3

Lasker’sManual of Chess

by

Emanuel Lasker

Foreword byMark Dvoretsky

2008Russell Enterprises, Inc.

Milford, CT USA

4

Lasker’s Manual of Chess

© Copyright 2008

Russell Enterprises, Inc.

All Rights Reserved. No part of this book may be used, reproduced, stored in a retrievalsystem or transmitted in any manner or form whatsoever or by any means, electronic,

electrostatic, magnetic tape, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without the expresswritten permission from the publisher except in the case of brief quotations embodied in

critical articles or reviews.

ISBN: 978-1-888690-50-7

Published by:Russell Enterprises, Inc.

PO Box 5460Milford, CT 06460 USA

http://www.chesscafe.cominfo@chesscafe.com

Cover design by Zygmunt Nasiolkowski and Janel Lowrance

Editing and Proofreading: Taylor Kingston, David Kaufmann,Hanon Russell

Production: Mark Donlan

Printed in the United States of America

5

Table of Contents

ForewordEditor’s PrefaceDr. Lasker’s Tournament RecordDr. Lasker’s Match RecordPreface to the Original German EditionBook I: The Elements of ChessBook II: The Theory of the OpeningsBook III. The CombinationBook IV: Position PlayBook V: The Aesthetic Effect in ChessBook VI: Examples and ModelsFinal ReflectionsAnalytical EndnotesIndex of PlayersIndex of Openings

Analytical Contents

First Book

The Elements of ChessBrief Account of the Origin of the GameThe Chess BoardThe PiecesThe Rules for Moving:

a. the Kingb. the Rookc. the Bishopd. the Queene. the Knightf. the Pawn

CastlingCapturing “en passant”Pawn PromotionThe Initial PositionChess NotationThe End of the Game: Mate, Stalemate, DrawThe Function of strategyOn the Advantages of a Plus in PiecesFirst Proposition: the Plus of a Rook Suffices to Win the GameRook and King vs. KingThe OppositionZugzwang, or Constraint to MoveSecond Proposition: King and Bishop or King and Knight against

Bare King make a Drawn GameThird Proposition: King and Two minor Pieces against Bare King

Force Checkmate unless both Minor Pieces are Knights

14161819202150

102140199216247250275277

21212123

232324242424262929293032323333343435

35

35

6

Major PiecesMinor PiecesIllustrations of Propositions Two and ThreeFourth Proposition: the Plus of a Pawn does not always Suffice to

Force the Win, but in the Majority of Cases it DoesIllustrations of Proposition FourPassed Pawn Defined“Square of the Passed Pawn” DefinedPeculiarities of the Rook’s PawnOn the Advantage of the Attack against an Unprotected KingSmothered MateDouble Check IllustratedOn the Advantage brought about by a Simultaneous

Attack upon Several ObjectsInterposing IllustratedQueening IllustratedPinning IllustratedThe ForkThe Discovered CheckIllusory PinsOn the Use of Superior Power at Decisive PointsRule for Determining Which Side has Advantage on a Given SpotHow the “Value” of the Pieces Affects the Use of Superior PowerComplications Arising through Simultaneous Contending

at Various PointsHow the “Pin” Affects the Use of Superior PowerOn the Exchange Value of the PiecesWinning the “Exchange”Importance of the “Right to Move” IllustratedPawn Promotion Showing Case where Under-promoted

Pawn is Stronger than Queen, Rook and Knight CombinedRook vs. Bishop and PawnQueen vs. Two RooksQueen vs. Rook

Second Book

The Theory of the OpeningsSome General Principles and a Little HistoryThe Petroff Defense or Russian GameThe Hungarian DefensePhilidor’s Defense

a. Hanham VariationThe Two Knights’ DefenseThe Center Game and Center GambitKing’s Bishop’s OpeningMax Lange AttackThe Ponziani OpeningThe Vienna Opening

353536

3838383839404242

42434343434444444545

4646474747

47484849

505051525354555757586060

7

The Scotch OpeningThe Scotch GambitThe King’s Gambit

a. the Kieseritzkyb. the Allgaierc. the Defense of Philidord. the Chigorin Attacke. the Salviof. the Muzio

The Cunningham GambitThe King’s Bishop’s GambitThe King’s Gambit DeclinedThe Falkbeer CountergambitThe Danish GambitGiuoco Piano or Italian Opening

a. the Moeller AttackThe Evans Gambit

a. Declinedb. Accepted

Four Knights’ GameRuy Lopez (or Spanish Game)

a. Steinitz Defenseb. Schliemann’s Defensec. Berlin Defensed. Morphy Defensee. “Breslau” Variationg. Exchange Variation

The Half-Open Gamesa. the Nimzovitch Defenseb. the Fianchetti

i. Fianchetto of the Kingii. Fianchetto of the Queen

c. Alekhine’s Defensed. From’s Gambite. the Caro-Kann Defensef. the Center Counter (or Scandinavian) Defenseg. the Sicilian Defense

i. the Wing Gambith. the French Defense

The English Opening (or Reverse Sicilian)The Close OpeningsThe Queen’s Gambit

a. Acceptedb. Declined

Other Queen Pawn GamesZukertort or Réti OpeningA Summary of Useful Principles in the OpeningValue of the Pieces in the Opening

