Winner's POV: Frankfurt 1887

This post is a bit of a behemoth, so I implore you to not read it in one sitting. I certainly didn't write it in just one. Anyway... ahem:

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.

Frankfurt 1887: The Captain's Comeback

This tournament was the fifth organized under the auspices of the German Chess Federation; if this is your first time stumbling into my blog, firstly welcome, secondly you can read about the previous four editions here, here, here, and most recently here. I'll be jumping straight into business here, so check those out if you want more context about the federation and such.

The Hauptturnier

I've decided to mix the minor tournament into this post, partly because there aren't many games to show, partly because the winner is once again a little lower on the totem pole of international relevancy. The winner of the Hauptturnier was a member of the quickly-growing Vienna cohort, Johann Bauer.

Stage one of this sub-event saw the twenty entrants separated into two equal groups, with the top three scorers after a single all-play-all advancing to the final stage. Bauer unnecessarily lost his third-round game, but otherwise conceded only two draws (against his fellow finalists) to finish second overall and qualify by 1.5 points.

The top three scorers from each group met in a final all-play-all to determine who would win the Master title for that year. Bauer's winning ways continued in this group, as he won three of his first four games, including one against the Hauptturnier veteran Hermann Neustadtl.

However, Bauer's most testing trial wouldn't await him until the fifth and final round, where he would encounter the other player on 3.5/4, and a doubtlessly stronger player than anyone else he had yet faced.

Round 5: vs. Jacques Mieses

Mieses had the unfortunate fate of being grossly overshadowed by his peers, notably previous subject Siegbert Tarrasch and future subject Emanuel Lasker, but his advancement of the King's Indian Attack and mastery of tactical wizardry should not go unnoticed. My series will play whatever role it can in advancing this agenda.

The players quickly eschewed a theoretical discussion with a 2. b3 Sicilian, where Mieses gave us a true novelty on move 4. Needing a win with Black, he was given a gift in the form of Bauer's weak 7th move, which cost him castling rights and exposed many issues with his piece coordination. One of the true signs of a chess master is their ability to make their opponent's jobs as difficult as possible, and in this era, that means sacrificing and attacking. Bauer's task was to do exactly that, and when you give up eight points of material and the engine only shows -2, you know that there's potential for greatness.

The players attacked and defended as well as could be expected, with the critical moment arriving on move 33. Mieses had calculated assuming Bauer would play 33. Qe5 and his defensive formation was such that this move had no venom; when Bauer instead opted for the slightly different 33. Qd4, it apparently caused Mieses so much frustration that he believed himself lost. His ill-calculated next move made this a reality, and the comeback that followed certainly has to qualify this game as one of Bauer's best.

Thus Bauer won the 300 Mark first prize, as well as the Master title and the accompanying invitation to the 1889 tournament. He'll make a good number of appearances in the years 89-90, so we'll check back with him then. 

Now, let's get into the main event.

Master Tournament: Format and Prizes

Twenty-one-player single all-play-all, three games every two days, 20 moves per hour. Nothing ever changes.

The prizes, per the tournament book, also didn't really change:

Players

Johannes Minckwitz and Arnold Schottländer are on the above list but did not actually play in the tournament. Edo's 1887 list gives the top of the field as George Mackenzie (2nd in the world behind World Champion Wilhelm Steinitz), Tarrasch (3rd), Max Weiss (5th), Joseph Blackburne (6th), Isidor Gunsberg (8th), and Curt von Bardeleben (10th). Consistently big, consistently strong seems to be the MO of these events.

The Winner: George Mackenzie

We covered Mackenzie's first noteworthy tournament win exactly 25 years ago (see here), and today we will cover his last. After dominating the American chess scene for all of the 1870s, Mackenzie finally picked up an international tournament win, the crowning achievement of his long and successful career. Let's cover Mackenzie's moment as we look at the Frankfurt 1887 tournament from the Winner's POV.

