< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 12 OF 12 ·
|Aug-18-11|| ||kingscrusher: Apparently there is a large element of psychology around the near 3-fold repetition. Alekhine was pretending to be on his way out of the tournament hall as though it was a draw by repetition. The arbiter disagreed, and the opponent was compelled to break the repetition with Bh1 which hailed the start of the vicious attack.|
|Aug-18-11|| ||qqdos: <kingcrusher> It's not quite that simple. Alekhine was desperate for the full point, while Reti was more than content with the draw. At the psychological moment when Reti could legally have claimed the repetition, Alekhine (according to an eye-witness <source Bruce Hayden's book Of Cabbages and Kings>) scrambled up the pieces and began walking away with some derogatory comment about Reti getting the draw he so badly wanted (needed?). This put Reti into a psychological bind. The draw was his to claim but he found himself insisting on the correct etiquette. The pieces were replaced and to Alekhine,s delight Reti played the losing(?!) move Bh1? A tragedy for Reti but a bonus for the rest of us!|
|Aug-18-11|| ||twinlark: 20. Bh1 was not the losing move. The best candidate for that was 27. Nf3 and possibly 28. Qxb5. Until then, Reti had an equal if not slightly better game.|
|Aug-19-11|| ||qqdos: <twinlark> thanx. Objectively and in analytical terms, you are right. I meant "losing" in the subjective sense that Reti threw away the 1/2 point with which he was more than content (given the current state of the tournament) and as White would not want to retreat that Bishop to a palpably less active square.|
|Aug-19-11|| ||twinlark: I get what you're saying now.|
|Sep-28-11|| ||kitbitzer31: Hey Sastre thanks alot. I really appreaciate it.|
|Oct-04-11|| ||Cemoblanca: 9...Na6!? I love this move.
14...Bg4! h3 and f3 doesn't work.
15...Qc8!? The roughing can begin. ;0)
20...h5! The start of a deep plan (22...h4, 24...Qc7!? and 26...Re3!).
21.b4 [21.f3?! b6! 22.fxg4 (22.Ne4!? Nxe4! 23.fxe4 Ne7 24.Rf1 Rf8) Ne3!, etc.]
23.a4?! A dubious plan, since the action takes place in the center. [However, it would be better to counter with 23.e4! Nb6 24.Qd3 Qc7 and then maybe 25.f3!, etc.]
24...Qc7!? The cheetah sneaks as far as possible at its loot along in order to strike down the last meters and it in maximum speed on the loot-animal with hits of the front-feet. I guess it fits with this move! ;0)
26...Re3! 27.Nf3?! [27.Bf3! Bxf3 28.exf3 cxb5!? 29.Nxb5 Qa5! 30.Rdd1 Re7! Ne4, etc.]
28.Qxb5 [28.Qd4 Ra4! 29.Nxa4 Qxc1 30.Rd1 Qc7! and the monster is back again.]
28...Nc3! Maybe the game-deciding move!
29.Qxb7 It's already too late to simplify anything.
31...Ne4! The cavalry is coming!!!
32.Rc4 Even if he finds the best moves, it doesn't help.
34.Rcc2?(?) [34.Rb4 Ng4+! 35.Kh3 (35.Rxg4? Bxg4 36.Ng5 f6! Ne4 Raa3!, etc.)] 35...Ne5+! 36.Kh2 (36.g4?? Ng1+! 37.Kg3 Raa3!) 36...Rxf3! 37.Rxe2 Ng4+! 38.Rxg4! There is nothing better! 38...Bxg4 39.Bxf3 Finally, the roughing would come to an end. ;0) 39...Bxf3 40.Re7]
34...Ng4+! 35.Kh3 [35.Kh1?? Ra1+ and mate is inevitable.]
