Ulhumbrus: In his book <masters of the chess board> Reti remarks that Lasker does not use the bishop pair in quite the way in which Steinitz uses it. Lasker makes use of his pawns to not just obstruct the opponent's bishop or to restrain the opponent's knights but to play for a combinatorial attack.To begin with Lasker reroutes or transfers his king's bishop from g7 to b6 and his queen's knight from c6 to d5.
Then the pawn attack 30...b4! induces the capture 31 Nxb4 which displaces the knight from its defence of the square e1.
That transforms the move 31...Ne3 into a winning thrust because in order to maintain its defence of the king's bishop the rook has to walk into the square e1 which is now defended no longer by 32 Re1 and this invites the discovered attack 32...Nc4+ gaining the exchange.
One question is how one is able to make use of one’s bishop pair to not just obstruct the opponent's bishop or to restrain the opponent's knights but to play for a combinatorial attack.
One example of an answer is as follows.
If one has the bishop pair, the bishop which is unopposed, being a long range piece, is able to support an attack or to make its contribution to a combination from a distance whereas a knight, being a piece of shorter range, will have to get closer to the enemy in order to support an attack or to make its contribution to a combination.
Let us assume that in order to deploy a piece for this purpose it is easier and safer to deploy it at some distance from the enemy than it would be easy and safe to deploy a piece closer to the opponent for this purpose.
This suggests that it will be easier for one’s unopposed bishop to support an attack or to make its contribution to a combination.
Now let us consider the question of how Lasker makes use of his bishop pair to not just obstruct the opponent's bishop or to restrain the opponent's knights but to play for a combinatorial attack.
One example of an answer is as follows.
If Lasker has the bishop pair the bishop which is unopposed - in this case his black squared king's bishop - a long range piece - is able to support an attack or to make its contribution to a combination from a distance whereas a knight - a piece of shorter range - would have to get closer to the enemy in order to support an attack or to make its contribution to a combination.
Let us assume that in order to deploy a piece for this purpose it is easier and safer to deploy it at some distance from the enemy than it would be easy and safe to deploy a piece closer to the opponent for this purpose.
This suggests that it will be easier for the unopposed bishop to support an attack or to make its contribution to a combination.
How does this work in practice?
In the present game after 30...b4! if White tries to avoid displacing his knight from its defence of the rook on e1 by playing 31 Nxb4, by playing instead 31 c4, Black's king's bishop supports an attack or makes its contribution to a combination from the square b6, a square which is distant from White's camp by 31...Bd4+ whereupon the white king has to walk into a fork.
Kibitzing
Annotations by 
