Fidelity X – Philidor X 0-1
Round 1 · 1981-09-21
Fidelity’s only loss in the displayed main table.
Six historical events, their winners and setbacks, with eleven selected game records.
WCCC means World Computer Chess Championship; WMCCC means World Microcomputer Chess Championship. Tournament programs and experimental hardware are distinct from retail products and from the physical specimens in this collection. A shared title is identified as such.
Results below are taken from the ICGA tournament database, a retrospective compilation of journals, event records and participant communications. Event dates are not mistaken for the publication dates of that database. The source register records this distinction.
| Tournament entrant | Recorded result / tournament hardware |
|---|---|
| Fidelity X | 6/7; first in the displayed main table |
| Princhess 2.9 | 5/7; second |
| Fidelity X vs Chess Champion Mark V | 3–0 in the separately recorded playoff |
Fidelity X won six games and lost to Philidor X in the displayed main table. The separately recorded three-game playoff against Chess Champion Mark V was a clean sweep. The database separates these records; its main table is not a complete account of the commercial division. SciSys X is not treated as the retail Mark V.
Source: ICGA result: Travemunde · Source: ICGA result: Travemunde Playoff
Round 1 · 1981-09-21
Fidelity’s only loss in the displayed main table.
Round 1 · 1981-09-28
The opening win in the separately documented 3–0 playoff.
Collection context, without asserting participation by each specimen: Fidelity Elite Champion eXperimental (Program X Travemunde) - 001 (1981) X-RARE · Fidelity Elite Champion eXperimental (Program X Travemunde) - 090 (1981) X-RARE · Fidelity Elite Champion Sensory Chess Challenger (model EC) - 094 (1981) RARE · Fidelity Elite Champion Sensory Chess Challenger (model EC) - 124 (1981) RARE · Chess Champion Mark V , Model 501
| Tournament entrant | Recorded result / tournament hardware |
|---|---|
| Elite Auto Sensory | 1st; 6/7; five wins, two draws, no losses |
| Mephisto X | 2nd; 5/7 |
| Super Constellation | 4th; 5/7 |
| Prestige Challenger | 5th; 4½/7 |
| Chess 2001 | 6th; 4/7 |
Elite Auto Sensory won the championship. Prestige Challenger was a separate entrant and finished fifth. A Prestige with a later Budapest program is not thereby the physical tournament winner; identifying the collection’s EPROM versions requires specimen evidence. The champion beat Mephisto X but drew against Novag X and Super Constellation. Prestige lost to Chess 2001 and Novag X.
Round 3 · 1983-10-15
Champion’s win against the runner-up.
Round 7 · 1983-10-19
A documented Prestige defeat, separating its result from the winning Fidelity program.
Collection context, without asserting participation by each specimen: Chess 2001 · Chess 2001, Model CXG-2001 · Fidelity Elite A/S Budapest Model EAS SN 32731035 (1983) · Fidelity Elite A/S Budapest Model EAS SN 32731203 (1983) · Fidelity Elite A/S Budapest Model EAS SN 33299385 (1984) · Fidelity Elite A/S Budapest Model EAS SN 762911 Germany (1983) · Fidelity Elite A/S Budapest Model EAS SN 763741 (1983) · Fidelity Elite A/S Budapest Model EAS SN 764666 (1983) · Fidelity Elite A/S Budapest Model EWC SN 40903715 (1984) · Fidelity Prestige Pre-Budapest, Budapest, Glasgow X-RARE · Super Constellation, Model 844
| Tournament entrant | Recorded result / tournament hardware |
|---|---|
| Psion | Joint champion; 5/7; 68000, 8 MHz |
| Princhess X | Joint champion; 5/7; 6502, 6.1 MHz |
| Fidelity Elite X | Joint champion; 5/7; 6502, 6 MHz |
| Mephisto Excl.S(A) | Joint champion; 5/7; 68000, 12 MHz |
| L’Empereur | 17th; 2/7 |
Four programs shared the title. Fidelity Elite X beat Psion, yet lost to Princhess X. Its four wins, two draws and one loss do not support a claim of an undefeated championship. The hardware values describe tournament entrants, not all retail machines bearing Glasgow-related names. The L’Empereur result supplies competition context without proving that a photographed collection specimen was that entrant.
Round 6 · 1984-09-14
The Fidelity co-champion’s only defeat.
Round 4 · 1984-09-12
One joint champion defeating another.
