Chess is a scientific game and its literature ought to be placed on the basis of the strictest truthfulness, which is the foundation of all scientific research. W._Steinitz

The Rosenthal-Zukertort Match,
London 1880
Researched by Nick Pope

    The Second Game. - Played on Thursday, May 5. - The two players punctually appeared before two o’clock, but the game did not commence till about a quarter past.  Rosenthal opened with the Ponciani [sic] attack, much to the surprise of connoisseurs, for this opening has been practically abandoned since the invention by Steinitz of the defence of P to K B 3 on the 4th move, which has since been pronounced by all authorities as most satisfactory for the second player.  Zukertort immediately adopted this defence, and it became evident that Rosenthal relied on a new plan of slow development by P to Q 3.  Zukertort, we believe, lost some ground by an indifferent 6th move, which gave the opponent an opportunity of instituting an attack with his Q P, but then a struggle for position commenced on both sides, than which we have not seen any finer since the Paris tournament.  Zukertort castled on the Q side in face of the advancing pawns, and pressed his pawns on the K side, driving back White’s pieces, and with the intention of opening the K file for his rooks.  The thick of the fight was reached about the 22nd move, when a series of manoeuvres were made by both players, which alternately made the game look precarious for either party.  Almost every move was a surprise, and kept the excitement of a large number of spectators alive, the French champion maintaining the attack in the end, until on the 31st move Zukertort, by a masterly coup, prepared a series of exchange which would have left the opponent with a weak P for the ending on the Q side.  Rosenthal took nearly half an hour to consider his reply, and the time for adjournment (half-past six o’clock) having been reached, he marked his move on the score sheet, which was handed over in a sealed envelope to the editor of this department, who joined the two players at dinner at a West-end restaurant.  It is one of the regulations of the match that the two opponents should not separate during the two hours of adjournment for refreshment.  Such a provision is now always adopted in tournament, and is obviously necessary where many different parties are interested in the contest.  Both masters are expert blindfold players and quite capable of analysing positions from memory, even when engaged in conversation.  Yet their stopping together during the dinner hour must be satisfactory to both, and is calculated to keep up a friendly feeling between the opponents.  At half-past eight o’clock the game was resumed and M. Rosenthal’s envelope on being opened, contained a move which at first sight appeared like a useless sacrifice of a pawn, and, therefore, like throwing away the game.  But is soon became clear that the French champion had secured a draw at least, by a fine calculation ; and Herr Zukertort, seeing through the danger of trying to maintain the P, forced a draw in a few moves by perpetual check.  The conduct of this beautiful game on the part of the French champion pleads strong justification of his challenge even on the score of skill.
The Field, London, 1880.05.08
Rosenthal,S — Zukertort,JH
(2)
C44/02
Ponziani: Steinitz
1880.05.05
GBR London
Annotations by Wilhelm Steinitz
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.c3 d5 4.Qa4 f6
** First adopted by Steinitz against Wisker in the handicap tournament of the British Chess Association of 1868.
5.Bb5 Nge7 6.d3 Bd7
** The proper way of development was 6...Be6.  The move in the text exposes him to a troublesome attack.
7.exd5 Nxd5 8.Qe4 Nb6 9.d4 a6 10.Be2 f5 11.Qc2 e4
