A Man With a Legacy of Losses

Our hotel marina

     Now that we are back from a mini-vacation things have returned to normal. Last week saw us leaving on Tuesday and making a 600 mile drive to Hampton, Virginia in spite of the possibility that we could encounter hurricane Dorian.
     Dorian was an extremely powerful, long-lived and destructive storm that devastated the northwestern Bahamas and caused significant damage from Florida to North Carolina and eastern Canada. 
     When we arrived in Hampton it was not clear how close the hurricane would come, but they were predicting damaging winds and dangerous storm surges. With our hotel being very near the mouth of the Hampton River, storm surges could have presented a serious problem. While the residents seemed unconcerned about the possibility, we were concerned enough that we bought some food to keep in the hotel room just in case. 

Interstate Route 66 near Front Royal, Virginia

     As it turned out, on Friday there was some gusty wind and light drizzle that lasted until about 7:00 in the evening when things cleared up and the storm was past us and headed for Canada where it inflicted even more damage.
     An amusing comment on Chessgames.com says the player whose game is featured today has one of the most impressive lists of lost games the commentator had ever seen for a relatively little-known player. He lost to Mieses, Euwe, Tartakower, Znosko-Borovsky, Smyslov, Najdorf, Keres, Larsen, and Kasparov...a legacy of losses anyone could be proud of! 
      “He” was Dr. Martin Christoffel (September,2, 1922 – April 3, 2001, 78 years old) of Switzerland. Christoffel was born in Basel and was Swiss co-champion in 1942 and won it outright in 1943, 1945, 1948 and 1952. 
     He was awarded the IM title in 1952, became a correspondence IM in 1989 and a Senior Correspondence IM in 2000. He won the Swiss Senior Championship in 1990, 1991, 1992, and 1994. From 1987 to 1991, he was president of the Swiss Chess Federation. 
     In January 1946, less than one week after the Hastings Christmas tournament, the newspaper Sunday Chronicle sponsored a Victory Tournament in London. The idea was to celebrate the end of the war with masters from all over the world playing. 
     It soon became clear that Botvinnik and the Russians weren’t going to show up and the participation of the World Champion Alekhine was protested against by Max Euwe and the Dutch Chess Federation and by Arnold Denker and the USCF, because of alleged Nazi sympathies. The result was Alekhine was uninvited. 
     The players were divided into two equally strong groups, A and B. The A-group consisted of California Champion Herman Steiner, Dr. Ossip Bernstein who had quit chess back in 1907 and the nearly sixty year old Tartakower who was the recent Hastings winner. 
     Also playing were the Czech Champion Karel Opocensky and Paul List (1887-1954), a Russian Jewish player, who emigrated to Britain in 1937 but never took British citizenship. Rounding out the list were Spain’s child prodigy Arturo Pomar, W.A. Fairhurst, British and Scottish champion, Reginald Broadbent, the UK Northern Counties champion, Harry Golombek, soon to become British champion and Joe Stone. 
     Joe Stone was born as Joseph Strachstein on March 16, 1906 in London. The British Chess Magazine has some games for him in 1933 as J. Strachstein. One assumes his name change was made shortly before or during WW2. He died in 1972 in London. The identity of the Czech player Friedmann is an enigma. See HERE 
     In the A Group Herman Steiner lost one game (to Bernstein), but still finished first a half point ahead of Bernstein. Tartakower was third. 
     The Group B consisted of Dutch champion and former World champion Dr. Max Euwe, US champion Arnold Denker, Christoffel, the former British champion 64-year old Sir George Thomas, Gerald Abrahams a strong British amateur and chess book author and Imre Konig. 

     Konig was a strong Hungarian amateur who lived in Austria, the UK and the United States. In 1938, he emigrated to England and in 1949, he became a naturalized British citizen; in 1953 he moved to California. 
     The others in the B Group were: Antonio Medina, the Spanish champion, Francisco Lupi, a Portuguese master and a friend of Alekhine, the Belgian champion Paul Devos, William Winter the former British champion (1935, 1936), Gabriel Wood, the London champion and Richard Newman the British Army champion. 

Group B 
Euwe lost one game (to Devos) and drew one (to Konig). Christoffel had no draws and lost three games: Euwe, Denker and Konig. 

1) Euwe 9.5 
2) Christoffel 8.0 
3) Denker 7.0 
4-6) Thomas, Abrahams and Konig 6.5 
7-8) Newman and Medina 45 
9-11) Devos, Winter and Wood 3.5 
12) Lupi 2.5 

     Christoffel’s game against Devos was a comedy of errors as both players were for many moves under the misapprehension that black couldn’t win white’s N with ...exd4. Still, it was an entertaining game with a nice finish. 
 

Play Online Chess

[Event "London "B" Victory Tournament"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "1946.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Martin Christoffel"]
[Black "Paul Devos"]
[Result "1-0"]
[WhiteELO "?"]
[BlackELO "?"]

