Blindfold Match Schlechter–Mieses

Stuttgart, 13–15 January 1909

Mieses' Preview Article: At Night the Imagination Works

On the eve of the match, 12 January 1909, the Stuttgarter Neues Tagblatt printed an article by Mieses under the title “Das Blindlingsspiel beim Schach” (Blindfold Play in Chess). He defined the chief requirement not as memory but as a vivid power of spatial imagination. The player must see the image of each position “so vividly in his mind’s eye, as if the board stood in front of him” (“das Bild der jeweiligen Stellung so lebhaft vor seinem inneren Auge sehen, als ob das Brett vor ihm stünde”).

One observation in the article was particularly striking. Mieses had noticed that he found blindfold play harder during the day than at night. “I explain this by the fact that the imagination, which is called upon more strongly in blindfold play than in ordinary play, works most vividly at night” (“Ich erkläre mir dies damit, dass die Phantasie, die ja beim Blindspiel stärker als beim gewöhnlichen Spiel in Anspruch genommen wird, nachts am lebhaftesten arbeitet”). Play in Stuttgart was scheduled from eight to twelve in the evening, “a time of day well suited to blindfold chess” (“also zu einer für das Blindspiel geeigneten Tageszeit”).

Source: Stuttgarter Neues Tagblatt No. 8, 12 January 1909. Facsimile in Martin Ramsauer, Schach in Württemberg vol. 1, Marbach 2013.

Format and Conditions

Course of the Match

First Game: The ABC Mate

Otto Rosenfeld, president of the Stuttgart Chess Club, welcomed the audience and gave a brief overview of the development of chess. He then proceeded to draw lots for colours. Schlechter received White and opened with the king’s pawn. Mieses replied with his Scandinavian. Four hours later Schlechter resigned. What the Wiener Schachzeitung later called the “ABC mate” occurred on move 28: Schlechter retreated the wrong rook and allowed Black an elementary queen mate on the back rank.

“ABC-Matt”

Second Game: Pawn Sacrifice and Bishops of Opposite Colour

On Thursday 14 January, Mieses opened with 1.e4 e5 and Schlechter replied with the classical king’s knight deployment. Mieses chose the Göring Gambit, that rare variation of the Scotch Game in which White sacrifices a second pawn for rapid development. Schlechter accepted, returned a pawn and steered into an endgame with bishops of opposite colour in which a pawn advantage for Black was insufficient to win.

After thirty-nine moves the position was drawn. It was the only game of the match in which neither master could extract a clear advantage. Schlechter later annotated the endgame in the Deutsche Schachzeitung with a notably lengthy complex of variations, into which the Polish master Dawid Przepiórka also contributed.

Source: Annotations by Schlechter (DSZ 1909, February issue, pp. 48 f.) and Hoffer (The Field 1909). Score from DSZ 1909, January issue, p. 17.

Third Game: The Queen Sacrifice

On Friday evening, 15 January, the audience was larger still than on the previous two nights. Again Schlechter played 1.e4, again Mieses replied 1...d5. On move 11 Mieses sacrificed his queen for a rook and two minor pieces. Schlechter launched a king-side attack through the centre, but Mieses had calculated more deeply. Two passed pawns on the b-file did the rest. After forty-four moves Schlechter resigned.

“This novel match was played at Stuttgart in January, and aroused the keenest interest. The quality of the games can only be described as amazing.”

Tarrasch’s Verdict

A week later, Siegbert Tarrasch commented on the result in the Berliner Lokalanzeiger, calling it surprising, since “heutzutage versteht wohl jeder bessere Spieler eine Blindpartie ungefähr mit derselben Stärke durchzuführen wie eine am Brett gespielte” (nowadays any reasonably strong player can conduct a blindfold game at roughly the same level as one played over the board). In Mieses’ case, however, a specialist’s skill was at work. Otto Rosenfeld closed the event with the remark that the Stuttgart Chess Club could “ohne unbescheiden zu sein, auf die Veranstaltung dieses neuartigen Wettkampfes stolz sein” (without being immodest, be proud of having organised this novel contest).

Tarrasch in Berliner Lokalanzeiger, Unterhaltungsblatt No. 18, 22 January 1909; Rosenfeld quoted from Stuttgarter Neues Tagblatt No. 12, 16 January 1909.

An Irony of Press History

A small irony of press history: the losing player was the one who reported the match in the most important German chess journal. At the time of the Stuttgart match, Carl Schlechter was based in Vienna as co-editor of the Deutsche Schachzeitung alongside Johann Berger. The scores of the first two games appeared in the January issue on pages 16 and 17. In the February issue, Schlechter published his detailed assessment with annotations to all three games on pages 48 f., openly naming his own errors.

Sources

• Stuttgarter Neues Tagblatt, No. 8 (12 Jan 1909), No. 10 (14 Jan 1909), No. 12 (16 Jan 1909). Supplement “Aus Leben, Kunst und Wissenschaft” No. 16, 21 Jan 1909.
• Württembergische Zeitung No. 10, 14 January 1909.
• Deutsche Schachzeitung, vol. 64 (1909), January issue, p. 16 (score of game 1) and p. 17 (score of game 2); February issue, pp. 48 f. (Schlechter’s annotations to all three games).
• The Field, London 1909, annotations by Leopold Hoffer.
• Wiener Schachzeitung 1909, p. 55 (the ABC mate).
• American Chess Bulletin vol. 6, 1909, p. 112.
• The Year Book of Chess 1910, pp. 16 f.
• Berliner Lokalanzeiger, 22 January 1909 (Tarrasch).
• Jacques Mieses, Das Blindspielen, Leipzig 1918, p. 41.
• Martin Ramsauer, Der Blindschach-Wettkampf zwischen Jacques Mieses und Carl Schlechter in Stuttgart, 13.–15. Januar 1909, Schach in Württemberg vol. 1, Marbach 2013.
• Martin Ramsauer, “Neues von alten Meistern: Mieses, Lasker, Schlechter, Tarrasch und Fahrni in Stuttgart 1903–1913”, in: Festschrift Egbert Meissenburg: Schachforschungen, ed. Siegfried Schönle, Vienna 2008, pp. 574–595.

Deutsche Version dieser Seite