E Lasker - Lasker's Manual of Chess [1st Ed.][pp 350], Manuais, Projetos, Pesquisas de Física

Baixe E Lasker - Lasker's Manual of Chess [1st Ed.][pp 350] e outras Manuais, Projetos, Pesquisas em PDF para Física, somente na Docsity! Lasker's Manual oi Chess Dr. RES] Lasker  TO MY DEAR WIFE WHO SHARES WITH ME MY CARES AND LABOURS AND WHO LETS ME SHARE IN HER JOyS The Martha Lasker Estate wishes to express its thanks to Harold M. Phil- lips for his efforts in making possible the publication of the present edition. EMANUEL LASKER: AN APPRECIATION What can be said to be permanent in this fleeting world, if not our remembrance of the deeds of great men?—LupwiG BAUER It is a commonplace that great men are not really ap- preciated until death has re- moved them from our pres- ence. Very few men, even very few great men, receive the homage that is rightly theirs during their lifetime. Emanuel Lasker was one of the few who become living legends; but in his case, itis a legend which is not easy to unravel. It is a legend which contains fact and fancy, un- fair criticism and undiscrim- inating praise; a legend which depicts Lasker as shrewd and naive, as pessi- mistic and cheerful; a legend in which the obvious is min- gled with the paradoxical. Confronted with this con- fusing mass of material, it is not easy to answer the simple questions: How did Lasker become a great chess master, and in what did his greatness consist? Consider some of the difficulties: The frequently made claim that Lasker did not found a school (a claim made even by emin- ent masters) rests on a mis- conception and is in fact not true. How are we to recon- cile the fact that although Lasker paid eloquent tribute throughout his life to Stein- itz's theory of chess, Lasker himself followed a totally different theory? Many of Lasker's games have to this day not been properly ex- Plained, in some cases be- cause of envy, in other cases because of the annotator's technical shortcomings. Yet Lasker himself frequently ex- pressed dissatisfaction with attempts to explain the se- cret of his genius. Surely this is a ludicrous dilemma: how could Lasker have been World Champion for twenty- seven years without yielding up the secret of his mastery? The best explanation of Lasker's genius appears in this very book. It is still another of the many Lasker- ian paradoxes that the high- est flights of chess genius vii x FRED REINFELD lates; Tchigorin wanted sur- prise, change, novelty, glit- ter, the lightning stroke from a clear sky.” In studying this contrast, we begin to sense the wide divergence between Lasker's praise of Steinitz and the way that Lasker played chess! Lasker wrote his tribute to Steinitz in so generous a mood that he omitted sev- eral failings of the Stein- itzian system. Steinitz was above all a doctrinaire, a fa- natic. He never took account of human weakness and im- perfection. If an idea fitted into his system, it had to be right. If he lost a million times with the move, it was still right, but something else had gone wrong. Steinitz never pleaded his own phy- sical weakness, his misery, his poverty, his loneliness as extenuating factors. They were ruled out by his system. Only what was on the board counted. He wanted general laws, he loathed the excep- tions. It is doubtful whether in Steinitz's view there could be such a thing as an excep- tion. Had Steinitz been told that much of his success was due to his passion for the game, his tenacity, his re- sourcefulness, his faith, his imagination — at all this he would have gaped. Insisting so strenuously on the rule of reason in chess, Steinitz forgot that there is in human beings, as in all living creatures, an irreduc- ible element of irrationalism. Itis, as we know, a force for great good as well as for boundless evil. Looking back to the description of Tchigor- in, we can see that he exag- gerated the role of the irra- tional as much as Steinitz overemphasized the power of reason. When the work of Steinitz was continued by Tarasch, chess theory was both en- riched and impoverished. Tar- rasch took from Steinitz what particularly appealed to his own temperament: the formulation of broad con- cepts and their systematic application. Sometimes Tar- rasch worked out these the- ories with a clarity and sim- plicity that to this day remain breathtaking in their large design and methodical execu- tion. But there was some- thing pallid about Tarrasch's method : it was most effective against weak opponents. Pit two players against each other who both have perfect technique, who both avoid weaknesses, and what is left? — a sorry caricature of chess. Tarrasch the technician in- fluenced a whole generation of chess players, but there was one man whom he never impressed. That man was Lasker! When the chess world was full of minor Tar- rasches, Lasker went hisown AN APPRECIATION xi way, spoke his own mind, steered clear of sterile fo: mulations, and gave the im- pression of being a complete anarchist in his chess style. And yet Lasker's“anarchy” was clearly motivated: he combined the objective laws of Steinitz with the subjective viewpoint of Tchigorin. Whereas Steinitz and Tar- rasch concentrated on the ex- bloitation of weaknesses, Lasker was just as interested in the defense of weaknesses. To his contemporaries this was incomprehensible — and terribly laborious. To follow a general law without devia- tion is easy enough; to search for the unique qualities which exempt a specific position from a general law is very difficult. Such a task requires an open mind, serene self. confidence, great self-control, and an ever-active ability to accomodate one's views to changes in the situation on the board. Few people are capable of such creative skep- ticism: they are content to follow the obvious routes, to imitate a famous game, to accept the traditional, to learn a method rather than acquire a critical attitude. Since most annotation was done by people who failed to fathom Lasker's views, he came off very badly in the books and magazines. The impression arose that he gen- erally had a lost game, that he “swindled” his way out at the end, that he did not know the openings, that his style was dull, and many other li- bels of similar content. If we think of Lasker as a cheerful pessimist, we get a better insight into his games. Despite the naive optimism which crops up occasionally in his work, Lasker was ba- sically a pessimist. But he was not the kind of pessimist who was wilted by his knowl- edge of evil: he was deter- mined to make the best of things as he found them, he knew that many desperate situations can be saved by manly resistance, he knew that his opponents lacked his own potse, Prepared for the worst, he generally knew how to ward it off. (He remarks in the Manual that a player who starts off with a slight disadvantage is thereby stim- ulated to work harder and often achieves a good result; whereas a player witha slight advantage may overestimate it, become careless and get a really bad game.) Lasker wanted his students to develop the same sturdy self-reliance which features his own games; he did not want to carry the reader on his back, Hence his notes are often short, mere hints: they point to the crucial factor in a situation, and the rest is left to the reader. Lasker's view of the openings follows xii the same line of reasoning. He did not believe in memor- izing thousands of fashion- able variations which would soon be out of fashion, re- placed by other variations equally fashionable and equally transitory. If the reader learned to develop his pieces and to develop a feel- ing for maintaining the bal- ance of power in apparently “bad” positions, Lasker was satisfied. Lasker's view of the openings was in line with his fundamental pessimism: in opening theory, the only cer- tainty is change, flux, capri- cious taste. But most players prefer to have their choice of openings derived from dogmatic authority. That Lasker was a great fighter is an observation which is common to all stu- dies of his play. Nobody can estimate what enormous will- power went into Lasker's fighting ability; and yet at the core of this quality was his belief that each position is unique, that it has some hidden aspect which the skep- tic, the man of resource, will finally unearth, But few peo- ple would have the self-con- fidence to agree with him when he writes, “Of my fifty- seven years I have applied at least thirty to forgetting most of what I had learned or read, and since I succeeded in this I have acquired a cer- tain ease and cheer which I should never again like to be without.” FRED REINFELD This, it seems to me, is the great lesson of the Manual: Lasker teaches the reader not only to play chess, but he re- veals something of his spirit of independence, of sincere striving for the truth, of faith in the humanities and heroic resignation in the face of what can't be cured and must be endured. He brings to the Manual not only the gifts of a great chessmaster but the qualities of a mathematician, a thinker and a poet. Where the modern specialist prattles glibly of right-angle forks in explaining a combination, Lasker reduces the combin- ative process to “the idea of superior force at a given point, and that of immobil- ity.” But “reduces” is not a good word to describe what Lasker does here. First he describes the combination clearly and precisely, as a mathematician or scientist might do it. Yet Lasker does not mean to disenchant the reader; he is trying to com- municate to him the magic and exaltation of the combi- nation, which is not only a technical process, but also the work of an artist. So the above passage con- tinues, “What is immobile must suffer violence. The light-winged bird will easily escape the huge dragon, but the firmly rooted big tree must remain where it is and may have to give up its leaves, fruit, perhaps even its life.” Thus Lasker has de- AN APPRECIATION Xv bury was gifted with the im- agination of a great artist. His plans were not beyond human grasp and execution (as Steinitz's so often were); they were clear, they were in the realm of the possible, they existed in the logic of the position. Yet they were plans which could be executed only by a great master. For Pillsbury was dy- namic. In his style imagina- tion and energy were per- fectly blended. Economy of means existed side by side with simplicity of design. The plans were on a grand scale, and they were carried out with an artistry which weaves its magic to this day. More than that: they were plans which were success- fully executed not only against the outsiders ànd also-rans of the tournament world. Steinitz, Tarrasch, Maroczy, Schlechter, Jan- owski, Marshall and Lasker himself carried away many a bloody nose and a rueful countenance from their en- counters with Pillsbury. He was also a great fighter — perhaps not quite on the same plane as Lasker, but nevertheless a fighter in the grand manner. Thus we