Part 1

This is something that has been on my mind for a long time now in regards to Morphy. I may be right; I may be wrong but I think I'm being logical and consistant in the following:

Edge's book was funny and delightful and Edge is owed a great deal for his accountng of Morphy's activities in England and France. But sometimes I think Edge is a little slow on the draw. He did indeed explain how Morphy was staying up almost until sunrise, enjoying the Parisian nightlife, even during the beginning of the Harrwitz match and that it was only after much cajoling by Edge that Morphy finally set himself a midnight curfew after losing the 2nd match game (the 3rd loss in a row). I don't doubt anything Edge writes, but at the same time I feel Edge was a man who had such a need to show his own contribution to Morphy's success, that he had a bit of tunnel vision in that regard.

So, let's go back to Edge. He wrote how he and Morphy arrived in Paris, Morphy suffering from sea sickness after trip across the channel followed by a 10 hr. train ride and went directly to the Café de la Régence. (Edge's description of the Café is as charming a bit a writing as I have ever read.) Harrwitz wasn't there, so Morphy didn't announce himself. He and Edge walked around incognito, watching and making assessments. That was Wed. On Sat., Harrwitz returned.

Now note the sequence here. Morphy challenged Harrwitz to a match. Harrwitz acted hesitant to play and instead agreed to play an off-hand game.... which Morphy lost.

What if Morphy had won??

After this game, Harrwitz agree to the match and (on Sunday when the seconds met) he set all the terms for the match which Morphy accepted without arguing (in other words, offering Harrwitz, who had just shown his superiority, every advantage - rather odd, self-destructive behavior, I think - or was it?).

Part 2

The Match commenced on Monday. Harrwitz won. This is time of the famous incident in which Harrwitz checked Morphy's pulse and noted how "his pulse does not beat any faster than if he had won the game!"

I wonder why? Becaues Morphy didn't care if he won or lost? or maybe...

The second match game was also won by Harrwitz who, according to Edge, started acting in a manner which said "Oh, it takes very little trouble to beat this fellow."

Morphy was still matter-of-fact. But Edge was really worried.

If you remember the end, after Harrwitz sent his resignation based on his supposed ill health, Morphy was awarded the 285 francs stake. Morphy refused the winnings, obstensibly because the match never reached a natural conclusion. Morphy was appraoched and told how he HAD to accept the winnings so there would be an official end to the match which without side-bets couldn't or wouldn't be paid. It turns out that there was some serious betting going on in la Régence... serious betting by important people.

Flash back to Edge being really worried after Morphys 3rd loss (match sore 2-0 favor Harrwitz). The reason Edge was worried was because, acting as Morphy's manager and promoter, he was under the gun with some of these heavy betters. He said as much when he told Morphy that these people were getting nervous. Morphy replied, with a wave of his hand, "How astonished all these men are going to be. Harrwitz will not win another game."

Now wait a minute! Morphy just lost 3 in a row to Harrwitz and has never won even a single game from the man. Where does he get off with such a prediction?? One might be inclined to think he knows something no one else knows. I wonder what that something might be??

Edge just saw it as Morphy's ultimate confidence in his ability (or a prjection of Edge's confidence in Morphy's abilities)... but that doesn't make total sense, does it, unless you consider first that Morphy had been playing below his ability (which he proved was the case) and that he had reason to believe from that moment on he would be playing to his full strength.

It really comes down to whether you want to consider Morhy as this idiot-savant who can play chess but little else... or do you see Morphy as a highly educated prodigical mind who embraced philosophy, languages, music, the arts and sciences and who was quite capable not only of independent, and usually secretive, thoughts, but of cold-blooded calculation.

Harrwitz in 1858 was the best player in Europe. He was in practice, clever, and unorthodox, very conscious of taking players out of their known schemes. He had however an excitable temperament, and matches tended to make him physically sick.

The arrival of Morphy was a great opportunity for him. His relationship with Staunton was acrimonious ever since Staunton had dismissed his play with Lowenthal with theatrical venom (a match he won after being down 9-2 and taking a sick break) Yet he was wary of Morphy, not appearing at the Cafe for a few days, which seems odd for a chess addict, and then only agreeing to an offhand game.

