"A reader lives a thousand lives before he dies. The man who never reads lives only one." ― George R.R. Martin

"If you don't like to read, you haven't found the right book." – J.K. Rowling

The Human Side of Chess by Fred Reinfeld

A Biographical Work on the World Champions
Reviewed in the United States on December 27, 2013 Since this is a lengthy review, I've divided it up into various topics. Please pick and choose those topics that are of interest to you. If you want a quick review of this book, then the fourth paragraph, "Reinfeld's coverage of the World Champions," should, hopefully, suffice.

WHO WAS FRED REINFELD? Fred Reinfeld (January 27, 1910 - May 29, 1964) was considered one of the world's most prolific chess writers. In 1950, Reinfeld was ranked as the sixth strongest chess player in the United States. (See the article on Fred Reinfeld in the Wikipedia encyclopedia for more information.)

A COMPARISON OF THE 1952 AND 1960 EDITIONS OF THIS BOOK. The "Human Side of Chess" was published in 1952 (302 pp.). It covers the World Champions from Adolf Anderssen to Max Euwe. There is a short chapter (5 pages), "After Alekhine," that briefly covers the period from Alekhine's death in 1946 to 1951 (Botvinnik's match with David Bronstein). A revised edition of this book appeared in 1960 under the title "The Great Chess Masters and Their Games" (334 pp.). Chapter IX, "After Alekhine," was shortened to four pages and a new chapter, "Mikhail Botvinnik and Vassily Smyslov" (23 pp.), was added. Four games (2 by Botvinnik and 2 by Smyslov) were added to the Game section at the end of the book (66 pp. in the 1st edition; 92 pages in the revised edition). Unfortunately, the publisher decided to delete the "Tournament and Match Records" (10 pages) and the Index (6 pages) from the revised edition. When I read this book as a teenager in 1957, I was fascinated by the tournament and match records of the various World Champions. I was sorely disappointed when this section was left out of the revised edition in 1960.

REINFELD'S COVERAGE OF THE WORLD CHAMPIONS. Reinfeld devotes approximately 30 pages to each world champion. Unlike Reuben Fine's "Psychoanalytic Observations on Chess and Chess Masters" or John S. Hilbert's "Shady Side: The Life and Crimes of Norman Tweed Whitaker, Chessmaster," this book is neither a psychological study nor does it consist of intimate and detailed biographical commentary, i.e., I wouldn't call it a scholarly work. Yes, there are psychological insights and, yes, there are some personal details, but Reinfeld is mostly interested in the world champions as chess players first and foremost. We are not going to learn those intimate details that so often add spice to a biographical work. One also notices that Reinfeld is not reluctant to draw conclusions from what appears to be flimsy evidence. For example, he notes that Anderssen "was brusque at times, still suffering from the conflict between pride and embarrassment over money troubles and his humble origins." Can this be substantiated? Or is this simply a conjecture on Reinfeld's part? It should also be pointed out that Arnold Denker and Larry Parr, in their book, "The Bobby Fischer I Knew and Other Stories," warn us not to "read Fred's chess books for precision history." Although I did not note any factual errors in this book that is not to say that such errors don't exist. "My purpose," according to Reinfeld, "is not to criticize and not to apologize; only to understand." In my opinion, he more than succeeds. After reading this book, you will indeed have a greater understanding of these world champions.]

WHY DOES REINFELD BEGIN HIS BOOK WITH ADOLF ANDERSSEN? According to FIDE (the World Chess Organization), Wilhelm Steinitz was the first World Champion. Fred Reinfeld disagreed! He begins the reign of the World Champions with Adolf Anderssen of Germany (Anderssen was born July 6, 1818 in Breslau). Why does Reinfeld begin with Anderssen and not Steinitz? The answer is very simple, Anderssen won the first international chess tournament, London 1851. Howard Staunton wrote a wonderful book on this tournament. The title of the book is "The Chess Tournament" (377 pp. + 83 page introduction; published in 1852). It is interesting to note Staunton's comment from page lxxiv of his introduction, "...it will be ever memorable in the annals of Chess, as the first general meeting of players from different parts of the world...." Seven years later, Anderssen was defeated in a match (7 losses, 2 wins, and 2 draws) against the American Paul Morphy. Morphy retired from chess shortly after this match. Anderssen then played a match with Wilhelm Steinitz in 1866 (Steinitz won the match by 8 wins, 6 losses, and 0 draws), so, according to this scenario, Steinitz was the third not the first World Champion.