Round 1: vs. Johannes Zukertort

The beginning of a tournament is arguably the worst time to face Zukertort, as his health would impact him more heavily later on. Mackenzie is one of the better people for this task, however, as he boasts a lifetime score of three wins to one over the former challenger up to this point. With this being the final game the two ever played, Zukertort can't even the score, but he can at least cut into it.

These two had a fascination with the Double Spanish variation of the Four Knights, which was the battleground for this opening round's game. Mackenzie guided the game into a position where he could exchange his Bishop pair for saddling Zukertort with doubled isolated Queen's pawns. While the objectivity of his moves can be critiqued, Mackenzie's approach makes sense with respect to the tournament situation: play a safe game, get any pre-event jitters out of the system, and don't drop the first game like the other subjects tend to do.

The critical moment came at move 27, where Mackenzie had a choice of how he wanted to finally collect one of the pawns. Had he taken with the Rook, he could have forced a minor piece endgame where he possessed palpable winning chances. He instead captured with the Bishop, and his Rook trade five moves later resulted in a wildly different endgame. While Zukertort would have been pushed to the brink to hold the former, he didn't encounter any problems in this one. 

Round 2: vs. Max Harmonist

For the unaware, Mr. Harmonist qualified for this event by winning the previous edition's Hauptturnier (see here), so let's welcome him for his debut at the top level. He hadn't played any serious events between then and now, but a first round win over Emil Schallopp ought to speak to the form he's bringing into this event.

The Germans had a reputation for being immaculately up-to-date with the latest theoretical trends, and I wonder if that can explain Harmonist's decision to repeat the first 11 moves of a game Mackenzie had played during his Cuba trip at the start of the year. The decision had few of its own merits, and Mackenzie quickly got a very comfortable game. With a semi-open f-file and a Queenside pawn majority, the freedom to choose which side of the board would be the battleground was his.

The Queenside was the initial choice, with Mackenzie opening the a-file and getting a Rook to a2, forcing Harmonist to retreat with his Queen. Then action switched to the Kingside, and Harmonist's cramped pieces were in no form to adequately defend. Mackenzie played a pretty "sacrifice" to win one pawn, then picked up a second to obtain connected passed pawns for which Harmonist had no answer.

Round 3: vs. Siegbert Tarrasch

Tarrasch wrote in Dreihundert Schachpartien (Three Hundred Chess Games) that he had only just returned from his honeymoon when he got invited to this event. After a bye in the first round, a loss to Schallopp perhaps demonstrates that he wasn't in his best form right out of the gate.

I'll be honest, I don't think I'm properly certified to summarize this game. Just, uh, take a look for yourself.

After three rounds, the only person remaining on a perfect score was Blackburne, who was usually known to be something of a slow starter. I wonder if he appreciated this change of pace, or if the early losses made him hungrier for future wins. Who's to say?

Round 4: vs. Emil Schallopp

Of the five recorded games these two played, four were Black wins - Mackenzie gained the sole White win at the BCA congress last year. Also somewhat unusual is that Mackenzie played 1. f4 in both of his games with White, a move which he played maybe five times in his entire career. There's no moral to this story, just enjoy the trivia.

Mackenzie must have really appreciated the idea Tarrasch sprung on him the day before, so he tried to repeat the motif against Schallopp - and it worked. Although it didn't win a piece, Schallopp was forced to trade off his central Knight prematurely, and Mackenzie's Bishops gained full control of the board. However, with a pleasantly dominant position in hand, Mackenzie began effecting trades of all minor pieces, ultimately getting a Rook endgame where he admittedly had respectable winning chances.

Now, Rook endgames have always been hard, they remain hard today, and I imagine they always will be hard for even the best players; as a result, I make an effort to not criticize the players as much as I do in the earlier phases of the game. The mistake Schallopp made is actually quite an understandable one: he focused on Mackenzie's King rather than hunting pawns. Unfortunately for him, one particular pawn needed to be removed in order to generate the counterplay required to hold this game.

