Landmarks In Chess History
Updated: 1 day ago
Ten Essential Games
Anderssen–Kieseritzky, 1851 — The “Immortal Game”: an archetypal Romantic-era combination in which Anderssen sacrificed a bishop, both rooks, and his queen before delivering checkmate.
Morphy–Duke Karl of Brunswick and Count Isouard, 1858 — The “Opera Game”: a model demonstration of rapid development, open lines, and an attack against a king trapped in the centre.
Capablanca–Tartakower, 1924 — Capablanca activates his rook and king, sacrificing pawns to create and support decisive passed pawns in one of the most celebrated endings from the New York tournament.
Réti–Capablanca, 1924 — A landmark hypermodern victory that ended Capablanca’s eight-year, 63-game unbeaten run.
Botvinnik–Capablanca, 1938 — A deep strategic buildup culminating in the famous 30.Ba3! and 31.Nh5+! tactical combination.
Byrne–Fischer, 1956 — Thirteen-year-old Bobby Fischer’s “Game of the Century,” featuring the celebrated queen sacrifice 17...Be6!!
Petrosian–Spassky, 1966 — Game 10 of their World Championship match, featuring two characteristic exchange sacrifices and a precise concluding combination.
Fischer–Spassky, 1972 — The celebrated sixth match game: a positional masterpiece that gave Fischer his first lead in the World Championship.
Kasparov–Topalov, 1999 — “Kasparov’s Immortal,” beginning with 24.Rxd4!! and developing into one of chess history’s most memorable king hunts.
Carlsen–Nepomniachtchi, 2021 — The 136-move sixth match game, officially the longest game in World Chess Championship history.
The Romantic and Classical Eras
Alexander McDonnell–Louis-Charles Mahé de La Bourdonnais, London 1834 — 0–1. In the 16th game of their fourth match, La Bourdonnais turns three connected passed pawns into an attacking force stronger than White’s extra material. The final position, with the pawns massed on the second rank, remains one of the defining images of early match chess.
Adolf Anderssen–Lionel Kieseritzky, London 1851 — 1–0. Played as a casual game during the London tournament, the traditional score of the “Immortal Game” has Anderssen give up both rooks and then his queen before mating with his remaining minor pieces. Some historical accounts indicate that the published mating sequence may have extended beyond the moves actually played.
Adolf Anderssen–Jean Dufresne, Berlin 1852 — 1–0. The “Evergreen Game” builds toward 19.Rad1!, after which a cascade of sacrifices opens the black king. Later analysis found stronger defensive resources, but the finish remains a classic study in development, line-opening and coordinated attack.
Paul Morphy–Duke Karl and Count Isouard, Paris 1858 — 1–0. In the “Opera Game,” Morphy defeats two consulting opponents in 17 moves. Rapid development, control of open files and sacrifices of rook and queen lead to a model mating attack that is still used to teach the value of piece activity.
Johannes Zukertort–Joseph Henry Blackburne, London 1883 — 1–0. Zukertort’s restrained queenside buildup suddenly becomes a direct attack after 28.Qb4!!. The queen offer works because every white piece joins the assault, producing one of the Victorian era’s most celebrated combinations.
Emanuel Lasker–Johann Hermann Bauer, Amsterdam 1889 — 1–0. Lasker tears open the castled king with 15.Bxh7+ and 17.Bxg7, sacrificing both bishops to expose the dark squares. The pattern became the standard reference for the double-bishop sacrifice.
Wilhelm Steinitz–Mikhail Chigorin, Havana 1892, Game 4 — 1–0. Steinitz wins a sharp Ruy Lopez in the fourth recognised World Championship and the second title match between these rivals. The game captures their stylistic contrast: Steinitz’s accumulation of positional advantages ultimately supports a forceful attack against Chigorin’s active defence.
Wilhelm Steinitz–Curt von Bardeleben, Hastings 1895 — 1–0. Beginning with 25.Rxh7+!, Steinitz exploits overloaded pieces and a series of pins to drive his rook deep into Black’s position. The published finish is a celebrated example of how tactical possibilities can grow out of superior development and king safety.
Harry Nelson Pillsbury–Emanuel Lasker, St. Petersburg 1895–96 — 0–1. In a crucial tournament game, Lasker repeatedly offers a rook to break through against Pillsbury’s king. Pillsbury must finally accept, allowing Lasker to complete a forcing mating attack in one of the champion’s finest tactical victories.
