Paris, the French capital, was host to a world's fair exhibition in the summer of 1867 ... [more]
Player: Simon Winawer
| page 1 of 1; 22 games
| page 1 of 1; 22 games
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 1 OF 2 ·
|Nov-17-12|| ||Phony Benoni: <Kolisch immediately liquidated his antique porcelain and invested in real estate which soon made him an extremely wealthy man, allowing him to be a generous patron to chess for decades afterwards.>|
Is liquidating antique porcelain such a good idea? Wouldn't you make more money by keeping it intact?
|Dec-04-13|| ||thomastonk: With respect to the introduction above <Phony Benoni> recently asked (see Biographer Bistro) whether it wouldn't be a bit premature to state that Steinitz "played as a representative of the United States". Since such a grave mistake is usually accompanied by others, I checked the whole introduction in detail.|
The results are shoking, and hence I'll proceed in two steps. First I will show where the current introduction is unprecise or wrong. One post per paragraph. And only in the future, I will replace the text of the introduction and add sources.
Sources of the tournament and the exhibition are numerous, and online available. An in-depth tournament book, chess magazines like "La Strategie", "Le Spinx", "The Chess Player's Magazine", "The Chess World", and "Schachzeitung", as well as several chess columns, and general reports in "Le Figaro" and "Le Monde Illustre" etc.
So, in my view it is inexcusable to ignore them, and writing a text like that above. More generally the question how this became an accepted tournament needs an answer.
|Dec-04-13|| ||thomastonk: The first paragraph <Paris, the French capital, was host to a world's fair exhibition in the summer of 1867 (1). Among the enormous buildings erected to house new developments in science, technology (of which the Krupp Cannon was the most impressive display), and art, a master chess tournament was organized from June 4th to July 11th. It was held at the Grand Cercle, 10 boulevard Montmartre, not far from the 1.2 kilometer row of machinery for the exhibition.> is the subject of this post.|
<in the summer of 1867> The International Exposition of 1867 was opened on April 1, formally closed on October 31 and probably open until November 3.
<science, technology> The complete French name was "Exposition universelle d'art et d'industrie".
<of which the Krupp Cannon was the most impressive display> Krupp presented the largest cannon. A German source said "as usual" and that's it. Maybe this statement belongs to another world's fair (see the next point).
<It was held at the Grand Cercle, 10 boulevard Montmartre, not far from the 1.2 kilometer row of machinery for the exhibition.> Taken from the English Wikipedia, and completely wrong! The tournament was held on the Champ de Mars, which was the site of the exposition. How can such a mistake happen? Well, the named location was the venue of the tournament of the exposition in 1900!*
Not bad for a single paragraph!
* The following little detail cost me hours. Since I cannot read French, I read the articles of the tournament first in Englisch as published in "The Chess World". According to this source the tournament should be held "in the Palais de l'Exposition Universelle, in the rooms of the International Chess Club".
Have you ever heard about this club? Well, to make long things short: the French original speaks of a "Cercle International", and this was no chess club, but a special building on the Champ de Mars!
|Dec-04-13|| ||thomastonk: Now the second paragraph: <Thirteen chess masters were invited to participate in double rounds, with a time limit of six minutes per move and draws counting as zero for both players. The participants included Ignat Von Kolisch from the Austrio-Hungarian empire, Wilhelm Steinitz and Sam Loyd playing on behalf of the United States of America, Symon Winawer and Hieronim Czarnowski from Poland, Gustav Neumann from Germany, Cecil Valentine De Vere from England, Jules De Riviere, Samuel Rosenthal, Emile D'Andre, and Eugene Rousseau from France, Celso Golmayo Zupide from Cuba, and Martin Severin From from Denmark.>|
<Thirteen chess masters were invited to participate in double rounds, ...> This was no invitational event! Everyone with 80 francs could participate, and when the players met on June 1, fourteen were going to play. Some details. Article 2 of the tournament announcement: every subscriber of 30 francs has the right to entry to the playing location and will receive a copy of the tournament book. Article 3: Persons will be allowed to participate, if they are already a subscriber and pay further 50 francs. The fourtheenth player was Devinck, who did not start later on.
