Monthly Archives: April 2023

Kingston edge out Battersea to retain Alexander Cup

Alexander Cup final played at the Adelaide pub, Teddington on 14 April 2023

Kingston’s winning team. Bottom row from left: Silverio Abasolo, captain Ljubica Lazarevic, John Foley. Top row from left: Will Taylor, *Mike Healey,* Alan Scrimgour, *Peter Lalić,* Vladimir Li, *Peter Andrews,* *David Maycock, David Rowson. Photograph: John Saunders*

Where on earth to begin? Probably at the beginning. This was Battersea’s return to the Alexander Cup – and indeed to Surrey chess generally – after a long absence. They had beaten a very strong Epsom team in the semi-final and frankly we feared them. We were strong, but we knew that on paper they were likely to be even stronger. And so it proved: GM Simon Williams on board 1, IMs Gavin Wall and Chris Baker on 2 and 3, a 2230-rated player on board 7, an average ratings plus across the teams of about 50 points. This was going to be some challenge.

But one thing the Kingston team has going for it, as well as great individual talent, is collective esprit de corps, under Ljubica Lazarevic’s inspired captaincy. This was not a team that was going to lie down, no matter what the rating difference was and how many titled players our opponents had. Kingston’s first team had not been beaten since competitive chess resumed after the pandemic, and it was not going to relinquish that proud boast lightly. But where were our points going to come from?

On board 6, Will Taylor turned down an early draw offer from Battersea captain Blair Connell, despite a ratings disadvantage of more than 100 points. “With a tactical draw offer, since Blair was Black and Battersea outrated us on most boards, I did wonder whether it was still advantageous from a match perspective for me to accept, being heavily outrated myself,” Will explained later, “but it felt too negative at such an early stage.” Lazarevic had asked her players to be wary of accepting “grandmasterly” draws – every point was going to be precious – and it made sense to keep the Battersea skipper immersed in his own game for as long as possible. The virtues of the non-playing captain.

*Will Taylor: Turned down an early draw offer from Battersea captain Blair Connell. Photograph: John Saunders*

On board 5, Battersea junior Luca Buanne was playing well against Kingston’s Vladimir Li, whose Surrey rating of 2196 does not reflect his true strength (elo 2294 and rising!). This was a game where we had hoped to take the full point, but Buanne played quickly and confidently against Vladimir’s Sicilian, had no difficulty equalising, and a draw was agreed after 22 moves. Not exactly grandmasterly, but Vladimir is very close to getting an FM title and on this showing Buanne – one of the strongest 15-year-olds in the country – will be following him to a title very soon.

*Vladimir Li: Drew with the talented Battersea junior Luca Buanne on board 5. Photograph: John Saunders*

Board 10 was the only match-up where we had a clear rating advantage, so we were – while trying not to exert unnecessary extra pressure – relying on Peter Andrews to bring home the bacon. He did not disappoint, playing his favoured English (cue bacon puns) and out-techniquing his opponent Greg Taylor. Taylor built up a big time plus and may have assumed that trying to create tactical complexities, rather than grabbing back a pawn when he had an opportunity, would work to his advantage. Happily for us, it didn’t.

*Peter Andrews took Kingston’s first point with a technical knockout on board 10. Photograph: John Saunders*

In the position below, Peter thought his opponent might have been playing for 28…Qxc5, missing the fact that when he captured the white queen with his rook a back-rank mate would follow. Two pawns down and with White’s rook established on the seventh, this position is hopeless for Black (at least -6, according to engines). The game is already resignable, but became irretrievable when Black dropped the rook on a6, having forgotten there was no longer a pawn on b7 to protect it from the white queen. A victory for cumulative pressure.

Almost at the same moment that Peter Andrews was securing Kingston’s first point, our other Peter – the incomparable Lalić – was agreeing a draw with IM Gavin Wall on board 2. Peter L, with typical verve, had played the Staunton Gambit against Gavin’s Dutch Defence (1. d4 f5 2. Nc3 Nf6 3. e4 fxe4 4. Bg5 Nc6 5. d5 Ne5 6. Qe2 c6 7. O-O-O Nxd5 8. Nxd5 Nf7 9. Bh4 cxd5 10. Rxd5 b6). He stood better in the middle game, but was running short of time and allowed a draw by repetition.

“Gavin played his first 10 moves instantly,” Peter explained later. “He told me afterwards that he had played the identical opening the day before, against Graham Keane in the London League. By contrast, I hadn’t tried the Staunton Gambit in at least a decade. Hence my trepidation.”

*Peter Lalić (left) essayed the Staunton Gambit against Gavin Wall and drew. Photograph: John Saunders*

Kingston were 2-1 up, but in a 10-board match that meant little, especially with Alan Scrimgour apparently in trouble on board 9 and David Maycock, with Black, facing a GM on board 1.

