chessgames.com
Members · Prefs · Laboratory · Collections · Openings · Endgames · Sacrifices · History · Search Kibitzing · Kibitzer's Café · Chessforums · Tournament Index · Players · Kibitzing

Alexander Alekhine
Alekhine 
George Grantham Bain Collection (Library of Congress)
 

Number of games in database: 2,228
Years covered: 1905 to 1946
Overall record: +867 -170 =432 (73.7%)*
   * Overall winning percentage = (wins+draws/2) / total games in the database. 759 exhibition games, blitz/rapid, odds games, etc. are excluded from this statistic.

MOST PLAYED OPENINGS
With the White pieces:
 Ruy Lopez (184) 
    C68 C62 C77 C78 C79
 Orthodox Defense (169) 
    D51 D63 D50 D67 D61
 French Defense (127) 
    C01 C13 C07 C11 C15
 Queen's Pawn Game (109) 
    D02 D00 A40 A46 D05
 Sicilian (109) 
    B20 B32 B40 B62 B30
 Queen's Gambit Declined (103) 
    D06 D30 D37 D31 D35
With the Black pieces:
 Ruy Lopez (105) 
    C79 C78 C77 C68 C61
 Queen's Pawn Game (66) 
    D02 A46 A40 E10 A50
 French Defense (63) 
    C11 C01 C12 C00 C13
 Nimzo Indian (41) 
    E34 E33 E22 E30 E46
 French (36) 
    C11 C12 C00 C13 C10
 Sicilian (30) 
    B40 B20 B83 B80 B25
Repertoire Explorer

NOTABLE GAMES: [what is this?]
   Bogoljubov vs Alekhine, 1922 0-1
   Reti vs Alekhine, 1925 0-1
   Alekhine vs A Nimzowitsch, 1930 1-0
   Alekhine vs Lasker, 1934 1-0
   Alekhine vs Yates, 1922 1-0
   Gruenfeld vs Alekhine, 1923 0-1
   Alekhine vs Capablanca, 1927 1-0
   Alekhine vs M Vasic Miles, 1931 1-0
   Alekhine vs von Feldt, 1916 1-0
   Capablanca vs Alekhine, 1927 0-1

WORLD CHAMPIONSHIPS: [what is this?]
   Capablanca - Alekhine World Championship Match (1927)
   Alekhine - Bogoljubov World Championship Match (1929)
   Alekhine - Bogoljubov World Championship Rematch (1934)
   Alekhine - Euwe World Championship Match (1935)
   Euwe - Alekhine World Championship Rematch (1937)

NOTABLE TOURNAMENTS: [what is this?]
   Scheveningen (1913)
   19th DSB Congress, Mannheim (1914)
   All Russian Amateur (1909)
   Baden-Baden (1925)
   Karlsbad (1923)
   San Remo (1930)
   Bern (1932)
   Prague Olympiad (1931)
   Bled (1931)
   Zuerich (1934)
   Montevideo (1938)
   Semmering (1926)
   Bad Pistyan (1922)
   Hamburg Olympiad (1930)
   Karlsbad (1911)

GAME COLLECTIONS: [what is this?]
   Alex Alek Alex Alek Fredthebear Alex Alek Alex by fredthebear
   Alekhine's 300 games by 7krzem7
   Alekhine's 300 games by Malanjuk
   Match Alekhine! by amadeus
   Match Alekhine! by chessgain
   Match Alekhine! by docjan
   My Best Games of Chess (Alekhine) by daveyjones01
   book: My Best Games of Chess (Alekhine) by Baby Hawk
   My Best Games of Chess (Alekhine) by brucemubayiwa
   Alekhine - My Best Games of Chess 1908-1937 by StoppedClock
   My Best Games of Chess (Alekhine) by SantGG
   My Best Games of Chess 1908-1937 by smarticecream
   My Best Games of Chess (Alekhine) by MSteen
   My Best Games of Chess (Alekhine) by doug27

GAMES ANNOTATED BY ALEKHINE: [what is this?]
   Capablanca vs Tartakower, 1924
   Reti vs Bogoljubov, 1924
   Botvinnik vs Vidmar, 1936
   Alekhine vs Botvinnik, 1936
   Botvinnik vs Tartakower, 1936
   >> 78 GAMES ANNOTATED BY ALEKHINE


Search Sacrifice Explorer for Alexander Alekhine
Search Google for Alexander Alekhine

ALEXANDER ALEKHINE
(born Oct-31-1892, died Mar-24-1946, 53 years old) Russia (federation/nationality France)
PRONUNCIATION:
[what is this?]

Alexander Alexandrovich Alekhine was the fourth World Champion, reigning from 1927 to 1935, and from 1937 until his death in 1946. He is the founding inspiration for the Soviet School of Chess that came to dominate world chess after World War II.

Background

Alekhine was born in Moscow, on 31 October 1892 (October 19th on the Russian calendar). Circa 1898, he was taught the game of chess by his older brother, Alexei Alexandrovich Alekhine (1888-1939). His life and chess career were highly eventful and controversial, spiced with two World Wars, including internments by the Germans and the Soviet Cheka (by whom he was marked for execution as a spy) at either end of WWI; subjection to suasion by, and suspicions of collaboration with, the Nazis in WWII; the deaths of his brother, Alexei, in 1939 and his sister, Varvara, in 1944; four marriages; five world championship matches; alcoholism; poor health during WWII and conspicuously failed World Championship negotiations with Capablanca. His eventful life and career terminated in strange circumstances in Portugal just hours after the details of the Alekhine-Botvinnik World Championship match were finalised.

Despite – or perhaps because of this - Alekhine played some of the finest games the world has ever seen. His meticulous preparation, work ethic and dynamic style of play provided the founding inspiration for the Soviet School of Chess despite the fact that soon after he won the world title, his anti-Bolshevik commentaries marked him as an enemy of the Soviet Union until after his death.

Tournaments

1900-1910 By 1902, at the age of 10, young Alekhine was playing correspondence chess sponsored by Shakhmatnoe Obozrenie, Russia's only chess magazine at the time, and won the 16th and 17th Shakhmatnoe Obozrenie Correspondence Chess Tournaments in 1906 and 1910. In 1908, his win at the Moscow Chess Club's Spring Tournament, at the age of fifteen was followed by winning the Autumn Tournament a few months later, a feat which earned him the right to play in the All-Russian Amateur Tournament in 1909. The youngest player in the tournament at the age of sixteen, he won the event held in St. Petersburg (+12 -2 =2), thereby earning the Russian Master title and becoming acknowledged as one of Russia’s top players. His prize was a cut glass Sevres vase that was donated by Czar Nicholas II, and which became his most prized and life-long possession. The year 1910 saw Alekhine win the Moscow Chess Club Autumn and Winter Tournaments, give his first simultaneous exhibition (+15 -1 =6) and participate in the master section of the 17th German Chess Congress in Hamburg, coming equal 7th with Fyodor Ivanovich Dus Chotimirsky. Upon graduating from Polivanov Grammar School in July 1910, he enrolled in and started studying law at Moscow's Imperial University, but after a few months he transferred to the St. Petersburg School of Jurisprudence (where he eventually graduated in 1914).

