21. fxe3

click for larger view

Tarrasch comments: <Nevertheless Black’s game was still quite good, despite the missing pawn, had Black here and later under all circumstances maintained his best piece, the knight, in its position. The knight mechanically blocked the advance of the c-pawns, and threatened, if the white knight moved, to land on e4, successfully attacking the c3-pawn and also protecting the weak f6-pawn. In short, the knight held the game, and its expulsion from its square cost it almost its entire strength in attack and defense. Black’s following rook move to d2 did no harm (although …Rd7 immediately was better), but the rook after 22. Rf2 had to retreat to d7 in any event. > This comment, cutting to the heart of the position in a few well-chosen words, shows why Tarrasch’s annotations were, and are, so highly prized. That said, suppose Black had done what Tarrasch said and taken better care of his knight on c5. Could he have held the game? I played from this position a couple of times with Fritz, and it does seems hard for White to make progress. A typical line runs 22….Rd7 23. Rfd1 Rxd1+ 24. Rxd1 Ke6 25. Rb1 Na4 26. Rb7 Rxc3 27. Rxa7 Nc5. Now the c2 pawn will fall. White has an outside passed pawn, but it’s hard to accomplish much with it with only White’s rook to help. All that can be said for certain was that something like 22.…Rd7 would have given Black far better chances for a draw than he had in the game.

22….Rd2 22. Rf2 Rcd8? 23. Rb5! <Decisive!> Rd1+ 24. Rf1 Na4 25. Ne4 <The black knight wanders and the white knight attains the crucial, just freed-up square. > 25…Nb6 26. Ra5 Nc8. <What a terrible position the knight is in now! It was better to exchange rooks with …Rd7 but Black can no longer make up lost ground.> 27. Ra5 Nb6? <Black is hard-pressed to find a decent move, with the terrible White knight combining with the invading rook to cramp his whole game. Nevertheless it was still far better to exchange rooks and then play …Rd7. Time pressure! Now a pawn is lost.>

28. Rc7+ Kf8(?) <After 28….R1d7 follows 29. Rc6 and after 28.…R8d7, 29. Rxd7+, then 30. Rxf6. The game is now lost.> Nevertheless, Fritz confirms that either rook move was stronger than the king retreat.

29. Nxf6 Rxf1+ 30. Kxf1 Kg7 31. Ng4 Rd5 32. Rxa7 h5 33. e4(!) Nicely clearing e3 for the knight. 33….Rc5. <If the rook goes to d2, 34. Ne3 defends. Here the game was adjourned for the first time.> 34. Ne3 Rxc3 35. Ke2 Nc4. <Black seeks the knight exchange; in the rook ending one can fish in troubled waters.> (e.g. 36. Nxc4 Rxc4 37. Kd3 Rd4+ 38. Ke3 Rc4.) 36. Nf5+!

click for larger view

36…..Kh8 <This retreat requires explanation. I had formed the desperate plan after Rc7 to sacrifice the knight for the pawns on c2, g2 and g2. For example, 37. Rc7 Rxc2+ 38. Kd3 Rxg2 39. Rxc4 Rxh2 with perhaps some chances. To carry out this plan, the Black king could not be on g6, because then if... Rxg2, the rook by Nh4 + is lost. But if 36….Kf6, then White can advance a pawn to h4 with tempo, e.g. 37. Nf5+ Kf6 38. h4 (threatening mate by Ra6) and now after Rc7, White still retains the strong h-pawn, while Black can no longer regain the h-pawn for his knight offer. Nor does the king stand well on g8 after Nh6+ and certainly …Kh7 is not good in light of 37. Rxf7+. So only the retreat to h8 is left.>

37. Rxf7. Tarrasch notes that White passes up the knight sacrifice. Fritz thinks 37. Rc7 and 37. Rxf7 are pretty much equivalent. 37….Rxc2+ 38. Kd3 Rc1 39. Ne3(?). White has played very accurately and powerfully to this point, but Fritz finds that he gives up a big chunk of his advantage by trading knights here. White is still winning, though.

39…Nxe3 40. Kxe3 Rc3+ 41. Kf2 Rc2+ 42. Kg3 h4+ 43. Kh3 (43. Kxh4 Rxg2 would obviously increase Black’s drawing chances.) 43….Re2 44. Rf5 Rxe4 45. Rg5(?) (More accurate here, as Tarrasch notes, is 45. Rh5+ followed by Rxh4, saving White’s a-pawn.) 45….Kh7 46. Rg4 Re3+ 47. Kxh4 Ra3 48. Kg5 Rxa2 49. Kf5 Re2

click for larger view

50. h3 Kh6 51. g3 Re3 52. h4 Kh7 53. Rg5 Re1 54. g4 Kh6.

Now Black’s last pawn falls, but after 54….e4 55. Kf4 e3 56. h5 (better than Tarrasch’s 56. Re5 e2 57. Kg5, which also wins) e2 Kf3 the pawn would be lost anyway.

