Botwinnik PDF

CHESS
FROM MORPHY TO BOTWINNIK

CHESS
FROM
MORPHY TO BOTWINNIK
A CENTURY OF CHESS EVOLUTION
by
IMRE KONIG
LONDON
G. BELL & SONS, LTD
1951
Printed in Great Britain by
Cheltenham Press Ltd., Cheltenham
PREFACE
THE idea of dealing historically with the development of Chess occurred

to me some time ago, but the difficulty of writing a book of this nature
soon became apparent. After several unsuccessful attempts the solution
to this problem suddenly came upon me: to show how the masters of
the past and present have tried to take up the fight for the centre, which
is the fundamental idea of Chess.
As there is no Public Chess Library I should have found difficulty in
obtaining the necessary material for this book but for the help of E. G. R.
Cordingley' s unique library and for the generous loan of books by Messrs.
F. W. Alien, B ruce Hayden and Robin J. R. Hayward.
I was fortunate in finding a number of excellent helpers: first the late
A. N. Booth, later D. Castello, Robin J. R. Hayward D. B. Pritchard
,
and Miss Anne Sunnucks to all of whom I am most grateful for help in
remodelling the original manuscript and Mr. Hayward for reading and
correcting the proofs.
September, 1950 I.K.

CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION page xiii
Game Page
PART I
THE RUY LOPEZ 1
Chapter I
WHITE ATTEMPTS IMI\fEDIATE CONQUEST OF THE CENTRE 2
Morphy's treatment (as White) 1. Morphy-Lowenthal 2
Morphy's treatment (as Black) 2. Barnes-Morphy 5
Alekhine's attempt to revive the
classical attack 3. Alekhine-Keres 7
Chapter 11
WHITE KEEPS THE CENTRE CLOSED 8
Anderssen's treatment . . 4. Anderssen-Max Lange 8
Steinitz' treatment (as White)-
White holds the centre and
advances on the King's side .. 5. Steinitz-Lasker 10
Chapter Ill
THE BERLIN DEFENCE 12
Early Beginnings 6. Winawer-Lasker 13
The Modern Continuation -
Schlechter's Treatment 7. Schlechter-Reti 14
Chapter IV
THE STEINITZ DEFENCE 16
Steinitz' Treatment 8. Lasker-Steinitz 17
Lasker's Contribution 9. Bernstein-Lasker 18
White chooses an attacking for
mation-The Showalter Con
tinuation 10. Pillsbury-Bardeleben 20
Capablanca's Contribution 11. Euwe-Capablanca . . 21
Chapter V
THE STEINITZ DEFENCE DEFERRED 23
Blackburne's Treatment 12. Mackenzie-Blackburne 23
Black establishes a stronghold in
the centre-Schlechter's Treat-
ment 13. Teichmann-Schlechter 25
vii
CONTENTS
Game Page
White tries to restrict Black's
development on the King's
side-Capablanca's Defensive
Method 14. Romanovsky-Capablanca 27
Black foils White's attempt at
simplification - Alekhine's
Treatment 15. Stoltz-Alekhine 29
Bogoljubov's Contribution 16. Yates-Bogoljubov . . 30
The Modern Continuation -
White defers the Fight for the
Centre . . 32
Steinitz' Defence System 17. Marco-Steinitz 32
Alekhine's Continuation 18. Sergeant-Alekhine 34
The Siesta Variation 19. Reti-Capablanca 35
20. Euwe-Keres 36
The Duras Variation 21. Book-Andersen 37
Black holds the centre-Alek
hine's Defensive Method 22. Keres-Alekhine 38
Black Eases the Tension in the
Centre-Capablanca's Defen
sive Method 23. Keres-Capablanca . . 40
Black Holds the Centre-The
Modern Continuation 24. Keres-Reshevsky 41
Conclusions 42
Chapter VI
THE TcHIGORIN DEFENCE 43
Early Beginnings 25. Lasker-Tchigorin 43
The Modern Form of the Tchigo
rin Defence 26. Duras-Tchigorin 45
White Keeps the Centre Open
Lasker's Treatment . . 27. Lasker-Tarrasch 47
Rubinstein Improves the Defence 28. Leonhardt-Rubinstein 49
White Plays for a King's Side
Attack-Rubinstein's Defence 29. Bogoljubov-Rubinstein 50
White Maintains the Tension in
the Centre-Keres' Contribu
tion 30. Keres-Reshevsky . . 52
Black Chooses an Active Defen
sive System - Tchigorin's
Continuation . . 31. Schlechter-Tchigorin 54
32. Luckis-Najdorf 56
Later Trends in the Tchigorin
Defence - The Bogoljubov
Variation 33. Euwe-Keres 57
The Modern Continuation of the
Tchigorin Defence 34. Alexander-Keres 59
The Modern Continuation (for
White)-The Rauser System 35. Rauser-Rumin 61
White Resumes the Fight for the
Centre-The Worrall Attack 36. Lasker-Teichmann 63
viii
CONTENTS
Game Page
Keres' Continuation 37. Fine-Keres . . 64
Alekhine's Treatment 38. Alekhine-Keres 67
Conclusions 70
PART 11
THE QUEEN'S GAMBIT 73
Chapter VII
THE ORTHODOX DEFENCE 74
The Orthodox Defence of the
19th Century 74
Steinitz' Treatment 39. Steinitz-Anderssen 74
Pillsbury's Treatment 40. Pillsbury-Schiffers 75
The Modern Continuation against
the Fianchetto in the Orthodox
Defence 41 . Alekhine-Cuckiermann 77
The Modern Form of the Ortho
dox Defence-Lasker's Treat
ment 42. Steinitz-Lasker 78
Showalter's Continuation 43. Pillsbury-Showalter 81
44. Pillsbury-Showalter 83
Rubinstein's Continuation-The
Tempo Struggle System 45. Rubinstein-Maroczy 84
Capablanca's Freeing Manceuvre 46. Marshall-Capablanca 85
Capablanca's Contribution (with
White) 47. Capablanca-Steiner 87
Bogoljubov's Contribution 48. Bogoljubov-Thomas 89
Alekhine's Preventive System 49. Alekhine-Capablanca 91
Lasker's Defensive System 50. Alekhine-Lasker 94
Conclusions 95
Chapter VIll
THE EXCHANGE VARIATION OF THE QUEEN'S GAMBIT 96
The Minority Attack in the Ex-
change Variation-Early Be-
ginnings 51. Steinitz-Lee 96
Capablanca Revives the Minority
Attack 52. Capablanca-Alekhine 98
Alekhine Chooses a Better De-
fensive Formation 53. Capablanca-Alekhine 100
Flohr's Treatment 54. Flohr-Euwe 101
The Defence System to the
Minority Attack-Capablanca's
Defensive System 55. Alekhine-Capablanca 103
The Modified Capablanca Defence
System . . 56. Najdorf-Eliskases 104
Heterogeneous Castling in the Ex
change Variation-Reshevsky's
Treatment 57. Reshevsky-Stahlberg . . 106
ix
CONTENTS
Game Page
Chapter IX
THE QUEEN'S GAMBIT ACCEPTED 109
The Queen's Gambit Accepted in 58. de la Bourdonnais-
the Last Century McDonnell . . 109
White Plays for a King's Side 59. de la Bourdonnais-
Attack McDonnell .. 111
Staunton's Treatment . . 60. Saint-Amant-Staunton 113
Morphy Defends the Queen's
Gambit 61. Harrwitz-Morphy . . 115
The Steinitz Variation-Steinitz
Establishes his System 62. Zukertort-Steinitz 118
Steinitz Improves his System . 63. Pillsbury-Steinitz
. 120
White Builds up an Attacking
Formation-Schlechter's Con-
tinuation 64. Schlechter-Tchigorin .. 122
Chapter X
THE 8TEINITZ VARIATION IN MODERN TIMES 124
The Steinitz Variation by Trans-
position from the Caro-Kann
Defence 65. Botwinnik-Euwe . . 124
Lasker's Treatment 66. Lasker-Reshevsky 126
By Transposition from the Ortho
dox Defence - Botwinnik's
Continuation . . 67. Botwinnik-Vidmar 128
Capablanca's Treatment 68. Flohr-Capablanca 129
Chapter XI
THE Q uEEN's GAMBIT AccEPTED IN MoDERN TIMES 131
Alekhine's Defence System 69. Euwe-Alekhine 131
Euwc's Continuation 70. Euwe-Alekhine 133
Botwinnik's Treatment . . 71. Botwinnik-Keres 134
Conclusions 136
PART Ill
THE ENGLISH OPENING 137
Chapter XII
THE ENGLISH OPENING IN THE LAST CENTURY 138
The English Opening in the Last
Century 72. Staunton-Saint-Amant 138
The English Opening as Played
in the London Tournament,
1851 73. Staunton-Horwitz . . 140
X
CONTENTS
Game Page
Wyvill's Treatment 74. Wyvill-Lowe 142
75. Wyvill-Kennedy 144
Anderssen's Continuation 76. Anderssen-Morphy 146
Conclusions 148
Chapter XIII
THE ENGLISH OPENING IN MODERN TIMES 149
Nimzovitch's Contribution 77. Nimzovitch-Spielmann 149
Flohr's Treatment 78. Flohr-Landau 151
The Four Knights' System in the
English Opening-White Aims
at Immediate Conquest of the
Centre-Reti's Contributions 79. Reti-Przepiorka 153
80. Reti-Griinfeld 155
The Modern Continuation 81. Botwinnik-Levenfish 156
The Modern Form of the English
Opening-Mason's Continuation 82. Mason-Mieses 157
Alekhine's Continuation 83. Alekhine-Tarrasch 159
Golombek's Continuation 84. Golombek-Cruz 161
Black Adopts a Safer Defensive
System . . 85. Flohr-Kashdan 163
Rubinstein's Defensive System 86 . Nimzovitch-Rubinstein 164
Conclusions 166
PART IV
THE KING'S GAMBIT 167
Chapter XIV
THE KING's GAMBIT AccEPTED 168
The Kieseritzky Gambit 87. Anderssen-Kieseritzky 168
The Berlin Defence 88. Rosanes-Anderssen 170
Morphy Strengthens the Attack 89. Morphy-Medley 171
The Paulsen Defence 90. Steinitz-Zukertort 172
Blackburne's Contribution 91. Steinitz-Schlechter 174
The Modern Continuation of the
Kieseritzky Gambit . . 92. Stoltz-Samisch 175
The Classical Defence .
. 93. The Gambit of Greco 177
94. Spielmann-Griinfeld 178
The Cunningham Gambit (re
vived) 95. Kramer-Euwe 179
The Bishop's Gambit 96. Spielmann-Bogoljubov 181
xi
CONTENTS
Game Page
Chapter XV
THE KING's GAMBIT AccEPTED IN MoDERN TIMES 182
The Modern Defence to the
King's Gambit 97. Schallop-Paulsen 182
Rubinstein's Continuation 98. Hubinstein-Yates 184
The Latest Trend in the King's
Gambit 99. Santasiere-Levin 186
Bronstein's Treatment . . 100. Bronstein-Ragosin 187
Chapter XVI
THE KING's GAMBIT DECLINED 189
Morphy's Continuation 101. Morphy-Boden 189
Spielmann's Contribution 102. Spielmann-Tarrasch 191
Reti's Continuation lOB. Stoltz-Spielmann 193
Chapter XVII
THE KING'S GAMBIT DECLINED (CONTD.) 194
The Falkbeer Counter Gambit . . 194
Morphy's Continuation 104. Schulten-Morphy 195
White Adopts a Safer Line 105. Schulten-Morphy 196
Tarrasch's Contribution 106. Spielmann-Tarrasch 197
Keres' Continuation 107. Castaldi-Trifunovic 198
Conclusions 200
SuMMING UP 201
xii
INTR ODUCTION
WHAT is chess technique? Does it really exist or are we merely playing
with words when we refer to it?
Many an experienced player will profess a disbelief in the conception
and then, almost in the same breath, will go on to discuss whether the
great Paul Morphy would have been able to hold his own in a modern
tournament; thereby admitting the existence of fundamental differences
between past and present standards and methods of play.
What kind of changes has, in fact, taken place? The object of this
book is to trace the evolution of technique through the course of the last
hundred years within the framework of the major openings.
Capablanca writes in his Primer of Chess . . . Fundamental strategic
'
principles never change, though their mode of application may not always
be the same . . . . ' Here is the key to all that we mean when we speak
of technique. In chess we deal with the elements of force, space and
time, represented respectively by the varying powers of the pieces, the
chess-board with its arbitrary dimensions and inherent attributes and
limitations, and the movements of the pieces on this board.
These are fundamentals of chess; unchanging, unchangeable.
As our study of the game progresses we learn more of its many strengths
and weaknesses, examples of which are doubled pawns, open lines, etc.
Here we have the strategic principles of the game. They cannot be altered;
we merely strive to learn more about them. But how do we apply our
knowledge? Here time brings changes. As we come to know more about
fundamental principles, our practical methods become transformed.
Masters study and absorb the knowledge of their forerunners, and out of
the experience of the past forge their own practical tournament weapons.
How to attack-how to defend-how to win a won game-all this is
technique. We shall define technique, then, as 'the practical application
of known strategic principles.' Clearly, as more becomes known of the
unchanging principles of strategy, technique will progress.
Tarrasch pointed out that de la Bourdonnais failed at least once to win
a simple ending of Rook and two pawns against Rook, through lack of
technique. Evidence of how technique has progressed is given by the
fact that, nowadays, such endings are won by the most ordinary players
as a matter of routine. Only if we correctly interpret the principles of
strategy, can we devise a sound technique. Mistakes have been made in
the past; there has been many a deviation into a blind alley, many a false
step, but the sum movement of the technique of the game has been
perceptibly forward.
A considerable time may elapse before the discoveries of a pioneer
become common property. As we look back we realize that de la Bour
donnais and Morphy have exerted a great influence on the progress of the
game; yet Lasker speaks of an era after their time as a sort of "dark age,'
a period of relapse. And, indeed, surprising as it may seem, for a long
xiii
INTRODUCTION
time their successors not only did not progress beyond the ideas of these
masters, but failed even to understand and assimilate their contributions
to the game.
When we speak of absorbing previous la;lowledge we, as ordinary
players, should not, in the first place, expect to be able to do this for
ourselves. The ridicule accorded Steinitz and Nimzovitcb during the
greater part of the ir careers shows that not even the greatest contempo
raries of the truly inventive masters are always able to grasp the ideas
at once. What happens is that, slowly but surely, the less-inventive
masters, playing regularly in tournaments, experiment with the new ideas.
When these ideas have withstood the searching test of tournament play,
they become better understood, and finally, common knowledge.
This process was surprisingly slow in the last century and in the early
years of this one. The fact is, that the ti·uly inventive masters did not
surpass the other masters as players, so that the importance of their ideas
was not quickly realized. An example is the case of Lasker and Steinitz.
Lasker was the great player par excellence; Steinitz the great thinker.
Distinctly superior to Steinitz as a player, Lasker himself has explained
how he learned from Steinitz, and was able to put the latter's ideas into
practice in tournament play. This the more temperamental Steinitz was
never able to do with any measure of success. It is not surprising, there
fore, that the lesser contemporaries of Steinitz were slow in appreciating
his ideas, particularly as the competitive nature of the game serves to
obscure the evolutionary tendencies.
To illustrate the different approach of the older masters to the game,
we have selected characteristic examples from the past as well as the
present. They are considered together so that they can be readily com
pared. As we are to deal with the evolution of opening and middle game
technique, we have tried to analyze the games of the earlier masters from
two points of view:
( 1 ) Embracing the ideas underlying their moves, with regard to the
concepts prevalent at the time.
(2 ) Studying the games from the present-day standpoint, we have
endeavoured to determine how modern masters would deal with the
positions that arise.
The games selected have been chosen for the similarity of their strategy,
so that we can observe the two generations of masters wrestling with the
same ideas.
xiv
PART I
THE R UY LOPEZ
IN the last century there was much controversy as to the merits of this
remarkable opening. Although it has been established that the opening
was known in 1490, in the English-speaking world it bears to-day the
name of the Spanish priest who published an analysis of it in 1561.
It was the research of Ruy Lopez which first drew attention to the
opening. His bold assertion that the opening moves of a game could be
decisive roused the critics. Although one of the greatest players of his
time, he was declared to be a poor analyst.
Even in the last century leading masters frequently adopted unsatis
factory opening variations purely out of convention, believing the initial
stages of the game to be of only incidental importance, the final outcome
being decided at a later stage through some romantic combinations.
Two nineteenth century authorities had definite views on the subject.
Blackburne called it 'an opening for the safe and cautious player'; whilst
Steinitz was of the opinion that White could obtain only equality against
the best defence, which he 1hought hinged on the move 3 . . . . . P-Q3;
now known as the Steinitz Defence.
Despite these weighty condemnations, however, the Ruy Lopez not
only continued to flourish, but increased in popularity. Differences arose
as to what, in fact, was the best defence-a sure sign of strength in an
opening. All this controversy indicated what we know to-day: that the
Ruy Lopez is an elastic opening, affording several good lines to both
attacker and defender, a factor which has made it indisputably the most
popular of the King's side debuts.
1
I
"rHITE ATTEMPTS
IMMEDIATE CONQUEST OF THE CENTRE
MORPHY'S TREATMENT (AS WHITE )
THE earlier great masters of the game-de la Bourdonnais, McDonnell,

Staunton, Saint-Amant-did not adopt this opening, an interesting fact
that requires some explanation.
It is not difficult to conclude that the Evans and the Scotch Gambit
afforded more opportunities of open, tactical struggle coupled with central
control than the Ruy Lopez. Even when this opening was introduced
as a tournament weapon by Bird against Horwitz in London, 1851, it
was in a form where White played for early control of the centre by
P-Q4. On the rare occasions that Morphy adopted the Ruy Lopez he
played this line, which was at that time considered to give White the
initiative.
Morphy was not a theoretician in the modern sense of the word. Tar
rasch compared him with Capablanca, maintaining that Morphy was not
an opening expert, preferring to employ the best continuations conceived
by Max Lange. According to Steinitz and Staunton on the other hand,
Morphy was the leading exponent of the openings in his day. These
conflicting views may be reconciled. Morphy accepted what he considered
sound and recast it to suit his style, retaining a critical perspective of
any contradiction of general principles; an approach later accepted by
other great masters, as Lasker and Capablanca.
In this light, it will be interesting to observe how Morphy embarks on
the main problem of the opening-which is the main problem of all
openings-the struggle for control in the centre.
1 It is rarely seen nowadays, for

reasons which we shall discuss later.
White Black
P. Morphy J. Lowenthal 5. PxP
6. P-K5 Kt-K5
Played in London, 21st August, 7. Castles Kt-B4
1858 8. B x Kt QP x B
14th Match Game 9. Kt x P Kt-K3
This move is certainly not bad
1 . P-K4 P-K4 itself, but it commits Black to a
2. Kt-KB3 Kt-QB3 narrow choice of defensive lines.
3. B-Kt5 P-QR3 For the more elastic 9 . . . . . B-K2;
4. B-R4 Kt-B3 see the game Barnes-Morphy (No.
5. P-Q4 2, page 5).
A straightforward move, which
aims at securing the superiority in 10. Kt x Kt B x Kt
the centre by the most direct means. 1 1 . Q-K2 B-QB4
2
VIHITE ATTEMPT§ IMMEDIATE CONQUEST OF THE CENTRE 3
of the accumulated knowledge of

ahnost a century since this game
was played.
12. Kt-B3 Q-K2

13. Kt-K4 P-R3
14. B-K3 BxB
15. Q x B B-B4
Black's whole defensive strategy
was based on this move. If now
16. Q-B4, B X Kt; 17. Q X B,R-Q1;
and with only heavy pieces left on
the board, White would have had
difficulty in making anything of his
advantage.
16. Kt-Kt31
According to Maroczy, this
But Morphy finds the right reply.
Bishop should have gone to K2.
But even after this move, the con
tinuation 12. Kt-B3, Castles; 13. 16. . .. . . . BxP
B-K3, followed by QR-Q1 would 17. P-B4 P-KKt3
have restricted the activity of the The reply to the tempting 17.
Black Queen. Furthermore, Black . . . . Q-Kt5; would have been 18.
would have to face two positional R-B2; and the Black Bishop
threats: the exchange of one of the would have got into trouble, for
Bishops after Kt-K4 followed by instance 18. .. . . Q x KtP?; 19.
B-Kt5, leaving him with a vir QR-QB1, or 18 . . . .. B-R5; 19.
tually lost ending; and the march P-Kt3.
of the King's Bishop's Pawn to
KB4 and KB5. It is understandable
therefore that Lowenthal wished to
keep the square K2 for his Queen,
although the course of the game
shows that this move is not
satisfactory.
The right move was 11 . . . . .
Q-R5; with the threat of B-B5,
which would have compelled White
to play either 12. Kt-Q2-in
which case 12. . . . . Castles Q;
would have followed, with a game
offering chances to both sides--or
12. R-Q1, B-K2; when Black
would no longer have to meet the
threat of P-KB4-B5, owing to
the absence of the White King's 18. P-K6! !
Rook from the KB file. The combination of this move
The strategic considerations with the previous one reveals
which make the move 11 . . .. . Morphy's genius in open positions.
Q-R5; so much better than its The Pawn cannot be taken, because
alternatives may seem simple and of 19. Q-QB3; and if 18. . . . .
.
clear to us, but it should be re Castles QR; 19. Q-R7, would
membered that we have the benefit follow.
4 CHESS FROM MORPHY TO BOTWINNIK
18. B-B4
19. Kt x B P x Kt
20. P x P eh. KxP
21. Q-KR3 Q-B3
22. QR-K1 QR-K1
23. R-K5!
Now that the skirmish is over,
we can sit back and admire Mor
phy's fine judgment of position,
which guided him in making his
Pawn sacrifice. Superficially Black's
game appears defendable, for his
King's side is only partially broken
up, and there are only heavy pieces
left on the board. But this move
shows what a strong grip White has
on the game. Morphy-perhaps Position after 31. • . • • Q- Kt2
quite unconsciously-had a very
good idea of the modern theory of
32. Q-R5 R-Q4
strong points. Black now cannot
Not 32 . . . . . R-B2; 33. R X P eh.
exchange the Rook, because this
33. P-QKt3 P-Kt4
would bring White's King's Rook
Black is reduced to making only
into play, with great effect, so he
Pawn moves. If 33 . . . . . Q-B1;
must allow White to build up an
34. Q-Kt6 eh., K-Rl ; 35. R-K8.
attacking formation.
23. . . . . . . K-Kt3 34. R x P R-Q3

24. KR-K1 RxR 35. Q X BP eh. Q-Kt3
25. R x R R-Q1 36. Q x Q eh. KxQ
26. Q-Kt3 eh. K-R2 The foJlowing ending is not diffi
27. P-KR3 R-Q2 cult, and is handled irreproachably
28. Q-K3 P-Kt3 by Morphy.
29. K-R2 P-B4
30. Q-K2 Q-Kt3 37. R-R5 R-Kt3
31. R-K6 Q-Kt2 38. P-KKt4 P-B3
This part of the game is con 39. K-Kt3 P-R4
ducted by both sides in a manner 40. R-R7 PxP
which could not be surpassed even 41 . PxP K-B3
to-day. With our modern technical 42. P-B5 K-K4
knowledge, we should express it as 43. R-K7 eh. K-Q3
the struggle for the vital squares at 44. P-B6 R-Ktl
K5 and KR5. The Black Queen 45. P-Kt5 R-KB1
cannot hold both of these squares, 46. K-B4 P-B5
as 31. . . . . Q-B2; would be 47. PxP PxP
answered by 32. Q-K5, threatening 48. K-B5 P-B6
both 33. R-KB6 and 33. R-K8. 49. R-K3 Resigns.
At the time this game was played, it was probably not so highly appre
ciated as it is to-day. When we consider Morphy's fine Pawn sacrifice
with its tactical points (shutting out the Bishop), his transition into a
seemingly insignificant advantage in the middle game, and the simple
looking way in which he demolishes the defence, we are reminded of the
same masterly ease of technique displayed by Capablanca on so many
occasions.
WHITE ATTEMPTS IMMEDIATE CONQUEST OF THE CENTRE 5
We may ask, 'Would Morphy be able to obtain such positions against

a modern master?' Some light will be thrown on this question by the
following game and also by the notes to the game Alekhine-Keres, Kemeri,
1937 (No. 3, page 7).
MORPHY'S TREATMENT (AS BLACK)
In the last game we witnessed Morphy endeavouring to gain ground

in the centre, relying on an early advance of the Queen's Pawn; and his
opponent failed to counter this attempt. We have remarked, however,
that the variation is not quite satisfactory, and here Morphy, with the
Black pieces, is faced with his own line. His treatment of it, however,
cannot be termed definitive.
White Black
T. P. W. Barnes P. Morphy
London, July, 1858
1 . P-K4 P-K4
2. Kt-KB3 Kt-QB3
3. B-Kt5 Kt-B3
4. P-Q4 PxP
5. P-K5 Kt-K5
6. Castles P-QR3
7. B-R4 Kt-B4
With a clarity of purpose the
more remarkable considering the
state of chess knowledge at that Position after 1 1 . . . . . P-B3
time, Morphy simplifies in the
centre, and avoids the possible aggressive nature of the move is
dangers of, for instance, 7. . . . . only to be expected from a player
B-K2; 8. Kt x P, Castles; 9 . of Morphy's reputation. By ex
Kt-B5, a n attack which was later changing the Pawn on K5, he gains
played with success by Zukertort. the initiative, but the permanent
It was eventually demonstrated in characteristics of the position are
Collijn's Liirobok i Schack that even equally important. White remains
in this line Black can get a level with a Pawn majority on the
game after 9. . . . . Kt-B4; 10. King's side, and as his position is
Q-Kt4, P-KKt3; 11. B X Kt, quite solid he should be able to
QP x B; 12. Kt x B eh ., Q x Kt; repel the attack and remain with a
13. Q-Kt5. very favourable end game. Morphy's
move is therefore not good, indicat
8. B x Kt QP x B ing that although his plan was
9 . Kt x P B-K2 correct he did not possess the
10. Kt-QB3 Castles necessary technical knowledge to
1 1 . B-K3 P--B3 implement it. Eighty years later
Max Lange comments: 'With this in the game Alekhine - Keres,
move Black turns the attack in his Kemeri, 1937, the young Esthonian
favour.' This was the contemporary treated the same position in the
view shared by Lowenthal. The following way: 1 1 . R-K1!
· . . . .
12. R-K1 , B-B1; 13. P-B4, A fine trap, and at the same time
P-B3! The position is now very Morphy's only chance, for other
different. White has to weaken wise the strong Knight position at
himself and Black can exert pres Kt6, in conjunction with the mating
sure on the central lines instead of threat at KR8, would quickly
embarking on an uncompromising decide the game in White's favour.
attack on the King's side. (See
Game 3, page 7.)
12. P x P RxP
13. Q-K2 R-Kt3
14. K-R1 B-Q3
15. QR-Q1 Q-R5
16. P-B4 B-Kt5
If 16 . . . . . R-R3; 17. Kt-B3,
with the threat of B X Kt followed
by Q-K8 eh. and R-Q8.
17. Kt-B3 Q-R4

18. B x Kt BxB
19. Kt-K4 B-Kt3
The defensive move 19.
B-K2; also leads to a favourable
31. R-Q8?
position for White after 20. Kt
The position looks fairly simple,
Kt3, B X Kt; 21. Q X QB.
but when faced with the inventive
genius of Morphy, great care is
20. Kt(K4)-Kt5 P-R3 needed. Maroczy has pointed out
21. Q-B4 eh. K-R1 that the correct move was 31.
22. Kt-B7 eh. K-R2 KR-K1 ! If then 31 . . . . . R X
23. Kt(7)-K5 R-B3 QBP; 32. R-K8, R X Kt; 33.
24. Kt x B Q x Kt R(Q1 )-Q8, R-B8 eh.; 34. K
25. Kt-K5 Q-K3 Kt2, R X KtP eh.; 35. K-R3 and
26. Q-K4 eh. White wins. After the best move,
Barnes has played these com- 31. . . . . R-B7; 32. R-K8, R X Kt;
bined defensive and attacking 33. P X R eh., K X P; the White
manreuvres with great skill. Rook is on the King's file-not
subject to attack by the Black
26 . . . . . . . Q-B4 King-and this renders impossible
27. Q x Q RxQ the fine defensive manreuvre of
28. P-KKt4 Morphy's 34th move.
This and the following two moves
were considered weak· by Max 31. . . . . . . R x Kt! !
Lange and according to him were 32. P x R eh. KxP
the cause of the loss of the game. 33. R-Q7 R X BP
To-day it is natural in such a 34. R(1 )-B7 B-Q5!
position to post a Knight at KKt6. Here is the point of the ambush
It only shows what a hypnotic sprung on Black's 30th move. The
influence Morphy had on his con text move would be useless if the
temporaries. White King's Rook now stood on
K7.
28 . . . • . . . R-B3 35. R x BP R x KtP
29. P-B5 R-K1 36. R x QKtP R x QRP
80. Kt-Kt61 R-K7! 37. P-R4 P-QH4
WHITE ATTEMPTS IMMEDIATE CONQUEST OF THE CENTRE 7
38. P-H5 eh.?

This merely drives the King to
a better square. Better was 38.
R(B7)-Q7, P-B4; with the idea
of playing 39. R-Q6 eh., K-R2;
40. P-Kt5, or 38. R(B7)-Q7,
B-B3; 39. R-Kt6, P-B4; 40.
R-Q5, threatening P-Kt5.
38. . . . . . . K-Kt4
39. Rx KtP eh. K-R5!
40. R(KKt7)-K7 P-R5!
This move bars the White Rook
from coming to the 3rd rank which
would prevent the Black King from
penetrating with mating threats.
Position after 34. . . . . B-Q5! Black won.
Morphy was unsuccessful in solving the problem of the opening and

for 40 years this variation was in the forefront until Tchigorin demonstrated
how to meet it.
ALEKHINE'S ATTEMPT TO REVIVE THE CLASSICAL ATTACK
The following game is of particular interest as it shows an attempt by

Alekhine to revive the old Morphy continuation, namely, the early con
quest of the centre exemplified in the two previous games. This
game also answers those who ask how Morphy would have fared in our
times.
It also shows how Alekhine, one of the most inventive aggressive players,
is prevented from developing an attack in spite of his resourceful play
and his numerous threats, one of which is to arrive at a favourable end
game.
In addition White aimed at attaining the basic attacking position
already known. As, however, he was unsuccessful in achieving his aim,
he was never able to instigate a real attack. The way in which certain
positions were mastered by Morphy remains unsurpassed even to-day;
but would he have reached such positions without learning the present
day technique ?
3 7. P-K5 Kt-K5
8. R-K1 Kt-B4
White Black 9. BxKt QPxB
A. Alekhine P. Keres 10. KtxP Castles
1 1 . Kt-QB3 R-K1
Kemeri, 1937 This move is not new and was
played in the game Lasker-Tchi
1. P-K4 P-K4 gorin, St. Petersburg, 1895, which
2. Kt-KB3 Kt-QB3 continued 12. B-B4, Kt-K3;
3. B-Kt5 P-QR3 13. KtxKt, QxQ; 14. QR x Q,
4. B-R4 Kt-B3 B x Kt; 15. P-QR3, QR-Q1;
5. Castles B-K2 16. P-R3, R x R; 17. Kt x R,
6. P-Q4 PxP R-Q1 ; 18. Kt-K3, R-Q5! and
CHESS :FROM MORPHY TO BOTWINNIK
Lasker, who previously in his the two Bishops. Yet he is ready

Common Sense in Chess, considered to exchange one in order to get rid
the variation strong for White, got of the centralized Kt on Q4.
nothing out of it.
1 6. B-B2
12. B-K3 B-B1 Protecting the K4 square.
13. P-B4 P-B3! 16. . . . . . . QR-Q1
17. R-K3!
A very ingenious way of doubling
the Rooks, since 17 . . . . . RxKt?
would be answered by 18. RxR.
17. B-Kt3
18. QR-K1 B--Q3
19. RxR eh. RxR
20. RxR eh. BxR
21. P-KKt3 B-B2
22. P-QKt4!
A last attempt to force the Black
pieces out of the centre and to
make use of the superior Pawn
position on the King-side.
22. Kt-K3
With this move Black liquidates 23. Kt-K4 Q-Kt3
White's centre instead of playing 24. P-B5 Kt X Kt
for a King's side attack. Certainly 25. B X Kt Q-R4!
a more objective treatment of the The best 25. . Q-R3; 26.
. . •
position than shown in the previous B-K3, Q-R6; 27. B-B5, would
game. leave White the initiative.
14. PxP QxP 26. QxQ BxQ

15. Q-B3 B-B4! 27. P-B3 B-B6
Again demonstrating unpreju- 28. KtxB PxKt
diced judgment. One would at first 29. P-B6
think that Black's strength lies in Drawn.
Though the game, compared with the two of Morphy's, looks uneventful,
this is because both players mastered the positions which arose and took
account of the limitations imposed. But it has its fine points, and even
to-day only outstanding players could as effectively execute the general
plan.
11
WHITE KEEPS THE CENTRE CLO SED
ANDERSSEN'S TREATMENT
IN contrast to Morphy's treatment of this opening, Anderssen preferred
to keep his Queen's Pawn at Q3, exchanging his KB against the Black
Knight on his QB6, and retaining his two Knights for manreuvring. The
whole idea shows that, unlike his two great near-contemporaries, de la

Bourdonnais and Morphy, Anderssen did not realize that attack in the
centre is superior to attack on the wings. However, his method did
produce a solid position, with the centre well held, in which White is
at no disadvantage.
4 PxBP, BxP! (not 16 . . . . . Q x P;

17. Kt-R4).
White Black
A. Anderssen Max Lange 13. B-Kt5 Kt-B3
14. Q----'K2 Q-Q3
Aachen, 1868 15. Q-Q2 R-Ktl
16. P-Kt3 P-B4
1 . P-K4 P-K4 17. P-B4 PxKP
2. Kt-KB3 Kt-QB3 18. P X P B-Kt2
3. B-Kt5 P-QR3 19. Q-K3 Kt X P!
4. B-R4 Kt-B3 to open lines for the two Bishops.
5. P-Q3 P-Q3
6. BxKt eh. PxB 20. Kt X Kt Q-QB3
7. P-KR3 P-Kt3 21. Kt(B3)-Q2
8. Kt-B3 B-KKt2 The beauty of Black's sacrifice is
9. B-K3 Castles shown by the following variation:
10. P-KKt4 R-K1 21 . Kt(K4)-Q2, P-K5! opening
1 1 . Kt-K2 P-Q4 the diagonal for the King's Bishop.
12. Kt-Kt3?
A mistake which must, as the 21. . . . . . . P-B4
annotator says, be recognized. But 22. P-B3 P X Kt
even the recommended move 12. 23. PxP
Kt-Q2, would have left Black If 23. KtxP, Q-Kt3; is strong,
with the initiative. 24. QxP (24. KtxP, P-K5!),
QxQ; 25. KtxQ, BxP.
23. . . . . . . R-K3
24. Castles Q P-QR4
25. P-QR4 Q-Kt3
26. Q-QB3 Q-Kt5
The safest, but not the quickest
way to win. By 26. . . . . R-Q3;
with the idea of going to Q5,
followed by . . . . Q-Q3; tying
down the Knight on Q2, a decision
could be forced in the middle game.
27. QxQ BPxQ

28. QR-K1 P-R3
29. B-R4 P-Kt4
30. B-Kt3 P-R4
A clever move; Max Lange
12. . . . . . . KtxKtP knew how to make best use of the
An original sacrifice. If now two Bishops. The text-move not
13. P X Kt, B X P; (with the threat only prevents 31 . P-R4, but also
. . . . Q-B3) 14. K-B 1 , P X P; opens up a square at KR3 for the
15. QKt X P, P---KB4; winning back Bishop.
the piece. Or 14. R-KKtl,
Q-B3; 15. Kt-B5, P X Kt; 16. 31. R-K2 R-Q1
32. R-Ktl R-KKt3

33. B-R4 R-Q6
34. B x P R x RP
35. R(2)-Kt2 K-R2
36. K-Ql
A recommended continuation
here was 36. B-Q8, R x R; 37.
R x R, B-KR3; 38. K-Ql, B x
Kt(? ) with good drawing chances
for White, as the Bishops are of
opposite colours. But Black could
play 37 . . . . . R-Q6;! 38. B x P,
B X P; and the two Bishops are very
strong on their open diagonals.
36. .. . . . . B-QBI
37. B-Q8 B-Kt5 eh. Position after 42. R-Q3!
38. K-B2 R-QB3
39. Kt-Bl R-B6 eh. This analysis, given by a contem
40. K-Kt2 B-Ra porary annotator, demonstrates the
41. R-Kt3 type of finesse peculiar to the age.
If 41 . Kt-Kta, the reply 42 . . . . . . . R-K8!
B-K6; with the threat Keeping watch on the Q2 square
B-Q5; is too strong. with the Bishop.
41. . . . . . . R-B8 43. R-Q5 R-K7 ch.
42. R-Q31 44. K-Rl R x KP
A very subtle trap. If now 42. 45. Kt-Kt3 R-Q5
. . . . B-K7; 43. R-Q7 eh., K-Rl; 46. R x R PxR
44. B x P, R x B; 45. R x R, R x Kt; 47. Kt-K4 B-Kt2
46. R x R, B X R; 47. P-B5, P-R5; 48. K-Ktl P-Q6
48. P-B6, P-R6; (or 48 . . . . . 49. K-Bl B-Ra eh.
B-R6; 49. R-B7, B-Kt5; 50. 50. K-Kt2 P-Q7
R-B5, or here 49. . . . . B-K3; 51. Kt-B6 eh. RxKt
50. R-B6) 49. R-B8 eh., K-R2; 52. B x R P-Q8(Q)
50. P-B7, B-R3; 51. R-R8, 53. R x Q BxR
B-QKt2; 52. R-QKt8, with a 54. B-Q8 B-B5
draw. Resigns.
Max Lange's conduct of this most beautiful game is impressive even

by present-day standards. Important elements to be noticed are: the
strategic opening of the centre; the manner in which the two Bishops
take control of the position; the fine end-game technique displayed by
both sides. In this decisive game (the first prize depended upon it) Max
Lange proves himself as great a practical player as he was an analyst.
STEINITZ' TREATMENT (AS WHITE)-WHITE HOLDS THE CENTRE

AND ADVANCES ON THE KING'S SIDE
With Wilhelm Steinitz, an important epoch opens in the development

of the Ruy Lopez. In the previous chapter we saw that Anderssen
failed to appreciate the essential point of the Ruy Lopez, namely the
control of the centre. Steinitz, with his positional judgment, realized
that an attack on the wing could only be successful if the centre was
secured. In contrast to Morphy, he did not seek to gain command of
the centre, but contented himself with consolidating his position in this
theatre. When, and only when, his centre was secure, Steinitz com
menced his attack against the opposing King. The following game,
played in a World Championship match with Lasker, is a typical example
of his profound strategy.
5 more normal-looking move Kt-B I .

The text intensifies Black's task of
White Black carrying out .. . . P-Q4;
W. Steinitz Em. Lasker
8. Castles
Second match-game, 1 894 9. Kt-K3 Kt-K2
10. B-Kt3 P-B3
I . P-K4 P-K4 Here 10. . . . . Kt-Kt5; was
2. Kt-KB3 Kt-QB3 worth considering, with the idea of
3. B-Kt5 Kt-B3 exchanging the strong Knight on
4. P-Q3 P-Q3 K3 and preparing for the advance
5. P-QB3 B-Q2 of the King's Bishop's Pawn.
Lasker, perhaps, wrongly, often
gave the impression of not caring U. P-KR4 Q-B2
very much about the opening. 12. Kt-Kt5
Here, at any rate, he failed to rise Very fine. Superficially it looks
to the occasion. A satisfactory like a simple attacking move, but
method of treating this variation its chief aim is the defence of the
for Black had already been demon centre as is subsequently apparent.
strated some years before: I . P-K4,
P-K4; 2. Kt-KB3, Kt-QB3; 12. P-Q4
3. B-Kt5, P-QR3; 4. B-R4, 13. P-B3 QR-Q1
Kt-B3; 5. P-Q3, P-Q3; 6. 14. P-Kt4
P-B3. We now have a similar Comparison with the previous
position to that in the present game will show how carefully
game, with the interpolation of the Steinitz has prepared his attack.
moves, . . . . P-QR3 and B-R4;
6. . . . . P-KKt3; 7. QKt-Q2, 14. . . . . . . PxP
B-Kt2; 8. Kt-B1, Castles; 9. Another slight inaccuracy. Black
P-KR3, P-Q4; 10. Q-K2, P releases the tension in the centre
QKt4; U. B-B2, P-Q5; 12. too early.
P-KKt4, Q-Q3; and Black has
a good game. (Gunsberg-Tchigorin 15. BP X P P-KR3
Match, 1890.) 16. Q-B3! B-K1
Lasker's move involves a loss of If 16 . . . . . PxKt; 17. PxP,
time as White will in any case take Kt-R2; 18. Kt-B5! defending the
steps to preserve his Bishop. Kt5P and threatening Q-R3; with
tremendous effect.
6. B-R4
Avoiding the anticipated ex 17. B-B2 Kt-Q2
change of Bishops. 18. Kt-R3
And now the Knight is taken
6. P-KKt3 back for defensive purposes.
7. QKt-Q2 B-Kt2
8. Kt-B4 18. Kt-QB4
An important deviation from the 19. Kt-B2 P-QKt4
12 CHESS FROM MORPHY '1' 0 BOTWINNIK
This counter-attack is premature. Kt x Kt; 23. B-K3, making use of

Lasker stated that 19 . . . . . P-B3; his strength on the black squares.
would have stopped White's attack.
However, White could then have 22. P x P P-B3
continued with 20. P-R5, P 23. P-Kt6 Kt x KtP
KKt4; 21 . Kt-B5, and with the There is no other defence. If 23.
King's side secured, operate in the . . . . B-Q2; 24. Q x RP, KR-Kl ;
centre with B-K3; followed, after 25. Q-R7 eh., K-BI ; and White
due preparation, by P-Q4. The simply advances the KRP.
truth is that Black's several inac 24. P x Kt BxP
curate moves have added up to a 25. R-KKtl P-K5
bad game for him. Lasker later pointed out that the
20. P-Kt5 P-KR4 best defensive line here was 25 . . . . .
21. Kt-B5 P x Kt K-R2; 26. R x B, K x R; 27.
P-Q4 eh. , with some fighting
chances for Black.
26. PxP K-R2
27. RxB KxR
28. Q-B5 eh. K-B2
29. Q x RP eh. K-Ktl
30. Q x Kt Q-K4
31 . B-K3 P-R3
32. P-R4 KR-Kl
33. PxP RP x P
34. QxQ RxQ
35. R-R6 R-QBI
36. Kt-Kt4 R-K2
37. B-B5 R(2)-Kl
38. Kt-K3 B-Bl
39. B-Q4 K-B2
Here 21. . . . . Kt-K3; gave a 40. P-R5 B-K2
better defence. In this case White 41. B-Kt3 eh. K-Bl
would have continued 22. Kt x B, 42. Kt-B5 Resigns.
Ill
THE BERLIN DEFENCE
THE two previous chapters have shown that neither Morphy's early
opening of the centre, nor Anderssen's retention of the closed centre,
brought White any lasting initiative.
It has been found that after 1. P-K4, P-K4; 2. Kt-KB3, Kt-QB3;
3. B-Kt5, Kt-B3; White can safely castle since his King's Pawn is
only seemingly threatened; this continuation, recommended by Max Lange,
gave White new scope. Black has now to decide whether to accept or
decline the pseudo-sacrifice of the Pawn. Acceptance constitutes the
Berlin Defence, 4. . . . . P-Q3; the Steinitz Defence.
When Black plays the Berlin Defence, he does not expect to hold the
Pawn on his K4 (White, if he wishes, can recover it at once by 5. R-K1,)
but by exchanging the centre Pawns, he aims at a less restricted develop
ment for his pieces than he would achieve in the Steinitz Defence.
EARLY BEGINNINGS
6 16. QR-Q1
Ifl 6. B-Q2,R-Ktl; threatening
White Black . . . . P-Kt3, and . . . . R-Kt5.
S. Winawer Em. Lasker
16. . . . . . . B x Kt
Nuremberg, 1896 17. P x B Q-B1
18. Q-R5 Q-R3
I. P-K4 P-K4 19. R-K3 QxP
2. Kt-KB3 Kt-QB3 20. R--QB1 Q-B5
3. B-Kt5 Kt-B3 21. R-B3
4. Castles Kt x P If 21 . R-R3, Q x B; and the
5. P-Q4! Black King can escape.
This move, rather than the for
merly popular 5 . R-K1, is to-day 21 . . . . . . . Kt-K3
recognized to be strongest, as is 22. B-Q2 R-K2
shown by Max Lange's fine but 23. R-R3 Q-K5
almost forgotten analysis. Black 24. P-B3
cannot hold the Knight on his J\..5 On 24. P-KB4, Kt-B1; and
square (see following note). the pressure on "\-Vhite's King's
Pawn prevents his playing P-B5.
5. . . . . . . B-K2
6. Q-K2 Kt-Q3 24. . . . . . . Q-Kt3
If 6 . . . . . P-Q4; 7. Kt x P, 25. Q-R4 R-Q2
B-Q2; 8. B X Kt, P X B; 9. R-K1, 26. P-KB4 Q-K5
Kt-B3; 10. B-Kt5, Kt-Ktl; 27. P-Kt4 Kt-B1
11. Kt x B, White was threatening P-B5,
7. B x Kt KtP x B 28. Q-B2 P-QR4

8. P x P Kt-Kt2 29. R-K3 Q-B5
9. Kt-Q4 Castles 30. P-B5 P-R5
10. Kt-QB3 B-B4 30. . . . . Q X P eh.; 31. R-Kt3,
1 1 . Kt-B5 and the open file would strengthen
This old-style attacking move is White's attack.
not justified by the position. For
the correct continuation see next 3 1 . R-B1 P-R6
game. 32. R(3)-K1
32. P-K6, is not good because
1 1. . . . . . . P-Q4 of 32. P x P; 33. P x P,
12. Q-Kt4 B x Kt Kt x P; 34. R x Kt?, Q x P eh.
13. Q x B R-K1
14. B-B4 B-Q5 32 . . . . . . . P-R7
15. KR-K1 33. P-R3 P-QB4
Necessary because of the threat 34. K-R2
. . . . P-Kt3; winning a Pawn. 34. P-K6, is again prevented by
34 . . . . . P x P; 35. P x P, Kt x P;
15 . . . . . . . Kt-B4 36. R X Kt?, P-R8(Q);
34. P-Q5 tens to play 36. . . . . R(2)-R2;

35. Q-B3 P-QB3! forcing the QR Pawn.
36. P-K6 BPxP

37. Px KP KtxP
38. Q X P R(2)-R2
This move and the following
show Lasker's unique power in
combining attack with defence. If
39. R X Kt, then Q X R(8); 40.
R-K8 eh. , R X R; 41. Q X R eh. ,
Q-Bl;
39. R-QR1 R-KBl

40. KR-Kl Kt-Q1
41 . Q-QKt6 R(2)-KB2
42. B-Kt5 R-R7 eh.
43. K-Kt3
Another of Lasker's characteristic or 43. K-Ktl , Q-Q4.
defensive manreuvres. The Pawn
cannot be taken because of 36. 43. . . . . . . QxP eh.
QxP, P-R8(Q)! 37. RxQ, RxR; Resigns. 44. K-R4, QxP eh.
38. R X R, P X P. Black now threa- and Mate in two follows.
Surveying the game from a modern viewpoint we realize that Black
solved his opening problems by the 1 1th move, when he was able to play
. . . . P-Q4; without any interference from White. That White was
able to initiate an attack was due to the fact that Black captured a Pawn,
and lost time in consequence. The middle game is very lively and con
ducted with much ingenuity. We cannot help admiring Lasker's tactical
genius; the way he seemingly permits White chances only to counter them.
We can clearly understand from this game why the Berlin Defence became
popular between the years 1890-1910. It created positions where attack
on the King's side, and counter-attack in the centre by Black, brought
about lively games full of scope for tactical players. True, there were
some attempts to refute the defence by keeping back the centre Pawns,
but they were later abandoned.
THE MODERN CONTINUATION-SCHLECHTER'S TREATMENT

The above game proved that once Black can firmly establish a Pawn in
the centre his opening problem is solved. In the last century players
like Pillsbury and Tarrasch, recognizing that this is Black's aim, tried
to prevent it, but they were only partly successful, and the games in the
match Em. Lasker-Tarrasch, 1 908, showed that Black, by adopting
the so-called "Rio de Janeiro' variation, was able to obtain a playable game.
In the following game, however, Schlechter demonstrates how White's
pressure can be maintained.
7 2. Kt-KB3 Kt-QB3
White Black 3. B-Kt5 Kt-B3
K. Schlechter R. Reti 4. Castles KtxP
5. P-Q4 B-K2
Vienna, 1914
6. Q-K2 Kt-Q3
1 . P-K4 P-K4 7. Bxl{t KtPxB
8. P X P Kt-Kt2 would then be embarrassing, there

9. Kt-B3 Castles fore he tries a dangerous counter
10. Kt-Q4 attack.
10. R-Kl, Kt-B4; 1 1 . Kt-Q4,
Kt-K3; 12. B-K3, Ktx Kt; 13. 20. Q-Q3 Q-B2
Bx Kt, P-QB4; 14. B-K3, P 21. R-KB4 Q-K3
Q4; 15. P X P e.p. B X P;l6. QR-Ql, 22. P-KKt5 KR-K1
Q-R5;-the 'Rio de Janeiro' varia 23. P-R3 R-K2
tion-gives Black a playable game 24. K-R2 Q-Kt3
as shown in the 14th match game, 25. P-KR4 B-K3
Tarrasch-Lasker, 1908. 25 . . . . . P-Q4; would weaken
the black squares; and furthermore
10 . . . . . . . B-B4 White would play 26. Kt-R4,
1 1 . R-Ql BxKt with the threat Kt-Kt6. It would,
12. RxB P-Q4 however, have been useless to play
13. PxP e.p. PxP Kt-R4 before the QP had moved
14. P-QKt41 because of the reply . . . . P-QB4;
Preventing 14 . . . . . P-Q4; by
the threat of 1 5 . P-Kt5. 26. Kt-K2 P-B4
27. P-B4 PxP
14 . ...... Q-B3 28. PxP R-QB2
15. B-K3 B-B4 29. Kt-B3 Q-B2
16. QR-Ql P-QR3 30. Kt-Q5
17. P-Kt4! "\Vhite's manreuvres to expose his
opponent's Pawn weaknesses, while
covering those of his own, are
admirable.
30. . . . . . . BxKt
At the expense of a Pawn Black
at last obtains some counter-play.
31 . R X P! Q-K3
31. . . . . Bx P?, loses the ex
change.
32. R X B R-KBI
If 32 . . . . . Q-Kt5; 33. R-Q4,

but now Black threatens 33. . . . .
R-B6; and on 33. Q-K2, R(2)
Though it appears to weaken B2; 34. P-B4, RxP; wins.
White's King's position, this excel
lent move drives the Black Bishop 33. K-Kt3 ! !
away from its strong position. Very accurate! Now 33.
R(2)-B2; is met by 34. P-B4,
17. . . . . . . Q-Kt3 and the King guards the important
18. K-Rl B-Q2 square K-Kt4.
Not 18. . . . . B xBP?; 19. R
QBI , and the Bishop is lost. 33. . . . . . . P-KR4
34. PxP e.p.
19. P-KR3 P-KB4 White must play this dangerous
Black has no time to play 19. looking move otherwise his KKt4
. . . . P-Q4; since 20. Kt-R41 square would become too weak.
Kt5 eh.; 38. K-BI, Q-R6 eh.,

leads to nothing.
37. R x R eh. RxR
38. Q-B5!
By this move White beats back
Black's attack.
38. QxQ
39. R X Q R-Kt5
40. R-B4 RxR
41. B x R P-QR4
42. P x P?
42. P-Kt5, would have won.
The Rook's Pawn was not dan
gerous.
42. Kt x P
Position after 32. R-KBI 43. B x RP Kt x P
44. K-Kt3 K-R2
34. PxP 45. B-B4 P-Q4
35. K-R2 R-Kt2 46. K-B3 K�Kt3
36. R-KKtl ! R( I )-B2 47. K-K2 Kt-R4!
36 . . . . . R x R; 37. K x R, Q- Draw.
In this harmonious game Schlechter was able to carry out White's

strategic aim of holding back Black's centre Pawns. The way in which,
for positional gain, he deliberately exposed his King, and his subsequent
brilliant defence against Black's desperate counter-attack, are truly
admirable. It is no wonder that after this game the Berlin Defence
virtually disappeared from tournament practice. In this game Schlechter
not only makes a contribution to opening knowledge but also effects an
advance in middle game technique.
IV
THE STEINITZ DEFENCE
WHEN the Berlin Defence was at the height of its popularity and seemed
to solve the problem of a valid defence to the Ruy Lopez, Steinitz, in
stinctively distrusting the loose Pawn formation, had gone his own way.
He was firmly convinced that a player who has a strong hold on the
centre need have little fear of being overrun by an attack on the flanks,
and therefore sought an adequate defence based on this theory.
Unfortunately he was temperamentally unfit as a player to prove the
soundness of his theory. To maintain his grip, on the centre he often
made bizarre moves which brought both his play and his theory into
disrepute. Nowadays his theory is accepted without reserve. The pro
gress we have made in technique enables us to use his basic theory in a
practical and successful manner. Further examples of this progress will
appear later when we examine the 'Steinitz Defence Deferred.'
STEINITZ' TREATMENT
The following game is an excellent illustration of Steinitz' theory of

the centre.
8 In this instance, as will be seen, he

wanted to have open lines to
White Black counteract possible attack on the
Em. Lasker W. Steinitz King's wing, which usually occurs
when players castle on opposite
Seventh game of the first match, sides.
1 894
14. P-KKt4
1. P-K4 P-K4
2. Kt-KB3 Kt-QB3
3. B-Kt5 P-Q3
4. P-Q4 B-Q2
5. Kt-B3 KKt-K2
Steinitz regularly played this
move, which his contemporaries,
preferring the 'natural' KKt-B3,
condemned. We shall see later that
although his idea of holding the
centre by this move was right, his
manner of execution was at fault.
6. B-K3
In the previous game Lasker
played 6. B-QB4, and because of
the threat 7. Kt-KKt5, Steinitz
gave up his attempt to hold the This advance is premature, and
centre (though still possible with shows that in his younger days
6 . . . . . P-KR3; as he tried against Lasker did not fully appreciate
Schlechter in London, 1899) but Steinitz' theory of the centre.
gained a few tempi after 6. . . . .
P x P; 7. Kt x P, Kt x Kt; 8. Q x Kt, 14 . . . . . . . R-K1
Kt-B3; 9. Q-K3. 15. P-Kt5
Necessary was 15. P-KB3,
6. Kt-Kt3
7. Q-Q2 B-K2 15. . . . . . . B x Kt
8. Castles Q P-QR3 16. Q x B
9. B-K2 PxP 16. P x QB, was better, but even
10. Kt x P Kt x Kt then Black would have had suffi
1 1 . Q X Kt B-KB3 cient counter-play in the centre
12. Q-Q2 B-B3 against a King's side attack.
13. Kt-Q5 Castles
We have now reached a position 16. . . . . . . R-K4!
where White is in control of the The beginning of a deep defensive
centre. His contemporaries might combination.
well have questioned Steinitz' ap
parent inconsistency;-why had he 17. Q-Q2 BxP
chosen an artificial manreuvre 18. P-KB4 R x PI
(KKt-K2) to hold the centre, only This is the key to the combina
to surrender it a few moves later? tion. The move is not difficult to
see at this stage, but . for Steinitz Q-R4, Kt-B2; 34. P-R8(Q) eh. ,
to envisage such a possibility re R x Q; 3 5 . R x Kt eh., K x R.'
quired a firm faith in his own
theory. 32. . . . . . . P-B3
'On Steinitz' thirty-second move
19. P x B Q-K2 I expected . . . . K-B 1 ; whereupon
20. QR-B1 RxB B-B5 would have left me with
21. B-B4 Kt-R1 good chances for a draw, as the
Contemporary critics recommend- Bishop could not well be taken on
ed 21. . . . . R-KB1 , instead. How account of KR-KKtl,' is Lasker's
ever Steinitz probably wished to comment.
avoid the opening of the KR file
3a. B-B5! K-B2
after 22. P-KR4, Q-K4; 23.
34. KR-Ktl PxB
P-R5, Kt-B5; 24. P-Kt6, P X P;
This move is too risky, and leads
25. P X P, Kt X P; and Black must
to the same position as if the Pawn
be careful of surprises.
had been taken a move earlier.
22. P-KR4 P-B3 35. Q-R5 eh. K-K2

23. P-Kt6! 36. R-Kt8 K-Q3
The only move to create com 36 . . . . . K-Q1; is answered by
plications. 37. K-R2, (threatening QR
KKtl ,) 37. R-K8; 38. Q X
. . . •
23. . . . . . . P-Q4 R eh. ! Q x Q; 39 R x R!

The alternative was 23.
P x P; 24. P-R5, P-KKt.4; 25. 37. R x P Q-K3
P-R6, P x P; 26. KR x P, R-K1; 38. R x R QxR
and Black should be able to repel 39. R x BP eh. K-B4
White's attack. 40. Q-R6 R-K2
41. Q-R2!
Not 41 . R-B8? because of 41
24. P x RP eh. KxP . . . . R x P!
25. B-Q3 eh. K-Ktl
26. P-R5 R-K1 41 . Q-Q2
27. P-R6 P-KKt3 41. . . . . Q-Q1; was suggested
28. P-R7 eh. K-Kt2 as a better defence, but White
29. K-Ktl Q-K4 could play 42. Q-B2 eh. , K-Kt.4;
30. P-R3 P-QB4 43. P-R4 eh., K X P; 44. Q-QB5.
31. Q-B2 P-B5
32. Q-R4! 42. Q-Ktl eh. P-Q5
Steinitz writes: 'At first glance it 43. Q-Kt5 eh. Q-Q4
would seem that White could win 44. R-B5 QxR
by B X KtP. But this does not 45. Q x Q eh. K-Q3
realize 32. B X KtP, P X B; 33. 46. Q-B6 eh. Resigns.
This game provides an excellent example of Steinitz' theory of the centre;
and incidentally, of Lasker's tactical genius. It is interesting to note
that the critics were unanimous in condemning Steinitz' method of deve
loping his KKt at K2, which aims at holding the centre, but in practice
rarely succeeds in doing so. To-day we know that Steinitz was right,
but his idea can be fulfilled only in the 'Steinitz Defence Deferred.'
LASKER'S CONTRIBUTION
In the last years of his life, in the Vienna 1 898 and the London 1899
Tournaments, Steinitz resorted to the more natural . . . KKt-B3
.
(instead of . . . . KKt-K2; ) which implied that he recognized that his

own attempt to hold the centre was tactically not feasible. With one
exception-a memorable draw with Lasker-he was singularly unsuccess
ful, losing to Tarrasch, Pillsbury and Showalter.
It was left to his successor, Lasker, to introduce this system effect
ively into practical play. Lasker's keen perception soon fathomed
the limitations of the Steinitz Defence. The World Champion realized
that Black's problem was the development of his King's Knight, and, in
common with Steinitz, he perceived that KB3 was not a good post for
the piece owing to its exposure to attack by P-K5. He therefore moved
it to KB1 via R2, a simple looking but really deep defensive manreuvre.
9 15. Q-B4 P-QB4

16. Kt-Q5
White Black This looks very menacing, but
0. Bernstein Em. Lasker simpler was 16. Kt-B3, B-K3;
17. Q-R6, with the intention of
Exhibition Game, Moscow, 1914. exploiting Black's weakened Pawn
position.
I. P-K4 P-K4
2. Kt-KB3 Kt-QB3 16. . . . . . . Q-K4
3. B-Kt5 Kt-B3 17. Kt-Kt3 B-K3!
4. Castles P-Q3 Threatening . . . . P-QB3; and
5. P-Q4 B-Q2 leading to interesting complications
6. Kt-B3 B-K2 in which Lasker is able to display
7. R-K1 PxP his tactical skill.
8. Kt x P Castles
9. B x Kt PxB
10. B-Kt5 P-KR3
11. B-R4 Kt-R2
In the third match game against
Capablanca, 1921 , Lasker played
the more solid l l . . . . . R-1·0;
12. Q-Q3, Kt-R2; 13. B X B,
R x B; 14. R-K3, Q-Ktl; 15.
P-QKt3, Q-Kt3. Here we see
the same ideas prevail as in the
present game: Black seeks to bring
pressure on White's Queen's wing
while at the same time maintaining
a firm control of his own K4. But
White's strategic plan can best be
seen in the following continuation:
11. R-Kl; 12. P-K5, Kt
• . . . 18. Q-K2?
R2; 13. B-Kt3, P-QR4; - 14. 18. Q-R4 was better in order to
Q-Q3, B-KB1; 15. P x P, P x P; answer 18 . . . . . Q X KtP; with 19.
16.R X R, Q x R; (Bernstein-Lasker, Kt X P(B7), P-B5; 20. Kt X KR,
St. PetersbuTf�, 1914) and White P X Kt; 21. RP X P, B-Q2; 22.
could not break up Black's central Q-R3, Q x Q; 23. R x Q, B x Kt;
Pawn position. 24. R-Q3, with about equal
chances.
12. B x B QxB
13. Q-Q3 KR-K1 18. Q x KtP!
14. R-K3 Kt-B1 19. P-QB4
3
20 CHESS FHOM MOHPHY TO BOTWINNIK
19. Kt X P(B7) is now not good become even weaker than his own.
because after 19 . . . . . B x Kt; the This part of the game is a good
QR is loose, while with the vYhite example of Lasker's masterly tech
Queen on R4, White could have nique.
countered the threat with RP x B
defending the Rook. 24. R-K3 R-Kt5
25. Kt-B1 Kt-Kt3
19. QxQ 26. R(3)-R3 P-B4!
20. R x Q B x Kt 27. Kt-Q3 P x P!
21. BP x B P-QR4!
28. Kt x R RP x Kt
22. P-QR4 Kt-Q2
29. R-K3 Kt x QP
23. P-B3 KR-Ktl
Other players might have hesi- 30. RxP Kt-B6
tated to commit themselves to 2 1 . 31. R-K7 P-Kt6
. . . . P-QR4; binding the Q R to 32. RxP P-Kt7
the defence of its Pawn, but Lasker 33. R-KB1 RxP
saw that White's QR Pawn would Resigns.
The variation we have just seen was frequently adopted by leading

masters such as Lasker, Capablanca, Schlechter. Whilst having the
appearance of rigidity the defence provides plenty of scope for individual
enterprise, as may be seen by comparing Lasker's treatment of this game
with his later game against Capablanca referred to in the notes.
WHITE CHOOSES AN ATTACKING FORMATION

THE SHOWALTER CONTINUATION
In the more positional treatment of the Steinitz Defence, as in the last

game, White's aim was to carry through P-K5, and break up Black's
Queen's side formation leaving Black's double Pawns weak for the end
game. Black, however, was able to meet this threat by overprotecting
his square K4.
White had little hope of generating a successful King's side attack,
for Black's sound Pawn structure and the open QKt file would have
outweighed White's attacking chances.
It is not surprising that attacking players like Showalter tried to deprive
Black of this compensation by an early exchange of the QKt, forcing
Black to retake with the Bishop instead of the Pawn.
Even to-day this continuation is considered the strongest, and was
successfully adopted by Pillsbury. His game against Bardeleben is a
good example of this system.
10 5. Kt-B3 P-Q3
6. P-Q4 B-Q2
White Black 7. B x Kt BxB
H. N. Pillsbury C. von Bardeleben 8 . Q-Q3 PxP
Black gives up the centre one
Mun ich, 1 900 move too early. Correct is 8 . . . . .
Kt-Q2; 9 . B -K3, ( 0 . P-Q5,
1. P-K4 P-K4 Kt-B4; and . . . . B- c, 2) 9. . . . .
2. Kt-KB3 Kt-QB3 P X P; 10. B X P, Cas�'; 1 1 . Kt
3. B-Kt5 Kt-B3 Q5, B X Kt; 1 2 . P X D, .i. � -B3; 13.
4. Castles B-K2 KR-Kl, B X B; 14. Q X B, (Mar-
THE S'l'EINITZ DEFENCE 21
oczy-Capablanca, London, 1922).

