| Feb-20-04 | | drukenknight: HEres one of the earliest two knights caro kann w/ Bf5. No wonder lasker didnt fear it. I think modern players would go for: 8....Qd5 after all white has his q out there why not blacks? |
|
| Feb-20-04 | | ughaibu: Great game, thanks for posting it. Look at those bishops at move 15. And Lasker with his common sense and develop your pieces, development of the queens bishop on the game's final move. |
|
| Feb-20-04 | | aulero: After 8...Qd5, 9.Bc4 is very unpleasant. |
|
| Feb-20-04 | | drukenknight: doesnt he just take the N with check? |
|
| Feb-20-04 | | aulero: The knight is guarded by the Queen in h5 |
|
| Sep-27-08 | | ughaibu: Keypusher: What does Soltis say about this game? |
|
| Sep-27-08 | | AnalyzeThis: This just looks like a straightforward crush by Lasker, doesn't it? |
|
| Sep-28-08 | | ughaibu: Similar games gives eighteen white wins and one black win, this game: M Agopov vs O Salmensuu, 2001 And I thought the Caro-Kahn was considered drawish. |
|
Oct-11-08
 | | keypusher: <ughaibu: Keypusher: What does Soltis say about this game?> Nothing interesting. Black is busted after eight moves, as pointed out in the posts here. 9. Bc4 is a well-known improvement on 9. Qf3, and I think Lasker had even played 9. Bc4 himself in a simul before. Anyway, 9. Qf3 is good enough; Black's position is still an utter wreck. As I recall Soltis doesn't even have any comments for the last dozen moves or so. For the life of me, I don't know why this game is in the book. Soltis probably could have done better by picking a game randomly from London 1899 or Paris 1900. |
|
| Nov-26-08 | | ughaibu: Thanks. |
|
Jul-13-10
 | | FSR: Lasker himself apparently originated this trap back in 1908(!): Lasker vs Radsheer, 1908 There he played 9.Bc4, winning after 9...e6 10.Qe2 Bg7? 11.Nxf7! Instead, 10...Qe7! is correct, though hardly appealing. Lasker's 9.Qf3! in this game is actually an improvement, winning at least a pawn by force. If 9...Qd5? 10.Qxd5 cxd5 11.Bb5+ wins. If 9...f6?, 10.Bc4! e6 11.Bxe6! |
|
May-15-11
| | FSR: Questioning myself - 9...f6 would certainly be ugly, but maybe it's the best try. After 10.Bc4 (the move I gave in my prior comment) I'm not sure why Black can't eat the knight with 10...fxe5. If 11.Qf7+ Kd7 12.Qe6+, Black doesn't have to lose a rook to 12...Kc7 13.Qxe5+, but can repeat with 12...Ke8. |
|
May-15-11
| | FSR: Black may have a significant improvement in 12...e6! 13.Qxa8 Bc5! as in M Agopov vs O Salmensuu, 2001 - won crushingly by Black! Unless there's a major improvement on that game - I don't see it, but it certainly could be there - maybe White should go back to the old 9.Bc4! e6 10.Qe2! Lasker-Radsheer line. |
|
May-15-11
| | keypusher: <FSR> For what it's worth, Soltis says 8.Qf3 is "more exact" than 8.Qh5 (8....Nf6 9.Qb3 winning a pawn). But he doesn't even consider your 12....Ke8 in the 9....f6 line. |
|
May-15-11
| | FSR: <keypusher: <FSR> For what it's worth, Soltis says 8.Qf3 is "more exact" than 8.Qh5 (8....Nf6 9.Qb3 winning a pawn). But he doesn't even consider your 12....Ke8 in the 9....f6 line.> That's pretty pathetic. Black has two legal moves, one of which hangs a rook, and Soltis doesn't analyze the other one. |
|
| Dec-25-14 | | TheFocus: Lasker finished in 5th place at the Zurich tournament held in Zurich, Switzerland with a score of +9=2-4. This round 13, July 26, 1934. |
|
| Apr-20-15 | | zanzibar: This opening trap is covered in Lombardy's <Modern Chess Opening Traps> (which isn't quite so modern anymore). He give 5...Bg6 a question mark. |
|
| Jun-15-20 | | sneaky pete: Van Trotsenburg discussed this game in his Septemebr 1, 1934 column in Algemeen Handelsblad. https://www.delpher.nl/nl/kranten/v... He doesn't mention the alternative 9.Bc4 .. and the catastrophe from 1908. A bad memory or a sign that the Lasker vs Raadsheer simul game with 9.Bc4 .. is a phony? |
|
Kibitzing
Annotations by 
sac: 11.Qxb7