Round 5: bye

Mackenzie's 3.5/4 was good enough to share second with von Bardeleben and Berthold Englisch up to this point, but his bye will naturally throw a wrench into things moving forward. Regardless, all of the above-named gentleman continued to trail the perfect Blackburne, who would show no signs of slowing down with a win in this round against the Frenchman Jean Taubenhaus.

Round 6: vs. Semyon Alapin

It's been quite some time since we've seen Alapin, with his last (and only) appearance being a second place finish behind Mikhail Chigorin at the St. Petersburg 1879 tournament (see here). His only recorded activity between these events is an 1880 match he lost against Chigorin (3-7) and another St Petersburg tournament in 1881 where he once again tied for first before losing the playoff to Chigorin. It's a good thing Chigorin isn't playing at this event, as Alapin's potential is thus sky-high - though his 2.5/5 score up to this point is more grounded.

The Russian players, Alapin and Emmanuel Schiffers, were likely working together when analyzing the new fourth move unleashed in this Vienna (Schiffers would repeat the opening later, stay tuned). Alapin was able to win a pawn from Mackenzie, and he kept it through the time control albeit with the loss of his Bishop pair and the doubling and isolating of his d-pawns. A pawn is a pawn, however, and it looked like Mackenzie had once again failed to make the most of his chances with the White pieces.

Alapin adopted the very bold plan of sending his Queen to the Queenside and nicking another pawn right after the time control, prompting Mackenzie to fire Harry at his Russian nemesis with unwavering haste. This attack was quite defendable, and had Alapin found the proper defensive resources, we would possibly be looking at the first Mackenzie loss of the event. But defending is very difficult, and two bad moves from Alapin saw his Queen disappear from the board five moves before resignation.

Round 7: vs. Johann Berger

Berger won the title of "Viennese Drawing Master" at Hamburg with 14 draws in 17 games (ok he was from Graz, not Vienna, but whatever) but with only two draws thus far at Frankfurt, his title was definitely up for grabs. I imagine he had slightly higher ambitions for this event, perhaps.

Berger came with the opening surprise in this game, choosing to push d2-d3-d4 against Mackenzie's Dragon Sicilian. Hopefully the surprise factor won him some time off Mackenzie's clock (I have no knowledge of time usage so I can't confirm), because it earned him basically nothing over the board, as Mackenzie was enabled to fianchetto his other Bishop with advantage. He ultimately decided on the same strategy as in the first game with exchanging his Bishop on c3 for a better endgame, and while both players missed chances leading up to the first time control, Mackenzie held a slight advantage afterward.

The strategic battle these two engaged in is really quite interesting, and it resulted in an opposite-coloured Bishop endgame where Mackenzie had an extra pawn. He could certainly dream of a win, and he did rather well up until move 46, where he caused a trade that eliminated his capacity to get a passed pawn. After that, one doesn't really need Berger's endgame skill to ensure the draw (but having it probably wouldn't hurt).

Round 8: vs. Louis Paulsen

I'm a little surprised that these two have such a small history, with their only previous tournament matchup being at Vienna 1882 (Mackenzie won their pairing 1.5-0.5). Paulsen looked to be in rather fine form, sitting at 4/7 and scoring wins over Amos Burn and Zukertort.

Mackenzie sprung the first surprise in this mainline Sicilian, but it didn't end up changing the nature of the opening, with him getting a Kingside initiative in exchange for Paulsen getting excellent Queenside play. Despite being north of 50, Paulsen's play looked as sharp as ever, with his pawns getting to d5 and e5 with tactics aplenty to garner an advantage. The time control is forever a most cruel mistress, unfortunately, and Paulsen's 20th move gave up any initiative he may have possessed. 

Mackenzie's following attack was certainly defendable, and one would normally trust Paulsen to defend even the most violent-looking attacks. Something seemed to come over him at move 27, and he made a stutter-step with his Rook that gave Mackenzie a free tempo. The attack flowed rather naturally after that, and even prime Paulsen would have been unlikely to save it. 

