Taylor Kingston wrote:
help bot wrote:
Taylor Kingston wrote:
2. In a way, Capablanca already had "a lock on the title." Lasker
had earlier resigned his World Championship title and given it to
Capa.

That's one take on the issue.

No, it's an historical fact. For example the Hannak biography, page
195, says "Finally, after long and fruitless efforts to come to
mutually satisfactory terms, Lasker threw quite a bombshell by
publishing a statement solemnly renouncing his title for good and
all." This was in 1920, I believe.

But did anyone take this seriously? In the eyes of the world, was it
any more legitimate for Lasker to say, ``I'm not World Champion any
mo Capablanca is'' than it would have been for Capa to say, ``He's
not World Champion any mo I am''?


You're right, Capablanca definitely wanted to win the title the
right way, by beating Lasker. I was merely reporting the fact that
Lasker *had* resigned the title before them match, and so,
technically, Capa was *already* champion.

Capa was already champion in Lasker's opinion. I'm not sure anyone
else really agreed with him.


Dave.

--
David Richerby Homicidal Devil Atom Bomb (TM): it's
www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~davidr/ like a weapon of mass destruction
that's possessed by Satan but it wants
to kill you!