FICGS WCh results summary updated


Back to forum

Peter W. Anderson    (2014-06-23)
FICGS WCh results summary updated!238&app=WordPdf

I'll update this every six months or so.

Alvin Alcala    (2014-06-23 19:01:04)
FICGS WCh results summary updated

Cool! keep it up :)

Garvin Gray    (2014-06-24 05:17:57)
FICGS WCh results summary updated

Sorry to bring up an old topic, but it does show again that Eros Riccio has not actually won the World Championship match since the 4th cycle. All he has done is drawn the match.

The final match rules really do need to be re-written to make it more of a contest so the winner actually has to win the match.

It is thoroughly ridiculous that any one person is still champion after four drawn matches, without having won any of them. In some of them, not even winning a single game, IIRC.

Neel Basant    (2014-06-25 06:12:07)
FICGS WCh results summary updated

I agree with Garvin.
Need to do something which will result interesting championship not boring and drawed one.

Nick Burrows    (2014-06-25 17:11:51)
FICGS WCh results summary updated

Indeed, if a top player wants to draw a game he can. Therefore possession becomes 9/10 of the law. Analogous to the otb candidates - Should the final be an all play all??

Timofey Denisov    (2014-07-03 00:37:10)
FICGS WCh results summary updated

Maybe just increase number of games in final match, for sample, to 24? (as in old live chess championships)?

Thibault de Vassal    (2014-07-04 02:03:32)
FICGS WCh results summary updated

Garvin, it seems to me that this is only a question of definition: you win a chess game if you can take the king, or if your opponent runs out of time, or... and you win a championship if you fill certain conditions. Kramnik retained his title by this 7-7 against Leko in 2004 because it was defined this way. The question to know if it is ridiculous or not seems quite subjective.

@Timofey: 24 games would be a huge load of work. 12 games is quite a lot already and I'm not sure it would change anything. For example, Eros explained why he offered a draw in a probably winning position. Finally, we could change everything and make another ICCF but would it be useful or interesting when it already exists?

Timofey Denisov    (2014-07-08 08:19:31)
FICGS WCh results summary updated

Maybe, "revolving system"? For sample, first simultaneously start 12 games, but next game will start after end one of these games, etc until all games of this match started.

It will not huge load of work, but will give much more concurrency :)

Garvin Gray    (2014-07-08 17:01:05)
FICGS WCh results summary updated

Timofey: That format could result in more short draws as the players see it as a way to get through the early games faster.

The better format would be to have it as 12 games, but if one player is ahead after eight games have been concluded, the match is over.

The second idea would be to play an eight game match, and then if the result is 4-4, another four games are played.

That would encourage both players in the first eight games to try and win more games as they would know that agreeing to short draws does not shorten the match length, in fact it could lengthen it.

Garvin Gray    (2014-07-08 17:04:32)
FICGS WCh results summary updated

Thib, I know you are going to defend the status quo on everything. That is what you do. You do it on everything, so I have pretty much lost interest in trying to change or improve things around here.

The site with either live or die as is. I am finishing up my games and then seeing what happens. My participation is coming to an end. I am finding it has stagnated overall in terms of site progression, ideas and overall administration.

It has become stale for ideas and the format is dead. Time to move on me thinks.

Timofey Denisov    (2014-07-08 18:48:30)
FICGS WCh results summary updated

Timofey: That format could result in more short draws as the players see it as a way to get through the early games faster

Really? Why people in Final match will do short draws, when if result of match is draw Champion keeps his title?
This is very nonprofitable to Candidate.

Thibault de Vassal    (2014-07-11 01:01:06)
FICGS WCh results summary updated

Starting games one after another will take... years! 4 more games after the first 8 ones is 8 months more.

Garvin, I'm not defending the status quo to do nothing at all (even if it's ok for me from times to times), I really think that things are better as they are, even if there are many problems mainly due to the lack of players. Well, nowadays the curb of new players is going the right way, I hope this is only a start.

Peter W. Anderson    (2014-07-13 10:54:56)
FICGS WCh results summary updated

I have given the question of the format of the WCh matches a lot of thought.

There is no doubt that having the advantage of the draw is a huge advantage at correspondence chess, much more so than at normal chess, simply because the draw rate is so high amongst strong correpondence players.

However, there are disadvantages to other formats. It is true that a tournament final gives a better chance of having a new champion. But the outcome is dependent upon the results of players who are not necesarrily fighting hard for the prize (perhaps they have an early loss, perhaps other parts of their lives become too busy). You might hope that in the final this would not happen, but if you look closely at the games in the round robin finals you will see some strange results, clearly drawn games being lost etc. If it can happen in the round robin final it could happen in a championship final.

Having more games in the final is a very logical option. However, as Thib has pointed out, this will create a big workload. It would make it almost impossible for a serious challenger to enter consecutive championships without having to withdraw from later ones if they reached the final (this is already very difficult witouht more games!).

Another option would be an advanced chess play-off. I would be concerned that this would be too dependant on who had the biggest hardware with less chance for human skill.

Finally, there is the chance to decide a tied match with a toss of a coin. Not a great way of picking a champion.

This problem is not so much an issue with the format as with the game itself - chess is almost certainly drawn with sensible play and as engines get stronger it is going to become harder and harder to win games.

All in all, I think the current format is very reasonable, perhaps the best.

One final observation re Neel's comment that a top player can draw a game if he wants. Perhaps, and if this is 100% true then the draw problem is realy severe. However, I am a little more hopeful. Eros Riccio sometimes beats even very strong players playing the same openings he plays - it is not as if the openings he plays are guaranteed draws in practice. He finds ways of putting them under pressure and sometimes they make a mistake. Perhaps eventually he will do so too (we may have to wait for him to get old!). Or to put another way, chess is almost certainly drawn but it is not an easy draw even at correspondence if white plays really well!