Answers.Body: <p>But the format is normally chosen to maximise the sponsorship the FIDE can get.   How would giving the reigning champion control increase the income FIDE gets?</p>
  <blockquote>
  <p>Just letting the reigning champion have some control over the format
  as long as it's fair and can still prioritize the classical strength
  of players. What could be wrong with that?</p>
  </blockquote>
  <p>Likely to result in long and unproductive disputes about what  is fair and if it prioritize the classical strength.</p>
  
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2024-05-31T11:00:19.917Z
Answers.LastActivityDate: 2024-05-31T11:00:19.917Z
Answers.UserDisplayName: Ian Ringrose
Body: <p>What's the point of having a championship match if the winners must regularly grind for months or lose everything, or worse, come out broken or burnt out? I don't mean going back to the wild days of early 20th century with all sorts of demands like prize etc, or allowing one side to gain unfair advantage from logistic difficulties like location. Just letting the reigning champion have some control over the format as long as it's fair and can still prioritize the classical strength of players. What could be wrong with that?</p>
  <p>(PS: it doesn't necessarily mean mixing formats, though results of &quot;classical&quot; events are often decided by rapid/blitz or Armageddon anyway. I understand many people don't like these, because they may feel random and there's an obvious gap between classical and other formats. Perhaps a flexible format/scoring system where players can make games as short/long as they want but longer games are worth more points with a penalty factor for the side that took more time?)</p>
  
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2024-05-31T07:42:19.127Z
Comments.Text: Hey, the grinding to me seems on the side of the challenger who has to go through all sorts of qualifications...
Comments.UserDisplayName: Hauke Reddmann
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2024-05-31T07:50:38.470Z
Comments.Text: @HaukeReddmann  Hi, in today's heavily prepared chess world, the potential challengers would have known the champion's style since long ago, but the champion has much less time to prep against any given challenger in most cases. And the challengers usually have much less at stake
Comments.UserDisplayName: alices_and_bobs
Tags: <tournament><world-championship><time-control>
Title: What are the downsides of letting the reigning champion choose the format of the championship (within reason)?
ThreadText: # What are the downsides of letting the reigning champion choose the format of the championship (within reason)?
  
  (Asked by: username_0 on 2024-05-31)
  
  What's the point of having a championship match if the winners must regularly grind for months or lose everything, or worse, come out broken or burnt out? I don't mean going back to the wild days of early 20th century with all sorts of demands like prize etc, or allowing one side to gain unfair advantage from logistic difficulties like location. Just letting the reigning champion have some control over the format as long as it's fair and can still prioritize the classical strength of players. What could be wrong with that?
  
  (PS: it doesn't necessarily mean mixing formats, though results of "classical" events are often decided by rapid/blitz or Armageddon anyway. I understand many people don't like these, because they may feel random and there's an obvious gap between classical and other formats. Perhaps a flexible format/scoring system where players can make games as short/long as they want but longer games are worth more points with a penalty factor for the side that took more time?)
  
  **Tags:** tournament, world-championship, time-control
  
  > **Comments:**
  > **username_1**: Hey, the grinding to me seems on the side of the challenger who has to go through all sorts of qualifications...  
  > **username_0**: @HaukeReddmann  Hi, in today's heavily prepared chess world, the potential challengers would have known the champion's style since long ago, but the champion has much less time to prep against any given challenger in most cases. And the challengers usually have much less at stake  
  
  ---
  
  ## 1 answers
  
  ### Answer by username_2 on 2024-05-31. Score: 1
  
  But the format is normally chosen to maximise the sponsorship the FIDE can get. How would giving the reigning champion control increase the income FIDE gets?
  
  > Just letting the reigning champion have some control over the format
  > as long as it's fair and can still prioritize the classical strength
  > of players. What could be wrong with that?
  
  Likely to result in long and unproductive disputes about what is fair and if it prioritize the classical strength.
  
  
  ---
  
  