Chess Notes

In an interview with Martijn Smit on pages 6-8 of the 4/1984 New in Chess Tony Miles said:

‘... I have a strong tendency to look at crazy things first. When promoting a pawn I prefer a bishop to a queen if that is possible ... I am very fond of, let us say, three rooks on the board. In a weekend tournament I had that once, and instead of resigning my opponent allowed himself to be mated beautifully, in the middle of the board. That appeals to me.’

The comments were reproduced on page 22 of Tony Miles: ‘It’s Only Me’ compiled by Geoff Lawton (London, 2003). Is the three-rook game extant?

From page 3 of the Bellingham Herald (Bellingham, WA), 19 September 1922:

Page 97 of the May-June 1931 American Chess Bulletin set out in uncommon detail the budget for that year’s tournament in New York:

Edward Penn (London) informs us that he asked Miles, prior to his departure for the Dubna, 1976 tournament, to send him a cable if he obtained the grandmaster title.

Miles’ message was indeed two words (‘A cable’). Mr Penn’s recollection is that Miles, a close friend, signed not with his full name but simply with ‘Tony’. However, he has not yet been able to find the cable to confirm this.

Seldom nowadays does a chess treatise use the term ‘Wyvill formation’ (or, indeed, the term ‘treatise’).

From page 153 of The Unknown Capablanca by D. Hooper and D. Brandreth (London, 1975), concerning the game Capablanca v Haussmann, Philadelphia, 1918:

The ‘Wyvill formation’ was the description used in The Middle Game by M. Euwe and H. Kramer (London, 1964). Below, for example, is an extract from page 146 of book one:

The Euwe/Kramer work was originally published in Dutch in the 1950s, in five parts, and we are grateful to Harrie Grondijs (Rijswijk, the Netherlands) for providing the text about ‘De Wyvill-formatie’ on page 49 of Het middenspel, part three (The Hague and Djakarta, 1953):

The Tarrasch passage referred to by Euwe and Kramer was on page 59 of Das Grossmeisterturnier zu St Petersburg im Jahre 1914 (Nuremberg, 1914):

Did Tarrasch refer to Wyvill elsewhere in his writings, perhaps even using the specific phrase ‘Wyvill formation’?

On page 27 of Die Kunst der Bauernführung (Berlin-Frohnau, 1956) Hans Kmoch discussed ‘Die Wyvill-Formation’ and on page 257 added the ‘Wyvill-Benoni’ and ‘Wyvill-Rudi’. On page 277 of the English edition, Pawn Power in Chess (New York, 1959), readers were treated to the ‘Rex-Wyvill’ and the ‘Benoni-Wyvill’:

Mr Urcan has also supplied a cutting from page 7 of the Philadelphia Inquirer Magazine, 18 October 1914, which quotes the views of Emanuel Lasker as expressed to Walter Penn Shipley:

A report on page 22 of the February 1922 American Chess Bulletin:

The game against Tarasov was given on page 23 of that issue of the American Chess Bulletin, on page 8 of Wonders and Curiosities of Chess by Irving Chernev (New York, 1974) and on page 118 of our monograph on Capablanca.

A comment above by J.B. Clough about Capablanca is worth highlighting:

‘I saw him frequently playing two boards at one time with his right and left hand.’

This practice of the Cuban’s was also mentioned in a report about the Cleveland display on page 9 of The Times, 22 February 1922:

‘He was frequently seen to be playing two boards at once, one with his right hand and one with his left, a little habit of his we often noticed during his simultaneous tour in this country. The player at the board he had just left made a move; over his left arm would go Capablanca’s right hand, the left maintaining hold of the piece on the board he was at, and the right hand making the necessary reply on the other board with hardly a second’s delay.’

‘When I gave that exhibition against 103 players in Cleveland, USA early this year I had hardly touched a board for eight months and felt very hazy at the beginning, and yet towards the end I do not think my brain was ever working more clearly.’

Source: The Times, 12 July 1922, page 7 (not all editions). The text also appeared on page 464 of the Times Literary Supplement, 13 July 1922.

Two photographs taken during the US Open, Milwaukee, 1953 have been forwarded by John Donaldson (Berkeley, CA, USA), the author of Elmars Zemgalis Grandmaster without the Title (Berkeley, 2001), to mark the 90th birthday of Zemgalis (born in Riga on 9 September 1923):

Above, from left to right: Eriks Gutmanis, Leonids Gaigals, Indrikis (Heinrich) Kalnins,
Elmars Zemgalis, Leonids Dreibergs, Alexander(s) Liepnieks and Nicholas (Nikolajs) Kampars

Another new book in Polish, Mistrz Przepiórka by Tomasz Lissowski, Jerzy Konikowski and Jerzy Moraś (Warsaw, 2013), is also notable. It is a 271-page softback containing a biography, games, problems and many photographs.

