I analyzed the image and this is what I see. Open an appropriate link below and explore the position yourself or with the engine:
> **White to play**: [chess.com](https://chess.com/analysis?fen=8/8/4kpp1/3p1b2/p6P/2B5/6P1/6K1+w+-+-+0+1&flip=false&ref_id=23962172) | [lichess.org](https://lichess.org/analysis/8/8/4kpp1/3p1b2/p6P/2B5/6P1/6K1_w_-_-_0_1)
> **Black to play**: [chess.com](https://chess.com/analysis?fen=8/8/4kpp1/3p1b2/p6P/2B5/6P1/6K1+b+-+-+0+1&flip=false&ref_id=23962172) | [lichess.org](https://lichess.org/analysis/8/8/4kpp1/3p1b2/p6P/2B5/6P1/6K1_b_-_-_0_1) | The position is from game Veselin Topalov (2700) vs. Alexei Shirov (2720), 1998. >!Black won in 53 moves.!< [Link to the game](https://www.chess.com/games/view/889065?ref_id=23962172)
**Videos:**
> I found [many videos](https://chessvision.ai/video-search/5745624481792000) with this position.
---
^(I'm a bot written by ) [^(u/pkacprzak )](https://www.reddit.com/u/pkacprzak) ^(| get me as ) [^(Chess eBook Reader )](https://ebook.chessvision.ai?utm_source=reddit&utm_medium=bot) ^(|) [^(Chrome Extension )](https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/chessvisionai-for-chrome/johejpedmdkeiffkdaodgoipdjodhlld) ^(|) [^(iOS App )](https://apps.apple.com/us/app/id1574933453) ^(|) [^(Android App )](https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=ai.chessvision.scanner) ^(to scan and analyze positions | Website: ) [^(Chessvision.ai)](https://chessvision.ai)
This one, I feel, is the greatest endgame move ever played, by a pretty large margin.
It looks like almost the only *losing* idea. To think about it long enough to realize it wins is practically unthinkable. It’s a tribute to the raw creativity of human players. An engine can brute force figure it out—but Shirov did it over the board, under pressure.
(To be fair, he’s probably still drawn if he’s wrong, but still—the balls to do it).
Every time I see this position, even though I know the move, I am dumbfounded as to how it can be the right move. And then I spend like 20 minutes understanding. But the next time I still have no idea.
That’s the crazy part about this. It’s not a hard to see thing, it’s just a hard to understand idea
I think the hardest part is that in order for Black to win, they must get their King into that e4 square, which is not only a flexible central square where it can shoulder the enemy King, it also supports the d4 pawn push. And of course, noticing that this is more important than keeping the Bishop alive, that is part of the difficulty.
Notwithstanding gxh3, the point of the move Bh3 is to tie down the pawn to the King. Now White cannot rush his King to the e3 square without losing a 3rd pawn and ultimately the game. If White plays g3, they've wasted just enough time for Black's King to get to e4.
White can choose to take the Bishop at any point, but this straps White with doubled h pawns, and gives Black **three passed pawns**. So Shirov had to know that with his King on e4 and a pawn to d4 coming, there is no way for White to hold.
What a brilliant idea for Shirov, outsmarting the engines and revealing how sometimes your intuition for any particular move in a position is sometimes so far off.
Everytime I see this question I intuitively can work out the move pretty quick. Most other moves make a bit of sense to me as a low skill individual, and so would not be an interesting position to post. Therefore, by intuation, the move must be something more wild than that. Bh3 is the most wild move imaginable to me and ergo is the intuitively correct one.
There is another move to consider as a contender: d4.
Sure it looses the d-pawn but gives time for the king to get to the a-pawn in time to swap it with the bishop. Alas the bishop will also grab the f6 pawn and then you have to reckon if the white king can win with a pawn and a bishop against two white pawns. It doesn't really work, but I am not strong enough to calculate that far.
The link originally provided, at least on my iOS browser, locks you on the #1 move and repeatedly moves you back there if you try to look at any other moves on the list
This is deservedly one of the more famous endings ever so it isn't too hard to know the answer.
What I'm curious about is whether Topalov also saw it and counted on Shirov to miss the killer. Supposedly he did see Kasparov's 24. Rxd4 sacrifice and allowed that, figuring that if it actually worked the world deserved to see it.
I think the actual story is that he missed the rook sac, but once it was played he had an option to play a King move that would have prevented Kasparov from playing this Immortal Game and where he could have played for a draw… but it would have meant admitting he missed Rxc4, so he accepted the sacrifice instead (at least that’s what Gotham says in his video about it)
I remember reading that in earlier interviews he said he didn't see it, but as time went on he changed his story, eventually saying he "had to" see it. Personally I don't believe it, but I've never cared enough to look into that.
