In 1882, two men associated with the Wiener Schachgesellschaft - Ignatz von Kolisch, an honorary member of the club, and Albert von Rothschild, the club's president, organized an international tournament to celebrate its 25th anniversary. The two of them collected over 7500 francs as a prize purse for the top six places and a brillancy prize, to which Kaiser Franz Josef added 2000 Austrian Gulden as a Kaiserpreis to be paid to the winner.
Vienna was the site of one of the first international tournaments (Vienna (1873)), as well as the early stomping grounds for Wilhelm Steinitz. In the tradition of these two facts, Steinitz agreed to participate and 17 other chess masters from around the world were invited, among them the top ten in the world at the time. Of note, Simon Winawer and Mikhail Chigorin came from Russia, George Mackenzie and James Mason from the US, Joseph Henry Blackburne from England, and Louis Paulsen from Germany - making this the most internationally diverse tournament at that point. The tournament was a double round robin held from May 10th to June 24th. Games started each day at 10 am, and the players had to make 15 moves every hour. After the first four hours, all ongoing games were suspended for a two hour break, then resumed again for another four hours. Any games continuing until midnight were adjourned to be finished on rest days. Under this format, up to 90 moves had to be played each day.
Vienna, Austria, 10 May - 24 June 1882
As the tournament wore on, the grueling schedule took its toll on many of the players. Fleissig abandoned the tournament after the 20th round, Bird fell ill between rounds 29 and 33, and a few other players abdicated their games in the last few rounds. Noa was called away by judicial duties after the 17th round. All of their games were forfeited to their opponents.
01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18
=1 Steinitz ** 1½ ½½ 0½ ½1 10 ½½ 11 01 1½ 01 10 11 11 11 01 11 11 24
=1 Winawer 0½ ** 00 1½ 0½ 10 11 10 01 1½ 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 01 24
3 Mason ½½ 11 ** 0½ ½1 ½½ ½½ 11 11 10 01 11 ½1 1½ 0½ 11 01 ½1 23
=4 Zukertort 1½ 0½ 1½ ** ½½ 0½ 0½ 11 11 00 11 01 01 11 11 11 11 01 22½
=4 Mackenzie ½0 1½ ½0 ½½ ** 10 ½1 1½ ½0 11 11 01 01 11 10 1½ 11 11 22½
6 Blackburne 01 01 ½½ 1½ 01 ** ½½ 0½ 10 01 10 11 1½ 11 10 11 01 11 21½
7 Englisch ½½ 00 ½½ 1½ ½0 ½½ ** 11 ½0 ½½ ½½ 0½ ½½ 01 11 11 11 ½1 19½
8 Paulsen 00 01 00 00 0½ 1½ 00 ** ½½ ½1 ½1 11 ½1 ½1 ½1 11 ½1 ½1 18½
9 Wittek 10 10 00 00 ½1 01 ½1 ½½ ** ½0 01 10 ½½ ½½ ½1 1½ ½1 11 18
10 Weiss 0½ 0½ 01 11 00 10 ½½ ½0 ½1 ** 0½ 11 0½ 0½ 01 00 11 11 16½
11 Hruby 10 00 10 00 00 01 ½½ ½0 10 1½ ** 10 ½½ 11 01 10 01 11 16
=12 Chigorin 01 00 00 10 10 00 1½ 00 01 00 01 ** 11 00 11 1½ 01 01 14
=12 Schwarz 00 00 ½0 10 10 0½ ½½ ½0 ½½ 1½ ½½ 00 ** ½0 11 ½0 01 11 14
14 Meitner 00 00 0½ 00 00 00 10 ½0 ½½ 1½ 00 11 ½1 ** 01 01 01 11 13
15 Bird 00 00 1½ 00 01 01 00 ½0 ½0 10 10 00 00 10 ** 11 ½1 01 12
16 Ware 10 00 00 00 0½ 00 00 00 0½ 11 01 0½ ½1 10 00 ** 01 11 11
17 Noa 00 00 10 00 00 10 00 ½0 ½0 00 10 10 10 10 ½0 10 ** ½0 9
18 Fleissig 00 10 ½0 10 00 00 ½0 ½0 00 00 00 10 00 00 10 00 ½1 ** 7
Everyone was eager to prove himself against Steinitz, the best player in the world, especially since he had been out of practice, having last played (and won) the Steinitz - Blackburne (1876) match. But Steinitz was as formidable as ever. Despite a rough start (prompted by the end of his 25 game winning streak in the third round), he was only one point behind the leader Mackenzie, and half a point behind second place Winawer after the first half of games.
