| Nov-27-14 | | Karpova: This game is from a match between Marco and Schlechter in the Vienna Chess Club. The result was +4 -4 =3. This game won the Brilliancy prize. The match took place at the same time as two other matches: Schlechter-Zinkl (see A Zinkl vs Schlechter, 1894) and Marco-Zinkl (+5 -2 =1). With 15.g3, White initiates a kingside attack, which takes longer preparation according to the annotator. Meanwhile, Black attacks on the queenside. 18.Qd2: The annotator suggests <18.e4 dxe4 19.Qxe4 Re8 20.Qxc6 Rxe2 21.Rxc4 Rxb2>. However, Black may play 19...Bb7 first, and only then ...Re8. 24...f6<!>
28.Nh3 was not annotated, but maybe 28.Nge6 was better (on 27.Kf1, the annotator noted that <27.Nge6> was no better than the text move). 34...c3<!>
38...Rxh3<!>
39...Qc3<!>
Source: 'Österreichische Schachrundschau', August 1922, issue 6/7, p. 49 |
|
| Nov-27-14 | | TheFocus: According to Crain's book on Schlechter, this was a 3 person match-tournament, and not individual matches. |
|
| Nov-28-14 | | Karpova: Since the 'Österreichische Schachrundschau' is a bit vague about the event, here is a bit more detailed information: It is called a <Dreikampf Marco-Schlechter-Zinkl im "Neuen Wiener Schachklub".> (a "triathlon" in the New Vienna Chess Club) and took place in spring (<Frühjahr>) 1894. The "triathlon" was played as matches and Marco won 1st prize. Source: Adolf Julius Zinkl, 'Neue Wiener Schachzeitung', December 1923, p. 328 The final table was not given, but Marco was the only one to win a match. Overall, it would look like this: 1. Marco (+9 -6 =4)
2. Schlechter (+8 -8 =6)
3. Zinkl (+6 -9 =4)
Marco beat Zinkl +5 -2 =1 and drew Schlechter +4 -4 =3. Schlechter drew Zinkl +4 -4 =3. |
|
| Nov-28-14 | | TheFocus: No matter what you say, it was a match tournament, not individual matches. Rest assured, you are not the first to make this mistake. Kaufman drew his first nine games and withdrew! |
|
| Nov-28-14 | | Karpova: I was reporting what the 'Österreichische Schachrundschau' wrote (it was pretty vague as to the nature of the event) and Adolf Julius Zinkl, who calls it a <Dreikampf> and was one of the participants. Zinkl made it clear that it was one event, not individual events. And the designation <Wettkampf> (<In Form von Wettkämpfen>) was used by Zinkl. In English you can certainly call the event a match tournament, not an unusual format by the way. However I like to report as closely as possible what the sources write (and I mention them, too). Actually, I think that my second post makes it pretty clear that this event was what could be called a match tournament, and not unconnected individual matches. |
|
|
|
|
Kibitzing
sac: 38...Rxh3
icon.