Lasker's 27 year reign

The Kramnik interview is interesting and there is too much in it to comment on all of it, but some of the things he says about Lasker look a bit odd. The Lasker-Steinitz match exhibited a "huge gap" and Kramnik estimated it to have been a match between a 2700 and a 2400, yet the result was +10 - 5 = 4 for Lasker, not such a crushing victory. (Not mentioning that Steinitz was nearing 60 and his health and financial situation were deteriorating.) On the other hand, the Lasker-Capablanca match for him was the first WCH match in which both competitors played at a very strong level, yet Lasker didn't win even a single game in that match, and even resigned the match before it was officially over. Go figure.

That makes sense. However, wasn't it convincingly proven that the suggestion that Lasker played second rate moves was incorrect - perpetrated by the likes of Jankowski who were incapable of understanding his play.

I would have thought that Fischer would have seen through this.

I feel certain that Fischer analyzed Lasker's games himself and drew his own conclusions and didnt simply rely on what others said, you don't ? All this discussion of Lasker has motivated me to go back and reread volume one of Kasparov's great predecessors books ... 

Yes, I feel absolutely sure that Fischer would have looked through Lasker's games. I was surprised at the thought that Fischer's own analysis would have led him to believe that Lasker was deliberately playing inferior moves (except in the series against Jankowski where he was sandbagging for another tournament with a bigger payout)

In Moscow 1935 Lasker was 0.5 from Botvinnik and Flohr in first, in a very strong field, ahead of Capablanca. He was undefeated. Lasker won all the games he played against Euwe, two of them in the middle of the 1930s, one of them when Euwe was World Champion. The idea that Lasker wouldn't have been competitive against Euwe in 1936 is amusing to say the least.

In 1934, Lasker lost games to Alekhine, Bogoljubow and Nimzowitsch.  In 1936, to Botvinnik, Flohr (twice), Capablanca, Fine and Reshevsky.  Although he was amazingly strong for someone of his age, it's pretty clear he was no longer the best player in the world.

He wasn't the best player in the world by then, but he was close to 70 and hadn't played at all for almost ten years in 1934. With that in mind it's unbelievable that he could keep beating Euwe in 1934 and 1936 and finish ahead of Capablanca in 1935, as he had done on previous occasions. 

The point is that Lasker would most likely being playing that variation regardless of the what Capa might or not want to be doing "psychologically".  It was Lasker's favorite variation and he new it better than anyone.  The fact that it might have been particularly helpful given the circumstances in that tournament with Capa doesn't mean he played it for "psychological" reasons.

I don't think Fischer ever accused lasker of playing intentionally inferior moves.  Fischer just didn't like his play and was, btw, a huge Steinitz fan.

BUMP.

Capablanca responded to Lasker's remarks about the oppressive climate.

"For what follows it must be borne in mind that Dr Lasker had been in Havana twice, in previous years, giving exhibitions at the Havana Chess Club. Thus, it is only fair to assume that he knew the climate he was going to encounter. At any rate, it was not entirely unknown to him. In his letter of 11 April, page 21, after he lost the tenth game, Dr Lasker complains of the sun. The games were played at night, between 9-0 and 1-0; the sun had been down for over two hours when play started! If during the day the sun bothered him, all he had to do was to stay at home and rest and wait for the late afternoon and early evening to go out.

Again in his letter of 18 April, page 24, he complains of the sun, and this time of the heat also. He claims for that afternoon a temperature of 32° C. in the shade. What a wonderful imagination!

Such temperatures do not exist in Cuba except in midsummer, in August, the hottest month of the year. He claims 29° C. at night, with fresh north wind. Again absurd. When the north wind blows in Cuba at that time of the year at night the temperature cannot be more than 20° C., and the probabilities are that the temperature would be below 20° C. In such cases one feels chilly. I remember that on two occasions we had to close the windows because the air was too cool, yet he claims it was too hot. It might be well to state right here that far from being used to hot weather, as most people think, I cannot stand it. The only two summers I have spent in Cuba since 1904 caused me serious illness. I have spent most of my life in very cold climates, and while I enjoy cold weather, hot weather makes me ill. The truth is that we played under the most ideal conditions imaginable."

http://www.chesshistory.com/winter/extra/capablancalasker.html

Growing up in chess, I always heard that it was too hot, and the above defense only comes many years later.

:-D

                     H O G W A S H 

STOP THE HATE !

One thing to be learned (or re-learned) from this thread:

Never trust the statements of chess champions when it comes to their matches, and take anything else they say with a few boxes of salt. 

WTF is going on?