The Gunsberg-Steinitz Match,
World Championship 1890-91
Researched by Nick Pope
|
CHESS HONORS DIVIDED.
GUNSBERG AGAIN PLAYED AN EVANS
GAMBIT.
The Veteran Altered his Defence, and,
Although Gunsberg Played a Very Clever
and Brilliant Attack, he Could Not Win.
|
:
|
Again the Evans Gambit. This was the order
of play yesterday in the championship encounter between Steinitz and
Gunsberg
at the Manhattan Chess Club in West Twenty-seventh street. But
Steinitz,
in accordance with the intention of which he had already notified his
opponent,
declined to continue all through with the same defence he had adopted in
the cable game against Tschigorin. Of course, Gunsberg knew quite
well that the veteran would alter his method, and, therefore, in again
opening the Evans, Gunsberg manifested an enterprise at once admirable
and courageous. |
Speculation became rife after the opening moves
as to where Steinitz would first depart from the cable game, and the
spectators
did not have to wait for long before this point was decided. The
game of Monday was adhered to up to the end of the sixth move. On
blacks seventh turn came the anticipated change. In his game
by
cable with the Russian player, and also in the game played last Monday
with Gunsberg, Steinitz moved on his seventh turn Kt-K R 3.
Yesterday
he varied this move by playing P-K R 3. A spectator who was
present
when this move was recorded, stated that in tournament play a few years
ago this same movement was made by a strong amateur against Steinitz
himself,
who on that occasion was playing white. |
For some time the game was conducted on fairly
even
terms, Gunsberg pursuing the initiative with marked vigor and
ability.
At length the opinion of the spectators turned chiefly in favor of the
Hungarians game, which was considered, long before the
adjournment, to
be the superior of the two. |
Steinitz took a long time to consider his reply,
and was still thinking when the time arrived for adjourning the
afternoon
sitting. At this time it was clear that he was playing for his
only
hope-a draw. |
The move which Steinitz sealed on the adjournment
was one by which he attained his object of drawing the game. When
it had been opened and the move made on the board of play, the veteran
said to his younger opponent You may think it over and tell me if
you
want to play for a win. After a few moments
consideration, Gunsberg
said that if his opponents remark was intended to be an offer of a
draw,
he was willing to accept it. The game was thereupon recorded as a draw,
making the score now: Steinitz, 5; Gunsberg, 3; drawn, 6. The
greater
part of Gunsbergs play was counted by many as fine chess, and
altogether
he has proved a surprise. |
Steinitz makes the following comments upon the
game: |
Gunsberg is certainly very plucky. He
offered
the Evans Gambit for the second time, although I had given him notice
that
I thought myself at liberty to alter my defence at any time. In
his
comments upon this notice he calls it a retraction of a challenge that
ought never to have been made, but I do not think that fair-minded chess
players will agree with him, for all challenges ought to be accepted
formally
within a reasonable time, and Gunsberg could not expect that I should
wait
for his convenience and be bound to a long series of moves, while he
would
be at liberty to alter his tactics at any time or not play that opening
at all. |
However, I did not abandon the leading idea of my
defence: I played 6...Q-B 3, which was the original bone of contention
between Tschigorin and myself. On the seventh move I also advanced
P-K R 3, which was the line of play I had intended to adopt against
Tschigorin
before knowing that he had included in his conditions 7...Kt-R 3.
Gunsberg then proceeded with a sort of Ruy Lopez attack by 8 B-Kt 5, and
threatened to gain a pawn for two moves in successioa
[sic].
Black lost patience on the ninth move, and exchanged pawns in a manner
that gave his opponent a good centre attack, which could have been
avoided
by B-Kt 3 instead. |
The fight for position soon afterward resolved
itself
into an attempt on whites part to force on his K B P, while black
parried
that attack an attempted a counter demonstration by the advance of his
pawns on the queens wing. This was hardly judicious, though
it might
perhaps have worked well, considering that black was a pawn ahead, if he
had on the twenty-seventh move simply protected the weakened Q B P by
Q-K
sq. As it was, white won the queens centre pawn and obtained
a passed
K P, which at the time of adjournment, looked threatening.
However,
black had some compensation by the exposed position of the adverse king,
while his own was in security, and he had also more freedom of action
for
his rook on the open files. |
The Sun, New York,
1891.01.11
|
|
STILL ANOTHER DRAW.
THE FOURTEENTH GAME OF THE CHESS
MATCH.
