|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2 OF 2 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
| Sep-27-10 | | tonsillolith: Just because someone lives in the 19th century, they can't be rated 1800? I don't get it. Is that just because the rating system hadn't been developed yet? |
|
| Sep-27-10 | | rapidcitychess: <tonsillolith> The rating wasn't invented 'till about 1960, by Arpad Elo. Thus, the Elo system. |
|
| Sep-27-10 | | tonsillolith: <rapidcitychess> Ahh, so it is impossible to be of a certain strength if there is no system in place to measure it. Therefore all players before 1960 had a default rating of zero, or what? Ohh, that must be what Bobby Fischer meant when he said he "just got good" when he was younger. That must have been the moment the Elo system was developed! Chess is starting to make more sense now. Except...the Elo system is in place, and I am still terrible. What gives? |
|
| Sep-27-10 | | rapidcitychess: <tonsilolith> There is the chessmetrics rating which measures the ratings of players before the Elo system. And <I Play The Fred> is working on rating games. In conclusion, it is possible to rate older players.
And you are probably terrible if play like me. <I play The Fred> is also interested in why is one player better than another. Hope it helps. |
|
Sep-27-10
 | | Phony Benoni: <rapidcitychess: <I play The Fred> is also interested in why is one player better than another.> Perhaps the choice of opening has something to do with it. |
|
| Sep-27-10 | | eightbyeight: Not bad for 1800!
The position is by no means doomed for Black. He has queen against rook and bishop and can stop mate with Qf7. I wouldn't resign here. |
|
Sep-27-10
| | Phony Benoni: <eightbyeight> 26...Qf7 27.Rh8+ Qh7 28.Rxh7#. In fact, the only move Black has to stop mate is 26...Qh7, leaving him a rook behind after 27.Bxh7 Kxh7. |
|
Sep-27-10
 | | FSR: Freeborough and Charles Edwards Ranken were the co-authors of Chess Openings Ancient and Modern, first published in 1889, a predecessor of MCO. Games by Freeborough are very hard to come by. The only previous game of his I've seen is a game where he got humiliated by Amos Burn. It's in my Wikipedia article on Freeborough: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edward... |
|
Sep-27-10
| | Phony Benoni: This game was published in Freeborough's obituary from the British Chess Magazine, October 1896, p. 396: http://books.google.com/books?id=dh... However, there is no indication of its date.
There are a few games of Freeborough scattered throughout early issues of the B.C.M., usually of this same type as this game: gambits against "Another Amateur". |
|
Mar-28-22
 | | Sally Simpson: Hi Phony Benoni.
One could give a better approximation of the date due to the note here Blackburne vs Philp, 1875 Saying 8.Bf4, as played in this game, was at the time considered a novelty (we do not appear to have the 1842 game) so is it not safe to assume this game was played after 1875. (Freeborough would have been 45 in 1875 ) Add 1875? that way you will not get comments like Edward Freeborough (kibitz #1) Just a thought. |
|
| Mar-28-22 | | FM David H. Levin: <C4gambit: 24....Nf6 25. Bd3 keeps the pressure. Does it get white to a better position?> On 24...Nf6 25. Bd3, 25...Kg7 seems a strong defensive move: unpinning the rook, defending the knight, and attacking White's rook. If 26. Ra8, then 26...Nb4 threatens to exchange White's bishop while bringing the knight into play. |
|
| Mar-28-22 | | FM David H. Levin: <al wazir: 24...Nf6 25. Rf7+ (25. Bxf6 Rxf6 26. Rxf6 Qe8) Qxf7 26. Bxf7 Rg7 would have gotten black out of trouble.> I think Black still has some difficulties. After 27. Bc4, the knight remains pinned, and 27...Kg6 seems forced (27...Rg6 loses the exchange to 28. Bd3). Then 28. Bd3+ Kf7 29. Nxa7 gets a second pawn for the exchange, and Black's knight is remains pinned, while the rook has no safe move (29...Rg8 30. Bc4+). If 29...Nb4, then 30. Bc4+ Kg6 31. a3 Nc6 (If 31...Nxc2, then 32. Bd3+ picks up the knight.) 32. Bd3+ Kf7 33. Nxc6 bxc6 34. Bxc7, getting a third pawn for the exchange, and Black has yet to untangle. Perhaps better is 29...Ke7 (instead of 29...Nb4), but 30. Bf5 keeps Black bottled up and intends 31. a3 followed by advancing the b-pawn to constrict Black further. |
|
| Mar-28-22 | | FM David H. Levin: In a previous comment, one line I gave went 24...Nf6 25. Rf7+ Qxf7 26. Bxf7 Rg7 27. Bc4 Kg6 28. Bd3+ Kf7 29. Nxa7 Ke7, reaching the following position.
