accueil / home page                

Copyright R. Canter 1997

reprinted from BCCA magazine #135 by kind permission of the Editor
minor revisions by R. Canter (2001).

Thompson's Dilemma (A Warning)

by Ron Canter

     We used to have a chap called Thompson in our chess club, and he took the game very seriously. He wasn't a particularly strong player, but had dark brown eyes and a piercing stare - a bit like Tal's - which many people thought was worth pawn and move. If you got into a conversation about openings or endgames with Thompson you could look forward to at least half an hour of serious and intense discussion.

    One night he came into the club and announced that he had taken up correspondence chess; a competition had just been started by his trade union. Three players, each to play a game against two other players, were required to form a team, and Thompson had persuaded two of his workmates to participate. They weren't regular players, but Thompson had assured them that he would keep them right if necessary. This was in the days before email chess and moves had to be sent by post using a score card with provision for the addresses of yourself and your opponent. After writing your move on the card you popped it into a window envelope so that your opponent's address was displayed, put on a stamp and posted it; your opponent then replied by reversing the card so that your address appeared in the window.

    For a few weeks Thompson brought his games to the club and would sit and analyse them, showing them to anyone who expressed the slightest interest.  After a while everyone kept well out of the way while Thompson analysed his games, and it seemed to take him longer and longer each week.  I discovered that Thompson's colleagues had soon tired of postal chess and wouldn't play any more.  Rather than drop out of the competition, Thompson had taken over their games as well as his own.  I suppose six games aren't too many to handle but they seemed to be too much for Thompson.  He would sit in the corner of the club room, produce a sheaf of envelopes and move pieces around the board with the appearance of a juggler trying to manipulate one object too many.

    This went on for several months, and then one night I was careless enough to let myself be drawn into conversation with Thompson. I felt rather like that chap in the poem about the Ancient Mariner as Thompson told me about his dilemma:  "He holds him with his glittering eye ...  He cannot choose but hear."

    It seemed that all of the games were going reasonably well, and then complications had arisen in one of them. Thompson had achieved what he considered a favourable position and was quietly confident of winning that particular game, until he made a serious blunder. He had received the game through the post and quickly spotted a strong move.  Having marked it on the score card he posted it the next day; unfortunately he put the card into the window envelope the wrong way round and posted it to himself.  The game consequently appeared on his doormat the next morning and Thompson, somewhat confused by playing more games than he could cope with, carefully played it through and made a move.  He then posted it off, to his opponent this time, not realising he had replied to his own move.

    Thompson's opponent, who perhaps was also new to postal chess, received the game, played it through and made a move, unaware that he was now playing as White in a game he had started as Black.

    The game went on for a while until Thompson's opponent suddenly realised that he had changed sides. With his next move he enclosed a note to Thompson saying, "Hey, wasn't I playing as Black when we started this game?".  Thompson, after some investigation, saw what had happened and wrote to explain to his opponent, at the same time proposing that as the game now appeared to be level they should continue as it was - to avoid complications ! (Thompson had presumably neutralised his own strategy.) The opponent agreed and thus the game continued until the date for adjudication was reached.

    Thompson was now feeling very aggrieved as he was material down with a very poor position.  He was reluctant to resign and so had sent the game for adjudication with a letter of explanation which went something along the lines of:

Dear Sir,

    I feel that some explanation is required in respect of the enclosed game. It was started by A. Smith but was taken over by me after a few moves. I started this game as White and soon achieved a winning position. I am now Black, with a lost game ...

    Somehow I managed to keep a straight face while Thompson was telling me his tale of woe, but I must confess to breaking down several times as I was telling it to my friend on the way home.

    Shortly afterwards Thompson left the club and we never did find out what happened, but rumour had it that the adjudicator defaulted both players on the grounds of an impossible and insoluble position, then retired from chess, a broken man. Needless to say, Thompson's dilemma has entered into the folklore of our club, and if anyone thinks the atmosphere is getting too serious he has only to mention Thompson's postal game to cause instant merriment. I still burst out laughing about it sometimes at home, much to the disgust of my wife who thinks chess is a silly game.

    So before you send off your postal chess moves, always make sure that you are still playing the colour that you started with. And if your opponent is called Thompson, double check (usually a good move anyway).

                                         haut de page

Copyright R. Canter 2000

Thompson's Gambit

by Ron Canter

(The reader may care to have a chess set by him, as the story contains a game played by Thompson and the moves can be followed as the tale unfolds.)

    Some people thought that Thompson was accident prone, and various happenings in his eventful life seemed to bear out that opinion. Certainly, many things of a somewhat physical nature occurred to him during his time and frequently they impinged on his chess career, often with startling results. The events which I am about to relate must have been one of the most traumatic episodes of his history.

    Thompson's day started badly, although this was not an unusual occurrence for him. Now married, he lived in a village just outside the town and commuted to work each day by bus . On this particular occasion he was waiting for his bus and idly watching some birds pecking at a pie which somebody had dropped on the pavement, when a large alsatian dog came up, scared off the birds and started eating the pie. Not wishing to see the birds deprived of their meal, Thompson picked up some pieces of the pie and threw them up on to the roof of a shed on which they had settled, so that they could continue their repast. The dog, being of an aggressive nature, took exception to this and began to menace Thompson, barking ferociously.

    Thompson was pinned against a wall by the beast's attack and it was fortunate that the dog's owner heard the commotion and emerged to call off his pet. After threatening Thompson with extreme violence if he ever frightened his sensitive animal again he retired indoors, and Thompson turned round to see his bus at the stop. Not wishing to be late for work, Thompson broke into a run, intending to jump on to the bus, but failing to notice that there was a lamp-post between him and the vehicle. Unable to stop, Thompson crashed into the lamp-post and rebounded into the road where he lay for several seconds, dazed and bleeding. Some of the passengers saw what had happened, and being regular commuters used to Thompson's antics, picked him up without undue ceremony, and installed him on a seat, where he felt sufficiently recovered to carry on to work.

    On arrival at the office, bloodstained and slightly dazed, Thompson was fussed over by the lady members of staff and after a day of light duties and numerous cups of tea (a normal day for Thompson according to some cynics) he felt strong enough to proceed to the chess club after work.

    At the club we were naturally concerned on seeing his cuts and bruises, and after hearing about Thompson's exploits we felt that he should stick to friendly games, but he insisted on playing his scheduled tournament game with Bill Grimshaw. Bill, like most club members, had a nickname, and was affectionately known as Grimmers - partly due to his surname, but also because of his habit of grimacing whenever it was his turn to play and he was considering his move. On this night he was destined to really live up to his sobriquet.

    Grimmers was a little reluctant to engage in a serious game in view of his opponent's accident, but Thompson insisted on playing, and so they set up the board for their game. When they sat down, Thompson's eyes seemed to glaze over and instead of his usual alert posture he slumped casually in his chair. As the game commenced we saw a strange new Thompson who trotted out his moves without pausing to think, playing with a sort of steely nonchalance that was completely out of character. There was a surprise for Grimmers straight away when Thompson eschewed his normal Polish opening of pawn to queen knight four, and played pawn to queen four. Bill replied pawn to queen four and was somewhat astonished when the response was pawn to king four.

    A frisson ran around the room as people started to realise that something unusual was happening, and Grimmers' facial exercises went into overdrive. Not one to refuse a challenge, Grimmers took the king pawn and Thompson, who had never played a gambit in his life, replied with knight to queen bishop three. Grimmers defended with knight to king bishop three and Thompson's immediate response was pawn to bishop three. By now a few people were watching the game, including the club's openings expert, a small schoolboy with huge glasses, inevitably known as Specs, who announced that the opening was a Blackmar-Diemer Gambit.

    Grimmers, with an expression worthy of Quasimodo himself, took the pawn and Thompson replied with knight takes pawn. As Grimmers moved pawn to king three, Specs announced that black had played the Euwe defence. Thompson moved bishop to queen three, and Grimmers decided to pin the knight with bishop to knight five.

    Without hesitation Thompson coolly castled and after some thought, and considerable exercise of his facial muscles, Grimmers played bishop takes knight. Thompson, who had gone for a stroll round the room, returned and retook with pawn takes bishop. Grimmers castled, and Thompson replied instantaneously with bishop to rook three.

    At this stage Grimmers was feeling slightly unnerved, partly by Thompson's unexpected opening and partly by his strange demeanour. It was as if he was playing a completely new and unknown opponent, and to compose himself Grimmers decided to get a breath of fresh air outside. After playing rook to king one he walked out of the room. Thompson again replied without seeming to think, moving knight to king five, and while waiting for his opponent to return Specs tried to engage him in conversation about his opening, but without success. Although not rude, Thompson would not converse and his only response was a vague smile.

    Grimmers returned and after some thought played queen's knight to queen two, which was met immediately by queen to bishop three. Thompson wandered off again as Grimmers pored over his position then played knight to knight three - perhaps not the best move but Bill was feeling decidedly disorientated and having difficulty in concentrating. He told me afterwards that it was like playing someone from another planet - which is perhaps an apt description of Thompson.

    Thompson made his way through a crowd of spectators to get back to the board and with barely a glance played queen to rook three. Alive to the threat of rook takes knight and mate on rook two, Grimmers rapidly moved pawn to king rook three, only to be faced with knight takes pawn on bishop seven.

    Bill felt he had little option but to take the knight with his king and Thompson immediately played the obvious queen to rook five, check. King to knight one seemed the only move but Grimmers was then shattered by rook takes knight, and after a tentative rook to bishop one Thompson completed the demolition by rook takes rook pawn, and black had to resign.

    A buzz of excited conversation arose when the game had finished, but Thompson remained oblivious and had to be prompted when Grimmers asked for another chance to play against his Blackmar-Diemer Gambit, or BDG as Specs knowledgeably abbreviated it.

    The second game opened as before until black's fifth move, which was bishop to knight five - the Teichmann defence, as Specs informed us - but to no avail.  After seventeen moves Grimmers was forced to turn over his king in resignation.

    The contestants played several more games, all of which became gambits by Thompson who did not once hesitate before making a move, and all of which he won decisively.

    At the end of the night the club broke up and several people were ready to give Thompson a lift home, but he had already left. A few days later Thompson's wife phoned me to say that he had been in hospital, but was now fully recovered. After the chess club he had not returned home, and at midnight had been discovered wandering in a daze in a nearby field. Mrs. Thompson knew nothing of chess and had thought he was having some sort of mediaeval hallucination as he mumbled about knights, castles, queens and bishops. Thompson was taken to hospital, where concussion was diagnosed, and he was not allowed home, but after a couple of days he had returned to normality (insofar as such a state could ever be achieved by Thompson) and returned to the care of his long-suffering wife.

    Next week at the club Thompson was astonished to be told that he had beaten Grimmers as he had no recollection whatsoever of playing him. When told that he had played several gambits he vigorously denied this, saying that he never risked gambits - they were much too complicated. He insisted that somebody else must have played the games and indeed, the Thompson we saw that night was not the man we knew. Thompson could not be persuaded that he had been involved and was convinced that he was the target of some sort of stunt by Jumbo Pratt, the club joker.

But there lies another tale.

The Blackmar-Diemer Gambits were recorded by Specs and are given below.

Thompson vs Grimmers                           #1

Thompson vs Grimmers                           #2

               haut de page

HOW TO RESIGN GRACEFULLY

by Bill Wall

    Do you play on in a dead lost position because you don't know how to resign gracefully to your "lucky" chess opponent? Do you feel embarrassed to resign too soon with a large crowd looking over your shoulder? To admit defeat because you were outplayed or that your opponent is better than you (never mind his higher rating; you have always been underrated) is unheard of in chess. I have never seen a chessplayer whose eyes were not gleaming with murderous revenge after losing.

    The act of resigning gracefully is an art few have mastered. In theory, the simple task of resigning gracefully consists of gently, but firmly, picking up your king and laying him on his side while simultaneously saying, "I resign" in a distinct manner. You then extend your right hand and congratulate your deserving opponent for a fine game, shaking his hand with dignity and pride.

    In practice, however, other methods of resigning are more commonly employed. One popular method when using your opponent's pieces is to gently, but firmly, pick up the king, then hurl it as far as you can across the tournament room, knocking the rest of the pieces over, while simultaneously saying a host of profanities in a wild and crazy manner. The opponent's board sometimes comes crashing down his head as an extra gesture of a well fought game.  Another gesture of the and and middle finger may follow.

    Another popular method of resigning is the extension of the right arm towards your opponent. At first, the gesture looks like a friendly handshake. But as the arm gains momentum, the open hand becomes a closed fist gaining acceleration towards the nose of the unsuspecting opponent. For hypermodern players, both arms are extended towards the opponent. The hands stay open but placed around the neck of the opponent who is then shaken vigorously until the opponent's face turns a dark blue color. Usually, the tournament director intervenes at this point to make sure the game is over.

 Here are some guidelines for chessplayers on how to act after a hard-fought game of chess.

FOR THE WINNER

FOR THE LOSER  

      haut de page  

Copyright R. Canter 2000

Thompson's Battle

by Ron Canter

    Since the story of Thompson's Dilemma was told, several people have asked me if there are any other Thompson tales to be related. This took me back to the time when Thompson first appeared at our club after moving to the North East from the Midlands. During our first chat with him he told us that he had once played the "Grandmaster of Lincoln" and although unable to beat this distinguished personage, had given him a good run for his money. We were also informed that Thompson often played the Polish opening (pronounced as in shoe polish) and as black he usually essayed the Grundig defence if allowed.

    As I reflected, other incidents in Thompson's colourful membership of our chess club came to mind ......... Thompson and the stuffed turtle, Thompson and the exploding crutch ........., but perhaps it is time to tell of Thompson's Battle.

    You may recall that Thompson took his chess very seriously and this extended to passing comments on other people's games. This, together with his habit of punctuating his remarks with a sort of grunt (something like "mmphh"), was liable to cause extreme annoyance. One member of the club, a genial Irishman named Paddy O'Connor, was particularly disturbed by this habit of Thompson's and on a memorable occasion it became too much for him.

    Paddy was engaged in a championship game with Banger Haswell when Thompson appeared beside the board and started to make comments.  After a while Paddy politely asked Thompson to desist but this had no effect and after an exceptionally annoying sequence of "Mmphh, I wouldn't have done that" and "Mmphh, didn't think much of that" Paddy lost his rag.  Emitting a stream of Irish curses which considerably enhanced the vocabulary of those within earshot, he leaped to his feet, seized Thompson by the lapels of his jacket and dragged him into the cloakroom next door.  For a couple of minutes various gasps, grunts and thumps came from the room, but nobody else dared enter. Then there was a resounding crash resulting from the two combatants knocking over the free standing coat rack as they struggled with each other. This seemed to bring the fight to an end and shortly afterwards Paddy and Thompson reappeared breathless, flushed and dishevelled and were given a strong talking to by club chairman Arthur Silk, informally known as Acker due to the similarity of his name to that of a well known virtuoso of the clarinet who was popular at that time.

    The proceedings were then further enlivened by the appearance of a shapely young lady dressed in a judo outfit.  She had been sent up from the downstairs martial arts club to ask if the noise could be kept down as they could not hear their instructor as he explained to them how to throw people forcefully to the ground then break their limbs and dislocate their joints. (Strangely enough we in the chess club had never heard a sound as these vigorous exercises took place beneath us.) Nobody was inclined to argue with the lady as she was wearing a black belt (although one of the younger members was heard to remark that he wouldn't mind grappling with her on the mat), and profuse apologies were given by Acker.

    Acker then got everyone back to playing chess and things gradually settled down, although it was a while before Thompson and Paddy got their breath back and rearranged their clothing - Thompson had lost several buttons and Paddy's tie was torn. Thompson went home shortly afterwards and Paddy resumed his game, which he won in a few more moves as his opponent had completely lost concentration.  Banger was afterwards heard to remark that he didn't mind losing, as it was the most entertaining chess game he had ever played in.

    For weeks afterwards club members would challenge each other by raising their fists in a pugilistic stance and aggressively asking "Wanna play chess?" but the irony of this was lost on Thompson who instead of holding people in lengthy conversations about endgames would endlessly relate to anyone who was unlucky enough to be buttonholed by him how he had torn Paddy's tie.

    But that is not the end of the story. Two weeks later the draw for the next round of the championship was made, and sure enough Paddy's opponent was to be none other than Thompson. Acker, a man of instant decision, immediately announced that in view of previous events this game would be played in a separate room in which two boards would be set up with a partition between them and he, Acker, would personally convey the moves between the two participants, thus preventing any physical contact between the players. Spectators would be allowed, but not within six feet of the game.

    In due course everything was set up, the playing area was roped off and an electric atmosphere built up as a crowd of spectators waited expectantly. It was a bit like a boxing match as first Acker appeared and then the two contestants were separately led in and escorted to their seats. After a brief pep talk to each player by Acker, the clocks were started and play commenced.

