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

There is a clue unsolved right now on the Holiday Contest Clues Page!   [Official Contest Rules]
Please see this announcement for some updates.
(If you register a free account you won't see all these ads!)
Wilhelm Steinitz vs Emanuel Lasker
Lasker - Steinitz World Championship Rematch (1896), Moscow RUE, rd 3, Nov-17
Italian Game: Classical Variation. Greco Gambit Main Line (C54)  ·  0-1


Click Here to play Guess-the-Move
Given 54 times; par: 60 [what's this?]

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

TIP: If you find a mistake in the database, use the correction form. There is a link at the bottom that reads "Spot an error? Please suggest your correction..." Avoid posting corrections in the kibitzing area.

PGN Viewer:  What is this?
For help with this chess viewer, please see the Olga Chess Viewer Quickstart Guide.


Kibitzer's Corner
< Earlier Kibitzing  · PAGE 4 OF 4 ·  Later Kibitzing>
Nov-01-05  Norman Glaides: <Happy Puppet> Isn't Happy Puppet Syndrome another name for Angelman's?
Nov-01-05  LIFE Master AJ: <patzer2>
<"Sometimes I wonder if subsequent world Champions who criticized his play were jealous of two of Lasker greatest attributes -- an advanced education (Doctorial Degree) and a full time profession (Math Professor) and family life outside of Chess. Or in some cases were antisemites, who could not stomach the fact that a Jew was one of the longest standing and greatest Chess champions ever.">

I have often wondered why Lasker is not more appreciated today. In many ways - his willingness to fight, his accuracy, his ability to exploit the psyche of his opponent and give them exactly the kind of game that they weren't expecting or did not desire - Lasker can be seen as an early prototype of the players today. (Notably Garry Kasparov.)

Apr-27-06  LIFE Master AJ:

New data. This game is annotated by GM Andrew Soltis in his book. ("Why Lasker Matters," game # 25 page # 87.)

Comparing our notes ...
several sources give no comment after White's 33rd move, Maroczy's comment can be interpreted that he thought the move was forced. I think I was the first to question this move, Soltis (also) gives it a question mark.

By the way, I found this game in several different sources, I now even have a reprint of the original book on this match.

Apr-27-06  blingice: <LIFE Master AJ: I have often wondered why Lasker is not more appreciated today.>

Not to be controversial, but what do you want by way of people noticing him? I think that 27 kibitzing pages and several books written about a person who lived in the 1800s is pretty well noticed.

Jun-15-07  New Kasparov: 8.. d5! should be played
Jul-04-07  sanyas: <New Kasparov> erm, may I ask what is supposed to happen after 9.♘xd5?
Aug-21-07  sanyas: Unless you mean 9.d5, the Moller Attack, which has been pretty much analyzed out to a draw. Which is why nobody plays 7.Nc3 anymore.
Premium Chessgames Member
  whiteshark: <19.Qh5> is the only move that keeps the position in balance.

click for larger view

Premium Chessgames Member
  Chessical: <Whiteshark> 19.Qh5 seems an interesting alternative to the pawn capture played, 19...Bd5 (19...Rg7 20.Bxg5 Rdg8 21.g3 Qd7) 20.Qxh7 Bxg2 21.Rxg5 Rxg5 22.Bxg5 Rd7 with an unclear position.

Soltis, however, gives Steinitz's 19th move a "!" in "Why Lasker Matters" p.88, but also states that "<19.f3> was a serious alternative". He gives no analysis, but <19.f3> 20.fxg4 Rxg4 21.g3 Rd5 seems safe enough for Black.

Soltis believes that <28.Qf2> made Steinitz's game be more difficult that it should. He instead recommends <28.f5> Rg8 29.Bxf6 Qf3 30.Be5 h5 31.Qe2 hxg4 (31...Qxc3? 32.d5) 32.hxg4 Rh8+ (or 32...Qd5!? 33.Rg1) 33.Bxh8 Qf4+ 34.Kh3 Bf3 35.Qf2 Qxg4+ 36.Kh2 Qh5+ =

