chessgames.com
Members · Prefs · Laboratory · Collections · Openings · Endgames · Sacrifices · History · Search Kibitzing · Kibitzer's Café · Chessforums · Tournament Index · Players · Kibitzing
Harry Pillsbury vs Amos Burn
Hastings (1895), Hastings ENG, rd 16, Aug-26
Queen's Gambit Declined: Modern Variation. Normal Line (D55)  ·  1-0

8
7
6
5
4
3
2
a
1
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
White to move.
ANALYSIS [x]
Notes by Stockfish 9 v010218 (minimum 6s/ply)8...exd5 was played in Benko vs Petrosian, 1963 (0-1)better is 12.O-O c5 13.dxc5 Rxc5 14.Rxc5 bxc5 15.Ne5 Nc6 16.Nxc6 = +0.37 (24 ply)= -0.14 (28 ply) 16...c5 17.Qe3 Qd8 18.g3 cxd4 19.Nxd4 Rxc3 20.Rxc3 a5 = -0.17 (26 ply) ⩲ +0.72 (27 ply) 19...h6 20.Be4 Nb6 21.Qd2 a5 22.R3c2 a4 23.g3 Rd8 24.Qe1 = +0.47 (28 ply)+- +4.61 (25 ply)28...Nf8 29.Rxc7 Rxc7 30.Rxf8+ Kd7 31.Qd8+ Kc6 32.Qd6# +- mate-in-41-0

rnbqkbnr/pppppppp/8/8/8/8/PPPPPPPP/RNBQKBNR w KQkq - 0 1
FEN COPIED

Click Here to play Guess-the-Move
Given 55 times; par: 42 [what's this?]

Annotations by Stockfish (Computer).      [35437 more games annotated by Stockfish]

explore this opening
find similar games 4 more Pillsbury/Burn games
sac: 20.Bxh7+ PGN: download | view | print Help: general | java-troubleshooting

TIP: Some games have photographs. These are denoted in the game list with the icon.

PGN Viewer:  What is this?
For help with this chess viewer, please see the Olga Chess Viewer Quickstart Guide.
PREMIUM MEMBERS CAN REQUEST COMPUTER ANALYSIS [more info]

THIS IS A COMPUTER ANNOTATED SCORE.   [CLICK HERE] FOR ORIGINAL.

Kibitzer's Corner
Feb-01-03  refutor: a good example of the thematic bishop sac on h7 where white has a pawn on e5
Apr-18-04  Kenkaku: Beautiful finish. 28...Nf8 29. Rxc7 Rxc7 30. Rxf8+ Kxf8 (30...Kd7 31. Qd8+ Kc6 32. Qd6#) 31. Qd8#
Apr-18-04
Premium Chessgames Member
  tamar: Poor Amos Burn. I bet he didn't get his pipe lighted in this one either!
Jun-17-06
Premium Chessgames Member
  LIFE Master AJ: Wonderful play by Pillsbury ... poor Burn was smoked!
Jun-17-06
Premium Chessgames Member
  LIFE Master AJ: This game is analyzed in the most recent "Chess Express." (A monthly newsletter from the London Chess Center, # 115.)
Jun-17-06
Premium Chessgames Member
  Gypsy: 22...Nf8 23.Qh4 Ng6 24.Qh7+ Kf8 25.Qh8+! Nxh8 26.Rxh8#.
May-02-07  gauer: The game above turned out to be among the first with annotations I'd ever analysed. Do the opinions throughout the notes still hold (ie is there still really a distinguishing preference between Bg5 & Nf3)? Also, were these notes seen at all in the Art of Chess by Mason, and is the descriptive notation in that book worth another read?
May-02-07  RookFile: Just another example of Amos Burn getting slapped around.
May-02-07  Plato: <Just another example of Amos Burn getting slapped around.>

Amos Burn was a *very* strong player. It's unfortunate that his legacy for so many people is as the loser of the "Pipe Game" against Marshall and nothing more.

Despite the loss in the present game, he actually had an overall plus score against Pillsbury. He also had lifetime plus or equal scores against the likes of Steinitz, Chigorin, Maroczy, Blackburne, Gunsberg, etc... Let's show him some respect, shall we?

