chessgames.com
Members · Prefs · Laboratory · Collections · Openings · Endgames · Sacrifices · History · Search Kibitzing · Kibitzer's Café · Chessforums · Tournament Index · Players · Kibitzing

 
WCC:Alekhine-Bogoljubov 1929
Compiled by WCC Editing Project
--*--

ORIGINAL: Alekhine - Bogoljubov World Championship Match (1929)

DRAFT EDIT in progress: <JFQ>

The ex-world chess champion Jose Raul Capablanca challenged Alexander Alekhine to a rematch on February 10, 1928, requesting two changes to the London rules that had governed their first title match. Capablanca wanted to alter the playing times and reduce the number of games, but Alekhine refused any changes.<1><"L'Echiquier" April 1928, pp.883-885 In Edward Winter, "Capablanca," pp.207-299.> Alekhine held Capablanca to the London Rules stipulation that the world champion "need not defend" his title "for a lower purse than $10,000 U.S. dollars."<"American Chess Bulletin" Sept-Oct 1922, p.150. In Winter, "Capablanca" p.188> Capablanca's inability to raise this purse became the main obstacle to a rematch.<Milan Vidmar, "Golden Schachzeiten, 2d auflage" (Walter de Gruyter 1981), p.176><Capa's inability to raise the funds- Winter "Capablanca" the Cuban government cancelling their $5000 dollar purse pledge in 1929> In 1928, American organizers offered Bradley Beach, N.J. as a venue for the rematch, but there exists no evidence that they ever raised the required $10,000 purse.<2><W.H.W.,"Daily Mail" 16 November 1928 p.17. In Edward Winter, Chessnote 8193, http://www.chesshistory.com/winter/...> After his victory at Bad Kissingen (1928), Efim Bogoljubov challenged Alekhine, who accepted "in principle,"<3><"American Chess Bulletin" Dec. 1928, pp.174-175. In Edward Winter, "Capablanca" p. 213> so long as the financial guarantees were in place.<4><"American Chess Bulletin" March 1929, p.41. In Edward Winter, "Capablanca" p. 215> Less than a year later, when it became clear that Bogoljubov could not guarantee a $10,000 purse, Alekhine agreed to play him for a smaller amount.<(note 8)"Neue Wiener Schachzeitung" 29 Aug. 1929, p.253 > Alekhine announced that "The match with Bogoljubow interests me far more than the battle with Capablanca... Bogoljubow is a much more serious opponent."<6><"Deutsche Schachblatter" 1 Feb. 1929, pp.35-37. In Edward Winter, "Capablanca" p. 215>

Bogoljubov's record indicated that he was a legitimate challenger. He had drawn the Alekhine - Bogoljubov (1921) match, and finished first over Alekhine, Rudolf Spielmann, Ernst Gruenfeld, and Richard Reti at Bad Pistyan (1922). After sharing first with Alekhine and Geza Maroczy at Karlsbad (1923), he won both the USSR Championship (1924) and the USSR Championship (1925).<source- Cafferty and Taimanov "Soviet Championships"> At Moscow (1925) he finished first over Emanuel Lasker and reigning world champion Capablanca. He was also the FIDE champion, a title he had won twice in succession: Bogoljubov - Euwe: First FIDE Championship (1928) and Bogoljubov - Euwe: Second FIDE Championship (1928).<The FIDE champion was not considered to be world champion. See Edward Winter, "FIDE Championship (1928)." http://www.chesshistory.com/winter/...> At Bad Kissingen (1928) he triumphed over a group of very strong masters, including Capablanca, Max Euwe, Akiba Rubinstein, Aron Nimzowitsch, and Reti.

