But, in the US, a few months before the war began, on February 4th, Frederick Lorz (1884-1914), an American bricklayer and long-distance runner, died of pneumonia. The infamous Lorz was a cheater.
In the marathon at the 1904 Olympic Games, Lorz stopped running because of exhaustion after nine miles. His manager gave him a lift in his car and drove the next eleven miles, after which, Lorz continued on foot back to the Olympic stadium, where he broke the finishing line tape and was greeted as the winner of the race.
Spectators knew what happened and Lorz admitted his deception and despite his claims he was joking, the AAU responded by banning him for life, but he was reinstated after a year when it was determined that he had not intended to defraud...if you can believe it.
The winner, Thomas Hicks, walked part of the route, was carried by his trainers and was administered strychnine. Today the substance is primarily used to kill rats, but in those days it was used in small doses to strengthen muscle contractions, such as a heart and bowel stimulant and performance-enhancing drug. The race (or was it the rat poison?) almost killed him and he retired the next day.
In Germany, the Spielmann - Teichmann match was played in the Cafe Kaiserhof from February 19th to the 27th. Teichmann scored a crushing victory, but according to Emanuel Lasker, the reigning world champion, while the games were of a high order, the result was deceptive even though in previous encounters Teichmann had won six games and Spielmann only two.
According to Lasker, in a couple of games Teichmann reproduced the form he displayed when he won the 1911 Carlsbad tournament and in those games Spielmann only lasted a scant 20 moves or so.
As bad as his result in this match was was, in his next tournament (Baden-bei-Wien in 1914) which took pace in April, Spielmann won ahead of a number of strong players including Tartakower, Schlechter and Reti.
Because of that, it was Lasker's opinion that Teichmann's overwhelming victory gave an inaccurate idea of the relative strength of the two players. He wrote, "Whatever one may think of Teichmann, he cannot beat Spielmann in this fashion unless Spielmann is out of form, because nobody is able to do that."
What accounted for Spielmann's bad result? Lasker said it was the bad match arrangements. The players got an honorarium, but hardly any prize money was given to the winner.
According to Lasker, a prize was a necessary
element in the feeling of responsibility which animates the players. And, as the world was at the time, honor and glory did not seem sufficient to stimulate the players to their greatest exertions.
At the time of the match Spielmann was one of the new generation of players who had emerged in the first decade of the twentieth century.
Unlike many of his contemporaries, he was not a Hyper-modern. Instead, he was an aggressive tactician.
As for Teichmann, in 1911, Vidmar wrote that Teichmann "...was never a dry player. He draws a lot, but when he actually plays there was always fire." In 1914 Capablanca listed himself, Lasker, Rubinstein, Schlechter, and Teichmann as the strongest players in the world.
Capablanca also made the observation that "...(Teichmann) cannot extend himself to his best effort unless his whiskey and soda are at close call, and is clever at all games of cards and billiards. Work is no virtue with him despite his massive bulk. As soon as his money is gone, he sets about to play chess."
[Event "Match, Leipzig"]
[Site ""]
[Date "1914.02.22"]
[Round "3"]
[White "Richard Teichmann"]
[Black "Rudolf Spielmann"]
[Result "1-0"]
[ECO "B46"]
[Annotator "Stockfish 15.1"]
[PlyCount "37"]
[EventDate "1914.02.??"]
{Sicilian: Taimanov} 1. e4 c5 2. Nc3 e6 3. Nge2 Nc6 4. d4 cxd4 5. Nxd4 a6 {
The opening has morphed into the Taimanov vVariation in shich black keeps
options open regarding the placement of his pieces. One of the ideas of this
system is to develop the B to b4 or c5.} 6. Nxc6 {Another alternative is 6.Be2}
bxc6 7. Bd3 d5 8. O-O Nf6 {So far very modern. Nowadays white prefers 9.Re1} 9.
Bf4 Bb4 (9... Be7 10. Re1 {In Mason,J-Maroczy,G London 1899, white played 10.
Qe2 whicj is also good.} (10. Qf3 Bb7 11. Rad1 g6 12. Rfe1 O-O {is equal.
Doluhanova,E (2244)-Mischuk,D (2337) Lvov 2015}) 10... O-O {as in Kasimdzhanov,
R (2673)-Movsesian,S (2618) Sochi 2006 is another good choice.} 11. Qf3 g6 12.
Na4 Nd7 13. c4 Bb7 {equals.}) (9... Bb7 {is yet another option.} 10. Re1 Qa5
11. a3 Be7 12. b4 Qd8 13. e5 Nd7 {Here white can claim a small advantage.
Mortensen,E (2500)-Hellsten,J (2420) Copenhagen 1995}) 10. e5 Nd7 11. Qg4 {
A commonly seen move in the Taimanoiv. White could also play aggressively with
11.Na4 and 12.c4} g6 12. Rfe1 c5 {A routine move that allows white to gain the
initiative.} (12... h5 {and Black has nothing to worry.} 13. Qh3 (13. Qe2 {
is equally good.} Bb7 14. Rab1) 13... g5 14. Bd2 Bb7 {with completely equal
chances.}) 13. a3 Ba5 {After this white has a substantial advantage which he
quickly exploits.} (13... Bxc3 {was a must play.} 14. bxc3 c4 15. Bf1 h5 {
White's pieces are driven back and black can offer a stout defense.}) 14. Bg5 {
[%mdl 2048]} Qb6 {The Q turns out to be misplaced and exposed here therefore
14...Qc7 would have been much better.} 15. b4 cxb4 16. Nxd5 {[%mdl 512] He
could also have played this last move.} exd5 17. e6 {This is th ecruaher. The
routine recapture 17.axb6 would have worked out to black's advantage.} f5 {
Opening up his K's position results in a quick demise, but even the 17...O-O
was not a lot better.} (17... O-O 18. exd7 h5 19. Qh3 Bb7 20. axb4 Bxb4 21.
Rab1 {wins}) 18. exd7+ Kxd7 {Now comes a nice finish...} 19. Bxf5+ {[%mdl 512]
Black resigned.} (19. Bxf5+ gxf5 20. Qxf5+ Kc7 (20... Kc6 21. Qf6+ Kb7 22. Re7+
{wins easily.}) 21. Bf4+ Kb7 22. Qf7+ Kc6 23. Qf6+ Kb7 24. Re7+ {with an easy
win.}) 1-0
I don't know if the chess masters of the past were really such colorful characters, or if they were just written about in a more colorful way, but it's great fun to read about them either way
ReplyDeleteHaven't seen a comment from you in a long time! Nice to know you're still around!
ReplyDelete