My best win against a Grandmaster

Originally posted by David Tebb
...I don't understand why what I've posted can't be copied back into Winboard - but it doesn't work. I get an error message on move 5, saying an illegal move for some reason.

the notation for castling seems to have changed into numbers at some point. after replacing them with o-o it works for me. here's the version with replacements:



Tebb,David - Flear,Glenn
Cheshire -Leicestershire 1/4F Count Ch, 1988

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 a6 4.Ba4 Nf6 5.o-o b5 6.Bb3 Bb7 7.Re1 Bc5 8.c3 d6 9.d4 Bb6 10.Be3 {At the time this game was played, the main line was the very sharp Bg5. I knew that my opponent was a great expert on the Archangel system, so decided to choose the less well known Be3 line. I didn't know much theory, but Be3 looked quite solid and easy to play.} 10...o-o [10...Nxe4?? would be a blunder, losing a piece after 11.d5] 11.Nbd2 h6 12.d5 [12.h3 is the most popular move here ] 12...Ne7 13.Bxb6 cxb6 14.Nf1 {A standard Ruy Lopez manoeuvre, intending to bring the knight to g3 or e3} 14...Nd7 {Black is preparing ..f5 in order to get some play on the Kingside.} 15.Ne3 f5 16.exf5 Nxf5 17.Nxf5 Rxf5 18.a4!? {This might seem a bit strange, allowing Black to undouble his pawns. But I wanted to be able to put a pawn on c4 at some stage in order to give solid protection to my pawn on d5.} 18...bxa4 19.Bxa4 b5 20.Bc2 {I could have gone back to b3, but wanted to put my bishop onto a better diagonal.} 20...Rf8 [20...Rf4 was probably a better option] 21.b3 {Continuing my plan to prepare c4} 21...Rc8 22.Qd3 Nf6 {Black obviously didn't want to allow Qh7 check} 23.Nd2 {Black was beginning to threaten ..e4, so I moved the knight. I now had a vague plan of playing Ne4 in order to exchange his defender on f6 and get at his King.} [I could also have played the immediate c4. Eg. 23.c4 Qc7 (23...e4 24.Rxe4 is a good exchange sacrifice for White) 24.Nd2] 23...Qb6 [A logical move, giving extra protection to the pawn on b6 and lining up the queen against the pawn on f2. However, Black had a safer option of taking on d5 with his bishop, which would have practically forced a draw. Eg. 23...Bxd5 24.Rxa6 Qc7 25.c4 (25.Re3 is less clear) 25...bxc4 (25...Qc5; 25...Kh8) 26.bxc4 Ra8 (26...Qc5) 27.Rea1 Rxa6 28.Rxa6 Ra8 29.Rxa8+ Bxa8 30.Qa3= (30.Qg3=; 30.Qh3=) ] 24.c4 Qc5 {Putting pressure on c4 and d5. He had a couple of reasonable alternatives such as [24...Rf7; 24...Rc7]} 25.Ne4!? [I also had safer options such as 25.Rac1 ; 25.Re2] 25...Nxe4?! {Another natural move, but a definite mistake. He could have defended with [25...bxc4! 26.bxc4 (26.Nxf6+? Rxf6 27.bxc4 Qxc4) 26...Qxc4 (27.Nxf6+? Rxf6 28.Qh7+ (28.Qxc4 Rxc4) 28...Kf7–+) 27.Qxc4 Rxc4 (28.Nxd6 Rxc2 29.Nxb7 Rb8 (29...Nxd5) ) 28.Bd3 Rd4 29.Nxd6 Rxd3 (29...Bxd5 30.Bxa6=) 30.Nxb7 Nxd5 (30...Rb8 31.Nd6 Rxd5 32.Rxa6 Rd8 33.Nf5=) 31.Nc5 (31.Rxe5=) 31...Rd2 32.Ne4 Rd4 33.Rxa6=]} 26.Qxe4 Rf6 {Perhaps Black should have taken on f2 [26...Qxf2+? is bad. Eg. 27.Kh1 Rf6 Black has nothing better 28.Qh7+ Kf7 29.Bd3! (This is much stronger than 29.Bg6+ Rxg6 30.Rf1 Qf6 31.Rxf6+ Rxf6) 29...bxc4 30.bxc4 Qh4 (30...Qd2 31.Rf1 Qg5 32.Rxf6+ Kxf6 33.Rf1+ Ke7 34.Bg6+-) 31.Rf1 e4 32.Rxf6+ (32.Be2+-) 32...Qxf6 33.Rf1 exd3 34.Rxf6+ Kxf6 35.Qxd3+-; However he could have taken with the rook. 26...Rxf2!? 27.Qh7+ (27.b4 Qxc4! is also very interesting but unclear) 27...Kf8 (27...Kf7 28.Bg6+ Kf6 29.Bh5+-) 28.Bg6 (28.Bd3!?) 28...bxc4 29.bxc4 Ra2+ 30.Kh1 Rxa1 31.Rxa1 Qxc4 32.Qh8+ Ke7 33.Qxg7+ Kd8 34.Rd1±]} 27.Qh7+ Kf7 28.Bf5 Re8? [28...Rf8! was a better defence, although White would still have a large advantage. Eg. 29.b4! (29.Be6+ Ke8=; 29.Re3 Bc8 30.Bxc8 Rxc8 31.Rxa6) 29...Qxc4 30.Rac1 Qf4 31.Be6+ Ke8 32.Rf1+-] 29.Re3 [There was no need to rush in with 29.Be6+ Rexe6 30.dxe6+ Rxe6 (30...Kxe6 31.Qg8+ Rf7 32.Qe8+) 31.Qf5+ Ke7 32.Qg4±] 29...Bc8



