Members · Prefs · Laboratory · Collections · Openings · Endgames · Sacrifices · History · Search Kibitzing · Kibitzer's Café · Chessforums · Tournament Index · Players · Kibitzing

Louis Stumpers
L Stumpers 
Number of games in database: 55
Years covered: 1932 to 1969
Overall record: +13 -32 =10 (32.7%)*
   * Overall winning percentage = (wins+draws/2) / total games.

Repertoire Explorer
Most played openings
D94 Grunfeld (3 games)
B59 Sicilian, Boleslavsky Variation, 7.Nb3 (2 games)
C65 Ruy Lopez, Berlin Defense (2 games)
D45 Queen's Gambit Declined Semi-Slav (2 games)
E60 King's Indian Defense (2 games)

Search Sacrifice Explorer for Louis Stumpers
Search Google for Louis Stumpers

(born Aug-30-1911, died Sep-27-2003, 92 years old) Netherlands

[what is this?]

Frans Louis Henri Marie Stumpers was born in Eindhoven, Netherlands, on 30 August 1911. (1) He was champion of the Eindhoven Chess Club in 1938, 1939, 1946, 1947, 1948, 1949, 1951, 1952, 1953, 1955, 1957, 1958, 1961 and 1963, (2) and champion of the North Brabant Chess Federation (Noord Brabantse Schaak Bond, NBSB) in 1934, 1935, 1936, 1937, 1938, 1939, 1940, 1941, 1942, 1943, 1944, 1946, 1948, 1949, 1950, 1951, 1952, 1953, 1954, 1955, 1959, 1961, 1962, 1963, 1964, 1965, 1966 and 1967. (3) He participated in five Dutch Chess Championships, with a 4th place in 1948, (4) and represented his country at the 1st European Team Championship in Vienna in 1957 (two games, vs Josef Platt and Max Dorn). (5) From 1945 and until about 1956, he was first Secretary and then Chairman of the NBSB. (3)

Stumpers was a physicist, and worked for the Philips company as an assistant from 1928. During 1934-1937, he studied at the University of Utrecht, where he took the master's degree. (6) In 1938 he was again employed at Philips, (6) and at a tournament in 1942, he supplied the hungry chess players with food from his employer. (3) After the war, he made a career in physics, with patents and awards on information ("radio") technology. He received degrees from several universities and colleges, including in Poland and Japan. (1, 3, 6) He retired from Philips in 1972, but continued teaching, (6) partly as professor at the University of Utrecht (1977-1981). (7) He was also Vice President (1975-1981) and Honorary President (1990-2003) of URSI, the International Union of Radio Science. (8)

Louis Stumpers married Mieke Driessen in 1954. They had five children, three girls and two boys. (6)

1) Online Familieberichten 1.0 (2016), Digitaal Tijdschrift, 5 (255),
2) Eindhovense Schaakvereniging (2016), http://www.eindhovenseschaakverenig....
3) Noord Brabantse Schaak Bond (2016), Their main page:
4) (2016),
5) Olimpbase,
6) K. Teer, Levensbericht F. L. H. M. Stumpers, in: Levensberichten en herdenkingen, 2004, Amsterdam, pp. 90-97, Also available at
7) Catalogus Professorum Academię Rheno-Traiectinę,
8) URSI websites (2016), and

Suggested reading: Eindhovense Schaakvereniging 100 jaar 1915-2015, by Jules Welling. Stumpers' doctoral thesis Eenige onderzoekingen over trillingen met frequentiemodulatie (Studies on Vibration with Frequency Modulation) is found at

