Forum

Waiting for Anderssen to arrive from Breslau, Paul Morphy enjoyed the delights of Paris - including the Opera House. During The Marriage of Figaro he entertains his hosts with this elegant brilliancy, mating on the 17th move with his last two pieces!

Richard Réti Morphy was the first positional player who, unlike his Romantic rivals, understood the strategic basis for attack. He wrote nothing more than a few game notes and played fewer than seventy-five serious games. But his exploitation of open lines prepared the way for Steinitz's scientific treatment of closed positions and the era of modern chess. Andrew Soltis (in Golombek's Encyclopedia of Chess, New York, 1977) Genius is a starry word; but if there ever was a chess player to whom that attribute applied, it was Paul Morphy. Edward Lasker (in The Adventure of Chess, 2nd Edition, New York, 1959) After the passage of a century, Morphy still remains the most glamorous figure that has ever appeared in the chess world. Fred Reinfeld (in Great Moments in Chess History, Brancliff Manor, New York 1963) Paul Morphy was a great chessplayer, a genius... Morphy, I think everyone agrees, was probably the greatest genius of them all... Lasker In Paul Morphy the spirit of La Bourdonnais had arisen anew, only more vigorous, firmer, prouder... Morphy discovered that the brilliant move of the master is essentially conditional not on a sudden and inexplicable realisation, but on the placing of the pieces on the board. He introduced the rule: brilliant moves and deep winning manoeuvres are possible only in those positions where the opponent can be opposed with an abundance of active energy... From the very first moves Morphy aimed to disclose the internal energy located in his pieces. It was suddenly revealed that they possess far greater dynamism than the opponent's forces. Capablanca Reviewing the history of chess from La Bourdonnais to the masters of our day right up to Lasker, we discover that the greatest stylist was Morphy. He did not look for complicated combinations, but he also did not avoid them, which really is the correct way of playing... His main strength lay not in his combinative gift, but in his positional play and general style. Morphy gained most of his wins by playing directly and simply, and it is this simple and logical method that constitutes the true brilliance of his play, if it is considered from the viewpoint of the great masters. and [I play in] the style of Morphy, they say, and if it is true that the goddess of fortune has endowed me with his talent, the result [of the match with Emanuel Lasker] will not be in doubt. The magnificent American master had the most extraordinary brain that anybody has ever had for chess. Technique, strategy, tactics, knowledge which is inconceivable for us; all that was possessed by Morphy fifty-four years ago. Alekhine How much more vivid, more rich does the figure of Morphy appear before us, how much clearer does the secret of his success and charm become, if we transfer ourselves in our thoughts to that era when he lived and created, if we take the trouble to study, only a little, his contemporaries! Then...in London and in particular in Paris, where the traditions of Philidor were still alive, where the immortal creations of La Bourdonnais and McDonnell were still in the memory, at that time, finally, when Anderssen was alive, and with brilliance alone it was hardly possibly to suprise anyone. The strength, the invincible strength of Morphy- this was the reason for his success and the guarantee of his immortality! Botvinnik To this day Morphy is an unsurpassed master of the open games. Just how great was his significance is evidant from the fact that after Morphy nothing substantially new has been created in this field. Every player- from beginner to master- should in this praxis return again and again to the games of the American genius. Fischer A popularly held theory about Paul Morphy is that if he returned to the chess world today and played our best contemporary players, he would come out the loser. Nothing is further from the truth. In a set match, Morphy would beat anybody alive today... Morphy was perhaps the most accurate chess player who ever lived. He had complete sight of the board and never blundered, in spite of the fact that he played quite rapidly, rarely taking more than five minutes to decide a move. Perhaps his only weakness was in closed games like the Dutch Defense. But even then, he was usually victorious because of his resourcefulness. Smyslov There is no doubt that for Morphy chess was an art, and for chess Morphy was a great artist. His play was captivated by freshness of thought and inexhaustible energy. He played with inspiration, without striving to penetrate into the psychology of the opponent; he played, if one can express it so, "pure chess". His harmonious positional understanding the pure intuition would have made Morphy a highly dangerous opponent even for any player of our times. Kasparov Morphy can be regarded as the forefather of modern chess. Sources:Chessgames.com and Sarah's journal (Batgirl)

