< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 5 OF 5 ·
|Feb-19-09|| ||chancho: Very convenient of Steiner to say the game was pre-arranged 10 years after the fact, and a year after the great Cuban's death.|
|Mar-25-09|| ||WhiteRook48: Capablanca cheating?! Impossible!|
|Mar-22-10|| ||amadeus: Beautiful game, nice picture|
|Mar-22-10|| ||maxi: As a matter of fact ALL of Capablanca's wins against Steiner had been prearranged, as Capablanca at the time refused to play any other way.|
|May-08-10|| ||Once: I wish my pawns were as good looking as the ones in <Karpova>'s picture....|
In reality, though, it would be kind of unfair to play a genuine game of living chess. Imagine the poor pieces having to stand still for several hours.
|May-08-10|| ||whiteshark: If <20...Kg7 21.Rf7+ Kg8 22.Qxh7#>|
|May-08-10|| ||Chessmensch: I find it disappointing to believe that the game was arranged. But, Capablanca took Steiner (a really strong player) apart so systematically and like a patzer that I'm inclined to believe it. Also, Fritz shows that while the end was inevitable, there were much better ways for black to play it.|
|May-08-10|| ||kevin86: Was this game far enough back to be a "HOLLYWOODLAND" ending?|
|Jul-21-10|| ||sevenseaman: From the White side the game looks far too perfect to be real. So I am inclined to believe the Steiner confession. But Steiner's timing of it was despicable. If he was to have any latter day scruples about this game's 'unmerited immortality', why was he he an actor (and then a silent bystander for years) in a weird script that perpetrated a sinful deceit on the game's aficionados? In my eyes he has gained little absolution through his unilateral admission of guilt, if it is only that.|
|Jan-12-11|| ||Llawdogg: It was a Hollywood game with a Hollywood ending.|
|Jan-13-11|| ||ughaibu: Sevenseaman: Reinfeld's book was originally published in 1942, so your charge against Steiner seems to be unwarranted.|
|Jan-13-11|| ||TheFocus: Why the controversy? These games with living pieces WERE pre-arranged. That is what Steiner was admitting.|
Better to keep silent on what you know nothing about.
|Jan-13-11|| ||BobCrisp: Another pre-arranged Capa exhibition: Capablanca vs J Baca Arus, 1912|
|Mar-04-11|| ||BobCrisp: Guess the finish (White to play) of the game Savielly Tartakower vs <A. Holte> played in Copenhagen in January, 1923 (source: March 1923 <Wiener Schachzeitung>):|
click for larger view
|Oct-20-11|| ||chancho: A picture of Capablanca and Steiner:
The picture shows Capa with the black pieces, but in the database, the games played between Steiner and Capa, has the Cuban with the white pieces in the three games that they played:
search "herman steiner v capablanca"
|Oct-20-11|| ||chancho: No clock, a casual game?|
|Oct-20-11|| ||TheFocus: <chancho> This was probably a publicity photo.|
|Oct-20-11|| ||chancho: <The Focus> Thanks.|
|Oct-20-11|| ||chancho: In Edward Winter's site the same picture is shown with the caption: |
<‘José Capablanca (left) meets with US chess master Herman Steiner (right) for an informal game of chess in Los Angeles, 1933.’>
|Jul-07-12|| ||Nicocobas: "in reality it was pre-arranged by Capablanca, who at that time refused to play any other way."
What in the world did Steiner mean?
That Capablanca wouldn't play unless the game was fixed in advance? How did he become champion? By fixing every game?
|Jul-07-12|| ||RookFile: Obviously, he means that Capa wouldn't play this one living game unless it was staged. Steiner certainly didn't mean to suggest that every game Capa played was prearranged. Only Bobby Fischer said things like this.|
|Jul-19-12|| ||LoveThatJoker: Guess-the-Move Final Score:
Capablanca vs H Steiner, 1933.
YOU ARE PLAYING THE ROLE OF CAPABLANCA.
Your score: 38 (par = 29)
|Jul-19-12|| ||gezafan: If you consider the situation a pre-arranged game doesn't seem such a terrible thing.|
For one thing it was played at Steiner's club which gave the club publicity. Steiner was benefiting from the arrangement.
It was a public exhibition so an 80 move game with a 40 move endgame would not arouse the interest of the
casual player. A short, attacking game with a king hunt would be of more interest to the casual player.
Steiner was a strong player. His poor play in this game lends support to his claim that the game was prearranged.
Pre-arranging an exhibition game is not the same as pre-arranging a tournament game and does not deserve the same moral condemnation.
Waiting until Capablanca passed to reveal that the game was pre-arranged shows respect for Capablanca, not disrespect.
|Mar-31-13|| ||Alien Math: Her news notes
<Played at the Hollywood Athletic Club and refereed by famous film director Cecil B. De Mille, in this particular living game, Capablanca mated Steiner in 25 moves.
Capablanca died in 1942, but Steiner went on from this particular loss to form the Steiner Chess Club, which was eventually renamed the Hollywood Chess Group, which had a lot of famous guests, like Humphrey Bogart, Lauren Bacall, Charles Boyer, and José Ferrer. Steiner wrote a chess column for the Times until his death in 1955.> http://laist.com/2013/03/30/living_...
|Apr-08-13|| ||bamonson: RESOLVED: GAME A FAKE
Sorry to disappoint all the Capa purists out there who think he would never agree to a prearranged game, but you'd be wrong. This game was in fact prearranged. It's certainly not a slam against Capa to bring light on this fact, it's just reality.
This was not a practice employed only by Capablanca at this time, it was pretty standard. These 'living' games were meant to be entertainment to wow the crowd. The last thing you'd want is two guys battling through a four hour, 60-move game, and boring the crowd to death, which is why the game Morphy-Duke of Brunswick was so often used in these events. But obviously Capa isn't going to 'plagiarize' Morphy, so...
On the other hand, if you'd like a bigger question about what Capa was willing to accept, just look at the 'drawn game' from a 1933 simul he played against Mary Bain (the future U.S. Women's champion) during the same time he was in Hollywood. Capablanca actually hung a piece after about 12 moves and promptly resigned, but Bain offered him a draw instead, which he actually accepted! How disingenuous is that?!
For many years I have been working on Herman Steiner's biography. I have his own records on this matter, including several photos. One photo, in fact (with Cecil B. deMille looking on: he was master of ceremonies for this event), shows Capa and Herman playing this EXACT SAME Four Knights variation, but with <STEINER> playing the WHITE PIECES!
Clearly, they were in the process of 'crafting the brilliancy.' Ironically, Steiner--a brilliant tactician--likely contributed greatly to the aesthetic beauty of the final combination, knowing in the end he would have to play the fool. Well, it's Capablanca, so there would have been no question about who would take the winning side.
It's unfortunate that this game has been included in so many 'brilliancy' games anthologies, and presented as a real game.
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 5 OF 5 ·