docjan
|
| << previous
| page 1 of 4 | next >> |
|
- 1997 - Groningen Candidates Tournament
including FIDE's minimatch
1.Anand's Performance in Classical (Groningen): 2824
-- 71,4% [+6 -0 =8] vs. 2665 opposition
-- All Results: 67% [+8 -0 =15]
Anand's Performance in Classical (+FIDE match): 2794
-- 65% [+8 -2 =10] vs. 2686 opposition
-- All Results: 60% [+10 -4 =17]
2. Adams [2750 perf.in Classical: +4 -1 =9] all:60%[18/30] 3. Short [2793 perf.: +6 -2 =2] all:64%[13,5/24] 4. Gelfand [2626 perf.: +0 -1 =7] all:58%[10.5/18] 5. Dreev [2734 perf.: +2 -0 =6] all:63%[7.5/12]
6. Van Wely [2709 perf.: +2 -0 =6] all:57%[8/14] 7. Shirov [2704 perf.: +2 -1 =5] all:60%[6/10]
8. Krasenkow [2638 perf.: +3 -2 =5] all:57%[8.5/15] The matches, consisting of 2 (4 in round 7, and 6 in the championship) games, were played at the rate of 1 game per day, with time limits of 40/100, 20/50, and all remaining moves in 10 minutes. 30 seconds were added to the clock after each move, commencing from the first move. No adjournments! Should the match be tied, on the following day, a second match would be played, all game in 25 minutes for each player, with 10 seconds added to the clock after every move. Should this second match be tied, in rounds 2 - 7, another match would be played, all game in 15 minutes for each player, again with 10 seconds added to the clock after every move. If the score were still tied after the 2d match of round 1, or the 3rd match of rounds 2-7, then sudden death games, 4 minutes for White, 5 minutes for Black, 10 seconds added to the clock after each move, were played. In case, of a draw, another game would be played. Should the arbiter feel that too much time was being taken, he (or she...) could require one sudden death game, 6 minutes for white, 5 for black, no added time. In event of a draw, black advances to the next round.
|
|
326 games, 1997-1998 - 500 Master Games of Chess
'500 Master Games of Chess' by Savielly Tartakower and Julius Du Mont.
|
|
489 games, 1788-1938 - Agency International (Lonson `997)
|
The tournament was held May 26 - June 1, 1997, in celebration of the centenary of the first women's international tournament. With a line-up of five men and five women, it was a Category 6 event with an average rating of 2372, so an IM norm could be obtained with a score of 5.5/9. The closely matched field led to a tight race ending in a tirple tie for first between Dunnington, McShane, and Kachiani-Gersinska, with Forster and Stefanove just one-half point behind. table[
Agency International 1997
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0
1 Abgys Dunnington 2445 * ½ ½ 1 ½ 1 ½ ½ ½ 1 6.0
2 Luke McShane 2400 ½ * ½ 0 ½ 1 1 ½ 1 1 6.0
3 Ketino Kachiani-Gersinska 2365 ½ ½ * ½ ½ ½ ½ 1 1 1 6.0
4 Richard Forster 2365 0 1 ½ * 1 ½ 1 1 ½ 0 5.5
5 Antoaneta Stefanova 2415 ½ ½ ½ 0 * ½ ½ 1 1 1 5.5
6 Susan Arkell Lalic 2405 0 0 ½ ½ ½ * 1 0 1 1 4.5
7 John R Richardson 2360 ½ 0 ½ 0 ½ 0 * 1 1 1 4.5
8 Harriet Hunt 2330 ½ ½ 0 0 0 1 0 * 0 1 3.0
9 Richard Tozer 2380 ½ 0 0 ½ 0 0 0 1 * ½ 2.5
10 Marina Martsynovskaya 2300 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 ½ * 1.5 ]table
----
<Prizes>
1st-3rd: Dunnington, McShane, Kachiani-Gersinska: 400 pounds each)
4th: Forster, Stfanova (50 poiunds)
Forster also achieved a IM norm
-----
<Progressive Scores> table[
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
1 Dunnington 0.5 1.5 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5,5 6.0
2 McShane 1.0 1.5 2.0 3.0 3,5 4.0 4.0 5.0 6.0
3 Kachiani-Gersinska 1.0 1.5 2.0 3.0 4,0 4.5 5.0 5.5 6.0
4 Forster 0.0 1.0 1.5 2.5 3.0 4.0 5.0 5.0 5.5
5 Stevanova 0.5 1.5 2.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 4,5 5.0 5.5
6 Arkell Lalic 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 4.5
7 Richardson 0.0 0.0 1.0 2.0 2.5 3.0 3,5 3.5 4.5
8 Hunt 0.0 0.0 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.0 2.0 3.0 3,0
9 Tozer 0.5 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 2.0 2.0 2,5
10 Martsynovskaya 1.0 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1,5 1,5 1,5 1,5 ]table
-----
<Women vs. Men> table[
-------------- Kachiani-Gersinska,Ketino 2375 3.0/5
| ----------- Stefanova,Antoaneta 2415 2.5/5
| | -------- Arkell Lalic,Susan 2405 2.5/5
| | | ----- Martsynovskaya,Marina 2300 1.5/5
| | | | -- Hunt,Harriet 2330 1.0/5
| | | | |
1 Dunnington,Angus 2445 ½ ½ 1 1 ½ 3.5/5
2 McShane,Luke 2400 ½ ½ 1 1 ½ 3.5/5
3 Richardson,John R 2360 ½ ½ 0 1 1 3.0/5
4 Forster,Richard 2365 ½ 1 ½ 0 1 3.0/5
5 Tozer,Richard 2380 0 0 0 ½ 1 1.5/5 ]table
-----
<Men vs. Men>
table[
1 2 3 4 5
1 Dunnington * 1 ½ ½ ½ 2.5
2 Forter 0 * 1 1 ½ 2.5
3 McShane ½ 0 * 1 1 2.5
4 Richardson ½ 0 0 * 1 1.5
5 Tozer ½ ½ 0 0 * 1.0
]table
-----
<Women vs Women> table[
1 2 3 4 5
1 Kachiani-Gersinska * ½ ½ 1 1 3.0
2 Stefanova ½ * ½ 1 1 3.0
4 Arkell Lalic ½ ½ * 0 1 2.0
4 Hunt 0 0 1 * 1 2.0
5 Martsynovskaya 0 0 0 0 * 0.0
]table
|
|
45 games, 1997 - Amenities and Background of Chess-play
|
[Note: Originally, this work consisted of three booklets written and published by William Napier in 1934 and 1935. They were later edited by I. A. Horowitz and republished in 1957 under the title "Paul Morphy and the Golden Age of Chess", with additional material on Morphy and his games by Fred Reinfeld. Though thanks must be given to Horowitz for making the original work more widely available, I hope you'll forgive me for ignoring the Reinfeld portions. With all due respect, Napier deserves to stand alone. The introduction which follows gives some idea of his unique writing style.] <GREETING>
Gracious Reader: The main object of this work is the organized preservation of excellence in chess play. Worthy and significant games, long hidden away in old and previous journals, and memoranda, are to be dusted off and brought to life, if they have spark and courage--and withal, that charm and zest which, in the Middle Ages, the Chronicles relate, lifted chess to a respected place among the eight accounplishments of a gentleman. Zealously, then war is to be waged upon oblivion. In a playful mood the scholarly Reti observed quaintly that chess was the game of the unappreciated man! Mischief enough! Surely. But what then shall be done about the unappreciated chess player? He seems to be twice afflicted--like those Puritan women who endured the same hardshps as the men, and, intepidly, had also to endure the men. Perhaps Master Reti discovered a truth and a need while he jested. The remedy, however, is not obscure. Some spirited hope is now held that future chapters hereof will make full, though belated, amends to the inveterately unsung. And what a happy theme it is, that, in loftier moments the minor player is indispensable to a treasury of elegant chess, as aptly as the minor poet to the to the broad anthologies of verse. Current games and happenings do not come within the design; for, the pasture of a century to browse in is ample, embracing an even hundred years since Master Labourdonnais put forth his treatise. To the studious player, who lloks to a book for lessons before amusement, the alert inspection of showers of pithy games will supply a colorful background. Both meek and rash need more background; for, it brings less intimidation and fewer collapses. The richly carpeted chess-mind receives obstreperous ideas with more composure than would bare floors. Pillsbury told me that he had only once been outrageously surprised abroad! And even that one he begrudged. He had due pride of background. To have been once upon a time in the field myself, with moderate success and a lot of fun, perhaps bestows a clear title to the privileges of reminiscence; but you shall not on that account be unduly occupied with my own encounters.
