Besides traditional super strong tournaments (like Wijk aan Zee, Linares-Morelia, MTel Masters and Dortmund) we now have a new series of super tournaments (6 tournaments) which are part of the next World championship cycle.

The Grand prix winner will play against World Cup 2009 winner for the right to challenge the reigning World champion for the title.



The initial qualifiers were as follows:


1. Matches (players that are "still in the game" in the current World championship cycle)

- Viswanathan Anand (the reigning World Champion)
- Vladimir Kramnik (former World champion and the first challenger - Kramnik will play Anand in October 2008)
- Veselin Topalov (former FIDE World champion)
- Gata Kamsky (winner of World Cup 2007)

Kamsky and Topalov will play (probably) in Bulgaria in November-December 2008 for the right to challenge the winner of Anand-Kramnik match for the title (probably in September or October 2009).


2. World Cup 2007

- Alexei Shirov - runner-up
- Magnus Carlsen - semi-finalist
- Sergey Karjakin - semi-finalist


3. Rating list (Average of Jan2007 and Oct2007 rating lists)

- Vassilly Ivanchuk (2768.5)
- Shakriyar Mamedyarov (2753)
- Peter Leko (2752)
- Alexander Morozevich (2748)
- Levon Aronian (2742.5)
- Teimur Radjabov (2735.5)
- Boris Gelfand (2734.5)

- Michael Adams (2732) - 1st reserve
- Peter Svidler (2730) - 2nd reserve
- Judit Polgar (2717.5) - 3rd reserve
- Alexander Grischuk (2717) - 4th reserve


4. President nominee

FIDE president can nominate one player from the latest top 40 rating list. Kirsan (- the president) chose Peter Svidler as his nominee.

If any players from 1. decline (which is what happened), the president can fill their places.



5. Host city nominees

Each of the host cities can nominate one player who has a rating of at least 2550. The nominess are as follows:

- Vugar Gashimov (2665) - nominated by Baku, Azerbaijdzan
- Dmitry Jakovenko (2720) - nominated by Soci, Russia
- Mohamad Al Modiakhi (2569) - nominated by Doha, Qatar
- Yannick Pelletier (2600) - nominated by Montreux, Switzerland
- Ernesto inarkiev (2681) - nominated by Elista, Russia
- David Navara (2680) - nominated by Karlovy Vary, Czech Republic



Players that declined to participate

With the exception of Gata Kamsky, all players from 1. (Anand, Kramnik, Topalov) refused to participate (probably they all plan to win all their matches and thus participating in the cycle automatically as World champion - at least two of them will regret their decision )
As a result the FIDE president could nominate three more players (he already picked Svidler). He chose:

- Ivan Cheparinov (2713)
- Etiene Bacrot (2700)
- Wang Yue (2698)


From other qualifiers Alexei Shirov and Alexander Morozevich refused to participate so the two reserves from the rating list had to be called in. First reserves were Michael Adams and Peter Svidler, but because Svidler was already nominated by the FIDE president the next reserve - Judit Polgar was called in. Judit also refused so Alexander Grischuk took the final place.



GRAND PRIX

The Final list of participants and the schedule of the Grand prix tournaments. Each tournament will be a 13 round-robin tournament. Every participant will play in 4 of the 6 Grand prix tournament. The point structure of the Grand prix tournaments is as follows:



In case of ties, the points will be split equally. The overall winner of the Grand Prix will be the one who will score the most number of cumulative points. The cumulative score will be calculated from the best three results for each player. As already stated, the overall Grand prix winner will play against World Cup 2009 winner for the right to challenge the World champion (official regulations)



Other ways to be part in the World championship cycle

Everybody that didn't qualify for Grand prix (or refused to participate) still have a chance to fight for the world champion title. The World Cup (128 player knock-out tournament) will be held in November-December 2009 and, as said before, the World cup winner plays the Grand prix winner.

Note: There is no reason that a player who participated in Grand prix can't participate in World cup too.



----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



2008/2009 FIDE Grand Prix

1st Grand Prix tournament in Baku, Azerbaijan
2nd Grand Prix tournament in Sochi, Russia
3rd Grand Prix tournament in Elista, Russia
4th Grand Prix tournament in Nalchik, Russia
5th Grand Prix tournament in Jermuk, Armenia

For overall Grand Prix standings click here.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: ebutaljib,

Thanks for explaining! This makes things a bit clearer (at least for me).

