English Chess Forum

Christopher Kreuzer wrote:Also, Instead of 2.Kg7, what about 2.Kh6? Then, the black queen has to step onto the 'staircase' via h3 and c3! If 2.Kh7, then 3.Qf5+ immediately, which is boring. No staircase at all.

Well, I first thought of 2. Kh6 Qh1+ 3. Kg7 Qa1+ to get on the staircase again, overlooking 2... Bxh1. I did at least then find getting onto it via h3 and c3.

Kh7 just looked intuitively bad, so I didn't really consider it.

I have a suspicion, that if you remove the b5 pawn from the board, there are some stalemate possibilities that mean White may be able to draw the game! White gives up the bishop at some point on the white 'staircase' diagonal, and may be able to get stalemated on f7. I suspect, though, that Black will have a tablebase win in the Q+N vs Q ending (there is no stalemate, so no problem to be composed from this, at least not without further adjustments).

(Yeah, I missed Bxh1 as well!)

Christopher Kreuzer wrote:I'll let someone else start a 'Finals Day' thread when all the finalists are known.

A summary for now:

Open Yorkshire v Lancashire
Minor Suffolk v Lincolnshire
U180 Devon v Middlesex
U160 Lancashire v Yorkshire
U140 Nottinghamshire v Lancashire
U120 Middlesex v Essex
U100 Leicestershire v Warwickshire

(N.B. Not all the results above have been confirmed by the competition controller yet. Some are only based on rumours and posts to this forum, apologies if they turn out to be incorrect! Neil will be busily summarising how many finalists are from each regional union!)

If the above is correct NCCU 5(2); MCCU 4(4); SCCU 3(7); EACU 1(1); WECU 1(0). 2016 figures given in brackets

Christopher Kreuzer wrote:I have a suspicion, that if you remove the b5 pawn from the board, there are some stalemate possibilities that mean White may be able to draw the game!

Lomonosov says no - the ending without the b5 pawn is a win, and sacrificing the bishop just makes the win quicker.

Christopher Kreuzer wrote:U160 Lancashire v Yorkshire

Interesting; without wishing to exacerbate Neil's yearly gripes, the NCCU qualifying matches saw Cumbria beat Yorks who beat Lancs, so you could argue the strongest NCCU team hasn't reached the all NCCU final

Still, should be an interesting final

MartinCarpenter wrote:No problem. It seems like Kent defaulted(!) their semi Vs Lancs, so a Roses clash for the final.

Maybe some story behind it but it doesn't precisely encourage regarding the competitions ongoing health.

Neil Graham wrote:I thought Richard Bates told us on the preceding page that I would think the chances of Lancashire beating Kent (who appear to be trying this year) are virtually non-existent.. They obviously didn't have a strong and stable team.

Richard Bates wrote:Apparently it clashed with a Richard Haddrell memorial which obviously had a significant impact.

Neil Graham wrote:The date of the ECF semi-finals have been known for months in fact years (since 2016) - embarrassingly it looks as if SCCU participation in the finals might be limited to four teams, two of which will contest the U120 final.

This just goes to show how much Richard Haddrell is being missed, at club, county and Union level. He would undoubtedly have spotted the clash and avoided it, had he been around to do so.

I would have entered the memorial tournament had it been on a more suitable date. As it was, I was committed to playing for Surrey U180 against Devon U180.

Not that my presence did Surrey much good.

David Sedgwick wrote:

Richard Bates wrote:Apparently it clashed with a Richard Haddrell memorial which obviously had a significant impact.

Neil Graham wrote:The date of the ECF semi-finals have been known for months in fact years (since 2016) - embarrassingly it looks as if SCCU participation in the finals might be limited to four teams, two of which will contest the U120 final.

This just goes to show how much Richard Haddrell is being missed, at club, county and Union level. He would undoubtedly have spotted the clash and avoided it, had he been around to do so.

I suspect the chances of a memorial being held if he was still with us were minimal though

LawrenceCooper wrote:I suspect the chances of a memorial being held if he was still with us were minimal though

Maybe the chess world should start to do testimonials, rather than memorials? (Or rather, do both, one would be planned, the other if events overtake or precede planning.)

What is not clear is whether there was any attempt to arrange the semi-final on a different weekend?

I lost the argument on the weekend specified at last years U160 prelim which clashed with Great Yarmouth. We were up against Norfolk.
Switched to following weekend but got very late confirmation because the opposition were not on e-mail. Clashed with 4NCL final weekend.

As for our loss against Devon U180s I played my best game of the season. I was suitably prepared with 2 of the 3 weeks before off work & trying to put on a bit of weight (by an afternoon cream tea). There were a few if only moments in a number of post mortems I was looking at.

Now that Surrey have not got a final I may try & find another tournament - to get my monies worth of ECF membership for the first two months of next January's grading list.

If you are worried about the National Stages we should not be. Clearly the ECF consider & agree final stage entries even if not qualified at the Union Stage to assist in having a minimal number of byes. I should imagine that Middlesex U180s will be favourites v Devon if only for the easier journeys.

Nick Grey wrote:What is not clear is whether there was any attempt to arrange the semi-final on a different weekend?

I lost the argument on the weekend specified at last years U160 prelim which clashed with Great Yarmouth. We were up against Norfolk.
Switched to following weekend but got very late confirmation because the opposition were not on e-mail. Clashed with 4NCL final weekend.

As for our loss against Devon U180s I played my best game of the season. I was suitably prepared with 2 of the 3 weeks before off work & trying to put on a bit of weight (by an afternoon cream tea). There were a few if only moments in a number of post mortems I was looking at.

Now that Surrey have not got a final I may try & find another tournament - to get my monies worth of ECF membership for the first two months of next January's grading list.

If you are worried about the National Stages we should not be. Clearly the ECF consider & agree final stage entries even if not qualified at the Union Stage to assist in having a minimal number of byes. I should imagine that Middlesex U180s will be favourites v Devon if only for the easier journeys.

Where there are insufficient entries (ie less than in a competition the ECF may invite extra entries. Surrey will be fined £100 for defaulting and in addition have to pay any expenses incurred by Lancashire.

Neil Graham wrote: Where there are insufficient entries (ie less than eight) in a competition the ECF may invite extra entries. Surrey will be fined £100 for defaulting and in addition have to pay any expenses incurred by Lancashire.

Kent, not Surrey.

Can you imagine the piffy remarks that Richard Haddrell would have made on his SCCU website?
Anyway I cannot see Lancashire even getting close to Yorkshire

Christopher Kreuzer wrote:

Neil Graham wrote: Where there are insufficient entries (ie less than eight) in a competition the ECF may invite extra entries. Surrey will be fined £100 for defaulting and in addition have to pay any expenses incurred by Lancashire.

Kent, not Surrey.

Oops apologies for that!

I'd be careful about assuming Yorkshire will win too easily. Lancs have a fair few people who could in theory show up over that 1/4 final team, and hardly short of motivation! Horner and McPhilips say played the NCCU local match in 2016. Some other possibles, esp with GM not fielding a team. Could be a very strong clash.

We'll see

MartinCarpenter wrote:I'd be careful about assuming Yorkshire will win too easily. Lancs have a fair few people who could in theory show up over that 1/4 final team, and hardly short of motivation! Horner and McPhilips say played the NCCU local match in 2016. Some other possibles, esp with GM not fielding a team. Could be a very strong clash.

We'll see

I saw Jeff the other week in Morrisons; he hasn't actually played any chess over the board for a year or so now, so unlikely

As was discussed before on this forum, Joseph being born after 1974 isn't obviously actually qualified to play for Lancs