Winner's POV Chapter 18: Vienna 1873
This one's a big one. Here we go...
In Winner's POV, we take a look at tournaments from the 19th century and see the games that allowed the top player to prevail. Some tournaments will be known and famous, others will be more obscure - in a time period where competition is scarce, I believe there is some value in digging for hidden gems in the form of smaller, less known events.
Chapter 18: Vienna 1873
Following Paris's 1867 "Exposition Universelle," the next World's Fair was held in the summer of 1873, in the Austro-Hungarian Empire's capital, Vienna. Commemorating Emperor Franz Joseph I's 25th year in the role, "Kultur und Erziehung" was the exhibition's motto ("Culture and Education").
"Weltausstellung 1873 Wien" opened in May and was slated to continue all the way through October. Unfortunately, two major events in 1873 prevented the International Exhibition from reaching greatness: the stock market crash and resulting financial crisis known as the "Panic of 1873" (Wikipedia), and a cholera endemic that started in July. Vienna had been struck by many outbreaks of cholera dating back to the 1830s, with this thankfully being the last major instance. On account of these factors, the Vienna Exhibition was hardly a success, drawing in about half the number of visitors as Paris did six years prior.
Kaiser Josef put forth a sizeable prize fund towards a chess tournament, and together with Ignatz von Kolisch, an event was organized despite the conditions. That's what we'll be focusing on today, so let's leave the macabre intro behind and discuss logistics.
Format and Prizes
Vienna's format was a round-robin, except in the form of three-game matches; each player met one another for such a match, where a match win was worth 1 point, and a drawn match 0.5. With Sundays being reserved as rest days, this allowed for two matches to be played per week, with matches ending 2-0 resulting in an extra rest day for those involved. It'll make more sense when you see it, I think. The time control, as was standard for most tournaments in Germany and Austria, was 20 moves per hour.
The prizes were written in the tournament book, and while it can be a little hard to parse if you can't read German, I think it's mostly clear:
The top prize would be an art piece and cash whose combined value would equal 2000 florins. I'll admit that I'm not super sure how to translate this into a 2023 value, as data for this currency in this time period is hard to access. Let's optimistically assume that it's a sizeable amount of money.
Players
Following the recipe of previous international tournaments, the field was a split between strong international masters and local strong players. The 1872 Edo list says the top of the field is Wilhelm Steinitz (1st), Adolf Anderssen (2nd), Louis Paulsen (4th), Joseph Blackburne (8th), Samuel Rosenthal (11th) and Henry Bird (26th). The strongest Austrian native (aside from Steinitz) was Maximilian Fleissig (46th).
The Winner: Wilhelm Steinitz
One additional utility of making the last chapter about Altona 1872 is that I can avoid talking about Steinitz for two chapters in a row, because this tournament was among Steinitz's most legendary achievements and needs to be separated from everything else thus far. Not only was this the first event where Steinitz got to showcase some of his new ideas, it would mark the start of a since-unbeaten winning streak. We have a lot to get through today, so without further ado, let's look at the Vienna 1873 tournament from the Winner's POV.
Round 1: vs. Karl Pitschel
Although Pitschel frequented the German tournaments, he was natively Austrian, and was thus one of the local players competing at this grand event.
The first game was one of the more popular King's Gambit lines in the 2nd half of the 18th century. Steinitz's novelty on move 9 was perhaps dubious, but it didn't matter as Pitschel blundered on the very next move. With Steinitz getting a free tempo to push his pawn to c6, a diagonal for his Queen was opened that culminated in him winning a piece. A cute miniature to open the tournament was doubtlessly welcome.
The second game is annotated very lightly, because Pitschel flagged on move 14. Yeah...
With Steinitz winning this first match 2-0, he was free to rest on the third day. Let's see what else there is to see in the first round.
One potentially dramatic occurrence was Anderssen only managing two draws against Philipp Meitner. In this third game, Anderssen had a good position in his old weapon, the Sicilian, when he was gifted a free Knight by a desperate Meitner. Given that Anderssen had to be the pre-tournament favourite (as the only player with three high-profile tournament wins), it would've been very awkward had he not won his opening round.
