|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 3 OF 4 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
| Nov-07-05 | | euripides: <aj> I wouldn't exepct to have much of a chance against Alekhine either :-) , but I think I'd be happy with Black's position against a player of equal strength. It's true that this attack might have looked stronger when there was less experience of failed pawn storms in lines like the Sicilian Scheveningen. For a slightly reminiscent example: Fischer vs Gligoric, 1962 |
|
Nov-07-05
 | | LIFE Master AJ: <euripides>
I have to agree with just about everything you said. You still have to hand it to Alekhine, his brilliant defense was executed with style and panache. |
|
| Nov-07-05 | | RookFile: I thought 23..... Bxc3 was a shocking
move from Capablanca. A GM such
as Gufeld would never, ever, play a move such as this. |
|
| Nov-07-05 | | paladin at large: <LIFE MasterAJ><euripides> Thanks for your comments. Capablanca may have been the best player of the Queen's Indian ever, in tournament and match play - about 29 games, of which ca. 20 wins and ca. 2 losses. If these numbers are off, then not by much. |
|
| Nov-07-05 | | RookFile: With the queen's indian, Capa gave
the strong player a choice:
1) Accept a draw
2) Commit to a pawn storm and try
to win.
It was this latter part that was really scary. Do you really want
to overextend your pawns against Capablanca, heading into an endgame? |
|
Nov-07-05
 | | chancho: Why didn't Capa make the Queen's Indian, his primary defense against 1.d4 in the 1927 championship match? |
|
| Nov-07-05 | | Ziggurat: < I thought 23..... Bxc3 was a shocking
move from Capablanca. A GM such
as Gufeld would never, ever, play a move such as this.> Shocking, if you base your play on positional rules of thumb ... but if you look at it for 30 seconds, it's fairly obvious that it wins a pawn and leads to a crushing position. I don't what you mean with "a GM like Gufeld", but any GM worth his/her salt and especially the "concrete calculators" (Morozevich, Nakamura ...) would have spotted it, of course. Not to mention someone like Larsen. |
|
| Nov-07-05 | | sneaky pete: <Ziggurat> Gufeld loves the king's indian defence and the Sicilian dragon and considers black's king's bishop to be the stongest piece on the board. He would hesitate to exchange it even against the white queen. I can sympathize with that, I fancy white's king's bishop and am always shocked and disgusted to see Bf1-b5xc6 in a king's pawn opening. Of course you're right, real masters don't suffer from this kind of prejudice and play the strongest move irrespective, as Capablanca does here. |
|
Nov-08-05
| | LIFE Master AJ: Sorry, it should have been ... "You have to hand it to Capa," NOT Alekhine! (See my earlier posts.) |
|
| Nov-08-05 | | euripides: Capablanca also played the Modern Benoni Reversed for White: Capablanca vs Janowski, 1924 Somehow, he gets Janowski to play f4, mirroring Alekhine's f5. No wonder he liked the set-up :-) |
|
| Nov-21-05 | | raydot: This doesn't hold a candle to some of these earlier posts, but I have to get it out nonetheless...Capa's 5 Knight moves out of the 9 moves he makes between moves 17-26 are amazing! Is there any game in which the knights are more dominant? At move 26 he controls 7 of the 8 dark squares in White's first two ranks. I'm amazed Alekheine didn't resign much earlier, although I've read that he was more too focused on his time situation to figure out just when... |
|
| Mar-22-06 | | paladin at large: <LIFE Master AJ><I know I am going to be roundly condemned for saying this, but this looks like a routine positional crush.> I certainly would not condemn you for saying that but, you may find interesting Capablanca's own comment on this game from his notes of the tournament: "We had a very difficult defense to handle against Alekhine. Evidently trying to catch up, he chose a complicated form of development which he knows thoroughly. Aware of the difficulties of the opening as well as of the faculties of our opponent, we played with great care until we established what we considered a solid position. At that point Alekhine must have thought that he could successfully launch a direct attack against the king. The spectators were having a great thrill, as we allowed the attack to proceed while we were building what to us (though perhaps not to the spectators) seemed an impregnable position. At the same time we were getting ready, by gaining a few tempi, to launch a violent counterattack which we felt certain would paralyze White's onslaught. Our judgment proved sound, with the result that very soon Alekhine's game completely collapsed and he had to resign." |
|
| Apr-05-06 | | notyetagm: I love the Black position after 26 ... ♘d3!
