Emil Kemeny

      Emil Kemeny (13 January 1860, Budapest – 1 May 1925, Budapest) was a Hungarian–American master, editor and publisher.  Chessmetrics ranks him number 17 in the world on their 1901 rating list with a highest rating ever achieved of 2638.
      Kemeny was born in Budapest and immigrated to the United States in the late 1800's and lived in various cities (New York, Philadelphia and Chicago).  He returned to Budapest in the early 1900's. While in the US he worked for the Pennsylvania Railroad in 1893 and at the same time edited and published the American Chess Weekly in Philadelphia and went on to edit a chess column in the Philadelphia Public Ledger and in the North American.
       During the mid-1890s, Kemeny was one of the strongest players in the US. He took 2nd at Skaneateles 1891, lost a match to James Hanham (4–5) at New York 1891, and won at Skaneateles 1892. He also won the 1892-93 Franklin Chess Club championship tournaments as well as the Championship of Philadelphia, the nation’s second strongest chess metropolis, with a score of 14–4, a full point over Walter Penn Shipley. The next Franklin and city championship, that of 1893-94, however, showed Kemeny crushing his opposition with a score of 23–1, a full three points ahead of Mordecai Morgan, and four and a half points ahead of Hermann G. Voigt. In 1896, he had challenged Jackson W. Showalter, the U.S. Champion, to a match, which Kemeny lost, with the final score of +4 –7 =4.
      He tied for 4-5th at Philadelphia 1898, shared 1st at Philadelphia 1899-1900, took 3rd at Philadelphia 1900-1901, and took 4th at St. Louis 1904 (the 7th American Chess Congress which was won by Marshall.
      Between January and July 1897, he published correspondence chess games in the Philadelphia Public Ledger. In 1903 Kemeny went to Monte Carlo to report the Monte Carlo tournament for the North American. He published at Philadelphia for one year a weekly entitled the American Chess Weekly. This paper contained a full account of the Monte Carlo Tournament of 1903.
      As strong a player as Kemeny was, he was best known for his annotations. The American Chess Magazine stated that "not since the withdrawal of Mr. Steinitz from the New York Tribune has the analysis of games been conducted in so complete and entertaining a style as Mr. Kemeny presents them."
      Although not a correspondence player himself he appreciated correspondence play and gave a great deal of attention to correspondence chess in the Ledger.
      Kemeny knew correspondence players studied positions in detail and in general conduct games at a higher level than otherwise would have been possible. In the Ledger for January 15, 1897 he wrote that "in correspondence play, where three days time is given to each move, high grade chess may be justly expected, but such flawless play in a complicated position, as exhibited by Mr. Ferris in the present contest, must be regarded as a rare occurrence."
      The Continental Correspondence Tournament began modern correspondence tournament play in the United States. Seventy players began the tournament, which was conducted first in sections in a Preliminary Round followed by a Final Round. Shipley wrote that the tournament included "many of the best-known players of this country," and "was the largest and strongest Correspondence Tournament ever inaugurated up to that date this side of the water."
      Kemeny kept up close watch on chess developments in Hungary, especially the first correspondence tournament to be held in Hungary and elaborated on his views on correspondence chess: "Chess by correspondence has of late become popular, and, though it requires considerable time to play a game, the result, as a rule, proves satisfactory to the contestants. Errors and oversights are minimized and in the majority of cases the game is won on its merits. Correspondence play especially benefits those who do not reside in the large cities and have, therefore, but few chances to meet opponents of equal strength. But the best feature of correspondence play is the quality of chess it produces. Ample time being given, the contestants are enabled to penetrate the position much deeper, and very often players of average strength conduct a correspondence game in a way that would do credit to a master."
      He returned to his native homeland in the first decade of the 20th century, where he died in 1925.

Pennsylvania vs. New York 1898

     The Finger Lakes are a group of eleven long, narrow, roughly north–south lakes located south of Lake Ontario in an area of New York called the Finger Lakes region.

     Lake Keuka is one of the major lakes in the the group and it's different because it is Y-shaped in contrast to the long and narrow shape of the other Finger Lakes and so in the past it was referred to as Crooked Lake. 

     I don't know about today, but in the late 1800s and early 1900s it was one of the garden spots of New York and it was charmed with the beauty of the scenery. The water of the lake was said to be so clear that the pebbles on the bottom could be counted and in every direction on the sloping hill sides which surround the lake, miles of vineyards dotted with patches of woods and fields of grain stretched away into the distance. 

     In 1898 the meeting of the New York State Chess Association took place at the Grove Spring Hotel at Keuka Lake during the second week of August. In addition to tournaments there was a match between Pennsylvania and New York in which each team member played every member of the opposing team. I am unsure if there is an actual name for this type of match, but the old Chess Review magazine called them Virginia Reel matches. 

 

     A highlight of the event was that the local wine companies took the opportunity to allow players and guests to test the quality of their champagne and one company put up a dozen bottles as prizes and, also, to be used at a dinner. Another offered a bottle of wine as a prize for the best game in the match. The below Kemeny-Delmar game won the prize. 

     There were many regrets expressed at the absence of Walter P. Shipley, secretary of the Pennsylvania State Chess Association, who was unable to attend due to illness. 

     In the wine-winning game the Hungarian born Emil Kemeny (1860-1925), master, editor and publisher scored a quick point thanks to his swift and precise K-side attack. 

     Born Budapest, Kemeny lived in New York, Philadelphia and Chicago and during the mid-1890s, he was one of the strongest players in the country. He returned to Budapest some time in the 1900s and died there in 1925. His friend, Walter P.Shipley, described him as "...tall, standing over six feet in height. Kemeny was a genial companion with a keen sense of humor, well read, spoke several languages fluently and besides being an able chess player was passionately fond of good music." 

     Eugene Delmar (1841-1909) was born in New York City and for over 50 years he was a leading player in America. 

