Paul Morphy's chess strength
Ben Leostein
or entry-level GM.
A rating of 2400 - 2500 probably, given his lack of opening knowledge, however
his speculative sacrifices were very facinating to look at, however, most
postional, sound players of the highest levels today could counter them and
probably beat him.
Ben
Akorps
This is a little like saying "Newton would
be a 2400 or 2500 rated mathematician
if he came back today and tried to do
research. His discoveries are interesting,
but most college level instructors today
know more than he did."
The fallacy lies in the fact that Newton
discovered all these things in the first
place, things that noone in history had
noticed, and single-handed raised the
overall level of human knowledge. The
current mathematical hacks in our
universities count themselves lucky if
they come up with any good new ideas
at all. Mostly they just work with the
knowledge passed down through history,
and are incapable of creating anything
original. If Newton came back it might
take him awhile, but after he mastered
the framework of existing knowledge his
genius would lead to undreamed of new
stuff that no current hack could think of.
Similarly, Morphy would probably lose a
few games in a match against a GM at
the start, but then would do some
research in the books and raise the level
of his play to compensate. That was the
pattern when he met a new strong player,
at first he might lose a game or two, but
then would go to work and improve his
openings etc.
Fischer said Morphy was the most
accurate player who ever lived, and that
it sometimes took him 20 minutes to
find moves that only took Morphy 5
minutes to find. I'll give the reference next
time I come across it.
Here is a reference from Vukovic's "The
Chess Sacrifice"
"Anderssen and Morphy, whose sacrifices
have almost without exception outlasted a
century of criticism, certainly stand out as
the greatest players of the period."
"Newton has not diminished in stature
because of Einstein, nor has Morphy
because Steinitz"
Morphy is good to study, because he was
the first player who combined perfect
dynamic play with perfect positional play
(as close to perfection as is humanly
possible anyway). Before that there were
great positional players who were weak
dynamically (ie Philidor, Staunton), or
great dynamic players who were weaker
positionally. The contrast between Morphy
and his opponents of both positional and
dynamic styles is more instructive than
that of any other player, I think.
Anders Thulin
Ben Leostein <b76...@aol.com> wrote:
>I think it would be reasonable to judge Paul Morphy's strength at an IM level
>or entry-level GM.
>
It should be noted that Mark Glickman does not give a rating for
Morphy in his paper on Glicko rating ('Parameter Estimation in Large
Dynamic Paired Comparison Experiments'). He gives the 20 top players
(according to peak strength), and notes that Morphy ended up as nr 27
among the 88 players involved.
--
Anders Thulin Anders....@telia.se 013-23 55 32
Telia ProSoft AB, Teknikringen 6, S-583 30 Linkoping, Sweden
Brian Sumner
>
> >I think it would be reasonable to judge Paul Morphy's strength at an IM level
> or entry-level GM.
>
Excellent post.
mike fowler
World Champion. No one would play him after his tour of Europe...they
were too scared to...The sad truth is that Morphy went downhill fast
after a few years of brilliant chess...he died early in life of insanity
and a will to prove he could now beat his father in his own tradgic way
Umebart
knowledge in many openings. remember, If he came back today, he would have the
use of databases. furthermore, players today rely stongly on opening
preperation, and Morphy played so much diffrent stuff they couldn't prepare.
Onee other thing, let us not forget, a6 in the Spanish was developed but Morphy
Adamski
<ako...@aol.com> writes
>>I think it would be reasonable to judge Paul Morphy's strength at an IM level
>or entry-level GM.
>
>>A rating of 2400 - 2500 probably,
This raises the possibility of a Polgar - Morphy match. Continuing the
theme of canine allusions, it might be billed as 'The Trained Dog'
versus 'The Half Breed'.
>This is a little like saying "Newton would
>be a 2400 or 2500 rated mathematician
>if he came back today and tried to do
>research. His discoveries are interesting,
>but most college level instructors today
>know more than he did."
>
>The fallacy lies in the fact that Newton
>discovered all these things in the first
>place
Hardly.
>
>Fischer said Morphy was the most
>accurate player who ever lived,
He said he was "PERHAPS the most accurate player who ever lived".
Also Morphy "played quite rapidly, RARELY taking more than 5 minutes
to decide a move."
Be it noted of course that Fischer discounted himself from such
discussions.
> and that
>it sometimes took him 20 minutes to
>find moves that only took Morphy 5
>minutes to find.
Previously you wrote:
>Fischer said he used to have to analyze
>some of Morphy's positions for 15 or 20
>minutes before he could see why Morphy's
>move was best, whereas Morphy never
>took more than 5 minutes to make a move
>in his games.
> I'll give the reference next
>time I come across it.
I won't hold my breath.
>Here is a reference from Vukovic's "The
>Chess Sacrifice"
>
>"Anderssen and Morphy, whose sacrifices
>have almost without exception outlasted a
>century of criticism, certainly stand out as
>the greatest players of the period."
The post-Staunton period.
Michael Oberly
He died at 47,I believe-not a codger,but not all that early in
life,either,in those days.And he may or may not have been mentally
ill,but he certainly didn't die of 'insanity'.
