|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 3 OF 3 ·
Later Kibitzing > |
Dec-12-05
 |
| Chessical: Could Capablanca have had a better chance of escaping with a draw by replacing <33.Rd7> with <33.Qf3!?>? It seems not, e.g: <33.Qf3!?> Rf5 34.Qd3 d4 35.b3 Qe6 36.Kg2 g6 37.Qd1 Qe4+ 38.f3 Qe6 39.f4 b5; and now, (a). <40.Qc2> loses to 40...c4 41.bxc4 bxc4 42.Rc7 c3. (b). <40.Qd2> Qd5+ 41.Kh2 c4 42.Rc7 (42.bxc4 loses to 42...bxc4 43.Rc7 c3 44.Qc2 d3) 42...Qd6 43.Rc8 Qd7 44.Rb8 c3 and wins. |
 |
Dec-12-05
 |
| Calli: <chessical> Lets put White's pawns at a4 and b3. 33.a4 Qe6 34.Qd3+ g6 35.b3 What do you think? Any drawing chances? |
|
Dec-12-05
 |
| Boomie: <chessgames.com> The game data should read Round 1 with the date Sept. 16, 1927. Plus the event should probably read World Championship. |
|
Dec-12-05
|
| Boomie: After 14. c3, black can develop a powerful kingside attack. 14. c3 Re4 15. Nh3 Rae8 16. Ng5 Rh4 17. Nf3 Rh5 18. Rfe1 Qg4 19. Bd2 Re4 20. Qb5 Bxh2+ 21. Nxh2 Qh4 22. Bf4 Qxf4 23. g3 Qh6 24. Qxb7 g5 25. Qc8+ Kg7 26. Nf3 Ne7 27. Qd7 Ng6  (-1.22/13) |
|
Dec-13-05
|
| Chessical: <Calli> Your plan of putting White's pawns at <a4> and <b3> seems to me to offer stiff resistance, but I believe that Black can still break through. Here are some skeletal variations, I am sure that they can be improved for both sides, but I believe that they give a fair indication of a possible winning method for Black. So after: <33.a4>, we have:
<Calli's defence> of <33...Qe6> 34.Qd3+ g6 35.b3 d4 36.Qf3 Kg7 37.Kg2 Re1 38.Rc7 Qf6 39.Qxf6+ Kxf6 40.Rb7 b5 41.Rb6+ unfortunately for White he cannot capture the pawn with his R as the <d> pawn will the run off and queen - this is a recurring tactical plus for Black in this ending. 41...Ke7 42.Rb7+ Kd6 (or <42...Ke6> 43.Rb6+ Kd5 44.axb5 Rb1 45.Rb8 f5 46.Rd8+ Ke6 47.Rg8 Kf7 48.Rc8 d3 49.Rd8 Rxb3 50.Kf3 c4 51.Ke3 Rxb5 52.Kd4 Ke7 53.Ra8 Rb1 54.Ra2 Rc1 55.Ke3 Kd6 56.Kd2 Rb1 57.Kc3 Kd5 58.Ra5+ Ke4 and wins) 43.Rb6+ Kd5 44.Rb8 Rb1 45.axb5 Rxb3 46.g4 c4 47.h5 gxh5 48.gxh5 c3 49.Rc8 Rxb5 50.h6 Ke4 51.h7 Rh5 52.h8Q Rxh8 53.Rxh8 c2 and wins. There is also a possible defence around <Qf5> and threats on the <f> file: 33.<a4 Qf5!> (after <33...d4> 34.Qf3 Rf5 35.Qe4 Qe6 36.Qxe6 fxe6 37.f4 Rd5 38.Kf2 e5 39.fxe5 Rxe5 40.Rd7 and White appears to be holding the position.) <34.Kg2> d4 35.Qf3 (35.b3? loses to 35...d3 36.Qd2) <35...Qxf3+> 36.Kxf3 d3 37.Rd7 c4 38.Rd4 Re1 39.g4 (39.Rxc4?? loses immediately to 39...d2) 39...Kg6 40.Kf4 Kf6 41.Rd6+ Ke7 42.Rd4 (42.Rxb6?? and again <d2>) 42...Ke6 43.h5 f6, and Black will break through on the K-side, using his K to drive the White R from the <d> file, and swinging his own R to <h4> to infiltrate White's defences: <44.Kf3> f5 45.g5 Re4 46.Rd8 Ke7 47.Rd5 Rh4 48.Ke3 Ke6 49.Rb5 f4+ 50.Kd2 Rh2 51.Rxb6+ Kd5 52.Ke1 Rh1+ 53.Kd2 Rf1 54.Rb7 Rxf2+ 55.Kd1 f3, and wins. |
|
Dec-13-05
|
| Chessical: <Boomie> After <14.c3> Re4 15.Nh3 Rae8 16.Ng5 Rh4 17.Nf3 Rh5 18.Rfe1 Qg4 19.Bd2 Re4, the centralising move <20.Rad1> seems more solid than Q-side adventures with <20.Qb5>. I believe that here Black only has a slight advantage. |
|
Dec-23-05
|
| Boomie: <Chessical> I believe that by move 14, white's problems are chronic. His pieces are cramped and there is no clear plan for untangling them. Black's control of the king side may not be decisive but his advantage is clear. Here is the 14. c3 line with 20.  ad1.14. c3 e4 15.  h3 ae8 16. g5 h4 17. f3 h5 18. fe1  g4 19.  d2 e4 20. ad1 h6 21. c1 g6 (-0.95/14) |
|
| Mar-02-06 |
| johnwgoes: <who>, Alekhine's "comedy of errors" comment was in reference to the 11th game of the match. As far as I can tell there is no drawing line in this game. |
|
Apr-16-06
 |
| notyetagm: This game is covered in detail in one of Dvoretsky's books. Does anyone know exactly which book that is? Something like Training For The Tournament Player. Thanks.
