Evgeny Bareev & Ilya Levitov- From London to Elista

From London to Elista

Translated by Sarah Hurst and }immy Adams

..

Evgeny Bareev & Ilya Levitov


L , New In Chess 2007

2007 New In Chess Published by New In Chess, Alkmaar, The Netherlands www.newinchess.com

All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photo-copying, recording or otherwise, without the prior written permission fro'm the publisher.

Cover design: Steven Boland Supervisor: Peter Boel Proofreading: Rene Olthof Production: Anton Schermer

ISBN-13: 978-90-5691-219-2

FOREWORD What you Sow ... Strategy and Tactics 'feam Politics Physical Preparation Acknowledgements

Contents

PART ONE Overthrow of a Colossus

A Gift from the Gods Forward, to Berlin! ''fhe Blunder of the Century'

On World Championship Matches Horsing Around The Ghost of tl5.e Mad Rook

Chess and Kabbalah A toilet Story

The Berlin Philosophy incidents Come in Pairs Knockdown Akela Has Missed!

The Results of the First Half of the Matth 'fhe king Went to the Left ...

On the 'Iron Enemy' Torn to Shreds A New Twist on an Old Story Multicoloured Swings and Painted Roundabouts

On the Greats A Holiday Resort Blade Runner Eyes Wide Shut

The Results of the Match

PART TWO Photo Finish in Brissago

Between London and Brissago 'fhe Last Step The Unbearable Lightness of Being

12 13 16 20 25

27

2.9 34 39 48 60 68 84 85 91 93

102. 105 112 118 123 126 134 139 145 147 150 159 165

173

175 179 181

A Pyrrhic Victory 'A Brilliant Game' Russian Wall

Chess and Literature Leko-ish Way White to Win A Hungarian with no Hunger

Chess and Action A Dog in the Manger

Chess and Psychology Mission Accomplished A Tablet under the Tongue

Time in Chess A Miracle We Need Live and Let Die A Prisoner of Faint-Heartedness When the Gods Play Jokes When the Gods Laugh

The Results of the Match Two Matches

PART THREE Big Brother in Elista

Introduction You're Responsible for the One Who Made You Kramnik Versus Kramnik

A Sudden Blow Double Whammy

Flea Market Cash in While You Can Eagerly Waiting for the Champions League

Sweet and Lowdown The Horse Is Stolen

Topa- Cheater?! The Story of H6 Groundhog Day Rock Bottom The Usual Procedures

Condemned to a Tie-Break To Be Continued ... The Moment of Truth

Index of Openings

186 192 196 198 202 205 214 219 224 228 240 250 254 255 259 262 266 275 283 298

301

303 307 309 312 317 324 328 341 345 354 357 363 368 374 377 381 384 388

398

FOREWORD

'I can't get to sleep, it's freezing. Volodya went all-out!' Evgeny Bareev during the match in Brissago (2004)

When Vladimir Kramnik surprised everyone in Game 8 of his World Champion-ship match with Peter Leko by sharply complicating the situation on the board and playing a variation with a queen sacrifice that he'd prepared at home, his second, Evgeny Bareev, unusually, couldn't get ,to sleep peacefully after having been up all night working.

Evgeny BAREEV. Professional. In this book also called 'Zhenya'. Born November 21, 1966 in Chelyabinsk Oblast, In-ternational Grandmaster. Gold medal-winner on the Russian team in four Chess Olympiads '(1990, 1994, 1996, 1998), participant in two World Champion-ships (1997, 2005) and two European Championships (1992, 2003). Winner of many Russian and interna-tional tournaments. Character restrained and gentle. Lives in Moscow. Graduated from GTsOLIFK (the State Central Order of Lenin Institute of Physical Training). Married, has

two children. Favourite animals: big cats, crocodiles, sharks. Favourite food: sweetcorn, tomatoes. Favourite drink: black tea. Hobbies: poker, downhill skiing.

Kramnik, six games from the end of the match, with an equal score, decided to throw off the fetters of a heavy, stodgy battle and take a risk ... The computer, evaluating the position, endlessly changed its opinion and showed an uncondi-tional win first for Kramnik, then for Leko. Volodya was. playing unbelievably fast, and it was obvious that the entire variation was sitting at home on his com-puter screen ... Peter was thinking for a long time. After Black's 25th move the computer thought for a minute or two and finally announced that Kramnik was losing the game. Having put himself in a critical position, Vladimir was only able to outplay his opponent in the last game and keep the title ofWorld Chess Cham-pion.

From London to Elista 8

Constantly exchanging impressions with Bareev during this match, I thought it would be interesting to convey to the reader the unbelievable tension of the strug-gle that's characteristic of a battle for the chess crown. I - am Ilya Levitov.

Ilya LEVITOV. Amateur. Born September 11, 1979 in Moscow. A partner in the Russian consultancy agency SV Consulting. By pro-fession- public relations expert, by declaration- chess amateur. Character strange. Married, has a son. Favourite animal: elephant. Favourite food: 'Soviet' pie with cabbage. Favourite drink: apple juice, diluted car-bonated water with a ratio of 40/60. Hobbies: chess, football.

In autumn 2004 in the Swiss town ofBrissago Vladimir Kramnik defended the ti-tle of World Champion that he had won in London in 2000 in single combat against the hitherto invincible Garry Kasparov.

Kasparov's five matches with Anatoly Karpov ( 1984-1990) had been an out-standing occurrence, and not only in the professional sense. They marked the end of a golden age of chess, an era when the duels for the title of strongest player on the planet attracted interest even from people who were far removed from this game. At least, this was the case in the USSR. In the '90s Russian citizens' value sys-tem endured powerful external pressure. People lost interest in chess, quiet indoor pastimes were the last thing on their minds. The chess kingdom also had to deal with restructurings' and revolutions.

The departure in 1993 of Garry Kasparov and Nigel Short from the Interna-tional Chess Federation (FIDE), just before their match for the world crown, caused a schism, and the strict system for determining the chess king that had ex-isted for half a century collapsed. People who hadn't been regularly following events in the chess world started asking professional players more and more often -some perplexed, others ironically- 'So how many champions do you have, ex-actly, and who are they, in fact?' ..

All the events that were held in that decade to establish the strongest chess player in the world suffered from some deficiency or other, which made it impos-sible to take them completely seriously. Either the strengths of the players were

A reference to Soviet President Mikhail Gorbachev' s policy of perestroika, which means restructuring.

9 Evgeny Bareev and Ilya Levitov

clearly unequal, or the absence in a tournament of several of the top grandmasters inevitably devalued the title that was won in a tough sporting struggle, or the rules were too obviously favourable to one of the players, putting the other in disadvan-tageous conditions. And, most importantly, despite all his efforts to give weight to the play-offfor the title of World Champion in the democratic knockout system, FIDE President Kirsan Ilyumzhinov didn't manage to shake the 'monarchist con-victions' either of the ordinary amateurs or the venerable professionals that had developed over decades. In their opinion, the title could only be considered legal if it was won in single combat with the thirteenth chess king, Kasparov, who for all these years had still remained the absolute leader of the ratings list.

Indeed, the history of chess bears witness: the genuine World Champion, ac-knowledged by everyone, is the one who takes the title from the previous king in a one-on-one duel. Why is that? Because it just can't be any other way in this game.

A battle on the chess board is an ideal vehicle for a confrontation of personali-ties, a real intellectual rivalry. Here it's impossible to dump the blame for defeat on partners (there aren't any), arbiters (they decide almost nothing, they just ensure that the rules are followed), or coaches (during the garp.e they can't do anything to help you). You have to depend only on your own strengths and possibilities.

In the hall where a World Championship match takes place, spectators sit and listen through earphones to the grandmasters' play being gone through with a fine toothcomb by other grandmasters; amateur chess players sit at home with a sandwich in their hand and, using the most modern computer programs, they see the strongest move in the position each time. But the participants have to find the best decisions over the course of five or six hours without any computers or hints, to the sound of the inexorably ticking clock, constantly bringing them closer and closer to their biggest nightmare - TIME TROUBLE.

A person walks down the street and says on his mobile phone: 'Dude, I'min time tro1Jble, talk faster.' And he doesn't suspect that he's slashed a knife through the heart of the professional chess player walking past him! What does he know about time trouble?! You get an advantage in the opening, you increase it in the middle of the game - the middle game - and, when you only have to make a couple of precise moves to get the win ... you make a mistake, because there's a minute left on your clock. You can only imagine what a tragedy this is - the results of complicated, stressful work that you've been doing for many hours, disappear in one minute! Or for the entire game you've had to defend, to search for hidden resources, to devise traps, and when there are seconds left before the time control and you have to make the only correct decision, you slip, nervously making the first move you can think of, and you immediately realise that you can shake your opponent's hand to admit defeat. Against the applause of the audience, turning red with shame and vexation, you hide backstage. And there isn't anyone you can pass the responsibility onto -you lost in an honest battle, one on one, and you turned out to be worse, weaker ...

From London to Elista 1 0

It's precisely these emotions that Kasparov went through when he lost the second game ofhis match with Kramnik in one move. We'll return to this incident again.

A defeat in chess has a more powerful impact on the human psyche than a de-feat in any other sport, and a victory takes you to a higher :reak ofintellectual plea-sure. Why did the famous Bobby Fischer, after winning a World Championship match, not sit down at the board for 20 years? Why did Morphy, Steinitz and Rubinstein go crazy? Why, when they look at some of today's great chess players, do people rotate their finger on their temple? Because it's sometimes impossible to withstand the crazy nervous tension of a game, a tournament or a match, and it's hard to acknowledge someone else's intellectual superiority A defeat in chess is a harsh public destruction of the personality, and always a small death.

A World Chess Championship match ... everyone's attention is riveted on you, and you have to come out onto the biggest chess stage in the world and prove that you're better, smarter, more talented. In 2000 in London Vladimir Kramnik achieved the biggest victory of his life. Beating Garry Kasparov in two out of fif-teen games and not losing a single one, he became the fourteenth World Champion. We'll make a proviso: not everyone agrees with this. Part of the chess community thinks that Kramnik didn't obtain the right to a match in an honest sporting selection process, as Kasparov himself nominated him as his opponent, despite the fact that two years earlier Vladimir had lost a match to challenger Alexey Shirov. However, in the conditions of confusion that reigned in the chess world, evidently no decision existed that would have suited everyone. No matter how it all happened, only a person with very biased leanings, to put it mildly, could possibly diminish Kramnik's outstanding achievement.

