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

Emanuel Lasker vs Wilhelm Steinitz
Steinitz - Lasker World Championship Match (1894), Montreal CAN, rd 1, Mar-15
Spanish Game: Steinitz Defense (C62)  ·  1-0
ANALYSIS [x]

FEN COPIED

Click Here to play Guess-the-Move
Given 21 times; par: 97 [what's this?]

explore this opening
find similar games 45 more Lasker/Steinitz games
PGN: download | view | print Help: general | java-troubleshooting

TIP: Some people don't like to know the result of the game in advance. This can be done by registering a free account then visiting your preferences page, then checking "Don't show game results".

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
Nov-10-04  arielbekarov: Dear Fellow Chesslovers !
This game is worth studying ! I will come back to why later due to lack of time now. But take a look ! Ariel
Nov-10-04  Kean: Indeed a fine and fierce game, with a logical path. After the overprotection of double knights on c6 white retreats his bishop to c4, then come the exchanges on d4 and the white Q also retreats to e3, blocking his own bishop temporaly; 9...Ne5 and again the KB retreats; but the knigth was never safe on e5 neither on g6, therefore 12.h4, and Dr. Lasker seems sometimes sadic. Black softens the pressure exchanging Bs on e6 but the white has the attack with the h-pawn; besides he defends good with 22.Nd4 and 23.c3. Still the position seems drawish and maybe Steinitz lost his nerve; he shifts the bishop to a more useful place at the Q-side. I guess is after the Qs are exchanged that white shows his better endgame technique; he concedes the e-file but targets the weak d-pawn and then pawn after pawn in the queenside weakening them all, and then its great the way he use his pawn superiority there, wich precisely won the game. Pawns are still the heart of the matter.
Dec-05-06  Gouki: Lasker knows fully well that if the position is closed, that is when the knight is of more value than the bishop, hence why he wasnt so quick to exchange off pieces and go to the endgame.

placing all his pawns on the kingside on white squares gives nothing for the black dark squared bishop to attack.

and then came moves like, 47.c4! and 48.b5!

Lasker's play is so logical, it is almost computer like.

"Lasker is the great figure, he realized many global things in chess. Recently I`ve looked through his games again and was surprised: Lasker knew a great deal for his time! He was the first to understand the importance of psychological aspects of the game and began to take proper account of them, he was the first to modify his strategy and even partly his style depending on an opponent."

--World Champion GM Vladimir Kramnik

see this link http://www.e3e5.com/eng/petersburg/... for more :D

Apr-02-07  Helios727: Why didn't white play 60. Kxd2 instead?
Apr-02-07
Premium Chessgames Member
  beatgiant: <Helios727: Why didn't white play 60. Kxd2 instead?>

The d-pawn will fall later. White's threatening 61. Rxa5 followed by 62. Ra8, so Black has to rush the king over 60...Ke7 61. Rxa5 Kd7 62. Ra8 Kc7 63. Rxa8 Kxa8 and now after winning the a-pawn and achieving a rook trade, he can play 64. Kxd2 with a bigger advantage.

Feb-29-08  Knight13: This is a well played positional game by Lasker.
Oct-10-08  Xeroxx: <I will come back to why later due to lack of time now> When will you come back??
Oct-31-08
Premium Chessgames Member
  Calli: ....
Steinitz gives a very insightful variation after 49.Rg1 Rd2 He says, "Ill-judged. 49...Kf7 seems better, with the following probable continuation: 50.f4 Rc5 51.Nxc5 bxc5 with better drawing chances."


click for larger view

Not a very obvious exchange sacrifice! Its not clear how White gets free of the bind.

Apr-04-09  badbeat994: i´m sure steinitz played 35...Re3 instead of 35...Re6. otherwise Rook to f1 would make no sense
Apr-04-09
Premium Chessgames Member
  keypusher: <badbeat994> You are correct according to this source.

http://www.google.com/books?id=Gb0U...