|
|
| Oct-05-06 |
| Plato: Kasparov criticizes Capablanca's choice of opening, saying that he "half-heartedly and insipidly exchanged on d5... Capa did not play 1.e4 again -- and, it would seem, he was correct not to do so." Kasparov is a bit sloppy here; from a modern perspective, the exchange variation may well be described in those terms, but in 1927 it was still the main line against the Winawer. Interestingly, 1927 was also the year when 4.e5 started to gain popularity, thanks to the efforts of the Soviets: at the USSR championship, the Winawer was played four times and in all of them White answered with the more testing 4.e5! (a young Botvinnik was involved in three of those four games). It's also not so clear that Capablanca was right not to switch back to 1.e4 at some point in the match ... even here, where the opening turned in to a disaster for him, he might have pressed for a small advantage with 9.Nf4!, with a possible continuation being 9...Bxc3, 10.bxc3 0-0, 11.Qh5 Qd7, 12.Nd3 with an edge to White. 14.Rfe1?! is an error, of course, but White would still have been okay had he played 16.Nd3: after 16...Nxd3, 17.Qxd3 Qxd3, 18.cxd3 Black has the superior endgame based on pawn structure and a more active bishop, but realistically, I don't think Capablanca would have had much trouble holding a draw. The losing move was in fact his blunder with 16.Rac1? Here I must disagree with <Calli>'s comment -- I think Alekhine play throughout this game is almost irreproachable, including his play after the win of the pawn. Capablanca's position seems lost from the 16th move, and despite appearances of "near equality," Alekhine never lets him off the hook (although I'd be very interested if anyone does find a saving line). A terrible start for the World Champion. And it supports the opinion that he took his opponent too lightly before the match (indeed, less than three weeks before the start of the match he was playing casual exhibition games in Sao Paulo, Brazil!). As Kasparov states, Capablanca's belief in the legend of his own invincibility is what led to his downfall. It had all the ingredients of a Greek tragedy... |
|
| Oct-05-06 |
| Kean: yes, maybe capa was also overconfident in his own talent. he eated all the fame that ppl talked about his supposed invincibility. i read somewhere that gazza admires alekhine, and that could be because he saw in him his inspiration to beat another "perfect player": karpov.