When Alekhine died on March 24, 1946, the World Championship was decided by a tournament of the world's best players in 1948 (this tournament was won by Botvinnik). Reinfeld indirectly implies that the London Tournament of 1851, the first international tournament in which the world's best players participated, was the equivalent of the 1948 tournament.* If one accepts this line of reasoning, then Anderssen was the first World Champion. Since Steinitz's match with Zukertort in 1886 was for the "Championship of the World," then, according to the official version, Steinitz should be considered the first World Champion. In short, the title of World Champion did not exist prior to the 1886 match. Personally, I find Reinfeld's argument most persuasive. By adding Anderseen and Morphy to our pantheon of World Champions, I feel that we have enriched our chess heritage.**

A JUSTIFICATION FOR READING A BOOK ON THE WORLD CHAMPIONS. The reader might ask: Why read a book about the World Champions? The simple answer might be that their accomplishments are a source of inspiration and motivation for the rest of us, but I think that Veselin Topalov said it best: "From about the time of Anderssen and Morphy (mid-19th century) on, the champions were acknowledged as geniuses, and their best games had the status of works of art." ("Topalov-Kramnik, 2006 World Chess Championship, On the Edge in Elista," by Veselin Topalov & Zhivko Ginchev, p. 7.) Hopefully, the reader of this review will get as much enjoyment out of Reinfeld's book as I have.

A BRIEF NOTE ON REINFELD'S INTRODUCTORY CHAPTER. Although Reinfeld included a games section (pages 221 - 286), this book is primarily a biographical work. The first chapter (pages 3 - 8) has the intriguing title "The Illusion of Master Chess." "Chess becomes an art," according to Reinfeld, "when a player reaches the stage at which he is able to conceive a winning position and possesses the ability to bring the conceived position into existence. Such a player is called a master--a chessmaster. The great chessmasters, like the great poets, the great composers, the great artists, the great mathematicians, the great mystics, have the faculty of immersing themselves in some creative process with a concentration, a finality, that is beyond most of us. The creative activities of these chessmasters have produced a literature of masterpieces which is one of the glories of the human mind." He then goes on to talk about the "illusions" to be found in modern chess. I must confess that I am somewhat skeptical of his analysis, but I leave it up to the reader to draw his or her own conclusions (see pp. 7 - 8).

Chapter 2 begins with ADOLF ANDERSSEN (pp. 9 - 41). Reinfeld calls him "The Romantic." "Anderssen has been called 'the incarnation of Romanticism,' and there is a magic quality in his very name which thrills every devotee of chess to this day. Yet there is a bitter-sweet element in Anderssen's glory which is almost more poignant than frank neglect: for this fame is a spurious fame. It is based on a legend, on a tragic misconception. Admiration for Anderssen is blended with contempt; his true genius is obscured beyond recognition." What was Anderssen's "true genius"? For the answer to this question, you will need to read this book. For more information on Adolf Anderssen, see Hermann von Gottschall's Adolf Anderssen der Altmeister deutscher Schachspielkunst.

Chapter 3 covers PAUL MORPHY (pp. 42 - 71). He refers to Paul Morphy as "The Gentleman." According to Morphy, "Reputation is the only incentive I recognize." "Anderssen's career...began when he was thirty. Paul Morphy's playing days were over before he was twenty-three! In only three years of active play he conquered the Old World as well as the New, gave the development of chess theory a mighty impetus, set new standards for accurate and elegant play, enriched the chess world with many beautiful games." Eight years after Reinfeld wrote "The Human Side of Chess," Frances Parkinson Keyes wrote a fictional account of Paul Morhpy's life, The Chess Players (608 pages). She lists Reinfeld's book on page 606 of her bibliography. One of the best books on Morphy was published in 1976 by David Lawson, Paul Morphy: Pride and Sorrow of Chess (424 pp.). In my opinion, the best book on Morphy's games is Valeri Beim's Paul Morphy: A Modern Perspective (164 pp.; published 2005).

Chapter 4 covers WILHELM STEINITZ (pp. 72 - 118) who Reinfeld refers to as "The Lawgiver." Reinfeld states that "Wilhelm Steinitz, who has been fittingly described as 'the Michelangelo of chess,' was the most original thinker, the most courageous player, and the most remarkable personality that the chess world has produced in the fifteen or so centuries that the game has been in existence. Steinitz was born in circumstances of great poverty in Prague on May 14, 1836; he died a charity patient in the East River Sanatorium on Ward's Island in New York on August 12, 1900." Kurt Landsberger has written two very scholarly works on Steinitz: William Steinitz, Chess Champion: A Biography of the Bohemian Caesar (487 pp.) and The Steinitz Papers: Letters and Documents of the First World Chess Champion (325 pp.).

