Latest Updates:
Poll
Poll closed Question: Candidates 2020 how to proceed (options below)
bars   pie
*** This poll has now closed ***


A    
  17 (77.3%)
B    
  1 (4.5%)
C    
  4 (18.2%)
D    
  0 (0.0%)
E    
  0 (0.0%)




Total votes: 22
« Created by: Confused_by_Theory on: 03/27/20 at 22:55:41 »
Very Hot Topic (More than 25 Replies) Candidates 2020 how to proceed (Read 5055 times)
VGA
Junior Member
**
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 89
Joined: 08/13/17
Re: Candidates 2020 how to proceed
Reply #41 - 05/22/20 at 05:17:10
Post Tools
The tournament should continue where it left off like nothing happened.

Also, Radjabov forfeiting his spot and MVL replacing him makes the tournament more kosher and prestigious, not less. Of course FIDE miscalculated, they should not have gone ahead with the tournament during a pandemic *and* after one player declined to put his life in danger.

But making a mistake doesn't mean you have to compensate anyone or make even more weird decisions on top of your original mistake. An organisation doesn't have a "conscience". Just keep trucking along.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
trw
God Member
*****
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 1364
Joined: 05/06/08
Gender: Male
Re: Candidates 2020 how to proceed
Reply #40 - 05/07/20 at 22:34:04
Post Tools
Bibs wrote on 05/07/20 at 07:26:50:
trw wrote on 05/06/20 at 06:53:38:
Looks like FIDE is giving Radjabov the Wild Card to the next candidates tournament [2022]  The TopNotch/Kramnik Solution is definitely the cleanest.


Is this announced somewhere perchance? Link?



Oh, sorry, https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=youtu.be&t=2604&v=yWIdsKzu1DQ

FIDE President makes an 'unofficial' statement that he wouldn't make if isn't FIDE's default plan. Note, Radjabov is playing for his team that he captains in the FIDE Nations event.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Bibs
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 2170
Joined: 10/24/06
Re: Candidates 2020 how to proceed
Reply #39 - 05/07/20 at 07:26:50
Post Tools
trw wrote on 05/06/20 at 06:53:38:
Looks like FIDE is giving Radjabov the Wild Card to the next candidates tournament [2022]  The TopNotch/Kramnik Solution is definitely the cleanest.


Is this announced somewhere perchance? Link?
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
trw
God Member
*****
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 1364
Joined: 05/06/08
Gender: Male
Re: Candidates 2020 how to proceed
Reply #38 - 05/06/20 at 06:53:38
Post Tools
Looks like FIDE is giving Radjabov the Wild Card to the next candidates tournament [2022]  The TopNotch/Kramnik Solution is definitely the cleanest.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
TopNotch
God Member
*****
Offline


I only look 1 move ahead,
but its always the best

Posts: 2050
Joined: 01/04/03
Gender: Male
Re: Candidates 2020 how to proceed
Reply #37 - 04/17/20 at 21:51:32
Post Tools
I've already made my position quite clear on this.
  

The man who tries to do something and fails is infinitely better than he who tries to do nothing and succeeds - Lloyd Jones Smiley
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Confused_by_Theory
Senior Member
****
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 355
Location: Europe
Joined: 05/13/15
Gender: Male
Re: Candidates 2020 how to proceed
Reply #36 - 04/17/20 at 04:42:33
Post Tools
Hi.

Is there any remaining interest for a Radjabov poll now btw?

Provided I set it up question would be something like "Given the circumstances, would it seem fair to compensate Radjabov for the revocation of his candidates 2020 spot and if so how?"

A: No
B: A sincere apology
C: Financial compensation
D: A direct spot in the candidates tournament next wch cycle
E: A re-inclusion in the candidates tournament this wch cycle
F: Other (write in comments)

Have a nice day.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Confused_by_Theory
Senior Member
****
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 355
Location: Europe
Joined: 05/13/15
Gender: Male
Re: Candidates 2020 how to proceed
Reply #35 - 04/17/20 at 04:06:02
Post Tools
Hi.

The poll is finished and option A:
A: Tournament is resumed at later date with R1-7 results in force

Was the most picked option. My very brief analysis would be that this somewhat indicates how most would not want to make changes at this point, even if the Candidates in Yekaterinburg didn't go as planned.

Have a nice day.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Confused_by_Theory
Senior Member
****
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 355
Location: Europe
Joined: 05/13/15
Gender: Male
Re: Candidates 2020 how to proceed
Reply #34 - 04/08/20 at 15:31:37
Post Tools
Hi.

Two more days to vote. Alternatives:

A: Tournament is resumed at later date with R1-7 results in force
B: Tournament is cancelled and R1-7 results no longer matter. New candidates tournament is held at later date
C: Tournament is cancelled and R1-7 results no longer matter. New candidates tournament is held at later date with Teimour Radjabov included
D: Tournament is cancelled and R1-7 results no longer matter. Instead of new candidates tournament the eight players, Carlsen and Radjabov play a tournament directly for the title
E: I don’t care how this gets resolved. Let's just all agree we need a 1000 people at the opening ceremony when the candidates gets back.

Have a nice day.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Confused_by_Theory
Senior Member
****
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 355
Location: Europe
Joined: 05/13/15
Gender: Male
Re: Candidates 2020 how to proceed
Reply #33 - 04/05/20 at 02:26:27
Post Tools
Hi.

To bring up a new subject for whatever reason. I assume based on, admittedly Ilyumzhinov era bid regulations and such, that Fide still likes to collect money beforehand. In that case sponsors situations in a predicted economic downturn would really not matter much for the match continuing according to plan.

That being said sponsors look like quite big and diverse companies to begin with so it should be fine either way.

Algorand (Blockchain technology)
Phosagro (Fertelizers)
Kaspersky (Cyber security)
Prytek (Software for various kinds of companies I think but it was not entirely clear)
Merecedes-Benz Russia (Car production and import)

Have a nice night
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Confused_by_Theory
Senior Member
****
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 355
Location: Europe
Joined: 05/13/15
Gender: Male
Re: Candidates 2020 how to proceed
Reply #32 - 04/05/20 at 01:51:55
Post Tools
Hi.

