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

Moscow (1936) Following the successes in international tournaments of Moscow (1925) and Moscow (1935), Nikolai Vasilyevich Krylenko again sought to stun the chess world and the Soviet Union with a third international event between Soviet masters and their foreign counterparts. This time, however, he conceived of a more rigorous format, with the ten players (five Soviets and five foreigners) in a double round robin competition. The lineup was impressive, with Capablanca and Lasker being invited back a third time to compete in Moscow, in addition to the previous year's winners, Botvinnik and Flohr. The tournament was held in Moscow's famous Hall of Columns from May 14 to June 8. Capablanca's near flawless accuracy and superiority in the endgame proved to be instrumental in winning first prize by a full point over the future world champion Botvinnik. Lasker, who had always finished ahead of his successor to the crown in prior tournaments, started out strongly, but at 67 years of age he became fatigued more easily and his performance suffered during the second cycle. The tournament brought immense excitement and interest, both to the citizens of the Soviet Union and to the greater world at large. Capablanca's first place was to be one of the last successes against the Soviet Chess School before the triumph of Robert James Fischer 36 years later. It was also the last hurrah for Krylenko, the founder and organizer of the tournament. He was arrested in January 1938, tried and executed later that year. Moscow, Soviet Union (Russia), 14 May - 8 June 1936 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 Pts 1 Capablanca ** 1½ ½½ 1½ 1½ ½1 ½½ ½1 ½1 11 13 2 Botvinnik 0½ ** ½1 1½ ½1 ½1 ½½ ½½ 11 ½1 12 3 Flohr ½½ ½0 ** ½1 0½ ½1 ½0 11 0½ ½1 9½ 4 Lilienthal 0½ 0½ ½0 ** ½½ ½1 ½1 ½½ ½1 ½½ 9 5 Ragozin 0½ ½0 1½ ½½ ** 1½ 1½ ½0 0½ ½½ 8½ 6 Lasker ½0 ½0 ½0 ½0 0½ ** ½1 1½ ½½ 1½ 8 =7 Levenfish ½½ ½½ ½1 ½0 0½ ½0 ** 10 ½½ ½0 7½ =7 Eliskases ½0 ½½ 00 ½½ ½1 0½ 01 ** ½½ ½½ 7½ =7 Kan ½0 00 1½ ½0 1½ ½½ ½½ ½½ ** 0½ 7½ =7 Riumin 00 ½0 ½0 ½½ ½½ 0½ ½1 ½½ 1½ ** 7½ Original collection : Game Collection: Moscow 1936, by User: suenteus po 147.  page 1 of 4; games 1-25 of 90  Game   Result Moves Year Event/Locale Opening 1. Lasker vs Botvinnik ½-½ 37 1936 Moscow C01 French, Exchange 2. Capablanca vs I Kan ½-½ 39 1936 Moscow E43 Nimzo-Indian, Fischer Variation 3. Flohr vs Riumin   ½-½ 31 1936 Moscow A95 Dutch, Stonewall 4. Levenfish vs Lilienthal   ½-½ 34 1936 Moscow D17 Queen's Gambit Declined Slav 5. Ragozin vs Eliskases ½-½ 67 1936 Moscow A14 English 6. Eliskases vs Levenfish 0-1 65 1936 Moscow A28 English 7. Flohr vs Capablanca ½-½ 45 1936 Moscow D57 Queen's Gambit Declined, Lasker Defense 8. Lilienthal vs Lasker ½-½ 20 1936 Moscow D62 Queen's Gambit Declined, Orthodox, Rubinstein Attack 9. I Kan vs Ragozin 1-0 58 1936 Moscow B84 Sicilian, Scheveningen 10. Riumin vs Botvinnik ½-½ 80 1936 Moscow C90 Ruy Lopez, Closed 11. Lasker vs Eliskases 1-0 44 1936 Moscow C14 French, Classical 12. Ragozin vs Flohr 1-0 35 1936 Moscow D19 Queen's Gambit Declined Slav, Dutch 13. Botvinnik vs Lilienthal 1-0 44 1936 Moscow A15 English 14. Levenfish vs I Kan   ½-½ 46 1936 Moscow E22 Nimzo-Indian, Spielmann Variation 15. Capablanca vs Riumin 1-0 27 1936 Moscow A53 Old Indian 16. Eliskases vs Botvinnik   ½-½ 30 1936 Moscow E22 Nimzo-Indian, Spielmann Variation 17. Riumin vs Lilienthal   ½-½ 28 1936 Moscow A06 Reti Opening 18. Capablanca vs Ragozin 1-0 63 1936 Moscow E22 Nimzo-Indian, Spielmann Variation 19. Flohr vs Levenfish ½-½ 80 1936 Moscow D42 Queen's Gambit Declined, Semi-Tarrasch, 7.Bd3 20. I Kan vs Lasker ½-½ 42 1936 Moscow D66 Queen's Gambit Declined, Orthodox Defense, Bd3 line 21. Lilienthal vs Eliskases   ½-½ 61 1936 Moscow E33 Nimzo-Indian, Classical 22. Lasker vs Flohr ½-½ 21 1936 Moscow B05 Alekhine's Defense, Modern 23. Levenfish vs Capablanca ½-½ 33 1936 Moscow D37 Queen's Gambit Declined 24. Ragozin vs Riumin ½-½ 18 1936 Moscow E33 Nimzo-Indian, Classical 25. Botvinnik vs I Kan 1-0 40 1936 Moscow E33 Nimzo-Indian, Classical  page 1 of 4; games 1-25 of 90    REFINE SEARCH:   White wins (1-0) | Black wins (0-1) | Draws (1/2-1/2)   Aug-16-14    whiteshark: <'Sleep is extremely important to a chess player,'> Mikhail Botvinnik said. <'When I was young I slept wonderfully, but dur­ing the third Moscow international tournament of 1936 it was so hot and the streets were so noisy all the time that I lost sleep. But I was 25 and I could play well despite the lack of sleep, I forced myself to play.'> Source: Genna Sosonko, 'Smart Chip from St.Petersburg and other tales of a bygone chess era', New in Chess 2006, p.38 Feb-23-17    ZonszeinP: These gentlement (Flohr, Ragozin, Kan, Riumin) losing to Botvinnik in the second half of the tournament.............. Didn't prevent Capa from winning But then, Botvinnik was already one of the best at the time Probably only second to the one (and only) who won this tournament Feb-23-17    keypusher: < ZonszeinP: These gentlement (Flohr, Ragozin, Kan, Riumin) losing to Botvinnik in the second half of the tournament.............. Didn't prevent Capa from winning But then, Botvinnik was already one of the best at the time Probably only second to the one (and only) who won this tournament> Why second? Moscow (1935) Nottingham (1936) Feb-23-17    plang: No way Capablanca was the strongest player in the world in 1936. Alekhine? Botvinnik? Euwe? Feb-23-17    ZonszeinP: <keypusher> the second of your examples doesn't impress me. Capa lost a game to Flohr mainly because Euwe was interfering with his focusing (and also, because Flohr played very well. True) Hadn't he lost that game (which I believe could have been drawn) then he wouldn't have shared first with Botvinnik...(But won alone) Last: I would kindly refer you to my several concecutives dots in my kibbitz.... During those tormentous years, any Russian could throw some games to Botvinnik...(I am not 100% sure about that though. Have to admit) And <plang>: Alekhine didn't give a return match to Capa, simply, because he was frighten!! Thank you Feb-23-17    ughaibu: You realise that Flohr wasn't a Soviet in 1936? Feb-23-17    ZonszeinP: Good point! I prefer them not to throw a game at all! Feb-23-17    ZonszeinP: Riumin was an excellent player. I believe he even beat Capablanca once. I regret. I don't really believe he lost to Botvinnik without a real fight. Feb-23-17    keypusher: <ZonszeinP: <keypusher> the second of your examples doesn't impress me. Capa lost a game to Flohr mainly because Euwe was interfering with his focusing (and also, because Flohr played very well. True) Hadn't he lost that game (which I believe could have been drawn) then he wouldn't have shared first with Botvinnik...(But won alone)> Very tiresome, these excuses every time Capablanca loses. If he'd listened to Euwe he would have realized that he'd reached the time control and not made his losing blunder on move 37. But Flohr had already missed a chance to finish him off. Capablanca and Botvinnik finished at Nottingham with 10 points each. Euwe, Fine, and Reshevsky were just a half point behind. Alekhine was just a half point behind that group. Flip the result for any of a dozen games among that group (for example, Alekhine giving away his game to Capablanca) and the standings change completely. In short, <Euwe cost Capablanca the tournament> is another stupid chess myth. <Last: I would kindly refer you to my several concecutives dots in my kibbitz.... During those tormentous years, any Russian could throw some games to Botvinnik...