THE sixteenth game, played on
Thursday,
June 17. It is no compliment to M. Rosenthal to dwell on the fact that
the match is still proceeding, though his opponent has only one more
game
to win since Saturday last, for the former is merely fulfilling a plain
duty in holding out. Nor can it be the least offensive to Herr Zukertort
to suggest that his victory is no absolute certainty at the present
moment,
though no doubt the odds are immensely in his favour. Strange things
have
happened in some previous contests, and in several instances on record
a similar preponderance in the score was not sufficient to secure the
final
superiority. In the famous match between Harrwitz and Lowenthal for the
first eleven games, the latter stood at nine games to two at one time,
but afterwards could gain no more than one game, while his opponent kept
on winning and drawing, until at last the victory fell to Harrwitz. In
the match between Kolisch and Paulsen (ten games up), the latter stood
at six to one in the early part of the contest, which, however, had to
be drawn ultimately after a series of hard fights, the final score being
Paulsen seven, Kolisch six, drawn nineteen. Still more striking is the
case of Campbell against Barnes, which was a match for the first seven
games. The latter had scored six game without a break, but did not
succeed
in winning one more game, while his opponent pulled up gradually to the
full score, and actually won the match. This ought to be a warning, as
much against over-confidence on the one side as against premature
despair
on the other.Rosenthal again opened with a Ruy Lopez of the same
description
as in the fourteenth game, which Zukertort defended in the same style as
on the last occasion. Rosenthal remedied this time the defect in his
plan
of posting the Q Kt pointed out in our last weeks issue, and he
left that
Kt at Q 2, as suggested in our note (b) to the fourteenth game. He
obtained
a good opening with a well-supported development of pawns in the centre,
and we believe he could have instituted an earlier attack by R to Q B sq
on the 13th move. His 15th move was indifferent, as well as his 21st. On
the latter occasion he could have much improved the formation of his
lines
by Q to B 2, followed by Kt to Q B 4. But he obtained sufficient
pressure
on the Q side to compel the opponent to sacrifice the exchange for two
pawns. We agree with Rosenthal in the opinion that the adverse pawns
were
not superior to his own advantage, as they could be attacked by one R in
the rear, and their advance could be finally stopped by bringing up
Whites
K, which was near enough to for the purpose. As it went, Zukertort
overlooked
a fine manuvre of the opponent, which cost a clear P, and his game
would
have been utterly hopeless had Rosenthal brought his K to the rescue at
the right time, viz., on the 37th move. Rosenthal committed a fatal
error
as far as his chances of winning were concerned, on the 38th move, where
he could have safely exchanged pawns, and then again he had time to play
his K round. Instead thereof, he allowed an important P to go, which
ultimately
compelled his returning the exchange gained, and the game then became
equalised.
Rosenthal tried some useless dodges in the ending after the adjournment,
but could not succeed in disturbing the balance in his own favour.
