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

Jose Raul Capablanca vs Emanuel Lasker
"'21 It Was a Very Good Year" (game of the day Dec-31-2011)
Lasker - Capablanca World Championship Match (1921), Havana CUB, rd 11, Apr-13
Queen's Gambit Declined: Orthodox Defense. Main Line (D63)  ·  1-0

ANALYSIS [x]

FEN COPIED

Click Here to play Guess-the-Move
Given 56 times; par: 88 [what's this?]

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: You can get computer analysis by clicking the "ENGINE" button below the game.

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
< Earlier Kibitzing  · PAGE 6 OF 6 ·  Later Kibitzing>
Dec-31-11
Premium Chessgames Member
  Penguincw: Nice game by Capablanca.
Dec-31-11
Premium Chessgames Member
  WannaBe: <<<ANNOUNCEMENT>>> The Annual Caissar Award will commence soon. This is a long CG.com tradition that was started in 2004 by <Nikolaas>. As usual, we will have our regular 11 categories, ranging from serious to the silly, possibly absurd.

<Best Avatar - Non James Cameron Category>, <Best Profile>, <Best Game Collection>, <Best Historian>, <Best Username/Handle>, <Best Written Post>, <Funniest Kibitzer>, <Most Constructive>, <Best Informed>, <Most Helpful>, <Best Analysis - Non Silicon/Computer Category>

So, please take a moment this weekend, while you are passed out (or recovering) from champaign, to consider who should deserve a nomination.

Who have written some of the most thoughful posts, which member have helped (you) out the most when you posed that 'What happens if 25...Rxd4'?

Who have been most constructive in helping/improving CG.com's community, recommending new feature(s) to the admins.

Dec-31-11  MyDogPlaysChess: <danderie>, when <perfidious> wrote his remark, he didn't have <DrMal>'s supporting evidence. The Rybka analysis followed his not very diplomatic remark.

Second, the methodology - presenting a starting and ending point in a game, 28 moves is large gap, gives room for possibilities in between. I found the games strategic ideas instructive. This is a battle between two classical giants. They were making theory at the time, some of which we feed today to Rybka in it's opening book.

As a weaker player than many, <DrMal> included, I find comments like <16. To prevent c5, either now or a later stage. There is no Black bishop and White’s whole plan is based on that fact. He will attempt, in due time, to place a knight on d6.> instructive. It is something that a tool like RYbka won't ever help me understand.

I couldn't help to notice that <DrMal> statements that <very little was accomplished during the next 28 moves>, on a game with 48 moves, and <Capa's annotation at move 13 may not be charming but it is certainly accurate. It is one of the few that is> contrasts with you statement that <This the 11th game is an absolute gem in every way>

The fact that Rybka and other engines exists have changed chess preparation forever. In spite of their many uses, we won't ever remember all of their advise and play them over the board. At the end, we have to integrate their analysis into theory and abstraction that we can remember and use. It is not simply "egos" or "human stupidity"; it is chess at the very top as expressed by Anand, Kramnik and many other GMs. I expect Rybka and lesser engines to find mistakes in both book analysis (I love to run engines against older book analysis!) and game played by the cream of chess - the Kasparov, Botvinnik, Karpov, Fischer, Tal, Korchnoi, etc. It often gets me lost too, specially when learning from a pragmatic Lasker, or understanding a move within the context of a tournament or match development, where the player goal plays a large role.

I wouldn't dare to analyze one of my games without an engine. One last remark: in response to several after the game analysis Fischer used to remark, "yeah, but could you have found it over the board?"

Best regards.

Dec-31-11  AVRO38: Great game, great match! It's easy to get drawn into the "who was better" debate, but such a debate is pointless in my opinion.

To me, Lasker, Capablanca, and Alekhine are equal in strength and in a class by themselves. When they faced each other in 1921 and 1927 the younger man won, as is natural in a long match between two equal talents.

Rather than bemoan all the "what if" matches in chess history, like Fischer-Karpov for example, I'm just extremely grateful that the two ultimate dream matches actually DID happen! i.e. Lasker-Capablanca, and Capablanca-Alekhine. Those two matches not only represent chess at the highest level, but chess at the highest level possible.

Happy New Year!

Dec-31-11  nathanschulz: <arnaud> that's what I thought too! Got a feeling '21 is gonna be a good year.
Dec-31-11  King Death: <MyDogPlaysChess> If you read what <perfidious> said, he might have been taking issue with <DrMAL>'s comment at the end that "Morphy would have clobbered them both." Maybe he or she got a little hot about the rest, but I don't agree with the Morphy statement either even though I respect <DrMAL>'s analysis and contributions a whole lot.

