Magnus Carlsen Proposes Different World Championship Format

Discussion of anything and everything relating to chess playing software and machines.

Moderators: hgm, Rebel, chrisw

Sean Evans
Posts: 1777
Joined: Thu Jun 05, 2008 10:58 pm
Location: Canada

Magnus Carlsen Proposes Different World Championship Format

Post by Sean Evans »

Magnus Carlsen Proposes Different World Championship Format

Peter Doggers

Aug 11, 2015, 11:43 AM

Chess event coverage

Magnus Carlsen has suggested significant changes to the system to determine the world championship title in chess. The reigning champion prefers “moving to an annual knock-out event,” as he wrote on Facebook today.

Carlsen is about to travel to the U.S. where he is planning a training camp in advance of the 3rd Sinquefield Cup. His opponents there will be Fabiano Caruana, Hikaru Nakamura, Veselin Topalov, Alexander Grischuk, Viswanathan Anand, Anish Giri, Maxime Vachier-Lagrave, Levon Aronian and Wesley So.

The world champion dropped a small “conversation bomb” today on his official Facebook page: He reopened the old debate about what is the best format to decide on the world champion of chess.

“(...) I have, for a long time believed - and voiced publicly - that there should be a new World Championship cycle system, which is both balanced and fair,” writes Carlsen. “In short, I strongly believe the chess world should evolve to a more just system.”

The reigning world champion proposes a system thats involves a new champion on an annual basis:

“I have long thought that moving to an annual knock-out event, similar to the World Cup, would be more equitable. This change would in effect improve the odds of becoming World Champion for nearly every chess player, with the exception of the reigning World Champion, and potentially a few other top players who would no longer be favoured by the current format. Creating regional qualifying events combined with rating spots, the participation of all the top players in the world and the undisputed World Championship title at stake, I truly believe this would make the World Championship cycle more accessible to everyone.”

In advance of travelling to the US to prepare for the Sinquefield Cup, I felt it important to share with you something I...
Posted by Magnus Carlsen on Tuesday, August 11, 2015
The topic is dear to all chess fans, and not surprisingly dozens of comments can be found under Carlsen's post after only a few hours. That includes remarks from two grandmasters, who both disagree with Carlsen.

GM Michal Krasenkow, a former top player himself: “The K.O. format, with inevitable rapid and blitz tie-breaks, is too much a lottery. The present system, with the WCh match as a climax of the whole chess life, attracting world's media attention to chess, works well. The Candidates tournament is a great event, and the fears of unfair or morally awkward situations prove unjustified so far. The only suggestion I can do is to increase the number of games in the WCh match. 12 is too few after all. Of course, coming back to 24 would be nonsense in modern times but 16 would be perfectly adequate.”

GM Mohamed Al-Modiahki, the organizer of the Qatar Masters, agrees
: “We need to find a system that all agree to: officials players, sponsors, media and fans! We can't change the format all the time... A knock out system is not the best for the world championship title, it will be more thrilling but the quality will be so so...”

Arguments in favor of Carlsen's system is the relatively easy way to explain it to a wide audience, and the successful adaptation in other sports. In football the reigning world champion has to qualify for the new championship. In tennis, the most important events are annual knockouts.

Carlsen's suggestions are not new. As he notes himself, he criticised the format before, and raised the issue of the privileges held by the world champion on several occasions, prior to qualifying for the match in 2013.

The Norwegian player stepped out of the 2008-2010 FIDE Grand Prix series and, although qualified by rating, decided not to participate in the subsequent Candidates Matches. Back then he supported his decision as follows:

After careful consideration I’ve reached the conclusion that the ongoing 2008 – 2012 cycle does not represent a system, sufficiently modern and fair, to provide the motivation I need to go through a lengthy process of preparations and matches and, to perform at my best. Reigning champion privileges, the long (5 yr) span of the cycle, changes made during the cycle resulting in a new format (Candidates) that no World Champion has had to go through since Kasparov, puzzling ranking criteria as well as the shallow ceaseless match-after-match concept are all less than satisfactory in my opinion.