Emanuel Lasker–William Ewart Napier, Cambridge Springs 1904 — 1–0. Napier’s ambitious 12...d5 launches a dangerous counterattack in the Sicilian, but Lasker absorbs the pressure and turns the open lines against Black’s king. Napier later regarded the game as his best despite being on the losing side.
Georg Rotlewi–Akiba Rubinstein, Łódź 1907 — 0–1. “Rubinstein’s Immortal” culminates in 22...Rxc3! and a stunning queen offer. Black’s queen, rooks and bishops coordinate so completely that White cannot answer all the mating threats.
Akiba Rubinstein–Emanuel Lasker, St. Petersburg 1909 — 1–0. In their first tournament meeting, Rubinstein outplays the reigning world champion from a Queen’s Gambit. He converts superior development and central control into material gains, then finishes with the precision for which his positional play became famous.
Ossip Bernstein–José Raúl Capablanca, Moscow 1914 — 0–1. Capablanca’s 29...Qb2!! attacks both White’s queen and rook, with back-rank tactics preventing an adequate defence. The quiet-looking double attack is one of the clearest examples of his long-range tactical vision.
José Raúl Capablanca–Frank Marshall, New York 1918 — 1–0. Marshall unveils the pawn sacrifice 8...d5 in the Ruy Lopez, the idea that would take his name. Capablanca survives the fierce kingside initiative and wins in 36 moves; the often-repeated claim that Marshall had saved the exact line for years is not securely documented.
Hypermodernism and the Interwar Years
Emanuel Lasker–José Raúl Capablanca, Havana 1921, Game 10 — 0–1. Capablanca exchanges into a queenless middlegame and gradually turns small structural and activity advantages into a 68-move win. The victory gave him a two-game lead and is often treated as the critical game in the match that ended Lasker’s 27-year reign.
Géza Maróczy–Savielly Tartakower, Teplitz-Schönau 1922 — 0–1. From a Dutch Defence, Tartakower offers a rook before most of his pieces appear ready to attack. The sacrifice is supported by concrete variations, and Black’s queen, rook and pawns eventually drive the white king into a decisive net.
Friedrich Sämisch–Aron Nimzowitsch, Copenhagen 1923 — 0–1. Often called the “Immortal Zugzwang Game,” this victory leaves White’s pieces almost completely paralysed while Black improves at leisure. Whether the final position is a strict zugzwang is debated, but its demonstration of restraint and domination is unmistakable.
Ernst Grünfeld–Alexander Alekhine, Karlsbad 1923 — 0–1. Alekhine creates threats on both wings, then uses tactical exchanges and a queen sacrifice to force the finish. The game received one of the tournament’s first brilliancy prizes and helped establish his reputation for deep, multi-stage combinations.
José Raúl Capablanca–Savielly Tartakower, New York 1924 — 1–0. Capablanca accepts temporary pawn weaknesses to activate his rook and king in a famous rook ending. His king’s march into the kingside turns an apparently modest edge into a textbook demonstration of endgame activity.
Richard Réti–Efim Bogoljubow, New York 1924 — 1–0. Réti’s flank opening invites Black to occupy the centre, which White then attacks with pieces and pawn breaks. The elegant tactical finish earned first brilliancy prize at one of the strongest tournaments of the decade.
Richard Réti–José Raúl Capablanca, New York 1924 — 1–0. Réti controls the centre from the flanks, then converts his space and initiative against Capablanca’s queenside. The result ended Capablanca’s eight-year, 63-game unbeaten run in serious tournament and match play.
Carlos Torre–Emanuel Lasker, Moscow 1925 — 1–0. Torre’s 25.Bf6! offers the queen and begins the celebrated “windmill.” Alternating rook checks and discovered attacks strip Black of material before White emerges with a winning advantage.
Richard Réti–Alexander Alekhine, Baden-Baden 1925 — 0–1. Alekhine accepts severe complications and coordinates queen, rooks and knights in a long forcing sequence against Réti’s exposed king. Alekhine himself ranked the game among the finest of his career, though historical sources preserve slightly different versions of the score.
Paul Johner–Aron Nimzowitsch, Dresden 1926 — 0–1. Nimzowitsch blockades White’s central pawns, restrains every freeing break and reroutes his queen from d8 through d7 and f5 to h7. The first-brilliancy-prize game became a textbook example of blockade and prophylaxis.
