The tiebreak regulations at the World Rapid Chess Championship, which finished yesterday in Warsaw, Poland, are heavily debated on social media. This report brings an overview of the different opinions expressed online.

The World Rapid Championship ended on Tuesday in a four-way tie for first place among GMs Nodirbek Abdusattorov, Ian Nepomniachtchi, Magnus Carlsen, and GM Fabiano Caruana. All four had scored 9.5/13, but not all qualified for the playoff.

2021 World Rapid Championship | Final Standings (Top 10)

(Full final standings here.)

The regulations stated that only the top two players on tiebreak would play the blitz playoff to determine the champion. The first tiebreaker, which pointed toward Abdusattorov and Nepomniachtchi, was “Buchholz Cut 1,” meaning the total of the scores of each of the opponents they played (minus the worst score), multiplied by the player’s own score. Simply put, Abdusattorov and Nepomniachtchi’s 9.5 was valued higher because their respective opponents had played a better tournament than Carlsen and Caruana’s opponents.

This wasn’t the first time that something like this happened. Five years ago, in Doha, Qatar, GM Vasyl Ivanchuk clinched the rapid title on tiebreak (without a playoff) after coming equal first with GM Alexander Grischuk (silver) and Carlsen (bronze), who then pointed out that the first tiebreak criterion back then, the average rating of the opponents, unfairly worked against the player with the highest rating.

FIDE listened and introduced a blitz playoff the next year, but only for the top two players on tiebreak. At the 2017 World Rapid Championship in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, Nepomniachtchi missed out on the playoff after finishing in a tie for first place with GMs Vladimir Fedoseev and GM Viswanathan Anand, who ended up winning the playoff and the title.

Back then, the tiebreak wasn’t heavily discussed but this time the situation led to a heavy debate, firstly fueled by Carlsen himself, who knew he had just lost his chance to retain his title.

Interviewed on Norwegian TV right after the last round, he said: “It’s a completely idiotic rule. Either all players on the same amount of points join the playoff, or no one does.”

GM Ben Finegold on Twitter pointed toward a somewhat similar situation that occurred at the 2018 Sinquefield Cup.

A few years back, there was a 4 way tie for first (unless it was 5 🤷‍♂️🤷‍♂️)… in the Sinquefield Cup. They had the same rules, but Carlsen, one of the top 2, said “everyone plays the playoff, or I don’t play!” After a meeting of the organizers, they agreed to nobody plays. Integrity

— Ben Finegold Ⓥ (@ben_finegold) December 28, 2021

The tweet got quite a bit of traction on Twitter which asks for a slight explanation of what happened back then. Also at that tournament, only the top two players on tiebreak would play the playoff but in a tie between Carlsen, Caruana, and GM Levon Aronian, the different tiebreaks could not cut the tie. A drawing of lots was supposed to eliminate one player. When Caruana declined to participate in the playoff, Aronian and Carlsen preferred to cancel the playoff altogether and share the title, which is what happened.

Back to 2021. Carlsen’s description of the tiebreak rules as “completely idiotic” got support on Twitter from several grandmasters. Apart from the tiebreak regulations, which effectively sidelined two of the biggest names in chess Carlsen and Caruana, FIDE’s decision to cut the championship from 15 to 13 rounds was also criticized:

Time to agree with a World Champion https://t.co/O5yOekQ6Vm

— Sergey Karjakin (@SergeyKaryakin) December 28, 2021

Seeing the World Rapid Championship go from 15 rounds to 13 was an oddity, but seeing these tiebreak rules for a “World Championship” is beyond laughable.

— Hikaru Nakamura (@GMHikaru) December 28, 2021

Only top 2 qualifying for a tiebreak,
a blitz tiebreak after the world rapid,
and a bunch of other weird rules. Ridiculous. #WorldRapidChessChampionship https://t.co/f4frAiHao2

— Benjamin Bok (@benjamin_bok) December 28, 2021

In 2014 I lost a World Championship title on tiebreak because in the final round the Russian IM who I beat lost to the Italian IM who I didn’t play. That’s ridiculous enough, but it’s even worse when some of those tied 1st get to play-off and others don’t. Bad luck Magnus & Fabi

— Keith Arkell (@Atomrod) December 29, 2021

Two FIDE officials joined the debate on Twitter. First, FIDE Director General Emil Sutovsky argued that maybe a playoff, in general, isn’t a good idea, and also pointed out that new decisions might be made after top players have been consulted:

Playoff in a large Swiss is a dubious idea. What if 5 or 11 players tie? Play 2-3 hours more? Also unfair towards those having stronger opponents throughout – it’s not RR! Rules were not only known, but used in 2017 – nobody ever complained. FIDE to poll players and review again.