|
|
77 games, 1804-1932 - Amsterdam 1899
International Amateur Tournament
Amsterdam, Netherlands
August 7-16, 1899
The tournament consisted of sixteen players, mainly from the Netherlands and Germany with single representatives from England and Austria: Henry Atkins Dirk Bleijkmans Julius Dimer Arnold van Foreest Jan Frederik Heemskerk Jan Willem te Kolste Nathan Mannheimer Willem Meiners Julien Moquette Adolf Georg Olland Josef Partaj Ferdinand Walter Pelzer Wilhelm Schwan Rudolf Swiderski Joan Diderik Tresling Cornelius Trimborn It turned out to be one of those tournaments where the final crosstable speaks louder than words: table[
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6
1 Henry Ernest Atkins * 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 15.0
2 Adolf Georg Olland 0 * 0 1 = = 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 11.0
3 Jan Diderik Tresling 0 1 * 0 = 1 = = 1 = 1 0 1 1 1 1 10.0
4 Dirk Bleijkmans 0 0 1 * 1 0 = 1 1 1 = 1 1 0 1 1 10.0
5 Nathan Mannheimer 0 = = 0 * 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 10.0
6 Rudolf Swiderski 0 = 0 1 0 * 0 = 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 10.0
7 Julius Dimer 0 0 = = 0 1 * 0 = 1 = 1 1 = 1 1 8.5
8 Arnold Van Foreest 0 0 = 0 0 = 1 * 1 = 1 1 0 1 1 1 8.5
9 Josef Partaj 0 1 0 0 1 0 = 0 * = 0 = 1 1 0 1 6.5
10 F W Pelzer 0 0 = 0 1 0 0 = = * = 1 1 0 = 1 6.5
11 J J R Moquette 0 0 0 = 0 0 = 0 1 = * 0 0 1 1 1 5.5
12 Wilhelm Schwan 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 = 0 1 * 0 = 1 1 5.0
13 W B H Meiners 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 1 * = = 1 5.0
14 Jan-Willem te Kolste 0 0 0 1 0 0 = 0 0 1 0 = = * 0 = 4.0
15 Jan Frederik Heemskerk 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 = 0 0 = 1 * 0 3.0
16 Cornelius Trimborn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 = 1 * 1.5
]table
Perfect scores in international tournaments are rare and generally memorable, but Atkins' 15-0 is largely forgotten. Part of the reason is that there weren't any big names among his opponents. If you compare his achievement with perfect scores by Lasker (Game Collection: New York 1893, The Impromtu Tournament or Capablanca (Game Collection: Rice CC Summer Masters Tourn. (New York 1913)), there seems no comparison between the strength of the opposition--at least, for those more familiar with US chess history than Dutch chess history. In any event, if 15-0 were that easy everybody would do it. Most masters who visited the Netherlands for a tournament knew better than to take the locals lightly. As it turned out, Atkins needed most of those points. Olland started out with two draws, then ran off nine wins in a row before a round 12 loss left him two points down. He made a gallant effort in their round 13 game, but Atkins ground away to clinch the tournament. By then he had two of the tailenders left to play, so why not go for it? Last place finisher Trimborn put up a grim resistance in the final round and may have even missed a draw, but Atkins was not to be denied. Atkins played a number of attractive games in this touranment, particularly with White, but it was the round 8 game J D Tresling vs H Atkins, 1899 which took away the brillancy prize. <SCORING BY ROUNDS>
table[
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
1 Atkins 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 15.0
2 Olland = = 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 11.0
3 Bleijkmans 1 = 0 = 0 1 0 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 10.0
4 Mannheimer = 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 = 0 1 0 1 10.0
5 Swiderski 1 = 0 1 1 1 0 1 0 = 1 1 1 1 0 10.0
6 Tresling = = 1 1 = 0 1 0 1 1 = 1 0 1 1 10.0
7 Dimer = = 1 = = 0 1 = 0 0 1 1 1 0 1 8.5
8 Van Foreest = 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 = = 1 1 1 0 8.5
9 Partaj = 1 1 0 = 0 1 = 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 6.5
10 Pelzer 0 = 0 = = 1 0 1 1 1 = 0 = 0 0 6.5
11 Moquette = = 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 = 0 1 5.5
12 Meiners 0 = 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 = 0 0 0 5.5
13 Schwan = 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 = 0 0 1 0 1 5.0
14 te Kolste 0 = 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 = = = 0 1 0 4.0
15 Heemskerk 0 = 0 = 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 3.0
16 Trimborn 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 = 0 0 0 0 1.5
]table
<PROGRESSIVE SCORE>
table[
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
1 Atkins 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
2 Olland ½ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 10 10 11 11
3 Bleijkmans 1 1½ 1½ 2 2 3 3 4 5 6 6 7 8 9 10
4 Mannheimer ½ 1½ 2½ 3½ 4½ 4½ 5½ 6½ 7½ 7½ 8 8 9 9 10
5 Swiderski 1 1½ 1½ 2½ 3½ 4½ 4½ 5½ 5½ 6 7 8 9 10 10
6 Tresling ½ 1 2 3 3½ 3½ 4½ 4½ 5½ 6½ 7 8 8 9 10
7 Dimer ½ 1 2 2½ 3 3 4 4½ 4½ 4½ 5½ 6½ 7½ 7½ 8½
8 Van Foreest ½ ½ 1½ 2½ 2½ 2½ 3½ 4½ 4½ 5 5½ 6½ 7½ 8½ 8½
9 Partaj ½ 1½ 2½ 2½ 3 3 4 4½ 4½ 4½ 4½ 4½ 4½ 5½ 6½
10 Pelzer 0 ½ ½ 1 1½ 2½ 2½ 3½ 4½ 5½ 6 6 6½ 6½ 6½
11 Moquette ½ 1 1 1 2 3 3 3 3 4 4 4 4½ 4½ 5½
12 Meiners 0 ½ ½ ½ ½ 1½ 2½ 2½ 3½ 3½ 4½ 5 5 5 5
13 Schwan ½ ½ ½ ½ 1½ 1½ 1½ 1½ 2½ 3 3 3 4 4 5
14 te Kolste 0 ½ 1½ 1½ 1½ 1½ 1½ 1½ 1½ 2 2½ 3 3 4 4
15 Heemskerk 0 ½ ½ 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 3 3 3 3
16 Trimborn 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1½ 1½ 1½ 1½ 1½
]table
<Tournament book>: Amsterdam Internationale Schaakwedstrijd edited by H. D. B. Meijer. http://books.google.com/books?id=-b.... Thanks to <Calli> for spotting it. <Other sources> Many thanks to User: thomastonk for tracking down the dates of the individual rounds from contemporary newspapers, mostly the <Algemeen Handelsbad>. Also to User: Stonehenge for submitting many of the games. <British Chess Magazine>, 1899, p. 373>: http://books.google.com/books?id=Ro... <Deutsche Schachzeitung>, September 1899, p. 284, : http://books.google.com/books?id=9j... November 1899, p. 331: http://books.google.com/books?id=9j... <Tijdschrift van den Nederlandschen Schaakbond>, January 1900, p. 16-17: http://books.google.com/books?id=kh... <Wiener Schachzeitung>, August/September 1899, p. 126: http://books.google.com/books?id=nR...
|
|
120 games, 1899 - Botvinnik: Move by Move
'Botvinnik: Move by Move' by Cyrus Lakdawala.
|
|
59 games, 1925-1970 - Castle Early and Often
|
O, My Friends, these be perilous times! Wars, Famine, Disease, Baby Yoda -- all swirl about our heads in a riotous cacophony of Death and Destruction! Yet there remain some souls -- Brave, Courageous, Bold -- who face the dangers head-on; who laugh in the face of disaster; who boldly go forth into the Unimaginable, safety but a faint dream! Such are the Chess Players who do not castle until after move 30. These are their stories.
|
|
112 games, 1886-2017 - Dead Man Walking
|
Everybody enjoys a good King Hunt. Except for maybe one person -- and even the loser often seems to play it out just to see what happens. It's an aesthetic thing, you know. Criteria for this collection include:
1) The losing king must have reached the eight ranks at some point, though not necessarily be mate there. 2) Generally, there is a limit of 50 moves. This collection is limited to opening an middle game king hunts, not endgames. Of course, I reserve the right to include amy game that tickles my fancy. And, just incase anybody wonders, the title refers to the chess king, not to the player.
