A Way to Say Goodbye

Paul Charles Morphy – Adolf Anderssen
Paris, December 1858
King’s Gambit Accepted C38

1. e4 e5 2. f4 exf4 3. Nf3 g5 4. Bc4 Bg7 5. 0-0 d6 6. c3 Nc6 7. Qb3 Qe7 8. d4 a6? Anderssen’s stubbornness in not playing 8. ... h6(!) proved to be fatal for him. The text is even worse than 8. ... Nf6? as played by him earlier in the afternoon. 9. Nxg5! Now it is like a joke for Morphy. 9. ... Qxg5 10. Bxf7+ Kd8. On 10. ... Kf8 11. Bxf4 is even stronger. 11. Bxf4 Qe7 12. Bxg8 Bg4 13. Nd2 Kd7 14. Bd5 Nd8 15. Bxb7 Nxb7 16. Qxb7 a5

17. Bxd6! Unfailingly brilliant to the very end! 17. ... Bxd4+. Not 17. ... Kxd6 18. Qd5 mate. If, instead, 17. ... Qxd6 then 18. Rf7+ Ke8 19. Rxg7 and White wins. 18. cxd4 Qxd6 19. Rf7+ 1 : 0.

A Friendly Game

Adolf Anderssen – Paul Charles Morphy
Paris, December 1858
King’s Gambit Accepted C39

1. e4 e5 2. f4 exf4 3. Nf3 g5 4. h4 g4 5. Ne5 Nf6 6. Nxg4 d5 7. Nxf6+ Qxf6 8. Qe2. Varying from 8. Nc3, as played earlier by Anderssen in the same day. 8. ... Bd6 9. Nc3 c6 10. d4! Finally, Anderssen got a good opening, which gave him courage and strength to play according to his brilliant tactical style. 10. ... Qxd4 11. Bd2 Rg8 12. exd5+ Kd8

13. 0-0-0! “Giving up the Exchange and securing in return a tremendous attack. In none of his other games against Morphy does Anderssen show his skill so brilliantly”, Philip W. Sergeant writes in his book “Morphy’s Games of Chess”, New York, Dover, 1957, p. 279. 13. ... Bg4 14. Qe4 Qxe4 15. Nxe4 Bxd1 16. Nxd6 Bh5 17. Bxf4 cxd5 18. Nxb7+ Ke7 19. Bb5! A terrific blow, threatening the Rook check on e1. 19. ... Rxg2 20. Re1+ Kf6 21. Re8 Bg6 22. Nd6 Nc6. Black has no defence. As Géza Maróczy points out, 22. ... Be4 is met by 23. Be5+ Kg6 24. Nxe4 dxe4 25. Rg8++−, while 22. ... Kg7 23. Rc8 f6 (Sergeant) 24. Ne8+ Bxe8 25. Rxe8, however horrible-looking, is probably a bit stubborn. Finally, if 22. ... Rxc2+ then 23. Kd1 Kg7 24. h5 Rf2 25. h6+! Kf6 26. Bg3 (Δ Bg3-h4 mate) 26. ... Rg2 27. Bh4+ Rg5 28. Rd8! and Black ends up in Zugzwang. 23. Rxa8 Rxc2+ 24. Kd1 Nd4 25. Re8 Bh5+ 26. Ke1 Nf3+ 27. Kf1 Rxb2 28. Be2 Rxa2 29. Bg5+ Nxg5 30. hxg5+ Kxg5 31. Re5+ Kf6 32. Rxh5 1 : 0. Finally Anderssen won a game!

Calisson

Paul Charles Morphy – Adolf Anderssen
Paris, December 1858
King’s Gambit Accepted C38

1. e4 e5 2. f4 exf4 3. Nf3 g5 4. Bc4 Bg7 5. 0-0 d6 6. c3. “Morphy considered White’s 5th and 6th moves the best possible. 6. d4, however, was (and still remained into modern days) more usual, the continuation being 6. ... h6 7. c3 Qe7 8. Na3”, Philip W. Sergeant writes in his book “Morphy’s Games of Chess”, New York, Dover, 1957, p. 278. 6. ... Nc6. 6. ... h6 was still worth considering, as 7. d4 Ne7 8. h4 Ng6 9. h5 Ne7 transposes into Morphy – de Rivière, Paris 1863. 7. Qb3 Qe7. 7. ... Na5 8. Bxf7+ Kf8 9. Qd5 did not appeal Anderssen. 8. d4 Nf6? Now it was Anderssen’s last chance to play 8. ... h6 and if 9. Na3 then 9. ... Nf6 eventually transposing into Steinitz – Neumann, Paris 1867. 9. Nxg5 Nxe4 10. Bxf7+ Kd8 11. Nxe4 Qxe4 12. Bxf4 Bh3. “Ingenious but unsound, as Morphy shows”. (Sergeant, ibidem).

13. gxh3 Nxd4 14. Nd2. 14. Bg5+ Kd7 15. Qd5 is regarded by Géza Maróczy as simpler. 14. ... Ne2+. No better is 14. ... Nxb3 15. Nxe4 Nxa1 16. Rxa1 Rf8 (or 16. ... h6 17. Bh5 Rf8 18. Bg3+−) 17. Bg5+ Kd7 18. Bh5+− (Maróczy’s analysis). 15. Kf2 Qxf4+ 16. Kxe2 Qg5 17. Rae1 Bh6 18. Qd5 Re8+!? 19. Kd1 1 : 0. Anderssen’s dog day afternoon.

Closing credits

Adolf Anderssen – Paul Charles Morphy
Paris, December 1858
King’s Gambit Accepted C39

1. e4 e5 2. f4 exf4 3. Nf3 g5 4. h4 g4 5. Ne5 Nf6 6. Nxg4 d5. Morphy adopts here the move commended by Jules Arnous de Rivière, in place of 6. ... Nxe4 as played by Anderssen himself in the previous friendly game. 7. Nxf6+ Qxf6 8. Nc3 Qg6. Max Lange prefers here 8. ... Qg7 in order to answer 9. Qf3 by 9. ... Bd6 10. Nxd5 Nc6 11. c3 Ne5. 9. Qf3 Bd6 10. Bd3? A very bad mistake, perhaps due to Anderssen’s bad mood. Géza Maróczy rightly recommends 10. Nxd5 Nc6 (not 10. ... Bg4?? 11. Qxg4!) 11. Bb5 which gives White excellent play. 10. ... Bg4 11. Qf2 Nd7 12. exd5 f5 13. Bb5. With this and the next move White only helps his opponent’s deployment, but after neutral moves Black would have castled Queenside with consequences not so different from those of the game. 13. ... a6 14. Bxd7+ Kxd7 15. d3 Rae8+ 16. Kf1 Rhg8

17. Rh2. Very ugly-looking, but White’s position was undefendable. 17. Bf4?? Bxf4 18. Qxf4 Be2+ loses right off, while 17. Bd2 is elegantly met by 17. ... Bc5! 18. Qxc5 Be2+ 19. Ke1 Qxg2 with mate coming soon (Maróczy’s analysis). 17. ... f3 18. g3. Or 18. gxf3 Bc5! winning immediately. 18. ... Bh5 19. Bg5. Anderssen launches a desperate and vain counterattack in order to delay the end. If 19. Bf4 then 19. ... Bxf4 20. gxf4 Re2! finis. 19. ... h6 20. Qa7 hxg5 21. Na4 gxh4 22. Qxb7 hxg3 23. Nb6+ Ke7 24. Re1+ Kf7 0 : 1.

The Snow Queen

Paul Charles Morphy – Adolf Anderssen
Paris, December 1858
King’s Gambit Accepted C39

1. e4 e5 2. f4 exf4 3. Nf3 g5 4. h4 g4 5. Ne5 Nf6 6. Nxg4 Nxe4 7. d3 Ng3 8. Bxf4 Nxh1. Best. If 8. ... Qe7+ then 9. Be2 Qb4+ 10. Qd2! (Baucher) which promises Black more than enough compensation for the Exchange. 9. Qe2+. Not 9. Bg5 Be7 10. Qe2 h5 11. Qe5 f6! 12. Nxf6+ Kf7 and Black wins (Steinitz’s analysis). 9. ... Qe7 10. Nf6+ Kd8 11. Bxc7+ Kxc7 12. Nd5+ Kd8 13. Nxe7 Bxe7. “And Black should win”, Bobby Fischer writes in his book “60 partite da ricordare”, Milano, Mursia, 1972, p. 114. He obviously foresees that the Black’s three pieces may overpower the White Queen.

