<After defeating Gata Kamsky in the eight-game challenger match, Bulgarian grandmaster Veselin Topalov once again found himself preparing for a World Championship title match.>

I don't like this sentence for a number of reasons. In general, I dislike clauses preceding the initial mention of the subject. I think this should be reworked so that the first words of the sentence are "Bulgarian grandmaster (aren't we yet consistent on lower/upper case for Grandmaster?) Veselin Topalov......" "found himself preparing" is a pretty weak clause. Everything from "once" to the end of the sentence is pretty fluffy and probably not worth the increased word count. It just doesn't impart any information.

My first effort: Bulgarian Grandmaster Veselin Topalov defeated Gata Kamsky in an (not sure why I prefer "an" to "the" but open to disagreement) eight game challenger match to earn the right to contest another World Championship title match."

<The title match was mostly following the format of Anand-Kramnik 2008 and Kramnik-Topalov 2006 in that 12 games would be played, with a series of successively faster tiebreak rounds if needed. >

"...was mostly following" is a bit awkward. How about simply "mostly followed"?

< but the ever-aggressive Topalov seemed to have a psychological edge even while trailing. >

Game Collection: WCC: Anand-Topalov FIDE Championship 2010

<<After defeating Gata Kamsky in the eight-game challenger match, Bulgarian grandmaster Veselin Topalov once again found himself preparing for a World Championship title match.>

I don't like this sentence for a number of reasons. In general, I dislike clauses preceding the initial mention of the subject. I think this should be reworked so that the first words of the sentence are "Bulgarian grandmaster (aren't we yet consistent on lower/upper case for Grandmaster?) Veselin Topalov......" "found himself preparing" is a pretty weak clause. Everything from "once" to the end of the sentence is pretty fluffy and probably not worth the increased word count. It just doesn't impart any information.

My first effort: Bulgarian Grandmaster Veselin Topalov defeated Gata Kamsky in an (not sure why I prefer "an" to "the" but open to disagreement) eight game challenger match to earn the right to contest another World Championship title match.">

"the" isn't correct, because it's the first mention of the match. Your sentence is clearly better so I'm putting it in.

We decided to go with no capitals for anything after we saw what they looked like on the html page. Not so good.

Shouldn't it be "challenge match" or "challenger's match"?

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

<<The title match was mostly following the format of Anand-Kramnik 2008 and Kramnik-Topalov 2006 in that 12 games would be played, with a series of successively faster tiebreak rounds if needed. >

"...was mostly following" is a bit awkward. How about simply "mostly followed"?>

It is awkward. I'm killing it and putting your suggestion in.

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

<< but the ever-aggressive Topalov seemed to have a psychological edge even while trailing. >

I think this claim needs a contemporaneous source or else it should be excised.>

Great draft for Game Collection: WCC: Alekhine-Euwe 1935 !

<and Alekhine also indicated he might not take his new opponent too seriously.>

Source?

<Some Dutch press reported that his subsequent behavior at the board was drunken and disruptive, a charge later denied by Alekhine, Euwe, Maróczy, Landau, Kmoch, and FIDE president Alexander Rueb.>

Source?

<a performance Emanuel Lasker called "a brilliant achievement... It is the more to be acclaimed, as he was obviously getting through a mental/psychological crisis.">

Dr. Lasker uses the adjective <seelische> and there is no direct translation possible. The expression <Seele> (subject) can be directly translated to <Soul>. I put in <mental> and <psychological> to indicate that it is not so clear. For sure, you can leave it this way but maybe you find one word that fits best, with regards to <Seele = Soul>. Perhaps <psychological> as it contains <psychḗ>, although this has no christian connotation (although Dr. Lasker was jewish, he was probably used to the common usage of the expression).

<Euwe established a winning position, and after offering Alekhine a draw 3 times, he finally accepted. Max Euwe had become the 5th world chess champion.>

<<and Alekhine also indicated he might not take his new opponent too seriously.>

Source?>

The source is me, based on the following account in the intro. I agree with Kmoch that asking Euwe to play on a cruise ship for the world championship "if need be" was improper and condescending to Euwe, as if he were not someone to be taken seriously. Kmoch's opinion is sourced to Munninghoff in note 5.

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

<Source?

