He didn’t exactly have Paul Morphy’s number, but largely unheralded 19th century English master Thomas Barnes — born 200 years ago this month — did manage to win more chess games off the brilliant young American than any other player of the day.
Barnes is credited with at least eight wins (along with a greater number of losses) against the New Orleans phenom during Morphy’s legendary tour of Europe in 1858 and 1859, when he handily defeated all of the top European masters he faced. Morphy also chose Barnes as his partner in two consultation games with longtime English champion Howard Staunton, who notoriously declined Morphy’s repeated attempts to arrange a one-on-one match, with the Morphy-Barnes pairing victorious in both games.
Even the games Barnes lost to the young American superstar have a lot to recommend them, compared to Morphy’s lopsided wins against other top European masters. In a casual game from 1859, Barnes takes the play to Morphy in a Ruy Lopez Berlin, just missing a potentially winning line before going astray in the end. Our annotations largely track the work of Northern Virginia master Macon Shibut in his readable and highly recommended survey, “Paul Morphy and the Evolution of Chess Theory.”
Barnes as White doesn’t panic even as Black builds up a formidable attacking array against his castled king after 15. Rad1 Qh4, claiming a clear initiative after 16. f4! Bg4 (Rh6 is met by 17. Nf3 Qh5 18. Bxc5 Qxc5 [Bxc5 19. Rd8+ Bf8 20. Qe5! with a dominating bind] 19. Qe8+ Bf8 20. Ng5, with an edge) 17. Nf3 Qh5 18. Bxc5 Bxc5 19. Ne4 Bb6 20. Neg5 h6 (it was never remotely possible Morphy would miss White’s “smothered mate” threat of 21. Qc4+) 21. Qc4+ Kh8 22. Nf7+ Kh7 23. N7e5.
Black remains on his heels even after the queen trade as Barnes installs a powerful knight on g6, generating persistent mating ideas along the back rank. Shibut notes that White misses a subtle shot on 30. Ng6 Re2? (Morphy has been fighting uphill for a good while and now wrongly weakens his back rank; the humble 30…Rd6 31. Rde1 Rdd8 offered a stouter defense), when now 31. Rfe1! puts Black in a very difficult spot; e.g. 31…Rxc2 (Rf2 32. Rd8 Rxg6 33. fxg6+; or 31…Rd6 — probably best — 32. Rxe2 Rxd1+ 33. Kg2 Rd8 34. Re7, and White is better) 32. Rd8 Rxg6 33. Ree8! Rc1+ 34. Kg2 Rxg4+ 35. Kh3 and wins.
Black just manages to hold on after the game’s 31. Rd8?! Rxg6 32. fxg6+ Kxg6 33. Rd7 Rxc2 34. Rff7 Bd4!, defending the g-pawn in the nick of time as 35. Rxd4? would hang the other White rook on f7.
A draw in such a double-edged affair would be a proper result, but Barnes spoils things in the end pushing a little too hard: 37. h4 a5 38. h5+?! (not losing, but definitely going the wrong way; White still has all the winning chances after 38. Rf5 a4 39. h5+ Kh7 40. Rb8 Rb2 41. Ra8 Rb7 42. Rxa4 c5 43. Kg2) Kg5 39. Rxg7+ Kh4! (far better than taking the rook; suddenly it’s White’s king who is in a mating net) 40. Rge7? (the last mistake; White can still save the half-point with 40. Rdg7!, in lines like 40…c5 41. g5 hxg5 42. h6 a4 43. Rxd4+ cxd4 44. Rg7 Kh3 45. Rxg5 Rf2 46. Rh5+ Kg3 47. Rg5+ Kh3 48. Rh5+) a4!.
The seemingly modest pawn move takes the b3-square away from the White rook and forces instant resignation: 41. Rb1 Kh3, and mate with the rook on h2 can be delayed but not denied.
—-
Daniel Harrwitz — “a bad loser and even worse winner,” in Shibut’s succinct summary — was one of Morphy’s prime victims on his European tours. Barnes also scored some notable wins over the prickly German master, including another double-edged struggle coming out of a sharp, unbalanced English Opening in which Barnes gives up his queen in the first dozen moves for two Black rooks and a pawn.
Black fails to capitalize on his imposing pawn center, allowing White to develop his pieces and then handing all the positional trumps to Barnes in the misguided pursuit of more material: 17. Ne5 Bxe5 18. dxe5 Qc7?, a double attack that does win the e-pawn, but hands White the magnificent d4-square for his knight; better was 18…d4 19. exd4 Qxd4 20. Bb2 Nc4 21. Rad1 Qc5 22. Ba1 Nxe5, with play for both sides.
With all his pieces rushing to good squares, Barnes makes Black pay on 24. Rac1 Qe7?! (Harrwitz had the reputation of being an aggressive player, but he consistently takes the more passive routes here; Black is still very much in the game after 24…f4 25. exf4 gxf4 26. Nc6 Qe6 27. Nb4 Nb6) 25. Bb4 Qf7 26. Nc6! (with the threat of 27. Ne7+ Kh7 28. Rxc4 dxc4 29. Rxd7, dominating) Be6 (see diagram) 27. Rxc4! dxc4 28. Rd8+ Kh7 29. Ra8 and White’s active pieces overwhelm the Black queen-bishop tandem.
Black does put up some commendable resistance and nearly saves the game helped by some White inaccuracies: 33. b6 Ba6 34. h3!? (even stronger was 34. Rg7+!, sending the Black king running, since 34…Kxg7? 35. Ne6+ forks king and queen) f4 35. Rc6+ Kh7 36. Bd6?! (the fork motif was strong again with 36. Rc7+! Kg6 [Kg8 37. Nf5] 37. Rg7+! Kf6 38. Bc3) c3! 37. Bc7 Qd5 38. Rxc3 Qa2 39. Rc2, and now Black holds the draw after 39…Qb1+ 40. Kh2 Bd3, in lines such as 41. Rc6 (Rd2 Qc1 42. Ra2 Qb1) f3 42. Be5 fxg2 43. Kxg2 Qf1+ 44. Kh2 (Kg3?? Qg1 mate) Qxf2+ 45. Kh1 Qf1+, with a perpetual check.
Instead, another ill-advised pawn grab by Black’s queen allows White to reclaim the play: 39…Qxa3? 40. Be5! Qb4 41. Rc7+, and the Black king is flushed out as 41…Kg8 loses to 42. Ne6 fxe3 43. Rg7+ Kh8 44. fxe3 Qe1+ 45. Kh2 Bc4 46. Rg6+ Kh7 47. Nf8 mate.
The White pieces circle like buzzards in the final kill: 45. exf4 Bf1 (a last-ditch mate threat, but the position is already past saving; on 45…Bc8, White wins with 46. Ng3+ Kh4 47. Nxe4 Qe2 48. Nxg5! hxg5 49. Rh7+ Qh5 50. g3 mate) 46. Ng3+ Kh4 47. Nxf1 Qxf1 48. fxg5 (Black’s king is in a box with no exits; Barnes does not even need that passed b-pawn for the win) e3 49. g3+ Kh5 50. g4+ Kh4 51. Bg3 mate.
Despite his evident strength, Barnes played only sporadically, competing in just one major organized event, the 1862 London Tournament, finishing in the middle of the pack.
—-
The Tata Steel Masters, the first elite event of the year, is rounding the final turn in Wijk aan Zee, Netherlands, with newly crowned Indian world champ Dommaraju Gukesh in a three-way tie for first with compatriot (and fellow teenager) GM Rameshbabu Praggnanandhaa and Uzbek GM Nodirbek Abdusattorov with five rounds to go ahead of Tuesday’s Round 9. Top-seeded U.S. GM Fabiano Caruana is a full point behind the leaders but still has games to play against both Gukesh and Abdusattorov.
In the companion Tata Steel Challengers event, Czech GM Thai Tai Van Nguyen holds a half-point lead over veteran Dutch GM Erwin L’Ami, also with five rounds to go. The winner of the Challengers’ event gets a seat at the big boys’ table next year.
We’ll have results and a round-up of the action next week.
(Click on the image above for a larger view of the chessboard.)
Barnes-Morphy, London, 1859
1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5 Nf6 4. d4 exd4 5. e5 Ne4 6. O-O a6 7. Ba4 Nc5 8. Bxc6 dxc6 9. Nxd4 Be7 10. Nc3 O-O 11. Be3 f6 12. exf6 Rxf6 13. Qe2 Rg6 14. Kh1 Bd6 15. Rad1 Qh4 16. f4 Bg4 17. Nf3 Qh5 18. Bxc5 Bxc5 19. Ne4 Bb6 20. Neg5 h6 21. Qc4+ Kh8 22. Nf7+ Kh7 23. N7e5 Rf6 24. Nxg4 Qxg4 25. Ne5 Qe6 26. Qe4+ Qf5 27. Qxf5+ Rxf5 28. g4 Rf6 29. f5 Re8 30. Ng6 Re2 31. Rd8 Rxg6 32. fxg6+ Kxg6 33. Rd7 Rxc2 34. Rff7 Bd4 35. Rxc7 Rxb2 36. Rxb7 Rxa2 37. h4 a5 38. h5+ Kg5 39. Rxg7+ Kh4 40. Rge7 a4 White resigns.
Barnes-Harrwitz, London, 1859
1. a3 e5 2. c4 Nf6 3. e3 d5 4. cxd5 Nxd5 5. Nf3 Bd6 6. Bc4 Be6 7. Qb3 c6 8. Qxb7 O-O 9. Qxa8 Qb6 10. Bxd5 cxd5 11. Nc3 Nc6 12. Qxf8+ Kxf8 13. b4 f5 14. O-O h6 15. b5 Na5 16. d4 e4 17. Ne5 Bxe5 18. dxe5 Qc7 19. Ne2 Qxe5 20. Nd4 Bd7 21. Bd2 Nc4 22. Bc3 Kg8 23. Rfd1 g5 24. Rac1 Qe7 25. Bb4 Qf7 26. Nc6 Be6 27. Rxc4 dxc4 28. Rd8+ Kh7 29. Ra8 Qf6 30. Rxa7+ Kg6 31. Nd4 Bc8 32. Rc7 Qd8 33. b6 Ba6 34. h3 f4 35. Rc6+ Kh7 36. Bd6 c3 37. Bc7 Qd5 38. Rxc3 Qa2 39. Rc2 Qxa3 40. Be5 Qb4 41. Rc7+ Kg6 42. Kh2 Qe1 43. Rg7+ Kh5 44. Nf5 Qxf2 45. exf4 Bf1 46. Ng3+ Kh4 47. Nxf1 Qxf1 48. fxg5 e3 49. g3+ Kh5 50. g4+ Kh4 51. Bg3 mate.
• David R. Sands can be reached at 202/636-3178 or by email at dsands@washingtontimes.com.
• David R. Sands can be reached at dsands@washingtontimes.com.
Please read our comment policy before commenting.