[matsemann]

> What are they supposed to do, not have a world championship?

Perhaps change the format. Carlsen stepped down, because it's too much preparation year after year. And with him being the GOAT, everyone was always preparing defensively and hoping for a blunder, making it somewhat "boring" games (quotes, as in draws doesn't have to be boring).

[mtlmtlmtlmtl]

But doing that when Carlsen announced his forfeit after the candidates would be silly. If there's a time to change the format, it's now before the next cycle begins, not in the middle of the previous cycle.

[Sesse__]

Carlsen was pretty clear on this all along. He said there was a _slight_ chance of him changing his mind if Firouzja won the Candidates, which he was nowhere near doing. The announcement after the Candidates was just the final confirmation. Everybody playing knew very well that the second spot would give them a very real shot at playing the WCC, Ding and Nakamura included.

[mtlmtlmtlmtl]

That's true. But Carlsen still leaving the possibility meant it was always going to be a match in this cycle. So if Carlsen forfeiting should have consequences for the way the cycle is structured it should be now, after the match, not instead of it

Btw, are you in any way responsible for analysis.sesse.net? I've been using it every day!

[Sesse__]

I don't think Carlsen demanded changing the cycle, so indeed. (Well, he voiced opinions ten years ago, but this time around, there were no negotiations AFAIK. Just him plain stating he wasn't likely to show up.)

a.s.n is my site, yes. I haven't been following this match as closely as the previous ones, so it's been a bit delayed some days (and I haven't bothered dealing with some bugs in the source PGN, so the clocks have been off at times).

[jyscao]

Carlsen is clearly better than his contemporaries, no doubts about it. But calling the GOAT is a stretch.

[matsemann]

Eh, like 2 others that could contend it. You might disagree, but its not a stretch.

[ebiester]

Are you saying that he isn't even in the conversation, or that it's too hard to push him past Kasparov, Fischer, and Capablanca relative to his peers?

(I can't reasonably put Morphy in this conversation, and I'm not sure anyone else has an argument.)

[mtlmtlmtlmtl]

Not sure about GP, but he's definitely in the conversation for me though I think Fischer and probably Kasparov would be slightly ahead of him.

I would happily have Morphy in the conversation too, because he was so far ahead it's simply mind-boggling. He made his opponents, often the strongest players of the time besides him, look like idiots.

If we're judging only by strength relative to contemporaries, I think Morphy would take it.

If we judge only by absolute strength Carlsen at his peak is probably it. For some mix of the two, all the ones mentioned are potentially valid picks, and I'd include Lasker in that group as well.

Tal probably would've been if he was a lot healthier, but he doesn't make the list in an unfair world, though I'd be amiss not to at least mention my favourite historical player :)