|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 9 OF 9 ·
Later Kibitzing > |
| Dec-27-08 |
| Karpova: 90 years ago Carl Schlechter died.
Richard Reti: <The majority of people imagine a chess master as being a townsman who passes his life in an atmosphere of smoke and play in cafes and clubs: a neurasthenic individual, whose nerves and brains are continually working at tension: a one-sided person who has given his whole soul to chess.
Schlechter was the exact antithesis of that conception. He held himself aloof from club and cafe, so far as his vocation permitted. He lived for preference in the country, where he filled in his leisure with art and science. All his heart and soul went out to nature, and it is just that reflex of his love of nature that lends to his games their particular charm. His games stand out through their breadth of scheme – just as in the forest the trunks of trees and their branches stretch themselves out on all sides wherever there are open spaces: thus did Schlechter develop his forces; forcibly and, like Nature as it were, objectless. No hidden places and traps were there, but only sound development. With him was no undue haste and no pinning himself down to one idea, but one harmonious evolution. And indeed combinations by Schlechter are not artificially-reared roses which amaze everyone with their beauty and which, to the true nature lover, soon savour excess; nay, they are rather the humble and hidden forest flowers that have to be looked for and the love of which increases with their gathering. Thus one loses one’s self in Schlechter’s games in which are reflected, side by side with the immensity and simplicity of nature, the airiness of Viennese art and music.> From Reti, Richard: “Modern Ideas in Chess”; transl. by John Hart; Hardinge Simpole, Devon 2002. §20, Pages 82-83 |
 |
Mar-02-09
 |
| brankat: Carl Schlechter, perhaps more than any other Master of Chess epitomized Dostoyevsky's ideal of a "beautiful man". Kind, honest, compassionate, bright and talented.
Born 135 years ago!
R.I.P. Master Carl. |
|
Mar-02-09
|
| brankat: <Karpova> Thank You so much for this beautiful and heart-warming excerpt for R.Reti's book. |
|
Mar-02-09
 |
| Absentee: A master who fully deserved to be World Champion, and would have almost surely been if champions, at that time, hadn't treated their title as if it were a personal property. |
|
Mar-02-09
 |
| talisman: happy birthday carl. |
|
| Mar-14-09 |
| Fanacas: This man truly deserved to become world champion. I didnt heard of him before but he is already may faforit chess player |
|
| Apr-29-09 |
| Fanacas: I heard that he startet realy slow and wasent a natural talent at chess for example like capablanca and that he had to work realy hard to reach his level of play. Can anyone confirm this and when he learned to play chess ? |
|
| Apr-29-09 |
| myschkin: @ <fanacas>
"... Carl Schlechter (1874-1918) <kam mit 13 Jahren zum Schach>. Seine Spielstärke beruhte auf Kampfkraft und Kombinationsgabe und wuchs so gewaltig, dass er <1893 Berufsspieler wurde>. ..."
http://www.berlinonline.de/berliner... Bio (in Englisch): http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carl_S... maybe no "wunderkind", but remarkably talented IMO |
|
Apr-29-09
 |
| vonKrolock: He learned to play around his thirteenth year, and the first personality of the chess world he met personally was Dr. Samuel Gold, a friend of his familly who was also the first native from Hungary to publish a book on Chess Problems http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samuel... No wonder therefore, that, like Anderssen before him, Schlechter published his own compositions before being known as player... His first Chess books were "Katechismus des Schaspielskunst", by Magister Portius, and one of Dufresne's handbooks; his interest was growing to the level of a passion in the time of the 1889 match between Chigorin and Gunsberg, in Havana, Cuba, from where arrived a telegraphic coverage soon apearing in the daily newspapers. Then, as I posted in Berthold Englisch s page, <"In the year 1892, Englisch introduced to the "Wiener Schachgesellschaft" (the most important chess circle from Austria-Hungary), a young and talented player who, until then, and being a boy that started to work very early as tipesetter aprentice, had only the chance for training and practice in the cafés for amateurs, during the evenings and weekends, and that became then a full member of the important Club, and soon also a columnist in a local paper and one of the leading chess players in the country - his name was Carl Schlechter"> |