Here Black succeeds in properly
controlling his K4 square (the key
of the defence) by Kt-Q2 and
B-B3 (the same idea as in
Steinitz' treatment).
9. Kt x P B-Q2
10. P-QKt3
The 14th match game Lasker
Capablanca continued 10. B-Kt5,
Castles; 1 1 . QR-Kl , P-KR3;
12. B-R4, Kt-R2; 13. B x B,
Q X B; 14. Kt-Q5, Q-Ql; 15.
P-QB4, with advantage for White.
However, the text-move appears to
give an even more lasting initiative. have resulted from the se�mingly
stronger 17 . . . . . Q-Ql; 18. Kt
10. . . . . . . Castles Kt5, P-KKt3; 19. P-B5, R x R;
1 1 . B-Kt2 R-Kl 20. R x R, B-Kt2; 21. P x P,
A better line of defence is shown RP x P; 22. R-KB I , followed by
in the game Pillsbury-Steinitz, Q-KB3 with a winning attack.
Vienna, 1898. 1 1 . . . . . P-B3; This variation shows how well the
12. QR-QI , Q-B2; 13. KR-K1 , Queen is placed on Q3 to exert
KR-K1 ; 1 4 . KKt-K2, QR-QI ; pressure on the remote King's side.
1 5 . Kt-B4, B-KB1; 1 6. Q-Kt3,
K-Rl; 17. P-B3, Q-R4; 18. 18. B x Kt PxB
QKt-K2, Kt-Ktl ; 19. P-QR3, 19. Kt-R4 P-Kt4
Kt-K2. 20. Q-B5 QxQ
21. Kt x Q KR-Ktl
12. QR-K1 B-KBI 22. P-KR4 P-QR4
13. P-B4 Q-K2 23. P-R5 P-R3
14. P-KR3 P-B4 24. R-B3 P-R5
This appears weakening but there 25. K-R2 PxP
is no other way of development; 26. RP x P R-R7
besides, Black has a plan. 27. R-K2 P-B5
28. PxP PxP
15. Kt-B3 B-B3 29. R-B3 R-Kt5?
By forcing White to pJay 16. 30. R-K8 R(Kt5)
Kt-Q5, the weakness on Q6 -Kt7
disappears. 3 1 . R-Kt3 eh. Resigns.
An impressive demonstration of
16. Kt-Q5 B X Kt the Showalter attack. It is difficult
17. P x B Q-Q2 to detect any major mistake on
An interesting continuation would Black's part prior to his 29th move.
CAPABLANCA's CoNTRIBUTION
Capablanca was the third world master to accept the Steinitz Defence.
He did not employ it exclusively, but his faith in its soundness is proved
by his adopting it regularly against his great rival, Lasker, after his loss
to him at St. Petersburg, 1914.
Though the games between them do not constitute the last word on
this defence, they do reveal many new possibilities in its mode of conduct.
11 10. . . . . . . Kt x Kt!
One of Capablanca's characteristic
\Vhite Black moves by which he evades the dan
M. Euwe J. R. Cap ablanca ger arising after 10 . . . . . B-KB1;
11. B-KKt5, P-KR3; 12. B-R4,
London, 1922 P-KKt3; 13. Kt-Q5, B-Kt2;
14. Kt-Kt5, �-KKt4; 15. KKt X
I. P-K4 P-K4 P, P x B; 16. Kt x QR, Q x Kt;
2. Kt-KB3 Kt-QB3 17. Kt-B7, (better Q X P) (Lasker
3. B-Kt5 Kt-B3 Capablanca, 1921, 1 2th match
4. Castles P-Q3 game).
5. P-Q4 B-Q2
6. Kt-B3 PxP 11. Q x Kt B-K3
Capablanca gives up the centre To meet 12. P-QKt3 with 12.
a move before 7. R-K1 (or 7. . . . . Kt-Q2 and . . . . B-B3,
B � Kt, B x B; 8. Q-Q3, ) forces besides preparing . . . . P-Q4.
him to do so but thereby avoids
Showalter's variation (see previous 12. Q-B2 P-B3
game). A good example of Capa 13. B-Q2
blanca's preventive technique. If 13. B-K3, Q-R4.
13. . . . . . . Q-Kt3
7. Kt x P B-K2
14. Kt-R4
8. R-K1
This puts the Knight out of play
A more useful move appears to
but 14. P-QKt3, P-Q4; is also
be 8. P-QKt3, but it only gives
good for Black.
White equality after 8. . . . . Kt x
Kt; 9. Q x Kt, B x B; 10. Kt x B,
14 . . . . . . Q x Q eh.
Kt---,-Q2; 1 1 . B-R3, P-QR3; 12.
.
15. K x Q P-Q4
Kt-B3,B-B3; 13. Q-K3,Castles;
16. P-K5
14. QR-Q1, B X Kt! Lasker
If 16. P x P, Kt x P; and Black
Capablanca, New York, 1924.
threatens P-QKt4 followed by
. . . . B-B4 eh. and Kt-Kt5.
8 . Castles
. . . . • •
9. B-B1 R-K1 16. . . . . . . Kt-Q2

10. P-B3 17. P-KKt3
Tarrasch recommends 10. P Better, but not quite satisfactory,
QKt3, and B-Kt2. is 17. P-KB4, P-QKt4; 18. Kt
B3, B-B4 eh.; 19. K-B3, P-B3;
20. P X P, Kt X P; with the threat
of . . . . P-Q5.
17. . . . . . . B-KB4
18. QR-B1 P-QKt4
19. Kt-B3 B-B4 eh.
20. K-Kt2 Kt x P
The liquidation of White's centre
is carried out in Capablanca's con
vincing style.
21. P-KKt4 B-KKt3

22. K-Kt3 P-KR4
23. B-KB4 P-B3
24. B x Kt PxB
25. B-Q3 B-B2 33. P-QB4 RXP

Black naturally wishes to retain 34. P x QP PxP
the two Bishops. 35. B-Ktl B-B3
36. R-Q1 R(B6)-B5
26. P-Kt5 P-Kt3 37. B-K4 B-B4
27. R-K2 B-Q3 38. Kt-Q3 P X B!
28. K-Kt2 K-Kt2 Resigns. 3 9 . K t x B, R-Kt5 eh.
29. QR-K1 R-K2 leads to mate.
30. Kt-Q1 R-KB1
Truly a Capablanca game. Chiefly
31. Kt-B2 B-K1
32. P-Kt3 impressive is that even within the
R(2)-KB2
The game is won for Black; it is strict limitations of the Steinitz
nevertheless interesting to observe Defence Capablanca is able to
the ruthless way in which Capa demonstrate his smooth and ap
blanca exhibits his opponent's parently effortless style.
weaknesses.
THE STEINITZ DEFENCE DEFERRED
THIS most modern defence was played during the nineteenth century;
for instance, we know an example of its adoption by Louis Paulsen in
1871. However, since his mode of treatment was quite different from
present-day methods, we begin our study with a game played by Black
burne in 1 877, in which we see our modern strategical ideas beginning to
assume a definite shape.
At a later date, Steinitz himself revived this defence (which came to
be known as the 'Steinitz Defence Preceded') when, according to his
contemporaries, he had become disillusioned in his old defence. He
vigorously denied this saying, 'Some critics remarked that I had lost
faith in my usual favourite 3 . . . . . P-Q3; but it will be seen the same
idea is carried out after the move (3 . . . . . P-QR3; ) which secures a draw
at least against the most formidable attack, which according to the theory
and practice of first-class masters White has at his disposal.' (As we
shall see in the notes to game No. 16 Yates-Bogoljubov, San Remo, 1930,
it has since been proved that White cannot force the draw.) Steinitz
adopted it consistently during the Hastings Tournament of 1895, and at
last it seemed as if he achieved his objective of maintaining the centre
albeit at the expense of a cramped position.
The ultimate judgment on the Steinitz Defence Deferred has yet to
be given, but we can say in general that Black can maintain the centre,
and if he should have to give it up, he can do so safely in the knowledge
that he can secure a free development for his pieces.
BLACKBURNE'S TREATMENT
In the following interesting game Blackburne, a player of individual

outlook, adopting the defence for the first time, demonstrates his sound
appreciation of its principles.
12 Blackburne knows how to make

use of the centralized pieces.
White Black
G. H. Mackenzie J. H. Blackburne 13. QR-Q1 KP x P
14. B x B KxB
Played in a short match of 15. BP x P P-B4!
3 games after the Bradford 16. P-K5 P-B5
Tournament, 1877 17. K-R1 Q-B1
18. B x Kt PxB
I. P-K4 P-K4 19. K-Kt2
2. Kt-KB3 Kt-QB3 The alternative was 19. R-
3. B-Kt5 P-QR3 KKt1 , Q-R6; 20. Q-K2, R-B4;
4. B-R4 P-Q3 21. R-Kt2, R-R4; with the threat
5. P-B3 B-Q2 of Kt-B4-R5.
6. Castles P-KKt3
7. P-Q4 B-Kt2
Black has now reached the ideal
position in this variation. It is
•
certain that this was not deliber
ately planned, nevertheless it is
remarkable that Blackburne treats
it quite in the modern spirit.
8. B-K3 KKt-K2
9. Q-Q2
The usual move played to-day is
9. P x P, with the idea of bringing
the QB to B5.
9. . . . . . . Castles
10. B-R6 B-Kt5
Black avoids the trap! If (a) 19. . . . . . . Kt-B4!
10 . . . . . Kt x P; 1 1 . P x Kt, B x A fine, and by no means obvious
KB; 12. B x B, K x B; 13. P x P, Pawn sacrifice.
P x P; 14. Kt x P, regaining the
Pawn with the better position; (b) 20. Q x P Q-Q1
10 . . . . . Kt x P; 11. P x Kt, B x 21. K-R1 Kt-R5
QB; 12. Q X B, B X B; 13. Kt-Kt5, 22. Q-Kt4 P-KR4!
wins. 23. Q-Ktl Kt x P
24. Q-Kt3 Q-Q2
1 1 . Kt-R3 Takes control of the important
Contemporary critics here recom Kt5 square.
mended 1 1 . B X B, K X B; 12. Kt
K1 , with attacking chances for 25. Kt-B2 P-R5
White, but this shows that they 26. Q-Kt2
misjudged the position. By ex It is interesting to see how Black
changing the Bishops White has not has succeeded in controlling all the
unduly weakened Black's King important squares thus restricting
position and furthermore he has no the movements of the White Queen.
minor pieces left on the King's side
with which he can attack. 26 . ...... R-B5
27. Kt-K3 P-R6
u. B x Kt 28. Q-Kt3 QR-KB1
12. P x B P-Q4! 29. R-Q3 P-B4!
THE STRINITZ DEFENCE DEFERRED 25
breaks up the centre. If instead of

29. . . . . P-B4; 29. . . . . R X P;
30. R X R, Kt X R; then 31. Kt
Kt4! would follow with the threat
of Q x RP, also Q-R4! or 29.
Kt X QP; 30. R-KKtl ,
30. R-B1
Not 30. P x P, P-Q5; with the
threat Q-Q4, or R-Kt5.
30. PxP
31. P-K6 QxP
32. R x P eh.
The last desperate attempt. If
now 32. . . . . QR-B2; 33. Q X R,
Position after 29 . . . . . P-B4! 32. KR-B2
After Black has reduced \-Vhite 33. Kt-B1 Q-K7
to passivity on the King's side he Resigns.
That this game has aroused no particular interest is evident by its

omission from Blackburne's best games, whereas with to-day's knowledge
we cannot help admiring how well Blackburne mastered all elements of
the game, when we consider that it was played in 1887 when the strategic
implications were not fully appreciated. It is true Black achieved this
ideal formation as the result of White's indifferent handling of the opening.
Nevertheless, once Black had attained a firm hold on the centre, he proved
that he was able to carry out a combined attack in the centre and on the
King's side. It is surprising that this contest was dismissed as just a
good attacking game without regard to the genesis of the attack.
BLACK ESTABLISHES A STRONGHOLD IN THE CENTRE

SCHLECHTER'S TREATMENT
As soon as the fundamental differences between the 'Steinitz' and the

'Steinitz Deferred' had taken shape, the question arose: 'Can White force
Black into the "Steinitz" when Black intends to play the "Deferred"?'
If so, the latter would become meaningless, since from the first decade
of the new century Chess began to assume scientific form, and in master
play Black would long ago have abandoned a defence dictated by the
wishes of White. The following game is a good answer to this question.
13 5. B x Kt eh. PxB
6. P-Q4
White Black White's aim is to force Black to
R. Teichmann K. Schlechter play 6. . . . . P x P; which would
lead to an ordinary Steinitz De
Monte Carlo, 1902 fence.
1. P-K4 P-K4 6. . . . . . . P-B3

2. Kt-KB3 Kt-QB3 But this move, played by Alapin
3. B-Kt5 P-QR3 against Tarrasch in Nuremberg,
4. B-R4 P-Q3 1 892, foils White's attempt.
7. Kt-B3
With regard to the currently
popular 7. B-K3, see the following
game.
7. . . . . . . P-Kt3
8. B-K3 Kt-R3
9. P-KR3 Kt-B2
10. Q-Q2 B-KKt2
Black's method of developing
his King's side pieces is even to-day
considered best-an ideal which can
be realized only by indifferent
handling of the opening on the part
of White.
1 1 . R-Q1 Q-K2 Position after 19. B-Kt2

12. Castles Castles
13. KR-K1 P-R3 25. P-QKt3
14. Kt-K2 K-R2 More precise was at once 25.
15. Kt-Kt3 P-QR4 P-B4, for now Black had the alter
16. P-QR4 Kt-Q1 native break-through with 25 . . . . .
17. Kt-R2 Kt-K3! P-B5; 26. P x P, Q-Kl.
With this well-timed Knight
manreuvre Black not only prevents 25. . . . . . . P-R4
18. P-KB4, on which 18. . . . . 26. Kt-B2 Kt-B2
P X QP; 19. B X QP, Kt X B; could 27. P-B4 P-Kt4
follow, but clarifies the tension in All this is superbly played. The
the centre, since 18. P-Q5, P X P; Queen's side and the centre being
19. Q x QP, B-Q2; followed by blocked, Black can prepare the
P-KB4; would be too strong. break-through on the King's side at
his leisure.
18. P-QB3 P-QB4 28. K-B1 Kt-R3
19. Kt-K2 29. Kt-B3 P-Kt5
If 19. P x BP, Kt x P; 20. B x Kt, 30. RP x P PxP
P x B; and the position is in favour 31 . K-K2 B-KB3
of Black, who can now play 21. 32. R-R1 B-R5
. . . . B-K3; with the threat B 33. QR-Ktl R-KKtl
Kt6 and . . . . KR-Ql . 34. K-Q1 R-Kt3
35. Q-K2 QR-KKtl
19. . . . . . . B-Kt2 36. R-B1 PxP
By superlative manreuvring Black This break-through proves to be
at last induces White to close the too early and, as will be seen, it
centre, since he was threatening 20. should have been prepared by
. . . . P-KB4; in which case the QR-Kt2 and K-Ktl since the
two Bishops would have enhanced Black King on R2 is exposed.
powers.
37. P x P R-Kt7
20. P-Q5 Kt-Kt4 38. K-B2 Q-Kt4
21 . P-B3 P-B4! 39. B-Q2 Q-Kt6
22. Q-B2 P-KB5 40. Kt(B3)-Q1 B-R6
23. B-B1 B-B1 41. K-Q3
24. Kt-Kt4 B-Q2 Loses the Queen for Rook and
48. B X RP, R-Kt7; 49. B-Kl

was a good alternative for White.
48. . . . . . . K-Kt2
49. B-Kl
Not 49. R X Kt?, R-Kt7 eh.,
winning the Rook.
49 . . . . . . . Kt-Kt5
50. B x R Kt x R
51. B x Kt Q-Q5
52. R-Kt4 eh. K-B2
53. R-Kt2 Q-RS
54. K-Kl Q-Kt8
55. R-KB2 QxP
56. Kt-Kt2!
Position after 36. R-Bl As a result of the manreuvre
initiated by the 52nd move, White
Knight, but affording the best was able to defend aU the weak
chance for White. points of his position.
41 . B-Kt5 56 . ...... K-Kl

42. Kt x B RxQ 57. K-Bl K-Q2
43. K x R Q-Kt7 eh. 58. K-Kt2 K-Bl
44. K-Q3 Kt x Kt 59. R-K2 K-Kt2
45. R x B eh. 60. B-Ktl K-R3
Owing to the disadvantageous 61 . B-B2 K-R2
position of the Black King, White 62. B-Kl K-R3
has now this defensive resource at 63. B-R4 K-R2
his disposal. 64. B-QS Q-Ktl
65. B-R4 Q-Kt6
45 . ...... Kt-R3 66. B-Kl K-R3
46. R-B2 Q-Kt8 67. K-B2 K-Kt3
47. K-K2 R-Kt6 68. B-Q2 K-R3
48. R(2)-R2 Drawn.
Black's strategy in this game is almost perfect. The way in which he

uses his forces by diverting them from the centre to the flanks is most
impressive, as is his economy in using only as many pieces in the centre
or flank as necessary. If ever a proof were needed of Steinitz' theory
of the centre, this game provides one, and it is unsurpassed� even to-day,
as a model of how such a position should be treated.
WHITE TRIES TO RESTRICT BLACK'S DEVELOPMENT ON THE KING'S SIDE

CAPABLANCA'S DEFENSIVE METHOD
As soon as Black is able to develop his Knight to KB2, he has not only ,
established a real stronghold, but he has solved the problem created by
playing 6 . . . . . P-KB3, which deprives the Knight of its natural square.
In the following game, White's strategy is directed against Black's
harmonious development of the King's side. That this creates a difficult
problem for Black can be seen from the games referred to in the anno
tations in which Black has often to face a dangerous King's side attack.
14 attack as shown in the previous

White Black note, but with the advantage that
P. Romanovsky J. R. Capablanca his King is safer in the middle,
retaining the option of castling on
Moscow, 1935
the Queen's side if White tries to
I. P-K4 P-K4 open the central files.
2. Kt-KB3 Kt-QB3
3. B-Kt5 P-QR3 10. . . . . . . Kt-K2
4. B-R4 P-Q3 1 1 . P-KR3
5. B x Kt ch . PxB To be able to play QR-Q1
6. P-Q4 P-B3 without the interference of B-Kt5.
7. B-K3! P-KKt3
Another line of development is ll. Castles
7 . . . . . Kt-K2; 8. Kt-B3, Kt 1 2 . QR-Q1 Q-Ktl
Kt3; 9. Q-Q2, B-K2; 10. P 13. P-QKt3 Q-Kt2
KR4, P-KR4; l l . Castles Q, 14. B-R6
B-Kt5; 12. Q-Q3, P X P; 13. Threatening 15. B x B, K x B;
B X P, Kt-B5; 14. Q-B4, Q-Q2; 16. P x P, BP x P; 17. Kt x P.
Bogoljubov - Alekhine, Exhibition
game, Baden-Baden, 1934. 14 . . . . . .
. QR-Q1
15. B x B KxB
8. Q-Q2 B-KKt2 16. Kt-R2
9. Kt-B3 B-Q2! White wants to undertake an
action in the middle, but 15. Q-B1
with the idea of playing Q-Kt2 is
a more promising plan.
16. . . . . . . Q-Kt5!
One of Capablanca's typical "pre
ventive" moves. Now he eliminates
White's attacking chances before
they become dangerous. If now
17. P-B4, Q x P eh.; 18. Q x Q,
P x Q; and in the end game White's
centre is weak.
17. Q-K3 QR-K 1 !

Preventing again 18. P-KB4,
on which could follow 18.
P x QP; 19. R x P, Q-Kt3; with
A simple-looking, but important the threat . . . . Kt-B4;
waiting move to see which side
White is going to castle. The alter 18. QKt-K2 PxP
native is 9. . . . . Kt-K2; 10 19. R x P Q-Kt3
B-R6, Castles K; ll. Castles Q, 20. Q-Q2 P-QB4
B-K3; 12. P-KR3, Q-Ktl; 13. 21 . R-Q3 Q-Kt5!
P-KKt4, Q-Kt5; 14. B X B, K X 22. P-QB4
B; 15. P-R3, Q-Kt3; '\-\ith chances White cannot avoid exchange of
for both sides. (Bogoljubov-Sir G. Queens, for if 22. Q-B4, Kt-QB3!
Thomas, Hastings, 1922.) is too strong.
22. QxQ
10. Castles KR 23. R x Q B-B3
If White castles on the Queen's 24. Kt-B3 P-B4
side Black can carry out the same 25. Kt-Q5 Kt x Kt
THE STEINITZ DEFE�CE DEFERRED 29
26. KP x Kt B-Q2 29. Kt-B1

27. P-KB4
28. R-B3
R-K5
P-KR3 I Drawn, for if 29. . . . . P-Kt4;
30. Kt-Kt3 would follow.
Though this game looks superficially like a 'Grandmaster draw,' after

following the difficulties Black had to face in the two games given in the
notes, one recognizes that Capablanca's treatment, with its crystal clear
strategy, must, for the present at any rate, constitute the last word in
this variation. How, after holding the centre for· twenty moves, he gives
it up to transpose into an advantageous line of the Steinitz Defence, is
a real masterpiece of strategy.
BLACK FOILS WHITE'S ATTEMPT AT SIMPLIFICATION
ALEKIIINE 's TREATMENT
While the previous game has shown that White cannot forcibly trans
pose from the Steinitz Defence Deferred into the Steinitz Defence, a
second equally important question has to be solved, namely, whether
White by simplification can remove the sting of Black's play-rendering
the variation useless as an aggressive weapon.
15 14. KR-K1
15. Q-Q3 P-Kt5
White Black 16. Kt-K2
G. Stoltz A. Alekhine 16. Kt-Q5, Kt x Kt; 17. Q x Kt,
(or 17. P x Kt, Q-Kt4;) increases
Bled, 1931 White's drawing chances, in har
mony with the policy of simplifi
I. P-K4 P-K4 cation.
2. Kt-KB3 Kt-QB3
3. B-Kt5 P-QR3 16. ...... Q-B3
4. B-R4 P-Q3 17. P-KB3
5. P-Q4 P-QKt4 On 17. Kt-Kt3, Kt-Kt5; fol
6. B-Kt3 Kt x P lowed by . . . . Kt-K4; is strong.
7. Kt x Kt P x Kt
8. B-Q5 R-Ktl 17. P-Q4
9. B-B6 eh. 18. P x P Kt x P
Alekhine remarks, if White 19. QR-K1 B-B3
thought that by simplification he 20. P-QB4 Q-B4 eh.
could easily obtain a draw, he was 21. R-B2 Kt-K6
certainly ill advised. 22. P-QKt3 QR-Q1
23. B x Kt RxB
9. B-Q2 24. Q-B2 B-R5
10. B x B eh. QxB After breaking up White's centre,
u. Q x P Kt-B3 Black is able to win a Pawn, but
12. Kt-B3 B-K2 not without allowing White some
13. Castles Castles counterplay.
14. B-Q2
14. B-Kt5 is not good because 25. P-Kt3 R x BP
of 14. . . . . P-Kt5; 15. Kt-Q1 , 26. R-KB1 B-Kt4
(15. Kt-Q5, Kt X Kt; 16. Q X Kt, 27. K-Kt2 R x R eh.
R--Kt4;) 15. . . . . Q-Kt5; 28. R x R Q-B3 eh.
29. K-R3 B-K6 31. Q-B5, with counter-attack.

30. R-BI R-Q4!
31. Kt-B4 Q-Q2 eh.
32. P-Kt4 R-Q5
33. Q-KKt2!
An ingenious defence. By the
Mate-threat on R8 White wins a
tempo to defend his Kt Pawn.
33. P-QB3
34. Kt-R5 B-Kt4
35. Q-K2 P-KKt3
36. Kt-Kt3 P-KR4
37. Kt-K4 Q X P eh.
Seemingly allows White to sim-
plify, but the move has a point!
38. Q x Q P x Q eh.
39. K x P R x Kt eh.
40. K x B K-Kt21
Characteristic of Alekhine. Even Resigns. There is no defence
in a won position he plays the against 41. . . . . P-B3 eh. 42.
precise move. 30 . . . . R-Q3 R X P, R-K4 eh. winning the
would have allowed White to play Rook.
This game is important not only from the opening point of view but
for its contribution to middle game strategy, in demonstrating the dif
ference between the strong and weak centre. As White is backward in
his development, Alekhine is able to break up the position and to use the
lines gained for manceuvring his pieces, transforming this again into a
material win. As soon as this is realized, a direct attack is launched to
conclude matters.
BoGoLJUBov's CoNTRIBUTION
Although in the previous game Alekhine demonstrated that Black can

undermine White's attempts at simplification, it was left to Bogoljubov
to expound that, contrary to popular opinion, White cannot force a draw
by a Pawn sacrifice. Even Steinitz was unaware of this, as he observed
that this refinement constituted a possible blemish of the pefence Deferred.
16 8. P-QB3
White Black Up to here the game is identical
F. D. Yates E. D. Bogoljubov with Hymes-Steinitz, New YoTk,
1894, which was drawn by repeti
San Remo, 1930 tion of moves after 8. . . . . P X P;
9. Q-Q5, B-K3; 10. Q-B6 eh.
1. P-K4 P-K4 B-Q2. It is interesting to note
2. Kt-KB3 Kt-QB3 that in his attempts to find a line
3. B-Kt5 P-QR3 to avoid a draw, Steinitz analyses
4. B-R4 P-Q3 10 . . . . . K-K2; coming to the
5. P-Q4 P-QKt4 conclusion that it is too dangerous
6. B-Kt3 Kt x P for Black-and yet fails to find
7. Kt x Kt P x Kt Bogoljubov's simple reply.
8. . . . . . . B-Kt2! 25. . . . . . . RxP

9. P x P Kt-Ba Bogoljubov's direct method of
If 9. . . . . B x P; 10. Castles, breaking up White's centre by
B-Kt2; 1 1 . R-K1 eh., B-K2; sacrificing the exchange is most
12. B-Kt5, gives White a strong impressive. White was threatening
attack. Kt-B4, followed by P x P and
Kt-K6.
10. P-B3 B-K2
1 1 . Castles Castles 26. P x P PxP
12. Kt-B3 P-B4 27. B x R RxB
With this move Bogoljubov shows 28. B-B4 P-Kt4
that White' s seemingly strong 28. . . . . Kt-K6; 29. B x Kt,
centre is merely an illusion, since R X Kt; is worth considering.
he is totally unable to profit from
it. Better than White's next move 29. B-Bl R-K4
was 13. B-K3. 30. Q-Q3 Q-Kl
13. P-Q5 R-K1 If 30 . . . . . B X P; 31. B-Kt2 is
14. Kt-K2 B-KB1 too strong whilst if 30. . . . . R x P;
15. Kt-Kt3 P-Kt3 31. Q-Kt6 gives White a strong
16. B-B2 H-Kt2 attack.
17. P-QR4 R-QB1
18. B-Q2 P-Kt5 31. Kt-Kt3 RxP
19. P-R5 Kt-Q2 32. R-K2!
20. R-R2 Kt-K4 A clever tactical stroke to pro
21. P-Kt3 P-R4 mote complications. If 32. . . . .
22. Kt-K2 R-B2 B-K4; 33. Q-B5, B-Q5 eh.; 34.
23. P-B4 K-Rl, R X Q; 35. R X Q eh.,
This move appears to weaken K-B2; 36. R X R eh., K X R; 37.
White's centre still further, but he P-R3, wins.
has no choice since he must find
some counterplay against Black's 32. . . . . . . R-K4
impending B-QBI , Q2, Kt4, 33. B x P R xR
strengthening his position still 34. Kt X R Q-K5
further. 35. Q x Q BxQ
36. P-R3 Kt-K4
23 . . . . . . . Kt-Kt5 37. B-K7 Kt-B2
24. B-Q3 QR-K2 37 . . . . . B-Q6! would win an
25. P-B5 important tempo since if 38. R-B2,
Kt-B2; White cannot play 39.
Kt-Kt3 because of B-Q5.
38. Kt-Kt3 B-Q5 eh.

39. K-Rl B-QB7
40. Kt-B5! B-K4
41 . Kt x QP
The only chance. White must try
to break up Black's Pawn position.
41. R-B3 is met by P-B5!
41. . . . . . . Kt x Kt
Not 41. . . . . B x Kt; 42. R x Kt
with Bishops of opposite colours.
42. R-Bl BxP

32 CHESS FROM MOHPHY TO BOTWINNIK
43. R x P B-KB5 45. BxP B-Q4

If 43 . . . . . Kt-B5; 44. R--B8 46. RxP Kt-R5
eh., K-B2; 45. B x P, 47. B-Kl B x P eh.
48. K-Ktl B-Kt2
44. R-B6 4.9. R-KB6 B-Kt4
Not 44. R X P, B-B7; 50. B x Kt BxR
44. . . . . • . Kt-B4 Drawn.
THE MoDERN CoNTINUATION

WHITE DEFERS THE FIGHT FOR THE CENTRE
As soon as it was realized that "Thite could achieve no tangible result

by an attempt at early conquest of the centre, attention was directed to
building up a strong position by 5. P-QB3, a not uncommon move in
the Ruy Lopez.
For the defence it was a long step forward, as Black was now able to
hold the centre and even to fianchetto his King's Bishop.
STEINITZ' DEFENCE SYSTEM
The following game is of particular interest, as it shows how Steinitz

attempted to solve the problem of holding the centre, this time with the
Steinitz Defence Deferred. He succeeded in his endeavour, but failed
to obtain a good position. At that time his treatment of the opening
was considered one of his many experiments. However, by comparing
it with a game played by Alekhine we can easily discern where and why
he failed.
17
White Black
G. Marco W. Steinitz
Hastings, 1895
I. P-K4 P-K4
2. Kt-KB3 Kt-QB3
3. B-Kt5 P-QR3
4. B-R4 P-Q3
5. Castles Kt-K2
6. P-B3 P-KKt3
7. P-Q4 B-Q2
8. B-K3 B---:-Kt2
9. P x P PxP
10. QKt-Q2 Castles
1 1 . R-K1 Kt-B1 Position after 11 . . . . . Kt-B1
As usual in this variation the
development of the King's Knight Queen. He could then have trans
is Black's opening problem. Steinitz ferred his KKt to Q3 via K1 , which
developed the piece early to K2 is Black's aim in this variation. He
instead of at a later stage and is unable to prevent White's fol
retaining the option of going to lowing move by 1 1 . . . . . P-Kt3;
KB3, leaving the K2 square for the since 12. Kt-B l , Kt-Bl ; 13.
T HE STEINITZ DEFENCE DEFERRED 33
B-KKt5 !, Q-K1; (13. sufficient compensation for the

P-B3? 14. Q-Q5 eh. ) 14. Kt-K3, Pawn.
followed by Kt-Q5 would prove
embarrassing. 21. Kt-Q3
22. Q-Kt3 Kt x P
12. B-B5! R-K1 23. QR-Q1 Kt-Q3
13. Kt-B1 P-Kt3 24. Kt-Q5
14. B-R3 KKt-R2 Better was at once 24. Kt-Q2.
Black is now forced to undertake
this artificial manreuvre. 24 . . . . . . . P-K5
25. Kt-Q2 B x Kt
15. Q-Q3 QB-B1 26. Q x B P-K6!
16. Q-K2 B-Kt2 Better than 26. B x P;
17. Kt-K3 P-QKt4 27. Kt-B4.
18. B-B2 P-Kt5
Black has no time for . . . . 27. R x P RxR
P-QR4, and . . . . P--Kt5, since 28. P X R R-Ktl
after QR-Q1 and Kt-Q5 White Not 28 . . . . . B X P; 29. Kt-B4.
would exert too much pressure.
But the following Pawn sacrifice is 29. Kt-B4 RxP
not quite correct. 30. B-Kt3
This involved manreuvre endan
19. B x P Kt x B gers White's game. 30. Kt x Kt,
20. P x Kt Kt-Kt4 P X Kt; 31. Q X P, would have
21. Q-B4? drawn.
30. R-Kt4
31 . Q-B6 B-B l !
32. Q x RP Q-Kt4
33. R-KBl Kt x Kt
34. B x Kt Q x KP eh.
35 . K-R1 R-KB4
36. R-Rl
Or 36. R x R, P x R; 37. P-KR3,
B-B4; 38. K-R2, K-Kt2; (to be
able to play . . . . P-B5 without
interference of Q-B8 eh. and
Q-Kt4) and Black's attack is
decisive.
36. . . . . . . B-Q3
37. B-B1
A mistake. Correct was 21. If 37. P-KR3, Q-Kt6;
Kt-B4, with the threat Kt-R5.
21. Q-K2; 22. P-QR3, 37. . . . . . . B xP
B-QB 1 ; 23. Kt-K3! prevents 23. Resigns. There is no defence to
. . . . B-Kt5; and Black has no . . . . R-KR4.
This is not one of Steinitz' great games, but one in which we can per
ceive the Steinitz Defence Deferred coming into being; and for this reason
it is of great interest. As the following game will show, the strategical
r�ql!irements of the position were well recognized by Steinitz, only the
.
t1mmg of the moves bemg wrong; but complete accuracy on the very
first occasion would be too much to expect.
ALEKHINE's CoNTINUATION
Forty-two years later Alekhine was faced with the same problem
that Steinitz failed to solve. And his continuation is a good answer to
those critics who have condemned Steinitz for his unfruitful endeavours.
18
White Black
E. G. Sergeant A. Alekhine
Margate, 1937
1. P-K4 P-K4
2. Kt-KB3 Kt-QB3
3. B-Kt5 P-QR3
4. B-R4 P-Q3
5. Castles
More exact is 5. P-B3, since the
text-move allows Black to exchange
the KB with Kt-QR4.
5. . . . . . . B-Q2 Position after 9 . . . . . Kt-B3!

6. P-QB3 P-KKt3
7. P-Q4 B-Kt2 too arbitrary, but it is difficult to
8. P x P see what other plan White can
8. B-KKt5would only help Black conceive.
after 8. . . . . P-B3; 9. B-K3,
Kt-R3; followed by . . . . Kt-B2;
11. . . . . . P-QKt3
and the Knight has reached its
.
1 2. P-KR3 Castles KR
ideal post in this variation. (Bogol
13. B-Kt3 P-QR4
jubov-Alekhine Match, 22nd game,
14. P-Kt5
1929).
A better alternative is 14. P-
QR3 to maintain the tension on the
8. . . . . . . P x P!
Queen's side. Even then, White has
8. . . . . Kt X P; gives White more
little chance to improve his position,
chances after 9. Kt X Kt, P X Kt;
whereas Black can play 14 . . . . .
10. P-KB4, B X B; 1 1 . Q X B eh.,
Kt-KR4; . . . . B5 with advantage.
Q-Q2; 12. Q X Q eh., K X Q; 13.
P X P, K-K3; 14. B-B4, R-KB1 ;
15. Kt-Q2, B X P ; 1 6 . Kt-Kt3, 14 . . . . . . . Kt-Q1
B x B; 17. R x B, P-Kt3; 18. 15. P-QR4 Kt-Kt2
P-QR4, (Fine-Alekhine, Avro, 16. B-Kt5 Kt-B4
1938.) 17. B-Q5 QR-Q1
18. Kt-B4 P-R3
9. B-K3 Kt-B3! 19. B x Kt B xB
The most important move in this 20. Q-B1
variation; the Knight goes to B3 White plays for a trap. 20.
instead of to K2, as in the previous Q-B2, still gives him a playable
game. game: 20. . . . . B-Kt2; 21. Kt-K3,
B-K3; 22. B x B, P x B!
10. QKt-Q2 Q-K2
1 1 . P-QKt4 20. . . . . . . K-Kt2
This manreuvre was com;idered Not 20. . . . . Kt-Kt6? ; 21 .
Q x P, Kt x R; 22. Q x KtP eh. with 24. P x R B x Kt

draw. 25. KR-Q1 R-Q1
26. Q-K4 B-Kt6
27. R-Q2 Q-B4
21. Q-K3 Kt x RP!
28. Kt x P?
The decisive combination, quite
An oversight, but White's posi
in Alekhine's style : a seemingly
tion is naturally hopeless.
sound position is quickly broken up.
28. . . . . . . Q x BP!
22. R x Kt BxP Resigns. White has three pieces
23. QR-R1 RxB attacked.
Alekhine's handling of the game is certainly convincing. He does not

attempt the impossible, but exploits in full the potentialities of the opening.
THE SIESTA VARIATION
Though this variation appears more in the nature of an experiment,

it plays an important role in the development of the Steinitz Defence
Deferred. It throws light on a pertinent query: Can Black undertake
counter-action in the centre if White postpones his attack, as shown in
the previous game?
Short and fierce games resulted from 5. P-QB3, P-B4; reminiscent
of the old gambits. Once declared bad, the Siesta reappeared in the
short win of Keres against Euwe, Moscow, 1948.
That one single game can bring into disrepute a whole system, or revive
it, as in this case, proves that in scientific analysis we have made no
considerable progress compared with the older masters; while in accuracy
we may have retrogressed, as Alekhine once observed when comparing
a contemporary analysis with one made by Tchigorin in the last century.
It is interesting to note that Steinitz published an analysis in his Modern
Chess Instructor in which he tried to prove that Black can safely play
this 'Gambit' continuation, and Capablanca's conclusions, it will be seen,
are the same.
The following game is in his characteristic style.
19 7. Kt-Kt5
If 7. Kt x P, P x Kt; 8. Q-R5
White Black eh., K-K2; 9. B-Kt5 eh., Kt
R. Reti J. R. Capablanca B3; 10. B x QKt, P x B; l l . P x P,
Q-Q4! 12. B-R4, K-Q21 Up to
Berlin, 1928 this point both Steinitz' and Capa
blanca's analyses are identical.
I. P-K4 P-K4 Capablanca gives here 13. Q-Kt5,
2. Kt-KB3 Kt-QB3 P-R3; 14. Q-B5 eh., K-K1; 15.
3. B-Kt5 P-QR3 Q-Kt6 eh., Q-B2; 16. Q X Q eh.,
4. B-R4 P-Q3 K x Q; 17. P x Kt, P x P; with an
5. P-B3 P-B4 equal game.
6. P-Q4
For the superior 6. P x P, see 7. PxP '
following game. 8 . Kt x KP Kt-B3
9. B-KKt5 B-K2
6. P x KP 10. Q x P
4
13. Q X Kt eh. , B-Q2; 14. Q

B3, P X B; 15. Q-R5 eh. , K-B1;
16. Q-R6 eh. , K-Ktl; would not
yield White the draw, but he now
threatens Q-R5 eh. and Q-B5 eh.
drawing, as well as B-Kt7.
13. . . . . . . Q-Q2!
Meets both threats.
14. Castles
If 14. B-Kt7, Q-K3 eh.; 15.
Q x Q, B x Q; 16. B x R, K-B2;
winning two minor pieces for the
Rook.
This move turns out to be 14. . . . . . . B-Kt2

hazardous. Material loss could have 15. B-Kt7 Castles Q
been avoided, without advantage to 16. B x R Kt-K4
Black by 10. B x Kt, B x B; l l . 17. Q-Q1 B-B6!
Q-R5 eh. , P-Kt3; 1 2 . Q-Q5, Hastening the end.
B-Q2; (Kmoch-E. Steiner, Buda
pest, 1928.) 18. P x B
There is no defence against 18 .
10 . ...... P-QKt4 . . . . Q-R6;
II. Kt x Kt ch. P x Kt
12. Q-Q5 P x KB 18. • . . . . . Q-R6
13. B-R6 Resigns.
The following game shows the latest tendency of the Siesta Variation,
and it is particularly interesting since one of our greatest opening experts,
Euwe, is caught unprepared by a new variation.
20 l l . Q-B3
White Black
M. Euwe P. Keres
World Championship Tournament,

Moscow, 1948
I. P-K4 P-K4
2. Kt-KB3 Kt--QB3
3. B-Kt5 P-QR3
4. B-R4 P-Q3
5. P-B3 P-B4
6. P x P BxP
7. P-Q4 P-K5
8. Kt-Kt5 P-Q4
9. P-B3 P-K6!
Not 9 . . . . . P x P; 10. Castles,
and White obtains a strong attack.
This move created considerable
10. P-KB4 B-Q3 controversy. It was called �over-
elaborate' and the simple 1 1 . B x P, he interposed on the 11th move

was recommended. But after 1 1 . Q-R5 eh. B-Kt3; with Q-K6! he
B x P, Q-K2; 12. Q-K2, the could have forced the exchange of
position is by no means as simple Queens.
as it looks. True 12 . . . . . B-Q6?;
13. Q x B, B x P; is refuted by 14. 13. PxB
Kt-B7 ! I but 12. . . . . Castles Q; 14. Castles
13. B x Kt, P x B; 14. Q x P eh., 14. Kt-B3, was still not feasible
K-Q2; 15. K-B2, R-Kl; 16. because of 14. . . . . B x Kt; 15.
R-Kl, B X P; wins. R X B, Q-Kt3; . This variation
Analysts demonstrated 1 1 . Castles shows the importance of the KKt3
to be the clearest line for White. square for Black.
11 . . . . . P-R3; (not 1 1 . . . . . B x P;
12. R x B, Q x Kt; 13. B x P, ) 12. 14. Castles KR
Kt-B3, B x P; 13. P-KKt3, B 15. Kt-Q2 Kt-Kt3
Q3; ( . . . B-Kt4; 14. Kt X B,
.
16. P-KKt3 QR-K1
Q x Kt; 15. Q-B3, ) 14. Kt-K5, 17. Q-B2
(analysis by Kmoch). If 17. Q-B3, P-R3!
The artificial-looking move 1 1 .
Q-R5 eh. ! gave better chances for
17. B-Q6
White than the text. If 1 1 . . . . .
18. R-K1 R x R eh.
P-KKt3; 12. Q-B3, and the KKt
19. Q x R B x P!
cannot get to Kt3, and if 11 . . . . .
20. P x B
B-Kt3; the Bishop has to give up
There is no help. On 20. Q-K6
the control of the K3 square, the
eh., Q x Q; 21. Kt x Q, B-K6 eh.;
importance of which is shown by
22. K-Rl, R-BS eh.; 23. K-Kt2,
the 13th move.
R-B7 eh. wins a piece.
11. . . • . . .Q-B3
12. Q x P eh. 20. Kt x P
After 12. B x P, Kt-K2; the 21. QKt-B3 Kt-K7 eh.
White pieces are scattered and 22. K-Kt2 P-R3
disunited. 23. Q-Q2 Q-B4
24. Q-K3 P x Kt
12. . . . . . . Kt-K2 25. B-Q2
13. B x Kt eh. If 25. Kt X P, Q-B8 Mate.
If 13. Castles, Castles KR; 14.
Kt-B3, B X Kt; 15. R X B, Q-Kt3! 25 . . . . 0 0 0 B-K5
followed by 16 . . . . . B X P; But had Resigns.
Euwe came in for considerable criticism over this game, and annotators
suggested various moves to improve the defence; yet with unlimited time
they overlooked more than Euwe did under the strict time limit. The
only point on which censure is justified is that he went into an extensively
analysed variation unprepared. Which just shows the pains that must
be taken in this technical age if, avoiding over-solid lines, one wants to give
the game a more dynamic character.
THE DURAS VARIATION

This modern line is named after the Czechoslovakian master who
adopted this formation, though he treated it as a kind of Steinitz system,
by first playing 5. P-Q3, then 6. P-B4, and ultimately P-Q4: therefore
with the loss of a tempo compared with the modern continuation.
CHESS FROM MORPHY TO BOTWINNIK
To-day it is mainly used with the idea of first restricting Black chances
on the Queen's side, and then resuming the fight for the centre. It has
the merit of eliminating the Siesta variation, which is bad against the
Duras, as will be seen from the following short game.
21
White Black
E. E. Book E. Andersen
International Team Tournament

Warsaw, 1935
I. P-K4 P-K4
2. Kt-KB3 Kt-QB3
3. B-Kt5 P-QR3
4. B-R4 P-Q3
5. P-B4 P-B4
Black does not realise the dif
ference made by White playing 5.
P-B4, (instead of 5. P-B3).
Position after 9. B x Kt
6. P-Q4! BP X P
7. Kt x P! Better was 9. . . . . Kt-B3; 10.
Now this �acrifice is correct. Q x KP eh. , K-B2; 11. B-Q5 eh. ,
Kt x B; 1 2 . Q x Kt eh., Q x Q; 1 3 .
7. . . . . . . P x Kt P x Q, B-KB4; 1 4 . B-B4, R-B 1 ;
8. Q-R5 eh. K-K2 and Black can still fight on.
9. B x Kt QxP
At last Black realises that after 10. Q-K8 eh. K-Q3
9. . . . . P X B; 10. B-Kt5 eh., 1 1 . B-K3 Q x BP
Kt-B3; 1 1 . P x P, he cannot play 1 2. Kt-B3 B-Kt5
Steinitz' fine defensive move 1 1 . 13. R-Q1 eh! Resigns
. . . . Q-Q4; since the B P controls 13 . . . . . B x R; 14. Q-Q7 Mate
that square. would follow.
"\\7hile this game may impress many by its brilliancy and brevity its
importance lies in its theoretical value, for it shows that Black cannot
counteract White's move 6. P-Q4, by playing 5 . . . . . P-KB4.
BLACK HOLDS THE CENTRE-ALEKHINE'S DEFENSIVE METHOD

This section deals with the important problem of whether Black can
hold the centre when he has not the important move . . . . P-QKt4, at
his disposal. Alekhine, a most enterprising player, was the first to make
the attempt. Though, like Steinitz, he pays heavily for his pioneering
work, his idea is sound.
22 2. Kt-KB3 Kt-QB3
White Black 3. B-Kt5 P-QR3
P. Keres A. Alekhine 4. B-R4 P-Q3
5. P-B4 B-Q2
Margate, 1937
6. Kt-B3 P-KKt3
I. P-K4 P-K4 7. P--Q4 B-Kt2
Alekhine's aim is to hold the Castles, would have given a clear

centre at all costs. For 7. advantage after 13. . . . . Kt-K2;
P X P, see following game. (13 . . . . . B X P; 14. QR-Ktl ) 14.
B X B eh. , Q X B; 15. Q-Kt3.
8. B-K3 Kt-B3
This move has been much criti 13. . . . . . . P-KKt4
cized and either 8 . . . . . P x P; or In this complicated position,
8 . . . . . KKt-K2; recommended. Alekhine misses his chance. Analy
But after 8. . . . . KKt-K2; 9. sis by Keres and Alekhine has
P x P, Kt x P; (9 . . . . . P x P; 10. proved that 13. . . . . Kt x P; is
B-B5) 10. Kt X Kt, P X Kt; 1 1 . playable. 14. Q-K2, P-KB3; 15.
B x B eh., Q x B; 1 2 . Q x Q eh., Castles Q, P-B3; 16. B-Q6, Q
K x Q; 13. Castles Q eh., K-K1; R4; 17. Kt x Kt, P x Kt; 18. B x
14. B-B5! would be too strong. KP! Q x QB; 19. Q x Q eh., B x Q;
20. KR-K1, Castles Q; with suffi
9. P x P PxP cient defensive resources for Black.
This is a mistake! Better is 9 .
. . . . QKt x P; 10. Kt x Kt, P x Kt; 14. Q-Q5!
as 1 1 . B-B5 could have been met Meets Black's intended move 14.
by 1 1 . . . . . B x B; 12. Q x B eh., . . . . P-KKt.5 ; by 15. P-K61
Q-Q2; retaining the option of B X KP; (15 . . . . . P X P; 16. Q-R5
castJing on the Queen's side, with Mate) 16. B X Kt eh., P X B; 17.
good chances for Black. Q X P eh. , B-Q2; 18. Q-K4 eh.
followed by 19. R-QI .
14. . . . . . . B-KB1
15. B x B RxB
16. Castles Q Q-K2
There is no good direct defence
for the KKt Pawn after 16. . . . .
R-KKtl ; 17. P-KR41
17. B x Ktl
Avoids the trap! If 17. Kt x P,
Castles Q; with the double threat
of 18. . . . . B-Kt5; also 18.
Q x Kt;
17. . . . . . . BxB
18. Q-Q3 B-Q2
10. B-B5! Black gives up a Pawn in order
to castle, otherwise Kt-Q4 would
With this move, characteristic of follow.
the opening, White gets the upper
hand. 19. Kt x P Castles Q
20. Kt-B3 P-KB3
10. . . . . . . Kt-KR4 21. P x P RxP
To bring the Knight to Q5 via 22. KR-K1 Q-Kt5?
B5-K3. An oversight, but even 22 . . . . .
R-K3; 23. Q-Q4, with the threat
1 1 . Kt-Q5 Kt-B5 Q-R7 and also Q x BP, leads to
12. Kt x Kt P x Kt a loss.
13. P-K5
White's superiority is obvious. 23. Q x B eh. Resigns.
As subsequent analysis showed, 13. Mate in two follows.
40 CHESS FROM MORPHY TO BOTWINNII(
A complex game, especially in the opening which had not been previously
essayed, and was therefore untrodden ground. This game brought the
defence into discredit as is usual when a great player loses while adopting
a new system. As this variation has been rarely seen, the final word has
not yet been said. Black's counter-chances are very limited and for this
reason it has not found favour in modern tournament practice, more
elastic variations being preferred.
BLACK EASES THE TENSION IN THE CENTRE

CAPABLANCA'S DEFENSIVE METHOD
This game is an interesting counterpart to the previous one, in which

Alekhine attempted to solve the problem of holding the centre under
difficult circumstances. Here Capablanca elects to give up the centre
in order to relax the tension.
23 discredit. It continued: 9. Kt x Kt,

P X Kt? 10. Castles, Kt-K2; 1 1 .
White Black P-B5! with strong pressure since
P. Keres J. R. Capablanca 11 . . . . . P-Q4? is refuted by 12.
P x P, P x P; 13. Kt x P, Kt x Kt;
Buenos Aires, 1939 14. Q X Kt, B X B; 15. Q-K4 eh. ,
and Q X B . But with 9 .. . . . . B X Kt;
1. P-K4 P-K4 10. B x B eh. , P x B; 1 1 . B-K3,
2. Kt-KB3 Kt-QB3 Black with 11 . . . . . P-QB4; could
3. B-Kt5 P-QR3 meet the threat 12. B-Q4.
4. B-R4 P-Q3 9. KKt-K2
5. P-B4 B-Q2 10. Castles Castles
6. Kt-B3 P-KKt3 1 1 . P-KR3 Kt X Kt!
7. P-Q4 PxP 12. B x B Kt-K7 eh!
8. Kt x P B-Kt2 One of Capablanca's simplifying
moves, reducing White's pressure.
13. Kt x Kt
If 13. Q x Kt, Q x B; and the
threat 14. B-Q4, is prevented,
while 14. Kt-Q5, is met by
P-KB4.
13. . . . . . . QxB
14. B-Q4 B xB
Black must not play 14.
P-KB4; because of 15. B x B,
K X B; 16. Q-Q4 eh., K-Ktl;
17. P-K5, Kt-B3; 18. Q-Q5 eh.
15. Q x B Kt-B3
16. Q-Q5 QR-Kl
9. B-K3 17. Kt-B3
Another important line is shown Through his 12th move Black has
in the game Boleslavsky-Fine, gained a useful tempo.
Radio-match, U.S.S.R.-U.S.A. 1945
which brought the variation into 17 . . . . . . • Q-K3
THE S'fEINITZ DEFENCE DEFERRED 41
18. QR-Q1 P-B4! 21. . . . . . . R-K4!

At last Black is able to eliminate The key of the defensive man
White's Pawn centre, but the move, reuvre. It is not difficult to see at
though it looks simple, required this stage; but Black based his
exact calculation. defensive system on this move.
Naturally 21. . . . . R X R? 22. P X R,
19. P x P RxP would lose a piece.
20. QR-K1 RxQ
21. R x Q 22. R x R eh. RxR
23. R-Q1
If 23. Kt-Q5, R-K7;
23 . ...... K-B2
24. K-B1 Kt-K4
25. P-QKt3 Kt-Q2
26. Kt-Q5 P-B3
27. Kt-B4 R-K5
28. P-Kt3 K-K2
29. Kt-K2 Kt-B4
30. P-B3 R-K6
31 . K-B2 R-Q6
32. RxR Kt x R eh.
33. K-K3 Kt-K4
Drawn.
A game in Capablanca's convincing style. It is instructive to observe

how he defeats White's intentions to make use of the hole at KB6 by
B-Q4 and Kt-Q5.
BLACK HOLDS THE CENTRE-THE MODERN CONTINUATION
The last two games have shown that Black has the choice of holding
the centre, as Alekhine did against Keres, or giving it up and simplifying
by exchanges, as played by Capablanca. These are purely defensive
systems in neither of which had Black any chance of counter-play.
It is therefore not surprising that later a more aggressive system was
introduced, of which the following game is a good example.
24 essentially logical, as White has

weakened his Q4 square.
White Black
P. Keres S. Reshev8ky 6. Kt-B3
White can force Black to give up
World Championship Tournament, the centre with 6. P-Q4, P X P;
Moscow, 1948 7. B x Kt eh., P x B; 8. Q x P,
B x Kt; 9. P x B, but with 9 . . . . .
1. P-K4 P-K4 P-QB4; followed by Kt-K2-B3
2. Kt-KB3 Kt-QB3 Black can make use of White's
3. B-Kt5 P-QR3 weakness at Q4.
4. B___:R4 P-Q3
5. P-B4 B-Kt5 6 . . • . . . . Kt-K2
This is the current favourite; 7. P-KR3 B x Kt
42 CHES� FROM MORPHY TO BOTWINNIK
8. Q x B Kt-Kt3 20. P-Kt4 Kt-K3

9. Kt-Q5 R-QKtl 21. B-K3 Kt-B5!
10. Kt-Kt4 Kt-K2
10. . . . . Q-Q2; would be too
rigid, though possible. 1 1 . B x Kt,
P X B; 12. Kt X P? R-Kt3;
1 1 . Kt-B2 Q-Q2
12. P-Q3
White has no better prospects
after 14. P-Q4, P x P; (not 14 .
. . . . P-QKt4; 15. P X KtP, Kt X
P; 16. Kt x Kt, P x Kt; 17. B-Kt3)
15. Kt x P, P-QKt4; 16. Kt X Kt,
Kt X Kt; 17. B-Q1, Kt-Q5; and
the White Bishops have no freedom
to manreuvre.
12. . . . . . . Kt-B1
13. B-Q2 22. Q-B3
Preventing the exchange of the On 22. B X Kt, P X B; 23. Q-B3,
Bishop by 13. . . . . Kt-Kt3; and (23. Q X P? B-Kt4; ) 23 . . . . . Kt
. . . . Kt-R4; but more aggressive K4; 24. Q-Q1, P-B4; Black
was 13. P-QKt4. would secure a strong post for his
Knight.
13. B-K2
14. Q-Kt3 B-B3 22. . . . . . . Kt x QP
15. R-QB1 Kt-Kt3 23. R-Ktl Kt-B5
1 6. B-Kt3 Q-Q1 White threatened to trap the
17. Castles Kt-Q2 Knight with 24. P-Kt3.
18. P-QR3 Kt-B4
19. B-R2 Castles 24. P-Kt5 Drawn.
The superiority of the Knights If 24. B x Kt, P x B ; 25. Q x P,
over the Bishops is apparent in and Bishops of opposite colours
such closed positions. foreshadow the draw.
Although the game is cumbersome, and the early draw might suggest
that both players avoided battle, the contrary is true. The structure of
the defence demanded both caution and patience, and it is not surprising
that both players got into time trouble seeking a solution to their diffi
culties-but it should be realized that this is one of the first-known
examples of the opening in tournament play.
CONCLUSIONS
This concludes the chapters on the Steinitz and Steinitz Defence Deferred.
While the former is crystallized and very unlikely to undergo radical
changes, the latter has reached only a transitory state in its development.
We have dealt with its primary form, where the fight for the centre can
clearly be demonstrated.
These chapters show how great masters like Lasker, Capablanca,
Alekhine have put Steinitz' ideas into practice. It is interesting to see
how easily a player like Capablanca expresses Steinitz' fundamental
concepts. In his three games as Black, Capablanca displays perfect
THE TCHIGORIN DEFENCE 43
timing in surrendering the centre only on completion of development,

or when he was able to ease the position by forced exchanges. To-day,
we accept these principles as inherent, proving that we can speak of a
technique in chess.
VI
THE TCHIGORIN DEFENCE
THE other great pioneer in the Ruy Lopez was Tchigorin, who, like Steinitz,
distrusted the then fashionable Berlin and 'Open' defences.
Whilst trying to evolve a solid defensive system against the Ruy Lopez,
he seems to have passed through a period of mental conflict, and two
well defined phases in his approach can be clearly recognized.
In 1893, according to Tarrasch, his ideas on the defence were still
influenced by Steinitz. Indeed, in his match against Tarrasch in that
year and in the Hastings Tournament of 1895, he adopted a passive
defence similar to Steinitz', developing his KKt at Q2 via KB3 instead
of KKt3 via K2.
Later, he conceived a bolder plan, namely, advancing the Queen's side
Pawns, to drive back White's KB, gaining manceuvring space behind
the Pawn chain.
EARLY BEGINNINGS
The following game was the first in which he introduced his new system
into tournament play.
25 is remarkable that, although he had

good practical success with it
White Black against Tarrasch, he changed to
Em. Lasker M. I. Tchigorin the more aggressive system in the
text. The successful fusion of these
London, 1899 two variations by the Russian
masters Keres and Smyslov will be
1. P-K4 P-K4 shown later.
2. Kt-KB3 Kt-QB3
3. B-Kt5 P-QR3 5. . . . . . . B-K2
4. B-R4 Kt-B3 6. Kt-B3
5. Castles This move is quite in accordance
The 15th game of the Tarrasch with the then current dictum of
Tchigorin match in 1893 went 5. developing the minor pieces first.
Kt-QB3, P-Q3; 6. P-Q4, Kt To-day the more dynamic 6. R-Kl
Q2? !; 7. Kt-K2, B-K2; 8. P-B3, is preferred, since it aJlows White to
Castles; 9. Kt-Kt3, B-B3; 10. build up a Pawn chain by P-QB3
P-KR3, Kt-K2; 1 1 . Castles, and P-Q4.
Kt-KKt3; 12. B-Kt3, R-Kl; 13.
Q-Q3, Kt(Q2)--Bl ; 14. Kt-K2, 6. P-QKt4
Q-K2; 15. B-Q2. This was 7. B-Kt3 Castles
Tchigorin's original system, and it 8. P-Q3 P-Q3
9. B-K3 19. Kt-Ktl P-QR4

Lasker must have realised that 20. P-B31
9. P-QR4, (a move that he should This fine defensive move is
have played in place of 8. P-Q3), typical of Lasker. First, he secures
is easily met by 9 . . . . . B-Kt5; the centre and then he manreuvres
10. P X P, Kt-Q5; with his Kts; his handling of such
tasks has always been admired.
9. ...... Kt-QR4
10. Kt-K2 P-B4 20. . . . . . . P-Kt5
11. P-B3 Kt x B Preferable is 20. . . . . P-B5;
12. P x Kt Q-B2 21 . KtP x P, KtP x P; 22. P-Q4,
13. Kt-Kt3 P-Q41 QR-Ql. Black should try to open
diagonals for his Bishops.
21 . Kt-B5 Q-Kt2
22. Kt-R3 B-B3
23. P-QB41
Now White gets the upper hand,
since 23. . . . . P-Q5; is met by
24. P-B4, and White will be able
to break through on the King's side.
Moreover, Knights are stronger than
Bishops in closed position of this
nature.
23 . ...... P x KP
24. QP x P P-R5
25. PxP P-Kt6
26. Q-B3 RxP
The position is clearly in Black's 27. Kt-K3 1
favour. He has the two Bishops,
an attack in the centre and a
superiority on the Queen's side.
It is interesting to note that little
curiosity was aroused by the fact
that the world master had got into
such a difficult position after a
dozen moves in one of the strongest
openings.
14. Q-B2 B-Kt2

15. KR-K1 P-R3
16. QR-Q1 KR-K1
17. B-B1 B-KB1
18. K-R1 Q-B3
He tries to force White to give
up the centre, but the text man A move that shows Lasker's
reuvre does not have the desired superb skill in using his Knight not
effect. White's defence would have only for defence of the QBP but
been made very difficult had Tchi also for securing the square Q5.
gorin played 18. . . . . QR-Q1;
19. Kt-Ktl , R-Q2; doubling 27 . . . . . . . R-Ktl
Rooks on the Q file with the pos 28. Kt-KB2 Kt-K1
sible threats of P x P and of P-Q5. 29. Kt-Q3 P-B3
30. B-Q2 Q-B1 Q-Kt3 with an attack against

Better is 30. Q-Q2, as will Black's King's side.
be seen on the 34th move.
37. Q x KtP B x Kt
38. P x B Q-Q2
31. R-R1 Kt-B2 39. B-R5 R-K1
32. R x R B xR 40. R-Q1 Q-B1
33. P-B4 PxP 41 . Q-Q3 R-K4
34. Kt x KBP Q-K1 42. Kt-Kt6 R-K1
Now Black is unable to play 34. Not 42 . . . . . R x P; 43. B x Kt,
. . . . R-K1;-a consequence of his
43. P-R3 Kt-R3
mistaken 30th move.
44. Q-Q5 eh. K-R2
45. Q-B7 Kt-Kt5
35. Kt-B5 R-Q1 46. R-Q7 R-K8 eh.
36. Q-K3 B-Q2 47. K-R2 B-Q3 eh.
Whether this is a sacrifice or an 48. R x B QxP
oversight, there is no doubt that 49. R-Q8 Resigns.
Black has a difficult position. White If 49 . . . . . Q X Kt; 50. Q-Kt8,
threatens both 37. B-R5 and Mate.
Though the game aroused interest and Black's treatment of the opening
was highly praised a few years later as one of the best of the London 1899
Tournament, it took a long time for the chess world to appreciate that a
new vista had opened for Black in the Ruy Lopez. To-day the Tchigorin
is the most widely played defence in this opening.
THE MODERN FORM OF THE TCHIGORIN DEFENCE
The foregoing game exemplified the early form of the Tchigorin Defence.
The revolutionary character of Tchigorin' s idea was not immediate1y
realized; indeed, both Pillsbury and Tarrasch played the same in
different continuation as Lasker.
The following game shows the variation in a form approximating to
that of the present day.
26 12. QKt-Q2 K-R1

The idea of this move is to secure
White Black the King's side. To-day this is
0. Duras M. I. Tchigorin carried out in other ways and at a
later stage, but it wil1 be seen that
Nuremberg, 1906 the fundamental principles are the
same.
1. P-K4 P-K4
2. Kt-KB3 Kt-QB3 13. Kt-Bl Kt-Ktl
3. B-Kt5 P-QR3 14. Kt-K3 B-K3
4. B-R4 Kt-KB3 15. Kt-B5
5. Castles B-K2 Better was 15. P x BP, P x P; 16.
6. R-K1 P-QKt4 Kt-Q5,
7. B-Kt3 P-Q3
8. P-B3 Castles 15. . . . . . . B-B3
9. P-KR3 Kt-QR4 16. P-Q5
10. B-B2 P-B4 White closes the centre, as Black
11. P-Q4 Q-B2 threatens 16 . . . . . BP x P; 17.
P x P, B x Kt; 18. P x B, P x P; 30. K-K3, Q X Kt; 31. Kt x B ,

winning a Pawn. KR-Q1; 32. Kt-B6, Q-B5 eh.;
33. K-K2, Q X Kt; 34. B X Kt,
16 . . . . . . . B-Q2 P-Kt4; followed by . . . . R
17. P-KKt4 P-Kt3 KKtl and . . . . R-Kt3 winning
1 8. Kt-Kt3 B-Kt2 the exchange. This variation, given
19. K-R2 Kt-B5 by Tchigorin, shows that masters
20. Kt-Q2 of the last century were capable of
If 20. P-Kt3, Kt-Kt3; and accurately calculating deep com
Black can pursue his attack with binations.
. . . . P-QR4 and . . . . P-B5!
25. Q-Kt2
20 . . . . . . . Kt-Kt3 26. K-B2 B-B5
21. P-KR4 Q- Q1 27. Kt(Q2)-B1 QR-K1
22. K-Kt2 28. Kt-K3
Not 22. P-Kt5, P-B3; 23. If 28. B X B, P X B; 29. Kt-K2,
Kt-B3, P x P; 24. P x P, B-Kt5; P-B4; breaking up White's posi
with a strong position for Black. tion.
Whether the 21st move was a
sacrifice or oversight is difficult to
decide. 28. R-K2
29. Q-R1 P-B3
22. . . . . . . QxP 30. Kt-Kt2 B-Kt4
23. P-B3 B-R3 31. P-Kt3 R{2)-B2
24. R-Rl . 32. B-K3 Kt-K 2
The open KR file gives White 33. Kt-R4 B x B eh.
good attacking chances, and Tchi 34. K x B P-B4!
gorin 's defence of the position is 35. KtP x P KtP x P
very instructive. 36. KP x P Q-Kt4 eh.
37. K-K2 Kt(3) x QP
24 . . . . . . . Q-B3 This move discloses the other
function of the QKt, and also
Tchigorin's skill in preparing the
decisive break-through.
38. K-K1 Q-K6 eh.

39. Kt-K2 Kt-B5
40. R-R2 Kt X Kt
41 . R x Kt Q x P eh.
42. K-B2 . Q-Q5 eh.
43. K-Kt2 R-Kt2 eh.
44. Kt-Kt6 eh. Kt x Kt
45. P X Kt B-B3
46. R-B2 RxP
47. R x R B x R eh.
48. K X B Q-B6 eh.
49. K-K4 Q X B eh.
50. K-Q5 Q-Q6 eh.
25. R-R3! 51. K-B6 Q x KKtP
It looks as if 25. R X B, Kt X R; 52. K-Kt6 P-Q4 eh.
26. P-Kt5, would win, but Duras 53. K X P R-B2 eh.
avoids the trap 26. . . . . Q x KtP; 54. K X QP R-Q2 eh.
27. Kt-B4, Q-R5; 28. Kt x Kt, 55. K x P Q-K1 eh.
Q-R6 eh.; 29. K-B2, Q-R7 eh.; Played in the good old Romantic
I
style. To-day, we rarely see the 56. K-B4 R-B2 eh.
King being driven over the whole 57. K-Kt3 Q-K6 eh.
board. Resigns.
Tchigorin played this game when he was fifty-six years old during the
twilight of his chess career, when except for the Gambit tournament at
Vienna in 1903, success eluded him. This was the only defeat inflicted
upon Duras (who won the tournament), and Tchigorin had the satisfaction
of seeing his system triumphant.
WHITE KEEPS THE CENTRE OPEN-LASKER'S TREATMENT
The previous game was an interesting example of the conduct of the

defence by its inventor against the Modern continuation, but the first
real test was to come in the I asker-Tarrasch match of 1908.
..
Although Lasker was never a scientific explorer of the openings (it has
been said that he did not care to. gain advantages achieved by study),
his approach was really deeper and philosophical. He treated the openings
by applying the general principles of chess to them. Thus, although he
deprived himself of the advantages of prepared analysis, he achieved
more by an unbiased approach to the opening problems in practical play.
The following game shows a lively encounter between Lasker and the
scientific Tarrasch.
27 on chess. Thirty years later he still

recommends this move in his
White Black Manual of Chess in spite of the
Em. Lasker S. Tarrasch weight of analytical evidence against
him.
Fifth Match Game, 1908
13. BP x P
I. P-K4 P-K4 14. P x P QKt x P
2. Kt-KB3 Kt-QB3 15. Kt x Kt P x Kt
3. B-Kt5 P-QR3 16. B-Kt5
4. B-R4 Kt-B3 In the third match game Lasker
5. Castles B-K2 continued here with 16. Kt-Kt3,
6. R-K1 P-QKt4 Kt-Q2; 17. B-Kt3, Q-.Kt3; 18.
7. B-Kt3 P-Q3 Kt-B5, B-B3; 19. B-KB4, Kt
8. P-B3 Kt-QR4 K4; 20. B-Q5, R-R2; and could
9. B-B2 P-B4 not get sufficient attack for the
10. P-Q4 Q-B2 Pawn, and lost. Euwe recommends
1 1 . QKt-Q2 Kt-B3 16. Kt-Kt3, Kt-Q2; 17. Kt-B5,
12. P-KR3 Castles B-B3; 18. R-K2, Q-Kt3; 19.
13. Kt-B1 R-Q2, regaining the Pawn, but
The alternative is 13. P-Q5, Pachman has shown that after 19.
which gives White a safe game but . . . . Kt-K4! Black has a good
few winning chances; Lasker there game, as 20. Kt x P (20. R x P?
fore sacrifices a Pawn in order to B X Kt; 21. P X B, Kt-B6 eh.)
keep the game fluid. Though this Kt-B5; 21. R-Q3, B-Kt2!
is the first time he tried it, it
cannot be considered merely a 16. . . . . . . P-R3?
momentary impulse, or an experi Tarrasch writes: 'If 16.
ment, but part of Lasker's outlook Kt-Q4; 17. B x B, Kt x B; 18.
Kt-Kt3, B-K3; 19. Kt-K2,

Kt-B3; 20. R-Bl, Q-Kt3; 21.
Q-Q2, and White will ultimately
capture the Pawn at Q4 leaving
Black with an isolated Pawn at
Q3. . . . ' But Black can play 21.
. . . . P-Q4; 22. P x P, B x RP; 23.
QR-Ql , QR-Ql; with a good
game. This merely proves that
16. B-Kt5 is not the strongest
move. White may fare better with
Alapin's suggestion 16. P-QKt3
and B-Kt2.
17. B-KR4 Q-Kt3

18. Q-Q3 P-Kt4?
18. . . . . R-Kl; gives better Position after 25. P-B4!
chances of defence, since if 19.
P-K5, P x P; 20. B x Kt, B x B; 25. . . . . . . P-B4
and the King can escape to K2 if 26. P x P e.p. eh. B x P
necessary. 27. P x P PxP
28. B-K5!
With this move White is able to
19. B-KKt3 B-K3 eliminate Black's remaining King's
20. QR-QI KR-Bl side Pawn, after which his attack
21. B-Ktl Kt-Q2 becomes irresistible.
22. P-K5 Kt-Bl
23. Q-KB3 28. P-Q6 eh.
Naturally Lasker is not satisfied 29. K-Rl Kt-Kt3
to regain the Pawn, but wishes to 30. Q x P B-B2
exploit the weakness of Black's 31. Kt-Kt3
King's position. Preventing 31 . . . . . B x B; 32.
R x B, Q-KB3?; 33. Kt-R5 eh.
23. . . . . . . P-Q4
24. Q-R5 K-Kt2 31 . . . . . . . B xB
25. P-B4! 32. R x B R-Rl
This weakens Black's position 33. B x P R-QR2
still further. Tarrasch recommends Not 33. Q-KB3? 34.
25. . . . . Kt-Kt3; 26. P-B5, Kt-B5 eh.
P-Q6 eh.; 27. B-B2, B:__B4; 28.
Kt-K3, Kt-B5! but White can 34. QR-Kl K-Bl
interpose 28. P-B6 eh., K-R2; 35. B x Kt QxB
29. Kt-K3, Kt-B5; 30. B X QP 36. Q-K3 R-B2
eh., Kt X B; 31. R X Kt, with a far 37. Kt-B5 Q-QB3
superior game. 38. Q-Kt5 Resigns.
This game is important as it is here we see for the first time the fight
for the centre, Black forcing White either to lock the centre (by advancing
the QP) or to allow Black to break it up (as in this game) and initiate a
counter-attack (cf. the 3rd match game in the note to White's 16th move).
How is one to explain Tarrasch's demoralization and his condemnation
of the defence? He was never fond of passive resistance and believing
Black's pressure in the centre insufficient compensation for White's King's
side superiority, he dogmatically considered the defence inadequate.
RUBINSTEIN IMPROVES THE DEFENCE
Tarrasch's defeat in the previous game brought the Tchigorin Defence

into disrepute. His avoidance of it and his great influence as a writer
enabled him to convince others of its 'inferiority,' especially as he was
able to show a 'better' defence, namely the 'Open' variation, revived in
the Lasker-Schlechter match of 1910.
However, Rubinstein, who was at the height of his power, was able
to improve the defence, as is apparent in the following game.
28
White Black
P. S. Leonhardt A. Rubinstein
San Sebastian, 1911
1 . P-K4 P-K4
2. Kt-KB3 Kt-QB3
3. B-Kt5 P-QR3
4. B-R4 Kt-B3
5. Castles B-K2
6. R-K1 P-QKt4
7. B-Kt3 P-Q3
8. P-QB3 Castles
9. P-KR3 Kt-QR4
10. B-B2 P-B4 Position after 19 . . . . . Kt--K4!
1 1 . P-Q4 Q-B2
12. QKt-Q2 Kt-B3 21. Q x QP
13. Kt-B1 BP X P If 21. Q-K2, Kt-KR4; would
14. P x P P x P! follow with the threat of
Tarrasch played 14. . . . . Kt X Kt-B5.
QP; here; a similar position arising
but with the two Knights exchang 21. QxQ
ed. He was mistaken in thinking 2 2 . Kt x Q Kt x KtP
that fewer pieces make the defence 23. Kt-B6 P-Kt4!
easier. 24. Kt x B eh. R x Kt
25. B-KKt3 Kt-B5
15. B-Kt5 P-R3 26. Kt-B3 QR-K1
16. B-KR4 R-K1 27. QR-Q1
17. R-B1 Q-Kt3 lf 27. B x P, Kt x B; 28. P-K5,
18. Q-Q2 B-K3 Kt(Q3)-K5.
19. B-Ktl Kt-K4!
Here the distinction is manifest! 27. . . . . . . P-Q4
The Knight enters the fray with 28. P-K5 Kt-KR4
decisive effect at the moment when 29. B-R2 Kt-Kt2
VVhite is about to play QR-Q1 to 30. P-Kt4 B-B 1 !
attack and capture the Pawn at Rubinstein handles the technical
his Q4. Now if20. Kt X P, B x KRP; part of the game with his usual ·
21. P-B4, (21. P X B?, Q X Kt!; artistry.

