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

Emanuel Lasker
Number of games in database: 1,107
Years covered: 1889 to 1940
Overall record: +363 -92 =179 (71.4%)*
   * Overall winning percentage = (wins+draws/2) / total games
      Based on games in the database; may be incomplete.
      473 exhibition games, odds games, etc. are excluded from this statistic.

With the White pieces:
 Ruy Lopez (176) 
    C68 C62 C66 C67 C64
 French Defense (78) 
    C11 C12 C01 C13 C14
 French (54) 
    C11 C12 C13 C10 C00
 King's Gambit Accepted (49) 
    C39 C33 C38 C37 C35
 Sicilian (48) 
    B45 B34 B40 B44 B32
 King's Gambit Declined (30) 
    C30 C31 C32
With the Black pieces:
 Ruy Lopez (109) 
    C65 C67 C66 C79 C77
 Orthodox Defense (51) 
    D53 D63 D52 D50 D60
 Giuoco Piano (32) 
    C50 C53 C54
 Queen's Pawn Game (31) 
    D05 D02 D00 D04 A46
 Sicilian (29) 
    B34 B73 B33 B45 B32
 Four Knights (21) 
    C49 C47 C48
Repertoire Explorer

NOTABLE GAMES: [what is this?]
   Lasker vs J Bauer, 1889 1-0
   Lasker vs Capablanca, 1914 1-0
   Pillsbury vs Lasker, 1896 0-1
   Lasker vs W Napier, 1904 1-0
   Marshall vs Lasker, 1907 0-1
   Lasker vs Steinitz, 1894 1-0
   Euwe vs Lasker, 1934 0-1
   Lasker vs Schlechter, 1910 1-0
   Steinitz vs Lasker, 1896 0-1
   Tarrasch vs Lasker, 1908 0-1

WORLD CHAMPIONSHIPS: [what is this?]
   Lasker - Steinitz World Championship (1894)
   Lasker - Steinitz World Championship Rematch (1896)
   Lasker - Marshall World Championship Match (1907)
   Lasker - Tarrasch World Championship Match (1908)
   Lasker - Schlechter World Championship Match (1910)
   Lasker - Janowski World Championship Match (1910)
   Lasker - Capablanca World Championship Match (1921)

NOTABLE TOURNAMENTS: [what is this?]
   Lasker - Bird (1890)
   Nuremberg (1896)
   Paris (1900)
   St. Petersburg 1895/96 (1895)
   London (1899)
   Lasker - Janowski (1909)
   St Petersburg (1914)
   Maehrisch - Ostrau (1923)
   New York (1924)
   St Petersburg (1909)
   Moscow (1925)
   Hastings (1895)
   Cambridge Springs (1904)
   Zurich (1934)
   Nottingham (1936)

GAME COLLECTIONS: [what is this?]
   Match Lasker! by amadeus
   The Lion King by chocobonbon
   Why Lasker Matters by Andrew Soltis by keypusher
   lasker best games by brager
   Selected Lasker by LaBourdonnaisdeux
   the informal Lasker by ughaibu
   Chess World Champion Nr. 02: Lasker by Olanovich
   All Hail Emanuel by iron maiden
   Treasure's Ark by Gottschalk
   World Champions A-Z part 2 Lasker by kevin86
   Lasker vs the World Champions Decisive Games by visayanbraindoctor
   Lasker by vidra
   Match Steinitz! by amadeus
   brainiac9129's favorite games by brainiac9129

   Rubinstein vs Lasker, 1909
   Rubinstein vs Salwe, 1908
   Spielmann vs Rubinstein, 1909
   Tartakower vs Schlechter, 1909
   Lasker vs Teichmann, 1909

Search Sacrifice Explorer for Emanuel Lasker
Search Google for Emanuel Lasker

(born Dec-24-1868, died Jan-11-1941, 72 years old) Germany

[what is this?]
Emanuel Lasker was the second official World Chess Champion, reigning for a record 27 years after he defeated the first World Champion, Wilhelm Steinitz, in 1894.

