If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
Policy / Politique
The fee for tournament organizers advertising on ChessTalk is $20/event or $100/yearly unlimited for the year.
Les frais d'inscription des organisateurs de tournoi sur ChessTalk sont de 20 $/événement ou de 100 $/année illimitée.
You can etransfer to Henry Lam at chesstalkforum at gmail dot com
Transfér à Henry Lam à chesstalkforum@gmail.com
Dark Knight / Le Chevalier Noir
General Guidelines
---- Nous avons besoin d'un traduction français!
Some Basics
1. Under Board "Frequently Asked Questions" (FAQs) there are 3 sections dealing with General Forum Usage, User Profile Features, and Reading and Posting Messages. These deal with everything from Avatars to Your Notifications. Most general technical questions are covered there. Here is a link to the FAQs. https://forum.chesstalk.com/help
2. Consider using the SEARCH button if you are looking for information. You may find your question has already been answered in a previous thread.
3. If you've looked for an answer to a question, and not found one, then you should consider asking your question in a new thread. For example, there have already been questions and discussion regarding: how to do chess diagrams (FENs); crosstables that line up properly; and the numerous little “glitches” that every new site will have.
4. Read pinned or sticky threads, like this one, if they look important. This applies especially to newcomers.
5. Read the thread you're posting in before you post. There are a variety of ways to look at a thread. These are covered under “Display Modes”.
6. Thread titles: please provide some details in your thread title. This is useful for a number of reasons. It helps ChessTalk members to quickly skim the threads. It prevents duplication of threads. And so on.
7. Unnecessary thread proliferation (e.g., deliberately creating a new thread that duplicates existing discussion) is discouraged. Look to see if a thread on your topic may have already been started and, if so, consider adding your contribution to the pre-existing thread. However, starting new threads to explore side-issues that are not relevant to the original subject is strongly encouraged. A single thread on the Canadian Open, with hundreds of posts on multiple sub-topics, is no better than a dozen threads on the Open covering only a few topics. Use your good judgment when starting a new thread.
8. If and/or when sub-forums are created, please make sure to create threads in the proper place.
Debate
9. Give an opinion and back it up with a reason. Throwaway comments such as "Game X pwnz because my friend and I think so!" could be considered pointless at best, and inflammatory at worst.
10. Try to give your own opinions, not simply those copied and pasted from reviews or opinions of your friends.
Unacceptable behavior and warnings
11. In registering here at ChessTalk please note that the same or similar rules apply here as applied at the previous Boardhost message board. In particular, the following content is not permitted to appear in any messages:
* Racism
* Hatred
* Harassment
* Adult content
* Obscene material
* Nudity or pornography
* Material that infringes intellectual property or other proprietary rights of any party
* Material the posting of which is tortious or violates a contractual or fiduciary obligation you or we owe to another party
* Piracy, hacking, viruses, worms, or warez
* Spam
* Any illegal content
* unapproved Commercial banner advertisements or revenue-generating links
* Any link to or any images from a site containing any material outlined in these restrictions
* Any material deemed offensive or inappropriate by the Board staff
12. Users are welcome to challenge other points of view and opinions, but should do so respectfully. Personal attacks on others will not be tolerated. Posts and threads with unacceptable content can be closed or deleted altogether. Furthermore, a range of sanctions are possible - from a simple warning to a temporary or even a permanent banning from ChessTalk.
Helping to Moderate
13. 'Report' links (an exclamation mark inside a triangle) can be found in many places throughout the board. These links allow users to alert the board staff to anything which is offensive, objectionable or illegal. Please consider using this feature if the need arises.
Advice for free
14. You should exercise the same caution with Private Messages as you would with any public posting.
Re: Carlsen drops out of world champshionship cycle!
Perhaps this will shake up the decision makers at FIDE to the point where they will consider obvious and reasonable steps to make the championship work for fans and playes alike.
The present "system" is a disgrace, lacking in the fundamental requirements of stability and fairness. I defy anyone to explain the current plan, let alone to predict what actually will be implemented.
