CHESS.

New Zealand Mail, Issue 761, 1 October 1886, Page 5

CHESS.

All communications for this department must be addressed to the Chess Editor, Mr C. W. Benbow. 1/10/86. J.J.M. (Christchuich) —You have inadverj tently overlooked the defence of P to K Kt 5 in Problem No. 734, which defeats your proposed solution.

SOLUTIONS TO PROBLEMS. No 734 (W. A. Shinkmaun), 1 Q to Kt 7 1 Any move 2 Mates accordingly Solved by J.N.H. (Wellington); ‘Felix (Auckland); C.S. (Masterton) ; R.P. (Gisborne) ‘ A splendid bit of strategy (S|) f T.E. (Picton); R.J.L- (Palmerston North); A.L.T. (Wanganui) ; H.D. (Bulls) and R.J.D. (Clyde). ‘Although the K is the only piece—in this very ingeniously constructed position —that Black can move, ’tis nevertheless very difficult to find the key move (9).’ A well constructed problem with a good initial move (8). No. 735 (R. B. Wormald). 1 B to Kt 4 IBxB 2 Kt to Kt 3 2 Anymove 3 Q or P mates Solved by A.L.T. (Wanganui); Te lka a Maui ‘ Beautiful and instructive ;’ H.D. (Bulls); C.S. (Masterton) ; R.P. (Gisborne) Another problem in which the combination of the_ pieces is beautifully carried out (9);’ T.E. (Picton) ; and R.J.D. (Clyde). ‘This is an ingenious, puzzling position, but lacks variety (8). -A very neat conception indeed (8^).

PROBLEM No. 746. By Edward Samuell (Carterton).

Black

White. White to play and mate in two moves.

BRITISH CHESS ASSOCIATION.

The final round in the Masters’ Tournament was played on July 27th, the result being as follows :

It was decided by the Executive mat me ties should be played off, the best out of two games to be decisive. Mr Blackburne won the first and drew the second game against Mr Burn ; while the games between Messrs Gunsberg and Taubenhaus were both drawn. The distribution of the prizes was therefore as under : —lst prize, LBO, J. H. Blackburne ; 2nd prize, LSO, Amos Burn ; 3rd prize, L4O, 4th prize, L 25 (divided), J. Gunsberg and S. Taubenliaus ; sth prize, Ll 5, James Mason. « The Field ’ makes the following interesting remarks on the play and players ‘ Blackburne has maintained his reputation as the tournament player par excellence. He has never taken part in any tournament without being in the front rank, and on several occasions tie was absolutely first. Burn, who tied with him on this occasion, was a well-known talented player who lived in London some fifteen years ago. Since then he relinquished public play, only occasionally taking part in the contests of the Liverpool Chess Club. Recently he played a match with Bird which resulted in a draw, each winning nine games. Considering that Mr Bird wa3 the first strong player with whom he came in contact for so many years, it speaks well for his capacity. His style belongs to the modern school, with a slight predilection for close games; the latter habit he, no doubt, acquired from his frequent contests with the Rev. J. Owen, who is notorious for irregular openings. Burn is also one of the best odds givers living, and occasionally, when the opportunity presents itself, he departs from his assumed reserve, and shows flashes of brilliancy, as in his game with Schallop. We may class Mr Burn amongst the best representatives of English Chess. The next in the order of merit are Gunsberg and Taubenhaus. Gunsberg has established his reputation by winning the B.C.A. Tournament last year, and the first prize in the Hamburg To arn ament immediately afterwards. At the Hereford meeting he was not placed; but on the other hand, he beat Bird lately in a short match. Gunsberg’s style is bold and ingenious, and he excels in great fertility of resource, which enablss him to frequently save a hopeless game by a happy inspiration. Taubenhaus made his debut in Hamburg last year. Although unsuccessful, he nevertheless received the “ Brilliancy Prize ” offered by Mr F. H. Lewis, for his game with Berger. He has greatly improved, and, though he was fortunate to win a game of Blackburne, in which he had the worst Of it, his losing with Mortimer may be put down as a counterprose. At one period of the contest he stood well in for first honors, as he had the best score, and had encountered then almost all the dangerous rivals, with the exception of Zukertort. Mr Taubenhaus’s success will be highly beneficial to chess in France, where Rosenthal reigns supreme. Mason has had no practice whatever lately, and his play looked labored. He played the longest games, and was the only one who did not conclude his games in one sitting. At one time he had three adjourned games, and after he had concluded them, sprung up suddenly as a favorite in the contest. He threw away a game with Schallop, and later one with Mortimer. But for the latter mishap he would have tied with GuDsberg and Taubenhaus. Mackenzie, as a rule, either starts or finishes badly. In the first half of the 1883 Tournament he was nowhere, and m the second half he made a higher score than Zukertort or Steinitz. On this_ occasion he commenced well, but gave way in the latter part of the contest. However, but for his loss with Pollock, ho would have tied with Mason, even