>
--
Mike Oberly * Rain can't wet me,
when I have my poui in my hand. *
* Rain can't wet me,
I advancing on the foe like a roaring lion!*
Soca/Calypso fan?Check out http://www.iere.com/thebarn
hy...@tamu.edu
michael...@webtv.net (mike fowler) writes:
> I agree...this person knows the guts of Morphy...who was the first US
> World Champion. No one would play him after his tour of Europe
Absolutely false. Anderssen and Kolisch both wanted to
play Morphy, but he would not play them.
...they
> were too scared to...
Do you enjoy throwing around unjustified and easily
refuted accusations?
The sad truth is that Morphy went downhill fast
How do you know this? Rumors of Morphy's "insanity" have
been quite exaggerated, with some of the most damming
anecdotes turning out to be little more than invented
anecdotes.
> after a few years of brilliant chess...he died early in life of insanity
Died of insanity? That's a novel diagnosis.
> and a will to prove he could now beat his father in his own tradgic way
Sounds like you've been reading the Freudians or their
parrot, Cockburn.
William Hyde
Dept of Oceanography
Texas A&M University
hy...@rossby.tamu.edu
Adamski
>In article <3612-379...@newsd-142.iap.bryant.webtv.net>,
> michael...@webtv.net (mike fowler) writes:
>> I agree...this person knows the guts of Morphy...who was the first US
>> World Champion. No one would play him after his tour of Europe
>
> Absolutely false. Anderssen and Kolisch both wanted to
> play Morphy, but he would not play them.
Paulsen.
>...they
>> were too scared to...
>
> Do you enjoy throwing around unjustified and easily
> refuted accusations?
I prefer unjustified but difficult to refute accusations.
>The sad truth is that Morphy went downhill fast
>
> How do you know this? Rumors of Morphy's "insanity" have
> been quite exaggerated, with some of the most damming
> anecdotes turning out to be little more than invented
> anecdotes.
Plain nuts then?
>
>> after a few years of brilliant chess...he died early in life of insanity
>
> Died of insanity? That's a novel diagnosis.
>
>> and a will to prove he could now beat his father in his own tradgic way
>
> Sounds like you've been reading the Freudians or their
> parrot, Cockburn.
He was a real mummy's boy, which may account for the homosexuality.
hy...@tamu.edu
Adamski <mic...@mobius1.demon.co.uk> writes:
> In article <7nahd9$hnp$1...@news.tamu.edu>, hy...@tamu.edu writes
>>In article <3612-379...@newsd-142.iap.bryant.webtv.net>,
>> michael...@webtv.net (mike fowler) writes:
>>> I agree...this person knows the guts of Morphy...who was the first US
>>> World Champion. No one would play him after his tour of Europe
>>
>> Absolutely false. Anderssen and Kolisch both wanted to
>> play Morphy, but he would not play them.
>
> Paulsen.
You will have to elaborate. Are you referring to the
pawn and move proposal?
>>...they
>>> were too scared to...
>>
>> Do you enjoy throwing around unjustified and easily
>> refuted accusations?
>
> I prefer unjustified but difficult to refute accusations.
Why difficult to refute? We know that they wanted to
play the man, thus they were clearly not "too scared"
to play. Proposition refuted.
>
>>The sad truth is that Morphy went downhill fast
>>
> Plain nuts then?
Who knows the facts? So much nonsense has been written
about his insanity that I am unsure what to believe. The
clearest evidence of odd behaviour seems to be his lawsuit
against his cousin. But do we really know that this was
utterly without basis? Or did his cousin's lawyers take his
known eccentricies and make out a case for Morphy being,
as you say, plain nuts? Is everyone who launches a
frivolous lawsuit insane?
He was under a lot of stress (though I would argue that
by opposing the Confederacy he showed more sanity than
millions of his compatriots), he was deeply disappointed,
he accepted other people's negative valuations of
himself and what he did best. Is that insanity?
Adamski
>In article <F8kqdVAy...@mobius1.demon.co.uk>,
> Adamski <mic...@mobius1.demon.co.uk> writes:
>> In article <7nahd9$hnp$1...@news.tamu.edu>, hy...@tamu.edu writes
>>>In article <3612-379...@newsd-142.iap.bryant.webtv.net>,
>>> michael...@webtv.net (mike fowler) writes:
>>>> I agree...this person knows the guts of Morphy...who was the first US
>>>> World Champion. No one would play him after his tour of Europe
>>>
>>> Absolutely false. Anderssen and Kolisch both wanted to
>>> play Morphy, but he would not play them.
>>
>> Paulsen.
>
> You will have to elaborate.
Louis Paulsen.
> Are you referring to the
> pawn and move proposal?
Jawohl.
>
>>>...they
>>>> were too scared to...
>>>
>>> Do you enjoy throwing around unjustified and easily
>>> refuted accusations?
>>
>> I prefer unjustified but difficult to refute accusations.
>
> Why difficult to refute? We know that they wanted to
> play the man, thus they were clearly not "too scared"
> to play. Proposition refuted.
No, I just prefer unjustified but difficult to refute accusations.
Please try and keep up, sir.
>>
>>>The sad truth is that Morphy went downhill fast
>>>
>> Plain nuts then?
>
> Who knows the facts?
Fischer?
> So much nonsense has been written
> about his insanity
You bet.
>that I am unsure what to believe. The
> clearest evidence of odd behaviour seems to be his lawsuit
> against his cousin. But do we really know that this was
> utterly without basis? Or did his cousin's lawyers take his
> known eccentricies and make out a case for Morphy being,
> as you say, plain nuts? Is everyone who launches a
> frivolous lawsuit insane?
