I just found out about this place and extended its subscription to be honorary-lifetime.

As you know, the plan here is to create what JFQ called an "omnibus file of corrections". Using that as a guide, we are going to go edit the WCC source files.

A good question has been posed: why not just make the WCC pages like the other historical events, and let the articles be edited directly?

Perhaps one day both features could be folded together, but for right now the WCC feature works differently than the other historical tournaments. The issue is that there's a lot of customized bells and whistles in the WCC section which don't exactly translate to the general tournaments.

Behind the scenes, there are "source files" created just for the WCC section. Here's the top of <karpov-korchnoi-1978.txt> just as an example:

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

MATCH:Karpov-Korchnoi World Championship Match
DRAWSDONTCOUNT
HEADING:Karpov vs Korchnoi, 1978
SUBHEADING:Baguio City, Phillipines
FOOTNOTE: ¹ <a target="f1" href="http://query.nytimes.com/ ...

<P>The 1978 World Chess Championship was played between challenger Viktor Korchnoi and champion Anatoly Karpov in Baguio City, Phillipines. The conditions of the match were changed for the first time since 1951: the 24 game format was replaced with an unlimited game format, with the first player to win 6 games being declared champion. The rematch clause for the Champion, which had been discarded since 1963, was brought back into effect.</P>

IMAGETAGS:WIDTH="450" HEIGHT="222" ALT="Korchnoi vs Karpov" IMAGE:karpovkorchnoi1974.jpg
IMAGEHEADING:Korchnoi vs Karpov, 1974 Candidates Matches, Moscow

. . .

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

The final product is seen at Karpov-Korchnoi World Championship Match (1978).

You can see it's a mish-mash of basic HTML and special codes that trigger features like images and footnotes and the automatic tabular presentation of the games and results.

You folks are probably clever enough to edit this code directly, but it works a little wonky and we've never made any documentation for it. And so, the safest way to do this is surely to just hand the "omnibus of corrections" to us and let us redo the articles as necessary.

Also keep in mind, that since we can directly use HTML here, we can do a lot of tricks that are impossible in normal biographies. If we really wanted to show-off we could even have links to audio files!

On Game Collection: WCC: Lasker vs Tarrasch 1908

I would replace <At one point, Lasker had challenged him to a match and been curtly brushed off. Because of Tarrasch's earlier snub, the two were not on speaking terms for years, which delayed any chance Tarrasch might have of playing for the title>

with maybe the following:

Already in 1903, Dr. Tarrasch had challenged Dr. Lasker for a WC match [1] to take place in autumn 1904 [2] [3] and the conditions were published at the end of 1903 [4]. After Dr. Tarrasch suffered an ice-skating accident, the WC match to take place later that year, was postponed indefinitely.

In 1908, long negotiations headed by the chairmen of the German (Gebhardt) and Bavarian (Schenzel) Chess Federations lead to Dr. Lasker accept a lower honorarium than originally demanded while Dr. Tarrasch even abdicated a remuneration [5] [6] to enable the match taking place in Germany...

[1] p. 96, 1907 'Wiener Schachzeitung' (or even better if anyone has access, Dr. Lasker's original from 'Lasker's Chess Magazine' 1906 on chessmasters of the past and presence)

[2] p. 364, 1904 'Wiener Schachzeitung'

[3] <perfidious>' source 'Championship Chess' by P W Sergeant

[4] p. 291-292, 1903 'Wiener Schachzeitung'

[5] p. 176-177, 1908 'Wiener Schachzeitung' (<The winner got 4,000, the loser 2,500 Mark. Dr. Lasker an additional 7,500 Mark (originally demanded 15,000 Mark) while Dr. Tarrasch abdicated a honorarium, as in the text> - are there additional sources?)