In the next game to finish, Blair Connell (who had declared his intentions by playing the Fort Knox variation of the French) finally got his draw against Will Taylor. This was the position in which peace was declared:

Will was down on the clock and felt he no longer had realistic winning chances, so took the draw. A good result given the rating difference, allowing us to keep our noses in front. But the result that really made us believe we might win came next, with Mike Healey beating the highly rated Viktor Stoyanov on board 4. This was a tremendous game by Mike, paving the way for everything that came later.

Stoyanov played the Caro-Kann and Mike opted for the so-called Fantasy Variation (1. e4 c6 2. d4 d5 3. f3). The first 20 moves, with both players committing to the fight, were very even, and on move 24 (shortly after Mike had spurned a draw offer) this position was reached:

Here Mike, who much prefers eccentric knights to rather predictable rooks, made a very Mike decision: 24. Rdxd5! “White temporarily gives up an exchange,” he explained later, “but something is dropping for Black.” The game proceeded 24…cxd5 25. Rxd5 Re1+ 26. Kd2 Rae8 27. Rxc5. R8e2+ 28. Kd3 Re3+ 29. Kd4 R3e2 30. Bd3 Re8 31. Nf4 Rd1 32. Rd5 Bc8 33. Kc5 Rde1 34. Bxb5 R8e5 35. Bc4 Rxd5+ 36. Bxd5+ Kf8

Mike’s faith in his knights has paid off – his position is completely winning: 37. Ng6+ Ke8 38. Kd6 Rd1 39. c4 Bb7 40. Ne6 Bxd5 41. Nc7+ Kd8 42.Nxd5 Rd2 43.c5 Rxb2 44.c6 Rd2 45. Ne7 1-0 A very good knight – or indeed knights. That made it 3.5-1.5 and the early pessimism of Kingston supporters was starting to dissipate. We really could win this.

*Mike Healey: Played a wonderfully inventive game to beat Viktor Stoyanov. Photograph: John Saunders*

On board 7, Kingston’s David Rowson more than held his own with Black against Chris Beckett, who outrated him by almost 200 points. “It wasn’t the most exciting of games, but I was pleased to get a draw from a strong player,” David said later. “For once my Old Indian Defence led to Black, not White, getting the upper hand on the queenside, as my opponent made a couple of inaccuracies. I resisted the temptation to draw by repetition on move 26, but I didn’t have enough of an advantage to make anything of the ending.” This was the position in which a draw was agreed. Engines evaluate it as completely level.

*David Rowson, on board 7, secured a vital draw against a much higher-rated player. Photograph: John Saunders*

John Foley’s game against Duncan Kerr on board 8 was another canny, nip-and-tuck affair between two very experienced players, with threats and counter-threats from an early stage. In the final position, John’s passed d-pawn looks as if it might have potential, which was enough for Black to offer the draw. John could have continued with 36. Qxa6 but after the queens are exchanged the endgame is drawish.

*Kingston president John Foley (right) locked in battle with Duncan Kerr. Photograph: John Saunders*

The score was now 4.5-2.5 in Kingston’s favour and the winning line was in sight. Or was it? David Maycock was losing on board 1, Alan Scrimgour was losing on board 9, and the final game – Silverio Abasolo, with Black, up against IM Chris Baker on board 3 – was far from clear. The most likely scenario, pundits agreed (and Kingston pessimists feared), was a 5-5 draw, with Battersea winning on board count by virtue of victory on board 1.

GM Simon Williams (left), playing *the English Opening*, *up against David Maycock. Photograph: John Saunders*

David Maycock competed fiercely against Simon Williams on top board, but started to run short of time in the latter stages of the game. GMs are of course superfast calculators, and Williams set David many problems. “I solved a million of them, but couldn’t solve the million and one-th,” David said afterwards. Black is doing OK in this position, but the rook on c8 is under attack. Would should David play?

Best is probably Rxc1, with good drawing chances. But David opted for 27…Rc5, which loses to a forced sequence: 28. Bxe4 dxe4 29. Rxc5 bxc5 30. Nc6+ Qxc6 31. Qxh8+ Ka7 32. Qb2 Qb5 33. Rb1 Qc6 34. Qb6+ Qxb6 35. Rxb6 1-0. That made it 4.5-3.5, and it was getting too close for comfort.

