< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 5 OF 5 ·
|Mar-16-11|| ||Penguincw: < His name is associated with a variation of the Petroff Defense, the Cochrane Gambit: 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.Nxe5 d6 4.Nxf7!? >|
Hmm.That knight that began on g1 is exchanging itself for two pawns.How interesting.
|Sep-28-11|| ||Ziggurat: <"The great chess men have generally been long lived and have preserved their faculties to the last. I remember well receiving a note from John Cochrane, a famous player, in London just before the tournament in Paris in 1878. He was then ninety years of age and said that he would like to explain to me some new ideas. He did so, and I was surprised to see a man of his advanced years write out from memory variations sixteen moves deep. The next day I read in the papers a notice of his death. I cannot imagine a happier way to die. It is so with almost all who devote their time to the game of chess. They live long and they retain mental vigor to the end of their days.">|
Steinitz, quoted in the current Urcan column at ChessCafe. (http://www.chesscafe.com/urcan/urca...)
|Sep-28-11|| ||keypusher: <I remember well receiving a note from John Cochrane, a famous player, in London just before the tournament in Paris in 1878. He was then ninety years of age and said that he would like to explain to me some new ideas.>|
Subtraction was not Steinitz's forte.
|Oct-02-11|| ||Karpova: <keypusher: Subtraction was not Steinitz's forte.>|
I think that Steinitz can be forgiven considering that this was an interview and he probably didn't know every birthyear of every chessplayer up to 1894. Cochrane was still 80 years old and Steinitz' enthusiasm justified.
There are a lot of factually wrong or at least strange claims from famous chessplayers (not even counting the more recent ones). Like Marshall calling Johannes Zukertort a former Worldchampion and the story of the "Five First Grandmasters" at St. Petersburg 1914.
So let's just correct that mistake and appreciate the fact that a strong and important master like John Cochrane was still in such a good shape shortly before he died at the age of 80 (in the 19th century!).
|Oct-03-11|| ||keypusher: <Karpova> You are absolutely right, of course.|
It is nice to see you posting regularly here again.
|Oct-06-11|| ||tamar: Was Steinitz making the same error confusing John Cochrane b 1878 with James Cochrane b. 1870?|
<ARubinstein> <SBC> and <Calli> debate this on pages 3 and 4 of this page.
|Feb-04-12|| ||Penguincw: R.I.P. John Cochrane.|
|May-09-13|| ||Graham1973: I think I've found a Cochrane-Mohishunder game that does not appear to be in the database.|
It was printed in the St Louis Globe-Democrat of 13/07/1879. Supposedly it was from a private collection and had originally been published in the Glasgow Herald.
The article (Link below) contains annotations allegedly by Cochrane himself, but does not give any dating or location details.
My transcription of the moves is:
Assitance in converting to algebraic notation would be greatly appreciated.
|May-09-13|| ||Calli: <Graham1873> See Cochrane vs Mohishunder, 1852|
|May-09-13|| ||Graham1973: <Calli> Thanks for identifying the game. I'm going to incorporate the Cochrane annotations into the existing file and upload as a correction.|
|Jun-17-13|| ||Gottschalk: [Event "Unknown"]
[White "John Cochrane"]
[Black "H W Popert"]
1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. d4 exd4 4. Bc4 Bb4+ 5. c3 dxc3 6. O-O d6 7. a3 Bc5 8. b4 Bb6 9. Nxc3 Nf6 10. Bg5 h6 11. Bh4 g5 12. Nxg5 hxg5 13. Bxg5 Be6 14. Nd5 Bd4 15. b5 Be5 16. f4 Bxa1 17. bxc6 Bxd5 18. Bxd5 Bc3 19. cxb7 Rb8 20. Qd3 Ba5 21. Bxf6 Qxf6 22. Qb5+ Ke7 23. Qxa5 1/2-1/2
Source: Simbase from Netherlands.
|Jun-17-13|| ||thomastonk: <Gottschalk> The game has been published in "The Chess Player's Chronicle", Vol. III, p19. The game score is incomplete, because there it is stated after 23.xa5: "AND BLACK DREW THE GAME, BY GIVING `` PERPETUAL CHECK.´´"|
So, 23.. d4+ has to be added, but then it's ambiguous. The easy solution is 24.f2 d1+ 25.f1 d4+. But also 24.h1 xh2+ 25.xh2 h8+ 26.g3 g8+ should lead to a perpetual, but White's next move can be 27.h2 or 27.f3.
The easy solution is more probably, because otherwise, Staunton would have published the additional moves, I think.
The game has been played in London during Cochrane's visit from 1841 to 1843, and since the CPC appeared some time after April 27, 1842, the year is 1841 or 1842.
I couldn't find the game under the link you gave, because Cochrane's games are unavailable there. However, such collector databases often miss important information for such old games, which you can complete by using primary sources. Many useful links can be found for example here Calli's Game Collections or here http://www.chessarch.com/library/ma..., respectively.
|Sep-06-13|| ||thomastonk: Why do we have January 2, 1878 as his date of death, whereas usually March 2, 1878 is given? |
Ancestry.com has a John Cochrane, who died in London in January 1878, and who was born about 1800, but ... no.
