Played at All Saints Church, Kingston, 26 March 2025
The 11th All Saints Blitz tournament was the most well-attended so far with 16 players convening at the central Kingston church. Three-time winner IM Peter Large, the favourite on form and rating, left it until the fifth and last round game against former winner Robin Haldane from Streatham to secure first place. Peter had dropped a half-point against Surbiton’s Chris Briscoe in round 3, whereas Robin had breezed through the tournament, including disposing of Chris in the fourth round.
During the midway break, Robin Kerremans invited us to visit his new boardgames café in Teddington, Drinks and Dice. It offers all sorts of board games and is open every day except Sunday. We encourage chess players to go along and discover some other wonderful games.
Robin Kerremans presenting his board games café in Teddington
The game between Peter Large and the young Surbiton player Joshua Pirgon in the fourth round had an unusual ending. In an even heavy pieces endgame, the players were moving their rooks backwards and forwards on the same file and it seemed a draw by threefold repetition was imminent. However, Peter deviated by moving his h-pawn thus avoiding the draw. There followed a quick succession of moves which disturbed the former equilibrium. Under time pressure, Joshua blundered against his more experienced opponent. As he realised that he had just lost his queen, Joshua threw his head back dejectedly becoming frozen in space and time. At this point, I stepped forward prematurely with my iPad to confirm the result. However, Peter Large correctly pointed out, Joshua had not pressed his clock and the game was not over. We waited sympathetically until the time ran out, Joshua still frozen. At least he had held his own against the international master until the sudden end.
Kingston’s John Bussmann did exceptionally well in winning four games on the trot, losing only to Chris Briscoe in the last round. This is not reflected in the results because John registered too late to be automatically paired in the first round and was given a null bye. However, he managed to arrive before play began and was given an opponent. Hence all 16 players obtained five games.
Top table final round Large v Haldane, Bussmann v Briscoe
The decider between Robin Haldane and Peter Large was a tricky knight and pawns endgame where there was no time to calculate and intuition was critical. It was a knife-edge position whereby the players had to decide whether to grab an extra pawn at the expense of losing a pawn. Robin explained afterwards that he was torn between seeking a draw and seeking a win. It didn’t help that he couldn’t read the timer properly: he had picked up his glasses case which contained not his reading glasses but his sunglasses. He could make out that he had less than a minute left but was uncertain of the number of seconds. There is a lesson there about checking the contents of your glasses case before setting out to play a chess game.
Deciding final-round game between Robin Haldane (left) and IM Peter Large
Reward for egg-xelence: Peter Large presented with the prize by John Foley
To celebrate Peter’s fourth All Saints victory, the prize was a larger chocolate confection than usual. Indeed, it was so large, that I felt obliged to issue a cholesterol warning when presenting the giant Easter egg.
Results (>50%)
4½/5 IM Peter Large 4/5 Robin Haldane 3½/5 CM Chris Briscoe 3/5 Joshua Pirgon, John Bussmann, CM Anthony Hughes
The first and second teams played at the Holiday Inn, Coventry. The third team played in Peterborough on the third 4NCL weekend 15/16 February 2025
From left: front: Nia Videnova, David Maycock, Ash Stewart; back: Viviana Galvan Cipriani, Ulysse Bottazzi, Peter Finn, Liwia Jarocka, Vladyslav Larkin (Photograph: John Foley)
The 4NCL is the national chess league which is played one game per day over five weekends at hotels in central England. Divisions 1 and 2 comprise 12 teams – eight players in division 1, six in division 2. Division 3 is split into two groups of 12 teams, with six players in each. Division 4 has 32 many teams of six players. Kingston has teams in Divisions 1, 3 and 4. The team is called CSC/Kingston to reflect the aspiration that we provide a pipeline for those learning under the Chess in Schools and Communities project.
This was the third weekend and marks the halfway point of the season. It was make or break this weekend, and we proved ourselves up to the challenge. We were short-handed because some of our players were on international duty for England at the World Senior Team championships in Prague. Peter Large is in the 65+ first team, Clive Frostick is in the 50+ second team, and his wife Helen is in the women’s team. We were also missing players from our second team – Chris Fegan for England and Alan Scrimgour for Scotland. Nonetheless, we have a strong squad and others were drafted in.
The Kingston team is newly promoted and battling to survive at the top flight of British chess. During the first two weekends, we had won just one out of four matches. However, most of these opponents were from the “elite” group of first-division teams. We won against Alba which, although the top Scottish team, was not quite at the elite level. So we had not given up hope of survival.
Division 1 Round 5
The first match this third weekend was against the formidable Wood Green, a sponsored team which has won the title on many occasions. They outrated us on every board and the final defeat by 3-5 was within our expectations. Six of the games were drawn and we lost only two. This proved that we were able to slug it out with the elite.
One factor in our favour for the longer term is that the average age of our team is only 19 years old. We are much younger than the soi-disant “Wood Green Youth” team, whose teeth are getting long. Past players for our CSC/Kingston team (the fluctuating history of the team will be told one day) were the then teenagers Matthew Wadsworth and Harry Grieve, both of whom have now graduated to bigger teams.
Division 1 Round 6
After the loss, the team repaired to the Hungry Horse to lift our spirits. This had the desired effect because the next morning the team arrived fresh and creative to face the strong Barnet Knights A team. Barnet Knights have been a mainstay of junior coaching in north London and their talented protégés were participating, including the Badacsonyi brothers. We were delighted to see Stanley, who was a joint winner of the Kingston Invitational last summer.
This result marked the “coming of age” of the Kingston team according to an exultant tweet from Kingston club captain Stephen Moss, who had decamped to Florida. He loyally left aside the attractions of sun, sea and beach and hung on the live results feed from 4NCL. We were a shade outrated but by less than in the previous round. The first game to finish was from Ulysse Bottazzi, who made short work of his international master opponent as if in compensation for his quick loss the previous day. Peter Finn had two extra pawns against Ethan Pang, but both sides had two rooks which made progress very slow but he got there in the end.
