Fischer's Game Was So Complicated Commentators Thought He Lost 

Byrne is pronounced "burn". It is probably an old spelling, but I don't know.

However... while Bobby Fischer would side with Wesley So over Magnus Carlsen & Hikaru Nakamura as the real world champion, I'm not sure Bobby Fischer would side with Hans Niemann over Magnus Carlsen. If so, then I'm not sure what to think about this. Relatedly: It's possible FIDE lowered the time controls in the 2022 WFRCC to favour not Magnus Carlsen over Wesley So but Ian Nepomniachtchi over both Magnus Carlsen & Wesley So. Again, I'm not sure what to think about this. Source: ZS4ZPF

@@hansolowe19 Byrne is an Irish name and the spelling is correct

This is a legendary game. I can't believe you haven't covered it yet. Crazy! Such a gem! I really love how you explained the concept of the wrong rook so well. Great video!

Small correction though, on March 8 Capablanca died. He was born on November 19.

The best quotes are simultaneously painfull, funny and true.......yours (Paul Morphy's) is a good example

The ability to play 9LX is the sign of a gentleman or a lady. The ability to play 9LX well is the sign that you're not Magnus Carlsen. Source: ZS4ZPF Edit: Why the 24 likes? I'm saying Magnus Carlsen sucks at 9LX. Edit 2 : Wow 54 likes? Didn't realise so many people agreed with me that Magnus SUCKS at 9LX.

@@depausvandelilithkerk5785 i have an upgrade: The ability to play 9LX is the sign of a gentleman or a lady. The ability to play 9LX well is the sign that you're not Magnus Carlsen. Source: ZS4ZPF

@@nicbentulan Can you post again the previous lengthy comment you've written on why Magnus hates Americans?

@@user-cu6bo1sz8v chess is a waste of life. 9LX isn't.

ROFL.

Great line.

It works though

The good doctor, Dr. Tartakower was right!

this is truth

A perfect statement, marred only by the inaccuracy of missing a period at the end.

@@johngrey5806 lol do you think you're smart by phrasing your sentence that way?

@@mounirzouhari6453 your lack of punctuation and capitalization is shocking!

Verily, one cannot but applaud the fastidiousness with which the commenter scrutinized the original statement for its grammatical accuracy. Methinks, we ought to nominate them for the most prestigious award of 'Grammar Police Officer of the Year', for their unwavering dedication to the proper use of the Queen's English!

​@@johngrey5806bro think he the thinker

Well then he should be stripped for his medals as he was surely cheating in the same way as Hans was cheating. This should serve to stop idiotic judges from their judgmental behaviours when they have no proof and only assumptions. Hans surely appears as a swindler. The only way he can be judged is by catching him. That has not happened. Therefore he shall not be mistreated like he currently has been. So. It is apparently possible to play like our contemporary 2023 machines back in the 1960's. Then why are anyone ln Hans's neck now without evidence? Circumstantial evidence is indeed not enough.

Look at how long ago the evergreen game was

this is something of an exagerration if you study his book my 60 greatest games, he often gives long lines that dont really stand up to analysis. Even here at 6:54 the commentator mentions that Fischer had a prepared line that Averbakh showed actually doesnt work.

@@turnbackthealarm lol of course it’s an exaggeration…. Saying Fischer is a basically an engine is by definition an exaggeration… but thanks for the explanation

And a racist.

Liers will be kicked off!!!!!

Is this a metaphor or does he mean he played like a chess computer?

@@duffman18 they did not have engines, or good ones anyways at the time. Playing like a machine probably means like an unstoppable force.

@@edenli6421 I think he was referring to the way a machine performs a task without any humanity or sympathy. He's comparing Fischer to the efficiency of a machine but also making a point about how ruthless he was if you gave him an advantage

​@@wiebenijenhuis1825 God bless the true!

This game solved my dilemma of title of chess goat between Fischer and Magnus

@@chessvibes3182 yeah, the answer is Garry Kasparov

@@ayanbandyopadhyay7767 Kasparov was the strongest of the 4 K's by a small margin, the only K that ever played Fischer was Korchnoi, and Fischer was out of his league. Fischer beats any K easily. Magnus would give him trouble.

