[blind-chess] Annotated Game #023: Emanuel Lasker - Jose Raul Capablance, St. Petersburg 1914
- From: Roderick Macdonald <rmacd@xxxxxxxx>
- To: Blind Chess Mailing List <blind-chess@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 23 Jan 2011 21:44:04 -1000 (HST)
Annotated Game #023:
Emanuel Lasker - Jose Raul Capablanca, St. Petersburg 1914
Adapted and Condensed from
Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia
Contents:
++1. Emanuel Lasker
++1.A Life and career
++1.A1 Early years 1868-1894
++1.A2 Chess competition 1894-1918
++1.A2a Match against Steinitz
++1.A2b Successes in tournaments
++1.A2c Matches against Marshall and Tarrasch
++1.A2d Matches against Janowski
++1.A2e Match against Schlechter
++1.A2f Abortive challenges
++1.A3 Academic activities 1894-1918
++1.A4 Other activities 1894-1918
++1.A5 Match against Capablanca
++1.A6 1921 - end of life
++1.B Assessment
++1.B1 Chess strength and style
++1.B2 Influence on chess
++1.b3 Work in other fields
++1.C Friends and relatives
++1.D Publications
++1.D1 Chess
++1.D2 Mathematics
++1.D3 Other games
++1.D4 Philosophical
++1.E Quotations
++1.E1 By Lasker
++1.E2 About Lasker
++1.F Notable games
++1.G Tournament results
++1.H Match results
++2. Jose Raul Capablanca y Graupera
++2.A Biography and career
++2.A1 Childhood
++2.A2 Early adult career
++2.A3 World title contender
++2.A4 During World War I
++2.A5 World Champion
++2.A6 Losing the title
++2.A7 Post-championship and partial retirement
++2.A8 Return to competitive chess
++2.A9 Final years
++2.B Assessment
++2.B1 Playing strength and style
++2.B2 Influence on the game
++2.B3 Personality
++2.C Capablanca chess
++2.D Notable chess games
++2.E Writings
++2.F Tournament results
++2.G Match results
++3. Emanuel Lasker - Jose Raul Capablanca, St. Petersburg 1914
++1. Emanuel Lasker
World Champion 1894-1921
Emanuel Lasker (December 24, 1868 - January 11, 1941) was a German
chess player, mathematician, and philosopher who was World Chess
Champion for 27 years. In his prime Lasker was one of the most
dominant champions, and he is still generally regarded as one of
the strongest players ever.
His contemporaries used to say that Lasker used a "psychological"
approach to the game, and even that he sometimes deliberately
played inferior moves to confuse opponents. Recent analysis,
however, indicates that he was ahead of his time and used a more
flexible approach than his contemporaries, which mystified many of
them. Lasker knew the openings well but disagreed with many
contemporary analyses. He published chess magazines and five chess
books, but later players and commentators found it difficult to
draw lessons from his methods.
He demanded high fees for playing matches and tournaments, which
aroused criticism at the time but contributed to the development of
chess as a professional career. The conditions which Lasker
demanded for World Championship matches in the last ten years of
his reign were controversial, and prompted attempts, particularly
by his successor Jose Raul Capablanca, to define agreed rules for
championship matches.
Lasker made contributions to the development of other games. He was
a first-class contract bridge player and wrote about this and other
games, including Go and his own invention, Lasca. His books about
games presented a problem which is still considered notable in the
mathematical analysis of card games. Besides, Lasker was a research
mathematician who was known for his contributions to commutative
algebra, as he defined the primary decomposition property of the
ideals of some commutative rings when he proved that polynomial
rings have the primary decomposition property. On the other hand,
his philosophical works and a drama that he co-authored received
little attention.
++1.A Life and career
++1.a1 Early years 1868-1894
Emanuel Lasker was born on December 24, 1868 at Berlinchen in
Neumark (now Barlinek in Poland), the son of a Jewish cantor. At
the age of eleven he was sent to Berlin to study mathematics, where
he lived with his brother Berthold, eight years his senior, who
taught him how to play chess. According to the website
Chessmetrics, Berthold was among the world's top ten players in the
early 1890s. To supplement their income Emanuel Lasker played chess
and card games for small stakes, especially at the Cafi Kaiserhof.
Emanuel Lasker shot up through the chess rankings in 1889, when he
won the Cafi Kaiserhof's annual Winter tournament 1888/89 and the
Hauptturnier A ("second division" tournament) at the sixth DSB
Congress (German Chess Federation's congress) held in Breslau. He
also finished second in an international tournament at Amsterdam,
ahead of some well-known masters, including Isidore Gunsberg
(assessed as the second strongest player in the world at that time
by Chessmetrics). In 1890 he finished third in Graz, then shared
first prize with his brother Berthold in a tournament in Berlin. In
spring 1892, he won two tournaments in London, the second and
stronger of these without losing a game. At New York 1893, he won
all thirteen games, one of the few times in chess history that a
player has achieved a perfect score in a significant tournament.
His record in matches was equally impressive: at Berlin in 1890 he
drew a short play-off match against his brother Berthold; and won
all his other matches from 1889 to 1893, mostly against top-class
opponents: Curt von Bardeleben (1889; ranked 9th best player in the
world by Chessmetrics at that time, Jacques Mieses (1889; ranked
11th, Henry Edward Bird (1890; then 60 years old; ranked 29th,
Berthold Englisch (1890; ranked 18th, Joseph Henry Blackburne
(1892, without losing a game; Blackburne was aged 51 then, but
still 9th in the world, Jackson Showalter (1892-1893; 22nd and
Celso Golmayo Zupide (1893; 29th Chessmetrics calculates that
Emanuel Lasker became the world's strongest player in
mid-1890, and that he was in the top ten from the very beginning of
his recorded career in 1889.
The players and tournament officials at the New York 1893
tournament
In 1892 Lasker founded the first of his chess magazines, The London
Chess Fortnightly, which was published from August 15, 1892 to July
30, 1893. In the second quarter of 1893 there was a gap of ten
weeks between issues, allegedly because of problems with the
printer. Shortly after its last issue Lasker traveled to the USA,
where he spent the next two years.
Lasker challenged Siegbert Tarrasch, who had won three consecutive
strong international tournaments (Breslau 1889, Manchester 1890,
and Dresden 1892), to a match. Tarrasch haughtily declined, stating
that Lasker should first prove his mettle by attempting to win one
or two major international events.
++1.A2 Chess competition 1894-1918
++1.A2a Match against Steinitz
Wilhelm Steinitz, whom Lasker beat in World Championship matches in
1894 and 1896
Rebuffed by Tarrasch, Lasker challenged the reigning World Champion
Wilhelm Steinitz to a match for the title. Initially Lasker wanted
to play for US $5,000 a side and a match was agreed at stakes of
$3,000 a side, but Steinitz agreed to a series of reductions when
Lasker found it difficult to raise the money. The final figure was
$2,000, which was less than for some of Steinitz' earlier matches
(the final combined stake of $4,000 would be worth over $495,000 at
2006 values. Although this was publicly praised as an act of
sportsmanship on Steinitz' part, Steinitz may have desperately
needed the money. The match was played in 1894, at venues in New
York, Philadelphia, and Montreal. Steinitz had previously declared
he would win without doubt, so it came as a shock when Lasker won
the first game. Steinitz responded by winning the second, and was
able to maintain the balance through the sixth. However, Lasker won
all the games from the seventh to the eleventh, and Steinitz asked
for a week's rest. When the match resumed, Steinitz looked in
better shape and won the 13th and 14th games. Lasker struck back in
the 15th and 16th, and Steinitz was unable to compensate for his
losses in the middle of the match. Hence Lasker won convincingly
with ten wins, five losses and four
draws. Lasker thus became the second formally-recognized World
Chess Champion, and confirmed his title by beating Steinitz even
more convincingly in their re-match in 1896-1897 (ten wins, five
draws, and two losses).
++1.A2b Successes in tournaments
Sketch of Lasker, ca. 1894
Influential players and journalists belittled the 1894 match both
before and after it took place. Lasker's difficulty in getting
backing may have been caused by hostile pre-match comments from
Gunsberg and Leopold Hoffer, who had long been a bitter enemy of
Steinitz. One of the complaints was that Lasker had never played
the other two members of the top four, Siegbert Tarrasch and
Mikhail Chigorin - although Tarrasch had rejected a challenge from
Lasker in 1892, publicly telling him to go and win an international
tournament first. After the match some commentators, notably
Tarrasch, said Lasker had won mainly because Steinitz was old (58
in 1894).
Emanuel Lasker answered these criticisms by creating an even more
impressive playing record. Before World War I broke out his most
serious "setbacks" were third place at Hastings 1895 (where he may
have been suffering from the after-effects of typhoid), tie for
second at Cambridge Springs 1904, and tie for first at the Chigorin
Memorial in St. Petersburg 1909. He won first prizes at very strong
tournaments in St. Petersburg (1895-1896, Quadrangular), Nuremberg
(1896), London (1899), Paris (1900) and St. Petersburg (1914),
where he overcame a 1.5 point deficit to finish ahead of the rising
stars, Capablanca and Alexander Alekhine, who later became the next
two World Champions. For decades chess writers have reported that
Tsar Nicholas II of Russia conferred the title of "Grandmaster of
Chess" upon each of the five finalists at St. Petersburg 1914
(Lasker, Capablanca, Alekhine, Tarrasch and Marshall), but chess
historian Edward Winter has questioned this, stating that the
earliest known sources supporting this story were published in 1940
and
1942.
++1.A2c Matches against Marshall and Tarrasch
Lasker's match record was as impressive between his 1896-1897 re-
match with Steinitz and 1914: he won all but one of his normal
matches, and three of those were convincing defenses of his title.
He first faced Marshall in the World Chess Championship 1907, when
despite his aggressive style, Marshall could not win a single game,
losing eight and drawing seven (final score: 11.5-3.5).
He then played Tarrasch in the World Chess Championship 1908, first
at Duesseldorf then at Munich. Tarrasch firmly believed the game of
chess was governed by a precise set of principles. For him the
strength of a chess move was in its logic, not in its efficiency.
Because of his stubborn principles he considered Lasker as a
coffeehouse player who won his games only thanks to dubious tricks,
while Lasker mocked the arrogance of Tarrasch who, in his opinion,
shone more in salons than at the chessboard. At the opening
ceremony, Tarrasch refused to talk to Lasker, only saying: "Mr.
Lasker, I have only three words to say to you: check and mate!"
Lasker gave a brilliant answer on the chessboard, winning four of
the first five games, and playing a type of chess Tarrasch could
not understand. For example, in the second game after 19 moves
arose a situation (see diagram) in which Lasker was a pawn down,
with a bad bishop and doubled pawns. At this point it appeared
Tarrasch was winning, but 20 moves later he was forced to resign.
Lasker eventually won by 10= -5= (eight wins, five draws, and three
losses). Tarrasch claimed the wet weather was the cause of his
defeat.
