Nov-08-04
 | | ray keene: 12...a4 is a wonderful move |
|
| Apr-09-05 | | fgh: Truly a great game by the master of strategy. |
|
| Apr-09-05 | | THE pawn: Indeed. Nimzo must be the stronger pawn handler... |
|
| Apr-09-05 | | Whitehat1963: Another excellent game from the Player of the Day. |
|
| Apr-10-05 | | fgh: From the 7th move, till the last one, the king's knight stays on c5! |
|
| Apr-30-05 | | aw1988: Beautiful. |
|
| Oct-31-05 | | rjsolcruz: whatever happened to bogoljobov's "... when i'm white, i win because i'm white"? |
|
| Oct-31-05 | | WMD: The quote is wrong. |
|
| Oct-31-05 | | RookFile: I think white was slow in getting
a3 in. 9. a3 looks reasonable. |
|
| Sep-14-06 | | notyetagm: <ray keene: 12...a4 is a wonderful move> Yes, the brilliant tactical point of Nimzowitsch's 12 ... a4!! is 13 axb4? ♘xb4 14 ♕b1? ♘b3#, a beautiful picturesque pure checkmate from the Black knights: 
click for larger view |
|
| Oct-04-06 | | Tomlinsky: Taking a look at this game after many years and 12...a4 is such a peach. The move preceding it, 12.a3, on the other hand is complete dross. Bogoljubow completely misses the danger of the pawn advance. The standard of Bogoljubow's play mystifies me at times. His games can be either exceedingly average or excellent. |
|
| Sep-24-08 | | Sem: Well, Capablanca once said of Bogoljubov: 'He plays pieces all over the board, but it's all shifting wood, all shifting wood.' |
|
| Mar-18-10 | | Chess Guevara: 23. exf8 = R+ says the chessmaster2000 |
|
| Nov-20-11 | | indoknight: make me remember with Timman vs Kasparov, 1985 |
|
Apr-07-12
 | | OhioChessFan: There's nothing wrong with 12. a3. 13. Nb5 is the howler. Why allow the exchange of Bishops and free up a5 for the sake of not exchanging a Knight that isn't doing much of anything on c3 or b5? |
|
Oct-29-14
 | | WCC Editing Project:
Is 12...a4 really such a wonderful move?
What does it do to aid Nimzowitsch's position?
The bishop on b4 is still immune no matter which move Nimzowitsch makes on turn 12. If the purpose of 12...a4 is to tempt Bogoljubov into blundering, it didn't work. It would likely work on me, but not against world class opposition. So on move 12, Nimzowitsch can afford simply to develop another piece, if he so wishes. I doubt the move was made to "tempt a blunder," since any other move Nimzowitsch makes and leaves the bishop en prise would function as exactly the same temptation. |
|
| Oct-29-14 | | Karpova: <Jess>
Albert Becker annotations to the game (Wiener Schachzeitung, March 1930, pp. 76-77) may shed some light on the issue: He critisizes 9.e3<?>, suggesting the manoeuvre <9.a3 Bxc3 10.Bxc3 0-0 11.b4 Ne4 12.Bb2> with excellent play. White hoped to execute the plan later, but he errs. On 10.Be2, he notes that now <10.a3 Bxc3 11.Bxc3> is meat with <11...a5!> (and plater possibly <...a4>) and this prevents <12.b4? axb4 13.axb4 Nxb4! etc.>. 11...a5 receives an <!>, and is called the initation of an ingenious attack. 12.a3<?> is called a decisive mistake, since the hole on b3 is perversive of White's play. He suggests <12.Nd4!> instead. 12...a4 receives <!!> and he gives two beautiful mating lines, if White takes on b4 on moves 13 or 14. I do not know if Becker's analysis stands up to strong modern engines, but it's certainly interesting to see which plans a strong contemporaneous master like Becker identifies in that position. A plan involving b4 was considered fine for White. On move 9, he could have tried it. It would not have been that easy on later stages. 11.0-0-0 was not annotated, but 11.0-0 may have been better. 12...a4 fixes the ♙ formation on the queen's side, where White's ♔ tries to find shelter. There is a hole on b3, the Black ♘s can make excellent use of. Black can now try to (and does so) to open lines on the queen's side (15...d5). Another ♙-break maybe to be taken into account sometimes would be ...b5 followed by ...b4. White is prevented from improving his ♙ formation, since the Black a-♙ immobilizes both White's a- and b-♙ (if the Black a-♙ was on a5, White could under some circumstances play b3 to have both, a- and b-♙ on the same rank and answer later ...a4 with b4). There is also the psychological effect of White having to worry about Black's possibilities all the time, e. g. now it's clear that he can play ...Nb3(+) whenever he wants - when will he, and which ♘, etc.? The tactical refutation of taking the ♗b4 is also beautiful - for sure, it was also immune after, say, 12...Bb7 (13.axb4 Nxb4). The point is not so much that only 12...a4 kept it immune, since other moves did so also, but the tactics themselves. After all, Black could have overlooked it and opted for 12...Bxc3 instead (although the move does not look bad to me, but the (hidden) tactics are delightful and in this case, they were gone). |
|
Oct-29-14
| | WCC Editing Project:
Thanks <Karpova>!