 

[Event "New York v Pennsylvania Team Match"] [Site ""] [Date "1898.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "Emil Kemeny"] [Black "Eugene Delmar"] [Result "*"] [ECO "C41"] [Annotator "Stockfish 15.1"] [PlyCount "45"] [EventDate "1898.??.??"] {Philidor Defense} 1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 d6 {Today this relic of a bygone era is considered solid, but passive and so it has largely been abandoned.} 3. d4 { Almost always played. 3.Bc4 is playable, but it's very rare.} Nf6 4. Nc3 (4. dxe5 {According to Pillsbury this is premature.} Nxe4 5. exd6 (5. Qd5 Nc5 { And white's Q is exposed which will result in a loss of time.}) 5... Bxd6 { Black has fully equalized.}) 4... Nbd7 5. Be3 Be7 6. Bd3 {When commenting on the game Pillsbury preferred 6.Bc4} (6. dxe5 dxe5 7. Bc4 O-O 8. h3 c6 9. Qe2 { is fully equal. Regan,N (2165)-Vatter,H (2385) Berlin 1998}) 6... c6 (6... Ng4 7. Qd2 Nxe3 8. Qxe3 O-O 9. O-O c6 10. Rad1 Qc7 {is about equal. Noa, J-Blackburne,J Hamburg 1885}) (6... O-O 7. O-O {White 's other option was 7.d5} c6 8. a4 b6 9. Qe2 a6 10. Rfd1 Qc7 {equals. Schweitzer,W (2022)-Kleissl,H (2271) Jenbach 2009}) 7. Ne2 Qc7 8. c3 d5 9. Qc2 {This is just one of several reasonable moves at white's disposal.} dxe4 10. Bxe4 Nxe4 {Pillsbury felt that instead of this black should have simply castled and reserved the capture of the B which would have given him a good game. Actually, there is nothing at all wrong with black's move.} (10... O-O 11. Nxe5 Nxe4 12. Qxe4 {is completely even.}) (10... exd4 11. Bxd4 O-O 12. O-O Re8 {is yet another option that results in equality.}) 11. Qxe4 O-O {Pillsbury thought it was far preferable to continue with 11...exd4} (11... exd4 12. Bxd4 {However, white now has the advantage.} Rg8 13. O-O Kf8 14. Rfe1 Nf6 15. Qd3 {Black is in an awkward position at best.}) (11... f6 {This surprising move is black's best option.} 12. O-O O-O 13. Ng3 {with a minimal advantage.}) 12. dxe5 b6 {This move is really where black goes wrong.} (12... f6 {Challenging white in the center is not entirely satisfactory, but it's black's best option.} 13. Qc4+ Kh8 14. exf6 Bxf6 15. Ng3 {And white is only slightly better because of his more active pieces.}) 13. Ned4 Bb7 {Placing his B on the same diagonal as white's Q is very inviting, but it's also wrong! After this white gets a decisive advntage.} (13... Nc5 14. Qc2 Ne6 {is his best chance of holding his position together. After} 15. Nf5 Rd8 16. Qa4 {In order to transfer the Q to the K-side.} c5 17. Qg4 Bf8 18. O-O Bb7 19. Ng5 {qith good attacking chances.}) 14. Nf5 Rae8 (14... Nc5 {keeps fighting.} 15. Qg4 g6 16. O-O-O Bc8 17. Nxe7+ {White is better, but he has no forced win.} Qxe7) 15. O-O-O ({White needs this N for his attack so exchanging to would be wrong because it would allow black to equalize.} 15. Nxe7+ Rxe7 16. O-O-O c5 17. Qh4 Rfe8 {and white's attack has dissipated.}) 15... Bf6 16. Rxd7 (16. Bf4 {also works.} Bxe5 17. Bxe5 Nxe5 18. Nd6 Re7 19. Nxe5) 16... Qxd7 17. Qg4 Qe6 (17... Bxe5 18. Nh6+ {wins the Q}) 18. exf6 g6 { This loses quickly.} (18... Qxf6 {would have been better because after} 19. Bd4 Qg6 20. Qxg6 hxg6 21. Nd6 Re7 22. Nxb7 Rxb7 {Black has practical chances. True, white scored 5 wins in Shootouts, but they were 70+ ,ove games and tricky B+N vs R endings.}) 19. Nh6+ Kh8 20. Qxe6 (20. Ng5 {is an equally good alternative. } Qxg4 21. Ngxf7+ Rxf7 22. Nxf7+ Kg8 23. Nh6+) 20... Rxe6 21. Ng5 c5 (21... Ree8 {White mates in 10} 22. Bf4 Ba6 23. Ngxf7+ Rxf7 24. Nxf7+ Kg8 25. Nh6+ Kh8 26. f7 Re1+ 27. Rxe1 Kg7 28. Re8 g5 29. Bxg5 Kg6 30. Rg8+ Kh5 31. g4#) 22. Nxe6 fxe6 23. Rd1 {Black resigned.} *

Colonel Moreau, Not As Bad As You Might Think

     In 1903, Monte Carlo was the venue of the third of four tournaments designed to help bolster tourism during the winter season. Games were played between February 10th and March 17th in the Monte Carlo Casino and when the players complained of the noise to tournament director Jules Arnous de Riviere told them they would just have to get used to it. 
     The tournament started with a controversy. The committee had invited Lasker, Blackburne, Napier, Schieffers and, according to the tournament book, “others”, but they were unable to participate. Not invited was Janowski because according to de Riviere, Janowski had publicly stated that if invited he would decline because de Riviere was the tournament director. 
     Also not invited was Gunsberg. His crime was that he had written an article in a London newspaper criticizing the penalizing of drawn games particularly if the players involved have no chance of a prize; they couldn’t be blamed for being satisfied with a draw. 

     Chigorin’s situation was was appalling. He was invited and accepted and his name was listed as one of the participants in the various papers issued by the committee. Chigorin made the long and arduous trip of nearly 1,900 miles from St. Petersburg to Monte Carlo and when he arrived the president of the committee, Prince Dadian, either directly ordered Chigorin’s exclusion or intimated that he would not remain president of the committee and possibly withdraw his patronage (i.e. prize money) and go home that very day unless de Riviere barred Chigorin from participating. Action was taken accordingly and Chigorin was informed he was out. Wolf filled the vacancy created by Chigorin’s expulsion. 
     The reason for Chigorin getting kicked out of the tournament was that “in spite of the many acts of generosity on the part of the Prince, (Chigorin) had shown persistent animosity in the press, (publishing) articles which the Prince considers injuste et inaigne (unfair and unjust).” The tournament book added that the Prince had “won golden opinions” among the players because he was courteous and had charming manners, so his hostility towards Chigorin was not without just cause. It also hinted that the Prince was a nice guy because he was willing to indemnify Chigorin for his trouble in making the trip. 