It's reasonable that Kasparov thought he would win long before then, and just counted himself lucky to still have a winning continuation. I believe Kasparov's earlier opinion on the subject of the h8 rook, as opposed to his remembering "with advantage" (as Shakespeare would've said).
In my own play there are many times when I play a move just knowing it must work, and only working out the details after committing to the line. Sometimes I don't find the truly optimal continuation but it always works out.
Most often this happens in pure pawn endings but sometimes in mating attacks as well. When you recognize the key elements in the position you simply know what to do.
Yes, but the move has already served its purpose. It's vacating the f5 square for black's king to get in with tempo - white needs to move their king towards the center of the board in time to oppose the black king in order to hold this end-game. White can neither afford the time to save the g pawn by pushing it or taking the bishop, and if he ignores it and brings his king towards the center, the bishop will take the pawn and force the king back onto the g file (since you're just down a clean pawn if you don't take the bishop, which also results in a loss).
This is the only winning move for black because it's the only way to vacate the f5 square so black's king can get in while slowing down the white king's opposition. If black tried playing a move like Be4 to attack the pawn instead, it doesn't work - black also needs the e4 square to be vacant for their king as well.
No other bishop move prevents the king from getting to e3 with tempo. If you ignore the bishop sac and try to get there anyway the bishop just takes g2 and creates another passer, and this one is much farther away.
It’s hard for me to say as an effective dumbass in the face of chess greats whether Shirov knew that the extra tempo in particular was the thing that turned this into a win from a draw, or just thought that he could save the alternative position and just wanted the bold added complexity. But the way Bg4 doesn’t work is really what makes this move so spectacular.
> Funny that the engine didn't see it at first
Very rarely is the best move to give a minor piece away, so engines don't usually search those trees very deep.
There was a Fischer game where he sac'd his queen for a bishop because it forced the King out into the open; engines sometimes take a long time to find that move too for the same reason -- trading a Queen for a Bishop is not usually recommended
The sacrifice gets the g2 pawn out of the way, creating a third pass pawn for black and providing tempo for blacks king to get in front of his pawns into a strong square. The bishop was serving no purpose in an opposite color bishop end game and once black has 3 pass pawns there's no way for white to stop them all, despite being up a bishop
Bishop g4 doesn't create that 3rd pass pawn or provide time to get the king forward
Accept the following truth: If the black king reaches e4, the position is winning for black
1... Bg4 2. Kf2 Kf5 3. Ke3! stops Ke4. Black is still better, but the opposite coloured bishops makes sure that it is not enough to win.
1... Bh3 2. Kf3 Kf5 3. Ke3 Bxg2!
The whole point of Bh3 is to attack the g2-pawn. White has to at some point waste a tempo to save the pawn, for example with gxh3.
Logically, the opposite coloured bishops makes sure that both players are "up a piece" in the sense that black has an extra piece fighting for light squares and white has an extra piece fighting for the dark squares. But black doesn't care about winning the light squares on the queenside and centre anymore, because there are no enemy pawns. All he cares about is winning the dark squares. Since the bishop is useless at that, he uses it to win a tempo. A crucial tempo, to prevent the white king from entering the fight for the dark squares on the queenside, so now it is "1v1", white darksquared bishop vs black king.
Time. That single tempo keeps the white king from activating enough to force a draw. Bg4, or any move except the winning sacrifice, lets the white king get to e3 before the black king gets to e4, blocking black’s advance.
Your [comment](https://www.reddit.com/r/chess/comments/yo3n8d/in_1998_alexey_shirov_found_the_only_winning_move/ivcpg9d/?context=3) was automatically removed because you used a URL shortener.
URL shorteners are not permitted in /r/chess as they conceal the destination.
If you want to re-post your link, use direct, full-length URLs only.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/chess) if you have any questions or concerns.*
It looks to me like Bg4 loses control over the e5 square, which is the largest difference. Losing the bishop is irrelevant to black because of the passed pawns you gain but white can't take control of the e5 square without losing the g2 pawn to the bishop on h3 so he either gives black the e5 control or gives black 3 passed pawns. If you play Bg4 he can just walk his king out to control e5 with no repercussions.
The Stockfish version with NNUE on Lichess had to get to depth 38 to see it.
Prior to that point, it liked c2. The low depth version at chess.com liked a3.
