< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2 OF 2 ·
|Jan-31-07|| ||blancacapa: Anyone who has read "Paul Morphy and the Golden Age of Chess", a delighful collection of Napier's reflections on the game and it's great players, many of whom he knew personally, will appreciate that, besides being a fine player himself, he was possessed of an exquisite literary style.|
|Jan-31-07|| ||SBC: <blancacapa>
<"Paul Morphy and the Golden Age of Chess">
I'd posted some links to excerpts from Napier's book on L R Eisenberg 's page
|May-04-08|| ||Karpova: A feature article from Edward Winter: <The Chess Wit and Wisdom of W.E. Napier>
The article contains quotes from the three units of <Napierís Amenities and Background of Chess-Play> (later adapted into a single volume called <Paul Morphy and The Golden Age of Chess>)
|May-26-08|| ||brankat: At the time of the match against F.Marshall, William Napier was only 15 years old!|
|Jan-17-09|| ||WhiteRook48: why is the Napier-NN game a notable game? Almost anyone can beat NN. :-)|
|Apr-20-09|| ||whiteshark: <In the laboratory, gambits all test unfavorably; but the old rule wears well, that all gambits are sound over the board.>|
-- William Napier
As far as possible, true!
|Apr-20-09|| ||Raisin Death Ray: This guy decided he would rather be an insurance agent than a chess player. And people say Fischer was crazy!|
|Jan-17-10|| ||Richard Taylor: I immediately think of the Mathematician (of the Naperian logs or nepers base e) ...I saw his famous game in book at local library and it intrigued me..amazing game by them both. I wondered vaguely if he was related to the other Napier.|
|Jan-17-10|| ||Richard Taylor: <Raisin Death Ray: This guy decided he would rather be an insurance agent than a chess player. And people say Fischer was crazy!>|
But there is mostly no money in chess, especially in those times.
Charles Ives, who was a great and innovative composer, got little recognition, so he worked in Insurance and then started an Insurance Company and became a billionaire.
Napier maybe had less ability than Lasker or he wasted a better income. maybe he liked working in insurance. he may have enjoyed other intellectual activities - if he was family man, Chess is or would not be a good life.
|Jan-17-10|| ||Richard Taylor: It's not as if he "failed" at chess - he won quite lot of prizes and did well in many tourneys at a high level...and even when he went into Insurance he kept up chess. |
(This I gleaned from Wikipaedia.)
It seems he wasn't massively obsessed like Fischer.
|Sep-15-10|| ||GrahamClayton: Napier won the handicap tournament conducted at the YMCA in New York in 1895 at the age of 14 with a score of +26, -4, =0.|
|Sep-15-10|| ||TheFocus: Napier actually married a niece of Pillsbury's didn't he?|
His other great love was music. Said to be a great singer. I think he gave up chess for music.
John Hilbert did an excellent book on Napier. I have an extra copy if anyone wants to buy it. Only $60.00, MINT, hardbound, never opened.
|Nov-25-10|| ||vonKrolock: <A Lost Work> a recent - number 6843, published yesterday- entry in Winter's http://www.chesshistory.com/winter/ <Chess Notes> refers to Napier's book <"Evergreen Chess">, a manuscript that disappeared after his death|
|Dec-11-10|| ||whiteshark: "Of chess it has been said that life is not long enough for it, but that is the fault of life, not chess." |
-- William Ewart Napier
True true tripple true
|Feb-27-12|| ||whiteshark: and now, Ladies an Gentlemen, pleeeease welcoooooome ...|
|Feb-27-12|| ||Penguincw: Quote of the Day
< "In the laboratory the gambits all test unfavorably, but the old rule wears well, that all gambits are sound over the board." >
|Feb-27-12|| ||whiteshark: fanfare!|
|Jan-17-13|| ||ketchuplover: Happy Birthday Mr. Napier :)|
|Jan-17-13|| ||Kikoman: Rest In Peace Sir William Ewart Napier.|
|Jan-17-13|| ||waustad: If there is a game he played with a surprise rook move we could try "Slider Rules".|
|Mar-15-13|| ||rookhouse: I posted (at his request) a new John Hilbert article about William Napier on my site this morning at http://www.rookhouse.com/a-%E2%80%9... which includes a new game from Napier that Mr. Hilbert did not have in his original book Napier: The Forgotten Grandmaster.|
|Mar-16-13|| ||thomastonk: <rookhouse> Thank you and Mr Hilbert!|
The often mentioned game Showalter vs Napier from a simultaneous exhibition is neither in this database nor in a few others which I have checked. Here is it as published in the Brooklyn Daily Eagle, December 3, 1894.
[Event "Brooklyn Chess Club, simul"]
[White "Showalter, Jackson Whipps"]
[Black "Napier, William Ewart"]
1. e4 c5 2. Nc3 Nc6 3. Nf3 e6 4. d4 cxd4 5. Nxd4 Nf6 6. Be2 Bb4 7. Bf3 d6 8. O-O Bxc3 9. bxc3 Nxd4 10. Qxd4 e5 11. Qd3 O-O 12. Ba3 Ne8 13. Rfd1 Be6 14. Bxd6 Nxd6 15. Qxd6 Qxd6 16. Rxd6 Rac8 17. Rd3 Rc7 18. a4 Rfc8 19. Ra3 Rc4 20. Kf1 f5 21. Re3 f4 22. Rd3 R4c6 23. Ke1 Kf7 24. h3 Rc4 25. Kd2 Ke7 26. a5 R8c6 27. Rb3 Rc7 28. Rb4 R4c5 29. Ra4 Bc4 30. Rd5 Bxd5 31. exd5 Rxc3 32. Be4 g6 33. a6 b6 34. Bd3 Kd6 35. Be4 R3c4 36. Rxc4 Rxc4 37. f3 Ra4 38. Bd3 Kxd5 39. Be4+ Kc5 40. Bb7 Kb5 41. Bc8 Rxa6 42. c4+ Ka5 43. Kd3 b5 44. Bxa6 Kxa6 45. c5 Kb7 46. Ke4 Kc6 47. Kxe5 Kxc5 0-1
Before I will submit it, I would very much appreciate to see it checked. There is at least one database that contains a completely different version: after 7.f3 (instead of 7.f3) White's bishop is placed for 30 moves differently. Moreover the game score there is shorter. Finally, some of Black's rook moves in the c-file could differ, too. Thank you very much in advance!
|Apr-03-13|| ||rookhouse: <thomastonk> Sorry, I did not see your comment until last evening. Yes, the Brooklyn Daily Eagle has 7.Bf3 and the Brooklyn Standard-Union reported 7.f3.|
I have not personally played through the game as of yet and I am still looking for a third source to gain some clarity on the issue.
I will keep you posted.
|Apr-03-13|| ||thomastonk: <rookhouse> Thanks. The Standard-Union was not my source for 7.f3. But the next move of the king bishop there is 32.d3 as in the database I mentioned.|
So, let's assume 7.f3 happened. Then, after 7... d6 8.0-0?, Black could have won a piece easily by 8.. xd4. Moreover, following the game until 14.xd6, Black could again win, this time by 14.. b6+ and 15.. d8, but this is a little bit more complicated. There are some more occassions like this. So, 7.f3 is more likely, I think.
|May-13-13|| ||Graham1973: Found an article with three games, one of which may have been his last from 1942.|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2 OF 2 ·