55. Kf6 Kh7 56. Rxe5.

The position is now a straightforward win for White. Nevertheless Tarrasch played on to the bitter end, resigning only a few moves before mate. In the final position, Fritz gives 76….Kg7 77. Rb7+ Kh8 78. Kh6 Rg8 79. Rb8 Rxb8 80 g7#. Tarrasch’s stubbornness is understandable given that this loss put him behind 5-1 in the match, with one draw.

This game, a classic example of Dr. Lasker “winning ugly,” is not of the type that draws a lot of kibitzing. But it’s interesting to study with Dr. Tarrasch’s match book at one elbow and Fritz at the other. In the notes below Tarrasch quotes are in brackets; paraphrases, my own comments, and Fritz comments are all in plain text. On the other hand, Tarrasch’s punctuation after moves is in plain text, while mine are in parentheses.

Lasker plays the harmless 5. Bd3 against the McCutcheon, and Tarrasch reacts logically with 5…dxe4 (maybe better here is 5…c5 at once: see Marshall vs Alekhine, 1914 for an impressive example) 6. Bxe4 c5, against which Lasker plays 7. dxc5(!?!) Tarrasch cannot resist giving his opponent tripled pawns with 7…Bxc3+ 8. bxc3 Qa5. But after 9. Bxf6 gxf6 10. Qd4 e5 11. Qe3(!) White is better.

In the 9th game, Tarrasch varied with 7….Nbd7 (according to his book; cg.com gives 7….Qxd1+ first) 8. Bxf6 Nxf6 9. Bf3 Qxd1+ 10. Rxd1 Bxc5, with a slightly better position for Black. But Fritz thinks White has a clear advantage after 8. c6. If Fritz is right, then maybe 5….c5 really is better than 5….dxe4.

Fearing 12. c6, Tarrasch retreats his queen to c7, and the game continues 12. Ne2 Nd7 13. Qf3(!) Ke7!(!?) Tarrasch is proud of this move, while Fritz thinks 13…Nxc5 14. Qxf6 Rg8 15. Bxh7 Rxg2 is better.

click for larger view

I think the doctor is right. In Fritz’s line, White’s pawns couldn’t be uglier, but the h-pawn is going to be very hard for Black to deal with. After 16. Rd1 Black’s bishop can’t move because of Qh8+, while Black’s queen is tied down by the threat of Rd8#.

14. c6(!) Nc5 15. cxb7 (trading off one of his tripled pawns for Black’s b-pawn is obviously a significant achievement for White) Bxb7 16. Bxb7 Qxb7 17. Qe3

Concerning the obvious 17. Qxb7, Tarrasch writes, <If White exchanges the queens, his extra pawn won’t be of much value, and the isolated double pawns are on an open file.> I don’t understand this comment. The doubled pawns are on an open file whether White exchanges queens or not. And White’s advantage in this ending is not so much that he has an extra doubled pawn, but that his doubled pawns are passed. It will be much harder for Black to get a passed pawn of his own. For what it’s worth, Fritz’s pro-White evaluation drops significantly after 17. Qe3. Still, there is no question that the ending after 17. Qxb7 would be hard to win, and Lasker may have decided to keep the queens on for the pragmatic reason that Tarrasch might give him the opportunity to get an easier ending later. If so, this might be an example of Lasker choosing a second-best move (not a “bad” move, damn you Richard Reti) for practical reasons.

17….Rac8 18 0-0 Qe4! Having spurned the queen exchange on move 17, Lasker is offered the trade again on much less favorable terms. 19. Rab1 (threatening 20. Rb7+) Rfd8 20. Ng3

20. Qxe4 Nxe4 21. Rb7+ Rd7 22. Rxd7+ Kxd7 23. Rd1+ Ke6 24. Rd3 preserves the extra pawn, but it is very hard to see White winning the ensuing endgame.

20….Qxe3? 20…Qxc2 was much better. As Tarrasch points out in a long and anguished note, it’s not so much that …Qxc2 regains the pawn as that it wins the very useful d3 square for Black’s pieces. After 21. Qf3 (which Lasker apparently intended) Black can respond with 21….Qd3, when 22. Nf5+ Ke6 23. Ng7+ is a draw, while after 22. Qh5 Qg6 23. Qe2 (23. Qf3 Rd3) 23….Nd3 (threatening …Nf4) 24. Nh5 Kf8 both kings are vulnerable. If 25. f4 Rxc3 26. fxe5 fxe5 27. Rf6 Nf4!, while if 26. fxe5 fxe5 27. Rb7 Rc1 (28. Rxc1 Nxc1 29. Qxe5?? Rd1+ 30. Kf2 Nd3+).

