16.

I thought it was November 2013, in theory anyway?

I think Carlsen's a pretty big favourite to win the Candidates. I'd agree the ELO scale perhaps overrates him - it was amazing to listen to him in the press conferences in London; he clearly thinks that you just avoid all drawish continuations against 2720 punters even if you're worse, because obviously they're not going to be able to beat you anyway and sooner or later they'll do something stupid and you'll win. I really can't see Big V accumulating enough points to beat Magnus; he's just he's too efficient at beating your Svidlers and Gelfands compared to Vlad. Though to be sure an Ivanchuk tear can win any tournament.

The match I'd really like to see is Carlsen-Kramnik. Sadly, I don't think we're going to, unless I suppose Carlsen beats Anand and Kramnik has one more cycle in him.

Typically real problems with nerves there though.

But both Kramnik and Aronian have been genuinely close to Carlsen in recent tournaments and seem in good form. He's the individual favourite, but Carlsen vs the rest must be somewhere around 50/50.

As for eny eventual match, I dunno because they're so different to anything he's got any experience of.

The strongest player doesn't always win in matches, Kramnik-Kasparov 2000. Also it's no guarantee Carlsen will win the candidates; Aronian, Kramnik, Radjabov and Grischuk all have good chances if they get off to a good start. Also Svidler has been in the bunker for a long time, I doubt he'll get many more chances to compete for the world title so as the huge underdog he'll be very motivated. Also I don't want to rule out Gelfand either tbh. I think the candidates will be very close and exciting.