After his London triumph Vladimir started organising the Candidates cycle that he had agreed on with Kasparov even before the match. The ex-champion didn't want to take part in the selection process, insisting that Kramnik should give him the right to a rematch- a ridiculous idea to transport from a century ago without a time machine, when anyone could challenge the champion to a match if they could secure a prize fund. So what, it was his business, his problem. Kramnik ful-filled his obligations. In 2002 in Dortmund a Candidates Tournament took pl~ce, which Peter Leko won. It took over two years to organise his match with Kramnik - another testament to the fact that chess wasn't going through its best times. In these years two attempts by FIDE to hold its own match, in which Kasp~rov's op-ponent would be the FIDE World Champion, were also unsuccessful - first this was Ruslan Ponomariov, and then Rustam Kasimdzhanov.

Next came the scandalous unification match between Vladimir Kramnik and Veselin Topalov, after which Kramnik became the absolute World Champion without any prefixes ('classical') or slander ('but he's completely forgotten how to play!').

In this way, the matches in London, Brissago and Elista have now become the last in the series of classical duels for the chess crown. Journalist Iakov Damsky and

1 1 Evgeny Bareev and Ilya Levitov

grandmaster Sergey Shipov have already written a book, The Last Intrigue of the Century, about the Kasparov-Kramnik match. Is it worth going back to the events of seven years ago again? In our opinion, it is. If we're talking purely about the chess content, then il) previous years events on this scale always underwent a criti-cal interpretation - variations were checked thoroughly, and evaluations were fine-tuned several times. In our day it would seem that the annotator's use of 'in-fallible' computer programs would allow us to dot all the 'i's immediately. How-ever, we appeal to the reader: don't become like the kind of advanced amateurs who, sitting at home on their sofa and watching their Fritzes or Juniors work on the grandmasters' game, criticise chess players from on high and think that there are no more secrets left in this game. There are still areas where a person under-stands things better, and for a high-quality commentary on a game between two grandmasters it isn't enough to simply press one button. And although Sergey Shipov did his work professionally and conscientiously, that doesn't mean at all that there's nothing left for other analysts to do here.

There are two more reasons why we decided to describe the London match in detail. Firstly, Evgeny Bareev was Kramnik's second in the matches with Kasparov and Leko, he viewed the battle from within, he was a direct participant in it and is able to convey the drama of the intellectual confrontation at the highest level like nobody else. Another motive is the natural desire to compare the matches. In the opinion of a large number of people, in particular Kasparov, a World Champion is a spokesman for the ideas of his era. If we take this as an axiom, then how can the era ofVladimir Kramnik be characterised, how is it different from the preceding ones? How did Kramnik manage to conquer a giant like Kasparov? What did Vladimir change in himself and in the chess world in the four years that passed be-fore the next match? Why did the duel with Leko turn out to be so difficult, and thanks to what did Kramnik nevertheless manage to obtain the result that he re-quired? In order to answer these questions, we met a few times a week and re-corded Evgeny's opinion about Kramnik's matches on a Dictaphone. The inter-rogation was wide-ranging.

In our difficult times, concerned manufacturers often try to offer the grateful consumer a light version of their product. Shapely women drink the low-calorie Diet Coke, and the simple chess amateur puts the program ChessBase Light onto the computer, not burdening it with a database of a million games. It's rumoured that they've even invented a 'Viagra Light'.

By our reckoning, the notes to the games offered here shouldn't scare away those readers for whom chess is merely a pleasant leisure-time activity. .. Explain-ing the course of the battle to us, Evgeny laid stress on the positional and psycho-logical subtleties, avoiding cumbersome theoretical computations and densely tangled variations. But for chess professionals all the games have also been anno-tated by Bareev in the traditional manner.


In the same form as the Platonic dialogues, discussions are presented about im-portant elements like preparation for a match. In our time-outs and tea breaks we also touched on other subjects that the chess community is concerned about now-adays. Don't be surprised if, reading the book, you stumble upon reflections about the length of tennis player Maria Sharapova's legs and the whiteness ofher skirt, or the dramatic penalty that Roberto Baggio missed. If we remain in our tower made of black and white wood, chess will never get out of the current crisis.

We hope that you won't get bored in the intervals between games. We have tried to ensure that a book about the most difficult ordeal in the life of a chess player can be read easily.

WHAT YOU SOW ..

In 2000 Vladimir Kramnik won the title of World Chess Champion, outplaying the 'eternal' champion Garry Kasparov in brilliant style with a score of 8Y2-6Y2. For the majority of chess amateurs (and professionals, too) this result was shock-ing. Once again: Kasparov didn't win a single game!

But the people who were with Kramnik at that moment knew that Volodya had been able to approach the match in a virtually ideal physical ~;nd psychological condition. In this chapter you'll frequently read the delighted opinions of Kramnik's seconds about his external appearance before the match with Kasparov - 'he'd lost weight', 'he'd got stronger', 'he was glowing with health', 'he looked like an athlete'. In 2000 everything turned out better than it ever had- the choice of opening strategy proved to be correct, and his fighting mood and good sport-ing form helped him to save some hopeless positions . .As often happens, a person approaching the peak of his career was able to gather everything he needed into his hands and carry out the final push towards the main goal of his life.

Four years passed. Krarnnik looked more and more pale with each year (already not like an athlete). His health declined, he wasn't winning tournaments. Not possessing a big reserve of energy, he always gained his victories with great difficulty. In 2 0 0 3 at the Dortmund tournament Vladimir was able to win only one game out of ten, and the rest were drawn. But Kasparov, whom he had conquered, won five(!) games out of ten in 200 I at the Iinares super-tournament, not losing a single one. The ch~ss world started talking about 'the accidental champion' ... We, too, were starting to worry ..

In July 2002, after winning the Dortmund Candidates Tournament, the young Hungarian Peter Leko was set for a match with Kramnik. Here we exchanged glances approvingly: 'Yes, this isn't a Kasparov for you, Volodya yvon't have any problems, he's both more talented and more experienced'. Volodya himself as-sessed his chances as 60-40. We assumed he was being modest.

And the first game of the match completely confirmed our assumptions - in a dead-drawn endgame Leko contrived to lose as White! But in the direct internet

13 Evgeny Bareev and Ilya Le vi tov

broadcast of the post-game press conference we saw the tired, pallid face ofKramnik, who was only able to produce something like a smile at the end. It was then that doubt also crept in, the sense that something was rotten in the state of Denmark.

As a result, the match with Leko turned into sheer torment. Unconfident play, obvious psychological problems, the loss of a drawn endgame in the fifth game, an opening failure in the eighth. And only at the very end was Kramnik able to break Leko's resistance with an unbelievable exertion of his will, taking the match to a tie and retaining the World Title.

Doing a comparison with Bareev ofKramnik's preparation for the matches, we found that for Leko it was conducted differently than for Kasparov- most of the at-tention went to analysis of opening positions, and the physical and psychological aspects were put onto the back burner.

After the Leko match, we'd established with sadness that in our eye,s Kramnik had lost his unique understanding of chess, his creative mood, his fighting spirit; or, in other words, all the qualities that had allowed him to beat Kasparov. Vladimir approached the match with Topalov in Elista in 2006 in a much more combative condition. He'd been able to deal with his health and to bring back his former un-derstanding and energy at the board.

The general public in Russia mainly knows about how preparation is conducted for an important chess event from the Vladimir Vysotsky2 song The Honour of the Chess Crown. Much ofit is true to life, although some parts are grotesque, perhaps. In this chapter we'll try to look into the kitchen of a chess player in the period of his preparation for a World Championship match and to draw a complete picture of this labour-intensive process, and we'll also ask a question about why Kramnik, who had a successful recipe for preparation in 2000, didn't use it in 2004.

As Evgeny Bareev wasn't Kramnik's second at the time of the match with Topalov in 2006, our account of this event has received a slightly different form. There are obvi-ously no 'notes of a second', but as there was frequent contact before, during and after this match, the information given will still be very much 'from the lion's mouth'.

STRATEGY AND TACTICS

JOEL LAUTIER, Kramnik's second in the London match: 'There was a strategy, but it didn't work, as the match didn't follow the planned scenario. Ifs psycho-logically difficult to work out a strategy in advance, because it's impossible to foresee many subtle points.' (In this case Joel means the quick win in Game 2. A long series of draws or even a loss at first for Kramnik had been envisaged-E.B.)

2 A Soviet singer, poet, actor and alc;oholic who died in 1980, aged 42.


VASILY SMYSLOV, the seventh World Champion: 'The spirit of the age dic-tates that people have to prepare well. All these computer variations put pressure on them. I remember Marina Dolmatova described how Seryozha (grandmaster Sergey Dolmatov - I.L.) was playing in a tournament and be-fore a game he worried: "Oh, we haven't looked at this variation." And I: "Does it really matter?" I often had to play people I didn't know. I didn't have a computer, I wasn't familiar with the ideas of the new players, I had to play it by ear. And I was used to playing any move- l.e4, l.d4, l.c4, l.tt::lf3 .'

