Memory aside, I think there are two ways to work out combinations like this one - check all the forcing moves or look for weaknesses to exploit.

The forcing moves are fairly easy to spot. Rxg7 leads nowhere as the g7 square is protected four times. So then we look at the forced sequence 34. Qxh7+ Kxh7 35. Rh5+ Kg8. Now if a protected rook could land on h8 it would be mate. How can we engineer this? Let's look at Ng6, when there is nothing that white can do to prevent Rh8 followed (after Rf6) by Rf8.

That is when we notice the helping hand offered by the pawn on d5, which stops the king from escaping via e6.

So much for examining forcing lines. Could we work out the solution by looking at the features in the position? Black's problems are a weak h7 (only defended by the king) and dreadful congestion along the seventh rank. The black queen and bishop are out of play. White's trumps are the doubled rooks on the g file (although this point is well defended) and the advanced queen and knight. That ought to suggest an attack on h7, which does indeeed turn out to be the answer.

Is this trolling? It looks like it.

You fail to see the beauty of this puzzle if you're serious about what you said.

A good rule indeed, although in my case, it didn't really apply because I figured that 34.Qh6 DID work. :-)

Toga II 1.3.1 gives

[ply 15/63, time 04:52, value +3.41]

34.<Qh6> Qd4 35.Qxd6 Re8 36.e5 Kh8 37.e6 Bxe6 38.dxe6 Qxd6 39.exf7 Rf8 40.Rxg7 Qd8 41.Rg8+ Rxg8 42.fxg8Q+ Qxg8 43.Rxg8+ Kxg8 44.Ng2 Kf8 45.Nxf4 Ke7 46.Kg2 Kd6 47.Nd3 a5 48.f4 a4

Bad news: this puzzle needs way more than 15 plies. Slide down the proposed lines a couple moves, then back, and you should see a completely diferent best move 34 for black. Repeat, and yet another move surfaces. And this branching happens a lot, and then the engine starts dumping hash, so the analysis starts running in circles. I had to add this game to my engine-killer collection.

Up until then, and contrary to what some on this site have said, Schlechter played quite well. Indeed, according to Fritz, and as Tactic101 also points out, Schlechter had a solid, and nearly winning, position before his terrible mistake. Before move 33, Schlechter's most serious error was his failure to snatch White's QNP with his Bishop on move 28. He should also probably have played 29...RxN instead of 29...QxN. Had Schlechter played 33...Qd4 instead of 33...Rff7 and then ground Janowski into submission, we might well be celebrating a fine Schlechter win. But chess can be cruel, Schechter outplayed Janowski for most of the game, but made one fatal blunder which Janowski exploited brilliantly.

Janowski did not win the brilliancy prize for his winning combination here because--in the very same round of the tournament, Blackburne defeated Lasker with an amazing Rook sacrifice. Comparing the two games, it is hard to disagree with the tournament committee's decision on this. Among other things, apart from his spectacular closing combination, Janowski's aggression in this game was often misplaced. His 27. Rg1 was faulty (27. NxB check is better) and his 32. Rg5 could well have cost him the game where 32. Rag1 would have brought him near equality. As fate would have it, however, 32. Rg5 not only didn't cause Janowski to lose, it probably helped induce Schechter's fatal 33rd move.

The above notwithstanding, Janowski's combination is so gorgeous that all of his earlier missteps should no doubt be forgotten.

Not too bad

I would like to announce that I'm officially resigning my position of "Pun Critic"

Please welcome my successor <thegoodanarchist> and support him in his efforts to educate the local morons in what constitutes an actual pun, the difference between elementary play-on-word and professional pun creation, as well as identifying and utilizing homonymic puns, compound puns, recursive puns, visual puns, etc.

May this be a prosperous year for everybody!