Members · Prefs · Laboratory · Collections · Openings · Endgames · Sacrifices · History · Search Kibitzing · Kibitzer's Café · Chessforums · Tournament Index · Players · Kibitzing

(If you register a free account you won't see all these ads!)
Adolf Anderssen vs Howard Staunton
London (1851), London ENG, rd 3, Jun-??
Sicilian Defense: Paulsen-Basman Defense (B40)  ·  1-0


Click Here to play Guess-the-Move
Given 82 times; par: 56 [what's this?]

explore this opening
find similar games 4 more Anderssen/Staunton games
PGN: download | view | print Help: general | java-troubleshooting

TIP: If you do not want to read posts by a certain member, put them on your ignore list.

PGN Viewer:  What is this?
For help with this chess viewer, please see the Olga Chess Viewer Quickstart Guide.

Kibitzer's Corner
< Earlier Kibitzing  · PAGE 2 OF 2 ·  Later Kibitzing>
Jun-27-07  Pi Guy: <playground player: Whatever made Staunton think he could beat Morphy?>

Staunton never versed Morphy. I assume you meant "Whatever made Staunton think he could beat Anderssen?"

Jun-28-07  Petrosianic: Why wouldn't he? Staunton had been pretty much the best in the world in the 1840's, while Anderssen was relatively unknown.
Jan-14-08  shakkiseepra: And this is because of lack of quality and overall number of chess players in the world at the time. Staunton was an inferior chess player, but must be recognized as one of the pioneers on the journal side. The question 'Whatever made Staunton think he could beat Morphy?' is a good one. One who have studied history knows how he postponed and postponed the meeting, being propably well aware that he'd lose ugly. Morpy is the first superstar of chess, the first one ever to understand the game as art, and his play is so beautiful that Staunton's poor analyzis and by-the-book crab at the time makes me laugh. Of course, nowadays chess theory has taken huge leaps forward due to Steinitz and many more since, but in the 1800s Morphy's game was something never-seen-before.
Feb-01-08  Knight13: 6...Be7 is better.
Feb-01-08  HOTDOG: 6...Ba7 is a strange move,then 9...d6 seems better to avoid e5,and Black is perhaps already lost at this point. 11.Rae1! is a very deep move;16.g4 instead seems losing the advantage,better was the immediate 16.Kh1!;18...Qa5! is a very strong move and almost forced,but White is still better and he can strike with 22.g5!;23...Qd5+?! is not the decisive mistake,but better was 23...Rd8 although White still has a won position,although after 23...Qd5+ the simple 24.Kg1 seems better for White.24...Ne7? is the decisive mistake,Black had to move the rook to give space for the King or play 24...Qxd3.after 24...Ne7? Black has no defense
Feb-01-08  Knight13: 6...a7 is not the strange move, the strange move is 4...Bc5, which is not a good one.
Premium Chessgames Member
  keypusher: 4...Bc5 is common enough, and has been played several times by's own Gerard Welling.

<gejewe> if you see this, it would be interesting to have your comments on this opening and where Black goes wrong. I would guess that Black's position is hopeless by move 16.

Premium Chessgames Member
  keypusher: I am copying this from Mr. Welling's page.

<Gejewe: <keypusher> After the initial moves I prefer the active 5.Nc3 Qb6!? for example 1) 6.Na4 Qa5+ 7.c3 Bxd4 8.Qxd4 Nf6 ( two bishops but Na4 is clumsy ) 2) 6.Be3 Nc6 and the pawn sacrifice 7.Ndb5 Bxe3 leads to an unclear position but control of e5 should help black. I remember a matchgame Harstston-Basman, England 1974 as a good example how black should play. Staunton was a bit passive, 6..Qc7 was suggested in contemporary sources and Staunton was very critical on his play in this particular game in general.>

I think this is the Hartston-Basman game he refers to:

Hartston vs M Basman, 1973

Premium Chessgames Member

This game is annotated here.

