And I put blind faith in your geographical knowledge!

Since my ancestry is predominately Scottish, how did I miss <Edinburgh>?

And don’t get me started on the ambush and slaying of my kinsman <The Red Comyn> by <Robert the Bruce> and his henchmen—before the high altar of the Greyfriars Church in Dumfries—to clear the path for Robert's ascension as King of Scots.

6.Bd2 or Nc3 surprisingly better:

click for larger view

Stockfish_19082608_x64_modern:

<39/60 19:19 +1.12 6.Bd2 Nc6 7.Qe3> Bb4 8.Nc3 d6 9.f4 Qh4+ 10.g3 Qe7 11.0-0-0 Bg4 12.Nd5 Bc5 13.Qd3 Qd7 14.Bc3 0-0 15.Be2 Bxe2 16.Qxe2 Ne7 17.Nxe7+ Qxe7 18.Rhe1 f6 19.Kb1 c6 20.a4 a5 21.h4 Rfe8 22.h5 h6 23.Qd3 Qe6 24.Bd4 Bxd4 25.Qxd4 Red8 26.Qc3 Kh8 27.b3 Qf7 28.g4 Qc7 29.Kb2 Rab8 30.e5 fxe5 31.fxe5 dxe5 32.Rxd8+ Rxd8 33.Qxe5

<...But we don't know the composition of the teams.>

We do, they are listed here: Game Collection: 1824 Edinburgh Chess Club vs London Chess Club

If the pun was an error can it not be removed.

See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_...

We do, they are listed here: Game Collection: 1824 Edinburgh Chess Club vs London Chess Club...>

There you have it! There was a Cochrane on one side and a Buchanan on the other.

...or maybe whoever came up with the pun thought it was Edinburgh v Londonderry.

(Cochrane analysed in an 1822 book the move 3.d4. He persuaded London to play it first v Edinburgh, Edinburgh liked the idea so much they played it back v London. It was from Cochrane we get the name 'Scotch Game/Gambit. )

Yes the same player, John Cochrane, a mini hero of mine and I (we) are still researching him. His early life is a bit of a mystery but we are slowly putting it together.

If you look at his games v Mohishunder on here you will see he could have had half dozen other openings or variations named after him. Though played before 1860 you would think some of these game were played yesterday.

Cochrane vs Mohishunder, 1853

click for larger view

The Four Pawns Attack v the Pirc - 'The Cochrane attack.'

I'm nearly spot on regarding the Edinburgh ploy. (the slight doubt is did Edinburgh deliberately keep game 3 going to set this wonderful piece of gamesmanship up?)

London players were reporting this game was won and Edinburgh had agreed into making this the last game.

https://www.redhotpawn.com/chess-bl...

This game, however, is amazingly well played. There are a few slight inaccuracies here and there from both sides, but nothing you would call dubious. Even though White's pawn structure really looks bad after <26.exf5> (D), with Black's rooks controlling the e-file, the game still is very equal. And, as the game shows, that double doubled pawn structure is actually White's biggest asset!

click for larger view

White actually plays only two bad moves. <37...Bd2?> doesn't really accomplish anything, and Stockfish says it would have been better for Black to set its queenside pawns in motion with <37...a5> (I do agree).

But it's <39...Rc2?> (D) that is actually losing, which I, when I first played through the game, thought would be winning! It mean, Black finally gets the bishop, and that king doesn't look good, does he? Sure, but that move actually forces <40.g5>, and now suddenly White also threatens mate with <g6#>!

click for larger view

(It's getting even more spicy because, as <Sally Simpson> showed, there are hints that the cunning Edinburgh players agreed to London's suggestion that this would be the last game after this very move :D)

But although Stockfish gives this position around +6 pawns for white, its evaluations were constantly fluctuating wildly with each new level reached. Both kings are in dire straits, and both players need to play very accurately. And amazingly, both teams do, but the position is just so that everything White does makes the situation worse for its king. After <56.g4> (D), <56...Bf8+?!> (maybe desperately hoping for <57.g7?? Bxg7+ 58.Rxg7 hxg4>) does quicken things up a bit, but essentially, Black just can't keep his king from being mated AND stop this bloody g-pawn. Even after the best move <56...hxg4 57.g7 Rh2+ 58.Kg5 Rxh7 59.g8=Q+ Kd7 60.Qxh7+ Be7 61.Kxg4>, Black has a queen for a rook.

click for larger view

This game doesn't look that spectacular -- there are no deep tactics, no flashy sacrifices -- but it actually the best game I've seen so far, by far, and by both teams. It's amazing that these Scottish nobodies actually beat the London team which included William Lewis and John Cochrane.

This game was rather ground breaking at the time. The Edinburgh Club mentioned in their report on the game that perhaps Philidor's rules for pawn structure need re-examined as White had freedom for their pieces due to the 'bad placement' of their pawns.

<"It's amazing that these Scottish nobodies actually beat the London team....">

Cochrane had left London for India a long time before this game was played.

Lewis was probably not there all the time when the moves were being chosen (the request to take back the blunder and the refusal to take the perpetual in Game 2 attest to this.)

<"It's amazing that these Scottish nobodies actually beat the London team...."> (part II)

Staunton said something similar in his magazine when reviewing the match many years later. He was hit with a ton of furious letters and threatened cancellations to his magazine. This resulted in him coming up to Edinburgh to pacify the Scots.

On the Edinburgh team was one James Donaldson who was a very good player. See; https://en.chessbase.com/post/edinb...

I'd say he took over the games after Edinburgh lost one. (it was Donaldson v London). I can just imagine him convincing a doubtful committee that losing the Bishop is OK. The active Rook, King and Pawns will win.

London appear to have had many hands (some good, some not so good) making their moves.

I also have Donaldson's cunning mind behind the prolonging of the 99 move game so London would suggest (at Edinburgh's coaxing when London appeared to be winning ) that this game would be the last game.

Slight speculation but it carries weight. I do have the advantage of being able to read the minutes of the club for that period. (and the actual letters from London that sent their moves.)

That's hilarious :D I'm very glad they didn't succeed, because the hidden strengths in some "bad" pawn structures is one of the things that make our game so complex and surprising!

Also it speaks for Staunton that he went to Edinburgh to apologize, one usually gets the impression that he wouldn't have cared much.