Lasker, Emanuel2620–Napier, William Ewart25001–0B72Cambridge Springs3Cambridge1904
The Players 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. William Napier (1881–1952) was born in
England, but his family emigrated to the United States when he was five years
old. His international chess career was very short but he was a successful
competitor during the period 1900–5, one of his achievements being to win
the British Championship in 1904. Had he continued playing chess, he might
have risen to the top, but he retired from international chess, became a US
citizen in 1908 and embarked on a successful business career. Napier had an
attractive combinative style and although he left relatively few games, many
of them are worth studying. The Game Lasker was famous for his fighting spirit
and ability to induce mistakes by his opponents; both qualities are evident in
this game. Lasker plays over-aggressively in the opening, and should have been
punished for neglecting his development. Instead of refuting Lasker ’s
opening positionally, Napier goes in for tactics which rapidly become a
whirlwind of complications spreading over the whole board. Both players handle
the tactics brilliantly and at the critical moment Lasker, not content with a
slight endgame advantage, goes for broke. For a fleeting instant Napier has
the chance to score the success of his career by beating the World Champion,
but instead he adopts a tempting but unsound continuation. Lasker springs his
trap and liquidates to a winning ending. 1.e4 c5 2.c3 c6 3.f3 g6 4.d4 cxd4 5.xd4 g7 6.e3 d6 7.h3 f6 8.g4 Launching an attack before
completing your development is always a risky business, but Lasker ’s idea
is to drive away the black knight from f6 by g4-g5. This will make it much
harder for Black to develop counterplay by ...d5, his traditional response
when confronted by a kingside attack in the Dragon. Although this push of the
g-pawn is a valid idea in certain Sicilian variations, here the fact that
White has had to spend a further tempo on the preparatory h3 casts doubt on
the idea. The normal continuation today is 8 Bc4. 0-0 The simplest reply;
the threat of g5 is not so strong that Black need take any special measures
against it. 9.g5 e8 Black could even have continued 9...h5 for example
10.xc6 10.e2 f4 10...bxc6 11.e2 b8 and his counterplay against
b2 and c3 is more important than the threat to the knight on h5. 10.h4?!
This is going too far. White continues with his plan of attacking on the
kingside, but every pawn move is a non-developing move, and he simply cannot
afford to leave his king in the centre for so long. 10 Qd2 followed by 11
0-0-0 would have been safer and better. c7 Now Black is threatening to open
the position up by 11...d5, when White’s lack of development will become
serious. 11.f4 In order to meet 11...d5 by 12 e5, keeping the position
closed, but it is yet another pawn move. e5! Napier hits on the correct
answer to White’s plan. A central counterattack is usually the best response
to a flank attack, and this applies particularly when the opposing king is
still in the centre. 12.de2 d5? This move is the trigger for the
exciting complications which follow, but it is a mistake since these should
ultimately give White the edge. The simple 12...g4! would have been very
strong; for example, 13.d2 13.g1 d7 14.d2 exf4 and 15...Ne5 is
also good for Black 13...exf4 14.xf4 e5 15.0-0-0 e6 16.g3 c4 17.d3 c8-+ and Black has a very strong attack (18...Nxb2 is the immediate threat)
for which White has not the slightest compensation. 13.exd5 d4 14.xd4 xd5! The point of Black’s play. 15.f5! Lasker responds in style. 15.xd5 exd4 16.g2 dxe3 17.0-0 e6 18.e1 xd5 19.xd5 c7
White’s weak pawns and exposed king give Black the advantage. 15...xc3 16.xd8 Enabling the knight to check on e7. xd8 17.e7+ Better than 17.xg7 d5 18.0-0-0 g4! 19.xd5 xd5 20.g2 d7 21.fxe5 xg7 22.c3
when White faces an uphill struggle to draw. 17...h8 17...f8 18.c5 e4 19.a3 d6 20.xc8 axc8 21.0-0-0 e7 22.h3 c6 23.he1+- 18.h5!
Just when the complications are at a maximum, Lasker suddenly revives his
kingside attack, even in the absence of queens. e8! 18...d5 19.xd5 xd5 20.h6 f8 21.c4± 18...gxh5 19.f5 e4 20.f6 f8 21.xh5 g3 22.h4 xf1 23.xf1 xe7 24.fxe7 e8 25.c5± 19.c5 There is nothing
better than simply defending the knight. gxh5 A key moment. Black decides
to prevent hxg6 directly, but 19...exf4 was also tempting, pinning the knight.
In fact the move played appears more accurate, since 19...exf4 leads to a
significant advantage for White: 20.hxg6! fxg6 21.c4 b5 22.f7 b7 23.h2 d5 24.xe8 xe8 25.0-0-0 xe7 26.d7 c6 27.xe7 xe7 28.xe7 f3± with an advantage for White, although winning this endgame would be far from
easy. 20.c4? White could have secured an edge by 20.bxc3 f8 21.b5 xe7! 22.xe7 xe7 23.xh5 g4 24.h4 f5± Although White has some
extra material, there would be few winning chances in view of his scattered
pawns. Lasker evidently felt that this simple line would be insufficient to
win and so bravely went in for a more complex alternative. However, there was
a serious flaw in his idea which could have cost him the game. 20...exf4? This costs Black the first half-point. 20...e4! 21.xf7 g4! 22.xe8 xe8 23.a3 g3 24.h2 exf4-+ and Black has overwhelming compensation for
the exchange – he has one pawn already, White’s king is trapped in the
centre and his knight is hopelessly pinned. While this line may not appear
very complex, the sheer number of alternatives at each move makes Black’s
task far from easy. Moreover, one of the themes of the game is Black’s
desire to maintain his knight at c3 in order to prevent White from castling
queenside. It would not have been easy to overcome the psychological block
about moving it away, even though the bishop on g4 proves an effective
substitute. It is also worth mentioning that I have seen this game annotated
many times without any mention of 20...Ne4!. 21.xf7 e4? This tempting
but unsound idea costs Black the second half-point. 21...f8! 22.xh5 e4 23.g6+ g8 24.e7+= 24.xf8 xb2 25.d1 c3+ 26.f1 xc5∞ 22.xe8 xb2 23.b1 c3+ 24.f1 g4 The point of Napier’s idea: two of
White’s minor pieces are attacked and both White’s rooks are vulnerable to
a knight fork. Lasker finds a brilliant defence, returning the sacrificed
material to liquidate favourably. 24...xc5 25.xh5 e4 26.g2 g3 27.g6 xh1 28.xh1+- 25.xh5! xh5 25...g3+ 26.g2 xh5 27.b3 xh1 28.xc3 g7 29.xh1+- 26.xh5 g3+ 26...d2+ 27.f2 xb1 28.g6 g7 29.xh7+ f6 30.g7+- 27.g2 xh5 28.xb7 a5 The wild complications have led, oddly, to
material equality. However, all the white pieces are more active than their
enemy counterparts – the contrast between the knights is particularly
extreme. Lasker now exploits one vulnerable black piece after another to win a
pawn, while maintaining his pressure. Attempting to counterattack by
28...d8 29.xa7 d2+ 30.f3 xc2 rebounds after 31.f5 g8 32.h6+ h8 33.a8+ g7 34.g8# 29.b3! g7 29...a1 30.h3 g7 31.h6 e8 32.f3 g7 33.xf4+- 30.h3 g3 31.f3 a6?! 31...e8
would have put up more resistance, but 32.d6 f1 33.xf4+- will win in
the long run. 32.xf4 e2+ 32...f1 33.h1 d2 34.d1+- 33.f5 c3 34.a3 a4 35.e3 Since there is no defence to the threat of 36. g6 winning
another pawn. Lessons from this game: 1) It is risky to start an attack before
you have brought your pieces into play and safeguarded your king by castling.
2) The correct response to a flank attack is usually a counterattack in the
centre. 3) In wild complications, piece activity is often more important than
a material head-count. 4) If your opponent has sacrificed material for an
attack, it may be possible to stifle his attack by returning the extra
material. 1–0
No comments:
Post a Comment