VLADIMIR KRAMNIK (born Jun-25-1975, 50 years old) Russia PRONUNCIATION: [what is this?] Former World Champion - and former top ranked player in the world - Vladimir Borisovich Kramnik was born in Tuapse, on the shores of the Black Sea, on June 25, 1975. As a child, Vladimir Kramnik studied in the chess school established by Mikhail Botvinnik. In 2000, he won the Classical World Championship from Garry Kasparov, then won the unified title when he defeated Veselin Topalov in 2006 to become the 14th undisputed World Champion. Kramnik relinquished the title in 2007 to his successor, the 15th undisputed (and now former) World Champion, Viswanathan Anand. Championships <Age> In 1991, Kramnik won the World Under 18 Championship in Guarapuava, Brazil. <National> Kramnik finished equal first in the 1990 RSFSR (Russian) Championship in Kuibyshev, Russia, but placed second on tiebreak, behind Andrei Kharlov. He came third ex aequo in the Russian Championship Superfinal (2013) after a last round battle with Ian Nepomniachtchi for a share of first and the possibility of the title for the first time. However, he lost the game and scored 5.5/9. <World> Kramnik's early attempts at storming the citadel of the World Championship met with mixed results. In 1994, he lost a Candidates quarter finals match for the PCA championship to Gata Kamsky by 1½-4½, and a few months later he lost a Candidates semi-finals match for the FIDE championship to Boris Gelfand by 3½-4½. In 1998, Kramnik was defeated by Alexey Shirov by 3½-5½ in the Candidates match held in Cazorla to determine the right to play Garry Kasparov for the Classical World Chess Championship. In 1999, Kramnik lost in the quarterfinals of the FIDE knockout championship in Las Vegas to Michael Adams by 2-4, including the 4 game rapid play-off. Although Shirov had defeated Kramnik for the right to challenge Kasparov, suitable sponsorship was not found for a Kasparov-Shirov match, and it never took place. In 2000, however, sponsorship became available for a Kasparov-Kramnik match instead. This meant that Kramnik was the first player since 1935 - when Alexander Alekhine selected Max Euwe as his challenger - to play a world championship match without qualifying. Kramnik reached the pinnacle by defeating long-time champion Kasparov in the Kasparov - Kramnik Classical World Championship Match (2000) in London by the score of 8½ to 6½ (+2 =13 -0) without losing a game, becoming the next Classical World Champion in the line that started from Wilhelm Steinitz. It was the first time since the Lasker - Capablanca World Championship Match (1921) that the defending champion had lost a match without winning a game and it was also the first time Kasparov had lost a World Championship match. Kasparov said of Kramnik that: <"He is the hardest player to beat in the world."> In 2004, Kramnik successfully defended his title as Classical World Chess Champion against challenger Peter Leko at Brissago, Switzerland, by drawing the Kramnik - Leko Classical World Championship Match (2004) in the last game. Lékó was leading the 14-game match until the final game, which Kramnik won, thus forcing a 7 - 7 draw and ensuring that Kramnik remained world champion. Because of the drawn result, the prize fund of 1 million Swiss francs was split between the two players. Kramnik refused to participate at the FIDE World Championship Tournament (2005), but indicated his willingness to play a match against the winner to unify the world championship. His next title defence in 2006, therefore, was a reunification match with the new FIDE world title holder from the 2005 tournament, Veselin Topalov. The $1 million Kramnik - Topalov World Championship Match (2006) was played in Elista, Kalmykia from September 21 to October 13 and after controversially forfeiting the fifth game, Kramnik won the rapid game playoff by 2½ -1½ after the classical games were tied 6-6, thereby becoming the first undisputed unified World Chess Champion since the 1993 split. In the following year, Kramnik lost the unified world title when he finished second to Viswanathan Anand at the Mexico City World Championship Tournament (2007). In October 2008, Kramnik exercised his entitlement to a rematch as a challenger to World Champion Anand in Bonn, Germany, but lost the Anand - Kramnik World Championship Match (2008) match by 4½ to 6½ (+1 =7 -3). Kramnik's tournament performances in 2009 (see below) raised his rating (average of July 2009 and January 2010 ratings) sufficiently to qualify him for the World Championship Candidates (2011). In the first round he beat Teimour Radjabov by the narrowest of margins*: after tieing the classical games 2-2 (+0 =4 -0), and the rapid games 2-2 (+0 =4 -0), he won the blitz playoff by 2.5-1.5 (+2 =1 -1) to move to the semi final match against Alexander Grischuk, which he lost 1.5-0.5 (=1 -1) in the blitz tiebreaker after he drew the classical games 2-2 (+0 -0 =4) and the rapid games 2-2 (+0 -0 =4), thereby eliminating him from the contest. Participating in the World Championship Candidates (2013) on the basis of his rating, Kramnik came =1st with Magnus Carlsen on 8.5/13 after both lost their last round games. As the first tiebreaker (individual score against the other player in the tournament) left them level, the second tiebreaker (greater number of wins in the tournament) relegated Kramnik to second place due to scoring four wins to Carlsen's five. Kramnik was seeded directly into the World Championship Candidates (2014), as he met the pre-condition that he participate in the World Cup (2013). During the Cup, he defeated Zambian IM Gillan Bwalya in the first round, compatriot GM Mikhail Kobalia in the second round, Ukrainian GM Alexander Areshchenko in the third round, veteran Ukrainian GM and twice former Candidate Vasyl Ivanchuk in the Round of 16 (round four), his third Ukrainian opponent in the shape of GM Anton Korobov in the quarter final (round five), one of the wildcards