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

Rudolf Rezso Charousek vs Bernhard Richter
Berlin (1897), Berlin GER
Italian Game: Evans Gambit. Lasker Defense (C52)  ·  1-0



explore this opening
find similar games 1 more Charousek/B Richter game
sac: 29.Qxg5 PGN: download | view | print Help: general | java-troubleshooting

TIP: You should register a free account to activate some of's coolest and most powerful features.

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

Kibitzer's Corner
Jun-26-11  JoergWalter: Fritz is insisting that 29.Qxg5 is mate in 6. the others: if 32.Qg6+ instead of Qe5+ then mate in 1. And if 33.Nd6+ is replaced by Qg7+ it is mate in 2. quite a few oversights for a great attacker like Charousek.
Jun-26-11  parisattack: This is true, good spot - but:

I think what happens is the player sees a combination/continuation pretty much through to the end one way and at each move is mostly just checking his analysis and not looking for something different. Not necessarily wise but I believe that is how it goes.

Jun-27-11  sevenseaman: The checker knows he is locked on to a win and plays it by the ear; not necessarily making optimal clinical moves.

I'd rather be a Charousek than a Fritz.

Jun-27-11  JoergWalter: <I'd rather be a Charousek than a Fritz.> I agree, unfortunately I'm none of the two. so I use the computer to check the old games. you will find quite a lot of these "inaccuracies" and sometimes the wrong side wins and sometime you don't know why one side has resigned the game. A good source for the latter are the games of Staunton vs. Cochrane. Cochrane resigns and it is hard to see why.
Feb-01-14  Wulebgr: The pawn storm in this game is quite instructive. White's king is much more secure with his shield bearing down on the Black king while he stands naked and alone.
Premium Chessgames Member
  fredthebear: IMHO, any line that clearly, easily forces mate in a few moves is "good enough" to go ahead and play -- a string of consecutive checks that can't be interrupted is a good example. There is no better outcome than checkmate! However, we are wise (not obliged...) to follow Lasker's rule and WAIT! -- Look for a BETTER move, which means find a quicker checkmate in this instance. It's difficult to change course when one has already found a truly winning course.

I can most regretfully say that I have lost two rated tournament games by switching course in mid-stream when I found that proverbial "better move" (or so I thought) but did not analyze my opponent's alternate options as clearly, deeply, thoroughly as I had my original planned course of action combinational sequence. Had I stuck with my first well-analyzed plan instead of changing to "an even better move" I would have won instead of lost. Very painful to lose this way with victory at hand -- carefully saw it all the way through in my mind but did not actually play it because I gave in to temptation for a different flash move. (Thus, I support Charousek for staying with his winning plan and not finding a faster route because his plan surely did win -- there was no way to interrupt it.) Quicker does not always turn out better in a practical sense.

BTW, I would have played 35.Qg6+ instead with forced mate occupying f7 next move. However, I can find no fault with 35.Rg2+ as it will also force mate and encourages the opponent to resign rather than give up the Black queen for no good reason (she can embarrassingly block check for one move). Technically, my 35.Qg6+ mates one move faster (depending on Black's response), but perhaps Charousek's 35.Rg2+ ended the game sooner via resignation.

Bottom line, it's hard to argue against a forced checkmate in any fashion. Chalk up the point, 1-0.

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 member Iincludinfgall Admin and Owners or any of their family, friends, associates, or business interests. If you think someone is an idiot, then provide evidence that their reasoning is invalid and/or idiotic, instead of just calling them an idiot. It's a subtle but important distinction, even in political discussions.
  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.

<This page contains Editor Notes. Click here to read them.>

Featured in the Following Game Collections[what is this?]
Italian Game: Evans Gambit. Lasker Defense (C52) 1-0 Oversights
from yKnights Add Spice w/Rice IV Fredthebear by fredthebear
Italian Game: Evans Gambit. Lasker Defense (C52) 1-0 Oversights
from 7 Come 11 Makes About 187 by fredthebear
Italian Game: Evans Gambit. Lasker Defense (C52) 1-0 Oversights
from Attacks and Sacs of f7 Vol. II by Fredthebear by nakul1964
Italian Game: Evans Gambit. Lasker Defense (C52) 1-0 Oversights
from Attacks and Sacs of f7 Vol. II by Fredthebear by kishchess

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