GUNSBERG OPENED AGAIN WITH THE EVANS
GAMBIT-ONLY SIX MORE GAMES
CAN BE PLAYED.
|
:
|
The rooms of the Manhattan Chess Club in this
city
were very well patronized yesterday when Gunsberg opened the fourteenth
game in the match for the chess championship of the world. The
Hungarian
remained true to his intention to open again with the Evans Gambit
against
the veteran, Steinitz. |
The readers of The Tribune will remember that
before
the match started Steinitz challenged Gunsberg to play the Evans Gambit
against him, and undertook to play on four occasions the defence which
he had already adopted against Tschigorin on the cable match up to a
certain
point. Gunsberg played the Evans Gambit for the first time last
Monday,
winning the game after twenty-four moves. Meantime Steinitz
withdrew
his challenge, one of his avowed reasons being that he was no longer
bound
to keep it, since Gunsberg did not take it up at the beginning of their
match. Another reason which he gave was that if he played the same
continuation against Gunsberg he would be compromising the interests of
his backers in the cable match. |
He duly informed Gunsberg of his withdrawal, but
in spite of this fact the latter declared he would again play the Evans
Gambit when his turn came to open, and this he did yesterday. He
conducted the attack with great spirit and skill, and at the same time
played, on the whole, pretty rapidly throughout. On the other
hand,
Steinitz played in his usually careful and steady style, defending his
position, particularly toward the end, with great penetration and
foresight. |
After the eighteenth move the position was a very
interesting one. As will be seen from the score of the game which
is appended, Steinitz varied his defence as early in the game as the
seventh
move. On that move in Mondays game he played Kt-R 3, instead
of
P-R 3. He succeeded in keeping the gambit pawn till a very
advanced
stage of the game. In fact it was only on his thirty-third and
last
move that Gunsberg, by clever play, managed to recover it, although for
some time prior to this he had possessed a superior game. |
Steinitz sealed as his reply move, 33...Q-Q Kt
sq.,
which assured the draw he had for some time been aiming at. The
proposal
for a draw was made by Steinitz and readily accepted by Gunsberg.
The score now stands: Steinitz 5, Gunsberg 3, drawn 6, with six more
possible
games to be played. |
New-York Daily Tribune,
1891.01.11
|
|
A SPICY EVANS GAMBIT.
Another Interesting Contest Between
Two Great Chess Masters.
|
:
|
The extraordinary incident in the chess match of
Mr. Steinitz withdrawing his challenge, so confidently issued-the
particulars
of which have been narrated in THE WORLD
of Jan.6-warranted the unusual interest manifested in the fourteenth
game.
Although the English player had been already told by his opponent that
he will not consider himself bound to adhere to his innovation in the
defense
of the Evans gambit, a line of play which is considered unsound in every
chess experts opinion but in the authors, he nevertheless,
relying upon
his own resources, offered the pawn in the fourth move, greatly to the
delight of the numerous spectators, who naturally enjoy a sprightly and
spicy gambit more than all the finesses of the modern
school. |
After thirty-three moves the game was drawn. The
score now stands: Steinitz, 5; Gunsberg, 3; drawn, 6. The fifteenth game
will be played to-morrow. |
The World, New York,
1891.01.12
|
|
|
Gunsberg,IA Steinitz,W
|
(14)
|
C52/01 |
Evans Gambit: Steinitz
|
|
1891.01.10 |
USA New York, NY (Manhattan Chess
Club)
|
|
Annotations by Gunsberg &
Steinitz
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.b4
Bxb4 5.c3 Ba5 [0:02-0:01] 6.O-O Qf6 7.d4 h6
** |
Gunsberg: In his book
Steinitz
declares 7...Nh6 the right move to be at this juncture. It seems
that his present move is a little better. A still better course
seems
to be 7...Bb6.
Steinitz: Perhaps the safest plan,
considering
Blacks last move. |
8.Bb5
** |
Gunsberg: White has an
abundance
of moves to continue with, as for example 8.d5, or 8.dxe5 Nxe5 9.Nxe5
Qxe5
10.Qb3 with a view to continue afterwards with pawn to f4, all of which
give the player good attacking chances. The move actually made
seems,
however, as good as, if not better than, as any.
Steinitz: If 8.Qb3, Black intended to
play 8...Nge7 9.dxe5 Nxe5 10.Nxe5 Qxe5 11.Bxd7+ Kd8 with an excellent
game,
though the pawns are even. |
8...Nge7 9.Ba3
** |
Steinitz: Of course this
prevents
Black from castling for a little while, as in that case White would
answer
10.Bxe7, thereby winning a pawn. |
9...exd4
** |
Steinitz: 9...Bb6 was
preferable. |
10.e5
** |
Gunsberg: It was perhaps
better
to retake the pawn first.
