Alexander Alekhine Miscellanea by Edward Winter

Alexander Alekhine Miscellanea

Edward Winter

Alexander Alekhine in Prague, December 1933.
Photograph supplied by Olimpiu G. Urcan, courtesy of the ČTK Fotobanka.

***

Bobby Fischer’s view of Alekhine appeared in the article ‘The Ten Greatest Masters in History’ (on pages 56-61 of Chessworld, January-February 1964):

Would anyone venture to offer serious support to Fischer’s contention, ‘strangely, if you’ve seen one Alekhine game you’ve seen them all’?

(12011)

Column 63 on page 27 of The Chess Beat by Larry Evans (Oxford, 1982) discusses the spurious game Alekhine-Grigoriev ‘Moscow, 1915’, given by Alekhine in his first collection of best games, but now known to be more invention than reality. Evans writes that ‘The first 11 moves did take place but the rest was a total fabrication’. What Alekhine wanted to show off was the five queens position and the quiet winning move 24 Rh6. Yet Evans says that Black could have drawn anyway by ...

24...Bg4+ 25 Qgxg4 Bxe3 26 Qb4+ (Or 26 Qxe3+ Qc5) 26...Qxb4 27 Qxb4+ Kc7 28 Qd6+ Kb6 29 Qb4+ and White has no more than perpetual check.

Do readers have any more information about the circumstances of this ‘game’. We recall that the late D.J. Morgan once told us that in any case Alekhine had been Black.

(326)

The Quotes and Queries column in the February 1983 BCM takes up this question. Moreover, C.D. Robinson (Toronto, Canada) sends us a few more facts:

‘Dr Buschke exposed this “game” as a fabrication in 1950-51 in his Chess Life series “Alekhine’s early chess career”. Kotov came to the same conclusion in 1957 (see Krabbé’s “On mass suggestion”, Chess Life & Review, 1977, page 480). Despite this, Kotov includes the “game” in his biography of Alekhine as “Alekhine-N.N., Moscow 1915”. According to M.V. Anderson (BCM 1958, page 133) the “game” originated in du Mont’s Elements of Chess in 1925. Moreover, du Mont and M.E. Goldstein were then engaged in translating the French MS of My Best Games of Chess 1908-23, which was published in 1927. “Alekhine’s MS was in appalling writing, and there was no collaboration between Alekhine and his two translators”, says Anderson. “Goldstein told me ... ‘We found (the score) among his papers and had no reason to challenge it.’”’

Mr Robinson concludes: ‘It is clear that Alekhine’s text includes both suggestio falsi and suppressio veri.’

It seems reasonable to assume that Alekhine was so taken with the quiet rook move that he simply tried to pull the wool over the chess world’s eyes. There is much irony and even pathos in the fact that it has subsequently been proved that the rook move does not win at all.

(387)

Chess Curiosities by Tim Krabbé (George Allen & Unwin) has themes ranging from castling to Loman’s Move and the Saavedra Manoeuvre. All are examined in impressive depth; it is a safe bet that Krabbé is the only author ever to have devoted ten pages to a discussion of ‘Alekhine’s five queens game’.

(1094)

Headed ‘The Mythical “Five Queens’ Game”’, an item by D.J. Morgan on page 130 of the May 1956 BCM began:

‘The ghost has been truly laid ...’

He was reporting on a series of articles by Albrecht Buschke in Chess Life in 1950 which had demonstrated that the ‘five queens’ play given by Alekhine in a note to Game 26 in his first volume of Best Games was spurious.

C.N.s 326 and 387 touched on the matter, and since then it has been analysed in detail by Tim Krabbé, on pages 54-64 of Chess Curiosities (London, 1985) and on his website. The case is regularly cited as an example of Alekhine’s ‘dishonesty’.

How is it possible that, even today, there are authors who state that Alekhine won such a game? The latest instance noted by us is on page 381 of Best Play by Alexander Shashin (Newton Highlands, 2013).

(8213)

See also C.N. 5948.

‘Be more considerate to small boys.’ That request was made to Alekhine by Gerald Abrahams in 1936, as related on pages 135-136 of his book Not Only Chess (London, 1974).

At a simultaneous display in Liverpool in autumn 1923 Abrahams, then aged 16, was the last surviving player:

‘And there was Alekhine, standing over the board, insisting on instantaneous replies. He thought, then made his move, rapped sharply on the table and made impatient sounds in Russian.

The position was hard. Pawns wedged with pawns, and my king bishop and knight, endeavouring to be on guard at all moments against his king, and two fantastically wheeling knights. After 12 lightning moves under these conditions the boy went wrong, found a pawn indefensible, and resigned. The grandmaster swept the pieces aside brusquely, and stalked away. He was, let me emphasize, entirely within his rights.’

After describing how differently Capablanca later behaved towards him in similar circumstances, Abrahams related that at Nottingham in 1936 Alekhine’s wife (‘a delightful American lady’) required assistance with a visa renewal.

‘Alekhine asked me to oblige, and I gladly did so. He said, “If I can ever do anything for you, please ask me.” I replied, “You can do something for me.” He raised an interrogative eyebrow. I said, “Be more considerate to small boys.” The frozen blue eyes stared at me for some seconds. “Yes”, he said, I remember, Liverpool 1923. You had pawns, bishop and knight against my pawns and two knights. You should have drawn that game.”’

Although Abrahams stated that Alekhine faced 60 opponents, the master’s score given on page 403 of the November 1923 BCM and page 197 of the Skinner/Verhoeven book on Alekhine was +24 –1 =6. The exhibition took place on 29 September 1923.

Gerald Abrahams

(5127)

This photograph was published on page 54 of the March-April 1940 American Chess Bulletin. The reference to Rueb is rather surprising.

(5168)

We are grateful to the Cleveland Public Library for this better-quality scan of the photograph:

C.N. 3202 (see page 281 of Chess Facts and Fables) discussed the claim that in a game at Kemeri, 1937 Alekhine played two moves in succession. His encounter with Vladas Mikenas has been mentioned in that context, but Sandro Litigio (Como, Italy) writes:

‘An article “How I outplayed Alekhine!” by Mikenas on pages 52-54 of the January 2006 CHESS has his detailed comments on the game against Alekhine at Kemeri, 1937. As Mikenas mentions no double move, it would seem that any such incident must have occurred in a different game.’

(5181)

The extract below from page 114 of CHESS, 14 December 1937 is relevant to our items ‘Two moves in succession’ (C.N.s 3202 and 5181) and ‘Heaven’ (C.N.s 5600, 6813 and 8672):

(9432)

Concerning the Alekhine v Bogoljubow world championship rivalry, page 297 of Learn from the Legends by Mihail Marin (Göteborg, 2004) states:

‘Ironically, Alekhine himself remarks in one of his comments to an emphatic win against his challenger: “This game is a clear hint about the pointlessness of the whole match”.’

We take that to be a rather simplified version of Alekhine’s observation (in his second volume of Best Games) about Bogoljubow’s 29th move in game four of the 1934 contest:

‘This game – more than any other – proves how useless from the sporting point of view was the arrangement of this second match, and at the same time explains my indifferent play on a number of occasions. I felt sure that Bogoljubow was no longer able to take advantage of the opportunities my play might present to him, and – very unfortunately for the general artistic value of the present match – the score 7 to 1 in my favour after the 22nd game fully justified my sanguine outlook.’

We should like to draw together any other comments by Alekhine, either at the time or afterwards, on the overall status, value or importance of the 1934 match.

A. Alekhine v E. Bogoljubow, 25th match-game, Berlin, 11 June 1934

Page 490 of Alexander Alekhine’s Chess Games, 1902-1946 by Leonard M. Skinner and Robert G.P. Verhoeven (Jefferson, 1998) quoted a passage by Nimzowitsch in De Telegraaf, 1 May 1934 in which he reported on his conversation with Bogoljubow after the eighth match-game:

‘Apparently he believed that his performance in the match was being influenced by some hypnotic power brought about by Alekhine. In spite of being assured by Nimzowitsch that this was impossible, Bogoljubow insisted that it could be done. He seemed unable to comprehend that Alekhine was deliberately playing on his well-known sense of optimism in dealing with complicated tactical situations. Instead of defusing and simplifying the positions that Alekhine provoked, he aided and abetted Alekhine’s strategy by entering into the tactics with great enthusiasm.’

For further notes on hypnosis, see pages 170-171 of Kings, Commoners and Knaves. As regards optimism, it may be recalled from C.N. 832 (page 120 of Chess Explorations) that in an interview Bogoljubow stated:

‘People who know nothing about chess or character evaluation claim that I am an optimist. Quite the contrary, though, I am of a pessimistic nature. My wife always says (and quite correctly too), “Always expect the worst; if things then actually turn out better, you’ll be happy”.’

We quoted that passage from page 986 of L’Echiquier, March-April 1935, which mentioned that the interview had first appeared in Kasseler Neueste Nachrichten, 17 December 1932. Can a reader provide a copy of that original publication?

(5274)

Steve Wrinn draws attention to the following remark by Emanuel Lasker:

‘Bogoljubow, it seems, believes in the art of subjecting one person to the will of another by some extraordinary power. Can such an art exist? Decidedly no. If it did exist and someone set himself up as a teacher of this art, he would have the whole world for his customers and yet derive no advantage therefrom, because his pupils would hypnotize him and then suggest to him the return of the tuition fee.’

This comes from page 11 of Lasker’s book Games Played in the Return Match for the World’s Championship (London, 1935), and for the context we reproduce below the full page:

(5282)

See also Chess and Hypnosis, which includes the following:

See too page ix of Bled 1931 International Chess Tournament (Yorklyn, 1987), in a 1976 article by Flohr translated from 64:

‘This time, Nimzowitsch said that “Alekhine has hypnotized all of us”. But this was not original, since both before and after Alekhine all world champions “have hypnotized and will hypnotize”.’

Javier Asturiano Molina asks about an article by Alekhine in Skakbladet after Nimzowitsch’s death.

C.N. 1931 mentioned the tribute, which was published in the May 1935 issue of the Danish magazine:

(5275)

From Oliver Beck (Seattle, WA, USA):

‘In a bookstore I recently came across two boxes of books and other rare and interesting chess material which once belonged to Paul Hugo Little (Litwinsky). C.N. 4935 showed him at the board with Euwe and Alekhine during their game at Nottingham, 1936, in a photograph taken from Chess Review, and I wonder if he was seated there as an indirect result of the disturbance created by Euwe and others during the Flohr v Capablanca game in the third round (see A.J. Mackenzie’s comments on page 3 of the tournament book, as well as Alekhine’s note to Capablanca’s 37th move on page 59), although he may have received that privilege through his donation of prizes (page xiv). I am interested in learning more about this incident, which may have cost Capablanca sole possession of first place.

Little, who died in 1987, was an interesting character. His many notes in the material I acquired show him to have been a stickler for detail and accuracy. For example, among the newer books is a copy of With the Chess Masters which was signed and dedicated to him by George Koltanowski. This, however, did not stop Little from correcting it throughout with a ballpoint pen, finding many of the errors you pointed out on page 160 of Chess Explorations.’

Below are the passages by Alekhine and Mackenzie referred to by our correspondent:

Above: from Alekhine’s notes to Flohr v Capablanca, in the Nottingham, 1936 tournament book (with incorrect diagram)

From A.J. Mackenzie’s round-by-round commentary in the Nottingham, 1936 tournament book

An English translation (by Kenneth Neat) of all Capablanca’s notes to the Flohr game on page 2 of the 20 August 1936 issue of 64 appeared on page 279 of our book on the Cuban. Moreover, C.N. 211 mentioned that on page 166 of The Great Chess Tournaments and Their Stories (Radnor, 1975) A. Soltis expressed unjustified doubts about the account:

‘The only problem with Capablanca’s version of the incident is that the time limit was 36 moves in two hours, not 40. This would mean that Black’s blunder came after the time control.’

There is, though, a simple explanation. C.N. 211 quoted from page 314 of the Australasian Chess Review, November 1936:

‘The players were now so clock-pressed that they had not even been able to write down their last few moves. At any rate, Capablanca had not. Therefore, he did not know that he had made his 36. Hence this clock-blunder when the race was actually over.’

See also pages 432-433 of the September 1936 BCM and, in particular, the note to 37...Qc8:

‘Both players were so short of time they did not even know how many moves they had made. This explains the repetition of moves, and also their meaningless manoeuvres; and also how it happened that Black made a mistake when the time-limit was finished.’

(5292)

The remainder of C.N. 5292 had a note about P.H. Little.

Christian Sánchez sends the above cutting with caricatures of Arturo Pomar, Alexander Alekhine and Antonio Rico at Gijón, 1945, from page 6 of the Spanish (Cuenca) newspaper Ofensiva of 2 August 1945.

The caricature of Alekhine must be one of the last published during his lifetime.

(5307)

On pages 39-40 of Chess and its Stars (Leeds, 1936) Brian Harley published an open letter to Alekhine:

‘Dear Master,

The chess world undergoes agonies in its struggles with the spelling of your name, which has as many versions as Shakespeare’s.

Twenty years ago you were “Aljekhin”; then you suffered a “c” change to “Aljechin”; and then again we met with “Alechin”. We thought you had attained, with your French citizenship, the ultimate stage with “Alekhine”. And now, in an article in a chess magazine, you sign yourself “Alekhin”.

I recall that I was once asked at a Congress to point out Alkaline, when I made the comment that the acid test of a chessplayer should be the knowledge of the correct spelling of a champion’s name. So I implore you, Master, to make an announcement of a final, fixed and unalterable version: and to stick to it.

Brian Harley.’

Brian Harley

(5311)

From Dan Scoones:

‘Regarding Alekhine’s two-volume set in English entitled My Best Games of Chess, for many years I assumed that the books had originally been published in French, not least because of the existence of a two-volume set under Alekhine’s name, Deux cents parties d’échecs, but those volumes correspond to the first My Best Games of Chess book and to another work by Alekhine, Auf dem Wege zur Weltmeisterschaft. There are two questions of interest:

1. Were Alekhine’s two Best Games volumes translated from an unpublished manuscript?

2. Does Deux cents parties d’échecs contain some of the original manuscript, or is the whole thing a retranslation from English?’

The matters raised by our correspondent are not clear-cut, but we offer some pointers:

The first volume of My Best Games of Chess (London, 1927) stated that it was ‘translated from the original MSS (in French) by J. du Mont and M.E. Goldstein’. For an illustration of that title page, see C.N. 4310.

The second volume (London, 1939) contained no mention of any translator:

The only acknowledgment (deleted later on) for another party’s involvement in the book was on the imprint page:

‘The Author is indebted to Mr E.R. Cordingley for his valuable assistance in reading the proofs.’

In 1947, the year after Alekhine’s death, this second volume of Best Games was re-issued with a memoir by Julius du Mont (which made no reference to any translation involvement by himself). However, the obituary of du Mont by D.J. Morgan on pages 119-120 of the May 1956 BCM stated that du Mont had translated ‘Alekhine’s two volumes of My Best Games of Chess (the first with M.E. Goldstein)’.

That is certainly the common view, but is the reference to the second volume correct? It may be relevant to note a letter contributed by du Mont on page 173 of the May 1946 CHESS:

‘There is one aspect of Dr Alekhine’s character which may come as a surprise to chessplayers generally, for in that respect he has not been very advertised, that of kindliness and readiness to help.

In 1938 I happened to meet Dr Alekhine and his wife in the Strand Palace Hotel [in London] and he asked me to sit at their table. I had not met him or corresponded with him for some years, not since I translated his first book for a very substantial fee. I was neither wealthy nor influential, nor was I the editor of a chess publication. I was carrying in my hand the proofs of my Basis of Combination in Chess. Dr Alekhine asked me what it was and I said it would not interest him, but he insisted that everything interested him and he took a very long time glancing through the proofs. In the end he said: “I like the idea very much. Would you like me to read the proofs for you and to check the analysis?” I was dumbfounded and suitably expressed by appreciation. Some ten days later the proofs came back corrected, and in two places some valuable additions were made to the analysis. A charming little note accompanied the package with encouraging words of appreciation and enclosing another letter which Dr Alekhine said I could use in any way I wished, and which the publisher did in fact use on the blurb of the book when it came out.

As a contrast I may say that the first man I met who had read Dr Alekhine’s comments on the blurb asked me, “What did that cost you?” I avoided being ungentle by not answering.’

Alekhine was in London in January 1938 (C.N. 3817 discussed his game that month against Elaine Saunders), but du Mont’s account makes no mention of any arrangement to translate Alekhine’s second volume of Best Games (which was published on 18 October 1939, as reported on the inside front cover of CHESS, November 1939). Are there thus grounds for believing that du Mont was not the translator (in which case, who was?), or did du Mont provide confirmation elsewhere that he did indeed translate it? In either case, why was no translator named in the book?

A further consideration about du Mont is that in the late 1930s he was preparing, jointly with Tartakower, the 665-page book 500 Master Games of Chess. Although it was not published until 1952, the manuscript was delivered in 1939 (see the BCM, April 1952, page 105 and May 1952, page 133). It would be exceptional if, in 1938-39, du Mont were able to work concurrently on both that huge project and a translation of the Alekhine book, quite apart from finalizing in 1938 The Basis of Combination in Chess.

Deux cents parties d’échecs was published in Rouen in 1936 (in a single volume) by the French Chess Federation, which stated in an introductory note that Alekhine had generously provided the material:

‘Un geste généreux du grand Champion A. Alekhine nous a permis d’enrichir la littérature échiquéenne française d’un document inestimable, d’un choix unique de chefs-d’oeuvre.’

Pages xvii-xxiv carried a Preface by Alekhine dated September 1936, but we see no relevant information about the genesis of the collection, which was the first appearance of Alekhine’s best games in French.

The book was reprinted in two volumes by the BCM in 1973 and 1979 respectively and was re-issued by Bernard Grasset, Paris, also in two volumes, in 1999 and 2000. Broadly speaking, the first volume corresponds to My Best Games of Chess 1908-1923 and the second to Alekhine’s 1932 book Auf dem Wege zur Weltmeisterschaft. As far as we know, Alekhine’s second volume of Best Games has never, to this day, appeared in French.

C.J. Feather’s English translation of Auf dem Wege zur Weltmeisterschaft was published by Pergamon Press in 1984 under the title On the Road to the World Championship 1923-1927.

The above jottings are not, alas, direct answers to our correspondent’s questions about the manuscripts of Alekhine’s books, as we are still at the stage of laying the groundwork. Readers are invited to help us pursue the matter, and not least on the basis of the works’ contents. Do comparisons between various editions yield any clues?

(4436)

Our feature article on Elaine Saunders includes the following:

‘She is a genius.’ That was Alekhine’s observation on the 12-year-old Elaine Saunders after playing her in a simultaneous exhibition in London on 22 January 1938. From page 190 of CHESS, 14 February 1938:

‘Dr Alekhine was televised by the British Broadcasting Corporation in January, “lookers-in” seeing him make, once again, the move which regained for him the world’s championship.

On 22 January he played simultaneously against 30 of Kent’s strongest players and after four and a half hours had won all but three ... Twelve-year-old Elaine Saunders, British girl champion, covered herself with glory by holding out to the very end, succumbing in a rook-and-pawn endgame in the very last game to finish. Dr Alekhine, speaking afterwards, said, “She is a genius”.

... [Elaine Saunders] became famous overnight – as far as the general public was concerned – as a result of her fine show against Alekhine. Pictures of her with eye to a telescope, boxing a punchball, walloping her father blindfold, etc. were published in many of the daily papers.’

A photograph (featuring Alekhine in play against R.C. Noel-Johnson, Elaine Saunders, C. Chapman, H.H. Cole, H. Israel and W.J.E. Yeeles) of the display at the Charing Cross Hotel, London was published on page 115 of the March 1938 BCM:

We have never seen the moves of her game against Alekhine.

(3817)

Elaine Saunders gave an account of her game against Alekhine on page 224 of British Chess by G.S. Botterill, D.N.L. Levy, J.M. Rice and M.J. Richardson (Oxford, 1983):

‘The incident which received the most publicity was the “affair Alekhine”. Most of the pre-war giants were kindly if a little condescending towards me but the new world champion – he had just regained the title from Euwe – showed me no mercy. He took on 30 Kent players at the Charing Cross Hotel and after five hours demolished all except myself. [In fact, Alekhine’s final score was +27 –2 =1.] The ending was equal. He stood over our board and glowered. “Give the child a draw”, said someone in Russian in the audience, which despite the midnight hour were everywhere on chairs and even under tables. “I know what I am doing”, came the reply, and of course he did. I lost.’

(3826)

C.N. 3817 mentioned that we had never seen the moves of Elaine Saunders’ game against Alekhine. Maurice Carter (Fairborn, OH, USA) informs us that in a letter to him dated 19 February 1993 David Pritchard (later Elaine Saunders’ husband) was able to provide part of the game-score:

Alexander Alexandrovich Alekhine – Elaine Saunders
London, 22 January 1938
Sicilian Defence

1 e4 c5 2 Nf3 Nc6 3 d4 cxd4 4 Nxd4 d6 5 c4 Nf6 6 Nc3 g6

7 c5 dxc5 8 Nxc6 Qxd1+ 9 Nxd1 bxc6 10 f3 Bg7 11 Be3 Nd7 12 Rc1 Rb8 13 b3 O-O 14 Nf2 Bb7 15 Nd3 Bd4 16 Kf2 f5 17 exf5 Rxf5 18 Be2 Rbf8 19 Rhd1 Rd5 20 b4 cxb4 21 Nxb4 Bxe3+ 22 Kxe3 Re5+ 23 Kf2 Nc5 24 Nd3 Nxd3+ 25 Bxd3 Ra5 26 Bc4+ Kh8 27 Rd7 Bc8 28 Rxe7 Rc5 (David Pritchard: ‘Elaine’s score then became corrupt. The end position (in which Elaine resigned – this was published) was ...

... after move 73 with (presumably) Elaine to move – she doesn’t remember.’)

(3874)

This photograph comes from page 167 of the 1 November 1941 Deutsche Schachblätter. Taken in Cracow on 7 October 1941, it shows G. Kieninger and M. Blümich in the background, K. Junge in conversation with J. Lokvenc and, in the foreground, C. Carls and A. Alekhine.

(5259)

Dominique Thimognier submits pages 20-21 of the Bulletin de la Fédération Française des Echecs, 15 April 1929:

Left: Baratz (in 1929) played 15...Qxd3. Right: Alekhine (in 1908) played 16 Qxd6.

It will be noted that as the venue of the Alekhine game the Bulletin gave ‘Menheim’, which is a Bjelica-style misspelling for Düsseldorf.

We add a few further remarks. The Bulletin provided a precise date for the Drezga v Baratz game, 24 February 1929, and on pages 114-115 of the March 1929 L’Echiquier it was indicated that after Baratz’s victory the coincidence was pointed out by Alekhine.

The two games are often discussed jointly (see, for instance, 666 Kurzpartien by Kurt Richter and 1000 Best Short Games of Chess by Irving Chernev). We should welcome examples of similar coincidences.

Alekhine’s victory came in round four of the Hauptturnier A in Düsseldorf on 6 August 1908 and was given on pages 137-138 of the tournament book and on pages 11-12 of the January 1909 Deutsche Schachzeitung. Alekhine was aged 15 at the time of the game. After 16 Qxd6 the anti-climactic finish (not included in the above French-language magazines) was 16...Qxg2+ 17 Kxg2 Resigns. For Köhnlein (1879-1916) it was the only loss in the 14-man event, which he won. He was also known as a composer, and a collection of his best productions in both fields is Friedrich Köhnlein Schachmeister und Problemkomponist by Walter Fentze (Nuremberg, 1984).

Our collection includes a bound volume of the Deutsches Wochenschach, 1904 inscribed by Köhnlein:

A label explains the volume’s provenance:

(5327)

Charles Sullivan (Davis, CA, USA) refers to two positions from games in Alexander Alekhine’s Chess Games, 1902-1946 by Leonard M. Skinner and Robert G.P. Verhoeven (Jefferson, 1998):

a) Alekhine v Turover, Bradley Beach, 3 June 1929 (pages 359-360):

Play is said to have continued 21 Qxe5 Qxe5, and our correspondent asks if both players overlooked 21...Qxf2+, which wins for Black.

The book gave two sources for this game: the Brooklyn Daily Eagle, 13 June 1929, page 32, and the American Chess Bulletin, July-August 1929, pages 130-131. We do not have the newspaper, but according to the game-score in the Bulletin Black’s queen stood at h5, not f5 (18...Qa5-h5).

b) Sämisch v Alekhine, Prague, 15 December 1942 (page 696):

The continuation is given in the book as 26 Nxa7 Bg5, and Mr Sullivan asks if both players really missed 26...Ra8, which wins the knight.

Here, the source specified by Skinner and Verhoeven was page 51 of the Lachaga booklet Prag, 1942 (Martínez, 1973). We have checked the score in another book (also listed in the bibliography, on page 790): Durasův turnaj – Praha 1942 by Karel Prucha (Prague, 1943). It too had the same sequence (1 e4 e5 2 Nf3 d6 3 d4 Nd7 4 Bc4 c6 5 a4 h6 6 Nc3 Be7 7 O-O Ngf6 8 Qe2 Qc7 9 Rd1 Nf8 10 dxe5 dxe5 11 Ne1 Ne6 12 Bxe6 Bxe6 13 Nd3 O-O 14 Be3 b6 15 h3 c5 16 f4 exf4 17 Nxf4 Qe5 18 Nd3 Qh5 19 Qxh5 Nxh5 20 g4 Nf6 21 Nf4 Rad8 22 Rxd8 Rxd8 23 a5 Bc8 24 Nb5 Nxe4 25 a6 Bd7 26 Nxa7 Bg5). Before concluding that there was indeed a double blunder by Sämisch and Alekhine, we should like to know what moves were given in any other publications of the time. The game (drawn at move 41) is absent from the various Czech and German sources currently available to us.

(5333)

From Leonard Skinner (Cowbridge, Wales):

‘I have looked again at my print of the Brooklyn Daily Eagle, and it seems that I misread Black’s 18th move. It should be 18...Q-R4 (Qh5). Because of the state of the microfilm in the Library of Congress my print was not as good as one might want, so I originally took the move to be 18...Q-B4, i.e. Qf5.’

(5337)

The question has been taken up by Peter Anderberg in an article ‘Der junge Sämisch’ on pages 52-73 of the April-June 2010 issue of Kaissiber. He reports that Sämisch gave the game in the chess column of the Berliner Lokal-Anzeiger, 16 January 1943 and that after 22 Rxd8 ...

... the reply was 22...Bxd8, and not 22...Rxd8. Thus in the Berliner Lokal-Anzeiger version of the score (1 e4 e5 2 Nf3 d6 3 d4 Nd7 4 Bc4 c6 5 a4 h6 6 Nc3 Be7 7 O-O Ngf6 8 Qe2 Qc7 9 Rd1 Nf8 10 dxe5 dxe5 11 Ne1 Ne6 12 Bxe6 Bxe6 13 Nd3 O-O 14 Be3 b6 15 h3 c5 16 f4 exf4 17 Nxf4 Qe5 18 Nd3 Qh5 19 Qxh5 Nxh5 20 g4 Nf6 21 Nf4 Rad8 22 Rxd8 Bxd8 23 a5 Bc8 24 Nb5 Nxe4 25 a6 Bd7 26 Nxa7 Bg5 27 c4 Ra8 28 Nb5 Bxb5 29 cxb5 Nd6 30 Nd5 Bxe3+ 31 Nxe3 Nxb5 32 Nd5 Ra7 33 Ra4 f6 34 Nxb6 Nc7 35 Nd7 Rxa6 36 Nxc5 Rc6 37 Ra5 Rb6 38 b3 Rd6 39 Ra7 Rc6 40 Ra5 Rd6 41 Ra7 Drawn) no opportunity to win the white knight with ...Ra8 arose at move 26. The article in Kaissiber includes Sämisch’s annotations to the game (see pages 72-73).

Alexander Alekhine (Prague, 1942 tournament book by Karel Prucha)

(6553)

C.N.s 3232 and 3265 (see page 334 of Chess Facts and Fables) referred to the classicist Gilbert Highet (1906-78), who coined the phrase ‘the small, flat world of the chessboard’. It is still proving impossible to trace the first publication of the article in question, whose copyright was ascribed to the Oxford University Press (1957) when the piece was reproduced on pages 18-22 of The Joys of Chess by Fred Reinfeld (New York, 1961). Page 13 mentioned that the article, entitled ‘Chess Men’, was originally a radio talk.

Gilbert Highet

Another reference to chess occurred on page 92 of Professor Highet’s book Man’s Unconquerable Mind (New York, 1954):

‘After Stalin had won his struggle for power against Trotsky, Trotsky’s work in building up the Red army was expunged from Communist history books and is now virtually forgotten inside the USSR. Such distortions are extended to quite small details. Thus, the most distinguished of modern chess masters was a Russian, Alekhine; since he repudiated the Bolshevik revolution, his name is not mentioned in Russian histories of chess.’

On page 134 Highet intimated that he had only a secondary source for that chess information: page 12 of British Chess by Kenneth Matthews (London, 1948). The matter seems to us far more complex. For example, page 34 of Soviet Chess by D.J. Richards (Oxford, 1965) noted that Russian editions of Alekhine’s games collections were published (e.g. in 1927 and 1932).

Do readers know of any extensive, authoritative overview of how Russian chess literature treated Alekhine after his departure from the Soviet Union?

(5336)

Page 14 of Chess World, 1 January 1947 quoted from an article by Botvinnik in Ogonyok which was subsequently published in Albrecht Buschke’s periodical Chess News from Russia. An extract is given below:

‘During the Nottingham tournament of 1936 I happened to watch a curious scene. Bogoljubow was sitting deeply bent over the board, and was thinking tensely. Alekhine was briskly wandering around the table, fixedly looking at his opponent. Willy-nilly, I became interested, drew near to the table and saw the position after Alekhine had made his 35th move P-N5 [g5].

What can Black do? He has an extra pawn, but the situation is tense and the material superiority does not tell. White threatens 36 PxP, after which his bishop would be very strong.

Bogoljubow played 35...PxP. He had not taken the pawn off the board when Alekhine hurriedly approached and, without sitting down, played 36 P-B5!!, noisily banging down the piece. This sacrifice was so unexpected that Bogoljubow literally jumped out of his chair, in spite of his solid constitution. Evidently he had figured only on 36 PxPch K-N1; and in view of the threat, ...P-K4, Black’s situation would be quite secure.’

Alekhine’s annotations to the game can be found in the Nottingham, 1936 tournament book and in his second volume of Best Games.

(5348)

Charles Sullivan raises the subject of Alekhine v Nowarra, Cracow, 17 October 1941, as given on page 670 of Alexander Alekhine’s Chess Games, 1902-1946 by Leonard M. Skinner and Robert G.P. Verhoeven (Jefferson, 1998).

Our correspondent asks whether, after 52 Qe6+ Rc6, Alekhine really overlooked 53 g8(Q), which wins at once.