After starting with a perfect 7/7 score, Blackburne finally met his match in the eighth round at the hands of tail-ender Harmonist, who apparently played the game of his young career according to the commentators. He still kept a half point lead over von Bardeleben, and Mackenzie's 6/7 left him in sole third despite the bye - things were already looking good for our subject, which rarely happens at these events.

Round 9: vs. Berthold Englisch

These two received some criticism at the London 1883 tournament, where they were the only pairing that saw six drawn games, including two that finished in under 20 moves. Aside from those games, Mackenzie currently led their head-to-head with three wins to one, getting that third at Hamburg two years ago (from one of his few aforementioned Bird's opening games).

The World Championship match obviously had an impact on opening theory, and this game saw Mackenzie make use of one of Steinitz's inventions in the Queen's Gambit Declined. His pawn structure was quickly shattered, but he gained the Bishop pair and plenty of attacking potential in the unbalanced middlegame. Attacking Englisch is easier said than done, however, and Mackenzie made a few subpar decisions; after he castled, he allowed Englisch to castle when he could have posed direct King problems, and then he allowed a Queen trade. Things got out of hand quickly.

Ultimately, Mackenzie had to defend a bad structure against Englisch, who was in his element when playing calm positions. Although his pawn sacrifice was very professional and allowed his King to take up a strong defensive post, the post was static, and ultimately allowed Englisch to win an exchange. The good start had finally ended, and Mackenzie suffered his first loss of the event.

Round 10: vs. Curt von Bardeleben

After the Nuremberg tournament four years ago, Bardeleben took some time off to finish law school, and the break apparently did wonders for his abilities. He'll be a regular competitor for the rest of the century, and a very strong one at that.

Once more, Mackenzie's opening ideas with White landed him on the worse side of equality, with this Queen's Gambit Declined resulting in him having a huge hole on e4 and a Queenside minority with little action possible on the Kingside. Von Bardeleben threw his c-pawn up the board, opened the file, and placed multiple major pieces on it for total Queenside control. Things were already looking very one-sided.

The problem with such positions is that no matter how much better they may look, there isn't always a breakthrough, and that ended up being the case here. After a couple of inaccurate moves from von Bardeleben, Mackenzie was allowed to construct a very solid setup that prevented any more Queenside pushes. There were still reasons for von Bardeleben to push, but perhaps influenced by the intense schedule, he accepted a draw from a position of strength and gained a little more time to rest. He went into this round still only a half point behind Blackburne, so the tournament situation also allowed this small concession.

Round 11: vs. Joseph Blackburne

A very rough schedule which saw Mackenzie face the three tournament favourites in succession ends with the current leader, Mr. Blackburne. Mackenzie remains one of Blackburne's last remaining bracket demons, having scored four wins to Blackburne's three in tournaments, on top of a 2-1 score in a short match the two played in 1882. There were, as is often the case, scores to settle.

Blackburne tells a story wherein, one morning during breakfast, the trap that he executed on move 12 simply came to him as if by magic. Zukertort and Tarrasch fell for it in previous rounds, and today it was Mackenzie's turn to succumb to the loss of a pawn for little compensation. It seems that the success got to Blackburne's head, and he started to play a little carelessly following the time control. His f-pawn went up the board in an attack, and as the notes will show, both sides had remarkable resources at their disposal to generate an advantage.

Move 33 was the critical moment, with Mackenzie's 33... Be5 doubtlessly coming as a surprise to Blackburne, who sacrificed his Queen to keep up the pressure. Mackenzie defended well, and while the endgame was always guaranteed to be complicated, Blackburne's collapse continued. His 40th move allowed Mackenzie to coordinate, and the most important game of the round - and the tournament altogether thus far - went his way. I have no regrets about making this game the feature of the thumbnail, and I hope none of you reading this do either.

