![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | This article has been viewed enough times in a single week to appear in the Top 25 Report. The week in which this happened: |
Lots of edits over who has qualified via the Grand Prix. There will be no qualifications until after there have been 3 legs played. Nakamura and Aronian finished first and second respectively in the first leg. We will not know who the qualification spots went to until the third leg which is due to be completed in March. — Preceding unsigned comment added by CeviLevita ( talk • contribs) 17:05, 17 February 2022 (UTC)
The page states that Ding has said he will have played enough games come May 2022. The citation used to support this however, (this chess24 article: https://chess24.com/en/read/news/sergey-karjakin-banned-from-chess-for-6-months-over-ukraine-stance) says no such thing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Latendresset ( talk • contribs) 18:14, 28 March 2022 (UTC)
The use of live ratings was removed with the comment from an IP editor: "Removed promotional links of the "live rating" which looks like a marketing trick to me. We do not place "live ratings" here - only FIDE ratings. So, there is no point to discuss dynamic information, which changes every day. The final list of most rated players will be known on June 1, 2022 (May rating)"
However I think we should use live ratings in this case only, for the following reasons: (1) the use was certainly not promotional; I have no connection with the site. (2) The live ratings site is often cited by reliable sources such as Leonard Barden and chess.com, so there is no need to reject using it when it is useful. (3) Finally, I assert they *are* useful, and it is no big effort to update them daily. This is one of the very few times in which live ratings are more useful than official ratings, thanks to FIDE's decision to base qualification on a single ratings list. Assuming Karjakin's DQ goes ahead, there will be interest in the rating list leading up to May 1, so including it makes Wikipedia more useful. Remember WP:IAR! Adpete ( talk) 02:05, 31 March 2022 (UTC), edited Adpete ( talk) 00:01, 2 April 2022 (UTC)
Should these efn notes be removed? Those efn notes were useful when the World Cup and the Grand Prix was still on, but in my opinion the notes no longer serve any purpose as the events are over and players have already qualified from those events. SpyroeBM ( talk) 02:36, 7 April 2022 (UTC)
Fair enough, the suggestion of a general footnote that you mentioned could work, but the current one should be fine as it provides more detail which helps with the context as the article is written towards a general audience. SpyroeBM ( talk) 14:22, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
Ding Liren has completed the necessary games, but we should wait until the May rating list/FIDE's confirmation of his qualification before listing him. — Preceding unsigned comment added by CeviLevita ( talk • contribs) 18:31, 25 April 2022 (UTC)
Title says it all. Given that qualifier by rating is for a reserve position only, a table seems out of proportion to its importance. I would not object to saying that the next reserve is Mamedyarov, but I don't see what purpose a top 10 table serves. Adpete ( talk) 03:09, 6 May 2022 (UTC)
Thoughts on new participant table? Personally I prefer the former one since it is more in line with tables for the past candidates articles though that's not necessarily enough to say the new one is bad. Don't want to edit it though without a discussion. — Preceding unsigned comment added by CeviLevita ( talk • contribs) 15:48, 6 May 2022 (UTC)
Player | Age | Rating | World rank | Qualification method |
---|---|---|---|---|
![]() |
31 | 2773 | 6 | 2021 World Championship runner-up |
![]() |
35 | 2753 | 13 | Candidate nominated by FIDE |
![]() |
24 | 2750 | 16 | Chess World Cup 2021 winner [b] |
![]() |
Chess World Cup 2021 runner-up | |||
![]() |
19 | 2804 | 3 | FIDE Grand Swiss Tournament 2021 winner |
![]() |
29 | 2786 | 4 | FIDE Grand Swiss Tournament 2021 runner-up |
![]() |
34 | 2760 | 11 | FIDE Grand Prix 2022 winner [c] |
