Kasparov vs The World

This game was played in 1999 and included over 50000 users playing against kasparov. Kasparov stated that he had never put so much effort into any other game he has played.

It was hosted by msn games online. Each team had 24 hours to move, the world had 4 grandmasters that suggested moves but moves were decided by a vote. I thought move 48.Rxb1 was a brilliant move from Kasparov that gave him tempo and so he was able to get his queen before black could.

Something must have gone wrong with the system. Just by numbers alone, Kasparov should have lost. The odds were amazing, and you know some great chess players were working on it besides the 4 GM's. OR...they didn't have some IBM guys cheating in a back room. (Just kidding, guys.) :-D

 I can hear Kasparov screaming, "I want to see the e-mail logs!" if he had lost. Deep E-Mail. Very cool. 

show me

Haha, this reminds me of an article on chessbase. Almost exactly 25 years ago Kasparov gambled away the "honour of mankind".

https://en.chessbase.com/post/25-years-ago-deep-blue-beats-kasparov

Interesting

This is a fallacious argument. Just because Kasparov lost does not mean that something must have gone wrong with the system, as the odds were always against him. Furthermore, the insinuation that IBM employees were cheating is baseless and ridiculous. Kasparov himself has said that he would not have been able to beat Deep Blue if it had been playing at its full potential, and that the victory was more a result of human error than anything else.

Kasparov actually won

With his 62nd move, Kasparov announced a forced checkmate in 28 moves found by the computer program Deep Junior. In light of this, 51% of the World Team voters opted to resign on October 22, four months after the game commenced.

You realize this was 15 years ago?

In the famous Kasparov vs. The World game, Garry Kasparov managed to secure a win against the collective decision-making of numerous players from around the globe. Several critical moments in the game led to the World team's defeat. Let's look at some key positions and possible improvements for Black:

1. **After 11. Nd5 Qxe4?**

This move allowed Kasparov to gain a significant initiative with 12. Nc7+ and the subsequent knight capture on a8. Instead, Black could have played 11... Qc8 or 11... Rc8 to keep more control over the center and avoid losing the exchange.

**Alternative:**
``` 
11... Qc8
```

2. **After 12. Nc7+ Kd7 13. Nxa8 Qxc4**

Taking the knight with the queen loses tempo and leaves Black in a precarious position. A better move could have been 13... Rxa8, accepting material loss but keeping better coordination and defensive possibilities.

**Alternative:**
``` 
13... Rxa8
```

3. **After 15. Nc3 Ra8?**

This move fails to address the central and king-side threats. Instead of Ra8, focusing on development and defense with 15... e6 could have been more solid.

**Alternative:**
``` 
15... e6
```

4. **After 20. Qf7 Be5?**

Moving the bishop to e5 is another suboptimal move, exposing Black to strong attacks. A better move here could have been 20... Qf5 or 20... Qg4 to keep the queenside under control and counter Kasparov's threats.

**Alternative:**
``` 
20... Qf5
```

5. **After 28. h4 b5?**

The b5 pawn push didn't help Black's position. A more solid move like 28... Qe6 to exchange queens could have alleviated some pressure.

**Alternative:**
``` 
28... Qe6
```

6. **After 32. g3 fxg3?**

This move opens the f-file for White, giving Kasparov additional attacking chances. Instead, maintaining tension with 32... Qf5 could have been better.

**Alternative:**
``` 
32... Qf5
```

By making these adjustments, Black could have maintained a more solid position and potentially avoided the sequence of moves that led to the eventual loss. The key points are avoiding unnecessary exchanges that lose material or tempo, maintaining central control, and keeping the king safe.