<INTRODUCTION>

Lasker vs Schlechter, 1910 is the <8th game of the 1910 title match>.

Quantitative mapping of this game between these players is below. Figures in brackets immediately after each move are the corrected engine evaluations generated on the forward slide following the initial reverse slide after all the moves were inputted into the engine. This process smoothed out many, but not all fluctuation in the engine’s evaluations. General methods used are described in the bio at User: bridgeburner

The evaluation values in the opening come at the beginning of the forward slide following the reverse slide to the starting position from the last move of the game. Engine preferences are included throughout the game where they differ from players preferences.

Some analysis is included to provide some idea of the reason for the engine preferences where they didn’t coincide with the moves played, except in situations where the evaluation differences was very minor.

SUMMARY

Lasker again played <8.a4>, a move Capablanca detested. Schlechter responds properly and gains a small advantage. However, Lasker defends impeccably, neither player makes a mistake, and the game is drawn after an almost perfectly played and well contested 42 moves.

<GAME MOVES 1-8>

<1. e4> ( 0.27) <1…e5> ( 0.27)

<2. Nf3> ( 0.30) <2…Nc6> ( 0.30)

<3. Bb5> (=0.19) <3…a6> (=0.19)

<4. Ba4> (=0.05) <4…Nf6> (=0.14)

<5. 0-0> (=0.04) <5…Nxe4> (=0.17)

<6. d4> (=0.17) <6…b5> (=0.17)

<7. Bb3> (=0.17) <7…d5> (=0.17)

<8. a4> ( 0.29):

click for larger view

With an evaluation jump of only 0.46, this does not qualify as a <dubious move> for the purposes of this project, but is nevertheless considered to be a poor quality opening move that theory has essentially abandoned since this match.

Pillsbury and Chigorin appear to have been the only top players to have scored significant success with this move. But probably as a result of its use in this match, this move has permanently fallen from favor. Of the 73 games in the CG.com database with this position, only 11 have been played since WWI, and only once by a “name” player, namely Leonid Stein in Stein vs Suetin, 1962, which ended in a 19 move draw. Capablanca’s notes of the match indicated that he loathed this move, and for good reason as it concedes the initiative for no good reason. It was played by Lasker 4 times in this match, in games 2, 4, 6 and 8, with each game being drawn. His use of the opening was quite puzzling. The only game in the match in which Lasker didn’t play this variation was the fateful 10th and last game which he won, opening with the queen pawn, Schlechter defending with a Slav Defence, Quiet Variation (D11).

<GAME MOVE 8>: <8…Nxd4> ( 0.29)

<Capablanca: “The right answer. The same as played in the second game.”>

Both Capablanca and the engine consider this to be Black’s strongest response, yet of the 73 games in which White played <8. a4>, Black’s most successful response was the tame <8…Rb8> (+17 =8 -7), while <8…Nxd4> scored +6 =11 -8).

<GAME MOVES 9 AND 10>

<9. Nxd4> ( 0.29) <9…exd4> ( 0.29)

<10. axb5> ( 0.67)

<Capablanca: “Much better than 10. Qxd4 as played in the second game.”>

The engine prefers the odd looking <10. Nc3> (Black’s forward d-pawn is pinned against the rear d-pawn) ( 0.29) and this is indeed the most successful response by White in the database with a +3 =4 -2 record (2 of which were won by Schlechter later that year(!) in Vienna against Wolf and Perlis), as against +3 =6 -6 for the move played.

<GAME MOVE 10>

<10…Bc5> ( 0.67):

click for larger view

Black’s loss in Chigorin vs Wemmers, 1881 after he played <10…Be6> was not due to this move. However, Unzicker’s loss in G Blendinger vs Unzicker, 1946 was largely due to his choice at this stage of <10…Nc5>, a blunder that concedes a pawn and acquires a bad position.

<GAME MOVE 11>:

<11. c3> ( 0.56)

<Engine preference(s)>: <11. Nc3/Nd2> ( 0.67) - <11…0-0 12. Nxe4 dxe4 13. Qh5 Bb6 14. Bd2>

<GAME MOVE 11>:

<11…0-0> (=-0.23)

<Capablanca: “Black’s game is as good as White’s.”>

<Engine preference>: <11…Ra7> ( 0.67): <12. cxd4 axb5 13. Rxa7 Bxa7>

<GAME MOVE 12>:

<12. cxd4> (=-0.23) <12…Bb6> (=0.00)

<GAME MOVES 13-17>:

<13. Nc3> (=0.00) <13…Bb7> (=0.00)

<14. bxa6> (=0.00) <14…Rxa6> (=0.00)

<15. Rxa6> (=0.00) <15…Bxa6> (=0.04)

<16. Re1> (=0.04) <16…Bb7> ( 0.03)

<17. Na4> ( 0.30):

click for larger view

<Engine preferences> <17. Be3> (=0.03); <17. Bf4> (=0.01); and <17. f3> (=0.00). The position is now very drawish and remains that way for the rest of the game, notwithstanding a couple of very minor inaccuracies (if they could even be called that) by both players.

