The Palm Beach Post, West Palm Beach, Florida, Sunday, January 09, 2000 - Page 757
When Bobby Fischer became the youngest grandmaster ever in 1958 at the age of 15 years, 6 months and 1 day, he established a benchmark that seemed destined to endure. It was all the more impressive because of the sheer level of his chess talent.
In 1992, 34 years later, Judit Polgar of Hungary finally broke his record by a single month and opened the door for others to follow. In the relatively brief span that has followed, four other teens — Peter Leko of Hungary, Etienne Bacrot of France, Rusian Pnomariov of Ukraine and apparently Bu Xiangzhi of China — have each further lowered the mark.
The latest, Bu Xiangzhi, the first sub-14-year-old grandmaster in history (if his application is approved) is more than one year, seven months younger than Fischer when he qualified for the title.
Despite their precocity, none of his “successors” have yet shown that they possess him dazzling genius, although Leko — already among the top 10 grandmasters — is a likely future challenger for the world title. However they compare to Fischer, the five are nevertheless harbingers of a new age of chess in which tournament activity and the number of top players have swelled enormously and chess knowledge is easily available via books, databases and Web sites.
How much younger will our future grandmaster prodigies be? If we judge by the quality of play of top 8 and 9 year olds in recent junior tournaments, it is virtually certain that at least a year or two more can be shaved off his record. And it will take much less than 30 or 40 years to do it.
Albuquerque Journal, Albuquerque, New Mexico, Saturday, September 09, 2000 - Page 21
A Chess Olympian
Although he was the dominant player of his era, England's Howard Staunton (1810-1874) remains relatively obscure to players of our generation. It was both his strength and poor fortune to have an unspectacular, albeit winning style in an era when brilliant sacrifices and attacks were the rage.
A deserved disrepute has fallen on Staunton for his evasive behavior when the American chess nonpareil Paul Morphy made his triumphant European tour in 1858 and 1859. Spectacularly crushing the continent's top players, the New Orleans prodigy tried repeatedly to arrange a match with Staunton.
Expressing willingness to play Morphy on the one hand, Staunton offered only excuses and delaying tactics on the other. The match of course never took place. In his chess column and magazine, Staunton unfairly and unconvincingly tried to shift the blame to Morphy for the failure of the much wanted event to materialize.
A century and a few years later, Bobby Fischer wrote that Staunton was one of “the 10 greatest masters in history.” The choice was a surprise to most of his readers and testimony to the 19-year-old future world champion's deep grasp of the game's past.
“Staunton was,” said Fischer ”the most profound opening analyst of all time. He was more theorist than player, but he was nevertheless the strongest player of his day. Playing over his games, I discover that they are completely modern.
“Staunton appears to have been afraid to meet Morphy and I think his fears were well-founded. Morphy would have beaten him. It would have been a great struggle.”
Below is a loss by Staunton from an 1842 match with Pierre St. Amant, the leading French player of the time. Although he lost this game, Staunton decisively won the match 13-8 to end French supremacy in chess.