Is Ding Liren World Champion?

When Magnus Carlsen elected not to defend his title in 2023 against the winner of the Candidates tournament Ian Nepomniachtchi, the latter instead played a match against the tournament runner-up Ding Liren to determine Carlsen's successor. Already there were murmurings that this was not a "real" World Championship, with former World Champion Garry Kasparov notably describing it as an "amputated event" in Carlsen's absence. Widely considered to be the slight underdog, Ding Liren eventually prevailed in one of the bloodiest matches in recent memory - but does that really make him the new World Champion? With loud voices on both sides of the issue, I, having nothing better to do, intend to put this debate to rest.

* 

Is Ding Liren the current chess world champion? Many would consider this an absurd question, considering that he just won the World Chess Championship, and motion for its immediate dismissal on the grounds that it's stupid (it isn't) and a waste of time (it is). However, there are others in the rabbling rabble who would raise some objections, pointing to the indisputable facts that:

1. 1. he is clearly not the strongest player in the world - the previous World Champion Carlsen is stronger and still active;
   2. he did not qualify normally for the World Championship match; and perhaps most importantly,
   3. he did not defeat the previous World Champion in a match.

Indeed, there was much debate about whether the 2023 Nepomniachtchi-Ding match constituted a "real world championship match", and ChessDojo for instance thought the question had enough merit to leave Ding with an asterisk in their final list of true chess world champions.

It is unfortunate but natural for Ding that, having made a desirable jump which can occur in many contexts (e.g., from strong IM to weak GM, from richest millionaire to poorest billionaire), he is now subject to more scrutiny. From extremely dangerous chess assassin, one of the strongest of his generation, he has transitioned to weak World Champion, with a target on his back for any top player itching to enter the Chigorin Club. And some are casting doubt on his being a World Champion at all. This kind of sudden shift can easily lead to imposter syndrome and a negative effect on one's self-perception (Anand, incidentally, made the opposite shift in 2013 from weak and aging World Champion to extremely strong veteran and thereafter had a powerful resurgence in his career, progressing from a pitiful #8 in the world as WC to an impressive #10 at the age of 53). 

To begin answering the question of whether Ding Liren is indeed the current ruler of the chess world, I examine three other players who also had controversial paths to the title, but are nonetheless now fully accepted as legitimate world champions. 

Establishing Precedent

Exhibit A: Anatoly Karpov

In 1975, Anatoly Karpov won the title by default from Fischer. Thereafter, Karpov set out to prove that he deserved to be World Champion. With his refined, dry style and relentless precision, he crushed everyone in sight.

- Yasser Seirawan, Winning Chess Tactics

"The boy does not have a clue about chess, and there's no future at all for him in this profession."

- Mikhail Botvinnik

Let's start off easy. Karpov qualified to play the World Championship match after defeating Viktor Korchnoi in the 1975 Candidates Final. Bobby Fischer chose not to defend his title, and Karpov became champion by default. With Fischer quitting chess and finding other ways to express himself, Karpov went on to prove that he was without a doubt the best player in the world.

Verdict: Although Karpov did not defeat the previous World Champion in a match, he qualified to play the match fair and square, and was thus a deserving champion. What more can you do if you qualify and are willing to play? He did not need to add any further legitimacy to his title by winning every tournament in existence and several World Championship matches, but the fact that he did makes him, in my opinion, clearly the fourth-greatest chess player of all time (not just a mere World Champion).

Exhibit B: Mikhail Botvinnik 

When Alexander Alekhine died in 1946, there were no tactical wizards waiting in the wings to take his place. The science of pure chess took center stage, and the chief of the scientists, Mikhail Botvinnik, reigned from 1948 to 1960...

- Yasser Seirawan, Winning Chess Tactics 

"Chess is the art which expresses the science of logic."

- Mikhail Botvinnik

Botvinnik became World Champion by winning the 1948 World Championship tournament, which differed from the 1975 Karpov-Korchnoi match by being officially for the title, rather than a qualification to play a World Championship match. Although Botvinnik did not dominate the tournament circuit to the extent Karpov did later, he was definitely the best player in the world for some time, going on to win several World Championship (re)matches to further stamp his legacy.

Verdict: Like Karpov, Botvinnik did not actually defeat the previous World Champion in a match. Of course, Alekhine had a better excuse than Fischer did for not playing. However, you could interpret Botvinnik's path to the title as similar to Karpov's - saying it's roughly equivalent to winning a tournament to qualify for a match against Alekhine, who did not defend his title for personal reasons. By deservedly qualifying for the match and winning by default, Botvinnik became a legitimate World Champion.

Exhibit C: Vladimir Kramnik

"You get the impression that for the last ten years we've only been using his ideas."

- Viswanathan Anand

"Historically it had never been the case that the champion had to prove that he was the champion."