os t the very last moment. Pollock gained the right of being classed among the rising masters in last year’s B.C.A. Tournament. Pollock is a great enthusiast, a thoroughly scientific player of great promise. He made a good start by beating Blackburne and Mackenzie, and drew with Gunsberg ; but he was less fortunate with other competitors against whom he was expected to achieve a better result. The most promising of the younger players, no doubt, is Lipschutz, a Hungarian by birth. He is only twenty-three years old, but sound, and cautious as an old master. His style is similar to that of Burn, and he also belongs to the modern school, of which he is an able exponent. It is the first time he has played against masters, and it is to be hoped that he will have more confidence in himself on future occasions. He would have been among the higher prizes had he not lost a dead won game with Pollock, and a good game with Gunsberg; and he had none of those happy chances which fell to the lot of some of the other players. His was all hard work. Had he won a prize it would have been highly deserved. lUajor Hanham s style is the opposite of Lipschutz’s. He indulges .in irregular and close openings, which require closer attention and harder work, by reason or the player being thrown on his own resources. All his games are, therefore, of a difficult and complicated nature, in which the chances ora mistake or a weak move are increased, j-. Major, like Lipschutz, never before played in an important contest. Bird was entirely out of form, owing to his usual complaint. He was suffering for months, and certainly not in a fit state for such great mental exertions as a chess tournament. The same applies to Zukertort. He has not recovered yet from his recent illness, contracted during the latter part of his match with Steinitz ;. he is nervously impulsive, as in his game with Burn, where he captured a knight, losing his queen on the very next move; or in his game with Mackenzie, where he overlooked a mate in two moves, when he had a won game. If we add these two games to his score he would have been eight. But he also sacrificed a piece with Lipschutz, and lost the game; and with Major Hanham he sacrificed about three pieces m a combination which was quite unsound., or anyhow unnecessary to indulge in. judging, from the nature of the position. . These incidents alone are indicative of his being entirely out of form, if it could not be perceived by his personal appearance. Sehallopp is one of the foremost practitioners and theoreticians. in Germany, and he was expected to take a high place among the competitors. He commenced very well, hut after being defeated by Burn he only plaved one fine game with Gunsberg, and for that he received the Brilliancy Prize. With Mortimer he put his queen en prize, and with Taubenhaus he played indifferently too so that his present performances cannot be taken as a criterion of his strength. jMortimer has proved himself to be a dangerous opponent. He injured Taubenhaus’ chance for first prize, and Mason’s with a tie with Gunsberg and Taubenhaus.” . The prizes in the Problem Tournament in connection with the Association have been awarded as under : Ist prize, L 5 ss, for the best set of three problems, J osef Pospisil, of Kre, near Prague. Motto: “Rozmysli si Marenki, rozmy-

«)i ” 2nd prize, L 3 3s, Emil Lindquist, of Osterund, Sweden. Motto: “Are longa, vita

brevis.” ~ L 3 3s for best four mover to H. Maxwell Prideaux, of Clifton, Bristol. Motto : “A. Chequered Existence.” L 3 3s for the best three mover to SergeantInstructor J. Scott, of Chichester. Motto : “ Courage mounteth with the occasion.” L2 2s for best two mover, divided between Herbert Jacobs, of London. Motto : “ Erato” —and Captain A. W. D. Campbell, Fyzabad, India. Motto: “Omnes eodem cogimur.”

Bird a Burn a 3 3 EU P 3 £ "5' P w* p’ O o' ►3 o o 03 §* P, 3 NJ 3 nf Lost 1 Won 3* 3 CTq P 2 3 1 5§r 3 S & © *3 3 3* P g o

— 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 9A 1 1 1 1 A A A 1 0 1 0 1 ai &2T 1 6 0 1 0 1 •V 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 i 1 1 1 1 i 0 0 1 4 8 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 i SA Lipschutz .... Mackenzie .... 1 1 A 5 i 0 0 0 6 1 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 h 1 1 6 ChT 6 A i * * 1 1 i 0 1 0 1 £ o 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 i 1 1 1 0 8 0 1 0 A 1 1 1 0 6 • 0 0 0 7J Schallop Taubenhaua . - 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 A 1 0 0 1 1 i 0 0 0 7 4 i) s Zukertort 1 0 0 0 A 0 0 ,If 1 1 1