** Black could have exchanged pawns, thereby isolating the adverse d-pawn, followed by ...Qf6.  But in answer to the latter move, White would probably castle, and afterwards obtain a considerable attack by Rd1 in case Black took the d-pawn.
12.Ng5 Qf6 13.Nh3 h6 14.a4 0-0-0
** The course of the game proves this to have been hazardous.  14...g5 was, we believe, more worth trying.  There was no more danger in the latter experiment than the king would have to move to d8 in answer to the bishop checking at h5 ; but in many games nowadays the king moves for lesser advantages then is here presented by the adverse h-knight being shut out from action, while to opponents pieces on the queenside are also quite undeveloped.
15.a5 [1:00-?:??]
** At first site 15.Nf4, looks the stronger move, but it turns out inferior on examination, e.g.: 15.Nf4 g5 16.a5 gxf4 17.axb6 Bd6, with the superior game.
15...Nd5 16.Nf4 Nxf4 17.Bxf4 g5 [?:??-1:00] 18.Bd2 Bd6 19.b4 f4
** Black energetically pursues his counter attack in the center, and in his general judgment Zukertort seems to have been quite correct.  There was hardly any real danger to his kings quarters.
20.b5
** White, on the other hand, was bound to proceed on the left flank, and could not afford to capture the e-pawn without exposing himself to a powerful attack, commencing with ...Re8.
20...axb5 21.Bxb5 Nb8
** But now we think that the danger he wished to provide against was only imaginary, and it would have been more consistent to press at once the assault by 21...e3.  White could not capture twice on account of 23...Rde8 followed next move by 24...Rxe3, whether king or queen defended.  Nor would he gain anything by 22.a6, e.g.: 21...e3 22.a6 exd2+ 23.Kxd2 (best apparently) 23...bxa6 24.Bxa6+ Kb8 25.Qb3+ Nb4, etc.  If White on the 24th move play 24.Qa4, in lieu of 24...Bxa6+, the answer is also 24...Nb4, and Black in the meanwhile remains a piece ahead, and ought to get some pawns for it.
22.a6
** An excellent move.  White of course threatens to go on further with the pawn.
22...bxa6 23.Bxa6+ Nxa6 24.Rxa6 Bb5 25.Ra8+ Kd7 26.Rxd8+ Kxd8
** The manner in which Black recaptures shows extraordinary foresight.  At first it looks better to take with the rook, and to leave the latter free access on both wings; but Zukertort had, no doubt, already determined on his plan, and foreseen all its contingencies, and it will be found later on that he would have subjected himself to an inconvenient check of the adverse queen if he had left the king at d7.
27.c4 e3
** All this is in high style.
28.0-0
** The best answer.  He obviously could not take the pawn twice, on account of the following continuation: 28.fxe3 fxe3 29.Bxe3 Re8 30.Kd2 (if the queen defends, Black answers 30...Bf4) 30...Bf4 31.Re1 Rxe3 32.Rxe3 Qxd4+ 33.Qd3 (best) 33...Bxe3+, and wins.  It was equally useless to attempt 28.Bc3; e.g.: 28.Bc3 Bxc4 29.d5 exf2+ 30.Kd1 (Best. If the king moves elsewhere, Black wins accordingly either by 30...Re8+, or by 30...Bc5+) 30...Qf7 31.Bxh8 Qxd5+ followed by queening the pawn, thus regaining the rook with two pawns ahead.
28...exd2 29.cxb5 Qxd4 30.Nxd2 Re8 31.Nc4 [2:00-?:??] 31... Bb4
** A beautiful resource.  See our introductory remarks.
32.b6
** Rosenthal perceives now, with fine judgment, that his b-pawn will be weak for the ending, and that Black can force the exchange of rooks.  He sacrifices the pawn temporarily, with the assurance of regaining it.  We give a diagram of the position which occurred just after the adjournment.
32...cxb6 33.Rd1
** Best.  Rosenthal pointed out that if 33.Qa4, Black would have maintained the superiority thus: 33.Qa4 Qxc4 34.Rd1+ Ke7 35.Re1+ Kf6 36.Qxe8 Bxe1, etc.
33...Re1+ 34.Rxe1 Bxe1 35.Nxb6 Bxf2+
** To avoid a troublesome and uncertain ending.  If he took the knight, White recovered the piece by 36.Qd1+.
36.Qxf2 Qd1+ 37.Qf1 Qd4+ ½-½.
**
The Field, London, 1880.05.08

Return to Match Index

[Excavations] [Library] [Museum] [Journal] [Market] [Openings]
© 1999 Jacques N. Pope. All Rights Reserved.