< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 5 OF 5 ·
|Nov-24-14|| ||zanzibar: <He clearly enjoyed playing the role of "upright German man" who wanted the "German battle chess" gain worldwide recognition and championed especially for the "purity" of the German language (a goal that he pursued the way up to his death - see, eg, his translation of the biography of David Bronstein of Roman Toran in 1962 from Spanish into German).>|
|Nov-24-14|| ||zanzibar: From the above ref, pictures of Eliskases' grave:
<"Estaras siempre en el corazon de tu esposa, tu hijo e hija">
<"Always'll be in the heart of your wife, your son and daughter">
|Nov-24-14|| ||zanzibar: One last note - the <soloscacchi> site is also in Italian:|
It has a picture of Eliskases and Alekhine:
Maybe the first one is too, I just fed it straight to Google translate.
|Nov-26-14|| ||Fusilli: <zanzibar> <A native Spanish speaker will have to help.> Actually, as you noted in your later post, the site is in Italian. I suspect Google Translate will be better to translate to Spanish than to English, because Spanish and Italian are closer to each other than Italian and English. And I can understand some Italian. For example, it says he got married in 1954 to Maria Esther after obtaining Argentine citizen. They had a son together.|
Is there a particular fact or event you would like me to check by using the Italian-to-Spanish translation? The article is rather long... :)
|Nov-26-14|| ||Fusilli: <zanzibar> BTW, the tomb stone clearly refers to a son and a daughter, but both the Italian site and one of sites in Portuguese you quoted earlier (they were in Portuguese, not Spanish) mention a son and no daughter. I wonder if the daughter on the tomb stone inscription is a daughter in law...|
|Nov-26-14|| ||Fusilli: His Wikipedia entry also mentions a son and no daughter.|
|Nov-26-14|| ||zanzibar: Hi <Fusilli>, yes, I was going quickly through and should have slowed down to double-check the languages.|
Thanks for looking in, and offering to help. But if you have to use Google translator then there's no reason I can't as well.
The main idea was to provide pointers for additional information for interested readers, and eventually maybe, an improved biography.
OK, thanks again.
|Nov-27-14|| ||Fusilli: <zanzibar> oh no, thank *you*! Your attention to Eliskases made me go on a binge of Eliskases games this evening. What a terrific player he was!|
|Dec-15-14|| ||Abdel Irada: <MissScarlett: <I suspect he had some either Jewish or Slavic ancestry...>|
Transylvanian would be my guess. He looked like Bela Lugosi's brother.>
By this reasoning, he might have been Egyptian. He was a dead ringer for Hosni Mubarak.
|Dec-28-14|| ||diagonal: Obituary with selection of tournaments and games, published 1997 in the <Wiener Zeitung> (in german language): <http://schach.wienerzeitung.at/Defa...>|
|Jan-21-15|| ||zanzibar: I may have (or somebody else might have) posted this before, but it's good enough for a repeat:|
<Alekhine + Siamese cat -- Eliskases>
|Jan-21-15|| ||zanzibar: This site also notes the omission of Eliskases as analyst for Euwe in his first match with Alekhine:|
The followign site duplicates my earlier Spanish ref on this, but is signed by an author - Raśl Grosso
|Feb-18-15|| ||Andrijadj: Eliskases probably makes top 5 endgame players of all times. Together with Capablanca, Fischer, Karpov and Carlsen.|
|Feb-18-15|| ||keypusher: <Andrijadj: Eliskases probably makes top 5 endgame players of all times. Together with Capablanca, Fischer, Karpov and Carlsen.>|
Akiba Rubinstein just crawled out of the grave and brained you with a rook. Not to mention Lasker, Smyslov, Korchnoi, Kramnik...the latter two aren't even dead.
All such lists are pointless anyway. Here, I'll quote myself.
Jose Raul Capablanca
<I can never take these sorts of lists seriously, because there are no common criteria.
Endgames are even more cumulative than other aspects of chess; every great endgame player owes a debt to his predecessors. Assuming that, say, Kramnik makes fewer endgame errors than Rubinstein, how do we judge between the two?
Also, do we make an adjustment for players before 1990 because they had adjournments to help them analyze?
Selection bias is an even bigger problem in these kind of lists than it usually is. Anyone who has an endgame book has seen endings by Lasker and Capablanca, but how much do most of us know about the endgames of players in the past 20 years, or the past 50? This endgame blew me away when I saw it unfold (Topalov vs Kasimdzhanov, 2005) it seemed equal or better than any classic. But for all I know Topalov, Anand, Kramnik etc. have 50 endgames each that good.
Finally, Morphy? I can think of two good endgames he played, against Harrwitz. If that is enough to get him on the all-time list, then we are just wasting our time.>
|Feb-18-15|| ||keypusher: Stepping down from the WC and near WCs...why is Eliskases on your list and not Ulf Andersson?|
|Feb-19-15|| ||Andrijadj: I am a bit biased towards Eliskases probably-my first chess trainer, when I was a kid, was a big fan of his play because he knew him personally (the trainer is now 80+ if he is alive) and always told us kids that Eliskases' endgames were a model of correct endgame play. Therefore I analysed a lot of his games when I was young and a lot of it stuck. Eliskazes was really brilliant endgame player. Of course, all the people you mentioned were/are too. I mean, you cannot become a WC or a WC challenger without comprehensive endgame mastery. But Eliskases had an uncanny ability to conjure wins in endgames out of nothing and draws out of completely lost positions (I am not referring just to famous game vs Keres). In addition, he was commended by his peers (that included Rubinstein, Lasker, Capablanca, Botvinnik, Flohr...) precisely for his endgame play, as well as for ability to reach&switch to favourable endgame from middlegame. That is why I put him up there.|
Other players you mentioned-of course, all of them were/are great endgame players. I would not put Smyslov and Kramnik there though-I think they are more of an universal positional players than endgame players. Opening preparation plays a great role with Kramnik too-he excells in endgames that he analyses out of openings, but he is not into deliberately switching into endgames in order to outplay opponent there, like Carlsen or Karpov do or like Eliskases or Capablanca did. That is why I put him there-of course, it is valid only for endgame play-Kramnik or Smyslov are overall better players than Eliskases, of course.
Korchnoi wasn't that famous for endgame mastery, was he? Complicated middlegames and tenacious defending were his forte. Same goes for Lasker- As for Ulf Andersson, I must admit I don't know much about the guy. I never studied his games that much. I know he made lots of draws and beat Karpov with a hedgehog and that's it, really.
|Feb-19-15|| ||keypusher: <Andrijadj> Thank you for that very interesting reply! I think if you look into it you will find that many rate Korchnoi and Lasker as among the greatest at the endgame, and that Andersson played many beautiful endings. I see I need to learn more about Eliskases.|
|Mar-06-15|| ||Dr.Vulcan: Eliskases, when he had lived in Porto Alegre, state of Rio Grande do Sul (the same state where Mecking was born) - Brasil, told to my old friends, that his name came from the Basque Language (or Basque Tongue) of the Basque Country, at the north of Spain, from where came his ancestry to Tyrol (state) of Austria.This Basque Language is a derivation, like the Hungarian, of the old Celtic Language.|
|Mar-18-15|| ||offramp: One of 4 players who beat both Capablanca and Fischer.|
|Mar-27-15|| ||MissScarlett: From Wikipedia entry:
<However, Eliskases' defection to South America was badly timed, as documentary evidence later showed that the Nazi regime had scheduled him a 1941 match with the World Champion, but due to circumstances, had subsequently abandoned the idea.>
This relies on a <NIC> article:
<One cannot simply dismiss these statements as an attempt by Alekhine to please the Nazi regime, since several documents prove that as early as 1939 the plan of staging a world championship match between Alekhine and Eliskases in 1941 was being entertained by German chess circles.>
Anyone know anything about these documents? It'd also be interesting to learn how 'German chess circles' reacted to Eliskases and the other German players' decision to remain in South America. Presumably, their success in the Olympiad was celebrated in the media, but it can't exactly have gone unnoticed when none of the players took part in the 1940 German championship or other events. Did German chess magazines scrupulously avoid any politically sensitive topics?
Something else I didn't know: after the Olympiad, Capablanca was all set to employ Eliskases as a second for a return match with Alekhine:
|Feb-15-16|| ||TheFocus: Happy birthday, GM Erich Eliskases.|
|Apr-06-16|| ||john barleycorn: "Die besten Anmerkungen macht Eliskases"
(Eliskases makes the best annotations)
Dr. Em. Lasker said to Kmoch.
Kmoch also mentions that Alekhine chose Eliskases as his second for the 1937 rematch with Euwe. The grateful Alekhine winning back the title awarded a golden cigarette case to Eliskases.
Kmoch who was Alekhine's second in the 1934 match with Bogolyubov received a goulash in the "Cafe Vaterland" from the equally grateful Alekhine.
|Apr-06-16|| ||diagonal: thanks!
btw: in the cg. bio are two typos - 2nd at Wijk aan Zee, 1966 is wrong, of course Erich Eliskases was <2nd at Beverwijk (Hoogovens), 1959> behind Fridrik Olafsson
|Mar-17-17|| ||ughaibu: I guess the other three are Euwe, Keres and Reshevsky(?)|
|Mar-17-17|| ||MissScarlett: <Bogolyubov received a goulash in the "Cafe Vaterland">|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 5 OF 5 ·