Diagram:
White: King at f2, Queen at a7, Rooks at a1 and e1, Knight at f5,
Pawns at a2, b3, c2, e4, g2, h2
Black: King at h8, Queen at d7, Rooks at d8 and e8, Bishop at e7,
Pawns at c6, c7, d6, f6, h7
Tarrasch-Lasker
Position after 19. Qxa7
++1.A2d Matches against Janowski
In 1909 Lasker drew a short match (two wins, two losses) against
Dawid Janowski, an all-out attacking Polish expatriate. Several
months later they played a longer match, and chess historians still
debate whether this was for the World Chess
Championship. Understanding Janowski's style, Lasker chose to
defend solidly so that Janowski unleashed his attacks too soon and
left himself vulnerable. Lasker easily won the match 8-2 (seven
wins, two draws, one loss). This victory was convincing for
everyone but Janowski, who asked for a revenge match. Lasker
accepted and they played World Chess Championship match in Paris in
November-December 1910. Lasker crushed his opponent, winning 9= -1=
(eight wins, three draws, no losses). Janowski was not able to
understand Lasker's moves, and after his first three losses he
declared to Edward Lasker, "Your homonym plays so stupidly that I
cannot even look at the chessboard when he thinks. I am afraid I
will not do anything good in this match."
++1.A2E Match against Schlechter
Between his two matches against Janowski, Lasker arranged another
World Chess Championship in January-February 1910 against Carl
Schlechter. Schlechter was a modest gentleman, who was generally
unlikely to win the major chess tournaments by his peaceful
inclination, his lack of aggressiveness and his willingness to
accept most draw offers from his opponents (about 80% of his games
finished by a draw). The conditions of the match against Lasker are
still debated among chess historians, but it seems Schlechter
accepted to play under very unfavourable conditions, notably that
he would need to finish two points ahead of Lasker to be declared
the winner of the match, and he would need to win a revenge match
to be declared World Champion. The match was originally meant to
consist of 30 games, but when it became obvious that there were
insufficient funds (Lasker demanded a fee of 1,000 marks per game
played), the number of games was reduced to ten, making the margin
of two points all the more difficult.
At the beginning, Lasker tried to attack but Schlechter had no
difficulty defending, so that the first four games finished in
draws. In the fifth game Lasker had a big advantage, but committed
a blunder that cost him the game. Hence at the middle of the match
Schlechter was one point ahead. The next four games were drawn,
despite fierce play from both players. In the sixth Schlechter
managed to draw a game being a pawn down. In the seventh Lasker
nearly lost because of a beautiful exchange sacrifice from
Schlechter. In the ninth only a blunder from Lasker allowed
Schlechter to draw a lost ending. The score before the last game
was thus 5-4 for Schlechter. In the tenth game Schlechter tried to
win tactically and took a big advantage, but he missed a clear win
at the 35th move, continued to take increasing risks and finished
by losing. Hence the match was a draw and Lasker remained World
Champion.
++1.A2f Abortive challenges
Jose Raul Capablanca won the world title from Lasker in 1921.
In 1911 Lasker received a challenge for a world title match against
the rising star Jose Raul Capablanca. Lasker was unwilling to play
the traditional "first to win ten games" type of match in the semi-
tropical conditions of Havana, especially as drawn games were
becoming more frequent and the match might last for over six
months. He therefore made a counter-proposal: if neither player had
a lead of at least two games by the end of the match, it should be
considered a draw; the match should be limited to the best of
thirty games, counting draws; except that if either player won six
games and led by at least two games before thirty games were
completed, he should be declared the winner; the champion should
decide the venue and stakes, and should have the exclusive right to
publish the games; the challenger should deposit a forfeit of US
$2,000 (equivalent to over $194,000 in 2006 values; the time limit
should be twelve moves per hour; play should be limited to two
sessions of 2= hours each per day, five days a week. Capablanca
objected to the time limit, the short playing times, the thirty-
game limit, and especially the requirement that he must win by two
games to claim the title, which he regarded as unfair. Lasker took
offence at the terms in which Capablanca criticized the two-game
lead condition and broke off negotiations, and until 1914 Lasker
and Capablanca were not on speaking terms. However, at the 1914 St.
Petersburg tournament, Capablanca proposed a set of rules for the
conduct of World Championship matches, which were accepted by all
the leading players including Lasker.
Late in 1912 Lasker entered into negotiations for a world title
match with Akiba Rubinstein, whose tournament record for the
previous few years had been on a par with Lasker's and a little
ahead of Capablanca's. The two players agreed to play a match if
Rubinstein could raise the funds, but Rubinstein had few rich
friends to back him and the match was never played. The start of
World War I put an end to hopes that Lasker would play either
Rubinstein or Capablanca for the World Championship in the near
future. Throughout World War I (1914-1918) Lasker played in only
two serious chess events. He convincingly won (5= -=) a non-title
match against Tarrasch in 1916. In
September-October 1918, shortly before the armistice, he won a
quadrangular (four-player) tournament, half a point ahead of
Rubinstein.
++1.A3 Academic activities 1894-1918
David Hilbert encouraged Lasker to obtain a Ph.D in mathematics.
Despite his superb playing results, chess was not Lasker's only
interest. His parents recognized his intellectual talents,
especially for mathematics, and sent the adolescent Emanuel to
study in Berlin (where he found he also had a talent for chess).
Lasker gained his abitur (high school graduation certificate) at
Landsberg an der Warthe, now a Polish town named Gorzsw
Wielkopolski but then part of Prussia. He then studied mathematics
and philosophy at the universities in Berlin, Gottingen and
Heidelberg.
In 1895 Lasker published two mathematical articles in
Nature. On the advice of David Hilbert he registered for doctoral
studies at Erlangen during
1900-1902. In 1901 he presented his doctoral thesis \ber Reihen auf
der Convergenzgrenze ("On Series at Convergence Boundaries") at
Erlangen and in the same year it was published by the Royal
Society. He was awarded a doctorate in mathematics in 1902. His
most significant mathematical article, in 1905, published a theorem
of which Emmy Noether developed a more generalized form, which is
now regarded as of fundamental importance to modern algebra and
algebraic geometry.
Lasker held short-term positions as a mathematics lecturer at
Tulane University in New Orleans (1893) and Victoria University in
Manchester (1901; Victoria University was one of the "parents" of
the current University of Manchester). However he was unable to
secure a longer-term position, and pursued his scholarly interests
independently.
In 1906 Lasker published a booklet titled Kampf (Struggle), in
which he attempted to create a general theory of all competitive
activities, including chess, business and war. He produced two
other books which are generally categorized as philosophy, Das
Begreifen der Welt (Comprehending the World; 1913) and Die
Philosophie des Unvollendbar (The Philosophy of the Unattainable;
1918).
++1.A4 Other activities 1894-1918
In 1896-1897 Lasker published his book Common Sense in Chess, based
on lectures he had given in London in 1895.
Rice Gambit
Position after 1. e4 e5 2. f4 exf4 3. Nf3 g5 4. h4 g4 5. Ne5 Nf6 6.
Bc4 d5 7. exd5 Bd6 8. 0-0 -- White sacrifices the Knight on e5, in
order to get his King to safety and enable a Rook to join the
attack against the under-developed Black position.
In 1903, Lasker played in Ostend against Mikhail Chigorin, a six-
game match that was sponsored by the wealthy lawyer and
industrialist Isaac Rice in order to test the Rice Gambit. Lasker
narrowly lost the match. Three years later Lasker became secretary
of the Rice Gambit Association, founded by Rice in order to promote
the Rice Gambit, and in 1907 Lasker quoted with approval Rice's
views on the convergence of chess and military strategy.
In November 1904, Lasker founded Lasker's Chess Magazine, which ran
until 1909.
For a short time in 1906 Emanuel Lasker was interested in the
strategy game Go, but soon returned to chess. Curiously he was
introduced to the game by his namesake Edward Lasker, who wrote a
successful book Go and Go-Moku in 1934.
At the age of 42, in July 1911, Lasker married Martha Cohn (nie
Bamberger), a rich widow who was a year older than Lasker and
already a grandmother. They lived in Berlin.
Martha Cohn wrote popular stories under the pseudonym "L. Marco".
During World War I, Lasker invested all of his savings in German
war bonds. Since Germany lost the war, Lasker lost all his money.
During the war, he wrote a book which claimed that civilization
would be in danger if Germany lost the war.
++1.A5 Match against Capablanca
In January 1920 Lasker and Jose Raul Capablanca signed an agreement
to play a World Championship match in 1921, noting that Capablanca
was not free to play in 1920. Because of the delay Lasker insisted
on a final clause that: allowed him to play anyone else for the
championship in 1920; nullified the contract with Capablanca if
Lasker lost a title match in 1920; and stipulated that if Lasker
resigned the title Capablanca should become World Champion. Lasker
had previously included in his agreement before World War I to play
Akiba Rubinstein for the title a similar clause that if he resigned
the title, it should become Rubinstein's.
A report in the American Chess Bulletin (July-August 1920 issue)
said that Lasker had resigned the world title in favor of
Capablanca because the conditions of the match were unpopular in
the chess world. The American Chess Bulletin speculated that the
conditions were not sufficiently unpopular to warrant resignation
of the title, and that Lasker's real concern was that there was not
enough financial backing to justify his devoting nine months to the
match. When Lasker resigned the title in favor of Capablanca he was
unaware that enthusiasts in Havana had just raised $20,000 to fund
the match provided it was played there. When Capablanca learned of
Lasker's resignation he went to Holland, where Lasker was living at
the time, to inform him that Havana would finance the match. In
August 1920 Lasker agreed to play in Havana, but insisted that he
was the challenger as Capablanca was now the champion. Capablanca
signed an agreement that accepted this point, and soon afterwards
published a letter confirming this. Lasker also stated that, if he
beat Capablanca, he would resign the title so that younger masters
could compete for it.
The match was played in March-April 1921. After four draws, the
fifth game saw Lasker blunder with Black in an equal ending.
Capablanca's solid style allowed him to easily draw the next four
games, without taking any risks. In the tenth game, Lasker as White
played a position with an isolated queen pawn but failed to create
the necessary activity and Capablanca reached a superior ending,
which he duly won. The eleventh and fourteenth games were also won
by Capablanca, and Lasker resigned the match.
Reuben Fine and Harry Golombek attributed this to Lasker's being in
mysteriously poor form. On the other hand Vladimir Kramnik thought
that Lasker played quite well and the match was an "even and
fascinating fight" until Lasker blundered in the last game, and
explained that Capablanca was twenty years younger, a slightly
stronger player, and had more recent competitive practice.
++1.A6 1921 - end of life
By this time Lasker was nearly 53 years old, and he never played
another serious match; his only other match was a short exhibition
against Frank James Marshall in 1940, which he won. After winning
the New York 1924 chess tournament (1.5 points ahead of Capablanca)
and finishing second at Moscow in 1925 (1.5 points behind Efim
Bogoljubow, .5 point ahead of Capablanca), he effectively retired
from serious chess.
During the Moscow 1925 chess tournament, Emanuel Lasker received a
telegram informing him that the drama written by himself and his
brother Berthold, Vom Menschen die Geschichte ("History of
Mankind"), had been accepted for performance at the Lessing theatre
in Berlin. Emanuel Lasker was so distracted by this news that he
lost badly to Carlos Torre the same day. The play, however, was not
a success.
