David Maycock scored a perfect 6/6 to win the Kingston Bank Holiday Blitz, but young Zain Patel ran him close on an evening when the juniors shone
You have to be in it to win it. Quite a few of the Kingston big guns chose to sit out the Kingston Bank Holiday Blitz, held at the Willoughby Arms on Monday 26 May, but candidate master David Maycock put his reputation (and rating points – the event was ECF rated) on the line, and he triumphed in style, winning all six of his games.
The time control was the novel three minutes plus a seven-second increment – something we have come to think of as the “Kingston control” (we first used it in the monthly All Saints blitzes). Some young players mock it as blitz chess for oldies, preferring the high-pressure 3+2, but we reckon it makes for a better game, giving players more thinking time and having fewer games decided on time alone.
The key encounter of the tournament came in round 4 when David faced Zain Patel, the eventual runner-up with 5/6. Zain, with Black, was better in the middle game and had excellent drawing chances in an endgame with bishops of opposite colours, but David, with an extra pawn, was remorseless and Zain let it slip.
Zubair Froogh (left) v David Rowson on board 2 (foreground), with Zain Patel and David Maycock behind them
Both won their remaining games to secure first and second spots. Youngster William Lin was third with 4.5, gaining a whopping 61 blitz rating points in the process. Kingston president John Foley, Zubair Froogh, Peter Roche and Richmond’s Maks Gajowniczek tied for fourth with 4 points, and David Rowson, Surbiton’s Graham Alcock and 11-year-old Ethan Kim came next with 3.5/6 – a brilliant result for the talented Kim. The full final table can be found on Chess Results.
Twenty-eight players took part – the capacity for the playing room at the Willoughby – including nine from other local clubs. As we develop a roster of tournaments, we hope to make this inclusivity a feature. It increases the level of interest, ups the pitch of competition and changes the dynamic, allowing players who usually only meet fleetingly to get to know each other better. Summer plans include two more blitzes, a FischerRandom tournament and a Saturday rapidplay. Thanks to Julian Way and Edward Mospan for organising a very successful evening and pointing the way forward for future events.
Michael Healey on when to take an apparently free pawn – and, more important, when not to. Photograph by Roddy Mcgillivray
Before the start of a chess game I feel like giving an inspirational speech to the pieces: “We’re all going into battle together, and some of us might not live to see the end of it. Especially you little guys!”
I absolutely love sacrificing pawns. Opening up lines, gaining momentum, it puts all the obligation to calculate and defend and re-coordinate on the opponent. If your opponent has choking pressure on you it can suddenly be relieved with a pawn sacrifice, and the change of character from static to dynamic will completely throw some players. Sometimes you accidentally miss a pawn dropping and it turns out to be accidentally brilliant. Plus your opponent takes so much time thinking about whether the grab is “on” that it can be worth it long term. If there are enough open lines (and knights) something will usually turn up in the eternity that extra pawn takes to cross the board, and you get to look cool doing so; but it’s incredibly lazy.
Looking over grandmaster games in recent years, it seems that many games turn on taking or not taking a pawn. Oftentimes this appears to be a notable and critical decision in a game, assigned either a dramatic ! or ??; moreover it seems the pawn captures are almost always the ??s. A player like me has to force himself to take a pawn; being material up is complete anathema, especially if one loses that ethereal concept of the initiative.
Intuitively I believe most pawn grabs only lead to trouble. Yet some players have to restrain themselves from snatching pawns. Pawns make prizes after all. Some pawns look ripe for plucking; others look most poisonous. Most of the time we’re all trusting years of built-up intuition, because the consequences can be very hard to assess. Sometimes it comes down to a matter of taste. Unless you’re a computer – or a grandmaster.
As a chess teacher, my main experience of pawn grabbing is gut-wrenching – seeing queens en prise turned down while pawns are gobbled, or watching stalemate after stalemate when players refuse to win by checkmate. Yet to become a strong player pawn grabbing is a necessary skill, one might even say an art.
One player I really should have studied more by now is Victor Korchnoi (indeed website editor Stephen Moss and GM Vladislav Tkachiev gave me Chess Is My Life many years ago for defeating the latter in a simul). Korchnoi was notorious for snatching pawns, calculating and defending tenaciously whilst he voraciously gathered those loose crumbs. Such is the attitude of someone who survived the siege of Leningrad – take nourishment where you can get it, and enjoy doing so! Here he snacks on Fischer’s pawns and pieces to victory:
The most famous pawn grab of all time is probably Fischer’s 29…Bxh2from game one of the 1972 world title match against Spassky:
The analysis and psychology of that move have been pored over ever since. Possibly Fischer was trying to prove he could play unbelievably and still draw. An ordinary chess mortal would just say – “Nope, not taking that one.” A genius attempts the impossible.