José Raúl Capablanca–Rudolf Spielmann, New York 1927, Round 13 — 1–0. Capablanca meets Spielmann’s active play with a simplifying combination that leaves a powerful passed a-pawn. His accurate conversion won the tournament’s first brilliancy prize; this is the decisive Round 13 game, not their Round 1 draw.
José Raúl Capablanca–Alexander Alekhine, Buenos Aires 1927, Game 11 — 0–1. Alekhine survives a fluctuating Queen’s Gambit in which both players miss chances, then outplays the champion in a long endgame. The win levelled the match at two victories apiece; Alekhine won again in Game 12 and eventually took the title 6–3 after 34 games.
Alexander Alekhine–Géza Maróczy, Bled 1931 — 1–0. Alekhine transforms an orthodox Queen’s Gambit into a direct attack, using a queen incursion and tactical threats to overwhelm Maróczy. The win formed part of Alekhine’s unbeaten 20½/26 performance, 5½ points clear of the field.
Vera Menchik–Max Euwe, Hastings 1931–32 — 1–0. Played on December 29, 1931, the game sees Menchik punish an early central error and keep control through the complications. It was her second consecutive Hastings victory over Euwe, four years before he became world champion.
Max Euwe–Alexander Alekhine, Zandvoort 1935, Game 26 — 1–0. The “Pearl of Zandvoort” turns a Nimzo-Indian into a model of coordinated attack after Euwe’s central break 24.e5. The victory put Euwe ahead with four games remaining in the match he would win 15½–14½, making him the fifth world champion.
Mikhail Botvinnik–José Raúl Capablanca, AVRO 1938 — 1–0. Botvinnik builds a dangerous central pawn mass, then finds 30.Ba3!! to deflect Capablanca’s queen from the e-pawn. The ensuing knight sacrifice and advance of the passed pawn produce one of Botvinnik’s most celebrated victories.
The War Years and Postwar Masters
Max Euwe–Paul Keres, Rotterdam 1940 — 0–1. Played on January 5, 1940, as Game 9 of their 14-game Netherlands match, it belongs under 1940 even though the match began in 1939. Keres’s 23...Qxd3! gives up the queen; his two rooks and bishops then dominate the board, and 34...Bg4+ ends the game.
Mikhail Botvinnik–David Bronstein, Moscow 1951, Game 23 — 1–0. Bronstein entered the penultimate game leading 11½–10½ and needing only one point from the final two games. Botvinnik won a difficult bishop-versus-knight ending, sealing the position with 57.Bg5; the last game was drawn, so the 12–12 tie allowed Botvinnik to retain the title.
Max Euwe–Miguel Najdorf, Zürich 1953 — 1–0. Euwe turns a strategically complex fianchetto structure into a direct kingside attack. The former champion’s pieces converge on the exposed king, and the final position contains a forced mate beginning with Qh8+.
Efim Geller–Max Euwe, Zürich 1953 — 0–1. Under severe kingside pressure, Euwe finds 22...Rh8!!, offering a rook to divert White’s queen. After 23.Qxh8 Rc2, Black’s queen and rook invade decisively; Geller resigns when mate can no longer be prevented, making the game a classic of active defence and counterattack.
Yuri Averbakh–Alexander Kotov, Zürich 1953 — 0–1. Kotov’s 30...Qxh3+!! sacrifices the queen to drag White’s king into the open. Knight, bishop and rooks continue the hunt with forcing checks, producing the tournament’s most famous brilliancy-prize combination.
Paul Keres–Vasily Smyslov, Zürich 1953 — 0–1. In a vital late-round game, Keres sacrifices aggressively against the black king. Smyslov declines the most dangerous material, finds the defensive resource 19...dxc4!, and turns the attack into a counteroffensive that strengthened his grip on first place in the Candidates Tournament.
Mikhail Botvinnik–Vasily Smyslov, Moscow 1954, Game 14 — 0–1. Smyslov’s deeply prepared King’s Indian reaches 20...Bb7!!, apparently leaving his queen to be taken. After Botvinnik accepts, Smyslov receives three minor pieces whose coordination overwhelms the champion; the match eventually ended 12–12, allowing Botvinnik to retain the title.
Donald Byrne–Bobby Fischer, New York 1956 — 0–1. Thirteen-year-old Fischer’s “Game of the Century” begins its decisive sequence with 11...Na4!! and culminates in the queen offer 17...Be6!!. Fischer receives a rook, two bishops and a pawn for the queen, then coordinates his pieces to force mate.