Duration,
six hours. Score: Zukertort six, Rosenthal one, drawn nine. |
The Field, London,
1880.06.19
|
|
|
Rosenthal,S Zukertort,JH
|
(16)
|
C77/08 |
Spanish: Morphy (Anderssen)
|
|
|
Annotations by Wilhelm
Steinitz
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 Nf6 4.d3
d6 5.c3 a6 6.Ba4 g6 7.h3 Bg7 8.Be3 Qe7 9.Nbd2 h6 10.Qc2 Be6 11.d4 exd4
12.cxd4 Bd7 13.d5
** |
His opening moves were sound and in
accordance with the principles of this form of attack; but here we
should
have preferred 13.Rc1 . If Black took the e-pawn, White would recover
the
pawn, with the superior game, by 14.d5. |
13...Ne5 14.Bxd7+ Nexd7
15.Qd3
** |
Loss of time. 15.Qc4, at once was
much better. |
|
15.Q to B 3 is given in the issue of June
19; corrected to 15.Q to Q 3 on June 26. -[Pope] |
15...0-0 16.0-0 Rfe8 17.Rfe1
Rad8
** |
His hesitation to open the game
gets
him into a cramped position. We see no objection to taking the e-pawn,
fearless of the pinning maneuvers, and the game might have proceeded
thus:
17...Nxe4 18.Bd4 (if 18.Bxh6, the answer is 18...Ndc5) 18...f5 19.Bxg7
Kxg7 20.Nd4 Ndc5, followed mostly by 20...Qf7, attacking the d-pawn with
the superior game. |
18.Rac1 Nc5 19.Bxc5 dxc5
20.Qc4
** |
Which at any rate proves that he
had
previously lost a move (see note to Whites
15th move). Under any circumstances, it was stronger move to retreat
20.Qc2,
followed mostly by 21.Nc4. |
20...Nd7 21.b3 b5 22.Qc2 Qd6
23.Rcd1
Re7 24.a4 [1:00-?:??] 24...c6
** |
Hazardous. Zukertort informs us
that
he foresaw the opponents maneuvers,
but gave
up the exchange designedly, having faith in the strength of his two
passed
pawns. We should have preferred doubling the rooks on the
e-file. |
25.e5 Nxe5
** |
Of course he could not capture the
d-pawn, or the answer 26.Ne4, followed by 27.Nxc5, would have been
ruinous. |
26.Nxe5
** |
Zukertort points out if 26.Ne4 at
once, he would have taken 26...Nxf3+, followed by 27...Rxe4, and
afterwards
mostly 28...Bd4, threatening then ...Qg3+, etc. |
26...Rxe5 27.Ne4 Rxe4 28.Qxe4
cxd5
29.Qe7
** |
Well played. This was the best way
to fight against the pawns
superiority. |
29...bxa4 30.Qxd6 Rxd6 31.Re8+
Kh7
[?:??-1:00]
** |
Interposing the bishop was better;
but even then the pawns could be successfully stopped, and Black would
have been kept on the defensivee.g.: 31...Bf8 32.bxa4 d4 33.Rc8
Rb6 34.Ra8,
followed by 35.a5, threatening ultimately to fix himself at b6 with his
rook, via b3, whenever Blacks rook
leaves
the b-file. |
32.bxa4 c4 33.Rc8 c3
34.Rc5
** |
Which wins the most important pawn,
and ought to have won the game; for, even if the d-pawn advances, White
can take the c-pawn. |
34...Re6 35.Rdxd5 Re1+ 36.Kh2 Re2
37.f4
** |
Already loss of time. We see no
defense
against 37.Kg3. Of course we cannot enter into a full analysis, and give
only what seems to us the most plausible way of continuing the
resistance:
37.Kg3 Rd2 38.Rxd2 cxd2 39.Rd5 Bc3 40.Kf3 Kg7 41.Ke2 a5 42.Rd3 Bb4
43.Rd4
Bc3 (he must move the bishop, or White would take it off) 44.Rc4, and
wins. |
37...g5 38.Rd7
[2:00-?:??]
** |
A grave error. We give a diagram of
the position. |
** |
He could safely take the pawn, and
all he had afterwards to care for was not to take the second time if
Black
retook or advanced the c-pawne.g.: 38.fxg5 c2 (if 38...hxg5, then
also
39.Kg3) 39.Kg3 Bb2 40.Kf3. |
38...gxf4 39.Rxf7
Kg6
** |
He threatens now to win by 39...f3
and 40...f2, in case the adversary removes to c7 to stop the other pawn,
and he must recover the exchange. |
40.Rxg7+
** |
If 40.Rxc3, then followed, of
course,
40...Be5. |
40...Kxg7 41.Rxc3 Kf6 42.Kg1 Re4
43.Rc6+ Re6 44.Rc4 Kf5 45.Kf2 Re4 46.Rc5+ Re5 47.Rc8
** |
It was not worth while to go on
with
this, and there is no further interest in the movements on both sides.
The game is too even. |
47...Ra5 48.Rc4 Re5 49.Rc6
[3:00-?:??]
49...Re6 [?:??-2:00] ½-½.
** |
The Field,
London, 1880.06.19 & 06.26
|
|