Personal Notes

HarryP = Harry Pillsbury Please note that I NEVER disconnect during a game. Sometimes, though, I lose the connection. If that happens, I will be back on just as soon as I can. At times I turn on noescape, but I prefer not to do that since I do lose the connection at times.

Btw, I will not instantly challenge you to another game at the conclusion of our game. If you instantly challenge me to another game, I will decline. My declining will not, however, mean I will be averse to playing you again later.

Who was the greater player, Pillsbury or Lasker? We have to say Lasker, of course, but Lasker did not dominate Pillsbury in the way that he did every other rival of his until the time of Rubinstein and Capablanca.

In tournament play Pillsbury was 4-5-4 against Lasker. He also won a club game against him (Augsburg 1900) and won with Maclellan a consultation game against Lasker and Bate (Rochester 1899).

If we look at the tournament games, we can see that four of them are "brilliancies": Rds 1 and 10 at St. Petersburg 1895-96, Nuremburg 1896, and Cambridge Springs 1904. Pillsbury won three of these.

Three games are "endgame wins": Rd 6 at St. Petersburg 1895-96, their second game at London 1899, and Paris 1900. Lasker won two of these.

Two games might be classed as "lucky wins": New York 1893 and Hastings 1895. Lasker won both. At New York, Pillsbury had a draw but blundered, and at Hastings Pillsbury had a win but miscalculated and lost.

What the above suggests is that maybe Pillsbury could have defeated Lasker in a match for the World Championship but that, if he had and they had played a rematch, Lasker would probably have won.

If Lasker had "mixed it" with Pillsbury, he might have lost his title, though of course he too could play brilliantly: his win in Rd 10 at St. Petersburg is one of history's greatest games.

But if Lasker HAD lost, probably he would have won a rematch by -- if necessary -- relying on endgame play as in his admirable 75 move win at London 1899. This type of game was more characteristic of Lasker than of Pillsbury.

Server Ratings Details

Type Wild Rating 1252 Best
Type Blitz Rating 1349 Best 1820 (14/May/2002)
Type Standard Rating 1724 Best 2116 (22/Apr/2005)
Type Bullet Rating 1454 Best 1511 (19/Oct/1997)
Type 5-minute Rating 1533 Best 1692 (12/Nov/2017)
Type 1-minute Rating 757 Best 958 (28/Jan/2002)
Type 15-minute Rating 1819 Best 1819 (23/Dec/2020)
Type 3-minute Rating 1554 Best
Type Chess960 Rating 1396 Best

Statistics