22. Q X Q, Kt-B6 eh. ) 21. . . . .
B-Q2; 22. B-B2, Kt(4)-Kt5 ! 31. R x P B-Kt2
32. R-Q3 B x Kt
20. Kt(1)-R2 Kt-B5 33. R x B Kt x P
34. B x Kt 44. K-Kt2 R-B5

Forced, since if 34. R(3)-K3? 45. B-B5 Kt-B5 eh.
there follows Kt-B6 eh. 46. K-R2 P-Kt5
47. R-Kt7 Kt-K7
34. RxB 48. K-Kt2
35. R x R R xR If 48. B-K6, R-B5; 49. K-
36. K-B1 Kt-K3 Kt2, Kt-Q5.
37. R-R3 Kt-B5
Not the simplest. 37.
48. R-B5
Kt-B4; was better since after 38.
49. P-B3 P-R4!
R-QB3, K-B1; 39. R-B1,
50. K-B2 Kt-B6
K-K2; 40. R-Q1, P-Kt5; the
51. R-R7 P x P!
White Rook is bottled up and a
52. B x P K-B3
speedy decision can be forced on
53. P-R3?
the Queen's side.
A mistake. With 53. K-Kt3,
White could have made Black's
38. R x P! R-QB4
task very difficult.
39. R-R8 eh. K-Kt2
40. R-K8 Kt x P
41 . K-Kt2 Kt-B5 eh. 53 . . . . . .
. P-Kt6
42. K-B3 Kt-K3 54. R-Kt7 P-Kt71
43. R-QKt8 R-B6 eh. Resigns.
Though this game may have restored the confidence of many, it did
not popularize the defence, for in the great St. Petersburg Tournament
of 1914, we do not see this line played at all.
WHITE PLAYS FOR A KING's SIDE ATTACK-RuBINSTEIN's DEFENCE
In the previous games, the fight was mainly for predominance in the
centre. This was really a preliminary stage, to enable White to carry
out his King's side attack, and Black to start a counter-attack on the
Queen's side.
It was shown that White cannot keep up the tension in the centre
without a rather dubious Pawn sacrifice. This might have suited Lasker's
philosophical style which induced him to play doubtful variations, but
it was theoretically unsound.
The logical course, therefore, was for White to close the centre, which
seemed the more justified as he was able to close the Queen's side as well,
and have undisputed command on the King's side.
The following game is a good example of this system.
29 5. Castles B-K2
6. R-K1 P-QKt4
White Black 7. B-Kt3 P-Q3
E. D. Bogoljubov A. Rubinstein 8. P-B3 Castles
9. P-KR3 Kt-QR4
Baden-Baden, 1925 10. B-B2 P-B4
1 1 . P-Q4 Q-B2
1. P-K4 P-K4 12. QKt-Q2
2. Kt-KB3 Kt-QB3 It is important to note that after
3. B-Kt5 P-QR3 the interpolation of the moves 8.
4. B-R4 Kt-B3 . . . . Castles and 9. P-KR3 the
move P-QR4 does not constitute The centre and the Queen's side
a threat, since with 12 . . . . . B-Q2 are completely blocked and now he
the Black Rooks are connected. can safely turn his attention to the
Black is able to avoid the move King's side.
• .. . P-Kt5, and can choose the
right moment for counter-action on 16. Kt-K1
the Queen's side. 17. P-KKt4 P-Kt3
18. K-R1 Kt-KKt2
12. . . . . . . Kt-B3 19. R-KKtl
13. P-Q5
This move appears to be a simple
solution of the problem set in the
opening, but there is another equally
important problem to be solved.
White has to close the Queen's side
as well as the centre, otherwise he
could not attack on the King's side
without the risk of a dangerous
counter-attack by Black on the
other wing.
13. . . . . . . Kt-Q1
The alternative is 13. . . . . Kt-
QR4; 14. P-QKt3, B-Q2; 1 5.
Kt-B1 , Kt-Kt2; 16. P-B4,
KR-Ktl; 17. Kt-K3, P x P; 18.
Kt x BP, B-KB1; 19. P-QR4, 19. . . . . . . P-KR41
Kt-QR4; 20. KKt-Q2, (C. H. This looks like an attacking move
O'D Alexander-Keres, Hastings, and appears to violate the principles
1937-8). Although Black has suc of defence; i.e., not to move Pawns
ceeded in preventing the blockade where your opponent has the
of the Queen's side, White has the superiority and is preparing for
superiority there. attack. However, the strength of
this move lies in the fact that
14. P-QR4 R-Ktl Black, by exchanging the Rooks'
14 . . . . . P-Kt5; is no better, as Pawns, reduces White's chances to
White can either play 15. P-B4, break through with Pawn ex
transposing to the actual game, or changes to two files. The opening
15. Kt-B4, P--QR4?; 16. KKt x P, of the Rook's file is not dangerous
B-R3; 17. B-Kt3, P x Kt; 18. for Black.
P-Q6, B x P; 19. Q x B, Q x Q; 20.
Kt x Q, Kt-Kt2; with the better 20. Kt-B1
end game for White ( Capablanca 20. P-Kt5 is bad because the
Vidmar, New York, 1927). R3 Pawn is undefended. But, even
- if White had developed the King
15. P-B4 P-Kt5 previously to R2, on 20. P-Kt5,
If 15 . . . . . B-Q2; to keep the P-B3; 21. P x P, R x P; would
Queen's side open, 16. Kt-B1, have followed, with pressure on the
P x BP; 17. Kt-K3!, R-Kt5; 18. King's Bishop file.
Kt-Q2, regaining the important
QB4 square for the Knight. 20. . . . . . . PxP
21. P X P P-B3t
16. P-QKt3 Now 22. P-Kt5, can be an
White'& first task is completed. &wered by 22. . . . . P -B4.
5
52 CHESS FROM MORPHY T O BOTWINNIK
22. Kt-K3 Kt-B2 27. B x P R-B2

23. Kt-R4 Kt-Rl 28. B-R2 R-R2
Black's timing of the defensive 29. Kt-Kt2 Kt-B2
moves is perfect. 30. Kt-K3 B-Q2
31. K-Kt2 K-Kt2
24. P-B4 PxP 32. R-Rl R(Kt)-KRI
25. Kt(K3)-B5 33. Q-K2 Q-Bl
This sacrifice of a piece was 34. B-Kt3 Q-KKtl
planned before White's previous 35. Kt-Kt4 RxR
move. 36. R x R RxR
37. K X R Q-R2 eh.
38. K-Kt2 Q-R4
25. . . . . . . Kt x Kt! 39. B-Ql Kt-R3
Acceptance of this sacrifice would This leads to a dead draw. After
have led to ruin for Black: 25 . . . . . the exchange of Rooks there is
P x Kt; 26. KtP x P, B-QI; (lf 26. nothing in it.
. . . . R-B2; 27. Q-R5!) 27. Q
R5, R-B2; 28. B x P, and the 40. Q-Kl Kt X Kt
Black King cannot escape, since he 41 . B-B3
would lose his Knight on R8. White And the Knight cannot escape.
again could build up his position
with R-Kt2, QR-Ktl , R-R2, 41. P-R4
Q-R6 followed by Kt-B3 or 42. Q-K2 B-Kl
Kt-Kt6. 43. B x Kt Q-R3
44. K-Ktl B-B2
26. KtP x Kt P---Kt4 Drawn.
This, and two other encounters between these two players, threw some
light on the attack and defence of the Tchigorin variation. But while
White's attack is along usual lines and is easy to carry out, Black's
defence requires real mastership, and in this respect Rubinstein with his
unprejudiced preventive action ( 19th move) has certainly brought a new
idea into the game, and enriched the technique of the defence.
WHITE MAINTAINS THE TENSION IN THE CENTRE

�ERES' CONTRIBUTION
Among contemporary masters, the greatest contribution to the Ruy
Lopez has been made by Keres. His combinative style urged him to create
positions with attacking possibilities. The problem was how to vitalize
the game without resorting to doubtful variations. He therefore made
an extensive study of the opening and discovered hidden tactical possi
bilities which he merged into a cohesive system that opened new per
spectives.
The following game is a good example of his system.
30 3. B-Kt5 P-QR3
White Black 4. B-R4 Kt-B3
P. Keres S. Reshevsky 5 . Castles B-K2
6. R-Kl P-QKt4
Stockholm, 1937 7. B-Kt3 P-Q3
8. P-B3 Kt-QR4
1 . P-K4 P-K4 According to Keres, this move is
2. Kt-KB3 Kt-QB3 not as accurate as 8. Castles.
• • . •
9. B-B2 P-B4 lowed by QR-B 1 would have

10. P-Q4 Q-B2 given Black better chances.
1 1 . P-QR4!
17. P-QKt3 Kt-R4
This move disorganises Black's 18. B-Kt2 B-B3
defensive system. If now 1 1 . . . . . 19. QR-B1
R-QKtl; 12. RP x P, RP x P; 13.
P-R3! (not P X KP immediately,
because 13 . . . . . P X P; 14. Kt X P?
Q X Kt; 1 5 . R X Kt, Kt-Kt5 !; 16.
P-KB4, Q-B2; 17. R-R1, P
B5! threatening to win the ex
change) 13. . . . . Kt-B3; (Kt x P
was threatened as Kt-Kt5 is no
longer feasible for Black) 14. B
K3 ! and White is able to keep up
the tension in the centre, as Kt-R4
-B5 no longer constitutes a threat.
1 1. . . . . . . P-Kt5
12. P x KtP P x KtP
1 3. P-R3 Castles
14. QKt-Q2
In the first match game between 19. . . . . . . PxP
Tarrasch and Lasker in 1916, White It was certainly not an easy
continued with 14. B-Kt5, R-K1; decision to give up the centre after
1 5 . QKt-Q2, Kt-Q2; 16. B X B, holding it so tenaciously, but on
R x B; 17. QR-B1, Q-Kt3; 18. 19. . . . . Q-Ktl ; 20. Kt-Kt4,
Kt-B1, B-Kt2; 19. Kt-Kt3, B X Kt; 21 . P X B, Kt-B5; (the
P-Kt3; 20. P x P! and now instead only move, as 21. . . . . Kt-Kt2;
of 20. . . . . P x P; Black could have 22. P-Kt5, wins a Pawn) 22.
equalised with 20. . . . . Kt x P; P-Q5, P-Kt4; (White was threat
according to Lasker. ening 23. Q-Q2 and P-Kt3 win
ning the Knight) 23. P-Kt3, Kt
Kt3; 24. K-Kt2, followed by
14. . . . . . . B-K3
R-KRI-R5 with a decisive
Black wants to stabilise the
advantage.
centre, and tries to induce White
to play P-Q5. This move also
20. Kt x P
prepares for a counter-attack along
Not 20. B X P?, Kt X P; winning
the QB file.
a Pawn.
15. Kt-B1 KR-B1 20. . • . . . . Q-Q2

16. Kt-K3! 21. R-Ktl R-B4
With this well-timed manreuvre, 22. Kt(Q4)-B5!
White is not only able to defend This forces the exchange of the
his Bishop, but also to centralise Black Bishops, with resulting weak
the Knight, which will soon have nesses on the black squares.
important attacking possibilities.
22. B x Kt
. . . . . •
16. . . . . . . P-KKt3 23. P x B BxB

It is doubtful whether the alter 24. R x B R-K1
native move 16 . . . . . Kt-B5; 17. 25. B-Q3
Kt X Kt, B X Kt; 18. B-Kt5, fol- 25. Q-Kt4 with the double
threat of P x P and Q x QKtP be 30. . K-B1; 31. Kt-Q5,

. . •
would have been more direct. Q-B4; 32. R X R, R X R; 33. R X R,

P X R; 34. Q-B5 eh. , K-Ktl;
25. Q-B3 35. Q x P, Q-B8 eh.; 36. K-R2,
26. Q-Kt4 Q-Kt3 Q-Q8; 37. Q-Kt8 eh., winning
27. QR-K2 R(B4)-K4 the QKt.
28. P x P BP x P
29. B x KtP PxB 31. Kt-B5 R{Kl )-K3
30. Q X P eh. K-Rl 32. Q x Kt eh. K-Ktl
If 30. . . . . Kt-Kt2; 31. Kt-B5, 33. Q-Kt5 eh. K-Bl
Q-B2; 32. Kt x Kt, Q X Kt; 33. 34. Q-Kt7 eh. K-K1
Q x R eh. A better defence would 35. Kt x P eh. Resigns.
This game proves that White is able to maintain the tension in the
centre if Black plays inaccurately (8 . . . . . Kt-QR4; instead of 8 . . . . .
Castles; see game 33, page 57, note to move 9). The idea was tried some
time ago by Tarrasch, who in his game against Lasker (shown in the
notes) almost succeeded in demonstrating White's superiority; but Keres'
method of combining the defence of the Queen's side with an attack on
the centre is more convincing. However, this is not the final word, as
Keres has found a better defensive system for Black.
BLACK CHOOSES AN ACTIVE DEFENSIVE SYSTEM

TCHIGORIN'S CONTINUATION
It does not seem to be generally known that at the end of his career
Tchigorin evolved a still more aggressive defensive system, opening the
Queen's Bishop file by . . . . BP x QP and using this to keep White
occupied on the Queen's side thereby foiling any attempt on the part
of his opponent to build up a King's side attack. With this system
Tchigorin introduced an extremely controversial line which has been
regularly adopted since his death, and which only recently seems to show
signs of reaching finality, if indeed any opening system can be said to
reach this stage.
31 Botwinnik, who, against Bole

slavsky in the Tchigorin Memorial
White Black tournament at Moscow in 1947,
K. Schlechter M. I. Tchigorin played 9. . . . . B-K3; 10. B x B,
P x B; 1 1 . P-Q4, Q-Q2; 12. P x P,
Ostend, 1907 P x P; 13. Q x Q, Kt x Q; 14. B-K3,
Kt-B4; 15. B x Kt, B x B; 16.
1. P-K4 P-K4 QKt-Q2, B-Kt3; and the game
2. Kt-KB3 Kt-QB3 ended in a draw. It is of interest
3. B-Kt5 P-QR3 to note that this line had already
4. B-R4 Kt-B3 been adopted in the game Schlechter
5. Castles B-K2 -Tchigorin at Cambridge Springs,
6. R-K1 P-QKt4 1904, which continued, after 9 . . . . .
7. B-Kt3 P-Q3 B-K3; 10. P-Q4, P X P; 1 1 . P X P,
8. P-B3 Castles B X B; 12. Q X B, Kt-R4; 13.
9. P-KR3 Kt-QR4 Q-R3, P-B4.
The simplifying move 9. . . . .
B-K3 was revived recently by 10. B-B2 P-B4
l l . P-Q4 Q-B2 22. Kt(K4)-Kt5 Kt-B3

12. QKt-Q2 BP x P 22. . . . . B X Kt; 23. Kt X B, also
This is Tchigorin's new system. loses a Pawn, since Black's Knight
Some idea of its merits will be seen is attacked.
when we come to game 32, page 56.
23. B X P eh. K-B1
13. P x P B-Q2 24. QR-Q1 R-Q1
14. Kt-B1 Kt-B3 25. Kt x P! B-KB4
Even 14 . . . . . QR-B1 does not There is nothing better. After
give Black full equality after 15. 25. . . . . K X Kt; 26. Q-Q5 eh. ,
B-Q3, Kt-B3; 16. B-K3, (Chris K-B3; 27. Kt-Kt5, leaves Black
toffel-Bernstein, Groningen, 1946). without defence.
He contests the centre a move too
late. 26. Kt x R R x Kt
15. B-K3 QKt-Kt5
16. B-Ktl KR-B1
17. Q-Q2!
A fine move which foils Black's
plan to play 17 . . . . . Kt-B7; and
exchange White's King's Bishop
the 'dreaded' Lopez bishop.
17. . . . . . . P-Q4
There is nothing better than this
opening of the centre, which is
advantageous to White on account
of his superior development for if
17 . . . . . Kt-B7; 18. R-B1, fol
lows winning the Queen for two
Rooks and leaving Black's Knight
on QR8 out of play.
27. Q x R eh.
18. Kt-Kt3 KP x P This sacrifice of the Queen for
After 18 . QP X P; 19. Kt X P
• • . .
two Rooks is not difficult to see, but
(K5), Black's Pawn at K5 would it is noteworthy in that it is the
prove very weak. logical sequel of White's superb
strategy.
19. B x P PxP
20. B x Ktl 27. . . . . . . Kt x Q
This splendid and by no means 28. B X B Q-Kt3
obvious move is the right continua 29. Kt-K5 K-Ktl
tion of White's attack. 30. Kt-Q7 Q-R3
31. R X B Q-Kt4
20. . . . . . . BxB 32. Kt-B6 eh. Resigns.
2 1 . Kt x P B-K2 A worthy conclusion !
Though Tchigorin was unsuccessful in this game, his idea of preventing

White from closing the Queen's side and forgoing his King's side attack
gave inspiration to later players who have consistently employed his system
during the last forty years. It has been established that Black has
an easier game than in the passive defensive system shown in the game
Bogoljubov-Rubinstein (Game 29, page 50), even if modern theory has
established that White can counter Black's initiative on the QB file.
56 CHESS FR OM MORPHY TO BOTWINNIK
From the previous game we can see that Black's defeat was due to the
faulty timing of his moves (see the following game) and Schlechter's skill
in taking advantage of his redoubtable opponent's lapses in such masterly
fashion.
32 (b) 16 . . . . . P-R6; 17. P x RP,

R X P; 18. R-B 1 , Q-Ktl; 1 9 .
B-Kt3, Kt-QR4; 20. P X P, P X
White Black P; 21. B-B5, B x B; 22. R X B,
M. Luckis M. Najdorf Kt X B; 23. P X Kt, R-K1; with a
roughly equal game, Boleslavsky
Mar del Plata, 1945 Grigorienko, 1 938.
(c) 16 . B-Q2; 17. QR-B 1 ,
. • . .
I. P-K4 P-K4 KR-B1 ; 1 8 . B-Ktl , Q-Ktl ; 19.

2. Kt-KB3 Kt-QB3 Kt-B1 , Kt-QR4; 20. R X R eh. ,
3. B-Kt5 P-QR3 B x R; 21. B-Kt5, with the better
4. B-R4 Kt-B3 game, Smyslov-Reshevsky, The
5. Castles B-K2 Hague, 1948.
6. R-K1 P-QKt4
7. B-Kt3 P-Q3 17. QR-B1 Q-Kt2
8. P-QB3 Kt-QR4 18. Kt-Bl B-Q1
9. B-B2 P-QB4 19. B-Ktl R-K1
10. P-KR3 Castles 20. Kt-Kt3 P-KKt3
1 1 . P-Q4 Q-B2 21. B-Kt5 QKt-R4
12. QKt-Q2 BP X P
This exchange, which opens the
QB file, changes the whole course
of the game. White has to forgo
any idea of a King's side attack
and turn his attention to the
Queen's side where Black possesses
temporary superiority in develop
ment.
13. P X P Kt-B3
14. Kt-Kt3 P-QR4
15. B-K3 P-R5
16. QKt-Q2 B-R3
Apart from this move, which
seems safest for Black in a cramped
position, he has the choice of :
(a) A counter-attack by 16 . . . . .
QKt-Kt5; 17. B--Ktl , P-R6; 18. 22. P-Q5
Q-Kt3, Q-R4; 19. P X KP, P X White at last decides to accede
KP; 20. Kt x P, B-K3; 21. Q x P, to Black's desire and close the
Q x Q; 22. P x Q, R x P; 23. QKt centre. White seems to have had
B3! winning a pawn (23. . . . . nothing better since Black is threat
B x P? 24. B x B, R x B; 25. Kt ening to initiate a strong attack on
B6! R-K1 ; 26. Kt x B eh. , R X Kt; the Queen's side with Kt-B5.
27. B--B5! R x R; 28 R x R, Kt
B7; 29. R-R2! winning a piece) 22. . . . . . . Q-Q2
Boleslavsky - Hagosin, Leningrad, Not at once 22 . . . . . Kt-B5;
1947. because of 23. P-QKt3, Kt-R6;
(23. . . . . P X P; 24. Q X PI) 24. 30. Kt-B3 R-Ktl

P x P, P x P; 25. R-B6! (25. Q x P? 31. R-B3 R-Kt2
B-Q6). 32. R-R3 B-Kt4
23. B-Q3 K-Kt2 33. P-QKt4! Draw agreed.
24. Q-Q2 Kt-B5 This move secures the draw since
25. B-R6 eh. K-Ktl 33. . . . . RP X P e.p.; 34. P X P,
26. B x Kt PxB P x P; leads to the liquidation of the
27. Kt-KR4 K-R1 Queen's side Pawns, and on other
28. B-Kt5 Kt-Ktl moves Black is unable to break
29. B x B QxB through on the Queen's side.
LATER TRENDS IN THE TCHIGORIN DEFENCE

THE BOGOLJUBOV VARIATION
This line was for a long time considered a sub-variation as White is

able to transpose into an ordinary Tchigorin. Eventually, Keres adapted
it to his defensive system, proving what an important link it is.
33 Alekhine preferred 10. B-K3,

White Black but Black could play 10 . . . . . P X P;
M. Euwe P. Keres 1 1 . P x P, Kt-QR4; 1 2. B-B2,
Kt-B5; 13. B-Bl, P-B4; 14.
7th Match Game, 1940 P-QKt3, Kt-Kt3; and blockade
the White centre Pawns with . . . .
1. P-K4 P-K4 Kt-Q2 and . . . . B-B3 (Yates
2. Kt-KB3 Kt-QB3 Ed. I asker, New York , 1 924).
..
3. B-Kt5 P-QR3
4. B-R4 Kt-B3 10. . . . . . . Kt---QR4
5. Castles B-K2 1 1 . B--B2 P-B3
6. R-K1 P-QKt4 12. P x P QKt x P
7. B-Kt3 P-Q3 This and the following move do
8. P-B3 Castles not seem to help Black's preparation
9. P-Q4 of . . . . P-Q4, without which the
Instead of this move White could Black Q3 Pawn might later become
play 9. P�KR3, and seemingly a weakness. The Kashdan-Res
transpose into the ordinary Tchi hevsky, Hollywood, 1945, game con
gorin Defence. That is the reason tinued 12 . . . . . Q-B2; 13. P-KR3,
why the above variation was not B-K3; 14. Kt-Kt5, B-B1; 15.
considered important. But after 9. Kt-Q2, Q x P; 16. Kt-B1, P-R3;
. . . . Kt-QR4; 10. B-B2, P-B4; 17. Kt(5)-B3, B-K3; 18. Kt
1 1 . P-Q4, Q-B2; 12. P-QR4? Kt3, Kt-R2; 19. Kt-B5, KR
can be answered by 12 . . . . . B-Q2; K1; 20. Kt X B eh., with the better
now the Rooks are connected and game for White. But Keres' idea
Black can choose the right moment will become clear later.
to strike on the Queen's side. After
13. QKt-Q2? BP x P; 14. BP x P, 13. QKt-Q2 P-Kt5
KR-B1; 15. B-Q3, P X RP; 16. 14. B-R4 H-B1
Q-K2, Kt---QR4; Black has the 15. B x Kt P x P!
better game (Fine - Reshevsky, 16. B-Kt7 P x Kt!
Avro, 1 938). Not 16 . . . . . R-Ktl; 17. B x P,
P x P; 18. B x P, R x B; 19. Kt-B4,
9. . . . . . . B-Kt5 R-Ktl; 20. Kt-K3, preventing
10. P-Q5 . . . . P-Q4.
1 7. B x QP R-Ktl chances. 20. B X B, P X P; 2 1 .

18. B x P B x P, Kt x B; 2 2 . R x Kt, R x P;
23. B-B3, R X RP; would lead to
an equal game.
20. . . . . . . B-B4!
Creating complications. If 20.
. . . . P x P; 21. B-B3,
2 1 . R-Ktl PxP
Simpler was 2 1 . Q-Kt3.
2 2 . B-K3
Avoids the trap! 22. P X P,
B x P eh.; 23. K x B, Kt x P eh.
22. . . . . . . B-Q5?
Keres recommended 22.
B x B; 23. P x B, {23. Q x Q, KR x
18. P-Q41 ! Q; 24. P x B, R-Q7; with advan
Not 19. . . . . R x P; 20. B-B3, tage for Black) 23. . . . . Q-Kt3 !
and White would force on his QRP.
With the text-move Black not only 23. B x B PxB
carries through his strategic idea, 24. B-B1 Q-Q4
but begins an attack against White's 25. P x P Kt x P
King's side. 26. Q-B3 P-B4
27. P-Kt3 Q-R1
19. B-K2 Simpler was 27. . . . . K-R1; to
(a) 19. P x P, P-K5; 20. P meet the threat 28. B-B4.
KR3, B-R4; 21 . P-KKt4, P X Kt;
22. P x B, Q x P; 23. R x B, KR 28. P-QR4 R-Kt3
Q1; would give Black a strong 29. QR-Q1 Q-R4? ?
attack while (b) 19. B-Q3, P x P; A blunder under time pressure.
20. B X P, Kt X B; 21. R X Kt, First 29. . . . . R-Kt3 eh.; 30.
B x Kt; 22. P x B, R x P; 23. B-B3, B-Kt2, (30. K-R1? Kt x P
Q x Q eh.; 24. R x Q, R x RP; would Mate) 30 . . . . Q-R4! would have
lead to a draw. led to an interesting fight.
19. . . . . . . B x Kt 30. B-B4 eh. Resigns.

20. P x B If 30. . . . . K-R1 ; 31. R X Kt,
The only move offering winning wins a piece.
One of Keres' characteristic games; full of combinations, and if it had

not been for his annotations one would think he played for complications.
Only on deeper introspection one can see the strategic aim of the game
namely, the break through in the centre-which is carried out in a masterly
fashion. Although this game cannot be considered as the final word,
because of its involved character and the possibility that there may be
a more effective line for White which would enable him to hold back
Black's Queen's Pawn, it is an important link in Black's defence, since it
allows him to transpose into another line of the Tchigorin Defence. This
is shown in the following game.
THE MoDERN CoNTINUATION oF THE TcBIGORIN DEFENCE
The following game shows how Tchigorin's two systems are merged
into one very effective defence.
34 Superficially the position looks

like an ordinary Tchigorin Defence,
White Black but closer study will reveal some
C. H. 0'D. Alexander P. Keres important differences. Black in
duced White to play P-Q5 without
losing a tempo (by . . . . Kt-B3)
Anglo-Soviet Match, 1947 as is usual in this variation. The
Knight on Kt3 has an important
1. P-K4 P-K4 function as it prevents White closing
2. Kt-KB3 Kt-QB3 the Queen's side.
3. B-Kt5 P-QR3
4. B-R4 Kt-B3
14. Kt-Bl P-Kt3
5. Castles B-K2
15. P-KKt4 KB-Kt2
6. R-K1 P-QKt4
16. Kt-Kt3
7. B-Kt3 Castles
This move, which is usually
8. P-B3 P-Q3
played with the intention of build
9. P-KR3 Kt-Q2
ing up an attacking formation on
This is the alternative answer to
the King's side, is here a necessary
White's move 9. P-KR3 (instead
defensive precaution against 16.
of 9 . . . . . Kt-QR4;). It is worth
. . . . P-B4; clearly demonstrating
while remarking that Tchigorin used
what a difference a few tempi make
to play this move against Tarrasch
in the opening.
(Match 1893), but without the man
ceuvre . . . . P-QR3 and . . . .
P-QKt4. 16. . . . . . . B-Q2
17. P-Kt3
Another bitter necessity, to be
10. P-Q4 B-B3
able to develop the QB without the
1 1 . P-Q5
interference of . . . . Kt-B5. But
This move, by which White tries
the text-move allows Black to open
to transpose the game into an
the QR file.
ordinary Tchigorin, is too commit
ting at this stage; but that it is not
easy for White to keep up the 17. Kt-Kt2
tension in the centre without allow 18. K-R2 P-QR4
ing simplification is shown in the 19. B-K3 P-R5
game Boleslavsky-Flohr, Groningen, 20. Q-Q2 P-B3
1946. 1 1 . B-K3, Kt-Kt3; 12. 2 1 . Kt-Ktl Q-B2
QKt-Q2, Kt-R4; 13. B-B2, 22. Kt(Ktl)-K2 Kt-Q1
Kt(R4)-B5; 14. Kt X Kt, Kt X Kt; 23. P-B3 Kt-B2
15. B-B1, R-K1; 16. P-QKt3, This classical Knights' manreuvre,
Kt-Kt3; 17. P x P, P x P; 18. bringing over the Queen's Knight
Q x Q, R x Q; with equality. Nor to KB2 for defence and the KKt to
is 1 1 . P X P, QKt X P; 12. Kt-Q4, QKt3 for attack, was introduced
Kt-QKt3; dangerous for Black. by Lasker in his 5th match-game
against Tarrasch in 1916, and is still
considered best.
11. Kt-R4
1 2 . B-B2 P-B4!
13. QKt--Q2 Kt-Kt3 24. P-R4
move frees Kt(Kt3) to interpose on

the KB file.
37. . . . . . . Kt-Kt4
dis. eh.
Better was 37 . . . . . Q x R! 38.
Kt-B5, Kt-R7; 39. Kt-Ktl ,
Kt-Kt5 eh.; 40. K-Kl, Q-Kt7;
with the threat of . . . . Kt x B; also
R-Rl;
38. K-Kl QxR
39. B x Kt PxB
40. Q x P Kt-Bl
41 . P-Kt4
Alexander gives here 41. Kt-B5,
Q-R4; 42. Kt(2)-Kt3, Q x P; 43.
Too committing. White has no
B-Ql, as a better line of defence.
real attacking chances, and besides,
he is engaged on the Queen's side. 41. . . . . . . PxP
42. P X P Kt-K2
24. . . . . . . R-R2 43. Q-Kt7 Kt x KtP
25. R-KKtl PxP 44. Kt-B5 R-B2
26. P x P KR-Rl 45. Q-B8 eh. K-R2
27. R x R RxR If 45 . . . . R-Bl? 46. Kt-K7
28. P-Kt5 eh.
A mistake. It was necessary to
play 28. R-Ktl , R-R7; 29. Q-Ql 46. Q-K6 R-B2
to take up a defensive position on 47. Kt x B QxQ
the Queen's side. 48. Kt x Q RxB
49. Kt X P eh. K-Ktl
28. . . . . . . PxP 50. K-QI R-Kt7
29. B x P 5 1 . Kt-QB3 RXP
If 29. P x P, B-QBI; followed 52. K-B2 Kt-Bl
by . . . . Q-Q2 and Black would 53. Kt-B3 Kt-Q2
have chances on both flanks. 54. Kt-KR4 Kt-B4
55. Kt-B5 R-Kt3
29 . . . . . . . P-R3 55. . . . . Kt X P; 56. Kt X Kt,
30. B-K3 Q-Ql ! R x Kt; 57. Kt x P, R-Q5; 58.
31. P-R5 Q-R5 eh. Kt-B5, R-KB5; was also suffi
32. K-Kt2 Kt-Kt4 cient to win, but exchanging Pawns
33. R-KRI B-R6 eh. would be an unnecessary risk.
34. K-B2 Kt x BP
35. Q-Q3 56. Kt-K3 K-B2
All other moves lose quickly, e.g. 57. Kt-B4 R-R3
35. K x Kt, R-B2 eh.; 36. Kt-B4, 58. K-Q2 K-K2
P x Kt; 37. B x KBP, P-Kt4; 38. 59. K-K3 R-R8
Kt-B5, Q-Kt5 eh. wins. 60. K-K2 R-QB8
61. K-Q2 R-KR8
35. . . . . . . R-KB2 62. K-K3 R-R7
36. P x P R-Bl The first phase of the interesting
37. R x B end-game is over. Black's aim was
The only way to meet the threat to separate the two Knights which
37 . . . . . Kt-Q5 dis. eh. 38. K-Kl, he was able to force by "zugzwang"
Kt X Kt; winning a piece. The text- manreuvre. (63. K-B3?, R-R6
And now the other Knight has

to move since 66 . . . . . Kt-Q5 eh.;
was threatening. '
66. . . . . . . R-Kt6
67. K-B2
The only move. Neither of the
Knights can move because of . . . .
Kt-Q5 eh. But now the King is
forced away leaving the other side
unprotected.
67. . . . . . . R-Ktl
68. K-K8 R-QB1
69. K-Q8
69. . . . . R-B4; 70. Kt-R3,
Position after 6 2. . . . . R-R7 R-B6 eh.; 71. K-K2, Kt-B8 eh.
was threatened.
eh. or 63. Kt-Kt5?, R-R6 eh.).
69 . ...... Kt-B4 ch.
63. Kt-Q2 R-R6 eh. 70. K-K8 R-QKtl
64. Kt-B3 K-Q2 71. Kt-B3 R-Kt6
65. K-K2 Kt-Kt6 72. K-Q2 Kt x P eh.
66. Kt-QKt5 Resigns.
A clear demonstration that in this modern form of the Tchigorin

Defence Black retains considerable play whether or not White maintains
or curtails the central tension.
THE MoDERN CoNTINUATION (FOR WBITE)-TnE RAUSER SYSTEM
The Bogoljubov-Rubinstein game (Game 29, page 50) was a good

example of White's attempt to force a decision on the King's side while
closing the centre. But this attempt deprived the game of its dynamic
character. White must therefore seek a better use of the centre.
The following game is a good example of this idea.
35 9. B-B2 P-B4
10. P-Q4 Q-B2
White Black 1 1 . QKt-Q2 Kt-B3
V. Rauser N. Rumin 1 1 . . . . . Castles; is less direct
since it does not exert pressure on
Q5, and can be answered by 12.
Leningrad, 1936 Kt-B1 , B-Kt5; 13. P x KPI,
P x P; 14. Kt-K3, B-K3; 15.
1. P-K4 P-K4 Q-K2, KR-K1; 16. Kt-Kt5,
2. Kt-KB3 Kt-QB3 P-B5; 17. P-QKt41, P x P e.p.
3. B-Kt5 P-QR3 18. Kt x B, P x Kt; 1 9. P x P,
4. B-R4 Kt-B3 P-Kt5; 20. P X P, B X P; 21.
5. Castles B-K2 B-Q2, B X B; 22. Q x B, Kt-B3;
6. R-K1 P-QKt4 (Alekhine-Flohr, Avro, 1938). Al
7. B-Kt3 P-Q3 though Black was able to control
8. P-B3 Kt-QR4 the important squares on his Q4
and KB4, by allowing the doubling 1948. White's last move was 26.
of his centre Pawns, the resulting Kt-Q5 !)
weaknesses proved to be fatal.
1 2. P-QR4 R-QKtl
If 12 . . . . . P-Kt5; 13. P x KtP,
P x KtP; 14. Kt-B4, foUowed by
Kt-K3.
13. P x KtP RP x P
14. P x BP PxP
15. Kt-B1 B-K3
On 15 . . . . . Castles; 16. Kt-K3,
R-Q1 ; 17. Kt-Q5, Kt x Kt; 18.
P X Kt, B-K3; 19. Kt-Kt5, fol
lows with strong attack.
16. Kt-K3 Castles

17. Kt-Kt5 KR-Q1 19 . . . . . . . B x Kt
18. Q-B3 R-Q3 20. P x B P-R3
If 18. . . . . P-R3; 19. Kt x B, 21. Kt-K4 Kt x Kt
P X Kt; 20. Kt-Kt4, R-KB1 ; 21. 22. B x Kt B-B3
Kt X Kt eh., R X Kt; 22. Q-Kt4, 23. B-K3
with advantage for White. Black's King's side is secure for
a while, but now White turns to the
19. Kt-B5 1 Queen's side again.
23 . . . . . . . Kt-K2
24. P-QKt4 P-B5
25. P-Kt3 R--Q2
26. R-R7 Q-Q1
27. R x R QxR
28. P-R4 K-R1
29. P-Kt4
And now White is able to transfer
the fight to the King's side. This
shows how much more vitality can
be achieved in the game when the
centre is not closed.
29. . . . . . . Kt-Ktl
If 29. . . . . B x P? 30. Q-R3,
B-B3; 31. P-Kt5, wins.
This is the key-move in the
Rauser variation. When White is 30. P-Kt5 B-K2
prevented from occupying the Q5 31. R-Q1 Q-B2
square he is able to put the Knight 32. P-B6 B x BP
on this correspondingly important 33. PxB Kt x P
square. To illustrate how White is 34. B-B2 R--Q1
able to occupy the Q5 square when 35. BxP R x R eh.
he cannot place a piece to his KB5 36. B xR P-K5
square the following position is of 37. B-B4 Q-Ql
interest (Euwe-Smyslov,The Hague, 38. Q-K2 Resigns.
THE TCHIGORIN DEFENCE ft3
This system, introduced by Rauser, is completely revolutionary; breaking

away from the old established axiom that White cannot attack on the
King's side while his centre is open. Although such an authority as
Alekhine recommended it, it has gained ground only slowly. It had to
be proved that in spite of the simplification in the centre it gave White's
game increased dynamic power, since White has to gain control of the
vital squares (Q5 or KB5) by combinative means.
WHITE RESUMES THE FIGHT FOR THE CENTRE

THE WORRALL ATTACK
The previous sections have, in the main, dealt with the classical form
of the Tchigorin Defence, and although new ideas were introduced, they
were incorporated in the old framework.
We call this form 'classical' since it centres round White's King's side
attack, as in the game Bogoljubov-Rubinstein (Game 29, page 50). The
only - new ideas embraced were associated with the preparation of this
attack by first closing the Queen's side and the centre. The weakness
of this plan was that the centre became hopelessly blocked and the game
lost its dynamic character. Therefore, it is understandable that aggressive
masters like Alekhine or Keres sought new ways of revitalizing the centre.
The Worrall attack (and the Rauser system) seemed to fit these ideas.
The basis of this system is to play Q-K2 (instead of R-K1) and follow
up with KR-Q1 giving greater support, and therefore more force, to
the central push P-Q4. It is interesting to note how White has con
tinually tried to enliven the game, replacing 6. Kt-QB3 by 6. R-K1
and then replacing this by 6. Q-K2.
36 in the game or 10. P-Q5, Kt

QR4; 1 1 . B-B2, P-B3; 12. P x P,
White Black QKt X P; 13. P-KR3, B-R4; 14.
Em. Lasker R. Teichmann B-K3, ( Spielmann - Rubinstein,
St. Petersburg, 1909 Berlin, 1928).
I. P-K4 P-K4 10. P X P B-Kt5

2. Kt-KB3 Kt-QB3 1 1 . R-Q1 P-Q4
3. B-Kt5 P-QR3 12. P-K5 Kt-K5
4. B-R4 Kt-B3 13. Kt-B3 Kt x Kt
5. Castles B-K2 14. P X Kt P-B3
6. Q-K2 A mistake after which it appears
Lasker remarks that this move that Black cannot recover. Lasker
did not appear to have been played recommends 14. Kt-R4;
before. whilst in a game Reti-Stoltz,
Stockholm, 1928, after the interpo
6. P-QKt4 lation of P-KR3 and . . . . B-R4
7. B-Kt3 P-Q3 there followed 15 . . . . . Q-Q2; with
8. P-B3 Castles a roughly equal game.
9. P-Q4 PxP
On 9. . . . . B-Kt5; White has 15. P-KR3 B-R4
the alternatives of either 10. R-Q1 The Bishop has no good square
leading to variations similar to that for if 15 . . . . . B-KB4 also 16
P-Kt4! and if 15. . . . . B-K3;

16. P x P, R x P; 17. B-Kt5,
R Kt3; 1 8 . B--B2.
-
16. P--KKt4 B-B2

17. P-K6! B-Kt3
18. Kt-R4 Kt-R4
19. Kt x B P x Kt
20. B-B2 P-KB4
21. K-Rl B-Q3
22. P x P Q-R5
23. Q-B3 PxP
24. R-KKtl
White threatens 25. B X P, Q-B3;
26. Q-Kt2.
24 . . . . . . . P-B5 Position after 26. P-K7!

25. R-Kt4 Q-R3
27. B-Kt6, R x P; 28. Q x P eh.
26. P-K7!
and the QR is captured with check.
A fine move bringing about a
quick decision. If 26. . . . . R-B2; 26. . . . . . . Resigns.
This game is one of the very earliest examples of the adoption of the
Worrall Attack, and it is a good example of the potentialities of White' s
push i n the centre. Even to-day Black's defensive system i s considered
sound, but it has not the solidity of the Tchigorin Defence; and as Lasker
so forcibly demonstrated, even a slight inaccuracy can seriously endanger
Black's position.
But can White prevent Black from adopting the Tchigorin defensive
system? This is the problem with which we deal in the two following
games. ·
KERES' CONTINUATION
37 reply 8 . . . . . P-Kt5? is refuted by

9. Q-B4!
White Black
8. . . . . . . B-Kt5
R. Fine P. Keres
The only move to give Black
adequate counterplay. The older
Avro Tournament, 1938
move 8 . . . . . R-QKtl ; 9. P x P,
P x P; 10. P-B3, B-Kt5; l l .
I. P-K4 P-K4
R-Ql , Castles; 1 2. P-Q4, P x P;
2. Kt-KB3 Kt-QB3
(Black is forced to surrender the
3. B-Kt5 P-QR3
centre as 13. P-Q5 is threatened)
4. B-R4 Kt-B3
13. P x P, P-Q4; 14. P-K5,
5. Castles B-K2
Kt-K5; 15. Kt-B3, Kt x Kt; 16.
6. Q-K2 P-QKt4
P x Kt, Q-Q2; 17. P-R3, B-R4;
7. B-Kt3 P-Q3
18. R-R6, Kt-Ql; 19. P-Kt4,
8. P-QR4
a.:;; in the game Alekhine-Asztalos,
This move has greater significance
J.:ccskcmrt, 1 927, and in others,
here than in the R-Kl variation,
has proved unsatisfactory for Black.
since the Black QKt Pawn is ex
posed to attack, and the natural 9. P-B3 Castles
This Pawn sacrifice, simple 17. K-Kt2

though it may appear, had to be Preferable is the simplifying 17.
accurately ca]culated. B x Kt, B x B; 18. P x P, P x P; 19.
R-K1 , B -B5; 20. R-QI ! stop
10. P x P PxP ping 20 . . . . . R-Ktl on account
ll. R x R QxR of the threat of mate.
12. Q x P
Black now demonstrates this to 17. 0 0 0 • • • R-Ktl
be a mistake. Necessary was 12. 18. B-QB4 PxP
P-R3, B-R4; 13. R-QI. 19. P x P Kt-K3
20. P-Q5
12. . . . . . . Kt-R21 A sad necessity. If 20. R-K1,
It seems astonishing that this B-B3; 21. B x Kt, P x B; 22. R x P,
natural move passed unnoticed for K-B2; with advantage to Black.
so long. The other seemingly strong
move 12 . . . . . Kt-QR4? is met by 20. Kt-B4
13. B-B2, Kt X P; 14. Kt X P! 21 . Kt-B3 Kt-B1
R-Ktl (if 14. . . . . P X Kt; 15. 22. R-K1 K-Bl
Q x P wins) 15. B x Kt, R x Q; 16. 23. R-K2 P-B4
B x Q, winning a Pawn (Book C. -
More exact is 23. . . . . R-Kt5
H. O'D. Alexander, Margate, 1938). and the Bishop has to surrender one
of its diagonals for if 24. B-R2,
13. Q-K2 Kt-Q6; or 24. B-QKt5, Kt-R2.
This withdrawal involved a diffi
cult decision, for it is clear that the
24. Kt-Kt5 Kt-Kt3
best White can hope for is a hard
25. P-Kt3 Kt X QPI
fought draw. The alternative is 13.
A well-calculated move, as will
Q-R5, Q X PI; ( 13. . . . . Kt X P;
be seen from the next move.
14. B-Q5!) 14. Q X Kt, B X Kt; 15.
P x B, Q x Kt; 16. Q x P, (16. Q
K3, Kt-R4!) Q-Kt3 eh.; 17.
K-R1, Q-Q6; 18. K-Kt2, Kt
R41 with a winning attack. Whe�her
Keres had prepared this variation
or relied upon his intuition is
difficult to say, but it is an apt
illustration of his willingness to
submit to a long and complicated
variation, simply to meet the strate
gical requirements of the position,
rather than to fight a difficult defen
sive game.
13 . . .0 . 0 . QxP
14. Q x Q Kt x Q
15. P-Q4
It is difficult to avoid the 26. Kt-Q4
doubling of the Pawns for if 15. This looks very strong, since not
B-Q1, Kt-B4; 1 6. B-K2, P-K5 only is the BP attacked, but R x B
and White has a serious weakness and Kt-B6 eh. are threatened in
at his Q3. certain lines.
15. B x Kt 26. . . . . . . Kt-Kt5!

16. P x B Kt-KKt4 The only good move.
27. B-Q2? 38. Kt-B2 Kt-KS ! r

White persists in his original plan. If in reply 39. Kt X Kt, B X Kt;
Had he foreseen Keres' fine com 40. K-Q3, B-Q7; wins.
bination, he would have played 27.
Kt x P. 39. Kt-R3 B-B4
Good enough, but 39 . . . . . B-R5,
27. . . . . . . P�4! ! 40. K�l, Kt X P; is quicker.
28. B x Kt RxB
29. Kt-B6 40. K x Kt B x Kt
If 29. R X B, K X R; 30. Kt-B6 41. K-Ql B-Q3
eh., K-B3; 31. Kt x R, P x B; 32. 42. K-B2
P x P, and White has a lost end White must give up the Pawn
game on account of his weak QBP. otherwise B-B5 and B-B8
is decisive.
29. . . . . . . P x B!
30. Kt x R PxP 42. . . . . . . BxP
31. Kt-Q5 43. R-KRl
To prevent 31. . . . . B-B3 and If 43. K x P, B-K4 eh. wins
P-Kt7. easily.
81. . . • • . • K�6! 43. . . • . . . B-K4

The right reply, for if 32. Kt x B, More precise is 43 B-B5;
. • • . .
Kt-B5 eh. wins, or if 32. R x B, 44. R x P, B-Q7; as will be seen

P-Kt7! on the 49th move.
82. R�2 P-Kt7 44. R x P K-B2

33. R-Ql 45. R-Rl P-Kt4
If 33. Kt--B3, B-Kt5; 34. 46. R-Kl K-B3
R X Kt, B x Kt; 35. R�8 eh., 47. R-KKtl K-Kt3
K-K2; 36. R�Kt8, P-B4 wins. 48. R-Kl B-B3
49. R-KKtl P-Kt5!
33. . . . . . . P--B4 The only way to make progress,
Inexact; 33. . . . . Kt-BS (keep since the Black King is unable to
ing the Rook out) 34. Kt-B3, penetrate. This shows the disad
B-Kt5; 35. Kt-Ktl , P-B4; and vantageous position of Black's
P�B5 wins quickly. Bishop at K4.
34. R�Ktl P�B5 50. P x P P-B5

85. K-Bl B-B4 5 1 . P-Kt5l
36. K-K2 Otherwise 51. . . . . K-Kt4 fol
If 36. Kt-K3? B X Kt; 37. P X B, lowed by P-B6 decides.
P-B6 wins.
51. . . . . . • B�5
36. • • . • • . BxP 51. . . • • B X P? only draws.
37. Kt-K3!
A fine move making Black's task 52.R-Ql B-K6!
difficult, for if 37. . . . . B X Kt; 38. 53.KxP B--B8
K x B, and Black loses his Queen's 54.R-Q6 eh. KxP
side Pawns. 55.R-Kt6 P-B6
56.K-Q3 K-B5
37. . . . . . . P-B6! 57.R-Kt8 K-Kt6
A very subtle move, for if 38. Resigns.
K x Kt, B x Kt; 39. K x P, B-B8; If 58. R-Kt8 eh., K-B7; 59.
and the White Rook is incarcerated. K-B2, K-K7; 60. R-KS eh. ,
K-B8; 61. R K7, P-B7; 62. K_-B6; 64. R-B8 eh., B-B5; and
---:-
R-K8, K-Kt7, 63. R-Kt8 eh. , I wms.
This game, between the winners of perhaps the greatest tournament

of all time, presents, at first glance, a rather old-fashioned aspect especially
in the opening stages where White indulges in the ancient practice of
pawn-grabbing at the expense of development. The explanation seems
to lie in the remarkable variations given in the notes to White's 13. Q-K2,
the Queen's agile leap from QRI-K5 threatening the Knight at QKtl
and also Q-Kt3 eh. with mating threats. It is a good illustration of
the trend of modern play where strategical concepts are carried out by
tactical threats and where the most important points are more often
implied than implemented. The importance of this game from the point
of view of the opening we are studying, lies in showing that Black need
not spend time defending his QKtP but can continue his development.
The middle and end game are here inseparable, for in spite of the reduced
material the ending is rich in combinative strokes-a contrast to the
19th-century style of retaining Queens simply to provide such tactical
opportunities.
AI.EKHINE'S TREATMENT
Alekhine often adopted the Worrall attack when he played the Ruy
Lopez, since being less analysed it gave his combinative powers far greater
scope and allowed him to introduce that element of surprise so charac
teristic of his dynamic style.
In the next game we see the two greatest attacking players of modern
times engaged in a variation favoured by both. From the start Alekhine
introduces surprises by inverting the order of moves, although the greatest
surprise comes when he introduces the Rauser system (exchange of the
centre Pawns instead of blockading the centre by P-Q5), infusing new
life into the Worrall attack.
38 is reached. The simplest answer is 9.

P-Q3, P-Q5; 10. P X P, QKt X P;
White Black ll. Kt X Kt, Q X Kt; 12. B-K3,
A. Alekhine P. Keres Q-Q3; (Keres-Euwe, The Hague,
1948) and with 13. R-B l l (instead
Salzburg, 1942 of the move actually played 13. Kt
-B3), White could have obtained
1. P-K4 P-K4 a better game.
2. Kt-KB3 Kt-QB3
3. B-Kt5 P-QR3 8. P-B3 Castles
4. B-R4 Kt-B3 If at once 8. . . . . Kt-QR4 in
5. Castles B-K2 order to adopt a Tchigorin defence
6. Q-K2 P-QKt4 system then there would follow 9.
7. B-Kt3 P-Q3 P-Q41 Kt X B; 10. P X Kt, Kt-Q2;
The other line is 7. . . . . Castles; l l . R-Ql, B-B3; 12. P X P, P X P;
8. P-B3, P-Q4; where Black 13. Kt-R3 (Alekhine-Rey Ardid,
offers a Pawn for a vigorous 2nd match game, 1944) with a
counter-attack. Though the line slight advantage to White. Alek
has been much analysed, it is so rich hine's free and alert approach to
in possibilities that it may be a long the openings is well illustrated by
time before an ultimate conclu:aion this variation.
6
68 CHESS FHOM MORPHY 'fO BOTWINNIK
9. R-Q1 18. Q-Kt4 does not help Black to

Instead of playing 9. P-Q4 at overcome the weakness on his Q4,
once which would allow B-Kt5, after the !{night has been driven
White waits to see what system off by P-KKt3.
Black will adopt.
15. Kt-B1 Kt-R4
9. . . . . . . Kt-QR4 16. P-KR3 B-K3
If 9
. • . . . B-Kt5; 10. P-KR3, 16 . . . . . B x Kt; 17. Q x B, B x B;
B-R4; 1 1 . P-Kt4, B-Kt3; 12. 18. Q x Kt, is preferable, since the
P-Q3! and the Bishop is out of Bishop would prevent the White
play as Alekhine played against K�ight from reaching K3, although
Samisch at Bad Nauheim, 1937. A Black's weakness at his Q4 will still
striking illustration of the use of prove a handicap.
transposition of moves.
17. Kt-K31 P-B3
10. B-B2 P-B4
1 1 . P-Q4 Q-B2
Superficially it appears that Black
has achieved a normal Tchigorin
defence formation and, indeed, this
has often been recommended as the
safest defence for Black to adopt
against the Worrall attack, since
White cannot play 12. QKt-Q2 as
12. . . . . BP x P wins a Pawn (the
Bishop at B2 is now unprotected).
12. B-Kt5
To all appearances a developing
or waiting move, but Alekhine has
other aims.
Now it seems that Black will be
12. B-Kt5 able to play Kt-KB5, but he had
13. P x KP! PxP not reckoned with Alekhine's reply.
14. QKt-Q2
18. Kt-R2! I
Now Alekhine's idea becomes A superb move, the introduction
clear. He is able to set up a Rauser to a splendid example of the modern
formation (see game 35), with system of furthering strategical
the added advantage that he has aims (here the occupation and
gained time, since he has been able utilisation of White's Q5) by tac
to play his KR to Q1 at once tical threats. Naturally, not 18.
instead of to K1 first, and he has B-KR4, Kt-KB5!
also dispensed with P-KR3, a
move of little or no advantage in 18. . . . . . . P-Kt3
this system. This gain of two tempi Against the alternative move 18.
enables Alekhine to give the game . . . . B-B2 White has two lines,
a more dynamic character. (a) the immediate occupation of Q5
by the Knight; 19. Kt-Q5 when
14. . . . . . . J{R- Q1 there follows R X Kt; 20. P x R,
The simplifying move 14. . . . . P X B; 21. P-Q6, B X QP; 22.
Kt-R4; 15. P-KR3, B X Kt; 16. Q-Q3, R-Q1 (22. . . . . B-Kt3;
Kt x B, B x B; 17. Kt x B, Kt-KB5; 23. Q-Q5 eh.) 23. Q x P eh., with
a nebulous position, or the stronger P x B, R x P; 27. Q-K4, Q-Q2;

line (b) 19. P-KKt4, P X B; 20. (27 . . . . . R-Q1? 28. B X Kt, P X B;
P x Kt, and White has control of 29. Q-B3, Q-B2; 30. Q-B6, or
Q5 and KB5 . 27. . . . . Kt-Kt3; 28. B X Kt,
P X B; 29. Q-K2!) 28. B-B3,
19. B-R6 B-KB1 R-Q3; 29. Q-R8 eh., Q-Q1; 30.
20. B x B KxB Q--Kt7, regaining the Pawn with
lf 20 . . . . . Kt-KB5; 2 1 . Q-B3, a won game. The complications of
R X B; 22. P-KR4!, Kt-B5; 23. these lines are not so significant as
B-Kt3, Kt X Kt; 24. P X Kt, B X B; the realisation that the position
25. P X B, Kt-K3; 26. R-Q5! holds such opportunities for White
on account of his positional super
2 1 . P-KKt3 R x R eh. iority. Since Black is unable to
Black avoids the trap 21. . . . . accept the Pawn, White has at last
B x KRP? 22. Kt--Q5! Q-B2; 23. achieved the positional goal of the
P-KKt4, Kt-KB5; 24. Kt X Kt, Rauser variation-absolute control
P x Kt; 25. Q-B3, and the Bishop of his Q5. The rest of the game is
is lost. given to turning this advantage to
effect.
22. B x RI
White declares his intention of 25. . . . . . . Q--QKt2
opening the QR file for his Rook in 26. P-Kt3 Kt--Q3
exchange for the Queen's file, which 27. P--QB4 PxP
is of no use to Black, since White 28. P x P B x Kt
guards every square upon it. 29. KP x B Kt-Kt2
30. Kt-Kt4 Q-K2
22 . . . . . . . R-Q1 If 30. . . . . Kt(Kt2)-K1; 31.
23. P-QR4! Kt-QB5 Q-K3, Kt X P; 32. Q X P eh.,
24. P x P PxP Kt(B4)--Q3; 33. R-R7, Q-Kt8;
34. Kt-R6, Q X B eh.; 35. K-R2,
Kt-Kt2; 36. Q-B7, followed by
mate in a few moves.
31. B-B2 Kt(Kt2)-Kl

32. P-R4 P-K5
The drawback to this move is
that it surrenders KB5 to White.
33. Kt-K3
Threatening Kt-Kt2-B4--K6.
33 . . . . , . . Q-K4
A better defence is given by 33 .
. . . . R-Ktl; 34. Kt-Kt2, P-B4;
35. Kt-B4, Kt-KKt2; and Black
can either oppose his Rook on
25. Kt--Q5! QKt7 or use it aggressively at QKt5.
Just at the moment when Black
thought that he had successfully 34. R-R7! K-Ktl
overprotected his Q4, Alekhine 35. Kt-Kt4 Q-Q5
plays the thematic move in the 36. B x PI
Rauser system, Kt-Q5 offering a Decisive! If 36. Kt x B; 37.
Pawn sacrifice which Black dare Kt-R6 eh. , K-R1; (37. . . . .
not accept. If 25 . . . . . B x Kt; 26. K-B1? 38. R-B7 mate} 38.
38. B-B2 Q-B3

Q-K7 was threatened.
39. Q-K6 QxQ

40. PxQ R-Bl
41 . Kt-B7 eh. Kt x Kt
42. P X Kt Kt-Q3
43. B-Q3 K-Kt2
Or 43. . . . . R-Bl; 44. R-B7.
-M. P-B8(Q) eh. KXQ

45. R x P K-Ktl
46. R-Q7 Kt-Kl
47. P-R5!
Now 47 . . . . . Kt-B3 is met by
48. R-Q6!
Position after 35 . . . . . Q-Q5
47 . ...... PxP
Kt-B7 eh. wins the exchange, or 48. BxP R-Rl
36 . . . . . Q x B; 37. Kt-R6 eh., 49. B-K6 eh. K-Rl
K-Rl; 38. Q X Q, Kt X Q; 39. 50. R-Q5 Kt-B3
Kt-B7 eh., a combination not 51. RxP K-Kt2
difficult to foresee but impressive 52. K-Kt2 R-R7
in the active co-operation of White's 53. B-B5 R-R6
pieces. 54. R-B7 eh. K-R3
55. R-B7 R-R3
36. . . . . . . P-B4 56. P-B4 P-R5
37. Kt-R6 eh. K-Rl 57. P-Kt4 Resigns.
Logically we conclude our study of the Ruy Lopez with an example

of the modem form of attack in marked contrast to the classical attack
demonstrated by Morphy in the first game. And what greater exponent
than Alekhine? He demonstrates convincingly that although the require
ments of modern technique are exigent, it is possible to graft onto this
'solid' opening as many ideas as his romantic predecessor. But how
complex the game has become! 'Whilst for Morphy it was sufficient
to open the centre to obtain the superiority, Alekhine had to use all the
finesses known to modem opening theory, from transposing moves to
changing the field of action, first in the centre, then to the Queen's side
and back to the centre again, to force a decision. If a proof is needed
that time alone permits new ideas to become common property, it will
be found here. While the quality of this game has been recognized, the
fact that it combines the two modem systems in the Ruy Lopez-the
Worrall attack and the Rauser system-seems to have passed unnoticed.
CoNCLUSIONS
Our survey of the central struggle in the Ruy Lopez discloses three
principal conceptions, which may be classified according to the precepts
enacted by the three great players whose ideas dominate the founda tions
of these lines.
First Morphy, who attempted an early conquest of the centre, but

succeeded in achieving little in the way of establishing a lasting initiative
for White.
His greatest contribution is the defence named after him, characterized
by the move P-QR3 for Black. which releases the tension in the centre
and is the basis of all the modern defences to the Ruy Lopez.
Secondly Steinitz, who emphasized the importance of control of the
centre. We can distinguish three periods in Steinitz' later years. In
the first he attempted to hold the centre by the artificial 4 . . . KKt
. .
K2 with unfavourable results. In the second period he attempted to

revive the 'Steinitz Preceded,' now known as the Steinitz Defence
Deferred, and failed only because of the faulty timing of the moves.
The last period found Steinitz adopting his own defence in the modern
form (developing the KKt at B3), a variation he played in the London
and Vienna Tournaments at the close of the century. His lack of success
was due to his tactical inabilities and not to any endemic failing in the
variation. It was left to Lasker to demonstrate its inherent soundness.
Thirdly Tchigorin, who was more fortunate. He introduced his original
system against the formidable Tarrasch in 1893 with considerable success.
He was not, however, content with the line and evolved a more aggressive
system in the form that it is used to-day.
The latest trend in the Ruy Lopez, a blending of these two systems,
is the highest tribute that can be accorded his memory.
PART 11
T H E Q U E E N ' S GA M B I T
IF any opening has experienced marked changes in its treatment during

the last hundred years it is certainly the Queen's Gambit-the modem
opening. Despite its modernity, it is one of the earliest of recorded
openings (circa 1500 according to von der Lasa), and it appears to ante
date the King's Gambit.
Comparisons have been drawn with the King's Pawn Openings, and
for a long time the Queen's Gambit was considered dull and unenter
prising, a debut for the cautious player, whereas King's side Openings
remained the choice of the venturesome. To-day we know that this
classification is artificial, since many games in the Q.G. Orthodox Defence
illustrate brief and brilliant combinations (see Alekhine-Lasker, Game 50,
page 94), while even in the King's Gambit Accepted, games of a lifeless
and mechanical character have been played (see Santasiere-Levin, Game
99, page 186). In fact, by mastering the closed game and perfecting the
transition from the closed to the open formation, one can give the game
that liveliness applauded by the connoisseurs, whereas 'pure' open games
tend to lead to draws by rapid exchanges.
73
VII
THE ORTHODOX DEFENCE
WE commence with the Orthodox Defence. It derives its title from

Tarrasch who ridiculed those players who religiously adhered to this
old variation, electing to have a cramped. position without organic weak
nesses rather than accept the lasting weakness (isolated Pawn on Q5)
of the Tarrasch Defence (3 . . . . . P-QB4) with a free and open game.
This defence attained its peak of popularity during the latter part of
the last century, although this can be attributed rather to the paucity
of good defensive systems than to its inherent solidity ; for the 'Slav'
Defence had not been developed, nor had the Tarrasch Defence come
into favour.
The Orthodox Defence is characterised by White's ability to develop
his Queen's Bishop (after 1. P-Q4, P-Q4; 2. P-QB4, P-K3;
3. Kt-QB3, Kt-KB3; 4. B-Kt5 ) whilst Black's Queen's Bishop is
,
shut in, the satisfactory development of this piece being Black's main
problem.
THE ORTHOD OX DEFENCE OF THE 19TH CENTURY
'\Ve begin our study of the historical development of the Orthodox

Defence with an example of Steinitz' play, as it was he who introduced
into tournament play the development of the QB at KKt5. This line
had already been played by Saint-Amant in his 1 5th match-game against
Staunton, but only after making the move P-QB5. His motive there
fore was completely different from Steinitz' idea of exerting pressure on
Black's Q4 Pawn and of trying later by waiting moves to force him to
play . . . . QP x P, and thus to surrender the centre.
STEINITZ' TREATMENT
39 many years; as Gunsberg expressed

a similar opinion when Pillsbury
White Black adopted this line consistently in the
W. Steinitz A. Anderssen Hastings Tournament of 1895.
Vienna, 1873 4. B-K2

5. P-K3 Castles
1. P-Q4 P-Q4 6. Kt-B3 P-QKt3
2. P-QB4 P-K3 This plausible move appears the
3. Kt--QB3 Kt-KB3 simplest method of solving the
4. B-Kt5 development of the Queen's Bishop.
This move, considered strongest
even to-day, was adj u dged danger 7. B-Q3 B-Kt2
ous by Staunton who thought that 8. Castles QKt- Q2
White's QKt Pawn might become 9. PxP PxP
weak, a view that persisted for 10. R-Bl P-B4
74
U. P x P A mistake which precipitates a

A move showing Steinitz as the collapse. With 12 . . . . . Q-Kt3,
pioneer of modern positional play. preserving the Queen's Bishop,
He creates permanent weaknesses Black has a defensible position as
in Black's position instead of trying, long as he can avoid exchanging the
like Pillsbury, to build up a King's minor pieces which are needed to
side attack (see the next game) . support the Pawns.
11. PxP 13. B x Kt PxB

12. Q-R4 Kt-K5? 14. KR-Q1 1 BxB
15. Kt x BI
Precise! If at once 15. R X Kt,
Q-B1; 1 6. Kt X B, B-B3! winning
the Rook.
15. Q x Kt
16. R x Kt KR-Ktl
17. Q-Kt3 B-B3
18. Q x P eh. K-R1
1 9. P-KR4 Q-Kt5
20. RxP R xR
21 . QxR RxP
22. QxP Q-K3
23. R-Q1 P-R3
24. R-Q6 Q-B2
25. Kt-Q1 R-K7
26. K-B1 Resigns.
This game between the foremost representatives of the 'classical' and
the 'modern' school is really the beginning of modern positional play.
It was not recognized as such in 1873, for the tournament book mentions
nothing extraordinary about the game.
Steinitz' idea of isolating the Black Pawns and trying to exploit the
Pawn weaknesses was fundamentally a far better plan than that of
Pillsbury who, twenty-three years later in the same position conceived
another idea for initiating an attack against the Black King. This will
be shown in the following game.
PILLSBURY'S TREATMENT
At the close of the century the opening gained popularity after Pillsbury's
successful adoption of his system of basing a King's side attack on the
strong position of White's Knight at K5. To-day we cannot fail to
admire the vigour that he was able to infuse into this opening, previously
considered monotonous.
This was one of the games played with the system after it had become
more widely known.
40 3. Kt-QB3 Kt-KB3
White Black 4. B-Kt5 B-K2
H. N. Pillsbury E. Schiffers 5. P-K3 Castles
6. Kt--KB3 P-QKt3
Vienna, 1898
7. PxP PxP
I . P-Q4 P-Q4 8. B-Q3 B-Kt2
2. P-QB4 P-K3 9. Kt-K5
It is interesting to note how 23. R X R, Q-R5 eh., leading to a

