GM Harry Nelson Pillsbury - GM Emanuel Lasker; 

***************************************************************************

A beautiful game by Pillsbury, many consider it his best and/or greatest game. 
(It was also played in the twilight of his career, Pillsbury died just two years later in 1906.)

It IS an exceptional and very beautiful game of chess ... it is also the last time Lasker and 
PIllsbury played. And in a modern tournament, this game would have easily carried off a 
"best game" prize. 

 ******* 

 Here is also one of the most famous of all stories in all the realm of chess.   
You see, Pillsbury had lost to Lasker in St. Petersburg, 1895/96 in this line. 
(A fantastic encounter that is considered by some to be Lasker's finest and also 
 his most brilliant game.) Despite the fact that Pillsbury had literally DOZENS of 
opportunities to play a possible improvement - which he had burned untold hours of ... 
'midnight oil'  on  -  he saved the big surprise for his next encounter with Lasker. 
(And Lasker alone!) No one else was deemed worthy of Pillsbury's great idea. And 
though he played the great Lasker many times, it seemed he would never get the 
opportunity to use his new idea. (Either the color was wrong, or Lasker played 
another line.) But finally ... in their very LAST game together ... Pillsbury got to spring 
the trap!! (All of Pillsbury's hard work paid off - Lasker was rarely beaten in such a 
one-sided contest.)  --->  (Read  ...  about the great debate!)  

*******

This is also a very famous game ...  it seems virtually every annotator who ever lived 
(since) has tried his hand at this epic struggle. (Two brand-new books that I just 
purchased contain this grand contest!!) 

***

The ratings come from the website of Jeff Sonas. 

The game starts off as a fairly normal Queen's Gambit Declined.

***************************************************************************

1.d4 d5;  2.c4 e6;  3.Nc3 Nf6;   4.Nf3!?,  
While not the main line, which is Bg5; Pillsbury also liked to play this on occasion. 
(The database clearly shows that Pillsbury used this line on a regular basis, at least 
 10-15 different times.)

      [ Of course the move:  4.Bg5,  {Diagram?}  
         leads to the Pillsbury Attack, the line which he practically patented. 
         (Pillsbury may not have played this line because Lasker may have found 
          a fairly effective antidote the very first time he faced this system OTB.) ]  

 

4...c5!?;  (Possibly - '!')  {Diagram?}  
Many give this an exclam here ...  "an example of Lasker's very energetic opening(s),"  
says one author. But it is not really clear which line is best at this point.  

     [ By playing the continuation:  4...c6;  5.e3 Nbd7;  6.Bd3 dxc4;  7.Bxc4, "+/=" {D?} 
        a modern line - known as the Meran System - is reached. (This line gives a solid 
        edge for White. But it is an extremely popular system for Black.) 

***

       The simple developing move of  4...Be7;  preparing a quick  ...0-0;    
        was also very playable for Black. (This line probably yields close to 
        full equality for the second player from this position.) ]  

 

5.Bg5!?,  (Maybe - '!')  
Many authors give this move an exclam ... but is it really the best move here? 

Once again, theory has vacillated many times over what the correct continuation 
is at this particular junction. 

For my part, I like this move. White develops normally, and puts a lot of pressure on 
Black's slightly exposed central pawn set-up. 

"In the fashionable variation, 5.BPxP,  5...KntxP! etc., White obtains very little advantage." 
  - Fred Reinfeld. 

 

*************************

     [ According to modern theory, a better line for White would be: 
        >/=  5.cxd5! Nxd5;  {Diagram?}  
        I think this is the move that most books recommend here for Black. 

          (After the moves:   </=  5...exd5!?;  6.g3 Nc6;  7.Bg2 Be7;   8.0-0, "+/=" {D?}    
           White has obtained the formation known as: "The Rubinstein Set-up,"     
           and has a very solid edge.)    

       6.e4!,  {Diagram?}  
        To me, this appears to be the most energetic line White can adopt here. 

*******

       ( Instead of the sharp e4, White can play the simple (but effective) move of 
         just advancing the KP only one square, for example:     

         6.e3!? Nc6;  7.Bd3 cxd4;  8.exd4 Be7;  9.0-0 0-0;  10.Re1!?,  {Diagram?}  
          Many theoretical manuals give this move an exclamation mark.  

              ( I also like the move a3 here: 10.a3!? Bf6!?; 11.Qc2! h6; 12.Rd1! Qb6!;    
                13.Bc4! Rd8; 14.Ne2! Bd7; 15.Qe4!, "/\"  ("+/=")  {Diagram?}     
                 White had a very powerful initiative, that later developed into a strong      
                 K-side attack ...  that won for White.       