As I recall mr. Dvorkovich said he wasn't sure when the candidates could be resumed. He hoped for september at the latest; in order to allow time for preparation before a wch match in december. Also the (Russian) company sponsors will decide the venue and location. Presumably Yekaterinburg again though.

In my country there is a publicly available model from the health authorities of how many hospital spots and intensive care spots are thought to be needed throughout the country (meant for hospitals but it's public). It assumes, based on observations from China and Lombardy primarily and I would imagine at least some assumptions, that there is going to be a roughly 140 day period with heigtened demand for hospitalisations from (and this is a bit wooly) the day the virus is oficially classed as "out in the broader society". This is a sort of designation made by the authorities in my country basically done when the point is reached where there are multiple active cases not well traced by the authorities. In my part of the country this designation came 20/3.

The scary thing is the absolute numbers. In my area the peak demand for extra (i.e. not counting ones that need to be there already) hospital spots, modelled at roughly day 75-95 from when virus is out in the broader society, will be something like 160 intensive care spots compared to the 5 or so the model predicts today (week two here). I was scared when I read this. Like in other places extra unused hospital spots were not really present beforehand. Listening to my nurse friend rant about this is normally kind of interesting. They would have to be generated in the months before the peak or worst case just before. Both require intensive planning. I highly hope this kind of planning has been done in as many places as possible.

Anyway. Provided you'd want things to go back to near normal when it comes to new infections and hospitalisations before resuming the tournament. September could well be to soon.

Have a nice night.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Bibs
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 2170
Joined: 10/24/06
Re: Candidates 2020 how to proceed
Reply #31 - 04/05/20 at 00:34:00
Post Tools
I suspect FIDE will try to finish the Candidates when they can. None of us know when the 'when' might be, plainly. How long from now? Unlike Campo and Kirsan before, it strikes me that the new FIDE people are trying to do the right thing. And to appear to be doing the right thing too. Mistakes will be made, and some can disagree with aspects of what has happened, but I do have the strong impression that the new FIDE is a dramatic improvement on prior.

This is not a strike by Skynet, and it will end at some point. And things will return to comparative normality. Then things continue, among which there is the board game chess, and working out who is better at this particular board game...
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
an ordinary chessplayer
God Member
*****
Offline


I used to be not bad.

Posts: 914
Location: Columbus, OH (USA)
Joined: 01/02/15
Re: Candidates 2020 how to proceed
Reply #30 - 04/04/20 at 17:42:52
Post Tools
It's early days, but my best guess now is the 2020 Candidates will never be finished. The next World Championship will take place in 2022. None of the eight/nine gets seeded into the next cycle. It's a pandemic, draw a line under it, start from scratch.

All speculation by me, of course. As I said above, there's an infinite range of choices for FIDE.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
TopNotch
God Member
*****
Offline


I only look 1 move ahead,
but its always the best

Posts: 2050
Joined: 01/04/03
Gender: Male
Re: Candidates 2020 how to proceed
Reply #29 - 04/04/20 at 01:39:03
Post Tools
ReneDescartes wrote on 04/02/20 at 21:53:45:
This is one of those silly internet things where one of us makes a statement, as one might in conversation, that is mostly rhetorical (e.g., it's not likely all nine survive...), upon which another of us says it's technically false (e.g., (.99)^9>.5, ln(.5)÷ln(.99)>68), after which the first person feels attacked and tries to defend the statement as if he meant it as a studied opinion, and so on.

In defense of trw, if you imagine this as a conversation at a pub, the guy who takes it technically would look kind of out of it, like Mr. Spock. (Kirk: "what are the odds!" Spock: "approximately one in 96,562, Captain..." Kirk: "Sorry I asked.")

In further defense of trw, I will point out, Spocklike, that at trw's upper mortality rate of 10%, if >74.2% of the population gets infected (by about the time the tournament resumes, as herd immunity extinguishes the spread), the indicated result would indeed be more likely than not. Of course the players are young, etc., etc...

In even further defense of everyone, let's remember that the unfolding disaster has lots of people really wound up. I've had all kinds of friends and relatives say things that are out of character (or sometimes harsh things all-too-in-character that they would normally say more gently). In my mind I'm trying to issue everyone a get-out-of-jail-free card during this historic event.

Bless us all. I love these conversations. May we all do ok, even FIDE.


Times like these tend to reveal character or in some cases clarify it, and i'm specifically speaking of Donald J Trump here and his Press conferences in his own words. Enough said on that.

Regarding our own Commander Data, I found the statistical musing a useful distraction at times but not very helpful on the whole. The minutiae was too in the weeds for my tastes and way over my head. From my layman's point of view and from what I am observing in my country and elsewhere, is that too many people in a given population are irrational and need to be protected from themselves for the common good. Common Sense goes a long way, and one does not have to wait on Governmental proclamations to act sensibly, indeed in my country there was a strange phenomenon, the more the Government guided people on what to do, how to act and what precautions to take the more many of them were determined to do exactly the opposite like crowding the supermarkets, buying up a ridiculous amount of excess toilet paper until it had to be restricted to x amount per person, a reaction to being scared Sh**less I guess Smiley. Crowding the Banks every single day. essentially anything that remained open was over-run and overwhelmed much like what the virus will do to many health care systems if it is not contained. The best weapon we have to contain the virus right now is 'Physical Distancing' the term 'Social Distancing' is just misleading and sends the wrong message, the problem is as it always is, i.e Human Nature, to successfully implement Physical Distancing and for it to have any positive impact, it has to be enforced, there are simply too many idiots that do not care if they infect others, are infected themselves or are unable to comprehend the consequences of their own actions until they lay dying and suddenly have an epiphany. Despite many countries having head starts over others, they still kept making the same mistakes over and over with disastrous consequences, like being slow to call for and enforce Curfews and National Lockdowns. Being slow to shutdown borders and not being completely forthright with the population and therefore losing trust.

