The young master will be a formidable opponent in future contests.

Young Lasker only confirmed the opinion we expressed about him when we watched him in Breslau. He is only 21 years of age, but possesses already the qualities of a first-class master - erudition, judgement of position, quickness of conception, imagination, great enthusiasm for the game, and above all, he is a man of culture and more than average intelligence.

In my opinion the match with Steinitz does not have the great importance that they themselves attribute to it. For Steinitz has grown old, and the old Steinitz is no longer the Steinitz of old.

... the most important tournament of the 19th century, which assembled the entire cream of world chess.

... the Laskers were forced out of their comfortable retirement. The regime confiscated the Laskers' Berlin appartment, their farm at Thyrow and their lifetime savings. Emanuel and Martha Lasker, in their old age, suddenly found themselves destitute, without money home or homeland.

In order to survive Lasker had once again to build a career in chess. The first tournament he was invited to after nine years retirement was Zürich. ..... Lasker was invited to Moscow in 1936 to participate in another great international tournament. ... The Laskers were encouraged to stay on in Moscow after the tournament and Dr Emanuel Lasker, mathematician, was invited to become a member of the Moscow Academy of Science. The offer was accepted and the Laskers took up permanent residence in Moscow. Emanuel became absorbed with his mathematical studies at the Moscow Academy.

Lasker, throughout the tournament gave me the unmistakable impression that he was not extending himself. There may be a very good reason for this. He made his name a generation ago and although winning a high place would be a very fine performance, the strain of a long tournament with fifteen long arduous games would be unwise for a man of nearly seventy years.

Lasker's never failing fund of humour was much in evidence and he evidently excels at clock golf.

In that great roll-call of tournaments, St Petersburg 1896, St Petersburg 1914 and New York 1924, Emanuel Lasker always won. In 1896 it was by a two-point margin over his leading contemporaries, 18 years later again by a two-point gap in the final and ten years further on (three years after he conceded the title to Capablanca) $1\large\frac{1}{2}\normalsize$ points ahead of a mighty field. Such results surely indicate something truly remarkable about Emanuel Lasker.

The first time I saw Lasker, he was an elderly man. His appearance was not impressive. His movements were very slow. ... He was a very wise man - he was the first one who studied all the practical sides of a chess game: how to prepare for a tournament, when to play in it, how to rest, eat, etc. He perfectly understood all these practical aspects.

I did not study anything but the variations in question consisted of developing moves which were so sound and reasonable that they could not be so bad as my opponent thought. I was therefore convinced that he had misjudged these variations, and his understanding of them was faulty. I wanted to take advantage of this state of affairs.

Lasker's conception of life, as expounded in his writings, was that of a fight or struggle and as a chess player he was probably the greatest fighter that the game has seen. Supremely wary and tenacious, he would deliberately involve himself in difficulties to complicate the struggle and give himself chances of outplaying his opponent; and once he had the advantage, he would push it home with relentless vigour and decision.