chessgames.com
Members · Prefs · Laboratory · Collections · Openings · Endgames · Sacrifices · History · Search Kibitzing · Kibitzer's Café · Chessforums · Tournament Index · Players · Kibitzing

  WCC Overview
 
  << previous HISTORY OF THE WORLD CHESS CHAMPIONSHIP next >>  
  << previous FIDE CHAMPIONSHIPS next >>  
Kasparov vs Kramnik, 2000
London, England

 Kramnik-Kasparov 2000
 Kramnik (left) plays Kasparov for the title
Although Garry Kasparov was not recognized as champion by FIDE, the rest of the chess world continued to acknowledged him as the best player. He had continued to dominate the chess tournaments while FIDE's new system to select their champion, consisting of a single tournament of short knockout matches, offended the sensibilities of both players and fans. However, Kasparov had not played a match in 5 years, and believed that for his title to maintain its credibility, it was time to take on a new challenger.

The Braingames organization was created by a group headed by Grandmaster Ray Keene specifically to organize a match for Kasparov. Whereas the champion's challenger had since 1948 been the winner of a series of tournaments and matches, this time Kasparov's opponent was simply picked by GM Keene. Keene writes:

I personally selected Kramnik as the most worthy and dangerous opponent to play Kasparov in 2000. We wanted the best opponent possible for Kasparov. We chose the highest rated opponent, Anand, but he refused, so we went to the next man down on the ratings, Kramnik, who, by the way, overtook Anand in the ratings while the latter was considering whether to play or not. [1]
Vladimir Kramnik, born in Tuapse, Russia exhibited great potential very early in his chess career. At only 16, he won the under-18 World Championship. He then won first prize in many top International tournaments and was unbeaten in 86 classical games over 18 months up to July 2000.

The match was held in London England from October 8th to November 4th. Only 16 games were to be played, with Kasparov retaining his title in case of a tie. The purse was $2,000,000 dollars with 2/3rds going to the winner. Kramnik took an early lead by winning game 2, this was followed by 7 draws until Kramnik scored again in game 10. In the remaining games, Kasparov could not break through Kramnik's super-solid defences, notably the Berlin Defense of the Ruy Lopez.

After 15 games, with a final score of 8½ to 6½ Kasparov's long tenure as World Champion had finally come to an end. Vladimir Kramnik's had become the 14th World Chess Champion.

click on a game number to replay game 123456789101112131415
Kasparov½0½½½½½½½0½½½½½
Kramnik½1½½½½½½½1½½½½½

FINAL SCORE:  Kramnik 8½;  Kasparov 6½
Reference: game collection WCC Index [Kramnik-Kasparov 2000]

NOTABLE GAMES   [what is this?]
    · Game #10     Kramnik vs Kasparov, 2000     1-0
    · Game #2     Kramnik vs Kasparov, 2000     1-0
    · Game #4     Kramnik vs Kasparov, 2000     1/2-1/2

FOOTNOTES

  1. Posted in Chessgames.com's Kibitzer's Corner by GM Ray Keene.

 page 1 of 1; 15 games  PGN Download 
Game  ResultMoves YearEvent/LocaleOpening
1. Kasparov vs Kramnik ½-½252000Kasparov - Kramnik Classical World Championship MatchC67 Ruy Lopez
2. Kramnik vs Kasparov 1-0402000Kasparov - Kramnik Classical World Championship MatchD85 Grunfeld
3. Kasparov vs Kramnik ½-½532000Kasparov - Kramnik Classical World Championship MatchC67 Ruy Lopez
4. Kramnik vs Kasparov ½-½742000Kasparov - Kramnik Classical World Championship MatchD27 Queen's Gambit Accepted, Classical
5. Kasparov vs Kramnik ½-½242000Kasparov - Kramnik Classical World Championship MatchA30 English, Symmetrical
6. Kramnik vs Kasparov ½-½662000Kasparov - Kramnik Classical World Championship MatchD27 Queen's Gambit Accepted, Classical
7. Kasparov vs Kramnik ½-½112000Kasparov - Kramnik Classical World Championship MatchA31 English, Symmetrical, Benoni Formation
8. Kramnik vs Kasparov ½-½382000Kasparov - Kramnik Classical World Championship MatchE32 Nimzo-Indian, Classical
9. Kasparov vs Kramnik ½-½302000Kasparov - Kramnik Classical World Championship MatchC67 Ruy Lopez
10. Kramnik vs Kasparov 1-0252000Kasparov - Kramnik Classical World Championship MatchE53 Nimzo-Indian, 4.e3
11. Kasparov vs Kramnik ½-½412000Kasparov - Kramnik Classical World Championship MatchC78 Ruy Lopez
12. Kramnik vs Kasparov ½-½332000Kasparov - Kramnik Classical World Championship MatchE55 Nimzo-Indian, 4.e3, Gligoric System, Bronstein Variation
13. Kasparov vs Kramnik ½-½142000Kasparov - Kramnik Classical World Championship MatchC67 Ruy Lopez
14. Kramnik vs Kasparov ½-½572000Kasparov - Kramnik Classical World Championship MatchA15 English
15. Kasparov vs Kramnik ½-½382000Kasparov - Kramnik Classical World Championship MatchE06 Catalan, Closed, 5.Nf3
  REFINE SEARCH:   White wins (1-0) | Black wins (0-1) | Draws (1/2-1/2)  