This loss allowed von Bardeleben to catch up, and so at the halfway(ish) point of the event, there were two leaders with 8.5/11. Mackenzie was the only other one to reach 7.5 points at this juncture, keeping him in sole third still. Englisch's 7/11 can't be scoffed at, and rounding out the top five is Max Weiss with 6.5/10. 

We're a little over halfway done, so if you haven't yet, take a quick break before reading the rest of this. It'll still be here when you get back, I promise.

Round 12: vs. Isidor Gunsberg

Neither of Gunsberg's title defences had gone all that well, with his London campaign falling half a point short, while currently he struggled to stay at 50%. His record against Mackenzie up to this point was 2-1, but all games had been wins for the White pieces, and Gunsberg had to play Black - it's time to break the streak.

Mackenzie had plenty of practice against the French in his last match with Amos Burn, and he diligently tasked Gunsberg with demonstrating that he wasn't going to get endlessly squeezed. Our ex-subject was up to the task, and while the engine insisted his path was incorrect, Mackenzie didn't find the most punishing options. At the time control, Gunsberg had the Bishop pair and the Queenside majority while Mackenzie had, once again, primary access to the Kingside. 

For some reason, Gunsberg's energy was unsustainable, and he switched to pure defensive play for the rest of the game, sliding all of his pieces to his cramped Kingside. If, for example, at move 33, he had continued pushing on the Queenside, there exists a world where this game was incredibly combative and either player could have won. As it happened, he doubled Rooks on the f-file right in time for Mackenzie to close it, and only one player really played the remainder of the game.

Round 12: vs. Alexander Fritz

We were introduced to Fritz and his sizeable 'stache at Nuremberg, where I admitted I knew basically nothing about him. That remains true today, but the problem is that I can't exactly sweep him aside like I did at Nuremberg because he kind of annihilated Mackenzie in this game. Even now, writing this portion and looking over the game for a second time, I'm left somewhat speechless.

Thankfully Mackenzie's podium spot wasn't yet snatched, as Englisch had the bye and Weiss remained a point behind, but with Blackburne and von Bardeleben both on 10/13, he would need a little help if he wanted to catch them now.

Round 14: vs. Emmanuel Schiffers

Schiffers was last seen at that 1881 St. Petersburg tournament I mentioned when talking about Alapin, with no results in between. Tracking the activity of the Russian players is a little trickier, but it's known that the Russian chess scene was much less developed than in the other countries we look at, so the possibility of him doing nothing in the way of competitive chess is not zero.

The players repeated the first 12 moves of the Mackenzie - Alapin game we looked at earlier, with Schiffers opting to castle Queenside and begin a pawn storm. It was an especially sound decision due to the pawns winning tempi against Mackenzie's Bishop, and as the players approached the time control, it was clear that (yet again) Mackenzie had mishandled the White pieces. However, at that critical 20th move, Schiffers made the bewildering decision to push ...b7-b5 and expose his own King for nothing.

Now, the position after this move was still better for Schiffers, and the positions that followed had their own intricacies that I hope the notes properly explain. But Schiffers honestly deserved to lose the game for that move alone, and luckily for me, chess is a very fair game. 

Mackenzie's help arrived in a big way this round, with both Blackburne and von Bardeleben losing to Paulsen and Englisch respectively. The gap had closed to a half point, and with von Bardeleben receiving the bye in this next round, Mackenzie had a golden opportunity in front of him. Who would stand in his way of this opportunity?

Round 15: vs. Johannes Metger

We last saw Metger a decade ago at the Leipzig 1877 tournament. With play like this, we probably aren't missing much if we don't see him for another decade. I'm sure Mackenzie didn't mind games like this every so often if they propelled him into sole second place.

Round 16: vs. Max Weiss

Weiss was sitting at a measly four draws thus far, compared to Berger who had found his stride and accumulated nine going into this round. Granted, Berger had multiple draws of under 20 moves, while Weiss only had one (against Berger lmao), so that's perhaps indicative of his attempt to win more games. He was only a point behind Mackenzie at this stage, so a win would be very welcome indeed.