                 GM V. Smyslov - GM Z. Ribli;  Candidates Match (sf) (G #5)     
                 London,  ENG;  1983.     

                 {A fantastic game ... that could be one of the most brilliant ever     
                  played. It is certainly one of Smyslov's very best games.} )        

         (Returning to the  6.e3!?  line.) 
         10...Bf6;  11.Be4 Nce7!?;  12.Qd3 h6;  13.Ne5!?,  {Diagram?}  
          White grabs the out-post.  

                ( Interesting is:  13.a3!?, "+/=" )     

         13...Nxc3;  14.Qxc3 Nf5;  15.Be3 a5!?;  16.Rac1 a4!?;  {Diagram?}  
          The end of the column.  

         17.Red1 Nxe3!?;   {Diagram?}  
          It makes sense to me for Black to pick off one of the White B's. 

                ( Karpov suggests:  17...Ra5!?; 18.Nc4 Rb5!?; "<=>" {Diag?}        
                  and calls this unclear.  "~" )     

         18.Qxe3 Qb6!?;  19.Ng4, "~"  {Diagram?}   
          GM Nick de Firmian calls this as ... "a solid edge for White,"  ('+/=')  
          but I am not sure if I agree.  

          GM V. Topalov - GM A. Karpov;  Super-GM Tournament,   
          Linares, ESP;  1995.  (Black won a brilliant game.)  

          [ See MCO-14;  page # 428, col. # 85, and also note # (f.). ]   

                ( I prefer: >/=  19.Qe2!, "+/=" {Diagram?}  instead. );   )   

*******

       (Returning to the line with the more aggressive move of  6.e4.)  
       6...Nxc3;  7.bxc3 cxd4;  8.cxd4 Bb4+;  9.Bd2 Bxd2+;  10.Qxd2, "+/="  {Diag?}   
        White is clearly a little better, although this line is thought to give Black 
        good drawing chances. 

        GM V. Tkachiev - GM I. Rausis;  National Championship Tourney,  
        France-chT 0203,  2002.     
        (White won a fine game in only 39 moves.) ]   

*************************

 

(We now return to the actual game, after a brief foray into the theory of this line.) 
5...cxd4;  
Black exchanges to avoid an isolated pawn. 

While some have criticized this capture here ... it looks very nearly forced to me. 

     [ Even worse was:  5...Bd6?;  6.cxd5 cxd4;  7.Qxd4, '±'  {Diagram?}  
        and White wins at least a Pawn ... maybe more. ]  

 

6.Qxd4,  ('!')  {Diagram?}   
This looks best ... it prevents Black from playing the central advance of ...e6-to-e5. 

     [ Is taking with the Knight playable? After  6.Nxd4 dxc4!?;  7.e3 e5; 
        8.Nf3,  {Diagram?}  This might be best.  

          (</= 8.Ndb5?! a6; 9.Qxd8+!? Kxd8; 10.0-0-0+ Nbd7; 11.Nd6 Bxd6;       
            12.Rxd6 Kc7; 13.Rd1 b5; "=/+")      

        8...Qb6!?;  9.Qc2 Nbd7;  10.Bxc4, "+/="  {Diagram?}  
        White is slightly better here. ]   

 

6...Nc6;  {See the diagram given just below.} 
This is probably the best move here. 
(Despite what Reinfeld says, who claims that ...Be7 was better.)

*************************

*************************

  (r1bqkb1r/pp3ppp/2n1pn2/3p2B1/2PQ4/2N2N2/PP2PPPP/R3KB1R)  

 

Lasker has had this position before ...  and done quite well with it, thank you very much. 
He might also be wondering why Pillsbury would even allow this variation. (White's last 
outing with this line, as far as Lasker is concerned - was a bad loss to the very same 
opponent.)  

     [  If  6...Be7!?;  then  7.cxd5!, "+/="  {Diagram?}  
        with probably a small advantage for White. ]  

 

7.Bxf6!!,  TN  {Diagram?}  
The big improvement ...  which Pillsbury had patiently saved for Lasker for almost 
eight years. 

Not only is this a surprise for Lasker, it even refutes what the World Champion 
had thought - and written - about this position. 

This had to be VERY carefully worked out by Pillsbury, as the loss of his dark-squared 
Bishop is potentially EXTREMELY dangerous for White. 
(As the variation with ...gxf6; Qd2?, followed by  ...d4! clearly proves.) 

   '!' - GM Garry Kasparov. 

