Please turn on javascript in your browser to play chess.
Only Chess Forum

Only Chess Forum

  1. 04 May '13 16:02 / 1 edit
    Hi folks.

    I would appreciate if you took part in this topic.
    It's my last finished RHP game, and I waited for more than a year to finish it off just (without pressing the scull) in order to start this thread.

    It's about a refutation of the famous Alekhine's sacrifice he had made in one of his simoultaneos exhibitons...

    1. e4 e5 2. Ng1f3 Nb8c6 3. Bf1b5 d6 4. d4 exd4 5. Qd1xd4 Bc8d7 6. Bb5xc6 Bd7xc6 7. Nb1c3 Ng8f6 8. Bc1g5 Bf8e7 9. O-O-O O-O 10. h4 h6 11. Nc3d5 --

  2. 04 May '13 16:04 / 3 edits
    I cannot post pgn file...

    [Event "Open invite"]
    [Site "http://www.redhotpawn.com"]
    [Date "2012.02.24"]
    [EndDate "2013.05.02"]
    [Round "?"]
    [White "vandervelde"]
    [Black "GlennOC"]
    [WhiteRating "1792"]
    [BlackRating "1234"]
    [WhiteElo "1792"]
    [BlackElo "1234"]
    [Result "1-0"]
    [GameId "9096727"]

    1. e4 e5 2. Ng1f3 Nb8c6 3. Bf1b5 d6 4. d4 exd4 5. Qd1xd4 Bc8d7 6. Bb5xc6 Bd7xc6 7. Nb1c3 Ng8f6 8. Bc1g5 Bf8e7 9. O-O-O O-O 10. h4 h6 11. Nc3d5 {11. Bf4 is probably better. And, since 11. Nd5 is refuted, White could think something better than 10. h4... Bird defeated Steinitz with 10. h3.} hxg5 {11... Nxd5 leads to the draw when patzers play on the park bench. 11... Re8 was tried out without success.} 12. Nd5xe7 Qd8xe7 13. hxg5 Nf6h7! {Is it refutation? A German pair of masters sadi it was. But let's analyze this line from Alekhine's game: 13. ... Nxe4 14. Rh5 Qe6 15. Rdh1 f5 16. Ne5. Hoelsder played 16... dxe5 and after 17. g6!! he resigned. Some said that 16... Qxa2!? /instead of 16... dxe5/ can save the Black. There is another refutation--> 14. ... f5 15. g6 Qe6 16. Ne5 Rfe8 17. Rdh1 Kf8 18. Rh8+ Ke7 19. Nxc6+ Kd7! and Black should win.} 14. Rh1h4 Nh7xg5 15. Rd1h1 f6 16. Nf3xg5 fxg5 17. Qd4c4 d5 18. Rh4h8 Kg8f7 19. Rh8xf8 Ra8xf8 20. exd5 Bc6d7 21. d6 Qe7e6 22. Qc4xc7 Rf8c8 23. Qc7xb7 Qe6xd6 24. Rh1d1 Rc8c7 25. Rd1xd6 Rc7xb7 26. Rd6a6 Bd7b5 27. Ra6a5 a6 28. a4 Bb5c6 29. Ra5xa6 {I was thinking that it would better to have three Pawns on Queen side than to grab Pawn "g5"} Bc6xg2 30. Ra6d6 g4 31. c3 Rb7e7 32. Rd6d4 Bg2f3 33. a5 Re7e2 34. Rd4d2 {I am sure I could have played better in the mean time...} Kf7e6 35. a6 {? Black could now have played Re1+ and then Ra1, to take Pawn "a6"} Re2xd2 {?} 36. Kc1xd2 Ke6d6 37. b4 Kd6c6 38. c4 Kc6b6 39. b5 Kb6c5 40. Kd2e3 Kc5xc4 {?? I was reconciled with the loss of this game, and was only looking forward to this topic. That is why I did not want to press the scull. But Black made a mistake. I was calculating-> Black could play with his Bishop and take my Pawns on the Queenn side and lose pawn "g4" but still save the pawn "g7". I think Black should have moved with Bishop now or one move before it. Now White wins. "Matter of technique..." 😉...} 41. b6 Kc4b5 42. b7 1-0
  3. 04 May '13 16:11 / 2 edits
    Is it because of "update" of the site?
    Can anyone put this game between pgn and /pgn, please?
  4. Standard member SwissGambit
    Caninus Interruptus
    04 May '13 17:23
    It's because the PGN viewer isn't very robust and little things like carriage returns in the notation trip it up.

  5. 04 May '13 17:32 / 1 edit
    Thanks.
    This position can emerge from both Philidor and Steinitz variation in Ruy Lopez.