14

BAREEV: No, it does matter if your opponent is well prepared. The difference is that these obscure players also played it by ear and they played much worse than the harmonious Vasily Vasilievich. LEVITOV: In recent years there's been a revolution in opening preparation. What only Kasparov used to do, everyone now does, and there's an enormous amount of work for the top-class grandmasters to shoulder in the search for a new move. It's become difficult to find any untravelled path. BAREEV: This is mainly a problem for the top chess players. In essence, scrupulous analytical work that demands an enormous investment of effort and time is done by only a handful of people. They find and play the novelties, and the overwhelm-ing majority of chess players sit with the Internet, patiently waiting for a fresh idea to appear in a variation that's interesting to them, and as soon as they see some-thing new, having quickly checked it on their computer, they rush to successfully . use it first. It's the kind of work that the mechanics do in the film Only Old Men Go to Battle3 They wait. LEVITOV: So, does a grandmaster today really have to sit for two or three hours be-fore the game and simply refresh his memory with a huge number of opening lines? To learn everything from cover to cover- otherwise he can't do anything? BAREEV: If you've done a huge amount of work, then yes - you have to refresh your memory, because otherwise you won't remember it for the game, and it'll be as if you never had this knowledge. And Kramnik had to spend several hours be-fore a game refreshing his information, memorising certain variations. LEVITOV: So there's no creative work during a match? BAREEV: Of course there is. Where do you think novelties come from?! But the vol-ume of information that the chess player has to deal with is now so great that a team of assistants working several hours a day is needed, in order to work through a framework of variations. And to refresh the variations and ideas before the game, this takes several hours.

3 Soviet film about World War II pilots, released in 1973. In the film, the old men are only about 20.


We can get a sense of the full importance of opening preparation from the exam-ple of the lOth game of the 2000 match. Kasparov couldn't remember a certain variation at the board and a) lost a very important game, and b) played worse than average non-professionals had done before him. It turns out that even if you're a top chess player, that doesn't at all mean that you'll react in the besfway in an unfa-miliar position. LEVITOV: It's precisely for this reason that chess players try so hard to analyse the opening deeply? So that they, won't disgrace themselves? BAREEV: So that they won't be unpresentable. LEVITOV: But still, in my view, highly-qualified chess players overestimate the sig-nificance of the opening. BAREEV: They know from their own experience that if their opponent has studied theory, he will get a very familiar position, and it becomes problematic to exploit his weak spots.

In principle, today the paths to achieving equal positions have been shown in the majority of openings. Let's say, on some theme there were 17 games, and there's equality everywhere, and you need to digest a heap of material in order to obtain some small plus the next time. It's terribly boring. That's precisely why it's easier to wait for someone else to do the dirty work. Chess players spend hours, days on preparation, in search of an improvement ~ith the aim of achieving a plus-equal (a minimal advantage for White). But then there are also the kinds of plus-equals that, for example, send Leko into raptures, because he knows that he'll never in his life lose a slightly worse position. LEVITOV: Well, yes, and you're also in raptures, because you've got your plus-equal, and two enraptured idiots are sitting there ... The Kramnik-Leko match did go like that until Game 8. BAREEV: We should note that there were still two games that produced results, which isn't so few. And in the others, of course, there was 'Greek football' on the board. But the point of ~e game was the result, and who's going to take a risk, play-ing sharp variations, if the score's equal? Where's the sense in that? There isn't any

Volodya says that in five years it will become impossible to play- a win, especially with the black pieces, will be practically unattainable. In that case, in his opinion, the best solution to the problem would be a draw for the opening immediately before the game. This idea has a rightto exist, and, most likely; that's what will happen. There are only two provisos: the first is that such conversations have been going on for about 80 years already; and the second is that if you make the time control stricter, speed the game up, an opportunity always appears to play some 'fringe' opening that your op-ponent hasn't prepared, and thus to avoid the drawing variations. LEVITOV: Conversations about the fact that chess is threatened by 'draw death' were taking place even in Lasker's day It's just that Kramnik always starts to talk about this when he cannot win, his attacking power has decreased, which is why


he allows such discussions. Kasparov wouldn't have been stopped by such 'quib-bles'. That kind of draw for openings isn't a panacea. You could also have a draw for the time control - decide how much time to give immediately before the game. This influences the approach to the opening, it's also interesting. BAREEV: We can come up with plenty of idiotic ideas. There's another incident here ... This story is from Petya Svidler. During the Linares tournament in 1998 Kasparov makes a move and shakes his head in irritation: 'I don't remember any-thing.' Petya's a polite man, he's obliging, always ready to discuss any problem with anyone. So Garry Kimovich explains that I vanchuk is playing the Zaitsev Vari-ation in the Ruy Lopez against him, which Kasparov encountered many times in his matches with Karpov. 'Why didn't he warn me yesterday evening that he was planning on playing this?! I could have measured up to him!' This way he didn't even remember anything, and he had to go into some tributary (a deviation from the main line in search of a draw - I.L.) .-

Or I remember Kasparov also lost to I van Sokolov (Wijk aan Zee 1999). A varia-tion in the Nimzo-Indian Defence, which he had analysed up to mate, he simply forgot. These episodes very precisely reflect the situation. A person isn't capable of keeping everything in his head!

TEAM POLITICS

LEVITOV: On what principle did Volodya form his team before the match with Kasparov? BAREEV: On the professional principle - those who were capable of work, could withstand the serious physical and psychological burden, and wouldn't give up.

A limited number of people participated in the preparation. The team that formed was international, on the whole each person worked at home, and Kramnik himself held several study and coaching meetings with various chess players. In the preliminary stage I often got together with Sergey Dolmatov (later we again pre-pared together for Kramnik's match with the computer Deep Fritz in 2 0 0 2). And no matter how many times we got together- there was always a big disaster. Together we have a terrible destructive power. The first time, when we came to Zvenigorod, the submarine Kursk sank; another time, when we were preparing for the match with Fritz on September 11 and were sitting there with the television on, in front of our eyes a plane smashed into the second tower, and it collapsed. And every time something happened ... However, with Svidler it wasn't any better. Before the match in Brissago- Beslan, in 2005- the jazz capital New Orleans was flooded.

Most of all I liked working with Lautier, not least because I could make a trip to Paris for this. And although I mainly saw the chess board with the Nimzo-Indian set up on it, the awareness of the fact that, walking around the Seventh Arondissement on the warm June evenings, I was breathing the air of the same


streets that Diaghilev once breathed, filled me with a sense that I had made the right choice of profession.

In general, each person answered for his own sphere. I worked on the white colour, with the exception of the Griinfeld Defence.

Dolmatov and Kramnik prepared the Berlin Wall together in about two weeks. N ei-ther Lautier nor I knew what, specifically, would be our main weapon against l.e4. LEVITOV: That's nice! Volodya trusts you! BAREEV: I think that in the first place, Volodya himself didn't even know what would happen. In the second place, experience suggested how he should behave. It's well known that Kasparov-arepresentative of the Soviet chess school-is a pu-pil of Botvinnik and Karpov. And they were famous for intrigues and be-hind-the-scenes squabbles, which they won on most occasions. That's why it was impossible to absolutely exclude the possibility that an attempt would be made to -I'm not afraid to use this word- swipe something. In case of a loss in some area, Kramnik divided the field. That way something would always remain ... LEVITOV: That's smart. Wasn't Dolma,tov previously Kasparov's coach? BAREEV: From 19 8 7, and also earlier, in the matches with Karpov. He actually told us a lot about it, he described those epic times when the last matches between the titans took place, about the atmosphere within the camps and around them.

Continuing the subject of who was responsible for what, I'll tell you. that Kramnik and Lautier worked on the Scotch Game (Kasparov didn't play this ope-ning, but it came in handy later, in the match with the computer). If we're talking about the main opening for White, then Illescas worked on the Griinfeld, and he did very serious work on it.

Based on the assumption that it was impossible to look at everything, Kramnik determined which openings might occur and which wouldn't, and cut out the unnecessary. He thought that l.e4 would be Kasparov's main weapon. l.c4 Volodya himself plays as White, so he didn't put any particular work into this move. And about l.d4 he simply decided that it wouldn't happen in the match- a mistake that almost cost him a loss in Game 15. And which, four years later, led to defeat in the fifth game with Leko.

LAUTIER: 'I should say Volodya is very capable of distributing tasks, his head works like a computer in this respect. He knows which areas to entrust to whom, he draws his own conclusions ... The technical work was conducted at a high level. You can't palm off something of average quality to Volodya. He in-standy sees: "No, guys, I don't like this, work harder!" You have to put all you've got into it. He understands perfectly well that there are moves suggested by the computer that don't contain a human idea. This was serious work.' KRAMNIK: 'Forming the team turned out to be the simplest element of the pre-match preparation. I worked quite closely with Illescas and our joint work suited me. From time to time I collaborated with Lautier, and I also


liked the quality of that performance. Plus they had quite a good relation-ship with each other. 'I've known Zhenya for a long time, we have a good personal rapport. All the people more or less suited each other. Besides, it was impossible to think for long- there wasn't much time, we had to get to work. The choice has proven absolutely right, the team demonstrated superb results. The most important el-ement of a team's work in a World Championship match is the performance of the chess players. In this respect the guys did even more work than I expected; to be more precise, they worked harder than I could force them to work! 'I also held two short sessions with Svidler and Dolmatov. I was interested in specific variations on which they were considered experts.'

LEVITov: What changes in the team occurred four years later?

18

BAREEV: They were insignificant. Lautier went for a promotion- he became the president of the Association of Chess Professionals. Instead of him, Peter Svidler reported for duty. Petya is one of the 1 0 strongest players in the world, several times Russian champion- he's been doing this work for a long time. Perhaps his opening knowledge isn't quite as deep because he doesn't want to (or he can't) force himself to analyse pointless theoretical positions, but as compensation he has an incredibly wide chess horizon, which, without doubt, is useful during preparation for a match.

And, most importantly: the cook changed. For the match itself food was deliv-. ered from a restaurant, but at the last session in Roquebrune (Monte Carlo), Viktor Ivanovich Bobylev cooked for us, the chef from a Moscow restaurant who also pampered Karpov in Baguio ( 1 9 7 8) and Merano ( 1 9 81), and is completely inca-pable of cooking badly. These are my best recollections of the preparation for the match. The light delicacies that he found jostled with each other on the table, not repeated from one day to the next, lobster alternated with fresh lamb and sea bass or a succulent chop- the fridge wasn't locked, and you could always find a dessert and fresh fruit in there.

