My Immortal Initiative Game

I was going to post additional five games before this one, but this one stands out clearly as the best chess game I've ever played. Now, you may wonder, why this very game? Because both me and my opponent played accurately, with no real blunders, rather with slight inaccuracies or harmless mistakes not easily spotted. Or at least I think it was so (I haven't really had it analyzed by an engine yet). But it was still a balanced game, in which I took an advantage right out of the opening, and which was also full of creative play, bravery and original ideas (at least compared to my other games, some of which you'll see in my future posts). It's also got a checkmate in the end! One is sure: it wasn't boring! I hope you like it! And a big thanks to JUANPARODI, for his contribution to this beautiful game!

I liked the 9th move! Surprising way to gain the advantage, I don't know if I would have seen it. Good game.

I just forgot to mention: comments, analysis and anything you might notice - it's all very welcome and appreciated!

Hey everybody, I've analyzed several moves using Rybka, so here it is:

Instead of 6. Bg5, Rybka recommends 6. Be3 and, much to my amazement, continues to build a Yugoslav Attack formation, and doesn't even think 6... Ng4 really bothers White, although after 7. Bf4 play slightly changes.

After 6. Bg5, instead of 6... Nbd7,Rybka recommends 6... Bg7, fianchettoing the Bishop as prepared by Black's previous move.

Next, after 6... Nbd7, Rybka still recommends that White claims a Yugoslav formation in some move order, instead of 7. f4.

After 7. f4, Rybka agrees with 7... Bg7, but can also play 7... h6 first, followed by 8. Bh4 Bg7. Nothing much changes, at least in my ideas as White.

Instead of 8... c6, Rybka agrees with me that 8... O-O is required. But after 8... c6, Rybka says 9. Nxc6! IS the best move, and also agrees with me about 9... Qb6! as the preferred answer.

Of course, Rybka says that after 10... Rb8, 11. Qxd6! is the best answer, but then, oddly enough to me, responds not with 11... Rxb2, but with 11... Rb6, and even though, White just continues with 12. e5, and Black till ends up three pawns down. If White, in the same variation, tries 12. Nd5, Rybka plays out 12... Rxc6 13. Qxc6, sacrificing an Exchange to slow White's attack down, but in the end White still wins, thanks to his material advantage.

Rybka prefers 13... Bxf6, and 14. Be3 (losing for White), because for 14. Bxf6 Qxf6! I thought Black drops a piece, but after 15. Bxd7 Rxb2 White must do something about his Knight, and Black wins the endgame. :(

And against 13... Re8+, Rybka says 14. Ne2 is better than 14. Ne4 (which is tactically flawed? Who would see that anyway?), and, after 15. Qd2, prefers 15... Qa6, after which White loses in a long run - anyone notice the nonsense pattern?

Well, I don't think the rest of the game needs much analysis. After all, we're all much more complete chess players than Rybka, or Fritz, or Shredder, or any chess machine for that matter. They might be all science about chess, but they do not understand the concept of sport, or of a game, and they will NEVER - EVER - EVER - be artists.

So, any thoughts?

This game is just beautiful. Good job. I'll try playing this Bg5 + f4 formation against the phillidor from now.

Thanks! I'm glad that I helped someone. Still, don't forget 5... g6 took away an important protection from Nf6.

my comment is that board style confuses the hell out of me.  I keep thinking bishops are knights and knights are bishops. :(

OK, I can change that in two ways. The first one is harder, and it involves calling Bishops Knights and Knights Horses in every place in the text I didn't. The second way is to change the pieces style. If you feel an urge for me to do so, just post it below!

 LOL....

It would be interesting to see a different piece style:D

OK now, I've changed the pieces style from Condal to Maya, and have also swapped the Winboard board for the Marble Green one to shed some light on the game. :D I hope you like it, but if you want something changed or returned to previous state, just post it below, as always. And tonydal, thanks for the advice and for the suggestion not to overexaggerate my opinion (although we all do that sometimes :) ), but you must agree, chess machines' one true goal is to win the chess games they're playing, and they always look to maximize their advantage in their games, while an artist is ready to sacrifice just a little bit of that advantage to make it aesthetically pleasing - it's just something a chess machine would never understand.

well played game.  Thanks for sharing. 

You're welcome!

Unless you leave them analysing for a few months... then you might get some sort of response!  I mean, grandmasters use them for opening study... but as a supplement. They research the lines on their own and use the engines to make sure they're not missing anything big.

Well, I didn't miss anything big in my opening analysis, so I guess Rybka was only helpful about confirming what I thought, not suggesting anything radically different.