Pillsbury improved his system as a draw by perpetual check.
reaction to the ever improved de
fence of his opponents. Here he 20. . . . . . . Q-K2
plays Kt-K5 before castling and 21 . Q-Q1 P-Kt3
saves the move QR-B1 which does 22. P-R5 1{-Kt2
nothing to further his King's side 23. Q-Q4 QR-Q1 ?
attack. Black overestimates his chances.
With 23. . . . . P-QB4; 24. P X P
9. . . . . . . QKt-Q2 e.p., B X P; 25. P-K6 eh. , K-R3;
10. P-B4 Kt-K5 he could win a Pawn and leave
ll. B x B QxB White with only few attacking
12. B x Kt PxB chances for it.
13. Castles P-KB4
Too committal, since it leaves 24. P-K6 eh. K-R3
White in possession of his K5. 25. P x P KxP
13 . . . . . KR-K1 followed by . . . . 26. Q-K5 ! Q-R2
Kt-B1 and . . . . P-KB3 drives
off the White Knight.
14. P-KKt4
An aggressive move in keeping
with Pillsbury's style. In later years
Pillsbury recognized that Black's
weaknesses lie on the Queen's side
(as demonstrated by Steinitz in the
previous game) and in fact against
Barry in his last tournament at
Cambridge Springs, 1904, he played
14. Q-Kt3 eh., K-R1; 15. KR
Q1, Kt-B3; 16. QR-B 1 , P-B3;
17. Kt-K2, and won in a convin
cing style.
27. R{4)-B2! !
14. . . . . . . Kt x Kt This move must have been a
15. BP x Kt complete surprise to Black. Whilst
Not 15. QP x Kt, because of 15. admiring the beauty of the Rook
. . . . QR-Q1 ; followed by sacrifice we recognize that the
R-Q6. strong centralized position of the
'Vhite pieces indicates the possi
15. . . . . . . Q-Kt4 bility of such a combination.
16. R-B4 P-KR4
17. Q-Kt3 eh. K-R2 27. 0 . 0 0 0 0 P x R eh.
18. QR-KB1 RP X P 28. RxP Q-R3
19. P-Q5! P-Kt6 29. R-Kt2 eh. K-R2
White threatened 20. Kt x P, but 30. Q X QBP eh. K-R1
this could have been met by 19. 31. R-R2 R-Ktl eh.
B-R3; 20. R-B2, (20. 32. K-B2 Q x R eh.
Kt x P, Q-K2!) 20 . . . . . B-Q6. 33. Q x Q eh. K-Kt2
34. Q-B7 eh. K-R3
20. P-KR4! 35. QxB R-Kt2
20. Kt X P? P X P; dbl. eh. 21. 36. Q-R6 K-Kt3
K x P, P x Kt; 22. R x R, R x R; 37. Kt-K2 K-B3
THE OR THODOX DEFENCE 77
as. Q-B4 QR-KKtl 42. K-K1 K-Kt5

39. Kt-B4 R--R2 43. K-Q1 K-B6
40. Q-B3 eh. K-Kt4 44. Q-K1 RxP
41. P-Q6 R-R7 eh. 45. Kt-K2 Resigns.
THE MODERN CONTINUATION AGAINST

THE FIANCHETTO IN THE ORTHODOX DEFENCE
The previous two games have shown how two great masters of the
past played against the fianchetto in the Orthodox Defence. It will be
of interest to see how modern masters have treated the same opening.
And it will explain how our outlook on chess has changed especially in
respect of rational thinking.
41 Alekhine remarks that this move

White Black is more forceful than 12. P X P,
A. Alekhine J. Cuckiermann Kt X P; (as in the game Capablanca
Teichmann, Berlin, 1913). If in
Paris, 1 933 reply 12. . . . . Q X D; 13. P X P,
P x P; 14. Kt-QR4! v. ith great
1. P-Q4 P-Q4 advantage.
2. P-QB4 P-K3
3. Kt-QB3 Kt-KB3 12. Kt x B
4. B-Kt5 B-K2 13. B x B QxB
5. P-K3 QKt-Q2 14. P x P Q x BP
6. Kt-B3 Castles Necessary, in order to defend
7. R-B1 P-QKt3 the QP.
8. P x P PxP
9. B-Kt5 15. Kt-Q4 QR-B1
A move previously made by 16. Kt-B5 K-R1t
Capablanca, who explained that he Meeting the threat 17. Kt X QP,
made it on a momentary impulse. and setting a clever trap, for if now
It gives Black difficult tactical pro 17. Kt x KtP, P-Q5! (not 17 . . . . .
blems to solve, since on the one K X Kt; 18. Q-Kt4 eh.) 18. Q X P,
hand the driving off of White's Q X Q; 19. P X Q, R-KKtl; with
King's Bishop creates further weak the threat 20 . . . . . R x P eh.
nesses, and on the other hand White
threatens to exchange off Black's 17. Kt--K2 Q-Kt5
minor pieces and to exploit the 18. Q-Q4 QxQ
weakness of Black's Pawns. 19. Kt(2) x Q RxR
20. R X R Kt-B4
9. . . . . . . B-Kt2 Not 20. . . . . R-B1? 21 . R X R
10. Castles P-QR3 eh., B x R; 22. Kt-Q6, winning a
1 1 . B-QR4 P-B4? piece.
The position now reached is iden
tical with that in the Steinitz 21. Kt-Q6 B-R1
Anderssen (Game 39, page 74) 22. P-QKt4 Kt-Q6
where this same weakening move 23. R-B7 K-Ktl
was made except that White's 24. Kt-B8!
King's Bishop is on R4 instead of Alekhine observes that after 24.
Q3. P-QR3, Kt-K4; followed by . . . .
Kt-B5, saves the Bishop which
12. KB x Kt! now cannot escape its fate.
7R CHESS FROM MORPHY TO BOTWINNIK
24. . . . . . . Kt x KtP
25. Kt x KtP!
Threatening to win a piece by
R-R7.
25. . . . . . . R-Ktl
The last fling. If now 26. R-R7,
B-Kt2; 27. Kt-Q7, R-QB I ; 28.
P-Kt3, B-B3; saving the piece.
26. Kt-,---Q
- 7 R-Ql
27. P-QR3 Kt-Q6
28. R-R7 R-QBI
29. K-B1 Resigns.
There is no defence to 30.
Position after 23 . . . . . K-Ktl Kt-Kt6.
This system, originated by Capablanca and improved by Alekhine, clearly

shows how greatly our approach to the problems of the position differs
from that of the majority of the earlier masters, and it justifies Steinitz
who followed the same positional idea as did Capablanca 40 years later.
THE MODERN FORM OF THE ORTHODOX DEFENCE
This, which is even to-day considered the most solid defence, came into
fashion at the end of the last century when it was frequently adopted by
Lasker and Mason. Black's aim in this defence is to postpone the develop
ment of his Queen's Bishop and to ease his position by an exchange of
pieces. Since it entails the surrendering of the centre ( . . . . P x BP), it
remained unpopular until the end of the first World War when new
concepts on the centre were beginning to take shape.
LASKER'S TREATMENT
42 the text move is superior. To-day

it has become so established that it.
White Black is played as a kinci of routine move.
W. Steinitz Em. Lasker It is not, as thought by many, just
a waiting move. It prevents the
18th match game, 1894 freeing move 7 . . . . . P-B4; on
which 8. B x Kt, Kt x B; 9. P x BP,
I. P-Q4 P-Q4 B x P (9 . . . . . P x BP; 10. Q x Q,
2. P-QB4 P-K3 R X Q; 1 1 . P-B6!, P X P; 12. B X P),
3. Kt-QB3 Kt-KB3 10. P x P, P x P; 1 1 . Kt x P!, Q-R4
4. B-Kt5 B-K2 eh.; 12. Q-Q2, would follow.
5. Kt-KB3 Castles
6. P-K3 QKt-Q2 7. . . . . . . P-B3
7. R-B1 This is characteristic of the
In the 12th and 16th match modern defensive system, preparing
games Steinitz unsuccessfully tried for the following simplification.
7. P-B5, but, as Lasker remarked, 8. B-Q3 PxP
9. B x P Kt-Q4 Black's Queen's Bishop, sinceWhite's

10. B x B QxB only way of gaining the advantage
1 1 . P-K4 is to stop Black's P-QB4.
It appears that White has achieved
his aim-the occupation of the 15. B--Kt3 B-Kt2
centre-but his last move is too 16. Q-K3 P-QR3
committal. The question of how 17. Kt-K2 QR-B1
White is to make use of his com 18. KR-Q1 R-K1
mand of the centre has still to be In order to be able to play . . . .
answered. Direct attack on Black's P-QB4 the Black Rook must leave
King is not advisable, since his the Queen's file.
position is too solid. White's stra
tegy is therefore directed towards 19. Kt-K1 P-QB4
preventing Black from breaking up
the centre by . . . . P-K4, or . . . .
P-QB4.
11. • . .. • • Kt-B5
'Exchanging followed by
P-K4, was feasible; but then
White's centre might be strong, and
troublesome,' writes Mason, with the
typical contemporary view. How
ever, after 11 . . . . . Kt X Kt; 12.
R X Kt, P-K4; 13. Castles, P X P;
14. Q x P, P-QKt4, as in the fol
lowing game, Black has solved his
opening problems.
12. P-KKt3
Lasker considered this weakened Just as White was about to
\Vhite's position and recommended blockade the QBP with Kt-Q3,
instead 12. Castles, followed by Black is able to force his important
Q-Q2. Still after 12. Castles, freeing move . . . . P-QB4. Lasker
P-K4; 13. P X P, Kt X KP; 14. Kt X remarks that this move seems to
Kt, Q x Kt; 15. P-KKt3, Kt-R6 give Black the better game.
eh.; 16. K-Kt2, Kt-Kt4; 17.
P-B4? B-R6 eh. ; and Q-QB4 20. P x P Kt x BP
Black has solved his opening pro 21 . B-B2 R-B2
blems by the satisfactory develop 22. P-B3 KR-QB1
ment of the Queen's Bishop. 23. B-Ktl Kt-K4
12. . . . . . . Kt-I{Kt3 24. P-Kt3 P-B3
13. Castles R-Q1 25. R-B2
14. . . . . P-K4 is not so strong, This move allows Black to break
since after 14. P- Q5, P x QP; White up the centre, but the apparently
is always able to recapture with a stronger 25. R-Q2 does not prevent
piece on Q5, therefore Black con 25 . . . . . P-B4, since there follows
centrates on developing his Queen's 26. P x P, P x P; 27. B x P? Kt x P
Bishop at QKt2. eh. ; 28. K-B2, Kt x R; 29. Q x Q,
R X Q; 30. B X R, Kt(7)-K5 eh.,
14. Q-K2 P-QKt4 winning a piece.
We see that both players are fully
aware of the problems posed by the 25. P-B4
position, namely, the development of 26. P x P PxP
80 CHESS FROM MORPHY TO BOTWINN IK
27. Q-B2
In view of the threat 27.
Kt x P eh.
27. . . . . . . P-Kt3
28. Kt-B4 Kt(B4)-Q2
29. Kt-Q5 Q-Q3
30. R(B)-Q2 R-BS
31 . Kt-K3 RXR
By offering the Queen for two
Rooks which White dare not accept,
Lasker is able to force the exchange
of one pair of Rooks, thus greatly
diminishing White's defensive re
sources.
32. Kt x R Q-K3
33. K-Bl
Black threatened 33 . . . . . Kt X P 43. Kt(Kt2)-B4 Q x Q eh.
eh.; 34. Kt X Kt, B X Kt; 35. Q X B, 44. K x Q Kt-Kt5
45. B-Ktl Kt-K4
Q-KS eh.
46. Kt-Q4 K-B2
33. . . . . . . R-B4 47. P-QR3 Kt-Q4 eh.
34. Q-K3 R-Q4 48. Kt x Kt B x Kt
35. R x R QxR 49. B-Q3 K-K2
36. Kt-B3 Q-B3 50. B-K2 K-Q3
37. K-B2 K-Kt2 51. P-B4 Kt-Q2
38. Kt-K2 Q-Q3 52. P-KKt4
39. Kt-Q4 Q-KB3 White must take action before
40. Kt-Kt2? Kt-B3 Black's superiority on the Queen's
'An extraordinary oversight ac side becomes active.
countable for only by the pressure
of the time limit. 40. . . . . B x KBP 52. ...... . PxP
instead obviously gains a clear Pawn 53. B x KKtP Kt-Kt3
and leaves Black with a winning 54. P-KR4 B-Kt2
advantage' (Lasker) . 55. B-K6 Kt-Q4 eh.
56. B x Kt KxB
41 . Kt-K6 eh. K-Ktl 57. Kt-B3 B-Bl
42. B-B2 Q--K4? 58. Kt-Kt5 P-KR4
Lasker writes, 'Again the chance 59. Kt-K4 B-B4
to win at once is overlooked. 42. 60. Kt-B3 eh. K-B4
. . . . Kt(3)-K4; 43. Kt-Q4, B x 61 . Kt-K4 eh. K-Q4
KBP wins without much difficulty.' Drawn.
This game, considered one of the best in the first Steinitz-Lasker match
for the world championship, shows clearly the characteristics of the new
defence system. Black gives up the centre but tries to maintain equili
brium in an attempt to break White's centre by means of a vigorous
counter-attack. Lasker's execution of this plan is admirable, though he
is helped to some extent by White's weak handling of the opening.
Far more important from our point of view is the beautifully conducted
middle-game. Here we see White in complete possession of the centre,
but unable to do anything with it. 'Ve cannot blame Steinitz overmuch,
for he was unaware that the centre is not an end in itself but only a means
to an end, since even the great teacher Tarrasch failed to realize this.
THE OHTHODOX DEFENCE 81
Unless White is able either to transform his central preponderance into

a tangible advantage, e.g., a King's side attack, before Black has com
pleted his development, or to prevent Black from developing harmoniously,
his centre may suddenly change from an asset to a serious liability. This
dynamic conception of the centre (shown clearly in the Griinfeld Defence)
was imperfectly understood until quite recently, and proves how even
an accepted fundamental principle may have to be considerably modified
as a result of prolonged experience.
SHOWALTER'S CONTINUATION
Whilst Lasker had done much to place the new Orthodox Defence to
the Queen's Gambit on a sound footing, it was left to Showalter to create
the defensive system which even to-day is considered the safest for Black
to adopt. Showalter's frequent adoption of this system proves that it
was more than a fortuitous experiment.
43 This defensive move is not in

keeping with Pillsbury's previous
White Black strategy. Better was 18. P-K5,
H. N. Pillsbury J. Showalter Kt-B4; 19. Kt-Q4, B-Kt2; 20.
Kt-B5!
Match game, 1897
18. Kt-B3
1. P-Q4 P-Q4 19. Q-Kt5 P-KR3
2. P-QB4 P-K3 20. Q-R4 Q-Kt5
3. Kt-QB3 Kt-KB3 A well - timed counter - attack,
4. B-Kt5 B-K2 threatening 21. . . . . Kt-Kt5.
5. P-K3 QKt-Q2
6. R-B1 Castles 21. Kt-Q4
7. Kt-B3 P--B3
8. B-Q3 PxP
9. B x BP Kt-Q4
1 0. B x B QxB
1 1 . Castles Kt x Kt
12. R x Kt P-K4
13. P-K4
The logical move, according to
the nineteenth century tenets, pre
venting 13. . . . . P-K5; and gain
ing the advantage in the centre.
13. . . . . . . PxP
14. Q X P P-QKt4
A bold manceuvre. Modern theory
recommends 14. . . . . Kt--Kt3; 15.
B-Kt3, B-K3; with equality.
21 . . . . . . . R-Kt3
15. B-K2 P-QB4 If 21 . . . . . Q x KtP; 22. Kt-B6,
16. Q-Q5 R-Ktl R-Kt2; 23. P-K5, Kt-Q2; (23.
17. R-Q1 P-B5 Kt-R2; 24. Kt-K7 eh.,
18. R-K3 K-R1; 25. Kt X B, R X Kt; 26.
R-QS eh. ) 24. Kt-K7 eh., K-Rl; A clever manreuvre. Against the
25. P-K6, gives White a strong passive defence 43. P-B3, R-B6
attack. and R X QRP soon decides.
22. P-QKt3 R-Kl

23. Kt-B2 Q-B4
24. P-QKt4 Q-Kt4
By exchanging Queens Black gets
the better game, since White cannot
make much use of the open Queen's
file, whereas Black's passed Pawn
is a potential asset for the end-game.
25. Q x Q PxQ
26. P-K5 Kt-Kt5
27. B x Kt B xB
28. R-Q5
28. R-Q2 threatening 29. R-
KKt3 is better.
43. . . . . . • R x KKtP
28 . . . . . . . B-K3 If 43. . . . . R-B6; 44. Kt-B5,
29. R-Q4 B-B4 R X P; 45. Kt-K6 follows.
30. Kt-Kl R-QB3
31. P-KKt4 B-KtS 44. Kt-B5 B-QS
32. P-QR3 P-B6 45. R-Q7
33. R-Ql B-Kt3 If White plays 45. Kt-K6,
34. K-Bl KR-QBI B-B6; 46. R x P eh., K-B4; 47.
35. R-QBI Kt-B5, R-QB5; gives Black a
Forced since Black threatens 35. strong attack.
. . . . R-R3 winning the QRP.
45 . . . . . . . B-B6
35. . . . . . . R-B5
46. R-Q3 B-Kt7 eh.
35 . . . . . K-Bl looks much more
47. K-K2 R-R5
promising. If 36. Kt-Q3, B x Kt;
48. R-Q7 R x RP
37. R x B, K-K2; could follow and
49. Kt-K6 R-R5
White's KP is weak.
50. P-KB3 R-QB5
51. R X KtP eh. K-B4
36. P-K6 P-B3 52. Kt-B7 R-B7 eh.
37. P-K7 P-B7 53. K K3
- B-BS
38. R x P BxR 54. K-Q4 '� .� R-B5 eh.
- ·
39. P-KS(Q) eh. R X Q 55. K-K3 R-B6 eh.
40. R x R eh. K-B2 56. K-B2 B-B5
41. R-QRS B-R5 57. R-K7 R x RP
White has eliminated the dan 58. Kt-KS R-R7 eh.
gerous passed Pawn, but Black still 59. K-Kt3
has the superior game since his If 59. K-Kl, K-B5; is too
Rook and Bishop co-operate better strong.
than White's Rook and Knight.
59 . . . . . . . B-BS
42. R x P eh. K-Kt3 60. Kt-Q6 eh. K-Kt3
43. Kt-Q3 61. Kt-K4 R-Kt7 eh.
62. K-R3 P-B4 64. Kt-B5 R-Kt7

63. R-K6 eh. K-Kt2! dis. eh.
Not 63 . . . . . K-B2; 64. R-B6 65. K-Kt3 RXP
eh. and Black won on the 91st move.
In spite of Showalter's masterly exposition of the principles of his new
system, contemporary players failed to appreciate its importance, and it
lay neglected for many years.
However, Pillsbury himself must have realized that this 'simplifying'
system had more in it than was at first apparent, since in a later game
we notice that he tried to avoid an early exchange of his King's Bishop.
Pawn position. His last move, al
though risky, is necessary to prevent
White Black 23. P-K5 and Kt-B6 which
H. N. Pillsbury J. Showalter would win for White.
Match game, New York, 1897 23. Kt-B2 K-Kt2

24. Kt-R3 Q-Q3
1. P-Q4 P-Q4 25. QR-Q1 Q-Kt3
2. P-QB4 P-K3 26. KR-K1 R-Q2
3. Kt-QB3 Kt-KB3 Black, by exerting pressure on
4. B-Kt5 B-K2 White's centre, finds the right
5. P-K3 QKt-Q2 answer to White's impending attack.
6. R-B1 Castles
7. Kt-B3 P-B3 27. P-K5 PxP
8. B-Q3 PxP 28. Kt-Kt5 Kt x Kt
9. B X P P-QKt4 29. Q x Kt R-B3
This move introduces the second 30. Q x KP R-Q4
important line in the Orthodox
Defence in which Black develops
his Queen's Bishop at Kt2. Showal
ter's handling of the opening is lucid
and distinctive in his clear - cut
adherence to one system, not mixing
the two as did Lasker in Game 42.
The importance of this system will
be seen later on.
10. B-Q3 P-QR3
1 1 . Castles P-B4
12. Kt-K4 P-B5
13. Kt x Kt eh. Kt x Kt
14. B-Ktl B-Kt2
15. Kt-K5 Kt-K5
16. B x B QxB
17. P-B3 Kt-Q3
18. Q-B2 P-Kt3 This is the turning point of the
19. Q-Q2 P-B3 game. 31. Q-Kt8 has been sug
20. Kt-Kt4 Kt-B2 gested as a good continuation,
21. P-K4 QR-Q1 after which 31. . . . . R x QP; 32.
22. Q-K3 P�KR4 K-R1, R X R; 33. R X R, gives
Pillsbury has cleverly evolved an Black a difficult position. However,
attacking formation on the King's Black has a better line in 31. . . . .
side and Showalter is only able to R-Q3; 32. B-K4, B-Q4; 33.
hold the balance by weakening his Q x Q, R x Q; 34. B x B, P x B; and
7
84 CHESS FR OM MORPHY TO BOTWINNII{
his Queen's side majority gives him 39. . . . . B-B3; 40. R X Q, B X Q;

the superior game. with a won end-game.
38. QxQ
31. Q-K4 P-K41
0 0 0 0 0 0
39. RxQ R-Q4

32. K-R1 PxP
40. R-K3 R(B2)-Q2
33. Q-K8 R-Q1
41 . K-B2 K-B3
34. Q-K7 eh.
42. R(Q1)-K1 R(Q4)-Q3
If 34. R-K7 eh., K-R3 and
43. P-R4 P-Kt5
White has nothing better than to
44. R-QB1 B-R3
give up the exchange with 35. R x B.
45. B-R2 R-QB2
46. B-Ktl P-B6
34. 0 0 0 0 0 R-B2
0 47. PxP PxP
35. Q-K5 eh. Q-B3 48. BxP RxB
36. P-QR4 P-Q6 49. RxR BxR
37. P x P PxP 50. K-K3 B-B4
38. K-Ktl 51. K-Q4 P-B7
38. Q X KtP is met by 38. 52. K-K3 R-Q2
B X P; 39. R-KB1 (39. P X B, 53. P-Kt4 R-Q8
Q x P eh.; 40. K-Ktl, R-B4) Resigns.
RUBINSTEIN's CoNTINUATION-THE TEMPO STRUGGLE SYSTEM
Rubinstein's name is closely connected with the Orthodox Defence,

mainly from White's point of view. He achieved great success at a time
when there was no clear-cut defensive system worked out. To-day his
contribution is considered as merely transitory, because against his
'tempo struggle' (8. Q-B2,) system several equalizing lines have been
found.
Rubinstein's handling of the opening left the path open for Capablanca
to perfect a workable defence, and it is still important, since it proved that
great accuracy and tactical skill are necessary to equalize in the Orthodox
Defence.
45 necessary. To-day this move is

thought to give Black a difficult
White Black defence.
A. Rubinstein G. Maroczy
Goteborg, 1920 8. Q-B2 PxP
If 8. . . . . P-B3; 9. B-Q3,
1 . P-Q4 Kt-KB3 P x P; 10. B x P, Kt-Q4; 1 1 . B x B,
2. Kt-KB3 P-Q4 Q x B; 12. Kt-K4! KKt-B3; 13.
3. P-B4 P-K3 Kt-Kt3, would make it difficult
4. B-Kt5 B-K2 for Black to carry through the
5. P-K3 QKt-Q2 freeing move . . . . P-K4, since
6. Kt-QB3 Castles White would threaten both Kt-B5
7. R-B1 R-K1 and Kt-Kt5. These threats show
This defence, preferred to 7. . . . . the weakness of 7. . . . . R-K1;
P-B3 (as played previously by leaving Black's KB2 exposed to
Showalter), reflects the dogma then attack.
prevailing: namely, time must not
be lost by playing 7 . . . . . P-B3 as , 9. B x P P--ll-t
ultimately . . . . P-B4 will be 10. Castles PxP
1 1 . Kt x P P-QR3 22. B x Kt B-K3

In those days to restore equili 23. Q-K4! BxB
brium in the centre by 9 . . . . P-B4 24. RxB QR-B1
and . . . . P x QP, was considered 25. QR-Q1
more important than developing
the Queen's Bishop. The latter line
had already been proved by Showal
ter to give Black full equality (see
Games 43-44, pages 81-83).
12. KR-Q1 Q-R4

13. B-R4 Kt-K4
14. B-K2 Kt-Kt3
15. B-Kt3 P-K4
Black has seemingly freed his
position and he was able even to
develop his Queen's Bishop along
the QB1-R3 diagonal, which is
still considered the soundest plan.
But Rubinstein calculated deeper.
16. Kt-Kt3 Q-B2 The only advantage Rubinstein

17. Q-Ktl ! Q-Ktl gained from the opening is the
Necessary. 18. Kt-Kt5, was control of the Queen's file but it is
threatening winning the exchange. sufficient. Now on 25 . . . . . P-B4?
26. Q x BP, R x Kt; 27. R-Q7
18. B-B3 Q-R2
would be decisive.
A remarkable position. At the
moment when Black hoped to bring
25. . . . . . . B-B1
his Queen's Bishop into play White
26. P-QKt3
prevents this development by tac
Here the above variation was
tical threats. On 18 . . . . . B-KKt5;
threatened, since the mate on KKt2
19. B x B, Kt X B; 20. Kt-Q5, with
is prevented.
the double threats Kt-B7 and
Kt-Kt6 would decide. If 18 . . . . .
26. P-QKt4
B-K3; 19. Kt-Q41 and finally if
27. Kt-Q6 B x Kt
18. B-Q2; 19. Kt-Q5!
28. RxB R-B2
Kt x Kt; 20. B x Kt is too strong.
29. P-KR4 P-B3
19. Kt-R5! 30. Q-Q5 eh. ! K-R1
Preventing Black from playing 31 . P-R5 Kt-B1
19. . . . . R-Ktl ; and 20. . . . . 32. P-R6 Kt-Kt3
P-QKt4; by the threat Kt-B6. 33. Q-K6! R-KB1
34. R-Q7 PxP
19. B-QKt5 35. B-R4! Resigns.
20. Kt-B4 B-Q2 On 35. Kt x B; 36. Q-K7,
21 . Kt-Q5 Kt x Kt wins.
CAPABLANCA's FREEING MANCEUVRE
It was left to Capablanca to perfect a system which combined the

solidity of the games of his predecessors with the convincing clarity of
form that characterized his style. To-day his 'methods are so widely
known that it is difficult to appreciate how slow his contemporaries were
86 CHESS FROM MORPHY TO BOTWI��IK
to realize the value of his defensive svstem. It is well to remember that

before this was perfected, great ma:sters struggled in vain to find an
adequate defence to the Queen's Gambit and Rubinstein had li ttle difliculty
in obtaining a superior game with the White pieces.
When Capablanca's system became known and was adopted by other
masters, such as Vidmar in London, 1922, and Tarrasch in Hastings, 1922
(see notes to the following game), they found that a deviation from it,
however slight, resulted in a positive decline of position.
The following game shows Capablanca playing his defence against a
line introduced by Rubinstein, and at the time considered strong.
46 P-QB4! 14. B-R6, B X B; 15.

Q x B, P x P; 16. Kt x P, Kt-B4;
White Black 17. Q-Kt5, draw. Soon after this
F. Marshall J. R. Capablanca game the great Chess teacher of his
day-Tarrasch-tried to improve
Capablanca's system by interposing
New York, 1918 the move (after 13. Q-Q3,) 13.
. . . . R-Q1? 14. Q-K2, P-QB4;
1 . P-Q4 P-Q4 15. B-Kt5, P x P; 16. Kt x P,
2. Kt-KB3 Kt--KB3 B-Kt2; 17. R-B7, QR-Ktl ;
3. P-B4 P-K3 1 8 . R-Q1, B-Q4; 1 9 . Kt-B6,
4. Kt-B3 QKt-Q2 Resigns. (Bogoljubov-Tarrasch,
5. B-Kt5 B-K2 Hastings, 1922.) It emphasises that
6. P-K3 Castles this position cannot be assessed by
7. R-B1 P-B8 old conceptions. (On this occasion a
8. Q-B2 PxP gain of a tempo proved fatal. )
Against Rubinstein in St. Peters
burgh, 1914, Capablanca continued 13. B-Kt2
8 . . . . . R-K1;9. B-Q3, P x P; 10. 14. KR-K1 KR-Q1
B x P, P-QKt4; 1 1 . B-Q3, P 15. P-Q5 Kt-B4!
QR3? and after 12. Kt-K5, he lost This move is stronger than 15.
a Pawn. We might assume that he . . . . Kt-B1; which Capablanca
evolved this more solid system on played against Kostic in an earlier
the basis of 'trial and error.' round of the same tournament.
Now Black threatens 16.
9. B x P Kt-Q4 Kt x P; also BP x P.
10. B x B QxB
1 1 . Castles Kt X Kt
The game Capablanca-Vidmar, 16. P x KP Kt x P(K3)
London, 1922, continued 11 . • • • •
17. B x Kt QxB
P-QKt3? 1 2. Kt X Kt, BP X Kt; 18. Kt-Q4!
13. B-Q3, P-KR3; 14. Q-B7, Capablanca explains that he
Q-Kt5; 15. P-QR3! and White hoped to win a tempo by attacking
soon obtained a winning position. the QRP but that the text-move
,
This proves that even his great took him by surprise. 18. . . . .
contemporaries did not at once Q X HP? 19. R-R1, wins the Queen.
appreciate the finer p oints of his
defensive system. 18. . . . . . . Q-K4!
The only move! An excellent
12. Q X Kt P-QKt3 example of Capablanca's intuition,
13. P-K4 as the only visible compensation for
The game Alekhine-Capablanca, the sacrificed Pawn is a slight
London, 1922, continued 13. Q-Q3, initiative. 18. . . . . Q-Q2; 19.
24. R-IG
Marshall prefers to stake every
thing on a counter-attack rather
than to remain with his pieces tied
up.
24. 0 0 0 0R-K3
0 0
25. R( 1)-QB1 K-Kt2

26. P-QKt4 P-Kt4
27. P-R3 R-Kt3
28. K-B1 R-R7
29. K-Ktl
Better was 29. P-K6.
29. 0 P-R6
0 . 0 . 0
30. P-Kt3 P-QR3

31. P-K6 R x KP
Position after 17 . . . . Q x B
32. P-Kt4
.
If the Knight moves 32. . . . .

Kt-B5, P-B3; 20. Q-KKt3,
P-R7 eh. ; 33. K x P, R-R3 eh.;
K-R1; 21. QR-Q1, Q-KB2; 22.
34. K-Ktl, R-R8 Mate would
P-KR4, would give White an
follow.
overwhelming position.
19. Kt x P QxQ 32. . . . . . . R-R3
20. R x Q R-Q7 33. P-B3
21. R-Ktl On 33. P-Kt5, P-R7 eh.; 34.
A mistake. Capablanca gives 21 . K-R1, R x Kt; 35. R x R, R x BP;
Kt-K7 eh., K-B1 ; 22. R-B7, wins.
R-K1; (22 . . . . . B x P? 23. P-B31)
33. . . . . . . R-Q3
23. R X B, R X Kt; 24. R-Kt8 eh.,
Better than the obvious 33.
R-K1; 25. R x R eh., K x R; with
P-R7 eh.
a probable draw.
21. . . . . . . R-K1 34. Kt-K7 R(Q3)-Q7
22. P-K5 35. Kt-B5 eh. K-B3
On 22. P-B3, P-B4; 23. P X P, 36. Kt-R4 K-Kt4
R(1)-K7; would follow. 37. Kt-B5 R-Kt7 eh.
38. K-B1 P-R7
22. . . . . . . P-KKt41 39. P-B4 eh. K x BP
23. P-KR4 PxP Resigns.
This game shows that in order to carry through the idea of the defence
(the development of the Queen's Bishop), tactics as masterly as those used
by Capablanca are necessary. By his fine Pawn sacrifice Black, according
to Capablanca, obtains an easy game.
CAPABLANCA'S CONTRIBUTION (WITH WHITE)

Showalter has already shown (see Games 43-44, pages 81-83) that
Black can develop his Queen's Bishop either on the diagonal QB1-R6
by playing . . . . P-K4, or on the QKt2-R8 diagonal by playing . . . .
P-QB4 (after . . . . P-QKt4). Black thus appears to have plenty of
latitude, but CapabJanca proved that in actual fact BJack is forced to
adopt the particular line dictated by '\\'bite's play. The following game
is a good example of this.
88 CHESS FROM MOR PHY TO BOTWINNIK
47 18 . . . . . . . QR-Q1
19. Kt-K5 Q-Q3
White Black 20. P-B4 Kt-Kt l
J. R. Capablanca H. Steiner 21. R-B7 B-Rl
22. R x RP Kt-B3
Budapest, 1928 23. R x B!
Far stronger than 23. Kt x Kt,
1. P-Q4 Kt-KB3 B x Kt; 24. Q x B, Q x B; with some
2. P-QB4 P-K3 attacking chances for Black.
3. Kt-QB3 P-Q4
4. B-Kt5 QKt-Q2 23. . . . . . . Kt x Kt
5. P-K3 B-K2 24. R x R RxR
6. Kt-B3 Castles 25. B-K2! Q-Q7
7. R-B1 P-B3 A desperate counter-attack. On
8. B-Q3 PxP 25. Kt-Q2; 26. R-Q1,
9. B x P Kt-Q4 Q-K2; 27. Q-B7, K-B1; 28.
10. B x B QxB B-Kt5, is decisive.
1 1 . Castles Kt x Kt
12. R X Kt P-QKt3
As this game demonstrates, Black
has only one adequate move: . . . .
P-K4.
13. Q-B2! P-QB4

13. . . . . B-Kt2; is not satis
factory, since after 14. B-Q3,
Black must play the weakening
move . . . . P-KB4; for after 14.
. . . . P-Kt3; 15. B-K4, he would
lose the QB Pawn. This variation
would not be available for White if
his Queen were standing before his
Rook. (The reason for this is that
Black could pin White's Bishop
after 16. B X BP.) 26. Q x Q!
Typical of Capablanca· to choose
14. P x P Kt x P a simple and conclusive line instead
15. P-QKt4 Kt-R3 of the gain of a piece for after 26.
Black hopes to win a tempo by P x Kt, Q x P eh.; 27. K-R1,
attack on the QKtP. On 15 . . . . . R-Q7; Black can still hold out
Kt-Q2; 16. B-Q3, P-Kt3; 17. a while.
R-B7, with the threat 18. B-K4
is too strong. 26. . . . . . . RxQ
27. R-B8 eh. K-Kt2
16. P-QR3 B-Kt2 28. K-B1 Kt-Q2
17. B-Q3 P-Kt3 Black cannot avoid the pin, the
18. R-B1! point of White's 26th move.
Preventing Black from opposing
the Rook. After 18 . . . . . QR-B1; 29. R-Q8 K-B3
19. R x R, R x R; 20. Q x R eh. , 30. B-Kt5 R-Q4
B X Q ; 21 . R X B eh., K-Kt2; 22. 31. P-QR4!
B X Kt, White gains Rook and two Stronger than 31. B x Kt, K-K2;
minor pieces for the Queen. 32. R-QKt8, R x B; 33. R x P,
R-H2; and resistance is still 32. PxR K-K2

possible. 33. H -QB 8 P-K4
31. . . . . .
. RxB 34. R-B6 P-K5
The Pawn ending after 31.
35. K-K2 P-B4
K-K2; 32. R X Kt eh. , R X R; 33.
B x R, K x B; 34. K K2 is hope
- ,
36. K-Q2 K-B2
less for Black. 37. K B3
- Resigns.
From this game we discover that when the White Rook is on the Queen's
Bishop file with the Queen behind it, Black cannot develop his Bishop
on the QKt2-R8 diagonal without fatally weakening his Queen's side.
(See Game 46, page 86, for an example when he can do it safely!)
BoooLJunov's CoNTRIBUTION
In this game, an interesting counterpart to the previous one, Bogoljubov

shows that White can prevent Black playing the liberating move . . . .
P-K4; thereby restricting Black's methods of development to one line
only (see note to move 11 ).
48 R-Q8 Mate would follow. How

White Black insignificant looking moves can
E. D. Bogoljubov Sir G. A. Thomas prove decisive is shown by com
paring this game with Yates-Gilg
Carlsbad, 1929 in the same tournament, in which
from a similar position White con
1. P-Q4 P-Q4 tinued 12. B-K2, P X P; 13. B X P,
2. P-QB4 P-K3 P-K4; 14. Castles, P-K5; and
3. Kt-QB3 Kt-KB3 Black has equalized.
4. B-Kt5 QKt-Q2
5. P-K3 B-K2 12. . . . . . . Q-B3
6. Kt-B3 Castles 13. B-K2 P-QKt3
7. R-B1 P-B3 Black changes his plan of playing
8. P-QR3 Kt-K5 . . . . P-K4, since even if he pre
The best move. 8. . . . . P x P; pared this move with 13. . . . .
9. B x P, Kt-Q4; would lead to a P-KKt3; 14. Castles, P X P; 15.
position in which White gained the B x P, P-K4; 16. P x P, Kt x P;
important move 8. P-QR3 (see 17. Kt X Kt, Q X Kt; ( 17.
Game 46, page 86). R X Kt; 18. P-B4!) 18. Q X Q,
R X Q; 19. R-Q8 eh. , K-Kt2; 20.
9. B x B QxB KR-Q1, the pin on the last rank
10. Q-B2 Kt X Kt would be ruinous.
1 1 . Q x Kt R-K1
Black is trying for . . . . P-K4; 14. Castles B-Ra
but this game shows that it is not 15. P-QKt4 QR-B1
feasible. Capablanca's continuation 16. R-B1 P-K4
is best: 1 1 . . . . . P X P; 12. B X P, On 16 . . . . . P-B4; 17. KtP x P,
P-QKt3; and . . . . P-QB4. P x P; 18. Q-R5 would follow.
1 2. R-Q1 17. KR-Q1 P x QP

With this move White prevents 17 . . . . . P-K5; 18. Kt-Q2, and
12 . . . . . P x P; 13. B x P, P-K4; ultimately � White will break up
since after the exchanges on K5, B lack s position by P-B3.
'
18. Q X P! Kt-K4 33. K-K3 R-R7

On 18 . . . . . Q x Q; 19. Kt x Q, 34. P-Kt3 K-Bl
P-QB4; 20. B-Kt4! is decisive. 35. B-K8
With this move White conceives
19. Kt x Kt Q x Kt a plan of giving up his QR Pawn
20. Q x Q RxQ for Black's B Pawn. This would
give him a two Pawn superiority
on the King's side.
35. . . . . . . K-Ktl
_ 36. R-Q7 K-Bl
On (a) 36 . . . . . B-R5; 37. B x PI
R x P eh.; 38. R-Q31 wins; and on
(b) 36 . . . . . R x RP; 37. R-Q3,
wins.
37.R-R7 K-Ktl
38.R-K71 R x RP
39.K-Q4! K-Bl
40.K-K5 K-Q1
41.K-B6 B-B5
42.P-B4 P-QKt4
43.B X BP R-R3 eh.
21. P-Kt51 44. B-K6! P-Kt5
Forcing the issue, since after 21. The Queen's ending is interesting
. . . . P X KtP; 22. P X KtP, B-Kt2; after 44 . . . . . R X B eh.; 45. R X R,
23. R x R eh., B x R; 24. R-QBI, B x .R; 46. K x B, P-Kt5; 47.
followed by R-B7 would lead to a K-B71, P-Kt6; 48. P-K5, P
winning position. Kt7; 49. P-K6, P-Kt8(Q); 50.
P-K7 eh., K-B2; 51. P-K8(Q),
21. . . . . . . B-Kt2 Q-Kt6 eh.; 52. K-Kt7, Q x P;
Black decides to sacrifice a Pawn 53. Q-K7 eh., followed by Q
to obtain some play. Kt5 and White would win both
Black Pawns.
22. P x BP R x BP 45. P-B5 PxP
Better than 22. . . . . B x P; 23. 46. P x P B xB
P x P, B-Kt2. 46 . . . . . R-Kt3; 47. R-Q7 eh.,
K-Kl; 48. R x P, K-Q1; 49.
23. P x P RxR R-R8 eh., K-B2; 50. R-B8 eh.,
24. R x R K-B1 followed by R X B wins.
If 24. . . . . R x QP?; 25. B-B3
wins. 47. PxB R-R6
25. R-B7 BxP 48. R-Q7 eh. K-Kl
26. R x RP B-Kt6 49. P-Kt4 R-B6 eh.
27. K-Bl R-QB4 50. K-Kt5 R-K 6
28. B-Q3 ll-B8 eh. 51 . RxP RxP
29. K-K2 R-QR8 52. R-QKt7 R-K5
30. P-K4 P-Kt3 53. P-R5 K-Bl
3 1 . P-KR4 K-10 54. P-H6 K-Ktl
32. B-Kt5 eh. K-QI 55. K-R5 Resigns.
Th is game confirms that B l ack can develop his QB on the QKt2-R8

diagonal only when White's Queen is on the QB file with the Rook behind
it, and further establishes that Black has to adopt the line White forces
upon him. Here is expressed the essence of the Orthodox Defence ; but
though it appears simple, its development was protracted and complex.
( See also Game 47, page 88.)
ALEKHINE's PREVENTIVE SvsTEM
The previous game demonstrated that Black can secure equality if he

masters the tactical points of the defence and adapts his defensive plan
to the line that White forces on him. Then he will be able to secure a
free development for his Queen's Bishop after either P-K4 or P-QB4.
After his game against Capablanca at London in 1922, Alekhine realized
this and evolved a new system aimed at preventing, at least temporarily,
Black's freeing moves, and at utilizing the time gained to consolidate the
slight advantage in space that White obtains after Black's surrender of
the centre by QP x BP. At first he was eminently successful with his
new system and even Capablanca, in their match, had considerable
difficulty in maintaining equilibrium.
49 K-Kl l P x P; 18. R x P, R x R;
19. Kt x R, gives White the advan
White Black tage), as Capablanca played in the
A. Alekhine J. R. Capablanca 6th match game in which he was
unable to play either of the freeing
22nd Game, World Championship, moves P-B4 and P-K4.
1927, Buenos Aires
12. Kt-Kt3 Q-Kt5 eh.
I. P-Q4 Kt-KB3 13. Q-Q2 Q x Q eh.
2. P-QB4 P-K3 14. K x Q R-QI
3. Kt-QB3 P-Q4 15. KR-QI P-QKt3
4. B-Kt5 QKt-Q2 16. P-K4 B-Kt2
5. P-K3 B-K2 17. P-K5 Kt-Kl
6. Kt-B3 Castles 18. K-K3 K-B1
7. R-QBI P-B3 In the 16th match game Capa
8. B-Q3 PxP blanca played 18. . . . . P-QB4 at
9. B x P Kt-Q4 once, but drifted into an inferior
10. B x B position after 19. P-Q5, P x P; 20.
Previously Alekhine had tried the B x P, B x B; 21. R x B.
more aggressive move 10. Kt-K4,
but this proved to be too risky on 19. Kt-Kt5
account of 10 . . . . . P-B3; 1 1 . In the 28th match game Alekhine
B-R4, Q-R4 eh.; 1 2. K-K2, continued with 19. P-KR4, but he
QKt-Kt3; with good counterplay considers the text-move far superior.
for Black.
19. P-KR3
10. . . . . . . QxB 20. Kt(5)-K4 K-K2
1 1 . Kt-K4 Kt(Q4)-B3 21. P-B4 P-KB4
This is the correct order of the 22. Kt-B3
moves and not 1 1 . . . . . Q-Kt5 eh.; After 22. P x P e.p. eh., Kt(2) x
12. Q-Q2, Q X Q eh. ; 13. K X Q, P; Black gains command of his Q4
R-QI; 14. KR-QI , QKt-B3; 15. with sufficient counter chances.
Kt X Kt eh. , Kt X Kt; 16. B-Kt3!
(preventing 16 . . . . . P-QKt3 and 22. Kt-B2
also 16. . . . . P-B4; when 17. 23. Kt(Kt3)-K2 P-KKt4
92 CHESS FROM MOR PHY TO BOT,VINNIK
24. P-KR4 P-Kt5 QI far better and gives 34. R x Kt,

Playable was 24. . . . . P x RP; Kt X R; 3:3. R X Kt, R-QKtl ; 36.
25. R-KRI, KR-Ktl ; 26. R x P, Kt-R4 (36. Kt x B, R-Kt6 eh. )
R x P. KR-Bl; 37. R x R, R x R; 38.
P-Kt4, P X P; 39. P X P, with only
25. Kt-Kt3 P-QR4 a very slight advantage to White.
26. B-Kt3 QR-Bl
In the 24th mate� game Capa
34. Kt X B R-Kt6 eh.
blanca played the stronger 26. . . . .
On 34 . . . . . R x Kt; 35. Kt-K2!
P-Kt4; and soon equalised.
with the threats of Kt-Q4 eh. and
27. P-QR3 R-Bl also P-Kt4 and R x Kt,
28. R-Q2 B-Rl
To free the QKt file for the Rook. 35. R-B3 R x R eh.
29. R(2)-QB2 P-B4

After 29(! !) moves Black is at
last able to play this important
move which ought to give him
equality.
30. P x P Kt x BP
Alekhine considers this the deci
sive mistake, suggesting that with
30. . . . . P x P; followed by occupy
ing the QKt file and his Q4 square,
Black would have obtained suffi
cient counter-play.
31. Kt-R4 Kt(2)-R3
36. P x R! !
A surprise for Capablanca who
probably expected 36. R x R, when
36 . . . . . R x Kt; 37. P-Kt4, P X P;
38. P x P, Kt x P! 39. R x Kt,
R-R6 eh. followed by Kt-Q6 eh.
would have given him the advan
tage.
36. . . . . . . R x Kt
37. R-Ql R-KBI
Necessary, for if 37 . . . . . Kt-
Kt2; 38. R-QKtl .
38. R-Q6 eh. K-K2

32. B x P! 39. R x P Kt-B2
A most difficult type of sacrifice, 40. R-R7 eh. K-Ql
White obtaining two Pawns and an 41 . P-B4 Kt(2)-K3
attack for his Bishop. 42. R-QR7?
A mistake: Alekhine points out
32. . . . . . . KxB that he had an easy win by Kt
33. Kt X KtP R-QKtl K2-B3-Q5, preventing Black's
Alekhine considers 33. . . . . QR- counter of Kt x P (on account of
T HE ORTHODOX DEFENCE 93
46. K x Kt Kt-K3 eh.

47. K-K3 P -B5 eh.
48. K-B2 P x Kt eh.
49. K x P R-KRl
50. R-Q5 eh. K-K2
5 1 . P-B5 RxP
52. P-B6 Kt-Bl
53. R-B5 K-Ql
54. K x P R-Kt3 eh.
55. K-B3 K-B2
Position ajteT 41 . . . . . Kt(2)-K3
the dominating position of the

Knight at Q5).
42. . . . . . . Kt-B2
43. R x P Kt(4)-K3
44. P-R5
Stronger was 44. Kt-K2, but
Black is still able to hold the posi
tion by 44. . . . . K-Q2; 45. Kt
Q4, Kt x Kt; 46. K x Kt, R-QKti !
47. R-R7, K-B3; 48. P-K6, A highly instructive position.
K-KKt3; 49. R-R4, Kt x P eh. ; Though White has four Pawns for
50. K-K5, R-Kl; 5 1 . K x P , the piece and Black dare not allow
P-Kt6! a variation given by an exchange of Rooks, he still
Alekhine. cannot win.
44. . . . . . . K-Q2 56. P-Kt4 Kt-K3

45. P-R6 57. R-Q5 Kt-Bl
58. R-B5 Kt-K3
59. R-Q5 Kt-Bl
60. R-R5 R x BP
61. K-K4 R-B8
62. R___.:.R7 eh. K-K3
63. R-R6 eh. K-Q2
64. R-R7 eh. K-K3
65. R-R6 eh. K-K2
66. P-R4 Kt-Q2
67. R-R6 R-K8 ch.
68. K-Q4 Kt x P
69. P-R5 Kt x P
70. R-R7 eh. K-Q3
71. P-R6 R-QR8
72. P-R7 Kt-B3
73. R-QKt7 Kt-Q2
74. R-Kt2 RxP
45. . . . . . . Kt x P! 75. R-Q2 Kt-B4
94 CHESS FROM MORPHY TO .BOTWI�"'NIK
76. K-B4 dis. eh. K-B3 82. R-R4 eh. K--B6

77. R-I\R2 R-R5 eh. 83. K-B2 R-Q6
78. K-B3 R-KKt5 84. R-KB4 K-Q7
79. K-Q2 R-Kt6 85. K-Kt2 R-Q4
80. R-R5 K-Kt4 86. K-B3 K-Q6
81. K-K2 K-B5 Draw.
A truly titanic struggle and an extremely difficult type of game to follow.

Indeed it would be almost impossible but for Alekhine's comments. There
are two important points to be observed. Firstly, that a pure tactical
struggle does not take place until the 2_6th move, at which point the game
diverges from the 24th match game. Secondly, that Black was eventually
able to free his game with . . . . P-QB4, although he required 29 moves
to prepare for this key-move.
LASKER'S DEFENSIVE SYSTEM
The following game shows a different defensive system. Lasker here

adopts a more energetic but also a riskier line than that played by Capa
blanca (see Game 49, page 91). Although he succeeds in forcing through
the liberating move P-K4, at an early stage, nevertheless he loses
very quickly.
50 Kt3, B-Kt5; 17. P-KR3, offering

the QP when White has a strong
White Black attack on account of the open
A. Alekhine Em. Lasker King's file. But even 14. Kt x P,
Kt-Kt3; 15. B-Kt3, gives White
Ziirich, 1934 a strong game without any need to
sacrifice.
1. P-Q4 P-Q4
2. P-QB4 P-K3 14. Q-Q1
3. Kt-QB3 Kt-KB3 15. KKt x P Kt-K4
4. Kt-B3 B-K2 1 6. B-Kt3 B x Kt
5. B-Kt5 QKt-Q2 17. Kt x B Q-Kt3?
6. P-K3 Castles
7. R-B1 P-B3
8. B-Q3 PxP
9. B x BP Kt-Q4
10. B x B QxB
1 1 . Kt-K4 KKt-B3
12. Kt-Kt3 P-K4
An enterprising and rather dan
gerous attempt to solve the pro
blems presented by the defence, at
the expense of some insecurity of
position.
13. Castles PXP
14. Kt-B5
The simple 14. P x P gives White
more chances. Alekhine suggests
the Pawn sacrifice 14. P X P, Kt
Kt3; 15. R-K1, Q-Q3; 16. B- Position after 26. Q X PI /
An insignificant move but the 2 1 . Q-Kt5 K�R1

decisive mistake. Sufficient for White threatened 22. R�Q6 ,
equality is 1 7 . . . . P�KKt3.
. Kt-K5; 23. R x KtP eh., K-Rl ;
(Euwe-Flohr, Nottingham, 1936.) 24. Q-R6.
18. Q-Q6! QKt-Q2
22. Kt-Q6 K-Kt2
If 18 . . . . . Kt-Kt3; 19. Kt-R6
23. P-K4! Kt-KKtl
eh.
24. R-Q3 P-B3
19. KR-Q1 QR-QI 25. Kt-B5 eh. K-RI
20. Q-Kt3 P-Kt3 26. Q x P! ! Resigns.
As Alekhine remarks, the final attack could hardly have been more
efficiently directed after Black's wasted 17th move. Examining Alek
hine's conduct of the final attack, we cannot help noticing the enormous
strides that attacking technique has made since the age of the HEvergreen"
and the "Immortal" and also the technique of changing a closed position
into an open one.
Whether Lasker's system is an improvement on Capablanca's is difficult
to say since it has rarely been played, and the other lines suggested for
White have never been subjected to the rigorous test of tournament play.
However, Alekhine himself says that his move (Kt-K4) is no better than
the normal l l . Castles, which seems to show that Black can achieve
approximate equality.
CoNCLUSIONS
The problem of the Orthodox Defence is this: how is Black to develop

his Queen's Bishop? In the preceding games we have endeavoured to
show how masters of the past and present tried to solve this problem.
In the first example Anderssen attempts a straightforward solution
by playing . . . . P-QKt3, and though Steinitz refutes it on the first
occasion, the defence is to be found in the tournament repertoire for the
next 50 years. In this period Pillsbury adopted a system based on his
famous Kt-K5 position, yielding victory through a King's side attack.
But the defence technique progressed, and even Pillsbury in his last
tournament at Cambridge Springs, 1904, changed his strategy and sought
to exploit Black's concrete weakness on the Queen's side instead of the
illusory weakness on the other wing. Capablanca introduced a more
convincing line strengthened by the addition of some refinements by
Alekhine (see Game 41, page 77).
This leads us to the modern defence illustrated by Lasker's treatment,
which avoids the Pawn weaknesses and deliberately surrenders the centre
( . . . . P x BP;) to prepare for the freeing moves . . . . P-K4; or . . . .
P-QB4; with the dual purpose of restoring the equilibrium in the centre
and gaining an outlet for the Queen's Bishop. This object we see carried
out ideally by Showalter, but it failed to be appreciated or universally
adopted.
The next milestone occurs between the years 1907-1920, when Rubin
stein achieved singular victories with the Queen's Gambit, attributed at
that time to his superb positional play ; whereas we now know that the
explanation of his success lies not only in his technique but also because
no clear-cut defensi \-e systems had been evolved. To-day, against his
"tempo struggle" system (Q-B2) not less than five adequate defences
have been form ulated. A definite line for Black was introduced by
96 CHESS FR OM l\IOHPHY TO BO'l'W IN NIK
Capablanca who, in the war years, revived the old Showalter continuation
and by enriching the defence tactically introduced what we call 'Capa
blanca's Freeing Mamcuvre.' Alekhine's attack (Kt-K4) offered White
chances, chiefly dependent on the su rprise elemen t, but these were
overcome.
VIII
THE EXCHANGE VARIATION OF

THE QUEEN'S GAMBIT
THIS is one of the most important variations of the Queen's Gambit, as
White can usually force some line of it upon his opponent, and because it
also provides a means of avoiding the many and varied tactical complica
tions of the Cambridge Springs and allied defences.
By exchanging in the centre (BP x P, KP x P), White sets up a rigid
formation and transfe.rs the fight to the wings. It might seem that such
a policy would deprive the game of its dynamics, reducing it to a mere
djsplay of technique. This is fortunately not the case. Many great
masters manage, as we shall see, to infuse into this system many novel
ideas and personal refinements, despite the reduced material resources.
We divide the Exchange variation into two main lines:
1. The Minority Attack, where \Vhite (and in some cases Black) attacks
the opposing Pawn majority with a view to isolating and weakening the
Pawns.
2. Heterogeneous Castling, where the players castle on opposite sides
and attack the enemy King's position.
THE MINORITY ATI'ACK IN THE EXCHANGE VABlATION

EARLY BEGINNINGS
This modem variation of the Queen's Gambit Declined poses a middle

game problem: Can White succeed in attacking Black's seemingly solid
Queen's side Pawns with his minority? The attempt opposes a dogma
which was generally accepted in the period between Steinitz' death and
the First World War: that a Pawn minority should not advance a{!,ainst
a majority.
Thus we find no examples of this system from the time when the theory
of Tarrasch held sway until Capablanca's revival of the system in 1921 .
We have to return to the nineteenth century to find examples from
tournament play.
Here we discover that it was played by Pillsbury against Showalter,
and by Steinitz against Lee. Since Pillsbury's treatment has little in
common with modern methods, we start our study with Steinitz v. Lee
in the London Tournament 1R99.
,
51 15. P-Kt5 RP X P
16. P x P R xR
White Black 17. R x R P-KB4
W. Steinitz F. J. Lee 18. R-R8 Kt-Q2
There is nothing better.
London, 1899
19. Kt-R4 Kt-Kt3
1. P-Q4 P-Q4 20. Kt x Kt Q x Kt
2. P-QB4 P-K3 21. Kt-B3 B-Q2
3. Kt-QB3 Kt-KB3 22. Q-R2 RxR
4. B-Kt5 B-K2 23. Q X R eh. B-Q1
5. P-K3 Castles If the suggested line 23.
6. B x Kt BxB K-Kt2; 24. Kt-R4, Q-B2; 25.
7. P x P PxP P-Kt6, Q-Bl; 26. Q-R7, B-Q3;
8. Q-Kt3 threatening to dislodge the Queen
Steinitz' manreuvre in the last after B-Ktl is played, there fol
three moves indicates that he was lows 27. Kt-B5, B x Kt; 28. P x B,
deliberately aiming at 1·eaching this with the threat 29. B-R6.
position. With the experience of
modern theory as support, we now 24. Kt-R4 Q-B2
know that it is possible to arrive 25. P-Kt6 Q-B1
at this type of position without the
committing 6. B x Kt, and the
tempo-losing Q-Kt3.
8. . . . . . . P-B3
9. B-Q3 R-Kl
10. KKt-K2
This move, adopted thirty years
later by Alekhine and Flohr, is
much more elastic than the usual
Kt-B3.
10. Kt-Q2
1 1 . Q-B2 Kt-Bl
12. Castles KR P-KKt3
13. P-QKt4 P-QR3
14. P-QR4 B-K2
Now we have reached the critical 26. Q-R7
position, and it is interesting to note Safer was first 26. Q-R5, and
what one contemporary critic said: if 26 . . . . . P-B5; 27. P x P, B
'The plan of attacking on the left KB3; 28. Q-Kt4. Against other
wing practically four Pawns with moves, White can secure his King's
two should not succeed. Black side and eventually break through
might have played 14. . . . . P on the Queen's side with Kt---,.B5,
QKt3; stopping 15. P-Kt5, followed by Q-R7 and B-R6.
because of 15. P-QB4;
threatening . . . . P-B5, and estab 26 . . . . . . . P-B5
lishing a passed Pawn.' Though The only move, but an ingenious
this remark is correct, it proves only resource.
that White should have gained
control of the Queen's Bishop file 27. Kt-B5
first and omitted the premature A tempting alternative is 27.
6. B x Kt. B-R6, but Black simply replies
27. P x P; and if 28. B x P, B-R6, Q-K3 follows.

then 28. P-K7 wins.
30. QxB
27. . . . . . . PxP 31. Kt X B Q-Q6 eh.
28. Kt x P 32. KXP Q-Q7 eh.
If 28. P x P, then 28. 33. K-B3 Q-Q6 eh.
B-Kt4. 34. K-Kt4 Q-B4 eh.
35. K-Kt3 Q-Q6 eh.
28. P x P eh. 36. K-R4 Q X P eh.
29. K-Bl B-B4 37. P-Kt4 Q-B3 eh.
30. B x B 38. K-Kt3 Q-K4 eh.
If 30. B-K2, B-Kt5; or if 30. Drawn.
Except for a slight transposition of the opening moves, this game has
quite a modern appearance.
Its clear-cut strategy and purposefulness might well have given new
life to the 19th century Queen's Gambit Declined, but contemporary
players passed it by unnoticed. Unfortunately, we do not know Steinitz'
own views on this line as he played it in this, his last tournament, only
a few months before his death.
CAPABLANCA REVIVES THE MINORITY ATTACK
Capablanca revived the Minority Attack as Black in the tenth game

of the World Championship Match against Lasker, in 1921. He demon
strated with great ski11 that, contrary to accepted theory, a majority of
Pawns can be successfully assailed, provided the attacker has an advantage
in space for the mobility of the supporting pieces. In his later match
against Alekhine in 1927, Capablanca purposely sets up an 'exchange
variation' formation, carrying through the 'Minority Attack.'
52 Q x B; freeing his game and enabling

White Black him to manreuvre his Knight to the
J. R. Capablanca A. Alekhine key position, Q3.
25th Match Game, 1927

10. R-Kl
1 1 . Castles Kt-Bl
1 . P-Q4 P-Q4
1 2. KR-Kl
2. P-QB4 P-K3
A seemingly insignificant move,
3. Kt-QB3 Kt-KB3
but in reality a typical conception
4. B-Kt5 QKt-Q2
of Capablanca, who thus retains the
5. P-K3 B-K2
option of attacking in the centre,
6. Kt-B3 Castles
should Black initiate any attack on
7. R-Bl P-QR3
the King's wing.
8. P x P PxP
9. B-Q3 P-B3
10. Q-B2 12. . . . . . . B-K3
In the 23rd match game Capa To-day, in such a position as this,
blanca played the less exact move we would prefer 12 . . . . . B-KKt5;
10. Castles, which allowed Black to in order to follow with B-R4-Kt3,
reply 10 . . . . Kt-Kl; 1 1 . B X B, a manreuvre which can now only
THR EXCHANGE VARIATION OF THE QUEEN'S GAMBIT 99
be played with much difficulty. If

White replies 13. Kt-K5, B-R4;
14. Kt-R4, Kt-Kt5 ! can follow.
13. Kt-QR4 KKt-Q2

14. B x B QxB
15. Kt-B5 Kt x Kt
16. Q X Kt Q-B2
17. P-QKt4 Kt-Q2
We have now arrived at a typical
position in the Minority Attack.
White threatens to break up Black's
Queen's side by P-QR4 and
P-Kt5, whilst Black's counter
attacking chances on the King's side
are unsubstantial. Even so, the text
move is a slight inaccuracy, as Position after 25 . . . . Q-B8
.
Alekhine points out, recommending

17. . . . . QR-Q1; and on 18.
Kt-Q2, B-Kt5; followed by . . . . King's side and for attacking the
B-R4 and B-Kt3.
. . . •
Queen's side Pawns.
26 RP x P
18. Q-B2 P-R3
. . . . . • .
27. P x P B-Kt3
19. P-QR4 Q-Q3 28. B x B QxB
20. R-Ktl KR-QBI
29. R-Rl QR-QBI
21. KR-QB1 B-Kt5
30. P--Kt6
22. Kt-Q2 R-B2
White has nothing better. He
23. Kt-Kt3 B-R4
cannot force Black to play P x P
If 23. . . . . Q X P? 24. Kt-B5.
breaking up the Pawn position.
24. Kt-B5 Kt X Kt 30 . ...... R-Q2

25. Q X Kt Q-B3 31. R-R7 K-R2
Naturally Black keeps the Queen 32. KR-Rl P-B4
since his whole defensive chances 33. Q-B2 R-K2
lie in a possible counter-attack on 34. P-Kt3 R(l )-Kl
the King's side. 35. R-R8 R-K5
36. R xR RxR
26. P-Kt5 37. R-R7 R-QKtl
Premature. He must play 26. 38. P-R4 P-R4
R-Rl l B-Kt3; 27. B-B1 first, 39. K-Kt2 Q-K3
retaining his advantage by keeping 40. Q-Q3 K-Kta
the Bishop for the defence of the 41. K-R2 Drawn.
A most pleasing and harmonious game, in which Capablanca carries

out the minority attack in a masterly fashion. Very impressive is his
'preventive technique,' the manner in which, by not weakening his Pawn
position, he prevents Black from counter-attacking on the King's side,
thus avoiding any mark of attack which Black might use later as a means
of providing counter-play in a difficult position. We know to-day that
\\Thite was able to do this only because Black omitted to execute the
manreuvre B-KKt5-KR4-KKt3.
8
100 CHESS FROM 1\IORPHY TO BOT,VINNIK
ALEKHINE CH OOSES A BETTER DEFENSIVE FORMATION
53 ning the Knight. Black has based

his defence on this trap.
White Black
J. R. Capablanca A. Alekhine 22. . . . . . . B-Bl
23. Kt-B3 Kt-K3
27th Match Game, 1927 24. P-K4
The position is now clarified. By
1. P-Q4 P-Q4 means of his complicated Bishop
2. P-QB4 P-K3 and Knight manreuvre, Black has
3. Kt-QB3 Kt-KB3 been able to prevent White from
4. B-Kt5 QKt-Q2 carrying out his minority attack,
5. P-K3 B-K2 but not without allowing him
6. Kt-B3 Castles chances in the centre.
7. R-B1 P-QR3
8. PxP PxP 24. . . . . . . PxP
9. B-Q3 P-B3 25. RxP R-K2
10. Q-B2 P-R3 26. QR-Kl B-Q2
1 1. B-R4 Kt-K1 If 26 . .. . . KtxP? 27. RxR,
12. B-Kt3 B-Q3 B-K3; (R-K8 is threatened) 28.
13. Castles BxB Q-B2.
14. RP X B Kt-Q3
This Knight manreuvre was in 27. Q-B2 P-KKt3
troduced by Capablanca in the 14th 28. B-R2 Q-KBl
match game and it is considered 29. Kt-K5 Q-Kt2
best even to-day. If 29. .... B-B1; 30. KtxKtP,
P X Kt; 31. B X Kt eh., K-Kt2;
15. Kt-QR4 R-K1 (31. . .. . K-R2? 32. B-Kt8 eh.)
16. KR-K1 Kt-B3 32. BxB, RxR; 33. QxR, RxB;
Better is 16. .. . . Kt-B1; in 34. Q-Q4 eh. wins.
order to be able to drive off the
Knight from K5 with P-B3. 30. KtxB RxKt
31. BxKt PxB
17. Kt-K5 Kt(B3)-K5 32. R-KKt4! K-R2
18. Q-Kt3 B-K3 33. RxP R-KKtl
19. Kt-B5 Kt X Kt 34. Q-K4 R-KB2
The ideal position of White's 35. P-B4 Q- Bl
Knights prompts Alekhine to adopt
a simplifying manceuvre which
hinges on his 21st move. Better was
his recommendation 19.
Q-B3; when White plays 20.
B x Kt, P x B; (20 . . . . . Kt x B;
21. Kt x Kt, P x Kt; 22. Q x P,
QR- Ktl ; 23. Q x BP!) 21. Q-B2,
B-Q4; and after preparation P
B3, obtaining the superiority in the
centre.
20. P X Kt Kt-Kt4
21. P-R4 Kt-B2
22. B-Ktl
Not 22. QxKtP? B-Bl; win-
36. R(Kt4) X P White can still win by 38. K-K2,

Simpler is 36. R(6) X KtP, Q X P Q x P eh.; 39. K-B3, Q-Kt6 eh.;
eh.; 37. K-B l , Q-B8 eh.; 38. (preventing 40. K-Kt4? because
K-B2, Q-Q7 eh.; 39. K-Ktl , of Q x R eh.) 40. K-B2, Q-Kt7
Q-Q8 eh.; 40. K-R2, and wins, eh.; (40. . . . . Q-Kt3 eh. 41.
since the Black Queen cannot check K-B l ) 41 . K-Ktl, and wins,
on KR4. since the White King escapes to
R2 without having to fear Q-R4
36. Q x P eh. eh.
37. K-Bl Q-B8 eh. 38. . . . . . . Q-Q7 eh!
38. K-B2? Drawn.
This game shows that Black is able to prevent White from carrying
out the Minority Attack, but he is unable to solve satisfactorily the
other problems of the opening.
Herein lies the importance of the game from our point of view. We
see that by merely threatening to play the Minority Attack White can tie
down Black's pieces and force a decisive break-through in the centre.
Alekhine himself was full of praise for his opponent's fine play.
FLOHR'B TREATMENT
Another great 'technician' to adopt the Minority Attack was Salo Flohr.
He used this system mainly to prevent his opponents from adopting the
Cambridge Springs and Manhattan defences, with all their attendant
tactical complexities.
Especially instructive is the way in which he neutralises Black's King's
side counter-chances, so that his eventual action on the Queen's side
may proceed unhindered, and with the greatest effect.
54 12. B x B QxB
13. Kt x Kt B x Kt
White Black 14. KR-Kl
S. Flohr M. Euwe In the 5th match game against
Showalter, Pillsbury played 14.
1st Match Game, 1932 QR-Kl, Q-B3; 15. P-QR4,
R-K2; 16. P-QKt4, QR-Kl ; 17.
1. P-Q4 P-Q4 P-Kt5, Q-Kt4; and in order to
2. P-QB4 P-QB3 meet the dangerous attack, played
3. Kt-KB3 Kt-KB3 the weakening move 18. P-B4,
4. Kt-B3 P-K3 after which his minority attack
5. B-Kt5 QKt-Q2 should not have been successful.
6. P x P KP x P The idea of the text-move is to free
7. P-K3 B-K2 KBl for a minor piece, where it
8. B-Q3 would be well placed for defensive
More precise is 8. Q-B2 since purposes.
after the text Black can free his
position with 8. . . . . Kt-K5. 14. . . . . . . QR-Ql
15. Kt-K2 R-Q3
8. Castles An easier defence is given by 15.
9. Q-B2 R-Kl . . . . B x Kt; after 16. R x B, P
10. Castles KR Kt-Bl KKt3; 17. R-Ktl, Kt-K3; 18.
1 1 . Kt-K5 Kt-Kt5 P-QKt4, P-QR3; 19. P-QR4,
102 CHE�S FROM MORPHY TO BOTWINNIK
R-QBl; 20. Q-Kt3, Q-Kt4;

when Black can meet 21. P-Kt5
with RP X P; 22. P x P, P-QB4.
16. Kt-Kt3 R-R3
Position after 23 . . . . . R-K2

24. Kt-R21 !
A complete surprise! One would
expect White to play the Knight
17. B-B5! to Q2 and thence to the Queen's side
Very important! In a similar in order to assist in the decisive
position (the White QKtP was at break-through, but the piece returns
Kt4) against Keres at Semmering to the King's side, since White
Baden, 1937, Flohr allowed Black intends to reply to 24
. Kt-K1
• . . .
to play Q-R5 and after 18. Kt with 25. Kt-Kt4, R-K3; 26.
B1, Kt-K3; 19. P-Kt5, Black Kt-K5, and follow later with
obtained a very dangerous attack P-Kt5.
with B-B6! ! (20. P X B, Kt-Kt4; 24. . . . . . . R(R3)-K3
21. K-Kt2, Q-R4; 22. B-B5, 25. Kt-B3 P-KB3
followed). White has, by subt1e play, com-
17. .. ... . Q-Kt4 pletely secured his King's side,
18. B x B QxB since the Black Rook cannot be
19. P-KR3 Q-Q2 transferred to this wing without the
20. P-QKt4 Kt-K3 intermediary P-KB4, after which
21 . QR-Ktl Kt-B2 the White Knight could be estab
22. P-QR4 P-QR3 lished at K5 with great effect.
23. Kt-B1 R-K2 26. Kt-Q2 R-K1
Black probably expected 24. 27. Kt-Kt3 R(K3)-K2
Kt-Q2, when 24. . . . . Kt-K1; 28. Kt-B5 Q-B1
25. Kt-Kt3, Kt-Q3; gives him a 29. KR-QB1 R-Q1
good defensive position. Had he 30. Kt-Q3! Q-Ktl
comprehended White's deep stra White threatened 31. P-Kt5. If
tegy he would have played 23 . . . . . 30. . .. . Q-B4; 31. Q-B5, R-B2;
R-QB1; (intending 24 . . . . . Kt 32. R-Kt3, follows with the threat
K1; when the Rook prevents Q-Kt6.
White's break - through by 24.
P-Kt5) 24. Q-Kt3, R-Kt3; 25. 31 . Kt-B4 Kt-K3
K-R1, Q-B4; 26. R-K2, Kt In the long run Black cannot
K1; 27. P-Kt5, RP x P; 28. P x avoid the exchange of Knights and
P, Kt-Q3; with sufficient counter White was also threatening 32.
play. Q-QB5, followed by Q-Kt6.
32. Kt x Kt R x Kt Not 36 . . . . . Q-Kt2; when 37.