=1 Winawer 1 0 1
=1 Steinitz 0 1 1
At the end, Steinitz and Winawer tied for first with 24 points each. A two game playoff match was devised to determine the victor, but it was tied at one game each, leaving the lion's share of the prize purse to be split between the two winners. The tournament was both Steinitz and Winawer's greatest international victory, as well as a landmark event for international chess. It would be only four years later that Steinitz would go on to defeat one of his rivals, Zukertort, in a match for the world championship, becoming the undisputed greatest player in the world. The tournament itself would later be heralded as the strongest of the 19th century, if not all time.
Original collection: Game Collection: Vienna 1882, by User: suenteus po 147.
| page 1 of 11; games 1-25 of 270
| page 1 of 11; games 1-25 of 270
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2 OF 2 ·
|Dec-27-15|| ||zanzibar: Here is the DSZ v37 n8 p235 August 1882 xtab:
The caption reads:
<"Die Parenthesen bedeuten, dass die betreffenden Partien in Folge Ausbleibens des einen Spielers dem andern als gewonnen angerechnet worden sind. Noa trat nach dem 17., Fleissig nach dem 20. Gang aus.">
which google poorly translates as:
<The parentheses mean that the lots concerned of a player other than the won have been credited consecutive absence. Noa occurred after 17, industrious from after the 20th passage.>
Surely a better translation could be done.
|Dec-27-15|| ||zanzibar: The intro is misleading, since it's easy to misconstrue that the grueling schedule cased Noa to withdraw halfway through.|
Far from the case, he was actually doing well enough, scoring 9/17 points (MacKenzie led with 12.5, then Winawer 12 and Steinitz 11). The actual fact is that Noa withdrew because he was <"called away by judicial duties that could not be neglected">.
This is according to Harding, as found in his bio of Blackburne, on p182.
|Dec-28-15|| ||Retireborn: <z> Thanks for that, and season's greetings to you too, my dear fellow.|
Yes, Toad is an amusing character, and also an aristocrat, so suitable for a Boston Brahmin, to be sure :)
|Mar-30-16|| ||zanzibar: Harding, quotes the following Steinitz remark concerning the inclusion of <Preston Ware>:|
<whose name is unfavorably connected with a scandal which occurred in the late American Congress>
<Eminent Victorian Chess Players> - Harding, p187.
Such may have been the truth, but Ware's main fault was probably, and ironically, his honesty in discussing the scandal.
As Harding comments, the committee maintained its stance, allowing Ware to play. And he went on to beat Steinitz in one of their games, somewhat famously.
|Apr-07-16|| ||zanzibar: <Calli> gives a tournament book by Sellman, but it's really just a pamphlet with less than 50 selected games:|
<sneaky> discusses the situation a little here:
P Ware vs Steinitz, 1882 (kibitz #7)
I haven't seen Bijl's book, and never heard of "La Vie Moderne" for chess, but have been using these sources:
https://books.google.com/books?id=A... (maybe the most complete?)
|Apr-07-16|| ||zanzibar: Sometimes I'm a bit thick...
What would be a natural place to look for good coverage of this tournament?
Chess-Monthly - edited by Hoffer and Zukertort.
Z also being a player, it would be a natural first stop.