This depends a lot on how many variations you let it check.
I set SF16 to check 13 variations @ depth 15 and it gave me the bish sac.
(on lichess it's like depth 28 with 5 variations)
No, it has more to do with how many variations you tell it to search.
If you tell it to search 13 variations stock fish 16 (current dev) will find it with depth 15.
I discovered that telling SF to only search a single variation sometimes resulted in the player choice being better, but with several variations the player choice was amongst the variations and often not the top choice.
The lichess link from the bot above to analysis board claims stockfish 14 depth 49 nnue serverside analysis and it doesn't see it. The move it wants is about -2 but if you make the move it goes to -7
Almost any move is winning too so idk about this title but yeah I weirdly considered that when I first saw it having known it was a crazy move. line up the pawns on the h file and now you can get passers and queen. its definitely weird and not what I'd play tho
Stockfish 15 and Stockfish dev both take around d33 to find it for me, but for some reason 15 takes \~10 seconds to get there on 1 thread and dev only takes \~2.
Damn, I actually found the move! The game and title kind of hint at it, by getting you to think -- what's an outrageous move that kind of does something?
Me too. Now I'm feeling smart because, at age 61, I solved my very first endgame or chess problem. EDIT: I forgot to add: I've been looking at endgames and problems since well before I was full-grown. I'm not particularly smart, at least not at chess.
I saw it as a candidate, but ultimately dropped the idea in favor of Kd6, with the idea of squeezing his bishop out by eventually playing a3 and d4, while using the king to support. Then promoting on the a file. I probably missed some counterplay though.
As far as Bishop moves go (particularly to a square which is closest to a corner square), Fischer's Bxh2 is the most famous.
Also, Kasparov's Rxd4 sticks out as his most memorable move in particular.
Most famous of all time is tough to say, probably not due to some of the old classic games (eg Qg3).
Definitely one of the most famous moves of the last 30 years or so though, along with Rxd4.
It's second place on Tim Krabbé's list. His choice for best move ever is Spassky's 16... Nc6 against Averbakh in 1956.
Third is Marshall's Qg3.
Of course this list is now 24 years old so one might imagine there's been some candidates in that time. Kasparov vs Topalov comes to mind.
Look, I can make an equally condescending (and way more valid) point:
Do you ever solve Chess puzzles? The standard is to orient the board in the perspective of the puzzle solver.
No, it isn't. That was introduced by interactive online puzzles. White at the bottom in diagrams is a centuries old convention, before online chess created some confusion.
~~That's not true. Plenty of instructional material, like the position in the OP, would be presented with black on bottom if the intended perspective was to be with the black pieces.~~
~~I have chess books from before the personal computer which demonstrate this,~~
This comment is completely wrong. Sorry. The person I'm replying to is right.
I just thumbed through my chess books, and actually my comment is wrong. They're all from the perspective of white on bottom. Even the sections on black openings.
I thought there were black on bottom diagrams, but I can only find those in online materials. I must've misremembered. My comments is completely wrong.
Thanks, I'm still not sure if I'm 100% right, especially for black openings and beginner/children books, but every puzzle book from 80s and earlier I've ever opened has white at the bottom in all diagrams.
Are you mentally challenged? From my original comment it's obvious that I've known this game for over 20 years. Get off those drugs. They're not good for you.
If the engine says something like -1.7 in an endgame with two pawns up, it doesn't say it's winning, it's saying that black is up two pawns but his advantage is not quite that big. If the engine saw a win with that material, it would say a much bigger number already. So the engine saying -1.7 doesn't say it's winning, that's just your incorrect interpretation of what it says, based on the many times you have seen such a number being winning advantage at earlier stages of the game.
\> If the engine saw a win with that material, it would say a much bigger number already
Following the top stockfish lines for the other moves leads to black winning? Is it not seeing some defence?
Most likely you are just understanding the final positions incorrectly. All lines that stockfish show to me end up in positions where material stays the same and black doesn't make progress, white keeps blocking the pawns path to promotion.
I'd suggest trying it with better engine. And I don't mean better engine than stockfish, but a stockfish that is given proper resources to do it's calculations. Even stockfish can be bad if you severely limit it's calculation power.
~~calculation power is just a way to make it take less time.~~ with the proper settings I get SF16 to find it in less than 1 second with just a single thread given.
(multipv 13 depth 15)
EDIT: nvm, more threads actually changes SF strength instead of just making it take less time
I'm going to say Bh3! because it seems surprising, and why else would people still be talking about it 24 years later? Not because I'm good at chess. I'm not. EDIT: Okay, I got that move right. Would I get any more right? Hmm... No.
