I am researching a little article on people's view of blindfold chess (and
sometimes serious chess in general) as a dangerous activity. I have a few
questions, some even medical, which I would like to hear any comments on.

1) A widely believed notion was that blindfold chess was responsible for the
death of Labourdonnais. The account seems to be that while Labourdonnais
could play 2 blindfold games well, when he tried 3 "something gave way in
his brain" and he never fully recovered. Does anyone know more about the
exhibit where this occurred. Is it at all medically plausible that the
strain of blindfold chess could cause some brain injury?

2) A letter by Buckle declining an invitation to the London 1851 tournament
has a curious phrase. He sys that he reluctantly has resolved not to play at
the tournament, because "I have had latterly one or two unpleasant symptoms,
which warn me that my brain is not made of iron, and that I cannot, with
impunity, take too much out of myself." Any idea what these symptoms might
be, and whether there is an underlying medical explanation?

2) One writer in 1858 cautioned against Morphy giving blindfold exhibitions,
saying that it killed Labourdonnais and had nearly destroyed Horrwitz. The
spelling Horrwitz makes the player name ambiguous. It was certainly Harrwitz
who was known for blindfold exhibitions, but he was at the time this was
written considered to be perhaps the top player in the world, and was still
giving blindfold exhibitions. Horwitz played a bit blindfold, but I do not know
of any incidents that may have scared him off the pursuit. Any guesses about
what incident the writer was referring to?

3) On February 19, 1876, an article in Living Age says that a great chessplayer
died the other day, said to have injured his brain through blindfold play
(the author does not buy this explanation). What player is he referring to?
Perhaps an incorrect rumor of death of a player such as Morphy?

4) With the mental collapse of Steinitz fairly soon after a match with
Lasker, the indictment against blindfold chess was extended by some to attack
all "serious" chess. An article written in 1897 says that Steinitz has
forgotten all about chess playing, and occupies his time between attacks of
delirium in writing what he imagines to be essays on philosophy. Do these
essays still exist, and if so were they gibberish or simply naive writings of
an untrained person?

5) A Lasker article defending serious chess from its critics argues that
Steinitz went insane despite rather than because of chess playing. He claims
that scientists had discovered that Steinitz's brain had a defect in its
motional brain cells. Does anyone know what he is talking about, and whether
Lasker was grasping at pseudoscience or whether this was an accepted notion
of its time (and whether Steinitz's brain was actually tested in some way?)

6) An article written in 1903 talks about the mental collapse of young Smythe
caused by serious chess. Does anyone know this incident?

These are not the only incidents which led to the bad reputation of blindfold
chess (early deaths of especially Zukertort but also Paulsen, for example, were
seen as supporting evidence), but these are ones I have particular questions
about. Thanks for any help!

Jerry Spinrad

Keywords:

I read that GM George Koltanowski played lots and
lots of blindfold chess. He lived into his 90's.
His picture was on the cover of CL a while back.
Chuck

Jeremy Spinrad asked:

I am researching a little article on people's view of blindfold chess (and
sometimes serious chess in general) as a dangerous activity. I have a few
questions, some even medical, which I would like to hear any comments on.

A general caveat: do not take seriously old accounts of "brain fever" and other
ailments supposedly induced by blindfold chess. In virtually every case there
was some real organic problem unrelated to chess (e.g. Pillsbury's syphilis).
Many excellent blindfold players lived to an advanced age: Blackburne, Najdorf,
Koltanowski, Fine, Saemisch, Newell Banks, to name a few. Other blindfold
experts who died relatively young, such as Morphy, Paulsen, Zukertort,
Pillsbury, Breyer, Réti, and Alekhine, all died from causes unrelated to chess.


1) A widely believed notion was that blindfold chess was responsible for the
death of Labourdonnais. The account seems to be that while Labourdonnais could
play 2 blindfold games well, when he tried 3 "something gave way in his brain"
and he never fully recovered. Does anyone know more about the exhibit where
this occurred. Is it at all medically plausible that the strain of blindfold
chess could cause some brain injury?

According to Hooper & Whyld in "The Oxford Companion to Chess", La Bourdonnais
suffered a stroke in 1838, then became afflicted with dropsy (edema), neither
of which were properly treated. These led to his death in 1840. Neither the OC,
nor Diggle's account of the La Bourdonnais-McDonnell matches (BCM, 1934),
mention anything about him in connection with blindfold chess. The number of
games you mention sounds more like Philidor, who played two games sans voir in
1744, and first essayed three in 1750. However, since he lived happily until
1795, he does not fit the rest of your scenario. I suppose La Bourdonnais'
stroke might have coincided with blindfold chess play, but the sources I have
on hand say nothing to support it.

2) A letter by Buckle declining an invitation to the London 1851 tournament
has a curious phrase. He sys that he reluctantly has resolved not to play at
the tournament, because "I have had latterly one or two unpleasant symptoms,
which warn me that my brain is not made of iron, and that I cannot, with
impunity, take too much out of myself." Any idea what these symptoms might be,
and whether there is an underlying medical explanation?

The OC says "In his youth Buckle suffered ill-health," but gives no specifics.
Again neither the OC, nor an article on Buckle by Charles Tomlinson in a 1948
BCM, mention anything about blindfold chess in relation to him. He also may
have declined to play in 1851 because he felt a greater obligation to work on
his book, "A History of Civilization in England".

2) One writer in 1858 cautioned against Morphy giving blindfold exhibitions,
saying that it killed Labourdonnais and had nearly destroyed Horrwitz. The
spelling Horrwitz makes the player name ambiguous. It was certainly Harrwitz
who was known for blindfold exhibitions, but he was at the time this was
written considered to be perhaps the top player in the world, and was still
giving blindfold exhibitions. Horwitz played a bit blindfold, but I do not know
of any incidents that may have scared him off the pursuit. Any guesses about
what incident the writer was referring to?

Who is this writer? Probably Harrwitz was meant, who in 1858 was probably the
most active chess player alive, spending almost all his waking hours at it in
the Café de la Régénce. If so, it is hard to know what was meant by "nearly
destroyed," since Edge describes him that year as being in fine shape, his
usual energetically obnoxious self.

3) On February 19, 1876, an article in Living Age says that a great
chessplayer died the other day, said to have injured his brain through
blindfold play (the author does not buy this explanation). What player is he
referring to? Perhaps an incorrect rumor of death of a player such as Morphy?


Possible candidates: Pierre Saint-Amant (1800-1873), Howard Staunton
(1810-1874), Thomas Barnes (1825-1874), Cecil De Vere (1845?-1875), John W.
Schulten (?-1875). If I had to guess, I'd say he meant De Vere, who had real
chess genius but was afflicted by depression, tuberculosis, and alcoholism.

4) With the mental collapse of Steinitz fairly soon after a match with
Lasker, the indictment against blindfold chess was extended by some to attack
all "serious" chess. An article written in 1897 says that Steinitz has
forgotten all about chess playing, and occupies his time between attacks of
delirium in writing what he imagines to be essays on philosophy. Do these
essays still exist, and if so were they gibberish or simply naive writings of
an untrained person?

This 1897 article sounds like quite a font of misinformation. Steinitz did
briefly suffer what might be called a "mental collapse" after the second Lasker
match, but it has been exaggerated. His confinement to a Moscow psychiatric
clinic may have been arranged under false pretenses. Far from forgetting about
chess, Steinitz played in four tournaments after this: New York 1897, Vienna
1898, Cologne 1898, and London 1899, doing well in all but the last. Kurt
Landsberger's "The Steinitz Papers" (McFarland & Co., 2002) has a great deal of
his correspondence from that time, and it evinces no "delirium." Steinitz did
write a few things that might be called philosophical essays They are certainly
not gibberish. Steinitz was a very intelligent, well-read man, and they are
well thought out, if now rather dated. I suggest consulting the Landsberger
book for more details.

5) A Lasker article defending serious chess from its critics argues that
Steinitz went insane despite rather than because of chess playing. He claims
that scientists had discovered that Steinitz's brain had a defect in its
motional brain cells. Does anyone know what he is talking about, and whether
Lasker was grasping at pseudoscience or whether this was an accepted notion of
its time (and whether Steinitz's brain was actually tested in some way?)

Steinitz did have a life-long nervous disposition and suffered from insomnia,
both of which were aggravated when he played serious competitive chess. He also
exhibited some symptoms of congenital syphilis. Again, Landsberger presents
quite a lot on these matters. I can offer nothing about any examination of
Steinitz's brain.

6) An article written in 1903 talks about the mental collapse of young
Smythe caused by serious chess. Does anyone know this incident?

I can find no significant chess personage named Smythe in any of my sources.
The closest is Samuel Smyth, born ?, died 25 November 1869, Philadelphia, PA
(Gaige's "Chess Personalia" citing an obituary in the Philadelphia Evening
Bulletin of 3 December 1869).

These are not the only incidents which led to the bad reputation of
blindfold chess (early deaths of especially Zukertort but also Paulsen, for
example, were seen as supporting evidence), but these are ones I have
particular questions about. Thanks for any help!

