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

Rezso Charousek
Number of games in database: 264
Years covered: 1890 to 1899

Overall record: +170 -40 =39 (76.1%)*
   * Overall winning percentage = (wins+draws/2) / total games in the database. 15 exhibition games, blitz/rapid, odds games, etc. are excluded from this statistic.

With the White pieces:
 King's Gambit Declined (19) 
    C30 C32 C31
 King's Gambit Accepted (18) 
    C33 C37 C36 C34 C39
 French Defense (18) 
    C13 C14 C11 C01
 Giuoco Piano (11) 
    C50 C53
 Evans Gambit (10) 
    C51 C52
 French (10) 
    C13 C11
With the Black pieces:
 Ruy Lopez (35) 
    C60 C67 C77 C68 C78
 Giuoco Piano (10) 
    C50 C53
 Two Knights (9) 
    C55 C59 C58
 Sicilian (7) 
    B40 B45 B20 B30
 King's Pawn Game (6) 
    C20 C44
 Evans Gambit (5) 
    C51 C52
Repertoire Explorer

NOTABLE GAMES: [what is this?]
   Charousek vs J Wollner, 1893 1-0
   Charousek vs Englander, 1894 1-0
   Maroczy vs Charousek, 1896 0-1
   D Hermann vs Charousek, 1896 0-1
   Charousek vs J Wollner, 1895 1-0
   Charousek vs Lasker, 1896 1-0
   Charousek vs K Schneider, 1891 1-0
   Charousek vs Pillsbury, 1896 1-0
   Charousek vs G Exner, 1897 1-0
   Charousek vs Chigorin, 1896 1-0

NOTABLE TOURNAMENTS: [what is this?]
   11th DSB Kongress, Cologne (1898)
   Berlin (1897)
   Budapest (1896)
   Nuremberg (1896)

GAME COLLECTIONS: [what is this?]
   Charousek Comets by chocobonbon
   Anderssen - Blackburne - Charousek - Fredthebear by fredthebear
   Rudolf Rezso Charousek by wanabe2000
   Budapest 1896 by suenteus po 147

Search Sacrifice Explorer for Rezso Charousek
Search Google for Rezso Charousek

(born Sep-19-1873, died Apr-18-1900, 26 years old) Hungary
[what is this?]

Rezső (Rudolf) Charousek was born in Prague. He learned to play chess in his early teenage years, and his international debut came at the Nuremberg Tournament of 1896. Although he failed to win a prize, he defeated World Champion Emanuel Lasker in their individual encounter. Later that year he tied Mikhail Chigorin for first place at Budapest, and then took clear first place in the Berlin tournament of 1897. After these and other successes, Lasker remarked, "I shall have to play a championship match with this man someday." This did not happen, however, due to Charousek's death from tuberculosis on April 18, 1900, at the age of twenty-six.

User: jessicafischerqueen's YouTube documentary of Charousek:

