On May 26, 8:50 pm, samsloan wrote:

One good thing is that, unlike other collections in which the problems
are so difficult that nobody could ever solve them, many of these
endgames can be solved by normal humans. Even I was able to solve a
few of them.

So then, both normal and abnormal humans are
able to solve the problems. Good!


Whitaker published one of his own games in the introduction. His
opponent was Alfonso Ferriz, a master who was many times Champion of
Mexico. The game was played in Mexico City in 1959.

White (Whitaker) had a king on h2, rooks on e4 and e6 and pawns on g2
and a4. Black (Ferriz) had a king on d3, a queen on f2, a knight on f5
and pawns on c6 and h5.

This position is an elementary win for White, due
to his overwhelming preponderance of material.


In this position, Black played Nd4,

Obviously, the simple ...h4 wins.


threatening Nf3+ followed by
checkmate.

No, it doesn't threaten mate, but it does however
threaten ...Nf3+, Kh3 Ng5+ -- winning a Rook.


Whitaker responded by 44. Rxd4+ Qxd4 45. Rxc6 and claimed a
draw, saying that he can get his rook to f3 and then he has a fortress
situation in which the black king cannot penetrate to give checkmate.
Whitaker reported, "Neither black nor the spectators believed it
possible."

Generally speaking, one should not claim that
one "can" do this sort of thing; one should instead
demonstrate it OTB, and THEN ask for a draw. In
this case, the fortress would require a good bit of
cooperation from the opponent, I think.


I do not believe it possible either. I think Black had a win there.


Sam Sloan is obviously correct. (Take note, for
I only type those words about once in a decade.)


It is just that I have not been able to find it (and I have not tried
hard either).

That's probably because it doesn't exist. White is
clearly winning.


My picture is in Hilbert's book in two places: pages 211 and 246. In
the picture on page 246, I am the kid sitting on the floor on the
lower right hand corner. This picture is incorrectly identified as
being from the 1957 New Western Open in Milwaukee. It is actually from
the 1956 Eastern States Open in Washington DC.

Books are full of such errors. I find it amusing
that so many self-professed "academics" will
insist on such sources as "proof" of facts, when
they are no proof at all.


The tournament offered a phenomenal prize fund,
including a $300 first prize.

To put this in perspective, that's more than all
the money I had earned in my life up to that time.
But then, I was not yet born.


It was probably the strongest tournament held in the United
States that year. Because of the lack of publicity, only the top
players who had heard about the $300 first prize played. Patzers did
not come. The tournament was won by Hans Berliner. Fischer, Lombardy,
Rossolimo and Feuerstein tied for second.

With opposition like this, why did you finish in
last place, again? ;D


In one of these North Carolina 30-30 events(perhaps the same one), I
was pared

Ouch! I bet that hurt.


against a player named Davis who was Champion of the State
of Georgia. I had white. In those tournaments, we played 30 moves in
30 minutes and then, if the game was not finished, a committee of
strong players would come around and adjudicate the games. In my game
against Davis, nothing much had happened in the opening and few pieces
had been exchanged. However, after 30 moves, I did have a small
advantage. Whitaker, being the strongest player, was on the Committee.
When the committee came around to my game, Whitaker looked at it for
about 15 seconds and then adjudicated the game a win for me!

That's an awfully quick time control for the
good old days.

-- help bot