Steinitz—Chigorin, Havana 1889 a World Championship Match Or Not ?

Steinitz—Chigorin, Havana 1889 A World Championship Match or Not ?

Anders Thulin, Malmö 2009-03-31

Abstract introduction to the analyses of the games of the match, and is probably where claim of world A close reading of contemporary press records championship status for the match originates. suggests that the Steinitz-Chigorin match in The preface of the Modern Chess Instructor is Havana, 1899 was not for the World Champi- dated May, 1889, i.e. within a few months of onship title as usually claimed. the match, and as Steinitz writes about a recent event that he was closely involved with, there is no obvious reason to suspect that it may be Introduction wrong in any important respect. However, when Steinitz’ earlier writings are “In the early part of 1888 Mr. Steinitz visit- examined, some inconsistencies with this ac- ed Havana, in consequence of an invita- count need to be considered. tion from the hospitable Chess Club of that city to give some Chess exhibitions and to play matches and off-hand games against The Match with Chigorin the Cuban Champion, Judge Golmayo; the Mexican Champion, Senor Vasquez, Con- “The idea to arrange this affair was already sul General of Mexico; Senores Carvajal, suggested in the early part [of 1888] during Ponce and other prominent players. The the visit of Mr. Steinitz to Havana. A simi- members of the Havana Chess Club, who lar contest was then proposed between him are most enthusiastic and liberal patrons of and Captain Mackenzie, who was also a the game, made on this occasion the offer guest of the Havana Chess Club at the time, to Mr. Steinitz to provide the stakes and to but the latter gentleman absolutely de- defray all the expenses of a match for the clined the offers made to him for that pur- championship of the world to be held under pose. The members of the Havana Chess the auspices of that society against any op- Club, with their usual generosity, thereupon ponent whom the visitor would accept. Mr. proposed to make arrangements for a com- Steinitz accepted the handsome offer on bat during the next winter season against condition that the contest should consist of any first-class player whom Mr. Steinitz a limited number of games, [...]. He select- would select, and the latter having chosen ed for his opponent the Russian master, Mr. Mr. Tschigorin, it was agreed by the Ha- Tschigorin with whom he had played on vana Chess Club to authorize an invitation two previous occasions.” to the Russian master, on the distinct con- —Steinitz: Modern Chess Instructor, p. 162. dition that it should not be regarded as a challenge on the part of Mr. Steinitz.” —International Chess Magazine, This quotation is taken from Steinitz’ vol. ii, p. 356 (Dec. 1888)

