The games were hard fought in Baden-Baden 1870. Draws were rare. Anderssen led most of the tournament with uncompromising chess. Steinitz had a disastrous start and a great finish. Rosenthal wanted to score at least a draw against the strongest players and called it a duel scar or ‘Schmitzel’. But he forfeited his four games against De Vere and Minckwitz.(1)|
Be sure to see Jan van Reek's stupendous website for the historical context and logistics behind this tournament, player information, the crosstable, and final standings (1).
*Ten games decided by forfeit have been excluded from this collection.
Baden-Baden 18 July - 4 Aug
"+" and "-" represent wins and losses by forfeit.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
1 Adolf Anderssen ** 11 00 1˝ 11 1˝ 10 10 11 11.0 3000 francs
2 Wilhelm Steinitz 00 ** 11 0˝ 11 11 11 ˝1 ˝0 10.5 600 francs
3 Gustav Richard Neumann 11 00 ** 1˝ 01 01 11 0˝ 11 10.0 200 francs
4 Joseph Henry Blackburne 0˝ 1˝ 0˝ ** 10 11 1˝ ˝˝ 11 10.0 200 francs
5 Louis Paulsen 00 00 10 01 ** 10 1˝ 1˝ ˝1 7.5
6 Cecil De Vere 0˝ 00 10 00 01 ** 01 ++ 01 6.5
7 Simon Winawer 01 00 00 0˝ 0˝ 10 ** 1˝ 11 6.5
8 Samuel Rosenthal 01 ˝0 1˝ ˝˝ 0˝ -- 0˝ ** -- 5.0
9 Johannes von Minckwitz 00 ˝1 00 00 ˝0 10 00 ++ ** 5.0
10 Adolf Stern ˝0 10
References: (1) http://www.endgame.nl/bad1870.htm, (2) Minckwitz / Neumann / Paulsen vs Blackburne / Steinitz / De Vere, 1870 was played as a consultation game at the event, (3) Original collection: Game Collection: Baden-Baden 1870, by User: suenteus po 147
| page 1 of 3; games 1-25 of 67
| page 1 of 3; games 1-25 of 67
|Jun-12-13|| ||brankat: So then, who had won this tournament? Anderseen or Steinitz? |
According to the cross-table neither of the two had won/lost any games by forfeit. It gives Anderssen 13 points, Steinitz 11.5. But the Final Standings show Steinitz on top with 11 points compared to Anderssen's 9.5. Although, the cross-table seems more likely to be accurate.
|Jun-12-13|| ||Troller: The final standings is automated from the games in the DB related to this event. As Anderssen has only 14 games against Stenitz' 18, he is relegated to second place by the robot.|
The crosstable shows the actual results from all played games and I suppose we have no reason to disbelieve it.
|Jun-12-13|| ||Phony Benoni: <Troller> is exactly right. When there is a discrepancy, the crosstable is almost always more accurate.|
Another fact here is missing and cancelled games. Steinitz played two games against Stern, who withdrew from the tournament after four rounds and had his score cancelled. However, the games are included, and are taken into account by the automated Final Standings.
Also, some games appear to be missing: a win by Steinitz over Winawer, and wins by Anderssen over Minckwitz and De Vere.
|Jun-12-13|| ||brankat: Thank You the explanation my friends.|
|Dec-09-13|| ||thomastonk: <Phony Benoni> wrote: <Also, some games appear to be missing: a win by Steinitz over Winawer, and wins by Anderssen over Minckwitz and De Vere.> |
Several sources claim that four games are lost, the fourth being Blackburne vs Winawer.
|Dec-11-13|| ||thomastonk: During my continuing work on Paris (1867) I've observed several similarities to this one here (organizers, prizes, rules, players). So, I've had a closer look at this tournament, too. Unfortunately, I expect it to be a mess, and it begins already on the level of games, where I've made only a brief check of the number of moves.|
A few examples.
Steinitz vs Blackburne, 1870: moves 28-37 are an analysis of Zukertort, the game ended completely different!
A few games are simply incomplete, say Blackburne vs Steinitz, 1870, Steinitz vs Winawer, 1870 and S Rosenthal vs G Neumann, 1870.
At least one game has too many moves: Paulsen vs De Vere, 1870.
During these simple checks I observed that the order is wrong and the dates, too, but it is too early to say to which extent.
There are singular problems with other games: at least one wrong result (maybe two), one game is missing from the collection, but is present here at cg, etc etc.
|Dec-13-13|| ||Paint My Dragon: Is there some small confusion in the intro? It is first stipulated that there are TEN forfeited games, yet totalling the + and - signs in the crosstable only accounts for FOUR, as far as I can see.|
It may also help to state that Stern's results were declared void for the purposes of scoring.
|Dec-14-13|| ||perfidious: Is it possible that Stern defaulted six games, withdrew and his results were then annulled? An alternative explanation is that the arithmetic is incorrect.|
|Dec-14-13|| ||thomastonk: <Paint My Dragon> <perfidious>|
"Schachzeitung" (edited by Minckwitz!) 1870, p 254 reported that Stern's games counted as wins for the opponents (played or unplayed) after he left the tournament. The same view gives "Neue Berliner Schachzeitung" (edited by Zukertort (and Anderssen)) 1870, p 244.
Stern did no play 12 games (including two against Rosenthal) and Rosenthal 4 more (not counting the games with Stern again). But that's not all! On the final day of the tournament Minckwitz forfeited one game against Paulsen (not given by '-' and '+' above). So we have at least 17 unplayed games.
Minckwitz also named 5 games, where one player came late or even too late (according to the rules). I think the latter case only concerns games already counted above.
|Dec-14-13|| ||offramp: <Perfidious: ... An alternative explanation is that the arithmetic is incorrect.>|
If only there'd been some sort of maths professor on hand...
|Dec-14-13|| ||thomastonk: <offramp> Well, I think the 10 can be explained without deeper study of maths: 9 players double round-robin gives 72 games, plus 4 of Stern's games gives 76, minus the 66 games found results in the magic 10. Then call the missing ones "decided by forfeit".|
|Dec-16-13|| ||thomastonk: The folowing game should be added to this tournament: G Neumann vs J Minckwitz, 1870. Correction submitted.|
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, 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, or profane language.
- No spamming, advertising, or duplicating posts.
- No personal attacks against other members.
- Nothing in violation of United States law.
- Don't post personal information of members.
See something that violates our rules? Blow the whistle and inform an administrator.
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, you might try the Kibitzer's Café.
posted by Chessgames members do not necessarily represent the views of Chessgames.com, its employees, or sponsors.|
your profile |
Premium Membership |
Kibitzer's Café |
Biographer's Bistro |
new kibitzing |
Tournament Index |
Player Directory |
World Chess Championships |
Opening Explorer |
Guess the Move |
Game Collections |
ChessBookie Game |
Chessgames Challenge |
privacy notice |
Copyright 2001-2015, Chessgames Services LLC
Web design & database development by