chessgames.com
Members · Prefs · Laboratory · Collections · Openings · Endgames · Sacrifices · History · Search Kibitzing · Kibitzer's Café · Chessforums · Tournament Index · Players · Kibitzing

There are 3 clues unsolved right now on the Holiday Contest Clues Page!   [Official Contest Rules]
 
St. Petersburg 1895-96
Compiled by keypusher
--*--

At the closing banquet for the Hastings 1895 tournament, Chigorin announced that the top prizewinners had been invited to St. Petersburg for a match-tournament to begin in December of that year. The top three finishers (Pillsbury, Chigorin, and Lasker) plus fifth-place finisher Steinitz agreed to play; fourth-place finisher Tarrasch declined. Even so, St. Petersburg was enormously strong; the top five places on the December 1895 Chessmetrics list are occupied by Lasker, Tarrasch, Chigorin, Steinitz, and Pillsbury respectively. Each entrant played six games against the other three.

The tournament began on December 13, 1895 with 23-year-old Harry Nelson Pillsbury, the victor at Hastings, crushing the 26-year-old world champion, Emanuel Lasker (Lasker vs Pillsbury, 1895). After three cycles (half the tournament), Pillsbury held the lead, having scored 2 1/2 out of 3 against Lasker and 3 out of 3 against Chigorin. But Lasker's 2 1/2 out of 3 against both Steinitz and Chigorin, combined with Pillsbury's loss and two draws against Steinitz, kept it close. At the midpoint, the score stood: Pillsbury 6 1/2 out of 9; Lasker 5 1/2; Steinitz 4 1/2; Chigorin 1 1/2.

The second half of the tournament began on January 4, 1896, with Lasker facing Pillsbury and scoring perhaps the greatest victory of his long career (Pillsbury vs Lasker, 1896). Pillsbury lost his next two games to Chigorin and Steinitz, so at the end of the fourth cycle Lasker, despite a loss to Steinitz, led the field by a point, and Steinitz had caught up to Pillsbury. In the fifth cycle, Pillsbury again lost to Chigorin and Steinitz, finally ending his miserable run of five straight losses with a drawn game against Lasker on January 19, 1896. Lasker, meanwhile, had beaten Steinitz and drawn with Chigorin, so that after five cycles the identity of the winner was scarcely in doubt, and Pillsbury had fallen to third place: Lasker 9 1/2, Steinitz 7 1/2, Pillsbury 7, Chigorin 6. In the sixth and final cycle, Lasker beat Chigorin and drew with Steinitz and Pillsbury to coast home with 11 1/2 out of 18, two points ahead of Steinitz, who beat Pillsbury (for the fourth time in the tournament!) and drew with Chigorin. Pillsbury also drew with Chigorin and so was able to avoid falling into last place. Final standings: Lasker 11 1/2 (+8-3=7), Steinitz 9 1/2 (+7-6=5), Pillsbury 8 (+5-7=6), Chigorin 7 (+5-9=4). It was a fine result for Lasker, solidifying his position as world champ, and creditable for the 59-year-old Steinitz. But it was a great disappointment for Pillsbury and Chigorin.

The prizes were: first 50 pounds sterling, second 30 pounds, third 20 pounds, fourth 10 pounds, plus four pounds for a win, two pounds for a draw, and 1 pound for a loss. (I am quoting from a British tournament book, so I don't know if the authors converted ruble prizes into pounds sterling, or whether the prizes were paid in pounds.) Lasker received 99 pounds, Steinitz 74 pounds, Pillsbury 59 pounds, and Chigorin 47 pounds. All players received traveling expenses and incidentals. According to Soltis' <Why Lasker Matters>, there were no brilliancy prizes.

The head-to-head matchups were intriguing. Pillsbury beat Lasker (3 1/2 - 2 1/2) and Chigorin (3 1/2 - 2 1/2) while scoring a horrible 1-5 (two draws, four losses) against Steinitz -- a result that is even more remarkable when you consider that, outside of this tournament, Pillsbury had a +5-0=2 score against the first world champion! (<Calli>) Lasker beat Steinitz 4-2 and Chigorin 5-1 but, as noted, lost his mini-match to Pillsbury.

Equally intriguing were the varied fortunes of Chigorin and Pillsbury, compared with the consistency of Lasker and Steinitz. Lasker scored 5 1/2 in the first half, and 6 in the second. Steinitz scored 4 1/2 in the first half, and 5 in the second. Chigorin managed only one win and one draw in the first half of the tournament, but in the second half scored 5 1/2 out of 9, just a half-point less than Lasker. Pillsbury's reversal of fortune was even more dramatic: in the first half he scored five wins, one loss, and three draws to lead the field, but in the second half he obtained three draws, six losses and not a single win.