"In the game between the same opponents at St. Petersburg 1895, Pillsbury had 
  continued with Q-R4 and 0-0-0, soon obtaining an inferior game. Legend has it 
  that he saved the text for ten years, to avenge the sparkling defeat Lasker inflicted 
  upon him at that time!" -  Fred Reinfeld. 
  (From the book on the tournament.)   

      '!' - Fred Reinfeld.    

****************************************

     [ The very famous encounter went:  7.Qh4!? Be7;  8.0-0-0!?,  {Diagram?}  
        To me, this is much too risky. I think White had to at least try to castle on 
        the King-side. 

          (Maybe better was: 8.e3)    

       8...Qa5!;  9.e3 Bd7!;  10.Kb1 h6!; "="  {Diagram?}  
       Black has already equalized ... and went on to win one of his 
       very best and most brilliant (& famous) games. 

       Harry N. Pillsbury - Emanuel Lasker;  (Super) Master Quadrangular Tourney, 
       St. Petersburg, RUS;  1895/96.    (Click  here  to see this famous contest!!)    

       --->  *** The above game has been reprinted an almost endless number of 
       times - and in dozens of books and game anthologies. ***  

       {Lasker often said this was his favorite and very best game.}  ]   

****************************************

 

7...gxf6;  
This could be forced.  

The funny part of this story - and a facet that is not very well known - is that Lasker said, 
in his chess magazine, that this position probably "clearly favored Black." 

****************************************

     [  Variation # 7B1.)  
        The following line looks to be much better for Black, but upon deeper 
         inspection - it turns out to be a lot better for White: 
         </=  7...Nxd4?!;  {Diagram?}  
         This looks like it wins material ... but eventually White will trap the Black Knight 
          in the corner. 

         8.Bxd8 Nc2+;  9.Kd2 Nxa1;  10.Bh4! Bb4!?;   {Diagram?}  
         Black tries to use the pin to extricate the Knight. 

            ( Maybe Black should play:  10...f6!?;  {Diagram?}       
              instead ... but this will not change the fate of the stranded cavalry     
              on the a1-square. )       

        11.e3 Bd7;  12.Be2 dxc4;  13.Bxc4 Rc8;  14.Bd3 Nb3+; 
        15.axb3 f6;  16.Nd4! 0-0;  17.Nc2, '±'  {Diagram?}   
         and White is probably (close to) winning, as he has two clear minor 
         pieces for the Rook he lost. (At least "+/" ...maybe "+/-".) 

***************

        Variation # 7B2.)   
        </=  7...Qxf6?;  {Diagram?}  
         Black sets a trap, but it is weak and easy to refute. 

        8.Qxf6 gxf6;  9.cxd5 Nb4;  {Diagram?}  
        This looks nearly forced.  

             ( If  </= 9...Ne7?;  simply  10.e4, '±' )   

        10.0-0-0, "+/="  (Maybe - '±')  {Diagram?}  
         White is up a pawn and will retain it. I feel sure Black has 
         inadequate compensation here. ]  

****************************************

 

8.Qh4,   
The best square for the Queen.
(Some have given this move an exclam, but it looks like the only good move 
 for White at this point.)  

Pillsbury has foreseen this position, he played his first 10-15 moves very
quickly.  

**************

     [ Just terrible is:  </=  8.Qf4? d4!;  "+/="  {Diagram?}  
        and Black is already better.  

***

        Even worse is: </=  8.Qd2?? d4;  ("-/+")   {Diagram?}  
        Black wins a piece, for if White moves his Knight, ...Bb4 
        will win the White Queen. ]  

**************

 

8...dxc4!?,    
It looks ugly to open the game in this fashion, but Black may not 
have any choice at this point.  

*******

     [  Even worse was: </=  8...d4?!;  9.0-0-0! e5;  10.e3, '±'  {Diagram?}  
        and White will win at least a pawn ... and maybe more.  

***

           ( The following variation clearly demonstrates Black's problems:  
              10.e3 Bf5;  {Diagram?}  This could be nearly forced.  

                ( Sergeant and Watts give ...Bc5;  in this position. But this      
                   move also fails to solve Black's problems. 

                  For example:  </=  10...Bc5?!; 11.exd4 Nxd4!?; {Diagram?}       
                  Taking with the Bishop or the Pawn is answered by the same move.     

                  12.Nd5!,  '±'   {Diagram?}  and White has a clear advantage.      
                  Most programs - like  Fritz 8.0  - consider White to be winning      
                  ("+/-")  in this position. )         

              11.exd4 h5;  12.Bd3 Bg4;  13.Nd5! Bg7;  14.Rhe1, '±'  {Diagram?}  
               and White is nearly winning.  (Maybe  "+/-") )  ]   

*******

 

Lasker was famous for being able to avoid the worst ... ('damage control') ... 
but here it does not help him. (Pillsbury has analyzed this position very deeply.) 