33. P-Kt5 RP x P R(l )-B5, R(3)-Q3; 38. P-K4! is
34. P x P PxP decisive.
A dubious move, but if 34.
Q-Q3 (35. P x P, R x BP; 36. Q x R! 37. R-QKti R-Q2
must be prevented) 35 . Q-R2!, 38. R x KtP QxR
with threats on both the Rook's file 39. QxQ RxQ
and the diagonal, makes Black's 40. RxR K-B2
position very difficult. 41 . K-R2 K-K2
42. K-Kt3 R-R2
35. R X P P-QKt3 43. K B4
- P-KKt3
If 35 . . . . . R-B3? 36. Q X R. 44. P-Kt4 R-R7
45. R-Kt7 eh. K-K3
36. Q-Kt3 Q - Q3 46. K-B3 Resigns.
Flohr's clear-cut play makes this game a strategical masterpiece.

His defensive technique is of special interest. Unlike Capablanca in
the last game he was unable to avoid making a weakening Pawn move
on the King's side, but by skilful manreuvring with his Knight and by
employing his latent threats on the Queen's side, he managed to drive off
Black's pieces and break through on the Queen's side, just at the moment
when his opponent's pieces were most disorganised.
This game and Capablanca's method of handling the Minority Attack
in the previous one show how the problems of the opening extend deep
into the middle-game: an apt illustration of how involved and intricate
are the problems posed by modern theory.
THE DEFENCE SYSTEM TO THE MINORITY ATTACK

CAPABLANCA'S DEFENSIVE SYSTEM
Since all the previous games have featured the Minority Attack from
White's point of view, it may seem as if White has almost a 'walk over.'
However, it must be remembered that it always takes some considerable
time for a sufficient counter to be found to any attack. In the following
games we shall examine this problem of finding an adequate defensive
system by showing its gradual evolution at the hands of the great masters.
We commence our study with the original system played by Capablanca
in his World Championship match against Alekhine.
55 8. Q-B2 P-QR3
9. P-QR3 P-R3
White Black In the second match game, Capa
A. Alekhine J. R. Capablanca blanca played the more exact 9.
. . . . R-Kl and avoided being
14th Match Game, 1927 forced into the exchange variation
as 10. P x P, is answered by Kt X PI
1. P-Q4 P-Q4
2. P-QB4 P-K3 10. B-R4 R-K1
3. Kt-KB3 Kt-KB3 11. P x P KP x P
4. Kt-B3 QKt-Q2 Now 11 . . . . KtxP is answered
.
5. B-IH5 B-K2 by 12. B-Kt3.

6. P-K3 Castles
7. R-Bl P-QB3 12. B-Q3
14. Castles KKt-B3

15. P-KR3
Too slow. 15. P-QKt4, Kt-K1 ;
16. P-QR4, Kt-Q3; 1 7 . P-Kt5,
gives White a strong initiative,
showing that Capablanca's man
ceuvre to place the Knight at Q3
requires exact timing, and is satis
factory only when Black is suffi
ciently developed and able to play
�-QKt4 before White can play
P-QKt5.
15. . . . . . . Kt-K1
16. Kt-K2
If White now plays 16. P-QKt4,
Position after 12. B-Q3 Black replies 16 . . . . . Kt-Q3; 17.
P-QR4, P-QKt4; 18. Kt-K2,
The usual continuation in posi
Kt-B5; and he can block the QB
tions of this type is 12 . . . . . Kt-B1;
file without having to put his
13. Kt-K5, Kt-Kt5; 14. Kt x Kt,
Queen's Bishop out of play at Kt2.
B x Kt; which, though perfectly
playable, allows White to adopt a
16. Kt-Q3
line in which he can dictate the
17. Kt-Kt3 Kt-B1
future trend of the play for some
18. Kt-K5 P-KB3
time. This passive defence does not
19. Kt-Kt6 Kt X Kt
suit Capablanca's style of play, and
20. B x Kt B-K3
he therefore chooses a simplifying
21 . Kt-K2 Q-Q2
continuation.
22. Kt-B4 B-B4
12. Kt-R4 23. BxB QxB
13. B x B RxB 24. QxQ Kt x Q
To make room for the Knight 25. Kt-Q3 Kt-Q3
at Kl . Drawn.
The importance of this game lies in Capablanca's introduction of the
Knight manceuvre to Q3 which has since become an important defensive
resource.
THE MODIFIED CAPABLANCA DEFENCE SYSTEM

As we have seen from the preceding game, Capablanca's defence
system, though positionally sound, involves a loss of time, which White
is able to turn to good use in building up an attacking position on the
Queen's side and in the centre (see, for example, Alekhine's game against
Tylor at Nottingham in 1936).
Attempts have consequently been made to carry out the defensive
manceuvre without undue preparation. The following game is a good
example of modern trends in the treatment of this problem.
56 2. P-QB4 P-K3
White Black 3. Kt-QB3 P-Q4
M. Najdorf E. Eliskases 4. B-Kt5 QKt-Q2
5. P-K3 B-K2
Mar del Plata, 1947 6. Kt-B3 Castles
1. P-Q4 Kt-KB3 7. R-B1 P-QR3
8. P x P PxP This attempt to counter-attack is

9. B-Q3 P-B3 too early. With 22 . . . . . Q-K3;
10. Q-B2 R-K1 23. Q-Kt6, R-K2; 24. P-Kt5,
1 1 . Castles Kt-B1 RPxP; 25. P x P, R-QB1 ; 26.
12. P-KR3 R-B5 (26. R-R1, P-Kt4!) R(2)
If this move is considered neces -B2 Black is able to satisfactorily
sary in order to prevent B-KKt5- defend his Queen's side and keep
R4-Kt3, it means that Black gains his Pawn chain intact and could
a move besides creating a possible then start a counter-attack by
point of attack at KKt5. P-KR4 and P-KKt4-KKt5.
12. . . . . . . P-KKt3 23. Q-Kt6 ! R-K2

With the idea of playing the usual If 23. . . . . Q-Q2; 24. P-Kt5,
manreuvre Kt-K3-Kt2 and B RP x P; 25. RP x P, R-K3; 26.
KB4, which may be called the R-R1, R-QB1; 27. R-R7 would
modified Capablanca system. follow and White has considerable
pressure.
13. Kt-K5 Kt(B3)-Q2
14. B-KB4 24. P-Kt5! RP x P
Kt x Kt
1 5. B x Kt 25. P x P PxP
B-Q3
16. B x B QxB Now Black must allow his Pawn
17. Kt-R4 position to be broken up, since 25.
If 17. P-R3, Kt-K3; 18. P- . . . . R-QB1; 26. P X P, Q-K3; is
QKt4, Kt-Kt2; 19. R-Ktl , B- refuted by 27. P X P! !
84; 20. P-QR4, B X B; 21. Q x B, 26. R-B5 K-Kt2
P-QKt4 follows and Black will 27. Q X P(Kt5) R-Q1
eventually be able to secure the 28. Q-R5 R(2)--Q2
strong square QB5 for his Knight 29. R(1 )-B1 P-Kt5
via Kt-B4-Q3. 30. P x P QxP
31. R-Kt5 K-R1
17 . ...... Kt-K3 32. Q-Kt6
18. Kt-B5 Kt x Kt Avoiding the trap 32. R X KtP?
19. Q x Kt Q-B3 R-KKtl .
20. P-QKt4 B-B4
21. BxB QxB 32. . . . . . . R-Q3
22. P-QR4 33. Q-B7!
Not 33. Q x P, R-KKtl ; 34.
P-Kt3, Q-R6l with the threat
R x P eh.
33. . . . . . . R-KKtl
Now if 33. R-KR3; 34.
Q-K5 eh., P-B3; 35. Q X QP!
repulses the attack.
34. P-Kt3 Q-K3

35. R-K1
In view of the threat 35.
R x P eh.
35. . . . . . . P-Kt3
36. P-K4!
Just when it looks as if Black
22 . . . . . . . P-KKt4 has set up a defensible position,
White institutes a decisive break 38. P-Q5 P-R4

through in the centre. 38 . . . . . Q-R8 eh.; 39. K-Kt2,
R-R3; 40. Q-K5 eh., Q X Q; 41.
R x Q, gives Black better drawing
chances.
39. K-Kt2 Q-Kt3
40. R-KB4 R-Kt2
41. R-KR41
The threat of 42. R x P eh. forces
the Black Rook to an inactive post
on R2, a weakness which later
proves to be decisive.
41 . . . . . . . R-R2
42. R(5)-Kt41 Q-B3
43. R(R4)-KB4 Q-QI
44. Q-B3 eh. K-Ktl
45. R(Kt4)-B41 Q-KB1
Position after 36. P-K4! 46. R-B8 R-Q1
47. R(4)-QB41
If Black replies 36 . . . . . P-B4; This is the key of White's skilful
White plays 37. R(l )-Ktl, (not manreuvre. The opposing Rooks
37. P-K5? R-B3; 38. Q-R7, are driven away, whilst his own
P-B5!) 37 . . . . . BP X P; 38. R x pieces are established at their most
KtP, R x R; (not 38 . . . . . R(I)-QI; effective posts. A masterpiece of
39. Q X R eh !) 39. R X R, Q-B4;
.
strategy.
40. Q-K7! with decisive advantage.
47• . . . . . . R-R3
36 . . . . . .
. PxP 48. R x R QxR
37. R x KP Q-B3 49. R-B8 Resigns.
The first part of the game demonstrates how Black should handle this
defence; that is by the exchange of the Queen's Bishop for White's King's
Bishop and the deploying of the Knight via KKt2 to Q3, keeping it
always in close proximity to the centre, so that he can readily deal with
any possible change of plan by White.
The second phase of the game is remarkable for the middle-game play
by Najdorf, the foremost tactician of our time, who correctly exploits
with his heavy pieces Black's Pawn weaknesses.
HETEROGENEOUS CASTLING IN THE EXCHANGE VARIATION

RESHEVSKY'S TREATMENT
In the other main line of the Exchange Variation, after the early
exchange of the centre Pawns, instead of developing the Queen's Rook,
White tries to give the game a sharper note by Castling Q'side.
Fifteen years ago, this line used to be looked upon as an independent
system in which the Minority Attack had no place. However, the following
game shows its introduction as an effective counter to the defensive
system illustrated in the last game.
57 B-KB4; 14. P-QKt4, P x P; 15.

White Black P X P, R-R6; when Black stands
S. Reshevsky G. Stahlberg well.
This system of heterogeneous
Kemeri, 1937 castling introrluces a new system
I. P-Q4 Kt-KB3 which was fashionable in the 1930's,
2. P-QB4 P-K3 until it was realized that Black's
3. Kt-KB3 P-Q4 counter-chances on the Queen's side
4. Kt-B3 B-K2 are more easily realized than White's
5. B-Kt5 QKt-Q2 attack on the King's side. Reshev
6. PxP PxP sky, who fears none of the dangers
Better is 6 . . . . . Ktx P; 7. B X B, attendant upon lines such as this,
Q X B; ( Alatortsev - Capablanca, has adopted the system several
Moscow, 1935), and Black has eased times in order to inject more life
his position by the exchange of into the game.
Bishops.
11. . . . . . . Castles
7. P-K3 P-QB3 12. K-Ktl
8. Q-B2 With 12. P-KR3 White can
With this move White chooses a prevent Black's impending man
more elastic system than we have reuvre, remaining more in harmony
seen hitherto. Not only does he with the strategy. Still, even after
save the move QR-B1 (the Rook 12. P-KR3, P-B4; (12. . . . .
usually has to return to QKtl to Kt-Kt2; 13. P-KKt4,) 13. P X P,
support P-QKt4) but he retains Kt x P; 14. P-KKt4, B-K3; 15.
the possibility of castling on the K......: Ku, R-Bl; Black obtains
Queen's side. good counter-chances on the Queen's
side.
8. . . . . . . Kt-B1
But Stahlberg is also on his guard 1 2. Kt-Kt2
and likewise selects a non-commit 13. P-KR3 B-KB4
tal move, which according to 14. B x Kt
White's play can either transpose Better than 14. P-KKt4, B X B;
into regular lines or, as in the game, 15. Q X B, Kt-K5.
can be the prelude to a modified
defensive system. 14. KB x B
15. P-KKt4 B xB
9. B-Q3 Kt-K3 16. Q X B Kt-K3
10. B-R4 P-KKt31 The object of Reshevsky's stra
Now Black's plan becomes ap tegy becomes plain. He is able to
parent. He wants to exchange the advance his King's side Pawns
opposing King's Bishop by playing whilst Black's usual response, a
the usual manreuvre Kt-Kt2 and similar Queen's side Pawn advancE-,
B-KB4, but wishes to save a move is purposeless here since White has
by dispensing with R-K1, which not moved any of his Queen's side
in order to make room for the Pawns and so has an ideal defensive
Knight, is necessary after castling. position.
1 1 . Castles QR 17. P-KR4 P-B41

Reshevsky changes his plans A Pawn sacrifice ( Black s only
'
since he realizes that to adopt the counter-chance), the consequences

minority attack leads to nothing of which are not easy to assess.
after 1 1 . Castles KR, Kt-Kt2; 12.
QR-Ktl , P-QR4; 13. P-QR3, 18. P x P B x Kt
19. Q x B R-B l White has kept the Pawn and has

20. P-K4! RxP consolidated his position, but Black
21. Q-R3 has a surprise in hand.
Now White is threatening Q X P,
and on 21 . . . . . P-QR4; 22. 25. . . . . . . P-R4!
Kt-Kt5, Q-Q3; 23. P x P, wins 26. R-K1 !
a Pawn, as after 23. . . . . Kt x Kt; The only move. If (a) 26. P X P?
24. P X Kt, R-Q1; 25. Q-R3 Q-B4 eh.; 27. K-R1 , R-Q6; wins
follows. a piece; if (b) 26. R-Ktl? P x P;
27. R x P, Q-Q8 eh. winning the
21. . . . . . . Q-Q3! Knight.
22. P x P
If 22. Q x P, Q-B51 26. . . . . . . PxP
27. Kt-K5 Kt-Kt2!
28. Q-K4!
Avoiding the trap 28. Kt x P (4) ?
Q-B4 eh.; 29. Q-K4, R-Q8 eh.;
30. K-B2, R x R; wins.
28 . . . . . .
. QxQ
29. R x Q P-B4
30. R-QB4 K-R2
31 . K-B2 R-K1
32. Kt-Q3 Kt-K3
33. P-R4 K-R3
34. R-Kt4 R-K2
35. R-Kt6!
A fine move that indirectly de-
fends the KRP for if 35. . . . .
22. . . . . . . R-Q1 ! K-R4? 36. R x Kt, R x R; 37.
The key to Black's play, which Kt-B4 eh. follows, and if 35 . . . . .
enables him to win the QP and Kt-Q5 eh. ; 36. K-B3, Kt-B6;
open up the centre files. 37. Kt-B4.
23. Q x P RxP 35. . . . . . . P-B5

24. R x R QxR 36. R-Kt4! P-KKt4
25. Q-K3 37. P x P eh. KxP
38. R-Kt5 eh. K-R5
39. R-K5!
Forcing a Knight ending in which
chances are roughly equal.
39. . . . . . . Kt-Q5 eh.

40. K-B3 RxR
41 . Kt x R Kt-K3
42. Kt-Q3 P-B6
43. P-Kt4 P-Kt6
44. P x P eh. KxP
45. P-R5 Kt-B5
46. Kt-B5! K-Kt7
On 46 . . . . . P-B7; 47. Kt-K4
eh. , K-Kt7; 48. Kt X P, K x Kt;
49. K-Q4 follows.
47. Kt-K4 Kt-Q4 eh. 52. P-R6 Kt-K5

48. K-Kt3 Kt-B2 53. P x P! Kt x Kt eh.
49. K-B4 Kt-K3! 54. K-B3 P-B8 (Q)
50. P-Kt5 Kt-Kt4 55. P-Kt8(Q) Q-B8 eh.
51. Kt-Q2 P-B7 56. K-Q3 Drawn.
The system adopted by Reshevsky was no mere improvisation, but

the logical development of a system which he had engineered successfully
against Monticelli at Syracuse in 1934.
This system, and others closely allied to it notably Alekhine's method
,
of playing his KKt to K2 and keeping the King in the middle as long as
possible, proves that the seemingly rigid structure of the exchange variation
gives plenty of scope to a player of fertile imagination.
IX
THE QUEEN'S GAMBIT ACCEPTED
THE Queen's Gambit Accepted occupied the minds of the analysts of the
past, and we are indebted to them for some interesting variations which
are analysed in the 'Gottinger Manuscript' in 1500, and later (1536) by
Ruy Lopez. They show that after the moves I. P-Q4, P-Q4; 2.
P-QB4, P x P; 3. P-K4, P-QKt4; 4. P-QR4, P-QB3; 5. P-QKt31
(an important improvement given by Ruy Lopez instead of first taking
the Pawn 5. P x P, P x P; 6. P-QKt3, B-Kt21), White regains the sacrificed
Pawn. More important by far was Damiano's (1512) assertion that Black
would remain with the inferior game, a contention that Philidor tried to
confirm by a fine analysis, claiming that after the continuation 5 . . . . .
P x KtP; 6. P x KtP, P x P; 7. B x P eh., B-Q2; 8. Q x P, B x B; 9. Q x B
eh., Q-Q2; 10. Q x Q eh., Black's isolated Pawn is weak and might get
lost. A very advanced statement that conforms with present-day views.
This was the analytical background to the games between de la Bour
donnais-McDonnell, and is the starting point of our historical study.
Thus we can understand why McDonnell never attempted to hold the
Pawn, but tried to free his position by playing early 3. . . . . P-K4.
Even in this form the acceptance of the gambit was considered· a risk,
and it is said that although McDonnell realized this, nevertheless nothing
could induce him to decline the gambit. (For the present-day view, see
notes at the end of Game 59, page 1 12.)
THE QUEEN'S GAM BIT ACCEPTED IN THE LAST CENTURY

-
58 2. P-QB4 PxP
White Black 3. P-K4 P-K4
L.C. M. de la It is difficult to form an opinion
Bourdonnais A. McDonnell on the opening moves as this line
has been so rarely played. Euwe
50th Match Game, London, 1 834 suggests that 3. . . . . P-QB4; 4.
P-Q5, P-K3; is better since 4.
I. P-Q4 P-Q4 P x P, Q x Q eh.; 5. K x Q! and
White's King's side Pawns may

become dangerous.
4. P-Q5
This move gives a too rigid Pawn
formation.
4. . . . . . • P-KB4
Steinitz-Blackburne,London, 1 899
continued 4. . . . . Kt-KB3; 5.
Kt-QB3, B-QB4l 6. B x P, Kt
Kt5; 7. Kt-R3, P-B4l
5. Kt-QB3 Kt-KB3
6. B x P B-B4
7. Kt-B3 Q-K2
8. B-KKt5 Position after 13. Kt-Q5
A mistake. Necessary is 8. Castles
when Black must play 8. . . . . for if 1 3 . . . . . Q-Q 1; 14. QKt x P,
P-KB5; followed by . . . . B-Q3; P x Kt; 15. P-K5, or 13. . . . .
closing the position so that he can Q-B1; 14. B-Kt5 eh., and Black's
castle. position is insecure, but McDonnell
finds a remarkable answer, the
8. . • • . . B x P eh.
• sacrifice of the Queen for two minor
9. K-Bl pieces and attack.
Lasker pointed out that a modern
player would have preferred 9. 13. Kt x Ktl l
K xB, Q-B4 eh.; 10. K-Kl , 14. B x Q Kt-K6 eh.
QxB; 11. Kt x P, and White has 15. K-K1 KxB
eliminated the dangerous Bishop 16. Q-Q3
and regained his Pawn. White realizes that the Black
Knight is too strong and offers to
9. . . . . . . B-Kt3 exchange it for the Rook. Black
With the threat 10 . . . . Q-B4. declines to oblige. A better defence
This move looks very strong and, is 16. B-Q5, Kt-B3; 17. B x Kt,
indeed, enables Black to prod uce P x B; 18. R-Q3, followed by
one uf the most beautiful combina R x Kt; but even then Black, with
tions seen on the chess- board. Rook, Bishop and two Pawns for
Nevertheless, a logical modernist the Queen, has the superior game.
would have played 9 . . . . . B-B4;
followed by 1 0 . . . . B-Q3, not 16. R-Q1
onl y defending the King's Pawn but 17. R-Q2 Kt-B3
circumventing the thre at of P-Q6. 18. P-QKt3 B-QR4
After castling, Black with a Pawn 19. P-QR3 QR-B1
plus and attack along the King's 20. R-Ktl
Bishop file, would ha v e a greatly After 20. P-QKt4, Kt x QP; 21.
su peri or game. P x Kt, B x P; 22. B-Kt3, R-B8
eh. wins. An impressive variation,
10. Q-K2 P-B5 considering Black's material in
11. R-QI B-Kt5 feriority.
12. P-Q6 PxP
13. K t Q5-- 20. P-QKt4
It a ppear s as if White has 21. B x P B x Kt
obtained counterplay in the centre 22. P x B
2 2 . B x Kt, does not save the 22. Kt-Q5

game for there follows 22. . . . . 23. B-B4 Kt x P eh.
R X B; 23. P-QKt4, (2a. P X B, 24. K-B2 Kt x QR
R-B8 eh. ; 24. K-B2, B x R; 25. 25. R x P eh. K-B3
Q X B, R-B7; ) 2B . . . . . B-Kt3; 26. R-B7 eh. K-Kt3
24. P x B, R-B8 eh.; 25. K-B2, 27. R-K7 QKt x B
Kt-Q4 dis. eh. and Black won.
Playing through this beautiful game, we can see why lovers of romantic
chess speak so appraisingly of such games and the era in which they were
played. Nevertheless, whilst we share their admiration for the abundance
of original ideas displayed and the ilaring play involved, wc cannot shut
our eyes to the fact that these combinations should never have been
allowed to come into being.
In an opening in which both players r'eientlessly pursue their respective
aims-without acknowledging the requirement8 of the position-rapidly
changing situations are produced culminating in McDonnell's masterly
Queen sacrifice. Our judgment is that whilst some phases were beauti
fully played, too much was left to the element of chance in situations
where to-day pure technique would decide the game. Also, the phases
of the game are too disconnected and do not form a co-ordinated whole.
WHITE PLAYS FOR A KING's SIDE ArrAcx
Whilst the previous game bears little resemblance to the modem form
of the Queen's Gambit Accepted, the following game is a definite step
forward, displaying some of the familiar features which we associate with
this debut. White is left with an isolated Queen's Pawn, but gains control
of the vital central squares and is able to carry out a successful King's
side attack.
59 8. B-K3 P-B3
Stronger is 8. . . . . B-KKt5; 9.
White Black Castles (9. Q-Kt3, B x Kt; 10.
L. C. M. de la P X B, Kt-B3!) 9. . . . . Kt-B3;
Bourdonnais A. McDonnell with a good game.
17th Match Game, 1834

9. P-KR3 QKt-Q2
1 0. B-Kt3 Kt-Kt3
I. P-Q4 P-Q4
1 1 . Castles KKt-Q4
2. P-QB4 PxP
The position is similar to the
3. P-K3 P-K4
modem Queen's Gambit Accepted
4. B x P PxP
set-up with the important differ
5. P X P Kt-KB3
ence that Black's Queen's Bishop
This move was consistently played
is not shut in and so Black has no
during the match, though neither
worries about the development of
player foWld White's strongest
this piece.
reply, 6. Q-Kt3, Q-K2 eh.; 7.
K-Bl, and Black has many dis
agreeable threats to attend to. 12. P-QR4
This move is not only unnecessary
6. Kt-QB3 B-K2 but it gives Black undisputed
7. �1\t-B3 Castles control of his QKt5.
12. P-QR4 Black was relying on this move,

13. Kt-K5 B-K3 but de la Bourdonnais has seen
14. B-B2 P-KB4 further.
Too committal, since it allows
the Knight at K5 to dominate the 21. Q-R6 B xR
game. With 14. . . . . Kt-Kt5; 22. B x PI
followed by Kt(3)-Q4 Black would An attractive sacrifice not diffi
have a strong position, and White cult to see but noteworthy as the
has few attacking chances to com logical outcome of White's previous
pensate for his isolated Queen's strategy.
Pawn.
22. . . . . . . PxB
23. Kt x KtP Kt-Bl
15. Q-K2 P-B5 Black has other defences but
16. B-Q2 Q-Kl none avails him, e.g. 23. . . . .
White threatened Kt x P. B-KKt4; 24. Q-R8 ch.,K-B2; 25.
Q-R7 eh., K-B3; 26. R x Q,
17. QR-K1 B-B2 KR x R; 27. Kt-K5, and wins, or
23 . . . . . B-Q3; 24. Q-R8 eh.,
Black sets a trap. 17.
K-B2; 25. Q-R7 eh., K-B3; 26.
B-KB4; 18. B X B , R x B; 19.
Kt-K4 eh. wins.
Q-Q3, still gives White the superior
game, but Black has fighting chances
24. Q-RS eh.
Even without analysis it is clear
18. Q-K4 P-Kt3 that the attack is decisive since all
19. B x P Kt x B White's pieces are centralized and
20. Q x Kt B-B5 can be deployed at will. At the
time this game was played such
assessment of a position was non
existent, native intuition guiding
the players. De la Bourdonnais was
reputed to have often said, 'All I
need is a little position.'
24. K-B2
25. Q-R7 eh. K-B3
26. Kt-B4
Threatening Kt-K4 mate.
26. B-Q6
27. R-K6 eh. K-Kt4
28. Q-R6 eh. K-B4
29. R-K5 Mate.
It is interesting to note that contemporary critics considered Black's

difficulties were caused by his acceptance of the gambit, whilst we know
that in fact his position was better than it would be in the modern lines
of the Q.G. Accepted. The P-KB4-B5 manreuvre was the cause of his
difficulties, a stratagem that McDonnell thought to be strong, as evinced by
his repeated adoption of this line. De la Bourdonnais' not dissimilar
mistake, 12. P-QR4, indicates that square weaknesses had not been
recognized as a decisive handicap.
STAUNTON'S TREATMENT
The previous games indicate the struggles that are liable to result from
the acceptance of the gambit Pawn; and we can see why our forebears
considered it risky to accept the gambit.
Our next example introduces a new defensive system adopted by
Staunton. At the time that this game was played the practice of White
playing first had not come into general usage and Saint-Amant was
actually Black. However, to avoid confusion the colours have been
reversed.
60 1 2. B-B3
White Black 13. R-K1 Kt-Q3
P. C. F. 14. B-R2 P-KR3
de Saint-Amant 11. Staunton Staunton, imbued with the atti-
tude of 'wait and see' prevalent at
19th Match Game, 1843 that period, fails to profit from the
position. Here, for instance, Black
1. P-Q4 P-Q4 can exploit White's isolated Pawn
2. P-QB4 PxP by 14 . . . . . B-Kt3; followed by
3. P-K3 P-K4 B-R4 or Kt-B4,
4. B x P PxP according to White's play.
5. P x P B-Q3
Better is 5. . . . . B-Kt5 eh.; 15. Q-R4
6. Kt-QB3, Kt-KB3; 7. Kt-B3, Staunton comments: 'The object
Castles; 8. Castles, B-Kt5; (Stahl of this sally of the Queen is not at
berg-Gligoric Match, 1949) but best all clear to us.'
is Golombek's suggestion 5. . . . .
Kt-QB3! 6. Kt-KB3, (6. Q-Kt3, 15. Kt-K2
Q-K2 eh.) 6. . . . . Kt-B3; 7. 16. QR-Q1 Kt-Kta
Q-Kt3, B-Kt5 eh.; followed by 17. B-B1
. . . . Castles. As Saint-Amant observes: 'To be
able to play Kt-K5,' proving that
6. Kt-KB3 Kt-KB3 White's 15th move was not devoid
7. P-KR3 Castles of purpose.
8. Castles Kt-QB3
Staunton remarked that he should 17. P-B3
have played 8 . . . . . P-KR3; here, 18. Kt-K5
a move that he considered indis
pensable for both players in this
opening.
9. B-KKt5 B-K2
Better first 9 . . . . . P-KR3; 10.
B-R4, B-K2.
10. Kt-B3 B-KB4

1 1 . P-R3 Kt-K5
12. B-K3
White is now able to avoid sim
plification, whereas if Black had
interposed 9 . . . . . P-KR3; White
would be forced to exchange
Bishops.
1 14 CHESS FROM MORPHY TO BOTWINNIK
18. Q-B2 28. R-K1

Staunton remarks: '18. . . . . K 29. R-Q1 B-K5
R2; would have been stronger play,' 30. R-Q4 B-Q4
indicating that he considered his 31. B x B PxB
subsequent difficulties arose out of 32. K-B2
this oversight. But on 18. . . . . Better is 32. R X P, R-QB1 ; 33.
K-R2; 19. P-KKt4! appears B-K3, and Black has no counter
strong, e.g. 19 . . . . . B-B 1 ; 20. chances whatsoever.
B x BP, Kt x B; 21. Kt x Kt(6),
K X Kt; 22. Q-B2 eh! or 19. . . . . 32. R-QB1
B-Q2; 20. B X BP, Kt x Kt; 21. 33. B-K3 Kt-K2
P x Kt, Kt x B; 22. P x B. To us it 34. K-K2 R-Ktl
seems obvious that with the strong 35. B-B1 K-B1
Bishop at R2, the Knight at K5 36. P-Kt4 R-Kt4
and the centralization of all White's Staunton remarks that this is
pieces, he should have some way of Black's best move. Probably he had
demonstrating his superiority. in mind the avoidance of the trap
36 . . . . . P x P; 37. R x KtP, R x R;
19. P-KKt4! P-Kt4
38. P x R, Kt-B3; 39. B-K3! with
The only move to avoid losing a
the threat P-QKt5.
piece.
20. Q-Kt4 B-B7 37. PxP Kt-B3
21. R-Q2 P-QR4 38. R-R4 Kt x RP
22. Q-B5 B x Kt 39. B-Q2 Kt-B3
23. P x B Kt-Kt2 40. B-Kt4 eh. K-K1
Black has played very cleverly. 41 .P-R4 P-Kt4!
42. BP x P PxP
24. Kt x KtP! 43. R-R8 eh. K-Q2
The best. If 24. Q-K3, P-Kt5; 44. P-R5 Kt x B
saves the piece. 45. P-R6
White's best chance.
24. Kt x Q
25. Kt X Q Kt-Q6
26. R x Kt B xR 45. Kt-B3
27. Kt x R R x Kt 46. P-R7 R-Kt7 eh.
The way Staunton created com 47. K-Q3 R-IH6 eh.
plications is admirable as is also According to Staunton 47. . . . .
Saint-Amant's ingenuity in meeting Kt X P eh.; 48. K-B3, R-KR7;

them. However, whilst the game 49. P-R8(Q), R X Q; 50. R X R,
seemed in the balance to last cen Kt x P; would lead to the same
tury's onlookers, we with our accu position as in the game.
mulated knowledge, would never
hesitate to assert. that White will 48. K-B2 R-KR6
ultimately emerge with the superior 49. P-R8(Q) RxQ
game, simply because he entered 50. R x R Kt x P
into complications with all the 5 1 . K-B3
advantages one can hope to have The previous part of the game
in such a position. was played in the true 'romantic'
style, but whilst Staunton makes
28. P-B4 use of his chances in a praiseworthy
Too slow. 28. P-K6, P· x P; 29. manner, Saint-Amant's play de
R x P, wins a second Pawn, and serves censure, since he had many
with two Bishops White has a very simpler and more convincing ways
quick win. of demonstrating his superiority.
51. Kt x P
5 2 . K-Q4 Kt-B3
53. K-K5 K-K2
54. P-R4 Kt-Q2 eh.
55. K-B5
If 55. K x P? Kt-Kt3 eh.
55. P-Q5
56. P-QR5 Kt-B4
57. K x P P-Q6
58. K-B4 P-Q7
59. R-Rl K-Q2
60. K-K3 K-B3
61. R-QKtl
Not only cutting off the Black
King, but threatening 62. K x P.
61. . . . . . . P-QS(Q) Position after 66 . . . . . K-R3
62. R X Q K-Kt4
63. R-Q5 67. Kt-QI
With this move White at last 68. R-B5 Kt-B3
assures himself of victory. 69. R-B6 K-Kt2
70. K-Kt5 Kt-R2 eh.
63. K-B3 71. K-B5 Kt-Bl
64. K-Q4 Kt-K3 eh. 72. R-KR6 Kt-R2
65. K-B4 K-Kt2 73. P-R6 eh. K-Ktl
66. R-Q7 eh. K-R3 74. R-R7 Kt-Bl
67. R x P! 75. R-Kt7 eh. K-Rl
A fine move. If now 67. 76. K-B6 Kt-R2 eh.
K x P; 68. R-B5 eh., K-R5; 69. 77. K-B7 Kt-B3
R-B6, Kt-B2; 70. R-B6, wins 78. K-Kt6 Kt-Kt5
the Knight. 79. R-Q7 Resigns.
An interesting game, played in an admirably aggressive spirit. But on

reflection we see that Staunton's troubles arose from his inability to
recognize the strength of the Bishop on QR2-KKt8 diagonal and from
failing to take steps to neutralize it by placing a Knight on his Q4 (as did
McDonnell in the previous game)-a new technique that later became
very common and is still considered best to-day.
Again White failed to utilize his great superiority through not recognizing
where his advantage lay. For this reason the game became long and
drawn out, a sign that his technique must have been inferior.
MORPHY DEFENDS THE QU�EN'S GAMBIT

-
This game is of particular interest as it is one of the very few in which
we see Morphy, the master of the 'open' game, defending with the Queen's
Gambit Accepted (by transposition). On the authority of Morphy him
self, we know that he was fully aware of the fundamental differences
between the 'open' and 'closed' game. He did not like the 'closed' game,
the principles of which had not in his time been laid down by Steinitz.
His treatment of the opening is creditable in one respect, that he
recognized the limitation of the defence and therefore did not force risky
combinations. On the other hand he fails to gain the initiative, being
9
misled by a pseudo-threat of attack on the part of his opponent (see

note to Black's 12th move).
61 10. B-Kt2
1 1 . Castles B-K2
White Black 12. B-K5
D. Harrwitz P. Morphy Though this move looks logical-
defending the QP and preparing
1st Match Game, 1858 Q-K2 and QR-QI-the usual
method of development in this
1 . P-Q4 P-Q4 variation, it is out of place here.
2. P-QB4 P-K3 Better is 12. B-K3, or 12. B-B2,
3. Kt-QB3 Kt-KB3 followed by Q-Q3 and QR-Ql .
4. B-B4
Lowenthal comments: 'Mr. Mor 12 . . . . 0 • • Castles
phy agrees with us in the opinion
that, at this stage of the game the
text-move is the most forcible one
that can be selected, indeed he says
he found it so strong that in his
subsequent games with Mr. Harr
witz he preferred meeting 1. P-Q4
with 1. P-KB4, in place of expos
ing himself to this attack.' Present
opinion considers that 4. B-B4,
allows Black to equalize easily.
4. . . . . . . P-QR3
This move was considered neces
sary to prevent 5. Kt-Kt5, but
to-day we would not waste time,
as 4. . . . . P-B4; 5. Kt-Kt5,
BP X P; 6. Kt-B7 eh., Q x Kt; 7. Here Morphy misses his chancel
B x Q, B-Kt5 eh.; follows with the He assumes that after 12. . . . .
better game for Black. Kt X B; 13. P X Kt, (or 13. Kt X Kt,
Q-Q3; and 14. . . . . QR-QI) the
5. P-K3 P-B4 Pawn at K5 will exert considerable
6. Kt-B3 Kt-B3 pressure and White will be able to
7. P-QR3 P x QP use it as pivot for a King's side
8. KP x P PxP attack. However, after 13. . . . .
9. B x P P-QKt4 Kt-Q4; White has to meet the
10. B-Q3 threat of 14 . . . . . Kt-B5; with 14.
The position now reached shows B-K4, and after 14 . . . . . Kt x Kt;
the familiar characteristics of the 15. Q x Q eh. , K x Q; 16. B x B,
Queen's Gambit Accepted. The R-R2; Black has the advantage.
text-move was thought to be good 13. Q-K2 Kt-Q4
at that period because the Bi�hop 14. B-Kt3 K-Rl
attacks Black's KR2, a weak square Morphy considered this the losing
in the castled position. To-day we move and recommended 14.
consider it preferable to keep the B-B3; with equality.
Bishop on the QR2-KKt8 diagonal
with possibilities of playing P-Q5 15. KR-Kl B-B3
and also bringing pressure to bear Lowenthal comments that Mor
on Black's KB2 after Kt-K5. phy's idea behind 14. . . . . K-Rl ;
THE QUEEN'S GAMBIT ACCEPTED ll7
was t o follow with 1 5 . . . . . P-B4;

but this is met by 16. Q X P,
Kt X l(t; 17. P X Kt, P-B5; 18.
Q-K4, P-Kt3; 19. B x BP.
16. Q-K4 P-Kt3

17. Kt x Kt Q x Kt
18. Q x Q PxQ
19. Kt-K5 !
Now this move is very strong, not
only threatening Kt-Q7, but also
tying down the King's Rook to the
defence of KB2.
19. . . . . . . QR-Q1
20. Kt x Kt B x Kt
21 . QR-B1 R-B1
Position after 29. BP X B
22. B-Q6 KR-Ktl
Not 22 . . . . . KR-Ql; 23. B-
K7, B X B; 24·. KR X B, R-Q2? P-K7, K x P; 34. K-K5, P-Q5;
25. R x B ! 35. P-KKt3, followed by K x P
and playing the Bishop to Q5.
23. B-K5 K-Kt2
A contemporary annotator points 29. . . . . . . B-K3
out that 23 . . . . . B x B; draws, but 30. P-QR4! PXP
this appears doubtful in view of 31. B X RP R-QKti
Black's weakness on the dark 32. R-Kt5 R-Ql
coloured squares. Loss of time. 32 . . . . . R-QR1;
at once is better.
24. P-B4
In the position reached, White 33. R-Kt6! R-QR1
has control of his QB5 and K5 and Necessary, otherwise 34. B-Kt7
we would nowadays say that White ties down the Black pieces and
has almost a won game, but Harr K-Q2-B3-Kt4 decides.
witz's recognition of the fact ninety
years ago reflects much credit on
34. K-Q2 B-Bl
him.
35. B x B RxB
24. B-Q2 36. R-Kt5 R-QRI
25. K-B2 P-R3 If 36 . . . . . R-Ql ; 37. K-B3,
26. K-K3 RxR R-B1 eh. ; 38. R-B5, R-Ql; 39.
27. R x R R-QB1 K-Kt4, R-Ktl eh.; 40. K-R3 ,
28. R-B5! winning a Pawn.
Although to-day this creation of
a 'strong-point' is merely technique, 37. RxP P-R6
it shows clearly Harrwitz's ma�?tery 38. PxP RxP
of the position. 39. R-B5 K-Bl
40. K-K2 K-K2
28. . . . . . . BxB 41. P-Q5 K-Q2
29. BP x B 42. R-B6 P-R4
Decisive, as after the exchange of 43. R-B6 K-K2
Rooks White wins. 29 . . . . . R x R; 44. P-Q6 eh. K-Kl
30. P x R, B-B3; (necessary to 45. P-K6 PxP
prevent 31. P-B6,) 31. K-Q4, 46. R x P eh. K-B2
P-B5; 32. P-K6, K-B3; 33. 47. P-Q7 R-Rl
48. R-Q6 K-K2 50. R-Kt5 R-RI

If 48. R-QI; 49. K-K3, 51. K-B3 K-K3
and the White King enters deci 52. K-Kt3 P-R5 eh.
sively. 53. K-Kt4 P-R6
54. P-Kt3 K-B3
49. R x P KxP 55. R-KR5 Resigns.
A masterly game by Harrwitz, who prevented his great opponent from

displaying his combinative ability. The importance of the game lies in
the growth of the idea of differentiating between the 'open' and 'closed'
games. Lowenthal says of Harrwitz, 'Mr. Harrwitz, when first player,
almost invariably adopts this mode of opening his game. It is one with
every variation of which he is thoroughly familiar, and in no match of
importance has he ever failed to avail himself of it.' The remark suggests
that our predecessors had very different ideas about the openings from
ourselves. To-day, when the variations of even one opening cannot be
thoroughly explored, we should hesitate to say that anybody knows
every variation of an opening.
THE STEINITZ VARIATION-STEINITZ ESTABLISHES HIS SYSTEM
We have seen that a century ago the technique of attack excelled the
technique of defence. This is the more remarkable, since in the Queen's
Gambit Accepted Black had an easier task than he has to-day, as he was
able to play the freeing move 3 . . . . . P-K4; and did not need to shut in
his QB, by . . . . P-K3. It was an innovation of Blackburne' s (I . P-Q4,
P-Q4; 2. P-QB4, P x P; 3. Kt-KB3!) which forcibly transposed the
game into a closed formation. That the defence had a far more difficult
task to solve soon became apparent.
It was left to Steinitz to work out a system that McDonnell had already
tried against de la Bourdonnais (see Game 59, page Ill). His idea con
sisted of placing a Knight on his Q4 square blocking White's isolated
Queen's Pawn, thus erecting a barrier behind which he could safely
develop his pieces to meet White's attack. How far he was ahead of his
time can only to-day be appreciated. His system is considered the best
method of playing against an isolated Pawn (instead of attempting
conquest by direct attack).
62 the tension by . . . . Kt-B3 as

played to-day) is called the 'Steinitz
White Black Variation.'
J. H. ZukeTtort W. Steinitz
7. P x P B-K2
9th Match Game, I886
8. Castles Castles
Better is 8. Kt-B3! (see
1. P-Q4 P-Q4
next game).
2. P-QB4 P-K3
3. Kt-QB3 Kt-KB3
4. Kt-B3 PxP 9. Q-K2!
5. P-K3 P-B4 Even to-day this is considered to
6. B x P PxP be most forceful, but it is playable
This early exchange of Pawns only if Black adopts an indifferent
(instead of continuing keeping up continuation like 8 . . . . . Castles.
9. QKt-Q2 Steinitz' plan as White's position

10. B-Kt3 Kt-Kt3 is still insecure, due to the 'hanging
1 1 . B-KB4 pawns' in the centre.
This normal-looking developing
move is quite out of place here. 18. P X Kt Q-B2
Best is 1 1 . R-Q1, QKt-Q4; 12. 19. Q-Q3
B-Kt5, Q-R4; 13. QR-B1 , R White is losing too much time by
Q1; 14. Kt-K5, and Black is un moving his Queen aimlessly instead
able to attain the Steinitz formation of adopting a positive idea such as
since 14. . . . . B-Q2; 15. Kt X Kt, 19. B-Kt3, B-Q3; 20. P-B4,
Kt x Kt; ( . . . . P x Kt; 16. B x Kt, (recommended by Lasker). In this
B x B ; 17. R-B5!) 16. B x B, case the centre Pawns might become
Kt x B; 17. Q-B3 wins a Pawn. A strong.
very important variation showing
the difficulties Black has to face 19 . . 0 • • Kt-Q4
• •
after the inaccurate move 8 . . . . . 20. B x B QxB

Castles. 21. B x Kt
This surrender of the Bishop for
11. QKt-Q4 the inferior Knight, which can
12. B-Kt3 Q-R4 always be driven away by P-QB4,
13. QR-B1 B-Q2 is incomprehensible to the reasoning
14. Kt-K5 KR-Q1 of to-day. Moreover, the Bishop
15. Q-B3 B-K1 secures the Knight at K5, since to
16. KR-K1 QR-B1 drive it away by . . . . P-KB3;
17. B-KR4 weakens Black along the KKtl
QR7 diagonal.
21. o o o o RxB
. .
22. P-QB4
This only weakens the Pawns still
further, since White cannot now
support their advance with minor
pieces.
22. 0 0 0 0 0KR-Ql0
23. R-K3
This move shows that when
White played 21 . B x Kt, he had an
idea of bringing over the Rook to
the King's side for attack. To us
it seems a doubtful enterprise, since
the Knight can always be driven
White at last has attained an away by . . . . P-B3 (there is no
attacking position but at the cost fear that White will be able to
of losing time with his Queen's obtain counter-chances along the
Bishop. Now he threatens 18. QKt3-KKt8 diagonal).
B x QKt, P x B; ( . . . . Kt x B; 19.
B x B, Kt x B; 20. Q x KtP) 19. 23. . . . . . . Q-Q3
Kt-Kt4! 24. R-Q1 P-B3
25. R-R3 P-KR3
17. . . . . . . Kt x Kt On 25 . . . . . P X Kt; 26. Q X P eh. ,
Appearing to give up the idea of K-B1; 27. R-B3 e h . , B-B2; 28.
playing against White's isolated Q-R5, Q-Q2; 29. Q-R8 eh.,
Queen's Pawn, but it is part of K-K2; 30. Q-R4 eh. , draws.
26. Kt-Kt4 Q-B5 rank. If now 28. R-Q2, P-QKt4;

27. Kt-K3 29. R-B3, Q-Ktl ; 30. P x P,
R-B8 eh. ; 3 1 . Kt-Ql , P-K4
(Steinitz).
28. R-B3 Q-Q3

29. R-Q2 B-B3
30. R-Kt3 P-B4
31. R-Kt6 B-K5
32. Q-Kt3
Superficially it appears that
White has good attacking chances.
32. K-R2
33. P-B5 RxP
34. R x KP R-B8 eh.
35. Kt-Q1 Q-B5
36. Q-Kt2 R-Kt8
37. Q-B3 R-QB1
�7. . . . . . . B-R5! 38. RxB Q x R(5)
Forcing the Rook off the first Resigns.
This game marked a great advance in the treatment of the Queen's

Gambit Accepted. Steinitz claimed, 'For it will be remembered that the
capture of the QBP by the second player was formerly held disadvanta
geous for the defence.' Here we see that a system, imperfect though it
may be, is preferable to mere move to move improvisation such as
Zukertort resorted to in this game.
Next we will follow the development of Steinitz' system through the
later modifications of Steinitz himself.
STEINITZ IMPROVES HIS SYSTEM
Steinitz' Defence System had to stand a much more severe test eight
years later against Pillsbury, at that time the most feared attacking
player. In this game Steinitz plays a variation that he formerly thought
inferior to his original line (see previous game), an opinion which he may
have later revised.
63 By putting pressure on White's

Queen's Pawn Black prevents him
White Black from adopting the favourable line
H. N. Pillsbury W. Steinitz of Q-K2, and KR-Q1 (see pre
vious game).
St. Petersburg, 1 896 7. Castles PXP
The modern line is 7.
1. P-Q4 P-Q4 P-QR3.
2. P-QB4 P-K3
3. Kt-QB3 Kt-KB3 8. P x P B-K2
4. Kt-B3 PxP 9. B-B4
5. P-K3 P-B4 An indifferent move often adopt
6. BxP Kt-B3! ed by Pillsbury, without success.
At that time it was not recognized 15. P-KR3 QKt-Kt5

that 9. B-K3, enabling him to play 16. B-Ktl QKt-Q4
Q-K2, etc., is better. The text 17. B-K5 B-B3!
move loses the initiative. By his 14th move Black has
gained time in which to deploy his
. 9 . . . Castles
. • • Bishop on this diagonal, a man
10. R-B1 Q-Kt3 reuvre characteristic of the varia
1 1 . Q-Q2 tion, as will be seen later.
In an earlier game Pillsbury tried
1 1 . QKt-Kt5, Kt-Kl; 12. KR 18. KKt-Kt5 P-KR3
K1, Kt-R4; 13. B-Q3, B-Q2; 19. KKt-K4 QKt x Kt
14. Kt-B7, R-Bl; 15. Kt-Q5, 20. P x Kt Kt x Kt
P X Kt; 16. R X B, Kt-B3; and 21 . B x Kt BxB
Black stands well. 22. Q x B Q-B3
Black has beaten back \\'bite's
11 . . . . . . . R-Ql attack and has left him with weak
12. KR-Q1 B-Q2 hanging Pawns.
13. Q-K2
The strength of Black's system
lies in the fact that White has to 23. Q-Kt4 B-Bl
lose time with the Queen to attain 24. P-QB4
his most favourable formation. Though weakening, this move is
necessary, otherwise Black can
13. B-K1 blockade the Pawns with
14. B-Q3 Q-Q4 and . . . . R-B5.
24. P-B4
25. Q-Kt6 Q-Kl
26. Q-Kt3 P-QKt3
27. Q-Kt3 Q-B3
28. P-QR4 P-QR4
Black's decision to play this move
must have been a difficult one since
it leaves the QKtP backward,
and it might become weak after the
exchange of the Bishops.
29. R-B3 B-Q3

30. P-Q5 Q-B2
31. B x B QxB
32. R-K3
If 32. R-KB3, to prevent
14. . . . . . . QR-Bl ! P-K4; 32. . . . . R-B4; follows.
A fine manreuvre which can best
be appreciated by comparison with
a later game Pillsbury-Tarrasch, 32. P-K4
33. R-Ktl P-K5
Nuremberg, 1896, where Black play
ed 14 . . . . . QKt-Kt5; 15. B-Ktl, 34. R-QB3
QKt-Q4; 16. B-K5, QR-Bl ; 17, If 34. Q x P, Q x Q; 35. R x Q,
KKt-Kt5, P-KR3; 18. KKt-K4, R x BP; 36. R-R3, R-B4; wins
QKt x Kt; 19. R x Kt, R x R; 20. a Pawn.
Kt x Kt eh., B x Kt; 21 . B x B,
P X B; 22. P X R, and White was 34. . . . . . . Q-K4
able to break up Black's King's side. Threatening 35 . . . . . R X QP.
122 CHESS FROM MORPHY TO BOT\VINNIK
35. R-B2 R-Q3 39. RxR P-B6

36. R(1 )-QB1 40. Q-Q1 R-KKt3
Better is 36. R-K1, Q-Q5. 41. P-Kt4 P-K6
42. Q-K1 P-K7
36. P-B5 43. R-B1 QxP
37. P-B5 PxP 44. Q-B3 R-QB3!
38. R x P RxR Resigns.
This game was played during Steinitz' declining years, and it is a tribute
to the strength of his system that Pillsbury had no success in his games
against him in this line of the Queen's Gambit Accepted. That Pillsbury
was unable to find any means of initiating an attack shows that he had
not sufficiently understood his former failings.
WHITE BUILDS UP AN ATTACKING FORMATION

SCHLECHTER'S CONTINUATION
In the previous games we have seen that White's attacking formation

was not sufficiently powerful to overcome Steinitz' Defensive System.
Although great attacking players like Pillsbury and Zukertort had
tried in other games to employ better tactics in the early middle game,
they were unsuccessful in these attempts. In the following game
Schlechter improves White's opening strategy.
64 P-R3, R-Q1; 1 2 . P-Q5, P x P;

13. B x P, QKt-Kt5; 14. P-K4,
White Black KKt x B; 15. P x Kt, B-B4; 16.
K. Schlechter M. I. Tchigorin B-B4, Q x B; 17. Q x B, with an
equal game (Reshevsky-Fine, Sem
London, 1 899 mering-Baden, 1937).
I. p_:_Q4 P-Q4 10. PxP

2. P-QB4 PxP 11. P X P Kt-Kt3
3. Kt-KB3 P-QB4 12. B-Q3 QKt-Q4
4. P-K3 Kt-KB3 13. Kt-K5 Kt x Kt
5. B x P P-K3 A doubtful move, but if 13 . . . . .
6. Castles QKt-Q2 Q-R4; 14. B-Q2, with the threat
7. Kt-B3 B-K2 Kt-B4, and the Black Queen's
8. Q-K2 Castles mobility is very limited.
9. R-Q1 P-QR3
10. P-QR4
The game runs on lines similar to 14. P x Kt Q-B2
the modern variations, and by 15. P-QB4 Kt-Q2
delaying the exchange of Pawns by 16. Kt-Kt4
. . . . BP x P; Tc.higorin shows much Very fine, avoiding simplification.
more insight into the requirements
of the position than his contempo 16. . . . . . . R-Q1
raries. Still, his inaccuracy in 17. B-B2!
developing his QKt at Q2 early on, This seemingly insignificant wait
and later playing . . . . P-QR3; ing move is much better than the
brings him into difficulties. Had he routine development of the Queen's
played . . . . QKt-B3; a possible Bishop, the function of which has
development is 10 . . . . . Q-B2; 1 1 . not yet been determined.
17 . . . . . . . Kt-B1 26. Q-K4 P-Kt4

18. R-Ktl B-Q2 This looks very risky, but he has
19. Kt-K5 no choice; if 26 . . . . . Kt-Kt3; 27.
A very strong move, with the B-Q2, B-B3; 28. B X P, R-KB1 ;
intention of playing Q-K4, threat 29. B-B6, followed b y B-Kt7
ening Q x KtP also B-B4. and P-B6.
1 9. . . . . . . B-Q3 27. B-K3 P-B4

20. Kt x B R x Kt 28. Q-Kt7 Kt-Kt3
21. P-Kt3 P-QKt3 29. B-Kt31
A mistake, but White's reply was White now turns to the weakened
not easy to foresee, and White was King's side.
threatening P-B5.
29. K-B2
30. Q-B3 K-Kt2
31. B-QB4 P-B5
32. B-Q2 P-K4
If 32 . . . . . R X P? 33. B-B3.
33. B-B3 R-B1

34. Q--K4 R-R2
35. R-Kt6 P x KtP
36. RP X P Q-R6
37. B-B1 Q-R4
38. B-K2 Q-R3
39. K-Kt2 P-Kt5
There is no other way to extricate
the Queen, for if 39. . . . . K-R 1 ;
40. R-KR1, Q-Kt2; 41 . R x Kt.
22. P-R51
A fine Pawn sacrifice creating a 40. Q X KtP B-Q1
passed Pawn. Preparing the following desperate
sacrifice.
22. PxP
23. B-R4 R(2)-Q1 41. B-Q2 R x P eh.
24. P-B5 B-K2 42. KxR Q-R7 eh.
25. B-B41 43. K--K3 BxR
The first move by White's Queen's 44. PxB R-K2
Bishop, which, however, comes into 45. P-Q5 R-KB2
action with decisive effect. Com 46. R-KB1 RxR
paring White's strategy with that 47. BxR Q-Kt8 eh.
of Pillsbury in the last game, we 48. K-K2 Q x QKtP
cannot but admire Schlechter's 49. Q-Q7 eh. K-Ktl
economical and purposeful dev�lop 50. B-R3 Kt-B1
ment, enabling him to advance his 51. B-K6 eh. Kt x B
QB Pawn successfully, instead of 52. P x Kt Q-Kt4 eh.
having to allow it to be blockaded. 53. QxQ PxQ
54. BxP K-Kt2
25 . . . . . . . Q-B1 55. B-Kt4 Resigns.
A fine example of White's modern strategy in the Queen's Gambit

Accepted. Though this game was played only three years after the
previous one, it represents a great advance in technique. Here Black
delays . . . . BP x QP, keeping White's Queen's Bishop locked in. Schlech

ter's solution of the opening problem-actually leaving his Queen's
Bishop undeveloped, but using it still as a latent force, able to be developed
on either diagonal as the position may demand-is truly masterly. This
technique has since become a new and important feature of the chess
master's repertoire, and indeed Alekhine has frequently adopted it (see
his game against Davidson, Semmering, 1926).
THE STEINITZ VARIATION IN MODE RN TIME S
To-DAY the Stcinitz Variation, characterized by White's isolated Pawn

at Q4, is rarely played in its original form. Rubinstein tried to revive
it by introducing minor improvements, but it still remained a difficult
defence to play. Moreover, a much more elastic and promising defensive
system had been introduced (see Games 69 and 70, pages 131 -133). Even
Steinitz did not claim that his system gave Black a definite advantage,
merely pointing out that Black can blockade the Pawn at Q4 and, by
cautious manceuvring behind this barrier, he can hope to reach an
advantageous end-game.
The following games deal with the Steinitz Variation in its modern
guise, the result of a favourable transposition from the Caro-Kann and
Orthodox Defence.
THE STEINITZ VARIATION BY TRANSPOSITION

FROM THE CARO-KANN DEFENCE
65 KKt5 and its retreat to K3 would

lose time.
White Black
M. M. Botwinnik M. Euwe 10. R-B1 P-QR3
1 1 . B-Q3
Hastings, 1934-5 Aimed at preventing P-QKt4,
which is now met by 1 2. Kt-K4!
1. P-QB4 P-QB3 B-Kt2; 13. B X Kt, B X B; 14.
2. P-K4 P-Q4 Kt-B5.
3. KP x P PxP
4. P-Q4 Kt-KB3 11. . . . . . . P-R3!
5. Kt-QB3 Kt-B3 An important move, the object
6. B-Kt5 P-K3 of which is to gain control of his
7. Kt-B3 PxP KB5 .
8. BxP B-K2
9. Castles Castles 12. B-K3
Now White has no chance of Preferable to the text-move is 12.
playing Q-K2 without prepara B-R4, Kt-QKt5; 13. B-Ktl,
tion, since his QB is already at P-QKt4; 14. P-QR3, QKt-Q4;
THE STEINITZ VARIATION IN MODERN TIMES 1 25
R-K7! (26. R-KB2, R x R; 27.

K X R, Kt-Kt5 eh!)
24 . . . . . .
. Kt x Q
25. B-Q2 R(R1 )-Kl
26. P-QKt3 R-K7
27. R-KB2 Kt-B3
28. B-R5 RxR
29. K x R Kt-K5 eh.
30. K-Bl Kt-Kt4
31. B-Q7
Better is 31 . B-KKt4.
31 . . . . . . . R-K2
32. B-B5 R-K4
33. B-Ktl B-K5
Position after 12. B-K3 34. B x B Kt x B
35. R-B6
15. Q-B2 forcing Black to play Better is 35. R-B8 eh., K-R2;
either P-KKt4 or P-KKt3. 36. B-Kl .
12. . . . . . . Kt-QKt5 35. . . . . . . R-B4 eh.

13. B-Ktl P-QKt4 36. K-K1
14. Kt-K5 B-Kt2 If 36. K-Ktl , R-B7; 37. P
1 5 . Q-Q2 R-K1 QR4, R-Kt71 or if 36. K-K2,
Preventing the sacrifice on R6, R-B7 eh. ; 37. K-K3, R x RP.
for if 16. B x P, P x B; 17. Q x P,
B-KB 1 . 36 ....... R-B7
37. P-QR4 RxP
1 6 . P-B4 QKt-Q4 38. R x QRP PxP
17. Kt x Kt 39. PxP RxP
17. B-KB2, is no better, for 40. R-R8 eh. K-R2
there follows 17. . . . . Kt x Kt! 18. 41. B-Kt6 R-QR7
P X Kt, Kt-K5! 42. P-R5 P-R4
43. P-R6 P-R5
17. . . . . . . Q x Kt 44. P-R7 P-R6
18. P-B5 B-Q3
19. P x P RxP
Preventing White from moving
his Knight, for if 20. Kt-B3, Kt
Kt5! 21 . B-KB2, B x P eh. ; or
20. Kt-Q3, R x B! On 20. B-B4,
B X Kt; 21. P X B, Q X Q; follows,
winning a Pawn.
20. B-B5 R-K2

2 1 . B-R3 B x Kt
22. P x B Q x KP
23. B-B4
If 23. B-Q4, R-QI.
23. . . . . . . Q-Q4
24. Q x Q
Not 24. B x P, P x B; 25. Q x P, Position after 47. R-K8
12� CHESS FROM MORPHY TO BOTWINNIK
45. B-Ktl Kt-B3 available to the Rook. This varia

46. K-Q1 ! tion was pointed out by Botwinnik
Necessary, for if 46. R-Q8, after the game.
R x P; 47. B x R, P-R7 wins.
48. BxP RxP
49. B-Kt8 R-R1
46. . . . . . . Kt-Kt5 50. R-Q8 Kt-K4
47. R-K8 P-R7 51. B-B7 RxR
Not 47 . . . . R x P? 48. B x R,
. 52. BxR K-Kt3
P-R7; 49. R-K1 (the idea behind 53. K-K2 K-B4
White's 46th move) but 47. . . . . 54. K-K3 K-Kt5
Kt-B7 eh! 48. K-K1, Kt-Q6 eh.; 55. B-B7 Kt-B6
49. K-Q1, R X P! 50. B x R, P-R7; 56. K-B2 P-B4
wins, since White's K1 is no longer Resigns.
LASKER'S TREATMENT
The following game is of some interest since it gives us a clue to an

important question: With chess knowledge in its advanced state, can a
player now apply only the general principles to the openings, treating
them like other phases of the game, thereby ignoring modern analysis?
It is well known that Lasker was an exponent of this theory and in the
following game he deliberately avoids 'book' variations, for it was common
knowledge that in the Queen's Gambit Accepted the development of
White's Queen's Knight is best when delayed.
66 Black is able to play 8. . . . .