of the event, French GM Maxime Vachier-Lagrave match in the semi final (round 6) before defeating compatriot GM Dmitry Andreikin in the final by 2.5-1.5 (+1 =3). His win also guaranteed qualification in the World Cup 2015, although he would qualify by rating alone. At the Candidates in March 2014, he placed 3rd with 7/14 behind Anand and Karjakin. He qualified by rating to play in the World Cup (2015) where he met and defeated Peruvian Deysi Estela Cori Tello and Cuban GM Lazaro Bruzon Batista in the first two rounds to advance to the third round where he lost to Dmitry Andreikin in the first set of rapid game tiebreakers, thereby bowing out of the event. Tournaments Kramnik won Chalkidiki 1992 with 7.5/11, and in 1993, he played in Linares, finishing fifth and defeating the then world number three, Vasyl Ivanchuk. Following some solid results in the interim which resulted in him winning the 1994 PCA Intel Grand Prix, major tournament triumphs were soon to follow, such as Dortmund 1995, Horgen 1995, Belgrade 1995, =1st in Dos Hermanas in 1996 and 1997, =1st in Tilburg 1997 (8/11). Dortmund became a favourite stop, as Kramnik has gone on to win nine more times in 1996, 1997, 1998, 2000, 2001, Dortmund Sparkassen (2006), Dortmund Sparkassen (2007), Dortmund Sparkassen (2009) and Dortmund Sparkassen (2011), as either equal or clear first; in the 2011 edition of the event he won by 1.5 points despite losing in the last round. In 2000, Kramnik won his first Linares tournament, completing his set of victories in all three of chess' "triple crown" events: Corus, Linares, and Dortmund. Kramnik later captured additional Linares victories in Linares (2003) (shared) and Linares (2004) (outright). He won the Tal Memorial (2007) with 6.5/9, 1.5 ahead of Shirov. Kramnik had exceptionally good results in 2009, winning once again in Dortmund and then winning the Category 21 (average ELO = 2763) Tal Memorial (2009) in Moscow with 6/9 and a TPR of 2883. At the time, the average ELO rating of the field made it the strongest tournament in history. He also participated in the London Chess Classic (2009) in December, finishing second to Magnus Carlsen. These magnificent results qualified him for the 2011 Candidates on the basis of his boosted ratings. Kramnik began 2010 at Corus Group A (2010) in the Netherlands, during which he defeated new world number-one Carlsen with the Black pieces in their head-to-head encounter, ending Carlsen's 36-match unbeaten streak. A late loss to Anand knocked him out of first place, and Kramnik finished with 8/13, tying for second place with Shirov behind Carlsen's 8½ points. He came 2nd in the preliminary Shanghai Masters (2010) to qualify for the Grand Slam Chess Final (2010) against Carlsen and Anand, who had pre-qualified. He then won at Bilbao with +2 -0 =4 over world champion Anand, then-world number one Magnus Carlsen, and Shirov. The 2009 Tal Memorial and the Grand Slam Final at Bilbao were the most powerful tournaments (in ratings terms) ever staged. In late 2011, he easily won the 15th Unive (Crown Group) (2011) with 4.5/6 and a TPR of 2903 and finished the year with outright first at the London Chess Classic (2011) with +4 -0 =4 and a TPR of 2934, recovering ground lost following a mediocre performance in the Tal Memorial (2011) where he failed to win a game. In June 2012, he placed =4th at the category 22 Tal Memorial (2012), with 4.5/9 and in July 2012, =3rd (4th on tiebreak) at the category 19 Dortmund Sparkassen (2012) tournament. Kramnik finished 2012 with a surge, placing 2nd at the London Chess Classic (2012) behind Magnus Carlsen, scoring 6/8 (16 points in the 3-1-0 scoring system used in the event) and a TPR of 2937 to Carlsen's 2994. His final training preparation for the Candidates tournament in March at the category 21 Zurich Chess Challenge (2013), was less than completely successful in terms of results (2.5/6), drawing five and losing one to Anand, although it seemed to contribute to his game fitness at the Candidates as he placed second by the narrowest of margins, scoring equal to Carlsen who won the event and the right to challenge Anand for the World Championship. He placed =4th with 4.5/9, a point behind the winner, in a low scoring Alekhine Memorial (2013) and then had one of his worse ever results at the Tal Memorial (2013), coming last with 3/9 (+0 -3 =6). However, he returned to form in the Dortmund Sparkassen (2013), placing outright second behind Adams, scoring 6.5/9, jointly dominating the category 19 field to the extent that no other player scored better than 50%. In November 2014, Kramnik competed at the category 20 Petrosian Memorial (2014), and was outright second behind Alexander Grischuk with 4.5/7, signalling a mild return to form after a slump that saw him exit the world's top 10 for the first time since he entered the top 10 in January 1993. There followed 2nd at the powerful Qatar Masters (2014), with 7/9, and =1st at the London Chess Classic (2014). 2015 saw Kramnik starting his competitive year by placing outright 3rd behind the winner Anand and runner-up Hikaru Nakamura, ahead of Sergey Karjakin, Levon Aronian and Fabiano Caruana respectively, in the standard section of the RR category 22 Zurich Chess Challenge (2015). He won the final section of the Zurich event, namely the Zurich Chess Challenge (Rapid) (2015), but the added points were insufficient to give him the overall lead and he finished with 3rd prize behind Nakamura and Anand respectively. A relatively poor performance at the Gashimov Memorial (2015) where he scored only 4/9 was followed by a solid performance at the Russian Premier League 2015 (see below) and a below average 3.5/7 for fourth place at the annual Dortmund Sparkassen (2015). He saw out the year with equal third, scoring 6.5/9 at the powerful Qatar Masters (2015), half a point behind the joint leaders Magnus Carlsen and the rising Chinese star Yangyi Yu. Kramnik started 2016 with equal