The next few moves (9-12) are all the very best and or forced ...  
for both parties. (Kasparov seems to agree, citing a game where White played 
Qxc4 on his 9th move ... and Black had no problems.) 

 

9.Rd1! Bd7;  10.e3 Ne5!;   
Best ... according to the principle that the player who is being attacked, 
(or is under pressure); should seek to relieve problems by exchanges. 

Kasparov says this is not the best and instead gives the move ...f5 as being 
superior in this position. (But I do not find his analysis to be convincing.) 
{Reinfeld also criticizes ...Ne5 here, and calls it time-wasting, but his 
analysis inspires ZERO confidence.}  

*************************

     [  Variation # 10B1.)   
        Some have suggested ...f5 here as being much better:  
        10...f5!?; ('?!')  11.Qxc4!,  {Diagram?}   
         Easily the most natural move, and therefore also the best.  

*******

            ( After the moves: </=  11.Qg3?! Qb6!; "="  {Diagram?}      
              my (deep) analysis of this position indicates that Black      
              is already equal ... and may even be better.     

***

              Interesting was:  11.Qh5!?, "~"  {Diagram?}      
               with a rather vague position.       

***

              After the moves:  11.Qxd8+!? Rxd8;  12.Bxc4, "="  {Diagram?}       
               it is hard to believe either side has much of an advantage. )     

*******

        11...Bg7;  {Diagram?}  
         The only move given by GK.   

            ( ...Rc8 looked more natural. )        

        12.Qb3 Bxc3+?!;  13.Qxc3 Qa5!?;  {Diagram?}  
         This does not look safe to me.  ('?!')  

            ( Maybe just  13...f6!?;  instead? )       

        14.Qxa5 Nxa5;  15.Ne5 Ba4;  16.Rd4?,  {Diagram?}  
         A terrible move ... passed on without any comment by Garry. 
         (A check with any analysis engine will probably reveal that both 
          b3 and the move Rc1 are MUCH better!)  

*******

            ( Why not the simple:  >/=  16.b3 Bc6!?;  17.b4 f6;  18.Nd3 Nc4; 
              19.Nc5 Bd5;  20.Bxc4 Bxc4;  21.Nxb7 Bxa2;  22.0-0 Bd5;  
              23.Nd6+ Kf8;  {Diagram?}  
              This is virtually forced.  

                  ( Not  </=  23...Ke7?;  24.Nxf5+!,  {Diagram?}       
                    which simply drops a Pawn. )       

              24.f3, "+/="  {Diagram?}   
              A simple check with any strong chess engine will reveal White is 
              clearly better. (If now  ...Rd8?; then simply 25.Nxf5!, exf5; and now 
              e4 wins back the material with a very distinct edge for White.) 
              Several computer tests of this position clearly show that White   
              prevailed the majority of the time.   

              (The second player has multiple weaknesses in his pawn structure.);   )      

*******

        16...Nc6;  17.Rxa4 Nxe5;  18.Bb5+?! Ke7!;  "~"   {Diagram?}   
          ... "with equal chances,"  ("=")  according to GM Garry Kasparov.   

        Duz-Khotimirsky - Znosko-Borovski;  St. Petersburg, Russia;  1905.  

        [ See the book:  "My Great (chess) Predecessors," 
          by (former) World Champion & GM, Garry K. Kasparov.  
          Chapter Three (Number # 3), 'Emanuel The Second.'  
          Page # 136, column # 1.]   

**************

        Variation # 10B2.)   
        The continuation of:  10...Be7; ('!?')  {Diagram?}   
        (This move was originally suggested by Reinfeld 
          and later heralded by M. Euwe.)  

        11.Bxc4 Qb6!?; ('?!')  {Diagram?}   
         Maybe  ...Rc8;  instead?   

***

            ( Instead Kasparov gives the following continuation:     
              </= 11...Qa5?!; 12.0-0 f5?!; ('?') 13.Qf4!? 0-0-0!?; "cp"  {Diag?}      
              claiming that  ... "Black has clear counterplay."  - G.K.       
              Fuster - Cuellar;  Havana, 1966.      