B-Kt2; retaining control of the
White Black squares Q4 and K5.
Em. Lasker S. Reshevsky
8. . . . . . . P x PI
Nottingham, 1936 This is an important move, the
object of which is to fix White's
1. P-Q4 P-Q4 Pawns.
2. P-QB4 PxP
3. Kt-KB3 Kt-KB3 9. P x P B-Kt2
4. P-K3 P-K3 10. B-Kt5 B-K2
5. B x P P-B4 1 1 . Q-K2
6. Kt-B3 White has handled the opening
According to modern theory, this in an indifferent manner and does
move is best deferred until later. not seem to realize that he is
drifting into an inferior position.
6. . . . . . . P-QR3 Alekhine recommends here 1 1 . B X
7. Castles Kt, B x B; 12. B-K4, in order to
Or 7. P-QR4, Kt-B3; 8. Castles diminish the strength of Black's
B-K2; 9. Q-K2, P x P; 10. R-Q1, Queen's Bishop.
P-K4; 1 1 . P x P, P x P; 12. Kt x P,
Kt X Kt; 13. Q-K5, Q-Q3; with 11. Castles
equality. 1 2 . QR-Q1 QKt-Q2
13. Kt-K5
7. . . . . . . P-QKt4 This move, characteristic of the
8. B-Q3 variation, is entirely out of place
8. B-Kt3 is better, but even so here, since White has no attacking
THE STEINITZ VARIATION IN MODERN TIMES 127
chances whatsoever. He should 19. P x P, P x P; 20. B x Kt,

have avoided simplification by play Q X B; 21 . Q X P, B-R3; wins the
ing 13. B-B1, Kt-Q4; 14. Kt-K4. exchange.
13. . . . . . . Kt-Q4 1 9. . . . . . . Kt-Kt4

14. B-B1 20. P x P
It seems that Lasker still hoped If 20. Kt-Kl, P x P.
to obtain the initiative, for other
wise he would have chosen the PxP
20. . . . . . .
continuation 14. B x B, Kt X B; (14. Better than 20 . . . . . Kt x Kt eh.;
. . . . KKt X Kt; 15. B X P eh! or 14. 2 1 . Q x Kt, with counter-chances for
. . . . Q x B; 15. QKt x Kt, B x Kt; Black.
1 6. B-K4!) 15. B-K4, B x B; 16.
Kt x B and White has in the strong
position of his Knights compensa 21 . B x P
tion for the weakness of his Pawn. If 21 . Kt-K1, Kt-R6 eh.; 22.
K-R1, Kt-B5.
14. . . . . . . KKt x Kt
15. P X Kt Kt-B3 21 . Kt x Kt eh.
16. P-QR4 22. P x Kt Q-Kt4 eh.
A Pawn sacrifice with the idea of
pushing forward his centre Pawns
(P-QB4), but the position does not
contain such a tactical chance;
besides, Lasker faces a tactician of
equal calibre, who from now on finds
the very best moves.
16. . . . . . . Q-Q4!
17. Kt-B3
If 17. P-KB4, P-Kt5.
17. ...... KR-B1

18. B-Kt2
18. P x P, P x P; 19. B x P, R x P;
is no better.
18 . . . . . . . Kt-K5 White resigns, for if 23. K-R1 ,

19. R-B1 Q-Kt5 wins.
Lasker was unsuccessful in his treatment of the opening because he

rejected certain important findings of the analysts, and allowed his
opponent to obtain an ideal formation in the Queen's Gambit Accepted.
The fact that he could have achieved at one stage approximate equality
does not confirm his theory, since White can always keep the balance
of the position without complicated opening analysis.
Even a great tactician when facing an opponent of equal skill will find
it difficult to regain terrain lost in the early stages. When he has to fight
against modern opening theory as well, his task will be practically
impossible.
The last two games have shown us the modern development of the
Steinitz system, from which emerge two salient points. First, White
must use care in the development of his Queen's Bishop, which is strong
at KKt5 if he can force Black to weaken his King's side (e.g. by forcing
P-KR3, giving White a point of attack at KKt5), but is weak if Dlack
can simplify by KKt-Q4. Secondly, Black can often develop his
Queen's Bishop at QKt2, using it aggressively along the long diagonal
instead of following Steinitz' passive deployment of the piece for defence
of his King's position via Q2 to Kl.
BY TRANSPOSITION FROM THE ORTHODOX DE FENCE

BOTWINNIK'S CONTINUATION
The question has often been posed whether our attacking technique
has advanced at all. On the other hand it is debatable whether this
age of scientific play encourages attack.
For providing an answer to this problem our study of the Queen's
Gambit Accepted with its numerous transposition possibilities is most
useful. In the following game Botwinnik, who is considered a 'strategist'
rather than 'tactician,' challenges his opponent to create a position
characteristic of the Steinitz Variation, by avoiding the 'tempo struggle'
continuation which results after 7. R-Bl. The game itself has some
resemblance to the Zukertort-Steinitz game (see Game 62, page 1 18) and
Botwinnik's handling of the attack gives a clear answer to the question
whether attacking technique can be acquired.
67 B X B. If instead (a) 13. B-K3,

Kt X Kt; 14. P X Kt, B-QR5; or
White Black (b) 13. Kt-K4, B-QR5; and in
M. M. Botwinnik M. Vidmar both cases Black, by exchanging
White's powerful King's Bishop,
Nottingham, 1 936 has good prospects of simplification.
This analysis given by Botwinnik
1. P-QB4 P-K3 is highly instructive since he moves
2. Kt-KB3 P-Q4 his King's Knight to Q4 ( instead of
3. P-Q4 Kt-KB3 the usual . . . . QKt-Q4). By fol
4. B-Kt5 B-K2 lowing his idea Black is able to
5. Kt-B3 Castles force an exchange of minor pieces
6. P-K3 QKt-Q2 and to ease his position.
7. B-Q3
This move in place of the more 13. Kt-K5 B-B3
normal 7. R-QBl , allows Black to 14. QR-Q1
play 7 . . . . . P-QB4 with impunity. Now Black's position is becoming
uncomfortable, for if (a) 14. . . . .
7. P-B4 Kt-R4; 15. Kt X B, P X B; 16.
8. Castles BP x P B-B 1 , with a very good game, or
9. KP x P QP x P (b) 1 4. . . . . Q-,-R4; 1 5. B-B 1 ,
10. B X P Kt-Kt3 Kt x Kt; 16. Kt x B, P x Kt; 17.
1 1 . B-Kt3 B-Q2 P X Kt, with the better game.
12. Q-Q3 QKt-Q4
By an inversion of moves we have 14. . . . . . . Kt-QKt5
reached a Queen's Gambit Accepted 15. Q-R3
formation. The Queen is able without loss
Better was 12 . . . . . KKt-Q4; of time to reach this strong position,
and if 13. B-B2, P-Kt3; with the from which she can threaten Black's
double threat of Kt-Kt5 and also vulnerable squares at K6 and KR7.
THE STEINITZ VARIATION IN MODERN TIMES 129
15. B-Q4
16. Kt x B QKt x B
Better is 16 . . . . . KKt X B; 17.
B-B1, R-B1; and Black has some
defensive chances, though White
still has the better game.
17. P-B4 QR-B1

Not 17 . . . . . P-KKt3; 18. B
R6, R-1{1 ; 19. B-R4, winning the
exchange. If 17 . . . . . Kt-K5; 18.
Kt x P! K x Kt; (R x Kt, Q x KP!)
19. QR-K1!
18. P-B5 PxP

No better is 18 . . . . . Q-Q3; 19.
P x P, P x P; (19 . . . . . Q x P; 20. Position after 19 . . . . . Q-Q3?
Q-B3,) 20. QR-K1 !
If 21. . . . . Kt X B; 22. R X Kt,
19. R x P Q-Q3? B x R; 23. Q x R eh.
This loses immediately; but even
after the best move 19 . . . . . R-B2; 22. R x Ktl
20. QR-KB1, retains the strong Much stronger than 22. B x Kt.
pressure. 22. . . . . . . Q-B3
23. R-Q6
20. Kt x PI R x Kt Avoiding the trap 23. R-QB5?
Not 20 . . . . . K x Kt; 2 1. B x Kt B x P eh.
eh.
23. Q-K1
21. B x KKt BxB 24. R-Q7 Resigns.
CAPABLANCA'S T REATMENT
Capablanca has very rarely accepted the Queen's Gambit and the
following game is one of the few occasions on which he did so. It is a
curious fact that his opponent should have been Salo Flohr, who very
often chose to accept the gambit.
It is indeed fortunate that Capablanca had very little knowledge
of previous theory, for in his unbiassed approach to the opening problems
he succeeds in evolving a system which is, in effect, a compromise between
the old and the new. He isolates White's Queen's Pawn and is able still
to retain mobility for his pieces.
68 2. P-QB4 PxP
3. Kt-KB3 Kt-KB3
White Black 4. P-K3 P-K3
S. FlohT J. R. Capablanca 5. B x P P-n4
6. 0-0 P-QR3
Semmering-Baden, 1937 7. Q-K2 Kt-B3
8. R-Q1 Q-B2
I. P-Q4 P-Q4 9. Kt-B3 B-K2
130 CHESS FR Ol\1 MOR PHY TO BOT\VINNIK
A move chara cteri sti c of Capa B1ack's treatment in the game

b1 an ca' s sty1e. He avoids the com Pillsbury-Steinitz (Game 63, page
mittal line 9. . . . . P-QKt4; 10. 1 20). Now 1 4 . . . . . Kt x QP is not
B-Kt3, B-Kt2; 11. P-Q5 , good because of 1 5. R x Kt, B x Kt;
P x P; 12. Kt x P, Kt x Kt; 13. 16. B-QB4 winning the QR Pawn.
B x Kt, B-K2; 14. P-QKt3, Cast
les KR; 14. B-Kt2, preferring to 15. Kt-B3 B-Kt4!
maintain the tension in the centre A typical Capablanca simplifying
without weakening his Pawn posi combination.
tion, and to advance on the Queen's
side only when he is in a position
to do so with the greatest effect. 16. Q-K5
If 16. Kt x B, P x Kt; 17. Q x P
eh., Kt-Q2; and wins a piece.
10. P-QR3
Now 10. P-Q5, P X P; 1 1 . Kt X P, 16. . . . . . . Q-Kt2
Kt X Kt; 12. B x Kt, can be met by 17. B-Kt3 Kt-Q6
12. Castles; 13. P-K4, 1R. Q-Kt3 Kt x R
B-Kt5. 1 9. QR x Kt B-Q2
20. B-QB4 QR-B1
21 . P-QKt3 Castles
10. . . . . . . P-QKt4 22. Kt-K5 B-Kt4
1 1 . B-R2 P-Kt5 B xB
23. Q-Q3
12. Kt-QR4 P x QP 23. . . . . B-R6; 24. R-B2,
13. KP x P B-Q2 B-l{t5; would have maintained
14. P x P Kt x KtP the tension on the Queen's side (25.
The manner in which Capablanca KtB x B, P x B; 26. Kt x KtP? R
has secured freedom to manreuvre x R).
for his pieces on the Queen's side
and has isolated White's Queen's 24. P x B KR-Q1
Pawn is quite remarkable and re 25. Q-K2 Q-R2
presents a great advance upon 26. P-B5
Simpler than 26. Q-Q3, when
he might have experienced some
difficulty in safeguarding his Pawns
after 26. . . . . B-Q3.
26 . . . . . . . Kt-Q4
27. Kt x Kt R x Kt
28. R-R1 P-QR4
29. Q-Kt5 B xP
30. P x B
30. R x P, B x P; 31. R x Q,
R X Q; is good for Black.
30. R x Kt
31. R x P Q-K2
Position after 1 5 . . . . . B-Kt4! Draw.
Capablanca's free and easy style is well manifested in an opening in

'Which analysis apparently confined the players to a narrow choice of moves.'
XI
THE QUEEN'S GAMBIT ACCEPTED

IN MODERN TIMES
THE Queen's Gambit Accepted is a good example of the manner in which

the chess thought of a period is often reflected in the contemporary
handling of the opening. During the nineteenth century this opening
invariably led to a rigid Pawn formation, with an isolated Queen's Pawn
at White's Q4, with compensation for White in the free development of
his pieces (his Queen's Bishop not being shut in). To-day Black avoids
playing . . . . P X QP, but by putting pressure on White's Q4, prevents
his bringing out his Queen's Bishop.
Tension, and the maintenance of tension, is Black's aim until he is able
to complete his development on the Queen's side. This White tries to
counter by a break-through in the centre, often by Pawn sacrifices.
ALEKHINE'S DEFENCE SYSTEM
The next game is a fine example of the intricacies of modern opening

theory. Whilst we are accustomed to long and far reaching combinations
for definite objects which are immediately decisive, e.g. material gain or
mate, here we see Alekhine introducing surprising and remarkable com
binations in the opening solely to maintain the tension and to prevent
his Queen's side Pawns from being broken up.
69 QKt-Q2; though after 9. P-QR4,

P-Kt5; 10. QKt-Q2, B-Kt2; 1 1 .
White Black Kt-B4, Black's Pawns are fixed
M. Euwe A. Alekhine and may become weak.
Bad Nauheim, 1937 8. . . . . . . B-Kt2

9. P-QR4 QKt-Q2! !
1. P-Q4 P-Q4 A surprising move that keeps
2. P-QB4 PxP Black's Pawns position intact. If
3. Kt-KB3 Kt-KB3 now 10. P X KtP, P X KtP; 1 1 .
4. P-K3 P-K3 R x R, Q x R; 12. Q x P, B x Kt.
5. B x P P-B4
6. Castles P-QR3 10. R-Q1 B-K2
7. Q-K2 P-QKt4 1 1 . QP X P Castles
8. B-Kt3 This Pawn sacrifice enables Black
This move is good only when to maintain the tension.
Black's Queen's Knight is deve
loped at QB3. Correct is 8. 1 2. B-B2
B-Q3, after which 8 . B-Kt2?
. . • . Threatening 1 3. P-QKt4, this
is bad, being met by 9. P X P, move forces Black to play 1 2 . . . . .
B X P?; 1 0. B X P eh. , winning a B X P; Euwe recommenrls 12. P
Pawn. Black has to play 8. B6, B X P; 13. Kt-K5, Q-B2; 14.
10 181
19. B-Q3 Kt-Ktl

20. B-B4 Kt-B3
21 . R-Q2
21 . R-Q1? B x B; wins a piece.
21 . . . . . . . Q-Kt3
The best chance. Black obtains
some compensation for the sacrificed
Pawn.
22. B x B PxB
23. R x P Kt-Kt5
24. R-Ql
Position after 1 1 . . . . . Castles
Kt X B, Q X Kt; 15. B-B2, with

the two Bishops and a better Pawn
position. Still it appears that Black
has a promising line in 13. . . . .
B-Kt2! ; 14. P x P, Q-B2!; 15.
Kt x Kt, Kt x Kt; 16. P x P, Kt
B4; and he has good compensation
for the sacrificed Pawn.
12. . . . . . . BxP
13. Kt-K5
Preferable is the solid move 13.
QKt-Q2. 24. . . . . . . Kt-B7?
The decisive mistake. With 24.
13. . . . . . . P-Kt5 . . . . QR-B1; 25. B-Q2, R-B7;
Although at last White has forced 26. Q-B1, Kt-R7; Black's strong
Black to make this characteristic position is adequate compensation
move in the Queen's Gambit Ac for the lost Pawn.
cepted, he has lost too much time.
25. R-Ktl Q--QB3
14. Kt x Kt Kt x Kt 26. B-Q2 QxP
15. Kt-Q2 27. B-B3
15. B X P eh. , K X B; 16. Q-Q3 Now the position is clarified. The
eh . , P-B4; 17. Q x Kt, Q x Q; 18. Black Knight has nothing to say
R X Q, QR-Ql ; is in favour of jn the following play, whilst White's
Black, but 15. P-K4 is better than Bishop threatens Black's most vul
the text-move. nerable spot.
15. . . . . . . P-B4 27. . . . . . • Q-Kt4

�. 16. Kt-Kt3 B-Q4l 28. Q-B3 QR-Q1
b 17. Kt-Q4 B x Kt 29. Q-Kt3 R-Q2
�: 18. R X B P-Kt6? 30. R-Q6 R(B1 )-B2
The right move is 1 8. . . . . 31 . QR-Q1 P-B5
Q-Kt3; {9. B-Q2, P-QR4; lock Alekhine sacrifices a Pawn to
ing in the White Queen's Bishop. meet the threat of 32. R x R , R x R ;
THE QUEEN'S GAMBIT ACCEPTED IN MODERN TIMES 133
33. R X R, Q X R; 34. Q-Kt8 eh . , 34. P-B 6 P Kt3

-
K B 2 ; 35 . Q X P eh.
- 35. P-R4 RxR
36. Q x R P-R4
32. P X P P-QR4 If 36 . . . . . Q-K1; 37. Q - Kt6 .
33. P-B5 P-R5

Protecting the QKt Pawn and 37. Q-K6 Resigns.
preventing the line mentioned in If 37 . . . . . Q-Ktl ; 38. R-Q7,
the last note. Q-KB1 ; 39. R-K7, decides.
EuwE'S CONTINUATION
The following game is an interesting counterpart to the last, and is a

further illustration of the tactical complexities to be faced when playing
the Queen's Gambit Accepted.
70 10. P x P BxP
White Black l l . P-K4 P-Kt5
M. Euwe A. Alekhine Now ll . . . . . B-Kt2, is mean
ingless, but 1 1 . Kt-Q2; comes
• • • .
5th Match Game, 1937 into consideration.
1. P-Q4 P-Q4 12. P-K5 P X Kt

2. P-QB4 PxP If 12 . . . . . Kt-Q2; 13. Kt-K4,
3. Kt-KB3 P-QR3 is too strong.
4. P-K3 Kt-KB3
5. B x P P-K3 13. P x Kt P x BP
6. Castles P-B4 The alternatives are (a) 13.
7. Q-K2 Kt-B3 Q X P; 14. Q-B4! Q-K2; 15.
8. Kt-B3 B-K3, or (b) 13. . . . . Q x P; 14.
Superficially, this looks an ob Q-B41 P X P; 15. Q X B, P X B ( Q),
vious developing move, but it was (15 . . . . . P X R(Q); 1 0. Q X Kt eh.,
a long time before it was generally K-Ql; 17. R-Q1 eh., K-K2; 18.
recognized that this is stronger than B-R3 Mate) 16. QR x Q, B-Q2;
the old move 8. R-Q1, since after 17. B-R4, R-QB1; 1 8. KR-Q1,
8. . . . . Q-B2; 9. Kt-B3, P with a strong attack.
QKt4; 10. B-Kt3, B-K2; 1 1 .
P x P, B x P; 12. P-K4, KKt 14. Q-B4 Q-Kt3
Kt5; gains a tempo (White's KB 15. Q X BP Kt-Q5
Pawn is unprotected) and prevents On 15 . . . . . B-K2; 16. B-K3,
White from p�aying 13. P-K5. Q-Kt4; 17. QR-Bl, B-Kt2; 18.
Q-B2, gives White the better
8. . . . . . . P-QKt4 game.
9. B-Kt3 . B-K2
At the time this game was pl�yed, 16. Kt x Kt B x Kt
9 . . . . . B-K2; though it involves 17. B-R4 eh. K-K2
the loss of a tempo, was considered 18. B-K31 1
safer than 9 . . . . . B-Kt.2. To-day A surprising move which enables
the latter move has been rehabili White to keep up his attack.
tated, since after 10. R-Q1, Q-B2;
l l . P-Q5, P X P; 12. P-K4, 18. . . . . . . B x Q?
P-Q5! Black is ahle to maintain · A better defence is given by 18.
the tension, although this is not . R-Ql; 19. QR-Q1, P-K4;
• . .
without its dangers. 20. B x B, R x B; 21 . R x R, P x R;

K x R; 22. R-Q1 eh. , K-K4; 23.

B-B6, wins a piece .
• 2 1 . P-B4
22. R-B3
B X KtP
This quiet move is decisive. If

now 22 . . . . . P-B4; 23. R-QKt3,
B-B3; 24. B-B6, wins a piece.
22. . . . . . . B-Kt2
23. R-KKt3 B-R6
There is no other way of meeting
the threat of mate. If 23. . . . .
R-B1; 24. R-Q8 eh., R x R; 25.
B-B5 eh.
Position afte:r 17 . . . . . K-K2 24. RxB R-KKtl

25. R-KKt3 R xR
(21. . . . . Q X R; 22. Q-B6,) 22. 26. PxR B-Q4
Q-B3, and, although White main 27. B-Kt3 BxB
tains his attack, Black has defensive 28. PxB K-K1
chances. 29. P-QKt4 R-Ktl
30. B-B5 R-B1
19. B x Q B-K4 31. R-R1 R-B3
Black must do something about 32. K-B2 P-B4
the threat of 20. B-B5 eh. If 19. 33. K-K3 P-B3
. . . . B-Kt5; 20. KR-Q1 , (threat 34. K-Q4 K-B2
ening 2 1 . P-QR3, B-Q3; 22. 35. K-B4 K-Kt3
R x B,) 20. . . . . QR-Ktl ; 2 1 . 36. R-Q1 K-R4
B-B7, R-Kt2; 2 2 . QR-B1, with 37. R-Q6 R xR
the threat 23. P-QR3. 38. BxR K-Kt5
39. B-K7 KxP
20. QR-Q1 K-B1 40. BxP K x BP
If 20. . . B-Q3; 21. R X B,
. • 41 . K-B5 Resigns.
An extremely instructive game showing how a seemingly slight in

accuracy such as Black's 9th move, enabling White to gain a tempo for
his central advance, can prove fatal. White was able to maintain this
advantage in spite of the exchange of Queens and direct his attack to
its logical conclusion. A masterpiece of strategy.
BoTWINNIK's TREATMENT
Another important line arises when White endeavours to prevent

Black's Pawn advance on the Queen's side by an early P-QR4. This
old continuation received new life when Botwinnik demonstrated that
White has nothing to fear from weakening his QKt4. He has adopted
it several times on many important occasions and his fine tactical sense
1� well illustrated in the many finesses which he has introduced into
this line.
THE QUEEN' S GAMBIT ACCEPTED IN MODERN TIMES 1 35
71 threat Q-B-i, gives White a strong

attack.
White Black
M. M. Botwinnik P. Keres 13. B-Kt2 B-Kl
14. P-Q5
Moscow, 1 941 At last White is able to carry out
this characteristic break-through.
I. P-Q4 P-Q4
2. P-QB4 PxP 14. . . . . . . PxP
3. Kt-KB3 P-QR3 15. B x QP Kt-Q5!
4. P-K3 Kt-KB3
5. B x P P-K3
6. P-QR4 P-B4
7. Castles Kt-B3
8. Q-K2 B-K2
9. R-Q1 Q-B2
10. P-R3
Here we reach the crucial point
of the variation. Can White save
a tempo by dispensing with this
move and give the game a more
dynamic nature by the substitution
of a developing move? Against
Euwe at Groningen, 1946, Botwin
nik played 10. Kt-B3, (instead of
10. P-R3,) 10. . . . . Castles; 1 1 .
P-QKt3, B-Q2; 1 2 . B-Kt2,
QR-B1; 13. P-Q5, with the better Black must try to simplify; other
position, but analysis has shown wise White will soon achieve super
that with 10. . . . . Castles; 1 1 . iority in the centre by P-K4-K5.
P-QKt3, P x P ; 1 2 . P X P , Kt
QR4; 13. P-Q5, Kt X B; 14. P X Kt, 16. Kt x Kt Kt x B
P x P; 15. Kt x P, Kt x Kt; 16. 17. Kt-B5 Kt x Kt
P X Kt, B-KKt5! Black obtains 18. B X Kt P-B3
an easy game. On 1 8 . . . . . B-Bl; 19. Q-Kt4,
P-KKt3; (19 . . . . . B-Q2; 20. Kt--
10 . . . . . . . Castles R6 eh. ) 20. Q-Kt5, with the threat
1 1 . Kt-B3 R-Q1 21. Q-B6, follows.
12. P-QKt3
Botwinnik maintains the tension 19. Q-Kt4 B-Kt3
in the centre. The alternative is 20. B-R5! R x R eh.
12. P-Q5, P X P; 13. B X QP, Kt On 20 . . . . . Q X B; 21. Kt X B eh.,
QKt5; 14. P-K4, KKt x B; 15. K-B2; 22. Kt X B, P X Kt; 23.
P X Kt, B-B4; 16. B-B4, Q x B ; R-Q7 eh., follows with good win
17. Q X B, (Reshevsky-Fine, Sem ning chances for White.
mering-Baden, 1 937), which leads to
interesting complications, but gives 21. RxR Q-K4
White no advantage. 22. Kt x B eh. Q x Kt
23. R-Q7 Q-K5
12. . . . . . . B-Q2 24. Q-Kt3 Q-B3
Keres chooses Steinitz' method of 25. Q-B7 QxQ
developing the Queen's Bishop 26. RxQ R-Ktl
since if 12. . . . . P-QKt3; 13. 27. B-Ktft B-B7
P-Q5, P X P; l 4. B x QP, with the 28. P-R5 BxP
29. B x P B-Q4 eh. and P-B5 eh. be come very

ao. P-Ba B-BB dangerous.
31. B-Kt6 R-KB1
B2. B-B5
38. P-B5 PxP
Preventing 31. . . . . R-B2.
39. P x P B-B3
40. K-B4 R-Q4
32. R-Q1
If 40. . . . . R x P; White regains
33. P-K4 R-Q2
the Pawn with 41 . R-B7 eh., or
34. R-BS eh. K-B2
secures perpetual check.
35. K-R2 R-Q7
36. K-Kt3 B-Kt4
37. P-B4 P-KKt3 41 . R-B7 eh. R-Q2
Necessary otherwise 38. R-B7 Drawn\
Though this line is not as popular as that shown in the previous two
games, it is still a good illustration of the maintenance of the tension
and of White's striving for a central break-through by P-Q5.
Black's defensive system is characterized by not striving to establish
a Knight on Q4 as in the Steinitz System (even though here it seems
even stronger, since Black can occupy the 'hole' QKt5 with his Queen' s
Knight). Experience has shown that White can obtain more than
sufficient compensation by playing Kt-K5.
CONCLUSIONS
In these chapters on the Queen's Gambit Accepted we witness a cavalcade

of the great masters, both past and present facing the problem of White's
isolated Pawn on Q4. Is it strong or weak? If weak, can White obtain
sufficient attack to compensate him for this potential end-game handicap?
From the time of de la Bourdonnais the technique of attack was superior
to the technique of defence, and the pendulum of advantage swung
heavily to White until the great defensive player William Steinitz estab
lished in his match against Zukertort in 1886, a system which remains
classic; namely, the blockade of the isolated Pawn rather than direct
assault. At the end of the century Schlechter strengthened White's play
(see Game 64, page 122), which led to the practical disappearance of the
Steinitz variation (early exchange of Pawns in the centre).
Let us follow the modern method employed in this variation arising
mainly from transpositions from the Q.G. Orthodox Defence and from
the Caro-Kann (Panov-Botwinnik attack). An improvement on the
Steinitz line is Black's attempt to develop his Queen's Bishop more
effectively on Kt2 (instead of Stcinitz' B-Q2-K1), which is tactically
not an easy task, but when successful gives Black a good game.
Chapter XI deals with the Q.G. Accepted of to day . The isolated White
-
QP is not in evidence, Black avoiding the exchange at Q4 in order to

restrict the White Queen's Bishop. White on the other hand endeavours
to free the Bishop preparatory to a centre thrust which usually leads to
a very tense struggle where even a slight inaccuracy brings disaster to
either side. This underlines the modern tendency to harness study and
tactics to one purpose: to maintain the tension in the centre.
PART Ill
THE ENGLISH OPENING
THIS debut, which was often practised by the English players during the
middle of the nineteenth century, disappeared for a time but was revived
by the 'hypermoderns' in their quest, after the First World War, for an
opening capable of giving expression to their original ideas.
Even at its inception, it did not meet with much favour and Staunton,
in his Chess Players' Handbook, makes this lament: 'The move recom
mended by modern (sic 1847) authors for Black's reply is 1 . P to K's 4th,
and we have then of course the same position as if Black had commenced
the game with I. P to K's 4th, and you have replied with I. P to QB's 4th,
with this difference, that in the present instance you have the advantage
of the move, a circumstance which seems to have escaped the notice of
some writers, since, with a strange inconsistency, they carry on the game
from this position, and decide it in favour of the defending player, who
is a move behind; while in the 'Sicilian game' I. P to K's 4th, P to QB's
4th; }Vhen the position is reversed and you have Black's position, and in
addition the advantage of the move, you can barely make an even game.'
137
XII
THE ENGLISH OPENING IN THE LAST CENTURY
We commence our survey with a game of the Staunton-Saint-Amant

match, in which Staunton uses the English Opening for the first time.
Although we know that most of the modern openings owe their origin
to a chance adoption in an important game, and to their being gradually
worked out by succeeding generations, we here see Staunton deliberately
setting up a formation which even to-day is considered difficult to handle.
To defend oneself against the fierce King's side attacks to which one is
sometimes subjected in this line, still requires great independence of
outlook and much confidence in one's own ability.
72 the long diagonal by P-KKt3

• . . •
in place of . . . . Kt-KKt5. After

White Black* 1 1 . QKt-Q5, Kt X Kt; 12. Kt X Kt,
H. Staunton P.C. F. de Saint-Amant B-K3; 13. Kt X B eh., Q X Kt; 14.
Q-K2, White obtained the better
1 2th Match Game, 1 843 game on account of the strong
position of his Bishop on QKt2.
1. P-QB4
Staunton remarked: 'This way of 1 1 . KKt-Q5
opening the game, although not Stronger than 1 1 . QKt-Q5,
usual, is perfectly safe.' since it prepares for P-KB4.
1. P-QB4 11. B-B3

2. Kt-QB3 P-B4 12. Kt x B eh. Kt x Kt
3. P-K4 P-Q3 13. Kt-K2 Kt-KKt5
4. B-Q3 P-K3 14. P-B4! P-QKt3
5. Kt-R3 Kt-KB3 15. P-KR3 Kt-R3
6. PxP PxP 16. R-B3 Q-R5
7. Castles B-K2 17. R-Kt3 P-Kt3
8. P-QKt3 Kt-B3 White has at last forced Black to
9. B-Kt2 Castles weaken his King's position, for if
10. Kt-B4 Kt-KKt5 he plays 17. . . . . R-B2; 18.
So far the game is identical with R-Kt5, threatening Q-KB1 and
the famous 6th match game in P-Kt3, would follow.
which Staunton first introduced his
new English Opening. There Saint 18. Q-K1
Amant had played 7. . . . . P As Staunton remarks, this har
KKt3; 8. P-QKt3, B-K2; �. B rowing of the Queen is not as force
Kt2, Castles; 10. Kt-B4, Kt-B3; ful as 18. Q-KB1 , (threatening
leading to a position identical "·ith R-Kt5 and P-Kt3, winning the
the one in the present game, except Queen) Q-K2; 1 9. Q-Ba, followed
that he had weakened himself on by . . Q--R5, with an irresistible
. .
* The game was played with colours reversed.

1 38
THE ENGLISH OPENING 13Q
followed by Kt-K5 eh., or (b) 29 .

. . . . P x P; (29 . . . . . Q x BP; 30.
P x P,) 30. Kt x P, B x Kt; 31 .
Q x B.
29. Q-R5
30. Kt-R2 P-KR3
31. Kt-B3 Q-Kt6
32. Kt-K1
This move loses a Pawn. It was
necessary to play 32. Kt-R2.
32. . . . . . . R-K1
33. Q-KB2
Or 33. R x P, R X P; and wins.
Position after 17 . . . . . P-Kt3 33. . . . . . . Q x KP

34. P-R3
attack. However, in 18 . . . . . Kt Staunton remarks, 'From this
B2; Black has a better defence. point to the end, the game abounds
Here we see the superb positional with rare and critical situations.'
player Staunton led astray by a
tempting tactical diversion instead 34. . . . . . . Kt-QB3
of pursuing the positional line, 18. 35. Kt-B3 Q X Q eh.
Q-B2! B-Kt2; (18 . . . . . Kt-Q5; Not 35 . . . . . Q x BP? 36. B-B1 ,
19. Q-B3) 19. Q-B3, Kt-Q5; winning the Queen.
20. Kt x Kt, Q X R; 2 1 . Kt-B6,
with a won game; an illustration of 36. KxQ R-K3
the strength of the open diagonal 37. P-KKt4 QKt-K2
(QR1-KR8) occupied by the QB. 38. Kt-R4 B-K5
39. B xB RxB
18. Q-K2 40. RxP PxP
1 9. Q-B2 Kt-QKt5 41 . PxP R x P eh.
20. R-K1 B-Kt2 42. K-Kt3
21. B-Ktl QR-K1
22. R-K3 Q-Q1
23. Kt-Kt3 K-B2
24. Q-K2 R xR
25. P x R
Objectively much better than the
drawish line 25. Q x R, R-K1 ; etc.
since if in reply 25. . . . . P-Q4;
26. P-R3, and R-Ql can follow.
25. Q-R5
26. Kt-B1 Kt-Kt!
27. R-Ql R-Q1
28. Kt-Q2 Q-Kt6
29. Kt-B1
Much too slow! 29. P-K4! was
the correct move, and gives White
a strong attack, e.g., if (a) 29 . . . . . 42. . . . . . . P-KKt4?
R-Kl; 30. Kt-B3! P-KR3; (30. A weak move. Not only does it
. . . . Q x BP? 31 . B-B l ! ) 31 . R x P, render Black's King's side Pawn
majority valueless, but it drives P-Kt5, since the KtP is too strong,
White's Knight to a far better but he can force a draw by 50.
square. Black could have retained R-K8 eh.
his advantage with 42 . . . . . R-BS;
43. Kt-B3, R-QKt8. 49. Kt-K5 R-R8
The only defence to the threat
43. Kt-B3 R-K5? of 50. B X Kt, and R-R8 eh.
Falling into the trap, but even
50. B x Kt R-B8 eh.
after the better move 43. . . . .
51. K-K4 Kt x B
Kt-KB3; then 44. B X Kt, R X B;
52. R-R8 eh. R-B1
45. Kt-K5 eh., K-Kt2; 46. R
- 53. R-R6
Q7, gives White a good game.
Staunton remarks that 53. R x R
eh. only draws.
44. R x RP R-K6
44. . . . . R x P eh.; 45. K x R, 53. . . . . . . Kt-Ktl
Kt x R eh. draws. On 53 . . . . . Kt-B1; 54. P-Kt5,
is too strong.
45. R-R7 eh. K-K1
46. B-B1 RxP 54. R x P Kt-B3 eh.
47. B x P RxP 55. K-K3 Kt-Q2
48. K-B4 P-R4 56. R-K6 eh. K-Q1
This move endangers Black's 57. R-Q6 K-K2
position. He should play 48. . . . . 58. R x Kt eh. K-K3
R-R8 in order to bring back his 59. R-Q5 R-B8
Rook for defensive purposes. After 60. Kt-Q3 R-KKt8
49. Kt-K5, R-B8 eh.; 50. K-K4, 61 . Kt x P eh. K-B3
it is doubtful whether Black can 62. P-Kt5 eh. K-Kt3
play for a win with 50. . . . . Kt 63. Kt-K4
B3 eh.; 5 1 . B X Kt, R X B; 52. and White won on the 89th move.
In this, one of the first examples of �he 'English Opening,' two important
characteristic features make their appearance.
The first is Staunton's well conceived plan to break up his opponent's
central Pawn position. But let Staunton speak for himself. In his notes
to his 3rd move (P-K4, in reply to Saint-Amant's 2. P-KB4), he
remarks: 'A forcible reply to White's Jast move; since if he now takes the
KP, the Black Kt comes into excellent play on his K's side, and, if he
does not take the P, his own centre Pawns are sure to be broken up and
displaced.' (Staunton opened the game with the Black pieces.)
The second important contribution is the introduction of the Queen's
Fianchetto, of which Staunton says: 'Playing this P forward to afford
an outlet for the Q's Bishop, was first brought into vogue by the present
games, in which the advantage of this mode of play over the old ( I I )
system i s eminently conspicuous.' From this we see that even a s early
as 1843 one could speak of an 'old system.'
THE ENGLISH OPENING AS PLAYED IN THE LONDON TOURNAMENT, 1851

The fact that the English Opening was played by the English partici
pants in the Tournament of 1851, shows that one eminent player can
create a 'school.' The following game should be considered a step forward
in this opening. For Staunton, though retaining the essential features
of his earlier system, here introduced some distinctly new ideas.
73
White Black
H. Staunton B. Horwitz
London, 1851
1 . P-QB4 P-K3
2. Kt-QB3 P-KB4
3. P-KKt3 Kt-KB3
4. B-Kt2 P-B3
5. P-Q3 Kt-R3
6. P-QR3
This sequence of moves would be
incompatible with modern opening
analysis, but it is not our purpose
to examine it . from that angle. We Position after 12 . . . . . B
- Q2
aim at seeing how this position was
treated according to the theory of 13. . . . . . . BP x P
that period. Here to-day one would On 13 . . . . . P-K4; 14. P x QP,
play 6. P-K4. P X QP; 15. P X QP, Kt(2) X P; 16.
Kt x Kt, Kt x Kt; 17. B x P, wins a
6. . . . . . . B-K2 Pawn.
7. P-K3 Castles
8. KKt-K2 Kt-B2
14. QP X P QR-Q1
Horwitz regularly played this
15. P-K5 KKt-K1
move. \Ve see that 'overprotection'
On 15. . . . . Kt-Kt5; 16. Kt
is not just an invention of
B4, Kt x KP; 17. P x P, KP x P; 18.
Nimzovitch.
QKt x P, is the simplest.
9. Castles P-Q4
10. P-Kt3 Q-K1 16. P-B4 PxP
1 1 . B-Kt2 Q-B2 This looks like a mistake, but
The · game, characterized by the even 16 . . . . . B-B1; 17. P x P,
cautious manreuvres in the centre, Kt X P; 18. Kt X Kt, BP X Kt; 19.
has quite a modern appearance. Kt-Q4, gives White the superior
But while White still has moves game.
with which he can strengthen his
position, Black has not, and he 17. P x P B-B4 eh.
should, therefore, have started an 18. K-R1 B-K6
action in the centre by 1 1 . . . . . 1 9. QR-Ktl P-KKt3
P-K4; since 12. P-Q4, or 12. The decisive mistake. This move
P-B4, could have been answered weakens his KB3 square, which, in
by 12 . . . . . P-K5. On other moves conjunction with the weakness on
by White, Black could have played Q3, must prove fatal.
. . . . Q-R4, with an attack similar
to that arising from the Dutch 20. Q-Kt3 B-B1
Defence. 21. Kt-K4 B-Kt3
22. QR-Q1 Kt-R3
12. R-B1 B-Q2 23. Q-QB3 RXR
13. P-K41 24. R x R Kt-B4
Staunton realizes that it is time 25. Kt-Q6 Q-B2
to take action in the centre before A better defence was 25.
Black can play 13. . . . . QR-QI . Kt-R5; 26. Q-B2, Kt x Kt; 27.
Q X Kt Kt-B4; in order to case

, nates Black's counter-chances on the
the position by exchanges. Queen's side, which he had achieved
by sacrificing his QB Pawn.
26. Q-B2 Kt-Kt2
27. P-Kt4 Q-K2 33. . . . . . . K-R1
28. B-Q4 Q-QB2 34. Q-KR3!
29. P-QR4 Kt-R3 The speed with which the Queen
30. P-QB5 B-R4 and the Knight are switched over
31. Q-Kt3 P-Kt3 is really remarkable.
32. Kt-K4 PxP
33. Kt-B6 eh. . 34. . . . . . . Kt-K1
35. B-R1
Black's Pawns on the Queen's
wing are broken up, and his chances
are reduced to a minimum.
35. Kt x Kt
36. P X Kt K�Ktl
37. B-K5 Q-QKt2
38. B-K4 Q-KB2
39. Kt-Ktl B-Q1
40. P-Kt5 B-Kt2
41 . Kt-B3 R-K1
42. B-Q6 BxP
Staunton remarks, 'It is indiffer-
ent what he plays, the game being
past all surgery.'
This part of the game shows 43. P x B QxP

Staunton's advanced technique. 44. Kt-Kt5 Q-Kt2
Before attacking on the King's side, 45. B-K5 Q-K2
where his advantage lies, he elimi- 46. B x KtP Resigns.
In this logical game, a new element of modern positional play-the

double fianchetto-makes its appearance. That this was not merely an
improvisation is clear to us after setting up the Pawn formation that
usually follows this development of the White Bishops.
The technique displayed by Staunton in the middle-game is equally
remarkable. On examining the way in which he reduces his opponent's
counter-chances on one wing before going over to the other, one is reminded
of the strategy so characteristically demonstrated by Capablanca seventy
years later.
WYVILL'S TREATMENT
The other great exponent of the English Opening in the last century
was Wyvill, the winner of the second prize in the London 1851 Tourna
ment. Staunton called him 'One of the finest players in England.' He
adopted only this opening (for with the Black pieces he played the Sicilian
Defence) and he can be considered a forerunner of those great masters
who to-day specialize in certain openings. His games show that he
understood the spirit of the opening, and they therefore supply very
useful material from which we draw our conclusions concerning the finer
strategical points of this debut.
74 On 14 . . . . . P-B4; 15. QR-Ktl !

would manifest the strength of
White Black \Vhite's King's Bishop. But after
M. Wyvill E. Lowe the text-move White is able to
demonstrate how a centre can be
London, 1 851 effectively broken up.
l. P QB4
- P-K4
2. P-K:l P-QB4
3. Kt-QB3 Kt-QB3
4. P-KKt3 B-K2
5. B-Kt2 P-Q3
6. P-Q3 Kt-KB3
7. P-QR3 B-K3
8. KKt-K2
With minor deviations and trans
positions the opening is the same
as played to-day, when Black aims
atblockadingWhite's Queen's Pawn,
whilst White, purposely acquiescent
to his opponent's plan, hopes later
to break up Black's centre with
P-Q4. To-day we would play 8.
Kt-Q5, with which move White 15. P-KB4! P-B4
retains all his chances in the centre, On 15. . . . . B-R6; 16. B X B
whilst those of Black's are non Q x B; 17. P x P, Kt x P; 18. Kt
existent. B4, with advantage for White would
follow.
8. . . . . . . P-Q4
9. P x P Kt x P 16. P x KP Kt x P
10. Castles Castles On 16. P X P; 17. P-Q4,
1 1 . Q-B2 is strong.
On 1 1 . P-Q4, BP x P; 12. P x P,
P x P; 13. Kt x P, QKt x Kt; 14. 17. Kt.:_B4 Kt-Kt5
Q x Kt, B-B3; would follow with 18. B-Q2 P-B5
advantage for Black. This shows 19. P-Q4 B-B2
White's strategy was faulty in 20. P-K5 QR-Ktl
allowing himself to be blockaded. 21. P-R3 Kt-R3
22. P-Q5
11. . . . . . . Kt x Kt Staunton remarks, 'Now are these
The right move was 1 1 . Pawns quite irresistible.'
R-B 1 ; with the latent threat . . . .
Kt-Q5. 22. . . . . . . B-B4 eh.
23. K-R1 Q-K2
12. P x Kt B-Q4 , 24. QR-Kl Q-Kt4
13. P-K4 B-K3 A mistake, but Black is lost in
14. B-K3! any case.
A very important move. Now
14 . . . . -. P-B5; can be answered 25. Kt-K6 Q-K2
by 15. P-Q4. 26. B-Kt5 Q-K1
27. Kt x R
14 . . . . . . . Q--Q2 and won on the ,n st move.
CHESS FROM MORPHY TO BOTWINNIK
In this game we see the power of the advance P-KB4, by White,

to-day common knowledge, but unknown at that time, and not appreciated
until many years later. An equally important motive is the pressure
of White's King's Bishop against the weak square at Black's QKt2, a
stratagem still considered to be of a most promising nature.
The following game shows a further development of the English Opening,

but on this occasion it is from the point of view of Black, who here adopts
a more solid line by answering 1. P---QB4, with 1 . P-K3; a move
. • • •
which was considered by Steinitz to be safer than the committing 1 .

P-K4.
75 ll. P x P PxP
White Black 12. P-K4!
M. Wyvill Capt. G. Kennedy This push in the centre and the
preparation for it by Q-Kt3, to
London, 1 851 bring out the strength of White's
(Played with reversed colours) King's Bishop, shows Wyvill's in
sight as a fine strategist. Even
1. P---QB4 P-K3 to-day this is the basis of the
2. P-K3 P---Q4 English Opening.
3. P-KKt3 P---QB 4
4. B-Kt2 Kt---QB3
Staunton remarks, 'Taking the 12. P---Q5
Pawn would have been imprudent, 13. Kt-Q5 Kt-Q2
since it would have disjointed the 14. B-Kt5 P-B3
centre and Black (here first player) 15. B-B4
would win a Pawn in return at once Staunton observed that Wyvill
by checking with his Queen.' had now a great superiority of
Modern theory tells us that 4 . . . . •
position.
P x P; 5. Q-R4 eh. , B---Q 2 ; 6.
Q x BP, B-B3; 7. KKt-B3, leads 15. . . . . . . B-K4
to ·a variati0n of the Catalan 16. B-R3
system, where \Vhite's P-K3 is a It looks as if Black cannot now
weak move (weakening him on the defend his QB Pawn, but Kennedy
light coloured squares on the King's finds a very ingenious reply.
side).
5. Kt-K2 Kt-B3
6. P---Q3 B---Q3
7. QKt-B3 B-B2
8. Castles P-KR4
This attack is premature, as
Staunton observes.
9. Q-Kt3 Kt-R4
An ingenious reply. On 9 .
P-Q5; 1 0 . P x P, P x P; 1 1 . Kt
Kt5, B-Kt3; 1 2. B-B4, gives
White a strong position.
10. Q -Kt5 eh. Kt-B3

16. . . . . . . Q-R4! which would have prevented 27.

17. Q- Kt3 . . . . R(2)-R2; because of the
On 17. Q x Q, Kt x Q; 18. B x B , threat 28. B x B, P X B; 29. Kt-B6
Kt x B; 19. Kt-B7 eh., K-QI ; eh.
20. Kt X R, B X B; 2 1 . R-Ql,
White's Knight on R8 is trapped 27. PxP
and Black would remain with two 28. BP X P R(2)-R2
minor pieces against the Rook. 29. R-Q2 BxB
30. P X B P-Kt6
17. . . . . . . J{t-l{t3 31 . R X P P X P eh.
1 8 . KB x B RxB Black suddenly obtains excellent
19. KR-QI counter-chances.
Up to this point Wyvill's strategy
has been really impressive, but now 32. K-R1 K-Q1
he misses his chance. With 19. 33. Kt-Q5 R-R6
QR-B1, preventing Black from 34. R-B1 P-B4
exchanging Queens, he would have 35. R-B1
left his opponent without a good Better was 35. P-K5.
move.
35. . . . . . . PxP
19. . . . . . . Q-R5 36. P x P P-Q6
20. Q x Q Kt x Q 37. R(1 )-B2 Kt-Q5
2 1 . B-B1 Kt-Kt3 38. Kt-Kt4 R-K6
Here Staunton writes, 'Captain Staunton gives here 38.
Kennedy has fought manfully R-Ktl; with a win for Black. (a)
through his difficulties, and at this 39. R x RP, R x R eh.; 40. R x R,
point there appears no serious dis Kt-B6; or (b) 39. R-Kt2, R x R;
parity between the two sides.' This 40. R X R, R-K6; 41 . Kt x QP,
comment is interesting since it Kt-B6; 42. R-Kt8 eh., K-B2;
throws valuable light on the con 43. Kt-B2, R-K8 eh.; 44. K
temporary positional judgment. It Kt2, R-Kt8 eh.; 45. K x Kt,
is evident that Staunton must have R x R; and wins. (c) 39 .. R-Q1,
thought that Black was able to Kt-B6; 40. R-Kt2, (40. R x Kt,
equalize the game between his 1 5th R-Kt8 eh.! 41 . R X R, P X R (Q) ;
and 21st moves. From the modem double eh. wins.) 40. . . . . R x R;
viewpoint we have no hesitation in 41. K X R, P-R8(Q) eh.; 42. R X Q,
asserting that had White not com R X R; 43. K X R, P-Q7; and wins.
mitted the serious positional mis (d) 39. R-B1, Kt-K7; 40. R x QP
take on his 19th move, Black would eh., R X R; 41 . Kt X R, Kt-Kt6 eh.;
have been unable to recover. 42. K X P, Kt X R eh.; wins. These
variations show Staunton's remark
22. KKt-B4 P-Kt4? able ability as analyst.
A mistake. Correct was B x Kt.
39. Kt x P RxP
23. Kt x Kt RP x Kt - 40. R x P R x R eh.
24. Kt-Q5 P-Kt5 41, R x R Kt-K7
Black cannot save the Pawn. On 42. R-B2 K-K2
24. . . . . P-QKt4; 25. P-B4 wins 43. K-Kt2 K-B3
the KB Pawn. A mistake in a lost position.
25. Kt x P R-B2 44. K-B3 R-R5

26. B-B4 P-R5 45. R x Kt RxP
27. QR-B1 46. R-K5 R-R3
Much simpler was 27. Kt-Q5, 47. R-QKt5 R-Q3
1 46 CHESS FROM MORPHY TO BOT\\riNNIK
48. Kt-K5 P-Kt3 56. R-R6 eh.

49. Kt-B4 R-Q6 eh. Now we notice why Black has
50. K-K4 R-QB played on. He hoped for 56.
51 . R x P eh. K-K2 P-BS(Q), and then to play for a
52. P-B5 R-QBB stalemate by checking with the
53. P-B6 eh. K-B2 Rook.
54. Kt-K5 eh. K-Ktl 56. . . . . . . KxR
55. P-B7 eh. K-R2 · 57. P-BS(Q) eh. and wins.
This game has two outstanding features, first Wyvill's excellent strategy
in undermining Black's centre and, �ater, Capt. Kennedy's tactical skill.
ANDERSSEN' S CONTINUATION
Although Anderssen played this opening very rarely, his system is

extremely important in relation to our modern theory. Here we see him
adopting (with the White pieces) the 'Sicilian Defence,' in order to avoid
the openings of a regular character in which, as pointed out by Lowenthal,
he was usually outplayed by Morphy.
Anderssen made use of the true ' Classical Sicilian style,' omitting the
Fianchetto of the King's Bishop, and for this reason his method of treat
ment is very different from that of the English School under Staunton.
76 9. P x Kt P-K5
White Black 10. Kt-Q2 P-KB4
A. AndeTssen P. Morphy 1 1 . P-KB4 P-KKt4
A sharp attacking move that one
6th Match Game, 1 858 might expect from Morphy. But
even he could not have been satis
1. P-QR3 P-K4 fied with the effect of this move,
2. P-QB4 since in the 8th game of the match
By a transposition of moves we he continued with 11 . . . . . Q-R5
have now come to an English eh.; 12. P-Kt3, Q-R6; 13. B-B 1 ,
opening. Q-R3; without, however, achieving
more than in the present game.
2. Kt-KB3
3. Kt-QB3 P-Q4 12. B-B4 BxB
4. P x P Kt x P 13. Kt x B PxP
5. P-K3 B-K3 14. P x P Q-K1
6. Kt-B3 B-Q3 White has the superiority in the
7. B-K2 Castles centre, which Black should try to
8. P-Q4 Kt X Kt break up by 14. . . . . P-B4; 15.
Although this exchange is often Kt x B, Q x Kt; 16. P-QR4, Q
played even to-day, it is inexact. KKt3. If here 15. P-QR4, ( 1 5.
Black should play 8. . . . . P X P; P-Q5, P-Kt4;) P X P; 16. Kt X B ,
first clarifying the position in the Q x Kt; 17. B-R3, Q x P; 18.
centre, since 9. P x P, Kt-B5; is B X R, Q-K6 eh. ; 1 9. Q-K2, ( 1 9 .
clearly bad for White on account K-B 1 , Q-B5 eh. ; ) Q X P eh. ; 20.
of his weak isolated Pawn. On 9 . K-B2, P-K6 eh. ; 21 . K-Kt3,
K t X P , K t X Kt! 1 0 . P X Kt, ( 10. Q-B2 eh. ; 22. K-R3, K X B; with
Kt x B, Q-B3! 1 1 . P x Kt, P x Kt; ) a good game for Black would follow.
10 . . . . B-Q4! would have given
.
Black an easy and free game. 15. Castles Q-B3

THE ENGLISH OPENING 1 47
16. Q-Kt3 Q-Q4 to the mind of a master of our time

17. R-Ktl P-Kt3 and to his approach to the above
1 8 . Q-R2 P-B3 position by giving Lasker's analysis
Owing to the threat 19. R-Kt5. in which he says that 28. R--R3,
previously considered decisive, leaves
19. Q-K2 Kt-Q2 Black the reply 28 . . . . . Q-Kt4!
20. Kt-K3 Q-K3 while the right continuation he gives
21. P-B4 Kt-B3 is 28 . B K5, B X B; 29. P x B,
-
22. R-Kt3 K-B2 Kt X P; 30. Kt-Q6, QR-KB1 ; 31.

White threatens to open the files R-R3, R-Kt2; 32. R-R5.
with 23. P-Q5, and after 23. . . . .
P x P; 24. P x P, Kt x P; 25. Kt x 28. . . . . .
. KxB
Kt, Q X Kt; 26. R Kt3 eh. , would
- 29. Q-Kt2 eh. K-B2
win. Though the Kin g s move tem
' 30. R-R3
porarily meets the threat, the King's Here Anderssen misses his chancel
position in the middle remains in First 30. Q-Q4! R-B4; (31 . Kt-K5
secure. Even after 22 . . . . . R-B2; eh., B X Kt; 32. P x B, is threatened)
23. B-Kt2, B-B 1 ; 24. R-Q1, 31. R-R3, R-Kt2; 32. R-R6,
R-Q 1 ; 25. P-Q5, P x P; 26. B-B2; 33. P-Q6, K- Ktl; 34.
B x Kt, R x B; 27. Kt x QP, White R-Ql, B-Q1; 35. Kt-K5, Q
would have broken through in the Kt4; 36. R-K6, P-KR3; 37. P
centre. Q7, Q-K7; 38. Q-Ktl, R-B7;
39. R-K8 eh., K-R2; 40. R x B,
23. B-Kt2 QR-B1 R x KtP; 41. R-R8 eh., K x R; 42.
24. K-Rl R-KKtl P-Q8(Q) eh., followed by Mate in
25. P-Q5 PxP a few moves would have followed.
26. P x P Q-Q2 This fine analysis by Maroczy gives
If 26 . . . . . Kt X P? 27. Q-R5 eh. us an idea how an attack should
be directed.
27. Kt-B41 K-K2
27. . . . . Kt x P; 28. R-R31 is 30. . . . . . . R-Kt2
decisive. 31. Q-Q4 K-Ktl !
Now we notice that owing to
transposition of moves (by White)
Black escaped immediate danger
(Kt-K5 eh. ).
32. R-R6 B-Bl

33. P-Q6 R-KB2
This part of the defence is well
conducted by Morphy. Now 34.
Kt-K5? is met by 34.
Q-Kt4.
34. R-R3 Q-R5!

35. R-Bl R-B4!
Preventing Q-K5; and Q-
K6, 35. . P-Kt4? would be a
. . •
mistake because of 36. P-Q7,

28. B x Kt eh. R-Ql; 37. R-Kt3 eh., B-Kt2;
This move is good enough, but 38. R X B eh., R X R; 39. Q-Q5 eh.,
White should be able to decide the K-Rl; 40. Kt-K5.
game by direct attack, keeping his
strong Bishop. We provide a clue 36. R-Kt3 eh. B-Kt2
II
37. P-R3 K-R1 the pin from 38 . . . . . Q-B3; still,

38. R x B 39. R-Ql , was a good enough
This sacrifice should lead only to reply.
a draw; while 38. Q-Q2, would still
have given White by far the better 38. . . . . . . RxR
game. Anderssen might have feared 39. R-B3 P-K6!
Anderssen must have overlooked
this saving move. As Morphy
points out, 39. . . . . K-Ktl; is of
no use because of 40. R-KKt3!
. Q-Q2; (40. . . . R X R? 41 . P
.
Q71) 41 . Kt-K5, R x Kt; 42 R X R

eh., followed by P x R wins.
40. R x P
A mistake. 40. Q-B6 still drew.
40. . . . . . . R x Kt
41 . Q-B6
Better was 41 . Q-K5.
41 . R-B8 eh.
42. K-R2 Q x P eh.
Position after 39. R-B3 Resigns.
It is interesting to see how Morphy was outplayed throughout this

game, except during the concluding moves; and that in the other two
games against Anderssen in which this opening occurred, he was at no
less disadvantage.
Lowenthal certainly over-praises Morphy's treatment of the opening
when he writes: 'It seems to make no difference' (what opening he plays)
'nor should we expect it would, to one so well versed in the principle of
the game as he is.' On the contrary, these games prove, in our opinion,
that the great chess genius was unable, without previous study, to master
this opening.
CONCLUSIONS
These five selected games give a clear picture of the English Opening
as it was played in the second half of the last century. The standard of
these compares favourably with that reached by contemporary games
with other openings: which is not surprising since, in addition to Staunton
and Wyvill, a number of English players including Horwitz and Williams
frequently made use of this opening. Thus we can with truth speak of
an 'English School.'
In the first game of this chapter, we see Staunton adopting the original
line of developing his King's Knight at R3-B4-Q5 (later claimed by the
'hypermoderns' as their own invention) and also clearly controlling all
the central squares with his pieces and Pawns. The succeeding game was
a step forward; for in it, by means of the double fianchetto and by keeping
back his central Pawns, he establishes a kind of Reti system.
Wyvill's treatment in the following games was slightly different. He
clearly demonstrates how the control of the centre should be carried out.
Anderssen again introduces quite another system, perhaps with the

idea of avoiding regular lines against Morphy, without adopting the
fianchetto. His method became popular eighty years later, and was then
revived by Nimzovitch and Flohr.
XIII
THE ENGLISH OPENING IN MODERN TIMES
IN the latter half of last century the English Opening was seldom played.
Steinitz made a few attempts to bring it to life again, as did Zukertort,
and still later Mason. The latter players, however, used it as a means of
transposing into a favourable line of the Queen's Gambit.
In the early years of this century further attempts at revival were made,
particularly in Bremen where it was often played. Indeed, in Gennany
it became known as the 'Bremer Partie.' Later Rubinstein played it
occasionally, although he did not adopt any definite system.
When, after the First World War, Nimzovitch and Reti evolved some
kind of system, the real re-birth of the English Opening took place.
NIMZOVITCH's CoNTRIBUTION
In company with the other 'hypermoderns,' Nimzovitch helped to

revive the English Opening. He really continued from the point where
Anderssen left it: namely, to play the Sicilian Defence with a tempo more.
He was successful with this opening, mainly because his opponents (in
the same way as Morphy against Anderssen, see previous game) fai1ed
to realize that they were running their heads against the wall. His
encounters with Spielmann, the greatest gambit player of this century,
were interesting, and in the following game he confirmed Staunton's
theory that the Sicilian Opening with the White pieces is of distinct
advantage to the first player, owing to the extra tempo.
77 4. Kt-Q4 Kt-B3
5. Kt-Kt5 P-Q4
White Black This move is the cause of later
A. Nimzovitch R. Spielmann troubles. Black should have kept
the position closed. 5. . . . . P
Carlsbad, 1929 QR3; 6. KKt-B3, was the right
continuation.
1. P-K3 P-K4
2. P-QB4 Kt-KB3 6. PxP Kt x P
3. Kt-KB3 P-K5 7. QKt-B3 Kt-B3
Nimzovitch remarked that Black 8. Q-R4 B-KB4
should have been aware of the 9. Kt-Q4 B-Q2
missing tempo and be sufficiently 10. Kt x Kt B x Kt
'modest' to play 3. . . . . P-Q3; 11. B-Kt5 Q-Q2
4. P-Q4, QKt-Q2; followed by 1 2. BxB QxB
the fianchetto of his King's Bishop. 1 3 . Q x Q eh. PxQ
14. P-QKt3 Castles 30. R-B2, and forces Black's next

15. B-Kt2 B-Kt5 move.
16. P-QR3 B x Kt
17. BxB R-Q6 29. . . . . . . R(6)-Kt7
18. Castles KR KR-Q1 30. R-Kt7 K-Kt2
31 . P-R3 R(Kt)-B7
32. R-Kt5 K-Kt3
33. R-KB1 P-B4
Spielmann hopes at last to get
rid of the weakness of his QB Pawn
that was due to his faulty concep
tion of the opening, but new dis
appointments are waiting for him.
34. R-B4 P-B5

35. P-KR4 R-R7
36. R-B6 eh! K-Kt2
37. R-Kt5 eh.
'Mechanical development,' says

Nimzovitch, who recommended in
stead 18 . . . . . R-Ktl l; 19. P-B3,
Kt-Q4; 20. P x P, Kt x B; 21 .
P x Kt, R-B1 . Nimzovitch causti
cally remarked that such discreet
use of the energies of a Rook (18 .
. . . . R-Ktl l) is not usual in a
gambit, but very necessary when
one wants to win first prizes.
19. P-B3 Kt-Q4

20. B x PI
White is now able to demonstrate
the superiority of the Bishop over Nimzovitch uses his Rooks very
the Knight, proving that the Black cleverly. The aim of this move is
Rook would have been much better both offensive and defensive. It
placed on KKtl . enables the Rook on the 6th rank
to defend his KKt Pawn while the
,
20 . . . . . . . R x QP QR can be switched over to attack

21 . B-Q4 P-KB4 the Black Pawns on KR4 and QB2.
22. P x P PxP
23. B x P R-Q6 37 . ...... K-B1
24. P-QKt4 Kt x KP 38. R-KKt6 R-K7
25. B x Kt RxB 39. R-QB5 R(R7)-B7
26. KR-K1 R-QKt6 40. R-Kt7 K-Ktl
27. R x P R-Q7 41 . R(5) X BP(7) R x P eh.
28. R-K7 P-R4 42. RxR R-B8 eh.
29. R-B7 43. K-B2 KxR
Black was threatening 29. 44. R-Kt5 P-B6
P-R5; 30. P-R3, R-Kt6. The -'5. R x P R-KR8
text-move aims at simplifying with On �5 . . . . . P-B7; 46. R-B5
THE ENGLISH OPENING IN MODERN TIMES l 51
eh., K-Kt3; 47. K-K2, would If 49. . . . . R x P; 50. K-Q3,

follow. R-R6 eh. ; 5 1 . K-B2, followed by
R x P, would give White an easy
46. R-B5 eh. K-Kt3
win.
47. K-Kt3 R-QB8
48. K-B2 R-KR8
50. K-Q4 P-B7
49. K-K3!
51. R x P R x P eh.
Much better than 49. R x P, R x P;
52. K-B3 K-Kt4
50. K- K3, K-Kt4.
53. K-Kt3
49 . . . . . . . R-R6 eh . and White won on the 70th move.
In this game we actually witness two fundamentally different views

of theory of the opening. Nimzovitch even made the ironical remark
that Spielmann's method of developing was the result of his playing
gambits all the time and of his inability to change this style of play.
FLOHR'S TREATMENT
With the exception of Nimzovitch, Flohr has contributed more than

any other master to our understanding of the English Opening.
In order to employ his pieces more effectively, in support of the central
thrust, he has often successfully assumed positions hitherto thought very
difficult to defend.
The following game is a fine example of the many notable victories
won by him in this opening.
78 8. KtP x P Castles
9. P-Q4 B-Q3
White Black 10. B-K2 Q-K2
s. FlohT S. Landau l l . CastJes B-Kt5
ll .
. .. . P-K5; 12. Kt-Q2,
Kemeri, 1937 P-B4; 1 3. Kt-B4, at once leads
to a position similar to that of the
Anderssen-Morphy game (Game
1. P-QB4 Kt-KB3 76). But now Black threatens 12.
2. Kt-QB3 P-K4 . . . . P-K5; with counterplay.
3. Kt-B3 Kt-B3
4. P-K3 P-Q4 12. P-R31
5. P x P Kt x P A fine parry! Now on 12. . . . .
6. Q-B2 B-R4; 13. Kt x P, B X B; 14.

The alternative is 6. B-Kt5, Kt x Kt, wins a Pawn. Black there
Kt X Kt; 7. KtP X Kt, B-Q3; (7. fore cannot keep up the pin.
. . . . P-K5; 8. Kt-K51) 8. P-Q4,
B-Q2; 9. P-K4, P x P; 10. BP_x 12. . . . . . . B-Q2 ·
P, B-Kt5 eh.; l l . B-Q2, B x B 13. P-B4 P-QKt3

eh.; 12. Q X B, Castles; (Nimzovitch 14. B-Kt2 QR-K1
Spielmann, Berlin, 1928) with the Black tries to maintain the ten-
better game for White. Flohr's sion in the centre. It was better to
move aims at avoiding exchanges. simplify with 14. . . . . P X P; 15.
P X P, B-KB4; 16. Q-QI .
�. . . . . . . B-K2
7. P-QRS Kt x Kt 1 5 . P-B51
A strate�ical mistake. With this Pawn 1acriftce, White
This move is much clearer than

23. Q X P, R-KKt4.
23. RxR
24. Q x R R-Bl
25. P-R4 P-R4
26. P-R5 P-R5
27. Q-Q5 !
Meets Black's threat of 27.
B x P; 28. B X B , P-R6; 29. Q-Q5,
Q x B eh.; 30. Q x Q, P x Q.
27. B-B4
28 . P-R6 B-K5
29. Q-Q7 B-B4
30. Q-K7 P-R6
Position after 14 . . . . . QR-K1 3 1 . P-R7 B-K5
On 3 1 . . . . . P x P; 32. B x P,
B-R6; 33. P-R8(Q), R x Q; 34.
breaks up Black's Pawn position. R x R eh. , K-R2; 35. Q-R4 eh.
wins.
15 . . . . . . . P x BP
16 . .P x KP Kt x P 32. Q-Q7! R-Rl
17. Kt x Kt B x Kt 33. Q x RP
18. B x B QxB The way in which Flohr has
19. KR-B 1 ! beaten back Black's attack is very
This self-confident move is char- impressive.
acteristic of Flohr's style. The Rook
has to make room for the Bishop, 33. P-QB4
which is needed at KBI for defen 34. Q-Q7 Q-QB3
sive purposes on the King's wing. 35. Q x Q BxQ
36. R-R5 B-K5
19. Q-Kt4 The Bishop must retain the con
20. Q x P R-K4 trol of the diagonal, otherwise on
21. Q x RP BxP 36. . . . . B-Q2; 37. B-K2, wins.
22. B-B I !
The key move of \Vhite's precise 37. P-B3 B-Kt2
defensive manceuvre starting on the 38. RxP RxP
19th move. 39. R-B7 P-B3
40. K-R2 K-Rl
22. Q-Kt3 41 . B-Kt5 R-R6
23. R-B5! and Black resigned.
This game in its clarity of purpose and straightforward strategy is a

masterpiece of technique. On comparing it with Anderssen-Morphy
(Game 76, page 146), we notice with how much greater coolness Flohr
defends his King's wing against an attack which in the nineteenth century
would have been thought decisive.
Although great defensive players are still rare, his play in this game
emphasizes that during the last fifty years the technique of defence has
developed considerably.
THE ENGLISH OPENING IN MODERN TIMES 1 53
THE FOUR KNIGHTS' SYSTEM IN THE ENGLISH OPENING--WHITE AIMS AT

IMMEDIATE CONQUEST OF THE CENTRE-RETI'S CONTRIBUTIONS
Until now we have dealt with a system in which White takes up a

defensive position, allowing Black temporarily to occupy the centre, in
order later to reap the benefit of the latent power in his position and
overwhelm Black by force. The principal success of this 'lying in wait'
system was due to players failing to recognize the enormous potentialities
possessed by this opening which is, in effect, a Sicilian defence with a
•move in hand.'
The next stage in the evolution of the opening was the investigation
of whether this 'lying in wait' stage could be dispensed with, and an
immediate thrust made to gain control of the centre.
Soon after the First World War, the 'hypermoderns' evolved our next
system, where White tries this direct approach by means of an early
P-Q4, a perfectly logical idea reminiscent of the Scotch Game (1. P-K4,
P-K4; 2. Kt-KB3, Kt-QB3; 3. P-Q4, etc.). Though he most
certainly was not the inventor of this system, we associate with it the
name of the Viennese grandmaster, Richard Reti, who contributed so
much to its theory. His profound and clear demonstrations added a
great deal to our modern dynamic . concepts of the centre. A typical
example of his incisive style and the brilliance of his strategical conceptions
is the following game against Przepiorka.
79 For the better move 5. ....

White Black B-Kt5 see Game 81.
R. Reti D. Przepiorka
6. Kt x Kt KtP x Kt
Marienbad, 1925 7. P-KKt3 P-Q4
8. B-Kt2 B-K3
I . P-QB4 . Kt-KB3 9. Castles Castles
2. Kt-QB3 P-K4 10. Q-R4
3. Kt-B3 Kt-B3
4. P-Q4 PxP
The alternative is 4 . . . . . P-K5;
5. Kt-Q2, Kt x P; 6. KKt x P,
Kt-K3; 7. P-KKt3, Kt x Kt; 8.
Kt X Kt, B-Kt5 eh.; 9. B-Q2,
B X B eh.; 10. Q x B, Castles; 1 1 .
B-Kt2, P-Q3; 12. Castles K , B
Q2; 1 3 . Kt-B3, B-B3; 14. Kt-Q5,
P-QR4; 15. P-K4, Kt-B4;
Flohr-Botwinnik, 5th match game,
1933, and though Black has a firm
position he has not yet obtained
full equality.
5. Kt x P B-B4
This was the fashionable move at
the time the game was played, con The first phase of the opening is
forming to the current conception over, and we have reached a posi
of developing a piece, which forces tion where, according to the tenets
White to declare his intentions in of the Tarrasch school, Black has
the centre. secure possession of the centre.
154- CHESS FROM MORPHY TO BOTWINNIK
However, the early 'hypermoderns' thwarts this, demonstrating the bad

would maintain that Black is lost position of Black's Queen.
owing to his weak Pawn position.
To-day we would prefer to say 15. P x P PxP
that Black has committed himself Not 1 5 . . . . . R x P; 16. P x P!
to a central Pawn formation which 1 6. Kt x P BxP
is under immediate pressure, al If 16 . . . . . R x P; 17. Kt x B eh. ,
though it has the advantage of P X Kt; 18. B-R3, B-B1; 1 9 .
providing a pivot for building up B x B, Q x B; 20. Q x BP i s good
an attack if the central structure enough.
can be maintained.
17. QR-Ktl P-QB3
10. . . . . . . B-Q2 Not 17. . . . . B-K4; at once
This move manages to afford since 18. R X R, Q X R; 19. Kt-K7
Black only temporary relief. He eh. , wins a piece.
could have tried 10 . . . . . Q-K1;
and after 11. R-Q1 , (if 1 1 . B-Kt5, 18. Q x RP!
B-Q5; 12. QR-Q1, B x Kt; 13. Though this move allows Black
P X B, Kt-K5 !) B-Kt3; 12. P X P, to obtain Bishops of opposite
(if 12. B-Kt5, Kt-Kt5! ) P X P; colours, it proves to be the most
13. Q x Q, QR x Q; 14. Kt x P, expeditious way of winning. Over
Kt x Kt; 15. B x Kt, B x B; 16. whelming pressure is exerted on
R X B, R X P; Black has fair defen Black's KB2.
sive chances. 18. P x Kt
19. R x P Q-K1
1 1 . B-Kt5 B-K2 20. R x QB QxP
He might have tried 1 1 . 21. R x P B-K4
B-Kl . 22. R x R RxR
23. R x P eh. BxR
1 2. KR-Q1 P-KR3 24. Q x R eh. K-R2
13. B x Kt BxB 25. Q-Ktl eh. K-R1
14. Q-R6 R-Ktl 26. B-K4 B-K4
Now his defensive plan is appar If 26 . . . . . B-Q5; 27. Q-Kt8
ent. He has hopes of obtaining eh. , K-Kt2; 28. Q-B7 eh. , K
adequate counter-chances by exert Ktl ; (not 28 . . . . . K-B3? 29. Q
ing pressure on White's QKt2, but Q6 eh. ) 29. Q-Q8 eh. , wins a piece.
White, by means of his more force
ful threats on the Queen's file, 27. Q-Kt7 Resigns
From this game we see that Reti's main contribution to our modern
theory was his illustration that control of the centre does not imply
occupation with Pawns or even with pieces. This concept of 'remote
control' formed the underlying idea of the brilliant and profound 'Reti
Opening' which he adopted so successfully in these years.
Reti's method of allowing his opponent to occupy the centre temporarily
so as to demonstrate the weaknesses of his Pawn skeleton has extended
our knowledge of the implications of strong and weak centres.
Another important contribution to the theory of the centre was provided

by Reti in the following game.
Black here avoided committing himself to a Pawn-centre, but held
back his Pawns, and continued the development of his pieces-a line of
play setting this problem: Can White prove that his control of the central
squares gives an advantage sufficient to be transformed into material gain?
80 1 3. . . . . . . P-B4
At last Black decides to make a
White Black Pawn move in the centre, but
R. Reti E. Griinfeld instead of 13 . . . . . P-Q4; which
would leave him with hanging
Baden Baden, 1 925 Pawns, he tries to erect a solid Pawn
formation akin to the Steinitz Var
1. P-KKt3 P-K4 iation of the Ruy Lopez. Still, this
2. B-Kt2 Kt-KB3 move gives White the control of
3. Kt-KB3 Kt-B3 his Q5 square, a characteristic
4. P-Q4 PxP feature of this variation.
5. Kt x P B-B4 On the alternative 13. . . . . P
6. Kt x Kt KtP x Kt Q3; 14. Q-R4, Q-Q2; 15. B-Kt5,
7. P-QB4 B-K2; 16. B x Kt, B x B; 17.
With a transposition of moves we Kt-Q5, with the threat of Kt-Kt4
have arrived at a typical position could follow.
of the English Opening where Reti
has cleverly prevented Black from 14. B x B RxB
playing . . . . B-QKt5 and from 1 5 . B-Kt5
pinning the Knight, a man<:Euvre This move is now very strong,
which constitutes Black's best since the square Q5 is weakened.
counter-chance.
15. . . . . . . B-K2
7. Castles 1 6 . Q-R4 P-R3
8. Castles R-K1 A Pawn is lost in any case, but
9. Kt-B3 B-B1 Black hopes at least to obtain some
10. B-B4 counter-chances by exerting pressure
10. B-Kt5 at once is useless, on White's QKt2 square.
since Black would get rid of the
pin at once by 10 . . . . P-KR3. 17. B x Kt B xB
18. R x P Q-Ktl
10. R-Ktl 19. R-Q2
1 1 . Q-B2 B-Kt2 The simplest way to secure an
12. KR-Q1 P-QR3 advantage, though it appears that
12 . . . . . P-B4; at once is weak White could have tried for more
because of 13. Kt-Kt5. with 1 9. Kt-Q5, B x P; 20. R--Q1 ,
and he has then many threats (e.g.
13. R-Q2 21. Kt-K7 eh. , followed by Kt
B6, or 2 1 . Kt X P).
19. B x Kt
20. P X B R-Kt8 eh.
21. R x R Q x R eh.
22. K-Kt2 R-K3
23. Q-B2 QxQ
24. R x Q R-K5
Though Black regains his Pawn,
White still has a sound Pawn more
on the King's side.
25. P-B3 RxP

26. P-K4 K-B1
27. K-B2 K-K2
28. K-K3 R-R5
29. K-Q3 K-Q3 43. P-R6 K-Ktl

30. R-QKt2 P-B5 eh. 44. K-R5 K-R2
31. K-K3 K-B4 45. R-Q2
32. P-B4 R-R6 Now the Rook comes decisively
33. R-QB2 P-Kt3 into play.
Black suffers in the end-game
from his inability to bring his Rook 45. R x BP
into action. Therefore 33. . . . . 46. R-Q7 eh. K-R1
R-R4; with the idea of playing 34. 47. K-Kt6 R-Kt6 eh .
. . . . R-Kt4; gave him some saving 48. K x P P-B4
chances. He could have then con 48. . . . . R-KR6; would have
tinued with . . . . R-Kt8; or P given White a more difficult task.
QR4, P-R5, P-R6 threatening 49. K-Kt5, R-Kt6 eh. ; 50. K
R-Kt7. R4, R-KB6; 51 . K-Kt4 followed
by 52. R x P.
34. K-B3 K-Q3
35. K-K3 K-B4 49. R-QB7 P-B6
36. P-R4 P-KR4 50. RxP K-R2
37. P-B5 PxP 51. K-B7 KxP
38. PxP K-Q3 52. P-B6 R-B6
39. K-B4 P-KB3 53. P-R4 R-Q6
40. P-Kt4 PxP 54. P-R5 R-B6
41. KxP K-K2 55. R-B6 K-Kt4
42. P-R5 K-B2 56. K-Kt7 Resigns.
Black, although suffering defeat, made no major mistake in this har

monious game; the decisive factor was superior strategy on the part of
White.
THE MoDERN CoNTINUATION
Though Reti was successful in his adoption of a King's fianchetto in

the Four Knights' system, he showed later in a match game against
Landau that this is not tactically feasible-yet another example of a
sound strategical idea having to be modified by tactical considerations.
Therefore an alternative method was sought for gaining control of the
centre, and in particular White's Q5 square, and this was found in pinning
the King's Knight by B-KKt5. This pin poses difficult problems for
Black. The following is an example.
81 B x Kt, P x B; ) 8 . . . . . P x Kt; 9 .
P-QR3, ( o n 9. B X Kt, Q X B; 10.
White Black P x P, P x P; ll. Q x P, B-K3;) 9.
M. M. Botwinnik G. Levenfish . . . . B-K2; 10. P-K3, B-K3;
1 1 . P X P, P X P; 12. B-K2, P-B4;
1 . P-QB4 P-K4 (Samarian-Balogh, Brasov, 1 947).
2. Kt-QB3 Kt-KB3
3. Kt-B3 Kt-B3 7. B-R4 B x Kt eh.
4. P-Q4 PxP 8. P x B Kt-K4
5. Kt x P B-Kt5 8. . . . . P-Q3 is also playable
6. B-Kt5 P-KR3 but after 9. P-B3, Castles; 10.
Interesting is the newest line fl. P-K4, Kt-K4; 1 1 . B-K2, Kt
... . Castles; 7. R-B 1 , P-Q4!; 8. Kt3; 1 2. B-B2, Kt-Q2; 1 3. Q
Kt x Kt, (if 8. P x P, Q x P; 9. Q2, Kt-Kt3; 14. Kt-Kt3, B-K3;
(Botwinnik-Pirc, Moscow, 1935), Better was 13. . . . . Kt-Bl.

