"The Second International Chess Tournament, Moscow 1935" Edited by Nikolai Krylenko and Ilya Rabinovich, Translated by Jimmy Adams and Sarah Hurst, Caissa Editions 1998, Figurine Algebraic Notation, 356pp., $45.00 If you asked most chessplayers to name the most historically important five or six chess tournaments ever played, chances are that Moscow 1935 would not make the list. Yet this powerful tournament played in February and March of 1935 heralded the arrival of the Soviet School of Chess in general, and Mikhail Botvinnik in particular, two factors whose enormous influence on international chess may still be felt. To appreciate the significance of Moscow 1935, it is helpful to understand some of the circumstances and conditions in the world at that time. The Great Depression's catastrophic consequences were still being felt worldwide. America and Western Europe were trying to cope as best they could. In Germany, the Nazis had assumed power. In the East, the civil war had ended and Stalin had ruthlessly consolidated his power in the Soviet Union. Chess has always been regarded in Russia (then called the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics - the Soviet Union) as a national paradigm of culture, a reflection of higher ideals and sophistication. Earlier in the century, the German Lasker's nearly three-decade hold on the title had been broken by the brilliant Jose Raul Capablanca from Havana, who in turn had lost the title to Alexander Alekhine. Born in 1892 in Czarist Russia, Alekhine posed a delicate problem for the Soviets. He had fled his native land during the civil strife that was sweeping the country. Although the new regime would have dearly loved to hold him out to the world as a prime example of Soviet supremacy, this was impossible - Alekhine had never returned to his homeland and had been careful to distance himself from the Communists. So any political or cultural triumphs that might be claimed against the Western establishment had to be achieved by the current group of Soviet players. Enter Mikhail Botvinnik. By the late 1920s, the soft-spoken engineering student from Leningrad had emerged as the USSR's premier player. In 1931 and 1933, he had won the USSR Championship. The tightly controlled Soviet society did not favor extended contact in any form with foreigners, but clearly the full measure of Botvinnik's talent could not be judged until he did battle with the top non-Soviet players. In 1933, he drew a match with the Czech Grandmaster Salo Flohr, who, at the time was surely among the top eight or ten players in the world. The first major international tournament for Botvinnik had been Hastings 1934/35. It was a disappointment. He finished fifth out of ten, and returned home leaving many questions unanswered. There had not been a strong international tournament in the USSR since Moscow 1925, perhaps the most outstanding tournament success in Bogolyubov's career, who finished clear first ahead of Lasker and Capablanca. The organizing committee for Moscow 1935 sought the best and the strongest players. In all, twenty players participated, among them Lasker, Capablanca, Lilienthal, Flohr, Spielmann, Stahlberg and of course, the Soviet Union's twenty-three year old star, Botvinnik. Botvinnik and Flohr finished the tournament tied for first, both scoring 13-6. Botvinnik notched nine wins but was defeated twice, by Kan and his nemesis Bohatyrchuk. Flohr was undefeated, as was the 67-year old Emanuel Lasker, turning in one of the most impressive performances of his career. As early as the third round, Botvinnik had shared first place, and except for a brief stumble in round fifteen, he