Chess Notes
Edward
Winter
When contacting
us
by e-mail, correspondents are asked to include
their name and full
postal address and, when providing
information, to quote exact book and magazine sources.
The word ‘chess’ needs to appear in the subject-line
or in the message itself.
9259. Korchnoi and
Karpov
Source: Punch, 14 October 1981, page 652. A
chess article on the same page, ‘Above Board?’ by Jonathan
Sale, attained a similar level of humour.
9260. Long
and wrong
An article by Julio Kaplan (‘Games from Lone Pine’) on
pages 364-366 of the July 1977 Chess Life & Review
stated on the final page:
‘... as Lasker used to say: “Long analysis, wrong
analysis”.’
Chess literature has references by the barrowful to what
this or that master ‘used to say’, but responsible writers
do not diffuse such material without secure sources. The
‘long/wrong’ saying is commonly attributed to Larsen, e.g.
by A. Soltis on page 190 of The 100 Best Chess Games
of the 20th Century, Ranked (Jefferson, 2000) and on
page 27 of The Wisest Things Ever Said About Chess
(London, 2008). In each case the wording offered was ‘long
variation, wrong variation’, and the corroboration offered
was zero.
Larsen’s own words are shown below from page 46 of How
To
Get Better At Chess by L. Evans, J. Silman and B.
Roberts (Los Angeles, 1991), in the chapter ‘How Do Top
Players See Things So Quickly?’:
9261. Desler
v Eliskases
Jan Kalendovský (Brno, Czech Republic) provides a
photograph from page 3 of Das interessante Blatt,
24 July 1930:
A game by Arne Desler was discussed in Chess and The Prisoner.
9262. Threats
‘Threats are the very warp and woof of chess. Every
game is an unspoken dialogue of threats and
counterthreats.’
Source: page 119 of Complete Book of Chess
Stratagems by Fred Reinfeld (New York, 1958).
9263.
Capablanca in 1905
Brooklyn Standard-Union,
15 January 1905, page 6
American Chess Bulletin,
February 1905, page 126
The above illustrations were given in C.N. s 8244 and
3812 respectively. Below is a reverse shot, from page 18
of the Texas newspaper El Paso Herald, 29 December
1906:
9264. The House of
Commons v Canberra
From page 7 of the 10 May 1927 edition of the Manchester
Guardian:
There was a detailed report on pages 253-254 of the June
1927 BCM. The event will be referred to in our
feature articles Chess and
the House of Commons and Chess and British Royalty,
although so far we have found no apposite pictures of
either the Prime Minister (Stanley Baldwin) or the Duke of
York (the future King George VI).
9265. Young
v Janowsky
Two cuttings from Steve Wrinn (Homer, NY, USA):
Brooklyn Daily Eagle,
30 March 1913, page 6
Brooklyn Daily Eagle,
3 April 1913, page 10
William Wallace Young – Dawid Janowsky
New York, 29 March 1913
King’s Gambit Accepted
1 e4 e5 2 f4 exf4 3 Nf3 g5 4 Bc4 Bg7 5 O-O d6 6 d4 h6 7
c3 Ne7 8 Qb3 O-O 9 h4 Ng6 10 hxg5 hxg5 11 Nbd2 Nc6 12 Qc2
g4 13 Nh2 Nxd4 14 cxd4 Bxd4+ 15 Kh1 Qh4
16 Nf3 gxf3 17 Rxf3 Kg7 18 Bxf4 Bg4 19 Bg3 Qh5
20 Rxf7+ Rxf7 21 Bxf7 Bb6 22 Rf1 Rf8 23 Qc3+ Kh6 24 Rf6
Rxf7 25 Bf4+ Kg7 26 Rf5+ Kg8 27 Rxh5 Bxh5 28 Be3 Ne5 29
Bxb6 axb6 30 Qh3 Bg6 31 Qc8+ Kg7 32 Qxb7 Nc4 33 Qd5 Ne5 34
Kg1 Rf4 35 Qb7 Rf7 36 Nf1 Ng4 37 Qd5 Rxf1+ 38 White
resigns.
Later that year, W.W. Young (1877-1940) was described by
the American Chess Bulletin (July 1913, page 162)
as an engineer in a full-page feature on ‘The Young
Gambit’, which gave his well-known 13-move win against
Marshall in Bordentown, NJ.