     Other players were said to have felt Chigorin’s criticism was severe and pointed and it was not unlikely that some of the Prince’s games, admired as they were everywhere, caused some envy and Chigorin was trying to minimize their value. 
     It was also said the Chigorin had hinted that perhaps the games weren’t actually played and the Prince’s opponents were unknown, perhaps even non-existent! Endeavoring to belittle the Prince’s achievement Chigorin unjustly upheld him to ridicule and contempt. 
     According to Chigorin he wasn’t aware of anything he did that warranted such drastic action. He stated that he had seen a couple of the Prince’s games where the brilliancy prizes he had been awarded were unsound and he published the games with copious notes pointing out how the Prince should have lost.
     Chigorin also related that the previous year in Kiev and allegedly in either a theater or a circus, he had passed by the Prince without taking any notice of him. 
     The tournament book commented that the only representatives of France were Taubenhaus and “a Col. Moreau, the latter hitherto unknown to fame, whom, however, the committee accepted to make up the required number. Not much is known of the player hitherto unknown to fame, Col. Moreau. 
    Some have questioned whether the chess player Colonel Moreau and the French officer Moreau were the same person. The little known retired French Army officer had acquired some wealth as a businessman and, also, at the Monte Carlo casino, but had scant skill as a chess player. It has also been claimed that he helped sponsor the tournament and invited several of the players, himself included. It was his first and last tournament. 
     One source commented that so bad was his play that against the “Drawing Master” Carl Schlechter, Moreau played the notoriously drawing French Defense Exchange Variation, and still lost.
     Emil Kemeny, writing in American Chess Weekly in 1903, gave Moreau a break when he stated, “Colonel Moreau, who finished last is perhaps stronger than the score would indicate, but he is not used to Tourney play, and too old to stand the continuous strain.” Moreau did win 75 francs for his efforts.
     Kemeny’s estimation of Moreau’s ability may not be far off. This tournament was so strong that even losing 26 games gives Moreau an estimated rating of 2382 according to Chessmetrics.  Of course, that means nothings since he lost all of his games, but playing over a few of them seems to confirm Kemeny’s comment that Moreau was better than the results indicate.
     Colonel Charles Paul Narcisse Moreau (September 14, 1837, Paris – July 6, 1916) was a French soldier and mathematician. He served in the artillery and as an officer of the French Legion of Honor. He introduced Moreau's necklace-counting function into mathematics. 
     Just to be clear: In combinatorial mathematics, Moreau's necklace-counting function is where μ is the classic Mobius function, counts the number of "necklaces" asymmetric under rotations that can be made by arranging n beads the color of each of which is chosen from a list of α colors. 
     One respect in which the word necklace may be misleading is that if one picks such a "necklace" up off the table and turns it over, thus reversing the roles of clockwise and counterclockwise, one gets a different "necklace", counted separately, unless the necklace is symmetric under such reflections. This function is involved in the cyclotomic identity. 
     Documents detailing Colonel Moreau's military career say he was promoted to lieutenant on October 1, 1861. He served in Mexico from May 1863 to March 1867 during the French intervention in Mexico and received a couple of awards.
     In August 1868 he was promoted to captain and served in Africa from January 1869 to August 1870, when he returned to take part in the Franco-Prussian War. He participated in the battle of Sedan in September 1870, and was taken prisoner; he was released in June of 1871. 
     He then served Algeria from August 1871 until November 1873. In 1886 he was promoted to lieutenant colonel, and in 1890 was promoted to colonel. He was made an officer of the French Legion of Honor in 1893. 
     Tarrasch won the tournament after several losses in the opening rounds. Geza Maroczy, who had won the tournament the previous year, came in second. Harry N. Pillsbury, whose health in the last few years had been steadily declining, managed only third place in what would be his penultimate international tournament. 

Final Standings: 
1) Tarrasch 20.0-6.0 
2) Maroczy 19.0-7.0 
3) Pillsbury 18.5-7.5 
4) Schlechter 17.0-9.0 
5) Teichmann 16.5-9.5 
6) Marco 15.5-10.5 
7) Wolf 14.0-12.0 
8) Mieses 13.0-13.0 
9) Marshall 12.0-14.0 
10-11) Taubenhaus and Mason 10.5-15.5 
12) Albin 8.0-18.0 
13) Reggio 7.5-18.5 
14) Moreau 0.0-26.0 

Play Online Chess

[Event "Monte Carlo"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "1903.3.13"]
[Round "23"]
[White "Frank Marshall"]
[Black "Colonel Charles P.N. Moreau"]
[Result "1-0"]
[WhiteELO "?"]
[BlackELO "?"]

%Created by Caissa's Web PGN Editor
{King's Gambit Accepted: Muzio Gambit} 1. e4 e5 2. f4 exf4 3. Nf3 g5 4. Bc4
g4 5. O-O {White offers a N in the hopes of profiting from black's weakness on
the f-file. Its popularity declined with improvements in defensive technique.
Its easiest for black if he simply avoids the Muzio altogether by playing 4...
Bg7.} 5... gxf3 6. Qxf3 Qf6 7. e5 Qxe5 8. Bxf7+ {This has all been played a
gazillion times and now black should play 8...Kxf7 forcing white to prove he
has compensation. After 9.d4! Qxd4+ 10.Be3 black dare not grab the b-Pawn
with 10...Qxb2?? becaue 11.Qxf4+ wins. However, after 10...Qf6! black, if he
is careful, should win with hsi extra material.} 8... Kd8 {Even after this
wimpy move the onus is on white to prove his position is worth a piece.} 9.
d4 {A pointless sacrifice of a P. Better was 9.d3.} 9... Qxd4+ 10. Kh1 Bh6
11. Bd2 Qg7 12. Bb3 {White could also have played 12.Bxf4 with equal
non-effect.} 12... Nc6 13. Bc3 Ne5 14. Qd5 d6 15. Rd1 Bd7 {Marshall has no
really satisfactory move here. If 16.Qxb7 Bc6 and he has to surrender his Q.}
16. Ba4 {Up to this point Moreau has been playing engine moves and has, after
16...f3! 17.gxf3 Nf6, an advantage of 6 Ps (Komodo) or 8 Ps (Stockfish)!}
16... Bc6 {A tactical blunder of an elementary type.} 17. Bxc6 bxc6 18. Qxe5
{Black must lose at least a R...plus his K is fatally exposed. All as a
result of his 16th move.} 18... Qg4 19. Na3 Kd7 20. Nc4 f3 {A very forlorn
hope.} 21. Rxd6+ {It's mate in 11 moves} 21... cxd6 22. Qxd6+ Kc8 23. Qxc6+
Kd8 24. Rd1+ Ke7 25. Qd6+ Ke8 26. Re1+ Kf7 27. Ne5+ Ke8 28. Ng6+ Kf7 29.
Nxh8# 1-0

Oliver Perry-Smith, a Colorful Amateur

     I did a post on Perry-Smith's opponent, Emil Kemeny, HERE. Perry-Smith is long forgotten, but in his day his name often appeared in the Philadelphia newspaper society pages. His son of the same name was a mountain climber and skier of some renown. 
     Perry-Smith, the father, was an athlete who demonstrated prowess in rowing, boxing and skiing. He was a member of the First City Troop of Philadelphia and when the Spanish-American War broke out he was commissioned as a captain in the Commissary of Subsistence (Supply Corps) in Fitzhugh Lee's 7th Army Corps. 
     He died in 1899 at the age of 38 of nephritis while aboard the USS Missouri which was anchored in Havana. His widow remarried and moved to Germany. His son later returned to the US and lived off his trust fund.
     Chessplaying Perry-Smith played in all of the Franklin Chess Club Championships that were played between 1893 and 1898 and in several rapid tournaments. According to the Philadelphia Ledger of May 1898 Perry-Smith played in a continuous tournament of the Mercantile Library Cup and received a prize for the most wins. The paper added that there was no prize for the most losses or Perry-Smith would have received that one, too.
     Our Folder, a monthly magazine published in Philadelphia by the Good Companion Chess Problem Club, had an article describing a dinner in 1923 that had a table decoration, the Oliver Perry-Smith silver plate, upon which was engraved the final position of his win against the Turkish Ambassador. A big deal was made of that game, but the Ambassador played horrible chess and allowed Perry-Smith to mate in 7 moves. The game is included in the score of his game against Kemeny below. According to the Edo rating site his rating was between about 1900-2000 in the 1890's.

Correspondence Chess Then and Now

Postal play then

     Engines have become so strong that winning games in the upper levels of correspondence play is almost impossible. On Lechenicher SchachServer I played exclusively in the Rapid events (10 Basic plus 1 day per move; no vacations) and even then only about 1/3 of the games were decisive. 
     Tactical wins are a thing of the past; success requires superior strategy. One top level CC player described his method for selecting a move as given below and added that about the only good program for using this method is Aquarium’s IdeA. 

1) Do an infinite analysis for several hours (perhaps overnight) 
2) Go to the end of the line and start an infinite analysis on the end position for a reasonable period of time. How much time you want to spend doing this depends on how much time and/or patience you have. 
3) Step backwards to the previous move and do the same thing. As you do this you will notice the engine may suggest a better move. You will explore these new suggestions in a similar manner. 
4) Eventually you will have worked your way back to the starting position. By that time you should have a pretty good idea of the best line. 

Correspondence play now

     Be prepared to spend days following this procedure. Also, be prepared to draw because unless you’re playing rapid correspondence games, you opponent is doing the same thing. 
     After Pillsbury's success at Hastings in 1895 a meeting was held in January, 1896 in Chicago and the Pillsbury National Correspondence Chess Association (PCAA) was organized. 
     In March of 1896 the PCCA President, Edward Runge, received a letter from Pillsbury saying he was pleased with the founding of the organization and any use of his name that would increase the interest in chess was freely given. 
     The PCCA only had 50 members and in 1897 they began their first correspondence tournament, the Grand National. Dr. Otto Meyer of Richmond, Virginia was the winner. 
     The club struggled until late 1905 or early 1906 when all of a sudden, the tournaments stopped for unknown reasons. However, the PCCA revived in the Fall of 1907, but the only person doing any work in the club was a fellow named George Walcott and so the club soon folded for good in a couple of years. 
     A fellow named Stanley Chadwick had won a few tournaments and had qualified for the second round of their 1905 Grand National, but he quit the PCCA in 1909 and founded his own club which eventually became the Correspondence Chess League of America (CCLA). 
     The Jamuary 17, 1916 edition of the magazine Chess News, edited by the secretary of the Boston Chess Club George H. Wolcott, carried an amusing article on postal chess: 

Saving for postage is one of the pleasures of a chess player. He walks up to the little window, leaves there some of his good coin, receiving in return that which enables him to communicate with his friends in far away cities. There is no sport, no other pastime, as dependent as chess upon the mail service. 

     The article then went on to express the opinion that Americans were disposed to take the government for granted, leaving it to the powers that be to make changes, improvements or otherwise. But, when it came to the matter of first class postage, an immediate readjustment of the rate was needed and apparently the government was lax in that area and needed prodding by the citizens. 
     The magazine complained that an abnormal profit was being made from a public service (i.e. the post office) that should be merely self-supporting. It was pointed out that although all letters cost two cents to mail, only a small portion of them weighed the full ounce permitted and it actually cost the government less than one cent each to handle them. This resulted in the accumulation of a surplus of over eighty million dollars each year on first class letter mail! 
     Wolcott asked what happened to this eighty million dollar surplus then proceeded to answer his own question. Second class mail service was for publishers who paid one cent per pound for newspapers and magazines. Each year the deficit in the for handling this second class mail was...wait for it...eighty million dollars. Thus the good citizens who wrote letters (which included postal chess players using post cards) were subsidizing publishers of newspapers and magazines.  
     There was an organization that was trying to do something about this awful situation, the National One Cent Letter Postage Association headquartered in Cleveland, Ohio. The group was asking that each group of mail users pay for the cost of the service they were being provided and that writers of letters (and post cards) no longer be taxed 100 percent to subsidize publishers of periodicals. Wolcott concluded with the plea for readers to: Write to the Association; do it now. 
     In the following lively correspondence game the players were Mordecai Morgan of Philadelphia and J. E. Narraway of Ottawa, Canada, both well known players of the day. The play is complicated and some of the positions are very subtle with many hidden points. 

     Mordecai Morgan (December 30, 1862 – September 21, 1931, 68 years old) was active in Philadelphia. He was mostly active in correspondence chess play and Walter Penn Shipley described him "as one of the leading correspondence players of this country.” 
     In 1884, he beat Zukertort in a simul and in 1892 he beat the future world champion Lasker. In 1887, he tied for first with Samuel W. Bampton and W. H. Schultz. He then went on to win the championships in 1888, 1891 and 1894. 
     In 1888, Morgan became one of the directors of the Franklin Chess Club in Philadelpha, and was reelected in 1891, 1894 and 1897. He also became the treasurer of the Pennsylvania Chess Association in 1897. 
     In the Franklin Chess Club championship in 1894, Morgan was the runner up behind Emil Kemeny. He dominated the 1895/1896 championship, won in 1903 and again in 1905. 
     Morgan was active in telegraph matches between the Franklin Chess Club and the Manhattan Chess Club and he participated in the Anglo-American cable match in 1907. In addition, he wrote the four volumes work Chess Digest (Philadelphia, 1901-1905). 
     James E. Narraway (June 11, 1857 – June 16, 1947, 90 years old) was born in either Guysboro, Nova Scotia or in Sackville, New Brunswick; nobody is sure which one. 

     Before moving to Ottawa in 1887, he was the champion of Saint John, New Brunswick for several years. He beat Sam Loyd on top board in a team correspondence match of players between the USA and Canada. 
     In 1888 he tied for first place in the Canadian Championship and was awarded 3rd place after play-off.  He won the championship outright three times: 1893,1897, 1898. He also won several prestigious correspondence tournaments in the late 1800s and early 1900s. 
     Narraway, an accountant, worked in Civil Service for the Canadian government. Also, as a paleontologist he made two discoveries on the banks of Ottawa River accepted by Royal Ontario Museum and British Museum. 

Play Online Chess

[Event "Correspondence"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "1897.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Mordecai Morgan"]
[Black "James E. Narraway"]
[Result "1-0"]
[WhiteELO "?"]
[BlackELO "?"]

%Created by Caissa's Web PGN Editor
{C77: Ruy Lopez: 3...a6 4 Ba4 Nf6, unusual lines Ruy Lopez} 1. e4 e5 2. Nf3
Nc6 3. Bb5 a6 4. Ba4 Nf6 5. Qe2 {The Worrall Attack. White avoids a lot of
theory associated with the mainlines and these days it enables him to avoid
the endgames resulting from the Berlin Defense. It's a good line for amateurs
because it is positionally sound and doesn't rely on memory and move order is
not crucial.} 5... b5 6. Bb3 Bc5 {This natural move develops the B to an
active square.} 7. c3 O-O 8. d3 {White's focus is on quiet development and
control of the center. Black has played a number of successful moves here.
8...h6 preventing the pin is probably mot necessary. Two other good moves are
8...d5 and 8...Bb7.} 8... d6 {This move has resulted in the least success for
black although it can hardly be considered bad.} 9. Bg5 Be6 10. Nbd2 Bxb3
{Probably not as good as: 10...Qe7 as played by Tiviakov against Almasi in
Wijk aan Zee 1995. In Kosteniuk-Stefanova, Cap d'Agde 2006, black played
10...Bb6 and back in 1853 at Brussels Staunton-Von Heydebrand continued
10...h6.} 11. axb3 {Here black has a number of moves that keep the position
even (11...h6, 11...Bb6 or even 11...Qe7), but instead he allows his Ps to be
doubled and seriously weakens his K-side.} 11... Qd7 {Stockfish really slams
this move attaching two question marks to it and assigning white an advantage
of two Ps.} 12. Bxf6 gxf6 13. Nh4 Kh8 {Obviously black has his heart set on
using the open g-file. White is aiming to place a N on f5.} 14. Nf1 Ne7 15.
Ng3 Ng6 16. Nhf5 Nf4 17. Qf3 {Black's 10th move has caused him a wee bit of a
problem. His R needs to guard the a-Pawn and so can't be used anywhere
else...like on the g-file.} 17... a5 18. O-O Rg8 {A punch in the center with
18...d5 was also worth considering. In either case, white has the better
chances.} 19. Kh1 Bb6 20. Nh5 Nxh5 21. Qxh5 Rg5 22. Qh4 Qe6 23. b4 {A
momentary diversion.} 23... a4 24. f4 exf4 25. Qxf4 Rag8 26. g3 d5 {Black
appears to be doing quite well: he has both Rs on the g-file and this
counterattack in the center. Plus, white is force to lose time withdrawing
his Q. But, as we will soon see, it is white who stands much better!} 27.
Rae1 Rg4 28. Qd2 Rd8 29. Qe2 Rg5 30. d4 {The weakness in black's position is
revealed. There is no way to defend the b-Pawn. If 30...c6 31.Qf3 dxe4
32.Rxe4 white's R penetrates with Re7 which would be decisive. Exchanging on
e4 leads to the same result.} 30... Re8 31. Qxb5 dxe4 32. Rf4 c6 {This is the
best defense.} 33. Qxb6 {Much better was 33.Qf1 depriving black of any
counterplay. White is going down the wrong path and giving his opponent a
chance to equalize.} 33... Rxf5 34. Rxf5 Qxf5 35. Qxc6 Re6 36. Qxa4 {Now even
stronger for black was 36...Qf3+ first and only then ...e3 so as to deny white
the Q check on a8 from where it then reaches g2.} 36... e3 {White has to watch
this pawn} 37. Qa8+ Kg7 38. Qg2 e2 39. Kg1 Qd3 40. Qf2 h5 41. h4 {White's
gaggle of Ps are pretty much useless because his pieces are tied up by black's
e-Pawn.} 41... Qd2 42. Kg2 {Black's next move is a clever, but risky,
counterattack that will have consequences. He probably should have played a
neutral move like 42...Re7 or 42...Re8.} 42... f5 43. b5 Qxb2 {It looks like
white should now play 44.c4 keeping his P mass intact, but that runs into the
surprising defense 44...f4!! White could then only draw. But he must be
careful not to lose! For example: 44.c4 f4!! 45.Qxf4 Qc3 and now if 46.Qf2??
(He has to take the perpetual check with 46.Qg5+) Rf6 and black wins!} 44. d5
Re4 45. b6 {White is trying to deflect the black Q from the defense of the
e-Pawn. Black still has the clever 45...f4 available. If white takes the P
his K is exposed. It's very complicated, but one clever line is 45...f4
46.gxf4 Qb2 47.b7 Qxd5 48.b8Q Re8+ draws.} 45... Qd2 {After this black is
totally lost. White's next move is brilliant! It's the only way to secure
the win as it avoids and checks onb the diagonal. On the logical 46.c4 there
follows 46...f4!! and no matter what he does white's K is exposed to a series
of checks from which there is no escape.} 46. Kh2 {Brilliant.} 46... Qxd5 47.
Rxe2 {At long last the e-Pawn has fallen and with it black's hopes have
disappeared.} 47... Rg4 48. Rb2 Qd6 49. b7 Qb8 50. Kh3 Kh6 51. Qf3 f4 52. Rg2
Qd8 53. Qc6+ Kg7 54. Qb5 fxg3 55. Qxh5 Rg6 56. Qf5 Qb6 57. Qe5+ f6 58. Qe7+
Kh6 59. Qf8+ Kh7 60. Re2 {Black will have to surrender his Q and so
surrendered the game. Stockfish declares it's mate in 21 moves.} 1-0

S.W. Bampton vs D. Stuart

 

    The following game was played back in 1899 and it decided the Franklin Chess Club of Philadelphia Junior Championship. Probably the best known Franklin players of the day were Walter Penn Shipley and Emil Kemeny. The winner of this games was Samuel Warren Bampton (1863-1952) who had the distinction of winning the club's junior championship seven times: 1887, 1892 and 1885 through 1899! According to the Edo Historical Rating site, Bampton's highest rating was achieved in 1896 when he peaked at 2403.

Fox Bashes Bampton

      In 1904, in the United States life expectancy was a mere 46.2 years for men and 49.1 years for men. King C. Gillette patented his Gillette razor blade. Thomas Sullivan accidentally invented tea bags when he wanted the small bags to be samples of the tea. People dunked them instead. 

     Several people in the US and England began selling ice cream in edible cones, each claiming to be the inventor. However, ice cream cones were sold during the St Louis World Fair by Charles E. Menches. In fact, the 1906 World’s Fair was the a turning point for American food. Besides ice cream cones the list includes the hamburger, the hot dog, peanut butter, the club sandwich, cotton candy, to name just a few. 

     In chess in 1904, the famous chess salon at Simpson’s Restaurant in London closed when Simpson’s was bought out by the Savoy Hotel group of companies. The chess club was first formed at Simpson’s in 1828. 

     In 1904, the cable matches between the United States and England was halted due to the Russio-Japanese war because cables were filled with battle reports and diplomatic messages. 

     Frank Marshall tied for 1st with Rudolf Swiderski in the Rice Gambit tournament held in Monte Carlo. Marshall also won the great Cambridge Springs international tournament. But, he wasn't through...he wonderful the 7th American Chess Congress held in St Louis. 

     In 1904, a series of annual over the board matches between the Manhattan Chess Club and Franklin Chess Club (of Philadelphia) that was inaugurated on May 30th on what was then know as Decoration Day. After WW2 people began referring to the holiday as Memorial Day. 

     The initial match for the Martinez trophy took place at the rooms of the Manhattan Chess Club which at that time was located in Carnegie Hall. Luster was added to the match by the participation of Frank Marshall, who 10 days earlier had taken first prize at Cambridge Springs and his opponent in the match, Harry N. Pillsbury. It’s not clear why these two great masters were on second board, but it’s likely that the club champions were on first board. In any case, after a lively game Pillsbury obtained a partial revenge for his losses to Marshall. 

 

 

     A dinner was held at the Hotel Savoy after the match and Marshall was presentation an expensive gold watch and chain in recognition of his results in the international arena. 

     The best known Franklin Chess Club players of the day were Walter Penn Shipley and Emil Kemeny. The loser of this games was Samuel W. Bampton (1863-1952) who had the distinction of winning the club's junior championship seven times: 1887, 1892 and 1885 through 1899! According to the Edo Historical Rating site, Bampton's highest rating was achieved in 1896 when he peaked at 2403. 

     Besides being a pretty good chess player, the winner, Albert W. Fox (1881-1964), was a newspaperman and lawyer. He was born in Boston and spent a few years in Germany studying mathematics. He won the championships of the prestigious Brooklyn and Manhattan clubs. A brilliant tactician, he was the youngest participant at Cambridge Springs on 1904 where he won games from Schlechter, Janowski and Chigorin. In In 1915, Capablanca claimed Fox was one of the most promising young players in the world and added, “...at the time he gave up chess to engage in newspaper work, and I still think he is the best odds giver I have ever seen.” Pretty high praise! 

[Event "Club Match, New York"] [Site "?"] [Date "1904.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "Albert W. Fox (Manhattan)"] [Black "Samuel Bampton (Franklin)"] [Result "1-0"] [ECO "C66"] [Annotator "Stockfish 16"] [PlyCount "51"] [EventDate "1904.??.??"] {[%evp 11,51,49,56,31,70,67,71,60,61,43,45,38,244,253,511,512,513,494,525,505, 510,494,540,530,536,514,516,515,582,582,582,580,583,579,920,936,959,970,1378, 1364,29991,1110] C66: Ruy Lopez} 1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5 Nf6 {The Berlin Defense is a classical way of meeting the Ruy Lopez. Black develops the N to a good square and attacks the e-Pawn, but this is not actual a threat because if black play ...Nxe4 white can easily win back the P. The defense can lead to an early exchange of Q resulting in an early endgame being reached thta slightly favord white. Even so, it's difficult for white to make any use of his advantage and so the defense is often played by players wanting to draw.} 4. O-O {By far the most common move, but occasionally 4.Nc3 is seen.} Be7 (4... Nxe4 5. d4 Nd6 6. Bxc6 dxc6 7. dxe5 Nf5 {is the main line.}) 5. Re1 d6 { The opening has transposed into the Old Steinitz Defense which is passive and cramped, but quite solid.} 6. c3 O-O 7. d3 Ne8 {Instead of the super solid 7... Re8 black intends to play ...f5} 8. Nbd2 f5 9. exf5 Bxf5 10. Ne4 (10. d4 exd4 11. Qb3+ Kh8 12. Bxc6 bxc6 13. Nxd4 Bd7 14. N2f3 {is only very slightly better for white.}) 10... Bg4 11. Qb3+ d5 {A miscalculation that costs the game...the reason will soon be apparent.} (11... Kh8 {keeps the balance. For example...} 12. Neg5 {Taking on c6 leads nowhere.} Bxg5 13. Nxg5 Qf6 14. f3 Bc8 15. d4 Qg6 (15... exd4 16. Bd3 Na5 17. Nf7+ Kg8 18. Nh6+ Kh8 19. Qb5 {and black is in deep trouble.}) 16. dxe5 h6 17. Bxc6 bxc6 18. Ne4 Rxf3 {with a complicated position offering equal chances.}) 12. Bxc6 {[%mdl 32]} Bxf3 {Going from bad to worse.} (12... bxc6 13. Nxe5 {picks off a P and there follows} Bd7 14. Bg5 Bxg5 15. Nxg5 {White has a decisive advantage.} Qxg5 16. Nxd7 Rf7 17. Qb7 Rd8 18. Ne5 Rf8 19. Nxc6) 13. Bxd5+ Kh8 14. gxf3 {White has won a piece and black has zero compensation.} c6 (14... Rxf3 15. Bxb7 Rb8 16. Qd5 Rxd3 17. Qxd8 Rdxd8 18. Bc6 {White has won a piece.}) 15. Bf7 Nd6 16. Nxd6 Qxd6 17. Qe6 Qxd3 18. Qxe7 Qxf3 {Black can resign at any time, but naturally he wants to stretch the game out becuase who wants to lose a teen-mover?} 19. Re3 {[%mdl 32] Black gets in some spite checks, but that's all.} Qd1+ 20. Kg2 Qg4+ 21. Rg3 Qe4+ 22. Kf1 {White threatens Bh6! and mate.} Qh1+ 23. Rg1 Qf3 {This prevents the mate with 24.Bh6 (24...Qh3+ wins the B), but white has a clever alternative.} (23... b6 {A pass to show white's threat and it's a pretty nifty one.} 24. Bh6 Rxf7 25. Qxf7 Qxg1+ 26. Kxg1 Rg8 27. Kh1 e4 28. Rg1 c5 29. Bxg7+ Rxg7 30. Qxg7#) 24. Rxg7 Qd3+ (24... Rae8 25. Rxh7+ Kxh7 26. Bxe8+ Kg8 27. Qg5+ Kh8 28. Qxe5+ Qf6 29. Qh5+ Kg7 30. Be3 {etc.}) (24... Kxg7 25. Bh5+ {wins the Q}) 25. Kg1 Rg8 ( 25... Rxf7 26. Qxf7 Qd1+ 27. Kg2 Qd5+ 28. Qxd5 cxd5 29. Rxb7) 26. Bxg8 { Black resigned. Not that it matters, but 26.Rg3 mates a move quicker.} (26. Bxg8 Qd1+ 27. Kg2 Rxg8 28. Bh6 Qd5+ 29. Kg1 Qe6 30. Qxe6 Rxg7+ 31. Kf1 Rg6 32. Qxe5+ Rf6 33. Qxf6+ Kg8 34. Qg7#) 1-0

