Is the European Chess Championships a legitimate event?
Magnus Carlsen- arguably the best chess player of all-time, but not a fan of the European chess championships.
The European Rapid and blitz championships takes part in Croatia this weekend, and I did consider playing in the event, as some people I know personally, are actually doing. However as things stand I don't have any money, so it was a relatively easy pass. 😔
I counted nine European chess players who are rated over 2700 on live ratings, that is it at the classical time control. None of these individuals are in Croatia and the top seed is David Navara from the Czech Republic, a lovely chap who is below 2700 on classical ratings (he has been above before) but is over 2700 at rapidplay. He also won both of these tournaments last year. But with all due respect to David, he isn't the best player in Europe. His chances of winning if the missing nine were to decide to enter, would be fairly low.
I understand that the event we are discussing is rapid and blitz, but when you look at the classical European championships which I believe was won this year by Alexey Sarana, formerly of Russia but now representing Serbia, very few of the top players were playing in that tournament either.
Which begs the question- is this really a European championships? Or is this a silly argument, as you can only beat what is in front of you?
Firstly I think you have to examine the reasons why the best European players aren't bothering to play in the European championship. There is a competing event- the champions chess tour finals, and Magnus and Firouzja and MVL seem to find this a more attractive tournament to play in, presumably because they were offered higher fees/ and or there is a tougher level of competition than they would find in the Euro rapid and blitz.
This isn't a problem confined to European chess championships.
Mick the slick- could he have 20 British titles by now?! 😲
In the British championships, there were many years in recent times when the top players were missing from the event. For about 15 years, our best player at the time (arguably still is) Michael Adams, did not play in the event, either because he preferred to play in the Dortmund tournament in Germany that was going on at the same time, or because the British championships couldn't meet his fee.
Adams stands on 8 British championship wins, within sight of Jonathan Penrose's record of 10 British championship victories, but it's reasonable to assume he'd have blown way past that score by now if he had played every year since the late 1990s. I would roughly estimate that Adams would have won around 12 out of the 15 or so British championships tournaments that he missed during that period. That would have got him already to 20 wins, a Nadal like record.
It's entirely possible I'm underestimating Adams in this respect. Who knows, he might have won even more, because everytime he's played in the event he's won it.
Does this detract from the players who won the championships during that time, names like Aagard, Rowson, Ramesh, Gallagher?
Well not really, because you can only beat what is in front of you. I was also playing in most of these British championships and despite being close a few times, wasn't quite good enough to win it. These people were, so their name is rightly in the record books.
It is also possible to talk about the world championship in this regard, as Magnus Carlsen has famously withdrawn himself from contention as he has no wish to spend several months digesting computer preparation, just so that he's battle-ready against an equally obsessive opponent.
But in my view the world championship situation is a bit different, because it is only one player. Albeit a great one, the best one. But still only one player.
The only comparison with the European championship would come if the top ten on the World rating list took themselves out of contention to win the World chess championships. Nobody then would take it seriously. It would struggle to get sponsored by Costco.
The fact is we don't really regard the European championships as a real barometer is in my view, partly a result of the fact that these kind of tournaments struggle for sponsorship, which has a knock-on in terms of the players they can attract. The European championships just don't have the pull of the world championships; either for the players themselves, or for possible benefactors.
Comments
Post a Comment