< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 264 OF 264 ·
|Aug-13-15|| ||zanzibar: Well, guess I'll just save further comment here.|
|Aug-13-15|| ||Sally Simpson: There is the Morphy Gambit which was first played by him in;|
J Schulten vs Morphy, 1857
The key move being 6.e4-e3.
click for larger view
It's still being played today if White players happen to stray into this line.
Other than that I can not think of any Morphy innovation except the whole concept on how to open and play a game chess. Developing with a plan rather than developing hotch-potch and hopes something turns up.
As was mentioned earlier we cannot judge a player by the number of TN's he (or his backroom staff) has introduced.
|Aug-14-15|| ||zanzibar: Let's compare...
<Steinitz wrote in 1885: "It is a striking feature in Morphy's match play, that he shows greater knowledge of the openings than any of his opponents, but it is still more curious that he did not introduce a single innovation in the early part of the game.">
Paul Morphy (kibitz #6916)
<Edward Winter has these Steinitz quotes, taken from his <International Chess Magazine> [...]
July 1886, pages 204-205:
‘But when it is so freely asserted that Morphy’s style was all genius and inspiration throughout, while the play of modern masters is all book and study, I would take leave to answer frankly that just the very reverse can be proved in the only part of the game in which knowledge and study can be of much use and in which a test of the assertion can be applied, namely in the openings. For Morphy possessed the most profound book knowledge of any master of his time, and he never in his practice introduced a single novelty, whereas since his day the books have had to study the players.’>
One question, where did Steinitz exactly publish, in 1885, the first quoted section?
Or, in other words, where did Shibut find it?
|Aug-14-15|| ||zanzibar: OK, I guess Shibut also used Steinitz's writings from the <ICM (1885)>.|
These issues are difficult to find online.
However, I do see quite a bit of material from these issues being discussed in
<The Steinitz Papers: Letters and Documents of the First World Chess Champion
By William Steinitz>
in particular, from <ICM July 1885 p209-210>:
<the question of the so-called Reichhelm Muzio and the Morphy-Evans has been definitely settled in my favor>
So, Steinitz may have a stake in the matter, and might be down-graded Morphy's opening innovations (if any did indeed exist) to bolster his own claims.
And can we trace back the Lasa excerpt that Steinitz alludes to?
|Aug-14-15|| ||saturn2: @Sally Simpson: Developing with a plan rather than developing hotch-potch and hopes something turns up.|
That is a very good point describing Morphys style. I am not aware if any of his predecessors had this strive for activity. Looking at Morphys games one gets the sensation every move in the opening has a meaning beyond mere development.
As I dont believe too much in miracles I would say this was the result of intensive study of the openings which were known at his time and not so much a result of natural talent which rather helped him more in later stages of the game.
He had his own particular style. It is striking that this feature is displayed in the games he played as a 12 year old boy, during the days of his public success as well as in those he played privately in 1869.
|Aug-14-15|| ||Sally Simpson: Hi Zanzibar,
"...and might be down-graded Morphy's opening innovations (if any did indeed exist) to bolster his own claims."
We must recall that Steinitz was at one time under the Morphy spell, in fact his early style won him the nickname 'The Austrian Morphy'.
Peaking at this style Steinitz realised that without an unforced error then no matter how brilliant you were at playing combinations, with correct play you would not get a chance to display your skill.
Steinitz then set about laying the foundations for the modern game. To do this first he had to, as he had done with himself, debunk what he considered the Morphy myth.
|Aug-14-15|| ||keypusher: < saturn2: @Sally Simpson: Developing with a plan rather than developing hotch-potch and hopes something turns up.
That is a very good point describing Morphys style. I am not aware if any of his predecessors had this strive for activity. Looking at Morphys games one gets the sensation every move in the opening has a meaning beyond mere development.>|
I think Anderssen had that striving for activity (beyond development) to a degree.
