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!!
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.