Statistician Jeff Sonas of Chessmetrics writes, "if you look across players' entire careers, there is a significant amount of statistical evidence to support the claim that Emanuel Lasker was, in fact, the most dominant player of all time." By Sonas' reckoning, Lasker was the No. 1 player in the world for a total of 24.3 years between 1890 and 1926.


He was born (on the exact same day as Richard Teichmann) in what was then Berlinchen (literally "little Berlin") in Prussia, and which is now Barlinek in Poland. In 1880, he went to school in Berlin, where he lived with his older brother Berthold Lasker, who was studying medicine, and who taught him how to play chess. By Chessmetrics' analysis, Berthold was one of the world's top ten players in the early 1890s.


Soon after Lasker obtained his abitur in Landsberg an der Warthe, now a Polish town named Gorzow Wielkopolski, the teenager's first tournament success came when he won the Café Kaiserhof's annual Winter tournament 1888/89, winning all 20 games. Soon afterwards, he tied with Emil von Feyerfeil with 12/15 (+11 -2 =2) at the second division tournament of the sixth DSB Congress in Breslau, defeating von Feyerfeil in the one game play-off.* Also in 1889, he came second with 6/8 (+5 -1 =2) behind Amos Burn at the Amsterdam "A" (stronger) tournament, ahead of James Mason and Isidor Gunsberg, two of the strongest players of that time. In 1890 he finished third in Graz behind Gyula Makovetz and Johann Hermann Bauer, then shared first prize with his brother Berthold in a tournament in Berlin. In spring 1892, he won two tournaments in London, the second and stronger of these without losing a game. At New York 1893, he won all thirteen games, one of a small number of significant tournaments in history in which a player achieved a perfect score. Wikipedia article: List of world records in chess#Perfect tournament and match scores

After Lasker won the title, he answered his critics who considered that the title match was by an unproven player against an aging champion by being on the leader board in every tournament before World War I, including wins at St Petersburg in 1895-96, Nurenberg 1896, London 1899, Paris 1900 ahead of Harry Nelson Pillsbury (by 2 points with a score of +14 −1 =1), Trenton Falls 1906, and St Petersburg in 1914. He also came 3rd at Hastings 1895 (this relatively poor result possibly occurring during convalescence after nearly dying from typhus), 2nd at Cambridge Springs in 1904, and =1st at the Chigorin Memorial tournament in St Petersburg in 1909. In 1918, a few months after the war, Lasker won a quadrangular tournament in Berlin against Akiba Rubinstein, Carl Schlechter and Siegbert Tarrasch.

After he lost the title in 1921, Lasker was still in the top rank of players, winning at Moravská Ostrava in 1923 ahead of Richard Reti, Ernst Gruenfeld, Alexey Sergeevich Selezniev, Savielly Tartakower, and Max Euwe. His last tournament win was at New York 1924, where he scored 80% and finished 1.5 points ahead of Jose Raul Capablanca, followed by Alexander Alekhine and Frank James Marshall. In 1925, he came 2nd at Moscow behind Efim Bogoljubov and ahead of Capablanca, Marshall, Tartakower, and Carlos Torre Repetto. There followed a long hiatus from chess caused by his intention to retire from the game, but he re-emerged into front line chess in 1934 placing 5th in Zurich behind Alekhine, Euwe, Salomon Flohr and Bogoljubow and ahead of Ossip Bernstein, Aron Nimzowitsch, and Gideon Stahlberg. In Moscow in 1935, he was 3rd, undefeated, a half point behind Mikhail Botvinnik and Flohr and ahead of Capablanca, Rudolf Spielmann, Ilia Abramovich Kan, Grigory Levenfish, Andre Lilienthal, and Viacheslav Ragozin. Reuben Fine hailed the 66-year-old Lasker's performance as "a biological miracle". In 1936, Lasker placed 6th in Moscow and finished his career later that year at Nottingham when he came =7th with 8.5/14 (+6 -3 =5), his last-round game being the following stylish win: Lasker vs C H Alexander, 1936.


