[Event "St Petersburg 1895/96"]
[Site "St Petersburg"]
[Date "1896.??.??"]
[Round "4"]
[White "Steinitz, William"]
[Black "Lasker, Emanuel"]
[Result "1-0"]
[ECO "D35"]
[WhiteElo "2590"]
[BlackElo "2640"]
[Annotator ""]
[PlyCount "65"]
[EventDate "1895.12.13"]
[EventType "tourn"]
[EventRounds "18"]
[EventCountry "RUS"]
[EventCategory "15"]
{The Players Wilhelm Steinitz (1836-1900) was the first official World
Champion, a title he received after defeating Zukertort in New Orleans in 1886.
Despite actually being one year older than Paul Morphy, Steinitz really
belonged to the next generation of chess players. By the time Steinitz was
beginning to dedicate himself seriously to the game, in 1862, Morphy’s chess
career was already finished. After a few years living in Vienna, Steinitz came
to England, and it was there that he developed his positional style, which
contrasted with Anderssen’s wholly combinative play. Steinitz’s importance
was not just as a player of the game. He was also a profound thinker and
teacher and became the most prolific chess writer of the nineteenth century.
Unlike Philidor, who also advocated a positional approach to chess, Steinitz
was able to persuade the world of its absolute importance. He was undoubtedly
helped in this respect by his excellent results using his deep concepts of
positional play. Emanuel Lasker (1868-1941) is one of the most famous chess
players of all time. As a youngster Lasker showed incredible talent at both
chess and mathematics and he fulfilled his potential in both fields. Lasker
defeated Steinitz to become World Champion in 1894, a title he was to hold for
twentyseven years, which is still a record. Despite his victory over Steinitz,
the chess world remained unimpressed, chiefly as the former World Champion was
32 years older than Lasker and his health was declining. Lasker, however, was
still improving. In 1896 he proved his worth without doubt by winning four
successive major events, including the St Petersburg tournament. Lasker
continued to have excellent results, before beating Steinitz in a return match
in 1896/7. During his chess career he still found time to pursue his
mathematical studies, and in 1900 he was awarded his doctorate at Erlangen
University. In chess Lasker was an exceptional tactician, but more than
anything he was an immensely resourceful fighter. On countless occasions he
was able to turn inferior positions to his advantage and his defensive
qualities were without equal. The Game Steinitz introduces a new concept in a
well-worn opening, which presents Lasker with some early difficulties. Lasker
reacts badly to the new circumstances and leaves the opening with clear
disadvantage. Steinitz then plays the rest of the game in an accurate and
imaginative fashion, never once letting Lasker use his renowned fighting
abilities. Faced with problem after problem, the new World Champion finally
breaks and Steinitz’s relentless attack reaps the reward his ingenious play
deserves.} 1. d4 d5 2. c4 e6 3. Nc3 Nf6 4. Bf4 {These days 4. Bf4 is very
uncommon, since it has been shown that the active 4...c5 offers Black a
problem-free position. If White is intent on playing Bf4 lines, he tends first
to play 4. Nf3 and only after 4...Be7 does he commit the bishop to f4.} Be7 5.
e3 O-O 6. c5 $5 {Even the great Lasker underestimated the danger of White's
clamp on the queenside. Only 90 years later Black found the right way to
create counterchances, in the game Lerner-Geller: 6...b6 7.b4...} Ne4 $6 {
Kasparov: 'Of course Lasker doesn't wait for the realisation of White's plan.
But his attempt to organize counterplay in the centre plays directly into
Steinitz' hand.'} (6... b6 $1 7. b4 a5 8. a3 axb4 9. axb4 Rxa1 10. Qxa1 Nc6 11.