Essential services is what is needed to keep society functioning until this Virus burns itself out, such as access to food, medicine, telecommunication networks, water, power grids, but yet you are arguments about church services being essential and parishioners being encouraged to come to church by some Pastors, to be clear any person encouraging people to congregate in large groups should be arrested fullstop. The attitude of religious zealots tend to be problematic in every society, as they tend to be an intractable sort that cannot be reasoned with even when their actions have dire implications for others. Another serious issue is people hoarding Personal Protective Equipment (PPE), Depriving the health care system of it, in the hopes of driving up the price to make a profit. Such people should be tracked down and heavily prosecuted, since their actions are contributing to Doctors, Nurses, Care-Givers etc. dying needlessly due to the lack of adequate PPE. What do you think will happen if the majority of Doctors become sick or simply refuse to treat patients that test positive for Covid-19 because of insufficient PPE, why aren't voters demanding of their representatives that this be dealt with immediately. While on the topic of voters, and as an observer from a country with universal health care, I am bemused as to why Biden is winning the American Democratic race and why americans consistently vote against their own self interest, swayed by strawman arguments like how you gunna pay for that, when you have one candidate blowing $500 Million dollars!! of his own money!! in a campaign designed to stop the one man running on a platform to ensure that the majority of americans can afford and access health care. I mean I get why the wealthy minority want to block universal health care, what I don't get is why the majority poor and disenfranchised don't vote in one voice to change it, it's completely absurd to me. 

Anyhow, back to Covid, at this time Governments should be brainstorming and focused on ways to get meals and medication to the most vulnerable parts of the populous, to give them less reasons to have leave home, take care of the people and the economy will bounce back, trying to do it in reverse order is stupid, and if your leaders are suggesting this then that's your cue to vote them out as soon as humanly possible, House and Senate. There is still  a lot unknown about COVID-19, and the experts say that a possible vaccine is at least over 12 months away. To have the best chance to survive this pandemic people have to observe restrictions and take recommendations from the W.H.O seriously, or there will be an inevitable culling of the World's population far exceeding what it should be. Non compliance without a compelling reason should be punished swiftly and decisively for all our sakes. 

From watching the news, it is clear that mixed messages are being sent with politicians saying one thing and medical experts saying another. Rule of thumb, in a health crisis listen to the medical experts, CNN's Dr. Sanjay Gupta and Pandemic Expert Dr. Anthony Fauci are the voices to take note of. If you are religious then pray for a speedy outcome, but do it at home.
  

The man who tries to do something and fails is infinitely better than he who tries to do nothing and succeeds - Lloyd Jones Smiley
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Bibs
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 2170
Joined: 10/24/06
Re: Candidates 2020 how to proceed
Reply #28 - 04/03/20 at 08:51:05
Post Tools
In general, it’s probably better to stick to discussing chess rather than death.
You’re probably right on that.
Apocalypse aside now.
I’m looking forward to seeing who MC gets in his event.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Jack Hughes
Junior Member
**
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 72
Joined: 07/22/19
Re: Candidates 2020 how to proceed
Reply #27 - 04/03/20 at 07:02:06
Post Tools
Damn! This is not exactly the first time someone has compared me to Mr Spock - but you know it's bad when it's coming from a forum for discussion of chess openings! Putting my Spock hat (or ears, perhaps?) back on, I do think that a scenario where 7.4% of the world's population dies seems ridiculously unlikely, and not an epistemically justifiable prediction. At least that appears to be the case for the US - which at the moment seems like it will be one of the worst hit places - if the March 30-31 McAndrew survey is to be believed, where even the worst case scenario of the most pessimistic of 18 experts was that 2 million people (~0.6%) die. At any rate, if 7.4% of the world's population were to die within a year then I think we would all have much, much bigger problems to worry about than the Candidates Tournament.
Apologies if my posts in this thread - including I suspect this one - have come across as cold or insensitive. That was certainly not my intention, and I understand that this is quite a stressful time for a lot of people. If people so wish then I am perfectly willing to leave this thread alone from now on.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Bibs
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 2170
Joined: 10/24/06
Re: Candidates 2020 how to proceed
Reply #26 - 04/03/20 at 05:18:45
Post Tools
Nice post RD!

For those of you who are into numbers, this may be of interest: https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p02nrss1/episodes/downloads
A podcast about stats. For non-stattos (I'm in this group). Interesting stuff, and clearly explained. Well, I found it interesting anyhow Smiley

Yeh, best wishes all. Crazy times, but when the sun comes out after a storm, people then do quickly forget it's been raining. And the sun will come out again...

  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
an ordinary chessplayer
God Member
*****
Offline


I used to be not bad.

Posts: 914
Location: Columbus, OH (USA)
Joined: 01/02/15
Re: Candidates 2020 how to proceed
Reply #25 - 04/03/20 at 03:44:32
Post Tools
Nice post, _and_ your math checks out.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
ReneDescartes
God Member
*****
Offline


Qu'est-ce donc que je
suis? Une chose qui pense.

Posts: 1153
Joined: 05/17/10
Gender: Male
Re: Candidates 2020 how to proceed
Reply #24 - 04/02/20 at 21:53:45
Post Tools
This is one of those silly internet things where one of us makes a statement, as one might in conversation, that is mostly rhetorical (e.g., it's not likely all nine survive...), upon which another of us says it's technically false (e.g., (.99)^9>.5, ln(.5)÷ln(.99)>68), after which the first person feels attacked and tries to defend the statement as if he meant it as a studied opinion, and so on.

In defense of trw, if you imagine this as a conversation at a pub, the guy who takes it technically would look kind of out of it, like Mr. Spock. (Kirk: "what are the odds!" Spock: "approximately one in 96,562, Captain..." Kirk: "Sorry I asked.")

In further defense of trw, I will point out, Spocklike, that at trw's upper mortality rate of 10%, if >74.2% of the population gets infected (by about the time the tournament resumes, as herd immunity extinguishes the spread), the indicated result would indeed be more likely than not. Of course the players are young, etc., etc...

In even further defense of everyone, let's remember that the unfolding disaster has lots of people really wound up. I've had all kinds of friends and relatives say things that are out of character (or sometimes harsh things all-too-in-character that they would normally say more gently). In my mind I'm trying to issue everyone a get-out-of-jail-free card during this historic event.

