chessgames.com
Members · Prefs · Laboratory · Collections · Openings · Endgames · Sacrifices · History · Search Kibitzing · Kibitzer's Café · Chessforums · Tournament Index · Players · Kibitzing

(If you register a free account you won't see all these ads!)
Donald Byrne vs Robert James Fischer
"The Game of the Century" (game of the day Mar-09-2013)
Third Rosenwald Trophy (1956), New York, NY USA, rd 8, Oct-17
Gruenfeld Defense: Three Knights Variation. Hungarian Attack (D92)  ·  0-1
ANALYSIS [x]

FEN COPIED

Click Here to play Guess-the-Move
Given 229 times; par: 76 [what's this?]

NOTE: You are using our new chess viewer, "Olga." For more info see the Olga Quickstart Guide. You can switch back to the old viewer (pgn4web) from the pulldown menu below. If you have questions or suggestions see our Olga chessforum.

explore this opening
find similar games 6 more D Byrne/Fischer games
sac: 17...Be6 PGN: download | view | print Help: general | java-troubleshooting

TIP: If you cannot see the game above, try switching to the viewer Olga.

PGN Viewer:  What is this?
For help with this chess viewer, please see the Olga Chess Viewer Quickstart Guide.
    [help]

A COMPUTER ANNOTATED SCORE OF THIS GAME IS AVAILABLE.  [CLICK HERE]

Donald Byrne vs Robert James Fischer (1956) The Game of the Century
Cover of Chess Review, December 1956.


Kibitzer's Corner
< Earlier Kibitzing  · PAGE 57 OF 57 ·  Later Kibitzing>
Jul-29-17  Nerwal: <What's wrong with 33...Bd6ch? (forking white queen)>

Everything, it's not a legal move as the bishop is pinned.

Jul-29-17
Premium Chessgames Member
  john barleycorn: Which gives me an idea. let us say during a game each player is allowed to do one "illegal" move. Like ignore a check etc. but no piece is allowed to move out of its usual range meaning you cannot move a knight from g2 to b6 or make a white square bishop a black squared.

If one player makes use of it, it costs him .5 point. If he does not use it he gains .5 point. So a win by a player who uses an illegal move against a player who does not is .5 point each. A win of a player who does not use the option against a player who does is 1,5 vs -.5. If neither one of them uses it it is the good old result.

Aug-27-17  sharpnova: @john barleycorn

Logged in just to say that I think that's the worst idea I've ever heard.

Aug-27-17
Premium Chessgames Member
  john barleycorn: <sharpnova: @john barleycorn

Logged in just to say that I think that's the worst idea I've ever heard.>

hahaha, you got the spirit of that idea. I did not claim it was good or anything. But I think it is on level with most other proposals here.

Aug-27-17
Premium Chessgames Member
  morfishine: What is it with all these questions about "should he have resigned earlier?" or when should he have resigned or why didn't he resign earlier?

Forget these questions, these are unanswerable and not even worthy of being questioned

They are the GM's and you are not

You are mere spectators, so spectate and otherwise, shut up

*****

Aug-27-17
Premium Chessgames Member
  AylerKupp: <<Sally Simpson> "In tennis, players will applaud brilliant shots by the opponent. In chess, such gallant behaviour is practically non-existent.>

So true. But, as a notable exception, in "Bobby Fischer Goes to War" by David Edmonds and John Eidinow, the authors say that after the completion of Game 6 of their 1972 WCC match, "The packed auditorium rose as one; a bemused, crushed Spassky joined in the applause, clapping for his opponent in recognition of the artistic creation to which he had fallen victim."

Such exceptions are unfortunately few and far between. But perhaps it's too much to ask for.

Aug-27-17
Premium Chessgames Member
  AylerKupp: <<morfishine> Forget these questions, these are unanswerable and not even worthy of being questioned.>

I agree that these questions are unanswerable. The only one who could have answered them, at least for this game, is Donald Byrne, and unfortunately he is no longer with us. But I don't see why you think that they are not even worthy of being questioned. As you pointed out, we are not GMs. Perhaps if we were we would not need to ask them, we would know. But, alas, we are not.

Aug-27-17  Sally Simpson: Hi Aylerkupp

" The only one who could have answered them, at least for this game, is Donald Byrne, and unfortunately he is no longer with us."

But he did answer it whilst he was alive.

D Byrne vs Fischer, 1956 (kibitz #1430)

But I'll repeat again what it was IM Donald Byrne said about the end of this game.

