Can White Win this? Weiss vs. Chigorin New York 1889
samsloan
This is a game I discovered in my chess research. This game is not in
any of the chess databases. It was played in a match that was supposed
to be for the World Chess Championship. However, the match was drawn
and therefore no World Champion was declared.
I believe that in the final position in which a draw was agreed,
White, Max Weiss, had a win. It is a simple king and pawn endgame. The
annotator, Steinitz, said nothing about this position.
Needless to say, the full details of this match will be available soon
at a bookstore near you.
So, am I right? If Weiss had played this out, would he have won this
game and have been declared World Chess Champion.
Max Weiss quit chess for a career in banking right after this game and
that is the reason you have never heard of him.
Sam Sloan
[Event "New York 1889 Play-Off Match"]
[Date "1889.05.24"]
[Round "3"]
[White "Weiss,Max"]
[Black "Tschigorin,Mikhail"]
[Result "1/2-1/2"]
[ECO "C49"]
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 Nf6 4.Nc3 Bb4 5.O-O O-O 6.d3 d6 7.Bxc6 bxc6
8.Ne2 Bg4 9.Ng3 Nh5 10.h3 Bxf3 11.Qxf3 Nxg3 12.fxg3 Bc5+ 13.Be3 Bb6
14.g4 Qe7 15.Bxb6 cxb6 16.Rf2 Qe6 17.b3 a5 18.a4 f6 19.Qe3 Rab8
20.Raf1 d5 21.g5 d4 22.Qg3 fxg5 23.Rxf8+ Rxf8 24.Rxf8+ Kxf8 25.Qxg5
Kf7 26.Kf2 Qf6+ 27.Qxf6+ gxf6 1/2-1/2
http://search.barnesandnoble.com/booksearch/isbninquiry.asp?ISBN=4871878470
http://www.amazon.com/dp/4871878473
Offramp
Steinitz's book on this event is one that could do with a reprint.
Jon D'Souza-Eva
According to chessgames.com (http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?
gid=1002471), Black played 27. ... Kxf6.
I agree that after 27. ... gxf6 White wins (or at least I managed it
three times in a row against Crafty!)
e.g.
1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5 Nf6 4. Nc3 Bb4 5. O-O O-O 6. d3 d6 7. Bxc6
bxc6
8. Ne2 Bg4 9. Ng3 Nh5 10. h3 Bxf3 11. Qxf3 Nxg3 12. fxg3 Bc5+ 13. Be3
Bb6
14. g4 Qe7 15. Bxb6 cxb6 16. Rf2 Qe6 17. b3 a5 18. a4 f6 19. Qe3 Rab8
20.
Raf1 d5 21. g5 d4 22. Qg3 fxg5 23. Rxf8+ Rxf8 24. Rxf8+ Kxf8 25. Qxg5
Kf7
26. Kf2 Qf6+ 27. Qxf6+ gxf6 28. Kf3 b5 29. Kg4 Kg6 30. g3 h6 31. Kh4
Kg7
32. Kh5 Kh7 33. g4 Kg7 34. h4 Kh7 35. g5 hxg5 36. hxg5 bxa4 37. bxa4
Kg7
38. gxf6+ Kxf6 39. Kh6 c5 40. Kh5 Kf7 41. Kg5 Ke6 42. Kg6 c4 43. Kg5
Kd6
44. Kf6 Kc5 45. Kxe5 c3 46. Kf6 Kb4 47. e5 Ka3 48. e6 Kb2 49. e7 Kxc2
50.
e8=Q Kd2 51. Qb5 c2 52. Qxa5+ Ke2 53. Qc5 Kd2 54. Qxd4 Ke2 55. Qc3
c1=Q 56.
Qxc1 Kf2 57. d4 Kf3 58. Qe1 Kg2 59. Qe3 Kh2 60. Qf3 Kg1 61. Qe2 Kh1
62. Kg5
Kg1 63. Kg4 Kh1 64. Kg3 Kg1 65. Qe1#
However after 27. ... Kf6 it looks very drawn to me.
On 25 Nov, 14:37, samsloan <samhsl...@gmail.com> wrote:
samsloan
> >http://search.barnesandnoble.com/booksearch/isbninquiry.asp?ISBN=4871878470
>
> Steinitz's book on this event is one that could do with a reprint.