616464646566666767686870707171737374747679798080818385868687

878889909192929496969696989999

100

8

Third Book

The CombinationVariation, Definition ofSimple Combinations IllustratedCapablanca-YatesCombination Involving a StalemateCombination Involving a Smothered MatePaulsen-MorphyThe Combination, What It Is and How Carried Out in Practical PlayVarious Motifs in CombinationsMotif of the Weakness of a Piece of little or no MobilityA Faulty Opening in which a Bishop is Deprived of all MobilityThe Geometrical MotifMotif of Encircling the KingObstruction of Rook by a Bishop or vice versaEndings by TroitzkyObstructing or Pinning an Obstruction IllustratedPost-KaganEnding by L. KubbelMotif of Indirect Support IllustratedMotif Illustrating Passed Pawn Supporting Distant Pieces or Pawns

(i.e., Motif of “Function”)Another Function Motif IllustratedSteinitz-HirschfeldLöwenthal-MayetSteinitz-ChigorinAlekhine-KubmannSteinitz-MeitnerBergen-SchmidThe Motif of “Desperado”Forgács-Durasv. Popiel-Marcov. Oppen-NNTarrasch-Em. LaskerBogolyubov, Réti and Spielmann vs. Englund, Jacobson, Nyholm and OlsonEnding by Troitzky (Queen and Bishop vs. Queen)“Intentions” in Combinations Make Players Reckon with Them“Threat” in an Intended CombinationTarrasch-BurnTartakower-CapablancaJohn-SüchtingPrevalent Types of CombinationsMorphy-Baucherde Rivière-MorphySteinitz-AmateurEm. Lasker-BauerSteneberg-BolteMotif of Tearing Away Safeguards of Hostile King IllustratedSteinitz-NN

102102102103103104104105106106106106106106107107107108108

109109109109110110110111111111112112113113114114114114115115115116116116116117117117

9

Boden-OwenAlbin-SteinitzKolisch-PaulsenTypical Attack on Pinned KnightTypical Defense to Heavy Attacks against KingZukertort-SteinitzEm. Lasker-Ed. LaskerTartakower-AlekhineBird-SteinitzSchlechter-SalweChigorin-SteinitzLasker-JanowskiSteinitz-LaskerCapablanca-MolinaCaldas Vianna-SilvestreBernstein–Znosko-BorovskySteinitz-v. BardelebenSchiffers-ChigorinSchiffers-HarmonistNimzovitch-FluesReggio-MiesesPrzepiorka-W. Cohnv. Freymann-ForgácsRubinstein-Em. LaskerEsser-DavidsonMackenzie-BlackburneTartakower-Em. LaskerRubinstein-SpielmannZugzwang and StalemateEnding by TroitzkyKing and Pawn ending Illustrating “Losing of a Move”Ending by WeeninkOpposition Illustrated in Ending of King and PawnsSchelfhout-MuurlinkEnding by Em. Lasker after an Idea of v. GottschallEnding by TroitzkyThe Promotion of the PawnLindehn-BerghDufresne-HarrwitzMaróczy-TarraschHallgarten-DimerEnding from Chess Player’s ChronicleEndings by Leonid KubbelChigorin-TarraschThomas-MarshallEnding by RétiIllustration of the Pawn “Break-through”Tarrasch-Em. LaskerEm. Lasker-JanowskiOn Made-up Combinations and on Combinations Arising in

the Course of a Hard-fought Game

117117118118118118118119120120121121122122123123123124125125125125126126126127128129129130130131131132132133133133134134134134135136137137137137138

138

10

Fourth Book

Position PlayPosition Play as Opposed to Combination PlayThe PlanPlans vs. IdeasExamplesMetger-PaulsenRook and Pawn vs. Bishop and PawnQueen vs. Rook and Pawn (Philidor)Forgács-SpielmannForgács-E. CohnPerlis-SalweVidmar-SpielmannMacDonnell-LewisMarshall-CapablancaNimzovitch-CapablancaKaufmann and Fahndrich vs. CapablancaJanowski-CapablancaThe History of Planning in ChessPhilidor on PlanningRook and Pawn vs. Rook (Philidor)Rook and Bishop vs. Rook (Philidor)Count Brühl-PhildorL’ Analyse (Philidor)La Bourdonnais on PlanningLa Bourdonnais-McDonnellPhilidor, La Bourdonnais, McDonnell, Staunton, Anderssen, Morphy, SteinitzThe Theory of SteinitzSteinitz as AnalystSteinitz, Master of Strategy, Compared with ZukertortGenius of CombinationsYouth of SteinitzHamppe-SteinitzAnderssen-SteinitzSteinitz-GreenSteinitz-MongredienThe Evolution of the Theory of SteinitzMacDonnell-BodenStubbornness of SteinitzSteinitz and PotterAnderssen-SteinitzThe Lasting Advantages

a. Phalanxb. Doubled Pawnc. Backward Pawnd. Blocked Pawne. Isolated Pawnsf. Blocked Isolated Pawng. the “Hole”

