What is the provenance for this claim? <Lasker accepted, but was convinced that Tarrasch had hypnotic powers and therefore suggested to play the match from a different room.>

Second, is there any actual reliable source that might bear out such a claim, or indicate how such a claim came to arise in chess lore?

Ok now we can say that the "factual" portion of this portion of the existing <Lasker-Tarrasch 1908> intro is simply false.

<At one point, Lasker had challenged him to a match and been curtly brushed off. Because of Tarrasch's earlier snub, the two were not on speaking terms for years, which delayed any chance Tarrasch might have of playing for the title.>

See especially <Karpova's> edit info in mirror intro: Game Collection: WCC: Lasker vs Tarrasch 1908

We can now also say that the language "curtly brushed off" and "snub" is not borne out by the actual facts as unearthed so far by <Karpova>, <Sarah Beth (Batgirl)>, <TheFocus>, and <perfidious>. See also their edit info in the mirror intro.

<Ok the "snub" is becoming clearer and clearer.

We are missing this though- Hoffer reports that <the consequence was a sharp polemic in the Chess Monthly,>

with regard to <Lasker-Tarrasch 1908>, and also <Steinitz-Lasker 1894>-

<whiteshark> is currently reading a German biography of <Lasker> and a German book by Robert Huebner about <Lasker-Tarrasch 1908>: http://www.schachversand.de/e/detai..., and http://www.edition-marco-shop.de/ep...

He has promised to give us further reports on the progress of his research when he returns from a 10 day hiatus.

See part of what <whiteshark> has discovered so far in this mirror intro:

<2. Tarrasch bowed, clicked his heels, and said to Lasker "I have only three words for you, check and mate.">

On http://books.google.de/books?id=iRk... I found the 2ndary source: L Steinkohl 'Schach und Schalom. Das Schach der Juden gestern und heute', Maintal 1995, page 16

I'm a little confused- The reference (note 134 from the text) is to a book published in 1995, right?

I have two questions.

1.Why wouldn't the author cite the "check and mate" line from <Hannak> (1952)? Seems like neither this author nor the author of the Lasker Wikipedia article even bothered to check if there was an earlier instance of this anecdote.

2. If the citation is from the 1995 book, this certainly isn't promising, as you say. This would just be the same line (true or legendary) being reprinted again, as so many of them are.

I think that the 1952 account by <Hannak> cannot be used unless we find out where he got that from. Hannak never sourced it, but not sourcing was the norm in chess history writing, and still is, outside of MacFarland publications.

Did he find it reported in a journal or newspaper story dated from 1908?

On the other hand, I doubt Hannak just made up the anecdote. He must have heard it or read it somewhere from somebody.

So until we find an earlier instance, and solve the mystery, we can't say "Tarrasch never said that."

But neither should we say "Tarrasch said that" or "Tarrasch probably said that" or "Tarrasch might have said that" and insert the anecdote in yet another historical account of the 1908 match. I wouldn't even want to say "Hannak reports that Tarrasch said..."

We don't need to disprove the quote in order to decide not to use it in our edit.

<The Oxford Companion to Chess> doesn't include this anecdote in their entries on Tarrasch or Lasker.

Also, <Leopold Hoffer> was there at the match. He was clearly an intimate, at least a chess intimate, of both players, since he had previously acted as their intermediary.

He was at the 1908 match and wrote the book about it.

If this "check and mate" anecdote was circulating at the time, you might think he'd get wind of it eh?

But he doesn't report anything like that- not that we've found so far anyways.

It seems to me we need to look at as many contemporaneous sources as we can find, especially in German.

I have some hope that the German Lasker biography <whiteshark> is currently reading will be full of contemporaneous primary source material.

Perhaps we'll learn more then.

So- I think we should keep investigating. We might even consider writing a letter to Edward Winter at <chess notes> inquiring about the earliest known published account of this anecdote.

Are Tarrasch's "answers" to the questions things he actually said that are actually sourced to these notes?

<[1] S. Tarrasch: „Das Champion-Turnier zu Ostende im Jahre 1907“, 1907, S. 9.

[2] S. Tarrasch: „Dreihundert Schachpartien“, 1925, S. 92

[3] S. Tarrasch: „Dreihundert Schachpartien“, 1925, S. 21

[4] S. Tarrasch: „Das Champion-Turnier zu Ostende im Jahre 1907“, 1907, S. 12.