Chapter 5 on EMANUEL LASKER (pp. 119 - 141) starts off with the interesting assertion: "'Who was the greatest chessplayer of all time?' has narrowed down to: 'Who was the greatest chessplayer of all time--Lasker or Alekhine?'" Reinfeld refers to Lasker as "The Philosopher." "Lasker is elusive, remote, paradoxical. From the outset his career puzzles us because of his life-long interest in philosophy and mathematics. Most chessplayers are...well, chessplyers. But Lasker had two other interests which absorbed his attention at least as much as chess did. He refused to give his whole life, as Steinitz had, to chess. Sometimes years passed without his playing a single serious game; there must have been months on end when he did not look at a chessboard. This gave him poise, breadth of view, a sense of proportion. Even at the age of twenty-one, when he was 'just another chessplayer,' he impressed Hoffer (Steinitz's archenemy) as 'a man of culture and more than average intellect.'" The fact that Albert Einstein wrote the forward to Dr. J. Hannak's biography on Lasker, Emanuel Lasker: The Life of a Chess Master, is evidence of the high esteem Lasker had as an intellectual. In 2005, Andrew Soltis wrote a wonderful book on Lasker's best games of chess, Why Lasker Matters (320 pp.).

Chapter 6 introduces us to JOSE RAUL CAPABLANCA "The Machine" (pp. 142 - 167). I'm sure that Reinfeld's good friend, Irving Chernev, would have disagreed with Reinfeld's claim in the previous chapter. Chernev, as he wrote in his book "The Golden Dozen," considered Capablanca the greatest chessplayer of all time. Yet, Reinfeld felt that Capablanca was a flawed genius. "Capablanca realized just as well as Lasker that chess had reached a point where one had to take risks in order to obtain winning chances. Lasker had the greatness of character, the resourcefulness, the daring to defy the development of the Macheide; Capablanca did not. The idea of taking such risks was deeply repellent to Capablanca. He, who loved the tidy technique of neat endgames. was horrified by the illogic of risk." What was the Macheide? You will find the answer on page 123 of Reinfeld's text. There are many excellent books on Capablanca, but Fred Reinfeld's The Immortal Games of Capablanca is a wonderful book in its own right (239 pp.); I highly recommend it. Although not primarily a biographical work, Edward G. Winter's Capablanca: A Compendium of Games, Notes, Articles, Correspondence, Illustrations and Other Rare Archival Materials on the Cuban Chess Genius Jose Raul Capablanca, 1882-1942 is noted for its meticulous attention to historical accuracy.

Chapter 7 focuses on my favorite chessplayer, ALEXANDER ALEKHINE (pp. 168 - 198). Reinfeld calls him "The Fighter." "Some fifteen centuries of chessplaying and theorizing meet and fuse in the style of Alexander Alekhine. He was a very great man in some ways, very weak in others; but above all he was a historical phenomenon, and this gives him a dignity far beyond his personal significance. Many influences were woven into Alekhine's games, but he was no hack, no imitator. Alekhine was the most brilliant, the most artistic, the most dynamic chessplayer in history." What more can you say? His two books on his best games are superb! "My Best Games of Chess 1908 - 1923" (265 pp.) and "My Best Games of Chess 1924 - 1937" (285 pp.) were written before the personal computer, so there are the inevitable flaws, but, for a true lover of chess, these books are to be treasured. The Dover edition, My Best Games of Chess, 1908 - 1937, combines both volumes into a single book.

Chapter 8 deals with an extraordinary individual, MAX EUWE (pp. 199 - 215). Reinfeld calls him "The Logician." Of the World Champions, he was probably the most prolific chess writer (he wrote over 70 chess books). He earned a doctorate in mathematics from the University of Amsterdam in 1926. He was, undoubtedly, the most underrated of the World Champions. According to Reinfeld, "Euwe's great fighting victory over Alekhine in 1935 has never received due appreciation, and thus Euwe's career poses the paradox: How can a World Champion be the most underrated player in the world; or, how can the most underrated player in the world become World Champion?" Sadly for Euwe's fans, he lost his return match to Alekhine in 1937 (10 losses, 4 wins, and 11 draws). Euwe was fifty-one years old when this book was published. He died on November 26, 1981. The following books should be of interest: "From My Games 1920 - 1937" is an excellent book by Dr. Euwe. In 2001, Alexander Munninghoff wrote "Max Euwe, the Biography" (351 pp.).