third on 5/9 at the Norway Chess (2016) behind Carlsen and Aronian respectively after also coming third in the preliminary Norway Chess (Blitz) (2016) used to determine the draw. Several months later in July he placed =2nd (with 4/7) behind Vachier-Lagrave at Dortmund Sparkassen (2016). Kramnik's year in standard time chess finished with a reasonably efficacious equal third at the London Chess Classic (2016), a point behind the winner Wesley So. In April 2017, Kramnik was second on tiebreak ahead of co-runners up Wesley So and Veselin Topalov at the category 21 Gashimov Memorial (2017), scoring 5/9, half a point behind the winner Shakhriyar Mamedyarov. Two months later he again placed equal second, this time at the category 22 Norway Chess (2017), scoring 5/9 alongside Hikaru Nakamura, a point behind the winner Levon Aronian. Team Events <Olympiads> Kramnik has won three team and and individual gold medals at the Olympiads as well as two team silvers. He played in the gold medal winning Russian teams in the Manila 1992, Moscow 1994 and Yerevan 1996 Olympiads, his first gold medal being awarded to him as an untitled 16 year old in 1992 when he scored eight wins, one draw, and no losses to record a remarkable TPR of 2958. In 1994, he came fifth on the second board with 8/11 and a 2727 TPR. In 1996, he scored a relatively meagre 4.5/9 on the second board. He did not participate in any more Olympiads until Turin Olympiad (2006) in Turin, when he again won a gold medal with overall best performance on the top board with 6.5/9 (2847 TPR). In the Dresden Olympiad (2008) in Dresden, he scored 5/9 on top board and a 2735 TPR. Kramnik played board one for the silver medal winning Russian team in the Khanty-Mansiysk Olympiad (2010) in Khanty-Mansiysk, coming fifth with a scored of 5.5/9, winning 2 and drawing 7 with a TPR of 2794. At the Istanbul Olympiad (2012) held in Istanbul, he again played top board scoring 5/9 and coming 7th on that board, leading his team to another silver medal. At the Tromso Olympiad (2014), he again played board 1 for Russia. He played board two for Russia in the Baku Olympiad (2016), scoring individual gold for his board, and team bronze with his countrymen. <National Team Events> In 1991, 2490-rated FM Kramnik represented Russia on board 2 at the World U26 Championship played at Maringá; with a perfect score of 6/6 he helped Russia to win gold, and won individual gold for his performance. He played in the European Team Championships on one occasion, in 1992, when the then FM was rated 2590. Again representing Russia, this time on board 3, he helped his team to win gold with a 6/7 effort, and won individual gold for board 3 as well as a gold medal for the best rating performance at the event, that being a 2863 performance, ahead of Kasparov's 2809 performance that won rating silver. That same year (1992), he also played on the USSR team against the Rest of the World. He played for Russia twice in the World Team Championship, in 1993 and 2013. On the first occasion, he lead his country to a bronze medal, and on the second occasion - at the World Team Championship (2013) - to a gold medal. <European Club Cup> Kramnik participated in the European Club Cup between 1995 and 1999 inclusive, in 2005 and again in 2015 and 2016. He started off playing board one with SV Empor Berlin in 1992 and 1993, moved on to Sberbank-Tatarstan Kazan in 1994 where he helped the club to bronze, then played board one with the powerful Agrouniverzal Zemun team in 1998 and 1999, winning team silver in 1999. Since then, he played for NAO Paris in 2005, winning team bronze and for the Siberia Novosibirsk team in the European Club Cup (2015) and European Club Cup (2016) winning team gold in 2015 as well as an individual gold for board 1. At the Russian Team Championship (2015), Kramnik played board 1 for Siberia Novosibirsk, winning gold for that board; his effort also helped his team to win gold. He repeated his individual effort in the Russian Team Championship (2016), this time helping his team to a bronze medal in the double round robin 5-team contest. Matches In 2004, he won a simul against the German National Team 2½:1½. In October 2002, Kramnik played an eight game match against Deep Fritz (Computer) in the Brains in Bahrain (2002) match, drawing 4-4 after leading 3-1. In 2006 the German organization Universal Event Promotion (UEP) staged a return match of six games between Kramnik and Deep Fritz in Bonn, which Kramnik lost, +0 -2 =4. In April 2012, Kramnik and Levon Aronian played, as part of their preparation for the 2012 Candidates Tournament, a six-game training match in Zurich. The Kramnik - Aronian (2012) match was drawn 3-3 (+1 -1 =4). From late November to early December 2016, he played a rapid and blitz match against Yifan Hou at the Kings Tournament in Romania, winning both by significant margins, the rapid by 4.5-0.5 and the latter by 6/9 (+5 -3 =2). Rapids Kramnik has been an excellent and consistent performer at rapid and blindfold play. He won or shared the overall lead at Amber in 1996 (outright overall 1st), 1998 (=1st with Shirov with 15/22), 1999 Monaco (14½/22), 2001 (=1st with Topalov with 15/22), 2004 (=1st with Morozevich with 14.5/22), and 2007 (outright overall first with 15½/22). He also won the 2001 rapid play match against Lékó by 7-5, drew the 2001 rapid play Botvinnik Memorial match with Kasparov 3:3 and the 2001 rapid play match against Anand 5:5, lost the 2002 Match Advanced Chess Kramnik vs. Anand (Leon) 3½:2½, was runner up to Anand in the Cap D'Agde FRA (2003), won the 2009 Zurich Champions Rapid (2009) with 5/7 and shared 1st in the 2010 President's Cup in Baku with 5/7. In tandem with the London Classic 2014, Kramnik came =1st in the blitz event and =3rd in the rapid play open. Kramnik came in equal 5th with 10/15 in the World Rapid Championship (2015), 1.5 points behind the winner Carlsen, and half a point behind the joint runners up