What basically happened was, that Capablanca mounted a campaign - he also needed to raise the money first. That's why he had to win over the public with 'My Chess Career', for example. The same goes for Akiva.

It's only natural that Rubinstein would try to arrange another match against Lasker. Even if it was extremely hard, if not impossible - should he have just shrugged it off, not caring about the world championship any longer?

The talk about a chessplayer "having the money" is merely a metaphor. It's not that Capablanca was running around with a suitcase full of dollars, while Rubinstein didn't. They didn't have money, they found sponsors. Rubinstein had to find them, Capablanca had to, later Alekhine had to, etc..

<Karpova, Colleagues>

This is what I think. This part of the passage was better two edits ago. Here is the version two edits ago:

<Yet Rubinstein still had a contract and felt left out. He suggested a triangular tournament as a compromise to determine the champion. But Rubinstein had lost his basis of financial support in post-war Europe,27 and Capablanca was left as Lasker's chief rival. However, the Cuban declared that, should he win the title, he would accept a challenge from Rubinstein.25>

And here is the latest version of this part of the passage:

<As he was being left out, Rubinstein proposed an official body to administer the world championship. Furthermore, he suggested a triangular tournament as a compromise to determine the champion. In contrast to Cuba, necessary funding for a title match could not be obtained in post-war Europe.27 So only Capablanca was successful in arranging a title match. However, the Cuban declared that, should he win the title, he would accept a challenge from Rubinstein.25>

The first version I understood perfectly well. I actually have the source material noted here, and I have checked it, but I didn't need to in order to understand what the passage meant.

<"So only Capablanca was successful in arranging a title match."> This sentence is unnecessary. We already know this information just from the title of the match. By this, do you mean that "...so this is why Rubinstein was unsuccessful in arranging a title match"? If so, you already supplied this information in the "two versions ago text" I posted above, more economically and in better style too.

This is just my opinion, but yes it makes <Rubinstein's> viewpoint totally understandable. It wasn't his fault that post-war Europe was in a state of almost total economic collapse.

No, I don't think what you wrote in that "two versions ago" text makes him look like a simpleton.

I agree with you, although I'm not sure about Janowski. If it was really so much cleverness on his part, or not mostly driven by Nardus.

So this is still the current version of that passage:

Game Collection: WCC: Lasker-Capablanca 1921

This is what's in the Mirror right now:

<After the war, Capablanca considered himself, Lasker and Rubinstein to be the strongest players.25 Capablanca published "My Chess Career" to convince the public of his right to a challenge.26 Yet Rubinstein still had a contract and felt left out. He even suggested a triangular tournament to determine the champion.27 Capablanca declared that he would accept a challenge from him, should he win the title.25 But Rubinstein had lost his basis of financial support in Europe.27>

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

So is this here what you want me to put in the Mirror? Remember we can always change it still as you wish, right up to the deadline which is a long way away.

I've spent a little bit of time footnoting this bio of the late great Gyula Sax.

That spacing problem we were discussing on my forum shows up in spades on this bio, as even removing large tracts of text does not uncover the last 10 or 12 footnotes. Seems urls use up a few extra bytes, something I need to ask admin about.

Anyway, take a squiz and let me know whether you think I've over done the bio.

My rationale for this particular bio was to address the criticisms about sourcing, so I've gone overboard a bit with these, but more importantly to provide a decent coverage and tribute to a great player whose career was not even remotely researched and covered in any of the eulogies or obituaries.

Have we finished inspecting Game Collection: WCC: Lasker-Capablanca 1921?

I don't see any reason to waste time needlessly on these promotions. <Daniel> has replied to my latest "update" email on our work, and he has expressed agreement with the "one week" limit per inspection schedule.

He also expressed understanding about the current <Feb 24> deadline for this promotion, extended due to my vacation to Canada.

However, I'll be in Canada about 50 hours from now, and after a day or so to get my "sea legs" I've plenty of free time to devote to the current draft under inspection. So there's no need to hold up this draft so long because of my vacation. I'll have more time, not less time, to work on it because I don't have to go to work! (I hadn't thought of this clearly before)

I see no reason not to promote the draft much earlier than <Feb 24>, particularly if nobody has worked on the draft for the last 3 days.

Unless I hear a compelling argument against it, I'm certainly not going to wait until Feb 24 to promote this one draft. I wouldn't say that if I didn't think it's already in fine shape, and in my opinion it's ready to go right now. When I get to Canada I'd like to check the notes over once more, since I have the same book as <Karpova> and I actually have access to all of the notes except the WSZ one. But after that, as I said I don't see any problems in the draft.

I think I'll wait for Daniel's response before I create a new page to store source links (I have to shut my mid up as it's coming up with names like Saxy Sources, stop it! stop it!!).

It's a neat work around, but I would like all the info on one page in the bio.

The bio reads a bit like a laundry list in the tournament achievements, but I figure the preliminary summary tells most people what they want to know.

omg that bio took a long time.

I'm still torn between providing comprehensive bios and shorter ones that cleverly summarise and encapsulate a player's career.

Sax isn't a problem as he's no longer an active player and doesn't have a large fan base to complain about such things. But I wouldn't use the Sax bio technique on everyone.

I see no reason for you to necessarily feel torn between comprehensive bios and shorter ones, any more than you should feel torn between the <Great Red Kangaroo> and the <Red Necked Wallaby>.

This was the latest version

<After the war, Capablanca considered himself, Lasker and Rubinstein to be the strongest players.25 Capablanca began negotiations with Lasker in January 1920,28 and published "My Chess Career" to convince the public of his right to a challenge.26 Yet Rubinstein still had a contract and felt left out. He suggested a triangular tournament as a compromise to determine the champion. But Rubinstein had lost his basis of financial support in post-war Europe,27 and Capablanca was left as Lasker's chief rival. However, the Cuban declared that, should he win the title, he would accept a challenge from Rubinstein.25>

There is one small thing left and I propose the following small change:

<After the war, Capablanca considered himself, Lasker and Rubinstein to be the strongest players.25 Capablanca began negotiations with Lasker in January 1920,28 and published "My Chess Career" to convince the public of his right to a challenge.26 Yet Rubinstein still had a contract and felt left out. He proposed an official body to administer the world championship, and suggested a triangular tournament as a compromise to determine the champion. But Rubinstein had lost his basis of financial support in post-war Europe,27 and Capablanca was left as Lasker's chief rival. However, the Cuban declared that, should he win the title, he would accept a challenge from Rubinstein.25>

Looks good.

Perhaps the last two sentences could be improved.

<But Rubinstein had lost his basis of financial support in post-war Europe,27 and Capablanca was left as Lasker's chief rival. However, the Cuban declared that, should he win the title, he would accept a challenge from Rubinstein.>

Following a "But" sentence with a "However" sentence sounds a bit off to me. The "But" seems necessary in the first one. I wouldn't use the comma after Europe but that's a minor issue.