Chess History and Reminiscences | Page 7

Bird one of the most dangerous opponents in "skittle play,"
or in matches regulated by a fast time limit; but they prove almost
antagonistic to the acquirement of excellency as an author on the game.
For the first-class analyst is not merely expected to record results, but
to judge the causes of success or failure from the strictly scientific point
of view, and he has often to supplement with patient research the
shortcomings of great masters in actual play. In such cases every move
of a main variation becomes a problem which has to be studied for a

great length of time; and the best authors have watched the progress of
different openings in matches and tournaments for years, and
pronounced their judgment only after the most careful comparisons, Mr.
Bird is, however, too much of an advocate to be a good judge, and he
evinces great partiality for ingenious traps and seductive combinations,
which form an attractive feature of his own style in actual play, but
which mostly occur only in light skirmishes. Moreover he often treats
his duties as an analyst in a cavalier fashion. In his quotations from
other authors he embodies variations which stand already severely
condemned by first-class chess critics in various chess periodicals; and
his original researches contain a considerable portion of "skittle"
analysis, which does not bear cursory examination.
We have no room for lengthened demonstrations, and must confine
ourselves to a few instances of the latter description, all occurring in the
compiler's new additions. On page 6, he overlooks the winning of a
clear piece which White can effect by Q to R4, followed by P to QR3 if
the B be defended. On page 22 Black can win a piece on the 16th move
by P to KB4, followed by P to KKt3, and there is no chance of any
counter-attack by P to KKt4, for Black may afterwards interpose the B
at K4, and get the K into the corner. On page 105 a piece can be won
by Black on the l0th move by B to Q5, for the Kt has no retreat, a mate
being threatened at KB3. The ending of a game between Messrs. Bird
and MacDonnell affords a still more remarkable illustration. There is
abundant proof that the author must have examined the position at least
more than once, for, by a singular error, the identical ending appears
twice in the book--on pages 183 and 197,--each time with a large
diagram. On each occasion a win is demonstrated for White in nine
moves, while at least a piece can be gained at once by Q to K7,
followed accordingly by P to Q6 dis. ch., or B to KKt5. Mr. Bird would
be annoyed to make such oversights over the board; and there is no
excuse for such shallow examples being recommended to the student
without the least comment on their weak points.
As regards the general arrangement, we have to remark that the
variations sometimes seem to have been examined loosely and
separately, irrespective of their relation to each other, or to the main

propositions of the author in reference to the form of opening he deals
with; and the brevity or length of space assigned to different forms of
play have apparently been decided in a whimsical and arbitrary manner.
For instance, on page 29, in the Philidor's defence, 7. Kt to KB3, is
described to afford the most satisfactory and secure opening for Black.
On the next page the move is repeated under the separate heading,
Example II, and it looks odd enough that one single move should have
received such prominence, the only addition being, "Won by Harrwitz
in 40 moves," as if it were to be forced by Black in that number, while
at the time the positions show little difference. But, stranger still, four
pages later on (page 34) the identical variation reappears, taken from
the same game between Morphy and Harrwitz (though this is not
stated), with three more moves on each side added to it, but this time
the remark is made, that "White has a good position." To take another
example. On page 78 there is a repetition of 10 moves on each side,
merely for the purpose of indicating a different 11th move for White. It
is scarcely necessary to point out that in each case the stronger move
should have been inserted in the main variation, while the weaker one
could have been disposed of in a foot-note of one line.
While on this subject we cannot refrain from mentioning the frequent
references to "Chess Masterpieces," a work previously published by the
author, which contained a collection of fine games partly reproduced
from Howard Taylor's "Chess Brilliants," and other publications, with
additions mostly from Mr. Bird's own