|
|
95 games, 1834-2019 - docjan's Botvinnik games
1 game, 1943 - Friday Puzzles, 2011-2017
<Difficult>
See Game Collection: Game of the Day & Puzzle of the Day Collections for complete lists of my Game of the Day and Puzzle of the Day collections. <Missing Entries> (May-[Note: No puzzle is given for May-17-13, 2013. That day's puzzle had already been used on Friday, July 8, 2011, and a game can appear only once in a collection.] A game may appear only once in a collection, so if one is repeazted during the time span covered by a collction, only the first instance will appear. In this collection, the following games are affected: Fischer vs W Beach, 1963 (Jul-08-11, May-13-13) Mamedyarov vs A Timofeev, 2004 (Mar-11-11, Mar-31-17)
|
|
363 games, 1884-2017 - Friday Puzzles, 2018-2020
146 games, 1920-2018 - Game of the Day & Puzzle of the Day Collections
|
These are my collections, User: chessgames.com also maintains archives of recent games and puzzles: Game of the Day Archive contains the previous year. Tactics Archive contains recent puzzless with diagrams: -----
<Game Of The Day Collections> Game Collection: Game of the Day 2004 Game Collection: Game of the Day 2005 Game Collection: Game of the Day 2006 Game Collection: Game of the Day 2007 Game Collection: Game of the Day 2008 Game Collection: Game of the Day 2009 Game Collection: Game of the Day 2010 Game Collection: Game of the Day 2011 Game Collection: Game of the Day 2012 Game Collection: Game of the Day 2013 Game Collection: Game of the Day 2014 Game Collection: Game of the Day 2015 Game Collection: Game of the Day 2016 Game Collection: Game of the Day 2017 Game Collection: Game of the Day 2018 Game Collection: Game of the Day 2019 Game Collection: Game of the Day 2020 -----
<Game of the Day Pun Indexes> Game Collection: Game of the Day Pun Index (A - Boey) Game Collection: Game of the Day Pun Index (Bogo - Deacon) Game Collection: Game of the Day Pun Index (Dead - French Game Collection: Game of the Day Pun Index (Frere - I Fought) Game Collection: Game of the Day Pun Index (I Got - Levertin Game Collection: Game of the Day Pun Index (Levi - No Game Collection: Game of the Day Pun Index (Noa - Pulverised Game Collection: Game of the Day Pun Index (Pun - Sister) Game Collection: Game of the Day Pun Index (Sittin' - Topalov) Game Collection: Game of the Day pun Index (Torah-ZZ) -----
<Puzzle of the Day Collections, by Year> Game Collection: Puzzle of the Day 2004 Game Collection: Puzzle of the Day 2005 Game Collection: Puzzle of the Day 2006 Game Collection: Puzzle of the Day 2007 Game Collection: Puzzle of the Day 2008 Game Collection: Puzzle of the Day 2009 Game Collection: Puzzle of the Day 2010 Game Collection: Puzzle of the Day 2011 Game Collection: Puzzle of the Day 2012 Game Collection: Puzzle of the Day 2013 Game Collection: Puzzle of the Day 2014 Game Collection: Puzzle of the Day 2015 Game Collection: Puzzle of the Day 2016 Game Collection: Puzzle of the Day 2017 Game Collection: Puzzle of the Day 2018 Game Collection: Puzzle of the Day 2019 Game Collection: Puzzle of the Day 2020 ----
<Puzzle of the Day Collections. by day of the week> Game Collection: Sunday Puzzles, 2004-2010 Game Collection: Sunday Puzzles, 2011-2017 Game Collection: Sunday Puzzles, 2018-2022 Game Collection: Monday Puzzles, 2004-2010 Game Collection: Monday Puzzles, 2011-2017 Game Collection: Monday Puzzles, 2018-2022 Game Collection: Tuesday Puzzles, 2004-2010 Game Collection: Tuesday Puzzles, 2011-2017 Game Collection: Tuesday Puzzles, 2018-2022 Game Collection: Wednesday Puzzles, 2004-2010 Game Collection: Wednesday Puzzles, 2011-2017 Game Collection: Wednesday Puzzles, 2018-2022 Game Collection: Thursday Puzzles, 2004-2010 Game Collection: Thursday Puzzles, 2011-2017 Game Collection: Thursday Puzzles, 2018-2022 Game Collection: Friday Puzzles, 2004-2010 Game Collection: Friday Puzzles, 2011-2017 Game Collection: Friday Puzzles, 2018-2022 Game Collection: Saturday Puzzles, 2004-2010 Game Collection: Saturday Puzzles, 2011-2017 Game Collection: Saturday Puzzles, 2018-2022 ----
I have been adding a random game to the collection each day to see how long it takes for a randomly selected games game to pop up twice. Cycle 1: 235 days (January 1, 2018 - August 23, 2018) -- Games 1-235 Cycle 2: 230 days (August 24, 2018 - April 10, 2019) -- Games 236-465 Cycle 3: 310 days (April 11, 2019-February 14, 2020) -- Games 466-775
|
|
316 games, 1851-2016 - Icelandic Gambit
5 games, 1988-2004 - Instructive Positions from Master Chess
|
Compiled and lightly annotated by Jacques Mieses, the book was originally published in England around the time of his emigration in 1938. It contains 125 positions with striking continuations, taken from actual play. Well, almost. He sneaks in the Saavedra position at #99 as an actual game between Fenton and Potter. You know the one I'm talking about:
click for larger view
In case you don't know what I'm talking about, try to figure out how White wins this. Once you've done that, look again and find the <real> win. History might not be Mieses' strongest point, but his notes are pithy and his style amusing.
|
|
85 games, 1851-1937 - Ivanchuk is IN
|
All wins by GM Ivanchuk against World Champions. Ivanchuk's Record vs World Champions (Overall): +123 -143 =324 | [48.3%] +21 -28 =78 vs. Anand
+17 -18 =30 vs. Carlsen
+13 -14 =36 vs. Karpov
+3 -5 =13 vs. Kasimdzhanov
+6 -15 =27 vs. Kasparov
+11 -3 =8 vs. Khalifman
+20 -24 =65 vs. Kramnik
+12 -10 =25 vs. Ponomariov
+3 -2 =3 vs. Smyslov
+0 -0 =1 vs. Spassky
+17 -24 =38 vs. Topalov
Ivanchuk's Record vs World Champions (Classical): +49 -78 =201 | [45.6%] +7 -13 =47 vs. Anand
+3 -8 =16 vs. Carlsen
+1 -3 =21 vs. Karpov
+2 -4 =9 vs. Kasimdzhanov
+4 -11 =22 vs. Kasparov
+8 -3 =8 vs. Khalifman
+6 -11 =31 vs. Kramnik
+5 -7 =17 vs. Ponomariov
+3 -2 =2 vs. Smyslov
+0 -0 =1 vs. Spassky
+10 -16 =27 vs. Topalov
|
|
123 games, 1988-2017 - Janowski vs. Marshall Matches
|
<"Although not always successful, there are no more interesting chess masters to be found at the present day than the American champion, Frank J. Marshall, and the Franco-Polish expert, D. Janowski. A careful perusal of the games they played at Biarritz will show that these men do not believe in waiting tactics. Neither of them expects his adversary to beat himself, but they go hammer and tongs at each other and do not mind the consequences. Their object seems solely to be to create complicated and exciting positions and thus make it worth their while to fight.> ["New York Sun", October 6, 1912, commenting on the fourth Janowski - Marshall match] <Match 1: New York, 1899> A match rivalry lasting almost two decades started immediately after the conclusion of Janowski - Showalter, 1st Match (1898), as David Janowski began a scheduled series of five games for a nominal stake with Frank Marshall, champion of the Brooklyn Chess Club. The player who first scored three points would win the match. table[
1 2 3 4
Janowski 0 1 1 1 3.0
Marshall 1 0 0 0 1.0
]table
[Janowski had White in the odd-numbered games.]
The match was played January 18-21, 1899. Only four games were contested, as Janowski swept the last three after Marshall pulled off a surprising victory in the first game. The third game was played at the Brooklyn Chess Club, the others at the Manhattan Chess Club. <Source>: "American Chess Magazine", February 1899, p.370. *****
<Match 2: Paris, 1905> Following the tournament at Cambridge Springs in 1904, where Marshall came out the victor and Janowski tied for 2nd, there was much interest in arranging a match between the two--not just for its intrisic interest, but as a possible precursor to a challenge to Lasker. This came about in Paris from January 24-March 7, 1905. The conditions of the match were published in the British Chess Magazine for February, 1905: <"The stakes of 500 dollars each side to be deposited with the President of the Philidor Chess Club. The victory to be decided by attaining the score of eight won games, drawn games not counting. If the scores should be seven each, the match will be prolonged until one of the players wins ten games, which will then be decisive. If the scores come to nine each, the match will be declared drawn. "Three games will be played each week, on Tuesdays, Thursdays, and Saturdays, from 1:30 p.m. to 6 p.m., and from 8:30 p.m. till midnight. Unfinished games will be resumed the next day at the same hours. The time limit is 30 moves in the first two hours, and 15 moves per hour afterwards."> Later, a clause was added allowing each player one postponement, Marshall taking advantage of this on February 4th due to a severe cold. The match was played in a small room at the Philidor Club of Paris to which only the players, their witnesses, and the director were admitted. Moves were displayed on a large board in the lobby for the public's behalf. The play saw Marshall twice pop out to two-point leads, and Janowski come back to tie the score. Then Marshall popped out to a three-point lead, which soon settled the matter. table[
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17
Marshall 1 1 0 = 0 = 1 1 0 0 1 = 1 1 = 0 1 10.0
Janowski 0 0 1 = 1 = 0 0 1 1 0 = 0 0 = 1 0 7.0
]table
[Marshall had White in the odd-numbered games.]
An additional game, played a week after the match ended for a separate stake of 500 francs (300 to the winner, 200 to the loser), was provided by Janowski's patron, Leo Nardus. This game, won by Janowski, is sometimes included as part of this match. See Janowski vs Marshall, 1905. Janowski accepted the defeat with his usual good grace: <"Mr. F. J. Marshall, Paris DEAR Sir:--I consider that the result of our match far from proving our respective abilities. On the contrary, as in the great majority of games I allowed the 'win or draw' to escape me, I am persuaded that normally I should have won very easily. "I therefore challenge you to a return match on the following conditions:--The first winner of ten games to be declared the winner, draws not to count. I also offer you the advantage of four points: that is to say, my first four wins are not to count. Stakes are not to exceed 5,000 francs. JANOWSKI"> Foolhardy, to say the least. When the rematch was finally played three years later, Janowski won by only three points. <Sources>:
"American Chess Bulletin", February 1905, p. 24-26. "British Chess Magazine", February 1905, p.59 ; March 1905, p. 105. "Marshall v. Janowski : the games of the Paris match" with notes by F.J. Marshall; reprinted from the Manchester Guardian. Kegan Paul, 1905. Available at: http://books.google.com/books?id=rZ... *****
<Match 3: Suresnes, 1908> table[
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Janowski 1 1 = 1 = 0 0 = 1 1 6.5
Marshall 0 0 = 0 = 1 1 = 0 0 3.5
]table
[Marshall had White in the odd-numbered games]
What had been a much anticipated rematch turned out to be a private affair, held at the house of noted chess patron Leo Nardus in the Parisian suburb of Suresnes from January 17-February 4, 1908. Marshall was never able to recover from losing the first two games, and Janowski scored the match by 5 games to 2, with 3 drawn. <Source>: "American Chess Bulletin", March 1908, p.48; June 1908, p. 118. *****
<Match 4: Biarritz, 1912> Well, maybe it was. The "New York Sun" of September 22, 1912, has this interesting passage: <"When writing to a friend in this city Marshall distinctly states this this is not a match at all, that at the request of M. Nardus of Paris the masters were asked to play a series of ten exhibition games, the Parisian Maecenas paying a fee for each game. Both players consider these games good practice for the forthcoming New York-Havana Congress."> This sounds much like the 1908 match, a series of ten games played at the home of Nardus. This time he sweetened the pot a bit with a trip to the resort of Biarritz in southwestern France. All the game dates have not yet been found. Reports in the New York papers indicate the series was played in the last three weeks of September, but other sources indicate the match started September 2 and was played at a rapid pace. Apparently, the reports may have been delayed due to the remote location. table[
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Marshall = 0 1 1 1 = 1 1 0 1 7.0
Janowski = 1 0 0 0 = 0 0 1 0 3.0
]table
[Janowski had White in the odd-numbered games.]
Janowski started well, but Marshall turned the tables with his famous brilliancy in game 3 and cruised to victory. You know, the
click for larger view
<12...Qxf3!!> game. Everyone knows that was from their 1912 "Match", so I'm not about to change history and call it an "Exhibition". Marshall notwithstanding. <Sources>: "New York Sun", September 15 and 22, 1912; *****
<Match 5: New York, 1916> The fifth and final match between Marshall and Janowski was held from June 1-15 at the Manhattan Chess Club in New York City. Originally scheduled to be ten games, it ended when Marshall clinched victory with a draw in the eighth game.
table[
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Marshall 1 = = 1 0 1 1 = 5.5
Janowski 0 = = 0 1 0 0 = 3.5
]table
[Janowski had White in the odd-numbered games.]
In all, Janowski and Marshall played 49 match games. Marshall won three of the matches, with a total score of +21 -16 =17 (55.1%). <Source>: "American Chess Bulletin", July-August 1916, p.144-148.
|
|
49 games, 1899-1916 - Karlsbad 1907
|
This was the first of four great Karlsbad tournaments, the others being Game Collection: Karlsbad 1911, Game Collection: Karlsbad 1923, and Game Collection: Karlsbad 1929. It featured a number of younger players who would take leading roles in the chess world over the next quarter of a century facing a strong group of more established Masters. Here is a list of the participants, arranged by age: Johann Berger (1845-1933)
Mikhail Chigorin (1850-1908)
Georg Salwe (1862-1920)
Jacques Mieses (1865-1954)
Adolf Georg Olland (1867-1933)
David Janowski (1868-1927)
Richard Teichmann (1868-1925)
Geza Maroczy (1870-1951)
Carl Schlechter (1874-1918)
Heinrich Wolf (1875-1943)
Frank Marshall (1877-1944)
Paul Leonhardt (1877-1934)
Fyodor Duz-Khotimirsky (1879-1965)
Oldrich Duras (1882-1957)
Akiba Rubinstein (1882-1961)
Rudolf Spielmann (1883-1942)
Erich Cohn (1884-1918)
Milan Vidmar (1885-1962)
Aron Nimzowitsch (1886-1935)
Savielly Tartakower (1887-1956)
Paul Johner (1887-1938) Looking at this list today, some of the younger players would seem to be the favorites. At this time, however, though most of them had been active for several years, they probably would have still been considered "promising young players" rather than top-class masters. My hunch is that the smart Chessbucks would have been riding on Maroczy and Schlechter, with Marshall and Janowski picking up their fair share as well. The time control was 30 moves in two hours, followed by 15 moves per hour therafter. A more modern provision forbade agreed draws before move 45 without the permission of the tournament director. This had the usual effect, with only 40 of the 210 games ending in this manner. <Round 1: Tuesday, August 20> 1 Nimzowitsch 1/2 Wolf
2 Vidmar 1 Olland
3 Dus Chotimirsky 0 Chigorin
4 Janowski 1 Cohn
5 Tartakower 0 Maroczy
6 Duras 1/2 Schlechter
7 Mieses 1 Marshall
8 Salwe 1 Leonhardt
9 Berger 1/2 Spielmann
10 Johner 0 Teichmann
Rubinstein - BYE
The established players got off to a good start, Vidmar being the only winner under age 30. Maroczy was the star, as his win over Tartakower would be awarded the first prize for beauty. Rubinstein started with a bye in the 21-player field; this will be indicated by an "*" following the player's name. <1.0>: Chigorin, Janowski, Maroczy, Mieses, Teichmann, Vidmar; <0.5>: Berger, Duras, Leonhardt, Nimzowitsch, Salwe, Schlechter, Spielmann, Wolf; <0.0>: Cohn, Dus Chotimirsky, Johner, Olland, Marshall, Rubinstein*, Tartakower <Round 2: Thursday, August 22> 11 Spielmann 1 Johner
12 Leonhardt 1/2 Berger
13 Marshall 1/2 Salwe
14 Schlechter 1 Mieses
15 Maroczy 1 Duras
16 Cohn 0 Tartakower
17 Chigorin 0 Janowski
18 Olland 1 Dus Chotimirsky
19 Wolf 0 Vidmar
20 Rubinstein 0 Nimziwitsch
Teichmann - BYE
