Random Posts

Saturday, November 19, 2011

Correspondence Chess and Databases

These days with the use of engines in CC DB’s are very important because when it comes to opening selection, gone are the days of playing risky openings.  At high level CC you see mostly solid, mainline stuff: Ruy Lopez, Sicilian, Nimzo-Indian, Q-Indian, etc.  In the past I have been using my own personally constructed DB consisting of 3.5 million games, NOT the Fritz opening book, to select opening lines.

Yesterday I finished making a new DB consisting of about 350,000 correspondence games which I think will be an even bigger help in my CC games.  I can search opening lines that have been played by strong CC players.  This has an advantage of telling me what lines have been successful plus I know that they have in all likelihood been engine checked.  I checked a couple of my current CC games that are in the opening stage and here’s what I found:

After the following moves where I am playing Black: 1.d4 d5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.e3 e6 4.Bd3 c5 5.b3 Nc6 6.Bb2 Bd6 7.0–0 0–0

Fritz’ opening book shows a result of +4 -5 =2 and my database of CC games with at least one player rated over 2200 results: +9 - 8 =22, so the chances are about equal and a draw wouldn’t be unexpected.

 On the other hand in the following game where I am also playing Black, after the moves 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 Nc6 6.Bg5 e6 7.Qd2 Be7 8.0–0–0 0–0

The Fritz book shows +25 -11 =15 and my new database with both players rated over 2400 results are not good either: +20 -7 =16, so it looks like I’m going to have an uphill battle in this one!
A final example where I am White: 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 Bb4 4.e5 c5 5.a3 Bxc3+ 6.bxc3 Ne7 7.Qg4 cxd4 8.Qxg7 Rg8 9.Qxh7 Qc7

After 9.Qxh7 Fritz’ opening book shows only two moves for Black 9…Nbc6 and 9…Qa5 with results of +2 -0 =1; not much help.  My DB gives a different picture because after 9…Qc7, which isn’t given in the Fritz book, a search of the diagrammed position where both players were rated over 2400 shows +11 -1 =11, so that’s very encouraging.

Hopefully, this new DB will help me avoid inferior lines and bring better results.  We’ll see.

Friday, November 18, 2011

Stonewall Attack

NM William Stewart presents a nice 4-part online video where he discusses the Stonewall Attack.

His Part 4 analysis of Steiner-Botvinnik, Groningen, 1946 is especially interesting.  He recommends this opening for beginners.  I’ve played it a few times against stronger players, but it never seemed to work out like the examples!  Still, not a bad opening for under 1600’s. 
WATCH

How to Win the World Correspondence Title

No, I’m not going to tell you how, but  Victor Palciauskas does a good job telling us how he won the 10th World CC title back in 1984.  The article is 9 pages long as Palciauskas describes every step along the way and annotates several of his more interesting games.

Besides being very strong you have to have a LOT of patience because the journey started in 1970 and by 1982 he was sure he would win, but it took another two years for his victory to become official.

There was even some skullduggery in the last round.  The ultimate 2nd place finisher, Juan Morgado of Argentina was playing his remaining game against the former World Champ Estrin.  It was a complex game and Morgado had the worst of it.  So he decided his best chance lay in filing a claim with the tournament director claiming Estrin exceeded the time limit twice, thus forfeiting the game. This claim was disputed by Estrin. Morgado's motivation was that in the event that his claim is upheld by the ICCF and Palciauskas  lost against Sanakoev, they would be tied with Morgado winning on tiebreaks.

The ICCF denied Morgado's claim so Morgado wrote Palciauskas requesting to be sent his game score with Sanakoev.  After reviewing the game Morgado determined Palciauskas was unlikely to lose, so he dropped the issue. His game with Estrin continued, eventually ending in a draw.

The site also includes a crosstable with all the games from the event. LINK

Here’s a miniature (!!) from the event.

