Dragnus Drawlsen vs Drawiano Drawuana

So whats a better format for tiebreaks than currently applied by fide?

i like 960, same time controls, but only after an initial series of draws,
instead of armageddon (??)

:)

How about starting the WC match with first 8 games of Crazyhouse, 8 games of Chess960, 8 games of 3-check, and if there's no decision yet, only then regular chess, all at rapido time controls. Win win for the world wide audience :)

More classical matches honestly. We already have other championships for rapid and blitz. Why declare a classical champion based on a rapid/blitz time format for a tie break. The real thing to look at here is the error to make it only 12 matches. I'm a huge fan of increasing the number of games and decreasing the time off in between as you get further into the matches. Example:
Day 1: Game 1
Day 2: Game 2
Day 3: Rest Day
Day 4: Game 3
Day 5: Game 4
Day 6: Game 5
Day 7: Rest Day
Day 8: Game 6
Day 9: Game 7
Day 10: Game 8
Day 11: Game 9
Day 12: rest day
Day 13: Game 10
Day 14: Game 11
Day 15: Game 12
Day 16: Game 13
Day 17: Game 14

You keep going with a stretch like this and you will see who functions better under stress and fatigue. But please please keep it to a classical type chess game.

Grischuk mentioned 960 as an alternative to the current tiebreak formula on the chess24 WCC game 12 stream today, and he talked about it with Svidler and Giri. Grischuk basically said: I haven't seen any logical arguments against it.

Regardless of what they do -- and I think 960 at classical time controls as a tie-break makes the most sense -- I think they should change the current format. Calling someone the world chess champion, when they attained the title based on winning in rapid or blitz time controls, doesn't seem logical to me. That's World Chess Rapid champion, or World Chess Blitz champion, not World Chess Champion.

Draw odds to one of the players.
Either the defending champion or (my preferred idea) to play the tie-breaks on the first day and give the winner draw odds.
In that way, the world championship would be guaranteed to be determined after a classical game.

They could remove the last rest day.

I would prefer if they continued playing classical games with slightly less time after the initial 12 games. They could apply the sudden death system. Each round would obviously consist of 2 games of course.

bit.ly/2RcCAH2

"After every game a decision has to be made. First, a tournament game, in case of a draw, rapid chess and, if necessary, blitz. Every day has a winner of the day. Who has 6 wins first wins the World Cup."

This is it.

@Episcopul before you suggest increasing the number of games, don't forget to remember KK-1984 :)
www.chess.com/article/view/clash-of-champions-kasparov-karpov

I recon the champion should just retain their title. It would make draw offers/acceptances on move 31 of game 12 much less likely.

That said, the fans get to see a bunch more games with the current format, even if the quality of play is diminished a little.

@gbtami this was a good read, thank you for that! I would have to say I'm still a fan of more games less days off as you progress. The difference here is that the match you reference is a first to 6 wins, here its first to a set number of points. If you do 14 games its 7.5 pts if you do 24 its 12.5 etc etc to win. So draws still make a difference when they didn't in KK-1984. So here, you cant just draw it out forever and ever to prevent frustrate your opponent into not playing as good. If they have a 4 pt advantage like Karpov did, Kasparov drawing would have made Karpov the winner. Its just a blend of old school rules and modern rules. All that being said, I'm no professional. I'm just trying to add ideas to the debate and maybe if I had been clearer in my original post it would make more sense.

Broken down what I would like to see is:
1) Lets say 24 possible games?
2) First to 12.5 or better wins (better because 13pts is possible as well)
3) Draws still count as 1/2pt for each player to prevent riding things forever like KK-1984
4) Maintain classical time controls

Now where does the debate continue from there?
What happens in the even of a 12-12 tie? be it all draws or a combinations of wins and ties that does it.

My suggestion is I believe borrowed from an old school rule as well:

5) In the event of a 12-12 draw the current world champion retains their title as long as their FIDE score remains higher than the challanger's FIDE score. If the challenger has a higher FIDE score, they become new World Chess Champion.

So lets say its all tied 11.5-11.5 going into game 24 and you're the world chess champion but your challenger has a higher FIDE score. You now know you HAVE to win this game to retain your title, you are more likely to take more risks and a draw become less likely. Or you draw and give up your title.

Now lets say its all tied 11.5-11.5 going into game 24 and you're the world chess champion but your challenger has a lower FIDE score than you. While you may still play for a draw knowing you will retain your title, the challenger would be more likely to play more risks. Knowing they don't win the title should they draw you can assume well I don't win if I lose either, so I have to play for the win to get the Title. The challenger needs to take more risks as well or pray for the blunder of all blunders from the current champion.

Bottom line, this makes the last game worth really fighting for. But this is just my opinion.

Thank you again for the great read!