|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 3 OF 3 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
Dec-02-24
 | | jnpope: <stone free or die: I really prefer the name of the opening used by the contemporaneous press -> Me too. So it's agreed that it is the <Irish Gambit>! https://books.google.com/books?id=O... |
|
| Dec-02-24 | | stone free or die: Oh you wicked, wicked man!
Time for another vote (after I finish the various side alleys I'm wandering). * * * * *
Amos Burn has a curious dearth, or gap, of games between 1889 and 1895 for some reason. Anyone know why? I found at least one game during this period, with Sheriff Spens as the opponent. Might be worth adding: https://books.google.com/books?id=j... I found it in a German source, but the link is to a better known English language periodical. |
|
Dec-02-24
 | | FSR: <stone free or die> Do you have Richard Forster's biography of Burn? If not, I can look at it and see if he addresses that. |
|
Dec-02-24
| | FSR: <stone free or die> How can it be the Razzle-Dazzle Defense? White is the one who's razzle-dazzling, with 3.Nxe5(??). Like <jnpope>, I like Irish Gambit - but as a Chicagoan (more or less), Chicago Gambit also has its appeal to me. |
|
Dec-02-24
 | | fredthebear: As I was trying to say...
No such free thing as <The Razzle-Dazzle Defense> that I know of. Sometimes 3.Nxe5? is referred to as the Irish Gambit, Chicago Gambit (read FSR's disclaimer), or Razzle Dazzle GAMBIT. White instigates the gambit, not the Black defender. It is not unusual for that spontaneous combustion to make dubious statements, multiple posts. Maybe this will help, but I doubt it: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vz1... A reminder that too much coffee can affect your spelling: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-9Z... It seems that the Bistro remains in good hands with the full-time volunteer pope googling his trade. |
|
| Dec-02-24 | | stone free or die: <FSR> yes, of course I meant Gambit. And no, I don't have Forster - would appreciate if you could have a look. * * * *
Fred (the smelly bear Fred, and not Frederick), please do us all a favor and go soak your head in a honey jar. |
|
| Dec-02-24 | | stone free or die: (Yes, I know it should be called a Gambit, but let's face it, White's unsound play is almost certain to end up playing defense) |
|
Dec-02-24
| | fredthebear: Let's face it, MORE spontaneous combustion full of excusez as predicted above. Take your own advice sfod, and shut up before you SCREW UP AGAIN. I propose that rockhead be banned from the Bistro for the rest of the month for lack of accuracy and attention to obvious detail. We just don't need such glaring z mistakes. P.S. the fast response indicates that z didn't bother to get educated watching the dazzling video links so graciously provided. We try to help inform, but the opportunity to gain knowledge is ignored over the need for hollow insults from the mistake maker. |
|
| Dec-02-24 | | stone free or die: drip, drip, drip by the drip, drip, drip
Give it up putz. |
|
| Dec-02-24 | | stone free or die: More scrubbing might be needed in the thread here. |
|
Dec-02-24
 | | perfidious: <FSR: <stone free or die> How can it be the Razzle-Dazzle Defense?> Ship me a razzle-dazzle pie.
Good stuff. |
|
| Dec-03-24 | | stone free or die: This is hilarious (no, not the stalker, but rather)... <During a simultaneous production in Chicago, the comical incident occurred that Pillsbury lost the Schultze Gambit (1. e2-e4, e7-e5 2. Ng1-f3, Nb8-c6 3. Nf3 X 05) in defense. The Americans call the Schultze Gambit the Razzle Dazzle Gambit. Perhaps the chess world will also learn at the next opportunity what the even more powerful Schultze-Müller Gambit (1. e2-e4. e7-e5 2. Ng1-f3, Nb8-c6 3. Nb1-c3, Ng8-f6 4. Nf3 x e5) is called in good American.> https://books.google.com/books?pg=P... There's yet another contender for the opening gambit (I'm practising!) - <The Schultze Gambit> Poor Sergeant Schultze.