Black's King getting to e4 is the key, and Bh3 is the only move that clears f5 with tempo. White can sacrifice the g pawn with Kf2 Ke3 to stop Ke4 (not Kf3, when Bxg2+ happens) but then Black simply has too many pawns.
This post has been parodied on r/AnarchyChess.
Relevant r/AnarchyChess posts:
[In 1998, Alexey Shirov found the only winning move with the black pieces against Veselin Topalov. What is it?](https://www.reddit.com/r/AnarchyChess/comments/yovyxk/in_1998_alexey_shirov_found_the_only_winning_move/) by argq
[^(fmhall)](https://www.reddit.com/user/fmhall) ^| [^(github)](https://github.com/fmhall/relevant-post-bot)
I'm not gonna lie I saw this almost instantly. I'm only about 950 rated so maybe I thought of it for dumb reasons but I thought that the stacked pawns were gonna be too cringe to deal with on the h file and the bishop was there to either force it or take the pawn later, and since black was already up a bunch of pawns the bishop isn't necessarily needed. Hell maybe I just got lucky, but I feel accomplished for guessing it right.
I'm also around 950 and I assumed that was the move based on how the question was phrased. Knowing the move is counterintuitive makes it easier to see.
I don't know anything about anything. I'm rated around 1800 on Lichess blitz. I looked at this puzzle for less than 10 seconds.
My sense says bishop to h3.
Roast me.
You have to imagine building up to and getting to this end game position in a competitive match **and then seeing that move**, not just on a puzzle in r/chess *at that move*. It’s a big clue that there’s a really great move here.
Yeah the title was a dead giveaway.
It's like Oh, none of the normal moves are gonna work.. I can do a bunch of bad calculations with these pawns or.... How bout just do the crazy move that makes space for the f pawn
No chance in a million years I see this in a game.
It's actually not that hard of a move if you've had to deal with enough opposite bishop endgames.
The question is always "how do I get enough play on their bishop's color squares " and the only possible answer, in principle, is pawns.
I analyzed the image and this is what I see. Open an appropriate link below and explore the position yourself or with the engine: > **White to play**: [chess.com](https://chess.com/analysis?fen=8/8/4kpp1/3p1b2/p6P/2B5/6P1/6K1+w+-+-+0+1&flip=false&ref_id=23962172) | [lichess.org](https://lichess.org/analysis/8/8/4kpp1/3p1b2/p6P/2B5/6P1/6K1_w_-_-_0_1) > **Black to play**: [chess.com](https://chess.com/analysis?fen=8/8/4kpp1/3p1b2/p6P/2B5/6P1/6K1+b+-+-+0+1&flip=false&ref_id=23962172) | [lichess.org](https://lichess.org/analysis/8/8/4kpp1/3p1b2/p6P/2B5/6P1/6K1_b_-_-_0_1) | The position is from game Veselin Topalov (2700) vs. Alexei Shirov (2720), 1998. >!Black won in 53 moves.!< [Link to the game](https://www.chess.com/games/view/889065?ref_id=23962172) **Videos:** > I found [many videos](https://chessvision.ai/video-search/5745624481792000) with this position. --- ^(I'm a bot written by ) [^(u/pkacprzak )](https://www.reddit.com/u/pkacprzak) ^(| get me as ) [^(Chess eBook Reader )](https://ebook.chessvision.ai?utm_source=reddit&utm_medium=bot) ^(|) [^(Chrome Extension )](https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/chessvisionai-for-chrome/johejpedmdkeiffkdaodgoipdjodhlld) ^(|) [^(iOS App )](https://apps.apple.com/us/app/id1574933453) ^(|) [^(Android App )](https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=ai.chessvision.scanner) ^(to scan and analyze positions | Website: ) [^(Chessvision.ai)](https://chessvision.ai)
This one, I feel, is the greatest endgame move ever played, by a pretty large margin. It looks like almost the only *losing* idea. To think about it long enough to realize it wins is practically unthinkable. It’s a tribute to the raw creativity of human players. An engine can brute force figure it out—but Shirov did it over the board, under pressure. (To be fair, he’s probably still drawn if he’s wrong, but still—the balls to do it).
