He said some interesting things about the time control, but what I found notable was his view that it might mark the beginning of a rejuvenation of the world championship.
According to him, and I suppose he should know, many top players were just not that interested in the championship cycle, for three reasons. First, the financial and opportunity cost of preparing seriously; second, the randomness of the qualification process; and third, and perhaps most of all, the fact that at the end of it you were mostly likely only going to get beaten by Carlsen.
Now that Carlsen is out of the picture, Dubov thought that quite a few people would be thinking about the championship more earnestly. He half seriously thought that even Anand might make a comeback!
"At least when the game isn’t settled by the players’ homework with the computer - which is, frankly, one of the big reasons why faster time controls have become increasingly popular."
It's a common take that homework with the computer (and also knowing "established opening theory") matters more at classical time controls, but why would this be the case? With less time, you really need to know opening theory as you cannot figure it out over the board (or monitor). Also, it's harder to deal with surprises - even if you can neutralize them you may end up well behind on the clock: spending 10 minutes obviously matters more when you have, say, 15 minutes for the entire game plus some increment than when you have plenty of time remaining nonetheless.
Maybe deep topical lines are less common in rapid/blitz, while offbeat openings are more playable - Smith-Morra Gambit very recently in Nakamura-Caruana, even King's Gambit (I know Dennis doesn't like it). More playable because the surprise factor matters more than when the opponent can adjust.
Reportedly, Richard Rapport is a second of Ding Liren, not Nepo.
Some Chinese players have worked closely before with non-Chinese players.
Wang Hao was a second of Levon Aronian.
Some Chinese players (such as Li Chao and Wang Yue) are personally close; others are not.
Ding Liren may have chosen his second(s) for reasons other than nationality.
Interesting interview of Dubov concerning the match:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3nq9ueqiLKw
He said some interesting things about the time control, but what I found notable was his view that it might mark the beginning of a rejuvenation of the world championship.
According to him, and I suppose he should know, many top players were just not that interested in the championship cycle, for three reasons. First, the financial and opportunity cost of preparing seriously; second, the randomness of the qualification process; and third, and perhaps most of all, the fact that at the end of it you were mostly likely only going to get beaten by Carlsen.
Now that Carlsen is out of the picture, Dubov thought that quite a few people would be thinking about the championship more earnestly. He half seriously thought that even Anand might make a comeback!
"At least when the game isn’t settled by the players’ homework with the computer - which is, frankly, one of the big reasons why faster time controls have become increasingly popular."
It's a common take that homework with the computer (and also knowing "established opening theory") matters more at classical time controls, but why would this be the case? With less time, you really need to know opening theory as you cannot figure it out over the board (or monitor). Also, it's harder to deal with surprises - even if you can neutralize them you may end up well behind on the clock: spending 10 minutes obviously matters more when you have, say, 15 minutes for the entire game plus some increment than when you have plenty of time remaining nonetheless.
Maybe deep topical lines are less common in rapid/blitz, while offbeat openings are more playable - Smith-Morra Gambit very recently in Nakamura-Caruana, even King's Gambit (I know Dennis doesn't like it). More playable because the surprise factor matters more than when the opponent can adjust.