Bless us all. I love these conversations. May we all do ok, even FIDE.
« Last Edit: 04/03/20 at 00:06:49 by ReneDescartes »  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Jack Hughes
Junior Member
**
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 72
Joined: 07/22/19
Re: Candidates 2020 how to proceed
Reply #23 - 03/31/20 at 03:12:04
Post Tools
trw wrote on 03/30/20 at 14:53:02:
Worse case was 2.2 million deaths and that's when we thought the death percent was 2%, now it is generally accepted to be closer to 3%... but that doesn't account for NYC's unbelievably bad response where we will likely see 10%. So experts I have spoken with at the CDC have raised the max to 3.3 million deaths. On the low end, it's still around 500k. Again, we don't know. You're right that there is good reason to believe in Germany's .4% for a lot of the country... but the US has big rural populations which are also doing NOTHING to prepare themselves and also have very limited healthcare, ICU beds and medical equipment. Again, we don't know. To call the analysis sloppiness is both bullshit and the same rudeness I was accused of early in this post. I really wish people would stop stating stupid crappity smacking shit like this. I actually have family members working the front medical lines that are in the most at risk group. It is very likely that nearly everyone is going to lose someone they love dearly.  Cry And yet we still prance around the internet like the dumbest crap out of our mouths is worth saying to people.

From what little a person in my position can tell trw's numbers seem quite reasonable to me, especially the point about the huge potential range - certainly that is the main conclusion I have drawn from from the expert surveys. I don't know if this will be any consolation but assuming that 1% of population dies then the smallest group of people to have a greater than 50% chance of a death would be 69 (log base 0.99 of 0.5 is ~68.97) - so at least if you're as unloving and as I am then the odds of losing someone you love should be well below that. Best of luck to your family members on the medical front lines - no one deserves to make it through more than those actively fighting against this pandemic.
As a sidenote I agree that my contributions to this thread have derailed it a bit, and for that I apologise. Perhaps a moderator could move this discussion to a more appropriate location,
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
trw
God Member
*****
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 1364
Joined: 05/06/08
Gender: Male
Re: Candidates 2020 how to proceed
Reply #22 - 03/30/20 at 14:53:02
Post Tools
an ordinary chessplayer wrote on 03/30/20 at 01:11:15:
Jack Hughes wrote on 03/29/20 at 18:58:29:
trw wrote on 03/29/20 at 16:32:25:
The issue is that .4% or 10% is a huge differing variable. Right now, 500,000 to 3.3 million are likely to die in the US alone depending on how well we deal with the lockdown, medical supplies and the overwhelmed healthcare system... Given how poorly NYC has responded... I think the US is closely to 3 million than 500k... So we just don't have the data right now... but that means the probability of one of the 9 people dying is anywhere from 3.6% to 90% which is just an insane range. We don't know.

Okay, now I'm confused again. The US has a population of about 330 million people. Assuming that 3.3 million (1%) of them die in a given time frame then the odds of all nine surviving is 0.99^9, or ~91.3%, and that is even before you take into account age and medical profiles and the likelihood that the US suffers more fatalities than the other participating countries. What am I missing here?


You are missing nothing, except that trw is sloppy with both his underlying numbers, and with his calculations.

The worst-case do-nothing scenario for the USA was 2.2 million deaths. Since the USA belatedly did "something", the new worst-case scenario is 1.2 million deaths. But Dr. Fauci recently stated his best estimate is 100,000 to 200,000 deaths, although he also said he doesn't want to be held to that. So all talk of 500,000 to 3.3 million deaths is unsupported.

As for 0.4% to 10% range, this is supported but needs interpretation. Germany is testing aggressively, so the low 0.4% is based on a very large denominator. The 10% is no doubt Italy, which has a bunch of special circumstances. The USA is testing feebly, only symptomatic patients, which is about the same as not testing, so the 1.4-1.6% (with std deviation, across states, almost as large) is hospitalizations and quarantines. It will certainly jump if hospitals become overwhelmed, which could happen in one to two weeks, but it won't go to 10%.

trw's stated 3.6% to 90% is simply (0.4% to 10%) times 9, which is not how it's done.



Worse case was 2.2 million deaths and that's when we thought the death percent was 2%, now it is generally accepted to be closer to 3%... but that doesn't account for NYC's unbelievably bad response where we will likely see 10%. So experts I have spoken with at the CDC have raised the max to 3.3 million deaths. On the low end, it's still around 500k. Again, we don't know. You're right that there is good reason to believe in Germany's .4% for a lot of the country... but the US has big rural populations which are also doing NOTHING to prepare themselves and also have very limited healthcare, ICU beds and medical equipment. Again, we don't know. To call the analysis sloppiness is both bullshit and the same rudeness I was accused of early in this post. I really wish people would stop stating stupid crappity smacking shit like this. I actually have family members working the front medical lines that are in the most at risk group. It is very likely that nearly everyone is going to lose someone they love dearly.  Cry And yet we still prance around the internet like the dumbest crap out of our mouths is worth saying to people.

But of course this isn't a thread on coronavirus, it's about how to fix the mess FIDE created. I read a pretty interesting solution by GM PHN this morning. He proposes to finish the tournament as is and have the winner of this tournament play the winner of a second candidates tournament with the original 8 players (if it isn't the same person). People are coming up with a ton of interesting and fair ways to address the problem. The only real issue here is the cost of a second tournament. Still I imagine the easiest thing is to do at Toppy and Kramnik and just seed Radjabov into 2022.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
an ordinary chessplayer
God Member
*****
Offline


I used to be not bad.

Posts: 914
Location: Columbus, OH (USA)
Joined: 01/02/15
Re: Candidates 2020 how to proceed
Reply #21 - 03/30/20 at 01:11:15
Post Tools
Jack Hughes wrote on 03/29/20 at 18:58:29:
trw wrote on 03/29/20 at 16:32:25:
The issue is that .4% or 10% is a huge differing variable. Right now, 500,000 to 3.3 million are likely to die in the US alone depending on how well we deal with the lockdown, medical supplies and the overwhelmed healthcare system... Given how poorly NYC has responded... I think the US is closely to 3 million than 500k... So we just don't have the data right now... but that means the probability of one of the 9 people dying is anywhere from 3.6% to 90% which is just an insane range. We don't know.

