chessgames.com
Members · Prefs · Laboratory · Collections · Openings · Endgames · Sacrifices · History · Search Kibitzing · Kibitzer's Café · Chessforums · Tournament Index · Players · Kibitzing
Efim Bogoljubov vs Alexander Alekhine
Alekhine - Bogoljubov World Championship Match (1929), Wiesbaden GER, rd 6, Sep-15
Nimzo-Indian Defense: Spielmann Variation (E22)  ·  1-0

ANALYSIS [x]

FEN COPIED

Click Here to play Guess-the-Move
Given 35 times; par: 93 [what's this?]

explore this opening
find similar games 93 more Bogoljubov/Alekhine games
PGN: download | view | print Help: general | java-troubleshooting

TIP: If we are missing an important game, you can submit it (in PGN format) at our PGN Upload Utility.

PGN Viewer:  What is this?
For help with this chess viewer, please see the Olga Chess Viewer Quickstart Guide.
PREMIUM MEMBERS CAN REQUEST COMPUTER ANALYSIS [more info]

A COMPUTER ANNOTATED SCORE OF THIS GAME IS AVAILABLE.  [CLICK HERE]

Kibitzer's Corner
Nov-18-03
Premium Chessgames Member
  Honza Cervenka: If 11...Ne3?, then 12.Qd3 wins the Knight in few moves: 12...Ng2+ 13.Kd1 Qf2 14.Qe2 Qd4+ 15.Kc2 etc.
Nov-18-03
Premium Chessgames Member
  Honza Cervenka: This game shows that Bogoljubov was not only a superb tactician, but (sometimes) also very good positional player. Here he gave no chance to Alekhine, whose Rook was compelled to defend Pa7 from a8 and whose Knight on a6 was absolutely motionless.

Chessgames.com, according to V.A.Charushin's book about Bogoljubov ("Odna, no plamennaya strast"; GAZ: Nizhnyj Novgorod 1995.) the gamescore here is not correct. 36.Rg2 was played, not 36.Ra2.

Oct-23-05  csmath: <This game shows that Bogoljubov was not only a superb tactician, but (sometimes) also very good positional player.> Yes. I don't think that one can find too many games where Alekhine was so outclassed first in the opening (since AA's opening knowledge was legendary) and then in the middlegame positionally. Bogo just totally strangled the great attacker, bit by bit. Bogo must have been mighty proud of this great game.

<the gamescore here is not correct. 36.Rg2 was played, not 36.Ra2.>

That makes little sense. This gamescore here is more consistent.

Oct-23-05  Kean: yeah, the roles seem inverted. Torre suggested 8.d3
Oct-24-05
Premium Chessgames Member
  Calli: Bogo did play 36.Rg2. <Csmath> refers to the fact that he could have taken the pawn after 36...g6?, but didn't.

So what happened? Alekhine and Bogoljubow simply made errors in time trouble. Someone apparently didn't believe they could make such moves and "corrected" with Ra2 to make things look good.

Oct-24-05  csmath: Well, if that is the case, then the game is not as good as it appears to be. :-))
Oct-24-05
Premium Chessgames Member
  Calli: Ra2 would be pretty weird too. Also there is no reason to play g6 after Ra2. After Rg2, perhaps AA thought his king was still at f7 - he had just moved it.

I would submit a correction, but since Honza couldn't get changed ...

Aug-01-06
Premium Chessgames Member
  Honza Cervenka: <Alekhine and Bogoljubow simply made errors in time trouble.> I guess that Bogo simply prefered to keep black Rook inactive by 37.Rc2. To take the Pawn or not to take it changed nothing on the fact that black was completely outplayed and hopelessly lost. 37.Rc2 looks like a call from Bogo to Alekhine: Hey, Sasha, it's time to resign this one...:-D
Aug-05-06
Premium Chessgames Member
  Honza Cervenka: <Chessgames.com> 36.Rg2 was played in the game, not 36.Ra2. In above mentioned Charushin's book there is given such a comment to the 37th move of white:

<37.Rc2!? <White is not allured by 37.fxg6 hxg6 38.Rxg6 Ne6 with a sort of counter-play. Now already 38.Nc7! is threatening.>>

Dec-21-06  Gouki: when 16...♘a6 was played, who would have thought that this knight would remain out of the game up until move 47 where as soon as it comes to life, it is already a hopelessly lost position for black :D
Mar-04-08  Knight13: Black's already worse on move 19. That ...Qh4+ ...Qxd4 lost too much initiative.
Mar-01-09  WhiteRook48: revenge for the triple queen sacrifice :D
Jul-20-10  aragorn69: Alekhine's article after the game:
<New York Times, 18 September 1929, page 25 of the sports section:

‘WIESBADEN, Sept. 17 – The sixth game of my championship match with E.D. Bogoljubow resulted in a victory for the challenger, made the honors even again in the championship, and once more the cause of my losing is to be found in my choice of an unfortunate variation as the player of the black pieces.

This time, however, the defeat was not due to an unsound development of pieces as was the case in the fourth and fifth games, but because a tactical “joker” was overlooked in the course of working out a somewhat complicated variation.

On the 15th [sic] move, pawn to queen’s knight three, the player of the black pieces overlooked the reinforced counter-move employed in the chief variation which was played on this occasion – that is, after pawn to king’s four on 11th move, knight to king’s sixth cannot be played because of queen to queen’s three on the 12th move. After the retreat of knight to king’s two and the enforced exchange of queens which followed a few moves later, a position resulted which, in view of the existing general weakness of the entire queen’s wing, could not be defended against by accurate play.

