A Shared Concern

I have shared my concerns over the novel Paul Morphy: Confederate Spy with Edward Winter, prompting a posting at his Chess History website.

Pilfer another person's pieces or pawns. Leave their words alone.  

Sunday Book Review: Paul Morphy: Confederate Spy

Paul Morphy: Confederate Spy
by Stan Vaughan
Three Towers Press (2010)
soft cover, 402 pages
descriptive notation



I could hardly wait to pick up Paul Morphy: Confederate Spy. The American chess champion from Louisiana, cast as an undercover agent during the War Between the States!

First, though, I had to set aside my concerns about the author, Stan Vaughan, of the American Chess Association (as opposed to the better known United States Chess Federation) and claimant to the World Chess Federation World Champion title (as opposed to the better known FIDE). There was more than a bit of trepidation in reviewing the July 1, 2011 WCF Top rating list, since there seemed to be a few players missing:

1. Stan Vaughan 2965 (current WCF "The World Chess Champion" after 2011 ACA Nevada State Open)
2. Bobby Fischer (deceased) 2897 (after WCF "The World Chess Championship" title match of 1992 versus Spassky)
3. Boris Spassky 2805 (after WCF "The World Chess Championship" title match of 1992 versus Fischer)
4. Ron Gross 2575 (after WCF 2011 Starbucks International- official WCF 2012 title match challenger after winning the 2010 WCF Candidates matches Final at Las Vegas Riviera Hotel Casino).

However, I took the leap.

The author writes from the omniscient, third person point-of-view, fully strident in a way that befits the Southern perspective of American Civil War

According to Article I, section 8 of the US Constitution, only US Congress has the power to call forth state militia (and even then it must be as a result of a call for assistance from a state legislature, or when said state's legislature is not in session, its governor). Yet, once the trespassers had been evicted from Fort Sumter, which should have been the end of the matter, Lincoln usurped this authority and issued his own illegal proclamation call on April 15, 1861. Not only was it illegal from the standpoint that he had no authority to issue it, it called for suppression of a so-called insurrection in South Carolina, a state no longer even part of the Union, as South Carolina had seceded the previous year!

Whew! As a Yankee, I was quickly getting schooled on Dishonest Abe Lincoln and his War of Northern Aggression. Of course, I awaited the author's treatment of the "Peculiar Institution", which was not immediately forthcoming...

I tripped over an occasional mismatch in verb tenses and some misspellings that should not have been there, but I was settling into a tale set in a vibrant time in chess and non-chess history.

The presentation of the chess games seemed a bit silly, however, placing "annotations" within the dialogue, e.g.

[After 1.P-K4 P-K3 2.P-Q4 P-Q4 3.PxP] Talking with some nearby spectators, Morphy commented, "This is my favorite treatment of the French Defense, whereby I get an open game."
4.Kt-Kb[sic]3 B-Q3 5.B-Q3 Kt-KB3 6.Castles, castles 7.Kt-B3 P-B3 8.B-KKt5 [Black's move is missing; it should be 8...B-KKt5] 9.P-KR3 BxKt 10.QxB QKt-Q2 11.KR-K1 Q-B2 12.P-KKt4
De Maurian, in a low voice to a fellow spectator, so that Jose Maria [Sicre] could not overhear, re marked, [sic] "This is one of his patented P.C. (Paul Charles) moves. Not only is it justified in a position like the present, but it is twice as strong, for it provokes anxiety, confusion and fear!"

Awkward.

Still, things moved along, and Morphy, in the role of diplomat, found himself across the Atlantic, in Spain... and the style of writing in Paul Morphy: Confederate Spy changed from politics and intrigue to more of a travelogue. I rode it out for about a dozen pages (like so much of the book, the places and buildings were interesting, even if I struggled with the prose), and then parked myself on a couple.

The phrase "characterized by a magical use of space, light, water and decoration" (page 62) describing a particular piece of architecture caught my eye, and I Googled it. Hmmm... That phrase shows up in the DK Eyewitness Travel Guide: Seville & Andalusia (page 194).

Somewhat disappointed, I then chose "where the reigning sultan listened to the petitions of his subjects and held meetings" (page 62) and Googled that, only to find that the phrase is also from DK Eyewitness Travel Guide: Seville & Andalusia (page 194).

It turned out that "an undigested cube of rock, and whoever designed it failed to realize that when plumped down beside the delicate Moorish palaces upon which it encroaches, it could only look ridiculous" (page 63), however, appears in Iberia, (page 227) by James A. Michener.

I set the book down. I do not know if I will pick it back up again.

Pity. I was just getting into the story.

I wonder how things turned out in the end.