The book’s source was pages 172-173 of the November 1941 Deutsche Schachzeitung:

It will be seen that Heinz Nowarra provided notes, and that the game-score corresponds to what appeared in the Skinner/Verhoeven book. However, a correction to the score was published on page 181 of the December 1941 magazine, where ‘M.B.’ (Max Blümich) indicated that White’s 52nd move was Qd6+, not Qe6+:

We have few biographical details on hand concerning Heinz Nowarra. A small photograph of him was given on page 158 of the December 1942 Deutsche Schachzeitung, with the information that he was born in 1897.

(5354)

From Yasser Seirawan (Amsterdam):

‘I am currently writing a romance/adventure novel which features a chess theme. It was originally written in 1980 and 1981, but a baggage mishap during a flight to Berlin caused me to lose my only (handwritten) copy. Laptops did not exist in those days. Now, half a lifetime later, I have revived the project. How many grandmasters have written a novel?’

Two works come to mind: Belye i chernye by A. Kotov (Moscow, 1965) and Los Voraces 2019 by A. Soltis (Jefferson, 2004). Regarding the former, which concerned Alekhine’s life, see C.N. 4073 for information about the ensuing film. The dust-jacket of the Czech translation of the novel (Prague, 1971) is reproduced below:

(5366)

C.N. 593 quoted from page 80 of Lessons from My Games by Reuben Fine (New York, 1958):

‘Both Alekhine and Capa were anxious to see Euwe do badly. I was rather amused when a most critical situation arose in my game with Euwe and both the ex-world champions whispered suggestions in my ear.’

Fine reiterated that claim about the game (a 19-move draw) on page 33 of his book Bobby Fischer’s Conquest of the World’s Chess Championship (New York, 1973):

‘... at the Nottingham tournament in 1936, when I was playing Euwe, then world champion after his defeat of Alekhine in 1935, both Alekhine and Capablanca spontaneously came up to me during the game to suggest moves, even though I had not asked them to do so.’

(5394)

Charles Sullivan asks about the last-round game Alekhine v Salwe, Hamburg, 6 August 1910, which is given as follows on pages 51-52 of Alexander Alekhine’s Chess Games, 1902-1946 by Leonard M. Skinner and Robert G.P. Verhoeven (Jefferson, 1998):

1 d4 d5 2 Nf3 Nf6 3 c4 e6 4 Bg5 Be7 5 e3 b6 6 Nc3 Bb7 7 cxd5 Nxd5 8 Bxe7 Qxe7 9 Bb5+ c6 10 Bd3 Nd7 11 O-O O-O 12 Rc1 Rfc8 13 Qd2 c5 14 Nxd5 Bxd5 15 e4 Bb7 16 Qe2 cxd4 17 Nxd4

17...Ne5 18 Rfd1 g6 19 f3 Kh8 20 Kh1 Kg8 21 Kg1 Kh8 22 Kh1 Kg8 Drawn.

Mr Sullivan comments:

‘If the game-score is correct, the last five moves by Alekhine (starting with 18 Rfd1) are blunders which would lose a piece to, for example, 18...Rxc1 19 Rxc1 Rd8. Can you shed any light on this?’

The Skinner/Verhoeven volume reproduced the game, faithfully, from pages 147-148 of the Hamburg, 1910 tournament book, but we wonder whether Black’s 17th move was 17...Nc5 rather than 17...Ne5, as the remainder of the game would then make more sense. 17...Nc5 was, in fact, the move given on page 122 of Alexander Alekhine I Games 1902-1922 (Sofia, 2002), but we have yet to find this short draw in any contemporary source other than the tournament book.

(5429)

From page 23 of the January 1952 Chess Review:

In reality, the play as far as 9 Qh5 had already been seen, with a transposition of moves, in a game won by Alekhine against Sánchez in Bogotá in March 1939. It was published on page 35 of the March-April 1939 American Chess Bulletin and, with notes by Tartakower, on pages 410-412 of the September 1939 BCM. Alekhine mentioned the opening on page 128 of his book Gran Ajedrez (Madrid, 1947); see also page 64 of 107 Great Chess Battles (Oxford, 1980).

The encounter was described by Alekhine as ‘una partida de exhibición contra el campeón de Bolivia, Sánchez, en Bogotá, marzo de 1939’. There is no reason why a Bolivian should not play a game in Colombia, but verification of Sánchez’s identity is sought. The above-mentioned item in the American Chess Bulletin described him as the ‘winner of the 1938 “Olympic” tournament at Bogotá’.

(5436)

From Christian Sánchez:

‘According to the Colombian master Luis Augusto Sánchez, in a text quoted in a review of the book Jaque al olvido by Boris de Greiff, he was defeated by Alekhine in 1939: “[Alekhine], que me derrotó en las simultáneas del año 39 ...”

A question that arises is whether Luis Sánchez was “the Bolivian champion” or “the Bolivarian champion”. Support for the latter version is to be found at the Ajedrez en Colombia website, with this reference: “del campeón bolivariano Luis Augusto Sánchez”. The adjective “bolivariano” refers to the Colombian region Bolivar, and not to the country Bolivia. However, it is hard to know whether, assuming that there was confusion between Bolivarian and Bolivian, it was created by Alekhine or by somebody involved in his (posthumous) book Gran Ajedrez.’

We do not have a copy of Jaque al olvido and shall be grateful to any reader who can help us to acquire one.

(5400)

Christian Sánchez writes:

‘Luis Augusto Sánchez Montenegro was born in Neiva (Colombia) on 20 July 1917 (El Tiempo, 22 February 1969, page 18) and died on 20 April 1982 (El Tiempo, 22 April 1982, page4-A). He won the chess championship in the first Bolivarian Games, which took place in Bogotá (Colombia) on 10-20 August 1938 (El Tiempo, 21 August 1938, page 9).

The Bolivarian Games are a sports event, similar to the Olympic Games, in which countries liberated by Simón Bolívar can participate (Bolivia, Colombia, Ecuador, Panama, Peru and Venezuela).

Alekhine played Sánchez on 21 March 1939 in a simultaneous exhibition in Bogotá (El Tiempo, 22 March 1939, page 1). The game lasted 28 moves, and not 25 as the known score indicates.

Thus Alekhine won against the Bolivarian champion (“campeón bolivariano”), i.e. the champion of the Bolivarian Games, and not the “Bolivian” champion (“campeón de Bolivia”) as stated in his posthumous book Gran Ajedrez.’

(9908)

Further to the discussion on Pal Benko and ...b5 (see C.N.s 3957 and 3967), Gerd Entrup (Herne, Germany) raises the wider question of the earliest occurrence in play of the general ideas behind the Benko Gambit (not necessarily in the first few moves). He proposes Marshall v Réti, New York, 1924, which was annotated on pages 37-40 of Alekhine’s book Das Grossmeister-Turnier New York 1924 (Berlin and Leipzig, 1925) and on pages 18-20 of the English translation.

The game began 1 d4 Nf6 2 Nf3 g6 3 c4 Bg7 4 Nc3 O-O 5 e4 d6 6 Bd3 Bg4 7 h3 Bxf3 8 Qxf3 Nfd7 9 Be3 c5 10 d5 Ne5 11 Qe2 Nxd3+ 12 Qxd3 Nd7 13 O-O Qa5 14 Bd2 a6 15 Nd1 Qc7 16 Bc3

Réti played 16...Ne5, and Alekhine wrote: ‘Bereitet das folgende allzu kühne Bauernopfer vor – im Bestreben, gewaltsam remis zu vermeiden.’ [‘Preparing for the subsequent over-daring sacrifice of the pawn with the intention of avoiding a forced draw.’]

After 17 Qe2 b5 Alekhine commented:

‘Diesen Bauern konnte Weiß ruhig nehmen, da Schwarz Schwierigkeit gehabt hätte, dafür positionellen Ersatz zu erlangen, z.B. 18 c4-b5: a6-b5: 19 De2-b5:! c5-c4 (offenbar die beabsichtigte Pointe des Bauernopfers) 20 Lc3-e5: Lg7-e5: (oder 20...Tf8-b8 21 Db5-c6 Dc7-c6: 22 d5-c6: Lg7-e5: 23 Ta1-c1 Le5-b2: 24 Tc1-c4: mit Vorteil, da Schwarz den a-Bauern wegen 25 Tc4-c2 usw. nicht nehmen darf) 21 Sd1-e3 c4-c3 22 b2-c3: Dc7-c3: 23 Ta1-c1 und Weiß hätte zum mindesten ein sehr leichtes Remis gehabt. Nach der Ablehnung des Opfers wird er dagegen erst hart kämpfen müssen, um es zu erreichen.’ [‘White could safely have captured this pawn, as Black would have difficulty in obtaining positional compensation, for instance: 18 PxP PxP 19 QxP P-B5 (clearly the reason for the pawn sacrifice) 20 BxKt BxB (or 20...KR-Kt 21 Q-B6 QxQ 22 PxQ BxB 23 QR-B BxP 24 RxP with advantage, as Black dare not capture the QR pawn, on account of 25 R-B2) 21 Kt-K3 P-B6 22 PxP QxP 23 QR-B, and White would have had at least a very easy draw. After the refusal of the sacrifice, on the other hand, he can now reach that goal only after hard fighting.’]

The game continued 18 cxb5 axb5 19 f4 Nc4 20 Bxg7 Kxg7 and was drawn at move 50.

(5457)

Tim Bogan (Chicago, IL, USA) comments that if ‘general ideas’ is taken to mean that Black sacrifices a queen’s-side pawn for pressure on the opened files, the game Nimzowitsch v Capablanca, St Petersburg, 1914 may be regarded as an early model.

We add that Alekhine made a similar point about that game (describing it as ‘sensational’) in his notes to van Scheltinga v Opocenský, Buenos Aires, 1939. See pages 165-167 of Gran Ajedrez (Madrid, 1947) and pages 200-202 of 107 Great Chess Battles (Oxford, 1980).

(5461)

Charles Sullivan refers to Tarrasch v Alekhine, Hastings, 18 September 1922. Alekhine annotated the game on pages 45-47 of his tournament book (published in London in 1924); in the Dover reprint (New York, 1968) the page numbers are 41-43. See also pages 172-173 of the Skinner/Verhoeven volume on Alekhine.

Our correspondent asks whether the game-score in these sources is faulty, given that Alekhine would have been unlikely to miss the opportunity in the position below (after 34 Bxh1) to win the white bishop with 34...d4.

We suspect (but cannot prove) that there is indeed an error in the game-score. When moves 1-37 were published on pages 36-37 of the November 1922 Chess Amateur Black’s 32nd move was given as ...Re8 and not ...Rd7. In that case, the position after 33 Rh1 Rxh1 34 Bxh1 would not give the possibility of winning the bishop. An alternative explanation is that at move 32 Alekhine played ...Rd6. That is the move given on page 378 of Alexander Alekhine I Games 1902-1922 (Sofia, 2002).

(5495)

Source: Chess Review, January 1957, page 6.

(5497)

Page 229 of Kings, Commoners and Knaves referred to Alekhine’s alleged description of a dream in which chess masters were banned from Heaven but Bogoljubow gained entry because ‘he only thinks he’s a master’. See, for instance, pages 21-22 of The Bright Side of Chess by Irving Chernev (Philadelphia, 1948). We pointed out that the same yarn had appeared on page 6 of the July 1898 American Chess Magazine, and that item is reproduced below:

heaven chess

When were Alekhine and Bogoljubow introduced into the story?

(5600)

An avoid-at-all-costs book is Chess Stories Through the Ages by Donald L. Boone (Lexington, 2010). For a sample snippet we cull from page 34 this ‘once’ anecdote concerning ‘Alehkine’ and ‘Bofolubov’:

Noting that the story had appeared on page 6 of the July 1898 American Chess Magazine, C.N. 5600 asked when Alekhine and Bogoljubow were introduced into it. The earliest instance we can offer now is in an article ‘Humour and Chess’ by J. du Mont on page 133 of the May 1941 BCM:

6813)

A ‘once’ yarn from a column by Al Horowitz on page 8 of the September 1948 Chess Review:

Horowitz also considered that the story, worded differently, merited a full page (page 134) in his book The New York Times Guide to Good Chess (New York, 1969).

(8672)

From page 114 of CHESS, 14 December 1937 is relevant to our items ‘Two moves in succession’ (C.N.s 3202 and 5181) and ‘Heaven’ (C.N.s 5600, 6813 and 8672):

alekhine

(9432)

Two pairs of self-contradictions from Reuben Fine, as given in C.N. 1424:

On page 37 of the November 1953 CHESS Irving Chernev pointed out these statements by Fine:

Chess Review, February 1941, page 32: ‘As a matter of fact, Alekhine has tried to emphasize the psychological element far more than Lasker ever did, but without any success as far as I can see ...’

Chess Review, April 1946, page 19: ‘Alekhine, not Lasker, was the outstanding exponent of psychology in chess.’

Reuben Fine

The other example was shown by us on page 10 of CHESS, October 1976:

The World’s Great Chess Games (page 112): ‘As far as style goes, there were three Capablancas. The first was the boy who, like every aspiring youngster, thought of brilliancies, attack at all cost.’

The Psychology of the Chess Player (page 51): ‘He never seems to have gone through the romantic attack-at-all-costs period which so many young players go through.’

(5597)

We add here some further remarks of Fine’s, in a comparison between Alekhine and Keres on pages 142-143 of his book Chess Marches On! (New York, 1945):

‘Despite the many points of similarity there are a number of important respects in which they differ. Chief among these are Alekhine’s superior grasp of psychological factors and his all-consuming ambition ...

Reliance on psychology has been both an asset and a handicap for Alekhine. The legitimate use of psychology in master play is to maneuver the opponent into positions where he feels ill at ease, which do not “lie right” for him, as the German puts it. Alekhine has been able to apply this principle with consummate skill on a number of occasions – the match with Capablanca is the most notable. At other times, however, chiefly when he was at the height of his fame, around 1932-1934, Alekhine has exaggerated the human factor out of all proportion. In one French tournament he even went so far as to make a serious attempt to win by hypnosis.’

What exactly happened at that ‘one French tournament’?

Another question concerns the extent to which Fine applied (or claimed to apply) ‘psychological factors’ in his own games. That matter is raised tentatively, however, since few topics lend themselves so readily to waffle as does ‘chess psychology’.

(5616)

Our feature article about Reuben Fine also quotes the following:

Fine on Alekhine:

‘When I first met him, at Pasadena in 1932 ...’

Source: The World’s a Chessboard by R. Fine (Philadelphia, 1948), page 165.

‘When I first met Alekhine in New York in 1932 ...’

Source: Bobby Fischer’s Conquest of the World’s Chess Championship by R. Fine (New York, 1973), page 9.

A. Alekhine v K. Richter, Munich, 1941. Source: page 71 of Alt om Skak by B. Nielsen (Odense, 1943)

(5648)

From the plates section of the book on the 1931 Olympiad:

Ernst Grünfeld and Alexander Alekhine (Prague, 1931)

(5676)

Alexander Nikolaevich Zamega (Naberezhnye Chelny, Russia) comments on the apparent invisibility of the black queen, even allowing for the unusual chess set (e.g. the white king on g1).

The game as it appeared on pages 12-13 of the Czech tournament book (which gave Kostić’s notes, translated from pages 180-182 of the July-August 1931 issue of Kagans Neueste Schachnachrichten): 1 d4 d5 2 Nf3 Nf6 3 c4 e6 4 Nc3 c5 5 cxd5 Nxd5 6 e4 Nxc3 7 bxc3 cxd4 8 cxd4 Bb4+ 9 Bd2 Bxd2+ 10 Qxd2 O-O 11 Be2 Nd7 12 O-O b6 13 Rac1 Bb7 14 Qf4 Nf6 15 Bd3 Rc8 16 Rxc8 Bxc8 17 Rc1 Bb7 18 h3 Re8 19 e5 Nh5 20 Qg4 Bxf3 21 Qxf3 g6 22 g4 Ng7 23 Bb5 Rf8 24 Qe3 h5 25 Be2 Qd5 26 a3 Rd8 27 Bf3 Qd7 28 Qg5 hxg4 29 hxg4 Rc8 30 Rd1 Qd8 31 Qh6 Qf8 32 Kg2 Ne8 33 Qh4 Qxa3 34 Rh1 Kf8 35 Qg5 Resigns.

A further complication is that whereas both the book and the magazine gave White’s 30th move as Rd1 (as did page 236 of the August 1931 Wiener Schachzeitung), the Skinner/Verhoeven volume on Alekhine (page 398) and some databases have Re1.

(8500)

Michael Clapham forwards a photograph of Alekhine playing a game of living chess, against Bogoljubow, at the Münsterplatz, Villingen, Germany in April 1934:

Below is the information provided on the reverse of the picture:

(5834)

Also from Mr Clapham comes this game, from a 25-board display:

Alexander Alekhine v Keltisch
Munich, 18 September 1941
Alekhine’s Defence

1 e4 Nf6 2 e5 Nd5 3 c4 Nb6 4 d4 d6 5 Nf3 Bg4 6 Be2 dxe5 7 Nxe5 Bxe2 8 Qxe2 N8d7 9 c5 Nd5

10 c6 Nxe5 11 cxb7 Rb8 12 dxe5 e6 13 Qb5+ Qd7 14 Qxd7+ Kxd7 15 Nc3 Bb4 16 Bd2 Bxc3 17 Bxc3 Nxc3 18 bxc3 Rxb7 19 O-O Rd8 20 f4 Ke7 21 Rf2 Rdb8 22 Rd2 Rb1+ 23 Rxb1 Rxb1+ 24 Kf2 Rc1 25 Ke3 Rxc3+ 26 Kd4 Rc1 27 Ke3 h5 28 g3 a5 29 Rd4 Rc5 30 Ke4 g6 31 a3 c6 32 Rd3 Rd5 33 Rb3 Kd8 34 Rb7 Rd7 35 Rxd7+ Kxd7 36 Kd4 Kc7 37 Kc5 Kb7 38 h3 Kc7 39 g4 hxg4 40 hxg4 Kb7

41 g5 Kc7 42 a4 Kb7 43 Kd6 Kb6 44 Ke7 c5 45 Kxf7 c4 46 f5 c3 47 fxg6 c2 48 g7 c1Q 49 g8Q Qf4+ 50 Ke7 Qb4+ 51 Kf6 Qf4+ 52 Ke7 Qb4+ 53 Kf6 Qf4+ 54 Ke7 Drawn.

In the newspaper report Unzicker is mentioned as one of Alekhine’s opponents. A photograph featuring both of them was given in C.N. 4373.

(5835)

The above-mentioned photograph, from page 13 of 125 Jahre Münchener Schachclub 1836-1961 (Munich, 1961) shows the 16-year Wolfgang Unzicker (far right) in play against Alekhine in Munich, 1941:

Dominique Thimognier sends this bizarre cutting from Le Figaro of 3 December 1927:

For reasons unexplained, the French newspaper reported that the new world champion, Alekhine, had just been sent a first challenge for his title, by the English player C.A.S. Damant.

(5846)

Pages 318-349 of the November 2008 issue of the Moscow magazine Караван (Karavan) have an extensive article Капабланка: гений игры for which we supplied a number of photographs of Capablanca and his second wife. The other illustrations include, courtesy of the Agence France-Presse, a shot of Alekhine outside the Café de la Paix, Paris in 1927.

(5878)

C.N. 5878 referred to a photograph of Alekhine in the November 2008 edition of the Moscow magazine Караван (page 346), and we now have permission to reproduce it (credit: Collections/Roger-Viollet Archives):

The Archives state that Alekhine and his unidentified companion were at the Café de la Paix in Paris in 1927.

(11607)

From Luc Winants:

‘In an old notebook of Victor Soultanbéieff’s I have found two cuttings with the same photograph, and they name Alekhine’s companion as Andrei Sedykh (Андрей Седых). He was a Russian emigrant and prominent writer, his real name being Yakov Moiseievich Tsvibak (1902-94).’

(11616)

From page 237 of Why You Lose at Chess by Fred Reinfeld (New York, 1956):

‘I shall never forget the description of the final scene of the 1935 match for the world championship. Both Alekhine, the defeated champion, and Euwe, the new champion, were in tears. There was this difference: Alekhine, the defeated, wept tears of sorrow. Euwe, the victor, wept tears of joy.’

In which contemporary source did the ‘description’ in question appear?

(5907)

Prompted by the Reinfeld quote regarding Euwe and Alekhine, Michael Clapham has sent us from his collection a photograph taken at the end of the 1935 world championship match:

(5914)

Concerning the involvement of Eric Klein in the 1935 world title match, see our feature article on him.

From Jan Kalendovský comes a photograph (source unknown) of Alekhine at the studios of Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer with Renée Adorée (1898-1933) and Fred Niblo (1874-1948):

Can it be confirmed that the photograph was taken during Alekhine’s visit to Los Angeles in May 1929?

(5915)

David Picken (Greasby, England) and Luc Winants (Boirs, Belgium) note that Renée Adorée played the role of a gypsy in an MGM film directed by Fred Niblo, Redemption. Shot in 1929 and starring John Gilbert, it was not released until 1930. Without the production delays it would have been his first talking picture.

We add that Redemption was unsuccessful, as noted, for instance, on page 66 of La fabuleuse histoire de la Metro Goldwyn Mayer en 1714 films (Paris, 1977). See also pages 261-262 of volume one of The Great Movie Stars by D. Shipman (London, 1989). According to page 544 of Close-Ups From the Golden Age of the Silent Cinema by J.R. Finch and P.A. Elby (New York and London, 1978) Gilbert’s ‘greatest film was The Big Parade with Renée Adorée’.

(5922)

Lonnie Kwartler (Chester, NY, USA) notes misprints in the pages of Lasker’s Lehrbuch des Schachspiels reproduced in C.N. 5924: ‘Mares’ should read Marco, and in the next diagram White’s king is missing, from h1.

The review of the Lehrbuch on page 318 of the July 1926 BCM commented, ‘There are unfortunately a large number of misprints, which will require correction in a second edition.’ Later versions did indeed make improvements. However, while including such corrections, the English-language edition of Lasker’s Manual, first published in 1927, introduced new problems, and we look at one of them now.

The victim of a famous Alekhine brilliancy (New York, January 1924) was named as Kußmann (i.e. Kussmann) by Lasker in his Lehrbuch (see either page 104 or page 108). In the English edition (page 137) it came out as ‘Kubmann’, i.e. with apparent confusion between the Eszett (ß) and the letter b. The spelling ‘Kubmann’ persisted in subsequent editions of Lasker’s Manual.

In, respectively, Auf dem Wege zur Weltmeisterschaft and his second volume of Best Games Alekhine named his opponent as A. Kußman and A. Kussman. Use of the initial A. may be due to his having played a draw against Abraham S. Kussman on another occasion: in a clock simultaneous display in New York on 23 March 1929 (American Chess Bulletin, April 1929, pages 62 and 65).

As regards the brilliant miniature which Alekhine won, it is rather surprising that page 734 of the Skinner/Verhoeven volume entertained, albeit tentatively, the possibility that Alekhine played two almost identical games, against L. Kussman and L. Kubmann (the sources being, respectively, the above-mentioned books by Alekhine and Lasker).

So, who had the misfortune in the above position to face 16 Qb5+ from Alekhine? We wonder whether there is any reason to doubt the information supplied when the game was published on page 8 of the January 1924 American Chess Bulletin:

‘A simultaneous game played between Alexander Alekhine and Leon Kussman, dramatic editor of the Jewish Morning Journal, in the former’s exhibition at the Newspaper Club of New York, January 13, 1924 – the Russian New Year’s Day.’

(5930)

Russell Miller (Camas, WA, USA) informs us that the ancestry.com webpage offers basic information about Leon Kussman, such as his dates: 1884-1977.

Our collection includes an inscribed copy of Kussman’s poems in Yiddish, Mein Stam (New York, 1940):

(5965)

One of T.H. Tylor’s very rare forays into chess writing was ‘The Grand Masters’ on pages 26-29 of the anthology Home and Away (London, 1948). Directed at a mainstream audience, the article contained little that is quotable, although on page 28 he described Alekhine as ‘perhaps the greatest chess genius of them all’.

(5966)

In connection with the new algebraic edition of the Nottingham, 1936 volume (Milford, 2009) Hassan Roger Sadeghi (Lausanne, Switzerland) notes the misconception that it was Alekhine’s last tournament book; a volume on Madrid, 1943 is sometimes overlooked.

Gran torneo internacional de ajedrez differed from Alekhine’s other tournament books in that the 105 games were unannotated, although each had an introductory paragraph. Two sample pages are shown below:

(6162)

Christian Sánchez points out an interview with Capablanca by Adelardo Fernández Arias in ABC on 12 May 1932.

Many of the standard interview topics were covered. In particular, the Cuban complained about being unable to obtain a rematch with Alekhine and said that FIDE was not strong enough to run the world championship. He was sure that he could regain the title, and especially if Alekhine lost in the early games, which would demoralize him. Capablanca evoked race and climate when stating that Slavs were the best chessplayers. He also commented that he had earned more money from chess than anyone else, although the sums to be derived from the game were not high. He believed that chess should be taught in schools to help children organize their thoughts and, regarding actual play, expressed a particular liking for pawns. Asked about women players, Capablanca named only Vera Menchik, whom he described as ‘very strong’. On the subject of important games, as a curiosity he referred to a simultaneous display in Moscow in 1925 at which the People’s Commissars Rykov and Krylenko were present. He added that Trotsky was a good player, as Lenin had been. Among chessplaying celebrities, he mentioned the pianist Rosenthal.

(6171)

(Title page inscribed by Eero Böök)

The above photograph by Man Ray was also the frontispiece of Alekhine’s Chess Games, 1902-1946 by L. Skinner and R. Verhoeven (Jefferson, 1998).

A second shot was number 48 in Man Ray’s Paris Portraits: 1921-39 by Timothy Baum (Washington, 1989):

(6191)

Now, Jeremy Silman draws attention to a third photograph, apparently from the same time. The website dates it circa 1925, which seems to us less likely than the ‘circa 1928’ in the book mentioned in our earlier item, Man Ray’s Paris Portraits: 1921-39 by Timothy Baum (Washington, 1989).

(8363)

Alekhine’s first volume of Best Games has appeared in various languages, but does a complete Spanish translation exist?

We have the very rare edition Mis mejores partidas de ajedrez 1908-1923 (Montevideo, 1929), translated from the English by ‘Passer By’, but it is only 100 pages long and stops after Game 50 (Alekhine v Rabinovich, Moscow, 1918). The front cover states ‘primera serie’and ‘50 partidas’, and it seems that no volume with the remaining 50 games was published.

(6313)

Regarding C.N. 6313, information has been received from Josep Alió (Tarragona, Spain) and Javier Asturiano Molina. The latter points out the strange existence of websites claiming that a Spanish translation of the first volume of Alekhine’s Best Games was published by Afrodisio Aguado, Madrid in 1924; such an early date might have been expected to arouse suspicion. Two editions from that publisher have been found; they date from the 1940s, but only one has an exact year of publication (1947). In common with the 1929 Uruguayan volume discussed in C.N. 6313, only the first 50 games were given. No translator’s name appeared. The Spanish text was the same as in the 1929 book, but there were differences in lay-out.

The dust-jacket of one of the editions had a curious description of the work as posthumous.

A photograph was included of Alekhine signing his contract for the book:

Our correspondents note furthermore that a full version of Alekhine’s book (100 games) was published by Ricardo Aguilera, Madrid in 1974 and 1986. In 2001, La Casa del Ajedrez (Madrid) also brought out an edition.

The 1974 edition from Ricardo Aguilera

Mr Alió, who has provided the illustrations for the present item, comments:

‘The imprint page of the Ricardo Aguilera edition says:

‘Versión de la edición realizada por Editorial Afrodisio Aguado, S.A., Madrid, en 1944, según la traducción del original de M. Golmayo.’

It is interesting to note that Golmayo was the translator of the 1940s edition, but there is no explanation of the difference in the number of games. Even though there are 100, not 50, games, it is stated that the edition is a “version” of the 1940s one.’

(6328)

A claim that Alekhine scored only 17 wins out of 50 games in a 1930s simultaneous exhibition in Riga was discussed in C.N.s 2793 and 3450 (see page 257 of Chess Facts and Fables).

At the webpage of the National Digital Library of Latvia Dominique Thimognier (Fondettes, France) has found a number of reports for the period 11-18 September 1935 in the Latvian publication Rits. An example, from page 5 of the 13 September 1935 issue, is reproduced below.

We shall be grateful if a reader with knowledge of Latvian can check whether any of the reports refer to a particularly low score by Alekhine in one of his displays.

(6321)

Olimpiu G. Urcan provides, courtesy of the State Russian Museum Archive, this photograph of Alekhine in Riga on the same occasion as in the photograph given above in C.N. 6321:

On 27 January 1935 Alekhine gave a clock simultaneous exhibition in Barcelona (+10 –0 =3). Seven of the games (against Catalá, Lloréns, Busto, Vilardebó, Duffo, Cherta and Ribera) were published in the books on Alekhine by Morán and Skinner/Verhoeven, and we have now received from Andrés Vicente Sanz (Valencia, Spain) five of the six others:

Alexander Alekhine – V. Marín
Barcelona, 27 January 1935
Queen’s Gambit Declined

1 d4 d5 2 c4 e6 3 Nc3 Nf6 4 Bg5 Be7 5 e3 O-O 6 Nf3 Ne4 7 Bxe7 Qxe7 8 Qc2 Nxc3 9 Qxc3 Nc6 10 a3 a5 11 Rc1 a4 12 cxd5 exd5 13 Bb5 Bd7 14 O-O Rfc8 15 Qc5 Qd6 16 Rc3 Nb8 17 Bxd7 Qxd7 18 Ne5 Qe6

19 Qb5 b6 20 Rfc1 Ra5 21 Qe2 c5 22 Nd3 Nd7 23 Nf4 Qd6 24 Qg4 Raa8 25 Qf5 Nf6 26 f3 g6 27 Qe5 Qxe5 28 dxe5

28...g5 29 Nh3 Nd7 30 Rd3 d4 31 exd4 cxd4 32 Re1 Ra5 33 Rxd4 Nxe5 34 Nxg5 Nd3 35 Rxd3 Rxg5 36 Rd2 Rgc5 37 Kf2 Rc2 38 Ree2 Rxd2 39 Rxd2 Rc4 40 Ke3 b5 41 Rd8+ Kg7 42 Rb8 Rc2 43 Rxb5 Rxg2 44 h4 Rh2 45 Rb4 Kg6 46 Rxa4 Rxb2 47 Rb4 Ra2 48 a4 f6 49 Kf4 Ra1 50 Ke4 Ra3 51 f4 Ra1 52 f5+ Kf7 53 Rb7+ Kg8 54 Ra7 Resigns.

Source: La Vanguardia, 15 February 1935, page 14.

Alexander Alekhine – J. Cabestany
Barcelona, 27 January 1935
Queen’s Gambit Declined

1 d4 Nf6 2 c4 e6 3 Nc3 d5 4 Bg5 Nbd7 5 Nf3 Be7 6 e3 c6 7 Bd3 dxc4 8 Bxc4 b5 9 Bd3 a6 10 O-O c5

11 a4 b4 12 Ne2 Bb7 13 a5 Rc8 14 Qb3 Bd5 15 Bc4 cxd4 16 Bxd5 Nxd5 17 Bxe7 Qxe7 18 Nexd4 O-O 19 Rfc1 Qd6 20 g3 f5 21 Ng5 Nc5 22 Rxc5 Rxc5 23 Ngxe6 Rf6 24 Nxc5 Qxc5 25 Rd1 Kf8 26 Ne6+ Rxe6 27 Rxd5 Qc1+ 28 Rd1 Resigns.