Unfortunately for me, the relevant issue isn't available on google books, so I don't have the PDF. It was only after stumbling through the other sources, and not finding a game, that I found this:
It's a shame that google books doesn't have it, as it comes from Princeton library, and they have many other issues. I think this one volume got damaged(?).
I haven't systematically looked through it, but it's coverage appears to be the best.
|Apr-09-16|| ||zanzibar: Sadly for me, I forgot this info. It was refound in some deleted (ok, hidden) forum:|
<There was no contemporary tournament book and, with such a huge number of games, only a small percentage appeared promptly in chess magazines. Hermann Lehner (co-editor of the 1873 Vienna congress book) had access to the original game score manuscripts in the Vienna Chess Club archives and he was editor of a literary magazine entitled the <<Oesterreichische Lesehalle>> "Austrian reading room") which devoted considerable space to chess each month. Lehner transcribed and published the game scores, continuing until 1887, though sometimes truncating the finishes. His magazine, together with reports in the <<Wiener Allgemeine Zeitung>> were the foundation for Christian Bijl's <<Das II. Internationale Schachmeisterturnier Wien 1882>>, which appeared in 1984 as part of the Tschaturanga series from the Zürich publishing house Olms—a true labor of love by both Lehner and Bijl. This book (subsequently referred to as "Bijl") also includes notes from other contemporary journals and annotations to about 40 games by Dutch IM Corvan Wijgerden>
Harding - Blackburne p177
* * * * *
Hermann Lehner seems to not have a <CG> page. Pity that.
|Apr-09-16|| ||zanzibar: Lehner's obit in ACM v1 (1897) p23:
|Apr-13-16|| ||zanzibar: BTW- In the intro, I would have written the drop-outs in chronological order, starting with Noa. Maybe even explicitly mentioned that he missed the entire 2nd half of the tournament. I'd also explicitly mention that Bird forfeited his games (after all, they could have been rescheduled).|
Finally, a list of the other forfeits might be useful, even if only relegated to a footnote.
BTW- I tried to reconstruct the playing schedule from <DSZ v37 (1882) p234/252>, but only ended up being confused.
It took me awhile to notice one problem, that the pairing <Hruby--Schwarz> shows up twice. This is indicative of non-sense, from which only confusion can result.
So, despite DSZ looking like it had a helpful layout, it seems that only Lehner can be used.
|Apr-13-16|| ||zanzibar: Oh, and did I mention that DSZ skips from R29 (06.15) to R31 (06.17), completely omitting R30 (06.16)?|
|Apr-13-16|| ||zanzibar: The second half scheduling is confusing, as the Committee rearranged pairings for some reason. |
This lead to Fleissig having a double-forfeit in R33, which can cause confusion (as is guaranteed by altering the schedule in the first place).
There is also a strange episode with the Chigorin--Wittek (R32) forfeit win by Chigorin:
<NR. Mit Bezugnahme auf § 2 der „Zusatzbestimmungen"
(Oesterr. Lesehalle 1882, Seite 146) ordnete das Turnier-Comite
an, dass die für den 34. Gang ausgelosten Partien bereits im 32. Gang
und vice versa die für den 32. Gang ausgelosten erst am Schluss
des Turniers an die Reihe kommen. Die Partie Tschigorin-Wittek
wurde verschollen, da Tschigorin keine Kenntniss von obigem Beschluss
hatte; Dr. Meitner bekam gegen Bird (gichtleidend), Paulsen
und Zukertort gegen zurückgetretene Partner je 1 Zähler gut
If a German-speaker could explain exactly why Chigorin scored the win, I'm be much obliged.
|Apr-13-16|| ||zanzibar: There is also this missing game:
I'm not sure what the story is, or even when it was scheduled.
|Apr-13-16|| ||mike1: Hi Zanzibar
The German text does not explain why Chigorin won; it says that the complete pairings for rounds 32 & 34 are played in reverse order and that The game Chigorin- Wittek is postponed (verschollen would be : missing but I think the text would read: verschoben, hence my translation as postponed), because Chigorin does not have any knowledge of that reversal.
