The following stats have been sent to us by Kevin of rookhouse.com
Head-To-Head Statistics
(Anand leads): 19 Wins – 15 Losses – 92 Draws = 126 Games
Anand (as White): 12 Wins – 3 Losses – 43 Draws = 58 Games
e4 (52 games): 11 – 3 – 38
d4 (4 games): 1 – 0 – 3
Nf3 (2 games): 0 – 0 – 2
Kramnik (as White): 12 Wins – 7 Losses – 49 Draws = 68 Games
e4 (12 games): 1 – 0 – 11
d4 (28 games): 4 – 2 – 22
Nf3 (28 games): 7 – 5 – 16
Poll Results (Who Will Win the 2008 Kramnik-Anand World Championship Match ?)
Kramnik 65 votes (52%) – Anand 61 votes (48%)
Official website: http://www.uep-worldchess.com/
Chess Daily News from Susan Polgar
okay, but what are the stats in classical chess?!
Kramkik…not because he’s my favorite….I just think he’ll win and we’ll then see a Kramnik-Kamsky match.
Interesting comparison is their performance against Kasparov in their respective 1995 & 2000 matches for the Classical WCC title.
Anand in 1995 was strong and could take the lead after 8 games but he failed in his match strategy; after taking the lead he repeated the opening (open ruy) and ran into Kasparovs most brilliant opening preparation. After that he crumbled in the next 4 games.
Kramnik in 2000 on the other hand had to defend inferior positions in all his black games – but he had a perfect match strategy to counter Kasparovs opening-superiority. For example he came up with the Berlin-Defense surprise weapon.
So Anand may be the somewhat better “overall” player, but Kramnik IMO is better in match-play.
It will be an interesting fight…
Anand is the older man. His overall plus should result from the years when he already was a Super GM and Kramnik still trying to become one.
A statistic for the last ten years (or so) would be more meaningful.
Kramnik is the favourite to win in my books even though I am rooting for Anand. In the other match I hope Kamsky will win.
– Mr X
“So Anand may be the somewhat better “overall” player, but Kramnik IMO is better in match-play.”
I absolutely agree with this statement from ANON 7:33am.
I even stated on my Rookhouse Blog that I felt Kramnik was much more “battle tested” in match play (i.e. 2000-Kasparov, 2004-Leko, 2006-Topalov) than Anand.
But, I also feel that Anand is a stronger tournament player.
Yeah, stats that include Blitz, Blindfold and Rapids are worthless. What are they thinking mixing games like that in the databases? They should be kept separate.
Both will freeze up and then Magnus will be crowned king!
Yes, these mixed game stats are meaningless.
How can we get stats for only classical games in the last 10 years?
“ANON 10:05am – Yes, these mixed game stats are meaningless.
How can we get stats for only classical games in the last 10 years?”
These stats aren’t “meaningless” just because you personally do not think that rapid and blindfold games are real chess.
I do agree with you that the “classical” chess games are of more analytical value and I prefer them as well.
It was just way too time consuming of a task to manually go through every single database game of theirs and figure out which were rapid, classical, blind, etc.
If you have the time to do it, then I eagerly await your research results.
I will only accept statistics from Fischer Random Games, Bug House, followed by several rounds of “spin the bottle”.
Pass it on.
According to my database, they are almost tied in classical games (Kramnik won one game more than Anand). It’s the same if we only look the classical games in last 10 years. Kramnik has 1 win more.
ANON 3:31pm – Thanks for the info. Did you pull those stats off ChessBase, ChessGames, etc. ??
Has Anand generally been considered one of the better rapid or blindfold players?
>>
okay, but what are the stats in classical chess?!
>>
In Classical, the stats are Kramnik 6, Anand 4, Draws = 41.
please update ur poll result everyday mam!