So yes, I agree that there is a possibility that Morphy being alert to signs of hesitancy-probably the same signs Staunton showed, only agreeing to play in consultation games-he may have tempered his play with Black in that first game, and pointed for a draw. In Sergeant's notes, Morphy plays an early inaccuracy, but struggles almost back to equality, but then Harrwitz finds some strong moves to end the game.

Whatever the intent, Harrwitz then agreed to a match without seconds. At this point I see no motive for Morphy to play below his strength, and I see his loss in game 1 as purely a bad opening choice. He thought Harrwitz 4th move Bb4 was the strongest move in the QGD and cited it as the reason for his switch to the Dutch Defense.

The incident where Harrwitz grabbed his wrist and exclaimed <"his pulse does not beat any faster than if he had won the game!"> is usually put down to Harrwitz's low character, but I am inclined to believe he was spooked by Morphy's demeanour even while he was leading the match. I think Morphy's pulse was low because he saw hours earlier that his 14th move lost him the game (again according to Sergeant's account) and treated the rest of the game as an intellectual puzzle, trying to make the win as difficult as possible to convert.

For the sake of discussion, here's a few more thoughts:

This is Max Lange's view of Harrwitz's style-

"His [Harrwitz's] play is ready and elegant, rather than deep, and his combinations appear more to be isolated, though ingenious manoeuvres, than well combined and premeditated designs. He is very skilful in profiting by the mistakes of his adversaries, and knows how to gain an advantage by speculating upon their probable miscalculations. It was natural therefore, that against a deeper and correct opponent he should be in a disadvantage, till at last, feeling himself the superiority of his antagonist, he should despair of a favorable termination of the contest."

<Yet he was wary of Morphy, not appearing at the Cafe for a few days.>

Actually, Morphy announced himself at la Regence the day after he arrived in Paris. It was Harrwitz who was out of town and didn't until 3 days later.

<matches tended to make him physically sick.>

It seems only matches that he chanced losing tended to make him sick, but fortunately for Harrwitz, he was a very successful match players. After his strange match with Staunton, he tied a match with Anderssen and won matches from Horowitz (+6-5 and +7-6), Williams (+3=2, +7=2, +7-0), Lowenthal (+11-10) and Medley (+11-9).

Whether he was, or was ever considered, the strongest European player is debatable, given Anderssen and der Lasa (or even Falkbeer or Lange), but he was certainly one of the best and most successful.

Harrwitz, as I picture him, was an entertainer or a showman. Probaby most of his antics were meant to be funny, but it also seems that many people didn't like him, considered him arrogant and would have liked nothing more than watching Morphy (whom most people, in contrast, seemed to like) beat him. When Harrwitz took his early lead, his actions were interpreted as arrogant (and it's my understanding that his behavior toward Morphy eventually cost him his position at la Regence) whether they were or not. They seemed to me more the 19th century equivalent of trash talk. The problem with that is that after running off at the mouth, the idea of losing becomes unbearable. So, Harrwitz might have truly been sick - but the sickness was opportunely timed (and only when it came to playing Morphy -as even Staunton pointed out- and not during the day when he was able to play anyone else) and possibly psychological in origin.

Morphy figured Harrwitz out, which I believe was Harrwitz secret terror even while winning. Harrwitz welcomed tactical skirmishes, as Lange implied, because he knew that he could gain positional advantages when the attack misfired. <He is very skilful in profiting by the mistakes of his adversaries, and knows how to gain an advantage by speculating upon their probable miscalculations.>

Morphy would have taken a big lesson from this game. Harrwitz basically snatches a pawn in broad daylight, and then throws all the living room furniture in front of Morphy's lively but unfocussed attack. After this game, Morphy carefully prepared his attacks and did not over-reach (except in game 7 where he mixed up his moves, turning a crushing victory into a draw). When the attack was not there, he played for the endgame, and outplayed Harrwitz in games 3, 5 and 6.

I really don't know.

The Harrwtz match wasn't the only time Morphy predicted his opponent would never win another game. He did the same thing with Paulsen at the Chess Congress. Almost every match Morphy played with a capable opponent started off slow for Morphy but ended with a display of dominance.

One of two reasons seem most evident. Either Morphy was unsure of himself and played hesitantly until he got the feel for his opponent or else he deliberately built up their self-confidence by not extending himself in the first few games.

