Announcement

Collapse

Forum Rules

Forum rules

(1) Posts are to be made in the relevant forum. Users are asked to read the forum descriptions before posting.
(2) Off topic posts are limited to active members who have actually posted on-topic in one of the chess-oriented sections in the past. Any user whose first post does not relate to chess will be banned permanently. Posts in the Introduction section do not count.
(3) Members should post in a way that is respectful of other users. Be tolerant at any time. Flaming or abusing users in any way will not be tolerated.
(4) Discussions on political and religious topics are not allowed. Posts containing elements thereof will be redacted or deleted and a temporary or permanent ban may be placed upon the user.
Discussions on politics in chess organisations and the way politics affect chess are allowed.
(4a) Drug use references are not allowed and discussions on drugs are not allowed.
(5) Members are asked to not act as "back seat moderators". If members have something to report they are welcome to bring it to the attention of moderator either by a PM or in this thread: http://www.chessforums.org/forum-new...moderator.html
(6) If you wish to report a PM please forward the PM to a moderator and leave a post here: http://www.chessforums.org/forum-new...moderator.html. Don't hesitate to report a PM if you believe it violates the forum rules, even if someone else has already reported a (similar) PM by the same user; having more reports makes it easier for the moderators to take action.
(7) These rules apply to forum posts as well as private messages (PMs).
(8) Members should post in a way which is consistent with "normal writing". That is users should not post excessive numbers of emoticons (smilies), large, small or coloured text, etc. Similarly users should not SHOUT or use excessive punctuation (e.g. ! and ?) in topic titles or posts.
(9) Members should use an appropriate, descriptive title when posting a new topic. Examples of bad titles include; "Help me!", "I'm stuck!", "I've got an error!", etc. Examples of good titles include; "New Game: Perseus - SomeOtherPlayer", "Two Knights Defense: Fritz Variation and sidelines", etc.
(10) Spam is not tolerated here under any circumstance.
(11) Continuously linking your own website to promote it is not allowed. You may use your signature (which will come up beneath all your posts) for this purpose.
(12) Members should refrain from posting without adding to the discussion. Posting just to increase postcount is not allowed.
(13) Combine your comments into one post rather than making many consecutive posts to a thread within a short period of time. This can be done by clicking the 'edit' button next to your post.
If your last post, which is the last in the thread, is very old you may use the following trick to make sure it's bumped up to the new posts. Click on the 'edit' button of your last post. Copy the content of the post. Click delete and delete your last post. Paste the content of the now-deleted post in a new post, add what you will and click 'submit reply'.
(13a) You are not allowed to make consecutive posts. If you post more than once without a reply from another user, all posts after the first will be deleted.
(13b) Exceptions may be made for specific types of threads.
(14) Warez are intellectual property (software/music/movies/tv-series/tv-shows/etc) either through download, serial, or crack in a manner that breaks its copyright and/or license. You are not allowed to give/link to/ask for/advocate/provide information for obtaining and the use of warez.
Bittorrent links are not allowed.
(14a) The following international treaties apply:
-Berne Convention for the Protection of Literary and Artistic Works (Berne Convention) (Berne, 1886)
-Universal Copyright Convention (UCC) (Geneva, 1952)
-Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) (Marrakesh, 1994)
-World Intellectual Property Organization Copyright Treaty (WIPO Copyright Treaty) (Geneva, 1996)
(15) Books published before 1920 are considered free of copyright and e-books thereof are not warez. Books published after 1920 with permission from the author are considered free of copyright and e-books thereof are not warez provided it can within reason be established that permission has been given. All other books are considered copyrighted and e-books thereof are considered warez.
(16) Usernames that contain obscene or vulgar language or denigrate individuals and/or organisations are not allowed.
(17) Users may only delete their own posts on the grounds that they constitute a severe breach of these rules. Even when this is the case, the editing of the post to effect repairs must at all times be considered first.
The emptying of posts (substituting the content by non-content) is explicitely considered a breach of this rule.
Deletion of whole batches of posts harms thread continuity and the forum as a whole and the Moderation team will take action; in the most extreme case an account may be permanently banned to preserve the posted.
(18) Administrators (Admins) and Moderators (Mods) reserve the right to edit or remove any post at any time. The determination of what is construed as indecent, vulgar, spam, etc. is up to them and not to forum members.
(19) Aforementioned Admins and Mods reserve the right to edit this list of rules at anytime.
See more
See less