1 Steinitz—Chigorin, Havana 1889

The full account is given on p. 355–357 in the between Steinitz, and Tchigorin of St. same volume (with an earlier mention on p. 334– Petersburg, in January next, whilst Capt. 335). There is also a brief note from Steinitz’ visit Mackenzie is engaged to play matches with to Havana in February-March the same year (p. Golmayo, Vasquez, and Carvajal, in Decem- 44–45 and 81–82), in which the plan for a match ber.” —The Chess-Monthly, with Mackenzie is mentioned. vol. x, p. 103 (Dec. 1889) In none of these pages is there any suggestion that the planned match with Chigorin would be for the world championship title as the al- In Deutsche Schachzeitung vol. 43, p. 374 (Dec. ready quoted passage from Modern Chess In- 1888), there is only a brief mention that Steinitz structor says. and Chigorin would play a match in January or There is a suggestion that Steinitz may have February 1889. regarded the contest as of somewhat less impor- In none of these further accounts is there tance than the match against Zukertort: any indication that these games actually were played for the title of the world chess cham- “The contest will otherwise [apart from pionship. This is another unusual point: what the stakes] be regulated by the same condi- reason could there be for not advertising such a tions as the last championship match be- match as widely as possible? tween Steinitz and Zukertort. It should, One answer might be that there was no need however, be remembered that a limited for the contestants to advertise it, as the Havana number of games cannot be considered such Chess Club already had agreed to pay for the a sure test as a match, if only for the reason match. This is not entirely satisfactory: surely that either party who happens to be consid- the players would want to draw public attention erably ahead in the score may systematically to the event. It also seems unlikely that the ar- play for draws and this is great odds in the rangers would not try to recoup at least some of hands of a fine player. Yet even such a limit- the costs in form of admittance to the match, for ed direct trial of skill, if consisting of a large which even limited advertising would be ben- number of games as on the present occasion, eficial. is in our opinion a more accurate measure A second possibility could be that the match of relative skill than a tournament [...]” was not originally planned to be for the World —International Chess Magazine, Championship title, but evolved into one so late vol. ii, p. 356 (Dec. 1888) that it was not mentioned in the cited sources. The Havana Chess Club started a short-lived chess periodical to cover the match: La Revista Though these points cannot, on their own, be de Ajedrez (9 issues, 40 pages, January 1–Feb- taken as proof of non-championship status for ruary 27, 1889). Once the match was over, the the match, they raise the question why this ‘con- publication was closed, although it was resur- test’ should have been different, and in particu- rected as a monthly journal later the same year. lar, arranged to a lower standard than that of the In this publication, the following statement can match against Zukertort. There seems to be no be found: information given on this particular point: perhaps it was for economical reasons. “Las condiciones aceptadas por los Sres. (It may be also of some interest to note that Steinitz y Tchigorin, para venir á esta ciu- Steinitz avoids using the term ‘match’ both here dad con el objeto de jugar la serie de par- and elsewhere: it seems he preferred to use that tidas, que ha de discernir al vencedor, si term for contests for a set number of wins, rath- no de derecho (por no haberse extipu- er than a set number of games.) lado así de un modo expreso) al menos The Chess-Monthly mentions the match: de hecho, el rango de campeón del mun- do ajedrecista, son las siguientes: [...]” “From information received from Mr. —Revista de Ajedrez, vol. i, p. 8 (Jan. 3, 1889) A. Moliner, of Havannah, we learn that a match, or series of twenty games, will be played at the Havannah Chess Club which may be translated as:

2 Steinitz—Chigorin, Havana 1889

“The conditions accepted by Mr. Steinitz and and to be incorporated in the Book of the Tchigorin, in coming to this city with the pur- Congress.” —International Chess Magazine, pose of playing a match to decide the win- vol. iii, p. 3 (Jan. 1887) ner of the rank of world chess champion, if not formally (by not having stipulated it ex- pressly), at least informally, are as follows: [...]” The programme was signed by the Corre- sponding Committee of the congress: W.W. This passage seems to say that the match was Ellsworth, C. Schubert and W. Steinitz. (The not formally for the title. (I have not been able to programme is also reprinted in the tournament find a retraction or correction of this statement), book.) and so indicates that there were no last-minute In the same issue of ICM, Steinitz gives his modifications of the programme. personal comments: But as we have already seen, Steinitz, just a few months later, clearly indicates that it was “[...] I know I am not fit to be the champi- a title match. on, and I am not likely to bear that title for Before any attempt is made to reconcile these ever. Therefore let us select a better one, and apparently contradictory statements, it should whoever it may be, I shall cheerfully say to be noted that a closer study of other materi- him, like the old soldier: al from the time seems to support the Havana ‘Mein Sohn, hier hast du meinen Speer, Chess Club: at the time of the match with Chig- Meinem Arm wird er zu schwer.’ orin the World Champion title was no longer in Steinitz’ hands, and so could not easily be put (My son, here you have my spear, it be- up for contest. comes too heavy for my arm.) [...]” —International Chess Magazine, vol. iii, p. 23 (Jan. 1887)