Yes, but it will take me a long time to get that one done.
At least two days. Possibly even three.
Sam Sloan
samsloan
As several people have pointed out just in the few minutes since I
posted this, there was a mistake in the score.
Had Chigorin played 27. .... gf6, Weiss indeed would have won.
But Chigorin actually played 27. .... Kxg6 and the game was obviously
a dead draw.
As to how I made this mistake, it came from converting Descriptive
Notation to Algebraic.
The last move was KxQ.
The move above it was Q-B3.
However, the tail of the Q stuck down into the K below it making it
look like the K was a P so the move appeared to be PxQ.
I apologize to anybody who wasted time because my error.
The book will be out early next week
http://search.barnesandnoble.com/booksearch/isbninquiry.asp?ISBN=4871878473
http://www.amazon.com/dp/4871878473
Sam Sloan
[Event "New York 1889 Play-Off Match"]
[Date "1889.05.24"]
[Round "3"]
[White "Weiss,Max"]
[Black "Tschigorin,Mikhail"]
[Result "1/2-1/2"]
[ECO "C49"]
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 Nf6 4.Nc3 Bb4 5.O-O O-O 6.d3 d6 7.Bxc6 bxc6
8.Ne2 Bg4 9.Ng3 Nh5 10.h3 Bxf3 11.Qxf3 Nxg3 12.fxg3 Bc5+ 13.Be3 Bb6
14.g4 Qe7 15.Bxb6 cxb6 16.Rf2 Qe6 17.b3 a5 18.a4 f6 19.Qe3 Rab8
20.Raf1 d5 21.g5 d4 22.Qg3 fxg5 23.Rxf8+ Rxf8 24.Rxf8+ Kxf8 25.Qxg5
Kf7 26.Kf2 Qf6+ 27.Qxf6+ Kxf6 1/2-1/2
jeremy.p...@vanderbilt.edu
Sam, you have the history wrong. This was a 4 game playoff since they
tied for 1st at NY 1889; a playoff as in many other tournaments. The
winner of NY 1889 could then be challenged, and the committee would
choose between challengers, for the world championship. I can't
believe it isn't in databases; these games were published in many
major chess columns at the time.
It is true that if you read certain documents, the entire NY 1889
tournament was touted as being a world championship tournament. The
whole notion of world championship was much less fixed than it is now
in any case, with some saying that the whole concept was absurd, and
some believing the title belonged to each winner of an international
tournament; Steinitz, of course, claimed it could only come through a
match. However, Steinitz helped write the rules for NY 1889, which
made the claim that it was for a world championship more interesting.
Jerry Spinrad
None
> Oops!...I Did It Again
>
> As several people have pointed out just in the few minutes since I
> posted this, there was a mistake in the score.
Classic Sloan
samsloan
As such, there were 38 rounds with 10 games each round.
However, there was an unusual special rule: If two players drew their
second game, that game did not count and they had to play a third
game. Only if their third game was also a draw did it count as a draw.
There were 48 times that this happened. The most noteworthy time was
when Max Weiss drew his second game with Chigorin. They had to play a
third game and this time Chigorin won.
Since there were 48 times when the players drew their second game,
there were 48 times that a new third game had to be played.
After Weiss and Chigorin tied for first, they had to play a four game
match. However, all four games were draws. Both players stated that
they did not want to play any more games. They wanted to go home.
Weiss had come from Vieaan Austria, Chigorin had come from St.
Petersburg, Russia.
Finally, the organizers reluctantly agreed to split the prize money,
so the tournament concluded without a decisive result.
As there were 380 games in the regular event, plus 48 extra games
because the second game had been a draw plus there was a 4 game match,
this means that there should have been 380 + 48 + 4 or 432 games.
I have collected 434 games. Right now I am trying to figure out where
the two extra games came from.
I will send the book to the printers by Midnight tonight or at the
very latest by Friday.
Sam Sloan
http://search.barnesandnoble.com/booksearch/isbninquiry.asp?ISBN=4871878473
http://www.amazon.com/dp/4871878473
Offramp
> After Weiss and Chigorin tied for first, they had to play a four game
> match. However, all four games were draws. Both players stated that
> they did not want to play any more games. They wanted to go home.
I'm not fucking surprised.
Offramp
> How sure are you that 27. ... gxf6 was played?
