Talk:FIDE Grand Prix 2022

"Reference 3: At most the World Cup and Grand Swiss will provide 6 Grand Prix players each..."
Why 6 at most, and not 8? Is there some mathematical reason for this, given that each tournament qualifies the top 8 except those already qualified for the WC cycle? If this is not a mistake, perhaps some reasoning could be provided?

Kriventsov (talk) 21:45, 26 July 2021 (UTC)


 * I believe the article was edited in the meantime and now it is very clear why.


 * "Five of the quarterfinalists from the Chess World Cup 2021 (of the other three quarterfinalists, Magnus Carlsen qualified for the next world championship cycle thanks to being the incumbent World Champion, and Sergey Karjakin and Jan-Krzysztof Duda qualified for the Candidates Tournament directly from reaching the final of the World Cup). The players ranked third to eighth in the FIDE Grand Swiss Tournament 2021, who are not World Champion and have not otherwise qualified for the Candidates." this as the top2 in the WC and the top2 in the grand swiss get qualified to the candidates and thus it is not needed that they play the grand prix and Magnus is already qualified as well.


 * --Pier4r (talk) 17:58, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

" to reduce the randomness imposed by the previous knockout format."
While a knockout format based on mini matches introduces more upsets, actually a series of tournaments balances out. Over many tournaments the strongest player (don't rely only on rating, strongest means also player that do not choke) are selected, whether they play knockouts, swiss or round robin.

Thus the "randomness" part can be misleading here because (a) is not that random, a knockout with mini matches has a bit more variance, that is it and (b) the variance was decreased over several tournaments. Therefore I would remove that part of the sentence.

It is true though, that the format in 2022 (double round robin and then knockout and then points over several tournaments) likely would reduce variance even more.

--Pier4r (talk) 17:54, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

Ding Liren
Ding Liren didn't participate in the FIDE World Cup 2021 or play at least 9 rated games in 2021. Olegvm7 (talk) 08:33, 29 November 2021 (UTC)


 * See the chess.com reference. Adpete (talk) 07:12, 12 December 2021 (UTC)


 * That is false. Candidates in April 2021 (7 games) and A 4 rounds match vs Lu in China in Nov 2021 (4 games). Thus 11 rated games between Feb. and Dec. 2021. --Pier4r (talk) 15:35, 29 January 2022 (UTC)


 * Yes, that is what the chess.com reference said. Adpete (talk) 06:20, 8 February 2022 (UTC)

World Chess
World Chess redirects to the FIDE page for some reason, and World Chess doesn't have a Wikipedia article, so I changed it to an external link pointing to World Chess' site.

User:I_dream_of_horses reverted it, claiming Worldchess.com is run by FIDE. That's not true. World Chess is an independent company that happens to be a FIDE partner. That's pretty clear in the FIDE article too.

I'm not an active editor and I don't wish to enter an edit war, so I'll just leave this here for the record. Rcaetano (talk) 01:30, 21 December 2021 (UTC)


 * @Rcaetano Isn't World Chess and FIDE the same organization? If not, the Wikipedia article for FIDE might need to be clarified or corrected. It starts with "The International Chess Federation or World Chess Federation, commonly referred to by its French acronym FIDE ([insert IPA here] FEE-day Fédération Internationale des Échecs)..."
 * " I dream of horses (Contribs) (Talk) 01:35, 21 December 2021 (UTC)


 * @I dream of horses No. You restored the link to World Chess in your revert; have you read it? "World Chess" is not the same as "World Chess Federation". The former is a for-profit company formerly known as Agon. The latter is an unofficial moniker for FIDE, a non-profit organization officially registered as Fédération Internationale des Échecs in Switzerland. The literal translation of the official name is International Chess Federation.


 * Yeah, I know it sounds confusing. And that confusion was probably intentional i.e. Agon's management wanted their company to look more important/official than it is; but this is already out of scope of Wikipedia.
 * Rcaetano (talk) 04:36, 21 December 2021 (UTC)
 * @Rcaetano Oh. My bad. Maybe put the external link in the external link section. We don't always need every word to link elsewhere, internally or not. I dream of horses (Contribs) (Talk) 04:38, 21 December 2021 (UTC)


 * World Chess should redirect to the section "Commercial agreement with Agon and World Chess" in the FIDE article. I think that is the right thing to do, until World Chess gets its own article. Does that not work in some browsers? Adpete (talk) 22:02, 24 January 2022 (UTC)

Wei Yi
I see tht Harikrishna took over Wei Yi. Does someone know why? Any source about it? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pier4r (talk • contribs) 18:08, 23 January 2022 (UTC)


 * Chessbase says it has happened but gives no explanation . Adpete (talk) 21:58, 24 January 2022 (UTC)

Tables
I have removed green from the tables, because the usual convention is only to put a player in green once they have qualified for the next stage.

