| New York (1927) |
|
Following the success of the New York (1924) tournament they organized, Norbert Lederer and his associates decided to hold a match tournament of six or seven masters where each player would meet the other competitors four times. Geza Maroczy was asked to be the tournament director and invitations were sent to Jose Raul Capablanca, Emanuel Lasker, Frank James Marshall, Alexander Alekhine, Efim Bogoljubov, Aron Nimzowitsch and Milan Vidmar. Capablanca was the only player who would get an appearance fee. However, due to an incident in one of his games with Capablanca in the 1924 event, Lasker was involved in a bitter and public dispute with Capablanca and some members of the organizing committee. He did not reply to his invitation and his place was offered to Rudolf Spielmann, who immediately accepted the invitation. Bogoljubov wrote back asking for an appearance fee of $1,500 and that the tournament should be replaced by a World Championship match between himself and Capablanca. His conditions were given in the form of an ultimatum which the committee could not accept and they also decided that his place would not be offered to anyone else, so the number of players was now reduced. A number of accounts stated that the tournament (1) would be regarded as a qualifier for choosing the challenger for the World Championship. When Alekhine heard about this, he was furious as he and Capablanca had already arranged terms for their forthcoming match in September that year. Alekhine would not take part unless he was given an assurance the tournament would not affect the conditions that had been agreed previously. The committee, with Capablanca's agreement, duly telegraphed this assurance and Alekhine then confirmed his acceptance of the invitation. Held from the 19th of February to the 23rd of March 1927, the tournament had a time control of 40 moves in 2½ hours, rather than the then standard of 30 moves in 2 hours. It was held in the Trade Banquet Hall of the Hotel Manhattan Square on 77th Street, New York. Five rounds a week were played in the early part of the tournament, but this was later relaxed with the introduction of more rest days to ease the strain on the players. Capablanca registered one of the greatest triumphs of his career, taking first place without the loss of a game. C A N V S M
1 Capablanca **** 1½½½ 1½1½ ½½1½ ½½1½ 11½1 14.0
2 Alekhine 0½½½ **** ½01½ ½½½½ 1½½1 ½1½1 11.5
3 Nimzowitsch 0½0½ ½10½ **** 100½ 11½½ 1½½1 10.5
4 Vidmar ½½0½ ½½½½ 011½ **** ½½½½ ½01½ 10.0
5 Spielmann ½½0½ 0½½0 00½½ ½½½½ **** ½½1½ 8.0
6 Marshall 00½0 ½0½0 0½½0 ½10½ ½½0½ **** 6.0
Allocation of Prizes: 1st $2000
2nd $1500
3rd $1000
Brilliancy Prizes:
First brilliancy prize of $125 to Capablanca for his 13th round win against Spielmann (Capablanca vs Spielmann, 1927).
Second brilliancy prize of $100 to Alekhine for his win over Marshall in the 18th round (Alekhine vs Marshall, 1927).
Third brilliancy prize of $75 to Nimzowitsch for his win over Marshall in the 17th round (Nimzowitsch vs Marshall, 1927).
Fourth brilliancy prize of $50 to Vidmar for his win against Nimzowitsch in the 14th round (Vidmar vs Nimzowitsch, 1927).
Capablanca also won a special prize for his win against Nimzowitsch in the 15th round (Nimzowitsch vs Capablanca, 1927). Non-prizewinners received $50 for each point scored. The main source for this collection was Alexander Alekhine's Chess Games, 1902 - 1946 by Leonard M Skinner and Robert G P Verhoeven. ISBN 0-7864-0117-6. Reference: (1) Wikipedia article: New York 1927 chess tournament. Original collection: Game Collection: New York 1927, by User: Benzol.