can say of Pillsbury that he was sound, aggressive and always a dangerous oppon- ent. Of all the masters who were active in the period of Lasker's prime, he came nearest to being a worthy opponent of the Champion, Pillsbury's great country- man Marshal] was second to none in imaginative power, but it was an almost wholly undisciplined quality. He was a dangerous opponent to everyone, including him- self. In the presence of a pretty combination, he was like a child to whom every toy is irresistible. Lacking the ability to discriminate between the attractive and the possible, Marshall frequently over- reached himself. Had he possessed this lacking qua- lity, he could have reached the heights of chess mastery. His inability to discipline his imagination kept him out of the ranks of the first-rate. With one or two excep- tions, Lasker regularly beat Marshall in their individual encounters. Not only did Lasker beat him, but he did it in every conceivable way. Lasker crushed Marshall by refuting unsound combina- tions, by resorting to pas- sive defense, by adopting simplification, by steering the game into channels dis- tasteful to Marshall — and even by outcombining Mar- shall! But merely enumer- ating all these methods gives us a hint of Lasker's uni- xvi versality. What better proof of Lasker's greatness than his ability to outplay this richly endowed genius?! Carl Schlechter was as far apart from Marshall as one could possibly imagine. It was Schlechter who in the end proved the most dan- gerous of Lasker's age con- temporaries. Schlechter's growth as a chess master was slow, but he was all the greater when he reached maturity. All accounts of Schlechter paint him as an unusually good-natured and kindly man. He did not have that deeply imbued compe- titive instinct which is the mark of the immortals, and it was this defect which made him only a great master in- stead of one of the very greatest. In Schlechter's character and style there were many paradoxical features. He was always known as the “Draw- ing Master,” from his readi- ness to accept an offer of a draw. Many an opponent took advantage of his easy- going nature by suggesting a draw in a position where Schlechter had the advant- age. But Schlechter was not a man who knew how to say “No!” Yet, despite this quality, he played many astonishingly beautiful games, and carried off a great number of brilliancy prizes. FRED REINFELD Schlechter had an unri- valled knowledge of the book lines and opening theory, yet he generally played the initial stage with a freshness and simple, lucid originality which one would expect only from a natural player. In the beautifully written Modem Ideas in Chess, his disciple Richard Reti has paid el- oquent tribute to the quality of naturalness in Schlechter's play; yet the most scholarly revision of the monumental Handbuch was the edition prepared by Schlechter! One paradox after an- other: Reti tells us how Schlechter loved to refresh himself with the sights and smells of the lovely forests in the environs of Vienna; yet Schlechter spent most of his life in smoke-filled cafés! And who is to explain the greatest paradox of all: how did the gentle Schlechter succeed in holding the mighty Lasker at bay? What a riddle for the psychol- ogists! In their match in 1910, the Viennese master was at his best: he played questionable opening varia- tions with great skill; he scored his only win in a game where he was unques- tionably lost; he displayed courage and determination throughout. In fact, he missed winning the title of World Champion only by Playing for a win in the last AN APPRECIATION game of the match, when a draw would have given him the title! Perhaps this is the key to the riddle, and a key as well to Lasker's greatness. May it not well be that Lasker, with his subtle instinct for the imponderables of com- bat and his flair for forcing his opponents to play out of character, deliberately led Schlechter into a wild posi- tion where placid play was out of the question? And so, in the last analysis, Lasker saved his precious title not by superior technical ability, but by fighting his oppon- ent's will. It was a great tri- umph for Lasker's theories. Janowski was a player who had much in common with Marshall. Janowski had the soul of a gambler, that quality of stubborn unreason which compels a man to choose the wrong course even though he knows bet- ter. Janowski was a thor- ough master of the middle game, a fine endgame Player, a student of the open- ings. His defects were all personal: he was conceited, learned nothing from experi- ence, never comprehended his strength and weakness. In Lasker's eyes, Janowski was a wilful child: he once remarked contemptuously that Janowski was merely a good position player gone wrong. For while Janowski xvii could play positional chess beautifully and occasionally did, he suffered from the delusion that his forte was attacking play. He lost game after game with ridiculously headiong attacks; he never learned, and repeated the same faulty tactics again and again. Lasker also remarked with his detached, penetratingly ironic insight that Janowski took so much pleasure in a won position that he could not bear to part with it and wind it up to a victorious conclusion. No wonder then, that Lasker simply toyed with Janowski in their matches. Janowski's irra- tional gambling instinct had nothing in common with Lasker's daring yet carefully weighed taking of risks. Janowski tried to batter down stone walls and ride ruthlessly over obstacles; he never bothered to appraise his opponents; he ignored technical difficulties. Al these defects proved ruinous when he had to play Lasker. Now we come to the man who succeeded in wresting Lasker's title from him: José Raoul Capablanca. In this one instance, Lasker's sure appraisal of his opponents failed him with catastrophic results. As soon as Capa- blanca achieved world-wide fame at the age of 21, by his overwhelming defeat of DR. LASKER'S MATCH RECORD Year — Obpponent Played Won Lost Drawn 1889 Bardeleben 4 2 1 1 1890 Bird 12 7 2 3 1890 Miniati 5 3 — 2 1890 Mieses 8 5 — 3 1890 Englisch 5 2 — 3 1891 Lee 2 1 — 1 18922 Blackburne 10 6 — 4 18922 Bird 5 5 — — 1893 Golmayo 2 — 1 1893 Vasquez 3 — — 1893 Showalter 10 6 2 2 1893 Ettlinger 5 5 — — 1894 Steinitz 19 10 5 4 189-7 Steinitz 17 10 2 5 1907 Marshall 15 8 — 7 1908 Tarrasch 16 8 3 5 1909 Janowski 4 2 2 — 1909 Janowski 10 7 1 2 1910 Schlechter 10 1 1 8 1910 Janowski 1 8 — 3 1916 Tarrasch 6 5 — 1 1921 Capablanca 14 — 4 10 Totals 194 106 23 65 XX BOOK H. HI. Iv. VI. CONTENTS Emanual Lasker: An Appreeiation by Fred Reinfeld . Dr. Lasker's Tournament Record . Dr. Lasker's Match Record . Analytical Contents . . Introduction by W. H. Watts. Preface . Preface to the Original German “Edition . The Elements of Chess . The Theory of the Openings . The Combination . Position Play . . The Aesthetic Effect in Chess . Examples and Models . Final Reflections . xxi PAGE vii xix XxX xxiii XXXV xxxvii xxxix 1 39 109 166 261 284 336 ANALYTICAL CONTENTS FIRST BOOK THe ELEMENTS OF CHESS . . cc cc. 1 Brisr Account op ORIGIN OP GAME. . cc... 1 THE Cuess BOARD. La 2 Tee Preces Ce a e na aa Tue Ruzes vor Movixc . . cc. 5 a. Tas King (with Rules for Casting ss) Co 6 b. Tee CastiE (or Rook) .. . cr. 8 e THE BISHOP. . LB d. THE QUEEN . 9 e. Tme KNIGHT. LD £. Tee Pawn o. cer e CapruriNG “EN PAssanT” ce e + OI Pawx PROMOTION . LL NIIZ Tue InrriaL POSITION LL 2 THE EnD Or THE Game: MATE, STALEMATE, DRAW. . . . 12 THE SrALEMATE ora a ea a AZ PerreruaL CHECK TELUSTRATED” coa ea e 13 Tme Funcrion Op SrratEGy Ce 18 Tas Prcruresque (or English) Norarios . . 13-14 Tre Geexan Noramos (or Notation by Co-Ordinates) . 13-14 Dr. Laser Sums up His Task AS INSTRUCTOR . . . . . 15 Ox THE ADVANTAGES OF A PLUS IN PIECES . . 15 Firsr ProposirioN: The Plus rs a Rook + suficos to win the game Ce Rook anp KING vs. Krxa co 1518 THE OrrosirioN . |. cor 16 Zugewang OR Consrrarr To Move . a 7 Secoxo Prorostriox: King and Bishop or King and Knight against the bare King make a Drawn Game . .. 18 Turno Prorosrrion: King and two minor pieces against me bare King will force the Checkmate unless both the minor pieces are Knights . cc 8 Major Pieces. Lc IB Mrxor Preces . . o 18 TuusrraTioNs Or PropostrioNs Two AND THREE co 18-22 xxiii xxvi ANALYTICAL CONTENTS Ruy Loerz (or Spanish Game). . 2... a. Srernrrz DEFENCE . Lc b. Somuremann's DEFENCE . e. BerLIN DEFENCE Lc d. MorpHy DEFENCE . Lc e. “BRESLAU” VARIATION . + cc. Dr. LASKER-SCHLECHTER . . ce. £. RUBINSTEIN'S VARIATION . cc. g. EXCHANGE VARIATION . . ce. Tue HaLr-Orex Games . .. .. a. Tre OprxING Op NiMzOWITSCH a. b. THe FrancHETTI e. à. Fraxcerro op mEE KING. 0. ii FIANCHETTO OP THE QUEEN . . e. ALEKHIN'S OPENING Lc d. From's GamBIT . co. Brap-LasKER . à. Lrpke's INVENTION ii. ANALYSIS BY RUBINSTEIN iii. Bran's OpENING RECOMMENDED e. Caro-KaNN Forasos-Dr. BrrNsrerx. £. Tre ScanpiNAvIAN OrentNG (Center Counter) g. Tue Srcrian OPENING à Tee “Wiso GamBrr” h. Tu FrencH OrENTNG (French Defence) . SrEINITZ ON THE FRENCH Soria 1X THE Fresr Movz Twe Crosen OPENINGS . . Tue Queen's GAMBIT a, ACOBPTED . LL b. DecLinED . . Co MaRSHALL-RubINSTRIN GAME (incomplete) . Ormer Queen PAWN GAMES. Rerr OR ZUKERTORT OPENING A Summary . Userur PRINCIPLES IN THE Orxixo, Vans AND or Same . . . VaLuz Op HE PiECES IN THE OpENING . THIRD BOOK THE ComBINATION PR VariATION, DEFINITION OP. Lc m 78 78 79 80 83 83 86 86 87 ss 88 88 89 90 90 90 90 91 91 92 93 94 96 98 99 « 101 - 101 . 101 102 . 103 . 104 . 105 2 + 106 Demieriox - 106 . 107 . 109 . 109 ANALYTICAL CONTENTS xxvii SrmPLE COMBINATIONS ILLUSTRATED +... 10 CAPABLANCA-YATES Cree e WI ComsixaTioN INVOLVING A Sraremame . Ce + MI Comnrxarion InvoLviNG A SMOrHERED MATE . . . . . . 112 Lovis PauLseN-MORPHY . . . 112 Tme ComBrinarion, War Ir Is AND “How “Cargo Our 1x PracricaL PLAY. . cr 4 Various Monves IN CoMBINATIONS , 115 Morre op mim Wesxxess or A Precs op Lrrrie or No MoBrLrrr 115 A FavLry OpenIxG IN Wuicm 4 BrsHor Is DEPRIVED OP ALL Mosmuirr .. ce e e 05 THE GroMETRICAL Mons core e + 116 Morre or ExcrrciiNo BrAcK KING .. 116 Opsrevcrron or Rook BY A BISHOP OR VICE-VERSA. . “ns, 117 EnvisG BY TROITZKI . .. o. 116,117 Onsmucrrxa or PrxxING AN OBSTRUCTNON ILIUSTRATED . . 118 Posr-Kacan Crer e e 8 Exprxa py L. Kubnes .. cor 9 Morrr or Ixpirecr SuproRT Tuosmramen . o 19 Morre Inxusrrarino Passep Pawx SuprorrisG DISTANT Prrces or Pawns (ie, Motif of “Function”) . . . . 120 AxoTHER FUNCTION MOTIF ILLUSTRATED . . 2 Srgrxrrz-HrRSCHRELD Ce e e e RL LowentHAL-MAYET Lc SreixtTZ-TSCHIGORIN co 122 ALEKHINE-L. KUBMANN . ee e e 122 SrensrtZ-MEITNER Co e o 128 Pror. Bercer-Dr. Serum Ce e o + 128 Tue Morir Op “DESPERADO” . LL 124 Forcacs-Duras Core e e 124 v. PorreL-MARCO . LL 125 v. OpPEN-K . LL. 125 TarrascH-EM. LASKER . . 