Rosenthal has held the field in Paris for many years, but his star is waning. Taubenhaus and Goetz are now in possession, and de Riviére is more to the fore than ever. There has been a great split among the Parisian chessists, and an opposition room is now running in the Boulevard des Italiens. The old Café de la Regence holds its own as yet, and no doubt will continue to do so. We played five games there last week, and we may shortly give our friends the best of them.
The old place has been renovated since last we saw it, but the old-fashioned look remains. There is no chess until evening, and we were able to inspect the picture of Mr. Morphy playing eight games blindfold without inconveniencing anybody. It is an old French paint, and represents the great master as sitting with his back to the players without any facial bandage. The room appears to have been the second or inner chamber on the ground floor, which is used as a billiard room. The place is not so quiet and favourable for chess play as Simpson’s Divan, London.
This is probably the sketch mentioned by Buckley. From the John G. White collection at the Cleveland Public Library.
The French amateurs, contrary to expectation, are terribly slow; and they affect the French Defence – unfairly called by George Walker the “sneak” opening – to an alarming extent. When first player they often adopt the Double Fianchetto, which they call “the little Chapels.” They are wonderfully polite and obliging, and do not explain it too much when they lose.
[Source: Birmingham Weekly Mercury, August 15 1891]
Robert John Buckley – Hofmann
Paris 1891
Notes by Buckley
(remove White’s queen knight) 1. e4 e6 2. f4
Bad in even games, but affording good chances to the odds given. 2 … Nc6
d5 was his plan, followed after White’s e5, by c5. 3. Nf3 d5 4. e5 f6! 5. d4 Be7 6. c3 Nh6 7. Bd3 O-O 8. h4 Nf5 9. g4 Ng3 10. Rh3 Ne4 11. Qc2 f5 12. g5 g6
This pawn should not have been moved at the present. It can now be attacked by h5 whenever convenient to White. 13. Be3 Qe8 14. O-O-O Nd8 15. Rdh1 c5
This good move comes a little late. 16. Qh2 c4 17. Bc2 Nf7
18. h5
White having completed his arrangements, now proceeds to business. 18 … Nh8 19. hxg6 Qxg6 20. Rxh7 Nf7
To prevent Rh8+, or Rh6 attacking the queen. 21. Ba4
With an object which becomes apparent a little later. 21 … a6
Intending b5 to enable him to develop the bishop on c8.
And in this position White mated in four moves.
[Source: Birmingham Weekly Mercury, September 12 1891]
Our accomplished confrére, M. Numa Preti, in the September issue of his charming magazine, La Stratégie, points out that in our notice of French amateur play, we have not sufficiently considered that eight of the players at the Café de la Regence are foreigners. M. Preti says that the modern school has very few followers among the French players.
[Source: Birmingham Weekly Mercury, October 3 1891]
In his chess column in Allgemeine Sport-Zeitung (January 13 1918) Schlechter announced that he was to play a match against Rubinstein:
At the end of Januar Schlechter and Rubinstein will play a small match at Kerkaupalast in Berlin. The match will begin on January 19 [the first game was in fact played on the 21st. ed.]. 6 games will be played. Draws counts as half a point. The player with the most points will be declared winner and is awarded 1000 Marks, and the other player 600 Marks. In addition both masters will receive compensation for travel and accommodation.
The match was originally scheduled to be played December 1917, but postponed because Rubinstein “at the last moment demanded completely different conditions”.
(Source: Deutsche Schachzeitung, December 1917, p. 282)
On his way to Berlin Schlechter made a stop in Prague and gave a simultaneous exhibition. He played 37 opponents, won 24, lost 4, and drew 9 games.
Carl Schlechter.
Carl Schlechter – NN
Prague, January 16 1918 1. Nc3 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. d4 d6 4. e4 Bg4 5. Bb5 Bxf3 6. gxf3 exd4 7. Qxd4 Qf6 8. Qe3 Nge7? 9. Nd5
And white won in a few moves.
(Source: Deutsche Schachzeitung, February 1918, p. 45)
Rubinstein also played a simul before the match. In Berlin on January 19 he won 24 games and only lost one. The exhibition took place at Kerkau-Palast, the same venue that hosted the match.
The day before the match Jacques Mieses published a long piece in Berliner Tageblatt (January 20):
Despite the horrible fight for our existence that demands all the power of our nation, and which we have fought for 3½ years, there is an almost unabated interest in all intellectual fields in our fatherland. That is a phenomenon which we can be proud of. The fact that we can once more organize an interesting chess match in the nation’s capital, in this time of weapons clinking, is a joyful event. Not just from a chess point of view but also in general.
This time it is two foreign masters, C. Schlechter of Vienna and A. Rubinstein of Warsaw, who will wrestle each other in the Kerkau-Palast, the scene of so many exciting chess battles. Because of the present circumstances it has not been possible to properly measure the fighter’s strengths in a long decisive match. The masters will only play a series of six games, but with the well-founded reputation of the two matadors, even a short clash between the two can be categorized as a significant chess event.
The match mainly came about on the initiative of the well-known Berlin chess publisher and teacher B. Kagan, who also organized the Lasker-Tarrasch match in 1916. His name is sweet music especially to the ears of chess enthusiasts in the German and Austrian-Hungarian forces. Despite the war, B. Kagan has published a great number of stimulating chess books and made them available free of charge to chess friends at the front, in the field hospitals, and in the infirmaries. Thus he has greatly contributed to the spreading and popularity of the noble game and deserves the gratitude of so many soldiers. (…) The games between Rubinstein and Schlechter will undoubtedly be followed with excitement by many chess friends in uniform.
The match begins tomorrow, January 21. To predict the mutual chances of the matadors is a delicate matter. Both have performed excellently in tournaments as well as matches and they are completely evenly matched. Famously, Schlechter is the only player who has drawn a match against World Champion Lasker. In a match as short as the present, luck could play a role which must not be underestimated as the first couple of games could decide the end result. So even if surprises could very well be possible, they would not be surprises to chess connoisseurs.
Was Rubinstein a traitor?
World War 1 was still raging. Rubinstein (Russia) and Schlechter (Austria-Hungary) were citizens of countries at war with each other, and Rubinstein participated in an event on enemy soil. Did that make Rubinstein a traitor? Some in the British press thought so:
Mr Yates notes in “Yorks. W. Post” that Rubinstein seems to have thrown in his lot definitely with his country’s enemies, and is now engaged in a match with Schlechter at Vienna [in a later column this was corrected to Berlin. Ed.]. – If so, we can chalk Mr Rubinstein off as a poor creature, and certainly can’t congratulate him on his move from the frying pan into the fire! Russia is in the melting pot, but the Ramshackle Show is practically in “Blazes.”
(Source: Falkirk Herald March 20 1918)
Rubinstein lived in Warsaw which had been occupied by German troops since 1915. He was a Russian citizen, but lived in a Poland that hungered after independence. At the time of the match an armistice between Russia and the Central Powers (mainly Germany and Austria-Hungary) had been in place for a month, and peace negotiations were under way. A peace treaty was signed on March 3. Poland gained independence after the end of WW1 in November 1918, and Rubinstein automatically gained Polish citizenship.
The games
Game 1
Carl Schlechter – Akiba Rubinstein
Berlin, January 21 1918
Notes by Carl Schlechter
Additional notes by Jacques Mieses 1. e4 e5 2. Bc4 Nc6 3. Nc3 Nf6 4. d3
White wanted to bring about the well-known variation 4… Bb4 5. Bg5 h6 6. Bxf6 Bxc3+! 7. bxc3 Qxf6 8. Ne2 (as in the game Schlechter-Leonhardt, Bad Pistyan 1912). However, Rubinstein remembered his game against Mieses in the 1908 Vienna tournament and avoided the danger with 4… Bc5. 4… Bc5 5. Be3
White could transpose to the so-called “Giuoco Piano” with 5. Nf3. 5. Bg5 came into consideration. 5… Bb6
The opening of the f-file with 5… Bxe3 would be advantageous for white. White would continue with Qf3, Nge2 followed by 0-0 and attain very strong play. 6. Qd2 d6 7. Nge2 Be6 8. Bxe6
White could of course just as well have played 8. Bb3 or 8. Bd5. The text move releases the tension too soon. 8… fxe6 9. Bxb6
This exchange is the natural follow-up to the 8th move. 9… axb6 10. 0-0 0-0 11. f4
11… d5! Mieses: White’s opening doesn’t give black any problems. Black completely equalizes with the text move. 12. exd5
White could bring about complications with 12. fxe5 Nxe5 13. Qg5 Qd6!, but that would only be favorable for black. Mieses: 12. fxe5 Nxe5 13. Qg5 was also to be considered but black has the strong reply 13… Qd6. Then white can’t play 14. Nb5 because of 14… Qc5+, and if 14. d4 then 14… Nf7 15. Qe3 e5 after which the game peters out. [At the end of this line black had an even better move, 15… Qxh2+! winning a pawn. ed.] 12… exd5 13. fxe5 Nxe5 14. Nd4 Qd7 15. Rae1 Rae8 16. Qg5
The position is very dangerous for black. Rubinstein thought for a long time and found the best move. 16… Nc6!
The best. 16… Ng6 would be bad because of 17. h4. If 16… Qg4 then 17. Qxg4 Nexg4 18. Ne6 Rf7 19. h3. After 16… Nf7 17. Qf5! black would be under pressure. 17. Ncb5 Nxd4 18. Nxd4 Rxe1 19. Rxe1 Re8 20. Re5 h6 21. Qe3 Rxe5 22. Qxe5 Qe8 23. Qxe8+ Nxe8 24. Ne6 Kf7 Draw.
Of course, white doesn’t play 25. Nd8+ followed by Nxb7 because the knight would be lost, but rather 25. Nf4.
Sources: Deutsche Schachzeitung February 1918 pp. 28-29 Tidskrift för Schack January-February 1918 pp. 13-14
Kerkau-Palast in Berlin, the playing venue.