Peter Finn (right) v Ethan Pang
The league table shows we are now fourth from the bottom, which crucially is just above the cut-off point for demotion back down to the second division. A decade ago, I captained a team which had just been promoted to the first division, and my policy was to reward the players who had won promotion for their loyalty and devotion by retaining them in the team. They had the pleasure of playing some of the best players in the country, if not Europe. Whilst this policy had ethical merits, it led to our immediate demotion. The competitive reality is that to survive after promotion it is necessary to strengthen the team, which is what we have done this season.
Division 3 Round 5
Turning now to our second team, which was on 3/4 after two weekends, our only loss being to Sussex Martlets 1, which is the strongest team in the division and top of the table. As mentioned, we were shorthanded as some of our players were on international duties. To make matters worse, at the very last minute, after the pairings against The Rookies, one of our players pulled out due to illness. Defaulting a game is a serious matter in the 4NCL, losing not just the game, but also suffering a penalty point and possibly a financial penalty. Fortunately, Gerhard Bezuidenhout, the father of one of our first-team players, stepped into the breach and, although he lost quickly, he saved the penalties.
This was an excellent victory 4-2 against a slightly higher-rated team. I wondered if they were members of the Stephen Moss fan club named eponymously for The Rookie, his book ruminating on the chess world. Alas, he could not be present to give a speech. After the match, the team tracked to the Hungry Horse for dinner with the first team. The social aspects of team morale cannot be underestimated.
Division 3 Round 6
The morning train from London to Coventry brought our Sunday substitute, Giampiero Amato, who eschewed the offer of a lift to take the No 9 bus from the station. One has to admire his faith in public transport, but it doesn’t do much for the captain’s blood pressure. We swapped the bottom board from the first team and the top board of our second team partly to keep our opponents MK Phoenix guessing.
The team cruised to another victory. Giampiero won a piece in the early middle game and could get the next train back. Ewan Wilson notched up his second point of the weekend. Zain Patel obtained a draw on board 1, as did Viviana Galvan Cipriani on board 2. Tom Farrand was under attack for most of the game, but when the smoke cleared he was the exchange up in the endgame and won.
The games have yet to be published on the 4NCL website at the time of writing so I will mention mine. I had overreached, losing a pawn. I was on the wrong side of a R+P v R ending. It looked ominous, but the game ended curiously. I had been continually checking my opponent’s king from the rear, not allowing any time for the pawn to be promoted. I offered a draw and, to my surprise, my opponent accepted, which was quite a relief. The scoresheets were signed. Our team-mates on both sides subsequently queried whether the position was really drawn. They were right of course – the position was lost.
The second team’s hopes of promotion were greatly increased this weekend with two victories. We are third in the table. Our match against second-placed ToBeDecided will be critical.
Division 4
The third team were playing a Peterborough, which meant that I was unable to learn much more than the match results. The vibe was very positive, with match wins on both days. Chris Rice and Harry Evans both scored a brace.
Division 4 Round 5
Division 4 Round 6
It was an excellent weekend, with five match victories out ofsix. Kingston are definitely contenders for promotion from Divisions 3 and 4 and to avoid demotion from Division 1. Most of the credit should be given to Kate Cooke, who organises the entire squad and was there for all the crucial moments such as dropouts and replacements, logistics and transfers. It really is a team effort.
Kingston v Epsom, Alexander Cup semi-final 10-board match played at the Willoughby Arms, Kingston on 5 February 2025
Photographs from John Saunders unless captioned otherwise
Match report from Kingston match captain John Foley
See also match report from Marcus Gosling of Epsom Chess Club
Kingston, the clear favourites, won the semi-final of the Alexander Cup, the Surrey team knockout championship, by a wide margin but were full of admiration for the youthful Epsom team. At one point during the evening, the balance of the match was evenly poised. The 8½–1½ result flatters Kingston because the games were much closer.
The match started with a one-minute silence following the sad news of the death of Stewart Reuben. Most of those present would not have known Stewart, so I have posted a short blog about his enormous contribution to chess.
Silence for Stewart Reuben
Board 4: Chris Wright (Epsom) v Mike Healey (Kingston) [1-0]
The first game to finish was at 9pm when Mike Healey trapped the queen of Chris Wright, a former Kingstonian. Sometimes it is easier to capture an unsuspecting queen rather than a well-defended king. The full brevity may may have some instructional value.
Chris WrightMike Healey
The final position
Board 10: Alan Bates (Epsom) v David Rowson (Kingston) [2-0]
As the match progressed, the game positions became harder to judge and the ratings advantage of Kingston seemed to count for naught. It was not until 10pm that the next result came from David Rowson. His opponent, Alan Bates, even though massively outrated, held the advantage for most of the game. Unfortunately, the game ended suddenly when Alan retreated his threatened knight to the wrong square.
David Rowson (playing black)Alan Bates
The white knight under attack moved to the middle of the board 30. Ne4? but this lost to 30. Nd3 attacking the white queen whilst revealing an attack on the Ne4. White resigned immediately. The saving move would have been 30. Na6!, which goes against the usual advice that knights should not be placed on the edge of the board. However, the Na6 cannot be captured because White has counterplay, eg pin and win the black knight or else give the knight an escape on c7 with Qg3.
A quarter of an hour later came a flurry of results with Ash Stewart, Luca Buanne, Peter Andrews and Peter Lalić all winning and Will Taylor settling for a draw. Kingston had won the match.
