| London (1851) |
|
London, England; May 1851—July 1851 Some of the main organizers of the tournament were Bledow (who had passed away by the time the final proposals could be arranged), von der Lasa, Kennedy and Staunton(1). They wanted a congress of competitive chess players at the start of the London World's Fair that could serve as an international and recurring chess meeting for the best players in Europe and the rest of the world(2). The tournament started in May of that year and proceeded to standardize issues such as consistent time-controls, rules and notation in a knock-out style format.
——————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————
Round 1
————————————┐
Anderssen │
+2=1-0 ├——┐ Round 2
Kieseritsky │ │ ————————————┐
————————————┘ │ Anderssen │
├── +4=0-2 ├──┐
————————————┐ │ Szen │ │
Szen │ │ ————————————┘ │
+2=0-0 ├——┘ │ Round 3
Newham │ │ ————————————┐
————————————┘ │ Anderssen │
├── +4=0-1 ├──┐
————————————┐ │ Staunton │ │
Horwitz │ │ ————————————┘ │
+2=1-1 ├——┐ │ │
Bird │ │ ————————————┐ │ │
————————————┘ │ Staunton │ │ │
├── +4=1-2 ├──┘ │
————————————┐ │ Horwitz │ │ Round 4 Place/Prizes
Staunton │ │ ————————————┘ │ —————————————————————————
+2=0-0 ├——┘ │ Anderssen 1st £183 6s8d
Brodie │ │ +4=1-2
————————————┘ │ Wyvill 2nd £55 0s0d
├── —————————————————————————
————————————┐ │ Williams 3rd £39 5s9d
Williams │ │ +4=1-3
+2=0-1 ├——┐ │ Staunton 4th £27 10s0d
Löwenthal │ │ ————————————┐ │ —————————————————————————
————————————┘ │ Williams │ │
├── +4=0-0 ├──┐ │
————————————┐ │ Mucklow │ │ │
Mucklow │ │ ————————————┘ │ │
+2=0-0 ├——┘ │ │
E. Kennedy │ │ ————————————┐ │
————————————┘ │ Wyvill │ │
├── +4=0-3 ├——┘
————————————┐ │ Williams │
H. Kennedy │ │ ————————————┘
+2=0-0 ├——┐ │
Mayet │ │ ————————————┐ │ ————————————┐
————————————┘ │ Wyvill │ │ Szen │ —————————————————————————
├── +4=1-3 ├──┘ +4=0-0 ├——┐ Szen 5th £20 0s0d
————————————┐ │ H. Kennedy │ Horwitz │ │ +4=1-0
Wyvill │ │ ————————————┘ ————————————┘ │ H. Kennedy 6th £13 15s0d
+2=0-0 ├——┘ ├── —————————————————————————
Löwe │ ————————————┐ │ Horwitz 7th £9 3s4d
————————————┘ H. Kennedy │ │ (forfeit)
+4=0-0 ├——┘ Mucklow 8th £7 10s0d
Mucklow │ —————————————————————————
————————————┘
——————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————
Format: First player to two wins, draws not counting, is the winner of round one.
First player to four wins, draws not counting, is the winner of subsequent rounds.
Individual Matches
Round 1
1 2 3 4 Wins
—————————————————————————————————
Anderssen 1 ½ 1 2
Kieseritsky 0 ½ 0 0
—————————————————————————————————
Szen 1 1 2
Newham 0 0 0
—————————————————————————————————
Horwitz ½ 0 1 1 2
Bird ½ 1 0 0 1
—————————————————————————————————
Staunton 1 1 2
Brodie 0 0 0
—————————————————————————————————
Williams 1 0 1 2
Löwenthal 0 1 0 1
—————————————————————————————————
Mucklow 1 1 2
E. Kennedy 0 0 0
—————————————————————————————————
H. Kennedy 1 1 2
Mayet 0 0 0
—————————————————————————————————
Wyvill 1 1 2
Löwe 0 0 0
—————————————————————————————————
Round 2
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Wins
———————————————————————————————————
Anderssen 1 0 0 1 1 1 4
Szen 0 1 1 0 0 0 2
———————————————————————————————————
Staunton 0 1 0 1 ½ 1 1 4
Horwitz 1 0 1 0 ½ 0 0 2
———————————————————————————————————
Williams 1 1 1 1 4
Mucklow 0 0 0 0 0
———————————————————————————————————
Wyvill 1 0 0 1 ½ 0 1 1 4
H. Kennedy 0 1 1 0 ½ 1 0 0 3
———————————————————————————————————
Round 3
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Wins
—————————————————————————————————
Anderssen 1 1 1 0 1 4
Staunton 0 0 0 1 0 1
—————————————————————————————————
Wyvill 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 4
Williams 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 3
—————————————————————————————————
Szen 1 1 1 1 4
Horwitz 0 0 0 0 0
—————————————————————————————————
H. Kennedy 1 1 1 1 4
Mucklow 0 0 0 0 0
—————————————————————————————————
Round 4
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Wins
———————————————————————————————————
Anderssen 1 ½ 0 1 1 0 1 4
Wyvill 0 ½ 1 0 0 1 0 2
———————————————————————————————————
Williams 1 0 0 0 1 1 ½ 1 4
Staunton 0 1 1 1 0 0 ½ 0 3
———————————————————————————————————
Szen ½ 1 1 1 1 4
H. Kennedy ½ 0 0 0 0 0
———————————————————————————————————
Horwitz* +
Mucklow -
———————————————————————————————————
* Mucklow was absent and the committee awarded the match to Horwitz.