Last updated: 2017-10-26 05:00:13

 page 1 of 3; games 1-25 of 55  PGN Download
Game  ResultMoves YearEvent/LocaleOpening
1. L Stumpers vs J Lehr  1-0191932EindhovenD18 Queen's Gambit Declined Slav, Dutch
2. Prins vs L Stumpers  1-0391936NED-ch prelimB20 Sicilian
3. L Stumpers vs E Spanjaard  1-0551938Dutch Ch prelimE02 Catalan, Open, 5.Qa4
4. E Sapira vs L Stumpers 0-1251938NBSB - FlandersD94 Grunfeld
5. A J Wijnans vs L Stumpers  1-0361939NED-chB05 Alekhine's Defense, Modern
6. J van den Bosch vs L Stumpers  ½-½581939NED-ch11A48 King's Indian
7. L Stumpers vs S Landau 0-1411939NED-ch11D33 Queen's Gambit Declined, Tarrasch
8. H van Steenis vs L Stumpers  1-0251939NED-chB02 Alekhine's Defense
9. L Stumpers vs H Kramer  0-1361940HilversumE25 Nimzo-Indian, Samisch
10. A J van den Hoek vs L Stumpers  1-0271941BondswedstrijdenB10 Caro-Kann
11. T van Scheltinga vs L Stumpers 1-0351942NED-ch12D94 Grunfeld
12. W Wolthuis vs L Stumpers  ½-½521946NED-ch prelim IC58 Two Knights
13. L Stumpers vs J H Marwitz  1-0401946NED-ch prelim ID31 Queen's Gambit Declined
14. G Fontein vs L Stumpers  ½-½261946NED-ch prelim ID94 Grunfeld
15. L Stumpers vs H van Steenis 0-1241946NED-ch prelim ID28 Queen's Gambit Accepted, Classical
16. C B van den Berg vs L Stumpers  1-0581946NED-ch prelim ID19 Queen's Gambit Declined Slav, Dutch
17. L Stumpers vs Euwe 0-1301946NED-ch prelim IE60 King's Indian Defense
18. L Stumpers vs Cortlever  ½-½501946NED-ch prelim IE60 King's Indian Defense
19. L Stumpers vs Grob 1-0601947Int BA55 Old Indian, Main line
20. L Stumpers vs H van Steenis  0-1331947Int BD23 Queen's Gambit Accepted
21. Tartakower vs L Stumpers 1-0241947Int BD74 Neo-Grunfeld, Nxd5, 7.O-O
22. V Soultanbeieff vs L Stumpers  ½-½461947Int BD96 Grunfeld, Russian Variation
23. L Stumpers vs F Henneberke 1-0431948NED-ch14C92 Ruy Lopez, Closed
24. J T Barendregt vs L Stumpers  0-1261948NED-ch14C86 Ruy Lopez, Worrall Attack
25. L Stumpers vs C Vlagsma  0-1451948NED-ch14C65 Ruy Lopez, Berlin Defense
 page 1 of 3; games 1-25 of 55  PGN Download
  REFINE SEARCH:   White wins (1-0) | Black wins (0-1) | Draws (1/2-1/2) | Stumpers wins | Stumpers loses  

Kibitzer's Corner
< Earlier Kibitzing  · PAGE 108 OF 303 ·  Later Kibitzing>
Premium Chessgames Member
  Jim Bartle: I think Leaf's basic problem is that he's a jerk.
Premium Chessgames Member
  HeMateMe: Yeah, I guess he's a problem that just happened to have a great arm. Unfortunate. Calls to mind Art Schlecter, a qb the Colts had, Ithink in the 80s, who gambled his way out of the league.

Has anyone noticed that qbs seem to have more offspring with medical problems related to the brain? Dan marino and Boomer Esiason both have kids who are autistic. There are othe stats too, about this. I wonder if it is the flip coin of the quaterback having superior hand/eye coordination and excellant eyesight? could the gene pool swing in the other direction, too?

Mar-31-12  Shams: <HeMateMe> Rypien is also in the news because as a former player with a concussion history, he just joined a lawsuit against the NFL.
Premium Chessgames Member
  HeMateMe: They're big boys who play a rough game. Every single player quote I've ever read said 1)players know they have had concussions, 2) they will continue playing despite this, 3) they won't tell team doctors/trainers when they have a concussion, because it means they could be taken off a field, and it might hurt their roster chances with a team.