Yet I have the impression that Bogoljubow’s play from then on, although well carried out, nevertheless lacked “absolute exactness” for on the 18th [sic] move it was possible for me, by playing rook to queen’s square and only then knight to bishop’s square, to make it difficult for him to find the path to win.

After this lapse, which is further indication that as yet I have not been able to get into my real stride in this match, Black had only a few harmless tactical sorties at his disposal, and finally he had to yield to the inevitable.

The following variation may be noted: 47th move, knight to knight’s 5, rook to knight’s 5, 48th, pawn to rook’s 5, knight to bishop’s four mate.

Thus, out of six games played, four have ended decisively – an unusually high percentage for a match of this importance and which may be explained on the ground that both players have selected risky variations when handling the black pieces. Perhaps the present pace will let up in the course of the next few games, but in any event, the match promises to become more exciting than was at first generally expected.’>

Source: http://www.chesshistory.com/winter/...

Jul-20-10  aragorn69: In other words, Nc8 sould have been played only after 19-Rd8.

And if 47.Nb5? Rg4 48.h5?? Nc5 mate. Pretty, but was it really worth mentioning after being so soundly outplayed in the endgame?!?

Jul-05-11  qqdos: <36.Rg2 or 36.Ra2?> Sergei Soloviov, in his 2004 book Bogoljubov : The Fate of a Chess Player, gives this game and plumps for 36.Rg2! g6 37.Rc2 (intending 38.Nc7!). If 36...Kf8 37.e5 fxe5 38.Bxe5 . Does this help to resolve the question?
Sep-19-13  Karpova: After 11.e4


click for larger view

Paul Saladin Leonhardt suggests: 11...Ne3 12.Qd3! Qxd3 <not 12...Ng2+ 13.Kd1! Qf2 14.Qe2!> 13.Bxd3 Ba6 14.Bxa6 Nc2+ 15.Kd1 Nxa1 16.Bb7 <not 16.Bc4 Nc6! followed by 0-0-0+ and Na5 or Nd4; worse is also 16.Bb5+ Ke7! 17.Ba4 b5! 18.Bxb5 Rd8+> 16...Kd7 17.Lxa8 Nc6 18.Bb7 Nc5 <Schwarz hätte die Figur bei überlegener Stellung zurückgewonnen. Schach scheint doch nicht ganz einfach zu sein!> (Black would have regained his piece and obtained a superior position. Chess doesn't seem to be quite easy at all!)

Leonhardt's conclusion is then refuted: 19.b4! Nxb7 <19...Nd3 20.Be3 c6 21.Kd2 Ne5 22.Kc3 followed with Ne2 and Na1 is lost for Black> 20.Bb2 Nb3 21.Kc2 <winning the Nb3, so Alekhine didn't miss a chance by not going for 11...Ne3?>.

Source: Page 295 of the October 1929 'Neue Wiener Schachzeitung'

Jan-17-16
Premium Chessgames Member
  thegoodanarchist: 48...Rf7 allows 49.Rd8#

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.

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 game 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 Chessgames.com, its employees, or sponsors.
All moderator actions taken are ultimately at the sole discretion of the administration.

This game is type: CLASSICAL. Please report incorrect or missing information by submitting a correction slip to help us improve the quality of our content.

<This page contains Editor Notes. Click here to read them.>

Featured in the Following Game Collections[what is this?]
Game 131
from Garry Kasparov's On My Great Predecessors (1B) by demirchess
When Alekhine is outclassed in positional play
from Brilliancies @ best games by totololo
2nd of 2 losses of Alekhine's while playing Nimzo-Indian
from Alexander Alekhine Games, 1925-1929 by shankartr2018
Game 131
from Garry Kasparov's On My Great Predecessors (1B) by AdrianP
Nimzo-Indian: Spielmann variation (vs 4... Qe7).
from Opening themes of Tarrasch or Dr. Siggy? by fredthebear
Rook a8 ''the Protector''
from yugiohgiorgos' favorite games by yugiohgiorgos
Alekhine's Worst Games 1927-1939
by isolatedpawn
Nimzo-Indian Study
by fispok
Bogoljubov - Alekhine, 1929 Game 6
from FGetulio's How World Champions Win II by fgetulio
Nimzo-Indian Study
by swclark25
Game 6, Match tied 2-2 (3-3)
from 1929 World Chess Championship by Penguincw
Efim Bogoljubov
by blues66
2nd of 2 losses of Alekhine's while playing Nimzo-Indian
from Alexander Alekhine Games, 1925-1929 by MonsieurL
November,p. 174 [Game 104 / 5172]
from American Chess Bulletin 1929 by Phony Benoni
Game 131
from Garry Kasparov's On My Great Predecessors (1B) by nakul1964
bogoljubov 1
from emilio's favorite games, 2 by emilio martinez
challenger wins with a mighty pawn...
from WC-part three Capa-Khine by kevin86
Nimzo-Indian: Spielmann variation (vs 4... Qe7).
from Opening themes. by jpetersen46321
Match Alekhine!
by docjan
The Hardest Wins
by crwynn
plus 7 more collections (not shown)

Home | About | Login | Logout | F.A.Q. | Profile | Preferences | Premium Membership | Kibitzer's Café | Biographer's Bistro | New Kibitzing | Chessforums | Tournament Index | Player Directory | Notable Games | World Chess Championships | Opening Explorer | Guess the Move | Game Collections | ChessBookie Game | Chessgames Challenge | Store | Privacy Notice | Contact Us

Copyright 2001-2021, Chessgames Services LLC