Thanks for the link. Good article, and good examples from GM play.
Below is a famous blunder by then-WC Euwe (black) against Lasker, Nottingham 1935. Watch how black hangs a piece on move 23. Notes by Alehkine.
Header
EVENT
Nottingham
SITE
Nottingham ENG
DATE
1936.08.25
ROUND
13
WHITE
Emanuel Lasker
BLACK
Max Euwe
RESULT
1-0
WHITEELO
?
BLACKELO
?
ECO
D12
EVENTDATE
1936.08.10
PGN
[Event "Nottingham"] [Site "Nottingham ENG"] [Date "1936.08.25"] [EventDate "1936.08.10"] [Round "13"] [Result "1-0"] [White "Emanuel Lasker"] [Black "Max Euwe"] [ECO "D12"] [WhiteElo "?"] [BlackElo "?"] [PlyCount "65"] 1. d4 {Notes by Alekhine} d5 2. c4 c6 3. Nf3 Nf6 4. e3 Bf5 5. Bd3 {This seems to promise even less winning chances than the more usual 5 cxd5 after which Black gets a satisfactory position by the manouver ... Qc8 and eventually ...Nfd7} e6 6. cxd5 {If first 6 Bxf5 exf5 and then 7 cxd5, Black would reply Nxd5.} Bxd3 7. Qxd3 exd5 {The position now reached is familiar with colors reversed, in a variation of the Caro Kann Defence (1 e4 c6 2 d4 d5 3 exd5 cxd5 4 c3) in which Black - as in this case White - has to choose between a "minority attack" on the Q side or a break in the center by e4. Dr. Lasker selects the second method, which gives him, however, only prospects for a draw.} 8. Nc3 Bd6 9. O-O O-O 10. Re1 Nbd7 {White's next move could not be prevented.} 11. e4 dxe4 12. Nxe4 Nxe4 13. Qxe4 {This looks like a drawing proposition, as after Black's next move further liquidation will be practically forced. But White had no objective reason to avoid a draw, as the alternative 13 Rxe4 Qf6 would now offer him attacking chances.} Re8 14. Qxe8+ Qxe8 15. Rxe8+ Rxe8 16. Kf1 {At this moment the game might safely be declared a draw; certainly with more reason that many other games in this tournament. That the draw was not declared here was only, I presume, because neither player offered one, for different reasons. Dr. Lasker, because (although he doubtless was perfectly aware that his isolated pawn is by no means a serious weakness) he was, theoretically at least, at a slight disadvantage; Dr. Euwe because as the new champion he felt obliged to exploit even the shade of a winning chance. The unfortunate result was the ending catastrophe, which changed the normal course of the tournament.} Nb6 17. Bd2 f6 18. Re1 Rxe1+ 19. Nxe1 Kf7 20. Ke2 Ke6 21. h3 Nc4 22. Bc1 Bc7 23. Kd3 Ba5 {?? This move is hard indeed to understand, as even the answers 24 Nc2 or 24 Kxc4 Be1 25 Be3 would yield Black no advantage.} 24. b4 {! The rest of the game requires no comment.} Bxb4 25. Nc2 Bd2 26. Bxd2 Nb2+ 27. Ke3 Kd5 28. Bc1 Nc4+ 29. Kd3 Nb6 30. Ne3+ Ke6 31. Nc4 Nc8 32. Na5 Nd6 33. Bf4 1-0
@eladarsaid Is it a blunder if you do not know the move is a blunder? Or would you just be considered a lesser player because you do not understand why that move really sucked.
I guess the real question is if a blunder is a relative term.
If the other player is sharp, he will show you exactly why it was a blunder. If he misses it and YOU notice it a move later but it is still your move, you can correct the situation, limit the damage.
Is a mistake automatically a blunder? Wiki says no.
Well it would be easy to call a move a blunder if say you took a protected pawn with your queen with no plan. But if you sac'd the queen like that for a combination that ended in mate, that would rather change the assumption of calling it a blunder. So it depends on what happens down wind.
