Steinitz-Anderssen. London, 1866

September 1866 – The Chess Player’s Magazine

THE MATCH BETWEEN ANDERSSEN AND STEINITZ .

THE match between Herren Anderssen and Steinitz is, if we are

not mistaken, the first set encounter of any duration which has

ever taken place between masters representing the rival schools of

Austria and Prussia. Just at the time at which the young levies

of Prussia were proving their superiority over the old experienced

armies of the Austrian Empire, a quiet, unassuming Austrian

player was avenging, in his own way, the defeat of Sadowa, and

gaining victory over Professor Anderssen, the famous Prussian

champion, a veteran of a hundred successful battles in the mimic

war of Chess. Germany was divided against herself in both instances

; there the contest was physical, and the laurels of the

conqueror not unstained with blood ; here it was mental, and the

crown could be worn without causing misery, whilst a great neutral

but friendly country looked on as arbiter of the lists, and afforded

the fairest field for action , for there was no fear lest she should turn

either the defeat of the one or the aggrandisement of the other to

her own peculiar advantage . There were strange vicissitudes in

the match. The first blow was struck by Anderssen, who was

afterwards overpowered in four successive encounters ; then regaining

something of his pristine strength the Prussian scored , in

his turn, the next four games, but falling away by degrees, in the

later stages of the match, he finally succumbed to the prowess and

good fortune of his youthful opponent. Our duty as journalists

requires us to say a word or two respecting the issue and also the

character of the play exhibited, at the hazard of performing a

somewhat ungrateful and invidious task. At the commencement

Anderssen was doubtless held in the highest esteem by most competent

judges, yet those who affected to look upon the match when

first made as a hoax, and those who asserted that Steinitz could not

win a single game of such an adversary, never for one moment

represented genuine public opinion . By a succession of victories ,

hardly tarnished by one defeat , when he was rendering odds to a

skilful amateur who has since proved himself to be one of the best

English players , Steinitz had gradually attained a distinguished

place amongst the votaries of Chess . If it was doubted whether,

under such circumstances , he could be put upon a par

Anderssen , it was because some of the previous victories of the

latter were of the most brilliant character . It is impossible to

exaggerate the services which the Breslau master has rendered to

the cause of Chess . If he had been only a problematist and an

analyst his fame would have been at the highest, but add to these

considerable qualifications-the result of much study guided by

seldom-erring instinct, an intuitive ingenuity-his practical skill ,

and who can fail to recognise that rare personage even amongst

Chess masters-the born player ? His spirit of chivalry has always

been equal to his genius and ability. Ever ready to play, whether

in his own country, or coming to gain and risk laurels in London ,

or courting defeat in Paris, he has, by example more than precept,

laid down the golden rule that the true Chess - player is he who

plays, not he who talks about the game. If we except consultation

matches (in which , if our memory serves us right, he has also distinguished

himself) his most remarkable performances during his

career have been the triple victory in the tournaments of 1851 and

1862 , and in the London Cup, the match with Harrwitz and that

with Kolisch . Of these two last named, the first was one of the

earliest and the last one of the latest of Anderssen's matches of

which we have public record . When Anderssen played with

Harrwitz the latter had returned for a while to Germany, fresh

from the best English practice, and brimful of ingenuity. Consequently

Harrwitz , at the commencement of the match, gained an

advantage , but the earnest Anderssen, through the great qualities

which he always possesses , though they are not invariably at his

command, soon brought himself up to the level of his opponent,

and in this unsatisfactory manner the match terminated, as it was

never finished . It was at this period that Anderssen showed also

his capacity for blindfold play, as he won a game from Harrwitz in

the finest manner, both playing without sight of the board . With

the Kolisch match we were less satisfied , for although Anderssen

just obtained the victory, we have ever thought the play exhibited

far below the standard of both masters. We have forborne to

mention Anderssen's match with Paulsen , since that, as the match

with Harrwitz , was abandoned when both players stood upon an

equality. The circumstances connected with the tournaments of

1851 and 1862 , and his match with Morphy, we may presume to

be known to the majority of our readers ; we have not space to

recapitulate them ; sufficient be it to say that Anderssen's play upon

most occasions was of the highest order. We believe that his skill

really reached its zenith about 1851. It was on account, then, of

these great exploits of Anderssen, and for no other reasons , that the

friends of Steinitz had misgivings when their young champion

entered the lists against the Prussian veteran . But they were soon

agreeably disappointed when they perceived that, whatever might

be the capacity of Anderssen , Steinitz possessed moral qualities

which rendered him at least a match for his powerful antagonist .