In 1926 Lasker wrote Lehrbuch des Schachspiels, which he re-wrote
in English in 1927 as Lasker's Manual of Chess. He also wrote books
on other games of mental skill: Encyclopedia of Games (1929) and
Das verstdndige Kartenspiel (means "Sensible Card Play"; 1929;
English translation in the same year), both of which posed a
problem in the mathematical analysis of card games; Brettspiele der
Vvlker ("Board Games of the Nations"; 1931), which includes 30
pages about Go and a section about a game he had invented in 1911,
Lasca; and Das Bridgespiel ("The Game of Bridge"; 1931). Lasker
became an expert bridge player, representing Germany at
international events in the early 1930s, and a registered teacher
of the Culbertson system.
In October 1928 Emanuel Lasker's brother Berthold
died.
In spring 1933 Adolf Hitler started a campaign of
discrimination and intimidation against Jews, depriving them of
their property and citizenship. Lasker and his wife Martha, who
were both Jewish, were forced to leave Germany in the same year.
After a short stay in England, in 1935 they were invited to live in
the USSR by Nikolai Krylenko, the Commissar of Justice who was
responsible for the Moscow show trials and, in his other capacity
as Sports Minister, was an enthusiastic supporter of chess. In the
USSR, Lasker renounced his German citizenship and received Soviet
citizenship. He took permanent residence in Moscow, and was given
a post at Moscow's Institute for Mathematics and a post of trainer
of the USSR national team. Lasker returned to competitive chess to
make some money, finishing fifth in Zurich 1934 and third in Moscow
1935 (undefeated, .5 point behind Mikhail Botvinnik and Salo Flohr;
ahead of Capablanca, Rudolf Spielmann and several Soviet masters),
sixth in Moscow 1936 and seventh equal in Nottingham 1936. His
performance in Moscow 1935 at age 66 was hailed as "a biological
miracle."
Unfortunately Stalin's Great Purge started at about the same time
the Laskers arrived in the USSR. In August 1937, Martha and Emanuel
Lasker decided to leave the Soviet Union, and they moved, via the
Netherlands, to the United States (first Chicago, next New York) in
October 1937. In the following year Emanuel Lasker's patron,
Krylenko, was purged. Lasker tried to support himself by giving
chess and bridge lectures and exhibitions, as he was now too old
for serious competition. In 1940 he published his last book, The
Community of the Future, in which he proposed solutions for serious
political problems, including anti-Semitism and
unemployment. He died of a kidney infection in New York on January
11, 1941, at the age of 72, as a charity patient at the Mount Sinai
Hospital. He was buried in the Beth Olom Cemetery, Queens, New
York. His was survived by his wife Martha and his sister, Mrs.
Lotta Hirschberg.
++1.B Assessment
++1.B1 Chess strength and style
Lasker was considered to have a "psychological" method of play in
which he considered the subjective qualities of his opponent, in
addition to the objective requirements of his position on the
board. Richard Reti published a lengthy analysis of Lasker's play
in which he concluded that Lasker deliberately played inferior
moves that he knew would make his opponent uncomfortable. W. H. K.
Pollock commented, "It is no easy matter to reply correctly to
Lasker's bad moves."
Lasker himself denied the claim that he deliberately played bad
moves, and most modern writers agree. According to Grandmaster
Andrew Soltis and International Master John L. Watson, the features
that made his play mysterious to contemporaries now appear
regularly in modern play: the g2-g4 "Spike" attack against the
Dragon Sicilian; sacrifices to gain positional advantage; playing
the "practical" move rather than trying to find the best move;
counterattacking and complicating the game before a disadvantage
became serious. Former World Champion Vladimir Kramnik writes, "He
realized that different types of advantage could be
interchangeable: tactical edge could be converted into strategic
advantage and vice versa", which mystified contemporaries who were
just becoming used to the theories of Steinitz as codified by
Siegbert Tarrasch.
The famous win against Jose Raul Capablanca at St. Petersburg in
1914, which Lasker needed in order to retain any chance of catching
up with Capablanca, is sometimes offered as evidence of his
"psychological" approach. Reuben Fine describes Lasker's choice of
opening, the Exchange Variation of the Ruy Lopez, as "innocuous but
psychologically potent." However, an analysis of Lasker's use of
this variation throughout his career concludes that he had
excellent results with it as White against top-class opponents, and
sometimes used it in "must-win" situations. Ludek Pachman writes
that Lasker's choice presented his opponent with a dilemma: with
only a.5 point lead, Capablanca would have wanted to play safe; but
the Exchange Variation's pawn structure gives White an endgame
advantage, and Black must use his bishop pair aggressively in the
middle game to nullify this. In Kramnik's opinion, Lasker's play in
this game demonstrated deep positional understanding, rather than
psychology.
Fine reckoned Lasker paid little attention to the openings., but
Capablanca thought Lasker knew the openings very well, but
disagreed with a lot of contemporary opening analysis. In fact
before the 1894 world title match Lasker studied the openings
thoroughly, especially Steinitz' favorite lines. In Capablanca's
opinion, no player surpassed Lasker in the ability to assess a
position quickly and accurately, in terms of who had the better
prospects of winning and what strategy each side should adopt.
Capablanca also wrote that Lasker was so adaptable that he played
in no definite style, and that he was both a tenacious defender and
a very efficient finisher of his own attacks.
In addition to his enormous chess skill Lasker had an excellent
competitive temperament: his bitter rival Siegbert Tarrasch once
said, "Lasker occasionally loses a game, but he never loses his
head." Lasker enjoyed the need to adapt to varying styles and to
the shifting fortunes of tournaments. Although very strong in
matches, he was even stronger in tournaments. For over twenty
years, he always finished ahead of the younger Capablanca: at St.
Petersburg 1914, New York 1924, Moscow 1925, and Moscow 1935. Only
in 1936 (15 years after their match), when Lasker was 67, was
Capablanca able to finish ahead of him.
In 1964, Chessworld magazine published an article in which future
World Champion Bobby Fischer listed the ten greatest players in
history. Fischer did not include Lasker in the list, deriding him
as a "coffee-house player (who) knew nothing about openings and
didn't understand positional chess." In a poll of the world's
leading players taken sometime after Fischer's list appeared, Tal,
Korchnoi, and Robert Byrne all said that Lasker was the greatest
player ever. Both Pal Benko and Byrne said that Fischer later
reconsidered and admitted that Lasker was a great player.
Statistical ranking systems place Lasker high among the greatest
players of all time. The book Warriors of the Mind places him
sixth, behind Garry Kasparov, Anatoly Karpov, Fischer, Mikhail
Botvinnik and Capablanca. In his 1978 book The Rating of
Chessplayers, Past and Present, Arpad Elo gave retrospective
ratings to players based on their performance over the best five-
year span of their career. He concluded that Lasker was the joint
second strongest player of those surveyed (tied with Botvinnik and
behind Capablanca). The most up-to-date system, Chessmetrics, is
rather sensitive to the length of the periods being compared, and
ranks Lasker between fifth and second strongest of all time for
peak periods ranging in length from one to twenty years. Its
author, the statistician Jeff Sonas, concluded that only Kasparov
and Karpov surpassed Lasker's long-term dominance of the game. By
Chessmetrics' reckoning, Lasker was the number 1 player in 292
different months - a total of over 24 years. His first No. 1 rank
was in June 1890, and his last in December 1926 - a span of 36=
years. Chessmetrics also considers him the strongest 67-year-old in
history: in December 1935, at age 67 years and 0 months, his rating
was 2691 (number 7 in the world), well above second-place Viktor
Korchnoi's rating at that age (2660, number 39 in the world, in
March 1998).
++1.B2 Influence on chess
Lasker at home in Berlin, in 1933
Lasker founded no school of players who played in a similar style.
Max Euwe, World Champion 1935-37 and a prolific writer of chess
manuals, who had a lifetime 0-3 score against Lasker, said, "It is
not possible to learn much from him. One can only stand and
wonder." However Lasker's pragmative, combative approach had a
great influence on Soviet players like Mikhail Tal and Viktor
Korchnoi.
There are several "Lasker Variations" in the chess openings,
including Lasker's Defense to the Queen's Gambit, Lasker's Defense
to the Evans Gambit (which effectively ended the use of this gambit
in tournament play until a revival in the 1990s), and the Lasker
Variation in the McCutcheon Variation of the French Defense.
One of Lasker's most famous games is Lasker - Bauer, Amsterdam
1889, in which he sacrificed both bishops in a maneuver later
repeated in a number of games. Similar sacrifices had already been
played by Cecil Valentine De Vere and John Owen, but these were not
in major events and Lasker probably had not seen them.
Lasker was shocked by the poverty in which Wilhelm Steinitz died
and did not intend to die in similar circumstances. He became
notorious for demanding high fees for playing matches and
tournaments, and he argued that players should own the copyright in
their games rather than let publishers get all the
profits. These demands initially angered editors and other players,
but helped to pave the way for the rise of full-time chess
professionals who earn most of their living from playing, writing
and teaching. Copyright in chess games had been contentious at
least as far back as the mid-1840s, and Steinitz and Lasker
vigorously asserted that players should own the copyright and wrote
copyright clauses into their match contracts. However Lasker's
demands that challengers should raise large purses prevented or
delayed some eagerly-awaited World Championship matches -- for
example Frank James Marshall challenged him in 1904 to a match for
the World Championship but could not raise the stakes demanded by
Lasker until 1907. This problem continued throughout the reign of
his successor Capablanca.
Some of the controversial conditions that Lasker insisted on for
championship matches led Capablanca to attempt twice (1914 and
1922) to publish rules for such matches, to which other top players
readily agreed.
++1.B3 Work in other fields
Lasker was also a mathematician. In his 1905 article on
commutative algebra, Lasker introduced the theory of primary
decomposition of ideals, which has influence in the theory of
Noetherian rings. Rings having the primary decomposition property
are called "Laskerian rings" in his honor.
His attempt to create a general theory of all competitive
activities were followed by more consistent efforts from von
Neumann on game theory, and his later writings about card games
presented a significant issue in the mathematical analysis of card
games.
However, his dramatic and philosophical works have never been
highly regarded.
++1.C Friends and relatives
Lasker was a good friend of Albert Einstein, who wrote the
introduction to the posthumous biography Emanuel Lasker, The Life
of a Chess Master from Dr. Jacques Hannak (1952). In this preface
Einstein express his satisfaction at having met Lasker, writing:
Emanuel Lasker was undoubtedly one of the most interesting people
I came to know in my later years. We must be thankful to those who
have penned the story of his life for this and succeeding
generations. For there are few men who have had a warm interest in
all the great human problems and at the same time kept their
personality so uniquely independent.
Poetess Else Lasker-Schueler was his sister-in-law. Edward Lasker,
born in Kempen (Kepno), Greater Poland (then Prussia), the German-
American chess master, engineer, and author, claimed that he was
distantly related to Emanuel Lasker. They both played in the great
New York 1924 chess tournament.
++1.D Publications
++1.D1 Chess
* The London Chess Fortnightly, 1892-1893
* Common Sense in Chess, 1896 (an abstract of 12 lectures
delivered to a London audience in 1895)
* Lasker's How to Play Chess: An Elementary Text Book for
Beginners, Which Teaches Chess By a New, Easy and
Comprehensive Method, 1900
* Lasker's Chess Magazine, OCLC 5002324, 1904-1907.
* The International Chess Congress, St. Petersburg, 1909,
1910
* Lasker's Manual of Chess, 1925, is as famous in chess
circles for its philosophical tone as for its content.
* Lehrbuch des Schachspiels, 1926 - English version Lasker's
Manual of Chess published in 1927.
* Lasker's Chess Primer, 1934.
++1.D2 Mathematics
* Lasker, Emanuel (August 1895). "Metrical Relations of Plane
Spaces of n Manifoldness". Nature 52 (1345): 340-343.
* Lasker, Emanuel (October 1895). "About a certain Class of
Curved Lines in Space of n Manifoldness". Nature 52 (1355):
596.
++1.F Notable games
* Emanuel Lasker vs Johann Hermann Bauer, Amsterdam 1889.
Although this was not the earliest known game with a
successful two bishops sacrifice, this combination is now
known as a "Lasker-Bauer combination" or "Lasker
sacrifice".
* Harry Nelson Pillsbury vs Emanuel Lasker, St. Petersburg
1895. A brilliant sacrifice in the seventeenth move leads
to a victorious attack.
* Wilhelm Steinitz vs Emanuel Lasker, London 1899. The old
champion and the new one really go for it.
* Frank James Marshall vs Emanuel Lasker, World Championship
Match 1907, game 1. Lasker's attack is insufficient for a
quick win, so he trades it in for an endgame in which he
quickly ties Marshall in knots.
* Emanuel Lasker vs Carl Schlechter, match 1910, game 10. Not
a great game, but the one that saved Emanuel Lasker from
losing his world title in 1910.
* Emanuel Lasker vs Jose Raul Capablanca, St. Petersburg
1914. Lasker, who needed a win here, surprisingly used a
quiet opening, allowing Capablanca to simplify the game
early. There has been much debate about whether Lasker's
approach represented subtle psychology or deep positional
understanding.
* Max Euwe vs Emanuel Lasker, Zurich 1934. 66-year old Lasker
beats a future World Champion, sacrificing his Queen to
turn defense into attack.
++1.G Tournament results
1888/89 Berlin (Cafe Kaiserhof)
1st 20/20 +20 -0 =0
1889 Breslau "B"
Equal 1st 12/15 +11 -2 =2 Tied with von Feyerfeil and won
the playoff. This was Hauptturnier A of the sixth DSB
Congress, i.e. the "second-division" tournament.
1889 Amsterdam "A" tournament
2nd 6/8 +5 -1 =2 Behind Amos Burn; ahead of James Mason,
Isidor Gunsberg and others. This was the stronger of the
two Amsterdam tournaments held at that time.
1890 Berlin
1-2 6.5/8 +6 -1 =1 Tied with his brother Berthold Lasker.
1890 Graz
3rd 4/6 +3 -1 =2 Behind Gyula Makovetz and Johann Hermann
Bauer.
1892 London
1st 9/11 +8 -1 =2 Ahead of Mason and Rudolf Loman.
1892 London
1st 6.5/8 +5 -0 =3 Ahead of Joseph Henry Blackburne, Mason,
Gunsberg and Henry Edward Bird.
1893 New York City
1st 13/13 +13 -0 =0 Ahead of Adolf Albin, Jackson Showalter
and a newcomer called Harry Nelson Pillsbury.
1895 Hastings
3rd 15.5/21 +14 -4 =3 Behind Pillsbury and Mikhail
Chigorin; ahead of Siegbert Tarrasch, Wilhelm Steinitz and
the rest of a strong field.
1895/96 St. Petersburg
1st 11.5/18 +8 -3 =7 A Quadrangular tournament; ahead of
Steinitz (by two points), Pillsbury and Chigorin.
1896 Nuremberg
1st 13.5/18 +12 -3 =3 Ahead of Giza Marsczy, Pillsbury,
Tarrasch, Dawid Janowski, Steinitz and the rest of a strong
field.
1899 London
1st 23=/28 +20 -1 =7 Ahead of Janowski, Pillsbury, Marsczy,
Carl Schlechter, Blackburne, Chigorin and several other
strong players.
1900 Paris
1st 14.5/16 +14 -1 =1 Ahead of Pillsbury (by two points),
Frank James Marshall, Marsczy, Burn, Chigorin and several
others.
1904 Cambridge Springs
2nd = 11/15 +9 -2 =4 Tied with Janowski; two points behind
Marshall; ahead of Georg Marco, Showalter, Schlechter,
Chigorin, Jacques Mieses, Pillsbury and others.
1906 Trenton Falls
1st 5/6 +4 -0 =2 A Quadrangular tournament; ahead of Curt,
Albert Fox and Raubitschek.
1909 St. Petersburg
Equal 1st 14.5/18 +13 -2 =3 Tied with Akiba Rubinstein;
ahead of Oldrich Duras and Rudolf Spielmann (by 3.5
points), Ossip Bernstein, Richard Teichmann and several
other strong players.
1914 St. Petersburg
1st 13.5/18 +10 -1 =7 Ahead of Jose Raul Capablanca,
Alexander Alekhine, Tarrasch and Marshall. This tournament
had an unusual structure: there was a preliminary
tournament in which eleven players played each other player
once; the top five players then played a separate final
tournament in which each player who made the "cut" played
the other finalists twice; but their scores from the
preliminary tournament were carried forward. Even the
preliminary tournament would now be considered a "super-
tournament". Capablanca "won" the preliminary tournament by
1.5 points without losing a game, but Lasker achieved a
plus score against all his opponents in the final
tournament and finished with a combined score .5 point
ahead of Capablanca's.
1918 Berlin
1st 4.5/6 +3 -0 =3 Quadrangular tournament. Ahead of
Rubinstein, Schlechter and Tarrasch.
1923 Moravska Ostrava
1st 10.5/13 +8 -0 =5 Ahead of Richard Reti, Ernst
Gruenfeld, Alexey Selezniev, Savielly Tartakower, Max Euwe
and other strong players.
1924 New York City
1st 16/20 +13 -1 =6 Ahead of Capablanca (by 1.5 points),
Alekhine, Marshall, and the rest of a very strong field.
1925 Moscow
2nd 14/20 +10 -2 =8 Behind Efim Bogoljubow; ahead of
Capablanca, Marshall, Tartakower, Carlos Torre, other
strong non-Soviet players and the leading Soviet players.
1934 Zurich
5th 10/15 +9 -4 =2 Behind Alekhine, Euwe, Salo Flohr and
Bogoljubow; ahead of Bernstein, Aron Nimzowitsch, Gideon
Stahlberg and various others.
1935 Moscow
3rd 12.5/19 +6 -0 =13 half a point behind Mikhail Botvinnik
and Flohr; ahead of Capablanca, Spielmann, Ilya Kan,
Grigory Levenfish, Andor Lilienthal, Viacheslav Ragozin and
others. Emanuel Lasker was about 67 years old at the time.
1936 Moscow
6th 8/18 +3 -5 =10 Capablanca won.
1936 Nottingham
7-8th 8.5/14 +6 -3 =5 Capablanca and Botvinnik tied for
first place.
++1.H Match results
Here are Lasker's results in matches.
1889 E.R. von Feyerfeil
Won Breslau 1-0 +1 -0 =0 Play-off match
1889/90 Curt von Bardeleben
Won Berlin 2.5-1.5 +2 -1 =1
1889/90 Jacques Mieses
Won Leipzig 6.5-1.5 +5 -0 =3
1890 Berthold Lasker
Drew Berlin .5-.5 +0 -0 =1 Play-off match
1890 Henry Edward Bird
Won Liverpool 8.5-3.5 +7 -2 =3
1890 N.T. Miniati
Won Manchester 4-1 +3 -0 =2
1890 Berthold Englisch
Won Vienna 3.5-1.5 +2 -0 =3
1891 Francis Joseph Lee
Won London 1.5-.5 +1 -0 =1
1892 Joseph Henry Blackburne
Won London 8-2 +6 -0 =4
1892 Bird
Won Newcastle upon Tyne 5 -0 +5 -0 =0
1892/93 Jackson Showalter
Won Logansport and Kokomo, Indiana 7-3 +6 -2 =2
1893 Celso Golmayo Zupide
Won Havana 2.5-.5 +2 -0 =1
1893 Andres Clemente Vazquez
Won Havana 3-0 +3 -0 =0
1893 A. Ponce
Won Havana 2-0 +2 -0 =0
1893 Alfred Ettlinger
Won New York City 5-0 +5 -0 =0
1894 Wilhelm Steinitz
Won New York, Philadelphia, Montreal 12-7 +10 -5 =4 World
Championship match
1896/97 Wilhelm Steinitz
Won Moscow 12.5-4.5 +10 -2 =5 World Championship match
1901 Dawid Janowski
Won Manchester 1.5-.5 +1 -0 =1
1903 Mikhail Chigorin
Lost Brighton 2.5-3.5 +1 -2 =3 Rice Gambit match
1907 Frank James Marshall
Won New York, Philadelphia, Washington, D.C., Baltimore,
Chicago, Memphis 11.5-3.5 +8 -0 =7 World Championship match
1908 Siegbert Tarrasch
Won Duesseldorf, Munich 10.5-5.5 +8 -3 =5 World
Championship match
1908 Abraham Speijer
Won Amsterdam 2.5-.5 +2 -0 =1
1909 Dawid Janowski
Drew Paris 2-2 +2 -2 =0 Exhibition match
1909 Dawid Janowski
Won Paris 8-2 +7 -1 =2
1910 Carl Schlechter
Drew Vienna-Berlin 5-5 +1 -1 =8 World Championship match
1910 Dawid Janowski
Won Berlin 9.5-1.5 +8 -0 =3 World Championship match
1914 Ossip Bernstein
Drew Moscow 1-1 +1 -1 =0 Exhibition match
1916 Tarrasch
Won Berlin 5.5-.5 +5 -0 =1
1921 Jose Raul Capablanca
Lost Havana 5-9 +0 -4 =10 lost World Championship
1940 Frank James Marshall
Lost New York .5-1.5 +0 -1 =1 exhibition match
++2. Jose Raul Capablanca y Graupera
Jose Raul Capablanca y Graupera (November 19, 1888 - March 8, 1942)
was a Cuban chess player who was world chess champion from 1921 to
1927. One of the greatest players of all time, he was renowned for
his exceptional endgame skill and speed of play. Due to his
achievements in the chess world, mastery over the board and his
relatively simple style of play he was nicknamed the "Human Chess
Machine".
++2.A Biography and career
++2.A1 Childhood
Jose Raul Capablanca, the second surviving son of a Spanish army
officer, was born in Havana on November 19, 1888. According to
Capablanca, he learned the rules of the game at the age of four by
watching his father play, pointed out an illegal move by his
father, and then beat his father twice. At the age of eight he was
taken to Havana Chess Club, which had hosted many important
contests, but on the advice of a doctor he was not allowed to play
frequently. Between November and December 1901, he narrowly beat
the Cuban Chess Champion, Juan Corzo, in a match. However in April
1902 he only came fourth out of six in the National Championship,
losing both his games against Corzo. In 1905 Capablanca passed with
ease the entrance examinations for Columbia University in New York
City, where he wished to play for Columbia's strong baseball team,
and soon was selected as shortstop on the freshman team. In the
same year he joined the Manhattan Chess Club, and was soon
recognized as the club's strongest player. He was particularly
dominant in rapid chess, winning a tournament ahead of the reigning
World Chess Champion, Emanuel Lasker, in 1906. In 1908 he left the
university to concentrate on chess.
According to Columbia University, Capablanca enrolled at Columbia's
School of Mines, Engineering and Chemistry in September, 1910, to
study chemical engineering. Later, his financial support was
withdrawn because he preferred playing chess to studying
engineering. He left Columbia after one semester to devote himself
to chess full time.
++2.A2 Early adult career
Capablanca's skill in rapid chess lent itself to simultaneous
exhibitions, and his increasing reputation in these events led to
a USA-wide tour in 1909. Playing 602 games in 27 cities, he scored
96.4% - a much higher percentage than those of, for example, Giza
Marsczy's 88% and Frank Marshall's 86% in 1906. This performance
gained him sponsorship for an exhibition match that year against
Marshall, the U.S. champion, who had won the 1904 Cambridge Springs
tournament ahead of World Champion Emanuel Lasker and Dawid
Janowski, and whom Chessmetrics ranks as one of the world's top
three players at his peak. Capablanca beat Marshall by 15-8 (8
wins, 1 loss, 14 draws) - a margin comparable to what Emanuel
Lasker achieved against Marshall (8 wins, no losses, 7 draws) in
winning his 1907 World Championship match. After the match,
Capablanca said that he had never opened a book on chess openings.
Following this match, Chessmetrics rates Capablanca the world's
third strongest player for most of the period from 1909 through
1912.
Capablanca won all seven games in the 1910 New York State
Championship. After another gruelling series of simultaneous
exhibitions, Capablanca placed second, with 9.5 out of 12, in the
1911 National Tournament at New York, half a point behind Marshall,
and half a point ahead of Charles Jaffe and Oscar Chajes. Marshall,
invited to play in a tournament at San Sebastian, Spain, in 1911,
insisted that Capablanca also be allowed to play.
According to David Hooper and Ken Whyld, San Sebastian 1911 was
"one of the strongest five tournaments held up to that time", as
all the world's leading players competed except the World Champion,
Lasker. At the beginning of the tournament, Ossip Bernstein and
Aron Nimzowitsch objected to Capablanca's presence because he had
not fulfilled the entry condition of winning at least third prize
in two master tournaments. Capablanca won brilliantly against
Bernstein in the very first round, more simply against Nimzowitsch,
and astounded the chess world by taking first place, with a score
of six wins, one loss and seven draws, ahead of Akiba Rubinstein,
Milan Vidmar, Marshall, Carl Schlechter and Siegbert Tarrasch, et
al. His loss, against Rubinstein, was one of the most brilliant
achievements of the latter's career. Some European critics grumbled
that Capablanca's style was rather cautious, though he conceded
fewer draws than any of the next six finishers in the event.
Capablanca was now recognized as a serious contender for the world
championship.
++2.A3 World title contender
In 1911, Capablanca challenged Emanuel Lasker for the World Chess
Championship. Lasker accepted his challenge while proposing
seventeen conditions for the match. Capablanca objected to some of
the conditions, which significantly favored Lasker, and the match
did not take place.
In 1913, Capablanca won a tournament in New York with 11/13, half
a point ahead of Marshall. Capablanca then finished second to
Marshall in Capablanca's hometown, Havana, scoring 10 out of 14,
and losing one of their individual games. The 600 spectators
naturally favored their native hero, but sportingly gave Marshall
"thunderous applause". In a further tournament in New York in 1913,
at the Rice Chess Club, Capablanca won all thirteen games.
In September 1913, Capablanca secured a job in the Cuban Foreign
Office, which made him financially secure for life. Hooper and
Whyld write that, "He had no specific duties, but was expected to
act as a kind of ambassador-at-large, a well-known figure who would
put Cuba on the map wherever he travelled." His first instructions
were to go to Saint Petersburg - where he was due to play in a
major tournament. On his way he gave simultaneous exhibitions in
London, Paris and Berlin, where he also played two-game matches
against Richard Teichmann and Jacques Mieses, winning all his
games. After arriving in Saint Petersburg, he played similar
matches against Alexander Alekhine, Eugene Znosko-Borovsky and
Fyodor Duz-Chotimirsky, losing one game to Znosko-Borovsky and
winning the rest.
The St. Petersburg 1914 chess tournament was the first in which
Capablanca played World Champion Emanuel Lasker under normal
tournament conditions. This event was arranged in an unusual way:
after a preliminary single round-robin tournament involving eleven
players, the top five were to play a second stage in double round-
robin format, with scores from the preliminary tournament carried
forward to the second contest. Capablanca placed first in the
preliminary tournament, 1.5 points ahead of Lasker, who was out of
practice and made a shaky start. Despite a determined effort by
Lasker, Capablanca still seemed on course for ultimate victory.
However, in their second game of the final, Lasker reduced
Capablanca to a helpless position and Capablanca was so shaken by
this that he blundered away his next game to Siegbert Tarrasch.
Lasker thus finished half a point ahead of Capablanca and 3.5 ahead
of
Alekhine. Alekhine commented:
His real, incomparable gifts first began to make themselves known
at the time of St. Petersburg, 1914, when I too came to know him
personally. Neither before nor afterwards have I seen - and I
cannot imagine as well - such a flabbergasting quickness of chess
comprehension as that possessed by the Capablanca of that epoch.
Enough to say that he gave all the St. Petersburg masters the odds
of 5-1 in quick games - and won! With all this he was always good-
humoured, the darling of the ladies, and enjoyed wonderful good
health - really a dazzling appearance. That he came second to
Lasker must be entirely ascribed to his youthful levity - he was
already playing as well as Lasker.
After the breakdown of his attempt to negotiate a title match in
1911, Capablanca drafted rules for the conduct of future
challenges, which were agreed by the other top players at the 1914
Saint Petersburg tournament, including Lasker, and approved at the
Mannheim Congress later that year. The main points were: the
champion must be prepared to defend his title once a year; the
match should be won by the first player to win six or eight games,
whichever the champion preferred; and the stake should be at least
#1,000 (worth about #347,000 or $700,000 in 2006 terms.
++2.A4 During World War I
World War I began in midsummer 1914, bringing international chess
to a virtual halt for more than four years. Capablanca won
tournaments in New York in 1914, 1915, 1916 (with preliminary and
final round-robin stages) and 1918, losing only one game in this
sequence. In the 1918 event Frank James Marshall, playing Black
against Capablanca, unleashed a complicated counter-attack, later
known as the Marshall Attack, against the Ruy Lopez opening. It is
often said that Marshall had kept this secret for use against
Capablanca since his defeat in their 1909 match; however, Edward
Winter discovered several games between 1910 and 1918 where
Marshall passed up opportunities to use the Marshall Attack against
Capablanca; and an 1893 game that used a similar line. This gambit
is so complex that Garry Kasparov used to avoid it, and Marshall
had the advantage of using a prepared variation. Nevertheless,
Capablanca found a way through the complications and won.
Capablanca was challenged to a match in 1919 by Borislav Kostic,
who had come through the 1918 tournament undefeated to take second
place. The match was to go to the first player to win eight games,
but Kostic resigned the match after losing five straight games.
Capablanca considered that he was at his strongest around this
time.
++2.A5 World Champion
The Hastings Victory tournament of 1919 was the first international
competition on Allied soil since 1914. The field was not strong,
and Capablanca won with 10.5 points out of 11, one point ahead of
Kostic.
In January 1920, Emanuel Lasker and Capablanca signed an agreement
to play a World Championship match in 1921, noting that Capablanca
was not free to play in 1920. Because of the delay, Lasker insisted
that if he resigned the title, then Capablanca should become World
Champion. Lasker had previously included in his agreement before
World War I to play Akiba Rubinstein for the title a similar clause
that if he resigned the title, it should become Rubinstein's.
Lasker then resigned the title to Capablanca on June 27, 1920,
saying, "You have earned the title not by the formality of a
challenge, but by your brilliant mastery." When Cuban enthusiasts
raised $20,000 to fund the match provided it was played in Havana,
Lasker agreed in August 1920 to play there, but insisted that he
was the challenger as Capablanca was now the champion. Capablanca
signed an agreement that accepted this point, and soon afterwards
published a letter confirming it.
The match was played in March-April 1921; Lasker resigned it after
just fourteen games, having lost four games and won none. Reuben
Fine and Harry Golombek attributed the one-sided result to Lasker's
being in mysteriously poor form. Fred Reinfeld mentioned
speculations that Havana's humid climate weakened Lasker and that
he was depressed about the outcome of World War I, especially as he
had lost his life savings. On the other hand, Vladimir Kramnik
thought that Lasker played quite well and the match was an "even
and fascinating fight" until Lasker blundered in the last game.
Kramnik explained that Capablanca was twenty years younger, a
slightly stronger player, and had more recent competitive practice.
Edward Winter, after a lengthy summary of the facts, concludes
that, "The press was dismissive of Lasker's wish to confer the
title on Capablanca, even questioning the legality of such an
initiative, and in 1921 it regarded the Cuban as having become
world champion by dint of defeating Lasker over the board."
Reference works invariably give Capablanca's reign as titleholder
as beginning in 1921, not 1920. The only challenger besides
Capablanca to win the title without losing a game is Kramnik, in
the Classical World Chess Championship 2000 against Garry Kasparov.
The score sheet of Capablanca's defeat by Richard Riti in the New
York 1924 chess tournament, his first loss in eight years
Capablanca won the London tournament of 1922 with 13 points from 15
games with no losses, ahead of Alexander Alekhine on 11.5, Milan
Vidmar (11), and Akiba Rubinstein (10.5). During this event,
Capablanca proposed the "London Rules" to regulate future World
Championship negotiations: the first player to win six games would
win the match; playing sessions would be limited to 5 hours; the
time limit would be 40 moves in 2.5 hours; the champion must defend
his title within one year of receiving a challenge from a
recognized master; the champion would decide the date of the match;
the champion was not obliged to accept a challenge for a purse of
less than US $10,000 (worth about $349,000 in 2006 terms; 20% of
the purse was to be paid to the title holder and the remainder
divided, 60% going to the winner of the match, and 40% to the
loser; the highest purse bid must be accepted. Alekhine, Efim
Bogoljubow, Giza Maroczy, Richard Reti, Rubinstein, Tartakower and
Vidmar promptly signed them. Between 1921 and 1923 Alekhine,
Rubinstein and Nimzowitsch all challenged Capablanca, but only
Alekhine could raise the money, in 1927.
In 1922, Capablanca also gave a simultaneous exhibition in
Cleveland against 103 opponents, the largest in history up to that
time, winning 102 and drawing one - setting a record for the best
winning percentage ever in a large simultaneous exhibition.
