[Event "World Championship 12th"]
[Site "Havana"]
[Date "1921.04.08"]
[Round "10"]
[White "Lasker, Emanuel"]
[Black "Capablanca, Jose Raul"]
[Result "0-1"]
[ECO "D61"]
[WhiteElo "2686"]
[BlackElo "2719"]
[Annotator ""]
[PlyCount "136"]
[EventDate "1921.03.15"]
[EventType "match"]
[EventRounds "14"]
[EventCountry "CUB"]
{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. José Raúl Capablanca (1888-1942) is one of
the legends in chess history. Born in Cuba, he learned chess at the age of
four and gave due notice of his talent when, barely a teenager, he defeated
Corzo, who won the national championship in the same year, in an informal
match. Capablanca was educated in America, and spent much of his free time
playing masters at the Manhattan Chess Club. Even in his younger days it was
obvious to everyone that Capablanca was a natural-born chess player.
Positionally and in the endgame he had no equal, but as his countless wins
against other tacticians show, he was also at home in highly complex positions.
At one stage of his career Capablanca lost only one tournament game in ten
years, which gave him an aura of invincibility. It came as absolutely no
surprise when, in Havana during 1921, he finally met with Lasker and took the
world title, without losing a single game. The Game Here we see Capablanca in
tremendous form, remorselessly grinding down Lasker in a game that effectively
sealed Capablanca’s victory in the match. In a fairly normal Queen’s
Gambit position, Lasker takes on an isolated queen’s pawn. However, he fails
to play dynamically enough to make use of his active pieces, and Capablanca is
able to execute some elegant exchanging manoeuvres. To the untrained eye it
looks as if the game is heading for a draw, but Capablanca secures an edge,
which he turns into a serious endgame advantage. He increases the pressure in
all sectors of the board, and eventually, having started off with just one
moderately weak pawn, Lasker is left with nothing but weaknesses. Robbed of
all counterplay, bound and gagged, he can do little but await the execution.
What makes this game so remarkable is that Capablanca was able to render one
of the most resourceful players of all time so completely helpless.} 1. d4 d5
2. c4 e6 3. Nc3 Nf6 4. Bg5 Be7 5. e3 O-O 6. Nf3 Nbd7 7. Qc2 {(the Rubinstein
Attack)} c5 $1 8. Rd1 Qa5 9. Bd3 h6 10. Bh4 cxd4 11. exd4 dxc4 12. Bxc4 Nb6 {
The position is equal.} 13. Bb3 Bd7 14. O-O Rac8 {A classic set-up in the
spirit of Steinitz (cf. Game No.18).} (14... Bc6 15. Ne5 Bd5 16. Nxd5 Nbxd5 17.
Qe2 Rad8 18. f4 Ne8 19. Bxe7 Nxe7 20. f5 Nxf5 21. Nxf7 Rxf7 22. Qxe6 Ned6 23.
g4 Kh8 24. Qe5 Qxe5 25. dxe5 Ne3 26. Bxf7 Nxd1 27. exd6 Rxd6 {1/2-1/2 (27)
Stahlberg,G-Capablanca,J Moscow (Russia) 1935}) 15. Ne5 Bb5 {'This is a weak
move which might have given Black a great deal of trouble.} 16. Rfe1 {And now
Nxf7! would win.} Nbd5 $146 {[%cal Rd5c3] The first critical moment. Lasker's
next move shows that the typical methods of playing positions with an isolated
d-pawn had not yet been mastered.} (16... Bc4 17. Bxc4 Nxc4 18. Bxf6 Bxf6 19.
Nd7 Rfd8 20. Nxf6+ gxf6 21. Rd3 Kf8 22. Rf3 Qg5 23. h4 Qd2 24. Qxd2 Nxd2 25.
Rxf6 Kg7 26. Rf4 Rc4 27. Ne2 Rc2 28. Ng3 Rxb2 29. Nh5+ Kf8 30. Rxe6 Rxd4 31.
