Le Lionnais, the vanishing virtuoso

World Chess Championship update: at the time of writing, Ding and Gukesh are tied on 2-2, with one win each and two draws. In today’s fifth game, Gukesh has White.

My colleague Adam Black, in the course of his research into the games of Marcel Duchamp, has long extolled the virtues of Le Lionnais; this French polymath, whose infuriatingly rare, but evidently eminent credentials are all too infrequently acknowledged, and studied even less .

François Le Lionnais, a man so various that he seemed to be, not one, but all mankind’s epitome…

Before commencing on this week’s disquisition into one of the more obscure branches of chess arcana, I wish to also record my thanks to Dr Natalie Berkman, the award winning scholar from Princeton University, whose paper,  François Le Lionnais , has been the foundation for much of the information I here reproduce. Herself, a notable polymath (French, German, Literature, Mathematics, Digital Studies, Education etc.) her article for the  Literary Encyclopaedia  has been an indispensable reference work for this column.

François Le Lionnais (1901-1984) lived through two World Wars, the Nazi occupation of France and  the Cold War. Any search for François Le Lionnais in databases, encyclopaedias, books, or other sources will show that he was a French chemical engineer by trade, while many more refer to him as a mathematician writer, and general polymath, with an impressive memory and rebellious attitude, a unique and energetic  genius, spanning every intellectual field . A teacher , a joker, and owner of a prodigious library , he was also a political activist, member of the French resistance, and deportee to the Dora Nazi concentration camp.

In his persona as political activist , having signed up to the Communist Party in 1930, Le Lionnais joined the French Resistance.  He was arrested in 1944, interrogated and tortured by the Gestapo, deported briefly to Buchenwald and then to the Dora work camp (which he describes in a letter to T.R. Dawson as “much worse than Buchenwald ” ). It was in Dora that the Nazis forced prisoners to construct the V2 rockets.

In April 1945, as the Allies approached, Dora was evacuated and the Nazis led the prisoners on a death march. The irrepressible Le Lionnais escaped, walked for several days to arrive at Seesen, a small German village that had already surrendered to the Allied Forces. Once installed there,  he helped other escapees and, amazingly,  even published a journal entitled  Revivre Français séjournant à Seesen libérés du jougnazi.  (“French survivors staying in Seesen freed from the Nazi yoke.”)  

From a very young age, Le Lionnais played chess, learning the rules from his uncle by marriage, a Russian Freemason named Naoumov, who lived in France permanently and was an old acquaintance of Trotsky. Le Lionnais enjoyed a longstanding friendship with Marcel Duchamp, begun by their mutual admiration of chess. He even beat Duchamp in 48 moves in a 1932 game, which will appear in a subsequent column, with comments updated and based on those by Grandmaster Ksawery Tartakower. 

In the 1960 s , Le Lionnais’ vast library of 25,000 books apparently included 2,500 on chess. Before the war, he played chess regularly in cafés in the 7th arrondissement of Paris, and after the war he developed his pedagogical and theoretical texts on the subject, to discuss chess rules and strategies. In one he shares an anecdote about Nimzowitsch (Duchamp’s role model for chess strategy) and an opponent, who appears to be on the verge of lighting up a cigarette. Nimzowitsch, who hates tobacco, vigorously protests that one is not allowed to smoke during a tournament game. The opponent retorts that he has not yet smoked, to which Nimzowitsch shoots back that, in chess, it is well known that the threat is stronger than the execution .

Perhaps the most lasting creation of Le Lionnais was the  OuLiPo  ( Ouvroir de Littérature Potentielle)  which he founded with his friend and colleague, Raymond Queneau in 1960.

OuLiPo strikes me as one of the more outlandish manifestations of Gallic intellectualism. The group defines the term  littérature potentielle  as “the seeking of new structures and patterns which may be used by writers in any way they enjoy”. Queneau described Oulipians as “rats who construct the labyrinth from which they plan to escape.”

Constraints on writers are used as a means of triggering ideas and inspiration, most notably Perec’s “story-making machine”, which he used in the construction of  Life: A User’s Manual . As well as  lipograms  (Perec’s novel  A Void ) and palindromes, the group devised new methods, often based on mathematical problems, such as the  knight’s tour  of the chess-board. Another constraint would be the writing of a novel, which totally excludes a certain letter of the alphabet.

While Oulipian works would doubtless be setting themselves up in the UK as prime targets for Pseud’s Corner, there was nothing bogus or artificial about Le Lionnais’ gift for chess. Apart from his extensive literature (even his maths books contain references to chess) he edited a chess journal, Les Cahiers de l’Echiquier Français, and both gave and participated in, numerous simultaneous displays. Further still, he would appear to be a chessic autodidact.

It is astonishing that only a very few of his games have survived for posterity. Adam Black then informed me that a note on the chesshistory.com site, identified an Alekhine game against the Magazine Vue team, in 1935. Le Lionnais (unnamed) headed this team.

This detail was corroborated by Skinner and Verhoeven’s exemplary,  Alexander Alekhine’s Chess Games, 1902-1946,  a standard reference book in my library. Upon closer examination, it transpired that Alekhine had, in another simultaneous display against a team, also played Le Lionnais in 1932. Both games, credited to Le Lionnais for the first time in full, appear at the foot of the column, along with his win against Emanuel Lasker.

However, if any, especially Francophone, readers see this column and know of further games by Le Lionnais, I urge them to contact me. I suspect that a vanished treasure trove of ingenious chess games is lurking somewhere, and it would represent a signal service to a mighty and diverse intellect, if they could be uncovered.   

Courtesy of the excellent French Chess heritage website ( http://heritageechecsfra.free.fr/ ) we have already been contacted about more games, some which we had already sourced, but with an new additional game where he and one Baron du Charmel (playing Black) had drawn against the very strong player, Victor Kahn.

So to summarise : playing solo, he had beaten Duchamp, and leading a team, had beaten Alekhine with another game drawn, drawn against Victor Kahn, and beaten Emanuel Lasker. It is also of significance that even in the two draws (against Alekhine and Kahn) Black had been in a winning position prior to settling for peace. For now, how he became this strong must remain one of life’s mysteries. As far as we can establish, the following collection of these five games, is the most complete to have been published at any time.  

Emanuel Lasker vs. Francois Le Lionnais and Mme.Tonini

Simultaneous Display, 30b, Paris, 1933

(Mme. Tonini was the Italian Ladies Champion)

1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. c3 e6 4. d4 d5 5. exd5 exd5 6. Be3 c4 7. Nbd2 

A somewhat diffident move by the former world champion. 7. b3 is standard.

7… Be6 8. Ng5 Nf6 9. Be2 Bd6 10. f4?!

More ambivalence: 10. b3 is still best, or alternatively, 10. Nxe6.

10… O-O 11. O-O Qe7 12. Bf3?!

An error that asides other considerations, leaves the e3-bishop undefended. White is better advised to try 12. Ndf3.

12… Bf5 13. Re1 Qc7 14. g4 

14… Bxg4?

An error possibly emboldened by the loose approach White has taken to the opening. It is intended as a gambit, but simply should not be sufficient for the investment made, when simply 14… Bd3 or …Bd7, is enough for Black to retain a small but telling edge.  

15. Bxg4 Bxf4 16. Qf3?!

Better was 16. Nf1, when after 16… Rae8 (or 16… Bxg5 17. Bxg5 Ne4 18. Rxe4 dxe4 19. Ne3) 17. Qf3 Rxe3 18. Nxe3 Bxg5 19. Nxd5 Nxd5 20. Qxd5, White can maintain his advantage.

16… Bxh2+ 17. Kg2 Rfe8?

A mistake, 17… Rae8 was the best move. After the text, White can gain a serious advantage with, for example, 18. Bf5 Rxe3 19. Rxe3 Bf4 20. Nxh7 Nxh7 21. Bxh7+ Kxh7 22. Qh5+ Kg8 23. Rh1 Bh6 24. Nf3 Rf8 25. Nh4, with material parity, but White’s pieces far more active.  

18. Nh3?!

Discarding much of his potential advantage, charted last move.

18… Nxg4 19. Qxg4 Ne7 20. Bf4 Bxf4 21. Nxf4 Rad8 22. Nf3 Qd7 23. Qxd7 Rxd7 24. Re2 f6 25. Rae1 Kf7 26. Ne6?!

Perhaps 26. Nh5 is stronger, leaving the e8-rook pinned such that, if now, 26…Kg6 27. Ng3 Kf7, White is the player with more active pieces.

