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 First Game.-Played on Monday, the 3rd inst.  The two players arrived before two o’clock-the time appointed for commencing the game-in order to discuss some further details. We have all along commended M. Rosenthal’s chivalry in the conduct of the negotiations, and we are glad to put on record an instance of reciprocation of this spirit of courtesy on the part of his antagonist. M. Rosenthal proposed that both parties should dispense with the assistance of bystanders in taking down the game or regulating the stop watches which mark the time limit, and Herr Zukertort at once agreed. This was a very courteous concession, for the winner of the Paris tournament would have found plenty of enthusiasts willing to relieve him of the troublesome duty of scoring the game, while M. Rosenthal, who employs the French notation, would have been very much limited in the choice of his assistants. In the absence of Mr Lindsay, M. Rosenthal’s umpire, the Rev. W. Wayte, Herr Zukertort’s representative, drew for the first move with Mr Salter, and this considerable advantage fell in favour of Herr Zukertort. Amidst breathless silence the first few moves were made by both players at a moderately quick rate of time, and the game assumed the aspect of the well-known Double Ruy Lopez, which often occured in the Paris tournament, M. Rosenthal having, however, designedly omitted the usual advance of P to Q R 3, in order to drive back the B to Q R 4, the tug of war began on the 7th move, when Zukertort instituted a new form of attack by P to Q 4, of which Mr Blackburne is the inventor. Rosenthal took a long time to consider his reply, and at last entered on a line of defence which appeared the simplest. On the 9th move it was Zukertort’s turn to deliberate for a long while on an important line of action, and he at last decided on a course of general exchanges, which, at least in his own opinion, led to a clear drawn game ; for when, after making his 12th move, Rosenthal proposed a draw, Zukertort impetuously knocked down his king in agreement with the offer, play having lasted altogether about fifty minutes. This clearly breaking up of the game caused some natural disappointment, and the general impression was that the French champion had slightly the best of the result, and that the spell of Zukertort’s two successive victories against his present opponent in the Paris tournament was somewhat shaken. We believe that Zukertort had slightly the superior position ; at any rate, he could run no risk, and the prospective moral effect of a third continuous victory would have made it worth while to go on longer. But both combatants pleaded indisposition for a continued hard struggle, which of course is a valid excuse ; and Herr Zukertort, like some other great masters, does not easily work himself into form at the beginning of a great contest, for it will be remembered that his score in the first two rounds of the Paris Congress was the worst of the ultimate winners. The game, though it is very valuable for analysis and students of the opening, is the shortest match game on record, in point of number of moves, with the exception of one between Blackburne and Fleissig in the tenth match of the Vienna Congress, which was resigned by the latter on the eighth move under the misapprehension that he was bound to lose a clear rook, while it was afterwards proved that he could have relieved himself from difficulty with the lose of the exchange for a P only, with a fair game.
    This first encounter resembles a reconnoitring fight before a great battle, or a feeler between two wrestlers who wish to ascertain each other’s strength. We publish it below with our comments ; and in reference to the notes we intend to give throughout the match, we may be allowed to remark that we shall endeavour, to the utmost of our power, to do full justice to the two players and to the nature of the positions arising in the games; but we are much restricted in our examinations by considerations of space and by the time fixed for our going to press. We must therefore confine ourselves to the points which appear to us the most striking, and must leave the more detailed analysis to the periodicals exclusively devoted to chess. We have no doubt, however, that Herr Zukertort’s splendid analytical powers will fully satisfy the technical requirements of the match in the pages of the Chess Monthly, of which journal the winner of the Paris tournament is the chief editor.
The Field, London, 1880.05.08
Zukertort,JH — Rosenthal,S
(1)
C49/01
Four Knights: Brentano
1880.05.03
GBR London
Annotations by Wilhelm Steinitz
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 Nf6
** Rosenthal, as well as some other first-class practitioners, deliberately reject Morphys favorite defense of 3...a6 at this point, probably on account of the dulness of the positions which arise therefrom ; for we do not think that any palpable inferiority can be demonstrated for the second player adopting that line of play. The turn which the present game takes shows, however, not the least improvement on the score of vivacity over most other variation of the Ruy Lopez, which seem to assume an early aspect of a draw.