Okay, now I'm confused again. The US has a population of about 330 million people. Assuming that 3.3 million (1%) of them die in a given time frame then the odds of all nine surviving is 0.99^9, or ~91.3%, and that is even before you take into account age and medical profiles and the likelihood that the US suffers more fatalities than the other participating countries. What am I missing here?


You are missing nothing, except that trw is sloppy with both his underlying numbers, and with his calculations.

The worst-case do-nothing scenario for the USA was 2.2 million deaths. Since the USA belatedly did "something", the new worst-case scenario is 1.2 million deaths. But Dr. Fauci recently stated his best estimate is 100,000 to 200,000 deaths, although he also said he doesn't want to be held to that. So all talk of 500,000 to 3.3 million deaths is unsupported.

As for 0.4% to 10% range, this is supported but needs interpretation. Germany is testing aggressively, so the low 0.4% is based on a very large denominator. The 10% is no doubt Italy, which has a bunch of special circumstances. The USA is testing feebly, only symptomatic patients, which is about the same as not testing, so the 1.4-1.6% (with std deviation, across states, almost as large) is hospitalizations and quarantines. It will certainly jump if hospitals become overwhelmed, which could happen in one to two weeks, but it won't go to 10%.

trw's stated 3.6% to 90% is simply (0.4% to 10%) times 9, which is not how it's done.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Jack Hughes
Junior Member
**
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 72
Joined: 07/22/19
Re: Candidates 2020 how to proceed
Reply #20 - 03/29/20 at 20:24:40
Post Tools
Jack Hughes wrote on 03/29/20 at 18:58:29:
The issue is that .4% or 10% is a huge differing variable. Right now, 500,000 to 3.3 million are likely to die in the US alone depending on how well we deal with the lockdown, medical supplies and the overwhelmed healthcare system... Given how poorly NYC has responded... I think the US is closely to 3 million than 500k... So we just don't have the data right now... but that means the probability of one of the 9 people dying is anywhere from 3.6% to 90% which is just an insane range. We don't know.

Okay, now I'm confused again. The US has a population of about 330 million people. Assuming that 3.3 million (1%) of them die in a given time frame then the odds of all nine surviving is 0.99^9, or ~91.3%. This is even before you take into account age and medical profiles and differences in fatality rates between countries, which would presumably lower the likelihood of a death considerably further. What am I missing here?
« Last Edit: 03/29/20 at 21:49:47 by Jack Hughes »  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Jack Hughes
Junior Member
**
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 72
Joined: 07/22/19
Re: Candidates 2020 how to proceed
Reply #19 - 03/29/20 at 18:58:29
Post Tools
trw wrote on 03/29/20 at 16:32:25:
The issue is that .4% or 10% is a huge differing variable. Right now, 500,000 to 3.3 million are likely to die in the US alone depending on how well we deal with the lockdown, medical supplies and the overwhelmed healthcare system... Given how poorly NYC has responded... I think the US is closely to 3 million than 500k... So we just don't have the data right now... but that means the probability of one of the 9 people dying is anywhere from 3.6% to 90% which is just an insane range. We don't know.

Okay, now I'm confused again. The US has a population of about 330 million people. Assuming that 3.3 million (1%) of them die in a given time frame then the odds of all nine surviving is 0.99^9, or ~91.3%, and that is even before you take into account age and medical profiles and the likelihood that the US suffers more fatalities than the other participating countries. What am I missing here?
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
trw
God Member
*****
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 1364
Joined: 05/06/08
Gender: Male
Re: Candidates 2020 how to proceed
Reply #18 - 03/29/20 at 16:32:25
Post Tools
Jack Hughes wrote on 03/29/20 at 03:08:49:
Fair enough. Personally I would argue that describing the survival of all nine as "very very unlikely" implies a (substantially) higher than fifty percent chance of at least one death, but if you disagree I don't want to quibble over it. As regards estimating the actual probability I'll leave that to people more qualified than myself, to which end I'm content to rely on Thomas McAndrew's weekly surveys. From a certain point of view any scenario in which a moderately normal resumption of the candidates tournament later in the year, regardless of how it deals with the Radjabov situation, would be a very encouraging sign.



The issue is that .4% or 10% is a huge differing variable. Right now, 500,000 to 3.3 million are likely to die in the US alone depending on how well we deal with the lockdown, medical supplies and the overwhelmed healthcare system... Given how poorly NYC has responded... I think the US is closely to 3 million than 500k... So we just don't have the data right now... but that means the probability of one of the 9 people dying is anywhere from 3.6% to 90% which is just an insane range. We don't know.

Keano wrote on 03/29/20 at 15:47:49:
I would scrap the current tournament and relegate it to a bad decision and bad memory.

Start again with Radjabov.



Yeah another great option, probably the best one. Another option needed in the poll.

dfan wrote on 03/28/20 at 22:28:49:
I disagree.

And if you disagreed with him, you could just say so, rather than demanding that he remove the poll.


I am realizing the disconnect here isn't that the poll was badly done and doesn't include the correct options (see Keano just provided another great option). The disconnect is how best to compensate Radjabov. Yet many haven't reached this conclusion yet and they still exist in the nexus devoid of morals where it is actually a question for them personally on if Radjabov should be made whole.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Keano
God Member
*****
Offline


Money doesn't talk, it
swears.

Posts: 2891
Location: Toulouse
Joined: 05/25/05
Gender: Male
Re: Candidates 2020 how to proceed
Reply #17 - 03/29/20 at 15:47:49
Post Tools
I would scrap the current tournament and relegate it to a bad decision and bad memory.

Start again with Radjabov.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Confused_by_Theory
Senior Member
****
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 355
Location: Europe
Joined: 05/13/15
Gender: Male
Re: Candidates 2020 how to proceed
Reply #16 - 03/29/20 at 04:40:16
Post Tools
Hi.