But, jumping ahead, I'll note that in the match with Leko the team was virtually unnecessary. The opponent changed his opening with every 'black' game, so our work between games became pointless. That is, the team was necessary, of course, but it followed that once we understood Leko's strategy, we should wm;k on over-coming it in advance and doing that purposefully, without digging into what he'd already played. And it turned out that Volodya was only pounding sand, he gave the impression that his team was working intensively, he made moves from the previous game ... and waited until Leko went into a new variation. With Kasparov, though, what we did at home appeared later on the board. LEVITov: Here's an example for you. At the football Worid Cup you have to get through the group tournament, then the quarter-final and the semi-final, and the idea is that a team has to come to the final in peak physical form. Is there a similar

1 9 . Evgeny Bareev and Ilya Levitov

principle or any other principle in chess players' preparation for tournaments of the highest level? Let's say, you approach the match in optimal form and you try to maintain it- or do you start playing and then reach your peak? Did you work on developing a match strategy? As Botvinnik did? BAREEV: Meaning what, exactly? LEVITOV: I plan that I'll win ... well, the first, second and third games are draws-let's say the fourth. If I win, then I'll play such-and-such, and if I lose -such -and -such. BAREEV: This is the first I've heard of it. LEVITOV: This is written in the book The Botvinnik-Bronstein Match. BAREEV: Well, nothing like that can happen. And as far as I understand it, in order to get a result, you have to forget about it. Concentrate on the game itself, the cre-ativity. What kind of strategy is this- planning a win? And how are yo:u going to win there?! Above all you mustn't lose, and after that, however it works out. And as for your best form- it would be good towards the end of the match, but it's prefer-able to have excellent form throughout the entire contest. LEVITOV: I mean the scenarios. The match can be turning out well, and then you

,,

use certain openings, or it could be going badly - then other openings. BAREEV: There are days between games, and in that time the player chooses a varia-tion from those he has, from the arsenal that was worked on before the match. Or he prepares something new. Depending on the score and the character of the struggle in the match, and also his own general state of mind. LEVITOV: During the match with Leko the impression was created that Volodya ab-solutely wasn't ready to be leading 1-0, or for the score to go to minus one. Leko had imagined that he could be losing 'minus one', and he had a precise strategy for this case. He knew that if he was ahead in the score, he'd dry things out (simplify the position, play for a draw- I.L.), and if he was losing, then he also wouldn't burn his bridges. As Black, dryness, and as White he'd obtain a slight advantage in his openings and try to make the most of it. Leko had a strategy, but Volodya, seem-ingly, devoted too much attention to the opening, and he pushed everything else into the background. BAREEV: I can add that Leko, evidently, had an idea- on an equal score or minus one, in the first half of the match he wouldn't take a risk, but he would launch something only at the end, when Kramnik was getting tired.

But Volodya, possibly, decided thus: 'I'll play according to the score- I'll create an openings database and depending on the course of the match I'll choose whether to go there or here. I have a team that's capable of quickly preparing any variation I need.' We didn't discuss the possibility that he could be losing. Perhaps he went through some scenarios in his head, but we were far from everything that was connected with the strategy of conducting the battle. We were working on concrete things. He worked on the strategy himself.


LEVITOV: When you and I were talking about this subject earlier, I was surprised that you brought everything around to opening variations: he's obtained his posi-tion- it's fine, we play; he hasn't obtained it- everything's bad. During the match Volodya didn't have precise reference points, and, for example, an opening catas-trophe knocked him off balance and he couldn't play properly BAREEV: That's another issue. But if he hadn't been knocked off balance, this kind of strategy would have had a right to exist. In the first match he anticipated all the strategic questions, in essence, broke Kasparov down into his constituent parts, but in all the strategic decisions that he mad~ before the match with Leko he got a malfunction. Oversights and mistakes were made. LEVITOV: He didn't consult with you? BAREEV: We chatted about various subjects, his psychological condition wasn't a matter of indifference to me. But the feeling never left me that when he was talking to me it was as ifhe was discussing the problem with himself out loud. It's difficult for me to convey this.

He wasn't afraid of Kasparov, having played him successfully in tournaments, but it was still important to give him psychological confidence that six months was enough time for preparation and successful play But before the match with Leko his psychological condition wasn't all that important, Kramnik had been World Champion for four years already and he could get in the right mood by himself

PHYSICAL PREPARATION

KRAMNIK: 'I always used to train seriously The difference is that when I was preparing for tournaments, I actively participated in sport for about two months before a tournament, and then I gave up. But here I did this very in-tensely for the entire six months before the match. And the closer we got to the match, the more intensive the activities became.' LAUTIER: 'Before the match with Kasparov I saw a complete metamorpho-sis. In six months (ip Mar

1ch 2000 we discussed everything, and the match

was supposed to start at the end of October) he changed- you couldn't re-cognise him. In March he was even fatter than usual, and here- an athlete! He was ready by all measures. The fact that he was ready in the chess aspect, I knew. But when I saw him about two weeks before the start of the match,it was a shock for me. Before our arrival in London we hadn't seen each other for a couple of months, we'd been communicating by email and phone -and I barely recognised him. Tanned, strong, slim. He was so charged with energy that it was pleasant to look at him. Ideas came easily It was clear that at this moment he was living only for the match and nothing else interested him. Unfortunately, after that time I never saw him like that again.'

21 Evgeny Bureev and Ilya Levitov

BAREEV: A month before the match \vith Kasparov Volodya held a training session with illescas in Spain. He left, and the next time I saw him was at the match. I didn't re-cognise him- he'd given up smoking and lost another five or six kilograms, he was so smart, energetic and relaxed. Physically he was unexpectedly in phenomenal form. LEVITOV: He prepared for that match brilliantly. Was there a secret to his transfor-mation into fighting condition? BAREEV: There was. LEVITOV: Which, apparently, had been lost after the match with Kasparov. BAREEV: But the secret is simple: the all-consuming desire to be number one. The desire to prove that he was exceptional, to go down in history, a desire for which the man was ready to temporarily sacrifice even love, the love of his indulgences and bad habits. We didn't do much physical preparation before the match with Leko. He refused to give up smoking - categorically. Meaning that in this respect there was already a minus. LEVITOV: I want to ask, as the only former smoker among those present: why's it obligatory to give up smoking? With a football player it's clear- in order to run for an hour-and-a-half, he has to be able to breathe. But why for a chess player? BAREEV: Can you guarantee that smoking has a positive influence on the brain cells? LEVITOV: A good question ... No, I can't. BAREEV: And no one can. Today among the top chess players there are virtually no smokers- this is probably significant. All that was done was that Kramnik swam a lot. (It was the same story before the match with Topalov- I.L.) But this wasn't enough, apparently. What's more, swimming is in the category of rhythmical sports, like running, too, for example. These are contra-indicated for players- it exhausts the nervous system. It's no coincidence, in my view, that Karpov, who on the advice of a distinguished psychologist went running along the African coast as a way to get himself into ideal physical form, convincingly lost his match to Short in 1992. Read Zagainov's book The Defeat. LEVITOV: Volodya thought that he'd win no matter what? BAREEV: No, he didn't think that. What basis did he have for that? Before the match he'd won one game out of thirty against Leko! In London in 2000 Kramnik had five or six worse positions, of which three were almost hopeless. Unbelievably, Kasparov couldn't win a single one. And despite the fact that Kramnik was very tenacious in de-fence, in some cases this won't save you, simply because of the way the position is, and you won't be able to do anything no matter how tenacious you are. Kramnik defended magnificently. but the positions were so bad that if Kasparov had played more accu-rately. Kramnik would have lost. Simply because the position was hopeless.

So, five difficult positions out of fifteen- where's the guarantee that the next time he won't have three or four out of fourteen and won't lose one or two of them? That means he also has to win somewhere. But how to do this, if the open-ing that Leko has before the match ~s very serious -the reliable Sveshnikov system


in the Sicilian Defence, which Kramnik himself plays as Black? Moreover, Leko de-fends well, he's young, he shouldn't get tired. Kramnik couldn't be certain of suc-cess, although the match started out optimistically LEVITOV: That means the physical preparation wasn't ideal... BAREEv: Attention wasn't placed on this particularly Theoretically it was known that it would be better not to smoke, to walk a lot, but in practice to force himself not to smoke, to walk, to sleep well - it didn't work out. LEviTOv: But for what reason -lack of motivation? BAREEv: No, he was working a lot, even too much- 1 0 to 12 hours a day, this does not seem to suggest a lack of motivation. But he couldn't drop his usual methods of pre-paring for tournaments, which he'd been using for three years. And even while plan-ning the future match Volodya didn't anticipate that Leko was capable of pulling off such a breakthrough in his preparation- completely changing his opening repertoire. LEviTOv: What could Kramnik have done to avoid this situation? BAREEv: He simply shouldn't have allowed the mistakes he'd already made. He wasn't ready for Kasparov to play 1.d4 and 1.c4, he was swimming then. Kasparov is an ambidextrous player, but it didn't even occur to Kramnik that he had to pre-pare for 1.d4 too. With Leko it was even worse, because Leko couldn't do such a thing, he could never do such a thing. But he did it! LEviTOv: Volodya devoted too much attention to the chess aspect and miscalcu-lated strategically? BAREEv: Yes, and he worked very deeply on the variations that seemed dangerous to him. From what we'd worked on, digging deeply, only a tiny portion occurred~ and from what he himself had worked on before the match, nothing occurred. He worked so much that he wore himself out. In the theoretical aspect he was better prepared in some lines than he was for the match with Kasparov.

Another very serious mistake was made- before the sfart of the match we held a training session where we worked 10 to 12 hours a day, and we went to play im-mediately after this. LEVITOv: I'll respond to this for you with a quote from Leko from an interview in the magazine Schach (December 2004): 'By September 1 we'd finished the opening preparation for the match. In any case,}: had. After this I only worked on chess for one hour a day I had to preserve my energy so that at the board during the Il}atch I'd be ready for a big battle. It was clear to me that Kramnik, thanks to his superiority in prep-aration, would put constant pressure on me and play with great confidence. My physi-cal form had to be ideal in order to stand up to him. And physically I was ready!' BAREEv: They made us laugh. Kasparov supposedly calculated variations slightly better than a computer before the match and regularly blundered during it, Leko prepared as if for a marathon, and lost the last game. LEviTov: As a result Volodya turned out to be unfit. It works out that he sacrificed some of his preparation in order to deal with problems in the opening. But he did


not do this consciously- emotionally -look, you should have worked another lit7 tle hour here, another little half hour here, a little day there ... BAREEv: Absolutely correct. He couldn't force himself to get away from the so-called unsolved opening problems. To lie down and get to sleep peacefully, knowing that you haven't dealt with some scheme or other- you don't know how to obtain an advantage or to equalise in a variation which, most likely, will occur ...