Nepomniachtchi, Radjabov and Leinier Dominguez Perez. He followed up the next day with equal second alongside Vachier-Lagrave scoring 15/21, half a point behind the outright winner Alexander Grischuk at the World Blitz Championship (2015). Ratings Kramnik entered the top 100 in January 1992 and has remained there since that time. He rose rapidly in the rankings such that a year later in January 1993, he entered the top 10 where he has been ensconced since, apart from a few months in 2014. Yet during that time he made it to world #1 in only two rating periods. In January 1996, Kramnik became the world top rated player. Although he had the same FIDE rating as Kasparov (2775), He became number one by having played more games during the rating period in question. He became the youngest ever to reach world number-one, breaking Kasparov's record; this record would stand for 14 years until being broken by Magnus Carlsen in January 2010. Ironically, during his reign as world champion, Kramnik never regained the world number-one ranking, doing so only in January 2008 after he had lost the title to Viswanathan Anand. As in 1996, Kramnik had the same FIDE rating as Anand (2799) but became number-one due to more games played within the rating period. Kramnik's 12 years between world-number one rankings is the longest since the inception of the FIDE ranking system in 1971. In July 1993 soon after his 18th birthday, he crossed 2700 for the first time and has remained in the 2700+ rating ever since. In April 2001, he became the second of only eight chess players to have reached a rating of 2800 (the first being Kasparov, followed by Anand, Topalov, Carlsen, Aronian, Caruana and Grischuk). Kramnik's highest standard rating to date is 2811 achieved in May 2013 when he was ranked #3 in the world. Other In 1995, Kramnik served as a second for Kasparov during the latter's successful defence of his Classical World Chess Championship against Anand, and in an ironic counter point in 2010 he served as a second for Anand during the World Champion's successful defence against Topalov. Kramnik has a form of arthritis called ankylosing spondylitis. In January 2006, Kramnik announced that he would miss the Corus Group A (2006) to seek treatment for this condition. He returned from treatment in June 2006, playing in the 37th Chess Olympiad, winning gold by top scoring on the top board. Kramnik's performance in winning the Classical World Championship in 2000 won him the Chess Oscar for 2000, while his 2006 victory in the reunification match earned him the Chess Oscar for 2006. On 30 December 2006 he married French journalist Marie-Laure Germon and they have a daughter, Daria, who was born 28 December 2008, and a son, Vadim, born 28 January 2013. Sources and references Website: http://www.kramnik.com/; Biography: http://www.kramnik.com/eng/biograph...; Extended and candid interview with Kramnik by Vladislav Tkachiev in August 2011: http://whychess.org/node/1605; Live rating: http://www.2700chess.com/; * http://chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp...; Wikipedia article: Kramnik Last updated: 2023-11-23 11:45:25

Try our new games table.

page 1 of 130; games 1-25 of 3,250  Game   Result Moves Year Event/Locale Opening 1. Kramnik vs Serdyukov 1-0 31 1984 Belorechensk B78 Sicilian, Dragon, Yugoslav Attack, 10.castle long 2. A Oganyan vs Kramnik 0-1 31 1984 Belorechensk B89 Sicilian 3. Remezov vs Kramnik   0-1 52 1985 Krasnodar B45 Sicilian, Taimanov 4. Zaitsev vs Kramnik 0-1 49 1986 Team Tournament B83 Sicilian 5. Kramnik vs Zhukov 1-0 38 1986 Belorechensk B43 Sicilian, Kan, 5.Nc3 6. Shilov vs Kramnik 0-1 37 1987 USSR Boys' Championship B33 Sicilian 7. Kramnik vs A Chjumachenko 1-0 32 1987 Gelendzhik B21 Sicilian, 2.f4 and 2.d4 8. Kramnik vs Mayorov 1-0 34 1987 Gelendzhik C12 French, McCutcheon 9. Kramnik vs Otsarev 1-0 18 1987 Baku Training B21 Sicilian, 2.f4 and 2.d4 10. I Odesskij vs Kramnik 0-1 25 1987 URS-chT U14 A52 Budapest Gambit 11. Yakubovsky vs Kramnik   0-1 51 1987 URS-chT U14 B23 Sicilian, Closed 12. Yakovich vs Kramnik 1-0 42 1988 URS B45 Sicilian, Taimanov 13. Kramnik vs Danislian ½-½ 60 1988 URS-chT U18 B15 Caro-Kann 14. M Golubev vs Kramnik 0-1 38 1988 URS-chT U18 B33 Sicilian 15. M Sorokin vs Kramnik ½-½ 52 1989 Chigorin Memorial-B A81 Dutch 16. A V Filipenko vs Kramnik 0-1 40 1989 Chigorin Memorial-B B00 Uncommon King's Pawn Opening 17. J Ivanov vs Kramnik ½-½ 12 1989 Chigorin Memorial-B A85 Dutch, with c4 & Nc3 18. G Kallai vs Kramnik ½-½ 22 1989 Chigorin Memorial-B A81 Dutch 19. Khenkin vs Kramnik ½-½ 17 1989 Chigorin Memorial-B D39 Queen's Gambit Declined, Ragozin, Vienna Variation 20. Kramnik vs A Grosar ½-½ 47 1989 Chigorin Memorial-B B58 Sicilian 21. Kramnik vs A Panchenko ½-½ 60 1989 Chigorin Memorial-B B58 Sicilian 22. Kramnik vs B Podlesnik 1-0 37 1989 Chigorin Memorial-B B33 Sicilian 23. Kramnik vs R Shcherbakov ½-½ 35 1989 Chigorin Memorial-B B58 Sicilian 24. Kramnik vs G Tunik 0-1 38 1989 Chigorin Memorial-B B46 Sicilian, Taimanov Variation 25. Kramnik vs Yakovich ½-½ 14 1989 Chigorin Memorial-B B33 Sicilian  page 1 of 130; games 1-25 of 3,250

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

