What do you think?
Rate this book
Kramnik: My Life & games
Since he first burst onto the world chess scene in 1992, displaying a maturity of play far beyond his sixteen years, Vladimir Kramnik has benn tipped as a future world champion. Still only in his mid twenties, he is now firmly consolidated in the world top three (as of 2000 when the book was published).
This book describes Kramnik's rise to the elite levels of professional chess and ends just before his historic upset of Garry Kasparov later in 2000.
This book describes Kramnik's rise to the elite levels of professional chess and ends just before his historic upset of Garry Kasparov later in 2000.
272 pages, Paperback
First published August 1, 2000
11 people are currently reading
212 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 7 of 7 reviews
October 20, 2019
[Original review, written January 2009]
The only chessplayers that anyone's heard of, if they aren't themselves a chessplayer, are Bobby Fischer and Garry Kasparov. Vladimir Kramnik's claim to fame is that he's the only human being who has ever won a match against Kasparov - Kasparov of course also lost the famous match against IBM's Deep Blue in 1997. There aren't likely to be any more, since Kasparov has now retired from chess, and spends most of his time on Russian politics.
The story of how Kramnik won the 2000 match is in fact quite interesting. He used to be a very dynamic, intuitive player, and this book gives many examples of what his play was like when he was the young lion of the Russian chess world. He's also a deep and uncompromising analyst. When he got his chance to play Kasparov for the title, he took a good look at his own play, and decided that he would never beat Kasparov on brilliance and intuition, which are Kasparov's home territory. Instead, he spent over a year carefully refashioning his own style so that it was as dry and technical as possible. Taken by surprise, Kasparov was completely at sea in the resultant positions, and Kramnik won the match two games to zero, with 13 draws.
So Kramnik became the world champion... but he was never able to get back his "real" style, and is still mostly a dull, technical player. Though every now and then you see a tantalizing flash of the old Kramnik. Maybe someone will write an opera about it one day.
__________________________________________
[Update, January 2012]
Well, I was wrong, but most of world's other chess players were too. Kramnik's done it again: he's somehow managed to turn himself back into a dynamic, intuitive player. We watched him playing in the recent Supergrandmaster tournament in London, and his games were once more full of daring attacks and bold strategic decisions. During the post-game analysis session, he amazed the public with lightning-fast analysis. He'd rattle off a sequence of fifteen moves, then grunt "Well, I couldn't make this work, so I did the other thing instead." His opponent, a strong Grandmaster, was shaking his head and saying modestly that he'd seen maybe one percent of that.
The more I think about it, the more impressive it becomes. Becoming the opposite of your true self to defeat one of the two greatest players of all time, then reversing the change once you've succeeded. A unique achievement.
__________________________________________
[Update, June 2013]
I had the pleasure of meeting Kramnik in person for the first time when Not and I were doing the web commentary at the Geneva Chess Masters this week. He isn't just one of the greatest chessplayers of all time, he's also a really nice guy. We were so disappointed when he lost the final match against Mamedyarov.
The only chessplayers that anyone's heard of, if they aren't themselves a chessplayer, are Bobby Fischer and Garry Kasparov. Vladimir Kramnik's claim to fame is that he's the only human being who has ever won a match against Kasparov - Kasparov of course also lost the famous match against IBM's Deep Blue in 1997. There aren't likely to be any more, since Kasparov has now retired from chess, and spends most of his time on Russian politics.
The story of how Kramnik won the 2000 match is in fact quite interesting. He used to be a very dynamic, intuitive player, and this book gives many examples of what his play was like when he was the young lion of the Russian chess world. He's also a deep and uncompromising analyst. When he got his chance to play Kasparov for the title, he took a good look at his own play, and decided that he would never beat Kasparov on brilliance and intuition, which are Kasparov's home territory. Instead, he spent over a year carefully refashioning his own style so that it was as dry and technical as possible. Taken by surprise, Kasparov was completely at sea in the resultant positions, and Kramnik won the match two games to zero, with 13 draws.
So Kramnik became the world champion... but he was never able to get back his "real" style, and is still mostly a dull, technical player. Though every now and then you see a tantalizing flash of the old Kramnik. Maybe someone will write an opera about it one day.
__________________________________________
[Update, January 2012]
Well, I was wrong, but most of world's other chess players were too. Kramnik's done it again: he's somehow managed to turn himself back into a dynamic, intuitive player. We watched him playing in the recent Supergrandmaster tournament in London, and his games were once more full of daring attacks and bold strategic decisions. During the post-game analysis session, he amazed the public with lightning-fast analysis. He'd rattle off a sequence of fifteen moves, then grunt "Well, I couldn't make this work, so I did the other thing instead." His opponent, a strong Grandmaster, was shaking his head and saying modestly that he'd seen maybe one percent of that.
The more I think about it, the more impressive it becomes. Becoming the opposite of your true self to defeat one of the two greatest players of all time, then reversing the change once you've succeeded. A unique achievement.
__________________________________________
[Update, June 2013]
I had the pleasure of meeting Kramnik in person for the first time when Not and I were doing the web commentary at the Geneva Chess Masters this week. He isn't just one of the greatest chessplayers of all time, he's also a really nice guy. We were so disappointed when he lost the final match against Mamedyarov.
January 27, 2021
I remember “back in the day” when World Champion Garry Kasparov said that if there was an up and coming chess player who had the talent to be able to contend for the World Champion title, it would be Vladimir Kramnik. Since that time I’ve always kept an eye on him, yet I never sat down and studied his collection of games… until now.
