Talk:American Chess Congress

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Chess Mid‑importance

	Chess portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Chess, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Chess on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ChessWikipedia:WikiProject ChessTemplate:WikiProject Chesschess articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

New York City Low‑importance

	New York City portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject New York City, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of New York City-related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.New York CityWikipedia:WikiProject New York CityTemplate:WikiProject New York CityNew York City articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

references

Most of the references are to an AOL member webpage. The article needs better references. Bubba73 (talk), 16:51, 14 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sixth American Chess Congress

I've corrected the material about the role of this tournament in the World Championship, using the same refs as in Wilhelm Steinitz. These do not cover anything about Lipschutz, not the 1890 Chigorin-Gunberg match, so more refs are needed.

Re the 1890 Chigorin-Gunberg match, the article says it was "first to 10 wins" but drawn at 9-9. Does anyone have refs for this? It may be relevant to the controversial conditions Em. Lasker set for Rubinstein and Capablanca in 1911-1921. --Philcha (talk) 09:40, 4 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Scandal at the 5th Congress

The article has no mention of the scandal at the 5th Congress, and neither do the James Grundy or Preston Ware pages. From The Brooklyn Daily Eagle, Feb 9, 1880, p. 10: "it will be as well to quote from the startling editorial which appeared in the Turf, Field and Farm, of February 6. In this striking expose of the rotten condition of things in the metropolitan chess arena Mr Busby—the author of the article in question—says: "Ware had beaten Grundy the first time they played together, and the Englishman seemed to scent another defeat at his hands. If Grundy could secure a draw, he felt confident of the second prize, as his score would then be 13. The situation was perplexing, and Grundy, deeming a bird in the hand worth two in the bush patched a scheme for making himself secure. Mr. Ware has made a statement in writing from which we quote, says Mr. Busby. It is this: "I was walking down the Bowery with Mr. Grundy, on Sunday, January 25, and he remarked to me that he was poor and really needed the second prize; that I had in beating him, knocked him out of the first prize, and that it would not make any difference to me, if I played easily in our next game, so as to give him second prize, and that he would be willing to give me a consideration for it. I said "I suppose you mean for us to play a draw." He said, "Yes," and I agreed to do it, and twenty dollars was to be the consideration. As it turned out, the contest between Messrs. Mohle and Judd, which Grundy thought Judd would have won, resulted in a draw, and when Grundy learned of this, he saw that nothing but a victory over Ware would give him second prize, so instead of accepting the draw he took advantage of Ware's purposely weak play and eventually won the game, thus going back on Ware in a manner which induced the Boston player to expose the "little game" to the committee, he forgetting apparently that in doing this he equally exposed his own lack of honesty in agreeing to join in such a scheme to trick Mr. Mohle out of the second prize. Mr. Busby very pointedly says in his article that had Ware played a manly, upright game, it is pretty certain that the second prize would have gone to young Mohle. When the subject of the "crookedness" came up before the committee, Ware reiterated his charge, and Grundy denied it point blank. The committee had no means at the time of verifying the statement of either, and so they decided to let the games be played." Quale (talk) 07:13, 20 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

M D Hago

I am positive this is Martin D. Hago as shown here [1]. Evidence comes from [2] confirms he was member of the Manhattan Chess Club, which in turn [3] links him to Martin D. Hago. --Voorlandt (talk) 13:00, 23 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on American Chess Congress. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:15, 3 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]