"First of all, you have to remember that in 1956 no one knew that Bobby Fischer was going to become Bobby Fischer! He was just a very promising 13-year-old kid who played a great game against me.

When it got to the position where I was lost, I asked some of the other competitors if it might be a nice thing to let the kid mate me, as a kind of tribute to the fine game he played. They said, ‘Sure, why not?’ and so I did."

---

The tag 'The Game of the Century' was given to this game by Hans Kmoch:

"The following game, a stunning masterpiece of combination play performed by a boy of 13 against a formidable opponent, matches the finest on record in the history of chess prodigies."

So he is not quite saying it was the best game of chess played last century. In his opinion, it was the best game played by a child prodigy.

Aug-28-17
Premium Chessgames Member
  Diademas: <<morfishine> You are mere spectators, so spectate and otherwise, shut up> I think you may have misunderstood the point of this site...
Aug-28-17
Premium Chessgames Member
  Petrosianic: <Sally Simpson> <But I'll repeat again what it was IM Donald Byrne said about the end of this game.>

That still presupposes that there's some magical objective time that a game ought to end, that Byrne needed some kind of special permission to violate. There really isn't. Chess is just the only game whose fans can't stand to see played one second longer than they personally think it should be.

Aug-28-17  Sally Simpson: Hi Petrosianic,

He was just covering his ass amongst his fellow players because he knew this game was something special and bound to end up in print.

People might think...

A) He was not good enough to know he was losing.

B) He played on till mate because he was sulking at getting beaten by a kid.

C) He thought the kid might blow it going for the final kill.

Some of these reason have been cited by posters not knowing (or understanding) what the real reason was.

It was an act of sportsmanship.

----

Back to:

C) He thought the kid might blow it going for the final kill.

Chess history is loaded with the so called weaker player screwing up a won game when they have a stronger player on the ropes.

The May Chess Life 1956 published a rating list.

Donald Byrne 2257.
Bobby Fischer 1726

I was 1825 when I beat my first 2200+ player. I knew I was winning and an unknown kind of nervousness crept in. Thankfully he never offered a draw. I might have taken it .

Aug-28-17
Premium Chessgames Member
  Petrosianic: <People might think... [A, B and C].>

They might think that ANYWAY. After all, the game itself is much better known than is the story about Byrne's explanation. You said yourself that you've seen posters saying all those things despite the explanation.

Without any explanation, only a very weak player could believe A. B possibly, but again, I think only a weak player would think it of a game with an exciting combinative sequence in progress.

As for C, suppose he had been playing for that reason? It would have been legit.

<I was 1825 when I beat my first 2200+ player. I knew I was winning and an unknown kind of nervousness crept in.>

Yeah, but I bet you weren't playing in an Invitational Tournament with the best players in the country. The joke in Eliot Hearst's column was that a USCF Rating is a numerical figure that reflects the way you played chess a year ago. I guarantee you that they didn't think of Fischer as a B player when they invited him to the tournament. It would have been sadistic if they had.

Aug-28-17
Premium Chessgames Member
  Petrosianic: What do you think about games like Game 16 of the 1972 match? That's the kind of game that users go apoplectic over, especially in Live Kibitzing. "How dare they keep playing???" I always tell them that if they're <really> sure of the outcome, then to just forget it and watch a different game (or leave if it's a match). That never gets an answer because they're not really sure.

Of course the same people also go nuts if a game ends earlier than they thought it should. I saw a kibitzer at Sinquefeld (presumably a Nakamura fan) loudly announcing that he'd lost all respect for Nakamaura forever, for agreeing to a draw in a position that was, if not totally dead, then at least one in which a draw was a reasonable result. It's a completely irrational mindset. Such people think that they and they alone know how long a game should last. But then they get upset that others don't know it too. What sense does that make?

Aug-28-17  Sally Simpson: "Yeah, but I bet you weren't playing in an Invitational Tournament with the best players in the country."

it was a league game, 36 moves in 1½ hours. I played for Edinburgh IV and I beat the Edinburgh 1 team captain.

The funny thing about that league season I beat or drew with the higher graded players and lost to the lower graded players. Such is chess. These days I cannot beat anybody. I have aged, chess wise, badly. Probably due to lack of games, I only now play league chess, 9-10 games a year.

Last season I was losing v a 1300 player. He got nervous due to my poker-face and blew it. One of my few recent wins.

