FIRST GAME - Ruy Lopez - At the close of opening stages Schlechter had emerged with slightly the better game, and this advantage was maintained for a long time. Lasker, however, put up a very fine defence in the final stages, and succeeded in drawing a hard fought game.

SECOND GAME - Ruy Lopez - Like his opponent in the first game Lasker chose a Ruy Lopez, which Schlechter defended in an unusual way, which is alluded to below and which he resorted to in another game of the match. Lasker lost a pawn in the opening, but this disadvantage did not deter him from drawing the game.

THIRD GAME - Ruy Lopez - Proceeding on the same lines as the first game, Shlecter deviating on the 11th move, but this proved less favourable, and a drawn position was arrived at on the 31st move.

FOURTH GAME - Ruy Lopez - Lasker played the first eight moves of the second game, whereupon Shlecter adopted the recognised move instead of embarking on the unusual variation referred to. Lasker could have won the exchange, but possibly this would have been no advantage in the position, as Schlechter would have had a passed Pawn to the good in compensation. Schlechter kept this Pawn, but instead of it being a Pawn plus, the material remained equal, until Lasker later on won a Pawn. The advantage now rested with Lasker, but Schlechter, playing in fine style, was able to secure a draw.

FIFTH GAME - Ruy Lopez - Here Schlechter chose a better continuation against the same defence, as in the first and third games. Lasker courted the exchange of pieces, relying on his superlative skill in the end-game. But Schlechter met the champion on his own ground, and playing in masterly style, scored the first victory in the match. This game closed the Vienna series, the net result of which showed Shlecter in a highly favourable light. Not only had he registered the only won game, but he had troubled Lasker in the majority of the drawn games, and the honours of the series were largely in his favour.

SIXTH GAME - Ruy Lopez - The first game of the Berlin series, interest in the news from Vienna, that Schlechter held the big advantage of 1 to 0 and 4 draws. Hence the latter half of the match worthily upheld the interest of the former. In this game Schlechter again utilised the recognised defence to the variation hitherto played by Lasker. Exchanges in passing from the opening to the close of the middle game left Lasker with a Pawn ahead for the ending. Here again he was unable to utilise his skill in the end-game to appreciable advantage, and Schlechter was able to draw an instructive ending.

SEVENTH GAME - Sicilian Defense - Schlechter got the best of the opening, and in the middle game sacrificed a Bishop for two Pawns, subsequently obtaining a third. The sacrifice was quite sound, but led to no more than a draw.

EIGHTH GAME - Ruy Lopez - Here Schlechter resorted to the variation he played in the second game. Dr. Lasker wrote afterwards that Schlechter by this variation has found a valid defence to the Ruy Lopez. Another draw was eventually the result.

NINTH GAME - Sicilian Defense - By this time, as may be imagined, the interest in the play had become intense, as Lasker had very little time to save the match. In this game Lasker for the first time had distinct chances of a win. The opportunity occurred in the early middle game, but, ahving missed it, Lasker was never able to press home his advantage, and another draw left him in the unenviable position of having to save his match record on the last game. In that one game he would have to make a desperate effort to win, and even if he accomplished this it would only draw the match.

TENTH GAME - Queen's Gambit Declined - Schlechter's conduct of the game would appear quite inexplicable had he not stated afterwards that his mind was set upon winning it. He was unwilling to hold on to his advantage and play steadily for yet another draw. It is extremely probably that had he proceeded with the deliberate intention of drawing, he would have succeeded in doing so. As the game actually went, Schlechter had a probable win in a complicated position, and could certainly have drawn with care. Lasker was compelled to play for a win, and forcing a win against a player of Schlechter's strength is no easy matter even for a Lasker. Schlechter's chivalrous desire for victory did not end with his playing even a moderately steady game, and almost from the beginning he indulged in a far more reckless style than can be recollected in any other game he has played. Still, in spite of early disadvantage the game was prolonged until the 71st move, when Lasker emerged victorious.