              But now simply  Nb5, "+/="  gives White a very healthy edge      
              in this position.  {A.J.G.} )      

***

        12.Rd2!? 0-0-0!?;  13.0-0, "+/="  {Diagram?}   
         as recommended by Reinfeld leaves White with a very decent 
         and solid advantage. (Maybe - '±')   

         I conducted literally DOZENS of "computer-vs.-computer"  tests 
         from this position  ...  White won the overwhelming majority of these 
         experiments. ]   

*************************

 

11.Nxe5! fxe5;  12.Qxc4!,   
There is no escape for Lasker ... who would like to exchange Queens, 
 if only he could.

      [ Or  12.Qxd8+ Rxd8;  13.Bxc4, "="  ("~")  {Diag?} 
         and the position looks very balanced. ]  

 

12...Qb6!?,   {See the diagram just below.}   
Lasker probes White's Queen-side, and also puts out some 'feelers' in this position. 
('Do you want a draw?' 'Do you really want to sacrifice a pawn?'  ... ... ... 
 and ...  'How do you feel today?') 

  (r3kb1r/pp1b1p1p/1q2p3/4p3/2Q5/2N1P3/PP3PPP/3RKB1R w)  

 

While this move was harshly criticized by some writers as "a premature excursion 
of the Black Queen,"  my deep computer analysis might suggest that this was the only 
move which could yield Black any winning chances at all. 
 (Lasker thought for a long time before playing this move.)    

If you have studied Lasker's games, you will know that he rarely was satisfied with a 
purely passive defense, with no chance of a victory.  

     [ I have an entire notebook filled with my thoughts and analysis 
       concerning this game. 

       I shall spare you the long version,  but after a simple continuation like:  
       12...Be7!?;  13.Qg4! a6;  14.Be2 Rc8;  15.0-0 Kf8!?;  16.Rd2!,  '±'  {Diag?}  
       you don't have to be a GM to see that White is clearly better - and that Black 
       has been prevented from castling. ]  

 

13.Be2!,  (Probably - '!!')   
A really fine move by Pillsbury. 

 Just how much courage it took to play this can readily be seen ... in some        
  lines White has to sacrifice BOTH of his Queen-side Pawns!       

   '!' - GM Garry Kasparov.   '!' - Fred Reinfeld.   

     [ Or  13.Rd2!? Bc6;  "~"  {Diagram?}  but Black seems OK here. ]    

 

13...Qxb2!?;  (Maybe - '?!')    
As a mathematician, Lasker might have thought:  "Having stated 'A,' 
I must logically follow with 'B' in this position." 

This has been heavily condemned by some writers ... but is it so bad? 
Is it wrong to possibly take a risk  ...  if ALL of the other variations ... 
very clearly favor White?  

   '?' - Dr. S. Petrovic.   '?' - Fred Reinfeld.   

 Strangely - Kasparov allows this particular move to pass without any mark at all ...  
 or any comment as well. (Odd - this is a VERY critical move/moment of this game.)   

"Underestimating the attack which now follows."  - J.N. Pope 
  (Possibly quoting Reinfeld?) 

Having now spent close to six months on this game, I can safely say that this was 
definitely the critical move. Lasker probably should not have taken this pawn. 
(But you should also understand that this was often the Lasker method, he would 
choose to mix it up and make things difficult and more complex most of the time. 
Going quietly was NOT Lasker's way to handle a defence. Anyone who has carefully  
studied the games of this great player should be able to verify this.)  

*************************

     [  Variation # 13B1.)   
         After the relatively simple line:  13...Be7!?;  14.0-0!,  {Diagram?}  
         It is best to simply castle here.  
         (Forget the b-pawn, and the half-open g-file in this position!)  

            ( Interesting was:  14.Rd2!? )    

         14...Rd8;  15.Qe4!, "+/="  ('±')  {Diagram?}  
          White is very clearly better here - in this position.  

**************

        Variation # 13B2.)  
         Black should not play ...Qb4; here, as the 2nd player comes out on the 
         short end of the stick.  E.g., </=  13...Qb4?!;  14.Qc7! Bc6;  15.Bb5!,     
         15...Bxb5;  16.Qxb7! Rd8;  17.Qxb5+ Qxb5;  18.Nxb5,  '±'  {Diagram?}   
         White is clearly better here. ("+/")  

         In fact I sent this position to an on-line chess teaching service. 
         {The first game is free.}  The comment was that, 
         "Black probably cannot hold this ending."   

**************

        Variation # 13B3.)   
         The best continuation for Black is probably:  
         >/=  13...Bc6!;  14.Bf3!? Bxf3;  15.gxf3 Be7!?;  {Diagram?}  
         Black tries to develop.  