Three leaders emerged today. Janowski needed 99 moves before his mighty rook pair overcame Chigorin's queen. (It might be coincidence, but Janowski would lose his next four games and never be a factor thereafter.) Duras, warming up for bigger and better things, held out for 63 moves against Maroczy's extra pawn and mighty knight pair. Vidmar sacrificed a piece against Wolf, eventually winning with a mighty connected passed pawn trio in the endgame. And that's not s typo at the end of the standings: Rubinstein was still in the cellar after a loss to Nimzowitsch. Our copy of the game includes Nimzo's notes, and the game is well worth looking at as a classic example of using hanging pawns effectively. <2.0>: Janowski, Maroczy, Vidmar; <1.5>: Nimzowitsch, Schlechter, Spielmann; <1.0>: Berger, Chigorin, Leonhardt, Mieses, Olland, Salwe, Tartakower, Teichmann*; <0.5>: Duras, Marshall, Wolf; <0.0> Cohn, Dus Chotimirsky, Johner, Rubinstein* <Round 3: Friday, August 23> 21 Vidmar 1/2 Rubinstein
22 Dus Chotimirsky 1/2 Wolf
23 Janowski 0 Olland
24 Tartakower 1 Chigorin
25 Duras 1 Cohn
26 Mieses 1/2 Maroczy
27 Salwe 1 Schlechter
28 Berger 1/2 Marshall
29 Johner 0 Leonhardt
30 Teichmann 1 Spielmann
Nimzowitsch - BYE
No perfect scores survived the day. Janowski's descent began when Olland sprang a combination winning queen and two pawns for rook and knight. Maroczy was fortunate to survive against Mieses in a B+P ending, while Vidmar and Rubinstein avoided each other's traps and quickly exchanged down to a barren equality. Among the two-pointers, Teichmann was in good shape (having already had the bye) and Salwe powerfully outplayed Schlechter. The long draw Berger--Marshall is worth looking at for Marshall's ingenious play and a knight that apparently began life on the wrong square. <2.5>: Maroczy, Vidmar; <2.0>: Janowski, Leonhardt, Olland, Salwe, Tartakower, Teichmann*; <1.5>: Berger, Duras, Mieses, Nimzowitsch*, Schlechter, Spielmann; <1.0>: Chigorin, Marshall, Wolf; <0.5>: Dus Chotimirsky, Rubinstein*; <0.0>: Cohn, Johner <Round 4: Saturday, August 24> 31 Leonhardt 1/2 Teichmann
32 Marshall 1 Johner
33 Schlechter 1 Berger
34 Maroczy 1 Salwe
35 Cohn 0 Mieses
36 Chigorin 0 Duras
37 Olland 0 Tartakower
38 Wolf 1 Janowski
39 Rubinstein 1 Dus Chotimirsky
40 Nimzowitsch 1/2 Vidmar
Spielmann - BYE
Maroczy took the sole lead with a nice positional crush of Salwe. Vidmar was fortunate to draw with Nimzowitch; after an opening which only Nimzo could have thought up, Black was close to being Samisched but managed to randomize the position and survive after an error by White. Rubinstein got his first win, blasting open the center after a slow opening to win material with a persistent attack. The wins by Mieses and Marshall were typical, and you can guess what that means. <3.5>: Maroczy; <3.0>: Tartakower, Vidmar; <2.5>: Duras, Leonhardt, Mieses, Schlechter, Teichmann*; <2.0>: Janowski, Marshall, Nimzowitsch*, Olland, Salwe, Wolf; <1.5>: Berger, Rubinstein*, Spielmann; <1.0>: Chigorin; <0.5>: Dus Chotimirsky; <0.0>: Cohn, Johner <Round 5: Monday, August 26> 41 Dus Chotimirsky 1 Nimzowitsch
42 Janowski 0 Rubinstein
43 Tartakower 0 Wolf
44 Duras 1 Olland
45 Mieses 1 Chigorin
46 Salwe 1 Cohn
47 Berger 1/2 Maroczy
48 Johner 0 Schlecther
49 Teichmann 1/2 Marshall
50 Spielmann 1/2 Leonhardt
Vidmar - BYE
Maroczy's quiet draw with Berger was enough to keep the lead, as Tartakower was eaten alive by Wolf and Vidmar received the bye. Moving up with victories were Duras (despite missing a mate-in-three which has appeared in every combination book written since the day it was not played), Mieses (after a massive battle with Chigorin), and Schlechter (with a fine all-around performance against Johner). Rubinstein reached and won a rook ending against Janowski with some subtle play. Dus Chotimirsky's win over Nimzowitsch was a very powerful performance. <4.0>: Marcczy; <3.5>: Duras, Mieses, Schlechter; <3.0>: Leonhardt, Salwe, Tartakower, Teichmann*, Vidmar*, Wolf; <2.5>: Marshall, Rubinstein*; <2.0>: Berger, Janowski, Nimzowitsch*, Olland, Spielmann*; <1.5>: Dus Chotimirsky; <1.0>: Chigorin; <0.0>: Cohn, Johner <Round 6: Tuesday, August 27> 51 Marshall 1/2 Spielmann
52 Schlechter 0 Teichmann
53 Maroczy 1 Johner
54 Cohn 1/2 Berger
55 Chigorin 1/2 Salwe
56 Olland 0 Mieses
57 Wolf 1 Duras
58 Rubinstein 1 Tartakower
59 Nimzowitsch 1 Janowski
60 Vidmar 1 Dus Chotimirsky
Leonhardt - BYE
More flip-flopping at the upper levels. Maroczy held his spot by refuting a faulty pawn sacrifice from Johner, and Mieses pulled off a brilliancy against Olland. Schlechter blundered a pawn to Teichmann, who finished with a brilliant breakthrough. Wolf-Duras culminated in an ending that has been marvelled at ever since. Rubinstein continued to move methodically up the ladder. Standings after round 6 (* indicates player has had the bye): <5.0>: Maroczy; <4.5>: Mieses; <4.0>: Teichmann*, Vidmar*, Wolf; <3.5>: Duras, Rubinstein*, Salwe, Schlechter; <3.0>: Leonhardt*, Marshall, Nimzowitsch*, Tartakower; <2.5>: Berger, Spielmann*; <2.0>: Janowski, Olland; <1.5>: Chigorin, Dus Chotimirsky; <0.5>: Cohn; <0.0>: Johner <Round 7 (Thursday, August 29)> 61 Janowski 1 Vidmar
62 Tartakower 1 Nimzowitsch
63 Duras 0 Rubinstein
64 Mieses 1 Wolf
65 Salwe 1 Olland
66 Berger 1 Chigorin
67 Johner 0 Cohn
68 Teichmann 1/2 Maroczy
69 Spielmann 1/2 Schlechter
70 Leonhardt 1/2 Marshall
Dus-Chotimirsky - BYE
Mieses drew even with Maroczy with yet another fine win. Pulling within a point of the leaders were Rubinstein and Teichmann (who were well-placed, as both had recorded their bye) and Salwe (whose victory Marco attributed to the sparkling mineral water of the spa). Janowski finally got back on track with an interesting win over Vidmar. Standings after round 7 (* indicates player has had the bye): <5.5> Maroczy, Mieses; <4.5>: Rubinstein*, Salwe, Teichmann*; <4.0>: Schlechter, Tartakower, Vidmar*, Wolf; <3.5>: Berger, Duras, Leonhardt*, Marshall; <3.0>: Janowski, Nimzowitsch*, Spielmann*; <2.0> Olland; <1.5>: Chigorin, Cohn, Dus Chotimirsky*; <0.0>: Johner <Round 8 (Friday, August 30)> 71 Schlechter 1 Leonhardt
72 Maroczy 1 Spielmann
73 Cohn 0 Teichmann
74 Chigorin 1 Johner
75 Olland 1 Berger
76 Wolf 1/2 Salwe
77 Rubinstein 1/2 Mieses
78 Nimzowitsch 1/2 Duras
79 Vidmar 1 Tartakower
80 Dus Chotimirsky 1 Janowski
Marshall - BYE
A draw between Mieses and Rubinstein allowed Maroczy to go back in front with a quiet positional win over Spielmann, while Teichmann pulled into clear third with a destructive win over Cohn. Standings after round 8 (* indicates player has had the bye): <6.5>: Maroczy; <6.0>: Mieses; <5.5>: Teichmann*; <5.0>: Rubinstein*, Salwe, Schlechter, Vidmar*; <4.5>: Wolf; <4.0>: Duras, Tartakower; <3.5>: Berger, Leonhardt*, Marshall*, Nimzowitsch*; <3.0>: Janowski, Olland, Spielmann*; <3.5>: Chigorin, Dus Chotimirsky*; <1.5> Cohn; <0.0> Johner <Round 9 (Saturday, August 31)> 81 Tartakower 1 Dus Chotimirski
82 Duras 0 Vidmar
83 Mieses 0 Nimzowitsch
84 Salwe 0 Rubinstein
85 Berger 1/2 Wolf
86 Johner 0 Olland
87 Teichmann 0 Chigorin
88 Spielmann 1 Cohn
89 Leonhardt 1 Maroczy
90 Marshall 1/2 Schlechter
Janowski - BYE
There was a reshuffling at the top as the three leading players all lost. Rubinstein resumed his advance by knocking Salwe back, with Leonhardt and Nimzowitsch also moving up. Johner may have missed a chance to get on the board. <6.5>: Maroczy; <6.0>: Mieses, Rubinstein*, Vidmar*; <5.5>: Schlechter, Teichmann*; <5.0>: Salwe, Tartakower, Wolf; <4.5>: Leonhardt*, Nimzowitsch*; <4.0>: Berger, Duras, Marshall*, Olland, Spielmann*; <3.5>: Chigorin; <3.0>: Janowski*; <2.5>: Dus Chotimirsky*; <1.5>: Cohn; <0.0>: Johner <Round 10 (Monday, September 2)> 91 Maroczy 1 Marshall
92 Cohn 1 Leonhardt
93 Chigorin 1 Spielmann
94 Olland 1/2 Teichmann
95 Wolf 1/2 Johner
96 Rubinstein 1 Berger
97 Nimzowitsch 1/2 Salwe
98 Vidmar 1 Mieses
99 Dus Chotimirsky 0 Duras
100 Janowski 1 Tartakower
Schlechter - Bye
A crucial game between Vidmar and Mieses went the younger man's way, while Maroczy and Rubinstein also won excellent games to retain their places. Chigorin's win over Spielmann was particularly exciting, as might have been expected. And most everyone was happy to see Johner finally get on the board, though Wolf filed a strong minority opinion in the matter. Standings after round 10 (* indicates player has had the bye): <7.5>: Maroczy; <7.0>: Rubinstein*, Vidmar*; <6.0>: Mieses, Teichmann*; <5.5>: Salwe, Schlechter*, Wolf; <5.0>: Duras, Nimzowitsch*, Tartakower; <4.5>: Chigorin, Leonhardt*, Olland; <4.0>: Berger. Janowski*, Marshall*, Spielmann*; <2.5>: Cohn, Dus Chotimirsky*; <0.5>: Johner <Round 11 (Tuesday, September 3)> 101 Duras 1 Janowski
102 Mieses 0 Dus Chotimirsky
103 Salwe 1/2 Vidmar
104 Berger 1/2 Nimzowitsch
105 Johner 0 Rubinstein
106 Teichmann 1 Wolf
107 Spielmann 1 Olland
108 Leonhardt 1/2 Chigorin
109 Marshall 1 Cohn
110 Schlechter 1/2 Maroczy
Tartakower - BYE
Rubinstein's fine play in an opposite-colored bishop ending enabled him to tie for first as Marcozy drew with Schlechter. Vidmar also drew, and Teichmann was fortunate to keep up when Wolf could not convert his advantage. Mieses' slide continued with a loss to Dus-Chotimirsky. Standings after round 11 (* indicates player has had the bye): <8.0>: Maroczy, Rubinstein*; <7.5>: Vidmar*; <7.0>: Teichmann*; <6.0>: Duras, Mieses, Salwe, Schlechter*: <5.5>: Nimzowitsch*, Wolf; <5.0>: Chigorin, Leonhardt*, Marshall*, Spielmann*, Tartakower*; <4.5>: Berger, Olland; <4.0>: Janowski*; <3.5>: Dus Chotimirsky*; <2.5>: Cohn; <0.5>: Johner <Round 12 (Thursday, September 5)> 111 Cohn 0 Schlechter
112 Chigorin 1 Marshall
113 Olland 0 Leonhardt
114 Wolf 1 Spielmann
115 Rubinstein 1 Teichmann
116 Nimzowitsch 1 Johner
117 Vidmar 1/2 Berger
118 Dus Chotimirsky 1 Salwe
119 Janowski 1 Mieses
120 Tartakower 0 JoingDuras
Maroczy - BYE
Maroczy's bye allowed Rubinstein to go into the sole lead for the first time, having scored nine points from his last ten games. Vidmar joined Maroczy with a quiet draw, while Schlechter and Duras picked up important wins against Teichmann and Mieses. Standings after round 12 (* indicates player has had the bye): <9.0>: Rubinstein*; <8.0>: Vidmar*, Maroczy*; <7.0>: Duras, Schlechter*, Teichmann*; <6.5>: Nimzowitsch*, Wolf; <6.0> Chigorin, Leonhardt*, Mieses, Salwe; <5.0>: Berger, Janowski*, Marshall*, Spielmann*, Tartakower*; <4.5>: Dus Chotimirsky*, Olland; <2.5>: Cohn; <0.5> Johner <Round 13 (Friday, September 6)>: 121 Mieses 1 Tartakower
122 Salwe 1 Janowski
123 Berger 0 Dus Chotimirski
124 Johner 1 Vidmar
125 Teichmann 1/2 Nimzowitsch
126 Spielmann 1 Rubinstein
127 Leonhardt 1/2 Wolf
128 Marshall 1 Olland
129 Schlechter 1/2 Chigorin
130 Maroczy 1 Cohn
Duras - BYE
Not a very fortunate round for two of the leaders, as Vidmar suffered Johner's first win and Rubinstein found himself on the wrong side of Spielmann's beauty prize winner. Mieses also took home a beauty prize for his victory, while more mundane matters saw Maroczy climb back into a tie for first while Schlechter and Teichmann missed chances to close the gap. Standings after round 13 (* indicates player has had the bye): <9.0>: Maroczy*, Rubinstein*; <8.0>: Vidmar*; <7.5>: Schlechter*, Teichmann*; <7.0>: Duras*, Mieses, Nimzowitsch*, Salwe, Wolf; <6.5>: Chigorin, Leonhardt*; <6.0>: Marshall*, Spielmann*; <5.5>: Dus Chotimirsky*; <5.0>: Berger, Janowski*, Tartakower*; <4.5>: Olland; <2.5>: Cohn; <1.5>: Johner <Round 14 (Saturday, September 7)> 131 Chigorin 0 Maroczy
132 Olland 0 Schlechter
133 Wolf 1/2 Marshall
134 Rubinstein 1/2 Leonhardt
135 Nimzowitsch 1/2 Spielmann
136 Vidmar 1 Teichmann
137 Dus Chotimirsky 1 Johner
138 Janowski 1 Berger
139 Tartakower 1/2 Salwe
140 Duras 1 Mieses
Cohn - BYE
The two-thirds mark saw Maroczy creep to the top again, while Vidmar kept pace with an important win over Teichmann. Janowski, at least according to the tournament book, made something out of nothing and was awarded a share of the third Beauty prize. Standings after round 14 (* indicates player has had the bye): <10.0>: Maroczy*; <9.5>: Rubinstein*; <9.0>: Vidmar*; <8.5>: Schlechter*; <8.0>: Duras*; <7.5>: Nimzowitsch*, Salwe, Teichmann*, Wolf; <7.0> Leonhardt*, Mieses; <6.5>: Chigorin, Dus Chotimirsky*, Marshall*, Spielmann*; <6.0>: Janowski*; <5.5> Tartakower*; <5.0>: Berger; <4.5>: Olland; <2.5>: Cohn*; <1.5>: Johner <Round 15 (Monday, September 9)> 141 Salwe 1 Duras
142 Berger 1/2 Tartakower
143 Johner 0 Janowski
144 Teichmann 1/2 Dus Chotimirsky
145 Spielmann 0 Vidmar
146 Leonhardt 1/2 Nimzowitsch
147 Marshall 0 Rubinstein
148 Schlechter 1/2 Wolf
149 Maroczy 1 Olland
150 Cohn 1 Chigorin
Mieses - BYE
The top three held their serve, while Schlechter fell another half-point behind. I'll give away a little of the story to say that one of those three won't up there six rounds from now. You might take a look at the standings and guess who will catch up. The most famous game of the round saw Cohn lose a pawn in the opening, but he made something out of less than nothing and was awarded a share of the 2nd Beauty prize. Standings after round 15 (* indicates player has had the bye): <11.0>: Maroczy*; <10.5>: Rubinstein*; <10.0>: Vidmar*; <9.0>: Schlechter*; <8.5>: Salwe; <8.0>: Duras*, Nimzowitsch*, Teichmann*; Wolf; <7.5>: Leonhardt*; <7.0>: Dus Chotimirsky*, Janowski*, Mieses*; <6.5>: Chigorin, Marshall*, Spielmann*; <6.0>: Tartakower*; <5.5>: Berger; <4.5>: Olland; <3.5>: Cohn*; <1.5>: Johner <Round 16 (Tuesday, September 10)> 151 Olland 1 Cohn
152 Wolf 1/2 Maroczy
153 Rubinstein 1/2 Schlechter
154 Nimzowitsch 0 Marshall
155 Vidmar 0 Leonhardt
156 Dus Chotimirsky 1 Spielmann
157 Janowski 1/2 Teichmann
158 Tartakower 1 Johner
159 Duras 1 Berger
160 Mieses 0 Salwe
Chigorin - BYE
Marcozy drew when he wanted to, the tournament book noting that Wolf "played energetically for the draw". Rubinstein took no chances with Schlechter, but bot players were able to pick up ground on Vidmar whose loss to Leonhardt was a sign of things to come. Standings after round 16 (* indicates player has had the bye): <11.5>: Maroczy*; <11.0>: Rubinstein*; <10.0>: Vidmar*; <9.5>: Salwe, Schlechter*; <9.0>: Duras*; <8.5>: Leonhardt*, Teichmann*, Wolf; <8.0>: Dus Chotimirsky*, Nimzowitsch*; <7.5>: Janowski*, Marshall*; <7.0>: Mieses*, Tartakower*; <6.5>: Chigorin*, Spielmann*; <5.5>: Berger, Olland; <3.5>: Cohn*; <1.5>: Johner <Round 17 (Thursday, September 12)> 161 Berger 1 Mieses
162 Johner 1 Duras
163 Teichmann 1 Tartakower
164 Spielmann 1 Janowski
165 Leonhardt 1 Dus Chotimirsky
166 Marshall 1 Vidmar
167 Schlechter 0 Nimzowitsch
168 Maroczy 1/2 Rubinstein
169 Cohn 1/2 Wolf
170 Chigorin 1 Olland
Salwe - BYE
