English Chess Forum

Flicking through the latest New In Chess on the bus yesterday, I was interested to see an advert for the Dutch magazine Matten Schaakverrhalen, primarily because it advertised an article "Hoe sterk was Humphrey Bogart?". This means, evidently, "How strong was Humphrey Bogart?". Coincidentally I'd been thinking about this very question recently, having come across a claim that he was of 2100 strength, but lacking much in terms of actual games to prove (or indeed disprove) this.

I'd like to know what the article says, but I don't have any Dutch. I don't suppose anybody here reads Dutch and has seen (or is likely to see) the article, or can in any other way help answer the question "how strong was Humphrey Bogart?".

Mike Fox and Richard James put Bogart on board 1 of their "showbiz allstars team" in The Even More Complete Chess Addict. Some things they say about Bogart: (i) he beat Reshevsky in a simul; (ii) he was offered the job as resident expert/hustler at a chess cafe in New York; (iii) most of his published games are losses to masters. (So, nothing really conclusive, there, then.) I think Edward Winter has also written about Bogart.

This may help.

Yeah, Alex, I'd seen that - I'm not sure it's enough to make any judgements from it (as Mike observes) although it's pretty clear he was no patzer. I'm hoping the article has a little bit more.

JustinHorton wrote:I don't suppose anybody here reads Dutch and has seen (or is likely to see) the article

Justin,
I lived in Amsterdam for a long time and am fairly fluent, having even translated some books from Dutch into English. Send us a link or the text and I'll translate for you.
Paul

Paul U coming to Big slick at all as FIDE Arbiter Peter Ackley is there

Paul McKeown wrote:

JustinHorton wrote:I don't suppose anybody here reads Dutch and has seen (or is likely to see) the article

Justin,
I lived in Amsterdam for a long time and am fairly fluent, having even translated some books from Dutch into English. Send us a link or the text and I'll translate for you.
Paul

Paul that's very generous and I'd love to but I don't actually have the magazine - I just saw the ad!

JustinHorton wrote:Flicking through the latest New In Chess, I was interested to see an advert for the Dutch magazine Matten Schaakverrhalen...

Off topic, I know, but the first thing I looked for in the latest issue of NIC was a response to Nigel Short's piece in the previous issue on his rememberances of his 1993 World Championship Candidates' match against Timman. Alas, the current issue of NIC is missing its usual 'Your Move' column.

See here for some commentary on the matter from Justin.

Ben Purton wrote:Paul U coming to Big slick at all as FIDE Arbiter Peter Ackley is there

Ben, what, where, when, why and how is the "Big slick"?

Angus French wrote:Alas, the current issue of NIC is missing its usual 'Your Move' column

By way of compensation, they do have Loek van Wely calling him "Nigel Gump".

A Dutch friend has looked at the article and it is just discussing Bogart's skill, it doesn't show any games, but he does say ...

"No games as well, so hard to judge based on hearsay only. Apparently a simultaneous game between Reshevsky and Bogie does exist, but unfortunately Matten could not
get hold of a copy... However on the internet:

Reshevsky-Bogart, Hollywood 1956
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nf6 4.Ng5 d5 5.exd5 Nxd5 6.d4 f6 7.dxe5
fxg5 8.Qxd5 Qxd5 9.Bxd5 Be7 10.0-0 Bf5 11.c3 Nxe5 12.Bxb7 Rd8
13.Re1 0-0 14.Nd2 Bf6 15.Ne4 Bxe4 16.Bxe4 h6 17.Be3 a5 18.Bc5
Rfe8 19.Rad1 Kh8 20.Rxd8 Rxd8 21.Kf1 Ng4 22.h3 Ne5 23.Ke2 Nc4
24.Rd1 Rxd1 25.Kxd1 Nxb2+ 26.Kc2 Na4 27.Bd4 Bxd4 28.cxd4 1/2-1/2

"His best known game Bogart played on March 5, 1952, in San Francisco
against George Koltanowski. Koltanowski played blindfold and won,
but according to Denker a draw was a definitive possibility. 'A real
menace', said Koltanowski after the game. 'This guy is dangerous,
and I'm not kiddin'. 'That's right, bub', said Bogart.

Koltanowski - Bogart, San Francisco 1952
1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.exd5 exd5 4.Bd3 Nf6 5.Ne2 Bg4 6.O-O Bd6 7.f3 Be6
8.Bf4 O-O 9.Nd2 Nc6 10.c3 Ne7 11.Bxd6 Qxd6 12.f4 c5 13.Nf3 Nf5
14.Qd2 Ne4 15.Qc1 Rac8 16.dxc5 Qxc5+ 17.Ned4 Nxd4 18.Nxd4 Rc7 19.f5
Bd7 20.Bxe4 dxe4 21.Qf4 Re8 22.Rae1 Re5 23.Rxe4 Rxe4 24.Qxe4 Bc6
25.Qe3 Re7 26.Qg3 Re8 27.f6 g6 28.Qh4 h5 29.Re1 Rxe1+ 30.Qxe1 Qd6
31.Nxc6 Qxc6 32.Qe7 Qc8 33.h3 Qc6 34.b4 Qxc3 35.Qe8+ Kh7 36.Qxf7+
Kh6 37.Qe7 Qc1+ 38.Kf2 Qf4+ 39.Ke2 Qc4+ 40.Kf3 Kg5 41.f7+ 1-0"

Hope that helps.

Ta. If that account's accurate ,then, it doesn't say anything new. It probably just means somebody surfed the internet and summarised a few articles they found there.