9266.
Hastings, 1929-30
Wanted: a better copy of the photograph below, which has
been found by Gerard Killoran (Ilkley, England) on page 17
of the Evening Post, 15 February 1930:
The picture was taken during the first round, the
pairings being (from the background to the foreground):
Takács v Maróczy, Thomas v Vidmar, Winter v Capablanca,
Menchik v Price and Sergeant v Yates.
9267. Mr and Mrs
Prim
From page 62 of CHESS, 14 October 1938:
‘Was there a Connection?
L.C.K., Maritzburg, supplies the following (perfectly
authentic) item from an American paper:
“Mrs Lottie Prim was granted her divorce from her
husband, a chessplayer, on the grounds that he had
spoken to her only three times since they were
married. She was granted custody of the three
children.”’
A cursory Internet search (in, for example, Google
Books) provides many appearances of the story, and
even in a 1934 edition of Petroleum Engineer. An
eccentrically written version is shown below from page 2
of the Patriot and Free Press, Cuba, NY, 6 February
1936:
What more is known about the case? It is notable that
early reports mentioned no chess connection.
9268.
Fischer interview in 1972
Comments by Bobby Fischer in the article ‘“This little
thing between me and Spassky” – Bobby Fischer talks to
James Burke’ on pages 51-52 of The Listener, 13
July 1972, further to a BBC-2 television programme
broadcast at the beginning of the month:
-
‘I think I’ve been the best since I was about 18 or
19 – somewhere around 1962. I felt I had the talent
even before I played the game. I just was always
good at games. I like to keep taking on all the top
players to really prove that I am the best player in
the world today, so that when they go home that
night they can’t kid themselves that they’re so hot.
And so this is where it’s at, the apex of my whole
life, taking on this Spassky. This is really the big
match. This is for everything. This is for the
title. If I don’t win, it’s not going to be easy to
get up to again. This little thing between me and
Spassky, it’s a microcosm of the whole world
political situation. They always suggest that the
two world leaders should fight it out hand to hand,
and this is the kind of thing that we’re doing – not
with bombs but battling it out over the board.’
-
(In reply to a question on the most important thing
about winning the world title.) ‘I guess knowing
that other people regard me as the Champion. I’ve
felt all along that I’ve been the best so I’m not
proving that much to myself any more. I’d like to
prove it to myself as well, but especially to the
general public. I’d like to show the Russians too.
That’s what I’d enjoy the most about winning the
title – reading the Russian magazines, what they’d
say about it. Either they’re going to say nothing or
they’re going to have some involved nonsensical
explanation.’
-
(Did he resent the Russian domination of chess over
recent decades?) ‘When I first started playing
chess, to me the Russians were heroes, and they
still are as chessplayers. I used to study all their
literature; most of the first books I read were
Russian chess books. But the first time the Russians
ever mentioned me – I was 13 – they said: there’s
this talented young American player. And they showed
this famous game I’d won against Donald Byrne. They
showed the game, but on top of the game they said
he’s a very fine young player, but all this
publicity he’s having will surely do damage to his
character. And sure enough, from then on they
started attacking my character. They’d never even
met me, or knew anything about me. So this kind of
attitude really turned me off. They have the title,
and the title belongs to them in perpetuity because
it’s theirs – that’s their attitude. They don’t have
a sporting attitude about it. Their attitude should
be: he’s the best, he should have the title. They
don’t believe in giving foreigners a chance to play
for the title.’
-
(On his early interest in chess.) ‘I just found
that I had more of a feel for the game, more of a
knack for winning, than others had. I liked games: I
was playing a lot of board games at home. We had
Pachisi, Monopoly and all these board games, Chinese
chequers and what not, but I kept hearing the
hardest game was chess, so I finally persuaded my
mother to give me that. They thought that it would
be too advanced for me, but they finally got me a
set, and that is the game that I concentrated on
from then on. When I was playing these other games
they were too simple. There was something that
didn’t turn me on about games like Chinese chequers.