*GM Simon Williams let Battersea’s fightback with a smooth victory on top board. Photograph: John Saunders*

A few minutes later the scores were tied as Battersea’s Robert Noyce won against Kingston chair Alan Scrimgour. Alan was candid later about a game – a Closed Sicilian – which he felt had started to unravel at quite an early stage. “My first mistake was to close the centre with d4,” he explained. “I should have exchanged on e4 to keep some open lines. I then made a bad strategic decision to castle queenside. The result was that I had no counterplay and had to defend. My opponent took no chances and carefully built up his attack. In a difficult position I made further inaccuracies and my opponent finished clinically.”

*Alan Scrimgour was under the cosh for much of his game against Robert Noyce. Photograph: John Saunders*

The match was all square, so now – in the scenario which had been bothering us for the past hour – Kingston’s Silverio Abasolo had to win on board 3 against IM Chris Baker or we would lose the match on board count. No pressure. Silverio, though, a very strong player with a Fide rating of 2283 who has only resumed playing serious competitive chess this season after an eight-year break, is a cool customer who plays quickly and fluently . At no stage did he show any signs of tension and he continued recording even in a time scramble, where he was playing moves on the 10-second increment (all the games on the night were played at a time control of 75 minutes + 10 seconds per move).

*Silverio Abasolo had to win against IM Chris Baker to secure the trophy for Kingston. Photograph: John Saunders*

Baker had played another English Opening – it was a big night for the English – but Silverio skilfully established a small plus and, with Black to play on move 21 in the position below, he made a key strategic decision:

From many competing possible moves with very similar evaluations (this is actually the computer’s seventh choice), Silverio chose to swap bishop for knight. That choice largely determined the course of the rest of the game. Silverio’s knight found good squares, and on move 31, though objectively White now had an edge, he played a bold move which John Saunders, who will be annotating the game for the Kingston website, said caused a “psychological swing” by turning the screw on Baker.

Here Silverio plays 31…Qc5, threatening both the pawn on f2 and, more pressingly for White, a back-rank mate. White should play Qb2, which would maintain his edge, but instead he chose Rg1, presumably to counterattack down the g-file if Black played Qxf2, but overlooking 32. Nh3, which led to White giving up the exchange.

*Chris Baker and Silverio Abasolo lock horns (and pawns) in the night’s decisive game. Photograph: John Saunders*

Even after going the exchange up, however, there were still complications. Silverio missed an immediately winning continuation, and Baker tried to menace Black’s king with his queen and bishop. Even when Silverio had queened his a-pawn, Baker would not call it a day and was threatening mate in one. Saunders took a final photograph as Silverio, with 30 seconds left on his clock, countered the mate threat with a check of his own and proceeded to calmly notate the move.

*Abasolo resists the threat of mate in one by checking, then calmly notates the move. Photograph: John Saunders*

Now it really was all over bar the whooping – and the applause for Silverio. The two queens did their work and White was mated. Kingston had won a magnificent victory against the odds and the Alexander Cup could stay in our trophy cabinet for another year, alongside the trophies for winning both the Surrey League and the Thames Valley League this season. If we win the Thames Valley Knockout against Harrow on 22 May we will have chalked up a unique “Quadruple”. If we do, what on earth will we do next? Collapse probably.

*Abasolo poised to deliver the match-winning mate as John Foley looks on intently. Photograph: John Saunders*

We should put on record our thanks to Battersea for a memorable match played in a good spirit, to John Saunders for taking a wonderful set of photographs and for putting all the game scores on his superb BritBase site, to Richmond Chess Club for hosting the final (the Surrey association specifies it must be played at a neutral venue and the Adelaide pub in Teddington is perfect), and to tournament controller Huw Williams for acting as arbiter with just the right balance of firmness and discretion – visible but never overbearing. It was truly an epic match.

Battersea captain Blair Connell said afterwards that he doubted whether he would ever recover, but our fear is that next year they will be back with even more of their celebrity GMs. Thus does the bar get raised with every succeeding season. And talking of the bar…

Stephen Moss

Win at Surbiton gives Kingston 2 a relegation lifeline

Surrey League division 2 match played at the United Reformed Church, Tolworth on 11 April 2023

*Kingston 2 line up against Surbiton. Julian Way in foreground, flanked by Peter Andrews and Alan Scrimgour*

Oh, how the wheel of fortune turns. Five or six years ago, at the apogee of their success, Surbiton 2 would routinely beat Kingston 1. Here the roles were reversed, with Kingston 2 getting the better of Surbiton 1 by 5-2. It was a vital win for Kingston 2, who are threatened with relegation after a season in which we have struggled to put out our strongest possible second teams. Thankfully, here we had a powerful line-up and were rewarded with a victory which gives the club a chance of survival in division 2. One of Kingston, South Norwood and Surbiton will be relegated, with the crunch match being Kingston 2 v South Norwood 1 at Kingston on Monday 29 May.