4.Nc3 Bb4 5.0-0 0-0 6.Nd5 Bc5
** Black might also without disadvantage take the knight followed by 7...Nd4. In reference to this line of play the novel idea has struck us that White might give up a piece temporarily with the certainty of recovering it and some possibility of obtaining the advantage of position, and we, therefore, think it right to call special attention to the following variations: 6...Nxd5 7.exd5 Nd4, (or 7...Ne7 8.Nxe5 Nxd5 9.c3 with slightly the better game, as the bishop must retreat to e7, where he will be obstructed by his d-pawn which must drive away the adverse knight from being utilized on the queenside, and on the kingside he will be of little use. The bishop cannot well retreat to c5, or else he will be shut out from action by the adverse d-pawn.); 8.Nxe5 Nxb5 9.a4 Nd4 (This is best. If 9...Qe7, White answers 10.Re1 with advantage ; if 9...Qf6, White defends by 10.d4, and will afterwards recover the piece by the process indicated below ; and if 9...Bd6, White retreats the knight to f3, and Blacks knight is lost immediately. Again, if 9...Nd6, White pursues the bishop by 10.c3, and then accordingly by 11.d4 or 11.b4, and ultimately by pawn to a5, regaining the piece with the better game.); 10.c3 d6 11.Nf3 Nxf3+ 12.Qxf3 Bc5 13.d4 Bxd4 14.cxd4, and the position is even on account of the bishops of opposite colors.
7.d4
** Zukertort adopts here a line of attack which first was first played against himself by Blackburne in the Paris Congress. On the occasion. However, Black (Zukertort) had already pushed the pawn to a6, and the white bishop had retreated to a4. This slight difference in the position enabled Black to defend in the following manner: 8...Nxd4 9.Nxd4 Nxd5, with the better game, for White will gain nothing by 10.Nb3, attacking the bishop, as Black would reply 10...Nb6, followed by 11...d6 in reply to 11.Nxc5.
7...Nxd5
** The slight difference in the position makes all the difference, and the above-mentioned defense is no more practicable, for, in answer to 7...Nxd4, followed by 8...Nxd5, White would first takes the knight (d4), followed by 9.Nb3, Black having then no means of retaliation by attacking another piece. The point of the present attack lies in the danger threatened to Black by bishop to g5, for which reason neither knight nor bishop can take the d-pawn; e.g., in the first place: 7...Nxd4 8.Nxd4 Bxd4 9.Bg5 c6 10.Nxf6+ gxf6 11.Bh6, and wins the exchange; for Black has no time to take the bishop (b5), on account of the impending mate in two moves, commencing with 12.Qg4+.  Secondly, 7...Bxd4 8.Nxd4 Nxd4 9.Bg5 Nxb5 10.f4 d6 11.fxe5 dxe5 12.Rxf6 c6 (This seems best; for, if 12...gxf6, the bishop retakes, followed by 14.Qh5, winning easily.); 13.Rg6 hxg6 (The queen cannot escape; for, if 13...Qa5, White would answer 14.Nf6+, followed by 15.Qh5; and if 13...f6, White takes the pawn with the bishop, and the rook dare not retake, on account of 15.Nxf6+, also winning the queen.); 14.Bxd8, and wins; for the rook dare not take the bishop, on account of 15.Ne7+; and, if 14...cxd4, the reply is 15.Qxd4, attacking the knight.  Nevertheless, we do not feel sure of the soundness of the present attack, and we believe the following defense would be successful: 7...exd4 8.Bg5 Re8 (The object of this move is not alone to attack the e-pawn, but also to make room for the bishop at f8 in certain emergencies when the adverse bishop posts itself at h6. It should be observed that Black must be careful not to block his bishop by ...d6, until all danger is passed.) 9.Bxf6 (or 9.Nh4 Rxe4 10.f4 Be7 11.Bd3 Re6 12.f5 Re5, with two pawns ahead and a fine game.) 9...gxf6 10.Qd2 Rxe4 11.Qh6 Re6 12.Rae1 Ne5, threatening 13...c6 with an excellent game. Should White now answer 13.Qh4, for the purpose of taking the knight with the knight next move. Black might reply 13...Ng6, followed first by 14...Bd6, in case White answers 14.Qg3.
8.dxc5 Nf6
** Zukertort thinks that this was Blacks best move, and that White would have obtained some ultimate advantage with his combined two bishops had Black here retreated the knight to e7.
9.Bxc6
** Had the winner of the Paris tournament been better disposed, he would probably have elected to keep up the position, and to maintain his two bishops by 9.Qd3. The probable continuation was then as follows: 9.Qd3 Qe7 10.Be3 d6 11.Nd2, and Black will find it difficult to develop himself properly, for if 11...dxc5, White would first capture the knight, followed by 13.Nb3, recovering the pawn with the better game.
9...dxc6 10.Qxd8 Rxd8 11.Bg5 Re8 12.Bxf6 gxf6 ½-½.
** We believe that White had a small advantage in position. The knight is generally very strong when the opponent has a doubled pawn which cannot easily be dissolved, and we think White might have harassed the opponent considerably by knight to h4, followed at the earliest opportunity by pawn to f3 and pawn to g4. Of course he was bound in the meanwhile to guard against any danger from the opponent occupying the open d-file with his rook; but ultimately the knight might have been brought into play via g2 and e3, and White had then the better chance of winning.
**
The Field, London, 1880.05.08

Return to Match Index

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