Source: La Vanguardia, 15 February 1935, page 14.

Alexander Alekhine – Comas
Barcelona, 27 January 1935
English Opening

1 Nf3 c5 2 c4 Nc6 3 d4 cxd4 4 Nxd4 g6 5 e4 Bg7 6 Nc2 Nf6 7 Nc3 a6 8 Be2 O-O 9 O-O d6 10 Be3 b6 11 f4 Bb7 12 Bf3 Qc7 13 Rc1 Rac8 14 Qd2 Nb8 15 b3 b5

16 e5 dxe5 17 fxe5 Nfd7 18 Bxb7 Qxb7 19 Bh6 Nxe5 20 Bxg7 Kxg7 21 cxb5 Rfd8 22 Qf4 f6 23 Nd4 Qb6 24 Na4 Qd6 25 Rxc8 Rxc8 26 bxa6 Nxa6 27 Rd1 Kg8 28 h3 Nb4 29 Nb2 Nxa2 30 Kh1 Nc4 31 Qg4 Resigns.

Source: La Vanguardia, 22 February 1935, page 12.

Alexander Alekhine – Maristany
Barcelona, 27 January 1935
Sicilian Defence

1 e4 c5 2 c4 Nc6 3 d3 d6 4 f4 Nf6 5 Nf3 g6 6 Be2 Bg7 7 O-O O-O 8 Nc3 Ng4 9 h3 Nf6 10 Be3 Qc7 11 Rc1 Qb6 12 Rb1 Qd8 13 g4 h5 14 Ng5 hxg4 15 hxg4 Qd7

16 f5 Ne5 17 Kg2 e6 18 Rf2 b6 19 Qh1 Bb7 20 Qh3 Rfe8 21 Rh1 a6 22 fxe6 fxe6 23 Nh7 Rf8 24 Nxf8 Rxf8 25 g5 Nh5 26 Bxh5 Rxf2+ 27 Bxf2 gxh5 28 Qxh5 Qf7 29 Qxf7+ Kxf7 30 Rh3 Kg6 31 Bh4 Bc6 32 Kf2 b5 33 cxb5 axb5 34 Ne2 Resigns.

Source: La Vanguardia, 22 February 1935, page 12.

Alexander Alekhine – R. Doménech
Barcelona, 27 January 1935
French Defence

1 e4 e6 2 d4 d5 3 Nc3 Bb4 4 Ne2 dxe4 5 a3 Bxc3+ 6 Nxc3 f5 7 f3 exf3 8 Qxf3 c6 9 Bf4 Nf6 10 O–O-O O-O 11 Bc4 Nd5 12 Rhe1 b5 13 Nxd5 exd5 14 Bd3 a5 15 Qg3 Na6 16 Bg5 Qc7 17 Re5 Bd7 18 Rde1 Rae8

19 Bh6 Bc8 20 Rxe8 Qxg3 21 Rxf8+ Kxf8 22 hxg3 gxh6 23 Bxf5 Bxf5 24 Rf1 Kg7 25 Rxf5 Nc7 26 Kd2 Ne6 27 Ke3 Kg6 28 g4 Kg7 29 b3 a4 30 bxa4 bxa4 31 c4 Nc7 32 Kd3 Kg6 33 Kc3 Resigns.

Source: La Vanguardia, 22 February 1935, page 12.

The chess column in La Vanguardia was conducted by Ramón Rey Ardid, and in the 1 February issue (page 12) he listed the 13 opponents. The missing game, against Vallvé, was probably published in the chess column of the 8 February 1935 issue, which has yet to be found.

With no photograph to offer from the Barcelona display, we reproduce a shot taken in Madrid, from El Ajedrez Español, March 1935:

(6395)

Josep Alió (Tarragona, Spain), Pierre Bourget (Quebec, Canada), Jan Kalendovský (Brno, Czech Republic) and Christian Sánchez (Rosario, Argentina) have provided the remaining game from Alekhine’s 13-board clock simultaneous display. It was published on page 12 of La Vanguardia, 8 February 1935:

Alexander Alekhine – Vallvé
Barcelona, 27 January 1935
Sicilian Defence

1 e4 c5 2 Nf3 Nc6 3 d4 cxd4 4 Nxd4 Nf6 5 Nc3 d6 6 Bg5 e6 7 Nxc6 bxc6 8 e5 Qa5

9 Bb5 Rb8 10 Bxc6+ Bd7 11 Bxd7+ Nxd7 12 O-O Nxe5 13 f4 Nd7 14 f5 exf5 15 Nd5 f6 16 Rxf5 Qd8 17 Qe2+ Be7 18 Be3 Rb7 19 Bd4 Ne5 20 c4 Qc8 21 Raf1 O-O 22 b3 Bd8 23 Qe4 Bb6 24 Kh1 Bxd4 25 Qxd4 Qe6 26 Qe4 Rbf7 27 Nf4 Qe7 28 Rh5 g6 29 Rh3 f5 30 Qd4 g5 31 Nd5 Qe6 32 Re3 f4 33 Ree1 Qh6

34 Rxe5 dxe5 35 Qxe5 Qg7 36 Re1 Qxe5 37 Rxe5 h6 38 c5 f3 39 gxf3 Rxf3 40 c6 Rf1+ 41 Kg2 Kg7 42 Re7+ Kg6 43 Re2 Rc1 44 c7 Kh5 45 b4 Rc4 46 Re3 Rc2+ 47 Kg1 Rff2 48 c8(Q) Resigns.

R. Rey Ardid’s Vanguardia chess columns are available online.

Javier Asturiano Molina adds the full names of Alekhine’s opponents in the games presented in C.N. 6395:

In Spanish: Valentín Marín, José Cabestany, Juan Comas, José Maristany and Rafael Doménech.
In Catalan: Valentí Marín, Josep Cabestany, Joan Comas, Josep Maristany and Rafael Domènech.

As mentioned in C.N. 6395, another game from the same display, against Catalá, was given in the Morán and Skinner/Verhoeven monographs on Alekhine. However, Mr Sánchez now points out that when the game was published on page 14 of La Vanguardia, 15 February 1935 it lasted 37, and not 28, moves and had a different sequence between moves 11 and 17:

Alexander Alekhine – Catalá
Barcelona, 27 January 1935
Ruy López

1 e4 e5 2 Nf3 Nc6 3 Bb5 b6 4 O-O Nd4 5 Nxd4 exd4 6 c3 a6 7 Bc4 Nf6 8 e5 d5 9 Bd3 Ne4 10 cxd4 c5 11 Nc3

11...Ng5 (Mr Sánchez comments that the moves in the present score are more logical than the sequence in above-mentioned books, which was 11...Bb7 12 dxc5 Bxc5 13 b4 Bd4 14 Qe1 Ng5 15 Kh1 h5 16 f4 Ne6 17 Qe2.) 12 dxc5 Bxc5 13 b4 Bd4 14 Kh1 Bb7 15 Qg4 Ne6 16 f4 h5 17 Qe2 g5 18 fxg5 Nxg5 19 Bb2 Ne4 20 e6 fxe6 21 Nxe4 Bxb2 22 Rab1 Bd4 23 Nf6+ Ke7 24 Rbe1 Qd6 25 Nxh5 Raf8 26 Qg4 Rxf1+ 27 Bxf1 Bf6 28 Nf4 e5 29 Ng6+ Kf7 30 Nxh8+ Bxh8 31 Qh5+ Kg8 32 Qe8+ Qf8 33 Qd7 Qf2 34 Rd1 Qf7 35 Qd8+ Qf8 36 Qxb6 Qf7 37 Bxa6 Resigns.

Finally, Mr Alió observes, on the basis of other reports in La Vanguardia, that the clock display was played in difficult circumstances for Alekhine. At 22.15 on Saturday, 26 January 1935 he began a simultaneous exhibition against 43 strong players from Barcelona, scoring +33 –6 =4. The display did not finish until 05.00 on the Sunday, and later the same day the clock simultaneous exhibition took place, against opposition which included the ten best players in Barcelona. Our correspondent provides a photograph of the 43-board display, from page 1 of La Vanguardia, 26 March 1946:

(6399)

Daniel King (London) asks for information on the old story about Alekhine playing two games, with alternate colours, against a pair of amateurs who hatched a scheme whereby the master’s moves in the first game were repeated against him in the second one, the aim being to ensure that he could not win both games.

We recall the following feature on pages 48-50 of the February 1927 Wiener Schachzeitung (a special ‘chess humour’ issue):

(6452)

Thomas Binder (Berlin) reverts to a subject raised in C.N. 6452: stories about preventing a master from obtaining a 100% score in a pair of games through the trick of repeating in the second game his own moves from the first one.

C.N. 6452 quoted an article by Tartakower on pages 48-50 of the February 1927 Wiener Schachzeitung, and we now add an item on page 281 of the July 1884 BCM:

(6944)

Jan Kalendovský sends two photographs of Alekhine at the 1931 Olympiad in Prague:

We note that a cropped version of the first photograph was published on page 153 of the September-October 1931 American Chess Bulletin:

(6507)

A question concerning this photograph, from page 153 of the September-October 1931 American Chess Bulletin, is whether the person seated at Alekhine’s elbow is indeed Ståhlberg. For purposes of comparison, below are two photographs of the Swedish master from the period in question:

Source: Tidskrift för Schack, January 1930, page 10.

G. Stoltz v G. Ståhlberg. Source: Tidskrift för Schack, December 1931, page 205.

As regards the unpopulated version of the Alekhine photograph, Jan Kalendovský notes that it appeared on the front cover of Šachy by Karel Zmatlík (Prague, 1934):

(6525)

Knud Lysdal (Grindsted, Denmark) sends us from his collection a number of photographs taken during the Prague, 1931 Olympiad, including the following:

A. Alekhine v M. Vidmar

This article by G.H. Diggle, taken from page 4 of Chess Characters (Geneva, 1984), was first published in Newsflash, January 1975:

‘Perhaps the most exciting memory of any chessplayer is his first Tournament. The present writer’s début (or débâcle) was in the 3rd Class Section of the Scarborough Festival, 1928, where if he didn’t “conquer”, he at least “came and saw” for the first time such bygone heroes as W. Winter (1st Prize, Premier), E. Colle (2nd), R.P. Michell (3rd), Sir George Thomas, F.D. Yates, Victor Buerger, H. Saunders and Vera Menchik – the last-named at the age of 22 playing for the first time in the ranks of the masters, and confounding the “doubting ones” by beating Yates (then British Champion) in the very first round. The pair presented a strange contrast – the pleasant buxom and impassive girl and the small wiry professional, “peering and blinking” at the board, with a great heap of notes and news cuttings at his elbow (for he was handicapped by having to report the Tournament for several papers besides playing in it). Nevertheless, he had a kindly smile for his young opponent at the end of the game.

The highlight of the Congress came halfway through it when (as had been hoped) Dr Alekhine (who had just become world champion by defeating Capablanca) arrived for a three-day visit. Next evening the champion gave a simultaneous display, winning 24 and drawing one. The drawn game was the last outstanding, and the Doctor, having perambulated over three hours for his 24 victories, gratefully dropped into a chair opposite the sole survivor, who had (truth to tell) a won game with K, B, N and two pawns against Alekhine’s K and solitary rook. But what with the crowd converging all round him, the haunting fear of the Doctor’s giving up his rook for the two pawns and leaving him to win in 50 moves with K, B and N against K, and a humane reluctance to keep the world champion up all night after his arduous evening, he soon blundered away his N and agreed to a draw, receiving in return a profuse handshake from the great master.

One sadder memory. Isidor Gunsberg, then aged 74, also visited the Tournament, but his health was clearly failing, and he died two years later. In his prime it was said that “he conducted at different times more chess columns, and more at one and the same time, than any other journalist of his day”.’

Page 773 of the Skinner/Verhoeven book on Alekhine records that the world champion gave two simultaneous displays in Scarborough in 1928, conceding only one draw in each. The sole game-score available, on page 339 (a draw against C. Dawbarn), does not match the details in the above article.

(6538)

Daily Mirror, 2 June 1928, page 16

See Chess Photographs in the Daily Mirror.

Olimpiu G. Urcan provides, courtesy of the Hulton Archive, a photograph of Vera Menchik in play against Alekhine in the second round of play in the London tournament, 2 February 1932:

Robert Desjarlais (Bronxville, NY, USA) asks for information about a quote often ascribed to Alekhine, although without any reliable source:

‘During a chess competition a chess master should be a combination of a beast of prey and a monk.’

There are textual variants, but the above wording had a page to itself (88) in Bruce Pandolfini’s Treasure Chess (New York, 2007). Of itself, that naturally proves nothing (C.N. 5280 shows why), and we do not recall seeing the sentiments expressed in Alekhine’s writings.

There is, though, the following ‘once’ version on page 8 of Blunders and Brilliancies by Ian Mullen and Moe Moss (Oxford, 1990):

‘Alekhine was once quoted as saying that the successful tournament player must combine the chief characteristics of a research scientist, an ascetic monk and a beast of prey.’

At Google Books we found this sentence about Alekhine in an article ‘Chess Masters in Action’ by C.H.O’D. Alexander published in the Irish Digest, 1959:

‘Playing him, one gets a strong sense of someone dedicated to the game – a mixture of monk and scientist.’ [In fact, Alexander was writing about Botvinnik. See C.N. 6596.]

Only a snippet of Alexander’s text is available on-line, and we shall be grateful to any reader who can supply the full article – and especially since it seems also to contain information of relevance to the Alexander v Botvinnik c4/c5 matter (C.N.s 4292 and 6185).

Alexander Alekhine

(6587)

We have acquired the full article ‘Chess Masters in Action’ by C.H.O’D. Alexander, which was published on pages 79-82 of the Irish Digest, October 1959. Extracts are provided below, and there is a surprise concerning the monk/scientist quote attributed to Alekhine (C.N. 6587). ...

‘For me, Alekhine will always epitomize chess, and I shall always remember my games with him with pleasure, even though he did win a brilliancy prize against me for one of them.’

‘[Lasker, Capablanca and Alekhine] all had a genius for the game. Euwe, though he had great natural talent, always struck me as essentially a man of high all-round ability who systematically devoted this ability to making himself a great chessplayer.

Everything that could be learnt about chess Euwe learnt, and taught to others ...’

‘Smyslov, a big slow-spoken redhead in the middle 30s who looks more like a Scot than a Slav, has a style as massive as his personality; after being beaten by Smyslov you feel as if you have been run over by a steamroller.’

‘Botvinnik is in the greatest tradition of world champions, with Morphy, Lasker, Capablanca and Alekhine. Playing him, one gets a strong sense of someone dedicated to the game – a mixture of monk and scientist. When I played Botvinnik in Amsterdam in 1954 I was temporarily demoralized by watching him write down his first move. Slightly short-sighted, he gave his entire attention to recording the move in the most beautifully clear and precise script; only after completing this to his entire satisfaction did he again bend his mind to the game. This calm but intense concentration on even the most trivial aspect of the game made me feel like a fly under the scientists’ microscope.’

From that final extract it can be seen that (contrary to the impression derived from the Google Books snippet) the description ‘a mixture of monk and scientist’ concerned Botvinnik, not Alekhine. Nonetheless, as noted in C.N. 6587 the Mullen/Moss book Blunders and Brilliancies claimed that Alekhine had referred to ‘a research scientist, an ascetic monk and a beast of prey’.

C.N. 6587 also mentioned the possible relevance to C.N.s 4292 and 6185 of Alexander’s remark about how Botvinnik wrote down his first move.

The Irish Digest stated on page 79 that the article by Alexander was ‘condensed from The Listener’.

(6596)

For the full Listener text see C.N. 8138.

From page 185 of Rich As A King by Susan Polgar and Douglas Goldstein (C.N. 8957):

The alleged Alekhine quote has been discussed in C.N.s 6587, 6596 and 8138, and below is a chronological compilation of the occurrences already noted, together with a few additional ones:

‘Botvinnik is in the greatest tradition of world champions, with Morphy, Lasker, Capablanca and Alekhine. Playing him, one gets a strong sense of someone dedicated to the game – a mixture of monk and scientist.’

Page 611 of The Listener, 16 August 1958 (article by C.H.O’D. Alexander).

‘Alekhine himself lost his title as a drunk but regained it when he followed his own advice to live like an ascetic monk.’

Page 29 of CHESS, September 1988 (article by Nigel Davies).

‘Alekhine was once quoted as saying that the successful tournament player must combine the chief characteristics of a research scientist, an ascetic monk and a beast of prey.’

Page 8 of Blunders and Brilliancies by Ian Mullen and Moe Moss (Oxford, 1990).

‘“During a chess competition a chess master should be a combination of a beast of prey and a monk.” – Alexander Alekhine.’

Page 11 of Essential Chess Quotations by John C. Knudsen (Falls Church, 1998).

‘“During a chess competition a chessmaster should be a combination of a beast of prey and a monk.” Alexander Alekhine.’

Page 88 of Treasure Chess by Bruce Pandolfini(New York, 2007).

‘Alexander Alekhine was once quoted as saying, in summing up the situation, that the successful tournament player “must combine the chief characteristics of a research scientist, an ascetic monk and a beast of prey”.’

Page 139 of Counterplay by Robert Desjarlais (Berkeley and Los Angeles, 2011). An endnote on page 233 merely mentioned as the source the 1990 Mullen/Moss book.

‘Of course chess and chess problems are quite different. The former has been called a sport, an art form, a beautiful mistress, something for which life is not long enough, and a game in which one must envisage oneself as a cross between an ascetic monk and a beast of prey.’

Page 26 of Vladimir Nabokov A Literary Life by David Rampton (Basingstoke, 2012).

‘Temper your thinking in both areas with the words of the fourth World Chess Champion, Alexander Alekhine (1892-1946): “During a chess tournament, a master must envisage himself as a cross between an ascetic monk and a beast of prey.”’

Page 185 of Rich As A King by Susan Polgar and Douglas Goldstein (New York, 2015).

In short, with regard to Alekhine there has been no primary source, or recognition that, without one, any version of the quote is pointless and unusable.

(8958)

From page 22 of Aleksandr Alekhin by A. Kotov (Moscow, 1973):

The English translation by K.P. Neat on page 16 of Alexander Alekhine (London, 1975):

Kotov’s output on Alekhine is bestrewn with unsourced quotes. Regarding the one under discussion here, we have yet to find anything relevant in his two-volume work Shakhmatnoe Nasledie A.A. Alekhina (Moscow, 1953 and 1958).

(11062)

Pierre Bourget (Quebec, Canada) points out this pair of photographs of Alekhine and Bogoljubow, with Emanuel Lasker (Berlin, 1929):

They were published respectively on page 75 of Umkämpfte Krone by R. Stolze (East Berlin, 1986) and page 51 of Schach 2000 Jahre Spiel-Geschichte by R. Finkenzeller, W. Ziehr and E.M. Bührer (Aarau, Stuttgart, 1989).

Can the other persons be named? The man standing on the left also appeared with Alekhine and Bogoljubow in a photograph on page 191 of Grandmasters of Chess by Harold C. Schonberg (Philadelphia and New York, 1972).

(5667)

Alan McGowan identifies the man standing on the right as Ehrhardt Post (1881-1947). We add below a photograph of Post from page 12 of the 1 January 1942 issue of Deutsche Schachblätter:

(5697)

from page 24 of Famous Chess Players by Peter Morris Lerner (Minneapolis, 1973):

(6312)

Albert Silver (Rio de Janeiro, Brazil) points out some film footage of the occasion, entitled ‘Campionato di scacchi a Berlino’.

(7724)

C.N. 5667 referred to this photograph on page 191 of Grandmasters of Chess by Harold C. Schonberg (Philadelphia and New York, 1972), mentioning that the man behind the players remains nameless:

Page 8 credited the picture to Burt Hochberg. Although Alekhine’s eyes seem closed, it may be a matter of photographic exposure, given the following on page 79 of Umkämpfte Krone by Raymund Stolze (East Berlin, 1986):

Can the position on the board and/or on the demonstration board be identified?

(11355)

On the basis of a more generously cropped version, Alan McGowan points out that the photograph under discussion shows the 12th match-game, played in Berlin on 11-12 October 1929:

The pawn chain is white.

(11359)

Peter Anderberg (Harmstorf, Germany) identifies the man standing between Alekhine and Bogoljubow as P. Matzdorff, a board member of the Berliner Schachgesellschaft, as shown in this photograph on page 13 of Das internationale Schachmeisterturnier zur Hundertjahrfeier der Berliner Schachgesellschaft by Kurt Richter (Berlin, 1928):

(11760)

In C.N. 11756 a correspondent tentatively but incorrectly suggested that the person might have been Otto Conrad.

‘No world championship match ever produced a finer struggle than this.’

So wrote R.N. Coles on page 119 of Battles-Royal of the Chessboard (London, 1948), with regard to the 11th game of the 1929 Alekhine v Bogoljubow match. (He placed the game, a 63-move draw, in Wiesbaden instead of Heidelberg.)

Bogoljubow’s annotations were published on pages 408-410 of the December 1929 Kagans Neueste Schachnachrichten.

From page 170 of the November 1929 American Chess Bulletin:

(6692)

From Olimpiu G. Urcan comes this photograph on page 643 of the Illustrated London News, 12 October 1929:

Larger version

(7510)

Instances of surprisingly high praise are always welcome. Pages 63-64 of the December 1929 Chess Amateur introduced as follows Bogoljubow’s 71-move victory over Alekhine in the 14th game of that year’s world championship match:

‘One of the finest games we have ever published.’

(8654)

A news item on page 26 of the Chess Amateur, November 1928:

‘La Nation belge states that the Alekhine-Bogoljubow match will be played next May, starting at Bad Kissingen and continuing in India! The authority for these statements is dubious.’

What was the ‘authority’?

(9818)

Charles Sullivan asks about the game E. Znosko-Borovsky v A. Alekhine, St Petersburg, 27 January 1914, as given on pages 92-93 of the Skinner/Verhoeven volume on Alekhine.

After 34 Rh2 Ne7 35 Ng2 Rg5, instead of 36 Be4 White could have won a piece with 36 Qxe7, and our correspondent therefore wonders whether the game-score is correct, and whether the move-order was perhaps 34...Rg5 35 Be4 Ne7 36 Ng2 c6.

Unable to trace the game-score in any 1914 source, we contacted Leonard Skinner (Cowbridge, Wales), who has kindly forwarded the earliest publication of the game known to him (as included in his book): Alekhine’s notes on pages 209-212 of Shakhmatny Vestnik, July 1915. The relevant phase is reproduced below:

Given that the Skinner/Verhoeven book reproduced the game-score accurately, the question is whether an oversight occurred at the board at move 36 or whether Alekhine erred in the move-order which he submitted to the Russian periodical.

(5693)

From page 515 of Alexander Alekhine’s Chess Games, 1902-1946 by Leonard M. Skinner and Robert G.P. Verhoeven (Jefferson, 1998):

The source indicated (A. Alekhine) is the English-language edition of Pablo Morán’s monograph (Jefferson, 1989).

Andrés Vicente Sanz (Valencia, Spain) has sent us the complete game as published on page 3 of El Mundo Deportivo, 7 February 1935:

Alexander Alekhine – A. Galindo
Blindfold exhibition, Palma de Mallorca, 2 February 1935
Ruy López

1 e4 e5 2 Nf3 Nc6 3 Bb5 Bc5 4 c3 Nf6 5 d4 exd4 6 e5 Nd5 7 cxd4 Bb4+ 8 Bd2 Bxd2+ 9 Qxd2 Nce7 10 Nc3 c6 11 Bc4 b5 12 Bb3 O-O 13 Ne4 Ng6 14 Nd6 Qe7 15 O-O Qe6 16 h3 Ngf4 17 Bxd5 Nxd5 18 Ng5 Qg6 19 f4 h6 20 Nf3 a5

21 f5 Qg3 22 f6 Qf4 23 fxg7 Kxg7 24 Qxf4 Nxf4 25 Nh4 Ne2+ 26 Kh2 Nxd4 27 Rf6 b4 28 Rd1 c5 29 Rxd4 cxd4 30 Nhf5+ Resigns.

(6390)

Lilienthal never defeated Alekhine in a tournament but was successful against him in blitz play. Since confusion sometimes arises over the matter, we reproduce the account provided by Lilienthal on page 24 of his autobiographical work Életem, a sakk (Budapest, 1985):

Below is the German translation, from pages 19-20 of Schach war mein Leben (Thun, Frankfurt/Main, 1988):

(6570)

As noted on page 629 of the Skinner/Verhoeven volume on Alekhine’s games, Louis Zollner was aged 84 when he defeated the world champion in a simultaneous display in Newcastle on 24 September 1938. The game, in which Alekhine played the Evans Gambit, was taken from page 102 of CHESS, 14 November 1938, where it was part of a seven-page feature on Zollner. Regarding his victory, in 30 moves, Zollner commented: ‘This must be my farewell effort, I fear.’

Louis Zollner (1854-1945). Source: CHESS, 14 November 1938, page 99.

(6607)

From pages 109-110 of Shostakovich A Life by Laurel E. Fay (Oxford, 2000):

‘Chess was chiefly a youthful infatuation; although he followed match play, he was never as serious a competitor as Prokofiev or David Oistrakh. In old age one of the favourite yarns he liked to retell was how, as a callow teenager, he had challenged and lost to Alexander Alekhine, something which could have taken place only before the future world champion left Russia for good in the spring of 1921.’

The source for this information is given on page 310:

‘M. Dolgopolov, “Budem znakomï – Alekhin ...”, Izvestiya, 17 August 1974, 5. Among others who recall hearing the composer recount versions of this story are Yevgeniy Dolmatovsky and Mstislav Rostropovich.’

A photograph of Shostakovich at the chessboard was given on page 354 of the November 1946 BCM:

(6656)

Marcelo Sibille (Montevideo, Uruguay) mentions that a longer account of the meeting between Shostakovich and Alekhine is to be found on pages 396-397 of another biography, published in 1997: Shostakovich Su vida, su obra, su época by Krzysztof Meyer, the source specified being an article by M. Dolgopolov in the 6/1975 issue of Sputnik.

We see no reference to Alekhine in an earlier edition of Meyer’s book, in Polish, Szostakowicz (Cracow, 1973), but the story can be found in the later editions in French and German: on pages 476-477 of Dimitri Chostakovitch (Paris, 1994) and pages 477-478 of Schostakowitsch Sein Leben, sein Werk, seine Zeit (Mainz, 2008).

shostakovich

No English translation of Meyer’s book is known to us, but we have procured a copy of the English edition of the June 1975 Sputnik (‘Digest of Soviet Press’). Below is the article by Mikhail Dolgopolov on Shostakovich and Alekhine, from pages 105-107:

(7079)

Gloria Martín and Javier Boldó (Santa Cruz de Tenerife, Canary Islands, Spain) possess two pictures inscribed by Alekhine:

The second item (with Alekhine’s inscription, written a few months before he died, on a photograph of a sketch made five years previously) is of particular interest. The warm dedication is to Alvaro Díaz, whom Alekhine thanks for his many kindnesses, adding that he hopes to see Díaz again at a less turbulent time in his life.

(6672)

One of Euwe’s most famous wins is the ‘Pearl of Zandvoort’, the 26th game of his 1935 world title match against Alekhine. See, for instance, page 150 of Euwe’s From My Games 1920-1937 (London, 1938) and such well-known books as Wellmuth’s The Golden Treasury of Chess, Fine’s The World’s Great Chess Games and Schonberg’s Grandmasters of Chess. Various chess encyclopaedias (e.g. by Sunnucks, Golombek and Brace) have an entry for the ‘Pearl of Zandvoort’, and it is, in short, a matter on which no half-competent writer would go wrong.

From page 158 of The Big Book of Chess by Eric Schiller (New York, 2006):

The Euwe win given by Schiller as the ‘Pearl of Zandvoort’ was played in Amsterdam.

(6683)

Page 33 of The World Champions Teach Chess compiled by Y. Estrin and I. Romanov (London, 1988) quoted a comment by Nimzowitsch after Alekhine’s triumphs at San Remo, 1930 and Bled, 1931:

‘He makes short work of us as if we were little chickens.’

We are unaware of a Russian edition of the book, but the German version, Weltmeister lehren Schach (Hollfeld/Obfr., 1985), had put the following:

‘Er legt uns wie Grünschnäbel um.’

The most direct translation of Grünschnäbel is ‘greenhorns’ or, possibly, ‘whippersnappers’.

Nimzowitsch’s remark was quoted by Hans Kmoch in an article on Alekhine at the Chess Café:

‘At Bled, Alekhine’s superiority drove the proud Nimzowitsch to despair. When he resigned to the world champion after only 19 moves he was near tears. “It’s incredible”, he complained. “Only a few years ago we were all about equal”, he said, referring to the chess elite of that time, “but now he treats us like patzers.”’

Kmoch was present at the Bled, 1931 tournament. Page 53 of the English edition (Yorklyn, 1987) of his book on the event, translated by Jimmy Adams, had the following text in the introduction to the round in which the Alekhine v Nimzowitsch game was played:

‘Nimzowitsch could not recover from his astonishment. After taking both pawns, he left the board and, shaking his head, repeated several times, “He is treating us like patzers.”’

The words ‘He is treating us like patzers’ were also quoted, by Flohr, on pages viii-ix of the English book, in a 1976 article translated from 64.

The original edition of the Bled, 1931 tournament book (Leningrad, 1934) was a translation of Kmoch’s unpublished German text, which may or may not be extant. Below is the relevant passage, from page 53:

‘Он обращается с нами, как с желторотыми птенчиками.’

A literal rendering is ‘He treats us like yellow-beaked fledglings’. The term ‘yellow-beaked’ in Russian means young and inexperienced.

It is hoped that other sightings of the Nimzowitsch quote can be found. The unsatisfactory situation at present is that we have Estrin’s text in German but not the original Russian and Kmoch’s text in Russian but not the original German.

(6684)

On pages 67-69 of the March 1932 issue of Kagans Neueste Schachnachrichten Nimzowitsch wrote an article about whether his third place at Bled, 1931 (after Alekhine and Bogoljubow) was to be regarded as a relative failure:

nimzowitsch

In the passage marked with red Nimzowitsch states that his two defeats against Alekhine prove nothing. He mentions that although at one time he suffered a series of defeats against Bogoljubow, his latest score against him in tournament games is four wins, three draws and no losses. Nimzowitsch adds that as recently as 1930 (presumably 1920, since he also writes ‘after the War’) he stood equal with Alekhine; moreover, he had a tied result in his games with him at New York, 1927. Nimzowitsch’s conclusion is that Alekhine, to demonstrate his superiority, would have to defeat him in hard battles, whereas his two victories over him in the Bled tournament, one in gambit style and the other by catching him out with a pretty trap, proved absolutely nothing and were certainly pure chance.

