Author Archives: John Foley

About John Foley

John is president of Kingston Chess Club. He teaches chess in a school and a library. He also trains teachers on how to teach chess and sometimes trains the trainers. He is on the Education Commission of the European Chess Union and is a qualified FIDE Instructor.

Kingston wins Alexander Cup for fifth time in a row to break historic record

Kingston v Guildford, final of the Alexander Cup, played at the Peace Memorial Hall, Ashtead on 26 May 2026

From left: John Hawksworth, Silverio Abasolo, Ash Stewart, David Maycock, Peter Lalić, Peter Large, Luca Buanne, Zain Patel, Ameet Ghasi, Mike Healey, John Foley (captain) (photograph: Genc Tasbasi)

Kingston overpowered Guildford by 6½-3½ to win the Alexander Cup, the Surrey team knockout championship, for an unprecedented five times in a row. Guildford put up a good fight and at one point there was panic in the Kingston operations room that the match might go down to tie-break. In the end, however, the higher-rated Kingston team pulled through to win by a comfortable margin.

The match was played during the hottest heatwave ever recorded in May. The temperature in Kingston reached 35C and there was concern about the welfare of the players. Propitiously, Tom Barton from the host club Ashtead had arranged for us to play in one of the rooms at the venue which was more shaded from direct sunlight. James Toon from Guildford brought a large fan. Kingston set up a cool drinks station. We also sprayed water mist over the proceedings much as a priest might spray holy water over the congregation. The overall result was that the playing conditions were blessedly tolerable, if not entirely comfortable.

The final was a repeat of last year when we beat Guildford 8-2. We turned out the same team, replacing Vladimir Li (who is taking a chess sabbatical) with Zain Patel. Guildford were missing some of their stronger players. James Toon had to substitute for Seb Galer, who was delayed due to inevitable travel disruption. Nevertheless, the Guildford top boards put up a tremendous fight. Kingston won the match due to strength in depth, with IM John Hawksworth on bottom board.

The first game to finish was a short draw on board 3 between Peter Lalić and Nigel Povah after an unusual Queen’s Pawn, Mason variation. It was not a drawish draw. Maybe both players felt it was too complicated and too hot to continue.

The next two results were from the lads of King’s College School, Wimbledon. Zain Patel won on board 9 from the position below where he has two pieces for a rook and Luca Buanne drew on board 7. [2-1]

After sunset, the match started to hot up. The tension was mounting, with lots of players short of time. John Hawksworth won a pawn out of the opening with a painfully remembered tactic and then won the exchange to present us with another point. [3-1]

Silverio Abasolo is always a star performer at the big matches – finals and 4NCL. He was White against Tim Foster on board 6 and held the advantage in the position below. Tim was very short of time, which meant Silverio was in his element. Tim was soon playing on the increment and Silverio responded to each move almost immediately, putting huge pressure on his opponent who could not cope, giving Silverio the point. [4-1]

“Was 35C too warm for you, Silverio?” “No, I’m used to 40C in the Philippines.“

So far so good, but things were looking decidedly dodgy for Kingston on several boards. Club chair Peter Andrews expressed the possibility that we might lose on tie-break. A gloom descended through the water mist. The positions for David Maycock and Michael Healey seemed hopeless. The main talking issue was board 4 where Peter Large had gone for a brilliancy prize, having sacrificed the kitchen sink followed by the bath. As captain it was my responsibility to assess Peter’s position to quell the nervous brigade of Kingston followers. Up to now I had kept out of the playing room because I didn’t want to add another 100W body heat. I couldn’t see how Mark Josse was going to defend the onslaught, so I dutifully reported back that Peter was winning. Of this, more below.

Ameet Ghasi delivered the fifth point, which ensured we could not lose (other than on board count!). It was a game of manoeuvre rather than fireworks. Ameet was fresh from winning the annual Beer and Blitz on Saturday at the King’s Head in Moscow Road ahead of a dozen grandmasters and other Kingstonians, including David Maycock, Zain Patel and Stephen Moss. This invitation-only event, sponsored by David Norwood, was set up in 2014 as a celebration in memoriam for those chess players who passed away in the previous year. [5-1]

Only needing half a point to win the match, one might have thought that the remaining players would have been delighted to claim the credit for getting the ball over the line. However, chess players don’t operate like this – as all chess captains complain. In a completely closed position with the pawns locked together, James Toon, the Guildford captain offered a draw. Ash Stewart’s first response was to decline, causing at least two raised eyebrows in the Kingston dressing room. Perhaps this is due to the generally held suspicion that offering a draw is a sign of weakness. Anyhow, this state of affairs was corrected by a closer observation of the position and Ash later obtained the vital half point. Victory was ours! [5½ -1½].

By this time, Peter Large had thrown not only the sink and the bath but also the bathroom cabinet and the soap bottle into the attack. However, it was to no avail. Mark Josse had defended accurately, even if covered in suds. Sometimes defending is easy because the moves are forced whereas the attacker has to find new ideas to keep the momentum going. After the game, I agreed with Peter that he would be eligible for the Near Brilliancy award – a concept that almost works but not quite. Quite a lot of us would qualify for this honour. [5½ -2½]

David Maycock had been looking good as White against Gwilym Price, but lost the exchange somewhere. Gwilym kept his composure as he played out the RvB endgame. David and Gwilym have delicious encounters. David won in April when Kingston secured the Surrey League title and back in November 2025 in the first leg. [5½ -3½]

We witnessed the rare sight of not only FM David Maycock but also IM Peter Large losing a game. David has scored an amazing 16.5/17 this season and Peter a splendid 14.5/17. Statistically, both of these very consistent players losing in the same club match will occur only about once every seven years.

The result of the final game to finish was a surprise. Mike Healey had been in a lost position the exchange down. He looked dejected. He folded up his scoresheet and tossed it aside. He put his pen away. He was waiting to be put out of his misery. When he came into the post-mortem room, I was about to chalk up the result when he announced to general astonishment that he had won. The thing about Mike is that he is a tactician at heart and given a chance of counterplay he can produce a miracle.

Congratulations to the Kingston team on winning the Alexander Cup five times in a row. Looking at the records, we can see another ambition. We have won the Alexander Cup on nine occasions, whereas Redhill have won it 10 times and Wimbledon have won it 13 times. So we need to win the Alexander Cup five more times to be the overall highest performing knockout team in Surrey history.

Kingston Supporters Club

One aspect of this match was the strong turnout of Kingston supporters who doubled as reserves. We showed this support by immediately leaving the venue on move one and seeking sustenance in SuperFish next door. Alan Scrimgour sought the local hostelry, the Leg, to quench his thirst.

When the supporters gathered back at the venue, we realised that we would make a decent Alexander Cup team in our own right. Club researchers are going to investigate whether a club can submit two teams into the Alexander Cup.

John Foley, Kingston Chess Club president and Alexander Cup captain

Stalemates by Kingston players

John Foley explores a couple of sweet stalemates by Kingston players

Stalemates should be listed on the 100 things for a chessplayer to do before they die. They are very rare – around 0.1% of all games – so they need to be savoured. They come in two flavours – sweet and bitter. They are sweet when conjured up by the player who is in a lost position and seeking a last resort. They are bitter when they arise as an unexpected shock to the player who has a dominant position and cruising towards victory.

We take a look at two types of stalemate – when the king is in the corner a knight’s distance away from the opposing queen; and when the queen is sacrificed in order to deflect the opponent’s queen. We show a couple of games with these themes from Kingston players together with a high-level game illustrating the same theme. Even strong players are not immune to stalemate trickery.

Friedrich Baumbach (Germany) v Alan Scrimgour (Scotland)
World Senior Team Championships, Crete, 2017

This result was commendable for Alan as his opponent was a Fide master who had been world correspondence chess champion 1983–89 and East German champion in 1970.

