How many people here...

Let us start off with a brief intro on who those 2 people are:

Emanuel Lasker was the second World Champion who held on to his title for close to 27 years.

People during his time believed Emaneual Lasker used psychology to beat his opponents. They agrued Emanuel Lasker would play inferior moves to try and confuse there opponent to try and win.

However, This "labeling" they used to define Lasker is it completely accurate??

That is the question isn't it. You see Modern engines today have shown that the moves people claimed which were "inferior" were actually the strongest move in the position.

Which makes one agrue was Lasker using psychology at all? Was he playing inferior moves to try and confuse his opponent.

Or

Was His chess understanding so vast he saw the best move when no one esle could understand it?

DUN DUN DUN!

Surely that is a heated debate in of itself.

However, I did mention to characters so lets do some intro on who Isaac Leopold Rice.

Not alot of people know who this man is. His impression on chess was not super super great. However, He did have some contribution.

Believe it or not Isaac Leopold Rice created a line in the Kings Gambit which is known as:

The Rice Gambit

1. e4 e5 2. f4 exf4 3. Nf3 g5 4. h4 g4 5. Ne5 Nf6 6. Bc4 d5 7. exd5 Bd6 8. 0-0

Now here is the amazing part the Rice Gambit is not considered to be that good at all. Yet you can see tournements with this line being played!!!

WHY??? Well Isaac Leopold Rice was actually very rich!!

Isaac Leopold Rice decided not only was he going to name this line after him. He was also going to make offical chess tournament inviting all the great chess players to play his line.

He than payed the winner of the chess tournament with his own funds because he was rich lol.

Now tell me if that isn't amazing.

Isaac Leopold Rice bascailly woke up 1 day and decided I'm going to take an interest in chess. Than I am going to create a chess line after me and invite all the greatest chess players to a tournement were they will play my line from the starting position. Than I will reward the winner as the Greatest Rice Gambit player of all time!

Isn't that totally insane. Who on earth does such a thing lol.

You can't say the backstory on Mister Rice is totally dull lol.

Would you say that Howard Staunton influenced chess and its growth more than anybody in the 19th century?

I love that period of chess history, not just for the games, but for the players themselves.  There were many colorful characters on the scene, and many others behind the scenes, as you have so often pointed out and brought light to.  The entire structure of international chess was different, and the negotiations for matches still both fascinates and amuses me.  And there were some great games that most players today are not aware of.  It's too bad that some people are more concerned with ratings rather than learning about the game, but it really is just their loss.

I wouldn't.

Morphy, Steinitz, Chigorin, Lasker, Tarrasch, ...

As an organizer, however, Staunton's contribution was exceptional. As a writer, he's sorta like Raymond Keene, ... [let me rethink that. Staunton was not a plagiarist].

Nice sideline article on the Rice Gambit, X_PLAYER_J_X, but - in all regards, no offence - I think it would've been only more fitting had you posted about 'that' within a more appropriate topic heading, where you could've perhaps as well garnered a better reader following from there.

Nonetheless, I enjoyed your 'Chess Personality' test - think every serious club-level player should re-examine themselves through it just to see where they actually stand within their own self-proclaimed judgement upon their own game.

Anyway, thanks for sharing.

19th Century = 01 January 1801 to 31 December 1900

<Flame-proof firesuit on>

Leopold Rice didn't just wake up and take an interest in chess and he was far more fascinating than his self-named variation. see ⇨ Rice's Gambit.

*sigh*

@batgirl

You may be interested in this. It's not 19th century but it's interesting.

http://www.newsgram.com/how-a-game-of-chess-between-king-of-koch-behar-and-maharaja-of-rangpur-created-india-bangladesh-border-issue/ 

Thanks Smudge. That was indeed interesting and I'd never heard it before. 

After some superficial searching, it seems the story is a means to explain the ragged border between India and Bangledesh.  Most books I looked at called it folklore. Some places put it n the early 18th century, some in the mid 18th century, one place put it in the mid 16th century.  I also came across the rules names given as: King of Cooch Behar or the Maharajah of Cooch Behar and Maharaja of Rangpur or the Nawab of Rangpur or the Foujdar of Rangpur.  I don't know what any of these titles mean in practice.

Using chess as a means to settle things, or even for life-and-death decisions, is a common allegory.  This doesn't mean there's no truth in this border story, nor does it detract from its interest in the last, but it might be more plausible to me if there were sources other than handed-down stories. 