Non-title matches 1889 saw his long career in match play commence, one which only ceased upon relinquishing his title in 1921. He won nearly of his matches, apart from a few drawn mini-matches, including a drawn one-game play-off match against his brother Berthold in Berlin in 1890, losing only exhibition matches with Mikhail Chigorin, Carl Schlechter and Marshall, and a knight-odds match against Nellie Showalter, Jackson Showalter's wife. In 1889, he defeated Curt von Bardeleben (+1 =2) and in 1889-90 he beat Jacques Mieses (+5 =3). In 1890, he defeated Henry Edward Bird (+7 -2 =3) and Nicholas Theodore Miniati (+3 =2 -0), and in 1891 he beat Francis Joseph Lee (+1 =1) and Berthold Englisch (+2 =3). 1892 and 1893 saw Lasker getting into his stride into the lead up to his title match with Steinitz, beating Bird a second time (5-0) Lasker - Bird (1892) , Joseph Henry Blackburne (+6 =4), Jackson Whipps Showalter (+6 -2 =2) and Celso Golmayo Zupide (+2 =1). In 1892, Lasker toured and played a series of mini-matches against leading players in the Manhattan, Brooklyn and Franklin Chess Clubs. At the Manhattan Chess Club, he played a series of three-game matches, defeating James Moore Hanham, Gustave Simonson, David Graham Baird, Charles B Isaacson, Albert Hodges, Eugene Delmar, John S Ryan and John Washington Baird; of the 24 games he played against these players he won 21, losing one to Hodges and drawing one each with Simonson and Delmar. At the Brooklyn Chess Club, Lasker played two mini-matches of two games each, winning each game against Abel Edward Blackmar and William M De Visser, and drew the first game of an unfinished match against Philip Richardson. Lasker finished 1892 at the Franklin Chess Club by playing 5 mini-matches of two games each against its leading players, winning every game against Dionisio M Martinez, Alfred K Robinson, Gustavus Charles Reichhelm and Hermann G Voigt and drawing a match (+1 -1) with Walter Penn Shipley. Shipley offered cash bonuses if he could stipulate the openings and taking up the challenge, Lasker played the Two Knight's Defense and won in 38 moves, while in the second game, Shipley won as Black in 24 moves against Lasker playing the White end of a Vienna Gambit, Steinitz variation (Opening Explorer). Shipley, who counted both Lasker and Steinitz as his friends, was instrumental in arranging the Philadelphia leg of the Lasker-Steinitz match, that being games 9, 10 and 11. 29 years later, Shipley was also the referee of Lasker’s title match with Capablanca. In 1892-3, Lasker also played and won some other matches against lesser players including Andres Clemente Vazquez (3-0), A Ponce (first name Albert) (2-0) and Alfred K Ettlinger (5-0). Also in 1893, Mrs. Nellie Showalter, wife of Jackson Showalter and one of the leading women players in the USA, defeated Lasker 5-2 in a match receiving Knight odds.

These matches pushed Lasker to the forefront of chess, and after being refused a match by Tarrasch, he defeated Steinitz for the world title in 1894 after spreadeagling the field at New York 1893. While he was World Champion, Lasker played some non-title matches, the earliest of which was a six-game exhibition match against Chigorin in 1903 which he lost 2.5-3.5 (+1 -2 =3); the match was intended as a rigorous test of the Rice Gambit, which was the stipulated opening in each game. In the midst of his four title defenses that were held between 1907 and 1910, Lasker played and won what appears to have been a short training match against Abraham Speijer (+2 =1) in 1908. Also in 1908, he played another Rice Gambit-testing match, this time against Schlechter, again losing, this time by 1-4 (+0 =2 -3), apparently prompting a rethink of the Rice Gambit as a viable weapon.** In 1909 he drew a short match (2 wins 2 losses) against David Janowski and several months later they played a longer match that Lasker easily won (7 wins, 2 draws, 1 loss). Lasker accepted a return match and they played a title match in 1910 (details below). In 1914, he drew a 2 game exhibition match against Bernstein (+1 -1) and in 1916, he defeated Tarrasch in another, clearly non-title, match by 5.5-0.5. After Lasker lost his title in 1921, he is not known to have played another match until he lost a two-game exhibition match (=1 -1) against Marshall in 1940, a few months before he died. A match between Dr. Lasker and Dr. Vidmar had been planned for 1925, but it did not eventuate.***

