Candidates Matches 3rd - 27th May 2011

The very latest International round up of English news.
Ian Kingston
Posts: 1071
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2007 3:16 pm
Location: Sutton Coldfield
Contact:

Re: Candidates Matches 3rd - 27th May 2011

Post by Ian Kingston » Fri May 27, 2011 2:00 pm

Returning to the Candidates' matches: ECU President Silvio Danailov has weighed in with some criticisms.

Mike Truran
Posts: 2393
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2007 3:44 pm
Contact:

Re: Candidates Matches 3rd - 27th May 2011

Post by Mike Truran » Fri May 27, 2011 6:51 pm

Glad to see our glorious leaders getting on so well with each other - clearly keen not to let FIIFA hog all the headlines...... :lol:

Paul Cooksey

Re: Candidates Matches 3rd - 27th May 2011

Post by Paul Cooksey » Fri May 27, 2011 8:32 pm

I don't know if Danailov was motivated by political ambition as alleged. I suppose he might be lobbying for a different format because it favours Topalov.

But if they run an event like this again I certainly hope they adopt Sofia rules. The quick draws, sometimes in sharp positions, were really frustrating.

Mark Howitt
Posts: 829
Joined: Sat Nov 22, 2008 8:20 pm
Contact:

Re: Candidates Matches 3rd - 27th May 2011

Post by Mark Howitt » Fri May 27, 2011 8:48 pm

Of course I would support Adams or McShane if they were playing in any event. I'm just frustrated Adams isn't more motivated, at least at the moment! (I've actually said this before). Even though I care about chess less than I used to, I'm like a frustrated football fan wishing the team would win more.

LozCooper

Re: Candidates Matches 3rd - 27th May 2011

Post by LozCooper » Fri May 27, 2011 9:17 pm

Mark Howitt wrote:Of course I would support Adams or McShane if they were playing in any event. I'm just frustrated Adams isn't more motivated, at least at the moment! (I've actually said this before). Even though I care about chess less than I used to, I'm like a frustrated football fan wishing the team would win more.
On what do you base your opinion that Adams is not motivated at the moment?

Mark Howitt
Posts: 829
Joined: Sat Nov 22, 2008 8:20 pm
Contact:

Re: Candidates Matches 3rd - 27th May 2011

Post by Mark Howitt » Fri May 27, 2011 9:43 pm

Again you keep twisting my words- or simply not understanding them. I've said that I believe Adams is not 'AS MOTIVATED' as other top players to win the World Championship at the moment. I'm sure that other players didn't like the system (now that the event is over some of them are bitching about it) but they really believed they COULD win it, so they went along with it.

LozCooper

Re: Candidates Matches 3rd - 27th May 2011

Post by LozCooper » Fri May 27, 2011 10:43 pm

Mark Howitt wrote:Again you keep twisting my words- or simply not understanding them. I've said that I believe Adams is not 'AS MOTIVATED' as other top players to win the World Championship at the moment. I'm sure that other players didn't like the system (now that the event is over some of them are bitching about it) but they really believed they COULD win it, so they went along with it.
Why do you believe he is not "'AS MOTIVATED" I may be better placed to understand if you give a reason.

Mark Howitt
Posts: 829
Joined: Sat Nov 22, 2008 8:20 pm
Contact:

Re: Candidates Matches 3rd - 27th May 2011

Post by Mark Howitt » Sat May 28, 2011 10:24 am

Would like to point out I'm going to be doing less of these threads as it's so easy (and more fun) to make money in poker :).

It's easy to see what I mean by 'not as motivated' as the other top players to win the World Championship. If you don't want to play in events where you could qualify to win the World Championship you're not as motivated as people who do.

I'm actually only replying because something interesting's come to my attention... fascinating to see just how strong the 'seconds' the players have for these matches- many players over 2700! As far as I'm aware, Adams hasn't had a serious second in quite a while- two names I remember from back in the day were John Emms and Peter Wells. If Adams did want to compete in an event like this nowadays, would he want or able to get access to top quality seconds?

LozCooper

Re: Candidates Matches 3rd - 27th May 2011

Post by LozCooper » Sat May 28, 2011 10:57 am

Mark Howitt wrote:Would like to point out I'm going to be doing less of these threads as it's so easy (and more fun) to make money in poker :).

It's easy to see what I mean by 'not as motivated' as the other top players to win the World Championship. If you don't want to play in events where you could qualify to win the World Championship you're not as motivated as people who do.

I'm actually only replying because something interesting's come to my attention... fascinating to see just how strong the 'seconds' the players have for these matches- many players over 2700! As far as I'm aware, Adams hasn't had a serious second in quite a while- two names I remember from back in the day were John Emms and Peter Wells. If Adams did want to compete in an event like this nowadays, would he want or able to get access to top quality seconds?
Well he's motivated to play in the 2011 World Cup and hopefully he will be successful.

John Emms & Peter Wells are top quality seconds, Peter is very highly thought of by the current top England players and John also has a good reputation and is very experienced. There is nothing to stop him approaching these or other players/coaches although the funding of these would have to come from outside the ECF.

Mick Norris
Posts: 10328
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2007 10:12 am
Location: Bolton, Greater Manchester

Re: Candidates Matches 3rd - 27th May 2011

Post by Mick Norris » Sat May 28, 2011 12:33 pm

Back to the chess - well, sort of - Chessbase reports:

The questionnaire sent by GM Emil Sutovsky to the twenty top-rated players:

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,
Emil Sutovsky

Vladimir Kramnik, Paris (in a letter to Emil Sutovsky)

I personally prefer a round robin tournament, because it is more spectacular. In order to became a challenger (to win it) you have to play more agressively, it will make it interesting for spectators. Plus it will be a classical chess Candidates tournament, the winner will be the one who is the best in classical chess, not rapid or blitz. The only problem which should be solved than is a potential problem of buying (selling) games in such a tournament, but I believe it is not a major problem. Otherwise I think the double round robin is the best system.

If the match system is used, there must be definately six or even eight games matches, because otherwise most of the matches might be decided in rapid or blitz, like in Kazan, and it makes little sense because it is a classical chess championship. I believe the system used in Kazan was a failure because of this reason and also because short matches provoke players to play without any risk, which leads to big ammount of draws and not very interesting games.

Both variations are acceptable for me.

I believe a two years cycle is best, more often is difficult to organize and might devalueate the WCh title.
Any postings on here represent my personal views

Mark Howitt
Posts: 829
Joined: Sat Nov 22, 2008 8:20 pm
Contact:

Re: Candidates Matches 3rd - 27th May 2011

Post by Mark Howitt » Sat May 28, 2011 1:12 pm

Well I know who I'd prefer preparing me for a game with a 2700 player.... a 2700 player! Obviously at that level a similar level of player would know some key opening lines or have some useful information on the player in question- they would have probably have played against them a few times themselves. I don't see the other players plumping for players around 2500 ELO for this tournament and I would assume they were good at assessing a players assisting ability!

Paul Cooksey

Re: Candidates Matches 3rd - 27th May 2011

Post by Paul Cooksey » Sat May 28, 2011 1:16 pm

having the world's leading Grünfeld player on his team might have cost Grischuk the title :-)

LozCooper

Re: Candidates Matches 3rd - 27th May 2011

Post by LozCooper » Sat May 28, 2011 1:33 pm

Paul Cooksey wrote:having the world's leading Grünfeld player on his team might have cost Grischuk the title :-)
That'll teach him to employ 2700s :lol:

Post Reply