Who will win the world championship? Why?

Not too many are interested to make a prediction. 

Well, first game drew.

when is the next game on?

Anand

For those who didn't see the first game here is my recap http://blog.chess.com/ChristianSoldier007/2012-world-championship-round-1-recap

Chessbookie, a virtual fake gambling program on chessgames.com, puts Anand to win 3:1. I think Anand will win, although I was surprised today at Gelfand being able to get an advantage as black in the first game, I think it will still be a lively match

Gelfand is presently world no: 20. Right?

On the official rating list yes, on the live rating list Bologan passed him along with 8 other super GMs

Sorry for my ignorance. But, who is Bologan?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Victor_Bologan

Ok. Thanks. But, what is the significance of the 'live rating list"?

Schedule for World Chess Championship Match

The closing ceremony shall take place on the day after the FWCM has been decided or one day thereafter.

FIDE updates their ranking list only 6 times a year - whereas the Live rankings (not endorsed by FIDE) update after each rated game a player completes.

Currently (according to 2700chess.com), after the draw in game 1, Anand is ranked #4 in the world and Gelfand is #21.

Kramnik's beating Kasparov should maybe count as a big one as well, considering Kramnik's match results against weaker opponents and Kasparov's never losing another match against human opposition. Kasparov also won ten top tournaments in a row 1999-2002. But that would still be the only big upset in title matches the last 75 years, and even then the winner was ranked #2 in the world at the time of the match.

One of the reasons that Euwe and Kramnik are the biggest surprises is that all other challengers the last 80 years had to win tough qualification events, so their winning the title could never be a big sensation after that. For example Spassky's winning in 1969 could never be a big surprise after he had beaten several top players in Candidates matches. Euwe and Kramnik lost the matches they played leading up to their being given a title match without participating in a qualification, so they were in a position where their winning would be a much bigger surprise than when challengers like Fischer or Kasparov won the title.

Yes, it's almost strange. Kasparov had said that Kramnik would be his successor, and then he gave him the title match instead of Candidates winner Shirov (who didn't eaxctly have good results against Kasparov):

http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chess.pl?yearcomp=exactly&year=&playercomp=either&pid=15940&player=&pid2=15809&player2=&movescomp=exactly&moves=&opening=&eco=&result=

Recent Candidates winners never did well against Kasparov, just look at his scores at Chessgames.com against Shirov (winner of Candidates 1998), Leko (winner of Candidates 2002) and Gelfand (winner of Candidates 2011):

Classical games: Garry Kasparov beat Alexey Shirov 15 to 0, with 14 draws.

Classical games: Garry Kasparov beat Peter Leko 4 to 0, with 15 draws.

Classical games: Garry Kasparov beat Boris Gelfand 13 to 0, with 8 draws.

fabelhaft, where can we get the head-head to stats. I', interested in Kasparov-Topalov and Kramnik's and Topalov's stats against those three

www.chessgames.com