1911-1920 In 1911, his success at winning some events at the Moscow Chess Club earned him the right to play Board 1 for the Moscow Chess Club in a match against the St. Petersburg Chess Club, during which he drew his game with Eugene Aleksandrovich Znosko-Borovsky. Late in 1911, he played in the 2nd International Tournament in Carlsbad and placed equal 8th, behind Richard Teichmann, Akiba Rubinstein, Carl Schlechter, Georg Rotlewi, Frank Marshall, Aron Nimzowitsch, and Milan Vidmar. By 1912, Alekhine was the strongest chess player in the St. Petersburg Chess Society, winning the St. Petersburg Chess Club Winter Tournament in March and the 1st Category Tournament of the St. Petersburg Chess Club in April. His international successes began in 1912 when he won the 8th Nordic championship held in Stockholm with 8.5/10, 1.5 points clear of Erich Cohn, but then recorded his only minus score of his career later in 1912, when he won 7 and lost 8 games in the All Russian Masters Tournament in Vilna, placing equal 6th behind Rubinstein, Ossip Bernstein, Stefan Levitsky, Nimzovich, and Alexander Flamberg. In 1913, he tied for 1st with Grigory Levenfish in the St. Petersburg Masters Quadrangular Tournament, and then won the 40th Anniversary of the Nederlandschen Schaakbond Commemorative Tournament in Scheveningen with a score of 11.5 out of 13 ahead of a field that included David Janowski, Gyula Breyer, Fred Dewhirst Yates, Edward Lasker and Jacques Mieses. Alekhine's first major success in a Russian tournament came when placed equal first with Aron Nimzowitsch in the All-Russian Masters Tournament at St. Petersburg in early 1914; the playoff was drawn with one win each and they were declared co-winners enabling both to qualify for the 'tournament of champions' in St. Petersburg which was held a few months later. At St. Petersburg he placed 3rd behind Emanuel Lasker and Jose Raul Capablanca. This was the tournament at which Czar Nicholas II was reputed to have awarded the title of Grandmaster of Chess to the top five place getters: Lasker, Capablanca, Alekhine, Siegbert Tarrasch and Marshall. He graduated from the Emperor's College of Jurisprudence on May 16, 1914, finishing 9th in a graduating class of 46 and in July 1914, Alekhine tied for 1st with Marshall at the International Tournament in the Cafe Continental in Paris. (1)

A few weeks later, Alekhine was leading at Mannheim, Germany with nine wins, one draw and one loss, when World War I broke out and the tournament was stopped with six rounds left to play. However this did not prevent Alekhine from receiving the prize money for first place, some 1100 marks. After the declaration of war against Russia, Alekhine and other Russian players, including Efim Bogoljubov, were interned in Rastatt, Germany. After some drama, he was released several weeks later and made his way back to Russia, where he helped raise money to aid the Russian chess players who remained interned in Germany by giving simultaneous exhibitions. Soon after he won the Moscow Chess Club Championship in December 1915, his mother died after which he was posted to the Austrian front where he served in the Union of Cities (Red Cross) on as an attaché in charge of a mobile dressing station. In September, while hospitalised at the Cloisters military hospital at Tarnopol, he played five people in a blindfold display, winning all games. After leaving hospital, Alekhine returned to Moscow, where he was decorated for valour. In 1918, chess activity which had been briefly banned under the new Bolshevik regime picked up under Alexander Ilyin-Zhenevsky, the Chief Government Commissar for General Military Organization, who encouraged and organized chess activities in Russia as part of the campaign to promote culture and education in the Red Army. In 1918, Alekhine worked at the Moscow Criminal Investigation Department as an examining magistrate. In June 1919, while in Odessa, Alekhine was briefly imprisoned and marked for execution by the Cheka, as they suspected him of being a spy due to some documents that were left in his hotel room by a previous occupant. He was released, apparently because of an intercession of a Jewish chess player Yakov S Vilner, who was also the 1918 Odessa chess champion (see paragraph below concerning Alekhine’s purported anti-semitism). (2) A few months later in Moscow in January 1920, he made a clean score in the Moscow City Chess Championship with 11/11, and in October 1920, he won the first USSR Championship, his last tournament in Russia.

1921-30 Alekhine’s permanent departure from Russia in 1921 began a period of chess dominance matched only by Capablanca. Between leaving Russia in 1921 and winning the World Championship in 1927, Alekhine won or shared first prize in most of the tournaments in which he competed, including Budapest, L’Aia (in Italy), Triberg, and The Hague in 1921, Hastings and Karlsbad in 1922, the 16th British Chess Federation Congress at Portsmouth in 1923, Baden-Baden and the Five Masters Tournament in Paris in 1925, Hastings (1925-26), Birmingham, Scarborough and Buenos Aires in 1926, and Kecskemét 1927. Alekhine was 2nd or equal 2nd in the Breyer Memorial Tournament in Pistyan and at the 15th British Chess Federation Congress (known as the London victory tournament) in 1922, at Margate, Semmering, and the Dresden Chess Club 50th Year Jubilee Congress in 1926, and at New York in early 1927.

1931-38 Alekhine dominated chess for almost a decade after his title win. Tournament victories were at San Remo 1930 (+13 =2, 3½ points ahead of Nimzowitsch) and Bled 1931 (+15 =11, 5½ points ahead of Bogoljubov), London 1932, Swiss Championship in Berne in 1932, Pasadena 1932, Mexico City (=1st with Isaac Kashdan), Paris 1933, Rotterdam 1934, Swiss Championship in Zurich in 1934, and Orebro in 1935. In the eighteen months after losing the title to Max Euwe in 1935, Alekhine played in ten tournaments. His results were equal first with Paul Keres at Bad Nauheim in May 1936, first at Dresden in June 1936, second to Salomon Flohr at Poděbrady in July 1936, sixth behind Capablanca, Mikhail Botvinnik, Reuben Fine, Samuel Reshevsky, and Euwe at Nottingham in August 1936 (including his first game – which he lost - against Capablanca since the title match), third behind Euwe and Fine at Amsterdam in October 1936, equal first with Salo Landau at the Amsterdam Quadrangular, also in October 1936, first at the Hastings New Year tournament of 1936/37 ahead of Fine and Erich Eliskases, first at the Nice Quadrangular in March 1937, third behind Keres and Fine at Margate in April 1937; equal fourth with Keres, behind Flohr, Reshevsky and Vladimir Petrov, at Kemeri in June–July 1937 and equal second with Bogoljubow behind Euwe at the Bad Nauheim Quadrangular in July 1937. After regaining his title from Euwe, 1938 saw Alekhine win or come equal first at Montevideo, Margate, and Plymouth before placing =4th with Euwe and Samuel Reshevsky behind Paul Keres, Reuben Fine, and Mikhail Botvinnik, ahead of Capablanca and Flohr, at the historic might-have-been Candidates-style AVRO tournament in the Netherlands. The AVRO (meaning Algemene Verenigde Radio Omroep or General United Radio Broadcasting) tournament, the strongest tournament ever until that time, was held in Holland on November 2-27, with the top eight players in the world participating in a double-round affair. Alekhine finished ahead of Capablanca for the first time, defeating him in their second encounter. Flohr, the official FIDE-endorsed challenger to Alekhine in the next world championship match came in last place without a single win in 14 rounds.

1939-1946 Alekhine was playing first board for France in the 8th Chess Olympiad at Buenos Aires 1939 when World War II broke out in Europe and as team captain of the French team, he refused to allow his team to play Germany. Shortly after the 1939 Olympiad, Alekhine won all his games at the tournaments in Montevideo (7/7) and Caracas (10/10). Alekhine returned to Europe in January 1940 and after a short stay in Portugal, he enlisted in the French army as a sanitation officer. After the fall of France in June 1940, he fled to Marseille and tried to emigrate to America but his visa request was denied. He returned to France to protect his wife, Grace Alekhine, an American Jewess, whom the Nazis had refused an exit visa, and her French assets, a castle at Saint Aubin-le-Cauf, near Dieppe, but at the cost of agreeing to cooperate with the Nazis.

He played in no tournaments in 1940.

