chessgames.com
Members · Prefs · Laboratory · Collections · Openings · Endgames · Sacrifices · History · Search Kibitzing · Kibitzer's Café · Chessforums · Tournament Index · Players · Kibitzing
Wilhelm Steinitz vs David Janowski
London (1899), London ENG, rd 2, May-31
Queen's Gambit Declined: Janowski Variation (D31)  ·  0-1

ANALYSIS [x]

FEN COPIED

explore this opening
find similar games 6 more Steinitz/Janowski games
PGN: download | view | print Help: general | java-troubleshooting

TIP: Games that have been used in game collections will have a section at the bottom which shows collections which include it. For more information, see "What are Game Collections?" on our Help Page.

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
Apr-06-07  vonKrolock: <22...♗xd5> A very picturesque position, with both black ♗♗s hanging...

<23.♕xc5>?

<23...♗xg2>! A little surprise, wining a ♙ and leaving the white ♔ vulnerable ...

<24...♖ac8 25.♕d5>?? Serious double oversight! With 25.Re1!!, the ♘ would be saved...

<27.♖ac1> to exchange ♕♕s was the best chance for still obtain a draw - From now on, Janowskt's play is irrepressible

Nov-23-16
Premium Chessgames Member
  KEG: I agree that Janowski's combination beginning with 23...Bxg2 was flawed, and Steinitz would have emerged a piece ahead had he played 25. Re1. However, Janowski had a better combo on move 23: he should have played 23...Bxa2 after which the Re1 idea would not have worked for Steinitz and Janowski would have gotten a (slightly) better game.

I also agree with vonKrolock that even after Steinitz' error on move 25 he would have had a chance though a pawn down with 27. QxQ.

After Steinitz' unfortunate 27. Rac1 Janowski should have crushed him with 28...Qe2 check. Instead, he let Steinitz back in the game with his poor 28...Rg5 check, and then probably blew the win with his dreadful 29...Qh4 check (instead of the much better 29...Rc2 check). Steinitz missed his last chance to draw with his poor 31. Rc2 (he should have played 31. Rc8).

After that, Janowski, though missing several chances to end the game more efficiently and more brutally, always had the win in hand with his extra pawn and his better K-side pawn structure. Steinitz played on however, but his tough defense waned with his needless 43. h4 (43. Qd8 check reducing to a double Rook ending was the only practical chance), and then walked in a forced mate in four with his 44. Kg3 (though even after the "better" 44. Ke3 he would still have been dead lost).

The difficulties Janowski had after getting a "won" game by move 25 show how difficult it is to win heavy piece endings of this type. Even strong players like Steinitz and Janowski had problems with them

NOTE: Create an account today to post replies and access other powerful features which are available only to registered users. Becoming a member is free, anonymous, and takes less than 1 minute! If you already have a username, then simply login login under your username now to join the discussion.

Please observe our posting guidelines:

  1. No obscene, racist, sexist, or profane language.
  2. No spamming, advertising, duplicate, or gibberish posts.
  3. No vitriolic or systematic personal attacks against other members.
  4. Nothing in violation of United States law.
  5. No cyberstalking or malicious posting of negative or private information (doxing/doxxing) of members.
  6. No trolling.
  7. The use of "sock puppet" accounts to circumvent disciplinary action taken by moderators, create a false impression of consensus or support, or stage conversations, is prohibited.
  8. Do not degrade Chessgames or any of it's staff/volunteers.

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: Please keep all discussion on-topic. This forum is for this specific game only. To discuss chess or this site in general, 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 ultimately at the sole discretion of the administration.

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.

Home | About | Login | Logout | F.A.Q. | 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 2001-2025, Chessgames Services LLC