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

🏆
TOURNAMENT STANDINGS
Budapest Tournament

Mikhail Chigorin11.5/16(+10 -3 =3)[games]
Rudolf Rezso Charousek9.5/16(+8 -5 =3)[games]
Harry Nelson Pillsbury7.5/12(+6 -3 =3)[games]
Carl Schlechter7/12(+4 -2 =6)[games]
David Janowski7/12(+6 -4 =2)[games]
Karl August Walbrodt6.5/12(+5 -4 =3)[games]
Simon Winawer6.5/12(+6 -5 =1)[games]
Siegbert Tarrasch6/12(+4 -4 =4)[games]
Adolf Albin5/12(+4 -6 =2)[games]
Geza Maroczy5/12(+4 -6 =2)[games]
Georg Marco4.5/12(+3 -6 =3)[games]
Josef Noa4/12(+2 -6 =4)[games]
Ignatz von Popiel2/12(+2 -10 =0)[games]
*

Chessgames.com Chess Event Description
Budapest (1896)

In October 1896, the Budapest Chess Club, led by the efforts of Geza Maróczy, organized a chess tournament as part of the Budapest Millennial Exhibition, intended to mark the 1000 years since the Magyar conquest of Hungary by the legendary King Árpád in 896. (1) Among the participants were established masters such as Siegbert Tarrasch, Mikhail Chigorin, and David Janowski, as well as young chess stars such as Harry Nelson Pillsbury and Carl Schlechter. Hungary was represented by Rudolf Charousek, Josef Noa, and Géza Maróczy. Maróczy had planned to act solely as tournament director until Semion Alapin withdrew at the last minute, and Maróczy stepped in as a replacement to preserve the original organization. (2) Since Maróczy was now playing in the event, Arthur Havasi took over the duties of chief arbiter. (3) Maróczy managed to secure a fine venue and excellent funding for the event. Emperor Franz Joseph donated the rent for the venue: the monumental restaurant-hall of the fabulous Pest Vigadó, Budapest's premiere entertainment building, although the Budapest Chess Club had usually met in one of the smaller and more affordable back rooms. (2) The Emperor also donated a 12 kilogram solid silver trophy, a statue of "Winged Victory." Baron Albert von Rothschild provided 1000 Kronen and famed explorer Count Jenő Zichy provided 600 kronen towards the prize fund. (4)

Picture of the Pest Vigadó: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikiped...

Budapest, Austria-Hungary, 4-28 October 1896 (5)

C C P S J W W T A M M N P =1 Charousek * 1 1 ½ 0 ½ 1 ½ 1 1 0 1 1 8½ =1 Chigorin 0 * ½ 0 1 1 ½ 1 1 1 1 ½ 1 8½ 3 Pillsbury 0 ½ * ½ ½ 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 7½ =4 Schlechter ½ 1 ½ * 1 ½ 1 ½ 0 ½ 1 ½ 0 7 =4 Janowski 1 0 ½ 0 * 0 1 0 1 1 ½ 1 1 7 =6 Walbrodt ½ 0 0 ½ 1 * 1 0 1 0 ½ 1 1 6½ =6 Winawer 0 ½ 0 0 0 0 * 1 1 1 1 1 1 6½ 8 Tarrasch ½ 0 1 ½ 1 1 0 * ½ 0 0 ½ 1 6 =9 Albin 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 ½ * 0 1 ½ 1 5 =9 Maróczy 0 0 0 ½ 0 1 0 1 1 * ½ 0 1 5 11 Marco 1 0 0 0 ½ ½ 0 1 0 ½ * 1 0 4½ 12 Noa 0 ½ 0 ½ 0 0 0 ½ ½ 1 0 * 1 4 13 von Popiel 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 * 2

Playoff match:

Chigorin 1 1 0 1 3 Charousek 0 0 1 0 1

Tarrasch was awarded the special prize for best score against the prize winners. (6) Charousek tied Chigorin for first at the end of the tournament, and at first, Maróczy insisted that there be no playoff - he argued that since Charousek had won his tournament game against Chigorin, the Hungarian master should be given clear first. (7) Chigorin, however, insisted on a playoff mini-match, and Charousek was keen to participate in the showdown. Chigorin, a veteran match player, soundly defeated the young Charousek 3-1 in the playoff. After winning it, Chigorin was given a choice: the silver Winged Victory trophy or 2,500 kronen. (8) He took the money, and the trophy sat at the Budapest Chess Club until the advent of World War I, after which the trophy mysteriously was "lost." (4) Charousek received 2000 kronen for second place. (8) The result made Charousek a national hero in Austria Hungary, and he was invited by the nobility of Budapest and Vienna to lecture and to play simultaneous exhibitions. (9) To this day, Budapest 1896 is the strongest chess tournament ever held in Hungary.