![]() |
26 | 2776 | 5 | FIDE Grand Prix 2022 runner-up |
![]() |
29 | 2806 | 2 | Highest rating for May 2022 |
References
FIDE2021May
was invoked but never defined (see the
help page).Let me put it clear, FIDE position on the Russian invasion of Ukraine has nothing to do with its code of ethics and subsequent decision to disqualify Karjakin. It is a judicial procedure, where Karjakin might have harmed FIDE's reputation if he remained a participant at the Candidates Tournament-2022. It is important to make it clear for the readers. Ans the word "support" is very general as it may include actions, while Karjakin expressed his opinion, where he approved the invasion. As to the CAS appeal, I believe there is no need for additional section here as it is close to 100% that CAS will keep the FIDE's arbitrage decision as it has even harsher position on the Russian athletes. So, Adpete, if you really eager to add this info, I think Karjakin's page would be the most appropriate place and it is much less relevant for this Candidates Tournament. 2601:1C0:CB01:2660:B433:771F:24C2:833C ( talk) 02:25, 8 May 2022 (UTC)
Noticed that the Candidate Tournament articles does not use true performance rating ( TPR), which is used in other classical tournament articles, such as the Tata Steel and Norway Chess tournaments. I think we should add this section to the cross table as it would highlight the level a player performed in a tournament, and that it is standard practice as mentioned with the use of TPR in other classical articles. For example, this is the TPR calculated for Ian Nepomniachtchi during the Candidates Tournament 2020-2021, which calculated to be 2851. Wanted to mention in the talk page before editing. Thanks. SpyroeBM ( talk) 09:10, 27 May 2022 (UTC)
I think it would be better to have this table at least until the end of the tournament, because I find it very useful for fast checking of upcoming days schedule. Maybe it can be removed after the tournaments, but in the 2016-2021 Candidates articles it's still there. -- Matey1671 ( talk) 07:42, 15 June 2022 (UTC)
Hey everyone! I'm going to be binging the candidates and editing the schedule and ranking all tournament so don't worry about doing it -- TheMiniWeapon 9:50 UTC — Preceding undated comment added 21:51, 17 June 2022 (UTC)
I don't think we do. It makes the table too wide, and it is not done at earlier Candidates' tournament pages. Adpete ( talk) 02:36, 18 June 2022 (UTC)
Honestly just leave it in, I don’t think that there is any reason to leave it out other than aesthetics and also this could leave Hikaru accountable towards his bet with the openings he can’t use — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2604:3D09:727F:7100:1C4D:C422:8540:7629 ( talk) 12:53, 18 June 2022 (UTC)
Some anonymous user is constantly changing one of today's openings from Catalan to QID. I am sure we should have consistency over openings names (get info for every game from one source), but this user doesn't provide any source or even just comment, he just changes it. If someone doesn't agree with me, please reply. I already did 3 reverts today, so I should not revert any changes anymore today. I don't know what to to in such situation) -- Matey1671 ( talk) 20:36, 22 June 2022 (UTC)
Well, we tried using The Week in Chess for openings, and it looks like the main problem with it is that they are using uncommon names for many openings, and this leads to many edits without source. I think that using ChessGames can solve this problem. It's surely reliable source (it is used in many articles about past tournaments). It uses a bit longer opening names, but (1) not so unnesesarily long as chess.com, (2) we can use shorter forms for the longest names. -- Matey1671 ( talk) 19:23, 25 June 2022 (UTC)
Anyways, we've already seen Nepo.... seen Fabiano too.... Yet to see Alireza....
Wish Nakamura would win this just to have a smile when he sees Magnus
And ask him; "What did you say 'bout me?"
😁😁😁 Volten001 ☎ 07:20, 18 June 2022 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at
Module talk:Sports table/Chess § "Rules for classification"?.
