Kramnik-Leko World Championship Match (2004)

MATCH STANDINGS
Kramnik-Leko World Championship Match

Peter Leko	7/14	(+2 -2 =10)	[view games]
Vladimir Kramnik	7/14	(+2 -2 =10)	[view games]

WCC Overview

<< previous

HISTORY OF THE WORLD CHESS CHAMPIONSHIP

next >>

<< previous

FIDE CHAMPIONSHIPS

next >>

Kramnik vs Leko, 2004
Brissago, Switzerland

In 2002, the annual Dortmund Sparkassen Chess Meeting had an added significance: it also functioned as a Candidates Tournament, for the winner would earn the right to play Vladimir Kramnik for the title. Seven of the top ten players competed in Germany, and emerging as winner was the Hungarian chess prodigy, Peter Leko.

Kramnik-Leko 2004
Leko (left) playing Kramnik in Switzerland, 2004
The financial backing for the match (a prize fund of $1.2 million) was contributed by the the cigar manufacturer Dannemann, the latest in a line of corporate sponsors (Intel, Braingames, and Einstein) for the non-FIDE World Championship title. The match was only 14 games, one of the shortest in World Chess Championship history. Kramnik was to retain the title in the event of a tie match, a detail which was to prove very important.

The very first game illustrated Kramnik's incredible defensive techniques. Leko, by most accounts, had the advantage by move 23; but Kramnik's masterful handling of the ending, combined with an error by Leko, enabled the Russian to take the full point. Not until the fifth game was Leko able to accomplish what Garry Kasparov could not: beat Kramnik in a World Championship match. Then in the eighth game, Leko was able to take the lead, when he achieved victory with the Black pieces by alertly finding over the board a serious flaw in Kramnik's immense opening preparation. Games 9 through 13 were all draws, leaving Leko ahead in the match with only one game left.

Come game 14, Leko needed only one more draw to secure the title of World Chess Champion. Kramnik was faced with the task of winning, at all costs, in order to save his title. Chess author and grandmaster Raymond Keene wrote of this phenomenal game:

Kramnik, the defending world champion, scored a brilliant victory in the 14th and final game; Peter Leko resigned after 41 moves when faced with checkmate. This is only the third time in the entire history of the World Championship that the defending champion has saved his titled by winning in the final game.
The game itself was a jewel of controlled aggression. Despite consistent exchanges throughout the game, Kramnik maintained an iron grip on the position and ultimately blasted his way into the black camp via the dark squares. Taking no account of material sacrifices it was Kramnik's king that dealt the fatal blow when it marched right into the heart of the opposing position.¹

After 14 games, with a tie score of 7 to 7, Vladimir Kramnik defended his title of World Chess Champion.

click on a game number to replay game 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14
Kramnik 1 ½ ½ ½ 0 ½ ½ 0 ½ ½ ½ ½ ½ 1

Leko 0 ½ ½ ½ 1 ½ ½ 1 ½ ½ ½ ½ ½ 0

FINAL SCORE: Kramnik 7; Leko 7
Reference: game collection Kramnik - Leko WCC Brissago,2004

NOTABLE GAMES [what is this?]

    · Game #14     Kramnik vs Leko, 2004     1-0
    · Game #8     Kramnik vs Leko, 2004     0-1
    · Game #1     Leko vs Kramnik, 2004     0-1

¹ World Chess Championship: Kramnik vs Leko by Ray Keene, 2004, Hardinge Simpole, p. 145.

page 1 of 1; 14 games

Game Result Moves Year Event/Locale Opening
1. Kramnik vs Leko ½-½ 18 2004 Kramnik-Leko World Championship Match C88 Ruy Lopez

2. Leko vs Kramnik ½-½ 23 2004 Kramnik-Leko World Championship Match C42 Petrov Defense

3. Kramnik vs Leko ½-½ 43 2004 Kramnik-Leko World Championship Match C88 Ruy Lopez

4. Leko vs Kramnik 1-0 69 2004 Kramnik-Leko World Championship Match D37 Queen's Gambit Declined

5. Kramnik vs Leko ½-½ 20 2004 Kramnik-Leko World Championship Match C88 Ruy Lopez

6. Leko vs Kramnik ½-½ 21 2004 Kramnik-Leko World Championship Match D16 Queen's Gambit Declined Slav

7. Kramnik vs Leko 0-1 32 2004 Kramnik-Leko World Championship Match C89 Ruy Lopez, Marshall

8. Leko vs Kramnik ½-½ 16 2004 Kramnik-Leko World Championship Match E15 Queen's Indian

9. Kramnik vs Leko ½-½ 35 2004 Kramnik-Leko World Championship Match C78 Ruy Lopez

10. Leko vs Kramnik ½-½ 17 2004 Kramnik-Leko World Championship Match E15 Queen's Indian

11. Kramnik vs Leko ½-½ 34 2004 Kramnik-Leko World Championship Match B19 Caro-Kann, Classical

12. Leko vs Kramnik ½-½ 65 2004 Kramnik-Leko World Championship Match A61 Benoni

13. Kramnik vs Leko 1-0 41 2004 Kramnik-Leko World Championship Match B12 Caro-Kann Defense

14. Leko vs Kramnik 0-1 65 2004 Kramnik-Leko World Championship Match C42 Petrov Defense

REFINE SEARCH: White wins (1-0) | Black wins (0-1) | Draws (1/2-1/2)

< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 71 OF 72 · Later Kibitzing>
Oct-22-04		Willem Wallekers: <acirce> You mean <dwangneurose>? Long time ago a was in a sort of youth hostel in Turkey. one of the roommates was a Swedish lad who didn't speak English too well. Suddenly he jumped up and shouted: O zere ees a dirty leetle animal in my bed! Me: What sort of animal? Him: I don't know ze name een Eenglish. Me: What's it called in Swedish? Him: O, een Swedish eet ees called <kackerlack> So I knew which animal he ment. (I tried the render a strong Swedish acccent in writing.)