Tbf, he just had to beat US players..

@@dodekaedius Ha, fair, but Reshevsky and Benko were no slouches. And of course Fischer went on to take the world championship in convincing fashion, so he was plenty monstrous outside the US too. If he'd come up in his career with chess engines the way all today's GMs have, he'd give Carlsen a run for his money, no question.

Fischer definitely got mad that Byrne resigned. He was bitterly disappointed that he was unable to get all of his brilliancy into the record.

@@yume-e yah I woulda been mad too.

isn't it almost a sign of respect to know exactly when you lost..where you are simply showing you are a just as good player but got outplayed for this game

@@yume-e I'd like to see a reference for that. I mean Fischer could be angry for any reason but I dont recall anyone every saying that.

I don’t understand why Masters resign too early.. like Robert Byrne still had so much material.. kinda pathetic

Absolutely nuts with the Olympic match vs. Spasky. Fisher was in his hotel room by himself with no way to contact anyone because of Cold War politics. Spasky had the entire Soviet team in his room pouring over the game and coming up with lines. Fisher just shows up the next day and ends the game the way you would hustle someone in the park lmao 😂

It is very likely that Fischer's rating hadn't caught up to his actual playing strength, as well. His rating was still on the upward part of the curve; it hadn't plateaued yet. He would easily have broken 2800 had he kept playing at the same strength he showed in 1970-72.

No computers to help him he was a pure genius

​@@nekrataali I think William Lombardy was his second and they still corresponded. From what I remember from reading about the match, Fischer would do his own analysis, and then ask for Lombardy's (say, when Fischer was to continue an endgame the next day)

A 1972 rating of 2785 = a 2023 rating of 2850. Inflation.

When Donald Byrne played 13 year old Bobby Fischer (“the game of the century”), Donald also saw how he was about to be checkmated. However, realizing the extraordinary talent of this youngster who was an unknown at the the time, Donald Byrne made an interesting decision. He played the game out to the end, because he realized that this game would be published throughout the chess world.

Carlson: "what's different about Hikaru and I? Well...were simply..better at chess.."

Niemann: "Chess vibrates for itself"

@@johnsmoak8237Hikaru is to Carlsen as Bisguier was to Fischer

Bobby Fischer is dead

Why do you worship a traitor and racist anti semite?

He died so no birthday cake

@@vertexblue1007 Fischer died by his games live on.

well said.

With the exception of knights, that's where the belong. The bishops and queen are on powerful diagonals and the queen and king-rook are on open files. Of course if Byrne hadn't resigned on that move, the queen would have been advanced to h3.

@@JimBalter Thanks for pointing that out. I hadn't really considered that before, but now that you mention it it does seem to make sense.

I think they did have a "second" ... i believe Brady was Fischers second .. he wrote an amazing book about Fischer "Portrait of a Prodigy" .. great read ..

Now games are boring because it's all engine Learned moves and nothing surprising ever happens end it all goes to the end game every time

Two great forces known for their depth of calculation and sharp tactics, Fischer and Secretariat.

thanks, learnt something new, didnt know about the horse

@@nirmalyamisra Secretatiat was like a modern day Pegasus. That horse could fly!! 🏇

I never knew he had such a column, but Robert Byrne was strong so that would've been a cool column to read

Respect to the seniority 💯

Byrne was undoubtedly the best chess columnist ever. I use to buy The NY Times just to catch his column.

I confess I really don't see why resignation Was The only answer, which is why I don't win awards for brilliance.

I love protitutes😊

Very satisfying, right?

Ha! I had the same board 😎

It's not like he "found" the move; he had it planned.

You're looking for this: Chessnetwork - Bobby Fischer's 21-move brilliancy

@@JimBalter He found the move, there were no engines to prepare for games all these moves were ones he found on his own some before the game but he found them nevertheless.

I don't think everyone at the us chess championship were grandmasters (if you look at the table Donald Byrne is in last and he was an IM), US chess has gotten insanely stronger after Fischer

Not after Fischer, because of Fischer. @@Me-uv6kc

@@Me-uv6kc For a strong GM to win against even "only" an IM is no joke. It is not guaranteed. Even Carlsen doesn't always win against an IM.

