What do you think?
Rate this book
My Best Games of Chess, 1908 - 1937
World Champion from 1927-35 and again from 1937-46, Alexander Alekhine ranks as one of the four or five greatest players in chess history. Edward Lasker rates him the game’s supreme inventive genius; Euwe considers him the all-time greatest attacking player. A master of all phases of chess, his games were richly conceived and immensely complex. As Bobby Fischer observes in his writings, “He played gigantic conceptions, full of outrageous and unprecedented ideas.”
This unequaled collection reproduces Alekhine’s 220 best games, his own personal accounts of the dazzling victories that made him a legend. Spanning almost thirty years of tournament play, it includes historic matches against Capablanca, Euwe, and Bogoljubov, and chronicles his brilliant ascent to world mastery, his surprising defeat in 1935, and his dramatic return two years later — the first deposed champion to regain his crown.
Between 1927 and 1936 his successes in tournaments were unsurpassed by any master at any time in the history of chess. At San Remo 1930 and Bled 1931, in competitions that featured many of the world’s greatest players, Alekhine so outdistanced the field that he was indisputably in a class by himself. In a career including some seventy tournaments, he won first prize forty-one times, tying for first on nine occasions. He won or shared second prize fourteen times.
Chess was Alekhine’s life; he lived for it alone. And although the final chapter of his career and his life were tragic, his achievements at the chessboard rank him as one of the game’s true artists. Filled with Alekhine’s own penetrating commentary on strategy and tactics, and enhanced by a revealing memoir, My Best Games is grandmaster chess at its most sublime. This volume belongs in the library of every serious student of the game.
This unequaled collection reproduces Alekhine’s 220 best games, his own personal accounts of the dazzling victories that made him a legend. Spanning almost thirty years of tournament play, it includes historic matches against Capablanca, Euwe, and Bogoljubov, and chronicles his brilliant ascent to world mastery, his surprising defeat in 1935, and his dramatic return two years later — the first deposed champion to regain his crown.
Between 1927 and 1936 his successes in tournaments were unsurpassed by any master at any time in the history of chess. At San Remo 1930 and Bled 1931, in competitions that featured many of the world’s greatest players, Alekhine so outdistanced the field that he was indisputably in a class by himself. In a career including some seventy tournaments, he won first prize forty-one times, tying for first on nine occasions. He won or shared second prize fourteen times.
Chess was Alekhine’s life; he lived for it alone. And although the final chapter of his career and his life were tragic, his achievements at the chessboard rank him as one of the game’s true artists. Filled with Alekhine’s own penetrating commentary on strategy and tactics, and enhanced by a revealing memoir, My Best Games is grandmaster chess at its most sublime. This volume belongs in the library of every serious student of the game.
592 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1939
61 people are currently reading
611 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 14 of 14 reviews
September 15, 2018
Lilienthal died the other day and I noticed in an obituary this story:
This is Alekhine, the supposed Nazi sympathiser, an account of which you can find here: http://www.chesshistory.com/winter/ex...
Does this story go any way to offset his Nazi sympathies, if they've been proven? I wonder if I may make a case for the question being irrelevant?
What I really think is that Alekhine was a chess player and this meant he didn’t have a clue about the world we think of as real. If you play chess like Alekhine, the real world is the chess board. Maybe this story goes some way to explaining:
Is this relevant as a defence? Maybe, maybe not. Another example is the 5 queen game, where again, Alekhine’s conception of reality has nothing to do with normal people’s. The story in detail can be found here: http://www.xs4all.nl/~timkr/chess/al5...
Coming back to the first story, here he is, Alekhine, reaching into his pocket to help a destitute young chess player. Are we, then, able to forgive some special people for living in another world while being forced to inhabit our own. I sort of hope so.
Lilienthal could also boast three blitz game victories against the chess genius Alexander Alekhine, though these, played at the rate of five minutes per player per game, did not count for official tournament records. After his defeats in these quickplay contests, Alekhine, invariably generous to promising young chess talents, personally funded Lilienthal’s entry to an important blitz tournament for which the young Hungarian could not afford the entry fee. Lilienthal went on to reward his benefactor’s munificence by duly winning the first prize in the blitz tournament. When Lilienthal, now flush with cash after his victory, offered to refund the world champion’s subsidy, Alekhine declined the offer, insisting that his reward would be for Lilienthal to go on to become a master of the game that Alekhine loved and to which he had committed his own life.
