but, my main point is that the standings were fairly close in the end which kept the drama, but sometimes i like to see that runaway horse---performances like Carlsen has winning a tournament with a round to spare and basically telling the opponents catch me if you can on the crosstable

so, that special aura (how do you spell that word) a person creates in chess was missing as all the players had ups and downs, nobody clearly running away with it

didn't mamed lose the final round? another big surprise

oh well chess world today i guess

I wish Magnus would change his mind and compete for the FIDE crown in the matches and all, but i doubt that will transpire

and we can still see him play otherwise

I have to say no. A dozen other players could have won it. GM Ponomariov is a very strong chess player, but off hand I can give the names of nearly a dozen others who I believe are stronger than him.

It's why the titles that FIDE gave to winners of two-rounder KOs are disputed. People who deserve it more are unlucky and get KO'd. In addition, people who have won the same FIDE tournament format recently are not given the honorary title. For instance, Gelfand has just won a tournament with the exact format as the FIDE KO champions won (the World Cup); so why is he not 'world champion' too? Frankly I think he deserves it more than Pono, especially as he beat Pono himself to win it.

Thats exactly why its a lottery.>

A short match may also be considered a lottery. That's why Fischer wanted longer matches (<The unlimited match favors the better player.>)

So those who are "risk aversive people" adapt formats to 'what they think is perfect' while "risk takers" don't much care of format.

Chess champion is a tradition, and it "intrigues, hardship, politics, corruption, story, etc" which all the champions [in some way or another] went through.

The element of luck will definitely be stronger in short matches. I do hope that in the next WC cycle, the Candidates matches would be longer, say 8 to 12 games.