The match began September 6, 1929 under the following conditions: Alekhine would get $6,000 dollars win or lose, with any surplus going to Bogoljubov. A winner would be declared if he scored 15 1/2 points with 6 wins from a maximum of 30 games to be played in various cities: Wiesbaden, Heidelberg, Berlin, The Hague, and Amsterdam.<8><"Wiener Schachzeitung" 29 Aug. 1929, p.253> Emanuel Lasker served as arbiter.<9><"Wiener Schachzeitung" Oct. 1929, pp.311-313>

Alekhine drew first blood in <game 1>-<insert game link here> Alekhine vs Bogoljubov, 1929, but Bogoljubov fought back to even the score in <game 6>-<insert game link here> Bogoljubov vs Alekhine, 1929. Alekhine attributed the loss to an "enforced exchange of queens" on move 15 which produced a position that "could not be defended against by accurate play."<10><Edward Winter, "Seven Alekhine Articles." http://www.chesshistory.com/winter/...> Capablanca was not impressed, writing to Norbert Lederer "...can you imagine B. winning two games from me or Dr. L. so early?"<11><"The Russell Collection" Item 1494." In Edward Winter "Capablanca" p.217> Alekhine stormed back to take five points from the next six games, putting the match well out of reach. The <final game>-<insert game link here> Bogoljubov vs Alekhine, 1929 proved a fitting example of the whole match, which featured exciting, but risky tactical chess throughout. The Neue Wiener Schachzeitung commented that the games were played in "Wild West style," and that Alekhine had won by adapting himself to Bogoljubov's specialty, "the field of tactics."<12><"Wiener Schachzeitung" Nov. 1929, p.338>

In post match interviews, Alekhine took the opportunity to address Emanuel Lasker's comment that chess would eventually succumb to "draw death." <13><Emanuel Lasker, "Mein Wettkampf mit Capablanca" (1926 ed.), pp.32-33. In Edward Winter, Chessnote 5437, http://www.chesshistory.com/winter/...> When asked what was the most significant aspect of the match, he replied that the notion of "draw death in chess is senseless... that is the fault not of chess but the players concerned."<14><"Aachener Anzeiger – Politisches Tageblatt" 30 Nov. 1929. In Edward Winter, Chessnote 7567, http://www.chesshistory.com/winter/...> Asked to compare Capablanca and Bogoljubov, Alekhine reckoned that his most recent foe was "more dangerous, although it is much more difficult to win against Capablanca."<14><"Aachener Anzeiger – Politisches Tageblatt" 30 Nov. 1929. In Edward Winter, Chessnote 7567, http://www.chesshistory.com/winter/...> According to Alekhine biographer Yuri Shabarov, the champion gave a more scathing judgment to a Düsseldorf newspaper, announcing that "Now nobody has a chance to win a match with Alekhine," and that he had "...no respect for Capablanca. I would not advise him to play a rematch, because after this new bout, his halo has completely darkened."<15><Yuri Shaburov, "No Equal" in "Alexander Alekhine- The Undefeated Champion" (The Voice 1992)>

1 "L'Echiquier" April 1928, pp.883-885
In Edward Winter, "Capablanca," pp.207-299.

2 W.H.W.,"Daily Mail" 16 November 1928 p.17. In Edward Winter, Chessnote 8193, http://www.chesshistory.com/winter/...

3 "American Chess Bulletin" Dec. 1928, pp.174-175. In Edward Winter, "Capablanca" p. 213

4 "American Chess Bulletin" March 1929, p.41.
In Edward Winter, "Capablanca" p. 215

5 "The New York Times" 8 Sept. 1929, sect.2 p.3. In Edward Winter, "Capablanca" p. 216

6 "Deutsche Schachblatter" 1 Feb. 1929, pp.35-37. In Edward Winter, "Capablanca" p. 215

7 The FIDE champion was not considered to be world champion. See Edward Winter, "FIDE Championship (1928)." http://www.chesshistory.com/winter/...

8 "Wiener Schachzeitung" 29 Aug. 1929, p.253

9 "Wiener Schachzeitung" Oct. 1929, pp.311-313

10 Edward Winter, "Seven Alekhine Articles." http://www.chesshistory.com/winter/...

11 "The Russell Collection" Item 1494." In Edward Winter "Capablanca" p.217

12 "Wiener Schachzeitung" Nov. 1929, p.338

13 Emanuel Lasker, "Mein Wettkampf mit Capablanca" (1926 ed.), pp.32-33. In Edward Winter, Chessnote 5437, http://www.chesshistory.com/winter/...

14. "Aachener Anzeiger – Politisches Tageblatt" 30 Nov. 1929. In Edward Winter, Chessnote 7567, http://www.chesshistory.com/winter/...