During World War II, Alekhine played in 16 tournaments, winning nine and sharing first place in four more. In 1941, he tied for second with Erik Lundin in the Munich 1941 chess tournament, won by Gosta Stoltz the reception at this event was attended by Josef Goebbels and Dr. Hans Frank. Also in 1941, he tied for first with Paul Felix Schmidt at Cracow/Warsaw, and won at Madrid. In 1942, Alekhine won at Salzburg, Munich, Warsaw/Lublin/Cracow and tied for 1st with Klaus Junge at Prague, the latter having been sponsored by Germany’s Nazi Youth Association; these tournaments were organised by Ehrhardt Post, the Chief Executive of the Nazi-controlled Grossdeutscher Schachbund ("Greater Germany Chess Federation") - Keres, Bogoljubov, Gösta Stoltz, and several other strong masters in Nazi-occupied Europe also played in such events. In 1943, he drew a mini-match (+1 -1) with Bogoljubov in Warsaw, won in Prague and was equal first with Keres in Salzburg. By 1943 Alekhine was spending all his time in Spain and Portugal as the German representative to chess events. In 1944, he won a match against Ramon Rey Ardid in Zaragoza (+1 -0 =3; April 1944) and later won at Gijon when prodigy Arturo Pomar Salamanca, aged thirteen, achieved a draw, the youngest person ever to do so with a world champion in a full tournament setting, a record that stands as of 2014. After the event, Alekhine took an interest in the development of Pomar and devoted a section of his last book to him. In 1945, he won at Madrid, tied for second place with Antonio Angel Medina Garcia at Gijón behind Antonio Rico Gonzalez, won at Sabadell, tied for first with Lopez Nunez in Almeria, won in Melilla and took second in Caceres behind Francisco Lupi. Alekhine's last match was with Lupi at Estoril, Portugal near Lisbon, in January 1946 which he won (+2 -1 =1).

In the autumn of 1945, Alekhine moved to Estoril. In September, the British Chess Federation sent Alekhine an invitation to tournaments in London and Hastings. Alekhine accepted the invitations by cable from Madrid. In October, the United States Chess Federation (USCF) protested the invitation of Alekhine to the victory tournament in London. The USCF refused to take part in any projects or tournaments involving Alekhine. Protesters included Reuben Fine and Arnold Denker. In November, Alekhine was in the Canary Islands giving chess exhibitions and giving lessons to Pomar. Also in November 1945, a telegram arrived, signed by W. Hatton-Ward of the Sunday Chronicle, the paper that was organizing the victory tournament in London that, due to a protest from the United States Chess Federation, the invitations to tournaments in England had been cancelled. Shortly after, Alekhine had a heart attack. In December, Alekhine played his last tournament, at Caceres, Spain.

On March 24, 1946, Alekhine was found dead in his hotel room, under circumstances that continue to arouse controversy. The official cause of death was choking to death, since a large piece of unchewed meat was found in his larynx. Alekhine was known to be in failing health, having been told the previous year by a Spanish doctor that he was suffering terminal cirrhosis of the liver.

World Championship

In November 1921, Alekhine challenged Jose Capablanca to a world championship match. A match was suggested for the United States in 1922, but neither this nor a candidate match between Alekhine and Rubinstein in March 1922 to determine a challenger took place. In August 1922, Alekhine played in the 15th British Chess Federation Congress (known as the London victory tournament). The participants of the tournament signed the so-called London agreement on August 9, 1922, which were the regulations for world championship matches, first proposed by Capablanca. Signatories included Alekhine, Capablanca, Bogoljubow, Geza Maroczy, Reti, Rubinstein, Savielly Tartakower and Vidmar. Clause one of the London Rules stated that the match to be one of six games up, drawn games not to count.

After Alekhine won a tournament at Buenos Aires in October 1926, he again challenged Capablanca. The Argentine government undertook to guarantee the finances of the match and in New York Capablanca, Alekhine, and the Argentine organizers finally reached an agreement about the world championship match. The winner would be the first person with six wins, draws not counting. Capablanca accepted the challenge and began the Capablanca - Alekhine World Championship Match (1927) in Buenos Aires on September 16, 1927. All but two of the games in Buenos Aires took place behind closed doors at the Argentine Chess Club, with no spectators or photographs. The other two took place at the Jockey Club but were moved to the Argentine Chess Club due to excessive noise. (3) Assisted by superior physical and theoretical preparations for the match – including a thorough study of Capablanca’s games - Alekhine became the 4th World Chess Champion after defeating Capablanca by +6 -3 =25 in the longest title match ever played till that time. The only longer title match since then was the Karpov - Kasparov World Championship Match (1984/85).

On July 29, 1929, Alekhine and Bogoljubow signed an agreement in Wiesbaden for a match. The rules differed from the London Rules (6 wins, draws not counting) with the number of maximum games limited to 30 games, but the winner still had to score at least 6 wins. The match was not played under the auspices of FIDE or the London Rules. He and Bogoljubow played the Alekhine - Bogoljubov World Championship Match (1929) at Wiesbaden (first 8 games), Heidelberg (3 games), Berlin (6 games), The Hague, and Amsterdam from September 6 through November 12, 1929. Alekhine won with 11 wins, 9 draws, and 5 losses. In April-June, 1934 Alekhine again played and defeated Bogoljubow in the Alekhine - Bogoljubov World Championship Rematch (1934) in Germany with the score of 8 wins, 15 draws and 3 losses. He then accepted a challenge from Max Euwe.

On October 3, 1935 the Alekhine - Euwe World Championship Match (1935) began in Zandvoort, with 10,000 guilders ($6,700) to go to the winner. On December 15, 1935 Euwe had won with 9 wins, 13 draws, and 8 losses. This was the first world championship match to officially have seconds to help in analysis during adjournments. Salo Landau, a Dutch Jew, was Alekhine's second and Geza Maroczy was Euwe's second. From October 5 to December 7, 1937, Alekhine played Euwe for the world championship match in various Dutch cities (The Hague, Rotterdam, Haarlem, Groningen, and Amsterdam). Alekhine won the Euwe - Alekhine World Championship Rematch (1937), becoming the first world champion to regain the world title in a return match, winning 10 games, drawing 11, and losing 4.

Unfinished Championship negotiations

There were two sets of unfinished negotiations that featured prominently during Alekhine’s reign: the long awaited rematch with Capablanca and the extended negotiations for a match with Botvinnik.

On December 12, 1927, in Buenos Aires after their match finished, Alekhine and Capablanca agreed to play a rematch within the next year, under the exact conditions as the first match. In 1929, after winning at Bradley Beach, New Jersey, Bradley Beach offered to host a Capablanca-Alekhine return match, but Alekhine refused and instead accepted the challenge from Efim Bogoljubow. Subsequently, Alekhine not only avoided a return match with Capablanca, but refused to play in any event that included the ex-champion. (4) Capablanca was not invited to San Remo 1930 and Bled 1931 for this reason, a situation which continued until the Nottingham tournament of 1936, after Alekhine had lost the title to Max Euwe. During this tournament, Capablanca defeated Alekhine in their individual encounter. Negotiations continued in various forms until 1940, but the rematch never occurred, despite four title matches being played in 1929, 1934, 1935 and 1937, generating bitter denunciations from Capablanca.

FIDE had tried exercising its limited power by short listing Flohr and Capablanca respectively to challenge Alekhine, but Alekhine declared that he would not be bound by FIDE’s plans. After the AVRO tournament of 1938, which had originally been intended by FIDE as a Candidate-style tournament to produce a challenger for the title, both Botvinnik and Keres issued Alekhine with challenges with Flohr's challenge probably lapsing because of his last placing at AVRO. All three negotiations were stalled or derailed by World War II. The Soviet annexation of Estonia forced Keres’ withdrawal from negotiations in favour of Botvinnik, while Capablanca died in 1942. In 1946 within hours of the Alekhine-Botvinnik match arrangements having been completed, and a venue (in Britain) for the match finally agreed to, Alekhine was found dead in Room 43 of the Estoril Hotel in Lisbon, Portugal under unsettling circumstances.

Simultaneous exhibitions

Alekhine once reminisced: "I was only 9-years old, just after the turn of the century, when I saw the great American Pillsbury play 22 boards blindfolded in Moscow.", an experience that left a deep impression on the budding chess player.

