2022, Biographies, Games Analysis, History, Minor Pieces, Player, Richard James

Minor Pieces 35: William Ward Part 2

June 29, 2022 Richard James 1 Comment

Last time we left William Ward at the time of the 1901 census, where he was staying overnight with one Isidore Wiener.

As we know he played for Richmond at the end of 1902, was he living in our part of London at that time?

But before that, in April 1902 William Ward played a match against rising American star Frank Marshall, who was visiting London at the time. The two players had met the previous year in the Anglo-American Cable Match, where Ward was successful. In this match, however, Marshall won four games to Ward’s two. The American was noted for his attacking skills but in this game he had no answer to his opponent’s kingside attack. (As usual, you can click on any move and a pop-up window will appear, enabling you to play through the game.)

[pgn]

[Event “Match Marshall-Ward +4-2=0”]
[Site “London”]
[Date “1902.??.??”]
[Round “4”]
[White “Marshall, Frank James”]
[Black “Ward, William”]
[Result “0-1”]
[ECO “D55”]
[Annotator “Tactical Analysis 5.2 (1s)”]
[PlyCount “82”]
[EventDate “1902.??.??”]
[EventType “match”]
[EventRounds “6”]
[EventCountry “ENG”]
[SourceTitle “EXT 2002”]
[Source “ChessBase”]
[SourceDate “2001.11.25”]
[SourceVersion “1”]
[SourceVersionDate “2001.11.25”]
[SourceQuality “1”]

1. d4 d5 2. c4 e6 3. Nc3 Nf6 4. Bg5 Be7 5. Nf3 Nbd7 6. e3 O-O 7. Rc1 b6 8. cxd5
exd5 9. Bd3 Bb7 10. O-O c5 11. Bb1 Ne4 12. Bf4 {D55: Queen’s Gambit Declined:
4 Bg5 Be7: Lines without …h6 and 6…h6 7 Bxf6.} Rc8 13. Qc2 $146 ({
Predecessor:} 13. Qe2 Bf6 14. Rfd1 Re8 15. Qd3 g6 16. Nb5 a6 17. Nd6 Nxd6 18.
Bxd6 c4 19. Qd2 b5 {1/2-1/2 (29) Tarrasch,S-Burn,A Vienna 1898}) 13… f5 14.
Rcd1 {White is slightly better.} Ndf6 (14… g5 $5 15. Be5 Nxc3 16. bxc3 g4 $15
) 15. dxc5 (15. Qa4 $5) 15… Bxc5 (15… bxc5 $5 16. Qb3 Qb6 $11) 16. Nd4 Bxd4
17. exd4 Nxc3 18. bxc3 Ne4 19. Bd2 {Loses the game.} Ba6 20. Rfe1 Qh4 21. g3 $2
(21. f3 {was the only chance.} Qf2+ 22. Kh1 Nxc3 23. Bxc3 Qxc2 24. Bxc2 Rxc3
25. Ba4) 21… Qh5 $19 {aiming for …f4!} 22. Qb2 $2 (22. c4 Bxc4 23. Rc1)
22… Be2 ({And not} 22… Qf3 23. Be3 $17) 23. Rc1 {[#]} Nxf2 $1 {( -> …Qf3)
} 24. h4 Qf3 25. Kh2 Qg4 (25… Ng4+ $142 26. Kh3 Nf2+ 27. Kh2 Nd3 28. Rg1 Nxb2
29. Bf4 Nd3 30. Bxd3 Bxd3 31. Rg2 Be4 32. Rcc2 Bxc2 33. Rxc2 Rfe8 34. Be5 Qd1
35. Rg2 Rxc3 36. Rg1 Rc2+ 37. Rg2 Rec8 38. Bf4 Rxg2+ 39. Kxg2 Rc2+ 40. Bd2
Rxd2+ 41. Kh3 Qh1#) 26. Bf4 {Black is clearly winning.} Qh3+ (26… Rce8 $142
27. Rxe2 Rxe2 28. Qxe2 Qxe2) 27. Kg1 {[#]} Bf3 $1 28. Kxf2 Qg2+ 29. Ke3 Qxb2
30. Kxf3 Rxc3+ 31. Rxc3 Qxc3+ 32. Re3 Qxd4 {Hoping for …Qd1+.} 33. Bc2 Rc8
34. Bxf5 Rc3 35. h5 Rxe3+ 36. Bxe3 Qd1+ 37. Kf4 Qxh5 {Strongly threatening …
Qh6+.} 38. Be6+ Kf8 {…Qh6+ is the strong threat.} 39. Bg4 Qf7+ 40. Ke5 Qc7+
41. Kf5 g6+ {Weighted Error Value: White=1.26/Black=0.64} 0-1

[/pgn]

This season also witnessed William Ward’s first success in the City of London Chess Club Championship. It appears that he and Thomas Francis Lawrence shared first place, but that Ward won the play-off.

In the summer of 1904 Ward played a match in London against George Edward Wainwright, winning by a score of 5½-3½.

In this game Wainwright had the better of the opening, but, playing too fast, perhaps, miscalculated on moves 30 and 31, giving Ward the chance of a crisp finish.

[pgn]

[Event “Ward v Wainwright match”]
[Site “?”]
[Date “1904.08.??”]
[Round “?”]
[White “Wainwright, George Edward”]
[Black “Ward, William”]
[Result “0-1”]
[ECO “B73”]
[Annotator “Tactical Analysis 5.2 (1s)”]
[PlyCount “70”]
[SourceVersionDate “2022.06.29”]

1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Nc3 g6 4. d4 cxd4 5. Nxd4 Bg7 6. Be3 d6 7. Be2 Nf6 8.
O-O O-O 9. h3 Bd7 10. Qd2 Nxd4 11. Bxd4 Bc6 12. Bf3 {[#]} Ne8 $146 {B73:
Sicilian Dragon: Classical System without 9 Nb3.} ({Predecessor:} 12… Qc7 13.
Rfe1 Rfd8 14. Nd5 Bxd5 15. exd5 Ne8 16. Bxg7 Nxg7 17. c3 e5 18. dxe6 fxe6 19.
Re3 Rd7 20. Bg4 {1-0 (64) Tarrasch,S-Von Popiel,I Monte Carlo 1902}) 13. Rad1
e5 14. Be3 f5 {White is better.} 15. Bc5 Rf6 16. Ba3 Bf8 17. Nd5 Rf7 18. exf5
gxf5 19. b3 Qh4 20. Kh2 {Hoping for g3.} ({Don’t take} 20. c4 Nc7) 20… Bh6
21. Qe1 Bg7 22. g3 Qh6 23. Bc1 Qe6 24. c4 Nf6 25. Nxf6+ Rxf6 26. Bd5 Bxd5 27.
Rxd5 f4 28. gxf4 {Threatens to win with Qe4.} Raf8 (28… Rh6 $2 29. f5 Qxf5
30. Bxh6 Bxh6 31. Rg1+ (31. Rxd6 Kf7 $16) 31… Kf7 32. Qf1 (32. Rxd6 Bf4+ 33.
Rg3 Rf8 $16)) 29. Rg1 {Qe4 is the strong threat.} Kh8 30. Be3 {[#] Black must
now prevent fxe5.} Bh6 31. fxe5 $2 {Now White is beyond hope.} (31. f3 $11)
31… Rf3 $19 32. Rg3 Bxe3 33. fxe3 Rf1 34. Qc3 R8f2+ 35. Rg2 Qg6 {Weighted
Error Value: White=0.81/Black=0.16 (very precise)} 0-1

[/pgn]

The inaugural British Chess Championships took place in Hastings in 1904, giving masters an amateurs alike the chance for a two week summer chess holiday. William Ward didn’t play that year, but was selected for the Championship in Southport the following year.

Ward started slowly, losing his first three games, followed by a draw with Blackburne, before winning six in a row, finishing with a draw against Atkins, who ran out the clear winner on 8½/11. Ward’s score of 7 points was enough for a share of second place with another forgotten player, Charles Hugh Sherrard.

In this game he again demonstrates his affinity with the Queen’s Gambit.

[pgn]

[Event “British CF-02 Championship”]
[Site “Southport/ Merseyside”]
[Date “1905.08.21”]
[Round “7”]
[White “Ward, William”]
[Black “Wahltuch, Victor Leonard”]
[Result “1-0”]
[ECO “D55”]
[Annotator “Tactical Analysis 5.2 (1s)”]
[PlyCount “69”]
[EventDate “1905.08.14”]
[EventType “tourn”]
[EventRounds “11”]
[EventCountry “GBR”]
[SourceTitle “EXT 2017”]
[Source “ChessBase”]
[SourceDate “2016.10.25”]
[SourceVersion “1”]
[SourceVersionDate “2016.10.25”]
[SourceQuality “1”]

1. d4 d5 2. c4 e6 3. Nc3 Nf6 4. Bg5 Nbd7 5. e3 Be7 6. Nf3 O-O 7. Bd3 b6 8. cxd5
exd5 9. Ne5 {White is more active.} Bb7 {Prevents Nc6. D55: Queen’s Gambit
Declined: 4 Bg5 Be7: Lines without …h6 and 6…h6 7 Bxf6.} 10. f4 Ne4 {
[#] …Nxe5 is the strong threat.} 11. Bxe7 Qxe7 {White has an edge.} 12. O-O
f5 $146 ({Predecessor:} 12… c5 13. Bxe4 dxe4 14. Nxd7 Qxd7 15. dxc5 Qc6 16.
cxb6 Rfd8 17. Qe2 Qxb6 18. Rfd1 Rd3 19. Rxd3 exd3 {1-0 (25) Pillsbury,H-Von
Gottschall,H Munich 1900}) 13. Rc1 Nxe5 14. dxe5 {Hoping for Bxe4.} Nxc3 15.
bxc3 ({Reject} 15. Rxc3 g6 $11) 15… c5 16. h3 Rac8 17. Kh2 Rc6 18. Be2 {
[#] Strongly threatening Bf3.} Rh6 19. Bf3 Rd8 20. Qc2 Bc8 21. g3 {aiming for
Rcd1.} c4 22. Rcd1 Qc5 23. Rd4 Rc6 24. Rfd1 {White is clearly winning.} Be6 25.
e4 fxe4 26. Bxe4 dxe4 (26… h6 $142 27. f5 Bf7) 27. Rxd8+ $18 Kf7 28. Qxe4
Qf2+ 29. Qg2 Qxg2+ 30. Kxg2 {KRR-KRB} Rc5 31. g4 g6 32. Kf3 Ra5 33. R1d2 Ra3
34. Ke4 Rxc3 35. f5 {Black got outplayed after the opening. Weighted Error
Value: White=0.24 (precise) /Black=0.56} 1-0

[/pgn]

The 1905-6 edition of the City of London Chess Club Championship was another big success for William Ward, his score of 10½/13 putting him two points clear of the field.

By now he had developed notable skill in building up a slow attack from a closed position. He missed the chance of a brilliancy in this game, but his opponent gave him another, simpler, opportunity a few moves later.