15. Yuri Shaburov, "No Equal." In "Alexander Alekhine- The Undefeated Champion" (The Voice 1992)

#################################

SECONDS

8409. World championship seconds

From Leonard Barden (London):

‘In an interview after his match against Anand, Carlsen said that he had no on-site seconds in Chennai, although he was in contact via Skype with Jon Ludwig Hammer, Norway’s number two player.

When was the last time that a player had no strong assistant at a world championship match? I am referring to assistants of master level capable of providing technical help, and not “seconds” who were effectively managers dealing with match rules and similar matters.’

Precise records of players’ seconds are often difficult to trace, and no list of the kind requested by a correspondent in C.N. 5657 has yet been built up. For example, for the 1929 and 1934 Alekhine-Bogoljubow matches and, even, the 1927 Capablanca v Alekhine encounter it seems unclear which other players were involved in any capacity.

##################

thomastonk, <Karpova>

On DRAW ODDS <Alekhine-Euwe 1935>

<Kmoch describes with the last sentence beginning on that page and ending on the other. Here my rough translation:(concerning game 30) <"If Alekhine wins, the match is drawn, the champion undefeated and everthing remains the same, as it has happened after the match Lasker vs Schlechter.">>

-pp. 133-134 of the May 1936 'Neue Wiener Schachzeitung' (Hans Kmoch, Amsterdam, 15 December 1935).

=============

On page 284 of the September 1935 'Neue Wiener Schachzeitung', there is a short note in the news section: The conditions were the same as in the last two WC matches. At least 30 games, winner is the one with more points, if he won at least 6 games or else the match goes on until he reached 6 wins

############

C.N. 7567

http://www.chesshistory.com/winter/...

<An interview with Alexander Alekhine shortly after his 1929 world championship match against Bogoljubow has been brought to our attention by Thomas Niessen (Aachen, Germany). It was published in the Allgemeine Zeitung (Chemnitz) and reprinted in the Aachener Anzeiger – Politisches Tageblatt of 30 November 1929:

Below is our translation: >

‘What do you regard as the most important consequences of the match?’

‘Whom do you consider stronger? Capablanca or Bogoljubow?’

‘Oh no, it is really not possible to compare the two players. With Capablanca, for instance, everything is logical and natural. One knows exactly what he wants and how he will play. With Bogoljubow, though, it is always a case of being hurled into an unexpected adventure. On that account he is also more dangerous, although it is much more difficult to win against Capablanca.’

######################

MATCH DATES: 6 Sept.-12 Nov. 1929

BEFORE THE MATCH

London Rules Challenge Clause

Clause 7:

<"The champion <<<must defend his title>>> within one year after receiving a challenge. He will, however, only be compelled to accept such a challenge from recognised International masters.">

Claue 8:

<"The champion will not be compelled to defend his title for a purse below $10.000 <<<(Ten thousand dollars).>>> In addition to which sum the travelling expenses both ways of both players as well as their living expenses during the progress of the match must also be provided for.">

--Vlastimil Fiala and Jan Kalendovsky,
"Complete Games of Alekhine Vol. 2: 1921-1925"
(Olomouc 1996), pp. 153-154

===

######################

Negotiations

Capablanca challenges Alekhine to a rematch.

10 Feb. 1928 (date of letter from Capablanca to Alekhine)

Capablanca proposes to change the number of games and the time limit per move in the London Rules, but explicitly mentions the $10,000 purse guarantee be kept intact

"L'Echiquier" April 1928, pp.883-885
In Edward Winter, "Capablanca," pp. 207-299.

================

29 Feb. 1928 (date of letter from Alekhine to Capablanca)

Alekhine writes Capablanca that he will never agree to any modifications of the London Rules

"L'Echiquier" April 1928, pp.886-887
In Edward Winter, "Capablanca," p.299.

===

Article published on February 1928

<"In a letter to the <<<American Chess Bulletin>>>...Dr. Alekhine... confirmed the report that he had agreed to meet Capablanca during 1929 in a return match, or, as he termed it, a 'match-revanche.'"

