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 NINETEENTH AND LAST GAME OF THE MATCH.
*
   THE contest was decided yesterday in favour of the winner of the Paris tournament. Herr Zukertort again adopted the English opening; Rosenthal castled early, and obtained some attack with his two knights against the adverse centre. Zukertort had great difficulty in The defence, but at last found time to get his K secure, by castling on the K side. On the seventeenth move he had equalised the game, and then instituted a very fin manœuvre, which comprised a deep trap, without the least risk for his own position. Rosenthal did not see through the scheme, and lost a clear piece. He then fought out the hopeless game with the tenacity of despair; he sacrificed another piece to get the adverse K into some trouble, but he failed to make any lasting impression on the opponent’s game, and Zukertort compelled his resignation with a few vigorous strokes at the end. Duration, three hours.
The Field, London, 1880.06.29

THE LATE MATCH BETWEEN MESSRS ROSENTHAL AND
ZUKERTORT.
*
   THE final score of seven decided games against one, which Herr Zukertort accomplished in the match just concluded, makes the fair mark of eleven draws on the part of his opponent all the more conspicuous. The final score of the victor seemed to be out of reach of probability, when it is remembered that after the eleventh game of the match he counted only two games to one and eight draws. Yet M. Rosenthal’s deficiency in one important quality, which by no means belongs to the higher attributes of a chess master, will in the eyes of connoisseurs sufficiently account for his ultimate breakdown. It soon became evident that the Frenchman had no staying power either for a long game of for a long match. His complete downfall dates, in our opinion, from the twelfth game, where he left a piece almost en prise at the end. He then lost heart and consequently was outplayed in three successive game, whence he only recovered sufficient moral force to delay the opponent’s final victory for four sittings. One of M. Rosenthal’s minor defects is, that he does no know how to economise his time. Thus we saw him waste nearly an hour over a move in the early part of the thirteenth game. He naturally became fidgety and restless at the most important turning point, and not alone missed his best chances of gaining the superiority, but committed mistakes of reckoning under the pressure of time limit, while his opponent, who had moved in the opening with great rapidity, could remain cool and fresh, just in the most difficult part of the struggle. But, on the other hand, it stands to the credit of the French master that he did actually get out with the best of the opening and the early part of the middle in the majority of games played.
    It is generally difficult to draw the line of demarcation between the loser’s faults and the winner’s merits; but apart from Herr Zukertort’s greater powers of endurance, there is a marked superiority in the conduct of the ending game on the part of the winner of the Paris tournament. Notably does the beautiful end play of the fifteenth game stand out as a masterpiece of Herr Zukertort’s genius for exact and clever calculation, not alone at the deciding point, but even more so in leading up to it from the complicatious [sic] of the middle part. Of his fertility of resources in difficult and sometimes inferior positions, the course of the match furnished several instance, and the finish of the third game is an example of brilliant tactics such as rarely occurs in hard match play.
    The contest was watched with the keenest interest by members and visitors of the St. George’s Chess Club, and amongst the regular attendants on play days were the Earl of Dartrey, Lord Randolph Churchill, M. P., Lord Lindsay, Prince Teano, Messrs Catley, Francis, Lindsay Minchin, Wayte, and others.
The Field, London, 1880.07.03
Zukertort,JH — Rosenthal,S
(19)
A28/11
English: Four Knights
1880.06.25
GBR London
Annotations by Wilhelm Steinitz
1.c4 e5 2.e3 Nf6 3.Nc3 Nc6
** An alteration from the course taken in the seventeenth game, where Black played 3...Bb4 at this point.  Zukertort informs us that he intended to reply with the move adopted by Anderssen in the Paris Congress, viz., 4.Nd5, had Black now pursued the same line of defense as on the last occasion and that he considers Whites game superior in that case, albeit Black being enabled to double the pawns.
4.Nf3 Bb4
