If you remove the three games from simultaneous exhibitions, at least two of which were against master-strength opposition, his record is even more impressive: +5=1-1, or 78.6%.
The five wins were against Tarrasch (1908 world championship), Janowski twice (second Paris match), Capablanca (St Petersburg 1914) and Marshall (New York 1924).
The only blemishes on Lasker's record in these important games were a draw against Showalter (Cambridge Springs 1904) and a loss to Steinitz (1894 world championship).
Playing 4.Bxc6 was not Lasker's only weapon against the Spanish. He chose 4.Ba4 three times as often, but scored a much lower percentage - 63% with 4.Ba4, 82% with 4.Bxc6 (he was especially deadly with the follow-up 5.Nc3), according to ChessBase's 2020 Mega database.
The following traits can be seen in Lasker's 5.d4 Spanish Exchanges:
1. The white king usually stays in the centre, ready to support the white kingside pawns (but White castles long if circumstances dictate). White should not fear losing castling rights after a major-piece exchange on d1 - the king shuffles sideways to the e file.
2. With pawns on e4 and f4, the anti-positional thrust f5 can be surprisingly effective. If Black responds with ...f6, or has played the move earlier, the square e6 can become an outpost for a white knight. The Black f pawn can also be attacked by White's g pawn.
3. Piece exchanges generally favour White, even though a less-cluttered board usually enhances the power of a bishop-pair. This is because exchanges bring an endgame closer, which greatly favours White if the pawn-majorities are still as they are from the opening, ie White has a 4-3 kingside majority that can easily yield a passed pawn, while Black's 4-3 queenside majority can rarely do the same.
4. If both sides advance their pawn-chains and the pawns become fixed, this almost certainly favours the player with a knight rather than a bishop.
Here is one of my games, from last year's Pimlico summer congress, that illustrates some of the above points.
Spanton (171) - Gergely Kiss (207)
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 a6 4.Bxc6 dxc6 5.d4 exd4 6.Qxd4 Qxd4 7.Nxd4 Bc5!? 8.Be3 Nf6!?
Black's set-up is aggressive and has been tried by strong players, including Capablanca, but was condemned by Alekhine, who said it endangered the bishop-pair.
9.f3 0-0 10.Nf5!?
Alekhine's recommendation. Lasker played 10.Nd2 in a simul: https://beauchess.blogspot.com/2020/01/laskers-spanish-inquisition-part-four.html
10...Bb4
Three previous opponents of mine played the too-accommodating 10...Bxe3?!
11.c3 Bxf5 12.cxb4 Rfe8 13.Kf2 Bg6
As Alekhine warned, Black's bishop-pair is gone, but White's queenside pawn-formation is damaged. Stockfish10 and Komodo10 reckon White has the upper hand.
14.Nc3 Nd7 15.Bf4 Ne5 16.Rhd1
I cannot recall why I did not play 16.Nxe5. I guess I must have feared Black's bishop combining with his rooks in a way that White's knight cannot work with the white rooks.
16...Kf8 17.h3
Threatening to trap the bishop with 18.Bxe5 Rxe5 19.f4 etc.
17...f6 18.Bxe5
Now I exchange minors, and get a rook to the seventh into the bargain.
18....Rxe5 19.Rd7 Re7 20.Rad1 Ke8 21.Rxe7+ Kxe7 22.Ke3 Bf7 23.f4 Bc4 24.Rd4 b5 25.Rd2 a5 26.bxa5
 |
| How should Black proceed? |
*****
*****
*****
*****
26...Rxa5
Black seems to have excellent drawing chances with the engines' 26...b4!? Their main line runs 27.Na4 Bxa2 28.Nc5 Rxa5 29.Rc2, when White is a pawn down but Black's queenside is weak. The engines continue 29...Rb5 30.b3 Bb1 31.Rc1 Kd6! 32.Kd4 Rxc5 33.Rxc5 Bxe4 34.Kc4 Bxg2 35.Kxb4, when Black has two pawns for the exchange, and the reduced material makes a draw very likely.
27.a3
Better is 27.Kd4!, but I missed that 27...Bxa2?? loses to 28.b4.
27...Ra8 28.g3 h5!?
We have a typical Spanish Exchange ending of white knight and rook versus black bishop and rook. Usually White has much-the-better pawn-majority. Here that is not quite as pronounced as usual, but even so it will be difficult for Black to create a passed pawn. The text becomes Komodo10's top choice, but in my view is double-edged - it gains space, but puts another pawn on the same-coloured squares as the black bishop, which weakens Black's dark squares.
29.h4 g6!? 30.Kf3
The engines prefer the Lasker-like thrust 30.f5.
30...Rh8 31.Nd1 Rd8?
Definitely a mistake - removal of the rooks makes it much easier for the white knight and king to manoeuvre.
32.Rxd8 Kxd8 33.b4
Fixing the c pawns.
33...Ke7 34.Ke3 Kd6
KG offered a draw.
(The rest of the notes are from my original post about this game.)
Normally a bishop outplays a knight in an ending with rival pawn-majorities. But here White can stop Black activating his queenside majority, after which it is just a question of whether White can win or only draw with his kingside majority. Bearing in mind that Black's bishop is fairly bad - four out of six black pawns are on light squares - Black's practical chances of holding this ending are very low.
35.Kd4 Be2 36.Nc3 Bf3 37.a4 bxa4 38.Nxa4 Bd1 39.Nc5 Bf3 40.Nb7+
40.e5+ is probably a quicker way to win, but there is no harm in probing with the knight as Black cannot prevent White coming back to the e5+ idea.
40...Ke6 41.Nd8+ Kd7 42.Nf7 Ke6 43.Nd8+
I got cold feet about 43.Nh8 because of 43...f5, when 44.Nxg6 seems to be the only way to keep winning chances. White then has to be certain he is winning after both 44...fxe4?! and 44...Bxe4. I was not sure, but I was fairly confident that returning the knight to the queenside would win.
43...Kd7 44.Nb7 Ke6 45.Nc5+ Kd6 46.Nd3 Ke6 47.Ke3 Bg2?
This speeds defeat, as does 47...Bg4? 48.Nf2. Black had to play 47...Bd1 or 47...Bh1, but in each case White wins slowly but comfortably, eg 47...Bd1 48.Nc5+ Kd6 49.Na6 Ba4 50.Kd4 Bc2 51.e5+ fxe5 52.fxe5+ Kd7 (52...Ke6 53.Nxc7 Kf5 54.e6 Kf6 55.Kc5) 53.Ke3 Bf5 54.Kf4 Bc2 55.Nb8+.
48.f5+ gxf5
If 48...Kf7, then 49.Nf4.
49.Nf4+ 1-0
No comments:
Post a Comment