The tenth game of the match between José Raúl Capablanca and Emanuel Lasker was played at Casino de la Playa over three nights 8-10 April 1921 (for details concerning the playing conditions, see "
Refuge from Havana's Sun"). The tenth game was a historic achievement for Capablanca that many commentators have suggested was the critical game of the match.
Graham Burgess wrote that we see Capablanca, "remorselessly grinding down Lasker in a game that effectively sealed Capablanca's victory in the match" (96).
This post is
part 16 in a series commemorating the centennial of this World Chess Championship. This series follows the games on the anniversary of each one.
On the first page of the April 1921 issue of
American Chess Bulletin, which went to press before game eleven, a writer attempted to express the historic significance of Capablanca's win in game ten.
Capablanca has accomplished what no chess master before him has been able to do in all the twenty-seven years that Dr. Lasker has held the championship--play ten games with him in succession and not lose one. The late Carl Schechter lived through nine such games without losing, having won one and drawn eight, and then lost the tenth. Capablanca not alone did not lose the tenth, but actually won it, thereby increasing his score to 2-0 with 8 drawn. (65)
Few games in chess history have been subjected to a greater number of annotators. This attention should not come as a surprise. Capablanca considered his play from move 24 on as "one of [his] best efforts in his whole career, and that against one of the strongest players the world has ever seen" (A
Primer of Chess, 211-212). Lasker also praised Capablanca's logic and consistency (Lasker, 22). The game offers instructive value for understanding play against an isolated queen pawn, serves as an example of a minority attack to create weaknesses for the opponent, and contains several critical moments for understanding long-term strategic planning. At the bottom of this post, I list the sources consulted while writing about the game.
For the strategic ideas, the two
YouTube videos by kingscrusher and Danny King were especially valuable, as was Cyrus Lakdawala's comments in
Capablanca: Move by Move. The most lengthy analysis of variations appear in Burgess and in Kasparov. Although initially overwhelmed by the abundant annotations, I became captivated by the differences between Capablanca's annotations in 1921 in his book on the match and those created fourteen years in
A Primer of Chess. Indeed, I think the detailed annotations of both this game and game eleven in
A Primer make the book a worthy addition to any library. There are nine additional games--all among Capablanca's best--included in the back of that book.
Tartakower and Du Mont call this game "a triumph of logic" and an "object lesson in skill and patience, culminating in an end game of rare precision and beauty" (476).
Lasker,Emanuel -- Capablanca,José Raúl [D61]World Championship 12th Havana (10), 08.04.1921
[Capablanca/Lasker/others]
1.d4 d5 2.c4 e6 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.Bg5 Be7 5.e3 0-0 6.Nf3 Nbd7 7.Qc2In games one, five, and seven, Capablanca played 7.Rc1. Lasker's 7.Qc2 appeared previously in this match in game four.
In
A Primer of Chess, Capablanca wrote, "The text move is considered inferior to Rc1. White was probably trying to deviate from the better-known paths" (208).
7...c5"Considered the best answer to Qc2" (
A Primer, 208).
8.Rd1 The aggressive 8.O-O-O would be met with the same move as in the game. Kasparov notes that castling queenside "has lost its popularity due to 8...Qa5" (268), offering four paragraphs of analysis with reference games.
8...Qa5 White to move
9.Bd3 h6 "To remove the P from the line of the B and thus gain time for development. White threatened Bxh7+" (
A Primer, 208).
10.Bh4 cxd4 11.exd4 dxc4 12.Bxc4 Nb6 13.Bb3 Bd7 14.0-0"The development is now complete. White has a lone QP, but, on the other hand, Black is somewhat hampered in the maneuvering of his pieces" (Capablanca 1921, 22).
Kingscrusher has fun with Capablanca's term, "lone QP", instead of the term IQP used today. In
A Primer, Capablanca used the term "isolated QP" (see below).
Burgess notes that White's "freer game" is offset by the "long-term liability of the isolated queen pawn" (97).
14...Rac8 15.Ne5 Black to move
"Black has obtained an excellent development. He must now find the way either to exchange the White bishop at h4 for his bishop at e7, or to post a piece at d5 so as to bring about some exchanges that will simplify the position to some extent. All this must be done while keeping immobile the White pawn at d4. White's central weakness is his isolated QP. On the other hand the central position of the pawn at d4 as compared with the less central position of Black's pawn at e6 gives White more space and in consequence more freedom of maneuver" (
A Primer, 209).
