He was born in Germany in the family with strong chess traditions. In 1854 he emigrated to the USA and gained a reputation of one of the strongest chessplayers of Chicago.

For blind simultans, played firstly against 5 opponents, then against 15 opponents he was awarded Gold Medal by New York Chess Club.

At New York tournament in 1857 he was 2nd (after Morphy).

In 1860 he returned to Europe and took part in many international and state chess tournaments winning Bristol 1861, Krefeld 1871, Leipzig 1877, Frankfurt am Mein 1878, Brunschwick 1880. He was 2nd at London 1862 (after Anderssen) and Leipzig 1879 (after Englisch).

In individual duels he drawed with Kolisch in 1861 (match was suspended after +7-6+18 for Paulsen, and regarded as a draw) and Anderssen in 1862 (+3-3=2). In 1876 he met again with Anderssen and won +5-3+1. Beside that he won with A. Schwarz, G. Neumann and M. Lang.

He developed opening theory and his playing style was balanced beetween courageous play and prophylactics. W. Steinitz and A. Nimzowitsch were considering Paulsen a pioneer of the modern positional school of play.

He was playing in many tournaments and matches, and he was spending not enough time on preparations. Therefore he didn't gained such high place in chess history, as his skills and talent was predisposing him.

<Apparently Paulsen used to take forever to make his moves. One of his games against Morphy ended in a draw after 15 hours>

Probably then most annoying part was that this particular game ended in a draw. This was Morphy's second game with Paulsen during the 1857 Congress with Morphy playing the black pieces. According to Lowenthal, on move 23: "As soon as the second player [Morphy] had touched the Queen, he remarked that, had he taken the knight, the contest could not have been prolonged a dozen moves...Black's error consisted in reversing what should have been his 23rd and 24th moves."

I don't think Morphy was too happy with himself.

<uponthehill>

thanks!

<SBC:
What do you think yourself?
You're an expert on Morphy in specific, and chess history in general.>

No, I'm not an expert on either Morphy or on chess history in general.

But, my take is that Paulsen had no claim to being #1 in the 1860s.

according to G. A. McDonnell
Paulsen scored:
2nd in 1st American Chess Congress 1857
1st in Bristol, 1861
2nd in 1862 London International

In 1862 Paulsen tried exhaustively to get Morphy to play him in an even match. Morphy, who had demostrated his complete superiority over Paulsen, rightly refused an even match and Paulsen refused to receive odds...so that match never occurred but I couldn't imagine Paulsen winning if it had.

Morphy was one of the flies in the ointment for Paulsen in the 1860s.

Paulsen drew a match with Kolisch, 1861
In 1862, won an offhand series of games against Mackenzie by the slightest margin. The same year, lost a match to short match Steinitz, giving Steinitz odds of P&move. Paulsen placed 2nd, behind Anderssen, in Hamburg, 1869. In Baden-Baden, 1870, Paulsen was 5th, behind Anderssen,Steinitz, Neumann and Blackburne In 1873, won an offhand series of games against Steinitz (even) 3-2, excluding draws. Steinitz had just won at Vienna, 1873, in which Paulsen was 5th. (behind Blackburne, Anderssen and Rosenthal) Paulsen won Leipzig 1877 ahead of Anderssen (now quite old), Zukertort and Winawer. In 1880 at Weisbaden, Paulsen placed 11th (Blackburne won) In Vienna 1882, Paulsen placed 8th (Steinitz won)

I think Paulsen really came into his own in the 1870s and 1880s as his understanding of chess increased. Steinitz claimed that Paulsen was the one opponent he feared most in matchplay. But Paulsen, as a player, I think, suffered as timed games became more common and his results later in his career didn't reflect his true strength. Paulsen was definitely one of the best players of the 19th century (and also one of the most influential), and remained so for a long period of time but I'm not sure at any given point in time that he was THE best.