Members · Prefs · Laboratory · Collections · Openings · Endgames · Sacrifices · History · Search Kibitzing · Kibitzer's Café · Chessforums · Tournament Index · Players · Kibitzing
David Max Schapiro vs Gerard Oskam
NL vs Lower Rhine region (1911), Krefeld GER, Sep-30
Spanish Game: Berlin Defense. Rio Gambit Accepted (C67)  ·  1/2-1/2



Get this game explained with Decode Chess
explore this opening
find similar games 158 more games of G Oskam
PGN: download | view | print Help: general | java-troubleshooting

TIP: You can learn a lot about this site (and chess in general) by reading the Chessgames Help Page. If you need help with premium features, please see the Premium Membership Help Page.

PGN Viewer:  What is this?
For help with this chess viewer, please see the Olga Chess Viewer Quickstart Guide.

Kibitzer's Corner
Jan-26-14  Karpova: This game was played on board 4 of the 3rd Netherlands vs Lower Rhine Region match in the Stadtwaldhaus in Krefeld.

Annotations by W Therkatz from the 'Krefelder Zeitung' (condensed):

4...Nxe4 <Less often played lately, more common is 4...Be7 as in Capablanca vs O Bernstein, 1911>.

5...exd4 <First played in London 1851 (Bird-Horowitz), then differing in Neumann-Winawer (Paris 1867) and Mackenzie-Vazquez (Havana 1887). Was rarely considered as it was regarded as inferior until 1908 with the correspondence game Berlin vs Riga, 1906 - a final conclusion on this variation was not arrived at, the missing moves 3...a6 4.Ba4 (compared to the Berlin-Riga game) do not signify a disadvantage for White in the "Riga-Variante".>

6.Re1 <Reference to Alapin's analysis in 'Wiener Schachzeitung' 1910 and H. Krause-Oringe in the 'Deutsches Wochenschach'.> I skipped the lines.

6...d5 <Reference to Alapin's try in 1901 in the 'Wiener Schachzeitung' to support 6...f5. Berger disagrees with him in 'Deutsche Schachzeitung' 1908.> I again skipped the lines.

7.Nxd4 <Initiates the not yet refuted counter combination by Black, after which White has the choice to go for a draw or unforseen consequences. Now follows a long part on the opening, mentioned are Berger and Timbrel Pierce with 7.c4?!, A. G. Thomas in the 1909 BCM, a drawn game between Dr. J. F. L. Mc Cann - Dr. Allingham, correspondence match Lancashire-Surrey 1910 and again Berger's and Alapin's analysis 7.Bg5! (Berger) 7...Be7! (Alapin) 8.Bxe7 Qxe7 9.Nxd4 0-0! (Alapin) 10.Bxc6 bxc6 11.f3 c5 etc..>

7...Bd6 <! Prof. Dr. Bohl is credited with the evaluation of that move.>

8.Nxc6 <Reference to the postal game Hamilton-Brooke, Kent 1909.>

8...Bh2+ <!>

9.Kh1 <Discussion why 9.Kxh2 is bad and that the only alternative is 9.Kf1?! as in Maroczy vs J N Berger, 1908>.

9...Qh4 <!>

10.Rxe4+ <The exchange sacrifice is almost forced as 10.Nd4+ Kf8 and White can't parry all of Black's threats.>

13...Bf5 <They had followed Berlin-Riga so far. Alapin doesn't see how White should gain an advantage after 13...c6! 14.Bc4 f6 15.Nc3 Re8 16.Bf4 Be6 17.Rd1+ Ke7 18.Bxe6 Kxe6 19.Nxe4 Kf5 20.Nd6+ Kxf4 21.Nxe8 Rxe8 22.Rd7 Re2 and so on.> 19.Nxe4 is a mistake and 19.g4 better.

16.Be3 <Now follows an endgame correctly played by both players and in which it is not easy to realize the positional advantage of White.>

17.Bc5+ <!>

23.Ne3 <!>

25...Be6 <!>

36...f5 <!>

39.Bd2 <?>

39...h4+ <!>

44.Be1 <This final position was assessed by the arbitral court as a draw.>

Source: Pages 67-69 of the February-March 1912 'Wiener Schachzeitung'

As usual, Therkatz writes almost a whole book on the opening phase and then leaves the endgame basically unannotated. I skipped most of the 100-year old opening discussion.

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, 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.>

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