Found this gem of a game

It is a shame. In 1972 grandmasters used to prearrange draws and without any scrupules and even made it blatantly clear the game was not real. They got away with that without punishment.

@Requir a commentary of this game I found:
1. c4 (Huebner obviously likes that move) 1. ...Nf6
2.Nf3, g6 (Sajtar is finally happy, everything is played by the chess theory) 3. Ng1 (but.... White changed his mind. Audience is laughing, Arbiter is angry) 3. ...Bg7 (at least Black plays normally, thibks arbiter) 4.Qa4 (theoretical novelty) 4... 0-0
5.Qxd7 (despite black pawn is defended 4 times, white sacrifices his queen. Black had threat to develop that pawn on d5, so white prevents this by sacrificing his queen. Philidor was right: The pawns are the soul of the chess) 5... Qxd7 (After long thinking Black captures by Queen, because of great threat Qxd2) 6. g4 (Great move, White controls f5 and h5 and opens diagonal for his rook) 6... Qxd2 (Another great sacrifice. White must capture queen because of check. Spectators are around table, reporters, cameramen... This is the game for history) 7.Kxd2 (White captures with his King. One GM in audience explains it: Huebner is a big fan of Steinitz, who was player which treated King as very strong piece) 7... Nxg4 (Prevents white's maneuver Kc3 and Kb4) 8.b4 (Cunning trap.. after eventually 8. ...Bxa1, Bishop would be trapped with 9.Bb2 and 10.Nc3) 8... a5 (Black, of course doesn't fall in trap and blocks b4 where White wanted to put his King) 9.a4 (prevents b5) 9... Bxa1 (Fatal mistake, Black doesn't find the way) 10.Bb2 (Black didn't predicted this. Awesome move!! White took most important diagonal with idea to remove pawns on h2 and h7 and then Rh8#) 10.... Nc6 (Black foresees white's idea and hurries with his knight to defend h8) 11. Bh8 (In between move because of ...Bb2) 11....Bg7 (prevents moving of white bishop)
12.h4 (continuation of Rh8# plan)
After this move white doesn't have good square to develop his knight so Huebner offered draw and Rogoff accepted.

But... Referee, again, doesn't have understanding for this masterpiece, and order them to play new game. Next day Huebner didn't show up and Rogoff won 1 point.

(apparently from a book "Sahovska Citanka")

If you knew the circumstances you would not blame the players, you would blame the referees forcing the players into that game. A typical story - something is dealt again and again without knowledge.

** "Learn Chess from the Greats" by Peter J. Tamburro, 2000:

** "In the World Students Championship in Graz, Austria, in July, feeling overworked by two games totaling 135 moves, Huebner played 1P‐QB4 against Kenneth Rogoff of the United States and offered a draw, which Rogoff accepted. However, it was not accepted by the tournament director, who insisted the game be replayed and continued to greater length. After two attempts, both of which were made up of ridiculous moves in defiance of the director's authority, Huebner lost by forfeit. His rebelliousness forbade him the customary expedient of running up 10 to 15 moves of a standard, came drawing variation." ("Chess: Huebner Attracts Notice With Play and Temperament By Robert Byrne", The New York Times October 24, 1972)

** "The German grandmaster Robert Hübner also lost a game without playing any moves. In a World Student Team Championship game played in Graz in 1972, Hübner played one move and offered a draw to Kenneth Rogoff, who accepted. However, the arbiters insisted that some moves be played, so the players played the following ridiculous game: 1.c4 Nf6 2.Nf3 g6 3.Ng1 Bg7 4.Qa4 0-0 5.Qxd7 Qxd7 6.g4 Qxd2+ 7.Kxd2 Nxg4 8.b4 a5 9.a4 Bxa1 10.Bb2 Nc6 11.Bh8 Bg7 12.h4 axb4 (draw agreed).[16] The arbiters ruled that both players must apologize and play an actual game at 7 p.m. Rogoff appeared and apologized; Hübner did neither. Hübner's clock was started, and after an hour Rogoff was declared the winner" (Wikipedia,

** "In 1972, during the World Youth Team championship in Graz, Switzerland, Robert Huebner of Germany was scheduled to play Ken Rogoff of the USA. Both were tired from previous long games and Huebner offered a draw to Rogoff without making any moves. However, the arbiters did not like this and refused the game. So the two players put together a scoresheet of a game that looked like this: 1.Nf3 Nf6 2.Ng1 Ng8 3.Nf3 Nf6 4.Ng1 Ng8 and so on ... Draw. The arbiters were not amused. They insisted that the two play some real moves. So the next game went 1.c4 Nf6 2.Nf3 g6 3.Nf1 Bg7 4.Qa4 O-O 5.Qxd7 Qxd7 6.g4 Qxd2+ 7.Kxd2 Nxg4 8.b4 a5 9.a4 Bxa1 10.Bb2 Nc6 11.Bh8 Bg7 12.h4 axb4 draw. The arbiters were not amused. They insisted that the two play a valid game. Rogoff agreed but Huebner did not, so Rogoff was given a win and Huebner was given a loss. The Russian team pressed for a double forfeit, but Huebner insisted that he alone bore responsibility. Years later, the main arbiter, Sajtar, admitted he was wrong in ordering a rematch of the games." ("Chess in 1972 by Bill Wall", )