*******

             Or Black can try: 
             a).  Maybe just  15...a6!?;  "~"  {Diagram?}  
                   and Black is probably OK.  

*****

             b).  But NOT:  15...Qxb2?;  {Diagram?}   
                    This is a bad mistake.

                    16.Rb1! Qa3;  17.Qb5+ Ke7;  {Diagram?}  
                     This is probably forced.  

***

                            ( Obviously much worse was: 
                               </=  17...Kd8??;  18.Rd1+ Ke7;  {Diagram?}  
                               This is now forced.  

                                  (</= 18...Kc7?; 19.Rd7+ Kc8; 20.Qxb7#)      

                              19.Ne4 Rd8!?;  {Diagram?}  
                               Otherwise Black loses a whole Rook after Qxb7+. 
                               (White also threatened Qd7 mate as well.)  

                              20.Qxb7+ Ke8;  21.Nf6#. )   

***

                  18.Qxe5; ("+/-")  {Diagram?}  
                   and Black cannot successfully meet all the threats. 
                   (Rxb7+, Nd5+, and even QxR/h8.)  

*******

         (Returning to the main analysis line here.)  
         16.Qa4+ Kf8!?;  17.Rd2, "+/="  {Diagram?}  
          and although White has a very slight advantage, I think Black 
          should be able to draw. {eventually} 

         This would have been a definite improvement over the game. But I also am willing 
          to confess that this line is not perfect - an improvement might be found to strengthen 
          the first player's play. ]  

*************************

 

14.0-0!,   
This is clearly the best move for White. Pillsbury was still moving fairly quickly, 
so we can safely assume that this was all part of the great American player's 
preparation.  

I was the first to award this move an exclam - in an article I did for a state chess 
magazine over 15 years ago.   (*** also  ...  '!' - GM Garry Kasparov.)  

     [ Very interesting was:  14.Qc7!? Bc6;  15.Qxe5 Rg8;  16.Bh5!,  "--->"  
        (Possibly unclear?)  {Diagram?}  
        when White has a strong initiative. But whether or not it is 100% clear  
        that White will come out on top ...  with best play for both parties ...   
        I cannot really say for certain.  

        Note:  One of the things that will affect the LONG-TERM evaluation  
        of this position ... where will White place his King? ]    

 

14...Rc8;   
This is probably the best move for Black - the other alternatives are 
clearly and demonstrably worse.  

*************************

     [  Variation # 14B1.)  
         After the continuation:  
         </=  14...Bb4?!; ('?')  15.Nb5! Rc8;  16.Nc7+! Ke7;  17.Rb1 Qc3;  
        18.Qh4+ f6;  19.Rfc1! Qd2!?;  20.Qxb4+ Qxb4;  21.Rxb4, "+/-"  {Diag?}   
         Black has only managed to achieve a lost position. 

*******

        Variation # 14B2.)   
         Black also gets a very bad game after the continuation of:  
         14...Bc6?;  {Diagram?}   
         A natural move, Black seeks to move the Bishop off the (always dangerous) 
         d-file and possibly exploit his own half-open g-file.  

         But the idea has a tactical flaw.  

         15.Bh5! Be7;  16.Qxe6 0-0;  17.Qxe5,  '±'  {Diagram?}   
          White is clearly MUCH better here, (possibly  "+/-"); 
          Black is a Pawn down ... and has a rotten position.   

*******

        Variation # 14B3.)  
         Also not to be recommended for Black was:   
          </=  14...Rg8!?;  ('?!')  {Diagram?}   
          One article in a newspaper column of that period (Philadelphia) actually 
          claimed that  ...  "this was a great improvement over the game." 
          (Black has more than one threat! The idea was attributed to the American, J. Barry.) 

          But White gets there first!  
          15.Rxd7!! Kxd7;  16.Rb1! Qxb1+;  {Diagram?}  
          This is forced.  

              ( Not: 16...Qa3??; 17.Rxb7+,  {Diagram?}        
                and White mates in two or three moves. ("+/-") )       

          17.Nxb1 Rc8;  18.Qb5+ Kd8;  19.Qxb7,  ("+/-")  {Diagram?}   
           and now the win is only a matter of technique here. ]   

*************************

 

Now the next two or three ply looks to be forced.  
15.Qd3 Rc7;  '[]'  {Diagram?}  
Black definitely had to play this. 
(It also looks to be the most flexible.)  

*************************

     [  Var. # 15B1.)  
        Of course not:  </=  15...Rxc3??;  {Diagram?}  
        If this move were to be played, it would be a terrible blunder. 
        (Taking with the Queen has the same consequences.) 

        16.Qxd7#. 