Many explanations have been offered for Pillsbury's collapse. It has been said that he caught syphilis from a St. Petersburg prostitute, which caused his poor performance in the second half; it has even been suggested that he received the diagnosis of the disease on the day of his dramatic fourth-cycle encounter with Lasker. (OMGP I, p. 135.) These stories don't seem credible to me. If Pillsbury was infected with syphilis in St. Petersburg, he probably would not have suffered any serious symptoms there. It is also unlikely that he would have been diagnosed as having the disease immediately after catching it; no blood test for syphilis existed in 1895-96. On the other hand, there is no question that Pillsbury was unwell during the second half of the tournament; many of his games had to be postponed. <Calli> has uncovered an article from the Brooklyn Eagle in January 1896 saying that Pillsbury was still suffering from "influenza" that had afflicted him during the second half of the tournament. The symptoms of second-stage syphilis are apparently not that different from severe flu; if Pillsbury had caught syphilis <before> the St. Petersburg tournament, the second stage might have manifested itself during the tournament. Alternatively, of course, he could have just caught the flu.

Finally, it is worth noting that St. Petersburg posed unusual problems for a 19th century master. "Supertournaments" where every player was a leading master, like Corus or Linares today, were rare back then. Major international tournaments like Hastings or Nuremburg included a number of local masters, who were easy prey for the likes of Pillsbury, Chigorin, Steinitz and Lasker. But at St. Petersburg 1895-1896, there were no weak opponents. A master in bad form, like Chigorin in the first half of the tournament or Pillsbury in the second half, could expect no mercy.

Later in 1896, the St. Petersburg masters plus many others gathered in Dr. Tarrasch's hometown of Nuremburg. Lasker again emerged the winner. Pillsbury tied for 3rd-4th with Tarrasch; Steinitz finished sixth and Chigorin finished in a tie for 9th-10th. Late in the year, Lasker and Steinitz returned to St. Petersburg for their rematch. Lasker overwhelmed his opponent, 10:2 with 5 draws.

As for Pillsbury, the St. Petersburg tournament book, echoing <Paradise Lost>, said: "Pillsbury is still young, and the chess world is all before him. A match between Lasker and Pillsbury would be interesting from many points of view." But it was not to be. Pillsbury continued to play strongly, but never repeated his feat at Hastings of winning a leading international tournament. His last major tournament was Cambridge Springs, where he finished in a tie for 8th-9th. But he did have the pleasure of defeating Lasker in the same variation that had brought him disaster at St. Petersburg on January 4, 1896: Pillsbury vs Lasker, 1904.

My main source for this collection was <The Games of the St. Petersburg Tournament 1895-1896> by James Mason and W.H.K. Pollock.

First Cycle, Game 1 (December 13, 1895)
Lasker vs Pillsbury, 1895 
(C42) Petrov Defense, 33 moves, 0-1

First Cycle, Game 2 (December 13, 1895)
Steinitz vs Chigorin, 1895 
(D37) Queen's Gambit Declined, 38 moves, 0-1

First Cycle, Game 3 (December 15, 1895)
Chigorin vs Pillsbury, 1895 
(C49) Four Knights, 26 moves, 0-1

First Cycle, Game 4 (December 15, 1895)
Lasker vs Steinitz, 1895 
(C71) Ruy Lopez, 32 moves, 1-0

First Cycle, Game 5 (December 17, 1895)
Chigorin vs Lasker, 1895 
(C52) Evans Gambit, 26 moves, 0-1

First Cycle, Game 6 (December 17, 1895)
Steinitz vs Pillsbury, 1895 
(C43) Petrov, Modern Attack, 60 moves, 1-0

Second Cycle, Game 1 (December 19, 1895)
Steinitz vs Lasker, 1895  
(D35) Queen's Gambit Declined, 39 moves, 0-1

Second Cycle, Game 2 (December 19, 1895)
Pillsbury vs Chigorin, 1895 
(D07) Queen's Gambit Declined, Chigorin Defense, 57 moves, 1-0

Second Cycle, Game 3 (December 23, 1895)
Lasker vs Chigorin, 1895 
(C77) Ruy Lopez, 44 moves, 1/2-1/2

Second Cycle, Game 4 (December 21, 1895)
Pillsbury vs Steinitz, 1895 
(D44) Queen's Gambit Declined Semi-Slav, 54 moves, 1/2-1/2

Second Cycle, Game 5 (December 27, 1895)
Chigorin vs Steinitz, 1895 
(C52) Evans Gambit, 62 moves, 0-1

Second Cycle, Game 6 (December 25, 1895)
Pillsbury vs Lasker, 1895 
(C67) Ruy Lopez, 46 moves, 1-0

Third Cycle, Game 1 (December 29, 1895)
Chigorin vs Lasker, 1895 
(C53) Giuoco Piano, 47 moves, 0-1

