We can use pictures from the 1968 movie.

(1) <"he played 4th board for Britain against Alexander Kotov ...">

The error: he was playing in a match between England and the USSR. This is not the same as playing for Britain, and should be corrected.

The ambiguity: the wording seems to imply that the match itself was against Kotov, rather than a Soviet (USSR) team on which Kotov played 4th board. The context of the match and the overall number of boards should be given.

(2) <"but died during the operation as he was a diabetic">

Even in the 1940s, one did not automatically follow from the other. Prior to 1930 or so diabetics had a very poor survival rate if any kind of complications set in, but insulin treatment was developed in the 1930s and improved significantly by 1946-47. So Crown cannot be said to have died during the operation "as he was a diabetic". (I'm open to correction on this if somebody knows more about Crown's case, but this is my understanding of the historical development of treatment for diabetics.)

I suggest a different wording, something like <"Crown, who was diabetic, was rushed to hospital in November 1947 suffering from peritonitis, but complications set in and he died during surgery.">

Perhaps this level of detail is not really necessary, and something more concise would do.

These may seem like trivial points -- but I'm sure most people would agree with me that CG's biogs should be as accurate as possible, and ambiguities should be avoided.

On a broader scale, it might be a good idea in the long run if these biogs were to include brief references or citations. Nothing too elaborate -- just, perhaps, a reference to a biography if one exists, or to a magazine article or website if that happens to be the main historical source.

Without references, readers have no way of verifying information -- something that still damages the reliability of, for example, some wikipedia entries.

The book of the 1947 match by William Winter and Gregory Levenfish (you can find references to it online) is entitled Great Britain v USSR. The 1947 team included a Scot, Dr James Aitken, who played Vyacheslav Ragozin. Aitken also played against Igor Bondarevsky in 1946, while in 1954 the Scot William Fairhurst played, scoring a draw against Isaac Boleslavsky in the British team's crushing 1.5-18.5 defeat.

Second, as to the circumstances of Crown's death. The finger of blame must be pointed at the family doctor for failing to make a timely correct diagnosis. On Sunday 16 November 1947 a chess friend visited the Crown home at Ingledene Road, Liverpool, and found Crown in bed. He explained that his doctor had diagnosed a stomach upset and had recommended rest. The friend and Crown played and analysed together for several hours, and Crown did not appear in any physical discomfort. But that night sfter the friend left his condition deteriorated and he was rushed to hospital where he died in the early morning hours of 17 November. There was also a belief among some Liverpool chessplayers that the hospital procedures could have been better.

On another thread some CG posters expressed surprise at the Ritson Morry v Crown game where Morry fell into a well-known opening trap.

The British championship at Harrogate in August 1947 was played in a spa building where the underfloor heating was still switched on. This coincided with one of the warmest summers on record (it was the year in which Compton and Edrich made their memorable cricket achievements for Middlesex). By the second week of the BCF congress older and overweight players (the latter group including Ritson Morry) were wilting. Ritson also had some long adjourned games, and by the time of his game with Crown in the final round was exhausted. The game finished in 15-20 minutes so by the time other players went to spectate after their opening moves there was just a reset board with no sign of the players and no indication of what had transpired. Other final round results went Crown's way so that he finished third outright and thus got selected on a high board for the USSR match.

Indeed, he shows more than a detailed knowledge of British chess in the 1940s: A knowledge of British cricket and weather is also apparent. I have trouble remembering the 1960s & 1970s, despite actually living through them: such knowledge of the 1940s, 20-30 years earlier, is impressive.

Great Britain Australia

1.C H O'D Alexander 0 L Steiner 1
2.H Golombek = C J S Purdy =
3.R J Broadbent 1 G Koshnitsky 0
4.G T Crown 1 M Gellis 0
5.W Winter = M E Goldstein =
6.P S Milner-Barry 1 F A Crowl 0
7.W A Fairhurst 1* M Green 0*
8.Dr J M Aitken 1 B Y Mills 0
9.G Abrahams = H Klass =
10.R H Newman = G Karoly =

*The Fairhurst - Green game was adjudicated by Znosko-Borovsky

The ( White ) Gellis - Crown ( Black ) game reached the following position with White to play his 37th move.

-

click for larger view

Play proceeded

37.Re3 Rd3
38.Qa7 Rd2+
39.Kh1 Qc7
40.Kg1 g5
41.b3 gxf4
42.R3e1 f3
43.Rf2 Rd3
44.Rc1 e3
45.Rxf3 Rd1+
46.Rf1 Rxf1+

And Gellis resigned 0-1.

Unfortunately no. However, I have some of the other games from this match which I'll upload as soon as I'm able.

The analysis that C J S Purdy gives is the following:

37.f5 Rd2+ 38.Rf2 e3 39.Rxd2 exd2 40.Qd4+ Kg8 41.Qxd2 Qe4 42.Re3 and White should win.

Or 37.f5 gxf5 38.Rfg1 Qe4 ( checking with 38...Rd2+ is followed by 39.R1g2 Rxg2+ 40.Kxg2 ) 39.Qf6+.

Or 37.f5 Rd6 38.f6.