World Championship matches The Lasker - Steinitz World Championship (1894) was played in New York, Philadelphia, and Montreal. Lasker won with 10 wins, 5 losses and 4 draws. Lasker also won the Lasker - Steinitz World Championship Rematch (1896), played in Moscow, with 10 wins, 2 losses, and 5 draws. At one stage when Rudolf Rezso Charousek ‘s star was in the ascendant, Lasker was convinced he would eventually play a title match with the Hungarian master; unfortunately, Charousek died from tuberculosis in 1900, aged 26, before this could happen. As it turned out, he did not play another World Championship for 11 years until the Lasker - Marshall World Championship Match (1907), which was played in New York, Philadelphia, Washington, Baltimore, Chicago, Memphis. Lasker won this easily, remaining undefeated with 8 wins and 7 draws.

After a prolonged period of somewhat strained relations due to Tarrasch’s refusal of Lasker’s offer for a match, Lasker accepted Tarrasch’s challenge for the title, and the Lasker - Tarrasch World Championship Match (1908) was played in Düsseldorf and Munich, with Lasker winning with 8 wins 3 losses and five draws. In 1910, Lasker came close to losing his title when he was trailing by a full point at the tenth and last game of the Lasker - Schlechter World Championship Match (1910) (the match being played in Vienna and Berlin); Schlechter held the advantage and could have drawn the game with ease on several occasions, however, he pursued a win, ultimately blundering a Queen endgame to relinquish his match lead and allow Lasker to retain the title. Some months later, the Lasker - Janowski World Championship Match (1910) - played in Berlin - was Lasker’s final successful defense of his title, winning with 8 wins and 3 draws.

In 1912 Lasker and Rubinstein, agreed to play a World Championship match in the fall of 1914 but the match was cancelled when World War I broke out. The war delayed all further title match negotiations until Lasker finally relinquished his title upon resigning from the Lasker - Capablanca World Championship Match (1921) in Havana while trailing by four games.

Life, legacy and testimonials

Lasker’s extended absences from chess were due to his pursuit of other activities, including mathematics and philosophy. He spent the last years of the 19th century writing his doctorate. Between 1902 and 1907, he played only at Cambridge Springs, using his time in the US. It was during this period that he introduced the notion of a primary ideal, which corresponds to an irreducible variety and plays a role similar to prime powers in the prime decomposition of an integer. He proved the primary decomposition theorem for an ideal of a polynomial ring in terms of primary ideals in a paper Zur Theorie der Moduln und Ideale published in volume 60 of Mathematische Annalen in 1905. A commutative ring R is now called a 'Lasker ring' if every ideal of R can be represented as an intersection of a finite number of primary ideals. Lasker's results on the decomposition of ideals into primary ideals was the foundation on which Emmy Noether built an abstract theory which developed ring theory into a major mathematical topic and provided the foundations of modern algebraic geometry. Noether's Idealtheorie in Ringbereichen (1921) was of fundamental importance in the development of modern algebra, generalising Lasker's results by giving the decomposition of ideals into intersections of primary ideals in any commutative ring with ascending chain condition.****

After Lasker lost his title, he spent a considerable amount of time playing bridge and intended to retire. However, he returned to chess in the mid-thirties as he needed to raise money after the Nazis had confiscated his properties and life savings. After the tournament in Moscow in 1936, the Laskers were encouraged to stay on and Emanuel accepted an invitation to become a member of the Moscow Academy of Science to pursue his mathematical studies, with both he and his wife, Martha, taking up permanent residence in Moscow. At this time, he also renounced his German citizenship and took on Soviet citizenship. Although Stalin's purges prompted the Laskers to migrate to the USA in 1937, it is unclear whether they ever renounced their Soviet citizenship.

