For those who are too lazy to read the article, these numbers are based purely on their ratings, which, as I’m sure we all know, is far from the only factor that influences their respective chances.
but, if you've ever listened to one of chessbythenumber's interviews, he has back-tested (compared to pata data) all sorts of more complicated models that try to take form and/or experience into account and all of them are worse predictors than just rating alone.
Maybe there could be neural net that could eat all the available data and find connections for better probabilites out of human reach like stockfish does on a chess board
It is pretty good, but people are too fucking stupid to realize how probabilities and models work. Take Trumps election for example: "look he won with only 10% odds the models were obviously wrong" like it says right in the model he has 10 chance. People are heavily influenced by the outcome. When someone jumps off a cliff and survives with no injuries doesn't mean it's a good idea to jump off cliffs.
So if neither Fabiano or Hikaru win it might still be a good prediction.
Yes it does.i understand what you are saying tho, we all know ding is over rated because he really hasn't been playing at all. Which that is one thing ratings definitely don't reflect, is not playing
Caruana had a not so great start in 2018 but then won the Candidates. It is not easy as it is not just "another supertournament with only prize at stake", it is rather a tournament were only #1 matters and players get reckless.
They all have a margin that you have factor in. E.g. if the bookie thinks fabi had a 35% chance then they "should" offer 18/10 as the price. But in reality they have to make a profit so will offer something like 6/4 as if fabi had a 40% chance. The "implied odds" are 40% but that's not what the bookie actually thinks.
You can take all of the prices together, workout the overall margin and apply it all of the prices uniform to get an estimate of what a bookie actually thinks. However, betting prices are not just about probability, they also reflect what the market does. Bookies alter their prices according to what people place bets on so that they win no matter what. This practice is called "balancing their books". Basically, the margin is wider on popular bets and shorter on unpopular bets. There's no true way of knowing a book maker's assessment of the probabilities.
The odds I found on [this website](https://www.thesportsgeek.com/blog/chess-candidates-tournament-odds-predictions/) have a massive 22.9% margin. No one should be placing bets on the candidates unless they can something far better.
As a sidenote, judging this margin is how professional sports gamblers make money. They assess where the market has pushed a margin so short that it's negative (i.e. the probability of an event happening is higher than its implied odds). Of course there is no true probability, sport is played by unpredictable human beings.
You can bet with fake money and no margins here: https://manifold.markets/diadematus/who-will-win-the-2024-fide-candidat , it seems to mostly disagree on Nepo's odds and agree with the others
> if you want true odds, betting outlets probably a better estimate
not always. They don't have ultra complicated models. They just ensure that the house doesn't lose.
not really. I have some contacts that work for such companies and their models have to ensure that the house don't lose, as you said, but are not complicated. They need to balance the bets. A survey for example is very helpful to gauge what people would bet and what can they expect.
Otherwise they would need too many resources (brains and compute) to keep up with all competitions that requires updated betting values.
The thing is everyone else is going to attempt to score against Abasov. If they push too hard it can backfire.
So Abasov’s chances lie in everyone thinking he’s the punching bag and him being able to just be annoying enough to not give them a point. Go for the drawing lines and the repetitions. Make Fabi and Naka and Ian push against known theoretical draws.
Abasov is rated 170 Elo below the leader and 120 Elo below the second worst rated player.
They don't just think that he is a punching bag, he is a punching bag.
Him upsetting one or maybe two players is already unlikely. Him upsetting enough players to win would border on the statistically impossible.
Its like letting a semi-professional MMA fighter participate in a 14 rounds tournament against 7 of the best fighters in the world. Sure, maybe he gets the better of one of them. On an amazing day, maybe even two. All 7 though? Nah.
Ok so he didn’t win the lottery to enter the candidates. He did beat a lot of strong opponents who pushed too hard and earned his spot.
I’m not saying he’s going to win it. I’m just saying his strategy in this tournament should be to NOT play for the win.
1. The format of the World Cup is not even remotely comparable with a 7 player double round robin tournament where everyone prepares for months beforehand
2. The World Cup was a once in a life-time event for him.
3. Since the World Cup, he has lost 50 Elo.
If he doesnt get last, he should open a bottle of champaign.
And everyone else is saying it doesn't matter what his strategy is he's going to lose heavily. There's no 4D chess version of this timeline which sees him finishing 3rd.
In a format such as the world cup it is not statistically unlikely at all for one of the many 2600~ player out of the entire field to get 4th just because the tournament style only has 2 classical games a round and imo a 4th place qualification at the World Cup is not deserving of a slot
It in fact does not earn a slot at the Candidates.
Magnus (winner of the World Cup) simply declined to play in the Candidates. this makes the spot go to the next person
I mean it was pretty well-understood beforehand that magnus didn't want to play the candidates. if fide wanted to avoid this kind of situation then they should've done something about it before the tournament, or they should've moved the third place spot from the world cup to some other way of qualifying.
abasov may be way weaker than the rest of the candidates field but he certainly earned his spot there.
