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

Emanuel Lasker vs Samuel Reshevsky
Nottingham (1936), Nottingham ENG, rd 11, Aug-22
Queen's Gambit Accepted: Classical Defense (D26)  ·  0-1



explore this opening
find similar games 1,529 more games of Reshevsky
PGN: download | view | print Help: general | java-troubleshooting

TIP: Premium members can see a list of all games that they have seen recently at their Game History Page.

PGN Viewer:  What is this?
For help with this chess viewer, please see the Olga Chess Viewer Quickstart Guide.


Kibitzer's Corner
< Earlier Kibitzing  · PAGE 2 OF 2 ·  Later Kibitzing>
May-08-04  iron maiden: When was Reshevsky "treated without respect by Lasker?" By all accounts that I've heard, Lasker was a well-mannered gentleman.
Premium Chessgames Member
  paulalbert: When a high level competitor defeats another high level competitor, be it in chess, tennis, football, business,etc. that is competition, not disrespect. Naturally, competitors want to win the next head to head contest and prepare to do so.I doubt that either Lasker or Reshevsky viewed this as a matter of personal animosity. It was a matter of professional competition. Paul Albert
May-08-04  iron maiden: Well, if "treated without respect" means "defeated in a chess game", then I'd like to see that game, if a record exists. I thought Reshevsky and Lasker played only this one game.
May-08-04  Benjamin Lau: I read the thing and don't see any mention of Lasker insulting Reshevsky, I think Hans Ree just said that Reshevsky was "treated without respect" to make it sound like Lasker utterly demolished Reshevsky the first time around. I've never seen the other game before (there is only an Edward Lasker game besides this).
Premium Chessgames Member
  tamar: I think Ree had the Laskers mixed up.
American Chess Journal 1921 has the first hand account of this game by Edward Lasker,Reshevsky vs Edward Lasker, 1920 "Edward Lasker is impressed with the play of prodigy Sammy Reshevsky, but points out the only thing the child has to learn is to lose gracefully. 306pp."
Jul-07-05  calman543: What would be the finish up if white did not resign?
Jul-08-05  suenteus po 147: <calman543> 23.Kh1 Qh5 and now there is no way for white to prevent mate without losing his queen.
Jul-08-05  sheaf: <suenteus po 147> u mean 23.Kh1 Qg4
Jul-08-05  PivotalAnorak: <sheaf> well if 23.♔h1 ♕h5 24.♔g2 ♕g4+ is .
Nov-11-05  RookFile: This game is misunderstood. Lasker
should have emerged from this game
with an advantage. The Queen to d5
idea shouldn't have worked out so
well for black.
May-23-06  netlava: <RookFile> The queen to d5 idea forces white to lose a pawn.
Jun-28-06  RookFile: It does no such thing. Lasker should have been able to force the queen to retreat, and emerge with an opening advantage. I'll set up a reminder to myself to analyze this.
Jul-07-06  RookFile: Ok. In my hands is great book, called "American Chess Masters from Morphy to Fischer", by Bisguier and Soltis. This game is analyzed, and some of the notes are given below:

13.... Nd5!

"In this semi-open position, it is very much in Black's interest to exchange off minor pieces. On 14. Bxe7 Qxe7 15. Ncxd5 Bxd5 16. Be4, White concedes Black equality. Lasker chooses a tricky attacking line but misses the essential follow up three moves later."

14. Bc1 (!?)

16. a4 (!) Qd5 !?

".... Here White has offeed a strong pawn sacrifice that would allow him to play c4 and Bb2. The lost queen rook pawn is meaningless - that is, meaningless in the middlegame. Reshevsky's reply (16... Qd5) complicates the game, and although it is not as powerful as was thought duing the game, it's practical effect was powerful. Lasker now fumbles."

