<FSR: <keypusher> But the Evans did play a decisive role at Hastings. Pillsbury faced it twice, and won both times. http://www.chessgames.com/perl/ches... He only won the tournament by half a point, so both wins were critical to his success.>

Well, by that logic each opening in Pillsbury's fifteen wins played a decisive role at Hastings. :-)

It's interesting to compare how the three leaders did against the Evans. Tarrasch sniffed at Lasker for declining the gambit <although he has declared that he knows a winning defence> , but it worked out pretty well:

W Pollock vs Lasker, 1895



Chigorin faced the Evans twice. He won an exciting game against Pollock (W Pollock vs Chigorin, 1895) but blundered into a draw in a totally won position against Bird (Bird vs Chigorin, 1895).

Chigorin was the only one of the three who played the Evans as White, of course. He scored an anemic +1-1=0.

Chigorin vs Gunsberg, 1895



Chigorin vs Steinitz, 1895



So maybe the Evans Gambit really did play a decisive role in this tournament...

At Hastings Pillsbury got a lot of attention for playing the odd "Stone-Ware" defense, as in this nice win over Schiffers.

Schiffers vs Pillsbury, 1895



The following year at Nuremberg he played an inferior countergambit against the same opponent and lost an important game.

Schiffers vs Pillsbury, 1896