140140140140141141142142143144144144145145146146147148148149149150151151151152153154155155156156157158159159160161161161163

11

Zukertort-NNBird-SteinitzSteinitz’s Maxims for Practical PlayExamples of Steinitz’s PlaySteinitz-SellmannZukertort-SteinitzSteinitz-ZukertortNegligent Analysis of Games (Bachmann and Schallop on Steinitz-Zukertort)Zukertort-SteinitzZukertort-SteinitzZukertort-SteinitzSteinitz Advances his Theory beyond the Needs of Practical Chess

and thus Enters the Domain of Science and PhilosophyBalance of Position in ChessCompensation in ChessPrinciple of AttackWeaknesses and Weak Points as Objectives of AttackExamples of the Principle of AttackMackenzie-AmateurSalwe-MarshallCapablanca-TartakowerMorphy-AnderssenTeichmann-BernsteinBerlin-RigaDuras-E. CohnAnderssen-MorphyTarrasch-SchlechterPrinciple of DefenseExamples of the Principle of DefenseMorphy-AnderssenSteinitz-GolmayoSteinitz-ChigorinPonce and Chigorin vs. Gavilan and SteinitzChigorin-SteinitzThe Declining Years of SteinitzSteinitz and Dr. Emanuel LaskerCriticism of and Additions to Steinitz’s TheoryPrinciple of Cooperation of PiecesPawns are Best in the PhalanxRemarks on the Bishop and KnightExamples of Co-operation

a. Queen vs. Bishop and Knightb. Bishops of Opposite Colorsc. Queen vs. Two Knights

The Principle of JusticeExamples of the Principle of Justice

a Rook and Passed Pawnb. King and Pawn vs. Rookc. Knight and Pawnd. King and Pawn

Aim of Dr. Lasker in Regard to his Pupils

163164164164164165166166167168170

170171171171171172172172172173174174175175175176176176177177177178179179179179180180181181181182182183183183184184184

12

Antagonism of PiecesDie Blockade (Nimzovitch)Endings of Bishops of Same ColorDistanceBishop vs. PawnsRook vs. Bishop and PawnsThe Value of Points (Weak, Strong, Important, Essential)Rubinstein-SalweDuras-RubinsteinAttack and Defense in Balanced PositionsThe Sacrifice for PositionLa Bourdonnais-McDonnellPillsbury-Em. LaskerThe Principle of ProportionPhilosophy of Dr. Lasker and the Doctor as an Author

StruggleDas Begreifen der Welt (Comprehending the World)Die Philosophie des Unvollendbar (The Philosophy of the Unattainable)

Hyper-modern SchoolExamples of the Principle of ProportionTe Kolste-TorreRéti-ColleTe Kolste-RétiAn Enquiry into the Logical Origin and Domain of Application

of Steinitz’s TheoryAdequate Compensation for a Pawn Sacrifice Discussed

Fifth Book

The Aesthetic Effect in ChessTwo-Move Problem by Paul MorphyAnderssen-Kieseritzky (the “Immortal Game”)Examples of the Aesthetic Effect in ChessEnding by Comte de VilleneufHumorous Ending by an Unknown AuthorEnding from Ancient Persian DocumentThree-Move Problem by Sam LoydAnderssen-Dufresne (Critical Position from the “Evergreen Partie”)Mason-WinawerPillsbury-Em. LaskerZukertort-BlackburneRéti-BogolyubovRubinstein-TeichmannBogolyubov-AmateurList-HromadkaEndings by TroitzkyEnding by RatnerEndings by Leonid KubbelEndings by Henri Rinck

184184185186186186187187188189189190190191191

193193193194194

195197

199201201204204204205206206207208209210210211212212213214215

13

Sixth Book

Examples and ModelsBerger-GasparyTarrasch-PillsburyBurn - Znosko-BorovskyJanowski-Em. LaskerSchlechter-SüchtingCapablanca-MarshallTartakower-SeitzCoria-BoneoDus-Chotimirsky–CapablancaBogolyubov-RomanovskyTartakower-MiesesBogolyubov-RétiTorre-YatesSämisch-SpielmannAlekhine-MarshallNimzovitch-BogolyubovRéti-AlekhineThomas-RubinsteinAlekhine-ColleBogolyubov-MiesesBogolyubov-RétiRomanovsky-RabinovichMorrison-WattsTorre-GrünfeldRubinstein-ChwojnikCapablanca-AlekhineAlekhine-CapablancaEuwe-BogolyubovFinal Reflections on Education in ChessEstimated Time Required to Become a First-class PlayerOn the Future of the Theory of Steinitz

Analytical EndnotesIndex of Players and ComposersIndex of Openings

12

216216216216218219221222223223224226227228229231232233235236238239240241241243244246246247248249

251275277

14

Foreword

Can studying the classics be helpful? That depends. Many books that were popular in their dayhave grown dated, and are now of interest only to lovers of chess history. But Lasker’s Manual ofChess, written by Emanuel Lasker, has not lost its relevance even now, some eighty years after itwas first published.

