Mar-11-04
 | | tamar: A very fine game, the first of the match. |
|
Feb-07-05
 | | Honza Cervenka: Very fine game from both sides. 42.Qe4 was a decisive mistake losing an exchange at least as 44.Kf3 Rh3+ or 44...Rf1+ 45.Bf2 (45.Ke2 Re1+ 46.Kf3 Rxe4 47.Rxg6 Rxd4) 45...Rf6+ is even worse than continuation in the game. |
|
Feb-07-05
| | tamar: "The fortunes of the players during the game were constantly varying. Now Kolisch had the advantage—now Anderssen; and over and over again victory trembled so evenly in the balance that it was impossible to predict to which side it would eventually fall. It was a hardly-contested battle, no error of any importance having been committed by either player." The Dial 1861 Three publications followed this match concurrantly. The comments of Staunton, Boden and Lowenthal give an idea of the stir this game caused.
http://www.chessarch.com/excavation... |
|
| Mar-23-07 | | Calli: 42.Qe4? is supposedly the world's first time pressure blunder. The match was played with sand hourglasses as timers. I've seen it described that way although in the articles at Chess Archaeology say the time limit was 24/2hrs. Kolisch may have been trying to make 48 moves in his 4th hour before the sand ran out. Imagine flipping a glass filled with two hours of sand in a time scramble. |
|
Jan-30-13
 | | GrahamClayton: <Calli>Imagine flipping a glass filled with two hours of sand in a time scramble. <Calli>,
Did each player flip their own hourglass, or their opponent's glass? |
|
Aug-20-13
 | | Tabanus: I added date to this game based on "The Era" (London) Sunday 28 July 1861: <The first game was played on Tuesday> |
|
| Dec-11-14 | | Knight13: This is a good game. Like two Mr. Tactics playing ping pong until 42. Qe4??. <Calli: 42.Qe4? is supposedly the world's first time pressure blunder.> Didn't they use time controls in London (1851)? <"The tournament started in May of that year and proceeded to standardize issues such as consistent time-controls, rules and notation in a knock-out style format."> What source(s) suggest(s) that nobody might've blundered in time pressure in 1851 or the next ten years? |
|
Dec-11-14
 | | Gypsy: <What source(s) suggest(s) that nobody might've blundered in time pressure in 1851 or the next ten years?> History Of Chess Clocks:
https://www.youtube.com/
watch?v=IRW5S0-jdt8 |
|
Dec-11-14
 | | keypusher: <Diidn't they use time controls in London (1851)? ><"The tournament started in May of that year and proceeded to standardize issues such as consistent time-controls, rules and notation in a knock-out style format."> <knight13>. No. Staunton complained bitterly about slow play at the 1851 tournament. There were no clocks and no time controls. |
|
| Dec-12-14 | | Knight13: <Gypsy> "In 1861, sand glasses, one for each man, were tried in a major match." Got it, thanks. <GrahamClayton:
<Calli>,
Did each player flip their own hourglass, or their opponent's glass?>
As described and illustrated in the video provided by <Gypsy>, "when a player was not 'on move', his glass was laid flat." Each player had his own sand glass. <keypusher> Staunton's complaint seems understandable. I presume, then, that by <"The tournament started in May of that year and proceeded to standardize issues such as consistent time-controls..."> the writer meant the tournament brought to issue the seriousness of consistent time-controls, which was "proceeded" to become "standardized" in the future after the conclusion of the tourney. |
|
Dec-12-14
| | keypusher: <knight13> Staunton wanted to a congress of chess players to accompany the tournament to address the rules and regulations of chess, including " the propriety of assigning some limit to the time consumed by the players in the consideration of their moves." The congress never met. |
|
Kibitzing