Anderssen vs Szen, 1851
Of course Morphy would never play against a Sicilian that way. Possibly better example:
Anderssen vs Staunton, 1851
|Aug-15-15|| ||Sally Simpson: Hi Keypusher,
Anderssen was a brilliant player often using his tactical skill to get out of bad positions as well as crowning his better positions to produce some wonderful wins.
By coincidence I was looking at one of his casual games v Morphy a few weeks back.
Anderssen vs Morphy, 1858
Where he tried a 'swindle' on Morphy (added a post there.)
And many years ago when looking his at games I noticed he adopted what I call 'The Anderssen Knights' (we have the Harrwitz Bishops so why not the Anderssen Knights?)
click for larger view
I kept seeing this pattern pop up time and time again and although it's now a common set up in Lopez he appears to be the first to realise their strength in the 19th century.
You see chess quotes from famous players dotted all over this site, some contain valued words of wisdom. others food for thought and some are best forgotten But Anderssen's famous quote is one he played and lived by.
Attack! Always Attack!
|Aug-18-15|| ||WTHarvey: I posted 28 checkmate puzzles from the games of Paul Morphy @ http://wtharvey.com/morpm8.html What's the winning move ?|
|Aug-22-15|| ||nilanjanasm: A Paul Morphy game.
W - Paul Morphy
B - NN
|Aug-22-15|| ||jnpope: That would actually be this game:
Morphy - NN [C55]
1858 USA New Orleans
Blindfold Simultaneous (6 boards)
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nf6 4.d4 exd4 5.Ng5 d5 6.exd5 Nxd5 7.0-0 Be7 8.Nxf7 Kxf7 9.Qf3+ Ke6 10.Nc3 dxc3 11.Re1+ Ne5 12.Bf4 Bd6 13.Bxe5 Bxe5 14.Rxe5+ Kxe5 15.Re1+ Kd4 16.Bxd5 Rf8 17.Qd3+ Kc5 18.b4+ Kxb4 19.Qd4+ (# in 4) 1-0
source: Paul Morphy, Maróczy, 1909, pp113-114 (also as game 164 in Shibut)
|Aug-22-15|| ||jnpope: Which is also given on this site as:
Morphy vs NN, 1858
With a few altered moves...
|Aug-22-15|| ||nilanjanasm: Thanks. jnope. I could not even find any in chessgames. Com|
|Aug-22-15|| ||offramp: Why is his surname Morphy and not Murphy?|
|Aug-22-15|| ||MissScarlett: Lots of American immigrants changed their names; some groups more than others.|
|Aug-22-15|| ||Calli: The Morphy family claimed that the name was changed when part of the family (Captain Michael Murphy / Morphy) moved to Spain. His son and Paul's grandfather, Don Diego Morphy was the family member who immigrated to New Orleans from Spain circa 1800.|
|Aug-24-15|| ||saturn2: I would be interested in further details on Morphy's later years from which I only know some hints:
He liked to go for a walk, he chased some ladies, he read a lot, he had paranoia, he considered himself betrayed by a relative in land matters.
So did he get in touch with the ladies, which books did he read, and so on?|
|Aug-24-15|| ||diceman: <offramp:
Why is his surname Morphy and not Murphy?>
...sounds like he Morphed.
|Aug-24-15|| ||offramp: <saturn2>, this may sound stupid, but I cannot answer your question, but don't believe anything that is said about PC Morphy being non-PC. There's a huge amount of rubbish said about him.|
|Aug-24-15|| ||wrap99: <saturn2> In one of Edward Lasker's books (maybe The Adventure of Chess) he says that his mother-in-law would see him on the streets of New Orleans when she was a young girl -- I assume Lasker's mother-in-law was born in the 1860s or before. (His wife passed away early in their marriage, I think -- Lasker had a relationship with the much younger female player Mona Karff whom I believe I saw at LA events in the 1970s or 1980s.)|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 264 OF 264 ·