Lev Polugaevsky–Rashid Nezhmetdinov, Sochi 1958 — 0–1. Nezhmetdinov gives up his queen on move 24 and uses quieter moves such as 26...Bg7! to keep the white king trapped in the centre. The attack drives the king across the board and ends with unavoidable mate.
Mikhail Tal–Bobby Fischer, Candidates Tournament 1959 — 1–0. Tal steers a sharp Sicilian into the tactical complications he handled so well and defeats the 16-year-old Fischer. It was one of Tal’s four wins in four games against Fischer at the event, an important contribution to Tal’s first-place finish.
Boris Spassky–David Bronstein, Leningrad 1960 — 1–0. Spassky revives the King’s Gambit and plays the startling 15.Nd6!!, followed by a rook sacrifice and a rapid king hunt. The game was later recreated in the chess scene in the 1963 James Bond film From Russia with Love.
Mikhail Botvinnik–Mikhail Tal, Moscow 1960, Game 6 — 0–1. Tal’s speculative 21...Nf4!! opens lines and creates more practical problems than Botvinnik can solve at the board. The victory gave Tal the match lead and became the defining example of his willingness to trade material for initiative and psychological pressure.
Vasily Smyslov–Mikhail Tal, Moscow 1964 — 0–1. Tal makes a positional queen sacrifice and then patiently coordinates his remaining pieces over a 72-move struggle. The game is striking precisely because the renowned tactician converts the imbalance with sustained strategic control rather than an immediate mating attack.
Tigran Petrosian–Boris Spassky, Moscow 1966, Game 10 — 1–0. Petrosian makes two exchange sacrifices, beginning with 21.Ne3! and then 24.Rxf4!, to seize complete control of the position. He later recovers the material and reaches a winning minor-piece ending, showing that the great defender could also calculate a sustained sacrificial attack.
Lev Polugaevsky–Mikhail Tal, Moscow 1969 — 1–0. Polugaevsky’s 19.Bxh7+ begins an attack he had analysed deeply before the game, and 25.e6! keeps the initiative alive. He beats Tal in Tal’s own sacrificial idiom, combining opening preparation with precise calculation.
Bent Larsen–Boris Spassky, Belgrade 1970 — 0–1. On first board in the USSR versus Rest of the World match, Spassky answers Larsen’s 1.b3 with immediate central play and opposite-side castling. His h-pawn breaks through, promotes on move 17 and ends one of elite chess’s most spectacular miniatures.
Bobby Fischer–Tigran Petrosian, Buenos Aires 1971, Candidates Final Game 7 — 1–0. Fischer’s surprising 22.Nxd7+ transforms the position into a favourable endgame whose subtleties are still analysed. The victory was the second of four consecutive wins that carried Fischer through the Candidates final and into his 1972 title match with Spassky.
Bobby Fischer–Boris Spassky, Reykjavík 1972, Game 6 — 1–0. Fischer surprises Spassky with a Queen’s Gambit, then uses 20.e4! to seize the centre and conducts a near-model positional attack. The win gave Fischer his first lead in the match, and Spassky joined the audience in applauding at the end.
Fischer, Karpov, Kasparov and the Computer Era
Anatoly Karpov–Wolfgang Unzicker, Nice 1974 — 1–0. Karpov’s 24.Ba7!! fixes Black’s queenside and clears the a-file for his heavy pieces. He then improves his position almost without allowing counterplay, making the game a classic model of restriction and the “Karpov squeeze.”
Anatoly Karpov–Viktor Korchnoi, Baguio 1978, Game 32 — 1–0. With the first-to-six-wins match tied 5–5, Korchnoi surprises Karpov with 6...c5 in the Pirc Defence. Karpov responds confidently, gains space and finishes with the passed b-pawn advance 40.b5 and 41.b6, winning the deciding game and retaining the title.
Anatoly Karpov–Garry Kasparov, Moscow 1985, Game 16 — 0–1. Playing Black, Kasparov installs a knight on d3 on move 16; the piece remains there until Karpov gives up his queen to remove it on move 34. The “octopus knight” victory broke the match tie and is widely regarded as one of Kasparov’s finest games.
Anatoly Karpov–Garry Kasparov, Moscow 1985, Game 24 — 0–1. Karpov needed to win the final game to retain his title, while Kasparov chose active counterplay instead of passive defence. Kasparov’s counterattack prevailed after Karpov’s time-pressure errors, making him the 13th world champion at age 22.
