<<There were actually two or three games where a two-Bishop sack was played. (I also seem to remember one by Morphy as well.) However, it does not change the fact that this is the game that got all the attention and - served as THE MODEL ... for all future sacrifices of this type.>>

<ax2kool> Maybe I'm the one who has trouble counting, but as far as I can see Lasker only sacrificed two pieces. And I don't really see how the battle was long term - I think it was a quick burst of tactics which lasted eight moves, followed by ten moves of technical conversion, and finally six pointless moves of playing out the won position.

As for c5, it is indeed dubious, Nc5! (another reason Nbd7 was a fine move) would have been much better as it would have eliminated one of whites powerful bishops.

Although the biggest black mistake IMHO in that he did not play ...3 d4, when no matter what whites pawn structure is shattered, one reason to play Nf3 early on as white in the Bird's.

Although, those moves were typical of the style of the ages, and although nowadays most strong players would find d4 and Nc5 immediatley, that wasn't the way it was played then and you can't compare different eras.

Overall though, a fantastic attack by Lasker, and one of my all-time favorite combinations.

1. f4 d5 2. e3 Nf6 3. b3

<Lasker plays in his typical provocative style, avoiding the natural and superior 3. Nf3. He gets away with it but Nimzovitch - see below- was not so fortuate!>

3...e6 <Too solid - black should allow himself to be provoked! Correct is to cross the centre demarcation with 3...d4, when whites pawn structure will crack no matter what he plays. Nimzovitch vs. Steiner continued 4. Bd3 dxe3 5. dxe3 e5 and black had an excellent game. Incidentally Nimzovitch had an overwhelming score with the Bird: 5 wins (including one over WC Max Euwe), 2 draws and only that one loss to Steiner.>

4. Bb2 Be7
5. Bd3 <Lasker sets up his raking bishops to attack black's kingside - but this idea, while brilliantly succesful here, would hardly work against modern defensive measures>

5...b6 <One way to stop the danger immediatley would be 5...Ne4!? 6. Nf3 (6. Bxg7? Rg8) 6...Bh4+ 7. g3 Bf6 neutralizing both of white's mighty bishops!>

6. Nf3 Bb7 <6...Ba6 is another to eliminate white's bishop pair>

7. Nc3 <Usually in these fianchetto lines white develops this peice by way of d2-d3 and Nd2. Here because of Lasker's ecccentric (but aggressive) development of the light squared bishop, the knight has to go to this ackward square. Clearly the knight belongs on the kingside (Nc3-e2-g3) - and if it gets there without cost it can cause some serious damage - but objectively, black could equalize easily by snapping off a white bishop while all this is happening>

7...Nbd7
8. 0-0 0-0
9. Ne2 c5 <This is not a bad but, from a practical standpoint, much simpler is 9...Nc5. eliminating the dangerous bishop while also spoiling white's pawn structure (unless Lasker would be willing to play something like 10. Ne5 Nxd3 11. Nxd3 c5 when black has no problems). But again, I must state that Bauer's actual move, for all the criticism it has received over the years, is not an objective mistake, and black has, in fact, reasonable chances at this point.>

10. Ng3 Qc7
11. Ne5 Nxe5 <This is also not bad, but black should have taken advantage of a tactical opportunity and strike with 11...d4!, which is a common theme in the queen side fianchetto lines: black shuts out the dark-squared bishop. here it works, despite insufficient control of d4, because of a tactic based on the exposed g1-a7 diagonal. After 11...d4! play might continue 12.cxd4 cxd4 13.Bxd4 Bc5 (the tactic mentioned above) 14. c3 Nxe5 15. fxe5 Qxe5 and black is slightly better. Therefore white should not take the pawn but instead play 13. Qe2 when 13...Qd6 leads to an approximately equal game, as white has kingside play, but his bishop suffers.>

12. Bxe5 Qc6 13. Qe2 <White has to cover the mate threat before he attacks; the impetuos 13. Nh5 would only give black counterplay after 13...d4.>

13...a6? <Black fails to sense the danger, reacting to the sham threat of BB5 and completely missing the cyclone heading for his queen. Even now black could keep an apporximately level game in two ways. 13...Nd7 attacks a dangerous bishop, when the direct attack with 14. Bxh7+ leads only to a draw after 14...Kxh7 15. Qh5+ Kg8 16. Bxg7, while 14. Bb5 Qc8 15. Nh5 f6 16. Qg4 Rf7 also shuts down white's play. Alternatively black can play 13...Ne4 again obstructing a dangerous bishop with equality.>