(6695)

A passage from an article by Roberto Grau on San Remo, 1930 was quoted in C.N. 1041:

‘When Alekhine beat Nimzowitsch in such masterly style the first to congratulate him was the defeated man himself. This gesture by the aggressive Nimzowitsch is a token of his admiration for his opponent’s skill, and as he rose from the board he said in a loud voice, “Alekhine plays phenomenally”.’

Source: El Ajedrez Americano, March 1930, pages 66-69.

(7180)

Wanted: substantiation of this ‘once’ quotation:

‘Alekhine once said, “There must be no reasoning from past moves, only from the present position”.’

Source: The Golden Dozen by Irving Chernev (Oxford, 1976), page 260.

(6704)

Dan Scoones refers to comments by Alekhine in his 1938 radio interview (see C.N. 5838): ‘Look forward all the time is the thing to do.’ ... ‘I never look back on a game or a match but try all the time to see how I may improve my play.’

From Dominique Thimognier comes an article ‘Ce que nous disait Alekhine!’ by Louis Betbeder, which was published in a brochure for the 1967 French championship. One piece of advice by Alekhine (in Betbeder’s reported speech and under the heading ‘Objectivité du jugement’) was:

‘Savoir si l’on est mieux que l’adversaire est, par conséquent, essentiel; se poser très souvent la question, en particulier pendant qu’il réfléchit. Juger surtout une position en oubliant complètement l’histoire de la partie et en ne considérant que la géographie, c’est-à-dire le diagramme actuel.’

(6720)

From Steve Wrinn:

‘C.N.s 6704 and 6720 discussed the claim by Chernev that Alekhine “once” stated, “There must be no reasoning from past moves, only from the present position”.

There is a good example of this view, expressed in Alekhine’s own words, in his comments on a note by Euwe in game 19 of their 1937 world championship match, on pages 134-135 of Alekhine’s book The World’s Chess Championship 1937 (London, 1938).

Euwe was White, and play went 13 Re1 Nb4 14 Bb5+ Kf8 15 Qe2 Bc5

16 Nd1. Having played 13 Rf1-e1, Euwe rejected 16 Re1-f1 and wrote:

“Of course not 16 R-B1, as this would admit something that was not true, namely, that 13 R-K1 was a mistake.”

Alekhine then added his own comment:

“An interesting remark, important for the comprehension of Dr Euwe’s chess personality; he simply does not want to admit that at the 16th move the best policy may be to return with the rook to KB1, and this solely because at the 13th move this rook went from KB1 to K1. For my part I confess that if I had White I would be satisfied with the fact that my 13th move had forced my opponent to lose the power to castle; and that I would have made my choice only on the basis of a close examination of the respective value of the moves possible – not taking into account which squares the corresponding pieces had occupied a few moves earlier. As a matter of fact it appears that 16 R-B1 would have been the simpler alternative; for in that case 16...B-B4 would have led to nothing after 17 P-QR3 Kt-B7 18 R-Kt1.”

So in this case a “once” quotation at least approaches the truth – for once.’

(7232)

Pages 14-15 of 100 Classics of the Chessboard by A.S.M. Dickins and H. Ebert (Oxford, 1983) gave Alekhine v Sämisch, Berlin, 1923 under the heading ‘The Classic Blindfold Game’. The co-authors claimed:

‘Happening to meet in Berlin, the two players decided to take the opportunity of playing each other blindfold, creating as a result this astonishing brilliancy.’

The book added that Sämisch called Alekhine’s victory ‘the most brilliant game I have ever seen’. The moves: 1 e4 c5 2 Nf3 Nc6 3 Be2 e6 4 O-O d6 5 d4 cxd4 6 Nxd4 Nf6 7 Bf3 Ne5 8 c4 Nxf3+ 9 Qxf3 Be7 10 Nc3 O-O 11 b3 Nd7 12 Bb2 Bf6 13 Rad1 a6 14 Qg3 Qc7 15 Kh1 Rd8 16 f4 b6 17 f5 Be5 18 fxe6 Bxg3 19 exf7+ Kh8 20 Nd5 Resigns.

It is one of Alekhine’s most spectacular miniatures, number 97 in his first collection of Best Games (London, 1927). The heading was ‘Exhibition Game played at Berlin, February 1923’. The book did not suggest that either master was blindfold. Nor did the German translation, Meine besten Partien 1908-1923 (Berlin and Leipzig, 1929), although we have one later edition in German (Berlin, 1983), which states ‘Beiderseits ohne Ansicht des Brettes’. Various editions of the book Meisterspiele by Rudolf Teschner say that both players were without sight of the board, and Sämisch’s praise of Alekhine is quoted:

‘“Die genialste Partie, die ich je gesehen habe”, äußerte Sämisch voll Bewunderung für seinen Gegner.’

As shown below, Tartakower cited Sämisch when he published the game (a ‘Gastkampf’ , which Tartakower dated 1921, instead of 1923, with no intimation of blindfold play but with an additional move at the end) on page 276 of Die hypermoderne Schachpartie (Vienna, 1924):

tartakower

January, rather than February, 1923 was specified when the game appeared on pages 218-219 of the second volume of Complete Games of Alekhine by V. Fiala and J. Kalendovský (Olomouc, 1996). The co-authors asserted that the game was first published on page 16 of the Observer, 4 March 1923. In neither that volume nor in the Skinner/Verhoeven book on Alekhine (see page 184) was it suggested that Alekhine or Sämisch played the game blindfold. Moreover, the score was not included in Blindfold Chess by E. Hearst and J. Knott (Jefferson, 2009).

The brilliancy is absent from all the chess magazines of 1923 that we have consulted so far.

(6741)

alekhine

This group shot featuring Alekhine (Sofia, 13 April 1936) comes from Bulgarskiyat shakhmat v snimki by S. Sergiev (Sofia, 2006). The book has, in all, 684 pictures, running through to the Topalov era, and can be ordered from Karel Mokrý’s chess bookshop (which was warmly recommended in C.N. 4737).

(6749)

This photograph of Alexander Alekhine is surprisingly little-known, even though it was the frontispiece of his book Meine besten Partien (1908-1923), published by Walter de Gruyter & Co., Berlin and Leipzig in 1929.

(6754)

Eduardo Bauzá Mercére (New York, NY, USA) has provided the above photograph from the Alekhine v Rey Ardid match in Saragossa, 1944. He reports:

‘It appeared in the bulletin of rounds 8-9 of the 1957 Spanish championship (27-28 October), also played in Saragossa.’

(6828)

Jan Kalendovský has sent us from the archives of the city of Pilsen (Plzen) an application by the association of Czech chessplayers of the West Bohemian sector for an exception to be made to the general ban on meetings, so that Alekhine could give a 35-board simultaneous exhibition on 1 February 1943:

The application was accepted, the display took place, and two games are given on page 697 of the Skinner/Verhoeven book on Alekhine.

(6860)

Jan Kalendovský has sent us, courtesy of Miloslav Míc, a photograph which was taken during the simultaneous display by Alekhine discussed in C.N. 6860 (Pilsen/Plzen, 1 February 1943):

Larger version

(6885)

This photograph of James Whitfield Ellison comes from the dust-jacket of his chess novel Master Prim (London, 1968).

Pages 189-198 included a 29-move game between Julian Prim and Eugene Berlin, and that part of the story was reproduced on pages 143-146 of A Book of Chess by C.H.O’D. Alexander (London, 1973). Alexander did not identify the game, which was Alekhine v Sterk, Budapest, 1921.

C.N. 2830 (see pages 2-3 of Chess Facts and Fables) discussed that brilliancy prize game, noting that Alekhine’s first volume of Best Games contracted it by one move.

master prim

(6934)

From Oliver Beck:

‘While observing a game of chess, a character in Stefan Zweig’s Schachnovelle (Buenos Aires, 1942) points out its similarity to Alekhine v Bogoljubow, Bad Pistyan, 1922. In fact, beginning with 38...Kh7 the game described in Zweig’s novella appears identical to that game.

I find it interesting that Zweig was inspired to use the Alekhine v Bogoljubow game as a model, and I wonder what his source for this game might have been. There appears to be no obvious connection between the text on pages 33-37 of the Suhrkamp Verlag edition ofSchachnovelle (Frankfurt, 2001) and the game’s annotations found on either page 139 of the tournament book or pages 84-85 of Tartakower’s Die hypermoderne Schachpartie.

Zweig’s source may have been another book of collected games. We learn that the aforementioned character had become familiar with this game through his study of “ein Schachrepetitorium, eine Sammlung von hundertfünfzig Meisterpartien” (page 64), and in a letter written in Petrópolis, Brazil on 29 September 1941 and quoted on page 111 of Siegfried Unseld’s afterword, Zweig writes:

“... habe eine kleine Schachnovelle entworfen, angeregt davon, daß ich mir für die Abgeschiedenheit ein Schachbuch gekauft habe und täglich die Partien der großen Meister nachspiele.”

Can a likely source be identified?’

The matter was discussed in detail in an article ‘Stefan Zweig Schachspieler’ by Egbert Meissenburg on pages 20-28 of 65 Jahre Schachnovelle edited by S. Poldauf and A. Saremba (Berlin, 2007):

(6940)

On page 208 of Combinations The Heart of Chess (New York, 1960) Irving Chernev wrote of Alekhine:

‘His contributions to chess theory are of such importance as to justify saying, “The openings consist of Alekhine’s games with a few variations”.’

The identical words are on page 251 of Chernev’s book The Golden Dozen (Oxford, 1976).

Had the sentiments in double quotation marks been expressed by someone else before 1960 or can they legitimately be attributed to Chernev?

This fine photograph of Alekhine is from page 250 of The Golden Dozen. It is not difficult to identify the game in progress, but a clue is offered: Alekhine’s opponent was discussed in C.N. 3809.

(6945)

This advertisement on an inside cover page of the October 1956 BCM states that the Hollings Chess Salon was established in 1892, but we are also intrigued by the reference to ‘a catalogue of the Chess Library of the late Mr Christopher Ogle’. Does any reader have a copy of that catalogue?

Our interest in Ogle was prompted many years ago by the well-known anecdote regarding London, 1922, and for ease of reference C.N. 3083 is reproduced here:

If chess literature is to feature anecdotes, let them at least have a point. One story, set during the London, 1922 tournament, which has some purpose was related by David Hooper in the Capablanca entry of Anne Sunnucks’ Encyclopaedia of Chess:

‘These two rivals [Capablanca and Alekhine] were taken to a variety show by a patron, Mr Ogle, who recalled that Capablanca never took his eyes off the chorus, whilst Alekhine never looked up from his pocket chess set.’

In the first edition of The Oxford Companion to Chess (the Alekhine entry) the patron was named in full as Christopher Ogle, and in at least one other modern outlet he has been described as a ‘chess patron’. That remains to be demonstrated, but our particular interest is in knowing the source of the Ogle/ogling recollection and whether there are further reminiscences from London, 1922.

(6956)

A familiar blindfold brilliancy:

1 e4 e5 2 Nf3 Nc6 3 Bb5 a6 4 Bxc6 bxc6 5 d4 exd4 6 Qxd4 d6 7 O-O Be6 8 Nc3 Nf6 9 Bg5 Be7 10 Qa4 Bd7 11 Rad1 O-O 12 e5 Ne8 13 Bxe7 Qxe7 14 exd6 cxd6 15 Rfe1 Qd8 16 Nd4 Qc7 17 Re7 Nf6 18 Nf5 Qd8 19 Rxd6 Re8

20 Ne4 Rxe7 21 Nxf6+ Kh8 22 Nxe7 Qxe7 23 Qe4 Qxe4 24 Nxe4 Be6 25 b3 g6 26 Nc5 Bf5 27 Rxc6 Re8 28 f3 Re2 29 Rxa6 Rxc2 30 Ne4 Be6 31 h4 Kg7 32 Kh2 Kh6 33 Kg3 Bd7 34 a4 f5 35 Ng5 Rc3 36 Ra7 Rd3 37 a5 Kh5 38 Nxh7 Resigns.

This game (Alekhine v Kimura, Tokyo, 20 January 1933) appeared in the world champion’s second Best Games volume, and the circumstances were discussed at length on pages 442-443 of the Alekhine book by L. Skinner and R. Verhoeven. The co-authors noted that although the game was widely published at the time, with Kimura listed as one of the opponents in Alekhine’s exhibition, suspicions had been expressed as to the game’s authenticity. They mentioned the following letter from John Kalish on page 273 of the July 1968 Chess Life:

Richard Sams (Tokyo) informs us that an article by Yoshio Kimura entitled ‘Thoughts on Chess’ was published on pages 190-193 of the magazine Bungei Shunju, April 1933. Below is the complete text, in our correspondent’s translation from the Japanese:

‘About a decade has passed since I first took an interest in Western shogi (chess) and decided that I would like to study it. At that time, there was a chess club at the back of the Imperial Hotel and there I first learned how to play chess under the tutelage of an Englishman, Mr Havilland, who was apparently once an amateur chess champion. At first I learned only the basics, and for a while I had no opponents or opportunities to play. Fortunately, however, through the support and guidance of Dr Ishida of the Riken Group and Professor Mitamura of the Imperial University of Tokyo, I was able to acquire useful knowledge of chess openings and strategies. Upon inquiring about the most notable chess matches, I was surprised to learn the extent to which chess has gained international popularity as the ultimate intellectual contest. This aroused my interest further, giving me an even greater desire to study the game more deeply.

From that time on, Professor Mitamura helped me with my studies by providing me not only with well-known books on chess but also with specialist publications on matches from Europe and America. I thereby acquired a little knowledge of the exploits of leading players in the West and the most recent matches taking place around the world. This greatly increased my enthusiasm, and I even came to embrace the conceit and ambition that, if I could make a serious study of chess as I had of shogi, I might even be able to compete for the world championship.

One reason I came to think this is that, because chess is quite similar to shogi in many respects from strategy to the deployment of pieces and tactical methods, I would be able to adapt to its fundamental reasoning. Furthermore, the fact that, unlike in shogi, the pieces are no longer in play once they have been captured made chess seem quite simple (from the viewpoint of a professional shogi player). Therefore, armed with the profound technical skills characteristic of shogi, I might even be able to compete for the world championship in chess. Until quite recently, I had confidently held this conviction.

Seven years ago, the Tokyo Chess Club was established with the late Dr Fukada as President and Dr Masataka Ota as Vice-President. The inaugural meeting took place at the Tokyo Kaikan. Subsequent club meetings were held twice a month in a room in the Imperial Hotel. The original founding members were Dr Fukada, Viscount Masatoshi Okouchi, Dr Ota, Count Akira Watanabe, Baron Tatsukichi Nagakoshi, Mr Jozo Ikoma, Dr Yoshio Ishida, Dr Masaharu Nishikawa and Professor Atsushiro Mitamura, together with the professional shogi players Osaki 8-dan, Kon 8-dan and me.

The club met twice a month and, with the attendance of four or five chess enthusiasts from overseas, it flourished for a while. It was very enjoyable to do battle with foreigners over the chess board, but after Dr Ishida, Professor Mitamura and I decisively defeated three foreign opponents, including the strong player Mr Havilland, we found ourselves without any suitable rivals and had no choice but to play each other. As a result, the club’s activities gradually fell into abeyance.

At the time, I was quite intoxicated with feelings of superiority, having beaten foreigners at chess, but I was also concerned because I did not really know my true strength (in the eyes of a professional chessplayer). Then I learned that the world chess champion Alekhine, who was en route to a match in Shanghai, was planning to visit Japan on 16 January for just one week. I had already heard of Mr Alekhine about seven or eight years previously and viewed this as a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to determine my chess ability. Professor Mitamura telephoned Mr Alekhine to arrange a meeting, and we went to his hotel the following day (17 January). Somehow we missed him at the hotel and had to wait for a while. As usual, Professor Mitamura was well prepared. He showed me a photograph of Mr Alekhine at the front of a book which the world champion had written on a recent international tournament, so that we could stop him if we saw him leaving the hotel. Shortly afterwards Mr Alekhine appeared, and I was introduced to him as a professional shogi player. He is a splendid-looking gentleman, well built and easily six feet tall. He was more approachable than I imagined and seemed to possess a strong artistic sensibility. When Professor Mitamura showed me Mr Alekhine’s book, explaining how rich it was in content as a practical guide for students of chess, Mr Alekhine’s face seemed to light up, and he at once became more relaxed and familiar. He said he had heard that different forms of chess were played in Japan, China and India, and that, since Japanese chess was particularly sophisticated, it should be studied. He had therefore decided to come to Japan to learn more about it. As professional shogi players, we had considered the possibility of promoting shogi overseas, but we thought that it might be hard to understand for Westerners, who find chess a sufficiently difficult game. We also could not think of any suitable way of explaining the excellence of shogi and teaching it. However, considering that the most effective method would be for a respected professional chessplayer such as Mr Alekhine to introduce shogi to the world, I decided to take it upon myself to teach him the game.

Through the good offices of Dr Ishida we then made arrangements for a gathering of Japanese and foreign chess enthusiasts to honor the world champion. The Japan Shogi Federation undertook to organize a party and provided various assistance in making the preparations. We were particularly grateful to Count Yanagisawa for his help and to Mayor Nagata, who went so far as to arrange a welcome reception at the Japan Club, where Mr Alekhine was presented with a souvenir.

When the preparations had been made, what we desired most of all was for Mr Alekhine to display his skills as the world chess champion. He agreed to this, proposing to play a blindfold simultaneous display against all of us. I thought that, even for the world champion, it would be difficult to play simultaneously against 14 opponents of different strengths, to keep the positions in his mind and remember the moves of all the games without making any oversights, and surely impossible to win all of them, whatever the difference in strength between him and his opponents. However, Professor Mitamura pointed out that, since Mr Alekhine was the world record holder in blindfold simultaneous chess and had played blindfold against 26 opponents in New York in 1926 and 28 opponents in Paris in 1928, he should have no difficulty with just 14 opponents.

Here I think a brief outline of how Mr Alekhine has succeeded in reaching the pinnacle of world chess will provide insights into his serious attitude to chess and his character, which has particularly impressed me. Mr Alekhine is currently a French citizen living in Paris, and plays mainly against Russian opponents. A Polish-Russian, he is 42 years old according to the Japanese age-counting system. In 1914, while he was taking part in an international tournament in Mannheim, Germany, the Great European War broke out and he was for some reason taken prisoner. After being interned for almost two months, he was released and returned to Russia. He was drafted into the army and fought bravely, but having earlier graduated from law school, he was soon appointed to serve in the foreign ministry, mainly undertaking work related to criminal law. After he left this post, the Russian Revolution occurred and, under the suspicion of the Soviet Government, he was again imprisoned for a while, but succeeded in escaping to Paris five years later. Clearly he experienced great vicissitudes of fortune up to the time he became a French citizen in 1921. In 1924, he displayed his strength at the New York international chess tournament, where he came third below Lasker and Capablanca, who took first and second places respectively. In the spring of 1927, he again took part in an international tournament in New York, coming second behind the world champion Capablanca, thereby obtaining the right to challenge the latter to a match. This took place in Buenos Aires, Argentina, in the autumn of 1927. After a two-month long battle, Alekhine won an overwhelming victory of 6-3 and was crowned world champion. In 1931, he was challenged by Bogoljubow, another Russian who had become a German citizen, brilliantly retaining his world championship title with a score of 6-3. [It will be noted that Kimura’s biographical information about Alekhine contains a number of factual errors.]

Alekhine’s record since winning the world championship has been outstanding. He has not just won first prize in tournaments all over the world but has also won his games in fine style. His attitude to chess is deeply serious and he shows no sign at all of underestimating his opponent. Although I am considered a strong chessplayer in Japan, I must seem to him a mere novice. Nevertheless, when he sat down to play me, he showed no sign of relaxing his attention, and at moments where an unexpectedly interesting position arose he studied the position afterwards and explained it with the attitude of a researcher. His kindness and obvious passion for the game made this encounter a very pleasant experience for me.

Alexander Alekhine

According to Professor Mitamura, the world champion is well liked all over the world and praised for his character considerably more than other leading chessplayers. This reputation speaks volumes about his nature and breeding. Mr Alekhine says that for him chess is a way of refining the intellect and should transcend materialism, a statement which reflects his spiritual nature. He gives the impression of being very sensitive and straightforward, with no interest in flattery or deferring to conventional wisdom. I think that this is because, as well as being courteous and modest, he is above all an artist. His attitude calls to mind the Western tradition of chivalry, which is similar to the spirit of Bushido in Japan.

We did not have much time to teach shogi to Mr Alekhine but succeeded in outlining the rules, how the pieces move, and some basic opening strategies. He is a very quick learner. When I played a game with Professor Mitamura to show him an example of actual play, he indicated a move which he had not expected and asked about the best move in that position. This no doubt comes from his knowledge of chess, which gives him a confidence one rarely sees in people when they first learn shogi. I am sure that he will be able to introduce the game in the West based on what he has learned, and that this will make a great contribution to the future development of shogi.

Representing the Japan Shogi Federation at the welcome party on 20 January at the Imperial Hotel were the Meijin (shogi champion) Sekine, Doi 8-dan, Kon 8-dan, Hanada 8-dan, and Mr Nakajima. The party was also attended by chess lovers from both Japan and overseas who wanted to witness the amazing feat which the world champion was about to perform, and this made for a very congenial and pleasant atmosphere. On behalf of the Japan Shogi Federation, Mr Nakajima made a welcome speech in fluent English, stating that shogi and chess came from the same roots and expressing the hope that we could cooperate for their mutual development. Mr Alekhine said that, while chess and shogi may constitute only a small part of our respective cultures, they can play a significant role in promoting friendship among the peoples of the world. He promised to introduce shogi in the West with this aim in mind.

Now it was time for the final event in the program, the blindfold simultaneous chess display. In addition to Dr Ishida and Professor Mitamura, Kon 8-dan and I participated as professional shogi players studying chess. Also taking part were the foreign chess enthusiasts Clausnitze, Alexander, Mosler, Baumfeld, Kramer and Gotzscheke.

All the games in the blindfold display were played without odds. Thinking that I would have no chance of winning if I activated my pieces too early in the opening, I adopted a strategy of defending and waiting for my opponent to make a mistake. In the end, all 14 of us lost without much of a struggle. Considering my initial hopes, I felt quite ashamed of my inability to put up serious resistance, but I was also deeply impressed by the world champion’s extraordinary display of chess skill. On the way home, Kon 8-dan said that he considered Mr Alekhine’s feat almost inhuman.

Mr Alekhine told Professor Mitamura later that, in view of my experience in shogi, I could become a strong chessplayer if I studied intensively for six months. He says that he would like to visit Japan again next year, so it seems that he also has desires to study shogi. I showed him all the hospitality I could during the remainder of his stay in Tokyo until his departure for Shanghai on the morning of 22 January.

Finally, I should also like to express my thanks to the foreigners who took part in the simultaneous display and all those who attended the event.’

alekhine kimura

From page 276 of My Best Games of Chess 1924-1937 by A. Alekhine (London, 1939)

On the analytical front, we made a brief comment about Alekhine v Kimura on page 317 of the July 1985 BCM, pointing out that in Chess Life, January pages 22-23, Jan Frise of Sweden had shown that Alekhine’s note to 20...Rxe7 was faulty, because after 20...Nxe4 21 Rdxd7 ...

... Black can play 21...Qxd7, with the continuation 22 Rxd7 Nc3 (threatening 23...Re1 mate and forcing White to take perpetual check with 23 Nh6+).

Frise’s discovery (we are aware of no reference to 21...Qxd7 before 1980) was overlooked on page 80 of Alekhine in Europe and Asia by J. Donaldson, N. Minev and Y. Seirawan (Seattle, 1993), which misascribed the line to G.B. Lewis (who had mentioned it much later than Frise, i.e. in 1985). For further remarks on the Alekhine v Kimura position, by Larry Evans, see Chess Life, March 1989 (page 58) and February 2002 (page 32).

On page 361 of Kings, Commoners and Knaves (an item reproduced in The Games of Alekhine) we observed regarding Alexander Alekhine’s Best Games by A. Alekhine (London, 1996):

‘Many analytical emendations pointed out over the years by third parties are ignored; for instance, Alekhine’s note to Black’s 20th move in his game against Kimura at Tokyo, 1933 has been widely censured, but the Batsford book offers no comment.’

Incidentally, it would appear that Alekhine made a small factual error in his Best Games book, giving the number of opponents in the blindfold display as 15, instead of 14.

Another master who visited Japan in the 1930s was Lajos Steiner. His report, ‘A Chessplayer Turns Explorer’ on page 37-38 of the February 1937 Chess Review, included this paragraph:

‘Among the Japanese themselves, there are, as far as I know, only two players with real insight into the game. One is Professor Mitamura, a great pathologist and a member of the Imperial University of Tokyo. He is a man of keen intelligence, who speaks English and German well. Kimura, the greatest living shogi player, is the other.’

An article on shogi by Larry Kaufman on pages 28-33 of the September 1983 Chess Life mentioned Kimura Yoshio and gave a photograph of Korchnoi receiving an explanation of shogi from Aono Teruichi in London in 1980.

(6994)

Game 43 in Alekhine’s first volume of Best Games,against ‘M. Prat’, was described as ‘one of 20 simultaneous games played at Paris, September 1913’. The book was published in 1927; the German and Dutch editions brought out in 1929 identified Black as ‘J. Prat’ and did not stipulate the number of games in the exhibition. On the other hand, Deux cents parties d’échecs (Rouen, 1936) said that it was a 20-board display and that Black was ‘N. Prat’.

La Stratégie (October 1913, page 415) gave only the conclusion of the game and did not offer corroboration of Alekhine’s later statement that after Black’s 21st move he announced mate in ten:

As regards the number of players, 16 was the figure specified on page 360 of the September 1913 issue of the French magazine:

‘Le 10 septembre, également à La Régence, M. Alekhine conduit simultanément seize parties; avec une rapidité surprenante, il obtient le brillant résultat de quinze gagnées et une seule perdue contre M. le Dr de Hayes.’

(7040)

dia

White announced mate in ten: 22 Qh5+ Nxh5 23 fxe6+ Kg6 24 Bc2+ Kg5 25 Rf5+ Kg6 26 Rf6+ Kg5 27 Rg6+ Kh4 28 Re4+ Nf4 29 Rxf4+ Kh5 30 g3 any 31 Rh4 mate.

C.N. 7040 discussed discrepancies surrounding this famous Alekhine victory, and more are added now.

As regards Black’s identity, we have never seen a full name, but only ‘Prat’, with or without an initial. Our earlier item pointed out that in the English, German/Dutch and French editions of Alekhine’s first Best Games book the initial was given as M., J. and N. respectively. A fourth option, I., is in the Russian edition (Moscow and Leningrad, 1927). Although ‘M. Prat’ is the most common version, a misunderstanding may have arisen through M. being an abbreviation for Monsieur (as discussed, in another context, in C.N. 6693).

‘J. Prat’ was the name when the 22 Qh5+ finish was published on page 415 of La Stratégie, October 1913 (reproduced in C.N. 7040). The earliest occurrence of the full game-score that we can cite is on pages 286-287 of Shakhmatny Vestnik, 15 September 1913, shown here courtesy of the Royal Library in The Hague:

The heading stated that Alekhine played ‘against Mr Prat’; г-на is an abbreviation of the genitive singular form Господина (‘Mr’).

The Royal Library has also kindly provided the item on page 273 of the 1 September 1913 edition of Shakhmatny Vestnik to which the 15 September issue referred:

The report that Alekhine’s exhibition in Paris comprised 16 games (+15 –0 =1) corresponds to the information on page 360 of La Stratégie, September 1913:

As previously shown, page 415 of the October 1913 issue of La Stratégie also gave the date of the display as 10 September 1913. The fact that the above issue of Shakhmatny Vestnik was, formally at least, dated 1 September is not a stumbling-block, given the 13-day difference between the Julian and Gregorian calendars and the inclusion of Alekhine’s game against Edward Lasker, played on 7 September. It is, though, unclear why ‘August 1913’ was in the heading to the Prat game on page 119 of volume one of Complete Games of Alekhine by J. Kalendovský and V. Fiala (Olomouc, 1992). Page 87 of Alexander Alekhine’s Chess Games, 1902-1946 by L.M. Skinner and R.G.P. Verhoeven (Jefferson, 1998) put only ‘1913’ (and ‘J. Prat’), but the previous page duly referred to the 16-board display on 10 September 1913.

Although page 192 of Capablanca-Magazine, 15 November 1913 also dated the game ‘10 September 1913’, there was a mysterious assertion that it was played in ‘Carisban, Russia’:

The English and French editions of Alekhine’s first Best Games book stated that the simultaneous display consisted of 20 games, which contradicts the reports in Shakhmatny Vestnik and La Stratégie. Below are the headings in the various editions of Alekhine’s book, in chronological order of publication (London, 1927; Moscow and Leningrad, 1927; Berlin and Leipzig, 1929; The Hague, 1929; Rouen, 1936):

All these books recorded that the game began 1 d4 d5 2 Nf3 Nc6 3 c4 e6 4 Nc3 dxc4 5 e3 Nf6 6 Bxc4, whereas Shakhmatny Vestnik and Capablanca-Magazine had 1 d4 d5 2 Nf3 Nc6 3 e3 e6 4 c4 dxc4 5 Bxc4 Nf6 6 Nc3. The latter order is not among the five versions of the game in FatBase 2000, although the CD included 1 d4 d5 2 Nf3 Nf6 3 c4 e6 4 Nc3 dxc4 5 e3 Nc6 6 Bxc4.

The lengthiest coverage of Alekhine v Prat that we have seen is on pages 199-215 of How to Think Ahead in Chess by I.A. Horowitz and Fred Reinfeld (New York, 1951). The worst treatment is on page 308 of The Games of Alekhine by Rogelio Caparrós and Peter Lahde (Brentwood, 1992). Alekhine’s brilliant conclusion beginning with 22 Qh5+ was not even mentioned:

(10042)

C.N. 847 asked about the exact moves of the famous game Alekhine v Keres, Munich, 1942. After 1 d4 Nf6 2 Nf3 b6 3 c4 Bb7 4 g3 e6 5 Bg2 Be7 6 O-O O-O 7 b3 d5 8 Ne5 c6 9 Bb2 Nbd7 10 Nd2 ...

... the question posed was whether play went 10...c5 11 e3 Rc8 12 Rc1 Rc7 (Gran Ajedrez, 107 Great Chess Battles, Alekhine’s Best Games of Chess 1938-45) or 10...Rc8 11 Rc1 c5 12 e3 Rc7 (books on Alekhine by Kotov and Müller/Pawelczak).

On page 268 of Chess Explorations we remarked that when annotating the game on pages 143-144 of the 1 October 1942 issue of Deutsche Schachblätter Alekhine gave 10...Rc8 11 Rc1 c5, contrary to the move order in his (posthumous) book Gran Ajedrez. Moreover, in the German magazine Alekhine stated that the opening moves were 1 Nf3 Nf6 2 c4 b6 3 d4 Bb7, whereas Gran Ajedrez indicated 1 d4 Nf6 2 Nf3 b6 3 c4 Bb7.

This photograph of Alekhine and Keres was taken a few months earlier, at Salzburg, 1942:

Source: Alt om Skak by B. Nielsen (Odense, 1943), page 273.

