Shuffling Seasons

Joseph Henry Blackburne – John Wisker
Mongredien Tourney; London, 1868
rbbqknnr/pppppppp/8/8/8/8/PPPPPPPP/RBBQKNNR w HAha - 0 1

Position #692

Notes by Johann Jacob Löwenthal and George Webb Medley, “The Transactions of the British Chess Association for the Years 1868 and 1869”, Longmans, Green, Reader, and Dyer., London, 1869, pp. 90-91.

Places the Queen’s Knight on both sides on King’s Bishops’s square, and the King’s Bishop on Queen’s Knight’s square.

1. d4 d5 2. c3 c6 3. Nf3 Nf6 4. Ng3 Ng6 5. Nf5 Bxf5. It is difficul to give an exact opinion upon the value of opening moves in such novel specimens of Chess skill as these displaced games, but on principle the exchange of the Bishop for the Knight cannot be recommended at this stage of the game, as the two Bishops would presently have been in full co-operation.
6. Bxf5 e6 7. Bc2 Qd6 8. g3 0-0 9. h4 Ne7 10. Ne5

10. ... Nd7 (RR ⌓ 10. ... c5)
11. Bf4 Nxe5 12. dxe5 Qd7 13. Qd3 g6. Black has now a compromised position.

14. Bh6. Better to break up the game first with 14. h5.
14. ... Bxe5. At all hazards the Rook should have been moved to e8.
15. Bxf8 Rxf8 16. 0-0-0 c5 17. h5 b5 18. Rh3 Bg7 19. Rdh1 b4 20. hxg6 hxg6 21. Qe3 f5 22. Rh7 bxc3 23. Qxc5 cxb2+ 24. Kb1 Rf7 25. Qb4 Nc6 (RR 25. ... Qc7! 26. Qh4 Qe5⇄)
26. Qh4 Rf8 27. Ba4 Qc8 28. g4 Na5

29. Rxg7+ Kxg7 30. g5 Rg8 31. Qd4+ 1 : 0. And Black cannot avert the threatened mate.
This is a favourable specimen of a first player’s attack in displaced games of this description, as the advantage of the first move is maintained throughout the contest.

Harry Potter and the Philosopher’s Stone

Joseph Henry Blackburne – William Norwood Potter
London, October 10, 1875
rbnqknbr/pppppppp/8/8/8/8/PPPPPPPP/RBNQKNBR w HAha - 0 1

Position #524

Notes by Potter, The City of London Chess Magazine, Volume 2, 1876, pp. 316-317.

Played at the West-End Chess Club on the 10th of October, 1875, for a Prize offered by Dr. Ballard, the Bishops and Knights on both sides being displaced — viz., the Bishops standing on the Knights’ squares, and the Knights standing on the Bishops’ squares.

1. Ng3. This, as Mr. Blackburne observed at the time, threatens mate in two moves.
1. ... d5. Better, we should say, than 1. ... e5, to which 2. d4 would be an inconvenient answer.
2. c4 dxc4 3. Nf5 Ne6 4. b3 c3 5. d4 g6 6. d5 gxf5 7. dxe6 Qxd1+ 8. Kxd1 fxe6. The advanced c-Pawn must, of course, fall; and Black therefore comes out of the preliminary skirmish with a doubled Pawn ahead. Still his position, consequent upon White’s move of f2-f4, which soon follows, and which cannot be prevented, is a constrained one.
9. Nd3 c6 10. f4 Bf7 11. Bd4 Rg8 12. g3 Nd6 13. Bxc3

13. ... Bc7 [RR 13. ... Ne4! (Steinitz) 14. Bd4 Bc7∓]
14. Ne5 Bh5 15. Bd3 0-0-0. Perhaps Black’s best move at this point was 15. ... Ne4, notwithstanding the possibility of the Pawns being trebled on the e-file.
16. Kc2 Ne4 17. Bc4. White probably does wisely in not capturing the Knight.
17. ... Rd6 18. Rhd1 Rgd8 19. Bb4 c5 20. Be1 Nf6 21. Bf2

21. ... Bb6. 21. ... b6, though it admits of Bc4-a6+, was no doubt better than the move in the text, for the weakness of the c-Pawn is a cause of subsequent embarrassment.
22. Rxd6 Rxd6 23. Rd1 Nd5. Exchanging Rooks was possibly preferable.
24. a3 a6 25. Kb2 Nc7. 25. ... Nxf4 may appear plausible, but it involves the loss of a Pawn, though at the same time no worse result than a draw would seem to follow.
26. Rc1 Rd2+ 27. Kc3 Rd6 28. Kb2 Rd2+ ½ : ½. Both parties concluded to persist in the same moves, and the game was therefore abandoned as drawn.