I think every one of these suits has failed; it's been tried before. I'm sympathetic for the players, but they are all told to not play if they are unable.

Bryant Gumbell did a piece about this recently, on <Real Sports>. The team owners are putting the onus on team physicians. If the team doctor clears a player, he is ok to play. The paperwork is all set up to make sure team owners are absolved of any legal liability. Only the team doctor/trainers can be sued, if I read the piece correctly.

Mar-31-12  Shams: <HeMateMe> Actually I think the lawsuits are quite a significant threat to the NFL.

Football is on its way out, it's only a matter of time. I just hope the Seahawks can win one before it's over.

Premium Chessgames Member
  Jim Bartle: "If the team doctor clears a player, he is ok to play."

Except the doctor is paid by the team, and isn't really independent.

Premium Chessgames Member
  HeMateMe: Most lawsuits against teams for medical reasons fail, or are settled out of court for relatively small sums. The doctor may be a private contractor, and not an actual employee of the "Kansas City Chiefs Organization" or the "Baltimore Ravens organization."

There is an important distinction. The contractor is on his own. It's his/her butt if the player sues the team, and medical consultant/team doctor had the guy cleared to play when he should not have been playing.

Pretty easy distinction when someone has a torn hammy or dislocated shoulder. But what about concussions? The symptoms can be disguised or hidden. I think lawyers for Jerry Jones, the McCaskey family et. al., have it set up so that the player will have to sign off on playing, after an injury is noted, and the team doctor (contractor, not employee) also has to sign off, writings exist.

Thus, if the doctor is thought to be negligent or incompetent by a jury, he/she is liable for damages, and not the team--unless the team had very clear indications that the physician was incompetent, in general, and should not be retained.

Its tough for the player to prove damages.

Premium Chessgames Member
  FSR: <Shams: <HeMateMe> Actually I think the lawsuits are quite a significant threat to the NFL.

Football is on its way out, it's only a matter of time. I just hope the Seahawks can win one before it's over.>

Why? Boxing still exists, and it's gotta be even worse for one's brain than football. If people can consent to punch each other in the head (and elsewhere) in boxing, I don't see why they can't consent to play football. Personally I'd probably ban them both, but so what?

Apr-02-12  King Death: < HeMateMe: ...But what about concussions? The symptoms can be disguised or hidden...>

Especially in the macho world of football where it takes a cold day in hell before most players will admit that they aren't able to function. Even with things changing in the NFL some players are fighting against it like crazy, they want to go back out and hit anything that wears another uniform.

Premium Chessgames Member
  Jim Bartle: "Boxing still exists,"

Not because it causes brain damage, but boxing's popularity is a shadow of what it was twenty or thirty years ago, and I've read even that was nothing compared to the fifties and earlier.

Premium Chessgames Member
  HeMateMe: Nine of the top ten most watched television programs last year were NFL football games. Those were playoff games, and the ocassional great matchup, like New England v. Pittsburgh, stuff like that.

I don't understand why boxing fell by the roadside. I guess its all these more in your face violent sports like Ultimate Fighting and full contact karate.

It would help if there was some cohesian regarding who is in fact world champion, in various weight classes. I don't even know who is heavyweight champ right now. I used to always watch Ali, when his fights were televised. Sometimes that was on Saturday afternoon, sometimes at night. of course that was back when there were only a few channels of TV, and people had less to choose from.

Although a lot of people have gotten rich from HBO boxing, like Oscar Dela Hoya, I think pay per view has hurt the sport. It has kept the average fan from seeing a great fight, and demanding more. Now and then a charismatic fighter like Manny P. is on the scene, but it is slim pickings.

Premium Chessgames Member
  Jim Bartle: Not saying what effect this has had, but when I was a kid there were eight weight classes and one champion in each. Now there are something like 14 weight classes and three champions in most of them.