Alekhine: "It is perfectly evident that the match in question, in order to justify its denomination- revanche- must be played on absolutely the same conditions as the first one- namely the rules elaborated by Capablanca himself in London, 1922.">

-"American Chess Bulletin" Feb. 1928, p. 29.
In Edward Winter, "Capablanca"
(McFarland 1989), p. 207

===

24 August 1928- Last day of Bad Kissingen (1928)

EDIT <Karpova>

<Bogoljubov <<<challenged>>> Alekhine for a WC match in 1929 directly after winning Bad Kissingen (1928).>

-"Neue Wiener Schachzeitung" 1928, p.298

==========

<"The last round of the Bad Kissingen tournament was played on 24 August. A few days later Bogoljubow wrote a letter to Alekhine <<<challenging him to a match>>>. It was published... on page 858 of the July 1930 L'Echiquier.">

Edward Winter, "Capablanca" p.213

================

29 August 1928 - Alekhine accepts Bogo's challenge

<In a letter to Capablanca, Alekhine says he had already accepted <<<"in principle, the challenge of E.D. Bogoljubow">>> on August 29 1928.>

-"American Chess Bulletin" Dec. 1928, pp. 174-175 In Edward Winter, "Capablanca" p. 213

==================

11 October 1928

<"According to a message from Reuter's correspondent at Berne... Alekhine... had... made the <<<arrangement with Bogoljubow>>> for a World Championship match. But this arrangement is only provisional, as Alekhine is still prepared to play Capablanca if the latter should make up his mind in time, and accept the previous conditions." (London Rules)>

"Times Weekly" 11 Oct. 1928 (no page listed)
In Edward Winter, "Capablanca" p. 212

===

November 1928- Bradley Beach Offer

<C.N. 8193
http://www.chesshistory.com/winter/...

This following item does not appear in <Edward Winter's> Capablanca bio, and it is a crucial item, a necessary lynchpin in order accurately to evaluate the saga of Alekhine-Capablanca rematch negotiations:

<"Whether the Alekhine-Bogoljubow match takes place depends upon the provision of the necessary funds. Meanwhile, the <<<offer of an American group to finance a match between Alekhine and Capablanca at Bradley Beach, New Jersey, next spring, holds good.>>> It is the only arrangement that will satisfy the chess world.">

-W.H.W.
"Daily Mail"
16 November 1928
p. 17

=================

13 January 1929 Alekhine insists on London Rules

Alekhine's letter to Alekhine-Bogo match organizer Strick van Linschoten:

<"I... acknowledge receipt of your letter... in which you inform me that Mr. Bogoljubow... has paid in the sum of 500 dollars to serve as first guarantee for the conclusion of a match between him and me for the championship of the world at chess, and as a surety in case of the non-realization of this project... Mr. Bogoljubow will have to give me at least three months notice of the date of its commencement. Likewise, he will have to pay in at this time... the supplementary sums provided for by the <<<London rules,>>> or induce the organizers to do so. In case of the non-fulfilment (sic) of these conditions, the match with Mr. Bogoljubow... would not be able to take place.">

"American Chess Bulletin" March 1929, p. 41.
In Edward Winter, "Capablanca" p. 215

===

January 1929 Alekhine interview on Match

<"The match with Bogoljubow interests me <<<far more>>> than the battle with Capablanca.">

-"Deutsche Schachblatter" 1 Feb. 1929, pp. 35-37. In Edward Winter, "Capablanca" p. 215

===

28 June 1929- Alekhine Confirms Match Status

<"In an interview given by Alekhine to... <The Times>... he said that the match with Bogoljubow would <<<definitely>>> be for the world championship.">

"The Times" 28 June 1929, p. 8.
In Leonard Skinner and Robert Verhoeven,
"Alexander Alekhine's Chess Games 1902-1946"
(McFarland 1998), p. 490

===

Sometime between 13 January 1929 and 6 Sept. 1929 (start of match)

On the London Rules being waived

"Times Weekly" 21 Sept. 1933" commentary on the match purse:

<"It was reputed not to reach the amount prescribed by the London conditions, but as was clear no more would be available, Dr. Alekhine <<<consented to play.>>> In this connection it is as well to remember that the conditions state that 'the champion will not be compelled to defend his title for a purse below ten thousand dollars,' with the American dollar as the standard.">

-Edward Winter, "Capablanca" p. 216

########################

Conditions

EDIT <Karpova>

<From <<<page of the ''>>> the conditions:

Begin: 6th September

30 games

Winner is the one who scores most points (15 1/2), if he scored 6 wins.