This is Alekhine, the supposed Nazi sympathiser, an account of which you can find here: http://www.chesshistory.com/winter/ex...
Does this story go any way to offset his Nazi sympathies, if they've been proven? I wonder if I may make a case for the question being irrelevant?
What I really think is that Alekhine was a chess player and this meant he didn’t have a clue about the world we think of as real. If you play chess like Alekhine, the real world is the chess board. Maybe this story goes some way to explaining:
"'In 1935, an international team tournament was held in Warsaw. Alekhine played top board for France, of which he was a naturalized citizen. However, on this trip he arrived at the Polish border without a passport. When the officials asked him for his papers he replied: "I am Alekhine, chess champion of the world. I have a cat called Chess. I do not need papers.' The matter had to be cleared up by the highest authorities." Reuben Fine. The Psychology of the Chess Player.
Is this relevant as a defence? Maybe, maybe not. Another example is the 5 queen game, where again, Alekhine’s conception of reality has nothing to do with normal people’s. The story in detail can be found here: http://www.xs4all.nl/~timkr/chess/al5...
Coming back to the first story, here he is, Alekhine, reaching into his pocket to help a destitute young chess player. Are we, then, able to forgive some special people for living in another world while being forced to inhabit our own. I sort of hope so.
June 9, 2009
Alexander Alekhine was one of the all-time chess greats, and this collection covers the period when he was at his peak, dominating world chess. Almost every serious player of my generation read it several times. The games and commentary were close to being a sacred text.
Like many other chess fans, I was consequently disturbed when I read, sometime in the early 90s, that the English Grandmaster and analyst John Nunn had for the first time subjected the games to computer analysis. He said he had expected maybe to discover a few trivial slips. Instead, he was shocked to find major errors in the analysis of almost every game. Variations which Alekhine had examined in great detail, and claimed to be winning, were in many cases nothing of the kind. There were games everyone knew, in which the conventional wisdom was that Alekhine's opponent had made a tiny mistake early on, and then been squeezed by the World Champion's iron logic, with no possible chance of escape. The emotionless computer, unimpressed by Alekhine's god-like reputation, showed ways in which the apparently inevitable flow of the game could have been interrupted, and Alekhine's opponent could have turned the tables. We had all been victims of an illusion created by excessive respect for someone who was, in fact, just human.
After Nunn's discovery, it was only going to be a matter of time before computers overtook people as the world's best chess players. I wonder whether similar things will eventually happen in other fields. For example, imagine a mechanical literary critic, say fifty to a hundred years from now. It surely wouldn't understand the text as deeply as a person can. But having instant access to the whole of world literature, in all known languages, might give it insights that no human would be able to match. A lot of the time, you'd find quantity winning out over quality.
Well, we will see...
Like many other chess fans, I was consequently disturbed when I read, sometime in the early 90s, that the English Grandmaster and analyst John Nunn had for the first time subjected the games to computer analysis. He said he had expected maybe to discover a few trivial slips. Instead, he was shocked to find major errors in the analysis of almost every game. Variations which Alekhine had examined in great detail, and claimed to be winning, were in many cases nothing of the kind. There were games everyone knew, in which the conventional wisdom was that Alekhine's opponent had made a tiny mistake early on, and then been squeezed by the World Champion's iron logic, with no possible chance of escape. The emotionless computer, unimpressed by Alekhine's god-like reputation, showed ways in which the apparently inevitable flow of the game could have been interrupted, and Alekhine's opponent could have turned the tables. We had all been victims of an illusion created by excessive respect for someone who was, in fact, just human.
After Nunn's discovery, it was only going to be a matter of time before computers overtook people as the world's best chess players. I wonder whether similar things will eventually happen in other fields. For example, imagine a mechanical literary critic, say fifty to a hundred years from now. It surely wouldn't understand the text as deeply as a person can. But having instant access to the whole of world literature, in all known languages, might give it insights that no human would be able to match. A lot of the time, you'd find quantity winning out over quality.
Well, we will see...