Collection context, without asserting participation by each specimen: CLJ L'Empereur (1984) X-RARE · L'Empereur at the WMCC, Glasgow (1984) · Fidelity Elegance (1984) · Fidelity Elite A/S Glasgow Model EAS-C SN 43285586 (1984) · Fidelity Elite A/S Glasgow Model EAS-C SN 43285573 (1984) · Fidelity Elite A/S Glasgow Model EAS-C SN 43285606 (1984) · Fidelity Elite A/S Glasgow Model EAS-C SN 43285755 (1984) · Fidelity Prestige Pre-Budapest, Budapest, Glasgow X-RARE
| Tournament entrant | Recorded result / tournament hardware |
|---|---|
| Mephisto | 1st; 6½/7; six wins, one draw, no losses |
| Échec 1.9 | 2nd; 5½/7 |
| Gideon | 3rd; 5½/7 |
Mephisto came close to a perfect tournament, beating Gideon and conceding its only half-point to Échec 1.9. This documents dominance within this event; it does not supply a universal Elo rating or prove the strength of every retail Lyon module.
Round 4 · 1990
Champion defeating the third-place program.
Round 5 · 1990
The only half-point conceded by Mephisto.
Collection context, without asserting participation by each specimen: Lyon 16-bit (68000, 12 MHz ) + Exclusive board + Exclusive case · Lyon 32 bit (68020, 12 MHz ) + Munchen board + wood case · Mephisto Exclusive Lyon 68000 16 Bit (1990) · Mephisto Munchen "S" Lyon 68020 32 Bit (1990) RARE
| Tournament entrant | Recorded result / tournament hardware |
|---|---|
| Gideon | 1st; 6/7; six wins, one loss |
| MChess | 2nd; 5½/7 |
| The King | 3rd; 5/7 |
| Mephisto X | 4th; 5/7 |
Gideon won the event, although Mephisto X defeated it in the final round. Mephisto X in turn lost to MChess and The King. A retail model named Vancouver cannot be described as the overall winner from this table. The database’s playoff column is not explained sufficiently here to assign a separate manufacturers’ title. Gideon is credited to Ed Schröder; this is program history, not proof of the collection R30’s tournament participation.
Source: ICGA result: Vancouver · Source: Gideon program authorship
Round 7 · 1991
The champion’s only loss, in the final round.
Collection context, without asserting participation by each specimen: Vancouver 16-bit (68000, 12 MHz ) + Exclusive board + Exclusive case · Vancouver 32 bit (68020, 12 MHz ) + Bavaria board + wood case · Vancouver Tournament Machine (68030, 36MHz) + wood case · Vancouver WorldChampion Machine (66MHz) + original box · Mephisto Bavaria Vancouver 68020 32 Bit (1991) RARE · Mephisto Exclusive Vancouver 68000 16 Bit (1991) · Mephisto Tournament Machine (TM) Munchen Vancouver 68030 (1991) X-RARE · Mephisto World Machine (WM) ESB Vancouver 68030RC50B (1991) U-RARE · Tasc R30 version Gideon X-RARE
| Tournament entrant | Recorded result / tournament hardware |
|---|---|
| Chessmachine | 1st; 4½/5; four wins, one draw |
| Zugzwang | 2nd; 4/5 |
| Kasparov Sparc | 4th; 3½/5 |
| RISC 2500 | 6th; 3/5 |
Ed Schröder’s Chessmachine won the World Computer Chess Championship. It drew with RISC 2500 and defeated Kasparov Sparc in the last round. Chessmachine did not play runner-up Zugzwang in this table. This WCCC is distinct from the microcomputer WMCCC series; it is not a title automatically held by a retail TASC R30, its The King firmware, or every Gideon version.
Source: ICGA result: Madrid · Source: Chessmachine program authorship
Round 5 · 1992-11-27
A final-round win by the eventual champion.
Round 1 · 1992-11-23
RISC 2500 held the eventual champion to a draw.
Collection context, without asserting participation by each specimen: RISC 2500 - 128KB · RISC 2500 - 1MB, Model 322 · Tasc R30 version Gideon X-RARE
The Lyon and Vancouver PGNs retrieved use 1 January dates which have not been independently confirmed; only the year is presented here.
A tournament score measures performance against that event’s opponents under its conditions. It does not establish a universal Elo or a playing-style diagnosis. These games were selected to show decisive wins, losses suffered by champions and draws against eventual winners. Positional evaluations and claims such as “brilliant” or “tactically weak” await annotated analysis with reproducible evidence.