Part A

1. e4 e6

After the course of the fifth game I was in completely at a loss for a defense to the Ruy Lopez <war ich der grossten Verlegenheit wegen einer Verteidigung der spanischen Partie>. Therefore, I found reason to consider the French Defense, although for many years I have had a certain mistrust of it, which I could not help. It seemed to me that the variation named after the American McCutcheon (4. Bg5 Bb4 instead of the earlier-played 4....Be7) promising, and even advantageous for Black, but this view suffered a strong blow in the eleventh game, as I will discuss later. I am no longer inclined to consider the French Defense to be correct <ich bin geneigt, die franzosische Verteidigung heute nicht mehr zu den korrekten zu zahlen>. Soon I intend to publish my detailed inquiries about it in a book: _Lectures on the French Defense_. <Anyone ever seen or heard of this book?>

2. d4 d5 3. Nc3 Nf6 4. Bg5 Bb4

I hold the defense with 4....Be7 to be totally unsatisfactory. I cannot express my views fully here, as there isn't sufficient space, but I will here say only that after 4....Be7 5. e5 Nfd7 6. Bxe7 Qxe7 7. Nb5 Nb6 8. c3, while White must first defend on the queenside, sooner or later his attack will come on the kingside -- and be decisive. The rest I must defer to the aforementioned book.

5. Bd3

This is not an advantageous continuation, as the 9th game showed.

5....dxe4

Absolutely correct; Black gives up the center, true, but also exposes the white bishop. But 5...c5 could also be played.

6. Bxe4 c5 7. dxc5

Surprising and amazing! <Uberraschend und verbluffend!> Lasker permits an isolated tripled pawn! But this is utterly correct. If I had better heeded my own teaching, I would not not have taken the bishop. I have often emphasized my view that good positions for the pieces matter much more than that of the pawns. "I am a devil-may-care with an isolated doubled pawn" <"Ich kummere mich den Teufel um isolierte Doppelbauern"> -- so I wrote in the book about my match with Marshall.

Apart from the text move, the defense of the d-pawn by Ne2 (better than Nf3) comes into consideration (Tarrasch vs Schiffers, 1887), because Black then wins a pawn with 7....cxd4 8. Nxd4 Bxc3+ 9. bxc3 Qa5.

7....Bxc3+

Very weak! The tripled pawn here is not at all disadvantageous, because White has an extra pawn and Black must lose time regaining it, and the pawn at c5 is resistant to pressure, which finally leads to a weakening of the black kingside. In short, taking on c3 (i) loses a pawn, (ii) loses time and (iii) weakens Black's position. The right continuation, which I implemented in the 9th game, was ...Qxd1+ and ...Nbd7, and Black has a good game.

8....bxc3 Qa5(?)

If Black plays ...Qc7 at once, then Qd6 follows. <Shredder thinks the game is more or less equal after 8....Qxd1+.

9. Bxf6 gxf6 10. Qd4 e5

A weakening of the pawn formation, but necessary, because if ...Nd7, c5-c6 would follow.

11. Qe3 Qc7

So as to finally win the c5 pawn with ....Nd7; 11....Nd7 at once is answered by c5-c6.

12. Ne2 Nd7 13 Qf3

Hindering again the regaining of the pawn, because if the knight takes, then Qxf6 follows; if Black takes the pawn with the queen, White would respond, not by taking the b-pawn, since after 14. Bxb7 Rb8 and 15....Rxb2 Black would get a very good game, but rather, White would castle, leaving Black with an undeveloped position that is threatened on all sides. <Like Fritz, Shredder prefers 13. c6, but I am not convinced.>

click for larger view

13....Ke7!

The best move! Defending the f-pawn with the king frees the knight and threatens to take the c-pawn. So as not to lose it, White must advance his pawn, but things gives Black a fine development, though with a pawn less.

14. c6 Nc5 15. cxb7 Bxb7 16. Bxb7 Qxb7 17. Qe3

<See comment from [date]; 17. Qe3 might just be a case of Lasker choosing an objectively inferior move, albeit for practical reasons, not psychological ones.>

17....Rc8 18. 0-0 Qe4

Black has totally restored the game's equilibrium <Schwarz hat das Treffen vollstandig wiederhergestellt> and obtained a very good game. After the exchange of queens White would immediately lose the pawn at c3.

click for larger view

19. Rab1(?)

Threatening to exchange queens and check with the rook on b7. <19. Ng3 might be stronger here, precisely because the rook is not threatened after a later ...Qxc2. Shredder gives 19. Ng3 Qxc2? (19....Qxe3 is similar to the game) 20. f4 Qd3 21. Qe1! Rhe8 22. Rd1 Qg6 23. fxe5 fxe5 24. Qxe5+ Kf8 25. Qh8+ Qg8 Qd4 .>

19....Rfd8

Planning to interpose the rook in that event.

20. Ng3

A rook defending the pawn at c2 would be misplaced.

20....Qxe3?