In one case, however, the organizers tried to support participation: Anderssen, the winner of London 1862 (and 1851). When the organizers heared about problems, they got in touch with the Prussian ambassador in Paris.
<... with a time limit of six minutes per move and ...> Article 13: Ten moves at least, on each side must be played in the hour. For 20 francs additional 15 minutes were granted.
<... draws counting as zero for both players.> Draws were not mentioned in the articles, but the four prizes were awarded only according to the number of wins (article 4). The table in the tournament book contains draws as '-', and listed wins, draws and defeats separately.
<Ignat(sic) Von Kolisch> Then still Ignatz Kolisch.
<Wilhelm Steinitz ... playing on behalf of the United States of America> See my post above.
From the rules of participation it is clear that every player represented primarily himself as a person, and not a country. The tournament book solved the issue be giving the birth place for every player. The contemporary chess magazines and newspapers had different views, of course, and in their reports countries played a role. In particular, the players with German as native language were considered in different ways, and sometimes players were named emigrants. Etc.
<Celso Golmayo Zupide from Cuba> Golmayo was always considered as a Spaniard! Only Löwenthal called him once a Dutch(!), and in the next issue he wrote: "we should have said a Spanish player of Dutch extraction". Two sources mentioned that Golmayo has been the president of the Havana Chess Club some time before.
|Dec-04-13|| ||thomastonk: Third paragraph: <There was no formal organization to international events at the time, so beyond the matches and time controls being set, players seemingly encountered one another during the tournament according to availability and inclination. The games in this collection have been organized according to the dates attached. Twenty games whether decided by forfeit or missing in record have been omitted from this collection as they are absent from the database. The prize purse was distributed among the top six finishers, with Kolisch earning 5000 Francs for first place, Winawer 2500 Francs for second, Steinitz 2000 Francs for third, Neumann and De Vere 1500 Francs each for fourth and fifth places, and De Riviere 1000 Francs for sixth. The top four finishers also received a Sèvres vase as an additional prize. Kolisch immediately liquidated his antique porcelain and invested in real estate which soon made him an extremely wealthy man, allowing him to be a generous patron to chess for decades afterwards.>|
Well, the tournament had a local organisation, and a lot of rules specifying some aspects, but indeed no fixed rounds. The contemorary sources speak of 182 games, based on the 14 players. In addition to Devinck's 26 unplayed games, further twenty games were not played as can been seen in the tournament book. So, the collection has the right number of games (136).
Everything about the prizes is wrong! Only one vase, donated by the emporer, and only four prizes. Kolisch got the vase and 500 francs, and the next prizes were 800, 400, and 200 francs, respectively. The final sentence on Kolisch is at its best an anecdote.
|Dec-04-13|| ||TheFocus: Great work, <thomas>, as usual.|
|Dec-04-13|| ||tamar: I became frustrated trying to find details of Paris 1867, back in '05.
I found a post of mine on the Kolisch page that gives an indication that even the competitors were confused about the rules at the time.|
<Aug-06-05 tamar: History, with very little to work with from Morphy and Kolisch beyond their preserved letters in the early 1860's, seems to have conspired to keep the full record of what happened at Paris 1867 a secret.
I would invite anyone who is interested to read Steinitz tribute to Kolisch on the webpage link above and also his "Personal and General Notes" from 1889 on the same webpage that detail Kolisch participation in the 1867 Paris Tournament.
One of the intriguing points according to Steinitz is that Morphy, Paulsen, and Anderssen were expected to play right up to opening day. There was a deadline for entry fee, but it was waived because of the hope that one or all of those players might join at the last minute.
