|3rd American Chess Congress (1874)|
The 3rd American Chess Congress was held in Chicago, Illinois from July 7th to the 16th, 1874. Eight US players participated in the double rounds event by paying an entry fee of $20. The participants were previous congress winner George Henry Mackenzie, previous congress participants Frederic Elder, Henry Hosmer, Max Judd, Hiram Kennicott and Frederick Perrin, and newcomers Frederick Bock and James Adams Congdon. The time control was 15 moves every hour. For the first time in an organized US tournament draws were not required to be replayed. As with many tournaments from the 19th century, no official scheduling was in place, so the games are organized below according to the days in which play began.
Chicago, 7-16 July 1874
Four games were unavailable: Mackenzie - Congdon, Congdon - Mackenzie, Bock - Hosmer, and Hosmer - Bock. Elder and Kennicott withdrew early, but their games were included at the final.
1 Mackenzie ** 10 1½ 11 -- 11 11 11 10½
2 Hosmer 01 ** 10 11 -- 11 11 11 10
3 Judd 0½ 01 ** 1½ -- 11 11 -- 7
4 Bock 00 00 0½ ** 1½ 11 1½ -- 5½
5 Elder -- -- -- 0½ ** 01 11 -- 3½
6 Perrin 00 00 00 00 10 ** 10 -- 2
7 Congdon 00 00 00 0½ 00 01 ** -- 1½
8 Kennicott 00 00 -- -- -- -- -- ** 0
Mackenzie won his second title as well as the $225 grand prize by finishing clear first with +10 -1 =1, yet just half a point ahead of Hosmer.
The previous and next congresses were 2nd American Chess Congress (1871) and 4th American Chess Congress (1876).
Original collection: Game Collection: Chicago 1874, by User: suenteus po 147.
| page 1 of 2; games 1-25 of 36
| page 1 of 2; games 1-25 of 36
|Sep-22-13|| ||FSR: One rarely sees such a high proportion of Fredericks in a tournament.|
|Mar-07-16|| ||zanzibar: <FSR> or in the comments.|
(It was 100%, afraid I've just cut it in half!)
* * * * *
The missing games aren't missing at all, they're forfeits, as explained on the bottom of page 98 of the 5th American Chess Congress tournament book (which does a retrospective review of previous Chess Congresses, and so is the defacto tournament book for both the 3rd and 4th Congresses).
<Mr. Bock, who had been playing under the disadvantages attending
ill-health, resigned his two games to Mr. Hosmer, and on the last day
of the tournament General Congdon resigned his games to Captain
Mackenzie. By cancelling the games played by Messrs. Kennicott and
Elder, and computing the drawn games as half a won game to each
contestant producing a drawn battle, the final score appears as
Geo. H. Mackenzie, won 8.5 games.
Henry Hosmer, " 8 "
Max Judd, " 7 "
Frederick Bock, " 4 "
J. A. Congdon, " 1.5 "
Frederick Perrin, " 1 "
The rules stated that any player who dropped out before completing 2/3 of their schedule would have their results nullified.
Thus, the 3rd Congress only had six players, officially.
One more aside. The tournament book reports that the <London (1862)> rules were used. This isn't true in one important respect - the players alternated colors in the RR even if a game were drawn in a pairing match.
|Mar-07-16|| ||zanzibar: Here's the complete list of prizes awarded for the main tournament:|
George H. Mackenzie ... First Prize ... $225.00
Henry Hosmer ... ... ... Second Prize ... 150.00
Max Judd ... ... ... ... Third Prize ... 75.00
Wish <CG> preserved the formatting.
|Mar-07-16|| ||zanzibar: The full rules were spelled out in Brownson's <Chess Journal v59-69 (1875)> in the beginning of the journal.|
The distinction begin a draw and a nullified game is mentioned as concerns colors.
(I'm wondering what the primary source of the games is, as the 5th Congress Book has none of the actual games).
|Mar-07-16|| ||zanzibar: So there was a tournament book specific to the Congress issued:|
but it's unavailable on google books. Lyons lists it as the "scarcest of the American Chess Congress Books".
|Mar-07-16|| ||zanzibar: Again, we have a tournament where journal/newspaper coverage of the games was deliberately limited by the organizers - in an attempt to focus interest on the tournament book.|
The Westminster Papers (v7 1875) went so far as to comment on this (I guess partly from the experience with London (1860) and Birmingham (1858)):
<The Chicago Committee have resolved to publish the games
after the tourney in Book form. We can assure them that, in our
judgment, this is not wise policy. The games should be published at
once, and whilst the players are interested in the subject. We
believe that those games of the Baden Tourney and the Vienna Tourney
that were published by us as quickly as we could get them were more
played over than all the games that have been published since. The
games of the last tourney are still being published in the Continental
Chess papers, but we never see any one playing over the games, nor do
we see them quoted in this Country, Australia or America. (p62)
We can only repeat that when the book is published no one will read
it, except those who have to do so as a matter of business; whereas,
if the games had been sent to the journals at once, the whole of them
would have been played over by the end of next month. (p82)>
|Apr-20-16|| ||Erkostic: I just posted on my blog, how two Chicago Newspapers covered the congress, part one can be found here.|
Part two to follow.
|Apr-30-16|| ||Erkostic: Part two of my blog post on the congress
|Apr-30-16|| ||Calli: I have the OLMS reprint of the tournament book and can lookup any details if you wish.|
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.
- No posting 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 |
Notable Games |
World Chess Championships |
Opening Explorer |
Guess the Move |
Game Collections |
ChessBookie Game |
Chessgames Challenge |
privacy notice |
Copyright 2001-2017, Chessgames Services LLC