Game 2
Akiba Rubinstein – Carl Schlechter
Berlin, January 22 1918
Notes by Carl Schlechter
Additional notes by Jacques Mieses, John Donaldson & Nikolay Minev, and I. M. Brown 1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 d6 3. Nc3 Nbd7 4. e4 e5 5. Nge2
The knight is much better placed here than on f3. 5… g6 6. g3 Bg7 7. Bg2 exd4
This exchange seems to be necessary, otherwise white closes the position with d4-d5 giving black a cramped game. 8. Nxd4 0-0 9. 0-0 Nc5
Maybe 9… Ne5 was better in order to continue with Bd7 and Nc6. 10. h3
This move was probably not necessary. 10. f3 could be played at once. Mieses: Preparing Be3. 10… Re8 11. f3 Bd7 12. Be3 a6
Preparing the break b7-b5. There is no other obvious plan for black. Mieses: Black dare not keep passive because of the threat Nd5 followed by f4. An attack on the queenside is his only chance. 13. Qd2 Ne6 14. Kh2
14… b5 15. cxb5 Nxd4 16. Bxd4 axb5 17. a3 Rb8 18. f4 Be6
Very dangerous, as the bishop is exposed to the attack of the white f-pawn. Very much to be considered was 18… b4 and best play would be 19. axb4 Rxb4 20. e5! dxe5 21. Bxe5!. If 21. fxe5 Nh5! threatening Rxd4 and white would be in a very difficult position. Mieses: 18… Bc8 would be better than the text move. 19. Nd5! c6 20. Nxf6+ Bxf6
21. f5
A very strong move which gives white the advantage. 21. Bxf6 Qxf6 22. Qxd6 Qxb2 23. Qxc6 Rbc8 gives black good attacking chances. 21… gxf5
Forced. After 21… Bg5 22. fxe6! white would win easily and brilliantly. If 21… Bc4 then simply 22. fxg6. 22. exf5 Bc4 23. Rfe1! Re5
The best. After 23… Rxe1 24. Rxe1 nothing can save black, for example 24… Bg5 25. Re8+! Qxe8 26. Qxg5+ Kf8 27. Bg7+ Kg8 28. Bh6+ followed by Qg7#. Mieses: The exchange sacrifice is forced because after 23… Bxd4 24. Qxd4 white threatens both Bxc6 and f6, rendering black’s position untenable. 24. Bxe5 Bxe5 25. Bxc6 Qf6
26. Rxe5
White was in time trouble here and had to look for a clear and convenient continuation. 26. Rab1 was probably better and if 26… d5 then 27. b3. Mieses: Rubinstein was not forced to give back the exchange but could very well have kept the material advantage with 26. Rab1. However, he was in time trouble and after 26. Rab1 d5 the passed d-pawn could have given him difficulties. Psychologically, the exchange sacrifice can be explained in this way. Brown: Not forced, for 26. Rab1 Ba2 27. Rbc1 sufficed. Donaldson & Minev: We think that after 26. Rab1 Kh8! (intending 27… Rg8, if 27. Rg1 d5!), Black has strong counterplay and good compensation for the exchange. [Donaldson & Minev seems to have missed the tactic 26. Rab1 Kh8 27. b3! and after 27… Bc3 28. Qe3 Bxe1 29. bxc4 Bc3 30. cxb5 the two passed pawns should win. Ed.] 26… dxe5 27. Be4 Rd8 28. Qe3 Rd4 29. Re1 Mieses: Better was probably 29. Rg1 followed by Rg2. 29… Qd8 30. f6
Otherwise f7-f6 and black is safe. 30… Qxf6 31. Bg2 Rd3 Draw
Possible was 32. Qxe5 Qxe5 33. Rxe5 Rd2 34. Kg1 Rxb2 35. Re3 with equality. Mieses: 31… e4 would have increased black’s chances.
Sources: Deutsche Schachzeitung February 1918 pp. 29-30 Tidskrift för Schack January-February 1918 pp. 14-15 British Chess Magazine April 1918 pp. 118-119 Donaldson & Minev: The Life & Games of Akiva Rubinstein p. 312
The only known photo from the match. Rubinstein is seated on the left, Schlechter on the right.
Game 3
Carl Schlechter – Akiba Rubinstein
Berlin, January 23 1918
Notes by Carl Schlechter
Additional notes by Jacques Mieses 1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5 a6 4. Ba4 Nf6 5. Qe2
An ineffective continuation. The best way of playing is 5. 0-0. Mieses: This variation is seldomly played. It is considered to give black an easy defense. 5… b5 6. Bb3 Bc5 7. a4 Rb8 8. axb5 axb5 9. d3
9. Nc3 0-0 is more common. But even that gives no more than equality. 9… 0-0 10. 0-0 d6 11. Be3 Bg4 12. h3 Bxf3 13. Qxf3 Nd4 14. Bxd4 Bxd4
It would seem that a dreary drawish position has arisen, however, the play becomes quite lively now. 15. Nc3
Better than 15. c3, after which it will not be so easy to develop the knight.
15… g6
The World Champion [Emanuel Lasker. Ed.] recommends 15… Bxc3 followed by Nd7 or Ra8. Maybe Rubinstein avoided this continuation because he wanted to keep the opposite-colored bishops. 16. Nd1 Nh5 17. c3 Bc5 18. Ne3 b4 19. Bc4 bxc3 20. bxc3 Qg5 21. Rfd1!
Black doesn’t pay nearly enough attention to the attack in the centre. He should play for a draw with 21… Qf4. 21… Nf4? Mieses: Not good, as the continuation shows. 21… Rb2 would have been better. 22. d4
22… exd4?
Now black loses a piece. The bishop had to go to b6 immediately. Mieses: A mistake which costs a piece. After 22… Bb6 23. dxe5 dxe5 24. Rd7 white only has a small positional advantage. 23. cxd4 Bb6
If 23… d5 then 24. dxc5 dxc4 25. h4. 24. h4!
A move that is certainly easy to overlook. 24… Qxh4 Mieses: If 24… Qf6 then 25. Ng4. 25. g3 Qf6
Best. Black gets two pawns for the piece, though he must exchange queens. If 25… Nh3+ then 26. Kg2 Qh6 27. Ng4. 26. Qxf4 Bxd4 27. Qxf6 Bxf6 28. Ra7 Bd8 29. Rda1 Rb4 30. Bd5 Rb2 31. Rc1 h5 32. Rc2 Rb1+ 33. Kg2 Kg7
34. Ba2
White chooses a very sharp line. Clearer and safer was 34. Nc4-a5-c6. 34… Re1 35. Nd5 Rxe4 36. Nxc7 Re7 37. Rc6 Rh8 38. Nb5 Rxa7 39. Nxa7 h4 40. Rxd6
If 40. g4, to avoid further pawn exchanges, then 40… h3+ followed by Bg5 is dangerous for white. 40… hxg3 41. fxg3 Re8 42. Bc4 f5 43. Nc6 Bf6 44. Nd4 Re4 45. Ne6+ Kh6 46. Nf4 Kg7
Of course, after 46… Rxc4 47. Rxf6 white has an easily won game. 47. Rc6 Re1 48. Rc7+ Mieses: The simplest was probably 48. Be2 with the threat of Bh5. 48… Kh6 49. Bg8 Rb1 Mieses: Rubinstein defends himself as well as possible, but in vain. 50. Rc6
The continuation 50. Rh7+ Kg5 51. Nh3+ Kg4 52. Bd5 would be useless. 52… Rb2+ would follow and black’s king escapes the mating net. 50… Kg7 51. Bd5
51. Bh7 was faster. 51… Rd1
52. Re6!
Now white is on the right path. The continuation is clear and forcing. Mieses: White wants to play the bishop to e8 to attack the g-pawn. 52… Rd4 53. Bc6! Rd2+ 54. Kh3 Rd1 55. Be8! Rh1+ 56. Kg2 Rh6 57. Rb6 Mieses: Black is in a fatal zugzwang. 57… Be5 58. Nxg6 Bf6 59. Nf4 black resigns.
Sources: Deutsche Schachzeitung February 1918 pp. 31-32 Tidskrift för Schack January-February 1918 pp. 15-16
Game 4
Akiba Rubinstein – Carl Schlechter
Berlin, January 26 1918
Notes by Carl Schlechter
Additional notes by Jacques Mieses, Hans Kmoch, Walter Penn Shipley and Fritz Englund 1. d4 d5 2. Nf3 Nf6 3. c4 c6 Mieses: This defense has recently been abandoned as inferior, and it is strange that Schlechter would play it on such an occasion. 4. Nc3 dxc4 Mieses: 4… Ne4 is surely better. 5. e3 Bg4 Shipley: Black with his last two moves has adopted an unusual defense to the Queen’s Pawn Opening. He obtains a fair game, but failed to continue the defense with his usual ability, becoming somewhat indifferent in his play in the middle game. 6. Bxc4
Already threatening 7. Ne5 and 7. Bxf7+. 6… e6 7. 0-0 Nbd7 8. h3 Bxf3 Kmoch: 8… Bh5 was preferable. But even then black’s position would not be good as white’s center is too strong. 9. Qxf3 Be7 10. Rd1 0-0 11. e4 Re8
“White now has a strong centre and uses it impetuously” – says the World Champion in the “B. Z.” [Berliner Tageszeitung. Ed.] 12. Bf4 Nf8 Mieses: This is a mistake as white’s reply shows. Black hardly had anything better than 12… b5 followed by Qb6, but then he had to abandon sound positional play. Kmoch: White certainly has the superior position, by reason of his two bishops. Nevertheless it is amazing how quickly Rubinstein annihilates the opposing army.
13. d5!
This breakthrough decides the issue in white’s favor. 13… exd5 14. exd5 Qb6 Kmoch: If 14… cxd5 black loses the b-pawn to say the least: 15. Nxd5 Nxd5 16. Bxd5 Qb6 17. Bxb7 Rad8 18. Bd5 and now 18… Qxb2 is refuted by 19. Bxf7+ Kxf7 20. Be5+. 15. d6! Bd8 16. g4
Threatens g5 and if need be Bxf7+. Mieses: Clever. Even the obvious 16. Na4 would have led to a winning position for white. Kmoch: Threatening 17. g5 N6d7 18. Bxf7+ and Be3+. If black plays 16… Qxb2 there would follow 17. g5 Nd5 (17… N6d7 18. Bxf7+) 18. Nxd5 cxd5 19. Bxd5 and no less than four terrible threats impend. 20. Bc1; 20. Be5; 20. Bxf7+, and 20. Bxb7 followed by d7. 16… Ne6 Mieses: Black had nothing better.
17. d7!
The start of a pretty and well-calculated combination. 17… Re7 Kmoch: With 17… Rf8 18. Bd6 Nxd7 black might have put up a better fight. 18. Bd6 Rxd7 19. Bxe6 fxe6 20. g5 Rxd6
If the knight moves then of course 21. Qf8#. That is the point of the combination initiated with 17. d7. Kmoch: If 20… Qxb2 then 21. Rab1 followed by exf6. 21. Rxd6 Qc5 Englund: If 21… Bc7 then 22. Rxe6 Ne8 23. Nd5 threatening 24. Ne7+ and 25.Qf8#. 22. Rxd8+ Rxd8 23. gxf6 Qg5+ 24. Qg4 Mieses: The simplest would be 24. Kh1 Qxf6 25. Qxf6 gxf6 26. Rd1 and the endgame is hopeless for black. 24… Qxf6
Or 24… Qxg4+ 25. hxg4 gxf6 26. Rd1 and white wins easily. 25. Re1 e5 26. Qg3 Re8 27. Ne4 Qe7
28. Rd1
A very strong move. But 28. Ng5 also came into consideration. As an example look at this exciting variation: 28. Ng5 h6 29. Qb3+ Kh8 30. Rxe5! Qd7 31. Qd3! and white wins. 28… Rf8 29. Rd6 Kh8 30. Qg4 Rd8 31. Re6 Mieses: Even 31. Ng5 Rxd6 32. Qc8+ Rd8 33. Qxd8+ Qxd8 34. Nf7+ is possible. 31… Qb4 32. Qg5 Qe1+ 33. Kh2 Rf8 34. Re7 Black resigns
If 34… Rxf2+ then 35. Nxf2 Qxf2+ 36. Qg2 Qf4+ 37. Kh1 Qc1+ 38. Qg1 and white wins.
