Radjabov withdraws from candidates! MVL to play

It's been suggested by some that they can arrange for him to play all the other 8 candidates individually,
then resume the tournament normally over 8 rounds with everyone playing each other.

Failing that I agree, he should have a guaranteed slot in the next candidates,
so even if he plays no tournaments at all he still gets the wildcard.

OK Radjabov won the World Cup..which is a knock-out event and not your standard, super, elite GM competition. that said, let's not forget Radjabov ended up dead last in the London Candidates where he lost 7 games , and was 2 games behind the next player... IMO , I don't think he stands a chance to win the current Candidates (if he is allowed to compete).

@ogb said
OK Radjabov won the World Cup..which is a knock-out event and not your standard, super, elite GM competition. that said, let's not forget Radjabov ended up dead last in the London Candidates where he lost 7 games , and was 2 games behind the next player... IMO , I don't think he stands a chance to win the current Candidates (if he is allowed to compete).

Yes Radjabov didn't do well last time. Ding is in dead last now, does that rule him out of the next candidates as well? Radjabo's performance in the World cup was outstanding. Don't forget, you have to actually defeat your opponents in that event. All 128 entrants are winners of qualifying events or are World elite. Yes you have 2600 players in the first round, but a lot of those are under rated juniors. It is a tough event, arguably the toughest IMHO. 4 weeks of pressure to win, draws don't count at all if you don't score. In other sports this format would be for the actual title of WC.

The post that was quoted here has been removed

Well it's a suggestion. Removing the tournament leader would be pretty controversial, though it's all controversy at this point..

The post that was quoted here has been removed

Yes but if you include Radjabov then he will have to play everybody twice. I would be amazed if they went for that as it would set all sorts of weird precedents. One of the main criticisms labelled at Fide is inconsistency. A ruling like that would hardly banish such accusations.