(7055)

From Javier Asturiano Molina:

‘Page 140 of the October 1942 Deutsche Schachzeitung gave the opening moves as 1 Nf3 Nf6 2 c4 b6 3 d4 Bb7, and the later sequence as 10...Rc8 11 Rc1 c5 12 e3 Rc7. The same version was provided by Ramón Rey Ardid when he annotated the game on pages 285-286 of Ajedrez Español, October-November 1942.’

(7073)

From page 376 of the 14 July 1938 issue of CHESS:

alekhine

dia

The position in the Alekhine v Golombek game (before 19 d5) had been given on page 360 of the 14 June 1938 CHESS, with this note:

‘Black might well have tried capturing the pawn, e.g. 19...PxP 20 R-Q1 Kt-K2 21 P-K4?! P-KR3 with some freedom.’

On the same page CHESS indicated the time taken on the game: one hour by White and two hours by Black.

Alekhine’s remark on the projected match with Flohr was in response to this paragraph on page 337 of the 14 June 1938 CHESS:

‘Dr Alekhine and Flohr have signed a contract for a world’s championship match in the autumn (fall) of 1939. The match will be played at various places in Czechoslovakia and the financial and other conditions are to be exactly the same as for the Alekhine-Euwe matches.’

(7061)

Further to C.N. 7104, below are four more sketches by L. Nardus at Scheveningen, 1913, published on page 311 of The Field, 9 August 1913:

nardus

(7145)

In C.N. 5875 Olimpiu G. Urcan (Singapore) provided a link to a photograph of Chigorin at the website of the Bibliothèque nationale de France. He now points out three further pictures from the same collection:

Paris, 1925: Colle v Alekhine after 10...Bxc3+.

On Alekhine’s left is Tartakower, whose opponent that day (11 February) was Znosko-Borovsky. The man standing between Tartakower and Znosko-Borovsky is the tournament director, Alphonse Goetz. Mr Urcan comments that by zooming in it is even possible to read the time on Alekhine’s watch.

Two shots of Tartakower giving a simultaneous exhibition in 1932.

(7131)

John Blackstone (Las Vegas, NV, USA) has forwarded this an interview with Capablanca on page C3 of the Brooklyn Daily Eagle, 12 February 1928:

A few gleanings:

Asked whether his match loss to Alekhine surprised him, Capablanca said:

‘I confess it did. I never dreamt that my former good form could fail me at such an inopportune time. But Dr Alekhine is worthy of any man’s steel. If you don’t believe it, try it.’

‘I cannot fully explain it and I hate alibis. The fact is that I was not my normal self and I made mistakes that now that I look back upon them are quite unaccountable.’

After throwing away a win in game 27:

‘I knew then that the jig was up.’

The 12th match-game:

‘Yes, that was shocking. I cannot recognize myself as the player who lost it.’

On the future of chess:

‘The opening of the game has been so thoroughly analysed and masters have the middle-game combinations down so pat that there is little of mystery in the game for them. Given a clear head and good health, there should be no trouble in drawing a game at will.’

(7134)

The above photograph (Capablanca, Lasker and Alekhine) comes from a webpage of the World Camelot Federation, and we reproduce it with the permission of the Federation’s President and Founder, Michael Nolan (Troy, MI, USA). He informs us that he created it on the basis of this picture:

Here, Capablanca’s opponent is the Camelot and bridge expert Sidney Lenz, while E.V. Shepard (another bridge authority) looks on.

See too our article A Fake Chess Photograph.

(7164)

Wijnand Engelkes (Zeist, the Netherlands) reports that he has visited the Rua Alexander Alekhine in Estoril, Portugal:

Our correspondent comments:

‘The Rua Alexander Alekhine is beyond the tourist area of Estoril (city of Cascais) and a half-hour walk from the São João railway station. The street-sign is on the stone object on the left of the second picture. The Rua Alexander Alekhine is a small road on a slope, located at a high point in Estoril. There are no houses. On one side are the backs of the houses of an adjacent road, whereas the other side is empty land. There is really nothing there apart from a lonely tree at the top of the hill.’

(7174)

See Street Names with Chess Connections.

‘[Capablanca] had a better conceit of himself than had Alekhine, but was a much nicer and much better-liked man. Alekhine was qualified as a lawyer and had a powerful intellect. He was the only man I ever met who was arrogant without being conceited. What do I mean by arrogant? He treated inferiors as if they were inferiors – but he very rarely made Capablanca’s mistake of taking his own powers for granted.’

Source: page 139 of Not Only Chess by Gerald Abrahams (London, 1974).

(7179)

The accusation that Alekhine did not intervene on behalf of Dawid Przepiórka was rebutted in a footnote to Alekhine’s obituary on page 87 of the June 1946 Revue suisse d’échecs:

‘Le reproche de ne pas être intervenu en faveur du maître Przepiórka en 1942, lors de son séjour à Varsovie, est infondé. On sait maintenant, par des témoignages récents venant de la capitale polonaise, que le grand maître et compositeur polonais tomba victime de la persécution anti-juive en 1940 déjà, donc deux ans avant la visite d’Alekhine.’

The obituary was written by Erwin Voellmy and Jean-Charles de Watteville, and page 84 had a woodcut of Alekhine by Voellmy:

(7182)

The woodcut had originally been given on page 3 of the January 1928 Schweizerische Schachzeitung.

‘I dominate them all!’ is a remark commonly ascribed to Alekhine. The earliest appearance known to us is on page 171 of the May 1946 CHESS:

This was part of a three-page feature ‘Alekhine ... The Man and the Master’ by Thomas Olsen (about whom we lack biographical information).

(7209)

C.N. 8947 asked who wrote the following about Alekhine:

‘After his blindfold displays he would drink brandy in ordinary tumblerfuls.’

Suggestions included Arnold Denker and Harold C. Schonberg, but the most popular answer, in view of possible Internet searches, was Thomas Olsen.

From page 188 of The Great Chess Masters and Their Games by Fred Reinfeld (New York, 1952), in the chapter on Alekhine:

The previous year Reinfeld had included the following on pages 197-198 of The Treasury of Chess Lore (New York, 1951):

The next step is to verify that the quote is indeed in the magazine CHESS. Below is the relevant part of the May 1946 edition (pages 169-172):

However, if Thomas Olsen were the evident answer to our poser, C.N. 8947 would not have described the question as ‘exceptionally difficult’.

Page 198 of the June 1946 CHESS stated:

‘ALEKHINE NOTES
(continued)

In the May number of CHESS owing to a technical mistake the above title was omitted from the top of page 171. Mr Thomas Olsen’s article “Alekhine ... The Man and the Master” finishes with page 170, and the notes which follow are not from his pen.’

Consequently, Reinfeld’s later attributions to Olsen are incorrect, as is the reference in C.N. 7209 to ‘a three-page feature “Alekhine ... The Man and the Master” by Thomas Olsen’.

It is now tempting to assume that the writer of the remaining Alekhine material in the May 1946 CHESS was the magazine’s editor, B.H. Wood, but that is not so. Page 44 of the 12 November 1955 CHESS carried a review of Reinfeld’s The Treasury of Chess Lore which included this correction:

‘There are several quotations from CHESS; one of these (page 197), probably through our not making the authorship clear ourselves, is ascribed to Thomas Olsen instead of B. Reilly.’

How much unsigned material Brian Reilly wrote for CHESS naturally cannot be known, but in the mid-1940s he was indeed working for the magazine, as he informed W.H. Cozens on page 360 of the September 1981 BCM.

(8950)

C.N.s 7209 and 8950 showed the earliest known appearance of a famous remark ascribed to Alekhine, ‘I dominate them all’ (page 171 of the May 1946 CHESS):

This second-hand version related to unnamed third parties is often reduced to a general boast by Alekhine, as in this ‘once’ version on page 251 of The Golden Dozen by Irving Chernev (Oxford, 1976):

‘Alekhine played chess as if his life depended on it. He had to win, win, win, and live up to what he once said, “I dominate them all!”’

The phrase was used to advertise Al Horowitz’s New York Times column on page 233 of the April 1972 Chess Life & Review:

Another occurrence is on the back cover of the Dover edition of Fred Reinfeld’s collection 100 Instructive Games of Alekhine (New York, 1959):

The quote also stood alone in the heading (page 168) of the Alekhine chapter in Reinfeld’s The Great Chess Masters and Their Games (New York, 1952):

Reinfeld amplified on page 189:

(8970)

Page 39 of Famous Chess Players by Peter Morris Lerner (Minneapolis, 1973):

alekhine

It is easy to imagine writers reproducing the New York Times quote from that book, perhaps to glorify Alekhine or, alternatively, to criticize the newspaper’s suggestion that his claimed supremacy would endure for 1,000 years.

The text provides a curious illustration of how nothing in secondary sources should be accepted at face value. The brief New York Times article was published shortly after Alekhine’s death (in the 26 March 1946 edition), and below are the opening and closing passages:

‘When a game has been played for a thousand years the naming of one man as its greatest exponent requires an act of daring. ...

A pity that it [Alekhine’s life] was clouded at the close by charges of Axis collaboration based on a tangle of incidents yet to be explained. Leaving that aside, however, and looking only at Alekhine’s career as a chess master, no other name, not in the whole 1,000 years, can be placed ahead of his. The question is, Can any be placed beside it?’

(7375)

Chessplayers and Animals has many photographs of Alekhine, including the following (pages 3-4 of the 12 April 1936 issue of Pesti Napló Képes Melléklet):

This situation (White to move) arose in a game between Alfredo Olivera and Carlos Hounie Fleurquin in Montevideo in September 1939. White played 1 Re1, but Alekhine, a participant in the tournament, showed the line 1 Be4 fxe4 2 fxe4 Qxe4 3 Qf7+ Kh8 4 Bxg7+ Nxg7 5 Qf8+ Rxf8 6 Rxf8 mate.

Our source is Brian Harley’s column in The Observer, 5 November 1939, page 16:

For Oliveira read Olivera, and it may be noted that 2...Qg5 would offer more resistance. Can the complete game-score be found?

(7200)

From page 38 of Blunders and Brilliancies by Ian Mullen and Moe Moss (Oxford, 1990):

‘The late Isaac Kashdan who, in the 1920s and 30s, was Alekhine’s heir apparent ...’

(7255)

Michael Clapham draws attention to a passage on page 58 of Championship Chess by P.W. Sergeant (London, 1938):

(In the first paragraph the chronology is confusing, the Pasadena tournament having taken place in 1932.) As regards the comment about Kashdan, Fine and Flohr at the end of the second paragraph, we add the following from page 477 of the November 1933 BCM:

‘United States. – Dr Alexander Alekhine, before leaving New York for Europe on 5 [sic] September, told an interviewer that he regarded as specially likely future opponents Kashdan, Fine and Flohr, with the first-named the most probable. “America’s chances of possessing the next champion”, he said, “are excellent”.’

A correction appeared on page 527 of the December 1933 BCM:

‘In our first paragraph under the heading United States last month (page 477) the words “the first-named” should have been “the two first-named”, as Dr Alekhine included Reuben Fine with Isaac Kashdan in his choice of most probable future challengers for the world championship. He is said, indeed, to have described Fine as “a real threat” for the title.’

More information about the interview is sought.

Around the same time, Alekhine was interviewed by Kashdan himself, on pages 9-10 of the September 1933 Chess Review (see C.N. 5631). Alekhine was asked about US masters, but no names were mentioned in his reply:

‘We wanted to know what he thought of the American players, and how they compared with the younger European stars. “Your double success in the International Team Tournaments has put America in the first rank among the chessplaying nations. No other country has so many promising young masters. In New York City alone you have at least a dozen young men who have nothing to fear from the leaders of any country in Europe. I predict many new successes, and you have enough talent developing to keep in the top flight indefinitely.”’

(7259)

Writers on Mikhail Botvinnik tend to pass over a significant article which he contributed to International Championship Chess by B. Kažic (London, 1974). Published on pages 244-250, it is entitled ‘Botvinnik on his Meetings with World Champions’ and discusses Lasker, Capablanca, Alekhine and Euwe. An observation from page 248:

‘Alekhine’s was a complex character. As soon as he felt any signs of hostility, he would shoot out his quills like a porcupine. When people were kind he felt bound to behave in the same way.’

We should like to know whether Botvinnik’s original text is available, since the English version is sometimes defective. For example, page 247 has the following regarding AVRO, 1938:

‘The tournament marked the greatest in Capablanca’s entire career.’

A word such as ‘failure’ or ‘disappointment’ seems to be missing after ‘greatest’.

There is an interesting passage on pages 246-247, concerning the period after Hastings, 1934-35:

‘At the invitation of S.O. Weinstein, Capablanca came to the Soviet Embassy in London and immediately agreed to play in Moscow. It was a while before Capablanca actually came. Weinstein inconsiderately asked him about a possible match with Alekhine and suddenly the Cuban changed colour! He glared and could not calm down for a long time. Capablanca and Alekhine remained enemies for the rest of their lives.

Capa was phenomenal at calculating positions, but he was also a shrewd tactician. At the tournament in Moscow I played Black and skilfully brought the game to even play, when, unexpectedly, Capablanca in the end “overlooked” a man!? But – no! White had, in fact, been preparing a quiet move and a variation in which he actually took the pawn. All of this was artfully concealed.’

See too pages 92-93 of the English edition of the tournament book (Yorklyn, 1998). Botvinnik’s own notes appeared in the first volume of his Best Games series; for instance, on pages 181-183 of the English edition (Olomouc, 2000).

(7263)

The famous brilliancy F. Herrmann v H. Hussong, Frankfurt, 1930 published on pages 314-315 of the October 1930 Deutsche Schachzeitung, October 1930, and, with Alekhine’s notes taken from Denken und Raten, on pages 340-342 of the December 1930 issue of Kagans Neueste Schachnachrichten:

alekhine

(7402)

For further information on this game see our feature article on C.J.S. Purdy.

Olimpiu G. Urcan has submitted a series of photographs from the Illustrated London News:

Alexander Alekhine (blindfold exhibition in Paris). 25 February 1925, page 205

Alexander Alekhine. 10 December 1927, page 1064

1 October 1932, page 498

13 January 1934, page 67

28 December 1935, page 1186

18 December 1937, page 1106

(7490)

Dominique Thimognier supplies this photograph from page 1 of the Paris publication Le Matin of 23 December 1941:

This simultaneous display at the Hôtel Meurice against the German military was mentioned on page 677 of the Skinner/Verhoeven book on Alekhine. There are discrepancies, such as whether Alekhine faced 75 boards or 50.

(7629)

Wolfgang Franz (Oberdiebach, Germany) notes that a better-quality version of the Alekhine photograph was on the front cover of the February 1993 Rochade Europa:

Page 45 of the September 1993 issue gave the game Alekhine v Seibold, dated 21 December 1942 (sic). See page 677 of the Skinner/Verhoeven book on Alekhine.

Mr Franz also points out that the score of the simultaneous display was +40 –4 =6 according to page 5 of the January 1942 Deutsche Schachzeitung but +39 – 4 =7 in this report in La Gerbe of 8 January 1942:

Leonard Skinner (Cowbridge, Wales) provides the report on page 16 of Schach-Echo, 7 January 1942:

Nothing has been found to support the statement in Le Matin (C.N. 7629) that the Alekhine display was on 75 boards.

(7634)

Peter Anderberg notes that the first page of the Lower Saxony supplement to the February 1993 issue of Rochade Europa had a second photograph of Alekhine’s simultaneous exhibition:

(7642)

Félix Valderrama Loyola (Barquisimeto, Venezuela) reports that during a meeting which he had with Julio Bolbochán in Caracas 20 years ago the latter stated that his elder brother, Jacobo, gave Alekhine considerable assistance as a sparring partner in Buenos Aires in connection with the 1927 world championship match.

Our correspondent asks what solid information exists concerning Alekhine’s preparation for that match, beyond what he wrote in Auf dem Wege zur Weltmeisterschaft (Berlin and Leipzig, 1932).

(7502)

Page 251 of Schackvärlden, August 1937 had a photograph from the brilliancy Alekhine v Reshevsky, Kemeri, 1937:

(7561)

Josep Alió informs us that he has recently acquired the third personal notebook of the Catalan player V. Vallés. It covers the period May 1942 to December 1945, and the introduction states that the first volume began in 1935.

Pages 145-156 of volume three concern Sabadell, 1945, and pages 145, 146 and 147 provide an introduction to the tournament, including Vallés’ notes to his first-round game as Black against Alekhine (1 d4 Nf6 2 c4 e6 3 g3 c5 4 d5 d6 5 Bg2 Be7 6 Nc3 O-O 7 Nf3 exd5 8 cxd5 Re8 9 O-O Nbd7 10 e4 Bf8 11 Re1 Qa5 12 Bd2 b5 13 a3 Qb6 14 Qc2 a5 15 a4 b4 16 Nb5 Ba6 17 Bf1 Ng4 18 Bc4 Nde5 19 Nxe5 Nxe5 20 Be2 Bxb5 21 axb5 g6 22 Be3 Bg7 23 f4 Nd7 24 Bc4 a4 25 Rxa4 Rxa4 26 Qxa4 Bxb2 27 Bf2 Bc3 28 Re2 Qc7 29 b6 Qd8 30 b7 Nb6 31 Qb5 Nxc4 32 Qxc4 Qb6 33 e5 dxe5 34 Bxc5 Qxb7 35 fxe5 Rxe5 36 Rxe5 Bxe5 37 Bxb4 Qc7 38 Qxc7 Bxc7 39 Kg2 f5 Drawn).

Below are some extracts in our correspondent’s translation from the Catalan:

‘Alekhine turned up drunk; scarcely could he stand. It must be said that he did not let me play the game comfortably. It is a game that I have the feeling of not having played. On no other day did the world champion appear in such a state … He played very rapidly, but while I was thinking he continuously looked at the board, although he may have been mentally sleeping.’

After 31...Nxc4: ‘He now proposed a draw, but after thinking about it (moral and psychological considerations, mainly) I told him no; “Play a little more.” I think he became angry or took a dislike to me from then onwards.’

After 37 Bxb4: ‘“You want to win this?”, he asked with a scoff. I made a gesture and said, “Well, if you want a draw ...” or something like that. And then he said: “No! No! We shall play”, giving the public the impression, which was not the case, that the draw was being requested by me.’

After 39...f5: ‘And he said: “Yes, it is a draw.” And I did not know what to say, being ashamed.’

(7563)

From Olimpiu G. Urcan:

P.S. Milner-Barry v A. Alekhine (Plymouth tournament, 5 September 1938)
Western Morning News and Daily Gazette, 6 September 1938, page 11

Western Morning News and Daily Gazette, 9 September 1938, page 5

(7612)

Michael McDowell (Westcliff-on-sea, England) asks whether information is available about the problem ascribed to Alekhine on page 370 of CHESS, 28 May 1955:

The key move was given on page 443 of the 10 August 1955 issue, but without further particulars about the source of the composition.

(7670)

A database showing the alleged Alekhine problem has been pointed out by Han Bükülmez (Ecublens, Switzerland). The source specified there is L’Italia Scacchistica, 1932, and courtesy of Luca D’Ambrosio (Bolzano, Italy) and Alessandro Sanvito (Milan, Italy) we reproduce page 173 of the 1 June 1932 issue:

That, of course, is hardly the end of the story. How much further back can the problem be traced?

(7682)

Michael McDowell has forwarded pages 42-43 of the latest issue (105) of the Russian problem magazine Shakhmatnaya Kompozitsiya, in which three composers, A. Vasilenko, V. Aberman and I. Agapov, have improved significantly on the three-mover attributed to Alekhine:

Larger version

(7740)

Concerning Alekhine as a problem solver see A Chess Washout.

A widely-published blindfold game won by F. Sämisch against N.N.:

1 e4 e6 2 d4 d5 3 Nc3 Bb4 4 e5 c5 5 Bd2 cxd4 6 Nb5 Bc5 7 b4 Bb6 8 Qg4 Kf8 9 Nf3 Nc6 10 Qf4 f6 11 exf6 Qxf6 12 Nc7 Bxc7 13 Qxc7 h6 14 b5 d3

15 Bxd3 Qxa1+ 16 Ke2 Qf6 17 bxc6 Qe7 18 Bb4 Qxb4 19 Qd8+ Kf7 20 Ne5 mate.

Wanted regarding this game-score: the oldest possible citations from magazines and columns of the time. But when was ‘the time’? ‘Aachen, 1943’ was the heading when the game was published on pages 174-175 of The Joys of Chess by Fred Reinfeld (New York, 1961), but other books tend to give the date as 1934. See, for instance, pages 363-364 of Irving Chernev’s Best Short Games collection, which introduced the game as follows:

‘“Of all the modern masters that I have had occasion to observe playing blindfold chess, it is Sämisch who interests me the most; his great technique, his speed and precision have always made a profound impression on me.” So said Alekhine, himself one of the most magnificent exponents of the art.’

Alekhine made the remark on page 19 of Auf dem Wege zur Weltmeisterschaft (Berlin and Leipzig, 1932):

‘Von allen modernen Meistern, die ich beim Blindspiel zu beobachten Gelegenheit hatte, gefiel mir Sämisch am besten; seine große Technik, seine Schnelligkeit und Sicherheit haben mir imponiert.’

The French version, from page 270 of Deux cents parties d’échecs (Rouen, 1936):

‘De tous les Maîtres modernes que j’ai eu l’occasion d’observer au jeu à l’aveugle, c’est Sämisch qui m’intéresse le plus; sa grande technique, sa rapidité et sa sûreté m’ont toujours fait une profonde impression.’

(7683)

A position from Yates v Alekhine in the first round of the New York, 1924 tournament:

Yates played 29 Bd5, and on pages 17-18 of the tournament book (New York, 1925) Alekhine wrote:

‘Losing a piece. What follows is sheer desperation.’

The continuation was 29...c6 30 Rxg7 Kxg7, and White resigned after Black’s 35th move.

It was later found that White could have played 30 Nh4, but when was the discovery made?

Below is what appeared on page 332 of The Personality of Chess by I.A. Horowitz and P.L. Rothenberg (New York, 1963):

The matter was taken up by Sheldon McDonald of Connecticut on page 16 of the January 1978 Chess Life & Review, in the ‘Ask the Masters’ column, and a reply from Ken Rogoff followed:

The Complete Book of Chess was the new title of the Horowitz/Rothenberg work when it was reissued in 1969. The co-authors’ text leaves the reader to infer that they found 30 Nh4, but such was not the case. Horowitz’s magazine, Chess Review, had the following on page 291 of the December 1938 issue:

The solution on page 301 (also with incorrect move numbers throughout):

Nowadays the possibility of 30 Nh4 is regularly mentioned, though without attribution to Marshall or anyone else. See, for instance, page 43 of the second volume of the Chess Stars work on Alekhine (Sofia, 2002). For his part, Alekhine annotated the game briefly on pages 73-74 of La Stratégie, April 1924 (notes reproduced from Le Canada) and on page 99 of Wiener Schachzeitung, April 1924, but neither set of notes has anything of relevance to the play under discussion here.

(7746)

Dominique Thimognier has found the following games:

Alexander Alekhine – Cercle Rouennais des Echecs
Paris, 28 February 1932 (simultaneous display against 60 teams/300 players)
Queen’s Gambit Declined

1 d4 Nf6 2 Nf3 e6 3 c4 d5 4 Nc3 c6 5 Bg5 Nbd7 6 e4 dxe4 7 Nxe4 Bb4+ 8 Nc3 Qa5 9 Bd2 O-O 10 Bd3 Qd8 11 O-O Re8 12 Qc2 Nf8 13 Rad1 b6 14 a3 Be7 15 Rfe1 Bb7 16 b4 c5 17 dxc5 Bxf3 18 gxf3 bxc5 19 Bf4 Qb6 20 b5 Red8 21 Ne4 Ng6 22 Bg3 Rd4 23 Bf1 e5 24 Nc3 Bd6 25 Ne2 Rxd1 26 Rxd1 Bc7 27 Nc3 Qe6 28 Ne4 Qe7 29 Qa4 Nh5 30 Qa6 Bb6 31 Nc3 f5 32 Nd5 Qd8 33 Nxb6 Qxb6 34 Rd6 Qb8 35 Bd3 Qf8 36 Rd7 Nhf4 37 Bf1 Qc8 38 Qxc8+ Rxc8 39 Rxa7 Ne6 40 Bh3 Rd8 41 b6 Nd4 42 b7 Nxf3+ 43 Kf1 f4 44 Ra8 Nd2+ 45 Ke2 Resigns.

Source: Journal de Rouen, 17 March 1932.

Alexander Alekhine – Cercle Rouennais des Echecs
Paris, 28 February 1932 (simultaneous display against 60 teams/300 players)
Vienna Game

1 e4 e5 2 Nc3 Nc6 3 Bc4 Bc5 4 Qg4 g6 5 Qg3 Nf6 6 d3 Nh5 7 Qf3 Qf6 8 Nd5 Qxf3 9 Nxf3 Bb6 10 g4 Ng7 11 Bh6 Ne6 12 c3 d6 13 Nf6+ Ke7 14 Nd5+ Ke8 15 b4 Ncd8 16 a4 c6 17 Nxb6 axb6 18 d4 exd4 19 cxd4 b5 20 Bb3 Nc7 21 h3 Be6 22 Bc2 bxa4 23 Rxa4 Rxa4 24 Bxa4 b5 25 Bc2 Kd7 26 Kd2 Bc4 27 Ra1 Nde6 28 Ke3 Ra8 29 Rxa8 Nxa8 30 Nd2 Ba2

31 f4 Nac7 32 f5 Nd8 33 Nf3 f6 34 fxg6 hxg6 35 h4 Nf7 36 Bf4 Be6 37 g5 fxg5 38 hxg5 Na6 Drawn.

Source: Journal de Rouen, 31 March 1932.

Alexander Alekhine – Cercle Rouennais des Echecs
Rouen, 29 May 1932 (clock simultaneous display against six teams)

Alekhine announced mate in five moves.

Source: Journal de Rouen, 9 June 1932.

The solution was given in the following week’s edition: 51 Kg8 Ne5 52 bxa5 b4 53 a6 b3

54 axb3, followed by 55 Bg7 mate.

Alexander Alekhine – Three members of the Cercle Rouennais des Echecs
Rouen, 29 May 1932 (clock simultaneous display against six teams)
Queen’s Gambit Declined

[1 d4 d5 2 c4 e6 3 Nc3 Nf6 4 Bg5 Nbd7 5 Nf3 c6 6 e4] dxe4 7 Nxe4 Qa5+ 8 Nc3 Bb4 9 Bd2 O-O 10 a3 Be7 11 Nd5 Qd8 12 Nxe7+ Qxe7 13 Bd3 e5 14 O-O exd4 15 Nxd4 Qd6 16 Bb4 c5 17 Nf3 Qc7 18 Bc3 Re8 19 Re1 Rxe1+ 20 Qxe1 Kf8 21 Rd1 b6

22 Bxh7 Bb7 23 Bf5 Bxf3 24 gxf3 Re8 25 Qd2 Ne5 26 Bxe5 Qxe5 27 Qd6+ Qxd6 28 Rxd6 Re2 29 b4 cxb4 30 axb4 Re5 31 Bh3 Nh5 32 Kf1 Nf4 33 Bc8 Rh5

34 h3 Nxh3 35 Bg4 Rh4 36 Rd8+ Ke7 37 Rd7+ Kf6 38 Rxa7 Nf4 39 Ke1 Nd3+ 40 Ke2 Ne5 41 Rc7 Nxg4 42 fxg4 Rxg4 43 b5 Re4+ 44 Kd3 Re6 45 c5 bxc5 46 Rxc5 Rd6+ 47 Kc3 Ke6 48 Rc7 Rd7 49 Rc4 Ke7 50 Kb4 Kd6 51 b6 Kd5 52 Kb5 g6 53 Rc7 Resigns.

Source: Journal de Rouen, 23 June 1932. The opening moves were garbled in the newspaper, and the sequence suggested in square brackets above is merely one of a number of possible corrections.

Alexander Alekhine – Charles Dupin
Lille, 3 July 1932 (simultaneous display against 32 players, including two blindfold games)
Queen’s Gambit Declined

1 d4 d5 2 c4 e6 3 Nc3 c6 4 Nf3 Nf6 5 Bg5 Nbd7 6 e4 dxe4 7 Nxe4 Be7 8 Nc3 Qc7 9 Qc2 h6 10 Bh4 e5 11 O-O-O exd4 12 Rxd4 O-O13 Bg3 Qa5 14 a3 a6 15 Bd6 Re8 16 Bxe7 Rxe7 17 Bd3 Nf8 18 Rf4 Nh5 19 Rh4 Ne6 20 Re1 Nf6 21 Re5 b5 22 c5 Nd7 23 Re2 Ndxc5 24 Bh7+ Kf8 25 Kb1 Nd7 26 Ne4 Qc7 27 Ng3 Nf6 28 Nf5 Re8 29 Qc3 Nxh7 30 Rxh6 Kg8 31 Ne5 Nf4

32 Nd7 Resigns.

Source: Journal de Rouen, 21 July 1932.

Alexander Alekhine – Pierre Biscay, Marcel Berman and Marcel Duchamp
Paris, 15 June 1935 (simultaneous display against 36 teams)
Sicilian Defence

1 e4 c5 2 d4 cxd4 3 Nf3 Nc6 4 Nxd4 Nf6 5 Nc3 d6 6 Bg5 Qb6 7 Bxf6 gxf6 8 Nb3 e6 9 Qf3 Be7 10 O-O-O a6 11 Qg3 Bd7 12 Qg7 O-O-O 13 Qxf7 Qxf2 14 Qh5 Rdg8 15 h4 Ne5 16 Kb1 Be8 17 Qh6 Rg6

18 Qc1 Rhg8 19 Nd4 Bf8 20 b3 Rg3 21 Nce2 Re3 22 g3 Bh5 23 Rh2 Qxh2 24 Qxe3 Bg4 25 Rd2 Qh1 26 Qf2 Nf3 27 Nxf3 Qxf3 28 Qg1 Qxe4 29 Qa7 Bxe2 30 Bxe2 Bh6 31 Rd4 Qh1+ 32 Rd1 Qe4 33 Qa8+ Kc7 34 Qxg8 Qxe2 35 Qxh7+ Kc6 36 Qd3 Qe5 37 g4 Bg7 38 Qd4 f5 39 Qxe5 dxe5 40 g5 e4 41 h5 e3 42 h6 Bf8 43 Rh1 f4 44 Kc1 f3 45 Kd1 Bb4

46 c3 Bxc3 47 Kc2 e2 48 Kxc3 f2 49 White resigns.

Source: Journal de Rouen, 20 June and 4 July 1935.

Alexander Alekhine – Marcel Berman
Rouen, 14 March 1937 (simultaneous display against 35 players)
Alekhine’s Defence

1 e4 Nf6 2 Nc3 d5 3 e5 Nfd7 4 e6 fxe6 5 d4 c5 6 Nf3 cxd4 7 Nxd4 Nf6 8 Bb5+ Nc6 9 Nxc6 bxc6 10 Bxc6+ Bd7 11 Bxa8 Qxa8 12 O-O g6 13 Qe2 Bg7 14 Nb5 O-O 15 Be3

15...Qb7 16 a4 a6 17 Nd4 e5 18 Nf3 Bg4 19 h3 Bh5 20 Qd2 Ne4 21 Qa5 Bxf3 22 gxf3 Rxf3 23 Qd8+ Kf7 24 Kh2 d4 25 c3 dxe3 26 fxe3 Qxb2+ 27 Kg1 Rxf1+ 28 Rxf1+ Nf6 Drawn.