The World champion gets $6,000 in every case, Bogoljubov gets the surplus.*

Programme: 8 games in Wiesbaden in September, 3 games in Heidelberg October 1-8, 6 games in Berlin Ocotber 10-22, 4 games in Haag and 2 in Amsterdam Ocober 24 to November 4, 7 games in Wiesbaden in November as finish.

* "World Champion" apparently means Alekhine, and not the new WC after the match>.

-"Neue Wiener Schachzeitung" 29 Aug. 1929, p.253

===

EDIT <JFQ>

Bogoljubov had arranged a purse of $6,800 to be paid Alekhine should he win, and $5,000 should he lose

<There could be up to 30 games, but the winner had to score at least 6 wins and 15 1/2 points, meaning that there was also a necessary minimum number of games to be played>

-"The Times" 28 June 1929, p. 8.
In Leonard Skinner and Robert Verhoeven,
"Alexander Alekhine's Chess Games 1902-1946"
(McFarland 1998), p. 490

============

==============

###########################

Bogo career highlights

Soviet Champion

USSR Championship (1924) August 23-September 15, 1924

USSR Championship (1925) August 11 - September 6, 1925

Moscow (1925) November 7th to December 10th.

===============

FIDE Champion

<The Netherlands had also been the venue, a few months previously, for a match between Euwe and Bogoljubow which page 132 of the May 1928 Deutsche Schachzeitung described as being for the championship of the World Chess Federation (‘um die Meisterschaft des Weltschachbundes’). Page 238 of the June 1928 BCM commented:

‘It has been stated that this victory entitles the winner to be regarded as the official (FIDE) candidate for a challenge match with the world champion. As the FIDE annual meeting of delegates is not until August next, at the Hague, we fail to see how this can have been decided.’

Below, for the record, is the complete text in the FIDE minutes (The Hague, 1928) with respect to the ‘Championnat de la FIDE’:

‘L’A.G. Assemblée Générale vu les décisions des Congrès de Budapest et de Londres, approuve l’attitude du Comité Central qui a adopté le premier match Bogoljubow-Euwe comme le premier match pour le titre de Champion de la FIDE.

Le félicitant de sa victoire, elle reconnaît le Maître E. Bogoljubow comme le premier Champion de la FIDE.

Mr Wahltuch propose de dresser la liste réglementaire des quatre candidats pour le championnat de la FIDE (art. 5 Règlement des Epreuves).

Mais l’A.G. s’abstient pour cette année de l’établissement de cette liste, se réservant toute décision ultérieure à ce sujet.’

In short, the General Assembly approved the Central Committee’s decision to adopt the Bogoljubow v Euwe contest as the first match for the title of FIDE champion. The British delegate, Victor Wahltuch, proposed that the required list of four candidates for that title should be drawn up, but the General Assembly decided to defer the matter.

Nothing was said about <<<Bogoljubow>>> possibly becoming the world championship challenger by dint of his victory over Euwe.>

-Edward Winter, "FIDE Championship (1928)." Retrieved from http://www.chesshistory.com/winter/...

===

Bogoljubov - Euwe: First FIDE Championship (1928) April 4 - May 5 1928

Bad Kissingen (1928) August 12-24, 1928

Bogoljubov - Euwe: Second FIDE Championship (1928) 23 Dec. 1928 to 6 Jan. 1929

---

#########################

Predictions, comments before the Match

January 1929 Alekhine interview on Match

<"The match with Bogoljubow interests me <<<far more>>> than the battle with Capablanca.">

-"Deutsche Schachblatter" 1 Feb. 1929, pp. 35-37. In Edward Winter, "Capablanca" p. 215

#############################

Alekhine compares his style with Bogo's

<"I agree - Alekhine spoke - that in our understanding of the game of chess, we have a certain resemblance, but we have a dramatically different look on life as well as the principles of warfare. As far as I could see, Bogolyubov in his boundless optimism is always looking to gather new strength for creative ideas from his rich source of <<<natural talent.>>> He sees the enemy as an excellent experimental field for the application of his art, and never tries to study his opponent. He often hopes for a miracle where you need precise knowledge. This can lead to unexpected failures, which could undermine his confidence in himself. For Bogoliubov confidence is needed above all else. He considers his personal satisfaction to be the main purpose of the struggle....