It helped Kingston’s cause that Surbiton were missing several key players, notably Mark Josse, Chris Briscoe and David Scott, and that their board 1 failed to show up. John Foley sat patiently until the default time of half an hour, then claimed the point. Surbiton’s engaging captain Graham Alcock apologised for the Kingston president’s wasted journey, but frankly we were just happy with a free point.

Jon Eckert, with White, launched a vigorous attack against Alcock on board 5 that for a moment looked promising, but the Surbiton skipper repelled it comfortably and a draw was quickly agreed. That made it 1.5-0.5 to Kingston and we were starting to feel confident, though Surrey veterans Nick Grey and Paul Durrant were engaged in a messy struggle on board 6, and some of the other games were far from clear.

Peter Andrews was playing Nick Faulks, against whom he reckoned he’d played half a dozen games in the past, on board 3, and Faulks established a tiny plus against Peter’s English Opening, reaching this position on move 11, with Black to play:

Faulks played 11…Bd7 here, which Peter says is overly passive – Bg4 is better. The denouement followed remarkably quickly: 12. Na4 Bxb2 13. Nxb2 b6 14. Nc4 f6 15. d4 cxd4 16. Nxd4 Nxd4 17. Qxd4 Be6 18. Qe3 Bc8 19. Rfd1 Qe8 20. Nxb6 Rxb6 21. Rxc7 1-0

Peter wondered at the time if resignation here was premature, but engines bear out Faulks’s decision. Stockfish makes it +7 for White, and even my more conservative engines gives a +4.5 advantage. The a-pawn is falling, White’s rook on the seventh is a monster, and White’s pieces are very well coordinated. Peter’s win made it 2.5-0.5, and now we could really start to believe.

On board 7 David Shalom, who has made an excellent return to competitive chess this season, was playing an interesting game against Ye Kyaw. David played the London System very adventurously, recapturing a piece on g3 with the f-pawn to open up the f-file and then giving up a pawn in the centre to mobilise his rooks. This was the position on move 18. White has just played 18. Rae1 to gain a tempo by attacking the queen.

When I looked at this position I didn’t like it for White and feared for David in the game – potentially a crucial one with several other games looking drawish. Does White really have compensation for his pawn? But David clearly has a very well-calibrated positional sense because engines think he does have sufficient compensation, giving the position as more or less level. The problem for Black is the hole on f6, created by the unnecessary 12…g6 earlier in the game. What was it Steinitz said about never moving the pawns in front of your castled king without urgent reason?

This is how the game proceeded: 18… Qd6 19. Rf6 Kg7 20. Ref1 Bb7 21. Qf2 Qe7 22. Qf4.

There is a must-play move here, but Black fails to play it. You can’t allow White’s queen to occupy e5, and should play 22…e5, or at the very least 22…Rad8 to challenge the White queen on that square with Qd6. But Black has some misguided idea about solidity and plays 22…Rae8?? The end follows swiftly: 23. Qe5 Kg8 24. h4 Qc5+ 25. Kh2 Qc6 26. R1f2 Rd8 27. h5 Qd6 28. Qg5 Kg7? (28. Qd7 staves off mate but is still losing) 29. hxg6 fxg6 30. Rxg6+ Kh8 31. Rg7 1-0 A terrific win by David and now, at 3.5-0.5, we could not lose the match.

*Legends of Surrey chess: Nick Grey (right) struggles to hold Surbiton chair (and long-time lynchpin) Paul Durrant*

Alan Scrimgour’s draw with Angus James on board 2 followed soon after, giving Kingston an unassailable 4-1.5 advantage, and Nick Grey got a perpetual against Paul Durrant on board 6 when a piece for two pawns down. An important “swindle” in a division where relegation could be decided by game points.

With time for the match about to be called at 10.30pm, Julian Way and Andrew Boughen agreed to go to adjudication. Julian was the exchange down but had a passed pawn on e3 supported by an unmoveable knight on d5, so he certainly wasn’t losing and thought he might have winning chances. Later computer analysis, however, suggested that, while Black does have a tiny edge, with best play a draw was the most likely result, and that was the result mutually agreed between the players.

All in all, a great evening which gives us bragging rights in the borough of Kingston and, more importantly, makes sure we have a fighting chance of staying in division 2 of the Surrey League. Everything now hinges on that South Norwood match at the end of May.