Just heard a cool new song on Spotify about Paul Morphy called "Morphy's Gambit" by Aaron Drive. I think it's on YouTube and other services as well. https://open.spotify.com/track/240BOKQchKekL3eol6jPij?si=oPfrDzGcS1mFoXDHoJYxmg

wollyhood 18 days ago #1 Thank you so much to the admins that came before me, namely ProphetessMio <& give me other names to put in here> for their thoughtful work which we have built on and arrived with these rules and guidelines : D ~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~* Mar 14, 2019 #1 Vote chess is great. However, it involves some rules to ensure the game goes smoothly with communication amongst members. Here's how it will work. 1. Members of the group join the side they're playing for. If they are in both clubs, they can choose which side they want to be on. All members are encouraged to join, the more, the merrier! 2. Members playing should click the 'follow' box under the commenting box. This way, you will receive notifications every time someone comments. 3. Once it is our group's turn, members can discuss moves. Often, especially in the opening, discussion can be done while it is the other group's move and that is okay. 4. When you want to suggest a move, explain why you think it is a good move using a diagram, image of the final position or text (diagram is recommended as it is easy to understand). This improves communication between team mates. This might be a good tutorial for how to do that: https://www.chess.com/clubs/forum/view/posting-diagrams-especially-useful-in-vote-chess , Ask admins if you are having trouble posting these options. 5. As the discussion is going on, members can suggest their ideas or support other ideas. Please do not vote early as it will disrupt the system. Too many early moves might result in the wrong move being voted for! Don't be shy to ask questions about other variations, and feel free to post your own! We are all learning. 6. Once moves are decided, vote chess captains will post an image along with the Chosen Move to be voted for. Have fun! ************************ RULES New acronyms (easier to remember) used in these rules: VCC = vote chess captain, usually an admin. This person will be made known to you in the discussion before the first vote. VDL = voting deadline, if we haven't voted by this time, we forfeit. C4V = call for votes, 24 hours before VDL, this will be made by the VCC. CM = discussed and chosen move. Could sometimes be two options if we can't come to a consensus. The VCC or their deputized person are the only ones that can declare the CM. 1st day of the 3 days before VDL = discuss possible moves. 2nd day of the " " = will probably be asked to further discussion of possible moves, ending just before C4V when we all are instructed which move has been chosen and has become the CM. Exceptions: 1. For a forced (that is, on legal move only) a call for votes should be issued early 2. For a practically forced move, although there is absolutely no advantage in voting early, people get impatient so after at least a little time to let people suggest intermediate moves (we like to let the move run at least 24 hours, to allow one day right around the world) an early call for votes might be issued 3. Rarely, discussion will be ongoing at the 24 hour mark. It's then appropriate to hold up the call for votes (and post saying so!) and to wait for the discussion to resolve if possible. Other points: 1. Having the 24 hour mark roll around between midnight and 6am or any time the vote captain is regularly asleep or at work without Internet access is awkward. Sometimes the call for votes moves to 28 hours or 20 hours. Sometimes someone else in the game has to be deputized by an admin to give it. 2. People need to follow the rules in this club and not vote early (even if you are going away or have only been given 6 hours to live) and not vote against the Chosen Move. Failure to do this will result in a warning, and if it happens again you will be removed from the game. This would be a sad way to spend your last 5 hours on earth. 3. Try and be respectful when you are dismissing the ideas of others. For eg: instead of saying "Don't be stupid, that's a pointless move" you could say "I think h5 is way stronger because........., and also c4 creates a huge defensive weakness..." It is possible if people are causing too much negativity to the environment they could also be warned before getting kicked from the game. Please contact the VCC or other admin if you are feeling unhappy in the game or have noticed some rule breaking, and we will try and address your concerns asap. varelse1 17 days ago #2 Good point on the "be respectful" part. I have seen the weakest player on the team, suggest some of the best ideas at times. Being they can think of ideas, most stronger players would never even consider.

Morphy's Games of Chess 300 games by the greatest player of all time: 54 against such masters as Anderssen, Harrwitz, Mongredien, Bird, Paulsen and others; 52 of the best blindfold games; 52 games at odds; and 142 in consultation, informally, etc. Detailed annotations of games by such expert analysts as Sergeant, Steinitz, Anderssen and Morphy himself. Paul Morphy and the Evolution of Chess Theory This book, about the best chess player of the nineteenth century, analyzes Paul Morphy's games and positions in depth to reveal the essence of his style. The first collection in English of all 413 of Morphy's known games, the volume discusses other players of the period (Adolph Anderssen and Wilhelm Steinitz), Morphy's rare blunders and omissions, as well as selected endgames and openings. Also included are a 27-page essay on Morphy by Steinitz, and a series of letters between Alexander Alekhine and Eugene Znosko-Borovsky debating Morphy's chess style.