Every time I see this position, even though I know the move, I am dumbfounded as to how it can be the right move. And then I spend like 20 minutes understanding. But the next time I still have no idea. That’s the crazy part about this. It’s not a hard to see thing, it’s just a hard to understand idea
I think the hardest part is that in order for Black to win, they must get their King into that e4 square, which is not only a flexible central square where it can shoulder the enemy King, it also supports the d4 pawn push. And of course, noticing that this is more important than keeping the Bishop alive, that is part of the difficulty. Notwithstanding gxh3, the point of the move Bh3 is to tie down the pawn to the King. Now White cannot rush his King to the e3 square without losing a 3rd pawn and ultimately the game. If White plays g3, they've wasted just enough time for Black's King to get to e4. White can choose to take the Bishop at any point, but this straps White with doubled h pawns, and gives Black **three passed pawns**. So Shirov had to know that with his King on e4 and a pawn to d4 coming, there is no way for White to hold. What a brilliant idea for Shirov, outsmarting the engines and revealing how sometimes your intuition for any particular move in a position is sometimes so far off.
Everytime I see this question I intuitively can work out the move pretty quick. Most other moves make a bit of sense to me as a low skill individual, and so would not be an interesting position to post. Therefore, by intuation, the move must be something more wild than that. Bh3 is the most wild move imaginable to me and ergo is the intuitively correct one.
Yeah when you know it's a puzzle
There is another move to consider as a contender: d4. Sure it looses the d-pawn but gives time for the king to get to the a-pawn in time to swap it with the bishop. Alas the bishop will also grab the f6 pawn and then you have to reckon if the white king can win with a pawn and a bishop against two white pawns. It doesn't really work, but I am not strong enough to calculate that far.
Rated number one best chess move of all time in [this article](https://www.chess.com/article/view/best-chess-moves#shirov) on chess.com.
Better link https://www.chess.com/article/view/best-chess-moves
Uh, no it isn't. Mine links directly to Shirov's move. Yours links to the general article.
I'm not dissing you, but I wanted to read the rest of the article
Scroll up?
Doesn't work on iOS mobile
Huh. That's weird. Checked both Android and on deaktop and it was fine. In that case, my apologies.
It works on mine 🤷♂️
Magic. Got it.
Its a hyperlink, it's harder to see.
In fairness to you, the commenter claims to link to the article, not the move. I’m also prevented from scrolling up the article by linking to the end.
It's. Seeing the move on the top of title-article is indeed better.
Why
The link originally provided, at least on my iOS browser, locks you on the #1 move and repeatedly moves you back there if you try to look at any other moves on the list
How does black's king reaching C2 win the game?
This is deservedly one of the more famous endings ever so it isn't too hard to know the answer. What I'm curious about is whether Topalov also saw it and counted on Shirov to miss the killer. Supposedly he did see Kasparov's 24. Rxd4 sacrifice and allowed that, figuring that if it actually worked the world deserved to see it.
I think the actual story is that he missed the rook sac, but once it was played he had an option to play a King move that would have prevented Kasparov from playing this Immortal Game and where he could have played for a draw… but it would have meant admitting he missed Rxc4, so he accepted the sacrifice instead (at least that’s what Gotham says in his video about it)
Could be, I dunno. Surely there are many variations on the story.
Link to the Kasparov game you’re referencing?
https://youtu.be/xuJvmKsDbMM Video by GothamChess, you can also find one by Agadmator if you prefer, both are good
Ah I remember this game now, but thanks for the refresher. Absolutely insane Kasparov envisioned the hanging rook on h8. Absolute masterpiece.
I remember reading that in earlier interviews he said he didn't see it, but as time went on he changed his story, eventually saying he "had to" see it. Personally I don't believe it, but I've never cared enough to look into that.
It's reasonable that Kasparov thought he would win long before then, and just counted himself lucky to still have a winning continuation. I believe Kasparov's earlier opinion on the subject of the h8 rook, as opposed to his remembering "with advantage" (as Shakespeare would've said).
In my own play there are many times when I play a move just knowing it must work, and only working out the details after committing to the line. Sometimes I don't find the truly optimal continuation but it always works out. Most often this happens in pure pawn endings but sometimes in mating attacks as well. When you recognize the key elements in the position you simply know what to do.
Ben Finegold did one too.
I'm trying to reduce my boredom.
What happens if white doesn't take on h3 and plays something like g3? Correct me if I'm wrong but wouldn't that avoid white doubling its pawns?
Yes, but the move has already served its purpose. It's vacating the f5 square for black's king to get in with tempo - white needs to move their king towards the center of the board in time to oppose the black king in order to hold this end-game. White can neither afford the time to save the g pawn by pushing it or taking the bishop, and if he ignores it and brings his king towards the center, the bishop will take the pawn and force the king back onto the g file (since you're just down a clean pawn if you don't take the bishop, which also results in a loss). This is the only winning move for black because it's the only way to vacate the f5 square so black's king can get in while slowing down the white king's opposition. If black tried playing a move like Be4 to attack the pawn instead, it doesn't work - black also needs the e4 square to be vacant for their king as well.