126 BocoLsuBow, RETI AND SPIRLMANN-VE. Excrono, “ JAconsoN, Nymorm anp OLsON 126 Envisa BY A. Trorrzkxi (Queen and Bishop 1 vs. Queen) 127 “IntENTIONS” IN Comsrnarions MakE PLAYERS RECKON WITH THEM Cc 128 “PRBan” 1x AN INTENDED COMBINAMON . o 128 Dr. TarrascH-BURN . o. 128 Dr. TARTAKOWER-CAPABLANCA oc. 129 Jomn-Sucarina Core e e 129 PrevaLent TyrEs OF Comerxamons ce e 130 MorrHy-BAUCHER . Coe 130 A. vp Rivigre-MORPEY ce er e e e IB xxviii ANALYTICAL CONTENTS STEINITZ-AMATEUR| Lc Em. Lasker-BAUER . . STENEBERG-BOLTE . . . . 131 Morrr or TE4RING AwaY SarzouarDs or Hosrize KING ILiys- TRATED. cc cr SremITZ-X . cc Bopes-OWEN . . o. ALBIN-STEINITZ e. .. KoziscH-L. PAULSEN . .. re. TyPICAL ATTACK ON PINNED Kxrcar . TyricaL, DEFENCE AGAINST HEAVY ATTACKS AGAINST Krsa . LUKERTORT-STEINITZ Ca Em, Lasker-ED. LASKER . . Lc Dr. TARTAKOWER-DR. ALEKHIN Ce. o. Brap-STEINITZ . a. SCHACHMEISTER Srerxirz om | Bachmann) a. SCHLECHTER-SALWE . cc TSCHIGORIN-STEINITZ . . LasKER-JANOWSKI . . . L. BACHMANN . . SrersITz-LASKER . nn ee CapABLANCA-MOLINA . PR My Cress CAREER (Capablanca) a... Carpas VIANNA-SILVESTRE . . cnc Dr. BERNSTEIN-SNOSKO BOROWSKI . . +... Morir or Powir AND PREY. . . Srerxrrz-v. BARDELEBEN . . cc Scmrrrers-TSCHIGORIN . . PR NimzowirscH-DR. G. FLUES. +... X-Meses .. PE PrzeriorkA-W. Com” rn ne e e ea v. FREYMANN-FORGACS . LL cn RusinstEn-EM. LASKER . . cc Dr. Esser-DAVIDSON . . LL MacxENzIE-BLACKBURNE . PR Dr, TartAKOWwER-EM. Lasker aaa RUBINSTEIN-SPIELMANN . a THE ZUGZWANG AND THE STALEMATE .. . EnpisG BY TRoITZKI . . . EnvinG BY WEENIK . . . . OprosiTION ILLUSTRATED IN Exvrxe or Krxe axD PAWNS . ScHgLFHOUT-MUURLINE . 181 131 131 . 132 132 133 133 . 183 134 134 135 136 - 137 137 138 138 - 139 140 140 141 141 141 142 142 143 144 . 145 . 146 . 146 146 147 147 148 . 149 149 - 150 - 151 Krsc anp Pawx EnDING Trrusrramina “Losrxa or 4 Move” . 152 . 153 Envinc By Dr. EM. LASKER AFTER AN “Ipea Or v. GorrsorarL . 155 Enpina BY TROITZKI . LL 153 154 155 ANALYTICAL CONTENTS Barancg or Postmox 1x CHess .. CompensamON IN CHESS. LL. PriNCIPLE OP ATTACK WEAKNESSES AND WEAK Porwas as ; Onsmomves O or Arraok ExAMPLES OP THE PRINCIPLE OP APTACK . .. Caprars MACKENZIB-AMATEUR . SaLwEe-MARSHALL . LL CapABLANCA-DR. TARTAKOWER . . MoRPHY-ANDERSSEN . Lc TeiCHMANN-DR. BERNSTEIN . . Lo BerLIN-RIGA LL Duras-E. Comun . AnDERSSEN-P. MORPHY . . Dr. TARRASCH-SCELECHTER . LL. Principe op DerENCE .. ExAMPLES OP THE PRINCIPLR OF Desence .. MORPHY-ANDERSSEN . Lc SreinrrZ-GOLMAYO LL Srersrrz-TSCHIGORIN . . Poncz anp TscHIGORIN- Gavizas AND Senra . TSCHIGORIN-STEINIIZ . Tue DecLinin Yrars OF Srerwrra Srerxrrz axD Da. EMANUEL LASKER . . CRrTICISM OP AND ADDITIONS TO STEINITZ'S Tuzory . PrixcipLE OR Co-opERATION Op PrecEs . Pawxs Ark BEST IN THE PHALANX RemarKs ON THE BISHOP AND KNIGHT ExampLes OP CO-OPRRATION . . a. Qurex vs. Brsmor AND KNIGHT . b. BrsHors or Oprosrre COLORS . . e. Queen vs. Two KNIGHTS . +... THE PriNciPLE OP JUSTICE . . ExaMPLES OF THE PRINCIPLE OF Justor . a. Rook anp Passep PAWN . a. b. Krsc asp Pawx vs. ROOK . . e KnicHr AND PAWN . 2 Lc d. Krse anp Pawx o. . . Arm or Dr. LASKER IN REGARD TO His Purus . AxtagontsM Op PrECES . Lc Die Blockade (Nimzowitsch) +... Enprxcs or Bismops or Samp COLOR . . xxxi . 214 . 214 . 215 . 216 216-222 . 216 . 2 . 217 . 28 . 219 . 220 . 221 . 221 . 222 . 223 223-227 . 228 . 224 . 224 . 225 . 226 . 227 . 228 . 229 . 229 . 280 . 230 231-233 - 281 . 232 . 283 . 283 235-237 . 235 . 236 . 236 - 286 . 287 - 237 . 238 . 238 xxxii ANALYTICAL CONTENTS DISTANCE. Lc 2389-240 Brsmop vs. PAwNS . . corar e er + 289 Rook vs. BISHOP AND Pawxs .. Cc 240 Tre Vacvz or Posts (Weak, Strong, Important, Essen- til) cc Co 2AO-248 ExAMPLES . Lc 24I-248 RuBINSTEIN-SALWE Lc 241 Duras-RUBINSTEIN |. Co. 242 ATTACK AND DEFENCE IN “BaraxosD Postos Co. 248 Te SacrIFICE FOR POSITION. Lc. 244 ExAMPLES OF SACRIFICE FOR POSITION . . . 0. 245248 La BourponsaIs-Mac DONNELL cc 245 Prrrssury-EM. LASKER . . cc 247 Tre PriNCIPLE OF PROPORTION . . co. 248 PrrrosorHy Op DR. LASKER AND THE Docror + AS AN “Avrmor . 248 Struggle . . 248 Das Begreifen der Wet (Comprehending the Word) . .. 248 Die Philosophie des Unvollendbar (Me Philosophy « of the Un- attamable) o. 248 Hyrer-MODERN SCHOOL . Lc 250 ExampLES OF THE PRINCIPLE OF PROPORTION . . . . 251-254 Te Kozsre-TORRE . . Lc 251 Reri-CoLLE re a a e a a a e e a 252 Te KoLsre-RETL . . cr e 253 Kacan's Neuesten Schachnachrichten .. co. 253 Ax ENQUIRY INTO THE LOGICAL ORIGIN AND THE DOMAIN OF APPLICATION OP SreINIrZ'S THEORY . . 254 ADEQUATE COMPENSATION FOR A PAWN Sacririon. Discussen . 258 FIFTH BOOK Tae ArsrHEMO ErrECT IN CHESS. +... 261 Two-Move ProsLem By PauL MORPHY . cc. 264 AnpersseN-KreserrrzKr (The “Immortal Game”) o. 264 ExamPLES OF THE AESTHETIC ErreCT IN CHESS . . . 267-283 EnprsG BY COMTE DE VILLENEUVE . . . 267 Humorous ENDING BY AN UNKNOWN Avrmor (The “Cireus”) 268 ENDING FROM ANCIENT PERSIAN DOCUMENT . . 2. 270 Taree-Move PropLeM BY Sam Loyp . .. 2. 270 ANDERSSEN-DurrEsNE (Critical Position from the “Bvergreen Parti”) cc 2 ANALYTICAL CONTENTS Liirobok i Schach PE Mason-WiINAWER . . cc PirrsBuRY-EMANUEL Laskea us ZUKERTORT-BLACKBURNE . . |. Srernrrg's NOTES . . Rerr-BocoLIunow . . Rusissrters-TEICAMANN +... ScmLECHTER'S NOTES . . BocoLIuBOW-SPIELMANN . . 2. BoGOLJUBOW-AMATEUR . 2 cs Lisr-HROMADKA . Lc cce Enpixcs BY TROITZKI . . ca Enprsc BY RATNER . cc. Enprxes BY LEoNID KUBBEL. + +... Envixes By HENRI RINCK . . . 2 SIXTH BOOK ExaMpLES AND MODELS . . 2. 1 Bercen-P. GASPARY cc Probleme, Studien, Partien (I. Berger) . Dr. TARRASCH-PILLSBURY .. Die Moderne Schachpartie (Tarraseh) - .. Burn-SxosKo BOROWSKI . .. JaxowsKI-EMANUEL LASKER SorrLECHTER-SUCHTING CAPABLANCA-MARSHALL . Dr. TartaKowER-DR. SEITZ . . Corra-G. Bongo . Dus CrsorIxTRSKI-CAPABLANCA . Capablanca's Magazine BoGoLIUBOW-ROMANOWSKI Dr. TARTAKOWER-MIESES Bococjusow-RerI . TORRE-YATES SamISCH-SPIELMANN . ALEKHIN “MARSHALL . + ca NiMzowiTscH-BOGOLIUBOW ReETI-ALEKHIN .. 2 Sm Grorce THoMaAs- Rusrssmerx Vo ALEKHIN -COLLE BocoLsusow-MigsEs BocoLsusow-Remr . xxxiii «21 .. 272 .2m8 . 274 . 275 . 21 276 .. 276 am .2m . 278 “engano 280 . 281,282 " 28 . . 284 284 . 284 . 284 . 285 285 . 287 289 291 292 293 . 295 . 299 - 300 . 302 . 804 . 306 308 310 . 313 . 815 . 818 . 320 xxxvi INTRODUCTION when Dr. Lasker called upon me and proposed that 1 should both sub-edit and publish his book. I had flirted with the idea before that time, little thinking that ere I made up my mind to take definite steps I should be approached by the author himself. Tt says much for Dr. Lasker's business abilities when I say that within a week the necessary formalities were concluded, and to mark the occasion he invited a number of well-known English and Continental Chess enthusiasts to a luncheon at which the project was formally launched. Although that event took place nearly two years ago, the whole of the intervening period has been devoted to per- fecting the contents of the book, and I can only express the hope that the chess enthusiasts of the whole world will deem the time to have been well and successfully spent. My final word is one of thanks to Dr. Lasker for his ready, kindly, and attentive assistance with the proofs, amd his appreciative acceptance of suggestions and corrections; to Mr. A. H. E. Johnson for his thorough and painstaking vigilance in the matter of proof reading; and to the other players who have helped me so spon- taneously in various stages of the work. W. H. WATTS. June, 1932. PREFACE. THar I wrote this book, yea, that I wrote it with joy, will require, 1 trust, no more explanation than is supplied by its own con- tents and meaning. That after having written it in my mother tongue I should myself have re-written it in English does require ex- planation, even apology. Such, at least, is my senti- ment, for 1 am by no means blind to the shortcomings of my diction, and I admire all languages in their purity and their noble life and love to see them used with the utmost art and sincerity and veneration. But in the present case a difficulty arose. A transla- tion by somebody foreign to the matter would have prob- ably been, if conscientious, too literal. No translation, particularly no literal trans- lation, can be accurate; it is in danger of reproducing the body, but not the essen- tial thing, the soul, of the book. A book that has a history and has therefore been subjected to profound research may be translated, even so, only by a few masters of that difficult art; a book that has still to make its history is bound to change considerably in translation. There is much in a good book that is not expressed nor expressible by means of words. I had the option of sac- rificing the elegance or the meaning of what I desired to say. And I made, I trust, the right choice in preserving what seemed to me of greater value. On the other hand, after having lived a good part of my life in English-speaking coun- tries, É aid not doubt that I should be capable of ex- pressing myself definitely in the King's English. In this book, principally I desire to explain and to extend the theory of Steinitz which originated while the master lived in England and in America. I desire to show that theory at work within and without the limits of Chess. Where the diction of this book may seem involved, let the reader be sure that I strove after simplicity, knowing full well that deep things are both simple and marvel- lous. xxxvii xxxviii This book goes back to the “ Handbook ” of Staun- ton, with which it has in common the unbelief in compilation and the belief in the creative mind. 1 therefore trust that it will appeal to English readers. In conclusion, I desire to thank both Mr. W. H. Watts and Mr. W. Winter, who have helped me in various stages PREFACE of production, for their assistance and for the pains most conscientiously taken. Mr. Watts has thoroughly sub-edited the present edition, and all of the many corrections and alter- ations that he has made have my full approval. EMANUEL LASKER. LoNDON, 1932. LaskER's MANUAL OF CHESS FIRST BOOK. THE ELEMENTS OF CHESS. THE game of Chess has a history that at all times has awakened interest but of which very little is known. We know some fables treat- ing of the origin of the game, fables that are true to history only in so far as they lay the place of origin in Asia and the time of origin in a very distant past. Games similar to Chess have been discovered on Egyptian sculptures. Written documents, a thousand years old, refer- ring to Chess, have been found. The game of Chess of those days was not, how- ever, the game that we now know. No doubt, Chess has undergone many changes and who knows whether Draughts, or, more precisely, a game related to Draughts, was not a fore- father of our Chess. The European career of Chess began a thousand years ago. At that time it was an admired favourite in Spain, the game of the noble and the learned. In feudal castles and at the courts of princes it was cultivated; it was praised in artistic poems. For cen- turies it remained the aris- tocratic, noble, royal game, accessible only to a refined taste. Later, it