Tartakover - Spielmann

St Petersburg 1909

Queen's Pawn Openiing

1.d4 d5 2.Bf4 Nf6 3.e3 e6 4.Nf3 Bd6 5.Bd3 Bxf4 6.exf4 Qd6 7.Qd2 c5 8.dxc5 Qxc5 9.O-O Nc6 10.c3

10.Nc3 followed by the development of the Rooks, would be sounder play.

10...O-O 11.b4 Qb6 12.a4 a6

White:Tartakover; Black:Spielmann

The purpose of this move is not clear. The advance of White's a- and b-pawns can do Black no harm. Instead 12...Rd8 followed by 13...Bd7 and ... Rac8 was indicated. The Bishop could afterwards take up a waiting position on the e8 square.

13.a5 Qc7 14.Re1 Rb8

An ingenious idea; but it is questionable whether the slower attack

14...Bd7 then 15...Rac6 and ...Qd6, followed by doubling rooks on the c-file, or by ...d5-d4 would not have been more useful.

15.Ne5 b6 16.axb6 Rxb6 17.Qe2 d4 18.b5 axb5 19.Bxb5 Nxe5 20.fxe5 Nd5 21.cxd4

 It appears risky to accept the sacrifice. After 21.c4

21...Nf4 22.Qe4

If22.Qf3 Nxg2which move would now fail on account of the reply 22... Bd3.

22...Nh3 23.gxh3 Rxb5 24.Na3 Rb3 25.Rac1 Qd7

White:Tartakover; Black:Spielmann

 Intending to play 26...Qd5; but it was of the greatest importance to compel the Knight to move, lest the White Rook take possession of the third row and reach the g3-square. Black could win as follows, in analysis given by Spielmann and E. Cohn: 25...Qe7 26.Nc4(26.Qc2 White threatens 27.Qxc8.26...Qg5 27.Kf1 Ba6 28.Nc4 Rxh3and wins. ) 26...Bb7 and if now 27.Qg4 ( better is 27.Qf4 Rf3 28.Qd2 Qh4 29.Nd6 Bd5 30.Rc3 Qxh3 31.Ree3 Ra8) 27...h5 28.Qf4(28.Qxh5? Bf3))

26.Re3 Bb7 27.Qf4 Qd5 28.f3 f6

White:Tartakover; Black:Spielmann

In spite of the strength of Black's position there is no decisive manoeuvre. For instance 28...Rc8 would fail on account of 29.Rxc8 Bxc8 30.Nc2 followed soon by Ne1.

29.Rc5 g5 30.Rxd5 gxf4 31.Rxb3 Bxd5 32.Rc3 fxe5 33.dxe5 Rf5 34.Nc4 Rh5 35.Kg2 Rg5 36.Kf2 Rh5 37.Kg2 Rg5

1/2 - 1/2

Previous   Next

Generated with Rybka 3 Aquarium