[pgn]

[Event “City of London CC Championship”]
[Site “?”]
[Date “1906.??.??”]
[Round “?”]
[White “Shoosmith, Hector William”]
[Black “Ward, William”]
[Result “0-1”]
[ECO “D60”]
[Annotator “Tactical Analysis 5.2 (1s)”]
[PlyCount “86”]
[SourceVersionDate “2022.06.10”]

1. d4 d5 2. c4 e6 3. Nc3 Nf6 4. Bg5 Nbd7 5. e3 Be7 6. Nf3 O-O 7. Bd3 (7. Rc1 a6
8. cxd5 exd5 9. Bd3 Re8 10. O-O c6 11. h3 Ne4 12. Bf4 Ndf6 13. Ne5 Bf5 14. Ne2
Nd6 15. Nxc6 bxc6 16. Bxd6 Bxd3 17. Bxe7 Bxe2 18. Bxd8 Bxd1 19. Bxf6 {0-1 (72)
Shoosmith,H-Ward,W Southport/ Merseyside 1905}) 7… a6 {[#]} 8. c5 $146 {
D60: Queen’s Gambit Declined: Classical: Unusual White 7th moves.} ({
Predecessor:} 8. Qc2 dxc4 9. Bxc4 c5 10. dxc5 Qa5 11. O-O Bxc5 12. Rfd1 b5 13.
Bd3 Bb7 14. Bxf6 Nxf6 15. Ne4 Bxe4 16. Bxe4 Rac8 17. Qb1 Qb6 {0-1 (55)
Nachtikal,F-Sika,T Prague 1905}) 8… Re8 9. O-O c6 10. h3 {White is better.}
Nf8 11. Ne5 N6d7 12. Bxe7 Qxe7 13. f4 f6 14. Ng4 e5 15. fxe5 fxe5 {White
should prevent …e4.} 16. b4 e4 ({Worse is} 16… h5 17. Nf2 $11) 17. Be2 Qg5
{Against Rf5. Strongly threatening …h5.} 18. Qd2 Ng6 19. Rf2 h5 20. Nh2 Nf6
21. Kh1 Nh4 22. Rg1 Nf5 23. Nf1 Rf8 24. g3 Bd7 25. a4 Rf7 26. a5 Raf8 {White
must now prevent …h4.} 27. Nd1 h4 (27… Qg6 $19 {is more deadly. Hoping for
…Nh6.} 28. Rgg2 Ne7) 28. g4 $17 Ng3+ 29. Nxg3 hxg3 30. Rfg2 (30. Rxg3 $11 Qh4
31. Rfg2) 30… Qh4 31. Rxg3 Nh5 32. Qe1 {[#]} (32. gxh5 $14 {was forced to
keep a grip.} Bxh3 33. Bxa6 $1 Bf5+ 34. Qh2 Qxh2+ 35. Kxh2 bxa6 36. Nf2) 32…
Nxg3+ $2 $40 {Black has strong attack.} (32… Bxg4 $1 $19 {and Black stays
clearly on top.} 33. Kh2 (33. Bxg4 $2 Rf1 $19) 33… Nxg3 34. Bxg4 Nf5 35. Qxh4
Nxh4) 33. Qxg3 Qh6 34. Kg2 {Prevents Rf3.} Rf3 35. Bxf3 Rxf3 36. Qh2 (36. Qb8+
$11 {and White stays safe.} Kh7 37. Rh1) 36… Qh4 $19 37. Rh1 $2 {[#]} (37.
Qb8+ $15 Kf7 38. Qh2) 37… Bxg4 $1 {Black is clearly winning.} 38. Qb8+ Rf8
39. hxg4 {[#]} Qxh1+ $1 40. Kxh1 Rxb8 41. Kg2 Rf8 42. Nc3 Rf3 43. Nd1 Kf7 {
Weighted Error Value: White=0.82/Black=0.56} 0-1

[/pgn]

At some point round about 1905 Ward seems to have moved to North London, joining the Hampstead Chess Club, for whom he played successfully in the London League in the 1905-6 season. You can see him here, second from the right in the row of gentlemen seated on chairs.

The summer of 1906 was quiet: perhaps he was too busy with his legal work to take part in the British Championships in Shrewsbury. In the 1906-7 City of London Championship he failed to repeat the previous year’s success, sharing 3rd place behind the runaway winner George Edward Wainwright, with Hector William Shoosmith in second place.

William Ward didn’t have far to travel for the 1907 British Championships, which took place in Crystal Palace, but he failed to repeat his success of two years previously: this time he only managed 3½/11, sharing the tournament basement.

The 1907-8 championship of the City of London club provided a hat trick for players associated with Richmond Chess Club. Thomas Francis Lawrence won, with Ward and Wainwright taking the places.

In this game Ward experimented with what would much later become known as the Taimanov Variation of the Sicilian Defence, winning when his opponent failed to refute his unsound combination.

[pgn]

[Event “City of London CC Championship”]
[Site “?”]
[Date “1908.??.??”]
[Round “?”]
[White “Mongredien, Alfred Wornum”]
[Black “Ward, William”]
[Result “0-1”]
[ECO “B40”]
[Annotator “Tactical Analysis 5.2 (1s)”]
[PlyCount “60”]
[SourceVersionDate “2022.06.10”]

1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 e6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Nf6 5. Bd3 Nc6 6. Nxc6 {[#]} dxc6 $146 ({
Predecessor:} 6… bxc6 7. O-O d5 8. exd5 exd5 9. Bf4 Bd6 10. Bxd6 Qxd6 11. Nd2
O-O 12. h3 Re8 13. c3 Qf4 14. Re1 Rxe1+ 15. Qxe1 Bd7 16. Nf1 Re8 {1/2-1/2 (26)
Jacob,F-Blackburne,J Ostend 1907}) 7. O-O e5 8. Bg5 h6 {B40: Sicilian: 2…e6,
Unusual lines.} 9. Bh4 Bc5 (9… g5 $5 10. Bg3 Bd6 $14) 10. Nd2 Qe7 {The
position is equal.} 11. h3 g5 12. Bg3 g4 13. Bh4 Rg8 $36 {Black has the
initiative.} (13… gxh3 $2 14. Qf3 hxg2 15. Rfe1 $18) 14. Kh2 gxh3 15. gxh3
Bxh3 $2 {Black has more active pieces.} 16. Kxh3 $4 (16. Qf3 $18
) 16… Qe6+ $19 {Black is clearly winning.} 17. Kh2 {[#]} Ng4+ $1 18. Kh1 {[#]
} Nxf2+ $1 19. Rxf2 Bxf2 20. Qf3 {Inhibits Qh3+.} Bxh4 21. Bc4 Qd7 {Strongly
threatening …0-0-0.} 22. Rf1 O-O-O 23. Nb3 Rg3 24. Qf5 Qxf5 25. Rxf5 f6 26.
Kh2 Re3 27. Bd3 Rg8 28. Nd2 Bg3+ 29. Kh1 Bf4 30. Bf1 {Prevents Rh3+.} Reg3 {
Weighted Error Value: White=0.66/Black=0.38} 0-1

[/pgn]

The 1908 British Championship took place in Tunbridge Wells, and, despite his result the previous year, he was again selected for the championship itself.

In the first two rounds Ward scored 2/2 with the Sicilian Dragon. It’s clear from this, admittedly not entirely accurate, game that he was well aware of the latent power of the fianchettoed bishop.

[pgn]

[Event “British CF-05 Championship”]
[Site “Tunbridge Wells/ Kent”]
[Date “1908.08.10”]
[Round “1”]
[White “Michell, Reginald Pryce”]
[Black “Ward, William”]
[Result “0-1”]
[ECO “B75”]
[Annotator “Tactical Analysis 5.2 (1s)”]
[PlyCount “88”]
[EventDate “1908.08.10”]
[EventType “tourn”]
[EventRounds “11”]
[EventCountry “GBR”]
[SourceTitle “EXT 2017”]
[Source “ChessBase”]
[SourceDate “2016.10.25”]
[SourceVersion “1”]
[SourceVersionDate “2016.10.25”]
[SourceQuality “1”]

1. e4 c5 2. d4 cxd4 3. Nf3 Nc6 4. Nxd4 g6 5. Nc3 Bg7 6. Be3 d6 7. Qd2 Nf6 8. f3
Bd7 9. Nb3 $146 {B75: Sicilian Dragon: Yugoslav Attack, Miscellaneous.} ({
Predecessor:} 9. Nd5 O-O 10. Be2 Nxd5 11. exd5 Ne5 12. h3 Qc8 13. b3 Be8 14.
O-O Nd7 15. Rad1 Nf6 16. c4 Bd7 {1/2-1/2 (56) Krause,O-Moller,J Copenhagen 1907
}) 9… O-O 10. Nd5 Ne8 11. c4 {White is better.} e6 12. Nc3 f5 13. exf5 gxf5
14. O-O-O Ne5 15. f4 Ng4 16. h3 Nxe3 17. Qxe3 Qf6 18. Kb1 Bc6 19. Nd4 e5 20.
fxe5 dxe5 21. Nxc6 bxc6 22. c5 Rb8 {Threatens to win with …Kh8.} 23. Bc4+ Kh8
24. Bb3 a5 25. Rd7 e4 26. Rhd1 Rb4 (26… Bh6 $5 27. Qf2 Bg7 $14) 27. Ra7 f4
28. Qf2 Qf5 29. Rxa5 Nc7 {White must now prevent …f3.} 30. Qc2 Ne6 {Hoping
for …Nd4.} 31. Bxe6 (31. Ra4 $14 {stays ahead.} Rxa4 32. Bxa4) 31… Qxe6 $19
32. Ra7 Qc4 $2 (32… f3 $19 33. a3 Rb3 34. Rxg7 Kxg7 35. Nxe4 Rfb8 36. gxf3 (
36. Ng5 $2 Rxb2+ 37. Qxb2+ Rxb2+ 38. Kxb2 Qe2+ 39. Kc1 Qe3+ 40. Kc2 fxg2 $19)
36… Rxa3) 33. Na4 $2 {[#]} (33. a3 $11 {and White has nothing to worry.} Rb3
34. Rdd7 $1 Qxc3 35. Rxg7 Qxc2+ 36. Kxc2) 33… Rfb8 $2 (33… f3 $1 $19 34.
gxf3 exf3) 34. Qxc4 $11 Rxc4 35. Rdd7 Bf8 36. Rxh7+ Kg8 37. Rab7 $2 Rxb7 $19 {
Black is clearly winning.} 38. Rxb7 Rxa4 {Endgame KRB-KR} 39. Rc7 Ra6 40. Rc8
Kf7 41. h4 Bxc5 42. h5 Bd4 {And now …f3 would win.} 43. h6 Kg6 44. Re8 e3 {
Weighted Error Value: White=0.93/Black=0.90} 0-1

[/pgn]

British Championship, Tunbridge Wells, round 7, 17 August 1908: from left to right Isidor Gunsberg, vs Francis Lee (W), William Ward (W) vs Henry Atkins, and Joseph Blackburne vs Reginald Michell (W). Photo from BCM, Sept 1908, p372

This was the game which, in some ways, defined William Ward’s life. He exceeded the time limit on move 19 (the first time control was, strange as it might seem by today’s standards, on move 20) in a clearly better position. Atkins eventually won the title, finishing on 8/11, with Ward in second place on 6½/11. If he’d won the game, the title would have been his. Unlucky: perhaps he was distracted by the photographer!

The 1908-9 City of London Championship gave Ward his third title with an impressive score of 15/17 (no draws!), including wins over his nearest rivals, Blake, Wainwright and Edward Guthlac Sergeant, all players connected at some time in their lives with the Kingston area.

The 1909 British Championships took place in Scarborough: Atkins and Blake shared first place on 8½/11, with the Leicester born schoolmaster Atkins winning the tie-break. William Ward took third place a point behind, again, losing a game on time on move 19, this time against Blake. Admittedly on this occasion he stood rather worse. One wonders what was the reason for his problems with clock handling in these games.

Here’s a long and exciting game against the young Fred Yates, in which he opened 1. e4 with White and met 1. e4 with e5 rather than the Sicilian.

[pgn]

[Event “British CF-06 Championship”]
[Site “Scarborough/ North Yorkshire”]
[Date “1909.08.17”]
[Round “8”]
[White “Yates, Fred Dewhirst”]
[Black “Ward, William”]
[Result “1/2-1/2”]
[ECO “C87”]
[Annotator “Tactical Analysis 5.2 (1s)”]
[PlyCount “144”]
[EventDate “1909.08.09”]
[EventType “tourn”]
[EventRounds “11”]
[EventCountry “ENG”]
[SourceTitle “EXT 2006”]
[Source “ChessBase”]
[SourceDate “2005.11.24”]
[SourceVersion “1”]
[SourceVersionDate “2005.11.24”]
[SourceQuality “1”]

1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5 a6 4. Ba4 Nf6 5. O-O Be7 6. Re1 d6 7. d4 Nd7 8. c3
O-O 9. Nbd2 {C87: Closed Ruy Lopez: Steinitz-type lines after 6 Re1 d6.} Bf6
10. Nf1 (10. d5 Ne7 $11) 10… Nb6 $146 ({Predecessor:} 10… Ne7 11. Ng3 Nb6
12. Bb3 Bd7 13. Nh5 Ng6 14. Nxf6+ gxf6 15. Bh6 Re8 16. h3 Qe7 {1-0 (75) Jacob,
F-Shoosmith,H Ostend 1907}) 11. Bc2 {White is better.} Bg4 12. d5 Ne7 13. Ne3
Bd7 14. b3 Kh8 15. h3 g6 16. Kh2 Ng8 17. Qe2 Bg7 18. Ng1 f5 19. c4 f4 20. Nd1
Nf6 21. b4 g5 22. g4 h5 23. f3 Rf7 24. a4 Bf8 25. Nf2 Rh7 {Hoping for …Nxc4!}
26. Bb2 (26. a5 $5 Nc8 27. Kg2 $15) 26… Qe8 27. Rec1 Bxa4 (27… Nxa4 28.
Bxa4 Bxa4 29. Kg2 $17) 28. Bd3 Bd7 29. c5 Nc8 30. Ra3 Qg6 31. c6 bxc6 32. dxc6
Be6 33. Bxa6 Nb6 34. Bd3 Rxa3 35. Bxa3 Qh6 36. Kg2 hxg4 37. Nxg4 Qg7 38. Bb2
Nh5 39. Bc3 Qf7 40. Be1 Ng7 (40… Ng3 $6 41. Bxg3 fxg3 42. Qe3 $11) 41. b5
Bxg4 42. fxg4 Ne6 43. Bf2 {Active counter play!} f3+ 44. Qxf3 Nf4+ 45. Kf1 Be7
$2 (45… Qa2 $16) 46. Be2 Bd8 47. Bxb6 cxb6 48. Ra1 {Prevents Qa2.} Bc7 49.
Ke1 Kg7 50. Bf1 Qe7 51. Qa3 Kg6 52. Rd1 Rh8 53. Rd2 Rf8 54. Bc4 Qf6 55. Kd1 Rd8
56. Rf2 Qh8 57. Ra2 {aiming for Qf3.} Qg7 $2 (57… d5 $16 58. Bxd5 Nxd5 59.
exd5 e4) 58. Bd5 Rf8 59. Bc4 Qf6 60. Rf2 Qh8 61. Qa7 Qg7 62. Rd2 {Against d5}
Rh8 63. Rh2 $2 (63. Qa3 $18) 63… Rd8 {[#] …d5 is the strong threat.} (63…
d5 $5 64. Bb3 (64. exd5 e4 $17) (64. Bxd5 Nxd5 65. exd5 Qf7 $11) 64… Qe7 $11)
64. Rd2 {Against d5. Threatens to win with Qa3.} Rh8 65. Rf2 $2 (65. Kc2 $18)
65… Rd8 (65… d5 $5 66. Bb3 (66. exd5 e4 $17) (66. Bxd5 Qe7 $11) 66… Qe7
$11) 66. Ne2 {Strongly threatening Bd5. The board is on fire.} d5 $1 {The
position is equal.} 67. Nxf4+ exf4 68. Bxd5 Qd4+ 69. Rd2 Qg1+ 70. Kc2 {[#] And
now Qa3 would win.} Qc5+ 71. Kb1 Qxb5+ 72. Kc1 Qc5+ {Decoy. A wild game.
Weighted Error Value: White=0.49/Black=0.54} 1/2-1/2

[/pgn]

As we move towards 1910 we can summarise William Ward’s chess career up to this point.

Now 42 years old, he was generally recognised as one of the strongest players in the country, having represented his country in five Anglo-American cable matches, having played four times in the British Championship, finishing in second place twice and in third place once, and having won the prestigious City of London Chess Club Championship on four occasions.

He played regularly for Middlesex, and occasionally for other counties, his home county of Hertfordshire, and also appearing on occasion for Kent and Sussex. As well as playing regularly for City of London he represented a number of other clubs: Richmond, Hampstead and West London, for example, as well as the National Liberal Club: was that an indication of his political views, I wonder?

He was increasingly being called upon to give talks and simultaneous displays, so seems to have been a well respected member of the chess community as well as a formidable player.

Rod Edwards’ retrospective 1909 rating list makes interesting reading: the leading English players, according to his calculations (and excluding the English-born Horatio Caro, who played most of his chess in Germany) were:

21. Atkins 2508
28. Burn 2485
56. Ward 2428
66. Richmond 2411
69. Blackburne 2405
79. Yates 2392
88. Blake 2384
92. Thomas 2379
101. Lawrence 2375
102 Gunsberg 2374
104 Shoosmith 2371
108 Wainwright 2362
120 Griffith 2354
123 Wahltuch 2353
131 Michell 2350

The veterans Burn, Blackburne and Gunsberg had been world class players in their day, but their peak had been back in the 1880s. Yates and Thomas, on the other hand, would only reach their peak in the 1920s.

The unfamiliar name here might be George William Richmond, at this point about to move to Scotland, who was strong but played in very few competitions.

Join me next time to find out what happened next to William Ward in the last of this series of articles.

Acknowledgements:

ancestry.co.uk

findmypast.co.uk

BritBase

EdoChess (Ward’s page here)

British Chess Magazine

The City of London Chess Club Championship (Roger Leslie Paige): thanks to Paul McKeown for the book.

Graham Stuart for information on Ward’s games against Hampshire.

2022, Reviews, Richard James, Thinkers Publishing, Tournament

Tata Steel Chess Tournament 2021

June 28, 2022 Richard James 2 Comments

From the publishers’ blurb:

“That such a fine achievement should be immortalized, is beyond dispute. But who will pick up the gauntlet? We live in a volatile world where the Internet is dominant and when a tournament is over, the next one is already at the door. No time for reflection and historical awareness? Yet there was someone who had followed the tournament with great interest. The English grandmaster Daniel Fernandez, who also publishes for ChessPublishing came up with the idea of thoroughly examining all the games from this tournament. He did not take any chances in doing so. In addition to the various sources he found on the Internet, he of course used the strongest engines available at the moment. He also had engines in the cloud patiently calculate various positions. Together with his source research and his own insights, he has created a unique compilation of chess-technical material that is unprecedented.

In doing so, Fernandez has painted a fantastic picture of the opening variants that were on the board in this tournament. He has done a thorough research of the ins and outs of the various variants and placed them in a broader perspective. And it must be said that the organization was kind to him by providing an interesting field of players who gave it their all every round. This resulted in many nice confrontations with extremely interesting opening theory! That Fernandez did not get away with the middle game and the many fascinating endgames was clear from a first estimate of the amount of material when it had to be converted to the format of this book. Initially, we ended up with almost 900 pages! That is far too much and therefore drastic cuts had to be made. Hundreds of (analysis) diagrams have been dropped, small side notes are no longer in the book and sometimes – pain in the heart – the trees of variations had to be cut back. That only happened, by the way, when the ingenious structure became so extensive that it would be hard to follow for “mere mortals”. It is being considered whether this can be made available digitally at a later date, and the moment that it is, we will of course put Fernandez’s entire analytical work on offer! IM Herman Grooten, December 2021 ”

GM Daniel Fernandez (born 1995) is an English grandmaster with a slightly unusual approach to chess: at once mischievous and hardworking, and equally comfortable in tactical positions or dry endgames. His style fits the Modern perfectly and he has played it with success for almost a decade. He is a past holder of the British under-18 and under-21 titles, and the winner (or joint winner) of many open tournaments, such as Paracin 2017, Pula 2018, Ghent 2019 and the New Zealand Open 2020. Daniel also writes and commentates frequently, and is a columnist of the 1.e4 section on ChessPublishing.com. This is his third book for Thinkers Publishing, the Modernized Caro-Kann and Modern Defense were his first two and world wide acclaimed as the best you can get.

GM Daniel Fernandez, 2019 British Championships, Torquay. Courtesy of John Upham Photography

Chess book collectors will look back with fondness on the days when competitions between leading players were often commemorated by tournament books. Hastings 1895. New York 1924. The 1953 Candidates’ Tournament. Everyone with a passion for chess literature will have books such as these on their shelves. From time to time they’ll open them again, not just to admire the games but to relive the excitement of the event. Like me, they’ll regret that this tradition seems to have gone out of fashion.

Is this book a worthy addition to an almost forgotten genre of chess literature?

With 750 pages, trimmed down from an original almost 900, one can only admire Daniel Fernandez’s industry in compiling the book, in producing several pages of detailed analysis, often focused on modern opening theory, for almost every one of the 91, invariably hard-fought games produced by some of today’s leading Grandmasters.

The author has made an unexpected and seemingly unexplained decision in ordering the games by the player of the white pieces. So we start with all the White games of Alexander Donchenko, who eventually brought up the rear, through to those of Jorden van Foreest, the rather unexpected tournament winner.

I guess this makes sense if the main reason you’re reading the book is to study you heroes’ opening repertoires, but from my perspective as a humble club player it seems rather eccentric. Why not group the games by the player of the black pieces instead? Or, better still, why not group them by opening so that we can see all the Sicilian Defence, for example, games together? If, like me, you’re not especially interested in opening theory, you’d probably prefer a more conventional format, especially given that the book also includes the round summaries taken from a Dutch chess news website. So we get a Round 1 report, Donchenko’s white games, a Round 2 report, MVL’s white games and so on, which creates, at least for me, a rather disjoined effect.

The opening analysis is, for many games, extremely detailed. Take, for example, Esipenko’s win over Carlsen in round 8. We get five pages of notes about the latest trends in the Sicilian Najdorf, which I’m sure is deeply fascinating to anyone playing that opening with either colour at master level, but of only passing interest to someone like me who finds the opening far too difficult for comfort.

[fen]r3k2r/1b1nqp1p/p1npp1p1/1p6/3NPP2/P1N1Q3/1PP1B2P/1K1R2R1 w kq – 0 17[/fen]

Esipenko sacrificed a pawn in the opening, reaching this position where he gained a winning advantage: 18. Ncxb5+ axb5 19. Nxc6 Qxc6 20. Qc3: a familiar enough sacrifice but with an unusual follow-up. The queen fork regains the piece and the World Champion eventually succumbed.

50 or more years ago, when I was young and innocent enough to look at opening theory, the Sicilian Najdorf was all the rage. It’s still popular now, although most of it looks very different from the days when we eagerly awaited the news of Bobby’s latest games. One line that’s still popular, and hasn’t changed all that much, is the Poisoned Pawn variation. To the best of my knowledge it’s still, in general, standing up well for Black, but it’s very easy to go wrong and lose quickly, as MVL found out against Caruana.

[fen]r1b1kb1r/5ppp/p1pp4/3pP1B1/5P2/q7/P1PQB1PP/1R2K2R w Kkq – 0 14[/fen]

Black plumped for the wrong pawn capture on d5, and now White continued 14. e6!! A crushing breakthrough. After 14 moves Black is essentially lost against good play!, according to Fernandez, who provides some beautiful variations against various Black tries here.

As you’d expect, the tournament produced its fair share of fascinating endings. I found this position, from Wojtaszek – Anton Guijarro, particularly instructive.

[fen]4k3/2R2p2/8/4PP2/5K2/8/8/r7 b – – 0 58[/fen]

Here Black played 58… Rg1!. Fernandez comments: Black shows alertness and does not allow the half-point to slip away. There are only a few dangers for Black in this position, and foremost among them would be allowing the enemy king into f6. Hence 58… Ra2?? loses, because Black now has to go very passive to prevent the infiltration.

He then goes on to give a lot of analysis demonstrating how White can always, at worst, reach the Lucena position.

The analysis of the remaining moves (59. Rb7 f6 60. e6 and so on) is also informative as to how this very typical position should be played.

At one level this is a magnificent, monumental book. You get 91 top level games, all deeply annotated, all hard fought, with profound opening play, often exciting middlegames and sometimes intricate endings. Fernandez has put in an enormous amount of work to ensure that readers are informed about the latest opening theory in lines currently popular at top GM level (although I guess it’s all 18 months out of date now!), and that all the analysis has been thoroughly checked for accuracy using the most powerful engines. The production values are high, with many excellent photographs and lots of interesting background material. I spotted a few typos, but not enough to spoil the book.

And yet, writing as a fairly strong club player, it’s sadly not a book for me. It’s just much too heavy, in more ways than one. Picking it up made my arms hurt and reading it made my brain hurt.

Give me a 250-300 page tournament book rather than 750 pages, and I’d be happy. I’d want the games in round order, annotated in a user-friendly (but not patronising) way, with opening theory and computer-generated variations only included where necessary, with helpful tips on how I could learn and improve my game and perhaps some reader interaction such as quiz questions. Indexes of openings and endings would also be welcome.

If you’re an ambitious 2200+ player, this book will, I’m sure, be ideal for you. If, like me, you’re an unambitious under 2000 player, you may well think it’s too much of a good thing.

I sometimes get the impression that there are a number of grandmasters who write books for themselves and their friends rather than considering the nature of their target market. For me this book, praiseworthy and outstanding though it undoubtedly is, falls into that category.

I’d advise you to make up your own mind whether this is a book for you. If you click here you’ll be able to download a teaser.

Richard James, Twickenham 28th June 2022

Book Details :

Softcover: 750 pages
Publisher: Thinkers Publishing; 1st edition (14 Feb. 2022)
Language: English
ISBN-10:‎ 9464201428
ISBN-13:978-9464201420
Product Dimensions: 17.02 x 4.57 x 23.62 cm

Official web site of Thinkers Publishing

Books, Everyman Chess, Middlegame, Reviews

Dynamic Defence

June 20, 2022 Tony Williams Leave a comment

Here is the publishers blurb from the rear cover :

“Every chessplayer, from beginner to world champion, loves to win a game with a brilliant attacking display. However many, if not most, attacks that end in victory do so due to inaccurate defence. This may be due to simple tactical miscalculation or perhaps a more fundamental misunderstanding of the important principles of defence. Furthermore, many attacks that are launched are simply unsound but succeed because many players feel uncomfortable when forced to defend, get flustered and make mistakes.

In this book, highly experienced chess author and coach, Neil McDonald addresses these issues. Defensive skill is crucial in chess. Good, accurate defence can win a game just as well as a fine attacking display can, so expertise in this department is essential for any player wishing to improve their game. With thorough explanations, questions, and exercises, this book provides fascinating material to enable you to hone your defensive skill and not feel intimidated when your opponent hurls pieces at your king.”

About the author :

Neil McDonald is an English GM, an active player, a FIDE Trainer and a coach to the England junior teams. Neil has authored thirty-seven books for The Chess Press, Batsford and, most recently, Everyman Chess. One of his most recent works, The King’s Indian Attack : Move by Move, impressed considerably.

We have reviewed titles from Neil such as Coach Yourself: A Complete Guide to Self Improvement at Chess and Your Chess Battle Plan.

As with every recent Everyman Chess publication high quality paper is used and the printing is clear. Each diagram is clear as is the instructional text. Figurine algebraic notation is used throughout. The usual and reliable formatting from Brighton-based typesetter IM Byron Jacobs is employed.

The diagrams do not have a “to move” indicator or any kind of caption so you will need to work out for yourself how they relate to the text that they are embedded in. However, this is fairly obvious.

Everyman Chess (formerly known as Cadogan Chess) is a major publisher of Chess books. Other reviews on this site have covered the production quality and typesetting so i am not going to repeat that here. Figurine algerbraic notation is used throughout although the book is laid out in a single column format, a departure from the double column format normally used for chess books. Like other Everyman books the diagrams do not have a “to move” indicator or caption but it is easy to work out which player is to move when going through the games. The book does contain an Index of Openings and an Index of Games at the end of the book. Virtually all the games featured in this book are recent having been played in the 21st Century. Virtually all of the games included in the book were played by strong Grandmasters with several games featuring the worlds leading players. Magnus Carlsen features in 6 of the games in the book and Anand, Aronian Caruana, Giri & Mamedyarov , are also well represented here. One notable omission is that there are no games featuring Sergi Karjakin who is considered to be one of the best defensive players in the world.

The Chapters are as follows:

1 The Power of Centralisation

2 Keeping Out the Queen and Rooks

3 Knight versus Bishop: Caution or Counterattack

4 Resisting Raking Bishops

5 Challenging a Mighty Knight

6 Opposing an Advanced Pawn

7 Using the King as Bait

8 Fighting to Survive in a Bad Endgame

The subject of defence is neglected in chess literature, there are many books filled with best games and how to attack but very few that are devoted to the topic of defence. Everyone loves to attack when they are playing chess and don’t like having to defend. The book contains 60 games all of which are analysed in depth with some games spanning 7/8 pages. The analysis mainly consists of detailed explanations by the author supported by analysis. This is not book containing lots of detailed computer analysis trying to show that there are defensive resources available to players that they would not ever find over the board. At critical points in the games the author poses questions to the reader. Each game featured in this book is a battle between elite players and offer an insight in the dynamic nature of attack and defence.

The great defensive players of the past allexcelled in holding inferior positions and then slowly outplaying their opponents. Anatoly Karpov at his best is a prime example of this, often going on to outplay and eventually beat his opponent from inferior positions. Today the game has evolved so has defensive technique and players are a lot more enterprising in how they go about defending positions. Defenders now will look at how they coordinate their pieces, cover focal squares, overprotect, and generate counterplay rather than playing passively. In this book the author takes this even further and puts forward the concept of dynamic defence as a method of stealing the initiative from the attacking player. It is still necessary to defend well by playing patiently and being aware of the tactical resources available to your opponent. The author assumes that players are familiar with the principles of static defence and are looking to improve their defensive technique.

Here is a summary of the key principles from three chapters in the book.

1 The Power of Centralisation: Triumph of centralisation against a wing attack. Good centralisation can compensate for structural weakness or a lack of defenders around the king . But if the situation in the centre is bad and the kingside is weakened in some way then the defender is in big trouble

3 Knight versus Bishop: Caution or Counterattack: When facing an attack a crucial decision in whether to play according to the dictates of dynamic defence – that is – to try an seize the initiative – or to quietly strengthen the defensive line.

7 Using the King as Bait: An extreme method of provocation whereby a player will leave his king in the centre of the board and invite his opponent to attack trusting in his skills as a defender or where a player will try and goad his opponent into sacrifice material to expose their king. In doing so you are creating complications and trying to make your opponent overpress.

It is possible just to play through and enjoy the games in this book but in doing so you would miss out on many valuable lessons from an expert coach. I think that it is much harder to defend than it is to attack. if you have the initiative you can often have any good options at your disposal and can choose which one to analyze in depth. However as a defender you do not have the luxury of that option. Often you have to analyse and assess all the options available to your opponent which takes up considerable more time and often have to play precisely and find the ‘only’ move to keep you in the game.

The concepts put forward in this book are difficult and not immediately obvious to understand. This is a book that deserves close study and will ultimately earn you a lot of points, as you will be developing the skills to save inferior and even lost positions. Also, as you gain in confidence you will be more willing to take risks knowing that you have ‘dynamic defence’ to fall back on.

Tony Williams, Newport, Isle of Wight, 20th June 2022

Book Details :

Paperback : 348 pages
Publisher:Everyman Chess (1 Dec. 2021)
Language: English
ISBN-10:178194590X
ISBN-13:978-1781945902
Product Dimensions: 17.3 x 1.7 x 23.8 cm

Official web site of Everyman Chess

2022, Biographies, English, History, Player, Richard James

Minor Pieces 34: William Ward Part 1

June 17, 2022 Richard James 2 Comments

Here’s some hot news from Redhill Chess Club, just 120 years ago.

There are a few interesting things to note here. At this time, Surrey League matches, just like the London League today, took place at central London venues, rather than on a home and away basis.

You’ll also spot that, as so often in their matches at this time, Richmond failed to field a full team. They frequently either had a couple of absentees at the bottom or a couple of nominated players who failed to turn up.

The impression I get is that the club was very ambitious, choosing to play in the Surrey Trophy against stronger opposition rather than the calmer waters of the Beaumont Cup. Their administrative skills, though, didn’t seem to match their ambitions. Chess clubs (and, no doubt most other clubs as well) are as good as their organisers, not as good as their players.

Regular readers will already have met Thomas Etheridge Harper and Charles Redway, and heard a brief mention of club founder Horace Lyddon Pring, but there are other members of this team who are of interest.

In particular, there’s a new name playing on top board, although he was probably losing his game against Leonard Percy Rees, one of the most important figures in early 20th century English chess and one well worth a future Minor Piece.

In the first decade of the 20th century there were a lot of strong British amateurs with retrospective ratings round about 2300-2400, so, by today’s standards, FM to IM strength. They rarely if ever played in major international tournaments so, except for those of us who spend much of our time in the dusty recesses of old books and magazines, or perhaps visiting BritBase, their names are largely forgotten today.

As it happens, many of these players had links with our area, West and South West London. You’ve already met George Edward Wainwright here, here, here and here. Now I must introduce you to William Ward.

Researching him isn’t so easy. Cursed with one of the most popular male first names of his day, no middle names and a very common surname, any search for W Ward will turn up much of no relevance. In addition he came from a small family which has been little researched by genealogists: the few online trees I’ve been able to find don’t mention any chess connection and, if they give it at all, get his mother’s maiden name wrong.

Our William, 35 years old at the time of the above match, was born on 3 March 1867 in Abbots Langley, Hertfordshire, just north of Watford and now a large commuter village, and baptised there on 18 April the same year.

The 1871 census finds the Ward family there. William Ward senior is aged 27, a farmer of 184 acres employing 4 men and a boy, Ann (née Barford) is aged 26 and their two sons are William (4) and Mark (1). The family also have two servants. The parents were both born in Hatfield (the enumerator incorrectly recorded their sons as having been born there as well) and must have moved to Abbots Langley after their marriage. A third son, George Langton Ward, would be born early the following year. The family would later move to the Luton area, first to the small village of King’s Walden, and then to Lewsey, now a Luton suburb alongside the M1.

By 1881 young William is at boarding school in London: he’s recorded at 7 Highgate Road Kentish Town along with a Schoolmaster and a lot of other boys, including, exotically, three brothers from Quito (none of them, sadly, named Amos).

While his brothers followed in their father’s footsteps, pursuing a career in farming, William took a different route. The 1891 census finds him, now aged 24, living in a boarding house at 50 Finsbury Park Road in North London, not all that far from Kentish Town, and working as a solicitor.

At some point in the mid 1880s, then, he must have studied Law, and perhaps, at the same time, taken up the game of chess. We first find him in 1890 playing in the 3rd class in a handicap tournament at Simpson’s Divan, which tells us he wasn’t a strong player. No child prodigy, then, but a young man who was attracted to the game, and, over the next few years, would discover a real talent.

Ward made rapid strides during the 1890s, soon playing matches for the famous City of London club (in their 1894-5 championship he reached the final stages) and taking part in representative matches for the South of England against the North.

His first external tournament was the Southern Counties Chess Union (SCCU) Championship in Southampton in 1897. Henry Ernest Atkins was a convincing winner on 8½/10, while William’s score of 4/10 was relatively modest, but no disgrace for a newcomer to chess at this level.

In the 1897-8 edition of the City of London Championship Ward finished in third place behind Thomas Francis Lawrence and Lucien Serraillier: by now he was clearly one of the capital’s strongest players.

In this game he demonstrates excellent opening knowledge, capping a fine performance with some sparkling tactics to force through a passed pawn. (If you click on any move in any game in this article a pop-up board will magically appear, enabling you to play through the game.)

[pgn]

[Event “City of London CC Championship”]
[Site “?”]
[Date “1897.??.??”]
[Round “?”]
[White “Jones, Edward Owen”]
[Black “Ward, William”]
[Result “0-1”]
[ECO “D55”]
[Annotator “Tactical Analysis 5.2 (1s)”]
[PlyCount “92”]
[SourceVersionDate “2022.06.10”]

1. d4 {ChessBase} d5 2. c4 e6 3. Nc3 Nf6 4. Bg5 Be7 5. e3 O-O 6. Nf3 b6 7. cxd5
exd5 8. Bd3 Bb7 9. O-O Nbd7 10. Rc1 c5 11. Re1 {[#]} Ne4 $146 {D55: Queen’s
Gambit Declined: 4 Bg5 Be7: Lines without …h6 and 6…h6 7 Bxf6.} ({
Predecessor:} 11… c4 12. Bb1 a6 13. Ne5 b5 14. f4 Re8 15. Qf3 Nf8 16. Ne2 Ne4
17. Bxe7 Rxe7 18. Bxe4 dxe4 19. Qg3 {1-0 (52) Pillsbury,H-Tarrasch,S Hastings
1895 MainBase [ChessBase]}) 12. Bf4 Nxc3 13. bxc3 c4 {White has an edge.} 14.
Bb1 Nf6 15. Ne5 Ba3 16. Rc2 (16. Bg5 {looks sharper.} Qd6 17. Bxf6 Qxf6 18. Nd7
) 16… b5 17. Rce2 $2 (17. Bg5 $16 {keeps the pressure on.}) 17… Ne4 $17 18.
Bxe4 dxe4 19. Qb1 Qd5 {Hoping for …f6.} 20. f3 f6 ({Much weaker is} 20…
exf3 $6 {[#]} 21. e4 $1 Qd6 22. gxf3 $11) 21. fxe4 Qxe4 22. Nf3 Bc6 {A strong
pair of Bishops.} 23. Nd2 Qd3 {& Black is much more active.} 24. Qxd3 cxd3 25.
Rf2 Bd5 26. e4 Bc4 ({Don’t take} 26… Bxa2 27. Ra1 $16) 27. Nxc4 bxc4 28. Rb1
$2 {Now White is beyond hope.} (28. h4 $17 {is a better defense.}) 28… Rae8
$19 29. Rb7 $2 (29. e5 Rf7 30. Kf1) 29… Rxe4 {Black is clearly winning.} 30.
Rxa7 {[#]} Rfe8 $1 31. Bd2 {[#]} (31. g3 Re1+) 31… Re1+ $1 32. Rf1 R1e2 33.
Rd1 Bb2 {And now …Rxd2! would win.} 34. Rc7 {[#]} Rxd2 $1 35. Rxd2 Bxc3 {
Endgame KRR-KRB} 36. Rd1 d2 {…Re1+ is the strong threat.} 37. Rxd2 Bxd2 38.
Rxc4 {KRB-KR} Be3+ 39. Kf1 Rd8 40. Ke2 Bxd4 41. a4 Rd7 42. Kd3 Bb6+ 43. Ke4 Kf7
44. Rc6 Rd4+ 45. Kf3 Ba5 46. Ra6 Rxa4 {Weighted Error Value: White=0.64/
Black=0.22 (precise)} 0-1

[/pgn]

The following year, the SCCU Championship in Salisbury was a very different story from the previous year. William shared 1st place with Joseph Henry Blake on 7½/10, with strong players such as Gunston, Bellingham, Loman and Sherrard trailing in their wake.

In this exciting drawn game, against the Dutch organist Rudolf Loman, both players displayed extensive awareness of contemporary theory in the very sharp Max Lange Attack. Ward had the better of the early exchanges but, in a very complex middlegame failed to make the most of his chances. The knight ending was still difficult for both players, and here Loman missed an opportunity.

[pgn]

[Event “SCCU Championship Salisbury”]
[Site “?”]
[Date “1898.??.??”]
[Round “?”]
[White “Loman, Rudolf Johannes”]
[Black “Ward, William”]
[Result “1/2-1/2”]
[ECO “C56”]
[Annotator “Tactical Analysis 5.2 (1s)”]
[PlyCount “102”]
[SourceVersionDate “2022.06.10”]

1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bc4 Bc5
4. O-O Nf6 5. d4 exd4 6. e5 d5 7. exf6 dxc4 8. Re1+ Be6 9. Ng5 Qd5 10. Nc3 Qf5
11. Nce4 Bb6 (11… gxf6 12. g4 $1 Qg6 13. Nxe6 fxe6 14. Nxc5 $16) (11… O-O-O
$5) 12. Ng3 {Pair of Knights! C56: Two Knights: 4 d4 exd4 5 0-0 Nxe4.} Qg6 {
Strongly threatening …0-0-0.} (12… Qxf6 $2 13. Nh5 Qg6 14. Nxe6 $18) 13.
Nxe6 {& White is more active.} fxe6 14. Rxe6+ {White is clearly better.} Kd7 {
[#]} 15. fxg7 $146 ({Predecessor:} 15. Nh5 Rhe8 16. Nf4 Qf7 17. Qf3 Rad8 18.
Bd2 gxf6 19. Rae1 Rxe6 20. Nxe6 Re8 21. Ng5 Rxe1+ 22. Bxe1 {1-0 (31) Chigorin,
M-Charousek,R Budapest 1896 EXT 2018 [Tartakower/du Mont/Chigorin/Bogoljubow/
Maroczy]}) 15… Qxe6 16. gxh8=Q Rxh8 17. Bd2 Rf8 18. f4 Kc8 19. Kh1 c3 $36 {
Keeping White busy.} 20. bxc3 dxc3 21. Bxc3 Rxf4 22. Qh5 Qg6 23. Qd5 Qh6 $2 (
23… a5 $19 {and Black stays clearly on top.} 24. Qd1 (24. Rd1 Kb8 $17) 24…
Rf2) 24. Nf5 (24. Rd1 $2 {gets mated.} Qxh2+ $3 25. Kxh2 Rh4#) 24… Qf8 {
Prevents Qg8.} 25. Qe6+ Kb8 26. Ng3 a6 27. Re1 h5 $2 (27… Ka7 $19 {And now ..
.Rf2 would win.} 28. Bd2 Rf2) 28. Qg6 $2 (28. Qe8+ $11 Qxe8 29. Rxe8+ Ka7 30.
Re4 Rxe4 31. Nxe4) 28… Qc5 29. Bd2 Rf8 30. Be3 {Prevents Qf2.} (30. Bh6 Qa5
31. Rd1) 30… Qc3 (30… Qb4 $19 {has better winning chances.} 31. c3 Qxc3)
31. Rf1 $17 Rxf1+ ({But not} 31… Qxe3 32. Rxf8+ Ka7 33. Rf1 $14) 32. Nxf1
Bxe3 33. Qe8+ Ka7 34. Qxe3+ Qxe3 35. Nxe3 $11 {Endgame h4 is the strong threat.
KN-KN} Nd4 36. h4 {aiming for g4.} Kb6 37. g4 hxg4 38. h5 Ne6 $1 39. Nd5+ {
White has compensation.} Kc6 {[#]} 40. h6 $1 Ng5 (40… Kxd5 $2 41. h7 $18) (
40… Nf8 $5 41. Nf6 Kd6 $11) (40… Nf8 41. Nf6) 41. Nf6 a5 42. Kg2 {Hoping
for Kg3.} Nf7 {[#]} 43. Nxg4 {[#]} (43. h7 $1 $18) 43… Nxh6 $1 44. Nxh6 $18 {
KN-K3P} Kc5 45. Nf5 Kb4 46. Ne3 a4 47. Nd5+ Ka3 {Black is slightly better.} 48.
Nxc7 Kxa2 49. Kf3 Kb2 50. Nb5 Kxc2 51. Ke3 Kb2 {Never resign too early!
Weighted Error Value: White=0.50/Black=0.44} (51… Kb3 $5 52. Kd4 b6 $11)
1/2-1/2

[/pgn]

The 1898-9 City of London Championship proved a slight disappointment when he narrowly failed to make the final pool, but the 1899-1900 edition, held again as an all-play-all, was a different story. Lawrence was the winner on 14½/17, with Ward just half a point behind and the rest nowhere.

In 1900 William made his international debut, being selected to play in the 5th Anglo-American Cable Match, where he drew his game against Charles John Newman.

Rod Edwards’ retrospective ratings for 1900 put him on 2397, ranked 74th in the world.

A few days later he took part in an invitation tournament run by the City of London club, in which their members took on a bunch of international players based in London at the time. As you’ll see here, he scored an outstanding 8½/12, just behind Teichmann (9½), Mason and Gunsberg (9). While the winner hadn’t yet reached his peak and the runners-up were past their best, they were all genuine grandmasterly players. He was particularly devastating against the weaker competitors.

By now he was using the increasingly popular Queen’s Gambit with the white pieces, an opening which suited his style of controlled aggression perfectly.

Here he found himself with an IQP position out of the opening: understanding this pawn formation is still of vital importance to all serious competitive players today.

[pgn]

[Event “London City Club Invitation”]
[Site “London”]
[Date “1900.04.10”]
[Round “4”]
[White “Ward, William”]
[Black “Lawrence, Thomas Francis”]
[Result “1-0”]
[ECO “D40”]
[Annotator “Tactical Analysis 5.2 (1s)”]
[PlyCount “71”]
[EventDate “1900.04.05”]
[EventType “tourn”]
[EventRounds “13”]
[EventCountry “ENG”]
[SourceTitle “HCL”]
[Source “ChessBase”]
[SourceDate “1999.07.01”]
[SourceVersion “2”]
[SourceVersionDate “1999.07.01”]
[SourceQuality “1”]

1. d4 d5 2. c4 e6 3. Nc3 Nf6 4. Bg5 c5 5. e3 dxc4 6. Bxc4 cxd4 7. exd4 Nc6 8.
Nf3 Be7 9. O-O O-O 10. Rc1 h6 11. Be3 Nb4 12. Bf4 a6 13. a3 {D40: Queen’s
Gambit Declined: Semi-Tarrasch with 5 e3.} Nc6 (13… b5 $5) 14. Ba2 {& White
is more active.} Qa5 15. Bb1 {aiming for Ne5. White is clearly better.} Rd8 16.
Qd3 Qh5 17. Bc7 Rd7 18. Bg3 g6 19. Ne2 {[#] Threatens to win with Rxc6!} Bd6 {
Loses the game.} 20. Rfd1 Bxg3 21. Nxg3 Qg4 22. Qe3 {Inhibits Qf4. Black must
now prevent h3.} Nh5 23. h3 ({Not} 23. Qxh6 Nxg3 24. fxg3 (24. hxg3 Rd5 $16)
24… Rd5 $18) 23… Qf4 24. Nxh5 Qxe3 25. fxe3 gxh5 26. e4 {And now d5 would
win.} Rd8 27. Rc5 e5 $2 (27… Bd7 28. Rxh5 Kg7) 28. d5 $18 {White is clearly
winning.} f6 29. Ba2 Kg7 30. Rdc1 Ne7 31. Rc7 Kf8 32. Rf1 Ng6 {[#]} 33. Ng5 $1
{White threatens Nh7+ and mate.} f5 (33… Rd7 34. Rxf6+) 34. Nh7+ Ke8 35. Nf6+
Kf8 36. d6 {Weighted Error Value: White=0.49/Black=0.94} 1-0

[/pgn]

Against the artist and pianist Thomas Physick (from a family of sculptors) he chose a delayed exchange variation: another pawn formation which still plays a critical role in 21st century chess.

[pgn]

[Event “London City Club Invitation”]
[Site “London”]
[Date “1900.04.30”]
[Round “11”]
[White “Ward, William”]
[Black “Physick, Thomas”]
[Result “1-0”]
[ECO “D55”]
[Annotator “Tactical Analysis 5.2 (1s)”]
[PlyCount “91”]
[EventDate “1900.04.05”]
[EventType “tourn”]
[EventRounds “13”]
[EventCountry “ENG”]
[SourceTitle “HCL”]
[Source “ChessBase”]
[SourceDate “1999.07.01”]
[SourceVersion “2”]
[SourceVersionDate “1999.07.01”]
[SourceQuality “1”]

1. d4 d5 2. c4 e6 3. Nc3 Nf6 4. Bg5 Be7 5. Nf3 O-O 6. e3 h6 7. Bxf6 Bxf6 8.
cxd5 exd5 9. Qb3 c6 {D55: Queen’s Gambit Declined: 4 Bg5 Be7: Lines without …
h6 and 6…h6 7 Bxf6.} 10. Bd3 Qb6 11. Qc2 Na6 {aiming for …Nb4. The
position is equal.} 12. Qd2 Nb4 13. Bb1 a5 14. a3 Na6 15. O-O Bg4 16. Bd3 Rfe8
17. Rac1 Qd8 18. Bxa6 Rxa6 19. Na4 Ra8 20. Nc5 Qe7 21. Nd3 Bf5 22. Nf4 Qd6 23.
Nh5 Bd8 24. Ng3 Bh7 25. Ne5 f6 26. Nd3 Bc7 27. Nc5 Qe7 28. Rc3 f5 29. f4 a4 30.
Qd1 {& White is more active.} Ba5 31. Rd3 b5 32. Qf3 Bb6 33. Rc1 Qa7 34. Nf1 {
Pair of Knights!} Re7 35. Rdd1 {And now Nd3 would win.} Rae8 36. Kh1 Qa8 37.
Nd3 Rc8 38. Ne5 {Rxc6! is the strong threat.} Rec7 39. Rc3 c5 40. dxc5 $1 Bxc5
(40… Rxc5 41. Rxc5 Bxc5 42. Rxd5 $16) 41. Rxd5 {Black must now prevent Rcxc5!
} ({Not} 41. Qxd5+ Qxd5 42. Rxd5 Kh8 $16) 41… Qa7 {[#]} (41… Bb6 42. Rxc7 (
42. Rxb5 Rxc3 43. bxc3 Qxf3 $16) 42… Bxc7 43. Rxb5 Bxe5) 42. Rcd3 (42. Rdxc5
$142 $1 Rxc5 {[#]} 43. Qd5+ $3 Kh8 44. Nf7+ Kg8 45. Nxh6+ Kh8 46. Nf7+ Kg8 47.
Nd6+ Kf8 48. Nxc8 $1 Rxd5 49. Nxa7) 42… Bf8 $2 (42… Qa8 {was called for.}
43. Qh5 Bf8) 43. Rd8 $18 {White is clearly winning.} Rc5 {Against Qd5+} 44.
Rxc8 Rxc8 45. Qd5+ Kh8 46. Nf7+ {Weighted Error Value: White=0.41/Black=0.52}
1-0

[/pgn]

William Ward was again amongst the medals in the 1900-01 City of London Championship. Lawrence won again, with Herbert Levi Jacobs taking the silver and Ward the bronze. Edward Bagehot Schwann, coming to the end of his short life, was among the also-rans.

By now it was time for the census enumerator to call again. What we find is rather intriguing. William was in Kenley, Surrey, east of Coulsdon and south of Purley, visiting Isidore Wiener, a 41-year-old unmarried Hide Merchant’s Factor born in Holland but a British Subject. Also in the household were a housekeeper and a servant.

I’ve recently become interested in the significance of the word ‘visitor’ in census returns. Your census address is where you’re staying overnight. If you’re being paid to be there you’ll be described as a ‘servant’ or something similar. If you’re paying to be there you’ll be a ‘boarder’ or a ‘lodger’. A ‘visitor’ will often be a family member, but there might be other reasons. I can find no evidence that Isidore was a chess player, so perhaps he had some complicated legal business which required his solicitor to stay overnight. Perhaps they were just good friends. Who knows?

Anyway, in 1906 Isidore married 40-year-old Annie Sonnex (interesting surname) from Lancashire, continuing to live, now with his wife, in Kenley. A very late first marriage for both partners. They had their only child, a daughter named Albertine, a year later. In 1918, like many families with Germanic surnames at the time, they changed their name from Wiener to Winner. Albertine became a Winner in more ways than one, as you’ll see here.

And then we reach 1902, when we find William playing for Richmond Chess Club against Redhill. Had he moved to the Richmond area? Or did he have friends in the club who invited him to join and play in matches in central London? At present I don’t know.

It looks like he never owned his own property, living in lodgings and moving round various parts of London. I can find no further reference to Ward in association with Richmond Chess Club, but it’s quite possible that there may be more information online once the Richmond & Twickenham Times is digitised.

You’ll find out what happened to William Ward after 1902 in my next Minor Piece.

Sources:

ancestry.co.uk

findmypast.co.uk

MegaBase 2022 (analysis by Stockfish 15)

Britbase

EdoChess (William Ward’s page here.)

The City of London Chess Club Championship (Roger Leslie Paige 2005)

Other websites referenced in the text.

2022, Books, Middlegame, New in Chess, Reviews, Richard James

Attacking Strategies for Club Players: How to Create a Deadly Attack on the Enemy King

June 10, 2022 Richard James Leave a comment

From the publisher:

“Attacking your opponent’s king is not just a shortcut to victory, it’s also one of the most enjoyable and gratifying experiences in chess. If you want to win more games you should become a better attacker. Studying typical attacking motifs and ideas easily brings dividends while you are having a good time. Michael Prusikin presents the prerequisites and the rules for a King attack in a lucid and attractive manner. In 15 thematic chapters he teaches you how to assess the nature of the position, identify the appropriate offensive patterns, find the preliminary moves and conduct your attack in a clear and effective way. Battering rams, obstructive sacrifices, pawn storms, striking at the castled position, sacrificing a knight on f5, Prusikin demonstrates the most important patterns of attack with lots of clear and well chosen examples. Next, Prusikin tests your newly acquired insights and your attacking intuition with exercises covering all the themes and motifs. You will find that studying Attacking Strategies for Club Players is both entertaining and rewarding.

Michael Prusikin is an International Grandmaster and a FIDE Senior Trainer from Germany. In 2009 he was the co-winner of the German Championship. Several times he has been voted German Chess Trainer of the Year. He writes the tactics column in the German magazine SCHACH.”

In his foreword to this book, GM Alexander Khalifman explains that the subject of attack on the enemy king has been the subject of many recent books, many of which suffer from a combination of defects: lack of originality, exaggerated sensationalism, complication and subjectivity. I wouldn’t disagree in principle, but who doesn’t love any book featuring ferocious attacks, brilliant combinations and beautiful sacrifices? Khalifman believes this book is different because it explains how to set up an attack.

Here’s what Prusikin has to say in his introduction:

… the theme of this book is not basic attacking motifs. I assume you are already familiar with these or I would recommend that, if so inclined, you read the classic The Art of Attack by Vladimir Vukovic or its modern counterpart Essential Chess Sacrifices by David LeMoir. In this book we shall address the strategic requirements for a successful attack on the king and some lesser-known attacking motifs, though no less relevant in practice. I hope this will be both interesting and useful for players with an Elo rating between 1500 and 2300.

Chapter 1 is just two pages long. We learn the prerequisites for successfully attacking the king: lead in development/uncastled opposing king, space advantage in the vicinity of the opposing king, few defensive pieces near the opposing king, and weakened pawn protection. Then we have some tips for carrying out a successful attack: use all your pieces, open lines, don’t be afraid to sacrifice and don’t waste time.

Chapters 2 to 16 each feature a different attacking idea, with some brief instructions and some examples from play.

Chapter 2: King in the centre.

Here’s an extract from a game which particularly impressed Prusikin, between a 17-year-old Egyptian and a higher-rated 16-year-old Iranian (Fawzy – Maghsoodloo Abu Dhabi 2017).

[fen]r3k1nr/3n1pbp/p1q1p1p1/3pP1N1/Pp1B1P2/2N5/1PP3PP/R2Q1RK1 w kq – 0 16[/fen]

16. Nb5!!

An astonishing sacrifice, the idea of which doesn’t reveal itself until you have seen White’s 19th move.

16… axb5 17. axb5 Qb7 18. Rxa8+ Qxa8

And now what? Why has White actually given up the piece?

19. f5!!

The next hammer blow, a left-right combination in boxing parlance.

19… Nxe5

A) 19… gxf5 20. Qh5 +-

B) 19… exf5 20. e6! +-

C) 19… Bxe5 20. fxe6 fxe6 21. Nf7+-

20. fxe6 f6 21. Bxe5 fxe5 22. Rf7 Bf8 23. Nxh7

23. Qf1 Bc5+ 24. Kh1 Ne7 25. b6 Qc6 26. Qf6! Rg8 27. Rxe7+ Bxe7 28. Qf7+ Kd8 29. Qxg8+ Qe8 30. Nf7++– was the alternative solution.

23… Bc5+ 24. Kh1 Ne7

Fawzy would have had to demonstrate similar, perhaps even more beautiful motifs after the defensive move 24… Be7 25. b6! Kd8 (25… Nh6 26. Nf6+ Bxf6 27. b7 Qb8 28. Qxd5 Nxf7 29. Qd7+ Kf8 30. Qxf7#) 26. Qf1 Nh6 27. Qb5 Qb7 28. Rf1!! (Wonderful geometry: the rook swings to the a-file!) 28…Rxh7 29.Ra1 Bf8 30.Ra7 Nf5 31.Rxb7 Rxb7 32.Qxd5+ Nd6 33.Qc5 and White wins.

25. Qf1!!

Threatens 26. Rf8+ but at the same time ‘eyes up’ b5 – the queen in all her glory!

25… Nf5 26. b6!! Qc6 27. b7 Ba7 28. Qxf5+!

Not the only way to win, but certainly the most spectacular and at the same time the most convincing solution!#

28… gxf5 29. Nf6+ Kd8 30. e7+

Black resigned

What a game! The modern-day ‘Immortal’!

(A few comments on this extract: 1) I’ve omitted a couple of diagrams from the book 2) Prusikin doesn’t mention that Black could have held the position by playing 17… Rxa1, which he might have found had he foreseen 19. f5! and 3) if you have MegaBase you’ll find the same annotations (in German) there.)

Chapter 3: Obstructive sacrifice: a sacrifice to impede your opponent’s development: for instance White playing a pawn to e6.