Weiss favoured a system against the Spanish that fell one more short of the beloved Dilworth variation, over 50 years before Dilworth himself would play it. Although he found success with it against Tarrasch the day before, it gave him nothing here, and he spent the first time control playing passively. Although Mackenzie's play wasn't perfect, he nicked a pawn before the second time control, and traded down into a Bishop vs. Knight endgame with terrific chances of winning.

Now, I've consistently championed trading down into imbalanced endgames previously, because endgames are hard - especially because we're exploring a pre-Capablanca landscape. It showed itself to be relevant here as well, because with one bad move, Mackenzie lost all advantage despite being up two pawns. Now if Weiss's King wasn't able to hit c6 in time, then perhaps we'd be talking about a different game altogether.

The most important result of this round was doubtlessly von Bardeleben giving Blackburne his third loss, putting him on 11/16 with the bye in the next round. Mackenzie and von Bardeleben on 11/15, and perhaps Weiss on 10/15, now had the chance to take the undisputed lead with only a few rounds left to play.

Round 17: vs. Theodor von Scheve

Our first exposure to von Scheve was during Tarrasch's run through the Nuremberg Hauptturnier four years ago, where he finished half a point short of getting his master title. Frankfurt seems to be his lucky city, however, as an 1884 tournament hosted by the Southwest German Chess Federation saw him win with 9.5/11 and likely permit entry into this contest. Could he repeat the magic here? (No)

Mackenzie initially declined his opponent's King's Gambit, but quickly accepted it after a trade of central pawns. This version was much tamer than your usual Romantic staple, with von Scheve quickly having access to lines where he wins back his pawn with something like equality. He did manage to win back the pawn (after a move from Mackenzie that initially looked like a huge blunder), but his 17th move walked into a pin that dropped a piece, and the drama was quickly over. 

Gunsberg held von Bardeleben to a draw in this round, so the scores going into the final four rounds were Mackenzie with 12, von Bardeleben with 11.5, Blackburne with 11, Weiss with 10.5, and Louis Paulsen with 10. The last few rounds would be tense, as usual.

Round 18: vs. Josef Noa

This is the last we'll be seeing of Noa for a while, as his next tournament appearance wouldn't be until 1892. I can imagine being a judge is a slightly more important job than wooden figure mover, eh?

Noa's seventh move was thankfully a novelty, as closing up that structure is not how one plays the French. However, it didn't end up biting him as Mackenzie made a strategic misstep himself shortly later, allowing Noa to throw his Kingside pawns up the board with tempo. His King was allowed to stay in the center, while Mackenzie's immediately came under fire on the Kingside. I hope you're not getting sick of me saying it, but Mackenzie once again misplayed with White.

One mistake right before the time control allowed Noa to objectively break through, with pawn after pawn being fired at Mackenzie's shaky fortress. Noa gave Mackenzie precisely one move to save himself, but he was unable to find it, and the attack was decisive. To Mackenzie's credit, he held on for quite some time, but the result was never in question. This was a huge hit to his chances if I've ever seen one.

A draw by von Bardeleben and a win from Blackburne left all three gentleman on 12 points. It's hard to tell who had the best chances; von Bardeleben still had Weiss left to face, while Blackburne's event would live or die with the giant killer Fritz. Meanwhile, Mackenzie's last giant hurdle depended on which version of his inconsistent next opponent showed up.

Round 19: vs. Amos Burn

Apparently Burn had to walk from Cologne to Frankfurt shortly before the tournament started, which left him physically weak and unable to recover given the frantic schedule. It's quite a shame, as the Germans really wanted to test his mettle after an incredibly successful 1886. He would score just under 50% at the close of this event.