14. Qg4. If 14. Nc3 there might follow 14. ... Re8 (Maróczy) that also deserves consideration after the text move. 14. ... d6 15. Qf4 Rg8 16. Qxf7. Morphy aims to improve on 16. Nc3 Be6 17. Be2 Nc6 (or 17. ... Ng3 18. Bf3 Nd7 19. 0-0-0 Nf5 20. Qa4 Bxh4 21. Bxb7 Rb8 22. Bc6 Bg5+ 23. Kb1 Ne7 24. Qa5+ Nb6 25. Bf3 Nec8 26. Nb5 Bf6 27. d4 Rg5 28. b3 Ke7 29. Bc6 Kf8 30. Qa6 Ne7 31. Bf3 Nbc8 32. Nxa7 Nxa7 33. Qxa7 Rgb5 34. c3 d5 35. Be2 R5b7 36. Qa5 Nc8 37. Qa3+ Kg7 38. Bd3 Ra7 39. Qc1 Rba8 40. Rh1 Kf8 41. a4 Rb7 42. Qf4 Bg7 43. Rxh7 Rxb3+ 44. Kc2 Rb7 45. Rxg7 Kxg7 46. Qg5+ ½ : ½ Hebden – P. E. Littlewood, 58th Hastings International Chess Congress, Hastings 1982/1983) 18. 0-0-0 Ng3 19. Bf3 Nf5 20. d4 Nxh4 21. Kb1 Nxf3 22. gxf3 d5 23. Nb5 Rc8 24. c4 Kd7 25. cxd5 Bxd5 26. Nc3 Bd6 27. Qf5+ Be6 28. Qb5 Kc7 29. Ka1 Bd7 30. Nd5+ Kb8 31. Nf6 Rgd8 32. d5 Ne5 33. Qe2 Bf5 34. Ne4 Bxe4 35. fxe4 Nc4 36. Rc1 b5 37. e5 Nxe5 38. Qxb5+ Ka8 39. Rd1 Rc2 40. Qa6 f5 41. Kb1 Rc7 42. Rf1 Nc4 43. Rf2 Rb8 44. b3 Ba3 0 : 1 Baucher – Morphy, Paris 1858. 16. ... Bxh4+. Géza Maróczy regards 16. ... Rf8 17. Qxh7 Ng3 followed by ... Bc8-f5 as worth considering. 17. Kd2 Re8 18. Na3 Na6!? Maróczy severely criticizes this move, to which he attributes the reason for Black’s defeat. He gives instead 18. ... Ng3 19. Nb5 Be7 and now it could follow 20. Qf4 (20. Nc7? loses to 20. ... Rf8) 20. ... Nf5 with Black still maintaining more than sufficient compensation for the Queen. 19. Qh5 Bf6 20. Qxh1 Bxb2? Indeed, this does seem to be Black’s decisive mistake! After 20. ... Bg5+ 21. Kc3 Be6 22. b3 Rc8+ 23. Kb2 Bf6+ 24. d4! Bxd4+ 25. Kb1 Re7 the situation is far from clear, though easier to play for White. 21. Qh4+ Kd7. Or 21. ... Kc7 22. Nb5+ Kb8 23. Rb1 and White wins. 22. Rb1 Bxa3 23. Qa4+ 1 : 0.

Rue de Rivoli

Adolf Anderssen – Paul Charles Morphy
Paris, December 1858
King’s Gambit Accepted C33

One afternoon, following the conclusion of their official match, Anderssen and Morphy agreed to pose for a picture sitting at the board table at Hôtel de Breteuil in Paris. They also took the occasion to play – within about three hours – six parties sans façon, of which Morphy won five to Anderssen’s one.

1. e4 e5 2. f4 exf4 3. Bc4 Nf6 4. e5? A pernicious digression from the usual 4. Nc3. 4. ... d5 5. Bb3 Ne4 6. Nf3 Bg4! 6. ... g5 7. d3 Nc5 8. h4 g4 9. Nd4 Nxb3 10. axb3 Bc5 is also better for Black, de Rivière – Dubois, Paris 1855, but as usual Morphy’s moves touch perfection. 7. 0-0 Nc6 8. Ba4. Something went terribly wrong for Anderssen. Now 8. d4? was trivially refuted by 8. ... Nxd4!, so, after all, White’s clumsy way to arrange his own development seems quite justified. 8. ... g5 9. Bxc6+ bxc6 10. d4 c5 11. c3 Be7 12. b4 cxb4 13. cxb4 0-0 14. Qb3. “A good move is not to be found: but 14. Qe1 is perhaps better than the text-move”, Philip W. Sergeant writes in his book “Morphy’s Games of Chess”, New York, Dover, 1957, pp. 275-276. In such case Black could even continue by 14. ... a5!? 15. bxa5 c5! with a crushing initiative. 14. ... Rb8 15. a3 c5! Black’s supremacy is manifest, to say the least. 16. Nc3 Nxc3 17. Qxc3 cxb4 18. axb4 Bxb4 19. Qd3 a5 20. h4 h6 21. hxg5 hxg5 22. g3 Rb6! 23. Ra2 Rg6 24. Rg2. Anderssen tries a vain and desperate Exchange sacrifice, still hoping for something that won’t happen. 24. ... Bh3 25. e6 Bxg2 26. exf7+ Kg7. Naturally! 27. Kxg2

27. ... Qc8! Wilhelm Steinitz, who was never tender with Morphy, called it “A move of high strategical genius”. 28. Ne5 Rh6 29. gxf4 Rfh8 30. fxg5 Rh2+ 31. Kg1 Rh1+ 32. Kf2 R8h2+ 33. Ke3 Rh3+ 34. Nf3 Rxf3+! 35. Rxf3 Qxc1+ 0 : 1. For if 36. Kf2 there follows 36. ... Qe1+ 37. Kg2 Qg1 mate.

The Machine Who Was Also a Boy

Paul Charles Morphy – Adolf Anderssen
Match game 11; Paris, December 28, 1858
French Defence C00

1. e4 e6 2. d4 g6 3. Bd3 Bg7 4. Be3 c5 5. c3. Morphy, one of the most erudite players of all time, is faithfully following one of Anderssen’s games! 5. ... cxd4 6. cxd4 Nc6. Improving on 6. ... Qb6? 7. Ne2 Qxb2? 8. Nbc3 Qb6 9. Rc1 Na6 10. Nb5 Bf8 11. 0-0 and Black got destroyed quickly, Anderssen – Staunton, London 1851 Chess Tournament, London 1851. 7. Ne2 Nge7 8. 0-0 0-0 9. Nbc3 d5. “The side with less space rarely finds it profitable to fix the Pawn structure. Therefore, 9 ... b6 looks preferable”, Grandmaster Valeri Beim writes in his book “Paul Morphy Una Prospettiva Moderna”, Roma, Prisma Editori, 2008, p. 198. 10. e5 f6 11. f4 fxe5 12. fxe5 a6 13. Qd2 Nb4?! “Anderssen again neglects development and moreover Knights are frequently superior to Bishops in blocked positions. Hence, 13. ... Bd7 was better”. (Beim, ibidem). 14. Bg5! Nxd3 15. Qxd3 Bd7 16. Qh3 Qe8 17. Ng3 Rc8?! Géza Maróczy suggests 17. ... Nf5 18. Nxf5 Rxf5 19. Rxf5 gxf5 followed by ... Qe8-g6, which doesn’t look so bad. 18. Rxf8+ Qxf8 19. Rf1 Qe8 20. Qh4 Nf5? Wilhelm Steinitz calls this and Black’s 22nd move “flagrant errors of position judgment”. Black somehow had to keep his Knight on the board: 20. ... Nc6 is Beim’s suggestion. 21. Nxf5 gxf5 22. Rf3 Bb5 23. Rg3 Rc7 24. Bf6 f4!? A desperate Pawn sacrifice in order to transfer the Bishop on the diagonal b1-h7. If, instead, 24. ... Kh8 then 25. Qh6 Qf8 26. Nxb5 axb5 27. Rxg7 Rxg7 28. Kf2 winning as in the game. 25. Qxf4 Qf8 26. Nxb5. However, even in case of 26. Qh6 Bd3 Black’s idea didn’t work at all: 27. Rxg7+ Rxg7 28. Qxg7+! (not 28. Bxg7?? Rf1 mate) 28. ... Qxg7 29. Bxg7 Kxg7 30. Na4! with an easily won ending. 26. ... axb5

27. Qh6 Kh8 28. Rxg7 Rxg7 29. Kf2. Black is in Zugzwang. 29. ... Kg8 30. Qxg7+ Qxg7 31. Bxg7 Kxg7 32. Kf3 b4 33. g4 b6 34. h4 b5 35. Ke3 b3 36. a3! But 36. axb3 b4 37. h5 also wins. 1 : 0. Thus ended one of the most one-way matches in chess history. Eight years later, Wilhelm Steinitz will beat Anderssen 8–6 in a match fought until the last breath!

The Sun and the Moon

Adolf Anderssen – Paul Charles Morphy
Match game 10; Paris, December 27, 1858
Anderssen Opening A00

1. a3 e5 2. c4 Nf6 3. Nc3 d5 4. cxd5 Nxd5 5. e3 Be6 6. Nf3 Bd6 7. Be2 0-0 8. 0-0. Anderssen varies from 8. d4 such as occurred in the 6th and 8th games. 8. ... Nxc3 9. bxc3 f5 10. d4 e4 11. Nd2 Rf6 12. f4 Rh6 13. g3 Nd7 14. Nc4. Anderssen undoubtedly refined his strategy: the Bishop pair is worth trusting even in such positions! 14. ... Bxc4. Grandmaster Valeri Beim rightly criticizes this move as it gives White’s light-squared Bishop too much scope. His recommendation, 14. ... Nb6 (in order to answer 15. Ne5 by 15. ... c5), seems more than reasonable. 15. Bxc4+ Kh8 16. Ra2! Qe7 17. a4 Nf6 18. Qb3 c6 19. Be6. A mere loss of time, even though, given the closed character of the position, it is not so serious. 19. ... Re8! 20. Bc4. Not 20. Bxf5?? g6 and the White Bishop is trapped. 20. ... Ng4 21. Rg2 Rb8 22. Be2 Nf6 23. c4 b6 24. Bb2 Qf7 25. Qc2 Be7 26. Bc3 Rg8 27. a5 Bd6 28. axb6 axb6 29. Ra1 g5? Wilhelm Steinitz called it a bad strategical error, and, objectively speaking, it’s hard to disagree with him. It is surely a sign of impatience; since it was the second game of the day I think Morphy, after brilliantly winning the previous one, wanted to ride the tiger relying upon the demoralization of his opponent. 30. fxg5 Rxg5 31. Ra8+. Géza Maróczy gives 31. c5! bxc5 32. dxc5 Bf8 33. Ra8 which really seems horrible for Black. Enjoy! 31. ... Rg8 32. Qa4 Rxa8 33. Qxa8+ Qe8 34. Qxe8+. 34. Qb7 (Steinitz) was also very strong and possibly even stronger. 34. ... Nxe8 35. c5 Bc7 36. Bc4 Kg7 37. cxb6? But, as too often happened in the match, Anderssen lets slip away his chance! 37. d5+ followed by d5-d6 would certainly have forced matters toward a sad conclusion for Morphy. 37. ... Bxb6 38. Rb2 Bc7 39. Rb7 Kf6 40. Bb4 Rg6 41. Bf8 h5! 42. Kf2

42. ... h4!! The only one move! 43. gxh4 Rg4 44. h5 Rh4 45. h6 Rxh2+ 46. Kg1 Rh3 47. Bf1 Rg3+ 48. Kf2 Rg4 49. Bc4 Rh4 50. Bg8 Bd6 51. Bxd6 Nxd6 52. Rd7 Ne8! 53. h7! 53. Bf7? Rxh6 54. Bxe8 Rh8 leads nowhere. 53. ... Kg5 54. Re7 Nd6 55. Re6 Nc4 56. Rxc6 Nd2 57. Ke2 Rh2+ 58. Kd1 Nf3? Morphy, too, quite incredibly misses his saving chance: after 58. ... f4! 59. exf4+ Kxf4 White, in spite of his extra Pawn, doesn't seem able to make progress; for instance: 60. Kc2 Nf3+ 61. Kc3 Ng5 62. Rc2 e3 63. Re7 Ne4+ 64. Kd3 Rd2+ 65. Kc4 Rh2 66. Rf7+ Kg3 67. Rg7+ Rh2 68. Rf7+ Kg3 69. Re7 Kf4= (Beim’s analysis). 59. Rc7 Kg6 60. d5 f4 61. exf4 e3 62. Re7 e2+ 63. Rxe2 Rh1+ 64. Kc2 Nd4+ 65. Kd2 Nxe2 66. Kxe2 Kg7. Or 66. ... Kf5 67. d6 Kf6 68. Kf3 winning easily. 67. Ke3 Re1+ 68. Kd4 Rf1 69. Ke5 Re1+ 70. Kf5 Rd1 71. Be6 Rd4 72. Ke5 Rd1 73. f5 Rh1 74. f6+ Kxh7 75. Kd6 Ra1 76. Ke7 Ra7+ 77. Bd7 1 : 0. And finally Anderssen won for the second and last time in the match!

Fighting the Legend

Paul Charles Morphy – Adolf Anderssen
Match game 9; Paris, December 27, 1858
Sicilian Defence B44

1. e4 c5 2. d4 cxd4 3. Nf3 Nc6 4. Nxd4 e6 5. Nb5! d6 6. Bf4! This move used to be Bobby Fischer’s favourite! 6. ... e5 7. Be3 f5? Anderssen play too ambitiously in his aim for a comeback. Either 7. ... Nf6 (R. J. Fischer – T. V. Petrossiàn, Buenos Aires 1971, match game 1) or 7. ... a6 (Szén – Anderssen, London 1851 Chess Tournament, London 1851) would have been much better.

8. N1c3! An astonishing and powerful demolition! 8. ... f4. “Already Black has a lost game. If instead of this move he had played 8. ... a6 then ensued 9. Nd5 axb5 10. Bb6 &c.”, Howard Staunton writes in his book “Chess Praxis”, London, Bell & Daldy, 1871, p. 497. And, indeed, after 8. ... a6 9. Nd5! axb5 10. Bb6 Qh4 11. Nc7+ Kd7 12. Nxa8 Qxe4+ 13. Qe2 Black could resign (Kasparov’s analysis). On the other hand, also 8. ... Nf6 9. Bg5 Be6 (or 9. ... a6 10. Bxf6 gxf6 11. Qh5+) 10. Bxf6 gxf6 11. Nd5 Bxd5 12. exd5 Ne7 13. Qh5+ appear to be completely hopeless, so Anderssen consistently develops his primitive idea. 9. Nd5! fxe3 10. Nbc7+ Kf7 11. Qf3+? Morphy should have been more pragmatic in cashing in: 11. Nxa8 exf2+ 12. Kxf2 Qh4+ 13. g3 Qxe4+ 14. Bg2 gave White a virtually decisive advantage. Now Anderssen gets out of trouble thanks to a strong couple of moves. 11. ... Nf6 12. Bc4 Nd4! 13. Nxf6+ d5! Not 13. ... Kg6 14. Qh5+! Kxf6 15. Ne8+ and White wins. 14. Bxd5+ Kg6? After much suffering, Anderssen collapsed. The position ensuing from 14. ... Ke7! (Zukertort) 15. Qh5 gxf6 has been deeply analysed by a number of commentators through the centuries, so I won’t repeat their specific variations here. The only thing sure is that the game would have been unclear and very uncertainly balanced. 15. Qh5+! Kxf6 16. fxe3! Perhaps Anderssen was hoping for 16. Ne8+?? Qxe8! 17. Qxe8 Bb4+ and Black wins. 16. ... Nxc2+ 17. Ke2 1 : 0. For if 17. ... Nxa1 then 18. Rf1+ Ke7 19. Qxe5+ Kd7 20. Be6+ Kc6 21. Rc1+ and mate in two moves.

