With the Division 1 title sewn up, the opportunity was taken to give some of our younger players a taste of play in the top division before next year when places may be regularly available. Bristol and Clifton B were at full strength, so it was to be a tough match.
Reinhold was in action on top board, playing Zack at the junior time limit. Whilst this limit is to be supported in the lower divisions to introduce juniors to league play, I think that in the higher divisions it does neither player any favours; the senior player gets a half game at an unfamiliar time limit, the junior player likewise has less time to help develop his understanding of the game. What do others think?
Anyway back to the game. Reinhold maintained a small advantage for some twenty moves in a quiet King’s Indian line but then allowed a tactical point which took advantage of a pin on a knight both down the d file and along the a1-h8 diagonal. This enabled Zack to win the exchange and thereafter the result was never in doubt.
Board 2 saw Chris establish a traditional space advantage in a classical King’s Indian. The computers tend to give these positions as + 0.6, but the reality is that Black’s counter-play is usually enough to hold the balance, as Mark demonstrated efficiently.
My game on Board 3 had more content. I accidently sacrificed / blundered a pawn, which I didn’t like but the computer did as it thought that I had good play for it. Mike also saw some problems and returned it to reach an ending where he could again go a pawn up, this time with opposite coloured bishops and excellent winning chances. He did not make the most of these, choosing to mobilise his King-side majority immediately in a way that split the pawns, whilst a slower approach would have produced united passed pawns which would have been harder to stop, and then later he should have prioritised entering with his King instead of pushing the f pawn. As his time ran short I managed to set up a blockade and a draw was agreed, it turns out that he may well still have winning chances by bringing his King round to c1 via a3 (a long march) and then seeking a zugzwang to get the King to c4. Very hard to spot!
On Board 4 Aldrin struggled to get full equality against Colin who got the type of position, with pressure on Aldrin’s Queen-side, which he plays well. Aldrin duly lost a pawn and then had lots of difficult decisions to make, should he play actively or passively? He got most of them right and still would have had chances to hang on had he played Nd6 rather than Bxf6 after which his knight was completely dominated by Colin’s bishop and the extra pawn marched through.
Board 5, with Alexis in control of the White pieces was a game of a completely different style. A double King pawn opening led to an early pseudo sac with Nf7 and Alexis stood better for most of the game. Robert tried an ingenious development of his rook via a6, which was not especially effective and Alexis still had chances to win with a pair of mobile pawns ready to advance with f5 etc. Nevertheless a draw was agreed.
Finally to Board 6 where Carolus opted for a hybrid of a Semi Slav and a Nimzo-Indian. This did not work out well and John got a potentially mobile pawn centre. Carolus was passively placed but should have kept some tension in the position instead of making a typical error of pushing the c pawn forward to c4. This looks tempting but often, as in this case, it frees up White’s central/King-side play. John pushed forward and misplaced Carolus’s knight, then transferred his attention to the Queen-side where he won material, and soon after deservedly won the game.
Well done to Bristol and Clifton B on their 4½-1½ win against our less than full strength team, the cup final on May 5th should be a Battle Royal.
Many thanks to all who played this season and especial thanks and congratulations to Oli for masterminding our league triumph.