- Vladimir Kramnik

One of the most important chess players of all time, Vladimir Kramnik shocked the chess world in 2000 by defeating the invincible Garry Kasparov in a match and becoming World Champion. However, his claim to the throne is marred by the unfortunate circumstances surrounding the contest.

Firstly, the fact that Kasparov was not technically the official World Champion at the time, having broken away from the chess governing body FIDE in 1993 to organise his own matches. Secondly, the fact that Kramnik didn't even actually qualify to play against Kasparov, having lost the qualification match to Alexei Shirov. However, Kramnik later restored legitimacy to the title by defeating FIDE World Champion Veselin Topalov in the infamous 2006 match, reuniting the chess world and bringing balance to The Force.

Verdict: This is the most interesting case. Unlike Karpov and Botvinnik, Kramnik did not legitimately qualify for the World Championship match. Moreover, Kasparov may or may not have actually been the World Champion at the time. However, unlike Karpov and Botvinnik, Kramnik did actually defeat the champion to be the champion, which goes a long way.

Let's look at three possible arguments against the legitimacy of WC Kramnik.

1. 1. He was clearly not the best player in the world even after beating Kasparov, who remained active until his retirement in 2005. This is the weakest argument and one which no-one would use, which may prove important when considering the case of Ding Liren. There have been many times in chess history when the World Champion was not the best player, and that's fine. If Karjakin had beaten Carlsen in 2016, he would obviously have been World Champion despite clearly being a worse player - otherwise there would be no point to the match.
   2. Kasparov was not World Champion at the time (due to the split with FIDE). Personally, I like to think of the World Championship as being in a state of quantum superposition until the 2006 Kramnik-Topalov reunification match. When Kramnik played against Kasparov, the latter both was and wasn't the World Champion. In the leadup to 2006, Topalov (and others) had also become quasi world champions, existing in both states of being at the same time. If Topalov had beaten Kramnik in 2006, then perhaps we would now view the lineage as Kasparov→Kramnik→Topalov, or Kasparov→Topalov, or even Kasparov→Karpov→Khalifman→Anand→Ponomariov→Kasimdzhanov→Topalov. As it happened, however, the superposition collapsed the other way, and suddenly it was apparent to everyone that Kasparov had been World Champion all along, until Kramnik beat him in 2000.
      
      All that remained of WC Topalov was an afterimage as he became a "ghost world champion", an unrealised shadow of possibility. In the pantheon of World Champions, Kasparov and Kramnik stand a little further apart than you would expect, and the air distorts between their shoulders. If you look closely, you can make out the almost imperceptible outline of a figure with a goatee, mouth open in a perpetual scream that no-one can hear.
      
      

      

   3. Kramnik did not qualify for the match, and therefore his victory over Kasparov is null and void. Funnily enough, this may be the strongest argument. I don't really have a refutation, except to point out that the history of qualification has often been arbitrary, depending on the challenger having deep enough pockets to make it worth the champion's while. We still view the pre-1940, pre-FIDE WC matches as legitimate despite claims that some strong potential challengers were dodged, and those who missed out on matches have fallen by the wayside of history. Unfortunately, with time, all that seems to matter in the end are the actual match results. Kasparov selected his opponent the same way the old masters did, and lost.

While we already knew that you don't have to be the best player in the world to be World Champion, Kramnik additionally demonstrates that failing to properly qualify for the World Championship match can be forgiven if you beat the previous title-holder.

In conjunction, these exhibits show that in order to become a legitimate World Champion, it is sufficient to either:

• • Earn the right to challenge for the World Championship, and win the title by default; or
  • Defeat the reigning World Champion in an official match, regardless of the qualification method

The curious case of Ian Nepomniachtchi

After examining the cases of the above World Champions, a startling fact becomes clear - Nepomniachtchi should have been World Champion! Like Karpov and Botvinnik, he won a qualification process against the best players in the world (the 2022 Candidates Tournament) to earn the right to challenge the World Champion, who was unwilling or unable to defend their title.

Personally, I would have no problem whatsoever if at that point FIDE had simply declared him to be World Champion by default, à la Karpov. Although Karpov and Botvinnik's predecessors were not still active players after they lost the title (unlike Carlsen), we have the example of Kramnik and Kasparov to show that it's completely fine for the deposed champion to still be active and the best player in the world, without delegitimising the new champion's crown. The fact that Nepo was the previous World Championship cycle's runner-up only cements his claim further. And if he had then beaten Ding Liren, then that should have silenced the critics once and for all (though of course, it wouldn't have).

But as we know, it was the Chinese Grandmaster who won that fateful match. Which brings us to the man of the hour.

Ding Liren: The edgiest of edge cases

Though I was rooting for Ding, his winning makes things much murkier. For unlike Karpov and our interpretation of Botvinnik, he did not originally qualify for the World Championship match as he failed to win the Candidates, only getting in after Carlsen stepped down (what's more, he didn't even originally qualify for the Candidates tournament itself). Unlike Kramnik, he did not defeat the previous World Champion.