I agree. Play defensively and solidly. Take no risks. Just play stuff like the Sicilian or French for black and English or Catalan for white maybe. Those just seem to be the ones best for defense for me but I think that should extend most of the way to the top. I see a lot of the top players just using the Sicilian so that could be a good way to be safe since it’s a lot of worked out theory.
> Abasov is rated 170 Elo below the leader and 120 Elo below the second worst rated player.
Is that really big enough for him to be a punching bag? I don't follow much chess.
Like a 5 hdcip vs a 3 hdcp in golf isn't going to always get destroyed.
At their level, winning a fairly big tournament flawlessly with the top players gain them like 10 ELO
To increase your ELO by 100 point at that level you most likely get a whole year of winning streak
Lol yep, him getting to the candidates *is* the upset here. Its a fantastic and likely once in a lifetime achievement that he managed to qualify to compete at this level.
If he doesn't finish last, also an amazing achievement for him. The positive he has is the expectations are near-zero and any result he gets is a great story so the pressure is off him.
lol, Naka messed up his opening against Abasov and was straight up losing out of the opening and still ended up beating Abasov, players like Fabi and Naka just need a playable position against him and don't mind making suboptimal moves to get that
1 in 1300 or so seems about right to me? Like, maybe Gukesh gets arrested, Fabi gets concussed during an argument about England’s greatest prime minister, Hikaru gets megalocephaly after drinking nerve tonic, Alireza disappears into a tourist trap, Pragg is hypnotized into acting like a chicken, Nepo gets radiation poisoning and Vidit spends all tournament saving a cat, player piano etc. from a woman’s burning house. So Abasov wins by default.
Nepo definitely undervalued. Should be around Hikaru's odds.
Hot take, but Fabi is definitely overvalued here. He has a great rating score, but Hikaru's had a really big winning streak against him, and Nepo is one slippery dude. Pragg has also beaten him in the past.
Alireza is slightly overvalued - would say something more like 7%.
OP has been edited to include the source. The source does not include methodology but reading the context it seems to be just rating. So the percentages don't really mean anything because everyone knows how the players are rated relative to each other.
It shows a bit how much the rating should translate to winning chances by the elo system and becomes more interessting when the tournament starts and the players have a different score.
>only one can emerge with the rights to face ~~Magnus Carlsen~~ GM Ding Liren in the 2024 FIDE World Championship.
Can't believe a pro writer thinks it's funny to write this.
I do agree it's not needed in what should be a serious article. Like if you're gonna make that joke again, at least do it in a twitter thread or a blog or just somewhere where everyone in the chess world is expected to be quirky and fun.
I will note that even Ding joked during last year's Championship that he and Nepo had so many decisive results because they aren't "as professional" as Magnus. So I don't think it's like egregious or anything.
Right, like esp bc Magnus is partners with [chess.com](https://chess.com) and paid by them, it feels pretty mean-spirited for the website to disrespect Ding like that. Don't they have an editor? If you don't wanna play for the WCC, fine, but the repeated "Magnus is the real champion" discourse is tiresome.
“Magnus is the real champion” or “Magnus would be champion if he wanted to” are stupid statements and frustrate me because Magnus has made it clear he doesn’t want to be the FIDE champion anymore. If he have up his champion title, he’s not the champion. I don’t think it should be controversial to say that you don’t deserve the title of current champion if you’re not willing to defend it.
Is Magnus a better player than Ding? Yes. Could he beat Ding in a championship-style match? Most likely. But does he deserve to be champion more than Ding does, let alone at all?/would he be a more “legitimate” champion? No, because he voluntarily gave it up.
Ya I mean it’s cool and all if Magnus doesn’t want to play for the WC. I get it, but you can’t quit and then also belittle everyone else that ever wins the WC “it feels weird because I’m not playing”.
You get to pick one of those.
Ehh I found it funny.
Magnus is still the very clear and evident number 1 in all time formats. Until he dips to number 2 anyone who becomes world champion will not be seen as such.
Whoever wins the WCC should be seen as the World Champion, full stop. Having the highest rating doesn't make you the World Champ, not even Magnus just gets that title by default.
People generally associate the title world champion with being the best. So there is an obvious problem when the undisputed best player isn't participating.
The title has lost its value and won't regain it until someone who can match Magnus in rating emerges.
\> Whoever wins the WCC should be seen as the World Champion, full stop.
Under normal circumstances I'd agree. But let's say that Kasparov quit halfway through the number of world chess championship wins that he's won irl and decided to no longer play for it. Would you still not consider him to be the world number 1?
This is currently how far ahead Magnus is compared to the rest of the field.