Morphy, after returning to the US, said he was disappointed with his showing in Europe - that he felt he could have done much better. I tend to agree with that.

http://www.auschwitz.dk/schmeling.htm.

About this game, Edward Lasker also brings some light about Morphy's first two defeats in his match against Harrwitz:

<Morphy, entranced with the charm of Paris night life, had taken to going to bed in the wee hours of the morning. Foolishly he persisted in doing this even the night before the commencement of the match, and Harrwitz, who had the move in the first game, trounced him soundly, to the visible disappointment of the large crowd of onlookers who were all praying for Morphy's victory. The same thing happened the next day. In spite of his friends' warning, he stayed out until four o'clock in the morning. That afternoon, after obtaining a winning position in the game, fatigue overcame him, he made a few weak moves, and Harrwitz was again victorious.

Throughout the game the latter displayed an attitude of amused contempt. When Morphy resigned, he rose from his chair, took Morphy’s hand and felt his pulse. Then he said laughingly to the crowd: "Well, this is most astonishing. His pulse does not beat any faster than if he had won the game!"

Everybody was disgusted at this childish display of vainglory, but Morphy merely smiled and said to his "second": "How astonished all these men will be when Harrwitz does not get another game." And he didn't. Morphy promised to be in bed before twelve every night during the match, and he kept his promise. He scored the third and fourth games in beautiful style. The effect on Harrwitz was interesting. He became extremely nervous during the fourth game, often shaking violently when he was about to move. On the other side of the board sat Morphy, looking, according to eyewitnesses, like a block of living marble, the very embodiment of penetration and decision.

Morphy 8 mistakes:
15.Kb1 0.29 (15.f4 0.74)
18.Ree1 0.22 (18.f4 0.64)
19.Rg1 -0.17 (19.Ne7+ 0.29)
20.Qe3 -0.24 (20.Qh4 0.28)
30.Rh1 -2.47 (30.Rg4 -0.34)
31.Rhg1 -3.61 (31.Qb4 -2.52)
33.Rg5 -6.03 (33.Qc3 -4.38)
36.Qxe8 -7.73 (36.Qe1 -5.68)

He should just continue his attack

18. Ne7+ Kh1
19. Nf5 (threatening Rxe8! followed by Qxg7 mate)

Black options:

19. ...Rg8 20. Re4 (if ...f6 21. Ne7 and wins and if ...Nf6 21. Rh4 Qg2 22. Nxh6 leading to a mating net

19. ...Qg2 20. Nxh6 f6 21. Qh4! gxh6 (fxe5? 22. Nf5+! Kg8 23. Ne7 mate) Qxh6+ 22. Kg8 Rg5+ and wins)

19. ...f6 20. Re7 Rg8 (Qg7 21. Qd7 Rg8 22. Nxh6 and wins))21. Qd7 Qg2 Nxh6 and wins

<19. ...Qg2 20. Nxh6 f6 21. Qh4! gxh6 (fxe5? 22. Nf5+! Kg8 23. Ne7 mate) Qxh6+ 22. Kg8 Rg5+ and wins)>

should be
19. Qg2 20. Nxh6 f6 21. Rh5 gxh6 22. Rxh6+ Kg8 (if Kg7 23. Qh4 Rf7 24. Rh7+ Kf8 25.Rh8+ Ke7 26. Qe4+ mate) 23. Qd5+ Rf7 24. Qh5 Kf8 25. Rh8+ Ke7 26. Qc5+ Ke6 27. Qd5+ Ke7 28. Qe4 mate

Interesting enough, in Harrwitz's 1862 book, "Lehrbuch des schachspiels: enthaltend die analyse der eröffnungen und Endungen" he presented only two games between himself and Morphy (two of the three he won) and one of them was this game. However, Harrwitz gives the game with this score (in algebraic notation, no less) The score given here at chessgames.com was the one given by Maroczy:

[Event "match"]
[Site "Paris"]
[Date "1858.09.05"]
[Round "2"]
[Result "0-1"]
[White "Paul Morphy"]
[Black "Daniel Harrwitz"]

Morphy vs Harrwitz, 1858.
YOU ARE PLAYING THE ROLE OF HARRWITZ.
Your score: 60 (par = 56)