Lasker counted Albert Einstein amongst his friends. He published several chess books but as he was also a mathematician, games theorist, philosopher and even playwright, he published books in all these fields, except for the play which was performed on one occasion. As a youth, his parents had recognised his potential and sent him to study in Berlin where he also learned to play serious chess. After he graduated from high school, he studied mathematics and philosophy at the universities in Berlin, Göttingen and Heidelberg. Lasker died in the Mount Sinai Hospital, New York in 1941, aged 72, and was buried in the Beth Olom Cemetery in Queens. He was survived by his wife and his sister, Lotta. On May 6, 2008, Dr. Lasker was among the first 40 German sportsmen to be elected into the "Hall of Fame des Deutschen Sports".


"It is not possible to learn much from him. One can only stand and wonder." - <Max Euwe> Euwe lost all three of his games against Lasker, the most lopsided result between any two world champions.

"My chess hero" - <Viktor Korchnoi>

"The greatest of the champions was, of course, Emanuel Lasker" - <Mikhail Tal>

"Lies and hypocrisy do not survive for long on the chessboard. The creative combination lies bare the presumption of a lie, while the merciless fact, culminating in a checkmate, contradicts the hypocrite." – <Emanuel Lasker>


* E von Feyerfeil vs Lasker, 1889** *** User: Karpova: Emanuel Lasker (kibitz #1449) ****

Sources: Article about Lasker by J J O'Connor and E F Robertson; Obituary from the Times of London:

Notes Lasker played on the following consultation chess teams Em. Lasker / MacDonnell, Lasker / Taubenhaus, Em. Lasker / Maroczy, Em. Lasker / I Rice, Em. Lasker / Barasz / Breyer, Lasker / Pillsbury, Lasker / Chigorin / Marshall / Teichmann, Emanuel Lasker / William Ward-Higgs, Emanuel Lasker / Heinrich Wolf, Emanuel Lasker / Hermann Keidanski & L Lasker Em / Lasek.

Wikipedia article: Emanuel Lasker

 page 1 of 45; games 1-25 of 1,116  PGN Download
Game  ResultMoves Year Event/LocaleOpening
1. E von Feyerfeil vs Lasker 1-042 1889 Breslau HauptturnierC30 King's Gambit Declined
2. Von Bardeleben vs Lasker  ½-½27 1889 Berlin m 8990D53 Queen's Gambit Declined
3. Gunsberg vs Lasker 0-135 1889 AmsterdamC65 Ruy Lopez, Berlin Defense
4. R Leather vs Lasker 0-156 1889 AmsterdamA07 King's Indian Attack
5. Lasker vs Lipke 1-047 1889 Breslau (Poland)C26 Vienna
6. Lasker vs J Mason ½-½38 1889 AmsterdamC47 Four Knights
7. V Tietz vs Lasker 0-140 1889 German Chess Congress, Hauptturnier AC79 Ruy Lopez, Steinitz Defense Deferred
8. A Reif vs Lasker  0-113 1889 Breslau HauptturnierA02 Bird's Opening
9. Lasker vs Mieses 1-037 1889 Lasker - Mieses 1889/90A84 Dutch
10. L Van Vliet vs Lasker 1-024 1889 AmsterdamC41 Philidor Defense
11. Lasker vs A van Foreest 1-050 1889 AmsterdamA04 Reti Opening
12. L Mabillis vs Lasker 0-124 1889 Breslau HauptturnierC60 Ruy Lopez
13. Lasker vs J Bauer 1-038 1889 AmsterdamA03 Bird's Opening
14. Mieses vs Lasker 0-128 1889 Berlin (Germany)C25 Vienna
15. Loman vs Lasker 0-122 1889 AmsterdamC79 Ruy Lopez, Steinitz Defense Deferred
16. Von Bardeleben vs Lasker 1-050 1889 BerlinC26 Vienna
17. E von Feyerfeil vs Lasker 0-147 1889 Hauptturnier play offD00 Queen's Pawn Game
18. Lasker vs Von Popiel 0-121 1889 Berlin gameC26 Vienna
19. Lasker vs Von Bardeleben 1-047 1889 Berlin m 8990B06 Robatsch
20. Lasker vs Burn ½-½15 1889 AmsterdamC01 French, Exchange
21. Mieses vs Lasker ½-½60 1889 Lasker - Mieses 1889/90C25 Vienna
22. Bird vs Lasker 0-149 1890 Lasker - BirdA03 Bird's Opening
23. Lasker vs Mieses ½-½70 1890 Lasker - Mieses 1889/90D21 Queen's Gambit Accepted
24. Lasker vs Bird 0-156 1890 Lasker - BirdA81 Dutch
25. G Marco vs Lasker 0-174 1890 GrazC77 Ruy Lopez
 page 1 of 45; games 1-25 of 1,116  PGN Download
  REFINE SEARCH:   White wins (1-0) | Black wins (0-1) | Draws (1/2-1/2) | Lasker wins | Lasker loses  