I've checked the CPC of 1878, p.73 and British newspapers (wherein his death is noticed only in March), and hence I change the date.
|Sep-06-13|| ||Tabanus: <thomastonk> Actually Ancestry.com has "Jan-Feb-Mar 1878" which may well be March 1878. I think it's him, the one who died in Marylebone London.|
|Sep-06-13|| ||thomastonk: <Tabanus> Okay and thanks. A guest at Ancestry.com like me cannot see such details.|
|Oct-14-13|| ||jnpope: I believe they were recorded by Cochrane:
I just noticed the Cleveland library put his manuscript online. I just downloaded all four parts, but I haven't had a chance to go through the files.
|Oct-14-13|| ||thomastonk: <jnpope> Great!
I've found the games in the database, which is described and can be downloaded from http://www.kwabc.org/index.php/furt....
The game Cochrane vs Mohishunder, 1854 is transcribed therein with the date January 3, 1854.
|Oct-14-13|| ||thomastonk: <jnope> The game Cochrane vs Mohishunder, 1854 is in volume 1, pdf page 52. Additional comment: "Time 13 minutes".|
|Oct-14-13|| ||jnpope: re: Jay Whitehead database
I met Jay at the John G. White collection when I was finishing up my Pillsbury research and he was starting his research into games not found in the Oxford Encyclopedia of Chess Games. I had a 486 laptop at the time with Chess Base 3 and my Pillsbury game collection and I was going through the White collection scrapbooks looking for miscellaneous Pillsbury games. Jay was impressed with the technology and asked if I would be interested in creating a database of games from the hundreds of pages he had already photocopied. I spent that summer doing data-entry and then sent his photocopies back to him along with a print-out of the games and copy of the database. I suspect a large number of the games in his final database are the ones I entered into Chess Base years ago... I never utilized his discoveries (but I may have sent them to John Hilbert as part of a larger historical database when John was doing his Napier research). I'm happy to see Jay kept up on his research and that the games he found eventually made their way into public circulation.
|Feb-04-14|| ||offramp: He is PoTD again today. Was no other chess player born on February 4th?|
He is one of my favourites, though. A very attacking player. He was also a barrister. It is hard to be a barrister and play chess as well. Those customers won't wait for their coffee!
|Feb-04-14|| ||Penguincw: R.I.P. John Cochrane, probably best known for his 448 games versus Bonnerjee Mohishunder. If you ask me, +155 is pretty impressive (though score of "only" 67.3%). |
On an unrelated note, it has been 216 years since his birth. :)
|Feb-04-14|| ||FSR: <Penguincw: ... On an unrelated note, it has been 216 years since his birth.>|
As in six cubed!?! Great Capablanca's ghost! It'll be 127 years until Johnnie Cochran's next perfect cube birthday! We'll all be dead. :-(
|Feb-05-14|| ||Sally Simpson: Of course but for a trip to India just after the London to Edinburgh correspondence match started we would having been calling the Scotch Opening - The Cochrane Opening for it was he that suggested London play it in 1825.|
London played it in the first game
Edinburgh played it in the third and fifth games.
At that time White did not always go first. For the duration of the match London had White pieces and Edinburgh the Black.
But Edinburgh had the move in 3 of these games.
So this is infact what Edinburgh saw when playing the Scotch gambit in the 2nd half of the 1820's.
click for larger view
I Spent a few days with a very experinced chess historian in St.Andrews House, Edinburgh looking for the birthplace of John Cochrane.
We know it was Edinburgh, but where?
We could find no birth cert just his registration.
The mix up with the dates in February and March is because in them days you were usually registered weeks after you were born.
That is if you were a male, often females were never registered.
JC was born in February, registered in March.
We could not find out anything about where he spent his childhood or his early teens.
JC was a cousin to Admiral Thomas Cochrane.
This is the lad whose exploits inspired Captain Hornblower.
|Feb-05-14|| ||FSR: <Sally Simpson: ... At that time White did not always go first.>|
Correct. Very few people know this. For example, in the Immortal Game, Anderssen played with the Black pieces, even though he moved first. http://books.google.com/books?id=jC... For more, see my Wikipedia article https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White...
|Feb-06-14|| ||Sally Simpson: Cheers FSR, because I never knew that either.
Not that it makes much difference but it would be good to tell them they are infact looking at the wrong position next time some dip and their computer are trying to pull this masterpiece of creativity to shreds.
Chernev nails these sad people in 'Chess Companion' when he says some baseball spectators don't look at the majestic flight of a ball, they are too busy scribbling down stats and the batting average.
Made an error in my dates. The London - Edinburgh started in 1824 (Cochrane left London for India early 1825, that is where I stumbled).
OK one year out but considering I've seen and read the letters sent up by London for this match it was pretty clumsy of me.
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 5 OF 5 ·