Financial Times, 28 February 1976, page 8

Quite by chance we have just discovered the following:

• From Leonard Barden’s chess column on page 8 of the Financial Times, 28 February 1976:

‘On Tuesday the chess official who asked Tony to send a cable to London if he became a Grand Master received a laconic telegram which said simply “A cable. Tony Miles.”

The steel behind this casual facade becomes evident in Miles’s dedicated effort at the chessboard. His play is aggressive, precise, and above all fearless of reputations ...’

• From pages 9-10 of The English Chess Explosion by Murray Chandler and Raymond Keene (London, 1981):

‘A British chess federation official who had asked Miles to send a cable to London if he ever became a Grandmaster received a laconic telegram which simply read “A cable. Tony Miles”. The steel behind this casual facade becomes evident in Miles’ dedicated effort at the board – aggressive, precise, and above all fearless of reputations.’

• From page 31 of Tony Miles England’s Chess Gladiator by Raymond Keene (Aylesbeare, 2006):

‘A British Chess Federation official who had asked Miles to send a cable to London if he ever became a Grandmaster received a laconic telegram which simply read “A cable. Tony Miles”.

The steel behind this casual facade becomes evident in Miles’ dedicated effort at the board – aggressive, precise, and above all fearless of reputations.’

Page 6 of The English Chess Explosion stated, ‘we would like to thank Leonard Barden for permission to quote from his articles in The Guardian and The Financial Times’. The above, of course, is not a case of ‘quotation’.

John Townsend (Wokingham, England) writes:

‘There is mention of “Telemachus Brownsmith” in H. Meyer’s chess column in The Gentleman’s Journal (8 September 1872, page 64). In the notices “To Correspondents” he refers to errors that have arisen in the printing of the names of composers of problems, and comments:

“We advise our correspondents to be more careful with the names, and to avoid anagrams or translations – for instance, not L. Travoli for V. Portilla, or Lonsdale for Löwenthal, or Frankenstein for Francopierre, or Miss Betty G. for Dr. A. Nowotny, or Drakon Rabey for Konrad Bayer, or Telemachus Brownsmith for ******, &c.”

One possibility is that “Telemachus Brownsmith” is an anagram. If it is, the letters “B.A.” should perhaps be included – in fact, they may have been deliberately added to make up the full set of letters needed.’

From page 75 of The Badminton Story by Bernard Adams (London, 1980):

From Michael Spiekermann (Menden, Germany):

‘Concerning an earlier stage of the game Ståhlberg v Capablanca, Margate, 1936 ...

... White played 21 Nb5. It seems that 21...axb5 22 Rxc5 Nxc5 would have given Black a winning advantage. For example, 23 Be5 Nxd3 24 Bxf6 gxf6 25 Qh5 Kg7 26 Qxb5 Ba6. Consequently, an alternative such as 21 Ne4 would be better.

I note, though, that on page 128 of the second edition of Capablancas Verlustpartien by Fritz C. Görschen (Hamburg-Bergedorf, 1976) 21 Nb5 was given an exclamation mark.’

Below we add the relevant section on page 195 of the second ‘Chess Stars’ volume on Capablanca, published in 1997:

Regarding Reuben Fine’s post-Reykjavik challenge to Bobby Fischer for a world title match with a purse of one million dollars, a sourceless paragraph was published on page 125 of the February 1973 CHESS:

‘“I’d play Fischer for the world championship if the stakes were high enough”, said Reuben Fine to Robert Byrne recently. “How high?”, asked Byrne. “Say a million dollars”, replied Fine and was quite upset when Byrne thought he was joking.’

C.N. 7699 quoted a remark by Clive James on page 285 of Snakecharmers in Texas (London, 1988 and 1989): ‘Whoever called snooker “chess with balls” was rude but right.’