|
|
| page 1 of 3; games 1-25 of 60 |
     |
 |
|
| page 1 of 3; games 1-25 of 60 |
|
|
|
| Sep-18-14 | | visayanbraindoctor: Another early version of the super GM tournament. All these guys would probably be rated at least 2700 in today's Elo dominated chess world. Capablanca and Alekhine would probably be above 2800. It could also be the earliest version of a Candidates tournament, although an unofficial one. In spite of Alekhine's complaint, it seems that it was understood that whoever wins it, or places second to Capablanca, would have priority in challenging him for the Title. For instance, if Alekhine had failed to win second, or worse placed in the bottom half, chess history might have changed and Capablanca, who after all is said and done, was still the reigning World Champion and had the final say, might have chosen the second placer as his Challenger. The ('why must I win against this idiot') incident with Nimzovich seems to indicate that Capablanca felt this way, notwithstanding Alekhine's belief that he was the chosen Challenger In the grueling tradition of the first Candidates tournaments, each player had to play 20 games (4 games with each opponent, with 5 opponents). The thinking seems to be: surely the one who succeeds in such an arduous task of winning ahead of the world's best players in 20 games deserves to Challenge. It was clear even then that the chess world expected its Champion to play a deserving Challenger, even if in this pre-FIDE era, the Champion had the ultimate say. |
|
Sep-18-14
 | | perfidious: <visayan> One minor point: FIDE came into existence in 1924, though they had little or no influence over the world championship very early on. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FIDE#... |
|
| Nov-15-14 | | Karpova: <visayanbraindoctor: In spite of Alekhine's complaint, it seems that it was understood that whoever wins it, or places second to Capablanca, would have priority in challenging him for the Title.> What is the basis of this claim, especially the <it seems that it was understood> part? For a start, here are the London Rules: http://www.chesshistory.com/winter/... These are indispensable for an understanding of the WC situation of that time. Clauses 7 and 8 in particular. Capablanca had already accepted Alekhine's challenge prior to New York (1927). In addition, Capablanca was only then not compelled to defend his title against a recognized international master, if the challenger couldn't raise the $10,000 purse. Alekhine had managed to do it. The only way out for Capablanca would have been, if Alekhine's financial backers had dropped out - but they had given him a "firm commitment" to finance the match. More background information:
Vidmar later explained that, by signing the London Rules, he ended his dream of ever becoming World Champion. He would never have been able to bring up $10,000 without immediately (i. e. 1922) giving up his electrical engineering career and searching for a patron. See Milan Vidmar. In 1923, Marshall asked Capablanca for match terms. The Cuban declared that a match had to be for the WC title and directed his attention to the London Rules. The challenge came to nothing. Nimzowitsch challenged Capablanca in 1926. He dropped the challenge in late 1926, because he could only bring up $4,000 of the necessary $10,000 (Wiener Schachzeitung, November-December 1926, p. 362). Capablanca granted him time until 1 January 1927, but that didn't help. In addition, this was not just a <complaint> by Alekhine. Alekhine demanded, and got, Capablanca's confirmation that the tournament would have nothing to do with the WC match (Winter, "Capablanca", p. 319). This was not the first unsuccessful attempt by New York tournament organizers to connect a tournament to the WC, e. g. in 1889 (see for example Wilhelm Steinitz, 'The Book of the Sixth American Chess Congress', New York, 1891) or in the early 1910s (Wiener Schachzeitung, September-October 1912, pp. 260-261. Lasker didn't want to participate anyway.). <visayanbraindoctor: The ('why must I win against this idiot') incident with Nimzovich seems to indicate that Capablanca felt this way, notwithstanding