The other, arguably more important event was the match between Blackburne and Paulsen. With a win apiece, Blackburne refuted Paulsen's Philidor Defense in two key places: the one I've highlighted below, and the 41st move.
Round 2: vs. Joseph Henry Blackburne
The rivalry between these two continues in Vienna. After his defeat at London 1872, Blackburne promised to never again play the Italian against Steinitz, and we get to see the result of that promise right away.
Their opening game saw Steinitz attempt to revive the 3... Nge7 Spanish that was weirdly popular in the late 1860s. Blackburne unleashed his new weapon, 4. d4, which resulted in the players castling in opposite directions; he had successfully constructed a tactical, aggressive game without sacrificing any material for a gambit.
The game was a complete disaster for Steinitz. His g6 move created the perfect target for Blackburne to attack with his Kingside pawns, and once the attack got rolling, Steinitz's compromised Kingside didn't stand a chance. This was not the start he wanted in this crucial match, not by a long shot.
Blackburne deviated from his usual 3... Bb4 French, and instead played something that allowed for many more trades. It's honestly really impressive how difficult it was for Steinitz to avoid trading pieces, as each move presented a tactic that essentially forced exchanges. The game was drawn quickly, with Steinitz needing to win the third game to secure a match draw.
Steinitz employed the same Spanish defense, but Blackburne changed up his 7th move to be more in-line with what was considered best (and what he faced when he tried this opening at Baden Baden 1870). Steinitz's early f6 was a bad omen, as Blackburne was able to construct a position where he coerced his opponent into giving up castling rights. Once again, Steinitz had a very uncomfortable position to play.
Things went downhill very quickly for Steinitz right around the time control. He first weakened his Kingside before snapping up a pawn on c2, and Blackburne needed no second chances in the follow-up. This tournament was where Blackburne got the "Black Death" nickname, and with games like these, it's very clear why.
After this game, Steinitz reportedly told his friends "I have forfeited first prize." A bleak thought after only two rounds, but given the format of the tournament, it's possibly a reasonable thought.
Here are the standings after the first week of play:
With Anderssen and Rosenthal paired in round 3, the number of perfect scores rapidly declines. Speaking of round 3...
Round 3: vs. Maximilian Fleissig
Statistically, Dr. Fleissig was the strongest of the native Austrian masters. Does that make much of a difference when you're seated across from the world's strongest player? Let's see.
Steinitz tried the same Spanish defense, and he once again got into a bad position following an f6 push. As his King shamefully walked towards the Queenside, Fleissig developed quite naturally for an attack. However, things suddenly became much less interesting when Fleissig offered a Queen trade on move 23, and thereafter exchanged as many pieces as possible. It's a premature end to what could've been an interesting showcase of Steinitz's defensive skills.
Facing his third French of the tournament, Steinitz elected for what is now known as the Steinitz Variation (because what else?). The resulting locked center allowed Steinitz to forego castling, which proved useful when Fleissig castled Queenside and tried to provoke combat. It wasn't an unequivocally won opening, but it did allow him to play things slower.
Things went wrong for Steinitz right around the time control, when he incorrectly took a pawn on a4. Perhaps he didn't see Fleissig's tactic (which I discuss in the game) or perhaps he always meant to sacrifice his Bishop for two pawns; either way, his position was objectively worse but easier to play in the sense that it was just "push 'em, baby!"
In the end, Fleissig made too many mistakes that allowed Steinitz to improve and improve, until the piece was regained and the pawns were too powerful to stop. Not the cleanest win of Steinitz's career, but a win all the same.
I'll save you from another discussion about Steinitz's opening, you know the deal by now. Fleissig was on the way to applying pressure, but he miscalculated with his Queen infiltration and allowed Steinitz to force a repetition. It's a quick game that sealed the match for Steinitz, so let's move on.
Round 4: vs. Philipp Meitner
Meitner is most well-known for playing in the "Immortal Draw" (see here), but his reputation prior was solid enough to warrant an invitation to Baden Baden 1870. He was the father of renowned physicist Lise Meitner, after whom the element meitnerium is named (atomic number 109).
