The Immortal Game: Anderssen's 1851 Masterpiece
On June 21, 1851, during a break from the first international chess tournament in London, Adolf Anderssen sat down for a casual game against Lionel Kieseritzky. What followed was a combinative explosion that sacrificed a bishop, both rooks, and the queen, delivering checkmate with just three minor pieces. The game was dubbed "The Immortal Game" and it has defined attacking chess for 175 years.
The King's Gambit accepted
The game opened with the King's Gambit, 1.e4 e5 2.f4 exf4, an opening that was the mainline fighting choice in the mid-19th century. By accepting the gambit, Kieseritzky wins a pawn but surrenders the centre and allows White dynamic piece play. Anderssen continued 3.Bc4, targeting f7 immediately, and after 3...Qh4+ 4.Kf1, White sacrificed the right to castle for an initiative that would snowball into an avalanche.
This was not reckless. Anderssen understood something profound about the position: material means nothing if your opponent's king is exposed and your pieces are active. That principle, piece activity over material, is the foundation of every sacrifice in chess.
The sacrifices begin
The game continued with sharp play on both sides. By move 18, Anderssen had sacrificed a bishop and was about to lose both rooks. The critical moment came with 18.Bd6, offering the second rook, Kieseritzky could play ...Qxa1+, capturing the rook with check, but Anderssen didn't care. His minor pieces were swarming toward the Black king.
Why not take the rook? In fact, Kieseritzky did take it: 18...Bxg1 19.e5 Qxa1+. But after 20.Ke2, White's pieces coordinate with terrifying harmony. The knight on f5 eyes g7, the bishop on d6 cuts off escape, and Black's extra material, two rooks and a bishop more than White, is stranded on the queenside, miles from the action.
This is the great lesson of the Immortal Game: material advantage means nothing if your pieces can't reach the critical squares. Anderssen's pieces were active; Kieseritzky's were wealthy but unemployed.
The checkmate
The finale is breathtaking. After 20...Na6 21.Nxg7+ Kd8 22.Qf6+!, sacrificing the queen!, 22...Nxf6 23.Be7#. Checkmate. White has sacrificed a bishop, both rooks, and the queen, yet delivers mate with just two knights and a bishop. The Black king, surrounded by its own pieces, has no escape.
The candidate move here was 22.Bc7+ instead of 22.Qf6+, it looks tempting because it's check with a lesser piece. But after 22.Bc7+ Ke8, Black's king escapes toward the queenside, and White's attack evaporates. The queen sacrifice is the only move that forces mate. Anderssen saw it; Kieseritzky did not.
Why it still matters
Modern engines confirm that the Immortal Game is not technically perfect, Kieseritzky had defensive resources that neither player saw. But that misses the point entirely. The game is not celebrated for its objective correctness; it is celebrated for its vision. Anderssen saw a checkmate pattern five moves deep that required giving up his most powerful pieces. That combination of imagination and courage is what "brilliance" means in chess.
If you want to understand attacking chess, you start here. Every smothered mate, every back-rank combination, every exchange sacrifice descends from the principle Anderssen demonstrated: when the king is exposed, pieces are worth less than the initiative.
Try it yourself
Play through the full Immortal Game, move by move, in our legends archive. Then test your own attacking instincts: solve sacrifice puzzles where giving up material is the winning path. The pattern, sacrifice to open lines, coordinate minor pieces, checkmate with geometry, appears in games at every level.