< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2 OF 2 ·
|Jul-18-05|| ||Calli: <sneaky pete> Loman had win against Capablanca but it was a simul in London 1913. Don't what an experienced master was doing at a simul.|
|Jul-18-05|| ||sneaky pete: Thank you <aw1988> and <calli>. I only looked in this database when I read <offramp>s comment, I should have consulted Caparros' book which has the game. Loman, despite winning the Dutch championhip a year before, wasn't really considered a master, I believe, rather an expert. His professional career constisted of playing for money against patzers in a London coffeehouse (he lived in Hampstead) and conducting a chess column in the Dutch weekly <De Amsterdammmer>.|
He wrote about this simul in his October 19, 1913, column. All his columns can be found on http://www.groene.nl/ in the historic archive, but the link http://18.104.22.168/Exe/ZyNET.exe... to this column unfortunately doesn't open,
username and password are required.
The exhibition was held in the Cityclub "last Monday" (10/13/1913) with Lasker and Blackburne among the interested public. Capablanca's result was +18 -7 =3, but against the 9 experts or 1st class players only +3 (Saunders, Muller, Davidson), -5 (Cole, Wainwright, P.W. Sergeant, Walker, Loman), =1 (Michell).
|Jul-18-05|| ||Calli: <sneaky pete> Thanks for the information and translation. |
Capablanca also did similarly on his first London simul 15 Nov 1911 scoring 16+ 9- 3=. "The Unknown Capablanca" says that his "poor score was partly due to his habit of arriving at the last moment, giving himself no time for rest. Travelling from the continent during the day he played the same evening." Then they quote a contemporary source that "After one and a half hours play Capablanca was overcome by sudden lassitude, and then some indifferent moves occurred in those games he subsequently lost. This passed quickly, and he felt quite fresh again"
The 1913 London CC simul was his first in Europe on that tour and his result probably suffered similarly.
|Oct-17-08|| ||Karpova: Information on Rudolf Johannes Loman :
C.N. 4879 includes the following information: <1891 census: Rudolph [sic] J. Loman, age 29. Born in Amsterdam, Holland. Address: 49 Deronda Road (Lambeth), London. Occupation: teacher of music. Married with Hillegonda Loman (age 28, born in Groningen, Holland). Child: Rudolph Loman (son, age 2). Other household members: Eliya Thurston (age 21), general servant (domestic).>
There's also a nice picture.
Where he lived:
<Loman, R.J.: 49 Deronda Road, Lambeth, London, England (1891 British census*).
Loman, R.J.: Jaagpad 38, Delft, the Netherlands ("Ranneforths Schach-Kalender, 1915", page 68).
Loman, R.J.: Frankenstr. 27, The Hague, the Netherlands ("Ranneforths Schach-Kalender, 1929", page 56).>
We find the following in Edward Winter's "Royal Walkabouts" (1998, with additions): http://www.chesshistory.com/winter/...
Edersheim and Rudolf Johannes Loman – Censer and van’t Veer, The Hague, 14 May 1915
click for larger view
<White played 25 Qxa7 and the game was eventually drawn. In the Amsterdam publication Weekblad A. Speyer pointed out that White could win easily and prettily by 25 Qc6+ Kf8 26 Qc8 Ke8 27 h4 (Preventing 27…g5, followed by 28…Rg6. If 27…g5 then 28 h5.) and the white king is free to infiltrate.>
From: "Deutsche Schachzeitung", September 1915, page 269.
|Oct-17-08|| ||sneaky pete: Here's the link to Loman's October 1913 column on the Capa simul (scroll down to the lower half of the page) :http://22.214.171.124/Exe/ZyNET.exe...|
The column also has his October 1913 address 35 Heathstreet, Hampstead, London N.W. Loman was a fast mover, he never stayed long at any address. Since he was a <professional> chessplayer, I wouldn't be surprised if he left a lot of unpaid rent behind him.
|Oct-22-08|| ||Karpova: Loman teaches Jacques Davidson how to behave as a professional chessplayer at Cafe Vienna, London - from Hans Ree's "The Great Davidson", April 1998: http://www.chesscafe.com/text/hans2...|
<In Cafe Vienna the stake was a shilling per game. Davidson could beat most of the customers with his eyes closed, but from the experienced
Loman he had learned that he had to cede them a game every now and then, or their interest would slack. About one in five. Not more, because then the earnings would be negligible and even worse, one would stand the chance that the customer would lose respect for someone who could not beat him consistently and find another pro who was better.