[6] p. 263, 1908 'Wiener Schachzeitung'

-----

Additionally, should the match conditions for 1904 be more detailed? Both players had to contribute 8,000 Mark and the winner receives 16,000 plus the title 'Champion of the world' actual translation in the Wiener Schachzeitung'). The winner is the one who wins 8 games (draws not counting). Time: Septemer or October 1904 but time and place (possibly not restricted to one country only) to be fixed later. 14 moves per hour, not more than 6.5 hours play per day. Not more than one game to be finished in two consecutive days. Book about to be published and arbiter to be determined later.

What's the source for all those elaborations like hypnotic powers and refusing to shake hands (Dr. Lasker does not mention it in his report on game 1 on page 382 of the 1908 'Wiener Schachzeitung', originally appeared in 'Pester Lloyd') and so on apart from Cree? If there is no other source, I would throw it all out.

http://www.chessarch.com/excavation...

It's the penultimate paragraph in Showalter's column.

Again using the Google Advanced search function, I've found the exact text of the first half of the intro for our Lasker-Tarrasch World Championship Match (1908) got most of the text here in a blurb for a book about <Lasker>:

http://chesscollectorshop.com/test....

<Dr. Siegbert Tarrasch, after several major tournament successes in the 1890s, was widely considered the most likely successor to Steinitz. At one point, Lasker had challenged him to a match and been curtly brushed off. Because of Tarrasch's earlier snub, the two were not on speaking terms for years, which delayed any chance Tarrasch might have of playing for the title. In 1908, Tarrasch challenged Emanuel Lasker for the World Chess Championship. Lasker accepted, but was convinced that Tarrasch had hypnotic powers and therefore suggested to play the match from a different room. The match took place in Germany between August 17 and September 20, 1908. It was considered by many to be the most exciting chess match in history up to that date. An attempted reconciliation before the match came to nothing, when Tarrasch refused to shake hands, made a stiff little bow, and said: "To you, Herr Lasker, I have only three words to say: Check and mate!">

This text was originally linked in our WCC match intro not to this blurb, but rather to <World Chess Championship by Graeme Cree>, a link which no longer works.

So the person who wrote the blurb about the Lasker book copypasted from Cree, or Cree copypasted from the Lasker book blurb, and then our writer copypasted from Cree. At any rate none of these webpages tells us where the story really came from.

Is there any truth to this "snub" and "Check and Mate" story? Perhaps Edward Winter has something to say about it.

<Karpova> Whether there's truth to this "snub" "Check and Mate" version or not, I vote we use your version of the intro no matter what. If there is some truth to the story, we will still use your text. But we need a proper source for the "check and mate" story if it's true.

Ok thanks to <crawfb5> (or "Big"), I can now mark the original citation here CONFIRMED:

Game Collection: WCC: Lasker vs Steinitz 1894

[1 New York Recorder, March 11, 1894] <CONFIRMED> http://www.chessarch.com/excavation...

But now, from the same intro, we need to confirm this citation:

[2 Chess Life, December 1994 (p40)]

With respect to this intro Game Collection: WCC: Lasker vs Steinitz 1894, can you find anything that might verify this quote?

<As Siegbert Tarrasch said,

"In my opinion the match with Steinitz does not have the great importance that they themselves attribute to it. For Steinitz has grown old, and the old Steinitz is no longer the Steinitz of old.">

Unfortunately the 'Wiener Schachzeitung' did not publish in 1894 eh?

QUESTION: Did <Tarrasch> publish any articles in English, or are they all in German?

The duration of the Philadelphia section was keyed to the results (no more than six games or three wins, IIRC), which is why it was so short. I'll have to look a bit to find a good description of the conditions and make another post.

This is too long, so I'll break it into two posts.

NEW YORK LEG -- UNION SQUARE HOTEL

<Game 1>

15 Mar 1894 adjourned

http://www.chessarch.com/excavation...

16 Mar 1894 Lasker wins adjournment

http://www.chessarch.com/excavation...

<Game 2>

19 Mar 1894 Steinitz wins

http://www.chessarch.com/excavation...

<Game 3>

21 Mar 1894 adjourned

http://www.chessarch.com/excavation...

