You sure it is not in Sergeant's?

Maroczy and Chess Monthly both have it and Sergeant missed it?

I think W.W. Montgomery is correct.

My reasons are

1) Lack of a correction in Chess Monthly. Its unlikely that Morphy gave Fiske the wrong opponent to begin with. Morphy was right there in NYC and probably handed it to Fiske for publication personally. Even more unlikely that Fiske would not have heard from WW Mont. had he made a mistake.

That still leaves a bit of a mystery, CM Jan. 1860 credits the same game to WW Montgomery.

In the back of Maroczy's book he gives WinLossDraw statistice and at what odds for Morphy's opponents even though the game scores were not published in his book. I cannot say as to how he knows these.

For HP Montgomery Maroczy lists
M played HP once even and M won
M played HP 5 games odds of a Springer +2 -2 =1

So it would seem that Sergeant is correct about the 5 knight's odds games with HP

For HP Montgomery Maroczy lists
M played WW even four games M winning all
M played WW 3 games odds of bauer und doppelzug +1 -2 (WW won 1 and lost 2) M played 10 games at odds of Springer and WW lost 9 and drew one.

Lawson agrees with Maroczy's tally
<April also bought two visitors. W. W. Montgomery of Georgia arrived just before April, staying a week. He and Morphy then played their first four games even, Morphy winning all. Morphy then played him at odds of Pawn and Two moves, and under these conditions Montgomery won one but lost two. At Knight odds, Morphy won nine out of ten games, the tenth being a draw. PAGE 93> These games being played April, 1858

Still, I would feel better if I could come across that correction where <a game attributed to WW was really played by HP and the reason for te correction>. (as Lawson does not mention any games played between them after Morphy's return from Europe, possibly just an oversight OR is it possible Lawson erred listing WW in New York rather than HP. While not impossible it would seem more likely HP may have had business in NYC rather than WW from Georgia)

THE TRUTH IS OUT THERE ....

Has any one seen a correction in regard to this game as being played by HP rather than WW?

A correction might be as far off as he 1861 CM's. A remote possibility anyway.

and "it is said" that he conceded him the odds of Kt in 5 games, winning 2 (of which this is one), losing 2 and drawing one. But when Morphy visited Philadelphia in November 1859, Montgomery declined to take the odds, and they did not play.

What is Sergeant implying with "it is said", and how much of waht is related after does it apply to?

Is he indicating that he feels the 5 games at Knight odds are suspect and then <BUT when Morphy visited Philadelphia in November 1859, Montgomery declined to take the odds, and they did not play.> and citing what he feels is a contradiction to the "heresay" and that is why he feels compeled to relate it as "it is said".

The term "it is said", in context to me seems, to be questioning the fact.

Aye, it is too bad both Sergeant and Lawson are dead. They would both make excellent kibitzers.

In July 1858, they summarize M's games in NO before he leaves for Europe. For WW, Morphy went 4-0 in even games M , 2-1 at a Pawn and two , 9-0-1 at knight odds.

Its possible that CM 1859 has some more info, but I don't have that volume. This is all the research I can do for now. The game looks to me like an 1858 New Orleans odds game against WW as one of the ten they contested there or in NYC in 1859 as Lawson says that WW was there.

Not necessarily a match and not into November if the venue is right and they did not play in Philly. The games would need to be between early September and October 30.

Placed in N.O. 1857? It seems more likely to be W.W. Montgomery from Georgia.

Althought Hardman Philips Montgomery was the one who planted the seed of an idea that grew into the 1st American Chess Congress, according to Fiske, Montgomery had to leave the 1857 Congress after winning his match Allison and losing one game to Paulsen. There's no mention of he and Morphy playing even a casual game. Morphy and HP Montgomery certainly never met in New Orleans in 1857.

<On Thursday, October 8, Thompson resigned his third game with Morphy after forty-six moves, and two hours and thirty-six minutes of play. Now Morphy advanced to the second section. Later that day he played side games with H. P. Montgomery, Louis Paulsen, and James Thompson, winning all games, the last given here in facsimile of Morphy’s writing. <L p 58>>?

So the 57 game has it's precidence

<1857 New York is correct for the other game vs HP.>

<So the 57 game has it's precidence>

Here's the actual chronology of HP Montgomery at the Chess Congress.

Oct. 5 - HP Montgomery telegraphed that he'd been delayed but will arrive on the 6th.

Oct. 6 - Montgomery arrived and was appointed to the Provisional Committee. (W.W. Mongomery was also present as a pre-appointed member of the Management Committee - along with other prominent members of the New York and Brooklyn Clubs) HP Montgomery was matched with W.S. Allison for the first pairings of the tournament. The day ended: Allison -1; Montgomery -1.

Oct. 7 - by 12 noon, Montgomery won 2 more games: Allison -1; Montgomery -3.

Oct. 8 - offhand games played by: Morphy - Paulsen; Morphy - Montgomery; Hammond - Mead.

Oct. 12 - second pairings were arranged: Montgomery to play Paulsen.

Oct. 13-14. Paulsen beat Montgomery

Oct. 15-16 "Mr. Montgomery was unexpectedly called home, and was obliged to resign in the second session to Mr. Paulsen, the score standing Paulsen 2; Montgomery 0." (only one game actually completed)

January 5, 1860.
3 Hales Place South Lambeth

My Dear Fiske,
The game that you published in the November issue of the Chess Monthly between myself and Mr. Morphy was certainly not played by me. I would have insisted that Mr. Morphy accept odds from me rather than I to accept odds from someone without bottleholder and seconds. However I do recognize the game as one played between Mr. Morphy and Mr. Montgomery, a <hard <man <splat<to <beat>, as Mr.> Morphy had> consulted> with me about it at a later time. If you doubt my word I could write and a William<Splat> Montgomery would come forward to rightfully claim the game.

Believe me, sincerely yours,
Fred. Deacon

<However, the ocean voyage and stormy weather, rough seas had smeared and blotched some of the ink to obscure some of the message. I used today’s digital image enhancement algorithms and applied them to the letter (with the help from that Grissim dude on Law and Order - CSI ) and in matching some the indentation marks from the quill pen we were able to come up with the letter as the writer originally had written>

January 5, 1860. 3 Hales Place
South Lambeth

My Dear Fiske,
The game that you published in the November issue of the Chess Monthly between myself and Mr. Morphy was certainly not played by me. I would have insisted that Mr. Morphy accept odds from me rather than I to accept odds from someone without bottleholder and seconds. However I do recognize the game as one played between Mr. Morphy and Mr. Montgomery, Hardman Phillips, as Mr. Morphy had consulted with me about it at a later time. If you doubt my word I could write and a willing Montgomery would come forward to rightfully claim the game.

Believe me, sincerely yours,
Fred. Deacon

<So, <it would appear Morphy had tried to claim that he had beaten Frederick Deacon. When making the correction Fiske had apparently been unable to decern the proper contents of Deacon's letter and mis-attributed the game to WW Montgomery, an honest mistake.>