>
> According to chessgames.com (http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?
> gid=1002471), Black played 27. ... Kxf6.
>
> I agree that after 27. ... gxf6 White wins
I don't think so... I think 'tis drawn in any case.
samsloan
spent Thanksgiving in the company of my devoted computer.
This book of the New York 1889 Chess Congress by William Steinitz will
be out and published by the middle of next week.
I expect that this book will be my best selling chess book because it
is otherwise unavailable.
If you want this book relatively inexpensively I suggest that you
check the Barnes and Noble website below every day starting on Monday,
because they always offer my books at a deeply discounted pre-
publication price for one or two days. Since you will know that the
book will be out in two days more, you will not have to wait long.
samsloan
Sorry, it is already being offered there at $9 below list price !!!!
Taylor Kingston
> tied for 1st at NY 1889; a playoff as in many other tournaments. The
> winner of NY 1889 could then be challenged, and the committee would
> choose between challengers, for the world championship. I can't
> believe it isn't in databases; these games were published in many
> major chess columns at the time.
>
> It is true that if you read certain documents, the entire NY 1889
> tournament was touted as being a world championship tournament. The
> whole notion of world championship was much less fixed than it is now
> in any case, with some saying that the whole concept was absurd, and
> some believing the title belonged to each winner of an international
> tournament; Steinitz, of course, claimed it could only come through a
> match. However, Steinitz helped write the rules for NY 1889, which
> made the claim that it was for a world championship more interesting.
>
> Jerry Spinrad
Jerry, I'm not at home right now, so I can't check any of my
references, but I seem to recall that NY 1889 was supposed to be more
like a Candidates tournament, rather than a WCh. The winner would have
the right to challenge Steinitz. But Chigorin had already played a WCh
match, and Weiss wasn't interested in playing for the title, so
nothing came of it.
Was this information incorrect? Or perhaps I'm misremembering.
jeremy.p...@vanderbilt.edu
wrote:
>
> - Show quoted text -
At the time, this was clearly advertised as a world championship
tournament, and that the winner was required to hold himself open to
challenge afterwards for the title; thus, it was clear that Steinitz
would have to be the challenger rather than the title defender in a
match. Since there was no tournament winner, it became easier later to
describe it as a type of candidate's tournament, but that was not the
original arrangement.
Jerry Spinrad
Taylor Kingston
> Can White win this?
>
> This is a game I discovered in my chess research. This game is not in
> any of the chess databases.
Not true. The ChessBase Mega Database 2005 has it, plain as day. It
was the third game of the NY 1889 playoff match.
[Event "USA-06.Congress playoff-1pl"]
[Site "New York"]
[Date "1889.??.??"]
[Round "3"]
[White "Weiss, Miksa"]
[Black "Chigorin, Mikhail"]
[Result "1/2-1/2"]
[ECO "C49"]
[PlyCount "54"]
[EventDate "1889.??.??"]
[EventType "match"]
[EventRounds "4"]
[EventCountry "USA"]
[Source "ChessBase"] <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5 Nf6 4. Nc3 Bb4 5. O-O O-O 6. d3 d6 7. Bxc6
bxc6 8.
Ne2 Bg4 9. Ng3 Nh5 10. h3 Bxf3 11. Qxf3 Nxg3 12. fxg3 Bc5+ 13. Be3 Bb6
14. g4
Qe7 15. Bxb6 cxb6 16. Rf2 Qe6 17. b3 a5 18. a4 f6 19. Qe3 Rab8 20.
Raf1 d5 21.
g5 d4 22. Qg3 fxg5 23. Rxf8+ Rxf8 24. Rxf8+ Kxf8 25. Qxg5 Kf7 26. Kf2
Qf6+ 27.
Qxf6+ Kxf6 1/2-1/2
Taylor Kingston
wrote:
> I believe that in the final position in which a draw was agreed,
> White, Max Weiss, had a win.
Neither Rybka 3.1 nor Fritz8 agrees with you. Both see it as dead
drawn whether Black plays 27...Kxf6 or 27...gxf6.
jkh001
That's correct. The K+P ending is equal (both of them). In response to
a question on the USCF Forums, Sam claimed that White could win (after
27. ... gxf6) by bringing his King to f5. Of course, /if/ White could
achieve that he'd be winning, but he can't against any reasonable
defense.