penetrated through Italy and France, and at last it found a home wherever the foot of the white man trod. Chess, as pointed out, has changed, but in its attire, in its forms only, by no means in its essence, its idea. That has remained unchanged all through the many centuries of its life. To discover this idea is therefore not difficult: at all times Chess has had the will, the intent, the mean- ing of picturing a war be- tween two parties: a war of extinction, conducted The Square 2 LASKER'S MANUAL OF CHESS After Halving according to rules, laws, in a cultured manner, yet without clemency. This becomes evident from the rules of the game almost at first sight. The Chess-board. The most ancient and most enduring feature of Chess is certainly the board, the table upon which After Halving a Second Time After Halving the Third and Last Time. it is played, the field of the Chess struggle. In consists of 64 parts every one a small square, in their totality composing a large square. In eight rows and, perpendicularly thereto, in eight lines the 64 squares are ordered. Consequently one can draw a Chess-board by halving the side of a big square three times in suc- cession as shown by the above diagrams. The technical process of producing a Chess-board is therefore very simple, and the logical | conception, neither is apprehension of the board complicated. The perception of the 64 squares by the eye is nor so easy, but it has been facilitated by the use of colour. The squares are | aiternately coloured black and white, so that from time immemorial the Chess-board looks as follows : LASKER'S MANUAL OF CHESS 3 It is of importance that the student of Chess should know the board very accur- ately; he should be able to visualise each square in its individual position as well as in its relations to its neighbouring squares. For this reason the board has been divided into three re- gions: the middle and the two wings!” The left wing * is composed of the first and second line to the left, the right wing in the same way by the two extreme lines on the right hand, and the middle is formed by the four remaining lines, the Hthird, fourth, fifth and sixth. In the centre of this middle, T Squares “are situated, h' form “the on of the fourth = and AFA line with the foúrth and ffth "row. These four squares in the centre of the board have, for strategic urposes, the greatest sig- nificance. To describe the events on the Chess-board briefly and “ exactly, a name has been given to every one of the 64 squares; in olden times a descriptive name, in our time, where the science of Nature and of Mathematics has become so prominent, a mathematical name, This mathematical name reminds us of syste: f co- ordinates in the” ras introduced by Descartes. Accordingly, "the ei ht, “ lines,” running upwards, are successively designated by the letters a, b, c, d, e, f, g, h, and the eight “rows,” running from left to right, are successively designated by the numbers 1, 2,3/4,5,6,7,8. The a line, line h line is therefore a certain line; the first row, second row - eighth row a certain row. Since each square belongs to oneTine and to one row only, itis unambig- uously “designated by its line and row, For instance, bs is that one square on the ine that belongs to the fifth row. According to cus- tom the letter pr number; 5 never sb. Thus this notation has the advantage of naming each square with- out ambiguity. Of the other notation, the descriptive one, which is in use in many countries and also in the Anglo 6 LASKER'S MANUAL player who cannot save his King from capture, is “ Checkmate” and loses the game. These rules are not com- plete, besides they are too brief so that the reader can- not be expected to obtain a clear conception through them, but they serve as an initial step in that they produce a vivid impression of the Chess struggle. We shall now consider them in detail and at length in order to illuminate the various logical consequences that come thereby into play. The The King may move from the square it occupies to any square satisfying the following conditions : 1. A neighbour to the square of occupation. 2. Not occupied by a man of its own party. 3. Not menaced by any hostile piece. Once during the game the King may violate the first of these rules, namely, in Castling, otherwise never. In Castling, the King is moved TWO squares to the Right or Left, as the case may be, and the Rook towards which the King has moved is then placed upon the square which the King jumped over. But this move is not permitted when King. OF CHESS 1. The King is in “Check,” i.e, menaced with capture. 2. The King or Rook has already made a move. 3. The move of the Rook is obstructed. 4. The King or Rook after Castling would be ex- posed to capture. What has been said here in dry words may now be presented pictorially. ” ” Raios Sano Enio The White King placed on cz has only ONE pos- sible move, to wit, to bz. It may go there, because firstly, that square is neigh- bour to cz; secondly itis not occupied by a man of its own party but a hostile one; and thirdly, the square bz is not menaced by any enemy, neither the Black King nor the Black Rook, nor the Black Pawn in their present positions being able to capture a piece on bz. On the other hand, the White King could make no other LASKER'S MANUAL OF CHESS 7 move; it cannot move to bi, dr, on account of the Black Rook, nor to b3, d3, on account of the Black Pawn, nor to dz because of the White Pawn standing there, still less to cr, where two slayers would await it, nor to c3, which is menaced by Bishop bz and obstruc- ted by a White Pawn be- sides. To other squares it cannot move since they are not neighbours to its pres- ent residence. The reader may demon- strate that in the above posi- tion also the Black King has only one possible move, namely, to g7. Black to move. His King is Checked ” | because menaced by the White Queen. The King cannot capture the Queen since g7 is threatened by Pawn f6; the King can go nowhere else for the White Queen threatens its place of re- fuge; the White Queen can be captured by no Black piece. The King can there- fore not be saved, the “Check” is a “Mate,” ““Checkmate ”'; Black has lost the game. Castling * Cio E) o Ea Z E ma no Ele e The two Kings and the four Rooks still stand where they stood at the commencement of the game. Let us suppose that hitherto none of these pieces has moved. White, if he has the move, can Castle with Rook hr b) placing it on fr and simul- taneously jumping with King to gr; or he can Castle with Rook ar by placing it on dr and jump- ing with King to cr. Black, if it is his turn to move, cam Castle with Rook a8, whereby King and Rook occupy the squares c8, d8 respectively. But he can- not Castle with Rook h8, 48 *In practice the player will be well advised always to move the K first and then his R when making this move. 8 LASKER'S MANUAL OF CHESS because the White Queen would attack the Rook after Castling and therefore Cast- ling is illegal. The Rook or Castle * The Rook cz has the fol- lowing possible moves: to bz, dz, ez, f2 and capture of g2. Itcannot gotocr or c3 because it is under obli- gation to guard its King against the White Rook g2. The Rook c4 can go to a4 or by or dg or capture eq but cannot capture f4 be- cause Rook eq is an ob- struction ; it may also go to c8 or cy or c6 or c5 or c3 but not to cz or ct owing to the obstruction of Rook cz. The Rook e4 has only two squares open to it, d4 and c4, and the Rook g2 no less than 12 squares, any square of the g line and all but two *'The name “Castle” is rarely if ever used in modern chess literature for this piece. squares of the second row : hz, f2, ez, dz, cz, gr, g3, 84 g5 86, 87, 88. The Bishop. In this position three Bishops are on the board, c3 c4, f6; also three Rooks, cr, dz, fy, and of course the two Kings—the Kings never being captured —on at and g8. Since the Bishops move diagonally, Bishop c3 can capture f6, and vice versa. But the Bishop c3 cannot capture Rook dz because the Bishop is forced to protect its Ring against Bishop f6 by obstruction. The Bishop c4 can capture Rook fz; this piece is immobile since itis pinned by the Bishop cg. The number of squares to which in the above position the Bishops might move, is = LASKER'S MANUAL introduction of the new rule Pawn fz could evade Pawn g4 by advancing at once to f4 and could then molest Black unpunished. Naturally, the Pawn g4 on guard felt itself deceived, when the hostile Pawn crept through the advance posts. There were scenes of hot dispute. It could not be the meaning of the in- novation to make the ad- vancing Pawn immune. And finally justice was vic- torious: the Pawn standing on guard was acceded the right of capture, just as if the Pawn trying to slip through had advanced one step only; but the Pawn on guard cannot defer this movement but must execute it without loss of time as an immediate reply. to the attempted advance. If, for instance, in the above posi- tion White moves f2—f4 Black mav answer g4x'f3, thus executing his original intention of capturing the Pawn en f3.: This species of capture is named “'cap- ture in passing” or, with the French — expression capture “en passant. * If the Pawn, after a, is not immediately captured by gg “in passing,” it stays unmolested on f4 and has thereafter to contend only with the hostile Pawns of the f and e line. OF CHESS mn The Pawns only advanc- ing ahead arrive, in advanc- ing row by row finally to the eighth row where according to the rule they would come to a barrier and would be immobile. Should this sig- nify their death? Should they now become useless after having done their duty and fought their way through the ranks of the enemy? That would not be in keeping with justice. Since in a struggle it is honourable to draw upon oneself the fire of the enemy and to do him harm, the Pawn advancing to the last row is rewarded by becom- ing an “officer” initsarmy ; it is changed for a Queen, Rook, Bishop Or Knight, according to the will of the player; it is promoted to a higher rank since officers have much more mobility and value than Pawns. Na mo neo mom a Kit is White's turn to move here, he may advance Pawn ey to eg, change it for a Queen and call Mate | x | 12 Ifitis Black's turn to move, he can advance f2 to fr, de- mand a Knight and Check- mate White. The Initial Position. ' | , E From time immemorial the men are placed at the beginning of the game in the order shown above, and White makes the first move. In the corners stand the Rooks, on the first row the White officers in the order R,Kt,B,Q,K,B, Kt R; the corner to the right of Wee is “in the second row stand the White Pawns, in the seventh row the Black Pawns and in the eighth row the Black officers, every one opposite to a White officer of its Ow d, the Queen oppo- site the Queen, the King opposite the King, and so forth. The White Queen is placed on a white square, tHE Black Queen on a black square, the