In one of my own books, I analyzed the famous fourth game of the Tarrasch-Lasker match, andexamined the “desperado” theme – that is, a piece which, compelled by circumstance, displays apowerful urge for self-immolation – which was first introduced in that book. While preparing theEnglish edition, I was told that that English language chess literature treats the concept of “des-perado” slightly differently. I went back to the source of this concept, Lasker’s Manual of Chess,where I had first found this idea. And there I discovered that Lasker had not only invented the term,he had isolated and illustrated, by appropriate examples, three possible reasons why a piece mightbecome a “desperado.” One of them applied to the previously mentioned game against Tarrasch.English-language authors, however, use this term for a different situation, which was only one ofthe three! As it turns out, this useful idea for practical players is, if not forgotten, then at leastunderstood only in a simplified form.

I could also bring up other important ideas which were worked out in Lasker’s Manual of Chess,but which have been only dimly reflected in contemporary chess literature, such as his conceptionof how to defend. But such things are not the the chief value of this notable book by the secondworld champion. That lies in something more general, more universal.

Being constantly in contact with talented chessplayers of varying levels, I have become convincedthat only a few of them are able to find on their own the proper responses to general questions thatinterest them. Why do they constantly make the same errors over and over again? What are thestrong and weak points of their game? What habits and techniques should they develop in them-selves? What approach should they take to this or that particular chess problem, and where can theyfind the appropriate study materials, etc., etc. And if they do find answers to these questions, thenmore often than not, they turn out to be the wrong answers. The overwhelming majority of themnaively believe that the key to their success lies in opening preparation, the endless honing of theiropening repertoire.

Very few contemporary books help you work out a true chess philosophy; some even disorient theirreaders. But Lasker’s Manual of Chess is philosophical to its core. It helps you examine differentkinds of problems in the most varied positions and it is exceptionally important, both for practicalplayers and for trainers. Many times I have re-read, with great pleasure and great benefit to myself,those portions of the book dedicated to combinations, positional play (here we find accurately laidout the vital principles of the theory of Steinitz, which form the basis of contemporary chess), andchess aesthetics.

The thoughts expressed in his concluding “On Education in Chess” still resonate today. Here are afew of them:

Education in chess has to be an education in independent thinking and judging. Chessmust not be memorized, simply because it is not important enough. If you load your memory,you should know why ... You should keep in mind no names, nor numbers, nor isolatedincidents, not even results, but only methods ... He who wants to educate himself in chessmust evade what is dead in chess – artificial theories, supported by few instances and

15

Mark DvoretskyMoscow

September 2008

upheld by an excess of human wit; the habit of playing with inferior opponents; the cus-tom of avoiding difficult tasks; the weakness of uncritically taking over variations or rulesdiscovered by others; the vanity which is self-sufficient; the incapacity for admitting mis-takes; in brief, everything that leads to a standstill or to anarchy.

Throughout the course of my trainer’s work, I have followed this advice; never have I regretted it.Of course, there is a well-known Russian proverb that goes, “For every bit of good advice, you needten more bits to tell you how to carry it out.” Thus, Lasker’s ideas, in complete accordance with hisphilosophy, are not a dried-up end-product, but merely an excellent starting point for working outyour own way in chess.

Lasker was both a great fighter and a deep thinker. His book forms the quintessence of many yearsof exceptionally successful experience, and his thoughts on the same. It teaches you what he con-siders to be most important, general principles and methods applicable to any situation. Once youhave read the Manual, you will become wiser, which is bound to help you later on, both in chessand in life.

140

Fourth BookPosition Play

Whereas by combination values are transformed,they are proved and confirmed by “positionplay.” Thus, position play is antagonistic tocombination, as becomes evident when a“combinative player” meets with his counterpart,the “positional player.” The two often are whollydifferent in make up and constitution. Thecombinative player an adventurer, speculator,gambler, the positional player believing in rigiddogma, happy only in a firm position, afraid ofall dangers, parsimonious with all he holds, evenwith the minute values; the former perhapscareless of detail and large-visioned, the latterpenny-wise and pound-foolish. The combinativeplayer calls the positional player Philistine,pedant, woodshifter; the positional player replieswith invectives such as romancer, dreamer,presumptuous idealist. One meets withpronounced types of the two kinds and they pokefun at one another. Thus the following story istold of an onlooker at a game. He was acombinative player. Suddenly he interrupted theplayers: “I see a magnificent combination, asacrifice of the queen,” he excitedly called tohim who was to move. “If your opponent thentakes the pawn, he is mated, and if he goes outof check, he is mated in two.” “Well,” repliedthe player, “but the principal question is: whatam I to do if he captures the queen?” “That isthe only variation,” replied the combinationplayer, “which I have not yet looked into.”

However obviously the majority of chess playersmay be divided into two big classes ofcombination and positional players, in the chessmaster this antagonism is transformed into aharmony. In him combination play is completedby position play. By combination the master aimsto show up and to defeat the false values, thetrue values shall guide him in his position play,which in turn shall bring those values to honor.The master is like a man in a learned dispute whoknows sophistry but does not make use of it,except for the purpose of exposing the slysubtleties of an artful opponent who disputes atrue, sound, vigorous thesis with mere trickery.