Qa4 bxc5 $3 12. Qxc6 cxd4 {with a dangerous initiative for the sacrificed
piece.}) 7. Nxe4 dxe4 8. Qc2 f5 9. Bc4 Nc6 10. a3 {Kasparov: 'preventing
Nb4-d5, and also keeping the bishop on an important diagonal after Na5, Ba2.'}
Bf6 11. O-O-O $1 {A concrete decision: White's advance on the queenside will
be met by e6-e5, which is why Steinitz changes direction, preparing an attack
against the weakened black centre and potentially on the kingside.} Kh8 (11...
b6 $2 12. d5 $1 {leads to a disaster.}) 12. f3 Qe7 $1 {Not surprisingly Lasker
begins to fight hard in what can only be described as a miserable position.}
13. Bg3 $1 {refusing the pawn sacrifice that would give Black an initiative:} (
13. fxe4 $2 e5 14. dxe5 Nxe5) 13... f4 $6 {Very typical for Lasker - by
complicating dubious positions he won many great games. Now he hoped for 14.
Bxf4...} 14. Qxe4 $3 {This brilliant piece sacrifice kills Black’s attempt
at snatching the initiative. Lasker was once more hoping that White would grab
the offered pawn.} (14. Bxf4 $2 e5 15. dxe5 Nxe5 16. Qxe4 Bf5 $1 17. Qxf5 Nxc4
{winning. But on that day Steinitz was invincible!}) 14... fxg3 15. hxg3 {
Kasparov: 'White has gained only two pawns for the piece, but his initiative
will encounter no more obstacles.'} g6 {Kasparov: 'Giving up the third pawn
Lasker hopes to use the g-file for defence. After the obvious '} (15... g5 16.
f4 g4 17. Ne2 Bd7 (17... Rf7 18. Qc2 b6 19. e4 Bg7 20. e5 h6 21. Qg6 Qe8 22.
Bd3 {Kasparov-Fritz}) 18. Qc2 {followed by e3-e4-e5 Black would die without a
breath.}) 16. Qxg6 Bd7 (16... Rg8 17. Qe4 Rxg3 {would bring the white knight
into the attack:} 18. Ne2 Rg7 19. Nf4) 17. f4 Rf7 $2 {After this mistake
Black's game is finally doomed.} (17... Rg8 {would offer solid resistance,
although White's pressure remains very unpleasant.} 18. Qe4 Rxg3 19. Ne2 Rg7
20. Rh6 {followed by Rdh1.}) 18. g4 Rg7 ({If} 18... Rg8 {then} 19. Qh5 {
and g4-g5. Now 19.Qh5 allows Black to defend with Bd7-e8-g6, but...}) 19. Qh6
$1 Rxg4 20. Bd3 Rg7 (20... Rh4 21. Rxh4 Bxh4 22. Nf3 Bf2 23. Rh1 Bxe3+ 24. Kb1
{winning.}) 21. Nf3 Qf7 22. g4 $1 {The White attack rolls by itself.} Rag8 23.
g5 Bd8 24. Rh2 $1 {The disaster on h7 is unavoidable. The rest is simply.} Rg6
25. Qh5 $1 R6g7 26. Rdh1 $1 Qxh5 27. Rxh5 Rf8 28. Rxh7+ Rxh7 (28... Kg8 29.
Rxg7+ Kxg7 30. Rh7+) 29. Rxh7+ Kg8 30. Rxd7 Rf7 31. Bc4 Rxd7 32. Bxe6+ Rf7 33.
g6 {The mindpower and energy shown in this game by the 59-year-old Steinitz
deserves the greatest admiration. Lessons from this game: 1) Always be careful
to study carefully the consequences before allowing your pawn structure to
change. Lasker hoped that he would gain enough activity to counterbalance his
compromised structure after 6...Ne4, but was proved wrong by Steinitz’s
imaginative play. 2) If your opponent shocks you in the opening (as in this
case with 6. c5), don’t panic into moving quickly. Take a deep breath and
try to weigh up the novel idea in objective fashion. In most cases you’ll
find that the new move is not any better than its predecessors and that its
main strength is indeed its surprise value. 3) It is often worth giving up
material to kill off any chances of counterplay. This is shown with great
effect by Steinitz’s 13. Bg3! and 14. Qxe4!. With absolutely no attacking
chances to relieve the purely defensive task at hand, even great fighters such
as Lasker are going to make mistakes.} 1-0
No comments:
Post a Comment