ARCHIVED POSTS < Earlier Kibitzing  · PAGE 1424 OF 1600 ·  Later Kibitzing> Jun-07-09    Augalv: <Rubinstein had a nervous disorder known as anthrophobia (fear of people and society) for his entire life. His poor mental health was clearly an extremely difficult disability for him to contend with and caused him enormous suffering throughout his life. The beginning of deep psychological problems that eventually turned into full-fledged mental illness, the appearance of the Cuban Chess genius Capablanca, and the advent of World War I all combined to dash his championship hopes.> http://www.chess-poster.com/great_p... Jun-07-09    acirce: <kamalakanta>, I don't know much about the issue, but the Wiki article mentions "schizophrenic tendencies". Jun-07-09    Shajmaty: Reading the last nine posts (and some others), I only can ask: is this Volodya's or Akiba's page!? Jun-07-09    kamalakanta: <Shajmaty: Reading the last nine posts (and some others), I only can ask: is this Volodya's or Akiba's page!?> If you read the last 100 posts, you'll be even more confused! Jun-07-09    alexmagnus: "Volodya"? LOL now <that> would be considered disrespectful in Russia ;) (this informal short for of Vladimir used either among closest buddies or when talking about children). At least you said "Volodya" and not "Vovan" hehe. Jun-07-09    kamalakanta: <Augalv: <If you read the last 100 posts, you'll be even more confused!> I'm confused..> I hear you, man. Jun-07-09    visayanbraindoctor: <alexmagnus Grand-Prix is based not on rating... 7 highest rated players.> I am beginning to change my mind as to your intelligence. You are issuing self-contradictory statements. As in the GP is <based not on rating> and yet <7 highest rated players> are included. <6 local heroes, 7 highest rated players> Indeed the Grand Prix automatically disqualifies many strong Asian and Latin Americans from a Title shot via its door. You are talking as though you are trying to prove the opposite of the thesis above, but you just supported it. <And why do you think they are underrated.> Most local Asian tournaments are not even rated at all. I have answered this before, and I would not answer it now for the sake of your little one-upmanship game, save that other kibitzers may have missed my previous posts. <Also I don't know of many hypersuccessful Asian players from the old times too. You may come up with two or three, but that's what we have now too (Anand, Wang and, slightly below, another Wang, Ni and Bu).> Before you shoot your mouth off and reveal your appalling ignorance of the world, try looking up board games in Asia first - Go, Chinese chess, Indian chess, Japanese chess. Ever wondered why there are no Europeans who have been <hypersuccessful> in Go? Historically, Western chess has always been based in Europe rather than in Asia, thus a bigger mass base of professional players there. Western chess was invented 16th century in Spain, and first became popular in the northern Mediterranean countries. It's changing though. China will one day probably produce a World Champion in Western chess. India already has. Since you are obviously going to place in your usual last word, try to think it over thoroughly first so it does not come out as plain silliness. Jun-07-09    visayanbraindoctor: <kamalakanta> Thanks, Spassky was obviously being ironic or sarcastic. As with most chessplayers he also has his pre-WW2 models – he mentioned Chigorin, Alekhine, Morphy. Very gentlemanly, he praises Fischer in spite of losing his Title to him, even saying that in 1970, Fischer was already stronger than him. Spassky also seems support the stand that the traditional champion is the real champion, not the solely FIDE champions. Unfortunately, I have great difficulty in comprehending his accent, is it a Russian accent? <I tend to think that Rubinstein is one of those masters who could be a top-10 player (at least) if he lived in modern times.> I completely agree. Rubinstein was of at least Candidates level; and had circumstances differed slightly - for example, he did not have a tendency for Schizophrenia, or Capablanca never existed, or WW1 never occurred – he could have had good chances for a Title shot. Rubinstein strikes me as a player who prepared his openings well. Given a professional second, and a computer and a modern data base, he should not have much difficulty in updating himself within a few months. I think that one myth about the computer age is that it would be bad for past masters who did not grow up in it. This is a hypothesis that does not have any strong supporting basis at all. “The past masters would never learn anything about computers because they are from the past.” On the contrary, computers allow easier study of games. I expect that the past masters had to go through individual tournament books in order to study the latest trends in openings. This must have been a very laborious task. With computers, it’s so much easier. Anand and Kramnik in their chess childhood had no computers, but they learned about computers easily. Most computer programs are user-friendly. Computers are supposed to make the study of chess easier, not harder. Jun-07-09    visayanbraindoctor: <keypusher> Thanks for the info on the Meran. You probably are more knowledgeable of this. I am under the impression that games by top chessplayers in the 1920s and 1930s look quite ‘modern’, as compared to games before WW1. The games that I referred to above for example, if not known to me, would look to me as though they come from any modern GM tournament. However, there seems to be some differences in pre-WW1 games. I suspect it’s because the openings used beginning in the 1920s are fundamentally the same openings still being used today, including the Indian Defenses. I wonder what your opinion on this is. Jun-07-09    kamalakanta: <visayanbraindoctor> Yes, Spassky's accent is Russian, but with his very low voice (either baritone or bass) it is difficult to understand him... Jun-07-09    visayanbraindoctor: <kamalakanta> Spassky by the way is the only World Champion that I have ever met. When I was a child, he went to the Philippines and played a simultaneous exhibition. To my chess happiness, I drew him! Spassky, even past his prime, had a tied score with Kasparov. In CG.com data base: Boris Spassky tied Garry Kasparov 2 to 2, with 4 draws Other results with the World Champions: Mikhail Botvinnik beat Boris Spassky 1 to 0, with 9 draws Boris Spassky beat Vasily Smyslov 5 to 3, with 16 draws Boris Spassky beat Mikhail Tal 9 to 7, with 32 draws Boris Spassky beat Tigran Vartanovich Petrosian 11 to 10, with 53 draws Robert James Fischer beat Boris Spassky 17 to 11, with 28 draws Not so bad... However, Spassky could never handle Karpov. Anatoli Karpov beat Boris Spassky 16 to 3, with 25 draws In the interview, Spassky implies that he had psychological problems in facing Karpov. Karpov was his jinx. Jun-07-09    kamalakanta: <visayanbraindoctor: <kamalakanta> Spassky by the way is the only World Champion that I have ever met. When I was a child, he went to the Philippines and played a simultaneous exhibition. To my chess happiness, I drew him!