However, this system still seems overly long and complex. When so many of the best players decline to participate, that's a sure sign that changes to the system are needed.

As I'm a relative neophyte to professional chess, how was this cycle handled in the past?

Since 1950's until 1993 when Kasparov split the chess world there was a 3 year cycle. First the zonal tournaments, then Inter-zonals, followed by the Candidates tournament. Later, after complains (mostly from Fischer) that the Soviet players are drawing against each other and play "full throtle" against the rest of the world, the Candidates tournament was replaced with knock-out matches - Candidates matches. The winner of the Candidates tournament/matches then challenged the World champion in a match. If the champion lost, the re-match was played next year (the re-match rule was abolished in 1960-3 cycle, but reinstated back in the 1980's)


Read more on this excellent page

http://www.mark-weeks.com/chess/wcc-indx.htm

You can see the results from zonals, interzonals,etc - everything!

i actually didn't understand it before, i imagined it less complicated, though. now i'm thoroughly confused, and will have to re-read this a few times.

Well, I can understand Kirsan being able to nominate a player, but the fact that host cities are allowed to nominate players -- that makes no sense whatsoever...

But don't take too much time, because the chances are that they will change everything before you work it all out

quote:

Originally posted by KHollister:
Well, I can understand Kirsan being able to nominate a player, but the fact that host cities are allowed to nominate players -- that makes no sense whatsoever...

Commercial reasons. It would be hard to find sponsors for tournaments where there is no local player competing.

Interview with Topalov where he explains (among others) why he doesn't take part in Grand Prix.

I really enjoyed the interview... but I think Topalov's statements are somewhat contradictory. He said the system was too long and too big of a commitment (since one has to guarantee playing in four tournaments); but before that, he said it was a stable system.

I did notice that there's no love lost between Topalov and Kramnik -- or even Kasparov, for that matter.

The system is as stable as FIDE is, and FIDE isn't stable at all (in the meantime they "did it" again with the Women world championship - 3 months before the tournament they change the venue). So you'll never know how things will turn out. If this Grand prix and World Cup system will be used like it says on the paper, then all players will get used to it and will accept it, and thus the system will be stable as it was in the past. But if they will change something again... I think everybody should be satisfied with this system because it's a mixture of every other system we had. Tournaments (Grand prix), short KO matches with faster time controls (World Cup) and long standard matches (challenger match and World championship match).

In the past 15 years there have been constant changes, many times even during the cycle. It is understandable that many players refused to participate because they couldn't prepare for the events in advance, and even if they did, they didn't know if it will really come something out of it or not, because someone could change the rules in the meantime.

In other sports the venues and dates of big events like world championships are known at least at the beginning of the season if not years in advance. Everybody knows exactly what he/she has to do to qualify for the championship and what the format of competition is going to be. In chess they keep on changing the format, time controls, everything. Until we have this stabillity in chess, it is going to be as it is. The most disturbing statement in that interview is when Topalov says (about his possible match with Kramnik) that three things must happen. First two are obvious, he must beat Kamsky and Kramnik has to beat Anand, but the third ("we have to sign a contract with him [Kramnik], to play a match. Given the relations between us, this will not be an easy thing.") is unimaginable in other sports. Imagine that Federer and Nadal would win their semi-finals and would then say that they won't play the final of Wimbledon because of this and that So for chess sake I hope Anand wins. He was never someone who would be involved in chess politics and he never requested some special status like other players did (hell he even agreed that in case of a tie, the rapid tie-breaks are played in his match against Kramnik. I'm 100% sure that Kramnik, and most other players, would have never agreed to this).