Wikipedia article: Rudolf Charousek

Wikipedia article: Charousek Rezső

Last updated: 2021-04-25 04:58:09

 page 1 of 11; games 1-25 of 264  PGN Download
Game  ResultMoves YearEvent/LocaleOpening
1. K Schneider vs Charousek  0-1341890Charousek blindfold gameC27 Vienna Game
2. J Pap vs Charousek 0-1271890Casual gameB45 Sicilian, Taimanov
3. Charousek vs Gruenn  1-0241890Casual gameC25 Vienna
4. Charousek vs Gruenn  1-0231890Casual gameC51 Evans Gambit
5. Charousek vs J Pap  ½-½321890Casual gameC51 Evans Gambit
6. Charousek vs K Schneider  1-0211890Casual gameC37 King's Gambit Accepted
7. Truskovsky vs Charousek  0-1301890Charousek blindfold gameA82 Dutch, Staunton Gambit
8. Charousek vs K Schneider  0-1171890Charousek blindfold gameC22 Center Game
9. Charousek vs K Schneider  1-0341890Charousek blindfold gameC52 Evans Gambit
10. Charousek vs J Pap  ½-½211891Casual gameC11 French
11. Charousek vs K Schneider 1-0211891Casual gameC37 King's Gambit Accepted
12. E Kolos vs Charousek  0-1191891Casual gameC22 Center Game
13. G Kalniczky vs Charousek  1-0541891Casual gameC22 Center Game
14. Charousek vs J Pap  1-0261891Casual gameA83 Dutch, Staunton Gambit
15. Charousek vs Skultety 1-0191891Casual gameC34 King's Gambit Accepted
16. Charousek vs J Pap  ½-½301891Casual gameA80 Dutch
17. Charousek vs Englander 1-03318911891-1892 Match - EnglanderC51 Evans Gambit
18. Englander vs Charousek 0-1341892Casual gameC50 Giuoco Piano
19. Charousek vs Englander 1-0291892Casual gameC41 Philidor Defense
20. Brosztel vs Charousek 0-1211892Casual gameB30 Sicilian
21. Tyrnauer vs Charousek 0-1281892Casual gameC35 King's Gambit Accepted, Cunningham
22. A Berger vs Charousek 0-1441892Casual gameC52 Evans Gambit
23. A Berger vs Charousek 0-1231892Casual gameC39 King's Gambit Accepted
24. Englander vs Charousek  0-1201892Casual gameC53 Giuoco Piano
25. Charousek vs J Schaeffer  1-0201892Casual gameC41 Philidor Defense
 page 1 of 11; games 1-25 of 264  PGN Download
  REFINE SEARCH:   White wins (1-0) | Black wins (0-1) | Draws (1/2-1/2) | Charousek wins | Charousek loses  

Kibitzer's Corner
< Earlier Kibitzing  · PAGE 7 OF 8 ·  Later Kibitzing>
Premium Chessgames Member
  sachistu: <Telemus> I failed to go back far enough in our thread to recall your earlier response about Charousek-Exner match. It looks like our game numbers do match. However, the colors and results appear to be a different story. Hopefully, the breakdown I sent will provide an answer to the match result discrepancy.
Premium Chessgames Member
  sachistu: <Telemus> I changed game 10 (C56 1-0 in 24) back to have Charousek as White. This is how it was originally listed in my database. This now gives the 7.5 - 2.5 match result I was expecting. However, if the color assignments, results, and scores are as listed in my recent kibitz, then Charousek had White in both games 9 and 10, which seems odd. Sorry if I am adding to the confusion.
Premium Chessgames Member
  Telemus: <but if that was Charousek, it means he had White for both games 9 and 10.> That's exactly what I have. Looks suspicious.
Premium Chessgames Member
  sachistu: Thanks for the information <Jean Dufuse> However, Charuchin's data seems suspicious. First, assuming the game number is what you meant for '1' and '3', they would have had to play more than one game a day e.g. when was game 2 played? Both games 1 and 2 were 50+ moves, so it's hard to believe they would play 3 games in two days. Second, if the '10' means game 10, this is questionable as to the result, as it seems Black is winning. This would also mean the Di Felice (Chess Results) order of the games is wrong.
Premium Chessgames Member
  Telemus: <JD> And I obviously missed the chapter "Uncommented Games" ...

For me it's high time to stop with Charousek and do something else.

Nov-18-18  zanzibar: <<Telemus> For me it's high time to stop with Charousek and do something else.>

It was good while it lasted!

Premium Chessgames Member
  Jean Defuse: ...

<zanzibar> ;-)

<sachistu> <Game 10> played in the Budapest match befor - <Game 6 is> in reality <Game 10> (result 1/2) & <Game 6> of the match <is unknown>...

(... I can upload my Charousek books - if it is of interest...)


