Chigorin on Tarrasch, Lasker, Janowski, Russians



as told by M.S. Evenson  (translated from the original Russian by by WilhelmThe2nd)


“Tarrasch – He is a follower of Steinitz, however he is more flexible, less persisting in the once-and-for-all mastered dogmas. And he is therefore a more dangerous opponent in practical play. Janowski is closer to me: he is more often guided by intuition. I rate Janowski very highly and I am enraptured by many of his games. His talent is luminous, brilliant, but, unfortunately, his play sometimes, as if suddenly, becomes colourless and grows dim… Perhaps it is simply fatigue or weakness of nerves... However, as far as Lasker is concerned, he, in my opinion, represents a third direction: he considers chess mainly as a fight. And his weapons are diverse. Lasker will still be a terror for the most talented opponents for a long time. Here Tarrasch, who does not care for Lasker, found the time somehow to calculate how many games he [Lasker] had won which were "presented" to him by his opponents. At one Nuremberg tournament, by Tarrasch’s calculation, Lasker was obliged to "Luck" for no more and no less than five whole points! True, from these five won games he really stood to lose in three of them. In particular, I had a won game against Lasker, which I spoiled, after moving my queen away out of play. But who, besides Lasker, could have planned a dangerous attack on my kingside with such small means as remained at his disposal? … No, all this is nonsense. Neither luck nor hypnotism explain Lasker’s strength. He has the temperament of a champion and enormous talent. Steinitz wants to make from chess a science, I – an art, Lasker – a fight or, if you like, a sport...”
     Then the conversation passed to the participants in the tournament. We wanted to know M.I.’s  opinion of the Russian chess players present. Tschigorin expressed himself in very flattering terms about Rubinstein. He briefly spoke about Bernstein, that he promised much. About Yurevich he answered that as a chess player he undoubtedly had talent, but "I sense from him”, said M. I.,  “that he will not love chess".
     He especially noted Duz-Chotimirsky as a talented, but still unbalanced chess player, from whom much could be developed, "if he does not go crazy"...