Lasker,E (2750) - Napier,W (2500) [B34]
All-Master Tourney Cambridge Springs, PA (3), 1904
Commentary by A.J. Goldsby I. Please note that Mr. Goldsby thinks the article and analysis by Vukovic/Heisman was very good, and that he only wishes to add a few lines and remarks.

The analysis here is primarily based on the article: "The Ultimate Truth," by NM Dan Heisman. (http://mywebpages.comcast.net/danheisman/Articles/Vukovic_story.html). Make sure you READ this article first ... BEFORE tackling this analysis. (Only then will it make any sense!) Discussion of the game is in black text and the main line is bold. Commentary on Heisman's article is in dark blue text.

Supposedly this is all based on some analysis done by Vladimir Vukovic. This work here was done to help guide you through the article by NM Dan Heisman. (And understand the moves presented to you.)

1.e4 c5; 2.Nc3 Nc6; 3.Nf3 g6; 4.d4 cxd4; 5.Nxd4 Bg7; 6.Be3 d6; 7.h3 Nf6; 8.g4 0-0; 9.g5 Ne8; 10.h4 Nc7; 11.f4 e5; 12.Nde2 d5; 13.exd5 Nd4; 14.Nxd4 Nxd5; 15.Nf5 Nxc3; 16.Qxd8 Rxd8; 17.Ne7+ Kh8; 18.h5 Re8; 19.Bc5!?,
{See Diagram} Many have said this was best, others have awarded it one ... or more! ... exclams here.








But is this the best move? The only move? Or are other tries playable for White here?

I believe this is the starting point for the Heisman article. [Maybe 19.hxg6!?, "+/=" was better than the game.]

19...gxh5?; {See Diagram}

A bad move ... and one that should have lost the game for Black. (Many masters praised this move ... and some have even awarded an exclam to it.) '!!' - R.N. Coles.









The story centers on the possibilities for Black after the move, 19...exf4: 19...exf4!; 20.hxg6! fxg6!; This is best. (Definitely not: 20...Nd5?? as RxP/h7 is mate! {A.J.G.} ). 21.Bc4?! Bf5!? This is interesting ... and perhaps adequate to draw. (And the only move examined in the Heisman story.) However - the move 21...b6 probably represents a significant improvement for the player of the Black pieces. Marco originally ONLY gave the moves 21.Bc4!!, then 21...b5!! This analysis was repeated by literally dozens of analysts - who probably never even bothered to check the moves critically. 21...Bf5 is definitely better than the silly move, 21...b5. (This is the whole point of the article by Heisman.) More than likely, the try: 21...b6! (=/+) (maybe "/+") is a better move ... and probably results in an advantage for Black.)

A) 22.Bf7?! The first try by the man at the table in the Heisman story.

Play this line through all the way to the end of the line before looking at the second alternative (B) below. The main line of the first try continues as follows: 22...Ne4; 23.Bxe8 Rxe8; 24.Ba3 Ng3!; 25.0-0-0 Nxh1; 26.Nxf5 gxf5; 27.Rxh1 Kg8! ("/+"); Black is clearly better. Here the man at the table concedes defeat to our tall stranger, and decides to go back to the move, 22.bxc3 instead (22.bxc3 = the second try).

B) The second try by the man at the table ... vs. the tall and some-what mysterious stranger is the move, 22.bxc3. And now the two hypothetical contestants look at the following lines: 22.bxc3 Rac8; ('!') The best move. (22...Bxc3+?! 23.Kf2 Bxa1 24.Rxa1 Rac8?? 25.Bd4#). We now look at "the fun line" ... first, as it was in the story. 23.Bb5 Rxc5 24.Bxe8 Re5+ 25.Kf2 Rxe7 26.Rae1 Bf8! 27.Ba4 The best move? (The story seems to indicate that it is - at least, at this point.) (27.Rxe7? Bxe7 28.Rb1 b6 29.Kf3 Bxg5 (=/+) {A.J.G.} ).

27...Be4! 28.Rh4!? << "27. Rh4" he said authoritatively,and then started to look around. He was right after all. The stranger's analysis had a hole, and the position was starting to lose interest. >> - From the Heisman article. I don't know about this. {A.J.G.} (The move: 28.Rh2 is maybe a fuzz better. {A.J.G.} )

28...Re5 29.Rxf4!? Bc5+ 30.Ke2 Maybe best. (30.Kg3? Rxg5+ etc.).

30...Bc6+ 31.Kd1 Rd5+ 32.Ke2 This is completely forced. (32.Kc1? Ba3+! 33.Kb1 Bxa4 34.Rxa4 Rb5+ 35.Rb4 Bxb4 36.cxb4 Rxb4+ 37.Kc1 Kg8! ("/+") Black is clearly better. {A.J.G.} ).

32...Re5+ 33.Kd2 Rd5+ (=) and the game is drawn. (White's only viable moves are to move back and forth between e2 and d2; Black simply continues to check with the Rook.)


Returning to the actual game...
20.Bc4? (??) {See Diagram}
Given a double-exclam by Marco, Reinfeld and Fine, R.N. Coles, (and many others); this move may actually deserve two question marks.








The rest of the game is not really analyzed by Dan Heisman. [20.bxc3 Bf8; 21.Bb5]
20...exf4?; ('??') A very bad move. [Much better was: 20...Ne4! (=/+) and Black will probably come out to be just a little better.]

The rest of the game concludes with the following moves: 21.Bxf7 Ne4; 22.Bxe8 Bxb2; 23.Rb1 Bc3+; 24.Kf1 Bg4; 25.Bxh5 Bxh5; 26.Rxh5 Ng3+; 27.Kg2 Nxh5; 28.Rxb7 a5; 29.Rb3 Bg7; 30.Rh3 Ng3; 31.Kf3 Ra6; 32.Kxf4 Ne2+; 33.Kf5 Nc3; 34.a3 Na4; 35.Be3, Black Resigns. 1-0

White has overwhelming threats.
NOTE: This analysis was checked by the following programs: Fritz 8.0, Crafty, Junior 6.0, and ChessMaster 9000. - {A.J.G.}

Please go to my web page at: http://www.lifemasteraj.com/old_af-dl/lasker-napier_cs1904.html to see this game anayzed in detail.

Copyright (c) A.J. Goldsby I.

Copyright (c) A.J.G; 2003.