| Results |
| |
|
Match scores
|
| Name |
Edo |
Dev. |
Score |
/ |
Games |
| Geake, Edwin |
| |
0 | / | 2 |
| Humphreys, E.E. |
2086 | (93) |
2 | / | 2 |
| Geake, Edwin gave odds of pawn and move |
| |
| Cocking, H.W. |
1841 | (112) |
2 | / | 2 |
| Howard, A.G. |
1643 | (119) |
0 | / | 2 |
| |
| Young, Henry |
1946 | (76) |
2 | / | 3 |
| Percival, J. |
1916 | (108) |
1 | / | 3 |
| |
| Sich, Alexander |
2114 | (69) |
2 | / | 3 |
| Stewart, Cattley |
2228 | (72) |
1 | / | 3 |
| |
| Cruikshank, R.J. |
2091 | (81) |
1 | / | 1 |
| Barthès, Ch. |
1969 | (120) |
0 | / | 1 |
| Cruikshank, R.J. gave odds of pawn and move |
| |
| Humphreys, E.E. |
2086 | (93) |
1 | / | 1 |
| Cocking, H.W. |
1841 | (112) |
0 | / | 1 |
| Humphreys, E.E. gave odds of pawn and move |
| |
| Sich, Alexander |
2114 | (69) |
1 | / | 1 |
| Cruikshank, R.J. |
2091 | (81) |
0 | / | 1 |
| |
| Young, Henry |
1946 | (76) |
2 | / | 2 |
| Sich, Alexander |
2114 | (69) |
0 | / | 2 |
| |
| Humphreys, E.E. |
2086 | (93) |
1 | / | 1 |
| Young, Henry |
1946 | (76) |
0 | / | 1 |
| |
| Sich, Alexander |
2114 | (69) |
2 | / | 2 |
| Humphreys, E.E. |
2086 | (93) |
0 | / | 2 |
| |
| Sich, Alexander |
2114 | (69) |
2 | / | 2 |
| Young, Henry |
1946 | (76) |
0 | / | 2 |
| |
| Humphreys, E.E. |
2086 | (93) |
1 | / | 1 |
| Young, Henry |
1946 | (76) |
0 | / | 1 |
| |
| Humphreys, E.E. |
2086 | (93) |
1 | / | 1 |
| Sich, Alexander |
2114 | (69) |
0 | / | 1 |
| |
|
Event table notes
|
| Event data |
| Name: Saint James' Club Handicap Tournament |
| Place: London, England |
| Start date: Dec. 1861 |
| End date: June 1862 |
| |
| Notes: |
| Only partial results available. The initial reports in the Era of 15 Dec. 1861 (p.5) and 22 Dec. 1861 (p.4) listed Price and Roby [J. Robey] as participants, but the 19 Jan. 1862 issue (p.14) gave Perceval rather than Price as Young's opponent, and Stewart rather than Robey as Sich's opponent. In each pairing, the winner was the first to win two games. I am presuming that Cruikshank's opponent in the first round was indeed Barthes, as indicated in the 22 Dec. 1861 issue of the Era (p.4), but I do not know by what score Cruikshank won, so I record it as 1-0. The final first round pairing was Wilson-Sear, but the winner of that encounter is not reported. Whoever it was, Young beat that player in round 2. The second round pairings and winners are otherwise known (Humphreys beat Cocking, Sich beat Cruikshank, Young beat Wilson or Sear), but the odds given are not reported. However, in the handicap tournament at the Saint James Club that started immediately after this one, Humphreys was one class above Cocking, so I will assume that that was the case here too. Also, in the previous Saint James Club handicap tournament (in 1861), Cruikshank was one class above Cocking, so I presume that Cruikshank was in the same class as Humphreys here. Then, in the subsequent handicap, Humphreys, Sich and Young were all in the same class, so I will assume that that was the case here too. In the subsequent handicap, Stewart was one class above Sich, but the 19 Jan. 1862 issue of the Era (p.14) does not mention any odds between them in this tournament, while it does mention the odds between Geake and Humphreys, so I will guess that Sich and Stewart played even here. The 3 winners of round 2 had a 3-way play-off, and these results are given partially as Young-Sich +2-0, Humphreys-Young +1-0, Sich-Humphreys +2-0 (Humphreys won against Young and so must have won two games, but it is unclear whether the result was 2-0 or 2-1, so I will leave it as 1-0 to be conservative). Since there was still no clear winner, they were to play another play-off with one-game matches instead of two (Era, 1 June 1862, p.5). The results are not reported there, but the Era of 14 Dec. 1862 (p.5) says that Humphreys eventually won first and Sich was second. I assume therefore that Humphreys beat both Young and Sich, though this is contradicted in the Era of 25 Feb. 1866 (p.7), where it says that Sich won the tournament after winning his last two games, apparently against Young. I will guess that the result of the last encounter between Young and Sich was 2-0 but that Humphreys beat both Sich and Young to win the tournament. |
|
| |
| References |
| Periodicals |
| [Era], vol. 24, no. 1212, 15 Dec. 1861, page 5 |
| [Era], vol. 24, no. 1213, 22 Dec. 1861, page 4 |
| [Era], vol. 24, no. 1217, 19 Jan. 1862, page 14 |
| [Era], vol. 24, no. 1220, 9 Feb. 1862, page 14 |
| [Era], vol. 24, no. 1223, 2 Mar. 1862, page 14 |
| [Era], vol. 24, no. 1228, 6 Apr. 1862, page 14 |
| [Era], vol. 24, no. 1232, 4 May 1862, page 14 |
| [Era], vol. 24, no. 1235, 25 May 1862, page 5 |
| [Era], vol. 24, no. 1236, 1 June 1862, page 5 |
| [Era], vol. 25, no. 1264, 14 Dec. 1862, page 5 |
| [Era], vol. 28, no. 1431, 25 Feb. 1866, page 7 |
| |