May 22, 2016
This book is a conflation of two separate collections of Alekhine's best games: 1908-1923 and 1924-1937. If this book had just been the first volume, I would have given it five stars. I felt that Alekhin'es heart wasn't in writing the second volume. I think that the first volume had more variations of analysis than the second but also had better placement of diagrams and was therefore easier to read. There were some typos located in the book and I had to occasionally refer to the Dover edition in order to find out what moves were actually played.
The games of the second volume were also less interesting than those of the first; after he became world champion, he was such a dominant player that he seems to have had less passion for the game. It's as if Alekhine had his own version of Joe Louis "Bum of the Month Club".
The games of the second volume were also less interesting than those of the first; after he became world champion, he was such a dominant player that he seems to have had less passion for the game. It's as if Alekhine had his own version of Joe Louis "Bum of the Month Club".
December 29, 2024
I'm now more than 60 games through this more than 200 games compassing Alekhine collection. Simply great overall! Some of these games are real treasures and the annotations are surprisingly good, in terms of accuracy and the extent of variations but also verbal explanations of strategic and tactical maneuvers. I started this thing a couple of months ago and there is no end in sight. I am sure, you cannot help but improve when playing through (and enjoying!) this mammoth collection. Easy 5+ stars!
October 15, 2012
Here is a collection of World Champion Alexander Alekhine's best games. Alekhine was an attacking player, and it is interesting to see him in action against the best of his day. Interesting annotations by Alekhine.
January 9, 2021
It is an amazing book
October 27, 2024
Navigating Alekhine’s Chess Mind: Lessons for the Modern Player - The Light and Shadows in Alekhine's Annotation
"My Best Games of Chess 1908-1937" is an essential resource for any chess enthusiast, from club players to masters, offering invaluable insights into the mind of one of the game's greats, Alexander Alekhine, World Chess Champion between 1927-1935 and 1937-1946. One might wonder what you value (and rate) about a chess book. Is it the value of the games, the explanations, or maybe the editing? Everything matters. To clarify, the editing of this book is almost flawless. (speaking of the 21st Century Edition: "My Best Games of Chess 1908-1937 by Alexander Alekhine" Foreword by Igor Zaitsev 2013 Russell Enterprises, Inc. Milford, CT USA)
The games—the most important part of the book—are very instructive, nothing less than expected from the great attacker, Alekhine. Studying the games of chess masters can help many students improve their play. If Magnus Carlsen knows thousands of games from chess history, it’s for a reason. Patterns determine our way; chess patterns determine our chess road.
"My Best Games of Chess 1908-1937" consists of Alekhine's best 220 games (and some auxiliary games) annotated by himself. The explanations are good and very good, although some might prefer a more detailed approach. The analysis is valuable but should not be blindly trusted; more about that later.
Here are some key strengths of this collection. One can enter a corner of Alekhine's great chess mind. You can marvel at the combinations and the fierce competitive spirit that earned him a reputation as a formidable opponent who thrived in complex, dynamic positions. You can see Alekhine putting into action his words: "Playing simultaneously on both sides of the board, my favorite strategy." (quote from game 142)
Alekhine provides very instructive lessons about endgames, such as Two Rooks with pawns against Rook & Knight with pawns in Game 144 and two others. Alekhine states, "The winning procedure had the same characteristics: (1) Restriction of the knight by binding and, eventually, pinning it. (2) Gradual undermining of the strong points, which, as a rule, happen to be in the middle. (3) Threats to exchange rooks, which always means a step forward, especially if the knight does not possess passed pawns. Other tactics, such as centralization of the king and freeing of pawns, etc., are, of course, common to all types of endgames." p. 500.
There are illustrative games demonstrating the concept of exploiting a space advantage (game 132 and others). There is also an instructive game where Alekhine overturns the opponent's space advantage (game 169).
A wealth of additional instructive lessons stands ready for chess students to discover in this great book.
I greatly appreciated Alekhine's superb strategic and combinative play against Sämisch (game 196).
