Sämisch–Nimzowitsch: the Immortal Zugzwang Game

Aron Nimzowitsch’s 1923 win over Fritz Sämisch is known as the Immortal Zugzwang Game. The final position is remarkable: White has plenty of material and legal moves, but almost every move concedes something decisive.

Lesson

White to move. Main line: 1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 e6 3. Nf3 b6 4. g3 Bb7 5. Bg2 Be7 6. Nc3 O-O 7. O-O d5 8. Ne5 c6 9. cxd5 cxd5 10. Bf4 a6 11. Rc1 b5 12. Qb3 Nc6 13. Nxc6 Bxc6 14. h3 Qd7 15. Kh2 Nh5 16. Bd2 f5 17. Qd1 b4 18. Nb1 Bb5 19. Rg1 Bd6 20. e4 fxe4 21. Qxh5 Rxf2 22. Qg5 Raf8 23. Kh1 R8f5 24. Qe3 Bd3 25. Rce1 h6

Black first restrains White’s center, expands with ...b5 and fixes the queenside. The maneuver ...Nh5, ...f5 and ...b4 takes useful squares away from White’s pieces, especially the knight stranded on b1.

After 20.e4 fxe4 and 21.Qxh5, Black does not rush. The rooks invade f2 and f5, the bishop lands on d3, and 25...h6 completes the bind. White resigned because moving a major piece or pawn unguards a critical square or loses material.

Strictly speaking, the finish is not stalemate: White can move. It is a positional zugzwang in a middlegame, created by restriction rather than checks. That distinction makes the game especially valuable for teaching prophylaxis and piece mobility.