17 February 1876—2 March 1876

Game	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	Total
Steinitz	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	7
Blackburne	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0

Format: The winner of the first seven games to be declared the victor, draws not counting.
Time Control: 30 moves in 2 hours and then 15 moves every 1 hour.
Purse: £120 (£60 a side).

Conditions Of The Match Between Messrs Blackburne And Steinitz.
Messrs Blackburne and Steinitz have agreed to play a chess match on the following conditions:

The Match between Messrs Blackburne and Steinitz.—It has been agreed by Messrs Blackburne and Steinitz that their right of publication of the games shall be consigned to The Field exclusively, and that the annotations appended to the games shall be signed by both players before publication.

Match Between Messrs Blackburne And Steinitz.
According to announcement, the first game in this momentous contest commenced on Thursday, the 17th, at the West-end Chess Club. After some preparations, play commenced at half-past two o’clock; the toss for the first move having fallen in favour of Mr. Steinitz. An alteration in the conditions as published in our last number was agreed upon by the two combatants, to the effect that the time limit should be regulated by alarum [sic] time-pieces instead of sand glasses.

Messrs Blackburne And Steinitz’s Match.
The second game, played on Saturday, the 19th inst., commenced, by mutual consent, at three o’clock, and it has been agreed by both players to alter the rule respecting the hour for the beginning of the match games, to the effect that the games played on Tuesdays and Saturdays shall commence at three o’clock p.m., and the one due on Thursday at two p.m. A large number of visitors, including Lord Walden, Mr Cochrane, and Mr Strode, attended to witness the contest, which on that day was accompanied by unusually stirring incidents. Blackburne opened with the variation of the Scotch Gambit which had been adopted by the Viennese in one of the games of the memorable match by telegraph and correspondence between London and Vienna. The defence then adopted by the London council wins a P. for the second player, whose king has, however, to abandon the privilege of castling in consequence, and to remain confined for a long time in an extremely perilous-looking position, while his pieces on the Q side are also shut up, an cannot be brought into play for some time. Though it has been demonstrated by the success of the London council that the P was worth all the trouble of a protracted defence in a correspondence game, where several days could be taken for the consideration of one move, and though the theoretical soundness of this defence has been advocated in our columns and by other authorities, this line of play is shunned by many practitioners as too difficult, especially in match games over the board wherein a time limit is adopted, which must of necessity be much shorter than the time allowances for correspondence games.

Steinitz, who nevertheless adopted the same defence, wasted a great deal of time in the opening, and apparently hesitated in order to endeavour to vary the recognised line of play, as is his wont to do in match games; but he ultimately followed move by move the precepts of the so-called Vienna game, and the first deviation from that established form of play came from the leader of the attack. On the 9th move, Blackburne introduced the alteration of 9. Q takes B, instead of Kt takes B, as played by Vienna. The game became more especially exciting when the second player exhausted his first hour on the 13th move, and, having an exceedingly difficult game to fight, was therefore still more likely to get into trouble with the time allowance in the second hour, when, according to the stipulations, he might have to forfeit, unless he succeeded in raising the average speed of his moves, which seemed doubtful, as his position was very critical. He, however, managed to keep afloat up to the 20th move, when he ventured upon a sortie, attacking the opponent’s K Kt with his Q KtP, which some experts in the room considered questionable; and so it seems, unless our note to Black’s 22nd move should prove a redeeming feature of this defence. Blackburne, without stopping to defend the Kt, began a vehement attack in his usual vigorous and brilliant style, and certainly, if he consistently followed it up, would have obtained a winning position on the 24th move. He no doubt conceived at the time some of the beautiful variations which we give on that move below, for he showed them to the bystanders immediately after the game was finished; but he had no time left to make sure of them, and, seeing a mode of play which recovered his P, though it seemed to relax the attack, he preferred the latter as the less hazardous. On Mr Blackburne’s 29th move the alarum [sic] bell of his clock rang, to show that he could only rely upon the stipulated five minutes’ grace for his next two moves, and thus it happened that he did not elect the much stronger 29. QR takes B, which would have soon won a P. The adjournment for an hour took place on Black’s 30th move, and after resuming play Steinitz made two more moves, and then offered a draw. For reasons stated below, and probably also being annoyed at having let the opponent slip, Mr Blackburne rejected the offer, though the positions were quite equal. But in trying to win Blackburne had to deploy one of his rooks, and subjected his queen to the attack of the two combined hostile rooks. When the opponent took up the offensive, Blackburne had an extremely difficult game to defend, and was also getting short of time. A feeble move on his part, made under those circumstances, enabled Steinitz to win a P and exchange both rooks, after which it came to an extremely difficult ending game as both parties has still their queens on the board. By cautious advance Steinitz managed, however, to secure an easily winning position on the 58th move.

The third game, played on Tuesday, was opened by Steinitz with the Allgaier Kieseritzky Gambit, which the theorists thought completely demolished by Paulsen’s defence. It was at once surmised that Steinitz would not have adopted this attack unless he had some novelty in store. And so it was; for he sacrificed another pawn on the twelfth move by bringing the Q Kt to B 3, which led to the exchange of queens, and the recovery of the lost pawn, with, as Steinitz thinks, an even position. His opponent and Mr Zukertort opine, however, that Black has the best of the game, and future analysis and practice must decide between the conflicting views. The ending was carefully played on both sides, and seemed to lead to a drawn position. But on the 25th move Blackburne, by a fine coup, which took the opponent by surprise, won a P; and two moves later on he might have won the exchange, but missed his opportunity, owing to being pressed for time. Steinitz, who had managed to keep time in hand, adopted the usual policy under the circumstances, namely, to make the game as difficult as possible for the opponent who was pushed for time - even at the expense of correctness, and at some risk. By this means he succeeded in pretty nearly equalising the game, though he was still a P behind at the time of the adjournment on the 31st move. After the adjournment only three moves had been made on each side, when Blackburne made an oversight which cost him two pawns, and gave his opponent an easy victory in the end game.

