Akiba Rubinstein vs Sergey Nikolaevich Von Freymann (1909)

Akiba Rubinstein vs Sergey Nikolaevich Von Freymann
St Petersburg (1909) · Queen's Gambit Accepted: Classical Defense. Rubinstein Variation (D27) · 1-0

To move:

Last move:

Annotations by Emanuel Lasker. [80 more games annotated by Lasker]

explore this opening	find similar games	5 more Rubinstein/S Von Freymann games
	PGN: download \| view	Help: general \| java-troubleshooting

TIP: To flip the board (so black is on the bottom) either press F or click on the d7 square.

For help with this chess viewer, please see the Pgn4web Quickstart Guide.

Dec-28-02		mj29479: i think 12.Bd6 would have yielded better results for blacks.

Dec-28-02		pawntificator: It would help a little, but against Rubinstein in this position, I don't think it would help enough, or for very long.

Nov-13-03		Kenkaku: Interesting that Lasker denounces the QGA Classical here (signified by 6...c5). It reminds me of Blackburne playing the (first according to this database) Nimzo-Indian and saying that not much good comes of it.

Nov-13-03		Chessical: 12...Nb4 13.Bxb7 Qxb7 14.e4 Be7 15.e5 Nd7 16.e6 fxe6 17.Qxe6 Qc6 18.Qe2 Kf8 19.Bf4 Re8 Garcia- Pilnik Buenos Aires 1973 and White went on to win 13...Rd8 seems a better way to meet 14.e5 but Black is still inferior, before crashing out with 15..Na5.

Jul-22-12		shepi13: <Kenkaku>, black doesn't play QGA classical, but instead transposes to it. QGA classical is 5...c5. The fact that white didn't play 6. a4 gives black time to play 6... b5 and go into a better variation for black than the one with 6...c5 7. a4 (which is named after Rubinstein I believe)

Jul-22-12		perfidious: < Kenkaku: Interesting that Lasker denounces the QGA Classical here (signified by 6...c5). It reminds me of Blackburne playing the (first according to this database) Nimzo-Indian and saying that not much good comes of it.> In Alekhine's collection of games from 1924-37, after 1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.Nf3 Nf6 4.Nc3 dxc4 5.a4, he roundly condemns the move 5....e6-believe this was the game in question (Alekhine vs Bogoljubov, 1929). In recent years, this line has often been seen, though I've no idea what the present theoretical verdict is. My salient point is simple-opening theory is a constantly evolving creature, and there was precious little praxis in the lines you cite when these great players offered their views. Alekhine had no use for 1.e4 g6 in that same volume when he faced it here (Alekhine vs V Mikenas, 1933), but it's far from being a bad move.

NOTE: You need to pick a username and password to post a reply. Getting your account takes less than a minute, totally anonymous, and 100% free--plus, it entitles you to features otherwise unavailable. Pick your username now and join the chessgames community!

If you already have an account, you should login now.

Please observe our posting guidelines:

No obscene, racist, sexist, or profane language.
No spamming, advertising, or duplicating posts.
No personal attacks against other users.
Nothing in violation of United States law.

See something which violates our rules? Blow the whistle and inform an administrator.

NOTE: Keep all discussion on the topic of this page. This forum is for this specific game and nothing else. If you want to discuss chess in general, or this site, you might try the Kibitzer's Café.

Messages posted by Chessgames members do not necessarily represent the views of Chessgames.com, its employees, or sponsors.

Spot an error? Please submit a correction slip and help us eliminate database mistakes!
This game is type: CLASSICAL (Disagree? Please submit a correction slip.)

Featured in the Following Game Collections [what is this?]

Queen's Gambit accepted.
from Long games (72+). Short games (28-) by athyn

16
from 99_St Petersburg 1909 by whiteshark

St. Petersburg RUS 1909
from Favorite Games from (1515-1916) by wanabe2000

Round 16
from St Petersburg 1909 by Archives

Lasker annotates
by bishop

Game collection: 4
by p2c

Game collection: 5
by gr2ca1

lasker annotates games
by zakir