Queen therefore on a square of its own colour Da remnant of feudal gallantry. LASKER'S MANUAL OF CHESS The End of the Game: Checkmate (Mate), Stale- mate, Draw. With a Checkmate the game is decided, but not every game ends with a Mate. If he whose turn it is to move can make no legal move and yet his King is not Checked he is not Checkmated though the game necessarily is at an end. Such a conclusion of the game is called a Stale mate, a useless, a false, an nproductive Mate, briefly “Stalemate.” de who. is Stalemated does not lose the game nor win it either, because loss of the game is suffered only by him who is ““Checkmated,” and an essentiai condition therefore is that the King should be in a the in eck, whereas “Stalemating position King is not in Check, Again when neither of the opponents believes he has the power to end the game by administering Checkmate, the game is un- decided, “drawn,” by mutual agreement. This agreement may be volun- tary or compuisory. Com- pulsory when the two op- ponents repeat their moves, going backwards and for- wards without changing their position, compulsory also when for fifty moves in LASKER'S MANUAL OF CHESS 13 succession no essential change, no advance towards the final goal can be demon- strated by either player. This demonstration, such is the accepted law, is achieved when during these fifty moves no capture nor the advance of a Pawn has been performed, for these are, by common consent, the outward, the visible signs of an essential change. Here White is to move, Black menaces Checkmate in two ways, either by Qh3 captures hz or plays to g2. White cannot defend the threat, he therefore tries to attack the opponent by giv- ing Check with Qb6-—a6. Black is forced to reply K a8-b8. Now Qa6-b6 again checking. The pinned Pawn cannot capture, hence Kb8 —c8 or —a8. Again Qb6— a6, Ka8 (c8)—b8. And the Checks have no end, the game is drawn by “ Per- petual Check.” The Function of Strategy. Herewith the rules and laws of the game are laid down; according to the very same rules play the beginner and the veteran, the duffer and the master. Whoever does not follow these rules does not play Chess; whoever follows them belongs to the com- munity of Chess-players that counts many millions. What distinguishes the Chess-players, all of whom follow the same rules, is called strategy: the plan, meaning, intent, force, briefly the reason of their moves. This reason is no differ- ent from all reason, but a part of it, grown on its body, possessed of its force and conditioned by its pains. On the same tree where a little branch hangs, called the logic of Aristotle, there hangs another branch named Strategy in Chess. The Descriptive Notation. Since reason, to be com- municated, needs a system of expression, a kind of language, the Chess com- munity has invented and propagated technical words and a notation of squares and moves. True, many nations follow the notation by co-ordinates described 16 If the stronger side has the Move, we can demon- state that Rook and King against King can always force a Checkmate. This demonstration is mathe- matical. It is founded upon a certain process, by which the weaker side is eventu- aliy shorn of its mobility, its King being confined in a prison with ever narrow- ing walls, and finally forced into a Checkmate. The demonstration begins by showing that with the pieces available certain Mating positions exist and continues by making evi- dent that the weaker side, in the course of the above process, may be driven into one of these Mating posi- tions. As long as the King is in the middle of the board, it cannot be Mated by King and Rook. For let us sup- pose that the two aggres- sive pieces have arrived at their position of strongest effect. "Then the two Kings will stand opposite each other and the Rook will give Check on line or row, and thus the besieged King will be Checked and have five squares of its domain cut off by the enemy. This is easily seen. LASKER'S MANUAL OF CHESS Strongest Effect of King versus King. os sm mansa Here the Kings stand as near to each other as pos- sible since they must not expose themselves to cap- ture, not even to capture by the opposing King. They stand in “ Opposi- tion,” they prevent each other from moving on any one of the three squares Wihite's O3, Q4 Os. Strongest Effect of King plus Rook versus King. ER) no ams pr a The Kings are in Oppo- sition, the Rook Checks and deprives the hostile LASKER'S MANUAL OF King of the three squares adjoining, those dominated by the White King. Thus the King placed on the Bishop-line is driven to- wards the Knight line, a line nearer to the boundary than the one the King held previously. Mating Position with King on Border. Mating Position with King in Corner. na WU nm nó The stronger side forces the hostile King to the border and if need be into a corner by proceeding as the fisherman who drives fish into his net and then draws the net, narrowing down the space available to his prey until finally no room is left to the victim. But there is a point that needs further elucidation. After all, the above picture does not come true to reality. Let us consider the following position : CHESS 17 The King in the Net. True, the Black K on his QBs cannot get over the Q file nor his fourth row as long as the White Rook, protected by its King, stands on guard on Qs. But how is the net to be drawn tighter? If the Black King should refuse to move, the tightening of the net would be impossible. The fish in the net of the fisherman might refuse to move, not so the King in the net of the Rook. The right of moving in Chess is at the same time an obligation. In by far most instances the right to move is of great value, but there are cases, as shown above, where to move is disadvan- tageous. Yet, rightly or wrongly, the laws of Chess do not permit a free choice in this respect: vou have to move, whether you like it or find it irksome. The constraint to move is usually called by a German 18 LASKER'S MANUAL OF CHESS word, '“Zugswang,” that has become international in its usage. Let us return to the above position, White to move. White plays King from K6 to Q6. If Black replies King from Bs-Kts, or Kt6, the Rook will follow it up with R-OBs, thus cutting off the QB file; and if Black replies King from Bs-B6, the White King will get into Opposition, King from Q6 to Bs, and the play might further pro- ceed methodically King from B6 to Kt6, R from Os to Q4, King from Kt6 to B6, King from Bs to Os, King from B6 to B7, King from Qs to B4 and so on. To drive the King by means of the Zugzwang on to the border and there to give it the Checkmate is, after ail that has been said, an easy task. Second Proposition : King and Bishop or King and Knight against the bare King make a Drawn ame. Let us deliberate accord- ing to the above method. We soon find that a Check- mate with King and Bishop or King and Knight against King is impossible even when the weaker side has its King placed in the most unfavourable position, the corner. Should the aggressive King stand even in opposition to the cornered King, the be- sieged party will yet have one square of escape; should that be taken away by Bishop or Knight, the ing in the corner will not be Checked and therefore a Stalemate will result; con- versely, if the cornered King is Checked it is driven only on more favourable ground. The task of Check- mating with the above force is unsolvable. Third Proposition: King and two minor pieces against the bare King will force the Checkmate unless both the minor pieces are Knights. On account of the lesser force of Bishops or Knights as compared with the Rook or Queen the two latter offi- cers are called the “major” pieces, the former ofhcers the “minor” ones. With the aid of two minor officers and the King Mating posi- tions can always be con- structed, for instance, the three that here follow : LASRKER'S MANUAL OF in view, it is not hard to drive the King into a cor- ner. But now another diffi- culty arises. The adverse King must be driven into one of those corners that the Bishop can assail, as mate cannot be forced in either of the other corners. If the Bishop moves on white squares, it is limited to these white squares, for diagonals running through a white square comprise white squares only; and with black squares it is the same. Hence, the hunted King will be prudent to allow itself to be driven to- wards a corner unattainable to the Bishop and to shun either corner of the colour assailable by the Bishop. On the other hand, the assail- ant, having driven the King into the safe corner, is confronted by the prob- lem of driving it into one of the unsafe corners. This latter task has to be studied in detail. The play runs as follows: CHESS 21 1. K from R6 to Kt6 K from R square to Kt square 2. K from Kt6 to B6 K from Kt square to R square 3. Kt from Ky to Qs K from R square to Kt square 4. Kt from Os to B7 Thus the corner is cut off. K from Kt square to B square 5. B from Q4 to R7 K from B square to Q square 6. Kt from Bz to Os K from Q square to K square Black makes an attempt to gain more freedom of move- ment. 7. E from B6 to Q6 K from K square to Bz 8. Kt from Qs to K7 K from B2 to B3 9. Bfrom Ry to K3 The net holds tight, the attempt of the Black King is frustrated. 10. B from K3 to O4 K from B2z to K square 11. K from Q6 to K6 K from K to Q square 22 LASKER'S MANUAL OF CHESS 12. B from Q4 to Któch. K from Q square to K square Now the Knight has to cut off the square K8. 