The pros liked it when they were invited by a rich customer to play chess at his home. There they had him for themselves, without interference
from a competing chessmaster. Davidson was lucky to have such a customer and he visited him regularly. He was picked up by car. Two servants were in it, one to drive and one to open the garden gate of the rich customer. When Davidson was brought home after the chess session, two servants were again in the car, because the rich Englishman liked to indulge in the fiction that his chess partner also had a garden gate that should be opened by a servant.
It was wise for the professional to let the rich customer win the last game
of the session. That would lead to a friendly after-chess chat in which the
natural talent of the customer could be praised. If he would try hard, he
would become a master, for sure. The rich customer had been convinced
of that all the time. But try hard he would never do, because trying hard in
anything was contemptible for members of his class.
From Loman, Davidson had learned that he should never ask for the
money that was due to him. "Better try to get a meal at the Salvation
Army than ask for your money, even when it adds up to 200 shillings, for
he will pay at once, but never ask you again," Loman had said. And when
pay-day came at last, one had to feign that one did not know exactly what
was due, looking in a notebook, pretending to add figures. The rich man
knew exactly what he had to pay, had the amount in hand, but kept up the
fiction that he was above such financial trifles.
Was being so difficult in paying intended to humiliate the pros? No,
Loman said. It was because the rich people could not permit themselves
to realize that their opponents were poor chessplayers who had to live on
their winnings. If that thought entered their minds, they wouldn't be able to play anymore. One only played with gentlemen.
But in Cafe Vienna there was someone who really pestered the chess
professionals. A pensioned colonel who took endless time thinking about
his moves and kept a professional busy for an entire evening on one game
for one shilling. And they couldn't refuse to play him, according to the
code of the cafe. They all hated him.
One afternoon they heard a chessboard fall to the floor, the pieces
clattering all about. It had become too much for one of the pros; his
nerves had cracked. Poor boy, never again would he be allowed to play in
the Vienna, his colleagues realized. That also was part of the code.
The colonel kept coming to the Vienna, and from that moment he felt
forced to prove that he had not been slowing down the game on purpose
to minimize his losses. The professionals jumped on him. Now it was five games an evening, and not ceding one game in five to the customer, oh no, that rule did not apply to the colonel. A bit hard it was, because the colonel could not really afford to lose so many games. "Then let him burgle his general's house," Loman said pitilessly.
Most of this I learned from an interview that Jacques Davidson gave in
1962 to the Dutch newspaper 'Het Parool.' The title that journalist Willem Witkamp gave to his wonderful article was "The Great Davidson.">
|Oct-14-10|| ||brankat: A great article! A very intriguing man, Mr.Loman.
R.I.P. master Loman.
|Oct-18-10|| ||TheaN: <Karpova>
Nice setup that is you linked, thanks for that: it shows perfectly how a Rook and Bishop are no Queen in some situations.
|Oct-14-11|| ||BIDMONFA: Rudolf Johannes Loman|
|Nov-26-11|| ||whiteshark: Picture: http://www.chessbase.com/news/2008/...|
< Loman's hunt <>>(game is not in the database) http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail... <no.8>
|Jan-01-13|| ||SBC: A little on Loman:
|Feb-07-13|| ||King Radio: He beat Capa in a simul and his win against Lasker was also a simul, according to the Chessbase database. That's an accomplishment, of course, but not the same as a real tourny or match game. He was Dutch champion, so that indicates to me he was a pretty strong player.|
|Feb-07-13|| ||Nosnibor: <sneaky pete> According to the official tournament book of Hanover 1902 Loman was listed as living in Redhill London.Here is perhaps his best effort from that event: Hanover Hauptturnier Section A:White:Blekmans,Black:Loman,Queens Gambit Declined,Tarrasch.1d4 d5,2Nf3 c5,3e3 Nc6,4c4 e6,5Nc3 Nf6,6Bd3 Bd6,70-0 0-0,8b3 Qe7,9Bb2 Rd8,10Nb5? dxc4!,11Nxd6 cxd3!,12Nxc8 Raxc8,13Qxd3 e5,14Qf5 exd4,15exd4 Qe2!,16Bc3 Qe4!,17Qg5 cxd4,18Bb2 Rd5,19Qd2 Rcd8,20Rfd1 Ne5,21Nxe5 Qxe5,22Rac1 h6,23Rc4 Ng4!24g3 Nxh2! 25Qd3 Qh5,26Kg2 Ng4,27Rh1 Qxh1!White resigns 0-1 (The exclamation marks are those of the annotaters.)|
|Aug-04-13|| ||thomastonk: The feature in the BCM 1892, which Batgirl quotes in her blog (see the link in the biography), appears on pages 329-330, with the picture before page 329. It has already the wrong year of birth (1862 instead of the correct 1861). Moreover, in an article "MOEDERLANDSCHE PORTRETTEN. Rud. J. Loman.", published in the "Soerabaijasch handelsblad", May 17, 1930, it is stated that he learned chess at the age of 9 (instead of 16 in the BCM article), but until the age of 16 he used his free time mostly with music, and played chess only occasionally.|
Here is a link (hopefully stable for a while) for those who like to read Dutch: http://kranten.kb.nl/view/article/i....