Of the poll options maybe I should say that option D (don't do candidates and have wch tournament directly) would not exactly be relevant with any other world champion. Carlsen however dropped out of the 2009-2011 cycle (ended 2012 btw Cheesy) and gave up his candidates 2011 spot (highest rated) for various stated reasons.

What he did in direct connection to this was to raise the idea of having a 8 or 10-player tournament with the world's best players for the title. This didn't happen. Carlsen was back in for the 2011-2013 cycle regardless. Fide had changed the rules by scrapping the cup form candidates tournament and gave candidates rating spots after average rating over time instead of more time specific readings. Carlsen obviously won the candidates and became world champion. That was some time ago so it is not clear he is for the idea of a tournament anymore. Perhaps.

Have a nice day.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Jack Hughes
Junior Member
**
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 72
Joined: 07/22/19
Re: Candidates 2020 how to proceed
Reply #15 - 03/29/20 at 03:08:49
Post Tools
trw wrote on 03/28/20 at 21:34:54:
50% chance? No. And I would love for it to be a 0% chance to be clear, but it is a non zero number. Data is not good and estimates vary wildly. Original thesis put the death percent at 2-3%... The US was at 1.4% and is now at 1.6%. China doesn't release real data. Germany is at .4% Italy is at 9%... Unfortunately, NYC is set to make a record 10% or higher. We do know that FIDE increased their chances dramatically by exposing them to this debacle, travel, opening ceremony, more border and public spaces etc etc etc. They're young and healthy... but we don't know what is causing some cases to be mild vs gnarly. 17 year olds healthier than them have died brutally and painfully with no connected comorbidity. Sure, they're not in the target danger demographic of elderly, infirm or infants... but right now we don't know enough. Still, 8 people with a long enough time frame does not spell well for all 8 surviving. I would doubt we get through this crisis without each of us losing someone we love sadly.  Cry

Fair enough. Personally I would argue that describing the survival of all nine as "very very unlikely" implies a (substantially) higher than fifty percent chance of at least one death, but if you disagree I don't want to quibble over it. As regards estimating the actual probability I'll leave that to people more qualified than myself, to which end I'm content to rely on Thomas McAndrew's weekly surveys. From a certain point of view any scenario in which a moderately normal resumption of the candidates tournament later in the year, regardless of how it deals with the Radjabov situation, would be a very encouraging sign.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
dfan
God Member
*****
Offline


"When you see a bad move,
look for a better one"

Posts: 732
Location: Boston
Joined: 10/04/05
Re: Candidates 2020 how to proceed
Reply #14 - 03/28/20 at 22:28:49
Post Tools
trw wrote on 03/28/20 at 21:34:54:
As for CBT, it's pretty clear I haven't done anything wrong here at all. He proposed 4 options that make no sense whatsoever.

I disagree.

And if you disagreed with him, you could just say so, rather than demanding that he remove the poll.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
trw
God Member
*****
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 1364
Joined: 05/06/08
Gender: Male
Re: Candidates 2020 how to proceed
Reply #13 - 03/28/20 at 21:34:54
Post Tools
Jack Hughes wrote on 03/28/20 at 09:32:01:
trw wrote on 03/27/20 at 23:34:06:
Also we are assuming that all 9 people survive which is very very unlikely.

This part confuses me. Do you think that there is an above fifty percent chance that one of the players will die from Coronavirus? Given the age profiles of the players and the well documented effect of age on mortality rates this seems like a very strangle prediction to me.


50% chance? No. And I would love for it to be a 0% chance to be clear, but it is a non zero number. Data is not good and estimates vary wildly. Original thesis put the death percent at 2-3%... The US was at 1.4% and is now at 1.6%. China doesn't release real data. Germany is at .4% Italy is at 9%... Unfortunately, NYC is set to make a record 10% or higher. We do know that FIDE increased their chances dramatically by exposing them to this debacle, travel, opening ceremony, more border and public spaces etc etc etc. They're young and healthy... but we don't know what is causing some cases to be mild vs gnarly. 17 year olds healthier than them have died brutally and painfully with no connected comorbidity. Sure, they're not in the target danger demographic of elderly, infirm or infants... but right now we don't know enough. Still, 8 people with a long enough time frame does not spell well for all 8 surviving. I would doubt we get through this crisis without each of us losing someone we love sadly.  Cry

Bibs wrote on 03/28/20 at 12:36:00:
@trw
Let's keep it civil shall we?


I am afraid I disagree with you that I haven't been "civil." The only reason people aren't mercilessly attacking ?? to the e5 move is because Caruana played it. If it had been someone else outside the top 10 or heaven forbid a 2000 player, people would laugh at it forever. It will not be played in correspondence since I can assure you since white wins by force.

As for CBT, it's pretty clear I haven't done anything wrong here at all. He proposed 4 options that make no sense whatsoever.

TopNotch wrote on 03/28/20 at 17:44:42:
I agree with you for the most part, and I would add that as a chess fan I was thrilled with the 7 games we got, but as an impartial observer the Candidates going forward was a bit reckless to begin with. This whole argument about ultimatums feels like nonsense to me, Radja asked or as fide indicates demanded the tournament be postponed in view of a spreading pandemic. Fide refused, Radja dropped out and was replaced. Later the tournament had to be cancelled just like all other major sporting events due either directly or tangentially to the effects Covid-19 globally.

Clearly this a big mess, I suspect the players agreed to play reluctantly for various reasons, financial being a big one stigma being another. It is possible that legally FIDE may not owe Radjabov anything, the LAW is funny like that, but morally they surely need to do something to make Radjabov whole. The assertion that Radja may not be in shape 2 years from now, is simply not a strong enough counter argument, besides he is a proud guy and i'm pretty certain he wouldn't play if he felt he wasn't in good enough shape. The other argument that Radja would be robbing someone else of a spot may have some merit, but there is also merit that he is being robbed now.

The stance that Fide could not have foreseen what happened and took every precaution is weak, since every precaution would have included postponing the tournament until it could be better determined the impact of Covid-19 globally especially in the absence of a vaccine.   