> Do you still have that game? Jun-07-09    visayanbraindoctor: <kamalakanta> No, as it was a very non-descript game. It was a Pirc, and then Spassky immediately offered multiple exchanges right out of the opening, and then offered a draw. I did not think that the game really ever got started, before all the pieces got exchanged. Fortunately for me, Spassky seemed to have focused more on beating the players to my left and right. I think that he sensed they were weaker than me, and rather than expend a lot of energy beating me, he let me off with an easy and quick draw. Jun-07-09    visayanbraindoctor: Seems that Capablanca has met Meran-like play even before the 1930s, although Black did not push his c-pawn to c5. This game was back in 1914, pre-WW1. Capablanca vs O Bernstein, 1914 Jun-07-09    alexmagnus: <visayan> You say, most Asian tournaments are not rated? Prove it! Show me at least ten unrated Asian tournaments for which I cannot find ten rated ones during the same timespan. And yes, I know about Asian board games (hey, I play Go and Shogi myself!). When talking about lack of successful Asian players I didn't mean to say there cannot be any - what I wanted to say is that even your "proved" system brought no more Asians into the WC contedership than a current one. And I don't see how the current system is disadvatageous for Asians - as I said, you have to prove your rating claim. If a new Anand appears, he willbecome world champion under <any> system (note, Anand won two of three KO tournaments he participated in - so much for "randomness"). And yes, seven of twenty one players in the Grand Prix were selected based on rating. One third. Two thirds, i.e. consitutional majority, were selected based <not> on rating. Jun-07-09    alexmagnus: <note, Anand won two of three KO tournaments he participated in> And in his third participation he lost in the semifinal, which would be enough to qualify for the Grand Prix. Jun-07-09    visayanbraindoctor: <alexmagnus> I have nothing to prove to you. If you want proof, come over to Asia yourself. However, I am going to oppose what I regard as harmful discriminatory propaganda from you. If you are are propagandizing the elitist Grand Prix and chancy two-game KOs of the World Cup, you are doing potential harm to Asian and Latin American players who deserve a fair way to a possible Title shot. And naturally I am going to oppose your propaganda. What are you, an old Kirsan mouthpiece? Even the new Kirsan has now at least agreed to bring back the Candidates. Championships like the Asian Championship function as Zonals. Remove the Grand Prix, and turn the knock-out World Cup into a Swiss event, and basically it is now an Interzonals. It does not take much to set things right. As for the Candidates, traditionally, it included seeded players, such as the finalist of the previous cycle and the loser of the previous WC Match. However, to get into it, the other players had to prove themselves first in credible and fair Interzonal tournaments, which definitely were not ridiculous two-game knock-outs. And to get into the Interzonals, one had to prove oneself in the local Zonals. No free passage by those with access to highly rated tournaments which tend to give them high ratings. Even Bronstein (as cited by <kamalakanta>) could see that rating worship can lead to elitist circles at the top of the chessworld; at least I agree with him in this matter. The Grand Prix in effect legitimizes this elitism, 'legally' making ratings one of its main criteria for inclusion. If you learned chess only in the early 2000s, then you have never seen the old Zonals - Interzonals - Candidates system in action. It figures; you also have absolutely no idea of the games of the pre-WW2 masters. Most beginners have at least the prudence to shut up and learn first about chess history, the old Qualifying system, the pre-WW2 masters; but you just shoot off your mouth without fully knowing what you are talking about. Wonder what your 'rematch' would be this time. Jun-08-09    alexmagnus: I don't worship ratings. Where did I say I do? And you <havve> to prove it to me. Because I'm really sure I <can> find ten rated tournaments for any ten unrated ones (of the same caliber during the same timespan). And how is the World Cup harming Asians and Latin Americans? First, it's by far not as chancy as you think (I already told about Anand. Adams is even a more convincing example - he reached the semifinal four times (1997, 1999, 2000, 2004)). "One bltz game" may decide a fate of one player, but not of the tournament as whole. Last winner, Kamsky, had to go into tiebreaks only once (in the quarterfinal against Svidler, decided in rapids). The record on the number of tiebreaks among the winners belongs to Kasimdzanov (four tiebreaks) but here all tiebreaks were decided in rapids too. <Championships like the Asian Championship function as Zonals. Remove the Grand Prix, and turn the knock-out World Cup into a Swiss event, and basically it is now an Interzonals.> How about a compromize - to install interzonal <and> let the World Cup decide two qualificants. I.e. we have 8-player Candidates, 6 come from the Interzonal and two from the World Cup. As for rating, as I said, prove it. I want to see ten unrated tournaments with the best Asian players - let's see if I find ten rated ones of the same caliber during the same timespan. If I do, you claim of "European eliticism" in terms of rating is refuted. Jun-08-09    alexmagnus: <It figures; you also have absolutely no idea of the games of the pre-WW2 masters. Most beginners have at least the prudence to shut up and learn first about chess history, the old Qualifying system, the pre-WW2 masters; but you just shoot off your mouth without fully knowing what you are talking about. Wonder what your 'rematch' would be this time.