I played a little with my sister, but she
wasn’t too interested, so then I started playing games
with myself. I would make the white moves and the black
moves, and then I would just play through the whole
game. My mother started to get worried that it wasn’t
too healthy, playing chess by myself all the time, so
she got me some opponents, local kids. I started getting
lessons from a player in the Brooklyn Chess Club, and
that is when I started to advance. I was lucky: he
taught me an awful lot of things. I don’t think it would
be possible to have a better teacher. We worked together
for several years. I was giving him about a dollar a
lesson, one a week.
When I was 16 I wanted to play chess all the time. All
these invitations kept coming in to travel around and to
make money. I’d had enough and I didn’t particularly
like high school anyway. I wasn’t really learning that
much, and I felt I could learn on my own.’
-
(‘You have been said to be among the most
particular, the most perfectionist of players in
things like light and noise and distraction during
the game. Yet, to the outsider, you seem to be
someone who concentrates so greatly that that kind
of thing might not matter.’) ‘It does matter, if it
really gets annoying. I think I have pretty good
powers of concentration, but I remember I once
played, I think it was in West Berlin, and there was
this guy with his head right over the board. That’s
the kind of thing I’ve had to put up with. Another
time I was playing in Oakland in the States, and
this guy whispers a move in my ear. Things like this
are not really conducive to high-class play.’
-
(‘Is there anybody else in sight that you think
could topple you afterwards?’) ‘Possibly,
eventually. There are a lot of talented players in
the West. But I think that if you keep yourself in
good shape physically, and you keep in love with the
game and keep studying, you should be a top player
till you’re in your 60s.’
-
(‘Don’t you ever worry that concentration on just
one side of your character might prove to have been
a mistake?’) ‘I try to broaden myself. I read quite
a bit. But it is a problem, because you’re kind of
out of touch with real life, being a chessplayer –
not having to go to work and deal with people on
that level. I’ve thought of giving it up off and on,
but I always considered: what else could I do?’
9269. Buenos Aires
Olympiad, 1939
A deeply researched, richly illustrated 384-page hardback
has just been received: Pawns
in
a Greater Game by Justin Corfield (Lara,
2015).
9270. Boris
Eliacheff v N.N.
An addition for Fast Chess
from page 285 of Chess World, 1 December 1948, in
a column written by M.E. Goldstein:
1 f4 e5 2 fxe5 d6 3 exd6 Bxd6 4 Nf3 g5 5 d4 g4 6 Ng5 f5 7
e4 Be7 8 Nh3 gxh3 9 Qh5+ Kf8 10 Bc4 Qe8 11 Qh6+ Nxh6 12
Bxh6 mate.
On page 62 of Irving Chernev’s 1000 Best Short Games
of Chess (New York, 1955) White was identified as
‘Eliascheff’.
9271.
Pillsbury’s correspondence (C.N. 3598)
The letter below was published on page 217 of David
DeLucia’s Chess Library A Few Old Friends (Darien,
2007) and is shown here with Mr DeLucia’s permission:
9272. Theta
C.N. 3780 quoted a brief article by ‘Theta’ on page 129
of the Chess Amateur, February 1926. Below is
another one, from page 193 of the April 1927 issue:
Who was ‘Theta’?
9273.
Kasparov, Leko and Kramnik
Steve Wrinn (Homer, NY, USA) draws attention to a
passage on page 404 of Garry Kasparov on Garry
Kasparov Part III: 1993-2005 (London, 2014)
regarding the game Leko v Kasparov, Linares, 2003:
Our correspondent remarks:
‘In the rapid game referred to by Kasparov it was
Kramnik who had the rook against Leko’s bishop.
Kramnik ultimately won on time at the 133rd move, and
his decision to play on in a theoretically drawn
position elicited various comments. For example, in
the Los
Angeles Times, 14 January 2001 Jack Peters
wrote:
“The players revealed opposing attitudes to rapid
chess in the time scrambles at the end of the seventh
and tenth games. In both cases, Kramnik had a nominal
advantage that Leko neutralized easily. In the seventh
game, Kramnik, with only five seconds remaining,
offered a draw to Leko, who had 23 seconds left. Leko
graciously accepted. In the tenth game, Kramnik had
the edge on the clock and kept playing a drawn
position until Leko ran out of time.”’
9274. Two words
There are two words which all readers of chess books,
magazines, websites, discussion groups, etc. should be
encouraged to write publicly as often as appropriate:
‘Source, please.’