    Both players concentrated on their boards and Acker was kept very busy trotting backwards and forwards as they quickly made their opening moves. Then things slowed down and Acker had to keep asking the onlookers to remain silent as they began to kibitz the game.  Paddy built up an attacking formation but Thompson defended well and the game seemed about even when Acker made a drastic error.

    Thompson's Knights were on adjacent squares and when Thompson moved one of them in a solid move, Acker moved the wrong Knight, which happened to be preventing checkmate, on Paddy's board. Paddy spotted the mate immediately and punched the air in triumph as he picked up his Queen to administer the coup de grace. Unfortunately the air he punched was occupied by Acker's head as he realised his mistake and leaned over the board to correct it.

    Half stunned, Acker reeled into the partition and knocked it over on to Thompson's table, scattering chess pieces on to the floor. Thompson jumped up in alarm, knocking his chair over as Acker sank to the floor, shaking his head in attempt to clear it, then shouting in pain as he knelt on various chess pieces. Paddy dashed round and tried to help Acker up, but Acker, still unsure where he was, thought he was being attacked and wrestled Paddy to the floor where they thrashed around. By then Thompson had come round the table and tried to part the combatants. Nobody knew whether it was Paddy or Acker, but a hand reached up, grasped Thompson firmly by the throat and dragged him down to the ground where he too became embroiled in the struggle.

    At the same time the spectators at the back pushed forwards to see what was happening and propelled those at the front into the ropes and then into the three figures scrambling on the floor, resulting in several of them falling over, causing a general tangle of ropes and bodies. Perhaps I should earlier have compared the scene to a wrestling match, as it resembled nothing so much now as one of those battles where the ring is filled with numerous wrestlers committing mayhem upon each other.

    Then things started to get out of hand.  The door opened and a crowd of judoka from downstairs erupted into the room, asking where the action was and offering to sort out any troublemakers. Within seconds several innocent bystanders, who admittedly were making a lot of noise, found themselves in various chokes, strangles and arm locks as the martial arts students enthusiastically took the opportunity to put into practice the teachings of their instructor. The size of the group on the floor increased dramatically as various people in white suits and coloured belts threw themselves into the fray.

    Fortunately Acker had recovered his senses and managed to extricate himself, and with a masterly show of authority defused the situation and restored order before anyone suffered permanent damage. It was with some disappointment that the martial arts students returned to their class, although I noticed Thompson being helped away by two sturdily built girls. We later learned that Thompson had sustained an injury to his back and went downstairs on the promise of some Japanese style treatment. The chess game was declared a draw by Acker as nobody was in a fit state to play after all the excitement, although it was some time before people went home after discussing the evening's events.

    The following week Acker resigned as Chairman. The martial arts instructor had been so impressed with the way Acker had calmed everyone down that he had offered to train him as a referee.  Acker had accepted as he felt this was less dangerous then keeping order in a chess club and in fact went on to have a distinguished career refereeing judo, karate and kendo matches with great authority.

    Thompson still came to the chess club, but not so frequently, as his lady friends had persuaded him to join the judo club after curing his back injury by the esoteric method of walking up and down on his spine - he could hardly refuse after such intimacy. His conversations were now centred on various judo techniques, which left his unwilling listeners puzzled and even more bored. I remember on one occasion when he managed to trap me he related how, in a contest with a lady friend, he had attacked her with an ogoshi and achieved hiki waki, although I was not brave enough to enquire as to the meaning of this. On one occasion he came to the club proudly wearing a green belt which he had just won in competition in the judo club.

    Two of the judoka became members of the chess club, probably in the hope of more violence, and developed into fine attacking players. They always charmed their opponents by bowing to them before starting play, and then bewildered them by saying "Hajime" which apparently means begin. It was some time before we persuaded them not to give a judo cry of "Hai!!" when administering checkmate as this disconcerted their opponents who would often reply "Hello?" in some confusion.

    Such were some of the quieter nights at our chess club during Thompson's sojourn there. You should have been there when it got noisy.

                    haut de page

CHESS HOROSCOPE

par Bill Wall

ARIES (Mar 21 - Apr 19)

    You are the pioneer type and hold most people in contempt. You are quick tempered, impatient, and scornful of advice. You are not very nice. You play chess with dead people. People can't wait until you are dead. You like to take back moves and don't like touch move rules unless it's your opponent who tries to take back a move. You should sell insurance. Buy WorldCom stock. Avoid passed pawns. (Korchnoi, Smyslov, Portisch, Kasparov, Najdorf)

TAURUS (Apr 20 - May 20)

    You are practical and persistent in your chess games. You show no original thought. You have a dogged determination and work like hell to win, but you lose a lot of games. Most people think you are stubborn and bull headed. Sometimes you play chess with God. You are not very good at the endgame. You get into time pressure alot. You think astrology is a bunch of Taurus. Move your pawns with caution. Avoid back rank mate. Let others risk thier own pieces. (Spielmann, Steinitz, Euwe)

 GEMINI (May 21 - June 20)

    You are a quick and intelligent thinker and like to play speed chess. People say you are too boring. You are inclined to expect too much for too little. This means you are cheap. You have this hidden desire to beat up your father for pushing you into chess. Most of your games are won by swindles. Pick up the pieces from the floor when you lose and the game is over. Go home and start collecting stamps. (Karpov, Reti, Short, Kamsky, Petrosian)

 CANCER (June 21 - July 22)

    You are sympathetic and understanding to your opponents and you give up draws to easily. Your opponents think you are a sucker. You are always putting things off. That's why you'll never make anything of yourself. You like to take poisoned pawns. You think playing 1. f4 is for the birds. You like gambits. You like to be pushed to the limit. Push back and push your pawns forward. Tune out advice from others; it will only get you mated sooner. (Bird, Benko, Gelfand, Anderssen)

 LEO (July 23 - Aug 22)

    Your determination and sense of humor will come to the fore. Your ability to laugh at your opponents for making bad moves will be a blessing because you've got a day coming you wouldn't believe. You consider yourself a born leader. Others think you are pushy. Most Leo people are bullies. You are vain and dislike honest criticism. Your arrogance is disgusting. Leo people are thieves. You expect people to throw gold coins at you everytime you win a game. You don't like to analyze your games with your opponents. Leave the blitz games to others. Laugh, love, and learn. Let others blow smoke in your face while you turn the other cheek. Castle long. (Judit Polgar, Marshall, Botvinnik)

 VIRGO (Aug 23 - Sept 22)

    You are the logical type and hate disorder. This nitpicking is sickening to your friends. You are always adjusting your pieces. You are cold and unemotional and sometimes fall asleep while making love. You are good at blindfold chess, but have a poor memory at everything else. Resentment and jealousy will only turn obligation into torture. New chess strategies will soon become apparent after you lose all your games. Take up music and remember, pawns are the soul of chess, but queens are more fun. (Philidor, Zukertort, Koltanowski)

 LIBRA (Sept 23 - Oct 22)

    You are the artistic type and have a difficult time with reality. It's hard for you to accept losses or that you won't make it as a chessplayer. Your desire to play good chess is overshadowed by your desire to be nasty and a decent meal. Someone is watching you, so stop staring back at your chess opponents. You suffer from penis envy. You are obsessed by flies on your head. Trust that your seconds will be there for you and analyze your position while you are sleeping. Explore your romantic side. See a shrink. Fianchetto your bishops. (Fine, Rubinstein, Ehlvest)

 SCORPIO (Oct 23 - Nov 21)

    You are shrewd and cannot be trusted. You will achieve some success at the chess board. You may develop a drinking problem later in life. You lose games to idiots because you get too over-confident. You like to accept gambits, but you always lose being a pawn down. Avoid the endgame. You have many secrets to share with only a few people. Like being a Nazi. Answer questions with other questions until your curiosity is satisfied or when you pass out drunk. Remember, a knight on the rim is dim, but a rook on a7 is heaven. (Alekhine, Nimzovich, Tal, Tchigorin, Capablanca)

 SAGITTARIUS (Nov 22 - Dec 21)

    You are optimistic and enthusiastic when you play chess. You have a reckless tendency to rely on luck since you lack talent. People laugh at you a great deal because you play so poorly. You collect chess books but don't read them. You prefer comic books, especially from Mexico. You do not know how to win with knight and bishop vs king endgame, so avoid endgames and sudden death events. You are a fast player and a fast lover. Get away for the weekend. Go shopping at K-Mart for Martha Stewart checkered table cloths and play chess during a romantic dinner. (Reshevsky, Pillsbury, Blackburne, Timman, Anand)

 CAPRICORN (Dec 23 - Jan 19)

    You are conservative and afraid of taking risks. You hate gambits. You don't do much of anything and are lazy. This is why you lose games on time. Opponents will win brilliancy prizes from you. You always end up in 2nd place and never take 1st place. You are a loner, but seem to like it that way. Some areas of your chess life are better left unexplained. Like all the games you threw to those Russians. Friends respect you for saying j'adoube when you adjust your pieces. Indulge yourself. Play in blitz events. (Keres, Browne, Em. Lasker, Teichmann)

 AQUARIUS (Jan 20 - Feb 18)

    You have an inventive mind and are inclined to play original openings. That's because you hate to study openings. You lie a great deal. On the other hand, you are inclined to be careless and impractical, causing you to make the same chess mistakes over and over again. People think you are stupid. You like to kick people under the table. You are a poor loser and easily lose your temper. Go write a chess book. Or a hundred books. No one will read them anyway. Speak up for the timid chessplayer. Say "check" real loud when you get your opponent in check. Avoid isolated pawns. (Spassky, Mecking, Reinfeld, Chernev, Loyd, Gligoric, Taimanov)

 PISCES (Feb. 19 to Mar. 20)

    Look for the good things in life. Carry the American Express card and a weapon. The chess world is yours today, as nobody else wants it. You have a vivid imagination and often think you are being followed by the CIA, FBI or State Department. You have minor influence over your opponents and people resent your flaunting of your chess games. You lack confidence and you are generally a coward. You hate to lose, so give up the game and invent another one. Make random chess moves if you can. Give radio interviews when you can. Help a Jew and remember that moment the next time you feel lonely and useless (which is a lot lately). Take control and find strength with the revelation of your skills, talents, and potential. Go on a diet, but don't eat you chess pieces. You have a tendency of always getting in a bind. Accept all gambits. (Bronstein, Tartakower, Mieses, Schlechter, Geller, Maroczy, Tarrasch, Fischer)

                              haut de page

PAOLO  BOÏ  ET  LE DIABLE

    Paolo Boï, le plus grand joueur du XVI^e siècle, poète, soldat et marin, la personnalité la plus curieuse et attachante, d'une vie mouvementée, est caractérisé par de La Bourdonnais comme «une des existences complètes qui appartiennent aux heureuses et puissantes organisations».  Célibataire aux moeurs irréprochables, habillé avec élégance, comme un jeune homme, avec une belle figure aux cheveux entièrement blancs, d'une taille élevée, bien prise et bien proportionnée, capricieux et fantasque, magnifique et libéral, éloquent et affable, cet homme par sa douceur et son énigmatique caractère, doué de capacités diverses, nous rappelle son plus grand compatriote, et presque contemporain, Leonardo da Vinci. La légende prétend que, dans sa vie errante, il a joué une fois aux échecs avec le diable.

    Devant la porte de l'église de Santa-Maria de C..., de la petite ville de C..., en Calabre, un beau matin de l'année 1570.  Paolo Boï qui était religieux et observait tous les rites, rencontra une fois une jeune fille d'une beauté éblouissante, très brune et forte.  Ses yeux pénétrants et énigmatiques brillaient d'une flamme fiévreuse.  La conversation qui se noua tout de suite entre eux ne tarda pas à se transformer en amitié et Paolo Boï, à son grand étonnement, apprit que la jeune fille jouait aux échecs.

    Son étonnement fut encore plus grand, quand dans une partie engagée, il vit que sa partenaire était d'une force peu banale, faisant des coups extraordinaires.  La lutte devenait de plus en plus acharnée, et, au bout de quelque temps, le Syracusain,se croyant déjà vainqueur, voulut déclarer mat en deux coups à son antagoniste. Mais, à ce moment, à sa grande stupéfaction, il vit la dame blanche de sa partie transformée en dame noire et la belle brune lui dit en riant:

--Non, Paolo, tu ne me gagneras pas, car, maintenant, j'ai une dame, et toi, tu n'en a pas.

-- O, Santa Maria ! murmura Paolo effrayé.

    Et en prononçant ces paroles, il remarqua que, malgré cette transformation, il pouvait encore gagner la partie en deux coups.  La fille le comprit, fronça ses sourcils, sortit de la pièce sans dire un mot et disparut.  Paolo Boï vit bien qu'il avait joué avec le diable...  

solution

DEATHS OF CHESS PLAYERS

by Bill Wall

Georgy Agzamov (1954-1986) - Russian GM fell between some rocks at a beach and died

Alexander Alekhine (1892-1946) - Choked to death on a piece of meat in 1946

Curt von Bardeleben (1861-1924) - Threw himself out the window of his boarding home

Samuel Boden (1826-1882) - Died of typhoid fever

Efim Bogoljubov (1889-1952) - Suffered a heart attack after a simultaneous display

Paolo Boi (1528-1598) - Poisoned (murdered) in Naples

Mikhail Botvinnik (1911-1995) - Cancer

Jose Capablanca (1888-1942) - Died after watching a skittles game at the Manhattan Chess Club in 1942

Edgar Colle (1897-1932) - Died after an operation for a gastric ulcer

Ed Edmundson (1920-1982) - Died of a heart attack while playing chess on a beach in Hawaii

Janos Flesch - Died in a car wreck in 1983

Nikolai Grigoriev (1895-1938) - Died from appendicitis in 1938

Alexander Ilyin-Genevsky (1894-1941) - Died in the siege of Leningrad while on a barge

Klaus Junge - German army officer killed in action in 1945

Paul Keres (1916-1975) - Died of a heart attack returning home from a tournament in 1975

George Koltanowski (1903-2000) - Heart failure at the age of 93

Nikolai Krylenko - Executed in Stalin's purges in 1938

Leonid Kubbel (1891-1942) - Died in the siege of Leningrad in 1942

Salo Landau (1903-1944) - Killed by Nazis at a German concentration camp

Paul Leonhardt - Died of a heart attack while playing chess at a chess club in 1934

George Mackenzie (1837-1891) - Suicide: took an overdose of morphine

Frank Marshall (1877-1944) - Died of a heart attack after leaving a chess tournament

Alexander McDonnell (1798-1835) - Died of Bright's disease

Vera Menchik (1906-1944) - Died in the V2 German bombing of London

Tony Miles (1955-2001) - Died in his sleep at age 46; he was diabetic

Johannes Minckwitz (1843-1901) - Suicide: threw himself under a train

Paul Morphy (1837-1884) - Died of a stroke while taking a cold bath

Aron Nimzovich (1886-1935) - Died of pneumonia

Louis Paulsen (1833-1891) - Died of diabetes

Julius Perlis (1880-1913) - Died in a mountain climb in the Alps in 1913

Tigran Petrosian (1929-1984) - Cancer

Vladimir Petrov - Died in a prison camp in Russia in 1945

Harry Pillsbury (1872-1906) - Died of syphillis

David Przepiorka - Died in a mass execution outside Warsaw in 1940

Richard Reti (1889-1929) - Died of scarlet fever

Nicholas Rossolimo (1910-1975) - Fell from flight of stairs; died of head injuries

Pierre Saint-Amant (1800-1872) - Died after a fall from his carriage

Carl Schlechter (1874-1918) - Died from pneumonia and starvation

Vladimir Simagin (1919-1968) - Died of a heart attack while playing in a tournament

Gideon Stahlberg (1908-1967) - Died during the 1967 Leningrad International tournament

Howard Staunton (1810-1874) - Died of a heart attack will writing a chess book

Herman Steiner (1905-1955) - Died after a California State Championship game

Mikhail Tal (1936-1992) - Cancer

Mikhail Tchigorin (1850-1908) - Died of diabetes

Karel Treybal - Died a victim of the Nazis in 1941

Alexi Troitzky (1866-1942) - Died of starvation during the siege of Leningrad

Abe Turner (1924-1962) - Stabbed 9 times in the back by a fellow employee at the Chess  Review office

Frederick Yates (1884-1932) - Died in his sleep from a leak in a faulty gas pipe connection

Alexander Zaitsev - Died of thrombosis as a consequence of a leg operation in 1971

Johann Zukertort (1842-1888) - Died of a stroke while playing chess at a London coffee-house

Stefan Zweig (1881-1942) - Committed suicide

                           haut de page

CHESS NAMES

by Bill Wall

                      haut de page

HOW TO ANNOY YOUR OPPONENT

by Bill Wall

    I think it was my ex-coach Bill Lombardy who said, "In chess, winning isn't everything. It is the only thing!" As you know, chessplayers cannot stand losing a game of chess. Therefore, it is quite necessary to know how to win easily without just mastering the difficult task of playing good chess. The art of annoying your opponent is a must for those who do not have the time nor patience of playing master chess.  And that's most of us.

    The easiest and most common form of annoying your opponent is talking. There are several methods that can be adopted to disturb your opponent so as to distract him from making a good move. One method is to talk directly to your opponent, pointing out his bad moves and letting him know his position is hopeless. By the time he complains to the tournament director, his position will be hopeless. And, of course, you deny ever talking to him. Tell the tournament director it was him doing all the talking.

    If your opponent is about to make a good move despite your efforts to talk to him directly, then yell out "touch move" just before he moves his piece. Of course he will deny ever touching anything.  An argument will result, upsetting your opponent so much that he will have forgotten his original plan or think the almost touched piece was a losing move and make a weaker move instead.

    Another effective method is to talk to spectators about your opponent and perhaps start ugly rumors about him ("He has AIDS. He voted for Clinton"). People will soon be staring at your opponent, will start to snicker and point at him. This will make your opponent very uncomfortable and will take his mind off of chess. If that doesn't work, discuss your opponent's playing ability or talk about his hygiene habits. This will draw your opponent into the discussion with an argument and he will have forgotten all about his game.

    Another common method is to talk to yourself. Talking to God or praying out loud are other variations. Mumbling and even laughing at your opponent's moves and getting friends to laugh, also, will surely distract him from making strong moves.

    Other methods of disturbances are to cough, sneeze, and blow your nose loudly during the game. Spread lots of germs and let your opponent know that you may have some awful disease. If he thinks your disease is contagious, he will leave the board often, unable to concentrate on the game. Have lots of used tissue paper from blowing your nose on your side of the board.

    If your opponent is slow in moving, drum and tap your fingers on the table.  Act very impatient. You should heave a sigh, then yawn; look at the chess clock or your watch often; and finally, groan. Your opponent will be induced to make hasty moves so as not to appear a slowpoke.

    When you exchange pieces, always put one of your opponent's pawn or piece on your lap or hidden in your other hand. If your opponent likes to compare the pieces that have been exchanged, he will think he is winning and ease up a bit. If you are a piece up, roll the extra piece in your hands or toss it up in the air a few times. Let your opponent know he is an exchange down and there is no hope for him.  Find an extra queen from another board and have it nearby, indicating you may soon queen a pawn.

    For the musically inclined, humming is a favorite nuisance. Aggressive players can go into a full song accompanied by the gestures of a conductor. Bringing a radio along and occasionally turning it on during critical times of the game works. If your opponent is a sports fan, tune in to some important sports event.

    When smoking is allowed, it is best to get the foulest, blackest cigars or pipes. A lot of smoke towards your opponent not only obscures the position of the board, but causes your opponent to choke and become blind from the smoke in his eyes.

    A method popular among grandmasters for annoying an opponent is to stare directly and deliberately at your opponent. Let your opponent know he is being watched and stared at. Of course, if your opponent starts staring back at you during your move, carry a pair of sunglasses with you and slip them on. The mirror reflection type is best just in case your opponent or his guru is trying to hypnotize you.

    When you think you have a good position, rock your chair back and forth, smile victoriously, and let everyone know you have a won position. Your opponent will lose that much more quickly even if he doesn't see any threat.

    With the help of a friend, you can plan on taking pictures of the game. Make sure a bright flash can be produced. Just before your opponent reaches to make a move, your friend flashes the camera and blinds your opponent temporarily. He then touches the wrong piece which he must move as there are not only witnesses but a picture of it with a second snapshot.

    If you are so lucky, have a big-breasted gorgeous blonde sit by you or on your lap. He won't be concentrating on mating with his chess pieces for long. It helps if she has lots of perfume, wears tight clothes, and leans over the board alot.

    There is just one more kind of annoyance worth mentioning. Of all the annoyances to an opponent you can make, this is the most devestating of all. Although it is very infrequent in occurrence and almost entirely accidental, it is the most annoying and upsetting disturbance known to chess.  It is called «making a strong move»!

                         haut de page

EINSTEIN AND CHESS

by Bill Wall

    Albert Einstein was born in Ulm, Germany on March 14, 1879 and spent his youth in Munich. He may have learned chess in Munich, or later, in Berlin.

    He was an amateur chessplayer. He played chess with his neighbors and friends. He always had a chessboard set up at home. He was probably most active in chess in the 1920s and early 1930s.

 In the 1920s Albert Einstein and Emanuel Lasker learned Go while living in Berlin.

 In the 1930s Einstein shared an apartment with Emanuel Lasker.

     In October, 1936 Einstein was interviewed by the New York Times. In that interview, he said, "I do not play any games. There is no time for it. When I get through work I don't want anything which requires the working of the mind."

    Einstein was a good friend of both Emanuel Lasker (1868-1941) and Edward Lasker (1885-1981). Once, Edward Lasker gave Einstein an autographed copy of his book on Go and Chess. Einstein, in return, gave Edward Lasker one of his papers on relativity. The book given to Einstein later showed up in a Baltimore used bookstore. When someone told Edward Lasker about this, Lasker replied, "That's all right. I left his relativity paper on the subway."

    Einstein is quoted as saying that "Chess grips its exponent, shakling the mind and brain so that the inner freedom and independence of even the strongest character cannot remain unaffected."

Einstein also said, "I always dislike the fierce competitive spirit embodied in [chess]."

    Einstein wrote a preface to a posthumous biography of Emanuel Lasker, "Emanuel Lasker, The Life of a Chess Master," published by Dr. Jacques Hannak in 1952 (written in German in 1942). Barnie Winkelman wrote to Einstein to see if he would write an introduction to Hannak's book for an Engish edition... Einstein replied back with this foreward.

    Emanuel Lasker was undoubtedly one of the most interesting people I came to know in my later years. We must be thankful to those who have penned the story of his life for this and succeeding generations. For there are few men who have had a warm interest in all the great human problems and at the same time kept their personality so uniquely independent.

    I am not a chess expert and therefore not in a position to marvel at the force of mind revealed in his greatest intellectual achievement - in the field of chess. I must even confess that the struggle for power and the competitive spirit expressed in the form of an ingenious game have always been repugant to me.

    I met Emanuel Lasker at the house of my old friend, Alexander Moszkowski, and came to know him well in the course of many walks in which we exchanged opinions about the most varied questions. It was a somewhat one-sided exchange, in which I received more that I gave. For it was usually more natural for this eminently productive man to shape his own thoughts than to busy himself with those of another.

    To my mind, there was a tragic note in his personality, despite his fundamentally affirmative attitude towards life. The enormous psychological tension, without which nobody can be a chess master, was so deeply interwoven with chess that he could never entirely rid himself of the spirit of the game, even when he was occupied with philosophic and human problems. At the same time, it seemed to me that chess was more a profession for him than the real goal of his life. His real yearning seems to be directed towards scientific understanding and the beauty inherent only in logical creation, a beauty so enchanting that nobody who has once caught a glimpse of it can ever escape it.

    Spinoza's material existence and independence were base on the grinding of lenses; chess had an analogous role in Lasker's life. But Spinoza was granted a better fate, because his occupation left his mind free and untroubled, while, on the other hand, the chess playing of a master ties him to the game, fetters his mind and shapes it to a certain extent so that his internal freedom and ease, no matter how strong he is, must inevitably be affected. In our conversations and in the reading of his philosophical books, I always had that feeling. Of these books, "The Philosophy of the Unattainable" interested me the most; the book is not only very original, but it also affords a deep insight into Lasker's entire personality.

    Now I must justify myself because I never considered in detail, either in writing or in our conversations, Emanuel Lasker's critical essay on the theory of relativity. It is indeed necessary for me to say something about it here because even in his biography, which is focused on the purely human aspects, the passage which discusses the essay contains something resembling a slight reproach. Lasker's keen analytical mind had immediately clearly recognized that the central point of the whole question is that the velocity of light (in a vacuum) is a constant. It was evident to him that, if this constancy were admitted, the relative of time could not be avoided. So what was there to do? He tried to do what Alexander, whom historians have dubbed "the Great", did when he cut the Gordian knot. Lasker's attempted solution was based on the following idea: "Nobody has any immediate knowledge of how quickly light is transmitted in a complete vacuum, for even in interstellar space there is always a minimal quantity of matter present under all circumstances and what holds there is even more applicable to the most complete vacuum created by man to the best of his ability. Therefore, who has the right to deny that its velocity in a really complete vacuum is infinite?"

    To answer this argument can be expressed as follows: "It is, to be sure, true that nobody has experimental knowledge of how light is transmitted in a complete vacuum. But it is as good as impossible to formulate a reasonable theory of light according to which the velocity of light is affected by minimal traces of matter which is very significant but at the same time virtually independent of ther density." Before such a theory, which moreover, must harmonize with the known phenomena of optics in an almost complete vacuum, can be set up, it seems that evey physicist must wait for the solution of the above-mentioned Gordian knot - if he is not satisified with the present solution.  Moral: a strong mind cannot take place of delicate fingers.

    But I liked Lasker's immovable independence, a rare human attribute, in which respect almost all, including intelligent people, are mediocrities.  And so I let matteers stand that way.

    I am glad that the reader will be able to get to know this strong and, at the same time, find and lovable personality from his sympathetic biography, but I am thankful for the hours of conversation which this ever striving, independent, simple man granted me.

Here is a game attributed to Einstein.

 Albert Einstein - Robert Oppenheimer, Princeton 1933           

         haut de page

Occupations of chess players 

 by Bill Wall

Alexander          code breaker                                                    Berliner       computer scientist

Bernstein            lawyer                                                               Bird              accountant

Botvinnik            electrical engineer                                           Burger, Karl   M.D.

Byrne, R.            college instructor                                             Castaldi         dentist

Commons           real estate                                                         Euwe             math professor

Evans, William   sea captain                                                        Fine              psychoanalyst

Fomranek           math professor                                                 Grob            portrait painter

Gulko                  psychologist                                                       Harmonist   ballet dancer

Huebner            papyrologist                                                       Kevitz          pharmicist

Kotov                 mechanical engineer                                         Lasker         mechanical engineer

Lombardy         priest                                                                   Maroczy      math teacher

Mednis             chemical engineer                                               Morphy      lawyer

Najdorf             insurance salesman                                             Nunn          math professor

Olafsson            lawyer                                                                   Pfleger        M.D.

Philidor             musician                                                                Reshevsky  accountant

Rogoff              Federal Reserve Board                                        Ruy Lopez   priest

Schallopp         stenographer                                                        Soltis           news reporter

Staunton          Shakespeare scholar                                            Stoltz          car mechanic

Taimanov        concert pianist                                                      Tarrasch     M.D.

Tartakower     lawyer                                                                    Troitsky      forester

Znosko-Borovsky   music critic

                  haut de page

Les Échecs sous la Révolution Française

par Michel Soyez 

Les échecs n'ont pas échappé aux excès de la Révolution Française.

Ainsi, en 1793, le citoyen Guyton-Morveaux s'interrogeait:

    "Sera -t-il permis à des Français de jouer à l'avenir aux échecs ? Cette question fut agitée, il y a quelques jours, dans une société de bons républicains, et il fut conclu, comme on devait s'y attendre, par la négative absolu."

    "Mais on demanda ensuite s'il ne serait pas possible de républicaniser ce jeu, le seul qui exerce véritablement l'esprit..."

     "Tout le monde sait que le jeu d'échecs est une image de la guerre; jusque là rien qui répugne à un républicain..."

     "Ce sera le jeu des camps, ou si l'on aime mieux de la petite guerre. Le mot échecs a une étymologie royale ; c'en est assez pour le condamner à l'oubli..."

     "Le personnage principal sera le porte drapeau, ou pour mieux dire, le drapeau. Il ne sera pas difficile de donner à la pièce une forme convenable à cet attribut; elle tiendra la place du ci-devant roi [...]; lorsqu'on l'attaquera, on en avertira par ces mots: au drapeau; lorsqu'elle sera forcée, on criera victoire; lorsqu'elle sera seulement enfermée, on dira blocus..."

    "La pièce appelée si bêtement reine ou dame sera l'officier général, pour abréger, l'adjudant. Les tours seront les canons, et l'on ne cherchera plus le rapport de leur mobilité avec leur dénomination. Roquer sera mettre un canon près du drapeau; on l'annoncera en disant: batterie au drapeau. Les fous représenteront la cavalerie légère, les dragons. Les ci-devant chevaliers étaient déjà descendus au rang de cavaliers. Les pions formeront l'infanterie [...] quand ils auront enfoncé le camp ennemi jusqu'à sa limite [...] leur nouvelle marche ne sera plus que l'image naturelle de l'élévation en grade d'un brave soldat."

Extrait du Moniteur du 20 brumaire an 2 (10 novembre 1793)

                     haut de page

MOMENTS  WHERE YOU CAN SENSE

DANGER   IN CHESS

There has been a change in the pawn structure. Your opponent has 8 and you don't have any.

Your opponent begins to throw pawns at your eyes.

You have a postion won but your opponent has a gun.

The Director tells you not to bother turning in your scoresheet after the game.

Before game begins you notice your opponent 1^st initials are 'GM'.

After completing your development you sense your opponent playing the endgame.

Just as you make your opening move your opponent announces mate in 11.

You don't control any squares at all.  

Your draw offer sends all the people watching your game into uncontrollable laughter.

Your opponent has 3 bishops.

                haut de page

À  vous les blancs, capitaine Tolstoï !

    Le jeune comte Lev Nikolaïevitch Tolstoï (1828-1910) avait appris à jouer aux échecs à 17 ans à la faculté de philosophie de Kazan, section arabe et turque.  L'auteur de "Guerre et Paix" - qui offrit à la fin de ses jours l'image d'un apôtre de la vertu - a évoqué dans ses souvenirs sa vie d'étudiant "pleine de duels, d'orgies et de cartes ".

    Celui dont Gorki dira  "dans ses yeux,  il possède cent yeux " excelle très vite devant l'échiquier où il donne libre cours à sa puissante imagination.  À trente ans on le retrouve, capitaine d'artillerie, à la tête d'une unité de cosaques engagée dans la guerre d'Orient.

    Il brille alors parmi la cohorte d'officiers subalternes issus de la petite noblesse russe de province qui entendent se montrer supérieurs en tout aux aristocrates de la capitale - en tout et, notamment, aux échecs. Partout où le conduit le métier des armes, le capitaine-comte trimbale dans son sac, entre le nécessaire de toilette et la réserve de cartouches un petit échiquier de voyage.

    Sa  passion pour le jeu des rois est telle qu'il lui arrive parfois de s'éclipser de son poste pour aller "pousser du bois" dans une taverne des environs.  Ce qui  lui  vaut, un jour où il s'est fait surprendre, d'être rétrogradé à la demande de son chef de corps… Est-ce H.G Welles, l'auteur de "La guerre des mondes", ou bien Oscar Wilde, le père de Dorian Gray, qui a écrit : "Si vous voulez perdre un homme, apprenez-lui à jouer aux échecs. Vous le détruirez plus sûrement qu'avec le poison".

    Tolstoï avait conservé dans ses papiers la partie ci-dessous remportée contre un certain Maud (ou Maude). Il pourrait s'agir du traducteur de son roman "Hadji Mourad", odyssée d'un farouche chef de tribu  caucasien rencontré par le romancier alors qu'il servait sous l'uniforme de Sa Majesté le tsar.

  P.A.

 Tolstoï vs Maud            

                             haut de page

Copyright R. Canter 2000

Thompson's Gremlin

by Ron Canter

    In the earlier days of computing Thompson was one of the few members of our chess club who possessed a personal computer - he said it helped him to avoid errors in his postal games. Although it did not prevent him from posting his own moves to himself on occasion, it did help him to realise that he had done so when he came to record the moves on his machine, as he had devised his own system to flag who was to move. If he had problems with his computer he was able to consult a fellow member and computer owner, Donald Brian Evans, a Welshman who worked in the computer section of the university.

    DB, as he was known in the club, had, after much research, produced a chess database named DBExam which he offered to club members on a trial basis - a "beta version" I think he called it. The programme did not play chess but recorded and classified chess moves in various ingenious ways, though it was still very much a trial version with several known (and probably many unknown) bugs. DB hoped that feedback from colleagues would help him to perfect it. Thompson jumped at the opportunity to try out the database and installed it on his computer which, with his customary quirkiness, he called Freda as he said it was of the feminine gender and provided Far Reaching Electronic Data Arrangements.

    Casual visitors to the club and new members were often confused and puzzled as they overheard Thompson relating what he had been doing with Freda - they usually had to be taken to a quiet corner and put in the picture about our eccentric club member and his strange ways. I recall Thompson’s wife telling me how suspicious she had been one night on hearing her husband having a conversation in his study with someone called Freda . On bursting into the room to "catch him at it" she had been abashed to find him talking to his computer.

    As people experimented with the database and reported back to DB on club nights his nickname changed, and he was referred to for a while as "Evans the Database". That did not last for long however, and he soon became DB once more. There were many discussions about DB’s program and it was a regular talking point at the club, but on one occasion the discussions turned into argument, and of course Thompson was at the centre of it all. However, on this occasion it seemed that Thompson had finally rebelled against his unjust treatment at the hands of Fate and decided that, for a change, he would influence Fate. Unfortunately this meant that DB was about to undergo a Thompson-like experience.

    Thompson had appeared at the club and announced that when he had started to enter a move into the database it had replied with another move. Intending to enter a variation of his favourite Polish opening, Thompson had been astounded when, as soon as he keyed in Pawn to Queen Knight four, the programme replied with Pawn to Queen Rook four. Pawn to b5 resulted in the reply Pawn to d5, whereupon Thompson had decided to play on and see what happened. A lively and interesting game, won by DBExam, had ensued, and Thompson proceeded to demonstrate it to us. 

    DB insisted that his programme was only designed to record moves, not to make them independently. He thought there must have been a gremlin at work, and as Thompson was involved, this was a distinct possibility. After further discussion however, he was forced to admit that there was a remote possibility that the programme might do unexpected things as he had used what I think he described as source code - supplied by Boris, a fellow member of the chessplaying computer fraternity living in Vladivostok. A harassed DB then hurried off to re-examine his programme.

    Whenever DB appeared at the club after that he was constantly pestered by people wanting to know how to get the programme to play against them, people who would not be put off by the explanation that it was only a database, as they had seen the Thompson’s game. Thompson was usually to be seen lurking in the background, egging them on. DB had been unable to find any section of the code which enabled the programme to play chess, but was experiencing great difficulty in contacting Boris in Vladivostok. When he did manage to reach him he found that he was totally engaged in some sort of Russian flower festival. This involved folk dancing by Russian maidens and eligible swains, accompanied by balalaika music and much strewing of flower petals, which continued for a fortnight. Boris, as a highly eligible swain, was not going to be interrupted with chess trivia as he did not want to miss out on the chance of cavorting with various comely Russian maids - there was the possibility of a mate if his performance was up to standard.

    At the end of the festival contact was eventually re-established, but Boris’s English was not good, and DB had no Russian, so it proved difficult to acquaint Boris with the problem. It did not help that Boris had not come up to scratch with his folk dancing and, having failed to impress his dancing partners, was doomed to another year of swaindom, not having found a mate. After several communications he misunderstood what DB was trying to say and immediately threw a monumental Slavonic sulk, extremely peeved that anyone should question his programming. It was some time before Boris was finally persuaded to confirm that the source code definitely did not include anything which would enable a computer to play chess.

    By this time DB was heartily sick of being pestered about his programme, as well as being mentally exhausted from the hours he had spent searching through the code. He sought out Thompson who only then took pity on him, confessing that he had made it all up - everything apart from the game, that is. The game was in fact a real one that had been played by Sjerven and Chappell (don’t ask me where he found it) .  At this point DB’s patience finally gave out and he had to be physically restrained from attacking Thompson. There was so much noise that two of the building’s janitors appeared and removed DB from the premises to prevent violence. Thompson, in the role of injured party, looked so innocent and reasonable that he escaped their attentions - it seemed as if, at last, he was no longer the target of a malicious Fate.

    It was a long time before DB forgave Thompson, but all turned out well in the end as the database was finally perfected and proved to be an extremely useful chess tool. We also learnt that in the following year’s flower festival Boris’s dancing was so improved that he had attracted a partner who was not only becoming but also played a fair game of chess. However, Thompson was not given any subsequent versions of the database.

 Here is the game Thompson vs DBExam                  

                          haut de page

If the kids are alright... then why do they drive me so crazy?
Chess humor by Tom Chandler
First appeared in the September 1995 CHAT, Compuserve Chess Forum newsletter
Reprinted here with permission
 

    First of all, let me clearly state that I do not think all children are vermin. At least not most of the time. In fact, except for the vegetable- slinging mini-thugs who always seem to occupy the next table at restaurants, I usually tolerate kids just fine -- provided they aren't screaming, whining, wretching, or soiling themselves in my vicinity. My indifference to children fades rapidly, though, whenever I see one of their chocolate-smeared faces staring back at me from across the chess board. In fact, aside from the dream where I find myself naked in the middle of California's Largest Shopping Mall, my worst nightmare is seeing a pre-teen slide into the seat across from me at a tournament.  And apparently I'm not alone in this; I've talked to plenty of adults at chess tournaments who fear a pairing with a child more than anything they care to mention.

    I have to point out that these are the same adults who savage their co-workers in ruthless corporate meetings, drawing blood over weighty issues like the color of the company logo or exactly who is leaving the paper cups lying around in the cafeteria. High-powered adults? You bet.  Afraid to play children at chess tournaments? You better believe it...
 

Why I Hate Playing Kids, Part I:

    Respect. Small, chess-playing kids don't seem to care that I'm a sophisticated, mature adult with a car payment and my own business cards; like Rodney Dangerfield, I don't get no respect, despite the fact that I: 1) Have been personally responsible for many successful advertising campaigns; 2) Almost finished college; 3) Have successfully wired a boat trailer; 4) Once nearly set Paul Sondreal's house on fire when I overestimated the amount of lighter fluid needed to fire a potato out of a large plastic tube.

    Despite the above extremely impressive list, these kids -- who consider tieing their own shoelaces a major achievement -- treat me with stunning indifference -- and this in spite of the fact that I've probably lost their weight in hair over the past year.

    A game from my last tournament illustrates the "Dangerfield Principle" perfectly: I was outplaying a small-boned, chipmunk-cute little girl from the Black side of a Sicilian. I had just gathered in a pawn, and I was all-powerful on the dark squares. Plus I had a crushing queenside expansion in the works. All in all, she was lost. Had she given me the respect I deserved, she would have folded up right then and there. Instead, the little monster traded off my good dark-square Bishop.  After I blundered in recapturing, her queen slid to within clubbing distance of my king and the friendly dark squares suddenly took on a sinister aspect.

    My response? I wanted to scream at her; "Don't you know I've read Reassess Your Chess' from cover to cover? Don't you know I've got a 70,000 game database running on a RISC-based workstation? Don't you know I once fired a potato from a plastic pipe?"

    If she knew, she didn't care. I went on to win after a tough struggle, but not before I completely missed a nice sacrificial mate in two. Even in victory, the chipmunk robbed me of my self-respect...


Why I Hate Playing Kids, Part II:

    Stupidity. The problem with most of these kids is that they're too smart for my own good. Their devious little chipmunk minds are frighteningly quick; strategies that have taken me 15-20 minutes to devise are thwarted in seconds by opponents who needed phone books on their chairs just to reach their advanced pawns. Even worse are the chipmunks who need so little of their brain power to defeat you that they spend almost no time at the board; later you discover they were hustling blitz games in the hall to stave off boredom.

    Most of these kids couldn't tell you the difference between a Nimzo-Indian and Pocahontas; yet all my high-powered openings preparation seems to mean nothing to these brats, who get by -- and prepare to be outraged here -- by doing nothing more than simply making Good Moves. I despise them. Making the "stupidity factor" so much worse is the public nature of the game; your friends can wander by and see you firmly in control of the vital center squares one minute, and then find you a rook down in a busted position the next. The fact that your opponent's feet don't reach the floor couldn't be more obvious. Plus, should you get beaten by an adult opponent, you can always take refuge in "Ha! He's a sandbagger. He got lucky. He distracted me by breathing." Lose to a chipmunk, however, and there simply are no excuses...OK --

What Happens Should You Actually Win?

    Finally, we arrive at the crux of the problem -- should you actually triumph over one of these little wonders, no one's going to love you for it. In fact, the best you can hope for is that you don't get spit on by a parent as you leave the tournament. Face it: you don't hear a lot of applause when the hunters blast Bambi's mother -- you can expect no better after you've crushed a small child under the heel of your Sicilian jackboot. This, of course, is the sad paradox we all confront when playing kids; even if you win, you lose. It's this kind of pressure that has warped me as a chess player and as a human being. When I watch "Searching For Bobby Fischer" I always root for the adult players.

    When I see the smiling faces of sub-teen prodigies at local tournaments, I'm reminded more than anything of Damien (noted adult-killer and antichrist). And when I see a chipmunk slide into the seat across from mine at a tournament, I start worrying not about my openings preparation, but about finding escape routes from the building. As I set myself for another beating at the hands of a chipmunk, the best I can hope for is that I find an exit that takes me out of sight of my friends.  And out of spitting distance of my opponent's parents...
 

                    haut de page

Measure Your Chess Aggressiveness

By Robert Morrell

    From "The Gambit" the quarterly publication of the North Carolina Chess Association. From the May-June, 1990 issue.  Copyright 1990 by HYPERLINK" Robert Morrell .  Reprinted with permission.

    We all know that chess is a war game, and while some of us go at it on the boards like cerebral Rambos (nice oxymoron, that) others play like, well, George McGoverns.  Just how aggressive are you? Do you go for broke or wait for your opponent to make that big mistake ? The following test is scientifically designed to rank your aggressive tendencies on the board. Total the numbers at the end of text to put yourself between Morphy and Steintz.

THE TEST:

1)  Early in the game, your opponent collapses of an apparent heart attack.  His wife and children gather round, and after exchanging tearful farewells with them, he looks up, and with life fading from his eyes, asks you for a draw.  In response, you:

A) Accept immediately.

B) Analyze the position on the board first.

C) Ask the TD to get a doctor to confirm that he isn't faking it.

D) Tell him that you wouldn't give a draw to your dying mother, whom you love.

E) Try to push him over the edge by announcing mate in three.

2) When psyching yourself up for a game, you visualize yourself:

A) Crushing your opponent's pieces with a hammer.

B) Rolling hand grenades into your opponent's kingside.

C) Strangling your opponent with your bare hands.

D) Ransacking his village and carrying off his women.

3) You view your opponent's pawns as:

A) Potential Queens.

B) The shape of his position.

C) Juicy morsels to be gobbled up.

D) Speed bumps.

4) You view your own pawns as:

A) Potential Queens.

B) An integral part of your strategy.

C) Expendables in your kingside attacks.

D) Howitzer shells.

5) You will consider a pawn rush only:

A) When you have safely castled on the opposite wing.

B) When playing a lower rated player.

C) When you have more than a piece advantage.

D) When it's your turn.

6) Endgames are:

A) When the queens are off the board.

B) Sometime unavoidable.

C) When your opponent won't resign.

D) For weenies who can't finish off their opponents in the middlegame.

7) You are playing an eight year old, who leaves his queen hanging in a complex position. He begins to cry.  Your response is:

A) Offer to stop the clock while he regains his composure.

B) Capture the Queen without comment.

C) Pick up the queen with a chuckle and remark "Won't be long now!"

D) Call the child's mother and tell her to take her baby home, because he's not ready to be a chess player.

8) After leaving your own Queen hanging against an eight year old your would:

A) Resign gracefully and offer congratulations for a great win.

B) Smile knowingly to bluff him into not capturing her.

C) Announce mate in nine.

D) Tell him of an obscure rule about taking back moves that he's too young to know about.

9) You will sacrifice your Queen only:

A) When you see a force mate.

B) As a last attempt in a losing game.

C) For an overwhelming positional advantage.

D) When ever she hasn't been active enough (use it or lose it baby!)

10) For an open file on your opponent's kingside you would sacrifice:

A) A pawn.

B) A minor piece.

C) A major piece.

D) Your soul.

11) You might consider Alekhine's defense when:

A) Playing against e4.

B) Playing against someone you knew was unbooked.

C) Playing a non-tournament game.

D) You've had a mind-crippling stroke.

12) When you first spot a winning combination, you:

A) Look for way's your opponent can get out of it.

B) Look at your clock to see how much time you can spend checking it out.

C) Giggle uncontrollably.

D) Drool.  

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 RATINGS Scoring:

 1: A=0, B=1, C=2, D=4, E=7

2: A=2, B=3, C=4, D=5, E=0

3: A=0, B=1, C=3, D=6

4: A=0, B=1, C=2, D=5

5: A=0, B=2, C=3, D=5

6: A=0, B=3, C=4, D=6

7: A=0, B=1, C=4, D=5

8: A=0, B=1, C=3, D=4

9: A=0, B=1, C=3, D=5

10: A=0, B=1, C=3, D=5

11: A=0, B=1, C=2, D=4

12: A=0, B=1, C=3, D=5

0 to 10 Conscientious objector. You are a pacifist in the war game of chess. Negotiating a draw is your biggest thrill. Should you accidentally win, you feel obligated to buy them lunch or give some other form of foreign aid.

 11 to 30 Innocent bystander. You'll pick up wins if they fall in your lap (and happen to stick). You look for traps in a mate in one.

 31 to 50 Reluctant aggressor. The George Bush (post thyroid treatment) of the Royal Game. You'll do the "aggression thing" when backed into a corner, or when your wife tells you its time to leave and can you finish up your stupid game. (Yes, dear)

51 to 62 Psycho.  A danger to yourself and others. You don't play defenses, just offenses minus a tempo. You like lines with name like "the can opener", "the berserker" or "the long whip variation."  At home you kill small animals or unrated players for fun.

       haut de page

Le Jeu d'Échecs et les femmes

Jacques Dextreit et Norbert Engel

Jeu d'échecs et sciences humaines, payot - bibliothèque scientifique

    Le problème qui est en question ici est celui de l'absence des femmes dans le jeu d'échecs, et il existe deux façons fort répandues de ne pas l'envisager; la première est de contester son existence, en citant des cas d'espèce et en prédisant aux femmes une place de plus en plus importante dans les échecs de l'avenir; la deuxième, banale au point d'être devenue la règle, consiste à ignorer l'existence du problème, une cécité psychique troublante empêchant le joueur de voir  que les cercles et tournois d'échecs sont des déserts féminins.

    Pourtant la situation n'a pas toujours été semblable:  À l'époque médiévale, véritable âge d'or du jeu d'échecs en Occident, les femmes pratiquaient autant que les hommes ce jeu.  Murray écrit: «Aux échecs, les gens des deux sexes se rencontraient sur un pied d'égalité et on appréciait beaucoup la liberté dans les rapports que permettait ce jeu.  Il était même autorisé de rendre visite à une dame dans sa chambre pour jouer aux échecs avec elle, ou pour son amusement».  Ainsi les échecs étaient le seul lieu de rencontre, à rôle égal, des hommes férus de chasse et de combat, pour qui ils étaient le seul exercice intellectuel, et des femmes, promises aux tâches nourricières; et cette rencontre autorisait une liberté surprenante dans les comportements sexuels, où la femme tenait souvent le rôle le plus actif.  La littérature médiévale nous en fournit ici de nombreux exemples; ainsi, dans l'épopée «Raoul de Cambrai», on voit la belle Béatrice inviter le jeune et timide Bernier, dont elle est éprise, à venir jouer aux échecs dans sa chambre pour lui donner l'occasion de déclarer son amour; dans la chanson de geste «Huon de Bordeaux», un amiral ottoman propose à Huon de se mesurer à sa fille, fort belle et remarquable joueuse d'échecs; le marché est simple, si Huon perd il aura le cou tranché, mais s'il gagne...

«Que si tu pues ma fille au ju mater,

Dedens ma cambre ferai le lit parer,

Aveuc ma fille tote nuit vous girés,

De li ferés toutes vos volontés...»

    Grâce à plusieurs renversements de situation et à la complicité de la demoiselle, séduite par l'allure du chevalier, Huon gagne la partie, mais il renonce à la récompense, méritant cette réplique de son adversaire: «Si j'eusse su cela, dit-elle, je t'aurais bien maté».

    D'autres références littéraires un peu plus tardives témoignent de la présence des femmes et de la sexualité dans ce qui a trait au jeu d'échecs.  Dans son poème latin Scacchia Ludus, publié en 1527, Vida (1490-1566) indique que Jupiter inventa les échecs pour consoler la nymphe Scacchis de la perte de sa virginité.  Dans la pièce de Thomas Middleton, Women beware Women, le jeu d'échecs couvre la séduction et le viol, écrit T.S. Eliott dans les notes sur son poème «The Waste Land».