13. Kt from Ky to Bs K from Kto Bsq. 14. Kt from Bs to Q6 K from B sq. to Ktz 15. K from K6 to Bs K from Ktz to R3 16. B from Kt6 to QB K from R3 to R4 17. Kt from Q6 to K8 K from R4 to R3 18. B from Q8 to Ktsch. The Black King dares not return, else it is Check- mated at once. 18. rom R3 to R2 19. E from B5 to B6 K from Rz to Kt sq. 20. K from B6 to Ky K from Ktsq. to Rz 21. K from Kgz to B7 K from R2 to R sq. B from Kts to R6 K from R sq. to Rz 23. B from R6 to B8 K from R2 to R sq. 24. B from B8 to Ktzch. K from R sq. to Rz 25. Kt from K8 to B6 Mate. Fourth Proposition: The Plus of a Pawn does not always suffice to force the win, but in the majority of cases it does. In considering this pro- position, one must accen- tuate the condition of 22. ceteris paribus very strongly. The plan of ““exchanging ”” the hostile pieces one by one, until the extra Pawn beside the two Kings remains alone on the board, is often difficult and perhaps impossible to be carried through. But, for all that, let us consider this task solved and let us now inquire into the concluding stages of that contest. First, let the Pawn fight the adverse King unaided. Will the Pawn be able to advance unharmed on to the eighth row, there to be ueened, afterwards to heckmate the King? Or will the King approach the Pawn meanwhile and cap- ture it? The question is one of pure mathematics. While the Pawn advances one square the King ap- proaches one square. Hence, the Pawn having to advance by Pawn steps until it Queens, the King to approach by King steps to the square where the Pawn Queens, al! depends on the relation of the two members Pawn steps and King steps. If the number of Pawn steps is less than the number of King steps, the Pawn will Queen. If they are equal, or if the number of Pawn steps is greater than the number of King steps, the King will cap- ture. For instance, if the LASKER'S White Pawn is on K6, White to move, the Black King must stand at a dis- tance of two squares from Wihite's K8, or the Pawn, though unaided, will Queen. The Black King must therefore in that moment stand upon one of the squares QBr, QB2, OB3 Or, QO3, Kr, Ka, KBr, ÉB3, KKtr, KKtz, KKtg to stop the Pawn. The Black King must stand within a certain rectangle formed by two squares, which have the line White's K6, Kz, K8 as a side. Each one of these squares is commonly spoken of as ““the square of the Passed Pawn.” The Pawn is “passed” because it has escaped the perils of oppo- sing Pawns and is now free to advance to the eighth row unhampered by hostile pawns. As an exercise show that if the Black King stands here on Q4, Kg, or KBg4, White having the move, it cannot stop the pawn. MANUAL OF CHESS 23 In the next diagram, the Black King stops the Pawn, but the White King aids it. Will the Pawn now advance? Far from it! The King will first gain room for the Pawn by Zugswang and therefore use the Opposition. E White to move wins by «.K-Os K-Kz a K-B6 .. . Thus the White King has gained tie power over Q7, à point over which the Pawn will have to march. Ze KO 3. K-06 K-Br. 4. K-K7 Now the White King also guards Q8. No matter what Black may do, the Pawn will safely advance to Se Q6, Q7 and Queen on Black to move will draw. To cereneee K-—B2 Now the Black King fights the White one, pre- venting its advance. 2. P-QOs RK-Q2 26 LASKER'S 1. R—Któch. K—Kz 2. R—-Rych. K-Ki (best) 3. R—Kt8ch. O—O1 4. RxQch. Kxk 5. R-—-R8ch. K moves 6. RxR and wins by plus of pieces. E EH pia White has left the first row unprotected and Black can therefore drive the White King into a Mating net by co-operation of Rook, Knight, and Pawn on Bs. — — — R—R8ch. 2. K-R2 R—-R8 Mate or2. K-B2 R-B8 Mate In order to see more clearly why a series of Checks is so dangerous, let us analyse the defences against a Check. A Pawn that Checks forces the opponent to cap- ture the Pawn or to with- draw the King. A Checking Knight must be captured or the King must fly. MANUAL OF CHESS A Bishop or Rook or Queen that Checks must be captured or the line of assault must be obstructed or the King must fly. Against a “Double- Check,” a Check given by two pieces simultaneously, there is only one possible defence : flight. If therefore the King has no mobile aggressive parti- sans to help it by capture or obstruction of offenders, it must fly continually and has only the hope of finally joining its own forces and finding a place of safety. But against an assailant who knows what he wants and goes about his business deliberately, the task of the deserted King isa very hard one. For Checkmating suffice a few pieces provided their force is used up to its ex- treme limit. Here follow a few instances of maximum work. Fara e A Queen all by itself Checkmates the King hemmed in by its Rooks. LASKER'S MANUAL OF CHESS 7 E Y ” The King, in the middle of the Board and unob- structed, therefore very mobile, is Checkmated by the slight force of Queen, Knight, Pawn. And here in the middle of the board a Checkmate administered by Rook and two Bishops. 27 Against the cornered King, Rook and Knight alone are sufficient. Numerous are Mating positions of a few pieces provided that the hunted King is hemmed in by some of its own pieces which thus obstruct its flight. For instance, the *“* Smothered Mate” execu- ted by a lone Knight. E Y 7 4 W no no poa And now a Mate Double Check. by The two White pieces struggle against an over- powering number, but a Double Check saves them and wins the day. 1. R-—-B8 mate 28 LASKER'S MANUAL OF CHESS In these six pósitions the White K is not shown as he takes no part in adminis- tering the mate. From all the foregoing it is apparent that the attack against an exposed King is full of promise provided it can be pursued by several pieces of which one is a major officer. On the Advantage brought about by a Simultaneous Attack upon Several Objects. But also when the assail- ant has no superiority in pieces nor an exposed King as object of attack he has a multitude of aims to achieve which would pro- cure him an advantage, for the capture of any officer or even of the modest Pawn may be of great value; to capture is, ceteris paribus, a gain if the opponent can- not recapture; as we know from our first proposition. True, to threaten an ofi- cer is rarely opportune, be- cause the officer is either “ guarded,” i.e., defended by its comrades in that they dominate its square and therefore threaten with capture any and every piece capturing the officer-—or else the officer, being very mobile, simply takes to flight. But that is not so when several attacks of this nature take place at one and the same time. According to the fundamental rules, the players may move only one piece at a time; except when castling, hence, in case of a simul- taneous attack on several pieces, not all of the assailed pieces can fly at the same moment; some must therefore tarry and suffer the consequences. To save them requires an ex- traordinary efiort, princi- pally a hurried counter- attack by the flying officers themselves against the ad- verse King or on valuable pieces of the opponent, so as to prevent him from cap- turing one of the pieces that have fallen into his power and to make possible their flight; and this great effort has to be made very quickly and with energy, else a catastrophe is immin- ent. When a Bishop, Rook or Queen attacks a piece which by its flight would expose a comrade, possibly the King, to capture, the defender is in the same predicament, since flight may be out of the question. In that case the attacked piece has to be fortified as far as possible or else, if the defence fails, has to sell its life as dearly as possible. If the piece protects the King, whose life is precious LASKER'S MANUAL the corner and “ Discovers Check ”” thereafter by Rx KtP. Show that White in this fashion would finally win the QR. The Bishop pins the Knight inasmuch as the Bishop could capture the Queen but for the obstruc- tion of the Knight. This pin is, however, not uncon- ditional. If the Knight moves while attacking the adverse King, the pin is wholly illusory. —Hence, Black plays Rt-Ks, Check- ing and assailing the dan- gerous Bishop at the same time and thus winning it. OF CHESS 31 Black pins the White Knight on KBg3 by his QB. But the pin is conditional. Can White execute a strong threat by moving the Knight? Indeed, he can. He captures the KP with the Knight, thus attacking the Bishop with his Queen. And if BxQ, the threat of White against the King is executed: BxPch., K-Kz; Kt-Qs Checkmate. This motive recurs often. In an opera called the “ See- kadett” ('ºThe Cadet at Sea”) a short game of Chess is played on the stage and it is this motive that is used on that occasion. On the Use of Superior Power at Decisive Points. If a pinned piece in- capable of movement or a blocked Pawn is assailed, a fight ensues on that spot, since the piece under attack under conditions as above described cannot take to flight; the only way to save the piece is by hurrying supports to it. As soon as the assailant, and were it only for a moment, obtains the superiority at the point of contest, he is at liberty to capture the piece and to hold on to the advantage thus gained. The rule by which it is determined which side has the advan- tage on a given spot is very 32 LASKER'S MANUAL OF CHESS simple: two pieces which dominate the spot are stronger than one and weaker than three and keep the balance to two hostile pieces on that spot. And so it is in general, even the King making no exception to this simple piece of arith- metic. The Rook on Os is im- mobile because pinned by the White Bishop. White attacks it by Kt-K2. Now it is twice attacked and guarded only once. Black keeps the balance by R- R5. Now White plays KtxR, so as to immobilise the other Rook. Black may reply RxKt, but only to lose that rook, since White assails it anew by K-K3, thus gaining the superiority of two against one upon the disputed point Qs. The idea of superiority is of frequent use. I intend, for instance, to puta Pawn or a piece upon a point of vantage that my opponent will not let me gain and to obtain my purpose I must support that Pawn or that piece upon the point aimed at by units in number superior or at least equal to those of the defender. Here White intends P- Q4. That point is domin- ated by Queen, Knight on KBg and Pawn on QB3, it is defended by Bishop on OB4, Knight on QBs3, Pawn on K4. The units being equal in number, White is safe in advancing the Pawn. Though the rule as above stated holds unexception- ally good, it needs a corol- lary in that the “ value ” of the pieces engaged in the contest have to be taken into account. — Generally it would be foolish to post a Queen, however well defen- ded, upon an empty spot assailed by a hostile Pawn. To place a very valuable piece upon a contested point cannot be my inten- LASKER'S MANUAL OF CHESS 33 tion, unless I obtain thereby a very valuable compensa- tion. The question becomes very much more compli- cated as soon as several points are under contention simultaneously. To obtain the superiority upon the spot A, I may attack one of the defenders of that spot situated on B, and even though my opponent have superiority on B, that attack may serve me to gain superiority on A. pm a na na acer The Rook is twice assailed and twice defen- ded, hence on Wihite's Q4 the forces are even; in spite of this the Rook is lost, because the defending Queen is assailed. White plays Q x Qch. Now the Rook cannot save itself either by R-Q8 ch. or by R-Ktsch., be- cause Black is in Check. Black replies Ktx Q. After this interlude, White has gained the superiority on Q4 and captures the Ro k gratis. Also pins have to be taken into consideration. Here the Black Queen is pinned, the White Queen also. Though the Rook on Bz seems to be defended twice and assailed no oftener than twice, it is lost. White simply cap- tures it with Bishop, since neither King nor Queen can recapture. Black must answer K-Br, White con- tinues with B-Kych., forces KxB and wins the Queen. All this complication arises because the squares adja- cent to the spot KBz, also the spot KKtir, where the Black King stands, enter into the turmoil. 