Maroczy could take a big step toward the first prize by beating Rubinstein and gave it a good shot, even winning the exchange. However, Rubinstein's counterplay recovered the material and led to an even ending. Meanwhile, yet another loss by Vidmar left the race for third place wide open. Standings after round 17 (* indicates player has had the bye): <12.0>: Maroczy*; <11.5>: Rubinstein*; <10.0>: Vidmar*; <9.5>: Leonhardt*, Salwe*, Schlechter*, Teichmann*; <9.0>: Duras*, Nimzowitsch*, Wolf; <8.5>: Marshall*; <8.0>: Dus Chotimirsky*; <7.5>: Chigorin*, Janowski*;, Spielmann*; <7.0>: Mieses*, Tartakower*; <6.5>: Berger; <5.5>: Olland; <4.0>: Cohn*; <2.5>: Johner <Round 18 (Friday, September 13)> 171 Wolf 1 Chigorin
172 Rubinstein 1 Cohn
173 Nimzowitsch 1/2 Maroczy
174 Vidmar 1/2 Schlechter
175 Dus Chotimirsky 0 Marshall
176 Janowski 0 Leonhardt
177 Tartakower 1 Spielmann
178 Duras 1 Teichmann
179 Mieses 0 Johner
180 Salwe 1 Berger
Olland - BYE
The tension increased as Rubinstein overtook Maroczy with just three rounds to go. Vidmar was joined in third place by Leonhardt and Salwe, while three other players lurked but a half-point behind. Standings after round 18 (* indicates player has had the bye): <12.5>: Maroczy*, Rubinstein*; <10.5>: Leonhardt*, Salwe*, Vidmar*; <10.0>: Duras*, Schlechter*, Wolf; <9.5>: Marshall*, Nimzpwitsch*, Teichmann*; <8.0>: Dus Chotimisky*, Tartakower*; <7.5>: Chigorin*, Janowski*, Spielmann*; <7.0>: Mieses*; <6.5>: Berger; <5.5>: Olland*; <4.0>: Cohn*; <3.5>: Johner <Round 19 (Saturday, September 14)> 181 Johner 1/2 Salwe
182 Teichmann 1/2 Mieses
183 Spielmann 0 Duras
184 Leonhardt 1 Tartakower
185 Marshall 0 Janowski
186 Schlechter 1/2 Dus Chotimirsky
187 Maroczy 1/2 Vidmar
188 Cohn 0 Nimzowitsch
189 Chigorin 0 Rubinstein
190 Olland 1 Wolf
Berger - BYE
The leaders both reached equal positions. Maroczy and Vidmar agreed to a draw, and Rubinstein offered one to Chigorin. However, the Old Russian apparently spotted a winning chance, and probably figured he could draw with Rubinstein when he wanted to. This was a misjudgment. Leonhardt moved into sole third place with his fourth win a row, and took home a share of the 2nd Beauty prize to boot. Duras lulled Spielmann to sleep in a sprightly 99-mover, while Cohn launched what might be The Worst Kingside Attack of All Time. Standings after round 19 (* indicates player has had the bye): <13.5>: Rubinstein*; <13.0>: Maroczy*; <11.5>: Leonhardt*; <11.0>: Duras*, Salwe*, Vidmar*; <10.5>: Nimzowitsch*, Schlechter*; <10.0>: Teichmann*, Wolf; <9.5>: Marshall*; <8.5>: Dus Chotimirsky*, Janowski*; <8.0>: Tartakower*; <7.5>: Chigorin*, Mieses*, Spielmann*; <6.5>: Berger*, Olland*; <4.0>: Cohn*, Johner <Round 20 (Monday, September 16)> 191 Rubinstein 1 Olland
192 Nizmowitsch 1 Chigorin
193 Vidmar 0 Cohn
194 Dus Chotimirsky 1/2 Maroczy
195 Janowski 0 Schlechter
196 Tartakower 1 Marshall
197 Duras 0 Leonhardt
198 Mieses 0 Spielmann
199 Salwe 0 Teichmann
200 Berger 1/2 Johner
Wolf - BYE
For the third straight round Rubinstein won while Maroczy only drew. This gave the former a full-point lead with only a game versus Wolf, the tournament's drawing master. The struggle seemed over for all intents and purposes. Meanwhile, Leonhardt won his fifth straight game to all but nail down third place. Standings after round 20 (* indicates player has had the bye): <14.5>: Rubinstein*; <13.5>: Maroczy*; <12.5>: Leonhardt*; <11.5>: Nimzowitsch*, Schlechter*; <11.0>: Duras*, Salwe*, Teichmann*, Vidmar*; <10.0>: Wolf*; <9.5>: Marshall*; <9.0>: Dus Chotimirsky*, Tartakower*; <8.5>: Janowski*, Spielmann*; <7.5>: Chigorin*, Mieses*; <7.0>: Berger*; <6.5>: Olland*; <5.0>: Cohn*; <4.5>: Johner <Round 21 (Tuesday, September 17)> 201 Teichmann 1/2 Burger
202 Spielmann 1 Salwe
203 Leonhardt 1 Mieses
204 Marshall 1/2 Duras
205 Schlechter 1 Tartakower
206 Maroczy 1 Janowski
207 Cohn 0 Dus Chotimirsky
208 Chigorin 0 Vidmar
209 Olland 0 Nimzowitsch
210 Wolf 1/2 Rubinstein
Johner - BYE
Rubinstein did get his draw in a fashion that became legendary. He quickly built up a crushing attack against Wolf, but then inexplicably relaxed the pressure and steered toward a draw. Hans Kmoch later told the story that Wolf had actually offered a draw, and Rubinstein had declined before later steering toward one. His explanation: "Against Wolf I draw when I want to, not when he wants to!" Such incidents helped lead to an eccentric reputation. But I have to wonder if there is more (or less) to the story. In the tournament book, Georg Marco (a chatty soul who never missed a good story) doesn't refer to it at all. He attributed Rubinstein's missing the win as a case of him not trying his hardest to win when a draw would be sufficient. I haven't looked at contemporary sources, but it would be interesting to know what their take is. If our only source for the incident is Hans Kmoch's memory rather than documentary evidence, it might be needed to be taken with a grain of salt. Elsewhere, Maroczy and Leonardt secured their places with wins. Nimzowitsch's =4th with Schlechter established him as a player to be watched. And the presence of many established stars in the middle to bottom of the crosstable indicated that the new generation needed to be taken serioiusly.
table[
1 Rubinstein * = = 0 = = 1 1 1 = 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 = 1 1 1 15.0
2 Maroczy = * 0 = = = = 1 1 = 1 = 1 1 1 = 1 = 1 1 1 14.5
3 Leonhardt = 1 * = 0 1 = 1 = = = 1 = 1 1 = = 1 1 0 1 13.5
4 Nimzowitsch 1 = = * 1 = = = = = 0 0 = 0 1 = 1 1 1 1 1 12.5
5 Schlechter = = 1 0 * = 0 = 0 = = = = 1 1 1 = 1 1 1 1 12.5
6 Vidmar = = 0 = = * 1 1 = 1 0 1 1 1 0 = 1 1 1 0 0 12.0
7 Teichmann 0 = = = 1 0 * 0 1 1 = = 1 1 = = 0 = = 1 1 11.5
8 Duras 0 0 0 = = 0 1 * 0 0 = 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 11.5
9 Salwe 0 0 = = 1 = 0 1 * = = 0 0 = 1 1 = 1 1 1 = 11.0
10 Wolf = = = = = 0 0 1 = * = = 1 1 1 = 1 0 0 = = 10.5
11 Marshall 0 0 = 1 = 1 = = = = * 1 = 0 0 = 0 0 1 1 1 10.0
12 Dus Chotimirsky 0 = 0 1 = 0 = 0 1 = 0 * 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 10.0
13 Spielmann 1 0 = = = 0 0 0 1 0 = 0 * 0 1 = 0 1 1 1 1 9.5
14 Tartakower 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 = 0 1 1 1 * 0 = 1 0 1 1 1 9.0
15 Janowski 0 0 0 0 0 1 = 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 * 1 1 1 0 1 1 8.5
16 Berger 0 = = = 0 = = 0 0 = = 0 = = 0 * 1 1 0 = = 7.5
17 Chigorin 0 0 = 0 = 0 1 0 = 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 * 0 1 0 1 7.5
18 Mieses = = 0 0 0 0 = 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 * 1 1 0 7.5
19 Olland 0 0 0 0 0 0 = 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 * 1 1 6.5
20 Cohn 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 = 0 0 0 0 0 = 1 0 0 * 1 5.0
21 Johner 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 = = 0 0 0 0 0 = 0 1 0 0 * 4.5
]table
|
|
210 games, 1907 - Karpov Tournament Champion - I
|
Anatoli Karpov won more than 160 tournaments in his career, including 28 out of the 34 tournaments in which he took part from 1975 to 1984. Here are some of his major victories: Trinec 66/67, 1st place, +9 =4
European Ch. Junior 1967/68, 1st, +6 =8
World Ch. Junior 1969, 1st, +12 =5
Alekhine Memorial, Moscow 1971, 1st shared, +5 =12
