Does anyone else find the current system dumb?

They announced finalized that the candidates tournament next time would be played by the players in this link

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Chess_Championship_2014

I don't like this system. Why isn't it that the top 3 or 4 players in the world (excluding the WC loser), and the other 3 or 4 players decided by a wild card system play in the candidates?

I feel like to have such a qualification for a tournament, it should be decided by the player's overall body of work, not decided by a single tournament.

Players like Grischuk, Nakamura and Caruana are more deserving of a spot than say Adreikin and Svidler. Does anyone else see what I'm trying to get at?

I'm not trying to denegrade these amazing players, but I want to question the system.

You could also argue that people who don't get enough invitations to top events have no chance to reach the elo top

Having only eight candidates playing isn't enough to truly determine who the strongest challenger is. The top 20 grandmasters in the world are of roughly comparable level so I feel that there be at at least 16 players duking it out. Tehen again it's hard to argue that anyone in the world is better than those who have been invited..for example the three players you cited (Caruana, Nakamura or Grischuk) don't really deserve to play a world championship match more than Svidler does. Svidler has won the Russian championship a record 7-8 times whereas the aforementioned three have yet to achieve anything comparable..so maybe the current format isn't so unjust after all.

Best system ever. The world championship should consist of the top 20 grandmaster players. However, the top 5 are shrew ins and cannot be challenged by anyone, but those ranked 6-9 can be challenged. Here is where it gets a little bit complicated, #10 can only challenge 6-9 twice, so that specific number 10 has only two challenges. So say GM #10 loses both challenges than he automatically drops into the pool of the #10-19's, so the new 10 would be the determined by match play between 11-19 with the winner being the new #10 and having two challenges. Now GM #20 has two challenges to crack the top 19 if he fails then he drops into a the pool between 21-30  in which the same rules apply. However, if a #10 or #20 beat anyone in their  challenges, then the defeated opponent becomes the the new 10 and 20 and gets a rematch and one challenge to face anyone else in the upper limit.

(for example GM #10 loses rematch has to use his challenge on another opponent in that limit.) So if GM old#10 beats Gm#6 now Gm#6--> Gm new #10 and Gm old #10 is GM#6 ( yes leapfrogging everybody else, which doesnt really matter). So they have a rematch and Gm #10 loses so he must no use his challenege on GM#7,8 or 9. )

The ranking  to determine  GM #21 and above will be how it currently is. 

Challenges are only valid for a month. therefore a ggame should be played amongst each echelon once a month. To prevent #20 for holding out all year. 

Profound read huh

Yup. It was so profound that I couldn't understand what u were trying to say.

reread it, it may take a while to sink in, but i have trust in you sir

  64 players should be invited. How exciting is that!

Answer my post, this is always what happens. After i write the convulation of my point is too complexed, but to those who understand it create a debate. I write for the fans who want to discuss in depth. Actually my writing style has been told is intimidating. I am just trying to invoke and stimulate emotion. Everyybody on this site is smart and wants to be challenged, so can someone challenge me in a constructive way thanks

what are the pros and cons of my chess system thanks

i mean no disrespect to you beardogjones, i know you want to see a march madness approach huh

that may be better than my system it works for the ncaa

but lets discuss my system, sionce it has more variables

Yes! The later rounds could involve more games per match! To prevent draws there should be a doubling cube!

Translation:

Have a Ladder

(I think)

because it allows more competition, while concurrently allowing the top players to increase their reptoire by only studying and analzying opponent games. So, everybody will want to get into the the top 20.

Allow me to fix your grammatical errors:

Answer my post - this is always what happens. (Previously you had a run-on sentence.) When I write my point is convoluted and complex (convulation is not a word), but to those who understand it creates a debate. I write for the fans who want to discuss in depth (This sentence is grammatically correct, but sounds slightly awkward). Actually, I have been told that my writing style is intimidating. I am just trying to invoke and stimulate emotion (Again, this is grammatically correct; however, it is unnecessary to use two words that mean almost the same thing (invoke and stimulate), when you can get your point across using just one). Everybody on this site is smart and wants to be challenged, so can someone challenge me in a constructive way? Thanks.

You're welcome.

Pretty good for someone writing off the top of their head, huh. Sorry that I don't use word to proofread my stuff.

i appreciate the advise brah

and convolution is a word brah