The Rabbit in the Hat

Adolf Anderssen – Paul Charles Morphy
Match game 8; Paris, December 25, 1858
Anderssen Opening A00

1. a3 e5 2. c4 Nf6 3. Nc3 d5 4. cxd5 Nxd5 5. e3 Be6 6. Nf3 Bd6 7. Be2 0-0 8. d4 Nxc3 9. bxc3 e4 10. Nd2 f5 11. f4 Qh4+. Varying from 11. ... g5!?, such as occurred in the 6th game. Apparently it gives Black satisfactory play, but I would not be so sure that it is due to the actual merit of Morphy’s new idea. 12. g3 Qh3 13. Bf1 Qh6 14. c4 c6 15. c5 Bc7 16. Bc4 Nd7 17. 0-0 b5 18. cxb6 axb6 19. Qb3 Rfe8 20. Bb2 b5 21. Bxe6+ Qxe6 22. Qc2. Géza Maróczy is clearly right in recommending 22. Rfc1! Qxb3 23. Nxb3, but luckily enough 23. ... Rac8! should hold up quite comfortably. 22. ... Qd5. Here 22. ... Nb6! 23. Rfc1 Rac8! might have been even more promising for Black. 23. Rfc1 Ra6 24. a4 Rea8 25. axb5 Qxb5 26. Qc4+ Qxc4 27. Nxc4 Rxa1 28. Bxa1 Nf6 29. Bc3 Ra2 30. Bd2 Nd5 31. Kf1 Bd8. The ending is a bit more comfortable for Black, but not enough to realistically play for a win. Whatever it is, however, Morphy pushes hard to get something. After 31. ... Kf7 32. Ke1 Ke6 everything was more or less balanced. 32. Ke1 Be7 33. Rb1 h6 34. Ne5 c5!? Curiously enough, Grandmaster Valeri Beim puts a question mark to Morphy’s last move, objecting that 34. ... Ra6 35. Rc1 Bb4! would have held an easy balance. He’s right. But Morphy, too, is not wrong! 35. dxc5 Bxc5 36. Rb5

36. ... Nxe3! Of course! Here is the rabbit out of Morphy’s hat! 37. Rxc5 Ng2+ 38. Ke2. If 38. Kd1 there would equally follow 38. ... e3 39. Rc2 e2+ 40. Kc1 Ra1+ 41. Kb2 Rd1 and Black wins back the Bishop with a draw in sight. 38. ... e3 39. Nf3 g6 40. Rd5 Kf7?? Strangely Morphy committs a terrible blunder. He clearly ought to play 40. ... Kg7 in order to answer 41. Ra5 by 41. ... Rb2 (Beim’s analysis). 41. Rd6?? And Anderssen too, incredibly, makes his own blunder, missing the easy win by 41. Ra5! Rb2 42. Ne5+ Kf6 43. Nc4 (Beim’s analysis). They acted as if they wanted to give each other a gift, perhaps because it was their second game in the same day and that day was Christmas Day! 41. ... Kg7 42. h4. 42. Ne5 g5 (Maróczy) leads to a draw as well. 42. ... exd2 43. Rxd2 Ra4! The most elegant way to draw. 44. Kf2. If 44. Nd4 then 44. ... Ra3 and Black cannot lose. 44. ... Nxf4 45. gxf4 Rxf4 46. Rd4 Rxd4 47. Nxd4 Kf6 48. Ke3 g5 49. h5 Ke5 50. Nf3+ Kf6 51. Nd4 ½ : ½.

Board Roller

Paul Charles Morphy – Adolf Anderssen
Match game 7; Paris, December 25, 1858
Scandinavian Defence B01

1. e4 d5 2. exd5 Qxd5 3. Nc3 Qa5. “Perhaps a better move than playing the Queen home again; but the defence of 1. ... d5 is objectionable, however conducted”, Howard Staunton writes in his book “Chess Praxis”, London, Bell & Daldy, 1871, p. 494. 4. d4 e5 5. dxe5 Qxe5+ 6. Be2 Bb4. “In Mr. Lange’s observation on the present game, he remarks, ‘Black strives with masterly energy to relieve himself from the disadvantage entailed by the opening he has chosen’, which, considering the very ordinary moves really made, savours a little too much of the hyperbolical tone adopted by Mr. Morphy’s adulators in England”, Staunton said (ibidem). 7. Nf3! A positional Pawn sacrifice just to speed up his development. After 7. Bd2 Bg4 Black has no problem at all. 7. ... Bxc3+ 8. bxc3 Qxc3+ 9. Bd2 Qc5 10. Rb1 Nc6 11. 0-0 Nf6 12. Bf4. Playing to regain the Pawn. Géza Maróczy recommended 12. Rb5 Qd6 13. Re1 0-0 14. Qc1 which is also very strong. 12. ... 0-0 13. Bxc7 Nd4! 14. Qxd4 Qxc7 15. Bd3! Bg4? “He should have played 15. ... h6; this turns out a lost move”, Staunton said (op. cit., p. 495). Maróczy gives instead 15. ... b6 followed by ... Bc8-b7, which appears even more convincing. 16. Ng5! Intending Ng5-e4. 16. ... Rfd8? “Black had better saving chances after 16. ... Bh5!? 17. Ne4! Nxe4 18. Qxe4 Bg6 19. Qxb7 Qxb7 20. Rxb7 Bxd3 21. cxd3 Rfd8 22. Rd1 Rab8 because there are always chances in a Rook endgame”, Grandmaster Valeri Beim writes in his book “Paul Morphy Una Prospettiva Moderna”, Roma, Prisma Editori, 2008, p. 189. 17. Qb4 Bc8. “A fatal necessity”, Staunton said (ibidem). 18. Rfe1 a5. Not 18. ... h6 because of 19. Re7 Rd7? (or 19. ... Bd7 20. Nxf7 Nd5 21. Nxh6+ gxh6 22. Bh7+ Kf8 23. Re8+! and mate in two moves) because of 20. Bh7+ Kh8 (or 20. ... Kf8 21. Rxf7++ and mate next move) 21. Re8+ Nxe8 22. Qf8 mate.

19. Qe7! Morphy usually chose the strongest move in the position! 19. ... Qxe7 20. Rxe7 Nd5. Equally after 20. ... Rd7 21. Rxd7 Bxd7 22. Rxb7 h6 23. Nh7! Black’s cause is hopeless. 21. Bxh7+ Kh8 22. Rxf7 Nc3 23. Re1 Nxa2 24. Rf4! Ra6 25. Bd3! 1 : 0. An impressive display of strength Morphy made look easy.

The Ninth Hour

Adolf Anderssen – Paul Charles Morphy
Match game 6; Paris, December 24, 1858
Anderssen Opening A00

1. a3! The German giant understands that he must do something different to save the honour! 1. ... e5. What did you expect from Morphy? 2. c4 Nf6 3. Nc3 d5 4. cxd5 Nxd5 5. e3 Be6 6. Nf3 Bd6 7. Be2. Géza Maróczy suggests here 7. e4 Nxc3 (7. ... Nf6 8. d4 is decidedly more promising for White) 8. bxc3 with a slight edge. 7. ... 0-0 8. d4 Nxc3 9. bxc3 e4 10. Nd2 f5 11. f4. We might call it a critical position because it will repeat itself once more. 11. ... g5!? Morphy was severely criticized by Wilhelm Steinitz for his wild attempt to hunt the enemy King while yet in the centre. When I first saw this game I was so impressed by the fact that Morphy appeared to have been strategically outplayed by his opponent that I never seriously thought about it. What if Steinitz is right? Maybe 11. ... exf3 12. Nxf3 Nd7 with reasonable play. 12. Bc4. 12. Nc4 was strong as well, and, from a dogmatic viewpoint, even stronger. 12. ... Bxc4 13. Nxc4 gxf4 14. exf4 Qe8!! Morphy consolidates by an elegant (and really far from obvious) Queen manoeuvre. 15. 0-0 Qc6 16. Qb3 Qd5 17. Rb1 b6. It seems to me that 17. ... Nc6(!) would be quite better. 18. Qa2. With the not too hidden threat of Rb1-b5. 18. ... c6. Maróczy rightly recommends 18. ... Nd7 so to answer 19. Rb5 by 19. ... Qe6 with a perfectly playable game. 19. Qe2 Nd7 20. Ne3 Qe6 21. c4 Nf6 22. Rb3! Anderssen finally took off the mask and, with his Rook lift, shows Morphy his real intentions. 22. ... Kf7? His Majesty takes a walk on the wild side, where, however, will be exposed to unbearable dangers and threats. It is clear Morphy was playing to win and he could even be right, had he chosen not to “hide” his King into the wilderness. So, with the same idea in mind, I’d suggest 22. ... h6! 23. Bb2 Kh7 to follow with ... Rf8-f7, ... Ra8-g8, and eventually ... Rf7-g7. 23. Bb2 Rac8 24. Kh1 Rg8. No one in the world – not even Morphy – could afford to give Anderssen such a position.

25. d5! The crushing breakthrough. Now White must win. 25. ... cxd5 26. cxd5 Qd7. Not 26. ... Nxd5? 27. Qh5+ with very sad consequences for Black. 27. Nc4 Ke7. 27. ... Nxd5? 28. Rd5! is again disastrous. 28. Bxf6+!? It is still quite good, but Anderssen imperceptibly starts losing the thread. As was pointed out by most commentators, 28. Rh3! was much simpler (28. ... Qb5 29. Bxf6+ Kxf6 30. Qh5!+−), but I like to mention the alternative way given by 2nd World Chess Champion Emanuel Lasker: 28. Be5 Bxe5 29. fxe5 Nxd5 30. Nd6 Rcf8 31. Rh3 Rg7 (“after 31. ... Kd8 White would occupy the c- and d- files”) 32. Rh6 and “White wins easily by systematic attack on the weak Black Pawns. Instead of this winning line of play, White chose a much weaker procedure, failed again and again and at last lost the game”, as he writes in his book “Lasker’s Manual of Chess”, New York, Dover, 1960, pp. 221-222. 28. ... Kxf6 29. Qb2+? “This move costs White a portion of his advantage and terribly prolongs the game. Here, too, 29. Rh3! Bb8 (29. ... Qb5 30. Qh5! is familiar) 30. Ne3 was very strong, giving White an overwhelming position”, Grandmaster Valeri Beim writes in his book “Paul Morphy Una Prospettiva Moderna”, Roma, Prisma Editori, 2008, p. 186. 29. ... Kf7 30. Rh3? A careless inversion of moves that allows Black to defend with ... Rg8-g7 followed by ... Kf7-g8. As Maroczy points out, after 30. Qd4! Black would have had to face unsurmontable problems. 30. ... Rg7! 31. Qd4? Now this makes no longer sense. As Beim points out, best was 31. Qb3! Kg8 32. Rh5! Rf8 33. Rh6 to be soon followed by Nc4-e5 keeping a powerful edge. 31. ... Kg8! 32. Rh6 Bf8 33. d6 Rf7 34. Rh3. Not 34. Ne5?? Qb5 and Black wins. 34. ... Qa4! Morphy is finally out of the blue, but the breathtaking pathos of the drama is not yet over. 35. Rc1!? After such a heroic epic, Anderssen refuses to accept the inevitability of a peaceful outcome: 35. Rg3+ Bg7 36. Rxg7+ Rxg7 37. Qd5+ Kh8 38. Ne5 Rf8 with virtual equality. 35. ... Rc5? It worked! Morphy’s move serves the purpose to prevent White from playing Qd4-d5-e6 (35. ... b5? 36. Qe5! bxc4 37. Rg3+ Bg7 38. Rxg7+ Rxg7 39. Qe6+±/+−), but in fact it again puts Black in a critical situation. Correct was 35. ... Bg7! 36. Rg3 h6 37. h3 Kh7! 38. Qd5 Qd7 (Beim) leaving Black slightly better. 36. Rg3+ Bg7 37. h3 Kh8 38. Rxg7? Exhausted, Anderssen misses 38. Qd2! with Nc4-e5 to follow and more than excellent winning chances for White. 38. ... Rxg7 39. Rc3 e3!! Cooly Morphy plays the only saving move, which psychologically destroys his opponent. 39. ... Kg8? was instead elegantly refuted by 40. Rg3! Qd7 41. Ne5 Rxe5 42. Rxg7+ (Morphy’s analysis), while 39. ... Rc8 (which Steinitz wrongly claims as Black’s best) would simply lose the game after 40. Qf6! Qe8 41. Ne5 Rxc3 42. d7 Rc1+ 43. Kh2 Qxd7 44. Nxd7 Rc2 45. Kg1 Rcxg2+ 46. Kf1+− (Beim’s analysis). 40. Rxe3? At last Anderssen falls into an hallucination! The right way (and the right outcome as well!) was 40. Qf6! Rxc4 41. Qf8+ drawing by perpetual check. 40. ... Rxc4 41. Qf6. Too late, but also 41. Qe5 Rc5! was dramatically hopeless. 41. ... Rc1+ 42. Kh2 Qxf4+ 0 : 1. This titanic struggle took 8 hours.

Here is a drawing of Paul Charles Morphy wearing his broad Panama hat in London, 1859. Image courtesy of Chess.com.

The Bar on the Seine

Paul Charles Morphy – Adolf Anderssen
Match game 5; Paris, December 23, 1858
Scandinavian Defence B01

1. e4 d5 2. exd5 Nf6 3. d4 Nxd5 4. c4 Nf6 5. Nc3 Bf5 6. Nf3 e6 7. Be3!? It seems a strange place for the Bishop to stay. The alternative is 7. Bd3 Bxd3 8. Qxd3 Be7 9. Bf4 c6 10. 0-0-0 Qa5 11. Rhe1 with an edge for White, Keres – Novotny, Prague 1943. 7. ... Bb4!? Everyone puts here a question mark. It seems to me too severe. 8. Qb3. If 8. Qa4+ then 8. ... Nc6 9. Ne5 0-0 10. Nxc6 Bxc3+ 11. bxc3 bxc6 “and whether White take the Pawn or not, in either case his opponent has an equal game” – it’s Morphy’s holy word! 8. ... Bxc3+ 9. bxc3! A man ahead of his time! 9. ... Be4 10. Nd2 Bc6 11. Bd3 Nbd7. Intending ... Nd7-c5. 12. Qc2 h6? This move in particular, and the whole Black’s plan in general, appear to be of very questionable use. Both 12. ... 0-0 and 12. ... Ng4 seem more to the point. 13. 0-0 0-0 14. Rae1. That is the most romantic deployment for White’s Queen’s Rook. Johannes Hermann Zukertort, more soberly, suggests 14. Rfe1, followed by Ra1-d1. 14. ... b6 15. h3 Qc8. Black apparently prepares for a weird Queen fianchetto by ... Qc8-b7, thus attracting criticism – perhaps not unjustly – from most commentators.

16. Kh2! Kh8. In case of 16. ... Qb7 White was probably intending to play 17. Rg1 followed by g2-g4-g5 with a bayonet assault. But, as Grandmaster Valeri Beim points out, 16. ... Bb7!? 17. Rg1 c5 would have offered Black better prospects for counterplay. 17. Rg1 Rg8?! “Anderssen implements a misguised plan. Here either 17. ... e5!? 18. f4 exf4 19. Bxf4 Re8 or 17. ... Bb7!? 18. g4 c5 would have been quite good”, Beim writes in his book “Paul Morphy Una Prospettiva Moderna”, Roma, Prisma Editori, 2008, p. 182. 18. g4 g5?! “This move puts the final ‘splat’ on Black’s position. It was better to play 18. ... Bb7!? and after 19. h4 h5 20. f3 White would have been better, but with a whole game yet to be played. Now it ends quickly”. (Beim, ibidem). It’s all true, but I’m sure Morphy would have played 19. g5! (rather than 19. h4). 19. f4! Qf8 20. Rg3! Prepares for Nd2-f3. 20. ... Rd8. Zukertort recommended 20. ... Qd6, but 21. Rf1 (preparing for Nd2-f3) makes his long analysis unnecessary as White’s preponderance on the Kingside would be unstoppable. 21. Nf3! Bxf3 22. Rxf3 Qd6 23. Kg2 Nh5. Quite a desperate sacrifice, harshly dismissed by Wilhelm Steinitz as irrational craziness. But, of course, Anderseen is not crazy! His position is simply busted and so he goes all out. 24. fxg5 hxg5 25. gxh5 g4 26. hxg4. Another way to win was 26. Rxf7! (26. ... gxh3++ 27. Kh1 Rg2 28. Bf4+−). 26. ... Rxg4+ 27. Kf1 f5 28. Qf2 Ne5 29. dxe5. Morphy takes it easy. Stronger was 29. Bf4! Rxf4 (or 29. ... Nxd3 30. Bxd6 Nxf2 31. Be5+) 30. Rxe5 winning a piece in both cases. 29. ... Qxd3+ 30. Qe2 Qe4 31. Bf2 Qc6 32. Rd1 Rxd1+ 33. Qxd1 Qxc4+ 34. Qd3! Well, okay, by 34. Qe2 Morphy would have retained the a-Pawn, but the text allows White to exchange either Rooks or Queens, making the ending much easier. 34. ... Qxa2 35. Rg3 Qc4 36. Qxc4 Rxc4 37. Rg6 Rc6 38. c4 a5 39. Ke2 Rxc4 40. Rxe6 Rc2+ 41. Kf3 a4 42. Rg6 Rc4 43. Rg1 a3 44. e6 a2 45. Ra1. Morphy must enjoy playing cat-and-mouse or he would have won immediately with 45. e7 Re4 46. Bh4 followed by Rg1-a1. 45. ... Re4 46. Rxa2 Rxe6 47. Kf4 Rd6 48. Kxf5 Rd5+ 49. Kg4 b5 50. Ra8+ Kh7 51. Ra7 Rd7 52. Bg3 Rg7+ 53. Kh4 Rf7 54. Rxc7 1 : 0.