click for larger view<Black's position is now overwhelming. White's scattered pawns disappear with startling rapidity> -- Golombek in Capablanca's 100 Best Games |
|
Jun-12-06
 | | Honza Cervenka: This is a great fight of two heavy weights. An interesting detail is that two years later Capa as white used this line successfully against Marshall in Carlsbad 1929 but there he played 10.Bg5 instead of Alekhine's 10.Bf4. See Capablanca vs Marshall, 1929 |
|
| Jun-12-06 | | crwynn: Actually I think 20...Be5 was more surprising than 23...Bxc3. I'd expected ...Nb3 and ...Bxc3 at some point, but 20...Be5 is a bit puzzling. In the game it just leads to an improved version of the immediate capture on c3, but what about 21.Bg2 or 21.Bg3? |
|
| Jun-22-06 | | MindRotorVia: Capablanca was by far the better of the two players. Alekhine was too chicken to give him a return match, just like Kramnik did with Kasparov. |
|
Jul-27-06
| | Honza Cervenka: <Alekhine was too chicken to give him a return match> That is not true. Capa simply failed to meet agreed (and by himself on others in 1922 by his infamous London conditions imposed) condition that challenger is obliged to provide $10,000 fund of prize money for the match with World Champion. (The same condition was also a part of pre-match agreement for eventual rematch.) Capa fell on his own sword in this matter so to speak. Alekhine had no reason to treat him better than Capa had treated him before and to give him some special advantages. |
|
| Jan-21-08 | | paladin at large: <not yet agm><I love the Black position after 26 ... d3! >
Me too. It looks from the White side like an attack of "chubby rain" (movie "Bowfinger" - Steve Martin, Eddie Murphy). I don't know why I get that image, and yes, I am still taking my medication properly. |
|
| Jul-27-09 | | visayanbraindoctor: This game can be regarded as the first Modern Benoni game with the Black pieces (via a transposition). It can arise from the normal sequence of initial moves in the Modern Benoni, if White refrains from an e4. In fact Capablanca treats it exactly like a Modern Benoni, pushing his QBP to his QB5 square, posting his Knight on his QB4 square, exploiting holes, and attacking his opponent's Kingside, which is precisely how a Modern Benoni should be played. Alekhine probably did not suspect he was being led by a willy Capablanca into familiar terrain. Previously Capablanca had already slaughtered Janowski in Capablanca vs Janowski, 1924, which is exactly a Modern Benoni with colors reversed, and the first Modern Benoni in chess history. In that game, Capablanca uses the same strategy - pushing his QBP to his QB5 square, posting his Knight on his QB4 square, exploiting holes, and attacking his opponent's Kingside. Here, it is now the unsuspecting Alekhine that gets demolished. |
|
| Jul-27-09 | | visayanbraindoctor: The position here after 11. cxd5 (Diagram 1)
click for larger viewis almost the same in Capablanca vs Marshall, 1927 after 9. O-O, which arose after a more normal initial sequence of moves in the Modern Benoni (Diagram 2). 
click for larger viewIn fact, if in Diagram 2 above, Capablanca and Marshall had continued with 9...b6 10. Bf4 Bb7 11. Nh4, they would end up in the exact position as in Diagram 1. Obviously then, this game is a Modern Benoni arrived at by transposition. This is the first Modern Benoni game ever with the Black pieces. Having previously played the Modern Benoni with colors reversed in Capablanca vs Janowski, 1924, Capablanca must have fully known that he was leading Alekhine into a position in which the latter was at a disadvantage. Poor Alekhine on the other hand probably had no idea of what was happening until too late. Alekhine was possibly planning on out-preparing Capablanca in the opening and lead him into unfamiliar territory; instead the reverse happened. |
|
| Aug-05-09 | | MANOLITODEREGLA: capa's superiority is shown here alekhine just got crushed by the greatest natural chess genius ever to touch the pieces |
|
Aug-05-09
 | | paulalbert: I've always felt that this game is one of the reasons that Capablanca perhaps went into the 1927 Alekhine match overconfident about his superiority and ability to beat Alekhine without extensive preparation. Paul Albert |
|
Sep-18-09
 | | Chessical: It looks like Alekhine went over the top with his guns blazing <17. g4> but never got the attack he anticipated. I wonder what this master of calculation actually planned at the time? Was the move made through over-confidence or alternatively a feeling that even a slight positional deficit was unsupportable against Capablanca. |
|
| Sep-03-10 | | Marmot PFL: <"We had a very difficult defense to handle against Alekhine. Evidently trying to catch up, he chose a complicated form of development which he knows thoroughly. Aware of the difficulties of the opening as well as of the faculties of our opponent, we played with great care until we established what we considered a solid position.> What's all this "we" and "our"? |
|
| Sep-03-10 | | whiteshark: <Marmot PFL> We would like to answer it's the majestic plural as in <We are not amused>. :D |
|
 |
|
|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 3 OF 4 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
Kibitzing
sac: 33...Bxf3