Thursday, November 17, 2011

Arena Chess Program Review

           Arena is a free GUI for analyzing and playing games.  It runs on Windows XP or higher or on Linux with Wine 1.0 or higher.
          Arena has an easy-to-use and configurable interface that you can adjust to your preferences.  It also has many of the features of Fritz such as: detailed analysis information, the ability to run engine tournaments, online play, automatic analysis, EPD, PGN you can attach a DGT board, support in 19 languages, display of opening names, it can use opening books, play Chess960 and has an extra analysis board, just to name a few of its features. The interface is very nice and you can adjust the colors and piece selection just like Fritz. 
         Whether you use SCID or Arena is a matter of personal preference, but unless you can find Fritz for $20 somewhere like I did, this is the program to use and you can’t beat the price: free.  Download Arena

SCID Database Review

Like most people I like free stuff, but only if it’s of good quality.  I have only purchased a chess engine or database program twice.  After returning to chess in 2004 after a long absence, I bought Chessmaster but found it unsatisfactory for my purposes of serious correspondence record keeping and opening research and its database function was cumbersome at best.  Eventually I found free programs that did the job better.  The only other time I parted with any money was for Fritz 12 which I accidently discovered at Office Max for $20.00.  Apparently Office Max no longer carries it, but it may still be available at Best Buy for the same $20.00 price.
          But $20 still is not free. Chessbase sells Fritz 12 for around $56 and Chessbase starts at $135 and up. Don’t get me wrong, Chessbase sounds like a great program but SCID does just about anything Chessbase does and unless you are a professional player, it will work just fine.
         SCID stands for Shane's Chess Information Database and runs under a variety of formats besides Windows and uses PGN and its own SCID format.  It can use up to five piece endgame tablebases. WIth SCID you can maintain a database of games, conduct searches based on several different criteria, view graphical trends and produce printable reports on players and openigns.  Most menus and messages are available in 14 languages.
          Unfortunately some of the features are not intuitive, but once you learn how to use them you will be pretty much able to do anything Chessbase can do.  It comes with a few engines, but I recommend downloading some of the stronger ones you can find on Jim Abblett's excellent site (see the link on this Blog).  If you want, you can also use SCID as a GUI to play against the engines or you can connect to some of the Internet sites and play on line.
         Photographs and other information on players can be stored in the database, but I think most of this information is outdated and is of little use.  SCID also offers training with its ‘Find the Best Move’ feature.  The site also has all the help and tutorial files you’ll need.

Download SCID

Wednesday, November 16, 2011

Wild Encounter between Tarrasch and Walbrodt

      I remember when I first saw this game, probably back in the early 1960’s, how much I enjoyed it.  I played through it again a couple of days ago and nothing has changed.   The game, played at Hastings 1895, won Second Brilliancy Prize despite Tarrasch’s rather inept conduct of most of the game.  However, his brilliant combination at the end after Walbrodt mishandled the attack, allowed Tarrasch to redeem himself.

        Tarrasch's opponent, Carl Walbrodt (November 28, 1871 - October 3, 1902), was a leading German master of the period who participated in many tournaments and matches and wrote several chess columns.  In ‘real life’ he and his brother owned a pantograph factory.   He was diagnosed with tuberculosis  in the early 1890's and ultimately died from it.

       Enjoy the complications!

Celebrate Chess

I have added a link to an interesting site, Celebrate Chess,  I recently discovered that I think you will enjoy. Be sure to pay the site a visit!

Monday, November 14, 2011

A Man Who Loves Chess

Here’s a man who loves what he does! In his younger days, Washington had a low Expert rating (mid-2000’s).

"This is where you come if you're any good," says Ron Washington about the lakeside chess pavilion just south of the North Avenue beach house in Chicago. Considering he has spent every summer day there for the past 20 years-from 11 a.m. until dark, when he gets kicked out-he's better than good. "Every now and then I get beat-not too often, but it happens," Washington says. "I'm a hustler. I'm not a fun guy." Washington, who learned to play chess from his barber when he was 14, drives a cab all winter to support his hobby. Claim to fame: Washington once owned a chess club on State and Division called Chess Shop.


Beginner’s Opening Revisited

A while back I did a post on the Beginner’s Opening.  I foolishly decided to try it in a game against an ICCF Senior Master, no less!  The result was a sound defeat.
The position after 22…Bxg2? Was the one I discussed in a post concerning the Komodo engine.  After 5-1/2 hours Komodo had analyzed the position 13 moves deep and was showing the position as equal. It's recommendation began with 1...Bxg2 2.Nde4. 1...Bxg2?? is a horrible move because after 2.f3 Black loses a piece.

