Lasker-Schlecter 1910 match

In an earlier post, I wrote that before Kramnik's win on the October 18th, "only Kasparov (1987) managed to keep the title in a must-win situation in the last game of the match." In fact, there is a lot more to the story of the 1910 match, but I did not want to clutter up my post with it. Here's the whole story...

There was actually a clause in the playing rules that specified that 1-0 and 2-1 were to be considered drawn matches with the champion Lasker keeping the title. Although this thesis is strongly disputed by some chess historians, it seems likely that Lasker was in fact NOT in a must-win situation in the 10th and final game of the 1910 match.

In this case, it would have been Schlecter who was in a must-win situation to obtain a 2-0 result, which would definitely explain the extreme risks he took to win the last game. The standard explanation that he was bound by some sense of honor after winning game 5 from a lost position only because Lasker blundered seems far-fetched to me. While Schlecter was a gentleman, it seems doubtful that he would have been QUITE that sporting.