Board 5: Ash Stewart (Kingston) v Marcus Gosling (Epsom) [3-0]
Ash Stewart played White against Epsom team captain Marcus Gosling in a Classical Catalan and accurately built up the pressure. Marcus, a man of action not content with a defensive posture, boldly opened the position – unfortunately to his own detriment and soon Ash had doubled rooks on the seventh rank.
Ash StewartMarcus Gosling
Here Marcus played 26…b4 forking the rook and knight. Ash gratefully grabbed the Bc7. Black had no further counterplay after capturing the knight on a3. I glanced at the board at this point and wondered if Black could give up the c7 bishop 26…Bxf4 prior to playing the b4 fork on the desperado principle. Although White still has the advantage, at least Black would have an extra pawn compared to the game.
Board 7: Luca Buanne (Kingston) v Lev Razhnou (Epsom) [4-0]
This game always looked positive for Kingston. Lev doubled his rooks on the g-file hoping for a breakthrough. Meanwhile Luca had a free hand on the other side of the board and grabbed some pawns. Eventually Lev had to give up the exchange resulting in a RR v NR ending which Luca successfully navigated.
Luca BuanneLev Razhnou
Board 6: Arnav Kumar (Epsom) v John Hawksworth (Kingston) [4½-½]
The best Epsom result of the evening was achieved by Arnav Kumar, who drew against an international master. His brother Sachin also drew on board 8. These two brothers are a formidable addition to the Epsom squad. John Hawksworth was disappointed with the result, but credited his opponent for a very resourceful tactical defence.
Arnav KumarJohn Hawksworth
Board 9: Peter Andrews (Kingston) v Maya Keen (Epsom) [5½-½]
Peter Andrews essayed the English against Maya Keen who replied with the Agincourt Defence. Maya came out of the opening with a solid position, but ambitiously sacrificed a knight and a bishop for a rook and a pawn – an exchange which is usually regarded as disadvantageous. Peter entered the endgame with his two bishops dominating Maya’s rook. Maya, with her mother sitting behind lending moral support, put up a good fight in the ending time scramble. Peter visibly suffers from nerves under time pressure but managed to steer the game to a successful conclusion. One interesting point about the game is that although the sacrifice was unsound, so was Peter’s reply.
Peter AndrewsMaya Keen
After 18…Bxf2+, White played 19. Rxf2 automatically but should instead have played 19. Kh1! This quiet retreat wins a piece for two pawns because Black cannot save both the Ne4 and the Bf2. Peter expressed some embarrassment afterwards at missing this elementary tactic. It underlines the point that a won game is not exempt from error. Indeed, the dictum that one learns from one’s losses should be replaced by the dictum that one learns from all one’s games.
Board 3: Peter Lalić (Kingston) v Robin Haldane (Epsom) [6½-½]
Peter LalićRobin Haldane
Peter Lalić is a chess magician: his openings are passive: he tries to exchange queens early and he doesn’t mind losing tempi as his knights retreat to their starting square. Yet, all of a sudden, through a mysterious sequence of pointless moves, he is suddenly in a winning position. The reader will be pleased to know that this did not happen on this occasion – Robin Haldane did not allow Peter’s Mieses Opening to mesmerise him. Robin, a veteran of the Surrey league, played positionally gaining the upper hand. This is where the second part of Peter’s strategy comes into play – his opponents take so long to figure out what’s going on that their clock runs down. In the diagram below, Robin is a good pawn ahead and his rooks are actively placed. However, by now he was playing on the 10-second increment, which is no friend of accuracy.
Black saw a chance to simplify the game and exchange knights and so played 37…Nf5?? Unfortunately this knight had been doing a vital defensive job protecting the d5 square. Peter instantly lashed out 38. Rd5+ forking the king and rook. Game over.
Board 8: Sachin Kumar (Epsom) v Will Taylor (Kingston) [7–1]
Will Taylor seemed to be cruising towards victory when he was tempted to place his rook in the heart of enemy territory. It looked crushing but he had overlooked a tactic which his young opponent found. We join the game at the critical moment.
Sachin KumarWill Taylor
Sachin Kumar (right) v Will Taylor (photo: John Foley)
As usual, the top two boards were still slugging it out. Zain Patel had an advantage over David Maycock, who was playing on the increment in the endgame. However, David’s accuracy proved decisive. The final game to finish was the IM encounter on board 1 between the old adversaries Peter Large and Graeme Buckley. Peter played 1. d4 for the first time in 40 years and a defensive game drifted into an insipid rook endgame and an agreed draw.
Board 2: Zain Patel (Epsom) v David Maycock (Kingston) [8-1]
Zain knows Kingston well, playing for us in the 4NCL and having played against us previously. He had the confidence of managing to draw with David Maycock the previous week although he had lost to him last year in the final of the Lauder Cup. Zain played the solid Colle System, which led to an equal game. David thought too hard about finding a way to punish such a dull opening and ended up having to play on the increment from move 18. By the end, both players were playing within 10 seconds each. Inevitably mistakes were made. Zain had chances to reduce the position to a theoretical draw.
Zain PatelDavid Maycock
Zain and Graeme making a move (photo: John Foley)
Board 1: Peter Large (Kingston) v Graeme Buckley (Epsom) [8½-1½ ]
The encounter on top board between two international masters was a dull affair, with neither side conceding an inch. In the end, each player had a rook and three pawns on the same side. A draw could have been agreed at almost any point during the game.
The final
Kingston march on to our fourth final in as many years. Epsom last reached the final of the Alexander Cup in 1939. Only two teams have won four in a row – Mitcham and Redhill. Will Kingston share in this illustrious honour? The final against Guildford (to be played at Ashtead on Tuesday 29 April) should be a very competitive match.
