AApril 17 1891
Boston Evening Transcript, Boston, Massachusetts, Friday, April 17, 1891
The Cable Chess Match
Critique of the Battle Between Tschigorin and Steinitz.
Although play has not yet ceased, this match is, to all intents and purposes, ended, inasmuch as Tschigorin has the superior force, occupying a winning position in both games, and about all that remains for Steinitz is the privilege of resigning as gracefully as possible under the circumstances. Considered from any point of view, this match must be regarded as one of the most important chess encounters of modern times, the conditions of the play and the personnel of the combatants elevating it far above the level of a mere struggle for individual superiority and making it essentially a grand battle for supremacy between two radically diverse and bitterly antagonistic schools of chess play.
On the one hand Herr Wilhelm Steinitz, the present chess champion of the world and the greatest living exponent of the theory of chess strategics originated by Herr Hampe of Vienna some fifty years ago, stands as the defender of this system, which with its various modifications and improvements is known to chess players of the present era under the appellation of the Modern School. On the other hand M. Michael Ivanowich Tschigorin, chess champion of Russia and one of the foremost amateurs of the present day, entered the arena to maintain vis et armis against her great arch enemy the integrity of the creed and teachings of that venerable and illustrious chess structure, the Italian School of Chessplay.
The Modern School was founded about 1843. It is essentially the school of the professional. It was the parent of that abomination known as the time limit, and its teachings are thoroughly materialistic. It considers only the gaining of the victory, and is indifferent as to the manner of play by which the victory is gained. It eschews grand stategics and profound complications. Simplification is its paramount aim. Its victories are attained by the advantage of a pawn and after laborious and uninteresting struggles, so pithily and truthfully characterized by the great Anderssen as “pickpocket games.”
Of this school Mason, Gunsberg, Weiss and Steinitz are the more prominent votaries. The Italian school was founded at the Academy of Naples about 1400 A.D. It's earlier years were prolific in celebrities, viz.: Da Cutri, Paulo Boi, Damiano, Ponziani, Cozio, Greco, Dal Rio, Ruy Lopez, Lilli, Stamma, Carerra. Later came Philidor, De la Bourdonnais, Descapelles, McDonnell, Staunton, Anderssen, Kolisch, Morphy. Today its great leaders have been the late Captain Mackenzie, Paulsen, Blackburne, Tarrasch, Lasker and Tschigorin. These are masters of the supreme rank. Close upon them have ever followed a host of brilliant strategists, tacticians and writers, who in reputation and ability were but little their inferiors.
In literature, the Italian school is without a rival in any art of science, over three thousand different works having been published by its theoreticians. Most of these are preserved and many have passed through numerous editions. The largest collections extant are owned by Mr. J. G. White of Cincinnati, O., 2500 volumes, and Baron Von Heydebrant und der Laza of Wiesbaden, Germany, 2000 volumes.
The ethics of the Italian school treat of chess more as a fine art than a science. It holds that the chess maestro is born—not made. It emphasizes the elements of genius and inspirations, and repudiates the dictum of the new school that tyros can be passed through the hopper of modern progress and ground out masters equal to Morphy and the players of his time. It asserts the superiority of the intellect over physical force, and holds that an army of deer led by a lion is better than an army of lions led by a deer. In play, it strenuously seeks to exemplify the most profound and brilliant maneuverings possible to the highest order of grand tactics. Cheap victories over cheap antagonists are cheaply held. The annals of the Italian school are replete with elegant interpretations of the highest order of chess art, and practitioners, theorists and litterateurs, whether in search of entertainment or instruction, pass lightly over the ebullitions of more degenerate times to revel, dazzled and delighted, among the magnificent productions of the masters of the Old School.