— Emilchess (@EmilSutovsky) December 29, 2021

FIDE Vice President GM Nigel Short questioned having everyone in a tie playing a playoff:

Congratulations to Nodirbek Abdusattorov on an exceptional victory in the #FIDE World Rapid Chess Championship! The belated criticism of the tie-break system is wide of the mark. If, for example, 10 players share 1st, it is simply not practical to hold a play-off involving all.

— Nigel Short (@nigelshortchess) December 29, 2021

The reason behind keeping the playoff as short as possible by only having two players involved seems mostly of an organizational nature. Carlsen’s second GM Peter Heine Nielsen, who criticized the Olympiad tiebreak regulations in an article on Chess.com in 2018, remarked:

Cutting the event from 15 to 13 rounds, made it more likely that multiple players would tie for first.

Play 2-3 hours more? Yes!
The World Championship match was decided in a game ending after midnight.
That was a epic drama, followed by millions, not a problem to be avoided. https://t.co/yI7zAuvkKZ

— Peter Heine Nielsen (@PHChess) December 29, 2021

Sutovsky noted that having a higher number of rounds might lead to other issues:

Increasing number of rounds has its cons. A – it’s really difficult to play even 15 rounds in 3 days (many complained). B – there must be a proportion between number of players and rounds. Imagine round 14 – pairings would be a mess,as nearly all leaders already played each other

— Emilchess (@EmilSutovsky) December 29, 2021

The Norwegian grandmaster and Chess.com commentator Jon Ludvig Hammer suggested adding a day to the rapid tournament schedule. It should be noted that adding a day is probably impossible for planning reasons if the tournament continues to be held in the last week of the year as many players won’t be able to make it back home in time for New Year’s celebrations.

I think adding an extra day to the rapid championship, in addition to having a KO with all players tied for first, would address most concerns raised.

– Avoids the rough 5 games/day schedule.
– Giving byes in KO (if uneven numbers) preserve some advantage of superior tiebreaks.

— Jon Ludvig Hammer (@gmjlh) December 29, 2021

One chess arbiter had a complete different take on the tiebreak situation:

If we look at the mutual results of the top 4 finishers of the @FIDE_chess #WorldRapid, only one game was not played. So, yes, there should be a playoff: @MagnusCarlsen against @FabianoCaruana – and for third place! #WRBCC2021 #RapidBlitz pic.twitter.com/XPiuMaYzCL

— Ana Srebrnic (@velemojstrica) December 29, 2021

When interviewed for Norwegian TV, Carlsen also said: “To have a playoff for victory is very much how it should be in such a prestigious event, something you obviously also should have in the Candidates.” A day later, FIDE announced that this has now been arranged for the Candidates indeed.

As per decision made at the FIDE Council meeting on December 27, a playoff has been introduced for the Candidates Tournament and the Women’s Candidates Tournament, to be played in the case of a tie for first place. pic.twitter.com/qRgFMDwTt9

— International Chess Federation (@FIDE_chess) December 29, 2021

Some have made the point that criticism tends to appear only when complaining is too late. Two tweets, one from a grandmaster and one from an arbiter:

Why do top GMs always complain about tiebreak rules AFTER the tournament? 🤔

— Eugene Perelshteyn (@EugenePerel) December 29, 2021

It’s OK to not be happy about the tie-break regulations for a tournament, but the time to bring that up is when the regulations are published, not after the final round finishes! #WorldRapidChessChampionship

— Chris Bird (@ChrisBirdIA) December 28, 2021

Another arbiter pointed out that the perhaps the best place for players to make their points is FIDE’s Athletes Commission, instead of social media.

Well, I like to think that I wasn’t appointed to a Non-Elected Commission for political reasons to drag the quality down…

There is an Athletes Commission now. I hope players engage with that, rather than complain about things via Twitter, which isn’t very professional IMO.

— Alex Holowczak (@alexholowczak) December 29, 2021

What would be your ideal format and best way of determining the winner of the world rapid championship? Leave your thoughts in the comments!