After beginning with four draws, followed by a loss, Capablanca
placed second at the New York 1924 chess tournament with the score
of 14/20 (+10 -1 =9), 1.5 points behind Emanuel Lasker, and 2 ahead
of third-placed Alekhine. Capablanca's defeat at the hands of
Richard Reti in the fifth round was his first in serious
competition in eight years. He made another bad start at the Moscow
1925 chess tournament, and could only fight back to third place,
two points behind Bogoljubow and .5 point behind Emanuel Lasker.
Capablanca won at Lake Hopatcong, 1926 with 6 points out of 8,
ahead of Abraham Kupchik (5) and Maroczy (4.5).
A group of Argentinian businessmen, backed by a guarantee from the
president of Argentina, promised the funds for a World Championship
match between Capablanca and Alekhine in 1927. Since Nimzowitsch
had challenged before Alekhine, Capablanca gave Nimzowitsch until
January 1, 1927 to deposit a forfeit in order arrange a match. When
this did not materialize, a
Capablanca-Alekhine match was agreed, to begin in September 1927.
In the New York 1927 chess tournament, played from February 19 to
March 23, 1927, six of the world's strongest masters played a
quadruple round robin, with the others being Alekhine, Rudolf
Spielmann, Milan Vidmar, Nimzowitsch and Marshall, with Bogoljubow
and Emanuel Lasker not present. Before the tournament, Capablanca
wrote that he had "more experience but less power" than in 1911,
that he had peaked in 1919 and that some of his competitors had
become stronger in the meantime; however, he finished undefeated,
winning the mini-matches with each of his rivals, 2.5 points ahead
of second-place Alekhine, and won the "best game" prize for a win
over
Spielmann.
In December 1921, shortly after becoming World Champion, Capablanca
married Gloria Simoni Betancourt. They had a son, Jose Raul Jr., in
1923 and a daughter, Gloria, in 1925. According to Capablanca's
second wife, Olga, his first marriage broke down fairly soon, and
he and Gloria had affairs. Both his parents died during his reign,
his father in 1923 and mother in 1926.
++2.A6 Losing the title
Alekhine vs. Capablanca
Since Capablanca had won the New York 1927 chess tournament
overwhelmingly and had never lost a game to Alekhine, the Cuban was
regarded by most pundits as the clear favorite in their World Chess
Championship 1927 match. However, Alekhine won the match, played
from September to November 1927 at Buenos Aires, by 6 wins, 3
losses, and 25 draws - the longest formal World Championship match
until the contest in 1984-85 between Anatoly Karpov and Garry
Kasparov. Alekhine's victory surprised almost the entire chess
world. After Capablanca's death, Alekhine expressed surprise at his
own victory, since in 1927 he had not thought he was superior to
Capablanca, and he suggested that Capablanca had been over-
confident. Capablanca entered the match with no technical or
physical
preparation, while Alekhine got himself into good physical
condition, and had thoroughly studied Capablanca's play. According
to Kasparov, Alekhine's research uncovered many small inaccuracies,
which occurred because Capablanca was unwilling to concentrate
intensely. Vladimir Kramnik commented that this was the first
contest in which Capablanca had no easy wins. Ludek Pachman
suggested that Capablanca, who was unused to losing games or to any
other type of setback, became depressed over his unnecessary loss
of the eleventh game, a long, gruelling endgame, featuring errors
by both
players.
Immediately after winning the match, Alekhine announced that he was
willing to give Capablanca a return match, on the same terms that
Capablanca had required as champion - the challenger must provide
a stake of US $10,000, of which more than half would go to the
defending champion even if he was defeated. Alekhine had challenged
Capablanca in the early 1920s but Alekhine could not raise the
money until 1927. After Capablanca's death, Alekhine wrote that
Capablanca's demand for a $10,000 stake was an attempt to avoid
challenges. Negotiations dragged on for several years, often
breaking down when agreement seemed in sight. Their relationship
became bitter, and Alekhine demanded much higher appearance fees
for tournaments in which Capablanca also played.
++2.A7 Post-championship and partial retirement
Giving a simultaneous display on thirty boards in Berlin, June 1929
After losing the World Championship in late 1927, Capablanca played
more often in tournaments, hoping to strengthen his claim for a
rematch. From 1928 through 1931, he won six first prizes, also
finishing second twice and one joint second. His competitors
included rising stars such as Max Euwe and Isaac Kashdan, as well
as players who had been established in the 1920s, but Capablanca
and Alekhine never played in the same tournament during this
period, and would next meet only at the Nottingham, 1936
tournament, after Alekhine had lost the world title to Euwe the
preceding year. In late 1931, Capablanca also won a match (+2 -0
=8) against Euwe, whom Chessmetrics ranks sixth in the world at the
time.
Despite these excellent results, Capablanca's play showed signs of
decline: his play slowed from the speed of his youth, with
occasional time trouble; although he continued to produce many
superb games, he also made some gross
blunders. Chessmetrics nonetheless ranks Capablanca as the second
strongest player in the world (after Alekhine) from his loss of the
title through to autumn 1932, except for a brief appearance in the
top place.
After winning an event at New York in 1931, he withdrew from
serious chess, perhaps disheartened by his inability to secure a
return match against Alekhine, and played only less serious games
at the Manhattan Chess Club and simultaneous displays. On 6
December 1933, Capablanca won all 9 of his games in one of the
club's weekly rapid chess tournaments, finishing 2 points ahead of
Samuel Reshevsky, Reuben Fine and Milton Hanauer.
++2.A8 Return to competitive chess
At first Capablanca did not divorce his first wife, as he had not
intended to re-marry. Olga, Capablanca's second wife, wrote that
she met him in the late spring of 1934; by late October the pair
were deeply in love, and Capablanca recovered his ambition to prove
he was the world's best player. In 1938 he divorced his first wife
and then married Olga on October 20, 1938, about a month before the
AVRO tournament.
Starting his comeback at the Hastings tournament of 1934-35,
Capablanca finished fourth, although coming ahead of Mikhail
Botvinnik and Andor Lilienthal. He placed second by .5 point in the
Margate tournaments of 1935 and 1936. At Moscow in 1935 Capablanca
finished fourth, 1 point behind the joint winners, while Emanuel
Lasker's third place at the age of 66 was hailed as "a biological
miracle." The following year, Capablanca won an even stronger
tournament in Moscow, one point ahead of Botvinnik and 3.5 ahead of
Salo Flohr, who took third place; A month later, he shared first
place with Botvinnik at Nottingham, with a score of (+5 -1 =8),
losing only to Flohr; Alekhine placed sixth, only one point behind
the joint winners. These tournaments of 1936 were the last two that
Lasker played, and the only ones in which Capablanca finished ahead
of Lasker, now 67. During these triumphs Capablanca began to suffer
symptoms of high blood pressure. He tied for second place at
Semmering in 1937, then could only finish seventh of the eight
players at the 1938 AVRO tournament, an ilite contest designed to
select a challenger for Alekhine's world title. Capablanca's high
blood pressure was not correctly diagnosed and treated until after
the AVRO tournament, and caused him to lose his train of thought
towards the end of playing sessions.
After winning at Paris in 1938 and placing second in a slightly
stronger tournament at Margate in 1939, Capablanca played for Cuba
in the 8th Chess Olympiad, held in Buenos Aires, and won the gold
medal for the best performance on the top board. While Capablanca
and Alekhine were both representing their countries in Buenos
Aires, Capablanca made a final attempt to arrange a World
Championship match. Alekhine declined, saying he was obliged to be
available to defend his adopted homeland, France, as World War II
had just broken out. Alekhine also sat out the match when the teams
from Cuba and France faced each other in the Buenos Aires Olympiad,
thus declining an opportunity to play Capablanca once more.
++2.A9 Final years
On March 7, 1942, Capablanca was observing a skittles game and
chatting with friends at the Manhattan Chess Club in New York City,
when he asked for help removing his coat, and collapsed shortly
afterwards. He was taken to Mount Sinai Hospital, where he died at
6 a.m. the next morning. The cause of death was given as "a
cerebral haemorrhage provoked by hypertension". Capablanca's great
rival Emanuel Lasker had died in the same hospital only a year
earlier. Capablanca's body was given a public funeral in Havana's
Colon Cemetery on March 15, 1942.
His bitter rival Alekhine wrote in a tribute to Capablanca:
... Capablanca was snatched from the chess world much too soon.
With his death, we have lost a very great chess genius whose like
we shall never see again.
Emanuel Lasker once said: "I have known many chess players, but
only one chess genius: Capablanca."
An annual Capablanca Memorial tournament has been held in Cuba,
most often in Havana, since 1962.
++2.B Assessment
++2.B1 Playing strength and style
As an adult, Capablanca lost only 34 serious games. He was
undefeated from February 10, 1916, when he lost to Oscar Chajes in
the New York 1916 tournament, to March 21, 1924, when he lost to
Richard Reti in the New York International tournament. During this
streak, which included his 1921 World Championship match against
Lasker, Capablanca played 63 games, winning 40 and drawing 23. In
fact, only Marshall, Lasker, Alekhine and Rudolf Spielmann won two
or more serious games from the mature Capablanca, though in each
case, their overall lifetime scores were minus (Capablanca beat
Marshall +20 -2 =28, Lasker +6 -2 =16, Alekhine +9 -7 =33), except
for Spielmann who was level (+2 -2
=8). Of top players, only Keres had a narrow plus score against him
(+1 -0 =5). Keres' win was at the AVRO 1938 chess tournament,
during which tournament Capablanca turned 50, while Keres was 22.
Statistical ranking systems place Capablanca high among the
greatest players of all time. Nathan Divinsky and Raymond Keene's
book Warriors of the Mind (1989) ranks him fifth, behind Garry
Kasparov, Anatoly Karpov, Bobby Fischer and Mikhail Botvinnik - and
immediately ahead of Emanuel Lasker. In his 1978 book The Rating of
Chessplayers, Past and Present, Arpad Elo gave retrospective
ratings to players based on their performance over the best five-
year span of their career. He concluded that Capablanca was the
strongest of those surveyed, with Lasker and Botvinnik sharing
second place. Chessmetrics (2006) is rather sensitive to the length
of the periods being compared, and ranks Capablanca between third
and fourth strongest of all time for peak periods ranging in length
from one to fifteen years. Its author, the statistician Jeff Sonas,
concluded that Capablanca had more years in the top three than
anyone except Lasker, Anatoly Karpov and Garry Kasparov - although
Alexander Alekhine had more years in the top two positions. A 2006
study claimed to show that Capablanca was the most accurate of all
the World Champions when compared with computer analysis of World
Championship match games. However, this analysis was criticized for
using a second-rank chess program, Crafty, modified to limit its
calculations to six moves by each side, and for favoring players
whose style matched that of the program.
Boris Spassky, World Champion from 1969 to 1972, considered
Capablanca the best player of all time. Bobby Fischer, who held the
title from 1972 to 1975, admired Capablanca's "light touch" and
ability to see the right move very quickly. Fischer reported that
in the 1950s, older members of the Manhattan Chess Club spoke of
Capablanca's performances with awe.