Win despite material disadvantage

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Win despite material disadvantage

    I've been wanting to ask this for a long time. What are some of the most extreme cases in Chess in terms of winning with the biggest material disadvantage? These wins could be due to checkmate, to running out of time, to resignation, or whatever. Such stories could be from professional games, from amateur games, or whatever. They could be human vs. human or even human vs. computer. However, please restrict your answers to real-world games. I'm not asking about hypothetical "fool's" mates.
    Last edited by Black Dalek; 06-19-2012, 07:07 PM.

  • #2
    If you want to see wins with material disadvantages at the top level, check out an Alekhine database sometime. That man would sacrifice every single thing he had for a checkmate; awesome stuff!
    Alexander Alekhine is my chess hero.

    An eerie chess short story: The Empty Chair

    My newest chess story: Gamble: A Supernatural Chess Tale

    Comment


    • #3
      Don't know about the record, but I found some nice examples in a database. One of them is very famous.
      Attached Files
      Calculate chess title norm performances at http://skaktal.dk/en/norm.php: Tell about a player's games in a norm giving tournament, and get requirements for rating of opponents and score for the remaining games to get e.g. a GM norm.

      Comment


      • #4
        Thank you. I looked at those games, and found them quite interesting, especially that "Anderssen vs Kieseritzky" game. White wins in only 23 moves, despite being down by a queen, 2 rooks, a bishop, and a pawn.

        Clearly, that was the "very famous" one to which you referred. It was the only one of those 5 games that I found in chessgames.com (link). I'm lousy at analyzing games, but on that site, I found the following comment on Black's 18th move:

        It is from this move that Black's defeat stems. Wilhelm Steinitz suggested in 1879 that a better move would be 18... Qxa1+; likely moves to follow are 19. Ke2 Qb2 20. Kd2 Bxg1.

        I even found that game in the Wikipedia, under "Immortal Game", where it was thoroughly annotated.

        I also found it interesting that White wins in all 5 games you presented.
        Last edited by Black Dalek; 06-20-2012, 02:14 AM.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by Black Dalek View Post
          I also found it interesting that White wins in all 5 games you presented.
          Well, that is because I only searched for positions with black material advantage in games where white won in the database, and not the other way around.
          Calculate chess title norm performances at http://skaktal.dk/en/norm.php: Tell about a player's games in a norm giving tournament, and get requirements for rating of opponents and score for the remaining games to get e.g. a GM norm.

          Comment


          • #6
            Ah. And here I was beginning to wonder if it was due to some advantage in playing White. Thanks for clarifying.

            Comment


            • #7
              Black can also win! To prove that I also found 5 games where black wins with a big material disadvantage:
              Attached Files
              Calculate chess title norm performances at http://skaktal.dk/en/norm.php: Tell about a player's games in a norm giving tournament, and get requirements for rating of opponents and score for the remaining games to get e.g. a GM norm.

              Comment


              • #8
                Interesting. Those examples are not quite as extreme as the Immortal Game, of course, but they're interesting.

                (Then again, Hübner commented that in the Immortal Game, from the position following Black's 17th move, there are actually many ways to win, and he believes there are at least three better moves than 18.Bd6: 18.d4, 18.Be3, or 18.Re1, which lead to strong positions or checkmate without needing to sacrifice so much material.)

                Comment


                • #9
                  My goodness. I don't know if it was worth it for you to spend the better part of a day on this silly little question of mine, unless you REALLY wanted to post it. I mean, I don't understand Chess one tenth as well as the average poster on these forums.

                  I'll examine the game in a minute, but first, I just thought I'd make this suggestion: in your pgn file, get rid of the "#" and replace it with " 0-1". Maybe then the viewer will show the last move.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    I've made a total hash out of trying to post the pgn, BlackDalek, so I'll just post it below, without the java-stuff. Sorry!

