Just finished reading David Shenk's " The Immortal Game."  I highly recommend this book, which intertwines the spectacular match between Anderssen and Kieseritzky in London with a general history of chess. The book was highly entertaining and informative. Though I had read the notation of the game itself, I never realized all the drama that was swirling about both at the tournament and the Tavern just a few blocks away where the game actually took place. So I pose to you - was this the greatest game played? 

Probably...

not best but most familiar in the chess world. 

It was a bad game.  Sloppy play overall but it was a very good mate.  Kierseritzky got greedy.  A game typical of that era

KillaBeez wrote: It was a bad game.  Sloppy play overall but it was a very good mate.  Kierseritzky got greedy.  A game typical of that era

---

 Before I simply call you out as insane, my I point out that a good number of the sacrifices were sound? 

Yes I agree.  But if Kierzeritzky had played a proper defense, Anderssen would be down a rook and a piece for not enough compensation.  A big attack to be sure, but a player like Karpov would have found the refutes easily.  I am not denying that some were sound, but the number of opening principles broken was atrocious.