May-04-09
Premium Chessgames Member
  stoy: Yes, 35... Re3 was played. Perhaps this database can correct their gamescore? Thanks!
Jan-18-11  Llawdogg: This game looked pretty much even after 36 moves. Then Lasker played 37 Nc1! and initiated a knight maneuver that turned everything in his favor. Poor Steinitz. He was completely defensive after that.
Apr-08-12  Ulhumbrus: An alternative to 18...Nf4 which dislocates the e5 pawn is 18...Nf8 eg 19 h6 g6 20 f4 Qa5 21 Kb1 Kh8 22 Rhf1 Nd7 23 f5 gf 24 ef Nf6
Apr-19-13  RichardSharpe: Great game from the first of many Lasker Games I will be examining I have now the thought that Emanuel Lasker may have been the greatest Chess Player of all time! I'm going to relish going through his games. Especially against Steinitz!
Jul-26-13  screwdriver: Lasker gets the queens off the board to work on Stienitz's weaknesses.
Jul-26-13
Premium Chessgames Member
  beatgiant: What does White have after <34...Rxd5>?
Mar-20-14  David2009: Steinitz avoids falling into the "Lasker trap" 6...exd4 7.Nxd4 g6? (7...Nxd4 transposes into the game) 8.Bg5 Bg7


click for larger view

9.Nd5 Bxd4 10.Qxd4 0-0 11.Nf6+ Kh8 12.Ng4+ Nxd4 13.Bf6+ Kg8 14.Nh6# (analysis by Lasker in a post-match lecture in London, 1895). Source: G Renaud and Victor Kahn, 'L'art de faire mat' (the art of checkmate) first published 1947 and republished many times'

The "Lasker trap" combination has arisen in other games, for example B Blumenfeld vs NN, 1903.

Jan-01-16
Premium Chessgames Member
  keypusher: The first game of the match. Huebner gives this “tough struggle” a very thorough writeup in his-book. Here are some highlights from his voluminous notes.

Steinitz could have gotten a decent game with 10….Be7. Lasker, in turn, could have grabbed a clear advantage with 12.Bg5, since 12….Be7 13.Bxe7 Qxe7 14.0-0-0 wins a pawn, 12….Qa5 13.0-0-0 leaves Black with difficulties completing his development. …f6 or …h6 would leave him with serious kingside weaknesses.

Huebner thinks Steinitz did well not to take the pawn on move 16, but after 17.Ne2 (?), …Bxh4 was playable, with a sharp and risky game for both sides. 17….Rf7 left Black with a very solid position. Steinitz had opportunities to play …d5 with clear equality at various points; instead 25….Bc7 allowed 26.Nf5 (threatening Nh6+) with advantage. After 26.Nf3 (?) Qf6 27.Nd2 Rfe7 28.f3 d5 “Black had overcome all his difficulties.”


click for larger view

In this game, Steinitz played the same sort of cramped defense he had used in his matches with Chigorin and Gunsberg. In those matches, if he managed to survive the initial assault, he often took over the board and won, as in this game: Chigorin vs Steinitz, 1892. He probably expected something similar to happen here, but Lasker was a different kind of opponent. Now a whole new game begins.

29.Rh1 Re5 30.g3 Rg5 (?)

This allows White to get in g3-g4, solidifying his kingside pawns. 30….fxg3 31.f4 R5e7 32.e5 Qe6 would have been somewhat better for Black.

31.Qd7 Qf7 32.Qxf7+ Kxf7 33.g4 Bb6 34.exd5 cxd5.

<beatgiant> asks, <what does White have after 34….Rxd5?>. Huebner thinks retaking with the pawn is safer, because after 34….Rxd5 35.Ne4 Red8 36.Rxd5 Rxd5 37.Kc2 “and the Black position is uncomfortable.” I’m not sure what to think. The knight looks strong on e4, but it’s hard for me to see how White will make progress.

35.Nb3 Re3 36.Rhf1 Rge5?

