A young boy from Louisiana named Paul Morphy

September 7, 2011 5:46 AM

This is the story of the birth of modern chess - when the possibilities of chess as an art, a science and a sport all converged. The point of convergence was a young boy from Louisiana named Paul Morphy.

A collection of some of Morphy's best games.

posted by Wolfdog (37 comments total)

in the videogame version of Neuromancer, Morphy is the name of the AI that resides in the World Chess Federation message board.
posted by radiosilents at 5:53 AM on September 7, 2011 [3 favorites]

/n3rrrrd
posted by radiosilents at 5:53 AM on September 7, 2011 [1 favorite]

In an era before time control was used, Morphy often took less than an hour to make all of his moves, while his opponents would need perhaps 8 hours or more.

Jeesh, bring a book.
posted by DU at 5:59 AM on September 7, 2011 [1 favorite]

Also the birth of the legend of the chessplayer as mental case.
posted by MtDewd at 5:59 AM on September 7, 2011

You had me at Morphy.
posted by ged at 6:02 AM on September 7, 2011 [3 favorites]

Also the birth of the legend of the chessplayer as mental case.

Geniuses and lunatics are the two groups of people we describe as being able to see things other people can't, and the line between them can be pretty blurry.
posted by mhoye at 6:27 AM on September 7, 2011 [1 favorite]

Metafilter: the Game of Kings.
posted by clvrmnky at 6:32 AM on September 7, 2011 [2 favorites]

Fascinating man and a fascinating time.

Morphy was unable to successfully build a law practice after the war ended. His attempts to open a law office failed; when he had visitors, they invariably wanted to talk about chess, not their legal affairs. Financially secure thanks to his family fortune, Morphy essentially spent the rest of his life in idleness. Asked by admirers to return to chess competition, he refused.

posted by 2manyusernames at 6:33 AM on September 7, 2011

You had me at Morphy.

Morphy was unable to successfully build a law practice after the war ended. . .


Yeah, and then he lost a hand in an explosion and played drums in a rock and roll band.

"Hey Morphy! Don't turn away. . ."
 
posted by Herodios at 6:55 AM on September 7, 2011 [1 favorite]

Metafilter: Geniuses and lunatics... and the line between them can be pretty blurry.
posted by Multicellular Exothermic at 7:17 AM on September 7, 2011 [2 favorites]

[H]is letter to Willard Fiske dated February 4, 1863, ostensibly a reply to Fiske concerning an invitation by the Vienna Chess Club:

Pray, do not be too prompt in condemning the tardiness of my reply, for in this case at least, it can be justified. I have purposely abstained from returning an immediate answer to your favor, in the hope of being enabled to take a trip to Vienna, not for the sake of chess-playing, but activated by the very natural desire to see you after such a lapse of time as has gone by since my last visit to New York, and inquire about old friends and associations made doubly dear by the sad events that are transpiring in our distracted America. Much as I would enjoy a visit to Germany for those and other reasons. . .

[The entire cast and crew aligned upon a ridge in Glencoe]: GET ON WITH IT!!

Sorry, I can't make it.

 
posted by Herodios at 7:20 AM on September 7, 2011

Anyone who has even a passing interest in chess should look at Morphy's game against Duke Karl and Count Isouard -- the first one on the page linked -- which is a masterpiece. "Flawless" barely begins to cover it: Morphy is shedding pieces left and right and at the end, has exactly what he needs to win and nothing else. It has the look of a composed problem.

And I notice I brought it up on the blue once before in the context of, of all things, Joss Whedon's screenwriting.
posted by ricochet biscuit at 7:23 AM on September 7, 2011 [8 favorites]

Seconding checking out the first game. The Duke is clearly outmatched, and the knockout punch is beautiful.
posted by swift at 7:55 AM on September 7, 2011

There was a great Things You Missed in History Class episode on him, not long ago! I can't seem to dig it up on their site, though. "The Pride and Sorrow of Chess," I think it was called.
posted by Tomorrowful at 8:12 AM on September 7, 2011

This Radiolab episode about games has a great segment on the modern chess game.
posted by slogger at 8:44 AM on September 7, 2011

When I was in college, a friend of mine was a huge chess nut and I dabbled. Nonetheless, I spent a lot of time playing chess with him (beating me soundly). When he was feeling magnanimous, he would say "Gross me out," when I made a bad move and let me take it over. He studied great games by Morphy, Petrosian, et al., and would memorize them so he could demonstrate them. With his encouragement, I found that, remarkably considering the number of chemicals I was dumping into my body on a regular basis, I could also memorize games and developed the facility to play in my head (a long-ago-departed talent now). We would get high, go to Denny's, and sit there and play chess without a board. (The waitresses would sort of edge around us suspiciously and try to interact with us as little as possible.)

