click for larger view

as mentioned by <dac1990>. After 40...N7c5, black has a massive position and he is a pawn up.

click for larger view

But in this position

click for larger view

THE LASKER-STEINITZ CHESS MATCH. — "Reuter's Telegram.] MOSCOW, Dec. 10.

...In the eighth game of the Championship Match Steinitz reverted to his old defence to the Ruy Lopez, <d6>, and played excellently to the end. when, after having gained a substantial advantage, he gave Lasker an opportunity of forcing a draw in ingenious fashion. Steinitz was decidedly unlucky in thus missing an opportunity of gaining his first victory. It is, however, gratifying to observe that the game shows a marked improvement in his play. The score is now— Lasker, 5 ; Steinitz, 0 ; drawn, 3

<3...d6> Steinitz has had little success with this move in the past, and, seeing how completely it failed in his last match with Lasker it is somewhat surprising that he should revive it now.

<6.Bg5> Perhaps this is not so good as the methods adopted by Lasker on other occasions. <Bc4> has been shown by him to be an effective move in similar positions.

<17..Ne6> Black's play is rather curious, his efforts being directed towards inducing White lo weaken his centre by advancing his Pawns.

<22.Nh4> Having in view <23.Bh5> and if then Qe7 24. Ng6+ hxg6 25. Bxg6 threatening to mate by Qh5.

<28.Qf3> Steinitz's persevering attack on the Queen's side is thus rewarded by the capture of a Pawn, while White is at present unable to find an opening on the King's side. It is not to be doubted, however, that Lasker purposely submitted to this loss, intending to concentrate against the King while Black was occupied in another part of the field.

<32...Na4> Doubtless Lasker reckoned that this Knight would not have time to come into play again; but notwithstanding the massing of the White pieces they have not scope to operate, and the Black King remaining insecure.

<38...bxc3> To obtain a passed Pawn, which, with the White pieces on the other side of the board, ought to be very strong.

<46...Nxc3> Obviously it was necessary to give up the piece, but perhaps Lasker had calculated to get it back. If so, he did not see so far into the position as his opponent.

<Steinitz, in a letter dated December 17, admits that he is beaten. He says:

“Why am i so badly beaten? In the first place, because Lasker is the greatest player I ever met, perhaps the greatest who ever lived. To say so positively would be like making excuses for myself and disparaging other rivals at a time when I am incapable to compete in the first rank.

<‘A Chess-master has no more right to be ill than a general on the battlefield’>

or words to that effect, I once wrote; and I adhere to that. I may state that my fearful breakdown is chiefly due,as usual, to sleeplessness and nervous exhaustion.