John played in a number of American and international tournaments between 1880 and 1906. His best international result came when he scored 8-4 and finished tied for 4th-5th place in the Minor Section of the Fifth American Chess Congress. His best domestic result was his 3rd place finish in the Eighth Manhattan Chess Club championship in 1883.
The Sixth American Congress in New York in 1889, a double round robin that was one of the longest tournaments in history, John finished next to last out of 20 players while his brother, David, finished 14th.
The following game was played in the 6eth American Congress held in New York in 1889. Baird’s opponent didn’t play especially well, but the game is entertaining.
Nicholas MacLepd (February 8, 1870 – September 27, 1965, 95 (!) years old) was born in Quebec in Canada, At the age of 16 he won the Canadian championship in 1886 and 1888 (after play-off).
At the end of the century MacLeod moved to Minnesota where he won the state champion in 1899 and 1901.MacLeod married in 1902 and subsequently settled in Spokane, Washington, where he passed away in 1965.
[Event "6th American Congress, New York"]
[Site ""]
[Date "1889.03.26"]
[Round "?"]
[White "John W. Baird"]
[Black "Nicholas MacLeod"]
[Result "1-0"]
[ECO "C62"]
[Annotator "Stockfish 16"]
[PlyCount "47"]
[EventDate "1889.03.25"]
{C66: Ruy Lopez: Old Steinitz Defense} 1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5 d6 {Nowadays
black usually plays 3...a6 first (the Modern Steinitz Defense) which keeps the
possibility of breaking the pin with a timely ...b5 and gives black more
latitude than in the Old Steinitz Defense. In the Old teinitz white can
practically force black to give up the stronghold at e5. In the Modern
Steinitz black is able to maintain control of the centre, especially e5. In my
database the Old Steinitz results in white scoring in half of the games with
the remaining half being equally divided between black wins and draws.} 4.
Bxc6+ {Although this has been played numerous times by some strong players
like Nigel Short and Joel Benjamin it seems that 4.d4 offers white better
chances of gaining the advantage.} bxc6 5. d4 Nf6 {[%mdl 32]} 6. O-O Nxe4 (6...
exd4 7. Qxd4 Be7 8. e5 c5 9. Qd3 dxe5 (9... Nd7 10. exd6 cxd6 11. c4 O-O {
is equal. Short,N (2707)-Huebner,R (2581) Potsdam 2012}) 10. Qxd8+ Bxd8 11.
Nxe5 Be7 12. Re1 Be6 {is completely equal. Perlis, J-Forgacs,L St Petersburg
1909}) (6... Be7 7. Nc3 Nd7 8. dxe5 dxe5 9. Qe2 O-O {equals. Capablanca,
J-Janowski,D Havana 1913}) 7. dxe5 d5 8. Be3 h6 {Strictly speaking this is not
really bad, but it turns out to be a stepping stone to a bad idea.} (8... c5 {
is the way to maintain equality.} 9. Re1 Be7 10. c4 O-O 11. cxd5 Bb7) 9. Nbd2
Nxd2 10. Qxd2 g5 {[%mdl 8192] This creates a fatal weakness in his position.
He ought to have played 10...c5 with a playable position.} 11. Qc3 {The threat
is e6 and black has no good way to meet it.} Bb7 (11... Bg7 {prevents the
thrat, but white can continue to build up his position.} 12. Bc5 Be6 13. Nd4
Rg8 14. Rae1 (14. Nxc6 {is also very effective...} Qd7 15. Bxa7) 14... Qd7 15.
f4 {with a winning attack.}) 12. e6 {Already black is doomed.} f6 13. Qd3 Rg8 {
Against Qg6+} 14. Qh7 {[%csl Ge6][%cal Rh7f7] White plays this remarkably well,
and he now forces the game in a few moves.} Rg7 {Against Qf7+} 15. Qxh6 Qd6 {?}
(15... Qe7 16. Nd4 Rg8 (16... O-O-O 17. Nf5) 17. Qh5+ Kd8 18. Nf5 Qxe6 19. Qh7
Bb4 20. c3 Ba5 21. Rfe1 Rf8 22. Bc5 {and black is done for.}) 16. Qxf6 Qe7 17.
Qe5 Rg6 18. Bxg5 Qh7 19. e7 Bg7 (19... Bxe7 20. Qxc7 Rxg5 21. Qxb7 Rd8 22. Nxg5
{is hopeless for black.}) 20. Qxc7 Bf6 {Resigning was a good option.} 21. Qxb7
Qg7 22. Qxa8+ Kxe7 23. Qxa7+ (23. Rfe1+ {Not that it really matters, but this
leads to a forced mate.} Kd7 24. Re8 Kd6 25. Qb8+ Kc5 26. Ne1 d4 27. Re6 Qb7
28. Qxb7 d3 29. Qxc6+ Kb4 30. Nxd3+ Ka5 31. b4#) 23... Kd6 24. Qxg7 {Black
finally resigned. A horrible little game by black.} 1-0
No comments:
Post a Comment