So i just played this game, and I have to admit that the final position is just awesome. 14 moves in, we have only traded a knight for a bishop, and yet it's already checkmate. But what makes this game really perfect, it's that it is perfect. My good friend the computer analysis tells me that I didn't make a single inaccuracy in the whole game. Basically, if I had been a supercomputer, I would have played the same way.

Of course, whiners and haters of all things beautiful will say that if black had played the best move (13...c6) instead of that last mistake right here, the game would have reached what my aforementioned friend likes to call a drawish position, with only a .25 advantage for white. But if opponents always played their best options, how could we ever get to play beautiful moves?

I would like to thank : my mom, for allowing my greatness to shine on this ugly world, my dad, for the same reasons, my friends, for supporting me all those years when I wasn't as brilliant as I am right now, and finally tactics trainer, for stuffing endless smothered mate problems down my throat. Also you, my audience, because by making you smarter and giving you beauty, I can make the world a better place.

Thank you.

edit : hum looks like the diagram is not working, here is a link for the game : http://www.chess.com/echess/game.html?id=29952412

The thing about the supercomputer doesn't make sense, unless it was a supercomputer that analysed the game.

Thanks for sharing though. Smothered mates are nice - I have only acheived one in my time here so far.

Oh all right, so I am NOT a supercomputer, but I am a man, with feelings, and emotions, and a chess strengh of -2500, like my friend the analysis.

1. Your assumption that computer analysis is synonymous with perfection is flawed.
2. Rybka 2.2 likes 9. 0-0 better than 9. Be3 at a depth of 19.
3. At a depth of 18, Rybka 2.2 prefers 10. 0-0 with 10. Ra4 as a second choice rather than Nd5.
4. Regardless, playing the same moves as another of the same strength does not put you at the same strength, especially when the difference in time spent per move is so radically different. You may find that a program rated at 1400 also finds the same moves.

To give you a break from begrudgery, nice game! And it is a great feeling to get a clean sheet from the miserable nitpicking computer analysis - I've done it once, in a game a bit longer than yours (17 moves) where my opponent played badly.

 And much better for it! Supercomputers play so boringly.

Rather than make my own thread, I'm going to hijack yours.here's the most accurate game I've ever played( chess.com's engine says there's only three inaccuracies, which is damn good for me over 25 moves.)