Stephen Moss, Kingston 2 acting captain in Surrey League

Light lasers, swizzle sticks and killer moves

Daaim Shabazz’s Triple Exclam!!! The Life and Games of Emory Tate, Chess Warrior may be short on great games, but it provides a compelling picture of a remarkable chess life

Michael Healey

“Russian chess players use the somewhat untranslatable word творец [tvorets] to describe a particularly inspiring chess player. A tvorets prioritises elegance over rating points, values the quality of his games rather than his standing in the tournament. Above all a tvorets is someone who keeps the beauty of our game alive, inspiring us to follow in his footsteps. Emory Tate was most definitely a tvorets.” – GM Daniel Naroditsky

Emory Andrew Tate Jr, aka “Dennis” aka “The Exclam kid” aka “Emory Mate” aka “Indomitable Warrior” aka “Tactical Assassin” aka “ET the Extraterrestrial”, tvorets, was an American IM, martial artist, intelligence officer, poet, father, drunk and general weaver of chess dreams. He claimed the only chess book he ever read was Vladimir Vukovic’s Art of Attack in Chess, and this is born out by the games we’ve been left. He distrusted computers and databases, but took the scalps of many grandmasters. He died in 2015 at the age of 56 after a heart attack playing chess. Opening theoreticians will be aware of his contribution, Alekhine’s Defence Tate variation, an early rook development: 1. e4 Nf6 2. e5 Nd5 3. c4 Nb6 4. a4 a5 5. Ra3.

To the world at large, however, he is now more famous for producing Emory Tate III, aka Andrew Tate. He was the father of one of the most influential and controversial figures of our times.

Tate the father ticks a lot of the “tortured genius” boxes. From a good family, ill-disciplined but brilliant in high school, he achieved a scholarship to Northwestern University in Illinois at 17, but dropped out both here and then at Alabama University. He joined the US air force and entered intelligence, picking up Russian in a record time of three weeks (one of his eight languages). While based in the UK he snuck away to Camden for blitz with Limey locals, among them IM Malcolm Pein (who shares his memories in the book and contributes an analysis of one game). He formed a family, took them back to America, separated from his wife (who returned to England), split acrimoniously from the air force, and continued his life as a chess player and teacher, taking cross-country buses to tournaments and living the life of an eccentric, very much at home among chess players.

As an enjoyer of American writers focusing on this character type (Hubert Selby Jr, Charles Bukowski, John and Dan Fante), Tate very much appeals: the genius drunk living on the edge, circling the drain of life and finding beauty amidst the grime, loving and hurting everyone around him, exhilarated to suicidal from page to page. Reading through the book, the darker side is periodically hinted at: the paranoia and drinking, depression and resentments, critics and confrontations, not just involving Tate but fellow chess road warriors such as GM Aleksander Wojtkiewicz too. But we are mainly presented with the positives, chief among which are, of course, the games, such as this one against GM Leonid Yudasin in 1997.

Various Sicilians with both colours make up 20 of the book’s 35 full games, which give full rein to Tate’s penchant for sacrifices. He also shared my own desire for the holy move g5! (as did Fischer), as demonstrated in his win here against Alexander Beltre in 2001.

The main narrative thread is the paean to Tate, climaxing in a dramatic near miss of a GM norm in Curuçao 2007. Here, with White, he baffles GM Jan Gustafsson:

The question is presented: why was this man, a larger-than-life genius on and off the board, who played with such flair and scalped so many grandmasters (he claims about 80) not a grandmaster himself (he managed only – only! – IM)? Along the way he is regularly compared to Tal and Alekhine (for their gamestyles and lifestyles) but also Fischer (showing more determination against Russians). “You’re afraid of success,” he was told. “You could be the first black grandmaster, but you’ll never become a grandmaster unless you get serious.” Serious? This was a man who ended up in positions like this, as Black against Glenn Bady (somehow, the game was eventually drawn):

The book’s tendency towards hero worship is a definite feature of American chess culture (try disparaging Fischer or Nakamura to any US player). The über-competitiveness and trash-talk also comes across (play chess online and stars and stripes tend to be a decent predictor of insults in the chat). We’re constantly told people’s scores and placings in open tournaments, using a strange match system of 7-2 rather than 7/9. There is only one game given from a team match, something truly bizarre compared with our own domination by league chess culture. Tate himself is constantly aggressive, trying to dominate on and off the board with words and pieces, often simultaneously. Everything is a fight, even with his friends. Here he is in action in 2013 against GM Artur Chibukhchian.

Tate clearly had a remarkable ability to impress himself on an audience, resulting in legions of fans on and offline. Not only his moves, but his general patter and joy were infectious, sprinkled with cheeky expressions. Apart from the eponymous “Triple exclam!!!” here are a few other Tate-isms:

Light laser: light-squared bishop
Swizzle sticks!: castling
Sweeper/sealer: a “tai-chi pawn move”
ROVER: Rook-up-and-over
Intruder alert! Intruder alert! (with klaxon)

After meeting in 2009, Tate formed a friendship with the American rapper RZA, legendary founder of the Wu-Tang Clan, probably bonding over chess, philosophy and martial arts. For the youth and aged among you, Wu-Tang were a disparate group of competitive street rappers who shared an appreciation for all the above. Indeed their debut album featured Da Mystery of Chessboxin‘.