Bobby Fischer is MTOAT if not GOAT. But I heard GOAT is just Magnus, Garry or Bobby. Well Magnus & Garry are cheaters, so Bobby is GOAT & MTOAT. Yay! Source: ZS4ZPF

Thanks man! Appreciate it

@@agadmator no worries! Your love for the game is an inspiration and has taught me a lot

That's true. Even if computer analysis says his moves weren't perfect since technically Byrne could have responded, Fischer seemed to have a sense of where Byrne was going, not just which moves were best. And, as this video showed, Fischer had ideas of what to do even had Byrne more properly responded. Fischer truly was one of the best chess players of all time if not the best depending upon how one defines it and accounts for modern changes in chess.

+1

#suggestion

#suggestion

#suggestion

#suggestion

Yes, that is what I meant :)

@@agadmator but ok, sorry about that.

⠀ Who do you think is the GOAT now? Bobby Fischer managed to make chess more of a big deal than anyone else before or since. Despite the new found popularity of chess with Internet streamers that began during the pandemic, it still isn't quite mainstream. 99 out of 100 people on the street that you ask will say they've never watched a Magnus Carlsen chess game, for example. Actually it's probably more like 999 out of 1000, who've never watched one or his games. Internet streaming is big but it's still quite a niche thing in the context of the whole world. Most people still just watch TV. But Fischer made it so all his big chess matches were watched and followed like Superbowls and World Series etc. Everybody was hooked, watching the matches. Especially the ones against soviet chess players. Fischer became a symbol of the west during the cold war because of that. Of course it's a shame Fischer became severely mentally ill and refused to take meds and get mental healthcare for it, and left the US to go into permanent self-exile, while he spouted off racist anti-semitic nonsense to anyone who would listen. But I'm ignoring that part, I'm only talking about his chess ability and how he made chess popular than it's ever been before or since, he's the cause of that peak. We've never seen anything like it. The only other times chess and similar games have become a popular widespre thing again in more recent decades is when chess grandmasters have played computers, because so many chess players and computer scientists said that computers were unable to beat a human, just because of the way they are. But that was disproven when Deep Blue beat Kasparov. And then much more recently, a computer finally beat the world champion at the game Go, decades after the first computer to beat the world champion of chess. Go is apparently much harder to program a computer for, because I guess there's significantly more possibilities. It's why no computer has been able to beat grandmasters at Shogi (Japanese chess) yet. Because in Shogi you capture pieces like normal but then you can actually use those pieces, place them on the board again to join your army (the pieces are all flat 2 sided tiles so you flip them over so that it'll be the colour of your team, so you won't get confused as to who owns which pieces all the time, but you do have to learn what the Japanese kanji written on each of them means, it's their name, and all the tiles are identical pieces of wood. It's a bit confusing for the first handful of games but yeah it's worth learning). But yeah, because you can choose to add pieces you've capture to your army to grow it (or choose NOT to do that) it means there's millions of times more possibilities that open up for each move you make, compared to chess, and no current computer or even supercomputer can tackle this problem yet. Once quantum computers become a thing though, it'll be enough to beat a Shogi grandma stir By the way you absolutely _MUST_ try shogi. It's my favourite form of chess, for sure. It's really so fresh and unique compared to chess and other variants of chess like Fischer Random Chess (aka Chess960). But it also is still mostly chess and you dna still apply what you know from chess to it. Though don't expect it to be easy to start beating people at it. Whenever chess grandma stirs have faced even low level Shogi grandmasters, the Shogi ones always win. Always. It's the same vice versa, Shogi grandma stirs that have never played or learned chess try to play even a low level chess grandmaster, the chess player always wins. Because only by playing a game do you learn every tiny little thing about it that's not written down anywhere in a book that teaches you to advance your chess playing or in a video guide for how to get better at chess or anything like that. And it's always those very fine margins that win chess matches at the top level. Everything the best grandmasters do is really subtle. It comes with playing chess for over 10,000 hours. Eventually you stop being able to see the board like normal, and instead just see all the lines each piece can travel in, and the dozens of different possibilities for the next 5, 8, even 10 moves ahead. How did I get onto this topic? I do apologise, I tend to ramble after I've had my morning coffee, which is what I've just drank. But you _DEFINITELY_ definitely definitely definitely definitely definitely definitely definitely definitely definitely definitely definitely definitely _DEFINITELY_ must try Shogi. You must. That's an order. A command. Because I mean, I'm pretty terrible at chess. I used to be in the chess club for years when I was a schoolkid, but that's decades ago now, and I couldn't beat a goldfish these days. Yet I enjoyed Shogi so much that it quickly became my favourite form of chess that I've played, even though I'm even worse at it then I am at chess. So someone who's actually good at chess, like you probably are, will get way more enjoyment out of it than I did. The more you know about chess, the more you'll be able to enjoy the differences. Again it's mostly the same as chess, like 70% is the same. But it's different enough that it feels like a whole new experience, something even chess variants like Bobby Fischer Chess, or Double Chess don't give you (though Double Chess is awesome in its own way just cos of how ridiculous it is lol, I wish some chess grandmasters would play it; essentially you have a 16x12 rectangular chess board, for 128 squares, double the 64 squares on a regular 8x8 chess board, you have 16 pawns instead of 8, 4 rooks/castles, 4 bishops, 4 knights, 2 Queens, and 2 Kings. Give it a go, on a smartphone app. I'm sure one already exists, for double chess) But yeah, play Shogi. Definitely play Shogi. There's already multiple Shogi phone/tablet/chromebook apps for Shogi, in English. I actually first found out about it and played it because of the Nintendo game 51 Clubhouse Games, or whatever it's called. It's got every kind of traditional game on there, chess is there obviously. But it also has Shogi, and I discovered early on that Shogi is more fun than chess. This Nintendo collection of games has easy modes for many of them. Which on chess is that when you click on a piece it'll show you the lines of where the piece can travel to, which is great for beginners. Well Shogi has the same thing, which is useful because yeah not everything is exactly the same, rhee are differences. And so a shogi phone app might he great once you've already learned how to play it, it doesn't teach you how to play and so you'd have to brute force it. If you have a Nintendo switch, definitely get the 51 clubhouse games game collection (it's called 51 worldwide games in my country, the UK, and it seems to have different names in every country it's released in, but the number 51 is always in the name, so that'll tell you what it is, plus looking at the description of it on a website or on the Nintendo e-shop, or on the back of the box if you buy it physically in a shop) But you absolutely must try Shogi!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Damn it I'm sorry I do apologise for this long rambling comment that has nothing to do with anything let alone the thing you originally commented. I just get stuck in a zone sometimes and have to keep writing until I finish my thought. ⠀

