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

Henry Edward Bird vs Emanuel Lasker
Hastings (1895), Hastings ENG, rd 5, Aug-10
Bird Opening: From Gambit (A02)  ·  0-1
ANALYSIS [x]

FEN COPIED

Annotations by Joseph Henry Blackburne.      [148 more games annotated by Blackburne]

explore this opening
find similar games 22 more Bird/Lasker games
PGN: download | view | print Help: general | java-troubleshooting

TIP: If we are missing an important game, you can submit it (in PGN format) at our PGN Upload Utility.

PGN Viewer:  What is this?
For help with this chess viewer, please see the Olga Chess Viewer Quickstart Guide.
PREMIUM MEMBERS CAN REQUEST COMPUTER ANALYSIS [more info]

A COMPUTER ANNOTATED SCORE OF THIS GAME IS AVAILABLE.  [CLICK HERE]

Kibitzer's Corner
Jan-14-03  Samuel Maverick: Mr. Bird is just under even when playing the white side of his opening in the games in this database.
Jan-14-03  PVS: There seems to be little to recommend this opening at the GM level.
Jan-15-03  Sylvester: Yeah, you might say this opening is strictly for the birds!
Sep-03-05
Premium Chessgames Member
  An Englishman: Good Morning: Did you check out the annotations? "...or it may be this opening is not suited to his attacking style."

The Bird? Not suited to Bird?

Mar-30-06  who: <...or it may be this opening is not suited to his attacking style.> Interesting that Blackburne made no mention of this in his own games - Bird vs Blackburne, 1886, Bird vs Blackburne, 1888, and Bird vs Blackburne, 1892.
Mar-30-06
Premium Chessgames Member
  keypusher: <An Englishman> Blackburne is referring to From's Gambit, not 1 f4.
Apr-30-07  cloybloy: One lesson that may be gathered from this exercise is not to use this opening against world champions... ;)
Apr-30-07  Marmot PFL: Horrible game by Bird. Taking the b pawn, risky or not would still have been much better than 11.Bxe5, weakening the dark squares for nothing, which blackburne doesn't even comment on. Ideas like weak square complexes weren't really articulated before Nimzovich it seems, although players like Lasker understood them intuitively.
Apr-30-07  ganstaman: <cloybloy: One lesson that may be gathered from this exercise is not to use this opening against world champions... ;)>

Given that I love this opening so much, I was going to post games where the Bird was played successfully against a world champion. I may be missing some games, but here' generally what I found:

When a WC played the black side of a Bird, he won or drew the game. When a WC played the white side of a Bird, he won or drew the game. The only time a WC lost as black was when the white player was also a WC.

:(

Since I won't give in just yet, I will only say that seeing a WC win or draw against other players isn't interesting -- it's expected. The opening is still as good as anything else against them if you know it well.

Apr-30-07  jackpawn: I can't help mentioning - Lasker played Bird quite a bit in the early 1890's. Lasker of course had the much better of it, but Bird (and remember, he was an old man at this point) seem to give Lasker a much harder time than he gave Morphy 30+ years earlier - at a time when Bird should have been at the peak of his career.

I'm not trying to put Lasker down. I think he was truly one of the all-time greats, but I think often people forget what a huge talent Morphy was. If he had continued playing the whole history of chess would have changed. Stenitz probably never becomes champion, perhaps Lasker reign is delayed, etc.

Apr-30-07  Marmot PFL: Morphy was way ahead of his time. Probably the last player who could give pawn odds to all other players (except maybe Anderssen). Not much in this game from Lasker's side that Morphy couldn't also have played.
Apr-30-07
Premium Chessgames Member
  keypusher: Bird was not at his peak in the 1850s, when he played Morphy. He probably played his best chess in the 1870s. He was still pretty strong in 1895, viz. Steinitz vs Bird, 1895. Nor do I agree that Morphy had it easier against Bird than Lasker did. They both dominated him.

Trying to gauge how Morphy and Lasker would have fared against each other by looking at games against a (far weaker) common opponent 35+ years apart is a fool's errand anyway. Kolisch beat Barnes 10-0 in the early 1860s; does that make Kolisch better than Morphy?

I have spent a lot of time studying Morphy's and Lasker's games. Lasker did things on the chessboard Morphy never dreamed of. Chess did not stop developing in 1858. If Morphy had kept playing, well, who knows? If Marlowe hadn't been stabbed maybe he would have topped Shakespeare. (Hmmm, perhaps I should have phrased that differently...) Anyway, it doesn't mean Hamlet isn't a better play than Dr. Faustus.

