THE MATCH BETWEEN MESSRS. ROSENTHAL
AND
|
ZUKERTORT.
|
|
THE eleventh game. The
substitution
of Thursday for Wednesday in the play calendar necessitated also a
change
of appointment for the end of last week, and consequently the eleventh
game was played on Saturday, the 29th ult. Zukertorts start was a
surprise.
1 Kt to K B 3 has never been heard of, and the adoption of this odd
novelty
is, in one sense, a compliment to the knowledge of opening displayed by
his opponent hitherto. On the other hand, it could have no deep meaning;
and Rosenthal, by replying P to Q 4, clearly showed that he saw through
it. The object of this curious beginning is apparently, perchance, to
induce
the adversary to answer Kt to Q B 3, and then White would proceed with
P to Q 4, having gained a fine point of development, for in the Q P 2
opening
Blacks Kt is badly placed at Q B 3 before his Q B P has moved. The
early
attempt to steal a march on the adversary did not repay the trouble as
well as in the case of Anderssen, who twice baffled Morphys
ingenuity
by commencing with 1. P to Q R 3, and then obtained a fine opening by 2.
P to Q B 4 in reply to 1. P to K 4, being a move in advance in the
Sicilian
opening. Rosenthal, as we said before, made the right reply, and the
game
resumed all the aspects of the opening in the 9th game of the match,
with
the exception of the addition on Whites part of the useless
preparation
5. P to Q R 3. The French player treated his defence on the same system
as in the ninth game, or, properly speaking, instituted a counter-attack
by developing his minor pieces, almost regardless of the position of his
pawns, as in an open game. Zukertorts 9th move, R to K sq, might
pass
criticism, but is made remarkable chiefly by being completely retracted
three moves later on, apparently for the purpose of avoiding a hostile
attack, which gave the opponent at least a draw. We should be far from
advocating argumentation through thick and thin in favour of a position
once taken op, but this confession of error strikes us as an error in
itself.
He was bound to look out for some more dignified defence, and we believe
he could have accomplished his object, even with less risk, by P to K R
3. As it was, Rosenthal could either win an easily defensible P, or
obtain
an attack which would have well repaid trial, as he had at least a draw
by perpetual check in hand in a few moves, to fall back upon in case his
calculations did not satisfy his attempting to win. The French master
elected,
however, to pursue a course which left the parties with no other minor
pieces than bishops of opposite colours, rooks and queens still on the
board, and all the forces as well as position, quite even. A
prolongation
of the struggle would have been useless, and the game was fairly given
up as drawn on the sixteenth move, but altogether presents a feeble
specimen
of match play. Duration, two hours and a half. |
The Field, London,
1880.06.05
|
|
|
Zukertort,JH Rosenthal,S
|
(11)
|
D06/01 |
Queens Gambit: Grau
|
|
|
Annotations by Wilhelm
Steinitz
1.Nf3
** |
See our introductory comments in
explanation
of the meaning of this odd initiation and of the merit of
Blacks
reply. |
1...d5 2.d4 Nf6 3.e3 Bf5 4.Be2 e6
5.a3
** |
We do not discern any utility for
this move at the present stage. |
5...Bd6 6.c4 c6 7.Nc3 Nbd7
8.00
Ne4 9.Re1
** |
He stood now in the same position
as in the ninth game, excepting that he was a move behind, owing to the
thrown-away fifth move. Consequently he could not take the knight at
once,
as Blacks pawn would retake, and then
the
opponent would obtain a strong attack by 10...Qh4, forcing the advance
of Whites g-pawn, which, after Black
retreats
the queen, furnishes a mark for the onslaught of his h-pawn. The
expedient
is adopted with the intention of capturing the knight, followed, if the
pawn retakes, by the retreat of the knight to f1, viá d2,
as in the ninth game. |
9...Ndf6
** |
Excellent. Perceiving the
difference
of the situation, with true judgment he settles his plan accordingly,
and
prepares even a better one than in the ninth game. It is evident that he
now means to hold the adverse gap in the center with one of his knights,
which promises to be more advantageous than fixing his pawn at
e4. |
10.Nxe4
** |
Black threatened 10...Ng4, and,
though
White could in that case defend the f-pawn for the time by retreating
11.Rf1,
he was always afterwards under the inconvenience that he could not drive
either of the hostile knights from their respective posts. For,
attacking
one knight by 12.h3 was then obviously useless, as Black would advance
12...h5 in support, threatening to open the file for the rook with an
irresistible
attack should White take. Black could also sufficiently protect the
other
knight at e4 by withdrawing the bishop to g6, followed by ...f5, and
White
could never exchange without exposing himself to a powerful attack on
the
kingside, like the one pointed out in the note to
Whites
ninth move. |
10...Nxe4 11.Bd2 Bg4
12.Rf1
** |
Black threatened to win thus:
12...Bxf3
13.Bxf3 Bxh2+ 14.Kxh2 Qh4+ 15.Kg1 Qxf2+ , followed soon by ...Qxd2. But
the move in the text is a poor resource. Sooner than submit to such a
retreat
we would have moved the d-bishop, and then Black had no more than a draw
in the above indicated exchange and sacrifice. We think, however, that
12.h3 was better still.
If Black at once exchanged the two minor
pieces
by 12...Bxf3 and 13...Nxd2 he could get no more than a drawn position,
on account of bishops of opposite colors, while the extra pawn he might
gain in the exchange could not be maintained if attacked by Rc1. If, on
the other hand, he offered to sacrifice the bishop by 12...h5, then
White,
of course, was not bound to take, but could proceed with
13.Rc1. |
12...Bxf3
** |
Lack of energy. He would have been
quite justified in this position to attempt a win by 12...dxc4. This
pawn
was well defensible; and if White tried to recover it the game might
have
proceeded thus: 12...dxc4 13.h3 This seems best for the purpose; for, if
13.Bxc4 at once, Black will proceed in the same way as in the following
variation from the 15th move, with much greater effect, as he will
compel
the advance of the hostile f-pawn, and then open the game by ...g5.
13...Bh5
14.Bxc4 Bxf3 15.gxf3 , best 15...Qg5+ 16.Kh1 and Black has already
the choice of drawing by 16...Ng3+, followed by 17...Qxg3, which leaves
no other resource than the reply by 18.f4; then, at least, perpetual
check
may follow by 19.Qh3 and 20.Qg3. He may, however, also pursue the attack
by 16...Qh4, followed, in reply to 17.Kg2 by 17...Ng3, and 18...Nf5, or
else by the simple retreat of 17...Nf6 at once, with the object of
advancing
the pawns on the kings wing in each
case
with an excellent game. We give a diagram of the position in the
text. |
13.Bxf3 Nxd2 14.Qxd2
00
** |
He would gain nothing by
14...dxc4,
for the hostile rook would at once attack the same at c1, and
Blacks
b-pawn could obviously not advance to b5 in support, without leaving his
c-pawn
en prise of the adverse bishop. |
15.Rac1 Qe7 16.Rfe1 Rfd8
½½.
** |
It would have been waste of time
for
either side to go on with this game. |
|
The Field, London,
1880.06.05
|
|