| KEG: There was more than a bit of Tahl in Janowski at his best. Here, he sacrificed a pawn for an unclear attack. Cohn played solid chess and by move 27 was up a pawn and--theoretically--had much the better chances. But the pressure of fending off the charging Janowski eventually proved too great, and his collapse was sudden, dramatic, and perhaps predictable. In an Open Ruy Lopez, Janowski tried the unusual 8. a4 (8. dxe5 is normal and [along with 8. Nxe5] best). Lasker tried this same variation four times in his five games as White in his 1910 world championship match against Schlechter, was only able to draw these four games, and almost lost the title as a result. Cohn's response of 8...Be6 was OK but not best. Schlechter's 8...Nxd4 (which he played in two of the games against Lasker) was much better. But probably 8...b4 was best of all. (Schlechter's 8...Rb8 was bad, though he survived both times in this line against Lasker). The key moment in the present game came after Cohn's 16...c5. The position was then as follows: 
click for larger viewIt was here that Janowski played the Tahl-like 17. e6!? The computer here likes 17. Nc2, but Tahl would never have passed up the chance to mess up Cohn's game at the mere cost of a pawn. Cohn defended carefully after 17. e6, parried one Janowski threat after another and slowly built up close to a winning game. Janowski should perhaps have played to regain the pawn with 21. Ng5+, but--like Tahl--went for more with 21. Qc7. After Cohn's 23...Bd6, Janowski should perhaps have played 24. Be3, but he, predictably, went for the kill with 24. Re1. When Cohn continued to defend precisely against his Queen-side attack, Janowski immediately regrouped and creatively shifted his Queen to the other wing with 27. Qa2, 28. Qf2, and 29, Qh4. Cohn, who had played so solidly to this point, then wilted. His 30...Be8 was probably already a losing move (30...h5 would have left him fine), his 31...Kh8 was far inferior to 31...Kg7, and his 32...Qf7 (32...cxb4 was best) left him dead in the water. Janowski gave him a glimmer of hope with his 33. bxc5 (33. Bxc5 was much better), but Cohn missed 33...be7 (the only chance) and instead played 33...Bxc5. After the exchange of Bishops, Janowski's Rook sacrifice with 35. Rxe6 (which obviously could not have been accepted in light of mate on h7) seemingly ended the game. Janowski, however, shockingly missed 36. f5, and his 36. h3 gave Cohn the chance for one final gasp with 36...d4. But Cohn played 36...g5 after which it was all clear sailing for Janowski. Janowski finished nicely. But I am surprised that he missed the brutal and immediately crushing 40. Re7. His 40. Qf4, however, was more than good enough, especially with the dazzled Cohn faltering and ready for surrender. Janowski--like Tahl--could have that effect on opponents provided they were not named Lasker. | 
Kibitzing