It may be naive to hope that many cheap-jack peddlers of
untrue, uncertain and unsubstantiated quotes, anecdotes
and other would-be information will care if those two
words are, for instance, systematically tagged onto their
vacuous Internet postings, but the attempt has to be made.
‘Source, please’ is a measured, much-needed plea for
writers to act responsibly and for readers to be treated
respectfully.
9275. The greatest
players, past and present
On pages 201-202 of the April 1974 CHESS Irving
Chernev contributed an article, ‘Who were the greatest?’,
which concluded:
Chernev adhered to the same list in his book The
Golden Dozen (Oxford, 1976) but did not explain the
omissions. His CHESS article was prompted by a
poll conducted a few years earlier by William D.
Rubinstein, whose report, ‘Who are, or were, the
Greatest?’, was published on pages 75-76 of CHESS,
5 November 1970. Chernev was one of many prominent
contributors, and in the 1980s Rubinstein sent us copies
of all the correspondence. He has now given us permission
to reproduce some of the material here.
In a letter to Rubinstein dated 28 April 1970 Chernev
mentioned that his opinions were subject to change but
that his current listing was:
‘1 Capablanca; 2 Alekhine; 3 Lasker; 4 Botvinnik; 5
Petrosian; 6 Tal; 7 Fischer; 8 Spassky; 9 Smyslov; 10
Keres; 11 Bronstein; 12 Rubinstein. Pinch hitters:
Pillsbury, Tarrasch, Nimzowitsch.’
A late contributor to the poll was Larsen, who replied
on 17 November 1970 from Palma de Mallorca. The full
letter is reproduced below verbatim:
‘Dear Mr Rubinstein,
If “best” means: “of greatest practical playing
strength” my answer is, that the twelve “best” are
probably all alive to-day. I know that in an interview,
which as far as I remember was also published in Chess
Life, I mentioned Alekhine among the ten best, but
at second thought I would put Alekhine lower than number
12 on the list. His most brilliant successes were
against much weaker opposition than in a good
grandmaster tournament to-day.
Of course, when I mention Botvinnik, Keres, Smyslov,
Tal and Bronstein, my thoughts go back ten years or
more. Then add Petrosyan, Korchnoj and Spassky, these
eight russians belong to the list of twelve, in my
opinion. So do Fischer and I. The last two I would have
to find between Gligoric, Reshevsky, Fine, Najdorf,
Portisch and Hort, probably the first two.
To enumerate the ten or twelve is a little difficult,
I am not a neutral observer. I would rank Botvinnik
higher than Keres, that is about the only thing I can
say.
With best regards.
Bent Larsen.’
In an article ‘I Was There’ by Dimitrije Bjelica on
pages 49-50 of the February 1968 Chess Life the
following exchanges with Larsen were reported:
‘Q: “Who are the best players in chess history?”
A: “The best was Philidor, because he was ahead of the
others. Then Morphy, Steinitz, Lasker, Nimzowitsch,
Alekhine, Botvinnik ... these are the best.”
Q: “But you have forgotten Capablanca?”
A: “No, I did not forget him. I think he did not give
to chess what he could.”
Q: “Who are the most genial [sic] players of
all time?”
A: “Philidor, Steinitz, Nimzowitsch.”
Q: “Do you think that Bobby will be world champion?”
A: “He won’t be, because he is too afraid to lose a
game.”’
The concluding exchange in ‘Larsen Interviewed’ by
Dimitrije Bjelica on pages 283-284 of the May 1970 Chess
Life
& Review:
‘“And who are the best players in history?”
“Philidor, Steinitz, Lasker, Alekhine, Botvinnik, Tal,
Fischer, Petrosian, Spassky and Larsen.”’
See too Larsen’s remarks (e.g. ‘If I were put back in
the early 1920s, it would be easy, very easy to be world
champion’) in his January 1973 discussion with C.H.O’D.
Alexander, as quoted in Bent
Larsen (1935-2010).
Larsen’s view of his own position among the greatest
players was referred to by David Hooper in a letter dated
28 March 1971 which was published under the title ‘Are the
moderns so wonderful?’ on pages 250-251 of CHESS,
13 April 1971. Below is an abridged version (without the
diagrams and moves of the games cited, which are all
familiar):
‘Does the standard of play improve all the time? The
following positions may interest your readers:
In 1916 Janowsky won a brilliancy prize against
Chajes. ... An identical position arose 15 years later
when Mikėnas playing against Kashdan took a perpetual
check.
