Rudolf Spielmann vs Aron Nimzowitsch (1928)

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

Kibitzing

Rudolf Spielmann vs Aron Nimzowitsch
Berlin (1928), Berlin GER, rd 1, Oct-11
French Defense: Tarrasch Variation. Guimard Defense (C03) · 1/2-1/2

White to move.

ANALYSIS [x]

1/2-1/2

rnbqkbnr/pppppppp/8/8/8/8/PPPPPPPP/RNBQKBNR w KQkq - 0 1

FEN COPIED

explore this opening	find similar games	38 more Spielmann/A Nimzowitsch games
	PGN: download \| view \| print	Help: general \| java-troubleshooting

TIP: You can get computer analysis by clicking the "ENGINE" button below the game.

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

PREMIUM MEMBERS CAN REQUEST COMPUTER ANALYSIS [more info]

Mar-26-13		thomastonk: This is the stem game of the Guimard variation of the Tarrasch Defence (C04, btw), and a complex game without kibitzing. G.H. Marten wrote in his Nimzowitsch biography (Verlag Das Schacharchiv, 1995) that he would like to include an analysis by Robert Huebner into the second edition. Well, I played Huebner in 1985, and so I feel free to add some comments here. Black's opening concept didn't work, and after 8.. b6? he is already in trouble. Richmond (in his book on the Tarrasch from 1980) notes 12.d5! , and this is his only comment for the fragment. But 12.d5? is a mistake, because simplifications are in Black's favour. 12.0-0 or 12.♕e2 would have been . White could still have saved an significant advantage by 13.♗g5!?, but you can guess who this move suggested. Both sides continue normally until 20.. ♖e8?, after which the exchange sac at the next move is forced and yields a lost position. Here it was possible to improve the knight on a5 by 20.. ♘c4 . After winning the exchange, Spielmann prepares for more than 20 moves the final blow, because Black's blockade cannot be broken down by a fingersnip. After the game he thought that he missed the win by 50.Rc8, but this move is okay. Instead 51.♖c7+? is the mistake, whereas 51.♖xc6 is still winning. The final position is unclear: pawns are equal and Black is an exchange down. I played the position with my engine, and its plan is as follows: sac the h6-pawn, exchange a pair of rooks, sac the d4-pawn, and break through with the king via d4 into blacks camp. Very interesting, I think.

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.