You say that you wouldn't dare to analyze one of your games without an engine. I have to admit I don't have one but what's the fun in relying on the engine for all of its input? It seems like it would take away from the process of learning unless you had enough understanding of the game.

Dec-31-11  AlphaMale: Clobber is a vernacular English term for clothes, so I like to think pretty boy Morphy would indeed have pawned Capa and Lasker in the sartorial stakes.
Dec-31-11  Oceanlake: I wrote "...Capablanca at his best...."

I don't think he was at his best in 1927, nor, from later history, did Alekine.

Jan-03-12
Premium Chessgames Member
  kevin86: The fee for Qxf8 is immediate mate.Capa talks a good game as well as he plays it.
Mar-17-12  Norbi506: 25. Nxe8
"This Bishop had to be taken, since it threatened to go to h5, pinning the Knight." The bishop is doing absolutely nothing... Pinning the night had to be a big plan in blacks counterplay = LOL
Mar-17-12  ephesians: If black can get the bishop to h5 and chop on f3, it undermines white's control of e5. White's control of e5 is his trump in this postion.
Mar-17-12  whithaw: This is a beautiful, beautiful game... Extremely clear play.
Mar-18-12  Norbi506: You are probably right. Maybe that tempo on the Q (23.Ndb) was the issue. The pin shouldnt be a problem for Capa.
Sep-05-15  SimplicityRichard: <FSR: ....six times to Alekhine as Lasker did in his life.>

Well spotted.#

Sep-05-15
Premium Chessgames Member
  OhioChessFan: It's a shame to see the grammatical errors in the notes.

On a chess note, I continue to believe Lasker is vastly underrated in chess history. A really strong case can be made he was the best ever, though few people rate him there.

Sep-05-15  TheFocus: <OhioChessFan> <It's a shame to see the grammatical errors in the notes. On a chess note, I continue to believe Lasker is vastly underrated in chess history. A really strong case can be made he was the best ever, though few people rate him there.>

I believe Lasker was the strongest chess player ever. He would have spanked Carlsen like a yard dog.

Sep-05-15  Howard: Why Fischer didn't include Lasker in his, very questionable, list of the top-ten players of all time, has always been a mystery. Granted, the two of them had very different styles, but Lasker's greatness is simply unquestionable.
Sep-05-15  RookFile: He gave a reason at the time, which is that Lasker was a coffeehouse player. However, Profile of a Prodigy reported that later Fischer changed his mind and saw Lasker's greatness.
Sep-06-15
Premium Chessgames Member
  offramp: <Howard: Why Fischer didn't include Lasker in his, very questionable, list of the top-ten players of all time, has always been a mystery. Granted, the two of them had very different styles, but Lasker's greatness is simply unquestionable.>

The 1964 list was as follows:
Morphy
Staunton
Steinitz
Tarrasch
Chigorin
Alekhine
Capablanca
Spassky
Tal
Reshevsky

To Fischer's credit he did not do what most people do when asked for an all-time favourite list, which is to give a list of World Champions plus a few other players. He did nor include Petrosian (the WC), Smyslov, Rubinstein or Botvinnik.

The inclusion of Staunton is an oddity, but if Fischer liked him then that's that, it's a fait accompli!

And if Lasker wasn't one of Fischer's favourite players in 1964, then why should he go on the list?

Sep-06-15
Premium Chessgames Member
  MissScarlett: <Why Fischer didn't include Lasker in his, very questionable, list of the top-ten players of all time, has always been a mystery. >

Because if he had, it would no longer have been 'very questionable'; it would have been slightly or somewhat questionable. Why not just cut to the chase and give us your unquestionable top 10 list for 1964?

Sep-06-15  RookFile: Miss Scarlett asks a good question. I asked myself: "If a time transporter took me back to 1964, what list would I come up with for the all time top 10?"

This is the list I came up with, in alphabetical order:

Alekhine
Botvinnik
Capa
Keres
Lasker
Morphy
Petrosian
Reshevsky
Smyslov
Tal

Sep-08-15
Premium Chessgames Member
  offramp: In 1964 this might have been my top 10 list:

Alekhine
Mason
Capablanca
Lasker
Rubinstein
Chigorin
Tarrasch
Marshall
Zukertort
Tal

Sep-08-15
Premium Chessgames Member
  keypusher: < offramp: In 1964 this might have been my top 10 list: Alekhine
Mason
Capablanca
Lasker
Rubinstein
Chigorin
Tarrasch
Marshall
Zukertort
Tal>

A nice, subtle Bobby tribute. He inexplicably slighted Lasker in favor of Tarrasch; you inexplicably slight Steinitz in favor of Zukertort. Mason is a charming bit of chauvinism, but where are Blackburne and Atkins?