@@duffman18 Lol, Hi duffman, I'm the same except I usually pace around the room for 3 hours thinking, rather than writing it down. But you sound like me. I'm not trying shogi though, sorry. 🙂

​@@duffman18I never ever ever usually say this but...TL;DR

@@christophercarlone9945 Fischer the goat, made chess a global sensation even bigger than it is rn, play Shogi because it's cool.

​@@blucat4"Magnus" is undoubtedly the answer to that question. Tal, Fischer, Morphy, Kasparov... Sorry you guys never even had a chance against him (My opinion obviously).

Guys who hate Fischer says he got lucky. The guy he was playing made a mistake. They seem to say it after every game Fischer won. Fischer is either a genius or the luckiest player ever born. He got lucky to win 11 games here and the 20 in a row later on:)

@@larrylindgren9484 Hi, can I ask a question? I don't play chess, (I used to just a bit in school decades ago), but why is it so hard? I mean can't you just look at lines, horizontal and diagonal, and after awhile you would get to know all the sorts of combinations there are? Is that what Fischer did? Or it it a matter of him being able to visualise every combination for more moves into the future? Does anyone know how he did it? Did he explain it at all? Are there people who are so good at it they just don't play? Cheers.

Better than tal?

@@avg_user-dd2yb he defeated Tal a lot of times...

I believe he got money for games won not draws. So, Fischer played to win because he got paid more when he won. Fischer much took a draw. It lost him money.

