I don't remember where I read it. Or when, for that matter!

At any rate, if you did say that, I'd say that's almost never true, whereas the reverse is the norm, frequently to the bane of historians.

It's much more common that an archetypal meme will seep into a "real life anecdote" that turns out to be either totally false or exaggerated beyond repair.

At any rate, apologies if that wasn't you, and also if it was you, and I got all of it wrong- I can't find the page, although I just looked for it.

I'm not good at looking. Lazy too, when given the chance.

<Euwe> is a grand project, long overdue for some beefed up biographical information. Feel free to email me if you have any specific questions, as I have a biography of <Euwe> and some other books that mention him a lot.

With regard to this post:

<In a sentence, a rematch would have taken place in 1930 or 1931 had Capablanca not sought (for good reasons) a postponement. As revealed in correspondence between A. and C., Alekhine received Capablanca’s formal challenge on November 14, 1929, which he accepted in a letter of November 28, 1929, and in which he also fixed the start of the match between October 15 and December 15, 1930. Capa put down a deposit of $500 and tried unsuccessfully to organize a match for those dates in the United States. In a letter to Alekhine of June 1, 1930, the Cuban requested that the match be moved to early 1931; and Alekhine promptly agreed in a letter of June 18, to a new date of February 15, 1931. Capablanca then dropped a bombshell. In a letter dated June 18, 1930 - the same date as Alekhine’s letter - he wrote, “I find a clerical error was made in my letter of June 1, 1930. My proposal for the match is for the Winter 1931 - 32.” Which is to say, for a starting date NOT in early 1931 but a year thence in early 1932. Alekhine responded on July 3, 1930, stating that he would not entertain future challenges from Capablanca unless they were “formally supported by a Federation or backers known in the chess world, in each case guaranteeing the financial side of the match.”

The bottom line: Alekhine was willing, if not eager, to play in 1930 or 1931.>..the site is.. http://www.worldchessnetwork.com/En>...

---

I have all of the published correspondence between <Capa> and <Alekhine>, along with letters from <Norbert Lederer>, <Alexander Rueb> and others concerning a <Capa-Alekhine> rematch.

So I can confirm that the bloke's direct citations from two of these letters are accurate, and accurately dated. However, I doubt the overall body of all the correspondence supports the notion that <Alekhine> was "eager" for a rematch. That would be a massive stretch, I believe. It would also be wrong to say that <Alekhine> was unwilling for a rematch, although you could make a case for some unwillingness on his part, in the way <Alekhine> demanded not only a strict adherence to the <London Rules>, but also his own interpretation of those rules, which by no means agreed with <Capa's> interpretation.

I'm going to prepare a concise summary of the precise chronology and main points of the correspondence from this period, and then I'll post it for your use in editing the player bios of these two cantankerous Chess Legends.

I decided to directly send you a summary of the chronological correspondence up to 1931, and the infamous "clerical error" letter.

There's a lot more, which I'll summarize and send to you hopefully next weekend when I have more time.

So check your EMU, I sent the information as an attachment.

May-18-12
jessicafischerqueen: Ave <Doggimus>= Your <Euwe> work looks grand, nothing springs to mind that might want changing or adding anything you've got so far. I read Munninghoff's biography in January of this year, and your info certainly doesn't contradict anything I remember from it. I saw you linked <Niels'> invaluable link on <Euwe's> professional life outside of chess. Grand info that is eh?>

Thanks for dropping a line, both. Just now read your contributions and of course i will have a look and react in kind.

Good to hear of you both, as i sorta missed the old CG interaction from a few years ago.

Regarding Euwe it indeed is easier for me to track some details on events etc. - but I will first take the time to see what is there, and will then - if necessary - get back to you.

<Euwe won 102 first prizes <in> tournaments>

Or maybe save a few words with

<Euwe won 102 tournaments>

I've made that change, another good one. It's not always a matter of the previous writer's form of words. In this case, it was bad editing on my part.

You mention Euwe's mother teaching him the moves, introducing young Max to the royal game, and perhaps you might spell her first name as Elizabeth, the "Dutch" way, with the 'z' instead of the 's' - and I think her maiden last name would be appropriate to mention, perhaps this is a more of a dutch tradition, not sure, but Max' mom was Elizabeth van der Meer. His dad was Cornelis Euwe.

Also, small detail, is the city of <'s-Hertogenbosch> - spelled like this, or else the these days more common spelling "Den Bosch" can be used. Though personally I think the spelling with apostrophe-s-hyphen is preferred. Actually it resembles the spelling of The Hague, = 's-Gravenhage, or Den Haag, as it is more commonly pronounced and written.

Watergraafsmeer, Euwe's birthplace, is actually a <part of> (instead of "near") Amsterdam, which I'd prefer, as it is a city district, or borough, of Amsterdam, the municipality, like The Bronx or Brooklyn is of New York.

<He was born in what was then Berlinchen (literally "little Berlin") in Prussia, and which is now Barlinek in Poland.>

IT IS PERFECT!!

Don't let anyone, <ever>, touch that Bio again....

How are things on a personal level? I hope you are doing well. I noticed your contributions on the WC match and some of the gamepages, and thought about the fun we share as chess enthusiasts, and how not only chess is a life-long fascination - it never leaves you, ever - but also how some persons you meet online at community like this you will never forget; there will always be an interest in their well-being. Even though we've never met. Regardless of how much time has passed since we interacted. Even though we were both over 30 when we started mingling with the CG crowd back in 2004-5, those early years with you and Dom, and Joe Williams, are the most important, formative years, leave the most imprint.

I wonder how Joe is.

Thanks for your help with that. That sort of information can only come from the <inside>. I'll be composing an extended bio for van Wely sometime in the reasonably near term, so it would be terrific if you could provide some more feedback.

Personally, I'm fine, thanks. I'm playing a little OTB chess these days with very modest results. Win some, lose some and all that. I missed the bus for setting on the path to achieving great results by about 40 years (family, day job and all that), but that doesn't prevent me from enjoying a bit of OTB competition to keep my mind tuned a bit better than it might be otherwise.

Repeats "was born in".

enrol <enroll>

(the scar can still be seen over his right eye).

Not sure that is pertinent. If it is, I'd slightly prefer "on" instead of "over"

He will by dint of either his rating or his win in the 2012 EICC, participate in the 2013 World Cup.

Slightly prefer "virtue" instead of "dint".

for <a> playing percentage of 68.4%.

Has competed every year since 2002, his best results being top board for Tomsk for whom he played between 2004 and 2009 inclusive and with whom he won both individual and team gold medals in the 2004 and 2005 team championships and also in the Russian Team Championship (2007).

A little bit of a runon sentence. I'd prefer something like:

He's competed every year since 2002. His best results were from 2004-2009 as top board for Tomsk. He won both individual and team gold medals in the 2004 and 2005 team championships and also in the Russian Team Championship (2007).

As at <of> 1 May 2012

Respect that you "risk it all" in the OTB hot pot. Always a battlefield, but indeed it keeps you sharp, and mingling with the younger crowd is a good thing, teach'em a few LESSONS now and again...

Thanks very much for that. I made all the suggested changes apart from the date format as I've used the Day-Month-Year format in all the bios I've written and amended.