Sep-08-15
Premium Chessgames Member
  offramp: <keypusher: < offramp: In 1964 this might have been my top 10 list: Alekhine Mason
Capablanca
Lasker
Rubinstein
Chigorin
Tarrasch
Marshall
Zukertort
Tal>

A nice, subtle Bobby tribute. He inexplicably slighted Lasker in favor of Tarrasch; you inexplicably slight Steinitz in favor of Zukertort. Mason is a charming bit of chauvinism, but where are Blackburne and Atkins?>

That is the problem, isn't it?

The same problem Fischer had. If you are limited to 10 then many players are going to be left out.

I like Steinitz. But I also like Zukertort. But which one is better?

There's only one way to find out...

FIIIIGHT!!

Aug-01-18  EmanuelLasker: This would have been my top ten list in 1964, in alphabetical order:

Alekhine
Botvinnik
Capablanca
Keres
Lasker
Petrosian
Rubinstein
Smyslov
Steinitz
Tal

Honorable mention for Morphy, who might be the best in terms of dominance and how far ahead of his time he was. But due to his era and short chess career, it feels impossible to compare him with the others which is why I left him out.

Jump to page #    (enter # from 1 to 6)
search thread:   
< Earlier Kibitzing  · PAGE 6 OF 6 ·  Later Kibitzing>
NOTE: You need to pick a username and password to post a reply. Getting your account takes less than a minute, is totally anonymous, and 100% free—plus, it entitles you to features otherwise unavailable. Pick your username now and join the chessgames community!
If you already have an account, you should login now.
Please observe our posting guidelines:
  1. No obscene, racist, sexist, profane, raunchy, or disgusting language.
  2. No spamming, advertising, duplicate or nonsense posts.
  3. No malicious personal attacks, including cyber stalking, systematic antagonism, or gratuitous name-calling of any gratuitous name-calling of any members—including Admin and Owners—or any of their family, friends, associates, or business interests.
  4. Nothing in violation of United States law.
  5. No malicious posting of or linking to personal, private, and/or negative information (aka "doxing" or "doxxing") about any member, (including all Admin and Owners) or any of their family, friends, associates, or business interests. This includes all media: text, images, video, audio, or otherwise. Such actions will result in severe sanctions for any violators.
  6. NO TROLLING. Admin and Owners know it when they see it, and sanctions for any trolls will be significant.
  7. Any off-topic posts which distract from the primary topic of discussion are subject to removal.
  8. The use of "sock puppet" accounts to circumvent disciplinary action taken by Moderators is expressly prohibited.
  9. The use of "sock puppet" accounts in an attempt to undermine any side of a debate—or to create a false impression of consensus or support—is prohibited.
  10. All decisions with respect to deleting posts, and any subsequent discipline, are final, and occur at the sole discretion of the Moderators, Admin, and Owners.
  11. 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: Keep all discussion on the topic of this page. This forum is for this specific game and nothing else. If you want to discuss chess in general, or this site, 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 at the sole discretion of the Admin and Owners—who will strive to act fairly and consistently at all times.

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.

<This page contains Editor Notes. Click here to read them.>

Featured in the Following Game Collections[what is this?]
Game 91
from On My Great Predecessors 1 (Kasparov) by isfsam
Match Capablanca!
by amadeus
Game 39
from World Champion - Euwe (I.Linder/V.Linder) by Qindarka
Jose Raul Capablanca's Best Games
by alip
other good games
by sk.sen
Game 9
from Secrets of Modern Chess Strategy (Watson) by isfsam
Game 11, Capablanca leads 7-4 (3-0)
from 1921 World Chess Championship by Penguincw
danmanning2014's favorite games
by danmanning2014
Game 36
from Veliki majstori saha 12 CAPABLANCA (Petrovic) by Chessdreamer
L9.2 QGD
from How to Defend in Chess by Colin Crouch game coll by tak gambit
Game 91
from On My Great Predecessors 1 (Kasparov) by Grizmors
My favorite games from WCC matches
by skytzo985
QGD Orthodox Def. Main Line (D63) 1-0 Superior W Knights
from Annotations by Various Authorities & Fredthebear by fredthebear
!!!
from capablanca best games by brager
48.? (#102)
from Chess Quiz/Reinfeld Compiled by Phony Benoni by fredthebear
Game 51
from 20th Century Highlights (Burgess) by rajeshupadhyay
Game 9
from Secrets of Modern Chess Strategy (Watson) by cassiooo
sapientdust's favorite games
by sapientdust
White 48?..
from Guess The Move II by Ercan
Jose Raul Capablanca's Best Games
by KingG
plus 118 more collections (not shown)


home | about | login | logout | F.A.Q. | your 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 2001-2019, Chessgames Services LLC