After he won the world title in November 2013 in Chennai, Carlsen said: “It's good for the game that the best player is also the world champion. I feel that for a while I'm the highest rated player and won a few tournaments but the world title was missing.” Today Carlsen makes it clear that he hasn't changed his mind on the system.


Carlsen in Chennai 2013: “The world title was missing.”

Interestingly, his manager Espen Agdestein has mixed feelings about today's Facebook post by Carlsen. “For me as a manager, it is difficult to look at it because he could lose potentially a lot of money and the title. I do not like it,” Agdestein told Sjakboggen. “But at the same time I have respect for the fact that he feels this is an appropriate to change the system.”

Carlsen's system would mean the end of a long tradition. Starting from the first official event in 1886, the world championship title in chess has been decidede in two-player matches.

For more than half a century it was the world champion who faced a player who was considered a worthy challenger (and who could bring a nicely filled bag of money). In 1950 everything changed when the world chess federation (FIDE) introduced the Candidates’ Matches.

These were a series of relatively short, two-player matches that would ultimately lead to the challenger. Players qualified for these matches from (inter)zonal tournaments.

Soon after Kirsan Ilyumzhinov became FIDE President in 1995, in a turbulent period when a different organization led by Garry Kasparov was holding its own world championship matches, FIDE altered its format.

Four times the FIDE world championship was decided in a knockout tournament that lasted a few weeks, in 1999, 2000, 2002 and 2004. Twice the FIDE world championship was decided in a tournament, in 2005 and 2007.

Currently the world championship is a twelve-game, two-player match. The challenger qualifies by winning an 8-player Candidates’ Tournament. The participants are the loser of the previous match, two players from the Grand Prix Series, two players from the World Cup, two players by rating and one wild card from the organizers.
yanquis1972
Posts: 1766
Joined: Wed Jun 03, 2009 12:14 am

Re: Magnus Carlsen Proposes Different World Championship For

Post by yanquis1972 »

terrible idea...
whereagles
Posts: 565
Joined: Thu Nov 13, 2014 12:03 pm

Re: Magnus Carlsen Proposes Different World Championship For

Post by whereagles »

Sean Evans wrote:We can't change the format all the time...
This.

Plus: to each his own kitchen. Obviously, players and directors have to agree on a format that's attractive for players. But other than that, politics are for the ruling board of directors, not for top players. And there's a reason for this: WCh matches are naturally for promotion of the sport's best interests.
shrapnel
Posts: 1339
Joined: Fri Nov 02, 2012 9:43 am
Location: New Delhi, India

Re: Magnus Carlsen Proposes Different World Championship For

Post by shrapnel »

Basically it boils down to " He's afraid he will have to face a vengeful Anand again !" :lol:
i7 5960X @ 4.1 Ghz, 64 GB G.Skill RipJaws RAM, Twin Asus ROG Strix OC 11 GB Geforce 2080 Tis
User avatar
reflectionofpower
Posts: 1610
Joined: Fri Mar 01, 2013 5:28 pm
Location: USA

Re: Magnus Carlsen Proposes Different World Championship For

Post by reflectionofpower »

I think it's a good idea. We all remember the ole' days of grinding through a 4 year cycle.
"Without change, something sleeps inside us, and seldom awakens. The sleeper must awaken." (Dune - 1984)

Lonnie
carldaman
Posts: 2283
Joined: Sat Jun 02, 2012 2:13 am

Re: Magnus Carlsen Proposes Different World Championship For

Post by carldaman »

reflectionofpower wrote:I think it's a good idea. We all remember the ole' days of grinding through a 4 year cycle.
But it is no longer a 4-year cycle. Candidates tournaments and title matches are nowadays being held every (other) year. I think it may be better to improve and finetune the current system than going back to the old lottery that produced unworthy "champions".
User avatar
reflectionofpower
Posts: 1610
Joined: Fri Mar 01, 2013 5:28 pm
Location: USA

Re: Magnus Carlsen Proposes Different World Championship For

Post by reflectionofpower »

carldaman wrote:
reflectionofpower wrote:I think it's a good idea. We all remember the ole' days of grinding through a 4 year cycle.
But it is no longer a 4-year cycle. Candidates tournaments and title matches are nowadays being held every (other) year. I think it may be better to improve and finetune the current system than going back to the old lottery that produced unworthy "champions".
I know it's not 4 year cycles. That's why I said, "ole' days"
"Without change, something sleeps inside us, and seldom awakens. The sleeper must awaken." (Dune - 1984)

Lonnie
User avatar
MikeB
Posts: 4889
Joined: Thu Mar 09, 2006 6:34 am
Location: Pen Argyl, Pennsylvania

Re: Magnus Carlsen Proposes Different World Championship For

Post by MikeB »

I'm 100% behind Magnus on this one.