I also think the tiebreak columns should be removed, because there are no tiebreak scores. The only tiebreak is a playoff, and we can add extra tables for playoffs as necessary. Adpete (talk) 02:26, 25 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Everywhere in wiki we mark the Places which qualify for something, just to show which Place is important. If some Player finally qualify, than his Name is in bold letters. Is common in every sport page in Wikipedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Future-Trunks (talk • contribs) 05:57, 25 January 2022 (UTC)


 * I have never seen that. For instance here is the page for the Candidates 2020-21 after 8 rounds, Nepo is leading but his name is not in green yet. Here are two other examples in other sports, of green not used until teams have qualified: . Adpete (talk) 06:44, 25 January 2022 (UTC)
 * In NBA ad NFL are the Places ist not marked bei color but with a big stroke. So it is imported to show, where are the places which qualify. Some other Examples

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2021%E2%80%9322_Premier_League https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2021%E2%80%9322_Bundesliga https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2022_FIFA_World_Cup_qualification --Future-Trunks (talk) 11:02, 25 January 2022 (UTC)
 * So what that shows is some articles (NFL, NBA) only show colour when a team has actually qualified, while football (soccer) articles use colour even before the tournament begins. Perhaps that is because some soccer tournaments (like the Premier League example) have multiple things to qualify for. In any case, we want to ask what is best for chess articles, and personally I think the use of colour before a player has qualified is misleading. I would not object to a solid line, but I think it is unnecessary, because there is only one qualifying position, so it is obvious. It would also require redoing the tables after every round, which I think would be a pain. Adpete (talk) 03:11, 26 January 2022 (UTC)

But nobody knows the qualification modus. Ask some Chess fans, the most of them did not know the modus. Even the examples you brouhgt mark the qualification places. If you dont like colors, mark them of an other way. --Future-Trunks (talk) 06:12, 26 January 2022 (UTC) not only football https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=2022_European_Men%27s_Handball_Championship&diff=1066299271&oldid=1066299226


 * But the article explains the qualification! Anyway, if we mark them, e.g. by a solid line, it should be below all players who are equal first. Because there are no tie-break scores; all players who are equal first in their pool progress to a rapid playoff.
 * Do you agree about removing the tiebreak columns? Adpete (talk) 07:52, 26 January 2022 (UTC)

I really don't see the need to remove information, unless it is making things confusing but for the moment it is not. Nor it should be that one active editor "dominates" making the article a sort of personal property. --Pier4r (talk) 15:38, 29 January 2022 (UTC)


 * Surely including tiebreak scores, when tiebreak scores are not even used is misleading, which is worse than confusing! And the article is certainly not my personal property. Adpete (talk) 07:41, 30 January 2022 (UTC)


 * Oh then yes, if the tiebreaks aren't included they could go, or one could add them in additional stats but I am not sure whether that ends under the "original research" policy of Wiki (plus it would be basic arithmetic). --Pier4r (talk) 15:48, 2 February 2022 (UTC)
 * I removed the irrelevant tie-break columns. Joriki (talk) 20:06, 4 February 2022 (UTC)

time control info
>The time control throughout the Grand Prix (except in tiebreaks) is 90 minutes for the first 40 moves, with 30 minutes for the rest of the game after move 40. There is a 30-second increment starting from move one.

Why does r/chess have this info while wikipedia doesn't? Thewriter006 (talk) 08:23, 9 February 2022 (UTC)


 * Because we forgot. But remember WP:SOFIXIT. Anyway, I've added it now. Adpete (talk) 23:01, 9 February 2022 (UTC)


 * nice. thanks. any sources though? Thewriter006 (talk) 11:32, 22 February 2022 (UTC)


 * Regulations from FIDE website: "5. 2. 2. The time control for each standard game in pools and play-off is: 90 minutes for the first 40 moves, followed by 30 minutes for the rest of the game with an increment of 30 seconds per move starting from move 1." Matey1671 (talk) 19:26, 22 February 2022 (UTC)


 * That document is the reference for nearly everything in the "Format" section". The reference was given at the start of the section, but that probably was not enough. I have put it in a few more places now. Adpete (talk) 23:26, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

Esipenko and Wojtaszek ability to qualify
Esipenko and Wojtaszek are unable to qualify for the candidates as they are not expected to take part in either of the remaining legs. Is there any reason to assume they will take part, or shall we expect the tournament to continue as currently planned? PaddyM23 (talk) 17:38, 13 February 2022 (UTC)


 * The argument was that they might get subbed in for one of the other tournaments. Which is true... but only if there is a new announcement from FIDE. I would prefer that the table reflects the current state of the regulations, i.e. at the moment, Esipenko and Wojtaszek cannot qualify, and their names should be shaded. If they later get put in another tournament, we can easily unshade them. But (for me at least) it makes no sense for the table to say they are playing no further tournaments but still can qualify. Adpete (talk) 00:55, 15 February 2022 (UTC)


 * I agree with this, and also I think the same should be applied to Ding Liren now, because as for now he has no tounaments to participate in, so it should be marked that he can't qualify. Matey1671 (talk) 14:10, 15 February 2022 (UTC)


 * OK, I see the point – I added a sentence above the table to explain that this indication may change if such a player is invited as a replacement – I think without that caveat, this would be too speculative. Joriki (talk) 08:20, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

Country codes
An IP editor wrote in their comment: "Added the three-letter abbreviations for the players' countries. I noticed some strange abbreviations, though. According to the ISO codes, the Netherlands should be NLD and Iran should be IRN. Can anyone confirm this?"

