chessgames.com
Members · Prefs · Laboratory · Collections · Openings · Endgames · Sacrifices · History · Search Kibitzing · Kibitzer's Café · Chessforums · Tournament Index · Players · Kibitzing
Emanuel Lasker vs Jacques Mieses
Paris (1900), Paris FRA, rd 3, May-21
Queen's Gambit Declined: Semi-Tarrasch Defense (D40)  ·  1-0

ANALYSIS [x]

FEN COPIED

Click Here to play Guess-the-Move
Given 13 times; par: 35 [what's this?]

explore this opening
find similar games 12 more Lasker/J Mieses games
sac: 22.Nc6 PGN: download | view | print Help: general | java-troubleshooting

TIP: You can display posts in reverse order, by registering a free account then visiting your preferences page and checking the option "Display newest kibitzes on top."

PGN Viewer:  What is this?
For help with this chess viewer, please see the Olga Chess Viewer Quickstart Guide.
PREMIUM MEMBERS CAN REQUEST COMPUTER ANALYSIS [more info]

A COMPUTER ANNOTATED SCORE OF THIS GAME IS AVAILABLE.  [CLICK HERE]

Kibitzer's Corner
Jan-30-05  like a GM: Why did Mieses take the knight? (22..Qxc6)
Jan-30-05  sneaky pete: <like a GM> There is no better, other moves lose a full piece. If the rook moves to c8 or a8 white plays 23.Qc5+ Kg8 24.Ne7+ .. etc and if 22... Bd3+ 23.Kg1 .. etc.
Jul-11-17
Premium Chessgames Member
  KEG: Lasker's fine winning move 22. Nc6! was a thing of beauty, but Lasker's play before then was surprisingly weak. The errors in this game were (except for Mieses' final losing move--21...a6?) entirely missed by Rosenthal in the Tournament Book and by Marco in his analysis of this game.

With 7. e4, Lasker obtained an open and clearly superior position against Mieses' Semi-Tarrasch Defense. Mieses could nonetheless have had a playable game with 7...Be7 as noted by Rosenthal. Mieses' 7...cxd4?, however, was a blunder. It is hard to see how Mieses could have survived had Lasker responded 8. Bb5+, a move neither Rosenthal nor Marco mention. By contrast, Lasker's 8. Qxd4? let Mieses back in the game.

Mieses erred badly again with 12...Bb4, a move wrongly praised by Marco. After 13. BxN+ bxB, the simple 14. 0-0 would have given Lasker close to a won game.

But Lasker (and Rosenthal and Marco) missed the power of 14. 0-0 and played 14. Qxc6+, and then got into trouble after 14...Kf8 15. Qe4? (15. Qb5 should have been played).

After the ensuing exchanges, Lasker's pawn structure was fractured and his King was precariously placed. After 18...Bh6, Lasker's opening advantage was entirely gone, his King was under siege, and a dangerous pin on the e-file loomed:


click for larger view

Lasker's 20. Kf1 only made things worse (he needed to play 20. Qc5+). After 20...h5 21. Re1, Mieses definitely had the better game.

But Mieses failed to play 21...g6 (Marco spotted this) and instead played 21...a6? The position was now as follows:


click for larger view

Now Lasker pounced with the brilliant 22. Nc6! and suddenly the game was over. As previously noted on this site, Mieses' 22...Qxc6--though a losing move--was better than the alternatives.

Mieses' 25...Qh1+ led to immediate disaster, but even with the "best" move (25...g6) Mieses was lost.

Not one of Lasker's better games, but a lovely finish.

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:

  1. No obscene, racist, sexist, or profane language.
  2. No spamming, advertising, duplicate, or gibberish posts.
  3. No vitriolic or systematic personal attacks against other members.
  4. Nothing in violation of United States law.
  5. No cyberstalking or malicious posting of negative or private information (doxing/doxxing) of members.
  6. No trolling.
  7. 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.

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: 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.

Featured in the Following Game Collections[what is this?]
The Lion King
by chocobonbon
Game 406
from Max Euwe - From Steinitz to Fischer, Part 2 by demirchess
Paris 1900
by suenteus po 147
Paris 1900
by JoseTigranTalFischer
Game 406
from Max Euwe - From Steinitz to Fischer, Part 2 by FRoeten
lasker best games
by brager
Game 406
from Max Euwe - From Steinitz to Fischer, Part 2 by Chessdreamer

Home | About | Login | Logout | F.A.Q. | 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 2001-2021, Chessgames Services LLC