26… Rc8 27. Nc5 Rdc7 28. Nd2?

The text does much to eradicate White’s dominance of the board, in a single move…

28… b6?!

… but neither is it a good idea to waste a tempo forcing White to make a move that he already intended.  

29. Ne6 Rd7 30. Nf1 Nf5 31. Nf4 

White will live to regret t his move, that encourages Black to execute a kingside expansion, with his kingside pawn phalanx-sweeping all before it.

31… g5 32. Nh3 Re7 33. Rxe7+ Nxe7 34. Ne3 Rc6 35. Ng1 Re6 36. Nf3 Kg6 37. Kf2 h5 38. Rg1 g4 39. Ng2 Kh6!

Black merely side steps the rather obvious pseudo-sacrifice,39… gxf3? 40. Nf4+.

40. Nd2?  

The White knights need squares to operate from and it is this oxygen from which they are deprived by the pawn advance.

40… Kg5?

Unless Black blunders everything back, as he does with this move. Essential was 40… Ng6! 41. b3 b5 42. a4 a6 43. bxc4 bxc4 44. Rb1, and only now, 44… Kg5.

41. Re1??

An astonishing error from the ex-champion. A beginner’s error to swap the last remaining rook in such a position. From this point on, with or without the further minor blemishes that White throws in for good measure, Black never once takes his boot from White’s neck.

41… Rxe1 42. Nxe1 f5 43. Nf1   f4 44. Nd2 h4 45. Nc2 h3 46. Ne1 g3+ 47. Kg1 Kg4 48. Nef3 Ng6 49. Ne5+ Nxe5 50. dxe5  White resigns 0-1

  Because after, 50… f3 51. Nxf3 Kxf3 52. b3 h2+ 53. Kh1 Kf2 54. bxc4 g2+ 55. Kxh2 g1=Q+ 56. Kh3, Qg3 is checkmate.

Alexander Alekhine vs. Magazine Vue team

Simultaneous Display, 36b, Paris, 1935

  According to a column in  Vue  magazine, their team was captained by Francois Le Lionnais, but gives no details of other players. At this time, Alekhine is the World Champion, having beaten Boguljubov the previous year. He has an estimated rating of 2784 that June which, according to the  www.chessmetrics.com  website, made him the world’s #1 ranked player.  

1. d4 d5 2. c4 e6 3. Nc3 Nf6 4. Bg5 Be7 5. Nf3 Nbd7 6. e3 O-O 7. Rc1 c6 8. a3 a6 9. cxd5 exd5 10. Bd3 h6 TN

Deviating from theory, but with little ill effect.

11. Bf4 Re8 12. O-O Nf8 13. Ne5 Bd6 14. Bg3 Bxe5 15. Bxe5 Be6 16. h3 N8d7 17. Bh2 Rc8 18. b4 b5 19. a4 Nb6 20. a5 Nc4 21. Qc2 Nd6 22. g4 Qd7 23. f3 Nc4 24. Rfe1 Re7 25. Qf2 Nh7 26. e4?!

After a creditably level opening, this is the first inaccuracy. Better, for example, was 26. Bxc4 bxc4 27. Na4 Rf8 28. Bf4 Qd8 29. Nc5 Bc8 30. e4 dxe4 31. fxe4 Rfe8 32. Rf1 Nf8 33. Rxc4. 26 Bxc4 dxc4 27 Ne4 also leaves White well on top without any risk of opposing counterplay. 

  26… Ng5 27. Kg2 f6?!

Losing the initiative. Better is 27… dxe4 28. Bxe4 Nxe4 29. Nxe4 Qd8.

28. h4?!

Matching inaccuracies when, 28. exd5 cxd5 29. h4 Nh7 30. Ne2 kept it with White.

28… Nf7?!

After such an equally played opening stage, both sides are creaking their way into the middlegame. Better is, 28… dxe4 29. Nxe4 Nxe4 30. Rxe4 Bd5 31. Rxe7 Qxe7.

29. e5?

But this is a mistake, giving Black a tangible edge, which White could have maintained after 29. exd5 cxd5 30. Ne2 Nfd6 31. Nf4 Bf7 32. Rxe7 Qxe7 33. Re1 Qd7 34. h5.

29… f5?

And, if anything, this is an even worse response: a matching mistake! After 29… fxe5 30. Bxc4 dxc4 31. dxe5 Bd5 32. Rcd1 Qxg4+ 33. Bg3 Qe6 34. Nxd5 cxd5, Black is cruising.  

30. g5 hxg5 31. hxg5 Nxg5 32. Bf4?!

This misjudgement compromises White’s momentum, with two good alternatives available:

a) 32. Ne2 Rf8 33. Nf4 Ne4 34. fxe4 fxe4 35. Bxc4 bxc4 36. Kg1 Ref7 37. Qe3 Rf5 38. Rc2 Rg5+ 39. Bg3; or

b) 32. Rh1 Nh7 33. Rcg1 g5 34. Ne2 Rg7 35. Bf4 Kf7 (but not 35… gxf4+? 36. Kf1 Ne3+) 36. Bc1. White is considerably better after both these lines, but only equal after the text move.

32… Nh7 33. Rh1 g5 34. Rxh7??  

A cataclysmic error by the World Champion, with which, Black is merciless. White could keep a slight edge after, 34. Ne2 gxf4 35. Rcg1 Kh8 36. Kf1 Rg8 37. Rxg8+ Bxg8 38. Nxf4 Rg7 39. Rh6 Bf7 40. Qh4 Be8 41. Kf2.

34… Rxh7 35. Bxg5 Qg7 36. f4 Kf7 37. Rh1 Rxh1 38. Kxh1 Rh8+ 39. Kg1 Qh7 40. Qg2   Ne3  and mate follows. White resigns 0-1  

Alexander Alekhine vs. ‘The Black Team’

Simultaneous Display, Paris, 1932, ½-½

Source: Alexander Alekhine’s Chess Games, 1902-1946 (game #1463), (McFarland, 2019), Skinner & Verhoeven.

“The following game, played on February 20th, in the grand Alekhine match at Claridge, gives an idea of the strength of certain equal positions between which the world champion had to struggle. The captain of this board was my friend F. Le Lionnais, assisted by MM. Costes, Pontier, Stadel Hofer, and Jouffroy.” (Source: L’Action Francaise ) Punctuation has been retained from this source.

1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5 a6 4. Ba4 Nf6 5. O-O Nxe4 6. d4 b5 7. Bb3 d5 8. dxe5 Be6 9. a4 Rb8 10. axb5 axb5 11. c3 Bc5 12. Qd3 Ne7 13. Nd4 Bxd4 14. cxd4 Nf5 15. Nc3 Nxc3 16. bxc3 O-O 17. Ba3 Re8 18. Bc5 c6 19. Ra7 Ra8 20. Rfa1 Rxa7 21. Rxa7 Qg5! 22. Ba3 Nh4 23. Qg3

Alekhine has a well-established reputation for just having blown away opponents in this open line of the Ruy Lopez. It is therefore quite inexplicable that he should have made a disastrous, and potentially game-losing error such as the text. Quite sufficient to maintain equality was the following: 23. g3 Bf5 24. Qe3 Qxe3 25. fxe3 Nf3+ 26. Kg2 Be4 27. Kh3.

23… Qf5!

One can only suppose that Alekhine had failed to appreciate in his erroneous last calculation that after the text, 24. Qxh4 fails on account of 24… Qb1+, with mate to follow.

24. Ba2 Qc2 25. h3 Nf5 26. Qg5! Qxa2 27. g4 Nh6 28. Qe7! Qb1+

Of course, Black must not capture with 28… Rxe7 on pain of 29. Ra8+, mate following. But the text throws Black’s significant advantage to the winds. Correct was 28… Rc8, when against the two best moves available to White, Black should still be winning, as follows:

a) 29. Rc7 Kh8 30. Rxc8+ Bxc8 31. Qd8+ Ng8 32. Bf8 Be6 33 Qg5 g6 34. Qe3 Qa1+ 35. Kg2 Qa8; when Black remains a piece up and the matter is merely one of technique.

b) 29. Kg2 Nxg4 30. hxg4 Qe2 31. Qg5 Bxg4 32. Qf4 Be6 33. Qf3 Qc2 34. Be7 h6; with White losing further material, and Black’s piece advantage should prove a winning one.

c) 29. Bc5 Qb1+ 30. Kh2 Kh8 31. Qh4 Qc2 32. Ra3 Ng8; after which Black has no weaknesses and again, retains the decisive piece advantage.