Third Cycle, Game 2 (December 29, 1895)
Steinitz vs Pillsbury, 1895 
(C43) Petrov, Modern Attack, 37 moves, 1/2-1/2

Third Cycle, Game 3 (December 31, 1895)
Steinitz vs Chigorin, 1895 
(D21) Queen's Gambit Accepted, 34 moves, 1-0

Third Cycle, Game 4 (December 31, 1895)
Lasker vs Pillsbury, 1895 
(C42) Petrov Defense, 31 moves, 1/2-1/2

Third Cycle, Game 5 (January 2, 1896)
Lasker vs Steinitz, 1896 
(C64) Ruy Lopez, Classical, 32 moves, 1/2-1/2

Third Cycle, Game 6 (January 2, 1896(?))
Chigorin vs Pillsbury, 1896 
(C43) Petrov, Modern Attack, 32 moves, 0-1

Fourth Cycle, Game 1 (January 4, 1896)
Pillsbury vs Lasker, 1896 
(D50) Queen's Gambit Declined, 30 moves, 0-1

Fourth Cycle, Game 2 (January 6, 1896)
Chigorin vs Steinitz, 1896 
(C52) Evans Gambit, 26 moves, 1-0

Fourth Cycle, Game 3 (January 8, 1896)
Pillsbury vs Chigorin, 1896 
(D07) Queen's Gambit Declined, Chigorin Defense, 38 moves, 0-1

Fourth Cycle, Game 4 (January 8, 1896)
Steinitz vs Lasker, 1896 
(D35) Queen's Gambit Declined, 31 moves, 1-0

Fourth Cycle, Game 5 (January 12, 1896)
Pillsbury vs Steinitz, 1896 
(D44) Queen's Gambit Declined Semi-Slav, 44 moves, 0-1

Fourth Cycle, Game 6 (January 13, 1896)
Lasker vs Chigorin, 1896 
(C79) Ruy Lopez, Steinitz Defense Deferred, 30 moves, 1-0

Fifth Cycle, Game 1 (January 14, 1896)
Lasker vs Steinitz, 1896 
(C62) Ruy Lopez, Old Steinitz Defense, 47 moves, 1-0

Fifth Cycle, Game 2 (January 14, 1896)
Chigorin vs Pillsbury, 1896 
(C60) Ruy Lopez, 45 moves, 1-0

Fifth Cycle, Game 3 (January 16, 1896)
Steinitz vs Pillsbury, 1896 
(C43) Petrov, Modern Attack, 64 moves, 1-0

Fifth Cycle, Game 4 (January 16, 1896)
Chigorin vs Lasker, 1896 
(C53) Giuoco Piano, 37 moves, 1/2-1/2

Fifth Cycle, Game 5 (January 19, 1896)
Lasker vs Pillsbury, 1896
(D37) Queen's Gambit Declined, 50 moves, 1/2-1/2

Fifth Cycle, Game 6 (January 19, 1896)
Steinitz vs Chigorin, 1896 
(D45) Queen's Gambit Declined Semi-Slav, 43 moves, 0-1

Sixth Cycle, Game 1 (January 21, 1896)
Lasker vs Chigorin, 1896 
(D02) Queen's Pawn Game, 55 moves, 1-0

Sixth Cycle, Game 2 (January 22, 1896)
Pillsbury vs Steinitz, 1896 
(D44) Queen's Gambit Declined Semi-Slav, 100 moves, 0-1

Sixth Cycle, Game 3 (January 23, 1896)
Pillsbury vs Lasker, 1896
(C67) Ruy Lopez, 50 moves, 1/2-1/2

Sixth Cycle, Game 4 (January 24, 1896)
Chigorin vs Steinitz, 1896 
(C52) Evans Gambit, 99 moves, 1/2-1/2

Sixth Cycle, Game 5 (January 27, 1896)
Pillsbury vs Chigorin, 1896 
(D07) Queen's Gambit Declined, Chigorin Defense, 62 moves, 1/2-1/2

Sixth Cycle, Game 6 (January 27, 1896)
Steinitz vs Lasker, 1896 
(D35) Queen's Gambit Declined, 44 moves, 1/2-1/2

36 games

 » View all game collections by keypusher PGN Download
 » Search entire game collection library
 » Clone this game collection (copy it to your account)
 » FAQ: Help with Game Collections


home | about | login | logout | F.A.Q. | your profile | preferences | Premium Membership | Kibitzer's Café | Biographer's Bistro | new kibitzing | chessforums | Tournament Index | Player Directory | Notable Games | World Chess Championships | Opening Explorer | Guess the Move | Game Collections | ChessBookie Game | Chessgames Challenge | Store | privacy notice | contact us
Copyright 2001-2018, Chessgames Services LLC