We can now report that the observation was attributed to Mike Watterson in an article by Cynthia Bateman entitled ‘Chess with balls’ on page 16 of the Guardian, 3 April 1981:

Stephen Fry and Alan Davies, Radio Times, 24-30 August 2013, page 15

Stuart Rachels (Tuscaloosa, AL, USA) forwards a game which he won at the age of 14 in the Alabama State Championship:

Stuart Rachels – Tom Denton
Mobile, 1 September 1984
Queen’s Indian Defence

1 d4 Nf6 2 c4 e6 3 Nf3 b6 4 a3 c5 5 d5 Ba6 6 Qc2 exd5 7 cxd5 g6 8 Nc3 d6 9 Bf4 Bg7 10 Qa4+ Qd7 11 Bxd6 b5 12 Qf4 b4 13 axb4 cxb4 14 Qe3+ Kd8 15 Bxb4 Re8 16 Ba5+ Kc8 17 Qc5+ Kb7 18 Ra3 Resigns.

Our correspondent asks whether there are longer games in which all four of the winner’s king’s-side pawns remained unmoved.

In a review of Chess is my Life by Victor Korchnoi (London, 1977) on page 16 of The Times, 2 December 1977 Bernard Levin referred to Korchnoi’s departure from the Soviet Union in 1976 and added:

‘A new Soviet book on the 1974 Karpov-Korchnoi championship match had to have all references to Korchnoi deleted, so that he is simply referred to throughout as “the opponent”.’

To which book was Levin referring? Korchnoi’s autobiography does not seem to make such a claim.

Nor do we have any books in Russian exclusively devoted to the 1974 Karpov-Korchnoi match, although all 24 match-games were annotated in Tri matcha Anatoliya Karpova by M. Botvinnik (Moscow, 1975), which also covered Karpov’s matches against Polugayevsky and Spassky. An English translation by Kenneth P. Neat was published under the title Anatoly Karpov His road to the World Championship (Oxford, 1978).

From Michael McDowell (Westcliff-on-sea, England):

‘In a problem any pawn which begins on its starting square and promotes during the course of the solution (not necessarily in the minimum five moves) shows an excelsior. Nowadays the excelsior theme will usually be combined with other ideas.’

Gene Gnandt (Houston, TX, USA) comments:

‘Concerning the page from Alekhine’s notebook shown in C.N. 8203, the letter d in the handwritten name does not match the letter d in the score-card, e.g. “4 d2-d4”, where the vertical line is much more upright and the lower curve more circular than the oval shape in the name. The oval shape is a closer match to a lower-case c in the score-card. For example, “5...Lc8-d7”.

I therefore suggest that it is a c followed by an h. In the score-card, Alekhine writes his letter h with an almost flat lower line. In fact, it looks like the letter l, e.g. “10 h2-h4 h7-h6”. This matches the letter in the name. I therefore suggest that the letter interpreted as d is really two letters, c and h, which would make the name Hoelscher.’

From Denis Teyssou (Paris):

John Townsend (Wokingham, England) writes:

‘An announcement of a performance of Hamlet in the New York Daily Times (26 November 1855, page 5) suggests that F.M. Edge was already a journalist in New York by that time:

“THE HAMLET NIGHT. – It is respectfully announced that the representation of HAMLET will take place at the Academy of Music TO-MORROW, (TUESDAY EVENING) Nov. 27.

In its cast of characters, the names will be found of many of our authors, artists, and others well known, apart from the dramatic art. The play will be produced in a novel manner, and with all the unrivaled elegance and splendor, both of mise en scène and wardrobe, for which the Academy is distinguished ...”

The cast list included:

“Osric .......... Fred. M. Edge ......... Editor.”

Hamlet was played by C.T.P. Ware, who was described as “Dramatist”.’

Can further information about stage performances by Edge be traced? This new line of enquiry opens up the possibility of finding a picture of him.

C.N. 8256 mentioned in passing that the word ‘treatise’ is no longer fashionable in chess book titles. The most marked change in vocabulary may be in works for children (or nowadays, more commonly, ‘kids’). Half a century or so ago, young newcomers to the game received solid tutelage from The Chess Apprentice by R. Bott and S. Morrison (London and Glasgow, 1960), but such a title would seem unthinkable today, as would, for instance, Instructions to Young Chess-Players by H. Golombek (London, 1958).

A number of titles ostensibly for older players reflect a trend towards fantasy violence, an example being The Chess Terrorist’s Handbook by L. Shamkovich (Macon, 1995). It was dedicated to Mikhail Tal (‘The Greatest Chess Terrorist!’).

Then there are the productions of Thinkers’ Press, Davenport, such as The Chess Assassin’s Business Manual by Bob Long (2008) ...

... and a series of brief monographs including, to quote the covers, Alekhine The Executioner (2011) and Keres Machine Gunner (2012) or, to quote the title pages, Alexander Alekhine The Executioner and Paul Keres Machine Gun Keres.