** "But even a game played perfectly by both sides can be dull, if both players lack ambition. For example, there is a line in the Petroff Defense that sucks all the life out of the game, even though it involves no “mistakes.” Or even worse, consider Huebner-Rogoff, Graz, 1972: 1.c4 draw agreed. There’s no beauty in that, just as there is no beauty in a boxing match if neither fighter leaves his corner" ("Philosophy Looks at Chess" edited by Benjamin Hale, 2008)

** "Sergey Shipov was to the point in bringing up an episode from Robert Hübner's career when he was denied making a draw after move one and, together with his opponent, he went on to put on an act involving a mutual sacrifice of queens. It took place in the Germany - USA matchup of the 1972 World Student Team Championship, when board one Hübner was paired against the then hope of American chess, a future genius of the Western economy Kenneth Rogoff (even nowadays Rogoff was noted for drawing Carlsen in an exhibition blitz game!). All in all, Robert was far from eager to challenge a young overseas star, and that's what came of it...

Huebner - Rogoff, Graz 1972
1.c4 Nf6 2.Nf3 g6 3.Ng1!? Bg7 4.Qa4 0–0 5.Qxd7!? Qxd7 6.g4 Qxd2+! 7.Kxd2 Nxg4 8.b4 a5 9.a4 Bxa1 10.Bb2 Nc6 11.Bh8 Bg7 12.h4 axb4 Draw. Would the game ever cross you mind to have been played by two future professors of philology and economics?" ("Dying Hard in the Grob", Russian Chess Federation News 8 February 2017,

** "MP: One other thing I discovered in our archives, it was actually an April 1st post, but it seems to have been a real event. Your game with Robert Huebner, the World Students Team Championship in 1972 in Graz. What is the story? It’s not mentioned in the article and I was terribly curious.

Ken Rogoff: I think the real story was that Huebner had played a really important game against Karpov the round before and lost. It was a fantastic game by Karpov, if I’m remembering — he was white and just squeezed Huebner. And I don’t think they had met before, and Huebner had finished second in the Interzonal to Fischer. Karpov was an emerging talent. And so Huebner just didn’t want to play — he was just exhausted. He was emotionally exhausted because that was a very important game, and so — and this is just how I understood it — he told his team captain, ‘I don’t want to play’ and the team captain said, ‘well that’s silly, you’re white you can play first board, shift everybody else a board down and that helps us a lot. If you’re too tired, just make a draw.’

Huebner, playing white against a much lower rated player felt insulted to be making a draw so he wanted it to be very clear that he was just doing it [for the team], and so he played one move and offered a draw. And I should have refused it — I made a mistake — but I went to my team captain — I think it was Benko — and I said, what do I do? And Benko said, ‘you got to be kidding, take a draw’ — that’s how I remember it, I could remember it wrong — and so I did. I shouldn't have. Then they made us play something [the arbiters disallowed a one move draw -Ed.], and then he started playing suicide moves. They made us apologise, and so we played again. He started playing suicide moves. I played suicide moves back. By this time everyone was standing on every table watching the game instead of playing their own games. I think I had more pieces at the end, but we agreed to a draw again. And this time the tournament director said we’re going to forfeit both of you — quite rightly — we were both wrong. I didn’t know how to react when he was doing that, you know I had a lot of respect for him, and just didn’t handle it well. And then basically the third time I think I apologised and he didn’t and I think I won by forfeit in the end. And probably the correct decision was to forfeit both of us.

MP: So in the game that actually shows up in the database, the suicide moves that you were playing — it’s not like you’d agreed on this before — it was just a reaction to what you were seeing?

Ken Rogoff: Oh no no, I was following what he was doing. I had no idea — he was leading the way. He was this incredible player, playing white, and I just hadn't confronted this kind of situation before, and like I said, it was a team tournament — but of course, I should have just played. That’s very clear to me now — played and lost, it would have been fine. That was a wrong decision but once I sort of started down this path I didn’t seem to find a way out. So I’d agreed to a draw the first time, and then the second time we started doing that — I mean I didn’t want to win that way. This was insulting to the tournament and to everyone, it was just wrong. It was obviously wrong on his part, but it was equally wrong on my part to play along with that. I should have just said, 'ok beat me,' which he would have probably because he’d have been so mad. He’d have been very focused. But it would have been good for my chess." ("A birthday chat with Ken Rogoff by Macauley Peterson", Chessbase News 3/23/2018,

check also the following links,%20Kenneth.10852096.9680

This topic has been archived and can no longer be replied to.