Members · Prefs · Laboratory · Collections · Openings · Endgames · Sacrifices · History · Search Kibitzing · Kibitzer's Café · Chessforums · Tournament Index · Players · Kibitzing

Capablanca - Euwe Match

Jose Raul Capablanca6/10(+2 -0 =8)[games]
Max Euwe4/10(+0 -2 =8)[games] Chess Event Description
Capablanca - Euwe (1931)

This match between Euwe and Capablanca took place from 12 July to 30 July 1931 in Amsterdam, The Hague and Rotterdam, the Netherlands. (1) The time control was 2½ hours for 40 moves, then 1 hour for 16 moves. (2)

At Hastings (1930/31), Euwe had finished first, ahead of Capablanca. In earlier matches against world class players (Alekhine - Euwe Training Match (1926), Bogoljubov - Euwe: First FIDE Championship (1928), and Bogoljubov - Euwe: Second FIDE Championship (1928)), he had lost only narrowly. Capablanca arrived in Amsterdam on 10 July 1931. (3) The Wiener Schachzeitung wrote that both contestants implicitly played for the right to play a title match against Alexander Alekhine. (4) Capablanca's play in the match was described as imaginative and ingenious. (4)

Picture: (De Telegraaf, 13 July 1931, p. 9).

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 Capablanca ½ ½ 1 ½ ½ ½ ½ ½ 1 ½ 6 Euwe ½ ½ 0 ½ ½ ½ ½ ½ 0 ½ 4

Euwe had White in the even-numbered games.

Game dates and venues

Game 1: Amsterdam, 12 July 1931. De Telegraaf, 13 July 1931, p. 9,
Game 2: Amsterdam, 14 July 1931. De Telegraaf, 14 July 1931, p. 10,
Game 3: Amsterdam, 16 July 1931. De Telegraaf, 16 July 1931, p. 10,
Game 4: The Hague, 18 July 1931. De Telegraaf, 19 July 1931, p. 10,
Game 5: Rotterdam, 20 July 1931. De Telegraaf, 21 July 1931, p. 2,
Game 6: The Hague, 22 July 1931. De Telegraaf, 22 July 1931, p. 6,
Game 7: Amsterdam, 24 July 1931. De Telegraaf, 25 July 1931, p. 2,
Game 8: Amsterdam, 26 July 1931. De Telegraaf, 27 July 1931, p. 10,
Game 9: Amsterdam, 28 July 1931. De Telegraaf, 29 July 1931, p. 2,
Game 10: Amsterdam, 30 July 1931. De Telegraaf, 31 July 1931, p. 2,


(1) De Telegraaf, 9 July 1931, p. 2,
(2) Albert Becker, Wiener Schachzeitung, September 1931, p. 261. Provided in "ANNO/Österreichische Nationalbibliothek".
(3) Het Vaderland: staat- en letterkundig nieuwsblad, 10 July 1931, p. 3,
(4) Wiener Schachzeitung, September 1931, p. 257. Provided in "ANNO/Österreichische Nationalbibliothek".

Based on an original collection by User: TheFocus. Game dates and introduction by User: Karpova.

 page 1 of 1; 10 games  PGN Download 
Game  ResultMoves YearEvent/LocaleOpening
1. Capablanca vs Euwe ½-½211931Capablanca - EuweE34 Nimzo-Indian, Classical, Noa Variation
2. Euwe vs Capablanca ½-½261931Capablanca - EuweE44 Nimzo-Indian, Fischer Variation, 5.Ne2
3. Capablanca vs Euwe 1-0311931Capablanca - EuweE34 Nimzo-Indian, Classical, Noa Variation
4. Euwe vs Capablanca ½-½331931Capablanca - EuweE40 Nimzo-Indian, 4.e3
5. Capablanca vs Euwe ½-½591931Capablanca - EuweD34 Queen's Gambit Declined, Tarrasch
6. Euwe vs Capablanca ½-½251931Capablanca - EuweE16 Queen's Indian
7. Capablanca vs Euwe ½-½271931Capablanca - EuweD47 Queen's Gambit Declined Semi-Slav
8. Euwe vs Capablanca ½-½561931Capablanca - EuweE11 Bogo-Indian Defense
9. Capablanca vs Euwe 1-0351931Capablanca - EuweD17 Queen's Gambit Declined Slav
10. Euwe vs Capablanca ½-½291931Capablanca - EuweE11 Bogo-Indian Defense
  REFINE SEARCH:   White wins (1-0) | Black wins (0-1) | Draws (1/2-1/2)  

Kibitzer's Corner
Oct-01-13  RookFile: I love the comment in the introduction:

<His own success against this able Dutch expert no doubt afforded Capablanca no little satisfaction. In a sense the results gave notice to the chess world that a terrific struggle between him and Dr. Alekhine may be looked forward to with certainty, should the return match between them materialize – <American Chess Bulletin>. >

Oh, if only things had worked out that way.

Premium Chessgames Member
  WCC Editing Project:
Article from "American Chess Bulletin" but missing the date and page numbers:

<Jose Capablanca of Havana and Dr. Max Euwe of Amsterdam started their series of ten games, which were contested without a hitch at Amsterdam, The Hague, Rotterdam and Scheveningen. Without losing a game, Capablanca won the match by 2–0, with eight draws. Dr. Euwe, who outranked Capablanca at Hastings this year, put up a great fight, as was to have been expected. However, his showing was not up to the record he made in his earlier matches against Dr. Alekhine and Bogoljubow. He won five games in the three encounters with those masters.

His own success against this able Dutch expert no doubt afforded Capablanca no little satisfaction. In a sense the results gave notice to the chess world that a terrific struggle between him and Dr. Alekhine may be looked forward to with certainty, should the return match between them materialize – >

<American Chess Bulletin>.

Premium Chessgames Member
  perfidious: It was most unfortunate that this was the last serious chess played by Capablanca until Hastings (1934/35).
Premium Chessgames Member
  WCC Editing Project:

<perfidious> Quite right. I'd even say it was close to a tragedy, given that the likely reason for this hiatus was the terrible relations between Capablanca and Alekhine during this period.

The missing <Alekhine-Capablanca rematch> perhaps second only to the missing <Fischer-Karpov> match in "great losses to chess history."

Premium Chessgames Member
  perfidious: <WCC> My recollection is that Golombek speculated as to why Capa was out of action, the most probable reason being his failure to secure a return match. The two Bogoljubov-Alekhine encounters were poor substitutes for what might have been.
Oct-18-14  TheFocus: <WCC Editing Project> <Colleagues> <Whilst researching Game Collection: WCC: Alekhine-Bogoljubov 1934 ARCHIVE Contenders, I came across Capablanca - Euwe (1931).

The original verbatim "American Chess Bulletin" article, which had been the sole introduction to this event, is now placed intact in the Kibbutz section. I have included relevant historical information from that source in the new introduction.

In addition, I noticed the "original game collection" was a dead link, so I deleted it.>

Why delete the intro? It did not violate copyright laws.

Aren't you just being facetious?

I expect better from the Biographers of this site.

I do understand deleting the link to the original collection, which has been deleted.

Perhaps you should consult with Mr. Freeman.

Oct-18-14  TheFocus: If Mr. Freeman says I violated copyright issues, I will bow out.

If not, I expect you to say that you are sorry for overstepping your bounds.

Oct-18-14  TheFocus: I will conduct myself however Daniel rules. And if he rules in my favor, I will be a constant thorn in your side if you target my work.

I suggest you lay off the wine for a couple of days and come to your senses.

If I used an article from a magazine or a journal, I ALWAYS cited it.

Dec-03-14  Karpova: A photo can be found in 'De Telegraf', 13 July 1931, p. 9:
Dec-03-14  sneaky pete: <Karpova> Telegraf means Teletomb. Other accepted forms of the name are Telegrof (Telerude), Teleraaf (Teleraven) and Telegier (Televulture).
Dec-04-14  Karpova: Interestingly, in C.N. 5427, Winter writes: [...] <ninth match-game between Capablanca and Euwe in Amsterdam on 8 July 1931.> Link:

This seems to be he only time, he discussed the match in a C.N.. And it is not clear, which source he is referring to. Did he discuss it anywhere else?

On page 230 of his book on Capablanca (McFarland, 1989), he quotes Capablanca himself: <Furthermore, as you are aware, I am engaged to play a match with Dr. Euwe from 12 July to 1 August of this year,> [...] (a letter from 15 May 1931 to Alekhine).

This alone should have sufficed to dig deeper. In the 'Wiener Schachzeitung' of September 1931 (pp. 257-261), Albert Becker gives 16 July for game 3, 26 July for game 8 and 28 July for game 9.

The Dutch newspapers, not just 'De Telegraaf', covered the match pretty extensively and as "live" as is possible in such a medium. It was reported, that Capablanca arrived in Amsterdam on 10 July, when the match would have allegedly ended. Their daily reports seem to be the best source available. They can't be ignored in any discussion of the matter. Here is a possible selection:

NOTE: Create an account today to post replies and access other powerful features which are available only to registered users. Becoming a member is free, anonymous, and takes less than 1 minute! If you already have a username, then simply login login under your username now to join the discussion.

Please observe our posting guidelines:

  1. No obscene, racist, sexist, or profane language.
  2. No spamming, advertising, duplicate, or gibberish posts.
  3. No vitriolic or systematic personal attacks against other members.
  4. Nothing in violation of United States law.
  5. No cyberstalking or malicious posting of negative or private information (doxing/doxxing) of members.
  6. No trolling.
  7. The use of "sock puppet" accounts to circumvent disciplinary action taken by moderators, create a false impression of consensus or support, or stage conversations, is prohibited.
  8. Do not degrade Chessgames or any of it's staff/volunteers.

Please try to maintain a semblance of civility at all times.

Blow the Whistle

See something that violates our rules? Blow the whistle and inform a moderator.

NOTE: Please keep all discussion on-topic. This forum is for this specific tournament only. To discuss chess or this site in general, visit the Kibitzer's Café.

Messages posted by Chessgames members do not necessarily represent the views of, its employees, or sponsors.
All moderator actions taken are ultimately at the sole discretion of the administration.

Spot an error? Please suggest your correction and help us eliminate database mistakes!

Copyright 2001-2023, Chessgames Services LLC