May-01-07  jackpawn: I was simply trying to state, perhaps not well, that Morphy was a huge talent. Such a talent would have easily adjusted to the march of progress in chess at the time. Would Stenitz be able to compete against such a talent? I doubt it. Would Lasker in the early 1890's? Perhaps. Morphy would have been in his mid-50's by then and probably past his peak.

It's all a moot point anyway, unless you find a way to reinvent time!

Mar-12-08  Knight13: Extreme passiveness???
Mar-12-08  mistreaver: <but who would recognise Mr. Bird's play? He evidently was out of form this day, or it may be this opening is not suited to his attacking style.>
that is true i can't believe how many mistakes and strange moves from such a great chess player : 9 Nf1 < Nf3!?>
11 Bxe5?
14 Qd2? (i don't get the idea behind this>
Aug-31-17
Premium Chessgames Member
  tpstar: <9 Nf1 - Nf3!?> 8 ... Qe7 threatened 9 ... Nxd3+ regaining the Pawn and making the White King move. Bird could have tried 9. Ndf3 but perhaps he wanted the Bg2 to pressure the Pb7.

The final position is very sad for the White pieces.

NOTE: You need to pick a username and password to post a reply. Getting your account takes less than a minute, is totally anonymous, and 100% free—plus, it entitles you to features otherwise unavailable. Pick your username now and join the chessgames community!
If you already have an account, you should login now.
Please observe our posting guidelines:
  1. No obscene, racist, sexist, profane, raunchy, or disgusting language.
  2. No spamming, advertising, duplicate or nonsense posts.
  3. No malicious personal attacks, including cyber stalking, systematic antagonism, or gratuitous name-calling of any member Iincludinfgall Admin and Owners or any of their family, friends, associates, or business interests. If you think someone is an idiot, then provide evidence that their reasoning is invalid and/or idiotic, instead of just calling them an idiot. It's a subtle but important distinction, even in political discussions.
  4. Nothing in violation of United States law.
  5. No malicious posting of or linking to personal, private, and/or negative information (aka "doxing" or "doxxing") about any member, (including all Admin and Owners) or any of their family, friends, associates, or business interests. This includes all media: text, images, video, audio, or otherwise. Such actions will result in severe sanctions for any violators.
  6. NO TROLLING. Admin and Owners know it when they see it, and sanctions for any trolls will be significant.
  7. Any off-topic posts which distract from the primary topic of discussion are subject to removal.
  8. The use of "sock puppet" accounts to circumvent disciplinary action taken by Moderators is expressly prohibited.
  9. The use of "sock puppet" accounts in an attempt to undermine any side of a debate—or to create a false impression of consensus or support—is prohibited.
  10. All decisions with respect to deleting posts, and any subsequent discipline, are final, and occur at the sole discretion of the Moderators, Admin, and Owners.
  11. Please try to maintain a semblance of civility at all times.
Blow the Whistle See something that violates our rules? Blow the whistle and inform a Moderator.

NOTE: Keep all discussion on the topic of this page. This forum is for this specific game and nothing else. If you want to discuss chess in general, or this site, visit the Kibitzer's Café.

Messages posted by Chessgames members do not necessarily represent the views of Chessgames.com, its employees, or sponsors. All Moderator actions taken are at the sole discretion of the Admin and Owners—who will strive to act fairly and consistently at all times.

This game is type: CLASSICAL. Please report incorrect or missing information by submitting a correction slip to help us improve the quality of our content.

Featured in the Following Game Collections[what is this?]
The immortal Emmanual Lasker gives us another game to enjoy.
from Losing At Their Own Game by Nimzophile
Hastings 1895
by Benzol
BIRD O
from ANIL RAJ.R'S QUEEN PAWN GAMES by ANIL RAJ.R
World Champions face 1. f4
by YoungEd
The immortal Emmanual Lasker gives us another game to enjoy.
from Losing At Their Own Game by Bears092
other good games
by sk.sen
BIRD On The Bird's Opening-n-The Bird-Defence
by saveyougod
Lasker's variation defeats Bird's opening again
from Having your way with Birds by Zebra
Lasker's variation defeats Bird's opening again
from FG Having your way with Birds Compiled by Zebra by fredthebear
64idi0t's uncommon_&_flank
by 64idi0t
On all board battle
from old masters by totololo
Hastings 1895
by JoseTigranTalFischer


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 2001-2019, Chessgames Services LLC