About 1886 Herr Steinitz, who had recently taken a residence in this country, issued a monthly chess periodical. In the earliest numbers he evinced a strong hostility to the established order of things in America. The reverence accorded to the memory of Morphy and the old school seemed to make him frantic. His more moderate efforts for a peaceful revolution, which should substitute the rule of the Modern School in place of the established regime, were unavailing. His arguments, threatenings and pleadings were met with open derision. Steinitz lacks neither courage nor determination, and he hates peace on principle. If it was to be war, then war it was to be. Quickly he unfurled the banner of so-called modern progress, proclaimed the creed and dogmas of the new dispensation; announced himself its prophet and its champion and declared his intention to “stamp out all such rascals” as failed to acknowledge the veracity of the new gospel and the sway of the Bohemian Seizer. After the first shock had subsided, the astounding American chess clans gathered themselves together with but one common impulse—to figuratively sweep Steinitz from the face of the earth. As Hyder Ali hung over the Carnatic, so did the assembled chess might of America menace Steinitz. The blow had already begun to fall. Erstwhile friends became his bitter enemies. Clubs expelled him from honorary memberships; chess-plays withdrew their support from his magazine, clubs voted to refuse him engagements; the destruction of his career in America seemed certain. He was saved by the remarkable tact of a famous chess player. “He is one of us,” pleaded the latter. “Like us all he is an enthusiast—a crank. In chess matters he is non compos mentis. Have pity on him?” After this Steinitz no longer sought to foist his theories on others; nevertheless he clung to them himself with the utmost tenacity. Hence arose the present cable match. In discussing the merits of the various defences to the Evans gambit, and incidentally the Two Knights' Defence, Herr Steinitz claimed that the theory of each defence as advised by the Old School was radically unsound, and that in each instance the defence as advised by virtue of its numerical advantage in force should ultimately win. In short, Steinitz claimed that the Modern School, given the superior force, would defeat the Old School given the superior position. The match was arranged. It was to consist of two games, to be played simultaneously and by cable between Steinitz at New York and Tschigorin at St. Petersburg.
The complete record of the play to date is appended:
Mikhail Chigorin vs Wilhelm Steinitz
Steinitz - Chigorin Telegraph Match (1890), Telegraphic match, rd 1
Italian Game: Evans Gambit. Slow Variation (C52) 1-0
NOTE.
White's 35th move is a coup de grace and much more artistic than the obvious win by 35. Q-QR5ch K-Nsq; or K-Q2; 36. RxKP, etc.
Black has now no resource, inasmuch as white has a decisive advantage in both force and position.
Chigorin has several winning continuations. A very peculiar line of attack is the following: 36. R(Q2)-QN2, and Steinitz has but three replies:
First: P-Q4; (bad) 37. RxNPch, BxP; (best, for if K-B3; or K-Q3; 38. Q-N6mate); 38. QxBch, K-Q3; 39. R-N6ch K-B4; 40.Q-B6mate.
Second: K-Q2 (bad); 37. RxNPch BxR; (best) 38. QxBch K-Ksq; 39. QxKRP Q-KB2; (best) 50. R-QN7, and wins easily.
Third: R-Q2;(bad) 37. Q-QR5, and now if black plays K-Nsq; white wins by 38. R-QR6; and if K-Qsq; by 38. RxNPch, etc.
Wilhelm Steinitz vs Mikhail Chigorin
Steinitz - Chigorin Telegraph Match (1890), Telegraphic match, rd 2
Italian Game: Two Knights Defense. Polerio Defense Suhle Defense (C59) 0-1
NOTE.
By this 35th move black avails himself fully of his superiority in material. This, in combination with his powerful king's side attack, decides the victory.
Tschigorin has several winning continuations, one of the most artistic being as follows:
36. RxPch, 37. NxR, (best for if 37. K-K2, N-Q5ch; 38. K-Qsq R-KB8mate, also, if 37. K-N2, R(KB6)-KB2dis ch); winning the white Q). RxNch; 38. K-Nsq, (best vide above analysis.) B-Q7; and black threatens to force mate or the winning of the white queen by 39. B-K6ch, etc. White seems to have no other resource than 39. QR-K sq, whereupon follows BxR; and further resistance by white's decimate forces is useless.
Steinitz forces in both games occupied positions declared to be untenable by the Old Masters. Steinitz on the contrary declared these positions were constructed in accordance with the principle of the Modern School; that they were impenetrable and he staked his money and reputation on their defence.
The outcome can only be regarded as a brilliant and overwhelming victory of the Old over the New School.
Steinitz has not only been beaten but routed; out-generaled, out-maneuvered, out-played from the start. With this disaster the whole edifice of the so-called Modern School comes tumbling down about his ears, and probably few of his disciples but will deny that it ever existed.
