Jules Arnous de Riviere vs Adolf Anderssen (1858)

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

Kibitzing

Jules Arnous de Riviere vs Adolf Anderssen
Casual game (1858), Paris FRA, Dec-??
Scotch Game: General (C44) · 0-1

White to move.

ANALYSIS [x]

0-1

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

FEN COPIED

explore this opening	find similar games	9 more de Riviere/Anderssen games
	PGN: download \| view \| print	Help: general \| java-troubleshooting

TIP: You can step through the moves by clicking the < and > buttons, but it's much easier to simply use the left and right arrow keys on your keyboard.

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

PREMIUM MEMBERS CAN REQUEST COMPUTER ANALYSIS [more info]

A COMPUTER ANNOTATED SCORE OF THIS GAME IS AVAILABLE. [CLICK HERE]

Apr-29-04		Elrathia Kingi: Interesting opening... is there a name for this gambit?

Jun-23-04		johnqwoodpusher: I agree. This is kind of like a Vienna gambit for black or a Latvian gambit deferred. How about Anderssen's Gambit...? :-)

Aug-24-05		Jaymthetactician: I like 4.exf5,e4 for white, though it would be impossible to defeat a master with this gambit as black.

Jul-17-08		JonathanJ: after move 16, black seems to be totally destroyed. de riviere must have made some stupid blunders somewhere in the middlegame.

Jul-17-08		paul1959: White missed 22 Ne7+ with an easy win.

Mar-21-11		jbtigerwolf: paul1959, you are spot-on! I just played through it (not that you need to) and Black is gone. I'm surprised he missed that. I don't think anyone could come back from that. I am having serious misgivings now about the Philidor Counter-gambit. I had hoped it was a viable way to avoid the Ruy, Scotch, etc, but maybe not. More study! It does look as if 4.Bc4 may have refuted it, as everyone is saying. The move order was weird, but it's the same. At least the study doesn't have too many lines. Oh I hope it's not refuted!

Jul-14-12		sneaky pete: When two strong players overlook something elementary like 22.Ne7+ .. here, you can be sure the gamescore is wrong. That goes for the duplicate (with the move order 2... f5 3.Bc4 Nc6 4.d4 .. and a wrong site and year) De Riviere vs Anderssen, 1862 as well. The 1996 Pickard edition of Anderssen's games, based on Gottschall's work, gives a different and more likely gamescore after 20.b4 .. click for larger view 20... Rf7 21.b5 Nd8 22.Rfe1 Rhf8 23.f3 Rg7 24.Re4 b6 25.a4 Ne6 26.a5 Kb7 27.axb6 axb6 28.Rc4 Rd8 29.Ne4 Nf4 30.Nef6 Rxg2+ 31.Kh1 Rb2 32.Rg1 Nxd5 33.Nxd5 Rd7 click for larger view (not 33... Rxd5? 34.Rg7+ ..; now white should have played 34.Ne3 ..) 34.Nf6 e4 35.Re1 Rxh2+ 36.Kg1 Rg7+ 37.Kf1 Rh1+ 38.Ke2 exf3+ 39.Kd2 Rg2+ click for larger view 0-1 To add to the confusion, Pickard gives (as in the duplicate) site London and year 1862 and the 2... f5 3.Bc4 Nc6 4.d4 .. move order. The Oxford Encyclopedia has the site, year and move order as given here, however with 20... Rhg8? (instead of Gottschall's 20... Rf7), based on a publication in La Nouvelle Régence, 1861. Of course black is clearly lost after the opening. Pickard (Gottschall) gives the improvement 11.Qb5 .. click for larger view

Jul-15-12		Calli: Original publication is here: http://books.google.com/books?id=jC... Although my recognition of the French notation is shakey, the score appears to agree with ChessGames. As far as the chess blindness at move 22, "Il est extraordinaire" says Journoud in his notes.

Jul-23-22		MissScarlett: <Calli: Original publication is here...> That's the February 1861 <La Nouvelle Régence> mentioned by <sneaky pete>. The game appears in the <CPC> February (?) 1859, p.55, and follows the Pickard version <20... Rf7 21.b5 Nd8 22.Rfe1 Rhf8 23.f3 Rg7 24.Re4 b6 25.a4 Ne6 26.a5 Kb7 27.axb6 axb6>. It confusingly gives <39.Kd1 Rgg2+> but <39.Kd2 Rg2+> as in Pickard must be correct.

Jul-23-22		MissScarlett: For the record, I'm replacing <20...Rhg8 21.b5 Nd8 22.a4 Rg7 23.Rfe1 b6 24.Re4 Kb7 25.a5 Ne6 26.axb6 axb6 27.f3 Rc8 28.Rc4 Rd8 29.Ne4 Nf4 30.Nef6 Rxg2+ 31.Kh1 Rb2 32.Rg1 Nxd5 33.Nxd5 Rd7 34.Nf6 e4 35.Re1 Rxh2+ 36.Kg1 Rg7+ 37.Kf1 Rh1+ 38.Ke2 exf3+ 39.Kd1 Rgg1 0-1> with <20... Rf7 21.b5 Nd8 22.Rfe1 Rhf8 23.f3 Rg7 24.Re4 b6 25.a4 Ne6 26.a5 Kb7 27.axb6 axb6 28.Rc4 Rd8 29.Ne4 Nf4 30.Nef6 Rxg2+ 31.Kh1 Rb2 32.Rg1 Nxd5 33.Nxd5 Rd7 34.Nf6 e4 35.Re1 Rxh2+ 36.Kg1 Rg7+ 37.Kf1 Rh1+ 38.Ke2 exf3+ 39.Kd2 Rg2+ 0-1>. A curious aspect is that the versions transpose after move 27, but the Black rooks have switched (KR in place of QR) which only adds to the confusion at the end. I've also deleted the <De Riviere vs Anderssen, London 1862> duplicate mentioned above.

Jul-24-22		MissScarlett: The present score tallies with that in the <ILN> of March 26th 1859, p.318. Staunton wasn't editor of the <CPC> at this point, but it can't be ruled out as his source.

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.