Sources: Deutsche Schachzeitung February 1918 pp. 32-33 Tidskrift för Schack January-February 1918 pp. 16-17 Kmoch: Rubinstein Chess Masterpieces pp. 90-92 The Philadelphia Inquirer June 2 1918
Schlechter wrote in Deutsche Schachzeitung, February 1918 pp. 25-26:
The score after the 4th game was: Rubinstein +1, Schlechter +1, and 2 draws. Thus the match was shrunken to two games. This increased the tension of both players and indeed, the two remaining games were the worst of the match. The 5th game was, just like the third, decided by a big blunder.
Game 5
Carl Schlechter – Akiba Rubinstein
Berlin, January 27 1918
Notes by Carl Schlechter
Additional notes by Jacques Mieses, Gunnar Gundersen, Evgeny Pigusov, Herman Helms, and The Washington Post (the name of the chess editor is not known) 1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5 a6 4. Bxc6 dxc6 5. Nc3 f6 Mieses: Considered to be a good nowadays. Gundersen: We do not care for this move. It was first brought into prominence by Schlechter in his game with Lasker in the London tourney of 1899 – an uneventful draw. 6. d4 exd4 7. Qxd4 Gundersen: In the above-mentioned game Lasker played 7. Nxd4, departing from his usual style of getting queens off the board as soon as possible. 7… Qxd4 8. Nxd4 Bd6 9. Be3
The comment by the World Champion in the “B. Z.” that white developed this bishop too soon is hard to understand. Eventually all the pieces have to be developed and the bishop is excellently placed on e3. 9… Ne7 Gundersen: We prefer 9. 0-0-0 as played by Alekhine against Lasker in the Petrograd tourney of 1914. A most interesting game ensued, Lasker winning after 90 moves. 10. 0-0 Bd7 11. Rad1 c5 12. Nde2 Ng6 13. Nd5 The Washington Post: Rather better would have been 13. Rd2, followed by doubling of the rooks, which should be exchanged early so that neither side may gain control of the open file. 13… 0-0-0
White is arguably a little better in this position. The correct continuation was 14. c4, but instead came a huge blunder. Mieses: The best move. Furthermore, it contains a trap which Schlechter falls into. 14. Nb6+?? Pigusov: Better was 14. Ng3 followed by Nf5. The Washington Post: Again, doubling of the rooks would have been in order. 14… cxb6 15. Rxd6 Bb5 Pigusov: Black is winning. 16. Rxd8+ Rxd8 17. Nc3 Mieses: If 17. Re1 then of course 17… Bxe2. 17… Bxf1 18. Kxf1 Gundersen: White has now a losing game. It is instructive to notice carefully how Rubinstein makes his four pawns to three on the queen side tell. 18… Kc7 19. Ke2 Kc6 20. Nb1 b5 21. Nd2 Ne5 22. Nf1 Nc4 23. Bc1 a5 24. Ne3 Nxe3 25. Bxe3 a4 26. f3 b4 27. Bd2 Kb5 28. Be3 Kc4 29. Bd2 b3 30. cxb3+ axb3 31. a3 b5 32. g4 Ra8 Mieses: Threatening Rxa3. 33. Bc1 b4 34. axb4 Ra1 35. b5
Mieses: A lovely jest and Rubinstein plays along. The game now ends with a little fireworks. Gundersen: At first sight this looks as if were black to capture the bishop the pawn would advance safely to queen. 35… Rxc1 Pigusov: 35… Kxb5 also wins. 36. b6 Rc2+ 37. Kd1 Mieses: If 37. Ke3 then 37… Rc3+! followed by Rd3 and Rd8. 37… Rxb2
[Some sources claims the game ended here, but most sources including Schlechter himself in Deutsche Schachzeitung, gives one more move. Ed.] 38. b7 Rxh2 White resigns Mieses: If 39. b8=Q then 39… b2 and white only has a check on g8. Helms: A curious ending, cleverly worked out by Rubinstein. If white now queens his pawn, then 39… b2, and the black rook cannot be captured, because black queens in turn and, on the following move, wins his opponent’s queen. If the rook is not taken, then there is no way to meet the threat of 40… b1=Q, followed by Rh1+, after which black’s passed pawn would win easily. Neither would 40. Qg8+ open a way of escape to white.
Sources: Deutsche Schachzeitung March 1918 pp. 49-50 Tidskrift för Schack January-February 1918 p. 17 American Chess Bulletin May-June 1918 p. 128 The Australasian May 25 1918 The Philadelphia Inquirer May 26 1918 The Washington Post June 6 1918 Glatman: Akiba Rubinstein’s Chess Academy p. 114
Game 6
Akiba Rubinstein – Carl Schlechter
Berlin, January 29 1918
Notes by Carl Schlechter
Additional notes by Jacques Mieses 1. d4 d5 2. Nf3 Nf6 3. c4 e6 4. Nc3 Nbd7 5. Bg5 c6 6. e3 Qa5 7. Qb3?
A serious mistake which black could refute as follows: 7… Ne4! 8. Bh4 g5! 9. Bg3 h5! 10. h4 Nxg3 11. fxg3 g4 12. Ng1 Bh6! 13. Kf2 Nb6! with a completely superior position. However, black overlooked the winning opportunity on the king side and chose a continuation that only led to equality. [In this line the computer, in this case Stockfish 8, prefers 12. Ng5 and claims equality. Apparently there is no way to trap the knight with f7-f6 before the rest of white’s forces come to the rescue. Ed.] 7… Ne4! 8. Bh4 Bb4? Mieses: 8… g5 doesn’t give black anything; 9. Bg3 h5 10. h4! g4 11. Ng1 Bd6 12. Nge2 etc. 9. Rc1 Nb6 10. Bd3 dxc4 11. Bxc4 Qa4 Mieses: 11… Na4 could not be recommended because of 12. O-O Naxc3 13. bxc3 Nxc3 (or 13… Bxc3) 14. a3! and white wins a piece. Or 12… Bxc3 13. bxc3 Naxc3 (if 13… Nexc3 then 14. Qa3!) 14. Bd3 with advantage for white. 11… Nd5, however, would be a good continuation for black. 12. Bd3 Qxb3 13. axb3
And the game was drawn after a prolonged endgame. 13… Nf6 14. Ke2 Nbd5 15. Ne5 Be7 16. Ra1 Nb4 17. Bb1 b6 18. Rc1 Bb7 19. f3 Nfd5 20. Bxe7 Kxe7 21. Nd3 Rhc8 22. Nxd5+ Nxd5
23. b4 g6 24. Bc2 f6 25. Bb3 Rd8 26. Ra3 Mieses: The tempting 26. b5 is refuted by 26… Rd6. 26… a6 27. Ba4 Rac8 28. e4 Nc7
29. Bxc6 Bxc6 30. Rxc6 Nb5 31. Rxc8 Rxc8 32. Rxa6 Nxd4+ 33. Ke3 Mieses: If the king moves to the first rank, then Rc2 follows with some chances for black. 33… Nc2+ 34. Kd2 Nd4 35. Ke3 Nc2+ 36. Kd2 Nd4 Draw
Sources: Deutsche Schachzeitung March 1918 p. 50 Tidskrift för Schack January-February 1918 p. 18
Schlechter was not happy about the quality of play. He wrote:
With the outstanding class of both grandmasters one could expect noteworthy performances. Unfortunately these expectations were not met, the play was weak, very weak. We believe that six games are too few. Every single game can decisively influence the outcome of the match and that paralyzes the players. Even the six games between Lasker and Tarrasch in the autumn of 1917 [1916. Ed.] were hardly grandmasterly performances.
(Source: Deutsche Schachzeitung February 1918 p. 25)
It is not known where Rubinstein went after the match, but he probably returned to his home in Warsaw. He and Schlechter would meet again less than 3 months later in Berlin to play a small 4-player tournament.
Schlechter stayed on in Berlin and gave a simultaneous exhibition on Januar 31. He won 19 games and drew 1. On his way back to Vienna he visited Aussig (now Ústí nad Labem) and played 5 games simultaneously against consulting players. He won 4 and drew against the team of Thierfelder and Dörfler. He would visit Aussig twice more that year in connection with his travels to Berlin.
A Herald reporter found the great chess player at the Walker House yesterday afternoon, and had a very pleasant chat with him on chess, and on matters in general. Dr. Zukertort is not only the greatest chess player living, but he is at the head of a leading publishing house in London, and has been connected with some of the chief journals of England and Germany as a political and literary writer. He is of small stature, with a large and finely shaped head, and eyes that betoken superiority of intelligence and perception. He may be 40 or 50 years of age, for he is one of those men whose age it would be difficult to guess. He speaks with a slight German accent, and is a very interesting conversationalist. During the talk had with him yesterday by the HERALD man he said that he learned the game of chess when he was 19, and has attained his wonderful skill by dint of practice and concentration. He had made his progress in the art step by step, until as chess-players know, he has astonished the world by his play.
From chess the conversation turned on the Doctor’s impressions of America and Americans. He said that he was immediately struck with the truth of a report that has long been current in Europe – that Americans as a rule, whether rich or poor, are slaves of the the almighty dollar. They allow themselves no time for rest or relaxation, which are only to be had by change of occupation, but plunge ahead in their chase after cash, regardless of every other consideration. In England, he said, the men who do brain work, like those who do manual labor, have their hours so divided and systemized as to prevent that lassitude and collapse which inevitably result from overwork.
In his own business, that of a publisher, the hours are from 11 a.m. to 3 p.m., and the system is universal among the guild, so that all persons having business in that line must attend to it during the four hours of open office or not at all. The mechanic has a maximum limit of labor fixed at nine hours per diem, and the law is so strict that even if a man makes a bargain to work more hours it is null and void, and the employer is liable. Publishing firms, newspapers, and other industries in which the bulk of labor to be done taxes the brain rather than the muscles, guage their hours of labor to such a nicety as not to overtax and thereby ruin the usefulness of the brains on which their success largely depends. The Doctor had many other interesting things to say, but a prior engagement interrupted.