> I actually replayed all World Championship games and analyzed them thrice (by myself, with computer and checking my own lines with computer). And I <do> know how the previous qualification system worked. You say it was fair? Was it fair that no more than three players from the same country could reach the Candidates (without this rule, at some points Candidates would consist nearly of Soviet players only)? Also, the number of players sent from each Zone <has> to depend on the playing level of the Zone... Just like, f.x., in football, Oceania gets only half a spot on World Championships while Europe gets thirteen. Jun-08-09    alexmagnus: <Wonder what your 'rematch' would be this time.> It's not about match and rematch, wrong and right, win and lose. It's about a constructive argument, search for the truth. And <not> insulting the opponent (like you do in nearly each post directed to me). Jun-08-09    alexmagnus: <Most beginners have at least the prudence to shut up and learn first about chess history> Beginners? Heck, I've been playing chess for eight years. And on historical accounts, I know <much> more than you think. <Very much> more. I'm not an expert on it but I'm sure my knowledge beats that of many so called "fans". Just because my favourite players aren't Morphy, Lasker and Fischer, doesn't mean that I have no idea who they were. I have. Of Fischer I even replayed all games in this database. Jun-08-09    visayanbraindoctor: <alexmagnus> What are you, an official of my chess federation that you require me to present proofs to you? Come over here and join our local unrated tournaments and let's see if you don't end up as a whipping boy. If you think my posts are directed mainly to you, they are not. My posts are directed to your propagandizing the Grand Prix and the World Cup. Having seen your intellectual dishonesty over and over again (remember the way you tried to pass yourself off as an expert in the brain's 'wiring', that ended up in a lot of baloney posts when I asked you to please enumerate the major parts of the brain and how they are wired together), you sure overrate yourself if you think you are worth talking to. I draw the line with your propagandizing the Grand Prix and the World Cup. If you think you can advocate the present format indefinitely without opposition, I am sorry to tell you that I shall oppose you as non-stop propaganda from people like you can do concrete harm to underrated players from my my part of the world and Latin America as well. If you are trying to paint me as wanting Asians to have an unfair advantage, you are dead wrong. What I want is a fair and credible system. It is not only me who is severely criticizing the Grand Prix - World Cup system. And you must be intelligent enough to know exactly what I mean. <How about a compromize - to install interzonal <and> let the World Cup decide two qualificants. I.e. we have 8-player Candidates, 6 come from the Interzonal and two from the World Cup.> Now you are talking more sense if you are trying to think of improvements to the present Grand Prix - World Cup system. Jun-08-09    visayanbraindoctor: Disadvantages of using the rating system as a main criterion in Qualifiers: 1. There will always be parts of the world where a substantial number of tournaments are not FIDE-rated. It is possible that these parts of the world would then produce very strong players, but these are automatically disqualified from qualifiers because the number of FIDE-rated tournaments that they have joined in is relatively smaller compared to other parts of the world wherein nearly every tournament is FIDE-rated. 2. The chess-playing populations of the world are naturally divided into geopolitical regions. This creates naturally-occurring chess 'pools'. If one is a member of a particular pool A, chances are that most of the players one gets to play are from the same pool A, rather than players from pools B, or C. The pools then become quasi-equilibrium groups. Within each pool or group, players keep on interacting and their ratings would tend to equilibrate rapidly within the group. However, interactions among different player-pools are limited, say mostly to Olympiads or other relatively rare international events wherein there is a grand scale mixing of players. Now, if a quasi-equilibrium group starts with a relatively high rating (say if this group was the one that got rated first before the others in chess history; or if there were and are simply less rated events in the other groups), the minimal interaction between different groups would mean that it could take some time for all the groups to get into equilibrium with each other. In the meanwhile, individual players from groups that started with a lower rating who may be intrinsically as strong as other individuals from another group with a higher average rating may find themselves with lower ratings than the latter; they would be 'underrated.' Now a Zonal - Interzonal - Candidates system would deal with this phenomenon fairly, as ratings are not the main criteria for qualification, but a qualifier like the Grand Prix certainly and obviously would favor players whose groups had a higher average rating in the first place. (I could be wrong as I am no mathematician. My pre-med training is in Biology, where we learned that genetic drift could cause relatively isolated populations to acquire slightly different sets of genes.) Having said that, a pure Zonals - Interzonals - Candidates system would also be unfair to regions of the world with a relatively large number of very strong players compared to other regions. The classic example was the situation of the