held that position until the end. If there had been any doubts about the young Botvinnik's ability, they were dispelled when he finished second in Moscow 1936 and then won Hastings 1936. Botvinnik and the Soviet School of Chess had arrived. Shortly after the end of Moscow 1935 a tournament book was published in the USSR. It was in fact a superb effort, but it had a very small run. Jimmy Adams and Sarah Hurst have collaborated to present the English version, published by Caissa Editions. It is outstanding. After a very brief introduction by Adams and Hurst, the text of the original begins. An historical background piece by Zubarev, an opening and player review by Rabinovich and then the annotated games themselves. Notes to the games are by Botvinnik, Euwe, Levenfish, Yudovich, Kan, Alatortsev, Belavenets, Bohatyrchuk, Zubarev, Lilienthal, Lisitsin, Rabinovich, Ragosin, Sozin, Romanovksy and Chekhover. Krylenko and Rabinovich acted as Executive and Special Editors, respectively. Certainly the opening section is dated and observations about the players and their careers do not, cannot deal with anything beyond 1935, when the book was originally written. But it is still fascinating stuff. The dynamic vitality that one feels when reading the book makes it easy to overlook the occasionally awkwardly translated phrase or rare typographical error. Here is Game 95 (out of a total of 190), with notes by Chekhover... Queen's Indian Defence Spielmann White Chekhover Black 1 d4 Nf6 2 c4 b6? A risky continuation which allows White to form a strong pawn centre. Correct is 2 ... e6, and if 3 Nc3, then 3...d5 or 3 ....Bb4, preventing the move e2-e4. 3 Nc3 Bb7 4 Qc2 Now White will play e2-e4. 4 ... d5 5 cxd5 Even stronger is 5 Nf3!, and if now 5 ... e6, then 6 Bg5!, transposing the game into an unfavourable variation for Black of the Orthodox Defence to the Queen's Gambit. 5 ... Nxd5 6 e4 Also here stronger is 6 Nf3, and only after 6 ... e6 7 e4. Now, however, after the exchange of knights, Black replies not 7 ... e6, but 7 ... e5! with a double-edged game. 6 ... Nxc3 7 bxc3 e5! 8 Nf3! If 8 dxe5, then 8 ... Qh4! 9 Bd3 (Or 9 Bb5+ Nd7! 10 Nf3 Qxe4+ with an equal position, as in the game Euwe-Alekhine, Budapest 1921.) 9 ... Nd7 10 Nf3 Qg4 11 0-0 0-0-0 followed by ... Nc5, achieving an excellent position. 8 ... exd4 Also possible is 8 ... Nd7, intending 9 ... Bd6. 9 Bb5+ White sacrifices a pawn, obtaining in return a strong attack. The usual continuation here is 9 Nxd4 with a transfer of the knight to f5 for an attack on Black's king's flank. Compensation for the weakness of his king's flank is seen in the weakness of the White a2, c3 and e4 pawns, and also the possibility of consolidating a knight or bishop on the c5 square. Bad is 9 cxd4 in view of 9 ... Bb4+ 10 Bd2 Bxd2+, winning a pawn or denying the opponent the right to castle. (See Diagram) 9 ... c6 If 9 ... Nd7?, then 10 Ne5 c6 11 Bxc6, and it is White, not Black, who wins a pawn. 10 Bc4 b5 If an immediate l0 ... dxc3, then 11 Ng5 or 11 Ne5 with an overwhelming attack, since the bishop c4 remains on the a2-g8 diagonal. Now, however, on 11 Bb3 follows 11 ... c5, and therefore the bishop must leave the a2-g8 diagonal. 11 Be2! Leaving the d-file open. 11 ... dxc3 It would have been possibly more wise not to win the pawn, but complete his development by 11 ... Be7 and 12 ... 0-0. After the acceptance of the sacrifice, however, it is very difficult to beat off Black's attack, and in any case very accurate play is necessary. It is possible, however, that in general the attack cannot be repulsed and that 9 Bb5+ is a refutation of the move 8 ... exd4. 