At about 8 o’clock he met a number of local chess devotees according to arrangement at the Alta Club’s rooms, and gave them an exhibition of his skill after this fashion: There were six of the local players, namely, Messrs. Orson, Harmel and Arthur Pratt, Zera Snow, Joseph Barnett and Mr. Brook. These were to play against the doctor simultaneously, each having a separate board. The doctor sat in a corner of the room with his face turned away from the tables, and called out his moves, which were made by another local chess player who acted as teller. He played a different game on each of the six boards, being obliged to carry in his brain not only the situation of each man played by himself, but each and every move of his six opponents, several of whom are very skillful at the game. It was a wonderful sight, and one which can never fade from the memory of those who witnessed it. At the close of the evening the doctor had check-mated five of his adversaries without once looking at the boards; but the other, Harmel Pratt, managed to win a game, which is no small feather in his cap as a chess player.
The visit of Doctor Zukertort to this city should give an impetus to the study of the greatest of all games – a game that is a solace, an educator, a refiner, and a moral instructor.
Emanuel Lasker annotated 7 of Capablanca’s games from San Sebastián 1911 for his chess column in The Louisville Courier-Journal in the period March 26 – April 30 1911:
Frank J. Marshall – José Raúl Capablanca Round 2, February 21 1911 1. d4 d5 2. c4 c6 3. cxd5
The exchange balances the position, whereas white should retain initiative. 3. Nf3 Nf6 4. e3 seems therefore slightly preferable. 3… cxd5 4. Nc3 Nc6 5. Nf3 Nf6 6. Qb3 e6 7. Bg5 h6 8. Bh4 Qb6
Of doubtful value. 8… Be7 would have been good enough. 9. Qxb6 axb6 10. e3 Bd7 11. Bb5 Bb4 12. O-O
This is certainly weak. 12. Bxf6 gxf6 13. Ke2 would have ensured him a good ending. Now the balance of position is rather slightly in favor of black. 12… Bxc3 13. bxc3 Ne4 14. c4
If 14. Rfc1 Ra3 15. c4 Nc3 16. Rc2 the position is probably more advantageous for black than with the actual continuation. 14… Nc3
15. a4
Well done. He sacrifices a pawn in order to keep the initiative. 15… dxc4 16. Bxc4 Rxa4 17. Rxa4 Nxa4 18. Ra1 Na5 19. Ne5 Nxc4
Here 19… b5 was tempting, but the reply 20. Nxd7 Nxc4 21. Nc5 would have been satisfactory. 20. Nxc4 f6 21. Rb1 Bc6 22. f3 Kd7 23. Nxb6+ Nxb6 24. Rxb6 Ra8 25. Rb2 Ra1+ 26. Kf2 f5 27. Bg3 Bd5 28. Be5 g6 29. Bg7 h5 30. h4 Ra2 31. Rxa2 Bxa2 32. e4 drawn.
Marshall. Star Gazette, January 14 1911.
The play thus far at San Sebastián has brought Capablanca to the front. In the first week of the tournament, in which no less than 75 per cent of the games were drawn, he won two out of four. This is an excellent beginning that insured him a high position. Nine and one-half points should take first prize in the money; nine points would probably tie for first and second place.
(March 26 1911)
Capablanca. Illustrated Sporting and Dramatic News, March 25 1911.
The combination that Capablanca made in his first victory at San Sebastián, against Dr. Bernstein, has been greatly underrated. The critics did not do what I consider to be their duty. Without investigation they assumed that Bernstein had made the best move, and since he lost easily, that the combination was a superficial one. In that way they failed to do justice to its profundity. In fact, the combination has many branches. Dr. Bernstein selected a weak defense which gave Capablanca no opportunity of continuing his game in the brilliant style that he must have planned, and it is therefore plainly the office of the critic to resurrect Capablanca’s idea, which through the fault of his opponent has failed to come to maturity. This was the course of the game:
José Raúl Capablanca – Osip Bernstein Round 1, February 20 1911 1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5 Nf6 4. O-O Be7 5. Nc3 d6 6. Bxc6+ bxc6 7. d4 exd4 8. Nxd4 Bd7 9. Bg5 O-O 10. Re1 h6 11. Bh4 Nh7 12. Bxe7 Qxe7 13. Qd3 Rab8
Until this point the game has followed the lines laid out by a game of my match with Janowski, in 1909, and copied several times since. Here Bernstein varies. 13… Rfe8 in order to leave the f8-square free for the knight – a very favorable post for it – would have been preferable. 14. b3 Ng5 15. Rad1 Qe5 16. Qe3 Ne6 17. Nce2 Qa5
18. Nf5 Nc5 19. Ned4 Kh7 20. g4 Rbe8 21. f3 Ne6 22. Ne2 Qxa2
This is dangerous. 22… Qb6 would have been more cautious. But Bernstein thought that he would be able to weather the storm, and, possibly, he was right. 23. Neg3 Qxc2
This is the mistake. He should have continued with 23… f6 and Rf7. 24. Rc1 Qb2 25. Nh5 Rh8
Too late now for 25… f6 on account of 26. Nhxg7, menacing Qxh6+. White threatened Rc3, followed by Nhxg7, hence black prepared for it, intending Kg8 as a reply to Rc3. 26. Re2 Qe5 27. f4 Qb5
28. Nfxg7 Nc5
Thus he loses without resistance. He could have made a fight by 28… Nxg7 29. Nf6+ Kg6 30. Nxd7 f6! Then white had but one continuation to win the game: 31. e5! For instance, 31… dxe5 32. Qe4+ Kf7 33. Rxc6 Ne6 34. Nxf6 Nxf4 (34… Kxf6 35. f5) 35. Rd2; further 31… fxe5 32. fxe5 Re7 33. Rf1 threatening Rf6+ as well as Qe4+; again 31… Kf7 32. Nxf6 Re7 33. Ne4 dxe5 34. f5 Rd7 35. Rd2 with an overwhelming position. 29. Nxe8 Bxe8 30. Qc3 f6 31. Nxf6+ Kg6 32. Nh5 Rg8 33. f5+ Kg5 34. Qe3+ resigns.
Bernstein. Wiener Schachzeitung 1914, p. 81.
Capablanca’s games at San Sebastián arrive slowly. Only the other day, the third one came to hand, his encounter with Dr. Tarrasch. That ended in a draw, but, after the opening stage had passed, the young master had all the initiative, and it was only with difficulty that Tarrasch could stand off his attacks. There is no doubt that a player of marked originality has come, who combines soundness and daring. The game follows:
Siegbert Tarrasch – José Raúl Capablanca Round 4, February 24 1911 1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bc4 Bc5 4. c3 Nf6 5. d4 exd4 6. cxd4 Bb4+ 7. Bd2 Bxd2+ 8. Nbxd2 d5 9. exd5 Nxd5 10. Qb3 Nce7 11. O-O O-O 12. Rfe1 c6 13. a4
Up to this point all book. The doctor’s move perhaps is based upon a good idea. b5 will be prevented, the bishop on c8 will be embarrassed . 13… Qb6
He takes the bull by the horn. Either the queen is exchanged or he gains time to develop Bc8. 14. Qa3 Be6 15. a5 Qc7 16. Ne4
He might have attacked by 16. Ng5. The move he makes loses valuable time. 16… Rad8 17. Nc5 Bc8
Black has now his position well in hand. But the pieces of white are also on firm ground. Yet Capablanca contrives to make an attack that comes very near winning. 18. g3 Nf5 19. Rad1 Nd6 20. Bxd5 Nb5 21. Qb4
He could not play 21. Bxf7+, because the knight on f3 is unguarded. 21… Rxd5 22. Nd3 Bg4 23. Nde5
23… h5
Excellent! White gets into difficulties. 24. Nxg4 hxg4 25. Nh4 Rfd8 26. Re7 Qd6 27. Qxd6 Nxd6 28. a6 bxa6 29. Rxa7 Nb5 30. Rxa6 Nxd4 31. Kf1
The only salvation. 31… g5 32. Ng2 Nf3 33. Rxd5 cxd5 34. Ne1!
A skillful defense. Everything else would lose. 34… Re8 35. Nxf3 gxf3 36. Rd6 Rc8 37. Ke1 Re8+ 38. Kf1
If black protects the d-pawn by 38… Re5, white gains time, for 39. h3 f5 40. g4, and the f3-pawn remains indefensible. 38… Rc8 drawn.
(April 2 1911)
Tarrasch. Wiener Schachzeitung 1914, p. 88.
Capablanca has won the proudest distinction that Europe at this moment could offer him. The first prize in one of the strongest tournaments, if not the strongest, ever held, has been won by him. American chess friends will surely be glad. It is to their credit to have produced such a pupil, and have formed the style of one so worthy to represent them.
Here follows one of Capablanca’s wins:
José Raúl Capablanca – Amos Burn Round 3, February 23 1911 1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5 a6 4. Ba4 Nf6 5. d3 d6 6. c3 Be7 7. Nbd2 O-O 8. Nf1 b5 9. Bc2 d5 10. Qe2 dxe4 11. dxe4 Bc5 12. Bg5 Be6 13. Ne3 Re8 14. O-O Qe7
That provokes the move that follows. He should have retreated 14… Be7. If, then, 15. Rad1 Qc8 16. Nd5 Bg4, the doubling of the pawns by Nxe7 or Bxf6 would not have amounted to a great deal. 15. Nd5 Bxd5 16. exd5 Nb8
17. a4!
That hits the weakness. 17… b4
Black is now lost. He should have let the pawn go. With 17… Nbd7 he could have fought on, for instance: 18. axb5 axb5 19. Rxa8 Rxa8 20. Qxb5 e4 (preparing Rb8, now ineffectual because of 20… Rb8 21. Bxf6 gxf6 22. Qd3) 21. Bxe4 Qxe4 22. Bxf6 Bxf2+ 23. Rxf2 Nxf6. 18. cxb4 Bxb4 19. Bxf6 Qxf6 20. Qe4 Bd6
If 20… Qg6 21. Qxb4 Qxc2 22. Rac1 would win easily. 21. Qxh7+ Kf8 22. Nh4 Qh6 23. Qxh6 gxh6 24. Nf5 h5 25. Bd1 Nd7 26. Bxh5 Nf6 27. Be2 Nxd5 28. Rfd1 Nf4 29. Bc4 Red8 30. h4 a5 31. g3 Ne6 32. Bxe6 fxe6 33. Ne3 Rdb8 34. Nc4 Ke7 35. Rac1 Ra7 36. Re1 Kf6 37. Re4 Rb4 38. g4 Ra6 39. Rc3 Bc5 40. Rf3+ Kg7 41. b3 Bd4 42. Kg2 Ra8 43. g5 Ra6 44. h5 Rxc4 45. bxc4 Rc6 46. g6 resigns.
