Phony Benoni: Well, I for one think Rubinstein deserves a little credit for this game. Take a look at the position following <10...Re8>: click for larger viewNow Landau played the unusual <11.Bf4>. That's not just unusual, it's unique: none of the other 138 games in the database use it. And it doesn't look particularly good. So why does Landau play it? I wonder if he was thinking of a couple of games from the past. First, take a look at Euwe vs Rubinstein, 1928, following <11...h6>:  click for larger view<12.Bf4 Nh5?? 13.Nxd5!>, with the idea of 13...cxd5 14.Bc7. Second, Alekhine vs Rubinstein, 1930, after <11...Ne4>:  click for larger view<12.Bf4 f5?? 13.Nxd5!>, with the same idea. Did Landau really hope Rubinstein would do it again? Actually, the trap doesn't work here immediately: after, say 10...h6 11.Nxd5 cxd5 12.Bxc7 Bb4+, Black escapes. But Rubinstein instead chose <10...Nf8>, making darn sure there wouldn't be a threepeat. So, what this game really s shows is that Rubinstein was avoiding the old blunders of the past, instead inventing new and even more creative blunders. Is that so bad? |