PawnSac: < mhelshou: What the hell is this game? Nimzowitsch is throwing pieces right and left >< jerseybob: Well guys, the answer is, in 1905 Nimzo was not yet the Hypermodern he later became. Neither was Richard Reti. >
At this time he was 19 yrs old, and not yet developed to his full powers. That would come almost a decade later. It must be remembered that 110 years ago the chess world was not filled with books, trainers, computer progs, the huge database of games, and so forth. The learning curve was much slower.
In all fairness, one's strategical ideas and positional assessment could only be honed when tested in actual play against the strongest opponents, AND this game was not without some interesting tactical basis. Against a lesser player Nimzo may have won it in swashbuckling style. And lastly...
After the first sac (the Bg5) he was committed to following it thru. In for a penny, in for a pound, as they say. Regardless of the outcome, i can tell you that if i faced the same bishop sac
i would have a long think, sitting on my hands, before playing a hasty hxg5.
After the game no doubt the young Nimzo thought "well humph.. that didn't work" and realized his idea was a bit too ambitious;
but haven't we all done the same in games? If you haven't, then you have not pushed the limits on your attacking skills.
So my attitude is.. hey, this is just one game, a loss, in a collection of very fine games in the career of a fine player
who has taught us all something about good chess play.
Kibitzing
