A fine addition to my collection of wonderful annotations (H/T Edward Winter)

Click [...] for list of games

[Event "Bremen System A29"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "1933.??.??"]
[EventDate "?"]
[Round "?"]
[Result "1-0"]
[White "Carl Johan Margot Carls"]
[Black "Oscar Antze"]
[ECO "A22"]
[WhiteElo "?"]
[BlackElo "?"]
[PlyCount "46"]

1. c4 {Notes from Deutsche Schachzeitung 1933} e5 2. Nc3 Nf6
3. g3 d5 4. cxd5 Nxd5 5. Bg2 Be6 6. Nf3 Nc6 7. O-O Be7 8. d4
exd4 9. Nxd4 Nxc3 10. bxc3 Nxd4 11. cxd4 c6 12. Rb1 Qd7
13. Qa4 O-O 14. d5 Bxd5 15. Bxd5 Qxd5 16. Rxb7 Bc5 17. Rd1 Qe6
18. Qc2 Bb6 $14 {book position, Black falsely assumes =, white
assumes +=} 19. Rd3 $1 Qf5 20. Bf4 g5 21. e4 Qc8 22. Rdd7 gxf4
23. Qc4 $18 fxg3 24. Rxf7 {24... gxf2+ 25. Kh1 f1=Q+ 26. Rxf1+
Kh8 27. Qc3+ Bd4 28. Qxd4+ Rf6 29. Qxf6+ Kg8 30. Qg7#} 1-0


[Event "11th Hungarian National"]
[Site "Budapest HUN"]
[Date "1933.04.??"]
[EventDate "?"]
[Round "?"]
[Result "0-1"]
[White "Erich Eliskases"]
[Black "Lajos Steiner"]
[ECO "A28"]
[WhiteElo "?"]
[BlackElo "?"]
[PlyCount "44"]

1.c4 Nf6 2.Nc3 e5 3.Nf3 Nc6 4.e3 Bb4 5.Nd5 e4 6.Nxb4 Nxb4
7.Nd4 O-O 8.Be2 d5 9.a3 Nd3+ 10.Bxd3 exd3 11.c5 Ne4 12.b4 Qg5
13.g3 Bh3 14.f3 f5 15.Qb3 f4 16.exf4 Rae8 17.fxg5 Nxc5+ 18.Kd1
Nxb3 19.Nxb3 Bg2 20.Nd4 Bxh1 21.f4 Re4 22.Bb2 Rfe8 0-1

Tartakower annotated White's first move as follows (H/T Edward Winter):

"An opening which the master from Bremen has been playing, almost without exception, for about 30 years.

Just recently, however, I learned that in annotating the game Eliskases v L. Steiner, which Black won prettily ..., the German master and journalist Leonhardt expressed his joy that this tortuous opening, which comes from the Eastern Jews (Ost-Juden) Nimzowitsch and Tartakower, will lose some of its worth.

With such remarks, Leonhardt is certainly doing his homeland a disservice. His hope of flattering official circles may well backfire and he may well be "corrected" for publishing assertions which are:
1. untrue, since the opening was introduced by the Englishman Staunton;
2. maladroit, since the system was developed by the German Carls;
3. ridiculous, since in the game in question, Eliskases v L. Steiner, the move 1.c4 was played by a good Tyrolean, whereas it was refuted by a Semitic player;
4. preposterous, since in chess we take pleasure in seeking truth, without players’ personalities playing any role;
5. unhealthy, since in chess we prefer to be rid of political, ethnological, etc. discussions; and finally;
6. harmful, since the German authorities recommend their citizens not to make attacks on foreigners."