Premium Chessgames Member
  sachistu: Hi <Jean Defuse>. Have been occupied elsewhere the past couple of days. Sorry to see <Telemus> is dropping out. Regarding your message of Nov 19... it would help if you could briefly identify a little more about the games you listed e.g. ECO code, result, and who was White or Black. This would help in trying to resolve the match results. Thanks!

re: your offer to upload your Charousek books... I'm always interested in new material and locating additional sources. However, that sounds like a lot of volume. To what location were you thinking of uploading the materiel?

Premium Chessgames Member
  Telemus: There is a pawn ending from a game Charousek vs Kosterka (simul, Prague 1897), which for example can be found in Awerbach's "Bauernendspiele":

click for larger view

The usual solution (due to Dr.Josef Kvicala and Jan Kvicala from Prague, published in "Ceske listy sachove" 1897, pages 49-51) starts with 1.♔e4 ♔e8 2.♔f3 and has as one of its variations 2.. ♔d7 3.♔g3, all with more or less exclamation marks. But tablebases show that these eccentric manoeuvres have less surprising alternatives I understood more easily.

Premium Chessgames Member
  Jean Defuse: ...

Yuri Averbakh:

This interesting position was saved from oblivion by Dedrle (1950). It was reached in a simultaneous display, and after unsuccessful attempts to win, Charousek agreed to a draw. But analysis by Josef and Johann Kvicala demonstrated the possibility of a win.

<1. Ke4!> With the key squares being c6, d6 and e6, the main file is the d-file. If White's chances lay only in taking the opposition on the main file, he would be unable to achieve anything. He wins only by combining this threat with the appropriate preparation of h3-h4.

<Ke8! 2. Kf3!> Now Black is in dilemma: after 2... Ke7 he loses the opposition, while if 2... Kf7 or 2... Kd7, White succeeds in playing h3-h4.

For example:

2... Kf7 3. h4! (with the threat of 4. h5; with the king at e7 or d7 this does not work due to 3... gh 4. g5 Kd6 and 5... Ke5, but now the king does not have the e6 square) gxh4 4. g5 Ke7 5. Kg4 Kd6 6. Kxh4 Ke5 7. Kg4 Kd6 8. Kf4 and 9. g6

2... Kd7 (the king is now so far away that White has time for a necessary preparatory move) 3. Kg3! Ke7 4. h4 gxh4+ 5. Kxh4 Kf6 (otherwise 6. Kg5) 6. Kh5 and wins.

<2... Ke7 3. Ke3 Kd7 4. Kd3 Ke7 5. Kc4 Kd8 6. Kd4 Ke8 7. Kc5 Kd7 8. Kd5 Ke7 9. Kc6> 9. Ke5 (this is quicker than Kf7) <9... Kf6 10. Kd6 Kf7 11. Kd7 Kf8 12. Ke6 Ke8 13. f6 g6 14.f7+ Kf8 15. Kd6! Kxf7 16. Kd7> winning. A valuable analysis!


Premium Chessgames Member
  Telemus: <JD> English edition?
Premium Chessgames Member
  Jean Defuse: ...

<Telemus> Averbakh's analysis above is from a digital edition (by Convekta) of 'Comprehensive Chess Endings', with minimal difference to the original book - 'Pawn Endings', p. 171-172(Batsford; First edition, 1974).


Charousek's opponent in the simul on the Prague Chess Club (22.2.1897) was probably the little know Problem composer <Zdeněk Kosterka> ...?

The following miniature is missing in Kalendovsky's book 'The Complete Games of Oldrich Duras':

[Event "CSpS"]
[Site "Prague"]
[Date "1902.??.??"]
[White "Kosterka"]
[Black "Duras, Oldrich"]
[Result "1-0"]
[ECO "C33"]

1. e4 e5 2. f4 exf4 3. Bc4 d5 4. Bxd5 Qh4+ 5. Kf1 g5 6. Nf3 Qh5 7. h4 Bg7 8. Nc3 Ne7 9. d4 Nbc6 10. Bxc6+ Nxc6 11. d5 Bxc3 12. bxc3 Ne5 13. Ba3 Bg4 14. Qd4 Nxf3 15. gxf3 Bxf3 16. Qe5+ Kd7 17. Qe7+ Kc8 18. d6 1-0


Premium Chessgames Member
  Jean Defuse: ...