A sociological study could be written on the evolution of chess book titles and covers. Doctorates have been awarded for less.

Page 54 of the May-June 1937 American Chess Bulletin quoted an item from the South African Chess Magazine:

‘It is said a wealthy chess enthusiast left his son £1,000 a year on condition the lad never took the QKt pawn. The game (Botvinnik v Spielmann) once more serves to show how extremely wise the old gentleman was.’

On page 31 of the February 1970 BCM, in a report on Hastings 1969-70, Harry Golombek wrote with reference to Drimer v Portisch:

‘At move 17 he had to choose between taking Portisch’s queen’s pawn or queen’s knight’s pawn. The first capture would have left him a long, though uphill, fight, but the story of the Austrian nobleman who left his son a fortune provided that he never played QxQKtP has never penetrated the borders of Romania. Drimer took the queen’s knight’s pawn and found that two moves later he had either to lose his queen for a rook or be mated.’

Hans Renette (Bierbeek, Belgium) sends an interview with Steinitz by Wolf Heinemann which was published on page 48 of the Otago Witness, 5 October 1899:

Peter de Jong (De Meern, the Netherlands) and Christian Sánchez (Rosario, Argentina) have found that the game under discussion was given as Alekhine v Hoelscher (with the venue as Amstelveen) by Max Euwe in his column on page 8 of the 20 November 1933 edition of Het Volk:

Alekhine’s Amstelveen display took place on 3 November 1933 according to the report in the Tijdschrift van den Nederlandschen Schaakbond, November 1933 (C.N. 8203). In his notebook Alekhine dated the game 3 November.

Mike Forster (Horsham, England) reverts to the topic of penalty moves, mentioning the well-known story about an endgame in which Rubinstein allegedly sealed an intentionally incorrect move, Kc2-c7.

Johann Berger – A. Wimmer
Austria, circa November 1894
King’s Gambit Accepted

1 e4 e5 2 f4 exf4 3 Bc4 d5 4 Bxd5 Qh4+ 5 Kf1 g5 6 Qf3 c6 7 Qc3 f6 8 d4 a5 9 a3

9...Bb4 10 axb4 axb4 11 Rxa8 bxc3 12 Nf3 cxb2 13 Bxb2 Qh5 14 Rxb8 cxd5 15 Rxc8+ Kd7 16 Rxg8 Rxg8 17 Nc3 dxe4 18 Nxe4 Qg6 19 Nc5+ Kc6 20 Nd3 Kd5 21 Kf2 Re8 22 Ra1 b5 23 Ra6 Qf5 24 Nb4+ Kc4

25 Nd2+ Kxb4 26 c3 mate.

Source: Newcastle Courant, 1 December 1894, page 2.

Can further information about this game be found?

From page 260 of the October 1897 American Chess Magazine, in a report on that year’s international tournament in Berlin:

‘Charousek possesses indomitable courage, of which it is said he gave evidence while he was learning chess. Unable to procure the German Handbuch during his college days, he borrowed one and copied it – to those who are acquainted with the magnitude of that monument of German industry his task will be apparent.’

Page xix of Charousek’s Games of Chess by P.W. Sergeant (London, 1919) quoted from Armin Friedmann in Pester Lloyd, 20 June 1898:

‘At Kaschau he copied out Bilguer’s gigantic compendium, because of his pecuniary inability to secure the work.’

On page 11 of Chess Comet Charousek (Unterhaching, 1997) Victor A. Charuchin stated that after Charousek finished high school his mother gave him the sixth edition of the Handbuch.

There was a contribution on this subject by Ton Sibbing in K. Whyld’s ‘Quotes and Queries’ column on page 218 of the April 1997 BCM. It indicated that Charousek was given the Handbuch by his mother and that he copied some chapters, according to a letter written to a friend on 19 November 1891. The BCM item referred to ‘an unpublished biography (including 359 games), written in English by two Dutchmen, Marten [sic] de Zeeuw and the late Menno Ploeger’.

Below are both positions on the United States Chess Federation postcard submitted by Rick Massimo (Providence, RI, USA):

The second diagram shows the conclusion of a game won by William Lewis against an unnamed opponent. It is generally said to have been played in London in 1840; see, for instance, pages 145-146 of 200 Miniature Games of Chess by J. du Mont (London, 1941). When published on pages 68-69 of the Chess Player’s Chronicle, 1841 the game was merely described as ‘played recently’:

The opening 1 e4 e5 2 Nf3 Nc6 3 Bc4 f5 4 Bxg8 was discussed by Lewis on pages 124-125 of A Treatise on the Game of Chess (London, 1844).

