Jose Raul Capablanca vs Emanuel Lasker (1921)

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

Kibitzing

Jose Raul Capablanca vs Emanuel Lasker
Lasker - Capablanca World Championship Match (1921), Havana CUB, rd 1, Mar-15
Queen's Gambit Declined: Orthodox Defense. Capablanca Variation (D63) · 1/2-1/2

ANALYSIS [x]

FEN COPIED

Annotations by Jose Raul Capablanca. [26 more games annotated by Capablanca]

explore this opening	find similar games	23 more Capablanca/Lasker games
	PGN: download \| view \| print	Help: general \| java-troubleshooting

TIP: To flip the board (so black is on the bottom) press the "I" key on your keyboard.

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]

< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 3 OF 3 · Later Kibitzing>
May-24-11		madlydeeply: AH c'mon now! No more of this "Capa was a natural player"! He clearly analyzed this opening at home, no? I say all his comments up to move sixteen were a result of opening prep. I think he would say he "didn't prepare" as a way to psych out his opponents. His Capa cult of personality.

Oct-24-12		sillybilly47: I know how it ends but not a bad start for the good doctor.

Oct-31-12		Conrad93: Lasker had a chance for a better game with either 19...c4! or 19...d4!

Dec-19-12		Conrad93: Capablanca's comments are so biased.

Dec-19-12		beatgiant: <Conrad93> <19...c4!> What's the follow-up after 19...c4 20. Qc3? Looks to me like this helps White more than Black. <19...d4!> This actually does look pretty interesting. Capa claims it would have failed, but 19...d4 20. Qa3 Ng4 21. Ng3 Rbc8 looks fine for Black.

Dec-19-12		Conrad93: BeatGiant, the analysis was done by Rybka. The advantage goes to black after 19...c4. After 20.Qc3 white's position is cramped.

Dec-19-12		Conrad93: click for larger view 19...c4! 20.Qc3 Ne4 21.Qa5!Rdc8 22.Nc3 f5 23.Nf3 Rc5 24.Qa3 Qc7 25.Na4 Ra5! click for larger view

Dec-19-12		beatgiant: <Conrad93> Thanks, but I wasn't convinced by a few of White's moves in Rybka's line. Why not simply 19...c4 20. Qc3 Ne4 <21. Qd4>, for example?

Dec-19-12		Conrad93: click for larger view 21.Qd4 Bc6! 22.b3 Rb4 23.Qb2 Rb8 24.Qc1 Qf6! 25.Nf3 g5!? click for larger view I think black is much better off.

Dec-19-12		beatgiant: <Conrad93> I remain unconvinced. On 19...c4 20. Qc3 Ne4 21. Qd4 Bc6, simply <22. Rb1> appears to parry all threats.

Dec-20-12		Conrad93: Apparently not. 22.Rb1 is countered by 22...a5 or 22...Ba4 when black is doing much better. It's a very passive move.

Dec-20-12		beatgiant: <Conrad93> I don't see why <black is doing much better> in the line you posted. True, Black has the momentary appearance of some piece activity, but I don't see any major follw-up. Meanwhile, the c-pawn and d-pawn are a frozen weakness.

Dec-20-12		Conrad93: Giant, the c and d pawn are very strong. You are looking at the game like a patzer.

Dec-21-12		beatgiant: <Conrad93> <c and d pawn are very strong> Could you post something informative about your reasons? Do you say that just because <Rybka> gave Black a plus there? I'll post a sample line illustrating my belief about the position: 19...c4 20. Qc3 Ne4 21. Qd4 Bc6 22. Rb1 a5 <23. Nc3> Nxc3 24. Qxc3 Bd7 25. Rd2 Bf5 26. Rbd1 White has visible pressure on the c and d pawns (<27. Qxc4> is a threat).

Dec-21-12		Conrad93: Your line is faulty. I'll analyze later. Too tired for now.

Mar-10-15		offramp: Capablanca: "<19...Ne4. All the attacks beginning either with Ng4 or d4 would have failed.>" He could be right! It's a pity he didn't give a few moves of analysis.

Mar-10-15		Marmot PFL: <Capablanca writes, "Kc5 was too risky. The way to win was not at all clear and I even thought that with that move Black might win."> The younger Capablanca would take risks to win and make a name for himself, but by the 1920s he was already becoming risk averse.

Jan-18-17		edmundo51: Why not simply 19...c4 20. Qc3 Ne4 <21. Qd4 Bc6 and fine 22.f3 if 22...Ba4 23.fe4 B:c2 24. N:c2 and white must win.

Dec-06-17		nacional100: I created a lichess study with my own analysis of the game. I'm just an amateur trying to improve, and haven't used CPU analysis. Please be welcome to take a look and provide comments or feedback. https://lichess.org/study/VuYaPHUL

Dec-06-17		maxi: <Conrad93> Really you shouldn't use "biased" in relation to Capa's comments. You can say that he had a very high opinion of his own ability, you can say that sometimes he made analytic mistakes, but you shouldn't use that word. Capa was as objective as he could be as far as chess positions and moves are concerned. In general I learn a lot from this comments, but, for a player of his strength, he made too many mistakes in his notes.

Dec-06-17		RookFile: Lasker played a nice game here. His chess had a dynamic quality to it. I'm sure the computer finds improvements for both sides. It always does. Capa presented numerous losses of his in Chess Fundamentals. That's more objective than most people get.

Mar-23-19		Oldturtle: If 26. dxg5, the best for black is 26...BxR 27. cxQ RXR 28. Qxa6.

Mar-23-19		Oldturtle: If 26. dxc5, the best for black is 26...BxR 27. cxQ RXR 28. Qxa6.

Jul-19-22		Ninas Husband: The commentator might have been a bit biased. Just sayin!! :)

May-07-23		Mathematicar: In this game I first learned about "crazy rook" tactic. Sweet childhood, teen years. Agadmator explained that if 51.a4 f5 52.Ra7 Kh6 53.a5 fxg4 54.fg4 and Black gives up a rook for stalemate! (Game Collection: Crazy Rooks)

Jump to page # (enter # from 1 to 3)
search thread:
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 3 OF 3 · Later Kibitzing>

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.