Gambit wrote on 06/30/09 at 06:57:47:


Point 1
You doubt the quality of Schiller's material. But you choose to quote this as if it has any significance. Having your cake and trying to eat it. Cannot think of a more hapless choice of source.

Point 2
Impressive research thus far, but of course you have just started. You know where to find the material. You just have to do some further digging and find it. The joy of historical research surely - digging up such previously buried and forgotten material and revealing to the world. One hopes that the quest for historical veracity, even regarding such a dismal idea, does not lose out to ego. Best of luck with the microfiche. We look forward to finding out about Mr Stadelman.

HTH,

I frankly don't care much about what Johansson says. The reason is that he thinks a lot of openings have to named for Germans or Swedes. Just read his website, and see for yourself. That is first,

Second, TJ claims that 1 d4 e5 2 dxe5 Nc6 3 Nf3 Nge7 4 b3!? is a theoretical novelty. Maybe it is new to him, but not to me. That was one of the first two lines I analyzed back in 1993, the other being 4 Bg5.

Third, as far as I am concerned, the chess world knows 3...Nge7 to be my invention, or independent discovery, whatever term you want to use. It does not matter, because it has been called the Zilbermints Gambit ever since I published games in the following chess magazines:

BDG World,  #62, #63, #64: 1994
Blitz Chess magazine: 1993-1997 (edited by GM Walter Brown)
Illinois Chess Bulletin: November 1995
Gambit Revue (1995)
Kaissiber #5 : 1998 
Atlantic Chess News (chess magazine of New Jersey State Chess federation)
Gambit Chess Openings (2002)
Nunn's Chess Openings (1999)
Modern Chess Openings, 14th and 15th editions 

NM Eric Schiller, the prolific chess author (the quality of his books is another story altogether), clearly states that my devotion to this openings gives me the right to have my surname attached to it.
Here is the exact quote, dodo:

"Lev Zilbermints was not the first to play this opening, but his passionate advocacy and devotion to it earns him the right to have his named attached."  - Gambit Chess Openings, page 159

Sounds like you are in first grade, if I have repeat the same old thing over and over.

Third, I was the first one to systematically analyze and play 3...Nge7 in serious tournaments.  I have beaten titled players with it, and not just in blitz chess, but OTB tournaments as well.

Fourth and last, while I was doing the analyses and play in 1993, I had zero knowledge of Stadelman. All I knew was the idea that I came up with in the third week of March, 1993.

We Russians have an expression, "like throwing peas against a wall."
It means that some people like you, HTH, are so thick-headed that they cannot understand what they are told.  This is the case with the Zilbermints Gambit's origin.

HTH, you never took up my challenge of locating even a single game by Samuel Leigh Stadelman with 3...Nge7.  So how can you say he played it? My God, when I read that reprinted article, I thought it sounded more like ANALYSIS than a game, but who knows? Maybe Stadelman did play games with 3...Nge7, I don't know really!

I said as much that perhaps Stadelman did play some games, but even if so, these game scores (if such existed) are lost to us. So far, in 2009, we know of not a single game by Stadelman which goes 1 d4 e5 2 dxe5 Nc6 3 Nf3 Nge7.

Only a comprehensive search of Philadelphia Inquirer chess columns from 1930-1942  might answer that question finally and in detail. That means going over lots and lots of microfilm, hoping to find just a few games. It is like searching for a needle in the haystack.   

With due respect, HTH, you are just being dense. 

Roger Williamson wrote on 06/29/09 at 15:36:56:


Yeah, I did indeed get rid of most of them. 

I'm at the point that powerlifting is going well enough that I can safely do the occasional tournament without throwing progress off. Getting the FM title will be an issue of when, not if, and it's not a big enough priority compard to setting the next Bench/Squat/Deadlift PR...

Gambit wrote on 06/29/09 at 05:34:08:


Oh indeed, and I came up with 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 independly back in 1960, when I was in the 7th grade.  I knew nothing of theory at the time, so my invention was completely original.  That's why 3.Bb5 is correctly referred to as the Morss System.

HTH,

How many times do I have to tell you that I came up with the 1 d4 e5 2 dxe5 Nc6 3 Nf3 Nge7 variation, the Zilbermints Gambit, independently, back in March 1993?

Why don't you ask Stefan Buecker here? He will back up what I have to say.

Again, until 1996, I had no idea who Samuel Leigh Stadelman was. Buecker was the one who mailed me a photocopy of the column, reprinted in August 1965 Canada Chess magazine. The original was published in the 1930s, but that is just  an educated guess. For the book in which the original clipping was found, yellow with age, was Aron Nimzovich's "My System", the first edition of which came out in 1936.

The editor of Canada Chess, who bought the book, liked the old clippings enough to reprint them in August 1965. Sadly, the clippings had no dates, making it impossible to date them accurately.

My research shows that Walter Penn (Pym) Shipley was the chess editor of Philadelphia Inquirer until his death in 1942. He and S.L. Stadelman knew each other from their days at the old Franklin Chess Club in Philadelphia.

Using the Internet, I recently  located a World War II record of an American officer named S.L. Stadelman stationed in Canada. As during these days, all men 18-65 were called up, it is feasible that Stadelman was that officer. The record is from 1942. It would make Stadelman 61 years old (born 19.11.1881).

However, let me get this straight: I can find no extant games of Stadelman's that began with 1 d4 e5 2 dxe5 Nc6 3 Nf3 Nge7.  If you can help me search the Philadelphia Inquirer (and other Pennsylvania newspapers) chess sections, that would be great!

Keep in mind that I am talking every chess column from 1936 - 1942, just to find these games!

Hope this is a good reference.   

The natural limitations are correlated to response, or lack thereof.  If no one responds, the thread naturally dies.  In this respect the are no limitations.  If the response is so ludicrous, be it holocaust denial or something similar, the paucity of dialogue would be an indication as to its worth.

When it comes to "freedom of speech" I'm with Gambit 100% 

Btw BP, you still doing the power lifting?