A critic must now ask, in no captious spirit , has Anderssen's skill

suffered material deterioration , or is Steinitz superior to any foreign

player whom we have lately seen in the field ? We believe that

the truth, as is frequently the case , lies between these extreme

opinions. Steinitz is much better than he was originally thought,

and Anderssen is not now in his best form . We have said that the

latter's play was at its zenith in 1851. We mean by this that his

genius being always the same, he had just at that date been in

constant good practice , and was in the highest condition so far as

health was concerned . Before he entered the lists for the tournament

of 1851 he had been properly trained in a series of encounters

with such players as Szèn and Falkbeer, the former, it is true, a

little passée, but the latter in full intellectual vigour, and perhaps

better than we ever saw him in this country.

It was not necessary for Anderssen to be in quite the same condition

to carry off the first prize in 1862 Then he had only to

contend in one game against every individual player-a task, as

experience will prove , by no means so wearying as a long set match

with one opponent. There was not, however, any considerable

fault to be found with his condition at that period . We cannot say

the same of him upon the present occasion . It may be thought

that we lay too much stress upon the possession of good condition

as a necessary qualification for match-playing at Chess, but we

really believe it to be more than half the battle . What said the

great Athenian orator when asked the chief and also the second

qualification for any one to shine in the art which he himself

carried to perfection ? Delivery," was his answer, in both cases,

not genius or ability, but delivery." So in Chess, talent of the

highest order, combined with the most complete knowledge, will

not insure success unless a player is in good health, and also

practice enough to bring such qualities out on the day of action .

We have further to add that we have noticed in Anderssen, as in

other superior minds, a tendency to periodical break-downs. However

excellent his play, he cannot command it at the moment that

he wishes half as much as the world has generally been disposed to

believe. This failing-after all a natural defect on the side of

genius, let any one call to mind Cochrane, Kieseritzki, and Horwitz

-by no means detracts from his general capacity. We think

Anderssen just the man, immediately after a defeat, to enter upon

another match and vanquish even a stronger player than the one

by whom he himself has been defeated . Steinitz's victory is not at

all disparaged by the remarks which we have made respecting his

opponent. A player can but win when he has the opportunity, and

Steinitz did not win his games clumsily, but finely. It may be

reserved for the Austrian to occupy even a higher position in Chess

than that which his late distinguished antagonist has filled ; he has

youth in his favour, and up to this time has been constantly improving.

We trust that he, in common with every other good

player, may continue to improve.

It is the less necessary to speak critically of the games, as our published

notes, we hope, have been sufficiently suggestive to lead a wellinformed

reader to form his own opinion upon them . Always

wishing to assist any one who may be inexperienced, we should be

loath to deprive him of availing himself in some degree of his own

originality and sagacity. An impartial judge will readily pitch

upon the games in which Anderssen outplays Steinitz and those in

which he is outplayed , and will separate these again from those—

we regret that there are such - in which he breaks down. Once or

twice , but not more frequently, a little over-refinement will be

detected in the play of Steinitz , but this is more than counterbalanced

by his general steadiness and by his promptness in seizing

the right moment for action. Certainly the match cannot be accused of dulness, as the majority of the games were Evans's

and Salvio's gambits , Anderssen having the attack in the first and

the defence in the second of these brilliant openings. Wherever

any striking novelty occurred , we believe that we called attention

to it in our notes. We may, perhaps, be permitted to make one

remark respecting those notes. If any deficiency be detected in

them it arose from the necessity of the case, as we were anxious to

lay before our readers the games as soon as they were played, and

were therefore, on some occasions, obliged to eschew more elaborate

and exhaustive analysis. We trust, however, that no serious error

will be found in them, and that with all their shortcomings they

may serve in some measure to illustrate one of the most interesting

matches that has been contested within the last few years.