%Created by Caissa's Web PGN Editor
{Sicilian Dragon} 1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Nf6 5. Nc3 d6 6. g3
g6 {The Dragon is still is one of the best fighting defenses, but it't can't
be successfully played without any theoretical knowledge.} 7. Bg2 {The
fianchetto variation that white has chosen in this game has been played in
recent years by players such as Ivanchuk, Giri, Tiviakov and Efimenko, just to
name a few and it can be quite dangerous to black. White's best move here is
7.Nde2.} 7... Bd7 {Because this game has involved a slight transposition of
moves black should have take advantage of that by playing 7...Nxd4. The
reason is that in the fianchetto variation white has chosen it is important
for him to keep the Ns on the board. He plans to play Nd5 later and after Ne2
it can be useful to come back to d4 at the right moment or reroute it to f4.
This is why it was better to play 7.Nde2 and why black should have played
7...Nxd4 here.} 8. O-O Bg7 {The same comments apply.} 9. Nb3 {He still should
have played the N to e3 although Pal Benko once tried 9.b3 in a non-game
against Velimirovic at Majdanpek in 1976 and they agreed to a draw at move
15.} 9... a5 {This seems questionable as he has no real followup. Simply
castling was good.} 10. a4 O-O 11. h3 Rb8 12. Qe2 b6 13. Kh2 Bc8 {As a result
of his 9th move black is reduced to this type of pathetic maneuvering that
promises to accomplish little. In the meantime white can continue to build up
his position.} 14. f4 Nb4 15. Nb5 {White has an active position} 15... Nd7
16. c3 {At first glance you may ask why black would now play his N to the
miserable square a6, but after 16... Nc6 17.e5! Bb7 18.exd6 and 19.Nxd6 white
has a P and a dominating position.} 16... Na6 17. N3d4 {17.Rd1 and 18.Be3 was
an even stronger idea.} 17... Bb7 18. g4 {This give black the chance to
equalize. Instead he should have played 18.f5!} 18... Ndc5 19. Ra3 {This
totally pointless move gives black the upper hand. White should have pressed
on with 18.e5 or even 18.f5.} 19... e5 {This punch in the center actually
gives black slightly the better of it.} 20. Qc2 {An outright losing blunder.
Black is better after the obvious 20.Nb3} 20... Nc7 {It's hard to imagine what
misapprehensions both players were playing under here because after 20... exd4
black has a free piece.} 21. f5 {This move and black's reply are just as bad
as they were on the previous move!} 21... Nxb5 {After this white's previous
play is justified. After 21...exd4 black is on his way to victory.} 22. axb5
{Two question marks for this. After 22.Nxb5 white has a fine position.}
22... gxf5 {Two question marks to black for this! There was still not reason
no to take the N on d4 after which he would be on his way to the win.} 23.
gxf5 {Guess how many question marks? If you guessed two, congratulations. He
should have played 23.Nxf5 and be on his way to victory.} 23... Qh4 {At the
risk of being repetitious, he should have taken the N on d4.} 24. Bd2 {Same
comment. Either 24.Nc6 or 24. f6 leaves white with the initiative, but no
clear win.} 24... Kh8 {Ignoring the path to victory, says Fritz. 24...exd4
wins.} 25. b4 {As Fritz says 25.f6 and white has triumphed.} 25... axb4 {Not
exactly a gross blunder, or even a blunder, but taking the N on d4 was much
stronger.} 26. cxb4 {His best chance at a swindle was to play 26.f6} 26...
Nd7 {When auto-annotating Fritz usually makes silly comments, but here it's
comment 26...exd4 and black has it in the bag is quite correct!} 27. Rg3
{Perhaps this is an idea white had in mind when he played 19. Ra3, but here
all it does is equalize. With 27.f6! white has good chances.} 27... Qe7 {Two
question marks! Hands over the advantage to the opponent claims Fritz. Indeed
it does. In fact, it's a losing move. After 27...Rbc8 the chances would have
been equal.} 28. Rxg7 {Only one question mark for this because white does
retain a slight advantage, but not anything near what he would have had after
28.f6 and 29.Nf5.} 28... Kxg7 {Give this blunder at least two question marks!
If you think, once again, that taking the N on d4 was correct you are
absolutely right. After 28...exd4 the chances would be even.} 29. f6+ {
Devastating.} 29... Nxf6 30. Bg5 {Yet another second-rate move deserving of a
few question marks...much better was 30.Nf5+ and wins.} 30... Kg8 {More
question marks. Let me quote Fritz: Stumbles just before the finish line.
30...Ng4+! and black takes home the point.} 31. Bxf6 {Black can't avoid mate.
If 31...Qd7 32. Qd2 and mate follows. His only other option is to surrender
his Q.} 1-0