One of the collection's true gems lies in its insights into Alekhine’s art of chess thinking:
"After gaining a material advantage, the attack, as so often, vanishes, and White must now be particularly careful against a possible counter-attack." (game 168)
"The exchange of the opponent’s poorest piece would be, of course, a grave strategic error." (game 177)
"I confess that I did not accept the pawn offer quite independently of a would-be distaste for defensive play, but because I actually do not like to be mated." (game 192)
However, there are some mistakes in the book. In certain lines of a few games, Alekhine goes down the wrong path with his analysis. Errors are a human thing, even in the Era of A.I. This is understandable, given that the book was written in 1939, in an era without chess engines and probably without the help of other chess masters. I will point out only three mistakes that I saw in the book and analyzed with Stockfish. Surely there are more. However, I would have studied the book even if I knew this from the beginning.
In game 147, after 38.Q×g4 h×g4+, Alekhine notes: “Only apparently allowing White to reach a rook ending with only one pawn less; in reality, it will be only Black who will keep a rook. 39.K×g4 R×e4+ 40.K×g5 Kg7 1–0
Black’s next move would be now 41...f6+, followed by 42...Re5+, winning the rook. Therefore, White resigns.” My thoughts in the fowwling: Black is certainly winning the game, but he cannot win the rook. He will have to go to the endgame with pawns. I thought that after 40.K×g5 Kg7, White (Soltz) can play Rf4 and not lose his rook. Obviously, in this Silicon-brain Era, I checked my answer with an engine, and it's correct: 41. Rf4 f6+, 42. Kg4 (now available courtesy of the rook blocking Black’s counterpart), and Black still exchanges rooks with 42...Rxg4, 43. Kxg4 and wins the pawn race and the game. But Alekhine was wrong.
In game 151, after the nice positional sacrifice 22. Nxc7! Rxc7; 23.Rxd6 Bc4, Alekhine gives no less than six alternatives for Black, analyzing them all as "would finally lose." As the situation seemed unclear to me, I checked it with Stockfish. The machine states that after 23...Re8, Black is okay. In the book, Alekhine goes only into this variation: "23... Re8; 24. Nc4 Nd8." Stockfish dislikes the passive Black’s answer of 24...Nd8 and says that the best defense is the aggressive 24...Nd4!, which brings equality in the game. The best continuations for White will be A. 25. Qxd4 and B. 25.b4.
A. 25. Qxd4 Rxc5; 26. Rf3 Re5; 27. b4 Qe2; 28. Re3 Qc4; 29. f4 Qxd4; 30. Rxd4 Rb5; 31. Rc3 Rb7; 32.Rc6 Ree7 (=)
B. 25.b4 Ne2+; 26. Rxe2 Rxc5; 27. bxc5 Qxe2; 28.Qd4 Kf7; 29. c3 g5; 30. a4 a5; 31. c6 Qb5 (-0.13).
Other alternatives are better for Black. 27. Nxe4? Nxe4; 28. Qb3 Ng5; 29. Qxb5 axb5; 30. Rb6 Rxc2; 31.h4 Nxh4; 32. Rxb5 f5; 33. f3 Nd6; 34. Rxe8 Nxb5, and Black has a knight for White's two pawns, with Stockfish evaluating the position with a slight advantage to Black (-0.94). The moral here, after the machine's work: think for yourself, in chess as in life, not following blindly the "Authority," that being the World Chess Champion, any military or political leader, or anyone and anything. "Do not go gentle into that good night..." —Dylan Thomas
In game 164, Alekhine marks his 22nd move with an exclamation mark, 22.g3!, stating that the leading masters (Bogoljubow, Nimzowitsch, Lasker, and others) "completely misapprehend the value of this bold move." Well, the machine says that after 22.g3, the evaluation changes in Black's favor (-0.54) and gives the following: 23. g3 Nxh3+; 24. Kh2 Ng5; 25. f4 Ne4, etc. The point of this is that even if you are the World Chess Champion AND you won the match analyzed, that does not make that analysis sound. This is an error. Time and again, think for yourself!
This great collection of Alekhine's best games, like any learning tool, is meant to guide and support one's journey rather than dictate every step. The masters give the light, you must make a path. Chess books offer insights, patterns, and principles that can sharpen a player's understanding, but they should not be mistaken for a substitute for independent thinking or practical experience. As Capablanca put it so elegantly: "Chess books should be used as we use glasses: to assist the sight, although some players make use of them as if they thought they conferred sight."
Ultimately, Alekhine's insights, while sporadically flawed, provide a rich resource for understanding complex chess strategies and the mindset of a true champion.