36 LASKER'S MANUAL OF CHESS White with the move plays PxKt, calls for a Knight, says Check, simul- taneously attacks Queen, then captures Queen and thereafter the immobile and heipless Rook. Mark the exceeding value of the right to move. Black to move would have an enormous superiority. Ceteris paribus notwith- standing, the exchange values of which a few are set down above, are there- fore always somewhat prob- lematical. For all that, they are to the Chess-player a most needed compass. If he conscientiously follows them, his ship nearly always, even though only after many moves, runs safely into port. We are not without a method to probe the above values and to discover others. All we have to do is to build simple positions, in which the values under discussion, say Rook against Bishop and Pawn, with due regard to the ceteris paribus are set to fight each other and care- fully to analyse the course of that fight. Of the appli- cation of this method a few examples are here given. Rook versus Bishop and Pawn. The ceteris paribus condition is here fairly ful- filled, both sides having besides two blocked Pawns each. True, the White King has a very advantage- ous position, but such an advantage can be forced by methodical play as soon as the advantage of Rook ver- sus Bishop and Pawn is conceded. This position represents the final stages of the contest. White has all the initiative, he is the aggressor. He assails the OQP twice. It is guarded twice, but by assailing the King White can drive that protection away and thus attain the superiority on Q6. 1 R-Rych., K-Or;2 K-K6. | Thereafter R-Q7 and RxP. The advantage of the “exchange” is abandoned, since Bishop may now capture Rook, but King recaptures and holds now advantage of position in that it attacks the Black Pawns while the hostile LASKER'S MANUAL King is inactive and must suffer the destruction of its army of Pawns. Then White wins at his leisure. The Queen is weaker than two Rooks if the hostile King is protected against Checks, otherwise it may be stronger. Ceteris pari- bus, it would appear, the Queen is a trifle weaker than two Rooks. White plays here R- QB3, then R (R1)-OBr, thus doubling the Rooks to assail the BP and win- ning it. To win the RP would, it is true, be diff- cult, because the Rooks have to protect the King against Checks. It is evi- dent, however, that the Rooks have the initiative and that Black's hope is merely to Draw by Per- petual Check. Even one Rook is suff- cient to make a hard fight against the Queen, provi- ded that the Rook has not to lend its help to other OF CHESS 37 ieces, for instance, to weak awns, but has a little pro- tection from elsewhere to lean upon. White Draws by moving his Rook from B3 to QR3 and back to B3 un- less forced to move the King, which clings to the vicinity of its Pawn. Thus White is never in Zug- swang and his pieces are never unprotected. A Rook without any support loses against the Queen ceteris paribus. Tf it stays under the protection of its King it is at last driven off by Zugzwang. The following instance will illustrate sufficiently : UM a “mo mm E, mm nulas me Exa ZA ua E E) 38 If Black to move, the Rook must move away from the King and soon gets lost by White Check- ing and attacking Rouvk simultaneously, thus 1 R- OR7; 2 Q-Ktsch., K-R8; 3 Q-R6ch. The Rook can never go to KRy on account of the Checkmate by Queen on first row. 3 K -Kt8; 4 Q-Któch., K- Ry; 5 OR7ch., K-Kt8; 6 O Ktr or KB; Checks and wins the Rook. If White to move, he can easily manceuvre so as LASKER'S MANUAL OF CHESS to bring about the same or a similar position with Black to move. For in- stance 1 Q-QOgch., K-R: 2 Q-R8ch., K-Kt8; 3 O- Rg. It is not difficult to mul- tiply researches of the above type concerning the exchange-value, and such exercises are of exceeding use to the student. What has been said is sufficient to guide him in this work, which I should recommend to him most earnestly. LASKER'S MANUAL OF CHESS 41 thus tried to ofíset the efforts of book players. In the eighteenth century they announced their first rule: “Sortes les pieces”"— “Get the pieces out.” The meaning of this brief sentence is clear. The pieces obstruct each other in their initial position, the Chess-board in the middle is unoccupied, let the pieces get out so as to obtain dominance over a fair share of the unoccupied territory. And let the pieces fight the opponent in his endeavour to lay his hand on too much of that territory. And, if you have mobilised your pieces sooner than he, assail him quickly, before he can throw his undevel- oped and therefore ineffi- cient force into the action. It took a hundred years before a new rule was an- nounced. Anderssen, the winner of the first Inter- national Tournament, that of London, 1851, said: “Move that one of your pieces, which is in the worst plight, unless you can satisfy yourself that you can derive immediate advantage by an attack.” One may guess the reasons for this rule. If you cannot suc- cessfully carry through an ambitious enterprise, it is sufficient to get your house into order and to improve the worst spots. In the initial position the KP, the QP, the two Knights, occupy the weakest posi- tions, because they obstruct the most; hence, Anders- sen's rule points out the necessity of moving these four men from their initial positions. But later the same rule applies again and again. A few decades went by, tournaments became of fre- quent occurrence, and the masters, coming together oftener than before, evolved a * public opinion.” That tended towards the rule: Avoid the moves of Pawns in the Opening as far as possible. The distrust of Pawn moves was founded on experience in tourna- ment play. If one was worsted in the Opening, one could almost invari- ably point to a Pawn move as the original offence. The reason is that time is valuable in Chess as itis every where else. There are Pawn moves that are effective, for instance, such as lay hold on import- ant points in the centre of the board or remove an obstruction; but there are very many Pawn moves that really are not effective. Distrust a pawn move, ex- amine carefully its balance sheet: this was the senti- ment of the masters a few decades after 1851, and, 42 LASKER'S with slight modifications, this sentiment is still very strong and likely to last un- changed. I have added to these principles the law: Get the Knights into action before both Bishops are devel- oped. The advantage ob- tained in following this law is certainly not great, yet it is distinctly perceptible. By means of rules, laws, principles of the above kind, players with natural talent could dispense with compilations and the memorizing of them. But games played by them were again and again analysed and compiled and memor- ised, so that at last, no matter how they tried to vary from the “ book * they had to play against them- selves, and, of course, they could not successfully do that. All of which shows that nobody can wholly escape the dire necessity of compiling variations and of examining and memorising them. And therefore such a compilation, though a brief one, is correctly inclu- ded in a Manual of Chess. Here follows a collection of variations essential in Opening play. They are selected from the million of possibilities as possessing character, importance, and value as instruction to a MANUAL OF CHESS marked degree. A number of variations are slightly indicated, some only hinted at, so as to provide the reader with matter for his own research and to accus- tom him to independent judgment and to initiative. The Petroff Defence or Russian Game. 1 P-R4, P-K4; 2 Kt- KB3, KtKB3; Black re- plies to the attack on his KP by countersattacking the White KP.3 KtxP, P- Q3. It would not be advis- able to answer with 3... KtxP immediately, vi 4 Q-Ka, O-Ka; 5 QxKt, P-Q3; 6 P-O4, P-KB3; 7 KtOB3 with an obvious advantage. 4 Kt-KBg, Kt xP;5 P-QO4, P-QO4. Now White wants to drive off the Black KkKt. Black will fight to maintain it in its position. 6 B-Q3, Kt- QB3. Rather faulty would be 6... , B-Q3;7 0-0, B-KKts; 8 P-B4, O-O; 9 Kt-B3, and White has the superiority in the centre. 7 0-0. To bring the King into safety before the centre by exchange of Pawns is opened to the officers. 7. — Ke; 8 OKtQ2. The Knight avoids B3 so as to keep the OQBP mobile. Bu , P-B4;9 P-B4. LASKER'S MANUAL OF CHESS 43 Position after White's ninth move. mask Bars al sos WA E Al Um Y A ato Ê A SS A De ces B—Kg If 9 cu... » RtKts, White retreats 10 B-Ktr. 10. PxP BxP 11. R-KI White has attained his object of driving off Black's Knighton Ks. But White may also continue :— 10. R-Kr PxP 11. KtxKt PxB 12. Kt-Bs B—O4 13. B—Kts with attack. Again De cure KtxkKt 10. BxKt O—O 11. O-Kt3, and White has the best of it. Al in all, the early ad- vance of the KBP does not seem advisable. B—KB4 KtxKt 10. QxKt . Position after White's tenth move. Black may here play 10 eres » BxB or B-Kts. White has retained the ad- vantage of the first move, no more: As an instance 10... BxB;11 OxB, O-O; B-O2, B-B3; 13 Kt-Ks. Or else 10 ......... , B-Ktg; 11 KtKs; or 10 cs B-Rt5; 11 Rt-Ks. Inadvisable seems 10......... Q-Q2 because of 11 B-Kts. Returning again to the main variation, let Black retreat his advanced post. Bo Rt-B3 9. P-B; OO 10. Rt—Ks And now White will fortify his advanced Knight or force Black to exchange it and will then be able to recapture with QP and to assail the ad- verse King by a mass of Pawns. White has the initiative. White may also follow another plan. 3. BtxP, P-O3; 4. Kt- KB3, KtxP; 5. OKz, 46 LASKER'S some because of the reply IO. ice P-Q4; 11. PxP, B-OB4; 12. PxKt, BxP; 13. Kt-Kz2, BxB followed by RxKt or similar lines of play. Position after White's tenth move. White has the Initiative If Black tries to keep his KP in its place on Kg, Hanham's variation results. 1. P-K4 P—K4 2. Rt-KB3 P-Q3 3. P-O4 QOK-Q2 TB... KtOQOB3; 4. PxP, KtxP; 5. KtxKt, PxKt;6. OxQ ch, KxQ. The Black King is not well placed. 4. B-—KKts B-—Kz 5. BxB OxB 6. Eros EKBs 7. Q—Q2 8 0-0O—0O MANUAL OF CHESS Position after White's eighth move. White has gained in space, but the position of Black presents few assail- able points. Another important varia- tion of Hanham's defence : 4. B-QB4 P-QB3 To secure the point O4 and to obtain mobility for the Queen. 5. B-KKts Q-Bz Ts. cc. » Q-Ktg; 6 B-Kt3, and the Black Queen stands somewhat ex- posed. 6. P-B3 KKt-B3 To gain a Pawn move by 6. P-KR3; 7. B-R4 seems hardly to the point, since the Pawn, at least for the present, seems better left at home. 7. QKt—QOz LASKER'S MANUAL OF CHESS 47 Position after White's seventh move It will not be easy for Black to institute a counter- attack. True, a certain menace might develop in RRRPRRUA PxP and attack on KP or by the hazardous manceuvre 7 P- KRg followed by 8. P! RKtM. , The Two Knights” Defence. 