Saturday, November 12, 2011

Ivanhoe Chess Engine

As I have pointed out in the past I don’t know a lot about chess engines (OK, I know what you're thinking...or chess itself for that matter), but I’ve heard some interesting things about the Ivanhoe B47e x64 engine.  However,  I haven't been able to discover much about it so any insight from readers would be appreciated! The engine does not seem to appear on most engine rating lists. I have been testing it out at Lechenicher SchachServer and in a quick blitz match (4 minutes per game) I ran this morning,  it beat Houdini 1.5x64 by +3 -0 =1, not that that tells you much.

Back in June, 2010 a poster conducted his own private tournament with the following results which he posted on Open Chess:
1 IvanHoe
2 Deep Rybka 4 x64
3 Houdini 1.01 x64
4 Fire 1.31 x64
5 Stockfish 1.7.1 JA 64bit
6 Naum 4.2
7 Deep Fritz 12
8 Deep Shredder 12 x64
9 Critter 0.70 64-bit
10 Protector 1.3.5 x64

In August, 2011 one match result I saw resulted in a decisive win for Houdini 1.5ax64 over Ivanhoe B47e x64 by +40 -14 =46 and on 9-12-11 chess2u listed a match where Houdini Pro (the latest, NOT free version) defeated Ivanhoe +19 -12 =19.

This rating list appearing on the Sedatchess website:
1 Houdini 2.0b Pro x64
2 Houdini 2.0 Pro x64
3 Houdini 2.0b Pro x64
4 Houdini 1.5a x64 %
5 Deep Rybka 4.1 x64
6 Critter 1.2 x64
7 IvanHoe 47c GH x64
8 Fire 2.2 xTreme x64
9 IvanHoe 0B.09.18 x64
10 IvanHoe B47d x64

The results seem to be a mixed bag and I can’t say which engine is truly best, but one thing I have noticed is that the suggested moves and evaluations are often significantly different. When this happens you have to really investigate to discover what the best move is. For all practical purposes, we average players are going to be left with no choice but to pick a move and see what happens...I have done that a few times when playing without engines.

Friday, November 11, 2011

Reshevsky's 100th Anniversary

Reshevsky’s reputation was that of a positional player and  defensive specialist, but the 100th anniversary of the birth of Samuel Reshevsky, one of the greatest American players of all time, has never gotten the attention it should.  Reshevsky, who died in 1992, had the most remarkable careers of the pre-Fischer era.

A child prodigy born Nov. 26, 1911, in what was then the old Russian Empire, he won his first U.S. title in 1936 and his sixth and last in 1969, while playing top board for numerous U.S. Olympiad teams. Despite the need to finish his education and make a living Reshevsky was among the very best in the world in the 1930s and 1940s, and fell just short of winning the world championship in the face of the rising Soviet chess hegemony after World War II.

Despite his reputation as a positional grinder Reshevsky never would have made it without a talent for attack and for combinational play when the situation demanded it.

Hanon W. Russell conducted a two-part interview with him which you can read at Chess Café.

Part 1    Part 2

Thursday, November 10, 2011

Jacqueline Piatigorsky

Most chess players remember Jacqueline Piatigorsky (born November 6, 1911) only as the lady behind the fiasco that ended the 1961 Reshevsky-Fischer match.  What happened was she and her husband had established the Piatigorsky Foundation which helped sponsor chess in public schools and chess for underpriveledged and disabled children but its primarily purpose was to support the Piatagorsky Cup Tournament.   However, the first competition under the sponsorship of the Piatigorsky Foundation was the Reshevsky-Fischer.  The match was to be 16 games with the first 4 played in New York City and the next 8 played in Los Angeles and the last 4 back in New York City. There had been difficulty in setting up a time for the 12th game because as an Orthodox Jew, Reshevsky couldn't play on the Sabbath, so the game was scheduled after sundown, (9:00 pm).  Later Mrs. Piatigorsky realized that starting by at 9 pm, the game wouldn't end until 2 am. which she thought was too late.

