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

Wilhelm Steinitz vs Johannes Minckwitz
Baden-Baden (1870), Baden-Baden GER, rd 12, Jul-29
Vienna Game: Vienna Gambit. Steinitz Gambit Fraser-Minckwitz Defense (C28)  ·  0-1



Annotations by Stockfish (Computer).      [20913 more games annotated by Stockfish]

explore this opening
find similar games 1 more Steinitz/J Minckwitz game
PGN: download | view | print Help: general | java-troubleshooting

TIP: Help with kibitzing features can be found on our Kibtizing Help Page.

PGN Viewer:  What is this?
For help with this chess viewer, please see the Olga Chess Viewer Quickstart Guide.


Kibitzer's Corner
< Earlier Kibitzing  · PAGE 2 OF 3 ·  Later Kibitzing>
Nov-05-07  vibes43: Good puzzle - saw solution quickly. I like it when CG occasionally throws in these "just-take-it" puzzles.
Nov-05-07  RandomVisitor: After 12...Nd5 Rybka likes 13.Bc1. The position is unusual because white is down a pawn with 5 pieces on the back rank and an exposed king, yet has an advantage (apparently)

1: Wilhelm Steinitz - Johannes von Minckwitz, Baden-Baden 1870

click for larger view

Analysis by Rybka 2.3.2a mp up:
1. (0.45): 13...Na5 14.Bd2 Be7 15.Bd3 0-0 16.Be4 c6 17.Bxd5 cxd5 18.Bxa5 bxa5 19.Rxa5 Qf5 20.Rxd5

2. (0.46): 13...Nd8 14.Bc4 c6 15.h3 f5 16.c3 Be7 17.Bxd5 cxd5 18.Qb3 Qf7 19.Bg5 0-0 20.Bxe7

3. (0.46): 13...Nxd4 14.Ra4 Bc5 15.Rxd4 c6 16.c4 Nb4 17.Be3 Bxd4 18.Bxd4 0-0 19.Bc3 c5 20.Qxd7

Nov-05-07  Wolfgang01: Did Steinitz 19. Kf1?? alone, or was he developed by a kibitz?? I would have done this on my own.
Premium Chessgames Member
  sfm: The aim of playing chess is to win, and, when not possible, at least to draw. Chess players who best master this in their time are the greatest chess players of their time. Match- and tournament results. That's the bottom line.
Nov-05-07  Erdkunde: Deleting one's posts so that it looks like someone is posting to themselves is a very childish way to "win" a debate...
Nov-05-07  ongyj: Morphy's ideas in opening play resembles modern chess. Steinitz was the world champion, but nobody today really subscribes to his returning of pieces behind the pawns anymore.(Though I'd actually used this idea to cheat a win out of a disadvantaged game before=) Of course all chess players contributions(and computer chess) in the past makes what chess is today. In fact, to me we tend to judge the contributions of the players of the past based on how much we can actually learn from their games.

But I won't put up any disguise. I admire Morphy's chess more, because I'm most fascinate about opening play in chess. For instance, some of Morphy's ideas in the Evan's gambit are still being employed today, but I can't say for sure for most of Steiniz's lines. At least, his style of play has been branded "passive" and lost a lot of popularity to today's standards. Of course, whether it will resurge is another question...

Nov-05-07  Murphyman: DZECHIEL,

How do you manage to kibitz without clicking on the game the diagram is from?

Don't you ocassionally glance at the game score and doesnt that waste it a bit?

This isnt me having a pop at you in any way as I enjoy your analysis and sharing your thought process with us.

Do you set the position up on a board or cut and paste the diagram?

Just Curious

Nov-05-07  PositionalTactician: Looking at the "discussion"(Sounds like an understatement) between Plato and Rookfile, I feel that I must join in.

As Plato has said, Steinitz is a great player, and a lot of world champions acknowledge his efforts in greatly deepening our understanding of chess. He was the first person to talk about a scientific method of playing chess, and the first person who set out the conditions needed before starting an attack. He was also the first person who talked about weak squares, etc. He was the one, in a era when everyone would mindlessly attack each other by hurling piece after piece at each other, came up with a new set of rules and general grounds to follow, and he proved his theory by winning a lot of games following his theory.

However, every pioneer has some eccentric idea of theirs, and the Steinitz Gambit is one of them. I think his conviction in this line is derived from his maxim "The King is a strong piece". Of course, the Steinitz Gambit was just too dangerous for Black, but his maxim was rather interesting and useful.