Chapter 4: Attacking the king without the queen: attacks in queenless middlegames or even in endings.

Chapter 5: Pawn storm with opposite-side castling.

Chapter 6: Pawn storm with same-side castling.

Chapter 7: Using the h-pawn against a fianchetto.

I was very struck by this miniature: Gomez Sanchez – Otero Acosta (Santa Clara 2017). I’ll pick up the game with Black about to play his 9th move in this very typical Réti Opening.

[fen]r2qk2r/pp1n1ppp/2pbpn2/3p4/2P3b1/1PN2NP1/PB1PPPBP/R2Q1RK1 b kq – 0 8[/fen]

8… h5!

The first game of this chapter, Steinitz – Mongredien, was probably the first time that the fianchetto, rather unusual at the time, had been attacked in such a daring way. Here too, the Steinitz attack seems to pose considerable problems for the Réti set-up.

9. d3

(There’s a long note here, concluding that 9. cxd5 is probably White’s best move here, which I’ll omit from this review.)

9… h4 10. Nxh4?

The beginning of the end. Once again, the only feasible defence was to open the centre: 10. cxd5! exd5 11. e4, although even here White would have had some difficult practical problems to solve, for example: 11… hxg3 12. hxg3 d4!? 13. Ne2 Qa5! with the idea of switching to h5. Black gets a dangerous attack.

10… Rxh4! 11. gxh4 Nh5 12. Qe1?

The final mistake. 12. f4 Nxf4 13. Qe1 would still have offered resistance, although Black would have had a clear advantage.

12… Bf3!!

Blocks the f-pawn; 12… Qh4? 13. f4.

13. Bc1 Qxh4 14. h3 Nf4 15. Bxf3 Qxh3 0-1

I suppose Prusikin might have mentioned that the idea behind Black’s 12th move is well known from, for example, a famous Fischer – Benko game.

Chapter 8: Using the g-pawn to destroy your opponent’s king protection.

Chapter 9: The nail in the coffin: a pawn on f6 or h6 in front of an opposing castled king.

Chapter 10: Doubled g-pawns, which can be used as an attacking weapon, or, on the other hand, can weaken the king’s defence.

Chapter 11: Using pieces to attack the castled position.

Chapter 12: The Grand Prix Attack: attacking a king behind a fianchettoed bishop with f4-f5, Qe1-h4, Bh6 etc.

Chapter 13: The knight on f5: sacrificing a knight on this square where it can be captured by a pawn on g6.

Chapter 14: Long bishop on b2: how a fianchettoed queen’s bishop can help your kingside attack.

This example is taken from Zsuzsa Polgar – Chiburdanidze (Calva Ol W 2004)

[fen]rn1q1rk1/pb3p1p/1p1p2p1/2p1pBP1/1PP2n2/P1Q2N2/1B1PPP1P/R3K1R1 w Q – 0 14[/fen]

Here we join the game at its culmination: the dark-squared battery is already set up, the g-pawn has chased away the knight on f6 and with her last move … g7-g6 Black has carelessly weakened the long dark diagonal. In spite of all this, achieving the said culmination is anything but easy.

14. Nxe5!! Nxe2!

Was the Georgian former World Champion relying on this counter-attack?

A) 14… Qe7 15. Be4!! dxe5 16. 16. Bxb7 Nxe2! 17. Kxe2 Qxb7 18. Qxe5 f6 19. Qe6+ Qf7 20. Qxf7+ Rxf7 21. Bxf6+-

B) 14… dxe5 15. Qxe5 f6 16. Qxf4 gxf5 17. gxf6+ +-

15. Nxf7!!

If the first knight move was obvious, now comes the real ‘hammer blow’!

After 15. Kxe2? dxe5 16. Bc2 (16. Qxe5?? Re8) 16… Nc6 the advantage would have switched to Black.

15… Nxc3 16. Nh6+ Kg7 17. Bxc3+ Rf6 18. Bxf6+ Qxf6 19. gxf6+ Kxh6 20. Be6+-

Black could have resigned here but struggled on until move 39.

Chapter 15: Interference: specifically here playing a minor piece to the opponent’s back rank to block out an opposing rook.

Chapter 16: Breakthrough on the strong point: sacrificing on a square which appears to be very well defended.

At the end we have the seemingly obligatory quiz: 50 puzzles for you to solve. While some involve finishing off your attack, others require you to find a plan to put your attack in motion. You’re not told which is which.

You’ll see from the extracts above that, at one level, this is a lovely book crammed full of dashing attacks on the enemy king and beautiful sacrificial play. The expertly annotated examples are conveniently grouped by theme and with some helpful snippets of advice on how to identify when an attack of this nature would be appropriate, and how to carry it out.

As such it will, as the author suggests, appeal to anyone from, say, 1500 to 2300 strength. The themes won’t be new to stronger and more experienced players but they’ll still benefit from seeing them in action. While the author points out that the explanations at the start of each chapter are short to allow more space for games, they sometimes seemed rather perfunctory to me.

I’m also not sure that the book is entirely free from the flaws Khalifman has noted in other volumes of this nature. Yes, it’s a bit different from other books in the way it’s organised, and, while many of the games, including quite a few from Prusikin’s own games, were new to me, there were also some frequently anthologised chestnuts.

I’m also not convinced that the book is free from exaggerated sensationalism. The annotations, and sometimes the exclamation marks, perhaps tend towards the hyperbolic. As Khalifman rightly points out, ‘you don’t learn anything abut physics or chemistry by watching a fireworks display’, but the examples do tend to be firework displays rather than the more mundane attacks that are more likely to occur in your games.

It’s a large and complex subject, and, to do it full justice based on 21st century chess knowledge, you really need 400 or 500 pages rather than the 192 pages we have here.

The book was originally published in German and has been competently translated by Royce Parker, so the language problems sometimes apparent in books from this publisher don’t arise here. The production standards are high, and there’s a refreshing lack of typos.

It’s an entertaining and instructive book which will be enjoyed by a wide range of readers, but is it an essential purchase? Probably not.

Richard James, Twickenham 9th June 2022

Book Details:

Softcover: 192 pages
Publisher: New In Chess (31 Dec 2021)
Language: English
ISBN-10:9056919741
ISBN-13:978-9056919740
Product Dimensions: ‎17.02 x 23.11 cm

Official web site of New in Chess

2022, Biographies, English, Games Analysis, History, Minor Pieces, Player, Richard James

Minor Pieces 33: Charles Redway

June 1, 2022 Richard James 3 Comments

If you’re travelling by train to visit the Chess Palace you’ll alight at Whitton station and turn left from where it’s a fine and fancy 20 minute walk – or you can take the crosstown bus if it’s raining or it’s cold.

If you turn right instead you’ll find yourself in Whitton High Street, with a turning into Bridge Way (named after the railway bridge, not the card game) on your right. If you walk along Bridge Way you’ll find two turnings on your left, Cypress Avenue and Short Way (not named after Nigel, but because it’s a short way), which leads into Redway Drive. Not many of its residents will be aware that it’s named after a chess player.

Much of what is now Whitton was built up in the interwar years on land which had previously been farms and market gardens. Twickenham’s international rugby stadium was known informally as Billy Williams’ Cabbage Patch because a man of that name had grown vegetables there. This explains the name of the Cabbage Patch pub opposite Twickenham Station, well known both as a rugby pub and a music venue.

The exception was the land adjacent to the Hounslow Gunpowder Mills, which is where you’ll find the Chess Palace, but that’s another story.

In this aerial photograph from 1931 you can see the railway line, the newly opened Whitton Station, the first shops in the High Street and, in the centre, Short Way, leading to Redway Drive, with trees behind it. It meets Nelson Road on the left and, at the junction with Short Way, curves to the right where it would, by 1933, meet the A316 Great Chertsey Road. The rugby ground can be seen in the distance.

Mr Redway gave his name not just to the road but to the whole estate, as you can see from this photograph from a few years later.

Here’s the road itself: typical 1930s suburban architecture, newly planted trees and a notable shortage of cars.

Here’s a cutting from, I guess, the mid 1930s: found on Facebook without attribution but probably from the Richmond & Twickenham Times. Typically, the local press got Mr Redway’s middle initial wrong: he was Charles Percy Redway (1885-1953).

Redway was a stockbroker by profession who had presumably bought up the land speculatively and sold it for housing. Perhaps the proceeds had enabled him and his family to move from St Margaret’s Road Twickenham to Grove House, Hampton in 1927. Very nice too. Lucky chap!

Back in his teens, Charles Percy was a chess player, but as with many young players, life got in the way. In 1904 he was a member of Richmond Chess Club, taking part in matches between the residents of East Sheen and the rest. Here’s an example in which he was successful.

These, I’d imagine, were more social events than serious matches: the players on the higher boards were also seen in competitive matches against other clubs, but the lower boards, such as young Charles Percy Redway, gained experience from events such as this. His opponent here may have been Herbert Ereault, a bank clerk from Jersey, only three years his senior.

But Charles Percy Redway isn’t the real subject of this article: his father, plain Charles Redway, was a much stronger player, from a family involved in various chess related activities.

Charles Redway senior had been born in Paddington in the fourth quarter of 1861. His father, another Charles, had been born in Teignmouth, Devon and his mother, Mary Ann Richardson, near Corby in Northamptonshire. It looks like they had met while working in service in London. We can pick up our protagonist in the 1871 census: the family are living in Chelsea where his father is working as a butler. He is the second of five children at home: a sixth child would arrive later. By 1881 the oldest Charles is buttling for Scottish poet, biographer and translator Sir Theodore Martin in Onslow Square, Kensington, while Mary Ann is in the family home in Bywater Street, a 15 minute walk away, along with her father and six children: George, the eldest is a Publisher’s Assistant while Charles is a clerk and the only daughter, Mary Jane, a dressmaker.

The Redway family was clearly bookish as well as chess playing. Did this come from within the family or was their love of books inspired by Sir Theo? Where did the family’s love of chess come from?

Charles married Emily Jones in 1884 and by 1891 they were living in Elm Road, Mortlake, just round the corner from where you’ll now find the East Sheen branch of Waitrose, along with their four young sons (Charles Percy was the oldest), a 14-year-old domestic servant and Emily’s younger sister Ida. Charles’s occupation is given as an Assurance Clerk: he was employed by the Prudential Assurance Company.

At some point in this decade he joined the young and ambitious Richmond Chess Club. His first sighting in the chess world seems to be in an 1896 match over 100 boards between teams representing the North and South of the Thames. Charles was on board 38, winning his game against a reserve, T A Bedford.

Here he is playing board 2 behind Thomas Etheridge Harper in a Surrey Trophy match against Battersea in 1898. Richmond were well beaten, not helped by a default, something that was only too common in their matches at this time. Their ambition in taking on top clubs like Battersea in the Surrey Trophy, when they could have opted for less demanding opposition in the Beaumont Cup, seems not to have been matched by their competence in making sure all their players turned up.

You’ll find an excellent article about the Battersea board 3 William Philip Plummer here on their club website, and more about their club history here.

The 1901 census is interesting. Charles is still in the same job, living with his wife, six sons and a daughter, along with a domestic servant. Charles Percy is working as a Jewellery Merchant’s Clerk. They’ve moved along the road towards Richmond, though: their address is given as 134 Sheen Road (here on Google Maps, assuming the house numbers haven’t changed).

There, at the top of the same page, are Philip and Harriet Harper, and the previous page reveals that they’re the children of Thomas Etheridge Harper, who was living just round the corner from Charles Redway.

Perhaps it was Thomas who introduced Charles to Richmond Chess Club. You’d imagine they’d have got together to play chess on a regular basis, maybe, as was the habit in those days, over a glass of brandy and a fine cigar.