The stalemate theme of the queen being a knight’s move away from the king was also seen in the game played between two Hungarian grandmasters.

Lajos Portisch v Levente Lengyel
4th Costa del Sol, Malaga, February 1964

One of our younger stars is Zain Patel (pictured above), who delayed resigning against a strong international master in the recent Reykjavik Open. Zain was biding his time giving a few desultory checks.

Zain Patel (England) 2062 v Irakli Akhvlediani (Georgia) 2429
Round 5, Reykjavik Open, 28 March 2026

The stalemate theme of forking the king and queen was executed by Neil McDonald in a simultaneous display game against world champion Garry Kasparov in 1986. Neil became an international master in the same year and a grandmaster 10 years later.

Garry Kasparov v Neil McDonald Uppingham, 27 May 1986

If there is any moral to this story, it is don’t resign if you suspect you might be able to snatch stalemate.

Alicia Mason v “Fishfo” Lichess game 4 April 2025

Following the publication of the above positions, club member Alicia Mason (pictured below) sent in the following sweet stalemate. This is another route to stalemate – instead of sacrificing the queen with a royal fork as in the previous example, this is more direct. Once your king is immobilised, your queen is on a mission to self-destruct. One nice aspect of this position is that the variations disclose other stalemate finishes.

John Foley (Kingston) v Nick Edwards (Coulsdon)

Coulsdon v Kingston, semi-final of the Alexander Cup (board 10), played at Coulsdon Chess Club, 84-90 Chipstead Valley Road, Coulsdon on 9 February 2026

Image: Coulsdon Chess Club

Kingston Chess Club has been riding the crest of a wave. We have won the Alexander Cup, Surrey’s premier team knockout competition, for the last four seasons, equalling the longest sequence ever achieved by any club. Now the imperative is to supersede that record and become the first club to win five in a row.

We faced Coulsdon in the semi-final. This was a repeat the 2022 semi-final where I sensibly acted as non-playing captain. This time I performed three roles: chauffeur, team captain and player. I do not recommend this level of commitment because it multiplies the stress levels. At least I was only driving one passenger through dark, rainy Surrey in the rush hour.

Club captain Stephen Moss had taken on the task of organising team logistics. Stephen’s role was to be a driver, provide moral support and be the relaxed if excitable match commentator on the club’s WhatsApp feed. He announced he would never have the guts to play in such an important match – what if he messed up in the final critical game? In a twist of fate, Stephen nevertheless was obliged to join the team when one of our top players was caught somewhere between Croydon and Hades on the railway network. So my own misgivings about taking on multiple roles must pale compared to what Stephen must have felt, as described in his match report.

Club chair Peter Andrews invited me to publish this game reflecting that not all rook endings are the same. I have something of a reputation for my endgame technique – sometimes managing to squeeze out an advantage or avoid a loss. No doubt this is in comparison to my narrow opening repertoire and my preference of avoiding tactical mêlées in the middle game.

I was White against Nick Edwards, who had been in good form lately having drawn with Jasper Tambini the previous week and having won his previous three games against Peter Lee (the former British champion), Paul Dupré (the Surrey ratings officer who beat Chris Briscoe a few weeks ago), and the rising junior Ashwin Gopikrishna. I didn’t know about this run until afterwards, so it didn’t affect my choice of opening. After my customary London System opening, we reached a level endgame which is when it got interesting. I was determined to play a strategic no-risk rook endgame.

Measuring how individuals contribute to a team

A case study based on the performance of the CSC/Kingston first team in the 4NCL in the 2024/25 season, by John Foley

Our first team, having been promoted in 2023/24 to the first division of the Four Nations Chess League (4NCL), managed to stay up and achieved a creditable mid-table seventh place in 2024/25. The season comprises 11 rounds over five weekends of exciting and exhausting chess. The start of the 2024/25 season was ominous as we lost our first three matches. In mid-season, with two wins from six matches, the team management even contemplated the unthinkable – making this our last campaign – but our players rallied and, in a final glorious weekend, we drew one match and won two matches against our rivals to secure our survival.

Ten years ago, I was team manager when (under a different team name) we were last promoted. I kept the players together as a reward for their efforts – allowing them to play the cream of the chess world. Whilst my intentions were noble and regarded as fair by the team members, this was not the mindset to achieve glory. There is no room for complacency at the top; one needs a ruthless attitude. During the course of the 2024/25 season, we strengthened the composition of the team as it became clear that obtaining promotion from division 2 is one thing, but staying up in division 1 is something else completely.

The team managers deserved tremendous credit for keeping the show on the road. Each weekend requires considerable planning in terms of team selection, logistics and accommodation. Complications are multiplied because we also have a second and third team, and not all the teams play on the same weekend nor at the same venue. The first team is eight boards and the lower teams are six boards. Nightmare! We did not default a single game out of the 220 played during the season. The person at the centre of the operation is Kate Cooke, who should receive a medal from the 4NCL organisers.

We have one of the youngest teams in the first division, with an average age of around 21. They liked playing for us and a good team spirit developed both over the dinner table and through watching and analysing the games. The matches were written up by Stephen Moss, who doubled as the shadow team captain and guardian angel, always solving problems in the background and ensuring that we had the right resources to deploy competitive teams.

Four measures

The team’s success depends upon the contribution by its members. We use four measures to analyse different aspects of individual performance:

Commitment
Competitiveness
Combativity
Decisiveness

1. Commitment

Commitment can be measured by the number of games played in the campaign. Playing a game implies that one was available and selected. Three players participated in all 11 matches: Vladyslav Larkin, David Maycock and Supratit Banerjee. Vladyslav, a young man from Ukraine, made a considerable effort to come to the Midlands hotels in which 4NCL matches are played. Supratit was only 10 years old, so his parents also had to make a significant commitment. David Maycock not only played in the 4NCL, but is a vital member of the Kingston first team which won eight trophies. Liwia Jarocka and Roland Bezuidenhout each played nine games, for which they also deserve recognition.

Vladyslav Larkin: The Ukrainian IM played in all 11 matches, showing huge commitment. Photograph: John Saunders

2. Competitiveness

The traditional measure used to recognise performance is the percentage score. To be eligible, a minimum number of games must be played to be fair to other players who may have turned up more often, even if they have not been so successful. Turning up on two weekends out of five seems a reasonable cut-off point – equivalent to four games out of 11. There were two players who played at least five games and obtained a positive percentage score: Supratit Banerjee had 6.5/11 (59.1%) and Liwia Jarocka 5/9 (55.6%). Zain Patel and Ulysse Bottazzi both scored 50% from six games.

Supratit Banerjee: The most competitive player based on his percentage score. Photograph: John Saunders

3. Combativity

The Tour de France has a special prize for the most combative cyclist – the participant who animates the race by their aggression, attacking flair and will to win. The equivalent in chess is to find the players who perform well beyond their rating. This can be measured as the ratio between their actual performance and their expected performance. The expected performance is derived from the difference in the elo ratings of the players. A 100-point gap confers a two-thirds winning chance for the stronger player; a 200 points gap confers a three-quarters winning chance for the stronger player, and so on.

The most combative player was Supratit Banerjee, whose combativity score was 1.34. One way of looking at this is that the average return on a bet across all the games on Supratit would have returned 34%. This was a tremendous performance from a seriously talented junior. Supratit’s best result was in round 3 against the higher-rated Tomasz Sygnowski, in a match in which Kingston were trounced 6.5-1.5 by Wood Green Youth.