<Some Dutch press reported that his subsequent behavior at the board was drunken and disruptive, a charge later denied by Alekhine, Euwe, Maróczy, Landau, Kmoch, and FIDE president Alexander Rueb.>>

Source is Alekhine and the writer of the cited article.

Note 11: http://www.chesshistory.com/winter/...

Every name listed in the article as denying the claim Alekhine was drunk and disruptive at the board is also listed in the article. Rueb speaks for himself in the article. I also have Euwe and Kmoch speaking for themselves in two other distinct sources, as opposed to just being listed by Alekhine (although the corroboration proves that Alekhine was right they denied the claim).

This is what I was talking about in terms of having one note for three different sources, instead of putting three different notes in the intro- as in <11,12,13> and so on.

Alekhine: <"I have been the butt of a campaign of calumniation and misrepresentation organized by a part of the Dutch Press.">

I have a Euwe interview in which he castigates the press for saying Alekhine lost game 21 because he was drunk, but Euwe doesn't mention any specific reporters or newspapers.

What we really want is an actual Dutch chess writer, or any chess writer, from a contemporaneous newspaper complaining about Alekhine being drunk and disruptive at the game. I wonder if <dakgootje> could find something in the "kranten site" newspapers? Everyone seems to refer to these "bad reports about Alekhine's behavior" at this game but where did all the "bad reports" go?

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

On <Dr. Lasker> translation:

"crisis of the soul" is a well known English idiom, and also a recognized trope in German romanticism, not to mention Russian literature as well.

This phrase fits Alekhine in particular, I think.

I like "crisis of the soul" much better than "mental/psychological crisis."

It's also a more literal translation which is good in this case, I'm pretty sure. I will change it now.

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

<Euwe established a winning position, but Alekhine declined 2 draw offers. After move 40, he recognized the inevitable and they agreed to a draw. Max Euwe had become the 5th world chess champion.>

Thank you for correction, and for the great sentence replacement too. I'm putting it in now.

The source is me, based on the following account in the intro. I agree with Kmoch that asking Euwe to play on a cruise ship for the world championship "if need be" was improper and condescending to Euwe, as if he were not someone to be taken seriously. Kmoch's opinion is sourced to Munninghoff in note 5.>

If the source is Kmoch, cite Kmoch. If Kmoch (or other reliable contemporary sources) don't directly support that claim then it doesn't belong.

<Here is our <<<watchword>>>: all facts in the intros must be sourced to reliable primary material>

Thank you both, it's a fair cop. I have to back off my own feeling about Alekhine's state of mind, because it's a guess, and indeed a shaky interpretation.

<leaving Petrosian to hold the title unmolested for a full 3-year cycle.>

I also changed the intro to read:

Alekhine became angry that the car sent to pick him up was delayed by traffic, and he began drinking hours before the game.<12> The next day "the press became harsh towards Alekhine, claiming that he had come to the game totally intoxicated... to upset his opponent with unsportive behavior."<12> Alekhine, Euwe, Kmoch, and FIDE president Alexander Rueb later denied this claim.<11,12,13>.

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

Source <11> reports direct speech from Alekhine and Rueb, source <12> is Kmoch's report on Ermelo, and source <13> reports direct speech from Euwe.

We still need to look for an actual instance of a contemporaneous report accusing Alekhine of being drunk, or deliberately trying to upset Euwe at the board.

LOL! Good Heavens yes that word just leaps out at you doesn't it?

Game Collection: WCC: Botvinnik-Petrosian 1963

Just yesterday I was trying to find the exchange rate for "Dutch guilders" and "US Dollars" in 1935.

I could find no "historical currency calculator" for that date online.

<thomastonk> had to find the actual exchange rate in question by looking in newspapers from 1935.

That said, I'm not sure how crucial it is to find and quote current currency values, as opposed to historical values.

It would be useful information, but soon out of date, no?

http://www.measuringworth.com/uscom...

http://www.measuringworth.com/uscom...

I plugged in the $6,700 US from 1935, the purse in Game Collection: WCC: Alekhine-Euwe 1935, and look what it came up with:

http://www.measuringworth.com/uscom...