Here is the turning point of the game. Black has long since repaired the damage to his position and obtained excellent play. Not only would his direct concerns be laid to rest if he took the pawn on c2, but also would the d3 square be turned from a weakness to a strength for the black rook and knight, with which Black could have developed a strong counterattack. Because of a quite vague fear I abstained from taking the pawn in favor of the queen exchange, thus getting out of the rain in order to get into something worse <um damit aus dem Regen in die Traufe zu kommen>. The base of this fear was probably in my subconscious, in that the impression of imprudent pawn grabs in the second and fifth games caused "vestigial terror" in me. <Der Urgrund dieser Furcht lag aber vermutlich in meinem Unterbewusstsein, in welchem sich wohl die ublen Eindrucke des Bauernraubes in der zweiten und fuften Partie festgesetzt haben mochen und "vestigia terrent" riefen.> Aus ....Qxc2, if, as Lasker himself said, 21. Qf3 was played, then the black kingside would (in his view) give cause for concern. This I must concede, but the dangers, the greatest of which is the placement of the knight on f5, are immediate, while an endgame would be somewhat better for Black, on account of the weakness of the c-pawn. For this reason White must avoid the exchange of queens. After 21. Qf3 Black therefore responds 21....Qd3, because 22. Nf5+ would be pointless, since 22...Ke6 threatens the knight and leads at best after Ng7+ and Nf5+ to draw by perpetual check. <Shredder finds, I think rightly, that White maintains a permanent advantage after 22. Nf5+ Ke6 23. Ne3!> If the White queen goes to g4 or h5, then 21....Qg6 22. Qe2 (or 22. Qf3 Rd3) 22....Nd3 (Black can also play 22....Qd3, if Black aspires to no more than a draw; after the knight move Black threatens ....Nf4 and ...h5, with a strong attack) 23. Nh5 Kf8. Now the Black king formation is secure and the attacking chances are equal. On the only real attacking move, 24. f4, Black need not fear, because White threatens nothing. Black can with 24....Rc3, and if then 25. fxe5 fxe5 26. Rf6 can be answered by 26....Nf4, while if White aims at f7 with 25. fxe5 fxe5 26. Rb7, Black can parry with ....Rc1, when Black has an extra pawn and the attack.

After the text move White obtains a positional advantage because of the open f-file.

Well, the meaning of the comment seems to be quite clear: with Queens on the board it is a bit easier for white to defend (not to say advance) his extra Pawn which is deposited in isolated doubled Pawn on semi-open c-file. And I tend to agree with Tarrasch at this point. Let's assume that white trades the Queens and the game will continue 17.Qxb7 Nxb7 18.0-0 Rab8 19.Rab1 Rhc8 20.Rb3 Nc5 21.Ra3 a6 22.Ng3 Ke6 23.f3 Rb2 24.Rc1 f5, which is not given but quite plausible continuation (diagram)

click for larger view

1. e4 e6

Going into this 7th match game Lasker held a lead of 4 wins to 1. Lasker had won two of the three previous games where Tarrasch had responded 1...e5. Tarrasch had no doubt noted that Lasker, in demolishing Marshall in their 1907 World Championship Match had been held to a draw in three of the four games in which Marshall had played the McCuthcheon variation of the French Defense (losing all three of the other games in which Marshall played the French but shunned the McCuthcheon). It was therefore perhaps not surprising that Tarrasch decided to employ the McCuthcheon in the hope of slowing down the Lasker express. This strategy did not work out well for Tarrasch here, losing two of the three games (Games 7, 9, and 11) in which he played this line. As so often occurred with Lasker, he won this game by using what theoretically is a tame line against the McCuthcheon:

2. d4 d4
3. Nc3 Nf6
4. Bg5 Bb4
5. Bd3

click for larger view

Against Marshall, Lasker here played the usual and theoretically "best" 5. e5 in Game 4 of that match (which was drawn); the very tame 5. exd5 in the other three games where the McCuthcheon variation was played (winning one and drawing twice). In this match, Lasker played the text both here and in Game #9 (winning here and drawing in Game 9), and then reverted to the equally harmless 5. exd5 in Game #11 (which Lasker also won).

As was his wont, Lasker appeared satisfied to avoid any opening preparation and played a line that gave him approximate equality, confident he could at least hold his own and perhaps outplay Tarrasch (which is what occurred).

5... dxe4

Tarrasch called this "Absolutely correct," while <keypusher> and Marco prefer 5...c5. Both moves strike me as good, the choice being primarily one of style.

6. Bxe4 c5

click for larger view

Marco and Hoffer both condemn the text and tout 6...Nbd7. Tarrasch's move sure looks good to me, seemingly looking forward to playing against isolated tripled White c-pawns. But I understand the points made by Marco and Hoffer since the tripled pawns present some problems for Black which Tarrasch never adequately solved. As will be seen, Tarrasch later decided this was poor strategy for Black.

7. dxc5

Schroeder here says that "With an overwhelming lead in the match Lasker makes no attempt to avoid a draw."

This is likely true, but the tripled pawns had a strength Tarrasch may have initially underestimated.

7... BxN+

"Very weak"--(Tarrasch). In Game #9, Tarrasch played the arguably simpler 7...QxQ+ and 8...Nbd7. I too like that better, but calling the text "weak" or a "mistake" nonetheless was a serious over-statement. Tarrasch's loss was attributable to his later play.