The World Famous End of Festival Edinburgh fireworks are just about to start. I live in the shadow of Edinburgh Castle and have a grandstand view.

People come from all over the country just to see (and applaud(?)) fireworks. I should hire out out my rooms for the night, I'd make a small fortune.

I'll get back to you on some other things.

Aug-28-17
Premium Chessgames Member
  Petrosianic: <The funny thing about that league season I beat or drew with the higher graded players and lost to the lower graded players.>

That happens sometimes. You put all the energy into the games with the top players, and expect the weaker ones to be cakewalks by comparison. But they can be dangerous too.

Aug-28-17  Sally Simpson: Hi Petrosianic,

Yes there are few idiotic comments about all aspects of the game floating about and it not a recent thing.

I'm fairly new to Internet Chess. I joined my first one in 2008. Before then I wrote all my articles on Windows 3.1 (still a great system) put them on a floppy, emailed them from work or a net cafe and a friend posted them for me. I've only been here for 3 years.

From time to time on here I see old posts all saying the same nonsense and members like Everett and Perfidious, to name just a few, trying to correct their view. Not force their opinion on them but to get them to see it how chess players see it.

It often ends in bitterness (which in some cases never goes away.) hence a lot of the guff posted now goes unchallenged for fear of starting a thread war.

Offering a different point of view, no matter how slight, or correcting a statement on this site is not for the thin skinned. Here they appear to type with one hand and hold a mallet in the other.

(and you have to prefix every joke with: "I am now going to tell a joke"...tell joke...and add "that was a joke." )

---

The Fischer grade of 1726 in the May 1956 Chess Life was way off and everyone knew it.

The January 1956 cover of Chess Review is a picture is of Bobby (then 12) giving a 12 board simul v 12 young players ranging from 7 to 12 winning all his games in 2 hours and 20 minutes.

This by the way, is the full introduction of Kmoch's piece entitled 'Game of the Century'.

https://image.ibb.co/cofyP5/kmoch.jpg

Apparently Fischer wasted a lot of time in the opening then played his 'Grandiose Combination' in 20 minutes. That may explain the quicker, and IMO, easier to see more banal mate.


click for larger view

37...Re2+ 38.Kd1 Bb3+ 39.Kc1 Ba3+ 40.Kb1 Re1 Mate.


click for larger view

I'm thinking sportsmanship or no sportsmanship Donald Byrne would not have allowed that one on the board and resigned before Re1 mate.

I know you don't like links but I am not typing it all in. (I would probably miss out a word and screw it up.). It makes it clear he is talking about child prodigy games.

----

Fireworks brilliant, ruined slightly by dipstick tourists cheering and clapping every bang and sparkle. Why do people applaud fireworks?

Aug-29-17
Premium Chessgames Member
  Magpye: <Petrosianic> <Yeah, but I bet you weren't playing in an Invitational Tournament with the best players in the country. The joke in Eliot Hearst's column was that a USCF Rating is a numerical figure that reflects the way you played chess a year ago. I guarantee you that they didn't think of Fischer as a B player when they invited him to the tournament. It would have been sadistic if they had.>

Correct me if I am wrong, but wasn't Fischer invited because he won the Junior Championship? I bet they looked at him as a bonafide master.

Aug-29-17
Premium Chessgames Member
  Petrosianic: I think they thought of him as either a Master or very near to it. I'd have to go back and read some old Chess Life articles to see whether or not his -2 score exceeded expectations. It probably did (and this particular game definitely exceeded them).

In the 1957/8 US Championship, predictions were that he'd finish a little over 50%.

Of course they ran into trouble a few years later when they invited Robin Ault to the 1959 US Championship on the basis of his winning the US Junior, and he finished 0-11. That scared them off inviting Junior Champions until I think Ken Regan in the late 70's.

Aug-29-17
Premium Chessgames Member
  Petrosianic: Speaking of Ault, it might be instructive to compare Reshevsky's game against Ault in that tournament against this one.

Reshevsky doesn't dilly-dally in the opening as Byrne did. He's sure to get Be2 in early so his development doesn't suffer, and plays Bg5 in one move rather than two which is where Byrne really got in trouble. Ault goes crazy after that with a bizarre f6 plan, and goes down very fast. But the more interesting part of the game is how White played the opening. He might have been thinking back to this game.

Reshevsky vs R Ault, 1959

Aug-29-17  Howard: Actually, I think it was John Fedorowicz' participation in the 1977 championship, where they reinstated the idea of seeding the winner of the most recent US Junior.