17. Nf3 ?

"A sorry retreat, but the seemingly aggressive 17. f4 could be effectively answered by .....b4!", Reshevsky wrote in his notes. But then 18. c4! puts Black in real trouble because 18... Qxd4+ 19. Be3 Qc3 20. Bxh7+! and 21. Rd3 is too strong. If Black must retreat his queen, White stands very well."

19.... Ng5 !

".... White has been victimized by Black's bluff and his otherwise very astute counterplay...."

Dec-17-06  shr0pshire: Here is how Reshevsky recounts the game in his book, "Great Chess Upsets."

"I played Lasker only once. He was sixty years old when the following game was played. I had no difficulty equalizing with the black pieces, and Lasker also misplayed the middle game, making several dubious moves. On his 21st turn, Lasker blundered by over-looking a three move combiation, which forced his resignation."

Reshevsky doesn't mention anything about Lasker' attitude toward Reshevsky in either way.

Dec-17-06  suenteus po 147: <sheaf> You're right, your way is faster and thus better.
Sep-02-09  WhiteRook48: 34 Kh1 Qh5 24 Kg1 Bxf3 25 Qe5 Qg4+ 26 Qg3
Sep-05-09  backrank: 34. Kh1 is not answered by Qh5, but by the much stronger Qg4!, mating or winning the White Queen.
Aug-26-12  Ulhumbrus: On 17 f4 instead of 17 Nf3 an alternative to 17...b4 is 17...Ne4! as in the game starting an attack on the c3 pawn.

Lasker's first mistake may have been the withdrawal 14 Bc1?

An alternative to this is 14 Bd2. On 14...Nxc3 15 bxc3 Nf6 16 f4 Qd5 17 Bb1 Ne4 18 Be1 Rfc8 19 Rf3 f5 Black may be able to defend but that is much better for White than passing the advantage to Black

Premium Chessgames Member
  plang: Nowadays Nc3 is it usually delayed; partially as it is a potential target for Black's queenside play. Lasker's 8 Bd3?! is inferior to 8 Bb3 which eyes the important d5 square. Avoiding exchanges with 14 Bc1? was over-optimistic; 14 Bxe7 was better. 21 Ne1 would have been slightly better but after 21..Nh3+ 22 Kh1..Nf4 23 Qg4..Bg5 24 Rc2..h5 25 Qg3..h4 26 Qg4..h3 Black is still winning.
Nov-21-17  JimNorCal: So this is the only Reshevsky/Lasker game then.

I recall reading about an Ed Lasker/Reshevsky exhibition game. It ended as being "abandoned". Lasker had crushed young Sammy, who was reduced to starting angrily at the chessboard.

Jan-26-18  TheFocus: This score is not complete.

Alekhine in <The Book of the Nottingham International Chess Tournament>, pg. 197-198, gives 23. Kh1 Qg4! 0-1.

Euwe in <Meet the Masters>, pg. 192-195, agrees, giving the following note by Euwe after 23...Qg4!: <With the threat of 24…Bxf3+, against which nothing can be done.>.

Premium Chessgames Member
  Gregor Samsa Mendel: <TheFocus>--I have a 1962 edition of Alekhine's book, and it says that white resigned after black's 22nd move.
Jan-26-18  TheFocus: Yikes. Sorry, I was only looking at the notes by Euwe.

The Reshevsky bio by Gordon also ends it after Black's 22nd move.

I wonder why Euwe thought different?

Jan-31-19  billy2182: I read somewhere that after one hour of play in this game, Lasker had used 2 minutes, and Sammy 58.

Anyone else ever see that quoted?

Jun-10-19  SVarden: Yes, but not in connection with this games. Instead, it was Reshevsky-Smyslov from the USSR-USA Radio Match from 1945. Apparently Reshevsky ran into a variation of the Slav Defense that was well known to the Soviet players, and so Smyslov didn't have to spend much time during the opening.