8. bxB

click for larger view

How to assess this position? Not easy to say. White has two Bishops and an extra pawn (sort of) but a busted Queen-side pawn structure. Tarrasch may have initially over-estimated the significance of the weak White pawns. This was exemplified by his next move:

8... Qa5?

"?"--(Tarrasch)

"Weak. Better is 8...QxQ+ 9. RxQ Nbd7 [Not 9...NxB? 10. Rd8 mate). "--(Schroeder)

All true, but claiming this move was a blunder is beyond the pale. Tarrasch was far from lost after the text.

Schroeder got one other thing wrong. If 8...Qc7 White hardly wins with 9. Qd6??--which in fact loses after the obvious 9...QxQ 10. cxQ NxB. Instead, 9. BxN gives White a tiny edge.

9. BxN gxB
10. Qd4

click for larger view

"The correct judgment of Lasker, and his opponent's mistake, now become apparent. Black's King side Pawn position is at least as weak as White's on the Queen side, and he is a Pawn minus." (Wilson)

A reasonable evaluation, but--yet again--White's edge, while considerable, should not be exaggerated.

10... e5?!

"A weakening of the pawn formation, but necessary because if 10...Nd7 11. c6 would follow"--(Tarrasch)

Yes indeed, if Tarrasch had played 10...Nd7 Lasker would undoubtedly have responded 11. c6. The problem is that the text is worse. 10...Nd7 (or perhaps 10...0-0) were the best moves at Black's disposal and would have given Black some semblance of compensation.

11. Qe3

click for larger view

11... Qc7?

Very weak. Black needs to develop his Knight, either with 11...Nd7 or perhaps the ugly 11...Na6.

Tarrasch suggested that 11...Nd7 would have been bad in light of the inevitable 12. c6 , but--yet again--this would not have been anywhere near as bad as the text; e.g., 12...bxc6 13. Ne2 [even better than 13. Bxc6 Rb8] Rb8 14. 0-0 Ba6 with a playable albeit clearly inferior, game for Black. But after the text, Tarrasch looks lost to me:

click for larger view

12. Ne2?

I have found no discussion of this lemon anywhere. 12. Nf3 was plainly much better, after which White looks to be winning. But now, suddenly, Black had chances:

click for larger view

12... Nd7?

As Hoffer correctly pointed out, the text is "certainly unsatisfactory, to say the least." Black's only chance at counter-play (again quoting Hoffer) , and a good one it is, was 12...f5!

The inferior text left:

click for larger view

13. Qf3?

"!"--(<keypusher>)(Schroeder)

Sorry guys, but this looks to me like a blunder giving away White's winning edge. The winning move here was 13. c6! and after 13...bxc6 either 14. 0-0 or 14. Ng3 after which White has all the play. By contrast, after the text, Tarrasch was back in the game, the position now being:

click for larger view

13... Ke7!

"!"--(Tarrasch)

"!?"--(<keypusher>)

"The best move! Defending the f-pawn with the King frees the Knight and threatens to take the c-pawn. So as not to lose it, White must advance his [c] pawn, but [this] gives Black a fine development, though with a pawn less"--(Tarrasch).

According to <keypusher>, Fritz thinks 13...Nxc5 14. 14. Qxf6 Rg8 15. Bxh7 Rxb2 was better. I note that this comment by <keypusher> was posted in 2008. I have a much more recent version of Fritz, which much prefers Tarrasch's wonderful move. The older Fritz line is clearly flawed. After 15...Rxb2, Black is stone dead after 16. 0-0-0. Furthermore, while it wouldn't save Black, 14...Rf8 15. Bxh7 Qe7 is a major improvement, as is 15...Rf8,

After Tarrasch's actual 13...Ke7!, Black was very much back in the game, the position being:

click for larger view

14. c6

"!"--(<keypusher>)

This may well be best, but since it gives White excellent counter-chances, I prefer 14. c4 Nxc5 15. Nc3 or 14. 0-0 Nxc5 15. Bd5; or 14. Bd5 immediately since I prefer active play. However, the merits of the text--which preserves White's pawn plus--should not be ignored.

14... Nc5!

Much better than 14...bxc6 15. 0-0 with a wretched game for Black.

15. cxb7

"Trading off one of his tripled pawns for Black's b-pawn is obviously a significant achievement for Black"--(<keypusher>)

I am constrained to agree, especially since (unlike myalternative suggestion) preserves White's pawn plus, though--since I always like active play-- I flirted with 15. Ng3 NxB 16. QxN Qxc6 17. Qb4+ Qd6 18. Qh4. But it is difficult to argue against the formidable team of Emanuel Lasker and <keypusher> who side with the text.

15... Bxb7
16. BxB QxB

click for larger view

17. Qe3!

The merits of Tarrasch's comment that White's pawn plus "won't be of much value" if White trades Queen's here with 17. QxQ have been nicely debated by <keypusher> and <Honza Cervenka> I refer the reader to these well-considered annotations. On this one, I tend to agree with <Honza Cervenka> and thus prefer the text. They both agree that White, at best, would face a difficult problem in trying to win the ending after 17. QxQ. However, with better play, Tarrasch might well have saved the ending even after the probably superior text, the position now being:

click for larger view

17... Rac8?