Paulsen died of diabetes, Zukertort of a stroke. I think close examination will
show that all the ills ascribed to blindfold chess are cases of "post hoc, ergo
propter hoc," written at a time when it was also commonly believed that
masturbation caused blindness and insanity. However, your proposed article
sounds interesting as an historical examination of attitudes about blindfold
chess. Good luck with it.

Taylor Kingston

Jeremy Spinrad wrote:

These are not the only incidents which led to the bad reputation of blindfold
chess (early deaths of especially Zukertort but also Paulsen, for example, were
seen as supporting evidence), but these are ones I have particular questions
about. Thanks for any help!

I just stumbled on the following references in Holding's Psychology of Chess Skill,
which contains a section on blindfold play, and which might provide some
additional material.

A. Binet: Psychologie des grand calculateurs et joueurs d'échecs.
Paris : Hachette, 1894.

It appears to have much information based on a questionnaire that Binet
published in La Stratégie, and also sent out to leading players. (One of the
respondents -- [Alphonse] Goetz -- wrote an essay based on his own experiences,
which seems to be included as an appendix. Forsyth seems to have been another
respondent.)

Selections from the book are said to be available in translation in

A. Binet: Mnemonic virtuosity: a study of chessplayers
Genetic Psychology Journal, v.74, p.127-162.

--
Anders Thulin http://www.algonet.se/~ath

I am researching a little article on people's view of blindfold chess (and
sometimes serious chess in general) as a dangerous activity. I have a few
questions, some even medical, which I would like to hear any comments on.

A general caveat: do not take seriously old accounts of "brain fever" and other
ailments supposedly induced by blindfold chess. In virtually every case there
was some real organic problem unrelated to chess (e.g. Pillsbury's syphilis).
Many excellent blindfold players lived to an advanced age: Blackburne, Najdorf,
Koltanowski, Fine, Saemisch, Newell Banks, to name a few. Others who died
relatively young, such as Paulsen, Zukertort, Pillsbury, Breyer, Réti, and
Alekhine, all had causes unrelated to chess.

1) A widely believed notion was that blindfold chess was responsible for the
death of Labourdonnais. The account seems to be that while Labourdonnais could
play 2 blindfold games well, when he tried 3 "something gave way in his brain"
and he never fully recovered. Does anyone know more about the exhibit where
this occurred. Is it at all medically plausible that the strain of blindfold
chess could cause some brain injury?

According to Hooper & Whyld in "The Oxford Companion to Chess", La Bourdonnais
suffered a stroke in 1838, then became afflicted with dropsy (edema), neither
of which were properly treated. These led to his death in 1840. Neither the OC,
nor Diggle's account of the La Bourdonnais-McDonnell matches (BCM, 1934),
mention anything about him in connection with blindfold chess. The number of
games you mention sounds more like Philidor, who played two games sans voir in
1744, and first essayed three in 1750. However, since he lived happily until
1795, he does not fit the rest of your scenario. I suppose La Bourdonnais'
stroke might have coincided with blindfold chess play, but the sources I have
on hand say nothing to support it.

2) A letter by Buckle declining an invitation to the London 1851 tournament
has a curious phrase. He sys that he reluctantly has resolved not to play at
the tournament, because "I have had latterly one or two unpleasant symptoms,
which warn me that my brain is not made of iron, and that I cannot, with
impunity, take too much out of myself." Any idea what these symptoms might be,
and whether there is an underlying medical explanation?

The OC says "In his youth Buckle suffered ill-health," but gives no specifics.
Again neither the OC, nor an article on Buckle by Charles Tomlinson in a 1948
BCM, mention anything about blindfold chess in relation to him. He also may
have declined to play in 1851 because he felt a greater obligation to work on
his book, "A History of Civilization in England".

2) One writer in 1858 cautioned against Morphy giving blindfold exhibitions,
saying that it killed Labourdonnais and had nearly destroyed Horrwitz. The
spelling Horrwitz makes the player name ambiguous. It was certainly Harrwitz
who was known for blindfold exhibitions, but he was at the time this was
written considered to be perhaps the top player in the world, and was still
giving blindfold exhibitions. Horwitz played a bit blindfold, but I do not know
of any incidents that may have scared him off the pursuit. Any guesses about
what incident the writer was referring to?

Who is this writer? Probably Harrwitz was meant, who in 1858 was probably the
most active chess player alive, spending almost all his waking hours at it in
the Café de la Régénce. If so, it is hard to know what was meant by "nearly
destroyed," since Edge describes him that year as being in fine shape, his
usual energetically obnoxious self.

3) On February 19, 1876, an article in Living Age says that a great
chessplayer died the other day, said to have injured his brain through
blindfold play (the author does not buy this explanation). What player is he
referring to? Perhaps an incorrect rumor of death of a player such as Morphy?


Possible candidates: Pierre Saint-Amant (1800-1873), Howard Staunton
(1810-1874), Thomas Barnes (1825-1874), Cecil De Vere (1845?-1875), John W.
Schulten (?-1875). If I had to guess, I'd say he meant De Vere, who had real
chess genius but was afflicted by depression, tuberculosis, and alcoholism.

4) With the mental collapse of Steinitz fairly soon after a match with
Lasker, the indictment against blindfold chess was extended by some to attack
all "serious" chess. An article written in 1897 says that Steinitz has
forgotten all about chess playing, and occupies his time between attacks of
delirium in writing what he imagines to be essays on philosophy. Do these
essays still exist, and if so were they gibberish or simply naive writings of
an untrained person?

This 1897 article sounds like quite a font of misinformation. Steinitz did
briefly suffer what might be called a "mental collapse" after the second Lasker
match, but it has been exaggerated. His confinement to a Moscow psychiatric
clinic may have been arranged under false pretenses. Far from forgetting about
chess, Steinitz played in four tournaments after this: New York 1897, Vienna
1898, Cologne 1898, and London 1899, doing well in all but the last. Kurt
Landsberger's "The Steinitz Papers" (McFarland & Co., 2002) has a great deal of
his correspondence from that time, and it evinces no "delirium." Steinitz did
write a few things that might be called philosophical essays They are certainly
not gibberish. Steinitz was a very intelligent, well-read man, and they are
well thought out, if now rather dated. I suggest consulting the Landsberger
book for more details.

5) A Lasker article defending serious chess from its critics argues that
Steinitz went insane despite rather than because of chess playing. He claims
that scientists had discovered that Steinitz's brain had a defect in its
motional brain cells. Does anyone know what he is talking about, and whether
Lasker was grasping at pseudoscience or whether this was an accepted notion of
its time (and whether Steinitz's brain was actually tested in some way?)

Steinitz did have a life-long nervous disposition and suffered from insomnia,
both of which were aggravated when he played serious competitive chess. He also
exhibited some symptoms of congenital syphilis. Again, Landsberger presents
quite a lot on these matters. I can offer nothing about any examination of
Steinitz's brain.

6) An article written in 1903 talks about the mental collapse of young
Smythe caused by serious chess. Does anyone know this incident?

I can find no significant chess personage named Smythe in any of my sources.
The closest is Samuel Smyth, born ?, died 25 November 1869, Philadelphia, PA
(Gaige's "Chess Personalia", citing an obituary in the Philadelphia Evening
Bulletin of 3 December 1869).

These are not the only incidents which led to the bad reputation of
blindfold chess (early deaths of especially Zukertort but also Paulsen, for
example, were seen as supporting evidence), but these are ones I have
particular questions about. Thanks for any help!

Paulsen died of diabetes, Zukertort of a stroke. I think close examination will
show that all the ills ascribed to blindfold chess are cases of "post hoc, ergo
propter hoc," written at a time when it was also commonly believed that
masturbation caused blindness and insanity. However, your proposed article
sounds interesting as an historical examination of attitudes about blindfold
chess. Good luck with it.

Taylor Kingston

Jeremy Spinrad asked:

I am researching a little article on people's view of blindfold chess (and
sometimes serious chess in general) as a dangerous activity. I have a few
questions, some even medical, which I would like to hear any comments on.

A general caveat: do not take seriously old accounts of "brain fever" and other
ailments supposedly induced by blindfold chess. In virtually every case there
was some real organic problem unrelated to chess (e.g. Pillsbury's syphilis).
Many excellent blindfold players lived to an advanced age: Blackburne, Najdorf,
Koltanowski, Fine, Saemisch, Newell Banks, to name a few. Others who died
relatively young, such as Paulsen, Zukertort, Pillsbury, Breyer, Réti, and
Alekhine, all had causes unrelated to chess.

1) A widely believed notion was that blindfold chess was responsible for the
death of Labourdonnais. The account seems to be that while Labourdonnais could
play 2 blindfold games well, when he tried 3 "something gave way in his brain"
and he never fully recovered. Does anyone know more about the exhibit where
this occurred. Is it at all medically plausible that the strain of blindfold
chess could cause some brain injury?

According to Hooper & Whyld in "The Oxford Companion to Chess", La Bourdonnais
suffered a stroke in 1838, then became afflicted with dropsy (edema), neither
of which were properly treated. These led to his death in 1840. Neither the OC,
nor Diggle's account of the La Bourdonnais-McDonnell matches (BCM, 1934),
mention anything about him in connection with blindfold chess. The number of
games you mention sounds more like Philidor, who played two games sans voir in
1744, and first essayed three in 1750. However, since he lived happily until
1795, he does not fit the rest of your scenario. I suppose La Bourdonnais'
stroke might have coincided with blindfold chess play, but the sources I have
on hand say nothing to support it.

2) A letter by Buckle declining an invitation to the London 1851 tournament
has a curious phrase. He sys that he reluctantly has resolved not to play at
the tournament, because "I have had latterly one or two unpleasant symptoms,
which warn me that my brain is not made of iron, and that I cannot, with
impunity, take too much out of myself." Any idea what these symptoms might be,
and whether there is an underlying medical explanation?

The OC says "In his youth Buckle suffered ill-health," but gives no specifics.
Again neither the OC, nor an article on Buckle by Charles Tomlinson in a 1948
BCM, mention anything about blindfold chess in relation to him. He also may
have declined to play in 1851 because he felt a greater obligation to work on
his book, "A History of Civilization in England".

2) One writer in 1858 cautioned against Morphy giving blindfold exhibitions,
saying that it killed Labourdonnais and had nearly destroyed Horrwitz. The
spelling Horrwitz makes the player name ambiguous. It was certainly Harrwitz
who was known for blindfold exhibitions, but he was at the time this was
written considered to be perhaps the top player in the world, and was still
giving blindfold exhibitions. Horwitz played a bit blindfold, but I do not know
of any incidents that may have scared him off the pursuit. Any guesses about
what incident the writer was referring to?

Who is this writer? Probably Harrwitz was meant, who in 1858 was probably the
most active chess player alive, spending almost all his waking hours at it in
the Café de la Régénce. If so, it is hard to know what was meant by "nearly
destroyed," since Edge describes him that year as being in fine shape, his
usual energetically obnoxious self.

3) On February 19, 1876, an article in Living Age says that a great
chessplayer died the other day, said to have injured his brain through
blindfold play (the author does not buy this explanation). What player is he
referring to? Perhaps an incorrect rumor of death of a player such as Morphy?


Possible candidates: Pierre Saint-Amant (1800-1873), Howard Staunton
(1810-1874), Thomas Barnes (1825-1874), Cecil De Vere (1845?-1875), John W.
Schulten (?-1875). If I had to guess, I'd say he meant De Vere, who had real
chess genius but was afflicted by depression, tuberculosis, and alcoholism.

4) With the mental collapse of Steinitz fairly soon after a match with
Lasker, the indictment against blindfold chess was extended by some to attack
all "serious" chess. An article written in 1897 says that Steinitz has
forgotten all about chess playing, and occupies his time between attacks of
delirium in writing what he imagines to be essays on philosophy. Do these
essays still exist, and if so were they gibberish or simply naive writings of
an untrained person?

This 1897 article sounds like quite a font of misinformation. Steinitz did
briefly suffer what might be called a "mental collapse" after the second Lasker
match, but it has been exaggerated. His confinement to a Moscow psychiatric
clinic may have been arranged under false pretenses. Far from forgetting about
chess, Steinitz played in four tournaments after this: New York 1897, Vienna
1898, Cologne 1898, and London 1899, doing well in all but the last. Kurt
Landsberger's "The Steinitz Papers" (McFarland & Co., 2002) has a great deal of
his correspondence from that time, and it evinces no "delirium." Steinitz did
write a few things that might be called philosophical essays They are certainly
not gibberish. Steinitz was a very intelligent, well-read man, and they are
well thought out, if now rather dated. I suggest consulting the Landsberger
book for more details.

5) A Lasker article defending serious chess from its critics argues that
Steinitz went insane despite rather than because of chess playing. He claims
that scientists had discovered that Steinitz's brain had a defect in its
motional brain cells. Does anyone know what he is talking about, and whether
Lasker was grasping at pseudoscience or whether this was an accepted notion of
its time (and whether Steinitz's brain was actually tested in some way?)

Steinitz did have a life-long nervous disposition and suffered from insomnia,
both of which were aggravated when he played serious competitive chess. He also
exhibited some symptoms of congenital syphilis. Again, Landsberger presents
quite a lot on these matters. I can offer nothing about any examination of
Steinitz's brain.

6) An article written in 1903 talks about the mental collapse of young
Smythe caused by serious chess. Does anyone know this incident?

I can find no significant chess personage named Smythe in any of my sources.
The closest is Samuel Smyth, born ?, died 25 November 1869, Philadelphia, PA
(Gaige's "Chess Personalia", citing an obituary in the Philadelphia Evening
Bulletin of 3 December 1869).

These are not the only incidents which led to the bad reputation of
blindfold chess (early deaths of especially Zukertort but also Paulsen, for
example, were seen as supporting evidence), but these are ones I have
particular questions about. Thanks for any help!

Paulsen died of diabetes, Zukertort of a stroke. I think close examination will
show that all the ills ascribed to blindfold chess are cases of "post hoc, ergo
propter hoc," written at a time when it was also commonly believed that
masturbation caused blindness and insanity. However, your proposed article
sounds interesting as an historical examination of attitudes about blindfold
chess. Good luck with it.
Taylor Kingston

Actually, I was disappointed to learn that Koltanowski's "record" was not in a
blindfold simul, which is the display most of us find really dazzling. He played
single blindfold games back to back, which is interesting but not comparable to
playing many at once.

In addition, we have to be fair to the view that blindfold play is
dangerous and take it seriously, even if we no longer believe it. Generalizing
from a single player living a long time is just as
dubious as generalizing from a single player going insane. There were those who
didn't believe that smoking causes cancer, because they knew someone who smoked
two packs a day and lived to a ripe old age. Didn't quite disprove the theory,
however.

Jerry Spinrad

In article , "Chuck Coleman" writes:
| I read that GM George Koltanowski played lots and
| lots of blindfold chess. He lived into his 90's.
| His picture was on the cover of CL a while back.
| Chuck
|
|

Continuing my discussion with Taylor Kingston on the perception that blindfold
chess was hazardous:

Me: I am researching a little article on people's view of blindfold chess
(and sometimes serious chess in general) as a dangerous activity. I have a few
questions, some even medical, which I would like to hear any comments on.
|

TK: A general caveat: do not take seriously old accounts of "brain fever" and
other ailments supposedly induced by blindfold chess. In virtually every case
there was some real organic problem unrelated to chess (e.g. Pillsbury's
syphilis). Many excellent blindfold players lived to an advanced age:
Blackburne, Najdorf, Koltanowski, Fine, Saemisch, Newell Banks, to name a
few. Other blindfold experts who died relatively young, such as Morphy,
Paulsen, Zukertort, Pillsbury, Breyer, Reti, and Alekhine, all died from
causes unrelated to chess.

My current take is that blindfold chess is not dangerous given what we know,
but that it was entirely rational to think that it was given what was known at
the time. Still, I think that we are obligated to be nearly as skeptical
regarding our own assumptions as we are of those made at the time. For
example, we all "know" now that Pillsbury died of syphilis, but are we really
sure of this? It was certainly not known at the time of his death. There are
possible explanations for this (syphilis was very much hushed up even before
it was known to be sexually transmitted), but I have seen too many stories
where doctors project a modern disease back into history which is bogus
according to true historians (eg AIDS was the cause of the great plague of
Athens, etc). I don't disbelieve that Pillsbury had syphilis, but until I read
more I still have an open mind on the subject.

Me: 1) A widely believed notion was that blindfold chess was responsible
for the death of Labourdonnais. The account seems to be that while
Labourdonnais could play 2 blindfold games well, when he tried 3 "something
gave way in his brain" and he never fully recovered. Does anyone know more
about the exhibit where this occurred. Is it at all medically plausible that
the strain of blindfold chess could cause some brain injury?

TK: According to Hooper & Whyld in "The Oxford Companion to Chess", La
Bourdonnais suffered a stroke in 1838, then became afflicted with dropsy
(edema), neither of which were properly treated. These led to his death in
1840. Neither the OC, nor Diggle's account of the La Bourdonnais-McDonnell
matches (BCM, 1934), mention anything about him in connection with blindfold
chess. The number of games you mention sounds more like Philidor, who played
two games sans voir in 1744, and first essayed three in 1750. However, since he
lived happily until 1795, he does not fit the rest of your scenario. I suppose
La Bourdonnais' stroke might have coincided with blindfold chess play, but the
sources I have on hand say nothing to support it.

The first source I have is Littell's Living Age Aug 18, 1849, where it is said
that blindfold chess killed Labourdonnais (the article is taken from Quarterly
Review). The writer certainly knew and distinguished Philidor's events from
others. More details come from Living Age Feb 1, 1862; this says that
LaBourdonnaye was very strong in blindfold chess and could handle 2 games with
ease, but when he attempted to play 3 it was too hard for him and his brain
nearly gave way. I believe I read a bit more in another source, but I only
recently took my history seriously enough to write down all my sources of
information.

Me: 2) A letter by Buckle declining an invitation to the London 1851 tournament
has a curious phrase. He sys that he reluctantly has resolved not to play at
the tournament, because "I have had latterly one or two unpleasant symptoms,
which warn me that my brain is not made of iron, and that I cannot, with
impunity, take too much out of myself." Any idea what these symptoms might be,
and whether there is an underlying medical explanation?

TK: The OC says "In his youth Buckle suffered ill-health," but gives no
specifics. Again neither the OC, nor an article on Buckle by Charles
Tomlinson in a 1948 BCM, mention anything about blindfold chess in relation to
him. He also may have declined to play in 1851 because he felt a greater
obligation to work on his book, "A History of Civilization in England".

I didn't really mean to link Buckle up with blindfold play, though an article in
Harper's 1863 says he could play 2 blindfold games at once. As for his declining
to play, it was for a mixture of reasons, but let me quote his own words from
the too little known article Buckle as a Chess Player which appeared in the
Westminster Papers but I read in Hugh Kennedy's (the author) book Waifs and
Strays, Chiefly from the Chessboard:

written at Oxford Terrace, 25th November (1850)
My Dear Kennedy,
I am very willing to have my name on the committee, if you think I can be of
use, and when in Town shall be happy to attend its meetings; which, however, I
shall be prevented doing on Saturday, as I intend going to Brighton on
Wednesday, and shall not return till after Christmas. I am so constantly
engaged in my work, that I have, reluctantly, resolved not to play at the
Tournament, for I have had latterly one or two unpleasant symptoms, which warn
me that my brain is not made of iron, and that I canno, with impunity, take too
much out of myself.

May I beg you to have my name put down as a subscriber of ten pounds to the
fund, which I will have paid to whoever is appointed to receive the
subscriptions ...

When you seer Mr. Staunton, remember me kindly to him, and say how much I regret
that I shall not have the opportunity of a friendly struggle with him; not that
I am vain enough to suppose that such a struggle would be successful. Chess I
have given up as a study, and, indeed, have not played ten games in the last
five months.

Incidentally, Kennedy thinks that Buckle would have beaten Staunton in 1851
but that Staunton was a stronger player when at his peak a few years earlier.


Me: 2) One writer in 1858 cautioned against Morphy giving blindfold exhibitions,
saying that it killed Labourdonnais and had nearly destroyed Horrwitz. The
spelling Horrwitz makes the player name ambiguous. It was certainly Harrwitz
who was known for blindfold exhibitions, but he was at the time this was
written considered to be perhaps the top player in the world, and was still
giving blindfold exhibitions. Horwitz played a bit blindfold, but I do not
know of any incidents that may have scared him off the pursuit. Any guesses
about what incident the writer was referring to?

TK: Who is this writer? Probably Harrwitz was meant, who in 1858 was probably
the most active chess player alive, spending almost all his waking hours at it
in the Cafe de la Regence. If so, it is hard to know what was meant by "nearly
destroyed," since Edge describes him that year as being in fine shape, his
usual energetically obnoxious self.

The article was originally in The Press, as Dispatches from St George's Chess
Club, also in The Living Age September 4, 1858. I have a very funny quote from
the article which I will be using.

Me: 3) On February 19, 1876, an article in Living Age says that a great
chessplayer died the other day, said to have injured his brain through
blindfold play (the author does not buy this explanation). What player is
he referring to? Perhaps an incorrect rumor of death of a player such as
Morphy?

TK: Possible candidates: Pierre Saint-Amant (1800-1873), Howard Staunton
(1810-1874), Thomas Barnes (1825-1874), Cecil De Vere (1845?-1875), John W.
Schulten (?-1875). If I had to guess, I'd say he meant De Vere, who had real
chess genius but was afflicted by depression, tuberculosis, and alcoholism.

Me: 4) With the mental collapse of Steinitz fairly soon after a match with
Lasker, the indictment against blindfold chess was extended by some to attack
all "serious" chess. An article written in 1897 says that Steinitz has
forgotten all about chess playing, and occupies his time between attacks of
delirium in writing what he imagines to be essays on philosophy. Do these
essays still exist, and if so were they gibberish or simply naive writings of
an untrained person?

TK: This 1897 article sounds like quite a font of misinformation. Steinitz did
briefly suffer what might be called a "mental collapse" after the second
Lasker match, but it has been exaggerated. His confinement to a Moscow
psychiatric clinic may have been arranged under false pretenses. Far from
forgetting about chess, Steinitz played in four tournaments after this: New
York 1897, Vienna 1898, Cologne 1898, and London 1899, doing well in all but
the last. Kurt Landsberger's "The Steinitz Papers" (McFarland & Co., 2002) has
a great deal of his correspondence from that time, and it evinces no
"delirium." Steinitz did write a few things that might be called philosophical
essays They are certainly not gibberish. Steinitz was a very intelligent,
well-read man, and they are well thought out, if now rather dated. I suggest
consulting the Landsberger book for more details.

I will admit that this is well outside the area which I feel well-read about; I
am much better on the mid 1800s. However, I have read the newspaper accounts,
and this version seems overly believing of Steintz' own statements. My view
(which seems to have been the view at the time) is that Steinitz had a
breakdown which he largely recovered from, but his mental health declined
gradually until his death. His family had him committed for the first time
upon receiving from the printers some pamphlets he had written, and I gather
that at least at this time he was fairly far gone, though he still had long
periods of lucidity. The family had the pamphlets burned, according to his
obituary.

Actually, this is not one newspaper report but a series, the first of which
proclaimed the death of Steinitz; as you point out (and as I used as a line
in my article), he later had excellent results for a dead person.

Me: 5) A Lasker article defending serious chess from its critics argues that
Steinitz went insane despite rather than because of chess playing. He
claims that scientists had discovered that Steinitz's brain had a defect in its
motional brain cells. Does anyone know what he is talking about, and whether
Lasker was grasping at pseudoscience or whether this was an accepted notion of
its time (and whether Steinitz's brain was actually tested in some way?)

TK: Steinitz did have a life-long nervous disposition and suffered from
insomnia, both of which were aggravated when he played serious competitive
chess. He also exhibited some symptoms of congenital syphilis. Again,
Landsberger presents quite a lot on these matters. I can offer nothing about
any examination of Steinitz's brain.

Me: 6) An article written in 1903 talks about the mental collapse of young
Smythe caused by serious chess. Does anyone know this incident?
|
TK: I can find no significant chess personage named Smythe in any of my
sources.
The closest is Samuel Smyth, born ?, died 25 November 1869, Philadelphia, PA
(Gaige's "Chess Personalia" citing an obituary in the Philadelphia Evening
Bulletin of 3 December 1869).
|
Me: These are not the only incidents which led to the bad reputation of
blindfold chess (early deaths of especially Zukertort but also Paulsen, for
example, were seen as supporting evidence), but these are ones I have
particular questions about. Thanks for any help!

TK: Paulsen died of diabetes, Zukertort of a stroke. I think close examination
will show that all the ills ascribed to blindfold chess are cases of "post
hoc, ergo propter hoc," written at a time when it was also commonly believed
that masturbation caused blindness and insanity. However, your proposed article
sounds interesting as an historical examination of attitudes about
blindfold chess. Good luck with it.
|
| Taylor Kingston
|


Thank you very much for your comments; I add that I very much respect your
work in general.

Jeremy Spinrad wrote:
Actually, I was disappointed to learn that Koltanowski's "record" was not in
a blindfold simul, which is the display most of us find really dazzling. He
played single blindfold games back to back, which is interesting but not
comparable to playing many at once.

I wonder if you may be confusing two separate events here. Koltanowski did in
fact set a world simultaneous blindfold record at Edinburgh in 1937, playing 34
boards at once, scoring +24 =10 in 13½ hours. At San Francisco in 1960, he
played 56 consecutive blindfold games, all at ten seconds per move.
Koltanowski always insisted that his 1937 record was better than Najdorf's
later feats of 40 boards in 1943 and 45 in 1947 because, he claimed, that
Najdorf was allowed to look at scoresheets late in the session. Whether that's
true or not, I do not know.


Taylor Kingston

ospam (Taylor Kingston) wrote in
message ...
Jeremy Spinrad wrote:
Actually, I was disappointed to learn that Koltanowski's "record" was not
in a blindfold simul, which is the display most of us find really dazzling.
He played single blindfold games back to back, which is interesting but not
comparable to playing many at once.

I wonder if you may be confusing two separate events here. Koltanowski did in
fact set a world simultaneous blindfold record at Edinburgh in 1937, playing
34 boards at once, scoring +24 =10 in 13½ hours. At San Francisco in 1960,
he played 56 consecutive blindfold games, all at ten seconds per move.

Koltanowski always insisted that his 1937 record was better than Najdorf's
later feats of 40 boards in 1943 and 45 in 1947 because, he claimed, that
Najdorf was allowed to look at scoresheets late in the session.
Whether that's true or not, I do not know.

The reader may be interested in what I have written about the claimed world
records in simultaneous blindfold chess play in my posts in the RCGA thread,
"How do you read Chess notation?". Here's a link to one of my posts therein:

http://makeashorterlink.com/?Q69124066

'When to the sweet sessions of silent thought,
I summon up remembrance of things past,'
--William Shakespeare (Sonnet XXX)

--Nick