Harry Pillsbury vs Hermann von Gottschall (1900)

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

Kibitzing

Harry Pillsbury vs Hermann von Gottschall
12th DSB Congress, Munich (1900), Munich GER, rd 2, Jul-24
Queen's Gambit Declined: Pillsbury Attack (D55) · 1-0

ANALYSIS [x]

FEN COPIED

explore this opening	find similar games	1 more Pillsbury/von Gottschall game
	PGN: download \| view \| print	Help: general \| java-troubleshooting

TIP: All games have a Kibitzer's Corner provided for community discussion. If you have a question or comment about this game, register a free account so you can post there.

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]

Jul-29-18		KEG: Another quick win for Pillsbury on the White side of the Queen's Gambit Declined. Actually, von Gottschall played well for the first 23 moves; mixing some daring efforts at counter-play and counter-attack with skillful defense. But then he blundered on move 24 and the game ended suddenly. Was this good luck for Pillsbury? Hardly. As with Fischer decades later, Pillsbury truly UNDERSTOOD the opening variations he employed and kept his opponents under pressure at every step. Small wonder that they often failed while he was able to find the best moves even in complex situations. In effect, games with such opening lines were home games for Pillsbury. 1. d4 d5 2. c4 e6 3. Nc3 Nf6 4. Bg5 Pillsbury was primarily responsible for the popularity of this move. At Hastings 1895, his employment of this line was often criticized. Pillsbury's skillful handling in the resulting variations led to 4. Bg5 becoming part of the "Orthodox" line of the QGD. 4... Be7 5. e3 0-0 6. Nf3 b6 6...h6 and 6...Nbd7 are more usual and are perhaps theoretically better. But the text (playing b6 one move earlier than in the Tartakower Variation) is entirely playable, though requiring great care with the potential weakening of the White squares on the Black Queen-side. 7. Bd3 7. cxd5 seems more logical than the tempo-losing text, but it is always presumptuous to second-guess Pillsbury on the White side of a QGD. 7... Bb7 7...dxc4 was perhaps better, but placing the Black Bishop on b7 after b6 is always sensible. 8. cxd5 So Pillsbury gets to play this move after all. 8... exd5 8...Nxd5 was also OK. 9. Ne5 Pillsbury's favorite move when on the White side of the QGD. While 9. 0-0 is perhaps the theoretically "correct" move, it is hard to imagine Pillsbury missing a chance to play Ne5 in this opening. One can imagine Pillsbury rolling his eyes at anyone criticizing his choice of moves here, given all the victories he piled up after one of his attacks launcher with Ne5. 9... Nbd7 Black could play 9...Ne4 immediately here (a la Lasker), but the text is a tried and established solid line here. The position was now: click for larger view 10. f4?! 10. 0-0 or 10. Bf4 (or perhaps 10. Qc2) seem to be indicated. But when watching a genius at work we sometimes must suspend disbelief and just enjoy the show. 10... Ne4 10...h6 was a reasonable alternative. 11. BxB QxB 12. 0-0 This left: click for larger view Objectively, chances seem about even. But von Gottschall, doubtless knowing what Pillsbury was capable of doing in this kind of position, fearlessly decided to seek counter-play, even at the possible cost of a pawn. 12... c5?! 12...NxN (c3), 12...NxN (e5), 12...Rad8, and 12...Ndf6 were all solid reasonable choices, but I like von Gottschall's choice here. Better to have Pillsbury defending than bashing down your defenses. 13. BxN dxB 14. NxN QxN 15. dxc5 This left: click for larger view 15...QxQ 16. RfxQ bxc5 17. Rac1 would regain the pawn for Black but would give Pillsbury exactly the kind of ending he was famous for winning (the weak Black pawn on c5 would have been a luscious target). But, as will be discussed in my next post on this game, von Gottschall had other ideas, and managed to create exciting tactical chances that kept him very much in the game until he erred on his 24th turn.

Jul-30-18		KEG: Post II Facing trouble if he tried to regain the lost pawn, von Gottschall instead tried for counter-play with: 15... Qc6 The Tournament Book award this a "!" It certainly creates complications. Another possibility was 15...Qd3?! In any case, Black cannot afford to sit back and let Pillsbury have his way. 16. cxb6 A surprisingly tame response by Pillsbury, who apparently decided that "a pawn is a pawn." But this gave von Gottschall chances. If there was a refutation of von Gottschall's ide, it lay in 16. Qd6. If then 16...Qxc5 17. QxQ bxc5 Black get the pawn back (for a moment at least) but would face assault on his weak pawns beginning with 16. Rfc1. Alternatively, if 16...bxc5 17. Rfd1 Black would again face difficulties. After Pillsbury's move, von Gottschll assumed the initiative. 16... Rfd8 17. Qe2 More surprisingly tentative play by Pillsbury. 17. Qb3 was better. 17... Qxb6 18. Rfd1 Rd3! This left: click for larger view Pillsbury has won a pawn but faces numerous threats. 19. RxR Another placid move by Pillsbury that leaves him a pawn ahead but gives von Gottschall plenty of chances at attack. If he wanted to contest the initiative, Pillsbury should have tried either 19. Na4 or 19. Rac1. 19... exR 20. Qd2 He must keep an eye on his b2 pawn. The position was now: click for larger view Chances are now about even. But the wisdom of Pillsbury's decision to play to win a pawn was soon vindicated. This tactic might have been a recipe for trouble against Lasker, Janowski, or Marshall. But von Gottschall, though correctly fighting for counterplay, clearly did not know how to follow up his prospects, and things soon go downhill for him (though he remained very much in the game until his blunder on move 24). 20... Rd8 Not awful, but an attacking player such as Marshall would have played 20...Re8 like a shot. 21. f5 Pillsbury is reluctant to remain on the defensive, but 21. Rc1 or 21. Re1 were sounder and better. 21... Qc5 von Gottschall's instincts were correct, but 21...Re8 or 21...Bc8 were better follow-ups. 22. Qf2 The only chance to defend everything, but a fine move nonetheless. 22... f6 23. Rd1 a5 Still striving for counterplay to justify his pawn sacrifice, but 23...Qe5 or 23...Qb4 would have been more challenging for Pillsbury. 24. e4! Pillsbury immediately leaped at the chance to exploit von Gottschall's last few tentative moves. The position was now: click for larger view Pillsbury has gained ground, but von Gottschall certainly still has his chances. If Pillsbury had been facing Lasker in this position, a battle royale could be predicted. But here, von Gottshcall undid all his creative play with a blunder that lost immediately: 24... Rd4?? He should have played either 24...Qb4 (as recommended by the Tournament Book) or 23...Qc6, or perhaps even 24...Qd6. But now... 25. Rxd3 click for larger view Game over. If 25...Rc4 26. QxQ RxQ 27. Rd8+ Kf7 28. Rd7+ (ouch!) 1-0 A sad ending for von Gottschall after a game effort.

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.