The Sixth American Chess Congress, This leaves little doubt that Steinitz decided New York 1889 to allow the 6th Congress to include a contest for the title of world chess champion. More than a year before Steinitz’ visit to Ha- The Chess-Monthly also reprinted the pro- vana in 1888, when the first plans for what gramme (vol. xiii, p. 165 (Feb., 1887)), but viewed would become the match against Chigorin the proposal as unlikely to reach fulfilment, and were made, the next chess world champion- so did not comment on details. ship had already been planned. The official pro- Deutsche Schachzeitung reported on the plans gramme for the sixth American congress says: (in vol. 42, p. 91-2 (March, 1887)), but does not appear to have made any further comments. “It is the purpose of the Committee to make the Tournament a contest for the real Further information about the match was championship of the world, thus avoid- printed in “Report of the Sixth American Chess ing the controversies and disputes that have Congress.” so often arisen at the end of tournaments, which, owing to the absence of a regulation “The Committee will issue a detailed pre- providing for a match, have rendered them liminary programme on the lines of the fallacious tests of superiority. London Tournament of 1883, as soon as the In addition to the First Prize which will total amount [for the tournament book] is be $1,000, minimum, a trophy represent- subscribed. But in view of the fact that the ing such championship will be provided and ‘championship match’, which is a new fea- held, subject to challenge under fair and ture in connection with tournaments, has equitable conditions, thus combining the met with general approval, the Committee advantages of a tournament and a cham- deem it proper to say a few words in regard pionship match, to consist of at least seven to the main regulations that may be adopt- games up, forming part of the tournament, ed to govern this contest.

3 Steinitz—Chigorin, Havana 1889

1. The winner of the Tournament shall not The following month, Steinitz comments in be bound to play for stakes, but he may in- the ‘Personal and General’ column of ICM: sist upon a maximum of $500 a side. 2. The winner of the Tournament shall “The Sixth American Chess Congress is receive at least $250 whether he wins or progressing steadily and surely, and it is sig- loses the match. Special prizes may also be nificant that from first to last the opposition awarded if the funds allow. has rested on pure, or, better speaking, im- 3. The match must begin within a month pure personal grounds, which are even cyni- after the chief prize of the Tournament has cally admitted. But we notice with gratifi- been decided. cation that, so far, no fault has been found 4. If the winner of the Tournament be a with any single action or provision of the resident and the challenger a foreign player, Committee, and even the enemies of the the Jury may decide when the match shall Congress cannot help admitting, tacitly, at begin; not conflicting with Rule 3. least, the spirit of fairness which prevails 5. If the winner of the Tournament be the rules, published in the Supplement to a foreign player, he shall have the option our last number, in reference to the novel of fixing the time to any period within a Institution of a Championship Match in month. connection with an International Tourna- 6. The match shall be for the first 7 games ment. We specially call attention to the last up, draws not counting, but after 10 draws rules, commencing with Rule 8, which ob- each draw shall count ½ for each player. viously have the tendency to place obsta- 7. The right of challenge shall belong to cles in the way of the acquirement of the the prize winners in the order of their score. champion title for any player who has not 8. Any player winning less than 3rd prize, competed in the Tournament, or has not, at non-prize-winners and non-contestants least, gained the third prize. Perhaps I may shall be allowed to challenge only for Fel- be allowed to state that I was the prime low-championship. mover in making those propositions, which, 9. If less than 4 European players enter I may explain, are in no way contradictory the Tournament, the match contest shall to the views I have hitherto held in refer- not involve the championship of the world, ence to the Champion title. For up to the but only that of the 6th American Chess present no Congress Committee has even Congress. made the attempt of framing regulations 10. If a non-contestant desires to chal- for a final match, involving the acquisition lenge for the Fellow-championship he shall of the International Champion title in con- notify the Committee before the com- nection with a general Tournament contest. mencement of the Tournament and shall In the absence of any such arrangement I deposit the maximum stakes as per rule 2. held, and still hold, that the time-honored A Committee of 12 gentlemen will be se- and quite equitable usage by which the ti- lected before the Tournament and consti- tle was assigned to successful match players tute a Jury, which shall have power to over- like Labourdonnais, Staunton and Morphy rule the right of any challenger (providing should be regarded as law. But feeling sure there be more than one) by a ¾-vote at a that the efforts of the Committee of the full meeting, the vote to be taken by Ayes forthcoming Congress, for the purpose of and Noes. The Jury shall also decide other inaugurating a true champion test, are based points of controversy that may arise during on perfectly fair conditions, I certainly think the Tournament or the match, by major- that a great deal of preference is due to ity vote, and its transaction shall be placed actual competitors in the Tournament. The on record and published in the Book of the spirit of the rules throughout is to show the Congress. Votes may be by proxy, but at greatest consideration to competitors from least 8 members must be present.” abroad, and to hold the balance of equity, in —International Chess Magazine, the interest of fair play only, between the vol. iii (supplement Nov. 1887), competitors and the subscribers. It is especially noteworthy in that respect that for the