It's a shame that Topalov won't participate in Grand prix, but it is understandable. His manager, Danailov, is the main figure behind the Grand slam tournaments (Wijk ann Zee, Morelia-Linares, M-Tel Sofia, Dortmund, Ciudad de Mexico and final tournament of the winners). The negotiations for these series started before anything was known about Grand Prix. So of course Topalov obligated himself to play in Grand slam tournaments. The dates aren't really overlapping but it would really be too much if he would play in Grand slam and Grand prix, plus the matches inbetween. He would go insane



I think the relationship between Kramnik and Topalov will never improve (as with Karpov and Korchnoi). I don't think he has anything against Kasparov, and I agree with him. Everything was concentrated around Kasparov - he was the ultimate chess superstar (not undeservingly). Now the attention is more equally distributed. It was really probably like this, that the potential sponsors first asked if Kasparov will play before deciding to sponsor a tournament or not.

True... it seems that FIDE changes things far too often. It's much too complex for many people to follow.

Topalov's condtions about a possible match with Kramnik make it clear that it will never happen.

I will agree that I would like to see Anand win. Not only is he extremely intelligent; he's also very amiable -- not at all arrogant, like others. Given that, how can someone not want to wish him well?

As to his comments about Kasparov, I think the interviewer twisted the question -- he started asking about Kasparov's suggestions to improve FIDE's system, but then changed the question to "Do you miss Garry?"

Still, I would have to agree with Topalov's answer. For quite some time, all the attention was on Kasparov (much like it was on Bobby Fischer during the 1970s). Now everyone is getting the credit they are due.

The only problem is, when some sports lose a superstar, they also lose a lot of followers. Depending on how you look at things, that could be a good thing, too... because the remaining fans are generally smarter and more passionate about the sport.

If anyone is interested, here is a correspondence that is going on between Kamsky (and his representatives) and FIDE about the Topalov - Kamsky match.

http://www.chessarrabal.blogspot.com/

(you have to read from the bottom to read as it happened in chronological order - ignore the first two articles in Spanish and French)



If Roustam (Gata's father) is going to keep butting in, the match isn't going to happen. He still didn't overcome the USSR oppression and is overly paranoid, everybody - FIDE, Russians, Bulgarians even USCF and american media are against him and his son. He makes some good points in his posts to FIDE, but boy does he have some serious issues.

And the saga continues

http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=4562

Wow...

The behavior of Kamsky's representatives (especially his father) is appalling. I've seen pre-schoolers act more civilly...

Frankly, how Kamsky's people can claim that FIDE is showing favoritism toward Topalov is beyond me. They're bending all the rules so Kamsky can get what he wants. If I were a member of the Bulgarian Chess Federation, I'd be upset, too.

The bad thing is that professional chess gets more negative press, and fans have to put up with politics, instead of good games.

Well, what do you expect from a man (Roustam Kamsky) who threatened Nigel Short with death during the 1994 PCA semi-final candidate matches?

http://www.chessninja.com/dailydirt/2006/10/kamskyshort_19942006.htm



There was a very amusing conversation between Gata and Nigel 12 years later (when "toilet-gate" between Kramnik and Topalov broke out) about this incident on playchess.com. At first Gata tried to avoid talking about the past, but on further provocation from Short (he is no angel either) he broke out and challenged Short to a fist fight

Here is the conversation (source)

Nigel Short: Gata, in our 1994 match you delivered a written protest to the arbiter accusing me of visiting the bathroom too often. Was that done to disturb me, or because you thought I had a desktop hidden in the cubicle?

Gata Kamsky: ask me something i can remember nigel

Nigel Short: I remember it well, Gata.

Gata Kamsky: all i remember is that you started talking to me during the game

Nigel Short: Yes, and the arbiter had overheard a conversation between your father and yourself immediately after the game. He told you to complain. You said that there was nothing to complain about. And yet within the hour there was yet another written protest about me cheating during this match.

Nigel Short: I guess Daddy had his way

Gata Kamsky: i would be careful with making assumptions

Gata Kamsky: back then i didn't understood your dirty psychological tricks nigel

Nigel Short: I was also accused of "looking at Anand too much"

Nigel Short: and what a pity that the match organisers failed to erect a wall on the stage , like you insisted that they must

Gata Kamsky: nigel you had your chance against garry no?

Gata Kamsky: so stop complaining

Nigel Short: I do remember the death threat from your father, delivered in an extremely irate manner about 2cm from my face.