The fourth game was played on Thursday. Blackburne, who had the first move, repeated the same attack of the Scotch gambit which he had tried on the previous occasion. Steinitz this time, in the ninth move, adopted the defence of P to Q R 3, at once followed suit by Q to K 4 (on the Q Kt attacking the Q), and afterwards P to Q Kt 4, which shuts out the K Kt from action. Blackburne developed his forces rapidly, regardless of the loss of the piece threatened by Black advancing the P to Q Kt 5, to which he had at any time a fine answer by Kt to Q 5. Steinitz kept himself strictly on the defensive, brought his Q R out of the range of the hostile B, and developed at last the Q B by P to Q 3, followed by B to Q 2, as he had nothing to fear from the hostile Q B P. Thus he stood resisting the attack which the opponent, who was a P behind, was bound to pursue energetically. The storm was at last on the 18th, commenced by Blackburne, who adopted a ruse de guerre which has been often successfully tried by Anderssen, namely, of sacrificing a piece in order to complicate the position at a point when his opponent was hard up for sufficient time to reflect upon his moves. Steinitz hit upon a safe defence, which soon reduced matters to simplicity, and perceiving an opportunity of offering the exchange of queens of the 26th move, which the adversary was obliged to accept, unless he was willing to submit to a harassing attack with a piece behind. After that exchange, Black remained with a clear piece ahead, and even a weak move made in a hurry could not much hurt his prospects of winning. Having recovered time and breath on the 30th move, Steinitz proceeded after an hour’s adjournment to force the gain of pawns, and the exchange of one of the rooks, and the superiority of his forces soon proved too much for Blackburne’s clever and obstinate resistance.

Saturday’s game was opened by Steinitz with the Vienna opening. Blackburne defended on the second move by K Kt to B 3, and then on the fourth move introduced the novelty of K B to Q Kt 5, followed by the sacrifice of the K Kt, which gave him a fearful counter-attack. Steinitz, being thus early put on the defensive, conducted his game on the principle which prevails in the gambit named after him, namely, of marching out with his king to the front as far as possible, and then to endeavour to exchange queens, when, having brought his king towards the middle of the board, and therefore more favourably placed for the end game. Mr Blackburne, by a fine manoeuvre, took the first opportunity of driving the hostile king back, and then offered to exchange queens, which offer, if accepted, would have probably led to a draw. Steinitz immediately changed tactics, refused the exchange, and entered for a hard tussle of the middle game. Blackburne soon gave up a pawn in order to free his game a little, and after that Steinitz slowly gained ground, until it came to a general break-up of Black’s game on the 26th move, whereby Steinitz gained two pawns, and had afterwards easy work to win the game.

Tuesday’s game.—Blackburne commenced with the Scotch gambit, in the same way as in the fourth game, and Steinitz defended again by P to Q R 3; Blackburne retreated the K Kt at once to Q R 3 before bringing out the Q Kt. This might appear a measure adopted to prevent the K Kt being blocked out by P to Q Kt 4, as happened in the fourth game, since this expedient would have been unadvisable for Black to adopt at that point, on account of the reply of B to B 3. But Mr Blackburne assures us that his retreating the Kt at once was only a finger-slip, caused by his attention being diverted at the time in consequence of his desire to assist the scorers, who could not follow the players, owing to the rapidity in which the opening moves were played on both sides. Finding he had thus lost time he gave up a second pawn, in order to keep up the attack. On the twenty-second move, Steinitz gave up the exchange, in order to simplify the game; but his opponent, in his turn, elected to give up a piece for the very opposite purpose. On Black’s 31st move the game was adjourned, and Steinitz, whose turn it was to play, had in accordance with custom, to write down his move, and to hand it over to the secretary in a closed envelope. Just at that time the alarum bell of his clock gave the sign of his having completed the second hour, and, being under the impression that it was his 30th move, he hurriedly put his move down, which subjected him to a tremendous attack after the adjournment. Ultimately, however, he succeeded in exchanging queens, remaining with a rook behind for six pawns, three of which were bound to fall; but, having his king near to support the other three pawns, he succeeded in a difficult and long ending to force the game.

The final game, played on Thursday, was opened by Steinitz again with the Vienna debut. Blackburne defended in Anderssen’s favorite way, whereupon Steinitz at once blocked out the Q B by P to K B 5. The novelty proved a success, since White was able to support the whole battle line of pawns on both wings, with the choice to himself to break in on either side. Blackburne pushed hard, unable to castle, and, having most of his pieces knotted together uselessly on the Q side, forced an opening on the K side in order to relieve himself by exchanging queens. But the position proved unfavourable to him in the ending. Steinitz, having one important open file for the K R, and being able to force another opening for the Q R, soon compelled the opponent to sacrifice two pawns, and then managed to force the game in a pretty finish.