“I got strong ideas about my house. I’m going to hire the best architect and have him build it in the shape of a rook. Yeah, that’s for me. Class. Spiral staircases, parapets, everything. I want to live the rest of my life in a house built exactly like a rook.”
Welcome to the Rook House Chess Blog. This portion of our website was designed to provide instant interaction with chess enthusiasts all over the world. We cover many topics such as chess news, chess history, and the occasional chess puzzle.
Please visit our main website at www.rookhouse.com and view our extensive collection of historical facts and games. Lastly, please remember to be civil and respectful to all users of this site.
During Paul Morphy’s famous European adventures in 1858, he made several stops at the infamous Cafe de la Regence in Paris, France. The cafe had always been an important centerpiece in chess history, as most of the previous greats had played there at one time or another. Francois-Andre Danican Philidor, Legall de Kremeur, and Adolf Anderssen are just a few names to play at the famous cafe. It has also been documented that Benjamin Franklin, a noted chess enthusiast, played there on occasion while serving as American ambassador to France during the Revolutionary War.
One of Morphy’s encounters at the cafe involved him playing eight of the strong cafe regulars in a blindfold simul in the presence of approximately 250 chess fans. After ten hours of play, Morphy had amazingly won six games, drawn two, and lost zero. It was reported that Morphy never took a break and did not even appear fatigued at the conclusion of play. One of his games from this event is presented below, as annotated by Johann Jakob Lowenthal.
SOURCE: Harper’s Weekly – November 13th, 1858
[Event "blindfold simul"]
[Site "Paris, France"]
[Date "1858.??.??"]
[EventDate "?"]
[Round "?"]
[Result "1-0"]
[White "Paul Morphy"]
[Black "Henri Baucher"]
[ECO "C41"]
[PlyCount "57"]1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 d6 3. d4 exd4 4. Qxd4
Nc6 5. Bb5 Bd7 6. Bxc6 Bxc6 7. Bg5 f6 8. Bh4 Nh6 {It is a
question to which square this knight shoulbe played here, to
the one in the text or to e7. Much may be said in favor of
both; played to h6 it can be brought back to f7 and castling
effected; while if to e7 with the object of posting it on g6,
a diagonal is left open which will render castling a less easy
matter. Th relative merit, however, of the two moves can only
be determined by frequently tecting them in actual play.}
9. Nc3 Be7 10. O-O O-O 11. Qc4 Kh8 12. Nd4 Qd7 13. Rad1 Rf7
{Played, it would seem, with a view of occupying the square
vacated with the queen’s rook, though we do not see that
Black’s position would thereby have been much improved.}
14. f4 {In recording games played by Mr. Morphy, we have been
much struck by the skill and judgement with he invariably
times the advance of the f-pawn after castling. An immediate
advantage is immediately apparent. Here it allows the King’s
rook to be brought to bear on the adversary’s intrenchments.}
a5 15. f5 Rff8 {The advance of the f-pawn by white effectually
prevented Black from carrying on his original plan of bringing
his queen’s rook to f8 on account of Ne6; and this retreat of
the king’s rook was no doubt caused by Boucher’s wish to bring
his knight into play, which he now could not do without
leaving this rook ‘en prise’.} 16. Ne6 {White has now a fine
game.} Rg8 17. a4 Ng4 18. Qe2 {Mr Morphy exhibits the true
spirit of chess. From the commencement of the game he makes
such a disposition of his pieces, that, after serving his
purpose to the outmost in their original position, they are
brought at once, and without the least loss of time, to bear
on another weak point in the adversary’s game. the move in the
text is a fair prove of the truth of the assertion; for the
queen, after for some time having maintained a position of
importance, is now brought back and becomes even more powerful
than before. This move is a commencement of a very masterly
combination.} Ne5 19. Bg3 Qc8 {To get rid of the knight by
playing ...Bd7 and to allow the d-pawn to take the bishop if
his knight were captured.} 20. Bxe5 dxe5 21. Rf3 {The key move
to a combination of surprising merit, when it is remenbered
that it takes place in a game contested simultaneously with
seven others against strong players, and all without sight of
board and men.} Bd7 22. Rh3 h6 {If 22...Re8 White would have
won as follows 23 Qh5 h6 24 Nxg7 Bf8 (We see no better move
for if ...Kg8 white would win with Rg3) 25 Qxh6+ Kg8 26 Qh7+
Kf7 and White mates in two moves.} 23. Qd2 {Followed up with
real spirit.} Kh7 {To save the threatened mate.} 24. Qxd7 Bd6
25. Rxh6+ {The position deserves the student’s best
examination. Mr Morphy’s play here is a wonderful exhibition
of brilliancy and correctness.} Kxh6 26. Rd3 Kh5 27. Qf7 Kh4
28. Rh3 Kg4 29. Qh5# 1-0
The 1915 triangle match in Atlantic City, New Jersey (USA) was contested between Frank J. Marshall (United States champion), Sydney T. Sharp (Pennsylvania state champion), and Wilbur L. Moorman of Lynchburg, VA (USA). The format consisted of each contestant playing the other two players twice each. The final results were as follows:
Oddly enough, Moorman’s only win was actually over Marshall (giving him his only loss). Today, we give you one of the games from that match that is not in any database of which I have ever been able to locate. Included are the limited annotations (after white’s 2nd, 23rd, and 29th moves) as originally published.