It is hoped that a publisher will re-issue Lacking the Master Touch by Wolfgang Heidenfeld (Cape Town, 1970). It received an elegant, perceptive review from W.H. Cozens on pages 101-102 of the March 1972 BCM:

‘His personality comes out in his selection of games. He is a fighter. He gives us no brevities against pushover opposition, but hard-fought wins, some hard-fought draws and a few hard-fought losses. The spread of the games – 50 to cover a playing career of 40 years – is a guarantee of their quality; not that they are all deadly serious. One at least (Roele, 1954) is comical: the dénouement must be seen to be believed.

... The notes are ample, the 50 games occupying 100 double-column pages. Heidenfeld writes with a disarming openness, admitting his indecisions, his difficulties, his wrong judgements; never claiming to know all the answers. His notes show “how difficult chess is – not how easy it can be made to look”.’

The book has Heidenfeld’s wins over Euwe and Najdorf, and the draws include Game 44, against Larsen (Havana, 1966). Below is the first page of his annotations:

Regarding the photograph reference in Heidenfeld’s introduction to the game, K.F. Kirby told the story against himself on page 72 of the May 1984 South African Chessplayer after annotating his game against Botvinnik:

‘Photographs of almost all the games were daily offered for sale by the Israeli photographers, and I lost no time in ordering half a dozen copies of Kirby v Botvinnik. It was Mike Pines who rather brought me down to earth when, with his mischievous smile, he said he wondered how many copies Botvinnik had ordered.’

Two more games have been found by Alan Smith (Stockport, England):

Jacob Bronowski – Arnold Yorwarth Green
Yorkshire Championship (final), 1935-36
Queen’s Gambit Declined

1 d4 d5 2 c4 c6 3 Nf3 Nf6 4 Nc3 Bf5 5 cxd5 cxd5 6 Qb3 Qb6 7 Nxd5 Qxb3 8 Nxf6+ exf6 9 axb3 Nc6 10 e3 Nb4 11 Bb5+ Kd8 12 O-O Nc2

13 Ra4 Bd6 14 Bd2 Ke7 15 Rc1 a6 16 Be2 b5 17 Ra5 Rhc8 18 Bd1 Bb4 19 Bxc2 Bxd2 20 Nxd2 Bxc2 21 f3 Bd3 22 Raa1 f5 23 b4 h5 24 Rc5 Kd6 25 Rac1 Rxc5 26 bxc5+ Kd5 27 Rc3 Bc4 28 b3 Be2 29 Kf2 b4 30 Rc1 Bd3 31 Nc4 Bxc4 32 Rxc4 a5 33 Rc2 a4 34 bxa4 b3 35 Rc3 Rb8 36 Rc1 f4 37 Rb1 b2 38 a5 Kc4 39 c6 fxe3+ 40 Kxe3 Kc3 41 d5 Resigns.

Source: Staffordshire Advertiser, 6 June 1936.

Jacob Bronowski – Reginald Joseph Broadbent
Hull v Bradford match, Hull, 21 January 1939
Dutch Defence

1 d4 e6 2 Nf3 f5 3 g3 Nf6 4 Bg2 Be7 5 O-O O-O 6 b3 d5 7 Ne5 b6 8 Bb2 Bb7 9 Nc3 Nbd7 10 e3 c5 11 Ne2 Bd6 12 Nf4 Qe7 13 c4 Rad8 14 cxd5 exd5 15 Nxd7 Qxd7 16 dxc5 Bxf4 17 c6 Bxc6 18 gxf4 Ne4 19 Rc1 Qe6 20 Qd4 Rf6 21 f3 Nc5

22 e4 Rg6 23 b4 Na4 24 exf5 Qxf5 25 Rxc6 Nxb2 26 Rxg6 hxg6 27 Qxb2 Resigns.

Source: Observer, 5 February 1939, page 21.

Stephen Wright (Vancouver, Canada) asks why the moves 1 e4 c5 2 Nf3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4 Nxd4 Nf6 5 Nc3 Nc6 6 Bc4 g6 7 Nxc6 bxc6 8 e5 (8...dxe5 9 Bxf7+) are regularly referred to as the ‘Magnus Smith Trap’. He has been unable to find any game or analysis by Smith with that line.

