Members · Prefs · Laboratory · Collections · Openings · Endgames · Sacrifices · History · Search Kibitzing · Kibitzer's Café · Chessforums · Tournament Index · Players · Kibitzing
Carl Schlechter vs Richard Teichmann
Hastings (1895), Hastings ENG, rd 7, Aug-13
Spanish Game: Morphy Defense. Modern Steinitz Defense (C71)  ·  1/2-1/2



Annotations by Siegbert Tarrasch.      [16 more games annotated by Tarrasch]

Get this game explained with Decode Chess
explore this opening
find similar games 28 more Schlechter/Teichmann games
PGN: download | view | print Help: general | java-troubleshooting

TIP: Games that have been used in game collections will have a section at the bottom which shows collections which include it. For more information, see "What are Game Collections?" on our Help Page.

PGN Viewer:  What is this?
For help with this chess viewer, please see the Olga Chess Viewer Quickstart Guide.

Kibitzer's Corner
Jul-23-09  Knight13: <White might better perhaps have waited with this and the following move till he was obliged ; Qd3, Rad1, and Rfe1 seem to be correct.> I agree, but what Schlechter played was equally good.

<Ne2, f4, and e6 seems stronger.> Tarrash should've put this note on move 20...f5 explaining that the move ...f5? weakens the e6 square and thus Ne2, f4, e6 is effective. But Schletcher is infamous for being the positionally beaten player in many chess books so him not seeing that maneuvre is to be understood.

Jul-23-09  visayanbraindoctor: <But Schletcher is infamous for being the positionally beaten player in many chess books so him not seeing that maneuvre is to be understood.>

That's strange. It's a very common occurrence to see Knights being maneuvered to such an outpost, even by patzers. I would think players of super GM caliber such as Schlechter or Teichmann would NOT have missed that in serious tournament play OTB. Rather Schlechter may have been afraid of such moves as Qg5 which would have prevented a Knight jump to f4 and e6. Maybe some one with a computer engine can help..

Premium Chessgames Member
  keypusher: <visayanbraindoctor>

Pay knight 13 no mind. As you surely know Schlechter was one of the best positional players of his time.

Jul-24-09  Knight13: Of course, he was so good at positional chess that chess authors decides to ignore his positional wins in chess games and also was so good that he thought the Ne2-f4-e6 was waaaaayyyy too weak for his level of positional understanding.
Jul-24-09  Knight13: K I admit was stepping over the boundary with <so him not seeing that maneuvre is to be understood> but what I said before that is all true.

So, Mr. pusherkey, I guess you were on the far right and I was on the far left......

Jul-24-09  visayanbraindoctor: If 21. Ne2 and Black replies Qg5.. What then? White cannot jump his Knight to f4. The White Knight will never reach e6. Black now has the simple plan of doubling his Rooks on the open e-file with options to pawn-storm the White Kingside.
Jul-24-09  visayanbraindoctor: IMO Schlechter did the right thing. The position called for neutralizing a possible Black initiative down the open e-file. By liquidating Rooks, Schlechter killed any Black hopes for an attack. I do not think this game is an example of Schlechter being a bad positional player.
Premium Chessgames Member
  keypusher: As for you, young <knight13>, I am going to commend Schlechter vs W John, 1905 and Schlechter vs F J Lee, 1899 as examples of Mr. Schlechter's positional play.

Not that he was any slouch as a tactician either.

Schlechter vs Meitner, 1898

B Fleissig vs Schlechter, 1895

Premium Chessgames Member
  Gypsy: <Ne2, f4, and e6 seems stronger.>

Translating Tarrasch's advice into moves (no engine) in a straight forward manner, we get variations like this one:

21.Ne2 Qg5 22.g3 Qe3+ 23.Qxe3 Rxe3 24.Nf4 Rxe1 25.Rxe1 Kf6 26.Ne6 Rc8 ...

click for larger view

Tarrasch had a genius for converting spatial advantages. But this position looks more like it will peter out. Let's say,

27.f4 h6 28.Kf2 Nf8 29.c4 Nxe6 30.Rxe6+ Kf7 31.Ke3 Re8 32.Rxe8 Kxe8 33.Kd3 Kd7 34.Kc3 c6 35.b4 cxd5 36.cxd5 cxb4 37.Kxb4 Kc7 38.Ka5 Kb7 ...

Jul-26-09  visayanbraindoctor: <Gypsy> That's right. Even if White manages to get the Knight to e6, a Nf8 would immediately neutralize it. I was even thinking that perhaps Black can find a way to just double his rooks, and start pushing his h-pawn without exchanging Queens; and post his Knight at Nf8 if White ever plays Nf4 so that the White Knight can't get to e6 at all.

There is absolutely no doubt that super GM caliber players like Schlechter and Teichmann would have seen your line above, and other lines as well, and over the board decided that the game was already drawish; so why not get it over with. It wasn't Tarrasch who was playing the game after all. Perhaps Tarrasch could have tried his recommendation, but the game would probably have been drawn in short order anyway. Or if it were Tarrasch who was playing one side, he could have done what Schlechter and Teichmann did anyway.

Premium Chessgames Member
  tamar: Horace Cheshire expressed mild displeasure with Schlechter's drawing tendencies in his bio

<"He rarely loses a game, but is inclined to miss the just rewards of his labors by lapsing into a draw.">

Here it is not clear he missed any such just reward, and even Tarrasch refrains from saying anything about a win, just that Ne2-f4-e6 was a stronger plan.

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 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, 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.

Featured in the Following Game Collections[what is this?]
Spanish, Morphy Def. Modern Steinitz Def(C71) 1/2-1/2SeeNotes
from Deep Six Defenses to the Bottom of the Sea by fredthebear
Notes by Dr. Tarrasch
from Annotations e4 Various Authorities & Fredthebear by fredthebear
Tarrasch notes
by macaoui
Hastings 1895
by Benzol
Notes by Dr. Tarrasch
from Annotations e4 Various Authorities & Fredthebear by mneuwirth
from lazintata's_spanish_2 by lazintata
Hastings 1895
by JoseTigranTalFischer
Notes by Dr. Tarrasch
from Annotations e4 Various Authorities & Fredthebear by Patca63

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