| May-28-08 | | YoungEd: Hooray for Trenchard, normally a tail-ender! Lasker was young, but still Lasker! |
 |
Feb-09-11
 | | Phony Benoni: You can see some traces of the wily fighter Lasker developed into, but he never seemed comfortable with the opening or the resulting position. However, I can't shake the feeling something was there that could have saved him. Maybe if he hadn't given knight odds. Trenchard deserves credit, avoiding the traps and even setting a few nasties of his own. |
|
Feb-09-11
 | | eykca: What a sharp, fun game to watch. As a patzer the continual king/queen proximity would have wreaked havoc on my nerves. |
|
Feb-09-11
 | | An Englishman: Good Evening: Trenchant Tranchard defense! I wonder if 16.dxc5 would have improved, but this also could get complex: 16...0-0!?; 17.c6,Bg4!? might be a worthwhile Exchange sac. 17.Bxc5 might also improve on Lasker's play. But even if Lasker missed an outright win somewhere, it's still a great victory under heavy fire for Black. |
|
Feb-09-11
 | | Check It Out: A much longer battle than I thought it would be for some reason. The developing move 20.Nbd2, instead 20.Ne5, might have been prudent; that queen knight just sat there the whole game like a sad benchwarmer, and then on the last move of the game, CHOMP!, the black-widow queen takes his head off. |
|
| Feb-09-11 | | psmith: It seems 17. Bxc5 would have been better. |
|
Feb-09-11
 | | Once: So let's have a round of applause for Herbert William Trenchard. CG's database gives 48 of his games, of which he drew 12 lost 31 and won only 5... ... including this one.
Mind you, you do have to say that Lasker made most of the running in this game. Starting with the ultra romantic Evans Gambit, by way of pawn sacs, a rook sac, threatening back rank mate ... until his attack fizzled out and black was able to sweep up all the pieces into a clearly won endgame. Trenchard hung on grimly and scrapped his way to the full point. I can imagine Herbert in his twilight years, looking back on an eventful career. He played the likes of Tarrasch, Pillsbury, Blackurne and Chigorin. Travelled to international tournaments. Took part in cable matches representing England against the USA. And <once>, just <once> he took a point off the might Lasker. Now that is a happy thought to dwell on, as you smoke a pipe in an easy chair while the sun goes down. |
|
Feb-09-11
 | | patzer2: <psmith> Good observation about 17. Bxc5! After 17. Bxc5! Bxc5 18. Qc5  White's position is dominating.Fritz indicates the natural looking 20. Ne5?, allowing 20...0-0!  is the losing move, and recommends 20. Nbd2 0-0 21. Ne4 Rf5  instead. However, White's prospects here don't look much brighter than in the game. The stunner Black missed that would have ended the game sooner was 21...Rxf2!!, with a decisive discovered check threat: 
click for larger viewFrom here play might continue 22. Rxf2 22. Rxd8+ Rxd8 23. Qc1 (23. Qa4 Rf4+ 24. Kh1 Rf1#) 23... Rc2+ 24. Kf1
Rxc1+  , |
|
| Feb-09-11 | | BishopsPawn: I found it ironic that the opening gambit gave white a tempo he used to drive the bishop to a square where it would soon become a very powerful piece. |
|
| Feb-09-11 | | castle dweller: I am looking at move #16 for white.
I'm not sure but at a quick glance, Lasker may have been better off taking the c-pawn instead of the e-pawn? Hat's off to HWT though, for outplaying a legend. surely a sweet memory |
|
Feb-09-11
 | | kevin86: A rare loss by the Good Doctor.The championship was a few years ahead,but the fight already is present for Lasker. It did take time to develop,however. |
|
| Feb-09-11 | | Kazzak: Lasker needs a refresher on the Evans Gambit, clearly. No point in pushing the b-pawn if you don't know why it's smart. |
|
Feb-09-11
| | patzer2: <castle dweller> White's 16. Nd5 was fine. The mistake was missing 17. Bxc5! , keeping Black from castling and maintaining a strong initiative. |
|
| Feb-09-11 | | TheTamale: An especially fun game! |
|
sac: 20...O-O
icon.