At the last training sessions you shouldn't even touch a chess set. Kramnik knew all this, but we had the experience of London, when during the match itself we had to get variations up to scratch in a rush job. And this time he wanted to over-come that, to do this work before the match. LEviTOv: He wanted to smother his opponent with his knowledge of openings? BAREEv: Yes, but perhaps this was due to a lack of confidence. He believed that it would be difficult, and in order to make his task easier, he thought he would besiege Leko with his opening preparation. But it all went down the drain. Accordingly, the physical preparation was almost ruined and the emotional background was also dif-ficult- a week before the match we all simply needed to get some sleep. After such matches, by the way, you particularly value a good night's sleep. Precisely at those times when you have to take the children to school at eight in the morning. LEviTov: I'd say that Kramnik got into it like a creative person. Opening problems arose, and he was so bogged down in them that he lost his overall sense of direc-tion. BAREEv: Out of twelve hours that were spent on studying opening positions, Kramnik could calmly have assigned nine for the analysis of possible match situa-tions, walking, swimming, sleeping and going to the opera, and three hours, not getting too intense, for looking at games with all the possible openings. That would have been more useful.

Boris Naumovich Postovskl- our good old acquaintance- even called from America and fed him advice. He actually said that Volodya should walk more. You think there weren't people who said that he needed to relax more? Probably about seven people said this. Each said something of their own, but this, too. LEviTov: I don't understand why you need a physical trainer if he watches the man poring over the computer screen twelve hours a day. .. BAREEv: Krylov' claims that Kramnik listened to him much more four years previ-ously. Volodya had changed a little.

4 A former head coach of the Russian men's team for the chess Olympiads and subsequently captain of the us men's team (most of whom come from the former Soviet Union).

5 Dr. Valery Krylov, Kramnik's physitherapist.


LEVITOV: In essence, we can draw the conclusion that pre-match strategy doesn't play a particular role- you can be lucky with it or unlucky. The main task, as it seems to me, is to prepare yourself so that during the match you're not sitting there with 'eyes wide shut'. Seeing something unexpected, you have to be ready to react to it correctly, and not be afraid. A match is long enough that during it many events can occur that you didn't even think about before the match. But if you're well prepared physically and mentally, there's a chance that you won't react in the most undistin-guished manner and your opponent won't obtain a decisive advantage thanks to his prepared surprise. On the other hand, when your eyes are clouded, your reaction will be incorrect, as the fifth game of the match with Leko confirmed.

What did Krylov do at the training sessions? What was his sphere of responsibility? BAREEV: Valery Nikolaevich was a masseur for many years. He worked with the rowing and basketball teams in the golden Soviet times (lots of medals). In 19 7 8 he was thrown by the Sport Committee to the aid of Karpov in Baguio. Then for many years he revived him and put him to sleep. He got used to this. Specifically, his work consisted of ensuring that Volodya got a good night's sleep at the training sessions as well as the matches. In Brissago he didn't succeed in this. LEVITOV: Zhenya, what condition should a chess player's head be in before the game- empty and light, or is this akin to the condition before an exam- crowded with answers, variations, images of the game? BAREEV: Your head should be free of irrelevant thoughts, clear, light and able to quickly calculate the most complex variations. It shouldn't get foggy a couple of hours after the start of the game. It should produce opening variations on demand. LEVITOV: And what was Kramnik's menu on the day of a game? BAREEV: Immediately before a game Volodya eats only fish as a light nutritional product, otherwise he'll fall asleep during the game. At training sessions- any-thing he wants, according to his mood. Someone said that Kasparov, on the con-trary, eats his fill before a game, so that he can ensure that his body has energy up to. the fourth hour of the game. LEVITOV: Did Kramnik take any medicines at training sessions? To increase his re-. serve of energy, so to speak? BAREEV: Nothing in particular, he took some vitamins. I didn't get into the details. LEVITOV: And what was the daily routine at the training session in :N!onaco? BAREEV: Get up at 9, breakfast at 10, from 11 to 1 -chess, from 1 to 2 -the sea; 2:3 0 -lunch, from 3 to 4- siesta, from 4 to 8- chess, from 8 to 9- dinner, from 9 to 3 in the morning - chess. Sleep. LEVITOV: If we count that it works out as twelve hours of chess a day. You could go crazy! How could you tolerate the solitude with that work schedule, as you were there without your family and friends? BAREEV: Yes, it wasn't easy, but we listened to music, Petya and I fooled about by writing doggerel- a joint effort. We didn't do this before or after the match. We


touched on various subjects, mainly lyric poetry, the anguish of the soul and the flesh. LEVITOV: Example? BAREEV: Almost innocent:

You appear so unexpectedly, And disappear so suddenly, Like the scent of roses in a tea-room May beckons; and with one gulp I drink in this smell- the smell of bliss, And there'll be a strange sight: Eyes closed from sheer delight, I tremble with you in the wagon.

j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j

j j j j j j j j j j j j

j j j j j j

j j j

j j

I j j

PART ONE

Overthrow of a Colossus

j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j

j j j j j j j j j j j j j j

j j j j j j j

j j j

j j

j j j

The Match for the World Chess Championship Garry Kasparov versus Vladimir Kramnik

London 2000

A GIFT FROM THE GODS

LEVITOV: Strictly speaking, Kramnik was lucky. You could say that fate handed him the match with Kasparov, because he hadn't won any kind of qualification tourna-ment. Alexey Shirov won the right to a match with Kasparov, but the money couldn't be found for the match itself with Kasparov, and Garry evidently didn't want to play it, as Shirov had resoundingly lost almost all their games.

Legend has it that Kasparov ~onetheless managed to find $5 00,0 0 0 and he sug-gested to Shirov that they limit the prize fund to this modest amount. Alexey de-cided to take some advice - not from just anyone, but from Karpov. He, naturally, advised that it was better to wait for a more generous offer. The match fell apart. So did Shirov.

Then Kasparov announced that he'd play the number two on the ratings list, who at that moment happened to be Vishy Anand. But this plan didn't hold to-gether either, because Anand demanded a significant deposit in case the match was disrupted, not particularly trusting the organisers- and he had a point. There was no money. But in July 2000 a new ratings list came out and now Kramnik was the world number two. So Vladimir had earned the right to contend for the title. For this match sponsors who could afford several million dollars were also found.

Who was Kasparov preparing to take on? A fantastic player who'd been in the world chess elite for many years, with wonderful tournament results, and ... who'd contrived to lose three Candidates Matches already!

In 1994 Kramnik was crushed by Gata Kamsky with a score of l 1/2-4V2 (!) Ih the same year Volodya lost to Boris Gelfand in a FIDE Candidates Match with a score of 31/2-4 1/1 .. And, finally, in 1998 he lost to Alexey Shirov with a score of 3 Vi-5 1/2. That was also how Shirov had qualified for his match with Kasparov.

KRAMNIK: 'I don't know ifKasparov wanted to play the match wi:th me or not. When negotiations with Anand broke off- I don't know why, it wasn't my business- the sponsors deci,ded that they wouldn't be interested in any


match other than Kasparov-Kramnik. And Kasparov hadn't defended his ti-tle for five years, so he had to play come hell or high water, and the reality was that he had no choice other than to play me. 'I know that he respected me as a chess player and he understood perfectly that I would be the toughest opponent for him at that particular moment. He was afraid to lose, of course, which is completely natural, but on the other hand, I was the last chess player of his generation over whom he hadn't demonstrated clear superiority: he'd won against Karpov, as well as Anand and Short, and he almost always destroyed Shirov. If he beat me in a match, his career would be complete. His ambitions and his desire to 'tie up loose ends' combined in him with the fear of facing me specifically. After the match I was told that it was ob-vious in Kasparov's demeanour that he was very afraid of this match. 'My psychological approach to the match was very simple. I understood that Kasparov was the favourite. Not even because of his chess level- I didn't feel that he was better than me in our duels - but because of other factors that were indirectly associated with the chess itself He had colossal experience in matches, which is irreplaceable; a group of assistants who worked for him-this was a system that had been established over many years; and extremely powerful opening preparation, which had also been worked on for years.

30

'I wanted to prove that I really could do this. I wasn't absolutely certain of winning. Before the match I myself didn't know what I was capable o My goal was to come out at the maximum level of preparedness, chess-wise and physically. I wanted to be confident that even ifl lost, this wouldn't be' due to something stupid, it would not be due to lack of effort, but just be-cause I couldn't reach that level.'

BAREEV: In classical chess (out of a total of23), Kramnik had a score of3-3 against Kasparov, so he wasn't behind, and he often struck hard. It's enough to remember his brilliant win in 1996 at the Dos Hermanas tournament, and also their blitz matches.

Still, despite all this, it was thought that Kramnik didn't measure up in matches. By contrast, all the pluses were on Kasparov's side: great opening preparation and match experience. Also, he'd been preparing for two years to play Shirov, then Anand, and he'd done a huge amount of work. Kramnik only had six months be-fore the start of the match. He smoked, he liked to hang out with his friends and an outsider might have thought he was exactly how Botvinnik had described him: 'he's fat, he drinks and he smokes'. He played matches appallingly. And although Garry claimed that Kramnik was a very tough opponent, it wasn't surprising that he somewhat underestimated him. This was obvious in his preparation. He had to pay the price for his inaccurate judgment.

KASPAROV (in an interview with the Russian newspaper Sport Express six months before the match): 'For the first time since my matches with Kar-


pov I have an opponent who is in no way inferior to me. This makes it an at-tractive prospect. Unlike my 11-game superiority over Anand or my 9:0 score against Shirov, Volodya and I are absolutely equal! That's why there are hardly any of the complaints that I was expecting- rumours that I chose an opponent for myself without any kind of qualification process. On the con-trary, in the public's eyes it's considered an event worth waiting for- at last someone has appeared who is genuinely capable of beating Kasparov!'

