< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2 OF 2 ·
|Oct-19-07|| ||DWINS: Euwe missed a win on his 10th move! Every newspaper commentator missed it including Flohr, Fine, Lasker, and Tartakower. The winning move (10...Qb3!!) was later discovered by Oscar Tenner and published in "Chess Review."|
Alekhine said "More promising was 10...Qb3! 11.Bxg7 Rg8 12.Bh6 Nd7 etc., with a strong initiative for the pawn."
Purdy takes the analysis further and claims a win. He goes into quite a bit of depth, but a representative line would be 13.f3 e5 14.e4 exd4 15.Qxd4 0-0-0 16.Bc1 [16.exf5 Nc5] 16...Nc5 17.Qc4 Rd1+ 18.Kf2 Qc2+ 19.Kg1 Rxg2#
|Mar-16-08|| ||Knight13: <DWINS: Euwe missed a win on his 10th move! Every newspaper commentator missed it including Flohr, Fine, Lasker, and Tartakower. The winning move (10...Qb3!!) was later discovered by Oscar Tenner and published in "Chess Review."> Nice. And when was that? Did he use a computer or something? Just wondering.|
Good notes by Alekhine.
|Jul-06-08|| ||Dr. Siggy: I'm intrigued with Alekhine's comments about the opening, mainly about White's 8th and 9th moves. It seems to me that, after 8. Nc4 h6 9. Bh4 g5 10. Ng3 Ne4 11. Qb3 Na6 12. 0-0-0 or 8... Qd5 9. Bxf6 gxf6 10. Qb3 Na6 11. 0-0-0, White has somewhat of an advantage.|
|Aug-01-09|| ||WhiteRook48: what the 10...Qb3 had to be a computer one|
|Sep-25-09|| ||WhiteRook48: did Purdy say the line ending with 19...Rxg2# was forced? Probably not|
|Mar-12-12|| ||DWINS: <Knight13, WhiteRook48>, 10...Qb3 was certainly NOT a computer move, as both Tenner and Alekhine died in the 1940s.|
|Jun-23-14|| ||Ulhumbrus: As Alekhine's comment to the move 17...Bxc3?! indicates, 17...Bxc3 concedes the superior minor piece to White and White wins eventually a Fischer ending.|
|Jun-24-14|| ||aliejin: " Euwe missed a win on his 10th move! "
One thing is to acquire a strong initiative ... and another
thing is to say "missed a win!"
One thing is "live chess" and even... human chess analysis .... and another thing chess analysis .. made by computers
|Dec-07-17|| ||Mateo: Alekhine's notes are most often highly instructive. However, sometimes, it sems to me that he is a bit too much optimistic. For instance, his comment about 31...f5 (<31 ...f5 Then White would not play immediately 32 g4 because of 32...fxg4+ 33 Kxg4 Rg6+, followed by 34...Nf5 with counterattack; but he would play first 32 h5, after which g4 would free his king bishop’s pawn with disastrous effect for Black since the latter’s majority on the queen side has a nominal value only, owing to the passive position of his pieces.>). Well, it could be a bit premature, isn't it? 31...f5 32.h5 h6 33.g4 fxg4+ 34.Kxg4. White has something, but is this position a disaster for Black?|
|Dec-07-17|| ||john barleycorn: <Mateo: Alekhine's notes are most often highly instructive. ...>|
Well, I have gone through Robert Hübner's comments and they are not flattery about Alekhine's analysis/comments.
|Dec-09-17|| ||Mateo: <john barleycorn> Interesting. Could you provide some quotes?|
|Dec-09-17|| ||chancho: Some stuff IM John Watson wrote in his review of Robert Hubner's CD on his analysis of Alexander Alekhine:|
<Unfortunately, the CD features an 'analysis' of Alekhine's play and of his writings. All you have to do is read the 'Table of Contents' (a sort of summary of 23 Alekhine games) to see how harshly and negatively Huebner assesses both. For the record, I also looked carefully at several of the heavily-annotated games, which are in the same unimaginative spirit but more boring.
Anyway, in Huebner's view of the world, Alekhine had terrible weaknesses in every single aspect of the game, including technical and psychological ones. Here's his entire summary of Alekhine's play and annotation in Game#2: 'Ruining the pawn structure-materialism; underestimating the active counterplay of the opponent-strategic deficiencies in the opening; bad positional judgment-defensive possibilities of the opponent are not exhaustively scrutinized -lack of criticism towards the own conduct of the attack.' [apparently Huebner the linguist didn't check the English translation for grammatical errors, which are frequent; I've corrected some of the spelling].
Or Game#6: 'Overestimating the initiative, underestimating defensive possibilities; this brings about a wrong picture of the course of the game-self-propaganda-lack of criticism towards the own play-materialism-lack of immersion in concrete, tactical defensive possibilities-strategical deficiencies-harmful brilliance-lack of positional judgement and lack of the will to thorough research in the endgame, maybe due to a fear of unpleasant discoveries.'
Needless to say, Alekhine won both of these games in very nice style.
Many of these 23 analyses are distorted in a negative direction, apparently by Huebner's egotistical point of view. In the very first example (#1), he gives a one-move snippet from a game Alekhine-Romanovsky, St Petersburg 1909. Alekhine gets a '?' for that move, a pawn sacrifice, and Huebner launches into a typically extended analysis of his own suggested alternative, after which he has Black playing provocatively and eventually coming out clearly worse (one analysis goes for 18 moves). Huebner concludes: 'Alekhine's optimism in regard to his attacking chances is really amazing. Throughout his life he did not lose such an excessive faith in his own tactical opportunities.'
But two moves into the analysis, Huebner ignores several attractive (and I think good) alternatives if Black doesn't play so riskily, blithely providing only a single line in which Black commits suicide. Alekhine's move, moreover, is extremely creative, if eventually proven to be bad; one would never know that in the full game (annotated in the database and not even given a link!), it takes a very difficult sequence to ultimately turn the game against him.
Regarding Alekhine's annotations, one might do well to remember that he was first and foremost a player. Although he enjoyed writing about chess and improved his play thereby, I'm sure that the sort of obsessive immersion that would have been required to match the grindings of Fritz, with psychoanalytic sessions on the side, would not have benefited either his health or his play. His writings do, however, reflect the imaginative nature of the struggle, which is why so many generations have enjoyed them.
A few more snippets about Alekhine from Huebner (sorry, but this is sort of fun): 'gross tactical inaccuracy during liquidation-sloppy calculation-underestimating the defence', 'strategical misjudgments; overestimating the own possibilities (blatantly)-a lot of mistakes in detail-bad technique in a won position', ' strategical deficiencies of the highest order in the opening and in the middlegame', 'lack of strategical understanding-ruining the own pawn structure-inappropriate play for the attack; impatience-premature breakdown', ' playing for traps; addiction to combinations-lack of interest and feeling for positional subtleties; impatience-destruction of the own pawn structure-overestimating the initiative-lack of precision in calculating variations-tirelessness-unperturbed by changes of fortune', ' -sloppiness-chess blindness.'
Again, the above quotes refer mostly to victories, e.g., over Nimzowitsch, Bernstein, and Mieses. A funny question to ponder is whether Alekhine's rating would have gone up or down after thorough tutoring by Huebner-my guess is the latter. Certainly down if one believes in positive feedback: In the 23 games considered in this 'Table of Contents', I count only 4 or perhaps 5 positive comments, 3 of them in one sentence!>
|Dec-10-17|| ||Muttley101: Alekhine had a cat called Huebner.|
|Jul-06-19|| ||FSR: Got My Mind Set on Euwe.|
|Jul-06-19|| ||HeMateMe: Gun Euwe Down?|
|Jul-07-19|| ||goodevans: Unfortunately, neither of those puns work with anything resembling the correct pronunciation of 'Euwe'.|
|Jul-07-19|| ||Thief: <goodevans: Unfortunately, neither of those puns work with anything resembling the correct pronunciation of 'Euwe'.> The pun does work, though, because I've stolen the correct pronunciation of "Euwe".|
|Jul-07-19|| ||catlover: Well, his name in English looks the the word for a female sheep (in other words, it would sound like "you"). |
He was Dutch, so presumably the correct pronunciation of his name would be how they say it in Holland. How exactly is it pronounced in Dutch?