White has a slightly better game. 14. K-B2 Kt-B1
If 14. . . . . B-Q2; 15. B-Q3,
9. P-K3 Kt-B1 ; 16. B-K4, P-QB3; 17.
Stronger is 9. P-B4, Kt-Kt3; QR-QKtl , follows, with pressure
(If 9 . . . . . Kt x P; 10. P-K4, Kt along the open file.
K6; l l . Q-K2, Kt x B; 12. P-K5,
Castles; 13. Kt-B5!) 10. B X Kt, 15. P-QB5 PXP
Q X B; l l . P-Kt3, P-B4; 12. 16. B-Ins eh. Kt_:_Q2
Kt-Kt5! If 16 . . . . . B-Q2; 17. Kt-B5,
Q-B3; 18. Q-K4 eh., is decisive.
9. Kt-Kt3
10. B-Kt3 Kt-K5 17. Kt-B5 Q-B3
n . Q-B2 Kt x B 18. QR-Q1 P-KKt3
12. RP x Kt P-Q3 This looks like an oversight, but
Black has no satisfactory move; for
if 18. . . . . P-B3; (or 18. . . . .
P-R3; 19. Q-K4 eh.) 19. R-Q6,
Q-Q1 ; 20. Q-K4 eh. , K-B1; 21.
B-B4, R-KKtl ; 22. B X P, K X B;
23. Q-K6 eh., K-B1; 24. Kt-R4,
wins.
19. Kt x P R-B1
20. P-Kt4 P-R3
21 . P-Kt5 Q-K3
22. B-K2 Kt-Kt3
23. Kt-Kt4 Q-QB3
24. Kt-B6 eh. K-K2
25. R-R7 B-B4
26. P-K4 B-K3
27. P-B5 Resigns.
13. P-B4! Q-K2 If 27. . . . . P x P; 28. P x P,
B-B5; 29. B X B, Kt X B; 30. Q
In an earlier game against the K4 eh. , Q X Q; 31 . R-Q7 Mate, or
same opponent Botwinnik had if 27 . . . . . B-B5; 28. B x B, Kt x B;
played 13. B-K2, but the text 29. Kt-Q5 eh. , K-Q2; 30. Kt
move is more forceful. Kt4 dis. eh., winning the Queen.
A fine example of White's control of the central squares, countered by

Black's attempts at simplification in order to neutralize White's pressure.
Whether 'Vhite can overcome Black's efforts is still in the balance (see
note to move 6), and this system might easily share the fate of the Scotch
Four Knights' Game (to which it bears a remarkable similarity) and be
condemned as too drawish.
THE MODERN FORM OF THE ENGLISH OPENING

MASON'S CONTINUATION
Although Staunton realized the strength of White's King's Fianchetto,

a long period elapsed before this development was generally followed.
The Dragon Variation of the Sicilian Defence was played during the late
nineteenth century, but the inverted 'Dragon' had to wait until 1902,
in which year it was introduced by James Mason.
It was a revolutionary step to make an innovation of this nature in

the 'Tarrasch Era' when to give Black command of the centre as early
as the third move was considered 'audacious.' Mason, however, proved
that by playing an early P-Q4, White could eliminate Black's centre.
His ideas did not win much favour until after the first World War, when
the Hypermodern School began to propound its new theories.
82 10. Q x Kt B-B3
1 1 . Q-R4 eh. P-B3
White Black 12. " Kt x Kt B x Kt
J. Mason J. Mieses 13. R-Q1
White's strategy, starting from
Monte Carlo, 1902 the 8th move, is clearcut; and after
a few moves Black has a hopeless
I. P-QB4 P-K4 position, which to-day, when this
2. Kt-QB3 Kt-KB3 type of manreuvre is common know
3. P-KKt3 ledge, might not appear surprising.
This introduces the fianchetto in In 1902, however, such treatment of
the English Opening at an early the position was unknown, showing
stage of the game. how far Mason was ahead of his con
temporaries in his positional con
3. . . . . . . P-Q4 ceptions.
4. P x P Kt x P
5. B-Kt2 B-K3 13. P-QKt4
That such a natural developing 14. Q-B2 Q-B1
move could be a mistake would
have hardly been believed at that
time. To-day 5 . . . . . Kt-Kt3; 6.
Kt-B3, Kt-B3; 7. Castles, B-K2;
8. P-Q3, B-K3; 9. B-K3, Castles;
is considered good enough for Black,
since 1 0. P-Q4, P x P; 1 1 . Kt x P,
Kt x Kt; 12. B x Kt, P-QB3; 13.
Q-Q3, B-B3; 14. QR-Q1 , B x B;
(Szabo-Landau, Hastings, 1938-39)
leads only to an equal game.
6. Kt-B3 Kt-QB3
If 6 . . . . . P-KB3; 7.· Castles,
Kt-QB3; 8. P-Q4, P x P; 9. Kt
QKt5, B-QB4; 10. KKt x P, Kt x
Kt; 1 1 . Kt x Kt, B-B2; 1 2. Q-R4
eh., K-B1; 13. R-Q1 , (Alekhine 15. P-K4!
Dus-Chotimirsky, Carlsbad, 1 91 1 ), More convincing than 15. B x B,
with a superior game for White P x B; 1 6. Q x Q eh., R x Q; 17.
would follow. R X P, P-QR3; 18. R-Q6, K-K2;
19. R x P, KR-Q1 ; 20. B-K3,
7. Castles B-K2 B x P; 21. R-Ktl, R-B7; and
8. P-Q4 PxP Black has a strong position for the
9. Kt x P QKt x Kt lost Pawn.
Slightly better is 9. . . . . Kt X
QKt; 10. P x Kt, Kt x Kt; 1 1 . 15. B-B5
P X Kt, P-QB3; though White's 1�. P-K5 B-K2
advantage is clear. 17. P-Kt3 B-Q4
18. B x B PxB
19. Q x Q ch. RxQ
20. R x P
It is obvious that White has
gained three moves by his man
reuvre which started on the 1 6th
move, and has forced the Black
Bishop off its strong diagonal.
20 . . . . . . . R-B4
21. R x R BxR
22. B-Kt2 K-K2
23. R-QBI B-Kt3
24. K-Bl R-QI
25. K-K2 K-K3
26. P-B3
Stronger than 26 . . . . . P-B4. Position after 32. . . . P-K4
.
26. . . . . . . R-Q2 33. ...... B xB

27. R-B6 eh. K-B4 34. RXB P-QR3
28. P-Kt4 eh. K-B5 35. R-B7! P-R3
29. P-K6 R-K2 36. R-B6 P-K5
30. B x P PxP 37. R-B6 eh. K-Kt4
31. B-B8 R-Kl 38. R x QRP R-QBI
32. B-Q6 eh. P-K4 39. P-R4 eh. KXP
On 32 . . . . . K-Kt4; 33. B-Kt3, 40. R X P eh. K-Kt6
and 34. P-KR4 eh. , would follow. 41 . PxP R-B7 eh.
42. K-Q3 RxP
33. B-B5! 43. R-QKt6 KXP
Now White threatens 34. R X B, 44. RxP R-R8
P x R; 35. B-K3 Mate, and forces 45. R-Q5 R-Q8 eh.
a favourable Rook ending, in which 46. K-B4 R-B8 eh.
Mason shows his mastery of the 47. K-Kt5 K-B5
end-game. 48. P-K5 and White won.
Mason shows with crystal clearness how an attack in the centre should
be carried out. His idea of exchanging the centre Pawns in order to
make way for his own, judiciously held back until the right moment, is
masterly.
The importance of the game lies in this strategy, and not in its opening
theory. The latter, indeed, has been superseded, for (as shown in note
to move 5) White can be prevented from making an early break-through
in the centre, and a later one will bring him no advantage.
ALEKHINE's CoNTINUATION
From the preceding game we have learned that Black, while able to
delay White's central thrust, is powerless to prevent it. However,
although Black in the Sicilian Defence obtains an equal position as soon
as he has played . . . . P-Q4, and has eliminated the hostile King's Pawn,
White, on the contrary, if he were to attempt the same policy, would find
it insufficient, since it leads only to a drawish game. It is, therefore,
easy to understand why players have sought more forceful methods of
exchanging Black's King's Pawn, and for this purpose an early P-KB4
by White has been found most effective.
This is by no means a new idea, as it was adopted by Wyvill (see game
74, page 143), but he played as a preliminary, P-K3 and KKt-K2, a
manreuvre undoubtedly too slow and elaborate for modern praxis.
83 square with the Queen and the

Bishop.
White Black
A. Alekhine S. Tarrasch 15. Q-B1
1 6. P-B5 K-R2
Vienna, 1922 17. Q-B4 P-KKt4
18. P-Q4 Q-K1
1. P-QB4 P-K4 After 18 . . . . . P-K5; 19. B
2. Kt-QB3 Kt-QB3 Kt2, Black's Pawns would become
3. P-KKt3 P-KKt3 immobile and White, after prepara
4. B-Kt2 B-Kt2 tion could break them up with
5. P-Q3 KKt-K2 P-KKt4.
6. P-B4
To-day this method of breaking 19. P-B6 KtP X P
up Black's centre is considered to 20. P x BP B-K3
be stronger than the central push 21. P-Q5 B-Ktl
P-Q4. 22. B-Kt2 K-R1
On 22 . . . . . P-K5; 23. P-KKt4
6. . . . . . . P-Q3 would follow.
7. Kt-B3
For the newer method 7. Kt-R3, 23. QR-K1 Q-Kt3
see the following game. 24. P-QKt4 KR-Q1
25. R-Q1 P-B5
7. Castles 26. B-B2 B-R2
8. Castles P-KR3 27. KR-K1 Q-B7
9. P-K4 P-B4 The exchange of the Queens
10. Kt-Q5 only helps White. If 27. . . . .
The key-move in this variation Q-R4; 28. P-Q6, P-B6; 29.
which had been already adopted by P-Kt4, could follow. Probably 27.
Staunton (see Game 72). The only . . . . Q-B2; preventing 28. P-Q6,
difference is that Alekhine estab and threatening 28. . . . . P-B6;
lishes his Knight on Q5 before ex is the best.
changing Pawns, while Staunton
eliminated the tension in the centre 28. Q x Q BxQ
before carrying out the same idea. 29. R-Q2 B-R5
Alekhine's method gives the game 30. P-Q6!
a more dynamic character. The decisive break - through,
which leads to interesting corn-
10. Kt x Kt plications.
l l . KP x Kt Kt-Q5
12. P x P Kt x Kt eh. 30. RxP
13. B x Kt PxP 31. R x R PxR
14. B-K3 B-Q2 32. P-B7 R-QB1
1 5 . Q-Kt3 33. R-QB1 B-Q2
This is the second characteristic 34. B-Kt7 P-K5
manreuvre which had been adopted 35. B x KP!
in the nineteenth century, exerting Simpler than 35. B X R, B X B;
pressure against Blsck'8 QKt2 36. R-Q1 , B-B 1 ; 37. B-B5,
Position after 30. P-Q6!

Tarrasch's intending sacrifice of
P-K6! with great complications the piece for White's two Pawns
to follow. does not work. After 45 . . . . . B x P;
46. K-B3, R-Kt8; 47. R
35 . . . . . . . P-Q41 QKt7, R-B8 eh.; 48. K-Q2, wins.
36. B x QP B-K4
37. R-Kl PxP
38. R x B P x B eh. 46. K-B3 R-Kt8
39. K x P RxP 47. B-K4 R-B8 eh.
40. R-K7 R-B7 eh. 48. K-Q2 R-B5
41 . K-K3 B-Kt4 49. P-Kt6 RxB
42. R x P R x KRP 50. P-Kt7 R-Kt5
43. P-R4 B-B8 51. K-K3 B-B5
Not 43 . . . . . R-R6 eh.; 44. 52. R-R8 eh. K-Kt2
K-Q4, R-R6; 45. R-R8 eh., 53. P-Kt8(Q) RxQ
and 46. P x B. 54. RxR P-R4
55. R-Kt4 B-Q4
44. P-Kt5 R-QKt7 56. P-R5 P-Kt6
45. K-Q4 P-Kt5 57. P-R6 Resigns.
In this instructive game Alekhine proves not only that the control of
more space can by itself be decisive, but also that the style of a modern
master must be very elastic. For after many complications and exchanges,
he arrives at a position (see diagram after the 45th move) where he holds
an advantage, which although very slight is nevertheless sufficient for
victory.
GoLOMBEK's CoNTINUATION
That the push P-KB4 is more powerful than the break-through by

P-Q4, which leads only to exchanges, has been shown in the previous
game, where, however, Alekhine's development of the KKt at KB3 had
the disadvantage of blocking the King's Bishop. In the following game,
Golombek brought out the KKt at KR3, thereby introducing a more
elastic system.
162 CHESS FHOM MORPHY TO BOTWINNIK
84 19. . . . . . . Q-R3
White Black 20. Q-B2 Kt-B1
H. Go lombek 0. Cruz A necessary Pawn sacrifice. On
20. . . . . P-Kt3; 21 . B-Q3, Q
Buenos Aires Team
R4; 22. Kt-Kt5, would follow.
Tournament, 1939
1. P-QB4 P-K4 21. B X P eh. K-R1
2. Kt-QB3 Kt-KB3 22. B-Q3 Q-Kt3
3. P-KKt3 P-Q4 22 . . . . . Q-R4; was the only
4. P x P Kt x P move to continue the game, though
5. B-Kt2 Kt-Kt3 wi�h a Pawn down and a bad posi
6. Kt-R3 tion, there was little hope. The
With this move Golombek intro text-move leads to an interesting
duces a system invented by himself. combination.
It aims at giving the Knight more
mobility and keeping the diagonal 23. Kt-R4 Kt x P
free for the KB.
6. Kt-B3
7. Castles B-K2
8. P-B4 Castles
9. P-Q3 B-KKt5?
This move involves loss of time.
Better was 9 . . . . . P-B3; to keep
a firm hold on the centre.
10. Kt-B2 B-K3

ll. P x P Q-Q5
Black rejects the better move l l .
. . . . R-Ktl; since 1 2 . B-B4,
P-Kt4; 13. B-Q2, Kt x P; would
have seriously weakened his King's
side. But it was still the lesser of
the two evils, since now his Queen Hoping for 24. P X Kt, Q X P eh.;
gets into trouble. followed by Q X B, but White has
prepared a surprise!
12. P-K3 Q x P(K4)
13. P-Q4 Q-QR4 24. Q-Q1 !
This is the only square to avoid A fine quiet move.
immediate loss of material. On 13.
. . . . Q-KKt4; or . . . . Q-KB4; 24. . . . . . . Kt x P
14. P-K4, followed by P-Q5 wins. There is no saving move. On 24.
. . . . Q-Q3; 25. Q-R5 eh., Q-R3;
14. P-QR3 B-B5 26. Q x Q eh., P x Q; 27. P x Kt,
15. R-K1 QR-Q1 R x P; 28. B-B3, wins.
16. B-Q2
Threatening 17. Kt-Q5, followed 25. Kt x Q RxB
by 18. Kt x P. 26. Kt x Kt R x Kt
On 26 . . . . . R x B; 27. Q-R5 ch. ,
16 . . . . . . . Q-R3 K-Ktl ; 2 8 . K t X B Mate, follows.
17. P-Kt3 B-Q6
18. Kt x B Q x Kt 27. R-R2 K-Ktl
19. B-K4 28. R-Kt2 QR-Q1
Forcing the Queen back. 29. R x Kt Resigns.
At present this system can be considered as a definite advance in the

English Opening. The game well illustrates how the central squares
should be controlled by the co-operation of the pieces and Pawns.
BLACK ADOPTS A SAFER DEFENSIVE SYSTEM
The following two games deal with other defensive systems in which
Black avoids the committing 1 . . . . . P-K4; but tries to contest the Q5
square with 3. . . . . P-Q4.
Although its value has not yet been established, it is considered to give
a better defence for Black than the previous systems, since the omission
of an early . . . . P-K4; deprives White of a target for attack (by means
of P-Q4 or P-KB4).
85 the moment when Black is preparing

to castle.
White Black
S. Flohr I. Kashdan 13. . . . . . . PxP
14. P x P QxP
Folkestone, 1933 On 14. . . . . B X P; (14.
Kt X P; 15. Q-Q4!) 15. QR-Q1 ,
1. P-QB4 Kt-KB3 Kt-K4; 1 6. Kt x Kt, Q x Kt; 17.
2. Kt-QB3 P-K3 KB-R6, Q-B2; though it looks
3. P-K4 P-Q4 dangerous for Black was a playable
With this move Black tries to alternative.
clarify the tension in the centre,
but 3. . . . . P-B4; is more solid. 15. KR-Q1 B-K2
If 4. P-K5, Kt-Ktl; 5. Kt-B3, Black cannot castle because of
Kt-QB3; 6. P-KKt3, KKt-K2; 1 6. B-K3.
7. P-QKt3, Kt-Kt3; 8. Q-K2,
P-Q3; 9. P X P, B X P; and Black
has a good game (Landau-Euwe,
7th match game, 1939); while 4.
Kt-B3, Kt-B3; 5. P-Q4, P X P;
6. Kt x P, B-Kt5; transposes into
a Sicilian Defence, leading to
equality.
4. P-K5 P-Q5
5. P x Kt P x Kt
6. KtP x P QxP
7. P-Q4 P-QKt3
8. Kt-B3 B-Kt2
9. B-K2 Kt-Q2
10. Castles B-Q3
This move is the cause of later
troubles. 1 0. P-KR3, was 1 6. R x Kt
necessary. A fine sacrifice, which gives White
a lasting initiative, and is the more
1 1 . B-Kt5 Q-B4 praiseworthy, since White gains no
12. Q-R4 P-QB3 material advantage immediately.
13. P-B51
White opens up the lines at just 16 . . • • • . . KxR
12
17. B-K3 Q-R6 22. B x B R-Q4

If 17 . . . . . Q-B4; 18. P-Kt4! 23. P-QB4 RXB
Q-B3; 19. R-Ktl , KR-QKtl; Black is forced to give the ex
20. B-Q4, Q-B5; 21 . Kt-K5 eh., change back. Otherwise after 23.
K-B1; (21. . . . . K-K1; 22. R x B, . . . . R-Q2; 24. Q-B6, Q-Q3; 25.
R x R; 23. Q x P eh., K-Q1; 24. R-K1, White threatens R x P
Q x R, ) 22. R x B, R x R; 23. Q x P eh., which would soon decide the
eh., K-Ktl ; 24. Q-K8 eh., wins. game.
These variations illustrate the
strength of the minor pieces on the 24. Q x R K-Q2
board. 24. . . . . Q-Kt7; 25. R-Q1 ,
18. Q-Q4 eh. Q.:...K
._ t3; gave Black some defensive
K-K1
chances.
19. Q x KtP R-KB1
20. Kt-Kt5 R-Q1
25. R-Q1 eh. K-B1
21. B-R5
26. B x PI K-Ktl
White avoids the trap. On 2 1 .
27. BxP QxP
Kt x RP, Q-Kt7!; 2 2 . R-K1, Q x
28. R-Q8 eh. K-B2
B; wins.
29. Q-K7 eh. K-Kt3
21 . . . . . . . B x Kt 30. P-B5 eh. Resigns.
RUBINSTEIN'S DEFENSIVE SYSTEM
86 himself of his weakness and opening

up the game-always an advantage
White Black to the better-developed player.
A. Nimzovitch A. Rubinstein
7. Castles QKt-B3
Dresden, 1926 Preferable is 7 . . . . . KKt-B3.
I. P-QB4 P-QB4 8. P-Q3 Kt-Q5

2. Kt-KB3 Kt-KB3 Now Black must play this in
3. Kt-B3 P-Q4 order to secure a retreat for his
Rubinstein regularly played this Knight at Kt5.
move. The idea is to try to gain
the advantage in the centre by
9. Kt x Kt P x Kt
forceful methods before White can
secure an iron grip on the position. 10. Kt-K2 P-QR3
White threatened 1 1 . B-Kt5 eh.
4. P x P Kt x P
5. P-K4 1 1 . Kt-Kt3 B-Q3
An idea of Nimzovitch, where 1 2. P-B4
White allows his Queen's Pawn to 12. Q-Kt4, Q-B3; (12.
be backward, but obtains adequate Castles; 13. B-KKt5, B-K2; 14.
compensation in the better develop B-R6,) 13. P-B4, (not 13. Kt
ment of his pieces. R5, Q-Kt3!) is stronger.
5. . . . . . . Kt-Kt5 12. Castles

6. B-B4 P-K3 13. Q-B3 K-R1
After 6 . . . . . Kt-Q6 eh. ; 7. 14. B-Q2 P-B4
K-K2, Kt-B5 eh.; 8. K-B 1 , 15. QR-Kl Kt-B3
leaves White with the powerful 16. R-K2 Q-B2
threat of 9. P-Q4, at once ridding 17. PxP PxP
THE ENGLISH OPENING IN MODERN TIMES 1�5
his attack. We see that even in

middle game technique the game
has progressed, a new, more con
structive and comprehensive stra
tegy having replaced the static
manceuvring of the earlier players.
White has achieved his aim and
now proceeds with his King's side
attack, by establishing his Knight
on KKt5. He forces Black to weak
en his King's side, and to denude
the King of his scant defence, after
which Black's position crumbles to
pieces under a few forceful thrusts.
23. Q-R5 P-KKt3

18. Kt-R1 24. Q-R4
The idea of this seemingly bizarre Having compelled Black to weak
move is to manceuvre the Knight en the dark-coloured squares around
via KB2 and KR3 to KKt5, where his King, White now aggravates
it will be most effectively placed for this weakness by forcing the King's
the impending attack on the Black Bishop to leave the King's side.
King. It is a good illustration of
Nimzovitch's original and unpre 24. . . . . . . K-Kt2
judiced approach to a position as 25. Q-B2 B-B4
opposed to the dogmatic exploita If 25. . . . . Q-Kt3; 26. P
tion of the open King's file by 18. QKt4! threatening 27. B-B3,
KR-K1, B-Q2; 19. B-K6, QR follows.
K1 ; 20. B x B, R x R; (forced) 21.
26. P-QKt4 B-Kt3
Q x R. Although it must not be
27. Q-R4!
thought that this line is without
Having driven away the Bishop,
promise, Nimzovitch's method is
the Queen returns to the attack,
more likely to give the best results.
with additional threats on K7.
18. B-Q2 27. . . . . . . R-K1
19. Kt-B2 QR-K1 28. R-K5! Kt-B2
20. KR-K1 RxR If 28 . . . . . R x R; 29. P x R,
21. R X R Kt-Q1 Q x P; 30. Q-R6 eh., followed by
2 1 . . . . . R-K1; is not feasible mate, or if 28. . . . . P-R3; 29.
because of 22. Q-Q5, showing that P-Kt4, P X P; 30. P-B5, Q X R;
White has gained control of the 31 . P-B6 eh., Q X P; 32. Q X P
King's file as well as building up mate.
his attack
29. B x Kt QxB
22. Kt-R3 B-B3 30. Kt-Kt5 Q-Ktl
22. R-K1; is useless. 31 . R x R BxR
Now it is answered by 23. Q-R5, 32. Q-K1 B-B3
R x R; 24. Kt-Kt5, P-KR3; 25. In spite of the reduced material,
Q-Kt6. White's attack is irresistible. If 32.
This, and the previous note, show . . . . K-B1; 33. Q-K5, B-Q1;
that by simple combinative meth 34. Kt-K6 eh. , K-K2; 35. Q-B5
ods White can prevent Black from eh. , K-Q2; 36. Kt-B8 eh., an im
obtaining any sort of counterplay pressive variation given by Nimzo
on the King's file, and ca.n further vitch.
33. Q-K7 eh. K-R1 P-KR4; 36. Q-B6 eh., K-R2;

34. P-Kt5 37. Kt-Kt5 eh. , K-R3; 38. B
To bring the Bishop into action. Kt4, leads to mate.
34. . . . . . . Q-Kt2 35. Q x Q eh. KxQ

If 34. . . . . P X P; 35. Kt-K6, 36. P x B and wins.
CONCLUSIO�S
In this section, dealing with the English Opening of last century and
with its modern form, our object has been to show the development
during the past hundred years of this complicated type of opening. As
played from 1840 to 1860, it is difficult to classify, but when viewed with
the eyes of to-day, it seems a mixture of the English and Reti Openings
and of the Catalan System. To transpose from one system to a favourable
line of the other is still the most important feature of the opening. As,
however, the examination of the systems and transpositions would go far
beyond the scope of this book, we have discussed, therefore, the 'pure'
English Opening only.
We have classified the English Opening by dividing it into four systems.
I. White, by waiting moves and by developing his pieces quietly
(without the fianchetto), tries to induce Black to occupy the centre.
This system is illustrated by the games of Nimzovitch and Flohr (see
Games 77-78, pages 149-151). They were successful because Black did not
realize that aggressiveness in the centre was bound to fail on account
of the missing tempo.
2. The Four Knights' variation. White plays 5. P-Q4, and by the
fianchetto (as shown in the games of Reti, Games 79-80, pages 1 53-155)
or by playing B-KKt5 (shown by the game of Botwinnik, Game 81,
page 156), tries to gain control of key square Q5.
3 . The modern form of the English Opening. The early fianchetto
(3. P-KKt3, and 4. B-Kt2) with the same idea of controlling the vital
Q5 square, but without playing an early P-Q4, a move which often
leads to simplification.
4. An attempt by Black not to play I . . . . . P-K4; but by playing
I. . . . . P-QB4; or 1.. . P-K3; to avoid committing himself to such
• .
weaknesses and to keep control of the Q5 square. The two games by

Nimzovitch and Flohr ( Games 85-86, pages 163-1 64) show, that even in
these Black has plenty of difficulties in solving his opening problems
satisfactorily.
PART IV
T H E K I N G ' S GAM B IT
TIIIS most controversial opening has undergone, in the march of time,

a metamorphosis which is a particularly good illustration of our change
in outlook during the last hundred years.
Even in the last century we find a diversity of views. The sober
thinking Staunton called it an 'admirable opening which gives birth to
the most intricate and beautiful combinations,' while Mason, in his Art
of Chess, writes that, 'In the main these Gambits are regarded as unsound,
and in consequence they occupy no very conspicuous place in present-day
play.'
To-day many are inclined to take Mason's view, although the more
discerning will agree with Blackburne who wrote, 'At the present time
the King's Gambit is rarely played in important contests because when
there is a great deal at stake few players dare venture into the shoal of
intricate and hazardous positions to which it gives rise. Accordingly if
anyone more venturesome than his fellows ventures to offer it, the usual
plan is to resort to one or other of the numerous methods of declining.'
Many prominent players, indeed, discounted the gambit in the belief
that it may be easily met. But can it? That is where complacency has
assisted the inherent torpitude of the human mind that likes to avoid
problems which cannot be easily resolved. This question was investigated
by a few masters who concluded that Black cannot solve the opening
problems as easily as it was thought. To emerge from the opening with
a sound position, Black must either adopt a complicated and venturesome
defence, or he must cede the first player a lasting initiative in return for
one of the safer defence structures.
There has been much prejudice in the approach to the King's Gambit.
In 1 920, however, Rubinstein and Tartakower, followed by Stoltz
in 1 930 and Keres and Bronstein in 1 940, tried to prove that the King's
Gambit is a solid positional opening. Their several endeavours are only
now slowly lifting the veil of glamour and mystery that enshrouded the
opening in the last century and which still obscures the real issues to-day.
167
XIV
THE KING'S GAMBIT ACCEPTED

THE KIESERITZKY GAMBIT
87 8. . . . . . . P-B6
9. P-KKt3
White Black Also recommended by Kieser
A. Anderssen L. Kieseritzky itzky, but to-day considered weaker
than 9. P X P, B-K2; 10. B-K3,
London, 1851 B X P eh.; 1 1 . K-Q2, P X P; 1 2.
Q x P, a suggestion of Staunton,
I. P-K4 P-K4 endorsed by the modern Liiro bo k i
2. P-KB4 PxP Schack.
3. Kt-KB3 P-KKt4
4. P-KR4 P-Kt5 9. . . . . . . B-K3
5. Kt-K5 P-KR4 A fine defensive move later
This move, recommended by adopted in the Philidor Defence of
Kieseritzky, is aimed at retaining the King's Gambit. \'Vhite is com
the Pawn at KKt5, essential to the mitted to a rigid Pawn formation
maintenance of Black's position. in the centre.
Its value was certainly appreciated
at that period. 10. P,.-Q5 B-Q2
1 1 . P-K5 PxP
6. B-B4 R-R2 1 2. Kt X P B-Q3
7. P-Q4 P-Q3 13. B-B4 Kt-K2
In the game Bronstein-Dubinin, 14. Castles B-KB4
U.S.S.R. Championship, 1 947, 15. Kt-B3 Kt-Q2
Black played 7. . . . . B-R3; 8. 16. Kt x Kt Q x Kt
Kt-QB3, Kt-QB3; 9. Kt x BP! 17. B-QKt5 P-QB3
R x Kt; 1 0. B x R eh. , K x B; 1 1 . 18. P X P B-B4 eh.
B X P , B X B ; 1 2. Castles, Q X P ; 13. The defence is cleverly conducted
R x B eh. , K-Kt2; 14. Q-Q2, by Kieseritzky, who has eliminated
P-Q3; 15. QR-KBI , Kt-QI ; 1 6. all White's attacking chances on
Kt-Q5, B-Q2; 17. P-K5! P x P; the centre files. It is interesting to
18. P X P, B-B3; 19. P-K6! note the contemporary view ex
B X Kt; 20. R-B7 eh. , Kt x R; 21. pressed by Staunton who annotates
R X Kt eh., K-Rl ; 22. Q-B3 eh., Black's 18th move 'Fortunate
Kt-B3; 23. R x Kt, and Black enough for White (the game was
resigned on the 27th move. A more played with colours reversed) that
energetic attack than Anderssen's, he had this check in store.'
the German master missing the Evidently Staunton did not con
strongest continuation (see next sider this move part of Kieseritzky's
note). defensive plan. To-day this check,
as part of a combinative defence,
8. Kt-Q3 would evoke no special mention.
A timid move ! The sacrifice on
KB7 was still decisive according to 19. K-R2 PxP
Schlechter. 20. B-Q3 BxB
168
THE KING'S GAMBIT ACCEPTED 169
21. P x B P-B4 is 30. . . . . Kt x R; but after 3 1 .

22. R-Kl R-Ql Kt x R, P-B6; 3 2 . Kt x QBP, R
23. Q-R4 P-KB7 QB2; 33. Kt--K5, R-B8; 34.
Staunton- considers 23. . . . . Q- Kt x BP! Kt-Q8; 35. R-B l , P x Kt;
Kt2; better, but then 24. Q-B2, 36. R x P eh. , K-Kt2; 37. R-B5,
threatening R-K6 or Kt-R4, and though Black is a piece up, he
poses Black some difficult problems. has no winning chances.
Kieseritzky's move, aimed at the
exchange of Queens, is therefore 3 1 . R-K5
much more in harmony with our White avoids the trap! If 31.
modern treatment. Kt x R, P x R; 32. R x Kt, R x R;
33. Kt x R, P-K7; wins.
24. R--K2 K-Bl
25. B-K3 BxB 31. P x P eh.
26. RxB Q-Q5 32. Kt x P Kt x Kt
27. QxQ RxQ 33. R x R eh. K xR
28. QR-KBI P-B5 34. K x Kt R x P eh.
29. RxP Kt-B4! 35. K-B4 R-Q5 eh.
36. K-Kt3 R-Q4
37. R-K3 K-B3
38. R-QB3 P-QB4
39. R-R3 K-B4!
The Rook ending is ably con
ducted by Black, who conforms to
modern technique in bringing his
King into action rather than sub
mitting to the passive defence line
39 . . . . . R-Q2.
40. R x P R-Q6 eh.

41. K-B2 R-Q7 eh.
42. K-Kt3 RxP
43. R-KKt71
The only chance! 43. R-QB7,
R-QB7; 44. P-R4, R-B6 eh. ;
A fine manreuvrel Black reduces i s hopeless for White.
White's attacking potential by giv
ing back the extra Pawn to assert 43 . . . . . . . P�QB5
his Pawn majority-truly remini 44. R-Kt5 eh. K-K5
scent of Lasker's style. 45. R x RP P-B6
46. R-QB5 K-Q6
30. Kt-K2! ! 47. K x P
Anderssen meets guile with guile. A doubtful move. Better is 47.
This fine move at least averts im P-R5, at once.
mediate loss. It is interesting to
note how all the pieces, including 47. . . . . . . R-Kt5 eh.
both Kings, are brought into the 48. K-Kt5 R-QB5
fray after Black's next move. The 49. R-Q5 eh. K-K7
position is almost problem-like in 50. R-K5 eh. K-B7
structure. On 50. . . . . K-B8; 5 1 . R-B5
eh. , K-Ktl; 52. R-K5, and 53.
30. . . . . . . R-KB2 R-Kl, holds the Black Pawn.
This move leads to an advanta
geous Rook ending. The alternative 5 1 . R-Kt5 K-Kt6
Or 5 1 . . . . . P-B7; 52. R-Kt2, 53. K-B6 K-B5

followed by R x P and P-R5. If 53. K x P; 54. K-K6
draws.
52. R-Ktl R-B4 eh.
A mistake! 52 . . . . . R x P; would 54. R-QB1 K-K5
have won. 55. R x P Drawn.
T HE BERLIN DEFENCE
88 less a tangible advantage is obtained.

To-day the move is quite in accord
White Black with modern ideas, which hold that
J. Rosanes A. Anderssen the long-range objective of a favour
able end-game position overrides
Breslau, 1863 the demands of premature assault.
It is worth while noting that
I. P-K4 P-K4 Black's KtP is indirectly defended
2. P-KB4 PxP since 9. Kt x KtP, is refuted by 9.
3. Kt-KB3 P-KKt4 . . . . Kt-Kt6!; 10. R-R2, Q-K2
4. P-KR4 P-Kt5 eh.; 1 1 . K-B2, R-Ktl ; and wins.
5. Kt-K5 Kt-KB3
This so-called 'Berlin Defence' 9. . . . . . . P-B3
has superseded the original Kieser 10. P x P PxP
itzky variation as it has been Anderssen's fine judgment is ap
demonstrated that Black can in parent. Previously, against Harr
directly protect the Pawn at KKt5 witz in 1 858, Morphy played 10.
(or obtain sufficient compensation . . . . Castles; 1 1 . P X P, P X P; 12.
if it should be lost) as well as being Q x KtP eh., Kt-Kt2; 13. B X P,
able to exert pressure on White's with the far better game for White.
centre. It is an important link in
the chain of development of Black's 1 1 . Kt x QBP Kt x Kt
defence. 1 2. B x Kt eh. K-B1 !
6. B-B4
This instinctive reply was accept
ed for nearly seventy years, until
Rubinstein recommended the im
proved 6. P-Q4 (see Game 92,
page 176).
6. P-Q4
7. P x P B-Q3
8. P-Q4 Kt R4-
9. B-Kt5 eh.
This move is not good, but it
requires Anclerssen's genius to de
monstrate its inferiority. We can
not, however, condemn it for the
same reason put forward by nine
teenth century commentators-the A very fine continuation! Not
old axiom that a piece should not 12. . . . . B-Q2; 13. B X B eh. ,
be moved twice in an opening when Q x B ; 1 4 . Castles, with a playable
other pieces are undeveloped, un- game for White.
THE KING'� GAMBIT ACCEPTED 171
13. B X R Kt-Kt6 18. Kt-R4 Q-R3

14. R-R2 With the threat 19 . . . . . Q-K7
On 14. K-B2, Kt x R eh.; 15. chl
Q x Kt, P-Kt6 eh. ; 16. K-K1,
Q-K2 eh.; 17. K-Q1, B-Kt5 eh.; 1 9 . Kt-B3
1 8 . B-B3, B X B eh. ; 19. P X B, On 1 9 . P-B4, Q X Kt; 20. Q X Q,
R-Ktl; 20. Q-Kt2, R-Kt3! 21 . R-K7 eh. ; 2 1 . K-Ktl , R-K8 eh.;
Kt-B3, R-R3; 22. Kt-K2, R X 22. K-B2, R-B8 Mate follows.
P; 23. B-Q2, R-R7; wins.
14. B-KB4 19. B-K4

1 5 . B-Q5 K-Kt2! 20. P-R4 Q-B8 eh.
1 6. Kt-B3 R-K1 eh. 21. QxQ B x P eh.
17. K-B2 Q-Kt3 22. B-K3 RxB
Threatening 17. . . . . B-K4. 23. K-Ktl R-K8 Mate.
1\IORPHY STRENGTHENS THE ATTACK
89 adopted and analysed during the

White Black years 1850-1860. One would hardly
P. Morphy G. W. Medley believe that such a quiet move
could be an innovation, but we have
London, 1858 it on the authority of Bilguer's
Handbuch des Schachspiels that it
1. P-K4 P-K4 was so. In its apparent simplicity
2. P-KB4 PxP the move obscures its attacking
3. Kt-KB3 P-KKt4 possibilities. For instance Lowen
4. P-KR4 P-Kt5 thal's recommended reply 9 . . . . .
5. Kt-K5 Kt-KB3 Kt-Kt6; is met by 1 0. B x P,
6. B-B4 P-Q4 Kt x R; 1 1 . P-KKt3, Q-K2; 1 2.
7. PxP B-Q3 Q-Q2, P-KB3; 13. Castles QR,
8. P-Q4 Kt-R4 P X Kt; 14. P X P, B-Kt5; 15.
9. Kt-QB3! P-Q6.
9. . . . . . . B-KB4
A weak move. Later analysis
proved that Black had two p1ayable
continuations: (a) 9 . . . . . Q-K2;
(preventing White from castling-
10. Castles? B X Kt; 1 1 . P X B, Q
B4 eh.;) 10. B-Kt5 eh. , P-QB3;
1 1 . P X P, P X P; 12. Kt-Q5, Q
K3; 13. Kt-B7 eh. , B x Kt; 14.
B-B4, Q-B4; 15. B X P eh., Q X B!
( 1 5 . . . . . K-B1; 16. B X Kt, B X
Kt; 17. P x B, Q x P ch.; 1 8 . Q-K2,
Q X B; 19. B X P, B-B4; 20. Castles
K, with a good game for White) 16.
Kt X Q, K X Kt; and Black with
three minor pieces for the Queen
Morphy played this simple de has the better game; or (b) 9 . . . . .
veloping move instead of 9. B-Kt5 Castles (analysed by Anderssen) 10.
eh . , which had been consistently Kt-K2, R-K1; 1 1 . QKt X P! (re-
commended by Blackburne) B x Kt;

(better 1 1 . . . . . Kt X Kt; 1 2. B X Kt,
Kt-Q2 !) 12. Kt x Kt, B-Kt6 eh.;
13. K-Bl, R-K8 eh.; 14. Q x R,
B X Q; 15. B-KKt5, Q-Q3; 1 6 .
R x B, B-Q2; 1 7 . R-K5, P
KR3; 18. B-K7, Q-QKt3; 1 9 .
Kt-B6 eh., K-Kt2; (19. . . . .
K-Rl; 20. R-Kt5, ) 20. B-Q3,
Q X QP; 21. R-Kt5 eh., P X R; 22.
P x P, Q-B5 eh.; 23. K-K2,
Q-K4 eh. ; 24. K-Q1, Q X B; 25.
R-R7 eh., · followed by Mate.
Two fascinating but somewhat
intricate variations. No wonder that
Morphy's move 9. Kt-QB3, was
later replaced by the more rational Position after 1 1 . . . . Kt-Kt6
.
but less dynamic 9. Castles, Q X P;

10. Q-K1 , Q x Q; 1 1 . R x Q, R; 1 6. Q x P, and according to
Castles; 12. B-Q3! which leads to Maroezy the attack would not have
equality. been as easy to continue as in the
game.
10. Kt-K2 Q-B3
1 1 . QKt X BP Kt-Kt6 14. P-B3 Q-Q3
1 2. Kt-R5! 1 5 . Castles Kt-Kt2
An ingenious continuation of the 16. R x B Kt x R
attack. The move is not difficult to 17. Q x P Kt-K2
discover, but it is noteworthy as the 18. R-K1 P-KR4
key to Morphy's fine manreuvre A weak move.
Kt-QB3, Kt-K2, Kt x P(B4),
which was later to be universally 19. Q-B3 R-R2
adopted in similar positions in the 20. B-Kt5 eh . P-QB3
King's Gambit. 21. PxP PxP
22. Kt x QBP QKt x Kt
1 2. . . . . . . Kt x Kt 23. B x Kt eh. K-B1
1 3. B-Kt5 B-Kt5 eh. 24. B x Kt eh. QxB
Better was 13 . . . . . Q-Kt2; 14. 25. RxQ BxR
Castles, Kt-Kt6; 15. R X B, Kt X 26. BxR Resigns.
Here we have a fine example of Morphy's unprejudiced treatment of

the opening, at a time when the fashionable move 9. B-Kt5 eh. was at
its zenith. While Morphy did study contemporary theory (from which
he adopted the best), he retained an objective independence, a trait that
has characterized such great players as Lasker and Capablanca.
THE PAULSEN DEFENCE

It was Louis Paulsen, the 'Master of Defence,' who evolved a system
which was to dominate the second half of the 19th century. To him is
attributed the saying that every gambit can be defended; to decline a
gambit he considered a weakness.
While Staunton was first to recognize the power of a fianchettoed
Bishop as an offensive weapon, it was L. Paulsen who introduced it as a
defensive unit capable of exerting pressure on White's centre.
It is not easy to grasp the novelty of his idea to-day when our theoretical
knowledge is so far advanced, since these variations are now taken for
granted. By way of i1lustration, here is a brevity, to-day classed as an
opening trap and widely known, which is one of the earliest practical
examples of the new system.
White N.N. Black L. Paulsen. 1. P-K4, P-K4; 2. P-KB4, P X P;
3. Kt-KB3, P-KKt4; 4. P-KR4, P-Kt5; 5. Kt-K5, B-Kt2! At
first sight this move appears unsound as it allows White to break up
Black's King's-side Pawns which it is normal to endeavour to retain
intact. 6. Kt X KtP (the correct move is 6. P-Q4), 6 . . . . . P--Q4!;
7. P x P? (7. P-Q4 is still the right move) 7 . . . . . Q-K2 eh. ; 8. K-B2,
B-Q5 eh. ; 9. K-B3, B X Kt eh. ; 10. K x B, Kt-B3 eh. ; 1 1 . K-R3,
Q-Q2 eh. ; 12. K-R2, Kt-Kt5 eh. ; 1 3. K-R3, Kt-B7 double eh.
and wins.
90 Kt; 1 5 . B X Kt, P-B3; 16.Kt X KtP,

Q x KtP; 17. Kt-:-B2, R-K1 eh.;
White Black 18. B-K5, B-Kt5!
W. Steinitz J. J. Zukertort
1 2. P X P Kt-Q2
Vienna, 1882 13. Kt x Kt
White has no better move. If
1. P-K4 P-K4 13. Kt X P(B4), Kt-Kt6; 14. Kt
2. P-KB4 PxP K6, P x Kt; 15. P x P, K-R1; and
3 . Kt-KB3 P-KKt4 Black has a winning position.
4. P-KR4 P-Kt5
5. Kt-K5 Kt-KB3 13. B x Kt
6. B-B4 P-Q4 1 4 . Q-Q3 R-B1
7. P x P B-Kt2 15. Kt x P R-K1 eh.
8. Kt-QB3 Castles 1 6. K-Q1
9. P-Q4 Kt-R4 If 16. K-B1 , Q-B3; is too
10. Kt-K2 P-QB4 strong.
This is the key-move to Paulsen's
defensive system. Black starts an 16 . . . . . . . P-Kt4!
immediate counter-attack against
White's centre. Thus we see, even
in the romantic King's Gambit, the
same principles obtaining as in all
other openings.
1 1 . P-B3
For the more complicated coun
ter-attack, 1 1 . Kt x P, see following
game.
11. . . . . . . PxP
This is the simplest answer. 1 1 .
. . . . P-QKt4; recommended by
L. Paulsen is also good but leads
to a very complicated game. The
game Spielmann-Leonhardt (Match
Munich, 1906) continued 1 1 . . . . . The deciding move, since if 17.
P-QKt4; 12. B-Kt3, P-B5; 13. B x P, R x B eh. ; l S . R x B, Kt x Kt;
B-B2, Q X QP; 14. QKt X P, Kt X wins.
17. Kt x Kt PxB 24. K-Q2 Q x P eh.

18. Q-QR3 BxP 25. K-K3 R-K1 eh.
19. B-Q2 Q-Kt3 26. K-Q4 Q-K5 eh.
20. B-B3 R-K6 27. K-B5 Q-K2 eh.
21. R-K1 BxB 28. P-Q6 Q-K4 eh.
22. R x R QxR 29. KxP Q-K5 eh.
23. P x B 30. K-Kt3 R-Ktl eh.
If 23. Q x B, B-R5 eh.; is 31. Q-Kt4 R x Q eh.
decisive. 32. PxR Q-Q 6 eh.
33. K-Kt2 Q-Q5 eh.
23. 0 0 0 0 0 0 Q-Kt8 eh. Resigns.
BLACKBURNE'S CONTRIBUTION
Zukertort demonstrated (see previous game) that Black can success

fully attack and break up White's centre, clearly endorsing Paulsen's fine
defensive idea. Zukertort's victory over Steinitz had a lasting effect.
It was considered by Gunsberg and others to be the refutation of the
Kieseritzky Gambit.
BJackburne then introduced a new idea of great importance for "Vhite,
which is best illustrated in the following game.
91 Q x Q, P x Q; 17. B-B4, Kt-B3;

and now White with 1 8. Kt x Kt,
White Black (instead of the actually played 16.
W. Steinitz K. Schlechter Kt-Q7?) could have obtained a
good game.
Vienna, 1897
13. P x P BxP
1. P-K4 P-K4 14. B x B eh. K-R1
2. P-KB4 PxP 15. Q x P Kt x R
3. Kt-KB3 P-KKt4 16. B-K3 PxP
4. P-KR4 P-Kt5 Simpler is 16 . . . . . Kt-B3; 17.
5. Kt-K5 B-Kt2 Kt X Kt, P X Kt; 18. R-Q1, Q-B2.
6. P-Q4 Kt-KB3
7. B-B4 P-Q4
8. P x P Castles 17. B x P
9. Kt-QB3 Kt-R4
1 0. Kt-K2 P-QB4
1 1 . QKt x BP
This is Blackburne's innovation.
White makes no attempt to hold
the centre but tries to disrupt
Black's somewhat loose Pawn posi
tion, which is the thematic idea in
this variation.
11. . . . . . . Kt-Kt6
1 2. Kt-K6 P X Kt
The game Blackburne-L. Paulsen,
Vienna, 1873, continued 12. . . . .
B x Kt; 13. P x B, Kt x R; 14. Q x P,
Q x QP; 15. P x P eh. , K-R1; 16.
17. .. ...
. Q x B! 21. Castles
A spectacular sacrifice on which The best move. If 21. P-B3,
Black's defence strategy was based, Kt-B7; is too strong.
but it should only lead to a roughly
equal game. 21. B x P eh.
22. K-Q2 Kt-B7
18. Q X Q Kt-B3 23. R-QKU QR Q1 eh.
-
19. Kt x Kt 24. K-K2 B-Kt2

There is nothing better. On 19. 25. R-Kt7!
Q-Ktl , B X Kt; 20. Q X Kt, B A very important defensive move,
Kt6 eh.; 2 1 . K-Q2, QR-Q1 eh. as will be seen.
Black's attack is stronger than in
the game since the White Queen is 25. R-Q5
out of play. 26. Q x P R-K5 eh.
27. K-Q2 R-Q5 eh.
28. K-K3 Kt-Q8 eh.
19. . . . . . . P x Kt Not 28 . . . . . R-K5 eh.; 29.
The decisive mistake. Black over Q x R.
estimates his position. With 19.
. . . . B x Q; 20. Kt x B, Kt-Kt6; 29. K-K2 B-R3
2 1 . Castles QR, he could have 30. B-B7!
obtained an even game. Defends both mating threats on
Q2 and KB2.
20. Q-QB4 QR-Ktl
On 20 . . . . . Kt-B7; 2 1 . K-K2, 30. KR-Q1
would follow. 31. Q x B Resigns.
A fascinating game, and because of its surprising twists, quite foreign

to present-day play. In passing judgment, we must remember that part
of the game has been evolved from variations included in the playing
repertoire of the masters of the last century. Because of the existing
fashion for tactical complexities, evinced by analysis and games of the
period, we can appreciate the ability of the old-time masters to assess
far quicker than we are able to-day, a sound valuation of intricate positions
of this nature.
THE MoDERN CONTINUATION OF THE KIESERITZKY GAMBIT
It is difficult to speak of a modern way of treating the Kieseritzky

Gambit since to-day the variation is hardly ever played. In the last
Gambit tournament in Baden bei Wien, 1 914, it was not played at all,
probably because it was considered that Black has no difficulty in
obtaining a good game.
The change in outlook-th� unprejudiced approach-to the openings
after the first World War had its influence also on the King's Gambit.
Spielmann once said that when, together with Reti and Rubinstein, he
was asked to bring the Liirobok i Schack up to date and they came to the
King's Gambit, they expected just to add some new lines, but they soon
found that many of the older variations given in the books were incom
patible with modern outlook, thereby necessitating an analysis of the
openings from quite a new angle. Thus Rubinstein considered that
White' s 6. B-B4, in order to exploit Black's imagined weakness on
KB7, was incorrect since 6 . . P-Q4; abruptly terminated the attack.
. . .
Instead he recommended White to break up Black's Pawn position on

the King's side at once, an idea based on an old analysis by Philidor.
His recommendation, revolutionary as it was, had little effect, attributable,
perhaps, to the fact that the book was published only in Swedish and also
to the general unpopularity of the opening.
The following game is really the only one to illustrate Rubinstein's
recommendation.
92
White Black
G. Stoltz F. Siimisch
Swinemiinde, 1932
I. P-K4 P-K4
2. P-KB4 PxP
3. Kt-KB3 P-KKt4
4. P-KR4 P-Kt5
5. Kt-K5 Kt-KB3
6. P-Q4
This simple move explains Rubin
stein' s idea. White tries to eliminate
Black's BP even at the price of a
centre Pawn. Position after 10. P-KR4
6. P�3 QB4; 13. Kt-Q2, B-K3; with

7. Kt-Q3 Kt x P advantage to Black.
8. B x P Q-K2
Black follows an analysis of 11. Kt x Kt
Philidor. Rubinstein gives here the 1 2. K x Kt Q x Q eh.
other possible continuation 8 . . . . . 1 3. B x Q B-B4
B-Kt2; 9. P-B3, Castles; 10. If 13. . . . . Castles; 14. B-K3!
Kt-Q2, R-K1 ; 11. Kt x Kt, R x B-B4; 15. Kt-B4, B-Kt3; 16.
Kt eh.; 12. K-B2, Q-B3; 13. Kt-Q5!
P-KKt3, B-R3; 14. B-K2, with
the better game for White. 14. KR-KB1 Kt-Q2
9. Q-K2 B-Kt2
10. P-B3 P-KR4
Black does not realize the danger.
He thinks he is safe with a Pawn up
and hopes to refute White's im
pending attack by the exchange of
Queens which he can always force.
Safer was 10 . . . . . B-B4; with the
idea of preparing Castles Q.
1 1 . Kt-Q2!
This move must have come as a
complete surprise to Black who did
not expect White to force the
Queen exchange with a Pawn down.
Philidor recommended here 1 1 . P
KKt3, P-Q4; 12. B-Kt2, P- Position after 18. . . . . B x B
On 14 . . . . . Kt-B3; 15. B-Kt5! 1 7. QR-K1 eh. K-Q1

B--Kt3; 1 6 . Kt-B4, Castles K; Or 17. . . . . K-B 1 ; 18. B X B,
17. B-Q3! B x B; 18. Kt x B, P Kt X B; 19. Kt-Q5, R-Q1; 20.
BB; 1 9 . B-KB, K-B2; 20. Kt Kt x P, Kt-B3 (20 . . . . Kt-Kt3;
.
B4·, R-R1 ; 2 1 . Kt-Q5, QR 21. B-Kt5, } 21. B-Kt5, winning.

QB1 ; 22. B-Kt5, with the attack.
(Becker's analysis) . 18. B-Kt5 ! BxB
19. R x Kt! Resigns.
15. Kt-Kt4 Kt-B3 If 19 . . . . . B x R; 20. B x B eh.,
16. B-Kt5 eh. ! B-Q2 K-Q2; 21 . R-K7 eh., K-Q1; 22.
No better is 16 . . . . . P-B3; 17. R x KBP dis. eh., K-K1 ; 23. R
Kt x P, P x Kt; 18. B x P eh. , K K7 eh. , K-B1; 24. R x P, wins.
K2; 19. B x R, R x B; 20. B-Kt5, The attack with such reduced
B-K3; 21. R-B2 followed by material could hardly have been
QR-KBI . conducted more energetically.
THE CLASSICAL DEFENCE
This is one of the oldest defences to the King's Gambit and is considered
more solid than the above defences, since Black is able to keep his Pawn
chain intact on the King's side which White can break up only by the
sacrifice of a piece. To-day it is considered one of the most important
defences to the King's Gambit. Once it was thought that Black could
forcibly transpose into this defence from the King's Gambit Accepted
and avoid the Kieseritzky Gambit and the Bishop's Gambit. It was
therefore universally adopted. However, it will be shown that this
transposition is not altogether feasible, since after 1 . P-K4, P-K4;
2. P-KB4, P X P; 3. Kt-KB3, P-KR3; 4. P-QKt3, White can prevent
Black from playing 4. . . . . P-KKt4.
Every opening variation has its history, and in the King's Gambit
almost every move. In order to trace the historical development of this
variation, an example of one of the earliest games, followed by one of
the more recent, is given.
93 9. R x R BxR
10. Kt-K5
THE GAMBIT OF GRECO A very interesting but incorrect
sacrifice. It was supposed to have
I. P-K4 P-K4 been invented by Greco ( 1600-1634},
2. P-KB4 PxP but in fact it was published first in
3. Kt-KB3 P-KKt4 a book by Polerio which appeared
4. B-B4 B-Kt2 between the years 1 585 and 1590.
5. P-KR4 P-KR3
10. P x Kt
6. P-Q4 P-Q3
l l . Q-R5 Q-B3
7. Kt-QB3 P-QB3
1 2. P X P Q-Kt2
Recommended by Philidor but
13. P-K6 Kt-KB3
to-day 7 . . . . . Kt-QB3; 8. Kt
Still simpler is 13. . . . . B X P;
K2, Q-K2; 9. Q-Q3, B-Q2; 10.
14. B X B, Kt-KB3; 15. B X P eh.,
B-Q2, Castles Q; is considered
K-K2; 16. Q-Kt6, Q X B; with
better.
decisive advantage for Black.
8. P x P PxP 14. P x P eh. K-B1?
178 CHESS FROM MORPHY TO BOTWINN IK
A mistake, after which the follow 94

ing splendid combination turns the
tables in favour of White. 14 . . . . . White Black
K-K2; is the right move and after R. Spielmann E. Griinfeld
15. Q-K2, B-Kt5; 1 6. Q-Q3,
QKt-Q2; Black wins easily. Vienna, 1 922
1. P-K4 P-K4
2. P-KB4 PxP
3. B-B4 Kt-QB3
A waiting move by which Black
tries to transpose into the Classical
Defence.
4. Kt-KB3
With 4. P-Q4, White could have
avoided the transposition into the
Classical variation, but after 4 . . . . .
Kt-B3; 5. P-K5, P-Q4; 6. B
Kt5, Kt-K5; 7. B x P, P-B3; 8.
Kt-KB3, P X P; 9. Kt x P, B-Kt5
eh.; 10. P-B3, Castles; 1 1 . Castles,
the game is about even according
15. B x P! 1 to the Liirobolc i Schack.
A beautiful sacrifice. Now on 15.
. . . . Kt x Q; 16. B-Q6, mates 4. P-KKt4
while on 15 . . . . . P X B; 16. Q-B5 5. Castles P-Q3
mate. 6. P-Q4 B-Kt2
7. P-B3
On 7. Kt-B3, Schlechter recom
15. . . . . . . K-K2 mends 7 . . . . . B-K3.
16. B-Q6 eh.
Schlechter . recommended 1 6.
B x P. 7. P-KR3
8. P-KKt3 P-Kt5
9. Kt-R4 P-B6
16. . . . . . . KxB 10. Q-Kt3
Not 16. K-Q2; 17. Q x B, The other line is 10. Kt-Q2,
Q X Q; 18. P-BS(Q) . B-B3; 1 1 . QKt x P, P x Kt; 12.
Q X P, R-R2?; (best is 1 2 . . . . .
Q-K2! ) 13. Kt-Kt6! Spielmann
17. P-K5 eh. ! KxP Griinfeld, Teplitz-Schonau, 1 922, in
Or 17 K-K2; 18. P X Kt eh.,
. • . . .
which game Spielmann was success
Q x P; 19. Castles. ful. Analysis proved, however, that
the sacrifice of the piece is not
correct. The strategy adopted in
1 8 . P-B8(Q)! QXQ this game is considered the most
On 18 . . . . . Kt X Q; 19. Q-B5 promising line of attack in this
eh., wins. variation.
19. Q x P eh. K-Q3 10 . . . . . . . Q-K2

20. Q-B4 eh. K-K2 1 1 . Kt-B5 B x Kt
21. Castles QR and wins. 12. P x B
12. Q x P, would lead to great with 20 . . . . . P-Q4; and . . . . Kt

complications. 12 . . . . . Q X P; 13. K5 eh. , as in the game, because the
B-QKt5, Kt-K2; 14. Q x R eh. , KKt would be tied down to the
K-Q2; 1 5 . Q-Kt7, B X P eh. ; 16. defence of the KKtP and after
P X B , Q X P eh. ; 17. R-B2, Q-Q8 QR-R1; White's pressure would
eh. ; 18. R-B1 , and Black can force have become too strong. If 20.
the draw since on 17. K-R1 , R-R4, P-Q4; 21 . QR-Rl , Kt
P-B7; would be too strong. K2; 22. B-K5, Kt X P; 23. QB x Kt,
B X B; 24. R X P eh., with a decisive
12. . . . . . . Kt-Q1 attack.
Safer was 12 . . . . . Castles Q; 13.
B x BP, Q-K7; 14. Q-K6 eh. , R 20. B-KKt5? P-Q4
Q2; and White has nothing better 2 1 . R-R4
than to force the draw with 15. R Too late.
B2, Q-Q8 eh.
21. . . . . . . Kt-K5 eh.
13. B-B4 Kt-KB3 22. B x Kt PxB
14. Kt-Q2 Castles 23. P-B6 P-K6 eh. !
15. P-KR3! P-KR4 The only satisfactory answer.
1 6. B-Q3 Q-Q2 BxP
24. B x P
17. PxP PxP
25. R-R5 RxB
18. K-B2 Kt-B3
Now the fortunes have changed
19. R-R1 KR-K1
and Black is the attacker.
26. K x R B x P eh.
27. K-Q3 R-Q1 !
28. K-B2 B-K6
29. Q--'-B4
Against the threat 29.
Q-Q6 eh.
29 . . . . . . . Q x Kt eh.
30. K-Kt3 Q-Q2
31. R-Kl ·P-B7
32. QR-KR1
If 32. R X B, Q-Q8 eh.; and P-
B S ( Q) .
32 . ...... Q-K3
33. QxQ PxQ
Spielmann has built up a strong 34. KR-R4 R-KBl
position, but here he misses his 35. R x P eh. K-B2
chance. First 20. R-R4, would 36. R-K4 K-K2
have given him a decisive attack, 37. R-KB1 R-B6
as Black could not have continued Resigns.
THE CUNNINGHAM GAMBIT (REVIVED)
This formerly popular defence invented by the Scottish master, A.