Kibitzer's Corner
< Earlier Kibitzing  · PAGE 18 OF 18 ·  Later Kibitzing>
Nov-06-15
Premium Chessgames Member
  offramp: <Mr 1100: <offramp: "In Anand - Gelfand World Chess Championship (2012) Boris Gelfand seemed to want to get the classic games out of the way as quickly as possible and try to win the world championship with a cheapo in a 5-minute game."> Well, considering Gelfand's lifetime score against Anand at rapid chess, I'm not so sure anyone would have seen that as a very wise strategy.>

I thought it was a terrible idea. Had he tried a bit harder Gelfand might have won another game in normal time. But there was no effort there at all.

Nov-06-15  Petrosianic: <Mr 1100>: <Again, it's perhaps worth also noting that, according to the Guid & Bratko computer assessment study published in 2013, the Anand-Gelfand 2012 match actually was rated as being one of the five best WCC matches of all time, indeed ranked above any of the famous Karpov-Kasparov matches.>

A match in which every game was a 10 move draw that never left the book would rate perfectly on the scale you're talking about, but it would be foolish to recommend it as a good match on those grounds.

And Anand-Gelfand came closer to that than any other match.

Nov-06-15
Premium Chessgames Member
  offramp: I think that one of most colossal matches was 1966 match. Very close to 1927 match. In same area as 1978 match.
Nov-06-15  Absentee: <Petrosianic: A match in which every game was a 10 move draw that never left the book would rate perfectly on the scale you're talking about, but it would be foolish to recommend it as a good match on those grounds.>

It could be the best match never played.

Nov-07-15  Mr 1100: <Petrosianic: "...And Anand-Gelfand came closer to that than any other match.">

Well, look at the overall picture.

Anand-Kramnik (2008): 4 decisive games out of 11.

Anand-Topalov (2010): 5 decisive games out of 12.

Those match performances were also ranked highly by the Guid & Bratko study (http://tinyurl.com/o6t9nm8).

Kasparov-Anand (1995): a disappointing result for Anand, 4 losses out of 18 games.

The study looked at several WCC matches over the years, and their findings indicated Anand to be, overall, a more "accurate" player than any of his predecessors.

Within this context, the fact that the 2012 match was lacking in drama, doesn't really mean they were playing poorly. It was a 12-game match, and both players were being pragmatic, avoiding unnecessary risks.

Nov-07-15
Premium Chessgames Member
  keypusher: <Within this context, the fact that the 2012 match was lacking in drama, doesn't really mean they were playing poorly. It was a 12-game match, and both players were being pragmatic, avoiding unnecessary risks.>

Or as Nigel Short put it, if you play 25 moves of book and then call it a day, you won't make a lot of mistakes. Anand-Gelfand sucked.

Nov-09-15  Ulhumbrus: Kasparov says in his book that his preparation was was narrow and inflexible. He may mean that when Kramnik produced the Berlin defence Kasparov lacked an alternative first move such as 1 c4 or 1 d4, and when Kramnik found a way to gain the advantage against Kasparov's Gruenfeld defence, Kasparov once more lacked an alternative defence.
Nov-09-15
Premium Chessgames Member
  keypusher: <Ulhumbrus: Kasparov says in his book that his preparation was was narrow and inflexible. He may mean that when Kramnik produced the Berlin defence Kasparov lacked an alternative first move such as 1 c4 or 1 d4, and when Kramnik found a way to gain the advantage against Kasparov's Gruenfeld defence, Kasparov once more lacked an alternative defence.>

Interesting, and kind of shocking. Tal was pretty much guilty of the same thing in the Botvinnik rematch, but you don't expect that from Kasparov.