*******

        Var. # 15B2.)  
         Another disaster for Black is:   
           15...Bc6!?;  16.Bf3 Bxf3??;  {Diagram?}     
         This is obviously a mistake. 

             ( G. Marco says Black must play the move: >/= 16...Be7!?;  instead. )   

           17.Qd7#.     (Ouch!);  

*******

        Var. # 15B3.)   
         Maybe playable was:  15...Rd8!?;  16.Bf3!? Qb6;  
         17.Qe4 Qc7;  18.Rc1,  "/\"  {Diagram?}  
         White has tremendous piece activity, but what the outcome of 
         this particular position should be ...  is not really clear.  ]   

*************************

 

16.Ne4,   
The correct move.
(And almost worthy of an exclam in this position.) 

     [ Many of my students ask the question, "Why not Nb5 here?"  But the move, 
       which at first glance looks promising, is met rather simply:  
       </=  16.Nb5!? Qxb5!;  17.Qxb5 Bxb5;  18.Bxb5+ Ke7!;  "~"  {Diagram?}  
       Black is a Pawn up in a position where there are opposite-colored Bishops. 
       (Black is probably OK.) ]  

 

16...Be7;   
This looks forced. 

*******

     [  Not  16...f5??;  because  17.Nf6+, ("+/-")  {Diagram?}  and White will win.  

***

        Kasparov points out that:  16...Qc2!?;  17.Nd6+?! Bxd6; 
        18.Qxd6 Qc5; "~"  {Diagram?}  may be an adequate defense.  ]    

*********

 

17.Nd6+,   
This is probably the best way for White to proceed from this point. 

     [ Kasparov says that the position reached after the continuation of:  
       17.Rd2!? Qb6;  18.Rb1 Qc6;  19.Bf3!? Qa6!;  20.Qxa6 bxa6; "~"  {D?}  
        might be  "a tenable endgame" for Black, but I would have an uneasy 
        position about this position if I were the second player here. ]  

 

17...Kf8;  ('!')   
This looks to be Lasker's best bet.  

     [ Obviously worse was:  </=  17...Bxd6?!;  18.Qxd6, "+/="  {D?} 
       18...Qxe2??;  {Diagram?}  
        A mistake but played to illustrate a point here. 

           ( Or  18...Qb6; 19.Qxe5, '±'  {Diagram?}          
              and White has the clearly superior position.        
               - GM Garry Kasparov.       
             (His analysis continues on for many more moves, but a check with      
              any analysis engine will surely confirm White is much better here.)       

             Or  </=  18...Qc3?; 19.Bb5!, "+/-"  {Diagram?}      
               -  Jacques N. Pope. )      

       19.Qxc7,  "+/-"  {Diagram?}  and White will win. (easily)  ]   

 

18.Nc4, ('!')    
The correct move ... Kasparov, (and many others); give this move without any comment 
or mark of any kind. (This is strange as Rd2, Bh5, and f4 all looked promising.) 

     [ Interesting was: 18.Bh5!? (Is White better here?) ]  

 

18...Qb5;    {See the diagram given just below.} 
The correct move here. 
(Black had to protect the Pawn on the e5-square.) 

***

Editors note:  Dozens of sources give conflicting game scores for this epic contest. 
MOST databases - at least when I first started on this game - gave the wrong score! 
No less than E. Winter covered this matter in his "Chess Notes." Also Tim Harding 
covered this matter - deeply! - in an article on this game on the "Chess Cafe" web site. 
This note added: Sunday;  May 09th, 2004.  (Go here for more information.)    

 

  (5k1r/pprbbp1p/4p3/1q2p3/2N5/3QP3/P3BPPP/3R1RK1 w)  

 

At this point, I would be very curious to know how Lasker assessed his position ... 
equal, or worse? 

     [ Simply inferior was:  </= 18...Qb4?!;  19.Nxe5!, "+/="  {Diagram?}  
       and White is clearly a little better.  
       (The book on Lasker by Ken Whyld incorrectly gives the move ...Qb4 here.);  

***

       The position that is reached after the moves:  18...Qxa2!?;  19.Nxe5, "+/="  {D?}  
        looks very dangerous for Black. 
        --->  But months of analysis ... failed to reveal any forced win for White. ]  

 

White to move ... what move would you make if you were playing this game? 

19.f4!!,  (thematic?)  {Diagram?}  
A truly brilliant move ... considering there might have been at least one other continuation 
that was VERY promising for Pillsbury here. 

   '!' - GM Garry Kasparov.   '!' - Fred Reinfeld.    