This repetition is forced upon Black by the weak condition of his c-Pawn, while, as far as White is concerned, the latter being a Pawn behind, cannot afford to risk much. Had he considered to adventure something, two lines of play were open to him — viz., 27. Ka1 when checked, or 28. Rc2 in reply to 27. ... Rd6; whether either of these courses would yield any profit, and to whom, is a question to answer which would require a good deal of analysis.

By default

Serafino Dubois – Joseph Henry Blackburne
International Chess Congress; Grand Tournament; London, June 30, 1862
Owen Defence B00

Notes by Johann Jacob Löwenthal, “The Chess Congress of 1862”, London, Henry G. Bohn, 1864, pages 60-61.

1. e4 e6 2. d4 b6 3. Nf3 Bb7. Bringing out the Bishop to g7 and b7, in close games, has recently been in vogue. This double “Fianchetto” may perhaps be safely adopted, but it has not received much attention at the hands of analysts, and it would therefore be difficult to pronounce definitely on its merits. 4. Bd3 c5 5. c3 cxd4 6. cxd4 d6 7. 0-0 g6 8. Nc3 Bg7 9. Re1 Ne7 10. Bf4 a6. Necessary to prevent White from playing Nc3-b5. 11. Qb3 0-0 12. Rad1 Nbc6 13. e5 d5 14. Na4 Nc8 15. Rc1 Na5 16. Qc3

16. ... Bc6. Black had a very cramped game, the move in the text was perhaps his best. 17. Qb4 Bxa4 18. Qxa4 b5 19. Qb4 Ne7 20. Bg5 Nec6. This part of the game is played by Mr. Blackburne with uncommon skill. 21. Qc5 Qd7 22. b3 Rfc8 23. Qa3 Ra7 24. Bd2 Bf8 25. Qb2 Rac7 26. Bxa5 Nxa5 27. Rxc7 Qxc7 28. Qd2 Qc3 29. Qxc3 Rxc3 30. Rd1 Ba3 31. Kf1 Nc6 32. Ke2 Rc1 33. Rxc1 Bxc1 34. Bb1 Bb2 35. Ke3 h6 36. a4 bxa4 37. bxa4 Kf8 38. Bd3 Nb4 39. Ne1 Ke7 40. Nc2 Nxd3 41. Kxd3 ½ : ½. Drawn by mutual consent.

Timothy David Harding wrote in his book “Joseph Henry Blackburne A Chess Biography”, Jefferson, North Carolina, McFarland & Company, 2015, page 36:

This rather uneventful against the Italian champion, whose arrival in London had been delayed, was played on the first day of the public sessions in the St. James’s Hall. It should have been replayed next day, when Steinitz beat Barnes and some other games were also played, but only the 5 July article in the Illustrated News of the World says what happened: “Mr. Blackburne was announced to play against Signor Dubois but the latter gentleman was to unwell to attend”. The article was written by Löwenthal, the tournament manager, who evidently was satisfied with the excuse provided by Dubois, but presumably this postponement was not properly communicated to Blackburne or the press. Boden wrote in The Field of 26 July that “Mr. Blackburne scored one by default of Mr. Dubois”, but ultimately the committee disagreed with that view. Boden had already complained on 12 July that regulations had not been strictly followed in some cases and made recommendations for more strict observance in future tournaments. Then on 9 August, after the committee had made its decisions, Boden (while admitting that they had acted “with perfect impartiality”) stated more explicitly that the tournament manager had perhaps mislaid Blackburne’s claim document: In first place, Mr. Dubois is allowed to score a game by default of Mr. Blackburne, although Mr. Blackburne had the prior, and therefore the only claim to that game, he having, as we understood from himself, handed in its printed form at the expiration of the time of the first appointmemt to play, indicating that he claimed the game by default.

Joseph Henry Blackburne
Image courtesy of Westminster Papers, April 1876