New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1907-02-04
MARSHALL is HOPEFUL
analysis of Fourth Chess Game
Shoes Eren Position.

Subsequent analysis Of the fourth game OF the
chess match for the worlds championship between
Or. Emanuel Lasker and Frank J. Marshall. played
in this city Saturday. disclosed the fact mat az
no stage OF the contest did either player have
winning advantage. Matters stood perfectly even
from start finish. Many a move. perhaps, might
have been made by either player. If the game had
been one Of analysis, but. with the time limit
against them. the masters could not afford to
enter upon additional complications
Naturally the spectators discussed the chances
of Marshall throughout the afternoon and evening.
Most Of them. even MarshalIs strongest support
ers OF the opinion that he could not possibly
give Iasker the odds Of three games and hope TO
win Instances were quoted, however where the
unforeseen did happen. In the match between
Harrwitz and Loewerthal. played in London In
Htz beat him IN the end b ec To- Ten games
ten being drawn. In 1851 P4ulSen worsted kolsch
six and drew the next twelve games the match he
match with Barry lost the first four games and
then beat his adrersary by five TO four, while IN the
last match between steinitz and zukertort the lat
ter carried everything before him at first and was
In Ire T4asler- Marshall instance everybody takes
into the fact {6at MARSHAL Is nfner
This is. Of course good argument. but. on tho
other hand. It must be admitted that the young
tories, has stepped into the front rank OF interna
tlonai chess masters ard mas found support to ne
ship Taking this and the fact that he has lost only
admit that all hopes are not gone Vet. and If de-
feat IS 90 come. that lie viii give Iasker q good
fight and so save disgrace Marshall had the fol
lowing to say yesterday about Saturdays game:
Dr. I-askcr on his eighth move selected a line of
Thoroughly analysed by Mr.. Mct'utcheon with the
late Harry \. PillSbury. My opponents twelfth
Was of curse forced otherwise his Kings pawn
would have been lost II our Of the question
for to castle the Kings side OF the board
because Of the weakness OF my pawns there and
the threatening position OF the adverse queen.
and ! quite prepared TO take chances with my
King The other side. AS 10 Whites seven teenth
move. which is said to have caused good deal OF
discussion, II was rather better than kt-Cti fpr
IN that I would have opened tho Kings B!su-
ops file by means OF I'-k33 exposing his King
to violent onslaught
l did not 10 this line OF play when attack
ing the White Queen my seventeenth move sim
ply because 7 did deem tho situation wholly
ripe for II. Moreover the ttme limit was against
hazardous play OF any description, and | preferred
to content myself by playing for Knight
bishop ending, wherein / thought ! detected
slight chance obtain the upper hand
was at move z, where Or. Lasker had the choice
of recapturing my Bishop taking my Knight
with his Bishop Tho latter course would have IN
volyed crtica, lines of play dangerous both
R-Q2; a.. KR-kt3, BXP, then %. B-kt5 would
have won IN good style FOR my opponent. Instead.
however. % .PXB would lead draw. under
stand that in the ending was expected to mako
bid for a win by playing Be. P--R+ In place OF
taking the pawn. and thereby establishing passed
pawn the rocks hle This pawn would have
my row Of Kings side pawns would have been
demolished leaving actually playing uphill
game. As played Il, it left question about my
being able command q draw. In conclusion. I
feel that I IN much better condition do
myself justice. and my friends assured I
will be seen to better advantage from
The fifth game OF the match will be played at the
Everett House tomorrow afternoon.