<Everyone else> was accidentally defaulted into the job of managing a project in which we might well repeat hundreds of pages about chess history.

<Perhaps he did but his tenure as champion was short lived.>

<These matches were not considered world championship matches....Janowski's relative success in the first exhibition match, combined with his financial backing, was enough impetus for Lasker to put his title on the line.>

If they weren't world championship matches (Need a directive on capitalization of "World", "Champion", "Championship"), then Lasker's title wasn't on the line. I'm not in love with the phrase "combined with", though I can't think of anything better at the moment. Maybe "along with" or just plain "and".

<It would be another 11 years before another world championship match would take place.>

That doesn't flow in the narrative. The fact it's the only sentence in that paragraph shows it doesn't really fit in with the thoughts preceding and following.

<Janowsky was subject to unfortunate oversights >

<In 1928 Capablanca did manage to produce a $10,000 offer from Bradley Beach, New Jersey to host the rematch. >

I'm not sold on "produce". "Procure", "secure", something else. I know the factualness of this claim is in dispute so it may be moot.

<Alekhine then won a string of games and accrued a four point lead, from which Bogoljubov never recovered.>

<The highlight of this match is the biggest shock ending in the history of the Championship.>

To be consistent with the past tense usage the rest of the intro, the "is" should be "was". Or if the point of emphasis is on that still today being the most shocking ending, perhaps:

"The highlight of this match occurred in game #23, a stunning blunder that remains the biggest shock ending in the history of the Championship. Chigorin, a piece ahead, was on the verge of tying the score at 9-9 and sending the match into overtime."

<<These matches were not considered world championship matches....Janowski's relative success in the first exhibition match, combined with his financial backing, was enough impetus for Lasker to put his title on the line.>

If they weren't world championship matches (Need a directive on capitalization of "World", "Champion", "Championship"), then Lasker's title wasn't on the line. I'm not in love with the phrase "combined with", though I can't think of anything better at the moment. Maybe "along with" or just plain "and".>

Well on the capitalization issue, we may not decide that until the end. According to the jury rigged one we have now, I think that capitals would not be used here, because the words are not appended directly to an actual event? Except maybe this one: <first exhibition match>, although you know a capital there doesn't look quite right to me either.

With respect to the logic of the sentence, I don't like it either. I don't like anything at all about it. I believe this intro will be completely re-written.

<<It would be another 11 years before another world championship match would take place.>

That doesn't flow in the narrative. The fact it's the only sentence in that paragraph shows it doesn't really fit in with the thoughts preceding and following.>

Agree. See my previous comment.

<<Janowsky was subject to unfortunate oversights >

<<In 1928 Capablanca did manage to produce a $10,000 offer from Bradley Beach, New Jersey to host the rematch. > I'm not sold on "produce". "Procure", "secure", something else. I know the factualness of this claim is in dispute so it may be moot.>

I enacted this:

<The highlight of this match occurred in game #23, a stunning blunder that remains the biggest shock ending in the history of the Championship. Chigorin, a piece ahead, was on the verge of tying the score at 9-9 and sending the match into tie break games.>

But what about this?

<The highlight of this match occurred in game #23, a stunning blunder that remains the biggest shock ending in the history of the Championship. Chigorin, a piece ahead, was on the verge of tying the score at 9-9 and extending the match.>

<In 1894, defending champion Wilhelm Steinitz was challenged by a exciting 25 year old talent>

"an exciting".

< from Prussia by the name of Emanuel Lasker.>

I'd slightly prefer ".....from Prussia named Emanuel Lasker." to save 3 words. Or "an exciting 25 year old Prussian named Emanuel Lasker". to save 5 words.

<After the necessary negotiations, the following conditions were agreed upon: >

That first clause might be a waste of 4 words. And the second clause is a bit weak. How about a more active statement? "They agreed to the following conditions:"

<The match began in New York on March 15, 1894, and was fairly even with two victories to each player in the first six games.>

"to each player" might not be right. "for" or "by" are possibly better. Recording it here for future consideration.

<But then Lasker won the last two in New York and added three more consecutive victories in the second leg in Philadelphia. >

<St. Petersberg tournament >

St. Petersburg Tournament

<an upcoming star from Vienna by the name of Carl Schlechter.>

<In 1927 the two giants met over the chessboard in Buenos Aires with the World Championship title at stake.>

Could use a comma after "Aires".