We believe that ‘Magnus Smith Trap’ is a misnomer, although in the Sicilian Defence there is a ‘Magnus Smith Variation’ (a very rare instance of a player’s forename and surname being used jointly in openings terminology).

The bare score of his game against A. Kreymborg in round six of the New York, 1911 tournament, a win in 49 moves, was published on page 59 of the March 1911 American Chess Bulletin, and on pages 62-63 of the same issue he contributed an article entitled ‘An Innovation Against the Sicilian Defense’:

Although the line 8...dxe5 9 Bxf7+ was mentioned, in note (d), Magnus Smith’s innovation was 9 Bf4, proposed as an improvement over 9 e6, which Schlechter had played in his seventh match-game against Lasker the previous year.

The above analysis by Smith was also published on page 6 of the Philadelphia Inquirer (magazine section), 26 February 1911:

Annotating the game Lawrence v Fox in the United States v Great Britain cable match, Hermann Helms wrote on page 1 of the sports section of the Brooklyn Daily Eagle, 4 May 1911 and on page 129 of the June 1911 American Chess Bulletin:

‘Evidently leading up to the Magnus Smith variation, which continues as follows: 6 B-QB4 P-KKt3 7 KtxKt PxKt 8 P-K5 Kt-Kt5 9 B-B4 P-Q4 10 KtxQP PxKt 11 BxP, etc. The subsequent play, which yields a win for White, was analyzed exhaustively by Mr Smith in the March number of the American Chess Bulletin.’

Magnus Smith was mentioned for 9 Bf4 on page 167 of Modern Chess Openings by R.C. Griffith and J.H. White (London, 1913):

The term ‘Magnus-Smith variation’ for lines beginning with 9 Bf4 was used on, for instance, page 168 of the April 1927 BCM, as well as by W. Winter on page 76 of Kings of Chess (London, 1954) in his notes to the above-mentioned Schlechter v Lasker game.

Concerning game 26 in Fischer’s My 60 Memorable Games (New York, 1969), Stuart Rachels (Tuscaloosa, AL, USA) notes that after 1 e4 c5 2 Nf3 Nc6 3 d4 cxd4 4 Nxd4 g6 5 Nc3 Bg7 6 Be3 Nf6 7 Be2 Fischer wrote on pages 161-162:

‘In the 4th and 6th games of the match [against Reshevsky in 1961] I continued with 7 B-QB4 O-O 8 B-N3 N-KN5 [...] 9 QxN NxN and White got a clear advantage both with 10 Q-R4 and 10 Q-Q1, respectively.’

Position after 9...Nxd4

Mr Rachels points out that, given the play in the fourth and sixth match-games, this note should read ‘with 10 Q-Q1 and 10 Q-R4, respectively’. Moreover, he considers that after the latter move White has only a tiny advantage.

From pages 84-85 of The Fireside Book of Chess by I. Chernev and F. Reinfeld (New York, 1949):

From page 30 of The Delights of Chess by Assiac (London, 1960):

Both books omitted to identify the venue, date and opposing side, yet they contradict each other as to whether Bogoljubow and his allies played White or Black, and whether the move was ...Rxe4 or Rxe8. Chernev and Reinfeld were correct on both points.

Bogoljubow and his allies had Black against Alekhine, Sämisch, Steiner, Tartakower and Vajda. The game took place in Budapest on 20 September 1921 and was published on pages 1-4 of the January 1922 issue of Kagans Neueste Schachnachrichten. The magazine reported that the rate of play was 20 moves per hour and that the Black allies were in time-trouble when they blundered with 32...Rxe4.

The full score is on pages 146-147 of Alexander Alekhine’s Chess Games, 1902-1946 by L. Skinner and R. Verhoeven (Jefferson, 1998).

This feature was published in The Times on page 9 of the 6 June 1975 edition, and on many occasions subsequently. The competition diagram also appeared on posters at, for instance, London underground stations. The winner, P.F. Copping, was announced on page 4 of The Times, 7 February 1976, and the contest was discussed on pages 302-303 of the February 1976 issue of EG.

Harry Golombek wrote a lengthy article, ‘A Successful Experiment’, on pages 168-171 of the April 1976 BCM, and on page 170 he reported:

‘The set position was the finish of a game played at Smolensk in 1950 between Jesierski (White) and Lelczuk.’

