Chess history trivia

[Matt Mackenzie]

Chessgames has Botvinnik losing to Kopilov in the 1951 USSR Championship, though Kopilov "became a chess master of the USSR in 1946".

If we are counting FIDE titles only, that has to be a contender.

[JustinHorton]

I doubt that anyone who qualified for the USSR Championship Final fits the bill.

I don't see why not, there are plenty of other players in the tournament crosstables (he writes, with his copy of Cafferty and Taimanov on his lap) I've never heard of.

[John Moore]

Really, you surprise me.

[Tim Harding]

I'm only throwing it in because I don't know the answer, but excluding simuls, who was the first amateur player or untitled player if you like, or someone unknown to beat the official world champion of the day?

That is... a very difficult question to answer for a number of reasons. (For example, "untitled player" is not well-defined before 1950.)

Agreed. The earliest loss by Steinitz (not in a simul) in my database was nearly three years after the World Championship match against Zukertort.
In a series of friendly games against Vincent Martinez Carvajal in Havana, Steinitz lost a game played on 11 January 1889. He annotated it in International Chess Magazine, volume 5 (Feb 1889) on pages 55-56.
It's possible he lost other casual or simul games before that.

[Leonard Barden]

Agreed. The earliest loss by Steinitz (not in a simul) in my database was nearly three years after the World Championship match against Zukertort.
In a series of friendly games against Vincent Martinez Carvajal in Havana, Steinitz lost a game played on 11 January 1889. He annotated it in International Chess Magazine, volume 5 (Feb 1889) on pages 55-56.
It's possible he lost other casual or simul games before that.

I came to the identical conclusion as Tim a few days ago, but didn't get round to a Forum post.

https://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=1718650

[MJMcCready]

Perhaps then I ought modify the question and make it tougher. Which -assuming it has ever happened- was the first world champion to lose to what was described as 'a local player' So not a Maestro, First or Second rank Amateur, I mean a player known for playing at his club only and not extending his endeavors beyond that. It's happened countless times in simuls but some 'local players' were much stronger than was reported on. William Ward was only ever described as an amateur yet he came 2nd in the British Championship 3 times. I do believe in more recent time when Gallagher became British champion has played in a club match for whoever I can't remember but it was his 190 opponent that claimed victory not him. There is, I suppose, the additional problem of perspective. Tal's first loss as champion was to a man call Florencio Camponanes, who at the time, may have been thought as just 'some local player'.

[Kevin Thurlow]

"I do believe in more recent time when Gallagher became British champion has played in a club match for whoever I can't remember but it was his 190 opponent that claimed victory not him. There is, I suppose, the additional problem of perspective. Tal's first loss as champion was to a man call Florencio Camponanes, who at the time, may have been thought as just 'some local player'."

Joe used to play for Wimbledon. Campo was about 2200 - 2300 I think?

[MJMcCready]

Yes but how well-known at the time is another matter. Judging on the way Tal played, he didn't take him very seriously.

[JustinHorton]

Yes but how well-known at the time is another matter

Florencio Camponanes, who at the time, may have been thought as just 'some local player'

[Matt Mackenzie]

Um, what is the above claim about Tal based on?

He did indeed play Campomanes at the 1960 Olympiad soon after becoming WC - and totally squashed him.

(of course, he did lose *a* game at that event......)

[MJMcCready]

Yes, I am getting mixed up, he was his first opponent as world champion not first loss.

[MJMcCready]

I'm only throwing it in because I don't know the answer, but excluding simuls, who was the first amateur player or untitled player if you like, or someone unknown to beat the official world champion of the day?

That is... a very difficult question to answer for a number of reasons. (For example, "untitled player" is not well-defined before 1950.)

Yes unfortunately so. Take for example Maurice Fox who played for Middlesex around board 3 but was Canada originally I believe. I remember Richard James telling me was pretty good, as far as its known, he's the only the player to have beaten both Capablanca and Fischer. So he could obviously play a bit.

[Leonard Barden]

Take for example Maurice Fox who played for Middlesex around board 3 but was Canada originally I believe. as far as its known, he's the only the player to have beaten both Capablanca and Fischer.

https://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=1004796

https://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=1041139

[MJMcCready]

Interesting, I thought it was only M.Fox who did that.

[Kevin Thurlow]

Kevin Thurlow wrote: ↑
Sun Mar 15, 2020 2:01 pm
Florencio Camponanes, who at the time, may have been thought as just 'some local player'

Oh no I didn't.