Gata Kamsky: so talk to my father about it

Gata Kamsky: lol

Nigel Short: "Talk to my father"? Why not "talk to Danailov"? we can all benefit from hiding behind our henchmen

Gata Kamsky: nice try nigel

Gata Kamsky: trying to do others all work for you?

Nigel Short (a respond to Susan Polgar): they have relevance, Susan. It is the only time in my career I have accused of cheating. I was accused repeatedly. There are obvious similarities with the current match.

Nigel Short: the only thing that Danailov has not done is to physically threaten Kramnik with death

Gata Kamsky: i have no idea what you're trying to drag me and my dad back into nigel

Nigel Short: No doubt you would prefer to remember the result, rather than the manner in which it was attained, Gata.

Gata Kamsky: you mean your little dirty tricks ?

Gata Kamsky: we can go all day, you have your opinion and i have mine. So let's leave it at that

Nigel Short: It is funny, how you are the only person to have observed that I am a cheat, Gata. Indeed the protests and accusations went on even when you were 3-0 up. I must have been the most inept cheat in history.

Gata Kamsky: nigel

Gata Kamsky: i don't want to talk about it, but if you want to do something about this, we can settle this like real men, outside. I'll be waiting

Nigel Short: Yes. That is exactly how your Dad wanted to settle it too.

Gata Kamsky: it is YOUR problem

Gata Kamsky: but your insinuations are insulting me

Gata Kamsky: so put up or shut up

Nigel Short: Your comments reveal a complete abdication of responsibility. A player is 100%responsible for the actions of his delegation



Keep in mind that this conversation happened in chat on playchess.com for everyone to see

The Kamsky-Topalov challenger match is now supposed to be held in Ukraine.

http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=4564

Granted, Short's been known for his comments. After all, did face FIDE's Ethics Committee for calling the Deputy President and Vice-President "dunderheads" (see http://www.dnaindia.com/report.asp?newsid=1077079); not to mention, his comments after the game with Cheparinov ('there is a God, and he is not Bulgarian!') were, in my mind, poor taste. But those things pale in comparison with what Roustam Kamsky has said.

This whole thing makes me wish Kamsky wasn't representing the US.

over the next 50ish years professional chess will become a joke.

You mean it isn't already a joke?

Actually, all professional organizations (sports, government, religion, etc.) have incidents similar to this. And this isn't the worst, by far... In my opinion, Bobby Fischer's racist comments did far more to damage the reputation of professional chess.

But no matter what happens, life (and the game) goes on...

Throughout the history of world championship matches the leading grandmasters have been bickering about prize funds, competition format, special privileges, cameras, reflectors, chairs, yogurt flavours, voodoo magic, hypnosis, dead flies, bathroom visits, mysterious wires, etc.

So thats nothing new really. I guess It's part of the game



I hope someday we will have a strong world chess federation whos authority will be recognized by all players and everybody else. In present FIDE is more like Kirsan's private organization. He is the boss and he can basically do what he wants (he also finances the most from his own money). We need a stronger FIDE. It's too much dependant from the players themselves. They basically have to find their own sponsors for their matches, so of course they have the word on what the condition will be. This is wrong. In most other sports most athlets don't have to worry about organization and finance, they just come to do their thing. The rules and dates are set in advance and then they are followed. If anybody refuses to compete under those rules then he is just left out (in serious sports it happens very rarelly that someone would boycot some competition). Thats how things are supposed to run. No football (soccer) club or team (no matter how succesfull) can challenge FIFA, no tennis player can challenge ATP, no athlet can challange IAAF,....without a very very wide support from others.

quote:

Originally posted by KHollister:
You mean it isn't already a joke?

Actually, all professional organizations (sports, government, religion, etc.) have incidents similar to this. And this isn't the worst, by far... In my opinion, Bobby Fischer's racist comments did far more to damage the reputation of professional chess.

But no matter what happens, life (and the game) goes on...

I was actually thinking more because of how much the game will become about memorization. The more it becomes about memorization, the less it is about skill. They continually add new lines of play and find more that are bad, making it more about memorizing them. Computer are starting to help with this more and more, will continue to do so. The game has/will inevitably become more and more a display of a person's ability to memorize opening moves. Even if I am off by many years in my "prediction", that statement remains true.