Kasparov Vs Deep Blue

Game 2

Deep Blue - Kasparov
4 May 1997

1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5 a6 4. Ba4 Nf6 5. O-O Be7 6. Re1 b5 7. Bb3 d6 8. c3 O-O 9. h3 h6 10. d4 Re8 11. Nbd2 Bf8 12. Nf1 Bd7 13. Ng3 Na5 14. Bc2 c5 15. b3 Nc6 16. d5 Ne7 17. Be3 Ng6 18. Qd2 Nh7 19. a4 Nh4 20. Nxh4 Qxh4 21. Qe2 Qd8 22. b4 Qc7 23. Rec1 c4 24. Ra3 Rec8 25. Rca1 Qd8 26. f4 Nf6 27. fxe5 dxe5 28. Qf1 Ne8 29. Qf2 Nd6 30. Bb6 Qe8 31. R3a2 Be7 32. Bc5 Bf8 33. Nf5 Bxf5 34. exf5 f6 35. Bxd6 Bxd6 36. axb5 axb5 37. Be4 Rxa2 38. Qxa2 Qd7 39. Qa7 Rc7 40. Qb6 Rb7 41. Ra8+ Kf7 42. Qa6 Qc7 43. Qc6 Qb6+ 44. Kf1 Rb8 45. Ra6 1-0

It was discovered after the game that Kasparov could have drawn this game with perpetual check beginning 45...Qe3 46.Qxd6 Re8! 47.h4! h5!. It seems that he trusted the computer's analysis too much and just did not believe the computer would let the position be drawn!

I didn't play the opening very well - I was passive, because I thought the computer would not be able to understand and handle well the resulting position. I wish I would have played otherwise, however, in order to play 'normal' openings you have to spend a couple of months checking your openings with your computer. Every line. Because one mistake in the Najdorf Sicilian could be fatal. The level of preparation would be different. Obviously Deep Blue had a large team behind it studying the openings.

The rest of the game is history. Including my resignation in a drawn position. The truth is that I was very tired and couldn't believe the way the machine had just played. I trusted its calculations. I assumed that if the machine allowed a move such as Qe3 at the end, it had calculated everything that could follow and found wins, so I didn't even bother checking it. Costly error, as I soon found out. - Kasparov