|Dec-19-05|| ||offramp: Lasker walks a tightrope - when a queen and knight are hovering around your king you are always close to disaster.|
|Sep-28-06|| ||karik: I wonder why Lasker didn't claim draw. Threefold repetition after moves 49 51 and 61. Well, he did win, though.|
|Apr-12-07|| ||GrandPatzerSCL: I don't know if the three-fold was put into practice then.|
|Apr-13-07|| ||TrueFiendish: Janowski should have claimed the draw, but it would have been easy to miss.|
|Mar-02-08|| ||Knight13: Janowski should be winning at move 32, but he "oversights" too much so he paid the price.|
|Jul-07-08|| ||JimmyVermeer: karik, I don't wonder why Lasker didn't claim the draw, but I DO wonder why Janowski didn't! I was surprised the 3fold repetition didn't occur sooner.
Mark Weeks gives the ending 88 Ke7 Nf5+ 89 Resigns. Perhaps he believed he could win if he broke the pattern. For this arrogance, Janowski deserved to lose the game.|
|Aug-22-11|| ||wwall: 61.Qd6+ Kb7 is a three-fold repetition of the position, so it should have been a draw.|
Instead of 66.Qa8+, White had a perpetual check after 66.Qc8+. Black can't play 66.Kd5? 68.Qg8+ Kc5 (67...Qe6?? 68.Nc7+) 68.Qxb3, winning th knight. So Black must play 66...Kb6 67.Qd8+ Kc5 68.Qc8+ and draw.
Instead of 68.Kh3, perhaps 68.Kg1 Qe3+ 69.Kg2 Nd2 70.Qd5+ Ke7 71.Qd6+ Kf7 72.Nd4 with more resistance.
Instead of 70.Qb7+, perhaps 70.Qh8 Qf6 71.Qh7+ Qf7 72.Qh4+.
Instead of 72.Qf2, perhaps 72.Qb7+ Qf7 73.Qb6 Qd7 74.Nd6.
Instead of 73.Qa7+, perhaps 73.Qb6 Nd2 74.Qa7+ Kh6 75.Qf2 Ne4 76.Qe3+ Ng5 77.Qxe5 Nf3+ 78.Kg2 Nxe5, but this probably wins for Black.
Instead of 74.Qf7, perhaps 74.Qf2+. If 74...Nc5, then 75.Nd4 Ne4 76.Qf8+ Kh7 77.Qf7+ Qg7 78.Qxg7+ Kxg7 79.Nb3 Nc3 80.Kg2 Nxa4 81.Nf3 may draw. Stronger for Black may be 74...Qh5+ 75.Kg2 Qd5+ 76.Kg1 Qd1+ 77.Kg2 Qd2 78.Nd6 Qxf2+ 79.Kxf2 Nc5, threatening 80...b3.
Instead of 77.Qxe3, if 77.Qf7??, then 77...Nf3+ 78.Kg2 Qe2+ 79.Kh3 (79.Kh1 Qh2 mate) Ng5 mate.
Instead of 79...Kg5, 79...g5 looks stronger.
Instead of 82...Ke3, stronger seems 82...g5+ 83.Kh5 (83.Kh3 Ke4) 83...Ne5.
Instead of 85.Kf6, if 85.Nc5, then 85...Ne5+ 86.Kf5 Nxg4! 87.Kxg4 b3 wins.
|Jul-26-12|| ||King.Arthur.Brazil: After 30.Qd5+ Kf8 white could play: 31.Bxg7+! (if ...Kxg7 Nf5+ wins the Q, if Qxg7 32.Qxc5+ Ke8 33.Qc6+ etc. Black has ill Bishop and white N has c4 and e3 to play and 1P ahead. Maybe Janowsky loved checks...!|
|Apr-14-14|| ||zanzibar: Investigating double adjournments I came across a contemporaneous ref to this game of interest:|
Nov 30 SF Call reporting Nov 29 Berlin, 1910
<CHESS MASTERS RESUME PLAY
BERLIN, Nov. 29.— Play was resumed today in the eighth game of the championship chess match between D. Janowski and Manuel Lasker. This game was adjourned last evening, when Janowski seemed to have a chance of winning, but in the play today Lasker equalized matters and when second adjournment was declared it was, expected a draw will eventually result. The score: Lasker 4, Janowski 0, drawn 3.>
I'm interested in exactly what moves the game was adjourned at... any ideas? Refs would be most appreciated.
(These conditions affect play and are more interesting to me than exact day the game took place on, btw. For example, was newspaper assessment accurate? Etc.)
|Apr-15-14|| ||Karpova: <zanzibar>
In a short note on p. 6 of the 'Pester Lloyd' of 1910.11.28, Dr. Emanuel Lasker reports that the game was adjourned after 34 moves (<34...g6> to be exact, according to 'Pester Lloyd', 1910.12.01, p. 9). In the 'Pester Lloyd' of 1910.11.30, p. 9, Dr. Lasker notes that the game was adjourned after 66 moves (<66.Qa8+> to be exact, according to 'Pester Lloyd', 1910.12.03, p. 8).
|Apr-15-14|| ||zanzibar: Thanks <Karpova>, I'll use that information to walk through the game. |
By the way, what were typical conditions of play? For instance time conditions, and rules of adjournment. Did they use signed moves?
There isn't much on these details on the match page, but they could have a hand in Janowski's purported "erratic" play. I'm curious...
|Apr-15-14|| ||zanzibar: I think the answer to my sealed move question is "yes". |
According to Oxford Companion sealed moves were introduced in the 1878 Paris tournament, and so it's natural to think the practice was widely adopted shortly thereafter.
|Apr-15-14|| ||zanzibar: Guided by <Karpova>'s links in the match link I think I've answered the questions I asked above. Winter's Chess Note's actually has a published version of the conditions. See: |
Lasker-Janowski World Championship Match (1910)