Burn. The British Chess Magazine, January 1926.
A few of Capablanca’s games have arrived. The Schachwelt published three of them. Of these the most interesting one is that against Janowski. Though Capablanca commits a mistake, and, in consequence, is hard pressed, one must put a high value upon the accuracy of the defence of the young Cuban. And his counter-attack at the end is finely carried through.
José Raúl Capablanca – David Janowski Round 5, February 27 1911 1. d4 d5 2. e3 Nf6 3. Nf3 c5 4. c4 e6 5. Nc3 Be7 6. dxc5 O-O 7. a3 Bxc5 8. b4 Be7 9. Bb2 a5
This advance has no purpose. It only weakens the square b6. 9… Nc6 and then to capture the c-pawn would be sound. 10. b5 b6 11. cxd5 exd5 12. Nd4 Bd6 13. Be2 Be6 14. Bf3 Ra7 15. O-O Rc7 16. Qb3
Here he should maintain his pressure upon b6 by 16. Na4. If, then, 16… Nfd7 17. Nc6 Qc8 18. e4! Also after 16… Rc4 17. Rc1 the development of white would be preferable. 16… Nbd7 17. Rfd1 Ne5 18. Be2 Qe7 19. Rac1 Rfc8 20. Na4 Rxc1 21. Rxc1 Rxc1+ 22. Bxc1 Ne4 23. Bb2
He wants to capture the b-pawn, which at this moment would have failed on account of Qc7. But white should have taken the c-file by 23. Qc2. 23… Nc4 24. Bxc4
24… Bxh2+
This assures him, evidently, of at least a draw. 25. Kxh2 Qh4+ 26. Kg1 Qxf2+ 27. Kh2 Qg3+ 28. Kg1
If 28. Kh1 Bh3 wins. 28… dxc4 29. Qc2 Qxe3+ 30. Kh2 Qh6+ 31. Kg1 Qe3+ 32. Kh2 Qg3+ 33. Kg1 Qe1+ 34. Kh2 Nf6 35. Nxe6 Qh4+ 36. Kg1 Qe1+ 37. Kh2 Qh4+ 38. Kg1 Ng4 39. Qd2 Qh2+ 40. Kf1 Qh1+ 41. Ke2 Qxg2+ 42. Kd1 Nf2+ 43. Kc2 Qg6+ 44. Kc1 Qg1+ 45. Kc2 Qg6+ 46. Kc1 Nd3+ 47. Kb1 fxe6 48. Qc2
But at this point 48. Ka2 was preferable. 48… h5 49. Bd4 h4 50. Bxb6 h3 51. Bc7 e5 52. b6
52. Qxc4+ Kf8 53. Bd6+ Qxd6 54. Qc8+ might have drawn. The text move should lose. 52… Qe4 53. Bxe5 Qe1+
A mistake. He should have kept the diagonal bearing upon b7. 53… Qh1+ was necessary. 54. Ka2 Nxe5
Another error. 54… Nc1+ would have drawn. Now he is lost. 55. b7 Nd7 56. Nc5 Nb8 57. Qxc4+ Kh8 58. Ne4 Kh7 59. Qd3 g6
White has played all this excellently. If 59… h2 60. Ng5+ Kh6 61. Nf7+ Kh5 62. Qf5+ black is finally mated upon g1. 60. Qxh3+ Kg7 61. Qf3 Qc1 62. Qf6+ Kh7 63. Qf7+ Kh6 64. Qf8+ Kh5 65. Qh8+ Kg4 66. Qc8+ resigns. (April 9 1911)
Janowski. American Chess Magazine 1898, p. 215.
News has just come that Capablanca has won. His score of 9½ is the same I predicted three weeks ago would be sufficient for gaining the first prize. He probably aimed at no more and kept his powder dry, seeing what his rivals would do. This is a great moment in his life. His name has become known everywhere, his fame as a chess master is firmly established. The Berliner Tageblatt published his biography, the Lokal Anzeiger his picture; countless newspapers, chess columns and chess periodicals will speak of him, the man and the master. And he is 22 years of age. Happy Capablanca!
His style of play has pleased. It is sound and full of ideas. It has a dash of originality. No doubt that the chess world would not like to miss him, now that it has got to know him. In the beginning of his career, eight years ago, there were those who were fearful of his becoming what he is. They wanted him to have a profession and to be a chess master besides. Happily, nature was stronger than their influence. The world would have gained little had he become an engineer; the chess world would certainly have been poorer thereby.
Illustrierte Kronen Zeitung, March 22 1911.
Capablanca’s only loss in the San Sebastián tournament ran as follows:
Akiba Rubinstein – José Raúl Capablanca Round 13, March 13 1911 1. d4 d5 2. Nf3 c5 3. c4 e6 4. cxd5 exd5 5. Nc3 Nc6 6. g3 Be6 7. Bg2 Be7 8. O-O Rc8
As indicated in the book of the St. Petersburg tourney, 8… h6 is here the right move. 9. dxc5 Bxc5 10. Ng5
10. e4 d4 11. Nd5 would have kept an advantage, for instance: 11… Bxd5 12. exd5 Qxd5 13. Ne5. 10… Nf6 11. Nxe6 fxe6 12. Bh3 Qe7 13. Bg5
If 13. e4 dxe4 14. Bg5 Rd8, the queen has no good move left at her disposal. 13… O-O 14. Bxf6 Qxf6
Rubinstein makes now a wonderfully precise combination. Black should have captured with the pawn.
15. Nxd5 Qh6 16. Kg2 Rcd8 17. Qc1
If now 17… Rxd5 18. Qxh6 followed by Bxe6+. 17… exd5 18. Qxc5 Qd2
Capablanca, a pawn minus, fights now like Richard III, fallen from the horse. 19. Qb5 Nd4 20. Qd3 Qxd3 21. exd3 Rfe8 22. Bg4
Here he should have played 22. Rfe1, against 22… Nc2 23. Rxe8+ Rxe8 24. Rc1 Re2 25. Kf1 Rd2 26. Be6+ Kf8 27. Bxd5, white would win easily. 22… Rd6 23. Rfe1 Rxe1 24. Rxe1 Rb6 25. Re5 Rxb2 26. Rxd5 Nc6 27. Be6+ Kf8 28. Rf5+ Ke8 29. Bf7+ Kd7 30. Bc4 a6
With this he loses an important move. 30… Kd6 was preferable. If white exchanges the castle [sic.], black’s extra pawn should be very threatening. 31. Rf7+ Kd6 32. Rxg7 b5 33. Bg8 a5 34. Rxh7 a4 35. h4 b4 36. Rh6+ Kc5 37. Rh5+ Kb6
38. Bd5?
He had an easy victory by 38. Bc4, which assures him an excellent position with his rook on b5. For instance: 38. Bc4 b3 39. Rb5+ Kc7 40. Bxb3 axb3 41. axb3 Nd4 42. Rd5, and his pawns cannot be stopped. 38… b3
He could have made a better fight with 38… Rxa2. If, then, 39. Bxa2 b3, black wins. White would still have had to continue 39. Bc4 Rc2 40. Rb5+ Kc7 41. Bg8, and white would win, but with some difficulty. 39. axb3 a3 40. Bxc6 Rxb3
Against 40… a2 41. Rb5+, white gets on the a-file, thus: 41… Ka6 42. Rb8. 41. Bd5 a2 42. Rh6+ resigns.
Against 42… Kb5 43. Bc4+ obtains the a-file.
(April 16 1911)
Rubinstein. Illustrierte Kronen Zeitung, June 14 1914.
Here follows the game that secured the first victor of San Sebastián his prize. Had Dr. Vidmar won the contest he would have taken the place of his opponent.
Milan Vidmar – José Raúl Capablanca Round 15, March 16 1911 1. d4 d5 2. c4 e6 3. Nc3 c5 4. e3 Nf6 5. Nf3 Nc6 6. Bd3 dxc4 7. Bxc4 Be7 8. O-O O-O 9. dxc5
For an aspirant for the first prize this is far too tame. Why not 9.b3 followed by Bb2? To assume that the isolation of his d-pawn would lose him the game would be nervous anxiety. And he would have had hopes of obtaining a king’s side attack with smashing results. Now the elimination of the strong pieces, though it secures him against defeat, robs him of all chances to win by formidable assault.
Vidmar. Wiener Schachzeitung 1907, p. 6.
9… Qxd1 10. Rxd1 Bxc5 11. a3 b6 12. b4 Be7 13. e4 Rd8
He wants to place his knight on e8 if e5 drives it off. Hence he frees his rook before developing Bc8. 14. Bf4 Bb7 15. e5 Ne8 16. Bd3 Rac8 17. Nb5 Rd5
Thus he prepares the doubling of the rooks, in order to deprive white of his last means of attack, the rooks. At the same time he has in mind a pretty and effective way of parrying the attack that white may attempt. 18. Nd6 Nxd6 19. exd6 Bxd6 20. Bxd6
If 20… Rxd6, white wins by 21. Bxh7+. But 20… Rd8
Black regains the piece in another way. The game is now absolutely even, and a draw was agreed upon.
(April 30 1911)
“From a photograph taken at San Sebastián”. Linlithgowshire-Gazette, October 27 1911.
Yesterday afternoon, at 2:30 o’clock, Paul Morphy, the great chess player, died suddenly at the residence of his mother, on Royal street, between Conti and St. Louis. As shortly before his demise he had been met on the street, apparently in good health, the news startled those who knew him. Inquiries as to the cause of his death were made, and it was ascertained that he had died of congestion of the brain.
In the forenoon, as was his custom, he took his morning walk, but remained out somewhat later than usual. When he returned home he was very warm, and to cool himself immediately went to the bathroom. He was very fond of his bath, which he habitually took at 1 o’clock, and usually remained quite long in the water.
Yesterday, Mrs. Morphy, his aged mother, who was constantly watchful of his comfort and surrounded him with all the attention of a devoted mother, seeing that he remained in his bath uncommonly long, knocked at the door to call him out. Receiving no answer, she opened the door, which fortunately was unfastened, and found her son unconscious, clinging with both hands to the sides of the bath tub, and his head resting on the side of the tub. She immediately called for assistance. Dr. Meux, who happened to be passing the house at the time, was summoned in, and made every effort to recall him to consciousness, but in vain. Life was extinct, death having been caused by congestion of the brain, no doubt brought about by the cold water, which he entered while very warm after his walk. (The Times-Democrat, July 11, 1884)
Burial
The obsequies of Paul Morphy were very simple and very quiet. His relations and his devoted friends were around him. The news of his death had been as sudden as his demise, and the notice of his funeral so short that his admirers could not prepare the elegant tribute they would have done. But it was neither the wish of Morphy nor his family that the ceremonies should have been grander than they were. He had adjured the chess world long ago and he desired no recognition as the famed champion of the world, after he had surrendered the title unchallenged by his retirement. Morphy desired to be known only as a man and a christian, and those with whom he was intimate knew that even in his years of eccentricity he was still a knight of courtesy and a man of heart. It was the funeral of the man and not the great chess player.