With a title like “Kramnik: My Life and Games”, one would think that it would be primarily written by Kramnik himself. Unfortunately this is not true. And while Iakov Damsky (and others) add their thoughts to the games and body of text, it was somewhat disappointing to see that Kramnik didn’t involve himself as much as I would have liked. This is a shame, because Kramnik comes across as a very likable and humble person, and is capable of making some brilliant analysis and insights. I only wish that he had written all of the text and annotations.
The book does present a nice overview of Kramnik and his games. I was surprised at many of his brilliant moves and insights and there’s no doubt that he has been a brilliant player, but now Magnus Carlsen has taken the crown and is unwilling to let go of it.
Kramnik is certainly one of the more interesting players to emerge from the “Post-Kasparov” era, and this book provides a nice overview of his talents and life.
With a title like “Kramnik: My Life and Games”, one would think that it would be primarily written by Kramnik himself. Unfortunately this is not true. And while Iakov Damsky (and others) add their thoughts to the games and body of text, it was somewhat disappointing to see that Kramnik didn’t involve himself as much as I would have liked. This is a shame, because Kramnik comes across as a very likable and humble person, and is capable of making some brilliant analysis and insights. I only wish that he had written all of the text and annotations.
The book does present a nice overview of Kramnik and his games. I was surprised at many of his brilliant moves and insights and there’s no doubt that he has been a brilliant player, but now Magnus Carlsen has taken the crown and is unwilling to let go of it.
Kramnik is certainly one of the more interesting players to emerge from the “Post-Kasparov” era, and this book provides a nice overview of his talents and life.
October 21, 2025
Decent book if you wanna end up causing someone's death.
September 17, 2019
Kramnik is a complete genius!
An absolute must for a chess player. This book has taught Magnus Carlsen a great deal.
This book has been written before Kramnik became the world champion and it shows his desire of precision and his hard work. It doesn't contain many stories of Kramnik. It's a chess game analysis book and he has analysed many of his wins and draws against greats like Shirov, Anand, Karpov, Topalov, Kasparov, Ivanchuk and many more.
In most games, openings have been gone through without explanation. Middlegame and endgame and truly opened my eyes towards how difficult closed games are. The dynamic placing of pieces looks almost dumb but when you calculate some variations, all the pieces co-ordinate. Kramnik's
In selected games, there's the first one
Kramnik - Belyavsky
Belgrade 1995
1. Nf3 d5 2.g3 c6 3.Bg2 Bg4 4.0-0 Nd7 5.d4 e6 6.Nbd2 f5 7.c4 Bd6
Here, I thought Black is doing great. He has solved his problem of development of Light Bishop in a stonewall dutch. Then comes Kramnik,
"Here I decided to begin playing more actively, in order to try and exploit my opponent's slight delay in developing his kingside. Because if Black should succeed in playing Ngf6 and 0-0, he will achieve a highly favorable version of the 'stonewall' set-up, without his light square bishop shut in"
That game was enlightening. Thinking of e4 break early in a stonewall setup is something that would never even enter my mind with d5, f5 pawns there.
Tons of games I didn't understand well. The placement of pieces just didn't make sense to me but that's my handicap.
An absolute must for a chess player. This book has taught Magnus Carlsen a great deal.
This book has been written before Kramnik became the world champion and it shows his desire of precision and his hard work. It doesn't contain many stories of Kramnik. It's a chess game analysis book and he has analysed many of his wins and draws against greats like Shirov, Anand, Karpov, Topalov, Kasparov, Ivanchuk and many more.
In most games, openings have been gone through without explanation. Middlegame and endgame and truly opened my eyes towards how difficult closed games are. The dynamic placing of pieces looks almost dumb but when you calculate some variations, all the pieces co-ordinate. Kramnik's
In selected games, there's the first one
Kramnik - Belyavsky
Belgrade 1995
1. Nf3 d5 2.g3 c6 3.Bg2 Bg4 4.0-0 Nd7 5.d4 e6 6.Nbd2 f5 7.c4 Bd6
Here, I thought Black is doing great. He has solved his problem of development of Light Bishop in a stonewall dutch. Then comes Kramnik,
"Here I decided to begin playing more actively, in order to try and exploit my opponent's slight delay in developing his kingside. Because if Black should succeed in playing Ngf6 and 0-0, he will achieve a highly favorable version of the 'stonewall' set-up, without his light square bishop shut in"
That game was enlightening. Thinking of e4 break early in a stonewall setup is something that would never even enter my mind with d5, f5 pawns there.
Tons of games I didn't understand well. The placement of pieces just didn't make sense to me but that's my handicap.
August 8, 2022
Odd newspaper article formatting and some clunky translations. Kramnik’s analyses in the second half are the highlights.
July 21, 2014
Heavy going for patzers and duffers, especially when one’s time is limited. Still, Kramnik dispels the notion that he’s a dry, technical player. This volume is full of double-edged encounters with the likes of Shirov, Kasparov, and other acolytes of dynamism. The first half of the book is really a chronological - and lightly annotated - review of his life and games, while the second half consists of his notes to his personally selected games. It’s here that his talents as an analyst stand out. He is thorough, honest regarding his own mistakes, and refreshingly self-effacing. (At one point he claims that he has difficulty analyzing beyond five moves over the board. Color me skeptical.) Unfortunately, the book is marred by a poor translation which results in the overuse of quotation marks and a poor layout which make the thicket of variations in the second half even harder to comb through. In sum, this is a good game collection and biography, but not good as a learning tool unless one is being guided by an expert teacher.
Displaying 1 - 7 of 7 reviews