Funny thing is, the money boxers earned seemed to be as much as ever. At least what they announce they earn. Hard to know how much the Don Kings end up taking.

Funny thing about pay-per-view. It in effect replaced closed-circuit broadcasts at a local movie theater. The biggest fights were never on free TV. I wonder what effect that's had. I'll bet the atmosphere at some of those closed-circuit fights was wild.

Premium Chessgames Member
  HeMateMe: I remember closed circuit tv. Ray Leonard v. Roberto Duran, Ray Leonard's fights. Marvin Hagler. Larry Holmes. There seems to be about two big fights out there now--Manny P v. Floyd Mayweather and...well, thats pretty much it. Manny is the only fighter that draws real interest these days. bernard Hopkins is over the hill, as is Mayweather.

I do remember when Oscar De Lahoya tried to come back at a late age, his 30s, to take on Manny Pacquio. Geez, what a nightmare. Manny said "These are my fists. Thats the canvas. You will be well acquainted, soon."

Premium Chessgames Member
  Jim Bartle: When Ali was fighting (and before as well), when Tyson was champ, and when the Leonard/Hearns/Hagler/Duran group was fighting, interest in boxing spread well beyond serious fight fans (I'm an example). Maybe it was because most were Americans, but also because they had interesting personalities. Now, not so much, not that I'm trying to learn much about any fighters.
Apr-02-12  talisman: i remember the Gillette tuesday night fights...everybody knew who the heavyweight champion was...light heavy, middleweight etc...then they started adding super to everthing and of course wba,wbc, wbo, no one knows anything. i'd like to see boxing go back to the old days...much like chess with return of the interzonals.
Premium Chessgames Member
  Jim Bartle: Back in the days of Gillette even the contenders were celebrities. Today nobody even knows the champions.
Premium Chessgames Member
  HeMateMe: One of the great fights ever was the first Sugar Ray Leonard/Marvin Hagler fight. Ray Leonard had been retired for two years because of a detached retina. But, he was only about 30 years old, and was getting restless.

He asked his trainer, Angelo Dundee, to get him ready for one fight. Just one fight, not a new career, just one fight--a title shot against Hagler, for big bucks. The fight got scheduled. Hagler couldn't say no. It would be Marvin's biggest pay day ever.

You have to go to youtube and watch the entire fight, round by round. Hagler was built like Superman, minimized to 66% magnification. Leonard was a bit gangly by comparison, but had a longer arms and better footwork. Oh, he absorbed a physical beating. You can FEEL Hagler's body punches hitting you, right through your modem. Ray Leonard looked like he was going to either quit or die, when he entered the ring in each of the last three rounds.

But, somehow he outpointed Hagler and survived those body punches to pick up a narrow decision. And, his eye suffered no damage. One of the great fights ever, only a real man could absorb such a pounding, and come back each round to deliver the goods.

Ray Leonard, with his manager Mike TRainer, was quite intelligent in how he built his career. Right from the beginning he OWNED his own boxing telecasts when he formed the company "Sugar Ray Productions". Later, partnering with HBO, he made huge sums from his fights, from the television and ppv rights, not just from the usual fighters purse. For once, a Don King type hustler didn't get the best of a figher. I think Ray Leonard is worth over $50million. This is all described in his autobiography, which came out a couple of years ago.

Premium Chessgames Member
  Jim Bartle: Not to denigrate Leonard, but Hagler won that fight. If a person knowledgeable about boxing were to watch a tape of the fight without knowing the back stories, he would clearly give the decision to Hagler.

Leonard "won" because it was his dramatic comeback, and the judges were influenced by the fact that he managed to survive and fight back.

At least that was my opinion when I watched the fight, and the opinion of the friends I watched it with.

Premium Chessgames Member
  chancho: Leonard could not have beaten Marvelous Marvin in his prime.

By 1987, Marvin was not the same fighter.

Here's his title winning bout against Alan Minter in 1980:

The fans reaction was embarrassing at fight's end.

