I have one book which contains this game with annotations. The authors do not even give a question mark to Bxb6 probably because they assess everything else as hopeless. The alternate lines given are 18.Bxe6 Qb5+ 19.Kg1 Ne2+ 20.Kf1 Ng3++ 21.Kg1 Qf1+! 22.Rxf1 Ne2# mating by force or 18.Qxc3 Qxc5! 19.dxc5 Bxc3 20.Bxe6 Rxe6 black has an extra pawn plus a much better position or 18.Bd3 Nb5 19.Qa4 Qc7 black has an extra pawn and a better position. So it is concluded here that Byrne made the best practical choice of taking the queen and praying as his position was bad/losing after 17.Be6 anyway.
Annotation of 18. Bxb6? in the Game of the Century
Sort:
Sep 13, 2018
0
#3
There's no universally agreed upon rules for when single or double ? or ! should be used.
?? is usually for blatantly bad blunders. The devastation should be quick (only 1 or a few moves) and obvious (like losing your queen).
The whole computer evaluation thing, like if it drops a certain number of points, is IMO somewhat silly. Engines don't take into account practical considerations.
I have read a bunch of annotations of the Game of the Century played by Donald Byrne and Bobby Fischer in 1956, and after Fischer's ingenious queen sacrifice on his 17th move (17... Be6!!), Byrne decided to take his queen (18. Bxb6?). All of the annotations I've seen have this move by Byrne as a mistake (annotated with one question mark). But this move cost him an immediate loss of his position and the game became hopeless for Byrne. Because of how catastrophic his acceptance of Fischer's sacrifice was, I would argue that 18. Bxb6? is actually a blunder and should be annotated as such (18. Bxb6??). Computer analyses of Stockfish and Chess.com agree. So why is it always annotated as just a mistake instead of a blunder?