I understand how difficult it is to keep everyone happy---particularly chessplayers---but it is an even more unusual accomplishment to make everyone angry and frustrated.
On the other hand, Carlsen's suggestions are also blatantly self-serving.
I, for one, value the concept that the only way to become champion is to beat the reigning champion in a match of 12-20 games. At any one time, there are only perhaps four serious contenders and it should be simple to select the challenger by round robin or mini-match playdowns.
Re: Carlsen drops out of world champshionship cycle!
Here is an upcoming article in the Scarborough Community of Toronto Chess News & Views, Issue # 12-6, November 15, 2010, on this development:
" 8 players had qualified for the Candidates’ Matches, due to participation in various matches/tournaments, or by rating. All was ready to go next March/April. Generally, I think it was felt that FIDE had finally gotten it somewhat right.
There seemed to be a strong feeling that the World Championship should be a match, of a decent number of games. A Candidates knock-out preliminary to determine a Challenger, also seemed to be accepted – though there was still concern over the candidates’ matches being too short ( the lottery aspect concern ).
So it is somewhat surprising to have the discussion revert back to the World Championship being a tournament. It will be interesting to see how the top players weigh into this debate, and whether Carlsen will get support.
In any event, this is a big loss for chess – Carlsen has been # 1 since Jan. 2010, and only in the November FIDE rating list did he drop to # 2, behind 15th and current World Champion, Viswanathan Anand ( India ). Most chess observers gave him good chances at winning the candidates’ matches, and even taking the title from Anand – it was a much hoped-for match. But not to be it seems.
Any comments on our take on this? We'll publish your responses in our next newsletter.
Bob
Last edited by Bob Armstrong; Friday, 5th November, 2010, 12:43 PM.
I am quite disappointed in Carlsen, as he may now create chaos in the title contention. Of course the cycle isn't perfect, but it doesn't make sense to say that the WC should have the same starting point as everyone else when Carlsen is not the WC. There is no perfect cycle and everyone has their opinion on what it should be. Too bad!
Perhaps this will shake up the decision makers at FIDE to the point where they will consider obvious and reasonable steps to make the championship work for fans and playes alike.
The present "system" is a disgrace, lacking in the fundamental requirements of stability and fairness. I defy anyone to explain the current plan, let alone to predict what actually will be implemented.
I understand how difficult it is to keep everyone happy---particularly chessplayers---but it is an even more unusual accomplishment to make everyone angry and frustrated.
Gordon, there is the same situation in the International Correspondence Chess Federation. I have been severely criticising the ICCF for the way they are alienating the top players and devaluing the World Correspondence Championship.
It has come to the point where the recently completed international congress closed the forum. Nothing can be posted. I guess this is the reply to the criticism. If they can't see what is written then everything is good.
I went as far as to appeal a decision of the congress as it applied to the World Championship. I sent my appeal to the ICCF appeals commission which was headed by Alan Rawlings in England. The appeal was lost, of course, as they don't seem to have the authority to rule on a decision of the congress. I got a "drop dead idiot" reply.
I didn't mind losing the appeal and felt I had done all I could to try to rectify the situation. Too bad others would not stand up with me. Not an easy thing to do when people want to remain "one of the boys" and retain their prestigious positions. Sinecure is probably a better word with the benefit being power.
Re: Carlsen drops out of world champshionship cycle!
Hi,
This is awful news. What nonsense garbage from Carlsen in my opinion.
We go back to square one (Kasparov 1990s) as the public will not recognize a world champ nowadays in which Carlsen did not participate.
The present "system" is a disgrace, lacking in the fundamental requirements of stability and fairness. I defy anyone to explain the current plan, let alone to predict what actually will be implemented.
I'll attempt to, Gordon, best I understand it:
- 1990s Kasparov "pulled out" of FIDE and the candidate matches took strange turns or didn't happen at all.
- FIDE introduces knock-out championships to find "world champ", including Khalifman, Ponomariov & Kasimdzhanov.
- classical matches won by Kramnik (Kasparov 2000 London, Leko 2004 Brissago) not recognized by FIDE (as world championships) -- Leko qualified to this match by winning Dortmund (!?)
- Kasparov retires March 2005
- FIDE tried to re-create the championship with 2005 San Luis, Argentina. Topalov wins convincingly, taking the 8 highest rated players -- Kramnik refuses to participate claiming he must defend title in match
- (1st sort of attempt at re-unification) 2006 toiletgate, World Champion Topalov loses match to Kramnik (step backwards in finding unified champ)
- Mexico 2007 takes 2nd, 3rd and 4th place finishers from Argentina, 16 players take place in candidate matches (including a younger Carlsen, lost to Aronian) to find the the next 4 participants. The remaining (or first) spot gets awarded to Kramnik for winning toiletgate. Complete disaster as Topalov gets left out. Anand wins tournament. Kramnik participated on the condition that this is not the final of the world championship and he still must defend in match -- finished 2-3 with Gelfand.
- At this point from 2006-2008, FIDE was changing rules every 2 or 3 months
- 2008 Grand Prix begins (series of 6 Round Robin events, some 20 odd players play in 4 events each) -- Magnus Carlsen and Michael Adams pull out within the first 2 events. Ideally someone from this cycle would get some sort of ticket to world championship challenge.
- FIDE scrambles a two-match series to unify the world championship (again), where Kramnik (winner 2006 toiletgate) plays Anand (winner Mexico 2007) and Topalov gets a consolation match against Kamsky (knock-out winner, technically the world championship BS invention still in place by FIDE at this point - Carlsen also took part here)
- Winners play each other -- Anand crushes Kramnik, Topalov disposes of Kamsky, Anand narrowly edges Topalov in the most recent encounter
- All this ideally to find an undisputed world champion, while using the other (mis)steps as a build-up for a future cycle, or defense of the newly crowned world champion
The system in place now (for this cycle in progress only):
- FIDE finally recognizes that the knock-outs should be nothing more than a ticket to a candidate for matches
- FIDE takes their Grand Prix, awards top two spots
- FIDE takes the highest placed player who is not in the cycle
- The losers of the recent matches get a candidate ticket
- The host nation for the candidates matches gets a pick provided the player is rated above 2700.
- Winner of these 8 players, through candidate matches, challenge the world champion in a match.
And so we have:
Gelfand (knock-outs)
Aronian & Radjabov (Grand Prix)
Carlsen (high rated)
Topalov, Kramnik, Kamsky (match losers that made Anand champion)
Mamedyarov (named by host of candidate matches Republic of Azerbaijan)
Winner challenges Anand in a match.
But apparently, we have some problems in that: Azerbaijan won't allow Aronian to play there for political reasons, matches moved elsewhere, Mamedyarov retains his spot.
And now Carlsen drops out.
---
So... personally I think we just went back to the chess stone age of the 1990s where complete chaos begins because the top player goes solo and the chess world (and of course FIDE understands this) will never fully accept a world champion where the top player did not compete.
I am very disappointed in Carlsen, who had already pulled out of Grand Prix and still got a free ticket to the candidates by virtue of being the highest rated.
Re: Carlsen drops out of world champshionship cycle!
As a chess player and chess fan for most of my life, I am of course very disappointed that GM Magnus Carlsen has dropped out of the current World Championship cycle.
I must admit that I was looking forward greatly to the prospect of him becoming World Champion in the near future, and this development then hopefully serving as a precursor for cleaning up the all-too-sordid world of international chess organization.
GM Carlsen will be turning 20 years of age later this month, so he has plenty of time to become World Champion in the future, let us hope.
As other posters have written, there is no perfect system for determining the World Champion in chess.
