Morphy's great opening insight

[billbrock]

OT re Morphy: in Modern Ideas in Chess, Reti argued that Morphy’s great opening insight was the importance of rapid development for its own sake (rather than to merely attack).

[artichoke]

@billbrock

OT re Morphy: in Modern Ideas in Chess, Reti argued that Morphy’s great opening insight was the importance of rapid development for its own sake (rather than to merely attack).

Do we still believe that insight is correct?

Probably the Najdorf Sicilian players, who leave the QN on b8, QB on c8, and eventually develop the QR to a7 and then c7 or d7, don’t. Or the Ruy Lopez players who redevelop their QN from c6 back to b8, then to d7. Or even the Benoni and Gruenfeld defenders who move their KN from f6 to d7, when the QN is sitting on b8 and could have gone to that square.

Sometimes the pieces are well developed on their original squares.

[rharing]

Morphy was a child prodigy, and came upon the chess scene when he was around 12. He was also a hard worker both at chess (having studied all chess books available during his time) and in the field of law. Whenever you put together raw talent and ability with a hard worker you see the best shining examples of excellence.

It is clear that if Morphy were born today with the same talent and the massive amount of information available in books and online, he would have attained the highest levels.

Given the difference in information available, his style of play might have been different if playing today.

[billbrock]

@artichoke

@billbrock

OT re Morphy: in Modern Ideas in Chess, Reti argued that Morphy’s great opening insight was the importance of rapid development for its own sake (rather than to merely attack).

Do we still believe that insight is correct?

Probably the Najdorf Sicilian players, who leave the QN on b8, QB on c8, and eventually develop the QR to a7 and then c7 or d7, don’t. Or the Ruy Lopez players who redevelop their QN from c6 back to b8, then to d7. Or even the Benoni and Gruenfeld defenders who move their KN from f6 to d7, when the QN is sitting on b8 and could have gone to that square.

Sometimes the pieces are well developed on their original squares.

Good counterexamples; Watson’s Secrets of Modern Chess Strategy has more.

Reti himself didn’t believe it: he gives the famous Alekhine-Rubinstein miniature & Capa’s early Ne5 against the …Nd7 Caro-Kann as counterexamples (moving same piece several times makes sense when it fits the concrete requirements of the position). But Reti saw Morphy’s approach to the opening as an advance over Anderssen’s. (Paulsen was arguably the most modern pre-Steinitz, but he doesn’t figure in Reti’s history of ideas.)

[Joe_Lux]

@artichoke

@billbrock

OT re Morphy: in Modern Ideas in Chess, Reti argued that Morphy’s great opening insight was the importance of rapid development for its own sake (rather than to merely attack).

Do we still believe that insight is correct?

Probably the Najdorf Sicilian players, who leave the QN on b8, QB on c8, and eventually develop the QR to a7 and then c7 or d7, don’t. Or the Ruy Lopez players who redevelop their QN from c6 back to b8, then to d7. Or even the Benoni and Gruenfeld defenders who move their KN from f6 to d7, when the QN is sitting on b8 and could have gone to that square.

Sometimes the pieces are well developed on their original squares.

Doesn’t it matter whether you are white or black (more or less space), or whether it is an open, closed or semi-open position? Morphy’s approach to open positions fits Reti’s comment.

All the best, Joe Lux

[KeithAmmann]

@Joe Lux

@artichoke

@billbrock

OT re Morphy: in Modern Ideas in Chess, Reti argued that Morphy’s great opening insight was the importance of rapid development for its own sake (rather than to merely attack).

Do we still believe that insight is correct?

Probably the Najdorf Sicilian players, who leave the QN on b8, QB on c8, and eventually develop the QR to a7 and then c7 or d7, don’t. Or the Ruy Lopez players who redevelop their QN from c6 back to b8, then to d7. Or even the Benoni and Gruenfeld defenders who move their KN from f6 to d7, when the QN is sitting on b8 and could have gone to that square.

Sometimes the pieces are well developed on their original squares.

Doesn’t it matter whether you are white or black (more or less space), or whether it is an open, closed or semi-open position?

Neil McDonald says that the orthodoxies of opening development apply mainly to open games, not so much to semi-open or closed games, and cites as a counterexample a game between Alex Shabalov and Yasser Seirawan which begins:

1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.e5 b6 4.Bb5+ c6 5.Ba4 b5 6.Bb3 c5 7.c3 Ne7 8.Nf3 Nec6 9.0-0 h6

[artichoke]

I’ll agree with Joe that the minor pieces are rarely well developed on their original squares in open positions. By the way, did Morphy have games with the Ruy Lopez? I suppose the opening was known then, since Ruy had lived a few hundred years earlier. What did Anderssen do, just attack as fast as possible in open positions without substantially finishing development first?