** 4...e4 would have lost a pawn, thus: 4...e4 5.Ng5 Qe7 6.Qc2 Nb4 7.Qb1 d6 8.Ngxe4, and it would be of no use to pin the knight with the bishop at f5, either before or after exchanging one of the knights, for White might safely reply Nxd6+.
5.d4
** 5.Nd5, which, as stated above, Zukertort considers sound in a similar position on the fourth move, would not be favorable now that the c6-knight is already developed, for Black might exchange knights, followed by 6...Ne7.
5...exd4 6.exd4 d5
** The superior plan was to take off the knight, followed by 7...d6. Whites doubled pawn was then a great hindrance to his game. The move in the text enables White to gain an important move by attacking the bishop, or to force an exchange which strengthens his center.
7.a3 Bxc3+ 8.bxc3 0-0 9.h3
** This appears to us entirely superfluous, and we do not see how it assists the development in any way, or how it could be necessary for defensive objects.  9.Be3 at once would have kept White a move ahead.
9...Re8+
** 9...Ne4 10.Qc2 Bf5 (threatening 11...Ng3, etc.) 11.Qb2 Na5 12.cxd5 (if 12.c5, Black would reply 12...b6) 12...Qxd5 13.Qb4 Nd6 14.Ne5 b6 15.c4 Qe4+, threatening 16...c5, with the superior game; for White cannot develop his f1-bishop without losing his g-pawn.
10.Be3 Ne7 11.Bd3 Nf5 12.Ne5 dxc4
** 12...Ne4 13.0-0 (This seems best; for, if 13.Bxe4, 13...dxe4 , threatening to win a piece by 14...f6, followed by 15...h5; and Black also threatens to capture the bishop, followed by 15...Qh4+) 13...f6 14.Nf3 Nxc3 15.Qc2 Ne4 16.cxd5 Ned6, with the better game; for, should White now attack by 17.g4, Black would gain time by taking 17...Rxe3.
13.Bxc4 Nd6 14.Bb3 Be6 15.0-0 Nd5 16.Bd2 Ne4 17.c4
** See diagram.  In our general notice of this game published last week, we were wrong in stating that the deep trap laid here was attended with no risk.  On further examination we find that, beautiful as the combination is worked out in one direction, the initiatory move was not as correct as the straightforward line of defense by 17...Rf8.
17...Ndc3
** 17...Nb6 18.Ba5 (if 18.c5 , Black may capture the d-pawn with the queen) 18...f6 19.d5 (We see nothing better; for, whatever else he does, the answer 19...fxe5 will also gain a pawn, with a still better position) 19...Bxd5 followed by 20...Rxe5, with a pawn ahead, and a good position.  It may also be observed that Black, in lieu of the disastrous move in the text, could also equalize the game by 17...Nxd2, for White had no better answer than 18.Qxd2, as 18...fxe5 would lose, e.g.: 17...Nxd2 18.cxd5 Bxd5 19.Bxd5 Qxd5 20.Qxd2 Rxe5, with a pawn ahead, and a fine game.
18.Bxc3 Nxc3 19.Qc2
** This beautiful move decides the game absolutely in Whites favor.  No doubt Black has speculated on the adverse queen defending the d-pawn now, either at d2 or d3, whereupon he would capture the d-pawn nevertheless, afterwards recovering the queen by 20...Ne2+.
19...Qxd4 [?:??-1:00] 20.Nf3 Qf6 21.Rfc1
** All this is played with great foresight and precision.  Attacking with the other rook was inferior.
21...Ne2+ 22.Qxe2 Bxh3 23.Qd2 h6 24.Qc3 Qf4
** It was no more Blacks good play, but the remote chance of White playing badly, that could possibly save the game; and it is entirely a question of style how to go on with such a hopeless case.  Nevertheless, we cannot see the least prospect for him in throwing away another piece, since White, with proper precaution, had made room for the retreat of the king at f1 on the twenty-first move.  If anything was better than resigning, it was to exchange queens, and to face the ending game with two pawns ahead.  Such a defense was more feasible, though quite unlikely to succeed in drawing, for Blacks majority was separated on the two wings.
25.gxh3 Re6 26.Re1 Rg6+ 27.Kf1 Rf6 28.Re3 [1:00-?:??] 28...Qf5 29.Ke2 Qxh3 30.Rg1 Kh8 31.Bc2 Rd8 32.Qe5 Qd7 33.Rd1 Rd6 34.Rxd6 cxd6 35.Qe7
** Straightforward and correct.  It is no use wasting calculations on such a position.
35...g6 36.Qf6+ Kg8 37.Re7 1-0.
**
The Field, London, 1880.07.03

Return to Match Index

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