Pawn and Two: At move 24, and again at move 26, Alekhine indicated that Black's game was lost.
At move 24, Fritz indicated the game was near equal: (.16) (23 ply) 24...Qb7! 25.Qb3, (.12) (22 ply) 25...Qc6 26.Ng5 Bf6.
At move 26, Black could have continued with a near equal game: (.09) (22 ply) 26...Bf6 27.Nxe4 fxe4 28.Re1 c4 29.Qc2 Kb8 30.Bxe4 Qxe6.
Also playable was: (.28) (22 ply) 26...c4 27.Rc1 c3 28.Qc2 Qc4 29.Nxe4 fxe4.
Alekhine made no note of 26...Bf6 or 26...c4, only stating there was nothing Black could do, and provided the variation, 26...h6 27.Nxe4 fxe4 28.Re1, and if Black captures the e-pawn, then White would win with 29.Bh3.
However, even in this variation, (.48) (22 ply) 26...h6 27.Nxe4 fxe4 28.Re1, it is not clear that Black is lost if he plays: 28..c4! 29.Qc2 Kb8 30.Bxe4 Qxe6.
Instead of 26...Bf6, Alexander played 26...Bd4. Fritz provides the following analysis for this move: (.46) (22 ply) 26...Bd4 27.Qd3, (.38) (20 ply) 27...a5 28.Nxe4 fxe4 29.Bxe4 Qxe6, and Black may be able to defend this position.
In addition to 27...a5, Black also has chances to defend with 27...b5, 27...Kc7, or 27...Kb8. Instead of selecting any of these moves, Alexander effectively ended the game, with the terrible error 27...Qxa4??.
Alekhine made no comment about 27...Qxa4??, or of any of the alternative choices for Black at move 27. After move 24, it appears he believed the game was lost for Black, and other than his short comment at move 26, apparently thought additional comments or analysis were unnecessary.
Alekhine is virtually unrecognizable as the annotator for this game. It makes me wonder if something was missed or mistaken in the deciphering of his notes for the publication of the tournament book.