In conclusion, I would rate this collection a solid 4 out of 5. Its strengths lie in the high-quality games, valuable lessons, and insightful analysis it provides. However, it's important to acknowledge some occasional inaccuracies or gaps in analysis. Don’t let that deter you. Instead, view this book as a tool to sharpen your own thinking and deepen your understanding of the game. Remember, every great chess player has the chance to learn not just from the victories of masters, but also to think critically and even improve upon their insights. So dive in, and enjoy the rich lessons Alekhine has to offer!
Have fun and keep improving—with chess and with life. Shine on!
"My Best Games of Chess 1908-1937" is an essential resource for any chess enthusiast, from club players to masters, offering invaluable insights into the mind of one of the game's greats, Alexander Alekhine, World Chess Champion between 1927-1935 and 1937-1946. One might wonder what you value (and rate) about a chess book. Is it the value of the games, the explanations, or maybe the editing? Everything matters. To clarify, the editing of this book is almost flawless. (speaking of the 21st Century Edition: "My Best Games of Chess 1908-1937 by Alexander Alekhine" Foreword by Igor Zaitsev 2013 Russell Enterprises, Inc. Milford, CT USA)
The games—the most important part of the book—are very instructive, nothing less than expected from the great attacker, Alekhine. Studying the games of chess masters can help many students improve their play. If Magnus Carlsen knows thousands of games from chess history, it’s for a reason. Patterns determine our way; chess patterns determine our chess road.
"My Best Games of Chess 1908-1937" consists of Alekhine's best 220 games (and some auxiliary games) annotated by himself. The explanations are good and very good, although some might prefer a more detailed approach. The analysis is valuable but should not be blindly trusted; more about that later.
Here are some key strengths of this collection. One can enter a corner of Alekhine's great chess mind. You can marvel at the combinations and the fierce competitive spirit that earned him a reputation as a formidable opponent who thrived in complex, dynamic positions. You can see Alekhine putting into action his words: "Playing simultaneously on both sides of the board, my favorite strategy." (quote from game 142)
Alekhine provides very instructive lessons about endgames, such as Two Rooks with pawns against Rook & Knight with pawns in Game 144 and two others. Alekhine states, "The winning procedure had the same characteristics: (1) Restriction of the knight by binding and, eventually, pinning it. (2) Gradual undermining of the strong points, which, as a rule, happen to be in the middle. (3) Threats to exchange rooks, which always means a step forward, especially if the knight does not possess passed pawns. Other tactics, such as centralization of the king and freeing of pawns, etc., are, of course, common to all types of endgames." p. 500.
There are illustrative games demonstrating the concept of exploiting a space advantage (game 132 and others). There is also an instructive game where Alekhine overturns the opponent's space advantage (game 169).
A wealth of additional instructive lessons stands ready for chess students to discover in this great book.
I greatly appreciated Alekhine's superb strategic and combinative play against Sämisch (game 196).
One of the collection's true gems lies in its insights into Alekhine’s art of chess thinking:
"After gaining a material advantage, the attack, as so often, vanishes, and White must now be particularly careful against a possible counter-attack." (game 168)
"The exchange of the opponent’s poorest piece would be, of course, a grave strategic error." (game 177)
"I confess that I did not accept the pawn offer quite independently of a would-be distaste for defensive play, but because I actually do not like to be mated." (game 192)
However, there are some mistakes in the book. In certain lines of a few games, Alekhine goes down the wrong path with his analysis. Errors are a human thing, even in the Era of A.I. This is understandable, given that the book was written in 1939, in an era without chess engines and probably without the help of other chess masters. I will point out only three mistakes that I saw in the book and analyzed with Stockfish. Surely there are more. However, I would have studied the book even if I knew this from the beginning.
In game 147, after 38.Q×g4 h×g4+, Alekhine notes: “Only apparently allowing White to reach a rook ending with only one pawn less; in reality, it will be only Black who will keep a rook. 39.K×g4 R×e4+ 40.K×g5 Kg7 1–0
Black’s next move would be now 41...f6+, followed by 42...Re5+, winning the rook. Therefore, White resigns.” My thoughts in the fowwling: Black is certainly winning the game, but he cannot win the rook. He will have to go to the endgame with pawns. I thought that after 40.K×g5 Kg7, White (Soltz) can play Rf4 and not lose his rook. Obviously, in this Silicon-brain Era, I checked my answer with an engine, and it's correct: 41. Rf4 f6+, 42. Kg4 (now available courtesy of the rook blocking Black’s counterpart), and Black still exchanges rooks with 42...Rxg4, 43. Kxg4 and wins the pawn race and the game. But Alekhine was wrong.