Garry Kasparov–Anatoly Karpov, Seville 1987, Game 24 — 1–0. Trailing 12–11, Kasparov had to win the final game to retain his title. He chose a patient English Opening, took over after Karpov’s risky 31...Nxa4 and converted after adjournment; the 12–12 match draw left Kasparov champion.
Garry Kasparov–Viswanathan Anand, New York 1995, Game 10 — 1–0. One game after Anand took the lead, Kasparov immediately levelled the match with a prepared novelty in the Open Ruy Lopez. He first sacrifices a pawn and then a rook to keep Anand’s king exposed, beginning the surge that carried him to a 10½–7½ match victory.
Deep Blue–Garry Kasparov, New York 1997, Game 6 — 1–0. Deep Blue’s opening play draws Kasparov into a known tactical problem, and the champion resigns after only 19 moves. The result completed a 3½–2½ match victory, the first by a computer over a reigning world champion under standard tournament time controls.
Veselin Topalov–Alexei Shirov, Linares 1998 — 0–1. In a bishop-and-pawn ending, Shirov finds 47...Bh3!!, offering his bishop so that his king can enter with a decisive tempo and support the passed pawns. The counterintuitive move is now one of the best-known endgame sacrifices in chess.
Garry Kasparov–Veselin Topalov, Wijk aan Zee 1999 — 1–0. Kasparov’s 24.Rxd4!! begins a forcing king hunt that drives Topalov’s king from b8 to d1. The succession of rook and knight sacrifices, checks and quiet threats made “Kasparov’s Immortal” one of the most analysed attacking games of the modern era.
Vladimir Kramnik–Garry Kasparov, London 2000, Game 2 — 1–0. Kramnik introduces a powerful idea against Kasparov’s Grünfeld and converts an opposite-coloured-bishop middlegame into the match’s first win. He later won Game 10 and used the Berlin Defence to neutralise Kasparov with Black, taking the title 8½–6½ without losing a game.
Modern Classics and Championship Turning Points
Judit Polgár–Garry Kasparov, Moscow 2002 — 1–0, rapid. In the Russia versus Rest of the World match, played at 25 minutes plus a 10-second increment, Polgár outplays the reigning world No. 1 in a Berlin Defence. She became the first woman to defeat a reigning world No. 1 in competitive play.
Vladimir Kramnik–Peter Lékó, Brissago 2004, Game 14 — 1–0. Down 7–6, Kramnik had to win the last game to keep the Classical world title. He gained an opening advantage in a sharp Caro–Kann, broke through with a positional pawn sacrifice and forced Lékó to resign on move 41 with mate imminent; the match ended 7–7.
Vladimir Kramnik–Viswanathan Anand, Bonn 2008, Game 3 — 0–1. Anand unveils the prepared 14...Bb7 and 17...Rg4 in a sharp Meran, giving up two pawns for initiative and an exposed white king. Despite mutual time pressure, his attack survives the transition into a reduced-material position and gives him the first win of the match.
Viswanathan Anand–Veselin Topalov, Sofia 2010, Game 4 — 1–0. Anand’s prepared novelty 10.Na3! leaves Topalov’s pieces tied to the queenside. Once the defenders are displaced, 23.Nxh6+!! tears open the king and launches a precisely calculated attack.
Levon Aronian–Viswanathan Anand, Wijk aan Zee 2013 — 0–1. Anand answers Aronian’s provocative 12.Ng5 with 12...c5!, then strings together pawn and piece sacrifices to keep the white king exposed. The extraordinary coordination behind the final mating threats earned the game the nickname “Anand’s Immortal.”
Viswanathan Anand–Magnus Carlsen, Chennai 2013, Game 9 — 0–1. Needing winning chances, Anand launches his strongest kingside attack of the match while Carlsen races a passed b-pawn down the other wing. After Black promotes with check, 28.Nf1? permits 28...Qe1, and Anand resigns because his attack no longer compensates for the material loss.
Magnus Carlsen–Sergey Karjakin, New York 2016, Rapid Tiebreak Game 4 — 1–0. With Karjakin required to win, Carlsen builds a controlled attack and finishes with 50.Qh6+!!. Whether the queen is captured by the king or the g-pawn, mate follows immediately; the win retained Carlsen’s title on his 26th birthday.
Hou Yifan–Fabiano Caruana, Karlsruhe 2017 — 1–0. Hou’s deep preparation against Caruana’s Berlin Defence gives her the initiative from the opening. She steadily increases the pressure as the world No. 4 drifts into passivity, beginning the elite GRENKE Classic with a landmark victory.