Alekhine played many simuls during the six years leading up to his world championship match in 1927, using them as fundraisers to meet the stiff conditions Capablanca had set for the challenge. He continued to play simuls, including blindfold and match simuls throughout the 1930s. In New York, on April 27, 1924, Alekhine broke the world record for simultaneous blindfold play when he took on 26 opponents, winning 16, losing 5, and drawing 5 after twelve hours of play. He broke his own record, in early 1925, by playing 28 games in Paris, winning 22, drawing 3, and losing 3. In the early 1930s, Alekhine travelled the world giving simultaneous exhibitions, including Hawaii, Tokyo, Manila, Singapore, Shanghai, Hong Kong, and the Dutch East Indies (now Indonesia) in what subsequently became known as Alekhine's Magical Mystery Tour. In 1932, Alekhine played against 300 opponents in Paris grouped in 60 teams of 5 players each, winning 37, losing 6, and drawing 17. In July 1933, Alekhine played 32 people blindfold simultaneously (again breaking his own world record) at the Century of Progress Exhibition in Chicago (World's Fair), winning 19, drawing 9, and losing 4 games in 14 hours.

Team play

Alekhine played first board for France in five Olympiads: Hamburg 1930 (+9-0=0 on their top board **), Prague 1931, Folkestone 1933, Warsaw 1935, and Buenos Aires 1939. He won the gold medal for first board in 1931 and 1933, and silver medals for first board in 1935 (Flohr winning gold) and 1939 (Capablanca winning gold). Although he didn’t win a medal in Hamburg because of insufficient games played, he won 9/9 and the brilliancy prize for the game Stahlberg vs Alekhine, 1930. His overall game score for the five Olympiads was +43 =27 -2.

Theory

Several openings and opening variations are named after Alekhine, including Alekhine's Defence. Alekhine is known for his fierce and imaginative attacking style, combined with great positional and endgame skill. He also composed some endgame studies. Alekhine wrote over twenty books on chess, mostly annotated editions of the games in a major match or tournament, plus collections of his best games between 1908 and 1937.

Personal

Alekhine was married four times, first to Russian baroness Anna von Sewergin in 1920 to legitimise their daughter Valentina, and divorced her some months later. Valentina died circa 1985 in Vienna. In 1921, he married Anneliese Ruegg, Swiss journalist, Red Cross nurse and Comintern delegate and they had a son in 1922, named after him. Young Alex Aljechin, as he came to be known, was under the guardianship of Erwin Voellmy for some years and in later years, he made regular appearances as a spectator in Dortmund until about 2005. Alekhine divorced Ruegg in 1924. In 1924, Alekhine met Nadezhda Semyenovna Fabritskaya Vasiliev, widow of the Russian General V. Vasiliev, and married her in 1925, divorcing her in 1934. In 1934, he married his fourth and final wife, Grace Wishaar, a wealthy US-born British citizen. Alexander and Grace Alekhine – for whom this was also her fourth marriage - remained married until he died.

His elder brother Alexei Alekhine was also a keen player.

Accusations of Anti-Semitism

Alekhine was accused of anti-Semitism following a series of articles that were published in 1941 within Nazi-occupied France in the Pariser Zeitung and in the Deutsche Schachzeitung under his by-line. In April 1941, he tried to go to America, via Lisbon, but was denied a visa apparently because of these articles. Controversy over whether they were a result of genuine collaboration, or whether he was forced to write these articles under Nazi coercion, or whether articles written by him were changed by Nazi editing for publication continues to this day. The evidence against him includes hand-written manuscripts of the articles that were allegedly found after his death, but their existence remains unsubstantiated. The evidence that he was not anti-semitic includes a lifetime of friendly dealings with Jewish chess players (including his second at the 1935 world championship, Salo Landau); friends, and possibly his fourth wife, Grace Alekhine, to whom he was married for 12 years until his death; and Yakov Vilner who interceded on his behalf to save him from execution by the Soviet Cheka in 1918. Grace defended her late husband, asserting that he refused privileges offered by the Nazis.

Testimonials

“He played gigantic conceptions, full of outrageous and unprecedented ideas. ... he had great imagination; he could see more deeply into a situation than any other player in chess history. ... It was in the most complicated positions that Alekhine found his grandest concepts.” - <Bobby Fischer>

“Alexander Alekhine is the first luminary among the others who are still having the greatest influence on me. I like his universality, his approach to the game, his chess ideas. I am sure that the future belongs to Alekhine chess.” - <Garry Kasparov>

"He is a poet who creates a work of art out of something which would hardly inspire another man to send home a picture postcard." - <Max Euwe>

"Firstly, self-knowledge; secondly, a firm comprehension of my opponent's strength and weakness; thirdly, a higher aim – ... artistic and scientific accomplishments which accord our chess equal rank with other arts." - <Alexander Alekhine>

Notes

Alekhine also played at least 40 recorded consultation chess games including the following partnerships: Alekhine / I. Turover, Alekhine / B Reilly, Alekhine / Trompowsky, Alekhine / G Esser, Alexander Alekhine / Leon Monosson, Alexander Alekhine / Efim Bogoljubov, Alekhine / W Cruz, Alekhine / O Cruz, Alekhine / Blumenfeld, Alekhine / Bernstein, Alekhine / Znosko-Borovsky, Alekhine / H Frank, Alekhine / V Rozanov, Alekhine / D N Pavlov, Alekhine / Nenarokov, Alekhine / Tselikov, Alekhine / Tereshchenk, Alekhine / O Zimmerman, Alekhine / Victor Kahn, A Alekhine / G Barron / E Hanger, Alekhine / J van den Bosch, [bad player ID, Alekhine / R Wahrburg, Alekhine / Dr. Fischer, Alekhine / J Budowsky, Alekhine / Allies, & Alekhine / Koltanowski Blindfold Team ].

Sources and References

(1) 1912-14 results: http://storiascacchi.altervista.org...; (2) Wikipedia article: Yakov Vilner; (3) There is correspondence between Alekhine and Capablanca that suggests that Alekhine was open to a rematch and actually accepted a challenge from Capablanca in 1930, but that it fell through because of difficulties on Capablanca's side: Max Euwe (kibitz #167). (4) Shaburov Yuri: Alexander Alekhine. The Undefeated Champion (Publisher: Moscow. 'The Voice', 1992 256pp)

- Kevin Spraggett ’s theory about Alekhine’s death: hhttp://www.spraggettonchess.com/par... and http://www.spraggettonchess.com/par...;

- 2006 Chessbase article about Alekhine's death: http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail...;

- two Russian articles that include commentary on Alekhine's death: <1>: http://www.gambiter.ru/chess/item/1... (Russian language) - Google translation is as follows: http://translate.google.com.au/tran... and <2> http://www.kastornoe.newmail.ru/ale... (Russian language) - Google translation as follows: http://translate.google.com.au/tran...;

- Bill Wall on Alekhine:http://billwall.phpwebhosting.com/a...;

- Playlist of 29 games analysed by <Kingscrusher>: http://www.youtube.com/playlist?lis...

- Discussion about literature about Alekhine: http://www.chesshistory.com/winter/... and a list of books about Alekhine http://www.chesshistory.com/winter/...

Pablo Moran, Agonia de un Genio (ALEKHINE), 1977

Online biography of Alekhine by Jeremy Silman, in seven parts: https://www.chess.com/article/view/...