Chapter 9 covers the period following Alekhine's death in 1946 (pp. 216 - 220). This is a very sketchy chapter that deals with the World Championship Tournament of 1948 (won by Botvinnik) and Botvinnik's drawn match with David Bronstein in 1951. Reinfeld concludes this chapter by stating that "Today master chess must be played in the style of Alekhine or not at all." Although he doesn't state it in these terms, Reinfeld is referring to the "dynamic" style that was generally associated with the Soviet School of Chess. Larry Evans used the term eclectics when referring to this style of play, but this term never caught on. (Reference "Dynamic Chess" by R. N. Coles, "The Soviet School of Chess" by A. Kotov & M. Yudovich, and "New Ideas in Chess" by Larry Evans.)

GAME SECTION. The Games section (pp. 221 - 286) includes 14 annotated games in descriptive notation (two games for each World Champion). This is followed by a section on the Tournament and Match Records of each World Champion (pp. 287 - 296). The book ends with a six page index (pp. 297 - 302).

CONCLUSION: Of the approximately 700 chess books that I own, this is one of my favorite books; needless to say, I highly recommend it.*** ____________________________________

* "Nowadays we think of Anderssen's victory as establishing him as the first World Champion. But at the time no official title was involved; he was simply looked upon as the world's best player, as a matter of widespread opinion, but not by way of official status" (p. 22).

** Graham Burgess in "The Mammoth Book of Chess" lists the "unofficial" world champions in this order: Philidor, de la Bourdonnais, Staunton, and Morphy. Although he mentions the London Tournament of 1851, he makes no mention of Anderssen. This is rather surprising, because we find the following remark in a book written by Graham Burgess, John Nunn, and John Emms: "Adolf Andeseen...was undoubtedly one of the strongest players of his era and indeed was crowned unofficial World Champion after handsomely winning the great London Tournament of 1851..." ("The Mammoth Book of the World's Greatest Chess Games," p. 14; by the way, a great book!). According to H. Paul Lillebo ("World Champions - reclaiming a lost century," ChessBase website, 4/24/2014), "we ought to extend our official history of the chess world championship by 139 years to recognize these great champions. The revised list will then begin as: François-André Danican Philidor (world champion 1747-1795), Louis La Bourdonnais (world champion 1824-1840), Howard Staunton (world champion 1843-1851), Adolf Anderssen (world champion 1851-1858, 1861-1866), and Paul Morphy (world champion 1858-1861)."

*** The Ishi Press International reprint (March 2013) includes an introduction by Sam Sloan.

* "Dreams" by Fleetwood Mac (1977): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y3y...

<Dec-16-23 Sally Simpson: I recently saw this Christmas joke.

Q. Which one of Santa's reindeer has the best moves?

A. Dancer!

That is naff, it should be, Johannes Rudolph or Jan Hein Donner or Jan Hein Donner or even Comet (Computer) (Computer)>

* Chess Terms: https://chessmart.com/pages/chess-t...

* Morphy pounds Philidor's Defense: Game Collection: White - Philidor: Morphy

* MT Facts: https://www.chessjournal.com/facts-...

* Old P-K4 Miniatures: Game Collection: Games for Classes

* Play Stockfish 1-10: https://labinatorsolutions.github.i...

Alexander Alekhine's book of the New York 1927 international tournament is an acknowledged classic in European countries but is almost unknown in North America. The reason is simple: the book was published in German, and a proper translation has never been made available in English.

There are three types of people in the world:
Those who can count and those who can't.

The talking dog
A guy spots a sign outside a house that reads "Talking Dog for Sale." Intrigued, he walks in.

"So what have you done with your life?" he asks the dog.

"I've led a very full life," says the dog. "I lived in the Alps rescuing avalanche victims. Then I served my country in Iraq. And now I spend my days reading to the residents of a retirement home."

The guy is flabbergasted. He asks the dog's owner, "Why on earth would you want to get rid of an incredible dog like that?"

The owner says, "Because he's a liar! He never did any of that!"

— Submitted by Harry Nelson