Board 3 of the U2050 match between Surrey and Essex played at Cheam Parochial Hall on 7 December 2024
Essex is always a strong team and Surrey needs to call upon its full strength. It is fair to say that Kingston has made a solid contribution over the years. The Surrey team of 16 comprised three Kingston players – Peter Andrews on board 1, John Foley (pictured above) on board 3 and Alan Scrimgour on board 5, all playing Black. This was one of the last games to finish and a small crowd, to which the players were oblivious, had gathered around the board. The Surrey team captain, Graham Alcock, beamed when this game finished, but then put on his serious face as he needed Marcus Gosling to draw with a pawn against two knights, which he duly did, but not before he made an illegal move in the time scramble, stretching nerves to the limit. Surrey won by one match point to keep us in the running to reach the national knockout stage.
IM Peter Large won the 8th All Saints Blitz on 27 November for the second time in a row
Photo: Peter Large receiving first prize from Stephen Moss
Peter Large cantered through the All Saints Blitz disposing of his opponents without too much difficulty to win the monthly event with 5/5. Twelve people competed in total. There was one new person who had not played chess over the board in 40 years. He found out about the event through a leaflet he picked up in the church next to the Christmas cards display.
We played in the Heritage Room, which is an ideal venue for chess – quiet and warm. The electric underfloor heating is supplemented by gas-fired radiators, all very welcome during this freezing snap.
I used the occasion to test how many spare queens should be placed on the tables. I allocated one black and one white queen to each table, on each of which two games were being played. As it happened, nobody used an extra queen. The games were quite decisive and any queen promotions were in the endgame after the original queens had been exchanged off. This is useful information for optimising our equipment storage, the crucial question being to size the container for the standard complement of 32 pieces or an expanded 34 pieces. The results of this research will be revealed to a bemused chess world at the end of the season. The matter arises because of the industry fashion from the year 2000 of including an extra queen in each set despite the most likely piece to need replacing being a pawn. There are a tiny number of competitive games (less than 0.1%) where one side has more than one queen. Perhaps the most famous is Fischer v Petrosian from the Candidates Tournament 1959.
Life at the top table: Peter Large v Robin Haldane in their crucial round 4 encounter at All Saints Blitz VIII
Returning to our event, the final positions were
Peter Large 5/5 Robin Haldane 3.5/5 John Bussmann, Alan Hayward, David Rowson 3/5
First prize was an advent calendar with an obligatory chocolate for each day of December up till Christmas Day. Peter said he had not yet finished the box of chocolates he won for coming first at the October Blitz, but this will not deter him from playing chess, which he loves. In any case, he now has two months to work though the backlog. The All Saints Blitz rests in December, while the church reverts to more traditional activities, and resumes on Wednesday 29 January.
IM Peter Large wins the All Saints Blitz VII on 30 November at his first attempt but it wasn’t easy
Photo: Peter Large receiving first prize from previous winner David Rowson
Peter Large, a new and valued member of Kingston Chess Club, is gradually becoming familiar with the club programme. Apart from intense league matches, we run friendly events such as the All Saints Blitz at the central Kingston church each month which is free and open to all.
The event attracted 16 entrants. We played in the Heritage Gallery for the first time since the funeral for Chris Clegg in January 2015. At the time we felt it was an ideal place to play chess and we were proved right again. The room is bright and warm and secluded from the main part of the church.
Mark Frankel (right) v Robin Haldane in round 1Round 2 under way in the Heritage Gallery
Peter qualified as an international master as far back as 1987, but has waited until retirement to relaunch his chess career. He faced tough opposition in rounds 2, 3 and 4 in the form of past Blitz winners Tony Hughes, Alan Hayward and Robin Haldane. Peter appeared to be on the backfoot for most of these games, but defended stoutly and managed the clock well, dropping only a half-point to Robin in the penultimate round. Going into the fifth and final round, Peter and Robin were neck and neck at 3½/4 each. Peter was paired against another newcomer IM, John Hawksworth, on 3/4. In the other top game, Robin faced Tony Hughes, who was on 3/4, but lost.
Final round: Clash of the IMs between Peter Large v John Hawksworth
In the last game to finish, even though John Hawksworth defended ingeniously, Peter expertly converted a rook ending in which he had a couple of pawns advantage. For this display of excellence, Peter was awarded the prize of a box of Lindor chocolates. Wimbledon players Tony Hughes and Stephen Carpenter were just half a point behind.
The Heritage gallery has a smaller space in which casual chess was played. Derek Bruce used to belong to Kingston in the 1960s and has reconnected with the club. He and Kingston club captain Stephen Moss played an instructive game in which (as you may be able to see in the position shown below) Derek has the chance to play a queen sac to win a piece and the game. This may be why Stephen, who has obviously just spotted the killer sequence, is shielding his eyes.
Derek Bruce (left) and Stephen Moss enjoying some languid social chess as the blitz tournament rages next door
The final results for those scoring above 50% were:
4½/5 Peter Large (Kingston)
4/5 Tony Hughes, Stephen Carpenter (both Wimbledon)
3½/5 Robin Haldane (Streatham)
3/5 Alan Hayward (Pimlico), John Hawksworth (Kingston), David Rowson (Kingston)
The latest edition of the monthly blitz at All Saints Church in central Kingston resulted in a surprise win for newcomer Alan Hayward
After the summer break, the monthly All Saints Blitz resumed on Wednesday 25 September with a cohort of a dozen players. It comprised five rounds, with each player allowed three minutes per game with an increment of seven seconds per move. The tournament controller was John Foley. The event took a brisk two hours from 10.15am with no gaps between rounds.
There was a new winner of the event – Alan Hayward from Pimlico Chess Club (pictured above left receiving his prize), who scored 4/5. It was Alan’s first time at the Blitz, but he showed few nerves as he disposed of four of his opponents. His only loss was to his friend Robin Haldane in the second round, though in the end Robin may have regretted bringing Alan along. Robin led on 4/4 going into the last round against Tony Hughes, both previous winners. Tony bested Robin, leaving Robin and Alan on 4/5, with Alan winning on a tie-break. Tony came third with 3.5/5.
Alan Hayward and Byron Eslava look on as Tony Hughes (White) converts against Robin Haldane in the final round
The prizes were purchased from the church’s charity bric-a-brac table (Kingston Chess Club’s generosity knows no limits). They comprised diverse entertainments: a crossword puzzle book (third prize); a John Grisham thriller (second prize); and a game of Agatha Christie Bingo (first prize). Prizes were ordered based on weight rather than intellectual merit.
Alan was surprised to win because he had lost to Robin earlier – it is quite common to treat the head-to-head result as decisive. However, we use the Buchholz tie-break system, whereby the person with the higher sum of opponents’ scores is the winner. Others who finished on or above 50% included David Rowson, Peter Roche, Byron Eslava and Stephen Moss.
The tournament was completed quickly within two hours. Several participants said they preferred to play during the morning when they were wide awake, and one said it always set him up for the day. In addition to the tournament players, four attendees opted to play social chess, adding to the variety of the chess experience at All Saints.
On Saturday 27 July we brought Hnefatafl and giant chess to the centre of Kingston – and the success of the move exceeded our wildest imaginings
Image: The Mayor of Kingston visiting the Kingston Chess Club stand
Kingston Chess Club will celebrate its 150th anniversary in the 2025/26 season, but last Saturday we decided to delve a little deeper into the history of both Kingston and chess. Several members of the club participated in, or attended, the Kingston Saxon Fayre organised by the Kingston Heritage Service. We had two locations – one in the ancient market square and one in the churchyard of All Saints Church. The day exceeded our wildest expectations. For a start, the weather was glorious – the weather gods are more interested in Saxon history than Parisian sports events – and we were extremely busy at both locations from the start at 11am until the end at 5pm.
Alicia Mason on the large chess board and John Foley on the Hnefatafl board
Market Square
The town’s market square was the centre of the Saxon celebrations. Managing our stall was club president John Foley, who arrived early to set up our gazebo. This housed a trestle table on which was a splendidly large demonstration chess set and a game from the Saxon period – Hnefatafl. The name of the club was prominently displayed on two menu stands. All Saints church had kindly provided the trestle table and four chairs as well as several posters to bring attention to the regular chess social activity which takes place at the church on Wednesday mornings.
Our stall sat prominently within a circle of Saxon-themed stalls, including live sheep and goats, a forge, stained glass-making, some nasty-looking weapons, craftwork, Anglo-Saxon clothing, falconry, historic recreations, music and so on. Also attending were organisations closely involved in research into Saxon history and culture, including the Kingston Society, Surrey Archaeology, the Dark Ages Society and Malmesbury Archaeology.
The set of large pieces attracted considerable interest from the public, proving that chess can be a tactile as well as an intellectual experience. So many youngsters queued up to play that Jaden Mistry was tasked to fetch another chess set which we squeezed on to the trestle table. Jaden was there for most of the day and played chess against all-comers.
Jaden Mistry (front right) takes on the Man in the Suit. Alan Scrimgour plays Dominic Fogg on the second board
John took responsibility for demonstrating the game of Hnefatafl. This was necessary for historical authenticity because the Saxons never played chess – they got it from the Vikings. A brief history of the Saxons is required.
John Foley teaching Hnefatafl
When the Romans left Britain in 410 AD, the Saxons started to arrive in numbers from Germany. Kingston Council runs the Saxon Fayre to reclaim its history. Seven Saxon kings were crowned at Kingston, starting with Æthelstan in 925 – the 1100th anniversary of that event next year promises to be a very big event in the royal borough. Æthelstan was followed by Eadred in 946 and Æthelred the Unready, who we like to consider the patron saint of the Kingston club, in 978. Kingston was the capital of England in the 10th century after Æthelstan effected a merger of the kingdoms of Wessex and Mercia. Kingston is a crossing point on the Thames between the two kingdoms.
The Saxons mixed with the local Britons, resulting in a hybrid Anglo-Saxon culture. The Anglo-Saxons continued to play Roman games such as Nine Men’s Morris and Ludus Latrunculorum. It was only with the Vikings that new games came along. Lindisfarne Priory was famously sacked by the Vikings in 793 AD – not the best way to introduce a new game.
The first record of chess being played in England dates back to Cnut, King of Denmark and England, who learned to play chess while on a pilgrimage to Rome in 1027. The famous Lewis Chessmen found in the Isle of Lewis in Scotland have been dated to the 11th or 12th century. William the Conqueror was already playing chess in 1060, before the Norman Invasion of 1066 which, according to historians, is the official end of the Anglo-Saxon period.
We may infer that the Anglo-Saxons may only have been playing chess for a decade or so before they were conquered. What is certain is that they were playing the game of northern Europe and Scandinavia spread by the Vikings. This game is known as Hnefatafl, which translates as “fist table” where “fist” represents a “king”, giving us the most common translation: “king’s table”.
According to the chess historian Richard Eales “Chess did not become popular in the 11th and 12th centuries because it came to people who thought it wholly original or had never seen board games before. Rather, chess succeeded by displacing the existing range of games; because it was inherently more complex and interesting or because it was introduced as one aspect of a new dominant culture.”
Never a quiet moment at the stand
For this event, we procured from Regency Chess a beautiful Hnefatafl set of reconstructed pieces made from resin and stone powder, with a historically accurate wooden board. John was surprised to find that the queue for Hnefatafl was just as long, if not longer, than the queue for chess. There was no break for lunch.