After this, some delicate maneuvers by Lasker leave Steinitz unable to save both of his pawns on f4 and d5. Huebner recommends 36….g6, with equality after 37.hxg6+ Kxg6 38.Nc1 (38.Nd4 h5) 38….Bc5 (covering b4) 39.Nd3 Bd6 followed by …h7-h5.

37.Nc1 Bc7 38.Nd3 Rg5 39.Nb4 R3e5 (39….Ke6 40.Nc2 Ree5 41.Rd4 Re2 42.Rb4 Bb6 43.Rxb6+) 40.Rd4 Bb6 41.Rxf4+ Kg8 42.Nd3 Re2 43.Rd1 Be3


click for larger view

44.Rb4. Huebner thought a simpler win was 44.Ra4 followed by Nb4.

44….b6 45.Ra4 a5 46.b4 d4 47.c4 (keeping the rook on g5 under wraps) Bd2 (?) (Huebner thinks White would have a harder time after 47….axb4 48.Rxb4 Ra5) 48.b5?

Huebner thinks White can force the win with 48.c5 bxc5 49.bxc5 Bc3 50.Rc4.

48….Bc3?. Black is more or less committed to an exchange sacrifice after this. Huebner exhaustively analyzes various alternatives, eventually recommending 48….h6 49.a3 g6 50.hxg6 Bc3 51.c5 bxc5 52.Rc4 h5 53.gxh5 Rxh5 54.Rxc5 Rxc5 55.Nxc5 Rb2+ 56.Kc1 Rxb5 with good drawing chances: 57.Ne6 Rb6 58.Nxd4 Bb2+ 59.Kc2 Bxa3.

49.Rg1 Rd2

As <Calli> pointed out, Steinitz had an excellent idea with 49….Kf7 50.f4 Rc5 51.Nxc5 bxc5 and it’s tough for White to get out of the bind. Huebner thinks White can win after 52.Ra3 Rb2+ 53.Kc1 Rf2 54.Rxc3 dxc3 55.Re1. Now if 55….Rxa2 56.Re5, and if 55….Rxf4 56.Kc2 (56….Rxc4 57.Rb1).

50.f4 Rxg4 51.Rxg4 Rxd3 52.c5

“This long-awaited breakthrough decides.”

Not a flawless game by any means, but tough, resourceful, determined play from both sides. Steinitz must have known he was in for a hell of a match after this.

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.

<This page contains Editor Notes. Click here to read them.>

Featured in the Following Game Collections[what is this?]
+5 -10 =4 vs. Lasker (WC match, USA/CAN, 1894)
from Match Steinitz! by amadeus
The Games in the Steinitz - Lasker Championship Match
from Annotated Master Games by Yossarian Lives
13
from Veliki majstori saha 7 LASKER (Petrovic) by Chessdreamer
RL53
from ANIL RAJ.R's KING PAWN GAMES by ANIL RAJ.R
Steinitz - Lasker World Championship Match (1894), New York, NY
from Spanish, Steinitz Defenses by fredthebear
virgil's favorite games
by virgil
Lasker vs the World Champions Decisive Games
by visayanbraindoctor
Lasker-Steinitz WC, USA 1894 Rd.1 (First Encounter)
from Favorite Games from (1515-1916) by wanabe2000
WCC: Steinitz-Lasker 1894
by WCC Editing Project
Lasker vs. Steinitz
by c3230
!!
from lasker best games by brager
Lasker's first ever WC game victory
from World Champions A-Z part 2 Lasker by kevin86
A real great game !
from A game of chess has a beginning and an end, but by arielbekarov
Game 1, Lasker leads 1-0 (1-0)
from 1894 World Chess Championship by Penguincw
RichardSharpe's favorite games
by RichardSharpe
The Ruy Lopez in World Championship Matches
by frogmanjones
+10 -5 =4 vs. Steinitz (World Match, USA/CAN, 1894)
from Match Lasker! by amadeus


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