Thomas Long, the distinguished analyst, after summarizing the openings at the congress, reaches the following conclusions:

1. That the Regular Openings, as against the Irregular, are the favorites by upward of 3 to 1.

2. That amongst the Regular Openings the open games predominate by about 100 to 80 over the close ones.

3. That the open Regular, the Ruy Lopez, is first favorite, by a small majority, over the first close Regular, the French, viz., as 53 to 49.

4. That in the Ruy Lopez, the favorite defense is 3 P to QR3, by 27 to 19, 4 and 3, respectively.

5. That different players adopt various moves at the same stage in the same opening.

6. That the same players also adopt different moves at the same stage in the same opening.

7. That chess practice shows that at almost every step in each variation of all the openings there are several roads equally safe, and that, according to the temperament of the player at the time, or in accordance with his ordinary style of play, will such and such a move be selected.

8. That the best players at times adopt moves-even in important tourneys-which they condemn, as is evidenced in several of the late

congress games.

9. That there is scarcely in any chess opening one particular move or form of play universally accepted as the best, even amongst the magnates of the game, although there are some generally preferred, and, therefore, so far, approaching finality in the favorite "openings" of chess.

Mr. J. H. Blackburne, in summing up the London Congress of 1883, in which he participated, said: "No striking novelties have been introduced by any of the players. The Ruy Lopez, as in all previous tournaments, has been the most frequent debut. Zukertort, in his openings, generally won on the Queen's side by adopting the English and the Queen's gambit. Blackburne, Mason, Sellman, and Noa, have persistently adopted the French defense. The Guioco Piano has also more frequently been resorted to in this than in former tournaments. No fewer than eighty-one games-or exactly one half of the won games-were draws."

During Mr. Zukertort's recent visit to New Orleans, he expressed his lack of faith in the King's Knight's gambit, and the King's Bishop's gambit in particular. As a first move he condemns P to KB4, for either first or second player. He declared 3 P to KB4 a lost game for the defense in the Ruy Lopez, agreeing there with the "Synopsis," page 29. He approved of the Queen's pawn opening and the Evans attack.

The foregoing remarks show two things: First, that the masters in supreme contests do not risk their reputation on gambits; second, that analysis of the chess openings is still in a transition stage. Such being

the case, new ideas are welcome: and the eventual disposition of them is not always to be guessed. They will serve, in any event, to give variety to the game; while the surprises and neat little schemes of the gambits will never be disrelished. It often happens to beginners in chess that an antagonist makes a move or adopts a line of play at an early stage that seems invincible. In such a case the "Synopsis" will hardly fail to aid the student quickly, and often suggest a counter line to turn the tables; for some of the bits of strategy most troublesome to learners are wholly unsound. A good manual in the openings is indispensable to the player who would improve and keep step with the progress of chess. Such a text-book embodies the chess wisdom of centuries, and productions of the mental ingenuity of all nations, civilized and half civilized. Yet analysis of the chess openings is not finished. There are, doubtless, errors to remove and important discoveries to be made.

The game of chess is better known throughout the world now than any other æsthetic human invention. It is the first thing, and the only thing thus far to gain admittance into the poet's "parliament of man, the federation of the world." It is the first language to spread around the globe, none the less expressive for dispensing with words, and none the less intelligible for its unerring appeal to reason and mental concentration, rather than to the diplomacy of the tongue. The communion of two minds at chess is not subject to the limits of language or nationality. Some knowledge of so universal a pastime should be regarded as a necessary accomplishment for all.

THE EVANS GAMBIT.

This beautiful gambit is still in great favor. In tournament, as in offhand play, the attack wins a majority of games. Analysis has not yet found an entirely satisfactory defense against the Evans. Mr. Zukertort is of the opinion that the Compromised is the best of the defenses. For rapid, sparkling, intricate play this gambit is second to no other; and analysts are constantly called on to examine new lines of attack that may be adopted after a dozen moves have been played on each side. The variations in the following pages present some forcible ideas.

1 This move is disapproved on page 59 of the "Synopsis," but the British Chess Magazine for May, 1884, says: There is now reason to believe that it is the most potent form of the attack." In the London Congress, 1883, Tschigorin made this move against Steinitz, and won on the 39th move.

2 Best. If 10 Kt-K2 10 Q-K2 is very cramping.

3 Instead of 14 Q-Q3, as given in the "Synopsis," leading to a winning game for Black. The move in the text is the invention of Rosenthal. Black can not reply Kt-K2 or B-Q2 without losing a P, and his development becomes very difficult. The succeeding moves are from the Tschigorin-Steinitz game referred to, which will be found in the Book of the London Congress.

4 The Compromised Defense.

66

5 Now generally preferred to 11 Kt-K2. M. Zukertort says it gives the most lasting form of attack in the Compromised." The other plausible moves are 11 R-Ksq and 11 R-Qsq, lately suggested by Mr. W. N. Potter.

6 Herr Anderssen was experimenting with this move at the time of his death. Mr. Mortimer played it against both Steinitz and Zukertort at the London Congress, 1884.

7 Recognized as a better continuation than the "Handbuch's" 12 Kt-QKt5.

8 Mortimer played this move against Tschigorin in the London Congress; and 13 Kt-Q1 against Zukertort in the same meeting. He should have lost both games. Black's 11 QR-Ktsq is unsatisfactory.

9 With a fine attack.

10 Mr. W. N. Potter's recent suggestion. The variations are from his analysis in "Land and Water.'

11 Mr. Potter says: "Mate next move, save for a useless check. If 15 Q-Kt5 or Q-R3, then 16 Kt-B6ch, and wins; or (in the latter case) 16 B x Pch as before. After 14 Kt-Q5, there is 14 Kt x Kt; 15 B x Pch, followed by 15 B x R; or 14 B-Kt5; 15 B x B, Kt x B; 16 Q x Kt, Ktx Kt; 17 B x Pch, followed by Q x R, with a comfortable superiority in cach case. We would, however, desire to point out that after 11 R-Qsq, 0-0, White can at once play 12 B-Q3, Q-K3; 13 B x Pch, K-Rsq; 14 Q-R4, P-KKt3; 15 Q-R3, or 15 B-Kt5, or 15 Kt-KKt5, with a warm attack in each case. There is also 14 B-Kt5, 15 B-Ktsq, or 15 B-Q3, or 15 B-QR3, with more or less satisfactory results. Altogether we do not think that 11 0-0 will be generally adopted."

12 If Black takes the Queen he loses the Gambit Pawn; and if he play Q-Q4, then 15 Kt-Kt3, and White seems to have at least as good a game as in the normal grooves of this opening. As to 11 R-QKtsq. White answers 12 P-QR4, and smiles. There remains now brt 11 B-Kt3, 12 Q-R3 (among other replies) 12 0-0, 13 Kt-K2, or 13 B KB4, or 13 B-Q3, with a sense of comfort. Altogether we think that we have made good our case, which is, that 11 R-Qsq ought to be reckoned as a candidate for adoption. We purpose dealing with PQ-Kt4, and our ideas will crop out in the form of additional variations. To proceed: 11 R-Qsq, P-QKt4; 12 Ktx P, R-QKtsq; 13 B-Q3, Q-K3; 14 Q-R4, P-QR3; 15 Q x B, Rx Kt; or Px Kt (if Ktx Q, then Ktx Peh, with an undoubted advantage): 16 Q BP, and White has rather the better game. Instead of 14 P-QR3 Black may play 14 B-R3. White has three replies, viz.: 15 Qx B, 15 Kt x Pch, and 15 QKt-Q4. The two last named continuations, branch out into a luxurious display of variations and sub-variations, some of them highly interesting. As net result, White, adopting any one of these three replies, can at least stand his ground.

13 This may seem formidable, but, as a matter of fact, there are two replies-one being 14 P-KR3, Q-QKt5; 15 QxQ, BxQ; 16 Kt x Peh K-Qsq (K-Bsq; 17 B-KB4); 17 Kt-QKt5, P-QR3; 18 Kt-Q6, B-B6; 19 R-Ktsq, or Ktx Pch, and White for choice. Instead of 15 B x Q, Black may play 15 Kt x Q, wherefore 16Ktx RP, Ktx B: 17 Rx Kt, and, while claiming no superiority for White, we must express, doubt whether his bold bid for a numerical superiority can be proved to be a disastrous stroke for him. However, there is the other answer, viz.: 14 B-K2 (instead of P-KR3). If Black reply with P-QR3, then 15 Kt-Kt5, Q-B4, best; 16 P-Kt4, with a promising attack. If Black answer 14 B-K2, with Q-QKt5, then 15 QxQ, KtxQ (B× Q, 16 Kt x Pch); 16 B-Q2, with a good game. Altogether there seems to be plenty of scope for the analyst in 11 R-Qsq, answered by P-QKti. Our methoi (continues Mr. Potter) of improving the attack is impugned by "W. W.," than whom there is no more eminent authority amongst English analysts. He writes as follows: If your move of 11 KR-Qsq is met by 110-0, and White then plays 12 B-R3, Black's reply should be 12 P-QKt4, not P-QR3, which loses too much time; and if 12 B-Q3, not 12 Q-K3 (which is all right before castling), but 12 Q-R4, and I can not see that the attack is at all strengthened. We mentioned two continuations for White, namely, 12 B-R3, and 13 B-Q3. These are the continuations which "W. W." takes up; he replying to the former with P-QKt4, and to the latter with Q-R4. After premising that these moves are of such importance that they ought to be considered, though we