'More from Prague'

Simultaneous games:

(Charousek scored +20 -1 =7)

Charousek vs K Vocasek, 1897 (Source: Ceske listy sachove 1897, p. 38-39.)


[Event "28-board simultaneous display"]
[Site "Prague, CC"]
[Date "1897.02.22"]
[White "Charousek, Rudolf Rezso"]
[Black "Popov, A."]
[Result "1-0"]
[ECO "C29"]

1. e4 e5 2. Nc3 Nf6 3. f4 d5 4. fxe5 Nxe4 5. Qf3 $1 Nxc3 6. dxc3 c6 7. Bd3 Qb6 8. Ne2 Be6 9. Nd4 Nd7 10. Nxe6 fxe6 11. Qh5+ Kd8 12. Bg5+ Kc7 13. O-O-O Bc5 14. Rhf1 g6 15. Qh3 h6 16. Bf6 Rae8 $2 17. Bxh8 Rxh8 18. Rf7 $1 1-0

Source: Svetozor 5.3.1897


Exhibition games:

Svejda/Kotrc/Kvicala v Charousek/Moucka/Tuzar

(Kotrc / Kvicala / Svedja vs Charousek, 1897 - <missing Charousek's allies>)

Source: Charuchin - Chess Comet Rudolf Charousek, p. 214.


[Event "Prague"]
[Date "1897.02.19"]
[White "Kotrc, Jan"]
[Black "Charousek, Rudolf Rezso"]
[Result "1/2-1/2"]
[ECO "C66"]

1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5 d6 4. d4 Bd7 5. Nc3 Nf6 6. Bg5 Be7 7. O-O a6 8. Ba4 O-O 9. a3 b5 10. Bb3 Bg4 11. Bxf6 gxf6 12. Ne2 Bxf3 13. gxf3 Qd7 14. Bd5 Kh8 15. Bxc6 Qxc6 16. Ng3 Rg8 17. Kh1 Rg5 18. d5 Qd7 19. Nf5 Rag8 20. Qd3 Bf8 21. Rg1 R5g6 22. Rg3 Bh6 23. Nxh6 Rxh6 24. Rag1 Rhg6 25. Qe3 f5 26. Rxg6 Rxg6 27. Rxg6 f4 28. Qa7 hxg6 29. Kg2 f5 30. Qxa6 fxe4 31. fxe4 Qg4+ 32. Kf1 Qd1+ 33. Kg2 Qxc2 34. Qxb5 Qxe4+ 35. f3 Qc2+ 36. Kh3 Qf5+ 37. Kg2 Kg7 38. Qe8 1/2-1/2

Source: Jan Kotrč - Aus meiner Mappe, Arbeiter Schachzeitung - Wien, 1927, No. 3, p. 73.


See: Jan Kalendovsky - Historie šachu v Čechách, p. 49-50 (


Nov-29-18  Straclonoor: <There is a pawn ending from a game Charousek vs Kosterka (simul, Prague 1897)>