Evening blitz: (players from left) David Maycock, Zain Patel, Ulysse Bottazzi, Vladyslav Larkin.
Ulysse was one of the team’s most combative players

Competitiveness and combativity are correlated and Supratit is the most competitive player, so, to share the honours, we can look to the next highest combative player, Ulysse Bottazzi (then rated 2320) achieved a combativity score of 1.18 from six games. Ulysse had a formidable run in rounds 6, 7 and 8, where he beat IM Stefan Macak (2305) and took draws from IM Rajat Makkar (2413), and GM Daniel Alsina Leal (2490).

Eray Kilic: Most combative player over three games

If we want to recognise more players who contributed to the final team standing, or to recognise outstanding performance, we can widen the net to those who played just three games. On this criterion, the most combative player was Turkish IM Eray Kilic, who scored 2.5/3 (83%) on the final weekend to gain a combativity score of 1.42. This was largely on account of having beaten GM Keith Arkell in round 9 in the match which we drew against Cheddleton, one of the stronger teams in the competition (Cheddleton were fifth in the final table).

4. Decisiveness

The measure of decisiveness recognises that some games are more important than others. In a tight match, an individual result can make the crucial difference: converting a lost into a drawn match or a drawn match into a won match. Using an idea by the Nobel prize-winning game theorist Lloyd Shapley, we can identify the player who has made the greatest difference to the team result by winning or drawing in critical matches.

Think of the sort of person who holds their nerve when under a lot of pressure. They pay attention to the balance of games in each match and try to get the right outcome, eg taking a draw to win the match or trying to get a positive result from a hopeless position. With a minimum of four ranking games, we can rank the players who made the most decisive impact:

David Maycock               21.0%
Vladyslav Larkin             20.7%
Liwia Jarocka                  20.6%
Supratit Banerjee          19.9%
Roland Bezuidenhout 17.9%

David Maycock: Most decisive player based on performances in matches where CSC/Kingston either won or drew

David Maycock made an impact when the team won or drew. He scored four points in these six matches, perhaps most valuably in round 10 when there was a small margin between the teams. Liwia was also in the running and might have pipped David, but she participated for one fewer weekend. In the game below, David converts a lost ending to a decisive victory.

To summarise, we have navigated through the team result numbers to identify the valuable contributions made by individual players. We identified the most committed player, the most competitive player, the most combative player and the most decisive player. Putting these together, the player who made the overall greatest impact on the team’s performance – the most valuable player – was Supratit Banerjee.

I am grateful for computational support from Dr Lawrence Liao in preparing this article.

Stuart Fancy v Ken Inwood

Evening Standard 10th Islington Open, played at the Islington Green Youth Centre, Prebend Street, London N1 on 20 December 1974

We don’t have many games of our long-time top Kingston board Ken Inwood. This is a notable game where Ken succumbed to the dynamic Four Pawns Attack of Alekhine’s Defence. The game was originally published in Chess magazine in January 1975. It is sourced from John Saunders’ historic database resource for chess in Britain. The winner Stuart Fancy later moved to Papua New Guinea, where he became a member of their Olympiad team.

Source: CHESS, January 1975, p110

Irresistible and smooth – Peter Large wins 16th All Saints Blitz

Peter Large won the 16th blitz held at the All Saints church in Kingston on 26 November 2025 with 5.5/6

The phrase “irresistible and smooth” refers not only to the style of play of IM Peter Large in winning All Saints Blitz XVI but also to the first prize of a box of Lindor salted caramel chocolates. Peter has now won seven of the 16 All Saints blitzes, just enough to open a confectionery kiosk in the market square for Christmas. He dropped half a point in the penultimate round to Graham Keane, the second-highest rated player after Peter.

The 16th edition of the All Saints Blitz was held in the heritage room of the church, which is a quiet and comfortable space to the side of the church with wooden flooring, panelled cupboards and a vaulted ceiling. It was also warm, which was welcome on a day starting at -2°C.

