And here is me thinking I'm on site of chess people.

Nothing but a crowd of narrow-backed jacksons, one eye on a computer t'other on a grade and nothing in between.

To say I'm surprised is an under statement. Disgusted is closer to the knuckle.

All those moaning about the Fischer Film 'Pawn Sacrifice' and not one of them has been here.

(You have to admit so far this is a better intro than. 'I'm really surprised there has been no kibitzing to this game.)

I enjoyed the film. The link below will tell you more and how I got my hands on it.

Of course the posh lot whose toes curled up and teeth gnashed when a factual appeared loathed it.

As I say in my review.

http://www.redhotpawn.com/chess-blo...

I suspect that half of the sad ones were trying to work out Fischer’s grade during the picture. The other half were just looking for errors.

But what about this game.

If you saw the film how come you did not right after the film dig out this game and play out the analysis Bobby showed Lombardy on how he could have won v Petrosian.

It's what any chess player would have done. I really am disappointed in you lot. I really am.

I saw the original position and a glimpse of the final position. It was not too hard to recreate the analysis. (of course if you need a chess computer to get through the day then it's impossible. This blank page has helped me mark all your cards.)

click for larger view

Bobby plays out.

25... Nd4 26. Rxb4 Qxd5 27. Bxd4 Bd6 28. Rc4 exd4 29. Rxd4 Qe5 30. Nf3 Rxf3 31. gxf3 Qh2+ 32. Kf1 Qh1+ 33. Ke2 Qxa1 34. Rxd6 Re8+ 35. Kd2 Qe1+ 36. Kc2 Qxf2+ 37. Kc3 Re3

I do it with notes in the above link with a PGN thingummy.

It ends here.

click for larger view

Lombardy then says: 'Holy $&!@.' (which could be the perfect pun for the game.)

Now some Elmer Fudd is going to pop up and try and appear clever by spilling a load of electronic vomit on that analysis.

It is possible it is a suggested variation in a note to the game somewhere, possibly in an American Mag.

It does show that someone did a piece of genuine research for the film. Which makes it all the more surprising that one or two of those other niggling errors crept in.

1.h4 h5 was a surprise, everything else I could let go but that was a chess bit and a needless error.

...Or was it?

That USB stick is now doing a tour of the office. No.3 came across wondering why recently me and No.5 were getting so friendly.

No. 3 will pass it to No 7 who wants it next and she will pass onto No.23.

Anyway...

It was No.5 who first gave me the idea the mistakes were put in on purpose.

She said something like other people will not know nothing about these mistakes you mention and from what else you have told me nobody knew the real Bobby Fischer. This all adds to the myth.

Straight from a non-player. It all makes sense.

He has the lopping walk right and the haunted look. And the hands in front of the face when 29...Bxh2 was played in games one. (see pic)

Spassky vs Fischer, 1972

Toby has obviously seen that and fitted it in.

(but then they have Fischer resigning when Spassky plays 30.g3. These are the niggling chess mistakes but I guess it makes good drama. )