Source: Journal de Rouen, 27 March 1937.

Alexander Alekhine – Thierry
Rouen, 14 March 1937 (simultaneous display against 35 players)
Queen’s Gambit Accepted

1 d4 d5 2 c4 dxc4 3 Nf3 Bf5 4 Nc3 e6 5 e4 Bg6 6 Bxc4 Nf6 7 Qe2 Bb4 8 Bd3 O-O 9 O-O Nbd7 10 Rd1 c6 11 Bg5 Be7 12 e5 Bxd3 13 Rxd3 Nd5 14 Bxe7 Qxe7 15 Qd2 Nxc3 16 bxc3 Rad8 17 h3 Nb6 18 a4 f6 19 a5 Nc4 20 Qa2 fxe5 21 Qxc4 e4 22 Re3 exf3 23 Qxe6+ Qxe6 24 Rxe6 fxg2 25 Kxg2 Rd5 26 a6 Kf7 27 Re3 b6 28 Rae1 Rd7 29 Re6 Rc7 30 Rd6 Re8

31 Re3 Rxe3 32 fxe3 Ke7 33 White resigns.

Source: Journal de Rouen, 24 April 1937.

(7796)

Olimpiu G. Urcan provides, courtesy of the Hulton Archive, this photograph of Alekhine’s display against consulting teams in Paris on 28 February 1932:

Below are two photographs from Valitud partiid 1931-1958 by Paul Keres (Tallinn, 1961), pages 37 and 201:

Paul Keres v Savielly Tartakower, Kemeri, 1937

Paul Keres v Alexander Alekhine, Prague, 1943

(7802)

Simon Browne (Somerville, Australia) notes the remarks by Alekhine about possible world championship rivals on page 178 of 107 Great Chess Battles (Oxford, 1980):

‘Before 1940 I was quite certain that two masters, Botvinnik and Flohr, wished to fight for this title. Neither of the two matches could be brought about, and the above-mentioned challengers know very well that I had decided to face them.

As regards Keres, his position in 1938-39 was less resolved; he gave the impression of preferring to let a few years pass. But in 1943, perhaps influenced by the disastrous results he obtained against me in recent meetings (+3 =3 –0 in my favour) he resolutely declared that he had not the slightest intention of challenging me to a match. Fine too, in 1940, made an analogous declaration.’

These remarks were originally published on page xix of Alekhine’s book ¡Legado! (Madrid, 1946), and Mr Browne asks whether it is possible to find statements by Keres or Fine along the lines indicated by Alekhine.

Readers’ assistance will be appreciated. Firstly on this topic, we would draw attention to an earlier article by Keres, ‘The World Chess Championship’, published on pages 51-53 of the March 1941 Chess Review.

(7839)

Alexander Roshal (left) is with Alex A. Aljechin (the world champion’s son) at the 1982 Olympiad in Lucerne. The photograph comes from page 586 of the December 1982 Schweizerische Schachzeitung.

(7840)

An article by G.H. Diggle in the November 1979 Newsflash and on page 52 of Chess Characters (Geneva, 1984):

‘Of all ex-world champions, Alekhine has (from some quarters) been “most notoriously abused”. For example, Harold Schonberg (Grandmasters of Chess) while acknowledging the master’s genius, opines that “few would care to say much in his favor as a human being”. He was, it seems, a “loner” and a “social monster” – he could not bear to lose at chess or even at more frivolous pastimes – amongst other disagreeable accomplishments he was, in adversity, an inveterate ping pong ball crusher. On one occasion (we read) when his opponent stood at match point, the Doctor “grabbed the ball”, shouted “Stop the game! Adjourned!” and then “tried to pass it off as a joke”. (But perhaps it was a joke; though not so good as the one about the wealthy “Britisher” of foreign extraction, who attempted to ride to hounds, but soon exclaimed: “Hi! Stop ze chase! I tumble! I fall off! Stop ze fox!!”)

But William Winter (Kings of Chess), who was Alekhine’s companion at many congresses, gives a far more favourable picture. “He was excellent company and full of good stories about his fellow-masters, all completely unmalicious. An excellent trait in his character was the generous praise he was always willing to bestow on any fine performance by one of his rivals. For example, he described the game played by the British champion, Yates, against Vidmar at San Remo as ‘the greatest game since the War’.” He also called one of his own losses to Yates a “belle partie”. Winter’s estimate is supported fully when one examines Alekhine’s notes to My Best Games of Chess, Nottingham, 1936 and The World’s Chess Championship, 1937 (v Euwe). They are unbiased, human and often humorous. He calls Euwe’s 35th move in Game 19 a defence “which, in my opinion, very few masters would have found” and Euwe’s king’s knight in Game 25 “the most hated knight of the match”. He is always scrupulously fair to Capablanca, with whom he was then at variance; and he deals with his own blunders without extenuation: “An awful move; the fact that White was very short of time is, to my mind, as little to be considered as an excuse as, for instance, the statement of the law-breaker that he was drunk at the moment that he committed the crime. The inability of an experienced master to deal with the clock should be considered as grave a fault as a miscalculation.”

He was, no doubt, in some respects, an unreliable man. An eminent chess editor (who had known all three masters) once told the BM that had any journalist attempted to arrange interviews with Fischer, Alekhine and Botvinnik respectively, Fischer would not have “bothered with the guy”, Alekhine would have said “Yes” and then failed to turn up, and Botvinnik would not only have granted the interview but would have been there dead on time.’

As regards Alekhine and table tennis, see page 152 of The World’s Great Chess Games by Reuben Fine (New York, 1951) and some remarks by Spassky in an interview with Leonard Barden on page 13 of the January 1970 Chess Life & Review. Concerning Vidmar v Yates, see C.N. 3227 (page 123 of Chess Facts and Fables).

(7973)

From Michael Negele (Wuppertal, Germany):

Larger version

Source: Wiener Bilder, 9 January 1938, page 6. The occasion was mentioned on, for instance, page 79 of The World-Championship Match by B.H. Wood (Sutton Coldfield, 1938), and below we quote from page 26 of Chess for the love of it by A.R.B. Thomas (London, 1973):

‘Alekhine had just regained his world title from Euwe and he came to the congress [Hastings, 1937-38] as a spectator. In Holland he had been presented with a cake which showed the final position on the board when he regained his title. Before our first round started, he cut up the cake and gave each of us ten competitors a piece. Every day he watched the play intently and discussed the games afterwards with the players. More and more he convinced me that he truly loved chess and indeed was unable to understand that people could exist who were unable to sacrifice their whole lives to play chess, once they had learnt its beauty. He was an utterly dedicated man.’

(7981)

Dominique Thimognier has forwarded a shot of Alekhine which was published on page 29 of La Tunisie Revue Mensuelle Illustrée, February 1938:

Our correspondent adds that according to the article which followed, the photograph was taken during the world champion’s tour of Tunisia in December 1934.

We note that the position is the conclusion of Alekhine’s victory over Lasker in Zurich earlier that year.

(8043)

A Chess Omnibus had this footnote on page 308:

Another straightforward example of K. Whyld’s propensity for distortion and untruth is his assertion (Kingpin, Summer 1997, page 61) that on page 264 of Chess Explorations we ‘savaged’ Irving Chernev over a Lasker/Capablanca matter. The public record is 100% clear there too. As regards Whyld’s conduct regarding F.M. Edge (see pages 245-260 of A Chess Omnibus), at the Chess Café on 1 August 2000 we quoted a number of Frank Skoff’s apposite observations about Whyld, from a communication to C.N. dated 17 November 1989. Among the milder ones were: ‘He thinks calling people names (including myself) somehow is proof by itself’ and ‘It is astonishing how little value K.W. places on truth: He prefers its suppression at any cost. Why?’

Below is the complete passage on page 264 of Chess Explorations:

C.N. 564 quoted from pages 38-39 of Chernev’s Wonders and Curiosities of Chess:

‘A strange disaster occurred to Lasker and Capablanca in 1934. Alekhine beat Lasker at Zurich in 26 moves, sacrificing his queen to do so; Lilienthal beat Capablanca at Hastings in 26 moves, sacrificing his queen to do so!’

Alas, the Lilienthal-Capablanca game was played on 1 January 1935.

Would anyone other than K. Whyld suggest that the above passage ‘savaged’ Irving Chernev?

From John Donaldson comes a further photograph (Pasadena, 1932) contained in the archives of Jacqueline Piatigorsky:

The shot appeared in small format in the monograph on Dake, Grandmaster from Oregon by Casey Bush (Portland, 1991). As mentioned in C.N. 3306, we have a copy of the book extensively inscribed and annotated by Dake. From the plates section:

From the bottom of the book’s last page:

(8049)

Two correspondents in Paris, Christophe Bouton and Denis Teyssou, inform us that they have created a webpage concerning notebooks written by Alekhine towards the end of his life.

Future C.N. items will revert to a number of matters, but for now we invite readers to peruse the material presented so far. It is not to be missed.

(8060)

A search in Google Books, or on the Internet more generally, throws up all kinds of claims as to when Alekhine became French. For example, from page 234 of the New Encyclopaedia Britannica (various editions) and the Universalium website:

‘After the Russian Revolution of 1917, Alekhine became a naturalized French citizen ...’

On the other hand, the introduction to a Keres v Alekhine game in the various editions of L’art de faire mat by Georges Renaud and Victor Kahn – both of whom knew Alekhine well – stated ‘naturalisé français en 1929’.

The year 1925 is often seen too, but an editorial note on page 22 of the January 1962 Europe Echecs (C.N. 8025) gave a specific date in 1927, commenting that the world title match in Buenos Aires began as a contest between a Russian and a Cuban and was won by a Frenchman:

‘Pour conclure ces souvenirs concernant Alekhine, rappelons un fait curieux: né en 1892 à Moscou, Alekhine a été naturalisé français par décret du 2 novembre 1927 alors qu’il disputait en Amérique du Sud, du 16 septembre au 30 novembre 1927, le championnat du monde qu’il remporta contre Capablanca. Si bien que le match commencé par un Russe contre un Cubain fut gagné par un Français.’

Can official documentation be found regarding Alekhine’s naturalization?

(8054)

Dominique Thimognier writes that a CD-ROM on ‘Naturalisations en France entre 1900 et 1950’ records that Alekhine was naturalized on 5 November 1927, the same day as his wife (née Fabritsky, born in Odessa on 19 March 1884). The decrees were numbered 11670-27 and 11676-27 respectively.

We are also grateful to Stéphane Krebs (Cafquefou, France) for providing the same information, from the genealogie.com website.

(8058)

From Denis Teyssou:

‘I have consulted the 38 files of Alekhine’s naturalization record at the French national archives in Pierrefitte-sur-Seine and have posted a facts page.

Alekhine tried several times to become a French citizen between 1924 and 1927 and finally obtained citizenship with the support of Fernand Gavarry, who was the President of the French Chess Federation and a Plenipotentiary Minister at the Foreign Affairs Ministry. On 20 April 1927 Gavarry sent a letter on the Federation’s stationery asking the French authorities to grant Alekhine French citizenship so that he could lead the national team at the first International Team Tournament, to be held in London in July 1927. However, Alekhine had to await the promulgation of a new Law on naturalization to obtain a French passport.

My page also comments on Alekhine’s date of birth (C.N.s 4719 and 4739). I report too that in April 1922, three months after his arrival in France, Alekhine was suspected of Bolshevism, which, besides his frequent trips abroad, contributed to delays in the processing of his naturalization application between 1924 and 1927.’

(8284)

Denis Teyssou informs us that he has been authorized to post on his website documents relating to Alekhine’s application for French citizenship in the 1920s.

(8366)

Denis Teyssou points out that the registration record of Alekhine’s last marriage (26 March 1934) is available on line at the website of the Conseil général des Alpes-Maritimes (page 4):

‘Alexandre Alekhine, homme de lettres, né à Moscou (Russie) le dix-neuf octobre mil huit cent quatre-vingt-douze, quarante [et] un ans, domicilié à Villefranche-s-mer, fils majeur de Alexandre et de Agnès Prokhoroff, divorcé de Nadezda Simonovna Fabritzky depuis le dix-neuf février mil neuf cent trente-quatre.’

‘Grâce Wishaar, sans profession, née à Beverly, état de New Jersey (Etats-Unis d’Amérique) le vingt-six octobre mil huit cent quatre-vingt-six, quarante-sept ans, domiciliée à Villefranche-s-mer, fille majeure de Emile Bernard et de Marie Ida Smith, divorcée de Henry James Bromley, veuve de Archibald Freeman.’

Mr Teyssou notes that Grace Wishaar’s year of birth was given as 1886, rather than 1876. See page 254 of Chess Facts and Fables and C.N. 7565.

(8074)

From page 34 of Famous Chess Players by Peter Morris Lerner (Minneapolis, 1973):

‘From 1921 to 1927 Alekhine won practically every tournament in which he played. Only the current world champion, José Capablanca, and ex-world champion Emanuel Lasker could restrain him.’

By no means did Alekhine win practically every tournament during that period, and below is a comment of ours in The Games of Alekhine:

‘As he neared his goal of a match against Capablanca, his playing-record remained patchier than is sometimes imagined, particularly in tournaments which also featured other potential challengers.’

(8008)

With readers’ help we hope to draw up an accurate list of Alekhine’s wives with as many biographical dates as possible. As a starting-point, there follows an extract from the obituary of Alekhine by Erwin Voellmy and Jean-Charles de Watteville on pages 85-86 of the June 1946 Schweizerische Schachzeitung:

(8009)

Dominique Thimognier draws attention to the article ‘Souvenirs d’une époque révolue’ by Jeanne Léon-Martin published on pages 3, 4 and 22 of the January 1962 Europe Echecs, having originally appeared in the Bordeaux newspaper Sud-Ouest. Our correspondent comments:

‘She and her husband, the problemist Gabriel Léon-Martin, were friends of Alexander Alekhine and his third wife, Madame Vassilieff. There is a detailed explanation of how Jeanne Léon-Martin introduced Grace Freeman to Alekhine, and how this led to his divorce from Madame Vassilieff.

The article must cast serious doubt on the oft-repeated story that Alekhine met Grace Freeman during a simultaneous exhibition in Tokyo, given that Madame Léon-Martin specifies that his separation from Madame Vassilieff occurred earlier and that Grace Freeman “accompanied Alekhine on his world tour”.

The article is also interesting for the details provided regarding Alekhine’s home life (rue de la Croix-Nivert, Paris) and his interest in bridge.

On the other hand, it supplies scant information regarding dates. Madame Léon-Martin was the “pioneer” of women’s chess in France, and she organized the first French championships (starting in 1924). Her article indicates that she introduced Grace Freeman to Alekhine when she, Grace Freeman, had just enrolled for the French championship. The first reference to Grace Freeman that I have found in a list of participants in the French women’s championship is in February 1931. She participated again in 1932 and 1941. (A photograph taken during the 1941 championship may well feature her, but I am not sure.) It would therefore appear that Alekhine and Grace Freeman met in 1931 or 1932, before Alekhine’s world tour (which began at the end of 1932).

I would also mention an article by Genna Sosonko, “Alexander Alekhine, The Paris years” on pages 80-87 of the 1/2010 New in Chess. It relates how Alekhine met Nadezhda Semenovna Vasilieva, née Fabritskaya, at a Russian ball in Paris in 1924, but unfortunately Sosonko provides no sources.’

The Sosonko article can also be found on pages 38-49 of his latest anthology, The World Champions I Knew (Alkmaar, 2013).

We transcribe a few extracts from Jeanne Léon-Martin’s article:

‘Il [Alekhine] fit la connaissance, avant son départ pour l’Amérique d’où il revint champion du monde, de Mme Vassilieff, veuve d’un général ...

Un jour, une Américaine, Mme Freeman, vint me demander de bien vouloir l’inscrire comme participante [in a women’s tournament]. Elle était grande, gaie et paraissait fort enthousiaste du jeu d’échecs. Sur le bateau qui la ramenait des Etats-Unis, un tournoi d’échecs avait été organisé et elle avait gagné un livre d’Alekhine: Deux cents parties d’échecs. Elle habitait un coquet appartement, très moderne, à Montparnasse, et je fus invitée chez elle avec quelques-unes de ses compatriotes. Mme Freeman me confia qu’elle serait très heureuse si Alekhine pouvait lui dédicacer le livre qu’elle avait gagné.[Since Deux cents parties d’échecs was not published until 1936, the book in question may well have been the English edition of Alekhine’s first volume of Best Games, published in 1927.]

... Ayant organisé une rencontre pour “samedi prochain”, j’avais la conscience absolument tranquille et j’étais plutôt satisfaite d’avoir fait plaisir à tous.

Ce samedi-là, lorsque nous sommes arrivés mon mari et moi – Mme Freeman devait venir plus tard – Alekhine chantait une de ses chansons préférées: “J’embrasse votre main, madame”, accompagné au piano par Mme Isnard. Lorsque Mme Freeman fut là et après qu’Alekhine eut dédicacé son livre, je laissai le champion, Mme Freeman et des amis faire une partie de bridge derrière les fameuses tentures ... partie qui durait encore lorsque nous primes congé.

Quelque temps après, je reçus un coup de téléphone de Madame Alekhine me donnant rendez-vous à la Régence. Cela ne me surprit pas. Nous avions l’habitude de nous rencontrer quelquefois dans Paris pour prendre le thé. “Alors, lui dis-je, comment trouvez-vous Mme Freeman? Sympathique, n’est-ce pas?

– Oui, certainement ... Trop peut-être! Elle a beaucoup plu à Alekhine. Déjà, dès cette première rencontre, à la fin de la partie de bridge, il a tenu à la raccompagner ... C’est fini pour moi. Je sais qu’elle a gagné et que j’ai perdu.”

J’étais bouleversée. Il me semblait que j’étais coupable. Avec l’expérience que la vie lui avait durement inculquée, elle comprit mon désarroi. Très bonne et peut-être un peu fataliste, elle me dit sans animosité:

“Mme Freeman saura garder Alekhine.” J’aurais voulu la consoler. Ce fut elle qui me consola. Sensiblement plus âgée qu’Alekhine, elle devait mourir peu après.

Mme Freeman devint Mme Alekhine. Elle l’accompagna lors de son tour du monde, en Asie, en Indonésie. Ils habitèrent jusqu’à la guerre de 1939 le château d’Arques-la-Bataille, près de Dieppe, propriété de Mme Freeman.’

(8025)

Chris Turnbow (Memphis, TN, USA) notes a press release concerning the pianist Nikolai Lugansky, who states:

‘Alekhine was always my favourite chessplayer, even in my childhood. I was impressed by his ability to find the thread for a combination of almost any position. The quadruple world champion viewed every chess game as a work of art – as a chess fan, that way of thinking of things is very close to my own.’

The unusual term ‘quadruple world champion’ evidently reflects the fact that Alekhine won four world title matches.

Our correspondent asks whether light can be shed on the following statements about Alekhine (not by Lugansky) in the press release:

‘In 1939, during the chess Olympics in Buenos Aires, he called for the German team to be disqualified because of the German attack on Poland. After the Olympics he performed charity games, with funds going to the Polish Red Cross.’

(8010)

Chess researchers soon learn that their work, however painstaking, is liable to be either plagiarized or, conversely, ignored. A familiar Alekhine brilliancy illustrates the latter course:

1 e4 c5 2 Nf3 e6 3 d4 b6 4 d5 d6 5 Nc3 a6 6 a4 Nf6 7 Bd3 h6 8 O-O Be7 9 h3 O-O 10 Re1 exd5 11 Nxd5 Nbd7 12 Bf4 Nxd5 13 exd5 Nf6 14 c4 Re8 15 Bc2 Nh7 16 Qd2 Bd7 17 Bxh6 gxh6 18 Qxh6 f5

19 Re6 Bxe6 20 Qxe6+ Kg7 21 Qxf5 Nf8 22 Qg4+ Kh6 23 Ra3 Bf6 24 h4 Ra7 25 Ng5 Re1+ 26 Kh2 Qe8 27 Rf3 Qe5+ 28 g3 Qxb2 29 Rf5 Ng6

30 Qh5+ Resigns.

When the game was published on page 267 of the June 1934 BCM (‘played in a simultaneous display in Czechoslovakia last year’) Black was named as ‘Ing. Kontay’, and no other details were provided (C.N. 1041). However, pages 479-480 of Alexander Alekhine’s Chess Games, 1902-1946 by L. Skinner and R. Verhoeven (Jefferson, 1998) showed that the exhibition took place in Prague on 20 November 1933 and that Black’s name was Koutný. The source specified was Československý Šach (January 1934, pages 11-12):

Thus apart from the unrecorded forename of Black (‘Ing.’ means engineer, i.e. inženýr), all key details concerning the game were readily available in 1998.

Readers who recall C.N. 3507 [see above] will not be surprised to learn that page 5 of Alexander Alekhine Master of Attack by A. Raetsky and M. Chetverik (London, 2004) went astray, dating the game not 1933 but ‘1935’. A date one further year out (‘1936’) was on page 75 of another Everyman Chess book, The Times Winning Moves by R. Keene and B. Jacobs (London, 2003):

The inaccurate or incomplete references to other Alekhine games in The Times Winning Moves (see pages 29, 33, 35 and 41) could all have been avoided by consulting Alexander Alekhine’s Chess Games, 1902-1946. Below is the last of those four positions, offering a small example of how chess information and knowledge go backwards in the hands of hack writers:

Keene and Jacobs, 2003.

Skinner and Verhoeven, 1998

When this game ending was given in the Spanish and English editions of Pablo Morán’s monograph on Alekhine (see pages 337-338 and 262 respectively), it was pointed out that Black was a well-known figure, Juan Lacasa Lacasa.

A more general point is that many of the other positions in the 2003 Keene/Jacobs book published by Everyman Chess were mere repeats of what had already appeared in two similar volumes by Raymond Keene for Batsford, The Times Winning Moves (1991) and The Times Winning Moves 2 (1996). For instance, ‘Yanowsky v Toriran, Canada, 1953’ is in the second and third books (on, respectively, pages 78 and 57).

(8116)

From our article on World Champion Combinations by Raymond Keene and Eric Schiller (New York, 1998):

Keene and Schiller report that Euwe dethroned Alekhine in 1937; everybody else believes that Euwe won the title in 1935 and lost it in 1937.

From page 73 of Chessnicdotes II by G. Koltanowski (Coraopolis, 1981):

‘During the International tournament in Paris, 1927, Dr Alexander Alekhine had all of the contestants up to his hotel suite. He had just returned from Argentina, having beaten Jose Raoul Capablanca for the world title in Buenos Aires. After a special rapid transit round robin tournament, coffee, tea, whiskey, cake and “klatch”, I managed to corner our host and asked him: “Is there anyone in the world today that could take the world title away from you?” Alekhine twiddled his blond hair and smilingly replied, “Non! I am the greatest!”’

Wanted: information about ‘the International tournament in Paris, 1927’.

(8158)

See Koltanowski for other examples of his writings about Alekhine.

On page 331 of the November 1952 Chess Review Tartakower wrote concerning the Capablanca:

‘On that occasion [in 1938], he remarked, “I relied too much on intuition and didn’t prepare properly for my world championship match with Alekhine in 1927. I paid the penalty.”

“Thereafter I tried to avoid intuitive play as much as possible, and this cost me many a valuable point.

“So intuition was at fault?”, I inquired.

“Intuition”, Capablanca replied, “is a wonderful means to an end; but intuition should not be made the end of all the means that intelligence places at our command. This may seem like one of the paradoxes you love so dearly; but it is, just the same, a tragic truth which I have felt very deeply in the course of a career which has been rich in kaleidoscopic changes.”’

(8163)

Asked about chess books which had a profound influence on him, John Nunn replied (see the 3/2002 New in Chess, page 98):

‘When I was a young player, I read The Most Instructive Games of Chess Ever Played by Irving Chernev which made chess seem extremely easy. However, I then read Alekhine’s Best Games of Chess, which made chess seem impossibly difficult. I eventually discovered that the truth lies somewhere between the two.’

Dr Nunn informs us:

‘I was referring to the 1924-37 volume by Alekhine. I recall being particularly impressed by 18...Nxf2 in Rubinstein v Alekhine, Semmering, 1926, or rather the fact that Alekhine must have seen it some time in advance.’

(8196)

Javier Asturiano Molina notes a passage on page 82 of Half a Century of Chess by Mikhail Botvinnik (Oxford, 1984):

‘There, in England, I finally gained international recognition, and after the tournament [Nottingham, 1936], on the pages of Manchester Guardian, Alekhine declared that Botvinnik had every chance of becoming world champion.’

Our correspondent asks if Alekhine’s exact words can be found.

The article was published on pages 13-14 of the Manchester Guardian, 29 August 1936, and the full text is given below:

(8233)

From pages 84-85 of The Fireside Book of Chess by I. Chernev and F. Reinfeld (New York, 1949):

From page 30 of The Delights of Chess by Assiac (London, 1960):

Both books omitted to identify the venue, date and opposing side, yet they contradict each other as to whether Bogoljubow and his allies played White or Black, and whether the move was ...Rxe4 or Rxe8. Chernev and Reinfeld were correct on both points.

Bogoljubow and his allies had Black against Alekhine, Sämisch, Steiner, Tartakower and Vajda. The game took place in Budapest on 20 September 1921 and was published on pages 1-4 of the January 1922 issue of Kagans Neueste Schachnachrichten. The magazine reported that the rate of play was 20 moves per hour and that the Black allies were in time-trouble when they blundered with 32...Rxe4.

The full score is on pages 146-147 of Alexander Alekhine’s Chess Games, 1902-1946 by L. Skinner and R. Verhoeven (Jefferson, 1998).

(8308)

Regarding the consultation game (Budapest, 1921) won by Alekhine, Sämisch, Steiner, Tartakower and Vajda against Abonyi, Bogoljubow, Grünfeld, Kostić and Sterk, we add that one phase was discussed by Tartakower on page 110 of Die Hypermoderne Schachpartie (Vienna, 1924).

(8592)

‘He is a poet who creates a work of art out of something which would hardly inspire another man to send home a picture postcard.’

That well-known quote (Euwe on Alekhine) provides a small illustration of the current state of chess ‘scholarship’ on the Internet. It is commonly given sourcelessly, but what happens if, as is only reasonable, basic information is wanted about the occasion and context (e.g. whether Euwe was writing in general or was referring to a particular game or theme, and whether he expressed the sentiments before or after winning the world title from Alekhine)? We leave readers to try to find any websites which:

i) mention that the remark comes from Euwe’s book Meet the Masters (London, 1940). See pages 27-28.

ii) give the full paragraph with its context (Euwe’s introduction to Alekhine v Lasker, Zurich, 1934):

‘Curious is Alekhine’s knack of developing a seemingly harmless attack, within a few moves, into a hurricane which smashes down all resistance. His methods are simple; it is not so much any particular move which is important, as the whole series of moves – and the move after that! He is a poet who creates a work of art out of something which would hardly inspire another man to send home a picture postcard.’

iii) provide, especially in the case of Dutch-language webpages, Euwe’s original text, from page 16 of Zóó schaken zij! (Amsterdam, 1938):

‘Eigenaardig is de kunst van Aljechin, een oogenschijnlijk onschuldigen aanval binnen enkele zetten te doen aangroeien tot een orkaan, welke alle tegenstand breekt. Hij gebruikt dan vaak heel eenvoudige middelen, waarbij niet elke zet afzonderlijk maar de heele reeks van zetten en vooral ook de volgende beslissende beteekenis heeft. Hij is dichter, die kunstwerken schept met dezelfde middelen, welke een ander nauwelijks voldoende zou vinden om een briefkaartje te schrijven.’

There have also been, of course, many printed versions of the Euwe quote without a source. Curiously, a few English-language publications continue, after the word ‘postcard’, with:

‘The wilder and more involved a position, the more beautiful the conceptions he can evolve.’

See, for instance, page 50 of The New Yorker, 28 October 1972 (an article by George Steiner on the 1972 world championship match), pages 15-16 of Steiner’s book The Sporting Scene (London, 1973) and Kasparov’s Foreword to Alexander Alekhine’s Best Games (London, 1996). All three publications had ‘conception’ in the singular.

In fact, that sentence by Euwe came several pages later in Meet the Masters, on page 32. The Dutch text (on page 19 of Zóó schaken zij!) was:

‘Hoe wilder en verwarder een stelling is, des te fraaiere combinaties weet de wereldkampioen ons voor te tooveren.’

(8474)

A detail of Alekhine from the Carlsbad, 1911 group photograph (Wiener Schachzeitung, September-October 1911, pages 304-305):

Larger version

(8574)

Further to the references to Rudolf Spielmann in Chess: the Need for Sources, the passage below comes from page 111 of The Bright Side of Chess by Irving Chernev (Philadelphia, 1948):

Can the original text be traced?

(8579)

From page 3 of Meet the Masters by Max Euwe (London, 1940):

‘Ordinary mortals can envy Alekhine’s genius in the discovery of charming and startling combinations; the more skilful player who feels himself quite capable of executing such combinations has a different feeling on the subject. To quote Spielmann, who is surely competent to pass an opinion on combinative skill: “I can comprehend Alekhine’s combinations well enough; but where he gets his attacking chances from and how he infuses such life into the very opening – that is beyond me. Give me the positions he obtains, and I should seldom falter. Yet I continually get drawn games, even out of the King’s Gambit.”

Well said, Master Spielmann! Alekhine’s real genius is in the preparation and construction of a position, long before combinations or mating attacks come into consideration at all.’

In case it helps in tracing the original of Spielmann’s words, below is the relevant section of pages 2 and 3 of the Dutch edition of Euwe’s book, Zóó schaken zij! (Amsterdam, 1938):

(8603)

Charles Krauthammer (‘current member of Chess Journalists of America’, the dust-jacket of Things That Matter proclaims) has only one thing to say about Alekhine, on page 56 (in an article from the Washington Post, 27 December 2002):

‘... Alexander Alekhine, who in 1935 was stopped while trying to cross the Polish-German frontier without any papers. He offered this declaration instead: “I am Alekhine, chess champion of the world. This is my cat. Her name is Chess. I need no passport.” He was arrested.’

Alekhine’s supposed words replicate what appeared on page 277 of The Golden Dozen by Irving Chernev (Oxford, 1976), but the story has been seen in many forms. Chernev, for instance, made no reference to an arrest or any other consequences.

On page 328 of the November 1956 Chess Review, in an article about the 1935 Olympiad in Warsaw, Reuben Fine wrote:

‘He began by arriving at the border without a passport. When he was asked for one, he replied: “I am Alekhine, chess champion of the world. I have a cat called Chess.” After this episode was straightened out, Alekhine came to the tournament and went through most of his games in a state of mild inebriation. Most remarkably, his play did not seem to be affected, though his eccentricities did cost him the world championship in the match with Euwe a few months later.’