In a way, this move is also the most logical ... 
White wishes to open the f-file against the Black King. 

*******

     [ Interesting was: 19.Rb1!?,  {Diagram?}  with great play for White.  

***

       I have a very deep analysis that indicates the move  19.Qe4!, "+/="  {Diag?}  
       will give White good play against Black's very weak pawn structure. 

       (My line here is close to 30 moves long. It is VERY complicated ... and has 
        MANY branches! In the final proof of this game, I decided not to reproduce 
        it here.)  {A.J.G.}  

        NOTE:   I first saw 19.Qe4! and analyzed it out to a win as a teenager. 
        (I even wrote several chess magazines about my discovery.)  
        But before I publish any analysis I should insure that it is basically  "air-tight." ]  

*******

 

19...exf4!?;  (Maybe dubious?)  {Diagram?}  
I don't think it is a good idea for Black to open the file here ...  
(Reinfeld echoes this opinion); yet it is difficult to come up with 
anything that is clearly and/or demonstrably better. 

(Kasparov questions this, but the line he gave as superior leaves White with 
 a very solid advantage ... and Black with little counterplay.)  

*************************

     [  Var. # 19B1.)  
        Black can avoid the opening of the f-file by playing: 
        19...e4!?;  20.Qd4 Kg8;  21.Rd2 Qc5;  22.Qxe4, "+/="  {Diagram?}  
        but it costs him a pawn to do so. 

**********

        Var. # 19B2.)   
        Another continuation is:  
        19...Qc5!?;  20.Nxe5 Be8!?;  {Diagram?}  
        Probably the safest move. 

        21.Qe4! h6!?,  {Diagram?}  
        Black prepares to occupy the half-open g-file. 

            ( Or  21...Rg8;  22.Rf2!, "+/=" )     

        22.f5 Bg5;  23.fxe6 Qxe3+;  24.Qxe3 Bxe3+;  25.Kh1 Kg7;  
        26.h4! fxe6!?;  {Diagram?}   
        Black decides to rid himself of the pesky e-pawn.  

            ( If  26...Rc2!?;  then  27.Bb5!!,  "+/="  {Diagram?}       
              (If Black captures on b5, he is mated in three moves.) )     

        27.Rd3!,  '±'  {Diagram?}   
        & White has a very strong attack. 
        (If ...Bb6; then Rg3+ may win on the spot for White.);   

**********

        Var. # 19B3.)  
        Black could also try:  
        19...Bc6!?;  20.fxe5 Qd5;  21.Qxd5 Bxd5;  22.Nd6, "+/="  {Diagram?}  
        and any strong program will show that White has a fairly substantial edge 
        in this position. (This is the line that Kasparov claimed to be much better 
        than the game.) ]  

*************************

 

20.Qd4!,   
With virtually the precision of a computer ...  
Pillsbury once again shows the correct path. 

   '!' - GM Garry Kasparov.   '!' - Fred Reinfeld.  

     [ It is entirely possible that the line, beginning with the move:  
       20.Rxf4!?, "+/="  {Diagram?}  
       leads to a position where White also has a fairly solid edge. ]  

 

20...f6; {Box?}  {Diagram?}  
As a teen-ager, I questioned this move, (believing ...Kg8 to be better); 
but now I see that this play is <basically> forced for Black. 

     [ </=  20...Rg8??;  21.Qxf4, "+/-"  (White is winning.)

       </=   20...fxe3??;  21.Qxh8#.    (Its mate.)

       </=  20...Kg8?; ('??')  21.Qxf4! Be8; 22.Qxc7, ("+/-")  and White wins.  

       </=  20...e5?;  21.Nxe5! Qxe2[];  22.Nxd7+ Kg8;  23.Qxf4 Qh5;  
              24.Qxc7, "+/-"  {Diagram?}  (White has a won game.)  ]  

 

21.Qxf4!,   
The most natural move ... and definitely the best. 

   '!' - Drazen Marovic.  

     [ With the move:  21.Rxf4!?, "+/="  {Diagram?}  
        White prepares to double Rooks on the f-file, and retains a solid edge. ]   

 

White has all kinds of nasty threats, but Ne5, with a big discovery, is definitely 
the biggest threat Lasker has to consider here.  

Lasker's solution is both simple and elegant ... he ignores his development, 
guards d6 a second time, and also avoids the possible attack by B/on-e2. 

21...Qc5!;   {See the diagram given just below.}   
The crafty fox - Lasker - seemed to always find the best defense in almost every 
position. (Several disasters awaited Lasker here, but he avoids stepping on any 
of Pillsbury's land-mines.)