Haha, yes, Fischer aka the Moriarty or Jack the Ripper of chess. That's grim but likely accurate way of putting it. He seemed to combine the artistry of a master composer or story teller with the brutal coldness of a machine is his games. I watched a dramatization of him as a kid once, not real but based on him in real life. It showed him playing with the pieces as if they were real characters in a story and the game of chess was just simulating real battles. I'm sure that wasn't really what happened but I like to think Fischer still was sort of like that. Like he had an understanding of chess on a totally different level than most other players. Sure he sounded like kind of an ass in interviews and strange, even rude, and very simplistic in chess approach but that was just his public presentation. His actual thought process during games (with more difficult opponents at least) was likely very deep and like he was composing a masterpiece.

(Or in any form of English.)

oh! and what do you think about Magnus dissing Fischer? Fischer didn't have high tech computers teaching him all the great moves, Bobby had to come up with strategies all on his own, and seems unfair that Magnus ranks Bobby so low..

"against far stronger opponents" Um, perhaps you mean higher rated.

Totally agree. That 20-game streak will never be approached again. I doubt seriously if anyone will be able to get a 10-game streak at the highest level.

@@judhudon6235 didn't Fabiano Caruana get a 7 game streak?

The way Spassky demolished, in Candidates matches, Keres, Geller two times), Tal, Larsen and Korchnoi between 1964 and 1968, when all those tremendous players were at their prime, is even more impresive than Fischer victories against Taimanov, Larsen and Petrosian. Fischer was a genious, but not the only one in the history of chess. The best ever??? Its a very debatable question with no effective answer

@@carlossimancas9867 Wellwhy anyone couldn’t till now get a perfect score the way Fischer did against top and champions, question your debatable mind… he has done it without engines and by no one has on his side and he buried Spassky too… yeah your intelligence is not even close to debatable

It used to be. Now 9LX is about truth. Chess is about mainly memory and prearrangement and then about truth. Source: ZS4ZPF

It's not *that* hard to see that white is vulnerable on the h3-f1 diagonal.

It felt like cocking a gun of a move.

No he was literally schizophrenic and paranoid

@@vertexblue1007 According to the people who he criticized and their apologists. I should start using that as an excuse whenever someone criticizes me. "What? No, I didn't do that. You're just a schizo!"

@@MrFreeGman it's well know the Russians were organizing draws but using facts to make up conspiracies doesn't make them true. He was schizophrenic and paranoid and very anti semetic. This isn't making things up, this is based on his own words and opinions of medical professionals

@@vertexblue1007 He was never diagnosed with a mental illness, nor medicated for one, and lived independently until the end. He is very clearly lucid, logiclal and aware in every interview with him that I've ever seen. These "medical experts" didn't even know him personally and were merely abusing their positions of authority because he said some naughty things about some protected groups; it's easier to just call someone schizo than to debate someone much smarter than you. Your slander says more about who you are as a person than anything else. As far as "anti-semitism" goes, you're just operating on a lower level and choose to ignore your inherent ability to recognize patterns. You choose ignorance. That's your choice.

@@MrFreeGman so you're a troll or you're just crazy

Everyone game from Wesley So is like a game from Bobby Fischer since Wesley So is Bobby Fischer's one and only successor in classical time controls.

Bobby Fischer is MTOAT if not GOAT. But I heard GOAT is just Magnus, Garry or Bobby. Well Magnus & Garry are cheaters, so Bobby is GOAT & MTOAT. Yay! Source: ZS4ZPF

@@nicbentulan you're a sad obsessed man

​@@nicbentulan If you meant cheaters by their accessibility to theories and engines, thats a based reason. Every1 has access. Chess now is the most competitive it has ever been. High level games are solved up to 20 to 30 moves and often brought to endgames. And we know magnus can squeeze a win out of even the most drawish endgames. Can bobby fight hours maintaining an equal game against magnus? + endgame?

It's obvious that you don't have enough brain cells for chess,so quit it

@@trapmango4110 of course not. i'm talking about when 1 - garry cheated judit in 1994 2 - magnus cheated alireza in 2019 3 - magnus cheated danya in 2021 4 - magnus cheated danya in 2022 5 - magnus cheated nepo in 2021

A significant one. You'd definitely have to be under 1500 to throw the game from that advantage, though I'd play it through just to make sure he don't mix some position up and hangs a queen. It happens