Notes
Buckle - Loewenthal (1851), Deacon - Lowe (1851),
Loewenthal - Williams (1851),
Bird - Horwitz (1851), Jaenisch - Staunton (1851) and Staunton - Williams (1851) were "set matches" arranged by the tournament committee. Historical Footnote
Anderssen vs Kieseritzky, 1851, the famous Immortal Game, was played at the venue but was not part of the tournament. Missing information
The exacting dating of each game.
Sources
The Chess Tournament, Staunton, London 1852, p(lxxxix)
(1) Wikipedia article: London 1851 chess tournament
(2) Wikipedia article: The Crystal Palace
|
|
| page 1 of 4; games 1-25 of 85 |
     |
 |
|
| page 1 of 4; games 1-25 of 85 |
|
|
|
|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 3 OF 3 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
Dec-10-16
 | | MissScarlett: <R2.x and R3.x = 1851.06.?? R4.x = 1851.07.??>
Yes, this is correct.
<There might be some uncertainty for end R3/beginning R4, but it's not too likely. Nor significant, as an inexact date might suggest some uncertainty of a day or two.> Provincial papers were in the habit of unattributed copying of reports from bigger and better titles, and the necessary delay in recycling sometimes leads to confusion. |
|
| Dec-10-16 | | zanzibar: <MissS> yes, but I think I exhausted the ILN reportage for info. So where else can hope reside?
It's unfortunate the coverage tampered off in the later stages of the tournament (at least, iirc, not having worked on this for awhile now). |
|
| Jun-27-17 | | zanzibar: Rookhouse has this interesting (but unsourced) Anderssen quote about the playing conditions: <Additionally, the playing conditions were reportedly bad enough to inspire the following quote from Anderssen:Things were not particularly comfortable; tables and chairs were both small and low; the large boards stuck out over both edges of the tables; any space near the player was taken away by the person recording the moves; in short, there was not the slightest amount of free space on which one could support one’s head which might be so full of care during the hard struggles.> http://www.rookhouse.com/london-1851/ |
|
Feb-19-19
| | MissScarlett: <So where else can hope reside?> I've been looking at some reports in the <Morning Chronicle>, a London daily, via the <BNA>. The print quality is generally poor, which hampers its searchability - presumably explaining why I wasn't aware of its coverage before - but I've already found some useful information regarding game dates. |
|
| Feb-19-19 | | zanzibar: <MS> unlikely I'll be able to access that source anytime soon. But I'd encourage you to further the work, either here or on your own blog, and take up the work from where it was left off. . |
|
| Feb-19-19 | | zanzibar: PS- There's only a select few "elite" posters I'd share this tip with, but <MS> is one of them, as concerns historical newspapers... For some issues, particularly old German/Austrian newspapers, the layout can be extremely dense - tight multiple columns across the page, with just a brief mention of a chess item in a passing paragraph, often without a heading. So, even knowing the page, the info can be hard to find - especially if in a foreign language. <A useful aid, then, is to add a column number to the page citation, e.g. p6 -> p6c4> Not often needed, but quite a convenience when it is. |
|
Feb-19-19
| | MissScarlett: <There's only a select few "elite" posters I'd share this tip with, but <MS> is one of them, as concerns historical newspapers...> Thanks, we'll just keep it between ourselves. Incidentally, no need to put elite between quotation marks - if I'm not part of the elite, the word has no meaning. |
|
| Feb-19-19 | | hashtag: 3l173 m0n0l06u35 |
|
| Feb-20-19 | | zanzibar: <MS> don't let it give you a big head, but I've always put you in a "special" category, all your own! * * * * *
<hashtag> what is that? Gotta wonder if cryto-posts should be item #12. Hmmm... |
|
Feb-20-19
| | MissScarlett: <<MS> don't let it give you a big head, but I've always put you in a "special" category, all your own!> #metoo Started a collection: Game Collection: London 1851 Work in progress...
<<hashtag> what is that?> Just my Russian handler. #callyoulater |
|
| Feb-20-19 | | zanzibar: Looks like a good start. Might that be your first <CG> tournament in the making?! |
|
Sep-22-19
| | MissScarlett: I'm interested in historical precedents for use of the knock-out format in other sports or pastimes. What about mediaeval jousting tournaments or even the ancient Olympic Games? Wikipedia is singularly unhelpful:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Singl... |
|
Sep-22-19
 | | beatgiant: <MissScarlett>
Or maybe you didn't look in the right place in Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pankr... The ancient Olympic pankration is described as a 16-player, 4-round knock-out event with the pairings selected by drawing of lots. |
|
Sep-22-19
| | beatgiant: <MissScarlett>
One finds random sources on the web that claim that mideaval jousting used elimination contests, but without citing authoritative sources. For example http://www.lordsandladies.org/joust...