LEVITOV: Zhenya, how was Kramnik able to hold Kasparov to an equal score? Volodya hadn't demonstrated enormous superiority over the other chess players in the elite, but he played so well against Kasparov. BAREEV: True, Kramnik didn't always play consistently, but in his games with Kasparov he got his act together. His broad and deep knowledge of openings al-lowed him to obtain decent positions after the opening, which other chess players could_rarely boast o He never had to resort to swindles or stunts - Kramnik always evaluated the position with the utmost accuracy and level-headedness. In good form Volodya was capable of calculating variations deeply and accurately; and also he was never afraid of Kasparov, and fear, as we know, is paralysing and distracting.

We arrived for the match with Kasparov two days before the start. I saw people in masks with strange instruments walking around the house that'd been rented for us. They were in there for two hours, while we went for a walk and fed the swans. The games were played on Tuesdays, Thursdays, Saturdays and Sundays. Af-ter the games we swam and played tennis. We relaxed on Mondays, Wednesdays and Fridays- three wonderful rest days! LEVITOV: Were they really that wonderful?! During a game you can relax, but on rest days the work continued at full pace, didn't it? BAREEV That's true, of course, but still we slept well before thexest days and there wasn't that awful stress during our work. Only the chief organiser, Raymond Keene, disturbed Kramnik with trivial details before the match- in particular, they couldn't make up their minds how to divide up the prize fund, and they even threatened to replace Volodya with A dams, but this was highly unlikely to happen, and Kramnik didn't pay any attention to Keene, referring him to his lawyer. LEVITOV: What was the routine on a game day? BAREEV: Before the game Kramnik went to sleep at three in the morning, and his seconds stayed up until six (who can go to bed after 5 o'clock tea?) and then we went to sleep. In the morning Volodya came in, we gave him the results of our all-night vigil, he quickly made some comments if he thought that something wasn't quite right (he always thought this) and there were 'holes' in the analysis. We still had a couple of hours before the game to patch them up. After eating he would listen to the final conclusions for about three minutes while he was tying his tie- what he could do, what he absolutely couldn't. Then he went out to the game and the team sat down to lunc;h, as this was now our free time. Of course, he


would leave us with some kind of task, but no one actually did anything, because we were following the game.

LAUTIER: 'I can describe our routine a little- usually Kramnik came in after the game and showed us. the variations he'd seen and calculated at the board; we wrote down the ones that could be useful. After the demonstration and analysis we had dinner, then the obligatory walk, which lasted for about an hour. Three of us usually walked together- Volodya, Zhenya and I. We lived in a private house and towards evening the water subsided1 and we could go out. We walked along the Thames and sometimes the low-lying smog gave our walks a special English feel, as it seemed that Jack the Ripper might sud-denly run out from a dark corner (according to one theory he moved to Russia-E.B.). We mainly discussed specific problems in the match. I recall that Volodya very accurately foresaw the theme of the next game; moreover, he was almost always completely right in his predictions about Kasparov's be-haviour during the game. It was amazing how well he understood him. 'After the walk we would get down to some real work. Sometimes Volodya allocated us our jobs beforehand- one of us started preparing for the next game, and another for the one after that. He allocated variations to all the seconds and sat down with us to analyse, but not for long. Later he worked until about three in the morning at his own computer. After that he went up to his room and slept.'

LEVITOV: You didn't go to the games? BAREEV: La uti er went to some of the games and Illescas went to others. Krylov sup-ported Volodya at all the games. But Lautier and Illescas quickly realised that it was more convenient to watch the games on the Internet in the house. The company CanalWeb provided very good coverage, young guys from France, they showed live video and had well-known grandmasters commenting on the games ... After-wards, of course, the company quickly went bust.

As a person who likes to sleep, I often took a nap, even for a few hours. But there were some tense games when even I didn't sleep.

LAUTIER: 'There was one funny moment in the match. When I arrived for the first game, Volodya was playing Black and his whole camp was sitting on the right-hand side. Then I missed a few games. The next time I s:ame in, Volodya was playing White, but I didn't pay any attention to that and I went and sat in the same place. When I looked around I realised that everyone was giving me strange looks and that I didn't know any of these people. Something was wrong - then I saw that Krylov was on the other side. I

The Thames, a river which is subject to ebb and flood, flooded during the match.


turned around and saw that 'Kasparov team' was written on my seat. And next to me ~as Khodarkovsky (not the magnate, someone else) and an-other ofKasparov's friends. No one said anything, but the looks they gave me said, he's crazy, how dare he?!' .

LEVITOv: Zhenya, were you a team, or was this more a commercial interest- were you working for Kramnik for the money? BAREEv: Usually we were accused of working for an idea. LEVITOv: For the idea of bringing down Kasparov? BAREEv: Yes. In a post-match interview with Sport Express, Kasparov alleged that a couple of dozen grandmasters were in a conspiracy against him. This was rubbish, of course. Yes, we're friends ofKramnik, but we're also professionals, and no profes-sional wants to do a poor job. You have a sense of responsibility. Yes, we were one team, and we tried to do our work as best we could, to prepare quality material. LEVITOV: So the seconds' job wasn't to make strategic decisions, but to prepare their man to make the right decisions? BAREEv: Our job was to do the work that we were asked to do, as quickly and as well as possible. So that time was left for extra things- in the match we had to deal with a wide spectrum of openings and we had to work through a lot. On the other hand, this was a satisfying job-whatever you worked on, it all appeared on the board.

BAREEv in an interview on the KasparovChess website after the London match: 'Did you and Kramnik discuss methods for playing the match against Kasparov, or was that not within your prerogative? No, we didn't do that. We had a narrow field of preparatory work. Kramnik, of course, worked on all the general concepts by himself. Alone, he didn't consult with anyone? It was all fairly obvious. Exchange queens, play boringly- how else could he beat Kasparov?'

BAREEv: The draw favoured Kasparov- it was very important to play White in the first game. LEVITOv: To set the tone of the match? BAREEv: Not only that. They were playing a 16-game match ... LEVITOv: Ah, so they wouldn't have to play the last game? BAREEV: Exactly. But Kramnik needed to make a draw as Black in Game 15. It's usu-ally easier with White, but he found himself, as usual, a hair's breadth from losing.

I look at my notes and see written here: 'Mood before the first game- cau-tious optimism.' Now I think this optimism was brought about by Kramnik's su-perb physical and psychological form, and also because this was the first title match for all of us. We couldn't begin to imagine what stressful, hellish work it would be.

Anyway, Volodya took the Berlin Defence from his bag of tricks and cheerfully set out for the first game at the Riv~rside Studios.


FORWARD, TO BERLIN!

NOTES OF A SE~OND (made by Bareev during the match): Before the game, Volodya was very nervous, but he solved his problems successfully. Kasparov played well, but he couldn't achieve a tangible advantage. Kramnik made a draw fairly easily.

8 October 2000 No 1. Ruy Lopez KASPAROV - KRAMNIK 1st Match Game

1.e4 The first move, energetically made by Kasparov, unequivocally declares his inten-tions: a readiness for a theoretical discus-sion on the main lines, with the aim of de-ciding the outcome of the struggle at the very start of the game. Total superiority over opponents in the opening has played a major role in his achievement of outstand-ing results throughout his whole career. 1 ... e5 Vt:Jf3 tt:Jc& 3 . .illb5 tLlf& If Kramnik's choice of the Spanish wasn't exactly a surprise, then the same can't be said of the Berlin Defence, which had been an infrequent guest in tournament practice, with only a few grandmasters daring to adopt it. The variation is charac-terised by trench warfare and - the main thing- at this time the theory on it hadn't yet been sufficiently developed. The 2000 match provided a gigantic im-pulse for the development of this system and serious discussions haven't abated to the present day. Many leading grandmasters have included the Berlin Defence in their armoury and proved its viability. In retro-spect, we can say that Kramnik made an ideal choice of opening against 1.e4. 4.0-0 tt:Jxe4 5.d4 tt:Jd& & .illxc& dxc&

7 .dxe5 tLlf5 8. 'ixd8 + ~xdB 9.tt:Jc3

9 ... .illd7 All possible plans for Black involve thepo-sitioning of the king on c8 or e8, and later came the modification of various ideas with the inclusion ofh7-h6, or without-in conjunction with a flank attack aS or hS. The position is quite rich, but on every deployment of the black pieces it isn't easy for White to find the best plan, in view of the abundance cif possibilities. The variation was at an early stage of devel-opment and during the match both players and their teams were already making inten-sive efforts to determine the right move or-der and optimal deployment. They did an enormous amount of work, t:J;ying to get one step ahead of each other and revealing the fine points of the variation. 10.b3 h& Afterwards Kramnik established that this move wasn't obligatory, and later on, when moving his king away to c8, he tried to do without it. After the match, several games were played where Black saved a

3S

tempo on the move h7 -h6. Upon 1 0 ... c8 the move 11.~b2 is possible.

Analysis diagram

11...aS 12.h3 hS 13.a4 ~e7 14.l:!.fd1 l:!.d8 1S.~a3 (1S.tt:le4!?) 15...~b4 16.tt:le4 b6 1 7 .hb4 axb4 18. tt:leg S ~e8 19 .l:!.xd8 + (19.h2 l:!.dS) 1.9 ... xd8 20.l:!.d1 + (20.h2 e7 21.g4 hxg4 22.hxg4 tt:lh6 23.g3 ~d7=) 20 ... e7 21.g4 hxg4 22.hxg4= Volokitin-Alexandrov, Sochi 2004. Vladimir achieved pleasant positions out of the opening after 11 ... ~e7. For exam-ple: 12.l:!.ad1 (12.l:!.fe1 aS 13.h3 hS 14.tt:le4 a4 1S.tt:leg5 ~e6 16.tt:lxe6 fxe6 17.l:!.e4 axb3 18.axb3 l:!.xal+ 19.~xa1 l:!.d8= Leko-Kramnik, 2nd match game, Budapest 2001) 12...aS 13.h3 (13.a4 hS 14.l:!.d3 b6 15.l:!.fd1 ~e6 16.tt:le4 C:S 17 .c4 b7 18.tt:lfgS ~xgS 19.tt:lxgS l:!.ae8 20.g3 l:!.hf8 21.tt:lxe6 fxe6 22.f4 c8 23.g2 l:!.d8 24.3 l:!.xd3+ 2S.l:!.xd3 l:!.d8 26.l:!.xd8+ '/z- 1/2 Ponomariov-Kramnik, Moscow 2002) 13 ... hS 14.g3?! l:!.a6 1S.~c1l:!.e8 16.~gS ~b4 17 .l:!.d3 tt:le7 18 .~xe7 ~xe7 19.g2 ~fS 20.l:!.e3 ~xc2-+ Shirov-Kramnik, Monaco rapid 2 0 0 1. The latest tweak at that time was precisely the evacuation of the king to the queenside. 11 . .\ib2 'ii?c812.h3 Not a bad move. In Game 3 Kasparov played 12.l:!.adl.