<In 2012, the relative worth of $6,700.00 from 1935 is:

$112,000.00 using the Consumer Price Index

$88,900.00 using the GDP deflator

$245,000.00 using the value of consumer bundle

$272,000.00 using the unskilled
wage

$336,000.00 using the Production Worker Compensation

$594,000.00 using the nominal GDP per capita

$1,460,000.00 using the relative share of GDP>

I believe "fascinating" is an appropriate word to describe this information.

Even the lowest figure on here indicates it was a substantial purse eh?

Your idea is certainly worth considering, and absolutely worth remembering, so I logged it at the top of this collection:

Game Collection: WCC: FIDE WCC Tournament 1948

<When war broke out in 1939, Mikhail Botvinnik had been negotiating a title match with Alexander Alekhine to be played in Moscow. In early 1946, Botvinnik renewed his challenge. Negotiations were carried out between Moscow and the British Chess Federation, <<<since the Alekhine-Botvinnik title match would now take place in London.>>> On 22 March 1946 the BCF informed Alekhine that match conditions had been agreed to. Alekhine received the telegram, but died a day later.>

Or

<since the Alekhine-Botvinnik title match was now slated for London>

Agree that <since> is a problem.

Ok in his autobiography, <Botvinnik> does indeed supply the clarification we're looking for. The choice of London instead of Moscow, and the curious role of the BCF as intermediaries in the negotiations, has to do with the accusation against Alekhine of collaborating with the Nazis.

After the "anti Alekhine" committee got Alekhine's invitation to London A (1946) revoked, the Soviet government was leery of any direct contact with Alekhine.

So Botvinnik suggested the match be played in London, and that negotiations be opened first through the BCF as intermediaries.

Botvinnik: <"The situation was a delicate one. First of all it was out of the question to invite Alekhine to Moscow, as this was linked with the preliminary investigation of <<<the accusations,>>> and secondly it was undesirable to enter into direct negotiations with him. I suggested that the whole match be played in England and at first the negotiations went through an intermediary, Mr Du Mont, editor of the "British Chess Magazine" (from material published in the magazine one could take it that du Mont and Alekhine were corresponding with each other)... the suggestion was accepted and negotiations began.">

Just to clarify a few points- the translation is a little awkward, but becomes clearer when read in the context of Botvinnik's entire discussion of the affair in his autobiography.

In this sentence:

<First of all it was out of the question to invite Alekhine to Moscow, as <<<this>>> was linked with the preliminary investigation of the accusations, and secondly it was undesirable to enter into direct negotiations with him.>

The word "this" refers to the plan to play Alekhine for the title match. Botvinnik means the match would be too directly linked to the accusations (of Alekhine's collaboration) if the match were to take place in Moscow.

In the sentence

<the suggestion was <<<accepted>>> and negotiations began>,

Botvinnik means it was <accepted> by the Soviet government. Despite this, a faction in the Soviet government still tried to prevent the match, and Botvinnik had to spend most of his time arranging political allies to help convince his government to allow the match. Some in the Soviet government feared that they would be accused of dealing with a Nazi collaborator. In particular, they were worried about losing credibility with the French communists, who were among the most vocal detractors of Alekhine.

<Now, March 1946>

Botvinnik: <"A letter arrived from England, from Derbyshire (the organiser of the Nottingham tournament). Now he was president of the <<<British Chess Federation.>>> He told us that in principle the English were prepared to run the match...">

It was a telegram from the same Derbyshire that (according to Francisco Lupi) Alekhine received the day before he died.

Botvinnik: <"The day before (Alekhine's death)... there was a meeting of the executive committee of the British Chess Federation where the question of the match was resolved favourably. Immediately after the meeting Alekhine was sent a telegram with an official <<<proposal>>> to play a world title match with the USSR champion (meaning Botvinnik)." >

<Was the British Federation putting up stakes, etc? If so, that would explain their involvement, but that needs to be clarified.>

The Soviet government agreed to put up all of the stakes: a $10,000 US purse for the match.

Botvinnik: <"Derbyshire... told us that in principle the English were prepared to run the match <<<(which was quite understandable as the prize fund was guaranteed by the Soviet Union)>>> and that he proposed starting in August at Nottingham...>

<So Botvinnik suggested the match be played in London, and that negotiations be opened first through the BCF as intermediaries.>