Study decisions, not reputations
A player’s reputation can hide the actual lesson. Anderssen is remembered for sacrifice, but his successful attacks were supplied by development, open lines, and pieces arriving with tempo. Fischer is remembered for precision, yet much of his endgame strength came from repeatable habits: active pieces, a working king, fixed weaknesses, and careful control of counterplay.
Begin each game without the label. Ask who has more space, which king is less safe, where the pawn breaks are, and which piece is not participating. Only then compare your answer with the move played. This makes the historical game relevant to positions you will actually reach.
Use contrasting model games
Pair games with different kinds of decisions. A direct attacking game teaches local force, development, and calculation. A technical ending teaches improvement, restriction, and the value of small irreversible changes. A positional squeeze teaches how a favorable structure can limit an opponent before tactics appear.
The Immortal Game is a useful attacking model because the final sacrifices did not appear from nowhere. The earlier moves explain why the combinations became forcing. Fischer’s endings provide the opposite rhythm: improve the position, reduce counterplay, and only then convert the advantage.
A repeatable study session
First, play through quickly to understand the story of the game. Second, return to three turning points and hide the next move. Write two or three candidates, calculate the opponent’s most forcing reply, and choose. Third, compare your plan with the game and explain the difference in one sentence.
Finish by extracting a rule you can test: develop with threats when the enemy king is uncastled; improve rook activity before collecting pawns; prepare the pawn break that changes the structure. A small rule connected to a real position is more useful than remembering a long sequence without its purpose.