The youngest wave of supergrandmasters have grown up with supercomputers – computers like pawns, and can swat away emotional attacks with cold calculation. Modern grandmasters have seen enough computer lines to give them confidence to do the same. They are prepared to do the incredibly hard work of defending because, like computers, they are so very good at it. Here a tiny Rameshbabu Praggnanandhaa coolly takes on f6 and faces down Gawain Jones’ vicious attack:
A game from the recent Women’s World Championship had a big effect on me. It was very much a fire and ice match: Tan Zhongyi tried to complicate and produce chaos whenever possible; Ju Wenjun was cool and calm at all times:
On move 20 of game 5 Ju Wenjun, with White, has a beautiful position – a pawn up and everything looks pretty rosy. Suddenly she snatches a pawn on a6. There is a short-term tactic making the move possible (Bxa6 Qxa6 Bxc5 Qc4+), but she is willing to suffer the de-coordinating of her pieces and opening of lines for her opponent for a mere weak isolated pawn when she already has an edge. There is of course a deeper point – to defang the dangerous bishop at b7 pointing at White’s king. The move looked horrific to my eyes, but Ju Wenjun goes with the “ugly” pawn capture. She went on to win an incredibly calm game (and the match).
However there was also a moment earlier in the game where the unnatural but best move was not to take the pawn:
Here Ju Wenjun captured with bxc3, whereas the incredibly brave Qd4 promises far more. The queen is centralised and primed for kingside attack, but joins the king on the pinned diagonal from a7 to g1. The c3 pawn is a bystander, unwilling to capture on b2 for fear of adding the c1 bishop to the attack. A human winces, a computer shrugs. The best move is the best move.
In the recent Alexander Cup Final I had an extremely tough battle with Guildford’s Clive Frostick. The game itself is very interesting, played to a fairly high standard, only suffering towards the end from time trouble-induced dubious moves (and the distractions of two fascinating games either side, on boards 5 and 7). It was a very unusual game for me (not least because I’m playing a new opening this season) where I tried to refrain from complications and play calmly for as long as possible (alas, I failed). The theme seemed to be the question of pawn grabbing: could pawns be grabbed, and more importantly should they be? Here are 12 positions from the game. Please have a quick ponder of each and judge whether you would snatch or not.
Diagram 1: 7…Nxe5
Diagram 2: 12. Bxd5 exd5 13. Qxd5
Diagram 3: (Analysis move 15…Na6) 16. Bxb7
Diagram 4: 17…Bxb2
Diagram 5: 18…Bxa3
Diagram 6:22…Bxa3
Diagram 7: 23. Bxa3
Diagram 8: 33. Bxc6 Qxc6 34. Qxa7
Diagram 9:34. Qxa7
Diagram 10: 36. Qxa5
Diagram 11: 40. Bxb7
Diagram 12: 41. Bxb7
Are we all ready? Hands ready to grab? On to the game!
A sad end to a good game, which White really deserved to win. One spectator summarised my own game to me as I took one pawn, then another, and I was never really in trouble. I think we’ve put paid to that. It also serves as a lesson to us all in pawn grabbing. By my count, of the 12 possible pawn captures in the diagrams, five were for Black, seven for White; eight were incorrect and only four were correct captures (diagrams 4, 5, 7 and 9). Of the 11 possible captures (one was from later analysis), the players chose correctly on nine occasions. Not bad for board six of an evening match!
Kingston A v Ealing A, Thames Valley League division 1 match played at the Willoughby Arms, Kingston on 12 May 2025
After contesting 11 matches crammed into just five months of play, we arrived at our final Thames Valley division 1 encounter on Monday 12 May. I say “we arrived”, but I was actually abroad for this last match and was grateful to Peter Large for taking on the captaincy duties.
Kingston effectively made a winning start before any of the players had sat down, as Ealing’s captain, Andrew Harley, considerately informed us in advance that their board 6 had had to drop out due to pressure of work.
The first game to finish was that on board 3, where Jonathan White had moved 1. f4, Bird’s Opening, against Vladimir Li. A complicated set of exchanges took place in the centre of the board, leading, eventually, to a level position. Despite the players still having four pieces and six pawns each, neither of them saw a reason to continue.
In Vladimir’s case this was probably partly due to his disappointment at not having taken some chances to gain an advantage earlier. Vladimir has played little recently and he said afterwards, with typical self-criticism, “I think I am simply in bad form for a variety of reasons. The main one is being rusty.” To the average observer the chances not taken were far from obvious. In the position below White has just played 11. Qa4? attacking two pawns but potentially reducing the co-ordination of his pieces.
The board 4 game opened with Peter Lalić, with White, choosing the Austrian Attack against Tony Wells’s Modern Defence. His opponent advanced his kingside pawns but neglected his piece development. This was the position after White’s 13th move:
This game is a good example of the perils of underdevelopment. Tony Wells only brought out his king’s knight on the 34th move, upon which Peter immediately chopped it off.
Board 5 saw Ealing’s Xavier Cowan, with White, opting for the Sämisch Variation against Ash Stewart’s King’s Indian Defence. After the queens were exchanged a position with asymmetrical pawn structures was reached, in which chances were roughly even, but Black had to keep an eye on White’s c4 and d5 pawn pair:
On board 2, against Alan Perkins’ Sicilian Defence Peter Large played a kind of Closed line with Bb5. His bishops were soon pointing menacingly at Black’s king’s position:
The remaining game saw the debut of Supratit Banerjee (pictured above) on board 1 for Kingston, an acknowledgement of the remarkable fact that at just 11 years of age he has reached an ECF rating of 2401. With Supratit Black, the opening was a classical French Defence (1.e4 e6 2. d4 d5 3. Nc3 Nf6 4. Bg5 dxe4). White won a pawn on the queenside, but Supratit played resourcefully to set his opponent problems. This was the position after White’s move 26:
Thus Kingston not only won the match 4.5-1.5, but also completed an historic 100%-winning Thames Valley division 1 season (see final table below). As captain, I want to thank all our players for making our progress so smooth and relatively undramatic. We have an incredibly strong squad, but results don’t always follow ratings, and what was impressive was the determination and consistency with which our top players won game after game.
Special mention must be made of Peter Lalić’s remarkable record of 10 wins and one draw from 11 games, and also the fact that both Peter Large and David Maycock had ECF rating performances of 2441 for their Thames Valley League seasons. John Hawksworth and Ash Stewart were great additions to the squad, and our very talented young players Supratit Banerjee and Luca Buanne made significant contributions. At different times different clubs looked capable of challenging us, but none of them managed to maintain such a level of consistency.
Thanks are also due to Peter Andrews and Peter Large for stepping in to captain in my absence, to Stephen Moss for all his support and advice, and to Greg Heath and Ed Mospan for unfailingly being available to set things up in the Willoughby.
That makes it three Thames Valley League titles in a row. Can we do it again next season?
David Rowson, Kingston A captain in Thames Valley League division 1
Kingston B v Richmond C, Thames Valley League division 2 match played at the Willoughby Arms, Kingston on 12 May 2025
I was abroad when this match took place, so can give only the sketchiest second-hand account of what happened. Alan Scrimgour kindly deputised for me as captain and played board 1, winning the match 4-2 but being thwarted with Black in his own game, held to a draw by the solid and almost certainly underrated Peter Kasprowicz.
Kingston veteran Peter Roche (pictured above, left, at a recent All Saints blitz tournament), who has returned to the fray this season after a long break, won well with White on board 2 against the capable George Milligan; Adam Nakar and Genc Tasbasi maintained their excellent form with wins with White on boards 4 and 6; and David Bickerstaff drew with Black on board 5 against Richmond C captain Michael Robinson-Chui.
Seth Warren, who has had an encouraging debut season, lost with Black to Barry Sutton on board 3, but Seth was feeling unwell and should be commended for playing at all in the circumstances, saving us from a default. A loyal service medal will be awarded.
An excellent performance by the team, which had undergone several enforced changes in the run-up to the match. With two matches left this season, Kingston B have been crowned as division 2 champions and remain unbeaten. That record will, though, be tested in those final matches, which are against Richmond B, who are themselves vying for promotion and are sure to put out a strong team. The two fixtures will be played back to back, home and away, on 2 and 3 June.
The final weekend of the 4NCL season saw CSC/Kingston 1 survive in the first division, while the second team were pipped for promotion from Div 3 and the third team finished a creditable sixth in Div 4
The final weekend of the 4NCL season, on the bank holiday weekend of 3-5 May, saw all three CSC/Kingston teams in action, though at different locations – the first and second teams in Daventry, the third team in Coventry. As ever, squad manager Kate Cooke handled the logistical complications with calm efficiency.
The first team survived their debut season in the very tough division 1 and live to fight another day. At the beginning of the season, I put our chances of survival at 50-50, or perhaps in my more pessimistic moments 60-40 against. Clearly we were identified by the rest of the league as likely relegation contenders – one rival captain told me that explicitly. Our first weekend did not go well, with defeats to eventual title winners Manx Liberty and to the very experienced Blackthorne. But we got stronger and the incredible victory against Sharks 1 on Weekend 4 paved the way for survival.
On the Saturday of the final weekend, we played the strong Cheddleton team – just the three GMs! We had brought in young Turkish IM Eray Kilic as a wildcard as a hedge against possible relegation – we were still not mathematically safe, though by now we were fairly confident of surviving. Eray, who played superbly all weekend, defeated GM Keith Arkell on board 1 to set up a drawn match in which Polish WIM Liwia Jarocka also scored a fine win against Nina Pert (the first of Liwia’s three victories across the weekend).
The crunch match came on Sunday against Barbican, who needed to beat us to have a chance of avoiding relegation. It was an extremely tense encounter, with victories for IM Vladyslav Larkin and Supratit Banerjee (newly confirmed as an FM at the age of just 11) offset by losses for IM Malcolm Pein and CM Peter Finn. It all came down to the board 5 game between David Maycock (pictured above) and IM John Pigott. The Barbican player held the advantage in a minor-piece endgame, but David would not relent, time started to worry his opponent and the IM blundered and eventually lost on time. We were finally safe. On Monday we defeated Sharks 2, who were already doomed to relegation, to secure seventh place in the table – a terrific result after our travails in the early part of the season.
Div 1 – Round 9
Div 1 – Round 10
Div 1 –Round 11
Div 1 – final table
We had hoped that the second team would win promotion from Div 3 (Knights) into division 2. It would certainly have been team planning easier as the top two divisions always play alongside each other at the same venue. But it was not to be. The team won well on the Saturday, but lost to a strong Brown Jack team on Sunday and went down to the excellent To Be Decided in the promotion decider on Monday.
We needed to beat To be Decided 5-1 to win promotion, but in truth that never looked likely. To Be Decided ran out 4-2 winners and go up with Sussex Martlets 1, who had a perfect season – 11 wins in 11 matches – to win the division. Many congratulations to both the promoted sides. CSC/Kingston 2 finished in fourth place, tied on match points with the Rookies. In the end a slight disappointment when we had been vying for the second promotion spot all season.
Div 3 (Knights) – Round 9
Div 3 (Knights) – Round 10
Div 3 (Knights) – Round 11
Div 3 (Knights) – final table
In division 4, CSC/KIngston 3 have enjoyed an extremely successful season and finished sixth in the 32-team league. This division is structured as a Swiss rather than an all-play-all, and sixth spot was a good deal higher than we have been in previous seasons. The drawn match on Sunday against Div 4 title winners Barnet Knights C was particularly notable, as was Petr Vachtfeidl’s performance in winning all three of his games (two of them against 2000-strength players) across the weekend. Chris Rice, too, had a tremendous weekend, scoring 2.5/3.
Div 4 – Round 9
Div 4 – Round 10
Div 4 – Round 11
Div 4 – final table
Well done to everyone who played for the CSC/Kingston teams through the season, and thank you all for trekking to motorway hotels across the Midlands in all sorts of weather (who can forget the biblical downpour at Daventry last November?) to keep the flag flying. Despite stumbling in Div 3 in the final two matches, it has been an amazingly successful season, and the way we have competed with GM-packed teams in division 1 has been remarkable. Thanks above all to Kate and Charlie Cooke, who have made all this possible. Now at last Kate can get some rest after seven months spent juggling three teams and a squad of 40 players at three different venues. A truly fantastic effort.
Richmond C v Kingston B, Thames Valley League division 2 match played at the Adelaide, Teddington on 6 May 2025
This was a somewhat low-key way to ensure Kingston B won Thames Valley division 2, but satisfying nonetheless. Not easy either. Richmond C may be bottom of the table and certain to be relegated, but they put up a stern fight and there were some excellent games.
Adam Nakar and Richmond captain Michael Robinson-Chui had a hard-fought draw on board 5 which both clearly enjoyed; Jon Eckert, continuing his rich run of form, won a fine attacking game with Black against the resilient Peter Kasprowicz on board 2, and Genc Tasbasi won emphatically against Andreas Maroulis on board 6, delivering mate with the white king stranded in the middle of the board and assailed on all sides.
The sole reverse came on board 3, where Alicia Mason lost a thriller to Tom Lloyd, who on this performance looked significantly underrated. Lloyd directed his heavy artillery in the form of queen and both rooks at the white king and eventually the white fortress cracked, with the king pursued across the board at the expense of significant material loss. Alicia cleverly went in search of a perpetual, but eventually the checks ran out and Richmond had got a point back.
In the end , though, it didn’t matter because wins for Kingston on boards 1 and 4 put the result beyond any doubt. On 4, Seth Warren, who has had an encouraging start to his Kingston career, won well with Black against Barry Sutton. White’s decision to castle queenside in a Queen’s Gambit Declined always looked a little suspect, and so it proved, with Seth going several pawns up and smoothly converting a rook and minor piece endgame.
That left Peter Andrews up against the dependable Victor Bluett on board 1. In the position below, White already has an edge, but Peter felt the sequence that followed made it close to terminal for Black. Peter himself provides the commentary.
Peter’s win completed a 4.5-1.5 victory for Kingston B and secured the Thames Valley division 2 title with three matches to spare (see table below). The team has won 10 of its matches and drawn the other. A formidable performance which very nearly matches the title-winning A team’s record of 11/11. Quite a season.
Played at All Saints Church, Kingston, 30 April 2025
Peter Large won the 12th edition of the All Saints Blitz with a perfect score of 5/5. He has won the event each of the five times he has entered. There were 16 entrants spanning a range of expertise from beginner to international master.
Peter is at the peak of his career, having been a key member of the England over-65 team which this season won both the World and the European titles. He enjoys playing chess and it is a credit to the All Saints Blitz that he is participating.
Round 3: Chris Briscoe (White) v Robin Haldane
For the first time, we played not in silence but to the accompaniment of the organ where we were treated to a practice session of church music written by the blind French composer Jean Langlais. Some players were able to screen out the music, others found it uplifting, whilst a minority found it interfered with their concentration. One person compared it favourably with the Irish folk music at the Willoughby Arms.
Peter Large said that none of the games was easy. Even in the first round, when his opponent turned up late, Peter was happy to be paired with FM Julian Way, who had turned up to observe the first round and departed for his volunteering duties at Oxfam afterwards.
Round 1: Julian Way (White) v Peter Large
If this were a rated event, then Peter’s rating would have jumped from the modest ECF 2053 to a still underrated ECF 2080. Top players usually play in Fide-rated tournaments and do not pay much attention to their ECF rating, especially for rapid and blitz. In Peter’s case, his Fide rapid rating is 2250, which is more realistic. It is a pity that the ECF does not try to achieve a better alignment between their domestic ratings and the international ratings. The forthcoming SCCU London Team Championships is based on ECF rapid ratings and team selection takes advantage of this discrepancy.
Round 5: Alan Hayward (White) v John Hawksworth
Alan Hayward from the Pimlico club came second on 4/5, with a fine kingside attack in the final round against IM John Hawksworth. Had there been a sixth round, Peter and Alan would have played each other. Five rounds is usually enough to generate a winner and there is no plan to change the current format, which allows the participants to have a chat between rounds and patronise the café.
Foreground: John Hawksworth (White) v Peter Large; background: Alan Scrimgour (White) v Chris Briscoe
Alan Scrimgour played all three titled players IM Peter Large, IM John Hawksworth and CM Chris Briscoe and ended with a creditable 3/5. (The other titled player, FM Julian Way, only played the first round as a filler.) The most improved player was John Hawes, who scored 0/5 in the last blitz and jumped to 3/5 this time, far outstripping his estimated rating of ECF 1200.
Foreground: Stephen Moss (White) v David Shalom; Background: John Hawes (White) v Genc Tasbasi
Results
1st IM Peter Large 5/5 2nd Alan Hayward 4/5 3rd Robin Haldane 3½/5 4th-8th IM John Hawksworth, Alan Scrimgour, John Hawes, Peter Roche, Genc Tasbasi 3/5 9th-13th Stephen Moss, CM Chris Briscoe, Robin Kerremans, John Cattermole, David Shalom 2/5 14th Kevin Bowyer 1½/5
Peter Large (right) receives the winner’s traditional box of chocolates from tournament controller John Foley
