< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2 OF 2 ·
|Nov-23-05|| ||Chopin: I guess even the best blunder.|
|Nov-23-05|| ||syracrophy: In the slav defense, its premature the move ...Bf5?, because it unprotects the b7-pawn. You can see the game Torre-Beihoff, Moscu, 1925: 1.d4 d5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.c4 c6 2.Nc3 Bf5? 3.cxd5! cxd5 4.Qb3! and the black has problems because of the b7-pawn hanging, and 4...Qc8, in my opinion, its premature. So, in the slav defense, avoid playing ...Bf5?, to get rid of problems with the b7-pawn|
|Nov-24-05|| ||EmperorAtahualpa: Why not 4...b6?|
|Sep-07-06|| ||KOCCMOHAYT: wait a secound, this can't be lasker|
|Sep-07-06|| ||technical draw: Yes it Kann.|
|Sep-07-06|| ||Benzol: <KOCCMOHAYT> It is Lasker but this loss didn't stop him from finishing 1st= with his brother Berthold. Caro was 3rd= with Scheve.|
|Sep-08-06|| ||syracrophy: After 14...Kf6 15.Nd7+ and "good night, Lasker"|
|Dec-15-06|| ||Achilles87: 14 Nc8 absolutely slaughtered Lasker|
|Nov-30-07|| ||FSR: I was inspired by this game when I played the following blitz game on playchess.com: 1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.Nc3 Bf5?! 4.Qb3! Qc7 5.Bf4! (disdaining the free pawn) Qd7 6.e3 Nf6 7.Nf3 Nh5 8.Ne5 Qc8 9.cxd5 Nxf4? 10.dxc6! Be6 11.cxb7! 1-0|
|Jul-13-08|| ||micartouse: A practical opening trap - one of those that does come up. A master who plays 1. d4 on every board in a simul can expect somebody to play a Slav with ... Bf5 before ... dxc4.|
|Jul-13-08|| ||RookFile: <In the slav defense, its premature the move ...Bf5?, because it unprotects the b7-pawn. You can see the game Torre-Beihoff, Moscu, 1925: 1.d4 d5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.c4 c6 2.Nc3 Bf5? 3.cxd5! cxd5 4.Qb3! and the black has problems because of the b7-pawn hanging, and 4...Qc8, in my opinion, its premature. So, in the slav defense, avoid playing ...Bf5?, to get rid of problems with the b7-pawn>|
The ...Bf5 idea is reasonable on the second move... e.g. 1. d4 d5 2. c4 Bf5. Black has had pretty good results with this. Let's say you play 3. Qb3. Black then answers with the surprising 3.... e5! and actually has a plus score in this database. Or 1. d4 d5 2. c4 Bf5 3. Nc3 e6 4. Nf3 c6 5. Qb3 Qb6 6. c5 Qc7! 7. Bf4! Qc8 8. Nh4 Nf6 is a tough nut to crack. Also, 1. d4 d5 2. c4 Bf5 3. Nc3 e6 4. Qb3 Nc6! is fine for black.
So, evidently Lasker's first inaccuracy was 3....c6 instead of 3....e6.
|Aug-29-08|| ||GrahamClayton: RookFile,
Yes, 3...e6 is correct, so that if White plays 4. Qb3 Black can respond with 4...Nc6 5. Qb7 Nb4.
8...Ra7? was the losing move. Lasker should have played 8..Nd7 9. Rc1 Qd8, which would have lasted slightly longer.
|Sep-02-08|| ||GrahamClayton: Source: Andy Soltis "Chess Lists", 2nd edition, McFarland Publishing, 2002|
|Dec-15-12|| ||SeanAzarin: According to my sourcebook, the fatal mistake was 4... Q-B1. 4... Q-N3 instead would have left Lasker with a quite playable game.|
|Dec-29-12|| ||FSR: Caro Can.|
|Dec-29-12|| ||12.12.12: black's last move shows he does not know what's going on on the board.|
|Dec-29-12|| ||DanielBryant: <12.12.12> What alternative are you proposing?|
|Dec-29-12|| ||FSR: <12.12.12: black's last move shows he does not know what's going on on the board.>|
Black was already in difficulties after 3...c6? (3...e6! 4.Qb3 Nc6!), lost after 7...a6?, and dead lost after 8...Ra7? He had no chance of survival at any time after that. Incidentally, note the possibility 3...c6 4.Qb3 Qb6 (rather than Lasker's 4...Qc8) 5.cxd5 Qxb3? 6.axb3 Bxb1 7.dxc6! Be4?? 8.Rxa7!! Rxa7 9.c7 1-0, a cousin of Schlechter vs J Perlis, 1911.
|Dec-29-12|| ||waustad: Lasker got pancaked.|
|Aug-09-14|| ||kevin86: Lasker gets syrupped.|
|Oct-13-14|| ||joddon: who the heck plays ra7 and a6 in a position like this......was Lasker pissed drunk ...or did he forget what a gambit is...he tries playing a positional opening where lightening fails!what a loser.|
|Oct-13-14|| ||JimNorCal: A colossal defeat. Still, he eventually got better :)|
|Feb-11-15|| ||poorthylacine: Lets not forget Caro in this affair:
he did not miss even ONE heavy blow from his 7th move!!
|Jun-24-19|| ||perfidious: <JimNorCal: A colossal defeat. Still, (Lasker) eventually got better :)>|
Indeed, he eventually learnt to play a little.
|Oct-07-19|| ||FSR: Chessmetrics reckons that Lasker was already the No. 1 player in the world at the time he sustained this extremely uncharacteristic defeat, the shortest loss of his career. http://www.chessmetrics.com/cm/CM2/... He scored 5.5/6 in the rest of the tournament, tying for first with his brother Berthold.|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2 OF 2 ·