Anderssen - Paulsen 1869. ''Paulsen's Most Impressive Work of Art''.

Good afternoon everyone.

I hope from the bottom of my heart ( some will tell you that I don't have one, but that is a mild overstatement!! ) that you are all safe and well. 

Put together something brief (  by my standards!) to keep those on lock down entertained and distracted for a short time. It involves quite a bit of reading and thinking, but that's how it is, guys.

In my last posting  https://www.chess.com/blog/simaginfan/adolf-anderssen-how-he-really-played-not-what-you-have-been-told   

I looked at how Anderssen actually played serious chess back in 1869. In that period he lost one serious tournament game, so I have decided to post it for you.

Also, back in the comments to that post, the question was raised of me doing articles on the evolution of chess thinking, which, albeit my own special field, is a monstrously huge subject, and one which most would find 'dull as dishwater'.

However, one idea ( out of many, many!!  ) that I have toyed with along that line of thought relates to the game presented here and the Ruy Lopez games from the cited article, plus many others.

SO!! This is a taste of what such things would look like, and I am sure that they would not exactly attract a great fan base.

Louis Paulsen.

When you go down the line of the evolution of chess thinking he was an absolute giant. He was objective about chess back in the days when the initiative was everything. Where others came up with new attacking ideas, he found defensive ones.

Where others found tactics, he found maneuvers.

Where others found objects of attack, he found obstructions to the attack.

Where others tried to improve on what was known, he explored what was not known.

It has been said that Morphy never introduced anything new in the openings - Paulsen came up with whole systems that took nearly a century to be accepted.

For one such system, go look here :- https://www.chess.com/blog/simaginfan/my-favorite-game-of-number-4-louis-paulsen   

I will throw in the words of Steinitz - the so called 'father of modern chess' from his obituary of Paulsen - there are various versions available - this one is from the New York Daily Tribune August 23rd, 1891.

Yep, I am going to be 'abrasive' again!!

Anyone who 'believes' - and publishes material to that effect - that Steinitz single handedly changed chess thinking, is wrong. You don't have to believe me - I have been known to be wrong - but perhaps you should believe Steinitz himself, who was honest enough to say where he got some of his ideas from.

If you don't like that, go argue with him!! 

My friend the wonderful Hans Renette has written the definitive work on Paulsen.

https://www.kingpinchess.net/tag/hans-renette/    for more information.

First of all, if you want to take the development of chess thinking seriously, go buy it if you can.

Here is what he had to say about the following game in the introduction.

''Paulsen's most impressive work of art in which he perfectly combined defence with counterattack doubtlessly occurred against Adolf Anderssen in the Hamburg 1869 tournament.'' I have added the rest of the comment in the notes!

Many of you won't be impressed! Such things are not to everyone's tastes. If that is the case, feel free to say so in the comments. If I am going to write such articles in the future, all feedback - positive and negative - will be a big help.

I have done the notes to the game as I went along - basically from memory, so suggestions/improvements are most welcome.

Enjoy the game, as I always say, and I hope that you appreciate it for what it is - a game in a main line theoretical debate of the time, between two fine players.

And no, my German is not good enough to explain the 'Hamburg/Altona thing!!

  Take care, my friends, and stay well. Hopefully we can all get together in times to come, united by our love of chess, and our love of learning. Simaginfan.