From pages 30-31 of Life of Paul Morphy in the Vieux Carre of New
Orleans and Abroad by Regina Morphy-Voitier [Morphy's niece]:
'Another mania which lasted a while, was walking up and down the
long verandah of his home, his hands behind his back and muttering
these words in a low voice: "Il plantera la banniere de Castille
sur les murs de Madrid au cri du Ville gagnee, et le petit Roi s'en
ira tout penaud." ("He will plant the banner of Castile upon the walls
of Madrid to the cry of the victorious [sic - gagnee means 'won'] city,
and the little King will go away looking very sheepish.") He did not
know that he was being overheard, nor was it ever known what he meant
by these words.'
(Chess Notes, no.2026)
My first thought was that the style was reminiscent of Nostradamus
but it's too short.
>
>William Hyde
>Dept of Oceanography
>Texas A&M University
>hy...@rossby.tamu.edu
My last email to you, regarding the S&M material, was sent to the old
address. Did you ever get it?
hy...@rossby.tamu.edu
Adamski <mic...@mobius1.demon.co.uk> writes:
> In article <7nakk8$m6u$1...@news.tamu.edu>, hy...@tamu.edu writes
>> Are you referring to the
>> pawn and move proposal?
>
> Jawohl.
I never did learn what the consequence of that was.
Paulsen asked for time to study the matter (open
f file), but I don't know if anything happend after that.
I suspect that by the time Paulsen made up his mind
Morphy had decided never to play serious chess again.
> No, I just prefer unjustified but difficult to refute accusations.
> Please try and keep up, sir.
It's not easy when I'm asleep. Sorry about that.
> (Chess Notes, no.2026)
>
> My first thought was that the style was reminiscent of Nostradamus
> but it's too short.
It is also in far more modern French. Anyway, I'd call
it an eccentricity, not a sign of insanity.
was sent to the old
> address. Did you ever get it?
I've only had the one address, given below. For some
reason my newsreader intermittently puts my return address
as hy...@tamu.edu() and the mail goes to a student named
Hyde who never uses his computer account. If he ever
signs on he will be in for a surprise when he reads
your email. Let's hope he sends a copy to his grandfather
the congressman. It's about time for another Youthful
Indiscretion for old Henry.
George Szaszvari
<snip>..
> He was under a lot of stress (though I would argue that
> by opposing the Confederacy he showed more sanity than
> millions of his compatriots), he was deeply disappointed,
> he accepted other people's negative valuations of
> himself and what he did best. Is that insanity?
Sorry to butt in to your private argument with the following
digression, but what about the story of Morphy going to Europe
to help raise funds *for* the Confederacy [as well as to play
chess]...or is that story simply untrue?
--
Communist China's Genocide in Tibet * www.tibet.org
Milosevic's Crimes Against Humanity * www.radicalparty.org
Akorps
>He said he was "PERHAPS the most accurate player who ever lived".
Thanks. I was quoting from memory, so I forgot the correct wording.
>Morphy "played quite rapidly, RARELY taking more than 5 minutes to decide a
move."
Yes, the records of time taken for the
moves of each player, that have survived,
only show one case where Morphy took
more than 5 minutes for a move (this was
the famous queen sacrifice against
Paulsen, that started a century of
arguments- Morphy took 7 minutes that
time, I believe :-)
Again, I am relying on my memory, so if
you can correct me please do. My
memory is certainly not perfect :-)
I take it you have the correct references,
so I won't make a big effort to dig them up
(ie don't hold your breath :-)
To throw more wood on the fire, here is
a tangential reference I happened to come
across in "3 Steps to Chess Mastery" by
the Soviet grandmaster Suetin (an
excellent writer, in my opinion)
"Play on general positional grounds ...
is a definite method of thinking, which
arose ... during the second half of the 19th
century. Its founder was Steinitz, but a
whole series of principles ... were
established somewhat earlier in the games
of Paul Morphy ... from that time chess
became elevated to the level of a science"
Morphy was a lazy genius, too lazy to
write down his principles for the benefit
of posterity. We owe it to the hard-working
Steinitz, a genius of another type (not so
much as a player but as a systemizer)
that the Morphy principles were made
explicit, in the Steinitz theory, which also
went beyond Morphy in certain respects.
So to a certain extent, we owe the
development of chess theory to the
antagonism between the Steinitz and
Morphy styles, as Steinitz tried to improve
on Morphy, and in hindsight we can take
the best from both.
Similarly, the antagonism Morphy felt for
the style of Staunton was actually a
stimulus that improved Morphy's play.
>>"Anderssen and Morphy, whose sacrifices have almost without exception
outlasted a century of criticism, certainly stand out as the greatest players
of the period."
>The post-Staunton period.
Yes, I don't mean to denigrate the great
Staunton, a fine positional player, ahead
of his time in many respects. The English
certainly have a right to take pride in their
hero.
Gianluca
1858 Morphy-Andersenn 7-2
1866 Steinitz-Andersenn 8-6
That's' all.
Luke.
Chesspride
Do you also judge professional sports teams by the scores?
Lakers 98 Bulls 92
Spurs 78 Bulls 62
etc.?
What idiocy!
Eric C. Johnson
Mig
>>
>>Morphy's chess strength?
