The Second Game. - Played on Thursday, May
5. - The two players punctually appeared before two oclock, 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 Whites 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 oclock)
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 oclock the
game
was resumed and M. Rosenthals 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
|
|
|
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
|
|