Now here we are, and this is what we are left with. Clearly Radja has been aggrieved, Fide has made a misjudgement and needs to attempt to find an amicable remedy for all concerned. However the current players in the Candidates cannot be disadvantaged any further and I say again the best, though not perfect solution is to resume the candidates at a later date and to try to make amends with Radjabov by seeding him directly into the next Candidates. This is the humane thing to do under the circumstances.

Lastly I hope everyone remains well, calm and rational and that a cure is soon found for this scary disease. There is a 2011 film entitled Contagion that eerily mirrors what we are going through now right down to the source of infection and I would highly recommend viewing it while most of us are 'sequestered' in our homes, as it may offer some hitherto new perspective and gravity to what we could be facing going forward.



I agree with you mostly except that Radjabov didn't drop out he was forced out with an ultimatum. Kramnik also agrees with your solution. I hope FIDE is smart enough to repair this situation without forcing the courts to do it for them. It was totally reckless on their part to push the candidates forward and without consulting with any competent medical professional anywhere at any point that would have advised them against this decision. It makes one wonder why FIDE doesn't have a chief medical officer...

At any rate, now the question is what to do and how to course correct. The prevailing opinion from top players seems to vary on how to compensate Radjabov but thus far no one seems to question that he needs to be made whole.

Vladimir Kramnik: https://chess24.com/en/read/news/carlsen-dvorkovich-kramnik-on-ending-the-candid...
Sergey Karjakin: https://twitter.com/SergeyKaryakin/status/1243483082822496257
Gata Kamsky: https://www.facebook.com/gata.kamsky/posts/3582661241804381
Azeri National team: https://www.chess.com/news/view/azerbaijan-team-open-letter-fide-radjabov

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


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 680
Location: London
Joined: 12/29/13
Gender: Male
Re: Candidates 2020 how to proceed
Reply #12 - 03/28/20 at 20:30:11
Post Tools
Is there some other way of 'compensating' Radja - i.e seeding into another competition for example, not just a future candidates event?
  

"As Mikhail Tal would say ' Let's have a bit of hooliganism! '"

Victor Bologan.
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
TopNotch
God Member
*****
Offline


I only look 1 move ahead,
but its always the best

Posts: 2050
Joined: 01/04/03
Gender: Male
Re: Candidates 2020 how to proceed
Reply #11 - 03/28/20 at 17:44:42
Post Tools
LeeRoth wrote on 03/28/20 at 12:57:02:
Afraid the die is already cast.  This was thought about ahead of time.  Plan has always been to resume with standings, results, and players intact.  Theres an agreement with the players and likely also with sponsors, investors, the venue, etc.  Can’t just disregard all that and change things up at random.

As for Radjabov, FIDE doesn’t owe him anything. He chose to drop out when others chose to play.  There’s no provision for bringing him back in, expanding # of players, etc.  Idea of seeding him into the next one is interesting, but what if, two years from now, he’s no longer one of the top players and giving him a seed takes a spot away from someone more deserving? 


I agree with you for the most part, and I would add that as a chess fan I was thrilled with the 7 games we got, but as an impartial observer the Candidates going forward was a bit reckless to begin with. This whole argument about ultimatums feels like nonsense to me, Radja asked or as fide indicates demanded the tournament be postponed in view of a spreading pandemic. Fide refused, Radja dropped out and was replaced. Later the tournament had to be cancelled just like all other major sporting events due either directly or tangentially to the effects Covid-19 globally.

Clearly this a big mess, I suspect the players agreed to play reluctantly for various reasons, financial being a big one stigma being another. It is possible that legally Fide may not owe Radjabov anything, the LAW is funny like that, but morally they surely need to do something to make Radjabov whole. The assertion that Radja may not be in shape 2 years from now, is simply not a strong enough counter argument, besides he is a proud guy and i'm pretty certain he wouldn't play if he felt he wasn't in good enough shape. The other argument that Radja would be robbing someone else of a spot may have some merit, but there is also merit that he is being robbed now.

The stance that Fide could not have foreseen what happened and took every precaution is weak, since every precaution would have included postponing the tournament until it could be better determined the impact of Covid-19 globally especially in the absence of a vaccine.   

Now here we are, and this is what we are left with. Clearly Radja has been aggrieved, Fide has made a misjudgement and needs to attempt to find an amicable remedy for all concerned. However the current players in the Candidates cannot be disadvantaged any further and I say again the best, though not perfect solution is to resume the candidates at a later date and to try to make amends with Radjabov by seeding him directly into the next Candidates. This is the humane thing to do under the circumstances.

Lastly I hope everyone remains well, calm and rational and that a cure is soon found for this scary disease. There is a 2011 film entitled Contagion that eerily mirrors what we are going through now right down to the source of infection and I would highly recommend viewing it while most of us are 'sequestered' in our homes, as it may offer some hitherto new perspective and gravity to what we could be facing going forward.
  

The man who tries to do something and fails is infinitely better than he who tries to do nothing and succeeds - Lloyd Jones Smiley
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Bibs
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 2170
Joined: 10/24/06
Re: Candidates 2020 how to proceed
Reply #10 - 03/28/20 at 13:20:33
Post Tools
I agree with LeeRoth.
I have some sympathy with Radjabov, but yes, names, sponsors, games played, contracts etc. Yes.
I am not sure how active Radjabpv is as a player nowadays? Certainly, two years down the line is a long way away.

Anyhow, I do not see any competitive endeavour of any kind happening for a few months.

Wishing you all safety and good health.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
LeeRoth
God Member
*****
Offline


I love ChessPublishing.com!

Posts: 1492
Joined: 10/22/05
Re: Candidates 2020 how to proceed
Reply #9 - 03/28/20 at 12:57:02
Post Tools
Afraid the die is already cast.  This was thought about ahead of time.  Plan has always been to resume with standings, results, and players intact.  Theres an agreement with the players and likely also with sponsors, investors, the venue, etc.  Can’t just disregard all that and change things up at random.