Soviet Union commencing from the 1950s. Since only a limited number of players could qualify from any country, many Soviet players found themselves automatically disqualified; while much weaker players (for example from Asia) got into the Interzonals regularly. In the above case, then it is conceivable that ratings can prove to be of partial help in seeding obviously very strong players directly into the Interzonals, although care must be taken also not to over-emphasize ratings. Too much emphasis on ratings would swing the balance the other way - very strong players from underrated regions could find themselves automatically disqualified. Or perhaps, FIDE could set up a wild card system, wherein the FIDE GA has the right to vote in several players already known to be very strong right into the Interzonals. Then again, the latter would increase the politicking within FIDE, which could also be detrimental. In conclusion, a fair and credible qualifying system should be installed; and a balance should be achieved. Jun-08-09    alexmagnus: <remember the way you tried to pass yourself off as an expert in the brain's 'wiring', that ended up in a lot of baloney posts when I asked you to please enumerate the major parts of the brain and how they are wired together)> It was more lack of English knowledge than lack of brain knowledge. I also never pretended to be an expert (don't put your words into my mouth!). No, I am a layman, but my layman knowledge is better than that of an average layman. I told you those parts in German, if you remember. <I draw the line with your propagandizing the Grand Prix and the World Cup> I don't propagandize Grand Prix. I just said that it's incorrect to call it elitist - it isn't elitist (local heroes=elite???? Note, local heroes make 6 participants, rating based qualificants 7, i.e. almost equal). And yes, I surely would lose in your unrated tournament - I'm a lousy 1500 - but would a 2400 end up as "a whipping boy"? I doubt it. I myself don't like Grand Prix. But not for the reason of alleged eliticism. More because playing six tournaments with the same players doesn't make much sense. I propose a system which never exsted before but is IMO fair (and close to the old system): divide the world in 12 zones and let there play Zonals (as a Swiss, open for everybody but the loser of the previous WC match and WC himself), with the first two of each tournament advancing to the Big tournament (call it Interzonal, even though it's different from Interzonals of the past). I.e. we have 24 players after this stage. Then play the World Cup - 128 players, where the 24 who already qualified via Zonals and the the loser of the previous WC match and WC are <not> allowed to play. Both finalists of the World Cup qualify to the Interzonal too. BTW, the Zonals may be also qualification for the World Cup (places 3-7 from each Zone qualify to it as well as eight highest rated players who don't belong to the "forbidden" category). So, we have already 26 players in the Interzonal. Add the loser of the previous WC match (IMO he has to go through Interzonals, putting him immediately into the Candidates is too much of an advantage). 27. Now, complete the field with 5 highest rated players among those who didn't qualify from these three criteria. Note, we have five players based on rating, but rating here is only a <fourth> criterion. The "elite" is already qualified anyway via the first three ones - on the other hand, if some of them had bad luck in the Swiss and World Cup, now they are in too. So we have 32 players in the Interzonal. Let them play another Swiss (over 13 rounds). Now, these 8 players qualify tpo the next stage, the Candidate matches (KO with 8 games per match). The winner of the Candidates plays the World Champion for the title then, in a 16-game match. No draw odds (in case of a tie, an 8-game rapid match decides). I think this cycle is fair. But it is quite lengthy. I suggest this graphic: ~January of the WC year (let's call it year 0): Zonals are played ~December 0: World Cup is played. ~March of year 1: Interzonal is played. ~October of year 1: Candidates ~March of year 2: WC match. note, in January of 2 already new Zonals start. So we have a 2-year-cycle, beginning in January and ending in March in 2 years. Jun-08-09    visayanbraindoctor: <alexmagnus> Your proposal above sounds more reasonable than the present Grand Prix - World Cup format. Others probably have similar thoughts with slightly different details. Jump to page #    (enter # from 1 to 1600) search thread:    ARCHIVED POSTS < Earlier Kibitzing  · PAGE 1424 OF 1600 ·  Later Kibitzing>

NOTE: Create an account today to post replies and access other powerful features which are available only to registered users. Becoming a member is free, anonymous, and takes less than 1 minute! If you already have a username, then simply login login under your username now to join the discussion.

Please observe our posting guidelines: No obscene, racist, sexist, or profane language. No spamming, advertising, duplicate, or gibberish posts. No vitriolic or systematic personal attacks against other members. Nothing in violation of United States law. No cyberstalking or malicious posting of negative or private information (doxing/doxxing) of members. No trolling. The use of "sock puppet" accounts to circumvent disciplinary action taken by moderators, create a false impression of consensus or support, or stage conversations, is prohibited. Do not degrade Chessgames or any of it's staff/volunteers. Please try to maintain a semblance of civility at all times. See something that violates our rules? Blow the whistle and inform a moderator. NOTE: Please keep all discussion on-topic. This forum is for this specific player only. To discuss chess or this site in general, 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 ultimately at the sole discretion of the administration.

Copyright 2001-2025, Chessgames Services LLC