Stasch Bashes Mr. Widmeyer

     In the following game Stasch Mlotkowski played the Latvian Gambit which still has those who firmly believe in it. It has a long history of diehard adherents, even a few correspondence players specialized in it, especially in the pre-engine days. 
     The unfortunate Mr. Widmeyer suffered miserably after he failed to give heed to his own King's safety when he neglected to castle at move 10. Then at move 13, he played the artificial 13.Kd2 which resulted in a lot of fiddling around trying to get the K to safe haven and at the same time get the rest of his pieces into play...a task that turned out to be just too much. 
     Finally, on move 26 he made a seemingly innocuous trade that left his K-side totally stripped of pieces that might have offered some counterplay. Throw in the fact that the rest of his pieces, blocked by their own K as a result of 13.Kd2, were all gummed up, and black was able to almost coast to victory. 
     The game was played in the 1904 Western Open Minor Tournament which was held in St.Louis, Missouri. The "Minor Tournament" consisted of 14 players who played two games a day and Mlotkowski dominated the event  He went undefeated, being held to draws only by Louis Uedemann and J. Sawyer. At home back in Philadelphia Mlotkowski was recognized as a strong player and this tournament gave him a national reputation. 

1) Mlotkowski 12-1 
2) Uedemann 9.5-3.5 
3) Schrader 8.5-4.5 
4-5) Daly and Kemeny 8-5 
6) Smith 7.5-5.5 
7-8) Sawyer and Shrader 7-6 
9) Widmeyer 6-7 
10) Wickersham 5-8 
11) Rundle 4.5-8.5 
12) Cowles 3.5-9.5 
13) Clark 2.5-10.5 
14) Terker 2-11 
 

McFarland Publishing Chess Books

Disclaimer: I have NO financial interest in their books.

I received a catalog of chess books by McFarland Publishing in the mail today and can highly recommend their books. I have a couple and am impressed with the quality, but be aware that they are pricey. For example, Alekhine’s Best Games 1902-1946 by Skinner and Verhoeven which contains 2,543 games will cost you $125; I don’t think there are any notes, just game scores with diagrams. Prices are generally in the $45 range!  Looking through the catalog I could have spent about $500.

There are books with biographies and annotated games on the great, near great and obscure players:  Botvinnik, Nimzovich, Capablanca, Victorian players, Emil Kemeny, Kashdan, Arthur Kaufmann, W.H.K. Pollack, Adolf Albin, Julius Finn, Amos Burn, James Mason, Albert Hodges, James A. Leonard, Walter Penn Shipley, Steinitz, Frank Marshall, Thomas Frere, Reshevsky, Reuben Fine and more.  Next year they will be publishing books on Samuel Lipschutz, Vera Menchick and Ignaz Kolisch.

McFarland is a publisher of academic and nonfiction books ranging from history, military history, sports, literature, etc. Check them out at McFarland Publishing.  If you live in Europe, Australia, Asia or Africa you can check them out at Eurospanbookstore.

Louis Uedemann

    This morning finds me thankful that we survuved yesterday afternoon with no damage! At about 4:00pm it grew dark and we were hit with a severe thunderstorm with 65-90mph wind gust and a tornado. 

    Trees were swaying wildly and sheets of water swirled past our dining room window. We lost power for about a minute, but many are still without electric this morning and some streets are blocked with downed trees. Car upturned

    Again, I am thankful that we, our neighbors an our family members scattered around town survived with no damage as others were not so fortunate.

    Through 1938 the forerunner of the US Open tournament was organized by the Western Chess Association and, after 1938, the American Chess Federation. Since 1939 the US Open has been run by the USCF. 

    In the early years the number of entrants was small, and play was conducted as round robin with included preliminary rounds. Winners of the preliminary rounds advanced to the Championship Finals and Consolation Finals. Starting in 1947 the Swiss System has been used. Up until 1967 the US Open was a really long event…12-13 rounds played over two weeks. Starting in 2006 it became a nine round event. 

    What is considered to be the first US Open was played in 1900 in Excelsior, Minnesota and was won by Louis Uedemann. He also won the 1902 event, also held in Excelsior.

    Not much is known about Louis Uedemann (January 10, 1854 – November 22, 1912). He was born in Westphalia, Germany and immigrated to the United States at the age of 12. Uedemann was the chess editor for the Chicago Tribune. He developed a code that was later refined by D. A. Gringmuth, of St. Petersburg, a leading Russian problem composer, that adapted for use with telegraphs for cable matches. The Uedemann-Gringmuth code was first used in the telegraphic match between London and St Petersburg in November 1886.

    Uedemann usually finished well in local tournaments and was generally among the leaders. He played for the Chicago Chess Club and in 1904 and 1905 he participated in the club’s cable matches against the Twin Cities (Minneapolis and St. Paul) CC, Franklin CC of Pennsylvania, Brooklyn CC and Manhattan. 

    According to the Edo rating list, Uedemann maintained a rating of around 2425. While that may not be considered particularly high today, back in the day it was a pretty hefty rating. That said, remember that ratings measure how well one performs against the players in one’s rating pool, NOT absolute ability. Still, Uedemann was a solid master. 

    St. Louis was a busy place in 1904. The Louisiana Purchase Exposition (known informally as the 1904 World's Fair) was held there from April 30 to December 1, 1904. The Summer Olympic games were also held in St. Louis from July 1st to November 23rd, 1904. Although originally scheduled to be held in Chicago, a St. Louis group played hardball and threatened to hold their own international athletic competition unless the event was moved to St. Louis. Poorly run and with relatively few foreign athletes (only about a tenth of the competitors were from outside the US), the games were largely overshadowed by the fair itself. 

    With the fair and the Olympics as a backdrop, the 7th American Chess Congress was held at the Missouri Athletic Club in St. Louis 11-26 October 1904.

    The MAC was founded just before the fair and the original building was lost to fire in 1914. Max Judd, who was head of the organizing committee, wanted to name the winner US champion, but Harry Nelson Pillsbury, both directly and by proxy through his friend Walter Penn Shipley, objected strenuously to the idea. This, along with his poor heath, was probably responsible for Pillsbury's absence from St. Louis. Despite Pillsbury's objections, Marshall was awarded a gold medal recognizing him as US "champion" for winning the tournament. 

    Draws were replayed with colors reversed, and if the second game was also drawn the result was scored as one draw. The sequence of rounds was determined by lot each day. Games were played 1-6 PM and 8-11 PM with time controls of 30 moves in 2 hours and 15 moves an hour thereafter. 