<GAME MOVE 17>:

<17…Qf6> ( 0.28)

<Engine preference> <17…Qh4> ( 0.30) <17. Be3 Ba5 18. Re2 Rb8>

<GAME MOVE 18>:

<18. Be3> ( 0.27) <18…Ba7> (=0.16)

<Engine preference>: <18…Ba5> ( 0.27): <19. Re2 Rb8 20. Rc2 Qd6 21. Rc1 c6 22. Nc5 Bc7 23. g3 Nxc5 24. Bf4 Qd7 25. Bxc7 Qxc7 26. Rxc5 Qd6>

<GAME MOVE 19>:

<19. f3> (=-0.08)

<Engine preferences> <19. Nc5> (=0.16); <19. Nc3> (=0.16).

<GAME MOVE 19 -20>:

<19…Ng5> (=-0.08)

<20. Nc5> (=-0.08) <20…Bxc5> (=-0.08)

<Capablanca: “By this move, Black gains a passed pawn, but White on the other hand has two bishops.”>

<GAME MOVES 21-24>

<21. dxc5> (=-0.08) <21…Ne6> (=-0.08)

<Capablanca: “A poor move.”>

<22. Qd3> (=-0.08) <22…Rd8> (=-0.08)

<23. Bc2> (=-0.08) <23…g6> (=-0.08)

<24. b4> (=-0.12)

<GAME MOVES 24-25>:

<24…d4> (=-0.12)

<25. Bc1> (=-0.12) <25…h5> (=0.00)

<Engine preference>: <25. Nf4 26. Bxf4 Qxf4 27. Bb3 Qh4>

<GAME MOVES 26 – 27>:

<26. Bb3> (=0.00) <26…Bd5> (=0.00

<27. Bxd5> (=-0.15)

<Engine preference>: <27. Bc2>; (=0.00); <27…Nf4 28. Qd2>

<GAME MOVES 27-28>:

<27…Rxd5> (=-0.15)

<28. h3> (=-0.21)

<Engine preference>: <28. Bd2> (=-0.15)

<GAME MOVES 28-29>:

<28…Re5> (=-0.21)

<29. Rxe5> ( 0.37)

The exchange allows Black’s Queen to wander into White’s position, but White is in no danger if he defends accurately, which he does effortlessly. The engine preferences below are basically piece shuffling exercises designed to keep the Black Queen on its side of the board. Subsequent engine preferences are omitted as essentially meaningless because of the narrow value differences and the drawn nature of the position.

<Engine preferences>: <29. Rf1> (=-0.21); <29. Rd1> (=-0.21).

<GAME MOVES 29-36>:

<29…Qxe5> ( 0.37)

<30. Kf2> ( 0.37) <30…Qd5> ( 0.37)

<31. h4> ( 0.37) <31…Qa2+> ( 0.35)

<32. Qe2> ( 0.40) <32…Qb1> ( 0.40)

<33. Qb2> ( 0.40) <33…Qd3> ( 0.40)

<34. Qe2> ( 0.40) <34…Qb3> ( 0.40)

<35. Bd2> ( 0.40) <35…Kh7> ( 0.40)

<36. Ke1> ( 0.35)

<Capablanca: “The game was adjourned here and giveup [sic] later as a draw without resuming play. There is a slight advantage for Black but not enough to win. The whole game is we[ll] played by both sides and the natural outcome was a draw.”>

<GAME MOVES 36-43>:

<36…Qb1+> ( 0.35)

<37. Qd1> ( 0.35) <37…Qf5> ( 0.35)

<38. Qe2> ( 0.35) <38…Qc2> ( 0.35)

<39. Qd1> ( 0.35) <39…Qf5> ( 0.35)

<40. Qe2> ( 0.35) <40…Qb1+> ( 0.35)

<41. Qd1> ( 0.35) <41…Qf5> ( 0.35)

<Threefold repetition>

<42. Qe2> ( 0.35 )

<Threefold repetition>

<42…Qb1+> ( 0.35)

<Threefold repetition>

<43. Qd1> ( 0.35) <43… Qf5> ( 0.35) <Fourfold repetition>

Game agreed drawn. Position at the final move:

click for larger view

<CONCLUSION>: