The worst move of all time!

Avatar of aronian22
| 0

Hello again. Today, I was looking at some old articles, when I found one by GM Serper that looked interesting. It was a bracket, trying to figure out who was the best world champion. (SPOILERS: IT'S FISCHER) When I saw this, I had an idea. What if I did the opposite? And so, without further ado, here is the worst move of all time bracket. This is a long one, so settle in.

ROUND 1

First matchup: Anand-Grischuk vs Bacrot-Inarkiev.

This one isn't easy. At first glance, it seems like Anand-Grischuk should win. The stakes were higher, and additionally it was a double blunder, since a draw was agreed. But this game does have one problem, it was a blitz game. This makes the blunder a lot more easy to see happening in a time scramble. Meanwhile, Bacrot-Inarkiev is just a good old queen blunder. Sometimes you can't beat the basics.

WINNER: Bacrot-Inarkiev.

Second matchup: Saemisch-Capablanca vs Spassky-Fischer

This time, we find ourselves in a matchup of two very different blunders. Objectively, Capa's blunder was much worse and much easier to see. But there are two factors that swing this in Fischer's favour. First, the Fischer-Spassky game was played in a world championship match. Second, Capablanca had a history of getting distracted and blundering. On the other hand, Fischer almost never blundered, making this even more amazing.

WINNER: Spassky-Fischer

Third matchup: Deep Fritz-Kramnik vs Christiansen-Karpov

This one, oddly enough, is easy for me to decide. While Karpov's blunder was a blunder just for Karpov, Kramnik's was a blunder for the whole human race. This was when we all realized that we were the inferior beings, and that's powerful. Karpov's blunder.....was just a blunder.

WINNER: Deep Fritz-Kramnik

Fourth Matchup: Petrosian-Bronstein vs Nielsen-Karjakin

These two blunders are very similar. Both times, a player lost a major piece to a knight. However, this is again very simple. Petrosian dropped a queen and Karjakin dropped a rook. That's all there is to it.

WINNER: Petrosian-Bronstein

Fifth matchup: Chigorin-Steinitz vs Karpov-Sadler

This is a very hard one. Karpov dropping a queen is pretty shocking. Obviously, though, mate is more important. Also, the higher stakes help Chigorin win this one.

WINNER: Chigorin-Steinitz

Sixth matchup: Gibuad-Lazard vs Carlsen-Gagunashvili

This one was once again easy. Carlsen's blunder of mate is more elegant to me than Lazard's combination. He just wants to keep his pawn, but he runs into a worse fate. 

WINNER: Carlsen-Gagunashvili

Seventh matchup: Carlsen-Anand vs Von Popiel-Marco

Here, we have an interesting match. Carlsen-Anand is a double blunder, in that Anand didn't play Nxe5. But Marco's blunder was resigning in a winning position. But to me, a double blunder isn't really a blunder. However, resigning when you have a win? That's a real blunder.

WINNER: Von Popiel-Marco

Eigth matchup: Carlsen-Jones vs Negyesi-Honfi

Objectively, I believe Carlsen-Jones is a worse mistake. However, there's something enchanting about the simplicity of what Honfi missed. Also, Carlsen-Jones was a blitz game, so there's that, too.
WINNER: Negyesi-Honfi

ROUND 2

First matchup: Negyesi-Honfi vs Bacrot-Inarkiev

Here, both games involve the loss of a queen. But there's a big difference here. In Negyesi-Honfi, Honfi missed a trick at the end of a combination. But Bacrot-Inarkiev is just Bacrot dropping a queen. This makes it much more of a mistake.

WINNER: Bacrot-Inarkiev

Second matchup: Von Popiel-Marco vs Spassky-Fischer.

This one is interesting, but I think Von Popiel-Marco wins. Why? Well, I don't think Fischer knew he was making a mistake. I think he saw the risks and saw that it was the best way to win. But Marco believed that resigning was the only option. He really believed it.

WINNER: Von Popiel-Marco

Third matchup: Fritz-Kramnik vs Carlsen-Gagunashvili

To be clear, Carlsen's mistake is worse. The reason for this is that Kramnik's was a compilcated position, while Carlsen's was a simplified ending. But what about the battle of man vs machine, you ask? Well, Kramnik's blunder wasn't some kind of 'fall of man', but proof that humans are not as consistent as computers, something already proven.

WINNER: Carlsen-Gagunashvili.

Fourth matchup: Chigorin-Steinitz vs Petrosian-Bronstein

Chigorin-Steinitz is mate, but Petrosian-Bronstein is a measly queen. Enough said.

WINNER: Chigorin-Steinitz

ROUND 3 (Final Four)

Chigorin-Steinitz vs Bacrot-Inarkiev

Normally, I would say what I just said on the previous match. But there's a big difference here. Here, the knight on g8 is seemingly not an important piece. It's easy to miss. Still, Chigorin-Steinitz was a key game in a world championship. Despite some doubt, it still wins.

WINNER: Chigorin-Steinitz

Carlsen-Gagunashvili vs Von Popiel-Marco

This match is VERY hard. The reason for this is that they are complete opposites. Carlsen pushed too hard to win, and lost. Marco gave up when he had a win. But Magnus' blunder barely slips by. His position was simplified, and the mate was easy to see. Marco's win was just a tiny bit harder to see.

WINNER: Carlsen-Gagunashvili
ROUND 4 (Final Match)
Carlsen-Gagunashvili vs Chigorin-Steinitz
This is it. The final. The worst blunder ever. And I want you to decide. Is Carlsen-Gagunashvili or Chigorin-Steinitz a worse blunder? Vote in the comments, and I'll tell you who won in my next post. Goodbye!

This blog is dedicated to helping lower-rated players and beginners learn new things about chess, one article at a time.

 

Check out this page for all my posts in chronological order!

https://www.chess.com/blog/aronian22/links-to-my-other-posts