|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.
|Jun-30-13|| ||Check It Out: I've just played 8.Qe2 in a (no computer) correspondence game. Feeling good that Lasker the great one is on my side. I'm hoping the rest of the game goes just like this one.|
|Jun-30-13|| ||whiteshark: |
<CIO: <Feeling good that Rubinstein the great one is on my side.>>
Fixed it 4u
|Jun-30-13|| ||Check It Out: Thanks, <whiteshark>
:) I was referring to Lasker's notes to this game, but I should have placed due respect to Rubinstein in there too.|
|Mar-09-18|| ||RKnight: Lasker's annotation says "After 16... Nb7, 17 Nd5 would decide the game at once." How so? White has the better game, but methinks the great Lasker might be exaggerating a bit. |
For instance black survives 17... Qd1, 18 e6 Nd3. In the longer term with good play white should win, but there's nothing "at once" I can see in the position.
|Mar-09-18|| ||john barleycorn: <RKnight: Lasker's annotation says "After 16... Nb7, 17 Nd5 would decide the game at once." ...|
For instance black survives 17... Qd1, 18 e6 Nd3....>
17... Qd8, 18 e6 Nd6 you mean?
18.e6? why that?