Originally posted by GoshenFrom the Oxford Chess Companion:
He was a failure as a lawyer cos everyone knew him as a chessplayer. analogy with kasparov trying to be prez
"Morphy attemped twice to set up a law practice, but his unpopular decision not to side with the Confederacy during the civil war, the shattered economy of the south afterwards, and his general laziness all doomed any chance of his success at law."
Originally posted by Sam The ShamBut I also read somewhere it was bcos he was too well known as a chessplayer. Maybe in Reinfeilds Treasury of Chess Lore
From the Oxford Chess Companion:
"Morphy attemped twice to set up a law practice, but his unpopular decision not to side with the Confederacy during the civil war, the shattered economy of the south afterwards, and his general laziness all doomed any chance of his success at law."
Originally posted by GoshenYeah Morphy's uncle was a strong chessplayer, seems like I read that he developed the Morphy Gambit, which later came to be called the Morra Gambit, but I could be wrong.
But I also read somewhere it was bcos he was too well known as a chessplayer. Maybe in Reinfeilds Treasury of Chess Lore
1 edit
In part Morphy learned from previous generations.
de La Bourdonnais-McDonnell,London Match-1,game 2,1834
Black to move:
McDonnel played 5....,d3 a move which Morphy praised in the New York Ledger on Saturday,August 13,1859: "It effectually prevents the formation of centre pawns by his adversary,and in a measure restrains the action of the White pieces on the queen's side." - Morphy.
Note the similarity between the next two games.
McDonnell-de La Bourdonnais,London Match-1,game 24,1834
Schulten-Morphy,New York,offhand game,1857
Source: Paul Morphy,a modern perspective - Valeri Beim.
As for Morphy's supremacy I would like to refer to Beim once more.From his introduction to the same book: "Thus I found myself reviewing Morphy's most significant games and found,somewhat surprisingly,that they were hard fought battles with chances for both sides.His opponents were not always lambs for the slaughter - not by a long shot!"
Originally posted by Sam The Sham🙂
Yeah Morphy's uncle was a strong chessplayer, seems like I read that he developed the Morphy Gambit, which later came to be called the Morra Gambit, but I could be wrong.
That would bea good name for a an opening.
Morphy's Uncle's Gambit.
A lot of my opening ideas I got from Morphy's Dustbin.
Originally posted by Ice ColdYou said "I thought I read somewhere that he was taught by an uncle, who was a decent player.
I asked you not to quote me, I even said please, asshat.
But don't quote me on that please".
Second of all I said I was his uncle. I never once said did i teach him.
Third of all you going to insult me please come up with something better than asshat. A five year old little girl could do better.
Originally posted by jman566Your birth certificate is an apology from the condom factory.
You said "I thought I read somewhere that he was taught by an uncle, who was a decent player.
But don't quote me on that please".
Second of all I said I was his uncle. I never once said did i teach him.
Third of all you going to insult me please come up with something better than asshat. A five year old little girl could do better.
😀
Originally posted by Romanticuslook at the positional and strategic ideas in this game Romanticus, they are way ahead of their time,
In part Morphy learned from previous generations.
de La Bourdonnais-McDonnell,London Match-1,game 2,1834
Black to move:
[fen]r1b1kbnr/pppp1ppp/2n2q2/8/2BpP3/2P2N2/PP3PPP/RNBQK2R b[/fen]
McDonnel played 5....,d3 a move which Morphy praised in the New York Ledger on Saturday,August 13,1859: "It effectually prevents the formation of centre pawns by h ...[text shortened]... always lambs for the slaughter - not by a long shot!"
6..e3! a beautiful pawn sacrifice, which leads to an advantage in development and an open e file.
11...c6!, undermining the d5 pawn and opening the queens file which will facilitate and magnify his lead in development.
13...Rxe2! the man is a genius!
Originally posted by robbie carrobieI think the point Beim is making is that McDonnell and de La Bourdonnais had these ideas before Morphy.He most likely picked it up from their games.Therefore it's not way ahead of Morphy's time.
look at the positional and strategic ideas in this game Romanticus, they are way ahead of their time,
6..e3! a beautiful pawn sacrifice, which leads to an advantage in development and an open e file.
11...c6!, undermining the d5 pawn and opening the queens file which will facilitate and magnify his lead in development.
13...Rxe2! the man is a genius!
It doesn't mean he's any less of a genius though.
1 edit
Originally posted by Romanticusi kind of get the feeling that Morphy's contemporaries were not so fully aware of what they were doing, for while the moves as in ...d3 are similar, they seem to still be attacking simply for attacking sake, and not with any type of positional sense, and certainly not with an overall strategic plan in view. i could be wrong though, for it is of interest and noteworthy that Reti himself states, that Morphy was the first, truly positional player.
I think the point Beim is making is that McDonnell and de La Bourdonnais had these ideas before Morphy.He most likely picked it up from their games.Therefore it's not way ahead of Morphy's time.
It doesn't mean he's any less of a genius though.