|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 3 OF 3 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
| Oct-10-13 | | rccomputacion: En el libro de Roberto Grau III dice que el con Alekhine estuvieron 9 horas analizando la partida y llegaron a la conclusión que no se podía ganar... mientras tanto Capablanca atendia obligaciones "sociales" descuidando el torneo... así se fue también. |
|
Oct-10-13
 | | offramp: That sounds absolutely like Hooey as well! Capablanca just ignoring the game and popping out, in the certainty that his opponent was analysing. These are just myths created probably to give a reason for Capablanca's stunning loss. |
|
| Oct-11-13 | | aliejin: Alekhine wrote Ne2 and "Black can resign .....with peace of mind. " |
|
Oct-12-13
| | offramp: Here is a possible scenario.
The organizers offer to put up Alekhine, "and his second."
Alekhine has no regular second but he invites along the second nearest Joe Schmoe. He gets a free holiday and helps Alekhine a bit.Capablanca, of course, would never have considered having a second. |
|
Nov-18-13
| | offramp: 32.Bb3xe6
click for larger view
That must have shocked Capablanca. |
|
| Dec-02-13 | | Owl: If Alekhine would of played 42.Ne2 he would won two games in row again like he won game 11 and 12 |
|
Dec-31-13
| | offramp: After 44...Kd7
click for larger view
It is hard to say if Alekhine saw the idea of 45...Nxf4 46.Kxf4 Ne6+ 47.Ke3 f4+ 48.Ke4 fxg3 or not. Playing Ne2 at some earlier point would have defused the idea entirely. It is too late to play that now owing to ...Rh8. 7000. |
|
Dec-31-13
| | offramp: Happy New Year to all at <chessgames>. |
|
Sep-29-14
 | | Richard Taylor: I played this game over today without (many) notes (from a facsimile of an old book of the tournament) and it seems to me one of the greatest games, by both players. Capablanca's defence was superb while Alekhine played great strategy and an interesting positional sacrifice. |
|
| Apr-10-18 | | Howard: The "win" after 42.Ne2 doesn't look very clear. Anyone have a more concrete idea as to why it should win. |
|
Apr-10-18
 | | OhioChessFan: <AnalyzeThis: He then got permission to analyze for a while with his clock running, then showed up, and held the position without any problems.> Oh, please. Capa "got permission" to violate the rules of chess by moving around pieces on a different board in the middle of a game in the WCC match? I don't care what citation anyone may turn up, this didn't happen. |
|
| Apr-10-18 | | Howard: You're apparently overlooking two (legal) possibilities regarding that Capa story. First, he may have analyzed the position in his head while away from the board. Second, he may have analyzed using the demonstration board that the audience would have been viewing. That, distinct, latter possibility reminds me of a story from the Korchnoi-Spassky 1977 candidates final match. |
|
Apr-10-18
| | OhioChessFan: 42. Ra7 has the idea of simply gaining a Pawn while clearing the h file for the eventual progress of the passer there. The h Pawn was eventually easily captured by Black, and the a Pawn didn't enter into any of the tactical motifs, so perhaps Ra7 wasn't best. 2 moves to essentially trade Rook Pawns is a pretty expensive cost in time. OTOH, it does stop in its tracks any ideas of the Black Rook penetrating down the b file and causing problems for the isolated h3 Pawn. I have played through the game some after the idea of 42. Re2, and there's no doubt the Knight will head to c3. What advantage does that accrue? As an example, I quickly played this out, no claims that it's best, but just to get a feel for the position: 42. Ne3 Re8 43. Nc3 Re7 44. Rh8+ Re8 45. Rh6 Kd7 
click for larger viewWhere surely 46. Nd5 is called for. Black's King has to make a big decision as to which side of the board he'll operate on, and White certainly has the initiative. I'll note that 45...Re7 is another possibility that forestalls this line. Anyway, winning? Well, maybe for Alekhine against almost anyone other than Capa. |
|
Apr-10-18
| | OhioChessFan: <Howard: First, he may have analyzed the position in his head while away from the board.> So he needed permission to do that? Scratch that one. <Second, he may have analyzed using the demonstration board that the audience would have been viewing. That, distinct, latter possibility reminds me of a story from the Korchnoi-Spassky 1977 candidates final match.> Again, a violation of the rules of chess, no matter what board was used. Capa doesn't seem to be the kind of player to do that, nor AA the kind of player to allow it. |
|
Apr-10-18
| | OhioChessFan: I meant <42. Ne2> in my line above, of course. |
|
| Apr-10-18 | | WorstPlayerEver: Übermütig simply means overconfident. |
|
| Apr-10-18 | | WorstPlayerEver: 33... Rcd8 34. Nxa8 Rd3+ 35. Kf2 Rxa8 36. Rxc5 Nxc5 37. Rxc5 Rb8 38. Rc6+ Kd7 39. Rc2 Ke6 1/2-1/2 |
|
| Apr-10-18 | | Howard: Ohio Chess Fan, you've apparently misinterpreted my point. Capa didn't need permission for either of those "analytical" methods. By the way, how does the second option violate the rules of chess? |
|
Apr-10-18
 | | GerMalaz: I think Capa showed up and analyzed on a side board, after the game restarted, so his clock was running, but before he sat down at the match table. Those days, you had an hour to show up. |
|
| May-26-18 | | Howard: Some of us are still waiting for concrete proof that 42.Ne2 would have "won". Kasparov, as I recall, doesn't give much in the way of detail. |
|
| Sep-23-18 | | Howard: Looks like the now-provided computer analysis has pretty much given the "concrete proof" that 42.Ne2 would have apparently won. Thanks very much to whoever posted it! |
|
| Apr-26-19 | | condor: I thought i knew chess, but now I i'm not sure. Capablanca seems to have an easily defendable position but Alekhine gets away with a draw? How |
|
| Jul-30-19 | | edubueno: 42 Ce2!-g3!;
43 Cxg3 Rg8 44.Nxf5 Rxg2 45.Nd4 Rg3+ 46.Nf3 Ng7 47.f5 Nxf5+ 48.Kf4 Nd3+ 49.Kxf5 Rxf3+ 50.Ke4 Rh3 51.h5 Nc5+ 52.Kd5 Nd7 53.Rh8+ Ke7 54.Rh7+ Ke8 55.Rh8+ Ke7 =
43 Ta7 Cc7 |
|
| Apr-16-20 | | pepechuy: Did Capablanca really play 57... Nd8?
(I do not mean it is bad move, I am asking a question)
In the Encyclopedia of Chess Endings, volume 3, it says he played 57... Nf8! (the exclamation point comes from that book). |
|
| Apr-16-20 | | HaydenB: My Fritz database gives the move as
52. ...Nf8 |
|
 |
|
|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 3 OF 3 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
Kibitzing
