Annotated chess game: J. Schulten - Paul Morphy, New York 1857

ANNOTATED GAME

J. Schulten - Paul Morphy, New York 1857
J. Schulten vs. Paul Morphy
Annotated by: alex_ratchkov (2458)
Chess opening: KGD (C31), Falkbeer, Rubinstein variation

Interactive

•

Show all comments

•

All annotated games

•

View chessboard as:

After becoming US Champion, for a time Morphy settled in New York, where he played 161 games at odds (=107 -36 =18) and 100 games on equal terms (+87 -5 =8), in which his opponents included the strongest players of that time, such as Paulsen, Stenley, Lichtenhein and Schulten. One of his wins over the latter was published all over the world.

1. e4 e5 2. f4 d5	Morphy was never one to accept gambits...
	3 comments the-sigularity (1300) on 04-Sep-15: teardrop, contrary to your chess educators. Accepting a gambit is not always best way to go, you need to apply logic to anything that is offered, to decide the best response.. teardrop34 (2197) on 04-Sep-15: I always wondered about this since I was always told the best way to refute a gambit is by accepting it. But I cannot question someone with the brilliancy of Morphy @stealth-invader: I never said that accepting the gambit was the way to go all the time, and I am sorry if that is what you gathered from my comment. I was merely pointing out an observation that in the many, many Morphy games I have gone over, I've never seen him accept a gambit. The quote is attributed to W. Steinitz, a 19th century GM champion, and has been repeated multiple times throughout history. Even Fischer wrote: "The refutation in any gambit begins with accepting it." (Bust to the King's Gambit) alex_ratchkov (2458) on 04-Sep-15: There is a funny story about that, actually. During the late 1950's or the early 1960's, well before their WC match, Fischer knew that Boris Spassky liked playing the King's Gambit, so he had published an article in American Chess Quarterly (the precursor to Chess Life magazine), basically stating that he had found a refutation to it (The Fischer Defense with 3...d6) and showing why it was bad for White. A short while later, Fischer actually got a chance to test out his refutation against Spassky when Fischer had the black pieces and Spassky played the King's Gambit against him. Unfortunately, things did not go well and Fischer ended up losing that game. So there were still some kinks to be worked out with his refutation!


3. exd5 e4	The Falkbeer Counter-Gambit, the evaluation of which remains not altogether clear even to this day



4. Nc3	More is promised by 4.d3 Nf6 (4...Qxd5 5.Qe2, or, as suggested by Keres, 5.Nd2!? exd3 6.Bxd3) 5.dxe4 Nxe4 6.Nf3 Bc5 7.Qe2 Nf5 8.Nc3 Qe7 9.Be3!



4... Nf6 5. d3 Bb4 6. Bd2	After 6.dxe4 Nxe4 7.Qd4 Qe7 Black has a comfortable game: 8.Be2 0-0 9.Bd2 Nxd2 10.Qxd2 c6! (10...Bg4 has also been played) 11.Nf3 (11.dxc6?! Rd8 12.Qc1 Nxc6; 11.0-0-0 cxd5 12.Bf3 Be6 and ...Nc6) 11...cxd5 12.0-0 Nc6 (Bardeleben-Blackburne, London 1895)
	1 comment alex_ratchkov (2458) on 05-Sep-15: 11.Nf3 is better than 11.dxc6, in the 11.dxc6?! line White ends a pawn up but with the worse quality of pieces than Black...the quality of pieces is often times much more important than quantity (material imbalance)


6... e3	(!?) "Entirely in Morphy's style! We have here a splendid example of a POSITIONAL sacrifice." (Euwe) Later they began making this move automatically, occasionally also trying 6...exd3 7.Bxd3 0-0. But in the game Spassky-Bronstein (Moscow 1971) Black actually preferred 6....0-0 and after 7.Nxe4 Re8 8.Bxb4 Nxe4 9.dxe4 Rxe4+ 10.Be2 Rxb4 (a variation by Falkbeer!) 11.Nf3 Rxf4 12.Qd2 Qd6 13.0-0-0 Nd7 14.Nd4 a6 15.g3 Rf6 16.Rhe1 Ne5 17.Bh5 Bd7 18.Qe2 Re8 he gained a draw. Apparently, after 6...e3, without going into details, Spassky was intending somewhere to improve on Schulten's play...
	1 comment alex_ratchkov (2458) on 07-Sep-15: 12.Bh5 in which variation, jkarp? can you please give the complete line leading up to 12.Bh5 in order for me to answer your question. @jkarp, 17...g6 and the g-pawn leaves the defense of the Rook on f6, and now White has 18.Qg5! which poses problems for Black, as the undefended Rook is not under attack and the g-pawn is under an absolute pin. The position remains unclear, but I like White's chances...