1. P-K4 P—K4 2. RKt-RB3 KE-ÓBs 3. B—B4 Ki-B3 4. Kt-—Kts The idea of this move which sacrifices develop- ment in the interest of at- tack is to disturb the de- velopment of Black by assailing the weakest point in the Black camp, KBaz. That the attack of White is reasonable appears from the consequences of 5. eres » KtxP. Then White may obtain an advantage by the sacri- fice 6. KtxBP, KxKt; 7. Q-B3 ch, K-Kg; 8. KÉ B3, Kt-Kz; q. PA Q4, P- B3; 10. B- -KKiS, soon to be followed by Castling Queen's side. Black can- not get his King into safety, the White Rooks very soon become active, for instance, o PxP; ar. 0:05, P% t; 12 KR-Ki ch, K-O2; 13. KBxKt, PxPch.; 14. K-Kt. Or 10. ii P-RR3; 11. OBxKt, BXB; 12 0-0-0, RA Br; 13. O- Kg. Or else, EN KEK6: 9. O:K4 as recommended by Leon- hardt. GO. P-B3; 10. P-O4. The sacrifice of the piece against some Pawns, in view of the in- secure position of several of the Black pieces, appears to be well founded. De Kt—QR4 to retain attack Black abandons a Pawn for the present. 6 B-Kits ch P-B3 To hold on to the attack. TF 6... B-O2; 7. O- PxP P-KR3 9 Kt-KB3 P-Ks 10 Rt-Ks The Knight wants to stay in the centre supported by the White Pawns. White has nothing to fear from ro. O-0s; 11. P-KB4, 48 B-QB4; 12 R-Bir since then the White Pawns will soon drive the Black pieces off with P-B3, P-Q4 or P- OKt4. JO. eis B—O3 un P—Q4 O-Bz 12 B—-Q2! Thus White takes advan- tage of the bad position of Black Knight on R4. Tf RPPRIIER BxKt; 13. PXB OXP; 14, BOBS; White has an excellent position. IZ css Kt—Ktz 13 Kt-B4 Position after White's thirteenth move 14 B—K3 15 Kt-B3 A position full of life. White has an advantage in development. Black may follow another line of attack. Kt-Os Su The Knight goes into the centre and therefore re- LASKER'S MANUAL OF CHESS nounces immediate attack against the White KB. 6 P-OB3 P-Ktyg! The Knight defends its good post. Ifitgives way at once, White proceeds with 7 P-Q4 7. B-Br The precious KB does not desire to be exchanged for the exposed Black Knight (Leonhardt). But 7. PxKt, PxB; 8. PxP, QxP; 9 O-O, B -Ktz; 10. Kt-KB3, Kt- Q2; 11. Kt-Bg is not with- out merits. eee KtxP 8 PxKt OxKt 9 PxP óxP ch 10 Q—Kz QOxQ ch 1 BxQ P-—OB3 A difficult End Game, White probably has a slight advantage. Position after Black's eleventh move Continuations where White instead of making an immediate attack is satis- fied with placid develop- LASKER'S MANUAL OF CHESS 51 B-K2;6 P-Ks, Kt-KKts; 7. R-Kr, P-03; 8 PxP, QOxP; 9. P-KR3, Kt-B3; or 6. P-Os; 7. KtxP, O—O, where- upon Black is well enough developed. White may, of course, choose a slow development, for instance, by 3. P-Os, Kt-B3; 4. KtOQOB3, B- Kts; 5. KtKz2, P-O4; 6. PxP, KtxP;4. O-O, B- K3; but then Black has no difficulties to overcome. Max Lange's Attack. 1 P-K4 P-R4 2 Kt-KB3 Kt-OB3 3 P-Os PxP 4 B-OB4 Kt-B3 5 0-0 B-—B4 Black tries to maintain the advantage of the Pawn plus, White aims at throw- ing the Black pieces into disorder. Position after Black's fifth move. abandons the King's side, Steinitz, consequently, pro- posed 6 ......... +» KE-KKts. 1 White, analysing super- ficially, then tries an im- petuous attack, the weak troupe of the aggressor is soon repulsed, viz., 7. Bx Pch, KxB;8. Kt-Kts ch, K-Ktr; 9. QxKt, P-Q4; 10. P-K6, O-B3. Again 7. P-KR3, KKtxKP; 8. KtxKt, KtxKt; 9. R-Kr, P-Q3; 10. P-B4, P-O6 ch; 11. B-K3, PxP; 12. 8 BP, ORs; 13. Q-Ba, OxQch.; 14. BxQ, BxB ch; 15. KxB, B-Kg3. Black has no difficulty in over- coming such premature assaults and thereby gain- ing an advantage. The right plan for White is to play safely. 7 B-B4. Now 8. P-KRg is menaced. Hence Te cr P-03;8. PxP, PxP;9. R-Kch., K-Br. Position after Black's ninth move m Steinitz' variation 6 P-Ks P—O4 This counter-attack de- velops OB and Queen but 10 P—KR3 Kt-B3 11 QRt-O2z B-B4 12 Rt-Kt3 Q-—Kt3 52 LASKER'S MANUAL OF CHESS The possibilities are num- erous. White can hardly claim an advantage. The Max Lange attack is provoked by Black's sixth move. 6... P-Q4. 7 PxKt PxB 8 R-—Ksq ch. B—-K3 Black may answer 8 denis » K-Br, but the King remains there ex- posed a long time, for in- stance, after 9. B-Kts. The strategy of Black should be to try for safety and counter-attack by means of Castling Queen's side. 9 Kt-Kts Ifg, PxP, R-KKtr; 10. B-Kts, B-Kz; 11. BxB, QxB; 12. KtxP, R-Or; 13. P-OB3, RxP; Black is well developed. 14. Q- R4?, K-Br! vwhereupon the KKtP is weak. After the Knight move, on the con- trary, the development of Black is hampered, since 10. KtxB followed by 11. QO-R5 ch winning the Bishop is a menace. By this threat White retains the attack. 9 eee Q-O4 10 Kt-QOB3 O-B4 1 QKt-K4 B—-KBr The right move since the King's wing needs support. TÉ II ss » B-Kty, Black's Quen's wing re- mains very strong, but at the expense of giving up resistance on the King's side, wherefore the Black King then cannot obtain a safe post. White would reply to 11. ......... +» B-Rtg by 12. PxP, R-KKtr; 13. P-RKKy, Q-Kt3; 14 Ktx B, PxKt; 15. B-Kts, thus preventing Castling Queen's side and forcefully menacing 16 Q-B3. A cele- brated game-—White : Mar- shall; Black: Dr. Tarrasch, took the following course, 11 +, O—-O—O; 12. KtxOB, PxKt; 13. P- KKtg, Q-K4; 14. PxP, KR-Ktr; 15. B-R6, P-06; 16. P-OB3, P-O7; 17. R- Kz, B-Kt3; 18. K-Kto. In the long run the Black Pawn on Oz is untenable. The Knight on Kg, soon supported by P-B3, dom- inates the centre. There- fore, the retreat of the Bishop 11....... B-KBr is well founded. Apparently 12. P-RRKtg refutes the move, but in reality no. Black would defeat the attempted refutation by 12. crer » QxPch; 13. Ox O, BxQO;14. PxP, BxP;is. Kt-B6 Double Check, K- Br; 16. KtxB, P-KR4! Taken all in all, White can hardly do better than 12 RtxBP KxKt 13 Kt-Ktsch K—Kt 14 RxB PxP 15 PRKR4 OO LASKER'S Not 15... +» O-Ktg on account of 16. Q-B3. 16 RxP P-KR4 17 R-—-Któch B-—Ktz 18 Kt-K6 K-B2 Position after Black's eighteenth move a E ne E White to play. There is plenty of play in it on either side. The Ponziani Opening. TP-R4 2 Kt-RKRB3 P-K4 3 P-B3 Kt-QB3 Black will do best to attempt neither gain of a Pawn nor to sacrifice a Pawn, but rather to strive for continued development. 3 cerema Kt-B3 4 P-Q4 KtxKP Now 5 , P-Q4 is possible; hence White is forced to attempt a counter- move. s P-Os Kt-Ktr The Knight must not go to Kz where it would block Bishop and Queen. MANUAL OF CHESS 53 6 KtxP Or else 6. B« 03, Kt-Bg4. 6 B—B4 7 Kt-Os B—Kt3 B-—Kz o—o 9 0-0 P—QOs 10 Kt-Q2 Ktx Bt The Knight is captured, because it threatens to ex- change the valuable KB via OB4. Position after Black's tenth move Black will now complete his development by Kt-Qz, R-Kr, Rt-Br. Black is by no means re- stricted to the above line of play. He may, for instance, very well play Ors.PxP, P-Qg4, where- upon Black is secure. 5 ces Kt-O4 Se ces Kt-Ks would be speculative, not to say hazardous. 6. Q-Kz, P- B4; 7. PxP in passing, 56 LASKER'S MANUAL OF CHESS White has now some at- tack, Black, in compensa- tion, a fine Pawn in the centre. 1 O-B3 B—Kz 12 R>-Kr R—Kr Position after Black's twelfth move. Black will be able to drive the advanced White pieces off and to build up a firm position, for instance, 13 O- Kta, Kt-Rg4; 14 O-Rg, Bx B;15 0xKt, PKR3. The Opening takes a wholly different turn if White attempts to delay Black's Castling. To that end he must forego further- ing his own development ly 5 Kt-QB3 and harass Black as much as possible. 5 KtxKt KtPxKt 6B-O3 The sudden assault 6 P- Ks would fail if Black keeps cool. Black replies 6 ......... Q-K2; 7 Q-K2, Kt-Q4. Tt White continues in the same hazardous style, 8 P-OB4, B-R3; 9 P-Bg, Black ob- tains the advantage by 9 a » Q-Ktsch. If White slows down, Black can placidly proceed with his development, say with P- Q3, B-Q2, Castling Queen's side, or perhaps P- Ktg and B-Ktz, disturbing the opponent on his part. [o P—-O4 7 Q-Kz B—Kz 8 PXKs Kt-Qz To push 9 P-K6, where- upon 9... + Kt-B3, ob- viously causes no incon- venience to the opponent. 9 O—O o—o so as to reply to 10 P-KB4 with 10. ......... » P-RKB4. Black stands prepared. While these variations are not unsatisfactory to the second player, he may try to obtain even more than above by assuming the ag- gressive at once. B-B4 4 s B-K3 The impertinent attempt 5 Kt-Bs can be punished by 5 » P-Q4; 6 Ktx Pch., K-B1;7 Rt-Bs, Px P;8 QxQch., KtxQ; 9 Kt-K6, P-B4; and Black is better developed than White. dermerana O-B3 6 P-OB3 Instead of this defensive move Blumenfeld has pro- posed the attackng move 6 Kt-Kts. Obviously, White LASKER'S MANUAL OF CHESS s7 thereby gets his KP doubled so that the point K5 becomes easily acces- sible to the opponent. Black will first of all exchange the Bishops 6 ......... BxB; 7 PxB, then weaken the points KR6 and KB6 by Tee Q-Rs ch;8 P-Kt3 and finally defend his OBP with 8... +» O-Qr. Now White will resume the at- tack with 9 O-Kty, bearing down upon the KtP which has to serve as pro- tector of the KKt that is bound to establish itself on B3. A good and safe reply to this is 9 ......... » K-Br. Now 10 O-B4, P-Q3; 11 B-B4, Kt-B3; 12 O-O, P- KRg4! which provides the needed outlet for the KR while it threatens to engage the White KtP by P-Rs and thus to enlarge the scope of the Rook still further. Position after Black's twelfth move in the Blumen- feld variation Black is well developed. After :— 13 OKt-B3, Kt-K4; 14 B -Kt3, P-B3; 15 Kt-Q4, P- Rs the task of White would be a hard one. The main play proceeds 6 KKt—Kz2 Now 7 B-QBg4 is not to be recommended, because Black counters by 7 ......... , Kt-Kg4. The aim of Black to advance P-QOq is hard to prevent. 7 B-Ko P-Q4 8 B-B3 BxKt 9 PxB PxP thus isolating the QP which will soon be a target for a Black Rook. Paulsen proposed as pre- paratory to 8. Kt-Kts. 7º: Q—O2 P-Q4 8 Kt-Kis BxB 9 0xB o—o Black sacrifices the BP with good reason. 10 Ktx BP, R-Kt; 11 KtxP?, KtxkKt; 12 PxKt, Kt- Kts! with terrible threats against the exposed White King. Better 11 Kt-Q2, PxP;12KtxP, O-K4; 13 KtOKts, Kt-B4; 14 Q- Kz, P-OR3; 15 Kt-R3, P -QKt4. The sacrifice of the Pawn is manifestly justified. 10 Kt-Qz B-—K3 58 LASKER'S MANUAL OF Position after Black's tenth move in Paulsen's variation In view of the splendid development of Black, no danger threatens from the attack of the Knight against the OB7. White will have his hands full to maintain the balance. Again, another turn is given to the Opening if White defers or foregoes al- together the recapture of the Pawn he has given up. 4 B-OB4 B-B4 The move 4 Kt-B3 leads to the Max Lange attack or the Two Knights” Defence as previously out- lined. 5 P-B3 To attack at once before additional force is brought into play would be rather weak, even though a Pawn may thus be regained 5 Kt- Kts, Kt-R3;6 KtxBP, Kt xKt; 7 BxKt ch, KxB; 8O-Rs ch, P- Kt3;9 Ox B, P-QO4! whereby Black CHESS assumes the aggressive 10 PxP, R-Kich. If 11 K- Br, P-Ktg. White is in very bad shape. 5 PxP Instead of this Black can decline the proffered bait and proceed with 5 ......... , Kt-B3 turning into a main line of play of the Giuoco Piano; but to accept a sac- rifice and see the attack through is also good strategy. 6 KtxP P—O3 7 B-KKts Q-—QOz Black must safeguard the point KBz. 8 O-QOz 9 B—-R4 10 O—-O—O Position after White's tenth move. P—KR3 KKt—Re The task for Black is no easy one. One of the possi- bilities runs as follows : 10 aiii Kt—Kt3 1 B-—KKtg P—-R3 12 Rt-QOs P-—Ktg 13 B—Kt3 B—Ktz 14 K—Ktr O—-O—0O