The following was sent by Grandmaster Emil Sutovsky (of Israel) to 20 of the top players in the world:
Dear colleagues,
On behalf of the World Championship and Olympiads committee (WCOC), I’d like to ask your opinion regarding the format of the future World Championship Cycles.
As we all know, opinions differ, and it is not easy to find a solution that will satisfy all the leading players. However, we shall try to find a system which will be both professional and realistic. In this regard, I would appreciate hearing your thoughts before the topic is discussed on the next WCOC meeting in the beginning of June and important decisions are taken.
As the topic is too complex, I’ve prepared several questions. It would be nice to have your answers, but of course, you are most welcomed to present your vision as a separate letter. The questions:
-
What is more suitable system for Candidates – matches or double round robin?
-
If the match system is used, what format would you prefer (4+4+6, like in Kazan, 6+6+6, other…) Do you have positive/negative remarks about the format used in Kazan?
-
Should the World Champion’s privilege stay intact or should the World Champion join the Candidates in the future cycles?
- Do you think FIDE should preserve two-year cycle or consider switching to a yearly Championship?
I would appreciate having your response before May 30, so that it can be presented on the WCOC meeting.
Best regards,
GM Emil Sutovsky
What is your opinion? What is the fairest and most exciting format?
https://chessdailynews.com/the-700-lbs-gorilla-issue-to-draw-or-not-to-draw/
I think the present time control of 2 hours for 40 moves has to be reviewed. It is an average of 3 minutes per move. Now opening moves are mostly done fast by players. So the time for first 10 moves has to be modified. The first 10 moves to be finished in 20minutes (average of 2 minutes/move). The next 20 moves to be completed in 60 minutes. (Average of 3 minutes per move). No draw offer till 30 moves are over. The rest of the time limits can be set as appropriate.
I think the world champion should be allowed to have the privilage of waiting for the challenger. If he refuses to play with the challenger once in 2 yrs. he should be stripped off the title. 8 candidates to be selected from tournaments and ranking. They should be played in round robin tournament and the best 2 – 4 players to go for match play to find a suitable candidate. No blitz games.
Q#1: DOUBLE ROUND ROBIN TOURNAMENT is most suitable. Puts a premium on taking at least some risk to win.
(Also, with 8 players, this makes for a 14 round tournament which takes fewer days, and therefore is less expensive for organizers, than the recently completed Candidates Matches. Indeed, the shortest number of rounds in regulation that the Candidates could have took was 4+4+6, which is exactly the number of rounds in an 8 player round robin.) The Zurich tournament in 1953, although I believe this had more than 8 players, was an example of a successful Candidates format.
Q#2: MATCH SYSTEM SHOULD NEVER AGAIN BE USED TO DETERMINE World Championship challenger, unless organizers are willing to fund the format that existed in 1971: 6+6+6 with 1st player to reach 6 points AND finish at least 1 point ahead of opponent the winner of the match. ALL GAMES played in regulation. NO BLITZ. NO RAPID.
KAZAN format was a disgrace.
(But I’m glad Boris won. 🙂
Q#3: WORLD CHAMPIONSHIP PRIVILEGE MUST stay intact. (Whose joke is this, that would consider World Champion not to have this privilege? But, on 2nd thought, don’t tell me whose idea this was.)
Q#4: STICK TO 2-YEAR CYCLE. (Are organizers crazy? Are players crazy? Every-year championship: too expensive for organizers, and too taxing on players. Also, cheapens the prestige of being World Champion. 3-year cycle would be OK.
I’ve been following Candidates and World Championships since 1954. Please take advice of longtime chess fan. (I’m still going to be around for a long time, too, so my opinion still counts.)
Lucymarie Ruth
Q#1: Ideally the format used when Fischer qualified to play Spassky is best,but perhaps impracticable nowadays. So we may have to be content with a double-round robin format.
Q#3: Absolutely! The World Champion’s privileges MUST stay intact!!
Q#4: Absolute minimum should be Two year cycle.
From an avid chess fan.
World Championship must be held every three months.
FIDE will get their share of taxes every three months and give to poor chess countries.
Sutovsky can resign as he doesn’t see this possibility.
Format must be decided by Mr. Makcroppolous. He is the most knwoledgebale person on the planet.
Everyone elses opinion doesnt matter.
Long live Greece!!
Hi Susan Polgar & Emil Sutovsky,
Well,as audiences / Spectators,I prefer to address the question “What is the fairest and most exciting format ?” placed by Mr.GM Emil Sutovsky.
As of fairest is concerned – Every player,at least should have second bout with the same player,to decide the best between the two.
Most exciting is concerned – Slightly reduce the time limit & prevent early draw offerings and acceptance.
World Champion – Should at least have the privilege of bearing the tittle for 2 yrs.
Toughest & Fairest – Open World Championship,that is current Champion should contest in regular bout in the relevant year,for title contest,then the candidates of first two places,will have World Championship number of rounds to decide the World Champion.
Well,I am not sure whether its feasible to formulate a structure and put into practice commercially successful by considering all the above set of views but even few additions and few omissions may sound interesting.
By
Venky [ India – Chennai ]
OK the format needs a change, I agree, but also the players have to take a lot of the blame. Kamsky played really good exciting games, Topalov was good also. If you look at top players, about half are just really boring with no guts. Kramnik really sucked! Chess needs more young talent with the will to win, like Carlsen and Naka!