Mr ‘X’ and the Mystery of the Wheaton Cup

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Mr ‘X’ and the Mystery of the Wheaton Cup

    In 1943 a Saint John chess player read a newspaper article about a millionaire in Ontario throwing money out a window. He told his friends and they decided to write to the eccentric philanthropist asking him to donate a trophy for the New Brunswick Chess Championship. To their amazement, a large Birk’s box was delivered to Maurice Elman’s home on Elliot Row. Within was a silver trophy! Included was a note stating: You can have this trophy if you name it the Andy Wheaton Cup. The players gratefully accepted the trophy although they had no idea who Andy Wheaton was. Over time, even the name of the eccentric donor faded from memory.

    Introducing Mr ‘X’:

    “We were at the Beatty Hotel in Saint John. Harry goes out to get some air and sees a woman with three children struggling with her bags to put them in a cab. He says to the doorman, “Get over there and help her!” The doorman says, “Who do you think you’re talking to?” Harry says, “You!” POW!! So I get a call about ten o’clock at night: The boss is in jail again.” – from Building An Empire by T. Charland

    Harry Falconer McLean was nearing 60 when this incident occurred in late 1942. With guts, gumption, and gallons of whisky, he made a fortune blasting tunnels and laying railway track from Flin Flon to Guysboroug. He did it faster and better than anyone else, taking jobs others considered impossible or too dangerous to do.

    Born in Bismark North Dakota in 1883 to Canadian parents, Harry had a pioneering and poetic disposition. He spent his life extending the frontiers of civilization with a poem in his heart. That poem was Kipling’s Sons of Martha, about the doers of the world. Harry could be short with words, “Railway men don’t talk about things,” Harry would often quip, “we build them.”

    Combining business acumen with hard labor, Harry worked his way to the top. Beginning with the Cooke Construction Co, he soon branched out, starting the Dominion Construction Company. Most of his jobs were in Canada. He worked building a section of railway line in northern New Brunswick in 1913. It was there that he met Andrew (Andy) Wheaton. Andrew and his brother William had their own Moncton based construction company and were hired on as sub-contractors. This was before McLean started Dominion Construction; when he did however, Andy Wheaton became one of his top men.

    Always a generous man, Harry would look after the needs and the families of anyone who got hurt on his jobs, and he did not want any recognition for it. He was especially sympathetic to wounded soldiers. It was in ’43 that he became known as Mr ‘X’ for handing out 100 dollar bills to soldiers. He paid a reporter to keep his name anonymous, but it leaked out and Harry was flooded with requests… So begins our story.

    Thanks to Harry Falconer McLean we have the Andy Wheaton Cup, but the question remains: who exactly was Andrew Wheaton?

  • #2
    Re: Mr ‘X’ and the Mystery of the Wheaton Cup

    Post erased. Sorry, I was thinking of Arthur Wheaton rather than Andrew Wheaton.
    Last edited by Thomas Bean; Sunday, 16th April, 2017, 11:40 AM.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Mr ‘X’ and the Mystery of the Wheaton Cup

      Hello Mr. Bean,
      You have me at a disadvantage. You played a move then took it back because you considered it unsound. What about my tastes? 1.d4 e5 is unsound, but I play it all the time because I find it interesting. Consider the line 1.d4 e5 2.dxe5 Nc6 3.Nf3 Qe7 4.Bf4 Qb4+ 5.Bd2 Qxb2 6.Nc3 Bb4 7.Rb1 Bxc3. This is unsound, but I find it interesting. After 8.Rxb2 Bxb2 Black has a R&N for his Q. Technically white has a slight material advantage and also the move, and so should win. But what are the absolute right moves? To me – despite whatever unsoundness may be attributed to the opening – this makes an interesting study.
      Last week at the library I only had a brief look at your post before you erased it. I did look up “Tlon… etc.” and learned it was a short story by Jorge Borges. The review mentioned something of Berkeley and idealism. I usually get my idealism straight from Schopenhauer, who I know was fond of Berkeley. In fact, only a few days ago I was rereading Schopenhauer’s essay on the ludicrous. On a whim I just did a Google search on “Berkeley and Schopenhauer”. The second item on the list was “Jorge Luis Borges Interview – Denis Dutton”.
      Mr. Bean, This is getting very interesting. I want to thank you for the unsound move you played.

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Mr ‘X’ and the Mystery of the Wheaton Cup

        Originally posted by John Torrie View Post
        Hello Mr. Bean,
        You have me at a disadvantage. You played a move then took it back because you considered it unsound. What about my tastes? 1.d4 e5 is unsound, but I play it all the time because I find it interesting. Consider the line 1.d4 e5 2.dxe5 Nc6 3.Nf3 Qe7 4.Bf4 Qb4+ 5.Bd2 Qxb2 6.Nc3 Bb4 7.Rb1 Bxc3. This is unsound, but I find it interesting. After 8.Rxb2 Bxb2 Black has a R&N for his Q. Technically white has a slight material advantage and also the move, and so should win. But what are the absolute right moves? To me – despite whatever unsoundness may be attributed to the opening – this makes an interesting study.
        Last week at the library I only had a brief look at your post before you erased it. I did look up “Tlon… etc.” and learned it was a short story by Jorge Borges. The review mentioned something of Berkeley and idealism. I usually get my idealism straight from Schopenhauer, who I know was fond of Berkeley. In fact, only a few days ago I was rereading Schopenhauer’s essay on the ludicrous. On a whim I just did a Google search on “Berkeley and Schopenhauer”. The second item on the list was “Jorge Luis Borges Interview – Denis Dutton”.
        Mr. Bean, This is getting very interesting. I want to thank you for the unsound move you played.
        Hi John

        I once looked at the line you gave in the Englund Gambit, using the now very old engine Fritz6. After 6.Nc3, it had several interesting ideas, other than giving up the queen. In the alternative line ECO gives, namely 4.Qd5 f6 5.ef6 Nf6 6.Qb3, I suggested 6...b6 to my engine, and after going into some deep (by no means conclusive) variations with my prodding, the engine thought this move, intending ...0-0-0, was interesting (based on it's evaluation being not so heavily in White's favour, I seem to recall).

        Kevin
        Last edited by Kevin Pacey; Saturday, 22nd April, 2017, 06:06 PM. Reason: Spelling
        Anything that can go wrong will go wrong.
        Murphy's law, by Edward A. Murphy Jr., USAF, Aerospace Engineer

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Mr ‘X’ and the Mystery of the Wheaton Cup

          Every story is a long story. Here is but part of it:
          My fascination with the Englund Gambit began in the early ‘90s. Having recently joined a chess club it soon became apparent that I learn something about the openings, since all the other players seemed to know them and I didn’t. The library edition of MCO by Korn proved daunting, with variation after variation that were later questioned in the footnotes. It appeared to be a lot of guess work, so I put the book aside and looked at the board for myself.
          One of the things I came up with was 1.d4 e5. I discovered the 8 move mate with 8…Qc1#. This delighted me. I called the opening “The King’s Counter” as a parallel to the Center Counter 1.e4 d5. After 1.d4 e5 2.dxe5 Nc6 3.Nf3 Qe7 4.Qd5 I would play 4…b6. So I took my opening to the club. It seemed unlikely that any of the players would hit upon 4.Nc3, which I considered a refutation. At the club, Dan Elman seen one of my games and said, “Oh, the Englund Gambit. I used to play that, but an English grandmaster said it was a bad opening.”
          When I won the game with 4…b6 and throwing everything at my opponent’s kingside I turned to Dan and said “This one’s for you Dan.”
          Even in the line I gave: 1.d4 e5 2.dxe5 Nc6 3.Nf3 Qe7 4.Bf4 Qb4+, there is something to be said for 5.Nc3 Qxf4 6.Nd5, but I did not want to complicate things.
          Every so often I go back to this opening to see what I can get out of it.
          Kevin, I’d be interested to know how you first encountered the Englund. Also, if you are interested I’ll offer you either the white or the black side in the study posted above…sans computer.

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Mr ‘X’ and the Mystery of the Wheaton Cup

            I can't remember how I first heard of the Englund, but I'm sure I wrote it off as simply unsound. Much later, as a master, I investigated even very offbeat openings from time to time, to try to see if they're as bad as their reputation, or whether something might be salvaged IMO (and usually that of a computer's, too). Like you I would write off the queen-down line above as (apparently) losing, but proving it with clinical analysis or play might take considerable technique, without using a computer. I've probably spent too much time over the years looking at arguably less suspect offbeat lines as it is. My latest frivolous use of time has been to venture into the world of chess variants, but I'm now going to give that a possibly permanent rest.
            Anything that can go wrong will go wrong.
            Murphy's law, by Edward A. Murphy Jr., USAF, Aerospace Engineer

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Mr ‘X’ and the Mystery of the Wheaton Cup

              No disadvantage intended, Mr. Torrie, by any means. My opening (reminiscent of Bioy Casaere’s opening in the final, unfinished round of the tragically-doomed first and only Uqbar National Chess Open) was indeed an homage to Borges. I sometimes make moves of an unusual nature for my own amusement and in this case I definitely kept my finger on the piece out of a concern it was too frivolous for the occasion and ultimately retracted, but I am very pleased to learn that it may have afforded some entertainment for you!

              As I expect you will appreciate, there are still some considerable ambiguities in many of the lines of this opening, which I am still exploring. I don't believe the opening yet has a name; I am partial myself to the name The Labrynthine Defence, which strikes me as appropriate in the circumstances, but I would be pleased to have your input.
              Last edited by Thomas Bean; Tuesday, 25th April, 2017, 01:53 PM.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Mr ‘X’ and the Mystery of the Wheaton Cup

                My familiarity with Borges starts with you Mr. Bean. Unable to find the Labyrinth collection, I am exploring Universal Infamy as an appetizer. The Etcetera section is a real treat, reminds me of snacking on Baudelaire’s Paris Spleen. Very good move on your part.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Mr ‘X’ and the Mystery of the Wheaton Cup

                  Aside from playing Chinese chess (it’s been years) and pre-modern chess (shatrang) I do not have much experience with chess variants other than from researching the origins of the game. However, I do know that it is often difficult and discouraging to get people to try something new, even if that something new does not take them too far from their doorstep.

                  For instance, awhile ago I sought to entertain a visitor to the local club with one of my ‘inventions’. I set a black king for myself on the board and gave him a white rook and a knight. “Okay,” I said, “see if you can mate me.” “Where is my king?” he impudently asked. “You only have the rook and the knight,” I said. “This is not chess,” he responded, got up and walked away. He did not waste his time learning if the mate was possible, or how to coordinate the pieces in this study. He also did not waste his time trying the R&B vs K variation.

                  At the time I was disappointed with this fellow for his lack of enthusiasm, but perhaps my method of presentation was lacking as well. Now I think it is all a matter of finding likeminded souls and letting the rest of the world go to… heaven if it wants.

                  By the way, Kevin, I should mention that you have acquired some fame with The Saint John Chess Player. In our Dec 2016 edition you are mentioned by Jonathan MacDonald alongside Donner, Alekine, and Steinitz, in an article he called: Chess Quotes to Chew On.

                  Here is part of what Jonathan wrote:

                  ““You should study chess tactics and problems when you are tired” – Pacey. This instructive quote I’ve heard only once. It was said by a fellow Canadian, one Kevin Pacey. His strategy, I believe, is if you are able to master this habit you will have a substantial edge against your tired opponent. In a game several hours long, both of you are tired, and if you have trained yourself when very tired to calculate comfortably and accurately, you have the advantage.”

                  Just did a site search on chess variants and hit upon a copyright controversy involving R. Keene where the wronged party offered to settle for $200.00, but Keene and Co. refused and ended up with a $3000.00 penalty. Must have a closer look.

                  In the meanwhile, here’s a little something for the road: We all know that K&B vs K, or K&N vs K is insufficient material to mate; but is either of these sufficient to force a stalemate?

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Mr ‘X’ and the Mystery of the Wheaton Cup

                    You might like the following link: it's the main one in the world for chess variants, as far as I know (the site recently had a major hiccup, but most of the problems for its members have been sorted out by now):

                    http://www.chessvariants.com/
                    Anything that can go wrong will go wrong.
                    Murphy's law, by Edward A. Murphy Jr., USAF, Aerospace Engineer

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X