CapnZapp (
talk)
10:48, 18 June 2022 (UTC)
Can anyone explain how Sonneborn–Berger score is lower for Nepo after two games? He defeated Ding (the first highest rating in the Candidates Tournament) and did a draw with Caruana, the third highest rating in the Candidates Tournament. Caruana's opponents had lower ratings in both games. It looks like someone miscalculated here. 2601:1C0:CB01:2660:9C06:E51B:DB4E:A1B4 ( talk) 21:13, 18 June 2022 (UTC)
Everyone please stop changing the rankings for the players to them not being tied. Leave them tied during the tournament as their is insufficient information to break the ties, ex. Hikaru should be put as 3-6, not 6 as its day two and all that matters so far is points — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2604:3D09:727F:7100:A07C:26EB:3195:1471 ( talk) 14:30, 19 June 2022 (UTC)
Ya good point, Ill start using that table. Also, don’t worry about editing the tables I can get it all done within 5 mins of each match ending and when we’re both racing to edit it it just gets annoying. If your the one editing the openings also, please use the linked website with the proper names for the openings — Preceding unsigned comment added by TheMiniWeapon ( talk • contribs) 16:45, 19 June 2022 (UTC)
I see many people are a bit confused with this table. I renamed it to "Total scores by round", so it's not so associated with points, but I'm not sure if it's the best name for it, maybe it'll be confused with "results by round". Please share what do you think about name for it. Also, I am sure that the format of this table used in 2021, 2018, 2016, 2014 Candidates articles is very comfortable and I don't see why we should change it from "+-" to just number of points. After all, total number of points after each round is already mentioned in "Results by round" section, and also with "+-" format it's much easier to see when decisive games happened for each player. -- Matey1671 ( talk) 11:11, 19 June 2022 (UTC)
Whoever the idiot who is changing the page before the matches are over, stop being an idiot and wait for the game to finished TheMiniWeapon ( talk) 17:32, 19 June 2022 (UTC)
Edit it is: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/2601:801:201:AA0:80B9:2B35:39A5:8987 so if you see this, stop being an idiot
/info/en/?search=Special:Contributions/2601:801:201:AA0:0:0:0:4739 does the same today (maybe it's the same user). I don't know how to deal with them. Is there a way to stop this? -- Matey1671 ( talk) 16:33, 23 June 2022 (UTC)
It says in the article that tiebreaks for first place are broken by a games not statistics so we shouldn't be using the tie breaking procedures to break ties for first place and should be leaving them tied (sx. fabi and nepo are tied right now since if the tournament ended right now they would have to play a tie breaking game TheMiniWeapon ( talk) 02:59, 21 June 2022 (UTC)
If Magnus refuses to play in the Championship, are the first place tie breaking procedures played if there are two people tie for 1st / 2+ people tied for second. i.e if there are two people tied for first and Magnus says he's not going to play will they play the tiebreak or if there are 2+ people tied for second will they now play a tiebreak for a spot in the championship TheMiniWeapon ( talk) 21:14, 22 June 2022 (UTC)
Because of this possibility, I expanded on Carlsen's comments (taking them from the WCC 2023 page) at Candidates Tournament 2022#Organization, and marked the 2nd places in the points-by-round-table. (Two sources should be enough; I guess Peter Heine Nielsen's tweet is also telling, as a long-time Carlsen second.) TWIC already singles out the battle for 2nd place as important, so doing so seems to be justified by RS. In the last few rounds, this would mean distinguishing players that are mathematically eliminated from the top two places, from those that mathematically cannot finish first, but could finish second.
It would indeed be an interesting situation if there is a clear 1st place, a tie for 2nd place, no tiebreaks are held, and Carlsen refuses to defend his title. However I suspect there will be no shortage of RS opining on such a situation should it actually occur, so if it does happen, we will just wait and see what they say. Double sharp ( talk) 07:02, 30 June 2022 (UTC)
I think H2H column should be used only for players tied by SB and wins, because it's only 4th tie-breaker. If, for example, there are three players with same number of points, but only two of them have same SB and number of wins, then H2H score as tie-breaker is needed only for this two players, and is counted only between this two players. I think we should put H2H score between 2 players, not 3 in this case, and similarly we shouldn't put H2H score at all if there are no players tied after SB and number of wins. Matey1671 ( talk) 06:41, 24 June 2022 (UTC)
|sb_before_w=
in the Chess Module, and have now implemented this new argument here. Seems to work just fine. I guess now I need to add it to the module documentation...
NHammen (
talk)
18:52, 2 July 2022 (UTC)If you win once and draw once against a opponent is your SBS for that opponent 1.5x TheMiniWeapon ( talk) 15:33, 1 July 2022 (UTC)
If he drew with Hikaru, they each get half a point. 213.163.150.146 ( talk) 15:39, 1 July 2022 (UTC)
It seems a troll changed the table taking Ian from it and substituting him with a (probably fake) Irish player 2A02:1210:80FA:CE00:E5ED:2189:4E6D:68A7 ( talk) 20:15, 2 July 2022 (UTC)
{{ITN note}} nominating for an ITN article. i'll add it to the page in a second. Ayyydoc ( talk) 06:44, 4 July 2022 (UTC)
Double_sharp reverted my fix to the table color description. I'm fairly certain the correct description is:
Dark red backgrounds indicate player(s) who could no longer win the tournament after each round, while light red backgrounds indicate those who could no longer finish second either.
It's most easily seen with Ding's color in the final round, as he is the only one who can't win the tourney but can win second. The table has him dark red and the lower standings light red. This is fairly unimportant, but I'm trying to avoid an edit war. DanielTheManual ( talk) 18:38, 9 July 2022 (UTC)
The table in Candidates_Tournament_2022 #Standings lists the consequence for Nepomniachtchi "Advances to title match". It should also mention the consequence for Ding Liren - that he advances to the title match, provided Carlsen does not defend his title. Admittedly the syntax of this table is too complex for me to understand how to do this - anyone agrees & is able to help, please? -- KnightMove ( talk) 14:30, 10 July 2022 (UTC)
Cite error: There are <ref group=lower-alpha>
tags or {{efn}}
templates on this page, but the references will not show without a {{reflist|group=lower-alpha}}
template or {{notelist}}
template (see the
help page).
![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | This article has been viewed enough times in a single week to appear in the Top 25 Report. The week in which this happened: |
Lots of edits over who has qualified via the Grand Prix. There will be no qualifications until after there have been 3 legs played. Nakamura and Aronian finished first and second respectively in the first leg. We will not know who the qualification spots went to until the third leg which is due to be completed in March. — Preceding unsigned comment added by CeviLevita ( talk • contribs) 17:05, 17 February 2022 (UTC)
The page states that Ding has said he will have played enough games come May 2022. The citation used to support this however, (this chess24 article: https://chess24.com/en/read/news/sergey-karjakin-banned-from-chess-for-6-months-over-ukraine-stance) says no such thing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Latendresset ( talk • contribs) 18:14, 28 March 2022 (UTC)
The use of live ratings was removed with the comment from an IP editor: "Removed promotional links of the "live rating" which looks like a marketing trick to me. We do not place "live ratings" here - only FIDE ratings. So, there is no point to discuss dynamic information, which changes every day. The final list of most rated players will be known on June 1, 2022 (May rating)"
However I think we should use live ratings in this case only, for the following reasons: (1) the use was certainly not promotional; I have no connection with the site. (2) The live ratings site is often cited by reliable sources such as Leonard Barden and chess.com, so there is no need to reject using it when it is useful. (3) Finally, I assert they *are* useful, and it is no big effort to update them daily. This is one of the very few times in which live ratings are more useful than official ratings, thanks to FIDE's decision to base qualification on a single ratings list. Assuming Karjakin's DQ goes ahead, there will be interest in the rating list leading up to May 1, so including it makes Wikipedia more useful. Remember WP:IAR! Adpete ( talk) 02:05, 31 March 2022 (UTC), edited Adpete ( talk) 00:01, 2 April 2022 (UTC)
Should these efn notes be removed? Those efn notes were useful when the World Cup and the Grand Prix was still on, but in my opinion the notes no longer serve any purpose as the events are over and players have already qualified from those events. SpyroeBM ( talk) 02:36, 7 April 2022 (UTC)