    La situation a depuis beaucoup changé:  La Dame sur l'échiquier a vu ses pouvoirs décuplés mais les connotations sexuelles ont disparu du jeu et les femmes ont cessé d'y jouer.  L'histoire moderne du jeu d'échecs n'a retenu que quelques noms de joueuses:  Vera Menchik-Stevenson (1906-1944), qui disputa dans les années trente avec un certain succès des compétitions de premier plan (deuxième ex aequo avec Capablanca au tournoi de Ramgate en 1929); Nona Gaprindachvili (née en 1941), longtemps championne du monde et seule femme possédant le titre de Grand Maître International; Maïa Tchibourdanidzé, devenue, à dix-sept ans, l'actuelle championne du monde.  À considéréer tant l'aspect quantitatif (proportion de femmes parmi les joueurs licenciés) que l'aspect qualitatif (situation dans le classement Elo), le rôle des femmes dans les échecs modernes est minime; on peut proposer à cela deux niveaux de réponses:

a) Le mode de pensée serait différent chez l'homme et la femme et cette différence avantagerait l'homme.

b)   Les motivations à jouer ne seraient pas les mêmes.

    Si nous nous tournons vers la littérature spécialisée pour y chercher quelques réponses, une constatation s'impose d'emblée à nous, le sujet n'a pas retenu l'attention des auteurs !  Herbstman y consacre quelques mots, Fine et Binet quelques lignes... Seul Reider propose un essai de réflexion sur le sujet, les autres éludant le problème par une pirouette, rarement à leur avantage.  Ainsi Alfred Binet remarque, en 1894, que «Les femmes ne brillent point aux échecs; on cite une dame qui a composé un problème; une autre, que l'on considère en ce moment comme la meilleure joueuse de Paris, ne dépasse pas une force moyenne d'amateurs, un professionnel lui ferait avantage de la tour.  Il est difficile de mesurer exactement la force des femmes aux échecs, parce que leurs adversaires ne mettent pas en général le même acharnement à les combattre que s'ils jouaient contre des hommes, et aussi parce que les femmes ne jouent point dans les tournois».  Plus près de nous, Reuben Fine ne dédaigne pas avoir recours aux poncifs du phallocratisme: «Les rôles respectifs de la victoire et de la défaite, écrit-il, aident à comprendre pourquoi les échecs sont si peu joués par les femmes.  Pour la femme, l'ennemi est habituellement une autre femme, qu'elle désire vaincre pour obtenir un homme.  Une victoire sur un adversaire masculin n'a pas d'intérêt pour elle, puisqu'elle l'isole des hommes au lieu de lui gagner leur amour.  Et la victoire sur une femme ne l'aide en rien à se rapprocher d'un homme».

    Les auteurs ne veulent rien connaître des femmes au jeu d'échecs, les joueurs font de même: Dans une interview recueillie par Ralph Girzburg, Bobby Fischer déclare:  «Les femmes sont stupides comparées aux hommes; elles ne savent pas jouer aux échecs, savez-vous, elles ont le niveau d'un débutant, elles perdent toutes les parties qu'elles disputent contre des hommes.  Il n'y a pas une femme au monde à qui je ne puisse donner l'avantage d'un cavalier et gagner malgré tout», et il met ses principes en pratique en refusant de participer à un tournoi où était inscrite la championne américaine Lisa Lane.  En 1977-1978, la finale des candidats, opposant Boris Spassky et Victor Kortchnoï, a lieu à Belgrade et les parties se déroulent dans un vaste cinéma-théâtre de deux mille places, du centre de la ville, chaque fois devant une salle comble.  Quelques mois plus tard, toujours à Belgrade, la finale des candidates, entre Alla Kouchnir et Maïa Tchibourdanidzé, a pour cadre... une chambre d'hôtel, un échiquier de démonstration placé dans une chambre voisine suffisant à satisfaire les rares spectateurs !

    Le désir des joueurs d'échecs d'ignorer tout ce qui touche à l'autre sexe étant suffisamment illustré, tentons maintenant de répondre à la question que pose l'absence des femmes.  Norman Reider est partisan d'une origine «génétique»; quelque chose dans le fonctionnement mental de la femme serait défectueux et placerait celle-ci en «infériorité naturelle» aux échecs par rapport à l'homme.  Aucune étude comparative n'a pu confirmer cette hypothèse, mais il faut bien noter que dans les domaines faisant le plus appel à l'abstraction (mathématiques, musique, jeu d'échecs), les femmes n'ont jamais tenu de rôle comparable à celui des hommes.  L'analyse des motivations inconscientes qui poussent à jouer aux échecs est plus riche; les échecs sont, nous l'avons dit, une mise en scène de la thématique oedipienne classique; l'Oedipe féminin, qui associe amour pour le père et désir de mort de la mère, ne trouve donc aucune possibilité de se projeter dans ce jeu  et seules des variantes, des inversions de cet Oedipe, peuvent pousser la femme à jouer aux échecs.  Kavka cite un exemple d'un tel retournement, où les pulsions homicides envers le père trouvaient un parfait exutoire dans les échecs; Marti-Ibanez propose une deuxième observation à l'appui de cette thèse, plus élaborée puisque le désir  de mort (et de castration, dit cet auteur) est dirigé ici contre le mari, substitut du père détesté.  L'explication que suggère la psychanalyse à l'intérêt des femmes pour le jeu d'échecs est donc fort restrictive: Aimerait les échecs la femme qui aurait inversé la structure oedipienne classique et qui chercherait l'aide de la mère pour mieux abattre le père.

    Soulignons l'évolution paradoxale du rapport femme-joueuse/dame-pièce: À la période médiévale, où la dame est une pièce encore mal différenciée mais où la femme est une adepte fervente du jeu (et nous avons évoqué les implications sexuelles que cela comporte), a fait place la période contemporaine, avec sa dame puissante, son absence de l'élément féminin dans le microcosme échiquéen et le refoulement des affects, sexuels notamment; ainsi, à mesure que la dame comme pièce devient plus puissante sur l'échiquier, le rôle des dames comme joueuses ne cesse de diminuer.  On peut donner une raison historique à cela; jusqu'aux XV^e et XVI^e siècles, le jeu d'échecs se joue essentiellement dans les demeures, fiefs de la femme.  Puis ce jeu d'intérieur devient un jeu d'extérieur (tavernes, puis salons, cafés...).  Les femmes ne sortent guère, le jeu d'échecs se trouve donc transplanté dans un lieu où par la force des choses les femmes ne peuvent plus s'y adonner.  Explication séduisante, mais qui ne dit mot du pourquoi de cette mutation topographique.  On peut alors proposer l'interprétation suivante:  La transformation de la pièce-dame, oeuvre masculine à l'évidence, a eu pour corollaire de faire entrer la femme, et la dimension sexuelle qui s'y rattache, dans la matérialité du jeu; la partie d'échecs entre homme et femme, ce qui, au Moyen Age, pouvait n'être qu'un prétexte, qu'un prélude à une relation charnelle, est devenue impossible, la Femme n'étant désormais plus jamais la joueuse mais toujours la pièce dame; dès lors la femme, en tant qu'individu réel, n'a plus de place dans le jeu d'échecs et celui-ci fonctionne de façon autonome comme «machine à donner du plaisir», à la plus grande satisfaction de ses adeptes.  Voilà qui expliquerait le refus manifeste des joueurs de s'intéresser aux femmes dès lors qu'il s'agit de jeu d'échecs.

       haut de page

The Morals Of Chess

 by Benjamin Franklin

    The Game of Chess is not merely an idle amusement; several very valuable qualities of the mind, useful in the course of human life, are to be acquired and strengthened by it, so as to become habits ready on all occasions, for life is a kind of Chess, in which we have often points to gain, and competitors or adversaries to contend with, and in which there is a vast variety of good and ill events that are, in some degree, the effect of prudence, or the want of it. By playing at Chess, then, we may learn:

    1st: Foresight, which looks a little into futurity, and considers the consequences that may attend an action, for it is continually occurring to the player, “If I move this piece, what will be the advantage or disadvantage of my new situation? What use can my adversary make of it to annoy me? What other moves can I make to support it, and to defend myself from his attacks?”

    2nd: Circumspection, which surveys the whole Chess-board, or scene of action, the relation of the several pieces, their situations, and the dangers they are repeatedly exposed to, the several possibilities of their aiding each other, the probabilities that the adversary may make this or that move, and attack this or that piece, and what different means can be used to avoid his stroke, or turn its consequences against him.

    3rd: Caution, not to make our moves too hastily. This habit is best acquired by observing strictly the laws of the game, such as, if you touch a piece you must move it somewhere, and if you set it down, you must let it stand.

    Therefore, it would be the better way to observe these rules, as the game becomes thereby more the image of human life, and particularly of war, in which, if you have incautiously put yourself into a bad and dangerous position, you cannot obtain your enemy’s leave to withdraw your troops and place them more securely, but you must abide by all the consequences of your rashness.

    And, lastly, we learn Chess by the habit of not being discouraged by present bad appearances in the state of our affairs, the habit of hoping for a favourable chance, and that of preserving in the search of resources. The game is so full of events, there is such a variety of turns in it, the fortune of it is so subject to vicissitudes, and one so frequently, after contemplation, discovers the means of extricating one’s self from a supposed insurmountable difficulty, that one is encouraged to continue the contest to the last, in hopes of victory from our skill, or, at least, from the negligence of our adversary, and whoever considers, what in Chess he often sees instances of, that success is apt to produce presumption and its consequent inattention, by which more is afterwards lost than was gained by the preceding advantage, while misfortunes produce more care and attention, by which the loss may be recovered, will learn not to be too much discouraged by any present successes of his adversary, nor to despair of final good fortune upon every little check he receives in the pursuit of it.

    That we may, therefore, be induced more frequently to choose this beneficial amusement in preference of others, which are not attended with the same advantages, every circumstance that may increase the pleasure of it should be regarded, and every action or word that is unfair, disrespectful, or that in any way may give uneasiness should be avoided, as contrary to the immediate intention of both the parties, which is to pass the time agreeably.

    1st: Therefore, if it is agreed to play according to the strict rules, then those rules are to be strictly observed by both parties, and should not be insisted upon for one side while deviated from by the other, for this is not equitable.

    2nd: If it is agreed not to observe the rules exactly, but one party demands indulgences, he should then be as willing to allow them to the other.

    3rd: No false move should ever be made to extricate yourself out of a difficulty, or to gain an advantage, for there can be no pleasure in playing with a man once detected in such unfair practice.

    4th: If your adversary is long in playing, you ought not to hurry him, or express any uneasiness at his delay, not even by looking at your watch, or taking up a book to read; you should not sing, nor whistle, nor make a tapping with your feet on the floor, or with your fingers on the table, nor do anything that may distract his attention, for all these things displease, and they do not prove your skill in playing, but your craftiness and your rudeness.

    5th: You ought not to endeavour to amuse and deceive your adversary by pretending to have made bad moves and saying you have now lost the game, in order to make him secure and careless, and inattentive to your schemes, for this is fraud and deceit, not skill in the game of Chess.

    6th: You must not, when you have gained a victory, use any triumphing or insulting expressions, nor show too much of the pleasure you feel, but endeavour to console your adversary, and make him less dissatisfied with himself by every kind and civil expression that may be used with truth, such as, you understand the game better than I, but you are a little inattentive, or, you play too fast, or, you had the best of the game, but something happened to divert your thoughts and that turned it in my favour.

    7th: If you are a spectator while others play, observe the most perfect silence, for if you give advice you offend both the parties: Him against whom you give it, because it may cause him to lose the game, and him in whose favour you give it, because, though it be good and he follow it, he loses the pleasure he might have had if you had permitted him to think till it occurred to himself. Even after a move or moves you must not, by replacing the pieces, show how they might have been placed better, for that displeases, and might occasion disputes or doubts about their true situation.

    All talking to the players lessens or diverts their attention and is, therefore, unpleasing, nor should you give the least hint to either party, by any kind of noise or motion; if you do, you are unworthy to be a spectator.

    If you desire to exercise or show your judgment, do it in playing your own game, when you have an opportunity, not in criticizing, or meddling with, or counseling the play of others.

    Lastly, if the game is not to be played rigorously, according to the rules before mentioned, then moderate your desire of victory over your adversary, and be pleased with one over yourself.

    Snatch not eagerly at every advantage offered by his unskillfulness or inattention, but point out to him kindly that by such a move he places or leaves a piece en prise unsupported, that by another he will put his King into a dangerous situation, etc.

    By this general civility (so opposite to the unfairness before forbidden) you may happen indeed to lose the game, but you will win what is better:  His esteem, his respect, and his affection, together with the silent approbation and good will of the spectators.

haut de page

Une nuit aux échecs

Les Mille et Une Nuits, traduction de Joseph-Charles Mardrus

Robert Laffont, "Bouquins", 1990

"49^e nuit.  Histoire du roi Omar al-Némân"

    Alors la jeune femme se leva et vint prendre Scharkân par la main et le fit s’asseoir à ses côtés et lui dit: "Prince Scharkân, sans doute joues-tu aux échecs." Il dit: "Certes, ô ma maîtresse, mais, de grâce !  Ne sois point comme celle dont se plaint le poète»:

    Je parle en vain ! Broyé par l’amour, que ne puis-je à sa bouche heureuse me désaltérer et, d’une gorgée à ses lèvres bue, respirer la vie !

    Ce n’est point qu’elle me néglige ou ne soit point pour moi pleine d’attentions; ce n’est point qu’elle diffère de faire porter le jeu d’échecs pour me distraire.  Mais est-ce là la distraction ou le jeu dont a soif mon âme ?

    Et d’ailleurs, pourrais-je lui tenir tête, moi qui suis fasciné par le jeu en coulisse de ses yeux, les regards de ses yeux qui pénètrent mon foie !

    Mais la jeune femme, souriante, approcha les échecs et commença le jeu. Et Scharkân, chaque fois que c’était son tour, au lieu de faire attention à son jeu,  la regardait au visage, et il jouait tout de travers, mettant le cheval à la place de l’éléphant et l’éléphant à la place du cheval.  Alors elle se mit à rire et lui dit: "Par le Messie ! que ton jeu est savant !" Il répondit: "Oh ! mais c’est la première partie. D’ordinaire ça ne compte pas !" Et l’on rangea le jeu de nouveau.  Mais elle le vainquit une seconde fois, et une troisième, quatrième, et cinquième fois.  Puis elle lui dit: "Voici qu’en toutes choses tu es vaincu ! " Il répondit: "Ô ma souveraine,  il sied d’être le vaincu d’une partenaire telle que toi !"

        haut de page

Wilhelm, le joueur d'échecs

 Laurence VIALLE

    Cinq minutes d'inattention, de la part de Wilhelm Steinitz, lors de la partie contre Anderssen, dans le tournoi pour le titre de premier champion du monde des échecs, à Londres, en 1866.

    Dans une salle close, sans fenêtre, aux murs jaunis, deux hommes sont assis, face à face, aux extrémités d'une table sur laquelle est peinte un échiquier.

    Des hommes, de rares dames, accoutrés façon fin du dix-neuvième siècle, sont assis autour d'eux, un peu en retrait. D'une entente tacite, les deux hommes ne s'intéressent pas à leur entourage, quant aux gens qui les regardent, ils ont les yeux posés sur la table et, peut-être par pudeur ou par simple convention sociale, ils regardent très peu le visage, l'expression, l'individualité reliée aux mains qui déplacent les pièces. Le premier joueur porte une cinquantaine d'années comme l'on porterait un manteau emprunté. Son regard, d'un bleu perçant, semble à celui d'un jeune enfant qui observe tout avec curiosité. Seuls son crâne dégarni et sa gorge pendante laissent paraître une certaine lassitude.

    L'autre est jeune, il a vingt-huit ans, grand, gros, il porte une barbe en queue de paon, les cheveux sont de longueur moyenne, rien qui ne soit choquant pour un jeune intellectuel de son époque. Il impose sa stature comme un train arrive en gare.

    Cet homme, un peu trop jeune pour la place qu'il occupe, s'égare dans ses pensées.

    -- C'est un éternel défi que de jouer avec lui. Ils disent tous qu'il est impitoyable, moi je le trouve plutôt habile, le vieux renard.

    Grâce à quelques victoires, qui n'étaient pas du tout prévues en ma faveur, je me suis attiré un petit groupe de partisans.

    Ces gens (jeunes fanatiques pour la plupart) ont fait en sorte que je joue ici aujourd'hui.

    Anderssen, le grand-maître, déclare partout qu'il a pour moi une très grande estime. Il dit que je figure parmi les recrues les plus prometteuses.

    Dans un journal, il déclarait, suite au tournoi d'il y a trois ans, que des jeunes, comme moi, lui faisaient courir du sang neuf dans les veines. Bon, je n'ai rien à ajouter à cela. Je suis arrivé sixième à ce tournoi, c'était minable.

    Une chose, au plus profond de moi a changé depuis ce tournoi. Maintenant, je sais que je veux faire une carrière avec ce métier. J'ai compris que de toute façon, il est trop tard. Je ne ferais jamais plus rien d'aussi bien que cela et puis, c'est toute ma vie.

    Je ne suis quand même pas arrivé ici complètement dénué. Ça fait des mois que je me prépare. Il ne peut pas savoir à quel point j'ai étudié son jeu. Il doit y avoir longtemps que personne ne lui a rendu cet hommage. J'ai recherché toutes les transcriptions possibles des parties qu'il a disputées. Cela en valait vraiment la peine... Même celle que j'ai dû acheter à cet escroc, un petit filou de faubourg.  J'avais fait une offre d'achat à son petit frère, il n'avait qu'à me la copier. Ce jeune morveux n'a pas voulu et la crapule qui lui sert de grand frère a sauté sur l'occasion. Il m'a vendu l'original et le péteux s'est retrouvé sans rien... Tant pis pour lui, quand votre frère est un voleur, il faut apprendre à être généreux. Toutes ces parties ont façonné le contenu de mes études. Elles étaient toutes importantes, je les connais toutes par cœur (enfin presque !) Grâce à ces précieuses études, je sais que je peux le prendre par surprise, il ne s'attend pas au nouveau moi. Je vais le dérouter et ses lèvres n'auront plus que la force de grincer le juron  «malepeste» !

    Cela suffit avec la vantardise ! Non, ce n'en est pas,  j'ai le droit de prétendre à le vaincre.  Je sais que je peux gagner en ne répondant pas à ses attaques. C'est un très grand guerrier, un loup de la pire race, à presque cinquante ans, il est plus vif qu'un serpent.  Mais... Il est habitué à ce que l'on réponde à ses attaques par d'autres attaques... Erreur, ce serait la pire façon de faire, ce serait signer mon arrêt de mort. Dans chaque acte agressif, il y a toujours un talon d'Achile, moi je répondrai différemment à son jeu. Il n'a jamais joué contre une forteresse, aujourd'hui, la forteresse, c'est moi.

    Wilhelm, vous n'êtes qu'un prétentieux !

    Elle aurait dit ça de sa voix la plus tranchante, plus tranchante qu'une hache.  La hache sur le cou du coupable... Ma mère avait le sens du juste, et une terrible punition tombait sur le moins juste. Elle aurait décidé de tous les châtiments, de la manière la plus partiale, selon ses préjugés. À l'en croire, nous étions tout bons pour la potence. Elle ne connaissait pas la justification, l'atténuation de la cause.

    Pour elle, un regard porté à ma cousine, à ses formes longues et gracieuses, un regard qui eut porté en soi traces d'éternité, était puni à coups de bâton.

    Wilhelm, votre prétention vous perdra ! Et sur cela, elle avait bien raison. Je n'ai à peine que trente ans et déjà, je suis esclave de ma passion.  C'est cette passion, seulement cette passion qui peut me procurer cet immense bonheur que je ne crois pas être capable de décrire.

    Prétentieux ? Oui, je crois que oui. Mais ma prétention, la seule, la vraie, c'est celle qui me permet de rester de longues heures assis à penser, habillé de ce grand et robuste corps. Ce corps qui servirait mieux, à court terme, mon peuple en travaillant aux champs.  Cela, selon moi est mon unique péché.  J'ai la prétention d'être plus utile assis que debout.

    Nous ne sommes pas tous pareils, heureusement. Pauvre étudiant à Vienne, je ne sais pas ce que j'aurais fait sans le bon patron d'auberge qui, de temps en temps, m'offrait une assiette de soupe chaude pour combler mon estomac affaibli. Il eut été à la table de flanc, absorbé par une partie lui aussi, que le cas de nos estomacs ne se serait pas réglé aussi facilement.  C'est pour cela que je suis content de ce que chacun de nous est, et que je sais ce que moi je dois être. Le premier champion du monde des échecs.

    Je repense à mes débuts, mes premières heures passionnées, entièrement dédiées à soupeser l'influence d'un coup. Je n'exécutais jamais de mouvement sans réfléchir, très longtemps, sur les éventuelles réponses, toutes, même les plus inusitées. Et les contre-coups que j'aurais pu y faire. J'allais en avant, comme cela, jusqu'à ce que je ne puisse plus contenir toutes ces données. Finalement, je me lançais à l'assaut.

    Les années passaient, je grandissais, l'estime que je maintenais pour ma petite personne aussi et c'est pour cela que je me dirigeais droit vers la catastrophe. Et oui, la fin la plus terrible qui peut frapper quelqu'un d'exceptionnel, c'est de devenir minable. Laisser la paresse de l'intellect surpasser l'imagination. Je stagnais. Je jouais aux échecs comme certains vont à confesse ou d'autres côtoient l'amour, sans grande conviction.

    Je me contentais d'en donner toujours seulement un peu plus que ce que pouvait faire mon adversaire, j'avais cessé depuis longtemps d'évaluer toutes les combinaisons possibles et c'est pour cela que, continuant de la même façon, je serais toujours resté un joueur médiocre.  J'étais entré dans le cycle de ces joueurs qui, toujours assis aux mêmes tables, dans les mêmes cafés, jouent toujours les mêmes parties contre des adversaires qui ne connaissent que trop bien les mêmes pas de danse. Une vieille troupe de cirque qui exécute chaque soir son numéro, omettant l'enthousiasme d'antan.

    Le rite était devenu le suivant. L'échiquier sous le bras et le ventre vide, j'arrivais au café. Je m'approchais d'une table ou, de préférence, deux nobles ancêtres, comme deux automates, jouaient une partie refaite déjà à l'infini. Je suivais la partie pendant un temps et demandais ensuite l'honneur de disputer une partie avec celui de ces messieurs qui avait eu une finale heureuse.

    Je ne dis jamais que je voudrais tenter ma chance, ceci aux échecs est une expression qui n'a pas sa place.

    Ils commençaient à me connaître, mais l'honneur de leur seigneurie n'aurait su leur permettre de se soustraire à la proposition. Pour moi, ils étaient devenus tous si monotones, je dis  devenus  parce qu'avant, avant de savoir comment les battre, ils étaient mes maîtres, je leur prêtais les mêmes vertus que les Grecs entretenaient pour leurs divinités. Mais voilà, il y avait trop longtemps qu'ils avaient cessé de chercher quelque chose de nouveau, d'ailleurs plus personne ne leur proposait de nouveauté, ou si peu. La tour d'ivoire avait grandi et durci, ils étaient vieux, et donc respectables, et plus personne n'osait les déranger. Ils se couchaient le soir avec toutes leurs illusions intactes.

    Comme pour des curés: On se décoiffe, on les appelle mon père et on va à la messe quand une occasion s'y prête, mais qui imagine vraiment que par eux passe la force céleste ?

    Beaucoup de jeunes n'avaient pas l'audace nécessaire pour proposer une partie à l'un de ces vieux boucs qui, sûrement, l'aurait regardé avec mépris. C'est que tout le monde commettait la même erreur, tous se laissaient impressionner et les suivaient dans leur cheminement de jeu. Leur proposer une nouvelle sortie de jeu aurait signifie les confondre, les dérouter, leur enlever leurs réponses toutes faites.  La nouveauté, l'inconnu, voilà ce qui leur aurait fait peur.

    Mon jeu, plus jeune, plus svelte avait le dont de leur faire prendre conscience de leur âge avancé, ils réalisaient, tout d'un coup, qu'ils étaient engagés dans un processus irréversible. Une peur amère les prenait à la gorge, un sentiment de panique venait leur serrer la tête, les empêchait de penser. Loin de moi l'idée de diminuer ces agréables fidèles des cafés viennois. Ils m'ont aidé, ne serait-ce que pour réaliser ce que je ne voulais pas, ils m'ont aidé, dis-je à définir mon destin.

    Ainsi, ils perdaient et moi, j'empochais la petite somme sur la table, pourcentage des mises effectuées durant la partie. Ces pauvres diables savaient, ils le savaient, avant même de commencer la partie, que je gagnerais.  Dans mes yeux, il n'y avait pas de place pour le retour en arrière. C'est tout mon être qui venait les toiser, ils n'avaient plus qu'à architecturer leur défaite.

    Sans autre cérémonie, je me levais, refusais la revanche, rangeais les pièces de l'échiquier et le peu de gloire récoltée dans la boîte de bois. Avec un joli sourire, timide et humble, je laissais le vieux, hébété d'incompréhension, les yeux égarés, fixés encore sur la table qui avait supporté sa défaite. Une main qui, négligemment, grattait son front malsain. Je les abandonnais devant la défaite.

    En reculant devant la revanche, que l'honneur aurait dicté, je me dirigeais vers la sortie. Une fois sur deux, quelque jeune imberbe se dressait sur mon chemin. Une fausse contenance lui donnait l'air plus surpris que moi de cette rencontre. Il en profitait pour me saluer, avec le respect dû.

    Tout en me prenant l'épaule et en me félicitant pour ma victoire, ses yeux tenaient un autre langage. L'espérance de ces jeunes idiots était que je me rappelle les avoir déjà vus pratiquer le digne sport du damier et que je leur propose une partie pour avoir le luxe de me la refuser. Ils restaient des heures, manquaient des cours importants dans le but de perfectionner leur jeu aux échecs. Ils me connaissaient, ne me parlaient pas mais, à voix basse, parlaient de moi.

    Je gagnais les vieux, alors qu'ils n'osaient même pas leur proposer une partie.

    Àprès avoir fait semblant de me reconnaître, ils me couvraient de leurs fleurs, de leurs compliments.  J'étais le plus grand, le plus fort, l'orgueil de ma génération.  Eux-mêmes aimaient jouer aux échecs, mais, jamais, ils n'auraient espéré atteindre un niveau si imposant. Après quelques instants d'émouvante dévotion, je mettais un frein, je leur proposais de disputer avec moi une partie. Non ! Peur.  J'étais bien trop brave. Comment auraient-il osé se mesurer à moi ? Comment... ?

    Ils ne voulaient pas jouer. Perdre mais risquer d'apprendre quelque chose, non, ce qu'ils voulaient c'était avoir leur nom écrit au tableau des tournois et être acclamés par leurs copains. Je les connaissais bien, j'étais l'un des leurs, avant.  Avant ma rencontre avec le vieux Joseph.

    Trois heures du matin, une fine pluie se déposait doucement à nos pieds. Depuis onze heures, nous n'avions pas abandonné la terrasse. Tous nous avaient laissés seuls. Nacha nous avait courageusement apporté de la bière, juste un peu avant, mais elle avait finalement décidé de fermer ses portes et était allée se réfugier dans le lit qu'elle partageait avec ses deux filles. Le petit matin aurait tôt fait de l'en délogée.

    La première partie, celle que nous terminions à l'instant, avait été un fiasco pour moi. Le vieux Joseph m'avait battu. Je ne lui avais pas opposé le dixième de résistance que j'aurais pu. Je jouais toujours en fonction de l'adversaire qui était assis en face de moi, je n'aurais jamais cru que cet ancêtre en avait autant à me montrer. Mon roi couché, gisait là, dans sa déchéance…

    Le vieux Joseph pris l'échiquier, le retourna et commença à replacer les pièces aux endroits destinés au commencement d'une nouvelle partie. Incrédule, je le regardais. Il mit toutes les pièces, lentement, chaque mouvement était accompagné de toute la force de sa concentration. Après avoir méticuleusement tout placé, chaque joueur ayant son petit carré blanc à droite, chaque reine sur sa couleur, chaque rangée de petits soldats armés, tournés vers l'ennemi, prêts au combat, n'attendant que l'ordre du général, le vieux s'appuya sur ses coudes et se mit à attendre.

    Je ne comprenais toujours pas le pourquoi de cette deuxième chance.

    Cet homme surprenant ne me regardait pas, son regard était fixé un peu au-dessus de mon épaule droite et, intuitivement, je savais ce qu'il voyait.

    C'était moi, le vrai moi, celui qui n'avait pas bu toutes ces bières en trop, celui qui ne s'était pas laissé aller à des coups faciles, sans profondeur de champ. Tous ces stupides coups, que je m'étais abandonné à faire durant la première partie, un peu par paresse, un peu parce que l'enivrement et le sentiment de grandeur, dérivant des nues de l'alcool, m'avaient fait croire que même en ne regardant pas très loin, j'aurais toujours trouvé une solution, tel le chat qui, envoyé en l'air, trouve toujours le moyen de retomber sur ses pattes.

    La défaite m'avait fait l'effet d'une douche froide. Le vieux Joseph avait tout vu et il semblait sûr, maintenant, qu'en recommençant il se mesurerait à un jeune joueur intelligent, qui aspire à utiliser toutes ses capacités. C'était cela qu'il regardait au-dessus de mon épaule, ce moi plein de rêves, de soif de conquêtes, qui tirerait profit de tout le pouvoir intellectuel mis à la disposition de ce corps maintenant lucide. Celui qui utiliserait cette faculté de penser, d'élaborer à dimensions humaines, une partie qui le porterait, nous porterait, ce jeune intellectuel et moi, vers la joie sincère découlant de la victoire.

    Je donnais le coup d'envoi pour une position de base facile, élastique, visant à l'avantage.

    Le plus simple aurait peut-être été de chercher à manger plus, d'échanger en tramant d'en prendre toujours un de plus. Une fois l'adversaire en difficulté, à bout de souffle, je pourrais le mettre mat avec un avantage de deux ou trois pièces, achever ce roi seul, abandonné de ses forces. J'avais déjà pratiqué ce genre de parties, trop souvent. Je décidais de ne plus jamais y avoir recours.  Je méprisais maintenant la facilité et me faisais le serment de laisser la médiocrité des parties mathématiques aux joueurs sans imagination.

    Inventer, je voulais réinventer la partie d'échecs, ce soir-là, et Joseph savait ce qu'il stimulait en moi en tenant ses yeux fixés là où, avant, personne n'avait jamais rien vu.

    Àprès une belle élaboration du champ de bataille et quelques coups menaçants pour le conduire où je voulais, la victoire était dans ma poche. Je ne saurais retracer précisément nos mouvements. Dans tous les moments qui se trouvent au-delà de la compréhension humaine, l'intellect est tellement occupé à fournir l'effort, qui sert à se rapprocher de la divinité, que la mémoire ne parvient à enregistrer que les rares moments d'hésitation.

    Joseph m'a-t-il laissé l'emporter ?  A-t-il facilité ma réussite ?

    Non, Joseph n'aurait pas pu me donner comme vérité un mensonge.

    Tout pour moi, tout le reste de ma vie dépendait de cet instant. Plus cette certitude se faisait concrète devant mes yeux, plus l'adversaire me rendait les choses difficiles, plus j'étais heureux.

    Étrangement, après un premier temps, une petite troupe de gens s'était amassée autour de nous. Je m'aperçus qu'il ne pleuvait plus et que l'air avait perdu cette pesanteur nauséabonde qu'il avait toujours eue avant et que,  jusqu'à cet instant, je n'avais jamais remarquée.

    Àprès le mat, sans proférer une parole, je me levais de ma chaise et m'éloignais de la table, de la terrasse, du petit attroupement et du monde en général.

     J'étais nouveau.

    Cette nuit-là, je ne sais plus si c'est moi qui volais ou si c'est le monde entier qui était descendu d'une douzaine de mètres au-dessous de moi.

    L'histoire a donc suivi son cours et me voilà jeune prétendant au trône de champion du monde. Celui qui remportera ce titre en deviendra le premier porteur de tout les temps. Car s'il y a eu plusieurs tournois, jamais l'univers (Angleterre-France-Autriche) ne s'était doté d'un championnat mondial.  C'est le premier, et il sera à moi !  Je ne peux croire à ma chance...

    Je sais que mon adversaire compte sur sa forte personnalité pour que les autres lui répondent en son langage. Ceci est une erreur que je ne ferai pas, car elle me coûterait la partie. Je serai fort, une forteresse imprenable. Il m'attaquera, mais je ne répondrai pas. Il s'épuisera sur mes murailles et, à aucun moment, je ne me préoccuperai des défis lancés, des menaces vaines. Quand l'on veut arriver à un but, l'orgueil n'a pas sa place. Je lui laisserai donc le rôle du conquérant. Moi, je n'aspire qu'à la victoire, je ne veux que devenir le premier champion du monde des échecs.  Échecs, un bien drôle de mot, ceci dans un bien drôle de monde…

    Bon ! Il a encore commencé avec un de ses mouvements agressifs... Il veut me faire trembler. Je dois, dès maintenant élaborer ma petite maison et, s'il veut venir s'y frotter, il y perdra ses plumes.

    Déjà, en emmenant mon cavalier, je couvre.  Ensuite, mon roi... De biais...

    Wilhelm Steinitz remporta la partie, ainsi que le tournoi et fut consacré champion du monde des échecs. Le premier de l'histoire mondiale de ce très beau jeu. Félicitations à ce jeune homme.

     haut de page

A walk with Garry Kasparov

(Internet, may 1995)

Last round, VSB Tournament, Amsterdam, May 18th 1995

    After resigning against Piket, Kasparov does not immediately come to the analysis room where Piket, grandmasters and other observers are waiting.  I can understand that.  This new defeat, the second in a six-round tournament, must be a terrible blow to him.  But just as Piket starts to explain his win by himself, the World Champion comes in after all.  I admire him for that.  As always, he analyses politely and objectively, admitting that after his 19...Re4?, 20.Bg3! was probably already the winning move.

    But his heart does not seem to be in this analysis.  He gazes away from the board several times, muttering into himself, seemingly unaware of the TV camera he is directly staring into.  «I'm trying to reconstruct this», he repeats.  «We mathematically checked every move here, eight years ago in Seville.  It is in my notebook.  But I can't remember.  I'm trying to reconstruct.  We analyzed this for days».

    If that is true, this also the second time in three days he forgets his analysis - against Lautier with the inexplicable 16.Nd6+?? where he knew his computer says 16.e5  is practically winning.

    He seems subdued, in mild shock, analysing rather timidly and forlornly, thinking of those forgotten lines somewhere in his computer.  Gone are the bravado of earlier sessions, with pieces slammed down onto winning squares, broad laughs that accompanied his stunning ideas, the triumph with which he revealed the most remarkable thing about his crushing win against Topalov - that his queen had never moved from d8!

    Even Dokhoyan, his second, who has always sat silently through these sessions, now boldly grabs a pawn to suggest a move.  He has never done that before.  Next time it will be a knight, maybe even a rook.  The kingdom crumbles.

    The camera running, Dutch TV asks Kasparov why he didn't play the Kings Indian.  «Good question,» he says.  «I don't know.  I planned to play it.  But I changed my mind five minutes before the game.  I shouldn't have.  The Grunfeld was a very bad choice.»

    Indeed a few hours earlier, I had been wondering why, after 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4, Kasparov thought for five minutes before playing g6.  Some sort of psychological warfare ? - did he want to suggest to Piket he was still hesitating about what to play ?  So he had been hesitating.

    I ask him: «Do you mean to say that Re4 might be in your computer and you forgot about it ?»

    «Maybe, maybe,» he says.  «I'm just curious to know.  Are you curious too ?»

    «Yes I am.»

    «Then come to my hotel and we'll check.»

    I'm very surprised at this.  He hardly knows me.  That is, fourteen years ago, when he played his first major tournament in the west, the Interpolis in Tilburg, I interviewed him. He remembers that.  He also knows that years later, I wrote an extremely unfavourable review of his book (Child of Change) in New in Chess magazine.  Still, he granted me a short interview during this tournament.  I appreciated that very much.  And now he wants to show me his openings secrets ?

    When the analysis is over, he watches Topalov - Lautier for a while on a monitor, analysing from the screen.  Topalov is winning, which would give Kasparov a shared first place with Lautier after all, but he does not betray any excitement about this.  We watch in the small room where the Dutch Teletext man is working - not in the VIP-room where, after games, Piket, Lautier and Topalov will chat and drink with the tournament entourage.  Kasparov has never been there, and he also didn't come to the tournament dinner.  He doesn't mix, he's not a man you easily approach.

    He asks me once more if I will come with him.

    Then I lose track of him for a while but ten minutes later, he storms into the analysis room again, a heavenly smile on his face as if he has been told he has been awarded the win against Piket after all.  It turns out Dokhoyan has found a draw, beginning with 29...Qf8.  Together with Piket and others who come flocking back in, they analyse again.  These sessions used to be demonstrations, but now, apart from Piket and Dokhoyan, lesser grandmasters make suggestions too.  But not everything is permitted.  When a Belgian master has the temerity to suggest a move, Kasparov points out it is refuted by Kf1.  The Belgian still mutters something.  Kasparov «King f1». The Belgian:«Yes, but...»  Kasparov:«I told you, King f1.  Repeat after me, King f1».  The analysis stops, everybody waiting, holding their breaths, until the Belgian has said: «I see, King f1».

    They find Piket could also have won after 29...Qf8.

    Then the World Champion is asked to meet the public in the demonstration hall, and he does.  I admire him even more.  He answers a few questions, says Piket has played really well, is warmly applauded, and leaves.  He does not have time to wait for the end of Topalov-Lautier, or the ceremony, even if he still might win a shared first prize.  He's in a hurry, later in the evening he will be driven to Cologne where he will play the computer Chess Genius on Saturday.  He beckons me to follow him, to come and see whether 19....Re4 is in his computer.

    It turns out we don't take a taxi, but go walking.  Kasparov and Dokhoyan must have made this walk several times before, but now I have trouble keeping them from taking wrong turns everywhere.  They analyse.  The pace is unbelievable, even if I already knew Kasparov has clocked himself at 12 minutes for the distance, beating Lautier by 4 minutes.

    He's not the kind of man to point out interesting buildings to, or the unbelievably beautiful light shining in the streets, at least not under these circumstances.  He seems to have forgotten me, doesn't speak a word to me, except for one moment in the middle of a square when he stops me and says: «f6.  It draws, maybe.  f6, instead of h5».

    I know that whenever I will pass that spot in the future, I will think (f6) for an instant, and remember this strange walk.  He's obviously grieving, and in that grief, boyishly vulnerable.  What does this king want, taking a total stranger to see his secrets in this dark hour in his life ?  He knows I'm a writer, that I will do the tournament book - that this walk will be in that book.

    In his hotel, we head straight for Dokhoyan's room, a broom closet next to Kasparov's suite.  On a table there is a chessboard with an abandonned position, clearly the remains of a Kings Indian.  Kasparov throws his raincoat on a chair, slumps down on a settee, and I sit beside him.  Without a word, he opens his notebook, types his password, leaves Norton Commander, goes to ChessBase, navigates the Grunfeld tree to the variation he has been playing this afternoon, for the first time since he played it against Karpov in Seville, eight years ago.

    Moves, positions flash by at incredible speed.  Occasionally, Kasparov glances, judges, remembers something, stops for a millionth of a second.  I can't believe what I'm seeing - no games, just raw analysis, prepared for the World Championship match in 1987, variations branching off on and after move 19 - the vaults of wisdom.  A name, Ivanych, often appears in brackets with the leading moves of subvariations.  Never heard of - an analyst for Kasparov at that time ?

    Kasparov seems oblivious to the fact that I am seeing all these Grunfeld secrets, perhaps rightly assuming that I will not be able to remember anything.  But can this really be the same person who, a few days before, told me that he will never use the Internet to send his analyses, for fear they might be intercepted by his enemies ?

    I feel overwhelmed, nauseated almost, by the sheer amount of this knowledge, the amount of work that goes into World Championship level chess.  All these myriads of variations that have been invented, evaluated, discussed, memorized, in the vague hope of ever improving a score by half a point - but probably to be played never at all.  And theses are only the sublines in a subline of a line in the Grunfeld.  On d4, Kasparov also plays the Kings Indian, the Queens Indian, the Nimzo Indian, the Slav, the Queens Gambit, the Benoni.  Not to speak of 1.e4  With White, he plays 1.d4 and 1.e4

    He is desolated, but he cannot find 19.Na4, let alone 19...Re4.  He's absolutely sure Na4 is in one of his computers somewhere, but it doesn't seem to be in this one.  He gives up - his curiosity about 19.Na4 will have to wait, and so will mine.  He switches off the notebook, shakes my hand - the audience is over.  Doesn't show me to the door, doesn't say another word.  Without looking at me again, he sits down at the table with the chessboard, and Dokhoyan and he start to analyse.

    I'm back in the playing hall just in time for the ceremony.  Late in their endgame, Topalov has let Lautier escape, and Lautier is now the sole winner of the 1995 VSB tournament.

    The final position of Piket - Kasparov is still on one of the demonstration boards and suddenly I realise Kasparov's queen is still on d8 - and has never moved in all of the 41 moves of that game.

(c) Tim Krabbé 1995

   haut de page

Le Noble Jeu des Échecs

de Jacques de Cessoles

adapté par Jean-Michel Péchiné

Découvertes Gallimard, tirage limité. Édition hors commerce.

    En l'an de grâce 1300, un moine dominicain piémontais du nom de Jacques de Cessoles entame une série de prêches dans lesquels il fait un parallèle entre les figurines du jeu d'échecs et l'organisation de la société médiévale.  Sur un ton moralisateur et allégorique, il définit les devoirs et les fonctions de chaque figurine, emblème d'une classe sociale.  En 1315, devant le succès de ses sermons, il les compile en un volume intitulé Le Livre des Moeurs des Hommes et des Devoirs des Nobles au travers du Jeu des Échecs.

    Clercs et nobles, chevaliers et prélats s'arrachent l'ouvrage qui est traduit à travers toute l'Europe.  En 1372, Jean de Vignay l'adapte en ancien français.  Que vous soyez joueur ou profane, noble ou manant, découvrez les enluminures de ce manuscrit exceptionnel ayant appartenu à Charles V le Sage, roi de France, et soyez édifié par les paroles du moine de Cessoles.

Les Moralités

    La littérature médiévale se veut didactique et satirique.  À partir de l'an 1000, les trouvères, puis après eux, les auteurs des romans de chevalerie illustrent systématiquement leurs récits d'une partie d'échecs.  Ainsi, les joutes galantes et délictueuses de Lancelot du Lac, le plus célèbre des preux chevaliers de la Table Ronde, font le délice des gentes dames et des barons; tout autant que les aventures épiques de Palamède, l'un de ses compagnons d'armes, dont le blason est un échiquier noir et blanc.

    Les moines copistes traduisent ces récits en toutes langues.  En ce Moyen Age aussi épris d'épopées fantastiques que de foi chrétienne, le «jeu des rois» devient le «roi des jeux» pour les classes oisives et guerrières.  À partir de 1200, en un tournemain, c'est la folie du jeu qui gagne les villes et les campagnes.  Dans les tavernes, qui fleurissent alors jusqu'aux confins des royaumes, au contact des ribauds, les gentilshommes se dévoient.  Les parties font l'objet des enjeux les plus divers.  En outre, le poids des figurines, massives, se chiffre en kilogrammes.  Entre les mains de ces joueurs impavides, les échecs sont une arme.  Parfois, il y a meurtre autour de l'échiquier.  Il faut moraliser, tonnent les prélats.

    Dès lors, il n'est pas étonnant que des ecclésiastiques entreprennent une moralisation des moeurs, au travers du jeu d'échecs.  Le premier de ces traités allégoriques est un court essai en latin, intitulé Quaedam moralitas de scaccorio, plus connu sous le nom d'Innocente Moralité.  Dans cet ouvrage, attribué au pape Innocent III, qui exerça son pontificat de 1198 à 1216, il est dit que «le monde ressemble à l'échiquier quadrillé noir et blanc, ces deux couleurs symbolisant les conditions de vie et de mort, de bonté et péché.  Les figurines sont les hommes de ce monde, qui ont une essence commune, occupant les charges et les emplois, et disposant des titres qui leur sont dévolus dans cette vie, réunis par une même destinée malgré leurs conditions respectives différentes»; s'ensuit une description de chaque pièces, de leur pouvoir et de leurs diverses fonctions.

    De par la dignité de son auteur, l'Innocente Moralité va être traduite et diffusée dans toute l'Europe.  Elle exercera ainsi une influence prépondérante, tant sur les auteurs postérieurs de Moralités, comme Jacques de Cessoles, que sur les membres du haut clergé voire de certains aristocrates, plutôt enclins jusqu'alors à condamner et à interdire «ce jeu vaniteux, qui laisse l'esprit en langueur et n'apporte guère de profit», hors le gain qu'on peut en attendre.

    C'est ainsi qu'un moine dominicain du nom de Jacques de Cessoles, originaire de la province d'Asti, en Italie, propose chaque dimanche, vers 1300, à ses concitoyens de méditer sur «ce jeu amusant», qui offre un parallèle utile entre l'organisation de la vie sociale et le nom et la puissance des figurines.  Vers 1315, au vu du succès croissant que ses prêches rencontrent, le moine compile par écrit ses sermons, en les enrichissant de quelques paraboles antérieures, conçues sur le même mode allégorique.  Jacques de Cessoles, dans son introduction, tient à rappeler l'origine du jeu des échecs qu'il situe à Babylone et attribue au philosophe Philométor.  Le penseur avait ordonné le jeu, en disposant de part et d'autre de la table, sur deux rangs, les figurines blanches et les figurines noires.  Déjà, il commençait à jouer avec l'un de ses disciples, dans la cour magnifique d'Evilmerodag, le roi tyrannique de Babylone.  Une foule de nobles curieux les observaient, s'interrogeant l'un l'autre, et ce jeu, à leurs yeux, présentait déjà bien des attraits; lorsque le Roi survint, alors, le philosophe, bien qu'en proie à une peur réelle, commença à instruire son souverain des moeurs et des règles dévolues à chaque pièce, en lui disant d'abord que le Roi doit posséder la justice et la clémence.

    Il l'instruisit ensuite de la forme de la Reine, et de son mouvement, précisant là aussi quels devaient être ses moeurs, chaste et fidèle en toutes circonstances.  Il lui enseigna la marche des Fous; en lui précisant que ceux-ci reproduisent les juges, justes conseillers, dont la présence en tous lieux du royaume est indispensable, car ce sont eux qui règlent les causes criminelles ainsi que les litiges qui naissent entre les individus.  Même chose pour les Chevaliers en armes, qui doivent demeurer sages et généreux, bien qu'ardents et impitoyables lorsqu'il s'agit de combattre pour la sauvegarde de la personne du Roi.

    Il lui expliqua que les Vicaires, positionnés aux angles, et figurés par les Tours, ont pour mission de restaurer l'autorité royale, lorsque les provinces ennemies se soulèvent.  Il l'instruisit encore des devoirs des gens du peuple, lesquels, dévoués corps et âme à leurs seigneurs, ne doivent jamais être méprisés.  Il ajouta enfin qu'il avait inventé ce jeu afin que les nobles et ceux qui vivent dans les délices et la quiétude évitent l'oisiveté.

    Entendant cela, le roi, estimant que ce vassal avait trouvé là un moyen noble et ingénieux de le critiquer, et séduit par la simplicité et la subtilité de ce jeu, décida de récompenser le philosophe de ce bienfait; avec munificence, comme il se doit.  En outre, lui, Evilmerodag, le despote, qui avait plongé son peuple dans l'affliction et qui menait jusqu'alors une vie impure et désordonnée, il décida de se conformer aux prescriptions de son sage conseiller.  Il devint juste, droit et généreux, et manifesta des vertus aux yeux de tous; puisqu'il est dit que «mener sa vie sans vertu n'est pas le propre de l'homme, mais de la bête sauvage».

    L'engouement pour Le Livre des Moeurs des Hommes et des Devoirs des Nobles, au travers du Jeu des Échecs est immense.  Au point que les bibliophiles considèrent aujourd'hui qu'il aura été l'ouvrage le plus traduit et diffusé en Europe, durant deux siècles, après la Bible.  Riches de vingt miniatures réalisées sur une feuille d'or fin, le manuscrit reproduit ci-après a appartenu à Charles V, dit le Sage, roi de France de 1364 à 1380.  La traduction en vieux français est l'oeuvre de Jean de Vignay.  Cet exemplaire exceptionnel, daté de 1372, est aujourd'hui conservé à la Bibliothèque d'Étude et de Conservation de la ville de Besançon, sous la nomenclature de référence MS 434.

Les quatre livres qui composent l'ouvrage

    Le sermon du moine dominicain de Cessoles est divisé en quatre livres et vingt-quatre chapitres.

Le premier livre traite de l'invention du jeu d'échecs.

Le deuxième livre traite des pièces nobles.

Le troisième livre décrit les devoirs des gens du peuple, c'est à dire, des pions.

    Les livres III et IV constituent les passages les plus remarquables de l'ouvrage.  Enflammé, Jacques de Cessoles s'exclame que «Le peuple est la gloire et la vie des nobles».  Ce sont ces deux livres qui valurent au sermon tant de copies et de traductions en toutes langues.

Le quatrième livre traite de leur mouvement et de leur déplacement.

    Curieusement, l'auteur ne présente que les pièces du camp des noirs.  Il procède comme si le lecteur était assis face à lui, disposant des pièces blanches, prêt à engager une partie.  Les règles proposées sont celles dite du «jeu lombard».  À cette époque, la Reine et les Fous ont une marche réduite.  Les maîtres italiens et espagnols réformeront ces règles primitives, lentes et désuètes, en introduisant un mode de déplacement dynamique de ces deux pièces, à la Renaissance.  Autorisée depuis lors à se déplacer dans toutes les directions, sans limite, la Reine est considérée de nos jours comme la pièce maîtresse du jeu.

Prologue

    «Au nom du Seigneur, amen.  Ici commence le prologue de ce Livre des Moeurs des Hommes et des Devoirs des Nobles, au travers du Jeu des Échecs, qui fut composé par le frère Jacques de Cessoles, de l'ordre des Frères Prédicateurs.  Ayant été prié par des frères de l'Ordre, ainsi que par divers séculiers, de transcrire l'amusant jeu des échecs, qui contient un enseignement remarquable quant à la conduite des moeurs ainsi que celle de la guerre, je réalise leur désir.  Il est vrai que j'en avais prêché au préalable le contenu au peuple, et cela avait plu à moult gentilshommes.»

De la forme du roi, de ses moeurs et de son état

    Ce royaume du monde, le roi le dirige lui-même et voici quels doivent être ses moeurs et comment il est représenté.  Le roi est assis sur son trône, revêtu d'un manteau pourpre qui est la couleur royale par excellence.  Il tient dans la main droite un sceptre et dans la main gauche un globe, qui sont les deux attributs de son rayonnement sur le monde.  La dignité royale, symbolisée par la couronne, est la gloire du peuple et tous doivent converger vers lui et obéir à son commandement.  Mais le roi se doit d'être juste et bon, car que serait-il en son royaume sans la hardiesse et la loyauté des ses chevaliers, la prudence et la droiture de ses juges, l'autorité de ses vicaires, la continence de sa reine et la concorde de son peuple ?

De la forme de la reine, de ses moeurs et de son état

    La reine se doit de demeurer en tous points chaste et honnête.  Sa forme fut fixée de la manière suivante:  Sur un trône est placée une belle dame, avec une couronne sur la tête.  Elle est enveloppée d'un manteau de fine étoffe, qui masque son corps à la concupiscence des hommes.  Car il ne faut oublier que la reine est assise à la gauche du roi par la grâce divine et pour les embrassades de son époux.  Il faut que la reine soit docile, issue d'une bone famille et soucieuse de l'éducation de ses enfants.  Sa sagesse ne doit pas seulement se révéler dans ses gestes, mais aussi dans ses paroles, surtout lorsque son époux lui confie un secret.  C'est pourquoi, dans la cité comme au combat, où elle évoluera avec précaution,  la reine ne doit jamais s'éloigner de son roi.

De l'état et de la forme des alphins,

de leurs devoirs et de leurs moeurs

    Il faut savoir que les alphins (les fous) ont été façonnés à la manière des juges, juchés sur une chaire et un livre ouvert sous les yeux, emplis des prescriptions du roi et de ses ordonnances.  Étant donné qu'il existe dans le royaume deux sortes de litiges, qui sont les causes criminelles et les différents liés aux affaires temporelles, comme la propriété, il fut nécessaire de créer deux juges.  L'un est placé à la gauche du roi, l'autre à sa droite.  Leur mission est de conseiller le souverain, puis de consigner par écrit les lois, nantis desquelles ils parcourent le royaume.  C'est pourquoi ils doivent observer autant de fermeté que de droiture, afin de ne pas se laisser corrompre ni par l'amour ni par l'argent, car leurs sentences sont comprises comme des paroles du roi.

De l'état et de la forme des chevaliers,

et de l'ordre de la chevalerie

    Le chevalier est représenté juché sur sa monture et paré de toutes ses armes.  Son corps est revêtu d'une armure.  Il se protège par un bouclier sur lequel est reproduit son blason et il tient une lance ou une épée dans la main droite.  Le chevalier se doit de posséder un cheval docile et entraîné pour le combat.  Lorsqu'il est armé chevalier, on le plonge dans un bain, afin qu'il mène un vie nouvelle, empreinte de vertus, parmi lesquelles la première est la loyauté.  Que le courage, la miséricorde et le souci permanent de protéger le peuple soient en lui, car, autant la dignité militaire surpasse les autres par l'honneur et la déférence, autant les chevaliers se doivent de se distinguer par l'observation des bonnes moeurs.

De l'état et de la forme des rocs

    La forme des rocs (les tours), qui sont les vicaires et les légats du roi, a été définie comme suit:  Ils portent un manteau de cuir à capuchon et tiennent dans la main droite un bâton de justice.  Étant donné que le roi ne peut être personnellement présent partout à la fois, il s'avéra nécessaire de créer cette noble fonction, et de la doubler, car les provinces du royaume sont vastes.  Les vicaires et les légats se déplacent à cheval et manifestent la puissance royale à tous les sujets.  Pour cela, en eux, doivent résider la justice, la piété, l'humilité, la patience, la pauvreté volontaire et la générosité.  Mais qu'ils resplendissent aussi de justice, parce que la justice elle-même est la plus brillante des vertus.  Les vicaires feront régner l'ordre jusqu'aux confins, aussi rapidement que l'inventeur de ce jeu leur accorda la faculté suprême de parcourir jusqu'à huit cases en un saut.

De l'état et de l'office des laboureurs

    Le paysan, comme tous les gens du peuple, est placé devant une pièce noble.  Ceci s'explique tout d'abord parce que les gens du peuple constituent en quelque sorte la couronne des nobles.  Ils doivent faire preuve de dévotion et satisfaire à toutes les demandes, qu'elles émanent du roi et de sa reine, ou de représentants qui parcourent le royaume.  Ainsi, le paysan porte dans la main droite une faux, avec laquelle il cueille le blé dont il fera la nourriture, et dans la gauche, un bâton avec lequel il conduit les troupeaux d'animaux, dont la viande servira de complément à l'alimentation.  Il dispose encore d'une serpe qu'il porte à sa ceinture, instrument au moyen duquel il taille les vignes et élague les arbres fruitiers.  Le paysan doit connaître les lois, s'acharner au travail et mépriser la mort lorsqu'il part au combat.

Des forgerons et des charpentiers

    Les artisans travaillent les métaux, frappent les monnaies d'or, construisent les coques des navires, et, à cet effet, coupent le bois.  C'est pourquoi, à l'entame du jeu, l'artisan est placé devant le cavalier, portant dans la main droite une dolabre, avec laquelle on aplanit le bois et autres matériaux.  Car que ferait le chevalier s'il n'avait devant lui celui qui lui prépare les mors et les éperons ?  Et quelle serait sa valeur, sans son cheval équipé et lui-même privé de toutes ses armes qui le parent ?  C'est pourquoi, lorsqu'ils accomplissent leurs besognes, les artisans doivent faire preuve de fidélité, de courage et de sagesse; car la vie des hommes qui naviguent, comme celle des chevaliers qui se ruent au combat, dépend de la qualité de leur travail.

De l'office des tailleurs

    De quelle façon vivraient les nobles, sans vêtements, si faisait défaut celui qui les fabrique et les vend?  Le tisserand et le notaire sont placés devant l'alphin de droite, car les actes authentiques doivent être consignés sur un papier de qualité.  Le tisserand est représenté muni des ciseaux, avec lesquels il coupe les morceaux d'étoffe, les tond, les teint et rase aussi les barbes.  Puisqu'ils s'occupent ainsi, aussi bien de la chair que des étoffes, il convient que tous exercent leur métier avec diligence et fermeté.  Ils doivent être sociables, honnêtes et modérés dans leurs paroles, ainsi que dire la vérité, pour que la cité se réjouisse en paix.  Mais si la guerre survient, alors, ils déposeront leurs ciseaux et les remplaceront par les armes, afin d'accompagner l'alphin au combat.

Du quatrième pion qui procède à toutes les mesures

    Le changeur est la quatrième pièce populaire.  Placé devant le roi, il a l'aspect suivant:  C'est un homme qui porte à la taille une brasse, qui sert à établir les mesures, et, nouée à la ceinture, une bourse renfermant de l'argent destiné à satisfaire ceux qui en réclament.  En effet, son rôle est de changer les monnaies, mais également de recueillir les dépôts d'argent.  C'est pourquoi les changeurs doivent éviter par-dessus tout les maux avarice et  cupidité.  Mais ils doivent aussi être attentifs aux promesses et rendre intégralement ce qui a été déposé chez eux.  S'ils sont placés devant le roi, c'est précisément parce qu'ils s'occupent des trésors royaux.  Ce sont eux qui répartiront les soldes aux soldats, lorsque le roi aura entrepris ss campagne.

Des médecins, des épiciers et des apothicaires

    Que feraient le roi, la reine et tous les autres, sans le recours d'un médecin ?  Le docteur est représenté assis devant la reine, sur une chaise magistrale.  À la ceinture, il porte les instruments métalliques usuels, pour le nettoyage des plaies et la guérison des blessures.  S'il a un livre ouvert sous les yeux, c'est que ce dernier symbolise la grammaire, la logique, la réthorique, la géométrie, la musique et l'astrologie, autant de sciences que le parfait médecin naturaliste doit connaître.  En outre, il fera preuve de pudeur, d'un langage poli et d'une chasteté corporelle irréprochable.  Car, n'oublions pas que le médecin doit veiller en premier à s'occuper des malaises de la reine et que  sa fonction le conduit parfois à observer des choses cachées et respectables.

Des taverniers qui hébergent et de ceux

qui vendent les viandes aux gens

    La sixième pièce populaire est l'aubergiste.  Il tient dans la main gauche le pain et le vin et, dans la droite, les clefs qui ouvrent les portes de sa maison.  Ces deux attributs symbolisent l'hospitalité.  Mais, comme les auberges sont des lieux ou éclatent régulièrement des rixes, cette pièce a été placée devant l'alphin de gauche, qui règle les litiges.  Sa mission est triple.  L'aubergiste se doit de bien nourrir ses hôtes, de bien servir les voyageurs et les combattants qui surviennent pour le repos, ainsi que de veiller à conserver en sûreté les biens que ceux-ci lui auront confiés.  Pour cela, il doit fuir le vice, la gourmandise et toute forme d'excès, car il est dit que «L'homme doit manger et boire pour vivre et non pas vivre pour boire et manger».

De l'état et de l'office des gardes des cités

    C'est à juste titre que le gardien de la cité a été placé devant le chevalier de gauche.  En effet, en temps de paix comme en temps de guerre, le gardien doit veiller à parcourir les remparts et les allées, afin de rechercher ce qui est nécessaire pour la défense de la cité.  Il trasmet ses recommandations au chevalier, duquel il reçoit ses ordres en retour.  Comme la quiétude de la communauté repose entre ses mains, le gardien de la cité devra faire preuve de vigilance, de conscience et d'un zèle profond; afin qu'il n'impute à aucun homme une faute qu'il aurait commise par manque de vertu.  Enfin, on observe qu'il dispose d'une brasse nouée à sa taille, car il a pour mission de recueillir les taxes imputables aux étrangers.

Des prodigues, des joueurs et des messagers

    Le jeu des échecs représente le pion situé devant le vicaire de gauche, de la façon suivante:  C'est un homme qui tient dans la main droite un peu d'argent à changer, dans la main gauche trois dés, et sur le ventre, nouée à la ceinture, une bourse remplie de lettres.  Le premier attribut symbolise les prodigues, qui dépensent sans compter, alors qu'il est dit que «celui qui ne regarde pas à la dépense mendie avant même de s'en apercevoir».  Le second, le joueur impénitent, qui, lorsqu'il se retrouve dans la nécessité, doit mendier ou voler pour survivre.  Le troisième, enfin, incarne le messager, qui transporte rapidement les lettres et les édits du roi aux quatre coins du royaume.  Le messager reçoit ses ordres du vicaire, voici la raison de son positionnement.

De la forme et de la façon de l'échiquier

et comment il est fait

    Il faut parler de l'échiquier, qui représente la ville de Babylone.  Il dispose de soixante-quatre cases, car chaque quartier de cette cité, construite selon un plan quadrillé, occupait un espace de seize mille pas de côté.  Ce chiffre, multiplié par quatre, équivaut à soixante-quatre mille lombards ou lieues gauloises.  En second lieu, il faut savoir que les rebords de la table, que l'on trouve parfois relevés, symbolisent les hautes murailles qui entouraient ladite cité.  Enfin, l'ultime chose à savoir est qu'il y a autant d'espace vide que d'espace occupé; car celui qui a la charge de gouverner la nation doit veiller à respecter un rapport équitable entre les sols occupés par les cités, les camps retranchés, les champs cultivés et les habitations isolées.

Comment le roi se meut de son premier

siège et comment il fait mat

    Le roi occupe une position centrale, au coeur du royaume.  Il se doit de prendre conseil auprès de ses sages conseillers, qui sont les alphins et les preux chevaliers, ces derniers étant la gloire du royaume.  Mais, si chacun se préoccupe égoïstement de ses seules affaires, et non de celles qu'il doit défendre, le royaume perd son nom et sa dignité.  Aussi, parce que le roi a une dignité suprême en raison de son titre, il n'était pas convenable qu'il s'éloignât trop vite de son trône, et qu'il ne s'aventure sans protection hors du royaume.  C'est pourquoi il ne progressera plus que d'un pas à la fois, après un premier saut légal de deux ou de trois cases, qui lui permet en un coup de visiter les gens du peuple et de passer ses troupes nobles en revue.

Du mouvement de la reine et comment

elle est hors de son siège

    Comme le roi et la reine sont d'une même chair, celle-ci ne progresse que d'une case à la fois.  En raison de sa fragilité physique, le combat lui est impropre.  Mais, si l'on veut comprendre pourquoi la reine s'expose ainsi aux dangers d'une bataille, il faut se souvenir que les hommes, de tous temps, emmenaient avec eux en campagne leurs femmes, et toute leur famille.  Car c'est une préoccupation légitime que le roi soit approvisionné en amour, comme il est légitime que le peuple se soucie que la question de la succession royale ne soit pas laissée en suspens.  C'est pourquoi la reine doit suivre son époux pas à pas.  En outre, au camp, comme au-delà des limites du royaume, elle se doit de se draper dans un voile de pudeur, afin de ne pas attiser la convoitise des hommes.

Comment les alphins doivent se déplacer

    Les alphins sont appelés «blanc» et «noir» en raison de leur course atypique de trois cases en trois cases, qui ne les mène, pour l'un, que sur des carrés noirs, pour l'autre, que sur des carrés blancs.  Ces trois cases correspondent aux trois missions des juges qu'ils représentent, et qui sont:  Soutenir une cause juste; délivrer des conseils empreints de droiture; juger suivant la loi sans jamais dévier du droit chemin.  Ainsi, ils parcourreront l'échiquier en six sauts de trois cases, ce dénominateur commun, chiffre parfait, avant de revenir à l'endroit exact d'où ils s'étaient élancés.  Ils accomplissent ainsi un mouvement circulaire, mais le cercle n'est-il pas cette figure géométrique parfaite ?

Comment les chevaliers doivent se déplacer

    Le chevalier parcourt l'échiquier à bride abattue, en bifurquant à droite ou à gauche, s'il le juge nécessaire, par un saut impromptu.  À son premier saut, celui de l'aile droite visite le paysan, puisque ce dernier lui délivre le fourrage nécessaire à l'alimentation de sa monture.  Il visite en second le tisserand, qu'il se doit de protéger, car celui-ci lui fournira des vêtements neufs, lorsqu'il regagnera le camp.  Il se repose enfin sur une case noire, à proximité immédiate du couple souverain; car son rôle est de préserver la couronne.  Mais, si le roi le lui ordonne, il se rue au combat et charge avec fureur les troupes ennemies, n'écoutant que son courage et offrant avec fermeté sa poitrine à leurs traits.

Comment les rocs doivent se déplacer

    Il est notoire que les vicaires n'ont pas de légitimité tant qu'ils ne se sont faits connaître dans le royaume.  Or, à l'entame des débats, ceux-ci occupent les cases situées aux angles de la table.  Ils s'y retrouvent enfermés, et n'ont d'autre possibilité que celle d'attendre que les nobles et le peuple leur ouvrent le passage.  Mais, comme leur autorité est grande, puisqu'ils sont les dépositaires de la toute puissance divine, dès qu'ils se fraient un chemin au travers des lignes, ils disposent de la faculté de parcourir en un saut les huit cases d'affilée, soit verticalement, soit horizontalement.  Leur ligne est droite et juste.  Ils font preuve alors d'une telle ardeur au combat qu'à eux seuls ils peuvent s'emparer d'un royaume et abattre la figure du roi ennemi.

haut de page

Solution Palo Boï :  A) Cc7 x e6       (quatre variantes)

                                             B) Cc7 - b5          (cinq variantes)

     haut de page / page up      graphique / graphics        accueil / home page