Also, Rookfile, according to Random Visitor, Stenitz actually had a large advantage if he had played 18.Kg1. The fact that he could have gotten a large advantage even if he allowed himself to make bad moves in the opening showed how great a player he was. However, he made a slip later on and blundered. If Anderrson made some blunder in his Immortal Game and lost, are you going to defame Andersson like you did to Steinitz? Also, what are you going to say about those games when Steinitz played the Steinitz Gambit and won? You cannot judge anything from a single game.

Nov-05-07  jokerman: <Murphyman> i had the same question in my mind a while ago, i guess he has some super powers and just like he moves the pieces around in his head, he can move words on the screen without looking! :0) or perhaps dzechiel has a notepad in wich he draws every diagram and uses the notepad for other chessplayers?
Nov-05-07  greensfield: <18...Qxc4> Bishop up and forces exchange of Queens via Knight fork.

Re <RandomVisitor: After 18.Kg1> So Steinitz ?? with 18.Kf1

Nov-05-07  MenisfromVenis: <Murphyman: DZECHIEL,

Don't you ocassionally glance at the game score and doesnt that waste it a bit?>

I'm a fan of Dzechiel, whenever I have no idea what the first move might be, I tell myself, do what Dz. does i.e. check who's ahead and poss. why and how, is there a move I wish I could play but cannot and if so, can I do something about it and so on.

I don't always succeed, but it has been of great help.

Nov-05-07  MenisfromVenis: PS I was quite surprised to see Steiniz losing this badly, but even Kasparov has blundered in the past.
Nov-05-07  Marmot PFL: Steinitz on the losing side of a Monday puzzle...
Nov-05-07  zb2cr: As to the puzzle, it is, indeed, "Very Easy". Black is up by a Pawn, and because of White's King interfering with his Rooks, has a very comfortable game strategically.

Looking at the tactical situation, though, Black has to deal with his Queen being harassed. Here, the position of the White King and Bishop on a square of the same color as the Knight is a valuable clue to look for a Knight fork. And there it is. 18. ... Qxc4 wins a piece.

I don't know that we can really cluck and wag our fingers at Steinitz; he lost this game in a moment of inattention. Had he played 18. Kg1, the Knight fork wouldn't have been there, and both analysis by our silicon friends (see posts by <Random Visitor>) and our own tactical senses say that White would have a reasonable chance of saving or winning this game. And which of us hasn't had moments of inattention?

Now, Steinitz put himself into the poor position of this game by inappropriate opening experimentation. He had a reputation for such experiments. I'm sure most of the posters here have heard the tale of his defense against the Evans gambit? Quite possibly such weird opening experiments contribute to why his loss percentage in the database here at <> is 24%.

Nov-05-07  2ndNature: I just went through saga at:

User: ziggurat

I liked RF's sense of humour, I find Pluto a bit pompatic - such personalities are destined for a debate.

Anyway, it was interesting what <RandomVisitor> showed Rybka is "thinking" of <After 18.Kg1> - this Steiniz is amasing... he happened to blunder in this game... shame.

Nov-05-07  Aas: <Murphyman: DZECHIEL,

Don't you ocassionally glance at the game score and doesnt that waste it a bit?>

Guess he just does his notes on notepad while looking at the start page, and then pastes it into the kibitz field when he's done...

Anyways keep up the good work Dzechiel, i always read your posts

Nov-05-07  benjinathan: I once told <dzechiel> that he should write a puxzzle book in the same way that he does his posts here ("Think Like a Strong Player") but he declined. I have found his posts incredibly helpful in explaining the positions to my kids.
Nov-05-07  xrt999: <zb2cr:>

I think you are being too kind. By move 13, white is totally paralyzed. Minckwitz plays beautifully and refutes 4.f4. Even after your extensive analysis of 18.Kg1 white's king is still on g1 and his play is defensive; White has no attack and barely any play.

Looking at Steinitz's games you see he favored moves like 4.f4, inviting the attack. In this game Minckwitz declines and plays 5...b6. In the same exact opening, the same year, Rosenthal goes on the attack, plays the attacking 5...d6, and Steinitz crushes him.

Nov-05-07  RookFile: Ah yes. This game is a fine example of Steinitz losing in the open game, where he had his share of weaknesses.
Nov-05-07  znprdx: In spite of the ludricrous exchange between <Plato> vs <RookFile> which of course is in clear violation of <CG rule 3: No personal attacks against other users> those of us which see Chess in its true objective light of White Pieces vs. Black Pieces such that any moment one is analyzing the game itself and NOT who played it. The litmus or acid test is would anyone seriously believe that a player the caliber of Steinitz would blunder in such a clear cut position? And seriously 15.Qe4? even a 1200 player would try c4: even again on move 16.

What was happening here is a common phenomenon which I call 'playing into it' - an eyes wide open deliberate invitation - a kind of mesmerism as distinct from hypnosis. I used to play a someone who would always only move his knights a dozen times or so - no matter what opening I tried, with White or Black. I'd end up with positions where my pawns looked like knocked over bowling pins as he laughed his way to an endgame crush.