SOURCE: Washington Post – August 22nd, 1915
[Event "Triangle Match"]
[Site "Atlantic City,NJ (USA)"]
[Date "1915.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Sharp, Sydney T."]
[Black "Marshall, Frank J."]
[Result "0-1"]
[ECO "B22"]
[PlyCount "72"]
[Source "WP-08221915"]1.e4 c5 2.c3 {A line of play that was adopted successfully many years ago in correspondence play
by J.E. Narraway, of Canada. The idea is to obtain a strong center and at the same
time prevent the opening from assuming the normal lines of the Sicilian defense.} Nc6 3.d4 cxd4 4.cxd4 d5 5.exd5 Qxd5 6.Nf3 Bg4 7.Be2 Rd8 8.Be3 e6 9.Nc3 Qa5 10.O-O Nf6 11.Qb3 Rd7 12.Rfd1 Bd6
13.Rac1 O-O 14.h3 Bxf3 15.Bxf3 Ne7 16.Qb5 Qxb5 17.Nxb5 Bb8 18.Bg5 a6 19.Bxf6 gxf6 20.Nc3 Rfd8 21.Ne4 Rxd4 22.Nxf6+ Kg7
23.Ne8+ {Sharp states that this move allows black to bottle up the knight and is responsible
for white’s subsequent trouble. Ne4 was the proper continuation leading to an even
position.} Kg6 24.Rxd4 Rxd4 25.Bxb7 Bf4 26.Re1 Rd8 27.g3 Bb8 28.Be4+ f5 29.Bc2 {Bxf5 would have given white better drawing chances.} e5 30.Ba4 Kf7 31.Re3 Rd4 32.b3 Nd5 33.Rf3 f4 34.gxf4 e4
35.Rg3 Rd1+ 36.Kg2 Nxf4+ 0-1
Here is a classic game from the 1883 London International tournament between legendary chess greats James Mason of Ireland and Henry Edward Bird of England. In this game, Bird would play a Sicilian Defense against his ooponent’s king’s pawn opening, but severely neglected his kingside defenses and Mason would eventually take advantage.
Now that the Bobby Fischer had defeated Boris Spassky in a rematch of their legendary encounter in 1972 Reykjavik, the burning question was whether or not he would play again. His belief that he was still the true world champion did not bode well for the possibility of him going through the normal FIDE qualification process to earn a shot at the recognized champion, Garry Kasparov.
Another question was whether or not his level of play against Spassky, after a 20-year hiatus from competitive chess, was good enough for him to even sit at the table with someone of Kasparov’s caliber. Many grandmasters pointed out that Fischer’s play steadily improved during the course of the match and that he showed flashes of his previous brilliance, but that he was not yet ready to challenge the top grandmasters of the time. Implications were made that his uncharacteristically conservative play was intentional and that he played just well enough to win, without revealing any theories or novelties that he had devised over the last twenty years.
When asked about the possibility of his next match, Fischer replied “It depends on the offer, the money, and how it pleases me. My plans are open now.” This opened the proverbial flood gates for all types of speculation. The Yugoslav business man who financed the Spassky rematch, Jezdimir Vasiljevic, had made mention of attempting to arrange a match for the official world title between Fischer and Kasparov. Another report had a match being negotiated between Fischer and the world’s top ranked female, Judit Polgar.
