So it all ended with a three way tie in Wijk Aan Zee. Topalov, Radjabov and Aronian are the joint winners of the event (as far as I can tell, there is no tie-break system in operation).
There was a lot of exciting chess during the tournament and the number of 'grandmaster' draws were relatively few. However, I can't help feeling a bit dissatisfied with the outcome - a three way tie?! Surely there needs to be a single winner of such an event?
Of course, the difficulty is deciding how to operate the tiebreak . The Sonnenborn-Berger (S-B) system seems to be a standard way, but surely rapid playoffs could be used to decide a winner? I appreciate that time would need to be built into the schedule for this, but this should not be a problem.
What do the sponsors think of a three-way tie as an outcome? Maybe the Wijk sponsors, Corus, are too busy making steel and don't care, but I think many chess fans and sponsors would prefer a sole winner to be crowned. It's not too much to ask is it?
Should there be tiebreaks in chess tournaments?
- No, let there be joint winners
- 0
- Yes, use a tiebreak system to decide
- 1
- Yes, use playoffs to decide
- 1
Sign in to vote