If Carlsen played Anand now, and Carlsen had the normal amount of time for his moves, but Anand had, say, one week for his, and if by some quirk Carlsen was unable to think about the position during Anand's thinking time, who would be more likely to win?
Anand simply has more thinking time. No computers.
Another question. Is it illegal for a player to write anything down during a game, other than what moves have been played? Or using a pocket set to aid visualization?
Both of those are illegal. If Anand has to follow these rules in your scenario as well, he's not going to be able to do 40x more analysis than Carlsen, even though he has about 40x more clock time. There will be diminishing returns. He would spend a larger proportion of his extra time just trying to keep his thoughts organized. But I think it's enough that he can never really get into time pressure, and never has to cut his analysis short due to time constraints, to make him the favorite.
Originally Posted by lastcardcharlie
Another question. What measures are in place to prevent Carlsen or Nepo having a device via which an outsider with a computer can communicate with them?
I'm not sure, but metal detectors have been used in chess tournaments before.
Fun fact: In KK3 and KK5, Kasparov clinched the title by scoring 12 points after 23 games, yet the 24th game was still played in both cases. (There were no tie breaks, the champion retained the title in a 12-12 tie.
the reason for that was that in case of a 12-12 tie, the prizemoney would have been split 50-50. So they didnt play for the title at that point, but for money
Just wanted to say as a casual observer( by some super inclusive criteria I could be considered non casual) I really enjoyed following game 6. Really illustrates Magnuses greatest strength to bleed out wins in tough endgames. What a champ.