|
|||||
|
|
|||||
|
Chessville
Advertise to Single insert:
|
Annotated Games
Steinitz v.
Lasker
Click
here to view the game on an interactive Javascript chess board. Steinitz,W - Lasker,E [D46] Notes by Lasker & Steinitz 1.d4
d5 Steinitz: An old idea revived by Chigorin and Gunsberg, and also adopted by Lasker against Blackburne in a similar position. It practically prevents the development of White's c1-bishop on the kingside, but it has its drawbacks, notably that it exposes Black to an attack in the center, as in the game. 4.e3
Nf6
7. ..... 0-0 Steinitz: If Black here advanced 7...e5 White would have
exchanged both 8.e4
dxe4 Steinitz: He could not now advance the e-pawn without losing a pawn, as White would have exchanged twice, followed by Bxh7+, etc. 11.Bc2
11. ..... f5 Lasker: Although this advance weakens the e-pawn, it paves the way for a strong attack on the king's wing. Steinitz: If now 11...e5 12.Qd3 f5 13.Qb3 Kh8 14.dxe5 Nxe5 15.Rd1 with a strong attack. The text move, however, weakens his center at once. 12.Re1
Nf6
Steinitz: Black, no doubt, on his eleventh move speculated upon this attack. However, it will be seen that it does not compensate for the weakness of his e-pawn. 17.Qh3
Qg7 Lasker: "White has skillfully prepared a strong attack in the centre of the board if an opportunity arrives. He threatens now P-Q5, and if then 19...PxP 20.PxP KtxP and 21.RxKt PxR followed by a discovered attack on the queen." 18. ..... g4 Lasker: Playing White's game, it merely drives the queen from a harmless post to a most threatening position. Black was under the impression that he could continue with 19...Qg5, but saw too late that White could then gain a clear pawn by 20.Nxg4. 18...Bh5 and if 19.f3 g4 or if 19.Rd2 Rae8 and his position would have been excellent. Black should have played 18...Bh5 and if 19.f3 ( or if 19.Rd2 Rae8) 19...g4 and his position would have been excellent. 19.Qe3 Bh5
Steinitz: The soundness of the sacrifice here involved is shown by the sequel. 20. ..... Bxh2+ Lasker: The combination selected in the text is by far superior to the alternative 22.Kh1 because there might follow 22...gxf2. 22. ..... Qxg3+
24.Bxd1 Steinitz: Better than 24.Ne7+ Kf7 25.Bxd1 Rfe8 26.Bb4 Rxe7 27.Bxe7 Kxe7 28.d5 Ne4 etc. 24. ..... bxc6 Lasker: This seems to be the only move to prevent White from playing 26.d5. Steinitz: If 25...Rac8 White intended to continue 26.Bf3 ( It should be remembered that 26.d5 would not work well on account of the continuation 26...Ne4 27.Rg6+ Kh7 28.Rg7+ Kh8 29.Bd4 c5 30.Be5 Rfe8 etc.) 26...Ne4 27.Rxh6 ( or 27.Bxe4 ). 26.Rxc6 Nxc3 The following note is not a direct quote from a single source. My first source gives 'superior' in place of 'inferior', and then gives 'mating' where the second source has 'waiting'. So for the sake of clarity I have merged the two sources to provide a single ambiguous rook-quote. -[Pope] Lasker: "By far inferior to R-K. White could hardly then have taken the KRP on account of the close confinement of his king, and if Black can force the entrance of his rooks into the enemy's camp it would be at least very difficult to avoid a mating position." 28.Ra6
Rf7
Lasker: Although White would have had a chance to extricate himself on account of the three moves that Black had lost, by means of pawn to g4, followed eventually by Ra4, yet the maneuver would have made the win more difficult for White. Far superior would have been 29...Re7. 30.Kg1 Steinitz: The only danger to White's game now was that the opponent should double rooks on the eighth file, and the move adopted tends to prevent the formation of any possible mating position of this nature, but creates other difficulties which might have been obviated at once by 30.Re6 followed by 31.Bf3, after which the advance of the pawns could not be hindered. 30. .....
Re7
Lasker: The crossing of the king into the support of his pawns practically ends the battle. 37. .....
Re2+
[Return to Lasker-Steinitz Index]
|
The
|
|||
|
|||||