We really need a few really good players (to me this currently in games 1800+) to field a good back up team here. At the moment we have a handful of people under 1550. Please register your interest otherwise I might have to withdraw our team's position as back up, as there are a few teams ranked in the top 500 on this site, so it's going to be pretty fierce competition. These are screenshots from the organizer's club she started just for this Tourney:

#1 Thank you so much to the admins that came before me, namely ProphetessMio for their thoughtful work which we have built on and arrived with these rules and guidelines : D ~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~* Mar 14, 2019 #1 Vote chess is great. However, it involves some rules to ensure the game goes smoothly with communication amongst members. Here's how it will work. 1. Members of the group join the side they're playing for. If they are in both clubs, they can choose which side they want to be on. All members are encouraged to join, the more, the merrier! 2. Members playing should click the 'follow' box under the commenting box. This way, you will receive notifications every time someone comments. 3. Once it is our group's turn, members can discuss moves. Often, especially in the opening, discussion can be done while it is the other group's move and that is okay. 4. When you want to suggest a move, explain why you think it is a good move using a diagram, image of the final position or text (diagram is recommended as it is easy to understand). This improves communication between team mates. This might be a good tutorial for how to do that: https://www.chess.com/clubs/forum/view/posting-diagrams-especially-useful-in-vote-chess , Ask admins if you are having trouble posting these options. 5. As the discussion is going on, members can suggest their ideas or support other ideas. Please do not vote early as it will disrupt the system. Too many early moves might result in the wrong move being voted for! Don't be shy to ask questions about other variations, and feel free to post your own! We are all learning. 6. Once moves are decided, vote chess captains will post an image along with the Chosen Move to be voted for. Have fun! ************************ RULES New acronyms (easier to remember) used in these rules: VCC = vote chess captain, usually an admin. This person will be made known to you in the discussion before the first vote. VDL = voting deadline, if we haven't voted by this time, we forfeit. C4V = call for votes, 24 hours before VDL, this will be made by the VCC. CM = discussed and chosen move. Could sometimes be two options if we can't come to a consensus. The VCC or their deputized person are the only ones that can declare the CM. 1st day of the 3 days before VDL = discuss possible moves. 2nd day of the " " = will probably be asked to further discussion of possible moves, ending just before C4V when we all are instructed which move has been chosen and has become the CM. Exceptions: 1. For a forced (that is, on legal move only) a call for votes should be issued early 2. For a practically forced move, although there is absolutely no advantage in voting early, people get impatient so after at least a little time to let people suggest intermediate moves (we like to let the move run at least 24 hours, to allow one day right around the world) an early call for votes might be issued 3. Rarely, discussion will be ongoing at the 24 hour mark. It's then appropriate to hold up the call for votes (and post saying so!) and to wait for the discussion to resolve if possible. Other points: 1. Having the 24 hour mark roll around between midnight and 6am or any time the vote captain is regularly asleep or at work without Internet access is awkward. Sometimes the call for votes moves to 28 hours or 20 hours. Sometimes someone else in the game has to be deputized by an admin to give it. 2. People need to follow the rules in this club and not vote early (even if you are going away or have only been given 6 hours to live) and not vote against the Chosen Move. Failure to do this will result in a warning, and if it happens again you will be removed from the game. This would be a sad way to spend your last 5 hours on earth. 3. Try and be respectful when you are dismissing the ideas of others. For eg: instead of saying "Don't be stupid, that's a pointless move" you could say "I think h5 is way stronger because........., and also c4 creates a huge defensive weakness..." It is possible if people are causing too much negativity to the environment they could also be warned before getting kicked from the game. Please contact the VCC or other admin if you are feeling unhappy in the game or have noticed some rule breaking, and we will try and address your concerns asap.

My two chess heroes: Morphy and Capablanca. Does this make sense to anyone? I think it's because I like the swashbuckling style. If I'm not on the attack by move 5 (preferably earlier), then there must be something wrong.