    In this position Alekhine played 11. Nd5.
  6. 05 May '13 03:12 / 1 edit
    The game is given as Alekhine v van Mindeno, Holland 1933
    as game no 120 in his Best Games 1924 - 1937.

    This is known as an error and the 'real' name is under suspicion.
    The name scribbled in Alekhine's hand written notes was deciphered
    as Hoelsder. It's not apparently a Dutch name and has appeared in
    various books and DB's with various spelling along with van Mindeno
    and even the location changes.

    I read years ago Black can put up a better defence and the piece sac
    was questionable. But there again all brilliancies must have an error of
    miscalculation somehwere by the loser. So let us not butcher too much
    this piece of brilliance.

    ALekhine is famous for (or infamous for) making up games or adding a
    more spectaculor finish. This may be one but it is more likely to be
    an actual simul game, where Black stumbled due to the fact he must
    move when the Master appears.

    (if he did stumble he can be forgiven because the hole is well hidden.
    13...Nxe4 is the baddie. Vandeers 13...Nh7 puts up stiffer resistance but
    is an awkward looking move to find OTB in a simul when the Master is
    coming around at a pace and Black, who ever he was, was not the
    strongest player in world else he would not be a simul victim.)

    I ran it through the RHP DB and Tripcyc User 237933
    knows this game well. Three times he has had this position as White.


    Black has just played 13...Nxe5 and Tripcyc has won all three games
    in quick order.

    Here all three with the opening the position came from

    Game 4075677 Tripcyc - mark99 RHP 2007 (Phildors)
    Game 4985865 Tripcyc - Tukumnieks RHP 2008 (Ruy Lopez)
    Game 6048354 Tripcyc - yournightmare RHP 2009 (Ruy Lopez)
  7. 05 May '13 07:52 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by greenpawn34
    [b]The game is given as Alekhine v van Mindeno, Holland 1933
    as game no 120 in his Best Games 1924 - 1937.

    So let us not butcher too much
    this piece of brilliance.


    Game 4075677 Tripcyc - mark99 RHP 2007 (Phildors)
    Game 4985865 Tripcyc - Tukumnieks RHP 2008 (Ruy Lopez)
    Game 6048354 Tripcyc - yournightmare RHP 2009 (Ruy Lopez)
    [/b]
    Well, I am not butchering great Alekhine. At least that was not the intention of this thread.

    This name - Hoelsder - is given also in ChessGames database.
    There is also a game with the name Van Mondeno = in the same competiiton.
    There is at least one more game that was misattributed.
    There is also an almost identical game of Finnish master Book from 1940's...

    I did not want to butcher Alekhine's brilliancy, but to share my own experience.

    I played this Alekhine's variation for years, in numberless blitz games and online, even OTB a couple of times.
    I saw that variation first in a collectio of Alekhine's 200 games, and the writer claimed that everything was just ingenious. I believed it.

    That I managed to lose some games during the years, I attributed to my patzerish nature...

    When I learned that some people showed that the variation is refuted, I did not stop ti play it - it was ony blitz tournaments - but I wanted to learn why it was refuted.


    Now on ChessGames, in the comments for "another game", that is Alekhine vs Van Mindeno, I found this refutation>>>

    13. ... Nh7!!

    mainline

    14. Rh4 Rfe8 15. g6 Nf8!
    and the attack is gone.

    [16. Rdh1 Nxg6 17. Rh7 f6]
    [16. gxf7+ Qxf7]
    (Claus Dieter Meyer, 1997)
    .....................
    .....................
    Alekhine had a "coutume" to prefer magnificent combinations for the simple solutions. He may have invented once the whole game just for the sake of 4 Queens sacrifice on some restaurant serviette, he loved fat women and he was eating like a monster, but I am not talking about it on this thread.
  8. 05 May '13 13:39
    Hi Vanders,

    I knew pullng the game to bits was not your intention, it's unsound
    but it's is a remarkable piece of chess and as Tripcyc has proved
    it still carries weight as players struggle to find the refutation.

    Alekhine 'tampered' with some of his games, either publishing a flashy finish
    that never happened or making up a game. (at least 10 proven examples
    are out there, possibly more). Why is never too clear. Instructive value?
    But match this with the 100's of brilliant games we know did happen and
    it hardly matters, though he should have relegated the cute finish to the notes.

    Of all the great players he more than anyone deserves a film about their life.

    First of all he was a brilliant Chess Players. (Absolute fact.)

    Now the rumours/facts that screen writers would have no trouble
    at all turning into epic film.

    Condemned to death just after WWI, a bigamous marriage, winning the
    title and ducking Capablanca, collaborating with the Nazi's (Alekhine's wife
    at the time was Jewish) and finally being murdered by the KGB so Russia
    could get their hands on the World Title.