 

 

    There are two games missing. 1) Eisenberg-Shrader 1-0 from Round 9 was a forfeit. Helms wrote in the Brooklyn Daily Eagle that Eisenberg added another point by default when Dr. Shrader received word that he had to return home. 2) Jaffe-Uedemann 1-0 from Round 8 is a bit murkier. The game collection sources I have consulted give either no game at all or present it as a forfeit in favor of Jaffe. 

    However, the Brooklyn Daily Eagle reported that Charles Jaffe of Brooklyn strengthened his position considerably by winning from Uedemann who was the Western champion. So, the game collections imply a forfeit, but the Eagle coverage implies a played game. In either senario, no game score seems to be available and all sources agree it was a win for Jaffe. 

    Uedemann finished second behind Mlotkowski in the "minor" tournament (Western Chess Championship) held just before the congress. As the highest-scoring eligible player (Uedemann was from Chicago), he was named Western Champion. 

    The biggest surprise of the tournament was the poor showing of Mlotkowski. In the "minor" tournament, he had finished clear first, by 2.5 points (+11 -0 =2).

    Kemeny, Schrader, Shrader and Uedemann also played in both the minor and major events, and why Mlotkowski did so well in the minor and so poorly in the major is a mystery. Playing two games per day for a week in the minor apparently took a lot out of him. 

    The coverage in the Brooklyn Daily Eagle speculated, “Fatigue, coupled with his fondness for the Evans and Greco counter gambits, which yielded poor results in this contest, no doubt are the factors responsible for his lack of success.” 

    There wasn't much of a race for first. Marshall easily ran through the field and only gave up a pair of draws (scored as one draw) to Mlotkowski in the last round. A draw in the crosstable indicates both the initial and the replay game were drawn. If only the initial game was drawn, the result from the replay game was used. 

     Max Judd lost an endgame to Uedemann in Round 2 which put him a point behind Marshall. When they met in Round 7, Judd completely collapsed and lost in less than 20 moves leaving Marshall in complete control with a 2-point lead. 

[Event "American Chess Congress, St. Louis"] [Site ""] [Date "1904.10.19"] [Round "?"] [White "Louis Uedemann"] [Black "Stasch Mlotkowski"] [Result "1-0"] [ECO "C63"] [Annotator "Stockfish 16"] [PlyCount "51"] [EventDate "1904.??.??"] {C63: Ruy Lopez: Schliemann Defense} 1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5 f5 {Sharp and tactical! This is the most aggressive response to the Ruy Lopez. Although it looks very risky and appears to violate opening principles, it's extremely tricky and if white does not play correctly, black often gets a winning position right out of the opening!} 4. d3 (4. exf5 {results in equality after} e4 5. Qe2 Qe7 6. Bxc6 dxc6 7. Nd4) ({is the main line.} 4. Nc3 fxe4 {Also to be considered is the sharp 4...Nf6} (4... Nf6 5. exf5 e4 6. Ng5 d5 {White is slightly better.}) 5. Nxe4 Nf6 6. Qe2 d5 7. Nxf6+ gxf6 {with equal chances.}) 4... fxe4 5. dxe4 Nf6 6. O-O d6 7. Nc3 Be7 8. a3 Bg4 (8... O-O 9. Bc4+ Kh8 10. Ng5 Qe8 11. f4 exf4 12. Bxf4 {Svidler,P (2722)-Aronian,L (2801) Moscow RUS 2010 is about equal after 12...Ne5}) 9. Bc4 (9. Qd3 {was played in Shrader, E-Marshall,F in the same event which continued} Qd7 10. Bc4 Rf8 11. Ne1 Nh5 { White is slightly better, but he eventually lost.} 12. Nd5 {0-1 (48)}) 9... Nd4 10. Qd3 Bxf3 11. gxf3 Qd7 12. Kg2 Nh5 13. Nd5 {This is an inviting post for the N, but it really doesn't accomplish anything here. It would have been better to eliminate black's well placed N with 13.Nb5} (13. Nb5 {was a better option because after} Nxb5 14. Bxb5 c6 15. Bc4 {equals.}) 13... Rf8 14. f4 { It's attack and defense on the K-side. Who's going to succeed?} c6 15. Nxe7 Qg4+ {This is inviting, but, as will soon be seen, black is barking up the wring tree and this move allows white to get a small, but promising edge.} ( 15... Nxf4+ {was a little better.} 16. Bxf4 Rxf4 17. Nf5 {Now white's best chance is to play aggressively with} d5 {with about equal chances.}) (15... Qxe7 {This allows white easy equality after} 16. c3 Ne6 17. Bxe6 Qxe6 18. f5) 16. Kh1 Nf3 {[%mdl 8192] Black has badly miscalculated...this is the losing move.} ({Better is} 16... Kxe7 17. fxe5 dxe5 18. Rg1 Qf3+ {is equal.}) 17. Be6 {[%mdl 512] This surprising move refutes black's last move and it is the only move that avoids defeat!} (17. Nf5 {to save the N runs into} Rxf5 18. exf5 Nxf4 19. Bxf4 Qxf4 20. Kg2 Qg4+ 21. Kh1 Qh3 {and wins}) 17... Qxe6 18. Qxf3 g6 { White's N is trapped and so he decides to sell it for a P, but that turns out to have been a poor decision because after 19.Nxg6 black is back to equality.} 19. Nxg6 (19. Nf5 {is correct because it maintains white is winning position. If 19...gxf5 20.Qxh5, so...} exf4 {This is a bit more tricky and so for practical reasons is probably the best try.} (19... Nxf4 20. Ng7+) (19... O-O-O 20. fxe5 Qxe5 21. Bh6 Rfe8 22. Ng3 {White is a piece up.}) 20. Bxf4 Rf7 21. Rad1 gxf5 {Now not 22.Qxh5 which allows black to equalize.} 22. Rfe1 fxe4 {etc. } 23. Qxh5 {The clearest continuation.} (23. Rxe4 Nxf4 24. Rxe6+ Nxe6 {is good for white, but it's a tricky position to play.}) 23... d5 24. Rg1 {etc/}) 19... hxg6 20. f5 Qf7 {Black has recovered his piece and white can claim to be only slightly better.} 21. Bg5 Kd7 22. Rad1 gxf5 {Black has manages to survive thanks to his opponent's inaccurate [;ay.} 23. Qc3 Qg7 {[%mdl 8192] This is fatal and this time Uedeman doesn't miss the win.} (23... fxe4 24. f4 (24. Qb4 Qf3+ {wins}) 24... Qe6 25. fxe5 Rxf1+ 26. Rxf1 d5 {and the chances are completely equal.}) 24. Qb4 {Black completely missed this move attacking Ps on d6 and b7...there is nothing he can do to meet both threats.} Qg6 (24... Kc8 25. Qxd6 Re8 26. exf5 e4 27. Bd8 Nf4 28. Rg1 Qf7 29. Qxf4) 25. Qxb7+ Ke6 26. Qe7# 1-0