Hnefatafl is a tabletop game played by both the Saxons and the Vikings, and can be seen as a precursor of chess. The king sits in the middle of the board and attempts to escape to one of the corners, as the monarch’s guards do battle with the berserkers of the chasing army. It all seems rather insurrectionary and politically provocative for the early medieval period – is the king trying to flee his realm? But it proved a big hit in the marketplace, alongside the falconry, forge and flax spinning, and President Foley is now talking about renaming us Kingston Chess and Hnefatafl Club. After all, he argues, nobody challenges the full name of the All-England Lawn Tennis and Croquet Club.
A Saxon playing with his trusty staff
John did a huge amount of work to ensure the day went well, even dressing up in appropriate Saxon clothing, which may well now become his standard uniform at club matches. At one point he was able to join a passing procession of friars and minstrels without anyone batting an eyelid. With all due respect, a man born a thousand years too late.
Saxon procession from All Saints Church
All Saints churchyard
Stephen Moss managed the giant chess set in the church grounds. His challenge was to find some way to hook the audience. Nobody was going to wait around for Stephen and his able assistant Dominic Fogg to finish their game lumbering over the giant chess table. So he came up with the brilliant idea of borrowing another trestle table from the church and a couple of sets that we use for Wednesday chess. This served as the Beginners Corner, with fascinated children and more especially ultra-competitive dads playing throughout the afternoon.
In the All Saints churchyard
The giant chess set was hampered by the fact that we were four pawns short of a full set – a description which could be applied to the club generally, one wag said unkindly – but we ingeniously got round the problem by wrapping bean tins in plastic bags. At one point we also pressed a young man dressed in chain mail into service as a knight, though the fact that he was smoking was not ideal and it was in some ways a relief when he was captured. One very strong player came by and said he found trying to calculate variations on a giant set where four central pawns were represented by bean tins wrapped in blue and white plastic bags very tough, but who said chess was meant to be easy?
Stephen Moss had been rather doubtful about the day. He was only wearing regular suburban T-shirt and shorts, not the Saxon garb. Even though a cynic, he had to admit it had been splendid. He may have been influenced by the supply of free oat and honey cakes (made using an original Saxon recipe apparently), and by the fact that none of the vigorous battles between small children using swords and shields that were taking place on the lawn where the giant set was located resulted in hospitalisation. He admired the children who stuck with the chess when they could have been plunging vicious-looking plastic weapons into their friends and siblings. A happy day and a peaceful knight.
Credits
Club activators: John Foley, Stephen Moss, Alicia Mason, Malcolm Mistry, Jaden Mistry, Dominic Fogg, Alan Scrimgour, Leila Raivio Club visitors: Vladimir Li, Colin Lyle, David Shalom, John Bussmann, Leon Mellor-Sewell, Ergo Nobel
Robin Haldane wins All Saints Blitz V on Wednesday 30 May 2024
Photograph: One of the most beautiful places to play chess.
We had our strongest line-up yet for the fifth All Saints Blitz with 14 players. School half-term meant that, freed from teaching duties, Robin Haldane (Streatham) and Marcus Gosling (Epsom) joined us for the first time and proved formidable competitors alongside three-time winner Tony Hughes (Wimbledon) and the hardy perennials Peter Roche and David Rowson from Kingston. Other Kingston first-timers were Aziz Sannie and junior Jaden Mistry. Derek Bruce, who volunteers teaching chess at the Tudor Drive library, used to play for Kingston in the 1970s.
Round 2: Aziz Sannie snatched victory from the jaws of defeat against Marcus Gosling
Despite of the numbers being higher, the tournament controller John Foley kept to a leisurely five rounds with a break between rounds 2 and 3 for the players to patronise the café.
Round 3: Robin Haldane v Tony Hughes, with Nick Grey (right) v Aziz Sannie in the background
The two favourites, Robin Haldane and Tony Hughes, were jointly in the lead with 2/2 when they met in round 3 and obtained a draw when Robin went for a perpetual check. They both won in round 4, so it came down to the last round. Robin held his nerve against David Shalom whereas Peter Roche threw a spanner in Tony’s works. Peter found some strong moves in a complex tactical position, thereby kicking Tony’s hopes of a fourth victory into touch.
Robin Haldane receiving his box of chocolates prize from John Foley (Photo: Marcus Osborne)
Book review by John Foley: Originally published in British Chess News, 27 May 2024
I have a parochial interest in any book on Reginald Pryce Michell because he ended his playing career as a member of Kingston Chess Club of which I have the privilege to be president. His main career was in the first third of the 20th century. Other notable contemporary club members from the 1930s include the legendary Pakistani player Mir Sultan Khan, the chess author Edward Guthlac Sergeant and Joseph Henry Blake against whom we show some Michell games below.
This new book from Carsten Hansen is a welcome addition to the coverage of an important player who represented England. It is an update and expansion of the book originally published in 1947 by Pitman, London and compiled by Julius du Mont, the former editor of British Chess Magazine.
Julius du Mont, Editor of British Chess Magazine from 1940 to 1949
The original book has long been out of print, so the new book allows players to familiarise themselves with an almost forgotten former luminary of English chess.
R.P. Michell: A Master of British Chess by J. du Mont, Pitman, 1947
Reginald Pryce Michell
I share some background on R. P. Michell from my article on the history of Kingston Chess Club.
Reginald Pryce Michell, British Chess Magazine, Volume XLV1, April, 1926, photographer: Theo J. Gidden, Southport
Michell (1873-1938) was the British amateur chess champion in 1902 and played for Great Britain in the inaugural 1927 Olympiad in London and the 1933 Olympiad in Folkestone. He played in eight England v USA cable matches between 1901 and 1911. He participated in the Hastings Premier over 20 years, defeating both Sultan Khan and Vera Menchik in 1932/33. He finished second, third and fourth in the British championship (officially constituted in 1904), beating the multiple champion H.E. Atkins on several occasions. Modern estimates have placed him at the level of a strong international master.
