In these king's gambit positions you have to play very ressourceful and precise to not fall behind. You can't play with direct tactical threats the whole game. For example Bronstein recognized that he had time to twice change the position of his white-squared bishop. And in other positions he knew that it's time for very difficult precise moves. Fantastic timing and understandig. I admire Bronstein. It would be a dream to play a game like this.
@@aqswd6825 I mainly hate the influence engines have had on human chessplay. Games have become more centered around opening theory than actual planning and strategy. You have to learn variations that can be over 40 moves, such as in complex openings like the Poisoned Pawn variation of the Sicilian Najdorf. There are actual drawing lines now, constructed not through human ingenuity and experimentation, but raw, soulless computer analysis. Players don’t lean into individual play styles anymore because they always want to emulate computers. I despise computer chess because of what it has done to human chess.
1991 haha that chess program was probably 2100 rating. Wait another 10 years and then see if he could beat a chess engine on highest level. Deep Blue was rated around 2800 give or take then latest stockfish is 3600 something.
@@dannygjk wikipedia says that engine "reached a max rating of 2325". Now, not sure if that means after more years of tweaking or in 1991. But okay, 2325 is prob GM level back then. I don't know but one thing I do know is that he wouldn't crush Stockfish today - artistically or otherwise. :)
@@dannygjk okay. But 2325 in 1991 might be 2500 today. No? I don't know. Just saying that beating a chess algorithm in 1991 wasn't a shocking thing. Beating Stockfish on highest level WOULD BE a shocking thing. That's all I'm saying.
Absolutely beautiful adn great analysis. Would be hardly as watchable without the great commentary.
What a beautiful game! Thanks for it!
My pleasure!
In these king's gambit positions you have to play very ressourceful and precise to not fall behind. You can't play with direct tactical threats the whole game. For example Bronstein recognized that he had time to twice change the position of his white-squared bishop. And in other positions he knew that it's time for very difficult precise moves. Fantastic timing and understandig. I admire Bronstein. It would be a dream to play a game like this.
Great game! Brave choice by DB to play the KG! 👏👏
Incredible insight into to exactly what is happening at all times.
One day ill make “computer” resign 🎉
How nice, I have the Pre designed predecessor of this chipset from 1987 in the super nine high fidelity chess engine
I hate computer chess to no end, kudos to Bronstein!
What's wrong with computer chess?
@@aqswd6825 I mainly hate the influence engines have had on human chessplay. Games have become more centered around opening theory than actual planning and strategy. You have to learn variations that can be over 40 moves, such as in complex openings like the Poisoned Pawn variation of the Sicilian Najdorf. There are actual drawing lines now, constructed not through human ingenuity and experimentation, but raw, soulless computer analysis. Players don’t lean into individual play styles anymore because they always want to emulate computers. I despise computer chess because of what it has done to human chess.
What a game! Thanks.
My pleasure.
1991 haha that chess program was probably 2100 rating. Wait another 10 years and then see if he could beat a chess engine on highest level. Deep Blue was rated around 2800 give or take then latest stockfish is 3600 something.
Certainly better than 2100.
@@dannygjk wikipedia says that engine "reached a max rating of 2325". Now, not sure if that means after more years of tweaking or in 1991. But okay, 2325 is prob GM level back then. I don't know but one thing I do know is that he wouldn't crush Stockfish today - artistically or otherwise. :)
@@TruthSurge 2325 is IM level (if 2325 Elo).
@@dannygjk okay. But 2325 in 1991 might be 2500 today. No? I don't know. Just saying that beating a chess algorithm in 1991 wasn't a shocking thing. Beating Stockfish on highest level WOULD BE a shocking thing. That's all I'm saying.
@@TruthSurge The inflation hasn't been that high but true it is significant especially since Arpad Elo stepped down as administrator.
it's bronstein the machine !!
Oh the age when engines could still lose to humans, nowadays anyone with a smartphone and no moral compass can beat Magnus
Just lower the ranking. Its perfectly enjoyable if you place it on reasonable elo
Prodigious !
And he called the opponent "iron idiot" after the game. Or it was another game?
Pretty sure it was Bronstein vs some computer.
How good was Fidelity at the time?
In 1991 probably IM strength.
@@dannygjk ok, thanks.
Save button not working ???
As far as I know, it works.
The greatest victory of a human against a computer is fools-mating martin in 4
Who is the engine?
Why not just show the game, for any sake!