>>
>>1858 Morphy-Andersenn 7-2
>>1866 Steinitz-Andersenn 8-6
>>
>>That's' all.
>>
>>Luke.
>>
>
>Do you also judge professional sports teams by the scores?
>
>Lakers 98 Bulls 92
>Spurs 78 Bulls 62
No, we judge them by 7-game series.
Chesspride
>No, we judge them by 7-game series.
>
>
>
>
Fair enough.
If Morphy played Anderssen 7 matches (not games)....and won 4...then I'd be
willing to apply this rule.
Otherwise...on the basis of one match...no thank you.
Individual games...by themselves...tell one little.
Eric C. Johnson
Todd
Chesspride wrote:
> >
> >No, we judge them by 7-game series.
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
> Fair enough.
>
> If Morphy played Anderssen 7 matches (not games)....and won 4...then I'd be
> willing to apply this rule.
So now a chess match is the equivalent to one game of basketball? Jeez, then
Kasparov and Karpov still have at least one match to go. God help us all....
>
>
> Otherwise...on the basis of one match...no thank you.
>
> Individual games...by themselves...tell one little.
Except that a match is not an individual game.
Todd
hy...@tamu.edu
g...@dial.pipex.com (George Szaszvari) writes:
> In article <7nakk8$m6u$1...@news.tamu.edu>, hy...@tamu.edu says...
> <snip>..
>
> digression, but what about the story of Morphy going to Europe
> to help raise funds *for* the Confederacy [as well as to play
> chess]...or is that story simply untrue?
Well, I can only say that the books I have read describe
Morphy as unsympathetic to the Confederacy. The only
reference I have to hand is the Oxford Companion which
also makes this point.
Can you tell me where you read this story about Morphy?
Many prominent figures in the South opposed secession
(among them Sam Houston, governor of Texas). Unless
one subscribed fully to the patriotic "one of us is worth
five of them" motto any rational person had to realize
the war was a very long shot at best. Morphy was quite
capable of positional judgment, after all.
pulgao
> Many prominent figures in the South opposed secession
> (among them Sam Houston, governor of Texas).
Who ceased to be governor as soon as his sentiments were made public.
;-)
> Unless
> one subscribed fully to the patriotic "one of us is worth
> five of them" motto any rational person had to realize
> the war was a very long shot at best.
There's been some academic debate on this point over the last decade
or so. The "Lost Cause" school of thought is losing popularity.
Current thought is that the South might have won diplomatically by
prolonging the war to a point where the Union became tired of it and
sued for peace. There's evidence to suggest that had Grant not been as
successful as he was during the summer and fall of 1864, McClellan
could have won the presidential election. Since he was an anti-war
Democrat, it's entirely possible that the Union would have negociated
peace terms with the Confederacy. It's true that many U.S. citizens
had become weary of the war by mid-1864 and were pressuring the
government to end it quickly, militarily or otherwise.
Of course, this may well be revisionist history, as the notion that
R.E. Lee was a poor commander has also gained popularity over the last
ten years. As a student of military history, I remain unconvinced that
this was the case. All of the materials I've read supporting this
thesis are terribly biased and only give "facts" supporting that side
of the argument, completely ignoring the political (as well as
geographical) considerations under which Lee had to operate.
However, your point that neither side in the war enjoyed 100% support
from its citizens is completely accurate and it's entirely posible
that Morphy was against seccession.
-- Steve Lopez
http://www.geocities.com/TimesSquare/Hangar/5176/index.html
http://clubs.yahoo.com/clubs/chesskamikazes
Adamski
>In article <7natjc$m5o$2...@lure.pipex.net>,
> g...@dial.pipex.com (George Szaszvari) writes:
>> In article <7nakk8$m6u$1...@news.tamu.edu>, hy...@tamu.edu says...
>> <snip>..
>>
>> Sorry to butt in to your private argument with the following
>> digression, but what about the story of Morphy going to Europe
>> to help raise funds *for* the Confederacy [as well as to play
>> chess]...or is that story simply untrue?
>
> Well, I can only say that the books I have read describe
> Morphy as unsympathetic to the Confederacy. The only
> reference I have to hand is the Oxford Companion which
> also makes this point.
>
> Can you tell me where you read this story about Morphy?
>
> one subscribed fully to the patriotic "one of us is worth
> five of them" motto any rational person had to realize
> capable of positional judgment, after all.
From our point of view, it was just a lot of Americans shooting at each
other.
Did Morphy ever sport facial hair? Practically every cricketer of the
Victorian era had, at least, a moustache. No sideburns or even a little
goatee?
When Morphy arrived in England for his grand tour the welcoming
committee apparently expected Morphy to be a huge bearded bear of
a man. When Morphy made his way down the gangplank, they probably
thought 'Roger the cabin boy?', for there was a lot of it about even
then.
http://www.chesscafe.com/text/morphy.asc
Will they ever reprint the Lawson book?
hy...@tamu.edu
>> (among them Sam Houston, governor of Texas).
>
> ;-)
impeached) but he was irrelevant politically. Are you
sure he was removed?
> There's been some academic debate on this point over the last decade
> or so. The "Lost Cause" school of thought is losing popularity.