In 1906 Chigorin (aged 56, and past his best) played
27 R-B7 [against Rubinstein] and his opponent resigned.
Forty years later ... Smyslov (soon to be champion) took
a perpetual check [against Lundin].
In 1886 Zukertort defeated Steinitz (world champion)
with a crushing attack ... Thirty-eight years later
Alekhine (soon to be challenger) drew against Capablanca
(champion). [Hooper was referring to the fifth
match-game in the 1886 world championship match, which
began 1 d4 d5 2 c4 c6 3 Nc3 Nf6 4 e3 Bf5 5 cxd5 cxd5 6
Qb3 Bc8 7 Nf3 Nc6 8 Ne5, and Alekhine v Capablanca, New
York, 1924, which opened 1 d4 d5 2 c4 c6 3 Nc3 Nf6 4 e3
Bf5 5 cxd5 cxd5 6 Qb3 Bc8 7 Nf3 e6 8 Bd3.]
[Taimanov v Larsen]. Black lost after 63...K-K4?
instead of 63...R-KR1ch= (Palma de Mallorca, 1970).
It happens I have the scores of about 900 games played
by Capablanca. I cannot find one in which he lost a
drawn rook and pawn endgame. For a brief moment I
thought: was it possible that he played the endgame
better than Larsen? But no! Capablanca, of course, only
played against Lasker, Rubinstein, Alekhine and other
second-raters.’
To pursue the topic of the greatest
players past and present, information is sought, in
particular, on other occasions when Larsen gave his views.
Further to Larsen’s controversial inclusion of himself on
the ‘best’ list, we note Max Euwe’s reply to William D.
Rubinstein:
9276. Louis Paulsen
Ross Jackson (Raumati South, New Zealand) forwards a
photograph of Louis Paulsen which he owns:
Our correspondent points out that a similar photograph,
believed to be taken by Sam Loyd during the New York, 1857
tournament, was reproduced, from the Russell Collection
archives, in the International Chess Calendar 1991
(Russell Enterprises, Inc.).
9277. Samuel
Reshevsky and Joseph Schwarz
The Gallica website has a photograph
of the prodigy Reshevsky with the opera singer Joseph
Schwarz (1880-1926).
9278. An old
task
The 32 units are placed on the board so that none can
move.
9279. Exploiting a
weak back rank
Michael Schorr (Illingen, Germany) asks for details about
this position:
White to move.
Our correspondent notes that according to pages 182 and
185 of Erfolgreich kombinieren by Volkhard Igney
(Zurich, 2002) the conclusion was 1 Re1 Rd8 2 Qb5 c6 3 Qb6
Rc8 4 dxc6 Rxg2+ 5 Kh1 and wins, whereas pages 27 and 190
of Improve Your Chess Tactics by Yakov Neishtadt
(Alkmaar, 2011) had 1 Re1 Rd8 2 Qb5 Rxg2+ 3 Kh1 Resigns;
the headings in the books were, respectively,
‘Wehnert-Liess, Saßnitz 1962’ and ‘Wehnert-Leiss, East
Germany 1962’.
9280. The
Encyclopaedia
of Chess by Anne Sunnucks
On page 399 of the September 1978 BCM W.H. Cozens
remarked that The Encyclopaedia of Chess by Anne
Sunnucks (London and New York, 1970) was ‘loaded with what
we must now call female chauvinism’, and on the following
page he pointed out that since the entry for ‘Hastings
Christmas Chess Congress’ contained crosstables printed
one to a page, that single entry occupied one-thirteenth
of the whole book.
When it first appeared, the Encyclopaedia was
witheringly criticized by Wolfgang Heidenfeld in letters
published on page 233 of the August 1970 BCM and
on pages 80-81 of the February 1971 issue. The second
letter was in reply to comments by Anne Sunnucks on page
358 of the December 1970 BCM. The specific
complaints in Heidenfeld’s first letter included the
allocation of only eight lines to Stoltz and four to
Richter, ‘but 21 lines are wasted on Miss Sunnucks herself
and 25 (!) on a “player” of the strength of Lisa Lane’.