As you said: lots od confusion!
|Apr-13-16|| ||zanzibar: <mike1> Thank you. That's what google translate suggested.|
I think maybe Chigorin got confused, not knowing German, during the schedule change, and that the game did get delayed. But Wittek probably just forfeited it as a courtesy to the foreign visitor.
|Apr-13-16|| ||zanzibar: Even the <BCM> suggested a double forfeit by Fleissig in R33, <BCM v6 (28 Jun 1882) p301/314>.|
Of course, this would require some other player to have a double entry for the "missing" Fleissig round.
With a little sweat, blood, and tears, I put the <Schwarz--Ware> forfeit in R29, and got some semblance of a workable schedule (9 games/round, etc.).
One has to wonder if this much effort is worth it, but at least one can accurately follow the BCM round-by-round synopses.
The take-home lesson is, don't reschedule in the middle of a tournament unless absolutely necessary!
|Apr-14-16|| ||zanzibar: I think the xtab is wrong... what was the source?
Also, it's difficult to reference, lacking the needed index numbers on the first column and on the top row.
|Apr-15-16|| ||suenteus po 147: <zanzibar> I used http://www.endgame.nl/wien.htm for the crosstable. I think I also cross checked it against another site (don't currently have the link to that one) and found no discrepancies.|
|Apr-15-16|| ||suenteus po 147: <zanzibar> If I were you I would bookmark Van Reek's website (especially on historical tournaments) for your ongoing verification/correction of tournament pages based on my game collections. I assembled quite a few (without crediting Van Reek) before I got in the habit of giving credit to sources. He was always my main resource since he often included some kind of narrative context in addition to xtabs and dates.|
|Apr-15-16|| ||zanzibar: Thanks <suenteus po 147>. |
I'm familiar with Van Reek, and use him for, er.., "color". Partly because he's very selective in what games he hosts in PGN downloads, and partly because of the occasional missing detail.
In this case I think the double-forfeit game <Noa--Fleissig> was scored 1/2-1/2 by the "Committee". Which makes sense since both had withdrawn - either score it 0-0 or 1/2-1/2.
My go-to source for standings, where I first caught the discrepancy, is Reichhelm's <Fifty Tournaments>:
or my version:
Where you can see me as I work through the list (bold-facing the tournaments as they get processed).
OK, thanks again.
|Apr-15-16|| ||zanzibar: Compelled to mention, another example of the utility of stubs...|
(not Complied... gheesh, too many typos tonight!)
|Apr-15-16|| ||zanzibar: Excluding Noa (dropped out after R17), Fleissig (after R20), and Bird (ill R29-R33), here are the other defaults I have:|
1882.06.19 A00 0 (R32) 1-0 Chigorin -- Wittek
1882.06.21 A00 0 (R34) 0-1 Schwarz -- Chigorin
1882.06.15 A00 0 (R29) 0-1 Schwarz -- Ware
|Apr-15-16|| ||zanzibar: BTW- I reread van Reek's page on the tournament, and it's pretty good:|
His xtab has index row/column, but doesn't split the point for <Noa--Fleissig (R27)>.
|Aug-20-16|| ||ughaibu: So, which game won the brilliancy prize?|
|Aug-21-16|| ||sneaky pete: <ughaibu> No game did, since there was no brilliancy prize (you shouldn't believe everything you read in the introductions here).|
There was, however, a special prize for the player (finishing 4th or lower) with the best result against the top three finishers. A win against number one counted for 2 points, against number two for 1.5 points and against number three for 1 point, and draws against the top three had half this value. Zukertort won this special prize.
|Aug-21-16|| ||ughaibu: I see. Thanks.|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2 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, 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 |
World Chess Championships |
Opening Explorer |
Guess the Move |
Game Collections |
ChessBookie Game |
Chessgames Challenge |
privacy notice |
Copyright 2001-2017, Chessgames Services LLC
Web design & database development by