Father Mignot officiated at the house and at the grave. The body was exposed at Morphy’s modest residence, No. 89 Royal street. Numerous floral offerings betokened the affection in which he was held. At 5 o’clock the coffin was carried down by Edward Morphy, Edmond Morphy, Leonce Percy, Henry Percy, Edgar Hincks and Charles Maurian, his life long companion and former adversary over the chess board. The hearse, followed by a few carriages, drove to the old St. Louis Cemetery. The tomb of Morphy’s was opened and Paul’s body placed beside that of his father, a well known figure in the history of Louisiana. (The Times-Picayune, July 12, 1884)
From Emanuel Lasker’s chess column in Pester Lloyd, Februar 5, 1911:
Spielmann is one of the young masters who have a lot of knowledge, but that has not limited his originality. He knows the beaten track, but also enters the unfamiliar ones. His pursuit of originality is not, as can be seen frequently in others, empty manner, but the expression of a need for development, based on sound positional sense. His innovations are, therefore, although sometimes shown to be inaccurate after later analysis, always inspiring and worthy of attention.
In Vienna, he has played a number interesting matches with great success. In the Master Tournament of the Vienna Chess Club he shared the victory with Schlechter. Both scored ten points out of thirteen, or 77 percent. Not just an excellent result; the quality of his games were at a high level. Against Dr Perlis Spielmann gave an outstanding effort. His treatment of the opening was exemplary and the execution of the attack flawless.
[The game is not from a tournament but from a 5-game match played in december 1910. According to a news report in Neue Freie Presse (December 6) this was the first match game. Spielmann won the match 3-2. Ed.]
Here is the game:
Rudolf Spielmann – Julius Perlis
Vienna 1910 1. e4 e5 2. Bc4 Nf6 3. d3 Bc5 4. Nc3 d6 5. f4 Nc6 6. Nf3 Bg4 7. Na4
Here Chigorin played 7.h3 with the intention after 7… Bxf3 8. Qxf3 Nd4 9. Qg3 Nxc2+ 10. Kd1 Nxa1 11. Qxg7 Rf8 or Kd7 12. fxe5 followed by Bg5, Rf1 etc. to initiate a very dangerous attack. However, black can decline the sacrifice and obtain a satisfactory position with 9… Qe7.
Spielmann’s move is unusual. He removes a piece from the centre and allows black time to threaten the king. But the analysis shows that the white position has adequate defenses. If 7… Nd4 then 8. c3 Nxf3+ 9. gxf3 Bh3 10. Nxc5 dxc5 11. fxe5 Nd7 12. Bf4 Qe7 13. d4 with a large advantage for white. Black will also be overwhelmed by the attack after 7… Bxf3 8. Qxf3 Nd4 9. Qg3. For the defense, therefore, a quiet move seems necessary. 7… Bb6 recommends itself even though white obtains the two bishops; the position is closed and therefore the terrain is advantageous for the knights. 7… exf4
The idea of this move is to open lines in the centre, and especially to prepare Ne5. 8. Nxc5 dxc5 9. Bxf4 Qe7
Deutsche Schachzeitung gives 9… Nh5 10. Be3 Ne5, but then a disaster would follow: 11. Nxe5 Bxd1 12. Bxf7+ Ke7 13. Bxc5+ Kf6 14. O-O+ with mate following shortly. 10. Bb5 O-O 11. Bxc6 bxc6 12. O-O c4 13. Qd2 Rfd8
Here 13… cxd3 was forced, followed by Rad8. Now a pretty combination is possible:
14. e5 Nd5 15. Bg5 f6 16. exf6 Nxf6 17. Rae1 Qc5+ 18. d4
Black can no longer get rid of the tripled pawns and so his destiny is decided. 18… Qd6 19. Ne5 Bh5
If 19… Qxd4+ 20. Qxd4 Rxd4 21. c3 Re4 22. Bxf6 and wins. 20. Rf4 Rf8 21. Nxc4 Qd5 22. Bxf6 Qxc4 23. b3 Qa6 24. Be5 Rxf4 25. Qxf4 Bg6
26. Bxg7 Qxa2
If 26… Kxg7 27. Re7+ Kg8 28. Qf6 followed by mate. 27. Bh6 Qa5 28. Rf1 black resigns.
During a visit to Copenhagen in 1927, Lasker told a news reporter an anecdote about meeting the world heavyweight boxing champion:
Politiken, March 20, 1927
The former chess world champion, Dr. Emanuel Lasker, who is staying in this city for a couple of days, is a cheerful man who appreciates both hearing and telling anecdotes. Here is one of his adventures, which he told our reporter yesterday:
34 years ago, Dr. Lasker said, I was staying in New Orleans. In a nearby village, the world heavyweight boxing champion, Fitzsimmons, had set up his training camp. One of my friends was an acquaintance of Fitzsimmons and invited me to come out and say hello to the world champion. At that time I was a strong fellow – no one would dare to step on my toes – and I was pleased to accept the invitation. Upon arrival, I had the great honor of being given the opportunity to deliver a deep and heavy punch to Fitzsimmons – he didn’t flinch at all – but moments later I was knocked out.
Well, you see, Fitzsimmons began training with a punching ball, and I was standing next to it. Now, either the string in which the ball hung was not strong enough or Fitzsimmons was particularly strong; suddenly, while the boxing champion was working the ball with punches and blows from all angles, the string broke. The ball went flying against the back wall, jumped back and hit me in the face.
And then?
Well, I don’t remember. But my friend told me that I immediately fell to the floor and only woke up a little while later. I had been knocked out, even though it wasn’t deliberate. That was my big fight with Fitzsimmons!
And Dr. Lasker smiles ironically.
This anecdote is new to me, and I have tried to verify it.
34 years ago would have been 1893, and indeed, Lasker stayed two weeks in New Orleans in February and March 1893. Local newspapers (The Times Democrat, The Times Picayne) covered his visit extensively. Lasker arrived on February 18, played simuls, consultation games and single games, and on March 3 he gave the first of three lectures on advanced mathematics at Tulsane University. He then went to stay in Bay St. Louis (a small town in Mississippi, 87 km north east of New Orleans) as the guest of Judge Robert N. Ogden. He travelled back to New Orleans on two occasion to finish his lectures, and finally left for Kokomo on April 3 to play a match against Showalter.
The other man in the anecdote, Robert James “Bob” Fitzsimmons, arrived in Bay St. Louis on February 1, 1893, two weeks before Lasker, to prepare for his championship match against the challenger, Jim Hall. The match took place in New Orleans on March 8.
Excerpts from The Times Democrat, February 2, 1893:
Fitzsimmons has arrived. He did not come to the city, but got off the train at Bay St. Louis. (…) The cottage, which Mrs. Fitzsimmons had prepared for their reception and which Fitzsimmons has purchased, is about a quarter of a mile east of the Robinson cottage, and it is in every way admirably fitted for training quarters. It could not be improved upon, and the champion was more than satisfied with it.
So far everything fits. Both Lasker and Fitzsimmons was in the area at the same time. Lasker could have visited Fitzsimmons’ training quarters, his description of it seems accurate.
But then … further from The Times Democrat:
It is easy to see that the champion is extraordinarily strong just now by the way he breaks his balls and the rawhides with which they are attached to the ceiling. On one occasion not long ago he hit the ball so hard that the thong of tough rawhide broke, and the ball, flying off the stage, struck a man in the audience and “knocked him silly” for the time being.
The exact same anecdote, but clearly not about Lasker as this was published 16 days before he arrived in New Orleans. A likely explanation is that Lasker heard this story while he was in New Orleans and liked it so much that he inserted himself into it.
Einar Michelsen’s first major event was the 3rd Nordic Correspondence Tournament, which started in November 1902. The participants were divided into two groups. Michelsen played in group A and achieved an impressive score of 3½ / 5, losing only to the favorite A. C. Rosendahl. As shown in the tournament table in Tidskrift för Schack1, it amounted to a split 2nd price and thus 70 kr. A not insignificant amount, it corresponded to approx. a weeks wage for a worker, and probably even more for Michelsen, who was still an apprentice.
Tidskrift för Schack published all of Einar Michelsen’s games:
A. C. Rosendahl
Andreas Christian Rosendahl – Einar Michelsen2
Correspondance 1902-03
Notes by A. C. Rosendahl 1. e4 e5 2. Nc3 Nc6 3. f4 exf4 4. d4 Qh4+ 5. Ke2 g5
According to E. von Schmidt, who in his Schacheröffnungen have subjected the Steinitz gambit to a thorough investigation, black’s best defense is 5… d6 6. Nf3 Bg4 7. Bxf4 f5. The subsequent variations are indicated in Collijn’s Lärobok. 6. Nd5 Kd8 7. Nf3 Qh5 8. h4 Bh6 9. Kf2 g4
Black’s defense is mentioned by von Bardeleben, who continues with 10. Ng1 g3+ 11. Ke1 Qxd1+ 12. Kxd1 Nxd4 13. Bxf4 Bxf4 14. Nxf4 d6 believing black to be better. Von Schmidt also gives this variation in the above mentioned analysis, noting that black’s advantage is minimal. The following sacrifice is presumably new and gives white a strong attack.
10. Bxf4 gxf3
If 10… Bxf4 then 11. Nxf4 Qh6 12. Ng5 Qg7 (12… Ke8 13. Nd5) 13. e5. 11. Bxc7+ Ke8 12. gxf3 Bg7 13. c3 Nge7 14. Bc4 b5
An attempt to develop the queen side pieces; better seems 14… d6 15. Bxd6 Be6 16. Nc7+ Kd7. 15. Bb3 a6
A wasted move, black had to play 15… Bb7 immediately, or maybe 15… a5 which would have forced white’s bishop back to c2. 16. Qd2 Bb7 17. Rag1 Ng6 18. Nf4 Bh6
If 18… Qh6 then 19. Rg5 Bf6 20. Nh5 Bxg5 21. hxg5 Qf8 22. Nf6+ Ke7 23. e5. 19. Nxh5 Bxd2 20. Nf6+ Ke7 21. Nd5+ Ke8 22. Nb6 Ra7
By offering the exchange by playing 22… Bh6 black would still have been able to defend himself. 23. h5 Nf4
If 23… Nf8 then 24. d5, and if 23… Nge7 24. Rg7. 24. d5 Nb4 25. cxb4 Bc8 26. Bd6 Kd8 27. Rg4 Nd3+ 28. Ke2 Bxb4 29. Bxb4 Nxb4 30. d6
And black resigned, as the threatening Rhg1 cannot be parried. 1-0
The game finished February 13, 1903.