Evgeny Bareev and Ilya Levitov

12 ... b6 Instead he could try an immediate knight shuffle: 12 ... tt:le7, and the struggle will turn out differently. On the whole it can be said that White holds the initiative:

A) 13.l:!.fe1 tt:lg6 14.l:!.ad1 aS 1S.ti:ld4 ti:lf4 16.tt:lce2 tt:le6 17 .f4 ~b4 18.l:!.fl tt:lxd4 19.ti:lxd4 l:!.e8 20.h1 (20.a3! ?) 20 ... a4 2l.fS axb3 22.axb3 b6 23.e6= Gagunashvili-Sargissian, Dubai 2003;

B) 13.l:!.ad1 tt:lg6 14.l:!.d2 ~e7 1S.l:!.fd1 ~e6 16.ti:ld4 ~gs 17 .l:!.e2 ~d7 18.e6 (18.tt:le4!?) 18 ... fxe6 19.tt:lxe6 ~f6 20.tt:la4 ~xb2 21.tt:lxb2 l:!.e8 22.l:!.de1;\; Smirnov-Harikrishna, Mumbai 2004. 13.l::!.ad1 13 .g4 is premature, since moving the bishop off the c1-h6 diagonal has weak-ened the f4-square: 13 ... tt:le7 14.g2 tt:lg6 1S.g3 ~e7 16.l:!.fe1 b7 17.l:!.ad1 l:!.ad8 18.tt:le4 ~e6 19.ti:ld4 ~h4+ with equality. 13 ... tt:le7 Lautier tried to improve Black's play by 13 ... aS, but landed in a difficult position: 14.a4 ~b4 1S.tt:le2 l:!.e8 16.tt:lf4 ~f8 17.g4 tt:le7 18.g2 cS 19.g3 ~c6 20.c4 b7 21.l:!.d2 l:!.ad8 22.l:!.fd1 l:!.xd2 23.l:!.xd2 c8 24.h4 ~d7 2S.eM Timman-Lautier, Dordrecht blitz 2001. But the position reached after the move in the game prompted a great discussion.


14.ltJe2 B) 1S.c4 aS 16.a4 l:i:g8?! 17.Wh2 Jl.e7 BesidesthemovechosenbyKasparov,it's 18.g4 cS 19.ctJc3 l:i:h8 20.ctJdS hS probably necessary to devote some atten- 21.ctJxe7 + ctJxe7 22.Wg3;:!; ].Polgar-Milov, tion to the alternatives, because in the Moscow 2001, but 16 ... bS! is correct. game Black could almost have equalised. I'd recommend 14.l:i:d2!? and 14.ctJd4!?. For example:

A) 14.l:i:d2!? (14.ctJh4?! Jl.e6 1S.ctJe2 gS 16.ctJf3 cS=) 14 ... cS ( 14 ... ctJg6 lS.l:i:fdl Jl.e6 16.ctJd4;:!;) lS.l:i:fdl, and here there is a parting of the ways:

AI) 1S ... Jl.e6 16.ctJe2 (16.l:i:d8+ Wb7 17.l:i:xa8 Wxa8 18.l:i:d8+ Wb7=) 16 ... ctJg6 (16 ... ctJc6 17 .ctJf4 Jifs 18.ctJh4 Jih7 19.e6+-) 17.h4 (17.ctJel Jl.e7 18.f4hS) 17 ... Jl.e7 18.hS ctJh419.ctJxh4 Jl.xh4 20.ctJf4 JigS 21.ctJxe6 Jl.xd2 22.ctJxg7 JigS 23.g3 Grischuk-Marciano, France 2003;

A2) IS ... Jl.fs 16.ctJh2 Jl.e6 17.f4 Wb7 18.g4 g6 19.ctJe4 Jig? 20.c4 l:i:ae8 21.ctJf3 ctJc6 22.Wg2 Jl.c8 23 .ctJg3t Morovic-Mitkov, Poikovsky 2 0 0 1 ;

B) 14.ctJd4!? cS (14 ... ctJg6 1S.f4 aS 16.a4 hS 17 .ctJe4 Jl.e7 18.ctJg5 cS 19.ctJxf7 l:i:f8 20.e6 cxd4 2l.f5 Shirov-Rizouk, Moscow 2001) 1S.ctJde2 Jl.c6 16.ctJf4 Wb7 17 .ctJcdS ctJxdS 18.ctJxdS c4 19 .bxc4 Jl.a4 20.ctJe3 Jl.cS 21.Ji.d4 Jl.xd4 22.l:i:xd4 l:i:ae8 23.cS and White had a slight advantage in Grischuk-Alexandrov, Poikovsky 2004. 14 ... ltJg615.tt::le1 There have been other tries, but these do not seem to offer White an advantage ei-ther:

A) 1S.ctJg3 ctJf4 16.ctJd4 aS 17.a4 bS 18.Wh2 bxa4 19.bxa4 ctJdS 20.l:i:d3 ctJb6 21.l:i:e 1 ctJxa4 22.Jl.al cS (22 ... ctJc5 !) 23 .e6 with equality, Shirov-Kramnik, Astana 2001;

15 ... h5! () An absolutely stunning continuation, bearing in mind that Black only a few moves ago played h7-h6. But the knight has moved away from f3, there's no need to cover the gS-square, and Kramnik in-tends h5-h4, devaluing White's kingside pawn majority. Kramnik's idea is confirmed by the fol-lowing non-forced variation: lS ... aS?! 16.f4 ctJe7 17.g4 hS 18.f5 hxg4 19.hxg4 l:i:h4 (19 ... ctJd5 20.l:i:f3 l:i:h4 21.l:i:g3;:!;) 20.e6 l:i:xg4+ 21.ctJg2 Jl.e8 22.f6 ctJdS (22 ... gxf6 23."exf7 Ji.d7 24.l:i:xf6 ctJdS 25.l:i:f3) 23.e7 ctJxe7 24.fxe7 Jl.xe7 25.Wf2 a4 26.ctJe3t. 16.tt::ld3 In reply to 16.f4 it's better to transfer the knight to fS via h4- 16 ... ctJh4!, since on 16 ... ctJe7 17 .ctJf3 White has chances of an advantage, for example: 17 ... ctJfS 18.ctJg5 JicS+ 19.Jid4 Jl.xd4+ 20.ctJxd4 ctJe3 21.ctJxf7 l:i:e8 22.e6 Jl.xe6 23.ctJxe6 ctJxfi 24.ctJxg7 ctJe3 25.l:i:el l:i:g8 26.l:i:xe3 l:i:xg7 27.l:i:e7. If 16.ctJf3, then 16 ... Jl.e7 17 .Ji.cl aS 18.a4c5 19.c4Jl.f5=. 16 ... c5

37

Not only denying the knight square d4 but also preparing the standard c5-c4. This explains White's next move. 11.c4 Or 17/t:lef4 tt:lxf4 18.tt:lxf4 c4 19.bxc4 ~fsg?. 17 ... a518.a4h4 Fixing the kingside. The bishop remains on f8, so that in many lines the g7 pawn is de-fended. 18 ... ~e7 is inaccurate: 19 .tt:lef4 ~f5 20.e6 fxe6 2l.~xg7 tt:lxf4 22.tt:lxf4 .l:!.h7 23.~e5 ~c2 24.tt:lxe6 .l:!.a7 25 . .l:!.al !;!;. 19.tt:lc3 No better is 19.tt:lef4 tt:lxf4 20.tt:lxf4 ~f5 2I..l:!.d2 \t>b7 22 . .l:!.el .l:!.e8=. 19 ... i.e6 20.lt:ld5 b7 21.lt:le3 .l:!.h5 22.i.c3 Essentially a waiting move. Already it's un-clear how White will improve his position (if 22.f4, then 22 ... tt:le7), whereas Black still has several useful moves. 22 ... .l:!.e8 23 . .l:!.d2 cB 24.f4 If he doesn't play this then as early as the next move the rook will go back to d8. And only now follows: 24 ... lt:le7 25.lt:lf2lt:lf5 Here Kramnik offered a draw, which Kasparov accepted.

Evgeny Bareev and Ilya Le vi tov

A possible continuation is 26.tt:lxf5 ~xfS 27.tt:lg4 ~e7 28.tt:le3 ~e6 (28.:.~e4 29 . .l:!.fdl g6 30.\t>f2) 29 . .l:!.d3 g6 30.tt:ld5 ~d8 or 27 ... .l:!.d8 28 . .l:!.xd8+ \t>xd8 29.tt:le3 ~e4 30.f5 c6 3I..l:!.f4 ~d3 32.f6 (32.\t>f2 ~e7) 32 ... g6 33 . .l:!.f2 ~e4 34 . .l:!.d2+ \t>e8 35.tt:lg4 ~f5 36.e6 ~xe6 37.tt:le5 ~h6 38 . .l:!.e2=. The position is close to equality, but it's still full of play. The only thing that can be said is that if White pushes his luck somewhere then his position might be jeopardised-Black's light-squared bishop has no oppo-nent and White's queenside pawns are vul-nerable. On the kingside White's pawns are blockaded and there's apparently no clear plan of play. In the first game the Berlin De-fence had passed the test. Match score: V2- 1/2.