    You can get all the details about the last claim from here:

    http://kevinspraggett.blogspot.co.uk/2009/03/part-1-alekhines-death.html
  9. 05 May '13 17:57
    Greenpie,

    You are ruining my thread by turning it into Alekihne-hagiography.
    It is not anti-Alekhine thread, but the thread about one single variation, I had been playing for years in a belief it was correct, and I couldn't wait to finish one RTP game (when I could not finish a OTB game) and then analyze it, to settle account with that variation.

    Believe me, I have been playing OTB and corr chess from 1976 and I do know biographies of many players. Even the tafct that Alekhine choked by piece of meat and then it was romanticised into heart attack while he was preparing for the match with Botvinnik...

    But that's not the point.

    I'll try tomorrow to post several pgn and fen diagrams with critical moves after 14...f5 (when noone other is interested in the variation).
  10. 05 May '13 19:53
    Hi Vanders

    I'm terribly sorry for ruining your thread, it was not my intention.
    I misread the bit.....

    "Hi folks.

    I would appreciate if you took part in this topic....
    It's about a refutation of the famous Alekhine's sacrifice..."

    This game was at one time under the made up cloud so by adding a
    bit of background I thought I was establishing that the thread would be
    about a game that actually took place.

    I added three games of a player who played the same sacrifice
    to show how difficult it was to refute OTB.

    I was expecting someone to pop up with some Houdini/Fritz/Rybka
    cold analysis and that will be that. What is more to discuss. It's busted.

    So I padded it out with an idea about an Alekhine film.

    (I suppose it's no good asking you what actor would make a best Alekhine?)
  11. Standard member RJHinds
    The Near Genius
    06 May '13 00:41 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by SwissGambit
    It's because the PGN viewer isn't very robust and little things like carriage returns in the notation trip it up.

    [pgn]
    [Event "Open invite"]
    [Site "http://www.redhotpawn.com"]
    [Date "2012.02.24"]
    [Round "?"]
    [White "vandervelde"]
    [Black "GlennOC"]
    [Result "1-0"]
    [WhiteElo "1792"]
    [BlackElo "1234"]
    [PlyCount "83"]
    [EventDate "2012.??.??"]
    "Matter of technique..." ...} 41. b6 Kb5 42. b7 1-0
    [/pgn]
    You said you want to analyze this line from Alekhine's game: 13. ... Nxe4 14. Rh5 Qe6 15. Rdh1 f5 16. Ne5. Hoelsder played 16... dxe5 and after 17. g6!! he resigned. Some said that 16... Qxa2!? /instead of 16... dxe5/ can save the Black.

    Here is my 2 cents on the matter:

  12. 06 May '13 13:57
    Hi RJ

    I think the critical test the sac must pass is from here.


    Black played 13..Nxe4 but Black has been winning OTB with 13....Nh7
    and I'm sure this was the ref I saw in print years ago.
    A backward Knight move and it just seems to invite 14.Rxh7 - Rh1+
    - e5 and Qh5 mating down the h-file ideas.
    (this quick assessment is most likely why it's been rejected in play).

    Here is the brute force 14.Rxh7 line from an OTB game.
    I think Vanders is coming back with the more sensible 14.Rh4 line.
    It's assessment is crucial because if it holds up then there will OTB points
    to scored.

    Manigk - Beck, Germany, 1998



    I shoot for it in blitz when I face a Philidor and even went for it
    on here from a Pseudo Pirc which is another way to reach the sac position.

    greenpawn34 - ReddersP RHP 2009

  13. 01 Jul '13 16:31
    comming soon, probably again from Amsterdam, where Blondie will hold a gig, saving the thread from closing due inactivity
  14. Subscriber Paul Leggett
    Chess Librarian
    01 Jul '13 17:53
    Originally posted by greenpawn34
    [b]Hi Vanders

    I'm terribly sorry for ruining your thread, it was not my intention.
    I misread the bit.....

    "Hi folks.

    I would appreciate if you took part in this topic....
    It's about a refutation of the famous Alekhine's sacrifice..."

    This game was at one time under the made up cloud so by adding a
    bit of background I thought I was establi ...[text shortened]... e film.

    (I suppose it's no good asking you what actor would make a best Alekhine?)
    [/b]
    I can't believe this is even debatable.

    Of course Frank Gorshin would have been the perfect actor to play Alekhine.
  15. 02 Jul '13 00:04
    Hi vandervelde

    Am going to see Blondie tomorrow night in Playhouse, Edinurgh
    (Birthday present from daughter.)
    If can (pictures permitted.) I'll put something on the blog.