Romantic Rumble: George Mackenzie vs. Isidor Gunsberg

Let's keep the good times rolling.

Going purely by seeding, Gunsberg is actually the underdog in this match, perhaps contrary to expectations. This is primarily because of his horrid result at his debut tournament, Nuremberg 1883; take that out of the equation and Gunsberg enters this tournament with a higher seed than Mackenzie (see how I actually calculated the seeds here). The two would still face off in this round, so the point is mostly moot.

Romantic Rumble: George Mackenzie vs. Isidor Gunsberg

Recall that Gunsberg's tournament career didn't really begin until the aforementioned Nuremberg tournament, at which point Mackenzie was already an established master. Although the American champion didn't have any victories yet, he was consistently strong in his international appearances: 5th at Paris 1878, 4th-5th at Vienna 1882, and 5th-7th at London 1883. He understandably sat out of Nuremberg, though he could have scored an early victory against his present rival.

We have to jump ahead to Hamburg 1885 before we get to see these two face off. Their game feels very representative of their overall styles: Gunsberg thrives in objectively bad positions with lots of room for traps, while Mackenzie loves material imbalances and navigating the chaos. Their opening game was sufficiently volatile, with Mackenzie sacrificing a piece early to keep Gunsberg on the defensive. The veteran ultimately failed to play with enough energy, and once Gunsberg got the initiative, he capitalized on it with verve.

Gunsberg won this tournament with 12/17 (see here), while Mackenzie's 10/17 was only enough for sixth.

Less than a month later, at the Hereford congress, the rematch happened. It developed into a dream position for Mackenzie, who had a wide open board and an initiative that wouldn't go away. Gunsberg got to show off his "trappy" defensive style, chock full of tricky attempts to generate some activity, but they never amounted to much. Ironically, as the analysis will show, a more solid and perhaps passive defence would have worked out better, but that's not the kind of chess you'll get from either player.

Mackenzie finished fourth with 7/10, while Gunsberg shared fifth with Mason on 5.5/10.

The London tournament the following year was one that didn't live up to either player's expectation, but that harmed Mackenzie (who didn't even win a prize) more than it did Gunsberg (who was a half point shy of defending his title). Their game was good, if pure Romantic fistfights are your thing, but it's far from the most scientific specimen we'll see. Yet again, Mackenzie had the advantage throughout, and should have been able to convert the extra piece Gunsberg sacrificed in the opening. But starting at move 24, he made a few careless moves, and Gunsberg exploited the awkward geometry with a couple of precise captures.

Gunsberg's 8/12 was only enough for shared third with Taubenhaus, while Mackenzie's 6/12 had him share seventh with Zukertort.

Frankfurt, you may recall, was Mackenzie's biggest tournament success. His game with Gunsberg, while not his best, was rather clean. It was yet another stable advantage and annoying initiative, though this time Gunsberg assumed the defensive from an early point, and really forced Mackenzie to find the breakthrough. He ultimately did, cementing a pawn on f6 that wholly paralyzed the defence, and crashing through the h-file to deliver mate.

Mackenzie famously won this event with 15/20 (see here), while Gunsberg disappointingly scored only 8.5/20, his worst performance since his debut.

Their final encounter of the decade happened in Bradford, and it's the most one-sided of the games we'll cover today. Gunsberg tried the Canal Variation of the Italian, and demonstrated why Black has to push h6 as quickly as possible. His attack developed very quickly, with the center opening up before Mackenzie had a plan to get his King to safety, and a resignation was given after only 25 moves. 

Despite the game, both players had a very good tournament, with Gunsberg winning with 13.5/16 (see here) and Mackenzie finishing in second with 12/16. 

Mackenzie's illness throughout 1889 prevented the two from playing in New York, depriving us of at least two more games. To compensate, I'll once more include a game from Mackenzie's final tournament, Manchester 1890. It's quite different from the rest of the games seen today, with Mackenzie hinting at a Kingside attack before trading down into a Rook endgame. This was perhaps a good decision, as he won a pawn just before the time control and outplayed Gunsberg in the simplified ending. But all it took was one erroneous pawn push for a crucial set of pawns to be exchanged, and our only draw of the day was achieved.

Once more, both players had a good result, with Mackenzie's 12/19 good enough for shared third with Bird, and Gunsberg's 11.5/19 good enough for shared fifth with Mason (again).

Conclusion

As far as their interpersonal matchup goes, Mackenzie and Gunsberg are hard to separate, with Gunsberg technically winning their head-to-head 3.5-2.5, but it very well could have been 1-5 in Mackenzie's favour instead. This one will, in my opinion, primarily come down to their separate tournaments; Gunsberg arguably had higher highs (like 3rd place at New York) but certainly lower lows (like his 50% finish at Amsterdam 1889), giving solid arguments in favour of either player.

As always, I'll leave the poll up for about a week, and hopefully the follow-up post will come shortly after Christmas.

Thanks for reading, happy voting and happy holidays.