The committee rescheduled the game to start at 1:30 pm the next day, but Mrs. Piatigorsky wanted to see the game and this starting time would conflict with a musical performance her husband was giving.   So, on her own, she scheduled the game for 11 am that morning. Fischer, who would not play that early in the morning, became infuriated that she had consulted neither him nor Reshevsky, threw one of his hissy fits and using language that was fit for the gutter, stormed out in protest, Reshevsky wisely said nothing and was declared the winner, collected his prize money and returned home.  The match was tied at 5½-5½ going into the disputed game.
 
For an interesting article written by Mrs. Piatigorsky written when she was  90 years, visit  HERE. 



Born Jacqueline Rothschild she had every advantage growing up but she led a secluded childhood, with no friends, was dominated by sadistic or uncaring nannies, saddened by parents who would visit her and her siblings only rarely, she claimed to have never have been out alone until she became an adult.

She was taught chess by an English nurse when she was 6 years old and convalescing from peridonitis, but she was mostly interested in tennis and golf.
She had a circle of acquaintances and played chess with people like Marcel Duchamp and Sergei Prokofiev. Prokofiev was a strong player who once defeated Capablanca in a simul.  Prokofiev  partnered with Mrs. Piatigorsky in bridge and would often make demeaning remarks against her during their games. They only played two games of chess.  The first was a draw but she won the second  and Prokofiev refused to play her again.

She married her husband, Gregor, the renowned cellist in 1937.  Being Jews, they fled France for the United States when it threatened to fall under Nazi control.  While in New York Mrs. Piatigorsky began playing correspondence chess.  In 1949 they moved to California where she met Herman Steiner who encouraged her to enter tournaments. In 1951 she tied for next to last in the U.S. Women's Championship.  Steiner died suddenly in 1955 right in the middle of the state championship.  He had a club called the Hollywood Chess Group to which many celebrities belonged, including a lot of women players.  After Steiner’s death Mrs. Piatigorky took over the club that was renamed the Herman Steiner Chess Club in his memory. In 1956 the club hosted the California Women's Championship.   Mrs. Piatigorsky finished third behind Sonja Graf-Stevenson and Lina Grumette.

In 1957 she took part in the first Women's Chess Olympiad played at Emmens, Netherlands and scored a very respectable 6 wins, 3 draws and 2 loses. In individual games, she beat Merete Haahr (Danish Women's Chess Champion in 1952, 1958, 1959, 1962, 1967, 1970 and 1975), Beth Cassidy of Ireland, R.P Foggie (the 1955 Scottish Women's Chess Champion) twice, Berta Zebinger (the Austrian Women's Champion in 1955 and shared in 1967), Ms. Welter of Luxembourg. She drew against Miroslawa Litmanowicz (the 1968 Polish Women's Champion-to-be), Éva Karakas (7 time Hungarian Women's Chess Champion), and Antonia Ivanova (6 time Bulgarian Wome's Chess Champion in 1951, 1952, 1954, 1957, 1958 and 1967). She lost to Kveta Eretova of the Czech Republic and to Ursula Altrichter (East German Women's Chess Champion in 1954). She played second board and won the bronze medal.

The First Piatigorsky Cup Tournament was held in 1963. Fischer was invited but demanded a $2000 appearance fee but was turned down so didn’t play.  Petrosian and Keres shared first place Najdorf, Panno, Gligoric, Olafsson,Benko and Reshevsky also participated. She seemed to have really disliked Fischer, but because his standing in the chess world, she also invited him to the 2nd Piatigorsky Cup Tournament in 1966. To her surprise, Fischer accepted without demanding an appearance fee.  She wrote, "in the Second Piatigorsky Cup, Fischer played under the same conditions as everyone else. I think I was the first person ever to stand up to him."   In this tournament Fischer finished the first half of the double round event in last place, then in a surprising surge, finished in second place a half point behind Spassky.

This tournament was unique for another reason:  Mrs. Piatigorsky wrote, "Until then, the only way the public could follow the games was by setting up magnetic boards and having youngsters run back and forth, moving pieces on the board to adjust to each new position. It was cumbersome. So I invented a new system with overhead projectors and electric clocks so the public could not only follow the games comfortably, but also the time control."
Sidebar:  For an interesting story on the chess sets used in the Piatigorsky tournaments, go HERE.  Visit HERE for a Sports Illustrated article.