The point of White's play was clearly to invite an over zealous attack by violating basic opening principles to induce error. This often happens when one plays the player so to speak. It still happens today at the highest levels - look at Morozevich's's play in the recent World Championship tournament. Even Krammik moves his Queen half a dozen times in the first 20 moves in one of his prepared lines.

Steinitz was most likely flustered by having overlooked the cute Nf6 response to the pin... the resulting adrenalin led to the hasty or sloppy King move - hey maybe he let go of it for half a second:)

Premium Chessgames Member
  patzer2: For today's puzzle solution, Black springs a winning Knight Fork combination on the great Wilhelm Steinitz with 18...Qxc4! , winning a piece and the game.

As <Atking> and <Random Visitor> note, Steinitz could have avoided this with 18. Kg1 instead of 18. Kf1??

Nov-05-07  dzechiel: <Murphyman><jokerman><MenisfromVenis>


How do you manage to kibitz without clicking on the game the diagram is from?

Don't you ocassionally glance at the game score and doesnt that waste it a bit?

This isnt me having a pop at you in any way as I enjoy your analysis and sharing your thought process with us.

Do you set the position up on a board or cut and paste the diagram?

Just Curious>

Once the page is open and I can see the diagram, I open a copy of Notepad and size the window such that it sits to the left of the board. I then note down all of my thoughts (sometimes going back to edit what I have already written if I see something new) into that window while looking at the diagram on the screen. On some Saturday and Sunday positions, I will set the position up on my chessboard, just to verify complicated analysis (I did this last about three weeks ago).

Once I am finished with all my thoughts, I click on the diagram and copy/paste the text from Notepad into the kibitz window. Typically I will then compare my notes against the game score checking and correcting for TYPOS ONLY. Rarely I will add some more to the bottom of the message, but I try to make it clear that that has been written after I have seen the solution. Then I submit my notes. If I feel compelled to comment on my own original analysis I will then write a second message.

Jumping back and forth between the position and the kibitz box is, as I'm sure you are aware, impractical.

Premium Chessgames Member <the ludricrous exchange between <Plato> vs <RookFile> which of course is in clear violation of <CG rule 3: No personal attacks against other users>> We just removed the bulk of that argument, not entirely due to rule #3 (the debate was kept mostly civil), but rather because only a few of the comments referred to this specific game. If anybody wants to argue the relative merits of Paul Morphy and Wilhelm Steinitz they should use their respective player pages.
Premium Chessgames Member
  playground player: Steinitz could lose pretty ugly; in fact, I can't think of another champion who looked so bad when he lost. For a Steinitz loss that makes this game look like a masterpiece, see Steinitz vs. Jeney, Steinitz vs E Jeney, 1860 .
Premium Chessgames Member
  Honza Cervenka: Baden-Baden was the first event where time control was used. It is possible that Steinitz's blunder in move 18 had something to do with that. Anyway this loss with Minkwitz (last with 5/16) cost Steinitz (2nd with 10,5/16 just half point behind winning Anderssen) the first prize and some 2400 francs.:-)
Jump to page #    (enter # from 1 to 3)
search thread:   
< Earlier Kibitzing  · PAGE 2 OF 3 ·  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, 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.

Featured in the Following Game Collections[what is this?]
zumakal blunders archivadas4
by zumakal
Johanes von Minckwitz (1843-1901)
from Player of the day: Notable game. by nikolaas
Vienna G. Steinitz G. Fraser-Minckwitz Def (C25) 0-1 Decoy
from yDecoy To-o, Deflection From, Remove Fredthebear by trh6upsz
Vienna G. Steinitz G. Fraser-Minckwitz Def (C25) 0-1 Decoy
from Spearheads (Batteries w/a Q) Prod Fredthebear by fredthebear
Vienna G. Steinitz G. Fraser-Minckwitz Def (C25) 0-1 Decoy
from To V or not to V?! by fredthebear
18 moves
from Chess Miniatures, Collection II by 3sun3moon
The Open Games: 1.e4 e5
by chessman95
Baden-Baden 1870
by suenteus po 147
18...? (Monday, November 5)
from POTD Vienna by takchess
Vienna G. Steinitz G. Fraser-Minckwitz Def (C25) 0-1 Decoy
from yFredthebear's Knights Add Spice III by trh6upsz
by maheshml
18...? (November 5, 2007)
from Monday Puzzles, 2004-2010 by Phony Benoni
18 negras
from Puzzle 3 by ALEXIN
from Great masters losing by WhiteRook48

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 2001-2020, Chessgames Services LLC