|May-10-14|| ||ljfyffe: DeSoyres-Loman, Holland, 1903: En Passant, no. 144, 1997 (Last of the Nineteenth Century Chess Champions of Saint John by Larry Fyffe) has the game, likely annotated by white.|
|May-31-14|| ||Stonehenge: He died on the fifth of November not on the fourth as in the Wikipedia article.|
|Jun-05-14|| ||TheFocus: Nicknamed the Loman Drop Kid.|
|Jul-01-14|| ||ljfyffe: The bun is the lowest form of wheat.|
|Oct-19-14|| ||Karpova: 1st Class tournament, The Hague, August 1890, double round robin|
1. R Loman 7.5
2. A E van Foreest 6.5
3. J F Heemskerk 6.0
4-5. J F Malta 4.0
4-5. Dr. A v Rhyn 4.0
6. C Messemaker 2.0
Loman won 125 Guilders, van Foreest 75. When it became clear that the games wouldn't have an influence on the prizes, Messemaker and Malta withdrew (Rhyn with 2 forfeit wins over Messemaker, Heemskerk with a forfeit win over Malta).
Loman had no forfeit wins, scoring +4 -0 =6. He was the only undefeated player (Foreest with +4 -1 =5).
Source: Deutsches Wochenschach, 31 August 1890, issue 35, p. 294
|Oct-21-14|| ||sneaky pete: Wochenschach is mistaken, Heemskerk and Malta shared 3rd place with 5 points. See
Johannes Filippus Malta giving Malta's 10 games (+4 -4 =2) from this event, with a loss (not by forfeit) and a win versus Heemskerk.|
Loman's 7.5 points came from 5 wins and 5 draws.
|Oct-21-14|| ||Karpova: <sneaky pete>
Thanks for the additional information! The 'Deutsche Wochenschach' writes that a game Malta-Heemskerk would possibly be played, to see who would reach the honourable 3rd place. If the game was played, this may explain why Malta has 10 games and 5.0 points here.
The Loman score was my mistake, the printing quality is bad and the 1 looks like 1/2. He has indeed +5 -0 =5.
|Oct-22-14|| ||ljfyffe: <Rudolf Johannes Loman (1861-1932), a Dutch Champion, was a musician who spent much of his adult life in England. There is a variation named after in the Max Lange Attack.>Last of the Nineteenth Century Champions of Saint John
by Larry Fyffe, En Passant, June, 1997, p30-36.|
|Oct-22-14|| ||Karpova: Regarding Malta-Hemskeerk (The Hague, 1890), it was now confirmed that they played the game in Rotterdam, and Malta won. So both players ended the tournament with 5.0 points (Deutsches Wochenschach, 30 November 1890, issue 48, p. 405). I presume that this game simply counted instead of the earlier forfeited game.|
The same source mentions that Loman began to edit the chess column of the Amsterdam 'Weekblad voor Nederland' on 1 November 1890. In addition, he won a match against A E van Foreest in Amsterdam in September 1890 by the score of +3 -2 =2.
|Feb-18-15|| ||zanzibar: I've submitted a BCM Portrait Gallery photograph of Loman, from v12 Aug 1892 issue.|
Might show up here, might show up on my blog as well.
|Mar-23-15|| ||Stonehenge: <zanzibar> Thanks, that's a great photo.|
More evidence that he died on the fifth:
gisteravond is yesterday evening.
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2 OF 2 ·