< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 1 OF 477 ·
|Jul-05-07|| ||preybird: So, let me get this straight. If Kramnik wins, he must play Topalov in a rematch. If Kramnik loses, he plays the winner of Mexico for his title. Is that right?|
|Jul-05-07|| ||fgh: Second! Yes, you are right.|
|Jul-05-07|| ||SniperOnG7: Third! :P|
|Jul-05-07|| ||weisyschwarz: It makes no sense that Kramnik is there. Basically he takes up the spot of another possible candidate.|
|Jul-05-07|| ||ThunderStorm: Fifth :(|
|Jul-05-07|| ||chessmoron: This is qualification tournament IMO. If Kramnik wins, he must wait for the winner Topalov vs World Cup 2007 winner. If Kramnik loses, he will get a rematch against the Mexico winner. If Kramnik wins the rematch, the winner of Topalov vs World Cup 2007 winner is next as well.|
|Jul-05-07|| ||vascobardo: You're all wrong. From the home page:
"Eight players compete in Mexico City for the right to challenge Kramnik for the world title. The players are: Anand, Svidler, Morozevich, Leko, Gelfand, Aronian, Grischuk, and Kramnik. Discussion forum now open."
Therefore, if Kramnik wins, he must play... Kramnik!
(I predict a draw, you heard it here first).
|Jul-05-07|| ||weisyschwarz: LOL at <vascobardo>. I say kick Kramnik out of Mexico City, and put someone else in his place. One vote for Ivanchuk.|
|Jul-05-07|| ||Sneaky: The worst part of Kramnik participating is that he could intentionally throw games in order to manipulate the final standings. I'm not saying that Kramnik would actually do that, but the mere fact that it is a possibility means that the system stinks to high heaven.|
|Jul-05-07|| ||Petrosianic: >>
I'm not saying that Kramnik would actually do that, but the mere fact that it is a possibility means that the system stinks to high heaven.
For that matter, ANYONE could do that. Remember the last round situation at Sofia, and imagine that that was a World Championship. Player A is in first but Player B can catch him if he beats Player C (who needs a win to get out of last place).
Topalov needs Adams to Win or Draw, but from Adams' point of view, only a Win gets him out of last place. The game is of little importance to him otherwise, even though it's going to determine the "World Champion".
So if Player C likes B better than A, he might drop the game. Or be paid to drop the game. Or even if he tries to play it fair, he might make wild, unjustified winning attempts to get himself out of the cellar, end up losing a game that he easily could have drawn, and result in a tie for first. People would blame him, and act like he should have tried harder to hold the game since the championship depended on it, but he'd be doing what any tournament player should be doing: attending to his own place in the scoretable.
The danger is heightened with events like San Luis, where the first four were seeded into Mexico, but the last four had to start lower. So a person for whom a win might get him into the top 4, but a loss and a draw wouldn't, might make wild winning attempts, that boomerang and give the title to someone else. The first time the title was ever decided that way, everyone would see the problems inherent in a tournament championship, though it would be too late then.
|Jul-05-07|| ||trapdor: Drawnik will not win, because he simply cannot. It's double round robin and one has to be a little bit wild to win.|
|Jul-05-07|| ||vascobardo: "Drawnik" is seriously wild, dude.
|Jul-05-07|| ||vascobardo: You should see him with alcohol around.
|Jul-05-07|| ||vascobardo: He'll triple round robin you.|
|Jul-05-07|| ||yalie: While what Petrosianic says is possible, I think he misses the point that the conflict of interest is most acute with Kramnik since he has the opportunity to influence who his opponent will be.|
|Jul-05-07|| ||Petrosianic: No, I don't miss that point, I'm simply saying that the whole idea of a tournament to choose a world champion is wrong-headed. That it may be even more wrong-headed to do it with Kramnik in may be true, but it's a case of Dumb and Dumber.|
|Jul-05-07|| ||vascobardo: you could of course also say it's a case of Fide and Fider.|
|Jul-05-07|| ||THE pawn: I still don't understand why Kramnik is here. Give his place to Ivanchuk!|
I don't think Kramnik will manipulate the standings, he's too proud to do that, but as <sneaky> said, when a title and $$$ is in play, there is always a chance that you might enjoy a ...«certain» type of opponent more than another.
|Jul-05-07|| ||chessmoron: Kramnik shouldn't be in here. Topalov should be here with Anand, Svidler, Morozevich, Leko, Gelfand, Aronian, Grischuk. The winner of Mexico challenges Kramnik for the title in a match. |
<The pawn> Although Chucky is soaring in the standings in 2007, but FIDE looks at 2005 World Cup and the San Luis candidates so Chucky can't be placed here.
Here's why FIDE World Cup (2005)/Vassily Ivanchuk. Lost to Ivan Cheparinov in the second round.
|Jul-05-07|| ||NakoSonorense: Twentieth!
|Jul-05-07|| ||WannaBe: I second what my friend <NakoaSonorense> said: Go Anand! =)|
|Jul-06-07|| ||tal lover: Im hoping for a really good tournment for Morozevich, I really enjoy his style. Go Moro!!!|
|Jul-06-07|| ||Viking55803: Ivanchuk, Ivanchuk!|
|Jul-06-07|| ||SwitchingQuylthulg: I guess that either Kramnik will win or it will be close between Aronian and Anand, Anand eventually winning because Kramnik drops his games against him, much preferring him to Aronian as a match opponent ;-)|
|Jul-06-07|| ||rookattack: i dont quite agree with the term 'drawnik'. perhaps,kramnik is a defrensive player and a very good one at that, but i think in recent times(sparkassen and the rapid match against leko and aronian)many of his matches have endeed in a result|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 1 OF 477 ·