letsgohome wrote:
and convolution is a word brah
Yes, I know. You said "convulation." I used the word in its adjective form (convoluted) because I couldn't fit it into the sentence in its noun form.
Does anyone else find the current system dumb?
Sort:
letsgohome wrote:
i appreciate the advise brah
Anyone who corrects grammar is just someone who got butt hurt and felt the need to throw up a defense mechanism to save face.
letsgohome wrote:
but other than that good job. You are the coolest brah
Thanks brah!
Cade_Bryan wrote:
letsgohome wrote:
i appreciate the advise brah
Anyone who corrects grammar is just someone who got butt hurt and felt the need to throw up a defense mechanism to save face.
Or someone who has nothing better to do, and is just having fun trolling :)
Nov 6, 2013
0
#26
lmao why didnt you use convolution lol brah? Because this minute was the first time you typed the word huh lol
Nov 6, 2013
0
#27
letsgohome wrote:
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.
Pros and Cons of this system
macer75 wrote:
Cade_Bryan wrote:
letsgohome wrote:
i appreciate the advise brah
Anyone who corrects grammar is just someone who got butt hurt and felt the need to throw up a defense mechanism to save face.
Or someone who has nothing better to do, and is just having fun trolling :)
I stand corrected
letsgohome wrote:
lmao why didnt you use convolution lol brah? Because this minute was the first time you typed the word huh lol
As I said, I didn't use "convolution" because it didn't fit in the sentence. I changed it into its adjective form to preserve as much of your original language as possible. I could have just deleted the word altogether, and the sentence wouldn't have lost any of its meaning.
Nov 6, 2013
0
#31
letsgohome wrote:
letsgohome wrote:
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.
Pros and Cons of this system
Nov 6, 2013
0
#32
I presume they set it up this way to draw interest in their tournaments. They get the top players to attend that way too. No one is going to blow off an event that is mandatory for a shot at the title.
Nov 6, 2013
0
#33
exactly, hence the top 19 are nearly a shrew it. The rank becomes imperative in terms of match ups. But, it still has a NCAA march madness approach where anyone can be eliminated. That is a con right there it is hard to crack the top 20, but i dont think complacency from the top GMS is a problem.
Nov 6, 2013
0
#34
I guess people are taking a long time to dissect this system, so it must be good
olichris wrote:
I do appreciate your grammatical corrections Macer, but in Transactional Analysis terms are you being a Critical Parent ( like a teacher correcting grammar) a Nurturing Parent ( trying to help out the poster) or The Little Proffesor ( trying to be a naughty boy and get on his nerves) or the straight adult, ( trying to merely clariffy) for everyones sake ?
Actually none of those. I'm simply being the Obnoxious Troll, who looks for every opportunity he can find to... well... troll.
Also, I decided to correct the grammar in that particular post because of what letsgohome was saying in that post.
Nov 6, 2013
0
#36
well played sir well played. Or did i already know that. We will leave it for the readers to decide. But my chess systme is flawless, infalliable
Nov 7, 2013
0
#37
I don't like the 12 game chmionships, either. That's too short. Should be 24, like Fischer-Spassky. Or (most) Karpov-Kasparov matches.
Making the WCC a best of 12 games match, is like making the World Series best of 5.
Nov 7, 2013
0
#39
I rather like the current system. It rewards the highest rated players, provides for the loser of the world championship an opportunity to play in the next cycle, and creates opportunities for players well outside the top 20 to qualify as well.
Regarding the comment about only high rated players being invited to elite tournaments: players can prove themselves in other events such as Olympiads, team tournaments, and even Swiss events. Players earn high ratings and earn invitations by beating up on lesser grandmasters. It's not a closed system.
but other than that good job. You are the coolest brah