We of course know that none of these matches ever occurred and that Fischer unfortunately never played competitive chess again. But for one brief moment in 1992, the world was blessed with the artistry and brilliance of Bobby Fischer for one last time. Robert James Fischer passed away on January 17th, 2008 at the site of his greatest achievement in Reykjavik, Iceland. He was appropriately enough, 64 years of age. Rest in peace Bobby, the chess world is eternally in your debt.
Bobby Fischer won the 30th game in the match with his old nemesis Boris Spassky in Belgrade, Yugoslavia. The win additionally sealed the match for Fischer by the score of 10 games to 5, as well as the winner’s purse of $3.35 million dollars. The return match of their classic 1972 encounter began in Sveti Stefan on September 2nd and moved to Belgrade on September 30th, lasting just over two months and 30 games.
Leading 9 games to 5 and needing only one victory to clinch the match, Fischer had to settle for hard fought draws in the previous three games, as Spassky was not going down without a fight. Fischer had the Black pieces in game 30 and answered his opponent’s queen’s pawn opening with his trusty King’s Indian defense. Spassky chose the route of the Saemisch attack with 5.f3 and Fischer countered with the Panno variation by playing 6…Nc6 and 7…a6.
Fischer played aggressively and removed his king’s best defender with 9…Nd7 from his post in an effort to free the king’s bishop and press the attack. After 15.h5 cxd4 16.Nxd4 Nc5, Fischer had achieved an ideal post for his king’s knight, severely hampering the movement of Spassky’s pieces.
Spassky tried to open up the g-file with a knight sacrifice, but after 18.Nf5 gxf5 19.gxf5, but the plan was not sound. Fischer replied with 19…Bxd5 20.exd5 and picked off another pawn with 20…Bxb2. Spassky now had a losing position and resigned seven moves later after 27…Kg7. Fischer’s comeback was complete, but where would he go from here?
Next week, we’ll do a post-mortem on the match and give some quotes from the players themselves and hear the opinions of some of the other grandmasters who were intently watching this match.
What Is The Greatest Rivalry In The History Of Chess?
The most recent poll has closed and the chess rivalry between Garry Kasparov and Anatoly Karpov was convincingly voted the best. There were 55 votes in all and the winner received 44% of the votes. Our choices must have been very thorough, as there were no other rivalries mentioned outside of what we had listed. The final voting was as follows:
There will be a new poll posted over the weekend. Feel free to contribute further conversation on this topic right here. As a bonus, we give you the 24th and final game from their 1987 match in Seville, Spain. Kasparov needed an outright win to force a match tie and retain his world championship title. We hope you enjoy it.
Boris Spassky bounced back to win game 26 of his 1992 match with Bobby Fischer, just one day after being thoroughly dominated by the American in the previous game. Knowing that his back was against the wall, as Fischer only needs one more game to take home the $3.35 million dollar winner’s prize, Spassky came up with arguably his best performance of the match thus far. Fischer tried his King’s Indian Defense that moved ever so slightly into a Benoni Defense.
Spassky’s early pawn chains and powerful bishops hampered Fischer at every turn. Spassky’s space advantage became evident after 18.g5 forced 18…Nf7 and Fischer’s knight had nowhere to maneuver. With Spassky’s kingside defenses impenetrable, Fischer attempted to load up on the b-file for a queenside attack to no avail. Spassky continued his kingside pressure with 29.h5 and 30.h6 and suffocated black’s kingside defenses.
Fischer attempted a hasty trade-off of queens and the last remaining rooks to give himself some breathing room with 33.Ng5 Rxb1 34.Qxb1 Qxb1 35.Bxb1, but Spassky expertly used the advantage of his twin bishops and maneuvered his king into Fischer’s back yard. They battled on until move 58 when Fischer finally resigned. Fischer now leads the match by a score of 9-5.
Aron Nimzowitsch (1886-1935) was born in Russia, but later made his home in Copenhagen, Denmark. He was considered one of the original “hypermodern” players, whose beliefs are that controlling the center squares is more important than actually occupying them. Chess Praxis and My System are two books written by Nimzowitsch that are still considered by many to be the foremost instructionals on the game of chess.
The Nimzo-Indian Defense was named after him and is still often used among today’s grandmasters. Several of the French Defense variations are also named after him. His most notable tournament victories were Copenhagen 1923, Dresden 1926, and Karlsbad 1929. Nimzowitsch had an opportunity to challenge Jose Raul Capablanca for the world title 1925, but was unable to come up with the necessary finances for the match.
Here is one of his classic battles with fellow hypermodernist Richard Reti in Berlin 1928: