|Nov-12-04|| ||Bobak Zahmat: Very complicated game, with much stuff to think about. |
|Nov-12-05|| ||tud: This game obsessed me for a while. Capablanca was already stronger than Lasker (my opinion). Is 40 Ba7 a stronger move ?|
|Nov-12-05|| ||Averageguy: <tud> I don't think so, after
40.Bxa7 bc the Bishop has to defend c1 with 41.Be3. After 41...c2 the game looks drawn. If the Bishop moves of the c1-h6 diagonal then the Black Bishop Pawn will promote. If White tries to get the King over then he abandons his K-side Pawns and Nf6 will pick them off.|
|Nov-14-05|| ||JYMMI: JYMMI: GOD! THAT'S IMPOSSIBLE!CAPABLANCA HAD THE WIN ON HIS HANDS WITH 22_Rh1 BUT WITH A MAGIC LASKER DRAWS THE GAME! AH! I THINK IT WAS BETTER TO PLAY 42_Bg5+ SO 42... Ng5+ 43_ Ke3(no possibities of check on the next move) and if 43... Kf6 capablanca plays 44_a5 Kg6 45_b5 and if 45... axb5 capablanca can play
|Nov-14-05|| ||Stevens: STOP SHOUTING!!|
|Apr-29-08|| ||pikket: "I THINK IT WAS BETTER TO PLAY 42_Bg5+ SO 42... Ng5+ 43_ Ke3(no possibities of check on the next move) and if 43... Kf6 capablanca plays 44_a5 Kg6 45_b5 and if 45... axb5 capablanca can play 46_a6!"|
But if simply 43...Kd7 then Blk has time to stop a/b pawn with his king and his knight can keep the white king out. I think 42. Bg5+ just loses.
|Jul-29-10|| ||GrahamClayton: Here is a photo of the game:
|Aug-04-13|| ||malufet: 23) Bc4! is much more better than Bxc6|
|Jul-29-14|| ||RookFile: I'm not sure. Tricky position. White hits the rook on g8, so black moves it somewhere, let's say 23.... Rd8. If I were black, I would consider a plan of trying to play ...Qg7 and ...Ne7 at some point. It hits the white queen, maybe at some point you can drop that knight into f4. I guess that Capa reasoned it would be good to get rid of that knight in a closed position.|
|Jul-29-14|| ||john barleycorn: Tarrasch in "Das Grossmeisterturnier zu St. Petersburg 1914" (my translation of some points):|
Now defense gets difficult. The symmetrical Bg4 is dubious, Ne7 is refuted;Qe7 with Nd8 is artificial. Lasker, seemingly unprepared in this often played opening, chooses a defense, which I used in Vienna 1898 against Janowski.
Janowski vs Tarrasch, 1898
Janowski won brilliantly; however, he conducted the attack more resolute than Capablanca.
Completely wrong. The move may be made after the doubling of the rooks or the tripling of the heavy pieces on the h-file.
Lasker finds fault with Capablanca's play. Capablanca exchanges one bishop and is clueless what to do with the other and he conducts an attack with 2 pieces, queen and rook, against 4 pieces queen, rook, knight and king!
He had to bring Bb5 into the game via d7 after d4-d5 and bring Bg3 to c3. Then push the f and g pawn and attack.
It seems that deep, broad plans are not the cuban's strength. He knows how to combine but not how to compose.
|Jul-30-14|| ||RookFile: Lasker's 41... Ke7 was very important. If the king was not close enough, the pawn sacrifice 43. a5 would have won for white.|
|Feb-12-17|| ||edubueno: Primer encuentro Capablanca vs Lasker en partida seria. Capa jugó tranquilamente la apertura y no sacó un granito de ventaja frente al gran estilo de Emanuel Lasker que venía agrandado por ganar previamente a Rubinstein.|
|Apr-15-17|| ||chessgame901: [Event "St Petersburg"]
[Site "St. Petersburg RUS"]
[White "Jose Raul Capablanca"]
[Black "Emanuel Lasker"]
[PlyCount "98"] the informations