click for larger viewThen I suggested 30. Bf5, but this exposes the bishop after 30...Rf7 (threatening 31...Nd7, to force a minor piece exchange). So, 30. a3 seems better, to prevent 30...Nb4. If 30...Rf7 in reply, then 31. c4 prevents 31...Nd5. If 31...Nd7 in reply, then 32. Bg3, and Black's knights are still starved for decent squares. |
|
Mar-28-22
 | | Stonehenge: Just uploaded:
E Freeborough vs J R Clark, 1878 Probably the same Clark (from Hull). |
|
Mar-28-22
| | Sally Simpson: Hi Stonehenge,
Almost certainly, I see this game has had the dated changed to 1878. |
|
Mar-29-22
| | Stonehenge: <dated changed to 1878> The game can be found in <Land and Water>. See < The Sydney Mail and New South Wales Advertiser, 15 Nov 1879, Page 837>. https://trove.nla.gov.au/newspaper/... |
|
| Mar-29-22 | | Z free or die: A few biographers are subscribed to BNL. It would be nice to have the original <Land and Water> ref. (Also - since this articles are out of copyright, aren't people allowed to make clippings of such articles? That also would be a good standard to aspire to.) The Trove article doesn't give the full names, J. Clark (now updated to J.R. Clark) comes from BCM article. Let's see if the J.R. part is referenced on his bio page, hold on.... nope. Could biographers who add such useful info please also add a comment on the player's bio, or at least on his/her kibitzing page? Again, a good standard to aspire for. |
|
Mar-29-22
 | | MissScarlett: <Land and Water> is not available at <BNA>. |
|
| Mar-29-22 | | Z free or die: It's not?! You aren't getting your money's worth then, are you? |
|
Mar-29-22
| | MissScarlett: The site includes a page where members can suggest new titles but there's thousands of pages of such and no feedback or other indication that the management are taking a blind bit of notice. One can but hope that just as <The Field> mysteriously dropped from the sky, <L & W> might follow. |
|
| Mar-29-22 | | Z truth 000000001: As concerns chess history - it's an important one (I think - do you agree?). |
|
Mar-29-22
| | MissScarlett: As an indicator of the priorities of the <BNA>, here are the five most recent updates of material: <Civil & Military Gazette (Lahore)Kilmarnock Standard
Liverpool Evening Express
Rutherglen Reformer and Cambuslang Journal
Hinckley Times>
I'm betting that exactly nobody requested any of these titles (only one of which is actually new, to be fair). |
|
| Mar-29-22 | | Z truth 000000001: Maybe it's guided by genealogical yields? Certainly a much higher demand for that sort of material than chess. Really, we're mostly a gratuitous beneficiary of the digitization movement. I guess. |
|
Mar-29-22
| | MissScarlett: Harding (<BCL to 1914>) on L&W: <Important London column, discussed in Chapter 3. Details in Whyld, page 238, are largely correct: Lowenthal was the originator, from 27 August 1870 to 27 December 1873. Whyld mentions Wisker, who may well have assisted before Lowenthal retired from ill health. Wisker was next until ill health led to his resignation also, when P. T. Duffy took over from about April 1876 to November 1877. The final editor was W. N. Potter to 29 August 1885; a letter from Skipworth published on 12 September 1885 was the last chess item.> |
|
| Mar-29-22 | | Z truth 000000001: Thanks for that nice copy. Harding is probably responsible for my original impression as well. |
|
 |
|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2 OF 2 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
Kibitzing
sac: 6.Nxf7