Alekhine in San Rome 1930: rd 1

In this series I shall analyze all the games by Alexander Alekhine in the famous San Remo tournament year 1930. My intention is to observe the dazzling and aggressive style of AA. First I will play the game with guess-a-move method. I will try to denote the moves, that reveal the thinking of AA, and make LESSONS for me of those moments. I shall analyze several candidate moves in all positions. All this I will do without the help of the computer. Finally, I will check the lines with Stockfish 10, however.

I shall not publish complete analysis of all the games, because that would take too much time. In many games, I will analyze only the crucial moments that I think are characteristic for the style of AA. However, some of the most interesting games I intend to analyze completely, which will take 2-3 weeks per game.

Summary:

The game in the round one starts in an orthodoxical manner, following the Ruy Lopez Worrall attack line. However, in move 9. AA discards the boring sensible main line and plays 9. a4!?. He loses the edge instantly (according to Stockfish 10) and the game is dead even. I often have similar moments in my games, when my opponent makes a move like this, neglecting development, and I know intuitively that my opponents move cannot be the best. But the question is, how to punish him.

However, Monticelli fails to punish AA. Move 9.-Bg4 would have equalized. Next, game continues more or less sensibly. Then, in my opinion, AA initiates a sequence of dazzling moves, neglecting development: 17. h3, 18. Ra6 and 19. Ng5!? It seems, that AA tries to get a confusing position, where he often comes on top and wins his opponent. The game goes on in a crazy manner, AA winning a piece for two pawns around move 26, until Monticelli blunders his rook, and the game is over. Maybe he was in a time trouble or something like that.

The game is full of mistakes and blunders, which is really perplexing for me. The quality of the game is actually quite bad, imo.

Mistakes and blunders (lost points calculated by Stockfish 10):

AA: Move 9.-a4!? Points lost -0.40.

Monticelli: Move 11.-exd4!? Points lost -0.50.

Monticelli: Move 18.-Kh8!? Points lost -0.40.

AA: Move 19.Ng5!? Points lost -0.50.

AA: Move 21.Nf3!? Points lost -0.50.

Monticelli: Move 22.-c6!? Points lost -0.50.

AA: Move 21.Nd3!? Points lost -1.00.

AA: Move 24.f4!? Points lost -1.00.

Monticelli: Move 24.-f5?? Points lost -2.10.

Monticelli: Move 25.-Bxf6?? Points lost -2.00.

AA: Move 33.Bf2!? Points lost -1.00.

Monticelli: Move 33.-Re4??? Points lost -5.00.

What an astonishing list of blunders!? The quality of the game was really uneven.

Next I present OBSERVATIONS from the game, how to play like AA. Originally, I intended to call them LESSONS, but often the move by AA is far from being the best in the position. How could I call it a LESSON then? This topic is very problematic and we shall return to it later.

Observations - play like Alexander Alekhine:

1. (1.1) Grab space and put pressure on a weak flank pawn advancing on the Q-side. Don't worry about losing your edge. Move 9. a4!?. (There were 4 better candidate moves. AA lost  0.40 points according to Stockfish. 9.-Bg4 would have equalized for black.)

2. (2.1) Instead of developing sensibly, attack pieces by advancing flank pawns. Move 17. h3. Then, neglect development again and put your pieces in active positions. Moves 18. Ra6 and 19. Ng5!?. (Moves 17. h3 and 18. Ra6 were the best moves in the position. However, move 19. Ng5?! is not on the TOP 10 candidate moves list according to Stockfish. Amazing. AA lost 0.50 points with this move.)