Cunningham ( 1650-1730), was often played in the last century, but it
went out of fashion after it was found that after the moves 1. P-K4,
P-K4; 2. P-KB4, P x P; 3. Kt-KB3, B-K2; 4. B-B4, B--R5 eh.;
White does not need to sacrifice the Pawns (5. P-KKt3, P x P; 6. Castles)
iince with 5. K-Bl ! he can lilecure the better 2'ame .
IJ
1 80 CHESS FROM MORPHY TO BOT\VINNIK
Since the Second World War, the Defence has been revived by Kmoch,
who, following the suggestion of Bilguer' s Handbuch des Schachspiels,
recommends 4. Kt-KB3; (instead of 4 . . . . . B-R5 eh. ).
95 6 . • . . P-Q4
• . .
7. B-Kt3
White Black Safer was 7. B-Q3, while 7.
H. Kramer M. Euwe P x P e.p., B x P; would have been
bad for White.
Match, 1941
7. . . . . . . B-R5 eh.
1. P-K4 P-K4 8. K-B1 P-QKt3!
2. P-KB4 PxP Naturally not 8. . . . . Kt-B7;
3. Kt-KB3 B-K2 9. Q-K1, Kt x R; 10. Q x B, and
4. B-B4 Kt-KB3! the Knight is locked in.
That this simple developing move
has escaped attention for the last 9. B X BP B-R8 eh.
hundred years is further proof of 10. P-B4
how the evolution of chess is hind There is nothing better (10. K:
ered by prejudice. Formerly, the Ktl ? B-B7 Mate).
move 4 . . . . . B-R5 eh. was ex
clusively played, and the following 10 . ...... PxP
complicated line based on a Rook 11. B-R4 eh. P--QKt4
sacrifice extensively analysed: 4. 12. Kt-B3
. . . . B-R5 eh.; 5. K-B1 , P-Q4; Or 12. B-B2, P-Kt5.
6. B x P, Kt-KB3; 7. Kt-B3,
Kt X B; 8. Kt X Kt, P-KB4; 9 . 1 2. PxB
Kt x B, Q x KKt; 1 0 . Kt x P eh., 13. Q x P eh. P-B3
K-Q1 ; 1 1 . Kt X R, P X P; 1 2. Q 14. P-KR3 Kt-R3
K1, Q-K2; 13. Q-B2, Kt-B3. 15. P-Q5
This was considered favourable for On 15. P-K6, Castles; 16. B x
Black, but later analysis has shown QKt, B-QKt4! iiaves the piece.
that White, with 14. P-QKt4,
(threatening 15. P-Kt5, also 15. 15 . ..... . Kt-B4
Q-B5) 14. . . . . Q X P; 15. Q-R4 16. R-Q1 Castles
eh., K-Q2; (15 . . . . . Kt-K2; 16. 17. P-KKt4 Q-Kt3
Q x BP,) 1 6 . Q-Kt4 eh. , K-Q1; 18. Q-B2
17. Q x KtP, would obtain the
better game.
5. P-K5
Or 5. Kt-B3, Kt x P; 6. B x P
eh., K x B; 7. Kt x Kt, R-B l .
5. . . . . . . Kt-Kt5
This move is now strong, since
the Knight cannot be driven off at
once because of 6. . . . . B-R5 eh.
6. P-Q4
If 6. Castles, Kt-QB3; 7. P-Q4,
P-Q4; 8. P x P e.p., B x P; 9.
R-K1 eh., Kt-K2; and Black
stands welL 18 . . . • . . . Q-K6! !
A surprising move, i n the spirit 21. Kt x B PxP

of the old King's Gambit. Black 22. RxP B-Kt2
retains his material advantage. 23. R-QB1 BxR
24. Kt x B Kt-Q5 eh.
19. B x Q Kt x B eh. 25. K-K3 Kt-K3
20. K-K2 Kt x Q Resigns.
Although this defence is not yet explored, it is considered sound and

proves the inexhaustible qualities of the game. If one considers that
much time has been spent analysing the artificial 4 . . . . B-R5 eh. ,
.
while the natural move 4 . . . . . Kt-KB3, has passed unnoticed, it will

be realized that our modern approach to certain old fashioned openings
is likely to create more new lines, especially in the King's Gambit.
THE BISHOP'S GAMBIT
The Bishop's Gambit, once considered sounder than the King's Knight
Gambit, has gone out of favour since it has been found that Black can
either avoid it by playing 3 . . . . . Kt-QB3; (see Game 94, page 178 ) or
with 3. . . . . Kt-KB3; obtain sufficient play in the centre without much
risk and dispense with the artificial Queen check on the third move.
96 A weak move. Better was 5 .
Q-B3, P-Q4; 6 . P x P, B-Q3;
White Black 7. P-Q3, B-KKt5; 8. Q-B2,
R. Spielmann E. D. Bogoljubov Castles; 9. B X P, R-K1 eh.; 10.
K-B 1 , P-QKt4; 1 1 . B-QKt3,
Carlsbad, 1 923 P-Kt5; 12. QKt-K2, Kt x P; 13.
B x Kt, P x B; 14. Q-Kt3, B x Kt
1. P-K4 P-K4 eh.; 1 5 . Kt X B, Q-B3; with
2. P-KB4 PxP equality.
3. B-B4
Dr. Tartakower considers the 5. . . . . . . B-Kt5 !
Lesser Bishop's Gambit to be better, 6. Q-B3 P-Q4!
but the old continuation 3. B-K2, The Bilguer Handbuch des Schach
P-KB4! ; 4. P-K5, P-Q3; 5. spiels here recommends 6. . . . .
P-Q4, P x P; 6. P x P, Q x Q eh.; Castles; 7. B X P, Kt X P. The text
7. B X Q, Kt-QB3; gives Black a move is far more energetic.
good game.
3. . . . . . . Kt-KB3 7. P x P Castles
4. Kt-QB3 P-B3 8. Kt-K2 PxP
This line is far more energetic 9. B-Q3 B-Kt5!
than 4. . . . . Kt-B3; 5. Kt-B3, A fine move which maintains the
B-Kt5; 6. Kt-Q5, Kt x P; 7. initiative for Black.
Castles, Castles; 8. P-Q4, Kt-B3;
9. Kt x B, Kt x Kt; 10. B x P, 10. Q x BP B x Kt!
(Spielmann-Bogoljubov, Triberg, ll. K x B
1921) with the better game for After 1 1 . B X B, R-K1 would
White. prevent White from castling, while
Spielmann hopes to move his King
5. P-Q4 into safety by this move.
1 �2 CHESS FROM MORPHY T O BOTWINNIK
ll. Kt-B3
12. B-K3 R-Kl
13. KR-KBI
Preparing for R-B3 and K-B l .
13. . . . . . . Q-K2
14. R-B3 QR-Q1 !
Avoids White's clever trap. On
14. . . . . Kt x P eh.; 1 5 . Q x Kt,
B-B4; 16. Kt x P, would follow.
15. K-B1 R-Q3

16. Q-R4
The passive defence with 16.
K-Ktl , B x Kt; 17. P x B, Kt
K5 ! would leave White with the
inferior position, therefore Spiel Position after 17. B-KKt5
mann initiates an attack.
Spielmann might have expected
16 . . . . . . . B x Kt 17 . . . . . P-KR3; 18. B x P, Kt
17. B-KKt5 KKt5; 19. B-R7 eh. ! with compli
Now it seems as if White has cations in favour of White.
turned the game in his favour, but
Bogoljubov finds the right reply. 18. B x Kt Q x B!
19. Q x P eh. K-B1
17 . . . . . . . B x QP! ! Resigns.
XV
THE KING'S GAMBIT ACCEPTED

IN MOD E RN TIMES
THE MODERN DEFENCE TO THE KING'S GAMBIT

THIS modern line was introduced by Louis Paulsen in 1884 at a time when
his idea in the Kieseritzky Gambit was considered to give Black a good
defence. However, the latter is very involved, while this modern line
looks simple and straightforward. It is based on the same idea as the
Paulsen Defence, the relief of tension in the centre. It has the advantage
over the older defences that it does not commit Black to weakening his
King's wing at an early stage of the game. The value of this defence
is not yet established, since the problems of the opening have not been
exhaustively analysed, nor has it undergone the searching test of tourna
ment play. The following game is one of the earliest occasions on which
it was played.
97 2. P-KB4 PxP
White Black 3. Kt-KB3 Kt-KB3
E. Schallop L. Paulsen 4. Kt-B3 P-Q4
5. P x P Kt x P
Nassengrund, 1884
6. Kt x Kt Q x Kt
I. P-K4 P-K4 7. P-Q4 B-Q3
THE KING'S GAMBIT ACCEPTED IN MODERN TIMES 183
This is the position normally 20. P-Kt6! PXP

reached in the modern defence to 21. P X P B-Ktl
the King's Gambit. Black attempts 22. R-B1 K-Kt2
to resolve the position in the centre Paulsen must have had great
and to hold his Pawn, without confidence in his powers in playing
playing the committing . . . . P four pieces onto the diagonal of his
KKt4. The Bishop move which opponent's Bishop.
was constantly played in the Baden
bei Wien Gambit Tournament, 1 9 14,
exposes the piece to attack.
8. P-B4 Q-K3 eh.

9. K-B2 P-QB4
10. B-Q3 Q-B3
1 1 . R-K1 eh. K-B1
12. P-QKt4
This Pawn sacrifice is White's
most promising continuation.
12. P x QP
13. P-B5 B-B2
1 4. B-Kt2 Kt-B3
1 5 . P-Kt5 Kt-K4
16. B x QP B-Kt5
In this difficult position, Paulsen 23. R-B7
found the only move to secure the A picturesque position. Black's
defence. The combinations with pin chances appear rather doubtful, but
and counter pin give the game a it is hard to see how White can
very interesting character. increase the pressure on the Knight
at K5. If 23. R-B5, Q X P; 24.
17. B-K4 R{K1 ) X Kt, {24. R(B5) X Kt, Q X
White avoids the trap. 17. Kt x B ! ) 24 . . . . . B x R; 25. B x B eh.,
Kt?, Q-R5 eh.; wins. P-B3; 26. R-B7 eh., K-R3;
leads to complications which are
17. B x Kt not unfavourable for Black.
18. B x B R-Q1
1 9 . K-B1 23. . . . . . . R x B!
19 . . . . . R x B; 20. Q x R, Kt- Paulsen was clearly prepared for
Kt5 eh. was threatened. White's 23rd move.
19. . . . . . . P-Kt4 24. Q x R BxR

It seems rather rash to allow a 25. P x B Kt x B
third piece to be pinned by the 26. Q x Q eh. KxQ
Bishop, but Black has no other 27. P x Kt R-QB1
course, and the move is an inge 28. R-B1 K-K3
nious way of meeting the threat 29. R-B5 P-B3
20. B X P, on which would follow After this masterly defensive
20. . . . . P-B6; 21. P X P, (21 . play, Black was able to hold the
B X P? , P-Kt5!; which was the idea gambit Pawn. The irony lies in the
ofthemove 1 9 . . . . . P-Kt4; ) 21 . . . . . fact that he was unable to make use
Q-K3! with the double threat of of it. If 29. . . . . P-B4; 30. P
22. . . . . Q-B5 eh. and 22. . . . . KR4, P-Kt5 ; (30 . . . . . P-R3; 31.
Q-R6 eh. A very fine defensive P-R5,) 31 . K-Kt2, P-Kt3; 32.
combination. R---B4, K-K4; 33. P-R4, and
Black is unable to improve his 34. R-B7 eh.

position without sacrificing the 35. K-R3 RxP
Pawn on B5, and his chances of a 36. R x KtP K-B5
win are slight. 37. R x P KxP
38. R-KB7 R-R3
30. P-KR4 PxP
39. K x P K-B5
This move leads to a draw at
40. K-R3 P-B4
once. Black could have tried 30.
41 . K-Kt2 R-R7 eh.
. . . . P-Kt3; 31. R-B6 eh., K
42. K-B1 K-K5
K4; 32. P-R5, P-B4; 33. K-Kt2,
43. R-QKt7 K-B6
K-Q5.
44. R-Kt3 eh. K-Kt5
31 . K-Kt2 K-Q3 45. R-QB3 P-B5
32. R-B5 RxP 46. R-QKt3 R-KR7
33. R x P K-K4 47. R-QR3
34. R-QKt4 and on the 59th move a draw was
The best move. agreed.
A masterly performance by Paulsen, who was able to hold the gambit

Pawn without compromising his King's side. Most impressive was the
brilliant combinative play with which he checked White's Pawn's advance
in the centre. Nowadays, we cannot help feeling that White's attack
should have been successful, but we must not forget that this game was
one of the first of a new system, and for that reason perfection could not
be expected.
RUBINSTEIN'S CONTINUATION
The end of the first "\Vorld War saw the emergence of the Hypermodern
School of chess. Rubinstein also introduced some new ideas and tried
to revive the King's Gambit by asserting that it could be treated posi
tionally; and that White, by sacrificing a Pawn, could gain control of the
centre, with prospects of breaking up Black's Pawn position on the King's
side. He did not confine his opinion to the fine analysis in the Liirobok
i Schack but adopted the precepts he outlined in tournament play. We
owe to him brilliancies equal to those of Anderssen. The following game
was his second attempt to combat by new methods the sound formation
of the Defence.
98 rasch in 1 893, is far better than

7. . . . . B-Q3; which was played
White Black in the previous game, since the
A. Rubinstein F. D. Yates KB5 Pawn is defended indirectly
(by . . . . Q-K5 eh.) and the Bishop
Hastings, 1 922 is not exposed to attack.
I. P-K4 P-K4 8. B-Q3 P-KKt4

2. P-KB4 PxP 9. Q-K2 B-KB4
3. Kt-KB3 Kt-KB3 10. B x B QxB
4. Kt-B3 P-Q4 1 1 . P-KKt4
5. P x P Kt x P An interesting move which ex
6. Kt x Kt Q x Kt plains Rubinstein's idea. He tries
7. P-Q4 B-K2 to block Black's Pawns in order to
This move, recommended by Tar- break them up, if necessary at the
THE KING' S GAMBIT ACCEPTED IN MODERN TIMES 185
cost of a Pawn. However, the

slower method 1 1 . B-Q2, (if 1 1 .
. . . . Q X P; 1 2 . R-QB1,) followed
by 12. Castles QR, comes into
considcration.
11. . . . . . . Q-Q2!
A much better move than 1 1 .
. . . . Q-K3; 12. Q x Q, P x Q; 13.
P-KR4, P X P; 14. P-Kt5, Castles;
1 5 . R x P, B-Q3; 16. B-Q2, Kt
B3; 17. P-B4, (Rubinstein-Kostic,
The Hague, 1921 ) when Black main
tained a satisfactory game. The
fact that Rubinstein adopted the
variation in this game suggests that 21 . . . . . . . Q x R eh.!
he might have found a stronger line
The sacrifice of the Queen is the
for White. However, Yates gave
only move which gives Black a
him no chance and the text-move,
chance. Giving up a piece after 21.
sacrificing a Pawn, is more in keep
. . . . Kt-B4; 22. R X Q, Kt X Q;
ing with the spirit of the opening,
23. P X Kt, QR-K1 ; 24. R-K1 ,
since 12. Kt x P, · would be bad for
P-QR4; would have left him with
White after 12. . . . . Kt-B3; 13. ·
a lost game.
P-B3, Castles QR; 14. Kt-B3,
KR-K1 ; or 1 2. . . . . Kt-B3; 13. Kt-B7 eh.
22. K x Q
B X P, Kt X P; 14. Q-K4, Castles
23. K-K1 Kt X R
QR; 1 5 . Castles QR, Q x P; 16.
24. Q X Kt P-KR4
R X Kt, B X Kt; and Black keeps
25. B-B3 P-Kt5
his extra Pawn.
26. Q-R4 KR-Ktl
Better than 26 . . . . . QR-K1 eh.;
12. B-Q2 Kt-B3 27. K-B 1 , R-R2; holding the
13. Castles QR Castles QR Rook's Pawn, in which case White
14. P-KR4 P-B3 would have pushed on his Queen's
1 5 . P-B4 Q X KtP Pawn quickly, while blockading
The beginning of a rather adven Black's Pawns.
turous combination which gives
White some chances, while the purely 27. Q x RP P-Kt6
defensive move 15 . . . . . QR-K1 ; 28. B-Q4 QR-K1 eh.
1 6. P x P, P x P; 17. P-Q5, Kt 29. K-Q2
Q1; 18. Q-B2, K-Ktl ; would have 29. K-B1, loses on account of
been entirely in Black's favour. 29 . . . � . P-B6.
29. . . . . . . QR-KB1
1 6. P x P PxP
30. P-Q6
17. P-Q5 Kt-Kt5
If 30. Q-B3, P-Kt7; 31 . B
If 17 . . . . . Kt-Ktl ; 1 8 . QR
Ktl , R-Kt6; 32. Q-B2, P-Kt3;
Ktl , Q-Q2; 19. B-B3, KR-K1 ;
and Black threatens . . . . R-Kt5
20. R x RP.
and . . . . P-B6.
18. QxB Kt-Q6 eh. 30. PxP

19. K-B2 Q x Kt 31. Q-R6 K-R1
20. Q-K6 eh. K-Ktl 32. Q x QP R-Q1
21. R-R3 33. Q-B5 R x B eh.!
1 �6 CHESS FROM MORPHY TO BOTWINNIK
34. QxR P-Kt7 This forces a draw. On 38. K-B2,

35. Q-Ktl R-Kt6 R-R6; 39. Q-Q1, R-R8; 40.
36. P-Kt4 P-R3 Q-QB eh., and draw by perpetual
37. K-K2 P-B6 eh. check.
This game is characterized by its clear-cut strategy. On comparing it

with the previous game we notice the more rapid movement which
demonstrates that the general technique had developed in the period of
38 years between the two games. Although Black went astray in the
middle-game, he proved the strength of the system and the need for
White to play more aggressively in the early stages.
THE LATEST TREND IN THE KING'S GAMBIT
In the following game White aims at controlling the centre before Black
has time to consolidate and support the KB5 Pawn. This line was just
becoming popular before the Second World War, but progress was slow
because the opening was not in favour.
99 6. Kt x Kt Q x Kt
White Black 7. P-Q4 B-K2
A. Santasiere J. Levin 8. P-B4
A more vigorous continuation than
U.S.A. Championship, 1946 the established 8. B-Q3.
1. P-K4 P-K4 8. Q-K5 eh.

2. P-KB4 PxP 9. K-B2 B-KB4
3. Kt-KB3 Kt-KB3 1 0. P-B5 QKt-Q2
4. Kt-B3 10. . . . . Kt-B3; is considered
An interesting alternative is 4. better, and the continuation 1 1 .
P-K5. The older continuation is B-Kt5, Q-Q4; 1 2 . B x P, Castles
( a) 4. P-K5, Kt-R4; 5. P-Q4, QR; 13. B-K3, B-B3; 14. Q-R4,
P-Q4; 6. P-B4, Kt-QB3; 7. B-K51 leads to equality. (Kienin
P X P, Q X P; 8. Kt-B3, B-QKt5; ger-Eliskases, Stuttgart, 1 939).
9. K-B2, B x Kt; 10. P X B, B
Kt5; 1 1 . B-K2, Castles KR; (Reti 1 1 . B-Kt5 P-QB3
Nyholm, Abbazia, 1912) in favour 1 2. R-K1 Q-B7 eh.
of Black. Keres' continuation is 13. Q x Q BxQ
(b) 4. P-K5, Kt-R4; 5. Q-K2, 14. B x KBP! Kt-B3
B-K2; 6. P-Q4, Castles; 7. P 15. B-B4 R-Q1
KKt4, P x P e.p.; 8. Q-Kt2, P 16. R-K2 B-K5
Q3; 9. RP x P, B-Kt5; 10. B-K3, 17. QR-K1 Kt-Kt5 eh.
(Spielmann recommended 10. Kt 18. K-Ktl P-B4
R2, which however is answered by 1 9 . B-K6 P-KKt3
10 . . . . . Kt x P; 1 1 . Kt x B, Kt x R; Necessary, for 20. B x P, is
1 2. Q X Kt, B-R5 eh. ) 10. . . . . threatened.
QKt-B3; 1 1 . Kt-B3, P X P; 1 2.
P-Q5, Kt-Kt5; 13. Kt x P, Q 20. Kt-Kt5 P-KR4
B 1 ; (Randvir-Tolush) with advan There is no answer to the double
tage to Black. threat of Kt x B, and Kt-B7.
4. P-Q4 21. Kt x B !
5. P x P Kt x P This move is much stronger than
THE KING' S GAMBIT ACCEPTED IN MODERN TIMES 187
2 1 . Kt-B7, B-B3; and Black can

put up some resistance. The sim
plification leading to a won end
game is very instructive.
21 . P x Kt
22. B x Kt PxB
23. RxP R-R2
24. B-Q6 R-Q2
25. K-B2 K-Q1
26. B x B eh . QR x B
27. RxR RxR
28. RxR K xR
29. K-Kt3 K-K3
30. KxP K-Q4
31. K-Kt5 KxP
Position after 20 . . . . . P-KR4 32. KxP Resigns.
This game is devoid of those picturesque combinations with which the

public still likes to associate the opening, but it is both clear and logical,
and, judged by present standards, most impressive.
BRONSTEIN'S TREATMENT
Of the younger generation of masters not only Keres but also Hronstein
often adopts the King's Gambit. The latter has expressed a definite
opinion to the effect that the King's Gambit is neither incorrect nor
hazardous. By playing it on the most important occasions he has shown
his confidence in the opening.
The following game well illustrates how the King's Gambit can be
duller than the most Orthodox Queen's Gambit.
100 a definite judgment on it cannot be

White Black given. Many players (e.g. Ragosin
D. Bronstein V. Ragosin in this game) avoid the variation,
since their attacking chances are
Saltsjobaden, 1948 somewhat ephemeral, whilst White's
end-game prospects are excellent.
1. P-K4 P-K4
2. P-KB4 P-Q4 6. Castles Kt X P
3. P x QP PxP 7. P-B4 Kt-B3
4. K�KB3 K�KB3 8. P-Q4 B-K2
5. B-Kt5 eh. QKt-Q2 9. BxP Castles
5. . . . . P-B3; is supposed lo be 10. B-R4 Kt-QKt3
better, but 6. P X P, Kt X P; l l . B-QKt3 B-KKt5
7. P-Q4, Q-R4 eh. ; 8. Kt-B3, 12. Kt-B3 P-B3
B-QKt5; 9. Q-K2 eh., B-K3; 13. Q-Q2 P-QR4
10. Castles, Castles K; 1 1 . B-Q2, By this move Black weakens his
Q-Kt3; 12. B X Kt, P X B; 1 3 . Pawn position; but he has very
B x P, ( A . R. B . Thomas-E. G . little choice, since White's Pawn
Sergeant, Felixstowe, 1 949), does centre restricts his mobility.
not seem to confirm this. As
this line hai been iO little played, 14. P-QR3 P-R5
1 5 . B-R2 QKt-Q2 his game is sti1l difficult, since

1 6 . QR-K1 KR-K1 "Vhite's passed Pawn is very strong
17. Kt-KKt5 B-R4 and Black has to lose too much
18. K-R1 B-Kt3 time in creating one.
19. Kt-B3 Kt-R4
20. B-K3 Q-B2 37. . . . . . . K-Bl
21. Q-Ql Q-R4 If 37. . . . . Kt-Q6; 38. Kt X Kt,
22. B-Q2 Q-R2 B x Kt; 39. K-B2, K-B l ; 40.
23. P-B5! P-Kt3 K-K3, and the White King comes
If 23. . . . . P-Kt4; to keep the into powerful action.
QRP defended 24. P x ·P e.p.
38. K-B2 K-K2
24. B-Kt5 BXB 39. K-K3 K-Q3
25. Kt x B Kt(4)-B3 40. P-QKt4 Kt-R3
This Pawn sacrifice is probably 41. B-K2 Kt-B2
Black's best chance. 42. Kt-B3 Kt-Q4 eh.
43. K-Q4 Kt-B5
44. B-Bl P-B3
26. R x R eh. RxR 45. Kt-Q2 Kt-K3 eh.
27. Q x P QxQ 46. K-B3 Kt-B2
28. Kt x Q PxP 47. Kt-B4 eh. K-K2
29. P x P R-K7 48. Kt-Kt6 Kt-Kt4 eh.
30. B-B4 R-QB7 49. K-Kt2 B-B4
31 . B-Kt3 R-K7 50. P-QR4 Kt-R2
32. Kt-KB3 Kt-K5 5 1 . K-B3 P-R4
33. B-Ql R-K6 52. K-Q4 K-Q3
If 33. . . . . Kt-B7 eh.; 341. 53. Kt-B4 eh. K-B2
K-Ktl, Kt X B; 35. R X Kt. 54. K-B5 B-Q2
55. Kt-Q6 P-R5
34. K-Ktl Kt(lS) x P 5ft. B-K2 P-B4
35. Kt x Kt Kt x Kt 57. P-Kt3 PXP
36. R-Kl R x R eh. 58. P X P Kt-Bl
37. Kt x R 59. Kt x Kt B x Kt
60. B-B3 B-Kt2
On 60. . . . . B-Q2; 61. P-R5,
P-Kt4; 62. P-R6, B-B l ; 63.
P-Kt5, P x P; 64. P-R7, and
wins.
61. P-R5 P-Kt4

62. B-Kt2 P-B5
63. P x P PxP
64. B-B3 B-R3
65. B x P B-K7
66. P-Kt5 P-B6
67. P-R6 Resigns.
If 67 . . . . . P-B7; 68. P-Kt6 ch. ,
K-QI ; 69. P-R7, P-B8(Q); 70.
P-R8(Q) eh. , K-K2; 71 . Q-K8
eh. , followed by Q-B8 eh., Q x Q
Black has regained the Pawn, but and P-Kt7.
These two games represent the modern style in the King's Gambit
Accepted. They do not answer the question whether this variation has
THE KING'S GAMBIT DECLINED 189
any future, since Black has eschewed the main problem of the opening
(see note to Black's 5th move). It is therefore unlikely to be revived
in tournament play until masters are found who, like Steinitz, are willing
to embark on hazardous variations or to cope with complicated defensive
lines in the manner of Louis Paulsen.
XVI
THE KING'S GAMBIT D ECLINED
THE King's Gambit Declined is as old as the King's Gambit Accepted,

but it never achieved the popularity of the latter and was considered
inferior. As the acceptance of the King's Gambit led to complicated
variations which grew in numbers, declining the proffered Pawn seemed
to offer the simplest solution. Although the possibilities have not been
exhausted, it is generally recognized that the defence is far from being
simple.
MORPHY'S CONTINUATION
Morphy regularly adopted the following line, in which White aims at

neutralising the strong Black Bishop on QB4, and later initiating an
attack on the KB file.
In order to block the King's Bishop it was considered necessary for
White to play P-Q4, which created 'hanging Pawns.' Whether these
Pawns are strong or weak is the thematic question of the resulting struggle.
1 01 12. P-B3, R-K1; 13. B-K3,

B x B ; 14. Kt X B, Kt-Kt5; (Spiel
White Black mann - Tarrasch, Pistyan, 1922)
P. Morphy S. Boden leads to simplification.
London, 1 858 4• . . . B-KKt5

• • •
5. B-K2
I. P-K4 P-K4 Stronger is 5. Q-R4 eh. (see
2. P-KB4 B-B4 next game).
3. Kt-KB3 P-Q3
4. P-B3 5. . . . . . . Kt-QB3
This is one of the oldest continua 6. P-Kt4
tions, in which White attempts to On 6. Kt x P, B x B; 7. Kt x Kt,
establish a Pawn centre. To-day B x Q; 8. Kt x Q, B-B7; 9. Kt x
this line is considered the only one KtP, B-Kt3; 10. P-QKt4, B X P;
that maintains the initiative for would follow with the better game
'Vhite. for Black.
Here 4. B-B4, Kt-KB3; 5.
Kt-B3, Kt-B3; 6. P-Q3, B 6. . . • . B-Kt3
. .
K3; 7. B-Kt5, P-QR3; 8. B x Kt 7. P-Kt5 Kt-R4

eh., P X B; 9. Q-K2, P X P; 10. Lowenthal, in his 4th match game
B x P, Q-Kt1 ! ; 1 1 . Kt-Q1 , Castles; against Morphy, played 7. . . . .
QKt-K2; . The text-move is more 21. B-Q2 P-Q4

in the spirit of the opening. 22. Kt-B4 Q-R2
23. P-K5 QxQ
8. P-Q4 B x Kt 24. Kt x Q Kt-B5
9. B x B P x QP Not at once 24. . . . . Kt-K5;
10. P x P Q-B3 25. B X Kt(K4), P X B; 26. B X Kt,
1 1 . B-K3 Kt-B5 P x Kt; 27. B x B, RP x B; 28.
12. B-B2 Q x BP R-QI .
13. Castles Kt-B3
Up to this move Boden's strategic
exposition of White's Pawn weak 25. B-QKt4 Kt-K5
nesses was masterly, and Morphy 26. B x R RxB
was only able to hold the position Black's defensive strategy was
by a Pawn sacrifice. The text-move based on this sacrifice. But now
is too slow and allows White to comes the surprise!
recover. The right continuation,
13 . . . . . Kt-K6; 14. Q-BI, (14.
Q-Q2? Q x P eh. ! 15. K x Q, Kt x
R eh.;) 14 . . . . . B x P; 15. Kt-B3,
Q-K4; 16. B X Kt, B X Kt; would
have retained Black's advantage.
14. Q-Q3 Kt-QR4

15. Kt-B3 Castles KR
Now 15 . . . . . Kt-Kt5; 16. Kt-
Q5, Kt x B; R X B; is in White's
favour, who is compensated for the
loss of the Pawn by his strong
Knight on Q5.
16. P--Kt3 Q-R3

17. K-Kt2 QR-KI
18. QR-KI K-RI
19. B-K3 Q-Kt3 27. Kt-B4!
20. Kt-K2 More decisive than 27. B X Kt,
Morphy's play is characterized by P X B; 28. Kt-B4, (28. R X P?,
the almost perfect interco-operation Kt-Q7; ) K-Ktl; and Black is
of the pieces, a factor which some threatening to win a second Pawn
times tends to obscure the implica for the exchange.
tion of the individual moves. Com
paring this position with that on 27. . . . . . . Kt(K5)-Q7
the 13th move, we see that all Now 27 . . . . . P-QB3; 28. B x
\Vhite's pieces are now centralised, Kt, P x B; 29. Kt-Kt6 eh. , wins
whereas Black's have been forced the exchange, which again shows
to the flanks. The text-move is a that the thematic idea of the King's
positional trap. It aims at driving Gambit Declined, the open KB file,
the Black Queen to an insignificant is the deciding factor.
post at R2, and at controlling the
Q5 square, to restrict Black's
mobility. 28. B x P!
White gives back the exchange,
20. . . . . . . P-KR3 which is the quickest way to win.
�ot 20 . . . . . Kt X P? 21. Kt-B4! Morphy's end-game play recalls
Q-B4; 22. P-Kt4! Capablanca's easy, elegant styJe.
28. Kt x R tion of material, there is no defence.

29. B x Kt Kt-Q7
30. B-Q5 BxP 31. P-Kt4
31. P-K6! 32. P-K7 R-K1
An interesting position. Black 33. B x BP P x Kt
has retained the Pawn he won in 34. PxP RxP
the opening, yet despite the reduc- 35. R x R and wins.
Morphy enjoyed considerable success with this opening, though his

strategy of engaging on both flanks as well as in the centre was un
doubtedly hazardous. In those days the difference between a strong and
a weak centre had not been discovered, and Morphy relied on his tactical
ability to determine the issue.
SPIELMANN'S CONTRIBUTION
It is generally accepted that great progress has been made in our

knowledge of the principles of the game, yet it is held that the old romantic
masters were superior to us in attack. No lesser authority than Steinitz
expressed this belief. Therefore, it is interesting to see how the greatest
aggressive player of this century conducts the attack in the same opening
as the one played by Morphy in the previous game. It was noted that
White's strategy in driving back the KB with his Pawns is too committal
since they might become weak. Now we observe how a modern master
tackles the same problem in a less compromising but equally effective
manner.
102 which is based on the pin of the

Knight.
White Black
R. Spielmann S. Tarrasch 6. . . . . . . B-Q2
On 6 . . . . . Kt-B3; (6.
Carlsbad, 1923 Q-Q2; 7. B-Kt5, P-B3; 8. Kt x
PI) 7. Kt x P, Q-R5 eh.; 8. P-Kt3,
I. P-K4 P-K4 B-B7 eh.; 9. K X B, Q-B3 eh.;
2. P-KB4 B-B4 10. K-Ktl , Q x Kt; 1 1 . B-Kt2,
3. Kt-KB3 P-Q3 would follow with advantage to
4. P-QB3 B-KKt5 White.
An interesting line is 4. . . . .
B-Kt3; 5. P-Q4, (safer is 5.
B-Q3 and B-B2) Kt-KB3; 6. 7. Q-B2 Kt-QB3
BP x P, P x P; 7. Kt x P, P-B4; lf 7 . . . . . Q-K2; 8. P-Q4, P x
8. B-Kt5 eh., QKt-Q2; 9. B P; 9. P X P, B-Kt5 eh.; 10. Kt
Kt5, P-KR3; (better first 9 . . . . . B3, B-B3; 1 1 . B-Q3, with advan
P x P;) and Black has compensation tage to White (Euwe-Maroczy, 4th
for the sacrificed Pawn (Spielmann match game, Bad Auss�e, 1921).
Karlin, Lundt, 1939).
8. P-QKt4 B-Q3
5. P x P PxP After 8 . . . . B-Kt3; 9. P-Kt5,
.
6. Q-R4 eh. ! and Kt x P, would win a Pawn.

This manreuvre introduced in Black, therefore, is forced to with
the game F. Marshall-E. Cohn, draw his Bishop from the diagonal
Carlsbad, 1907, refutes Black's play on which his strategy is based.
9. B-B4 Kt-B3 26. QR x Kt

10. P-Q3
White has now achieved his stra
tegic aim. He has control of the
open KB file and a sound centre.
10. . . . . . . Kt-K2
1 1 . Castles
If 1 1 . P-QR4, to deprive Black
of counter-play 11 . . . . . P-QR3;
12. B-Kt3, P-B4; would follow.
11. . . . . . . Kt-Kt3
12. B-K3 P-QKt4
13. B-Kt3 P-QR4
14. P-QR3 PXP
15. BP x P Castles
15. . . . . B x P?; 16. Kt-Kt5,
Castles; 17. Kt X BP, R X Kt; 18. 26. . . . . . . KP x R
B X R eh., K X B; 1 9. Q-Kt3 eh., 26 . . . . . KtP x R; 27. R X P, fol
and Q x B winning the exchange. lowed by Kt-Kt3 would give
White an irresistible attack. The
16. Kt-B3 P-B3 sacrifice of the exchange, though
17. P-R3 Q-K2 not difficult to conceive, is remark
18. Kt-K2 B-Ktl able as a logical conclusion to
A rather cumbersome manreuvre, White's earlier strategy.
with the idea of exchanging the
27. P-K5 Q-K2
White QB. Better was 18. . . .
28. R-B6 K-Kt2
.
QR-B1 ; to be able to play . . . .

Slightly better was 28. . . . . K-
B-K3; also threatening P-B4.
R1; 29. Q-B3, K-R2; 30. P-Q4,
QR-Q1 ; 31. Q-B2, with the threat
19. K-R2 B-R2
of B x P, and Q x P eh.
20. B-Kt5 P-R3
21. B x Kt QxB 29. P-Q4 BxP
22. KKt-Q4! Q-Q3 30. B x P!
23. Kt-B5 B x Kt Not 30. Kt x B, Q x KP.
24. R X B Kt--B5
The pressure against KB2 is 30. . . . . . . B x P?
becoming embarrassing, and Black Loses at once, but after 30.
tries to close the file, hoping to trap R X B; 31. Q X P eh., K-B 1 ; 32.
the KR. Kt x B, R x R; 33. P x R, Q-KB2;
34. Q X P eh., K-K1; 35. Kt X BP,
25. QR-KB1 P-Kt3 with the threat Kt-K5 is decisive.
25 . . . . . Q x QP?; 26. Q x Q,
Kt x Q; 27. R x BP, R x R; 28. R x 31. Q X P eh. K-R1
R, is too strong. 32. Q x P Mate.
Again White's pressure on the open KB file proved decisive. How,

then, can we speak of a different method of attack to-day? Have any
improvements in fact been made? This game supplies the answer. The
difference is not in the formation of attack but in the preparation for it.
Spielmann did not commit himself in the centre. Instead, he stabilized
the Queen's wing to reduce his opponent's counter-chances in order to be
able to operate on the King's side at leisure.
'fhe small margin of initiative with which Spielmann was able to force
the win proves that the defence has been considerably improved since
the days of Morphy.
RETI'B CONTINUATION
This is the latest line in the King's Gambit Declined in which Black
allows White to set up a centre in the hope of breaking it up by . . . .
P-KB4. The following game is one of the best examples of this variation,
which ha& not been clarified because of its complicated character.
103 K2; 1 1 . Kt-K5,) 10. Castles,

P X KP; 1 1 . Kt X QP!, Q-K2; 12.
White Black B X Kt, P X B; 13. B-B7 eh., K
G. Stolts B. Spielmann Q1 ; 14. K-R1, with the attack.
This variation is very complex, but
4th match game, 1982 to solid responses like 7. . . . .
Kt-KB3; 8. P-K5, Kt-K5; 9.
1. P-K4 P-K4 P X P, B-Kt3; (9 . . . . . B-Kt5 eh.,
2. P-KB-4. B-B4 10. K-K2;) 10. Kt-B3, Kt-QB3;
8. Kt-KBS P-Q3 1 1 . B-K3, Kt-K2; 1 2. Q-Kt3,
4. P-B3 P-B4 P-B3; 13. B-B7 eh., K-B l ; 14.
This move was recommended by Kt X Kt, P X Kt; 15. Castles KR,
Cordel and has the advantage of P x Kt; 16. R X P, White gains the
forcing White to disclose his inten upper hand (Reti-Loman, Scheven
tions. The game now takes a very ingen, 1919).
complicated turn, and if White
intends to proceed energeticalJy he 8. Kt-K5 Kt-KB3
must be prepared to sacrifice. 9. Kt-B7 Q-K2
1 0. Kt x R P-Q6
5. P x KP QP x P Apparently Spielmann set great
6. P-Q41 hopes on this move which was
The only continuation that pro recommended by Olland. He pos
mises to give White the initiative. sibly considered it an improvement
On 6. P x BP, B x P; 7. P-Q4, on Svenonius's line 10. . . . . Kt
P X P; 8. P X P, B-QKt3! Black has B3; after which 1 1 . B-KKt5!
a good game. Kt-K4; 1 2. B. X Kt, P X B; 13.
Q-R5 eh., K-Q2; 14. P x P, and
6. . . . . . . P x QP White appears to retain the advan
7. B-QB4! tage (Tartakower).
Recommended by Reti. White
endeavours to capitalise the weak 1 1 . B-KKt5 B-B7 eh.
ness of the diagonal (the theme of 12. K x B Q-B4 eh.
the variation) in a tactical fashion. 13. B-K3!
White naturally wants to retain
7. . . . . . . P x KP the Bishop which blockades Black's
This continuation, analysed by central Pawns.
Svenonius, is based on a very in
volved sacrifice of a Rook. The 1 3. QxB
alternative, no less complicated, is 14. P-KR3 B-K3
given by Reti in the Liirobok i 15. Kt-Q2 Q-Q4
Schack: 7 . . . . . Kt-QB3; 8. P After the smoke of the mock
QKt4, B-Kt3; 9. Q-Kt3, Kt-R3; battle (most of which was analysis)
(9 . . . . . Kt-B3; 10. P-Kt5, Kt- has cleared away, we see the
18. P-Kt5 B-Kt5

19. Q-KB1 !
A fine defensive move. I t appears
illogical, as it allows the Bishop to
escape with attack on the Queen,
but 19. Q-KKtl, Q-B4 eh. ; 20.
K-K1 , Kt-Kt5; 21. P x B, Kt
B7 eh. ; 22. K-Q1, Kt x P; is in
Black's favour.
1 9. . . . . . . B-K7
20. Q-Kt2 Q-B4 eh.
21 . K-Ktl Kt-Q2
If 21 . . . . . B-B6; 22. R-KB 1 !
22. Q x P eh. QxQ
23. Kt x Q K-K2
Position after 15 . . . . . Q-Q4 24. Kt-Kt3 R X Kt
situation clarified. Materially, the The Knight is captured at last,
position is about even. Black will but in the meantime Black has lost
have two Pawns for the exchange, one of his central Pawns: the game
since the Kt on R8 cannot escape. is now decided by White's material
With the following move Stoltz advantage.
shows that he is not bound by old 25. Kt x B P x Kt
fashioned principles concerning the 26. R-R2! K-B2
movement of Pawns in front of the 27. RxP R-K1
King. 28. R-Ql KKt-K4
16. P-KKt4! Kt-B3 29. B-B4 R-K3
17. P-B4 30. K-B1 K-Kt3
Driving off the Queen. 31. R-Q5 K-B4
32. B-Kt3 R-K2
17 . . . . . . . Q-Q2 33. P-Kt4 Resigns.
A struggle of theoretical importance. The first part of the game is

given an old-fashioned touch by the Rook-sacrifice and by the consequent
disparity of forces, but all this is 'analysis,' for modern theory often
prescribes complications. An opening of this nature is suited only to
a particular style which Stoltz possesses, as evidenced by his 16th move
P -KKt4).
XVII
THE KING'S GAMBIT D ECLINED (coNTn .)

THE FALKBEER COUNTER GAMBIT
THIS is an opening of which the opinion of the experts has been constantly
changing during the last hundred years. Attacking players, like Morphy
and Pillsbury, have successfully adopted it; but real gambit players, such
as Tcbigorin, and later Reti and Keres, considered that Black could ill
afford to sacrifice a Pawn on the 3rd move for the liake of temporary
initiative. The latest theory in this variation is that, if White tries to

keep the sacrificed Pawn, he will have to face difficulties, but by giving
it back he may retain a slight advantage.
MoRPHY's CoNTINUATION
An early example of the Falkbeer, embracing the basic ideas of the

counter-gambit.
104 1 1 . P-B4
White Black On 1 1 . P-KR3, Q x P; 12. P x B,
J. W. Schulten P. Morphy Q x KtP; would follow.
New York, 1 857 11. . . . . . . P-B3

12. P x P
1. P-K4 P-K4 If 12. P-KR3, B X B; 13. Kt X B,
2. P-KB4 P-Q4 Q-K2; would prevent White
3. P x QP P-K5 castling.
4. Kt-QB3 Kt-KB3
5. P-Q3 B-QKt5 12. Kt x P
This move remained unchallenged 13. K-B1 RxB
until recent years. Claparede 14. Kt x R Kt-Q5
suggested 5 . . . . . B-KB4; with 15. Q-Ktl B x Kt eh.
the continuation 6. Q-K2, Q-K2; 16. K-B2 Kt-Kt5 eh.
7. P x P, Kt x KP; 8. Kt x Kt, 17. K-Ktl
Q x Kt; 9. Q x Q, B x Q; 10. P-B4,
B-QB4; 1 1 . B-Q2, P-QB3; and
the better game for Black.
6. B-Q2 P-K61
Theory still considers this move
the best, emphasising Morphy's in
sight into the position. The struggle
is concentrated on White's K4
square; but as Black can no longer
maintain his hold, he seeks counter
chances by opening the King's file.
7. B X P Castles
Again the best. Many would have
been tempted to win the Pawn back
with 7. . . . . Kt X P; 8. B-Q2,
B X Kt; 9. P x B, Castles; (9. . . . .
Q-B3; 10. Kt-K2, B-Kt5; 1 1 . 17. Kt-B6 eh.!
P-KR3,) 1 0 . Q-B3! with a ten 18. P X Kt Q-Q5 eh.
able position for White. 1 9. K-Kt2 Q-B7 eh.
20. K-R3 Q X BP eh.
8. B-Q2 B x Kt 21. K-R4 Kt-R3
9. P x B R-K1 eh. and Black forces Mate with Kt-B4
10. B-K2 B-Kt5 eh. and Q-R4.
This game has become a classic. It is one of the few early examples
in which no improvement, either of opening theory or execution of attack,
has been advanced.
14
196 CHESS FROM MORPHY TO BO'l'WINNIK
WHITE ADOPTS A SAFER LINE
The little known game that follows deals with one of the most important
lines against the Falkbeer Counter Gambit. It was played late by
Tchigorin, who adopted it after he had made many unsuccessful attempts
to refute the Falkbeer. It was declared by Marco and contemporary
theoreticians the best available to the first player.
105 7. P x KP Kt x KP
Morphy might have expected
White Black White to play here 8. Kt-K2, when
J. W. Schulten P. Morphy 8. . . . . B-Kt5; with an attack
could follow; however, he meets
New York, 1 857 with a surprise.
I. P-K4 P-K4 8. B-Q2!

2. P-KB4 P-Q4 Very fine! Now 8 . . . . . Q-R5
3. P x QP P-K5 eh. ; 9. P-Kt3, Kt x P; 10. P X Kt!
4. Kt-QB3 Kt-KB3 Q x R; 1 1 . Q-K2 eh. , followed by
5. B-B4 Castles QR, and White would
Schulten gained experience from obtain a decisive attack.
his previous defeat, and now adopts 8• • • • • • • B x Kt
a line which is considered by ex 9. B x B Castles
perts like Tchigorin, Marco, and 10. Q-R5 R-Kl
Tartakower the best for White. 1 1 . Castles I !
5. . . . . . . P-B3!
But Morphy is no less alert!
This move is certainly better than
5. . . . . B-QB4; 6. KKt-K2,
Castles; 7. P-Q4, P x P e.p.; 8.
Q X P, R-Kl; 9. P-KR3, Kt-R4;
10. Q-B3, Q-R5 eh.; 1 1 . K-QI ,
(Tchigorin-Marshall, Carlsbad, 1907)
when White can safely keep the
Pawn.
6. P-Q3
Whether the text-move is superior
to 6. P-Q6, B x P; 7. P-Q3, with
an about equal game, is doubtful.
6. P x P, Kt x P; 7. KKt-K2, Schulten continues in brilliant
B-QB4; 8. Kt-Kt3, Q-Q5; 9. style. 1 1 . . . . . Kt-B7; is met by
Q-K2, B-KKt5; 10. Q-B l , Kt 12. Kt-R3! , B-Kt5; (12. . . . .
Kt5; (Heyersmans-Blackburne) is Kt x QR; 13. Kt-Kt5, ) 13. Q x BP
favourable to Black. eh., K X Q; 14. P X P eh., K-Kt3;
15. R x Q, R x R; 1 6. P x P, Kt-B3;
6. . . . . . . B-QKt5 ( 1 6 . . . . . Kt x R; 17. B-Q3 eh. )
Morphy continues in his aggres 17. P x R(Q), R x Q; 18. Kt x Kt,
sive style, but the simplifying 6. wins. A fascinating variation given
. . . . BP x P; 7. B-Kt5 eh., B-Q2; by Maroczy.
8. P x P, P x P; 9. B-K3, was
preferable. 11. . . . . . .
'- Kt x B
12. P X Kt Q-R4 Q-R6 eh.; 20. K-Ktl, KBP x P;

13. K-Kt2 P-KKt3 21. B x P, R-K2; 22. KR-Ktl ,
14. Q-R6 B-Kt5 Black could have put u p some
15. Kt-B3 B x Kt resistance. Indeed, according to
For 16. Kt-Kt5 was threatened. contemporary records, both players
claimed to have the better game.
16. P x B P-QKt4 Morphy, however, demonstrated
17. P-B5 P x B? over the board his advantage,
An oversight foreign to Morphy. though this might be attributed to
Though White has in any case the his superior play rather than to the
better game, with 17 . . . . . Kt-Q2; actual position.
18. B-Q3! , P-Kt5; (18. . . . .
Kt-B4; 19. P-B6!) 19. P x KKtP, 18. P-B6 Resigns.
Schulten proves himse)f worthy of his great opponent, and the game
is a very valuable contribution to opening knowledge.
TARRASCH'S CONTRIBUTION
Tarrasch's contribution to the Falkbeer Counter Gambit is very im

portant. At a time when analysis rejected this continuation, Tarrasch
obstinately kept his faith in it. He had the satisfaction of proving his
case, to the confusion of the theorist, in the following game against
Spielmann.
106 An innovation by Tarrasch, which

injects the variation, hitherto con
White Black sidered bad, with new life. Consider
R. Spielmann S. Tarrasch 7. . . . . B-B7 eh.; 8. K-Q1,
Q X P eh .; 9. KKt-Q2! P-KB4;
Marisch Ostrau, 1923 10. Kt-B3, Q-Q5; l l . Kt x Kt,
P X Kt; 12. P-B3, Q-K6; 13.
I. P-K4 P-K4 Q-R5 eh. ! K-B1; 14. B-B4!
2. P-KB4 P-Q4 Q X KBP; 15. Q-Q5 ! B-Kt5 eh.;
3. P x QP P-K5 16. K-B2, K-K1 ; 17. Kt x P,
4. P-Q3 Kt-KB3 Q-B4; 18. R-B 1 , P-B3; 19.
5. P x P Q-Q3, Resigns ( Reti - Breyer,
At this point the experts differ. Budapest, 1917).
Reti recommended 5. Q-K2, but
Keres thinks 5 . . . . . B-KKt5; 8. P-KKt4?
would give Black a strong attack. Recommended by no lesser autho
rity than the Bilguer Handbuch des
Schachspiels, this move is neverthe
5. . . . . . . Kt x KP less a mistake, as Black demon
6. Kt-KB3 strates. The right continuation is
Alapin's continuation, the idea of 8. Kt-B3, Q-K2; 9. B-K3!
which is not only to meet Black's B X B; (9 . . . . . Kt X Kt; 10. B X B!
threat . . . . Q-R5 eh. but to pre Kt x Q; ll. B x Q, Kt x P; 12. B
pare an attack against the Kt at R3, ) 10. Q x B, Kt x Kt; l l . Q x Q
K4 with Q-K2 and KKt-Q2. eh., K x Q; 12. P x Kt, B x P; 13.
K-Q2, B-R5! (13 . . . . . B-Kt3?
6. B-QB4 14. R-K1 eh . , K-Ql; 15. Kt-Q4,
7. Q-K2 B-B4! P-QB4; 16. Kt-Kt5, Kt-Q2; 17.
P-Kt4, P-B3; 18. B-Kt2, (13 . . . . . P x P; 14. B-Q5 eh. ,

Wheatcroft-Keres, Mar!!.ate, 1 938, K-B1; 15. Q-R5,} 14. Q-B4 eh. ,
and White stands better) . 14. R and Q x B.
QKtl ! P-QKt3; 15. Kt-Q4, fol
lowed by 1 6. B-Kt5, with advan 13. Kt-QB3 P-KB3
tage to White. 14. Kt-K4
If here 14. B--Q2, P x Kt; is too
8. . . . . . . Castles! strong.
A surprise! Spielmann's blind
adherence to the book is soon 14. P x Kt
punished. 15. Kt x B Kt x Kt
1 6. P x P Q-R5 eh.
9. P x B R-K1 1 7. K-B1
10. B-Kt2 If 17. K-Q1, Q-Q5 eh.
After the game it was thought
that 10. Q-Kt2, would have 17. . . . . . . R-KB1
afforded better drawing chances, It looks as if White has recovered,
but 10 . . . . . Q x P; 1 1 . B-K2, but the insecurity of his King leaves
Kt-QB3; would still have given him with a difficult defence. Spiel
Black an overwhelming attack. mann's analysis shows that he must
lose one of the advanced Pawns,
10. Kt-B7 since after 18. Q-B3, Q-B5 eh.;
11. Kt-K5 Kt x R 19. K-Ktl , Q x BP; with the threat
12. B x Kt of . . . . R x P; would follow, and
on 18. P-B6, QR-K1 ; 19. P-K6,
R X P eh.; 20. K-Ktl, Q-Q5 eh.;
21. B-K3, R-Kt3 eh.
18. K-Ktl Q-Q5 eh.

19. B-K3 Q x KP
20. QR-K1 Kt-Q2
Not 20 . . . . . QR-K1; 21. Q-B4.
21. Q-B4 K-R1

22. B-K4 QR-K1
23. B-Q4 Q-B5
24. R-K2 Kt-BS
24 . . . . . R X B?; 25. R X R, Q X R;
26. B x P eh.
25. B x Kt PxB
12. . . . . . . Kt-Q2! 26. P-KR3 R-Ktl eh.
A well-considered move. If 12. Resigns. For 27. B-Kt2 loses the
. . . . P-KB3; 1 3. P-Q6, P X Kt; Queen.
This is the historic encounter which encouraged Spielmann to write his

famous article, 'From the sickbed of the King's Gambit.' Tartakower
suggested that, judging by the content and the conclusions, the title is
a gross misnomer.
KERES' CONTINUATION
Keres' contribution to the Falkbeer is important from White's view

point. The young Estonian evolved a system based on the idea that
White can avoid the Morphy continuation (pinning the QKt by

B--Kt5) by playing Kt-Q2 instead of Kt-QB3. This line is more
concrete than Alapin's (adopted in the previous game) in which White
plays KKt-B3, and KKt-Q2, a manceuvre which may allow Black to
turn the tables.
A good illustration of this idea, in which, however, there is room for
improvement in "\Vhite's strategy, is afforded by the following game.
Whether or not this line is superior to its predecessors time alone will tell.
107 Black with two strong Bishops

White Black would have had a definite advantage.
V. Castaldi P. Trifunovic
10. . . . . . . B-KB4
Hilversum, 1947 1 1 . Kt-Kt5 K-K1
12. K-Q1
I. P-K4 P-K4 There is nothing better. On 12.
2. P-KB4 P-Q4 P-B3, B-B7l; 13. P-QKt3, Kt
3. KP x P Q4; 14. P-B4, Kt-B2; the threat
If 3. Kt-KB3, QP x P; 4. Kt x P, . . . . P-QKt4 is decisive.
Kt-Q2; 5. P-Q4! P X P e.p . ; 6.
Kt x QP, KKt-B3; White lacks 12 . . . . . . . P-B3
harmonious development. 13. QKt-B3 QKt-R3!
14. P-QR3
3. . . . . . . P-K5 -Black was threatening 14. . . . .
4. P-Q3 Kt-KB3 Kt-B4.
5. Kt-Q2
Keres' move, which strikes at 14 . ...... R-Q1 eh.
the K4 square at once without 15. B-Q2 Kt-Q4
interference by . . . . B-QKt5. Now 16. K-K2 Kt-B4
on the natural 5. . . . . Q x P; 6. 17. B-Kt3 Kt x B
P x P, Kt x P; 7. B-B4, Q-QB4; 18. P x Kt B-Q3
8. Q-K2, P-B4; 9. Kt x Kt, leads 19. P-Kt3 K-B2
to advantage for White. 20. R-QB1 B-B2
21. K-B2 B-Kt3 eh.
5. . . . . . . PxP
22. K-Kt2 KR-Kl
6. B x P Kt x P
23. P-R3 Kt--K6 eh.
7. Kt-K4
This move endangers White. 7.
Q-K2 eh., would have been better,
although after 7 . . . . . B-K2; 8.
Kt-K4, Castles; White's advan
tage would be very slight.
7. . . . . . . Kt-Kt5!
8. B-Kt5 eh. P-QB3!
A disagreeable surprise for Cas
taldi who might have expected the
'theoretically correct' 8. . . . . B
Q2; 9. B X B eh. , Kt X B; which
would still only have given equality
for White.
9. Q x Q eh. KxQ
10. B-R4
If 10. B-Q3, Kt x B eh. ; and If 24. B x Kt, R x B; 25. P-
QKt4, B-K5; with the threat . . . . 27. P-Kt4 B-K5

R-Q7 eh. would be decisive. 28. Kt-Kl R-Q7 eh.
Resigns.
24. K-R2 R-Q6 For 29. B x R, R x B eh.; 30.
25. P-QKt4 KR-Ql K-Kt3, B-B7 eh.; 3 1 . K-R2,
26. B-B3 Kt-Q8 B X Kt(K8) dis. eh. wins.
CONCLUSIONS
The games in this part, dealing with the King's Gambit of the last
century and the 'modern' King's Gambit, give us a clear picture of how
the older generation conducted this romantic opening, and how it is handled
to-day.
We have not investigated the Muzio and Salvio Gambits and other lines
which may be classed as mainly tactical variations. They do not occur
in modern tournament games, and as they cannot be forced, it is not
considered a practical proposition to spend time studying them. They
are the products of a past age in which players were willing both to adopt
and defend them.
Is the King's Gambit an opening of the past or of the future? This
is a vexed question, but the few games played nowadays indicate that it
probably belongs to the future, for the problems arising are chiefly Black's
problems, a fact which has influenced young players like Keres and
Bronstein to support Tartakower in his contention that the Gambit is
correct, since it permits White to retain the initiative.
SUMMING UP
ON playing over these games, we realize that our ideas have developed
considerably with the passage of time; in other words, there has been an
evolution in the technique of chess. Steinitz recognized this as far back
as 1 886, when he defended himself and his contemporaries against their
critics, who compared the games of the world championship match between
himself and Zukertort unfavourably with those of Morphy, saying the
former were lacking in brilliancy, full of blunders and inferior in every
way. Steinitz replied by showing not only the blunders, but the strate
gical errors Morphy had made. While paying tribute to Morphy's genius,
he emphasized the progress which had been made by stating that 'Morphy
of 1886, if he had been alive, would undoubtedly have beaten the Morphy
of 1859.'
In what way is this progress apparent? Here again we may hear
Steinitz answering the critics. 'When it is so freely asserted that Morphy's
style was all genius and inspiration throughout, while the play of modern
masters is all book and study, I would take leave to answer frankly that
just the very reverse can be proved in the only part of the game in which
knowledge and study can be of much use, and in which a test of the
assertion can be applied, namely, in the openings. For Morphy possessed
the most profound book knowledge of any master of his time, and he
never in his practice introduced a single novelty, whereas since his day
the books have had to study the players.'
But did this progress in the 25 years between Morphy and Steinitz
apply only to the openings? Once more Steinitz gives us the answer
'We may all learn from Morphy and Anderssen how to conduct a King's
side attack and perhaps I myself may not have learnt enough. But if
you want to learn how to avoid such an attack, how to keep the balance
of the position on the whole board and how to expose the King and invite
a complicated attack which cannot be sustained in the long run, you must
go to the modern school for information.' The years between the death
of Steinitz and the first World War-the so-called 'golden age' of chess
saw a great deal of detailed work based on the principles laid down by
Steinitz. Progress was slow, since chess had become ridden with dogma.
When new players such as Rubinstein, Nimzovitch, Capablanca and
Alekhine appeared, whose inventive ideas promised to give new life to
the game, the first World War intervened. After the war there emerged
the so-called Hypermodern School. At first its opening methods-the
fianchetto and keeping back the centre Pawns-met with success against
the older generation of masters, but when it came to the real test in the
New York Tournament of 1924, to quote contemporary critics, 'They
came, they saw, and they lost.' Capablanca writes in his Primer o.f Chess,
'A great deal has been written in the past few years about the Hypermodern
School. In the openings, �he tactics o f some ?£ the so-called hyper
.
modermsts are somewhat different from the tactics formerly used. The
st�at�gic principles, however, are the same. Fundamental strategic
.
prmCiples never change, though their mode of application may not always
be the same.'
201
We now know that the Hypermodern School was really victorious,

although this was not apparent until many years later. By their un
biased approach to the openings and exhaustive analysis they opened quite
unexpected new possibilities where the dogmatism of their predecessors
had feared to penetrate, and gave the game a new dynamic chara<'ter.
Lasker, after his match with Capablanca, predicted that Capablanca's
detailed analysis of the openings would lead to the death of chess by
draws. Capablanca expressed similar views after his defeat by Alekhine .
Alekhine, however, took the opposite view, saying that imperfection
of technique was the cause of the great number of draws. As to the
over-analysis of the openings, he considered. that we knew very little about
them. The ever-growing chess literature will prove that he was right.
.
Lasker soon found that certain opening problems could not be solved
by applying common sense and general chess principles alone, and even
Capablanca's wonderful intuition failed to regain lost ground against
players of the younger generation who outplayed him in the openings.
After all, chess is not only logic.
Botwinnik, the present world champion, has been reproached for having
a very limited range of openings, and for playing on the same lines all
the time. This goes to prove that the modern age is the age of the special
ist, and that specialisation is the only way to attain perfection.
But has the progress of time enriched opening technique alone? Far
from that. If we use an academical and artificial classification of the
game--opening, middle game and end game-the extensive analysis of
the opening has made some changes : namely, that phase which formerly
was thought to belong to the middle game has become part of the opening.
In addition to the study of certain systems, creating weaknesses on the
black or white squares, Nimzovitch's doctrine of overprotection is certainly
an addition to the previous theory of the middle game.
As to the end game, we will omit this, since Alekhine said, 'We cannot
define when the middle game ends and the end game starts.' The study
of purely technical end games certainly increases our knowledge of them.
To conclude we repeat Steinitz' famous words: 'The progress of age can
no more be disputed than Morphy's extraordinary genius.'
BELL $ BELL
CHE S S B O O KS
'THE MOST BEAUTIFULLY PRODUCED
CHESS BOOKS OF MODERN TIMES'
says the magazine ' CHESS'
MY BEST GAME S OF CHE S S , 1 908- 1 923

By Dr A. Alekhine, the late World Champion. The selection includes
one hundred of his best games of the period. Field : '\:Vithout doubt
one of the finest chess books ever written. . . . Perusal of the contents
of the book has made us greedy for more.' 1 0s. 6d. net.
MY BEST GAMES OF CHE S S , 1 924- 1 937

By D r A. Alekhine, the late World Champion. Covers his brilliant rise
to world mastery, the anti-climax of his dramatic defeat in 1 935 and his
ascent to greater heights than ever two years later. This book has already
taken its place among the greatest chess books. 1 2s. 6d. net.
ALEKH INE 'S BEST GAMES OF CHE S S , 1 938- 1 945

By C. H. O ' D . Alexander with an Appreciation of Alekhine as a chess
player. Manchester Guardian : ' . . . will be welcomed by the fortunate
possessors of the first two volumes. Mr C. H. O'D. Alexander has done
his work admirably. . . . ' 9s. net.
CHE S S FUNDAMENTAL S .
By J. R. Capablanca. Sunday Times : 'Beyond question this book is a
valuable addition to chess literature. A book that will live and be sought
for by chess students throughout the world for many years to come.'
1 0s. net.
THE NEXT MOVE I S . . .

By E. G. R. Cordingley. A book of studies in chess combinations. Field :
'A very fine selection. . . . This book can be recommended as one
certain to provide many hours of instruction and entertainment.'
3s. 6d. net.
JUD GMENT AND P LANN ING IN CHE S S
B y D r M . Euwe, former Chess Champion o f the World, translated from
the Dutch and edited by J. du Mont. The basis of this book is an entirely
new idea. The author studies a number of orthodox openings from the
point where the opening stage has come to an end, describes the charac
teristics of the position reached, shows why one side stands better and
gives a thoroughly practical demonstration of the means by which the
game can be brought to its logical conclusion. In preparation.
IDEA S BEHIND THE CHE S S OPENINGS

B y Reuben Fine. The Times (Weekly Edition) : 'One o f the most impor
tant additions to chess literature . . . a most valuable book . . . even
strong players will study this book with profit.' 1 0s. 6d. net.
FIFTY GREAT GAMES OF MODERN C HE S S

By H. Golombek. Here is a careful selection o f the best games o f the
present century, played by such masters as Alekhine, Lasker, Keres,
Capablanca, Nimzowitsch, Euwe, Rubinstein, Flohr, Spielmann, Bot
vinnik, etc. Observer : 'An attractive book of famous games . . . . Mr
Golombek makes them all interesting and exciting. ' 3s. 6d. net.
CAPABLAN CA 'S HUNDRED BEST GAMES OF

CHESS
B y H . Golombek. Capablanca's matches against Marshall, Janowsky,
Lasker, Alekhine, Euwe, and other tournaments too numerous to cata
logue here, have produced a glorious colJection of games very fully
annotated by Mr Golombek. 1 5s . net.
WORLD CHE S S C HAMP I O N SHIP, 1 948

By H. Golombek. Field : '. . . will eventually find its way to the shelves
of every lover of chess . . . almost all the games are of outstanding
value and interest . . . Mr Golombek . . . has annotated these with
great accuracy and care, and the author's literary ability is here shown
on a par with his technical skill.' 1 2s. 6d. net.
CHESS
B y R . F . Green. The most famous o f all chess books for beginners ; in
its original form it was printed no less than eighteen times, and this
new edition has been completely revised and brought up to date by
Mr J. du Mont. Ss. net.
A PO CKET GUIDE TO THE CHE S S OPEN I N G S

B y R . C . Griffith and H . Golombek. Chess : ' . . . will b e welcomed by
all students of the game. Nothing in current chess literature is likely
to prove itself quite so indispensable as this sturdy little vade mecum . . . .
'
6s. net.
CHE S S FOR THE FUN OF IT
By Brian Harley. Observer : 'Mr Brian Harley has performed a public
service in writing Chess for the Fun of It. It fulfils a long-felt want. . . .
The author of this work has endeavoured, and with marked success, to
shatter the fallacy that chess is a difficult game to learn.' 6s. net.
MATE IN TWO MOVES

By Brian Harley. Glasgow Herald : 'This is a book that solvers and lovers
of problems . . . will find invaluable. . . . should make an enthusiast
of every reader.' 6s. net.
MODERN C HE S S STRATEGY
By Edward Lasker. A new book, successor to Lasker's famous Chess
Strategy of which many impressions were sold before the war.
1 7s. 6d. net.
IN STRU CTIVE P O S ITIONS FRO M MASTER

CHE S S
B y J. Mieses. Times Literary Supplement : 'An excellent little collection. '
Star : 'A notable addition to lighter chess literature.' 3s. net.
MANUAL OF THE END - GAME

.
By J. M ieses. The end-game in chess clinches the victory. The beginner
very soon finds that lack of knowledge of it will lose him many a victory.
Here is just the guide he needs. 4s. 6d. net.
KERE S ' BEST GAME S OF C HE S S , 1 93 1 - 1 948

By Fred Reinfeld. Tablet : 'A delightful surprise in these days of pub
lishers' difficulties . . . well worthy of its place amidst the splendid
collections of chess books issued by the House of Bell. What higher
praise is possible ?' 1 2s. 6d. net.
BRIT I SH CHE S S MASTERS

By Fred Reinfeld. An anthology of about fifty great games by British
masters from 1 821 - 1 946, with full annotations. Mr Reinfeld is eminent
as a player as well as an author, and is recognized as one of the very
best annotators of the games of the great masters. Ss. net.
MY SYSTEl\1
By Aron Nimzowitsch. One of the most important expositions of modern
ideas in chess. British Chess Magazine : '. . . a desideratum for all chess
players, for he delves into practically all the difficulties that are likely to
beset a player. We have been frequently asked what book to recommend
to a student who wishes to become proficient in the game, and we can
imagine no book more suited for such a recommendation than this.'
1 5s. net.
MODERN I DEAS IN CHE S S
B y Richard Reti. ' A reissue o f this, the most important contribution
to the literature of chess since Tarrasch's 300 Games of Chess, has long
been wanted . . . . Reti's faculty of fixing the reader's interest is un
surpassed.' From Mr Golombek's Foreword. 1 0s . net.
500 MASTER GAME S OF CHE S S

B y D r S. Tartakower and J. d u Mont. A unique book which covers
two centuries of chess. The games are the best produced by each succes
sive generation. They have been sifted from some 8,000 tournament
and match games and have been annotated with the utmost care and
discrimination. In preparation.
THE M I DD LE GAME IN CHE S S

B y E . Znosko-Borovsky. Observer : 'His analysis o f the mental processes
of experts in position-value, attack, defence and so on, is admirable and
justifies his claim to be a pioneer of systematizing middle-game strategy. '
1 0s. 6d. net.
* * *
MESSRS BELL will be very pleased to keep chess

players informed from time to time of their new
publications on chess, if they will kindly
forward their names and addresses
... *
LONDON : G. BELL AND SONS, LTD

YoRK HousE, PoRTUGAL STREET, W.C.z

Botwinnik PDF

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Botwinnik PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

CHESS

FROM MORPHY TO BOTWINNIK

A CENTURY OF CHESS EVOLUTION

G. BELL & SONS, LTD

THE idea of dealing historically with the development of Chess occurred

September, 1950 I.K.

INTRODUCTION page xiii

THE ENGLISH OPENING 137

THE KING'S GAMBIT 167

MORPHY'S TREATMENT (AS WHITE )

THE earlier great masters of the game-de la Bourdonnais, McDonnell,

1 It is rarely seen nowadays, for

of the accumulated knowledge of

12. Kt-B3 Q-K2

23. . . . . . . K-Kt3 34. R x P R-Q3

We may ask, 'Would Morphy be able to obtain such positions against

MORPHY'S TREATMENT (AS BLACK)

In the last game we witnessed Morphy endeavouring to gain ground

London, July, 1858

17. Kt-B3 Q-R4

38. P-H5 eh.?

Morphy was unsuccessful in solving the problem of the opening and

ALEKHINE'S ATTEMPT TO REVIVE THE CLASSICAL ATTACK

The following game is of particular interest as it shows an attempt by

Lasker, who previously in his the two Bishops. Yet he is ready

14. PxP QxP 26. QxQ BxQ

whole idea shows that, unlike his two great near-contemporaries, de la

4 PxBP, BxP! (not 16 . . . . . Q x P;

27. QxQ BPxQ

32. R-Ktl R-KKt3

Max Lange's conduct of this most beautiful game is impressive even

STEINITZ' TREATMENT (AS WHITE)-WHITE HOLDS THE CENTRE

With Wilhelm Steinitz, an important epoch opens in the development

5 more normal-looking move Kt-B I .

This counter-attack is premature. Kt x Kt; 23. B-K3, making use of

THE BERLIN DEFENCE

7. B x Kt KtP x B 28. Q-B2 P-QR4

34. P-Q5 tens to play 36. . . . . R(2)-R2;

36. P-K6 BPxP

39. R-QR1 R-KBl

THE MODERN CONTINUATION-SCHLECHTER'S TREATMENT

8. P X P Kt-Kt2 would then be embarrassing, there­

If 32 . . . . . Q-Kt5; 33. R-Q4,

Kt5 eh.; 38. K-BI, Q-R6 eh.,

In this harmonious game Schlechter was able to carry out White's

THE STEINITZ DEFENCE

The following game is an excellent illustration of Steinitz' theory of

8 In this instance, as will be seen, he

22. P-KR4 P-B3 35. Q-R5 eh. K-K2

23. . . . . . . P-Q4 R eh. ! Q x Q; 39 R x R!

(instead of . . . . KKt-K2; ) which implied that he recognized that his

9 15. Q-B4 P-QB4

The variation we have just seen was frequently adopted by leading

WHITE CHOOSES AN ATTACKING FORMATION­

In the more positional treatment of the Steinitz Defence, as in the last

oczy-Capablanca, London, 1922).

9. B-B1 R-K1 16. . . . . . . Kt-Q2

21. P-KKt4 B-KKt3

25. B-Q3 B-B2 33. P-QB4 RXP

THE STEINITZ DEFENCE DEFERRED

In the following interesting game Blackburne, a player of individual

12 Blackburne knows how to make

breaks up the centre. If instead of

8. P X P Kt-Kt2 would then be embarrassing, there

WHITE CHOOSES AN ATTACKING FORMATION

BLACK ESTABLISHES A STRONGHOLD IN THE CENTRE

WHITE TRIES TO RESTRICT BLACK'S DEVELOPMENT ON THE KING'S SIDE

BLACK FOILS WHITE'S ATTEMPT AT SIMPLIFICATION

THE MoDERN CoNTINUATION

13. Q X Kt eh. , B-Q2; 14. Q

BLACK EASES THE TENSION IN THE CENTRE

WHITE MAINTAINS THE TENSION IN THE CENTRE