The Immortal Game: Anderssen vs Kieseritzky, 1851

A move-by-move look at the Romantic-era attack that still teaches calculation, development and the power of initiative.

Afro RookSeptember 20, 20266 Mins read492 Views

One casual game turned sacrifice into a permanent part of chess history

Watch the whole game play out, move by move, with the key moments called out:

Press play to watch it move by move.

The Immortal Game is Adolf Anderssen’s 1851 win over Lionel Kieseritzky, a short attacking masterpiece built from gambits, exposed kings and extraordinary sacrifices. Its fame rests not on a perfect computer score, but on the way every piece seems to join one urgent idea: develop quickly, open lines and keep the initiative.

A casual game beside the tournament

The game was played in London on 21 June 1851, during the first international chess tournament. Anderssen and Kieseritzky were both taking part in the event, but this was not a tournament game. It was a casual skittles game played around the formal competition, a distinction that matters when judging its risks and its inaccuracies.

The game was published in the French chess magazine La Régence in July 1851. In 1855, the Austrian player and writer Ernst Falkbeer gave it the name “The Immortal Game”. The title captured the lasting impression of a battle in which White gave up almost everything except the attacking force around the black king.

The standard score begins with the King’s Gambit Accepted: 1. e4 e5 2. f4 exf4 3. Bc4. Anderssen offers the f-pawn to gain open lines and rapid development. Kieseritzky accepts the pawn, then answers 3…Qh4+, sending the white king to f1 instead of allowing a normal castle.

The early position is already a statement of Romantic chess. White does not spend several moves securing the king; White spends them bringing pieces towards Black’s vulnerable centre. After 4. Kf1 b5 5. Bxb5 Nf6 6. Nf3, both sides have accepted complications before either has completed ordinary development.

The queen is repeatedly chased, while White’s kingside pawns advance. The sequence 7. d3 Nh5 8. Nh4 Qg5 9. Nf5 c6 10. g4 shows the game’s character: threats are met with new threats, and tempi are valued more highly than a quiet material count.

Stage	Key moves	What to notice
Opening	1. e4 e5 2. f4 exf4 3. Bc4	The King’s Gambit opens lines for an attack.
First sacrifice	10. g4 Nf6 11. Rg1 cxb5	White gives up a bishop to keep Black’s king exposed.
Central breakthrough	16. Nc3 Bc5 17. Nd5	The knight enters with threats against the queen and king.
Double-rook idea	17…Qxb2 18. Bd6	White offers another rook to maintain the attack.
Finish	19. e5 through 23. Be7#	The queen joins the final combination, then disappears.

The sacrifices become a plan

The first major turning point is 11. Rg1. Anderssen places a rook where Black can take it indirectly, and after 11…cxb5, the bishop on b5 is gone. It is not a sacrifice made for decoration. Removing the bishop gives Black material, but White gains time, open attacking lines and a position in which the black king remains difficult to shelter.

White keeps pressing. The queen moves to f3, the h-pawn advances to h5, and the knight reaches f5. When Black’s queen retreats to g8, Anderssen recaptures the initiative with 15. Bxf4. The material ledger is already uncomfortable for White, yet the pieces are active and Black’s development is lagging.

The key manoeuvre is 16. Nc3 Bc5 17. Nd5. The knight’s jump attacks important squares and increases the pressure on the black queen. Kieseritzky takes the b2-pawn with 17…Qxb2, attacking both white rooks. In a calmer position that might be a profitable raid; here it allows the attack to dictate the next move.

Anderssen responds 18. Bd6. The move offers the rook on a1 and leaves the rook on g1 exposed. Black accepts with 18…Bxg1, and then the remaining rook falls after 19. e5 Qxa1+. White has sacrificed a bishop and both rooks, but the black queen has been pulled away from the king and White’s pieces have gained lines and checking possibilities.

Each offering changes the geometry of the board: a defender is removed, a file or diagonal opens, or Black’s queen is lured away. Material is being spent because the resulting activity creates immediate, concrete threats.

perhaps unparalleled in chess literature
Bill Hartston, English chess player and journalist

The final combination and its caveat

After 19…Qxa1+, Anderssen does not panic about the check. 20. Ke2 keeps the king in the centre, while 20…Na6 21. Nxg7+ brings another check and forces the black king towards d8. The white knight and bishop now work together against a king with few safe squares.

The famous finish is 21…Kd8 22. Qf6+. This is the final queen sacrifice: Black must take with 22…Nxf6, and White concludes with 23. Be7#. The mate is striking because White’s remaining attacking pieces coordinate perfectly even though the queen, rooks and one bishop have disappeared.

The standard score is usually printed through that checkmate. Historical accounts add an important qualification: Kieseritzky indicated that the game ended before the checkmate, and the queen-sacrifice continuation was later reproduced as part of the familiar version. That does not erase the combination’s beauty, but it does mean readers should distinguish the documented game report from the complete score commonly shown today.

Modern analysis also finds inaccuracies in the play, including alternatives that might have resisted the attack. ChessBase stresses that the game was a skittles game and that its moves are not all objectively correct. Its historical value therefore does not depend on pretending that Anderssen calculated every branch with modern precision.

Why the game remains immortal

The game belongs to the Romantic school, which prized rapid development, open attacks and bold sacrifices. Its appeal is unusually easy to see: the attack progresses in a clean narrative from pawn offer to bishop sacrifice, rook sacrifices, queen sacrifice and model mate. The climax is not merely a win; it is a visual demonstration that coordination can matter more than material for a few critical moves.

It also teaches practical chess. Anderssen repeatedly asks what Black’s king can do next, rather than what material White can save. The lesson for a modern player is not to throw pieces away. It is to calculate the compensation: open lines, forcing checks, trapped defenders, king safety and whether the opponent has time to consolidate.

That tension is the source of its durability. The game is a historical document, a Romantic spectacle and a practical study in initiative. Even after engines have challenged parts of its analysis, the board still shows why a well-timed sacrifice can make a position unforgettable.

Frequently asked questions

Tap any question to open the answer.

Who played the Immortal Game?

Adolf Anderssen played White against Lionel Kieseritzky, who had the black pieces. They played the casual game in London in 1851 while both were connected with the London international tournament.

Which pieces did Anderssen sacrifice?

In the standard published score, Anderssen sacrifices a bishop, both rooks and his queen. He then mates with three minor pieces, while the commonly recorded account says Kieseritzky had captured only three pawns from White.

Why is it called the Immortal Game?

The name was given by Ernst Falkbeer in 1855, after the game had been published and circulated. It refers to the game’s extraordinary attacking finish and enduring place in chess history, not to an official tournament title.