Chess Championship
 

Any of you chess guys have an opinion on this line?

101 Victor Kramnik -0.5 Game -108
102 Peter Leko +0.5 Game -102

Re: Chess Championship
 

I hadn't heard of Kramnik defending his title but here's some quick information to get things started.

Kramnik is the player who defeated Gary Kasparov in 2000 to end Kasparov's decade-and-a-half domination of the chess world.

Acording to the official FIDE ratings, Kramnik is ranked #3 in the world. He's a decent amount behind Kasparov who many think is still the best player despite losing the World Championship. He's also a bit behind V. Anand who is widely regarded as being in the same league as both Kasparov and Kramnik (but certainly a bit behind Kasparov until he proves otherwise).

I don't know much about Leko other than that he's currently ranked fourth by FIDE and he's a rather young 24. He's never competed for the World Championship before.

You could try posing the question in the Fide Forums.

Re: Chess Championship
 

Miscellaneoous: He's a link to a story by Bob Ciaffone about Kramnik beating Kasparov in 2000.

http://www.michess.org/webzine_20010...pionship.shtml

Re: Chess Championship
 

I couldn't find a good site which is covering the match. This is the best I found.

http://www.mark-weeks.com/chess/a3a4dnix.htm

A total of 14 games is to be played under classical time controls. Vladimir Kramnik is defending the title he won from Garry Kasparov in 2000 against Hungarian GM Peter Leko, who qualified at the Dortmund Candidates in 2002.

14 games is very short for a World Championship match. Because the match is so short, I think Kramnik will play defensively. He'll play not to lose, especially with the black pieces. As a result, it's very unlikely Leko will win the match. He may not even win a single game. I'd say Leko has at best a 20% chance of winning the match.

Question
 

How do "professional" chess players make money?

Are there prizes for these things, sponsors?

Re: Question
 

Matches and tournaments at the highest level have sponsors. In many situations, the sponsors provide the funds with no expectations of making their money back.

Re: Chess Championship
 

Here is a good place for regular chess news.
The Week in Chess

The story looks about the same as the one you posted.

I like Kramnik at that line, can't figure what they are thinking.

D.

Re: Question
 

Same way professional golfers make their money.

Someone throws a tournament, gets a sponsor, sponsor gets ad-time, top players get cuts of sponsor's money.

Re: Chess Championship
 

What's the line on this match being really boring?

Kasparov needs to get his act together again...

Re: Chess Championship
 

101 Victor Kramnik -0.5 Game -108
102 Peter Leko +0.5 Game -102

Here's what I will tell you (if you don't care to have any back story, I'll just say go to the bottom and there will be my pick).

Kramnik made his big debut playing for the Russian Olympiad team at Kasparov's insistence when he was 17, and backed it up with some ridiculously impressive score. Kasparov at all times had been quoted that Kramnik was his "likely successor", but Kramnik stumbled a few times (including a waxing at the hands of Shirov in a pseudo World Championship qualifying match). He eventually just got gifted the match against Kasparov and won it, in part due to Kasparov's insistence on trying to beat a drawish line of the Ruy Lopez.

Leko is also interesting; he broke the record for youngest Grandmaster ever and used that publicity to play with the "big boys" (the group of 6-10 super GMs at the very top) a few times, and was suitably crushed. After grinding it out for a few years, he made a breakthrough and moved up to that Super GM level himself.

Kramnik's results have been very uninspiring since winning this World Championship, while Leko has moved up to the super super GM level (which really includes only Kasparov, Kramnik, and Anand).

Both are very drawish players, very dull to watch many times. Both are known for being incredibly difficult to beat. As well, unless the rules of this match are unusual, the champion (Kramnik) will keep his title in the event of a tie. As such, I think there is incentive for Kramnik to tie.

Personally, I consider the match a toss up and would, presented these odds, put my money on Leko, no question for the following reasons:

1) Better value on Leko at 102
2) Likelihood of a tie and Kramnik's lack of incentive to win
3) Chess etiquette/tradition; say it enters the last game tied, and Leko needs the win to win the match; he goes all out and fails, getting a losing position. Chess "etiquette" will generally mean Kramnik offers a draw here anyways, and the match would end tied

Just my opinion.