Interesting article on ditching the title of World Champion
http://en.chessbase.com/post/anand-vs-carlsen-no-more-kings-
This is probably a good idea. Human beings have very little incentive to play once they reach the highest peak (not in ability but external titles), as we have witnessed with Anand. On the other hand, having Majors like in tennis, encourages all players to play all the time since you are only as good as your last few grandslams. This keeps the best players constantly interested.
Another possibility is to keep the title World Champion, but the title would require not just winning a head to head match but scoring a certain percentage of the 4 "slams", say +1 and +2 at least even on the other two. Any prize fund would only be awarded on completion of the total of them.
http://en.chessbase.com/post/anand-vs-carlsen-no-more-kings-
This is probably a good idea. Human beings have very little incentive to play once they reach the highest peak (not in ability but external titles), as we have witnessed with Anand. On the other hand, having Majors like in tennis, encourages all players to play all the time since you are only as good as your last few grandslams. This keeps the best players constantly interested.
Another possibility is to keep the title World Champion, but the title would require not just winning a head to head match but scoring a certain percentage of the 4 "slams", say +1 and +2 at least even on the other two. Any prize fund would only be awarded on completion of the total of them.