Fair enough, the suggestion of a general footnote that you mentioned could work, but the current one should be fine as it provides more detail which helps with the context as the article is written towards a general audience. SpyroeBM ( talk) 14:22, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
Ding Liren has completed the necessary games, but we should wait until the May rating list/FIDE's confirmation of his qualification before listing him. — Preceding unsigned comment added by CeviLevita ( talk • contribs) 18:31, 25 April 2022 (UTC)
Title says it all. Given that qualifier by rating is for a reserve position only, a table seems out of proportion to its importance. I would not object to saying that the next reserve is Mamedyarov, but I don't see what purpose a top 10 table serves. Adpete ( talk) 03:09, 6 May 2022 (UTC)
Thoughts on new participant table? Personally I prefer the former one since it is more in line with tables for the past candidates articles though that's not necessarily enough to say the new one is bad. Don't want to edit it though without a discussion. — Preceding unsigned comment added by CeviLevita ( talk • contribs) 15:48, 6 May 2022 (UTC)
Player | Age | Rating | World rank | Qualification method |
---|---|---|---|---|
![]() |
31 | 2773 | 6 | 2021 World Championship runner-up |
![]() |
35 | 2753 | 13 | Candidate nominated by FIDE |
![]() |
24 | 2750 | 16 | Chess World Cup 2021 winner [b] |
![]() |
Chess World Cup 2021 runner-up | |||
![]() |
19 | 2804 | 3 | FIDE Grand Swiss Tournament 2021 winner |
![]() |
29 | 2786 | 4 | FIDE Grand Swiss Tournament 2021 runner-up |
![]() |
34 | 2760 | 11 | FIDE Grand Prix 2022 winner [c] |
![]() |
26 | 2776 | 5 | FIDE Grand Prix 2022 runner-up |
![]() |
29 | 2806 | 2 | Highest rating for May 2022 |
References
FIDE2021May
was invoked but never defined (see the
help page).Let me put it clear, FIDE position on the Russian invasion of Ukraine has nothing to do with its code of ethics and subsequent decision to disqualify Karjakin. It is a judicial procedure, where Karjakin might have harmed FIDE's reputation if he remained a participant at the Candidates Tournament-2022. It is important to make it clear for the readers. Ans the word "support" is very general as it may include actions, while Karjakin expressed his opinion, where he approved the invasion. As to the CAS appeal, I believe there is no need for additional section here as it is close to 100% that CAS will keep the FIDE's arbitrage decision as it has even harsher position on the Russian athletes. So, Adpete, if you really eager to add this info, I think Karjakin's page would be the most appropriate place and it is much less relevant for this Candidates Tournament. 2601:1C0:CB01:2660:B433:771F:24C2:833C ( talk) 02:25, 8 May 2022 (UTC)
Noticed that the Candidate Tournament articles does not use true performance rating ( TPR), which is used in other classical tournament articles, such as the Tata Steel and Norway Chess tournaments. I think we should add this section to the cross table as it would highlight the level a player performed in a tournament, and that it is standard practice as mentioned with the use of TPR in other classical articles. For example, this is the TPR calculated for Ian Nepomniachtchi during the Candidates Tournament 2020-2021, which calculated to be 2851. Wanted to mention in the talk page before editing. Thanks. SpyroeBM ( talk) 09:10, 27 May 2022 (UTC)
I think it would be better to have this table at least until the end of the tournament, because I find it very useful for fast checking of upcoming days schedule. Maybe it can be removed after the tournaments, but in the 2016-2021 Candidates articles it's still there. -- Matey1671 ( talk) 07:42, 15 June 2022 (UTC)
Hey everyone! I'm going to be binging the candidates and editing the schedule and ranking all tournament so don't worry about doing it -- TheMiniWeapon 9:50 UTC — Preceding undated comment added 21:51, 17 June 2022 (UTC)
I don't think we do. It makes the table too wide, and it is not done at earlier Candidates' tournament pages. Adpete ( talk) 02:36, 18 June 2022 (UTC)