Once more, otherwise-obsolete theory was revived by the Steinitz-Zukertort match, with Burn going for the Harrwitz Attack in this QGD. He certainly got an opening that he could be happy with, but threw it all away with an unusual Kingside attack starting on move 13. He gave up his Bishop pair for... honestly, precisely nothing, and went into the time control with an unnecessarily worse position. 

This game perfectly shows off the kind of shape Burn was in, as he collapsed shortly after the time control due to a precise tactic from Mackenzie. The Black Queen was exchanged for three of Burn's pieces, and they coordinated beautifully to collect all of Burn's pawns. This is certainly not the best showing ever for Mr. Burn, but we'll be looking at him in a much better light shortly, worry not.

Draws by his closest rivals gave Mackenzie a half-point buffer with two rounds to go. His last two opponents were close to the bottom of the crosstable, so I can imagine his confidence was higher than usual, but anything can happen at the tail end of a mammoth even like this.

Round 20: vs. Jean Taubenhaus

Taubenhaus has had a busy 1887, with a large handicap tournament that he won in March, followed by the "Café de la Régence Championship" in the Spring that saw him place third. This second result is noteworthy because Taubenhaus would finish third from the bottom at this event. If anyone has more insight into why Taubenhaus was a master outside of vague "he was pretty good in French circles" reasons, do let me know, because I don't get it.

The first 11 moves of this game were the same as in Mackenzie's earlier game with Metger, and Taubenhaus's novelty on that 11th move was of about the same quality as Metger's play. Mackenzie very quickly snapped up a pawn, but Taubenhaus could claim some activity on the c-file as compensation. If that was his claim, why he chose to close it with his 21st move is beyond me; then again, I've already admitted that this guy is a bit of an enigma.

Although a lot of Mackenzie's advantage started to slip during the second time control, the active Bishops of Taubenhaus still required a good deal of precision to use, and to his credit he did quite reasonable. That is, until his 32nd move allowed Mackenzie's attack to break through, and a second pawn was picked up by our subject. Now, we have seen Mackenzie fail to win a position with two extra pawns already, and perhaps there exists a world where this game also fits that bill. But Taubenhaus resigned, so Weiss stands alone in that field.

Schiffers held Blackburne while Metger held von Bardeleben, increasing Mackenzie's lead to a full point. A draw would clinch the event, and we have a familiar face waiting for us in the final round.

Round 21: vs. Hermann von Gottschall

Our subject has played the same opponent, this man, in the final round of two consecutive DSB congresses, wonderful. This also marks the first tournament (of this scale) where I have a portrait of every single player, which is also wonderful. All in all, this has been a particularly wonderful tournament, even if it's taken me a while to write it - and I guess I'm not done, so let's finish this thing.

There are those that believe the best way to get a draw is to play for the win, and that was apparent in Mackenzie's play as early as move 11. Von Gottschall's play, on the other hand, didn't inspire much beyond sighing and head scratching, specifically with his 15th move. After Mackenzie picked up the pawn, his opponent was forced to go on the attack, but one never really existed. The only praise I can really give von Gottschall is that he allowed Mackenzie to win his first international tournament by delivering checkmate, so that's nice of him.

Conclusion

I hope there are no mistakes in that crosstable... Don't tell me if there are, I haven't the energy to fix it lol.

With that, Mackenzie became the first "American" (depending on if you go by place of birth or residence) to win an international tournament, which of course is a tremendous accomplishment. Blackburne, for the third time in a row, came in second, so very close to retaking the crown he won six years prior. Weiss and von Bardeleben both improved their skills tremendously, and perhaps most importantly, Berger reclaimed his "Viennese Drawing Master" title. Go buddy.

On the flip side, Zukertort's poor form continued, and Gunsberg didn't come anywhere close to defending his title. Burn's performance was also incredibly disappointing, though he'll be the subject of future posts rather quickly, so worry not. 

I think this was the second largest post I've ever made in terms of the number of games, thus I do hope none of you read this in one sitting. I would very much like to not look at chess for the next few days, so I'll see you all whenever that's over.