Wikipedia article: Alexander Alekhine , (**) Wikipedia article: World records in chess

Last updated: 2021-05-05 03:40:59

Try our new games table.

 page 1 of 90; games 1-25 of 2,228  PGN Download
Game  ResultMoves YearEvent/LocaleOpening
1. N Urusov vs Alekhine 0-1331905Shakhmatnoe Obozrenie Corr Tourney No. 16C33 King's Gambit Accepted
2. Alekhine vs A Gize ½-½41190516th Correspondence TournamentC33 King's Gambit Accepted
3. Alekhine vs R Geish-Ollisevich 1-022190516th Correspondence TournamentC39 King's Gambit Accepted
4. Alekhine vs A Andriyashev 1-0301905corrC38 King's Gambit Accepted
5. Alekhine vs N Urusov 1-0321905Shakhmatnoe Obozrenie Corr Tourney No. 16C25 Vienna
6. V Zhukovsky vs Alekhine 0-1201905corrC25 Vienna
7. Alekhine vs V Manko 1-0241905Shakhmatnoe Obozrenie theme 16th corrC25 Vienna
8. A Gize vs Alekhine 0-129190516th Correspondence TournamentC33 King's Gambit Accepted
9. V Manko vs Alekhine 1-0331905Shakhmatnoe Obozrenie theme 16th corrC52 Evans Gambit
10. Viakhirev vs Alekhine 0-1361906corr 1906/07C28 Vienna Game
11. Alekhine vs A Romashkevich 1-0181906Earl tournC20 King's Pawn Game
12. Alekhine vs V Manko 1-0281906F Shakhovskoi corr tC45 Scotch Game
13. Alekhine vs N Zubakin 0-1331906corr 1906/07C33 King's Gambit Accepted
14. B Lyubimov vs Alekhine ½-½391906corr 1906/07C80 Ruy Lopez, Open
15. V Manko vs Alekhine 1-0361906F Shakhovskoi corr tC52 Evans Gambit
16. Alekhine vs A Gize 1-0251906F Shakhovskoi corr /07C29 Vienna Gambit
17. Alekhine vs V Zhukovsky ½-½351906RUE corrC39 King's Gambit Accepted
18. Alekhine vs V Nenarokov 1-0101907MoscowD07 Queen's Gambit Declined, Chigorin Defense
19. Alekhine vs K I Isakov 1-0261907Moscow Club SpringC44 King's Pawn Game
20. Alekhine vs V Nenarokov 0-1431907Moscow Club AutumnD02 Queen's Pawn Game
21. Alekhine vs V Rozanov 1-0421907MoscowC45 Scotch Game
22. Budberg vs Alekhine 0-1341907Moscow Club SpringB00 Uncommon King's Pawn Opening
23. Alekhine vs NN 1-0461907KislovodskD06 Queen's Gambit Declined
24. Gajdukevich vs Alekhine 1-0321907KislovodskB20 Sicilian
25. Alekhine vs Gajdukevich 1-0201907KislovodskC35 King's Gambit Accepted, Cunningham
 page 1 of 90; games 1-25 of 2,228  PGN Download
  REFINE SEARCH:   White wins (1-0) | Black wins (0-1) | Draws (1/2-1/2) | Alekhine wins | Alekhine loses  

Kibitzer's Corner
< Earlier Kibitzing  · PAGE 143 OF 143 ·  Later Kibitzing>
Jan-27-24
Premium Chessgames Member
  GrahamClayton: <BobCrisp>


click for larger view

This is the ending of a simul game, Alekhine vs. A Nestor, Trinidad, 1939 (full game score unknown).

Alekhine uncorked 1.Rc8 Rxc8 2.Qe7!!

<BobCrisp>,
Played in Port of Spain, Trinidad on either 31 January or 4 February 1939.

Jan-29-24  mk volkov: <GrahamClayton> I've seen this ending in Neishtadt's book "Chess Tactics".

...

"Of course, Alekhine was an outstanding world champion. Having an amazing strategic talent, he was the first who felt the dynamics of the game very subtly. He's shown, that it is possible, naturally following the basic positional principles, to play the whole game, based on dynamics. Not to search the long-time advantages, but to begin to "weave" the net from the first moves, to create threats by every move, to attack. In this incomparable skill - to deploy the dynamic play Alekhine, possibly, was a discoverer."

- Vladimir Kramnik

Feb-04-24
Premium Chessgames Member
  Diocletian: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yjb...
Aug-10-24  WilhelmThe2nd: The baptismal record of Alexander Alekhine can be seen online here (first entry from the top of the page):

https://yandex.ru/archive/catalog/3...

The same source has the baptismal records of two of his siblings.

Alexei Alekhine, born on March 6(18), 1888 (second from the bottom of the page): https://yandex.ru/archive/catalog/3...

Varvara Alekhina (the Internet Movie Database gives her name as 'Varvara Alyokhina'), born on May 12(24), 1889 (first entry at top of the page): https://yandex.ru/archive/catalog/1...

I was unable to find a baptismal record for Alexander's other sister, Anna (1886-1890).

Sep-19-24
Premium Chessgames Member
  mifralu: Alekhine's chess notebooks: A blog about Alexander Alekhine's handwritten chess notebooks.

https://alekhine-nb.blogspot.com

Oct-26-24
Premium Chessgames Member
  perfidious: Interview from 1938 by what appears to be BBC:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GRC...

Nov-21-24
Premium Chessgames Member
  mifralu: < MME. ALEKHINE'S BAIL

U.S. CHESS CLUBS TO RAISE £100 FOR PLAYER'S WIFE.

NEW YORK, Monday. The chess clubs of America are to raise the sum of 500 dollars (£100) as bail for Mme. Alekhine, wife of the famous chess player, who is faced with the prospect of deportation from America unless she can produce this sum as bail. Mme. Alekhine has been ordered to return to Poland on the ground that she failed to prove her status as a temporary visitor, but her appeal was granted, and she will be permitted to stay in America if the money is forthcoming. Mme. Alekhine, who proposes to study the working of the prohibition laws while she is over here, is accompanied by her four-year-old son.—B. U. P. >

Source "Birmingham Evening Despatch, 25 January 1926, p. 3"

Dec-05-24  WilhelmThe2nd:

<<Jan-27-24 GrahamClayton: <BobCrisp>


click for larger view

This is the ending of a simul game, Alekhine vs. A Nestor, Trinidad, 1939 (full game score unknown).

Alekhine uncorked 1.Rc8 Rxc8 2.Qe7!!

<BobCrisp>,
Played in Port of Spain, Trinidad on either 31 January or 4 February 1939.>
>

***

Alekhine's opponent in the game Alekhine vs. A Nestor, Trinidad, 1939, mentioned by User: grahamclayton above, is probably <Arthur Louis Nestor>: https://www.google.com/books/editio...

Jan-21-25  Petrosianic: I asked Google's new Generative AI the burning question "Was Alekhine Murdered?", and got this reply:

<There is no evidence that Alexander Alekhine was murdered, but the circumstances of his death remain a mystery.>

Okay...

<An autopsy found that Alekhine died from asphyxiation caused by a piece of meat lodged in his larynx.>

That's quite true.

<Some speculate that Alekhine was murdered by a French "death squad" or Soviet agents.>

Here's where we start to see the problems with Generative AI. They're passing on gossip without providing any reason for believing it.

<Others believe that the Portuguese secret police manipulated the crime scene and autopsy.>

I believe that Kang and Kodos killed him, but they don't report that at all.

<Alekhine's son, Alexander Alekhine Jr., said that "the hand of Moscow reached his father">

Pure speculation, and very unlikely speculation. The Soviets are the last ones who would have killed him before his match with Botvinnik. All Alekhine's death did was to give others a bite at the cherry Botvinnik already had dibs on.

Looks like Generative AI isn't quite here, except for the most rudimentary, cut and dried questions. For example:

<When did man land on the moon?>

<July 20, 1969>

You're right!

Jan-22-25  visayanbraindoctor: Part of a previous post of mine:

<The strongest chess players in chess history?

First, it's possible to compare chess players from different eras by 'using' players with long careers whose active playing spanned across at least three or four decades. Some historical examples involving World Champions and almost World Champions are Lasker, Alekhine, Keres, Botvinnik, and Korchnoi. Specifically, Lasker as an old man in the 1920s was beating the hypermoderns.

