Board 1: Peter Clarke 0-1 Giuseppe Valerio
Board 2: James Alexander 0.5-0.5 Gerry Nolan
Board 3: Ray Holland 1-0 Peter Gill
Board 4: Rodrigo Fernandez 0-1 Nigel Staddon
Board 5: John McKeown 1-0 Peter Housden
We went into the match giving away an average of 16 grading points per board, so a draw was not a bad result, though we had opportunities to do better!
My game was the first to finish, with a draw that made lettuce look interesting. A balanced position that turned into nothing and we agreed a draw before both of us fell asleep.
Far more interesting was Giuseppe’s game, where a complex position followed from a pawn sacrifice by Giuseppe and led to all sorts of tricky options. His opponent finally succumbed to a devious attack, which resulted in mate, or massive material loss. So we were looking good for a positive match result at that point.
Next came Nigel’s game, where he had faced a massive pawn storm from early on. Resolute defence resulted in his winning a piece, so he entered a Rook and Pawn ending, but with an extra Bishop. His opponent tried a pawn rush with 3 against 1, but in the process lost his Rook to a cunning tactic. His opponent wasn’t able to make anything of the Pawns and soon succumbed. So we had at least drawn the match.
Peter G was next to finish. He had lots of pressure and ended up with a fairly solid position that looked like being a draw, but sadly, with little time left, he made an error with one of his Pawns and that was enough to seal an eventual win for his opponent.
Finally, Peter H had a difficult game, though he had managed to overcome the loss of the exchange, but ended up two Pawns down, with just Rooks left on the board. Unfortunately, the two extra pawns were split between the two sides of the board and it proved impossible to defend against both of them. So we ended up with a drawn match against strong opponents.
Hoping to see both the devious attack and the cunning tactic in the games section. We’re short of games involving Joe and Nigel so opportunity knocks!
Sorry I blew this Gerry! Hiarcs doesn’t make a single suggestion for an improvement in my play until my 33rd move, after which it disapproves of very other move until on move 45 I blundered and, for the first time in the game, had in its view a worse position. The explanation, despite the 10 second increments, the clock!!