Notes

1 Victor Charuchin, Chess Comet Rudolf Charousek 1873-1900 (Schachfirma Fruth 1997), p. 117.
2 Charuchin, p. 118.
3 Charuchin, p. 119.
4 Charuchin, p. 125.
5 Rod Edwards, EDO chess "Budapest 1896", http://www.edochess.ca/tournaments/....
6 Prager Tagblatt, 23 October 1896, p. 10.
7 Charuchin, p. 148.
8 One Hundred Years Ago Budapest 1896. Sakkelet 10-12, 1996, pp. 372-376. In Charuchin, Appendix D.
9 Charuchin, p. 153.

Original Collection: Game Collection: Budapest 1896, by User: suenteus po 147. Special thanks goes to <jessicafischerqueen> for the superb historical details.

 page 1 of 4; games 1-25 of 82  PGN Download
Game  ResultMoves YearEvent/LocaleOpening
1. Charousek vs Schlechter  ½-½441896BudapestC33 King's Gambit Accepted
2. Chigorin vs Von Popiel 1-0511896BudapestC51 Evans Gambit
3. Janowski vs J Noa 1-0411896BudapestD31 Queen's Gambit Declined
4. Pillsbury vs Albin 0-1341896BudapestC11 French
5. K A Walbrodt vs Maroczy 0-1361896BudapestC11 French
6. Winawer vs Tarrasch 1-0891896BudapestC26 Vienna
7. Schlechter vs Pillsbury ½-½331896BudapestC49 Four Knights
8. Von Popiel vs K A Walbrodt 0-1661896BudapestB30 Sicilian
9. J Noa vs Chigorin ½-½651896BudapestC50 Giuoco Piano
10. Maroczy vs Charousek 0-1341896BudapestA01 Nimzovich-Larsen Attack
11. G Marco vs Janowski ½-½691896BudapestC77 Ruy Lopez
12. Albin vs Winawer 0-1471896BudapestC50 Giuoco Piano
13. Pillsbury vs Maroczy 1-0471896BudapestD55 Queen's Gambit Declined
14. Winawer vs Schlechter 0-1341896BudapestC13 French
15. K A Walbrodt vs J Noa 1-0321896BudapestC15 French, Winawer
16. Tarrasch vs Albin ½-½441896BudapestA84 Dutch
17. Chigorin vs G Marco 1-0561896BudapestC50 Giuoco Piano
18. Charousek vs Von Popiel 1-0251896BudapestC45 Scotch Game
19. Schlechter vs Tarrasch  ½-½451896BudapestC24 Bishop's Opening
20. Von Popiel vs Pillsbury 0-1621896BudapestC23 Bishop's Opening
21. J Noa vs Charousek 0-1561896BudapestC48 Four Knights
22. Maroczy vs Winawer 0-1391896BudapestA07 King's Indian Attack
23. G Marco vs K A Walbrodt  ½-½351896BudapestC67 Ruy Lopez
24. Janowski vs Chigorin 0-1421896BudapestD46 Queen's Gambit Declined Semi-Slav
25. Winawer vs Von Popiel 1-0551896BudapestC00 French Defense
 page 1 of 4; games 1-25 of 82  PGN Download
  REFINE SEARCH:   White wins (1-0) | Black wins (0-1) | Draws (1/2-1/2)  

Kibitzer's Corner
< Earlier Kibitzing  · PAGE 2 OF 2 ·  Later Kibitzing>
Jul-02-16  zanzibar: An important post about the history of this tournament:

Tarrasch vs Albin, 1896 (kibitz #4)

Feb-08-18
Premium Chessgames Member
  mifralu: <zanzibar>
<<Semyon Alapin withdrew at the last minute....> and Gyula Makovetz Source: Neue Hamburger Zeitung / 07 Oct 1896/ Page 6
Aug-31-18  jnpope: Does anyone know the source of the claim that Tarrasch won a brilliancy prize for Popiel-Tarrasch. I have found no evidence of such a prize being offered during the tournament. It doesn't show up in the Deutsche Schachzeitung, British Chess Magazine or any newspaper source I have access to for 1896. Nor could I find it being belatedly awarded in 1897. And it is not mentioned in Maroczy's book of the tournament. Tarrasch did win the special prize offered for having the best score against the prize winners, but that's the only prize I've found him winning from this event.
Aug-31-18  zanzibar: <jnpope> this probably isn't too informative - but <suenteus po 147> once told me more of his material can from van Reek, but he doesn't seem to cover this tournament (see Wayback - https://web.archive.org/web/2003080... - sad to see his old website no longer works).