Hastings 1971/72, 1st shared, +8 =6 -1
San Antonio 1972, 1st shared +8 =6 -1
Leningrad Interzonal 1973, 1st shared, +10 =7
Madrid 1973 1st, +7 =8
Watch out, We're mad 1974
Portoroz/Ljubljana 1975, 1st, +8 =7
Milan 1975, 1st, +4 =16 -1
Skopje 1976, 1st, +10 =5
Euwe Memorial, Armsterdam 1976, 1st, +2 =4
Montilla-Moriles 1976, 1st, +5 =4
USSR Championship 1976, 1st, +8 =8 -1
Bad Lauterberg 1977, 1st, +9 =6
Las Palmas 1977, 1st, +12 =3
Tilburg 1977, 1st, +5 =6
Bugojno 1978, 1st shared, +6 =8 -1
Montreal 1979, 1st shared, +7 =10 -1
Waddinxveen 1979, 1st, +4 =2
Tilburg 1979, 1st, +4 =7
Bad Kissingen 1980, 1st, +3 =3
Bugojno 1980, 1st, +5 =6
Amsterdam 1980, 1st, +7 =6 -1
Tilburg 1980, 1st, +4 =7
Linares 1981, 1st shared, +5 =6
Moscow 1981, 1st, +5 =8
London 1982, 1st shared, +5 =7 -1
Torino 1982, 1st shared, +2 =8 -1
Tilburg 1982, 1st, +5 =5 -1
USSR Championship 1983, 1st, +5 =9 -1
Hannover 1983, 1st, +8 =6 -1
Oslo 1984, 1st, +3 =6
London 1984, 1st, +6 =6 -1
Amsterdam 1985, 1st, +4 =6
Brussels 1986, 1st, +7 =4
Bugojno 1986, 1st, +4 =9 -1
Amsterdam 1987, 1st shared, +2 =4
Wijk and Zee 1988, 1st, +6 =6 -1
Tilburg 1988, 1st, +7 =7
USSR Championship 1988, 1st shared, +6 =11
Mazatlan 1988 (I Rapid Chess WC), 1st, +8 =12 -2
Skelleftea 1989 WC, 1st shared, +4 =10
Reggio Emilia 1990/91, 1st, +3 =9
Reykjavik 1991, 1st shared, +7 =7 -1
Biel 1992, 1st, +8 =5 -1
Baden-Baden 1992, 1st, +8 =3
Dortmund 1993, 1st, +5 =1 -1
Tilburg, 1993, 1st, +3 -0 =9 [+4 -0 =2]
Linares 1994, 1st, +9 =4
Amber 1995, 1st, +13 =6 -3
Dos Hermanas 1995, 1st shared, +3 =6
Groningen 1995, 1st, +4 =7
Vienna 1996, 1st shared, +3 =5 -1
* * * * * * * *
Keywords: Karpov, Karpov collects, Iodised salt, Tolya Facts. Sister collection: Game Collection: Karpov Tournament Champion - II
|
|
393 games, 1966-1982 - Karpov Tournament Champion - II
|
Anatoli Karpov won more than 160 tournaments in his career, including 28 out of the 34 tournaments in which he took part from 1975 to 1984. Here are some of his major victories: Trinec 66/67, 1st place, +9 =4
European Ch. Junior 1967/68, 1st, +6 =8
World Ch. Junior 1969, 1st, +12 =5
Alekhine Memorial, Moscow 1971, 1st shared, +5 =12
Hastings 1971/72, 1st shared, +8 =6 -1
San Antonio 1972, 1st shared +8 =6 -1
Leningrad Interzonal 1973, 1st shared, +10 =7
Madrid 1973 1st, +7 =8
Watch out, We're mad 1974
Portoroz/Ljubljana 1975, 1st, +8 =7
Milan 1975, 1st, +4 =16 -1
Skopje 1976, 1st, +10 =5
Euwe Memorial, Armsterdam 1976, 1st, +2 =4
Montilla-Moriles 1976, 1st, +5 =4
USSR Championship 1976, 1st, +8 =8 -1
Bad Lauterberg 1977, 1st, +9 =6
Las Palmas 1977, 1st, +12 =3
Tilburg 1977, 1st, +5 =6
Bugojno 1978, 1st shared, +6 =8 -1
Montreal 1979, 1st shared, +7 =10 -1
Waddinxveen 1979, 1st, +4 =2
Tilburg 1979, 1st, +4 =7
Bad Kissingen 1980, 1st, +3 =3
Bugojno 1980, 1st, +5 =6
Amsterdam 1980, 1st, +7 =6 -1
Tilburg 1980, 1st, +4 =7
Linares 1981, 1st shared, +5 =6
Moscow 1981, 1st, +5 =8
London 1982, 1st shared, +5 =7 -1
Torino 1982, 1st shared, +2 =8 -1
Tilburg 1982, 1st, +5 =5 -1
USSR Championship 1983, 1st, +5 =9 -1
Hannover 1983, 1st, +8 =6 -1
Oslo 1984, 1st, +3 =6
London 1984, 1st, +6 =6 -1
Amsterdam 1985, 1st, +4 =6
Brussels 1986, 1st, +7 =4
Bugojno 1986, 1st, +4 =9 -1
Amsterdam 1987, 1st shared, +2 =4
Wijk and Zee 1988, 1st, +6 =6 -1
Tilburg 1988, 1st, +7 =7
USSR Championship 1988, 1st shared, +6 =11
Mazatlan 1988 (I Rapid Chess WC), 1st, +8 =12 -2
Skelleftea 1989 WC, 1st shared, +4 =10
Reggio Emilia 1990/91, 1st, +3 =9
Reykjavik 1991, 1st shared, +7 =7 -1
Biel 1992, 1st, +8 =5 -1
Baden-Baden 1992, 1st, +8 =3
Dortmund 1993, 1st, +5 =1 -1
Tilburg, 1993, 1st, +3 -0 =9 [+4 -0 =2]
Linares 1994, 1st, +9 =4
Amber 1995, 1st, +13 =6 -3
Dos Hermanas 1995, 1st shared, +3 =6
Groningen 1995, 1st, +4 =7
Vienna 1996, 1st shared, +3 =5 -1
* * * * * * * *
Keywords: Karpov, Karpov collects, Iodised salt, Tolya Facts. Sister collection: Game Collection: Karpov Tournament Champion - I
|
|
356 games, 1983-1996 - Karpov vs. the World Champions Decisive Games
|
The Romance of the Chess World Championship Match and the World Champions that won them: There can only be Two.
The Champion to hold the Title he beat all the masters for. The Challenger on quest for same Title of yore.
Anatoly Karpov Anatoli Karpov, one of the greatest of World Champions in chess history, has played all the post WW2 World Champions at least a dozen times each in serious classical games except for Fischer and Botvinnik. Karpov holds the unique distinction of having played the most games against the most World Champions. He has negative scores against Kasparov and Anand; tied scores with Petrosian and Kramnik; positive scores against Smyslov, Tal, and was massively dominating against Spassky, who once complained that he could not fathom Karpov's style. During his heyday from 1974 to 1984, Karpov so totally dominated the chessworld that tournaments that he joined essentially became fights for second place, as it was almost a foregone conclusion that he would win first even before the start. No one in the horizon played chess close to Karpov's level then (after Fischer's retirement and before Kasparov's ascension). His puzzlingly peaceful but profoundly unbeatable brand of chess made it look like he was going to reign forever. Karpov was unlucky in the sense that the latter part of his era coincided with Kasparov's career. If Kasparov were never born, it's possible that Karpov may have been world champion until 2000, a 25 year reign. He would have been right at Lasker's ballpark. Karpov claims that the first player that he seriously studied was Capablanca, yet many fans see in his prophylactic style a kind of more active and aggressive Petrosian. Karpov's stylistic attitude in a game seems to be to control every square of the board that he he could, while calculating every possible variations in an approximately 5 move range. This gives the impression of a prophylactic boa constricting the opponents' pieces onto their last breathe, while allowing no serious counter play. Karpov won the Title by default from a Fischer who would not play him in 1975, and lost it to Kasparov in their second match in 1985. In their fourth match in 1987, Karpov nearly won the Title back, but lost in the very last game. Had Karpov drew or won that last game, Kasparov's superiority over him would not have been that clearly demonstrated. In the tradition of Lasker, Alekhine, Botvinnik, Smyslov, and the Almost World Champion Korchnoi, Karpov played world class chess until he was 50, and until 1999, he arguably might still have had reasonable chances of beating anybody in a World Championship Match except Kasparov. Karpov beat Smyslov 3 to 1, with 10 draws
Karpov beat Tal 1 to 0, with 19 draws
Karpov tied Petrosian 1 to 1, with 12 draws
Karpov beat Spassky 13 to 1, with 23 draws
Kasparov beat Karpov 28 to 21, with 129 draws
Karpov tied Kramnik 2 to 2, with 9 draws
Anand beat Karpov 8 to 5, with 18 draws
Bonus: Karpov's breathtakingly beautiful positional Immortal game against Gulko
|
|
88 games, 1971-2003
|
|
| << previous
| page 1 of 4 | next >> |
|
|
| SEARCH ENTIRE GAME COLLECTION DATABASE |
use these two forms to locate other game collections in the database
|
|
Kibitzing