Nov-09-15  SChesshevsky: <.. Kasparov says in his book that his preparation was narrow and inflexible.>

I took it that, relative to a world championship match, Kasparov admits he didn't prepare much at all.

I don't know if he should've prepared for the possibility of a Berlin Wall defense but it seemed like you could almost feel like in each progressive game Kasparov was getting nearer to solving it over the board.

What really must've of been disappointing and kind of showing a little rust was in his two losses Kasparov came up short on what seemed tactical combinations. Very surprising for a guy who's known as a great calculator.

Nov-10-15  Petrosianic: <but Kasparov would have slaughtered him in a rematch and he knew it.>

That's what you said about the first match. If you were wrong about that, couldn't you be wrong about the other?

It was in fact Kasparov who ducked the rematch for reasons that are well known. If you really don't know what they are, I'll be glad to tell you, but you're going to feel pretty silly.

Jan-03-16  Hawkman: It's ironic. This match is famous for the Berlin Defense of the Ruy Lopez, but it didn't win one game. It's kind of a tribute to how feared Kasparov's KP game was before this. When you're losing and are arguably the greatest player since Fischer, it would have been nice to see greater efforts from Garry in the 11 and 14 move games. I don't understand that.
Jan-14-16
Premium Chessgames Member
  Karne: After Game 10, Kasparov remarked that he hadn't been in a "great mood" throughout the match.
Feb-07-16  The Kings Domain: A sad and embarrassing example of how the mighty have fallen. A 1990-era Kasparov would not have played as badly.
Mar-07-16  Hawkman: For Kasparov to wait until the last game to try 1. d4 was just silly.
Aug-24-16  Howard: Was there ANY game in this match where Kasparov had decent winning chances ?
Aug-24-16  Olavi: <Howard> Games 8 and 1.
Aug-24-16  Olavi: Of course 8 and 14, and possibly also 12.
Aug-24-16  todicav23: Kasparov is just a bad looser. He always tries to find excuses. In this match he was not prepared and he was also in a bad mood.

But I think that his main weapons, openings and intimidation, didn't work as well in this match as against Anand.

It is true that later Kasparov was able to crack the Berlin defense beating Kramnik. But it was just a game and it doesn't prove much.

The overall score favors Kramnik (+5−4=40) in classical games. Also, Kasparov didn't really dominate Karpov. All their matches were close and Karpov was really unlucky in 1987. Karpov was 12 years older and it was clear that his main weakness was long matches.

I lived in a former communist country and every time when I hear Kasparov talking I remember about that. His character is really unpleasant.

Apr-09-19
Premium Chessgames Member
  Messiah: What a legendary match! It is so weird that both of them already stopped participating in super-GM events.
Jun-08-19  The Boomerang: "Petrosianic: <but Kasparov would have slaughtered him in a rematch and he knew it.> That's what you said about the first match. If you were wrong about that, couldn't you be wrong about the other?

It was in fact Kasparov who ducked the rematch for reasons that are well known. If you really don't know what they are, I'll be glad to tell you, but you're going to feel pretty silly."

Could you please mention the reasons would love to know.

Jun-08-19  john barleycorn: Kasparov gave away the rematch clause as he thought he would win the match right away. pride comes before the fall.
Jun-08-19
Premium Chessgames Member
  beatgiant: <The Boomerang> Here's how I understand the attempts to get Kasparov back into world title competition since 2000.

Dortmund 2002 was the qualifier for a title match with Kramnik (strangely, I can't find a tournament page for that here). Kasparov asked to bypass that qualification step based on the strength of his recent results, but the event was played, Kasparov refused his invitation, and Leko won and played in Kramnik - Leko Classical World Championship Match (2004).

As part of the Prague agreement for title reunification, there was a plan for Kasparov - Ponomariov World Championship Match (2003) but Ponomariov did not accept. The organizers tried to substitute Kasimdzhanov, but failed to raise funds for the match.

Jun-08-19  sac 4 mate: Re the Kasparov-Kasimdzhanov match, FIDE delayed it several times when they couldn't come up with the money, but it was Kasparov who ultimately withdrew from the process. See https://en.chessbase.com/post/fide-...

I certainly wouldn't say Kasparov "ducked" a second match with Kramnik - but given that he passed up the Dortmund qualifier in 2002, and then withdrew from reunification in 2005, it's also false to say that he did everything in his power to secure that rematch.

Jul-07-19  rayoflight: Something worth noticing:
1-This match played from Oct 8th 2000 to Nov 4th 2000 which was almost at the end of the year.