Snits, titles require record keeping. That wasn’t available 50 years ago on a coordinated basis, and even the new title system will use ratings to define the qualifications for titles.

[billbrock]

@artichoke

I’ll agree with Joe that the minor pieces are rarely well developed on their original squares in open positions. By the way, did Morphy have games with the Ruy Lopez? I suppose the opening was known then, since Ruy had lived a few hundred years earlier. What did Anderssen do, just attack as fast as possible in open positions without substantially finishing development first?

[…]

3…a6–a non-developing move–is the Morphy Variation!

[Event “Paris m2”]
[Site “Paris”]
[Date “1858.??.??”]
[Round “4”]
[White “Anderssen, Adolf”]
[Black “Morphy, Paul”]
[Result “0-1”]
[ECO “C77”]
[PlyCount “102”]
[EventDate “1858.12.20”]
[EventType “match”]
[EventRounds “8”]
[EventCountry “FRA”]
[Source “ChessBase”]
[SourceDate “2001.11.25”]

1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5 a6 4. Ba4 Nf6 5. d3 Bc5 6. c3 b5 7. Bc2 d5 8. exd5
   Nxd5 9. h3 O-O 10. O-O h6 11. d4 exd4 12. cxd4 Bb6 13. Nc3 Ndb4 14. Bb1 Be6 15.
   a3 Nd5 16. Be3 Nf6 17. Qd2 Re8 18. Rd1 Bd5 19. Ne5 Qd6 20. Qc2 Nxd4 21. Bxd4
   Bxd4 22. Nxd5 Qxe5 23. Nxf6+ Qxf6 24. Qh7+ Kf8 25. Be4 Rad8 26. Kh1 Bxb2 27.
   Rab1 Rxd1+ 28. Rxd1 Qxf2 29. Qh8+ Ke7 30. Qh7 Be5 31. Bf3 Qg3 32. Kg1 Qg6 33.
   Qxg6 fxg6 34. Bb7 Rb8 35. Bxa6 c6 36. Kf2 Bd6 37. Rd3 Kd7 38. Ke2 Ra8 39. Bb7
   Rxa3 40. Rd1 Kc7 41. Bc8 Ra2+ 42. Kf3 Bc5 43. Be6 Rf2+ 44. Kg3 Rf6 45. Rd7+ Kb6
2. Bg4 Bd6+ 47. Kh4 c5 48. Bf3 c4 49. Rxg7 Rf4+ 50. Bg4 c3 51. g3 Rxg4+ 0-1

[Event “Paris m2”]
[Site “Paris”]
[Date “1858.??.??”]
[Round “2”]
[White “Anderssen, Adolf”]
[Black “Morphy, Paul”]
[Result “1/2-1/2”]
[ECO “C77”]
[PlyCount “88”]
[EventDate “1858.12.20”]
[EventType “match”]
[EventRounds “8”]
[EventCountry “FRA”]
[Source “ChessBase”]
[SourceDate “2001.11.25”]

1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5 a6 4. Ba4 Nf6 5. d3 Bc5 6. c3 b5 7. Bc2 d5 8. exd5
   Nxd5 9. h3 O-O 10. O-O h6 11. d4 exd4 12. cxd4 Bb6 13. Nc3 Ndb4 14. Bb1 Be6 15.
   a3 Nd5 16. Ne2 Nf6 17. Be3 Re8 18. Ng3 Bc4 19. Nf5 Bxf1 20. Qxf1 Ne7 21. N3h4
   Nxf5 22. Nxf5 Qd7 23. Bxh6 gxh6 24. Qc1 Bxd4 25. Qxh6 Re1+ 26. Kh2 Ne4 27. Bxe4
   Rxe4 28. Qg5+ Kf8 29. Qh6+ Ke8 30. Nxd4 Qd6+ 31. Qxd6 cxd6 32. Rd1 Kf8 33. Rd2
   Rae8 34. g4 R8e5 35. f3 Re1 36. h4 Rd5 37. Kg3 a5 38. h5 Kg8 39. Kf2 Re8 40.
   Kg3 Re7 41. Kf4 Kh7 42. Kg3 Re3 43. Kf4 Re8 44. Kg3 Re3 1/2-1/2

[Event “London m1”]
[Site “London”]
[Date “1858.??.??”]
[Round “?”]
[White “Barnes, Thomas Wilson”]
[Black “Morphy, Paul”]
[Result “0-1”]
[ECO “C77”]
[PlyCount “60”]
[EventDate “1858.??.??”]
[EventType “match”]
[EventRounds “8”]
[EventCountry “ENG”]
[Source “ChessBase”]
[SourceDate “1998.11.10”]

1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5 a6 4. Ba4 Nf6 5. Nc3 Bb4 6. Nd5 b5 7. Bb3 d6 8. O-O
   Bg4 9. c3 Ba5 10. d4 exd4 11. Nxf6+ Qxf6 12. Bd5 Ne5 13. Bxa8 Nxf3+ 14. gxf3
   Bxf3 15. Qd2 dxc3 16. Qg5 cxb2 17. Bc6+ Ke7 18. Qxf6+ gxf6 19. Bf4 Rg8+ 20. Bg3
   bxa1=Q 21. Rxa1 f5 22. a4 Bb6 23. axb5 f4 24. bxa6 fxg3 25. hxg3 Rxg3+ 26. Kh2
   Rg6 27. Rf1 Bd4 28. Kh3 Be5 29. Kh4 Bf4 30. a7 Rh6# 0-1

[Event “Paris m3”]
[Site “Paris”]
[Date “1858.??.??”]
[Round “?”]
[White “De Riviere, Jules Arnous”]
[Black “Morphy, Paul”]
[Result “1/2-1/2”]
[ECO “C77”]
[PlyCount “75”]
[EventDate “1858.??.??”]
[EventType “match”]
[EventRounds “11”]
[EventCountry “FRA”]
[Source “ChessBase”]
[SourceDate “1998.11.10”]

1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5 a6 4. Ba4 Nf6 5. Nc3 Bc5 6. d3 h6 7. Be3 Bxe3 8.
   fxe3 d6 9. O-O O-O 10. Bxc6 bxc6 11. Qe1 Be6 12. Nh4 g6 13. Rd1 Qe7 14. d4 Rae8
2. h3 Bc4 16. Rf3 exd4 17. Rxd4 Bb5 18. a4 c5 19. Rd2 Bc6 20. Nd5 Bxd5 21.
   exd5 Ne4 22. Re2 Qe5 23. c4 Rb8 24. Rf4 Rfe8 25. Nf3 Qg7 26. Nd2 Nxd2 27. Qxd2
   Rb3 28. Qa5 f5 29. Qxa6 Rxb2 30. Rxb2 Qxb2 31. Qc6 Rxe3 32. Qxc7 Re1+ 33. Kh2
   Qe5 34. Qd8+ Kf7 35. Qd7+ Kf6 36. Qd8+ Qe7 37. Qh8+ Qg7 38. Qd8+ 1/2-1/2

[Event “London m1”]
[Site “London”]
[Date “1859.??.??”]
[Round “?”]
[White “Loewenthal, Johann Jacob”]
[Black “Morphy, Paul”]
[Result “1-0”]
[ECO “C78”]
[PlyCount “75”]
[EventDate “1859.??.??”]
[EventType “match”]
[EventRounds “4”]
[EventCountry “ENG”]
[Source “ChessBase”]
[SourceDate “1998.11.10”]

1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5 a6 4. Ba4 Nf6 5. O-O b5 6. Bb3 Bc5 7. c3 d6 8. d4
   exd4 9. cxd4 Bb6 10. Bg5 Bb7 11. Nc3 Ne7 12. Re1 h6 13. Bh4 g5 14. Bg3 Kf8 15.
   Qd3 c5 16. e5 dxe5 17. Bxe5 Kg7 18. Ne4 Bxe4 19. Qxe4 Ng6 20. Qb7 Ra7 21. Qc6
   c4 22. Bc2 Bc7 23. Rad1 Qe7 24. Bxg6 Kxg6 25. d5 Bxe5 26. Nxe5+ Kg7 27. Ng6 Qd8
2. Nxh8 Kxh8 29. d6 Kg7 30. a4 Rd7 31. axb5 axb5 32. Qxb5 Rxd6 33. Rxd6 Qxd6
3. Qxc4 h5 35. h3 Nd7 36. Re3 Ne5 37. Rxe5 Qxe5 38. Qc3 1-0

[Event “Havana m”]
[Site “Havana”]
[Date “1862.??.??”]
[Round “?”]
[White “Sicre, JM.”]
[Black “Morphy, Paul”]
[Result “0-1”]
[ECO “C78”]
[PlyCount “68”]
[EventDate “1862.??.??”]
[EventType “match”]
[EventRounds “2”]
[EventCountry “CUB”]
[Source “ChessBase”]
[SourceDate “1998.11.10”]

1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5 a6 4. Ba4 Nf6 5. d3 Bc5 6. O-O b5 7. Bb3 d6 8. c3 h6
2. Be3 Bxe3 10. fxe3 O-O 11. Nbd2 d5 12. exd5 Nxd5 13. Qe2 Be6 14. Bxd5 Qxd5
3. Ne4 f5 16. Nf2 Qd8 17. b3 g5 18. Kh1 g4 19. Ng1 Qg5 20. Rad1 Ne7 21. Qd2
   Rad8 22. d4 c5 23. e4 Qxd2 24. Rxd2 cxd4 25. Rfd1 fxe4 26. Nxe4 Bd5 27. cxd4
   Bxe4 28. dxe5 Rxd2 29. Rxd2 Rf1 30. e6 Kg7 31. Rd4 Re1 32. Rd2 Nd5 33. e7 Kf7
4. Rf2+ Kxe7 0-1

[Event “London m1”]
[Site “London”]
[Date “1859.??.??”]
[Round “?”]
[White “Loewenthal, Johann Jacob”]
[Black “Morphy, Paul”]
[Result “1/2-1/2”]
[ECO “C84”]
[PlyCount “93”]
[EventDate “1859.??.??”]
[EventType “match”]
[EventRounds “4”]
[EventCountry “ENG”]
[Source “ChessBase”]
[SourceDate “1998.11.10”]

1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5 a6 4. Ba4 Nf6 5. O-O Be7 6. d4 exd4 7. e5 Ne4 8.
   Bxc6 dxc6 9. Qxd4 Bf5 10. Nc3 Bc5 11. Qxd8+ Rxd8 12. Nh4 Nxc3 13. Nxf5 Ne2+ 14.
   Kh1 g6 15. Ng3 Nxg3+ 16. hxg3 h6 17. Rb1 Ke7 18. b4 Bd4 19. f4 Ke6 20. Rb3 h5
2. Rd3 Bb6 22. Rfd1 Rxd3 23. Rxd3 Kf5 24. Bb2 Rh7 25. Bd4 h4 26. Bxb6 hxg3+
3. Kg1 cxb6 28. Rd7 Ke6 29. Rxb7 Rh4 30. Rxb6 Rxf4 31. Rxc6+ Kxe5 32. Rc5+ Kd6
4. Rg5 Rxb4 34. Rxg3 Ra4 35. a3 Rc4 36. Rd3+ Ke6 37. Rb3 Rxc2 38. Rb6+ Kf5 39.
   Rxa6 g5 40. Rb6 Ra2 41. Rb3 g4 42. Rb5+ Kf4 43. Rb3 f5 44. g3+ Ke4 45. Kf1 Ke5
5. Kg1 f4 47. Rb4 1/2-1/2

[billbrock]

And here’s Réti’s example of Morphy’s developing style: the point is that 5…Nh6! is an improvement over the seemingly aggressive but non-developing 5…Ne5?! (after which Meek’s combo yields White a solid plus)

[Event “Mobile”]
[Site “Mobile”]
[Date “1855.??.??”]
[Round “?”]
[White “Meek, Alexander Beaufort”]
[Black “Morphy, Paul”]
[Result “0-1”]
[ECO “C44”]
[PlyCount “42”]
[EventDate “1855.??.??”]
[EventType “game”]
[EventRounds “1”]
[EventCountry “USA”]
[Source “ChessBase”]
[SourceDate “1999.07.01”]

1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. d4 exd4 4. Bc4 Bc5 5. Ng5 Nh6 6. Nxf7 Nxf7 7. Bxf7+ Kxf7
2. Qh5+ g6 9. Qxc5 d6 10. Qb5 Re8 11. Qb3+ d5 12. f3 Na5 13. Qd3 dxe4 14. fxe4
   Qh4+ 15. g3 Rxe4+ 16. Kf2 Qe7 17. Nd2 Re3 18. Qb5 c6 19. Qf1 Bh3 20. Qd1 Rf8
3. Nf3 Ke8 0-1

Hmm. Blatny’s notes in ChessBase cite an 1845 game in which Harrwitz played 5…Nh6!

[Joe_Lux]

Is Morphy’s use of …a6 in the Ruy the earliest record of the move?

All the best, Joe Lux

[billbrock]

@Joe Lux

Is Morphy’s use of …a6 in the Ruy the earliest record of the move?

All the best, Joe Lux

I assumed that he couldn’t have been the first, but the answer is far more interesting than I’d imagined: Cajun home cooking! (Not literally true, but “Crescent City home cooking” doesn’t have the same ring.)

[Event “New Orleans m”]
[Site “New Orleans”]
[Date “1845.12.01”]
[Round “6”]
[White “Rousseau,Eugene”]
[Black “Stanley,Charles Henry”]
[Result “1-0”]
[Eco “C77”]
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 a6 4.Ba4 b5 5.Bb3 Nf6 6.d3 h6 7.Nc3 Bc5 8.0-0 d6
9.Be3 Ba7 10.h3 Ne7 11.a4 b4 12.Ne2 c5 13.Nh2 g5 14.Ng3 Ng6 15.Nh5 Nf4 16.Bxf4 gxf4
17.Nxf6+ Qxf6 18.Bd5 Rb8 19.Bc6+ Ke7 20.Qh5 Rg8 21.Nf3 Be6 22.Kh2 Rg6 23.Rg1 c4 24.Raf1 Rbg8
25.Qh4 Rg5 26.g4 Kf8 27.Rg2 Bb6 28.Rd1 Bd8 29.d4 Be7 30.dxe5 dxe5 31.Bd7 Bxd7 32.Rxd7 Qe6
33.Rd5 Kg7 34.Rg1 Qg6 35.Re1 Rh8 36.Rd7 Qe6 37.Red1 Re8 38.R1d5 Rg6 39.Qh5 f6 40.Nh4
1-0

[Event “New Orleans m”]
[Site “New Orleans”]
[Date “1845.12.01”]
[Round “16”]
[White “Rousseau,Eugene”]
[Black “Stanley,Charles Henry”]
[Result “1-0”]
[Eco “C78”]
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 a6 4.Ba4 b5 5.Bb3 Nf6 6.d3 Bc5 7.0-0 d6 8.Be3 Ba7
9.h3 h6 10.c3 0-0 11.Qe2 Ne7 12.Nbd2 Ng6 13.Nh2 Be6 14.Kh1 d5 15.exd5 Nxd5 16.Bxd5 Bxd5
17.Ndf3 e4 18.dxe4 Bc4 19.Qd2 Bxf1 20.Nxf1 Qxd2 21.N3xd2 f5 22.Bxa7 Rxa7 23.f3 c5 24.exf5 Rxf5
25.Ne4 Rd7 26.Ne3 Re5 27.Re1 h5 28.c4 b4 29.Nd5 Rd8 30.Rd1 Rc8 31.Kg1 Nf8 32.Kf2 Nh7
33.Nd6 Rc6 34.f4 Re6 35.Nf5 Kf7 36.g4 g6 37.Ng3 h4 38.Nf1 Re4 39.b3 Rce6 40.Nfe3 Nf6
41.f5 gxf5 42.Nxf5 Re2+ 43.Kf3 Nh7 44.Nxh4 Ng5+ 45.Kg3 Ne4+ 46.Kf4 Rf2+ 47.Nf3 Nc3 48.Rd3 Ne2+
49.Kg5 Kg7 50.Nh4 Nd4 51.Nf4 Re5+ 52.Nf5+ Kf7 53.Rxd4 cxd4 54.Nd3 Rexf5+ 55.gxf5 a5 56.c5 Rg2+
57.Kf4 Rxa2 58.c6 Rc2 59.Ne5+ Ke7 60.Nc4 a4 61.f6+ Kd8 62.Ke5 a3 63.Kd6 a2 64.f7 Rf2
65.c7+ Kc8 66.Nb6+ Kb7 67.c8=Q+ Kxb6 68.f8=Q Rxf8 69.Qxf8 1-0

Baby Paul may well have witnessed both games! See en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eug%C3%A9n … 28chess%29

[billbrock]

Cool link: see the pages on “Chess in New Orleans” with a brief account of the Stanley-Rousseau match: books.google.com/books?id=U9oWAA … q=&f=false