lichess.org
Donate

Should we have a preference on the next Chess World Champion?

Will Ding retain it or will Gukesh be a beacon for the human chess youth? They both have 3500+ rated computers to study from. Is there a reason to prefer one over the other? Does age matter more than who can ask our silicon friends/enemies? What are your thoughts on the importance of the title? Made more sense before computers were invented to solve chess right. ;)
I'm very torn.

If we go by the last 5-10 years, Ding is the third best player in the world (behind Magnus and Fabi).

But looking at what result would be the best for the future of chess, it would have to be a Gukesh win.
I'll be rooting for Gukesh, what's not to like? (And i'm an old Boomer.)
I don't see much reason to have a favourite. From what I can see (which is no more than anyone else), I think they are both fine young people. They both play interesting chess, and they both have that important competitive quality; the ability to hold it all together when the going gets tough and the stakes are high.
We can speculate about what victory or defeat might mean to either of them (or "the good of the game") in the coming WC final, but that's just it. Speculation. I'm looking forward to seeing some good chess. Is that too little to ask?
There are periods in chess history where the world's strongest player and world champion are one and the same. And there are others where the two are divergent. We are clearly in the second scenario, so in a higher sense it does not matter who becomes world champion.
Nevertheless, I will be rooting for Gukesh as it will be amazing to see an 18 year old world champion. And it will be the culmination of the great strides made by India as a chess powerhouse. Fifty years ago, the Philippines was by far the #1 chess nation in Asia while China and India were nowhere.
@basmati94 said in #2:
> I'm very torn.
>
> If we go by the last 5-10 years, Ding is the third best player in the world (behind Magnus and Fabi).

Fourth, you forgot Karjakin.
Don ́t get your question. Preferences are purely personal things, and nothing can force you to have them. So no, we shouldn ́t *have* to have a preference. But it ́s fine if we do.
I know an elite community that prefers to play their games fast. Magnus and Karpov are not fast at beating you yet still became world champions. The question I am really asking is how their styles differ? It feels like many players these days are afraid to take risks. Was Kasparov the true attacker or has chess reached the upper limit no matter who plays? I did not think Gukesh's play was that spectacular in the candidates, but I might not be in a position to judge. If the WC is too bland from my pov I might not pay attention to chess again. Computers and this type of play took some of the excitement out imo.
I think its clear everyone should root for Ding to recover from the yips or wtf he has going on in time to prepare. No one wants a world champion that beat a wrecked shell of a former great. Without knowing exactly what is going on with Ding, its hard to even speculate on the odds the match actually happens. I'd be surprised if the WC match dates and terms are announced before Ding has a successful comeback tournament.

If Ding shows he is back . . . then I don't really care who wins.