An 'old' Alekhine meted out crushing defeats to young Flohr (who played excellent chess even after WW2) and Keres (who I deem to be in his prime during 1936 to 1943) in the 1930s and 40s, and was clearly better than them. Alekhine had also played strong masters with fine post WW2 results such as Euwe, who had excellent results in several post WW2 tournaments although he was clearly over his peak, five time Candidate Reshevsky, Levenfish (two-time Soviet Champion, tied Botvinnik in a match, and slayed whole packs of Soviet players in the regional USSR championships post WW2), two time Candidate and 11 times Swedish Champion Stahlberg, seven time Czechoslovakian champion Pachman, Lilienthal (one time Soviet Champion), Barcza and had winning records against all of them.

In addition, Keres played terrific chess until the 1970s, was thrice Soviet Champion, finished second four times in five Candidates tournaments from 1950 to 1962, beating a whole slew of younger players. This included Korchnoi, another smoking gun proof of the mettle of older players. Korchnoi himself until the 2000s gave good beatings to teen and twenties Grandmasters of the turn of the century.

Keres is another smoking gun, bomb proof evidence of the fallacy of Watson's speculation that 'the best players of old were weaker and more dogmatic than the best players today', and Larsen's assertion that he would crush everyone in the 1920s. The glaring fact is that Keres is a pre-WW2 master who began his career in the late 1920s, and played competitively up to the 1970s, and he did learn (and contributed) to the newer opening variations (the most famous of which is the Keres attack which he invented in 1943). The ideal way for Watson and Larsen to prove their statements is to beat a top pre WW2 master such as Keres. They failed miserably. Tellingly enough an aging Keres beat both a rising Watson one time, and a peak Larsen two times with four draws when they happened play each other. Larsen even had a losing record (0-1) against Andre Lilienthal, the other pre WW2 master he met over the board.>

Alekhine has always struck me as an anomaly. He was the last Russian Empire Champion and the first Soviet Champion. At times he played quite poorly. Most of the time he played excellently. Once in his life, he played better than the post-peak Capablanca in the WC match of 1927 , who in my opinion was already suffering badly from hypertension; but still this Alekhine was good enough to beat most, maybe all, Titleholders in history.)

Jan-22-25  fabelhaft: <The ideal way for Watson and Larsen to prove their statements is to beat a top pre WW2 master such as Keres. They failed miserably. Tellingly enough an aging Keres beat both a rising Watson one time, and a peak Larsen two times>

Watson's assessment can be correct even if he didn't beat Keres himself. Watson was after all not a top 1000 player while Keres was top 25 when they faced each other.

I wouldn't say that Keres is <bomb proof evidence of the fallacy of Watson's speculation that 'the best players of old were weaker and more dogmatic than the best players today'>. Watson wrote this at the end of the 1990s, when the best players were Kasparov, Karpov, Anand and Kramnik.

It is obviously a generalisation (are the players "of old" that Kasparov et al were better than those of 1840, 1880 or 1920?) but it's hardly a bold claim that the objective playing level increased long term due to improved conditions with regards to professional training, coaching, tournament circuits, etc.

Larsen and Keres were ranked rather close to each other. Keres was for example #10 in 1969 when Larsen was #6. No idea how well Larsen would have done dropped into a top tournament in 1920, but he would have had an advantage with regards to opening theory. Enough to win a tournament with Lasker, Alekhine, Capablanca? I don't know. But he would probably have done much better than he did against Fischer and Spassky in his own time.

Jan-22-25
Premium Chessgames Member
  perfidious: <fabelhaft....Larsen and Keres were ranked rather close to each other. Keres was for example #10 in 1969 when Larsen was #6....>

Keres was also a tough out for Korchnoi, whose only win vs le grand maitre came in early 1975, mere weeks before Keres disposed of Watson at Vancouver.

<....No idea how well Larsen would have done dropped into a top tournament in 1920, but he would have had an advantage with regards to opening theory....>

Larsen himself on the matter in reverse, from a 1972 interview with Hugh Alexander:

<....Lasker? He would lose terribly; he would always find himself in types of position he had never seen before--because of course none of us would play a simple Queen's Gambit or a Steinitz Defence to the Lopez against him. It is true that he had no difficulty against the hypermoderns in 1924 though he expected it [...] But the best theorists were not the best players--Réti, for example, was weak tactically. No, I think he would lose terribly to the ten best players of today. If he could get into positions with which he was familiar--then of course he would be a great player; but I think he would not be able to. Even Alekhine would have had to study for a year first; I am not sure, but I believe the man had never seen an exchange sacrifice on c3 in the Sicilian. Imagine that!>

Jan-22-25  visayanbraindoctor: <Even Alekhine would have had to study for a year first; I am not sure, but I believe the man had never seen an exchange sacrifice on c3 in the Sicilian. Imagine that!>

E Schultz vs Alekhine, 1914

13... Rxc3!

Larsen speaking a patently untrue statement once again in his efforts to degrade pre-WW2 players. <exchange sacrifice on c3 in the Sicilian>. It's possible that it was Alekhine himself that invented this sacrifice in the above game in 1914. Imagine that. Larsen simply had no respect for WW2 players, probably because of what I call the narcissistic generation syndrome. The notion that everything that happened recently is always superior to the past, which is untrue.

<Larsen's assertion that he would crush everyone in the 1920s.>

After getting creamed by Keres (Paul Keres beat Bent Larsen 2 to 0, with 4 draws), Lilienthal (Andre Lilienthal beat Bent Larsen 1 to 0), and Stahlberg (Gideon Stahlberg beat Bent Larsen 3 to 2) (all pre WW 2 masters that started their careers in the 1920s), he should have known better, but the narcissistic generation syndrome probably put blinders on him.

Jan-22-25  visayanbraindoctor: <perfidious: Keres was also a tough out for Korchnoi, whose only win vs le grand maitre came in early 1975, mere weeks before Keres disposed of Watson at Vancouver.>

https://www.chessgames.com/perl/che...

Paul Keres beat Viktor Korchnoi 4 to 1, with 12 draws

Korchnoi's only win against a declining Keres came just before Keres died of a myocardial infarct. In his prime, Keres was never beaten by Korchnoi, even once.

Jan-22-25  visayanbraindoctor: <fabelhaft>

2. The strongest chess events in different eras of chess history?

Because of the brain's limitations explained below, the best professional (amateurs don't matter much in top level chess) chess players of each generation beginning in the Lasker era have always played at a similar level - near the maximum allowed by human standards. Now there are larger cohorts of chess professionals post WW2 than preWW2, thanks to government state funding in the Soviet era and presently corporate funding. The result is that large preWW2 tournaments had numerous 'bunnies', relatively weak players. By the Kasparov era, super-tournaments that featured most of the top ten, and no bunnies, had became more common. However, the top 4 or 5 since Lasker's time have always been very strong.

Consequently the smaller the top-player-only tournament, the stronger it gets. For any era. If there was a double round robin tournament in 1914 featuring Lasker, Capablanca, Alekhine, and Rubinstein, and no other, it would be as strong as any present day super-tournament.

Now weed out everyone except the two strongest players in the world. What we (usually) get is the chess World Championship match.

There has been talk of elite tournaments, composed only of the strongest top masters and no weaker bunnies replacing the World Championship match in prestige, probably because of the assumption that they would be the strongest chess events possible. False assumption. The strongest chess events in chess history generally have been World Championship matches. Even the strongest masters in each generation usually do not match the world champion and challenger in chess strength. In a World Championship match, the contestant has to meet the monster champion or challenger over and over again, with no weaker master in between. Capablanca vs Lasker 1921 was just as strong or stronger than a more recent chess event such as the Carlsen vs Anand 2013 WC match, and far stronger than modern super tournaments. (Imagine having to play 14 straight games with a computer-like errorless Capablanca at his peak.)

Jan-22-25  visayanbraindoctor: 3. The strongest chess players in chess history?

