|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 4 OF 4 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
| Sep-20-06 | | positionalgenius: Lasker scores a nice endgame win over an endgame master Rubinstein. |
 |
Apr-09-07
 | | Bridgeburner: This game is pivotal in Rubinstein's career and it is surprising it has not received more attention. This was the tournament in which he crashed and burned, missed out on being awarded one of the inaugural Grandmaster titles by Czar Nicholas, and was considered the turning point of his career. 1914 was also the year he was to purportedly play Lasker for the title, but, it was said, for the outbreak of the War. This combination of factors is thought by many to have shattered his already precarious mental equilibrium. I would be interested to know whether this game was the start of his losses in this tournament or further into the losing sequence. <Surely> since 1914, someone <must have> noticed that Rubinstein missed a straightforward tactical stroke that would have at the very least have netted him an easy draw against the World Champion but would have given him some very real practical winning chances. After Lasker played <33.Qd3> we get the following position: 
click for larger viewRubinstein now missed taking straightforward advantage of the pin on the Rook at e1 with <33…Bxd4!> winning a free pawn: 
click for larger viewUpon such moments, it seems, does history hinge.
|
|
| Apr-09-07 | | Archives: <I would be interested to know whether this game was the start of his losses in this tournament or further into the losing sequence.> This game was in the 4th round of the tournament. Rubinstein had drawn the previous two games against Marshall round 1, and Capablanca round 3 (he had the bye in the second round). The very next game after this loss against Lasker was against Alekhine which Rubinstein lost. The next two games were long fought draws against Bernstein and Tarrasch. He then won against Janowsky and Gunberg and then draw Blackburne and Nimzo. You could perhaps be right in thinking that losing this game affected Rubinstein's play in the rest of the tournament. Because it looked like he struggled to achieve draws against Bernstein and Tarrasch. |
|
Apr-09-07
| | Bridgeburner: This tournament was probably also the start of Rubinstein's long losing streak against Alekhine, the only other player against whom he had a negative overall score. |
|
Apr-28-07
| | Bridgeburner: <Chessgames.com> Thanks for correcting the game score to to the actual move that was played: <31.Ra1>. |
|
Oct-02-07
 | | offramp: <Bridgeburner: This game is pivotal in Rubinstein's career and it is surprising it has not received more attention. This was the tournament in which he crashed and burned, missed out on being awarded one of the inaugural Grandmaster titles by Czar Nicholas, and was considered the turning point of his career...> Not that old one ... The term Grandmaster was around long before Tsar Nicholas. |
|
Oct-02-07
 | | whiteshark: If I recall the past correctly the head of the 'Teutonic Order' was also called <Grand Master> ... and the heads of Hospitallers and Templars, too. |
|
Oct-02-07
| | whiteshark: <Bridgeburner>: Your 2 diagrams were faulty! After Lasker played <33.Qd3> we get the following position:
click for larger view<The white is on a1!> and not on e1. Therefore Rubinstein coundn't win  d4 without losing his  thereafter. |
|
Oct-02-07
| | offramp: <whiteshark: If I recall the past correctly the head of the 'Teutonic Order' was also called <Grand Master>
... and the heads of Hospitallers and Templars, too.> And so was the leader of the Furious 5. |
|
Oct-02-07
| | whiteshark: <offramp> And don't forget Grandmaster Clock and the NTP Timeserver. |
|
Oct-03-07
| | whiteshark: I think that 52... Kd6 is the final mistake.
It is the wrong idea to force a endgame. For the defender it is better if the remain on board. Furthermore the black queenside pawns should not advanced as they lose connection. So <52... Bc7!> is the right move. |
|
Oct-19-07
| | Bridgeburner: <whiteshark> <<Bridgeburner>: Your 2 diagrams were faulty!> Strange as it may seem, those diagrams are correct, but not for the score as it currently stands. You will notice that a couple of posts later I thank <Chessgames.com> <for correcting the game score to to the actual move that was played: <31.Ra1>. The game score on this page was originally <31.Re1>, and at my request, the administrators corrected the score. My post to them last April tells the story: chessgames.com chessforum. There were some other posts that were deleted by the administrators at the time so the continuity of the posts on this page are slightly disjointed. |
|
Oct-19-07
| | Bridgeburner: <offramp: <Bridgeburner: This was the tournament in which he__ missed out on being awarded one of the inaugural Grandmaster titles by Czar Nicholas> Not that old one ... The term Grandmaster was around long before Tsar Nicholas.> The term was around before then, but was it an official chess title before then? What is the Tsar Nicholas story about if this is not the case? |
|
Nov-09-08
 | | gambitfan: <fred lennox: 7...d5 looks over ambitious. Now Lasker exploits the backward c-pawn relentlessly to the end.> You are right ! BACWARD PAWN seems to be a keyword of the middle game... and looks also quite ZUGZWANGY...
This backward c-pawn forces Black to exchange the Bishops... After the exchange of the Bishops, the situation is much clearer for white... |
|
Nov-09-08
| | gambitfan: <offramp: Kasparov reckons that 59...b4 is the fatal error.> Why ??
After 59... b4
click for larger viewWhite to play
To what extent is 59... b4 a mistake ??
|
|
Nov-09-08
| | gambitfan: <tud: I don't understand how Rubisntein managed to loose this game. Look at move 39. Rubinstein has the good bishop but the bishop stays stuck waiting Lasker. 39... Ra7 is how he should handle it.> I do not agree with you...
To what extent is the black B any "better" than the white B ? white Pd4 is a white isolani aiming at taking advantage of black c-bacwrd pawn which is a draw back for Black in this case... white have a good "candidate" pawn Pf3...
white Pg2 is also "backward" but this can be corrected easily since there is no black P there to exploit this weakness... white seem to dominate the e-file more easily than black because white K is closer and more powerful... white K will be able to "cross" the e-file and to reach d3 ! The situation seems better for white at the 39th move... |
|
| Nov-09-08 | | Nietzowitsch: <offramp: Kasparov reckons that 59...b4 is the fatal error.> No, he doesnt! But proper quoting isnt offramps core competence. |
|
Nov-09-08
 | | sneaky pete: Say it isn't so. |
|
| Nov-16-08 | | Nietzowitsch: No, I dont. |
|
| Mar-29-09 | | Akiba Rubinstein: for me this game is still (endgame) still unclear |
|
Mar-29-09
| | whiteshark: Hence it is notorious that you are not <Akiba Rubinstein>. :D |
|
Sep-27-09
| | whiteshark: What has been the issue here? |
|
| Jan-19-11 | | GilesFarnaby: Rubinstein should have tried to get a position like this:
click for larger viewWhich is a draw.
It would have been maybe possible through:
59...d4...
click for larger view...60.Ke4 d3 61.b4+ Kc6 62.Kxd3 Kd5 63.Rf1 Rh6 64.f6 Rh3+ 65.Ke2... 
click for larger view...etcetera (in case white wants to push the f pawn, because he could also just offer a draw anytime) |
|
May-28-11
 | | keypusher: <Giles Farnaby>
61.b4+ may be a mistake.
59....d4 60.Ke4 d3 61.Kxd3 Kd5 62.Rf1 Ke5 63.Kc3 and 63....Rxf5 loses per the tablebases. 63....Ke4 64.Kb4 Ke3 65.Kxb5 Ke2 66.Rb1 also loses. |
|
May-01-12
| | offramp: <Nietzowitsch: <offramp: Kasparov reckons that 59...b4 is the fatal error.> No, he doesnt!>
Yes, he does - in the book On His Great Predecessors. |
|
|
|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 4 OF 4 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
