What is your favorite master or grandmaster game?

Hello fellow chessplayers:

For those who have played through and studied the famous games of great masters and grandmasters, I'm curious which game has influenced you and why it became your favorite.

The game that disclosed just how surprising and entertaining chess can be came from my first chess book, Edward Lasker's Chess for Fun and Chess for Blood (read my Amazon review here)  It was an offhand game played in 1912 at the City of London Chess Club between Edward Lasker and Sir George Thomas.  Many of you know the game that at move 11 began the most famous king hunt of all time.

However, as entertaining as Lasker-Thomas is, the game that cemented my lifelong love for chess at its most profound, competitive level came later in the book, in the "Chess for Blood" section.  It was the incomparable slugfest between Emanuel Lasker and his distant cousin Edward Lasker at the 1924 New York International Tournament.  It lasted 103 moves and ended in a draw.

A thorough, in-depth analysis of this game is found in Dvoretsky's Analytical Manual.

Okay, now post which classic influenced you, the one you perennially enjoy playing through because it never gets old.  Could it be Rubinstein's game against Rotlewi in 1907 or Nimzovich's "Immortal Zugzwang Game" against Saemisch in 1923.  Perhaps it's one of Alekine's shining examples against Bogoljubov in 1922 or against Reti in 1925?  Maybe you prefer more recent games such as the famous sixth of the Fischer-Spassky match or the even more modern sensibilities seen in one of the five Kasparov-Karpov matches.  Don't forget the creative tactical masterpieces of Tal or profoundly strategic wins of Petrosian.

So, what is your favorite master or grandmaster game?  Let everyone at Chess.com know.

     There are many games to fall in love with:  One that I liked was Rotlewi (I'm not sure of the spelling) vs. Akiba Rubinstein around 1906.  Go to the video section and enter "Greatest Chess Minds" and you will find a video of the game.  It's fabulous!

     Another game I was astounded by was Bryne versus Fischer, where Fischer sacrificed two knights for Bryne's f and e pawns plus Bryne's white-squared bishop on g2 and then Fischer had a won game because of the weakness of the white squares and the diagonal from a8 to h1.  Robert Bryne versus Bobby Fischer, 0-1.  I believe it was during a U.S. Championship.  It was an amazing middlegame conception and a wonderful game.

This might not be as historical as other games mentioned but it had a big impact on me. I believe it was Kasparov vs the upgraded Deeper Blue, 1997, first game. Kasparov patiently reorganized his pieces so that he could then sacrifice a rook for a bishop, creating connected passed pawns that could not then be stopped. All the while, during his piece reorganization, he was holding his King position together by a thread.

My favourite game is between Charousek vs Wollner .Where charousek played kings gambit and before 20 moves he checkmated opponent by sacrificing 2 queens...very informative & out of the box thinking game....must watch....

I consider chess more than a game, it is its own subculture.  More books have been written about chess than any other "game." However, chess extends beyond that subculture; with the florescence of various countries, chess has been part of that rise.  The best players in the 18th century were French, in the 19th century it was the British, Paul Morphy being the outlier, and America revealed its skill at the game in the first half of the 20th century before the rise of Russia; now China is becoming quite skilled at chess as played in The West.

My hope was that this thread would reveal what particular chess games mean to players who love chess as something more.  Unfortunately, it has not generated much interest, revealing that chess culture is not very deep here at chess.com.  It seems that for all too many players the games of the greats are there for one's self-improvement rather than works of art to be appreciated on their own terms, for their unique beauty or adamantine logic -- perhaps both.

Also, because I compare the great games to my piddling productions, I thought others might do the same.  In many ways I would rather play through the games of the masters than "create" my own, sort of like visiting a museum for Rembrandt, Van Gogh, Dali or Picasso rather than draw my own stick figures or dabble in finger painting.

Thank you Skinnyhorse, GalaxKing and Sachit_Yadav1 for seeing chess as more than just your next personal win.  In appreciation, I have listed your favorite games below.  Since I was a bit confused with Sachit_Yadav1 description, I have included two games between Charousek and Wollner, one with the Danish Gambit on display and the other sporting the King's Gambit.

My thanks to Chessgames.com for the PGNs.

Interesting game, and I know it was fun for you as the winner, but this thread is not about your best win but your favorite master or grandmaster game.  I don't think you qualify for those titles just yet, TungusGrunt.

Thanks for the great game, Lasker1900.  There were so many from the Zurich 1953 Candidates Tournament.

Game of the Century

Good choice, fischeriii.  Here it is with annotations.

Never forget about the Immortal:

Despite what engines may say about it.

the game could have also ended with 0-0-0 rather than Kd2. Also, didn't Lasker's opponent resign before the checkmate?

P.S. My favorite game is the "Immortal Game" between Alexander Alekhine and Lionel Kieseritzky. 

My favorite master game is Rubinstein's Immortal Game against Rotlewi (mentioned previously by others), though there are MANY other games I've enjoyed watching.

First, thanks for the post, kingofshedinjas.

Yes, engines are helpful but tiresome pains in the you know what, but they don't diminish this grand game of an attacking genius on one side and a inveterate materialist on the other.

By the way, American Chess Journal, Number 3, January 1996 edited by Christopher Chabris has a very detail, 22 page analysis -- yes, 22 pages -- of Anderssen's Immortal by Robert Hübner.  Hübner, a candidate for the world championship in 1971, 1981 and 1984, was the ultimate perfectionist; he never knew when to stop.  It is almost no exaggeration to say he could fill a page of analysis with the first move alone.

Best,
Bob

Thanks for your post, checkmate3141.

Yes, the game could indeed have ended with 18.O-O-O; Edward Lasker said he even considered it.  However, the game did go to mate with 18.Kd2.

What is strange about this game is how many different accounts there are of the year the game was played and the order of the first nine moves.  Edward Winter, a scrupulous chess historian, looked into this and wrote the definitive investigation into these discrepancies.  The one in my initial post has the correct date and game score.

By the way, the immortal game was between Adolf Anderssen and Lionel Kieseritzky.  Probably just a slip since Alexander Alekhine and Adolf Anderssen have first and last names that begin with the letter A.

Best,

Bob

Thanks for the post, edguitarock.

You might find it interesting that when Fischer wrote his list of the 10 greatest masters, he included Howard Staunton.  The list was initially published in Chessworld, Volume 1, Number 1, January-February 1964.  Click here for the article.

Best,
Bob

Thanks for posting, TheBlunderfulPlayer.  The game does culminate in one beautiful combination.

Best,
Bob