At last Steinitz returned to something normal with Morphy's Defense, and his position was noticeably better right away. Meitner played well, and was able to apply the usual Spanish pressure. Neither player made any egregious mistakes, but Meitner's piece infiltration was met with Steinitz constructing another move repetition. A short draw, but not necessarily a bad game.
I believe that the second game was the first that highlighted what kind of form Steinitz would be in for the rest of the event. Against his fourth consecutive French, he repeated the previous round's line, though something seemed to go wrong for Meitner. His position was quite cramped, especially after his erroneous g6 push made it impossible to release tension with f6. At last, Steinitz was on the correct side of a one-sided affair.
Steinitz played quite boldly, giving Meitner a passed d-pawn in exchange for a Queenside majority that was rapidly pushed. The play was quite modern, with Steinitz blocking every threat before advancing his own position. Material was won each time Steinitz's army advanced on the Queenside, and the game was resigned by Meitner after a painful 45 moves. This game really highlights the importance of pawn breaks in closed positions (among other things), because without one, Meitner never stood a chance.
The third game is presented without annotations, partly because it's an Evans Gambit Declined (barf), partly because the full game is lost. The final position is better for Black, but with Steinitz only needing a draw to secure the match, it's not like he needed to win it.
At the end of two weeks, the scores stood as follows:
We're only four rounds in and there's already a clear divide between the international and local players; this will only get larger as the event progresses (sorry for spoilers...). The following week would also be the start of something special for Steinitz, which is best explained by just exploring the week itself.
Round 5: vs. Samuel Rosenthal
At Paris 1867, Rosenthal withdrew from the tournament before he could play Steinitz. They did meet at Baden Baden 1870, where Rosenthal won a casual game played prior to the tournament, but Steinitz scored 1.5/2 in their official games. Thus, at present, the score was actually equal between them, which is a good result for any player against Steinitz.
Our next Steinitz Defense takes place in the Three Knights Opening, which almost looked hypermodern with how Steinitz punished Rosenthal's f4 push. The position was opened up, and Steinitz quickly coerced Rosenthal into giving up the Bishop pair to avoid indefinite passivity. Quite easily, Steinitz had equalized and then some.
The light-square Bishop proved especially useful for harassing the White Queen as Steinitz worked on winning the f-pawn. One he won it, it was a very simple matter of using his Bishops for defense as his Rook and Queen cemented themselves on the 2nd rank, gobbling up material as Rosenthal aimlessly flailed about. The ease with which Steinitz won this game against a player knocking on the door of the world's top 10 was impressive, but we're not even close to done.
This second game was the first of Steinitz's experiments with c4 and a3, a very non-provocative opening that took the form of a Sicilian in this game (note that the Sicilian wouldn't be too much of a counterattacking opening until Géza Maróczy got his hands on it). While there is certainly a game to discuss, the positional nuances of the previous game are lost here, as Rosenthal lost this game on account of an unsound Kingside attack. The piece sacrifice was not at all sufficiently calculated, and Steinitz cruised to a relatively easy 2-0 win.
Since I won't be talking about these two together again, I'll mention that the only other tournament in which these two played together was at the 1883 London tournament, where Rosenthal actually won both games (technically it was two draws and two wins, as draws still needed to be replayed; we'll talk about it when we get there). Thus, Rosenthal retired with an equal lifetime score against Steinitz, which again is quite the accomplishment.
Again Steinitz was given a break on the third day, but I'm afraid there isn't anything interesting to look at. Anderssen defeated Paulsen 2-0 in this round, and Blackburne did the same to Bird, so I don't have a game to show. If someone wants me to feature a game between two of the local players, let me know and I'll update this section with my favourite. Until then, let's finish the third week of play.
Round 6: vs. Louis Paulsen
Steinitz attributed his early ideas to some of the games Paulsen played at the London 1862 tournament, noting how he wasn't one to always search for the attack, but rather he played sensibly and upset the balance when the time called. Paulsen won their individual game at that event, but Steinitz had obviously gotten much stronger since then, as he defeated the German 2-0 at Baden Baden. Would Paulsen's defensive style allow him to outlast Steinitz's new ideas? Scroll down to see the answer.