from the Chessgames Store

Kibitzer's Corner
< Earlier Kibitzing  · PAGE 78 OF 78 ·  Later Kibitzing>
Dec-26-14  TheFocus: <Loss generally occurs when a player overrates his advantage or for other reasons seeks to derive from a minute advantage a great return such as a forced win> - Lasker.
Dec-26-14  TheFocus: <He who has a slight disadvantage plays more attentively, inventively and more boldly than his antagonist who either takes it easy or aspires after too much. Thus a slight disadvantage is very frequently seen to convert into a good, solid advantage> - Lasker.
Dec-26-14  TheFocus: <King of chess - (what he whispered to his wife before he died)> - Lasker.
Premium Chessgames Member
  keypusher: <A pleasant surprise to me. GM Nunn has in the past been known to make statements that denigrate pre WW2 masters. Larsen was another such player, making statements that he would have bested all of them easily. Perhaps Nunn has been changing his attitude then.

Larsen's attitude was totally unfounded given that in his youth, some of the pre-WW2 masters were still around; and he had the opportunity to actually play them competitively. Against the best of them, he came out a loser:>

<visayanbraindoctor> As far as I know, Larsen said he could have been world champion if he could have gone back to the 1920s. If he slighted all pre-WWII masters, or slighted Keres or Botvinnik in particular, I'd be curious to hear the quote.

For perhaps obvious reasons, the 1920s was a wasteland for the development of new chess talent. Euwe was the only strong master to come along during that decade. Alekhine was born in 1892, Euwe 1901, Botvinnik 1911.

Premium Chessgames Member
  keypusher: 6) He had an unprecedentedly long top career which only was successfully repeated by Keres and Korchnoi.

Botvinnik's career was as long as Keres', and he stayed in the top ten until the year before he retired.

Premium Chessgames Member
  MissScarlett: <Euwe was the only strong master to come along during that decade.>

Torre was pretty strong. Unfortunately, he went doolally. The Soviets had many talents, but as they practically cut themselves off from international competition between 1925 and 1933, it's difficult to gauge their true strength.

Dec-28-14  john barleycorn: < keypusher: 6) He had an unprecedentedly long top career which only was successfully repeated by Keres and Korchnoi.>

What about Smyslov? According to an earlier post by <Nimh>:

Smyslov: 43y7m top 10, 6y8m #1

Dec-28-14  john barleycorn: Sorry, post by <Lambda> not <Nimh>.
Premium Chessgames Member
  nimh: Ok, my bad, I should have mentioned Botvinnik and Smyslov too. Keres and Korchnoi are the most known examples of chess longevity, so I forgot about others.
Premium Chessgames Member
  visayanbraindoctor: <keypusher: <visayanbraindoctor> As far as I know, Larsen said he could have been world champion if he could have gone back to the 1920s. If he slighted all pre-WWII masters, or slighted Keres or Botvinnik in particular, I'd be curious to hear the quote.>

