Last Round Thrills In Vienna 1898

     The 1898 Vienna tournament celebrated the fiftieth anniversary of Emperor Franz Joseph I of Austria's accession to the throne of Austria-Hungary. The main organizer was Baron von Rothschild who also financed the Vienna tournaments of 1873, 1882, 1903 and 1908. As a side attraction the players visited his palace. 

Nice house!

     Rounds were played beginning at 10am (!!) in the club house of the Wiener Schachklub. The adjournment bell was rung at 2pm, with play resuming at 5pm to be continued until 9pm at which point a minimum of fifteen moves per hour must be made. One odd rule was that the players were forbidden to analyze adjourned games. 
     Of the great players of the day only Lasker and Charousek were absent. Lasker didn't want to play because he thought there were too many players and the tournament was too long; there were twenty players in the double round event. Charousek declined because of illness; he had contracted tuberculosis that year and by April 1900 he was dead at the age of 26. 
    Steinitz and Chigorin were still great rivals and Tarrasch had recently complied a great tournament record and Pillsbury who had won big at Hastings in 1895 was looking for another first prize. 
     During the eighth round the 62-year old Adolf Schwarz was forced to resign during his game and then leave Vienna due to health reasons.  His remaining games in the first half were forfeited and he was removed from the schedule of the second half. 

     Tarrasch and Pillsbury tied and had a play-off match which was won by Tarrasch by a score of 2.5-1.5. But it was the last round that was exciting. 

1-2) Tarrasch and Pillsbury 28.5 
3) Janowski 26.5 
4) Steinitz 24.5 
5) Schlechter 22.5 
6-7) Chigorin and Burn 21.0 
8-9) Lipke and Maróczy 20.5 
10) Alapin 19.0 
11) Schiffers 18.0 
12-13) Blackburne and Marco 17.5 
14) Showalter 16.0 
15) Walbrodt 15.5 
16) Halprin 15.0 
17) Caro 13.5 
18) Baird 9.0 
19) Trenchard 6.0 
20) Schwarz 1.0 

     After 19 rounds Pillsbury and Tarrasch were tied for the lead followed by Janowski with the aging Steinitz in fourth. Tarrasch had lost only one game, to Pillsbury who had lost to Chigorin and Maroczy. 
     After 24 rounds Tarrasch had a half point lead over Pillsbury and Steinitz had moved into third place. 
     After 26 rounds Pillsbury was in the lead and Tarrasch was second. Janowski was back in third with Chigorin fourth. Steinitz had slipped to fifth having lost two games. 
     After 32 rounds Pillsbury (with 24.5 points) continued to lead by a half point ahead of Tarrasch. Janowski was tied for third with Steinitz while Chigorin was a distant fifth a whole 6 points behind. 
     In round 33 Tarrasch defeated Pillsbury and took the lead only to lose to Janowski in round 34 while Pillsbury won. Both of them won in round 35. 
     In round 36 Tarrasch moved into the lead after drawing with Chigorin while Pillsbury lost to Burn in 91 moves. 
     In round 37, the next to last, Pillsbury beat Trenchard and Tarrasch beat Alapin. So, when the last round arrived on Monday, July 25th Tarrasch and Pillsbury were tied with 27.5 points with Janowski with 25.5 followed by Steinitz with 25 points. 
    Pillsbury had an easy pairing as he was playing Baird while Tarrasch was paired against Walbrodt. Pillsbury soon obtained an advantage, won two Pawns on move 27 and scored in 52 moves. Meanwhile Walbrodt had lost time with a N maneuver while trying to force exchanges and get a draw, but Tarrasch had managed to establish a bind on the position and was able to force resignation, also in 52 moves, and so first place was a tie between he and Pillsbury.
     Tarrasch's squeeze of Walbrodt has long been used as an example of punishing a cramped position and Reti used it as such in Modern Ideas in Chess. In the book, Reti did not heavily annotate the game and lead the reader to assume that Walbrodt was totally helpless which he was not. 
     Likewise, Reinfeld annotated the game in Tarrasch's Best Games and did the same thing. Not surprisingly, Stockfish and Komodo found resources that the annotators were not aware of or ignored because had they investigated more thoroughly, it would have thrown a monkey wrench into the point they were trying to make. 
     Just a couple of observations. Never trust everything you read in old chess books. While Walbrodt got himself into a passive and cramped position that was difficult to defend, the game was hardly a one sided thumping where he never had a chance as Reti and Reinfeld would have us believe. His real error was hunkering down and trying to defend instead of seeking active counterplay. That said, Tarrasch's play was admirable and quite instructive as an example of how to play positions in which one has more space.  Just taking a quick glance at the position after move 16 and it's hard to believe that white has any winning chances at all. In the end, Reti and Reinfeld are correct in that the game is a masterpiece of positional play.
     Also, never trust engine analysis...in a few years advances in engines may very well punch holes in what Stockfish and Komodo suggested in this game! 
     By the way, even though everybody likes to make fun of Fred Reinfeld's chess books, the fact his his earlier books were excellent and Tarrasch's Best Games was one of them. Reinfeld knew his later books were bad, but he didn't care because they were easy to write and they made him a lot more money. Recommended Reinfeld books are: 
1001 Winning Chess Sacrifices and Combinations 
1001 Brilliant Ways to Checkmate 
The Immortal Games of Capablanca 
Colle's Chess Masterpieces 
Dr. Lasker's Chess Career 
Botvinnik the Invincible 
How To Force Checkmate 
Nimzovich, the Hypermodern 
Morphy, Chessmaster 
British Chessmaster, Past and Present