Capablanca excelled in simple positions and endgames, and his
positional judgment was outstanding, so much so that most attempts
to attack him came to grief without any apparent defensive efforts
on his part. However, he could play great tactical chess when
necessary - most famously in the 1918 Manhattan Chess Club
Championship tournament (in New York) where Marshall sprang a
deeply-analyzed prepared variation on him, which he refuted while
playing under the normal time limit (although ways have since been
found to strengthen the Marshall Attack). He was also capable of
using aggressive tactical play to drive home a positional
advantage, provided he considered it safe and the most efficient
way to win, for example against Spielmann in the 1927 New York
tournament.
++2.B2 Influence on the game
Capablanca founded no school per se, but his style was very
influential in the games of two world champions: Fischer and
Anatoly Karpov. Botvinnik also wrote how much he learned from
Capablanca, and pointed out that Alekhine had received much
schooling from him in positional play, before their fight for the
world title made them bitter enemies.
As a chess writer, Capablanca did not present large amounts of
detailed analysis, instead focusing on the critical moments in a
game. His writing style was plain and easy to understand. Botvinnik
regarded Capablanca's book Chess Fundamentals as the best chess
book ever written. Capablanca in a lecture and in his book A Primer
of Chess pointed out that while the bishop was usually stronger
than the knight, queen and knight was usually better than queen and
bishop, especially in endings -- the bishop merely mimics the
queen's diagonal move, while the knight can immediately reach
squares the queen cannot. Research is divided over Capablanca's
conclusion: in 2007, Glenn Flear found little difference, while in
1999, Larry Kaufman, analysing a large database of games, concluded
that results very slightly favored queen plus knight. John Watson
wrote in 1998 that an unusually large proportion of queen and
knight versus queen and bishop endings are drawn, and that most
decisive games are characterized by the winning side having one or
more obvious advantages in that specific game.
++2.B3 Personality
Early in his chess career, Capablanca had received some criticism,
mainly in Britain, for the allegedly conceited description of his
accomplishments in his first book, My Chess Career. He therefore
took the unprecedented step of including virtually all of his
tournament and match defeats up to that time in Chess Fundamentals,
together with an instructive group of his victories. Nevertheless
his preface to the 1934 edition of Chess Fundamentals is confident
that the "reader may therefore go over the contents of the book
with the assurance that there is in it everything he needs."
However Julius du Mont wrote that he knew Capablanca well and could
vouch that he was not conceited. In du Mont's opinion critics
should understand the difference between the merely gifted and the
towering genius of Capablanca, and the contrast between the British
tendency towards false modesty and the Latin and American tendency
to say "I played this game as well as it could be played" if he
honestly thought that it was correct. Fischer also admired this
frankness. Du Mont also said that Capablanca was rather sensitive
to
criticism, and chess historian Edward Winter documented a number of
examples of self-criticism in My Chess Career.
Despite his achievements Capablanca appeared more interested in
baseball than in chess, which he described as "not a difficult game
to learn and it is an enjoyable game to play." His second wife,
Olga, thought he resented the way in which chess had dominated his
life, and wished he could have studied music or medicine.
++2.C Capablanca chess
In an interview in 1925 Capablanca denied reports that he thought
chess had already currently reached its limit because it was easy
for top players to obtain a draw. However he was concerned that the
accelerating development of chess technique and opening knowledge
might cause such stagnation in 50 years' time. Hence he suggested
the adoption of a 10x8 board with 2 extra pieces per side:
* Chancellor - a chancellor that moves as both a rook and a
knight;
* Archbishop - an archbishop that moves as both a bishop and
a knight. This piece would be able to deliver checkmate on
its own, which none of the conventional pieces can do.
He thought this would prevent technical knowledge from becoming
such a dominant factor, at least for a few centuries.
Capablanca and Edward Lasker experimented with 10x10 and 10x8
boards, using the same expanded set of pieces. They preferred the
8-rank version as it encouraged combat to start earlier, and their
games typically lasted 20 to 25 moves. Contrary to the claims of
some critics, Capablanca proposed this variant while he was world
champion, not as sour grapes after losing his title.
Similar 10x8 variants had previously been described in 1617 by
Pietro Carrera and in 1874 by Henry Bird, differing only in how the
new pieces were placed in each side's back row. Subsequent variants
inspired by Capablanca's experimentation have been proposed,
including Grand chess (which uses a 10x10 board and has pawns on
the third rank), Gothic Chess (which used to be patented), and
Embassy Chess (the Grand chess setup on a 10x8 board).
++2.D Notable chess games
* Jose Raul Capablanca vs L. Molina, Buenos Aires 1911,
Queen's Gambit Declined: Modern. Knight Defense (D52), 1-0
An impressive Greco's sacrifice along with deceptive
simplicity and effortless endgame.
* Jose Raul Capablanca vs Frank James Marshall, ch Manhattan
CC, New York 1918, Spanish Game: Marshall Attack. Original
Marshall Attack (C89), 1-0 One of the most famous games of
Capablanca. It is on record that Marshall unveiled this
attack after careful preparation. Perfect example of
defending against an extremely aggressive attack.
* Jose Raul Capablanca vs Professor Marc Fonaroff, New York
1918, Spanish Game: Berlin Defense. Hedgehog Variation
(C62), 1-0 A freaky ending with amazing accuracy.
* Emanuel Lasker vs Jose Raul Capablanca, Lasker-Capablanca
World Championship Match, Havana 1921. Queen's Gambit
Declined: Orthodox Defense. Rubinstein Variation (D61), 0-1
A strategic masterpiece and instructive endgame which
should be on everybody's list. Capablanca out-playing the
great Lasker in the endgame with simple and perfect
maneuvering of pieces. A must-see game for chess endgame
fans.
* Jose Raul Capablanca vs Savielly Tartakower, New York 1924,
Dutch Defense, Horwitz Variation: General (A80), 1-0 A
brilliant endgame from the natural genius. Dubbed as "Rook
Before you Leap". Demonstrates the exceptional endgame
skills of Capablanca with flawless artistry.
* Jose Raul Capablanca vs Rudolf Spielmann, New York 1927,
Queen's Gambit Declined: Barmen Variation (D37), 1-0 A
remarkable tactical game which earned the "Brilliancy
Price" for Capablanca. This is a showcase of Capablanca's
tactical skills complementing positional supremacy.
* Jose Raul Capablanca vs Andor Lilienthal, Moscow 1936, Reti
Opening: Anglo-Slav. Bogoljubow Variation (A12), 1-0 A
perfect endgame and pawn play utilizing the space against
material advantage.
* Ilia Abramovich Kan vs Jose Raul Capablanca, Moscow 1936,
Vienna Game: Anderssen Defense (C25), 0-1 Another
demonstration of Caplabanca's endgame supremacy. This game
seems a drawn game, but witness how Capablanca ekes out a
win using his positional mastery.
++2.E Writings
* Havana 1913, by Jose Raul Capablanca. This is the only
tournament book he wrote. It was originally published in
Spanish in 1913 in Havana. Edward Winter translated it into
English, and it appeared as a British Chess Magazine
reprint, Quarterly #18, in 1976.
* A Primer of Chess by Jose Raul Capablanca (preface by
Benjamin Anderson). Originally published in 1935.
Republished in 2002 by Harvest Books, ISBN 0156028077.
* Chess Fundamentals by Jose Raul Capablanca (Originally
published in 1921. Republished by Everyman Chess, 1994,
ISBN 1857440730. Revised and updated by Nick de Firmian in
2006, ISBN 0-8129-3681-7.)
* My Chess Career by Jose Raul Capablanca (Originally
published by Macmillan in 1921. Republished by Dover in
1966. Republished by Hardinge Simpole Limited, 2003, ISBN
1843820919.)
* The World's Championship Chess Match between Jose Raul
Capablanca and Dr. Emanuel Lasker, with an introduction,
the scores of all the games annotated by the champion,
together with statistical matter and the biographies of the
two masters, 1921 by Jose Raul Capablanca. (Republished in
1977 by Dover, together with a book on the 1927 match with
annotations by Frederick Yates and William Winter, as
World's Championship Matches, 1921 and 1927 by Jose Raul
Capablanca. ISBN 0486231895.)
* Last Lectures by Jose Raul Capablanca (Simon and Schuster,
January 1966, ASIN B0007DZW6W)
++2.F Tournament results
The following table gives Capablanca's placings and scores in
tournaments.
1910 New York State
1st 20/20 +20 -0 =0.
1911 New York
2nd 9.5/12 +8 -1 =3.
1911 San Sebastian (Spain)
1st 9.5/14 +6 -1 =7 Ahead of Akiba Rubinstein and Milan
Vidmar (9), Frank James Marshall (8.5) and 11 other world-
class players. His only loss was to Rubinstein, and his win
against Ossip Bernstein was awarded the brilliancy prize.
1913 New York
1st 11/13 +10 -1 =2 Ahead of Marshall (10.5), Charles Jaffe
(9.5) and Dawid Janowski (9).
1913 Havana
2nd 10/14 +8 -2 =4 Behind Marshall (10.5); ahead of
Janowski (9) and five others.
1913 New York
1st 13/13 +13 -0 =0 Ahead of Oldrich Duras.
1914 St. Petersburg
2nd 13/18 +10 -2 =6 Behind Emanuel Lasker (13.5); ahead of
Alexander Alekhine (10), Siegbert Tarrasch (8.5) and
Marshall (8). This tournament had an unusual structure:
there was a preliminary tournament in which eleven players
played each other player once; the top five players then
played a separate final tournament in which each player who
made the "cut" played the other finalists twice; but their
scores from the preliminary tournament were carried
forward. Even the preliminary tournament would now be
considered a "super-tournament". Capablanca "won" the
preliminary tournament by 1.5 points without losing a game,
but Lasker achieved a plus score against all his opponents
in the final tournament and finished with a combined score
.5 point ahead of Capablanca's.
1915 New York
1st 13/14 +12 -0 =2 Ahead of Marshall (12) and six others.
1916 New York
1st 14/17 +12 -1 =4 Ahead of Janowski (11) and 11 others.
The structure was similar to that of St. Petersburg 1914.
1918 New York
1st 10.5/12 +9 -0 =3 Ahead of Boris Kostic (9), Marshall
(7), and four others.
1919 Hastings
1st 10.5/11 +10 -0 =1 Ahead of Kostic (9.5), Sir George
Thomas (7), Frederick Yates (7) and eight others.
1922 London
1st 13/15 +11 -0 =4 Ahead of Alekhine (11.5), Vidmar (11),
Rubinstein (10.5), Efim Bogoljubow (9), and 11 other
players, mostly very strong.
1924 New York
2nd 14.5/20 +10 -1 =9 Behind Lasker (16); ahead of Alekhine
(12), Marshall (11), Richard Riti (10.5) and six others,
mostly very strong.
1925 Moscow
3rd 13.5/20 +9 -2 =9 Behind Bogojubow (15.5) and Lasker
(14); ahead of Marshall (12.5) and a mixture of strong
international players and rising Soviet players.
1926 Lake Hopatcong
1st 6/8 +4 -0 =4 Ahead of Abraham Kupchik (5), Giza Maroczy
(4.5), Marshall (3) and Edward Lasker (1.5).
1927 New York
1st 14/20 +8 -0 =12 Ahead of Alekhine (11.5), Aron
Nimzowitsch (10.5), Vidmar (10), Rudolf Spielmann (8) and
Marshall (6).
1928 Berlin
1st 8.5/12 +5 -0 =7 Ahead of Nimzowitsch (7), Spielmann
(6.5) and four other very strong players.
1928 Bad Kissingen
2nd 7/11 +4 -1 =6 Behind Bogojubow (8); ahead of Max Euwe
(6.5), Rubinstein (6.5), Nimzowitsch (6) and seven other
strong masters.
1928 Budapest
1st 7/9 +5 -0 =4 Ahead of Marshall (6), Hans Kmoch (5),
Spielmann (5) and six others.
1929 Ramsgate
1st 5.5/7 +4 -0 =3 Ahead of Vera Menchik (5), Rubinstein
(5), and four others.
1929 Carlsbad
2nd= 14.5/21 +10 -2 =9 Behind Nimzowitsch (15); tied with
Spielmann; ahead of Rubinstein (13.5) and 18 others, mostly
very strong.
1929 Budapest
1st 10.5/13 +8 -0 =5 Ahead of Rubinstein (9.5), Savielly
Tartakower (8) and 11 others.
1929 Barcelona
1st 13.5/14 +13 -0 =1 Ahead of Tartakower (11.5) and 13
others.
1929-30 Hastings
1st 6.5/9 +4 -0 =5.
1930-31 Hastings
2nd 6.5/9 +5 -1 =3 Behind Euwe (7); ahead of eight others.
1931 New York
1st 10/11 +9 -0 =2 Ahead of Isaac Kashdan (8.5) and 10
others.
1934-35 Hastings
4th 5.5/9 +4 -2 =3 Behind Thomas, (6.5), Euwe (6.5) and
Salo Flohr (6.5); ahead Mikhail Botvinnik (5), Andor
Lilienthal (5) and four others.
1935 Moscow
4th 12/19 +7 -2 =10 Behind Botvinnik (13), Flohr (13) and
Lasker (12.5); ahead of Spielmann (11) and 15 others,
mainly Soviet players.
1935 Margate
2nd 7/9 +6 -1 =2 Behind Samuel Reshevsky (7.5); ahead of
eight others.
1936 Margate
2nd 7/9 +5 -0 =4 Behind Flohr (7.5); ahead of Gideon
Stehlberg and eight others.
1936 Moscow
1st 13/18 +8 -0 =10 Ahead of Botvinnik (12), Flohr (9.5),
Lilienthal (9), Viacheslav Ragozin (8.5), Lasker (8) and
four others.
1936 Nottingham
1st= 10/14 +7 -1 =6 Tied with Botvinnik; ahead of Euwe
(9.5), Reuben Fine (9.5), Reshevsky (9.5), Alekhine (9),
Flohr (8.5), Lasker (8.5) and seven other strong opponents.
1937 Semmering
3rd= 7.5/14 +2 -1 =11 Behind Paul Keres (9), Fine (8); tied
with Reshevsky; ahead of Flohr (7), Erich Eliskases (6),
Ragozin (6) and Vladimir Petrov (5).
1938 Paris
1st= 8/10 +6 -0 =4 Ahead of Nicolas Rossolimo (7.5) and
four others.
1938 AVRO tournament, at ten cities in the Netherlands
7th 6/14 +2 -4 =8 Behind Keres (8.5), Fine (8.5), Botvinnik
(7.5), Alekhine (7), Euwe (7) and Reshevsky (7); ahead of
Flohr (4.5).
1939 Margate
2nd= 6.5/9 +4 -0 =5 Behind Keres (7.5); tied with Flohr;
ahead of seven others.
At the 1939 Chess Olympiad in Buenos Aires, Capablanca took the
medal for best performance on a country's first board.
++2.G Match results
Here are Capablanca's results in matches.
1901 Juan Corzo
Won Havana 7-6 +4 -3 =6 For the championship of Cuba; Corzo
was the reigning champion.
1909 Frank James Marshall
Won New York 15-8 +8 -1 =14.
1919 Boris Kostic
Won USA 5-0 +5 -0 =0.
1921 Emanuel Lasker
Won Havana 9-5 +4 -0 =10 For the World Chess Championship.
1927 Alexander Alekhine
Lost Buenos Aires 15.5-18.5 +3 -6 =25 For the World Chess
Championship.
1931 Max Euwe
Won Netherlands 6-4 +2 -0 =8 Euwe became World Champion
1935-1937.
++3. Emanuel Lasker - Jose Raul Capablanca, St. Petersburg 1914
St. Petersburg 1914
White: Emanuel Lasker
Black: Jose Raul Capablanca
Result: 1-0
ECO: C68 Ruy Lopez, Exchange Variation, Alekhine Variation
Notes by R.J. Macdonald
1. e4 e5
2. Nf3 Nc6
3. Bb5 a6
4. Bxc6
(This is the Exchange Variation of the Ruy Lopez.)
4. ... dxc6
(This is the preferred way to capture the bishop, choosing to
pursue rapid piece development rather than a strong pawn center
with 4. ... bxc6.)
5. d4
(5. 0-0 is the more common move here.)
5. ... exd4
6. Qxd4 Qxd4
7. Nxd4
(This is the Alekhine Variation.)
7. ... Bd6
(Also possible are (a) 7. ... Nf6 8. f3 Bd7 9. Nc3 0-0-0 10. Kf2
Bd6 11. Bg5 h6 12. Bxf6 gxf6 13. Rad1 Be6 14. Nxe6 fxe6 15. Ke2
Be5, with equality; or (b) 7. ... Bd7 8. Nc3 Bb4 9. Be3 Bxc3+ 10.
bxc3 c5 11. Ne2 b6 12. 0-0-0 0-0-0 13. f3 Ne7 14. Nf4 Kb7, which
also gives equal chances.)
8. Nc3
(Also good is 8. Be3 Nf6 9. f3 c5 10. Ne2 Bd7 11. Nbc3 0-0-0 12.
Bf4 Bxf4 13. Nxf4 Be6 14. Nxe6 fxe6 15. Rd1 Rd4, with equal
chances.)
8. ... Ne7
9. 0-0
(9. Be3 Bd7 10. 0-0-0 0-0-0 11. Nb3 Kb8 12. f4 f6 13. f5 b6 14. Nd2
Be5 15. Nc4 Bxc3 16. bxc3 c5 17. Bf4 Kc8 18. g4 Bb5 19. Rxd8+ Rxd8
20. Nd2 Re8 21. h4 Nc6 22. g5 Na5 23. gxf6 - 1/2-1/2 A. Karpov
(2660) - S. Furman (2540), Madrid 1973)
9. ... 0-0
10. f4
(10. Be3 looks better.)
10. ... Re8!?
(10. ... f6 11. Be3 Re8 12. Rfe1 Ng6 - 1/2-1/2, as in the game D.
Kosic (2415) - G. Laketic (2425), ladovo 1990)
11. Nb3
(11. Kf2 f6 gives equality.)
11. ... f6
12. f5
This gives White more space. 12. a3 Be6 leads to equality.)
12. ... b6
(This secures a5+c5, giving black a slight advantage.)
13. Bf4 Bb7
(13. ... Bxf4!? 14. Rxf4 c5 with a slight advantage for black.)
14. Bxd6
(This gives white a slight edge.)
14. ... cxd6
15. Nd4 Rad8
(Black has a cramped position. 15. ... Bc8 16. Rad1 would give
white a slight advantage.)
16. Ne6
(White threatens to win material: Ne6xd8. A classical outpost.)
16. ... Rd7
17. Rad1
(17. Na4 Nc8 gives white a slight advantage.)
17. ... Nc8
(17. ... c5 18. Rf3 gives white a slight advantage.)
18. Rf2
(18. Rf3 d5 gives white a moderate advantage.)
18. ... b5
(Black has a cramped position.)
19. Rfd2 Rde7
(19. ... g6 20. g4 gives white a moderate advantage.)
20. b4 Kf7
(Better is 20. ... Ba8 21. Rd3, but white still had a moderate
advantage.)
21. a3
(21. Rd3 Rh8 gives white a moderate edge.)
21. ... Ba8
22. Kf2 Ra7
23. g4 h6
24. Rd3 a5
25. h4 axb4
26. axb4 Rae7
(26. ... Rh8 27. Kg3 gives white a moderate advantage.)
27. Kf3
(27. g5 hxg5 28. hxg5 Rh8 is decisive for white.)
27. ... Rg8
(27. ... Rh8 28. Ra1 Bb7 29. Rdd1 gives white a moderate
advantage.)
28. Kf4
(28. g5 Ke8 is decisive for white.)
28. ... g6
29. Rg3
(29. g5 hxg5+ 30. hxg5 Rh8 gives white a winning edge.)
29. ... g5+
(29. ... gxf5 30. exf5 d5 31. Re3 gives white a moderate
advantage.)
30. Kf3
Key Move Diagram:
b1n3r1/
4rk2/
2ppNp1p/
1p3Pp1/
1P2P1PP/
2N2KR1/
2P5/
3R4
Position after white's 30th move.
30. ... Nb6?
(Better is 30. ... gxh4 31. Rh3 Ra7 32. Rxh4 Rh8, but white's
advantage should still be decisive.)
31. hxg5 hxg5
(31. ... fxg5 does not save the day: 32. Rh3 Nc4 33. Rxh6, and
white has a decisive advantage.)
32. Rh3 Rd7
(32. ... Nc4 does not help much either: 33. e5! (Mate attack) fxe5
34. Kg3 and white should win.)
33. Kg3 Ke8
(33. ... Na4 doesn't improve anything: 34. Nxa4 bxa4 35. Rh6 with
a decisive advantage for white.)
34. Rdh1
(34. e5 seems even better: 34. ... dxe5 35. Ra1 Bb7 with a decisive
advantage for white.)
34. ... Bb7
(34. ... c5 is not the saving move: 35. Nxb5 cxb4 36. Rb1 Bxe4 37.
Rxb4 with a winning position for white.)
Key Move Diagram:
4k1r1/
1b1r4/
1nppNp2/
1p3Pp1/
1P2P1P1/
2N3KR/
2P5/
7R
Position after black's 34th move.
35. e5!
(a fitting end to a beautiful game.)
35. ... dxe5
(35. ... fxe5 loses to 36. Ne4 Nd5 37. Rh7 Bc8 38. Rh8 Rxh8 39.
Rxh8+ Ke7 40. Rxc8 Nxb4 41. N6xg5 Nd5 42. Rxc6 b4 43. Nh7.)
36. Ne4 Nd5
37. N6c5 Bc8
(37. ... Re7 is no good, but what else? 38. Nxb7 Kd7 39. Nbc5+ Kc7
should win easily.)
38. Nxd7 Bxd7
39. Rh7 Rf8
40. Ra1 Kd8
41. Ra8+ Bc8
42. Nc5.
1-0
==========
The blind-chess mailing list
View list information and change your settings: //www.freelists.org/list/blind-chess
List archives: //www.freelists.org/archives/blind-chess
=========
Other related posts:
- » [blind-chess] Annotated Game #023: Emanuel Lasker - Jose Raul Capablance, St. Petersburg 1914 - Roderick Macdonald