<Capablanca was, of course, a heavy favorite in this match.>

< Game Collection: WCC:Alekhine-Bogoljubov 1929

<Alekhine then won a string of games and accrued a four point lead, from which Bogoljubov never recovered.>

"from which" is a bit awkward, though it's hard to come up with an alternative.. It's okay, but just recording it here while I think on it some.>

Perhaps breaking it into two sentences works:

Game Collection: WCC:Alekhine-Bogoljubov 1929

<Alekhine then won a string of games and accrued a four point lead.>

"accrued" is needlessly fancy.

How about:

<The match began in New York on March 15, 1894, and was fairly even with two victories to each player in the first six games.>>

<Bronstein went agonizingly close to his goal when he tied the match with a score of 12-12.>

"went agonizingly close"

Game Collection: WCC: Steinitz-Chigorin Return Match 1892

Enacted: <extending the match to tie break games.>

###############

Game Collection: WCC: Steinitz-Lasker 1894

Enacted: <In 1894, defending champion Wilhelm Steinitz was challenged by an exciting 25 year old Prussian named Emanuel Lasker.>

Enacted, with first part deleted as suggested: <They agreed to the following conditions:>

Enacted, with <BOOMIE> suggestion added: <The match began in New York on March 15, 1894, and was even with two victories to each player in the first six games.>

Game Collection: WCC: Lasker-Steinitz Return Match 1896

Enacted: <St. Petersburg Tournament>

Enacted: <a rising star from Vienna named Carl Schlechter.>

################

Game Collection: WCC: Capablanca-Alekhine 1927

Enacted: <In 1927 the two giants met over the chessboard in Buenos Aires, with the World Championship title at stake.>

Game Collection: WCC:Alekhine-Bogoljubov 1929

Enacted: your addition to <Ohio> edit- <Alekhine then won a string of games to take a four point lead.>

##################

Game Collection: WCC: Botvinnik-Bronstein 1951

Enacted: <Bronstein came agonizingly close to his goal when he tied the match with a score of 12-12.>

###################

Game Collection: WCC: Steinitz-Lasker 1894

Actually I Enacted this one to be shorter. We don't need to be told that a 2-2 tie, or any other tie, is "close" so we can save more words here? Anyways now it says

<When the war broke out in 1939, Alexander Alekhine had been negotiating a title match with Mikhail Botvinnik to be played in Moscow.>

Not sure why, but I'd prefer either "When war broke out" or "When World War II broke out".

< In early 1946 Botvinnik renewed his challenge, and on March 24, 1946, the British Federation sent a notification,>

Needs a comma after "early 1946". Notification of what? And why did it come from the British Federation?

< but Alekhine never receieved it for on that very day he was found dead in his Estoril hotel room.>

Game Collection: WCC: FIDE WCC Tournament 1948

<When the war broke out in 1939, Alexander Alekhine had been negotiating a title match with Mikhail Botvinnik to be played in Moscow. In early 1946 Botvinnik renewed his challenge, and on March 24, 1946, the British Federation sent a notification, but Alekhine never receieved it for on that very day he was found dead in his Estoril hotel room.>

All of this is a mess. You want to fix it together now? Might as well eh? It's not just a mess, it's wrong. Even the death date of Alekhine is wrong (much like in my "documentary film" about him).

Alekhine indeed received a cable on March 22d confirming the match from the BCF's "Mr. Derbyshire" and he was ecstatic about it. Francisco Lupi writes that he was actually with Alekhine when the telegram arrived.

Botvinnik had earlier sent Alekhine a letter on Feb. 4th 1946, care of the British Embassy in Lisbon, asking him if he wished to play a title match. He suggested Alekhine negotiate with Moscow through the British Chess Federation. So the British Chess Federation was indeed acting as an agent for Alekhine in order to stay in contact with <Moscow> about arranging an Alekhine-Botvinnik Match.

So when Botvinnik finally got official permission, and match conditions were agreed upon and in place, then Moscow contacted the BCF, and not Alekhine directly, with the offer of a title match.

The BCF, acting as an agent for Alekhine in this case, sent him a telegram on 22d March informing him that the match conditions had been agreed to and would take place in England.

Alekhine received the telegram, but died a day later.

What about this for a start?

<When war broke out in 1939, Alexander Alekhine had been negotiating a title match with Mikhail Botvinnik to be played in Moscow. In early 1946, Botvinnik secured both permission and financial backing from Moscow to renew his challenge. The negotiations were carried out between Moscow and the British Chess Federation, since the Botvinnik-Alekhine title match was to be played in England.>

-Pablo Moran
"A. Alekhine- Agony of a Chess Genius"
Edited and translated by Frank X. Mur
McFarland, 1989
p. 276

--Skinner and Verhoeven
"Alexander Alekhine's Chess Games 1902-1946"
McFarland, 1998
p. 733

##########

This is as much of a draft as I can offer at the moment.