(In fact, Lisa Lane’s entry was much longer even than
that: 43 lines. On the next page Bent Larsen received 24
lines.)
Heidenfeld’s first letter concluded:
‘This hotch-potch volume reveals not only a lack of
judgment to distinguish between what is important and
what is not; it has been compiled without even a proper
knowledge of chess history, for some of the above
omissions cannot be justified on any grounds of
selectivity. Unfortunately, good will and great industry
are not sufficient for an undertaking of this kind; one
needs solid knowledge and mature judgment as well.’
In his second letter Heidenfeld observed:
‘There is, in fact, an enormous over-emphasis on
British chess, on the one hand, and on women’s chess on
the other – to the detriment of subjects which any
moderately informed person knows to be far more
important in the chess world.’
CHESS was, at first, more lenient on the Encyclopaedia,
and the brief initial notice on page 288 of the 12 May
1970 issue read strangely:
‘The publisher’s claim “More ambitious than both its
Russian and French counterparts” does not stand up to
scrutiny. The compiler’s inexperience shows up, above
all, in an almost comical lack of balance. But the book
provides pleasant browsing for many an evening and, its
faults rectified, will probably be in print a century
hence.’
From page 27 of the 21 August 1970 CHESS:
‘We fear many other defects are coming to light. Three
times more space given to the Women’s World Championship
than to the World Championship itself; more about Lisa
Lane than Spassky; about chess in Romania 13 pages [sic
– three pages]; about France or Germany nil; about Sam
Loyd, nil; the entire coverage of some themes lifted
from out-of-date books. With drastic repairs the Encyclopaedia
will yet become a great reference work.’
Some repairs were made in the second edition (London and
New York, 1976), but it received little attention.
9281. Harry
Benson on Bobby Fischer
Having watched The
Story
of LIFE Magazine, Michael McDowell
(Westcliff-on-sea, England) points out that the comments
about Fischer by the photographer Harry Benson (in the
sequence beginning at about 54’15”) are markedly different
from what Benson said in the documentary Bobby Fischer
Against the World (C.N. 7345).
9282. Pestic
v Bernstein
As mentioned in our feature article on Sidney Bernstein, in
1986 he told us that the best game he ever played was
against R. Pestic, Philadelphia, 1978. Now, Brian Lawson
(Douglaston, NY, USA) has forwarded a letter from
Bernstein dated 10 July 1982:
Larger
version
9283. A composite
picture
From page 15 of A Book of Chess by C.H.O’D.
Alexander (London, 1973):
‘... all attempts – I am happy to say – to show that
chessplayers have some unique mental faculty (e.g.
exceptional memory) have been unsuccessful; the only
respects in which they are superior to non-chessplayers
of the same general calibre seem to be those in which
their experience of chess is directly relevant.
Summing up, can we form any kind of composite picture
of a chessplayer? He is likely to be an individualist
with a good deal of aggression in his make-up, better
with things than with people, mathematically oriented
and at home with abstractions, and an opportunist; in
his feeling for positions he has something of the artist
in him, he has some creative power but on a small scale
– he is a miniaturist, better at detail than at
large-scale ideas. He is no crazier than anyone else –
but when he is crazy, he will probably be paranoiac. But
– as is shown by the millions of players in the USSR –
there are potentially many of him; given suitable soil,
caissa vulgaris is a common enough growth.’
9284. How
To
Get Better At Chess
C.N.s 2447 (see page 393 of A Chess Omnibus) and
9260 have quoted from How To Get Better At Chess
by L. Evans, J. Silman and B. Roberts (Los Angeles, 1991),
and Jean-Pierre Rhéaume (Montreal, Canada) asks for
details about the genesis of the work.
The introductory section on pages ix-xi states that the
book is based on interviews conducted by Betty Roberts,
but information is sought as to the circumstances and
whether full transcripts are extant.
9285. Open
and close games
‘An open game can never be forced upon you, whether you
are Black or White; a close game always can.’
Source: C.J.S. Purdy, Chess World, 1 February
1950, page 43.
9286.
