Chess Advocate Setiembre 2013 | Page 3

faced with playing 17 games in 7 days against such formidable opposition, the boys from Memphis (not “boys,” exactly: B.B. Rosa B. Jefferson, sister of was about 38 years old, Scrivener Bradford B. Jefferson, deserves 32) “lost” it. In fact, B.B. did just her own biography. Intelligent, that. He scored only one point in witty, and an excellent writer, the first three rounds. “Mr. Rosa was not only Music editor Jeffersonʼs play has been without of the Memphis Commercial energy,” said the Chicago Tribune. Appeal, but also wrote the chess That diagnosis might have been column from 1903 to 1934. She right on, as we speculate below. Rosa B. Jefferson could also play a little. We know that in simuls she beat Pillsbury and Marshall, reportedly beat Maroczy, and drew World Champion Emanuel Lasker. But what is not known is that she apparently also beat Lasker in a one-game stakes match! At 4:00 p.m. on December 3, 1902, three hours before Lasker’s evening simul was to begin, she and Lasker met heads-up. Rosa referred to her “backers” and claimed that she challenged him. The game was adjourned and never finished, but according to Lasker’s Chess Magazine, “Miss Jefferson had the advantage and the judges awarded the game to her.” According to Rosa’s account of the match, “Perhaps he accepted my challenge — and, by the by, how my friends did laugh at me for throwing down the glove to the great man — just to take me down for my audacity and put me in the corner, as it were. But what he may have considered as ‘pink tea’ performance turned out to be, for him, three hours of strenuous life.” B.B.ʼs first two games were adjourned, looking like a draw and a loss, when he sat down on the second day to play, as fate would have it, his good friend Bob Scrivener. He had taught Bob how to play in 1904-1905, and Bob would become a kind of acolyte. “He is extremely modest and prefers to extol the ability of his fellow townsman, Jefferson, rather than his own,” reported the Chicago Tribune. But whatever the situation might have been with underestimating his erstwhile pupil, a debilitating bug, or loss of nerve, B.B. could expect no quarter from his friend, fellow clubber, and townsman. At move 30, Scrivener announced mate in four. Then – suddenly – things turned. In the afternoon session of the second day, just a few hours after being slammed with “Mate in 4!,” B.B. won. Then he won again. And he kept winning. In fact, in the next 14 games after Scrivener embarrassed him, B.B. won 12, lost 1, and drew 1: 12.5 points out of 14. Mystery? Maybe. Sometimes things are simpler than they seem. In college once a student answered a professorʼs question with what he thought was a very well-thought-out, complex, involved, clever analysis. Internally, he was smiling all over himself for being so smart. The professor said, “Son, youʼre reaching for the depths and drowning on the surface.” Occamʼs Razor. There might be a very simple explanation for what happened to B.B. after the game with Scrivener. Itʼs interesting to speculate that perhaps it was psychological shock. B.B.ʼs student, whom he taught how to play, rewards him by killing the king. How neatly Freudian. That must be what shook him out of his malaise, or torpor, or sui-mate. The Turn History is so often a mystery. Why in the world things turn out as they do is at times beyond our ken. We can only imagine B.B.ʼs state of mind at this point. He ended up drawing those first two adjourned games, and then in the very next round he lost spectacularly to his friend and former pupil. After three rounds, he was 1 - 2. It was a disaster in the making. He came all the way to Chicago for this? But thereʼs a much simpler way to look at the situation that explains it very well: B.B. was ill and didnʼt play like himself. Then he was healthy and did play like himself. And when he did that, he was one very tough guy to beat. The theory that he had a “bug” or some such seems even more likely given the fact that Dave Cummings, his compatriot, was not able to play at all because of a “slight indisposition.” 3