Of course one can win any conflict if the opponent's will
to fight is undermined, and indeed it almost looked in 1864
like that might happen. But as it never came to the
crunch we won't know if even McClellan would have signed
a peace (would the senate have let him? The president was
not as powerful in those days). Remember that whatever the
stalemate in Virginia, the western Confederacy was largely
in Union hands. It is hard to imagine on what terms peace
would have been arranged. Status quo ante was hardly possible.
In any event, Morphy, like a good chess player, would assume
the opposition would play the best moves, not mess about
pointlessly like the Union did for three years.
Now there's another pointless thread: chessplayers at war.
Let's see, we have Junge and Cohn for the Germans, Tartakover
for the Austrians and French, Alekhine allegedly for the
Russians (and French as an interpreter?), Denker for the
US along with Captain MacKenzie for both the US and
Britain (we will ignore Fine and Kashdan's brief stay in
the Mexican army) and Alexander and Milner-Barry in British
intelligence. Of course many Soviets must have served
(at least, many died in 1942-45) and then there is the
dubious case of Ozols. Remember: at war, not in the
military, i.e. Larsen served in the Danish military but
never went to war. Which raises the question of how
Fischer avoided the draft. Any ideas?
hy...@tamu.edu
Adamski <mic...@mobius1.demon.co.uk> writes:
[re the civil war]
> From our point of view, it was just a lot of Americans shooting at each
> other.
Actually it was four years in which the mills couldn't
get cheap American cotton.
And there were a fair number of United Kingdom volunteers
(or in some cases "volunteers" would be more accurate) in
the war.
> When Morphy arrived in England for his grand tour the welcoming
> committee apparently expected Morphy to be a huge bearded bear of
> a man.
Really?
I would think Lowenthal or Stanley might have disabused them
of that notion.
Adamski
>In article <nKBCAAAh...@mobius1.demon.co.uk>,
> Adamski <mic...@mobius1.demon.co.uk> writes:
>
> [re the civil war]
>
>> From our point of view, it was just a lot of Americans shooting at each
>> other.
>
> Actually it was four years in which the mills couldn't
> get cheap American cotton.
Sir, please don't think for a moment that Adamski is ignorant of the
subject. I've seen Gone With The Wind.
> And there were a fair number of United Kingdom volunteers
> (or in some cases "volunteers" would be more accurate) in
> the war.
>
>> When Morphy arrived in England for his grand tour the welcoming
>> committee apparently expected Morphy to be a huge bearded bear of
>> a man.
>
> Really?
I think it was in the Hartston book.
> I would think Lowenthal or Stanley might have disabused them
> of that notion.
Sorry, but I'm still waiting for either an apology for, or, at least, a
satisfactory explanation of, your conduct concerning the Chesspride
smear campaign.
Then I will be happy to forward you said article regarding Staunton's
Shakespeare edition.
George Szaszvari
> Well, I can only say that the books I have read describe
> Morphy as unsympathetic to the Confederacy. The only
> reference I have to hand is the Oxford Companion which
> also makes this point.
> Can you tell me where you read this story about Morphy?
I know nothing about Morphy except what I overhear people say,
so it's just hearsay, mostly from a school "history" teacher
years back...but he was given to outlandish theories that became
more plausible as the amount of alcohol intake increased ;-)
Anyway, it's an interesting area for future investigation...
> Many prominent figures in the South opposed secession
> (among them Sam Houston, governor of Texas). Unless
> one subscribed fully to the patriotic "one of us is worth
> five of them" motto any rational person had to realize
> the war was a very long shot at best. Morphy was quite
> capable of positional judgment, after all.
So I take it that you're not for the secessionist Republic of Texas?
hy...@tamu.edu
Adamski <mic...@mobius1.demon.co.uk> writes:
> I think it was in the Hartston book.
>
>> I would think Lowenthal or Stanley might have disabused them
>> of that notion.
>
> Sorry, but I'm still waiting for either an apology for, or, at least, a
> satisfactory explanation of, your conduct concerning the Chesspride
> smear campaign.
If my writings at the time did not explain themselves I
doubt that I will be able to improve on them now. I
suspect you will be waiting until at least the sun
goes cold for an apology from me on this topic.
> Then I will be happy to forward you said article regarding Staunton's
> Shakespeare edition.
That would be nice. Or I could just read Staunton's work.
You do own a copy, don't you?
Adamski
>In article <4czllEAo...@mobius1.demon.co.uk>,
> Adamski <mic...@mobius1.demon.co.uk> writes:
>
>> I think it was in the Hartston book.
>>
>>> I would think Lowenthal or Stanley might have disabused them
>>> of that notion.
>>
>> Sorry, but I'm still waiting for either an apology for, or, at least, a
>> satisfactory explanation of, your conduct concerning the Chesspride
>> smear campaign.
>
> If my writings at the time did not explain themselves I
> doubt that I will be able to improve on them now. I
> suspect you will be waiting until at least the sun
> goes cold for an apology from me on this topic.
OK then, we're not talking again.
pulgao
>In article <379c9b6b...@news.intrepid.net>,
> baays...@intrepid.net (pulgao) writes:
>> hy...@tamu.edu () was alleged to have uttered:
>>
>>> Many prominent figures in the South opposed secession
>>> (among them Sam Houston, governor of Texas).
>>
>> Who ceased to be governor as soon as his sentiments were made public.
>> ;-)
> Actually I thought he served out his term (i.e. was not
> impeached) but he was irrelevant politically. Are you
> sure he was removed?
It's not something I've studied closely (I live in MD so my major
interest is in the Eastern Theatre), but I saw a documentary a couple
of weeks ago that indicated Houston was forced to leave office when he
opposed secession. It didn't give specifics.
>
>> There's been some academic debate on this point over the last decade
>> or so. The "Lost Cause" school of thought is losing popularity.
>
> Of course one can win any conflict if the opponent's will
> to fight is undermined, and indeed it almost looked in 1864
> like that might happen. But as it never came to the
> crunch we won't know if even McClellan would have signed
> a peace (would the senate have let him? The president was
> not as powerful in those days). Remember that whatever the
> stalemate in Virginia, the western Confederacy was largely
> in Union hands. It is hard to imagine on what terms peace
> would have been arranged. Status quo ante was hardly possible.
Personally, I'm of the opinion that the South could have won through
diplomatic means and earlier than 1864, had Lee's two invasion
attempts been more successful. The Army of the Potomac had very poor
commanders prior to Grant's taking command. Lee just made a few poor
decisions plus had some fiendishly bad luck (the death of Jackson
being chief among them). However, I've only been giving serious
thought to this stuff for about a month, so my opinion may change
after further research plus your mileage may vary. ;-)
McClellan's election would have been just another factor on the CSA's
side of the scales.
> Which raises the question of how
> Fischer avoided the draft. Any ideas?
From Brady's apology, err, biography of Fischer:
[several paragraphs about Fischer's attemps to get a draft deferment
snipped]
"Eventually, Bobby took his physical examination and was rejected, for
reasons that have never been made public. Perhaps the local board
decided that this young American would be much more valuable sitting
across a chess board in the capitals of the world than he would be
toting a bazooka through a Vietnamese jungle. Whatever the reason,
Fischer never served in the military." [page 80 of the Dover edition].
Fischer was a skinny kid. Firing a bazooka would have knocked him flat
on his ass anyway.
pulgao
> And there were a fair number of United Kingdom volunteers
> (or in some cases "volunteers" would be more accurate) in
> the war.
As well as English journalists, several of whom followed the Army of
Northern Virginia.
The U.S. seized an English ship that had two Confederate diplomats
aboard as it attempted to run the blockade and imprisoned the
diplomats. The English responded by sending several thousand troops to
Canada. The U.S. released the diplomats and a two-front war was
narrowly averted. So the Brits considered the war to be a bit more
than just "Americans shooting at each other".
pulgao
>OK then, we're not talking again.
Then William's a lucky man.
pulgao
>In article <7nicrp$lqq$1...@news.tamu.edu>, hy...@tamu.edu writes
>>In article <nKBCAAAh...@mobius1.demon.co.uk>,
>> Adamski <mic...@mobius1.demon.co.uk> writes:
>>
>> [re the civil war]
>>
>>> From our point of view, it was just a lot of Americans shooting at each
>>> other.
>>
>> Actually it was four years in which the mills couldn't
>> get cheap American cotton.
>
>Sir, please don't think for a moment that Adamski is ignorant of the
>subject. I've seen Gone With The Wind.
>
Yeah, Kevin, and I've seen Monty Python's Flying Circus, so I know for
a fact that you like to dress in women's clothing and screech. Maybe
you should be shoplifting some *history* books once in a while.
pulgao
>So I take it that you're not for the secessionist Republic of Texas?
I'd be an advocate of giving Texas back to Mexico except that I'm
*way* too fond of the fair ladies of the Lone Star State. ;-)
hy...@tamu.edu
hy...@tamu.edu
g...@dial.pipex.com (George Szaszvari) writes:
>> Many prominent figures in the South opposed secession...
>
> So I take it that you're not for the secessionist Republic of Texas?
Not being a Texan or even an American it is somewhat
presumptious of me to hold an opinion. On the other hand
I have to ask myself if I can find any of the drugs they
were using when they made that decision.
Chesspride
>diplomatic means and earlier than 1864, had Lee's two invasion
>attempts been more successful. The Army of the Potomac had very poor
>commanders prior to Grant's taking command. Lee just made a few poor
Hmmm...if it is alternate history speculation you want....
...then I would offer the view that the South could have avoided war AND
declared independence....
...had they been willing to continue to pay taxes to Washington for a few more
years.
Had they continued to pay the tribute...they could certainly have 1) declared
their sovereignty 2) gained recognition from the European powers 3) sought
reinforcements (i.e., troops) from the European powers and 4) probably have
secured full independence in 5-6 years...thereafter stopping all tax payments.
The abrupt cessation of tax payments...coupled with the outbreak of
violence...doomed them. They needed a long period of "cold war" not a brief
and spirited period of "hot war."
But that would have taken planning...not emotion.
Eric C. Johnson
Phil Innes
>
> *way* too fond of the fair ladies of the Lone Star State. ;-)
I was talking to a Mexican and an Argentinan student the other day, and we
were discussing ladies - they didn't like Americans because "they smelled."
This meant that they used too much soap, shampoo and perfume.
What does this thread have to do with Isaac Newton?
Phil Bolívar
Phil Innes
>
> In article <6Nf1hTAZ...@mobius1.demon.co.uk>,
> Adamski <mic...@mobius1.demon.co.uk> writes:
> >
> > OK then, we're not talking again.
> >
>
> Now you're making Mig jealous.