RookFile posted that "In his book, Kasparov praises Reshevsky's play in the late opening, early middle game, pointing out how, in an unfamiliar position, that had been deeply analyzed by the Russians before the game, he found good moves, although at the cost of time, in a position where some others before him had gone astray." Smyslov eventually won the game in 71 moves.

search thread:   
< Earlier Kibitzing  · PAGE 2 OF 2 ·  Later Kibitzing>
NOTE: You need to pick a username and password to post a reply. Getting your account takes less than a minute, is 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, profane, raunchy, or disgusting language.
  2. No spamming, advertising, duplicate or nonsense posts.
  3. No malicious personal attacks, including cyber stalking, systematic antagonism, or gratuitous name-calling of any gratuitous name-calling of any members—including Admin and Owners—or any of their family, friends, associates, or business interests.
  4. Nothing in violation of United States law.
  5. No malicious posting of or linking to personal, private, and/or negative information (aka "doxing" or "doxxing") about any member, (including all Admin and Owners) or any of their family, friends, associates, or business interests. This includes all media: text, images, video, audio, or otherwise. Such actions will result in severe sanctions for any violators.
  6. NO TROLLING. Admin and Owners know it when they see it, and sanctions for any trolls will be significant.
  7. Any off-topic posts which distract from the primary topic of discussion are subject to removal.
  8. The use of "sock puppet" accounts to circumvent disciplinary action taken by Moderators is expressly prohibited.
  9. The use of "sock puppet" accounts in an attempt to undermine any side of a debate—or to create a false impression of consensus or support—is prohibited.
  10. All decisions with respect to deleting posts, and any subsequent discipline, are final, and occur at the sole discretion of the Moderators, Admin, and Owners.
  11. 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: Keep all discussion on the topic of this page. This forum is for this specific game and nothing else. If you want to discuss chess in general, or this site, visit the Kibitzer's Café.

Messages posted by Chessgames members do not necessarily represent the views of, its employees, or sponsors. All Moderator actions taken are at the sole discretion of the Admin and Owners—who will strive to act fairly and consistently at all times.

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.

Featured in the Following Game Collections[what is this?]
QG Accepted: Classical Defense (D26) 0-1 Own the diagonal, file
from Strategic Planning Helped Fredthebear Get In/Awa by fredthebear
Game 37
from Reshevsky's Best Games of Chess, Vol. I by suenteus po 147
Game 272
from Golden Treasury of Chess (Wellmuth/Horowitz) by Qindarka
A Diagonal
from Positional Chess Handbook II by isfsam
Reshevsky crushes Lasker
from Reshevsky plays 11 world champions by FSR
Round 11
from Nottingham 1936 by Hesam7
Game 498
from The Golden Treasury of Chess Part 2 by biglo
Game 498: The Golden Treasury of Chess by I.A. Horowitz
from Emanuel Lasker Collection by hrannar
Xadrez Básico - D'Agostini
by amadeus
"American Chess Masters from Morphy to (BF)" by Bisguier&Soltis
from Short games by masters by rbaglini
Game collection: QGA
by Gabo5588
QG Accepted: Classical Defense (D26) 0-1 Own the diagonal, file
from yDiagonals Attack: Bs Highway, Battery, Crossfir by trh6upsz
one-time prodigy beats G.O.M
from American chess triumphs by kostich in time
by 64idi0t
A Diagonal
from Positional Chess Handbook II by Retarf
Game 498: The Golden Treasury of Chess by I.A. Horowitz
from Spearheads (Batteries w/a Q) Prod Fredthebear by fredthebear
Bouwmeester Partijen van wereldkampioenen...
by PrinsJ
both wc
from jewish playersin chess by gmlisowitz
World champions lose miniatures 1.
by ughaibu
plus 24 more collections (not shown)

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 | Notable Games | World Chess Championships | Opening Explorer | Guess the Move | Game Collections | ChessBookie Game | Chessgames Challenge | Store | privacy notice | contact us

Copyright 2001-2019, Chessgames Services LLC