- Chess World Cup
- FIDE Grand Prix
- Olympiad
- World Championship
- List of strong tournaments
- List of world championships
- Checkmate patterns
- Chess openings
- Chess strategy
- Chess tactics
- Chess theory
- Endgames
- Pawn structure
- Problems/Compositions
 |
 |
| Vladimir Kramnik (RUS) | Veselin Topalov (BUL) |
| Classical World Chess Champion | FIDE World Chess Champion |
| Winner of the 2000 and 2004 Classical World Chess Championship | Winner of the 2005 FIDE World Championship |
| Born 25 June 1975 31 years old |
Born 15 March 1975 31 years old |
| 2743 FIDE Rating | 2813 FIDE Rating |
| FIDE World Rank: 4 | FIDE World Rank: 1 |
The World Chess Championship 2006 was a chess match between Classical World Chess Champion Vladimir Kramnik, and FIDE World Chess Champion Veselin Topalov. The match, which was won by Kramnik, determined the undisputed World Chess Champion for the first time in 13 years. The match was played between September 23 and October 13, 2006, in Elista, Kalmykia, Russia.
On September 29, Kramnik refused to play Game 5 due to a dispute over bathroom arrangements. Topalov won the game on forfeit, and the match was delayed as administrators sought to resolve the controversy.
On October 2 the match resumed with Game 6, but with Kramnik still protesting the result of Game 5. The scheduled match finished on October 12 with the score even at 6-6. A series of games with rapid time controls was played as a tie-breaker. Kramnik won the fourth game to take the tie-break 2½-1½ and win the match, becoming the 14th undisputed World Chess Champion.
After Garry Kasparov split from FIDE in 1993, there were two world chess champions. There was the 'Classical' world champion, the title that only passes on to a player when he defeats the previous world champion. This was held by Kasparov, until he was defeated by Kramnik in the Classical World Chess Championship 2000. There was also the 'Official' FIDE world champion, determined by various tournament formats, held since the FIDE World Chess Championship 2005 by Topalov.
From 1993 to 2006, no match was ever held between the various classical and official champions. This match brought the two titleholders together to unify the World Chess Championship for the first time since the 1993 split.
Match logoKramnik was invited to the FIDE World Chess Championship 2005 in San Luis, Argentina. As "Classical" World Champion, he refused to play, but indicated his willingness to play the winner in a match to unify the title. Negotiations for a match began soon after Topalov won in San Luis, but broke down after the two camps were unable to overcome substantial differences of opinion.
However, in April 2006, FIDE announced that Kramnik would play current FIDE Champion Veselin Topalov in a world championship match to unify the "Classical" champion line with the FIDE championship. The prize fund of $1 million would be evenly divided between the players - regardless of the outcome of the match.
In past encounters, Kramnik had defeated Topalov 10 times, lost 5 games, with 24 draws. (This becomes +19 −9 =34 if rapid and blindfold games are included.) In classical time control games since the beginning of 2004, the score was 2 wins each, with 3 draws.
The match was a best of 12 games. Players scored 1 point for a win and half a point for a draw. If, after 12 games, the score was tied at 6 points each, then a tie-break would be held. As it turned out, the first round of tie-breaks (rapid games) was indeed required, and was held on October 13, 2006.
From the match conditions:
The primary time control for each game shall be: 40 moves in the first 120 minutes, and if that is met, then a secondary time control of 20 moves in 60 minutes, and if that is also met, then the rest of the game shall be played out in 15 minutes, with an additional 30 seconds per move starting from move 61.