Michell’s track record is all the more remarkable because he worked in a senior position at the Admiralty throughout his career which left him little time to study chess theory or enter competitions. He had a “wide knowledge of English and French literature, and a book of essays in either language was his standby for any unoccupied moment.” He died aged 65 which was the official retirement age at that time.
Michell excelled in the middle game and could hold his own in the endgame as attested by his draws against endgame maestros Capablanca and Rubinstein. In the only article he ever wrote about chess, he singled out books on the endgame as the most useful for practical purposes.
Portrait of R.P. Michell
E.G. Sergeant wrote of him: “Michell’s courtesy as a chess opponent was proverbial, and on the rare occasions when he lost he always took as much interest in playing the game over afterwards as when he had won, and never made excuses for losing. Of all my opponents, surely he was the most imperturbable. Onlookers might chatter, whisper, fall off chairs, make a noise of any kind, and it seemed not to disturb him; even when short of time, he just sat with his hands between his knees, thinking, thinking.”
Michell’s wife Edith (maiden name Edith Mary Ann Tapsell) was British women’s champion in 1931 (jointly), 1932 and 1935, and played alongside him for Kingston & Thames Valley chess club.
Edith Mary Ann Michell (née Tapsell)
A Master of British Chess – what’s new?
The original book covered 36 games; the new book has been expanded considerably to 67 games. Moreover, the additional games are against some of the most notable players of the era, including several world champions. Chess historians should be grateful for the revival of the original game selection, which du Mont described as “characteristic games”, by the addition of another 31 “notable games”.
Self-published books are a labour of love because the subject lacks the mileage to justify the attention of a conventional publisher. The author lacks the quality assurance tasks typically carried out by a publisher such as proofreading and fact-checking. This is apparent in the first part of the book which reproduces the text from the original, presumably using a scanner which hiccoughed over some obscure passages. The spelling has been converted to American, which grates for a book on a quintessentially English player.
A frustrating omission in the new book is a list of games to navigate the collection; the original book contained a list showing game numbers, players, event locations and dates. In mitigation, the new book does have a useful index of openings and ECO codes as well as an index of opponents. Hansen claims that the first book had 37 games whereas it had 36. Perhaps we can take comfort that later Amazon printings will correct these infelicities.
The new book has some significant improvements over the original. As one might expect, the moves are now in algebraic rather than the descriptive format with which most players under 50 are now unfamiliar. In the text, whilst d-pawn is the modern equivalent of the queen’s pawn, I still hanker after naming the pawn according to the name of the file; it would be a comforting continuity with descriptive notation. The openings are given their modern names with ECO classifications. Casual readers will appreciate the increased number of diagrams accompanying each game. For example, for the game Blake v Michell, Caterham 1926, the original book only had one diagram compared to a generous five for the new book. Many of the original games did not appear in any commercial database. No doubt this situation will be remedied in short order.
The most frequent opponents listed in the revised book include his strong English contemporaries: Sir George Thomas, William Winter and Fred Yates with four games apiece. Hansen added notable opponents who should have been included in the first book on account of their elevated status in the chess world, including five world champions: Alekhine, Botvinnik, Capablanca (two games), Euwe, Menchik (woman world champion) as well as Maroczy, Marshall, Rubinstein and Sultan Khan who were posthumously recognised as grandmasters.
The edited first part
The first part of the book carries the concise game summaries of the original, which were proofread by the precocious Leonard Barden whilst still at Whitgift School who lived a short cycle ride from du Mont in Thornton Heath. The book came out a year later in 1947 when Barden started his National Service.
The editor of Chess Magazine, Baruch Wood, was scathing in his book review: “Britain is far from the top of the chess tree and there must be a hundred British players with better justification for the publication of a book of their games than Michell. Mr du Mont’s graceful pen has made the most of his subject. The price of the book (10/6 for 108pp, 36 games) is so extraordinarily high that one feels some appeal is being made to sentiment.”
No doubt the fact that du Mont was the editor of a rival magazine may have diluted Wood’s objectivity. England did not have a surfeit of players and Michell would have been in the first rank.
Hansen has added his comments as italicised notes in the text in the contemporary, rather dry style redolent of engine and database analysis. Inevitably, he has identified some improvements and errors which were not noticed in the original. These include not only outright blunders but also the missed opportunities. The logic of this approach is harsh and sits somewhat uncomfortably with the convention that the chess public is more forgiving of a failure to play the best move than of making a blunder. Treating both these types of inaccuracy symmetrically makes the world feel less tolerant.
Misattribution
The most significant discovery by Hansen is that one of the games (game 27) had been misattributed regarding who played White. Du Mont had Michell defeating Max Euwe (world champion 1935-37) at Hastings 1931, whereas Michell had lost.
Hansen surmises that the game intended for the collection was the game they played in the following year’s Hastings tournament when Michell had Euwe on the ropes but the game ended in a draw. We don’t know exactly how this error occurred, but confusion sometimes arises when quoting games at Hastings. This famous long-running annual tournament traditionally takes place in the period between Christmas and the New Year and is described according to the year it starts and the year it ends. Michell lost the game played in 1930/31, but drew the game they played in 1931/32.
Biography untouched
Carsten Hansen is a chess analyst rather than a professional biographer so it is perhaps wise that he has not attempted to update the biographical sketch provided by Du Mont. When the chess analyst Daniel King wrote a book on Sultan Khan, he got into hot water regarding his contested account of the life of the grandmaster.
Modern analysis compared
We may compare annotations between the original and the revised version of the book regarding the above-mentioned game. Here we have (courtesy of CH) an excerpt of the new book on the game Blake v Michell, Caterham, 1926. Blake, although half a generation older than Michell, was described by Du Mont as “one of the brilliant band of British amateurs of which R. P. Michell was one.”