When you look into the Clan, the sense is of a brotherhood of young black fatherless men, dropouts in and out of jail, becoming a mutually supporting family, going their own way and working together in an often predatory record business. They had built up their skills by travelling the New York boroughs competing against any contender in battle rhymes in front of an audience, before the best were selected for the Clan, with a famous promise from RZA that if they gave him five years of their lives, he’d take them to the top (he did). Did Tate wish he’d met RZA decades before, to focus him on that GM title?

This is something else that comes across strongly in the book – the plethora of references to a community of black chess players, not just in the US but across the world. “Tate’s Black Imperative”, “Rest in Power” and “The Black Bear School of Chess” mark out this especial American phenomenon. The need to support each other in the quest for rating, prizes and titles even led Daaim Shabazz in 2001 to create a website called The Chess Drum. Tate felt great solidarity with Pontus Carlsson of Sweden and Amon Simutowe of Zambia before he’d even met them. Back in America, future GM Maurice Ashley credited Tate for berating him into a switch from 1. c4 to 1. e4. When he plays other black players, another layer of meaning and importance is added:

I was lucky enough to play a few games with Simutowe, aka the “Zambezi Shark”, while he was at Oxford, sharing the spectators’ hysterics at various sound effects (the helicopter and Bruce Lee in particular). Were some of these adapted from the time he spent with Tate in the US?

One suspects this is the world Tate was happiest in – the fun, silly, competitive, adrenaline-fuelled buzz of blitz, a crowd of adoring spectators at hand. Yet his pride and ambition thirsted for achievement in classical chess, both in titles and prestige. He repeatedly brought up his five US Armed Forces Chess Championship titles. At one point he runs out of the tournament hall to celebrate a win over IM Georgi Orlov, noted for his expertise in the Black Knights’ Tango. “I beat the Tango guy!”, Tate shouts, determined to instantly demonstrate the game.

As the story comes to a conclusion, the tone becomes palpably darker. Tate himself was prone to a sense of foreboding about his end: “When you screw up the opening and the middlegame, then you’re going to have a bad endgame.”

A decade ago Simutowe put out a shortlist of his best games, intending to work on an autobiography. Sadly Tate did not compile his own games (he played in roughly a thousand classical tournaments, as well as rapids later in his career), so what remains are those collected and commented on by others (bar three taken from Tate’s lectures, with his own unique patter). There are also some tactical problems taken from his games but, quite frankly, there aren’t many jewels.

“I hope that for our younger students and our aspiring players, they will study my play and emulate my style,” said Tate in 2006. “I hope I’ll have a lasting influence. I understand that I’m creating a legacy per se, and I’m very aware of that. There is never a time when I play that I’m not aware of that.” So let this be a lesson to all of us: if you think you have games or positions which will be of interest to the wider world, get them organised and ready to go. Death always wins in the end.

I enjoyed the story of Tate and his world, more so than the actual games. It’s a wonderful tribute to the man that so many have contributed to this book in so many ways; Tate clearly touched many, many lives. We’ll leave the last words to his son, Andrew (Emory III): “The only thing that makes me feel better is knowing that he doesn’t know he’s dead. If he did, he would be furious!”

Kingston Easter Blitz sets new standards

Peter Lalić wins the inaugural event in a thrilling Armageddon play-off with close friend (and deadliest rival) David Maycock

Thirty players and assorted spectators gathered for the inaugural Kingston Easter Blitz played on Easter Monday. Gregor Smith, whose brainchild the event was, controlled the evening impeccably. The time control was 7 minutes per game plus 3 seconds increment per move. This is equivalent to 20 minutes per game, which is the maximum allowed for a game to qualify as a blitz. Gregor, as an official English Chess Federation ratings officer, will submit the games to the national listing.

The games were played on spacious modern trestle tables with new competition boards and sets. The time between rounds was only five minutes – enough to order a drink at the bar and look at the standings, which were displayed on a large screen at the end of the room. We used pairing software that we had first encountered last month at the London Chess Conference, which its developers attended. After each game finished, a hand signal (usually a polite one) was sufficient to notify Gregor of the result, which he then immediately updated on the pairings screen.

One participant said that he had an alternative blitz he could have attended, but he preferred Kingston because of our efficiency – there are no delays between rounds. The modern pairing software and the large screen make all the difference.

There were plenty of exciting games. In the final round, as if preordained, to force the tournament to extra time David Maycock, on 4/5, had to beat Peter Lalić, who was on 5/5, which he duly did. The play-off was then held surrounded by the biggest crowd seen upstairs at the Willoughby Arms since England were involved in a penalty shoot-out. (This is a football-loving pub – hence the flags and memorabilia which festoon the playing room.) The Armageddon format meant that the players bid to be White by giving away some time. They settled on Peter (four minutes) v David (five minutes).