4 Steinitz—Chigorin, Havana 1889

first time the concession will be made of is- vaguely worded offer of an “extra remunera- suing a preliminary programme, which will tion” will prove the stumbling block to the only be rendered final after being left open entry of the majority of intending competi- to public discussion for a reasonable time. tors. It is generally supposed that the win- As the subject of my entering the Tourna- ner will be required to play a match with ment has already been a matter of discus- Mr. Steinitz after the tournament. This sion, I beg to state that I do not desire to would be grossly unfair. We should hard- compete if I can possibly help it; in the first ly think that the organizers of the tourna- place on the ground that I wish to have no ment and Mr. Steinitz would wish to handi- direct personal interest in the coming Tour- cap an opponent so severely as to compel nament, and also because my duties to this him after a severe mental struggle of some Magazine and the preparation for the issue weeks’ duration to play with Mr. Steinitz a of the Book of the Congress will impose an match, when he would be quite fresh and extraordinary tax on my time and energies, would have prepared himself for the match which would make it unwise for me to at- by studying the games of his physically and tempt such a heavy additional ordeal as the mentally exhausted opponent. This opin- participation in the Tournament. Anyhow, ion is shared universally by all the players I may positively state that if I do not take we had the opportunity of meeting, and our part in the main contest I shall not chal- remarks are made upon the request of sev- lenge the winner, provided that the second eral competitors of the Bradford Congress. or third prize-holder issues a challenge for Captain Mackenzie, on his return to Amer- the final match. On no account, however, ica is authorised to make representation to shall I accept any office in the Congress— that effect in proper quarters.’ such, for instance, as that of a judge or ju- The Chess Monthly introduces these re- ryman—which would make it part of my marks with a slight fling about ‘protec- duty to decide disputes between players, or tive measures,’ which it assumes are to be would otherwise involve judicial functions adopted; but altogether I notice with grati- affecting important interests of the com- fication as it enables me to tune down my- petitors.” self, that the comments of that journal are —International Chess Magazine, of a much milder description and even very vol. iii, p. 370–1 (Dec. 1887) encouraging in comparison to the sort of criticism which was launched against us in their columns in the early part of last year. Ten months later, in October 1888, Steinitz re- But it must be still more gratifying to the turns to the subject. Although the early parts of members of the Congress Committee that the quote below are only indirectly relevant to though only the bare outlines of their rules the question of the status of the Steinitz–Chig- are published, the critics of their measures orin match, I quote it in full because it adds have to fall back as heretofore on person- light on Steinitz’ intentions and plans for the al and entirely suppositious grounds. We congress. might fairly answer the Chess Monthly as well as those for whom our London con- “The September number of the London temporary professes to plead, that a pre- Chess Monthly after giving some fair quo- liminary programme will be issued with the tations from the last circular of the Sixth very object of inviting objections and criti- American Chess Congress singles out for its cism before issuing the final programme, special criticism the passage which provides and it would have been more proper to wait that an ‘extra remuneration of $250 will be for the publication of the former before guaranteed to the winner of the tournament, giving expression to the ‘generally sup- if in consequence of a challenge he should posed’ personal insinuations. It would have play a match to which a prize of a trophy of been also more advisable for those critics the minimum value of $250 will be attached.’ of the ‘generally supposed’ Congress inten- Our London contemporary appends to tions to read more attentively and intel- this the following comments: ‘We fear this ligently in the meanwhile the proposed