Steinitz: Though Black dare not take
that
pawn on account of the ultimate Re1, it was far better to retake the
pawn
at once and leave the center pawns standing abreast, with the option of
advancing later on. |
10...Qe6 [0:06-0:26] 11.cxd4
Bb4
** |
Steinitz: Hardly a good
move. |
12.Bb2
** |
Gunsberg: White could here
recover the pawn sacrificed on the fourth move by taking the c-knight
and
in reply to 12...Bxa3 (best) take either the Black b-pawn or
d-pawn.
But White justly preferred to keep up his attack.
Steinitz: White could have won a pawn
here by 12.Bxc6 Bxa3 (of course 12...Nxc6 13.d5 with a winning attack)
13.d5 recovering the pawn with a good game. |
12...d5 13.Nc3 O-O 14.Ne2 Ng6 15.Qb3
** |
Gunsberg: 15.Qa4 was also a
strong continuation at this point. |
15...Ba5
[0:32-0:40]
** |
Steinitz: If 15...Be7, White
would probably have answered 16.Nd2. |
16.Ne1 Nce7 17.f4 Qb6
** |
Gunsberg: 17...Bb6 instead
and subsequently ...f6 would have been preferable.
Steinitz: 17...f5 at once was
superior. |
18.Ba3
** |
Gunsberg: A good move, which
effectually meets Blacks plan to
force the
exchange of queens by 18...c6, for White would retire 19.Bd3, and if
Black
takes the queen the pawn retakes. Blacks
best move would then be 20...Bd8 as both knight and bishop are menaced,
and White has an excellent game by playing pawn to f5. If Black,
however, takes the knight at e1 instead of retiring the bishop to d8,
then
White retakes with the a-rook and proceeds likewise with pawn to f5,
Black
being compelled to play ...Re8.
Steinitz: A very fine rejoinder, which
gives White the pull in a precarious-looking position. |
18...f5
** |
Gunsberg: He has to stop the
advance of the adverse f-pawn, but this move leaves White plenty of
scope,
for the array of his forces into an attacking position and gives him a
powerful passed pawn.
Steinitz: If 18...c6 19.Bd3 Qxb3
20.axb3,
threatening 21.Bxe7 as well as 21.f5 with an excellent game. |
19.Qa4 c6 20.Bd3 Qd8 [0:45-1:12]
21.Qc2 b5
** |
Steinitz: Maneuvering with
the pawns on the queenside was not advisable. The text move
weakens
the c-pawn, and although there is apparently no danger at present, it is
a source of trouble at a later stage. |
22.Kh1 Bb6 23.g4 a5
** |
Gunsberg: Perhaps 23...Nh4
would have been preferable. |
24.Rg1 b4
** |
Gunsberg: Not good, as the
sequel shows.
Steinitz: Instead of this, Black would
have done better to play 24...Qe8. |
25.gxf5 Bxf5 [0:58-1:22] 26.Bxf5
Rxf5 27.Rxg6
** |
Gunsberg: A very good move,
which at least wins a pawn. |
27...bxa3
** |
Gunsberg: It is obvious that
27...Nxg6 28.Qxf5 would be in favor of White.
Steinitz: Black could again have
improved
his position here by 27...Qe8. |
28.Rxc6
** |
Gunsberg: Here White might
have kept up a promising attack by 28.Re6 or 28.Nf3 instead.
Steinitz: White must have looked far
ahead
before taking this pawn, for in several ways his game looked dangerous
after this; but on examination it will be found that his position
remains
sound. |
28...Nxc6 29.Qxf5 Nxd4 30.Nxd4
Bxd4
[1:22-1:30] 31.Qe6+ Kh8 32.Rd1 Bc3 33.Rxd5 (Adjourned)
** |
Gunsberg: At this point the
time for adjournment had arrived. Steinitz devoted nearly half an
hour to the consideration of the extremely difficult situation before
sealing
his reply. An examination of the highly interesting and
complicated
position shows that Blacks choice of
good
moves is limited. Had he, for instance played the very plausible
looking 33...Qh4, White would have had in all probability a winning game
by 34.Ng2. |
33...Qb8 (Sealed)
½-½.
** |
Gunsberg: The exposed
position
of the white king now enables Black to draw by perpetual check.
Steinitz: Probably better than 33...Qh4
34.Ng2 Qh5 35.Qc6 Rb8 36.Qxc3 Rb1+ 37.Ne1 Rxe1+ (Black had no time for
37...Qe2, as White would mate in a few moves beginning with 38.Qc8+)
38.Qxe1
Qf3+, and Whites king has more
freedom, although
by best play it would also end in a draw. The probable
continuation
would have been: 34.Rd1 Bxe1 35.Rxe1 Qb7+ 36.Kg1 Ra6, and the game could
hardly be won by either side. |
|
The Sun, New York,
1891.01.11
|
The World, New York,
1891.01.12
|
New-York Daily Tribune,
1891.01.11
|
|
|
Return to Match
Index
|