FIDE Grand Swiss 2019 (Candidates qualifier)

[Mick Norris]

FIDE

Will be interesting to see where this ends up taking place

FIDE informs about additional qualification path to the Candidates 2020 - FIDE Grand Swiss.

Consequently, FIDE removes one qualification spot from the rating quota and passes it to Grand Swiss qualifier based on the understanding with World Chess.

The bids for the event are to be sent before February 9, 2019 to [email protected].

[Chris Rice]

FIDE

Will be interesting to see where this ends up taking place

FIDE informs about additional qualification path to the Candidates 2020 - FIDE Grand Swiss.

Consequently, FIDE removes one qualification spot from the rating quota and passes it to Grand Swiss qualifier based on the understanding with World Chess.

The bids for the event are to be sent before February 9, 2019 to [email protected].

Love the idea of bringing back the Interzonal! Here's the Chess24 write up.

[Mick Norris]

Funnily enough, Biel 1993 came immediately to mind with me (assuming my memory is correct a quarter of a century later, and that's the one I was at)

[NickFaulks]

105 players. Wouldn't an even number be better?

[Roger de Coverly]

105 players. Wouldn't an even number be better?

It appears local organisers can have wildcards.

FIDE have had difficulty in finding organisers and sponsors for the World Cup. This would seem an event of similar length and possibly greater cost.

It's the wrong timing for Gibraltar, but is the Isle of Man in the frame? For "tourist" interest, run a "B" section alongside.

Concepts of an "all play all" and "knockout" are commonplace in sports. The "Swiss" system of a hybrid between the two is something of a chess speciality. Arguably Kirsan was completely wrong to discard it as an integral part of chess world championships.

[Richard Bates]

Is not 11 rounds arguably too short for a tournament with this purpose?

[Mick Norris]

Is not 11 rounds arguably too short for a tournament with this purpose?

Yes, particularly with only 1 qualifying spot available

[Roger de Coverly]

Yes, particularly with only 1 qualifying spot available

When it was 11 round and a similar sized field, the British Championship managed to produce a single winner more often than not. But then there was often just one player a class better than the rest.

[NickFaulks]

Is not 11 rounds arguably too short for a tournament with this purpose?

I would say that 11 rounds is fine. What is vital is that there must be a properly devised playoff system, with at least a full day set aside for it. Two would be better.

[J T Melsom]

What besides novelty is the real objective here? We discussed in one of the world championship threads whether the candidates itself was the best way to determine a challenger for the match play format to follow. Will the Swiss provide a winner who is ready for the challenge of the candidates, and will they be more ready than the person who will lose out by one spot on the places allocated on ranking? Why isn't the best way to find a challenger for match play not to have more of the cycle as match play?

[Ian Thompson]

Why isn't the best way to find a challenger for match play not to have more of the cycle as match play?

The answer may well be because no-one is willing to cover the costs of more match play, so it's not an option.

[Roger de Coverly]

What besides novelty is the real objective here?

It gives a relatively open slot for a player to qualify for the Candidates. The World Cup does that as well but introduces the randomness of a knock out format.

A Candidates determined by match play has the same disadvantage as seen in the World Championship, namely a drawn match at regular time controls with the winner determined by the better rapid or blitz player. Kazan a few years back put everyone off. Fischer's objection to a tournament format, namely collusion dictated by a powerful federation or state establishment was discounted.

[J T Melsom]

Ian

Well yes I realise affordability is a factor, but why is the winner of a Swiss a worthy participant in the Candidates? Better than a wild-card possibly, but better than the player missing out on ranking? Is it hoped that the swiss might be won by a rising star, thereby getting experience of the world cycle earlier than might otherwise be the case?

[Roger de Coverly]

why is the winner of a Swiss a worthy participant in the Candidates?

I thought the theory was to invite as many of the top 100 as agreed to play. The winner of an 11 round Swiss against that class of field is clearly worthy of something. In a universe where international titles worked the same way as domestic ones, the title would be "world champion". I would have thought a likely winner would be someone at least in the top 20, if not the top 10 or top 5.

[J T Melsom]

But if the winner is already a Candidate then you have a bit of a mess. It is a bit like the situation where guest players are invited to play in national competitions to boost the strength of the event and the scores against them impact the determination of the winner. And being 'worthy of something' isn't really an answer to whether this person should be in the candidates? I'm sure if half the places in the candidates were awarded to the winners of top grade events (Swiss or APA) that already exist that would be too radical for most but that's potentially the direction of travel.