5 Steinitz—Chigorin, Havana 1889 rules of the Congress as published in the by studying the games of his physically and Committee-report of November last, (see mentally exhausted opponents.’ If, however, Supplement to our November number of our critics think that such a rule is likely to 1887), as well as what I said on the subject be passed in Committee, they are welcome as far as I was personally concerned, in our to suggest it to that august body and I shall December number, 1887, p. 371. promise to vote for it. It is no doubt some comfort that the ob- But now please to leave Mr. Steinitz and jectors do not oppose the Champion match what he is ‘generally supposed’ to do out of on principle, but merely on the ‘generally the controversy, and let us only assure you supposed’ assumption that I, myself, might that I have engagements on hand which challenge for such a contest without having will probably exhaust me ‘physically and entered the tournament. But just in refer- mentally’ more than any tournament, and ence to such assumption I already said dis- that there is therefore, very little chance tinctly in December last that: ‘Anyhow, I of my entering for the general or the final may positively state that if I do not take match contest. However, the ultimate win- part in the main contest I do not intend ner, provided that he fulfils all the condi- to challenge the winner, provided that the tions of the Committee shall have my most second or third prize-holder issues a chal- loyal support for his Champion title to lenge for the final match.’ This I think is which I shall lay no claim until perhaps, I plain enough, and practically I am dis- may be able to recover it in another con- qualified from the Champion match, for test at a later period. In the meanwhile, we it is most unlikely that the second or third may perhaps assume that the Committee to prize-holder will not challenge, more es- which I have the honor to belong, as well as pecially as in all probability further mon- myself, have no other desire than to frame ey prizes for the winner and the loser will fair and honest rules, not alone to govern be offered for this contest. (This of course the coming Congress, but which shall also cannot be positively promised at present.) form a guiding model for the organizers of fu- But in order to meet beforehand all further ture International tournaments. Just for in- ‘general suppositions,’ I may call attention to stance, like some of the rules of the Lon- rule 7 of the November report of the Con- don tournament of 1883, especially the one gress Committee which provides that ‘the in reference to the counting of the draws right of challenge belongs to the prize win- ought in our opinion to be accepted in all ners in the order of their scores,’ and to rule International tournaments on a grand scale. 10 which only empowers a selected jury of Let us further ‘generally suppose’ that not 12 gentlemen picked from the body of the Mr. Steinitz, but for instance Mr. Gunsberg, Committee whose integrity is already guar- who has undoubtedly the best recent match anteed through the process of gradual elec- and tournament record combined, may be tion by unanimous ballot, to overrule the prevented from joining the tournament right of any challenge by a three-fourths main time, say by an accidental delay of the jority vote at a full meeting. These are ‘restric- steamer which carries him across the At- tions’ enough against any personal objects lantic. Or else, that he joins the tournament of my own and can hardly be called ‘pro- and does not win any prize, a contingen- tective measures.’ If I were mean and de- cy which is by no means so very improb- ceptive enough for an attempt to evade my able, considering that he came out 16th in public declaration, I think there are suffi- the score-list of last year’s tournament at cient safeguards in those provisions. How- Frankfort. Nor is such an assumption in any ever, I could not go further in my own per- way derogatory to Mr. Gunsberg’s repu- sonal promise unless our critics wish me to tation. For a slight indisposition or a want propose a rule that Mr. Steinitz shall be al- of form for a couple of days, if he hap- together disqualified from the Champion pens to be paired against a chief rival just contest, unless he plays in the tournament at that time, may easily throw him back on the ground that he will be ‘quite fresh with four points and, as already proved in and would prepare himself for the match the Hamburg tournament, one point or

6 Steinitz—Chigorin, Havana 1889 half a game (a draw) may be sufficient to of the jury, after due challenge and deposit make the difference between obtaining the of $500, according to the rules for playing first or one of the next six prizes. Would it the final Champion match. The two players not be greatly unjust in either of the above have no doubt known each other’s play and mentioned cases to exclude absolutely Mr. style for years, and the difference between Gunsberg, the best reputed active player, them as regards preparation for the contest, from all chance of fighting a match at least is only that Captain Mackenzie has played for the ‘fellow championship’ as provided say 30 games more in hard contest against in the rules? As for the ‘physical’ exhaus- different first-class players under time limit tion of the winner of the tournament, it is over the board, whereas Mr. Gunsberg had already provided, that if he be a foreigner, the opportunity of studying those games at he will have the option of postponing the home. We should not hesitate to judge that commencement of the match for a month after a slight rest the odds of better training after the tournament. A clause can easily be would in such case be in favor of the Cap- added to the rules in the preliminary pro- tain by at least a couple of games out of the gramme providing that in no case shall it be first seven. compulsory (though both parties might agree Though neither the Chess Monthly nor on the subject) to commence the match those who apparently have instructed that before a fortnight after the tournament and journal seem to raise any objection against the winner will therefore have ample time the final match on principle, but merely to recuperate himself from his exertions in plead against the right of a non-contest- the contest. For many a time, matches have ant in the tournament to compete in the been arranged between competitors imme- match contest, we think it proper to add a diately after the tournament, for instance, few words about this new Congress-feature between Anderssen and Paulsen, Dubois in order to meet some opposition which we and Steinitz in London in 1862, between learn is entertained by at least one of the Neumann and Winawer in Paris, 1867; be- intending competitors against this measure tween Anderssen and Paulsen; Paulsen and on the ground, we understand, that some Schwarz at different German meetings, and amateur might win the chief prize in the the parties to these contests agreed to play tournament who would be unable to devote for prizes to the winner which as far as I further time to the match contest on ac- recollect did not exceed $25 on any of those count of more important business. But this occasions, whereas, in the coming tour- ‘want of time’ or ‘more important business’ nament, $250, or ten times the amount, is might be pleaded as an argument against guaranteed to the chief prize-holder wheth- the general contest as well, for no doubt er he wins or loses, and in addition, a cham- there are many high talented amateurs who pion trophy of the value of $250 and prob- would, especially by continued practice, oc- ably a further prize in case he wins the cupy high rank in tournaments if they could match, besides his having the privilege of spare the leisure for entering and compet- insisting upon playing for a stake of $500. ing in such contests. But amateurs all over As for the plea that a non-contestant may the world who are invited to contribute for ‘prepare himself by studying the games, etc.,’ a Chess Congress will expect that the best it is really too childish to be seriously en- test shall be applied for determining the tertained. If the studying of games would best players without much regard for any make a player, we would have thousands special ‘important business’ of any individ- of first-rates. But it is well-known that a ual competitor. General tournaments are few weeks’ practice with masters is worth modern institutions, and up to 1851 no other years of study. Let us ‘generally suppose’ that than the match test was known, but even Captain Mackenzie, one of the objectors ac- after the inauguration of tournaments the cording to the Chess Monthly, wins the first single handed contest was always regarded prize and Mr. Gunsberg who did not par- as the superior proof of skill. ticipate in the tournament for some reason, The Sixth American Chess Congress will is selected by a three-fourths majority vote therefore for the first time in history (and

7 Steinitz—Chigorin, Havana 1889

not merely in America as the Chess Monthly onship Match is completed or the time for suggests) inaugurate an International Tour- challenge has expired. nament for the real championship of the [...] world by officially combining the match test 4. If the winner of the Tournament be a with the all-round contest, and a whole- resident and the challenger a foreign player, some effect of this new addition to the the Jury may decide when the match shall Congress will be that it will stop at least begin. to a great extent, and for a long time, that [...] real or manufactured discord among dif- 6. The match shall be for the first sev- ferent claimants for the championship and en games up, draws not counting, but after their respective partisans which has some- ten draws each draw shall count for half for times manifested itself for years in succes- each player. The match shall be played at sion since the first International London the rate of four games per week, at least. If Tournament of 1851 much to the detriment at the end of four weeks the match is not of the progress and popularity of our no- finished, the Committee may, at the re- ble pastime. The Committee of the Con- quest of either player, decide that the score gress have repeatedly in their various cir- as it shall stand at that time shall be decisive, culars held out the institution of a final with the exception that the challenger must match as an additional feature of their pro- be at least one game ahead in order to be gramme, and several hundreds of subscrib- entitled to victory, while the winner of the ers who have approved of the idea by their Tournament shall be delcared the victor of contributions, have as much right to ex- the match if he has made even games. pect the games of the match to be scien- [...] tifically treated in the book of the congress 9. If less than four European players en- as a ‘matière première’ as the games of the ter the Tournament, the match contest shall tournament. In our opinion the subscrib- not involve the championship of the world, ers would be entitled to the return of their but only that of the Sixth American Chess money unless the Committee exhaust every Congress. reasonable effort in order to bring about 10. If a non-contestant desires to chal- such a final match context at the of the all- lenge for the Fellow-championship, he shall round affair.” notify the Committee before the com- —International Chess Magazine, mencement of the Tournament, and shall vol. iv p. 301–4 (Oct. 1888) deposit the maximum stakes as per rule II [!]. The Jury shall have the power to overrule the right of any challenger (provided On the basis of this information, it seems rea- there may be more than one) by a three- sonably clear that Steinitz has decided to give fourths vote at a full meeting, the vote to be up his championship title, at least temporarily. taken by ayes and noes. The Jury shall also The final rules for the championship match decide other points of controversy that may can be found in International Chess Magazine arise during the Tournament or the match vol. v, p. 70 (March, 1889). As only minor modi- by majority vote, and its transactions shall fications were made, only the modified rules are be placed on record and published in the shown here: Book of the Congress.”

“1. The winner of the Tournament shall be The contrast with the Steinitz-Chigorin bound to play the Championship Match if match is striking: the reader is not left in any duly challenged. He shall not be obliged to doubt that the planned match would be for the play for stakes, but may insist upon a maxi- title (provided that at least four European play- mum of $500.00 a side. ers entered). And there are no indication that To ensure compliance with this rule, one- Steinitz would have any particular privileges fourth of the amount of the First Prize in such a contest: indeed by his own words, al- shall be held as forfeit until the Champi- ready quoted, he would not even challenge the

8 Steinitz—Chigorin, Havana 1889 winner, unless the other prize-winners of the Summary tournament refused to do so. (It may be worth observing that no Jury trans- There seems to be no mention before or actions, as mentioned in rule 10, were published during the Steinitz-Chigorin match that it was in the Congress book.) in any way connected with the world championship. The arrangers of the match themselves • • • say that it was not a de jure title match. In the period from 1887 to May 1889, any con- The tournament ended in some disappoint- test for the world championship is mentioned ment for Steinitz and the arrangers. The official only in conjunction with the match planned to report is very brief on the matter: follow the main tournament of the 6th Ameri- can Congress. “At the end of the tournament there was Against these observations stands Steinitz’ a tie between M. Tschigorin, of St. Peters- own statement in Modern Chess Instructor that burg, and Herr Max Weiss, of Vienna. Both the Havana match was indeed for the champi- these masters expressed a desire not to be onship (as already quoted in the introduction). compelled to play a championship match, as The preface is dated May, 1889, and so that state- provided by the rules, and as there was no ment was probably made after the failure of the other challenge for the title and the priz- championship match. es offered for the purpose, the Committee This contradiction needs to be resolved in one decided that this contest should not take way or another. place.” —Sixth American Chess Congress, 1891, p. xxiii The simplest hypothesis is to assume that Modern Chess Instructor is incorrect. This re- moves the main crux of the matter, but it re- Steinitz expands a little on the subject: quires some kind of explanation why Steinitz came to make the claim in the first place. “In consequence of the division of the two A more complex hypothesis is that the Ha- chief prizes a match for the Champion- vana match was for the championship, and that ship could only have been arranged between the Revista misstated the circumstances. This the two first prize-holders, and as neither hypothesis requires an explanation of why the of the two masters was inclined for such a championship status of the match was kept contest, the Committee decided that the quiet, as well as why Chigorin would compete contemplated Championship Match could sub rosa for a title which, if he won it, he would not be arranged. It is much to be regret- have to reclaim within a few months. ted that the loyal efforts of the Committee to combine in this Congress the supreme My own preference is for the first hypothesis: match test with the usual measure of cross- I suspect Steinitz misstated the facts in Modern play in the Tournament, which combina- Chess Instructor. This is mainly because I have tion would have settled any disputes about not been able to find any similar statement in the Championship, have not be crowned International Chess Magazine—if Steinitz in- with the success which they deserved. But tended the match to be for the title, I would ex- under the circumstances their decision in pect to find a mention in more than one place. the matter was obviously the only one they On the other hand, I have not found any retrac- could have arrived at, and it is to be hoped tion or correction of the claim of MCI either. that the scheme of arranging a Champi- It does not seem at all impossible that the onship Match in connection with a Grand Havana Club actually did make an offer to host Tournament will be taken up again by the a match for the title. Steinitz would have been managers of a future Congress with a more obliged to decline it, given that the plans for the decisive effect.” 6th congress had already been made public, but —International Chess Magazine the offer would certainly have been remembered. vol. iv, p. 162 ( June, 1889) But without any solid evidence to back this up,

9 Steinitz—Chigorin, Havana 1889 it must remain a conjecture, particularly in the I’m less well read on Chigorin, but all of the absence of any material dated before May 1889. material available to me so far are game collec- Once Modern Chess Instructor is published, it is tions with little historical analysis. difficult to say if claims for championship status for the Havana match are based on the information in that book, or on independent infor- References mation. For that reason, later claims have to be evaluated carefully. The Chess-Monthly, vol. viii–x (Sept. 1888–Aug. 1890) (repr. Moravian Chess: Olomouc, s.a.) Notes for future research International Chess Magazine, vol. iii–v (1888– 1889) Periodicals & chess columns: Apart from Re- (repr. Olms: Zürich, 1985) vista de Ajedrez, I have examined only the Eng- La Revista de Ajedrez, vol. i (1889) lish and German chess periodicals mentioned below. There may be further information to find The Book of the Sixth American Chess Congress in other periodicals or perhaps also the chess (ed. Steinitz) columns of Steinitz and Chigorin. New York, 1891 (repr. Olms: Zürich, 1982) There may also be more to find inRevista : my L. Bachmann: Schachmeister Steinitz, vol. 3 knowledge of Spanish is close to non-existent, C. Brügel & Sohn: Ansbach, 1920 (repr. and I have essentially only looked for appear- Olms: Zürich, 1980) ances of the term ‘campeon’ or ‘champion’ for K. Landsberger: William Steinitz, Chess Cham- material. (An electronic faximile of the maga- pion zine for Acrobat Reader is available on request McFarland & Company, Inc.: Jefferson, 1995 for anyone who wants to go deeper.) K. Landsberger: The Steinitz Papers Biographies: The biographical material pub- McFarland & Company, Inc.: Jefferson, lished by Kurt Landsberger shed no light on 2002 this particular question. W. Steinitz: Modern Chess Instructor, Part 1 Bachmann, interestingly enough, does not G. P. Putnam’s Sons: New York & London, mention the world championship title at all in 1889 conjunction with the Chigorin match, but it does not seem safe to draw any firm conclu- sions from that.