1. The game involved two of the greatest of all time.

2. It was in an important tournament.

3. It was decisive.

How often does that happen with a 100 mover?

<MaxxLange> That's more like it! Keep it up!

But I think it's true that we don't look a lot at long games, regardless of the cirucumstances in which they were played. How many books have you seen containing only miniatures? How many containing only games of 75 moves or longer?

Many of the sea serpents contain long, technical passages, which also makes them unattractive. There aren't many the caliber of Lasker vs Ed Lasker, 1924 or Bronstein vs Panno, 1973, which are utterly fascinating throughout.

3. It was decisive.>

4. It was an important game for the standings. After the 16th round Najdorf was in the lead with 13, Stahlberg and Reshevsky had 12, Gligoric 10.5, Euwe 10. Because Reshevsky only drew, Najdorf increased his lead and had the tournament in the bag.

<Phony Benoni> Maybe this guy was trying to make a joke too. Somehow I doubt it.

1) I think people tend to search for and kibitz on games they have seen published before. You know, like D Byrne vs Fischer, 1956 or Morphy vs Duke Karl / Count Isouard, 1858 or Rotlewi vs Rubinstein, 1907 or Steinitz vs Von Bardeleben, 1895. I seriously doubt this game has been published elsewhere, unless in a tournament book or a collection of a player's games.

2) Neither player has "Star power", at least not like Fischer or Capablanca or Morphy or Tal. This is not simply due to playing strength; you could make a good argument that both these players were stronger than Marshall or Nezhmetidinov, but the games of the latter players probably draw more kibitzes.

3. Usually, tournaments don't matter unless they have received a lot of publicity. I doubt that Cambridge Springs, 1904 was stronger than Amsterdam, 1950, but about 50% of its games have kibitzes as opposed to about 20% of Amsterdam's game.

4. This may have been a crucial game, but if kibitzers aren't familiar with the tournament they're not going to know that.

In short (or in long for this game), I think the games that get kibitzes are generally familiar games from well-known players. Of course there is serendipity, and one of the nicest things about a site like this are recommendations from other kibitzers. However, since less that 15% of the 572,000 games in this database have kibitzing, it's obviously more surprising for games to have kibitzing!

LOL!

Here is what I have to say on the subject. Some good points! But funny it is not.

And putting an end to pointless conversations is hard.

"so" is a relative pronoun in a dependent clause, and obviously refers back to the noun phrase predicate.

I'm surprised there aren't more high quality kibitzes to this game. ;)

Seriously, Maxy, the symbol :) indicates that the speaker is joking IN ANY LANGUAGE!