35...Ne5+ and the rest was a matter of form.
|Mar-11-12|| ||plang: What an unusual opening; after 4 moves the position is unique. I have a number of sources for this game but none mention Reti's idea in playing 2 Nf3!?. 3..c5 or 4..c5 both look more ambitious than what Alekhine played (though Larsen had some success on the White side of similar formations).|
Most of the discussion in this thread has concentrated on 26..Re3! but even after Reti's error 27 Nf3? the position looked balanced after 31 Kh2.
The ending combination starting with 31..Ne4! is quite remarkable. A quote from Fischer: "It was Alekhine's stamina that carried him to victory. It was in the most complicated positions that Alekhine found the greatest concepts."
|Jun-24-12|| ||master of defence: The winning line is 41.Rf2(e3) Nxf3 42.Rxf3 Bd5 and 43...Bxb7. Or i´m wrong?|
|Feb-18-13|| ||Jafar219: Fantastic play by Alekhine.|
|Feb-19-13|| ||RookFile: Couldn't agree more, this is an amazing game.|
|Mar-11-13|| ||IndigoViolet: <The Dance of the Knights> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DUmq...|
|May-19-13|| ||pawntificator: Amusingly, I just read an old article by C.J.S. Purdy on this game. In it he states that Alekhine mistakenly claimed a draw. So that answers the question I asked 11 years ago on this page.|
|May-19-13|| ||PurdyGUDsoFAR: I once submitted the move 27.Rd3 to Dworetski as a refutation of the combo,... He told me I was correct and this move along with several others would of refuted the entire idea. |
It is still marvelous though,... I mean alekhine's combo Re3
|Aug-26-13|| ||jerseybob: PurdyGUDsofar: Your 27.Rd3 looks pretty good to me. Any analysis on black's best after that: swap, retreat or fortify?|
|Sep-20-13|| ||poslednieje: For the sake of history move 26 Bf3! was extensively analysed in a paper on monday 28 february 1966 PZC. Dutch IM
C.B. v.d. Berg published the analysis from a kibitzer J.J.M.Gommers. The same analysis is given by Kasparov in his book nr. 1 "From Steinitz to Alekhine" Ed. 2003
BBK 75.581 Russian edition.|
|Sep-20-13|| ||thomastonk: <poslednieje> Interesting remark! In the English edition of Kasparov's book there is no analysis of 26.f3, but 27.f3 is analysed. So, I assume this was only a typo.|
The first part of the analysis of 27.f3 there is a quote of Alekhine's faulty analysis. The second part is the correction thereof, but nothing special, if one assumes that Kasparov and his collaborator applied an engine check.
Is the Russian edition more extensive? And, please, what does PZC mean? Thank you!
|Sep-20-13|| ||sneaky pete: <thomastonk> I think PZC means Provinciale Zeeuws(ch)e Courant.|
|Sep-20-13|| ||thomastonk: <sneaky pete> Thanks! It seems they don't have an online archive, where I could check the analysis myself.|
|Sep-21-13|| ||poslednieje: thomastonk correct, typo! It should be 27|
|Sep-21-13|| ||sneaky pete: "Een interessante ontdekking" (bottom of the page) from the Provinciale Zeeuwse Courant:|
|Sep-23-13|| ||thomastonk: <sneaky pete> I knew that the Netherlands are a very nice country, but obviously it is the paradise for online newspaper research, when even Zeeland has its own <searchable> krantenbank! Thank you for this link.|
|Oct-02-13|| ||PhilFeeley: A weird reverse Alekhine's Opening?|
|Oct-02-13|| ||Bdellovibrio: <PhilFeeley> A bad opening by Reti, which Alekhine failed to exploit to the utmost. Black has the option of 3...c5 4. b3 c4 5. d4 c5, when white wishes he hadn't played g3!|
|Oct-02-13|| ||keypusher: <Bdellovibrio> It's not that bad.|
Larsen vs J H Donner, 1959
A H Wohl vs H Hamdouchi, 2003
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 12 OF 12 ·