There were 12 participants in the blitz, including former winners Peter Large, Robin Haldane and Marcus Gosling. The time control was the usual three minutes per game plus seven seconds per move. We treated ourselves to six rounds, which meant each game followed immediately after the other without intervening chit-chat.

Many games swung between comedy and tragedy. Several games were lost on time in a winning position. Tactics were missed given the short time control. In round 1 (photo above), Graham Keane as White had three connected pawns, a sheltered king and a queen against Alan Hayward’s queen and isolated pawn, with the king exposed in the middle of the board. Nevertheless, Graham somehow managed to lose when Black’s king went on the attack.

It was excruciating to watch some endings. On the optimistic side, players can improve simply by studying basic concepts such as the “opposition” in king and pawn endgames. A study of rook endgames is required to disprove the doleful but pragmatic perception of JJ Walsh that “Rook endings a pawn up are generally drawn – but rook endings a pawn down are usually lost.”

Graham won his next three games and faced Peter Large in round 5. The two top-rated players agreed a quick draw after a level opening – the only draw of the entire event.

Round 5: Graham Keane v Peter Large and behind Robin Haldane v Marcus Gosling

All Peter had to do in the final round was avoid defeat against Alan Hayward, who can be a dangerous player. Alan managed to whip up a threatening attack but ran out of time trying to prosecute it. So Peter ended up with 5.5, a clear point ahead of the field. Peter said afterwards that he keeps coming because he enjoys the relaxed atmosphere of the All Saints Blitz.

The winner Peter Large (right) receiving his box of irresistible and smooth chocolates from John Foley

We took a midway break to officially present a cheque for £250 as the club’s donation to the Saxon Kings Embroidery Project. As president of the Kingston club, I handed over the cheque to the Revd Joe Moffatt, vicar of All Saints, thanking the church for hosting the chess and expressing our particular interest in the tapestry of Æthelred the Unready as the unofficial club patron saint. In turn, the vicar said that they were very happy that we used the space as part of the community and brought custom to the café. He noted that we were friendly and flexible.

Revd Joe Moffatt receiving a cheque for £250 from John Foley, President of Kingston Chess Club, for the tapestry project (behind)

Final standings

5½ IM Peter Large (Kingston)
4½ Graham Keane (Crystal Palace)
4 Robin Haldane (Streatham), James Pooler (Epsom)
3 Alan Hayward (Pimlico), Marcus Gosling (Epsom), Peter Roche (Kingston), Dominic Fogg (Kingston)

Full results

List of All Saints winners

Jasper Tambini (Kingston) v David J White (Hounslow)

Hounslow v Kingston, Thames Valley Knockout match played at the Royal British Legion, Hounslow on 10 November 2025

Photograph: Jasper Tambini (top right), having won his game, watches the Moss-Fincham finale

This game was the best of the match between Hounslow and Kingston in the Thames Valley Knockout. It answers the question about the difference between a strong player (over 2000 rating) and a regular club player. Jasper deploys an opening – the Grand Prix Attack – which is full of danger for his unsuspecting opponent. Black allows White to drive a stake at f6 into the king’s position, after which the mating attack is inevitable.

Kingston KO Hounslow in Thames Valley Knockout

Hounslow v Kingston, Thames Valley Knockout match played at the Royal British Legion, Hounslow on 10 November 2025

Photograph: Stephen Moss (right, seated) sets a puzzle for Leon Fincham, while David White (left) and Jasper Tambini (right) look on. David Rowson (centre) is keeping the club updated on WhatsApp

Even though Kingston did not field our strongest side, we still outrated Hounslow by an average of 160 elo per board. Hence the final result of 5-1 was no surprise. As holders of the Thames Valley Knockout Cup, Kingston had a solid launch to the 2025/26 campaign.

The first to finish was David Rowson with a nothing-much-happened draw with Black in the Italian. Next up was Jasper Tambini, who, with White against David J White, executed a classical queen sacrifice against the castled king.

Next to finish was Genc Tasbasi, who exchanged pieces to reach a drawn endgame. I got a neat attack against Vibhush Pusapadi and was well ahead on the clock. My opponent resigned in a hopeless position just before his flag fell. So 3-1 to Kingston with two games remaining. On board 1, Peter Large was squeezing Mateusz Dydak in the endgame such that Mateusz froze with indecision and lost on time, to make it 4-1.

This left Stephen Moss, who had carelessly lost a pawn in the opening – he would argue it was an intuitive gambit – after which he played dynamically and rudely threw away another couple of pawns against Leon Fincham. In the crucial position below, Leon’s queen is under attack and he decided to capture the e3 bishop counter-attacking White’s queen (the counter-intuitive Qb6 is the best move). However, after the rook recaptured, not only was the queen still under attack but so was the bishop on e5, so Black had to lose a piece. The resultant complications ended in yet another frozen-by-indecision flag fall, though Black was lost on the board when his time ran out. That made the score a convincing 5-1.

We look forward to the next round, but discovered that this may not be played until next summer because Richmond and Harrow have busy schedules. Surely a league knockout should be held during the main season. We await developments, with our fixtures secretary on standby.

John Foley

Supratit Banerjee v Simon Williams

Played on 7 August 2025 in round 6 of the 111th British Chess Championship held in Liverpool

Kingston junior Supratit Banerjee made an impression at the 2025 British Chess Championship by finishing with 6/9, just one point behind the winner Michael Adams. He played four grandmasters, beating GM Mark Hebden and GM Simon Williams (game below), drawing with Kingston’s GM Ameet Ghasi, with his only loss to former Russian chess champion GM Nikita Vitiugov in the first round. He also drew with two IMs: Marcus Harvey and Yichen Han.

Tim Wall wrote up the game against Simon Williams, the “Ginger GM” in his daily report from the tournament. Under the heading “Super Supratit”, he noted that Supratit was 11 years old and switched his affiliation from Scotland to England after his family moved to London. “Banerjee displayed excellent endgame skills to outplay ‘Ginger GM’ Simon Williams in an engrossing French Defence struggle.” In truth, this summary does not do full justice to Supratit’s mature play, which also comprised a well-researched opening and a well-judged pawn sacrifice to gain space on the queenside.

Rohan Gadre (Surbiton) v Seth Warren (Kingston)

Rated classical game played at the Richard Mayo Centre, United Reformed Church, Kingston 13 October 2025

Photograph: Seth Warren (top right); Genc Tasbasi (bottom left) playing against Ye Kyaw

Having moved to a new venue, the spacious Richard Mayo Centre at the United Reformed Church in Kingston, the club is able to provide people with the opportunity to play a rated game at a classical time control, 75 minutes per game plus 10 seconds increment per move. Having more time on the clock should mean that one has more time to analyse the position. However, perhaps due to the rise of online chess at much faster time controls, not everyone takes full advantage of this opportunity.

This game was remarkable because Kingston player Seth Warren managed to obtain a draw from being a queen behind against Rohan Gadre. He said afterwards “I still don’t quite believe it! He was winning right until the very end”, describing the game as a swindle. Genc Tasbasi, who was playing next to Seth, enjoyed the encounter saying that his own game took longer because both he and his opponent were following Seth’s.

Seth was psychologically prepared to resign at two points in game, but his resilience and curiosity drove him to play one more move each time. Seth said afterwards “I was very surprised he didn’t just calmly recapture my pawn [on move 23] – it would’ve been far more practical. And again [on move 29] – shifting his rook along the sixth rank, I would’ve just resigned.” He added ” I think I managed to get to him a little; he was blitzing out his moves right up until the end when he realised it was drawn. He finished with about 55 minutes on the clock. Perhaps he should’ve used some of those spare minutes.”

This game is about the consequence of relaxing in a winning position, the need to use up all your time and the necessity of continuing to play precautionary moves.