29. Kh2 Rc8 30. Rc7 Game drawn ½-½

The difference between this ending and that given in line a) above, is that the black queen no longer attacks White’s bishop on a3, thus giving White a whole extra tempo.

Victor Kahn vs. Francois Le Lionnais and the Baron du Charmel

Consultation game played at the Cercle Caissa, Paris, 1932, ½-½

(Source:  L’Action Francaise )

1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 e6 3. Nf3 d5 4. Nc3 c5 5. e3 Nc6 6. Bd3 Be7 7. O-O O-O 8. a3 a6 9. dxc5 dxc4 10. Bxc4 Bxc5 11. Qe2 b5 12. Rd1 Qe7 13. Bd3 Bb7 14. b4 Ba7 15. Bb2 Rac8 16. Ne4 Nxe4 17. Bxe4 f5 18. Bb1 e5 19. Ba2+ Kh8 20. Rd2 e4 21. Nd4 Nxd4 22. exd4?

The text move is a poor choice, when 22. Bxd4! keeps Whites’s strong momentum.

22… f4 23. Qg4 e3 24. Re2 

24… Bxg2 

This may look spectacular, intending …f3 after White captures the bishop, but fails as

Black had failed to factor in the response played.

Had White have taken 25. Kxg2??, then …f3+ is just winning a rook for nothing. If White was foolish enough to attempt 25. Qxg2, then …f3 leads to winning lines after, 26. Rxe3 Qxe3 27. fxe3 fxg2 and now if:

a) 28. Bb3 Rce8 29. Re1 Rf1+ 30. Rxf1 gxf1=R+ 31. Kxf1 Rxe3 32. Bc2 Bb8 33. d5 Rh3 34. Be4 Rxh2; and Black is clearly winning.

b) 28. Bb1 Rf1+ 29. Kxg2 Rcf8 30. Be4 R1f2+ 31. Kg1 Rxb2; the additional rook lands the win.

c) 28. Bd5 Rc2 29. Rb1 Rff2 30. Rc1 g6 31. Rxc2 Rxc2 32. Bb7 Rxb2 33. Bxa6 Bb6 34. Bxb5 Bd8 35. h4 Bxh4; and the battle to snaffle pawns goes to the side with the extra rook!

Nor was the move utilized, necessary, as Black can gain an advantage through more conventional means. Two examples follow:

a) 24… Rc6 25. f3 Rg6 26. Qxg6 hxg6 27. Rd1 Kh7 28. Bb3 Bc8 29. Bc3 Bf5 30. Be1 Rc8 31. Kh1 Bb8 32. Kg1; or

b) 24… Rcd8 25. d5 Bxd5 26. Bxd5 Rxd5 27. f3 Qf7 28. Kh1 Kg8 29. Bc3 h5 30. Qh3 Rd3 31. Rc1 Rfd8 32. Be1; when in both lines, Black should win.

25. f3!! 

An inspired defence. Black’s bold bishop now becomes trapped. 

25… Rc6 26. Rxg2 e2 27. Re1 Rc2 28. Bb1 Rxb2 29. Be4 Bxd4+ 30. Kh1 Qf7 31. Rgxe2 Rxe2 32. Rxe2 Be3 33. Rc2 Qf6 34. Kg2 Qa1 35. Kh3 Qd1 36. Rc7  Game drawn ½-½

Le Lionnais, this fascinating, unsung hero, who seems to have sprung fully armed from the head of the Goddess of chess, in a kind of Caissic Parthenogenesis, will soon feature again in this column.

Ray’s 206th book, “  Chess in the Year of the King  ”, written in collaboration with Adam Black, and his 207th, “  Napoleon and Goethe: The Touchstone of Genius  ” (which discusses their relationship with chess) can be ordered from both Amazon and Blackwells. His 208th, the world record for chess books, written jointly with chess playing artist Barry Martin,  Chess through the Looking Glass ,  will be available from Amazon before Christmas. 

A Message from TheArticle

We are the only publication that’s committed to covering every angle. We have an important contribution to make, one that’s needed now more than ever, and we need your help to continue publishing throughout these hard economic times. So please, make a donation.