As you can see in the table below, our win in a match postponed from earlier in the season means we finish second in division one of the London League to the all-pro Wood Green.
| Team | Matches played | Won | Drawn | Lost | TBD | Games for | Games against | Games diff. | Adjourn. | Match points | Double defaults | Penalty points | Penalty Match points |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Wood Green 1 | 11 | 11 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 95 | 15 | +80 | – | 11 | – | – | – |
| Battersea 1 | 11 | 9 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 72.5 | 37.5 | +35 | – | 9.5 | – | -2 | – |
| Richmond & Twickenham 1 | 11 | 8 | 1 | 2 | 0 | 71.5 | 38.5 | +33 | – | 8.5 | – | – | – |
| Streatham & Brixton 1 | 11 | 5 | 2 | 4 | 0 | 61.5 | 48.5 | +13 | – | 6 | – | – | – |
| Hackney 1 | 11 | 6 | 0 | 5 | 0 | 57.5 | 52.5 | +5 | – | 6 | – | -2 | – |
| Wimbledon 1 | 11 | 5 | 2 | 4 | 0 | 54.5 | 55.5 | -1 | – | 6 | – | -2 | – |
| Athenaeum 1 | 11 | 5 | 1 | 5 | 0 | 59.5 | 50.5 | +9 | – | 5.5 | – | – | – |
| Cavendish 1 | 11 | 2 | 4 | 5 | 0 | 52 | 57 | -5 | – | 4 | 1 | – | – |
| Mushrooms 1 | 11 | 2 | 2 | 7 | 0 | 45 | 65 | -20 | – | 3 | – | -2 | – |
| Drunken Knights 1 | 11 | 3 | 0 | 8 | 0 | 19.5 | 88.5 | -69 | – | 3 | 2 | – | – |
| Kings Head 1 | 11 | 2 | 1 | 8 | 0 | 45 | 65 | -20 | – | 2.5 | – | -2 | – |
| Drunken Knights 2 | 11 | 1 | 0 | 10 | 0 | 23.5 | 83.5 | -60 | – | 1 | 3 | -4 | – |
 |
| Captain Midhun Unnikrishnan (centre) with five other members of Battersea's first team |
Afterwards I was congratulated by at least two of our stronger plays on a smooth positional performance. However, it was anything but …
Spanton (171) - Alistair Morton (122)
Spanish Exchange
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 a6
On the morning of the match, Battersea captain Midhun Unnikrishnan sent an email with the admonition: "Do remember, the NWGC trophy (non-Wood Green championship) is at stake in this match. Every half a point matters."
I took this to be a plea not to try anything crazy as our likely grading advantage should take care of itself, so I played:
4.Bxc6 dxc6 5.d4
The oldest and most thematic approach. White dispenses with subtleties such as 5.0-0 or 5.Nc3 and gets on with creating a kingside pawn-majority.
5...exd4 6.Qxd4 Qxd4 7.Nxd4 Nf6?!
A popular move, but it was condemned almost 80 years ago by Alekhine, who wrote: "This is an inferior move since White's e4 square can easily be protected while the knight has only very small prospects at f6. The correct plan consists of occupying the centre files with the rooks, not reducing the forces (particularly maintaining the two bishops) and gradually restricting the enemy pieces."
8.f3 Bc5?!
Easily the most-popular move in the position, but again Alekhine did not like it: "Now the exchange of one of the bishops is necessary without the slightest positional compensation."
[The quotes are from a collection of Alekhine's training annotations, published by Oxford University Press in 1980 as 107 Great Chess Battles.]
9.Be3 0-0 10.Nf5
"Of course!" - Alekhine.
The move was not so obvious to Lasker, who preferred 10.Nd2 and only drew in a simul given during his 1908 British tour.
10...Bxe3
Alekhine's comment: "10...Bb4+ would be no better; 11.c3 Bf5 12.cb etc with advantage to White."
11.Nxe3
A final word from the fourth world chess champion: "From now onwards any exchange that does not alter the pawn structure will favour White because it will facilitate the exploitation of his extra pawn on the king's side."
While during the game I did not recall Alekhine's exact words, I did remember the general thrust, and I rather stupidly thought the rest of the game would play itself.
11...Be6 12.Nc3
In two previous games in this line I preferred 12.Nd2, which allows queenside castling.
12...Rad8 13.Rd1
The game Alekhine was commenting on, Walter Cruz - Fricis Apsenieks, 1939 Olympiad, saw 13.0-0 (1-0, 46 moves).
13...Rxd1+ 14.Kxd1 Rd8+ 15.Ke2 Kf8 16.Rd1 Rxd1 17.Nxd1
Intending to route the knight via f2 to d3, from where it would eye the important dark squares c5, e5 and f4.
17...c5
Not 17...Bxa2?? 18.b3 etc.
18.a3 b5 19.Nf2 c4
 |
| White to make an instructive mistake |
*****
*****
*****
*****
20.c3?
It is normal for White in the Spanish Exchange to arrange his queenside pawns in a V formation as it makes Black's task of creating a passed pawn extremely difficult (but not impossible, as we shall see). However, there was as yet no need to move the c pawn, and here the main effects of playing c3 are to weaken the d3 square and leave White's queenside very inflexible, in particular making the b pawn a weakness.
Interestingly, Kings Head's top board David Okike (203), going over the game with my opponent, made some comment such as "yes" or "of course" when c3 was played on the board. That only goes to show how natural-looking the move is, but nevertheless it is a mistake and the root cause of White's later problems. A much better plan was to get on with it on the kingside with 20.f4 or 20.e5.
20...Nd7!
The knight heads for a4.
21.f4 f6 22.Nc2 c5
This takes away the c5 square from Black's knight but keeps White's pieces out of d4. Meanwhile Black's knight will continue its odyssey to a4.
23.Ke3 Nb6 24.h3 Ke7 25.Ne1 Kd6 26.g4 Na4 27.Nd1 h5!?
I am not sure Black should be pushing pawns on the kingside, where he is weaker, but my main analysis engines Komodo9 and Stockfish10 are happy with the move, assessing the position as completely equal.
28.f5
A la Lasker's famous win over Capablanca at St Petersburg 1914, as someone was kind enough to comment afterwards.
28...Bf7 29.Kf4 a5 30.Nf3 b4
 |
| A critical moment … Black threatens to win with 31...Nxb2! as 32.Nxb2 loses to 32...bxa3, when Black's cleverly created passer (see note to White's 20th) cannot be stopped |
*****
*****
*****
*****
31.axb4
This averts the immediate crisis, but better was 31.e5+! I rejected it because of 31...fxe5+ 32.Nxe5 Nxb2?? missing that White has 33.Nxb2 bxa3 34.Nbxc4+ Bxc4 35.Nxc4+ and 36.Nxa3.
Instead of 31...fxe5+, the engines prefer 31...Ke7 32.exf6+ gxf6, with rough equality after 33.axb4 or 33.Ne1.
31...cxb4
Now Black has the better pawn-majority, and the only bishop (nearly always superior to a knight in a race between rival majorities).
32.Nd4?!
Trying to keep watch on the queenside and the kingside at the same time, but a knight is not well-suited to such work. The pawn thrust e5+ was still the way to go, although now it is good for no more than equality.
32...Kc5
This may not be the best - the engines cannot agree - but, like many moves for Black here, it is enough for an edge.
33.e5?
Now e5 is a mistake. It seems White had to settle for defence with 33.Nc2 or 33.Ke3.
33...fxe5+?
Returning the compliment - Black wins with 33...bxc3 34.bxc3 Nxc3! 35.Ne6+ Bxe6 36.fxe6 (or 36.Nxc3 fxe5+ 37.Kxe5 Bg8) Nd5+.
34.Kxe5 hxg4 35.hxg4 Nb6?
The final mistake. Correct was 35...bxc3 36.bxc3 Nb6, which the engines reckon is equal, but there is still a lot of play in the position.
36.Ne6+ Bxe6 37.Kxe6
This wins, whereas 37.fxe6 only draws.
37...b3
Nothing saves Black, eg 37...Nd5 38.g5 bxc3 39.Nxc3 Nxc3 40.bxc3 a4 41.f6 gxf6 42.gxf6 a3 43.f7 a2 44.f8=Q+ - the check gives White time to capture the a pawn.
38.g5 a4 39.f6 1-0
My updated Battersea statistics for 2018-19
Event...Colour...Grade...Opponent's Grade...Result
CLL........B..........167...….........196...............…D
LL...…….B...…...167...………..159...………….D
CLL...…..B...…...167...………..161...………….W
CLL...…..B...…...167...………..190...………….D
LL...…….W...…..167...………..161...….………W
CLL...…..W...…..167...………..148...………….D
CLL...…..W...…..167...………..165...………….W
CLL...…..W...…..167...………..160...………….D
CLL...…..W...…..167...………..159...………….D
LL...…….B...…...167...………..168...………….D
LL...…….W...…..171...………..159...………….W
CLL...…..B...…...171...………..198...……….….L
CLL...…..B...…...171...………..169...…………..L
CLL...…..B...…...171...………..196...…………..L
LL...…….B...…...171...………..182...…………..D
CLL...…..W...…..171...………..189...…………..L
LL...…….B...…...171...………..178...…………..L
CLL...…..B...…...171...………..164...…………..D
LL...…….B...…...171...………..188...………….W
CLL...…..B...…...171...………..200...…………..L
LL...…….B...…...171...………..169...…………..L
CLL...…..W...…..171...………..186...…………..D
CLL...…..B...…...171...………..153...…………..D
LL...……W...…...171...………..188...…………..L
LL...……W...…...171...………..159...…………..L
LL...……W...…...171...………..153...…………..L
CLL...…..B...…...171...…….….172...……….....D
LL............B.........171................139..................W
LL...….….B...…..171...…….….214...……....….L
LL...……..B...…..171...………..173...……….….L
LL...…….W...…..171...………..166...…………..L
SL...……..B...…..171...………..167...………….W
LL...…….W...…..171...………..122...………….W
Overall this season for Battersea I have scored +8=12-13 for a grading performance of 164.
In season 2017-18 I scored +10=8-9 for a grading performance of 175.
CLL - Central London League; LL - London League; SL - Summer League
No comments:
Post a Comment