Le Coup de lune

Adolf Anderssen – Paul Charles Morphy
Match game 4; Paris, December 22, 1858
Spanish Game C77

1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5 a6 4. Ba4 Nf6 5. d3 Bc5 6. c3 b5 7. Bc2 d5 8. exd5 Nxd5 9. h3 0-0 10. 0-0 h6 11. d4 exd4 12. cxd4 Bb6 13. Nc3 Ndb4 14. Bb1 Be6? 15. a3 Nd5 16. Be3? Everything was happened already in the 2nd game and, now and then, no one of them took cognizance that 16. Qc2! would have almost won for White. 16. ... Nf6 17. Qd2 Re8 18. Rd1. Géza Maróczy rules out a tactical echo of the 2nd game by 18. Bxh6!? gxh6 19. Qxh6 Nxd4 for if 20. Ng5?? there would follow 19. ... Nf5−+, but White could play better by 20. Rd1 Bb3 (idem to say 20. ... Bc4) 21. Qg5+ contenting himself with perpetual check. 18. ... Bd5 19. Ne5

19. ... Qd6! It is the best and the most difficult move of the game! Catastrophic was 19. ... Nxd4?? 20.Bxd4 c5 21. Nxd5! Qxd5 22. Ba2 Qxd4 23. Bxf7+ 1 : 0 Tarrasch – Euwe, The Hague 1922, while if 19. ... Nxe5? 20. dxe5 Rxe5 there might follow 21. Bxb6 cxb6 22. Ba2 Qe7 23. f4 with an easy win. 20. Qc2? White’s trivial threat of winning a piece actually constitutes a big tactical mistake. Best was 20. Nxd5 Nxd5 21. Qc2 Nxe3 22. Qh7+ Kf8 23. Nxf7! Kxf7 24. fxe3 (as suggested by Grandmaster Rainer Knaak) with quite an unclear game. 20. ... Nxd4! 21. Bxd4. Even after 21. Rxd4 Bxd4 22. Bxd4 Bb7 23. Ba2 Rxe5 24. Bxe5 Qxe5 Black stands very much better (Beim’s analysis). 21. ... Bxd4 22. Nxd5 Qxe5. Clearly not 22. ... Qxd5?? on account of 23. Nc6! (23. ... Re4 24. Rxd4 Rxd4 25. Ne7+). 23. Nxf6+ Qxf6 24. Qh7+ Kf8. White obtained nothing for his Pawn sacrifice, and now he also has to contemplate a positional disaster. 25. Be4 Rad8 26. Kh1 Bxb2 27. Rab1 Rxd1+ 28. Rxd1 Qxf2 29. Qh8+. Not 29. Rd7?? Qe1+ 30. Kh2 Be5+ and mate in two moves. 29. ... Ke7 30. Qh7 Be5. Being lazy like a king, Morphy contents himself with putting the autopilot in a “won endgame” mode. He also could have continued the attack by 30. ... Rd8! as 31. Rxd8?? is met by 31. ... Qe1+ 32. Kh2 Be5+ and mate in two moves. 31.Bf3 Qg3 32. Kg1 Qg6! “This endgame is an elementary win. There were other possibilities, but Morphy was not interested in them. I’m sure Capablanca would have done likewise!”, Grandmaster Valeri Beim writes in his book “Paul Morphy Una Prospettiva Moderna”, Roma, Prisma Editori, 2008, p. 180. 33. Qxg6 fxg6 34. Bb7 Rb8! 35. Bxa6 c6 36. Kf2 Bd6 37. Rd3 Kd7 38. Ke2 Ra8 39. Bb7 Rxa3 40. Bc8+. White can no longer save himself into an ending with opposite coloured Bishops: 40. Rxa3 Bxa3 41. Kd3 Kc7 42. Ba6 Kb6 43. Bc8 c5 44. Be6 c4+ 45. Kc2 Kc5 46. Bf7 g5 47. Bg6 b4 48. Kb1 b3−+ (Maróczy’s analysis). 40. ... Kc7 41. Rd1 Ra2+ 42. Kf3 Bc5. Here Beim gives a pretty variation: 42. ... Ra8 43. Bb7 (or 43. Be6 Rf8+ 44. Ke4 Re8−+) 43. ... Ra3+ 44. Ke4 Ra4+ 45. Kf3 Be5 and White’s Bishop ends trapped. 43. Be6 Rf2+ 44. Kg3 Rf6 45. Rd7+ Kb6 46. Bg4 Bd6+ 47. Kh4 c5 48. Bf3 c4 49. Rxg7 Rf4+ 50. Bg4 c3 51. g3. After 51. Rxg6 c2! White cannot prevent Black from queening the Pawn. 51. ... Rxg4+ 0 : 1.

Le Comte de Monte-Cristo

Paul Charles Morphy – Adolf Anderssen
Match game 3; Paris, December 22, 1858
Spanish Game C65

1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5 Nf6. The Berlin Wall. 4. d4. The Barry Variation. 4. ... Nxd4. There is more than one good reason why 4. ... exd4 is much more popular. 5. Nxd4 exd4 6. e5 c6 7. 0-0! cxb5. Géza Maróczy’s suggestion 7. ... Nd5 8. Qxd4 Nc7 9. Bc4 d5 was well worth considering. 8. Bg5! Be7. On 8. ... h6?? 9. exf6 hxg5 10. Re1+ wins right off. 9. exf6 Bxf6. If 9. ... gxf6 then 10. Qxd4 Rg8 11. Bf4 with a clear advantage to White (Maróczy’s analysis). 10. Re1+ Kf8 11. Bxf6 Qxf6. As Morphy himself points out in his notes for The Chess Monthly, February 1859, p. 53, “Up to this move the game coincides with one played by Lange (Schachpartien, p. 56). That distinguished master now played 12. Na3 a6 13. Qe2 [...]”.

12. c3! Morphy’s powerful novelty: White pseudo-sacrifices a Pawn in order to enhance his development. If, instead, 12. Qe2 there might follow 12. ... g6 13. Nd2 d6 14. Qxb5 a6 15. Qd5 Bf5 16. Ne4 Bxe4 17. Rxe4 Kg7 18. g3 Rac8 with equality, Bird – Steinitz, London 1866, match game 14. 12. ... d5. The Pawn cannot be taken as after 12. ... dxc3 13. Nxc3 a6? 14. Ne4 Black can resign. 13. cxd4 Be6 14. Nc3 a6 15. Re5. Morphy’s apotheosys: powerful centralization, development advantage, control of the dark squares at the cheap cost of a Pawn. 15. ... Rd8 16. Qb3! “Morphy unsettles his opponent with positional threats, making his development more difficult”, Grandmaster Valeri Beim writes in his book “Paul Morphy Una Prospettiva Moderna”, Roma, Prisma Editori, 2008, p. 178. 16. ... Qe7 17. Rae1. Not 17. Nxd5? Qd6 and Black will end up winning at least a Pawn. 17. ... g5!? “Now after 17. ... g6 18. Ne2 Kg7 19. Nf4 Rhe8 20. Qg3 Rd6 21. h4 White creates long-lasting pressure. So Anderssen decides on this sharp, weakening thrust; other choises lose meekly”. (Beim, ibidem). 18. Qd1 Qf6 19. R1e3. “Morphy’s unfortunate habit resurfaces; upon achieving a most favourable position he loses focus. Much stronger was 19. Ne2! Rc8 20. Qd2 h6 21. f4 Bg4 22. fxg5 hxg5 23. Rxg5 Bxe2 24. Rxe2 with a great advantage”. (Beim, ibidem). With the text move White brutally threatens 19. Rxe6 fxe6 20. Rf3. 19. ... Rg8?? “Completely unmindful of the snare! He should have played 19. ... g4, and he would then have had at least as good a game as White”, Howard Staunton writes in his book “Chess Praxis”, London, George Bell and Sons, 1876, p. 489, but after 20. g3 followed by Nc3-e2-f4 White appears to stand much better. More solid looks 19. ... Kg7 20. h4 h6! although after 21. Ne2 White does keep the edge. 20. Rxe6! 1 : 0.

A Day’s Grace

Adolf Anderssen – Paul Charles Morphy
Match game 2; Paris, December 21, 2017
Spanish Game C77

1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5 a6! The Morphy Variation. 4. Ba4 Nf6 5. d3 Bc5 6. c3 b5 7. Bc2 d5 8. exd5 Nxd5 9. h3 0-0 10. 0-0 h6. “Steinitz had a field day criticizing White’s last two moves”, Bobby Fischer writes in his book “My 60 Memorable Games”, London, Batsford, 2008, p. 51. 11. d4. Whilelm Steinitz – maybe rightly – recommends here 11. Nxe5 Nxe5 12. d4, even though after 12. ... Qf6! Black doesn’t seem to have any problems. 11. ... exd4. “With a satisfactory game for Black”. (Fischer, ibidem). 12. cxd4 Bb6 13. Nc3 Ndb4 14. Bb1. Géza Maróczy suggests the subtle interpolation of 14. Be4! f5 15. Bb1 as 15. ... Nxd4? 16. Nxd4 Qxd4 (not 16. ... Bxd4?? 17. Qb3+) 17. Qf3 followed by a2-a3 and Rf1-d1 actually seems to give White far better chances for an advantage. 14. ... Be6? “This move is a terrible oversight. He should have taken the Pawn: 14. ... Nxd4 although after 15. Nxd4 Qxd4 (15. ... Bxd4 16. Qf3 Rb8 17. Rd1 c5 18. Bf4 results in approximate equality) 16. Qf3 Rb8 17. Qg3 White has full compensation for the Pawn”, Grandmaster Valeri Beim writes in his book “Paul Morphy Una Prospettiva Moderna”, Roma, Prisma Editori, 2008, p. 174. 15. a3 Nd5 16. Ne2? Grandmaster Rainer Knaak was the first one to provide the obvious refutation 16. Qc2! (followed by an one-word credit: “Fritz”), which gains material (at least a Pawn) in all variations, or – even worse – a clear piece (after 16. ... Nf6?? 17. Ne4!). 16. ... Nf6 17. Be3 Re8 18. Ng3 Bc4. And now, as once Peruvian Grandmaster Esteban Canal said, Black is ready to sit down on the d4-Pawn “with all his family”. 19. Nf5!? Desperation! “This position is strategically very pleasant for Black. White would be ill-advised to play 19. Re1 Nxd4! here; while after 19. Bd3 Bxd3 20. Qxd3 Qd5 White still has his isolated Pawn, but in a passive position. Anderssen, true to his usual active style, gives up the Exchange to retain some counter-chances. He also intended further sacrifices”. (Beim, op. cit., p. 175). 19. ... Bxf1 20. Qxf1 Ne7 21. N3h4 Nxf5 22. Nxf5 Qd7. 22. ... Qd5! (eventually followed by ... Nf6-e4) also seems very strong.

23. Bxh6!? This was clearly Anderssen’s idea when he sacrificed the Exchange: a last-ditch attack against the gigantic Morphy. Such a daring and courageous decision will be rewarded with a peaceful close. 23. ... gxh6. “It is hard to give this move a dubious mark; but 23. ... g6!? 24. Qc1 Ne4 gave Black a much simpler win”. (Beim, ibidem). 24. Qc1 Bxd4. Johannes Hermann Zukertort recommended here 24. ... Nh7 25. Qxh6 f6 26. Ba2+ (not 26. Nh4? Re1+ 27. Kh2 Rxb1!) 26. ... Kh8 27. Nh4 Rg8 28. Bxg8 Rxg8 as a possibly better way to proceed, but, of course, there is nothing wrong with Morphy’s decision. 25. Qxh6 Re1+ 26. Kh2 Ne4? Too nonchalantly sure of himself, Morphy omits to play 26. ... Qxf5! 27. Bxf5 Rxa1 that would ensure Black an overwhelming material superiority. 27. Bxe4 Rxe4. Perhaps Morphy – who, as usual, played very quickly – had overlooked that 27. ... Rxa1?? would have been met by 28. Nxd4! which wins for White! 28. Qg5+ Kf8 29. Qh6+ Ke8 30. Nxd4 Qd6+ 31. Qxd6 cxd6 32. Rd1! Kf8. “Black has fought his way through all White’s brilliancies into and ending where he is the Exchange ahead, only to find that White can nevertheless hold everything”, Richard Nevil Coles wrote in his book “Epic Battles of the Chessboard”, New York, Dover, 1996, p. 31. 33. Rd2 Rae8 34. g4 R8e5 35. f3 Re1 36. h4 Rd5 37. Kg3 a5 38. h5 Kg8 39. Kf2 Re8 40. Kg3 Kh7 41. Kf4 Re7 42. Kg3 f6 43. Kf4 Re8 44. Kg3 Re7 ½ : ½. All in all it has been a lucky escape for Anderssen, but it will be the last one.

Millennium bug

Paul Charles Morphy – Adolf Anderssen
Match game 1; Paris, December 20, 1858
Evans Gambit C52

Morphy usually was a bad starter, and, furthermore, he was even ill for the first two games of his match against Anderssen. But quite strangely, he refused to postpone the match. A year later, Anderseen got a clearer idea of what it happened, as he wrote to Tassilo von Heydebrand und der Lasa in a private letter dated December 31, 1859: “Altogether, he is not only a great chess player but also a great diplomat and all maneuvers which he inaugurated in reference to me since his arrival in England had not other purpose than to lure me to Paris and to burden me with the inconvenience of the trip. Likewise, I admired from the very beginning as a very tactful diplomatic maneuver that he took to his bed when I arrived in Paris, and I have never changed my mind about that”. 1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bc4 Bc5 4. b4!? Bxb4 5. c3 Ba5 6. d4 exd4 7. 0-0 Nf6? Morphy himself will write in his chess column for The New York Ledger of October 8, 1859: “The move recommended by Herr Anderssen at this stage of the Evans and played by him in his first match game with Mr. Morphy, is 7. ... Nf6. We have analyzed the move with great care, and have found that 8. Ba3 gave White a very fine attacking game”. 8. e5? Four months later Morphy was finally able to test his discovery: 8. Ba3! d6 9. e5! with an overwhelming initiative, P. C. Morphy – Greenaway, 8-board blindfold simultaneous exhibition, London 1859. 8. ... d5 9. Bb5 Ne4 10. cxd4. Géza Maróczy appears to regard 10. Qa4 0-0 11. Bxc6 Bxc3 12. Nxc3 Nxc3 13. Qc2 bxc6 14. Nxd4 c5 as more drawish. 10. ... 0-0! 11. Bxc6 bxc6 12. Qa4 Bb6 13. Qxc6 Bg4 14. Bb2. Wilhelm Steinitz called it a serious strategical error, both materially and immaterially. He gives as better 14. Be3, but then 14. ... f6 (Maróczy) was quite in Black’s favour anyway. 14. ... Bxf3 15. gxf3 Ng5 16. Nd2 Re8? As Johann Jacob Löwenthal pointed out, 16. ... Nh3+ followed by ... Qd8-h4 and then eventually ... Ra8-e8-e6 was almost crushing. Anderssen probably overlooked Morphy’s subtle 18th move. 17. Kh1 Nh3