Steinitz from Personal and General Notes 1889:
<Kolisch, who was at all times a resident of Paris, had repeatedly declared that he would not enter, on the ground that he was engaged in business on the stock exchange. However, one or two days before the tournament commenced he sounded me about the in the following manner: "What would you do," he asked, "if Morphy, Anderssen and Paulsen would now wish to compete in the Congress?" Of course I could easily see what he was driving at, and I answered substantially: "Neither you nor anybody else has a right to enter the tournament now without the unanimous consent of the competitors already inscribed according to the rules, but if either you or Morphy, Anderssen and Paulsen, or all, would wish to enter, I would give you my own vote rather than spoil the eclat of the tournament, and I have no doubt that all the other competitors would follow my example of waiving any personal interest.">
|Dec-05-13|| ||thomastonk: <TheFocus: Great work, <thomas>, as usual.> Thanks. But do you know why I picked this example? I guess, you do. And others know this for sure. We have a nice saying in German: den Finger in die Wunde legen. This picture is much better than the English translation.|
|Dec-05-13|| ||thomastonk: <Tamar> Thank you for these interesting aspects. I will cast an eye at them when I write the new introduction, as well as at the older posts on Kolisch's page.|
Do you know Sthig Jonasson's Kolisch biography from 1968? I know that someone is working already for a while on a new Kolisch biography, too.
|Dec-05-13|| ||tamar: <thomastonk> Hadn't heard of it, thanks for the heads up.|
|Dec-15-13|| ||martin moller: I might have some information on M.S.From the dane who attented the paris 1867 tournament. He only went because he had some other buisness to attent to in Paris.|
|Dec-15-13|| ||thomastonk: <martin moller> That sounds great! I have already collected similar information on other players, and I would very much appreciate to see your information, too.|
|Dec-16-13|| ||martin moller: Invitations to the Paris 1867 tournament was sent through Von der Lasa - Who was living in Copenhagen at the time - to Chairman of Copenhagen chess Club M.S.From, and he was only able to participate because he as Governor of prison, was able to inspect prisons in Paris at the same time, but he could not stay as long as the tournament lastet. According to a Danish biography on M.S.From (Skakspilleren Severin From 1828 - 95 af Claus Olsen)|
|Dec-16-13|| ||thomastonk: <martin moller> Thank you very much. |
If you have read my earlier posts, then you have seen that there is a problem with invitations. The first article of the official announcement of the tournament describes this tournament (and other events) as open for all chess players of all nations. So, is Olsen's biography speaking of a personal invitation, or could it also be the general announcement?
|Dec-30-13|| ||martin moller: My source is the Danish periodical : "Illustrerede tidende 1867.03.31".
It seems like a general announcement.|
|Dec-30-13|| ||thomastonk: Thank you again, <martin moller>!|
|Dec-16-14|| ||suenteus po 147: This just goes to show how difficult and important research and source citation are to recording historical events. If I had known I was going to be published and come under such scholarly scrutiny, I might have skipped the introductions all together!|
|Dec-16-14|| ||kia0708: None of them played Queen's Gambit Declined ! Amazing.|
|Mar-25-15|| ||Raisin Death Ray: Why wasn't Paris Hilton in this tournament?|
|Apr-07-15|| ||zanzibar: <suenteus po 147: This just goes to show how difficult and important research and source citation are to recording historical events. If I had known I was going to be published and come under such scholarly scrutiny, I might have skipped the introductions all together!>|
I sympathize with <sp> here - his introductions were really private collections that were promoted outside the critical review we have in place today (afaik). In that sense they are really beyond criticism.
Except for the fact that here we are, with his intro as an "official" bio intro to an important tournament.
Having <thomastonk>'s notes is important, and the knowledgeable reader will want to peruse the forum comments to get the full, and correct, story.
<But the question now really goes to the <CG> biographers - how are we to update and revise the intro to this important tournament>>
How are we to mark it as needing revision vs. for instance, a <Tab> approved writeup fully voted in via the "modern" protocol?
BTW- I know that the situation in 2005 could have been drastically different than today. Many of the "primary" sources, i.e. the contemporaneous chess periodicals, are now available via google books (typically from the collections of American Universities, like Harvard, Princeton, etc.).
So trying to get a reasonably accurate view is much easier today - especially if vetted on the Bistro.
