Alexander Alekhine vs Friedrich Koehnlein (1908) The effects of Ale-Koeh-Colle

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

Kibitzing

Alexander Alekhine vs Friedrich Koehnlein
"The effects of Ale-Koeh-Colle" (game of the day Jan-11-2024)
Duesseldorf (1908), Duesseldorf GER, rd 4, Aug-06
Colle System (D05) · 1-0

ANALYSIS [x]

FEN COPIED

Given 86 times; par: 27 [what's this?]

Annotations by Stockfish (Computer). [35437 more games annotated by Stockfish]

explore this opening	find similar games	1 more Alekhine/F Koehnlein game
sac: 16.Qxd6	PGN: download \| view \| print	Help: general \| java-troubleshooting

TIP: You should register a free account to activate some of Chessgames.com's coolest and most powerful features.

For help with this chess viewer, please see the Olga Chess Viewer Quickstart Guide.

PREMIUM MEMBERS CAN REQUEST COMPUTER ANALYSIS [more info]

THIS IS A COMPUTER ANNOTATED SCORE. [CLICK HERE] FOR ORIGINAL.

< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 5 OF 5 · Later Kibitzing>
Dec-18-13		MarkFinan: I think Alekhine is just taking the micky out of his opponent with the Queen sac here. There's just no need to play it as far as I can see anyway! Same threats, same result whether he plays 16.Qxd6!? or not. Or is my patzer brain missing something beside common sense here? For that reason alone this game doesn't make my collection of miniatures, and I know that would bother him greatly lool. ✌

Dec-18-13		beatgiant: <MarkFinan> <same result whether he plays 16.Qxd6!? or not> The difference: on the immediate 16. Nf7+, Black can play <16...Rxf7> because he still has the bishop on d6, thus allowing 17. Re7+ <Rf8>. So White would win only the exchange (17. Bxf7), instead of a whole piece as in the game line. Make sense? Now add it back to your collection of miniatures.

Dec-18-13		MarkFinan: Beatgiant.. For once your far superior than mine chess knowledge didn't make sense, no. I obviously saw that the bishop was defending the f8 square, but totally missed that if white did play Nf7+ ..RxN Re8+ and simply rook or bishop back to f8. So I missed it as I only skimmed through the game once very quickly looking for something brilliant to catch my eye to add to my collection. Now I've been back through the game I still don't think it's anything special and I honestly think if it was a game of my own I would have seen it. ✌

Jan-07-15		Paarhufer: The game score is wrong. Köhnlein played 16.. ♕xg2+ and resigned after 17.♔xg2. This can be found in the tournament book and in some newspapers from 1908. And also here: http://www.chesshistory.com/winter/..., where Winter gives the DSZ as a further source.

Dec-12-15		Sularus: This is probably the earliest Colle game here at CG.

Nov-24-23		FSR: This game was played 15 years before Colle played "his" opening in Colle vs R Loman, 1923. Of course it had been played hundreds of times before that, by Cochrane (1856), Zukertort, Blackburne, Steinitz, Lasker and many others. https://www.chessgames.com/perl/che.... Here a premature ...e5 break lands Koehnlein in hot water. 16.Qxd6! is the sockdolager, as Horowitz would say.

Jan-11-24		YoungEd: 16...♕xg2+!!! A spite check for the ages.

Jan-11-24		HeMateMe: Gorgeous pun! An alekhine game is always a treat.

Jan-11-24		An Englishman: Good Evening: Impressive pun, combining bits of the players names with the name of the opening. Convoluted but effective.

Jan-11-24		offramp: User: RAlehin spent a long time creating her Pun for Today. I consider this the BEST PUN of this year (so far). Here are my reasons. Game with consecutive ♕-sacs CHECK✅ An Alekhine/Alcohol Reference CHECK✅ Colle Opening Reference CHECK✅ Game in a <FredtheBear> Games Collection CHECK✅ Game that contains Editor Notes CHECK✅ Game with at least 5 pages of kibitzing CHECK✅ Monstrous Word Salad about "Ale-Koeh-Colle" FAIL❌ On my Huskisson Sliding Internet Pun Scale, this Pun scores 77.2 out of 100🌟🌟🌟🌟 Must try harder.