I felt like, at that time, I had pulled myself up to the point I could just peek over the rim of the high plateau guys that Morphy beat handily could play at. It gave me just an inkling of how rarefied that atmosphere must be. Morphy? He was in another dimension.

I don't play chess anymore.
posted by Mental Wimp at 9:29 AM on September 7, 2011 [1 favorite]

Oh yeah, the Opera game is great. After an initial minor piece exchange. Morphy explodes with development, then sacrifices a knight (a small one since the exchange stripped away black's queenside pawns) to pin both of black's knights.
posted by KirkJobSluder at 9:48 AM on September 7, 2011

Bad chess player here. In the Duke Karl / Count Isouard game that several people here have pointed out, after black moves Qe7, is there any reason^* for white not to respond with Qxb7? Looks to me like that wins the rook at a8 too.

*: I mean, other than "if you look ten moves ahead, Nc3 wins".
posted by Flunkie at 10:02 AM on September 7, 2011

After 8. Qxb7, black would respond with Qb4+, and white can't do any better than trading queens. Gain of a pawn for white, but it stalls his attack.
posted by Wolfdog at 10:09 AM on September 7, 2011 [1 favorite]

After 8. Qxb7, black would respond with Qb4+

Wow, I suck
posted by Flunkie at 10:18 AM on September 7, 2011

Even though the recounting of these past events was a bit on the dry side, I found myself engrossed in the political bluster of the 19th century chess world.

I found myself wanting to see Morphy hunt nail down Howard Staunton, (the English chess player who managed to avoid playing Morphy forever) and give him the beating he sorely deserved. That would make a great movie on its own.

Morphy = ultimate chess badass. Tucked away in this recounting is the fact that at a certain point later in his career he never played *anyone* at all without giving away a pawn (other chess champions included). Then, toward the end of the career he upped that to giving away a knight and often an extra move to his opponent. In a game that is often so extremely balanced among top players, that is crazy!

To his benefit, he seemed to recognize that competitive chess would eventually drive him insane. His story reminds me of Bobby Fischer, who was equally dominant in the world of chess, and also retreated in seclusion.

There is definitely something about chess that can consume your life. In the early 90's I used to hang out in Washington Square park and watch the players. There was a well-known grandmaster who used to come play. One day he invited a few of us to his apartment. His place defined the phrase "filthy hovel", and he was completely dependent on others for survival, it's as if all his mental resources were directed toward one thing. It was slightly scary to witness. Like Mental Wimp above, I don't play chess anymore either.
posted by jeremias at 10:21 AM on September 7, 2011

What Wolfdog said. Also, Morphy's big strategic advantage here is having a full one-move lead on development. Morphy can develop his pieces in two moves, as opposed to three for black due to the trapped bishop. Also, it protects his e-pawn and threatens a knight-queen fork at d5.
posted by KirkJobSluder at 10:41 AM on September 7, 2011

After 8. Qxb7, black would respond with Qb4+

Wow, I suck

Well, that's why I don't play anymore.
posted by Mental Wimp at 10:49 AM on September 7, 2011

in the context of, of all things, Joss Whedon's screenwriting.

James MacDonald recommends Logical Chess: Move by Move as a writing book. So you're not the only one I've seen draw strong comparisons between writing and playing chess, but I think it's a field of two.
posted by Zed at 11:54 AM on September 7, 2011

1. Attack
2. Attack
3. Attack
4. ????
5. Profit!

Really, though, the ending of C56, Morphy vs. Schrufer, made me laugh out loud.
posted by darth_tedious at 12:15 PM on September 7, 2011 [2 favorites]

After reading some of the the Morphy stories, and noting his reluctance to take fiscal advantage of his skills. I was surprised to then stumble across a story from this week. I think Morphy would have approved.

Game two of the third round of the World Cup produced an extraordinary display of fairness. First David Navara accidentally touched a piece, but his opponent, Alexander Moiseenko did not insist on the "touch-move" rule that would have lost him the game. Moiseenko was subsequently outplayed by the Czech GM, who with a forced mate on the board offered him a draw. Chess gentlemen.

We remind you that if David Navara had actually executed the mate (which he clearly saw) he would have had a guaranteed prize sum of $20,000, instead of the $12,800 he will get if he does not win the tie-break on Monday.
posted by Jakey at 12:19 PM on September 7, 2011

Really, though, the ending of C56, Morphy vs. Schrufer, made me laugh out loud.

It made me laugh out loud even after having been prepared for it (by reading that it made you laugh out loud).

If I were black in that game, I would have suspected that my opponent was drunk. Until I got mated.
posted by Flunkie at 12:45 PM on September 7, 2011 [1 favorite]

I don't get that. Accidentally touching doesn't count as touch-move.
FIDE rules:
"4.3 ...if the player having the move deliberately touches on the chessboard:..."

The Opera game is fun, but it's like watching the Dallas Cowboys beat my high school football team. The link to the Duke of Brunswick makes him out to be crazier than Morphy.

Here's a serious game: Paulsen-Morphy, 1857 (C48) against one of the best players in the world (well, at least in a few years) in the finals of the 1st American Chess Congress. 17...QxB!! [phooey on algebraic].

And speaking of crazy, the site seems to say that reports of his craziness are unfair to the man, although Reuben Fine seemed to think not. (Of course Fine was a pretty strict Freudian, so the King is a penis, checkmate is patricide, etc.)
posted by MtDewd at 12:48 PM on September 7, 2011

It made me laugh out loud even after having been prepared for it (by reading that it made you laugh out loud).

I didn't believe you, had a look at the game, and then I lol'd. It takes titanium balls to play like that.

Incidentally - in the Duke Karl/Count Isouard game, there are annotations by a "Fischer" on two moves. Is that actually Bobby Fischer?
posted by vanar sena at 1:08 PM on September 7, 2011

Thanks, all -- this is an example of why I never let a day pass without checking the FPP's. Favorited, and to be revisited surrounded by family and with a chessboard in front of us.
posted by dylanjames at 1:29 PM on September 7, 2011

Metafilter: I would have suspected that my opponent was drunk. Until I got mated.


(I'm sorry, that was the only thing in this thread I actually understood)
posted by bleep at 1:38 PM on September 7, 2011

Really, though, the ending of C56, Morphy vs. Schrufer, made me laugh out loud.

That is a beautiful game, thank you for drawing my attention to it.
posted by jcreigh at 9:11 PM on September 7, 2011 [1 favorite]

Incidentally - in the Duke Karl/Count Isouard game, there are annotations by a "Fischer" on two moves. Is that actually Bobby Fischer?
posted by vanar sena at 1:08 PM on September 7 [+] [!]


I'm amazed that question hasn't come up more often. I found only one comment among the 17 pages of analysis:

"Mar-24-09
chessgames.com: [walker: Why Bobby annotated this game?]; They were comments Fischer made on a Yugoslavian television show, as he played through this famous game on one of those large hanging demonstration boards."

There are 17 other games with annotations by "Robert James Fischer" on the Chessgames.com site. None indicate the source. It is certainly possible that they come from Fischer's Yugoslavian TV interviews but it would be nice to find a little documentation.
posted by notmtwain at 9:01 AM on September 8, 2011 [1 favorite]

After 8. Qxb7, black would respond with Qb4+, and white can't do any better than trading queens. Gain of a pawn for white, but it stalls his attack. posted by Wolfdog at 10:09 AM on September 7

Wow, I suck
posted by Flunkie at 10:18 AM on September 7 [+] [!]

I'm not convinced there's anything wrong with 8. Qxb7. You can't just stop your analysis because of the Qb4+ check unless you have no response. You have to look further. After 8. Qxb7 Qb4+ 9. Qxb4 Bxb4+ 10. Bd2 Bxd2+ 11. Nxd2 seem likely, Morphy would have ended up a pawn up with a winning position. (You can do this on the chessgames.com board. You don't have to do it all in your head. Just refresh the page afterwards to get the original game back.)

As Wolfdog said, white would be a pawn up. He says it like it's a bad thing. Most players would be more than happy to have such a position. White's spectacular win depended on more bad moves from black further on in the game.

Ihe only thing wrong is that there wouldn't be anything particularly memorable about the game. It's thoroughly debated on the Chessgames site. Other people like 8. Bxf7+.

So, Flunkie and Mental Wimp, it's too soon to give up.
posted by notmtwain at 11:50 AM on September 8, 2011

notmtwain: "chessgames.com: [walker: Why Bobby annotated this game?]; They were comments Fischer made on a Yugoslavian television show, as he played through this famous game on one of those large hanging demonstration boards.""

Thanks notmtwain. Now I can say I learned about zugzwang from Bobby Fischer.
posted by vanar sena at 12:35 AM on September 9, 2011

notmtwain: "I'm not convinced there's anything wrong with 8. Qxb7."

What are the odds that Morphy had an inkling of how his opponent would react to a certain line of play from studying his games? Most games are analyzed to bits now, as I understand it, but has that always been the case?
posted by vanar sena at 1:39 AM on September 9, 2011

I doubt Morphy studied the the games of the Duke and Count. When you're that much better than your opponent, you can usually just throw out reasonable moves and wait for an error. Games have always been analyzed, but it's a lot easier now with computers.

I finally went over the game with an engine (Tiger 15.0), and Tiger thinks 8. QxP (+1.44) is actually better than the move played 8.N-B3 (+.072)
posted by MtDewd at 5:41 AM on September 12, 2011