Well from what I saw and percieve is that Ding won and then enjoyed the win for eleven months ,playing absolutely nothing and now can't get back to same level because he took almost a year off. If you achieved what you've always wanted , then what next? , I hear a lot of Olympic champions suffer from this , once you've achieved your goal there is a massive low xxx edit : and to make matters worse you're not even the true world champion when Magnus didn't even defend it
Some people focus on destination then journey...and after that...they went blank
@SimonBirch said in #11:
> Well from what I saw and percieve is that Ding won and then enjoyed the win for eleven months ,playing absolutely nothing and now can't get back to same level because he took almost a year off. If you achieved what you've always wanted , then what next? , I hear a lot of Olympic champions suffer from this , once you've achieved your goal there is a massive low xxx edit : and to make matters worse you're not even the true world champion when Magnus didn't even defend it
If the champion of Wimbledon chose to not defend their title we would not say that the eventual winner was 'not even the true Wimbledon champion'. In chess some said this about Karpov when Fischer decided to not defend his title, so Karpov went on a tear and showed his dominance for the next decade.
> Well from what I saw and percieve is that Ding won and then enjoyed the win for eleven months ,playing absolutely nothing and now can't get back to same level because he took almost a year off. If you achieved what you've always wanted , then what next? , I hear a lot of Olympic champions suffer from this , once you've achieved your goal there is a massive low xxx edit : and to make matters worse you're not even the true world champion when Magnus didn't even defend it
If the champion of Wimbledon chose to not defend their title we would not say that the eventual winner was 'not even the true Wimbledon champion'. In chess some said this about Karpov when Fischer decided to not defend his title, so Karpov went on a tear and showed his dominance for the next decade.
@Gitananda said in #13:
> If the champion of Wimbledon chose to not defend their title we would not say that the eventual winner was 'not even the true Wimbledon champion'. In chess some said this about Karpov when Fischer decided to not defend his title, so Karpov went on a tear and showed his dominance for the next decade.
Ding will always be known as the world champion that year Magnus didn't defend ,sorry but that's the truth I can't see ding going onto ten year dominance. In my very limited knowledge xxx
> If the champion of Wimbledon chose to not defend their title we would not say that the eventual winner was 'not even the true Wimbledon champion'. In chess some said this about Karpov when Fischer decided to not defend his title, so Karpov went on a tear and showed his dominance for the next decade.
Ding will always be known as the world champion that year Magnus didn't defend ,sorry but that's the truth I can't see ding going onto ten year dominance. In my very limited knowledge xxx
yes
Yeah , he is sick but he Came back
@SimonBirch said in #14:
> Ding will always be known as the world champion that year Magnus didn't defend
Maybe to you. But not to me.
Magnus was out of the equation. Whether it had been because he didn't want to compete or had passed the pearly gates doesn't matter to me. He was not a competitor. Ding won against the competitors. That's the game.
We don't degrade previous world champs simply because they never faced Magnus. They of course could not have faced him. And they did what they had to do to win. Ding did that too.
> Ding will always be known as the world champion that year Magnus didn't defend
Maybe to you. But not to me.
Magnus was out of the equation. Whether it had been because he didn't want to compete or had passed the pearly gates doesn't matter to me. He was not a competitor. Ding won against the competitors. That's the game.
We don't degrade previous world champs simply because they never faced Magnus. They of course could not have faced him. And they did what they had to do to win. Ding did that too.
@MentalFugues said in #17:
> Maybe to you. But not to me.
>
> Magnus was simply out of the equation. Whether it had been because he didn't want to compete or simply had passed the pearly gates doesn't matter to me. He was not a competitor. Ding won against the competitors. That's the game.
>
> We don't degrade previous world champs simply because they never faced Magnus. They of course could not have faced him. And they did what they had to do to win. Ding did that too.
Fair enough xxx some ridiculous answers coming in but fair enough xxx
> Maybe to you. But not to me.
>
> Magnus was simply out of the equation. Whether it had been because he didn't want to compete or simply had passed the pearly gates doesn't matter to me. He was not a competitor. Ding won against the competitors. That's the game.
>
> We don't degrade previous world champs simply because they never faced Magnus. They of course could not have faced him. And they did what they had to do to win. Ding did that too.
Fair enough xxx some ridiculous answers coming in but fair enough xxx
@MentalFugues said in #17:
> Maybe to you. But not to me.
>
> Magnus was out of the equation. Whether it had been because he didn't want to compete or had passed the pearly gates doesn't matter to me. He was not a competitor. Ding won against the competitors. That's the game.
>
> We don't degrade previous world champs simply because they never faced Magnus. They of course could not have faced him. And they did what they had to do to win. Ding did that too.
Yes, but it is also relevant that had Carlsen chose to defend his title then Ding could not have faced him because he did not come close to winning the Candidates; lichess.org/broadcast/fide-candidates-tournament-2022/round-14/ZA07lchF
> Maybe to you. But not to me.
>
> Magnus was out of the equation. Whether it had been because he didn't want to compete or had passed the pearly gates doesn't matter to me. He was not a competitor. Ding won against the competitors. That's the game.
>
> We don't degrade previous world champs simply because they never faced Magnus. They of course could not have faced him. And they did what they had to do to win. Ding did that too.
Yes, but it is also relevant that had Carlsen chose to defend his title then Ding could not have faced him because he did not come close to winning the Candidates; lichess.org/broadcast/fide-candidates-tournament-2022/round-14/ZA07lchF
so far there have only been three world champions who have not defended their title: Alekhine, Fischer and Carlsen. You can't blame Alekhine because he died. Fischer was mentally ill. Only Carlsen just didn't feel like it.
Ding definitely deserved the world title.
Other things hurt chess, such as the unfounded cheating accusations by Kramnik against everyone or Carlsen himself against Niemann.
Ding definitely deserved the world title.
Other things hurt chess, such as the unfounded cheating accusations by Kramnik against everyone or Carlsen himself against Niemann.
This topic has been archived and can no longer be replied to.