Talk:FIDE World Chess Championship 2007
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[edit] Match vs. Tournament?
Shouldn't this article detail the original announced structure of the event (series of matches starting 10/06), and the controversy surronding FIDE's fiat in changing the structure in mid-course? Gelfand's protest, e.g. Billbrock 17:45, 30 September 2006 (UTC)
- Sounds good to me! BlueValour 22:54, 13 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Kramnik/Topalov loser left out?
Will the loser of the current Kramnik-Topalov match not be able to reclaim the title next year at all? It seems very odd if the tournament will include all the best players in the world except for the second best. Maybe I have misunderstood the article? -- Jao 20:51, 5 October 2006 (UTC)
- You understand correctly. It's a bizarre and very flawed system that FIDE has implemented. SubSeven 07:12, 8 October 2006 (UTC)
- I think the problem is not necessarily FIDE's fault but rather that Kramnik refused to partake in the FIDE system until now. If Kramnik has participated in 2005 then Topalov would likely be the runner up and everything would be fine. But unfortunately given that Kramnik did not participate and only agreed to the reunification match, it would have been kind of unfair to the other competitors to kick one of them out. If Kramnik takes part in the 2007 series then things will get a bit better. By the time of the next series (2009?) Topalov should have made it back to the FIDE Championship (although not automatically) and assuming they are still both second best and best will probably be meeting in the final. Really this all is part of the mess that Kasparov created when he refused to participate and isn't really FIDE's fault. We can at least be glad Kramnik won tho. One can imagine the total mess it would have been if he had lost Nil Einne 13:00, 14 October 2006 (UTC)
- I am not certain that Topalov won't be added. Without Topalov the event will lose some credibility. I suspect that the last word hasn't been said on this. Anyone feeling deeply pessimistic can dwell on the consequences of Kramnik losing in 2007. Since he will have lost in a tournament and not a match it is very unlikely, but not impossible, that he will claim still to be the Classical champion! BlueValour 19:51, 14 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Kramink's title
FIDE describe Kramnik as World Chess Champion 2006 and I think that's the title we should use here. References to 'undisputed' etc are relevant to the 2006 tourney but not needed from here on. BlueValour 22:56, 13 October 2006 (UTC)