Premium Chessgames Member
  heuristic: mo' better moves :

11...d5 12.Nf3 Nc6 13.Bxa7 Rxa7 14.a3

12.Nf3 Nc6 13.Bx7 Rxa7 14.Ne4 Qd8

16.Kh1 b4 17.a3 bxa3 18.bxa3 Rab8

16...Bxe3+ 17.Rxe6 Qb6 18.Qh3 Rad8 19.Bd3

19...Qb4 20.Bb7 Qc4 21.Rg1 Rd7 22.Bc6

22...Qd5+ 23.Rff3 Ne7 24.gxh6 g6 25.Qg5

Premium Chessgames Member
  keypusher: <heuristic> <11...d5 12.Nf3 Nc6 13.Bxa7 Rxa7 14.a3>

How about 11...d5 12. exd6 Qxd6 13. Qf3? Or, after 12. Nf3 Nc6 13. Bxa7 Rxa7, instead of 14. a3, 14. Ng5 h6 15. Nxf7 Nxf4 16. Rxf4 Rxf7 17. Ref1 Nxe5 18. Rxf7 Nxf7 19. Qg6?

Aug-31-10  dzhafner: why not 8... d6?

if 9 Qg4 ... 0-0
and if 10 Bh6?? ... Ng6 (the hanging bishop, knight, and threat of e5 seem difficult to meet) 11 Bg5 ... Qb6 (11 Be3 .. e5)

Black should be able to get in 9 ...Nf6 and possibly continue with ...e5, ...Nd4 la Adams vs Hydra, 2005 as jaymthetactician pointed out.

May-04-12  LoveThatJoker: Guess-the-Move Final Score:

Anderssen vs Staunton, 1851.
Your score: 63 (par = 56)


Nov-27-14  Knight13: The way Black developed his pieces... There's a lesson to be learned.
Dec-17-14  Ziryab: 13...Nc6 leads to an interesting training position. What is White's best reply?
Dec-18-14  Knight13: <Ziryab: 13...Nc6 leads to an interesting training position. What is White's best reply?> 14. Ng5: ... h6 15. Nxf7, etc.
Premium Chessgames Member
  Penguincw: If I were to travel to the 19th century (pre-Steinitz) and face a strong player (ex. Anderseen), in response to 1.e4, I'd probably play 1...c5 or something to try to get them offtrack. Unfortunately, this game proves otherwise...

Dec-18-14  Knight13: <Penguincw> Keep in mind that they didn't know how to "properly" play Black's side of Sicilian in pre-Steinitz times, either....
Premium Chessgames Member
  keypusher: <Penguincw> The Sicilian was probably more in vogue in 1851 (to Morphy's disgust) than it would be for 90 years after. Anderssen was particularly good with it, I think.

Steinitz vs Anderssen, 1866

Apr-10-15  rwbean: 15. c3 is +1.00 (Stockfish 6, 36 ply).

18. f5 is +2.67 (Stockfish 6, 37 ply). PV is like 18. f5 ♕xe5 19. ♗g2 ♕xb2 20. Bg5 ♖d7 21. fxg6 hxg6 22. ♕h4. This means 17... c5 was a serious error - better 17 ... ♗xe3.

Then it seems the final error is 19... ♕a4 instead of 19... ♕b4.

28. ♕f6+ is mate in 10.

Aug-15-15  saturn2: <Knight13 the strange move is 4...Bc5, which is not a good one.> Bc5 is more common after black has already played a6 and white has already played Nc3. The reason seems as follows: White could play 5.Nb3 and develope the other knight via d2 to c4 later on and whites e4-e5 is looming. Black can prevent this by d6 but then the d file gets opened and after Qd1xQd8 the castling is spoiled.

Actually e5 happened also in the game but white could have exploited the move ..4 Bc4 even better

Premium Chessgames Member
  Sally Simpson: In the tournament book at the end of this game Staunton states:

"Let the reader compare this game, which would be discreditable to two third-rate players of a coffee-house, with any of the match game in which Black has taken part heretofore, and say how far the result of this mere mockery of Chess is a proof of the absolute powers of two men who are called proficients."

I've copied it word for word. I think he is saying in his own sweet way that Black [Staunton] played an awful game of chess.

(adding to the confusion this note actually appears in the middle of the next game but it's marker '*' refers the reader back to the last move of the previous game. - this game.)

page 111 here:

Premium Chessgames Member
  zanzibar: <Sally> yes, I was just about to add the same passage that you have done.