15...Bb5"With this move and the following, Black brings about an exchange of pieces, which leaves him with a free game" (Capablanca 1921, 22).
Capablanca's view of this move changed in the light of annotations mentioned in reference to White's move 17 below.
"This is a weak move which might have given Black a great deal of trouble. Black wanted to gain time in order to play Nbd5, the pivot square of the whole position for Black. It was the wrong idea, however, as will soon be seen. The simple and logical Bc6, threatening Bd5, would have given Black an excellent game" (
A Primer, 210).
16.Rfe1 Nbd5 White to move
In this position, Lasker missed a more dynamic possibility that some commentators have seen as offering White good prospects for advantage. Gyula Breyer was the first to point it out in two columns in
Bécsi Magyar Újság (11 May and 18 June 1921). Later in 1926 Efim Bogoljubow anaylyzed it in detail, finding equality for Black (see Winter).
"At first glance Black seems to have the better position. Such, however, is not the case." And Capablanca gives part of the variation presented below (
A Primer, 210).
17.Bxd5 Edward Winter discusses the annotations by Breyer and Bogoljubow in the context of Capablanca's claim in
British Chess Magazine that Lasker, "is unable to show a single instance where he could have won a game" (October 1922, 376). Assessment of the merits of Capablanca's claim may depend on the thoroughness of Breyer's annotations (see also "
Lasker -- Capablanca, Game 8" where Basil Soldatenkov suggests Lasker could have pressed an advantage). Kasparov and others have compiled the annotations, only part of which I present here.
Breyer suggested 17.Bxf6 when 17...Nxf6 would lose to 18.Ng6 Rfe8 19.Rxe6 (I plan to use the position before 19.Rxe6 as a training exercise--if Black captures the rook, it is mate in four). Hence 17...Bxf6 18.Bxd5 exd5
a) 19.Ng4
Burgess carries this line out to move 36, when Black can force a draw by repetition, crediting the analysis as far as move 30 to Breyer.
b) 19.Qf5
Kasparov favors this line, and King also suggests it is probably best.
Black to move
 |
| Analysis Diagram |
19...Bc6 is Bogoljubow's suggestion, according to Kasparov However, the two Chess Base DVDs have Breyer's analysis extending to move 23 in this line, although he favors 19.Ng4
17...Nxd5 18.Bxe7 Nxe7 19.Qb3Black to move
19...Bc6"Not Ba6 because of Nd7, followed by Nc5" (Capablanca 1921, 22).
"The B pawn has to go back to his natural square. This in itself is a condemnation of Black's 15th move" (
A Primer, 211).
Kingscrusher finds 19...Ba6 quite playable, and perhaps better than Capablanca's move.
20.Nxc6 bxc6 "After the smoke of battle has cleared away, the position is slightly in favor of Black. It is true that Black has two isolated pawns, but owing to the position of the pieces the Black pawns are less easily attacked that the one isolated QP of White" (
A Primer, 211).
21.Re5 Qb6 22.Qc2 Rfd8 White to move
23.Ne2"Probably White's first mistake. He wants to take a good defensive position, but he should instead have counter-attacked with Na4 and Rc5" (Capablanca 1921, 22).
"I start to play mediocre chess. The rook went to e5 in order to go to c5. So Na4 was the required move" (Lasker).
This was Lasker's first comment in his
De Telegraaf commentary on the game. In
Mein Wettkampf mit Capablanca, he added a note referencing Breyer's suggested improvement at move 17. The tone of his comments highlight his own errors as the game moves past the midnight hour.
"The alternative would be Na4. But White does not wish to endanger the safety of his QP. He therefore adopts the text move, which places the knight in the best defensive position as regards the QP" (
A Primer, 211).
23...Rd5 24.Rxd5 "Even worse that the previous move. Correct was 24.Re3. If then, 24...Nf5 25.Rb3 Qd8 26.Rb4. White gains time to counterattack Rb4-c4 or a4, or g2-g4" (Lasker).
Lakdawala points out the engine move 24...c5 with a clear advantage for Black.
24...cxd5"Black has now the open file and his left side pawn position is very solid, while White has a weak d-pawn. The apparently weak Black a-pawn is not actually weak because White has no way to attack it" (Capablanca 1921, 22).
"Now Black has united his pawns and dominates the queen's side" (Lasker).
"Black has consolidated his position. He holds the open file, his pieces are very well placed, and the only weak point--the isolated a-pawn--cannot be attacked because of the general situation of the pieces. The question is, how can Black get the full benefit of all this? From now on the student will do well to study carefully every move up to the end" (
A Primer, 211).
This annotation concludes with Capablanca's "best effort" remark quoted near the top of this post.
White to move
25.Qd2 Nf5 "This keeps two of White's pieces tied up to the defense of the QP and prevents Rc1" (
A Primer, 212).
26.b3"In order to free the queen from the defense of the b-pawn and also to prevent Rc4 at any stage" (Capablanca 1921, 22).
"Mediocre chess! There was time for this advance. Better 26.g3" (Lasker).
26...h5"In order to prevent g4 at a later stage. Also to make a demonstration on the king's side, preparatory to further operations on the other side" (Capablanca 1921, 22).
A Chess Primer repeats this annotation.
27.h3 "Weak, but White wants to be ready to play g4" (Capablanca 1921, 22).
"This is unquestionably bad, since it allows Black to paralyze the White pawns with h5-h4" (Lasker).
27...h4"To tie up White's kingside. Later on it will be seen that White is compelled to play g4 and thus further weaken his game" (Capablanca 1921, 22). Capablanca rephrases this for
A Chess Primer, but the idea remains the same.
28.Qd3 Rc6 "In order to guard the a6 square, thus permitting the queen to go to b4 without letting the White queen penetrate into Black's position" (
A Primer, 213).
29.Kf1 g6 "Since White cannot do anything but mark time, Black, having all the time at his disposal, prepares his position before advancing" (
A Primer, 213).
30.Qb1 Qb4White to move
The game was adjourned at this point. Commentary will continue tomorrow with Lasker's sealed move in "
Lasker -- Capablanca, Game 10 (continued)".
Does Capablanca have a technical win? He certainly has an easier game, and he has the waking parts of the next twenty hours to formulate a plan.
SourcesBurgess, Graham, John Nunn, and John Emms. The World's Greatest Chess Games. New York: Carroll and Graf, 1998, pp. 96-103.
Capablanca, José Raúl. World's Championship Matches, 1921 and 1927. New York: Dover, 1977, pp. 20-23.
_______. A Primer of Chess. New York: Harcourt, 1977, pp. 208-216.
Chernev, Irving. Capablanca's Best Chess Endings. New York: Dover, 1978, pp. 124-130.
Chess Base. José Raúl Capablanca: Master Class, vol. 04 (2015). DVD.
_______. Emanuel Lasker: Master Class, vol. 05 (2015). DVD.
Gavriel, Tryfon (Kingscrusher). "Chess Strategy: Evolution of Chess Style #65" YouTube (23 February 2011), https://youtu.be/J9A0tFJZk-s.
Kasparov, Garry. My Great Predecessors, Part 1, trans. Ken Neat. London: Everyman Chess, 2003, pp. 268-271.
King, Daniel. "Majestic" YouTube (7 April 2021), https://youtu.be/rZwtcJ8mpSs.
Lakdawala, Cyrus. Capablanca: Move by Move. London: Gloucester, 2012, Everyman ebook.
Lasker, Emanuel. Mein Wettkampf mit Capablanca. Berlin and Leipzig: Walter de Gruyter, and Co., 1922.
Linder, Isaak, and Vladimir Linder. Jose Raul Capablanca: 3rd World Chess Champion, trans. Boris Belitsky. Milford, CT: Russell Enterprises, 2010, pp. 83-85.
Members of the I.L. Rice Progressive Chess Club. "Tenth Game." American Chess Bulletin, vol. 18, no. 4 (April 1921), pp.75-77.
Radić, Antonio (Agadmator). "Havana Knights" YouTube (8 August 2019), https://youtu.be/1xJ9H0iGECM.
Sánchez, Miguel A. José Raúl Capablanca: A Chess Biography. Jefferson, NC: McFarland, 2015, p. 247.
Shereshevsky, Mikhail. Endgame Strategy, trans. Ken Neat. London: Cadogan, 1985, pp. 53-54.
Smith, Bryan. "Clash of Champions: Capablanca vs. Lasker." Chess.com (31 July 2014), https://www.chess.com/article/view/clash-of-champions-capablanca-vs-lasker.
Tartakower, Savielly, and Julius Du Mont. 500 Master Games of Chess. New York: Dover, 1975, pp. 476-478.
Thomas, George A. "Game No. 4,852." British Chess Magazine, vol 41, no. 8 (August 1921), pp. 300-303.
Winter, Edward. "Lasker v Capablanca tenth match-game." Chess Notes 6153 (1 June 2009), https://www.chesshistory.com/winter/winter59.html#CN_6153.