I think three factors are necessary for success: first, an understanding of your strength and weakness in a chess position, and secondly, the precise understanding of the strengths and weaknesses of the enemy, and thirdly, a higher purpose than the momentary satisfaction. This purpose I see in the scientific and artistic achievements that put the game of chess on equal footing with a number of other arts. ">

Yuri Shaburov, "Alexander Alekhine- The Undefeated Champion" (The Voice 1992), p.??? IT IS IN CHAPTER "No Equal" near the beginning.

#############################

THE MATCH

EDIT <Karpova>

EDIT <Karpova>

<On pages 311-313 of the October 1929 'Neue Wiener Schachzeitung' is a report by Hans Kmoch (Berlin, October 23, 1929) and on page 313 he mentions that Dr. Lasker was the arbiter. And the Ufa shot a film.

Possibly, he was that just in Berlin (it's not mentioned)>

<On page 313, it is also mentioned that they played a 41-board Simul <alternierend> (alternating) which lasted 4 hours and they won 36 games while conceding only 5 draws (a lady was among those who drew).>

============

Report by I. W. Keemink from Hilversum:

<Match is relocated to the netherlands and Dr. Rueb welcomes them on October 25 in the "National Schaakgebouw" in the Haag chess club (? <Schachheim>, "Heim" is home/asylum) where games 18, 19 and 23 were played. 20th game in the "Hotel Bristol" in Rotterdam. Games 21 and 23 in the "Militiesaal" in Amsterdam (the masters were welcomed there by Dr. M. Levenbock.

Page 321 of the November 1929 'Neue Wiener Schachzeitung'

And then, on page 326 (after the game scores):

The farewell address was given by Jhr. H. Strick van Lindschoten. Both masters departed for Wiesbaden on November 8 and 9. In a short summary of what happened in the Wiesbaden games, Alekhine's victory is reported.

There follows a final report on pages 337-338 of the November 1929 'Neue Wiener Schachzeitung' which I will have a closer look at later. But it's mentioned that the public interest was not as great as could have been expected from WC match in Europe. And some remarks about Capablanca.>

######################

After the Match

EDIT <Karpova>

<Post-Game Collection: WCC:Alekhine-Bogoljubov 1929 interview with Alekhine in C.N. 7567: http://www.chesshistory.com/winter/...

<An interview with Alexander Alekhine shortly after his 1929 world championship match against Bogoljubow has been brought to our attention by Thomas Niessen (Aachen, Germany). It was published in the Allgemeine Zeitung (Chemnitz) and reprinted in the Aachener Anzeiger – Politisches Tageblatt of 30 November 1929:

Below is our translation:

<<<‘Conversation with the world chess champion

I met Dr Alekhine in the hotel. The last game had just finished, and I congratulated him with the comment that he had now truly earned a rest.

‘A rest – I do not know what that is. I am now going to prepare all the games for publication in book form under the title “Chess Thoughts During the Match with Bogoljubow”, and I shall clarify the meaning of all the games, where it was not always understood correctly. Then on 15 January there begins the San Remo tournament, in which I am taking part.’

‘And the match with Capablanca?’

‘If I receive his challenge, I shall meet him in a year’s time, probably in America, where it is an easy matter for him to acquire the money necessary.’

‘For that too you need to prepare.’

‘That is true, but I have my personal and quite idiosyncratic method of preparing. Essentially, I prepare only during the first games. I note exactly which variations my opponent chooses, what he is striving for, and then I select the openings which I shall play and establish my entire tactics accordingly. I find that each player should be allowed to play in his own style, but it is naturally then necessary to try to defeat him with his own weapons. Later on, I think about my own play, and my opponent’s. To give an example, in The Hague on one occasion I found a theoretical novelty in a cinema.’

‘What do you regard as the most important consequences of the match?’

