< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2 OF 3 ·
|Jan-05-06|| ||BIDMONFA: Louis Charles Mahe De La Bourdonnais|
LABOURDONNAIS, Louis Charles Mahe De
|Jan-06-06|| ||blingice: <cmp> What about Morphy?|
|Feb-24-06|| ||McCool: How come he was always playing Alexander MacDonnell?|
|Apr-18-06|| ||Maatalkko: Ugh, that's a terrible looking portrait of him. I hope that's not what he really looked like.|
|Apr-21-06|| ||NakoSonorense: He's got a nice hairdo, dont you think?|
|Apr-22-06|| ||Gioachino Greco: La Bourdonnais has a good case for being by far the strongest player in the world during his lifetime. |
He surpassed Deschappelles in games, causing his teacher to seek retirement. He then beat both Lewis and Cochrane (the two top players in England at the time), and later went on to defeat MacDonnell in a gigantic marathon series of matches.
The men who have the best claim to being world champions in all but name would probably be:
GIOACHINO GRECO (defeated Morano, then toured Europe and beat the strongest players he could find--given the narrow scope of chess at the time, this is as close to dominance as you can get)
PHILIDOR (beat Stamma, one of the best players in England, and dominated both his French and English rivals....in several cases Philidor was past his prime during these matches).
DE LA BOURDONNAIS (For reasons stated above; Deschappelles' case is a bit more nebulous, considering his penchant for odds and his lack of a great opponent on his resume).
STAUNTON (defeated Saint-Amant in a match; also has wins over Popert, Horwitz, Harrwitz)
ANDERSSEN (defeated Staunton and a large pool of other opposition during the 1851 international tournament; he went on to play fairly dominantly in tournament chess afterward)
MORPHY (defeated Anderssen, and held wins over the entire field of chess masters--including Harrwitz, Boden, Barnes, Lowenthal, Bird, de Riviere, Paulsen, etc.)
STEINITZ (Anderssen's dominance after Morphy is debatable; for all intents and purposes, Steinitz and Zukertort were the two top players in the world until the official unification match)
|Apr-27-06|| ||Maatalkko: <Gioachino Greco>
Regarding your list of pre-official world champions:
I would take Staunton off the list, he really was never that great of a player, and his genius lay more in self-promotion than chess.
Also, while Goacchino Greco was certainly the first author to analyse chess with any seriousness, its almost certain that most of his games were composed, so it's hard to rate his skill as a player.
|May-02-06|| ||Gioachino Greco: <Maatalkko>
I agree that Greco is debateable. His writings alone are not sufficient grounds for a world championship claim--just as Carrera, Polerio, Lopez, Damiano, etc. cannot be regarded as world champions.
What distinguishes Greco is the fact that he travelled around Europe playing the best players and defeating them. His chess skill is also well-documented (in sharp contrast to his predecessors). While it is definitely possible that the games are composed, it is equally true that Greco could certainly have played them if he composed them.
I take the fact that Greco was dominant in his home city, in his travels across Europe, and against Morano to be the closest anybody could come to the "strongest player" title in the 1600's.
Regarding Staunton: Yes, he was a promotional genius and organizer, but he holds wins over Harrwitz, Horwitz, and (most importantly) Saint-Amant, who was considered to be the French champion. He also played numerous games (most of which he won, as I recall) against Cochrane--another top chess player. He lost the 1851 tournament, but this is partly attributable to the fact that he was simultaneously trying to organize it. I think that this must have had some effect on his playing strength.
|Sep-03-06|| ||BishopBerkeley: This website maintains that there was a style of Chess pieces named for the Café de la Régence (photo shown):|
It's a rather pleasing style, I think! I wonder if this is true?
The "Selenus" style (shown on the page above) is also quite appealing, in my opinion.
(: Bishop Berkeley :)
|Sep-03-06|| ||Open Defence: yes bishop nice chess sets :)|
|Feb-12-07|| ||Egoch: I am desesperatly looking for the author of this portrait of La Bourdonnais. And by the way, in which circonstances was it drawn?|
|Mar-11-07|| ||Knight13: How tall was this guy? 160 centimeters?|
|Mar-11-07|| ||elLocoEvans: <I am desesperatly looking for the author of this portrait of La Bourdonnais> well the drawing has some Simpson's air, that maybe it was Matt Groening.|
|Sep-09-07|| ||Karpova: A picture:
The Chess Note:
|Nov-27-07|| ||DarthStapler: Who was a better player, La bourdonnais or Philidor?|
|Dec-19-07|| ||nimh: <Who was a better player, La bourdonnais or Philidor?>|
Computer analysis shows that La Bourdonnais and McDonnell were by far more accurate players than Philidor.
|Jan-17-08|| ||Knight13: <Computer analysis shows that La Bourdonnais and McDonnell were by far more accurate players than Philidor.> That's because 1. Philidor's age was less advanced in chess knowledge/theory and 2. Philidor barely has any games in the database.|
|Jan-25-08|| ||TigerG: Did this person spend his life playing with Alexander McDonnell?|
|Jan-26-08|| ||savagerules: < TigerG: Did this person spend his life playing with Alexander McDonnell? >|
Yes, I believed this was mentioned somewhere in the movie Brokeback Mountain.
|Jan-26-08|| ||Open Defence: heh I believe they were buried side by side is that right ? ... hmmmm probably they had a different idea of check mate|
|Mar-12-08|| ||kellmano: I never knew who i preferred out of McDonnell or Labourdonnais until i saw that picture.|
Every time i play through one of their games now, i will be picturing Labourdonnais at the board and be hoping he wins.
|Mar-12-08|| ||pawnofdoom: Haha he does look pretty funny. Like a really short, chubby man. But still an awesome player. Way better than me at least. I'm not sure how he would compare to players today. But he makes exciting, usually decisive chess.|
I wonder if you wrote out his name on a piece of paper, would it be taller than him?
|Mar-14-08|| ||sneaky pete: De La Bourdonnais also composed problems. This one was published in Le Palamède, 1837:
click for larger view
# in 7
|Mar-26-08|| ||Knight13: <TigerG: Did this person spend his life playing with Alexander McDonnell?> No need to use sarcasm, right? It was 1834, reason his games are mostly against McDonnell is because they were the best at that time and people cared enough to record the games. There weren't many masters in 1834. Of course, La Bourdonnais played many games against other weak players.|
|Sep-07-08|| ||GrahamClayton: The De La Bourdonnais v McDonnell match was the first match where all of the games were recorded and made available to the general public.|
Source: David Hooper and Kenneth Whyld, "Oxford Companion to Chess", 2nd edition, OUP, 1992
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2 OF 3 ·