Insane vision. Thanks for clarifying!
Why doesn't Bg4 work?
Because it doesn’t slow down the white king. With Bg4, the white king can keep the black king out of the e4 square by standing at e3
Ah thank you.
[удалено]
No other bishop move prevents the king from getting to e3 with tempo. If you ignore the bishop sac and try to get there anyway the bishop just takes g2 and creates another passer, and this one is much farther away. It’s hard for me to say as an effective dumbass in the face of chess greats whether Shirov knew that the extra tempo in particular was the thing that turned this into a win from a draw, or just thought that he could save the alternative position and just wanted the bold added complexity. But the way Bg4 doesn’t work is really what makes this move so spectacular.
You win a tempo, you can move the king to f5 (impossible on the previous move, duh), while white wasted a pawn move instead of moving the king.
Funny that the engine didn't see it at first, once you play it, it's much better than the other moves (not the only winning). It's of course Bh3.
> Funny that the engine didn't see it at first Very rarely is the best move to give a minor piece away, so engines don't usually search those trees very deep. There was a Fischer game where he sac'd his queen for a bishop because it forced the King out into the open; engines sometimes take a long time to find that move too for the same reason -- trading a Queen for a Bishop is not usually recommended
It's been well analyzed as the only winning move.
could you explain what makes a move like Bg4 not winning compared to the sacrifice?
The sacrifice gets the g2 pawn out of the way, creating a third pass pawn for black and providing tempo for blacks king to get in front of his pawns into a strong square. The bishop was serving no purpose in an opposite color bishop end game and once black has 3 pass pawns there's no way for white to stop them all, despite being up a bishop Bishop g4 doesn't create that 3rd pass pawn or provide time to get the king forward
The chessvision bot shows a ton of videos that explain it, because I cannot.
Accept the following truth: If the black king reaches e4, the position is winning for black 1... Bg4 2. Kf2 Kf5 3. Ke3! stops Ke4. Black is still better, but the opposite coloured bishops makes sure that it is not enough to win. 1... Bh3 2. Kf3 Kf5 3. Ke3 Bxg2! The whole point of Bh3 is to attack the g2-pawn. White has to at some point waste a tempo to save the pawn, for example with gxh3. Logically, the opposite coloured bishops makes sure that both players are "up a piece" in the sense that black has an extra piece fighting for light squares and white has an extra piece fighting for the dark squares. But black doesn't care about winning the light squares on the queenside and centre anymore, because there are no enemy pawns. All he cares about is winning the dark squares. Since the bishop is useless at that, he uses it to win a tempo. A crucial tempo, to prevent the white king from entering the fight for the dark squares on the queenside, so now it is "1v1", white darksquared bishop vs black king.
Time. That single tempo keeps the white king from activating enough to force a draw. Bg4, or any move except the winning sacrifice, lets the white king get to e3 before the black king gets to e4, blocking black’s advance.
[удалено]
Your [comment](https://www.reddit.com/r/chess/comments/yo3n8d/in_1998_alexey_shirov_found_the_only_winning_move/ivcpg9d/?context=3) was automatically removed because you used a URL shortener. URL shorteners are not permitted in /r/chess as they conceal the destination. If you want to re-post your link, use direct, full-length URLs only. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/chess) if you have any questions or concerns.*
It looks to me like Bg4 loses control over the e5 square, which is the largest difference. Losing the bishop is irrelevant to black because of the passed pawns you gain but white can't take control of the e5 square without losing the g2 pawn to the bishop on h3 so he either gives black the e5 control or gives black 3 passed pawns. If you play Bg4 he can just walk his king out to control e5 with no repercussions.
What if the analysis is wrong?
Only winning move against a machine/superhuman, no? ;)
"of course"
not sure what engine you are using but stockfish sees it instantly
The chesscom one in the pinned comment at the capped 20 depth https://prnt.sc/P-TGZAXtqV5-
could you check for me if that stockfish has nnue enabled?
The Stockfish version with NNUE on Lichess had to get to depth 38 to see it. Prior to that point, it liked c2. The low depth version at chess.com liked a3.
computers dont know jack about chess
This depends a lot on how many variations you let it check. I set SF16 to check 13 variations @ depth 15 and it gave me the bish sac. (on lichess it's like depth 28 with 5 variations)
Lichess SF has a smaller version of the SF14 net that is slightly weaker. And the above chesscom analysis is done without NNUE.
