|Sep-17-04|| ||InspiredByMorphy: What can black do better in reply to Alekhines 8.Nb5 ? |
|Dec-07-08|| ||seagull1756: relax and give up englund's gambit forever|
|Dec-07-08|| ||whiteshark: <InspiredByMorphy: <What can black do better in reply to Alekhines 8.Nb5 ?>>|
8...Qa5 is the move, e.g. 9.Nxc7+ Qxc7 10.Rxb4 Nxb4 11.Bxb4 d5!
|Dec-02-10|| ||Elsinore: I'm guessing 28.Kf7 29. Nxe7 Re8xe7 30. Rd7xd8. It's funny that after yesterdays GOTD debacle, CG.com 's act of penance is to give us a legend like Alekhine. You're forgiven.|
|Dec-02-10|| ||rilkefan: Wonder if black could have defended better after Bh3.|
I kept being surprised at white exchanging pieces, something I'm loath to do as an attack-first player. Anybody know any good middlegame books that talk about this?
|Dec-02-10|| ||An Englishman: Good Evening: <rilkefan>, I believe 'twas Mason who wrote that the ability to eschew the shiny pretty moves in favor of the one move that truly sustains the initiative is the mark of the real master. Dinger might have thought he was doing well, with his superior pawn structure and protected outside passed a-pawn, but he never had the time to move it, did he?|
As for books that at least partly describe the process of maintaining the advantage as the pieces come off, why not read the books of Alekhine himself? Many of his games show exactly this talent, and I can't think of a better means of learning than "peeking over his shoulder" as he plays, so to speak.
Concerning this game, Black had to stop the h-pawn in its tracks, either with 21...h5 or 26...h6.
|Dec-02-10|| ||igiene: I can't believe Dinger really try such a tricky line against a mighty opponent like Alekhine; Englund Gambit can work only against patzers, never against World Champion|
|Dec-02-10|| ||Skakalec: Back in 1977 (?) as a junior player, I gave up after 6.Bc3?? Bb4|
|Dec-02-10|| ||GilesFarnaby: Real man play 5.Nc3, but this Alekhine was a coward afraid of tactical complications it seems|
|Dec-02-10|| ||safar: Actually after 29...Kf7, 30. Nd6+ nets teh rook. On 29...Kf8 30. Nxe7 Rxe7 31. Rxd8 wins a piece.|
|Dec-02-10|| ||Llawdogg: Black needed space, but allowed himself to be crushed. On the other hand, that Alekhine was pretty good.|
|Dec-02-10|| ||JohnBoy: <Giles> - a real man does not want to give up the bishop on f4. I too fell for the famous <Skakalec> trap.|
|Dec-02-10|| ||kevin86: A center-counter with a poison pawn. Not too good 4 black.|
|Dec-02-10|| ||GilesFarnaby: <JohnBoy- a real man does not want to give up the bishop on f4. I too fell for the famous <Skakalec> trap.>|
A real man assesses the position at EVERY MOVE and discovers, after 5.Nc3 Qxf4:
click for larger view
And who´s trapped now? That Skakalec guy, I guess.
|Dec-02-10|| ||xombie: All the opening complications aside, I found the positional features very interesting, later on in the game. In particular may be emphasized the moves (or sequence of moves) encapsulated in 21. h4!. Apart from the immediate (possibly dubious) motif of preventing g5, it prepares the advance of the h pawn to h6, whereupon g6 would lead to a bad h pawn under lateral attack by the rook (of course, after the pieces move).|
|Dec-02-10|| ||JohnBoy: You are right <Giles>! Tactical morasses - like this and the Dracula-Frankenstein variation of the Vienna game - are way beyond me. I duly bow to the real men who battle them out.|
|Dec-02-10|| ||coconut: The positions before white's 13th and 26th moves might make good tactical puzzles. 13. Qd6+ Nge7 14. Nd5 and black cannot defend both the pinned Ne7 and the Rg8.
A simpler (and probably stronger) shot is 26. Rxd8, where 26...Rxd8 would be met by 27. Ne6+. This a N and also forces a R trade.
Then again, Alekhine's moves also win.
Would he have been planning 27. Rxh7 if 26...gxh6?
|Dec-02-10|| ||AGOJ: I was surprised by how White tried to defend e5; I tend to give these gambit pawns back and develop quickly. I guess in this case maintaining the pawn really keeps Black bottled up, at the expense of White's queenside pawns. The next surprise came when Black played 12...Qb2. Black can't/shouldn't move any other piece, and tries to exchange Queens... and White let's him! After the Queens are out and after the exchanges in e6, it looks like Black will be able to develop the kingside and get into the game, but he played 20...Ke8. Why not 20...Nd8 directly? The goal is to get the bishop to move, obtain f7 for the King, and bring the KR into the game. Alternatively he could have tried 20...g6 to play Kg7, and then free the KR. In any case, after defending for the whole game, Black fails to account for the advance of the h pawn. Now, how did Alekhine know at move 21 that he would be needing that pawn to break up Black's defenses? I guess I have a looong way to go.|
|Dec-02-10|| ||Riverbeast: What kind of patzer opening is this for black?
The Englund Gambit?
They should name it the "Begging for a Butt Kicking" variation
|Dec-02-10|| ||Elsinore: Should be called the Robert Englund Gambit because,,, Damn it's ugly.|
|Dec-02-10|| ||micartouse: <An Englishman: As for books that at least partly describe the process of maintaining the advantage as the pieces come off, why not read the books of Alekhine himself? Many of his games show exactly this talent, and I can't think of a better means of learning than "peeking over his shoulder" as he plays, so to speak.>|
Good point - Alekhine makes a big fuss of timing exchanges in his game annotations.
He even once said before the match with Capablanca that he only had two defects that made him inferior, and one was transitioning from the middlegame to the most favorable endgame.
|Jan-06-12|| ||Morbius: <whiteshark: 8...Qa5 is the move, e.g. 9.Nxc7+ Qxc7 10.Rxb4 Nxb4 11.Bxb4 d5!>|
8...Qa5 is not the move because White has a better continuation: 8...Qa5 9.c3 Qxb5 10.e4 Qc5 11.cxb4 Qe7. The move in the game, 8...Bxd2+, was best. Black made a mistake with 10...Kf8; 10...Kd8 would have been better, e.g. 10...Kd8 11.e6 fxe6 12.Ng5 Nh6.
|Oct-24-15|| ||TheFocus: From a simultaneous exhibition in SurabaYa, Indonesia at the Simpang Society on March 20, 1933.|
Alekhine scored +43=7-0.
See <Tijdschrift van den Nederlandsch-Indischen Schaakbond 1933>, pg. 111-112.