First, it's possible to compare chess players from different eras by 'using' players with long careers whose active playing spanned across at least three or four decades. Some historical examples involving World Champions and almost World Champions are Lasker, Alekhine, Keres, Botvinnik, and Korchnoi. Specifically, Lasker as an old man in the 1920s was beating the hypermoderns. An 'old' Alekhine meted out crushing defeats to young Flohr (who played excellent chess even after WW2) and Keres (who I deem to be in his prime during 1936 to 1943) in the 1930s and 40s, and was clearly better than them. Alekhine had also played strong masters with fine post WW2 results such as Euwe, who had excellent results in several post WW2 tournaments although he was clearly over his peak, five time Candidate Reshevsky, Levenfish (two-time Soviet Champion, tied Botvinnik in a match, and slayed whole packs of Soviet players in the regional USSR championships post WW2), two time Candidate and 11 times Swedish Champion Stahlberg, seven time Czechoslovakian champion Pachman, Lilienthal (one time Soviet Champion), Barcza and had winning records against all of them. In addition, Keres played terrific chess until the 1970s, was thrice Soviet Champion, finished second four times in five Candidates tournaments from 1950 to 1962, beating a whole slew of younger players. This included Korchnoi, another smoking gun proof of the mettle of older players. Korchnoi himself until the 2000s gave good beatings to teen and twenties Grandmasters of the turn of the century.

Second and more important, I believe that we can rationally compare chess players from different eras by using objective computer analysis of their middlegames and endgames (not openings). We can 'ask' the computers how accurately the players are playing. They take the place of the stopwatch. As far as I know, nearly every computer study using various programs has always placed Capablanca at number one or two in terms of accuracy. Computers 'love' Capablanca's play.

We have to take this question in the context of the limits of the human Anatomy and Physiology. A concrete example would be the one hundred meter dash. The human body is designed such that the limit it can run is about 9 seconds. In order for a human being to run faster, we would have to redesign the human anatomy into that of say a cheetah. One can rev up the human Anatomy and Physiology, say with steroids, but this regimen would hit an eventual Stonewall too; the same way that we could rev up human proficiency to learn openings with computer assistance.

Since the Nervous System has physiological limits (example of a limit- neuronal action potential speed don't go up much more than 100 m/s) and so limits the human chess playing ability, increasing the number human chess players, thus expanding the normal curve of players, simply creates more possibilities of players playing like a Fischer in his prime, but will not create a mental superman who plays chess at computer levels. This explains why human and computer analysis indicate that Lasker was playing on a qualitatively similar level as more recent WCs.

'Worse' in chess, any computer assistance ends once the opening is over. After a computer-assisted opening prep, every GM today has to play the game the way Lasker did more than a hundred years ago, relying on himself alone, with the same fundamental chess rules and chess clock. An Encyclopedic opening repertoire is not a necessity to be a top player. In fact, there are World Champions who did not do deep opening prep; they just played quiet but sound openings that got them into playable middlegames and then beat their opponents in the middlegame or endgame. Just look at Capablanca, Karpov, and Carlsen.

Because of subconscious adherence to the narcissistic generation syndrome, the belief that everything that is the best can only exist here and now, many kibitzers would not agree to the above theses. While it is true that there have been more active chess professionals and consequently larger cohorts of top chess masters on a yearly basis since WW2 thanks to Soviet state funding and present corporate funding, the very top chess masters since Lasker's time have always played at a similar level- within the limits imposed by the human brain. There is no physical law that bars a pre-WW2 chess master from playing chess as well as today's generation. The human brain has not changed in any fundamental manner in the past tens of thousands of years.

Jan-22-25  visayanbraindoctor: 4. The greatest chess players in history?

The answer depends on the criteria one uses. If the criterion is the ability to play world class chess for the longest period of time, Lasker would be it. He was playing at peak form from 1890 age 22 (when he began a remarkable run of match victories over Bird, Mieses, Blackburne, and Showalter, and culminating in his two massacres of Steinitz) until 1925 at age 57 (when he nearly won Moscow after winning New York 1924). Kasparov (high plateau from 1980 to 2005) and Karpov (high plateau from 1972 to 1996) would follow.

If the criterion is play at their very peak, for various reasons too long to elaborate on, I believe that Karpov was probably stronger than Lasker and Alekhine, and was definitely stronger than Steinitz, Euwe, Botvinnik, Smyslov, Tal, Petrosian, Spassky, Kramnik, Anand, and Ding. And was equal to Carlsen. The peak Capablanca, Fischer, Kasparov, and Carlsen\Karpov in order were stronger than any of the other World champions, with the possible exceptions of Lasker and Alekhine. By the way, Alekhine in my mind is an anomaly. At times he played quite poorly. Most of the time he played excellently. Once in his life, he played better than the post-peak Capablanca, who in my opinion was already suffering badly from hypertension; but still this Alekhine was good enough to beat most, maybe all, Titleholders in history.)

If the criterion is matches, Capablanca would be it. Prime Capa from 1916 through 1922 never made a losing error, even in the most bizarre complications. You can't beat a player in a match if he doesn't make a losing error. At the most all you can do is draw the match, with all games drawn. Prime Capablanca would beat any opponent in a World Championship match. By the way, Capa also played a lot of two game matches early in his career against strong opponents, and won them. He would have no trouble winning the World Cup.

If the criterion is quick games (rapid or blitz), Capablanca would be it. See my posts in his match with Corzo for more details. In a play-off World Championship match with quicker time controls, prime Capablanca would beat anyone.

Jan-22-25  visayanbraindoctor: 5. Computers and Humans of Different Genrarations.

Another related question is how history's top masters would fare against computers. It's obvious from Kasparov's time that computers would totally crush them all. Opening knowledge would not matter much. Computers swamp human opponents in the middle game, simply by calculating more variations more rapidly by several orders of magnitude.

The notion that computers are more advantageous to younger players IMO is not quite right. Younger players should have more energy and stamina in studying chess openings and endgames for long hours everyday compared to older ones, but the use of computers would tend to make the learning process easier for every one including the older ones. Computers would tend to level the learning process.

As a corollary, computers also make it easier today for very young players in their early teens to peak at a younger age than in past eras, although they tend to level off in their early 20s to their high plateau, defined by their inborn talents and determination.

In brief, computers tend to level chess learning for everyone, young and old, in any era (in which they existed).

Observations on the computer-less eras:

A false notion is that the nature of the middlegame today is somehow different from the middlegame in the past. The easiest way to prove the wrongness of this proposition is by observing CG's daily puzzles. Do not peek at the names of the players that played these puzzles, and don't look at the dates. Can you glean from the middlegame play and combinations in the puzzles the date they were played? You can't. You would not know if it was played in 2025, 2000, 1975, 1950, 1925, or 1900. Chess combinations don't just suddenly change their stripes just because a hundred years have passed. With or without computers.

Another observation is that when the best masters of pre-WW2, Lasker, Capablanca, and Alekhine, met the occasional 'modern' structures of the Sicilian Scheveningen and Dragon, KID, Modern Benoni, Benko Gambit, they played strategically perfectly, in just the way these opening structures should be played. So how did these masters play openings and the resulting middlegame structures that are deemed incomprehensible to them by some of today's dogmatically 'modern' kibitzers? The answer is that chess rules and principles have not changed. Center, rapid development, open files and diagonals, holes, weak pawns, piece activity, initiative and attack, positional sacrifices and all types of combinations were as familiar to them as to us.

Note that it is the frequencies of a few middlegame pawn structures that have changed since WW2. Not the Ruy Lopez or QGD, but obviously Sicilians and KIDs are much more common post-WW2. Since so many games nowadays begin with the Sicilian and KID, people associate these with being 'modern' (which is a rather vague undefined term IMO). But certainly Lasker and Capablanca understood the middlegame principles behind them and when they did get these positions they played them excellently, like the top masters they are.