Colors were determined for the regular games by the drawing of lots at the opening ceremony on 21 September 2006. The colors reversed between games 6 and 7. The colors for the first tie-break game were decided by drawing lots again. All regular games, and the first tie-break game, began at 3:00 p.m. local time, which corresponds to 1100 UTC.
| Game | Date | White | Black | Result | Standing |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Game 1 | 23 September | Kramnik | Topalov | Kramnik win | Kramnik leads 1 - 0 |
| Game 2 | 24 September | Topalov | Kramnik | Kramnik win | Kramnik leads 2 - 0 |
| Game 3 | 26 September | Kramnik | Topalov | Draw | Kramnik leads 2½ - ½ |
| Game 4 | 27 September | Topalov | Kramnik | Draw | Kramnik leads 3 - 1 |
| Game 5 | 29 September | Kramnik | Topalov | Topalov win (forfeit) | Kramnik leads 3 - 2 |
| Game 6 | 2 October | Topalov | Kramnik | Draw | Kramnik leads 3½ - 2½ |
| Game 7 | 4 October | Kramnik | Topalov | Draw | Kramnik leads 4 - 3 |
| Game 8 | 5 October | Topalov | Kramnik | Topalov win | Match level 4 - 4 |
| Game 9 | 7 October | Kramnik | Topalov | Topalov win | Topalov leads 5 - 4 |
| Game 10 | 8 October | Topalov | Kramnik | Kramnik win | Match level 5 - 5 |
| Game 11 | 10 October | Kramnik | Topalov | Draw | Match level 5½ - 5½ |
| Game 12 | 12 October | Topalov | Kramnik | Draw | Match tied 6 - 6 |
| Game | Date | White | Black | Result | Standing |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Game 13 | 13 October | Topalov | Kramnik | Draw | Tie-break level ½ - ½ |
| Game 14 | 13 October | Kramnik | Topalov | Kramnik win | Kramnik leads tie-break 1½ - ½ |
| Game 15 | 13 October | Topalov | Kramnik | Topalov win | Tie-break level 1½ - 1½ |
| Game 16 | 13 October | Kramnik | Topalov | Kramnik win | Kramnik wins tie-break 2½ - 1½ |
This is the only world chess championship match where the same opening move (1.d4) was played in every game. Only two openings, the Slav Defense and the Catalan, were played.
| a | b | c | d | e | f | g | h | ||
| 8 |
        |
8 | |||||||
| 7 | 7 | ||||||||
| 6 | 6 | ||||||||
| 5 | 5 | ||||||||
| 4 | 4 | ||||||||
| 3 | 3 | ||||||||
| 2 | 2 | ||||||||
| 1 | 1 | ||||||||
| a | b | c | d | e | f | g | h | ||
Kramnik won the first round of this match in a 75-move game that lasted six and a half hours. Topalov, whose style is more tactical than positional, blundered when he played a risky move late in the game. Topalov had a drawn position throughout most of the game and made a fatal miscalculation.
| a | b | c | d | e | f | g | h | ||
| 8 |
    |
8 | |||||||
| 7 | 7 | ||||||||
| 6 | 6 | ||||||||
| 5 | 5 | ||||||||
| 4 | 4 | ||||||||
| 3 | 3 | ||||||||
| 2 | 2 | ||||||||
| 1 | 1 | ||||||||
| a | b | c | d | e | f | g | h | ||
Kramnik won the second game of the match after 63 moves, taking a 2-0 lead. Topalov missed winning continuations at move 32 and 36. Some inaccuracies later in the game cost him the draw.
| a | b | c | d | e | f | g | h | ||
| 8 |
|
8 | |||||||
| 7 | 7 | ||||||||
| 6 | 6 | ||||||||
| 5 | 5 | ||||||||
| 4 | 4 | ||||||||
| 3 | 3 | ||||||||
| 2 | 2 | ||||||||
| 1 | 1 | ||||||||
| a | b | c | d | e | f | g | h | ||
The third game ended in a draw after 38 moves keeping Kramnik in a 2½-½ lead. Kramnik (white) had the advantage for much of the game. According to commentators he at least twice avoided moves with more winning chances but which also carried more risk: 17. Ne4 and 32. exd5.
The fourth game ended in a draw after White's 54th move, leaving Kramnik with a 3-1 lead. Topalov pressed hard, sacrificing a pawn. He achieved an advantageous endgame but despite five hours of play he failed to convert it (48.Qxc4! gave good chances, according to Sergei Shipov on chesspro.ru).
Kramnik was due to play the white pieces. The game ended with Topalov winning by forfeit, after Kramnik refused to play and his clock had been allowed to run for one hour. Kramnik's lead was reduced to 3-2.
Game 6 was due to be played on September 30, but was postponed until October 2 by the decision of the FIDE president. On September 30 and October 1 negotiations over match continuation between players, their teams, and FIDE took place instead. Kramnik agreed to play Game 6 under protest, with the status of Game 5 to be resolved later. The game was uneventful, ending in a draw after 31 moves. Kramnik played a rare sideline and gradually equalized. Kramnik now led 3½-2½.
The 5-hour game, a Semi-Slav Defence, was characterized as "a hard-fought 60-move draw". Topalov successfully defended a RBvRN ending a pawn down. Kramnik now led 4-3.
| a | b | c | d | e | f | g | h | ||
| 8 |
|
8 | |||||||
| 7 | 7 | ||||||||
| 6 | 6 | ||||||||
| 5 | 5 | ||||||||
| 4 | 4 | ||||||||
| 3 | 3 | ||||||||
| 2 | 2 | ||||||||
| 1 | 1 | ||||||||
| a | b | c | d | e | f | g | h | ||
Game 8 lasted 4½ hours, and resulted in Topalov's first win over the board in the match, tying the score at 4-4. It featured the strategically unbalanced Meran Variation Semi-Slav Defense. Topalov's 15...Qa5 was a theoretical novelty. After 21 moves, the players reached a sharp, complicated, queenless middlegame with Topalov having two knights for Kramnik's rook and pawn. Topalov spun a mating web with his knights and rook, aided by Kramnik's mistakes on moves 32 and 41.
| a | b | c | d | e | f | g | h | ||
| 8 |
|
8 | |||||||
| 7 | 7 | ||||||||
| 6 | 6 | ||||||||
| 5 | 5 | ||||||||
| 4 | 4 | ||||||||
| 3 | 3 | ||||||||
| 2 | 2 | ||||||||
| 1 | 1 | ||||||||
| a | b | c | d | e | f | g | h | ||
Game 9 was a 3-hour tussle featuring a Slav Defense. Topalov's 6.Nh4 and 7.Nxg6 is a standard idea gaining White the advantage of the bishop pair. Topalov followed up in unusual fashion, however, with a3, g3, and f4 on the next three moves, leading Susan Polgar to observe that, "Topalov made way too many Pawn moves in the opening." However, Kramnik was unable to find an effective response and eventually ended up in a middlegame position where his two knights were outmatched by Topalov's powerful bishops. Topalov steadily improved his position, seizing space and launching an attack on the king-side. A strong tactical blow by Topalov on move 38 won the game for him. Kramnik, who had struggled with a steadily deteriorating position in time trouble, resigned following Topalov's 39th move. Topalov took the lead for the first time in the match, with the score now 5-4.
| a | b | c | d | e | f | g | h | ||
| 8 |
|
8 | |||||||
| 7 | 7 | ||||||||
| 6 | 6 | ||||||||
| 5 | 5 | ||||||||
| 4 | 4 | ||||||||
| 3 | 3 | ||||||||
| 2 | 2 | ||||||||
| 1 | 1 | ||||||||
| a | b | c | d | e | f | g | h | ||
Kramnik played the solid Catalan System. At move 17, Topalov, playing Black, offered Kramnik the opportunity to win a pawn if he was willing to give up his fianchettoed king bishop for a knight (and thus weaken his king position). Kramnik accepted the offer. Susan Polgar wrote that Topalov's "compensation is his Bishop pair, good Knight on e4 and the White Knight is pinned on b5."
However, Topalov blundered on move 24, allowing Kramnik to win a second pawn. Topalov then gave up his rook for a knight and two pawns. That left Kramnik ahead a rook for a knight and, after forcing the trade of queens, he won the endgame easily. The match was now level 5-5.
| a | b | c | d | e | f | g | h | ||
| 8 |
|
8 | |||||||
| 7 | 7 | ||||||||
| 6 | 6 | ||||||||
| 5 | 5 | ||||||||
| 4 | 4 | ||||||||
| 3 | 3 | ||||||||
| 2 | 2 | ||||||||
| 1 | 1 | ||||||||
| a | b | c | d | e | f | g | h | ||
The eleventh game ended in a draw after 66 moves, leaving the match level at 5½-5½. Towards the end, Kramnik was pressing hard for the full point, a pawn ahead in a rook and bishop endgame, but was unable to convert his advantage.
This game featured the same variation of the Slav Defense (6.Nh4 Bg6 7.Nxg6 hxg6) as in games 9 (a Topalov win) and 11 (a draw), but for the first time Kramnik played the White side of this line. In a queen and rook endgame, with both kings open, Topalov forced a draw by perpetual check. This left the score tied 6-6 at the end of regular time-control play (Kramnik 6 - Topalov 5 in played games, plus the game 5 forfeit in favor of Topalov). Tie-breaker games were now played to determine the outcome of the match.
In the middlegame of this first game in the rapid tie-break Topalov made a pawn offer, which Kramnik accepted. Kramnik then exploited some tactics to return the pawn and trade into a level endgame.
White obtained a minimal advantage from the opening, which he maintained until queens were exchanged. Kramnik won in the endgame, to go up 1½-½.
Topalov equalized the tiebreak match with the sort of kingside attack he has become famous for.
| a | b | c | d | e | f | g | h | ||
| 8 |
|
8 | |||||||
| 7 | 7 | ||||||||
| 6 | 6 | ||||||||
| 5 | 5 | ||||||||
| 4 | 4 | ||||||||
| 3 | 3 | ||||||||
| 2 | 2 | ||||||||
| 1 | 1 | ||||||||
| a | b | c | d | e | f | g | h | ||
Just like in the second tiebreak game, Kramnik displayed his skill in positions where the queens have been exchanged. Topalov's small inaccuracy on move 20 was punished by a precise sequence of moves from Kramnik, which eventually won him a pawn. In an extremely difficult position, Topalov made one final blunder, and the match was over.
Topalov's 44. ... Rxc5?? cost him the game and the title. However, in a post-match interview, Kramnik claimed that he had a decisive advantage even before Topalov's blunder. According to Australian GM Ian Rogers in Chess Life Online, White should still win against the superior defense 44...e5 with 45.Rab5
| Rating | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | Points | R1 | R2 | R3 | R4 | Total | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Vladimir Kramnik (Russia) | 2743 | 1 | 1 | ½ | ½ | 0* | ½ | ½ | 0 | 0 | 1 | ½ | ½ | 6 | ½ | 1 | 0 | 1 | 8½ |
| Veselin Topalov (Bulgaria) | 2813 | 0 | 0 | ½ | ½ | 1* | ½ | ½ | 1 | 1 | 0 | ½ | ½ | 6 | ½ | 0 | 1 | 0 | 7½ |
Legend: * forfeited
On September 28, 2006, the rest day between games 4 and 5, Topalov's manager Silvio Danailov complained to the match organizers and the press about Kramnik's repeated visits to the bathroom. He noted that the bathrooms are the only place not under audio or video surveillance, and called the frequency of the breaks "strange, if not suspicious". Danailov suggested that Topalov would abandon the match if the concerns were not addressed.
On September 29, 2006, the Appeals Committee, which consisted of Georgios Makropoulos, Jorge Vega, and Zurab Azmaiparashvili, determined that, although the frequency of Kramnik's visits to the toilet had been exaggerated, the private bathrooms would be closed and a common toilet opened for both players.
In response, Kramnik's manager Carsten Hensel issued a public statement insisting that the original match conditions be adhered to - defending Kramnik's actions by saying, "The restroom is small and Mr Kramnik likes to walk and therefore uses the space of the bathroom as well...It should also be mentioned that Mr Kramnik has to drink a lot of water during the games." Otherwise, "Mr Kramnik will stop playing this match as long as FIDE is not ready to respect Mr Kramnik's rights, in this case to use the toilet of his own restroom whenever he wishes to do so." Hensel also declared his lack of confidence in the Appeals Committee and demanded that its members be changed.
Awaiting a reversal of the Appeal Committee's decision, Kramnik refused to play Game 5. At 5:00 p.m. local time, the Chief Arbiter declared that Kramnik had forfeited.