But since this is sport, I think we should be using the IOC country codes. In that case, the article as it stands is correct, i.e. NED for Netherlands and IRI for Iran. Adpete (talk) 04:46, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

Flags for Russian players
Russian flags in tournament two have been replaced by the FIDE flag to align with FIDE's decision to ban the display of the Russian flag at their events. Should this also be reflected in the overall standings table and/or the players' list, which currently both still show Russian flags? For tournament one I believe Russian flags can remain in place as that section concluded before FIDE's ban came into effect. PaddyM23 (talk) 15:12, 1 March 2022 (UTC)


 * Currently their country is given as "FIDE". I would rather leave the country ("RUS"), to make it clear they are Russian, and remove the flags. As an aside, the FIDE flag is copyrighted so it will get removed soon, if not by me then by the Wikipedia Copyright bot! Adpete (talk) 03:22, 2 March 2022 (UTC)


 * I think that the point of removing the flag is that athletes now don't represent their country, so I don't think "RUS" is ok. I think we have 3 options:
 * 1) take the "country" for each player in the leg 2 from last news on FIDE website (https://www.fide.com/news/1605);
 * 2) just put "CFR/FIDE" for every Russian player to differ them from regular players under FIDE flag;
 * 3) just leave the "FIDE" "country" for every player.
 * I think the best way is to take "countries" from the arcticle mentioned for the 2nd tournament, and to put "CFR/FIDE" for every Russian player in the overall GrandPrix standings.
 * About flags, I don't know much about copyrights, but I think that if we can use FIDE flag, we shold use it, and if we can't, than let's just leave Russian players without flag. I also agree that "first tournament" section should not be affected by this. Matey1671 (talk) 09:17, 2 March 2022 (UTC)

Return the RUS flag, FIDE banned RUSSIAN FLAGS from FIDE EVENTS ONLY not from Wikipedia. Stop spreading western propaganda Hardiksahu13 (talk) 06:10, 27 February 2023 (UTC)

Theoretical possibilities after 2nd leg
This edit says "It is mathematically impossible for Yangyi, Oparin or Keymer to qualify due to the seeding of group A of the third leg of the grand prix", but I believe that is incorrect. If Nakamura comes last in group A he will get 0 GP points, and Aronian and Andreikin come equal second they get 3 GP points, leaving them all on 13 points. Then Yangyi, Oparin or Keymer could win the tournament and be on 13 points too, tying for 2nd most GP points; then that person could win the countback and qualify. It's incredibly unlikely, but possible. So I have reverted the edit. Adpete (talk) 00:52, 15 March 2022 (UTC)


 * I agree. This edit made the same change again but was soon reverted.
 * Things may change today, though, either if Hikaru can no longer end up sole last in his pool, or if Vincent can no longer catch him in the game points tie-breaker. Joriki (talk) 10:46, 27 March 2022 (UTC)
 * I undid a change that for the wrong reason greyed out MVL and Predke. But: given that Nakamura is guaranteed 16 GP points and 9.5 Grand Prix points, shouldn't some players be greyed out?  Not MVL, who can win the tournament and achieve 20 if there is a four-way tied pool where he wins the play-off, but: If Shak wins his remaining three games (last round + semi + final), he ends up with 3 more game points, 9 in total, and behind Nakamura on tie-break number 3.  Also everyone with 3 points as of now: they can reach at most 8.5 game points, and will lose out to Nakamura.  Have I gotten it correct?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.157.190.82 (talk) 18:45, 27 March 2022 (UTC)

City or nation flags for tournament locations?
I replaced the national flags in front of the cities in which the tournaments were played by the city flags. User:SpyroeBM reverted the change; see the edit summaries here and here for the reasons they gave.

I believe the cities should be preceded by their city flags. I don't see a reason why we should go up exactly to the level of the nation-state and not, say, one level less to the province in which the city lies or one level further up to the European Union (in the case of Berlin). The location is specified as a city, and if it's to be accompanied by a flag, it should be the flag of the location and not of some other political unit in which that location happens to lie.

Note that this is different from the flags for the players. Those flags represent the chess federations of the players, not their nationalities; it just so happens that chess federations are largely organized corresponding to nation-states. The Berlin tournaments were not organized by the German chess federation.

I'd be interested to know what others think about this; I didn't want to re-revert without hearing further views. Joriki (talk) 21:54, 28 March 2022 (UTC)


 * I don't think city flags are generally recognisable. I don't even know the flag of my own city. So I much prefer the national flags. (Or no flags).Adpete (talk) 23:30, 29 March 2022 (UTC)