That text was reproduced on page 47 of Fine’s book Lessons from My Games (New York, 1958). ‘After this episode was straightened out ...’ is not much of a dénouement, but the rapid switch to the subject of alcohol helps mask the anti-climax.

When relating the tale on page 59 of his Psychoanalytic Observations on Chess and Chess Masters (New York, 1956) Fine gave Alekhine a little extra dialogue (‘I do not need papers’) and introduced the requisite psychological slant (Alekhine ‘began to show some signs of megalomania’). He also beefed up the finale, adding after the Alekhine quote:

‘The matter had to be straightened out by the highest authorities.’

(8462)

Luc Winants submits the game below, which comes from an ‘alternating blindfold simultaneous display’ (six boards) given by Alekhine and Landau at the Hotel Atlanta, Rotterdam:

Alexander Alekhine and Salo Landau (blindfold, in tandem) – C. Fontein, E.W. Beekman and P. van Reeuwijk
Rotterdam, 8 February 1934
Sicilian Defence

1 e4 c5 2 Nf3 Nc6 3 d4 cxd4 4 Nxd4 Nf6 5 Nc3 d6 6 Bg5 e6 7 Be2 Be7 8 O-O O-O 9 Kh1 d5 10 exd5 Nxd5 11 Bxe7 Ncxe7 12 Nxd5 Nxd5 13 c4 Nf6 14 Nb5 Qe7 15 Qd6 Qxd6 16 Nxd6 b6 17 Rad1 Ba6 18 b3 Rfd8 19 Bf3

19...Nd5 20 cxd5 Rxd6 21 Rfe1 exd5 22 Rxd5 Rxd5 23 Bxd5 Rc8 24 h4 Kf8 Drawn.

Source: Rotterdamsche Nieuwsblad, 9 February 1934, page 23.

Mr Winants comments:

‘This game was played on board six. The book on Alekhine by Skinner and Verhoeven has four other games in the display (games 1767-1770 on pages 486-487). The game played on board four, against A.M. Broer, A. de Bruyn and P. van Os, is still missing.’

(8496)

From pages 151-152 of Chess Traps, Pitfalls, and Swindles by I.A. Horowitz and Fred Reinfeld (New York, 1954):

In the initial diagram the white queen should be on c1. We do not know the basis for the co-authors’ statement that after the move Qh6 Nimzowitsch merely ‘took one look at the position’ before ‘quietly’ capturing the knight. Indeed, we cannot say when either player became aware of the mating line; on page 470 of the December 1928 BCM J.H. Blake wrote that it was pointed out by Alekhine.

The world champion annotated the game deeply in the Basler Nachrichten, 8 September 1928:

The full notes, incorporating some further remarks, were reproduced on pages 164-167 of the October 1928 Schweizerische Schachzeitung:

A different German version of Alekhine’s notes appeared, via Tidskrift för Schack, on pages 252-255 of Kagans Neueste Schachnachrichten, August 1929.

From pages 377-378 of the December 1928 Deutsche Schachzeitung:

When the Deutsche Schachzeitung had annotated the full game on pages 273-274 of its September 1928 issue, the ‘insidious pitfall’ was overlooked, the following being the note to 13...Bxc3:

‘Es drohte Sc3-e4. Dennoch sollte sich Schwarz lieber die beiden Läufer erhalten, z. B. 13...Kh8! 14 Se4 Le7 als Tg8 und Tg6.’

Similarly, the notes in The Field, reproduced on pages 83-84 of the January 1929 Chess Amateur, stated after 13...Bxc3:

‘To stop Kt-K4. Better, however, would have been 13...K-R1 14 Kt-K4 B-K2, followed by ...R-Kt1 and ...R-Kt3.’

On pages 27-29 of Schachjahrbuch 1928 by L. Bachmann (Ansbach, 1929) the moves 12...O-O 13 Qh6 Bxc3 14 bxc3 Kh8 were given without comment. Nor was the mating trap mentioned in C.S. Howell’s annotations on pages 137-138 of the September-October 1928 American Chess Bulletin.

A detailed set of annotations appeared in Tartakower’s German-language tournament book. See too the coverage of the game on pages 37-41 of Aaron Nimzowitsch 1928-1935 by Rudolf Reinhardt (Berlin, 2010), or pages 39-43 of the English edition (Alkmaar, 2013)

(8594)

From page 275 of the July 1928 BCM:

The blindfold game against Damant [sic] is on pages 339-340 of the Skinner/Verhoeven collection of Alekhine’s games. The other one is given below, from page 26 of the 19 July 1928 edition of the Brooklyn Daily Eagle:

Alexander Alekhine (blindfold) – Charles Wreford Brown
London, 8 June 1928
Centre Counter Game

1 e4 d5 2 exd5 Nf6 3 d4 Nxd5 4 Nf3 c6 5 Be2 Bf5 6 O-O e6 7 c4 Nf6 8 Nc3 Be7 9 Re1 Nbd7 10 Bf4 O-O 11 Nh4 Nh5 12 Nxf5 Nxf4 13 Nxe7+ Qxe7 14 Bf3 Qb4 15 Qd2 Ng6 16 b3 Rad8 17 Rad1 Nf6 18 Qc2 Qa5

19 Ne4 Rxd4 20 Nxf6+ gxf6 21 g3 Rfd8 22 Kg2 Rd2 23 Qb1 Qg5 24 Rxd2 Rxd2 25 Re4 Qa5 26 Re2 Ne5 27 Bh5 Rxe2 28 Bxe2 Qd2 29 Qe4 Ng6 30 a4 f5 31 Qf3 Qg5 32 Kf1 Qc1+ 33 Kg2 Qg5 34 Kf1 Drawn.

(8700)

White to move

This famous position (11 Qxh7+) comes from a game extensively discussed in Chaos in a Miniature (Edward Lasker v George Thomas, London, 1912), but a noteworthy addition is that two decades later Lasker played it with the black pieces.

First, an extract from page 109 of the American Chess Bulletin, July-August 1933:

And from page 4 of the September 1933 Chess Review:

‘... on the evening of 19 June came the awaited meeting between Dr Alekhine and Edward Lasker. This naturally drew the largest gathering of any single chess event with the exception of the blindfold display. Alekhine won in good style, but the game itself was less important to the audience than the idea of the spectacle. This game was repeated later at the Chicago Beach Hotel.’

Neither US magazine gave the moves of the Alekhine v Lasker game, which in any case was pre-arranged. From pages 160-161 of Lasker’s The Adventure of Chess (New York, 1950):

‘In a chapter on eccentricities of the game, Liddell’s book [Chessmen by Donald M. Liddell (New York, 1937)] brings a picture of a board with living pieces used in a game played in the open-air amphitheater of the Century of Progress Exposition at Chicago, in 1933. I happened to direct that game, and the picture recalled to my mind a tragicomic incident which occurred toward the end of it. The chess pieces were mostly boys and girls from Chicago high schools, dressed in real old-Indian costumes. On the day of the game a bright, hot sun was shining, and over 5,000 onlookers crowded every available spot in the arena. To the majestic tune of a march especially composed for the occasion by the well-known composer DeLamarter, who was a resident of Chicago, the chess pieces, in impressive array, descended a wide stairway and took their places on the board. The world champion, Alekhine, had been engaged for the occasion to play the game with me which the living pieces were to show, and a tower was provided from which Alekhine and I called our moves through megaphones. To make sure that the performance would not take more than an hour at most, we had decided to select a short game with which we were both familiar, rather than actually engaging in a contest ourselves. The choice of the committee had fallen on a rather well-known game which I had won some 20 years previously against the British champion, Sir George Thomas. Alekhine agreed, but insisted that he should play the winning side. Everything went fine for about a half hour, when suddenly my queen’s rook’s pawn fainted. The poor fellow had been standing motionless in the hot sun all that time, and instead of making it known to someone that he was feeling ill, he held out bravely until he finally collapsed. He was carried out on a stretcher and replaced by an “understudy” whom we had held in readiness in case one of the actors did not show up.

I doubt that a very large percentage of the crowd knew chess, but the colorful spectacle certainly served as a spellbinding introduction to learning the game.’

Below is the photograph mentioned by Lasker, as published opposite page 98 of Liddell’s book (and between pages 132 and 133 of the London, 1976 edition):

Larger version

(8917)

It is difficult to know what to make of Alekhine’s remark in brackets at the end of a letter published on page 161 of the August 1941 CHESS:

(8964)

The score below is taken from pages 59-60 of Ajedrez uruguayo (1880-1980) by Héctor Silva Nazzari (Montevideo, 2013):

José Montalbán – Alexander Alekhine
Montevideo, 27 October 1926
Trompowsky Opening

1 d4 Nf6 2 Bg5 c5 3 d5 Qb6 4 Bxf6 gxf6 5 Qc1

5...Bh6 6 e3 d6 7 c4 Bf5 8 Nc3 Nd7 9 f4 e5 10 g3 exf4 11 gxf4 O-O-O 12 Qd2 Qb4 13 Nb5 Qxd2+ 14 Kxd2 Nb6 15 Bd3 Bxd3 16 Kxd3 Rhg8 17 Ne2 a6 18 Nbc3 Rg6 19 Rhg1 Kd7 20 Ng3 Rdg8 21 Nce2 Nc8 22 Nf5 Bf8 23 Rg3 Ne7 24 Ke4 Nxf5 25 Kxf5 Ke7 26 Rag1 Rh8 27 Rh3 Bh6 28 Ng3 b5 29 Rc1 Kd7 30 b4 cxb4 31 cxb5 axb5 32 Ne4 Ra8 33 Rc6 Rxa2 34 Nxf6+ Kd8 35 Rxd6+ Kc8 36 Ne4 Bf8 37 Rxg6 fxg6+ 38 Ke6

38...b3 39 Nc3 b2 40 d6 b4 41 Nb1 Ra1 42 e4 Bxd6 43 Rb3 Rxb1 44 e5 Kd8 45 h4 Ke8 46 h5 gxh5 47 White resigns.

Page 57 provides information on that first visit of Alekhine’s to Uruguay: +84 –7 =9 in four simultaneous displays, 11½ points out of 12 in six two-board sessions with clocks, a lecture and a blindfold display (score unknown). The circumstances of the game against Montalbán are not specified.

(8972)

From page 8 of Chess Tactics by Alexander Kotov (London, 1983):

Why the name Johner?

The position, well known, is on page 635 of the Skinner/Verhoeven book on Alekhine as a victory by the world champion against A. Nestor in a simultaneous display in Port of Spain, Trinidad on either 31 January or 4 February 1939. The only full game available from Alekhine’s visit to Trinidad is a draw against Raymond Young (who had written on page 11 of the August 1993 Chess Life that Alekhine’s two displays were ‘on successive nights’ and that he believed they took place ‘in late 1939 or early 1940’).

As noted by Skinner and Verhoeven, the Alekhine v Nestor conclusion appeared in the Deutsche Schachzeitung in 1939 (in a feature on pages 197-198 of the July issue):

The position and solution were given again on pages 310 and 318 of the December 1939 issue, the finish being described as ‘wunderhübsch’.

Another early publication of the ending was in Brian Harley’s column on page 20 of the Observer, 30 July 1939:

On page 71 of Achieving the Aim (Oxford, 1981) Botvinnik referred to his title match discussions with Alekhine immediately after AVRO, 1938:

‘We agreed that I should send a formal challenge to an address he gave in South America (Alekhine was intending to buy some land in Trinidad) ...’

(9000)

Christian Sánchez writes:

‘The Trinidad Guardian of 14 May 2008 gives a detailed account of Alekhine’s visit to the island, but only his opponent’s middle initial can be added: A.L. Nestor.’

(9005)

Black to move

This was the position after White’s 38th move in the game between L.J. Isaacs and V. Buerger in the Chicago v London cable match, 6 November 1926 (1 e4 d6 2 d4 Nf6 3 Bd3 g6 4 Nf3 Bg7 5 O-O O-O 6 h3 Nc6 7 c3 Nd7 8 Nbd2 e5 9 d5 Ne7 10 g4 Nc5 11 Bc2 f5 12 Nh2 f4 13 f3 Kf7 14 Rf2 Bf6 15 Nb3 Nd7 16 Bd2 h5 17 Rg2 Rh8 18 g5 Bg7 19 h4 Nb6 20 Be1 Nc4 21 Qc1 Bh3 22 Re2 Nc8 23 Bf2 Bf8 24 Bd3 N4b6 25 Na5 Rb8 26 a4 Be7 27 Kh1 Bxg5 28 hxg5 Qxg5 29 Qg1 Qf6 30 Qe1 g5 31 c4 Ne7 32 b4 Ng6 33 c5 Nc8 34 cxd6 cxd6 35 Rc2 g4 36 Rc7+ Nce7 37 Nxb7 g3 38 Bxa7).

One of several magazines which published the game, noting that it was to be adjudicated by Alekhine, was the American Chess Bulletin (December 1926, pages 157-158). Page 158 mentioned that a suggestion by Capablanca was 38...Rxb7 39 Rxb7 Rc8. Buerger annotated the game on pages 72-73 of The “British Chess Magazine” Chess Annual 1926 by M.E. Goldstein (Leeds, 1927), without commenting on the final position.

As reported on, for instance, page 161 of the March 1927 Chess Amateur, Alekhine adjudicated the game as a win for Black, but is it known whether he supplied any analysis or commentary?

(9027)

Eduardo Ramirez (Chicago, IL, USA) draws attention to the analysis by Alekhine on pages 102-103 of the March 1927 BCM:

(10597)

Page 165 of CHESS, 14 January 1939:

For his article ‘The Most Exciting Game I Ever Played’ on pages 213-215 of CHESS, 14 February 1939, László Szabó chose his win as White against Pirc at Hastings, 1938-39 but commented in his introduction:

‘At Warsaw in 1935 I had a most wonderful game against Dake, of USA, which Dr Alekhine stated to be, for him, the most exciting game of the whole International Team Tournament. It was so exciting, actually, that I think it would be bad for everybody’s nerves to publish it again.’

Full notes to both encounters are in Szabó’s book My Best Games of Chess (Oxford, 1986), and concerning his draw with Dake he wrote on page 12:

‘My greatest chess experience at the Warsaw Olympiad was my meeting with the world champion, Alekhine. Well, I did not meet him across the board, since he was on first board for the French team, and I played fourth position in the Hungarian team. The world champion played against Lajos Steiner, who played on the first board. Alekhine’s behaviour during play aroused my interest. Why did he stand up after most of his moves, go behind his opponent’s back and contemplate the board from there with arms crossed? I have seen this pose of Alekhine’s many times since in pictures, and I used to wonder whether he stood behind his opponent for psychological effect, or to control events on the board from another angle.

... according to many contestants – Alekhine among them – I played the wildest game of the Olympiad against the American Dake.’

In CHESS and in his book Szabó stated that his game against Pirc ended 63 b7 Resigns, whereas page 8 of Hastings 1938/39 International Chess Congress edited by Dale A. Brandreth (Yorklyn, 1978) had 63 b7 Qg5+ 64 Kf3 Qf5+ 65 Ke3 Qg5+ 66 Kd4 1-0.

(9056)

From page 81 of the February 1971 Chess Life & Review (‘Larry Evans on Chess’):

It was hardly justified for Dennis King to assert that Reinfeld gave ‘two opposite opinions’ on White’s 12th move. Concerning P.W. Sergeant’s Championship Chess (London, 1938), Reinfeld brought out updated editions (New York, 1960 and 1963), with extra games but without revising Sergeant’s annotations. The other book, A. Alekhine vs. E.D. Bogoljubow (Philadelphia, 1934), was co-written by Reinfeld with Reuben Fine.

Such points passed Evans by, and his cursory remark that 12 Bh3 ‘looks like the best chance’ did not mention that the move was recommended by Bogoljubow, though not by Alekhine.

Below is a non-exhaustive compendium of notes to Bogoljubow’s 12th move (after 1 d4 c5 2 d5 e5 3 e4 d6 4 f4 exf4 5 Bxf4 Qh4+ 6 g3 Qe7 7 Nc3 g5 8 Be3 Nd7 9 Nf3 h6 10 Qd2 Ngf6 11 O-O-O Ng4):

Championship Chess by P.W. Sergeant (London, 1938), page 192

A. Alekhine vs. E.D. Bogoljubow by F. Reinfeld and R. Fine (Philadelphia, 1934), page 28

Schachkampf um die Weltmeisterschaft by E. Bogoljubow (Karlsruhe, 1935), page 56

My Best Games of Chess 1924-1937 by A. Alekhine (London, 1939), page 140

Alekhine vs. Bogolubow by I.A. Horowitz and S.S. Cohen (New York, 1934), page 13

Deutsche Schachzeitung, May 1934, page 146 (annotator: M. Blümich)

BCM, June 1934, page 264 (annotator: J.H. Blake)

Alexander Alekhine II Games 1923-1934 by A. Khalifman (Sofia, 2002).

Some annotators made no comment on 12 Be2, examples being Lasker in his match-book (page 38), Kmoch on page 146 of the May-June 1934 Wiener Schachzeitung and Tartakower on page 551 of L’Echiquier, 8 August 1934.

The game was played in Pforzheim on 25 April 1934. Page 55 of Bogoljubow’s above-mentioned match-book gave the players’ times as two hours and 41 minutes for White and 58 minutes for Black. See too pages 96-97 of Wonders and Curiosities of Chess by I. Chernev (New York, 1974).

(9116)

Eladio Mejuto (Madrid) sends an ironic report published on page 5 of El Sol, 23 May 1922 about Alekhine’s detention at the Spanish border on suspicion of being a Bolshevik:

(9134)

Daily Express, 30 November 1927, page 1

The nickname was referred to on page 1 of the January 1928 BCM:

See too page 109 of The Kings of Chess by William Hartston (London, 1985).

(9143)

From Christian Sánchez:

‘The colloquial expression “viejo y peludo” (sometimes with the intensifier “nomás”) is used in Argentina to congratulate, acclaim or praise a sportsman regarding his achievements. For example: “Leguisamo, viejo y peludo nomás”, in a tango sung by Carlos Gardel in 1927; also, “Burruchaga, viejo y peludo nomás”, as shouted by the sports commentator Víctor Hugo Morales during the World Cup final in 1986.

“Viejo y peludo”, of uncertain origin and probably meaning “grown up” or “experienced”, can be translated literally as “old and hairy/bearded”, but not “old baldhead”, which would be “viejo y pelado”.’

(9215)

Wanted: more information about this photograph, which is from page 69 of Alt om Skak by B. Nielsen (Odense, 1943), in the chapter on Alekhine:

(9157)

Dan Scoones points out that the boards and the fact that Alekhine was making a move with his right hand indicate that the photograph has been reversed.

We give an enlarged version in amended form.

Photographic evidence that Alekhine was right-handed can be found in C.N.s 6328 (signing a contract) and 7981 (cutting a cake), but clips in Chess Masters on Film show him making moves with his left hand.

(9170)

Bent Kølvig (Rødovre, Denmark) and John Rasmussen (Hicksville, NY, USA) note that the Danish photograph caption states that the world champion won all the games.

The only possibility that we see from the excellently researched list of results on pages 765-786 of Alexander Alekhine’s Chess Games, 1902-1946 by L. Skinner and R. Verhoeven (Jefferson, 1998) is a display in Haarlem on 28 April 1937, although Alekhine, who was not then the world champion, scored 29 wins and one draw from 30 games.

(9181)

From page 140 of the May 1951 Chess Review, in an article entitled ‘Recollections of Alekhine’ by Harry Golombek:

‘Witness, too, his writings on the game, which must rank with the best that the chess world has produced. The number of young players whose imagination has been stirred and for whom fresh vistas have been opened by his My Best Games of Chess 1908-1923 must be legion.

It is true, however, that in writing this book and others, he owed much to other masters and was not always frank in acknowledging the debt. In his collections of games, for example, he owed a great deal to the French masters, Renaud and Kahn.’

Did either Renaud or Kahn ever write about the matter? And did Golombek give more details, e.g. to justify his words ‘this book and others’ and ‘for example’?

(9161)

From an article (‘New Chess King Ruled by Fancy’) by Leon Wexelstein in the New York Times, 11 December 1927, page XX10:

‘To find out from Alekhine the ingredients that go into the making of genius in chess was not easy. As well try to learn what makes for a Heifetz, an Einstein, a Walt Whitman, a Tolstoy – or a Tunney. If genius could be readily analysed, then genius could be made to order – and genius cannot be made to order. It is there – or it isn’t.
Does, for instance, mathematical ability play a part? What are the rôles apportioned to fancy, to memory, to prudence? How does it feel to play 26 boards at the same time, and “blindfold”, as Alekhine has done? Does one weary? In what way? These questions were put to Alekhine.

“Mathematical ability?” he said. “Not at all. Dr Emanuel Lasker is the only one who, so far as I know, has any. I haven’t, myself. Or, if anything, very mediocre ability in mathematics. I don’t think it counts – in chess. What does? Well, fancy is one. And a flair for abstract reasoning is another.”

Alekhine laughed a little.

“Anyway”, he said, don’t place too much weight on inheritance. You might be a brilliant player even if no-one in the train of your family had ever seen a chessboard.”’

It would be helpful to know where and when Alekhine made the statements quoted in Wexelstein’s article.

(9214)

Alan McGowan has found film reports on the tournaments at Prague, 1942 (start: 0’30”) and Prague, 1944 (start: 4’05”). The former newsreel, for instance, includes footage of Alekhine and Junge, and we have made these screen-shots:

(9289)

An addition on 28 July 2023 to Chess: Hitler and Nazi Germany:

From his collection Olimpiu G. Urcan shares this photograph taken at Salzburg, 1942. It shows Junge, N.N. and Alekhine watching a game played by Paul Schmidt:

Varadachary’s Annotated Chess Masterpieces (Incomplete) by Vithal Rajan (2006) comprises 11 playlets, and a sample page from the first one, ‘Alekhine’s Greatest Defeat’, should suffice:

(9310)

C.N. 741 (see page 118 of Chess Explorations) pointed out the reference to canoeing in Alekhine’s Who’s Who entry. Below is the full text, which has some obvious errors, published on page 13 of Who Was Who, 1941-1950 (London, 1952):

alekhine

Has any researcher looked into the awards and honours attributed to Alekhine?

(9316)

Regarding the address given in the final line, C.N.s 4250, 4251, 4262 and 4345 have discussed Alekhine’s château in St Aubin-le-Cauf. In C.N. 4251 David McAlister (Hillsborough, Northern Ireland) wrote:

‘I am the custodian of the Ulster Chess Union archives, and amongst them is a letter dated 15 July 1938 from Alekhine to the Union’s secretary, William Minnis, indicating his willingness to give a simultaneous exhibition in Belfast. The headed notepaper has the address Le Château St Aubin-le-Cauf (Seine Inférieure), as well as a telephone number, St Aubin-le-Cauf No. 7.’

Hassan Roger Sadeghi drew attention to information available online about the Châtellenie, which has rooms named after various chess pieces, as well as a ‘chambre Alekine’ [sic].

In C.N. 4345 we reported, with a further link, that Alekhine’s château was owned by Agnès and Jean-Pierre Bosselin. Their daughter, Véronique Perrin-Bosselin, wrote to us as follows:

‘We are very interested in the illustrious former owner of our property and in providing information to our guests about its history. My grandfather acquired the castle from Madame Alekhine after the War. It had been completely looted during the evacuation and was then used by the German Army, which converted it into a hospital. A few years ago my parents transformed the château into guest rooms and reception halls, and all the bedrooms naturally have names with a chess theme. In addition to rooms named after chess pieces (rook, knight, king and queen), there is an Alekhine Room.

The château would be available for any kind of special event related to chess.’

The above article originally appeared at ChessBase.com.

See too C.N. 11017.

The above website also includes this historical note on the Châtellenie:

‘Dans les années 30, ce château d’été fut acheté par Grace Wishar, veuve d’un planteur de thé britannique de Ceylan, qui épousa en 1934 Alexandre Alekhine (1892-1946). Le château de St Aubin sera la dernière résidence de cet illustre champion du monde d’échecs franco-russe resté invaincu.

Pendant la guerre, le château sera occupé par un régiment de l’armée allemande qui y fait son quartier général et le transforme en hôpital. De cette époque reste le poste de garde, petite maison en brique construite par l’armée allemande à l’entrée du domaine.

A la mort d’Alekhine en 1946, son épouse, le cède à la famille des actuels propriétaires qui le découvrent vandalisé, vidé de tout meuble et pillé de tout matériau réutilisable.

Depuis, les propriétaires s’emploient à rénover et faire vivre cet ensemble architectural.’

We are grateful to Véronique Perrin for permission to reproduce from her website the plaque which refers to Alekhine’s residence in the château, and for sending us a close-up picture:

(5211)

From Steve Wrinn:

‘I have a question concerning the precise regulations governing Alekhine’s world championship matches against Bogoljubow and Euwe. All were scheduled for 30 games, with 15½ points being required for victory and with the added proviso that the victor must score at least six wins. But information on precisely what would have occurred if neither player won the required six games during the first 30 games is often incomplete and contradictory. To take the Alekhine-Euwe 1935 match, for example, here are three widely divergent descriptions of the match conditions:

a) On page 284 of its September 1935 issue the Wiener Schachzeitung stated:

“Die Bedingungen sind gleicher Art wie bei den letzten Weltmeisterschaftskämpfen. Es werden mindestens 30 Partien gewechselt. Wer die Mehrzahl der Punkte erreicht, ist Sieger, vorausgesetzt, daß er sechs Partien gewonnen hat. Andernfalls wird der Wettkampf bis zum sechsten Sieg fortgesetzt.”

This indicates that play would continue after 30 games even if Alekhine were in the lead but had not attained six wins. There is no mention of the possibility of a drawn extended match as referred to in my point b below. Additionally, according to the first sentence, such conditions also held true for Alekhine’s matches against Bogoljubow. (See, however, my point c below.)

b) Skinner and Verhoeven, on page 534 of Alexander Alekhine’s Chess Games, 1902-1946, cite The Times of 3 and 4 October 1935 and paint a very different picture:

“The match would consist of 30 games and the title would go to the player who first scores 15½ points, with at least six won games. If after 30 games Alekhine has a majority of points, but not necessarily six won games, the match is to be given up as a draw and Alekhine retains the championship. If Euwe is ahead after 30 games have been played but without six wins, then the match will be continued until either Euwe wins six games or Alekhine equals his score. In the latter case Alekhine retains the title and the match is drawn.”

Those last two sentences amount to a de facto requirement that the challenger (in this case Euwe) win an extended match by at least two points; in other words, a 6-5 victory would be impossible to achieve past the 30th game, as the previous 5-5 score would have brought the contest to a close. A related point is that under such conditions only the challenger could win an extended match, as once the trailing champion equalized the score he would retain his title via a drawn result.

Times, 3 October 1935, page 10

Times, 4 October 1935, page 16

c) On page 9 of his Tagebuch vom Wettkampf Aljechin-Euwe (Vienna, 1936) Hans Kmoch stated explicitly that the proviso that the champion would retain his title upon equalizing the score at any time after the 30th game, and the concomitant de facto requirement for the challenger to win an extended match by two points, were not in effect for the 1935 match. He added that they had been in effect for Alekhine’s earlier matches (i.e. the two contests against Bogoljubow). He thus contradicts both points b and a above. Kmoch also wrote that in 1935 a drawn match was possible only if the score was equal after 30 games and each player had won at least six games (the situation that would, in fact, have occurred if Alekhine won the 30th game):

“Wenn nach der 30. Partie ein Stand von 15:15 erreicht wurde und beide Spieler mindestens 6 Partien gewonnen haben, dann wird der Wettkampf als unentschieden abgebrochen und Aljechin behält seinen Titel. Im anderen Falle kann der Wettkampf nicht unentschieden ausgehen und es entscheidet unter allen Umständen die 6. Gewinnpartie. Diese letztere Bestimmung differiert von jenen früherer Wettkämpfe Aljechins: dort hieß es nämlich, daß der Wettkampf zugunsten des Weltmeisters unentschieden abgebrochen werde, falls der Weltmeister nach 30 Partien im Nachteil ist, es ihm aber später gelingt, gleichen Stand zu erreichen.”

That three contemporary sources could give such varying and irreconcilable accounts is remarkable. What were the exact final rules for the 1929, 1934, 1935 and 1937 world championship matches?

Incidentally, Skinner and Verhoeven (pages 364, 490 and 593) briefly mention the 15½ points/six wins requirement for the 1929, 1934, and 1937 world championship matches, but provide no further details, except to note that Euwe as world champion would retain the title if the 1937 match were tied after 30 games. The Wiener Schachzeitung offered the same minimal information (15½ points/six wins) for Alekhine’s 1929 and 1934 matches against Bogoljubow (see page 253 of the August 1929 issue and page 97 of the April 1934 issue), but did not spell out the conditions under which those contests would have continued after the 30th game.’

(9341)

Regarding the 1928 match between Bogoljubow and Euwe, see FIDE Championship (1928).

From Oliver Beck:

‘In “Echecs et Maths”, an essay on pages 42-51 of Marcel Duchamp: abécédaire, approches critiques edited by Jean Clair (Paris, 1977), François Le Lionnais claimed that although he and Marcel Duchamp were brought together through Dada and a strong philosophical and artistic affinity, their long friendship ultimately resulted from a shared interest in chess. He then provided an interesting summary of Duchamp’s chess career.

... An event not referred to in “Echecs et Maths” is a simultaneous exhibition in which Alekhine faced 36 teams in Paris on 15 June 1935. Details of the event are on page 60 of Le Lionnais’ Le Jardin des échecs (Paris, 1936), and the next two pages published Alekhine’s loss (included on page 526 of the Skinner/Verhoeven book on Alekhine) to Equipe de VU, a team consisting of Le Lionnais, Mmes Vogel and Melikoff, MM. Casciani, Melikoff and Wissiotzky.

C.N. 7796 gave Alekhine’s loss to the team comprising Pierre Biscay, Marcel Berman and Duchamp. Alekhine’s overall result was +27 –6 =3.

Page 46 of “Echecs et math” had a photograph of the French chess team (Kahn, Alekhine, Betbeder, Duchamp and Voisin) on a balcony during the 1933 International Team Tournament in Folkestone.’

(9465)

Jan Kalendovský has sent the items below:

De Indische Courant, 30 December 1935, page 13

Larger version

De Telegraaf, 7 October 1937, page 4

Larger version

(9514)

From Oliver Beck:

‘In Massimo Bontempelli’s La scacchiera davanti allo specchio (Florence, 1922), a children’s book with similarities to Through the Looking Glass, a child enters a mirrored world where he is told of the importance of chess pieces by a reflected white king:

“... e devi sapere che i pezzi degli scacchi sono molto molto più antichi degli uomini: molti secoli dopo che c’erano gli scacchi sono nati gli uomini, che sono all’ingrosso una specie di pedoni, con i loro alfieri, re e regine; e anche i cavalli, a imitazione dei nostri. Allora gli uomini hanno fabbricato delle torri per fare come noi. Hanno poi fatto anche molte altre cose, ma quelle sono tutte superflue. E tutto quello che accade tra gli uomini, specialmente le cose più importanti che si studiano poi nella storia, non sono altro che imitazioni confuse e variazioni impasticciate di grandi partite a scacchi, giocate da noi. Noi siamo gli esemplari e i governatori dell’umanità.” (Pages 98-101.)

