|
| |
Notes to Simon Spivack's tribute to Bob Wade
Note 1 The first two paragraphs and the verse are a direct quote from
the unpublished, but authorised, biography of Bob written by Paul McKeown. These
words were seen and approved by Bob himself. Hopefully these will scotch the
bizarre alternative suggestion for Bob's middle name. If the reader won't grant
this, then he may care to look at this image of Bob's 1946
passport. My explanation for
this tall tale is that either Bob was misheard, or that his sense of humour was
in play.
It should be noted that the quoted verse has never officially been part of the
UK national anthem. Some versions include “God” rather “Lord”. Understandably,
this verse rankles in parts of Scotland to this day.
Note
2. See page 451, game number 86 between Tal and Wade, played in
Tallinn in 1971; the actual comment can be found in the note to move 13 on page
452. The book in question: the UK edition of “The Life and Games of Mikhail Tal",
by Mikhail Tal, RHM Press (US), Pitman (UK), ISBN 0 89058 0278 (RHM), 273 014 90
3 (Pitman).
Note
3 See, for instance,
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/obituaries/article5268937.ece . A lot of the obituaries published contain errors, including that of TWIC.
Note 4.
I have never forgotten Daniel Castello's formula for rook and pawn against rook,
the key introductory concept to Philidor's position.
Note
5. Andrew Whiteley has kindly given me the following rueful note:
'At the British Championship in my home town of Oxford in 1967 I reached a won
ending against Bob, but he lured me into taking a second pawn, leading to a
drawn bishops of opposite colour ending. The local paper reported “Whiteley
failed to win two pawns up ...” The headline was simply “Whiteley fails in
Oxford chess”.'
Note
6. Many thanks to Jim Stevenson for pointing this out.
Note 7.
Getting Bob to open up was never easy. I was impressed at how much John Saunders
the editor of BCM was able to coax out of Bob in his highly recommended 1999
interview. It can be downloaded from:
http://bcmchess.co.uk/news/bcm1999-12wadeinterview.pdf
. Should this link be inoperative, it may be worth logging onto the BCM website
at http://bcmchess.co.uk/ and searching from there.
It cannot be stressed enough that Bob expected his interlocutors to think for
themselves. If I had asked him for an explanation of his extolling of “Anatomy
of a Murder”, I'm confident all I'd have received was an enigmatic smile. My
account of this book's importance to him could be off beam.
Note
8. 'CHESS readers will recall a correspondence in CHESS way back in
1949 on the subject of Bohatyrchuk, to which he himself contributed. He
apparently joined General Vlasov, who fought with the Nazis against the Russians
and it seems perfectly natural, therefore, for Communists patriotic to their own
regimes to regard him as a renegade. This being so, the stage was set for an
ugly scene when his candidature was put forward and it is difficult to see what
the F.I.D.E. assembly could do but shelve the question.
'Bearing in mind how intolerant a crusade Communism is, it seems to me that the
Russians have abused F.I.D.E. for propaganda purposes less than any similar
organisation I know. Exaggerated deference is paid to them, however, even
allowing for their pre-eminence, qualitative and quantitative, in play and
organisation. ...
...
...
'As for poor R. G. Wade, I don’t think he is a Communist, even though he now has
a column in the Daily Worker. He is suffering the usual unfortunate fate of the
fellow who tries to remain “in with everybody”!'
BH Wood.
_Chess, vol. 18, no. 209, February 1953, pp. 88–89
Note
9. 'Dear Mr. Wood,
'The letter of Mr. G. G. Ferguson, vice-president of Chess Federation of Canada,
to the Canadian Chess Chat, which you reproduce in February’s CHESS, is based on
completely wrong facts. First it is wrongly assumed that I am a Communist or
fellow-traveller.
'The two subjects discussed are taken from a newsletter — part of a series that
the editor of Canadian Chess Chat asked me to make a regular feature. As no
Canadian representative was present at the F.I.D.E. Congress last September, I
gave a résumé of the business which I thought Canada was specially interested
in.
'Canada had nominated Bohatyrchuk for the title of International Master. This
nomination was discussed by the F.I.D.E. qualifications commission twice.
Ragozin, representing the U.S.S.R., objected to the granting of the title,
pointing out that Bohatyrchuk was regarded as a traitor to his country and to
the war-time allies. That is one side of the case. Personally I think that it is
irrelevant and outside the jurisdiction of an international organisation
concerned with chess. If Bohatyrchuk had a clear claim to the title of
international master, the Soviet Union’s objections would have to be overruled.
There cannot be the least doubt that Bohatyrchuk is far stronger than many who
have been granted the title of international master. The weakness of Canada’s
case is that the title is granted for international results. Bohatyrchuk
participated in only two genuine international events and did not have
impressive results due to the fact that these two events were colossally strong.
For instance, if my memory serves me right, Bohatyrchuk was 11th at Moscow, 1925
— but what a field above him!
'There is a resolution passed at the last F.I.D.E. meeting that claims for the
master titles based entirely on pre-war record will not be considered after the
next congress at Zurich early this September. Canada has to decide this year
whether Bohatyrchuk’s record internationally warrants the F.I.D.E. taking a vote
on the question in which the voters will be split into three groups—politically
against, technically against and technically for. I hope that no one votes for
Bohatyrchuk’s claim simply on political grounds.
'I have few records with me as I meander around various Scottish clubs, so I
cannot consult Bohatyrchuk’s in the U.S.S.R. But if he participated in three
U.S.S.R. championship finals prior to the F.I.D.E. 1950 Congress, he
automatically is entitled to the title of international master.
'It should be wrong for anyone to assume the views expressed by a delegate to a
F.I.D.E. meeting without actually being present or having consulted the minutes.
Some of your readers will know that the late grandmaster, Bogoljubov, was the
subject of a similar controversy to that of Bohatyrchuk. Bogoljubov’s
international record was one of the finest. It was I who, when out-voted at a
qualifications commission meeting at the 1951 F.I.D.E. Congress, introduced the
dispute to the general assembly and forced a vote. It was I, with the consent of
the Australian Chess Federation and New Zealand Chess Association, who, in 1951,
nominated Bogoljubov for the title of grandmaster. In Kotov’s report, on that
Congress, written in the U.S.S.R. chess magazine, there was written “that Wade
is not fit to be a delegate to the F.I.D.E.” It seems that at least Kotov and
Mr. Ferguson agree on this.
'If the U.S.S.R. introduce ideas at F.I.D.E. meetings that will strengthen chess
internationally —such as some of their financial proposals — and I remain a
delegate to the F.I.D.E., I wish to be left with the discretion to support them
just as I will oppose them if their attitude is too nationalistic. Where
U.S.S.R. players play good chess I wish to be left with a power to appreciate
unwarped by political hysterics. The U.S.S.R. masters play good chess and
possess good chess manners. Where I have written U.S.S.R. in this last
paragraph, the names of most other countries could be written.'
- RG Wade in a letter to Chess, vol. 18, no. 211, April 1953, p. 132
Note 10.
It was a new concept for a modern country to have sport organised by the state
with its access to money and its power as employer. In the early days the band
of organisers overcame many difficulties by their sheer dedication. Gradually
the organisation grew. It hurt at first. There was a nagging conflict between
those who wanted to play chess for enjoyment or as an escape from reality and
those who wanted chess developed within the new educational and sporting
framework and who saw that this entailed constant drive. The state, in return
for its money, wanted evidence of new or more massive events and growth in every
year. The state also developed the mass media, like the young pioneers movement,
whereby the young between nine and sixteen could attend specialist centres and
receive tuition in chess and dozens of other recreational or vocational
activities. The chess organisations provided the teachers.
Similar organisation under the prevailing social system in England in 1967 is
possible. No Communist government is needed. Local boroughs are able to provide
and pay teachers if there is a proven demand. Courses for the teachers can be
available on demand. Chess is very popular amongst children of school age, but
the needed drive and tuition from adults is sadly lacking. The standards of
teaching chess vary widely but in general are poor.
From “Soviet Chess” by R.G. Wade, Outline chapter.
Note
11. Paul McKeown was kind enough to type the following, amongst other
things, for this tribute.
“Last but by no means least in the category of the chess professional's work is
newspaper reporting and the editorship of chess columns. All over the continent
this has always been regarded as the special preserve of the professional
master, and one of his principle sources of revenue. All the leading European
newspapers carry columns edited by the leading players, which are, in
consequence, a real benefit to the student. In England the case is vastly
different. "Why is it" the Belgian master Koltanowski remarked to me, on the
occasion of his first visit to this country, "Why is it that in England you give
all ze chess columns to ze people who cannot play ze chess?" and I could only
echo sadly, Why? When I joined the professional ranks in the middle of the
twenties the situation with regard to chess reporting could only be described as
disgraceful. ”
This was taken from William Winter's memoirs, written shortly before his death
in 1955, but serialised by BH Wood in Chess, vol. 28, this particular extract
taken from Chess, Vol. 28, No. 424-5, January 26th 1963, p. 111.
The point it illustrates was that William Winter was very concerned that a chess
column should be written by a chess professional, who should therefore gain some
degree of financial security from it. He had collaborated with Bob in writing
World Chess Championship 1951, W. Winter & R. G. Wade, Turnstile Press, 1951 and
was very happy with Bob's skill as a writer, editor and chess analyst. Indeed
that book had received some excellent reviews, viz. e.g. BCM 1952, p. 13 (G.
Abrahams).
Nothing to do with Communism and every thing to do with the professional
courtesy of one chess master towards another.
Bob edited the column in the Daily Worker from 1952, when he became British
Champion, until 1957, when events in Hungary had made Soviet style "socialism"
intensely unpopular in Britain, with the consequence that the Daily Worker,
having lost a large part of its readership, could no longer afford to keep Bob
as its only paid columnist.
The columns themselves were entirely devoted to chess and completely
non-political.
Often they were concerned with the development of chess amongst school children,
such as:
“Myrtle Barnes, of Bromley (Kent) county technical school, won the British
girls' championship at Hastings. The Birmingham Easter congress had a record
entry of 221. The newly instituted British junior championship was won by D.F.
Griffiths, of Birmingham, with 6½ points from nine games. B. H. Wood (Sutton
Coldfield) retained the senior Midlands championship title. The junior title was
won by W. Powell, of Staffordshire. The Southern Counties junior championship
was won by J. T. Farrand....”
The Daily Worker, Chess by R.G. Wade (British champion), 15 April
1953.
Typical other columns were concerned with the British championships, Hastings,
other strong national tournaments, the London League, National Club
Championships, the BCF Counties Championships, the national correspondence
championships, all often illustrated with games played by himself, other well
known players, and sometimes games by the most obscure of amateur players. He
also dealt with the Olympiads, Interzonal and Candidates tournaments, World
Championship matches and other international tournaments. An innovation of his
column in The Daily Worker was to include at least one position in most columns
with a puzzle to be solved, sometimes with a small prize, something that William
Winter had not been been able to achieve. These positions illustrated openings,
middlegames, endgames, problems, studies....
Nary a word regarding Communism - honi soit qui mal y pense.
|