The Plan

The thought which gives life to a combination iscalled the idea, the thought behind position playis called the plan. The idea has a point whichsurprises, which changes at one blow the stateof affairs; the plan has breadth and depth whichare imposing and which, by slow, methodicalbuilding, give a structure to the position.

The methods followed in the analysis of a givenposition by combination and by the creation ofplans are differentiated by the direction of theunderlying thought. The combination playerthinks forward: he starts from the given positionand tries the forceful moves in his mind; thepositional player thinks backward: he conceivesa position to be arrived at and works toward thatposition of which he is more conscious than theone on the board. He sees successive stages ofthe position aimed at and he visualizes the stagein a reverse order. If one position, according tohis plan, is to follow another he sees the one thatis to follow first and he deduces, as it were, theanterior position from it.

In looking for a combination the given positionis the essential thing, in the conceiving of plansthe intended position is the root of my thinking.When following the former process I seek to findout whether among the positions that I can derivefrom the present position by a succession offorceful moves I may not be able to detect onedesirable to me and to envisage it; with the latterprocess I hope to be able to attain to a positionthat I have in mind and try to find out whetherways leading up to that conceived position maynot start from the given position. Can I, bymethod, by systematic procedure, start myantagonist on the way to the position I aim at?This is the question uppermost in the mind ofthe positional players and this is the essence ofplan making.

When looking at the results of analysis, it is true,I cannot determine by logical deduction through

141

Fourth Book

which particular process of thought the result hasbeen arrived at. But to this end, though logic failsme, psychology will aid me. A spirit with a largeand roomy brain who without error could keepin mind millions of variations would have noneed of planning. Frail, weak man can clearlykeep in mind only half a dozen variations sincehe has but little time to spare for chess. And ifhe by chance had more time for it and in additionhad genius for the game, to see through hundredsof variations would turn his brain. His reasonwas not made to be a substitute for a printed table.His mind has a marvelous faculty which enableshim to conceive deep and farsighted planswithout being subject to the necessity ofexamining every possibility. From thepsychology of frail man I can decide whetherthis move belongs to a combination; that one toa plan.

There are simple positions by the analysis ofwhich one can practice combining and planningat the same time. One can understand suchpositions either way, and to do this is pleasurable.But let it be said at once that the method ofplanning has not been made for what is simplebut only for what is complicated, immense,infinite. True, complication is merely relative;to a mathematician, for instance, the complexmovements of the planets round the sun are verymuch simpler than the sequence of primenumbers. For all that, every spirit, however greator small, in combat with what to him iscomplicated, has need of this admirable facultyof conceiving plans with which Nature hasprovided him.

For the chess player the importance of planningis sufficiently manifest and is nowadaysacknowledged. So says Nimzovitch (My System,1929, page 33) “Settle on your objective is therule ... Aimlessly to drift from one to another,this will expose you to a strategic disgrace.”

The plan shall provide for long and manifoldseries of moves and conduce to a desirable end.In this the plan is different from a combination.Some combinations of artificial positions arelong and complicated it is true, but they can beregistered in a few lines or, at the utmost, in

several pages. In a contest of two well-matchedmasters the net of variations would fill volumes,they multiply indefinitely and the chess player,to grasp the immense number of possibilities,would have need of Ariadne’s thread, namely,of a plan.

ExamplescuuuuuuuuC(wDwDwDwD}7GpiwDwDw}6wDwDwDwD}5)wDKDwDw}&wDwDwDwD}3DwDwDwDw}2wDwDwDwD}%DwDwDwDw}v,./9EFJMV

Metger-L. Paulsen,White to play and win

1. Let us contemplate this position withoutseeking for a combination. Black’s ideal is tohave his king on a8 or on b7 after his pawn hasbeen got rid of. He sees his king in the corner,sure that the opponent cannot dislodge it.Alternatively he sees the bishop on a7, the whitepawn on b6, his king on b7, moving to a8 andback to b7 and meanwhile the white king at baylest it stalemate. He tries to bring one of thesepositions about, resisting every drift that wouldtend in another direction.

White sees the black king kept from a8. A moveof the b-pawn, he thinks, must be countered bya5-a6. He aims at maneuvering his king so as todrive the opposing king off by Zugzwang. Outof this web of plans the following play logicallyresults: 1.Kd4 The b-pawn must not be allowedto advance with check, since the reply to thatadvance is to be a5-a6.1...Kc6 2.Bb6 Kd6Of course, if 2...Kb5 3.Kd5 and conquers b7.3.Kc4 Kc6 4.Kb4 Kd6 5.Kb5 Kd76.Bg1 Kc7 7.Bh2+ Kany 8.Kb6 and wins.