Andreas Christian Rosendahl (1864-1909), a bookkeeper from Copenhagen, was one of the strongest Scandinavian players of his time. He was 4th in the Nordic championship 1897, and shared 3rd two years later. He was founder and editor of Tidsskrift for Skak (later Tidskrift för Schack) 1894-1901. Contracted tuberculosis and died relatively young.
Edvard Mortensen – Einar Michelsen3
Correspondance 1902-03
Notes by Fritz Englund 1. e4 e5 2. Nc3 Nf6 3. f4 d5 4. fxe5 Nxe4 5. Nf3
White can even play 5. Qf3 f5 6. d3 Nxc3 7. bxc3 d4 8. Bd2 etc. 5… Bb4 6. Qe2
6. Be2 is a more energetic continuation. After 6… c6 7. 0-0 Qb6+, which is indicated in Collijn’s Lärobok, white gets a very strong attack after 8. d4 Nxc3 9. bxc3 Bxc3 10. Ba3 Bxa1 11. Qxa1. 6… Bxc3 7. dxc3 f6
Collijn’s Lärobok gives von Schmidt’s 7… 0-0. The text move is hardly an improvement. 8. Bf4
Better seems 8. exf6 Qxf6 9. Bg5 followed by 0-0-0. Or 8… 0-0 9. fxg7 Re8 10. Be3 c5 11. Qd3 d4 12. 0-0-0 etc. 8… 0-0 9. c4 Bf5 10. 0-0-0 c6 11. cxd5 Qa5
12. dxc6?
After 12. d6 Qxa2? 13. Qc4+ Qxc4 14. Bxc4+ etc. or 12… fxe5 13. Qc4+ Kh8 14. Nxe5 etc. white seems to keep the pawn with good play. 12… Nxc6 13. Qc4+ Kh8 14. exf6 Rxf6 15. Ng5 Nf2 16. Nf7+
On 16. Bd2 white loses an exchange after 16… Qc7. However, this was preferable as a piece is lost after the text move. 16… Rxf7 17. Qxf7 Nxd1 18. Kxd1 Bg4+ 19. Be2
White is of course forced to block with the bishop. 19… Rd8+ 20. Kc1 Bxe2 21. Kb1 Nb4
22. Bh6!
An interesting move. If the bishop is taken, white has perpetual check. 22… Qe5 23. Qxb7 Nxc2
23… Rb8? 24. Bxg7+
Edvard Mortensen
24. Bxg7+ Qxg7 25. Qxg7+ Kxg7 26. Kxc2 Rf8! 27. Rg1
If 27. b4 then 27… Rf2 28. Rg1 Bf3+. Or if 27. g3 Rf2 28. Kc3 Bf3 etc.
The following endgame is quite instructive. 27… Rf1 28. Rxf1 Bxf1 29. g3 Kf6 30. Kd2 Kf5 31. Ke3 Kg4 32. b4 Bb5 33. a3 a6 34. Ke4 h5 35. Ke5 Kh3 36. Kf4 Kxh2 37. Kg5 Kxg3 38. Kxh5 Kf4 39. Kh4 Ke4 40. Kg3 Kd3 41. Kf2 Kc3 42. Ke3 Kc2 43. Ke4 Kb2 44. Kd4 Kb3 45. Ke3 Kxa3 46. Kd2 Kb2!
The king cannot take the pawn immediately as the white king then reaches the corner square and the game would then be a draw. 47. Kd1 Ba4+ 48. Ke2
If the king goes to d2, Bc2 follows. 48… Kc3 49. resigns 0-1
Edvard Mortensen, a bank clerk from Copenhagen. Had a degree in economy from the University of Copenhagen.
The next two games are annotated by Michelsen himself.
Einar Michelsen – Viktor Helmer Fahlander4
Correspondance 1902-03
Notes by Einar Michelsen
Viktor Helmer Fahlander
1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Nf6 5. Nc3 e5
The usual and probably stronger is 5… e6. In game no. 1157, Tidskrift för Schack 12/1903, white played 5… e5 6. Ndb5 and got a better position than in this game. (Referring to a game from the same tournament, Jonsson-Fahlander, which continued 6… a6 7. Nd6+ and white went on to win.) 6. Nxc6 bxc6 7. Bc4 Bb4 8. Bg5?
A lost tempo. Better was 8. Bd2. Now black goes on the offensive. 8… Qa5 9. Bd2 d5 10. exd5 cxd5 11. Bb5+
Of course, white cannot take on d5. 11… Bd7 12. Bxd7+ Nxd7 13. a3
White cannot take on d5 here either, because of 13… Qxd5 14. Bxb4 Qe4+. 13… Bxc3 14. Bxc3 Qb5 15. Qe2?
Better was 15. Qh5. 15… Qxe2+ 16. Kxe2 d4 17. Ba5 Rb8 18. b4 Rc8 19. Rac1 O-O 20. Rhd1 Rc3 21. b5 Rc4 22. Rd3 Rfc8 23. Kd2 Nc5 24. Rh3
24… f5!
Threatening 25… Ne4+ 26.Ke2 Rxc2+ 27. Rxc2 Rxc2+ 28. Kd3 Ra2.
(The editor of Tidskrift för Schack, Fritz Englund, added a couple of comments to the game. He gave black’s last move a question mark, and wrote: 24… d3 wins the exchange and the game in a couple of moves.) 25. Kd1 g6 26. Be1 e4 27. Ra1 h5 28. Ra2 d3 29. Bd2 dxc2+ 30. Rxc2 Nd3 31. Rxc4 Rxc4 32. Ke2 Rc2
Looks good, but white has a small surprise. 33. Rxd3! exd3+ 34. Kxd3 Rc7!
Better than 34… Ra2 when 35. Bb4 Rxf2 36. Bc5! follows. 35. Bf4 Rc8 36. a4 Kf7 37. a5 Ke6 38. Be3 Rc7 39. b6 axb6 40. axb6 Rb7 41. Kc4 f4 42. Bd4 Kd6 43. Kb5 Rf7 44. Bc5+ Kd5 45. h4 f3 46. gxf3!
If white plays 46. g3 the game is a draw. 46… g5
Black can’t take on f3 because 47. b7 Rb3+ 48. Bb4 follows.
(Englund claimed that 46… g5 was the losing move.) 47. hxg5 h4
Now a quite interesting endgame follows. 48. Be3
Threatening 49. g6 Rxg7 50. Bf4!
48… Ke5
(Black could in fact have saved the game at this late stage after 48… h3 49. g6 h2! 50. gxf7 h1=Q 51. f8=Q Qf1+! and white cannot escape the perpetual check.) 49. Kc6 Kf5 50. b7 Rxb7 51. Kxb7 h3 52. g6 h2 53. g7 h1=Q 54. g8=Q Qb1+ 55. Kc6 Qc2+ 56. Kd6 resigns
1-0
Viktor Helmer Fahlander (1866-1948), an adjunct professor from Östersund, Sweden. Mainly a correspondance player and problem composer, but participated in his only international over-the-board tournament in Stockholm 1905, where he played Michelsen again.
Helmer Pettersson – Einar Michelsen5
Correspondance 1902-03
Notes by Einar Michelsen 1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bc4 Nf6 4. d4 exd4 5. O-O Nxe4 6. Re1 d5 7. Bxd5 Qxd5 8. Nc3 Qd8 9. Rxe4+ Be7 10. Nxd4 O-O
Regarding the opening see Collijn’s Lärobok i Schack, second edition. 11. Nxc6 bxc6 12. Bf4 Bf5 13. Rd4 Qb8 14. Na4 c5 15. Rd2
This move gives black an advantageous pawn exchange. 15… Qb4 16. c4 Qxc4 17. Bxc7 Rac8 18. Ba5 Bf6 19. b3 Qh4 20. Bc3 Bxc3 21. Nxc3 Rc6
To play for the attack, though white quickly stops this.
30. Nc3 Rxh2 31. Rxd3 Ke7 32. Re3 Kd6 33. Ke1 Kc6 34. Ne2 Kc5 35. Kd2 Bd5!
Threatening to win a pawn by Kb4 or Rf2. 36. Kc3 Rf2 37. f4 Rf3
Black can’t play 37… Bf3 because of 38. Nc1, but the text move wins another pawn and the game. 38. b4+ Kb6 39. Kd4 Rxe3 40. Kxe3 Bxa2 41. Kd4 f6 42. resigns
0-1
Helmer Pettersson, Älvdalen, Sweden. Participated in the Nordic championship 1901, but placed last in the 2nd class tournament. Not to be confused with the stronger A. H. Pettersson, who won the Nordic championship in 1905.
Einar Michelsen – Herman Jonsson6
Correspondance 1902-03
Notes by Herman Jonsson 1. e4 e6 2. d4 d5 3. Nc3 Nf6 4. Bg5 Be7 5. e5 Nfd7 6. Bxe7 Qxe7 7. Nb5 Qd8 8. Bd3?
A mistake that costs a pawn. 8. c3 is the best continuation. 8… a6 9. Na3 c5 10. f4 Qa5+ 11. c3 cxd4 12. Ne2 dxc3 13. Nxc3 b5 14. Qd2
The only way to prevent the loss of a piece. If 14… b4 then 15. Ne2 can follow now. 14… Nc6 15. Nc2 0-0 16. 0-0 f6 17. exf6 Nxf6 18. a3 Bb7 19. Qf2 Rae8 20. Qh4 Rf7 21. Rae1 Qb6+ 22. Kh1 b4
The intention of this move is to 23. axb4 Nxb4 24. Nxb4 Qxb4 25. Re2 e5! and then let the two passed central pawns move further up the board.
However, the move should have been preceded by 22… g6 as white’s following bold attack nullifies the plan.
23. Nxd5!
Now black has other things to worry about and must defend pretty much for the rest of the game. 23… Nxd5
To take with the pawn would of course be deadly. 24. Qxh7+ Kf8 25. Bg6 Nf6 26. Qh8+ Ke7 27. Qh3 Kf8 28. Ne3
White should have checked on h8 again and then returned to h3 with the queen, because a draw seemed less satisfactory at this stage. I was ready to move the bishop from the good square on b7 to c8 to cover e6, and then it’s just sink or swim. 28… Kg8 29. Nc4 Qd4 30. Ne5 Rfe7 31. Re3
White doesn’t care about the exchange but continues to play for the attack, which is probably the right thing to do. 31…Rd8 32. Bc2
Stops the queen from going to d1 and threatens to attack e6 again. 32… Qxb2 33. Bb3 Nxe5
It is doubtful as to whether this is the best move. The position is so complicated that it is difficult to navigate the maze. If 33… Nd4 then 34. Nc4 and to save the queen black must sacrifice his bishop on g2. 34. fxe5 Nd5 35. Re4 Nc7
The rook threatened to go to h4, which is now parried by Bxg2+. (Black wins easily after 35… Qc3! 36. Qxc3 (forced) bxc3 and there is no compensation for the piece.) 36. Rxb4! Bxg2+
This sacrifice is forced. Other moves, for example Qe2 or Qxe5 would only worsen the situation. 37. Qxg2 Qxa3 38. Qe4 Nd5 39. Bc2 Qh3 40. Rf3 Qh6 41. Rb1 Rc7 42. Rg1 Rdc8 43. Bd3 Rc1 44. Rff1 Rxf1 45. Rxf1 Rc1
Hereby, an exchange is lost but there is hardly any better resort from the threatening Qf3-Qf7+-Qf8+ and Rf8 mate.