22 Mar 1894 Lasker wins adjournment

http://www.chessarch.com/excavation...

<Game 4>

24 Mar 1894 Steinitz wins

http://www.chessarch.com/excavation...

<Game 5>

27 Mar 1894 adjourned

http://www.chessarch.com/excavation...

28 Mar 1894 draw agreed without resumption of play

http://www.chessarch.com/excavation...

<Game 6>

29 Mar 1894 adjourned

http://www.chessarch.com/excavation...

30 Mar 1894 adjourned game drawn

http://www.chessarch.com/excavation...

<Game 7>

03 Apr 1894 Lasker wins

http://www.chessarch.com/excavation...

<Game 8>

05 Apr 1894 adjourned

http://www.chessarch.com/excavation...

06 Apr 1894 Lasker wins adjournment

http://www.chessarch.com/excavation...

PHILADELPHIA LEG -- FRANKLIN CHESS CLUB

<GAME 9>

14 Apr 1894 Lasker wins

http://www.chessarch.com/excavation...

<Game 10>

19 Apr 1894 Lasker wins

http://www.chessarch.com/excavation...

<Game 11>

21 Apr 1894 Lasker wins (held at Union League Club)

MONTREAL LEG -- COSMOPOLITAN CLUB

<Game 12>

3 May 1894 draw

http://www.chessarch.com/excavation...

<Game 13>

5 May 1894 Steinitz wins

http://www.chessarch.com/excavation...

<Game 14>

8 May 1894 Steinitz wins

http://www.chessarch.com/excavation...

<Game 15>

15 May 1894 Lasker wins

http://www.chessarch.com/excavation...

<Game 16>

17 May 1894 Lasker wins

http://www.chessarch.com/excavation...

<Game 17>

19 May 1894 adjourned

http://www.chessarch.com/excavation...

21 May 1894 Steinitz wins adjournment

http://www.chessarch.com/excavation...

<Game 18>

22 May 1894 adjourned

http://www.chessarch.com/excavation...

23 May 1894 adjournment drawn

http://www.chessarch.com/excavation...

<Game 19>

26 May 1894 Lasker wins

<What's the source for all those elaborations like hypnotic powers and refusing to shake hands>

I think the "hypnosis" is just some purple prose from the writer of the intro. That's a question of style and tone- some readers may like this, but I understand you not liking it. The writer doesn't mean Lasker had hypnotic powers; it's just meant to be a little comic hyperbole.

<not shaking hands> is a serious issue- agree totally, if we cannot find a source for this we cut it right out.

This begs a wider question though- We are going to run into "passed on legends" again and again in this work. We have to make some effort to find out where these legends started, like <Edward Winter> does. In fact we can search his site to see what he has to say about many of them.

I'm inclined to trust <Winter> over any other chess historian.

<correction slips or direct admin action.>

Brilliant- I hadn't thought of this.

It would be much easier for us if we just kept track of the venue info to be corrected and then let Daniel DIRECT ACTION fix it all at one time eh?

Worst case scenario he POINT BLANK REFUSES, and then we can just submit 39,000 corrections slips on one day.

We could call it "Black Monday" or something.

At any rate, fine work as usual <Big>, thanks so much for your diligence.

I have read both of their autobiographies, and both of them pretend they didn't <really> think the enemy team was able to hypnotize them, but it's clear from how they write that both in fact did believe in this "hypnotisim" enough to find it really upsetting.

In the USSR at this time there was a widespread belief in parapsychology- the government funded academics to study it even.

Interesting is the following: Dr. Lasker wrote in the 'Pester Lloyd' on August 17, 1908 (reprinted on page 381 ff. of the 1908 'Wiener Schachzeitung') that he proposed a match to Dr. Tarrasch 16 years ago (<Bereits vor sechzehn Jahren, [...], trug ich Dr. Tarrasch an, ein Match zu spielen. Damals lehnte er ab.>) but the latter declined, so Dr. Lasker played the revenge match against Steinitz. I guess that Dr. Lasker's match proposal in 1892 and the almost played match in 1904 were thrown together.