Premium Chessgames Member
  Jim Bartle: He couldn't beat him in 1987, either. In my opinion.
Premium Chessgames Member
  chancho: <Jim> The decision could have gone either way. I thought Leonard won it at the time, but I have looked at the bout a few times since, and Hagler should have gotten the nod. To Hagler's credit he retired, and never fought again.
Premium Chessgames Member
  Jim Bartle: Given the situation, that Leonard had been retired and was returning after a long layoff, that Leonard was moving up in weight class to fight him (I think?), Hagler should have KOed Leonard and left no doubt. He didn't, and left it up to the judges. They erred in my opinion, but Hagler never should have let it get that far.
Premium Chessgames Member
  HeMateMe: I think you guys are being unfair to Ray Leonard. Marvin Hagler never beat the gallery of fighters (Iron man Barkley?) that Sugar had. I know Hagler was a fine champion, didn't duck anyone. But, if he was really better than Ray Leonard, who was fighting one or two weight classes higher than his best weight then he should have knocked out Leonard or clearly outpointed him. I think that's the key point. Ray Leonard was moving up, to fight a larger man in the larger man's natural weight class. That's why Sugar Ray took such a pounding in that fight. His face looked like a ping pong ball that had seen better days. But, he did win the fight.

Hagler must have been told that the media friendly Ray Leonard would have the inside edge, and that Marvin would have to win convincingly, to get the decision. He didn't do that. Ali probably won a couple of close decisions because of world knowledge of his great body of work. Ken Norton and Jimmy Young come to mind. It puts the onus on the outsider to prove he is as good as the superstar.

Burt Sugar died recently. Seems like the end of an era. Burt looked like the last of the old timers, beat up fedora, dirty trenchcoat and a stogie in his mouth. Like Oscar Madison, from the Odd Couple. Burt Sugar edited Ring magazine.

Apr-04-12  JohnDahl: The stats support the fact that Leonard edged the fight:

That Hagler was champion, that Hagler was the one continually coming forward, that Leonard's punches were more flash than substance are all insufficient reason to argue that Hagler deserved the benefit of the doubt.

My memory of the fight is not how good Leonard was but how one-paced and one-dimensional Hagler was.

<"But I saw something when Hagler fought [John] Mugabi. Mugabi, who was a puncher, a slugger, was able to outbox Hagler. So I knew that if I got into shape - not just physically, but mentally and spiritually - I could win.>

Premium Chessgames Member
  Jim Bartle: Similar to what I remember.
Jump to page #    (enter # from 1 to 303)
search thread:   
< Earlier Kibitzing  · PAGE 108 OF 303 ·  Later Kibitzing>
NOTE: You need to pick a username and password to post a reply. Getting your account takes less than a minute, totally anonymous, and 100% free--plus, it entitles you to features otherwise unavailable. Pick your username now and join the chessgames community!
If you already have an account, you should login now.
Please observe our posting guidelines:
  1. No obscene, racist, sexist, or profane language.
  2. No spamming, advertising, or duplicating posts.
  3. No personal attacks against other members.
  4. Nothing in violation of United States law.
  5. No posting personal information of members.
Blow the Whistle See something that violates our rules? Blow the whistle and inform an administrator.

NOTE: Keep all discussion on the topic of this page. This forum is for this specific player and nothing else. If you want to discuss chess in general, or this site, you might try the Kibitzer's Café.
Messages posted by Chessgames members do not necessarily represent the views of, its employees, or sponsors.
Spot an error? Please suggest your correction and help us eliminate database mistakes!

home | about | login | logout | F.A.Q. | your profile | preferences | Premium Membership | Kibitzer's Café | Biographer's Bistro | new kibitzing | chessforums | Tournament Index | Player Directory | Notable Games | World Chess Championships | Opening Explorer | Guess the Move | Game Collections | ChessBookie Game | Chessgames Challenge | Store | privacy notice | contact us
Copyright 2001-2017, Chessgames Services LLC