46. Qh7+!
A beautiful move … and the only salvation! If 46. Bxa6 Rxf1+ 47. Bxf1 Qf4 48. Qxf4 Nxf4 followed by Ng6 and Nxe5 gives black winning chances. 46… Qxh7 47. Bxh7+ Kxh7 48. Rxc1 Nf4
If 48… Kg6 then 49. Rg1+ Kf7 50. Kg2 etc. 49. Ra1 Kg6 50. Rxa6 Kf5 51. Ra5 g5 52. Kg1 Nd3 53. Kg2 Kf4 54. Ra6 Kxe5 55. Kg3 Kf5 56. Ra8 Ne5 57. h3 Ng6 58. Rg8 e5 59. Rg7 e4 60. Kf2 Nf4 61. Ke3 Nxh3 62. Rf7+ Ke5
1/2-1/2
Herman Jonsson (1860-1936), a farmer from Partille near Gothenburg, Sweden. He specialized in problem composing, but also played correspondence and over-the-board chess. Played in the Nordic championship 1905 in 1st class, but only gathered three draws in 10 games. A diligent writer, he penned chess columns in a number of Swedish newspapers and magazines. In his later years he became a local politician, a judge, and even wrote and published a selection of his poems at the age of 74!
Herman Jonsson
Kristiania 1903
Einar Michelsen’s first international over-the-board tournament took place in Kristiania (now Oslo), Norway, August 9-21, 1903. It was the biannual congress of the Nordic Chess Federation, which invited participants from Denmark, Sweden and Norway, and at the general meeting Finland was also enrolled in the federation. Michelsen participated in the 2nd class tournament.
Michelsen’s journey to Norway was probably by train via Copenhagen and Malmö as all other Danish players and officials were from Copenhagen.
The Danish delegation arrived at Kristiania railway station on Sunday afternoon, August 9, and was received by the tournament committee from Kristiania’s Chess Society with organizer Svend Vaage at the forefront. First the group went to Centralhotellet where all the foreign guests stayed, and then to the playing hall at Studentersamfundet, located at 26 Universitetsgaden. The Nordic Chess Federation held a conference at 6 p.m. with subsequent dining in the St. Hanshaugen quarter. The players retired early to be ready for next morning’s games.7
The front of Studentersamfundet, ca. 1900. From oslobilder.no
Playing time was 10 a.m. – 2 p.m. with adjournments from 5 p.m. Time control was 2 hours for 30 moves and then 15 moves an hour. The games would start at the sound of organizer Svend Vaage’s gong.
There were 4 prizes in the 2nd class, 100 kr., 75 kr., 50 kr., and 20 kr.
The participants of the Nordic Chess Congress, Kristiania 1903. Michelsen is standing in the back row, second from left.
Monday, August 10
The 1st day of play started with a player meeting at 9.30 a.m., where lots were drawn for both groups, and the round began promptly at 10 a.m.
Round 1: Gustaf Nyholm – Einar Michelsen, Ruy Lopez, 0-1 (the game was adjourned, play was resumed at 5 p.m. and finished at 5.15 p.m.)
T. Kjølstad – M. H. Moe, 1-0
D. Muus – L. Lassen, ½-½
J. Lundgren, bye
It has not been possible to find any of Michelsen’s games from this tournament. All games were the property of the Nordic Chess Federation, and could only be published in its official magazine, Tidskrift för Schack. A special issue was published with all the games from the 1st class, but unfortunately none from the 2nd.
Tuesday, August 11
Round 2: Michelsen had a bye.
L. Lassen – G. Nyholm, 0-1
J. Lundgren – T. Kjølstad, 0-1
M. H. Moe – D. Muus, 1-0
Michelsen had the day off. Politiken wrote:
The spare time is used in the best way possible by the combatants for excursions in the beautiful surroundings or for boat and sailing trips on the Kristiania fjord.8
Wednesday, August 12
Round 3: Einar Michelsen – L. Lassen, King’s Gambit, 0-1 (the game finished at 12.17 p.m.)
D. Muus – J. Lundgren, ½-½
G. Nyholm – M. H. Moe, 0-1
T. Kjølstad, bye
Thursday, August 13
Round 4: M. H. Moe – Einar Michelsen, Sicilian, 1-0 (the game was adjourned, play was resumed at 5 p.m. and finished at 6.40 p.m.)
T. Kjølstad – D. Muus, 0-1
J. Lundgren – G. Nyholm, 0-1
L. Lassen, bye
A local paper, Aftenposten, published this the next morning:
Hr. Michelsen, a sympathetic young man who has already gained a lot of attention, yesterday received the sad news that his father had died. He will, however, participate in the tournament until Saturday, but it has been arranged that a game that he was supposed to play on Sunday will be played tomorrow evening.9
From a death notice in Fyens Stiftstidende, August 12, it appears that Michelsen’s father died already on August 10, 3 days before the message reached Norway. One could suspect that Michelsen first learned about the death by reading the notice in the paper. The funeral was scheduled for Monday and he therefore had to embark on the journey home already on Saturday.
The death notice for Michelsen’s father, Carl Johan Michelsen.
Friday, August 14
Before the start of the 5th round, a photographer visited the playing hall. Michelsen is sitting at the second table from the right and turns halfway around to look into the camera.
A close-up of Michelsen.
Round 5: Einar Michelsen – J. Lundgren, Vienna, ½-½ (the game finished at 1.10 p.m.)
L. Lassen – M. H. Moe, ½-½
G. Nyholm – T. Kjølstad, 1-0
D. Muus, bye
Round 7: Einar Michelsen – D. Muus, Ruy Lopez, 1-0 (the game started at 5 p.m. and finished at 7.35 p.m.) This was the game played in advance.
Saturday, August 15
Round 6: T. Kjølstad – Einar Michelsen, Queen’s Gambit Declined, 0-1 (the game finished at 1.20 p.m.)
J. Lundgren – L. Lassen, 1-0
D. Muus – G. Nyholm, 0-1
M. H. Moe, bye
Epilogue
Michelsen began his home journey in the evening and his father’s funeral took place two days later in St. Knud’s Church in the centre of Odense, at 1.30 p.m.
Later that day, the last games of the tournament was played, and Michelsen could note that he had won 3rd prize and 50 kr.
The last games from round 7:
L. Lassen – T. Kjølstad, 1-0
M. H. Moe – J. Lundgren, 1-0
G. Nyholm, bye
A dramatic trip for the young Einar Michelsen. He subsequently sent a telegram to the tournament committee at the end of the congress on Friday, August 21.10 The content of the telegram is not known, but he likely thanked the committee for help in connection with his father’s death.
A few days later, Monday, August 24, Michelsen held a lecture about his experiences in Norway for members of his own chess club, Læseforeningen’s Chess Department.
A notice announcing the general assembly followed by Michelsen’s lecture.
After this, Einar Michelsen disappeared from the chess world for almost a year. Part 3 of the series will discuss this and his reappearance in 1904.
During a visit to Copenhagen in July 1908, Lasker presented the members of Industriforeningen’s chess club this strange position with the stipulation, white to move draws:
It is in fact a study composed by H. F. L. Meyer and published in American Chess Nuts in 1880. The only difference is that Meyer’s study begins with the white knights on a3 and a6 and the black king on c3, which is the position after move 9 (except the knight is on a6, but after 10.Nb5+ the positions becomes identical.)
Two illustrations from Lasker’s simultaneous exhibition in Copenhagen, July 10 1908:
Politiken, July 10 1908.
Lasker’s opponent is Vilhelm Nielsen. Dagens Nyheder, July 10 1908.
Einar Michelsen was a minor American master who immigrated to the United States from Denmark in 1905 as a 20 year old. We do not know much about his Danish life and this article is an attempt to fill the gaps.
My starting point is an article in the American Chess Bulletin 1907, p. 193:
There can hardly be much doubt that the article is based on Einar Michelsen’s own information. Yet, there is reason to be critical.
The first we learn is that he was born in 1885 in Odense, Denmark, and a 1901 census confirms this. He was born April 16th. Furthermore, from the census we can see that he had 2 brothers and 3 sisters, his father was Carl Johan Michelsen, a retired baker. His mother’s name was Marie Petrine Michelsen. The family lived in Kongensgade 24 in the center of Odense. We also get an idea of how the family made a living, they had 3 young men living as lodgers.
His first name is spelled with a ‘j’, but this is likely a mistake as it is spelled with an ‘i’ everywhere else. The census also confirms that he was a bookshop apprentice. We even get the name of the bookstore owner, Rasmus Hansen.
The first time he appears in the the chess press was in Tidskrift för Schack no. 11 1902, where he is admitted to a Nordic correspondence tournament starting in November 1902. After this he is a frequent guest in chess magazines and newspaper columns.
American Chess Bulletin claims that he won a problem composing tournament in Berlin IllustratedZeitung (probably Berliner Illustrirte Zeitung) at the age of 16, ie. in 1901 or 1902. It would have a been quite a sensation if such a young boy won a foreign tournament, but there is no trace of it in the Danish media. It is true, however, that he was interested in problem composition and got a number of his problems published in Wiener Schachzeitung, Deutsche Schachzeitung, Tidskrift för Schack, Skakbladet, Nationaltidende, Illustreret Tidende, Svenska Dagbladet and even one in Carl Schlechter’s column in Wiener Hausfrauen-Zeitung:
Wiener Hausfrauen-Zeitung 50/1904 p. 574
The header says ‘Von Michelsen aus Hjörring’ which indicates that by 1904 he had moved away from his hometown of Odense. More about that later.
Einar Michelsen’s first published game was this fragment, ‘played recently in Odense’, published in Govert Nielsen’s chess column in Nationaltidende, December 12, 1902
A double piece sacrifice followed by a quiet king move, an impressive finish by the young bookstore apprentice.
In part 2 of this series I will look at games from the Nordic correspondance tournament, follow him on his first trip abroad, and we will learn more about his move away from Odense.