[5] S. Tarrasch: „Tarrasch's Schachzeitung“, Dez. 1932, S. 66

[6] S. Tarrasch: „Der Schachwettkampf Lasker-Tarrasch um die Weltmeisterschaft im August-September 1908“, 1908, S. 113

[7] S. Tarrasch: „Tarrasch's Schachzeitung“, Okt. 1932, S. 2

[8] S. Tarrasch: „Der Schachwettkampf Lasker-Tarrasch um die Weltmeisterschaft im August-September 1908“, 1908, S. 5

[9] S. Tarrasch: „Dreihundert Schachpartien“, 1925, S. 247

[10] S. Tarrasch: „Der Schachwettkampf Lasker-Tarrasch um die Weltmeisterschaft im August-September 1908“, 1908, S. 112

[11] S. Tarrasch: „Tarrasch's Schachzeitung“, Jan. 1933, S. 114-115

[12] S. Tarrasch: Übersetzung einer Antwort in einem Fragebogen der „Chess Review“, 1935

[13] S. Tarrasch: „Das Schachspiel“, 1931, S. 4

Not necessary, see C.N. 5707 though he didn't get further than Hannak. An update in C.N. 5719 was a variation used by Saint-Amant on page 40 of 'Le Palamède', 1845 (dispute with Staunton - was there anybody who did not have a dispute with him??):

<Le mot 'Echec', et clui plus heureux de 'mat', sont les seuls que desormais nous puissions employer l'un vis-a-vis de l'autre.>

Link: http://www.chesshistory.com/winter/...

Hmm it seems Edward Winter has already looked into this matter and not posted anything further than what we've found. He's conflated his account with an investigation of the "sea air" matter:

Chessnote 5707:

<5707. Tarrasch and Lasker

From an interview with Helmut Pfleger on page 98 of the 5/2008 New in Chess:

‘What is the best chess truth you ever heard?

What Siegbert Tarrasch said to Emanuel Lasker before their world championship match in Düsseldorf 1908: “For you, Dr Lasker, I have only three words: ‘Schach und Matt!’” Then he lost horribly, excusing himself partly because of the sea climate there.’

How far back can the ‘Schach und Matt’ story be traced? It appeared on page 118 of Emanuel Lasker Biographie eines Schachweltmeisters by J. Hannak (Berlin-Frohnau, 1952):

Photo: http://www.chesshistory.com/winter/...

Below is the English version, from page 130 of Hannak’s Emanuel Lasker The Life of a Chess Master (London, 1959):

Photo: http://www.chesshistory.com/winter/...

The ‘sea air’ matter was discussed on pages 188-189 of Chess Explorations and in C.N. 5517. We wonder whether Tarrasch gave any further explanation or apology for his claim to have been affected by the sea air in Düsseldorf, which is roughly 180 kilometres from the coast.

Below is a report on page 289 of the September 1908 Deutsche Schachzeitung.

Photo: http://www.chesshistory.com/winter/...>.

This might be a dead letter for us.

All right we can consider this "case closed" then?

The report from <New Yorker Staatszeitung> is reprinted on pages 100 ff. of the 1907 'Wiener Schachzeitung' with some interesting details:

The first game was played at the 'Thomas-Jesserson-building [sic], Court Square, Brooklyn.

Seconds were E. Clarke and E. W. Libaire and Libaire won the drawing so Marshall had White in game 1 (so apparently, Clarke was Dr. Lasker's and Libaire Marshall's second).

The arbiters were Prof. Rice and Herbert J. Watson.

<[1] p. 96, 1907 'Wiener Schachzeitung' (or even better if anyone has access, Dr. Lasker's original from 'Lasker's Chess Magazine' 1906 on chessmasters of the past and presence)

Dr. Lasker discusses WC candidates and considers only Dr. Tarrasch and Maroczy worthy challengers. The only other one mentioned was Schlechter whom had the capability but lacked something demoniacal (<so wenig Dämonisches an sich hat>) though ultimately he would put up the greatest fight from all of them. Marshall is not mentioned at all, despite the fact that this article was written only a year before the match.>

Puzzling:

<Janowski's relative success in these matches, combined with his financial backing, was enough impetus for Lasker to put his title on the line for the third time in a little over a year. It would be another 11 years before another world championship match would take place.>

Game Collection: WCC: Lasker vs Janowski 1910

Your EDIT seems unambiguous so I just went ahead and changed the mirro intro:

Original version: <Janowski's relative success in these matches, combined with his financial backing, was enough impetus for Lasker to put his title on the line for the third time in a little over a year. >

Edited version: <Janowski's relative success in the first exhibition match, combined with his financial backing, was enough impetus for Lasker to put his title on the line.>