As Dr. Lasker was not WC in 1892, do you think that the match proposal back then should be mentioned? I'm not sure, as it was no title match, it needn't be and as long as we differentiate between the declined match proposal by Dr. Lasker in 1892 and the WC challenge by Dr. Tarrasch in 1903, everything should be fine.

<WCC Editing Project: <Karpova> You got me thinking about when we get up to <Karpov v. Korchnoi>.

I have read both of their autobiographies, and both of them pretend they didn't <really> think the enemy team was able to hypnotize them, but it's clear from how they write that both in fact did believe in this "hypnotisim" enough to find it really upsetting.>

We may have to wait for more help to figure out some of these more elusive references.

In the mean time, I have put all your latest work on Game Collection: WCC: Lasker vs Tarrasch 1908 up on the editing template so we don't lose it.

Now our colleagues will have a chance to look at your work and ideas there in context with the original intro.

In answer to your question, I think it's important to mention the previous negotiations before <Lasker> was world champion, because that paints a more reliable story than the legendary account already sitting there as the intro was originally written. Unless we find out there is some truth to the legend that Tarrasch did indeed rudely "snub" <Lasker's> request for a match.

In general, however, I'm inclined to favor your take on what should and shouldn't go into this intro.

What's absolutely not in question is that you have hard primary references for the material you've supplied.

<Philadelfia (sic)>

Next you'll be telling us that the Dictionary is an authority on words, or some other poppycock.

Thank you for plugging in the correct dates!!

<because these are grouped as a single event the venue information probably has to be the same for all games>

Are you sure about this?

Maybe we should ask <Phony Benoni> what he thinks.

In fact, I have sent in correction slips in the past to differentiate the various venues within a single event.

Possibly I pulled a boner there...

At any rate now that I'm "thinking" I believe that putting the triple-name venue makes more sense eh?

At any rate I just entered your valuable information on to the template here- Game Collection: WCC: Lasker vs Steinitz 1894

In discussing Lasker vs Steinitz, 1894 (Game 9, the first game in Philadelphia), this position just before White plays 11. Bxd8!?

click for larger view

Soltis writes:

<"Most modern GMs would retreat the queen automatically, White enjoys a slight edge after, say 11. Qd2 Be7 12. Be3! and 13. O-O-O. But Lasker had discovered Steinitz's weakness: he could be beaten in endgames. Queens went off the board as early as move six and eight (twice) in other games of this match. Altogether, endings were reached in 16 of the 19 games. The average length of a game was 52 moves.

Compare that with the Kasparov-Karpov match of 1984-1985, when queens were traded only 17 times in 48 games. Or with the hard-fought Fischer-Spassky match of 1972, which averaged 45 moves.

It wasn't Steinitz's inclination to play endgames: He did it only six times in 23 games of his previous match, with Tchigorin. It was Lasker's plan to make it The Great Endgame Match.">

I think the <Soltis> quote is actually quite a bit better than the <Peters> quote as well.

Also, the Soltis is amenable to being edited down to a more bite sized chunk.

I think we should replace <Peters> with your find even if the reference is correct.

I'm pretty sure the existing reference is correct, since I looked at the cover of that issue of CHESS LIFE, and the topic is definitely in that issue. But we are not going to do any "guessing" in this project, unless we are absolutely forced to do so.

WHY CAN'T I BUY IT IN PDF ONLINE.

What is wrong with these people. When is the USCF going to <lrn2 internet>?

They could have had my Dollar and a Half in a second if I'd been able to buy an "e copy" of this issue.

Oh yes and I put your idea up in the template: Game Collection: WCC: Lasker vs Steinitz 1894

Secretly, I asked to work on this project solely because I enjoy typing the word "template."

I don't even know what the word means, exactly.

And don't be throwing any of these newfangled "dictionary definitions" in my face either.