On top board and last to finish Martin had an excellent win over David Hughes. Martin writes:
"I played my dismal own-brand Sicilian against David Hughes and developed a cramped position that can lead to disaster. On move 15 he won an important central pawn with a trick a five-year-old should have seen coming, but I turned the tables with pressure on the c file. By move 21 I was winning, and a pair of connected passed pawns finished the job".
Trefor's experience proved to strong for League debutant Vijay Kakarparthi, finishing quite early.
Trefor writes: I was black. After 1.e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nf6 3. Nc3 Nc6, I thought it was a standard Four Knights, but my opponent played what he said later was a well known gambit, 4. Nxe5.
I took the offered N with 4...N x e5, after which he had a pawn storm with d4, d5, f4, etc. I weathered the flood of pawns with some concern, and obtained a winning ending. Does anyone know the name of this gambit?"
I took the offered N with 4...N x e5, after which he had a pawn storm with d4, d5, f4, etc. I weathered the flood of pawns with some concern, and obtained a winning ending. Does anyone know the name of this gambit?"
Like me he was impressed by Tony's game against Wayne Kranz. Wayne had castled Kingside and Tony Queenside, with Wayne the first to attack. Tony's Queen was stuck on the h-file defending a pawn which was attacked by Queen and Rook. He then went down the a-file with Rook and Bishop against an exposed King. Now Tony brought the second Rook over, then his Queen and this eventually proved decisive.
and Jeff writes:..."I played Steve Douglas for the third time within a year. I drew with black a few weeks ago in the B team match against Altrincham A.
As white I played a Vienna game in the same variation as I had done 11 months ago (I lost that one badly so must have learned from it). I played for a strong king side attack and I was helped by some inaccurate defending when my opponent allowed his WS bishop to be trapped by pawns. After that it was a won game, I just needed to avoid traps. After 16 moves I had a massive advantage".
As white I played a Vienna game in the same variation as I had done 11 months ago (I lost that one badly so must have learned from it). I played for a strong king side attack and I was helped by some inaccurate defending when my opponent allowed his WS bishop to be trapped by pawns. After that it was a won game, I just needed to avoid traps. After 16 moves I had a massive advantage".
In my own game my resolution to improve my disastrous form was not helped by getting behind on the clock once again. I was down to six minutes with the initiative but little else when Steve Ward missed the opportunity to unpin his Knight. I won the Knight with mine and he failed to spot my steed checking him on it's next move, winning a rook and then his Queen. It was -80.0 (sic) when he resigned.
So a nice finish for me and a nice start for the team. Happy New Year? Maybe.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteAnother great result - well done! Trefor- to try and answer your question you ran into what is sometimes called the "Halloween Gambit" but is perhaps more correctly (though who is to say what is correct?) called the "Muller-Schulze Gambit" and is analysed as such in Euwes series of Opening Books in the 50's.Is it sound? Not really but is tricky to face, not least for psychological reasons, and scores quite well at blitz even amongst highly rated players.
ReplyDelete