In the span of four hours on Wednesday, a plan to hold two presidential debates between Joe Biden and Donald Trump went from rumour to reality.

While some details still need to be hammered out, it appears the Democratic and Republican candidates will face off twice, on 27 June and 10 September.

Mr Trump, who has for months been calling for a debate “anytime, anywhere”, got what he wanted.

Mr Biden, meanwhile, got to set the terms of th

eir meetings. Third-party candidates, namely Robert F Kennedy Jr, got less of a chance of being included on stage. And the bipartisan Commission on Presidential Debates, which has organised these showdowns since 1988, got a one-way ticket to the history books.

Now we have an idea of the agreed terms, here’s a closer look at how the debates could benefit, or damage, the two campaigns.

The president had been coy about whether he was ever going to debate his Republican opponent. But if he had taken a pass, he would have been the first president since Richard Nixon in 1972 to skip the debate process entirely.

Given that there have been repeated questions about his age and competency to serve another four years in office, a move to sidestep the presidential face-offs would have risked convincing the public that he was not up to the task.

As it was, he was able to set the terms of the debate in a way that could be to his advantage. The two events will be hosted by CNN and ABC News, and not Fox News, avoiding a debate moderator with a clear right-wing tilt.

The June debate will be held in CNN’s Atlanta studios with no live audience, which also may play better for the president, whose crowds have been less enthusiastic than the former president’s. It also guarantees Mr Biden will not be interrupted by pro-Palestinian protesters, which has been a campaign concern during recent public appearances.

There are several ways the early timing of the first debate – held, in a break with tradition, before the summer party nominating conventions – may also help Mr Biden.

First, it will allow his team an earlier opportunity to frame the election as a binary choice between Mr Trump and Mr Biden. Mr Biden’s advisers have long contended that as the public becomes more aware of the possibility of another Trump presidency, the Democrat’s support will solidify.

Second, a June debate gives Mr Biden more time to recover if he has a weak performance. Incumbent presidents – from Ronald Reagan to Barack Obama – have a history of uneven first-debates. If Biden follows this trend, he has months, including what is sure to be a carefully scripted Democratic convention speech, to rebound.

Of course, the plan also has risks. If he is still trailing in October, there won’t be any high-profile debates, with their audiences in the tens of millions, to shake things up. There’s also the chance he does struggle, which could lead to second-guessing about his decision to participate at all. And if he seriously falters in June, it may cement the public’s view that he’s not up to the task to the point where no convention speeches or multimillion-dollar advertising campaigns could change it.

Trump’s big debate gamble

Mr Trump gave up a lot of control to secure the president’s debate commitment. If he soundly defeats Mr Biden in November, as he promises he will do, it will prove to have been worth it.

The upside of the debate plan for the former president is clear. He will have the opportunity to draw a sharp public contrast between himself and his opponent and, potentially, advance the notion that Mr Biden is feeble and that he would be a stronger, more capable leader.

As with Mr Biden, the early debate timing would give Mr Trump opportunity to recover if he doesn’t fare well.

While the Biden team has said the two currently scheduled presidential debates will be the only ones this season, Mr Trump can – and already has – called for more face-offs and can try to paint Mr Biden’s refusal as a sign of weakness.