Mrs. Piatigorsky was not only a woman’s chess champion but a tennis champion, author, sculptor and a member of the Rothschild banking family of France. The daughter of the enormously wealthy and influential banker, Édouard Alphonse de Rothschild, and Germaine Alice Halphen. She was born in Paris.

She and her husband were also patrons of the arts and in 1985 created an endowment for the New England Conservatory of Music to provide the "New England Conservatory/Piatigorsky Artist Award" which gave the recipient a cash prize and a series of concert engagements.  In her forties she developed an interest in sculpting and arranged to take lessons from a professional.  A Los Angeles area gallery put on the first exhibition of her works in 1976. Widowed at the age of sixty-five, she continued working and playing tennis into her nineties and remained active in sculpting.
Sam Sloan wrote an interesting article describing his 1965 meeting with her which you can read HEREI was able to verify that Mrs. Piatigorsky was still living in 2008 and was unable to find any obituary, so assume she is, at the age of 100, still living! A fascinating woman.


Check out the instructive way in which she defeats many time US Women’s champion Mona Karff in the following game.


GM James Tarjan

In the 1970’s and 1980’s one of the most exciting US players was Jim Tarjan (born 22 February 1952) of Sherman Oaks, California. At age 17 he was selected to the American team for the 1969 World Students' Olympiad and was a member of the winning American team at Haifa 1970 and was selected again at Graz 1972.

He finished second at an invitational junior tournament at Norwich 1972, with 12/15, behind Gyula Sax. His best results in international tournaments include first at Subotica 1975, first at Vancouver 1976, and first equal at Vršac 1983, along with Predrag Nikolić and Georgy Agzamov. Other good finishes included tied for third at Chicago 1973, tied for fifth at Venice 1974 with 7.5/13; and tied second at Bogotá 1979, with 10.5/14, behind Beliavsky.

Tarjan played in several U.S. Championships during the 1970s and 1980s. He was fourth at El Paso 1973 with 7.5/12. At Oberlin 1975, he tied for sixth with a score of 6.5/13. At Pasadena 1978, which was the Zonal qualifier, he tied for second with 10.5/14, and advanced to the 1979 Riga Interzonal where he scored 8.5/17. Tarjan's last competitive tournament was the 1984 U.S. Championship at Berkeley, where he tied third, scoring 10.5/17. Tarjan earned his IM title in 1974, and his GM title in 1976.

He is a graduate of the University of Southern California and like many of the best US players of the day, gave up chess in 1984 while in his early thirties, in order to pursue a more stable career as a librarian. Tarjan was a player with a very aggressive style but away from the board, he was a very nice person. Tarjan is the brother of the well-known computer scientist, Robert Tarjan.


Tuesday, November 8, 2011

Brilliancy by an Average Player

It’s not often average players can produce a truly brilliant move, but after making a speculative, but unsound sacrifice, Black unleashes a really brilliant conclusion. His 29th move was very pretty. White’s rating was ‘Class B’ (1600-1799) while Black’s was ‘Class C’ (1400-1599)!

The Great Blitz Tournament

After the completion of the World vs. USSR match held in Belgrade in 1970, Fischer remained in Yugoslavia for a time.  Organizers tried unsuccessfully to get him to play in the “Second Tournament of Peace” to be held in Rovinj and Zagreb, but he surprisingly agreed to play in a 5 minute, double round blitz tournament held in Herceg Novi in which some of the best blitz players in the world at the time participated: Tahl, Korchnoi, Bronstein, Petrosian and Matulovic.  Fischer very rarely played blitz and the specialists were happy to see him participate because it was believed they would give him some ‘lessons’ in blitz play.  Surprise!  Fischer lost one game to Korchnoi and drew one game each against Hort, Uhlmann, Bronstien and Reshevsky and won all the rest, in most games taking only about half of the time used by his opponents.


