| Jun-09-04 | | WhoKeres: This was game 6 of the ill-fated Lasker Tarrasch WC match in 1916. The first game was drawn, then Lasker won five straight and Tarrasch abandoned the match. Tarrasch was competitive with white, but simply totally horrible with black. Can anyone provide some insight into why the second match was played, particularly from Tarrasch's point of view, since tournament results of this era didn't seem to indicate he should have got a shot at the title while more worthy players such as Capablanca, Rubinstein, and even Schlechter had to wait. I also understand that two of Tarrasch's sons had recently died, one in WW1, and one by suicide, which may have explained his poor form. |
|
| Jun-09-04 | | iron maiden: <WhoKeres> The match consisted of only six games (Tarrasch did not "abandon" it). It was also a non-title match (Lasker was not staking the WC title), and if I can remember correctly it was actually a non-profit match, with the proceeds going to a now-forgotten war charity. |
|
| Jun-09-04 | | Calli: It was not a World Championship match. There was a little thing called World War I going between 1914 and 1918. With no tournaments in Europe, Tarrasch and Lasker decided to play a match. Tragedy struck Tarrasch who lost all three of his sons 1914-1916.
A more serious loss than the match. |
|
Jan-27-06
 | | offramp: By the time of this match I suppose Tarrasch and Lasker were getting on all right. |
|
May-10-06
| | offramp: The world-record holder for a rook reaching e4 in a serious game: move 8. |
|
| May-10-06 | | percyblakeney: ...almost: Knorre vs J Minckwitz, 1880 |
|
| Aug-16-07 | | Karpova: Koltanowski also thought this was a WC match and claimed Tarrasch tried to take the title from Lasker. So Winter asked <‘When was the second time?’> as there was only one WC match (in 1908). Now it became quite funny when Schiller tried to defend Koltanowski's honour by accusing Winter of denying a match in 1916 altogether. He even called Winter <some whining lad who can’t even get the facts right.’> and went on calling him <Young Salieri>. The whole story:
http://www.chesshistory.com/winter/... |
|
| Oct-06-08 | | dwavechess: Rybka 3 agrees with 16/18 moves at min. per move with Lasker. Last 12 moves concur with Rybka. |
|
| Oct-30-08 | | ughaibu: Black rook to e4 on move 8: Capablanca vs E Corzo, 1901 |
|
| Jan-29-11 | | Llawdogg: This looks like about half of a game. May I have some more, please? |
|
| Mar-06-13 | | TheFocus: The final moves are: 18...Re8 19.Qxf7 Re7 20.Qg8+ Kd7 21.Nb6+ Kc6 22.Nxa4 Qb5 23.Qc8+ Kd6 24.b3 Qe2 25.Qc5+ Kd7 26.h3 Ke8 27.c3 Rf7 28.Rf1 Rf5 29.Qc8+ Ke7 30.Nc5 Kf7 31.Qxa6 Qe8 32.Qc4+ Kf6 33.g4 Rf4 34.g5+ 1-0 |
|
Feb-21-18
 | | keypusher: Soltis indicates the game ends after 18.Nxa8, which I assume is just an error. |
|
| Feb-15-21 | | SymphonicKnight: It is truly amazing how accurate Lasker is in these games, with Stockfish agreeing with almost every move he makes. The same cannot be said for Tarrasch, and it is clear he is not in good form here, but he was 54 by this time. His results deteriorated significantly after 1912 at the age of 50, and it was no longer justifiable to consider him a title contender (not saying that this match was for the title, because it was not), but he was a justifiable contender from about 1892 to 1912 (at least roughly comparable to everyone but Lasker.) |
|
| Feb-15-21 | | Boomie: ->
The g4-g5 flourish at the end is elegant. As Tal said "Of course the greatest of all was Lasker." |
|
Jan-17-25
 | | GrahamClayton: 15...Be7 16. Ne7 - Tarrasch has the unenviable choice of losing his queen on the e-file after 16...Qe7 17. Re1 or on the h4-d8 diagonal after 16...Ke7 17. Bg5+ f6 18. Bf6+. |
|
Kibitzing
sac: 14.Rxd5
icon.