                    Was no bother looking for it..when I read your post/topic I recalled the existence of the game, then obsession took over and I had to find it...did the search more for my own curiousity/peace of mind than anything! Strictly "dumb luck" that I managed to find it. Made a career last night transcribing the descriptive notation into algebraic, that was fun--NOT! LOL

                    Like I wrote in my now-deleted botched posting, it's an old game, not a good game, where around move 35 as Black I finally "woke-up" and realized I'd better "do something", so I threw together a little plan which worked ONLY because my opponent wasn't playing any better than I was--he totally played into my half-baked plan, and I won. I was down two bishops, a knight, and a pawn, so I had a serious material deficit, yet pulled off a win

                    [Event "ChessDay"]
                    [Site "JR's"]
                    [Date "1969.May.5"]
                    [Round "2nd Game"]
                    [White "J R"]
                    [Black "Me"]
                    [Result "0-1"]

                    1. d4 d5 2. Nf3 f6 3. Nh4 Bg4 4. f3 Bh5 5. g4 Bg6 6. Bh3 Qd7 7. O-O e6 8. a4 Nc6 9. Qd2 Nb4 10. e4 O-O-O 11. a5 Be8 12. b3 Nc6 13. Ra4 Bb4 14. Rxb4 Nxb4 15. Qxb4 Qd6 16. Qd2 g5 17. Ng2 h6 18. Nc3 Qb4 19. a6 Bb5 20. Nxb5 Qxb5 21. axb7+ Kxb7 22. Ba3 Qa6 23. Bc5 h5 24. gxh5 Rxh5 25. Qb4+ Kc8 26. Bg4 Rxh2 27. Kxh2 dxe4 28. Re1 f5 29. Bh3 Nf6 30. f4 Ng4+ 31. Kg3 e5 32. fxg5 Rg8 33. Be7 Qb7 34. Qa3 Nh6 35. dxe5 Kb8 36. Kf4 Qc8 37. gxh6 Qe8 38. Ne3 Qh5 39. Bxf5 Qf3#
                    Last edited by Celadonite; 06-20-2012, 07:47 PM.
                    "They work at the pace of amnesia."--M. Bloch

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by Celadonite View Post
                      ...so I threw together a little plan which worked ONLY because my opponent wasn't playing any better than I was--he totally played into my half-baked plan, and I won. I was down two bishops, a knight, and a pawn, so I had a serious material deficit, yet pulled off a win
                      So basically, you're saying that White's last move, 39. Bxf5, was the big blunder that lost him the game. After 38... Qh5, White should have played 39. Qb4+ (to protect that rook) and 40. Bg2 (to protect the f3 square from the queen). Then he'd have avoided the mating attack.

                      Then the best you could do, in terms of winning material, would be 40... Rg4+ 41. Nxg4 Qxg4+ 42. Ke3 Qxg2. You'd have won two minor pieces, but at the expense of a rook, and you'd have been left with nothing but a queen and 4 pawns, while he'd still be a rook and a bishop up on you. Is that the idea?

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by Black Dalek View Post
                        So basically, you're saying that White's last move, 39. Bxf5, was the big blunder that lost him the game. After 38... Qh5, White should have played 39. Qb4+ (to protect that rook) and 40. Bg2 (to protect the f3 square from the queen). Then he'd have avoided the mating attack.

                        Then the best you could do, in terms of winning material, would be 40... Rg4+ 41. Nxg4 Qxg4+ 42. Ke3 Qxg2. You'd have won two minor pieces, but at the expense of a rook, and you'd have been left with nothing but a queen and 4 pawns, while he'd still be a rook and a bishop up on you. Is that the idea?
                        I wasn't playing good chess or analzying at all deeply at the time of the game, nor was my opponent. There was precious little calculation occurring anywhere in that game. Not nearly as much as you just wrote regarding, I assure you LOL

                        I only knew via intuition , not calculation, around move 35. that I had to get my queen over near his king, and that with my rook, and hopefully one or two pawns that'd survive I could "put something together"--if he didn't move against my King, as he should have been doing.