Honestly just leave it in, I don’t think that there is any reason to leave it out other than aesthetics and also this could leave Hikaru accountable towards his bet with the openings he can’t use — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2604:3D09:727F:7100:1C4D:C422:8540:7629 ( talk) 12:53, 18 June 2022 (UTC)
Some anonymous user is constantly changing one of today's openings from Catalan to QID. I am sure we should have consistency over openings names (get info for every game from one source), but this user doesn't provide any source or even just comment, he just changes it. If someone doesn't agree with me, please reply. I already did 3 reverts today, so I should not revert any changes anymore today. I don't know what to to in such situation) -- Matey1671 ( talk) 20:36, 22 June 2022 (UTC)
Well, we tried using The Week in Chess for openings, and it looks like the main problem with it is that they are using uncommon names for many openings, and this leads to many edits without source. I think that using ChessGames can solve this problem. It's surely reliable source (it is used in many articles about past tournaments). It uses a bit longer opening names, but (1) not so unnesesarily long as chess.com, (2) we can use shorter forms for the longest names. -- Matey1671 ( talk) 19:23, 25 June 2022 (UTC)
Anyways, we've already seen Nepo.... seen Fabiano too.... Yet to see Alireza....
Wish Nakamura would win this just to have a smile when he sees Magnus
And ask him; "What did you say 'bout me?"
😁😁😁 Volten001 ☎ 07:20, 18 June 2022 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at
Module talk:Sports table/Chess § "Rules for classification"?.
CapnZapp (
talk)
10:48, 18 June 2022 (UTC)
Can anyone explain how Sonneborn–Berger score is lower for Nepo after two games? He defeated Ding (the first highest rating in the Candidates Tournament) and did a draw with Caruana, the third highest rating in the Candidates Tournament. Caruana's opponents had lower ratings in both games. It looks like someone miscalculated here. 2601:1C0:CB01:2660:9C06:E51B:DB4E:A1B4 ( talk) 21:13, 18 June 2022 (UTC)
Everyone please stop changing the rankings for the players to them not being tied. Leave them tied during the tournament as their is insufficient information to break the ties, ex. Hikaru should be put as 3-6, not 6 as its day two and all that matters so far is points — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2604:3D09:727F:7100:A07C:26EB:3195:1471 ( talk) 14:30, 19 June 2022 (UTC)
Ya good point, Ill start using that table. Also, don’t worry about editing the tables I can get it all done within 5 mins of each match ending and when we’re both racing to edit it it just gets annoying. If your the one editing the openings also, please use the linked website with the proper names for the openings — Preceding unsigned comment added by TheMiniWeapon ( talk • contribs) 16:45, 19 June 2022 (UTC)
I see many people are a bit confused with this table. I renamed it to "Total scores by round", so it's not so associated with points, but I'm not sure if it's the best name for it, maybe it'll be confused with "results by round". Please share what do you think about name for it. Also, I am sure that the format of this table used in 2021, 2018, 2016, 2014 Candidates articles is very comfortable and I don't see why we should change it from "+-" to just number of points. After all, total number of points after each round is already mentioned in "Results by round" section, and also with "+-" format it's much easier to see when decisive games happened for each player. -- Matey1671 ( talk) 11:11, 19 June 2022 (UTC)
Whoever the idiot who is changing the page before the matches are over, stop being an idiot and wait for the game to finished TheMiniWeapon ( talk) 17:32, 19 June 2022 (UTC)
Edit it is: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/2601:801:201:AA0:80B9:2B35:39A5:8987 so if you see this, stop being an idiot
/info/en/?search=Special:Contributions/2601:801:201:AA0:0:0:0:4739 does the same today (maybe it's the same user). I don't know how to deal with them. Is there a way to stop this? -- Matey1671 ( talk) 16:33, 23 June 2022 (UTC)