Lomonosov TB7 gives

1. Ke4 Ke8 2. Ke3 Kd7 3. Kd3 Kc7 4. Ke4 Kd6 5. Kd4 Ke7 6. Kc5 Kd7 7. Kd5 Ke7 8. Kc6 Ke8 9. Kd6 Kf7 10. Kd7 Kf8 11. Ke6 Ke8 12. f6 g6 13. f7+ Kf8 14. Kd6 Kxf7 15. Kd7 Kf6 16. Ke8 Kg7 17. Ke7 Kh7 18. Kf7 Kh6 19. Kf6 Kh7 20. Kxg5 Kg7 21. h4 Kf7 22. Kh6 Kf6 23. g5+ Kf5 24. Kh7 Ke5 25. Kxg6 Kd5 26. h5 Kc5 27. h6 Kb5 28. h7 Ka5 29. h8=Q Kb5 30. Qe5+ Kb4 31. Kf6 Ka4 32. g6 Kb4 33. g7 Ka4 34. g8=Q Kb4 35. Qgb8+ Ka4 36. Qa1#

I don't know is it only one way to win or not, but it looks different that pointed by Averbakh.

Premium Chessgames Member
  sachistu: Regarding the kibitz from Nov-27-18 <Jean Defuse> Was the date in the score (1902) a typo? The text above seems to indicate this was from a simul at Prague chess club 22.2.1897.
Premium Chessgames Member
  Jean Defuse: ...

<'Rare Charousek stuff'>

A photography with Steinitz - 'Masters analyze the Cologne games':

Source: Magyar Sakkélet, 1951 p. 225


& A chess-problem by Charousek:


Dec-23-18  Nosnibor: <sachistu> The date referred to is in respect of the Duras game and not Charousek.
Premium Chessgames Member
  Jean Defuse: ...

sorry <sachistu> I overlook your question - thanks to <Nosnibor>!


Premium Chessgames Member
  Telemus: <Straclonoor: I don't know is it only one way to win or not, but it looks different that pointed by Averbakh.>

I have hesitated months whether I should comment this. But every time I see you or some other honorable contributor posting some long variations (and that's almost every day), I am reminded of this issue.

Firstly, a single long variation from a table base (or an engine) provides limited information. Here we got confirmation that the position is indeed won, and that the distance to mate is 36. But a single line cannot describe a win, unless it is forced or it shows a winning maneuver, a crucial idea or something like that. In the given example, Black can vary at almost every move, and White has to react with different plans. So, one has to provide more than one line to describe the win.

Secondly, Averbakh is the wrong person to get any credit for the ending. According to <JD>'s quote he mentioned Dedrle and the Kvicalas, but it is unclear whether Dedrle contributed to the analysis. In the Encyclopedia of Chess Endings, where Averbakh was one of the editiors, only the Kvicalas are named. So, I assume that Dedrle's merit is just what Averbakh wrote: to save the position from oblivion (by republishing it as I assume).

I intend to return to the position and the winning plans soon.

Feb-15-19  Straclonoor: <But a single line cannot describe a win, unless it is forced or it shows a winning maneuver, a crucial idea or something like that.>

Yes, but it's best line from tablebase. Other black's vary moves goes to mate faster. It's principle of TB funcitoning. Explaining all moves in the line requires too much <long variations>. Dramatically.

<Secondly, Averbakh is the wrong person to get any credit for the ending.>

Definitely not. This position mentioned in 'Chess endings. Volume I - pawn ending' (Russian edition), edited by Averbakh. Probably you meant Derdle?

Premium Chessgames Member
  Telemus: <Straclonoor> Have you ever tried to solve real endgame studies by an engine or tablebases?! I have and therefore I know that very often the engine or tablebase lines, which minimize the damage or are the longest possible, resp., do not show any of the author's ideas and therefore they are not considered to be solutions to the studies.

In the given case, your longest line shows one idea, but it is not a complete proof. The analysis of the Kvicalas is complete, I would say, and it consists of three lines. You see, the sensible alternative to 'one line' is not 'all lines', it is 'a complete set of significant lines'.

Engines and tablebases can help to find such a set of lines, but it needs often a lot of work and experience on the human side.

When I posted the position in November, I thought that I could simplify the solution of the Kvicalas. In particular, I thought that no lines with the breakthrough h4 are needed. If you look to the line you posted, you'll see that White's king goes to d3 (while the Kvicalas move it to f3). This also suggests that lines with h4 are not necessary. Can you solve this problem? I have the answer, but the journey is the reward.