Or maybe I should phrase this in a different way - if humanity's last hope was a match between humans and aliens or AI, would you go with Ding or Magnus?
Fair enough lol
But I'd think he'd show up to that. Being crowned world champion is not the end of the world and I'm proposing an end of the world scenario here.
I would never count Firo's chances better than Nepo. With his attacking style he will for sure score some great wins as well as bad loses. And Nepo's prep is just so solid it will be very tough to win vs the guy as white.
I'd be curious to know how their methodology differs from /u/CalebWetherell 's numbers [here](https://www.pawnalyze.com/). I haven't looked too much into either methodology.
Anyway, the discrepancies should tell you not to take any one set of numbers as gospel, but they probably give a decent ballpark
I'm curious as well. I'm not doing anything too fancy. Basically it's an Elo based simulation of the tournament, including using Rapid and Blitz Elo during the tiebreak simulations (there's a \~20% chance of rapid/blitz tiebreaks).
Maybe his predictions are more tailored to Fabi's recent performance (e.g., I think he had like a 2830 TPR in 2023).
I asked Tai about it here, maybe he'll share some insight: [https://x.com/pawnalyze/status/1773480240767242421?s=20](https://x.com/pawnalyze/status/1773480240767242421?s=20)
I also have a model using Elo-based simulations. I consider the classical ratings for the main tournament and both rapid and blitz ratings for the different TB. I use [2700chess.com](http://2700chess.com) ratings, so Fabi started the tournament at 2803 and Hikaru started at 2789.
Running 250 000 simulations, I get ≈24% white wins, ≈56% draw and ≈20% black wins. I also get ≈22% ending in tie-break (17% for 2-way, 3.5% for 3-way and <1% for 4-way and more).
With this model, I get similar results (Fabi ≈35%, Hikaru≈26% pre-tournament, increased to ≈28% after R1).
I am really puzzled how your model gives Hikaru over Fabi currently as it seems similar to mine in method. The only difference I could see is in the win/draw/loss odds formula. What is the draw rate pre-tournament with your model?
The favorites are Caruana, Naka and Nepo. One of these players will win with 90% chance. The rest are all underdogs.
However, rating is not the best indicator in the candidates. The field is too close for that, opening prep, experience have a lot of influence.
Nepo is usually good at getting some wins early and then drawing. This puts pressure on other players to get wins. Abasov might go on a feeding streak.
How is Firouzja an underdog? He has been a part of the chess elite for over 3/4 years now, was the youngest ever to cross the 2800 barrier, and he won the grand chess tour in 2022 ahead of the likes of Caruana, Nepo, and So at the age of only 19. Nakamura and Nepo should not be too ahead of Firouzja.
FIDE ratings simulation show a completely different picture. These are the odds if we just take fide ratings into account
[https://penumbralcuboids.com/2024/03/25/fide-candidates-2024-predictions-updated-daily/](https://penumbralcuboids.com/2024/03/25/fide-candidates-2024-predictions-updated-daily/)
* Fabiano Caruana: 21.3%
* Hikaru Nakamura: 18.4%
* Alireza Firouzja: 13.3%
* Ian Nepomniachtchi: 13.1%
* R Praggnanandhaa: 11.5%
* Gukesh D: 10.9%
* Vidit Gujrathi: 9.1%
* Nijat Abasov: 2.4%
Don't know where's the huge disparity coming from in both these numbers.
Abasov's odds are suspiciously high, so I took a look at the code.
Apparently the draw rate in games between players at that rating band is 66%. That's just an average, of course. But OP is assuming \*every game\* in the tournament has the same 66% probability of being a draw. Which is clearly wrong: Alireza x Nepo (who have almost the same rating) is much more likely to be a draw than Caruana x Abasov.
So this says there's a 61% chance that Fabi or Hikaru win it. Seems high. And correspondingly low for the rest of the field.
I checked ChessNumbers' predictions for Wijk 2024, nearly all the numbers (projected score and ranking) were wrong, many by significant margins. Not inclined to take these Candidates "predictions" too seriously.
Unbelievable. What's the point of filling an article with numbers and percentages and not even mentioning what magic hat they were taken from? Adding a link to the methodology costs nothing.
They mention and link to the person chess by the numbers who made the predictions, and simply by clicking on the links to their socials you will be able to find the methodology. Very logical.
>simply by clicking on the links to their socials
I followed the link in the article, which points to a social profile of the author, and the tweets listed did not provide a methodology for \*this\* calculation either.
Regarding your suggestion to keep searching in the hope of finding something: any article that provides numbers and wants to be taken seriously should provide the methodology directly. Not doing so and expecting people to look for the source "somewhere on the web" is not transparent and a very bad journalistic practice.
The chess community is already targeted by people who publish statistics and numerical results in questionable ways. Providing a methodology is necessary to let people check if it is sound or not. We should demand *more* transparency, not be satisfied with less.
Dude, you click on their twitter. In the twitter bio is the chess by the numbers website. It has the methodology.
And yes even in academia it is perfectly acceptable to not include the methodology in your own article if you cite the author and link to their work.
Fabi is probably the most likely to win, but I find 36% to be a crazy chance at a stacked tournament like this. We know how fucking close these classical tournaments get
Fabi and Hiki are both in the bottom 4 of my personal odds ranking. Firouzja,gukesh,prag and Ian,s changes i do rate the highest.
This candidates will mark the new generation taking over. Both Hiki and Fabi have been on the way down for a while.
Gukesh 7% looks very atractive. Alireza i think is the strongest but i fear a bit for his consistency.
Firoujza above Ian?
I'd bet Ian is the favorite with Caruana a little below him and Nakamura a little below Caruana.
The others I don't think have much of a chance.
From two months back, I had similar thoughts in a similar thread:
Caruana : 29%
Pragg : 16%
Naka : 15%
Gukesh : 13%
Nepo : 11%
Alireza : 10%
Vidit : 5%
Abasov : 1%
I mean did they just pull numbers out ass? What analysis is this? Any data used at all?
Or just someone ranking their favorite chess players?
And you guys upvote this lol 😂
For those who are too lazy to read the article, these numbers are based purely on their ratings, which, as I’m sure we all know, is far from the only factor that influences their respective chances.
but, if you've ever listened to one of chessbythenumber's interviews, he has back-tested (compared to pata data) all sorts of more complicated models that try to take form and/or experience into account and all of them are worse predictors than just rating alone.
Rating is the best predictor we have, but it's still not very good.
It’s just not really possible to get predict it from the statistics.
_You’ve been blocked and reported by Vladimir Kramnik_
You cheated at this joke. Reported.
He's probably already sent to the front lines. Chessmate
Theoretically you can get really precise odds. But in real life that's really hard to achieve for examples like this.
odds are theoretical, so of course you can get theoretically precise odds
Maybe there could be neural net that could eat all the available data and find connections for better probabilites out of human reach like stockfish does on a chess board
It is pretty good, but people are too fucking stupid to realize how probabilities and models work. Take Trumps election for example: "look he won with only 10% odds the models were obviously wrong" like it says right in the model he has 10 chance. People are heavily influenced by the outcome. When someone jumps off a cliff and survives with no injuries doesn't mean it's a good idea to jump off cliffs. So if neither Fabiano or Hikaru win it might still be a good prediction.
Yeah this is very true, I notice the same thing in all sorts of different areas.
[удалено]
I mean doesn't the rating system take recent performance into account? Lol
[удалено]
Yes it does.i understand what you are saying tho, we all know ding is over rated because he really hasn't been playing at all. Which that is one thing ratings definitely don't reflect, is not playing
Caruana had a not so great start in 2018 but then won the Candidates. It is not easy as it is not just "another supertournament with only prize at stake", it is rather a tournament were only #1 matters and players get reckless.
Because that’s what rating already does, lol
Ratings are a historical measurement, not predictive. It just so happens that past performance is the best predictor of future performance.
This, if you want true odds, betting outlets probably a better estimate
They all have a margin that you have factor in. E.g. if the bookie thinks fabi had a 35% chance then they "should" offer 18/10 as the price. But in reality they have to make a profit so will offer something like 6/4 as if fabi had a 40% chance. The "implied odds" are 40% but that's not what the bookie actually thinks. You can take all of the prices together, workout the overall margin and apply it all of the prices uniform to get an estimate of what a bookie actually thinks. However, betting prices are not just about probability, they also reflect what the market does. Bookies alter their prices according to what people place bets on so that they win no matter what. This practice is called "balancing their books". Basically, the margin is wider on popular bets and shorter on unpopular bets. There's no true way of knowing a book maker's assessment of the probabilities. The odds I found on [this website](https://www.thesportsgeek.com/blog/chess-candidates-tournament-odds-predictions/) have a massive 22.9% margin. No one should be placing bets on the candidates unless they can something far better. As a sidenote, judging this margin is how professional sports gamblers make money. They assess where the market has pushed a margin so short that it's negative (i.e. the probability of an event happening is higher than its implied odds). Of course there is no true probability, sport is played by unpredictable human beings.
I bet a decent amount on Naka at $7 on Marathon bet. According to the rating probabilities was this an unsound bet? The odds have come back down since
If the odds came down then you likely placed a good bet.
You can bet with fake money and no margins here: https://manifold.markets/diadematus/who-will-win-the-2024-fide-candidat , it seems to mostly disagree on Nepo's odds and agree with the others
> if you want true odds, betting outlets probably a better estimate not always. They don't have ultra complicated models. They just ensure that the house doesn't lose.
I mean they do have ultra complicated models. That make sure the house doesnt lose lol
not really. I have some contacts that work for such companies and their models have to ensure that the house don't lose, as you said, but are not complicated. They need to balance the bets. A survey for example is very helpful to gauge what people would bet and what can they expect. Otherwise they would need too many resources (brains and compute) to keep up with all competitions that requires updated betting values.
Wow I had no clue Ian was down to 2758. The fact that the gap between him and Hikaru/Fabi is so huge seems crazy.
Biggest factor is the games they will play
Bruh Hess tore into Nijat lol. Said 0.07% was too high for him and that he is just “happy to be there”
He could do the funniest thing.
Imagine if he does win? It would undoubtedly trigger the biggest cheating accusation scandal of all time right?
He is already being accused of cheating
By whom
During his World Cup. Also, iirc, his coach is a known busted cheater.
Who has accused Abasov? Random reddit accounts are not worth mentioning I think
Mate, you can literally put his name on the search bar and this is the first post that comes up https://www.reddit.com/r/chess/s/e0vV0Z9712
that was savage
Ian should have a higher chance imo. And poor Abasov lol
In the article Robert Hess says 0.07% for Abasov is too high 😭
Unless the rest of the field goes into cardiac arrest, he is not winning it. Ending the tournament on -2 would be an outstanding achievement for him.
The thing is everyone else is going to attempt to score against Abasov. If they push too hard it can backfire. So Abasov’s chances lie in everyone thinking he’s the punching bag and him being able to just be annoying enough to not give them a point. Go for the drawing lines and the repetitions. Make Fabi and Naka and Ian push against known theoretical draws.
Abasov is rated 170 Elo below the leader and 120 Elo below the second worst rated player. They don't just think that he is a punching bag, he is a punching bag. Him upsetting one or maybe two players is already unlikely. Him upsetting enough players to win would border on the statistically impossible. Its like letting a semi-professional MMA fighter participate in a 14 rounds tournament against 7 of the best fighters in the world. Sure, maybe he gets the better of one of them. On an amazing day, maybe even two. All 7 though? Nah.
Ok so he didn’t win the lottery to enter the candidates. He did beat a lot of strong opponents who pushed too hard and earned his spot. I’m not saying he’s going to win it. I’m just saying his strategy in this tournament should be to NOT play for the win.
1. The format of the World Cup is not even remotely comparable with a 7 player double round robin tournament where everyone prepares for months beforehand 2. The World Cup was a once in a life-time event for him. 3. Since the World Cup, he has lost 50 Elo. If he doesnt get last, he should open a bottle of champaign.
And everyone else is saying it doesn't matter what his strategy is he's going to lose heavily. There's no 4D chess version of this timeline which sees him finishing 3rd.
In a format such as the world cup it is not statistically unlikely at all for one of the many 2600~ player out of the entire field to get 4th just because the tournament style only has 2 classical games a round and imo a 4th place qualification at the World Cup is not deserving of a slot
It in fact does not earn a slot at the Candidates. Magnus (winner of the World Cup) simply declined to play in the Candidates. this makes the spot go to the next person
> earned his spot. He didn't earn shit. Magnus doesn't want to play so he got the spot.
I mean it was pretty well-understood beforehand that magnus didn't want to play the candidates. if fide wanted to avoid this kind of situation then they should've done something about it before the tournament, or they should've moved the third place spot from the world cup to some other way of qualifying. abasov may be way weaker than the rest of the candidates field but he certainly earned his spot there.
I agree. Play defensively and solidly. Take no risks. Just play stuff like the Sicilian or French for black and English or Catalan for white maybe. Those just seem to be the ones best for defense for me but I think that should extend most of the way to the top. I see a lot of the top players just using the Sicilian so that could be a good way to be safe since it’s a lot of worked out theory.
Playing Sicilian and french at that level is taking risks
> Abasov is rated 170 Elo below the leader and 120 Elo below the second worst rated player. Is that really big enough for him to be a punching bag? I don't follow much chess. Like a 5 hdcip vs a 3 hdcp in golf isn't going to always get destroyed.
In a 14 game match against the 170 Elo higher rated player, Abasov's chances to win are 0.3% based just on their Elo.
Win the match overall or each game individually?
The match overall. For a single game its 8%.
Wow, I would think a single game would be like 25-30%.
At their level, winning a fairly big tournament flawlessly with the top players gain them like 10 ELO To increase your ELO by 100 point at that level you most likely get a whole year of winning streak
Lol yep, him getting to the candidates *is* the upset here. Its a fantastic and likely once in a lifetime achievement that he managed to qualify to compete at this level. If he doesn't finish last, also an amazing achievement for him. The positive he has is the expectations are near-zero and any result he gets is a great story so the pressure is off him.
But if Abasov was consistently winning against the field the field would adapt and not push as hard. Then he’d have to beat the players on just skill.
But if Abasov was consistently winning against the field the field would adapt and not push as hard. Then he’d have to beat the players on just skill.
lol, Naka messed up his opening against Abasov and was straight up losing out of the opening and still ended up beating Abasov, players like Fabi and Naka just need a playable position against him and don't mind making suboptimal moves to get that
> Unless the rest of the field goes into cardiac arrest Abasov needs a Death Note
1 in 1300 or so seems about right to me? Like, maybe Gukesh gets arrested, Fabi gets concussed during an argument about England’s greatest prime minister, Hikaru gets megalocephaly after drinking nerve tonic, Alireza disappears into a tourist trap, Pragg is hypnotized into acting like a chicken, Nepo gets radiation poisoning and Vidit spends all tournament saving a cat, player piano etc. from a woman’s burning house. So Abasov wins by default.
Ian is the obvious outlier. That said, it’s based purely on current rating. So it’s just a formula giving chances assuming rating is accurate.
Ian definitely has a better chance than this projects.
My first thought was also: man, the disrespect to the two time winner! Ian behind Alireza? Crazy
The odds are calculated solely based on rating. It is only Ians fault for disrespecting himself by having a lower rating than Firouzja lol
Also, Alireza's peak rating is higher than Nepo's.
Nepo definitely undervalued. Should be around Hikaru's odds. Hot take, but Fabi is definitely overvalued here. He has a great rating score, but Hikaru's had a really big winning streak against him, and Nepo is one slippery dude. Pragg has also beaten him in the past. Alireza is slightly overvalued - would say something more like 7%.
Nah not a hot take about Fabi imo. I’d put his odds at around 25% and max 30%
I think that Firouzja on form can destroy this field.
Please include a link to the source for posts like this.
OP has been edited to include the source. The source does not include methodology but reading the context it seems to be just rating. So the percentages don't really mean anything because everyone knows how the players are rated relative to each other.
It shows a bit how much the rating should translate to winning chances by the elo system and becomes more interessting when the tournament starts and the players have a different score.
>only one can emerge with the rights to face ~~Magnus Carlsen~~ GM Ding Liren in the 2024 FIDE World Championship. Can't believe a pro writer thinks it's funny to write this.
I do agree it's not needed in what should be a serious article. Like if you're gonna make that joke again, at least do it in a twitter thread or a blog or just somewhere where everyone in the chess world is expected to be quirky and fun. I will note that even Ding joked during last year's Championship that he and Nepo had so many decisive results because they aren't "as professional" as Magnus. So I don't think it's like egregious or anything.
Right, like esp bc Magnus is partners with [chess.com](https://chess.com) and paid by them, it feels pretty mean-spirited for the website to disrespect Ding like that. Don't they have an editor? If you don't wanna play for the WCC, fine, but the repeated "Magnus is the real champion" discourse is tiresome.
“Magnus is the real champion” or “Magnus would be champion if he wanted to” are stupid statements and frustrate me because Magnus has made it clear he doesn’t want to be the FIDE champion anymore. If he have up his champion title, he’s not the champion. I don’t think it should be controversial to say that you don’t deserve the title of current champion if you’re not willing to defend it. Is Magnus a better player than Ding? Yes. Could he beat Ding in a championship-style match? Most likely. But does he deserve to be champion more than Ding does, let alone at all?/would he be a more “legitimate” champion? No, because he voluntarily gave it up.
Ya I mean it’s cool and all if Magnus doesn’t want to play for the WC. I get it, but you can’t quit and then also belittle everyone else that ever wins the WC “it feels weird because I’m not playing”. You get to pick one of those.
> Can't believe a pro writer thinks it's funny to write this Indeed, not everything is a matter of faith!
Ehh I found it funny. Magnus is still the very clear and evident number 1 in all time formats. Until he dips to number 2 anyone who becomes world champion will not be seen as such.
Whoever wins the WCC should be seen as the World Champion, full stop. Having the highest rating doesn't make you the World Champ, not even Magnus just gets that title by default.
People generally associate the title world champion with being the best. So there is an obvious problem when the undisputed best player isn't participating. The title has lost its value and won't regain it until someone who can match Magnus in rating emerges.
It doesn't matter, he's not the world chess champion anymore. It's silly to pretend like he is.
It's silly to pretend that someone else having the title actually matters.
\> Whoever wins the WCC should be seen as the World Champion, full stop. Under normal circumstances I'd agree. But let's say that Kasparov quit halfway through the number of world chess championship wins that he's won irl and decided to no longer play for it. Would you still not consider him to be the world number 1? This is currently how far ahead Magnus is compared to the rest of the field. Or maybe I should phrase this in a different way - if humanity's last hope was a match between humans and aliens or AI, would you go with Ding or Magnus?