I do see <JFQ>'s name mentioned, perhaps she can shed some insight.

Here is mention of Tarrasch winning a special prize:

https://www.newspapers.com/clip/191...

Does anybody have Owen's book?

https://www.amazon.com/Budapest-189...

Aside - brief info about the Budapest Millennium:

http://kossuthfoundation.org/index....

Aug-31-18  zanzibar: *more of his material* = most of his material.
Aug-31-18  zanzibar: <jnpope> RE: Budapest Prizes

https://books.google.com/books?id=Z...

which mentions, unlike the above intro, the monetary amounts of the tournament prizes.

Tarrasch won 200 crowns for his best-score against top-5.

Aug-31-18  jnpope: <z>, the BCM also says "200", but the DSZ and the tournament book give "100". The Literary Digest probably used the BCM article, which I presume was a typo?

https://books.google.com/books?id=k...

Aug-31-18  jnpope: The 7th place prize is listed as being 200 Kronen and I doubt they would make the value of the Special Prize for best score against the prize winners the same amount as one of the main prizes.
Aug-31-18  zanzibar: <jnpope> quite likely, indeed.

It seems clear the claim of the von Popiel--Tarrasch brilliancy prize was a mistake. The question is, where did it originate?

Aside - how does <CG> determine the ordering for the Tarrasch games?

Budapest (1896)/Siegbert Tarrasch

It should be done by round, but it isn't.

Sep-01-18
Premium Chessgames Member
  Sally Simpson: The von Popiel-Tarrasch game is not in Reinfeld's 'Tarrasch's Best Games.'

The confusion may have come from how the result was printed in some quarters.

In 'Charousek's Games of Chess' by Sergeant (page 40)

It states:

"A special prize was awarded to Tarrasch (6)"

The '(6)' refers to the number of points Tarrasch won. With no other details about what a 'special prize' was, someone has perhaps took this for his round 6 win v von Popiel and it ran on from there.

Sep-01-18
Premium Chessgames Member
  Tabanus: Prager Tagblatt 23 Oct 1896 p. 10 says Tarrasch with 6 points won the special prize for best score against the prize winners.

http://anno.onb.ac.at/cgi-content/a...

Sep-01-18
Premium Chessgames Member
  TheFocus: <zanzibar> <Aside - how does <CG> determine the ordering for the Tarrasch games?

Budapest (1896)/Siegbert Tarrasch
It should be done by round, but it isn't.>

I don't know what you are seeing, but Tarrasch's games are in order by rounds. The second game is round 3 as Tarrasch had the bye in round 2.

Sep-01-18
Premium Chessgames Member
  Telemus: I wonder that the BCM is mentioned above, but not the special price which L.Hoffer awarded to Tarrasch: 17 volumes of the Chess Monthly. This is mentioned in the BCM 1896, p 440. This is also mentioned in the 1996 article in Sakkélet as given in Charuchin's book. No additional information in Kamm's Tarrasch biography.
Sep-01-18
Premium Chessgames Member
  Sally Simpson: Hi Tabanus,

Did another quick check this morning before going to do some work.

Nothing of note. It would appear someone has seen 'special prize', without any other details thought it referred to a brilliancy prize and decided Tarrasch's Queen sac v Popiel was the game.

No other Tarrasch win from this tournament comes close brilliancy wise. His win Tarrasch vs Janowski, 1896 has been POTD a few times but it is not exceptional.

I only have the Russian copy of Neishtadt's 'Queen Sacrifices' sad to say the Popiel - Tarrasch game does not appear in that either.

He does mention practically other Queen sac from history including the 1763 Lolli study.


click for larger view

White to play and draw.

Neishtadt only gives the less pretty variation.

1. Rf8+ Ka7 2. Ra8+ Kxa8 3. Qf8+ Ka7 4. Qc5+ Qxc5 Stalemate.

I think Lolli intended us to see.

1. Rf8+ Ka7 2. Qc5+ Qxc5 3. Ra8+ Kb6 4. Rxa6+


click for larger view

With three ways of taking the nuisance Rook all ending in a stalemate.