A school teacher, later professor of mathematics, Adolph Anderssen had to fit this now-historic match into the Christmas holidays. In some cases, two games were played in one day. This game and many others in the series give lie to the myth that Anderssen was interested only in attacks on the King. Here he answers a sharp assault on the Sicilian - repeated by Fischer more than a century later - with equal energy. The result is a violent miniature,their shortest game.. After the match, Anderssen wrote, "Morphy is too strong for any living player to hope to win more than a game here and there."

Morphy 1858 games vs Loewenthal, Anderssen & Harrwitz. Each game has a minimum 35 moves. This is so that a reasonable sample of non-theory moves can be generated in the more closely contested games. There are 23 Morphy games in the batch. I didn't cherry-pick Morphy's best games - those that meet this basic selection criteria are all here, including several draws & a few losses. I selected these because they were played against Morphy's strongest opponents (not including the perpetually *ahem* busy Staunton) during his crushing European tour when Morphy was at the peak of his powers. The games were then auto-analysed for top 1, 2, 3 & 4 engine choice moves once out of the onboard 4m game database. Cumulative results for the very best modern OTB Super GM's when using this technique are consistently Top 1 match =60%, Top 2 match =75%, Top 3 match =85% & Top 4 match just under 90% for sample sizes of typically 700-1000 non-database moves. History is always tapping you on the shoulder. I couldn't resist analysing the Morphy games! The system used is for this analysis is a pretty fast quad-core pc with Houdini 1.5a 4x CPU, rated about 3200 Elo. Here are the games. I will add the results for each one & then the cumulative engine match rates at the end: Game 1 { White: Loewenthal, Johann Jacob } { Top 1 Match: 19/42 ( 45.2% ) { Top 2 Match: 28/42 ( 66.7% ) { Top 3 Match: 30/42 ( 71.4% ) { Top 4 Match: 33/42 ( 78.6% ) { Black: Morphy, Paul } { Top 1 Match: 20/42 ( 47.6% ) { Top 2 Match: 31/42 ( 73.8% ) { Top 3 Match: 36/42 ( 85.7% ) { Top 4 Match: 38/42 ( 90.5% ) Game 2 { White: Loewenthal, Johann Jacob } { Top 1 Match: 28/67 ( 41.8% ) { Top 2 Match: 38/67 ( 56.7% ) { Top 3 Match: 50/67 ( 74.6% ) { Top 4 Match: 59/67 ( 88.1% ) { Black: Morphy, Paul } { Top 1 Match: 35/67 ( 52.2% ) { Top 2 Match: 47/67 ( 70.1% ) { Top 3 Match: 53/67 ( 79.1% ) { Top 4 Match: 60/67 ( 89.6% ) Game 3 { White: Loewenthal, Johann Jacob } { Top 1 Match: 31/61 ( 50.8% ) { Top 2 Match: 41/61 ( 67.2% ) { Top 3 Match: 44/61 ( 72.1% ) { Top 4 Match: 48/61 ( 78.7% ) { Black: Morphy, Paul } { Top 1 Match: 31/60 ( 51.7% ) { Top 2 Match: 41/60 ( 68.3% ) { Top 3 Match: 48/60 ( 80.0% ) { Top 4 Match: 52/60 ( 86.7% ) Game 4 { White: Morphy, Paul } { Top 1 Match: 30/54 ( 55.6% ) { Top 2 Match: 39/54 ( 72.2% ) { Top 3 Match: 42/54 ( 77.8% ) { Top 4 Match: 45/54 ( 83.3% ) { Black: Loewenthal, Johann Jacob } { Top 1 Match: 35/55 ( 63.6% ) { Top 2 Match: 43/55 ( 78.2% ) { Top 3 Match: 48/55 ( 87.3% ) { Top 4 Match: 52/55 ( 94.5% )

Hi all. I recently started up a group call Teaching to Learn, with the goal of creating a group which helps organize a one on one mentoring system. Here is the description and link: This group was created with the purpose of using individuals' passion for chess to allow us all to improve. Teaching to Learn will be a relatively small group dedicated to providing 1 on 1 mentoring. The group will be invite only, but anyone can request membership, just make sure you include a personal message expressing your personal interest in the group. “By learning you will teach, by teaching you will learn.” Latin Proverb http://www.chess.com/groups/home/teaching-to-learn As of now we have 2 mentors (the two group admins) and 2 students. Obviously we will need more of both to grow the group, so if you are interested in joining let me know. I may be willing to accept a few more students (and I guess put them on a "waiting list"), but we really need more willing mentors first. No specific rating range, we will just do our best to match up higher rated, more experienced players with lower rated, less experienced players. If you have any thoughts or suggestions, please share them.