Let's look briefly at the history of the world championship, with respect to the format of decision:
1) Prior to 1948, the champion was determined by a challenge match system, with the current champion essentially picking his challenger. This worked reasonably well so long as:
a) the challenger could raise sufficient financial stakes for the match to take place (which was often a demand from the champion), and
b) the champion selected worthy challengers at regular intervals. Strong players who didn't get the chance for a title match included GM Akiba Rubinstein (he came from a poor background and lacked the right connections to raise enough money to challenge World Champions Emanuel Lasker and J.R. Capablanca), and Capablanca himself (after Capa lost the title to Alexander Alekhine in 1927, Alekhine did virtually everything possible to avoid a rematch with Capa, which the chess world definitely wanted to see). Alekhine selected Efim Bogolyubov twice as his challenger, in 1929 and 1934, and won without much difficulty; he then picked Max Euwe in 1935, and lost, but availed himself of a rematch chance offered by his gentlemanly opponent two years later, and won. Alekhine also dodged GM Paul Keres, some 23 years younger, after Keres had won AVRO 1938, which was an official challenger selection tournament. Other players who would have given Alekhine a very hard fight in the late 1930s and early 1940s included GM Reuben Fine, GM Samuel Reshevsky, and GM Mikhail Botvinnik.
2) With World War II preventing most international chess from 1939 to 1945, and with Alekhine as title-holder dying under circumstances which have never been entirely cleared up in 1946 (some people, including me, think Alekhine, a Soviet defector in 1920, was probably poisoned in Portugal by the Soviet secret police), a new system was needed to find a champion. The one eventually used was essentially developed by Botvinnik, who was angling for a match for himself with Alekhine shortly after World War II ended. Total control of the World Championship cycle passed to FIDE, for the first time, and when the Soviet Union joined FIDE in 1947, it gradually became the dominant nation in the world chess organization, a position it (and many of its former constituent republics which have become independent nations) retains today.
Botvinnik's system was to hold a 1948 tournament among the world's consensus top players, to select the new champion, and then to have the champion defend his title every three years, against a challenger selected by a cycle method which would include representation from all FIDE member nations. This cycle method consisted of the Interzonal(s) and Candidates (tournament and / or matches)), and without a doubt, this system (which was approved by FIDE) was a significant improvement, in many ways, over the previous challenge system, where the World Title was essentially the personal property of the champion. One important caveat of the new system was that the champion would keep his title after a drawn match against the challenger. Botvinnik, who won the 1948 World Championship tournament, used that drawn match provision to keep his title, after drawing title matches with GM David Bronstein in 1951 and GM Vassily Smyslov in 1954. (We now know, virtually for certain, that GM Smyslov received important assistance in becoming the challenger through collusion among fellow Soviets, ordered from the highest levels of the Soviet Chess Federation, and indeed the KGB as well, at the Zurich 1953 Candidates' tournament.) A second important caveat, also proposed by Botvinnik, and adopted as part of the system, was that a losing champion was entitled to a rematch within one year, WITHOUT going through any other qualification requirements. Botvinnik used that provision to regain the title after losing to Smyslov in 1957 and GM Mikhail Tal in 1960. This rematch clause was taken away after Botvinnik lost to GM Tigran Petrosian in 1963, and Botvinnik then removed himself from the next Candidates' cycle, which, as losing champion, he was entitled to contest.
The new system, while an improvement, was decidedly not perfect. GM Reuben Fine declined his invitation to challenge in 1948, essentially because he suspected that Soviet collusion would occur during the tournament, to ensure a Soviet winner. With three Soviets (Botvinnik, Smyslov, and Keres) and the other prospective challengers in the planned 1948 field of six being Fine, Euwe, and Reshevsky, and based on events since that time, Fine was remarkably prescient!! When Fine declined his place, no replacement was obtained, although GM Miguel Najdorf was a worthy non-Soviet contender. Also, as GM Bronstein (a Soviet who would have done his best to avoid any pressure to collude) has pointed out, it would have made more sense to run the Interzonal tournament first in 1948, and then to include some of its best finishers in the subsequent World Championship event. The World Championship was held early in 1948, and the Interzonal (which Bronstein won) was held afterwards. The 1948 World Championship tournament field essentially reflected the top players of 1939, while excluding other top players (of whom Bronstein and Najdorf were perhaps the most dangerous contenders) who had developed between 1939 and 1948.
