Author Topic: Last ICCF WCC Final  (Read 2594 times)

Gino Figlio

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 4
    • View Profile
Last ICCF WCC Final
« on: September 28, 2018, 04:32:57 AM »
ICCF WCCC Final has ended with the victory of GM Aleksandr Dronov (RUS)
https://www.iccf.com/event?id=52852
Interesting facts:
  • Category 13
  • Only the winner achieved a GM norm
  • Draw percentage 90.4%
This illustrates how difficult it has become to play correspondence chess at the highest level

Michael Blake

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 5
    • View Profile
Re: Last ICCF WCC Final
« Reply #1 on: October 06, 2018, 10:12:04 AM »
This illustrates how difficult it has become to play correspondence chess at the highest level
Agreed Gino. I was looking at the tournament, there are some very interesting nuggets of information in there and proof that Black can still win. I'm hoping we will get an article on the winner if possible.

Peter Coleman

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 4
    • View Profile
Re: Last ICCF WCC Final
« Reply #2 on: October 24, 2018, 08:18:24 PM »
Have any of the games been annotated?

Stephen Ham

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 2
    • View Profile
Re: Last ICCF WCC Final
« Reply #3 on: December 12, 2018, 07:51:19 AM »
Hello Gents,

Please forgive me for sounding like a complainer, but Gino noted some interesting facts.

The latest WCCC was only a Category13 event. It included players rated 2358 and 2466, and some low 2500 rated players. To their credit, they somehow qualified, but at the expense of much stronger players who were excluded. Again, their qualification is a genuine credit, but those players are not legitimate WCCC candidates. This suggests that WCCC qualification events need to be rethought to ensure that only worthy challengers play, and are not excluded. ICCF's qualification event bar is presently set too low.

If one assumes that the World Champion is the strongest player, or at least "first among equals", then the WCCC needs to be played by only worthy players, aka the strongest players. I can't accept that my WC is merely a guy who won a Category 13 tournament when I've played in stronger events unrelated to the WC.

That said, I've played Dronov and know him to be a worthy WC. But his title is besmirched by only winning a Category 13 event. So, I'd like the ICCF to rethink WCCC qualification.

Since ratings are evidence of player strengths, then a rating floor (e.g. 2550 or so) should be established. Perhaps admittance to the WCCC should be based upon ratings, plus those who've won Category 14+ events in the last year, or such.

Another option - send invitations to only those rated 2550 and up, with only the highest-rated respondents admitted.

Then, the winner of this Category 14-15 event would be a legitimate WC. And the ICCF's qualification process would not be questioned.

What are your thoughts, gents?

All the best,
-Steve-


Arild Haugen

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 7
    • View Profile
Re: Last ICCF WCC Final
« Reply #4 on: December 12, 2018, 03:09:31 PM »
Hi Steve,
Great to see you back here and hopefully more people will start posting soon as well. I do not see a big problem in letting people qualify the way they do today. As far as I can see there are only two from each of three candidate groups that will qualify, and I do not know how the others are selected. Perhaps somebody can shear a light on this? There is only a marginal difference in quality based on rating in the last finals.
Personally I have been to close to 2600, but now I am below 2400 since I play all kinds of weaker tournaments. So if you have made your way through semi-finals and make it to the top two in the Candidates I think you have deserved the right to a final. It is quite similar to football where it is always interesting to see if some outsiders can make it to the cup-final even if they do not play in the highest league. (talking about proper football of course ;-) )
Best Regards
Arild

Peter Coleman

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 4
    • View Profile
Re: Last ICCF WCC Final
« Reply #5 on: December 18, 2018, 02:28:21 PM »
Perhaps the first question that needs to be asked is whether these "weaker" players really are weaker, or it's just that the current rating system is a bit slow to capture current strength?