Actually...Mig has just vacated a position - and chess is altogether too
sedate anyway, and Adamski is really a serious writer not yet recognised by
editors for his true worth, and should have a go at doing it straight.
Because he writes in an off-hand way to you and me, Bill, means that we have
not attained to any high esteem with our mutterings - it is we who are
blunt-witted and sluggards.
No - I say, Onward Kev!
Yor fren, Phil
Phil Innes
> So I take it that you're not for the secessionist Republic of Texas?
Actually, Vermont is the only state which insisted that it could secede
without penalty. There have been two (popular) plebescites (sp?) which
resulted in 80%:20% votes to leave the Union. Speakers for maintaining the
ties resorted to "they need us more than we need them."
Vermont does not need an Alamo. We shall become the Switzerland of the
farther-western hemisphere, establish an embassy in Québec, soak the tourists
at the boarders, issue our own stamps, make the export of maple-syrup illegal,
build a chess palace, and hire some Monarchs. I suggest Mel Gibson as consort,
and Judit Polgar as Queen, annually renewable.
Vermont is three times the size of Texas in any case (if you flattened it
out.)
Todd
pulgao wrote:
> g...@dial.pipex.com (George Szaszvari) was alleged to have uttered:
>
> >So I take it that you're not for the secessionist Republic of Texas?
>
> I'd be an advocate of giving Texas back to Mexico except that I'm
> *way* too fond of the fair ladies of the Lone Star State. ;-)
How about we trade Texas to Mexico for a chunck of the Yucatan Penisula
and future considerations?
Todd
pulgao
>The abrupt cessation of tax payments...coupled with the outbreak of
>violence...doomed them.
I agree. Firing on Ft. Sumter was the worst mistake the CSA made.
pulgao
>What does this thread have to do with Isaac Newton?
About as much as it has to do with chess at this point. ;-)
Sigmund B. Fernmeister
> Phil Innes <in...@sover.net> was alleged to have uttered:
>
> >What does this thread have to do with Isaac Newton?
>
> About as much as it has to do with chess at this point. ;-)
>
Isaac Newton fired on Fort Sumter? What an idiot. I used to reallybe
pissed at him for wasting my time by inventing geometry, but
now I have a whole new reason to revile him for starting the
Spanish American War. What a complete idiot. -rob
pulgao
have uttered:
>
>Isaac Newton fired on Fort Sumter?
No, he just lobbed an apple at it.
Michael J Fitch
hy...@rossby.tamu.edu wrote:
> In article <3612-379...@newsd-142.iap.bryant.webtv.net>,
> michael...@webtv.net (mike fowler) writes:
> > I agree...this person knows the guts of Morphy...who was the first
US
> > World Champion. No one would play him after his tour of Europe
>
> Absolutely false. Anderssen and Kolisch both wanted to
> play Morphy, but he would not play them.
>
As you know this statement is false Morphy beat Karl Anderssen and he a
played and beat Adolf Anderssen in Paris suffering from the flu.His
medical treatment consisted of being leeched.He lost 4 pints of blood
and was to weak to leave his hotel bed.and still won the match by 7-
2.Now as for as a Rematch,what would be the point,after getting crushed
so bad by a man Lying In Bed Suffering From The Flu.IT SEEMS TO ME BY
THIS AND OTHER POST YOU HATE AMERICAN CHESS PLAYERS.IF YOU DON'T HAVE
ANYTHING GOOD TO SAY/WRITE ABOUT THEM WHY DON"T YOU KEEP YOUR DAMN
MOUTH/KEYBOARD SHUT!! :-)))
Now as far as Kolisch is concerned i've never heard of him before your
mention,and i've looked for something about him.I've found 3 mentions
of him on the internet with only one significant mention,and that
is/was his lost to Adolf Anderssen 5-4 in 1861.I looked in my 1997
International Chess Calendar,It gives the birthdays and deathdays of
Prominent chess players from 1726 ANDRE PHILIDOR to the 1997 and he's
not in it.WHY, maybe he wasn't very significant in the chess world,who
knows.You mentioned in another post that Morphy said he would play
Kolisch but he reneged on this match or game.would you share your
source about this.I would like to read about it.because with all my
searching on the internet i can't find Morphy ever mentioning his
name.Did Morphy say he would play or did Kolisch want to Play when
Morphy wasn't interested in Chess anymore,and in fact started to hate
chess.I would tend to believe the later.
Now lets talk about "COWARD STAUNTON" you said in a previous post that
he was to busy writing some Shakespearean play or writing his Book or
some of the other Excuses Staunton Sympathizers like to use.
Morphy stayed in England for 3 months trying to arrange a match with
Staunton.but Staunton claimed that he had more serious things to
do,Albeit he participated in the Birmingham Tournament at the same
time.So i think your too busy arguement won't fly except for ya'll
Staunton Propogandist/Sympathizers.:-(((
Did you know that Paul Morphy was Born on JUNE 22 and Staunton Died of
a Heart attack in his Library chair(probably writing more lies about
other chess players)on JUNE 22.Isn't this weird
> William Hyde
> Dept of Oceanography
> Texas A&M University
> hy...@rossby.tamu.edu
>
>
You find this reply late because of some problems i'm having with PUTER.
--
Michael J Fitch
INDIAN SARCASM: Once there were no Taxes,No
police and no Crime,Women did all the work,Then
the White man came along to improve things.
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Share what you know. Learn what you don't.
