 |
 |
Editor: Dr Tim Harding |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
|
Editor: Dr Tim Harding |
|
|
|
|
© Chess Mail Ltd.
Last modified:
20 August 2009
The Cincinnati Commercial Gazette ran one of the earliest correspondence chess tournaments organised in the United States of America between 1882-5. Several strong players from various states and Canadian provinces competed.
Twenty-three competitors, including two unmarried women, began play on 3 April 1882 and the start-list was published on 15 April. The rate of play was forty-eight hours per move, Sundays not counting.
The late Ken Whyld’s Chess Columns: A List names Joseph W. Miller as the paper’s chess editor but the conductor of the tournament was William Jacob Ferris, from Delaware. The state of Ohio, though one of its main newspapers was hosting the event, was not well represented.
Reports of results and some games appeared from time to time during the three years it took to complete the event. The final report, including the crosstable with the 17 players who completed the tourney, was published in the Cincinnati Commercial on 23 May. It began as follows:
To the Chess Editor of the Commercial Gazette:
DEAR SIR—I have the pleasure of handing you herewith the complete score of the Cincinnati Commercial Gazette Chess Correspondence Tourney. With twenty-three entrants in May, 1882, the present month has found the contest finished with seventeen names still on the list. Five players, Messrs Aisdorf and Foster, of Michigan, Mr Hendricks and Miss Laurens, of South Carolina, and Mr Walker, of Ohio, have been compelled by business and other cares, to withdraw; and one, Dr L. P. Meredith, of Kansas, has, in the prime of his life, and to the great sorrow of all his friends, been taken from us by death.
Henry N. Kittson of Hamilton, Ontario, won the closely-fought race for first prize ($42) with 13 points from 16 games. There was a tie half a point behind for second/third, so the prizes ($25 and $15) were shared by another Canadian, W. Braithwaite (of Unionville), and James Tarbell of Upper Alton, Illinois. Ferris himself was fourth with 11 points and the Huddersfield-born Joseph W. Shaw, of Montreal, came fifth. He was also an organiser of postal tournaments.
The other players who completed the event were H. J. Anderson (Allentown, Pennsylvania) 8.5 pts, A. B. Block (Galveston, Texas) 9, C. A. Boivin (Saint-Hyacinthe, Canada) 5, J. D. Cotton (Marietta, Ohio) 6.5, E. B. Greenshields (Montreal) 6, Miss Phoebe Himrod (Waterford, Erie county, Pennsylvania) 2.5?, Narraway (Halifax, Nova Scotia) 6.5, D. C. Robertson (Lennoxville, Canada) 7, Dr Isaac Ryall (Hamilton, Canada, but born in Fethard, Co. Wexford, Ireland) 4.5, George Tatnall (Wilmington, Delaware) and C. W. Waterman (Neosho Falls, Kansas) both 8.5, and John T. Wylde (Hamilton) 4?. The uncertainty over two totals arises because the crosstable in the paper shows an odd number of players having a half in their totals (usually impossible) the game Himrod-Wylde as a loss for the former and a draw for the latter. It is possible, however, that Wylde won the game or there was an extraneous reason for the curious scoring.
So far I have found eleven games played in this event. Gustavus Reichhelm, of Philadelphia, and Alex Sellman, of Baltimore, judged the brilliancy awards. Ferris won the prize for the most brilliant Scotch Gambit, for the game shown below.
W. Ferris – W. Braithwaite
Cincinnati Commercial Gazette tourney, 1882
[Leeds Mercury, 13 April 1885]
1 e4 e5 2 Nf3 Nc6 3 d4 exd4 4 Nxd4 Bc5 5 Be3 Qf6 6 c3 Nge7 7 Bc4 Ne5 8 Bb3 d6 9 0–0 0–0 10 h3 Bd7 11 Nd2 N7g6 12 f4 Nc6 13 f5 Nge7
13...Nge5 failed in Braithwaite-Henderson, corr 1880.
14 N2f3 Ne5 15 Kh1 h6 16 Nxe5 dxe5 17 Ne6 Bxe3 18 Nxf8 Bc6 19 Nd7 Qg5
If19...Qd6 20 f6 Ng6 21 fxg7 wins.
20 Nxe5 Bxe4 21 Qg4 Nxf5 22 Kh2 Nd6 23 Nxf7 Nxf7 24 Qxe4 Bc5 25 Rxf7 Bd6+ 26 Kh1 Kh8 27 Bc2 g6 28 Qe6 1–0
Here is the only game so far found by the first prize-winner. It also won the prize for most brilliant game in the tournament played with the King's Knight's Gambit; judged by Reichhelm. We reproduce some of the notes by Tatnall that appeared in the Cincinnati paper, and were translated into French in La Stratégie (April 1885 pp. 13-4).
Henry Kittson – George Tatnall,G [C37]
Cincinnati Commercial Gazette tourney corr, 1882
1 e4 e5 2 f4 exf4 3 Nf3 g5 4 Bc4 g4 5 Ne5 Qh4+ 6 Kf1 Nh6 7 d4 f3 8 g3 Qh3+ 9 Kf2 Qg2+ 10 Ke3 f511 Nc3
If 11 exf5 Black forces mate in a few moves.
11...c6 12 Nd3
The normal book move is 12 Bd3. The point of the text move is to shut in the queen; at first sight it appears embarrassing.
12...fxe4 13 Nf4 Nf5+ 14 Kxe4 d5+ 15 Bxd5 cxd5+ 16 Ncxd5 Nd6+ 17 Kd3 Qf2
TH: Reichhelm remarked that it would be much stronger to play 17...Bf5+ 18 Kc3 Qf2 19 Nc7+ Kd7 20 Nxa8 Bxc2 21 Qe1 Ne4+ 22 Kc4 b5+ 23 Kxb5 Nd6+ etc. However, White can improve by 19 Be3 with roughly equal chances.
18 Be3 Bf5+ 19 Kc3 Nb5+
TH: This is an inaccuracy of which White fails to TH: take advantage. 19...Bxc2 20 Qxc2 Nb5+ 21 Kd3 Qxc2+ 22 Kxc2 Nc6 is somewhat better for Black.
20 Kb3
Tatnall observed that 20 Kc4 would avoid the loss of a pawn that results from the following exchanges, but that the white king's position would be very dangerous.
TH: Nevertheless it was the correct move, objectively. Black cannot keep queens on the board, e.g. 20...Qxc2+ 21 Qxc2 Bxc2 22 Kxb5 looks like a line Steinitz would have been happy to play with White.
20...Bxc2+!
The combination commencing with this move is very pretty (Reichhelm).
21 Qxc2 Qxe3+ 22 Nxe3 Nxd4+ 23 Kc3 Nxc2 24 Kxc2 h5 25 Ned5! Na6
Tatnall: An error that costs the game.
TH: No! Black is probably winning if he follows this up correctly. The right move was 25...Bd6 but then 26 Nxh5 followed by Nhf6 may be tenable.
26 Rae1+ Kf7 27 Re5 Rc8+
TH: 27...Nb4+! reduces material and ought still to win.
28 Kb1 Rc5?
TH: Here 28...Rc6 29 Rf5+ Kg7 (not possible with the rook on c5) should draw, White's activity balancing Black's extra pawn.
29 Rf5+! Kg8
TH: White now wins material. But if 29...Kg7 30 Ne6+or if 29...Ke8 30 Re1+ and wins.
30 Ng6 Rh6
TH: 30...Rxd5 31 Rxd5 Rh7 is better but White has chances after 32 h3.
31 Nxf8 Rxd5 32 Rxd5 Kxf8 33 h3 Nb4
TH: The Finish of the game from this point is not clear in some sources.
34 Rf5+ Kg7 35 hxg4 hxg4 36 Rd1
This is probably what happened. 36 Re1 was an incorrect version, continuing 36...Rb6 and Black gave up a few moves later according to 'Gambit Revue' 2-3/2002.
36 Rxh6? would give Black winning chances after 36...Kxh6 37 a3 Nd3 (Gambit Revue).
36...Kg6 37 Rb5 f2 38 Rxb4 Kg5 39 Rf4 Rh2 40 Rf1 Rg2 41 R4xf2 Rxg3 42 Rf7 Rg2 43 Rxb7 1–0
NOTE: a longer version of this article, with all the game so far discovered, can be found as my Kibitzer 159 (August 2009) at the Chess Cafe.