12 Qxc3 Nd7 Possibly better here is 12 ... Be7 13 Bb2 Bf6 14 e5 Be7, though even in this case, after 15 Rdl or 15 0-0, White has a strong attack. The move 12 ... Nd7 has the aim of defending, after ... Nc5-e6, the g7 pawn and in this way freeing the bishop f8. 13 0-0 Qe7? With the aim of preventing the move 14 Bb2, assuming in this case the reply 14 ... Nc5 with the double threat 15 ... Na4 and 15 ... Nxe4. However, White nevertheless still plays 14 Bb2, since the threat to the e4 pawn proves to be imaginary, thanks to a combina- tion based on the undeveloped Black pieces and the position of the king in the centre. Correct therefore was 13 ... Nc5 and then ... Ne6. 14 Bb2 Nc5 Not noticing the opponent's move in reply and hoping to exchange the dangerous bishop b2 after ... Na4 (for example, in reply to 15 Rel). 15 Qc2! Ne6 Not possible is 15 ... Qxe4 in view of 16 Bd3! Qxd3 (16 ... Nxd3 17 Re1!.) 17 Rfe1+ Be7 (17 ... Kd8 or ... Kd7 18 Rad1.) 18 Qxc5, and wins. Also bad is 15 ... Nxe4 in view of 16 Rfe1 with a future crush on the e-file. After the move 15 ... Ne6 Black wants to pursue his plan, and to be precise: 16 ... Qc5, then 17 ... Be7 and 18 ... 0-0. But White does not give him time for this! 16 a4! a6 17 axb5 axb5 As it turns out, 17 ... cxb5 is not possible because of 18 Rxa6! Rxa6 19 Bxb5+ Kd8 20 Bxa6 Bxa6 21 Rd1+, and wins. 18 Rxa8+ Bxa8 19 Rd1! Considerably stronger than 19 Ra1, as now White threatens 20 Bxb5! cxb5 21Qc8+ Nd8 22 Qxa8, and likewise also the simple move 20 Ne5. Besides this, Black does not manage to play 19 ... Qc5 in view of 20 Qd3 (Or 20 Qd2.) 20 ....Be7 21 Qd7+ Kf8 22 Qc8+ Nd8 23 Rxd8+ with mate next move. 19 ... Qb7 20 Ne5 Be7! On the natural 21 Rd7 follows 21 ... Qxd7! 22 Nxd7 Kxd7, and Black has a rook, knight and pawn for queen and two connected passed c- and b-pawns, together with a solid position. And if Black plays 20 ... Bc5? (instead of 20 ... Be7), then already now 21 Rd7! Qxd7 22 Nxd7 Kxd7 23 Bxg7! and, thanks to the position of the bishop on c5, White wins an important pawn, and with it also the game. Also bad is 20 ... c5 in view of 21 Rd7! Qxe4 22 Qxe4 Bxe4 23 Bxb5. And if 20 ... f6?, then 21 Rd7 Qxd7 22 Nxd7 Kxd7 23 Bg4!, and White wins. (See Diagram) 21 Bh5!! As brilliant as it is surprising. Ten moves earlier (after 11 Be2) it was hard to imagine that the bishop would deliver the decisive blow on the dl-h5 diagonal. 21 ... Rf8 If 21 ... 0-0, then 22 Rd7, winning a piece; and after 21 ... g6 22 Bg4 Rf8 23 Qb3 the same position as in the game would have been reached. 22 Qb3 ! A new blow along the a2-g8 diagonal. Now White threatens not only 23 Nxf7 or 23 Bxf7+, but also 23 Qxe6!. 22 ... g6 23 Bg4 Qc8 If 23 ... Nc5, then 24 Qh3 h5 25 Bd7+ Nxd7 26 Rxd7 Qc8 27 Ra7! Qxh3 (Or 27 ... Qd8 28 Rxa8.) 28 Rxa8+. 24 Nxf7! Kxf7 25 Qf3+ Ke8 Or 25 ... Kg8 26 Qh3 Ng5 27 Qb3+ etc. 26 Qh3 Nf4 Or 26... Kf7 27 Qxh7+ etc. 27 Bd7+! Black resigned. A brilliant crush! The game was awarded the 3rd prize for "best game" of the tournament. The publisher, Dale Brandreth's Caissa Editions, have produce a series of first class tournament and biographical books. See, for example, our reviews, available in The Chess Caf‚ Archives, of the Baden-Baden 1925 or St. Petersburg 1914 books. This book is produced in similar fashion, with a hardcover library-quality binding, clear, easy-to-read print and attention to detail throughout. With the release of this Moscow 1935 tournament book, Caissa Editions continues to maintain its very high standard of excellent publications. It belongs in every serious chessplayer's library. ["The Second International Chess Tournament, Moscow 1935" is available now in The Chess Caf‚ Online Bookstore.]