1. The true Chess World Champions are the holders of the Traditional Title that originated with Steinitz & passed on in faithful succession to Lasker, Capablanca, Alekhine, Euwe, Botvinnik, Smyslov, Tal, Petrosian, Spassky, Fischer, Karpov, Kasparov, Kramnik, Anand, Carlsen, Ding, and Dukesh.

Regarding the last three, Carlsen abdicated. That is his right. In the past when Fischer abdicated the Title, it was then awarded to Karpov (in 1975) who won the 1974 Candidates, which was in a match format. There was no sense in having Karpov play another match with the player he beat in the final 1974 Candidates match (Korchnoi).

After Carlsen's abdication, the top two 2022 Candidates placers (in a tournament format) were Nepomniachtchi and Ding. In my opinion, there was sense in having them play a match, because they had not played a finals Candidates match, traditionally played by the most qualified top two players in the world. Ding won that match (the 2023 World Championship match) and thus won the WC Title fair and square.

The sacredness of this Title is what makes it so valuable. And how does one become the true Chess World Champion? In general, by beating the previous Titleholder one on one in a Match. Matches are preferred over Tournaments because of the Tradition of the WC Succession and because the chance for pre-arranging a Tournament result is more likely.

In case where the Candidates and World Champion participate in an event that all the participants agree to be a World Championship event because of extraordinary circumstances, then the new Titleholder is legitimate.

Thus, the 1948 World Championship Tournament (which Botvinnik won) was justifiable because of the death of the Title holder Alekhine.

Likewise, the 2007 WC Tournament was justifiable under the extraordinary circumstances of the Chessworld trying to heal its internal rift over the 1993 Kasparov Schism. Anand himself became the World Champion in this 2007 Tournament and not in 2000 when he won a knock-out FIDE Tournament. Caveat: Some chess fans deem the 2007 WC Tournament as illegitimate, considering that Anand became the World Champion only in 2008, when he beat the previous Titleholder Kramnik in a WC match. From this perspective Anand only became the Undisputed World Champion in 2008.

Karpov lost his Title to Kasparov in 1985, & never regained it in the 1990s events that FIDE labeled as 'world championships'. All solely FIDE Champions that emerged outside WC Traditional Succession elaborated on above, strong as they were, were not true World Champions (eg., Bogolyubov 1928, Khalifman 1999, Ponomariov 2002, Kasimdzhanov 2004, Topalov 2005).

2. My thoughts regarding the quick game tiebreakers for the World Championship Match:

i. Ideally the Champion must have beaten the old one to be Champion.

ii. I hate these FIDE quick game tie-breaks to decide the Classical Champion.

iii. The tiebreakers should be as fair as possible.

Notice that in the traditional Champion-retains-Title-in-a-tie, all the Champion needs is a tied match to retain his Title. Advantage Champion.

My recommendation is we give more Whites to the Challenger. Advantage Challenger.

So things even out.

We still retain the tradition of the Challenger beating the Champ to get the Title.

The Challenger gets to do it in a classical game, not a quick game.

Thus suggestion if the World Championship match ends in a tie:

Additional classical games with a limit, wherein the Challenger receives more Whites. If the Champion manages to tie or win at the end, he retains the Title.

Thus the tiebreaker can be one extra White game for the Challenger. Or two, three, or four. Concretely, say two additional games. Challenger gets to play all two Whites. He has to win all two additional games as Whites. Or win one White and draw his remaining White game. If the score is tied after two games, the Titleholder retains the World Championship. We could even vary further, say one Black followed by one to three Whites for the Challenger. Studies can be made in order to determine the best specific format (of Blacks and Whites) that can afford the Challenger a fair chance at winning.

IMO this would probably be welcomed by most of the chess world in terms of the sporting excitement it affords. Here we have the Challenger; forced to try all means to win in classical games against a sitting Champion that only needs to draw all the tiebreak games. A real drama at the end of the match. If the match still ends in a tie, the Champion retains his Title, and deservedly so since he got more Blacks.