blingice: Capablanca played the same line until 5..e5 in Spielmann vs Capablanca, 1927, and it ended the same: 28 move draw.In the Spielmann game, Capablanca tried the somewhat successful 5..Bg4, which has been proven to be a somewhat good option for black (Opening Explorer), but also one that Spielmann was familiar with (Spielmann vs Carls, 1925).
In this game, Capablanca tries a different attack, seven rounds after the Alekhine draw. Here, Capablanca tries the primarily unsuccessful 5..e5, which has been shown to be relatively easy to dominate (Opening Explorer). Of course, Capablanca was the person who initially wanted the draw. Perhaps he felt lucky to get the draw? (I would be as cautious as Capablanca if I knew Alekhine had such competence in the opening, as the games Alekhine vs Tartakower, 1927, Alekhine vs V Berger, 1932, and Alekhine vs Van Rhee WA, 1933 show, but were all played during that year or after that year). I haven't looked at those games, although I know that Alekhine won, which is enough to show that he is pretty good at winning that opening. :)
The rest of the game is completely bland: it was a draw all the way. They both traded all their pieces away, and they both didn't try to form any attacks. Any trade offered was generally accepted. Other than the odd nature of this opening, the Caro-Kann (B15) (which is also discussed at I Bilek vs T Karolyi Sr., 1990), this is a disappointing and bland game between two of my favorite attackers.
Thank you for reading one of the most linked up posts on this entire site. :)
Kibitzing