2. A somewhat more complicated examplefollows:

142

Lasker’s Manual of Chess

cuuuuuuuuC(wDw$wDwD}7DwDwDwDw}6wDwDwDwD}5DwDpDwDw}&wDw)biwD}3DwDwDwDw}2wDwDwIwD}%DwDwDwDw}v,./9EFJMV

White to play

White conceives the plan of forcing the blackking away from the square e4 and thus ofdominating the important points d4 and d5 withking and rook. 1.Rh8 Black resists. He wantsto get his king to e4 or e3. 1...Bf5 2.Rh4+Bg4 3.Kg2 White forces the black king byZugzwang. 3...Kg5 4.Kg3 Bf5 5.Rh8 Bg66.Rf8 Be4 7.Re8 The black king is now drivenoff his fourth rank. 7...Kf6 8.Kf4 Bg2 9.Ra8Kf7 Here White is unable to take the oppositionowing to his king on f5 being exposed to checkby the bishop. 10.Ke5

cuuuuuuuuC(RDwDwDwD}7DwDwDkDw}6wDwDwDwD}5DwDpDwDw}&wDw)wIwD}3DwDwDwDw}2wDwDwDbD}%DwDwDwDw}v,./9EFJMV

White dominates the important points. He hasachieved what he set out to do. His plan nowincludes the capture of the pawn with the rookin a position where the single pawn would win,that is, when black’s king has been driven awayfrom the immediate vicinity of d7. 10...Be411.Ra7+ Ke8 12.Ke6 Kd8 13.Kd6 Kc814.Ra8+ Kb7 15.Rg8 Bf3 16.Rg3 Be417.Rc3 Bg2 18.Rc5 Now the king has beenforced away from the vicinity of d7 and Rxd5follows decisively.

The above is not the only plan that would win.The white king might have marched to c3, theblack king driven from the vicinity of the whitepawn, the white king then proceeds to c5, therook to e5 and if need be the black king is drivenaway from d7 as above.

cuuuuuuuuC(wDwDwDwD}7DwDwiwDw}6wDw0wDwD}5DwDw4wDw}&wDwDwIwD}3DwDQDwDw}2wDwDwDwD}%DwDwDwDw}v,./9EFJMV

PhilidorWhite to play

3. White’s plan must be to separate the black king

Lasker the Farmer: In1912 Lasker bought asmall piece of land about20 miles outside Berlin,with the idea of becominga farmer and pigeonbreeder. Neither effort metwith success: Lasker gotwalnut-sized potatoes, andhis birds did not breed.Consulting an expert, helearned the reason: theywere all male.

143

Fourth Book

from the pawn and also, if possible, to lead hisking to attack the pawn. Now the king may bedriven to e6 and then by a check at e8 to d5 wherethe king will obstruct the rook. Then Zugzwangmay be utilized by placing the queen on c8 andBlack gets into difficulties. Or the rook may beon c5, the queen on e8, the king on d5. Can Blackresist? Can he turn the game to a different issue?

1.Qh7+ Ke6 Or 1...Kd8 2.Qf7 Kc8 3.Qa7The rook has to guard the square e7, where thequeen would be powerful, hence 3...Kd84.Qb8+ Kd7 5.Qb7+ Kd8 6.Qc6 Ke7 7.Qc7+Ke6 8.Qd8. 2.Qc7 Rc5 3.Qd8 Re5 4.Qe8+Kd5 5.Qc8 Re4+ There is no help for it. Ifthe king moves, Qc6 follows. To move the rookaway from the king would permit fatalsimultaneous attacks. 6.Kf5 Re5+ 7.Kf6

cuuuuuuuuC(wDQDwDwD}7DwDwDwDw}6wDw0wIwD}5DwDk4wDw}&wDwDwDwD}3DwDwDwDw}2wDwDwDwD}%DwDwDwDw}v,./9EFJMV

The fifth rank has been forced by the king, butnot yet the e-file. Now to force the rook fromthe e-file. 7...Re4 8.Qb7+ Kd4 9.Qb4+Kd5 10.Qd2+ Kc6 11.Qc2+ Kd512.Qd3+ Rd4

cuuuuuuuuC(wDwDwDwD}7DwDwDwDw}6wDw0wIwD}5DwDkDwDw}&wDw4wDwD}3DwDQDwDw}2wDwDwDwD}%DwDwDwDw}v,./9EFJMV

At last! Now the king to the vicinity of the pawn.13.Qb5+ Ke4 14.Ke6 Ke3 15.Qb6 Kd316.Qb3+ Ke4 17.Qc3 Rd3 18.Qe1+ Kf3

cuuuuuuuuC(wDwDwDwD}7DwDwDwDw}6wDw0KDwD}5DwDwDwDw}&wDwDwDwD}3DwDrDkDw}2wDwDwDwD}%DwDw!wDw}v,./9EFJMV

The black king and rook are separated. Now tokeep them so and let Zugzwang do its work.19.Kd7 Rd4 20.Kc6 Rd3 21.Kb5 d522.Kc5 Kf4 23.Qe2, and the struggle is over.