Exploiting a weak back rank (C.N. 9279)
Alan McGowan (Waterloo, Canada) sends an extract from
page 304 of the October 1962 Schach, in an article
by Kurt Richter:
9287. Staunton in
oils
As mentioned in C.N.s 1136 and 3995 (see Pictures
of
Howard
Staunton), page 129 of the April 1930 BCM
referred to a Staunton painting on which details are
lacking:
John Townsend (Wokingham, England) writes:
‘Page 4 of the Cheltenham Chronicle of 15
February 1930 reported that the owner of the painting
was C. Forsdick of 34 Jewry-street, Winchester and
gave the following details:
“The size of painting is 12x10, and it is in a frame
with an inscription on – ‘Howard Staunton Esq.,
Champion Chess Player, Painted by P. Westcott, 1846’.”
Later, the Times of 10 March 1930 (page 11)
carried a report on the meeting of the Executive
Committee of the British Chess Federation that was
mentioned in C.N.s 1136 and 3995, and named the artist
as Philip Westcott:
“It was announced that an oil painting of the late
Howard Staunton, by Philip Westcott, had been offered
to the Federation, and that Sir Richard Barnett had
arranged to purchase it and present it to the
Federation.”
Philip Westcott was a portrait painter, born about
1815 in Liverpool, where he is to be found at the time
of the 1841 and 1851 censuses.
Sir Richard Barnett died later in 1930, his
obituary appearing in the Times of 18 October,
page 14.
Is any information available from BCF records that
confirms that the presentation took place and
identifies the person to whom custody of the painting
was entrusted?’
9288. A
problem composed in 1949
White mates in two moves.
9289.
Wartime film archives
Alan McGowan (Waterloo, Canada) has found film reports on
the tournaments at Prague,
1942 (start: 0’30”) and Prague,
1944 (start: 4’05”). The former newsreel, for
instance, includes footage of Alekhine and Junge, and we
have made these screen-shots:
9290. Two more
newsreel reports
From the same site which provided the footage of Prague,
1942 and Prague, 1944 in the previous item, we point out
Dutch film reports on the first part of the world
championship match-tournament (The Hague, round
nine, 23 March 1948) and the first Women’s World
Team Tournament (Emmen, 1957).
Ingrid Larsen
9291. Rules
on women’s participation in
chess tournaments
Further to Chess and Women
(a feature article which has just been greatly expanded),
Vladislav Tkachiev (Moscow) asks what rules have ever
existed, whether before or after the foundation of FIDE,
which specifically permitted women to play in men’s
tournaments, or specifically debarred them from doing so.
9292. 1 h4
Our latest feature article is on the ‘fantasy opening’ 1 h4.
9293. Stefan
Zweig and Alistair Cooke
As mentioned in the feature articles on Stefan Zweig and Alistair Cooke, the link to
a video clip referred to in C.N. 7520 became invalid.
Paolo Bertino (Madrid) has now provided a new
link.
9294.
Dissertation
Ross Jackson (Raumati South, New Zealand) draws attention
to a Ph.D. dissertation ‘Storming
Fortresses:
A Political History of Chess in the Soviet Union,
1917-1948’ by Michael A. Hudson (September 2013).
9295. F. Le
Lionnais
Oliver Beck (Seattle, WA, USA) writes:
‘In 1944, for his participation in the French
Resistance, François Le Lionnais was arrested and
deported to the concentration camp Dora-Mittelbau. On
pages 294-302 of Autour de la plage Bonaparte
(Paris, 1969), in a chapter entitled “Le Joueur
d’échecs”, the author, Rémy, recounts a conversation
in which Le Lionnais described how his internment was
made more tolerable when his guards learned of his
expertise in chess.
At Dora, each day in his cell Le Lionnais was given
a piece of paper, often taken from a newspaper or
book, for intimate use. One day there occurred a
remarkable coincidence:
“A ma stupéfaction, j'ai retrouvé un beau jour sur le
rectangle de papier un morceau d’un article sur les
échecs publié naguère sous ma signature dans la
collection l’Empreinte” (page 294).
With this Le Lionnais was able to gain the
attention of a high-ranking guard who sought his
advice on adjourned positions of games he was playing
against other guards, and because of this relationship
his situation began to improve. Although he continued
to be subjected to brutal interrogations, he was now
treated with some measure of respect. He began to
receive Red Cross parcels previously unavailable to
him, and was given access to books to satisfy his
insatiable desire to read.
Eventually he was able to convince another guard, a
cousin of Rudolf Hess, that he could produce a
valuable treatise on chess. He was thus able to obtain
writing materials, enabling him to slip an important
message to a fellow prisoner, and his handcuffs were
removed. He then began work on his book, “en
commençant par l’histoire du jeu d’échecs, suivie d’un
exposé théorique et d’exemples concrets choisis parmi
les centaines de parties que je connaissais par cœur”
(page 299). The completed manuscript was called “Le
Labyrinthe des échecs”, and upon his return to France
he was told that it had been recovered: “Je suis
ainsi rentré en possession de mon travail, qui figure
aujourd’hui au musée de la Déportation, où vous pourrez
le voir si vous allez aux Invalides” (page 302).
Is more information available regarding this
manuscript?
An example of Le Lionnais’ chess column in the
collection de l’Empreinte can be found on pages
251-255 of Epitaphe pour un espion (Paris,
1939), a translation of Eric Ambler’s Epitaph for
a Spy.’
9296. Lasker
and Blackburne
From Olimpiu G. Urcan (Singapore):
‘I have found photographs of Lasker and Blackburne
in several large scrapbooks containing application
forms for copyright registration filed with the
Copyright Office of the Stationers’ Company (digitized
via the Nineteenth
Century
Collections Online Database). The application
forms reveal further information about the
photographers, as well as the approximate date when
each picture was taken.’
Emanuel Lasker.
Photograph taken by Frederick Thomas Downey
(July-September 1892)
Joseph Henry Blackburne.
Photographs taken by David James Scott (January 1892).
9297. 1 h4
With regard to the opening 1 h4,
Jerry Spinrad (Nashville, TN, USA) points out an item on
the ‘Zulu Gambit’ on page 747 of the Adelaide
Observer, 23 April 1881:
9298. Negative
comments about the Ruy López
On page 192 of the US edition of his book on Morphy (New
York, 1859) F.M. Edge wrote that Anderssen ‘played that
disgusting arrangement, the Ruy López’. A
twentieth-century master who made surprisingly negative
comments about that opening was E.A. Znosko-Borovsky, in
an article on pages 105-108 of Le monde des échecs,
May 1946. Below are the first page and the last two
paragraphs:
9299. Bird,
Blackmar and Buckley
Hans Renette (Bierbeek, Belgium) asks what grounds Bird
had for stating that ‘Blackmar has invented two gambits’
(C.N. 9084). Readers’ suggestions are invited as to the
second gambit.
The full article in question is shown below, from the Chess
Amateur, June 1913, pages 270-272 (‘Memories of the
Masters. H.E. Bird’ by Robert
J.
Buckley). The Blackmar comment is near the bottom of
page 271.
9300. A
problem composed in 1949 (C.N. 9288)
White mates in two moves.
The solution is 1 a8(R). If 1...Kxd6, 2 Rd8 mate, and if
1...Kxd4 then 2 O-O-O mate.
The latter line depends on a perceived flaw in the chess laws of the time
(Article 8). The problem, by Jose Benardete [sic]
and Edgar Holladay, was published on page 2 of Chess
Life, 20 October 1949. It was given too on page 46
of Chess World, 1 February 1950:
9301. Stamma
William D. Rubinstein (Melbourne, Australia) reports that
the latest supplement to the Oxford Dictionary of
National Biography includes a chess figure, P.
Stamma. The article, by John-Paul Ghobrial, is available online.
9302. An old
task (C.N. 9278)
The task was set on page 190 of the Huddersfield
College Magazine, April 1880:
The solutions on page 215 of the May 1880 issue:
9303. A
better move (C.N.s 7837, 7841, 8738 & 8890)
From page 164 of Das Schachspiel by Siegbert
Tarrasch (Berlin, 1931):
‘Wenn man einen starken, selbst einen entscheidenden
Zug sieht, muß man sich immer die Frage vorlegen, ob
es nicht einen noch stärkeren gibt!’
The English version on page 122 of The Game of Chess
(London, 1935):
‘When one sees a strong, even a decisive move, one must
always ask oneself if there is not a still stronger
one.’
Chess
Notes Archives
Copyright: Edward Winter. All
rights reserved.
|