|Jul-07-19|| ||perfidious: 'Erver', as in fervour.|
|Jul-07-19|| ||catlover: Thanks!|
|Jul-07-19|| ||Breunor: Qb3 'winning' - computer gives black a big advantage but I don't think anyone would call it winning, although it is by far black's best move:|
1) -1.15 (25 ply) 10...Qb3 11.Bxg7 Rg8 12.Be5 Nd7 13.Bg3 Nb6 14.e4 Bxe4 15.Be2 Bxg2 16.Bd1 Bxc3 17.bxc3 Qd5 18.Rg1 Bf3 19.Qd3 Bxd1 20.Kxd1 Rg6 21.Ke2 Nc4 22.Qf3 O-O-O 23.Rgd1 f6 24.Rab1 Nb6 25.Qxd5 cxd5 26.f3
2) -0.29 (25 ply) 10...gxf6 11.e4 Qb3 12.exf5 e5 13.dxe5 Nd7 14.e6 fxe6 15.fxe6 Qxe6+ 16.Be2 O-O-O 17.O-O Bxc3 18.bxc3 Nc5 19.Qb2 Rhg8 20.g3 Qb3 21.Qxb3 Nxb3 22.Rad1 Rge8 23.Rxd8+ Kxd8 24.Bd1 Nc1 25.Bh5 Ne2+ 26.Kh1 Re7 27.Rd1+ Kc7 28.Re1
|Jul-08-19|| ||OrangeTulip: Certainly it does not sound like you.
It is a sound which is not known in Englisch.
But a more filosophical iasue, why does anglo-american sites and books always show a loss of Euwe?
He had several splendid wins against Alekhine...
|Jul-09-19|| ||Granny O Doul: We're so over the Euwe oeuvre.|
|Jul-10-19|| ||RandomVisitor: A deeper look at what some have called a winning move: 10...Qb3.|
click for larger view
60/80 24:05:10 <-1.59> 11.Bh4 Nd7 12.e4 Bxe4 13.Be2 Qc2 14.a5 a6 15.f3 Bf5 16.Qxc2 Bxc2 17.Kf2 Nf6 18.Rhc1 Bg6 19.Bg3 h5 20.Be5 h4 21.Na4 Nd5 22.Nb6 Nxb6 23.axb6 f6 24.Rc4 Be7 25.Bc7 Kd7 26.Rc3 Bd8 27.Bxd8 Raxd8 28.Ke3 Bf5 29.f4 Rhg8 30.Bf3 g5 31.fxg5 Rxg5 32.Rf1 Rgg8 33.Rf2 Ke7 34.Rc5 Rg7 35.b4 Rdg8 36.Rf1 Rg5 37.Ra1 Rd8 38.Raa5 Rgg8 39.Rc1 Bg4 40.Be4 f5 41.Bxc6 bxc6 42.Rxc6
|Jul-11-19|| ||RandomVisitor: After 17.Qc1:
click for larger view
58/87 22:36:56 <-0.39> 17...Kb8 18.Rb1 a5 19.Qf4 Be7 20.Rfc1 Qb4 21.Qxb4 axb4 22.Nd1 Rd2 23.Kf1 Bd8 24.Ne3 Bb6 25.Rd1 Bxe3 26.fxe3 Rhd8 27.Ke1 Rxd1+ 28.Rxd1 Rxd1+ 29.Kxd1 c5 30.b3 Nc6 31.Kc2 Kc7 32.Bd3 h6 33.h3 Na5 34.Be2 b6 35.Bf3 Kd7 36.Bd5 Kd6 37.Bf7 Nc6 38.Be8 Ne5 39.Bb5 Kd5 40.Ba6 Ke4 41.Kd2 Kf5 42.Bc8+ Kg6 43.Be6 Kg7 44.Bd5 Kf8 45.Bf3 Ke7 46.Kc2 Ke6 47.Bb7 Kd6 48.Ba6 Nc6 49.Bb5 Na5 50.Be2 Ke5 51.Bf3 Kf5 52.g3 Ke5 53.Bg2
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2 OF 2 ·