Oct-22-04		acirce: Tv�ngsneuros, exactly! :-)

Oct-22-04		cheski: Not something I would have associated with Leko. I was looking for a chess term, like 'Over the Board'. A touch of ADD maybe, judging from move 22... in game 14.

Oct-22-04		Willem Wallekers: For the rest of you: a kackerlack (is that how it's spelled in Swedish?) or kakkerlak is a cockroach.

Oct-22-04		acirce: <is that how it's spelled in Swedish?> Almost, "kackerlacka". It's interesting how Dutch first looks like total nonsense to me (no offense ;-) but if you actually look at it a lot of the words are perfectly recognizable.

Oct-22-04		percyblakeney: And they are dirty little animals. :)

Oct-22-04		AgentRgent: <Rawprawn: I'd say it would hinder in tight situations by making him take too much time in re-analysing stuff he'd already thought through.> Which could somewhat explain his frequent time trouble. OCD can range from mild to crippling, a mild form could slightly benefit a Chess player by helping him maintain focus. But I don't want to get into a discussion on OCD lest Clendenon come after me. ;-)

Oct-22-04		beenthere240: A compulsion to touch the pieces during a game could complicate one's play -- unless of course the compulsion was to touch the right piece to move.

Oct-23-04		Rawprawn: Of course Obsessive Cockroach Disorder would lead to people being compelled to discuss creepie-crawlies when others are speaking of higher things like chess.

Oct-25-04		chessgames.com: <If chessgames.com covers the Kasparov match, will it have sufficient bandwidth to cope this time> We're working on getting additional hardware set-up before the match, in the form of a dedicated "live broadcast" server, but whether or not we can get it working in time is still a question.

Nov-12-04		JFHALLON: leko is the better player. one touch of grandmaster.

Dec-02-04		haha: <JFHALLON> I think Leko will be the World Chamption someday.

Dec-06-04		Knight13: I don't like the tiebreak here.

Dec-22-04		shortsight: if Leko becomes th echampion one day, will he be the world champion with the fewest defeat, but also fewest wins in his games?

Jan-13-05		Stevens: you mean the world champion that draws the most then!

Jan-14-05		TIMER: First we must be considering proportions as players play different number of games. A player with the smallest proportion of wins, and the smallest proportion of losses, by implication has the largest proportion of draws. But the player who has the highest proportion of draws, needn't have the lowest proportions of wins or lowest proportion of losses- he could have neither. So some imformation is lost.

May-03-05		aw1988: This match essentially showed how useless computers are.

May-03-05		maoam: <aw1988> How did you arrive at that conclusion?

May-03-05		Cecil Brown: Perhaps the Marshall game that Kramnik lost? Detailed computer prep on Kramnik's part, apparently didn't leave the computer on long enough and missed a forced winning line for black that Leko found OTB. Do you blame the deficencies of computer analysis? Or the analysts for not looking at the position hard enough themselves or not leaving the computer on longer?

May-03-05		maoam: <Cecil Brown> That's my point, how can you say that computers are useless when in fact they find Leko's refutation given enough time?

May-03-05		WillC21: <aw1988> Computers are undoubtedly useful. Programs like Fritz 8 on deep analysis can analyze a game much better than the average human and the programs are an essential tool for opening preparation today. Computers have in essence created a new age of chess. Just because Kramnik's handlers turned the computer off too soon and neglected to analyze thoroughly themselves gives no basis to say computers are useless. Kramnik himself conceded his defeat in that game was all the fault of his team and him, not Fritz. Computers today are now essential for preparation to play at the top level. That's all.

May-03-05		aw1988: My statement was a bit too harsh; I only half-meant it. I was kibitzing on this page saying they are useless looking at material imbalances like in the first game or the fifth game where it was all theory but dubious. The reason I was in an anti-computer feeling was that I had just played a game as black in the Grunfeld where white played e5 and Fritz said "gaining space", but everyone who plays the Grunfeld seriously knows this is bad and d5 is the move to play.

May-03-05		who: Who won in the end?

May-03-05		WillC21: Neither. It was a draw.

May-03-05		maoam: <who: Who won in the end?> Yes, he did ;)

Jump to page # (enter # from 1 to 72)
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 71 OF 72 · Later Kibitzing>

NOTE: You need to pick a username and password to post a reply. Getting your account takes less than a minute, totally anonymous, and 100% free--plus, it entitles you to features otherwise unavailable. Pick your username now and join the chessgames community!

If you already have an account, you should login now.

Please observe our posting guidelines:

No obscene, racist, sexist, or profane language.
No spamming, advertising, or duplicating posts.
No personal attacks against other users.
Nothing in violation of United States law.

See something which violates our rules? Blow the whistle and inform an administrator.

NOTE: Keep all discussion on the topic of this page. This forum is for this specific tournament and nothing else. If you want to discuss chess in general, or this site, you might try the Kibitzer's Café.

Messages posted by Chessgames members do not necessarily represent the views of Chessgames.com, its employees, or sponsors.

Spot an error? Please suggest your correction and help us eliminate database mistakes!