Hermann von Gottschall vs David Janowski (1900)

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

Kibitzing

Hermann von Gottschall vs David Janowski
12th DSB Congress, Munich (1900), Munich GER, rd 3, Jul-26
Bishop's Opening: Vienna Hybrid. Spielmann Attack (C26) · 0-1

White to move.

ANALYSIS [x]

0-1

rnbqkbnr/pppppppp/8/8/8/8/PPPPPPPP/RNBQKBNR w KQkq - 0 1

FEN COPIED

explore this opening	find similar games	3 more von Gottschall/Janowski games
	PGN: download \| view \| print	Help: general \| java-troubleshooting

TIP: Some games have annotation. These are denoted in the game list with the

icon.

For help with this chess viewer, please see the Olga Chess Viewer Quickstart Guide.

PREMIUM MEMBERS CAN REQUEST COMPUTER ANALYSIS [more info]

Aug-12-18		KEG: Gottschall decides to embark upon a tactical struggle against Janowski. Not surprisingly, Janowski prevailed in the sort of game in which he excelled. INdeed, Gottshcall even allowed Janowski to play with two Bishops against two Knights: generally a recipe for disaster against a player celebrated for his tactical abilities with Bishops. 1. e4 e5 2. Nc3 The Vienna Game, a favorite of Mieses. This double-edged opening was a dubious choice when paired against the likes of Janowski (although here Gottschall didn't get into any really serious trouble until his 14th move. 2... Nf6 3. Bc4 Bc6 4. d3 The "usual" move in this position. 4. Nf3 and 4. h3 look better, though there is nothing terribly wrong with the text if White is seeking only equality. 4... d6 5. h3 As MCO-13 notes: "Many moves are plausible here." 5. Nf3 or 5. Na4 seem the most promising options. 5... Nc6 6. f4?! A wild shot, though in the spirit of the Vienna Game/Gambit. 6. Nf3 is most usual here. White might try 6. Na4. 6... Na5 Unnecessary. Black could obtain the better game with 6...0-0 or 6...a6, and perhaps also with 6...h6. 7. Bb3 He could play for more complications with 7. fxe5, but the text is probably more sensible. 7... c6 8. Qf3 0-0 9. Nge2 Again avoiding playing fxe5. This decision by Gottschall seems sensible. The text gives him an approximately level game. 9... b5 Playing for complications instead of the more solid--and perhaps slightly better 9...Re8 or 9...NxB. 10. fxe5 dxe5 11. Bg5 Be7 12. 0-0 NxB 13. axN The position was now: click for larger view Gottschall controls the open file. Janowski has the two Bishops. Chances at this stage were about equal. 13... Be6 13...a5 was probably a bit better. 14. BxN? This trade is hard to understand, and was the beginning of Gottschall's problems that led to his defeat. Why give up his fine Bishop? And why let Janowski play with two Bishops against two Knights? Janowski--who loved to attack with two Bishops--must have licked his lips when he saw Gottschall's move. 14... BxB 15. Ng3 Another poor move by Gottschall. The g3 square should be left available for the White Queen, and he needed to get his King off the a7..g diagonal. Accordingly, Gottschall should have played either 15. Kh1 or 15. Qg3. 15... Bg5 Tentative play by Janowski. 15...a5 or 15...Qd4 check were better. 16. Ra6 "?"--Tournament Book. The Tournament Book notwithstanding, the text move is not all that terrible. Perhaps Gottschall should have brought his King to safery here with 16. Kh1 or 16. Kh2. 16... Qd7 16...Bc8 was better. Among other things, it creates a trap (17. Rxc6? Bb7 and the Rook is lost, since if 18. Rc5 Qd4+). 17. Nf5! A good move in a tough position. 17... g6 17...Bd8 was a good alternative. The position was now (after 17...g6): click for larger view Gottschall's position was hardly great, but he was very much in the game here. But at this point Gottschall's desire to attack led him astray and into a lost position, as I will discuss in my next post on this game.