. |
|
| Dec-03-24 | | stone free or die: Again, my preference is for <Razzle Dazzle Gambit>. That's what more of the contemporaneous press called it in their coverage of the Pillsbury game. And, researching a bit, my suspicion that the <Irish Gambit> is actually a racial insult seems to be confirmed: https://books.google.com/books?id=O... This is the earliest usage of the <Irish Gambit> that I've encountered, in the July 16th 1887 issue of the <Columbia Chess Chronicle>, which has an entire lead feature article on the <Irish Gambit>. I'll cut to the chase - it was invented by <Dennis O'Flaherty>, who gave up poker after raising the table with a flush - i.e. three Clubs and two Spades. Need I say more?
All we need do next is find out the origin of the <Chicago Gambit>. |
|
Dec-03-24
| | perfidious: Sounds as though <Razzle Dazzle Gambit> is quite reasonable, then. |
|
| Dec-03-24 | | stone free or die: Well, I'd still like to find the first usage of the <Chicago Gambit> (mentioned back in the 1899 <ACM> already, along with <Irish and Razzle-Dazzle Gambit>). |
|
Dec-03-24
| | jnpope: When was <Schultze Gambit> first used? The "Müller and Schultze Gambit" is mentioned as far back as 1877, but that applies to a Four Knights variation (so <CG>'s use of that name to this game is apparently just wrong). |
|
| Dec-03-24 | | stone free or die: I think I saw the "Mueller and Schultze" variation mentioned as separate from the "Schultze" one, but I might be mistaken. But there's a possibility that Schultze got his name attached to two different gambits. . |
|
Dec-03-24
| | jnpope: https://books.google.com/books?id=H... Here's the 1877 mention of the Four Knights <Müller and Schultze Gambit>. I suspect Schultze first played 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Nxe5 and Müller just delayed the same idea in the Four Knights hence the Müller‐Schultze naming. The 1877 article pins it as occurring in Leipsic, so it should be the Leipzig Gambit over Chicago Gambit? I'd still like to see the first use of "Schultze Gambit" in print. As your first source seems to make the distinction between the Schultze Gambit and the Schultze-Müller Gambit. https://books.google.com/books?pg=P... |
|
| Dec-03-24 | | stone free or die: FWIW - I've yet to find any stand-alone usage of <Chicago Gambit>, so no idea how that name came about. |
|
| Dec-04-24 | | Chessist: Deutsche Schachzeitung 1875, page 334:
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Nxe5 Gambit Müller
1.e4 e5 2.Sf3 Sc6 3.Sc3 Sf6 4.Sxe5 Gambit Müller und Schultze. |
|
Dec-04-24
| | jnpope: Nice find of that Tendering vs Bothe game. |
|
| Dec-05-24 | | Chessist: German Wikipedia:
https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hallo... |
|
| Dec-05-24 | | Cassandro: Seeing this game I can't help marvel at the fact that illustrious chess personalities as Bobby Fischer and <Harrylime> consider Pillsbury as one of the greatest players ever. |
|
| Dec-05-24 | | Chessist: Please calm down. It's just a simultaneous game. |
|
| Dec-06-24 | | stone free or die: From <Chessist>'s wiki page (de): <The name Halloween Gambit comes from the German computer scientist Steffen A. Jakob, who had the chess program Crafty play several thousand games under the nickname “Brause” with this opening in the Internet Chess Club .> I couldn't find any mention of the name <Halloween Gambit> in my searches of the literature (pre-2000), including Proquest. Jakob dates it from 1996, maybe not the name, but that's when he began to examine the gambit: <This page contains some - relatively unsorted and sometimes not quite current - information about the Halloween attack in the Four Knight Game. I began to examine this wild gambit 1996 - inspired by a short article in the Randspringer.> https://www.jakob.at/steffen/hallow... Now we need the <Randspringer> article. . |
|
 |
|
|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 3 OF 3 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
Kibitzing
sac: 3.Nxe5