‘Firstly, that everything that has been said recently about the draw death in chess is senseless. Every position, and even the best known, contains so many possibilities that it is merely necessary to make the effort to look for them. The largest number of drawn games was in the Lasker v Schlechter match and in Capablanca’s matches; however, that is the fault not of chess but of the style of the players concerned. Secondly, that the new legend that, with the progression of tournaments and every new winner of a first prize, the number of evenly-matched players will become larger and larger is absolutely false. No doubt the world champions occupy a special position.’

‘And Nimzowitsch?’

‘A very original and strong player with whom it is very difficult to do battle. However, for him psychological moments play a decisive role, and if fortune does not smile on him at the start of a tournament, this can affect his entire subsequent play. From that standpoint, Bogoljubow merits only respect, for he always remained very cool-blooded even if the situation in the battle was by no means fortunate for him. He was always cheerful and pleasant.’

‘What do you consider to be his greatest strengths?’

‘He possesses inexhaustible fantasy. There is no position where he finds nothing. His disadvantage is that in a bad position he does not have the necessary calm. It then seems to him that the position is lost, and he does indeed lose. Precisely in the positions where Capablanca managed to put up the greatest resistance, Bogoljubow breaks down completely. In contrast, he handles very well positions in which he stands somewhat better.’

‘So you do not believe that Bogoljubow played more weakly in this match than usual?’

‘That is what is always said about the player who loses. The same was also asserted about Capablanca. I have nothing against everyone losing against me even if afterwards it is claimed that they played more weakly than usual.’

‘Whom do you consider stronger? Capablanca or Bogoljubow?’

‘Oh no, it is really not possible to compare the two players. With Capablanca, for instance, everything is logical and natural. One knows exactly what he wants and how he will play. With Bogoljubow, though, it is always a case of being hurled into an unexpected adventure. On that account he is also more dangerous, although it is much more difficult to win against Capablanca.’

‘Are you satisfied overall with the course of the match?’

‘Yes, the organization was quite good. There is just one thing that I should like to see changed. The games should not be played in public. Instead of a chessplayer, one becomes a performer. The impression given is that the public is more or less interested only in outward appearances, instead of focussing on the game. In this respect it was better in Buenos Aires, as we were not exposed to the eyes of spectators.’

‘And travelling from city to city?’

‘That was because of the financial agreement, and from the standpoint of chess publicity it is very good and important. Wherever we went, we received a very friendly welcome. It was obvious to me that the sympathies lay with Bogoljubow, who lives in Germany and wants to become German. I was prepared for that and was therefore not surprised that general goodwill was primarily directed at Bogoljubow’s personality. But everyone was at pains not to give any such impression, and if I ever noticed anything I did not feel offended. I also think that this often gave me a fresh incentive to play better. I regard chess as an art. For me, the chess board and chess ideas are the most important thing. Sympathy and antipathy are human passions which have nothing to do with chess.’>>>> #######################################

EDIT <Karpova>

<From page 338 of the November 1929 'Neue Wiener Schachzeitung'

Vor Beginn gab es in der gesamten Schachwelt mit Ausnahme von Bogoljubow niemand, der am Siege Aljechins auch nur leisen Zweifel gehegt hätte. (Before the start, there was no one in the whole chess world with the exception of Bogoljubov, who would have entertained even quiet doubt about Alekhine's victory.)

Bogoljubov is called one of the strongest tournament players of recent times but his lack of consistency excludes him from the list of potential World Champions.

For elaboration from the previous page 337, the games are said to have been played in <Wild-West-Stil>. On the choice of this playing style (why their choice cannot be resented): <Bogoljubow nicht, der nicht aus seiner Haut herauskann, Aljechin nicht, der sich seinem Gegner angepaßt und ihn auf dessen ureigenster Domäne, dem Gebiete der Taktik, geschlagen hat.> (not Bogoljubov, as a leopard cannot change his spots, not Alekhine who adapted himself to his opponent and beat him on his* very own demesne, the field of tactics.)