It would be nice if <thomastonk> had a blog page where he collected and collated all his corrections in the above into its own intro.
|Aug-18-15|| ||Nosnibor: The original tournament book was compiled by Neumann and de-Riviere and according to Hindle and Jones in their excellent book published in 2001 of the chess career of Cecil De Vere all of the twenty games so omitted were by default which would of course explain why From conceded eight due to his local employment. It does not explain why Rosenthal defaulted the same amount of games. They also state that De Vere received no prize.Finally there was a big hoo-ha following the late admission of Kolisch to the event.Much to the chagrin of Steinitz he was allowed to enter three days after the tournament started and Steinitz had already drawn with Czarnowski which due to the rules meant a zero point. He and others eventually withdrew their protest excepting De Vere. Winawer could have tied for first place but for a careless loss to the tail-ender Rousseau.|
|Feb-09-16|| ||zanzibar: Some chess hardware from the Paris 1867 Exhibition:
Fetching, in more ways than one.
|Feb-10-16|| ||offramp: <zanzibar: Some chess hardware from the Paris 1867 Exhibition:
Fetching, in more ways than one.>
A wonderful board and set. It sold for just under two million pounds. Unlike some exhibition chess sets (Star Wars, Lord of the Rings) this one looks usable, playable, as the pieces are very similar to Staunton-style pieces.
I would imagine that the French would be slightly chagrined that the ensemble was fabriqué in Birmingham.
|Feb-10-16|| ||zanzibar: <offramp> as long as it's spelled <fabriqué> I don't think they mind so much!|
|Feb-10-16|| ||zanzibar: I would like to know, from <Nosnibor>'s post, on what basis <Hindle and Jones> make their assertion that all 20 missing games were defaults?|
Paris (1867) (kibitz #21)
I starting to investigate this, as I'd like to make a complete PGN image of the tournament with stubs.
And I'd like the stubs to accurately state when a game is missing due to being a default vs. missing due to a lost scoresheet.
So far, I only know for certain that From's 8 games were forfeited when he withdrew early from the tournament (which caused some controversy, as mention in the tournament book, about how to score the unplayed and played games of his).
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 1 OF 2 ·
Spot an error? Please suggest your correction and help us eliminate database mistakes!
NOTE: You need to pick a username and password to post a reply.
Getting your account takes less than a minute, is totally anonymous, and 100% free—plus, it
entitles you to features otherwise unavailable.
Pick your username now and join the chessgames community!
If you already have an account, you should
Please observe our posting guidelines:
- No obscene, racist, sexist, profane, raunchy, or disgusting language.
- No spamming, advertising, duplicate or nonsense posts.
- No malicious personal attacks, including cyber stalking, systematic antagonism, or gratuitous name-calling of any member Iincludinfgall Admin and Owners or any of their family, friends, associates, or business interests. If you think someone is an idiot, then provide evidence that their reasoning is invalid and/or idiotic, instead of just calling them an idiot. It's a subtle but important distinction, even in political discussions.
- Nothing in violation of United States law.
- No malicious posting of or linking to personal, private, and/or negative information (aka "doxing" or "doxxing") about any member, (including all Admin and Owners) or any of their family, friends, associates, or business interests. This includes all media: text, images, video, audio, or otherwise. Such actions will result in severe sanctions for any violators.
- NO TROLLING. Admin and Owners know it when they see it, and sanctions for any trolls will be significant.
- Any off-topic posts which distract from the primary topic of discussion are subject to removal.
- The use of "sock puppet" accounts to circumvent disciplinary action taken by Moderators is expressly prohibited.
- The use of "sock puppet" accounts in an attempt to undermine any side of a debate—or to create a false impression of consensus or support—is prohibited.
- All decisions with respect to deleting posts, and any subsequent discipline, are final, and occur at the sole discretion of the Moderators, Admin, and Owners.
- Please try to maintain a semblance of civility at all times.
NOTE: Keep all discussion on the topic of this page.
This forum is for this specific tournament and nothing else. If you want to discuss chess in general, or
this site, visit the Kibitzer's Café.
Messages posted by Chessgames members do not necessarily represent the views of Chessgames.com, its employees, or sponsors. All Moderator actions taken are at the sole discretion of the Admin and Owners—who will strive to act fairly and consistently at all times.
your profile |
Premium Membership |
Kibitzer's Café |
Biographer's Bistro |
new kibitzing |
Tournament Index |
Player Directory |
Notable Games |
World Chess Championships |
Opening Explorer |
Guess the Move |
Game Collections |
ChessBookie Game |
Chessgames Challenge |
privacy notice |
Copyright 2001-2019, Chessgames Services LLC