Michael Oberly
>In article <7nahd9$hnp$1...@news.tamu.edu>,
> hy...@rossby.tamu.edu wrote:
>> In article <3612-379...@newsd-142.iap.bryant.webtv.net>,
>> michael...@webtv.net (mike fowler) writes:
>> > I agree...this person knows the guts of Morphy...who was the first
>US
>> > World Champion. No one would play him after his tour of Europe
>>
>> Absolutely false. Anderssen and Kolisch both wanted to
>> play Morphy, but he would not play them.
>>
>
>As you know this statement is false Morphy beat Karl Anderssen and he a
>played and beat Adolf Anderssen in Paris suffering from the flu.
<snip>
Uhhh,no.He was disputing the assertion that no one wanted to play
Morphy *after* his tour of Europe,i.e.,*after* Morphy had played
Anderrsen et al.It's amazing how people seem to need to ascribe to
Morphy super-human abilities,as if his games don't speak for
themselves.
Mike
--
Mike Oberly * Rain can't wet me,
when I have my poui in my hand. *
* Rain can't wet me,
I advancing on the foe like a roaring lion!*
Soca/Calypso fan?Check out http://www.iere.com/thebarn
Michael J Fitch
commercia...@die.a.twitching.death wrote:
> Michael J Fitch <michae...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>
> >In article <7nahd9$hnp$1...@news.tamu.edu>,
> > hy...@rossby.tamu.edu wrote:
> >> In article <3612-379...@newsd-142.iap.bryant.webtv.net>,
> >> michael...@webtv.net (mike fowler) writes:
> >> > I agree...this person knows the guts of Morphy...who was the
first
> >US
> >> > World Champion. No one would play him after his tour of Europe
> >>
> >> Absolutely false. Anderssen and Kolisch both wanted to
> >> play Morphy, but he would not play them.
> >>
> >
> >As you know this statement is false Morphy beat Karl Anderssen and
he a
> >played and beat Adolf Anderssen in Paris suffering from the flu.
>
> <snip>
>
> Uhhh,no.He was disputing the assertion that no one wanted to play
> Morphy *after* his tour of Europe,i.e.,*after* Morphy had played
> Anderrsen et al.It's amazing how people seem to need to ascribe to
> Morphy super-human abilities,as if his games don't speak for
> themselves.
YES I MISINTERPRETED HIS RESPONSE TO THE PREVIOUS THREAD.THANKS FOR
THIS CORRECTION.I WAS LOOKING FOR AN AMERICAN HATING LIMEY TO JUMP ON
(hehehe)
I DIDN'T ASCRIBE SOME SUPER-HUMAN ABILITIES TO MORPHY.
I WAS STATING A DAMN FACT.
IF YOU FIND ERROR WITH THESE FACTS THEN RESPOND WITH CORRECTIONS,IF YOU
DON'T FIND ERRORS OF FACT,DON'T INFER ANYTHING,JUST READ THE DAMN FACTS.
> Mike
> --
> Mike Oberly * Rain can't wet me,
> when I have my poui in my hand. *
> * Rain can't wet me,
> I advancing on the foe like a roaring lion!*
> Soca/Calypso fan?Check out http://www.iere.com/thebarn
>
--
Rolf Tueschen
<nKBCAAAh...@mobius1.demon.co.uk>:
>In article <7ni303$4ts$2...@news.tamu.edu>, hy...@tamu.edu writes
>>In article <7natjc$m5o$2...@lure.pipex.net>,
>> g...@dial.pipex.com (George Szaszvari) writes:
>>> In article <7nakk8$m6u$1...@news.tamu.edu>, hy...@tamu.edu says...
>>> <snip>..
>>>
>>> Sorry to butt in to your private argument with the following
>>> digression, but what about the story of Morphy going to Europe
>>> to help raise funds *for* the Confederacy [as well as to play
>>> chess]...or is that story simply untrue?
>>
>> Well, I can only say that the books I have read describe
>> Morphy as unsympathetic to the Confederacy. The only
>> reference I have to hand is the Oxford Companion which
>> also makes this point.
>>
>> Can you tell me where you read this story about Morphy?
>>
>> Many prominent figures in the South opposed secession
>> (among them Sam Houston, governor of Texas). Unless
>> one subscribed fully to the patriotic "one of us is worth
>> five of them" motto any rational person had to realize
>> the war was a very long shot at best. Morphy was quite
>> capable of positional judgment, after all.
>From our point of view, it was just a lot of Americans shooting at each
>other.
>Did Morphy ever sport facial hair? Practically every cricketer of the
>Victorian era had, at least, a moustache. No sideburns or even a little
>goatee?
>When Morphy arrived in England for his grand tour the welcoming
>committee apparently expected Morphy to be a huge bearded bear of
>a man. When Morphy made his way down the gangplank, they probably
>thought 'Roger the cabin boy?', for there was a lot of it about even
>then.
Allow me one question. What has all this to do with chess? Are you
married? With children? What has all this to do with chess? Let's not go
so low! Most of the time you made better contributions. What has Morphy
done to you? Do you have a problem with hair?
Adamski
dizin_ku...@t-online.de> writes
FYI Morphy was one of the leading coffee house players of the last
century.
Now my question. Where are my Movsesian games? I've just seen his
photo on the FIDEKOMMWCC site, so I need something to write home
about.
>