(I am not 100% sure about that though. Have to admit)> You didn't even know that Flohr was Czech? I'm guessing you don't know what Botvinnik's overall score was against Ragozin, Kan, and Riumin, either. You want to see a point being given away at Moscow 1936? Capablanca vs Riumin, 1936 You want another? Botvinnik vs Capablanca, 1936 As long as we're changing the results of games, can we give Botvinnik 28.Qa5 -- and the tournament? Feb-23-17    ZonszeinP: I knew very well that Flohr was an Ukrainian who became Czech. I admitted already that I shouldn't have include him among the Soviets in 1936. And thank you for all the other lessons... Feb-23-17    ZonszeinP: And BTW, I knew about Salo Flohr background even before this website ever existed Feb-23-17    ZonszeinP: Even before I ever saw a computer in my whole life! Or even knew they existed! I already knew about Salo Flohr Thanks Dec-29-17    Jonathan Sarfati: Capablanca was still a blitz monster at the time. Botvinnik says he was giving odds of one minute to five against “almost every Soviet master” (according to Soltis' biography https://www.amazon.com/dp/078647337...). Jun-26-18    jessicafischerqueen: <Botvinnik v Lasker> video analysis from <agadmator's Chess Channel> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1KE... Jan-10-22    CapablancaDisciple: Does anyone know if it's true that Capablanca told Stalin his players were cheating in this tournament by losing on purpose to Botvinnik? I read a quote once but I don't know the source. Jan-10-22    CapablancaDisciple: <<No way Capablanca was the strongest player in the world in 1936.>> Capablanca may not have been in his prime anymore but the truth is he was still the best then, and was indeed the best in the world his whole career, till the day he died. Even suffering from severe hypertension (throughout his whole life, even as a child) Capablanca was capable of beating anyone, and he had great tournament results even after he lost the World Championship. Jan-10-22    perfidious: <CapablancaDisciple: <<No way Capablanca was the strongest player in the world in 1936.>> Capablanca may not have been in his prime anymore but the truth is he was still the best then, and was indeed the best in the world his whole career, till the day he died....> I too admire Capablanca, but this statement is clearly rubbish. Jan-10-22    CapablancaDisciple: <<I too admire Capablanca, but this statement is clearly rubbish.>> How so? The truth is Capablanca was stronger than anyone he ever played. There may have been other more active players at the time, but that does not mean stronger. Jan-27-23    Teyss: Interesting posts about potential Soviet collusion: Tata Steel Masters (2023) (kibitz #269) and below. Tata Steel Masters (2023) (kibitz #273) and above. Myth or reality? Jan-27-23    keypusher: < Teyss: Interesting posts about potential Soviet collusion: Tata Steel Masters (2023) (kibitz #269) and below. Tata Steel Masters (2023) (kibitz #273) and above. Myth or reality?> Myth. Tata Steel Masters (2023) (kibitz #286) Jan-28-23    Teyss: <keypusher> To be honest I also have serious doubts as I generally do about anything without enough evidence e.g. Niemann cheating OTB (online ok), the toiletgate or Karpov's hypnotiser. Although I wonder about his blueberry yogurt ;) Otherwise there's no limit to conspiracy theories and not only in Chess of course. But it's always amusing to imagine what <could> have happened; in that regard the Capablanca-vs-Stalin-behind-the-curtain anecdote is much more fun and inconsequential than a potential collusion. Print the legend but keep in mind it's most probably just a legend. Jan-28-23    perfidious: <Teyss>, I too am sceptical of these ex post facto accounts--but the yoghurt in Baguio is clear-cut angle-shooting! 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: No obscene, racist, sexist, or profane language. No spamming, advertising, duplicate, or gibberish posts. No vitriolic or systematic personal attacks against other members. Nothing in violation of United States law. No cyberstalking or malicious posting of negative or private information (doxing/doxxing) of members. No trolling. 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. Do not degrade Chessgames or any of it's staff/volunteers. Please try to maintain a semblance of civility at all times. 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 tournament 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 2001-2023, Chessgames Services LLC