TalkChess.com

https://en.chessbase.com/post/proposal- ... hip-format

I believe that if the match ends up is draws after 12 games like it did Carlsen vs Caruana last year, they should decide it in FRChess960 at Normal time control NOT Blitz games, but again in two more years it might be GM So the challenger

That prologue stuff is pointless. Just do 12 classic games, and if it's 6:6 afterwards, the player with the higher Elo is declared winner. That's equivalent.

Ras wrote: ↑Mon Nov 04, 2019 10:42 pm That prologue stuff is pointless. Just do 12 classic games, and if it's 6:6 afterwards, the player with the higher Elo is declared winner. That's equivalent.

My thoughts exactly, that's what they do at FICGS and it has translated into five consecutive championships resulting in 100% draws.

Why not the player with lower elo? If you're really superior, you should prove it, not use your superiority to force draws.

Chessqueen wrote: ↑Mon Nov 04, 2019 10:29 pm https://en.chessbase.com/post/proposal- ... hip-format

I believe that if the match ends up is draws after 12 games like it did Carlsen vs Caruana last year, they should decide it in FRChess960 at Normal time control NOT Blitz games, but again in two more years it might be GM So the challenger

I like this 960 tiebreak idea quite a bit. Any proposal that favors one player or the other based on prior rating is just ridiculous. Just plays pairs of 960 games as a tiebreak, perhaps at a somewhat faster pace than standard to allow both to be played in one day, until someone wins a two game match (this assumes a 6-6 tie in the main event).