Jan-11-24		OhioChessFan: Convoluted, but still pleasing pun.

Jan-11-24		OhioChessFan: Color me skeptical about the spite check at the end. Doesn't the Winter piece show Black resigning? https://www.chesshistory.com/winter...

Jan-12-24		Teyss: Hi offramp, ROFL. Apparently Huskisson created a new scale, the HSIPS in replacement of HISPIDU: fairer, more accurate, down to one digit. Impatiently waiting for HUPIFE down to two digits.

Jan-12-24		Teyss: Hi OhioChessFan, Well spotted, the score says "16...Resigns". The move order is also different: notably, White plays Bg5 on move 11, not 9. Was wondering why Black didn't respond 9...f6, which he couldn't on 11 since he already moved f5. Unless the Bulletin is wrong which would be surprising. Will submit a correction slip, CG are smart they'll know where the truth is. For future readers in case the correction is accepted and you're confused about posts above: the score now includes 16...Qxg2+ 17.Kxg2. The game similar to this one, colours inversed, referenced in the Bulletin is T Drezga vs A Baratz, 1929 where the score seems to be correct.

Jan-12-24		MissScarlett: Since when does a 1929 French publication have priority over the tournament book and the contemporary <DSZ>? Alekhine vs Koehnlein, 1908 (kibitz #101) Which admin waved this through!?

Jan-12-24		Teyss: Hi CG, Thanks for processing the changes so fast. Hi Missy, Well it's not simple, that's why I was relying (wrongly?) on CG's intelligence. In the link, on the one side there are two photocopies of reference publications with 16...Resigns (as well as 11.Bg5 instead of 9.Bg5). On the other we just have the mention 16...Qxg2+ 17.Kxg2 without copies. So even if there is a mystery around the origin of these last two moves, I assumed two copies have more weight than none. And remember: a French reference will always be more reliable than a German one, and not only in Chess. Always.

Jan-12-24		stone free or die: <<Missy> Which admin waved this through!?> What?! You want integrity?! <We don't need no stinkin' Integrity!>

Jan-12-24		MissScarlett: Skinner & Verhoeven cite the <DSZ> (mistakenly referencing the 1908 volume) and the tournament book, <Dusseldorf 1908, p137-8> as sources.

Jan-12-24		Teyss: It seems Missy won because the score reverted to the original version. There's a logic keeping 16...Qxg2+ 17.Kxg2 but not discarding 9.O-O f5 10.Bd3 e5 11.Bg5 Qe8, because if two publications can miss two last plies, there's no reason they would invert three full moves, even if one publication might be copying the other. No big deal, I should have been more specific in my correction slip on what seemed certain and not. Regardless, forgot to say: smashing miniature.

Jan-13-24		sneaky pete: The tournament book has the move order 9.Bg5 etc as given here (as well as the spite check at the end). The game is from Hauptturnier A, won by Köhnlein with 11 points from 13 games. Alekhine took 4th place (shared with Busch) with 9 points.

Jan-13-24		Teyss: Hi sneaky pete, Thanks for the precision, I stand corrected. Strange two reference publications mixed the moves. "You have nothing to fear but my library." Indeed! Hi CG, Apologies for the confusion.

Jan-13-24		MissScarlett: <Strange two reference publications mixed the moves.> One was printed in March 1929 and the other in April 1929. Yes, it's difficult to see how this could happen.

Jan-16-24		Chessist: Süddeutsche Schachblätter, 15 Nov 1908, p192 has this different order of moves: 4.Bd3 Bd6 5.Nbd2 Nbd7 6.e4 Nxe4 7.Nxe4 dxe4 ... 16.Qxd6 1:0.

Jan-16-24		Chessist: De nieuwe courant, 7 Aug 1908: https://www.delpher.nl/nl/kranten/v...

Feb-20-24		kingscrusher: One of my favourites. It seems actually Black's 11... e5 was the key mistake. click for larger view Just accepting the backward pawn inconvenience was much better it seems. So moves like h6 followed by b6 would have been much safer.

Jump to page # (enter # from 1 to 5)
search thread:
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 5 OF 5 · 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:

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 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.