This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||
|
Bubba73 added that Leonard Barden has a Morphy Number of 3. What is the source of this? Neither the Harding nor the Kingston article appears to mention Barden. Krakatoa ( talk) 04:08, 10 April 2010 (UTC)
The second "reader comment":
Leonard Barden from England - I have a Morphy number of three as I drew with Mieses in the first round of the Premier Reserves at Hastings 1948-9. The occasion is described in my Guardian article of 28 June 2008. Perhaps Tim can claim a Morphy 4 based on our book co-operation....
. Bubba73 (You talkin' to me?), 13:45, 10 April 2010 (UTC)
The {{ original research}} tag I just added to this article was quickly reverted. Just examining the first couple of referenced statements:
Given that the article consists almost in its entirety of the extrapolated text of a ChessCafe article and its followup, and that both contain significant speculation, I think this article should be re-tagged for now. In particular, the assertion that Tim Krabbé came up with the idea when the two references used to support it make no reference of each other is textbook synthesis. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 17:12, 14 May 2010 (UTC)
I am wholly prepared to be shot down in flames here; having spoken personally to a current GM player about the Kasparov Number, which appears to be the same or a derived concept, I thought that you had to win your game to qualify for your number? So that a player with a Kasparov number of three, say, has to have beaten a player who has beaten a player who has beaten Kasparov. Is the Morphy number different? -- Anthony Bradbury "talk" 21:29, 10 September 2010 (UTC)
Chessgames has a game Garry Kasparov vs Martin Christoffel, 1988 http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=1070298
If this game is genuine (possibly a simul game?) and it is the same Martin Christoffel then Kasparov has an MN of 4 irrespective of whether or not he played Botvinnik. IM Martin Christoffel (1922-2001) is correctly listed as MN 3 having played Mieses.
Is there any reason for doubt about the authenticity or attribution of this game from Chessgames? If not then it provides firmer evidence for a 4-status for Kasparov than an anecdotal likelihood of playing Botvinnik. Therealsleepycat ( talk) 06:12, 18 September 2010 (UTC)
Is this huge chunk in the lede referenced? It seems to me to be WP:OR, and rather uninteresting OR at that:
I think it should be excised in any case as it doesn't improve the article. "The number of amateur players ... may be therefore approximated as ..." – OK, if this is so interesting, what is the result and why is it not in the article? Quale ( talk) 06:51, 18 September 2010 (UTC)
I documented that Najdorf and Purdy played Tartakower (2), so they are both 3s. I also documented a few others that were "citation needed", e.g. Sarapu and Bogatyrchuk. So stop reverting these changes which are perfectly in accord with Wiki policies: correcting errors using proper documentation. 216.221.74.90 ( talk) 03:04, 7 November 2010 (UTC)
Any additions to this needs to have a reference. Also, we can't list the Morphy Number of everyone, so let's stick to the references and verifiable sources - in particular ones that state their Morphy number. Bubba73 You talkin' to me? 02:36, 8 November 2010 (UTC)
Doesn't everyone at Paul_Morphy#Results have a Morphy number 1? Can I add them to the list? Anna Frodesiak ( talk) 09:05, 10 June 2011 (UTC)
This article has a longstanding problem of being self-contradictory because the original sourced claims that Kasparov has MN 5 have proved to be incorrect since he is clearly MN 4. As a result at the top of the article he is MN 5 (and has been for a long time) but further down he is in the MN 4 list.
This contradiction should be cleared up so the article does not contain a clear factual error, but i am not sure what the best way is to go about this. Options include:
Any thoughts on the best way to go to fix this? Therealsleepycat ( talk) 20:28, 23 August 2011 (UTC)
The addition of Hermann Helms, who faced numerous players of the old school, would increase the number of listed 3s or 4s greatly. Helms played in the weekly Manhattan Chess Club rapid tournaments almost to the date of his death in 1963. In doing so, he faced almost everyone of note in American chess history, including Bobby Fischer and William Lombardy. See ChessGames.com for a list of his early opponents, a list unfortunately that is far from complete. Abenr ( talk) 15:48, 29 November 2011 (UTC)
I don't think it is significant that Deep Blue has Morphy number 5. Bubba73 You talkin' to me? 04:06, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
Viswanathan Anand played Bent Larsen. Anand should have a MN of 4. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Snowman212 ( talk • contribs) 21:55, 19 April 2014 (UTC)
Boleslavsky, Kotov, Smyslov, and Szabó should have MN of 3 since they all have participated in the Groningen 1946 tournament and played there with Tartakower. BYOL ( talk) 19:17, 5 September 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Morphy number. 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).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 21:56, 5 February 2018 (UTC)
A few comments regarding today's many edits. The edits were mostly to change the status of many players who have lower MNs than previously published here, and also to remove some other incorrect and out of date material.
There may have been reluctance over time to edit this article to fix such issues because of the issue of using published games and crosstables to substantiate category changes and this being a perceived WP:OR issue. After all if no WP:RS has published that so-and-so has a given Morphy number, then this is a synthesis not stated in such sources. But provided the sources are correct, the synthesis involved (A played B who played C who played D) is so trivial that it should be considered a "routine calculation" for the purposes of this article and hence exempt. To do otherwise prevents the article from being improved by correcting statements and examples that are clearly false, and it seems that generally other editors have accepted games and crosstables as evidence. (Care is needed because databases are not completely error-free, eg misattributions between players with the same surname will sometimes occur.)
Discussion on the British Chess Forum in 2010 (eg https://www.ecforum.org.uk/viewtopic.php?t=2169&start=30) revealed many players, some of them still living now and some problematic to verify, who were MN3s not included in the list of living MN3s, mostly through Sergeant who played Mortimer. For some time to come there will be several MN3s living who will not necessarily be notable players. I therefore think it is best at this time - though maybe not in another 5-10 years - for the article to avoid claiming to list all living MN3s and just list examples, preferably notable enough to have their own page.
Earlier there was a problem with this page using Kasparov as an example of MN5 when he was actually MN4, so I changed this to Anand but he turns out to be MN4 too. As the concept is attributed (somewhat hazily) to Krabbe, I thought for now just using Krabbe's 2000 line was a good way to explain it as an example that might be relatively safe against further discoveries, but there may be better approaches. Therealsleepycat ( talk) 13:53, 27 August 2019 (UTC)
Just deleted additions that were of players who had Wikipedia pages but are not exactly "famous" on a global scale, as has been the practice in the past. The number of living MN4s who are the subject of Wikipedia pages for some reason (not even always a chess reason) will be very large and even more so for MN5s.
Wondering if there is merit in putting criteria at the head of the MN4 and MN5 sections to discourage additions of obscure players who happen to have played in Olympiads, eg restrict MN4 to GMs, IMs and very famous chess personalities, and restrict MN5 to GMs. Therealsleepycat ( talk) 15:52, 27 August 2019 (UTC)
The following two sentences contradict each other:
> but all of the known links for players with Morphy number 2 go through the following five players.[1][4]
> Some Irish players could go through the Rev. Dr George Salmon, who played in one of Morphy's blindfold chess simultaneous exhibitions.[6]
Since Salmon is not listen among those five, this is a clear hole in the first sentence. 69.113.166.178 ( talk) 22:01, 8 January 2022 (UTC)
They all played Smyslov, who is MN3. — Preceding unsigned comment added by BYOL ( talk • contribs) 20:40, 4 March 2022 (UTC)
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||
|
Bubba73 added that Leonard Barden has a Morphy Number of 3. What is the source of this? Neither the Harding nor the Kingston article appears to mention Barden. Krakatoa ( talk) 04:08, 10 April 2010 (UTC)
The second "reader comment":
Leonard Barden from England - I have a Morphy number of three as I drew with Mieses in the first round of the Premier Reserves at Hastings 1948-9. The occasion is described in my Guardian article of 28 June 2008. Perhaps Tim can claim a Morphy 4 based on our book co-operation....
. Bubba73 (You talkin' to me?), 13:45, 10 April 2010 (UTC)
The {{ original research}} tag I just added to this article was quickly reverted. Just examining the first couple of referenced statements:
Given that the article consists almost in its entirety of the extrapolated text of a ChessCafe article and its followup, and that both contain significant speculation, I think this article should be re-tagged for now. In particular, the assertion that Tim Krabbé came up with the idea when the two references used to support it make no reference of each other is textbook synthesis. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 17:12, 14 May 2010 (UTC)
I am wholly prepared to be shot down in flames here; having spoken personally to a current GM player about the Kasparov Number, which appears to be the same or a derived concept, I thought that you had to win your game to qualify for your number? So that a player with a Kasparov number of three, say, has to have beaten a player who has beaten a player who has beaten Kasparov. Is the Morphy number different? -- Anthony Bradbury "talk" 21:29, 10 September 2010 (UTC)
Chessgames has a game Garry Kasparov vs Martin Christoffel, 1988 http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=1070298
If this game is genuine (possibly a simul game?) and it is the same Martin Christoffel then Kasparov has an MN of 4 irrespective of whether or not he played Botvinnik. IM Martin Christoffel (1922-2001) is correctly listed as MN 3 having played Mieses.
Is there any reason for doubt about the authenticity or attribution of this game from Chessgames? If not then it provides firmer evidence for a 4-status for Kasparov than an anecdotal likelihood of playing Botvinnik. Therealsleepycat ( talk) 06:12, 18 September 2010 (UTC)
Is this huge chunk in the lede referenced? It seems to me to be WP:OR, and rather uninteresting OR at that:
I think it should be excised in any case as it doesn't improve the article. "The number of amateur players ... may be therefore approximated as ..." – OK, if this is so interesting, what is the result and why is it not in the article? Quale ( talk) 06:51, 18 September 2010 (UTC)
I documented that Najdorf and Purdy played Tartakower (2), so they are both 3s. I also documented a few others that were "citation needed", e.g. Sarapu and Bogatyrchuk. So stop reverting these changes which are perfectly in accord with Wiki policies: correcting errors using proper documentation. 216.221.74.90 ( talk) 03:04, 7 November 2010 (UTC)
Any additions to this needs to have a reference. Also, we can't list the Morphy Number of everyone, so let's stick to the references and verifiable sources - in particular ones that state their Morphy number. Bubba73 You talkin' to me? 02:36, 8 November 2010 (UTC)
Doesn't everyone at Paul_Morphy#Results have a Morphy number 1? Can I add them to the list? Anna Frodesiak ( talk) 09:05, 10 June 2011 (UTC)
This article has a longstanding problem of being self-contradictory because the original sourced claims that Kasparov has MN 5 have proved to be incorrect since he is clearly MN 4. As a result at the top of the article he is MN 5 (and has been for a long time) but further down he is in the MN 4 list.
This contradiction should be cleared up so the article does not contain a clear factual error, but i am not sure what the best way is to go about this. Options include:
Any thoughts on the best way to go to fix this? Therealsleepycat ( talk) 20:28, 23 August 2011 (UTC)
The addition of Hermann Helms, who faced numerous players of the old school, would increase the number of listed 3s or 4s greatly. Helms played in the weekly Manhattan Chess Club rapid tournaments almost to the date of his death in 1963. In doing so, he faced almost everyone of note in American chess history, including Bobby Fischer and William Lombardy. See ChessGames.com for a list of his early opponents, a list unfortunately that is far from complete. Abenr ( talk) 15:48, 29 November 2011 (UTC)
I don't think it is significant that Deep Blue has Morphy number 5. Bubba73 You talkin' to me? 04:06, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
Viswanathan Anand played Bent Larsen. Anand should have a MN of 4. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Snowman212 ( talk • contribs) 21:55, 19 April 2014 (UTC)
Boleslavsky, Kotov, Smyslov, and Szabó should have MN of 3 since they all have participated in the Groningen 1946 tournament and played there with Tartakower. BYOL ( talk) 19:17, 5 September 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Morphy number. 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).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 21:56, 5 February 2018 (UTC)
A few comments regarding today's many edits. The edits were mostly to change the status of many players who have lower MNs than previously published here, and also to remove some other incorrect and out of date material.
There may have been reluctance over time to edit this article to fix such issues because of the issue of using published games and crosstables to substantiate category changes and this being a perceived WP:OR issue. After all if no WP:RS has published that so-and-so has a given Morphy number, then this is a synthesis not stated in such sources. But provided the sources are correct, the synthesis involved (A played B who played C who played D) is so trivial that it should be considered a "routine calculation" for the purposes of this article and hence exempt. To do otherwise prevents the article from being improved by correcting statements and examples that are clearly false, and it seems that generally other editors have accepted games and crosstables as evidence. (Care is needed because databases are not completely error-free, eg misattributions between players with the same surname will sometimes occur.)
Discussion on the British Chess Forum in 2010 (eg https://www.ecforum.org.uk/viewtopic.php?t=2169&start=30) revealed many players, some of them still living now and some problematic to verify, who were MN3s not included in the list of living MN3s, mostly through Sergeant who played Mortimer. For some time to come there will be several MN3s living who will not necessarily be notable players. I therefore think it is best at this time - though maybe not in another 5-10 years - for the article to avoid claiming to list all living MN3s and just list examples, preferably notable enough to have their own page.
Earlier there was a problem with this page using Kasparov as an example of MN5 when he was actually MN4, so I changed this to Anand but he turns out to be MN4 too. As the concept is attributed (somewhat hazily) to Krabbe, I thought for now just using Krabbe's 2000 line was a good way to explain it as an example that might be relatively safe against further discoveries, but there may be better approaches. Therealsleepycat ( talk) 13:53, 27 August 2019 (UTC)
Just deleted additions that were of players who had Wikipedia pages but are not exactly "famous" on a global scale, as has been the practice in the past. The number of living MN4s who are the subject of Wikipedia pages for some reason (not even always a chess reason) will be very large and even more so for MN5s.
Wondering if there is merit in putting criteria at the head of the MN4 and MN5 sections to discourage additions of obscure players who happen to have played in Olympiads, eg restrict MN4 to GMs, IMs and very famous chess personalities, and restrict MN5 to GMs. Therealsleepycat ( talk) 15:52, 27 August 2019 (UTC)
The following two sentences contradict each other:
> but all of the known links for players with Morphy number 2 go through the following five players.[1][4]
> Some Irish players could go through the Rev. Dr George Salmon, who played in one of Morphy's blindfold chess simultaneous exhibitions.[6]
Since Salmon is not listen among those five, this is a clear hole in the first sentence. 69.113.166.178 ( talk) 22:01, 8 January 2022 (UTC)
They all played Smyslov, who is MN3. — Preceding unsigned comment added by BYOL ( talk • contribs) 20:40, 4 March 2022 (UTC)