May-02-07  ughaibu: Burn beat Pillsbury in 1898 and 1900, I guess we can say that during this period in time, Burn was at least as strong as Pillsbury.
May-02-07  capanegra: In fact, Pillsbury vs Burn, 1898 contains a beautiful and instructive Queen ending won by Burn.
May-02-07
Premium Chessgames Member
  chancho: Burns was no chump as evidenced by this game: Burn vs Alekhine, 1911

In all fairness, this Alekhine was not the great player he would later become, but it shows that Burn was a good, good player.

Oct-31-08
Premium Chessgames Member
  sleepyirv: Burn is one of those players that was strong enough to play with the best but couldn't beat the best on a regular basis. Which leaves him the victim of some very pretty games.
Oct-31-08  whiskeyrebel: Burn's career is covered by one of the biggest dang chess books I've ever seen. It's too heavy to even lug home from the university library where I spotted it.
Dec-30-08  Emma: Awfull, awfull game by Black here.
Feb-28-09  WhiteRook48: Burn was totally Burned!
Jul-23-09  Knight13: Burn not resigning on move 22 just shows that he must've been really, really upset.

14...a6? should've been labeled with a question mark by the annotater.

Jul-23-09  RookFile: <ughaibu: Burn beat Pillsbury in 1898 and 1900, I guess we can say that during this period in time, Burn was at least as strong as Pillsbury.>

I agree that Burn was at least as strong as a dying Pillsbury, who had syphillis.

After Pillsbury died, it was probably the case the Burn was even stronger.

Jul-23-09
Premium Chessgames Member
  chancho: Well, Pillsbury defeated Lasker twice in 1900 and 1904, and Lasker was the World Champ, as well as Karl Schlechter, who played Lasker for the World title in 1910, and who from 1896 to 1904 had a losing record of +1 -8 =9 against the sick Pillsbury. Are we to assume Pillsbury only went into dying mode whenever he played Burn? Or is it just possible that Burn was a difficult opponent for Pillsbury?
Aug-13-09
Premium Chessgames Member
  LIFE Master AJ: http://www.chess.co.uk/chessexpress...

The above link takes you to the LCC page for the analysis of this game.

Dec-14-18  HarryP: Pillsbury's record against Burn was 1-2-2.
Dec-14-18  perfessor: "... a queen too much." An unnecessary but entertaining annotation.

NOTE: Create an account today to post replies and access other powerful features which are available only to registered users. Becoming a member is free, anonymous, and takes less than 1 minute! If you already have a username, then simply login login under your username now to join the discussion.

Please observe our posting guidelines:

  1. No obscene, racist, sexist, or profane language.
  2. No spamming, advertising, duplicate, or gibberish posts.
  3. No vitriolic or systematic personal attacks against other members.
  4. Nothing in violation of United States law.
  5. No cyberstalking or malicious posting of negative or private information (doxing/doxxing) of members.
  6. No trolling.
  7. The use of "sock puppet" accounts to circumvent disciplinary action taken by moderators, create a false impression of consensus or support, or stage conversations, is prohibited.
  8. Do not degrade Chessgames or any of it's staff/volunteers.

Please try to maintain a semblance of civility at all times.

Blow the Whistle

See something that violates our rules? Blow the whistle and inform a moderator.


NOTE: Please keep all discussion on-topic. This forum is for this specific game only. To discuss chess or this site in general, visit the Kibitzer's Café.

Messages posted by Chessgames members do not necessarily represent the views of Chessgames.com, its employees, or sponsors.
All moderator actions taken are ultimately at the sole discretion of the administration.

This game is type: CLASSICAL. Please report incorrect or missing information by submitting a correction slip to help us improve the quality of our content.

Home | About | Login | Logout | F.A.Q. | Profile | Preferences | Premium Membership | Kibitzer's Café | Biographer's Bistro | New Kibitzing | Chessforums | Tournament Index | Player Directory | Notable Games | World Chess Championships | Opening Explorer | Guess the Move | Game Collections | ChessBookie Game | Chessgames Challenge | Store | Privacy Notice | Contact Us

Copyright 2001-2025, Chessgames Services LLC