It says in the article that tiebreaks for first place are broken by a games not statistics so we shouldn't be using the tie breaking procedures to break ties for first place and should be leaving them tied (sx. fabi and nepo are tied right now since if the tournament ended right now they would have to play a tie breaking game TheMiniWeapon ( talk) 02:59, 21 June 2022 (UTC)
If Magnus refuses to play in the Championship, are the first place tie breaking procedures played if there are two people tie for 1st / 2+ people tied for second. i.e if there are two people tied for first and Magnus says he's not going to play will they play the tiebreak or if there are 2+ people tied for second will they now play a tiebreak for a spot in the championship TheMiniWeapon ( talk) 21:14, 22 June 2022 (UTC)
Because of this possibility, I expanded on Carlsen's comments (taking them from the WCC 2023 page) at Candidates Tournament 2022#Organization, and marked the 2nd places in the points-by-round-table. (Two sources should be enough; I guess Peter Heine Nielsen's tweet is also telling, as a long-time Carlsen second.) TWIC already singles out the battle for 2nd place as important, so doing so seems to be justified by RS. In the last few rounds, this would mean distinguishing players that are mathematically eliminated from the top two places, from those that mathematically cannot finish first, but could finish second.
It would indeed be an interesting situation if there is a clear 1st place, a tie for 2nd place, no tiebreaks are held, and Carlsen refuses to defend his title. However I suspect there will be no shortage of RS opining on such a situation should it actually occur, so if it does happen, we will just wait and see what they say. Double sharp ( talk) 07:02, 30 June 2022 (UTC)
I think H2H column should be used only for players tied by SB and wins, because it's only 4th tie-breaker. If, for example, there are three players with same number of points, but only two of them have same SB and number of wins, then H2H score as tie-breaker is needed only for this two players, and is counted only between this two players. I think we should put H2H score between 2 players, not 3 in this case, and similarly we shouldn't put H2H score at all if there are no players tied after SB and number of wins. Matey1671 ( talk) 06:41, 24 June 2022 (UTC)
|sb_before_w=
in the Chess Module, and have now implemented this new argument here. Seems to work just fine. I guess now I need to add it to the module documentation...
NHammen (
talk)
18:52, 2 July 2022 (UTC)If you win once and draw once against a opponent is your SBS for that opponent 1.5x TheMiniWeapon ( talk) 15:33, 1 July 2022 (UTC)
If he drew with Hikaru, they each get half a point. 213.163.150.146 ( talk) 15:39, 1 July 2022 (UTC)
It seems a troll changed the table taking Ian from it and substituting him with a (probably fake) Irish player 2A02:1210:80FA:CE00:E5ED:2189:4E6D:68A7 ( talk) 20:15, 2 July 2022 (UTC)
{{ITN note}} nominating for an ITN article. i'll add it to the page in a second. Ayyydoc ( talk) 06:44, 4 July 2022 (UTC)
Double_sharp reverted my fix to the table color description. I'm fairly certain the correct description is:
Dark red backgrounds indicate player(s) who could no longer win the tournament after each round, while light red backgrounds indicate those who could no longer finish second either.
It's most easily seen with Ding's color in the final round, as he is the only one who can't win the tourney but can win second. The table has him dark red and the lower standings light red. This is fairly unimportant, but I'm trying to avoid an edit war. DanielTheManual ( talk) 18:38, 9 July 2022 (UTC)
The table in Candidates_Tournament_2022 #Standings lists the consequence for Nepomniachtchi "Advances to title match". It should also mention the consequence for Ding Liren - that he advances to the title match, provided Carlsen does not defend his title. Admittedly the syntax of this table is too complex for me to understand how to do this - anyone agrees & is able to help, please? -- KnightMove ( talk) 14:30, 10 July 2022 (UTC)
Cite error: There are <ref group=lower-alpha>
tags or {{efn}}
templates on this page, but the references will not show without a {{reflist|group=lower-alpha}}
template or {{notelist}}
template (see the
help page).