*Armageddon! David Maycock and Peter Lalić, appropriately dressed in battle fatigues, fight it out for first prize*

Peter won convincingly with a sacrificial attack and collected the first prize of £50. What does Peter play in the position below?

An engine suggests 12. Nxd5, with some neat tactics to follow: 12…Bxg5 13. h4 Bh6 14. Qe4 g6 15. Ne7+ Qxe7 16. Qxb7, giving White a small plus, but in blitz (and certainly in Armageddon with no increment – a recipe for chess chaos!) the route-one approach can be more effective. Peter needs no second invitation to sac a piece, and played 12. Bxh7+!? Objectively the position is level, but in blitz the initiative counts for a lot. The game proceeded: 12…Kxh7 13. Qh4+ Kg6 14. Qe4+ f5 15. Qxe6+ Kh7 16. Nxd5 Bxg5 17. Nc3 Bf6 18. Qxf5+ Kh8 19. Rd3 Qe8 20. Re1.

David is in trouble here, but far from lost. 20… Qd8 or 20… Qc8 just about hold, but he is worrying about keeping control of the e8-h5 diagonal and plays 20… Qf7??, which pretty well loses on the spot to 21. Ne5! To avoid mate, Black has to relinquish his queen. An intense game played in great spirit, and after the rivalry the two players (who have done so much to galvanise Kingston over the past two seasons) could revert to being friends. Armageddon, as the name suggests, is not, however, recommended for the faint-hearted.

The under-2000 rating prize (a chocolate confection) went to JoJo Morrison on countback over Lucy Buckley with a commendable 4/6. Greg Heath won the U1500 grading prize. The giant-killer prize (beating someone 400 Elo points higher) went to Jaden Mistry, who beat Byron Eslava in the first round. Stephen Moss would have been the recipient had he kept his nerve (or perhaps lost his moral compass) against IM Graeme Buckley. This is all the more remarkable given that Stephen was playing on the increment with only a few seconds to make his moves for much of the game.

Stephen Moss (left) agreeing a draw in a winning position against IM Graeme Buckley

Stephen agreed a draw in the final position.

Stephen had nothing to lose by capturing the g-pawn, leaving him with three pawns against a knight. According the the endgame tablebase, this is a win for White. As Graeme pointed out, there was no rush even to capture the pawn; simply advancing the a-pawn wins.

Stephen explained that he would not have felt comfortable taking the point given that he had been penalised one minute for an earlier infringement in the game. This saintly level of piety will see Stephen gain fast-track entry at the pearly gates (though not to the British blitz championship). However, Stephen had a point because earlier he was about to lose on time as he dithered over a move. Having decided not to move the piece to the tentatively chosen square – he realised he was moving his king into check, which is itself illegal of course – he returned it to its starting point and pressed the clock. This was also illegal and so the arbiter was called over.

During the intervening time, Stephen managed to compose himself and find a move. This is a rare example of someone being penalised for an illegal non-move. During a later game, Stephen declined a draw offer with a grumpy “No”, which also immediately made him feel guilty. Methinks Stephen is never going to break into the world’s top 10,000 players unless he is prepared to lower his ethical standards.

John Foley, president of Kingston Chess Club

Kingston 3 put up strong showing at Epsom

Surrey League division 4 match played at the Haywain Brewers Fayre, Epsom on 3 April 2023

I realise that, with our seventh defeat in seven matches in Surrey Div 4, we must be starting to sound like the Black Knight in Monty Python and the Holy Grail, but this latest loss really is only a flesh wound; a moral victory really. We are after all building for the future! Just wait till next season, when all these seeds will bloom

An away match against resurgent Epsom is never easy, and a 4-2 loss was by no means a disaster. Captain Stephen Daines enjoyed a quick win against a player rated well above him, though Stephen’s true rating (as someone who has returned to chess after a 40-year break and is now remembering everything he learned as a junior back in the Victorian period) is surely a good deal higher than his provisional one.

Charlie Cooke and Mark Sheridan performed admirably on the top boards, getting draws against seasoned players, but the other three games were lost, though everyone put up a fighting performance and Sean, in particular, battled hard despite being the exchange down for a long period. The upside: there is no relegation from Div 4, so we will be back next year and our players have learned a huge amount from the rigours of playing in a division that is surprisingly strong.

