Russia blogger Seva Bashirov made a map of the incidence of “suspicious votes” as per Sergey Shpilkin’s method (not necessarily all fraudulent, but there’s certainly a correlation) during these elections.
Here is a similar map for the 2011 Duma elections (methodology is different, so scale isn’t comparable).
And in finer resolution:
One of the previous threads raised the question of fraud in the second tour of the 1996 elections, so I might as well address that now that we’re on this topic.
The reality is that Yeltsin won, regardless of the falsifications.
Even the most falsified Russian elections ever, the Duma elections of 2011 [see the two maps above], only bumped up United Russia by no more than 11% (probably 8-9%).
In 1996, the difference between Yeltsin and Zyuganov was almost 14% points – while the fraud map looked something like this (Yeltsin did far better than he “should have” in Tatarstan and the South Caucasus based on his results in the first round), but there was no significant fraud in the vast majority of ethnic Russian regions:
Clearly bumped Yeltsin up by 2-3% points, but certainly not by enough to make a difference to the outcome.
Other evidence: The polls immediately before the second round all had Yeltsin out in front.
Alexander Kireev has a comprehensive explanation (in Russian) of why the falsifications in 1996 could not have stolen victory from Zyuganov.
And just for fun, a map of the incidence of reported bribery in Russia:
Clear correlations with the pattern of Putin-era electoral fraud, which is why I have always maintained it is a local phenomenon as opposed to centrally managed.