* "his" refers to Bogoljubov

Now back to page 338:

Alkhine abstained from a sharp weapon - solid positional play which he had demonstrated in his WC match against Capablanca. This one he will need in his rematch against Capablanca as he would lose horribly with the style employed against Bogoljubov. <Capablanca ist heute so stark wie je zuvor> (today, Capablanca is as strong as ever before). There's a footnote to this statement I will refe to later. Now the text goes on claiming that Capablanca fulfilled all imaginable obligations (<Der Kubaner hat seit mehr als Jahresfrist alle erdenklichen Voraussetzungen erfüllt ...>) seemingly prior to 1929 already and now Alekhine was obliged to fulfill his promise back from Buenos Aires, to accept Capablanca's challenge first, even if this is not fully possible anymore, as fast as he can.

The footnote cites an interview from the 'Mährisch-Ostrauer Morgenzeitung'.

Bogoljubov: <Was Capablanca betrifft, so steht er nach meiner Meinung an vierter Stelle, also hinter Aljechin, Lasker und mir.> (concerning Capablanca, in my opinion, he ranks on 4th position behind Alekhine, Lasker and myself)

Alekhine: <Bogoljubow spielt selbstverständlich ganz anders als Capablanca. Ich möchte sagen, daß er viel gefährlicher ist, schon deshalb weil er ein größerer Meister ist, und weil er viel mehr riskiert als Capablanca.> (of course, Bogoljubov plays completely different than Capablanca. I want to say that he is much more dangerous, if only because he is a greater master, and because he risks much more than Capablanca.)>

#####################################

EDIT <Karpova>

<Alekhine visited Vienna and was interviewed by Hans Kmoch on September 25, 1930 (pages 257-258 of the September 1930 'Neue Wiener Schachzeitung'. Page 257: Alekhine just ended his European tour and wants to remain in Vienna for about 2 weeks to finish his book "Der Weg zur Weltmeisterschaft" (On the road to World Championship). On October 18 he will leave for America, to visit the USA and Mexico but just for journalistic purposes and it has nothing to do with a rematch against Capablanca. He will return to Europe around Christmas.

Page 258: No Match against Capablanca, who withdrew his challenge for financial reasons. According to London Rules, he had to deposit $500 "Reuegeld" (forfeit/fine) to Norbert Lederer. Alekhine is convinced that it expired, while Capablanca is entertaining the thought of demanding it back. If the matter is not settled amicably, Alekhine wants to appeal to the contractually stipulated arbitrary court. But he emphasizes, that he doesn't want the money for himself, but donated for a good cause. Alekhine's intention is merely to create a precedent. The World Champion shouldn't be challenged and thereby bound to certain obligations, maybe even financially harmed, and then quietly disbanded so to speak (<dann aber sang- und klanglos quasi entlassen wird>). So it's not directed against Capablanca but a matter of principle. Yet, Alekhine believes that there will be time for a rematch against Capablanca on a later point of time. The first among other candidates is Nimzowitsch but there are also younger ones like Kashdan and Flohr. Alekhine also heard the rumour that Bogoljubov was preparing for a second WC match but he doesn't know the full particulars. At the moment there's no challenge pending but he is ready to accept one any time.>

########################

FIDE Championship (1928) Edward Winter http://www.chesshistory.com/winter/...

Seven Alekhine Articles Edward Winter http://www.chesshistory.com/winter/...

Alekhine vs Bogoljubov, 1929 
(D16) Queen's Gambit Declined Slav, 26 moves, 1-0

Bogoljubov vs Alekhine, 1929 
(E23) Nimzo-Indian, Spielmann, 51 moves, 1/2-1/2

Alekhine vs Bogoljubov, 1929 
(D17) Queen's Gambit Declined Slav, 70 moves, 1/2-1/2

3 games

 » View all game collections by WCC Editing Project PGN Download
 » Search entire game collection library
 » Clone this game collection (copy it to your account)
 » FAQ: Help with Game Collections


home | about | login | logout | F.A.Q. | your profile | preferences | Premium Membership | Kibitzer's Café | Biographer's Bistro | new kibitzing | chessforums | Tournament Index | Player Directory | Notable Games | World Chess Championships | Opening Explorer | Guess the Move | Game Collections | ChessBookie Game | Chessgames Challenge | Store | privacy notice | contact us
Copyright 2001-2018, Chessgames Services LLC