Larsen (fortunately) did not mention any names. Nevertheless if he had gone back to say 1921, I believe that Lasker probably would have walloped him in a match. So would Capablanca and Alekhine. And he could not have been certain of winning a tournament where the likes of Reti, Bogoljubov, Tartakower, Nimzovich, Spielmann at their prime were all playing. He probably would have made it to the podium though.

Jan-12-15  Petrosianic: Larson was an eternal optimist. He still hoped to be world champion in 1975.
Premium Chessgames Member
  perfidious: Indeed, if not still later than that.
Premium Chessgames Member
  offramp: What were the non-chess books of Emanuel Lasker?

<Kampf>, 1907

<Das Begreifen der Welt>, 1913

<Die Philosophie des Unvollendbar>, 1918

<Vom Menschen die Geschichte>, 1925 - a play

<Brettspiele der Völker>, 1928

<Das Weltbild der Spieler>, unpublished

<The Community of the Future>, New York, 1940.

<"Das verständige Kartenspiel">, available at prices ranging from $60 to $100.

What are the chances of that play being staged nowadays?

According to critics, none of these books are worth reading.

Feb-04-15  poorthylacine: In my opinion Emanuel Lasker was not only the best and most impressive chess champion of all times, but also the most intelligent as man, the most balanced mind, he had the strongest will of all, and too a lovely personality, as his kind wife Martha knew it very well... Like the one of unfortunate Morphy, his name will always be associated with honor, opposite to the shame on Alekhine and Fischer...
Feb-10-15  dannygjk: Lasker, Capablanca, Alekhine, among other strong GM's of that general era I'm sure would have done well in current times. The people who say they would not obviously have not studied the games of the old GM's.
Feb-20-15  zanzibar: From <Lasker's Chess Magazine> Aug 1905, p 189:

<The values of the pieces calculated with sufficient accuracy for over the board play are as follows:

Pawn, 6; knight, 17; bishop, 17; rook, 24; queen, 47.

These values have not been found by executing the indicated calculaton, but are those which come nearest to express my experience in hard fought games. It would be comparatively easy to find the values of bishop, rook and queen, by a mathematical calculation, but owing to the absence of obstruction for the knight, the change of power on the eighth row for the pawn, also the difference in the regions of mobility and of capture for the pawn, and finally the peculiar position of the king, the determination of values for these pieces by theory would be very hard and experience as a method of determination is preferable. The king, of course, is always on the board and hence for the above law it is unnecessary to find its value. But if we want to compare its capacity for supporting defence and attack with that of the other pieces, we may again use the above values and add that of the king — 20.>

Premium Chessgames Member
  keypusher: From an 1892 interview with the Washington Post, courtesy of the Rook House chess site.

Lasker on "preparation."

<Someone asked me the other day how I kept in practice. My answer will probably appear quite as curious to the general reader as it did to this questioner; I don’t practice. The truth is that the best preparation a professional player can make for a match game is to give up playing for a short time; go to a quiet seaside resort, or back in some secluded nook among the mountains, enjoy himself out-of-doors and not give any thought to chess.

“Playing the game is a considerable strain on a man, and he will find (at least in my experience I find) that he will play best after he has spent some time in relaxation and given no thought to chess. This is a kind of contest where you do not ‘train’ before hand. Of course, I occasionally, in my idle season, play a game for amusement as one would indulge in a game of skittles or cards. The professional match games which constantly take up my time (no less than sixty-four this year) give me all the practice I need, and the same may be said of other leading players.

