Many commentators predicted another big Kasparov victory. But who would have believed that the he could have gone 15 games without winning one, thus becoming the first champion since Lasker in 1921 to be shut out?
In the same token, Kramnik, now the only top player to have a plus score against Kasparov, has a phenomenal record of losing just one of his last 100 games. But, at the end of the day, these are the statistics that all add up to Kasparov losing his crown and the start of Kramnik’s new reign.
After the match, Kasparov said he had been completely out-prepared and was putting in 10 hours a day rebuilding his opening repertoire. About the legitimity of the match Kasparov has no doubt: “Everybody has their own opinion of the current state of affairs: Kramnik, Anand, me, and probably everybody in this room. We now have two world champions of equal strength. Kramnik has 120 years of tradition behind him, Anand has an organization (FIDE). I recognize only Kramnik as the world champion, as he defeated me to become it. To become world champion you have beat your predecessor; the name of the organization, be it FIDE, PCA, Braingames or Pepsi, doesn’t matter. That way you are part of a tradition of a title which has only had fourteen holders in almost 120 years.”
Kramnik was looking to the future and a possible unification “I would like to do something to change the chess world for the better somehow. And one must think over very carefully how to do this,” he said.
At the closing ceremony, the organizers proclaimed Karamnik as the 14th World Champion and successor of Steinitz, Lasker… and Kasparov. The title was recognized by the media and the top players but for FIDE the match had no value as such the title was already given to Khalifman in 1999. To who belongs the title of World Champion? Kasparov or FIDE? The question was confusing and still on stake after the schism of 1993.
A few weeks after the championship, Kramnik was interviewed by the Hungarian master T. Karolyi:
Q: Beating the world champion is the most difficult achievement in chess. However I felt that you had a small advantage, which people seem to miss. You are Kasparov‘s countryman. Maybe he would have fought a bit harder, if the pride of Russia would have been at stake. Have you thought of that?
A: No, I haven’t thought of that. I do not think it had an effect on the match. Top chessplayers are true professionals. I think it was the same for Garry, if he had played a foreigner.
Q: Kasparov said and many people think that you had outprepared him. I just think you had a better match strategy than he had. Did some of your seconds suggest it, or you was it your idea?
A: It was my strategy. I arrived at the match with several plans according to the standing of the match. Things went very well for me from the beginning. I have to add that my seconds worked for me with great devotion. I estimate that the importance of preparation in such a match is 20 percent. There are other factors in a match like this.
Q: When you were Kasparov‘s second against Anand in 1995 you were already formidable yourself. You must have estimated your chances against Kasparov. What do you think about your chances if you had played him at that time?
A: I did not speculate on that though I already beat him a few times. My intention was to see how to improve my chess.
Q: Did Anand have a chance?
A: Anand was a worthy challenger. I think Kasparov was better at that time, but the match could have gone Anand’s way, too. Things can go wrong in a big event like that. One mistake can be decisive.
Q: Your match reminded me of the Capablanca-Aljechin match. Have you thought of that?
A: That is a surprise for me I thought of Lasker-Capablanca, because a long time reigning champion was beaten and Lasker could not win a single game either.
Q: Let me tell you why I had this comparison! Aljechin had no superior results at tournaments before the match. He went to Buenos Aires half a year in advance. He stopped smoking and drinking and prepared very hard. Capablanca was facing a somewhat different opponent than he expected. He could not really readjust to the reborn opponent.
A: You have a point.
Q: Since the adjourned games have disappeared the level of endgames has dropped considerably. Don’t you think even in your match it was clearly below the level of Karpov-Kasparov? Is it not possible that players are simply too tired too think properly at the seventh hours?
A: Karpov and Kasparov played endings better because they could analyse it, not because they were less tired.
Q: Have you found out what brings the best chess out of you?
A: I know, a match like against Kasparov. It gives me the motivation to prepare very hard for several months. I prepared both mentally and physically as well, not to mention my chess preparation.
Q: Do you usually feel in advance that you would play well?
A: Yes, I do. I know when I am in my optimal shape.
Q: Do you want to prove sometimes that an opening is playable?
A.: No, I choose openings according to my chess, which I think are good for my style.