Moreover, Keres is another smoking gun, bomb proof evidence of the fallacy of Watson's speculation that 'the best players of old were weaker and more dogmatic than the best players today', and Larsen's assertion that he would crush everyone in the 1920s. The glaring fact is that Keres is a pre-WW2 master who began his career in the late 1920s, and played competitively up to the 1970s, and he did learn (and contributed) to the newer opening variations (the most famous of which is the Keres attack which he invented in 1943). The ideal way for Watson and Larsen to prove their statements is to beat a top pre WW2 master such as Keres. They failed miserably. Tellingly enough an aging Keres beat both a rising Watson one time, and a peak Larsen two times with four draws when they happened play each other. Larsen even had a losing record (0-1) against Andre Lilienthal

https://www.chessgames.com/perl/che...

and Gideon Stahlberg (2-3)

https://www.chessgames.com/perl/che...

who are also pre WW2 masters he met over the board.

Jan-22-25  visayanbraindoctor: 6. On ratings:

Elo ratings reflect relative and not absolute chess strength.

Chessplayers are naturally arranged in populations partitioned by geopolitical regions & time periods that have infrequent contacts with one another. Within such a population, players get to play each other more frequently, thus forming a quasi-equilibrium group wherein individual ratings would tend to equilibrate quickly; but not with outside groups. With caveats & in the proper context, FIDE/Elo ratings are simply fallible descriptors & predictors of an active player's near-past & near-future performances against other rated players, & only within the same quasi-equilibrium group.

As corollaries: the best way to evaluate a player's strength is to analyze his games & not his ratings; one cannot use ratings to accurately compare the quality of play of players from the past and present, or even the same player say a decade ago and today; & care should be taken in the use of ratings as a criterion in choosing which players to seed into the upper levels of the WC cycle. All the above often entail comparisons between players from different quasi-equilibrium groups separated by space and/or time.

Regarding inflation deniers, they imply that Elo ratings reflect absolute and not relative chess strength. Professor Elo himself would condemn their view. If the top 20 players were to suffer a serious brain injury and begin playing like patzers, but play no one else for the next decade, they would more or less retain their 2700s ratings, although they would be playing terrible patzerish chess.

Jan-22-25
Premium Chessgames Member
  perfidious: <vbd: On ratings:

Elo ratings reflect relative and not absolute chess strength....>

An obvious point, yet oft overlooked.

<....As corollaries: the best way to evaluate a player's strength is to analyze his games & not his ratings; one cannot use ratings to accurately compare the quality of play of players from the past and present, or even the same player say a decade ago and today....>

Looks in mirror after playing several events last year after over twenty years away from the game.

Jan-22-25  fabelhaft: <Capablanca vs Lasker 1921 was just as strong or stronger than a more recent chess event such as the Carlsen vs Anand 2013 WC match, and far stronger than modern super tournaments>

That is debatable. If Carlsen or Anand just had played Kg1-h2 in the diagram below, as Lasker did, there would be massive complaints about them being patzers not worthy of being mentioned in the same sentence as the masters of old.


click for larger view

Capa won easily after Ng4+ followed by Ne5 and picking up the exchange. But of course, everyone makes mistakes. See for example also

https://lichess.org/study/mvJtYO3C/... and https://lichess.org/study/mvJtYO3C/...

and compare with the games below

https://lichess.org/study/PWQ5l7ky/...

Difficult to compare though, the modern players had less time and no adjournments, but I think they played well enough.

Jan-23-25  visayanbraindoctor: <fabelhaft> If I may say so, debating or arguing using specific games is noneffective, because the person you are debating can also choose several games from a multitude of past games as counter examples. That is the very reason why that my 'essay' above does not use specific games. (Except for Larsen's argument that AAA did not even know or see a C3 exchange sac in the Sicilian, a grossly untrue statement that is debunked by a single case example.)

In any case, the rest of the theses in my essay above IMO are valid, They are all of course debatable.

Jan-23-25  fabelhaft: <debating or arguing using specific games is noneffective, because the person you are debating can also choose several games from a multitude of past games as counter examples>

If Capa vs Lasker 1921 was <just as strong or stronger than> Carlsen vs Anand 2013 it isn't exactly a question of a multitude of games to choose from if one wants to support such claims. It's in all 24 games.

Carlsen's accuracy according to the Lichess Stockfish 16 analysis linked above was between 93% and 99% in every game of the 2013 title match. Anand had one game under 91%.

Capa and Lasker both played well in the 1921 match, even if they had in all five games with an accuracy in the 80s according to Lichess Stockfish (Lasker three and Capa two). The match also had many adjournments, some of the games being adjourned more than once, so the players had considerably more time at their disposal.

The Lichess analysis is of course not some final truth on the matter, but in general it is interesting to go though the games a bit more in detail and compare the engine assessments.

Jan-23-25  visayanbraindoctor: <fabelhaft> I'm not sure if you know about this, but <twinlark> and I did analysis on several WC matches of past and recent WC matches. We came to the conclusion that the players ('Past'and 'Modern') played, according to computer analysis, at relatively the same levels.

I would be the first to admit that I once thought as you did, but after tremendous efforts to analyze these WC matches, my opinion drastically changed. The pre-WW2 Champions played just as accurately as the present ones. I just was a usual victim of the narcissistic generation syndrome. (Again explained above.)

Regarding the particular recent 2013 WC you mentioned, I believe that Lasker played at a significantly higher level than Anand, based on my personal assessment. If so, you are actually basing your themes on Carlsens's super excellent chess. Score was Carlsen 6½; Anand 3½, or 65% for Carlsen who did not lose any game.

So Lasker > Anand. Significantly.

(Debatable of course.)

On the other hand, I do know from past computer analysis that Capa never made a single losing error. Score was Capablanca 6½; Lasker 3½, or 64.3 % for Capa (no significant difference with Carlsen's 65% performance). Like Carlsen, Capa did not lose any game.

Even if my opinion that Lasker played significantly better than Anand is false, and that in truth they played at about the same level, You can't beat a guy in a match that never makes a losing error. (I elaborated on all these above.)

Assuming that Carlsen also never made a single losing error, then all games would have been drawn. Regarding Carlsen's accuracy according to computers, in our analysis of WC games, we found out there is a range of accurate moves. And depending on the computer and how far it 'sees' ahead, there can be several varying 'accurate' and 'best' moves, none or few of them losing. Conclusions of high 80s and low 90s are not significantly different; they're too near each other. Most would end in draws. (And if you are including Lasker's errors, Capa would be recorded as probably playing in the low 90s too.)

All these mean that Capablanca and Carlsen played at approximately the same levels in the 1921 WC and 2013 WC matches. Let's also assume that both did not make losing errors. Again, you can't beat a guy in a match that never makes a losing error, so logically they would have drawn all games.

Thus it would have come down to quick games tie breaks.

In this case, see my posts in the Corzo Capablanca match. IMO Capa would beat Carlsen at quick time controls. (Again debatable of course.)

(Also, Capa did play in a lot of quick game tournaments, and topped all or almost all of them. I forget which tournament, but AFAIK Capablanca placed second in only one quick game tournament in his entire career, topping all the rest.) Unfortunately, quick games pre-WW 2 were not well documented, and we have no record of most those tournaments. Also see my visayanbraindoctor's Game Collections Capablanca part.)

<The match also had many adjournments, some of the games being adjourned more than once, so the players had considerably more time at their disposal.>

This is insignificant to the final results. Almost all the games were already decided as win-loss or draw, even before the adjournment. It's mostly a matter of nailing in the result, with the disadvantageous side hoping for an error by his opponent. In case of long games way past adjournments, positions tend to veer off analyzed lines, thus forcing the players to play according to their innate skills. This is rather clear from our studies of WC games.

Mar-27-25  stone free or die: Biographer Bistro (kibitz #31788)
Jump to page #    (enter # from 1 to 143)
search thread:   
< Earlier Kibitzing  · PAGE 143 OF 143 ·  Later Kibitzing>

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.
  8. Do not degrade Chessgames or any of it's staff/volunteers.

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 player 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.

Spot an error? Please suggest your correction and help us eliminate database mistakes!
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 2001-2025, Chessgames Services LLC