(I have digressed...slightly....just pointing out how what someone else sees and publishes may not be the correct take on things - as is apparent here with 'special' and 'brilliancy'. I do not have the Lolli book so perhaps he only gave the first variation and I have started a new wrong path for others to follow. )

Sep-01-18
Premium Chessgames Member
  Tabanus: Hi SS, I replaced the sentence in the bio with <Tarrasch was awarded the special prize for best score against the prize winners.>

Not sure if that's good English.

Sep-01-18  zanzibar: <SallyS> sounds very plausible - and stands as the only explanation at the moment!
Sep-01-18
Premium Chessgames Member
  Sally Simpson: Hi Zanzibar,

Could have happened at anytime. In the 1930's or 40's or even a mistranslation.

These things sneak into chess lore and it can be a devil of a job to get them corrected and accepted.

No real harm done, but it's good to have it corrected.

Aug-20-19
Premium Chessgames Member
  Jonathan Sarfati: "Since Maróczy was now playing in the event, Hungarian master Kornel Havasi took over the duties of chief arbiter."

Obviously it can't be the Kornel Havasi linked in that sentence, because he was only four years old at the time!

May-09-20  Nosnibor: <Jonathan Sarfati> Was the chief arbiter possibly Leo Havas?
May-09-20  Nosnibor: <Jonathan Sarfati> It may well be Arthur Havasi who took part in the quadrangular correspondence tournament with Charousek, Maroczy and Prof.Exner which concluded in 1898 which originally commenced in 1896 after Charousek returned from the Budapest Tournament.
May-11-20  Nosnibor: Can we trust Charuchin when he mistakenly says Kornel Havasi was the arbiter when he clearly was not?
May-11-20
Premium Chessgames Member
  Stonehenge: Definitely Arthur Havasi (why not Artur?).

I found something on https://adtplus.arcanum.hu/en/. I have no subscription and could only read a bit for free.

Budapesti Hírlap, 1896-09-19:

Maróczy Géza Kdbioky Izidor és Havasi Artúr bi­zottsági tagokból alakult meg

(Géza Maróczy was formed from committee members Izidor Kdbioky and Artúr Havasi).

Ország-Világ, 1896-10-25:

magának A versenyeket erélyes tapin­tattal Havasi Artur vezette A versenybizottság pénz­tárosa Fleissig

(The competitions were led by Artur Havasi The treasurer of the competition committee Fleissig).

May-11-20  dumptrump: Nosnibor-
Some unsolicited advice, when it comes to trusting <CG> versus some other source, put your money on the other source.

Despite the air of authority a footnote lends to the info, if it isn't an exact quote, it's vulnerable to "editorial review".

<CG> 2020-05-11 intro:

<... Since Maróczy was now playing in the event, Hungarian master Kornel Havasi took over the duties of chief arbiter. (3) ...

3 Charuchin, p. 119. >

Here's what Charuchin really said:

<The <chief referee Havasi> announced the tournament regulations. Play started at 1 0 am and the players had to be present up to 8 hours a day. The first part of the daily play lasted until 2 pm, afterwards a two hours break was granted. Thereafter adjourned games had to be continued. The thinking time was: 2 hours for the first 30 moves and 1 hour for every 1 5 moves further.>

Clearly there was some "extrapolation" done by <CG>.

May-11-20  dumptrump: As for <stonehenge>'s suggestion of a name change, I think not, given the general trend of English langauge sources...

e.g. https://books.google.com/books?id=q...

https://books.google.com/books?newb...

https://books.google.com/books?id=e...

Not to mention Sergaent's book on Charousek as well. Arthur seems well established.

May-11-20  dumptrump: OTOH - there are some examples of "Artur" from back then, though far fewer in number...

https://books.google.com/books?id=f...

search thread:   
< Earlier Kibitzing  · PAGE 2 OF 2 ·  Later Kibitzing>

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:

  1. No obscene, racist, sexist, or profane language.
  2. No spamming, advertising, duplicate, or gibberish posts.
  3. No vitriolic or systematic personal attacks against other members.
  4. Nothing in violation of United States law.
  5. No cyberstalking or malicious posting of negative or private information (doxing/doxxing) of members.
  6. No trolling.
  7. 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.

Please try to maintain a semblance of civility at all times.

Blow the Whistle

See something that violates our rules? Blow the whistle and inform a moderator.


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 2001-2020, Chessgames Services LLC