Chess - Play & Learn


FREE - In Google Play

FREE - in Win Phone Store


Morphy had some stones

  • #41
    aa-ron1235 wrote:

     Morphy Paul (2680) vs. Cunninghamm (0)

    RE: post #14

           This participation in a b.f. simul with Morphy must have inspired James Cunningham of the Leeds Chess Club who was 21 years old at the time.   23 years later (Jan. 26, 1882) he is recorded as having given his own b.f. simul, against 9 opponents (one more opponent than Morphy), from the Dewsbury C.C., winning 4, losing 4 and drawing 1..

    The contestants in Morphy's b.f. simul at the London C.C. on April 13, 1859 were:
    1st bd. Lord Cremore
    2nd bd. Capt. Hugh Alexander Kennedy
    3rd bd. H.G. Cattley
    4th bd. Lord Arthur Hay
    5th bd. Thom Worrall
    6th bd. James Cunningham
    7th bd. J. Thrupp
    8th bd. Thomas Wilson Barnes

    ....all good players.
    Morphy won 5 but due to time (the event lasted from 2:00 pm - 6:30 pm) the remaining 3 were left unfinished.



  • #42
    SIowMove wrote:

    Morphy played blindfolded simuls against the strongest players in the region.

    And yes, his opponents were often much weaker. But then again, everyone was weaker than Morphy.

    Right.  A while back I created the forum topic, "Greatest master in history (relatively)," which generated no interest whatsoever.  I thought it was an interesting topic though.  I had read discussions in forums about how much weaker yesterday's masters were than today's.  It's an unfair comparison because today's masters have enormous advantages.  They have countless grandmaster games played over many decades to study.  They benefit from all the improvements in theory, particularly opening theory.  And obviously they have access to chess engines far stronger than any grandmaster to assist in analysis.  Morphy had none of those.  I made the case that masters of different eras should be compared on a relative basis - performance against their contemporaries.  I nominated Morphy.  He dominated his contemporaries, including Louis Paulsen, one of the world's best (5-1-2) and Adolph Anderssen, considered by many the world's best (7-2-2).  He also beat both convincingly in casual matches.  I don't think any player in history has dominated the best masters of his time as Morphy did.   

  • #43
    president_max wrote:

    how morphy really got stone & at bishop odds & twice too

    Paul Morphy vs. James Winchell Stone 

         These game are interesting because they were 2 of 5 games at Kt. odds between Dr. James. W. Stone of Boston and Morphy, played on May 14, 1859 in Morphy's hotel room in the St. Nicholas Hotel in NYC.    Morphy won all 5.

         Stone and Morphy also contended in Boston, but Stone played in consultation with G. Preston Ware, Geo. Hammond (the New England Champion). Theo. Rabuski and W. Everett, allmembers of the boston C.C

         Dr. Stone, born in 1824, died in 1863 at the youthful age of 38.


           James Winchell Stone, MD

  • #44

    oops, just realized i wrote bishop odds instead of knight odds ...


Online Now