< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 11 OF 11 ·
|Aug-19-10|| ||Lil Swine: he sacrificed a queen, 2 rooks and a bishop and lived, i guess thats why its called the immortal game|
|Oct-21-10|| ||Tigranny: Kieseritsky loved his queen too much. That was why he lost.|
|Nov-05-10|| ||WhiteRook48: yes, I also calculated 18...Qxa1+ 19 Ke2 Qb2 as having the best surviving chances for that. Variation without chess engine:
18...Qxa1+ 19 Ke2 Qb2 20 Bxc5 Qxc2+ 21 Kf1 Qc1+
22 Kg2 Qc2+ 23 Kh1 Qxc5 24 Nxg7+ Kf8? 25 Rf1 f6 26 Nxf6 Kxg7 27 Nxg8 Rxg8 28 Qf7+ Kh6 29 Rf6+ Kg5 30 Rf5+ Qxf5 31 Qxg8+ Qg6 32 hxg6 hxg6 33 Qxc8
|Nov-07-10|| ||kellmano: For any self-respecting chess fan, this is the best thing on youtube:|
|Nov-07-10|| ||BobCrisp: In any battle of numbers, I think self-abusing chess fans would hold a significant edge.|
|Feb-09-11|| ||Llawdogg: Wow! Anderssen sacrificed his bishop, both rooks, and his queen. He won with his other bishop supported by both knights. Kieseritsky still had all his pieces at the end. Amazing!|
|Mar-20-11|| ||Tigranny: Isn't 20...Na6 the losing blunder because it doesn't give the king an extra escape square like 20...Ba6 does?|
|Mar-22-11|| ||soothsayer8: One word: BRUTAL|
|Mar-22-11|| ||I play the Fred: Kieseritsky lost because he didn't have enough middle names.|
|Mar-22-11|| ||Phony Benoni: No, he lost because he didn't have enough middle game.|
|Apr-03-11|| ||Peligroso Patzer: <zanshin: Second point - the controversy over which rook was actually captured first. Rybka says take with the Queen first. *** >|
In "The World's Greatest Chess Games", by Burgess, Nunn & Emms, Constable & Robinson Ltd., revised edition (c)2010, at page 17, the stronger <18. ... Qxa1+> is given as the move played. It is objectively much stronger than <18. ... Bxg1> [as given in this database, and also, e.g., in the ChessBase score of this game], but only if Black continues (after <19. Ke2>) with <19. ... Qb2! >.
|Apr-03-11|| ||NM JRousselle: White's real lemon is 17 Nd5? With d4!, Black could resign with a clear conscience.|
|Jun-28-11|| ||SirChrislov: Again I say-- This is barbaric caveman stuff!|
|Aug-11-11|| ||Nightsurfer: A kind of replay - the sacrifice of the two Rooks in order to finish off the enemy King - has been realized 2010 in Hamburg, Germany, please compare Rajko Rakovic vs R Gralla, 2010, thus paying respect to the "Immortal Game" 149 years post festum.|
|Sep-02-11|| ||DrMAL: White's opening leaves black with a solid advantage if properly played (hence its absence in modern games) but black made moves like 7...Nh5?! (instead of 7...c6) or 10...Nf6?! (instead of 10...g6! or 10...cxb5). Play was inaccurate by both sides in general, this was 160 years ago.|
With the bishop sac, Anderssen shows beautifully how development is just as important (if not more so) than material, his play was very instructive here. By the time 16.Nc3 was played white had some advantage and black was on the run.
16...Bc5? was the first blunder at this point black had to play either 16...g5 or 16...Qc6 to survive (among several threats is 17.Nd5). Here, 17.d4! wins quite easily but white played 17.Nd5 anyway, also good. Engines show this moves as maybe drawing but it was not at all apparent to me. Black played his one move 17...Qxb2 leading to this. From here, white's best was simply 18.Re1! leading to a likely win by force.
Instead Anderssen played 18.Bd6? where, as Steinitz pointed out, 18...Qxa1+ was better. In fact, it was MUCH better it wins once black gets through some complications and solidifies his position. After 18...Bxg1? again 19.Re1! was best probably still winning but 19.e5 was also very good. Now, 19...Qxa1+ was too late even after the one good move left (20...Ba6) white gets a big advantage via 21.Nc7+! Kd8 22.Nxa6!! (22...Qc3 23.Bc7+! Qxc7 24.Nxc7 Nc6! 25.Nxa8 g6!).
<SirChrislov: Again I say-- This is barbaric caveman stuff!> LOL a bit barbaric indeed but the game was very instructive about development versus material, in that respect it was much better than Anderssen vs Dufresne, 1852 where the sac played there turned a probably winning game into a likely draw. Ah the good old days were men were men and got mated...
|Dec-17-11|| ||Penguincw: Didn't Kasparov try to repeat this game once.
Short vs Kasparov, 1993
|Jan-05-12|| ||kingscrusher: I have video annotated this game here:
|Jan-18-12|| ||Llawdogg: Thanks kingscrusher for the excellent video.|
|Feb-01-12|| ||Naniwazu: A game played in true Romantic style.|
|Feb-02-12|| ||Mozart72: The opening of the "Immortal Game" actually ends with 5.Bxb5 and the middle-game begins with 5...Nf6. The middle-game ends with 11...cxb5 and the end-game begins with 12.h4. It is necessary to have a more precise understanding of the fases of the chess game....|
|Feb-06-12|| ||Diademas: According to the database Kieseritzky actually had a positive score against Anderssen. +7 =2 -6.|
|Apr-07-12|| ||Mad Bishop: Just finished a 3D animation of this game:
|Jun-03-12|| ||ketchuplover: Someone on chesscircle.net tried to pass this game off as one of their own.|
|Jun-17-12|| ||The Big Lebowski: An amazing game with a beautiful mate! Black has 7 pieces including his Q to whites 3 minor pieces, although 3 of blacks pieces haven't left their starting position.|
|Sep-12-12|| ||waustad: <mad>The animation is amusing, though not the best way to see what is going on from the chess point of view. I liked the way that the captured pieces were absorbed into the taking piece. Nice job.|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 11 OF 11 ·