As for Radjabov, FIDE doesn’t owe him anything. He chose to drop out when others chose to play.  There’s no provision for bringing him back in, expanding # of players, etc.  Idea of seeding him into the next one is interesting, but what if, two years from now, he’s no longer one of the top players and giving him a seed takes a spot away from someone more deserving? 




  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Bibs
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 2170
Joined: 10/24/06
Re: Candidates 2020 how to proceed
Reply #8 - 03/28/20 at 12:36:00
Post Tools
@trw
Do you think you can tone it down a bit? You were unduly rude about Caruana and his prep, now rude about posts and other members here.
Let's keep it civil shall we?


  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Jack Hughes
Junior Member
**
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 72
Joined: 07/22/19
Re: Candidates 2020 how to proceed
Reply #7 - 03/28/20 at 09:32:01
Post Tools
trw wrote on 03/27/20 at 23:34:06:
Also we are assuming that all 9 people survive which is very very unlikely.

This part confuses me. Do you think that there is an above fifty percent chance that one of the players will die from Coronavirus? Given the age profiles of the players and the well documented effect of age on mortality rates this seems like a very strangle prediction to me.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
CanadianClub
Senior Member
****
Offline


Greetings from Catalonia!

Posts: 364
Joined: 11/11/12
Gender: Male
Re: Candidates 2020 how to proceed
Reply #6 - 03/28/20 at 00:27:53
Post Tools
E - The title match is played in a match Carlsen-Radjabov  Wink Cheesy

Seriously, my only desire about all of this mess is that everybody there gets OK in terms of health.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Confused_by_Theory
Senior Member
****
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 355
Location: Europe
Joined: 05/13/15
Gender: Male
Re: Candidates 2020 how to proceed
Reply #5 - 03/28/20 at 00:01:15
Post Tools
Hi.

This will not happen. Please read previous post.

Have a nice night.
CbT
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
trw
God Member
*****
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 1364
Joined: 05/06/08
Gender: Male
Re: Candidates 2020 how to proceed
Reply #4 - 03/27/20 at 23:54:23
Post Tools
Confused_by_Theory wrote on 03/27/20 at 23:51:29:
blah


No, you did not think about the options. You inserted several jokes you thought would be funny but were equally disrespectful. The four options, which are obvious, have been spelled out by me. Fix the poll or it is worthless.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Confused_by_Theory
Senior Member
****
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 355
Location: Europe
Joined: 05/13/15
Gender: Male
Re: Candidates 2020 how to proceed
Reply #3 - 03/27/20 at 23:51:29
Post Tools
Hi.

trw wrote on 03/27/20 at 23:34:06:
ABDE are stupid.

Only options are
A (Variant current C): New tournament, Radjabov included replacing MVL
B (Variant current C): New tournament, Radjabov included, MVL stays, BYE.
C (Variant current C): New tournament Radjabov included, MVL stays, another wild card to eliminate BYE.
D: What Toppy said which is most likely as well: Tournament resumed at a later date and Radjabov seeded directly into next Candidates.

Restart the poll.

This post is seriously disrespectful. Edit: Mod please remove alternative options so there is no confusion.

The basic point is to find out what is the most popular option. If that turns out to be C (not C in your post but in original options) then fine but make a bloody follow up poll then with whatever options you like. Don't try to derail a whole thread by making inflammatory posts.

I did seriously think about if there should be options with Radjabov getting seeded into the next candidates, although that is fundamentally a separate question and it would lead to considerably more poll options.

Regards
/ CbT

Edit: After posting for clarity at one point and mod request.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
trw
God Member
*****
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 1364
Joined: 05/06/08
Gender: Male
Re: Candidates 2020 how to proceed
Reply #2 - 03/27/20 at 23:34:06
Post Tools
ABDE are stupid.

Only options are
A (Variant current C): New tournament, Radjabov included replacing MVL
B (Variant current C): New tournament, Radjabov included, MVL stays, BYE.
C (Variant current C): New tournament Radjabov included, MVL stays, another wild card to eliminate BYE.
D: What Toppy said which is most likely as well: Tournament resumed at a later date and Radjabov seeded directly into next Candidates.

Restart the poll.


TopNotch wrote on 03/27/20 at 23:11:20:
There is no perfect solution to this mess as it stands now methinks.


What a mess... so agreed.


Also we are assuming that all 9 people survive which is very very unlikely.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
TopNotch
God Member
*****
Offline


I only look 1 move ahead,
but its always the best

Posts: 2050
Joined: 01/04/03
Gender: Male
Re: Candidates 2020 how to proceed
Reply #1 - 03/27/20 at 23:11:20
Post Tools
Tournament resumed at a later date and Radjabov seeded directly into next Candidates. That seems the best compromise at this stage in my opinion.

There is no perfect solution to this mess as it stands now methinks.
  

The man who tries to do something and fails is infinitely better than he who tries to do nothing and succeeds - Lloyd Jones Smiley
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Confused_by_Theory
Senior Member
****
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 355
Location: Europe
Joined: 05/13/15
Gender: Male
Candidates 2020 how to proceed
03/27/20 at 22:55:41
Post Tools
Okay so given the discussions about the now halted candidates tournament let's have a poll. What should happen? Options:

(The pool tool didn't allow poll options with many characters sadly so see below and read carefully)

A: Tournament is resumed at later date with R1-7 results in force
B: Tournament is cancelled and R1-7 results no longer matter. New candidates tournament is held at later date
C: Tournament is cancelled and R1-7 results no longer matter. New candidates tournament is held at later date with Teimour Radjabov included
D: Tournament is cancelled and R1-7 results no longer matter. Instead of new candidates tournament the eight players, Carlsen and Radjabov play a tournament directly for the title
E: I don’t care how this gets resolved. Let's just all agree we need a 1000 people at the opening ceremony when the candidates gets back.

Poll rules:
Duration 2 weeks
Only chesspub members can vote
Current standing visible all the time
You can only choose one option.
After voting you can change the vote if it's within 24 hours.

I will also try to remember taking a reading halfway or so in case this is interesting.

Have a nice day.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Bookmarks: del.icio.us Digg Facebook Google Google+ Linked in reddit StumbleUpon Twitter Yahoo