Ironically, the "Fed" finished dead last in the 1977 event, but he was quoted in CL&R as saying that "at least" he did better than Leslie Ault did.

Aug-29-17
Premium Chessgames Member
  Petrosianic: I think Regan and Fedorowicz both qualified from the same US Junior, but they didn't play in the same US Championship.

Yes, I just looked it up. Fedorowicz played in the 1977 Championship and Regan in the 1978, but I believe that they both played as a result of the same US Junior (in which they had tied for first). They both finished tied for last place, but both had respectable scores.

Aug-29-17  Howard: You're probably right. Regan and "Fed", in fact, got their pictures on the December 1977 cover of CL&R, in fact !

For the record, Regan got off to an excellent start in the 1978 event by beating Shamkovich in the first round! Unfortunately, that turned out to his only win in the tournament.

Aug-29-17
Premium Chessgames Member
  Petrosianic: I was wrong when I said they both finished tied for last. Regan did, but Fed finished dead last. But still, his 4½-8½ score was quite respectable, a very far cry from Ault's 0-11, and basically justified the idea of including the Junior Champion.
Aug-30-17  Howard: You're right--Regan TIED for last, with the late Kim Commons. Just looked it up last night.

Robin Ault, incidentally, died in 1994. Chess Life noted it, but it was "buried" (no pun intended) at the very back of that issue, as I recall.

Sep-28-17  Dr Winston OBoogie: Just watched Kingscrusher's analysis on this game it's really good https://youtu.be/WsjMzBm0JH0
Jump to page #    (enter # from 1 to 57)
search thread:   
< Earlier Kibitzing  · PAGE 57 OF 57 ·  Later Kibitzing>

from the Chessgames Store
NOTE: You need to pick a username and password to post a reply. Getting your account takes less than a minute, totally anonymous, and 100% free--plus, it entitles you to features otherwise unavailable. Pick your username now and join the chessgames community!
If you already have an account, you should login now.
Please observe our posting guidelines:
  1. No obscene, racist, sexist, or profane language.
  2. No spamming, advertising, or duplicating posts.
  3. No personal attacks against other members.
  4. Nothing in violation of United States law.
  5. No posting personal information of members.
Blow the Whistle See something that violates our rules? Blow the whistle and inform an administrator.


NOTE: Keep all discussion on the topic of this page. This forum is for this specific game and nothing else. If you want to discuss chess in general, or this site, you might try the Kibitzer's Café.
Messages posted by Chessgames members do not necessarily represent the views of Chessgames.com, its employees, or sponsors.
Spot an error? Please submit a correction slip and help us eliminate database mistakes!
This game is type: CLASSICAL (Disagree? Please submit a correction slip.)

Featured in the Following Game Collections [what is this?]
knightfly's favorite games
by knightfly
Three Knights variation
from Grunfeld Defense by leobabauta
Queen sac for a fierce attack of minor pieces
from Honza Cervenka's favorite games by Honza Cervenka
Joe Stanley's favorite games
by Joe Stanley
What can I say that hasn't already been said.
from If only my endgame was this good... by let the wookie win
Greatest Attacking Games of All Time
by PinkPanther
Young Fischer's immortal Queen Sacrifice topped off by mate!
from Backward Development's highlighted games. by Backward Development
d92
from favorite games according to opening d00-d99 by mirage
Fischer's memorisations
by prosoccer
totoma's favorite games
by totoma
Fischer - Best of the Best´s
from Ninja Player's favorite games by Ninja Player
Tom's favorite games
by thomasamagne
When they were young
by Roger Krueger
Fischer -- part I: "The Game of the Century"
from Grandmasters of Chess by SamAtoms1980
gibbonsm's favorite games
by gibbonsm
Windmills
by Arc
The 12 Legendary Games of the Century
by 50movesaheadofyou
wowieee
from funkymihir's favorite games by funkymihir
jm12's favorite games
by jm12
The game that started it all.
from Fischer Favorites by atrifix
plus 807 more collections (not shown)


home | about | login | logout | F.A.Q. | your profile | preferences | Premium Membership | Kibitzer's Café | Biographer's Bistro | new kibitzing | chessforums | Tournament Index | Player Directory | Notable Games | World Chess Championships | Opening Explorer | Guess the Move | Game Collections | ChessBookie Game | Chessgames Challenge | Store | privacy notice | advertising | contact us
Copyright 2001-2017, Chessgames Services LLC