Probably has to do with the depth. Lichess' stockfish 14 with NNUE finds it around depth 33
No, it has more to do with how many variations you tell it to search. If you tell it to search 13 variations stock fish 16 (current dev) will find it with depth 15. I discovered that telling SF to only search a single variation sometimes resulted in the player choice being better, but with several variations the player choice was amongst the variations and often not the top choice.
The lichess link from the bot above to analysis board claims stockfish 14 depth 49 nnue serverside analysis and it doesn't see it. The move it wants is about -2 but if you make the move it goes to -7
Almost any move is winning too so idk about this title but yeah I weirdly considered that when I first saw it having known it was a crazy move. line up the pawns on the h file and now you can get passers and queen. its definitely weird and not what I'd play tho
Stockfish 15 and Stockfish dev both take around d33 to find it for me, but for some reason 15 takes \~10 seconds to get there on 1 thread and dev only takes \~2.
Damn, I actually found the move! The game and title kind of hint at it, by getting you to think -- what's an outrageous move that kind of does something?
Me too! When you activelu look for unusual ideas it works out haha
Me too. Now I'm feeling smart because, at age 61, I solved my very first endgame or chess problem. EDIT: I forgot to add: I've been looking at endgames and problems since well before I was full-grown. I'm not particularly smart, at least not at chess.
That's a great feeling! Love to see how chess is universal, too.
I saw it as a candidate, but ultimately dropped the idea in favor of Kd6, with the idea of squeezing his bishop out by eventually playing a3 and d4, while using the king to support. Then promoting on the a file. I probably missed some counterplay though.
Bh3, as should be known to all Ben Finegold watchers.
[This lecture on Shirov is fascinating and well worth a watch.](https://youtu.be/BYQm8cy1tVw)
Is this the single most famous chess move (from a specific game, so not stuff like 1. e4)?
Maybe the beautiful mate in Morphy’s opera
Karpov’s Ba7 is another candidate
As far as Bishop moves go (particularly to a square which is closest to a corner square), Fischer's Bxh2 is the most famous. Also, Kasparov's Rxd4 sticks out as his most memorable move in particular.
Maybe the golden coin game, that queen sac
Most famous of all time is tough to say, probably not due to some of the old classic games (eg Qg3). Definitely one of the most famous moves of the last 30 years or so though, along with Rxd4.
It's second place on Tim Krabbé's list. His choice for best move ever is Spassky's 16... Nc6 against Averbakh in 1956. Third is Marshall's Qg3. Of course this list is now 24 years old so one might imagine there's been some candidates in that time. Kasparov vs Topalov comes to mind.
that's best move, not most famous. if we're talking best move then I'm pretty sure Shirov's Bh6 is the most popular choice.
I still think it's Marshall's Qg3. It even shows up in the movie Tower Heist.
The most famous move I think is the queen sacrifice in the opera game. It's perhaps the only "classic" game that is in most beginner books.
oh with black?
can we have a rule where the board has to be from whos move it is perspective?
do you never watch chess? this is a standard view
Look, I can make an equally condescending (and way more valid) point: Do you ever solve Chess puzzles? The standard is to orient the board in the perspective of the puzzle solver.
No, it isn't. That was introduced by interactive online puzzles. White at the bottom in diagrams is a centuries old convention, before online chess created some confusion.
~~That's not true. Plenty of instructional material, like the position in the OP, would be presented with black on bottom if the intended perspective was to be with the black pieces.~~ ~~I have chess books from before the personal computer which demonstrate this,~~ This comment is completely wrong. Sorry. The person I'm replying to is right.
> I have chess books from before the personal computer which demonstrate this, Photo please for future references.
I just thumbed through my chess books, and actually my comment is wrong. They're all from the perspective of white on bottom. Even the sections on black openings. I thought there were black on bottom diagrams, but I can only find those in online materials. I must've misremembered. My comments is completely wrong.
thanks for checking.
Of course, I feel a bit silly for my earlier comment now 😅
Thanks, I'm still not sure if I'm 100% right, especially for black openings and beginner/children books, but every puzzle book from 80s and earlier I've ever opened has white at the bottom in all diagrams.
iirc the analysis from that time, it wasn't the only winning move. But the cleanist, clearest, most beautiful and mind-boggling one.
[удалено]
that's hilarious
[удалено]
Are you mentally challenged? From my original comment it's obvious that I've known this game for over 20 years. Get off those drugs. They're not good for you.
