|Sep-13-04|| ||shr0pshire: 14. Be4 is this sound????? I can't help but think that black can protect against this. |
Does anyone know why this is sound?
|Sep-13-04|| ||clocked: Yes, it is sound. White threatens 16.Bxd5. After 16.Nxe4 the threat is Nf6+ and Qa3#. With the open d-file, dark square weaknesses, and two possible outposts on the 6th, there are numerous threats. One idea is Nf6+ Kf8 Nxh7+ Kg7 Nh5+. |
|Feb-27-05|| ||Saruman: Bogoljubov played very cleverly throughout the game. |
|Feb-27-05|| ||Autoreparaturwerkbau: 27.Qc8#, not 27.Qc8+ |
|Feb-27-05|| ||Saruman: <Autoreparaturwerkbau> True, thats a typhical mistake seen in many if not most of the games. |
|Jul-18-05|| ||OhioChessFan: Schnarre, I wonder if there are missing moves. No way does White's 24th move make sense if the mate was on the board.|
|Jul-18-05|| ||Calli: In the tournament, they played the same line Bogoljubov vs Spielmann, 1919 and Spielmann won. Apparently this exhibition was to test the variation a little further.|
|Jul-18-05|| ||capanegra: <OhioChessFan> 24.♔b1! makes perfect sense, since Black was threatening 24...♕h6+ followed by 0-0. The attack was beautifully conducted by Bogoljubov.|
|Jul-18-05|| ||OhioChessFan: Thank you <Capanergra>. I missed that White had continued to check after moving the h1 Rook.|
|Apr-14-07|| ||Avarus: This game should be more praised, the attack just keeps on mounting yet has time to take breathers like 24.Kb1!. |
I'd say the game is a lesson on how to use queen to its limits. I mean, 12.Qg3! Bogo's finest game.
|Sep-05-08|| ||ToTheDeath: Terrific attack- 24.Kb1!! is great prophylaxis.|
|Oct-20-08|| ||Karpova: Regarding the status/purpose of this game:
Richard Reti: <The following game was played by Bogoljubow against a well-known chess master at a confectioner's in Stockholm, December 1919, the object being the investigation of Alekhin's variation of the French game [...].>
From Reti, Richard: “Modern Ideas in Chess”; transl. by John Hart; Hardinge Simpole, Devon 2002. §40, Page 160
It's also notable that Reti didn't give the opponent's name. In this database it's labelled an "exhibition game" and reminds us again of the broad use of that term.
Exhibition games could be serious contests (there are examples from other masters but take Capablanca's pre-WW1 2-game minimatches for example.), they could be intended to test variations (e. g. in this case or Capablanca's Rice Gambit adventure) or be played to merely please the crowd (like the pre-arranged exhibition games from Capablanca after 1930, e.g. the famous Capablanca vs H Steiner, 1933 ).
So while Bogoljubov is to praise for the nice conduction of the game it should not be forgotten what kind of exhibition game it was.
|Oct-20-08|| ||sleepyirv: This reminds me of Morphy's Opera Game: A lot of sacrifices to get at the uncastled king for an interesting mate.|
|Aug-23-09|| ||WhiteRook48: Spielmann got checkmated?!?!|
|Aug-18-10|| ||sevenseaman: Sublime combination at the end makes Bogo's chess look beautiful. Very aggressive.|
|Apr-17-11|| ||mrsaturdaypants: Tuesday puzzle at white 25, eh?|
|May-19-14|| ||yariharimo: Hi, everyone, I thought you might like to examine a similar game bet. the same players until the 17th move where White played Qh4 instead of Qc3, and Black was able to parry White's attack and won the game. Very interesting, demonstrates why 17.Qc3 was the right move.|
|Jan-10-15|| ||ajax333221: |
click for larger view
26. Qc8+ Rd8 27. Rxe6+ fxe6 28. Qxe6+ Qe7 29. Qxe7# 1-0
this is one move longer, but more straightforward in my opinion.
|Dec-06-16|| ||clement41: This positional Be4!! sac, in the middle of a fierce attack, is mémorable|
|Dec-06-16|| ||MissScarlett: Can we identify an earlier source for this game than Reti's <Modern Ideas in Chess>?|
|Dec-06-16|| ||zanzibar: Might be helpful to mention Reti's work was first published in 1923...|
|Feb-13-17|| ||sachistu: Regarding the comments about the venue, score and players...|
The move 17.Qc3! is what Bogoljubov SHOULD have played. At the time, Bogoljubov was 1 point behind Spielmann and needed to avoid a draw. According to Paul Krueger, the move 17.Qh4 should lead to a draw.
This information comes from Deutsche Wochenschach 1920, page 48. DW cites Paul Krueger, who in turn cites Bogoljubov for providing the notes to the game.
The 'game' given here is actually the variation given by Bogoljubov(!) for what he should have played.
Regarding the 'game' identified by <Karpova> citing Reti's book, I can think of a couple of reasons why Reti identified it as such, but it would only be speculation.
It is interesting that ECO and some online sources choose to use this alternate version.
I suppose it might be useful to keep this game listed under 'analysis' (as has been done in at least one other situation on the site).
|May-23-17|| ||mifralu: <MissScarlett: Can we identify an earlier source for this game than Reti's <Modern Ideas in Chess>?>|
See Richard Réti in Algemeen Handelsblad 25-12-1919: