Chess Notes by Edward Winter

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.

2 January 2019: C.N.s 11161-11164
5 January 2019: C.N.s 11165-11167
6 January 2019: C.N.s 11168-11169
8 January 2019: C.N.s 11170-11171
9 January 2019: C.N. 11172
11 January 2019: C.N.s 11173-11175
12 January 2019: C.N. 11176
13 January 2019: C.N.s 11177-11178
14 January 2019: C.N.s 11179-11182
15 January 2019: C.N.s 11183-11185
16 January 2019: C.N. 11186
18 January 2019: C.N.s 11187-11188

Lev Aronian

A selection of feature articles:

Chess and Hollywood
Chess and Television
The Cambridge v Bedlam Chess Story
Reuben Fine, Chess and Psychology
Fischer’s Views on Chess Masters
The Chess Historian H.J.R. Murray
A Fischer Interview

Archives (including all feature articles)


11161. Courtesy

In a letter dated 24 March 1962 John Vining of London wrote on page 262 of the June 1962 CHESS:


11162. Fraser v N.N. (C.N. 11149)

Alan McGowan (Waterloo, Canada) draws attention to his feature on Dr James Cunningham Fraser (1825-76) at the Chess Scotland website.

11163. Bonar Law v Aurbach

Mr McGowan also submits a cutting about Andrew Bonar Law from the chess column in the 19 October 1921 edition of the Falkirk Herald, page 4:

bonar law

The establishment in Paris, mentioned in C.N. 10114, was the Café de la Rotonde au Palais-Royal.

11164. Humour in the opening

How did this position arise?


Black to move

It comes from a game between C.J.S. Purdy and F.A. Crowl (Melbourne, 29 December 1934 – see page 9 of the Sydney Daily Telegraph of 31 December 1934) which Purdy annotated on pages 317-318 of the November 1936 issue of the Australasian Chess Review under the heading ‘Humour in the Opening’.

Purdy began:

‘Little humour is to be found in the chess openings, a field that is sacrosanct to serious-minded theorists. The following game, however, contains a genuine piece of sheer buffoonery (unintentional) within the first dozen moves. Played in the fourth round of the last Australian championship tournament (Melbourne 1934-35), it is a disgrace to both contestants, but none the less entertaining for that.’

The full score, with Purdy’s punctuation:

1 c4 Nf6 2 d4 e5 3 dxe5 Ng4 4 Bf4 g5 5 Bd2! Nxe5 6 e4 Bg7 7 Nc3 d6 8 Qh5!? h6 9 Be2??? Nbd7 10 Bf1!! Nb6 11 Qd1!!! Be6 12 b3 Qd7 13 Be2! O-O-O 14 Nf3 Ng6 15 Qc2 g4 16 Ng1!! f5 17 exf5 Bxf5 18 Bd3 Rde8+ 19 Nge2 Rhf8 20 Bxf5 Rxf5 21 O-O-O Nh4 22 Nf4 Qf7 23 g3 Nf3 24 Be3 Qf6 25 Nb1! Kb8!? 26 h3 Qa1!? 27 Nd5 Nxd5 28 cxd5 Rf7 29 hxg4 Rfe7 30 Rd3 Ne5 31 Rd4 Nc6 32 Ra4 Nd4 33 Qd2 Nb5 34 Kc2 Nc3 35 Nxc3 Qxh1 36 Bxa7+ Kc8 37 Be3 Kd7? 38 Qd3 Rb8 39 g5 Bxc3 40 Kxc3 Qa1+ 41 Kc2 b5 42 Ra7 h5 43 Qf5+? Kd8 44 Qf8+ Re8 45 Qf7 Re7 46 Qxh5 Qe5 47 Qf3 Ke8 48 Qf6 Qe4+ 49 Kb2 Kd7 50 Qd4 Qxd4+ 51 Bxd4 Re2+ 52 Kc3 Rg8 53 Be3 Rg6 54 Kb4 Rxe3 55 fxe3 Rxg5 56 Kxb5 Rxd5+ 57 Kc4 Rg5 58 e4 Kc6 59 b4 Rxg3 60 a4 Kb6 61 Ra8 Kb7 62 Re8 Rg1 63 Re7 Rc1+ 64 Kb5 Ka7 65 e5 dxe5 66 Rxe5 Kb7 67 Re7 Ka7 68 a5 Kb8 69 Re5 Rd1 70 Re6 Rd8? 71 Kc6 Rh8 72 b5 Rg8 73 a6 Rd8? 74 a7+ Kxa7 75 Kxc7 Resigns.

A note in the middle-game is of interest:


Position before 37 Be3 Kd7

[37 Be3] ‘White’s sealed move, virtually forced. Now, a remarkable instance of the psychological factor in chess is that Crowl, in spite of having an hour for private analysis, and being certain of White’s sealed move, made a gross blunder immediately on resuming. He had failed to adjust himself to the fact that White had completely recovered his lost ground. He had therefore examined only defensive moves for White. This shows that it is much better to recover from a bad game than to have an equal game all the time.’

Finally, Purdy called 70...Rd8 ‘the losing move’, adding this maxim in bold type:

‘Avoid using a rook for defence.’

11165. 64

  • ‘Bobby Fischer died in Iceland of kidney failure on 17 January 2008 at age 64 – the exact number of squares on the chessboard.’

Page 314 of This Crazy World of Chess by Larry Evans (Las Vegas, 2009).

  • ‘... he died at the iconic age of 64.’

Page 26 of Battle of Bonn by Raymond Keene and Eric Schiller (2008).

  • ‘ ... [Fischer] moved to Iceland and died there at the iconic age of 64, the number of squares on the chessboard!’

Page 123 of Carlsen-Anand Match for the World Chess Championship by Raymond Keene (New York, 2013).

  • ‘Iconically, Fischer died in 2008 in Reykjavik, the scene of his 1972 triumph, at the age of 64, the number of squares on the chessboard.’

Page 29 of Carlsen v Caruana: FIDE World Chess Championship, London 2018 by Raymond Keene and Byron Jacobs (London, 2018).

  • ‘Upon Fischer’s death in 2008 at the age of 64 for 64 squares of the chess board, many where [sic] sad ...’

Page 8 of A Guide Book Of Places To Go and People You Will See Around NY Chess by Peter Julius Sloan (2012).

  • ‘On 17 January 2008 Robert James Fischer died at the age of 64 – one year for every square on the chess board ...’

Page 192 of The Big Book of World Chess Championships by Andre Schulz (Alkmaar, 2016).

  • ‘He died from renal failure, after refusing medical treatment from fear of being poisoned, at the symbolic age of 64 (the number of squares on a chessboard).’

Page 113 of The Psychology of Chess by Fernand Gobet (Abingdon, 2019).

How often has anyone bothered making such a point about, for instance, Staunton or Steinitz?

11166. Psychology

Below is a remark by G.H. Diggle from an article in the December 1981 Newsflash which was reproduced on page 78 of Chess Characters (Geneva, 1984). See too C.N. 7805.

‘Sixty years ago there were dotted around the provinces (either in small struggling clubs or once a week in “private house soirées”) players with only each other’s chess intellects to feed on who would loyally stick to the game without improving one iota through whole decades. ... Many of them were characters of as great psychological interest as a Fischer or a Korchnoi; for to imagine that “psychological motifs” and whatnot are the exclusive monopoly of grandmasters is to fall into the snobbish fallacy of the Sergeant Major who (when a poor Private reported sick with a “pain in the abdomen”) roared at him: “You ’ave a stummick! Only orficers has abdomens!’

11167. ‘Before the death of Alekhine in 1946’

An unfathomable claim about FIDE on pages 288-289 of Who Was The Strongest? by Raymond Keene, Nathan Divinsky and Jeff Sonas (Aylesbeare, 2006):

‘Three years later [in 1993] Kasparov annihilated Nigel Short in a match that was held outside the auspices of FIDE, the World Chess Federation, which had shown itself increasingly incompetent to handle events at the highest level. FIDE soldiered gamely on with its own championship, much as it did before the death of Alekhine in 1946, but FIDE always had to make do without the world’s top two players at any given time.’

11168. Vogue


11169. Reshevsky v Fischer


The above snippet, concerning a case not yet included in Chess in the Courts, comes from page 296 of the October 1961 BCM, in a section edited by Harry Golombek.


Chess Review, September 1961, page 264


Chess Review, October 1961, page 317

Below are five press reports:

reshevsky fischer

New York Times, 15 August 1961, page 36


New York Times, 17 August 1961, page 22

reshevsky fischer

New York Times, 18 August 1961, page 27


New York Times, 19 August 1961, page 15


New York Times, 10 April 1962, page 33

There were briefer reports in the New York Times of 14 August 1961, page 20 and 16 August 1961, page 25. The above photograph of Reshevsky, Fischer and Ferrer in the 15 August 1961 edition is similar to the one in Chess and Hollywood. C.N. 8923 referred to coverage of the affair in Chess Life; an article entitled ‘The Fischer-Reshevsky Snafu’ on page 321 of Chess Review, November 1961 provides a notable summary.

On page 137 of Endgame (New York, 2011) Frank Brady wrote that ‘the case lingered in the courts for years and was finally dropped’. Does a detailed account of the full procedure exist?

11170. Léonard Tauber (C.N.s 7821 & 7830)

Eduardo Bauzá Mercére (New York, NY, USA) sends this game from page 38 of the Washington Post, 13 July 1919:


1 e4 e5 2 f4 exf4 3 Nf3 g5 4 Bc4 g4 5 O-O gxf3 6 Qxf3 Qf6 7 e5 Qxe5 8 d3 Bh6 9 Nc3 Nc6 10 Bd2 Nge7 11 Rae1 Qc5+ 12 Kh1 d6 13 Nd5 Be6 14 Rxe6 fxe6 15 Qh5+ Ng6 16 Nf6+ Kf7 17 Qxh6 Kxf6 18 Rxf4+ Ke7 19 Qg7+ Kd8 20 Bxe6 Nce7 21 Qxh8+ Nxh8 22 Rf8 mate.


This game between Léonard Tauber and Charles d’Hersignerie had been published on pages 254-255 of La Stratégie, November-December 1918:

tauber d'hersignerie


As mentioned in Chess and Jews, A. Geoffroy Dausay was a pseudonym of Alphonse Goetz.

11171. On board the Llangibby Castle

From page 184 of the June 1930 BCM:


Larger version

The picture has been mentioned (‘group photograph of team match, 1930’) in Sultan Khan.

11172. Intellectual gymnastics

Olimpiu G. Urcan (Singapore) has been looking into claims that Steinitz referred to chess as intellectual/mental gymnastics (geistige Gymnastik or intellektuelle Gymnastik) and offers these citations for such terms:

  • Deutsche Schachzeitung, June 1866, pages 161-164 (article by V. Grimm):
  • Chess Player’s Magazine, September 1866, pages 257-260 (translation of the above Grimm article):
  • Illustrirte Zeitung, 8 September 1866, page 162:
  • Household Chess Magazine, 31 January 1865, page 2 (a magazine edited by Thomas Henry Hopwood):

‘It is our intention to create for our readers a series of mental recreations or, in other words, we have pleasure in presenting them with a complete

intellectual gymnastics,

on which the mental portion of their organization may take full swing.

First and foremost in our mental gymnasium stands chess, the royal game; patronized by the Emperor, who reigns over nations, and by Genius, who, still greater, reigns over minds.’

... Charades, draughts, riddles, novels of a chess character, and intellectual gymnastics generally will form additional attractions to our work, and which, we trust, will duly contribute to the amusement of our readers.’

  • Wiener Presse, 14 December 1884, page 1:

Complete article

  • Columbia Chess Chronicle, 24 September 1887, page 107, quoting from J.A. Congdon (‘Gen. Gongdon’) in the Scranton Truth:

‘Chess is considered the most intellectual of amusements. Its tendencies are moral and refining. It is admirable mental gymnastics.’

  • Letter from Steinitz to H.M. Gorham and W.E. Lester dated 13 April 1888, quoted on pages 95-96 of The Steinitz Papers by K. Landsberger (Jefferson, 2002):

‘You see I am trying to recover my good humor but I am really sincere in thinking that our mental gymnastics offered more relief to a philosophical mind in time of great affliction than even music or any other art.’

  • International Chess Magazine, June 1888, pages 175-176 (in Steinitz’s ‘Personal and General’ column):

‘For many enthusiastic chessplayers are, like myself, convinced that the general cultivation of chess logic would help to cure our age from many political, economical and philosophical escrescences, and would also greatly diminish such baneful excesses and unhealthy habits as over-smoking, drinking, gambling, etc., which are incompatible with the acquisition of excellence in our mental gymnastics.’

  • The Modern Chess Instructor by W. Steinitz (New York, 1889), page xxvii:

‘In our time the game is becoming more widely popular among intelligent people in different countries, and it is almost universally recognized as a healthy mental exercise, which in its effects on the intellectual faculties is akin to that of physical gymnastics on the conservation and development of bodily strength.’

  • Philadelphia Inquirer, 22 October 1893, page 21 (feature by Carl Synder which included an interview with Steinitz). One of the world champion’s remarks:

‘Chess may be described as mental athletics. It is the gymnasium of the mind. I believe that the mind can be trained as easily and perfectly as the body, and I know of no better exercise than chess. It develops, strengthens and clarifies the brain.’

  • Interview with Steinitz in the Pittsburg Dispatch, quoted on pages 197-198 of The Steinitz Papers by K. Landsberger (Jefferson, 2002):

‘It [chess] is a species of mental gymnastics, which, when properly applied, should be to the hygiene of the mind just what athletics are to the hygiene of the body. In other words, chessplayers may help brain workers to know how to take care of themselves.’

  • Article by Steinitz in Johnson’s Universal Cyclopædia, quoted on page 151 of The Steinitz Papers by K. Landsberger (Jefferson, 2002):

‘The influence of the cultivation of this game [chess] on the highest qualities of mind bears essential resemblance to the effect of gymnastics on the growth, increase and conservation of the physical powers.’

Mr Urcan adds:

‘I cannot provide independent corroboration of the text which Landsberger states was in the Pittsburg Dispatch.

You have noted on several occasions the inadequacy of the sourcing in his book William Steinitz, Chess Champion (Jefferson, 1993), and the gymnastics matter provides another example. From page 152:


The bibliographical reference ‘(34)’ leads to nothing more precise than this on page 472:


I can at least add that pages 357-358 of the November 1885 Deutsche Schachzeitung have a reference to H. Bennecke and to Steinitz’s useful letter, but there is nothing about any “intellectual gymnastics” remark.’

11173. An unidentified figure

The photograph below was published opposite page 208 of Hundert Jahre Schachturniere by P. Feenstra Kuiper (Amsterdam, 1964). For a larger version, see C.N. 4772 and Nimzowitsch’s My System:


Concerning the ‘unknown man’ standing third from the left, Dan Scoones (Port Coquitlam, BC, Canada) writes:

‘I believe that the same individual is in the 1937 Moscow team photograph on page 210 of Chess Review, September 1937 which was reproduced in C.N. 7022. He was identified there as David:


The only games of his that I have traced are from the Leningrad Semi-Final of the 11th USSR Championship, 1939, where he tied for last place with Solomon Gotthilf with 5½ points from 17 games.

There is confusion over his forename. The crosstable and game-file at the RusBase website do not agree, giving G. David and Michael David respectively. This has sown further confusion in the ChessBase database because there is a Michael David of Israel.

The Soviet player David does not seem to have had a particularly active or distinguished chess career, and his appearance in group photographs of important events is therefore rather mysterious.’

11174. Bird v Lasker

From page 101 of Lasker’s Manual of Chess (New York, 1927):

bird lasker

The text appears towards the end of the Second Book; page numbers vary in other editions.

Jean-Pierre Rhéaume (Montreal, Canada) points out that the game in question which began 1 f4 e5 2 fxe5 d6 3 exd6 Bxd6 4 Nf3 g5 occurred in the second Lasker v Bird match, i.e. in 1892 and not 1890.

The score was given on pages 485-486 of H.E. Bird by Hans Renette (Jefferson, 2016), with these notes by Steinitz from page 22 of the New York Daily Tribune, 25 September 1892:

bird lasker

Notwithstanding what appears in some publications and databases, the game continued until move 63, as reported in many contemporary sources, such as page 5 of The Scotsman, 31 August 1892 and page 12 of Lasker’s London Chess Fortnightly, 1 September 1892. The concluding moves (after 42...Bxh1) have not been found.

Page 68 of the recent Zenón Franco book on Lasker (C.N.s 11130, 11139 and 11140) has ‘40 Bb6 Bd5! 0-1’. As regards the opening, page 61 states:


The misspelling ‘Fromm’ is common, but the player’s name is not in doubt: Martin From (1828-95).

Some articles on the opening:

  • ‘Zur Eröffnung 1 f2-f4. From’s Gambit’ by S.A. Sörensen, Deutsche Schachzeitung, July-August 1862, pages 200-202;
  • ‘From’s Gambit’ by J.H. Zukertort, Chess Monthly, October 1879, page 54; December 1879, pages 110-111; January 1880, pages 141-144; March 1880, pages 213-215; April 1880, pages 246-248;
  • ‘From’s Gambit’ by C. von Bardeleben, Deutsche Schachzeitung, July 1919, pages 132-137.

11175. Opposite-coloured bishops


White to move

This position was analyzed by Emanuel Lasker. Can White win?

11176. Modern chess and the good old days

The start of an article entitled ‘Modern Chess Dull?!’ by Fred Reinfeld on page 32 of the Chess Review, March 1940:

‘It is unfortunate, but true, that a sizable proportion of amateurs find modern master chess dull. “Ah, the good old days!” This is based on what is for the most part an imaginary kind of chess which is supposed to have been peculiar to any age but our own. If the good old chess was really so interesting, we should expect it to have flourished in the first International Tournament, held at London in 1851. If we turn to the Book of the Tournament, however, we discover that it is an epochal collection of the most dreary, tedious, witless, planless, slovenly and inept chess that has ever been assembled between the covers of a book. Of the 85 games in the main event, not more than five could be described as brilliant by the most charitable man in the world; and he would be hard put to it to find ten games that were worth looking at.

It is impossible to retain any more illusions about the chess of this period as one reads Staunton’s peppery philippics against his bumble-fingered colleagues. (And since he was much inferior to present-day analysts, he leaves myriads of blunders untouched!)’

Reproducing the article, until the title ‘Ah, The Good Old Days!’, on pages 96-98 of his anthology The Treasury of Chess Lore (New York, 1951), Reinfeld added this introduction:

‘At the time I wrote this article I was nettled by the disparagement of modern masters which flourishes side by side with unthinking praise for the ancients. My views are still the same, although my approach to his [sic] type of controversy has mellowed considerably!’

‘The Good Old Days’ was the heading to game 46 (Flohr v Landau, Antwerp, 1930) on page 91 of Chess Strategy and Tactics by Fred Reinfeld and Irving Chernev (New York, 1933):

‘In every chess era the greybeards are forever bemoaning, maliciously or mournfully, the passing of “the good old days”. Nowadays, for example, one hears that there is no “brilliancy” left in chess, no sacrifices, no combinations. There is nothing left, runs the wail, but stodgy woodshifting. For those who still look back sadly to the flashy and trashy confetti of so-called “immortal games”, we offer a bit of consolation ...’

On page 181 of Great Brilliancy Prize Games of the Chess Masters (New York, 1961) Reinfeld introduced Flohr v Landau as follows:

‘Many years ago, when I first saw this game, it seemed to me an effective refutation of the charge that modern chess is much less brilliant than the old-time variety. Now that so many years have passed, this game is no longer “modern”, but it is still a delight to play over and appreciate.’

1 d4 Nf6 2 c4 c6 3 Nf3 d5 4 e3 e6 5 Nbd2 Be7 6 Bd3 Nbd7 7 O-O O-O 8 b3 c5 9 Bb2 cxd4 10 exd4 dxc4 11 bxc4 b6 12 Qc2 Bb7 13 Ne5 Qc7 14 f4 Rfd8 15 Ndf3 h6 16 Qe2 Nxe5 17 fxe5 Nd7 18 d5 Bc5+ 19 Kh1 exd5


20 Ng5 Nf8 21 Nxf7 Re8 22 Qg4 Re6 23 Bf5 Rae8 24 Bxe6 Rxe6 25 Nd6 Bxd6 26 exd6 Qd7 27 Ba3 Nh7 28 h3 dxc4 29 Qxc4 Nf6 30 Rxf6 gxf6 31 Re1 Bc8 32 Rc1 Bb7 33 Qg4+ Kh8 34 Rc7 Re1+ 35 Kh2 Qxg4 36 hxg4 Resigns.

From page 627 of L’Echiquier, 12 February 1930:

flohr landau

Flohr annotated his victory on pages 46-47 of Československý Šach, March 1930:

flohr landau


11177. Alekhine v Alexander

‘Some of Marshall’s most sparkling moves look at first like typographical errors.’

This well-known remark is listed in The Chess Wit and Wisdom of W.E. Napier.

On page 194 of Great Brilliancy Prize Games of the Chess Masters (New York, 1961) Fred Reinfeld wrote:

‘Some of Alekhine’s best combinations are so startlingly original that they give the impression of being oversights. In this regard, 20 P-K4! is one of his most striking moves.’

The game was Alekhine v Alexander, Nottingham, 1936:


On page 196 Reinfeld commented regarding 20 e4:

‘This sly move looks like a blunder, as Black can now win a pawn.’

The game continued 20...Nxe4 21 Qc1 Nef6 22 Bxf5, and Black resigned at move 27.

11178. ‘The Immortal Lightning Game’

From pages 306-307 of The Delights of Chess by Assiac (New York, 1974):



Assiac had also presented the conclusion on page 202 of Chess Treasury of the Air by Terence Tiller (Harmondsworth, 1966):


1 e4 c6 2 Nc3 d6 3 d4 Nf6 4 Bf4 Qb6 5 Qd2 Nbd7 6 Nf3 e6 7 Bd3 Be7 8 O-O O-O 9 a4 Qc7 10 e5 Nd5 11 Nxd5 cxd5 12 Rae1 Re8 13 Re3 Nf8 14 Rfe1 Bd7 15 a5 a6 16 exd6 Bxd6 17 Bxd6 Qxd6 18 Ne5 Bb5 19 Bxb5 axb5 20 b4 b6 21 axb6 Qxb6 22 Rc3 f6 23 Ng4 Rac8 24 Rg3 Kf7 25 Nh6+ gxh6 26 Qxh6 Ke7 27 Rg7+ Kd6 28 Qf4+ Kc6 29 Re3 Qb8 30 Ra3 Kb6 31 Qd6+ Rc6 32 Qc5+ Resigns.

The full score of this allegedly ‘celebrated’ game is in databases, but which is the earliest, or best, primary source?

11179. Lasker on development


Pages 60-61 of Common Sense in Chess by Emanuel Lasker (London, 1896):



On page 36 of Chess Treasury of the Air by Terence Tiller (Harmondsworth, 1966) Harry Golombek quoted the marked paragraph and contended:

‘This sentence alone contains more instruction than many a book that we see turned out by the dozen nowadays.’

11180. Chigorin engraving (C.N. 5686)

Another version of the engraving of Chigorin playing blindfold, published on page 444 of the 23 April 1888 edition of Niva:


11181. Johannes Metger (C.N. 11141)

The full obituary of Metger on pages 199-201 of Kagans Neueste Schachnachrichten, January-March 1926:




The end of the Gill v Metger game-score is garbled, and we have added 30...Qc1+: 1 e4 e5 2 Nf3 Nc6 3 Bc4 Nf6 4 Ng5 d5 5 exd5 Na5 6 Bb5+ c6 7 dxc6 bxc6 8 Be2 h6 9 Nf3 e4 10 Ne5 Bd6 11 f4 Qc7 12 d4 O-O 13 c4 c5 14 Be3 Rd8 15 Nc3 Rb8 16 Nb5 Rxb5 17 cxb5 cxd4 18 Qxd4 Nd5 19 Bd2


19... e3 20 Bxe3 Nxe3 21 Qxe3 Bb4+ 22 Kf1 Bd2 23 Qg3 Rd4 24 Nd3 Bf5 25 Rd1 Nc4 26 Rxd2 Nxd2+ 27 Ke1 Qc2 28 Nf2 Ne4 29 Qf3 Bg4 30 Qxg4 Qc1+ 31 Nd1 Rxd1+ 32 Bxd1 Qd2+ 33 Kf1 Qf2 mate.

11182. ‘The Immortal Lightning Game’ (C.N. 11178)

Hans-Georg Kleinhenz (Munich, Germany) sends a report by Lothar Schmid on pages 382-383 of Caissa (‘2. Oktober-Heft 1952’):


Larger version

11183. Meyer v Hirschfeld

Hans Renette (Bierbeek, Belgium) and Fabrizio Zavatarelli (Milan, Italy) provide two games between H.F.L. Meyer and P. Hirschfeld which are not in their book Neumann, Hirschfeld and Suhle (Jefferson, 2018).

11184. De mortuis

Wanted: examples of particularly negative chess obituaries, whatever the level of justification.

Norman T. Whitaker, one of the game’s leading reprobates, received little attention when he died in 1975. The obituary by his colleague James E. Gates on page 521 of the August 1975 Chess Life & Review was low-key:

‘Outside chess Norman was not very distinguished, being involved in too many things at and beyond the laws he studied.’

11185. Opposite-coloured bishops (C.N. 11175)

From pages 102-103 of Schachjahrbuch 1922 by Ludwig Bachmann (Ansbach, 1924):



11186. Barry Martin on chess history

Based on a very short browse, below are some extracts from Chess Problems, Play and Personalities by Barry Martin (Beddington, 2018).

The start of an article about Alekhine on pages 41-43:

‘... his father was a landowner, a Marshal of Nobility, and a member of the Russian Duma. His mother was an heiress to an industrial fortune. Alekhine became addicted to the game of chess at the age of 11 ...’

This brings to mind page 5 of The Oxford Companion to Chess by D. Hooper and K. Whyld (Oxford, 1984):

‘His father was a landowner, a Marshal of Nobility, and a member of the Duma, his mother heiress of an industrial fortune. ... Alexander became addicted to the game at the age of about 11 ...’

Similarly, pages 194-195 (the section on Leonard Barden) are little more than pickings from his Wikipedia entry.

Sometimes, though, Mr Martin is self-reliant. From page 70:

‘Howard Staunton, the only English chess player ever to have held the title of World Champion by winning against the generally accepted World Champion, St. Amain in Paris in 1843 ...’

Page 81 discusses St Petersburg, 1914:

‘The combatants in the main tournament were the leading lights at that time of world chess, five of whom had played in a pre-tournament which included 11 players to the main tournament in St Petersburg.’

Page 269 states that Capablanca ...

‘... taught himself the game of chess at the age of 13’.

11187. Hutagalung and Purdy

From page 35 of the February 1961 Chess Review:

hutagalung purdy

11188. Opposite-coloured bishops (C.N.s 11175 & 11185)


White to move

This position from a game between A. van Foreest and H. Wagner in an international team match was analyzed by Emanuel Lasker as a win for White.

W. John discussed the match on pages 121-123 of the June 1922 Deutsche Schachzeitung, with, at the bottom of page 122, a reference to Lasker’s analytical work:




The Deutsche Schachzeitung did not give the game-score, but it was published on pages 127-128 of Deutsches Wochenschach, 18 June 1922:



The game is also on pages 151-152 of the June 1922 Tijdschrift van den Nederlandschen Schaakbond, with a reference to analysis by Bernstein as well as Lasker:



The pages from Deutsches Wochenschach and Tijdschrift van den Nederlandschen Schaakbond are reproduced courtesy of the Cleveland Public Library.

The full game: 1 e4 e5 2 Nf3 Nc6 3 Bc4 Nf6 4 Ng5 d5 5 exd5 Na5 6 d3 h6 7 Nf3 e4 8 Qe2 Nxc4 9 dxc4 Bc5 10 c3 O-O 11 Nd4 Bg4 12 Qc2 Qe7 13 Be3 Rae8 14 h3 Bc8 15 Nd2 Nh7 16 O-O-O f5 17 g3 Ng5 18 h4 Nf7 19 N2b3 Bd6 20 c5 Be5 21 Ne2 Rd8 22 Nf4 Bxf4 23 gxf4 h5 24 Qe2 Nh6 25 Qc4 Qf7 26 Qd4 Ng4 27 c4 c6 28 d6 Be6 29 Nd2 Rd7 30 b3 Rfd8 31 f3 Nf6 32 fxe4 fxe4 33 Nxe4 Nxe4 34 Qxe4 Re8 35 Qd4 Bf5 36 Rhe1 Re4 37 Qc3 Rd8 38 Bd4 Rde8 39 Be5 Rxe1 40 Rxe1 Bd7 41 Kb2 Bg4 42 Re3 Bd7 43 Qe1 Kh7 44 Bc3 Rxe3 45 Qxe3 Kg8 46 Qe5 Kh7 47 Qg5 Kg8 48 Ka3 Bg4 49 Be5 Kh7 50 Kb4 Qd7 51 Qe7 Kg8 52 Bxg7 Qxe7 53 dxe7 Kf7 54 Be5 Kxe7 55 Bb8 a6 56 Ka5 Kd7 57 Kb6 Kc8 58 Be5 Bf5 59 Ka5 Kd7. Adjudicated a win for White.

For ease of reference, the feature on pages 102-103 of L. Bachmann’s Schachjahrbuch 1922 (C.N. 11175) is repeated here:



Richard Forster (Zurich) writes:

‘The analysis in the Schachjahrbuch and in the Dutch magazine differ, and it is possible that Lasker gave no concrete lines himself, but showed the general winning plan, which different editors then put into different lines. Although both sets of analysis lead to a win, the best result comes from combining the two.

60 Kb6 Kc8 61 b4 Bd3 62 a4 Bxc4 63 f5 Bg8 64 f6 Be6 65 a5! Bd5


66 Bh2!

66 b5 axb5 leads nowhere, but now Black is in Zugzwang. After the move in the Schachjahrbuch (66 Ba1), Black could defend more tenaciously with 66...Kb8, forcing White to go for the Zugzwang with, for instance, 67 Bb2 Kc8 68 Be5.

66...Bc4 67 b5! axb5

67...cxb5 68 c6 bxc6 69 Kxa6 c5 70 Kb6 also wins for White. The try 67...Kd7!? 68 bxc6+ bxc6 leads to a technically lost position after 69 f7 Ke7 70 Kxc6 Bxf7 71 Kb6 Kd7 72 c6+! (but not 72 Kxa6?? Kc6).

68 a6 bxa6 69 Kxc6 b4 70 Kd6!

White does not need the king manoeuvre to b6 or b5 (which is given in both sets of analysis, although at different points). Against the best defence, this would simply lose time. The king belongs on d6.

70...b3 71 Be5 Kd8 72 c6 a5 73 c7+ Kc8 74 Bb2 a4


75 Ba3!

The important last point. If White cashes in too early with 75 Ke7? Kxc7 76 f7 Bxf7 77 Kxf7, Black has 77...Kd6! and saves the game.

75...Bg8 76 Ke7 Kxc7 77 f7 Bxf7 78 Kxf7 Kc6

Thanks to 75 Ba3, Black does not have the square d6 for the king and must lose.

79 Ke6


White wins by picking up the queen’s-side pawns with his king.’

Chess Notes Archives


Copyright: Edward Winter. All rights reserved.