In La donna del Nadir (Rome, 1924) Bontempelli returned to the history of chess in a short essay entitled “Clima sacro”. Commenting on a report of a ten-board blindfold exhibition by Alekhine in Milan, and after suggesting that this achievement was made possible only by Alekhine’s ability to operate outside of any human faculty, Bontempelli offered the following:

“Non senza ragione del gioco degli scacchi non si conosce l’origine: esso probabilmente preesisteva all’apparizione dell’uomo sulla terra, e forse anche alla creazione del mondo; e se il mondo ripiomberà nel caos, e il caos si ridissolverà nel nulla, il gioco degli scacchi rimarrà, fuori dello spazio e del tempo, partecipe dell’eternità delle Idee.” (Page 60.)

On page 186 of the Skinner/Verhoeven book on Alekhine there is an account of his ten-board blindfold exhibition in Milan on 25 March 1923, and the following page shows two games from the event: a spirited win by Luca Morelli, referred to in C.N. 6903, and a loss by Giuseppe Padulli. The Padulli game also appears on page 120 of L’antica Storia della Società Scacchistica Milanese dal 1881 agli anni ’60, volume 1 by Alessandro Sanvito (Bologna, 2014). However, there it is recorded as a draw after 50 Rc2 (instead of 50 Kc2 h5 and resigns, which indicates a double blunder).

The Sanvito book states too (page 62) that Alekhine visited the Società Scacchistica Milanese and faced 14 opponents in a simultaneous blindfold exhibition at the salons of the Società Artisiti e Patriottica, winning each game. No date is given.

Estelle Gilson has produced an English translation of La scacchiera davanti allo specchio, with original illustrations: The Chess Set in the Mirror (Philadelphia, 2007).’

(9629)

Position after 49...Rg2

In C.N. 9629 a correspondent referred to a discrepancy in the conclusion of the blindfold game Alekhine v Padulli, Milan, 25 March 1923. Whereas page 187 of the Skinner/Verhoeven volume gave ‘50 Kc2 h5 1-0’, page 120 of L’antica Storia della Società Scacchistica Milanese dal 1881 agli anni ’60, volume 1 by Alessandro Sanvito (Bologna, 2014) stated that the game was drawn after 50 Rc2.

As always, the Skinner/Verhoeven book gave a source for the game, and it is shown below, courtesy of Henk Chervet of the Koninklijke Bibliotheek in The Hague. Pages 82-83 of the April 1923 L’Italia Scacchistica:

Larger version

The final note by Padulli states that after his move 50...h5 (‘?’) play in this remaining game of the display continued for more than two hours (another 40 or so moves) before he resigned, and that the game lasted eight hours in all.

To summarize: L’Italia Scacchistica had ‘50 Rb2-c2’, a king move, given that the Italian word for king is Re, but it would give away the white rook on e2. The Skinner/Verhoeven volume nonetheless put 50 Kc2 and did not mention that the game continued for dozens more moves. The Sanvito book made a correction, to 50 Rc2, but, for reasons unknown, stated that the game was then drawn.

The score: 1 d4 d6 2 e4 Nc6 3 Nc3 Nf6 4 d5 Ne5 5 f4 Ned7 6 Nf3 e5 7 dxe6 fxe6 8 e5 Ng8 9 exd6 Bxd6 10 Bc4 Nb6 11 Bb3 Nf6 12 Qe2 Qe7 13 Be3 Bd7 14 O-O-O O-O 15 Rhe1 Rae8 16 g3 Kh8 17 Bd4 Bc5 18 Bxf6 gxf6 19 Ne4 a5 20 c3 a4 21 Bc2 Nd5 22 Nxc5 Qxc5 23 a3 Bb5 24 Qe4 Rf7 25 Qd4 Qxd4 26 Nxd4 Bd7 27 c4 Nb6 28 c5 Nc8 29 c6 bxc6 30 Bxa4 Na7 31 Nb3 e5 32 Nc5 exf4 33 Rxe8+ Bxe8 34 Re1 Bd7 35 gxf4 Nb5 36 Bb3 Rg7 37 Rd1 Nd6 38 a4 Bg4 39 Re1 Bf3 40 Be6 Bd5 41 f5 Rg4 42 b3 Rg2 43 a5 Ra2 44 a6 Nb5 45 Re3 Rxh2 46 Rg3 Rg2 47 Re3 Rg5 48 Re2 Rg1+ 49 Kb2 Rg2 50 Rc2 h5, and White eventually won.

(9633)

From page 302 of the 14 May 1938 CHESS:

‘“What has been decided?”, we asked Dr Alekhine, “with regard to an eventual match against Flohr?”

“I go to Prague at the end of May and will discuss there with Flohr and, probably, the representatives of the Czechoslovakian Chess Federation the arrangements of a possible match at the end of 1939.”

Rumour says that Bata, the Czechoslovakian boot and shoe magnate, is keenly interested in Flohr’s challenge and willing to finance a match.’

Page 215 of the May 1938 BCM reported:

‘... it is now fairly certain that Dr Alekhine will play S. Flohr next year at Zlín, in Czechoslovakia.’

In World Championship Disorder we commented that ‘there has probably never been another period in chess history with so many “projected matches” that failed to materialize’.

(9677)

Dan Scoones also draws attention to the chess content (reports and photographs) in La russie illustrée/Иллюстрированная Россия, and particularly in the issue dated 11 February 1928.

Readers should have little difficulty in identifying the board position in the front-cover photograph of Alekhine.

(9757)

From page 30 of the January 1957 Chess World:

The question in the headline was answered on page 60 of the March 1957 issue:

The full score of Flohr v Alekhine, AVRO, 12 November 1938: 1 d4 Nf6 2 c4 e6 3 Nf3 b6 4 g3 Bb4+ 5 Nbd2 Bb7 6 Bg2 O-O 7 O-O d5 8 Qc2 Nbd7 9 a3 Be7 10 b4 c5 11 cxd5 exd5 12 dxc5 bxc5 13 bxc5 Nxc5 14 Nb3 Nfe4 15 Be3 Rc8 16 Nxc5 Bxc5 17 Bxc5 Rxc5 18 Qb2 Ba6 19 Rfc1 Qc7 20 Rxc5 Qxc5

21 Nd4 Rc8 22 Bh3 Qc3 23 Qxc3 Rxc3 Drawn.

Apart from the two mentioned by Purdy, the sources that we have consulted state that White’s 21st move was Nd4, and not Qd4, with one notable exception: page 632 of the Skinner/Verhoeven volume on Alekhine.

The publications cited by Purdy are shown below, beginning with page 131 of the 14 December 1938 issue of CHESS (the sole source indicated by the Skinner/Verhoeven book):

In the relevant part (pages 46-47) of König’s book The Queen’s Indian Defence (London, 1947) our copy has a handwritten correction at move 21:

(9797)

An advertisement from the back cover of the Schweizerische Schachzeitung, December 1947:

C.H.O’D. Alexander’s book was published nearly two years later, the dates in the title being 1938-1945. No material by Francisco Lupi was included, and we wonder whether the intention had been to give a new text by him or merely to reproduce the articles which, as discussed in C.N. 4388, he published shortly after Alekhine died.

The years in the book title are given as 1938-46 in the skimpy ‘Bibliography’ on page 6 of Alekhine move by move by Steve Giddins (London, 2016), and the following page has Mr Giddins’ contribution on the topic of Alekhine’s Death:

‘And even his death has been questioned, with suggestions he may have been murdered by a Soviet hitman. Admittedly, this latter theory has much less substance, and should probably be grouped with those that suggest the moon landings were faked and that Princess Diana was murdered by Lord Lucan, with Elvis Presley (or was it Dick Cheney?) driving the getaway car.’

(9888)

From page 104 of How to Play Winning Chess by Fred Reinfeld (New York, 1962):

‘Yet, for all his daring at the chessboard, he was burdened with strangely timorous quirks of character. After fleeing from Russia in 1921 he had lived in great poverty for some time in Germany. This harrowing period left a lifelong mark on him. I can vividly recall meeting him for the first time at the Pasadena tournament of 1932, for my naive hero-worshiping attitude was jarred by some of his strange whims. For example, although he was virtually a chain-smoker, he always kept his cigarettes in his pocket. When he wanted to smoke, he would reach into his pocket and maneuver one cigarette out without removing the pack. In this way he avoided the social necessity of offering his companion or opponent a cigarette.’

(9900)

See too Chess and Tobacco, which includes the following:

From pages 384-385 of Kings, Commoners and Knaves:

Innumerable books affirm that Alekhine gave up smoking in preparation for his 1937 match with Euwe, as if that were an unprecedented decision. From page 62 of the April 1929 American Chess Bulletin:

‘He [Alekhine] no longer smokes. We understand that he bid farewell to Lady Nicotine soon after the New York tournament of 1927 …’

In an article about Carlsbad, 1929 in the New York Times, 28 August 1929, pages 19 and 20 Alekhine wrote concerning F. Sämisch:

‘That the hopes placed in him in this tourney may not be realized is due – paradoxical as it sounds – according to the observation of the author of this article, to an excessive use of nicotine. Certainly a cigarette has a soothing effect for a moment. However, a player deep in thought and excited is easily apt to smoke too much, thus, in the first line, spoiling his memory and ruining his nerves and his power of resistance. Only when I rid myself of the passion for cigarettes did I attain enough confidence to win the world championship.’

From page 35 of Famous Chess Players by Peter Morris Lerner (Minneapolis, 1973):

‘Although Alekhine gave up smoking for the world championship, he took up the habit again as soon as the match was completed. One night he went to bed with a lighted cigarette and woke up amid flames. Luckily, he was not injured.’

The following appeared on page 27 of the February 1931 American Chess Bulletin:

The report in the Wiener Schachzeitung (on page 374 of the December 1930 issue) was nearly 40 lines long.

(5169)

The above-mentioned report on page 374 of the December 1930 Wiener Schachzeitung:

An addition from the Daily Herald (London), 30 December 1930, page 2:

The report, headed ‘Monday’ (i.e. 29 December 1930), states, improbably, that the hotel fire occurred ‘this morning’. On that day, as shown by page 389 of the Skinner/Verhoeven book on Alekhine, the world champion was in Novi Sad, having previously been in Subotica. On 23 December 1930 he gave a simultaneous exhibition in Osijek, the city referred to in the Wiener Schachzeitung report (Esseg in German).

(10859)

Black to move

C.N. 9903 asked which annotator gave ...Qe2 mate in both the above positions.

The answer is C.H.O’D. Alexander, in his annotations to Balparda v Alekhine, Montevideo, 1938 on pages 15-17 of Alekhine’s Best Games of Chess 1938-1945 (London, 1949):

The mistake was pointed out in a review on page 5 of the October 1949 CHESS, and the note was amended in subsequent editions:

The full score of the Balparda v Alekhine game, which was played in the sixth round of the Montevideo tournament on 14 March 1938: 1 d4 Nf6 2 Nf3 b6 3 g3 Bb7 4 Bg2 c5 5 c3 e6 6 O-O Be7 7 b3 O-O 8 Bb2 cxd4 9 cxd4 b5 10 Nbd2 Qb6 11 e3 a5 12 a3 Nc6 13 Ne5 d6 14 Nxc6 Bxc6 15 Bxc6 Qxc6 16 Rc1 Qb7 17 Qf3 d5 18 Rc2 Bd6 19 Rfc1 Qe7 20 Qe2 Rfb8 21 Nb1 h5 22 Rc6 h4 23 g4 Ne4 24 f3 Ng5 25 Kg2 b4 26 a4 e5 27 Nd2 Re8 28 Qb5 e4 29 f4 h3+ 30 Kg3 Rad8 31 Rf1 g6 32 Qb6 Kg7 33 Bc1 Ne6 34 Rg1 Rh8 35 Kf2 Nxf4 36 Ke1 Nd3+ 37 Kd1 Bxh2 38 Rf1 Bd6 39 White resigns.

The game was published on page 280 of the June 1938 BCM:

We do not know whether the reference to ‘Alekhine gives ...’ in note (d) is based on a written or an oral comment.

The game was annotated by, among others, Santasiere, on page 54 of the May-June 1938 American Chess Bulletin. Showing its customary deep research, the Skinner/Verhoeven book on Alekhine recorded on page 623 that the game had been published in 1938 issues of El Ajedrez Americano, Xadrez Brasileiro and De Schaakwereld. All three gave annotations, and we are grateful to the Royal Library in the Hague for copies of the Brazilian and Dutch periodicals.

A group photograph was shown in C.N. 4000, from page 113 of El Ajedrez Americano, April 1938, and from the same issue (pages 109, 110 and 113 respectively) further pictures are added:

Another group photograph is on page 64 of Roberto Grau, el maestro by G.C. Grau, J.R. Delfino and J. Morgado (Buenos Aires, 2007).

From the chessgames.com page on Balparda:

However, from page 82 of Ajedrez uruguayo (1880-1980) by Héctor Silva Nazzari (Montevideo, 2013):

‘La carrera ajedrecística de Balparda fue corta como lo fue su vida al fallecer prematuramente el 8 de julio de 1942 a los 39 años de edad.’

(9916)

Gerard Killoran (Ilkley, England) provides a cartoon from page 8 of the Sun (Sydney), 30 October 1929:

The cartoonist, Arthur Mailey (1886-1967), was an Australian test cricketer.

(9976)

A Spanish website has a large number of chess photographs. One recommended search, ‘ajedrez 1943’, gives these 12 shots:

(9978)

Richard Jones (Bologna, Italy) raises the question of whether Capablanca was a poor loser, and particularly in the immediate aftermath of his match defeat by Alekhine in 1927.

As shown on pages 202-206 of our monograph on the Cuban, his public statements about Alekhine’s victory were generous. The conclusion of the match was discussed on pages 348-350 and 521 of Miguel A. Sánchez’s 2015 book on Capablanca, but a properly documented account of what happened in Buenos Aires at the end of November 1927 remains to be written. With optimum use of source material, the chess historian must try to show what is certain, what is probable, what is unlikely and what is untrue, and at every stage the reader is entitled to ask, ‘Where did that come from?’ With erratic use of source material, Miguel A. Sánchez often makes do with a mixture of facts, assertion, imagination and speculation.

Concerning Capablanca’s letter of resignation of game 34, we do not know when the original first became public. One book which reproduced it (on a page chiefly comprising the fake Alekhine-Capablanca photograph) was Umkämpfte Krone by R. Stolze (East Berlin, 1986):

Correct French would have been desirable.

On page 521 of his book Sánchez characteristically referred to ...

‘... the text, originally written in French, although with some grammatical inaccuracies (probably because of Capablanca’s state of mind) and later fixed ...’

(10022)

Concerning Capablanca’s letter to Alekhine dated 29 November 1927, which was shown in C.N. 10022, Thierry Lafargue (Mont de Marsan, France) draws attention to an article entitled ‘Le séjour de Karpov à Paris’ by Roland Lecomte on page 197 of Europe Echecs, July 1976. It recorded that at a reception in his honour in Paris on 2 June 1976 Karpov was presented with the original letter, which had been bequeathed to the Ligue de l’Ile-de-France by its late Honorary President, Louis Sol. The document ‘est destiné à être la possession du champion du Monde en titre’.

The relevant parts of the report:

Mr Lafargue asks where Capablanca’s letter is today.

(10050)

Guy Gignac (Donnacona, Canada) informs us that he recently acquired this photograph:

Larger version

Assistance with identifying the group will be welcomed.

(10109)

Michael Clapham comments that the photograph appears to be a reverse image, given that the coats are buttoned on the left.

(10113)

Javier Asturiano Molina and Eduardo Bauzá Mercére note that the wording on the reverse of the photograph is:

‘Leyenda
‘El maestro Alekhine y su esposa momentos después de desembarcar con las autoridades del Club A. [Argentino] de Ajedrez.’

It is also indicated that the photographer was José Amorós, for La Razón. Did the picture appear in that publication?

Finally, the following words are stamped upside down: ‘Foto del revés’ (‘reversed photograph’).

(10151)

The Gallica website of the Bibliothèque Nationale de France has a photograph of Alekhine playing blindfold at the Café de la Rotonde au Palais-Royal in Paris.

(10114)

Hans Renette (Bierbeek, Belgium) forwards a photograph from page 3 of Die Deutsche Zeitung im Ostland, 26 September 1942:

We included the picture in Kings, Commoners and Knaves, identifying the game as Alekhine v E. Steiner, Kemeri, 1937. The photograph had appeared, without any particulars, in Nad šachovnicemi celého světa by K. Opocenský and V. Houška (Prague, 1960):

(10117)

From page 166 of Studies for Practical Players by Mark Dvoretsky and Oleg Pervakov (Milford, 2009), translated by Jim Marfia:

‘It often happens that a game, or the analysis which follows, will produce study-like positions. Some do not require any sort of further finishing work – they stand before us practically ready-made. Others are more like diamonds in the rough, awaiting further polishing. Alekhine had those kinds of positions, too.’

There followed this ‘bit of a study’:

Leaving aside, in the above extract, the incorrect date (1932) and the notational mishap, we observe that, as usual, Alexander Alekhine’s Chess Games, 1902-1946 by L.M. Skinner and R.G.P. Verhoeven (Jefferson, 1998) is the source to consult. From page 475:

Below is the coverage on pages 296-297 of the Tijdschrift van den Nederlandschen Schaakbond, November 1933:

Did any newspapers of the period offer further information about the game played in Groningen?

(10158)

Which move is preferable, 5 d3 or 5 e3?

On pages 67 and 265 of his book on Nottingham, 1936 Alekhine gave contradictory comments about the position after 1 c4 e5 2 Nc3 Nc6 3 g3 g6 4 Bg2 Bg7:

As mentioned in C.N. 2109 (see page 281 of Kings, Commoners and Knaves), the discrepancy was pointed out by T.V. Parrott on page 153 of CHESS, May 1953 and by Arthur Oliver on page 105 of Chess World, June 1962. A later reference is page 15 of Chess Life, January 1963 (in a ‘Chess Kaleidoscope’ article by Eliot Hearst).

(10172)

Position after 4...Bg7

From Yasser Seirawan:

‘Despite Alekhine’s contradictory comments, both the moves that he mentions, 5 d3 and 5 e3, are considered to be main lines of play in modern opening theory.

In his recent works on the English Opening, Mihail Marin has advocated 5 e4, and I wonder whether Alekhine might have suggested that that move weakens f3, d3 and d4. The most surprising comment by Alekhine is that after 5 d3 White may, in time, aspire to play f4; in modern games that simply does not happen.

In view of the forthcoming middlegame, modern masters would judge 5 d3 to be the prelude to a queen’s-side expansion, most often seen with the maneuver Rb1, b4 and b5, chasing away the c6-knight and improving the view of the g2 bishop.

Conversely, 5 e3 is considered rather more flexible. White signals that he intends a central expansion with Nge2, perhaps followed by the advance d4. In that line, White can sometimes also pursue a queen’s-side expansion, as mentioned above, after playing d3. The key difference is that the king’s knight is developed to e2 instead of f3, and in this case White will usually play f4, to counter-act an aggressive king’s-side expansion by Black.

In short, modern theory considers that the two moves given by Alekhine, 5 d3 and 5 e3, are equally good.’

(10176)

C.N. 10159 showed a picture of Koltanowski drawn by Henry Grob and published on page 1 of the 4 December 1936 issue of Schach-Kurier.

Richard Forster (Zurich) notes that it is one of five portraits of chess figures in Henry Grob: der Zeichner und Maler by Henry Grob (Zurich, 1965). The pages in the booklet were unnumbered, and the works were arranged chronologically. Below is his portrait of Alekhine.

(10217)

From page 96 of Wonders and Curiosities of Chess by Irving Chernev (New York, 1974):

This was number 63 in Alekhine’s second volume of Best Games. The final clock times given on page 55 of Bogoljubow’s book on the match were White: 2 hours 41 minutes; Black: 58 minutes.

(10221)

From Jan Kalendovský comes this photograph published on page 27 of Atpūta, 8 December 1939:

(10250)

From page 55 of Other Passports by Clive James (London, 1986):

The full poem, a parody entitled ‘Richard Wilbur’s Fabergé Egg Factory’, can be read on Clive James’s website.

(10184)

A fragment to which reference will be made in the 29...Bxh2 section of the feature article Spassky v Fischer, Reykjavik, 1972 concerns the position after 27...Bb5-c4 in the 30th match-game (also described as the fifth exhibition game) between Alekhine and Euwe, Rotterdam, 16 December 1937:

Alekhine now played 28 Bxh7. Below is the remainder of the game as annotated by Euwe on pages 200-201 of Alekhine’s match book:

The annotations by Alekhine on page 104 of his book ¡Legado! (Madrid, 1946):

Finally, Alekhine’s remarks about the five exhibition games, from page 183 of his match book:

(10264)

On page 10 of Bobby Fischer’s Conquest of the World’s Chess Championship (New York, 1973) Reuben Fine wrote regarding Alekhine:

‘When World War II ended, in 1945, all the leading masters of that day, incensed by his behavior, objected to his participation in international tournaments. The Soviets broke the boycott by having Botvinnik challenge Alekhine to a match for the title in 1946. Actually this was illegal, since Keres and I had prior claims. But Keres, born in Estonia, was a Soviet citizen, while I was no longer so interested.’

From pages 224 of the ‘revised and expanded edition’ of The World’s Great Chess Games by Fine (New York, 1976):

‘Legally there were various possibilities. Euwe might have reclaimed the title, as the last official champion before Alekhine. Or Keres and Fine could have been declared co-champions on the basis of their joint victory in the AVRO tournament. Or Euwe, Fine and Reshevsky might have played a three-cornered tournament to decide the championship. Or the free world might have chosen a champion, and the communist world been left to choose its own; then the two could have met for the world championship.’

On the next page Fine wrote with respect to AVRO, 1938:

‘As indicated before, on the basis of this victory and in light of the circumstances of international chess in the war period, Keres and I should have been declared co-champions for the period 1946-48, between the death of Alekhine and the 1948 tournament.’

Finally, a comment by Fine on page 151 of Lessons from My Games (New York, 1958):

‘Keres and I tied for first in the AVRO tournament; he was declared winner by the tie-breaking Sonnenborn-Berger [sic] system. Alekhine dodged a match in his usual skillful manner. Then the war intervened and all official chess activity stopped.’

There is a frequent lack of rigour in claims that Alekhine ‘dodged’ opponents, and it is unimpressive to find C.J.S. Purdy writing the following in a review of Lessons from My Games on pages 146-147 of Chess World, September-October 1967:

‘Reuben Fine became one of the world’s greatest players. At the time when his claims to play a match for the world title were unanswerable, he did not get to play a match because Alekhine, once he had regained his title from Euwe, did everything possible to evade a match.’

As regards possible challenges to Alekhine after AVRO, 1938, an observation on page 215 of Reuben Fine by Aidan Woodger (Jefferson, 2004) is noteworthy:

‘Fine seems not to have made any effort at all ...’

(10288)

As mentioned in C.N. 10291, Olimpiu G. Urcan has found a number of chess pictures in The Sphere. They include the following:

6 February 1932, page 203

12 March 1932, page 402

From page 8 of issue one of Albrecht Buschke’s publication Chess News from Russia, 10 November 1945:

‘Shortly before Dr Lasker’s death, i.e. almost three years after the return match between Alekhine and Euwe, the first few copies of a booklet about this match had arrived from Russia. The writer happened to have a copy of this booklet in his hands when he paid Dr Lasker one of his periodical visits. Dr Lasker had hardly looked at the book when he asked the writer emphatically to leave the book with him. At the astonished question whether he, of all chessplayers, had not seen these games yet, after almost three years, the Grand Old Man of Chess had a good and valid explanation: “Oh, I know the games, of course ... they don’t interest me any longer ... what I want to study are Botvinnik’s notes to these games – they are of real importance ...”’ (Ellipses in the original.)

Botvinnik’s volume on the 1937 Euwe-Alekhine match was reprinted by Издательство “Галерия”, Moscow in 2002:

(10305)

In his 2006 edition of Chess Fundamentals Nick de Firmian’s changes included putting ‘he or she’ where Capablanca had written ‘he’. If, heaven forfend, de Firmian were let loose on Alekhine’s book on Nottingham, 1936, he would come to this note, on page 56 of the original, concerning the third-round game between Alekhine and Tylor:

Or, in the ‘style’ imposed by de Firmian:

‘... the statement of the law-breaker that he or she was drunk at the moment that he or she committed the crime.’

(10354)

Regarding the 1937 Euwe v Alekhine world championship match, C.J.S. Purdy wrote on page 80 of Chess World, 1 May 1946:

‘Although for sheer accuracy it could not compare with the Alekhine-Capablanca match, it was, on the whole, the greatest chess match ever played.’

(10363)

As quoted in Capablanca v Alekhine, 1927, Kmoch’s article ‘My Personal Recollections of Capablanca’ on pages 362-363 of Chess Review, December 1967 included this paragraph (page 362):

‘In Kissingen [1928], my contact with Capablanca became rather close. We had long walks together, usually talking about the world championship in reference to which Capablanca always used the expression “my title”, making it seem that the title had only incidentally and temporarily strayed to Alekhine. More than once he explained to me how I could make a lot of money. Very simple: just organize the return match against Alekhine and bet as much as possible on me; you will win, that much is absolutely sure.’

On page 363 Kmoch wrote:

‘Capablanca used to see incredibly much with but a single glance at the board. There still rings in my ears Réti’s lament: “No sense in showing him a composition because he sees the solution before you have finished setting up the position.”’

(10384)

From page 113 of CHESS, May 1941:

Larger version

The letter was referred to on page 656 of the 1998 Skinner/Verhoeven book on Alekhine.

(10424)

From Josep Alió:

‘As mentioned on page 11 of my 1999 book Els Escacs a Tarragona, in 1944 Alekhine gave simultaneous displays in two towns near Tarragona: Reus (29 February) and Valls (5 March).

A photograph taken during the latter display (+27 =3 –0) is held by the Valls City Archives.’

(10513)

Olimpiu G. Urcan writes:

‘On pages 229-233 of our book Arthur Kaufmann. A Chess Biography, 1872-1938 (Jefferson, 2012) Peter Michael Braunwarth and I presented clues suggesting that Kaufmann met, and played against, Alexander Alekhine in Odessa in June/July 1919. Recently, Dominique Thimognier (Fondettes, France) has discovered incontrovertible proof thereof, in Georg Marco’s chess column in the Neues Wiener Journal. Mr Thimognier points out that in the 2 October 1920 column (page 3) Marco gave a position from the familiar Alekhine v “Dr A. Kaufman” game discussed on pages 230-232 of our book. Black was indeed Arthur Kaufmann:

Furthermore, Mr Thimognier has found that in the 6 October 1920 column in the same newspaper (page 3) Marco gave the conclusion of another game played by Kaufmann and Alekhine (Odessa, July 1919):

Marco presented each item as an “original contribution for the Neues Wiener Journal”.’

Black to move (Kaufmann v Alekhine, Odessa, July 1919)

1...Kh8 2 gxh6 g6 3 Qxg6 Rg8 4 Rg4 Bd4 5 Re4 Qxa2 6 Re7 Resigns.

(10586)

Jan Kalendovský sends, from the archives of the Zlín Chess Club, two photographs of Alekhine giving a simultaneous display in Zlín on 17 February 1943:

(10604)

Ross Jackson (Raumati South, New Zealand) provides two photographs which he owns:

Kroměříž, 11 February 1943

Zlín, 17 February 1943

We have added the date of the Kromeríž exhibition from the table of the world champion’s simultaneous performances in Alechin v Československu by Jan Kalendovský (Brno, 1992).

(10621)

Ross Jackson asks what is known about the claim on page 190 of The World of Chess by A. Saidy and N. Lessing (New York, 1974) that during the 1927 world championship match Jaffe sent Alekhine a cable which ‘contained an analysis of a variation of the Queen’s Gambit with a new move suggested by Jaffe, which Alekhine is thought to have adopted’.

(10674)

‘The combination, or rather series of combinations, in this game, is in my opinion the most remarkable tactical conception in chess history.’

That observation by Reuben Fine concerns Alekhine v Böök, Margate, 1938 and comes from page 531 of the November 1938 BCM, in a theoretical article on the Queen’s Gambit Accepted. Below is the relevant passage, after discussion of the moves 1 d4 d5 2 c4 dxc4 3 Nf3 Nf6 4 e3 e6 5 Bxc4 c5 6 O-O a6 7 Qe2:

(10676)

The above photograph, from page 191 of The Graphic, 7 February 1925, was shown in C.N. 10302.

Arthur Larrue (Lisbon) informs us that the Gallica website has a different shot, of high quality, taken at the same locale.

(10733)

An addition to the small number of photographs of Octávio Trompowsky is noted by Eduardo Bauzá Mercére, in Xadrez Brasileiro, May 1939, page 63:

Our correspondent also mentions a photograph of Alekhine on page 83 of the June-July 1939 issue of the Brazilian magazine:

The above are the best-quality scans that we are able to show, with the assistance of the Cleveland Public Library.

Regarding Alekhine v Joaquim Valladão Monteiro, see C.N. 3270 above.

(10768)

Alekhine gained the title ‘chess champion of Europe’ by winning the Munich, 1942 tournament. From page 134 of the report in the October 1942 Deutsche Schachzeitung:

‘Das Turnier um die Europäische Meisterschaft ist ausgegangen, wie man es erwartet hat: Aljechin hat neben dem Weltmeistertitel nun auch die Europäische Meisterschaft heimführen können.’

The creation of that title is well documented in the Deutsche Schachzeitung and Deutsche Schachblätter of 1942, but what can be said about a claim that Alekhine had acquired a similar title in the 1920s? Below is a comment by Edgard Colle in a report on Hastings, 1925-26 on page 9 of the January 1926 issue of L’Echiquier:

‘Il est clair qu’avant le commencement du tournoi, la victoire d’Alekhine ne faisait aucun doute – tout au plus pouvait-on se demander si le sympathique champion d’Europe accorderait une ou deux nullités à ses adversaires, parmi lesquels seul le Dr. Vidmar était de taille à l’inquiéter.’

(10772)

Despite its innocuous title, the editorial below (L’Echiquier, December 1927, pages 783-784) delivers a message which may be summarized as ‘good riddance to Capablanca’:

(10810)

As a contrast to the editorial reproduced in C.N. 10810, below is an article by C.S. Howell on pages 194-196 of the December 1927 American Chess Bulletin:

(10822)

In C.N. 7290 Christian Sánchez pointed out an interview with Alekhine by Carlos M. Portela on page 8 of the magazine Caras y Caretas, 4 September 1926, which was accompanied by a photograph of Alekhine playing the piano.

Eduardo Bauzá Mercére now provides this fine version, from Argentina’s Archivo General de la Nación, courtesy of the Ministerio del Interior, Obras Públicas y Vivienda (reference AR_AGN_DDF/Consulta_INV: 61876):

(10842)

Latest update: 18 November 2024.

To the Chess Notes main page.

To the Archives for other feature articles.