In a database we note a game (1 e4 e5 2 f4 Nc6 3 Nf3 d6 4 fxe5 Nxe5 5 d4 Ng6 6 Bc4 Be7 7 O-O Nf6 8 Nc3 O-O 9 Qe1 Re8 10 Ng5 d5 11 Nxd5 Nxd5 12 Bxd5 Bxg5 13 Bxf7+ Kh8 14 Bxe8 Bxc1 15 Bxg6 Bxb2 16 Qh4 Qxh4 17 Rf8 mate) which is labelled Jezierski v Lelczuk, Smolensk, 1953. On pages 85-86 of Test Your Chess IQ: Book 2 by A. Livshitz (Oxford, 1981) the position appeared as Ezersky v Lelchuk, Smolensk, 1950.

Is it possible to find the game in a publication from the 1950s?

From Wijnand Engelkes (Zeist, the Netherlands):

‘The Dutch are extremely flexible with first names. Johannes is often abbreviated to Jan, Johan, Jo, John, Han, Hans or Hannes. Hendrikus can be abbreviated to Hendrik or Henk.

Donner was very consistent in being inconsistent. On page 25 of his book De Nederlander en andere korte verhalen (Amsterdam and Antwerp, 1974) he referred to himself as Jan Hein:

“Dat is een verdriet dat alleen wij kunnen begrijpen, wij Ton Sijbrands en Achilles, Patroclos en Harm Wiersma en ook Jan Hein Donner.”

[“That is a tragedy which only we can understand, we Ton Sijbrands and Achilles, Patroclos and Harm Wiersma and also Jan Hein Donner.”]

In Schaakbulletin, April 1972 Donner wrote an article entitled “Johannes Donner” which discussed a game with Quinteros, during which there was a power failure just after Quinteros had overlooked an easy win. The remainder of the game was postponed until ten o’clock in the evening:

“Het leek mij waarschijnlijk dat Quinteros voor tien uur ’s-avonds geheel andere plannen had dan het spelen van een partij schaak met Johannes Donner.”

[“It was highly likely, I thought, that Quinteros had completely different plans for ten o’clock that night than playing a game of chess against Johannes Donner.”]

This remark can be found on page 133 of the 2006 edition of his book The King.’

Dan Scoones (Port Coquitlam, Canada) writes:

‘The game Ezersky v Lelchuk was published on page 279 of the 9/1950 issue of Shakhmaty v SSSR, in an article by Peter Romanovsky entitled “Dialogue with readers”. Ezersky, who had submitted the game for publication with his own comments, was identified as a first-category player, while Lelchuk was described as a second-category player. The Smolensk tournament was organized by the “Bolshevik” DSO (Voluntary Sports Society) and as such was intended for amateur players.

Romanovsky compared the finish of Ezersky v Lelchuk with the conclusion of the game Novotelnov v Rovner, 15th USSR Championship Semi-Final, Moscow, 1946, which also featured a deflection sacrifice.’

Romanovsky’s two-page article is given below, courtesy of the Cleveland Public Library:

A booklet not worth touching is Essential Chess Quotations by John C. Knudsen (Falls Church, 1998): about 40 pages of quotes; about five or six quotes per page; about sources – nothing.

The front cover highlights ‘“I’d rather have a pawn than a finger” – Reuben Fine’, an alleged remark which can be found, also devoid of specifics, on innumerable websites.

We note the following on pages 6-7 of the April 1944 Chess Review (in a report on that year’s US championship in New York):

An odd suggestion about Dawid Janowsky by I.A. Horowitz on page 8 of Solitaire Chess (New York, 1962):

‘Parodying one of Harry Lauder’s songs, the Polish master averred: “I’d rather lose my queen than lose my bishop.”’

Alan Smith (Stockport, England) reports that the Berger v Wimmer game was played at the Graz Chess Club on 31 October 1894 and was annotated in Hoffer’s column in the Standard, 26 November 1894, page 7:

The problem discussed in the previous item is shown as it appeared on page 60 of the April 1907 issue of Emanuel Lasker’s magazine the Chess Player’s Scrap Book:

The composition had been published on page 24 of Chess Harmonies by Walter Pulitzer (New York, 1894):

The book said nothing else about the composition, apart from giving the key move (‘1 Q-KB6’) on page 107. It is uncertain whether the problem had been published before the appearance of Chess Harmonies, given that the Preface stated:

‘The collection embraces unpublished as well as published problems; but (as I have expressly followed no plan of classification throughout the whole work) I must leave it to the eagle eye of the practiced solver or composer to detect the former – for the most part, the more pretentious productions, composed most likely for tourney use, or some such design.’