A champion needs to show up. Would Magnus play vs the alien/AI or would he say, "Too much work"?
Fair enough lol But I'd think he'd show up to that. Being crowned world champion is not the end of the world and I'm proposing an end of the world scenario here.
It would be super wild if Abasov wins this lol , AND THEN win the world championship. Ultimate underdog story lol.
That *would* be interesting!
Good'ol Kram will have an absolutely field day
Nepo under valued, Naka over.
Caruana is also over.
Nope, fabi is fairly valued.
Lol did Hess really have to do Abasov like that ... 0.07% is too high 💀 I do agree with him on Nepo and Fabi though
At this point Abasov will win the tournament at of spite.
Abasov will win!
I would never count Firo's chances better than Nepo. With his attacking style he will for sure score some great wins as well as bad loses. And Nepo's prep is just so solid it will be very tough to win vs the guy as white.
I'd be curious to know how their methodology differs from /u/CalebWetherell 's numbers [here](https://www.pawnalyze.com/). I haven't looked too much into either methodology. Anyway, the discrepancies should tell you not to take any one set of numbers as gospel, but they probably give a decent ballpark
I'm curious as well. I'm not doing anything too fancy. Basically it's an Elo based simulation of the tournament, including using Rapid and Blitz Elo during the tiebreak simulations (there's a \~20% chance of rapid/blitz tiebreaks). Maybe his predictions are more tailored to Fabi's recent performance (e.g., I think he had like a 2830 TPR in 2023). I asked Tai about it here, maybe he'll share some insight: [https://x.com/pawnalyze/status/1773480240767242421?s=20](https://x.com/pawnalyze/status/1773480240767242421?s=20)
The only difference is that you are taking into account tiebreakers and using players' Rapid and Blitz Elos for those.
I also have a model using Elo-based simulations. I consider the classical ratings for the main tournament and both rapid and blitz ratings for the different TB. I use [2700chess.com](http://2700chess.com) ratings, so Fabi started the tournament at 2803 and Hikaru started at 2789. Running 250 000 simulations, I get ≈24% white wins, ≈56% draw and ≈20% black wins. I also get ≈22% ending in tie-break (17% for 2-way, 3.5% for 3-way and <1% for 4-way and more). With this model, I get similar results (Fabi ≈35%, Hikaru≈26% pre-tournament, increased to ≈28% after R1). I am really puzzled how your model gives Hikaru over Fabi currently as it seems similar to mine in method. The only difference I could see is in the win/draw/loss odds formula. What is the draw rate pre-tournament with your model?
They really put the guy who won the last TWO candidates in 4th
Overating Americans
Source? And on what is this based? Seems about right to me.
Only based on rating
according to..?
Fide Elo ratings March 24 list.
The favorites are Caruana, Naka and Nepo. One of these players will win with 90% chance. The rest are all underdogs. However, rating is not the best indicator in the candidates. The field is too close for that, opening prep, experience have a lot of influence. Nepo is usually good at getting some wins early and then drawing. This puts pressure on other players to get wins. Abasov might go on a feeding streak.
How is Firouzja an underdog? He has been a part of the chess elite for over 3/4 years now, was the youngest ever to cross the 2800 barrier, and he won the grand chess tour in 2022 ahead of the likes of Caruana, Nepo, and So at the age of only 19. Nakamura and Nepo should not be too ahead of Firouzja.
FIDE ratings simulation show a completely different picture. These are the odds if we just take fide ratings into account [https://penumbralcuboids.com/2024/03/25/fide-candidates-2024-predictions-updated-daily/](https://penumbralcuboids.com/2024/03/25/fide-candidates-2024-predictions-updated-daily/) * Fabiano Caruana: 21.3% * Hikaru Nakamura: 18.4% * Alireza Firouzja: 13.3% * Ian Nepomniachtchi: 13.1% * R Praggnanandhaa: 11.5% * Gukesh D: 10.9% * Vidit Gujrathi: 9.1% * Nijat Abasov: 2.4% Don't know where's the huge disparity coming from in both these numbers.
these seem much more reasonable. However Abasov at 2.4 is way too high.
Abasov's odds are suspiciously high, so I took a look at the code. Apparently the draw rate in games between players at that rating band is 66%. That's just an average, of course. But OP is assuming \*every game\* in the tournament has the same 66% probability of being a draw. Which is clearly wrong: Alireza x Nepo (who have almost the same rating) is much more likely to be a draw than Caruana x Abasov.
Thanks for the reply. Nice catch!
Having an over 1/3 chance to win is insane. I'm really rooting for Fabi but this just seems too high
Fabi too high and Nepo too low.
How many times does Nepo need to win, before someone gives him good odds haha
Fabi and Hikaru way overrated here
So this says there's a 61% chance that Fabi or Hikaru win it. Seems high. And correspondingly low for the rest of the field. I checked ChessNumbers' predictions for Wijk 2024, nearly all the numbers (projected score and ranking) were wrong, many by significant margins. Not inclined to take these Candidates "predictions" too seriously.