1-Fischer 19

2-Tahl 14.5
3-Korchnoi 14
4-Petrosian 13.5
5-Bronstein 13
6-Hort 12
7-Matulovic 10.5
8-Smyslov 9.5
9-Reshevsky 8.5
10-Uhlmann 8
11-Ivkov 7.5
12-Ostojic 2


Monday, November 7, 2011

Interesting Position

In the November issue of Chess Life, GM Alejandro Ramirez, who tied for 1st-7th, gave some interesting analysis of his game against GM Julio Sadorra. Look at the following position:


Of this position Ramirez wrote, in part, “A swift glance will reveal nothing more than a normal KID/Benoni setup with Black having a ton of dark squares and White having a nice space advantage. A deeper study reveals that Black doesn’t have a plethora of dark squares, he has one: d4. This square isn’t even heavily controlled by him; as soon as White is able to play b4 and put the N back on b3, he will have full control over d4. White will then have a space advantage on the Q-side, the K-side and the center. Black, unlike most Benonis, has no targets. The d7-N has no squares. He doesn’t want to trade on d5, and at the same time he doesn’t have a useful move. Houdini might think that this game is about equal. I think Black’s position is awful.”

This is a good example of GM thinking about squares and such, but did you get that part where he said, “Houdini might think that this game is about equal. I think Black’s position is awful.”

This illustrates a point I’ve made elsewhere in this Blog that when an engine evaluation differs from a GM’s, trust the GM! I put this position into my program and let Ivanhoe (we already know Houdini thinks the position is about equal) look at it for about 10-12 minutes just to see what it came up with.

Ivanhoe also thought the position was about equal, giving White a 0.11 advantage. But…and this is important…when you jump to the end of the variation, the advantage changes drastically to nearly 2 Pawn’s in White’s favor.

This has to do with the ‘principle variation’ which is described as the line the engine believes represents best play by both sides if it has been set up to display thinking. CCGM Robin Smith advised that when looking at the PV, don’t pay too much attention to the whole line that is displayed. Never believe the programs PV all the way to the end. The first move displayed will be the move the engine thinks is best, but after that, all bets are off.

His advice was, after letting the engine run a sufficient amount of time, paste the moves into the game then jump to the end of the evaluation and step backwards through the moves. Using this technique will often result in your seeing something quite different than just looking at the initial output.

Such is the case here. After 10-12 minutes, Ivanhoe displayed the main line to move 11.Rd1 and evaluated the position as nearly equal (0.11), but when I stopped the analysis and went directly to the position after 11.Rd1, the evaluation was almost a 2P advantage for White, which is actually more in line with Ramirez’ evaluation. Stepping backwards we see that Black could have possibly improved with 7…Nxb3 or later with 10…Nc3.

My goal here is not to provide a complete analysis of this position, which is something I’m not capable of doing anyway, but to show, or rather hint at, the way GM’s look at positions when evaluating them. Of particular interest in this position is Ramirez’ comments when he is discussing squares. Also, it is another good example of the proper way to use engines to analyze games. In some positions you still can’t, even these days, rely solely on their output and you can’t just plug in an engine’s principle variation and think you’ve got good analysis. It still takes some investigating on the part of the human and you can’t get top notch evaluation by spending 15 minutes on a position like I did in preparing this post. That’s why titled CC players even with engines need days to evaluate positions in order to arrive at the best move.

Still, even we average players can learn a lot if we are willing to put some effort into analyzing with engines and do not, like most of us, just let it analyze our game at a few seconds a move and think we have come up with the best lines.

Sunday, November 6, 2011

Amateur Chess

The AmateurChess Organization (ACO) is a new chess organization that will organize world championships for amateurs, youth, and teams, starting in 2012. The ACO stands primarily for fun in chess and for social exchange among chess players. The ACO is a fully independent organization, and see themselves as a complement to FIDE, not as competition.

Question: Is this a political maneuver against FIDE by people who don't like the current president?