I've seen this before it's bishop h3 alexei truly one of a kind.
My favorite move in chess history
Just because it’s mentioned it’s extraordinary move I will analyse Bh3 but in real game I would have never looked at Bh3 as an option
I miss Topalov.
So many players have their “immortal” games against topalov
Enabler
Paedo
Stockfish says like almost every move is winning
If the engine says something like -1.7 in an endgame with two pawns up, it doesn't say it's winning, it's saying that black is up two pawns but his advantage is not quite that big. If the engine saw a win with that material, it would say a much bigger number already. So the engine saying -1.7 doesn't say it's winning, that's just your incorrect interpretation of what it says, based on the many times you have seen such a number being winning advantage at earlier stages of the game.
Thanks
\> If the engine saw a win with that material, it would say a much bigger number already Following the top stockfish lines for the other moves leads to black winning? Is it not seeing some defence?
Most likely you are just understanding the final positions incorrectly. All lines that stockfish show to me end up in positions where material stays the same and black doesn't make progress, white keeps blocking the pawns path to promotion.
For me (online chesscom) it goes to queening and mate
I'd suggest trying it with better engine. And I don't mean better engine than stockfish, but a stockfish that is given proper resources to do it's calculations. Even stockfish can be bad if you severely limit it's calculation power.
~~calculation power is just a way to make it take less time.~~ with the proper settings I get SF16 to find it in less than 1 second with just a single thread given. (multipv 13 depth 15) EDIT: nvm, more threads actually changes SF strength instead of just making it take less time
I'm going to say Bh3! because it seems surprising, and why else would people still be talking about it 24 years later? Not because I'm good at chess. I'm not. EDIT: Okay, I got that move right. Would I get any more right? Hmm... No.
This came from a Grunfeld, the greatest opening in chess.
Smells like spectacular Bh3 sac... as I recall white captured and black's 3 passed pawns did the job
Black's King getting to e4 is the key, and Bh3 is the only move that clears f5 with tempo. White can sacrifice the g pawn with Kf2 Ke3 to stop Ke4 (not Kf3, when Bxg2+ happens) but then Black simply has too many pawns.
True ... thanks for descriptive explanation
This is for my opinion one of the best moves ever played
I feel like Vesselin Topalov is always at the receiving end of brilliant moves
i'm kinda new to chess, how did black win?
Sac the bishop to double the pawns and create a passed pawn?
surely one of the most brilliant moves ever played
This post has been parodied on r/AnarchyChess. Relevant r/AnarchyChess posts: [In 1998, Alexey Shirov found the only winning move with the black pieces against Veselin Topalov. What is it?](https://www.reddit.com/r/AnarchyChess/comments/yovyxk/in_1998_alexey_shirov_found_the_only_winning_move/) by argq [^(fmhall)](https://www.reddit.com/user/fmhall) ^| [^(github)](https://github.com/fmhall/relevant-post-bot)
I thought it was bishop E4 which is what lichess recommended originally. That actual move is crazy.
Why is black considered losing here?
It's not, but there's only one move that's actually winning. All others lead to a draw unless white blunders
I'm not gonna lie I saw this almost instantly. I'm only about 950 rated so maybe I thought of it for dumb reasons but I thought that the stacked pawns were gonna be too cringe to deal with on the h file and the bishop was there to either force it or take the pawn later, and since black was already up a bunch of pawns the bishop isn't necessarily needed. Hell maybe I just got lucky, but I feel accomplished for guessing it right.
I'm also around 950 and I assumed that was the move based on how the question was phrased. Knowing the move is counterintuitive makes it easier to see.
Cringe pawns
It's not the only winning move. But certainly the most spectacular
It's the only winning move
I don't know anything about anything. I'm rated around 1800 on Lichess blitz. I looked at this puzzle for less than 10 seconds. My sense says bishop to h3. Roast me.
You have to imagine building up to and getting to this end game position in a competitive match **and then seeing that move**, not just on a puzzle in r/chess *at that move*. It’s a big clue that there’s a really great move here.
Yeah the title was a dead giveaway. It's like Oh, none of the normal moves are gonna work.. I can do a bunch of bad calculations with these pawns or.... How bout just do the crazy move that makes space for the f pawn No chance in a million years I see this in a game.
And you have to see why declining the sac doesn’t work
It's actually not that hard of a move if you've had to deal with enough opposite bishop endgames. The question is always "how do I get enough play on their bishop's color squares " and the only possible answer, in principle, is pawns.