Excerpt of Game 22
and
Excerpt of Game 22
and
Excerpt of Game 22
and finally
Excerpt of Game 22
We may briefly examine the new analysis. The original text by Du Mont/Barden criticises Blake’s choice of opening: “This method of development in the Queen’s Pawn game has its disadvantages in that the dark squares on White’s queenside become temporarily weak, and White will have to spend some time on remedying this defect (e.g., 6.a3). That is why the Colle system has come into favour, the basic idea of which is the quiet development of all the white forces with pawns at c3, d4, and e3, starting an attack at the proper time with the move characteristic of the system: e3-e4.”
Hansen gives short shrift to this perspective:
“There is nothing wrong with the text move; in fact, it is a popular set-up for White, played by countless strong grandmasters.”
This blunt contradiction is based upon a century of games played thereafter. However, the original comment may have seemed plausible in the era in which Colle popularised the system and it had yet to be fully proven.
After Black’s 18th move (diagram above), the original annotation prefers an alternative to the move played 19. Bxc4: “Undoubtedly, White should play 19. bxc4. His game will now deteriorate due to this weak centre and the backward d-pawn.”
Hansen is again blunt:
“Indeed, the text move is a blunder, whereas after 19. bxc4, White would have had the upper hand.”
According to Deep Hiarcs (running for one minute), the difference in evaluation between 19. bxc4 and 19. Bxc4 is the difference between +0.2 and -0.3. So at worst, this “blunder” puts Blake a third of a pawn behind instead of being a fifth of a pawn ahead. Whilst masters thrive on small measures, it seems an exaggeration to describe capture by the bishop as a blunder. The original narrative merely says that the pawn capture would have been preferable without overstating the difference. Perhaps there is a tendency when aided by an engine to lose sight of the natural uncertainties felt by chess players when ruminating on which piece to recapture with.
Drama at Hastings 1934-35
The foreword to the original book noted that the most dramatic moment of Michell’s career occurred at the annual Hastings Premier 1934-35. He was pitted in the last round against Sir George Thomas, who was then half a point ahead of Dr Euwe, having beaten Capablanca and Botvinnik. Some observers felt that the decent and patriotic course of action was to give Sir George an easy game.
As one later commentator remarked, “In almost any other country, at any other time, the result would have been foreordained: a friendly draw and Thomas finishes no worse than a tie for first. Indeed, many players had to be rooting for the universally beloved Thomas to win and come in sole first.”
There had not been a home winner since Henry Ernest Atkins in 1921, the first year the annual tournament was held. Thomas and Michell were England team-mates. However, Thomas slipped up and Michell pressed home his advantage. Thomas lost the game but tied for first place with Euwe and Flohr. Curiously, the original book did not include this crucial game. Hansen includes the game and praises Michell for his principled stance: “But there was a happy ending; Max Euwe, in a better position against tail-ender Norman, made a sporting gesture of his own by offering a draw unnecessarily and settling for a first-place tie with Thomas and Flohr.”
The second part
Hansen annotates the games in the new second part of the book in a readable style and does not let Stockfish intrude too much. He even offers his thoughts on some moves rather than taking the engine recommendations. The prose is functional: the game introductions lack the charm of the original game summaries. Whilst sometimes providing background information on the opponent, there is little attempt in the header to identify the key points from each game.
Hansen is consistent with the narrative style in the first part by avoiding long algebraic variations. Even if his move criticisms are sometimes anachronistic, he has been considerate in generally referring to older games when citing continuations. It must have been tempting to refer to games played in the database era.
The original book held to the hagiographic compiler’s conceit of not showing any losses save for the aforementioned misattribution. The reader would perhaps have gained more of an understanding of the subject’s character if presented with some games in which he struggled or indeed blundered. For example, Michell was crushed in 21 moves by Atkins at Blackpool in 1937 when he was still in his prime, even if he died a year later.
Hansen does not resist presenting Michell’s loss to Capablanca at Hastings in the Victory Congress of 1919. It was clear even then that Capablanca would be one of the next holders of the world championship. The game’s introductory text is misleading: “You don’t often get chances to play the best players in the world, let alone take points from them, even if it is ‘just’ a draw.” The implication is that this game (No. 41) is drawn whereas it is a win for Capablanca. In total the book contains two losses, 14 draws and 51 wins for Michell.
In the majority of the games in the second part, Hansen focuses on blunders by Michell or his opponent. There is no doubt that the top players from a century ago were not as strong as the top players of today, but it seems churlish to show so many games with blunders. Comparatively few moves have been awarded an exclamation mark. Perhaps the book should have been shorter, with higher-quality games. However, on closer inspection, the “blunders” are treated in the modern sense as discussed above. They are not the traditional blunders, bad moves losing the game, that would have been described by a contemporary annotator. Rather, they are blunders in which the game evaluation has switched by a certain margin.
Michell, a follower of Nimzovich, focused on positional advantages; tactical skirmishes and sacrifices were few and far between. A slight exception to this style was found in the game Blake v Michell, Hastings, 29 December 1923:
Conclusion
R. P. Michell should be an inspiration to amateur players with a full-time career. He made a mark in the chess world using solid play, eschewing theoretical or sharp lines. He held his own against the strongest players in the world. Carsten Hansen has brought welcome attention to this forgotten English master. The new book nearly doubles the number of games covered and introduces modern engine analysis. The reader will find many examples of successful middle-game strategies. Above all, we learn that chess is a struggle: one should keep trying to improve the position and make things difficult for the opponent. I recommend this book, especially to club players looking for new chess ideas.
John Foley with the Alexander Cup won by Kingston in 2021/22, 2022/23 and 2023/24
Kingston won the Alexander Cup, the Surrey team knockout tournament, in 1931/32 with Michell.