2-On 29 Nov 2016 after Taimanov passed away, Kasparov wrote on his Facebook: "I also owe Mark Evgenievich (Taimanov) my own personal happiness. At the beginning of the year 2000, he called and asked me to speak at an event at the Saint Petersburg University of the Humanities. I had no special reason to want to go there, but I could not deny Taimanov! It was there that I met a student named Dasha Tarasova, who later became my wife."

3-On April 4th 2005, the match arbitrator Eric Schiller wrote on chessgames.com: "Anyone who saw Kasparov just before the game knows that he was clearly greatly distracted by a non-chess matter. It was not appropriate for me, as arbiter, to ask why, so I didn't. He left quickly after the game. In many matches, things going on off the board affected some games, not just in Iceland 72. Perhaps Kasparov will write of such things in a future book, covering all of his matches."

4-Also I recall that Judit Polgar had said something to the same effect of Mr. Schiller but I don't remember the source now.

Conclusion:
By putting all above together we can understand with a high percentage of assurance that what was the issue with Kasparov at this match, or at least one of his main issues.

This does not undermine Kramnik's victory and caliber as he was a tough opponent for Kasparov even before this match. But it shows that Kasparov was not himself and was not playing at his real level of concentration and ability due to above distraction. had he been his real self, it is open to discuss the result though.

Jul-15-19  The Boomerang: "Dortmund 2002 was the qualifier for a title match with Kramnik (strangely, I can't find a tournament page for that here). Kasparov asked to bypass that qualification step based on the strength of his recent results, but the event was played, Kasparov refused his invitation, and Leko won and played in Kramnik - Leko Classical World Championship Match (2004)."

Thanks Beatgiant....I was aware of Kasparov avoiding the qualification process due to hia ego, but never thought all these years that he was ducking Kramnik.

I thought that he would have won the rematch and am sad that it never happened.

Kasparov clearly was not his usual level during the match, but Kramnik took full advantage of this with excellent play.

Jump to page #    (enter # from 1 to 18)
search thread:   
< Earlier Kibitzing  · PAGE 18 OF 18 ·  Later Kibitzing>
NOTE: You need to pick a username and password to post a reply. Getting your account takes less than a minute, is 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:
  1. No obscene, racist, sexist, profane, raunchy, or disgusting language.
  2. No spamming, advertising, duplicate or nonsense posts.
  3. No malicious personal attacks, including cyber stalking, systematic antagonism, or gratuitous name-calling of any member Iincludinfgall Admin and Owners or any of their family, friends, associates, or business interests. If you think someone is an idiot, then provide evidence that their reasoning is invalid and/or idiotic, instead of just calling them an idiot. It's a subtle but important distinction, even in political discussions.
  4. Nothing in violation of United States law.
  5. No malicious posting of or linking to personal, private, and/or negative information (aka "doxing" or "doxxing") about any member, (including all Admin and Owners) or any of their family, friends, associates, or business interests. This includes all media: text, images, video, audio, or otherwise. Such actions will result in severe sanctions for any violators.
  6. NO TROLLING. Admin and Owners know it when they see it, and sanctions for any trolls will be significant.
  7. Any off-topic posts which distract from the primary topic of discussion are subject to removal.
  8. The use of "sock puppet" accounts to circumvent disciplinary action taken by Moderators is expressly prohibited.
  9. The use of "sock puppet" accounts in an attempt to undermine any side of a debate—or to create a false impression of consensus or support—is prohibited.
  10. All decisions with respect to deleting posts, and any subsequent discipline, are final, and occur at the sole discretion of the Moderators, Admin, and Owners.
  11. Please try to maintain a semblance of civility at all times.
Blow the Whistle See something that violates our rules? Blow the whistle and inform a Moderator.

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, visit the Kibitzer's Café.

Messages posted by Chessgames members do not necessarily represent the views of Chessgames.com, its employees, or sponsors. All Moderator actions taken are at the sole discretion of the Admin and Owners—who will strive to act fairly and consistently at all times.
Spot an error? Please suggest your correction and help us eliminate database mistakes!


home | about | login | logout | F.A.Q. | your profile | preferences | Premium Membership | Kibitzer's Café | Biographer's Bistro | new kibitzing | chessforums | Tournament Index | Player Directory | Notable Games | World Chess Championships | Opening Explorer | Guess the Move | Game Collections | ChessBookie Game | Chessgames Challenge | Store | privacy notice | contact us


Copyright 2001-2019, Chessgames Services LLC