This move, which is not mentioned by any of the commentators to this game, might have cost Tarrasch dearly if properly exploited by Lasker. Black appears to have a holdable game after 17...Ne6 since he can now better position his Rooks on his next turn (e.g., 18...Rhg8) After the text, the position was:

click for larger view

Tarrasch's plan with the text, should have been apparent to Lasker, who might have now played 18. Ng3 (preventing Qe4 by Black). But instead, Lasker played:

18. 0-0?

This allowed Tarrasch to reply:

18... Qe4!

"!"--<keypusher>

click for larger view

19. Rab1

"?"--(Tarrasch)

"Threatening 20. Rb7+"--(<keypusher>)

Tarrasch later opined that 19. Ng3 "might be stronger here, since if then 19...Qxc2 then White has 20. f4 with a crushing attack. Indeed, after 19. Ng3, Black's only chance would rest in trading Queens, though after 19. Ng3 QxQ 20. fxQ White, despite his shattered pawn formations, has new attacking chances via the now half-open f-file (based on a variation supplied on this site by <keypusher>).

The text (19. Rab1) left:

click for larger view

19... Rhd8

"Planning to interpose the Rook [in the event of Rb7+ by White]--(Tarrasch)

I understand the theory behind 19...Rhd8, but it was surely simpler and safer for Black just to trade Queens here.

20. Ng3

"20. QxQ NxQ 21. Rb7+ Rd7 22. RxR+ KxR 23. Rd1+ Ke6 24. Rd3 preserves the extra pawn, but it is very hard to see White winning the ensuing endgame"--(<keypusher>)

Agreed, though I find 23. Rd1+ weak in the above line and prefer 23. Rb1. Even then, White's winning chances would likely be close to nil. The text was the only real chance for Lasker to try to maintain some edge.

After the text (20. Ng3), the position was:

click for larger view

20... QxQ

"?"--(Tarrasch)(Schroeder)

Here I must disagree. Tarrasch and Schroeder prefer 20...Qxc2, but that looks like a bad mistake to me. Let's examine Tarrasch's suggested line: 20...Qxc2 21. Qf3 Qd3 (Schroeder suggests 21...Qg6, but then White has excellent winning chances with 22. Rfd1) 22. Nf5+ [KEG--the move Tarrasch calls "pointless"] Ke6 and here, as <keypusher> reports (correctly in my view) based on analysis by Shredder that White can maintain a "permanent advantage" with 23. Ne3

Tarrasch and Schroeder are correct that 20...QxQ opens the f-file for White, but--unlike 20...Qxc2--Black, though marginally inferior, seems to have, as we shall see, good chances to hold the ending.

21. fxQ

click for larger view

Any of us would surely rather be playing White here, but the suggestion that Lasker now had the game in the bag (which appears to be the conclusion of Wilson whose analysis stops at this point) is nonsensical. I tried playing this position as White against Fritz and never came close to winning. White has too many weak pawns. Indeed, Dr. Lasker himself, no slouch in the endgame, had significant difficulty in winning this ending despite a seemingly discouraged Tarrasch whose play in the next stage was far below his usual standard.

21... Rd2
22. Rf2

click for larger view

22... Rcd8?

"?"--(Tarrasch)

I agree with Tarrasch that 22...Rd7 (which Schroeder mocks as "entirely defensive") was much better than the text. Here too, I tried after 22...Rd7 to make progress against Fritz with nothing good to report.

Perhaps an even better way to play for a draw lay in 22...RxR 23. KxR Ke6!

23. Rb5!

"!"--(Tarrasch)

"Decisive!"--(Tarrasch)

I too like 23. Rb5, but it--as we will see--was far from clearly "decisive."

23... Rd1+

The choice between this and 23...RxR looks close to me. In either case, White ends up with much the better chances but with nothing close to a clear win.

24. Rf1

click for larger view

Play for the next several moves was quite ragged. I initially thought this was because of the the approach of the move-30 time control. But the surprisingly weak play by both players continued through about move 32. Perhaps there was a time scramble so intense that the players made another few moves even after move 30 because they were unsure how many moves had been made. (Some of us recall Round 1 at Hastings 1895 where Tarrasch lost on time when he mistakenly thought his 29th move was his 30th!)

What is even more surprising is that the commentators have little or nothing to say concerning these moves, many apparently mistakenly believing the Lasker had a easy win at this point.

The one exception to all this was Tarrasch, who was generally a first-rate commentators who was probably kicking himself for missing the chance to offer more robust resistance here. But, as will be seen, even he missed a few crucial errors:

24... Na4?!

The only legitimate chance to try to hold lay in 24...RxR+ 25. KxR and then just sitting tight.