We are grateful to Olimpiu G. Urcan (Singapore) for investigating the background to Steinitz’s remarks about problem 24. He has found the following items in W.H.K. Pollock’s newspaper column:

• Baltimore Sunday News, 30 December 1894 (review of Chess Harmonies with problems cited from the book):

• Baltimore News, 5 January 1895 (further comments on Chess Harmonies):

• Baltimore News, 2 February 1895 (a composition (problem 36) from Chess Harmonies and a biographical note on Pulitzer, including a sketch):

• Baltimore News, 9 March 1895 (a discussion of Steinitz’s view of the book, including a direct quote regarding problem 24 in Chess Harmonies):

Mr Urcan has also found a letter from Pulitzer about his visit to Steinitz, on page 7 of the Brooklyn Daily Standard Union, 9 February 1895:

A further picture of Walter Pulitzer was on page 32 of the June 1897 American Chess Magazine:

Below is his obituary in the New York Times, 6 September 1926, page 15:

The obituary states that Pulitzer was aged 48 at the time of his death, and it was one of the sources for his entry in Jeremy Gaige’s Chess Personalia (Jefferson, 1987), which gave his birth-date as 4 April 1878. This would mean that Pulitzer was only 16 years old when Chess Harmonies was published.

An article by G.H. Diggle published in the May 1984 Newsflash and reproduced on page 2 of the second volume of Chess Characters (Geneva, 1987):

‘The centenary of the Scottish Chess Association (founded 1884) has been commemorated in a fine book, the main authors being C.W. Pritchett and M.D. Thornton. The former has selected and annotated over 40 of the best games ever won by our friends “over the border”, beginning with Zukertort-Mackenzie, 1878 and ending with Motwani-Plaskett, 1983. The latter has dealt with chess in Scotland “before 1822 to the present age”. A full roll of honour of Scottish champions from 1884 to 1983 is given. Nor are the ladies, the juniors or the problemists forgotten, being “mentioned in despatches” in separate articles by David Levy and N.A. Macleod. In his historical review Mr Thornton gives us glimpses from the past of four great clubs – Edinburgh (founded 1822), Glasgow (soon after, but records destroyed in 1866), Dundee (1847) and Aberdeen (1853), the last-named being as formidable in propriety as in chess – “no spirituous liquors, no smoking, no betting or gambling, no dogs, and certainly no chess on the ‘Sawbath’” – and prospective new members receiving more than one “black ball” in six were “oot”. We are also introduced to such great nineteenth-century figures as James Donaldson, hero of the famous Edinburgh-London correspondence match, G.B. Fraser of Dundee, Cecil De Vere (Scottish by birth but English by residence) and Captain G.H. Mackenzie, “the strongest player ever to win the Scottish championship in the nineteenth century”, though he was mainly resident in America, and he took first prize at several US congresses and at Frankfurt in 1887, where he scored wins against Blackburne, Burn, Gunsberg, Paulsen and Tarrasch. Finally, we meet Sheriff Spens, the real driving force behind the foundation of the SCA and no mean writer and poet – it was he who called Morphy “The Pride and Sorrow of Chess” – and his skill over the board is shown in his clever “offhand” win (included by Mr Pritchett in the games section) against the then chess champion of the world, Emanuel Lasker.

Coming now to “living memory”, the book (both in its history and its games section) duly honours two most eminent players of whom we have been sadly deprived during the last two years – Dr W.A. Fairhurst, English by birth but Scottish champion 11 times, “the finest player Scotland has ever seen”, and Dr J.M. Aitken, ten times champion and his lifelong opponent in congresses, Scottish championships and club matches. It would be interesting to know the total score over the years between the two great combatants. In 1938 they played a set match of eight games, Aitken winning by five and a half points to two and a half, but this is described in the BCM as their second match, and the result of the first one the BM has not yet discovered. The BM never saw Fairhurst, but he has very pleasant memories of Dr Aitken, whom he once actually had to meet in the very first round of a tournament, and felt like a rabbit facing a python. After “it was all over” the Doctor, conducting the inquest, never once expatiated on “where Black had gone wrong” but shook his head over his own play, which at one point had been “terribly speculative”. Apart from his play, the Doctor (in the opinion of the BM) was one of the best chess book reviewers in the world.’

A photograph taken during the Aitken v Diggle game was given in C.N. 3766.

From page 2 of the 9 March 1895 edition of the Newcastle Courant:

A remark of Gunsberg’s which is worth highlighting:

‘... there are benefits to be obtained in this life beyond and above the mere accumulation of great riches, and I know no art which gives its votary a larger share of these than chess.’