We have entered an era where it is not always obvious what the best
players are doing. They are better than previous generations, they play
all positions well, and they are fighting against players who also do
everything well, and what makes the difference is not apparent to me.
But while Kramnik’s play is subtle and deep, there are games which
makes it look as though what he is doing is as simple as it looks.
Opening
Kramnik brought to several apparently settled opening systems a new
clarity in pursuing White’s main plans. In the Grunfeld, it was White’s
central majority; in the King’s Indian, the Queen’s-side attack.
Middlegame
This is a fine multi-layered game: a stubborn insistence on retaining a
small initiative in the opening, an unexpected pawn sacrifice, and a
switch to attack.
An immensely revealing comment: some positions cannot be treated
lightly. It was always the case that Kasparov should never be allowed to
build up an attacking force on the King’s-side, yet here he falls foul
of the same strategy.
Endgame
Kramnik’s clarity showed itself to good effect in positions with
material inequality. His win against Leko was a model of how to
coordinate a pair of Rooks, and against Kasparov sheer persistence paid off.
A sharp modern game with many phases, which also exemplifies the ancient idea of transformation of advantages.