I was led to believe that this is a chess forum.
Speaking of volleyball. . . .
No, it’s not. Randy was responding to a question posed at the beginning of the the thread, about simply naming the highest rated player the World Champion with no match; IIRC (I admit, I was lazy and did not go back and look) Randy noted that FIDE ratings are lifetime accumulations - which poses one set of issues with naming a CURRENT World Champion based on a rating - and then noted that an approach like that in NASCAR would possibly be more appropriate; he specifically noted that NASCAR appeared to be closer to what was being argued, but that it was still considerably different from FIDE ratings.
So, if I understand your comments correctly, your comments have not changed Randy’s point at all. Thanks for the enjoyable rant though, although it may have had more import if you had understood Randy’s comments.
. .
She already has the title of the currently highest rated female player.
Analyzed by basic empiricism, your recommendation is nothing more than a confusing obfuscated way of saying -
“World Chess Championship matches should be discontinued, no more such matches (thus of course discard the whole cycle too)”.
. .
Judith Polgar has a higher rating than the present women’s world champion, Hou Yifan.
It looks like Carlsen @ 2861 might be a shoe in for the world chess champion title.
So, you’ll give me 50-1 odds on a $10 bet? After all, if Carlsen is a stone lock to win, the $10 is free money for you.
The list of players who were great, in the top 5 in their eras, but who did not win the title of world champion is a who’s who of chess: Akiba Rubinstein, Aron Nimzovich, Paul Keres, Reuben Fine, Sammy Reshevsky, Bent Larsen, Lajos Portisch, and a number of Russian titans like Bronstein, Beliavsky, Gelfand, Geller, Yusupov, Shirov. High rating alone does not carry the day. Being part of the process of world championship competition is grueling, and not necessarily lucrative. For reasons of opportunity, character, money, or just plain luck, many of these players did not mount a successful challenge for the crown. I do, however, give them credit for their bravery and will to push the rock up the hill even knowing the difficulty of the obstacles before them. Carlsen has yet to show the willingness to fight. He has deliberately sat on the sidelines, pouting and waiting for someone to throw money at him. He might have to wait forever as bold, eager young players come up all the time.
Um, that almost never works.
Just look at the crosstable for almost any two- (or more) section tournament where there is a cutoff at 1800. Look at the players rated 1700-1799 who played in the under-1800 section, and those who played in the 1800+ section. Compare the rating gains / losses between those two groups of 1700-1799 players.
Bill Smythe
There is at least one player that I know of who plays a couple of rated games against 1000 level rated players per year to keep his name on the rating lists. Over the last couple of decades he has not played in a regular tournament but added 50+ points to his USCF master rating. So yes, bunny bashing is possible. Good for business, too.
I believe that to be world champion you need to beat the world champion in a match!
This may soon be reality…
Perhaps, But Anand seems to be playing some of the best chess of his career right
now. Perhaps the “bells” that some considered the ending of an error, were in reality
the new Anand “train” roaring down the track??
I know this, the man successfully defended his world championship now, what, 4x??
Others may bet against him, but not I.
Ron Jones
…
Carlsen is in clear 1st
I guess Kramnik, Vladimir wants his world title back!!!
Kramnik is now clear first, Carlsen looks tired. 2 games left.
But if Kramnik gets a tie within the next 2 rounds we could maybe see a tiebreak between Carlsen and Kramnik…
Unlikely, as a tie-break is only a last resort. The first tie-breaker is the head-to-head result, followed by most wins, and then Sonnegorn-Berger. Only if all three tie-breaks are equal will it go to tie-break games.
If Carlsen draws while Kramnik loses, then both will have an equal # of wins, and it will go to the 3rd tie-break (SB), which is up in the air but looks like a slight advantage for Carlsen. If Carlsen wins while Kramnik draws, then Carlsen will have more wins than Kramnik and will win on the second tie-break.
Tomorrow decides who wins the Candidate’s. If both players are tied after tomorrow then what happens?