| Sep-04-04 |
| offramp: Is this the full score? Did Tarrasch lose on time? |
 |
| Sep-04-04 |
| offramp: It seems he did:
<Pillsbury's stunning victory at Hastings was perhaps the greatest upset in chess history, marred only by his victory by forfeit over Bardeleben in the 17th round after the latter had made a great early run by winning six and drawing three of his first nine games, in-cluding a defeat of Lasker, before folding up and finishing outside of the prize list. The other blemish was Tarrasch's loss to Mason in the 1st round by overstepping the time limit when he had an overwhelming position. He had left his seat to stroll around the room assuming that he had made the requisite number of moves. (He had written his name on the line indicated for his first move!?) A strong run thereafter, including a win over Lasker, could earn him no better than 4th prize.> |
|
| Sep-04-04 |
| sneaky pete: <offramp> He did. The game was played in round 1. "In this position Dr.Tarrasch, under the impression that he had made his 30th move already, exceeded his time, and the game was claimed by Mason." Teichmann in the tournament book, who then argues that T. "on the merits of the position" should have won. "Mr.Mason drew his opponent's attention to his clock more than once, and informed him that he had only made twenty-nine moves; but unfortunately the doctor had written his name at move one, and was sure he had made thirty moves" (editor Cheshire). When Dr.Tarrasch was sure of something, he was d@#$%d sure. |
|
Sep-04-04
 |
| iron maiden: <offramp> This game wasn't really a "blemish," since Tarrasch finished 2.5 points behind Pillsbury anyway. Even a win in this game would not have improved his finishing position, since Lasker, in third place, was 1.5 points ahead of Tarrasch. |
|
Sep-04-04
 |
| tamar: <sneaky pete> <When Dr.Tarrasch was sure of something, he was d@#$%d sure.> That is sadly true. This is the only game he ever lost to Mason +5-1=2, and he was probably casually strolling around evaluating his true rivals when the claim went against him. How would you rate the tournament book? I am thinking of ordering it. |
|
| Sep-04-04 |
| akiba82: Get the tournament book by Colin Crouch and Kean Haines. IM Crouch, while not a great over the board player, is a really fine annotator. He is better, in my view, than many famous grandmasters in this regard. |
|
Sep-05-04
 |
| acirce: <akiba82> Have you read Crouch's <How to Defend in Chess> and if so what do you think? |
|
| Sep-07-04 |
| akiba82: <acirce> I do have Crouch's How to Defend in Chess and I highly recommend it. |
|
Sep-08-04
|
| acirce: Thanks. I have been thinking about buying it since reading a review by Watson (I think) and I probably will sooner or later. |
|
| Sep-08-04 |
| Minor Piece Activity: <acirce>
I can attest to the quality of Attacking Technique by Crouch, so I think How To Defend in Chess should be pretty good too. My one cent. =D |
|
Sep-08-04
|
| acirce: Thank you too! Then maybe I should get the first-mentioned book too, but then again I already know how to attack. ;) |
|
Jan-11-05
 |
| keypusher: I have the Pickard reprint of the 1895 tournament book, annotated by the players with a description of the course of the tournament and capsule bios of the participants. It's a really fascinating window into how they thought back then. That said, the quality of the annotations varies widely. Tarrasch's are very good and thorough, as you might expect, while Pillsbury's notes look like he spent about 5 minutes on each game. So I wouldn't be surprised if the annotations in Crouch's book are better. |
|
Aug-02-05
 |
| Benzol: "Mr Mason drew his opponent's attention to his clock more than once, and informed him that he had only made twenty-nine moves; but unfortunately the doctor had written his name at move one, and was sure he had made thirty moves". - Cheshire. |
|
Aug-02-05
 |
| euripides: You mean writing your name on the scoresheet doesn't count as a move ? Even with a doctorate ? they must be good for something ... |
|
Nov-24-07
 |
| Richard Taylor: <Benzol> in my book "Cabbage Heads and Chess Kings" by Bruce Hayden, Mason is Bernstein's favourite player for (at least) two brilliant games he played - and I can believe he pointed the time situation out as he was known as "Gentleman Jim". |
|
Annotations by 
