Every game at chess is a collabora tion, says "The Times." In the so-called "brilliant" examples, in which the conclusion is reached by a sudden sacrifice of material, much more often than.not the spectacular result due to the weakness of the conquered rather than to the strength of the conqueror. On this fact is based the modern criticism of Morphy's masterpieces. He was the first to develop his pieces, whether in attack defence, in the modern style,—and none of his opponents, who in other respects were not stronger than the average first-class amateur of today, had knowledge of this strategy, 'Andersen, a combinationist genius, was' short of practice when defeated in a famous match; he complained, with good reason, that form in chess cannot be kept ina glass ease. 'Had Morphy met Staunton, who had worked out the theory scientific development, he might have found his Napoleonic instinct for bringing superior forces to bear on a weak point much more severely' tested.
Over a far longer period and against stronger opponents our J. H. Blackburne made "pictures on the board" as memorable as any of. Morphy's. This year is the centenary of the latter's birth, and it would bbe pleasant and not unprofitable (at any rate to chess players) to discuss. the changes of style in the play of the grand masters during the last. 100 years.
The idea was to create a barricade: of pawns, a sort of wire entanglement, behind which the deployed pieces were ready for obtaining minute tactical advantages. "Tt was defensive-offensive form of warfare, which kept the draw in hand. Work. ting on these lines the masters of the Vienna school produced innumerable games which seem inspired by Morphons rather than Morphy.
(Chess as Exact Selence Capablanca, who first became known as a brilliant young combina-Uionist, later on strove to make chess an exact science. He looked for vie~ tory in the end-game, and, having secured a superior pawn-position, would ruthlessly simplify the struggle. A legend of his invincibility arose, which he helped to maintain by a certain aloofness.
Meanwhile, the neo-romantic school was unbecoming. the principle which was to seek in any position not so much for the best move as for the best plan. When the leading exponent of this style, Alekhine, declared "it may not be possible for me, but it Is possible to beat 'Capa." he was accused of blasphemy. His' view tory by six games to three with 25 draws, was 'a shock to the chess-playing world. Many of the games in this wonderful match between artist and scientist are beyond the comprehension of the average amateur.
As a rule, the Russian master's defence was impregnable, but he was also able to evolve subtle far-secing, stratagems in positions which, even to master analysts. seemed to offer, nothing more than a dull draw. There is a mystical quality in Alckhine's finest victories which clefes definition. It can also be discerned, far below the surface, in some of the games of "Botwinnik, the young Russian champion. Similarly in Sultan Khan's play there is an_unusualness which must be Oriental In origin.
The defeat tua recent world's! championship match of Alekhine by Euwe was to some extent due to Inability 10 stand the strain of the
Text read from the printed page and cleaned; old type leaves the occasional error.