I believe brilliancy is a nice sacrifice like this one:
http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=1487929It's not a brilliancy to exploit blunders and win.
To select a winner there should be lichess wide poll or a celebrity judge who is Kasparov or a top 10 GM.
#10 - correction :2nd prize was 100 dollars in bitcoins - I have asked organiser to post here
I believe this was the winner of first place:
http://en.lichess.org/LT7RvIWk/black#33#13
Nice one!
Deserves to win!
Stockfish saying ...Qh4+ is a blunder clearly shows that someone should introduce the stupid machine to the concept of beauty.
The game posted in #13 is mainly a copy of a known bullet game between Roland Schmaltz and Ronen Har-Zvi:
http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=1553589Is there any official confirmation they actually got a price for that?
#16 - Very suspicious in that light, well spotted!
The game is an exact copy of the Schmaltz vs. Har-Vi game (with one move order transposition) up to the move 20.Kf5; VOrteX3543 (the winner Preslav1999's opponent) duplicated exactly the 1 mistake and 2 blunders played by Schmaltz up till this point.
Preslav then immediately found OTB 20... Rf3+ as being the road to the most brilliant (= unlikely looking but forced) mate; Har-Vi played the more obvious 20... Ng7+ and took 2 moves longer to mate.
Sobering thought, but if I'd been set on winning the brilliancy prize, this wouldn't have been a bad way to go about it, assuming that I had a similarly ranked accomplice who was willing to go along. Not that I'm accusing anyone of anything; it is of course perfectly possible for two players to leave book on move 7 and then duplicate another well-publicised ("Game of the Day") game for the next 14 moves.
PS also interesting is the fact that VOrteX3543 has only played 17 Blitz games, all of them in the "Pursuit of Brilliance" tournament; the quoted game was number 15. Mission accomplished.
Thumbs up, nice catch Dr_Schultz