7. Bxe3 O-O 8. Bd2	Black's lead in development and a much safer king make up for the material disadvantage. No better is 8.Be2 Bxc3+ 9.bxc3 Nxd5 10.Bd2 Qf6!, or 8.Ne2 Re8 9.Bd2 Bxc3 10.Bxc3 Nxd5 (Schulten-Kolisch, Paris 1860)



8... Bxc3	Eliminating the knight, which in some cases could have covered the e-file. Ex: 8...Nxd5 9.Nxd5 Re8+ 10.Ne3 (10.Be2!?) 10...Rxde3+ 11.Kf2, or 8...Re8+ 9.Be2 (inferior is 9.Nce2?! Bc5, when 10.c4? Ng4 11.Nh3 Qh4+ 12.g2 Nxh2! is not possible, while after 10.Nf3 Qxd5 Black is OK) 9...Bg4 10.Ne4! with advantage for White.



9. bxc3 Re8+	Later there occurred 9...Nxd5 10.Qf3 (10.Nf3 Qf6!) 10...re8+ 11.Ne2 Nc6 with double-edges play, although more active is 10.c4! Re8+ 11.Be2 Ne3 (11...Nf6 12.Nf3 Qe7 13.Ne5 Nc6 14.Bc3! Estrin) 12.Bxe3 Rxe3 12.Kf2! Re8 (incorrect is 13...Qd4? 14.Nf3 Qxf4 15.Qc1 Petroff-Schumoff, St Petersburg 1862) 14.Nf3, and Black still has to find real compensation for the pawn (for example, 14...Bg4 15.Qd2 Bxf3 16.Bxf3 Qd4+ 17.Kg3! etc.)



10. Be2 Bg4	Since Morphy won this game quickly, one does not feel inclined to critisize this move. Especially since after 10...Nxd5 11.c4!, as followed from my notes on the previous move, it is not obvious that Black can equalise.



11. c4	Greedy and materialistic. According to Neishtadt, this was the decisive mistake, though Kasparov disagrees. Neishtadt writes, "White could have escaped from the pin, firstly, by 11.h3 Bxe2 12.Nxe2 Qe7 (12...Nxd5 13.0-0) 13.Kf2 (Kasparov: "In my opinion, 13.c4?! c6 14.dxc6 Nxc6 Kf2 Qc5+ 16.Kg3 Re6 17.Kh2 Rae8 18.Ng3 is more promising") 13...Nxd5 14.Re1 Ne3 15.Qc1. Secondly, there was also the more useful move 11.Kf2, after which it is not easy for Black to demonstrate that his initiative is worth the sacrficided pawn". According to Estrin, however, after 11.h3 stronger is 11...Qxd5! 12.Kf2 (12.hxg4? Qxg2) 12...Bx2 13.Nxe2 Qc5+! "with the initiative for Black" (although the position after 14.Kg3 is by no means clear), whereas perhaps 11.Kf2 is indeed useful: 11.Bxe2 12.Nxe2 Qxd5 13. Rf1 (13.re1 Nc6 14.Kg1 Qc5+! 15.d4 Qd5=) 13...Nc6 (13...Qc5+ 14.Kg3 Qh5 15.Nd4; 13...Ng4+!?) 14.Kg1 Qc5+ 15.Kh1 Ng4 16.Nd4 with a slight advantage.



11... c6	(!)



12. dxc6	(??) This REALLY is the decisive mistake, a move of roughly a third category player. Absolutely essential was 12.h3 Bxe2 13.Nxe2 cxd5 14.cxd5 Qxd5 15.0-0 with an extra pawn, for which Black has some compensation, but not more. Now, however, Black has an ENORMOUS lead in development and initiative along with an irresistible attack.



12... Nxc6	With the threat of ...Nd4



13. Kf1	White would no longer have saved the game by 13.h3 Bxe2 14.Nxe2 Nd4, or 13.Bc3 Nd4 14.Bxd4 Qxd4 15.Nf3 Bxf3 16.gxf3 Nh5, or 13.Kf2 Qb6+ (but not 13...Rxe2+? 14.Nxe2 Nd4 15.Re1) 14.Kg3 Rxe2 15.Nxe2 Nd4.



13... Rxe2	(!) disaster strikes on e2!



14. Nxe2 Nd4 15. Qb1 Bxe2+ 16. Kf2	16.Kg1 Nxc2 and 16.Ke1 Qe7 are equally hopeless



16... Ng4+ 17. Kg1	If 17.Ke1 (17.Kg3 Nf5+ and ...Qh4#), then17...Qh4+ 18.g3 Qe7 or 18...Re8!



17... Nf3+	(!) Morphy forces mate in seven moves



18. gxf3 Qd4+ 19. Kg2 Qf2+ 20. Kh3 Qxf3+ 21. Kh4	Here Black announced mate in three: 21...Ne3 22.Rg1 Nf5+ 23.Kg5 Qh5#. White resigns. 0-1
	2 comments teardrop34 (2197) on 03-Sep-15: Currently studying a lot of Morphy's old games to improve my positional play. Thanks for the thorough analysis of this game alex_ratchkov (2458) on 03-Sep-15: No problem, glad you are enjoying it! I find that analyzing and annotating the games from the Romantic Era of chess is a lot easier as the concepts presented in those games are clearer and could be understood by players of a wide range of skill levels. I always used Morphy's games in my lessons when teaching chess to the kids back when I worked as a chess instructor...