A HUGE UPSET AT THE HACKENSACK DR OSTFELD MEMORIAL

Why is no one commenting??

I am, 4 years later. The winner just alluded to this game in a Facebook group. I hunted it down (thanks Google!) and will consider including it in The Fish That Roared book -- a collection of the greatest upsets (rated tournament games only) since 1950.

Wow. You know, there are other upsets as well that I have collected. Check out my study https://lichess.org/study/iJrH2Dor

Thanks Chessperson, I will take a close look at the games you showcased on your study page on that other site (hmmmm, I thought chessdotcom had bots here that would automatically delete any comments that mentioned, let alone contained links to, a rival chess server!).

Nice game thats a huge upset!

idk

wut

OK, I have gone through about half the games in chessperson's link on the other chess server (even though chessdotcom didn't zap his link, I still hesitate to mention the competitor's name here for fear they might delete it). 

The games are all quite low in quality of play (except the one that first brought me to this thread via a Google search: GM John M. Burke vs Paul Joseph). That might make them instructional: as Joel Johnson has pointed out, for readers who aren't very strong to learn from a game, there must be clear errors, whose punishment the game illustrates. But from my standpoint as an author collecting material for a book of exciting upset games, these are distinctly lacking in entertainment value. Most were quite boring, none featured sacrificial combinations, and most were filled with blunders and were decided by crude blunders -- even the one lost by 2550-rated IM Evan Sturt. (Again, Burke vs. Joseph was a notable exception, reasonably well played throughout, and decided by a pleasing if rather obvious 2- or 3 move combination based on an overloaded piece.)

For links to truly interesting (well-played and tactically exciting) upset games, see my next comment.

There is a Facebook group for people who enjoy replaying and discussing entertaining, well-played upset games won by club-level players. You will find plenty of such games in the book I am preparing, also named The Fish That Roared (2) The Fish That Roared | Facebook (the title comes from The Mouse That Roared, a 1959 comic film about a fictitious postage-stamp-sized country that declares war on the United States). 
Here are a few examples of the kind of games I'm talking about. I offered a series on this theme to chess.com, but after seeing the first article (based on this game (2) The Fish That Roared | Facebook), they blew me off. And they ended up running an upsets-themed video series by GingerGM and a Silman article showcasing puzzle positions from alleged upsets (that really weren't upsets at all -- just GMs beating stronger GMs). Neither of which delivered even 5% of the entertainment value as the examples I have collected.

(2) The Fish That Roared | Facebook

Edward W Formanek vs Dave Oshana (1970) (chessgames.com)

View Chess Game - Chess.com

 I think Hack N Sac should've sac'd his coach after that.

The Burke-Joseph game with useful annotations can be viewed here:

https://www.facebook.com/groups/942969445790845/permalink/3626763177411445/

Yeah, most of those games were pretty blunderful and thus very low-quality. However, I'm surprised that you overlooked a few other games that had no major blunders- simply a vastly lower rated player defeating a higher rated player. Look at game#9 on the study, which was Sylvander vs Milovanovic. Sylvander was rated 1600, Milovanovic was rated over 2200, and the latter player had an early advantage but eventually made too many positional errors that cost him the game. Sylvander played at the local chess club I went to (everything's currently on hold), and I was able to beat him several times, and this was when I was a beginner. He even blundered away a whole piece on move 7 or 8 against me a year or two ago. Last year, an opponent of his made an illegal move early on in the game, and he didn't even see it. Thus, the fact that he was able to upset a NM is all the more impressive.

Also, I'm confused about why you overlooked Robert Stortz vs Mikhail Zlotnikov. That game had a few mistakes, but no horrid blunders. Stortz was rated about 1100, Zlotnikov was, and is an IM rated over 2300. However, Stortz held his own and the game petered out to a draw. That game, unlike Sylvander's, can be found on databases. I don't know if you want to show upset draws, but you should look at that game.

Also, you should show the Kamsky vs Mischeryakov game, because Kamsky is a world-class GM and he lost to a player who wasn't even rated above 2000 in this game. That game can also be found on databases and posted my own analysis of the game on this site.

Even the Cherubin vs Resika game deserves mention, because, even though Resika (2200) dropped a pawn for no reason in the late middlegame, Cherubin (1300) converted his advantage very nicely.

How does white win? Black lost on time???

William, feel free to post one or more of the games in The Fish That Roared FB group that you joined. That's a better place to debate it than here: the group has over 650 members, at least 100 of whom will see the post.... probably many more than will see a 4-year old thread here.
Also, I will send you my raw notes on the games via a FB Messenger message; you may have to specifically look for it because when you get a message from someone not on your Friends list, FB asks you if you're willing to accept it.