To me this position demonstrates why chess is a great game. The basic rules we grew up with like a strong pawn center, doubling your rooks on an open file, and the micro advantage of bishop vs knight are all seen here.

After this position white makes no obvious blunder but just gets crushed. Janowski goes right back to the same position I think two games later and gets rolled again. 1909 was the year...this must have inspired hyper-moderns and the breaking of static rules.

So How did he lose this? Help please


1.e4 {Notes by Simon Alapin} e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.Bb5 Bb4
5.O-O O-O 6.d3 d6 7.Bg5 Bxc3 8.bxc3 Ne7 {This is the usual
move introduced by Pillsbury, the alternative 8...Qe7 is not
very attractive.} 9.Bc4 {The usual Bxf6 is better, but
Janowski had a predilection for preserving his 2 Bishops.} Ng6
10.Nh4 {?} Nf4 {! This very strong move was first made by
Pillsbury.} 11.Bxf4 exf4 12.Nf3 {Loss of time; 12 g3 followed
by Ng2 was preferable.} Bg4 13.h3 Bh5 14.Rb1 b6 15.Qd2
{Unnecessary, but Janowski evidently hoped for attacking
chances on the open g-file.} Bxf3 16.gxf3 Nh5 17.Kh2 Qf6
18.Rg1 Rae8 19.d4 Kh8 20.Rb5 Qh6 21.Rbg5 f6 22.R5g4 g6 23.Bd3
{So as to stop ...f5.} Re7 24.c4 {A careless move: White might
have tried something more passive such as Qc1 or Rg2, but he
was under great time pressure.} Ng7 {!} 25.c3 {? d5!} Ne6
26.Bf1 f5 {!} 27.R4g2 Rf6 {!} 28.Bd3 g5 {!} 29.Rh1 {Only now
White sees the terrible threat of the Queen sacrifice, but
there is no defence anyway.} g4 30.Be2 Ng5 31.fxg4 f3 32.Rg3
fxe2 0-1

I think there's a pretty easy way to cut to the heart of this position. Just ask yourself, if you had 5 moves to do with as you please where your opponent would do nothing but passively shuffle his pieces how would you make progress as white from the diagram? Assume g6 has already been played. If you look at the position from that perspective it should be fairly clear that that white's kingside attack is scary looking but ultimately nonexistent. Black's knight, though kind of odd looking aesthetically, is just incredibly powerful on h6.

It seems to me that white's play, if he can create any, is going to come in the center but that would require a fairly massive redeployment of his forces. And unfortunately black isn't going to just sit passively by as white himself spends 5 moves getting his rooks into the game.

I disagree. I prefer black. I would say the position is probably objectively equal/slightly better for black as white has no obvious plan. Black has locked down on e5 but maybe white can get some tactics going with the back rank and e5 ideas combined. But that's pretty slow and I'm not sure it's a realistic plan.

If black sits here and does nothing, what does white do?

If white does something else, black has a million options.

Is there a line where white can sac exhange a queen and rook for queen and knight + front f pawn?

Cause white is dominant on white squares and could hold perhaps negate blacks currently passive rooks and weak e8?

[QUOTE=mightytiny;9.Bc4 {The usual Bxf6 is better, but
Janowski had a predilection for preserving his 2 Bishops.}

fish

[QUOTE=DON CASTI;31931733][QUOTE=mightytiny;9.Bc4 {The usual Bxf6 is better, but
Janowski had a predilection for preserving his 2 Bishops.}

fish [/QUOTE]

GM Alapin is a fish....?

[QUOTE=mightytiny;31935772] YES


of course not.
But he did make a fishy decision imo. Come on, not taken on f6 cause u like bishops....¿?¿? at least do it for other reason.....

EDIT: I mean Janowski's move. Alapin was the commentator.

Please, anyone that continues that discussion, take the 5 seconds to fix the quoting issue.

Lasker himself pointed out that Black has the advantage in the middlegame because White, impressive as his position appears at first, has no pawn breaks to force open lines which would be useful to him. Things could easily have gone differently if White's pawn at c2 were, instead, at b2, enabling queenside play.

The funniest part of the whole 9. Bc4 business is that two moves later he gives up the Bishop anyway and gets nothing for it.

pretty much white needed to either try a4 or get c5 in nimzo style

This was my favorite game while learning to play chess. So many "classical" advantages and Lasker just demolishes them.

A black knight that does everything vs a bad white bishop that does nothing... Lasker is a piece up.