Fabiano Caruana–Magnus Carlsen, London 2018, Rapid Tiebreak Game 3 — 0–1. After all 12 classical games were drawn, Carlsen won the first two rapid tiebreaks and needed only a draw in the third. He nevertheless pressed with Black, converted a superior ending and completed a 3–0 rapid sweep to retain the world title.
Magnus Carlsen–Ian Nepomniachtchi, Dubai 2021, Game 6 — 1–0. The players navigate a complex queen-versus-rooks imbalance, mutual time trouble and a long technical ending before Nepomniachtchi resigns after 136 moves and 7 hours 45 minutes. It remains the longest game in world championship history.
Ian Nepomniachtchi–Ding Liren, Astana 2023, Rapid Tiebreak Game 4 — 0–1. With Black, Ding rejects a potential repetition with 46...Rg6 and keeps the game alive despite the risk. His decision is rewarded when Nepomniachtchi falters, making Ding the 17th world champion and the first Chinese player to hold the open world title.
Ding Liren–Gukesh Dommaraju, Singapore 2024, Game 14 — 0–1. A balanced ending appears headed for tiebreaks until Ding plays 55.Rf2?, allowing the decisive simplification 56...Bd5!. Ding resigns three moves later, and 18-year-old Gukesh becomes the youngest world champion in history.
Women’s Chess: Championship Context
The games by Vera Menchik, Judit Polgár and Hou Yifan are placed in the main chronology above rather than separated from the rest of chess history. These additional links supply wider context for the women’s championship tradition and several of its defining champions.
The First Women’s World Chess Championship, London 1927 — Vera Menchik scored 10½/11, conceding only one draw, to become the first Women’s World Chess Champion. She retained the title for the rest of her life and established an extraordinary record in women’s championship events.
Vera Menchik–Sonja Graf, World Championship Match 1937 — Menchik defeated her strongest contemporary rival 11½–4½ in a 16-game match at Semmering. FIDE approved and recognised the match, which Menchik won with nine victories, five draws and two losses.
Nona Gaprindashvili: Games and Career — The fifth Women’s World Champion held the title from 1962 to 1978 and became the first woman awarded the FIDE Grandmaster title. Her success in strong open events helped redefine the competitive possibilities for women in chess.
Maia Chiburdanidze: Games and Career — Chiburdanidze won the world title at 17, held it from 1978 to 1991 and became the second woman awarded the Grandmaster title. Her 13-year reign linked the great Georgian championship tradition to the modern era.
Hou Yifan: Games and Career — Hou became a grandmaster at 14 and won the Women’s World Championship at 16, then a record for the youngest champion. A four-time titleholder, she also established herself as one of the strongest women ever in elite open competition.
Continue Exploring
Chessgames.com — A long-running database of notable master games with player pages, themed collections and extensive reader discussion. It is especially useful for finding famous games and following the historical commentary around them.
365Chess — A searchable database of more than four million games. Searches can be filtered by player, opening, ECO code, year, result and move sequence; some download features require supporter access.
ChessTempo Game Database — A database of more than five million games with quick and advanced searches by player, opening, rating, result and date. It also allows searches from a particular board position.
ChessBase Online Database — A large online master-game database organised around players, tournaments and openings. It is useful for replay and opening research, although some ChessBase services and features require an account.
PGN Downloads and Specialist Archives
The Week in Chess Archive — Mark Crowther’s weekly record of international chess includes downloadable game files in PGN and ChessBase formats. It is one of the best sources for recent tournament games.
PGN Mentor Files — Free downloadable PGN collections arranged by player, event, opening and historical theme. The files can be opened by most chess-database and analysis programs.
BritBase Chess Game Archive — A specialist archive of British tournaments, matches and championships, including crosstables, game scores and downloadable PGN files.
Lichess Open Database — Bulk downloadable datasets for Lichess games, official broadcasts, puzzles, evaluations and openings. The official-broadcast files are the most relevant part for studying contemporary tournament chess.
Curated Discovery Lists
World’s Greatest Chess Games Reading List — A substantial community-created forum index with replay links, videos and discussion covering many eras and styles. It is useful as a discovery list, though it is not an official or independently edited reference work.
List of Chess Games — A chronological index of famous combinations, championship encounters, miniatures and unusual historical games. It is useful for discovering candidates for further study, with references that can be checked individually.