Rxh6 {Euwe,M-Landau,S Noordwijk 1938 1/2-1/2 (43)}) 17. Bxd5 $2 {A completely
unnecessary exchange, denying White all hopes of an advantage (a similar
mistake was made by Zukertort – Game No.18).} (17. Bxf6 $14 Bxf6 18. Bxd5 exd5
19. Ng4) 17... Nxd5 $15 18. Bxe7 Nxe7 19. Qb3 (19. Qe4 {is interesting.} Bc6
20. Qg4 Rcd8 21. Rd3 Qb4 22. Rd2) 19... Bc6 20. Nxc6 bxc6 21. Re5 Qb6 22. Qc2
Rfd8 23. Ne2 $2 {Too passive!} Rd5 $1 24. Rxd5 {'A worse mistake than the
previous move.} cxd5 {'From now on the student will do well to study carefully
every move up to the end. It is one of Black's best efforts in his whole
career, and that against one of the strongest players the world has ever seen.
' (Capablanca)} 25. Qd2 Nf5 26. b3 $6 h5 {'To prevent g2-g4 at any time.'
(Capablanca) 'A hasty move, as a result of which Black almost missed the win.}
27. h3 $2 {'A completely bad move, allowing Black to paralyse the white pawns.
' (Lasker)} h4 $1 {After the blockade of the kingside the number of weaknesses
in White's position exceeds the permissible norm, and he is now strategically
lost.} 28. Qd3 Rc6 29. Kf1 g6 30. Qb1 Qb4 31. Kg1 a5 $1 {'This decides the
outcome. From here and to the end of the game Black plays with merciless
consistency. Capablanca's style is irreproachable.' (Lasker)} 32. Qb2 a4 {
Giving White yet another weakness – at b3. 33...Rb6 and ...axb3 is threatened.}
33. Qd2 {(an attempt to save himself in the endgame)} Qxd2 34. Rxd2 axb3 35.
axb3 $17 {[%mdl 4096] Endgame KRN-KRN} Rb6 $1 36. Rd3 Ra6 $1 37. g4 hxg3 38.
fxg3 Ra2 39. Nc3 Rc2 {(with the threat of ...Nxd4)} (39... Rb2 {is more
complex.} 40. Nb5 Kg7 41. Kf1 Kf6 42. g4 Nh4) 40. Nd1 Ne7 41. Nc3 Rc1+ 42. Kf2
Nc6 43. Nd1 $1 {A pretty trap.} (43. Nb5 $15) 43... Rb1 $1 44. Ke2 $2 {[#]
Finally White blunders a pawn.} (44. Ke1 $17) 44... Rxb3 $1 $19 {[%mdl 512]}
45. Ke3 (45. Rxb3 Nxd4+) 45... Rb4 $1 {It is clearly simpler to convert the
advantage with the rooks on. And in the given instance this simplicity and
inevitability, typical of Capa, creates a particular impression, because
playing White was the great Lasker!} 46. Nc3 Ne7 47. Ne2 Nf5+ 48. Kf2 g5 49. g4
Nd6 50. Ng1 Ne4+ 51. Kf1 Rb1+ 52. Kg2 Rb2+ 53. Kf1 Rf2+ 54. Ke1 Ra2 55. Kf1 Kg7
{After tying down the opponent's pieces, Black activates his king.} 56. Re3 Kg6
57. Rd3 f6 58. Re3 Kf7 59. Rd3 (59. Nf3 {only move.}) 59... Ke7 60. Re3 Kd6 61.
Rd3 (61. Nf3 $142) 61... Rf2+ 62. Ke1 Rg2 63. Kf1 Ra2 64. Re3 e5 65. Rd3 exd4
66. Rxd4 (66. Nf3 $142 Kc5 67. Ke1) 66... Kc5 {Black is clearly winning.} 67.
Rd1 d4 68. Rc1+ Kd5 {“The black pawn will advance and White will have to
give up his knight for it. This is the finest win of the match and probably
took away from Dr Lasker his last real hope of winning or drawing the match.
” – Capablanca. wins. Lessons from this game: 1) If you have an isolated
queen’s pawn, it is necessary to play energetically and aggressively.
Otherwise the pawn is liable to become a static weakness that could easily
cost you the game. 2) “A weakness is not a weakness unless it can be
attacked.” 3) When the opponent’s position is paralysed on one wing, see
if you can take advantage of this by making additional gains in other parts of
the board before undertaking decisive action. 4) In a winning ending don’t
give the opponent any more counterplay than you have to - and ideally stamp
out his activity altogether. Then bring your king up and promote a pawn.
Accuracy: White = 37%, Black = 54%.} 0-1
No comments:
Post a Comment