the rest we all know |
|
| Nov-10-07 |
| rhedrich: Capa was forced to give up his d pawn on move 22 by moving his bishop or Alekhine could threaten mate with Rxh4. Clever clever. |
|
| Dec-21-07 |
| M.D. Wilson: Capa lost this game, the first of the match. On a number of occasions, the challenger would lose the first game of the match, e.g. Petrosian against Botvinnik in 1963; other matches started in similar fashion. Usually the first few games, in historical matches, were decisive. |
|
Mar-02-08
 |
| Knight13: 14. Rfe1, a normal move that loses a pawn!! The rest is just a matter of technique. |
|
Apr-06-08
 |
| capatal: Was Alkie still drinking and orbiting the ash tray during his match with Capa? If so, it didn't seem to cramp his style, as attributed to his first match with Euwe. |
|
| Apr-14-08 |
| Whitehat1963: What happens if 14. Qb5 (pinning the knight and forking the b and d pawns)? I'm sure there's a refutation, what is it? |
|
| May-01-08 |
| capin: The criticals generally analyze a determined number of moves, saying simply: if this plays here, the other plays there, etc., and they do NOT take in consideration the essential part, that is the general conception of the plan, in which the moves could say that they are incidental... ... and only the higher level contenders can appreciate it in their totality (Capablanca). Solves the chess programs this one problem? |
|
| May-01-08 |
| capin: For example, Alekhine said that after 14. Nxd5 the white king is in a critical position. In order to prove if this is certain I have selected one of the strongest programs mounting attacks to the king: Phalanx. As it is possible to be observed, the black soon loses the possibility of putting in danger the white king, but it is that perhaps a genius of the defense was not Capablanca? [White "ClearSimple"]
[Black "Phalanx"]
[Result "1-0"]
1. e4 e6 2. d4 d5 3. Nc3 Bb4 4. exd5 exd5 5. Bd3 Nc6 6. Ne2 Nge7 7. O-O Bf5 8. Bxf5 Nxf5 9. Qd3 Qd7 10. Nd1 O-O 11. Ne3 Nxe3 12. Bxe3 Rfe8 13. Nf4 Bd6 14. Nxd5 Bxh2+ 15. Kxh2 Qxd5 16. Kg1 Re4 17. f3 Rh4 18. g3 Rh5 19. g4 Rh4 20. Qd2 f5 21. Qf2 Rh3 22. Qg2 fxg4 23. Qxg4 Qh5 24. Qxh5 Rxh5 25. c3 Rf8 26. Kg2 Ne7 27. Bd2 Rhf5 28. Rae1 Ng6 29. Re4 Ra5 30. a3 Rb5 31. b4 Rh5 32. Kg3 b5 33. c4 bxc4 34. Rc1 Rhf5 35. f4 R5f7 36. Rxc4 Ne7 37. Rc5 Nf5+ 38. Kf3 Rd8 39. Be3 Ra8 40. d5 h6 41. Bc1 Nd6 42. Re5 Rb8 43. Kg2 Kh7 44. Re2 Rb7 45. Re6 Kg8 46. Be3 Kf8 47. Rc6 Rf5 48. Re5 Rf6 49. Bc5 Kf7 50. Kg3 g6 51. Kg4 Kf8 52. a4 Kg7 53. b5 h5+ 54. Kf3 Kf8 55. a5 Rxb5 56. Rxc7 Rxa5 57. Rc8+ Kg7 58. Re7+ Nf7 59. Bd4 Rxd5 60. Bxf6+ Kxf6 61. Rxa7 Nd6 62. Rc6 Rd3+ 63. Ke2 Rd5 64. Ra1 Kf5 65. Ke3 Kf6 66. Ra3 Kf5 67. Raa6 Ke6 68. Ra8 Kd7 69. Rca6 Ke7 70. R8a7+ Ke6 71. Rg7 Kf5 72. Rc6 Rd1 73. Rg8 Kf6 74. Rb8 Ke6 75. Ra6 Rd5 76. Rbb6 Rd1 77. Ra3 Rd5 78. Rd3 Ke7 79. Rxd5 Nc4+ 80. Ke4 Nxb6 81. Ra5 Nd7 82. f5 g5 83. Ra7 Ke8 84. Kd5 Ke7 85. f6+ Kxf6 86. Rxd7 Kf5 87. Kd4 Kf4 88. Kd3 h4 89. Ke2 Kg3 90. Kf1 g4 91. Kg1 Kf3 92. Rd8 Kg3 93. Rd4 Kf3 94. Kh2
 halanx resign 1-0
Then why Capablanca doesn't play 14. Nxd5? The answer is simple: We had the idea to play 14. Nxd5, allowing Bxh2+, but believing to gain a time, we committed a small error and we lost the opportunity (Capablanca). |
|
| May-13-08 |
| newton296: love to see alekhine play the french ,
why cant I play the french like this!
|
|
Apr-03-09
 |
| chancho: Either my eyesight is getting worse or I see September 15th 1927 as the date for Game 1 in the photo below: http://www.ajedrezargentina.org/ima... I checked other sources and they say game one was played on the 16th (which fell on a Friday) so what do you guys see, a 15 or a 16? |
|
| Apr-03-09 |
| slomarko: in this game the young Capablanca clearly still wasn't experienced enough to resist an old fox like Alekhine. that probably explains why he chose the useless ed5, too. |
|
| Apr-03-09 |
| AnalyzeThis: Thanks for checking in from the twilight zone, slomarko. |
|
Apr-03-09
 |
| keypusher: <chancho> Looks like a 15 to me, too. Though the content of the caption indicates that it was written years later, so it's not necessarily authoritative. Maybe Clarin has online archives? :-) |
|
Apr-03-09
|
| chancho: Here's an Alekhine photo:
http://www.p4r.org.ar/biografias/nc... |
|
| Jul-23-09 |
| WhiteRook48: only game here that wasn't a Queen's Gambit |
|
 |
|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 3 OF 3 ·
Later Kibitzing > |