When we consider the amount of room requiredby the queen for the execution of the plan, wesee that Black would not lose if the pawn hadbeen on Black’s second rank, nor if it had stoodon the b-file. Of course, a pawn on the seventhrank would be so threatening as to make a suredraw. If the pawn is on the border, whollydifferent motifs present themselves. Obviously,the resources of the defense would thereby befurther limited.

cuuuuuuuuC(rDbDwDrD}70pDwiqDw}6wDwDp0w$}5DwDpDwDw}&wDp)wDw!}3Dw)wDw)w}2PDPDB)wD}%DwIRDwDw}v,./9EFJMV

Forgács-Spielmann,White to play

4. White plans to get the pawns which obstruct

144

Lasker’s Manual of Chess

his pieces out of the way and to enter the blackcamp with his heavy artillery. 1.f4 Bd7 2.f5exf5 3.Bxc4 Rg4 If 3...dxc4 4.Re1+, and if4...Kany 5.Rxf6; if 4...Be6 5.d5. The plan isrealized. Now follows a brief struggle. 4.Re1+Be6 If 4...Kd8 5.Rxf6 wins. 5.Qh1 Kd66.Rh7 Qg8 The queen has to keep the bishopprotected, else Rxe6+. 7.Bb3 Re4 8.Rxb7Rc8 9.Qf1 Rc6 10.Rxe4 Resigns.

cuuuuuuuuC(rDbDrhkD}70p1wgp0w}6wDpDpDw0}5DwDw)wDw}&wDB)QDwD}3DwHwDNDw}2P)wDw)P)}%DwDR$wIw}v,./9EFJMV

Forgács-E. Cohn,White to play

5. White plans to bring superior forces to bearagainst the black king and to throttle theresistance of the few black pieces which couldbe collected in that narrow quarter. Black plansto make an advance in the center, but he needsmuch time for the preparations necessary to putsuch a plan into effect with so little developedforce. 1.Qg4 b6 2.Qh5 Bb7 3.Re4 Bb44.Rg4 The march of the rook to the kingside, adifficult enterprise, has been accomplished.4...Bxc3 One enemy less. 5.bxc3 Kh86.Ng5 Re7 7.Ne4 Rd8 8.Rd3 c5 9.Nf6White threatens Qxh6+. 9...Ng6 10.Rh3 andwins.

6. From the next diagram, White, who on thequeenside is hopelessly inferior, resolves toabandon his queenside to its fate and toconcentrate all his efforts upon the kingside.Therefore, he lets even the e-pawn go andadvances his f-pawn so as to narrow down thespace available to Black. 1.f5 Rf6 Black mustblock the pawn which would otherwiseadvance impetuously with new threats at eachmove.

cuuuuuuuuC(rDb1w4kD}70pDwhwDp}6wDpDwDwD}5DwDp0wDQ}&wDwDp)wH}3DB)wDwDw}2PDPDwDP)}%$wDwDRIw}v,./9EFJMV

Dr. Perlis-Salwe,White to play

2.Rae1 Kh8 3.g4 Bd7 4.Ng6+ Nxg65.fxg6 Rxg6 6.Rf7 Qb6+ 7.Kh1 Rg78.Qxe5 Rag8 9.Ref1 Qb5 10.R1f2 Qc511.Rxg7 Resigns.

cuuuuuuuuC(wDwDwDwD}7DpDwDkDp}6wDwDwDpD}5DwGwIwDw}&pDwDwDwD}3Dw)wDw)w}2wDwDwDw)}%DwDwDbDw}v,./9EFJMV

Vidmar-Spielmann,Black to play

7. B1ack, having a passed pawn on the queensidewhich will occupy at least one of the whitepieces, plans to attack on the kingside withsuperior force and to keep a remote pawn thereon a weak, unprotected spot, so as to have a targetfor his attack. 1...Bh3 Thus selecting as a targetthe white h-pawn which must not be allowed tomarch to safety. 2.Ba3 g5 3.Bb4 Kg6 4.c4Kh5 5.Ba3 Kg4 6.Bd6 Bg2 7.Kf6 Bf18.Kg7 By the pressure on the h-pawn Black hasdriven White from the center. Thence he canthreaten attacks on either wing. 8...Kf5 9.c5 If

145

Fourth Book

9.Kxh7 Bxc4 and wins with his two passedpawns of which one will cost the bishop whilethe other queens. 9...a3 10.c6 a2 11.g4+ Ke412.Be5 bxc6 13.Ba1 c5 14.Kxh7 c415.Kg6 Kd3 16.Kxg5 c3 Resigns.

cuuuuuuuuC(wDwDrDwD}70p0kDwDp}6wDw0rDwD}5DwDwDBDw}&wDwDwDwD}3DwDwDwDw}2P)PDwDP)}%DwDw$wIw}v,./9EFJMV

MacDonnell-Lewis,White to play

8. White has a pawn plus on the kingside, whileBlack is hampered in mobility and action by thepin of the rook. White plans to maintain the pinwhile his kingside pawns advance. Thus the gameproceeds: 1.c4 To make difficult the liberationof the rook by d6-d5 and Kd6. 1...c6 2.g4? Toosoon! First 2.b4 was indicated. 2...d5 Black doesnot grasp the opportunity. First 2...a5, then(eventually after the interlude 3.a3 a4) 4...b6 andat last d6-d5. 3.c5 That maintains the pinindefinitely. 3...b6 4.b4 d4 5.Re5 bxc56.bxc5 h6 Useless to advance the d-pawn,which White would stop with his inactive piece,the king. 7.Kf2 R8e7 8.Ke2 wins the d-pawnand the game easily.