“I cannot say that I feel particularly nervous or over-strained after playing for several hours. But I exercise ordinary precautions in regard to my work, if professional chess playing can be called work. And I do not know of any famous chess players who have suffered from nervous prostration as a result of playing match games. When Paul Morphy was in London and played against the leading experts of his day, on one occasion he sat almost immovable for ten hours, without having tasted a morsel of food, or even drank a drop of water during that time. And yet, it is said that when he rose from the contest, which it was declared was worthy of being inscribed in letters of gold on the walls of the London Chess Club, he looked, apparently, as fresh as when he sat down. The next morning he rose at 7 o’clock and told his friends that he was willing to continue the match with other contestants.>

Mar-25-15  TheFocus: <The game gives us a satisfaction that Life denies us. And for the Chess player, the success which crowns his work, the great dispeller of sorrows, is named 'combination'> - Emanuel Lasker.
Mar-25-15  TheFocus: <The combination player thinks forward; he starts from the given position, and tries the forceful moves in his mind> - Emanuel Lasker.
Mar-25-15  TheFocus: <The range of circumstances in which it is possible to presuppose the presence of a combination is very limited. The presence of such circumstances is the reason for the genesis of the idea in the master's brain> - Emanuel Lasker.
Mar-25-15  TheFocus: <By positional play a master tries to prove and exploit true values, whereas by combinations he seeks to refute false values ... A combination produces an unexpected re-assessment of values> - Emanuel Lasker.
Mar-27-15  TheFocus: <The fatal hour of this ancient game is approaching. In its modern form this game will soon die a drawing death - the inevitable victory of certainty and mechanization will leave its stamp on the fate of chess> - Emanuel Lasker.
Premium Chessgames Member
  Chessical: Dr. Lasker (White) plays without sight of the board against Messrs. Dafonte, Wilcox and Sequin in consultation, at New Orleans. This would probably be part of Lasker's tour of the USA commencing in October 1892.

1. e4 e5 2. Bc4 Nf6 3. d4 Nxe4 4. dxe5 Nc5 5. f4 g6 6. Nf3 c6 7. Be3 d5 8. exd6 Qxd6 9. Nc3 Bf5 10. Qxd6 Bxd6 11. O-O-O Be7 12. Rhe1 Ne6 13. Ne5 Bf6 14. g4 Bxe5 15. gxf5 Bxc3 16. fxe6 Bf6 17. exf7+ Kf8 18. Bc5+ Kg7 19. f5 Na6 20. Bxa6 bxa6 21. Rd7 Kh6 22. fxg6 Bg7 23. gxh7 Rxh7 24. f8=Q Bxf8 25. Bxf8+ Rxf8 26.Re6+ 1-0

<Source: "Nottinghamshire Guardian", Saturday 8th April 1893, p.7.>

Apr-27-15  Paarhufer: <Chessical> I think the game is already here: Lasker vs Daponte / Wilcox / Segui, 1893 , where also the date and further information given by <TheFocus> can be found - however, like all his quotes without a source.

<Dr. Lasker/1893> Lasker got his doctoral degree in mathematics many years later.

<probably be part of Lasker's tour> Lasker came from Havanna to New Orleans in the middle of February 1893, where he first had a one week engagement at the local chess club (chess, checkers and whist, if I remember this correctly), and then - during March 1893 - he gave mathematical lectures at the Tulane university, New Orleans.

Premium Chessgames Member
  offramp: <Paarhufer: ...the date and further information given by <TheFocus> can be found - however, like all his quotes without a source.>

"That is such a good comment!"
--Offramp E. Tavanipupu, Hut 8, Zone B, Lagos, Nigeria Africa 1002323, 17:52:53H GMT, posted at

Jump to page #    (enter # from 1 to 78)
< Earlier Kibitzing  · PAGE 78 OF 78 ·  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 users.
  4. Nothing in violation of United States law.
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 player 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 suggest your correction and help us eliminate database mistakes!

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 | World Chess Championships | Opening Explorer | Guess the Move | Game Collections | ChessBookie Game | Chessgames Challenge | Store | privacy notice | advertising | contact us
Copyright 2001-2015, Chessgames Services LLC
Web design & database development by 20/20 Technologies