Talk:Frederick Deacon: Difference between revisions
m In ictu oculi moved page Talk:Frederic Deacon to Talk:Frederick Deacon: British |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 8: | Line 8: | ||
{{WikiProject Chess|class=Stub|importance=Low}} |
{{WikiProject Chess|class=Stub|importance=Low}} |
||
{{reqphoto|chess biographies}} |
{{reqphoto|chess biographies}} |
||
RE: "He drew against Paul Morphy (1 - 1) in 1858.[11]" |
|||
Shorty prior to this statement, we are informed that Deacon's game vs. Morphy were spurious. Since this is true (as Morphy himself attests) the cited games from chessgames.com were attributed to Deacon in error. |
|||
In January 1860 Morphy wrote to W.J.A.Fuller in New York: |
|||
Dear Fuller: |
|||
The two games published in the 'Illustrated London News' of December 17, were |
|||
not played by myself with Deacon. I never contested a single game with the man, |
|||
on even terms or at odds. Had I played at all, I would have given the pawn and |
|||
move at least, as public estimation does not rank him as a player on an equality |
|||
with Owen, to whom I yielded those odds successfully. One of the games published in the 'Illustrated London News', the Evans Gambit, was shown to me in London by Riviere, as being played between Deacon and himself. I do not know who Deacon's competitor was in the other game, but must repeat that someone has been guilty of a deliberate falsehood in both instances. |
|||
Ever yours, |
|||
Paul Morphy |
|||
The match draw between Morphy and Deacon in the article need to be changed...actually deleted completely. |
|||
Revision as of 01:22, 13 May 2012
 | Biography Stub‑class  | |||||||||
| ||||||||||
 | Chess Stub‑class Low‑importance | |||||||||
| ||||||||||
 | It is requested that a photograph be included in this article to improve its quality.
The external tool WordPress Openverse may be able to locate suitable images on Flickr and other web sites. |
RE: "He drew against Paul Morphy (1 - 1) in 1858.[11]" Shorty prior to this statement, we are informed that Deacon's game vs. Morphy were spurious. Since this is true (as Morphy himself attests) the cited games from chessgames.com were attributed to Deacon in error. In January 1860 Morphy wrote to W.J.A.Fuller in New York:
Dear Fuller:
The two games published in the 'Illustrated London News' of December 17, were
not played by myself with Deacon. I never contested a single game with the man, on even terms or at odds. Had I played at all, I would have given the pawn and move at least, as public estimation does not rank him as a player on an equality with Owen, to whom I yielded those odds successfully. One of the games published in the 'Illustrated London News', the Evans Gambit, was shown to me in London by Riviere, as being played between Deacon and himself. I do not know who Deacon's competitor was in the other game, but must repeat that someone has been guilty of a deliberate falsehood in both instances.
Ever yours,
Paul Morphy
The match draw between Morphy and Deacon in the article need to be changed...actually deleted completely.