Schools of Play

SCHOOLS OF PLAY Chess has developed various schools of play from time to time. The theory of the game, however, did not advance in proportion to the enormous strides in its popularity. Formerly the theory of play had been enriched by such enthusiasts as Dr. Max Lange, Louis Paulsen, Professor Anderssen, Neumann, Dr. Suhle, beer, Kieseritzki, Howard Staunton, Dr. Zukertort, W. N. Potter and Steinitz. The most permanent influence on chess theory was exercised by Steinitz. In the days of Morphy and Anderssen players invariably strove for an attack on the king's position at any cost. Steinitz, however, realized that such attacks were, gen erally speaking, successful only against inferior opposition and came to the conclusion that the correct strategy was to strive to create weaknesses, however slight, in the hostile position, and by the accumulation of these weaknesses to obtain an opportunity for a decisive combination. This new method he not only preached but practised, and thus was founded the modern school. If to Steinitz credit must be given for founding this school, to other players credit must be given for combining the theory of minute advantages with the old method of rapid development adopted by Morphy and Anderssen. Steinitz preferred a slow development and the building-up of an unassailable (if cramped) position. Dr. Tarrasch, however, had no liking for cramped positions and so strove for rapid development (as Morphy), not to essay a violent and hazardous attack (as Morphy) but to use his rapid development and greater control of space to force his opponent to create those weaknesses which Steinitz had shown how to ex ploit. This may be said to be the method of the modern school.

In 1913, however, a young Russian master, A. Niemzowitsch, published some articles assailing some of the cardinal points of the Tarrasch creed. Their importance was not sufficiently esti mated at the time, for Niemzowitsch had already a reputation for a bizarre style of play, and the outbreak of war next year put an end to discussion of chess theories. But to Niemzowitsch must be given the credit (if credit it be) of founding what is now known as the hypermodern school. The teachings of this school, which has come into prominence since the World War, may be roughly summarised as follows: (i.) "The Golden Rule is that there is no Golden Rule"—in other words, the hypermoderns view generalizations with suspicion. As Richard Reti, one of the most ardent advocates of this school, said in his Modern Ideas in Chess, "The hypermoderns are the greatest opponents of routine play." (Richard Reti died June 6, 1929.) (ii.) Tarrasch had laid down the importance of being strong in the centre, hold ing that a player who has control of the four squares in the centre (e4, e5, d4, d5) has an advantage in that he can prevent the de ployment of his opponent's pieces from one wing to the other via those squares—the most natural and effective route. The hypermoderns do not, however, immediately hasten to seize con trol of those squares, preferring to delay that occupation until it can be done (as they consider) more effectively. To that purpose they hold back the centre pawns in the beginning of a game and develop their bishops in posts where they will be likely to aid the subsequent investment of the centre (e.g., at KKt2 and QKt2 or KKt2 and K3) . The views of the hypermoderns have not, how ever, been accepted in their entirety by all the masters, many of whom still follow the teachings of the modern school.

The World's Championship.

In the absence of any author ity to confer the title of world's champion, it was assumed by Steinitz—and rightly, for he was undoubtedly the strongest player of his day. In his old age, however—in 1894—he was beaten in a match for the championship by a young German player, Dr. Emanuel Lasker. Lasker held the title for 26 years, during which time he defeated redoubtable opponents in Steinitz (a return match), Marshall, Janowsky (twice) and Dr. Tarrasch, and drew with Schlechter. In 1921 a match was arranged at Havana be tween Lasker and J. R. Capablanca—a Cuban who was on all sides admitted to be Lasker's most dangerous antagonist. Capa blanca won by four games to none, with ten draws, Lasker resigning after the 14th game on the grounds that the climate at Havana was highly dangerous to his health. Capablanca, how ever, did not hold the title for long. In the autumn of 1927, after a struggle lasting nearly three months, he was defeated at Buenos Aires by the Russian master, Dr. Alekhin, who won six games to three, no fewer than 25 being drawn.

Federation Internationale des Echecs.

This body is the central authority for chess matters. Most of the European coun tries and the U.S.A. are members. A tournament under the aus pices of the Federation was held at Budapest in 1926, and the following year a tournament was held at London between teams, each of four players, representing 16 nations attached to the Fed eration. The tournament was won by Hungary with a score of 40 points out of a possible 6o. Close behind came Denmark (sec ond) and the British empire (third). Hungary also won a similar tournament held at The Hague in 5928.

Modern British Chess.

The British Chess Federation was in stituted in 1904, its first congress being held at Hastings in that year, when a British championship, a ladies' championship and a first-class amateur tournament were played. These competitions have been continued annually at the congresses of the Federa tion, with the exception of the War period and the years 1922 and 1927, when international tournaments were held in England. The holders of the British championship have been W. E. Napier, H. E. Atkins, R. C. Griffith, F. D. Yates, R. H. V. Scott and Sir G. A. Thomas.

In 1896 and following years matches between representative players of Great Britain and the United States respectively were played by cable, with the following results: By winning three consecutive matches Great Britain obtained permanent possession of the trophy. In England chess matches have been played annually since 1873 between the universities of Oxford and Cambridge, seven players on each side. Up to 1928 Oxford won 23 matches, Cambridge 25, and four were drawn. Literature of the Game.—The most ambitious of early Euro pean writings on chess was the work of a Lombard, Jacobus de Cessolis (Jacopo Dacciesole), whose main object, however, though he gives the moves, etc., was to teach morals rather than chess. He was a Dominican friar and his treatise, Liber de Moribus Hominum et Officiis Nobilium, was written before the year 1300. It was afterwards translated into several European languages, and in the year 1474 Caxton, under the title of The Game and Playe of Chesse, printed an English translation of the French version. About I500 we have the Gottinger Handschrift, a work contain ing 12 different openings and 3o problems. The author of this manuscript is not known. Of Lucena, a Spanish author who wrote in or about 1497, we are better informed. His treatise, Repetition des Amores e Arte de Axedres, comprises various practical chess matters, including 15o positions, illustrated by 16o well-executed woodcuts. Various of these positions are identical with those in the Gottinger Handschrift. In the 16th century works upon the game were written by Damiano, Ruy Lopez and Horatio Gianutio della Mantia ; in the 17th century by Salvio, Polerio, Gustavus Selenus, Carrera, Greco, Fr. Antonio and the authors of the Traite de Lausanne; in the 18th century by Bertin, Stamma, Ercole del Rio, Lolli, Cozio, Philidor, Ponziani, Stein, van Nyevelt, Allgaier and Peter Pratt; in the 19th century by J. F. W. Koch and C. F. Koch, Sarratt, John Cochrane, Wm. Lewis, Silberschmidt, Ghulam Kas sim and James Cochrane, George Walker, A. Macdonnell, Jae nisch, Petroff, von Bilguer, von der Lasa, Staunton, Kling and Horwitz, Bledow, Dubois, Kieseritzki, Max Lange, Lowenthal, Dufresne, Neumann, Suhle, Zukertort, Preti, Steinitz and others.

English chess owes much to W. Lewis and George Walker. But to Howard Staunton must be ascribed the most important share in creating the later popularity which the game achieved in Eng land. Staunton's first work The Chess Player's Handbook, was published in 1847, and again (revised) in 1848. For want of further adequate revision many of its variations are now out of date; but taking the handbook as it was when issued, very high praise must be bestowed upon the author. His other works are : The Chess Player's Text-Book and The Chess Player's Compan ion (1849) (the latter being a collection of his own games) ; the Chess Praxis (186o, republished in 1903) ; his posthumous work, various smaller treatises. The laws of the game as laid down in the Praxis formed the basis of the rules adopted by the British Chess Association in 1862. Besides editing the Chess Player's Chronicle and the Chess World, he was the chess editor of the Illustrated London News from 1844 till his death in 1874.