Stephen Moss

Resilient Kingston 1 survive scare to defeat Coulsdon

Surrey League division 1 match played at Coulsdon (CCF) on 3 April 2023

*The massed ranks of players at Coulsdon, where the Kingston match was played alongside an internal tournament*

This was in some ways a peculiar match. Kingston were already confirmed as champions in division 1 of the Surrey League and Coulsdon were not threatened by relegation. So what, apart from bragging rights, was actually at stake? Kingston captain David Rowson showed Coulsdon great respect – they are, after all, a large and very powerful club – by taking a strong team down to south London. Coulsdon, though, took a different approach, resting three of their strongest players – Gavin Lock, Ian Snape and Chino Atako, all of whom were at the club playing in one of Coulsdon’s highly competitive internal tournaments.

The sight of the three rested players may have lulled us into a false sense of security. Surely, as champions-elect, this would be a piece of cake. Far from it. Coulsdon have some tremendous juniors and, with three of them in the line-up, it was soon apparent that this was going to be a challenging encounter.

It started perfectly. Silverio Abasolo, playing quickly and efficiently on board 4, got an edge after some tactical exchanges and pressed home a kingside attack, a straightforward knight sac making mate inevitable on move 26. His opponent resigned a few moves before the final blow could be executed.

That, though, was the end of the relatively relaxed part of the evening. On board 3 Kingston’s Mike Healey had Black against strong Coulsdon junior Rahul Babu. Babu played the Scotch Game, and some very combative opening play by both sides gave Mike a small edge. This was the position that resulted, with Black’s 16th move to be played:

Mike played a very natural move here. Show this position to 50 players and I bet most would play it. He went for 15…Ba6 to attack the pinned bishop on e2, a move that had been shouting “play me” for a while. But White has a neat response, 16. c4, which relieves the pressure of Black’s attack, more or less forces an exchange of queens and equalises on the spot. Black should have played the quieter 15… Be6, or even 15… h6.

Black did not, in fact choose the best continuation, and some clever tactics gave White an edge that was never relinquished. The game continued: 15…Ba6 16. c4 Bxc4 17. Qxb2 Bxb2 18. Ne7+ Kh8 19. Bxc4 f6 20. Be3 Rxe7 21. Kf2 Ba3 22. Rd7 Rb8 23. Bb3 Rbe8 24. Rxe7 Bxe7 25. Bxa7 Bd6 26. g3 Kg7 27. Re1 Ra8 28. Bd4. Bishop pair; becalmed knight; extra pawn on the a-file. An unpleasant position for Black after having the edge earlier, and Babu converted well to square the match.

*David Maycock (left, foreground) and Ian Calvert battled hard on board 1, with Maycock edging a queen endgam*e

David Maycock was having a mighty struggle with Ian Calvert on board 1 – a queen and pawn endgame in which Calvert looked to have good drawing chances. Peter Lalić was engineering a powerful kingside attack on board 2, and we were counting on that for a win. David Rowson’s board 5 game was unclear; John Foley was the exchange down on 6; Alan Scrimgour, up against the immensely promising nine-year-old Supratit Banerjee (rated 1667 by Surrey but with a live ECF rating of 2022!), was holding a minor-piece endgame but in danger of falling behind on the clock on board 7; and on board 8 Peter Andrews looked on course for a win once he had established a passed e-pawn, though both sides still had queen and a rook, leaving work to be done.

David Rowson’s game rapidly went downhill in a flurry of tactics. “I was Black in an English,” he explained later, “but found it difficult to decide on the best plan and one mistake led to another. On move 39 I could still have saved something from the game by offering a rook which couldn’t be taken. This would have led to a draw.” But the chance went begging and Kingston were 2-1 down.

At one point I genuinely feared the worst, and started to crave a 4-4 draw to preserve the first team’s unbeaten record this season. Oh, ye of little faith! The Maycock and Lalić double act which has been central to Kingston’s success over the past two seasons once again came to our rescue. David found a way to win his queen-and-pawn endgame, and Peter performed his usual multi-dimensional tactical sorcery to mate his young opponent in 41 moves. Now it was 3-2 and much depended on the rather longer-established Kingston double act of president John Foley and chair Alan Scrimgour, who appeared to be up against it.

Both, though, are technically excellent endgame players, and we were safe in their hands. Alan turned around his endgame against the Prodigy and may well have stood better, but with hardly any time on his clock he took a draw. That made it 3.5-2.5, and, when Peter Andrews smoothly converted his “won” endgame, we were over the line.

That just left John Foley’s game. John had been under the cosh for much of the evening, but he is unflappable in a time scramble and found a way to draw. Indeed, later he thought he may even have had winning chances. That made the final score a very satisfactory 5-3, though you did wonder how strong Coulsdon would be if all their strongest adult players lined up alongside their terrifyingly proficient juniors. Let’s park that anxiety for next year.

Stephen Moss