Alekhine's belief that he was the chosen Challenger> I have to admit that I'm unaware of a <why must I win against this idiot> incident involving Nimzowitsch. Can you tell us more about it? By any chance, do you mean the "Why must I lose to this idiot" story? Nimzowitsch said this after losing a rapid transit game to Friedrich Saemisch in Berlin (see C.N.s 5019, 6718 and 8420). Sämisch didn't even participate in this tournament, so I don't see how this incident is supposed to tell us anything about Capablanca's feelings in 1927. And regarding <notwithstanding Alekhine's belief that he was the chosen Challenger>, Alekhine had good reasons to feel that way, since Capablanca had officially accepted Alekhine's challenge long ago. Is there any reason to suspect that Capablanca would commit so outrageously a breach of contract? And that any of the other participants would be capable of raising the money instead? I already covered the other participants, except for Lasker's replacement, Spielmann. How should Spielmann have raised the necessary funds and did he ever attempt to? It's worth remembering, that not even Capablanca could raise the money for a rematch. See <Jess>' Capablanca - Alekhine World Championship Match (1927) for how the match came about (some material for this post is also based on sources mentioned there). |
|
| Apr-29-15 | | Oliveira: The incident mentioned in the summary box to this tournament was narrated by Edward Lasker in his <The Adventure of Chess>. Apparently, he had opportunity to witness the sore dispute at first hand. <The one blunder [Lasker] made in the tournament was due to time trouble. This was in one of the games with Capablanca in a position which, ordinarily, he would have drawn with ease.In this game a scene occurred which shows how a perfectly genial disposition can go to pieces in a chess contest when the relentless clock adds to the nervous strain a tournament player has to endure in any case. Lasker, if anything, had a more kindly attitude than normal among chess antagonists. But he completely lost control of himself when, forced to make nine moves in less than two minutes, he made a bad mistake which lost the game. Capablanca also had been pressed for time, but it had seemed to Lasker that the minute hand on his opponent's clock was traveling more slowly than his own. In his excitement he not only accused the tournament committee of negligence in testing the timing equipment before the start of the tournament, but he insinuated that one of the committee members who was partial to Capablanca had purposely adjusted his clock so that it would run a little snow. He pointed out that more than four hours had elapsed when the two clocks showed two hours each, and he concluded that someone had "fixed" Capablanca's clock--something he would not have dreamed of in a normal frame of mind.> |
|
| Apr-29-15 | | Howard: Uhhhh......Lasker certainly made more than "one blunder" in the NY 1924 tournament ! For example, he was dead-lost against Marshall and Maroczy, but managed to draw Marshall and beat Maroczy. He also had bad positions against Janowski and Edward Lasker. |
|
Apr-29-15
 | | keypusher: <Howard: Uhhhh......Lasker certainly made more than "one blunder" in the NY 1924 tournament !
For example, he was dead-lost against Marshall and Maroczy, but managed to draw Marshall and beat Maroczy. He also had bad positions against Janowski and Edward Lasker.> Are you saying the only way to get a lost game (or even a bad position) is by blundering? |
|
| Apr-29-15 | | Oliveira: That would be a ridiculous statement for, although always choosing only the very best moves at my disposal, more often than not I and end up in crappy positions. Chess is indeed a mysterious game. |
|
Nov-16-15
 | | MissScarlett: Round 19 was played on the 21st March, and round 20, the last, on March 23rd. According to <The Unknown Capablanca>, on the 22nd March, Capa conducted a simul, scoring +26 =1. Surely Hooper & Brandreth are mistaken here. http://www.chesshistory.com/winter/... |
|
Nov-20-15
| | keypusher: <MissScarlett: Round 19 was played on the 21st March, and round 20, the last, on March 23rd.
