chessgames.com
Members · Prefs · Laboratory · Collections · Openings · Endgames · Sacrifices · History · Search Kibitzing · Kibitzer's Café · Chessforums · Tournament Index · Players · Kibitzing
Carl Schlechter vs Emanuel Lasker
London (1899), London ENG, rd 30, Jul-10
Italian Game: Classical Variation. Greco Gambit Moeller-Therkatz Attack (C54)  ·  0-1

8
7
6
5
4
3
2
a
1
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
White to move.
ANALYSIS [x]
Notes by Stockfish 9 v010218 (minimum 6s/ply)11...O-O was played in Fritz vs Anand, 1999 (0-1) 12.Qxc4 d6 13.Nd4 O-O 14.Re1 a6 15.Ne6 b5 16.Qc6 Bxe6 = -0.18 (31 ply)-+ -3.07 (28 ply)23.Rxa8 Bxa8 24.Rxa8 Rxh7 25.dxc6 a5 26.cxd7 Rxd7 27.h4 -+ -4.19 (25 ply)0-1

rnbqkbnr/pppppppp/8/8/8/8/PPPPPPPP/RNBQKBNR w KQkq - 0 1
FEN COPIED

Click Here to play Guess-the-Move
Given 21 times; par: 27 [what's this?]

Annotations by Stockfish (Computer).      [35437 more games annotated by Stockfish]

explore this opening
find similar games 18 more Schlechter/Lasker games
PGN: download | view | print Help: general | java-troubleshooting

TIP: To access more information about the players (more games, favorite openings, statistics, sometimes a biography and photograph), click their highlighted names at the top of this page.

PGN Viewer:  What is this?
For help with this chess viewer, please see the Olga Chess Viewer Quickstart Guide.
PREMIUM MEMBERS CAN REQUEST COMPUTER ANALYSIS [more info]

THIS IS A COMPUTER ANNOTATED SCORE.   [CLICK HERE] FOR ORIGINAL.

Kibitzer's Corner
Apr-12-05  aw1988: Lasker tears Schlechter to shreds.
Apr-12-05  AgentRgent: Schlechter later returned the favor: Schlechter vs Lasker, 1904
Apr-12-05
Premium Chessgames Member
  TheAlchemist: <aw1988> Yes, it was great defence by Lasker, but it is mostly Schlechter's terrible 12.Bg5? that decides the match. After 12.Qc4 it would have been a fairly even game.

I would like to point out an interesting variation:

11...Ncd6 12.Qxg7 Qf6 13.Qxf6 Nxf6 14.Re1+ Kf8 15.Bh6+ Kg8 16.Re5 Nfe4 17.Re1 and white is winning! It is better to give back the piece with 14...Nfe4 15.Nd2 f5 16.f3 etc.

Apr-12-05  Shams: what about simply 9.bxc3 0-0 10.d5 and white has the bishop pair plus a lead in development for his pawn? looks plenty good enough to me.
Apr-12-05
Premium Chessgames Member
  TheAlchemist: <shams> 9.d5 is very tricky and I think is considered to be white's best chance to fight for the advantage. After 9.bxc3 d5 10.Bd3 O-O black equalizes without much problem and is up a pawn.
Apr-12-05  Calli: Schlechter eventually learn to play the Piano Schlechter vs Meitner, 1899
Jun-02-08
Premium Chessgames Member
  keypusher: <Shams> Lasker, scourge of gambits, had driven 9. bxc3 permanently out of circulation three years before: Steinitz vs Lasker, 1896.
Aug-25-08  dwavechess: 18/21, 86% coincidence with rybka 2.3.2 at 14 ply forwards 1 cpu w32 for lasker! Very high agreement.
Aug-25-08  dwavechess: Seems much better opening for lasker
Sep-11-08  dwavechess: 68%, much less using Rybka 3 w32 at 3 minutes per move for Lasker
Oct-24-08
Premium Chessgames Member
  keypusher: <TheAlchemist: <aw1988> Yes, it was great defence by Lasker, but it is mostly Schlechter's terrible 12.Bg5? that decides the match. After 12.Qc4 it would have been a fairly even game.>

Apparently 12. Bg5 was Moeller's recommended continuation. They didn't have engines for blunder-checking in those days!

May-30-17
Premium Chessgames Member
  KEG: There is not much to say about this game. 12. Bg5? loses a piece and the game, even if it was a recommended continuation before Lasker's refutation of the move in this game.

As TheAlchemist correctly notes, 12. QxN(c4) would have led to an approximately equal game.

I do not care for 9. bxB as recommended by Shams, since 9...d5 gives Black a firm stake in the center--in addition to his pawn plus--and thus much the better game.

As dwavechess has demonstrated, Lasker's play here was nearly flawless. The closest thing I have to an "improvement" on Lasker's play is that 11...0-0 was probably better than Lasker's 11...f5.

With this loss, Schlechter wound up in 5th place. Had he managed to defeat Lasker in this game, he would have tied for second with Pillsbury, Janowski, and Maroczy.

Lasker didn't need the win. He had clinched first place three rounds earlier.

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.
  8. Do not degrade Chessgames or any of it's staff/volunteers.

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 game 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 Chessgames.com, its employees, or sponsors.
All moderator actions taken are ultimately at the sole discretion of the administration.

This game is type: CLASSICAL. Please report incorrect or missing information by submitting a correction slip to help us improve the quality of our content.

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 2001-2025, Chessgames Services LLC