But, I think Staunton is also putting a knock on Anderssen as well as himself, when he uses phraseology like:

<discreditable to two third-rate players of a coffee-house ... mockery ... of two men who are called proficients.>

in reference to the game, and not just Black's play.

Of course parsing his writing is laborious in this matter. Still, I've read in more than one place the opinion that Staunton was rather unfair and unkind to Anderssen in the London (1851) TB.

Premium Chessgames Member
  keypusher: <But, I think Staunton is also putting a knock on Anderssen as well as himself, when he uses phraseology like: <discreditable to two third-rate players of a coffee-house ... mockery ... of two men who are called proficients.>

in reference to the game, and not just Black's play.>

<zanzibar> Of course that is what Staunton is doing.

I've had the London 1851 tournament book for a long time. Staunton's evaluation heuristic is simple: If he wins, it's a good, probably even great game. If he loses, it's a terrible game.

If you beat Staunton (Anderssen, Elijah Williams) you're a bad player and a bad person. If you lose to Staunton (Horwitz, Jaenisch) you're a fine master and a prince among men.

Premium Chessgames Member
  zanzibar: <keypusher> Some more comments by Staunton:

Biographer Bistro (kibitz #14371)

search thread:   
< Earlier Kibitzing  · PAGE 2 OF 2 ·  Later Kibitzing>
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 login now.
Please observe our posting guidelines:
  1. No obscene, racist, sexist, profane, raunchy, or similar offensive language.
  2. No spamming, advertising, nonsense, or duplicate posts.
  3. No personal attacks, antagonism, name-calling or trolling of any member or their family, friends, associates, or business interests—including Admin and Owners.
  4. No posting of or linking to personal or negative information about any member or their family, friends, associates, or business interests. This includes all media: text, images, video, audio, or otherwise.
  5. Any off-topic posts which distract from the primary topic of discussion are subject to removal, at the sole discretion of the Moderators.
  6. The use of "sock puppet" accounts to circumvent disciplinary action taken by Moderators is expressly prohibited.
  7. 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.
  8. Nothing in violation of United States law.
  9. Try to maintain a semblance of civility at all times.
Blow the Whistle See something that violates our rules? Blow the whistle and inform a Moderator.

NOTE: Keep all discussion on the topic of this page. This forum is for this specific game 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, 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.
Spot an error? Please submit a correction slip and help us eliminate database mistakes!
This game is type: CLASSICAL (Disagree? Please submit a correction slip.)

Featured in the Following Game Collections [what is this?]
gibz's favorite games
by gibz
GM RAM in process
by olpa
Sicilian Attack Plan
from chess strategems vi - under construction by gauer
+4 -1 =0 vs. Staunton (London, semifinal)
from vaskolon's with sacrifices Mr. ANDERSSON by vaskolon
Ziyatdinov's game score goes to 33.Rg3 1-0
from GM-RAM by Pragmatist
gm ram
by retarius66
Selected 19th century games
by atrifix
joniefidelino's favorite games
by joniefidelino
dogged focus on the Kside
from attack_1900 by heuristic
Game 19
from Guinness Book - Chess Grandmasters (Hartston) by maple227
gm ram games
by chessloser68
19th century
by pim
Game 2
from gmram by chessbuzz
game 2
from GM RAM Game Selection by takchess
game 2
from GM RAM Game Selection by takking
game 2
from GM RAM Game Selection by RookHook
Game 2
from Chess Secrets - Romantics (Pritchett) by Qindarka
B40 1-0 33
from Anderssen - Blackburne - Charousek - Fredthebear by fredthebear
+4 -1 =0 vs. Staunton (London, semifinal)
from vaskolon's PAUL MORPHY'S GAMES by vaskolon
Game 19
from Guinness Book - Chess Grandmasters (Hartston) by Qindarka
plus 8 more collections (not shown)

home | about | login | logout | F.A.Q. | your profile | preferences | Premium Membership | Kibitzer's Café | Biographer's Bistro | new kibitzing | chessforums | Tournament Index | Player Directory | Notable Games | World Chess Championships | Opening Explorer | Guess the Move | Game Collections | ChessBookie Game | Chessgames Challenge | Store | privacy notice | contact us
Copyright 2001-2019, Chessgames Services LLC