Mar-01-08  Knight13: That queen on d5 and bishop on c6 created a dead aim.
Premium Chessgames Member
  FSR: This is the REAL "Immortal Zugzwang Game." Unlike in Saemisch-Nimzowitsch, after Black's "Zugzwanging" move, here 34...Rg8!!, White has absolutely no moves that don't immediately lose.
Apr-27-09  fref: 7.Bd2 should be better than 7.Nc3.
May-03-09  ScorpionInstinct: 28. f5 is the continuation in witch Black will have to find the right plan witch is far from easy in order to hold a draw as White can make queens. But 28. f5 and later it allows Black to open the h-file so Steinitz thought it would be not wise to grab f6 pawn and open another file so he believed he had better chances of survival with the text move. Anyway the all opening is hard for White without preparation.
May-24-09  Boomie: <Marco65: <jahhaj> I examined Chekhover vs I Pogrebissky, 1940 where after 11...f5 12.Nd2 Be6 13.Nxe4 fxe4 14.Rxe4 Qd5 15.Qg4 Black could have played 15...Kf7, but thinking it over I think White wins with 16.Qf3+ Kg8 (or Bf5) 17.Rae1>

In fact, 11...f5 appears stronger than 11...Be6. In <Marco65>'s post, 14...Qd7 refutes white's attack. The queen is needed on d7 to defend e8.

After 11...f5 12.Nd2 Be6 13.Nxe4 fxe4 14.Rxe4 Qd7 15. d5 0-0-0 16. Rxe6 Qxd5, black has the edge.

click for larger view

All this seems to mean that 10. Ba3 is not good. Lasker's 11...Be6 also leads to a black advantage, albeit smaller than 11...f5.

Jul-30-09  LIFE Master AJ: < <FSR> Your comments ... <"This is the REAL "Immortal Zugzwang Game." Unlike in Saemisch-Nimzowitsch, after Black's "Zugzwanging" move, here 34...Rg8!!, White has absolutely no moves that don't immediately lose."> .. ... ....

are right on!>

Aug-21-10  Lokaz: Steinitz had amassed a considerable amount of power of the E File. But since it isn't open, there isn't much to do with it.

click for larger view

Apr-12-11  LIFE Master AJ:
Nov-02-11  Oceanlake: Something I've read:

Bishops of opposite color favor the attacker...f Bishop against f 2/7, c Bishop on long diagonal.

Mar-29-12  Anderssen99: "Lasker's Greatest Chess Games 1889-1914" and "500 Master Games of Chess" finish the game after: 34....,Rg8 (0-1). Had White then played 35.Rg1 Black would have won prettily as follows: 35....,Qd6+. 36.Bf4,Rxg1!. 37.Bxd6 (Other moves are no better),Rh1 mate.
Jul-22-12  SAnsaritx: Why not 35. Rxg5 by black?
Premium Chessgames Member
  perfidious: < Boomie: In fact, 11...f5 appears stronger than 11...Be6....After 11...f5 12.Nd2 Be6 13.Nxe4 fxe4 14.Rxe4 Qd7 15. d5 0-0-0 16. Rxe6 Qxd5, black has the edge.

All this seems to mean that 10. Ba3 is not good. Lasker's 11...Be6 also leads to a black advantage, albeit smaller than 11...f5.>

The move 10.Ba3 seems to have all but disappeared, and rightly so; White now takes his chances in the Moller, though even this offers little against precise play by Black.

Lasker's judgment was superb, as usual-he was content to eliminate any counterplay by returning the piece and getting a playable position. Botterill annotates this in his book on open games and particularly commends Lasker's attacking plan with 16....Rg8 and 18....g5.

Oct-21-14  Ke2: <patzer2: <LIFE MASTER AJ> I believe is correct in his analysis at the link given that the decisive mistake was 33. a4? and not 34. f5 as I previously indicated. After 33. a4? the position was already on the verge of being hopelessly lost. White's only chance there, apparently, was to keep shifting the Queen along the second rank (i.e. d2 and f2) while waiting for Black to crack open the position. It takes patience to hold a position and wait for your opponent to commit before countering, and apparently Lasker realized that impatience (e.g. 33. a4? and 34. f5) was something he could take advantage of against Steinitz. As AJ asserts, Lasker was a great player, whose strength of play is not universally appreciated or understood.>

That was my instinct too, that perhaps White can make a fortress, but on move 33 he is completely lost. Black will invade and pick off the c-pawn. Or if the queen goes to far he will sac the exchange. After say 33. Qf2 Qf5 there is no good answer to the threat of Qd3. If 34. Qd2 the bishop simply hangs.

Premium Chessgames Member
  zanzibar: <Boomie> and <perf> both mention 10.Ba3 as being weak (or disappeared).