Paulsen played the moves e4, Nc3 and g3 against a handful of openings (including Anderssen's Sicilian in their 1862 match), and this particular game looked like a proto King's Indian Attack. Paulsen's e-pawns were doubled in front of his fianchettoed Bishop, so once the center got locked, it was pretty clear that Steinitz was at least equal, if not better.
The middlegame was even more King's-Indian-y as Steinitz built up pressure on the Queenside while Paulsen tried to utilize his unchallenged f-file. Unfortunately for Paulsen, his plan was second-best in this game. He desperately sacrificed his Knight on f5, and while it looked like he could start creating action against the Black King, it opened up a central inlet for Steinitz's Queen. The counterattack was swift, and Paulsen's forces got obliterated.
The second game was a Modern Defense, which Steinitz was probably happy to face, given how well he played with the space advantage. It was very quickly clear that he was better, as he occupied the center with three pawns, and got an h4-h5 sequence in that made castling Kingside impossible for Paulsen. It was a very won opening, I reckon.
The pawn structure eventually became very weird, though it favoured Steinitz's active Bishops much more than Paulsen's. One pawn was picked up, and in the middle of a great tactical sequence, a second. The endgame was trivially easy for Steinitz after that.
While there wasn't much drama on the third day of the round, I do have a game to show at least. With Anderssen leading the match 1.5-0.5 against Pitschel, he played a trademark Anderssen sacrifice to close out this third game.
Because of the round 7 pairing, it makes sense to look at the standings again:
Round 7: vs. Adolf Anderssen
I'm still curious about how many people actually thought Steinitz was the world's strongest player after beating Anderssen 8-6 in their 1866 match. Anderssen made up those two points by winning both of their games at Baden Baden, and with that tournament arguably being the strongest tournament to date, I'd hesitate in claiming that Steinitz had properly earned that designation yet.
Steinitz's lone 1. d4 was essayed in this game, with the players playing an unsettlingly modern Queen's Gambit Declined. Everything was reasonable until Anderssen's 12th move, where he likely missed Steinitz's beautiful 14. Rfd1, the result of which was Anderssen having multiple weak pawns while Steinitz got a Rook on the 7th rank.
The game was not a contest, as Steinitz swiftly made threats with his excellent pieces, and frustratingly denied Anderssen's attempts at counterplay. It was a rough one-move blunder from Anderssen, while Steinitz notched his fifth consecutive win.
This second game shows the clash of styles much better than any previous, sort of. Anderssen wasn't necessarily a reckless, all-out attacker; rather, he pressured the position and made it possible for attacks and combinations to appear. Steinitz, on the other hand, wanted positions with very obvious characteristics that he could take advantage of. In this game, that was initially the hole on d4 (assisted by Anderssen's strange 15. Qc3) and later the semi-open b-file.
The reason I say "sort of" is that it was really only Steinitz playing this game. Anderssen was uncommonly passive, and he allowed Steinitz to advance on, and eventually lock down, the Queenside. With his Queen permanently out of the game, Anderssen could only watch in despair as Steinitz took over the Kingside as well. I don't think the world number 1 has ever dominated the world number 2 this badly, perhaps except for games 3-6 of the 1972 World Championship match.
Blackburne kept his unbeaten streak going with his round 7 win over Pitschel the punching bag. To be fair to Pitschel, he did win a really nice game 2 with the black pieces, but the Black Death paid him back in full with this attack.
Round 8: vs. Adolf Schwarz
With 3/4 international masters being vanquished, Steinitz's week ends with the "other" Adolf. Vienna 1873 was Schwarz's first tournament, with his best results still years ahead of him. Still, he scored wins against Rosenthal, Paulsen and Anderssen at this event, so he had a reasonably strong start.
This game initially started as another Reverse Sicilian, though it soon turned into the Romantic fireworks we all know and love. Indeed, Steinitz castled Queenside and placed his pieces aggressively, prompting Schwarz to push his a- and b-pawns aggressively. This is a stark difference to the Steinitz we've been talking about so far, but obviously he's good enough to pull this off.
It all worked out in the end, as his defense was good enough to repel Schwarz's attack. After the Austrian sacrificed his Rook on c3, the resulting attack was fended off, and Steinitz collected a 7th consecutive win.
The second game was much more like the Steinitz we've been seeing already. In this Giuoco Pianissimo, he sacrificed the Bishop pair in a locked center, doubling Schwarz's pawns and attacking them. While he later won a pawn, it resulted in his own pawns being doubled, so the advantage was hard to prove. However, Schwarz's 25. c4 opened up a hole on d4 that Steinitz's Knight giddily jumped into, and the domination was efficient and precise. Eight in a row, Steinitz can't be stopped.
The most important match in this round was between Anderssen and Blackburne, which was 1-1 going into this third game. The game was not good for Anderssen, who got positionally outplayed again and lost his fourth game of the week.
Anderssen's two consecutive match losses result in the following standings:
With three rounds to go, any of Blackburne, Steinitz, Anderssen or even Bird could win the event, so there was lots of tension heading into the fifth week of play.
Round 9: vs. Oscar Gelbfuhs
At only 21, this was the first and only tournament in which Gelbfuhs played. Unfortunately, he had an early death in 1877, about a month before his 25th birthday. It was supposedly at this tournament that he invented and proposed the tiebreak system that would later go by the Sonneborn-Berger score (Wikipedia).
Apparently Steinitz endorsed this Dutch setup against 1. c4, calling it the best. Steinitz fianchettoed both of his Bishops, which is slow but promises long-term benefits depending on how the center opens up. Gelbfuhs packed the center with pieces, creating an equal position with endless possibilities.
Dutch theory emphasizes the importance of keeping Black's dark-square Bishop at all costs, and once Steinitz picked it off, the cracks in Gelbfuhs's position began to show. His first real mistake was arguably not until move 28, but it was a worse position that was hard to play. His shaky King was hunted down, and eventually executed with a precise final tactic from Steinitz.
Playing two good games against Steinitz is easier said than done, as Gelbfuhs found out. His 9. Nc3 gave him very awkward doubled pawns, and as he was faced with the reality that his light-square Bishop may become permanently useless because of them, he ended up receiving another pair. Though the material was equal, the quality was anything but, and Steinitz ground out his young opponent over the next 20 moves to win the major piece endgame.
If Blackburne won his match, it would put Bird out of the running for first place. The betting man would predict his win against Fleissig, though a win like this is possibly not what was expected.
Round 10: vs. Henry Bird
As mentioned in a previous chapter, Bird's status was elevated to that of a strong amateur when he played a match against Steinitz in 1866, which was closely contested (Steinitz leading +7-5=5) before Bird's job called him away to America. While this job prevented Bird from devoting his full attention to chess, this was the first of many future tournaments the elder statesman would enter.
Their first game is just awesome. Rather than explaining it, I'll just let you see it for yourself.
The second game was much more measured. Even though the game looked quite level as the Knights and Queens were traded, Steinitz's Bishops were much more active than Bird's. Even after one of them was traded, you could see that Steinitz's position was easier to play, as his pawn majority was more advanced and more dangerous than Bird's. Once Steinitz broke into the position with d4, he had the better endgame.
As usual, there are many critiques one could make about Romantic-era endgame technique, and both players made rather significant mistakes. However, Bird's mistakes were more numerous and more important, and thus he failed to hold. I wouldn't go through the endgame too critically, but the means by which Steinitz got such an endgame is impressive as well, and probably deserves more attention in my opinion.
With Blackburne quickly dispatching Meitner 2-0 in this round, Anderssen's victory was mathematically impossible. While he was 1-1 in this match against Fleissig, this game was not good for Anderssen. He managed to draw it, but a drawn match meant he had to fight for third place in the final round.
The last round is crucial, so let's examine the standings:
The only scenario in which Blackburne doesn't outright win is the one where he loses to Rosenthal and Steinitz wins his match. Given the subject of this chapter, can you guess what transpired in the sixth week of play?
Round 11: vs. Josef Heral
I know literally nothing about Heral, as his only recorded games are from this tournament. Interestingly, up to now he had drawn 6 of his 10 matches, twice as many as any other competitor (assuming I've done everything correctly, Paulsen and Schwarz drew 3 matches each).