First, to those that oppose this due to the concept of lottery, every championship match, title bout whatever, etc, simply by the nature of statistics is form of alottery - the best player, the best team does not always win. Just like the healthiest person doesn't always live the longest. You can never get away from that.

Second,to those that oppose this due the concept that the quality of chess will go down - slightly - I say who cares? The average person will not even have a clue if the quality even went down. Just like we play all these tournaments with thousands and thousands of games with micro times - nobody cares about the quality of those chess games - we just want to know which engines is best. With engines, you easily play 30,000 easily. If we played a computer tournment like we play people tournaments - say instead of a 500 game RR, we play a two game RR, everybody would scream that's not enough games -we haven not played enough games. Then consider the fact that people , but not machines, have good days and bad days , well guess what, we already a lottery system and the quality is not guaranteed or repeatable..

But that's not the reason why I'm in favored of Magnus's decision - simply from a marketing perspective, having a set standard schedule each year would be a huge driver in getting people interested in chess. If anybody has even been to a live blitz tournament with GMs - they are hugely entertaining- yes the quality is down- but it's blitz anyway and we understand that and I have seen some incredible but solid and sound moves pulled out of the air in a blitz game.

With that said, I don't this his idea is going anywhere soon - too may different fractions already have skin in the game with a little money making franchise - totally forgetting the fact that Chess as an entity - relative to other sports or competitions - is not getting anywhere near the potential type of return it could be. It's the classic case of why change it, I'm making money here and of course they are afraid if it gets changed, they would be left out in the cold making no money in chess. College football (USA) was in the same predicament for years - and that's why, for a long time , the College Football championship was not played for , but it was voted upon. None of the major bowls wanted to give up their little piece of the pie. It was the TV business people who saw ( can we say NCAA Basketball tournament? ) how much MORE money and greater interest could be acheived if we actually have a playoff for the NCAA national football championship , and they were finally able to get each of the major bowls to see the light.

Prediction - I'll be dead before Magnus's proposal is ever accepted. But if does happen, it will take somebody with a lot of conviction that this is the right way to go, somebody with very persuasive negotiating skills, and somebody who has credibility. Somebody like Pete Roselle who convince all the NFL team owners back in the 60's to give up their individual piece of the pie televising rights so that they the league could negotiate with the networks as one entity - and thus receeiving far greater returns.

So I'm all for it , but I don't see it happening in my lifetime or maybe ever.
carldaman
Posts: 2283
Joined: Sat Jun 02, 2012 2:13 am

Re: Magnus Carlsen Proposes Different World Championship For

Post by carldaman »

MikeB wrote:
So I'm all for it , but I don't see it happening in my lifetime or maybe ever.
You already saw it, about 15 years ago. ;)
supersharp77
Posts: 1242
Joined: Sat Jul 05, 2014 7:54 am
Location: Southwest USA

Re: Magnus Carlsen Proposes New World Championship Format

Post by supersharp77 »

Was present for the First FIDE knockout tourney.......I enjoyed it very much but the press coverage was so so and the top players complained strongly after many were knocked out in the early rounds....this new system based on top rated grand prix tourneys is fixed because only certain players (not nessesarily the best ones) get the top invites allowing them to accumulate the most points so they alway get the top spots and on into the candidate tourney invites....the candidates tourney system can "work" but not with 8 spots....you need 16 spots.......8 top rated player spots and 8 spots for world zonal qualifiers (S America N America Asia... Africa.....Europe etc.) The top 4 play matches to see who qualifies to play the world champion...This system should work very well.....long term.....AR :wink: