Staunton has been a controversial figure ever since his own time. In the words of chess journalist Mark Weeks, "Staunton represents a unique challenge to chess history. Many players immediately associate his name with Paul Morphy, as in 'Staunton ducked a match with Morphy'. ... This is extremely unfair, as it concentrates the focus on Staunton to a relatively minor, factually controversial incident, while it ignores his significant achievements." As chess historian
Edward Winter writes, "The issue of national bias does, unfortunately, require consideration in the Staunton–Morphy affair."
Staunton–Morphy controversy Chess historians trace much of the 20th century animosity against Staunton to books by Sergeant about Morphy. Sergeant in turn relied on a book by Edge, who accompanied Morphy to Europe in 1858 as his secretary and personal assistant, but returned to the U.S. in January 1859, a few months before Morphy. Opinions of Edge's value as a historical source vary widely: • American chess journalist
Daniel Willard Fiske, reviewing Edge's book, commented, "Mr. Morphy expressly disclaims any connection with it in any way or manner. ... will afford the reader a half-hour's entertainment". • Sergeant's books and David Lawson's
Paul Morphy: The pride and sorrow of chess (New York, 1976) make extensive use of Edge's book, but note Edge's strong anti-Staunton bias. Lawson also suggests that Morphy had seen the
manuscript of Edge's book, disliked its treatment of the Staunton affair so much that he disavowed it, and objected to Edge's treatment of other matters. • Chess historians
H. J. R. Murray,
David Hooper and
Ken Whyld described Edge as unreliable and having an extreme bias against Staunton.
E.G. Winter summarized the situation by writing: Edge's letters to Fiske show that Edge regarded Morphy as lazy and rather helpless, and himself as the one who would make Morphy's name immortal, and that Morphy wanted to keep the negotiations with Staunton discreet while Edge insisted on making them as public as possible. H.J.R. Murray wrote that Staunton's response to Morphy's initial challenge and his article about the same in
The Illustrated London News should have been interpreted as a courteous refusal of the offer, but that Morphy interpreted them differently, and one of the main reasons for his visit to Europe in 1858 was the hope of playing a match with Staunton. Edward Winter writes, "It is unwise for the 'non-playing' historian to publish his own analysis, although he may be a useful compiler. Similarly, players who are unversed in, and indifferent to, chess history should not touch it."
William Hartston wrote of Staunton's non-match with Morphy:
G. H. Diggle wrote in the
British Chess Magazine:
Playing strength and style There is a famous story that
Paul Morphy described Staunton as the author of "some devilish bad games". Chess historian
Edward Winter traced this back to a book published in 1902, whose author said he had seen a copy of Staunton's
The Chess Tournament in which Morphy had written "some devilish bad games" on the
title page; Winter was unable to trace the copy. Around the time of Staunton's death, Morphy is said to have commented that Staunton may have been the strongest player of his time, had great analytical ability and judgement of positions, but lacked the imagination required to deliberately create opportunities for
combinations. Twentieth-century opinions of Staunton's play varied enormously.
Fred Reinfeld,
Al Horowitz, and
Reuben Fine all condemned it. In his book The World of Chess,
Anthony Saidy refused to reprint a single Staunton game and said his style of play was mostly about the acquisition of material rather than strategic or analytical brilliance. On the other hand,
Savielly Tartakower wrote, "A remarkable feature of Staunton's play is the number of ultra-modern ideas with which he was familiar, e.g. the restricted centre, the
fianchetto development, bilateral work, the theory of the local engagement, etc., and, last but not least, the
English Opening (sometimes called the
Staunton Opening)."
Garry Kasparov considered Staunton "by the early 1840s ... superior to all his rivals".
Bobby Fischer opined that "Staunton was the most profound opening analyst of all time. He was more theorist than player, but nonetheless he was the strongest player of his day ... . In addition, he understood all of the positional concepts which modern players hold dear, and thus – with Steinitz – must be considered the first modern player." The website
Chessmetrics ranks Staunton as world number one from May 1843 to August 1849, in the top ten from July 1851 to May 1853, and in the top five from June 1853 to January 1856. From the early 1840s–1851 Staunton could successfully give
odds to almost any UK-based player, including eventually
John Cochrane; The closed
English Opening got its name from Staunton's frequent use of it, especially against Saint-Amant in 1843. Former world champion
Garry Kasparov commented that Staunton "founded and edited the magazine ''Chess Player's Chronicle'' ... wrote a chess column (1845–1874), studied opening theory ... published four remarkable books ... endorsed the famous '
Staunton pieces' ... organized the first international chess tournament in history ... ." However, British
International Master William Hartston wrote that Staunton's many achievements were done "with the full weight of an arrogant and pompous nature which has scarcely been matched in the history of the game." Even contemporaries sympathetic to Staunton admitted that he could be spiteful in response to unexpected defeats, Chess journalism could be a bruising business in those days, even when Staunton was not involved. However it does seem that Staunton was involved in more than his fair share of chess disputes. Staunton's enemies gave as good as they got.
H. J. R. Murray suggested that these frequent wars of words may have originated from leading players' and commentators' jealousy over Staunton's unexpected rise to the top in the early 1840s, and from snobbish disdain about his humble and possibly illegitimate birth. On the other hand, Staunton's often-criticized description of Anderssen as Germany's second best player, after Anderssen had won the 1851 London International tournament, may have been reasonable on the basis of what is now known about
von der Lasa's skill. Despite the disappointing way in which his playing career ended, All subsequent international tournaments took place in Great Britain until Paris 1867. Staunton's ''Chess-Player's Handbook'' (1847) immediately became the leading English-language chess textbook. It went through twenty-one reprints by 1935, spawned several imitators, and remained in print (in a revised edition) until the 1940s. Around 1888 Staunton's
Chess: Theory and Practice, published posthumously in 1876, was regarded as modern in most respects, but there was a growing need for more up-to-date analysis of openings. There is little evidence that Staunton had much direct influence on modern chess. Although he introduced the
English Opening, it has been called "really a 20th century invention" that only became fully respectable after future world champion
Mikhail Botvinnik began playing it in the 1930s. Similarly, although Staunton was an early champion of the
Sicilian Defense, which is today the most popular opening, and the most successful response to 1.e4, Staunton seems to have had little influence on how the Sicilian is played today: He regarded it as a safe defensive line, while it is now treated as a vigorous but slightly risky counterattack. Staunton introduced the
Staunton Gambit against the
Dutch Defence (1.d4 f5 2.e4). Although it was once a feared attacking line, it has been out of favour since the mid-1920s, and is thought to "offer White equality at best". Staunton also analysed a different
gambit approach to the Dutch, 2.h3 followed by g4. In 1979
Viktor Korchnoi, one of the world's leading players, successfully introduced this line into top-class competition, but later authorities concluded, as Staunton had, that Black gets a good game with 2...Nf6 3.g4 d5 Staunton also advocated the
Ponziani Opening 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.c3, which was often called "Staunton's Opening". It is rarely played today because it allows Black to choose between a sharp counterattack and a safe line that usually leads to a draw.
His other writings Staunton's edition of Shakespeare's plays was respected. ==Staunton Memorial Tournament==