BAREEV: During the game we noticed that Kasparov had looked at the full spec-trum of theory on the Ruy Lopez (also known as the Spanish Game), as he followed the main line, played the same ~way as a recent encounter (Shirov-Krasenkow, Polanica Zdroj 2000), and although he wasn't all that fantastically pre-pared for the nuances of the variation, he made sensible moves.

He didn't play based on ideas, but one move at a time, and Kramnik held the balance one move at a time. Kasparov didn't pose any huge problems in the ope-ning, attempting to undermine the defence only with the help of intricate ma-noeuvres by the white cavalry that ran into the knowledge of and timely use of methods that are standard in the Berlin Defence. Kramnik held the position with-out too much effort, not even making a single move with two of his pieces - the bishop on f8 and the rook on a8. ,


LEVITOV: Does the first game demonstrate the fighting condition of the partici-pants in any way? Are they trying to size each other up, or did they just come in, sit down and play? BAREEV: I can say that Kasparov played quite accurately. He made strong moves- 'if it works, it works'- and looked for a weak point. Here he was trying to find out which opening Kramnik had prepared.

KASPAROV on his match strategy: 'First I check all the possible directions, I look at where and what my opponent is preparing. Then I find a weak point. And I strike the decisive blow against that weakness. That's all.'

BAREEV: During the first game the seconds were in a constant state of terror because we thought defeat was inevitable. Kasparov threatens- but then he finds some kind of defence. Kasparov threatens again, and again a one-move defence! We had the feeling that if Kramnik didn't find the one-move defence against the next one-move threat, everything would collapse. In reality our fears were exaggerated. They reflect the gen-eral state of terror that Kasparov' s play instills in me personally. If we calmly analyse the game, it's clear that Black had quite a solid position and it's unlikely that he wouldn't find a defence to these one-move threats. There weren't any indicators of defeat, Black wasn't even worse. After the game Volodya was surprised when we.said that it was mi-raculously saved. His evaluation was completely accurate and sober. LEVITOV: Zhenya, why does Kasparov's play inspire terror? BAREEV: It's a very individual feeling, a sign of human weakness, sometimes caused by an unimportant thing, but also a vague feeling about Kasparov's per-sonal strength. LEVITOV: After Black's third move Kasparov stared at his opponent, smirked and shook his head, as if to say, well done, you prepared well, I didn't expect it. He ob-viously wasn't prepared to see the Berlin Defence on the board, never having faced it in his World Championship matches because of its oad reputation; it was con-sidered extremely difficult for Black to achieve equality in this opening.

As it later turned out, it w~s the Berlin Defence of the Spanish Game that became an impenetrable barrier for Garry, justifying its nickname, the Berlin Wall.

KRAMNIK: 'I had to get used to the conditions of the World Championship match. I wasn't looking at Kasparov and his reaction to the Serlin- I wasn't up to that, I had to get into the match, in conditions of colossal stress and excitement. With all the unexpectedness of the choice of the Berlin, Kasparov nevertheless knew the theory of this variation and followed the moves of a game that had been played a couple of months before the match. 'I should point out that grandmaster Almasi became one of my main assistants, without realising it himself He was the first to use the interesting plan with the retreat of the king to c8 rather than e8, he suggested it to me, as it were. I of-fered the draw in Game 1, it was important to me to hold my own, to show that I'd come out for the first World Championship game of my life, calmly made a

('


draw and got into the match. It was still a very unfamiliar situation, like playing all your life for Lokomotiv2 and then coming out to play for Real Madrid in the final of the Champions League. Of course, you have to get used to the new situation, kick the ball a couple of times so they don't laugh at you. To under-stand and prove to yourself that you're at that level, that you're worthy of it.' KASPAROV (in an interview on the KasparovChess website): 'After the first game I got the feeling that Vladimir wouldn't give me the opportunity to dem-onstrate the depth of my preparations as White. This was an unpleasant feeling. And yet I still thought that he'd play the PetroffDefence (also known as the Rus-sian Game). That was the core of our preparation. Now I won't make a secret out of it. Of course, we also analysed different variations of the Sicilian. Basi-cally we expected almost any variation, except for this Berlin ending. The fol-lowing note about this endgame is on my schedule of preparations for the match: "save some time for this ending". I planned to play a few games in this position with Michael Adams, but unfortunately there wasn't enough time. I repeat again- this position wasn't a priority in our preparations.'

NOTES OF A SECOND: During the game the monitor was turned off in Kasparov's room, on which he could see if his opponent had made a move or not. At his insistence the monitor in Kramnik's room was also turned off.

When he came home after the game, Kramnik sighed and said, 'Only seven to go as Black.'

Due to absent-mindedness I'd lost a huge amount of analysis of the Nimzo-Indian Defence and we had to reconstruct it all again.

At lunch we talked about memory. Kramnik complained that he couldn't re-member anything he learned at school, not one date. Lautier said: 'I' m even worse. I remember the date, and it really bothers me- what happened on that date?'

Keene banned Kramnik and his seconds from commenting on the game on the KasparovChess website. If only to nag us.

'THE BLUNDER OF THE CENTURY'

NOTES OF A SECOND: White was untested so far. The variation of the Griinfeld Defence that occurred in the game wasn't prepared by us- it was worked out by Kramnik himself together with Miguel. Kramnik used a good novelty, Kasparov defended well at first, but he blundered a piece in an unpleasant position just be-fore the time control. Kramnik took the lead with a score of 1 Yz-Yz.

2 Moscow football team.


10 October 2000 No 2. Griinfeld Indian Defence KRAMNIK - KASPAROV 2nd match game

1.d4 The principal and only weapon chosen by Kramnik for the match. 1 . ./t:Jf& 2.c4 g& 3.tt:Jc3 d5 The defence we expected most. The lion's share of our homework was devoted pre-cisely to this line. 4.cxd5 tt:Jxd5 5.e4 tt:Jxc3 6.bxc3 ~g7 7 . .!t:Jf3 c5 8.~e3 Usually Kramnik plays either 8 J'[b 1, or the variation with the development of the bishop on c4, in rare cases resorting to other continuations. Karpov successfully employed systems with the move j)_e3 against Kasparov in their 1990 match. 8 ... iVa5 9.iVd2 ~g4 The other main line is 9 ... .!2Jc6, In games with Leko and Van Wely, played after the match, Kramnik demonstrated his prepa-ration: neither of them could defend Black's position. And only Kasparov, well prepared, neutralised White's initiative. But this doesn't exclude the possibility that during the match he might have ex-perienced difficulties:

Analysis diagram

40

10.l:!.c1 cxd4 1l.cxd4 iVxd2+ 12.'it>xd2 0-0 13.d5 J:!.d8 14.'it>e1 .!t:Jas (14 ... .!2Jes lS . .!t:JxeS j)_xeS 16.f4 j)_d6 17.'it>f2 eS 18.j)_cs j)_xcS+ 19.J:!.xc5 exf4 20.'it>f3 j)_d7 21.j)_d3 J:!.ac8 22.J:!.hcl g5 23.l:!.c7 J:!.xc7 24.J:!.xc7 j)_a4 25.'it>g4 h6 26.J:!.xb7 J:!.d7 27.J:!.b4 j)_dl+ 28.\t>fS+-Kramnik-Leko, 1st match game, Budapest 2001) 1s.j)_gs j)_d7 16.j)_d3 J:!.dc8 17.'it>e2 e6 18.j)_e3 (18.J:!.xc8+ J:!.xc8 19.J:!.c1 J:!.xc1 20.j)_xc1 exd5 2l.exd5 bS 22.j)_f4 .!t:Jc4 23.j)_xc4 bxc4 24.j)_es j)_f8 25 . .!2Jd2 j)_bs 26 . .!2Je4 fs 27 . .!2Jc3 j)_d7 28.'it>e3 j)_cs+ 29.j)_d4 j)_b4 30.j)_es Vz- 1/z was Kramnik-Kasparov, Astana 2001) 18 ... exd5 19.exd5 b6 (19 ... J:!.d8!?) 20.j)_a6 J:!.d8 21.J:!.hd1 j)_c8 22.j)_xc8 J:!.axc8 23.J:!.xc8 l:!.xc8 24 . .!2Jd4 j)_f8 25 . .!2Jbs a6 26.d6! J:!.c2+ 27.'it>d3 J:!.xa2 28.d7 .!t:Jb7 29 . .!2Jc3 J:!.b2 30 . .!2Jd5 J:!.bS 3l.'it>c2 j)_cs 32.j)_h6 f6 33 . .!2Jc7 1-0 Kramnik-Van Wely, Wijk aan Zee 2001. 10.J:!.b1 A very Jogical move, prepared Kramnik for the match. On 1 O.J:!.cl Kasparov had already showed the solidity of Black's position and quite quickly seized the initiative: 1 O ... j)_xf3! ll.gxf3 e6 12.d5 exdS 13 .exdS .!t:Jd7 14.c4 iVb6! 1s.j)_h3 fS 16.0-0 iVd6 17.j)_f4 j)_es 18.J:!.fe1 0-0-0 19.j)_xe5 .!t:JxeS 20.'iic3 J:!.he8 2l.J:!.e3 'iif6 22.f4 tqd7 23.j)_g2 'iixc3 24.J:!.cxc3 .!t:Jf6 25.j)_f3 J:!.xe3 26.fxe3 J:!.d6 27.l:!.a3 'it>b8 28.J:!.b3 J:!.a6 29.a3 .!t:Je8 30.e4 fxe4 3l.j)_xe4 .!t:Jd6+ Yermolinsky-Kasparov, Wijk aan Zee 1999. 10 ... a6 10 ... b6 is dubious: 11.j)_bS+ .!t:Jd7 12 . .!2Jg5!?

41

11.J:::!.xb7! A novelty. In the stem game Timman chose the absurd 11.l:::!.b3 ?! , and, though the posi-tion remained unclear f

Evgeny Bareev & Ilya Levitov- From London to Elista

Documents

Transcript of Evgeny Bareev & Ilya Levitov- From London to Elista