Moreover, he is clearly not the best active player in the world, as Carlsen is still pottering around tournament halls, ruining other elite players' days. As mentioned previously, this is the weak argument, but here it still has some merit as at least in the case of Kramnik or a hypothetical Karjakin win, they had beaten the previous champion so didn't need to be higher-rated to prove themselves. To make matters worse for chess purists, Ding only beat Nepo in rapid tiebreaks after not leading the classical portion even once (and thank goodness it didn't go to blitz). He did not fulfil either of the methods of becoming World Champion which we have proven to be sufficient.

So it seems at first sight that the unusual precedents we have examined do not help Ding Liren's case at all, as he undoubtedly has a weaker claim to the title than any of Karpov, Botvinnik and Kramnik did at the time they became World Champion. But is it nonetheless strong enough to be legitimate? To help us untangle things further, we may ask an intermediate question.

Is Magnus Carlsen the current World Champion?

This is not as stupid a question as it sounds, but I believe the answer is simple. Although Carlsen explicitly stepped down and is presumably not continuing to claim the title, there is an argument to be made that since he was never defeated in a match and is still active as a player, he remains the World Champion.

I would take exception to the implied value of his never being defeated. Failing to show up for the match is worse than showing up and losing, no question. You can't simply sit on the title and refuse to defend it, while claiming that you never lost it so it's still yours. Of course, one can't judge Carlsen for not wanting to go through the gruelling and unrewarding ordeal for the sixth time. As far as his legacy goes, given:

• • how exhausting six title matches would be
  • how the short match format and long time control make it incredibly difficult for him to demonstrate his superiority over a well-prepared challenger
  • how large a favourite he would have been against Nepo had he played

- I'm inclined to give him as much benefit of the doubt as humanly possible. I view his refusal to defend the title as only very slightly worse than if he had played and lost convincingly. Of course, playing and losing has to be the absolute upper bound on the credit I can give him for not playing at all. 

"When you're judging a man, it's on the sum of his actions. Not what would have happened if he had done what they asked him."

- Soul

If Carlsen had played Nepo and lost, he would no longer be the World Champion. Since he didn't even play, he definitely isn't the World Champion.

So if Carlsen isn't WC, then who is? It can't be Nepo, as he just lost the World Championship match. Therefore, there are only two possibilities:

• • Ding Liren is the World Champion; or
  • There is no World Champion!

It would be depressing to think that there is currently no WC. It seems especially unlikely an answer as the World Championship cycle is still alive and well. But if we really cannot conceptually reconcile Ding Liren being the World Champion, then that is the improbable truth which remains.

Fortunately, there is a solution.

Tying it all together

Your Honour (if that is in fact your real name), when I began this case with Exhibits A, B and C, it seemed that it all came to nought, as Ding Liren's claim to the title is strictly weaker than all of theirs. However, if you recall, they did help legitimise the case of another player... 

I claim that after Magnus Carlsen refused to defend his title, the true Champion was Ian Nepomniachtchi!

(Audible gasps)

Seen in this light, Ding Liren's path to the chess crown makes perfect sense. Although he did not win the 2022 Candidates Tournament, by coming 2nd he was the best-qualified of all the contenders to challenge the defending World Champion, Ian Nepomniachtchi. Moreover, as the precedent of Vladimir Kramnik has proved, his unusual qualification can be forgiven as he managed to win the match.

Finally, the fact that he is clearly not the best player in the world is no longer relevant. This is conceptually a problem if it is the previous title-holder who is clearly stronger, still active and was not defeated in a match by the new champion. For example, Anand was still considered to be World Champion even during the last years of his reign when Carlsen was already a superior player - as he had earned his title properly by beating the previous holder. It didn't matter that some other player had since appeared on the horizon who was clearly better. Similarly, after Nepo deservedly gained the title by default from Carlsen (as discussed), Ding then legitimately gained the title by beating the new World Champion - Carlsen doesn't enter into the equation for him. All three possible criticisms are thus refuted.

It was Nepomniachtchi who used the first method of becoming World Champion - winning by default after qualifying legitimately. Ding used the second method - beating the reigning World Champion in an official match.

Alas for poor Nepo, it is tragic. Since he was never officially recognised as World Champion, he becomes a ghost, like Topalov. Time will tell if he makes a return in a more corporeal fashion. But like imaginary numbers, he served his conceptual purpose. Like a platformer video game, Ding jumped on a step in midair on the way to reach a stable higher platform - then looked back to see that the step had disappeared. Like Harry Potter taking ownership of the Elder Wand from a Malfoy who never knew he had it. Like, um, another nerdy reference... 

-But don't let the past injustice to Nepo prevent you from doing right by Ding today. Knowing what we do now, and having traced back the ghostly timeline of chess history, we can say with conviction that 

DING LIREN IS THE 17TH WORLD CHESS CHAMPION

(Applause)

"Order!"