                        I figured he'd take my knight, so I left it hanging as bait to buy time. As I had expected, or wished, he took it. I was buying time to scurry my Queen into position. I'd not anticipated he'd play 39.Bxf5....he did, though, and it sealed my win---the last blunder of the game, I guess

                        A friendly little mangey-mutt of a game, nothing more. Only posted it to your thread as it satisfies the premise of winning with a serious material disadvantage. Probably a poster-child for cautioning against gobbling material when you should be concentrating upon attacking the King, nothing more.
                        Last edited by Celadonite; 06-20-2012, 09:44 PM.
                        "They work at the pace of amnesia."--M. Bloch

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          See these. Someone put together a collection:
                          Odds games

                          Morphy's Games:
                          Morphy's Knight Odds Match vs Thompson
                          With odds.

                          Milov vs Rybka was a match with odds.

                          This game was played at exchange odds (Ra1 and Nb8 removed)

                          [Event "?"]
                          [Site "?"]
                          [Date "2008.09.14"]
                          [Round "2"]
                          [White "Rybka"]
                          [Black "Milov, Vadim"]
                          [Result "1/2-1/2"]
                          [FEN "r1bqkbnr/pppppppp/8/8/8/8/PPPPPPPP/1NBQKBNR w Kkq - 0 1"]
                          [SetUp "1"]

                          1. e4 c6 2. Nf3 d5 3. exd5 cxd5 4. d4 Nf6 5. Ne5 a6 6. Bd3 g6 7. O-O Bg7 8. Re1
                          O-O 9. c3 Be6 {Rybka is out of book}
                          10. Nd2 Qc8 11. Bc2 Bf5 12. Bb3 a5 13. Nf1 Bd7 14. a3 e6 15. Bc2
                          b5 16. Nd3 Bc6 17. Bf4 Re8 18. h3 Ne4 19. Ne3 Ra7 20. Ng4 Qd8 21. Qc1 f6 22.
                          Bh6 Qe7 23. Nf4 Qf8 24. Bxg7 Qxg7 25. c4 bxc4 26. Bxe4 dxe4 27. Qxc4 Bd5 28.
                          Nxd5 exd5 29. Qxd5+ Kh8 30. Rxe4 Rxe4 31. Qxe4 h5 32. Ne3 f5 33. Qh4 Kh7 34.
                          Nc4 a4 35. d5 Re7 36. f3 Re2 37. d6 Rc2 38. Kh2 Rc1 39. Qf4 Rd1 40. Qe3 Qd4 41.
                          Qe7+ Kh6 42. Qf8+ Kh7 43. Qf7+ Kh6 44. Qf8+ Kh7 45. Qf7+ Kh6 46. Qf8+ 1/2-1/2

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Oookay!

                            I have to get this off my chest. I mean... yes, I saw some impressive games on this thread, but somehow, I didn't think such a thing would ever happen to me. Sure, I must have seen a zillion puzzles where it happens. "White has a huge material disadvantage, but can mate... by giving up even MORE material." I would read that, shake my head, and reflect that the puzzle must be contrived. Such things don't really happen, right?

                            Wrong!

                            Just this week, I felt so confident of victory that I wasn't looking. I was Black and I had an extra rook and five pawns, while White had only an extra bishop. My opponent gave a few subtle signs of giving up, and continuing to play only in case I made a really dumb blunder. The board looked like this...



                            ...and it was my turn. You want to figure out what I should have done, before I give it away? I'll spoilerize it.

                             click to show


                            EDIT: And... for some reason, the spoiler doesn't work. I click on "click to show" and nothing happens. In case that's true for you too, here's what I put under that spoiler:

                            I should have avoided the trap with 40... f6. Instead, I confidently thought I'd chase away the queen with 40... Rad6. White then mated me in two... by sacrificing even MORE material, and a whole rook at that! 41. Re8+ Rxe8 42. Qg7#!

                            Of course, one major reason for my defeat is that after castling kingside and facing advancing pawns, I stopped those pawns with 28... g6. Usually, with a kingside castle, I advance my h-pawn, not my g-pawn, to avoid back-rank mates. With my opponent controlling the g7-square, I should have known to watch out for that. <sigh>
                            Last edited by Black Dalek; 06-23-2017, 07:29 PM.

                            Comment

                            Working...
                            X