Prime Kramnik vs Carlsen

This is Kramnik from 2000 when he beat Kasparov and this is Carlsen when he played the Zurich chess challenge

Who wins?

Carlsen

Post #3: Yeah, luck...

Carlsen.

This looks like a pretty interesting question. I'm surprised that this thread doesn't have way more views and comments.

To start with, I think one factor we need to consider is how much chess theory has improved from 2000 until now. The issue always comes up when we're comparing modern players to those from a much earlier era (Morphy, etc), but people don't seem to think it matters much when we're talking about 2 modern players. However, chess theory has been advancing very rapidly in recent years. In 1997 Deep Blue beat Kasparov and everyone was shocked, but nowadays it's generally accepted that the best engines play at a higher level than the best human players.

Carlsen.  Kramnik was an underachieving WC and Carlsen is already one of the greatest of all time.  

Whether Kramnik was an underachieving WC is irrelevant as we are only talking about the Kramnik that played in that one match, when he appeared virtually flawless.

I believe that taken literally the Carlsen of today would beat the Kramnik of 2000 due purely to the advances of known theory etc, the point made by macer75 above.  

If the question is more like, the focused, top form Kramnik of 2000 but with the knowledge of today, vs Carlsen of today, I think Kramnik would shade it.

Drawnik, ahem, Kramnik has never dominated his peers like Carlsen has, at any point in his career.  He just happened to summon his inner drawmaster skills during the match with Kasparov 

And somehow those drawmaster skills helped him win 2 games against Kasparov?

It's kind of like tennis sort of. If you know you can draw as black, that loosens you up for your white games, and you may get the occasional win. Vlad has smart opening preparation.

"I believe that taken literally the Carlsen of today would beat the Kramnik of 2000 due purely to the advances of known theory etc"

And I would say it would have very little to do with the advances of known theory. Given Carlsen's specific approach to the game. If you look at his match with Anand, Carlsen got, the majority of the time, dead equal or slightly worse positions. He was also in trouble in game 9 but won instead. Basically, in the opening, all Magnus has to do is not drop a piece and be comfortable with the position he reaches. Against Vlad himself Magnus has won some dead equal positions against him and drew difficult positions against him in the last few years.

Magnus studies obviously, but the kind of stuff he does probably doesn't work much better than it would have a few decades ago, because he doesn't pin his hopes on an opening advantage.

Well ok, in the sense that Vlad would do even worse against Magnus than usual, yeah I guess not having an opening theory cushion would hurt him :) But well booked up or not, the result will be the same.

Well since Carlsen is performing a bit subpar right now and you stated it was Carlsen when he was 2882ish at Zurich, Carlsen wins. But the Carlsen that played sinquefield would probably lose.

+1

Hasn't Kramnik lost more matches than he won ?  Take away the Kasparov match ( which is VERY fishy imo ) and he really doesnt have a good match record , does he ? 

Everyone knows the best drawmaster is carjackin

From what I could find these are his matches (not including fide KO world cups)

Candidates PCA 1995:

Kamsky – Kramnik 4.5 – 1.5

Candidates FIDE 1996:

Kramnik – Yudasin 4.5 – 2.5

Gelfand – Kramnik 4.5 – 3.5

Candidates 1998:

Shirov – Kramnik 5.5 – 3.5

WC 2000

Kramnik – Kasparov 8.5 – 6.5

WC 2004

Kramnik – Leko 7 – 7 (retains title)

WC 2006

Kramnik – Topalov 6 - 6 (2.5 – 1.5 TB)

WC 2008

Anand – Kramnik 6.5 – 4.5

Candidates 2012:

Kramnik – Radjabov 2 - 2 (4.5 – 3.5)

Grischuk – Kramnik 2 – 2 (3.5 – 2.5)

Friendly Match 2012:

Kramnik – Aronian 3 – 3

Not the greatest list ever.

Any particular reason why you didn't feel like it was necessary to include them?

Kramnik was an uncomfortable opponent for Kasparov, but even at his best he was never a single point ahead of #2 on the rating list, so I'd say Carlsen at his best plays in a different division considering that he has had a huge lead on the rating list many times.

All top players have someone they do badly against, and for Kasparov that someone was Kramnik. But the latter didn't win the matches and tournaments he played before and after that 2000 match, when facing other opponents, and had in general unimpressive match results, being the only World Champion to have a minus score in matches.

*Leko

Why do you think that was?