According to <The Unknown Capablanca>, on the 22nd March, Capa conducted a simul, scoring +26 =1. Surely Hooper & Brandreth are mistaken here.> Why do you think so? He traveled to Leningrad for a simul in the middle of the Moscow 1925 tournament (and played terribly on his return). Here the simul would have taken place in the same city and he had first place wrapped up already. Capablanca vs Verlinsky, 1925 |
|
Nov-21-15
| | MissScarlett: I greatly doubt Capa went to Leningrad willingly, so the situations are hardly comparable. My main reservation is that Capa would surely have understood that consenting to such a simul could be considered disrespectful to the other players, not least, his last round opponent and prospective world title challenger, Alekhine. |
|
Nov-22-15
| | keypusher: <MissScarlett: I greatly doubt Capa went to Leningrad willingly, so the situations are hardly comparable.> Seriously? You think the Cheka arrested him, put him on a train and...made him go play in a simul? <My main reservation is that Capa would surely have understood that consenting to such a simul could be considered disrespectful to the other players, not least, his last round opponent and prospective world title challenger, Alekhine.> Didn't he make the tournament director offer draws to all his last-cyle opponents in advance? Didn't he pass a note to Nimzowitch asking that he make better moves? Capablanca vs Nimzowitsch, 1927 But he'd be too polite to play an exhibition on an off day? |
|
Nov-22-15
| | keypusher: <MissScarlett: I greatly doubt Capa went to Leningrad willingly, so the situations are hardly comparable.> Seriously? You think the Cheka arrested him, put him on a train and...made him go play in a simul? <My main reservation is that Capa would surely have understood that consenting to such a simul could be considered disrespectful to the other players, not least, his last round opponent and prospective world title challenger, Alekhine.> Didn't he make the tournament director offer draws to all his last-cyle opponents in advance? Didn't he pass a note to Nimzowitch asking that he make better moves, or dictate moves to him? Capablanca vs Nimzowitsch, 1927 But he'd be too polite to play an exhibition on an off day? |
|
Jun-14-22
 | | kingscrusher: Wow, the downsides of no FIDE existing - both Lasker and Bogo dropped out in World championship organising related issues. FIDE does some good things occasionally. |
|
| Jun-14-22 | | Retireborn: FIDE did exist then and in 1928 they even organised two Bogoljubow v Euwe matches. They weren't able to seize control of the "real" World Championship until Alekhine died holding the title. The absence of Lasker and Bogo was indeed a pity. |
|
Jun-14-22
| | kingscrusher: <Retireborn> Yes good point. Tecnnically FIDE was apparently established in 1924: "The International Chess Federation or World Chess Federation,[2][3] commonly referred to by its French acronym FIDE (/ˈfiːdeɪ/ FEE-day Fédération Internationale des Échecs),[4] is an international organization based in Switzerland that connects the various national chess federations and acts as the governing body of international chess competition. FIDE was founded in Paris, France, on July 20, 1924" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FIDE
But it's influence for managing this terrible state of affairs relating to World championship matches was evident only in 1948 ..."FIDE's most visible activity is organizing the World Chess Championship since 1948" |
|
Jun-14-22
| | perfidious: <kingscrusher..... FIDE does some good things occasionally.> Evidence? (laughs) |
|
|
|
|
NOTE: Create an account today
to post replies and access other powerful features which are available only to registered users.
Becoming a member is free, anonymous, and takes less than 1 minute! If you already have a username,
then simply login login under your username now to join the discussion.
|
Please observe our posting guidelines:
- No obscene, racist, sexist, or profane language.
- No spamming, advertising, duplicate, or gibberish posts.
- No vitriolic or systematic personal attacks against other members.
- Nothing in violation of United States law.
- No cyberstalking or malicious posting of negative or private information (doxing/doxxing) of members.
- No trolling.
- The use of "sock puppet" accounts to circumvent disciplinary action taken by moderators, create a false impression of consensus or support, or stage conversations, is prohibited.
- Do not degrade Chessgames or any of it's staff/volunteers.
Please try to maintain a semblance of civility at all times.
NOTE: Please keep all discussion on-topic.
This forum is for this specific tournament only. To discuss chess or this site in general,
visit the Kibitzer's Café.
|
Messages posted by Chessgames members
do not necessarily represent the views of Chessgames.com, its employees, or sponsors.
All moderator actions taken are ultimately at the sole discretion of the administration. |
Spot an error? Please suggest your correction and help us eliminate database mistakes!
Copyright 2001-2023, Chessgames Services LLC
|
Kibitzing
