Playing White was D.T. Phillips. The game was played in a simultaneous exhibition in Chicago, IL on 01/07/1899.

This simultaneous exhibition was unusual in that Pillsbury played both chess and checkers.

His score at chess was +20 -2 =5 and his score at checkers was +7 -1 =2.

Your eyes just got pwned!

Ever tried. Ever failed. No matter.

Try Again. Fail again. Fail better.

After 18 Be3, Stockfish recommends g5 (19 Be4 gxf4 20 Bx f4 Bg5 21 Qc2 Bxf4 22 Bxh7 ch Kg7 23Rx f4 Qh4) for an evaluation of -2.42

The game move b6 evaluates to -0.8

After 20 Bc2 Stockfish recommends Nh6 (-1) instead of a5(-0.44)

After 21 Rf3, g6 is -1.2, while Nh8 is 0.

Black gets a reprieve, 22 g5 stays at 0, but Rh3 brings the score to -1.24

After 27 a3, the score would be -1.73 if black plays R5f7; R8f7 sets white to +0.15

After 28 b4, white is at 0 if black plays Na4; but after Nb7, the score is 0.8

The losing move should have been the 29th; after Bd4 white would be 0.8, but Bd2 gives black another chance. 29 c5 is evaluated at 0.08; the 'initial' losing move is Qe8 (3.45).

Whiteshark's 37 Bc3 is crushing, (7.38)although the actual g6 is still 2.79

Once again, white lets black back into the game with 39 Qf5 (1.32); Rh3 evaluates at 3.18.

Well, let me just say that Pillsbury hero worshippers definitively shouldn't take a closer look at his game. He doesn't lose because Mr. Phillips is an unsung genius which I had kinda hoped for. No, Pillsbury loses because he blunders just a bit more than Phillips -- but both guys' playing is highly flawed.

Up to move 27, the mistakes and inaccuracies are evenly distributed, so Pillsbury keeps his 3-point advantage despite <14...Bxe4??> and <15...Nf6?>, because here Phillips misses <16.Bf5! 0-0 17.g4 Ne8 18.g5 g6 19.Be6 Ng7> (D) which would have equalized.

click for larger view

Then the mistakes go back and until forth Black's move 26, when he begins a series of bad moves after which Phillips, even though he isn't accurate here himself, is actually winning by move 30 (+4.5). It would have been essential for Pillsbury to create some kind of counterplay, but he's just completely passive throughout the whole game, and he's no Steinitz :)

And so, even though Phillips plays quite weakly and goes on to nearly blunder his advantage with <37.g6??> (<37.Bc3!> would indeed have won) and <39.Qf5?>, Pillsbury misses <40...Qa1+! 41.Kg2 Qb2 42.Rd3 axb4 43.axb4 Qc2> (D), which would have thrown a nice little wrench into White's attack.

click for larger view

Those players were few and far between then, given that the likes of Staunton et al who dared respond to 1.e4 with anything other than 1....e5 were thought of as being lower than whale shyte and unchivalrous.

<....and second, they sucked at defending (cf. pretty much everyone, starting with MacDonnell 1834).>