My <MillBase> snapshot gives these stats (via opening tree feature) for even getting there at move 9:


Move ECO Frequency Score AvElo Perf AvYear %Draws

1: d5 . C54o 164: 85.4% 46.0% 2303 2363 1979 19%
2: bxc3 ---- ... 28: 14.5% 37.5% 2175 ---- . 1968 11%


(Sure would be nice to have verbatim mode on <CG>, right <CG>?)

As for playing the Steinitz variation with 10.Ba3, it looks good as far as winning percentage, but poor as for average year:

Move ECO Frequency Score AvElo Perf AvYear %Draws
1: Re1 7: 26.9% 35.7% ____ 1992 14%
2: Bd3 7: 26.9% 21.4% 2262 1977 14%
3: Ba3 7: 26.9% 42.8% 2310 1925 29% (C54o)
4: Bb5 2: . 7.6% 50.0% ____ 1963 0%
5: Bb3 2: . 7.6% . 0.0% 1895 2004 0%
6: Qc2 1: . 3.8% . 0.0% 2236 2009 0%
TOTAL: 26:100.0% 30.7% 1969 15%

Botterill, in his <Open Gambits (1986)> book, says

<Any hopes White might then have entertained after 9 bc were squashed by Lasker in his 1896 match against Steinitz>

This should be qualified with the condition that White plays 10.Ba3, otherwise I think 9.bxc is a very playable move. I think modern engines agree (provided a delta of 0.2 is the difference between being "squashed" or not).


Premium Chessgames Member
  zanzibar: Stockfish doesn't particularly think the 16...Rg8 / 18...g5 plan is strong, provided White plays the immediate 19.Qh5.

In fact, walking through, the engine thinks the position trends towards the drawish.

But, as it turns out, for Lasker, the 16...Rg8 / 18...g5 plan played (payed) out rather well.


Premium Chessgames Member
  TheFocus: <British Chess Magazine>, January 1897, pg. 22; <Deuetsches Wochenschach>, 1896, pg. 443, and <Deuetsche Schachzeitung>, December 1896, pg. 368; all end this game at 34...Rg8.
Jump to page #    (enter # from 1 to 4)
search thread:   
< Earlier Kibitzing  · PAGE 4 OF 4 ·  Later Kibitzing>
NOTE: You need to pick a username and password to post a reply. Getting your account takes less than a minute, 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, or profane language.
  2. No spamming, advertising, or duplicating posts.
  3. No personal attacks against other members.
  4. Nothing in violation of United States law.
  5. No posting personal information of members.
Blow the Whistle See something that violates our rules? Blow the whistle and inform an administrator.

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, you might try the Kibitzer's Café.
Messages posted by Chessgames members do not necessarily represent the views of, its employees, or sponsors.
Spot an error? Please submit a correction slip and help us eliminate database mistakes!
This game is type: CLASSICAL (Disagree? Please submit a correction slip.)

Featured in the Following Game Collections [what is this?]
The REAL "Immortal Zugzwang Game."
from 1870s - 1890s Classic Chess Principles Arise by fredthebear
The REAL "Immortal Zugzwang Game."
from The t_t Players: Staunton, Steinitz & Zukertort by fredthebear
34...Rg8!! Middlegame Zugzwang!
from hedgeh0g's favourite games (continued) by hedgeh0g
Pequeña celada de las negras!
from My favorite games by titoramia
Lasker chains up the old lion with 34...Rg8!!
from Zugzwang! by iron maiden
three straight for Lasker
from World Champions A-Z part 2 Lasker by kevin86
Via Gateway forcing an open door.
from 94_-> Middlegames with opposite-coloured Bi~ by whiteshark
W. Ch. 2nd Match
from 19th Century by rea
G minor piano
by saveyougod
Birth of Modern Chess & The Romantic Era
by SirChrislov
Greatest Chess Legends
by Orhtej
Zugzwang !
from Just CHESS ! by arielbekarov
from Why Lasker Matters by Andrew Soltis by StoppedClock
it was a nice game
from STEVE MWEWA's favorite games by STEVE MWEWA
Game 6
from Big Book of World Chess Championships (Schulz) by Qindarka
Games I'll look at later
by littlefermat
WCC: Lasker-Steinitz 1896
by WCC Editing Project
1896 World Chess Championship
from Best of each World Championship by Brit
from Why Lasker Matters by Andrew Soltis by Incremental

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