"Joust a plaisance - A series of elimination jousting contests which were held over over several days. An overall jousting winner would be determined" Other ancient civilizations like Egypt, China and India had sports competitions, but I couldn't quickly find any details about their tournament rules. You'd have to look for specialized academic literature. |
|
Nov-17-20
| | MissScarlett: The Chess Player (Kling & Horwitz), no.2, July 26th 1851, p.14: <Mr. Staunton challenged Mr. Anderssen to play him a match of twenty-one games for 100l. Mr. Anderssen accepted the challenge, on condition that the match commence shortly instead of the time named by Mr. Staunton, that no less than five games be played weekly, and that any one absenting himself during any day fixed for the contest shall be considered to have lost one game. As Mr. Staunton complains of indisposition, and demands time to recruit his health, we think it not likely that he will agree to these conditions; on the other hand, Mr. Anderssen is not likely to yield, because he is not at home in England; his stay here is expensive, and his professional duties in Prussia render it absolutely necessary for him to be in Breslau before October.> I see now this abortive match is referred to on the Wikipedia page of <London 1851>, but it had completely evaded my notice. Not sure if Anderssen ducked Staunton, or vice versa. |
|
Nov-17-20
 | | keypusher: <MissScarlett> Not to ask for free research, but off the top of your head do you know how 100 pounds compares with the stakes of other leading matches of the time? Staunton says that he challenged Anderssen within a few hours of the conclusion of the Anderssen-Wyvill match, see pp. lxxi-lxxii at the link to his book of the tournament (many of the pages have been scanned out of order). Read the whole thing to learn of the London Club's perfidy and the vicious nature of Anderssen's partisans. https://www.google.com/books/editio... |
|
| Nov-18-20 | | Z4all: <KP> you can scan through several contemporaneous tournaments: Tournament Index
It appears that at least a couple of other matches were also played at a £100 wager. (Which is worth 6 horses or 18 cows or 141 stones of wool in today's, err, "currency"... https://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk...) |
|
Nov-18-20
| | keypusher: Thanks!
(<zanzibar>, is that you?? Welcome back if so!) |
|
| Nov-18-20 | | Z4all: Yuppers, the Z is me. |
|
Nov-18-20
| | keypusher: <Z> Well, great to see you, hope you stick around. |
|
| Nov-18-20 | | Z4all: Ha! Thanks.
(Whether here or there, I'm usually in Z-vicinity [of a bad pun or two?!]) |
|
Nov-18-20
| | MissScarlett: Something that I've never been sure about regarding stake matches (but was afraid to ask) - does the winner (and the loser, in some cases) keep all the loot, or do the victorious backers get their money back? |
|
Nov-19-20
| | keypusher: <MissScarlett> For whatever it's worth, in Steinitz-Blackburne it appears that the winner took both sides' money. From the match page:
<"(1) The stakes in the match shall be £60 a side, and either player who first scores seven games, exclusive of draws, shall be declared the victor, and be entitled to receive the stakes of both sides.
(2) Each player shall deposit his stake of £60 with Mr J. H. Walsh, the chief editor of The Field newspaper, at least one day previous to the commencement of the match.
(3) The rooms of the West-end Chess Club, No. 8, New Coventry-Street, W., shall be the place of meeting throughout the contest for the purpose of play. The first game shall commence on Thursday, the 17th of February, at 2 p.m. and play shall proceed on every subsequent Saturday, Tuesday, and Thursday, at the same time until the conclusion of the match. After four hours' play either party may claim an adjournment for an hour. After eight hours' play the game shall be adjourned to the next day, Sundays excepted.
(4) Each player shall be allowed two hours for making his first series of thirty moves, and an hour for every subsequent fifteen moves, and the time gained in each series of moves shall be counted to the credit of the next series. This time limit shall be regulated by sand-glasses, and either player exceeding it by five minutes shall forfeit the game." - Chess match between Messrs. Steinitz & Blackburne, p. 7.> Steinitz - Blackburne (1876) I wonder if Baron Kolisch staked himself. Morphy certainly could have, but I don't think he did. |
|
| Nov-19-20 | | Z4all: From my sense of gentlemanly fair-play, I can't imagine the winner not reimbursing the promoter's wagers. But this sort of detail is very unlikely to be mentioned in the gentlemanly literature of the time. |
|
Feb-14-21
| | MissScarlett: For anyone wondering why Pierre Charles Fournier de Saint Amant was not amongst the fray, the <Morning Post> of June 3rd 1851, p.5, announced that <St. Amant, the great chess player, is appointed French consul at California.> |
|
|
|
|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 3 OF 3 ·
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:
- 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