30.Rg3! Rg8 {Forced [30...Bxf5?? 31.Qxg7#]} 31.Be6+! Bxe6 32.dxe6+ Ke7 [32...Rxe6? 33.Rf3+ Rf6 34.Rxf6+ Kxf6 35.Qxg8+-; 32...Kf8? 33.Rf3! Rxf3 34.gxf3 e4 (34...Qc7 35.Qf5+ Ke8 36.Rxa6+-) 35.e7+ (35.h4+-) 35...Kxe7 36.Qxg8+-] 33.h3!? {I could have defended the pawn with my rook, but preferred to sacrifice it and keep the rook active rather than have it tied down in defence. Also my King will be much safer on h2. [33.Ra2 Qc8 34.Rxg7+ Rxg7 35.Qxg7+ Kxe6 36.Qg4+ Rf5 37.Rd2+-; 33.Rf1 Qc8 34.Rxg7+ Rxg7 35.Qxg7+ Kxe6 36.Qg4+ Rf5 37.Rd1± (37.cxb5 axb5 38.Rd1) ]} 33...Qxf2+ [33...Rxf2 34.Kh2 Qc8 35.Rxa6 Qxa6 36.Qxg8+-]} 34.Kh2 Re8 [34...Rff8 35.Rxa6 (35.cxb5 axb5 36.Rg6 Qf4+ 37.Kh1 Ra8 38.Rxg7+ Rxg7 39.Qxg7+ Kxe6 40.Rxa8+-) 35...Qf4 (35...bxc4 36.Ra7+! Qxa7 37.Rxg7+ Rxg7 38.Qxg7+ Kxe6 39.Qxa7 cxb3 40.Qb7+-; 35...Kxe6 36.Qg6+ Rf6 37.Qg4+ Ke7 38.Qe4+-) 36.c5! dxc5 37.Qd3 Rd8 38.Qxb5+-; 34...Rgf8? 35.Rxg7+ Kxe6 36.Re7#] 35.Qxg7+ [35.Rxa6; 35.Rxg7+ Kxe6 36.Qd3] 35...Kxe6 36.Rxa6 {I realised that I was totally winning. My only problem was that I had only 2 minutes left on the clock to reach the time control on move 40} 36...e4 37.Ra7 Ke5 38.Rb7 bxc4 39.bxc4 [39.Rb5+ would have won more quickly. Eg. 39...d5 (39...Ke6 40.Qg4+ Ke7 41.Rb7+) 40.bxc4+-] 39...Qf4 40.Qd7 Rfe6 [40...Rff8 41.Rb5+ Kf6 42.Qg7+ Ke6 43.Qg6+ Kd7 44.Rb7+ Kc6 45.Qh7+-; 40...Rg8 41.Qb5+ Kd4 42.Qd5#] 41.Rb5+ {We had reached the time control and It's mate in two. Flear resigned. Unfortunately despite this win and a few other good results, Cheshire lost the match by a large margin. But we weren't too disappointed, as Leicestershire were a great team.} 1–0

Originally posted by stevetodd
I know what you are saying about it being a semul David but I think you are by far the least impressed out of the whole site about that win over Kasparov. What was Kasparov's score in that semul can you remember?

I think it was 30 boards and Kasparov lost two games (to me and Robert Furness) drew two or three (one was against my friend Tom Wiley) and won the rest.

Originally posted by wormwood
the notation for castling seems to have changed into numbers at some point. after replacing them with o-o it works for me. here's the version with replacements:



Tebb,David - Flear,Glenn
Cheshire -Leicestershire 1/4F Count Ch, 1988

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 a6 4.Ba4 Nf6 5.o-o b5 6.Bb3 Bb7 7.Re1 Bc5 8.c3 d6 9.d4 Bb6 10.Be3 {At the time this game wa ...[text shortened]... a large margin. But we weren't too disappointed, as Leicestershire were a great team.} 1–0

Thanks. That seems to have fixed it and it works fine in WinBoard now.

Originally posted by GinoJ
A win against "World's Greatest Chess Player" is the best win you can ever get. Maan, c'mon do not be so humble. That guy beat Deep Blue.

No, Deep Blue beat him.

Originally posted by cmsMaster
No, Deep Blue beat him.

Kasparov won the first match 4-2, but lost the rematch 3.5-2.5.

I believe he intentionally threw the last game of the rematch. The Caro-Kann was about the first opening Kasparov learned. He knew better than to play the early h6. Perhaps Kasparov intended to get out of Deep Blue's opening book and he did not have much respect for the engine; his comments indicated that he was tired of the match. It's at least true that he had no desire to play the last game.

Deep Blue
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deep_Blue

An Analysis of the Games, but not the moves of the rematch:
http://www.cs.vu.nl/~aske/db.html

Originally posted by Yuga
Kasparov won the first match 4-2, but lost the rematch 3.5-2.5.

I believe he intentionally threw the last game of the rematch. The Caro-Kann was about the first opening Kasparov learned. He knew better than to play the early h6. Perhaps Kasparov intended to get out of Deep Blue's opening book and he did not have much respect for the engine; his comments i An Analysis of the Games, but not the moves of the rematch:
http://www.cs.vu.nl/~aske/db.html

the Caro-Kann rocks...
it is the most reliable, nontheoretical (as in Sicilian (bleh) opening i use