Saturday, November 5, 2011

Hand held Chess Programs

Here’s an interesting site if you are looking for a hand held chess program.
From the author’s Blog: Originally I only reviewed handheld chess computers. Later I expanded my reviews to include other chess-related merchandise. In addition to handheld chess reviews, you'll find at this site: reviews of a few tabletop chess computers, a chess clock, and even a book covering scholastic chess

Friday, November 4, 2011

AVRO 1938


      The AVRO tournament was the last major chess event before the Second World War. The older players were pitted against the up-and-coming youth. Youth triumphed and a new era of chess players was to dominate the chess world for many years to come. The AVRO tournament belongs to history and few of today’s players remember it, but it still stands as one of the greatest tournaments ever.  The final standings were: Keres and Fine 8½ (14), Botvinnik 7½, Alekhine, Euwe and Reshevsky 7, Capablanca 6, Flohr 4½.  Keres won on tiebreaks by virtue of his 1½-½ score against Fine in their individual games.
        An indicator of how strong these new generation was, Capablanca had only lost 26 tournament games over a span of 29 years but lost four games in this event. He suffered a mild stroke during this tournament which was largely responsible for his poor performance.
       The tournament was organized in the hope that it would provide a challenger to Alekhine, but it was not an official Candidates Tournament and the outbreak of World War II put an end to any thought of a match until the FIDE organizedthe 1948 match tournament after Alekhine's death in 1946.  In that event the six surviving AVRO participants (Capablanca had also died) were invited but by that time Vasily Smyslov had eclipsed Flohr, so Smyslov replaced him.  Fine refused his invitation and for the rest of his life, felt he should have been granted  the special privilege of a match based on his AVRO results.  It was clear to everyone except Fine that he was no longer among the world elite.
       Salo Flohr, then of Czechoslovakia, had been nominated the year before AVRO as FIDE's official challenger for the World Title. Samuel Reshevsky and Reuben Fine achieved brilliant results in various competitions in the mid-thirties and the twenty-two-year-old Paul Keres who had made a name for himself in several strong tournaments and the olympiads.
       Alekhine had won the rematch against Euwe and  there were some other players who had laid claim to the World Championship title. Capablanca, who had lost to Alekhine in 1927, was still planning on a rematch against Alekhine so the Dutch radio company (Allgemeene Vereenigung Radio-Omroep) decided to organize the tournament in the belief that the winner of the tournament, if it wasn’t Alekhine himself, would earn the right to challenge him in the next World Championship match.
      There was some political turmoil at the time the tournament was held and it was apparent to most people that a second world war was about to take place.  As a result of the political situation, Salo Flohr, who had previously accepted his invitation asked to withdraw because Czechoslovakia had already been occupied and his family devastated. He request was denied and so he played but this took its toll on his play.
      Reuben Fine, who later abandoned chess,  was considering pursuing his career and he also asked to withdraw, but his request was also refused. Years later, in his book Lessons from My Games, he explained his success in AVRO. "Perhaps it was as a result of the decision to give up chess that I played with a new determination there."  Arnold Denker writing in The Bobby Fischer I Knew wrote, "Doubts are always the enemy of blind dedication, which is so essential for aspiring world champions. Unemployed from 1939 to 1941Fine saw that a future dedicated to chess was bleak at best, and he obeyed the dictates of common sense, returning to school in the mid-1940s..."
       Fine lead from start scoring 5½ out of the first six games, winning against Botvinnik, Reshevsky, Euwe, Flohr and Alekhine. Then in the 7th round he lost to Keres who finished the first half of the tournament only a half point behind Fine. In the second half Keres drew all of his games while Fine lost two.  Fine did beat Alekhine twice, thus winning his mini-match against the World Champion.
       It was the worst showing in his career for Capablanca. Capablanca and Alekhine, the oldest participants of the tournament ,complained that each round was played in a new town which made it difficult for the older players.
      As a result of his victory on tiebreaks, Keres was supposed to have gained the right to challenge Alekhine to a match for the World Championship, but before the tournament in his speech to the participants and organizers Alekhine stated that, although the tournament was conceived as a candidates' competition, he was not obliged to play a match with the winner of the tournament unless the met his usual conditions.
       The result was Botvinnik challenged Alekhine to a match shortly after the end of the AVRO tournament but the outbreak of World War II ended chess activity.  Botvinnik considered his third place in this tournament a serious failure because his victories in Moscow and Nottingham had made him feel confident that he could win AVRO also.  In this event Botvinnik won two games (against Alekhine and Capablanca)  that have been considered  his most outstanding masterpieces.

You can download all of the games in Chessbase format HERE.  You don’t have to study the games; just watching them play is rewarding.