Match Result
| Season | 19/20 |
| Date | Tue 26 Nov 2019 |
| Competition: | Hillingdon League Division 2 |
| Fixture | Hatch End 'B' v Ealing 'B' |
| Result | W: 3-2 |
Scorecard
| Board | Grade | Hatch End 'B' | Ealing 'B' | Grade | |
| 1 | 138 | Grant-Ross, Peter | Simon Healeas | ||
| 2 | 133 | Parsons, Robert | Alastair Johnstone | ||
| 3 | 112 | Harvey, John T | Harry Symeonidis | ||
| 4 | 104 | Connor, Mark | Trevor Bates | ||
| 5 | 102 | Wrigglesworth, Jim I | David Websdale | ||
| Total |
Captains Comment
Last week we played away to Hatch End B and came away with 2-2 and one game adjourned. That game has now been resolved in our favour making it 2-3, completing our fixtures for 2019 with four wins from four matches.
I was unable to follow all the games, so this report is assembled from short summaries supplies by the players.
Simon, on top board with White, played a Catalan, that received an active response from his opponent, striking the centre with a quick d5 and c5. A tense middlegame ensued in which Simon sacrificed a pawn in order to make threats which were well-defended. The subsequent endgame slightly favoured Simon - now having the extra pawn - but he was unable to make progress. Eventually the point was split which was a fair result.
For the second night running, Alastair dropped a piece in the opening. He played the 2...d5 line against the Sicilian Alapin which, when played correctly, is a good active choice for Black. But, unfamiliar with the theory, Alastair lost the thread early on and when faced with the inevitable loss of a piece, elected to give up his queen for two bishops. Although a piece (and a pawn) down for most of the game, Black's minor pieces proved very effective in suppressing White's activity. The reward came just before the first time control when White succumbed to a bishop fork which promised a full return of the lost material. Confronted with the dangerous prospect of an endgame of Q+5P vs. R,2B+3P, White offered the draw, which could anyway be forced by perpetual check.
Harry reports his game with White on board three: I played somehow repressed... I relied on an early positional advantage and didn't increase my pressure to build up some tactical threats. We opened with a rare variation of Queen's pawn game and Iaccepted an early Queens exchange as I had better development and centre. The middlegame continued with a slight advantage for white and a won pawn. Black lost his focus and wasted all of his energy to get the pawn back. After exchanging all heavy pieces, we entered a good/bad bishop endgame that the engine could evaluate as a draw but in human chess that would be really difficult for Black to hold. I finished the game with pawn advances, taking advantage of my kingside pawn majority and calculating all lines until my passed pawn creation. In a totally lost position, my opponent decided to adjourn, however he later conceded without continuation.
Trevor, playing Black on board 4, had a difficult game. In a Closed Variation of the Sicilian Defence there were several tricky exchanges to calculate and after fifteen moves the Queen, Bishop and both Knights had gone with just two half-open files on the board. There followed another thirty moves where black kept the initiative as he pressed hard to find the elusive win. With the position about to be repeated, a draw was agreed.
David, White on bottom board played a Tarrasch variation in reply to a French defence. At the transition from opening to middle game, David had a clear advantage, with Queen, Bishop and Rook threatening black's castled King. But his opponent defended well, inviting exchanges that were too readily accepted, such that the attack evaporated. Down to opposite coloured Bishops and equality of pawns, a draw was agreed.