The first game featured Heral falling into a trap that used to be seen in the Szén Variation of the Taimanov Sicilian, where White plants a strong piece on the d6 hole. Steinitz's play initially focused on this file, though his other Knight eventually made it to b6, a second hole that was created with the faulty 6... a6. The resulting attack gave Steinitz two pawns at exactly move 20, and the game was probably resignable. Heral, however, fought on.
To Heral's credit, his Knights did a surprisingly good job attacking Steinitz's King, with one of the Knights being sacrificed to win all of the Queenside pawns. With Steinitz's King lacking protection and a significant number of pieces still on the board, it wasn't a guaranteed game at all. Steinitz made no mistakes in his defense, and after he returned the extra piece, the endgame was surprisingly easy to win. A great effort from Heral, but Steinitz was on another level entirely in this event.
It was Steinitz's turn to pilot the Black side of this Anglo-Dutch-like opening. It worked out very well because Heral, possibly fueled by his fierce attack yesterday, went for broke here. He only had two pieces in the attack, and the resulting misplacing of his Queen meant that Steinitz had no trouble mopping up the Queenside pieces. That made an astonishing 14 consecutive wins for Steinitz, though they may not have meant anything given the tournament format.
The match between Blackburne and Rosenthal was causing drama. Rosenthal won the first game with the Black pieces, and then drew the second. With a draw and a loss effectively being the same, Blackburne went all out with his King's Gambit, sacrificing a full Rook in his efforts to get Rosenthal's King. It didn't work.
Conclusion?
Before we go to the tiebreaker, let's look at the final crosstable. Note the three-point difference between Paulsen and Fleissig; obviously the international players were in a league of their own. Perhaps if there were two tournaments - one for each group of players - then things would have been more interesting. The Vienna players managed 4 match draws against the international masters, none of which affected the prize winners, so their impact on the results is negligible.
In any case, the chapter isn't over yet, so let's finish strong.
Tiebreak: vs. Joseph Henry Blackburne
Whoever won two games first would be the overall winner, so let's get into the games.
Blackburne was not given another chance to refute the Cozio Defense, but he did opt for the unusual 5. Qe2 to keep the game fresh. His maneuver of Nb1-d2-f1 would have been ok if he found a use for it on e3 or g3, but it stayed put for quite some time. By the time he developed it to e3, Steinitz's Bishop prevented castling, which made it hard for Blackburne to bring his King's Rook into the fray.
Steinitz had the better plans on the Queenside, so Blackburne did his part to create chaos on the Kingside. His Knight sacrifice was not accepted, but rather the pieces were traded peacefully. With no plan to speak of, Blackburne put up a very measly defense as his Queenside was overrun, and eventually his uncastled King got harassed while his pieces were vacuumed up.
The second game was quite surreal. Steinitz tried to play 1. a3, but Blackburne's Modern Defense let Steinitz push e4 and d4 as normal. Blackburne's c5 could have been seen as a gambit, but it resulted in him moving his Queen 4 times to regain the pawn before the piece returned to its starting square. 10 moves in and the position looked leagues better for Steinitz.
Steinitz placed another Bishop in a spot that prevented Blackburne from castling, and from there, I can only imagine that Blackburne was experiencing the "Steinitz Effect." His play was purely defensive and passive, and given that Steinitz had the space advantage, he had no trouble generating threat after threat. Blackburne had one interesting trick on move 26, but Steinitz saw through it and avoided the trap. Although this game was longer than the first, it was no less decisive.
And with that, Steinitz's win streak hits a mind-boggling 16 games, a streak that wouldn't be beaten for almost a century (the streak would continue, but we won't cover most of the remaining games). Winning the tournament in such a fashion was a much stronger claim to the "world #1" title than his 1866 match win, and after this, I don't think any rational person would dispute that claim.
...
Man this was a long one. The next tournaments will be much, much shorter than this, thankfully...
Chapter 15 (contains links to chapters 11-14)
Chapter 10 (contains links to chapters 6-9)
Chapter 5 (contains links to chapters 1-4)
