I always give the white the finger ^^

LOL!

I'm commenting here in a shameless attempt to bump this back up so that people notice this. I really curious as to what people thought of this game (not so much my presentation) given its highly unusual characteristic. Also because I spent two days working on this game, I don't want it to just disappear with a whimper.

It's interesting how Andersson fails to adapt when the position's characteristics change.

Thanks for commenting Hitch ;) I think, given Andersson's great strength at that time, Basman's psychological warfare was a complete sucess. Andersson looked like a patzer at the end. I wish I knew more details about his and other's reaction to this game. It was one of Basman's few wins from this event so it surely caused a stir.

I guess it's a psychological trap (lack of objectiveness because of the earlier events in the game) and even the strongest chess-players aren't immune against that!

for an opening scientist like me this game is (nearly) unbelievable. To waist 12 moves in a normal position should be punished. Does Rybka dont find a winning continuation for white?

Strangely not- Basman, even with the waiting moves, is apparently playing perfect defensive chess. According to Rybka, white has a modest advantage (until the knight exchange) that didn't change at all after each of Basman's moves- no tactics were found until Andersson self-destructed.

I love Basman :mrgreen:
Many thx for sharing

it seems very strange that there was no clear way to break through. it reminds me a bit of how computers will often get beaten by this kind of strategy. Or a bit like on of those opening systems like the hippo where you just sit and wait. I think from the start, andersson played a bit too passive and allowed basman's strategy to prevail.

The truth is probably that it's exactly the other way around. Andersson wanted to find a way to break through, but it was not there. He still thought it had to be there and "broke through" and lost. He wasn't too passive, he did too much. Basman on the other hand just sat there and waited for Andersson to make mistakes, which he exploited right away. Sitting around and doing nothing is quite difficult to do in a skill-full way and Basman deserves a lot of credit for doing it here! Most of us would've lashed out and lost.

Just wanted to say that you are doing a great job with these videos on British chessplayers and i rated this one Five Pawnz. Basman is a unique character in the history of chess.

Ooooohhh! I remember this game... saw it in some magazine, can't remember if it was Chess Life & Review, but everyone was laughing at it back then. BTW, Basman didn't get his IM until '80 (if my memory serves me), all the more reason this game made the news.

There is a place in this chess world for people like Basman, but he is a naturally strong player and others who emulate his style are only hampering their own chess development - but that's just my opinion.

Basman is an intelligent guy who found a niche for the odd-ball approach to the game. He has also put out quite a few books on these weird openings and has a bit of a cult following. I don't necessarily think this is a good thing. Basman understood classical chess, lower rated players still need to hone their chess skills and using unorthodox openings may hinder this development. We have a few die-hards here in Arizona who play this weird stuff and they never seem to rise above 1800 for some reason. Their stuff is good enough to knock off people their own rating, but against higher rated players they usually get goose eggs.

Though I trashed the Trompowski in one of my recent videos, it is a much more sound opening than a lot of what Basman has come up with and I don't fear the Tromp, so why should something more questionable cause me any concern?

I have not run this game on Rybka and probably wont, but I can tell you why Rybka doesn't find something better for White, it is that White just followed the wrong plan from the start. Back in the mid-70s we felt that White could start a minority attack on the queenside combined with pressure along the c-file would eventually force Black to make concessions on that part of the board. This was certainly a much better plan than what Andersson came up with. Advances in modern chess knowledge? No, we figured this out just after the game was played.

Basman the person, I have no trouble with, but his openings... well, that's different. However, to show his good sense of humor he titled one of his books "The Killer Grob", hope you all know the tie-in with this title :wink: (hint, it was a play on the person who wrote "The Tactical Grob"). Maybe Basman didn't mean to make this inference, but it would be hard to believe that he was unaware of this notorious author.

I give this 5 Pawns for both the narration and for the game, after all, it IS the Immortal Waiting Game.

Fantastic game by Baseman !! never noticed it before believe it or not perhps i was guilty of not chasing after too many immortal games before .
I do appreciate the effort and time you put into this one Kamus , also very much the pick was very nice and of great educational value :idea: .
There were some exeptional pioneers in chess and Michael was one of them and then you always had the book worms but now the extremly annoying computer worms that are letting engine run over night for them while their asleep just to wake up in the morning with super engine line in their hand then they go to these tournament and do major damge and the rest of the chess suckers think that these players must be some super geniuses for winning like that , HOW SAD but i believe time will expose all the cheaters .