25. Ne4?

"The black knight wanders and the white knight attains the crucial, just freed-up square"--(Tarrasch)

All true. but as I will try to show, after the seemingly decisive text Tarrasch still had chances of resisting. Therefore better, and truly exploiting the weakness of Tarrasch's last move, was 25. c4! and then if 25...Nc3 26. Ra5 after which Black would have nothing better than 26...R1d2 27. Ra7+ R8d7 (unfortunate but best) 28. RxR+ RxR [or 28...KxR 29. Rxf6 Ke7 30. Rh6 Rxc2 31. c5 and wins] 29. Ra1 and wins.

But after Lasker's actual 25. Ne4 the position now was:

click for larger view

25... Nb6

Best.

26. Ra5

click for larger view

26... Nc8?

This could and should have been fatal. Black's best chance to hold on lay in counter-attack; i.e., 26...Nc4. Play might then have continued 27. Rxa7+ R(either one) d7 28. RxR+ [If instead 28. Ra4 Black would have 28...Nxe3 29. RxR NxR with excellent drawing chances] RxR 29. Nxf6 Rd2 30. Ng8+ Kd6 31. Rf6+ Kc5 32. Rd2 Rd1+ 33. Rf1 Rd2 34. Nf6 (even stronger than 34. Nh6 or 34. Rxf7 Nxe3 35. Rc7+ Kd6 36. Rg7 Ke6 37. Nh6 Rxc2 and Black--though temporarily two pawns down--has threats probably sufficient to draw) Rxc2 after which Black's threats make White's win at least problematic.

But now it was Lasker's turn to err:

27. Rc5?

Turning up the heat on Black with either 27. g4 or 27. c4 would probably have posed insuperable problems for Tarrasch.

The text left:

click for larger view

27... Nb6?

Yet again Tarrasch missed the line that held his best opportunities for salvation: 27...RxR+ 28. KxR Nd6 29. Rc7+ Ke6 30. Nc5+ Kf5 31. a4 Nc4 32. e4+ Kg6 33. Ke1 Nb2 34. Ke2 a5! White might still win this ending, but it sure wouldn't be easy.

To quote Tarrasch here:

"Black is hard-pressed to find a decent move...Nevertheless it was still far better to exchange Rooks and then play Rd7..."

The latter point must be a typo, since if 28...Rd7 in this line the Black Knight on c8 would be hanging.

28. Rc7+?

Again missing the much stronger 28. g4 or perhaps 28. c4.

click for larger view

28... Kf8?

"?"--(Tarrasch)

"The game is now lost"--(Tarrasch)

Nothing is entirely satisfactory here, but the text was just about the worst move Tarrasch could have made.

If instead, 28...R1d7 White--as Tarrasch pointed out--wins easily with 29. Rc6.

The best chance was 28...R8d7. If then 29. Rc6 Black can probably hold with 29...RxR+ followed by 30...Nd5. White can, of course, do better with 29. RxR+ RxR and then--as per Tarrasch's analysis--30. Rxf6. But now Black has at least practical chances with 30...Nc4 after which play might continue 31. Rh6 Nxe3 32. Rxh7 Rc7 after which Black can eventually grab either the White pawn on c2 or the one on c3, leaving him still a pawn behind but with enough counter-play to have hopes of saving the game.

After the text, things got gruesome for Black:

29. Ncf6 RxR+

The alternative 29...Kg7 30. Ng4 R8d7 31. RxR RxR 32. Nxe5 Rc7 would also be no picnic for Black.

30. KxR

click for larger view

30... Kg7?

The last move before the time control which may explain Tarrasch's poor play here.

The best chance, but almost certainly ultimately unavailing was 30...Nd5, though after 31. Rd7 RxR [or 31...Nxe3+ 32. Ke2 RxR 33. NxR+ Ke7 34. Nxe5] 32. NxR+ Ke7 33. Nxe5 Nxe3+ 34. Ke2! Nxg2 35. Nc6+ 35. Kd6 36. Nxa7 Black would be two pawns down in the Knight and Pawn ending with scant hope of recovery.

31. Ng4

Good enough to win, though 31. Ne4 or 31. Nh5+ were even nastier.

The text left:

click for larger view

31... Rd5?!

Tarrasch was probably now in desperation mode. Perhaps his best options at this stage were 31...e4 or 31...Rd2. But it is doubtful that either of these efforts would have enabled him to save the game.

32. Rxa7 h5?!

Nearly useless flailing at this point. Maybe 32...e4 could have presented Lasker with more problems. After the text, Lasker pretty much closed off any plausible resistance with:

33. e4

"!"--(Schroeder)(<keypusher>)

"Nicely clearing e3 for the Knight"--(<keypusher>)

click for larger view

33... Rc5

"If the Rook goes to d2 34. Ne3 defends"--(Tarrasch)

Sadly for Black, everything else is even worse.

34. Ne3

A gorgeous spot for the Knight, both for defense--and as we will soon see--for offense.

34... Rxc3

Now White at last sheds his doubled isolated c-pawns but cleans up elsewhere.

