|Jul-26-03|| ||kapinov: It is interesting, his record against one of the strongest players of his time. Louis Eichborn was either a forgotten world champion or one of Anderssen's local sparring partners where these game scores were his only wins (with the hundreds upon hundreds of lost game scores somehow "misplaced"). |
|Aug-27-03|| ||jaime gallegos: Breslaw was at that time a German city on the Eastern Prusia, now called Wroclaw on Polony. It was an important city with good chess players. Anderssen was not invencible and players like Eichborn were not defeated by him. The chess archeologists must find other games or players like him ! |
|Aug-27-03|| ||ughaibu: Eichborn's games were found among his papers after he died, he had only kept his wins and some draws. There's no reason to suppose he had an overall plus score against Anderssen. |
|Apr-24-05|| ||chessgames.com: Recently we added some more of Eichborn's games, mostly wins over Andersson. We're still picking through them for errors and duplications.|
So who is this Eichborn, who defeated one of the strongest players of that era with a score you would expect from an exhibition against amateurs? Some interesting information and ideas regarding Eichborn can be found here http://snow.prohosting.com/~batgrrl...
<According to the book "Adolf Anderssen" by Hermann von Gottschall the games-scores of the games between Anderssen and Louis Eichborn (who died on May 9 1882, in Breslau) were found in a notebook of the latter. And he naturally only wrote down the wins over his great opponent. That's why (almost) only wins by Eichborn are known!>
|Aug-08-05|| ||offramp: <chessgames.com> Is it because his games have just been updated that his overall score is given currently as '+0 -0 =0 (0.0%)'?|
|Aug-08-05|| ||sneaky pete: I'm not a mathematician, a lawyer or a philosopher, but wouldn't +0 -0 =0 be 50.0% score?|
|Aug-08-05|| ||Ziggurat: Well, to be nit-picky, the winning percentage is undefined, since the formula leads to the expression "0 divided by 0".|
<Overall winning percentage = (wins+draws/2) / total games>
|Aug-08-05|| ||weary willy: Presumably 0/0/0 because all games are "casual"|
|Feb-07-06|| ||ath: I've just come across a note about Louis Eichborn published in Deutsche Schachzeitung v. 48, p. 65-73 (March 1893) with some more information. (This is the first mention of the Eichborn notebook I have found so far.)|
The notebook covered the period from October 1850 to July 1861 and contained numerous endgames (he is said to have been strong endgame player) as well as around 500 game scores from his play, occasionally with notes. The opponents were Breslau players: Eliason and Friedländer (approx. 100 games each), then Anderssen, then Sadebeck and Promnitz (each ~40), Mannheimer and von Gottschall (~30), Ditterberner, Bruck, Hillel, Ravenstein, Schück (~12-25), and finally a few games with players such as von der Lasa and Jenay.
I'll try to upload the last two -- the only other non-Anderssen score given is against Dr. Eliason.
|Apr-02-06|| ||lentil: to me, these all look like 'what if...' games. the 1885 version of computer analysis...|
|Dec-28-06|| ||Karpova: He is considered to be the greatest player of all times according to this site.
Though his games were all casual and he was the only source for the gamescores.|
|Dec-28-06|| ||Karpova: 431. Alekhine (2636 in 1928)
And for those ones looking for Capablanca - he's on place 582 (rating of 2612 in 1921)
734. Max Euwe (2605 in 1936)
1714. Emanuel Lasker (2543 in 1907)
341. Wilhelm Steinitz (2484 in 1882)
and those were just some Wolrdchampions.
Akiba Rubinstein is on place 1395 with 2559 in 1918 (Silvio Danailov is much hiher ranked - place 1227)
3010. Paul Morphy (2496 in 1858)
9004. Adolf Anderssen (2371 in 1862)
19562. Philidor (2242 in 1790)
and the worst player ever is Hans Spronk (place 47366 with a rating of 263 in 1998)
They even list cheater Vladimir Afromeev (place 915 with 2591 rating in 2002)
|Oct-08-07|| ||voorlandt: <ath> It would be great if you could post some more games of Louis Eichborn. How many do you have?|
|Dec-02-07|| ||ath: <voorlandt> I have only about half-a-dozen games over and above what is available here already, but as they're all against totally unknown players, I rather doubt they merit inclusion here. Lasa is well known, and Jenay at least half-known: that's why I submitted them.|
|Nov-05-08|| ||amadeus: From Edward Winter (Chessnotes 3422 & 3427):
<As regards other games involving Eichborn, 15 or so were published by Deutsche Schachzeitung during his lifetime, and a couple of them are given below.
Louis Eichborn – Hillel
Breslau, January 1860
King’s Gambit Declined
1 e4 e5 2 f4 Bc5 3 Nf3 d6 4 c3 Bg4 5 Be2 Bxf3 6 Bxf3 Nc6 7 b4 Bb6 8 b5 Na5 9 d4 exd4 10 cxd4 Qf6 11 Be3 Nc4 12 Ke2 Nxe3 13 Kxe3 Ne7 14 Nc3 g5 15 fxg5 Qxg5+ 16 Kd3 c6 17 bxc6 Nxc6 18 Nd5 Bxd4 19 Rc1 Bb6 20 Nxb6 axb6 21 a4 b5 22 axb5 Qxb5+ 23 Ke3 Qb6+ 24 Kf4 Ne5 25 g4 Ra3 26 Rf1 Qe3+ 27 Kg3 Kd7 28 Qd5 Rb3 29 Rcd1 Rd3 30 Qxb7+ Ke6 31 Rxd3 Qxd3 32 Qd5+ Qxd5 33 exd5+ Ke7 34 h4 Rg8 35 Be2 Nxg4 36 Bxg4 h5 37 Rf4 Rxg4+ 38 Rxg4 hxg4 39 Kxg4 Kf6 40 h5 and wins.
Source: Deutsche Schachzeitung, January 1861, page 40.
Louis Eichborn – Nosa
Venue?, 22 November 1860
Queen’s Fianchetto Defence
1 e4 b6 2 d4 Bb7 3 Bd3 e6 4 Nf3 Ne7 5 c4 Ng6 6 a3 Be7 7 Nc3 O-O 8 Qc2 f6 9 g4 e5 10 Be3 c6 11 O-O-O a6 12 h4 b5 13 h5 Nf4 14 Bf1 b4 15 axb4 Bxb4 16 dxe5 fxe5 17 Nxe5 Qe7 18 c5 Qxe5 19 Qb3+ Kh8 20 Qxb4 Bc8 21 h6 Ne6 22 hxg7+ Nxg7 23 Rd6 Rf6 24 f4 Qe7 25 Rd2 a5 26 Qa3 Ba6 27 Rdh2 Bxf1 28 Rxh7+ Kg8 29 Rh8+ Kf7 30 Rxf1 Qe6
(At this point another player, Friedländer, took over the white pieces)
31 g5 Qc4 32 Re1 Re6 33 f5 Rxe4 34 g6+ Kf6 35 Bg5+ Kxg5 36 Rxe4 Qf1+ 37 Nd1 Nxf5 38 g7 Nxg7 39 Qg3+ Kf5 40 Qg4+ Kf6 41 Rf8 mate.
Source: Deutsche Schachzeitung, May 1866, pages 145-146.
Nosa – Louis Eichborn
Venue?, 10 September 1863
1 e4 e5 2 Nf3 Nc6 3 Bc4 Bc5 4 c3 Nf6 5 O-O Qe7 6 d4 Bb6 7 d5 Nb8 8 Qd3 d6 9 Be3 O-O 10 Nbd2 h6 11 Bxb6 axb6 12 h3 Nh7 13 Nh2 f5 14 f3 f4 15 Ng4 Qg5 16 Nf2 Rf6 17 Kh1 Rg6 18 Rg1 Qh4 19 Qe2 Nf6 20 Nf1 Nh5 21 Qd2 Nd7 22 Ng4 Ng3+ 23 Nxg3 fxg3 24 Bf1 Nf8 25 Ne3 Rf6 26 a3 Ng6 27 Nf5 Rxf5 28 exf5 Bxf5 29 Re1 Rf8 30 Re4 Bxe4 31 fxe4 Rf2 32 Qd1 Qxh3+ 33 gxh3 Rh2 mate.
Source: Deutsche Schachzeitung, June 1866, page 173.
Eliason – Louis Eichborn
Breslau, 10 August 1859
Two Knights’ Defence
1 e4 e5 2 Nf3 Nc6 3 Bc4 Nf6 4 Ng5 d5 5 exd5 Na5 6 Bb5+ c6 7 dxc6 bxc6 8 Ba4 h6 9 Nf3 e4 10 Ne5 Qd4 11 Bxc6+ Nxc6 12 Nxc6 Qc5 13 Nxa7 Qxa7
(A rare instance of a player’s queen’s-side pawns having all gone by move 13)
14 O-O Bc5 15 Qe1 O-O 16 Nc3 Ba6 17 Ne2 Qd7 18 h3 Nh5 19 Kh2 Qb5 20 d3 exd3 21 Nc3 Qb8+ 22 Kh1 dxc2 23 Rg1 Bxf2 24 Qxf2 Ng3+ 25 Kh2 Nf1+ 26 Kh1 Qh2 mate.
Source: Deutsche Schachzeitung (March 1893, pages 65-73)>
|Mar-03-13|| ||IndigoViolet: <With Anderssen and Steinitz the story is much different. I remember I once lent a brand-new copy of Adolf Anderssen, by Dr Hermann von Gottschall, to him. Some weeks or months later he returned it, and I had good reason to believe he had worked over every game and note in it – all 751 games in the main section, plus 80 problems by Anderssen in another section. And later on Bobby and I played over 36 games that Anderssen played during 1851 to 1859 in Breslau with Louis Eichborn, a banker and good friend of chess. Much to our great glee we found that Anderssen lost them all.>|
|Nov-16-14|| ||Ke2: His score is 29-2 vs Anderssen, which would make him better than Morphy... or not, there are probably at least 100 or 300 he lost.|
|Feb-06-17|| ||The Kings Domain: Intriguing. Was he really better than Anderssen? He was a predecessor to Kolisch.|
Chessgames can certainly write a better bio on this interesting personality.
|Feb-06-17|| ||offramp: One way of getting an idea of his playing strength is for User: Xeroxx to go through his games.
<Xeroxx> is the one who posts stats such as at Staunton vs Cochrane, 1841 |
<Howard Staunton (0)
25 Average centipawn loss
John Cochrane (0)
25 Average centipawn loss>
I think it is him, anyway.
|Feb-08-17|| ||An Englishman: Good Evening: Pity that Mr. Eichborn didn't preserve all of his games vs. Anderssen. He probably lost hundreds if not thousands of times, but the fact that he won these proves he must have played at a rather high level--high enough that A. A. must have unleashed some brilliancies that have now gone lost.|