That is an extremely helpful and informative annotation by Albert Becker, that gives a substantial answer to my question. |
|
| Mar-31-23 | | Honey Blend: My defensive plan here would start with 26. ♔b1 to avoid ♘b3+, possibly followed by f3 to guard the e4 square, also so that if Black plays ... ♕xe3 after f3 I can respond with ♕xf5+ and get a bit of counterplay. |
|
| Mar-31-23 | | goodevans: <Karpova: [...] I do not know if Becker's analysis stands up to strong modern engines...> It doesn't. In particular SF likes <12.a3> which Becker called a decisive mistake and SF doesn't think much of <12...a4>. But that's not the most important thing. Nimzowitsch was playing a human and your own final paragraph explains nicely why a human wouldn't want to face 12...a4 and thus why <ray keene> would describe it as "a wonderful move". <11.0-0-0 was not annotated, but 11.0-0 may have been better.> With so many Black pieces amassed on that side of the board I find it astonishing that Becker let this one go with out a comment, even one to justify it. <11.0-0-0> looks reckless and, I agree, <11.0-0> looks like a better option. |
|
| Mar-31-23 | | thegoodanarchist: Meanwhile, Alekine was in "Beast Mode":
San Remo (1930) |
|
| Mar-31-23 | | goodevans: <Honey Blend: My defensive plan here would start with 26. ♔b1...> With almost all of the kibitzing focusing on the opening it's worth keeping in mind that Bogoljubov came out of it alive and still in the game (if maybe a little cornered). In fact Nimzowitsch had let him off the hook to a large degree with <18...Qc7?> when <18...Bxc4! 19.Rxd8 Raxd8 20.e7 Nab3+ 21.Kb1 Bd3> would have seen him a piece to the good. After that White was back in the game until, presumably in an attempt for drum up counterplay, he erred with <26.g4?>. I like your idea with <26.Kb1> followed by <f3> much better. |
|
Mar-31-23
 | | perfidious: <goodevans....In fact Nimzowitsch had let him off the hook to a large degree with <18...Qc7?> when <18...Bxc4! 19.Rxd8 Raxd8 20.e7 Nab3+ 21.Kb1 Bd3> would have seen him a piece to the good....> Believe <ray keene> mentions this gaffe in his annotations in <Nimzowitsch: A Reappraisal>. At the finish, a droll point is that 36.Ka2 is done to death by 36....Nc3+. |
|
| Mar-31-23 | | YoungEd: Stockfish notates 11. O-O-O with a ?, and that seems right. The white king just heads into the vicinity with a cluster of black pieces. The position doesn't look ripe for a white king-side pawn storm, so I don't see the point of castling long. |
|
Dec-20-23
 | | kingscrusher: Great insights and points made. I would like to emphasise it seems that 12.a3 was the best move according to latest Stockfish 16: 74: Efim Bogoljubov - Aron Nimzowitsch 0-1 7.0, San Remo San Remo ITA 1930
click for larger viewAnalysis by Stockfish 16 - 2 cores only:
1. = (-0.21): 12.a3 Bb7 13.Kb1 Qe7 14.Ne1 Ne5 15.f3 d5 16.cxd5 exd5 17.Nd3 Ncxd3 18.Bxd3 Qf7 19.Bb5 Rfc8 20.axb4 axb4 21.Qb3 bxc3 22.Bxc3 Nc4 23.Bxc4 Rxc4 24.Rd4 2. ⩱ (-0.40): 12.Nd4 Bxc3 13.Nxc6 Bxd2+ 14.Qxd2 Qg5 15.h4 Qf6 16.Nd4 a4 17.f3 a3 18.b3 Ba6 19.Kb1 Rfd8 20.Qc3 e5 21.Nc2 d5 22.Rd2 dxc4 23.Rxd8+ Rxd8 24.Bxc4+ Bxc4 25.Qxc4+ Kh8 The position is equal
(Gavriel, 20.12.2023)
I think Nimzovich's quotation "The beauty of a move lies not in its appearance but in the thought behind it." could be updated in a more practical easy to use manner as: "The strength of a move likes not in its appearance but in it's follow up" (Kingscrusher 2023) which is applicable to the a3 debate - a3 is the best move - it needs though a good follow up - not Nb5 as pointed out. Several other moves and White is fine - e.g. 13 Rhg1 - 13.h4 13 Kb1 etc |
|
Kibitzing
sac: 18...Qc7