35.Ke2 Nc4

"Black seeks the Knight exchange; in the Rook ending one may fish in troubled waters"--(Tarrasch)

Lasker, of course, would have none of this.

click for larger view

36. Nf5+ !

"!"--(<keypusher>)

Now Tarrasch had to decide where and how to run. His problem was that there was no good answer to this question for him:

click for larger view

36... Kh8?

This initially looked to me that Tarrasch have given up (not that the "better" 36...Kg6 or 36...Kg8 had much chance of saving the game). But Tarrasch has given a detailed explanation for what he was actually thinking (see the translation of Tarrasch's commentary by <keypusher> that appears on this site).

In any case, though Black's game now seems hopeless to me, in fact the game was only about half over, as Tarrasch battled on until move 76. My guess is that the thought of falling behind Lasker by a margin of 5 wins to 1 was too depressing for Tarrasch yet to bear.

37. Rxf7

Even more brutal would have been 37. Rc7 Rxc2+ 38. Kd3 Rd2+ [if instead Black plays 38...Rc1 39. RxN [and not 39. Ne3? after which--contra <keypusher> White is not still winning but is actually lost after 39...Nb2+ picking up the White Rook] 39. Kc3 Rxg2 40. RxN Rxa2 41. Rc8+ Kh7 42. h4 leaving White up a piece for a pawn with an east win. But Lasker's move was also more than adequate to win.

37... Rxc2+
38. Kd3 Rc1

click for larger view

39. Ne3

<keypusher> assigns this move a "?" but acknowledges that White is still winning, as indeed he is. 39. Rf8+ and 39. Rb7 were indeed faster ways to win.

39... NxN
40. KxN

click for larger view

Closing out the game against a persistent opponent playing Black is indeed a bit of a chore. But the outcome was not truly in doubt, especially with Emanuel Lasker at the helm.

40... Rc3+
41. Kf2 Rc2+
42. Kg3 h4+

click for larger view

43. Kh3

<keypusher> claims that 43. Kxh4 Rxg2 "would have increased Black's drawing chances. But White then just plays 44. a4 and now, with Black's King locked on his first rank, the ending looks plenty easy to me (e.g., 44...Rxh2+ 45. Kg5 Kg8 46. Ra7 Kf8 47. a5 etc.).

In any case, White's actual move did the trick.

43.. Re2

If instead 43...Rxa2 44. Re7 wins either the e-pawn or the h-pawn for Black and White's win seems beyond question.

44. Rf5

44. Kxh4 looks easier, but Lasker's move didn't really spoil anything.

44... Rxe4

click for larger view

45. Rg5

"?"--(<keypusher>)

<keypusher>, as per Tarrasch, claims that 45. Rh5+ was more accurate. But then after 45...Kg7 46. Rxh4 Re3+ 47. g3 White's win is no easier than what occurred in the game.

45... Kh7
46. Rg4 Re3+
47. Kxh4 Ra3
48. Kg5 Rxa2

click for larger view

The adage "All Rook endings are drawn" contains a morsel of truth. And indeed there are many known Rook and Pawn endings in which one side has two additional pawns that are theoretical draws. But this ain't one of those cases. Black's King is cut-off and his pawn weak and soon to be captured. White's two pawns are connected and passed. And White's King is poised to wreck havoc. In sum, the game is a clear win for White. It is nonetheless pleasant and instructive to watch Lasker wrap up this completely won endgame.

49. Kf5

There are other ways for White to win, but the text is quite sufficient.

49... Re2
50. h3

Slow but steady.

50... Kh6
51. g3

click for larger view

51... Re3

Since Black has no real defense here, it is pointless to discuss alternatives.

52. h4 Kh7
53. Rg5 Re1
54. g4

click for larger view

54... Kh6

"Now Black's last pawn falls, but after 54...e4 55. Kf4 e3 56. h5 (better than Tarrasch's 56. Re5 e2 57. Kg5 which also wins) e2 57. Kf3 the pawn would be lost anyway"--(<keypusher>)

Actually Tarrasch's 56. Re5 is as good as 56. h5; both win easily.

55. Kf6

Mate in one is always a nice threat.

55... Kh7

Schroeder mysteriously considers 55. e4 56. Re5, apparently overlooking the mate on the move with 56. Rh6.

56. Rxe5

click for larger view

From here the commentators pretty much abandon interest since what follows is child's play for the likes of Lasker (or indeed for most experienced players).

56... Rf1+
57. Kg5 Rf7
58. h5 Ra7
59. Rb5 Rg7+
60. Kf4 Ra7
61. g5 Kg7
62. Kf5 Rf7+
63. Kg4 Ra7
64. h6+ Kg6
65. Rb6+ Kh7
66. Kh5 Ra5
67. Rb7+ Kg8
68. Re7 Rb5
69. Kg6 Rb6+
70. Kf5 Rb5+
71. Kf6 Rb8
72. g6 Ra8
73. Re5 Kh8
74. Kg5 Rg8
75. Rb5 Re8
76. h7

1-0

click for larger view