In game 151, after the nice positional sacrifice 22. Nxc7! Rxc7; 23.Rxd6 Bc4, Alekhine gives no less than six alternatives for Black, analyzing them all as "would finally lose." As the situation seemed unclear to me, I checked it with Stockfish. The machine states that after 23...Re8, Black is okay. In the book, Alekhine goes only into this variation: "23... Re8; 24. Nc4 Nd8." Stockfish dislikes the passive Black’s answer of 24...Nd8 and says that the best defense is the aggressive 24...Nd4!, which brings equality in the game. The best continuations for White will be A. 25. Qxd4 and B. 25.b4.
A. 25. Qxd4 Rxc5; 26. Rf3 Re5; 27. b4 Qe2; 28. Re3 Qc4; 29. f4 Qxd4; 30. Rxd4 Rb5; 31. Rc3 Rb7; 32.Rc6 Ree7 (=)
B. 25.b4 Ne2+; 26. Rxe2 Rxc5; 27. bxc5 Qxe2; 28.Qd4 Kf7; 29. c3 g5; 30. a4 a5; 31. c6 Qb5 (-0.13).
Other alternatives are better for Black. 27. Nxe4? Nxe4; 28. Qb3 Ng5; 29. Qxb5 axb5; 30. Rb6 Rxc2; 31.h4 Nxh4; 32. Rxb5 f5; 33. f3 Nd6; 34. Rxe8 Nxb5, and Black has a knight for White's two pawns, with Stockfish evaluating the position with a slight advantage to Black (-0.94). The moral here, after the machine's work: think for yourself, in chess as in life, not following blindly the "Authority," that being the World Chess Champion, any military or political leader, or anyone and anything. "Do not go gentle into that good night..." —Dylan Thomas
In game 164, Alekhine marks his 22nd move with an exclamation mark, 22.g3!, stating that the leading masters (Bogoljubow, Nimzowitsch, Lasker, and others) "completely misapprehend the value of this bold move." Well, the machine says that after 22.g3, the evaluation changes in Black's favor (-0.54) and gives the following: 23. g3 Nxh3+; 24. Kh2 Ng5; 25. f4 Ne4, etc. The point of this is that even if you are the World Chess Champion AND you won the match analyzed, that does not make that analysis sound. This is an error. Time and again, think for yourself!
This great collection of Alekhine's best games, like any learning tool, is meant to guide and support one's journey rather than dictate every step. The masters give the light, you must make a path. Chess books offer insights, patterns, and principles that can sharpen a player's understanding, but they should not be mistaken for a substitute for independent thinking or practical experience. As Capablanca put it so elegantly: "Chess books should be used as we use glasses: to assist the sight, although some players make use of them as if they thought they conferred sight."
Ultimately, Alekhine's insights, while sporadically flawed, provide a rich resource for understanding complex chess strategies and the mindset of a true champion.
In conclusion, I would rate this collection a solid 4 out of 5. Its strengths lie in the high-quality games, valuable lessons, and insightful analysis it provides. However, it's important to acknowledge some occasional inaccuracies or gaps in analysis. Don’t let that deter you. Instead, view this book as a tool to sharpen your own thinking and deepen your understanding of the game. Remember, every great chess player has the chance to learn not just from the victories of masters, but also to think critically and even improve upon their insights. So dive in, and enjoy the rich lessons Alekhine has to offer!
Have fun and keep improving—with chess and with life. Shine on!
August 8, 2008
The chess just keeps on coming. Very opinionated notes that are extremely deep. Another book to have with you on that deserted island.
December 9, 2019
Fabulous.
February 16, 2021
Dovol'no khorosho!
April 23, 2022
The master of the combination
Read
March 5, 2015ok
Read
April 10, 2016very good book
Displaying 1 - 14 of 14 reviews