I recently elected Morphy to be my mentor in chess study. He is brilliant, so smooth! I was happy to find this group here. I found this link to review all his recorded games. He is amazing! http://www.pgnmentor.com/players/Morphy/

In olden times the object was to win with beautiful strokes, and fans often felt cheated when good defense frustrated a brilliancy. Morphy was the father of positional play, and his style was the antithesis of romanticism. Instead of going for the quick kill, he brought out all his pieces as rapidly as possible. But close scrutiny of his 400 recorded games reveals that many of his combinations were flawed. Here, a pawn ahead with a routine win in sight, he embarks on a celebrated sacrifice that needlessly allowed Bird drawing chances.

Hi, fellow Paul Morphy fans. I wanted to let you all know about a tournament that I'm managing, with a Giuoco Piano opening theme. The rating range is 1400-1600. If you're in that range, please consider joining us!! You can find more info about the tourney, and register, here. Hope to see you over in tournament-land. Thanks!! Regards, Michael/ibiwisi

Developing the Queen early is a Crime that should be Punished. I think the Genius from New Orleans gives us a good example in this game. I especially enjoyed his 6th move Bd3! With pieces being threatened he thought inviting the Queen in closer was a Good Idea!

Anybody up for a Team game, maybe even a Team Vote Chess game? I think that there are a lot of strong players on this team, and a Vote Chess game would be a nice way to get to know each other and to learn from each other. Whaddayasay?

A Morphy's game based on Philidor's mate:

Hi, Paul Morphy Groupmates. I have deep admiration for Paul Morphy, and I was delighted to discover this Group. Pleased to meet you all. FYI, before I knew about this Group I started a Forum Topic (in the Forum "Games Analysis") called "Morphy's Games." No need for me to keep that Topic going any more! I have an idea for a Group match (maybe a Vote Chess group match, if that's possible). There are probably other Groups devoted to other famous players. For example, I know that there's a Capablanca Group. How about setting up a match between our Group and one of those? We can pretend that both players arose from their eternal slumber for "one more game," and this is their chance to prove which one is better, once and for all! We would do our best to "play like Morphy", and our opponents would do their best to "play like (e.g., Capablanca)." Thoughts, anyone?

Wilhelm Steinitz (1836 - 1900) represented a completely different chess style compared to the "classical play" which dominated around the 1850s. As argued in another blog post, Morphy represented the idea of "continuous development" (usually answering a threat with an aggressive development or attack move) and is mainly associated with forceful attacks combined with sacrifices, applied early in the game. I don't think there exists any factual confirmation of to what extent his play was based on "systematic analysis" or on "genial intuition", or which combination thereof. I have computer analyzed some of Morphy's games, and without any scientific verification - what strikes me is that in critical phases his positions seem to be "high risk" - basically showing one "genius move" and many inferior ones (of course, Morphy selected the genius one). However, compared with Morphy, Steinitz may be characterized as the "first modernist". He emphasized a scholastic approach to the game, characterized by the concept that a strategic advantage is made up of a multitude of marginal advantages in positioning and mobility. His key point was that a forceful attack or combination should only be attempted once such a strategic advantage had been reached (which of course, made it necessary to define such strategic advantages in detail). Looking at his games, they seem to be characterized by low risk early play, strong defense, and gradual improvement - until he strikes! Steinitz' theoretical work was substantial; here are a couple of games as an illustration (comments are included): In the first one, Steinitz focuses on systematically limiting the mobility of his opponent's bishop/knight by using his own pawn structure; in the second game his scholastic theories of how to play against closed positions comes into play (one of his thesis were: If you play against an opponent with a closed positions, do not be tempted to exchange, as this will give your opponent the room to maneuver he does not have): In the previous game it is striking how Steinitz totally immobilizes the officers of Rosenthal from the 16th move on. In the following game he applies his principles of how to play closed positions, narrowing down his opponent's room to maneuver, and avoiding all bishop exchanges that are being offered. Take a look: Steinitz emerged on the scene around 1862, played "classical chess" for a decade, and then intensively promoted his ideas for the rest of his life. His style was controversial at the time, and the recognition of Steinitz' contributions came mainly after his death in 1900.

A wonderful miniature from Paul Morphy