Aug-14-18		KEG: Post II Gottschall apparently thought his best chance against Janowski was to get his famous opponent on the defensive. No doubt about one thing, Janowski was better on offense than in defending. The problem in Gottschall's thinking here is that the position he generated was doubled-edged, not just a White attack. After 17...g6, Gottschall had two major problems: (1) Janowski had the two Bishops; and (2) his King was exposed. He should probably have tried to avoid variation in which Janowski had the opportunity to give check on the a7..h2 diagonal (e.g., Qd4+_. Instead, Gottschall--in an-ill-advised effort to attack on the King-side, made his King even less secure, and in son doing created a new problem for himself that was a major factor in his defeat: 18. h4? Bd8! "!"--Tournament Book. Nicely played by Janowski. His Bishop is poised to move to b6, undermining the pressure from White's a6 Rook and going after the White King. 19. Qg3 Having staked his fortune on attack, Gottschall might as well try this move. 19... Kh8 One can understand Janowski's interest in avoiding variations with Nh6+, but it is surprising that Janowski didn't play the natural 19...Bb6+. 20. Ne3 If 20. Qxe5+, Janowski would win a piece with 20...f6. 20... f6 21. Kh1 Bb6 22. Rf3 Worse than useless. Gottschall's position was hardly pleasant, but he should he knuckled down to tight defense with 22. Re1 or 22. Kh2 or even 22. Ne2. 22... Qg7! Nicely combining attack and defense. 23. Ra1 Rf7 Setting up a nice fortress for defense and attack on the King-side. But 23...f5 immediately was even better 24. Raf1 Raf8 The position was now" click for larger view 25. Ne2? Very weak. He had to play 25. Ng4 to be in a position to counter 25...f5. 25... Bc7? Astonishing from Janowski. 25...f5 was powerful...and likely leading to a clearly winning position for Black. 26. Qe1? Another puzzling move by Gottschall. He could have retained real chances of resistance with 26. Qh2 or perhaps 26. b4. 26... f5! "!"--(Tournamant Book). 27. Qc3 Bd7 This left: click for larger view Gottschall's position is probably beyond repair. But things got much worse very quickly. As I will discuss in my next post on this game, Gottschall's next three moves were awful and allowed Janowski to close out the game in short order.

Aug-14-18		KEG: Post III After 27...Bd7, the game went downhill for Gottschall very quickly. 28. exf5? 28. g3 was the only real chance at resistance. 28... gxf5 29. Rg3? Immediately fatal. If Gottschall watned to play on for even a little while, he had to defend his h4 pawn with 29. g3. The attack of the Black Queen the text undertakes only drives the Queen to an even more devastating post. 29... Qh6! Game over. But Gottschall finds time for one more oversight. 30. Nf4? Gottschall's "idea" was apparently based on the pinned status of Black's e5 pawn. Did he really expect Janowski to play 30...Qxh4+ (in fact, even this would win for Black). After 30. Nf4?, the position was: click for larger view Whatever Gottschall was imagining, Janowski's reply brought him back to earth: 30... b4! Ouch! 0-1

NOTE: Create an account today to post replies and access other powerful features which are available only to registered users. Becoming a member is free, anonymous, and takes less than 1 minute! If you already have a username, then simply login login under your username now to join the discussion.

Please observe our posting guidelines:

No obscene, racist, sexist, or profane language.
No spamming, advertising, duplicate, or gibberish posts.
No vitriolic or systematic personal attacks against other members.
Nothing in violation of United States law.
No cyberstalking or malicious posting of negative or private information (doxing/doxxing) of members.
No trolling.
The use of "sock puppet" accounts to circumvent disciplinary action taken by moderators, create a false impression of consensus or support, or stage conversations, is prohibited.
Do not degrade Chessgames or any of it's staff/volunteers.

Please try to maintain a semblance of civility at all times.

See something that violates our rules? Blow the whistle and inform a moderator.

NOTE: Please keep all discussion on-topic. This forum is for this specific game only. To discuss chess or this site in general, visit the Kibitzer's Café.

Messages posted by Chessgames members do not necessarily represent the views of Chessgames.com, its employees, or sponsors.
All moderator actions taken are ultimately at the sole discretion of the administration.

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.