Collusion in 1962 among several Soviets, at the Curacao Candidates' tournament, was designed to prevent GM Bobby Fischer from potentially becoming the official challenger. Fischer had won the 1962 Interzonal comfortably, and at age 19, was the most dangerous threat to the Soviets' hegemony over the World Chess Championship. The Soviet Union, the first nation in history to develop state-controlled sports programs, came to view the World Chess Championship as its national possession, in connection with Cold War aims. Capturing the world title took Fischer another decade, and this also required intervention by FIDE, to reform the selection system into a series of short matches, to determine the challenger.
The system we have today is, in effect, nothing more than a modified version of the 1948 system. Modifications have made it better, in my view, but the vast increase in the number of highly-rated players, which flowed from the chess boom stimulated by Fischer's rise to the top, make it problematic to select a fair champion. :) :)
Re: Carlsen drops out of world champshionship cycle!
It's a good decision. Carlsen is #1 in the power rankings and has no need to submit to the FIDE lottery system, which has lost a lot of credibility. It's likely he will continue to dominate the tournament scene unless he gets bored. Sooner or later the demand will boil over for a direct challenge to the nominal WC. The money will be found, and then we will see a match to rival Fischer-Spassky in 1972...
It seems that Carlsen has been hanging around Kasparov too much - even his political inclinations are now leaning the same way as G.K. Of course, the problems ALL stem from IllusionOf and his cronies... as long as they control FIDE, it is a useless governing body.
If (and it is a large IF) Carlsen's motives are to force out IllusionOf, then I would heartily applaud the move, otherwise it is purely self-serving prattle.
It seems that Carlsen has been hanging around Kasparov too much - even his political inclinations are now leaning the same way as G.K. Of course, the problems ALL stem from IllusionOf and his cronies... as long as they control FIDE, it is a useless governing body.
Kerry,
Be logical. If ALL problems stem from "IllusionOf and his cronies", how can you blame Carlsen for following in Kasparov's footsteps ? Carlsen took what I would call the principled decision: no way was he going to submit to FIDE's irrationnal and erratic behaviour. And since he can afford it why should he? If more people would have done the same the cronies would have been out for some time.
Kerry,
Be logical. If ALL problems stem from "IllusionOf and his cronies", how can you blame Carlsen for following in Kasparov's footsteps ? Carlsen took what I would call the principled decision: no way was he going to submit to FIDE's irrationnal and erratic behaviour. And since he can afford it why should he? If more people would have done the same the cronies would have been out for some time.
I agree. I was only pointing out (somewhat tongue-in-cheek) that Carlsen's collaboration with G.K. was apparently paying off in other ways... Carlsen is absolutely correct to call out FIDE for their ridiculous 'regulations' and inconsistent application of their own rules.
My apologies if my intent was not clear.
Kerry,
And since he can afford it why should he? If more people would have done the same the cronies would have been out for some time.
Possibly other people can not "afford it". There is much to consider before a player tells an organization to take a world championship and shove it.
How many people are there who are reasonably good enough to expect a second chance and young enough to reasonably expect to play at the same level, or better, when that chance comes?
Possibly other people can not "afford it". There is much to consider before a player tells an organization to take a world championship and shove it.
The key players, Anand, Topalov, Kramnik and several others could certainly afford it but of course agreeing among themselves is not easily accomplished.
Re: Re : Re: Re : Re: Carlsen drops out of world champshionship cycle!
I find him withdrawing pretty bizarre tbh. Just a bad decision in my opinion. Myself, being still a relatively new chess player this new cycle seems better than when I first started playing chess. It's nice to see most of his colleagues agree that its a strange decision and that the cycle is pretty good right now. I also find the analogy to the world cup pretty weak. Maybe he should get a publicist.
Tweet
Comment