Could Not Happen, Right? (Part 1)

Many readers are familiar with the game young Paul Morphy played against his uncle, Alonzo Morphy, where he gave his elder the odds of a Rook, and still checkmated him – with the last move being Castles:

Paul Morphy - Alonzo Morphy
New Orleans, 1850
Remove White's Queen Rook

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nf6 4.Ng5 d5 5.exd5 Nxd5 6.Nxf7 Kxf7 7.Qf3+ Ke6 8.Nc3 Nd4 9.Bxd5+ Kd6 10.Qf7 Be6 11.Bxe6 Nxe6 12.Ne4+ Kd5 13.c4+ Kxe4 14.Qxe6 Qd4 15.Qg4+ Kd3 16.Qe2+ Kc2 17.d3+ Kxc1 18.O-O checkmate

This is certainly a fun game to play over.

What if, instead of "Rook odds", someone gave an opponent "Jerome Gambit odds" – and also won the game with Castles as the last move?

Could not happen, right?

It did happen. I'll post the game tomorrow.

Italian Game Anti-Fried Liver Defense (Part 1)

Jerome Gambit Gemeinde member Welton Vaz sends us a Chess.com link to an enjoyable discussion on the play of 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 h6 – known on this site as the "Semi-Italian Opening" (after Euwe) – as a way of avoiding the Fried Liver Attack 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nf6 4.Ng5 d5 5.exd5 Nxd5 6.Nxf7

Although one of the Chess.com posters complained about 3...h6 "I hate when players play this as it is an insult to the Italian" there was no suggestion on the website, either in the discussion or the related 21 games given, that White could return the "insult" of 3...h6 by transposing to the Jerome Gambit with, say, 4.0-0 Bc5 5.Bxf7+.

Of course Welton sent one of his games where he provided that "insult" – which we will see in "Italian Game Anti-Fried Liver Defense (Part 2)".

By the way, Grandmaster Boris Alterman has a 6-part series on the Fried Liver Attack on his website, along with instruction on a whole list of gambits, including the Danish, Evans, Max Lange and Morra.

I note that Alterman has two books forthcoming, one on gambits with White and one on gambits with Black. Of the first, he writes

The Alterman Gambit Guide: White Gambits is both an opening book and an instructive manual. Sharpen your tactics and learn to play dynamic attacking chess while studying the most entertaining gambits. Lines covered include:Evans Gambit, Panov Attack, Morra Gambit, Philidor, Danish Gambit, Urusov Gambit, Morphy Attack, Cochrane Gambit, Max Lange Attack, Fried Liver Attack and Milner-Barry Gambit

For those who like their liver fried, there is also a book by NM Dan Heisman on The Computer Analyzes the Fried Liver / Lolli.

Dii minorum gentium

Chessfriend Anders Thulin, some good time back, mentioned that page 155 of The Chess Monthly, Volume 8 (1886-1887) contained "a long diatribe against the naming of Gambits and Openings, which ends..."

...The new mania among Chess-players to affix their names to some sub-sub-sub variation makes it anyhow a small honor indeed to be an inventor of an Opening, and when Labourdonnais, Anderssen, Morphy, Kolisch, Blackburne, and other good names are among the not decorated, we at least would prefer to belong to the same section and not aspire to those honours which seem to be the pride of the Dii minorum gentium [of the inferior orders]. No offense to anybody, but it is difficult enough already to know what is meant when every new year is marked with new Gambits, like Jerome, Blackmar, Pierce, Rosentreter, Qaade, &c...

But – Is this stuff playable?? (Part I)

Of course not.

The Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+) has many refutations.

I'm glad that's settled.

Maybe a more useful question would be --
Under what conditions might the Jerome Gambit be playable?

In casual or blitz games among "average" players , perhaps -- when Grandmaster Nigel Davies' words from his Gambiteer I (2007) are relevant:

Having examined literally thousands of club players’ games over the years, I have noticed several things:
1) The player with the more active pieces tends to win.
2) A pawn or even several pawns is rarely a decisive advantage.
3) Nobody knows much theory.
4) When faced with aggressive play, the usual reaction is to cower.

I like the sound of that.

Also, what do you make of the following position?

White, down two pieces without compensation, is lost, right?

Actually, the game is Morphy - T. Knight, New Orleans 1856, which ended in the first player announcing checkmate in 17 moves.

And this position?

Morphy - Maurian, New Orleans, 1858, a win for White in 15 moves..

Ok, you're catching on. It's possible for a stronger player to give a weaker player odds of a piece or more and still have a fighting chance.

Just like someone could give "Jerome Gambit odds" in the right situation..

One more position: White is lost, right??

This is a trick position.

Vazquez - Giraudy
Mexico, 1876
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Nxe5 6.Qh5+ Ke6 7.Qf5+ Kd6 8.d4 Bxd4 9.c3 Bb6 10.f4 Qf6 11.fxe5+ Qxe5 12.Bf4 Qxf4 13.Qxf4+ Ke7 14.Rf1 Nh6 15.Qe5+ Kd8 16.Qxg7 Re8 17.Qg5+ Re7 18.Rf8 mate

Andres Clemente Vazquez, the Mexican Champion and editor of La Estrategia Mexicane gave both Knight's and Jerome Gambit odds -- and still managed a checkmate in under 20 moves!