18. f4! “Wonderful! By opening the third rank for his pieces and capitalizing on the chance to coordinate his forces, Morphy finds the only way to avoid an inglorious and unresisting end as would have happened after 18. Nb3 Re6 19. Qc2 Qh4 20. Bc1 Bxd4 21. Nxd4 Qxd4 22. Bb2 Qf4”, Grandmaster Valeri Beim writes in his book “Paul Morphy Una Prospettiva Moderna”, Roma, Prisma Editori, 2008, p. 171. 18. ... Qh4 19. Qxd5 Nxf2+ 20. Kg1 Nd3 21. Bc3 Nxf4. As Beim observes, 21. ... c5! might have been well stronger here. 22. Qf3. Beim recommends 22. Qe4!? Ng6 23. Qxh4 Nxh4 24. Nc4 as more tenable because “Black would not have a great advantage”, but such an admission could not appeal Morphy’s eager for eternity. 22. ... Nh3+ 23. Kh1 Ng5 24. Qg2 Rad8 25. Rg1! Maróczy wisely suggests 25. Nf3 Nxf3 26. Qxf3 Bxd4 27. Bxd4 Qxd4 28. Qxf7+ Kh8 29. Rae1 thinking and dreaming about saving a draw in the endgame a Pawn down. But no! Such a stuff is not worth Morphy’s looking at. 25. ... h6 26. Raf1 Qh3 27. Qc6? This is actually the losing move! As Beim demonstrated through long analysis, after 27. Qxh3 Nxh3 28. Rg4! followed by Nd2-e4 White should not lose, and, if Black plays badly, he could even win! 27. ... Qd7 28. Qg2 Bxd4 29. Bxd4 Qxd4 30. Nf3 Qd5 31. h4 Ne6 32. Qg4 Qc6 33. Rg2 Rd3 34. Qf5 Red8 35. Qf6. Fighting to the end. If, instead, 35. Qxf7+ Kxf7 36. Nd4+ then 35. ... Rf3! finis. 35. ... Qd5 36. Qf5 Rd1 37. Rxd1 Qxd1+ 38. Kh2 Rd3 39. Rf2 Re3. “True to his principles, Anderssen is prepared to part with some of his material advantage to increase the positional. Despite White’s desperate resistance, he unhurriedly brings his advantage home”. (Beim, op. cit., p. 173). 40. Nd2 Re2 41. Qxf7+ Kh8 42. Ne4 Rxf2+ 43. Nxf2 Qd5 44. Ng4 Qxa2+ 45. Kg3 Qb3+ 46. Kh2 Qc2+ 47. Kg3 Qc3+ 48. Kh2 Qc6 49. h5 a5 50. Nf6 gxf6 51. Qxf6+ Kg8 52. Qg6+ Kf8 53. Qxh6+ Ke8 54. Qg6+ Kd7 55. h6 Qd5 56. h7 Qxe5+ 57. Kg1 Ng5 58. h8=Q Qxh8 59. Qxg5 Qd4+ 60. Kf1 a4 61. Qf5+. “Or 61. Qb5+ Kd6 62. Qa6+ c6 and checks are over”, writes Grandmaster Enrico Paoli in his book “Il Finale negli Scacchi”, Milano, Mursia, 1974, p. 461. 61. ... Kc6 62. Qc8 Kb5! 63. Ke1. “Not 63. Qxc7 Qc4+. If 63. Qb7+ Qb6 64. Qd5+ c5 65. Qd7+ Qc6 66. Qd3+ c4”. (Paoli, ibidem). 63. ... c5 64. Qb7+ Kc4 65. Qf7+ Kc3 66. Qf3+ Qd3 67. Qf6+ Kb3 68. Qb6+ Kc2 69. Qa7. “Again the Pawn was taboo”. (Paoli, ibidem). 69. ... Qc3+ 70. Ke2 a3 71. Qa4+. “Or 71. Qh7+ Kb2 72. Qb7+ Ka2 73. Qf7+ c4 etc.”. (Paoli, ibidem). 71. ... Kb2 72. Qb5+ Qb3! 0 : 1.

Paul Charles Morphy (R.) vs. Adolf Anderssen (L.)
Image courtesy of Chess Graphics

An American in Paris

Paul Charles Morphy – Adolf Anderssen
Paris, december 1858
King’s Gambit C39

1. e4 e5 2. f4 exf4 3. Nf3 g5 4. h4 g4 5. Ne5 Nf6 6. Nxg4 Nxe4 7. d3 Ng3 8. Bxf4 Nxh1 9. Qe2+. On 9. Bg5 Be7 10. Qe2 h5 11. Qe5 f6! 12. Nxf6+ Kf7 Black wins (Steinitz’s analysis). 9. ... Qe7 10. Nf6+ Kd8 11. Bxc7+ Kxc7 12. Nd5+ Kd8 13. Nxe7 Bxe7. “[A]nd Black should win”, Robert James Fischer wrote in his best-selling book “My 60 Memorable Games”. 14. Qg4 d6 15. Qf4 Rg8 16. Qxf7. This looks stronger than 16. Nc3 Be6 17. Be2 Nc6 18. 0-0-0 Ng3 19. Bf3 Nf5 20. d4 Nxh4 21. Kb1 Nxf3 22. gxf3 d5 23. Nb5 Rc8 24. c4 Kd7 25. cxd5 Bxd5 26. Nc3 Bd6 27. Qf5+ Be6 28. Qb5 Kc7 29. Ka1 Bd7 30. Nd5+ Kb8 31. Nf6 Rgd8 32. d5 Ne5 33. Qe2 Bf5 34. Ne4 Bxe4 35. fxe4 Nc4 36. Rc1 b5 37. e5 Nxe5 38. Qxb5+ Ka8 39. Rd1 Rc2 40. Qa6 f5 41. Kb1 Rc7 42. Rf1 Nc4 43. Rf2 Rb8 44. b3 Ba3 0 : 1 Baucher – Morphy, Paris 1858. 16. ... Bxh4+. Géza Maróczy also considers 16. ... Rf8 17. Qxh7 Ng3 followed by ... Bc8-f5. 17. Kd2 Re8 18. Na3

18. ... Na6!? This is most likely a questionable move by Anderssen and, according to Maróczy – a little exaggeratedly – the decisive mistake. He recommended 18. ... Ng3 19. Nb5 Be7 and now we’d interpolate 20. Qf4 (20. Nc7? loses to 20. ... Rf8) 20. ... Nf5 with Black still maintaining more than sufficient compensation for the Queen. 19. Qh5 Bf6 20. Qxh1 Bxb2? Indeed, this does seem to be the decisive mistake! After 20. ... Bg5+ 21. Kc3 Be6 22. b3 Rc8+ followed by ... Bg5-f6+ Black should be able to hold his own. 21. Qh4+ Kd7. Or 21. ... Kc7 22. Nb5+ Kb8 23. Rb1 and wins. 22. Rb1 Bxa3 23. Qa4+ 1 : 0.

Dyeus

Paul Charles Morphy – Adolf Anderssen
Match game 7; Paris, December 25, 1858
Scandinavian Defence B01

1. e4 d5 2. exd5 Qxd5 3. Nc3 Qa5. “Perhaps a better move than playing the Queen home again; but the defence of 1. ... d5 is objectionable, however conducted”, Howard Staunton wrote in his book “Chess Praxis”, London, Bell & Daldy, 1871, p. 494. 4. d4 e5 5. dxe5 Qxe5+ 6. Be2 Bb4. “In Mr. Lange’s observation on the present game, he remarks, ‘Black strives with masterly energy to relieve himself from the disadvantage entailed by the opening he has chosen’, which, considering the very ordinary moves really made, savours a little too much of the hyperbolical tone adopted by Mr. Morphy’s adulators in England”, Staunton said (ibidem, p. 494). 7. Nf3! A positional Pawn sacrifice just to speed up his development. After 7. Bd2 Bg4 Black has no problem at all. 7. ... Bxc3+ 8. bxc3 Qxc3+ 9. Bd2 Qc5 10. Rb1 Nc6 11. 0-0 Nf6 12. Bf4. Playing to regain the Pawn. Géza Maróczy recommended 12. Rb5 Qd6 13. Re1 0-0 14. Qc1 which is also very strong. 12. ... 0-0 13. Bxc7 Nd4! 14. Qxd4 Qxc7 15. Bd3! Bg4? “He should have played 15. ... h6; this turns out a lost move”, Staunton said (ibidem, p. 495). 16. Ng5! Intending Ng5-e4. 16. ... Rfd8? “Black had better saving chances after 16. ... Bh5!? 17. Ne4! Nxe4 18. Qxe4 Bg6 19. Qxb7 Qxb7 20. Rxb7 Bxd3 21. cxd3 Rfd8 22. Rd1 Rab8 because there are always chances in a Rook endgame”, writes Grandmaster Valeri Beim in his book “Paul Morphy Una Prospettiva Moderna”, Roma, Prisma Editori, 2008, p. 189. 17. Qb4 Bc8. “A fatal necessity”, Staunton said (ibidem, p. 495). 18. Rfe1 a5. Not 18. ... h6 19. Re7 Rd7? because of 20. Bh7+ Kh8 (or 20. ... Kf8 21. Rxf7++ and mate next move) 21. Re8+ Nxe8 22. Qf8 mate.

19. Qe7! Morphy usually chose the strongest move in the position! 19. ... Qxe7 20. Rxe7 Nd5. Equally after 20. ... Rd7 21. Rxd7 Bxd7 22. Rxb7 h6 23. Nh7! Black’s cause is hopeless. 21. Bxh7+ Kh8 22. Rxf7 Nc3 23. Re1 Nxa2 24. Rf4! Ra6 25. Bd3! 1 : 0. At first it looks easy :).

Paul Charles Morphy (R.) vs. Adolf Anderssen (L.)
Image courtesy of Chess Graphics

火星紀事

La Rivista degli Scacchi, 1859, page 151

Artwork: Puerpera