PS: <Probably you meant Derdle?> No, I meant Averbakh. I think my text shows clearly that the credit I spoke of is the authorship of the analysis. If one publishes the ending, the Kvicalas have the full credit therefore. Averbakh's presentation differs very slightly from the Czech original, but in my view it is not significantly better or worse.

Feb-18-19  Straclonoor: <Telemus>
< Have you ever tried to solve real endgame studies by an engine or tablebases?!> Yes, I have.

<Engines and tablebases can help to find such a set of lines> There is a big difference between engine and endgame tablebases analysis.

Engines give us <set of lines, but it needs often a lot of work and experience on the human side.> Tablebases gives solution with 100% certainity. Yes, we can search alternative lines in this case for example for training. In other cases it's wasting the time.

<In particular, I thought that no lines with the breakthrough h4 are needed.> Yes

<If you look to the line you posted, you'll see that White's king goes to d3 (while the Kvicalas move it to f3). This also suggests that lines with h4 are not necessary. Can you solve this problem? I have the answer, but the journey is the reward.> Lomonosov's TB7 gives three winning moves - 1.Ke4 (#36), 1.Kd4 (#36), 1.Kd3 (#37). All the rest goes to draw.

It's free of charge reward-:)))

Premium Chessgames Member
  MissScarlett: I’ve always pronounced his name <Cha-roo-sek>; now I discover it’s <Ka-roo-sek>. Disappointing!
Premium Chessgames Member
  MissScarlett: <[Event ""]
[Site ""]
[Date "????.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Rudolf Rezso Charousek"]
[Black "?"]
[Result "1-0"]

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4 d6 4.Bb5 Bd7 5.Nc3 Nf6 6.O-O Be7 7.Re1 exd4 8.Nxd4 O-O 9.Nde2 Ne5 10.Bxd7 Nfxd7 11.Ng3 Nc5 12.Be3 Qe8 13.Bxc5 dxc5 14.f4 Nc6 15.Nd5 Rd8 16.c3 Bh4 17.Nf5 Bxe1 18.Nf6+ Kh8 19.Qh5 gxf6 20.Qh6 1-0>

Anyone recognise this game? Black is given as <Konyovitz>.

Premium Chessgames Member
  Jean Defuse: ...

<MissScarlett: Anyone recognise this game?>

[Event "Budapest"]
[Date "1896.01.11"]
[White "Charousek, Rudolf Rezso"]
[Black "Konyovits, Miklos"]
[Result "1-0"]
[ECO "C66"]

Source: Magyar Sakktortenet Vol. 3, p. 53


Jump to page #    (enter # from 1 to 8)
search thread:   
< Earlier Kibitzing  · PAGE 7 OF 8 ·  Later Kibitzing>

NOTE: Create an account today to post replies and access other powerful features which are available only to registered users. Becoming a member is free, anonymous, and takes less than 1 minute! If you already have a username, then simply login login under your username now to join the discussion.

Please observe our posting guidelines:

  1. No obscene, racist, sexist, or profane language.
  2. No spamming, advertising, duplicate, or gibberish posts.
  3. No vitriolic or systematic personal attacks against other members.
  4. Nothing in violation of United States law.
  5. No cyberstalking or malicious posting of negative or private information (doxing/doxxing) of members.
  6. No trolling.
  7. The use of "sock puppet" accounts to circumvent disciplinary action taken by moderators, create a false impression of consensus or support, or stage conversations, is prohibited.

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: Please keep all discussion on-topic. This forum is for this specific player only. To discuss chess or this site in general, 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 ultimately at the sole discretion of the administration.

Spot an error? Please suggest your correction and help us eliminate database mistakes!
Home | About | Login | Logout | F.A.Q. | 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 2001-2021, Chessgames Services LLC