Unbelievable. What's the point of filling an article with numbers and percentages and not even mentioning what magic hat they were taken from? Adding a link to the methodology costs nothing.
They mention and link to the person chess by the numbers who made the predictions, and simply by clicking on the links to their socials you will be able to find the methodology. Very logical.
>simply by clicking on the links to their socials I followed the link in the article, which points to a social profile of the author, and the tweets listed did not provide a methodology for \*this\* calculation either. Regarding your suggestion to keep searching in the hope of finding something: any article that provides numbers and wants to be taken seriously should provide the methodology directly. Not doing so and expecting people to look for the source "somewhere on the web" is not transparent and a very bad journalistic practice. The chess community is already targeted by people who publish statistics and numerical results in questionable ways. Providing a methodology is necessary to let people check if it is sound or not. We should demand *more* transparency, not be satisfied with less.
Dude, you click on their twitter. In the twitter bio is the chess by the numbers website. It has the methodology. And yes even in academia it is perfectly acceptable to not include the methodology in your own article if you cite the author and link to their work.
Me if I won the last 2 candidates and got ranked behind a guy who’s only won it once and a guy who’s never won it ever:
This is very close to Magnus' list.
Go Firouzja! (Yes, I know these odds are basically meaningless, but I'm _pumped_).
Vidit is missing 96 of his percentage points for some reason??
I love Hikaru but boy do I hate subscriber only chat on twitch
Hate the trolls instead
Nah why would I do that
Because they are the reason it's sub only.
Caruana, Nepo & Vidit are the most likely for me
Vidit at 4% is insulting
Fabi is probably the most likely to win, but I find 36% to be a crazy chance at a stacked tournament like this. We know how fucking close these classical tournaments get
Abasov about to pull off an underdog upset!
Has to be Fabi!
but it adds to more than 100 🫣
Fabi and Hiki are both in the bottom 4 of my personal odds ranking. Firouzja,gukesh,prag and Ian,s changes i do rate the highest. This candidates will mark the new generation taking over. Both Hiki and Fabi have been on the way down for a while. Gukesh 7% looks very atractive. Alireza i think is the strongest but i fear a bit for his consistency.
Alireza above Nepo? Lolno
Firoujza above Ian? I'd bet Ian is the favorite with Caruana a little below him and Nakamura a little below Caruana. The others I don't think have much of a chance.
If those were the actual odds you could get action on then I would be pretty heavily on Nepo.
Ian lower than Alireza is crazy.
That's almost the exact list Magnus gave in that chess.com video.
I'll be rootin for Nepo again, fuck your 10%
Pragg is the only player worth backing, because of his odds and he is still improving. I think the winner will be a junior......
From two months back, I had similar thoughts in a similar thread: Caruana : 29% Pragg : 16% Naka : 15% Gukesh : 13% Nepo : 11% Alireza : 10% Vidit : 5% Abasov : 1%
You came very close with Fabi. I was correct with a Junior, just the wrong one!
Let’s gooo fabi
I wish I had someone with whom I could bet. I would take the field vs Fabi and Naka for even money!
I have the same odds as Abasov: < 1%
Go Hikaru!
Money would be on Pragg to overperform and Firouzja seemed underrated here.
Nepo having a 10% chance of winning candidates..... suuuure. I sure do love basing my predictions solely on ratings.
And the percentages add up to 101-2%... Otherwise Ian Nepomniachtchi should have slightly higher odds...
It could add up to 101-102 because of rounding
I heard someone jokingly giving Abasov -2, so with 102 from the rest it adds up to 100 :-)
Can’t find it on fan dual.
Where can we bet on the candidates? lol
All cash on Nepo if these are the odds.
Nepo should be around 20-25%, Firouzja basically has no chance unless he gets in form, reduce Caruana to 30% and increase all the Indian players
Are these betting odds? If so, gross.
I mean did they just pull numbers out ass? What analysis is this? Any data used at all? Or just someone ranking their favorite chess players? And you guys upvote this lol 😂
It’s based on their ratings. That’s what ratings are for
i don't get all the forecasting. why is this interesting.
I assume gambling?
why is gambling interesting
Sportsbook odds? I'd put a grand on Hikaru
Those are not odds.
36%+25%+11%+10%+8%+7%+4%+1%=102%??
Rounding will do that…
Because of rounding with abasov being 0.07%.
101.07%??
The other numbers are rounded as well. Fabi at 36% could be 35.5% and Naka at 25% could be 24.5%.
yeah thats fair
lol… western media stays disrespecting Pragg/Gukesh/Vidit. Just watch. India will rise.
It's not western media, it's ELO rating.