Well batgirl.... this was the BBC's take on it.

Still chess related.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-india-33532702

There is genuine interest Batgirl and it would be nice to discuss specific items for research purposes.

Many of your articles have been most informative and valuable not only here in the forums, but also what was available on your web page(s).  Your efforts are appreciated.

Historians often talk about a period of time like the eighteenth or nineteenth century in terms that don't fall into the confines of the actual dates. The nineteenth century is the birth of the Modern Era, and thus begins in 1789 (the French Revolution) or 1815 (Treaty of Paris), or some other similar date. It's logical end could be 1914 (WWI).

@batgirl, do you have an approximate year that a chess-like game was being played in India?  I remember the docent saying something about not being able to refer to the king as King out of defference to their leader.  They also couldn't give the king/queen pieces any  royalty association.

For any readers out there - Katherine Neville's The Eight depicts an international chess game that's played with high level stakes using people as the pieces and pawns.  Historical events with a fictional tale that spans thousands of years.  Suspenseful and riveting.....  Especially if you enjoy playing chess.  I enjoyed it so much I read it twice the same year.

I believe it's generally given as around the 6th century, at least some time before Muhammad founded Islam -most liturature is scarce and/or vague and much information is culled or derived from documents, manuscripts that mention the game in passing-   and the piece we call the King to the best of my knowledge was called the Raja, but I'm not certainly an authority of Chaturanga.

I'll predict batgirl's answer:

~600 AD, according to H.J.R. Murray. 

You can save the cost of his book (cost me $50) by reading an article published shortly before his death and reproduced by Edward Winter at http://www.chesshistory.com/winter/extra/murray.html.

For ancient chess, there is no better reference than Murray. For the nineteenth century, batgirl holds her own IMO. 

(edit: I typed too slow. batgirl posted while I was writing)

Yes batgirl makes very nice articles. I have read most of them and liked them all except for 1 article.

I am still a little upset about one article lol.

The Catalans article:

http://www.chess.com/article/view/catalans

Yeah I saw her making that article and my mouth got watery and I got super excited.

I got excited because I thought she was going to talk about the Catalan Opening.

I went to read the article.

Once I started reading the article it was about the Catalonian people yet the Catalan Opening which was created in homage of the Catalonian people was never even mentioned.

The Catalan opening is one of the most respected lines in all of chess.

Here is what wikipedia has to say about the line:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catalan_Opening

"In 1929 Barcelona tournament organisers asked Savielly Tartakower to create a new variation in homage to the area's chess history.

The Catalan came to prominence at the top level when both Garry Kasparov and Viktor Korchnoi played it in their Candidates Semifinal match (part of the process to determine who would challenge world champion Anatoly Karpov for the title) in London in 1983: five games of the eleven-game match were Catalans.

In 2004, Ruben Felgaer won a tournament celebrating the 75th anniversary of Barcelona 1929 and the birth of the Catalan Opening, ahead of Grandmasters Viktor Korchnoi, Mihail Marin, Lluis Comas and Viktor Moskalenko and International Master Manel Granados. Each game in the tournament, which was also held in Barcelona, began with the moves 1.d4 d5 2.c4 e6 3.g3 Nf6.

With its use by Vladimir Kramnik, the Catalan has recently gained a good deal of attention by high-level GMs. Kramnik played the opening three times in the World Chess Championship 2006. The Catalan was also played four times by Viswanathan Anand in the World Chess Championship 2010; in both instances the opponent was Veselin Topalov, and in each instance White scored two more points than Black."

I believe if you are going to talk about the Catalonian people showing one of there most respected lines which they admire is a must.

I hope there is a part 2 to that Catalans article or an extension to the one that already exist perhaps.

As I recall, the set at the heart of this riveting novel is one alleged to have been a gift to Charlemagne. Try as they might, historians have found no credible evidence that such a set ever existed. 

In fact, I introduced chess to Europe in Spain several years later.

Neville's writing, OTOH, is the stuff that Dan Brown only aspires to.

But anyways we are talking about the 19th century here. I am actually at a lost for words on what to say about the 19th century.

It was around the time electricity was starting to become invited. I guess some people were excited to play chess in the dark? I don't know.

I got absolutely nothing here lol. How to start the ball rolling on the 19th century is tough.