|
| Apr-29-09 |
| Fanacas: Thanks both of you. |
|
May-08-09
|
| vonKrolock: Vienna, 1904: A brief match was played between Schlechter and Teichmann, two draws and one victory for each side. Three of the games, each one highly interesting, are already here in the base: The first Schlechter vs Teichmann, 1904 The second Teichmann vs Schlechter, 1904 The third Schlechter vs Teichmann, 1904 Maybe the fourth, a draw, can be traced in contemporary sources or newer collections... |
|
| May-08-09 |
| returnoftheking: not in my megabase, not in NicBase.. |
|
| May-08-09 |
| returnoftheking: Chess Tournaments and Matches 1904
Gillam
£13.99/$19.95 142 pages
All the games of the top chess events of 1904: including Monte Carlo, Cambridge Springs, Coburg, Schlechter-Teichman, Marco-Janowski. Includes opening index, player index and tournament cross-tables. Should have it. |
|
May-08-09
 |
| Calli: <vonKrolock> A three game match according to Crain. |
|
May-08-09
|
| vonKrolock: Right, there's a drawn game played in Hamburg that could look as a possible find, as there was not a Tournament there in 1904, but with the wrong colours - May be a game played while they were going or returning from Cambridge Springs... For the score of that missing game, I'm trusting in old mags or newspapers as the main hope |
|
May-09-09
|
| Calli: Okay, here is the match data:
Event: Exhibition Match of 3 Games
Date: Jan 20-23, 1904 (no game on Jan 22)
Site: Vienna Chess Club
Time Limit: 30 in 2 hrs
Money: prize money provided by the Club, amount unknown |
|
May-09-09
|
| vonKrolock: That's really very informative, <Calli>! This encounter was mentioned as 'another of that S. drawn matches', but only the third game was available for a wider audience, being found somewhere in the 1916 Bilguer... <Exibition> This explains the choice of things like Portuguese Opening, Brentano Gambit, Bishop's Opening <Jan 20-23> And this, the counting of four - The match would be short enough with the actual three games, so the hasty researcher would infer a fourth, imaginary |
|
May-09-09
|
| Calli: Apparently, the match was meant for entertainment. The openings for the games were Portuguese Opening, Brentano Gambit and Urusov Gambit. No long games for the spectators! |
|
| Jun-24-09 |
| Tripler: Has anyone read "Carl Haffner's Love of the Draw" by Thomas Glavinic? It's based on the Lasker-Schlechter match in 1910. (I know there's still a doubt whether this was a world championship match - but wouldn't contemporary newspaper reports confirm it if this was true? Depending on the journalist, of course.) |
|
| Jun-24-09 |
| Petrosianic: <Has anyone read "Carl Haffner's Love of the Draw" by Thomas Glavinic? It's based on the Lasker-Schlechter match in 1910.> It was a very hard fought match, with games averaging over 50 moves each. Anybody who thinks they drew so much because they just liked draws couldn't have known too much about it. |
|
| Jul-02-09 |
| Tripler: Er... I think you should read the book before making any more comments. |
|
| Jul-02-09 |
| ughaibu: It was a world championship match, contemporary newspapers did confirm it, the journalist was Lasker. |
|
| Jul-02-09 |
| Karpova: <Tripler: (I know there's still a doubt whether this was a world championship match - but wouldn't contemporary newspaper reports confirm it if this was true? Depending on the journalist, of course.)> What doubt? Are you confusing Schlechter with Janowski (though even there are not many doubts: 1909 no WC match, 1910 a WC match)? Dr. Lasker wrote articles about the WC match in "Ost und West" (March 1910, issue 3) and clearly said that the WC title was at stake so no doubt about it. |
|
| Jul-03-09 |
| Tripler: Good to have it cleared up! Is it now known whether Schlechter had to win by two points? Or is it true he felt that winning the match in a game where Lasker blundered was "dishonourable" and so he went all out for the win in the final game? I know this last question is more subjective - it depends, I suppose, if we accept the image of Schlechter as almost insanely modest as depicted in e.g. Glavinic's novel. In other words, what do we know about the historical Schlechter's character - paricularly in terms of this match and the final game? (Did Schlechter ever write about the match?) |
|
Jul-03-09
 |
| acirce: <Tripler> It is pretty clear that there is nothing to the old myth that he had to win by two points. |
|
 |
|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 9 OF 9 ·
Later Kibitzing > |