FIDE President Kirsan Ilyumzhinov told Kramnik "...I hereby inform you of my full trust in the members of the Match Appeals Committee and their latest decision taken in respect of the appeal of Topalov's team dated 28 September 2006. I am also asking you in good faith to continue your participation in this match..."
Later, it emerged that Kramnik's team made a procedural blunder by not filing their protest before he defaulted the fifth game.
The players were invited for a meeting by Ilyumzhinov "to discuss the actual situation of the match and to solve the problems". Ilyumzhinov stated that cancelling the forfeit was possible, but that if no compromise was reached by noon on 1 October, the match would not continue.
On October 1, 2006, FIDE announced that agreement had been reached that the original bathroom arrangements would be reinstated and that the Appeals Committee had resigned and would be replaced.
Later that day, FIDE announced that Game 6 would be played on October 2, with the forfeit standing and the score Kramnik 3 - Topalov 2. Kramnik replied that he was "ready to proceed playing the match by reserving all my rights. My further participation will be subject to the condition to clarify my rights regarding game five at later stage." This is the first world chess championship match since Spassky-Fischer 1972 in which a game was forfeited.
On October 3, 2006, the new Appeals Committee responded to Kramnik's appeal against the Game 5 forfeit saying that they had no powers to vary the decisions of the original Appeals Committee. Earlier, Kramnik had said that if his appeal fails, "the only thing I know for sure is that in this case I will sue FIDE."
Kramnik's manager expressed concern that a member of Topalov's team might attempt to plant an electronic device in Kramnik's bathroom to foster suspicion that Kramnik is cheating. He suggested several measures relating to the inspection of the bathroom and Kramnik's person meant to forestall this possibility.
On October 2, 2006, more than 30 GMs, WGMs, and IMs expressed open support for Kramnik's position - including former World Champions Anatoly Karpov and Boris Spassky, whose opponent also famously disputed the match conditions.
On October 10, 2006, in a press release Team Kramnik said: "Should the decision of FIDE regarding the fifth game have any influence on the awarding of the World Championship title, with Mr. Topalov receiving the title after being granted a free point for the unplayed game, Mr Kramnik declares unequivocally: "I will not recognize Mr Topalov as World Champion under these conditions, and I will take legal action against FIDE at the end of the World Championship."
Since Kramnik won the match, this situation did not eventuate.
On October 4, Topalov's manager, Silvio Danailov, issued a press release that identified what it labeled "coincidence statistics" showing the percentage of times that Kramnik played a move that would be recommended by Chessbase's Fritz 9 chessplaying software in that position (about 78% on average).
GM Susan Polgar - who did not believe Kramnik was using computer assistance - characterized this as "another black eye for Danailov and chess. Even if he believes that it is true, he should complain to the committee and not through a press release. This is unprofessional and unacceptable."
At the press conference following Game 7, Kramnik commented on the second game where the Fritz analysis had shown a match with 87% of Kramnik's moves. Kramnik said, "A proper analysis must take into consideration that in the second game we both blundered a mate in three! First of all, this 87% is total nonsense - everything depends on the time allotted to the engine for analyzing a given position. Secondly, Topalov's percentages in San Luis, for example, were even higher."
In an interview with the Spanish daily ABC published on 14 December 2006, Topalov alleged that Kramnik had cheated with computer help during the match, that network cables had been found in the bathroom ceiling, that threats were issued, and that he felt physically unsafe during the match.
Kramnik, as the winner of the match, earned the FIDE World Champion slot in the World Chess Championship 2007, an eight-player, double round-robin tournament. The loser of the match, Topalov, was eliminated from the 2007 World Championship cycle.
Despite this, Topalov's manager was quoted after the match as saying "FIDE regulations allow every world champion that has lost the title to challenge the title holder. The total prize fund is 1.5 million dollars. We will find this money and will request the game to take place in Sofia. We will offer an exact date, 3rd of March 2007."
In June 2007, FIDE announced plans for the 2007-2009 World Championship cycle. It was confirmed that Topalov was excluded from the 2007 tournament, but he (along with Kramnik) was given special privileges for the 2008 and 2009 cycle.