9. In his Die Moderne Schachpartie, p. 207, Dr.Tarrasch very pertinently makes the followingcomment which interests us not only for itsbearing on this particular position but for itslogical context: “Now the players have toconceive a plan, the natural plan, the planmanifestly indicated by the position. For Whitethis plan was to advance his kingside pawns bye3-e4, f2-f4 and to make them count and, ifpossible, to evolve a kingside attack therefrom.But Marshall ... fails to grasp this plan, though itis the only suitable one, and therefore his play

appears to be guided by no recognizable planand his opponent thereby gets the advantage.”

cuuuuuuuuC(rDwDw4kD}70pDw1p0p}6wDwDbDwD}5Dw0wDwDw}&wDwDwDwD}3DwDw)Q)w}2P)wDw)B)}%$wDwDRIw}v,./9EFJMV

Marshall-Capablanca,White to play

The game proceeded as follows: 1.Rfc1 Rab82.Qe4 Qc7 3.Rc3 Before now, for tacticalreasons, White should have taken the open file.3...b5 “Capablanca on his part conceives theappropriate plan, namely, to make his majorityof pawns on the queenside tell, and conducts theplan to its logical conclusion.” (Dr. Tarrasch)4.a3 c4 5.Bf3 Rfd8 “Capablancademonstrates to his opponent all his omissions.”(Dr. Tarrasch.) 6.Rd1 Rxd1+ 7.Bxd1 Rd88.Bf3 g6 9.Qc6 Qe5 10.Qe4 Qxe411.Bxe4 Rd1+ 12.Kg2 a5 13.Rc2 b414.axb4 axb4 15.Bf3 Rb1

cuuuuuuuuC(wDwDwDkD}7DwDwDpDp}6wDwDbDpD}5DwDwDwDw}&w0pDwDwD}3DwDw)B)w}2w)RDw)K)}%DrDwDwDw}v,./9EFJMV

16.Be2 Stouter resistance was offered by16.Rd2 Kg7 17.Be4 Ra1 18.Kf3 Kf6 19.Ke2,aiming to bring the king to the defense of thequeenside. 16...b3 Adequate, but even stronger

146

Lasker’s Manual of Chess

was 16...c3! 17.bxc3 Bf5 18.Rd2 bxc3 19.Rd8+Kg7 20.Bd1 c2 winning the bishop at less costthan in the actual game. 17.Rd2 Rc1 18.Bd1c3 19.bxc3 b2 20.Rxb2 Rxd1 21.Rc2 Bf522.Rb2 Rc1 23.Rb3 Be4+ 24.Kh3 Rc225.f4 h5 26.g4 hxg4+ 27.Kxg4 Rxh2 andWhite soon resigned.30

cuuuuuuuuC(wDrDrDkD}7Dw0qDpgp}6wDp0whpD}5DwDwDwDw}&wDwDPDwD}3DwHQDwDw}2P)PDw)P)}%$wGwDRIw}v,./9EFJMV

Nimzovitch-Capablanca,Black to play

10. Concerning this position Capablanca writesin My Chess Career, p. 143: “Evidently White’splan is to consolidate his position and finally win

with the extra pawn. He fails, however, to takethe best measures against Black’s plan whichconsists in placing his rooks in the open lines,bringing his knight round to c4, if possible, andthrough the combined pressure of the bishop, thetwo rooks and knight, and the queen if necessaryagainst the a- and b-pawns, to regain his material,keeping the upper hand at the same time. Theplan in this case is masked by the direct attackagainst the e-pawn.” 1...Qe6 2.f3 Nd7 3.Bd2Ne5 4.Qe2 Nc4 5.Rab1 Ra8 “The realattack begins. Black is bound to regain the pawnwithout thereby losing ground. If White nowplays 6.b3, then 6...Nxd2 7.Qxd2 Ra3 and thea-pawn must go. White however, having nothingbetter, should have adopted this line.” 6.a46...Nxd2 7.Qxd2 Qc4 8.Rfd1 Reb89.Qe3 Rb4 10.Qg5 Bd4+ 11.Kh1 Rab8The rest of the game requires no comment. White,threatened by Bxc3, tried the sacrifice of theexchange and lost.

cuuuuuuuuC(rDwDwDwD}70pDwDwDk}6wDwDw4w0}5DwDpDpDw}&wDwDbDwD}3DwDw$NDP}2P)PDw$w)}%DwDwDwIw}v,./9EFJMV

Dr. Kaufmann and Fahndrich-Capablanca,Black to play

11. From Capablanca’s My Chess Career, p. 130,we cite 1...Rb6 “The beginning of a veryelaborate plan, the first object is to force theadvance of one of White’s queenside pawns, sothat the white rooks cannot be free to maneuverand attack Black’s queenside pawns.” 2.b3 Inciting above Capablanca and Dr. Tarrasch’sremarks, our main object, of course, is to showin what manner great masters plan and how theyjudge plans. Here, as a matter of detail, I shouldhave liked to know Capablanca’s opinion of2.Rb3, which obviously would have given theLasker, with full beard.