Over the next few years, he continued to play for Richmond on a high board, sometimes even on board 1, as well as being recorded turning up to club AGMs.

Here’s a game from the 1903 Surrey County Challenge Cup (presumably the county individual championship) against the artist Sir Wyke Bayliss. The opening was interesting: a Fried Liver Attack with an extra move for White. Black was able to play an immediate c6 so it’s not entirely clear whether or not White benefitted from the extra tempo. Anyway, Redway misplayed the attack and lost fairly quickly. (If you click on any move, a pop-up window will appear enabling you to play through the game.)

[pgn]

[Event “Surrey County Challenge Cup”]
[Date “1903.??.??”]
[White “Redway, Charles”]
[Black “Bayliss, Wyke”]
[Result “0-1”]
[ECO “C41”]
[Annotator “Tactical Analysis 5.2 (1s)”]
[PlyCount “48”]
1. e4 e5 2. Bc4 Nf6 3.
Nf3 d6 4. Ng5 d5 5. exd5 Nxd5 $2 {[%mdl 8192]} (5… h6 $15 {keeps the upper
hand.} 6. Nf3 e4) 6. Nxf7 {C41: Philidor Defence.} Kxf7 7. Qf3+ Ke6 $1 {
Hoping for …c6.} 8. Nc3 {[%mdl 1024] White has strong compensation. White is
better.} c6 {[#] And now …Qf6 would win.} 9. O-O $146 {aiming for Re1.} ({
Predecessor:} 9. d4 Bb4 10. O-O Bxc3 11. bxc3 Qf6 12. Qe4 Qf5 13. f3 Re8 14.
Bd2 Kd6 15. Bxd5 cxd5 16. Qxf5 Bxf5 17. dxe5+ {0-1 (37) Weir-O’Donovan
Telegraph 1863}) 9… Bc5 10. Re1 $2 (10. Ne4 $16 {and life is bright.} Qf8 11.
Ng5+ (11. Nxc5+ Qxc5 12. b3 Qd4 $15) 11… Kd7 12. Bxd5 cxd5 13. Qxd5+ Ke8 14.
d4 (14. Qxe5+ Be7 $11) 14… Bxd4 15. c3) 10… Rf8 $17 {[%cal Bh8f8,Bf8f5,
Bf5e5][%mdl 32]} 11. Qg4+ {[%mdl 8192]} ({Avoid the trap} 11. Bxd5+ $2 cxd5 12.
Qh3+ Kd6 $19) (11. Rxe5+ $17 Kxe5 12. d4+ Ke6 13. Bf4) 11… Kf7 $19 {[%cal
Be6f7,Bf7g8,Bg8h8][%mdl 32]} 12. Qh5+ Kg8 13. Ne4 {[#]} Rf5 $1 14. Qe2 (14. Qd1
Bb6) 14… Bd6 (14… Be7 $142 15. d3 Nd7) 15. d3 $2 (15. d4 exd4 16. Bg5)
15… Kh8 16. d4 exd4 {Threatens to win with …Bf4.} 17. Bg5 Qf8 (17… Rxg5
$2 18. Nxg5 Qf8 19. Bxd5 cxd5 20. Qh5 $18) ({Not} 17… Bxh2+ 18. Kxh2 Qf8 19.
Kg1 $14) 18. Bd3 $2 (18. Nxd6 Qxd6 19. Bd3) 18… Re5 19. f4 Nxf4 20. Bxf4 Qxf4
21. Rf1 $2 {[#]} (21. Nxd6 Rxe2 22. Rxe2) 21… Rxe4 $1 22. Bxe4 (22. Qxe4
Qxh2+) 22… Qxh2+ {Black mates.} 23. Kf2 Bg3+ 24. Kf3 {[#]} Qh5+ $4 {[%mdl
40960] Black took control after the opening. Weighted Error Value: White=1.33/
Black=0.69. Loss on time!?} (24… Bg4+ $1 {mates} 25. Kxg4 Qh4+ 26. Kf5 Na6
27. Qc4 Qh5+ 28. Ke6 Qe8+ 29. Kf5 Qg6#) 0-1

[/pgn]

The British Championships took place for the first time in 1904, giving many amateurs the opportunity for a two week chess playing summer holiday. Charles took part in the First Class B tournament in Southport in 1905, scoring 4½/11, a pretty respectable result. He tried again at Tunbridge Wells in 1908, but his result in the First Class A tournament was a disappointing 2½/11. (Note that the A and B tournaments were parallel and of the same strength.) To be fair, this was a pretty strong tournament: the winner was Georg Schories, a German master resident in England who wasn’t eligible for the championship, and the young Fred Dewhirst Yates shared 4th place.

Earlier in 1908, Charles had taken part in a simultaneous display at Surbiton Chess Club against World Champion Emanuel Lasker, emerging with a highly creditable draw.

[pgn]

[Event “Simul: Surbiton”]
[Date “1908.05.??”]
[White “Lasker, Emanuel”]
[Black “Redway, Charles”]
[Result “1/2-1/2”]
[ECO “B20”]
[Annotator “Tactical Analysis 5.2 (1s)”]
[PlyCount “78”]
1. e4 c5 2. b4 e5 3. Nf3 ({Predecessor:} 3. f4 d6 4. Nf3 Bg4 5. Bc4 Nc6 6.
O-O Nd4 7. Nxd4 Bxd1 8. Bb5+ Ke7 9. Nf5+ Ke6 10. Nc3 cxb4 11. Nd5 Nf6 12. Nxg7+
Bxg7 13. f5# {1-0 (13) Bird,H-NN London 1895}) 3… Qc7 4. Nc3 Nf6 5. Nb5 Qc6
6. Nxe5 {B20: Sicilian: Unusual White 2nd moves.} Qxe4+ 7. Qe2 Na6 {Inhibits
Nc7+.} 8. bxc5 (8. Qxe4 $18 {and the rest is easy.} Nxe4 9. Bc4 Nxb4 10. Bd3 (
10. Bxf7+ Ke7 $14) 10… Nxd3+ 11. cxd3) 8… Bxc5 $16 9. d4 Be7 10. Nc4 {
& White is more active.} O-O {[%cal Oe4c6]} 11. Qxe4 Nxe4 12. Bd3 Bb4+ 13. Kf1
d5 {[%cal Oe4c5]} 14. Ne3 {[%cal Bc4e3,Be3d1,Bd1c3,Bc3e2][%mdl 32]} Be6 15. Rb1
f5 {[%cal Bf7f5,Bf5f4][%mdl 32]} 16. Nc7 Nxc7 17. Rxb4 f4 18. Nd1 b6 19. f3 Nd6
20. Nc3 {[#] Threatens to win with Ne2.} Rf7 21. Ne2 Raf8 22. Kf2 g5 {[%cal
Bg7g5,Bg5g4][%mdl 32]} 23. Rb1 g4 24. Ba3 Rd8 25. Rhe1 Nc4 26. Bxc4 dxc4 27.
Bc1 gxf3 28. gxf3 Nd5 {Against Rb4} 29. Rg1+ Kh8 30. Bd2 Bf5 {[%cal Oc4c3]} (
30… c3 $5 31. Nxc3 Nxc3 $15) 31. Rb5 ({Of course not} 31. Bxf4 Nxf4 32. Nxf4
Rdf8 $17) 31… a6 (31… Bxc2 32. Nc3 Nc7 33. Rh5) 32. Rb2 Bg6 33. Nc3 b5 34.
Rg5 Rf5 35. Rxf5 Bxf5 36. Nxd5 Rxd5 37. Bxf4 a5 38. Be5+ Kg8 {[#] Hoping for ..
.c3.} 39. c3 $2 ({Only move:} 39. a3 $1 $16) 39… b4 $1 {Weighted Error Value:
White=0.33/Black=0.42} 1/2-1/2

[/pgn]

EdoChess estimates his rating as round about 2000: a strong club player but not of master standard.

One of their sons, Montague, had died in his teens in 1906, and, the following year, the family moved to Dryburgh Road, Putney, very close to Marc Bolan’s Rock Shrine. They’d remain for the rest of their lives. He continued to play up to the mid 1920s, for Ibis Chess Club in London, and in county matches for Surrey. The Ibis Chess Club was part of the Ibis Sports Club, for employees of the Prudential Assurance Company and particularly noted for its rowing. There are very few records concerning Richmond Chess Club available for this period (we should find out more once the Richmond & Twickenham Times is digitised), but perhaps he continued playing for Richmond as well.

He didn’t play in the 1912 British Championships in Richmond, but he did take part in a simul against visiting American champion Frank Marshall, winning his game.

Very little competitive chess took place during the First World War, but he returned to the board in 1919, playing in a 40-board simul against Capablanca in Thornton Heath. His club affiliation was given as Richmond rather than Putney, confirming that, in spite of moving out of the immediate area, he was still a member of Richmond Chess Club.

In 1934, with their family name now famous in Whitton, Charles and Emily celebrated their Golden Wedding. The report in the local press provides some interesting detail about Charles’s wide range of interests.

It’s sad that Charles was unable to take part in the festivities. He died just over a year later, on 7 March 1935. Emily survived another 21 years, into her 90s, outliving four of her sons and remaining at home until the end.

Charles wasn’t the only one of his siblings interested in chess, although he appears to have been the only active player.

Readers of a certain age may recall a London chess book shop called Frank Hollings. One of Charles’s brothers, William Edward Redway (1865-1946), ran the business for about 40 years until his death, selling and occasionally publishing chess books. Edward Winter provides some information in this fascinating article.

Another brother, George William Redway (1859-1934), was also a bookseller and publisher, specialising in books on the occult. An announcement was made in 1895 that he was going to publish Lasker’s book Common Sense in Chess, but the arrangement, if indeed there was one, seems to have fallen through. The American edition was published by the New Amsterdam Book Company in 1895 and the European edition jointly by Bellairs & Co London, Mayer & Müller Berlin and the British Chess Company the following year.

You might wonder whether any current residents of Redway Drive are aware of the Redway family and their chess connections. Perhaps two of them are: when visiting the Chess Palace a few years ago, noted chess historian Jimmy Adams told me that his sister and her husband lived in Redway Drive (her husband is a rugby fan and wanted to be near Twickenham Stadium).

Here’s what the road looks like in 2022.

It’s a bit different, 90 years on from the photograph at the beginning of this article.

Here you have it – the road, and estate, named after Charles Percy Redway, whose father was one of our great predecessors in the early years of Richmond Chess Club. Join me again soon for some more Richmond Chess Club members from the first decade of the last century.

Acknowledgements and sources:

ancestry.co.uk

findmypast.co.uk

‘Whitton Memories’ Facebook group

Wikipedia

Twickenham Museum website

britainfromabove.org.uk

chessgames.com

BritBase

EdoChess

Chess Notes (Edward Winter)

Lyrics from At the Zoo (Paul Simon)

2022, Books, Middlegame, Reviews, Thinkers Publishing

Unbeatable!: The Art of Defense

May 26, 2022 Richard James 1 Comment

From the publishers’ blurb:

“GM Jan Werle is a professional chess trainer, coach and author. In 2008 he became EU Champion in Liverpool and reached his peak rating of 2607. Afterwards he finished his law studies, obtaining Master’s degrees in Civil and Commercial Law, and embarked on a career as a lawyer. However his main passion, chess prevailed, and led to a comeback. He gives chess lessons to pupils worldwide, individually and in groups. He enjoys teaching and helping his students and watching them improve. He combines teaching with playing in tournaments, keeping up his own level. Jan likes to meet new people and see new places and has been travelling to tournaments across the globe since an early age. He has played in all age categories in the World and European Championships finishing 3rd in the U-16 Championship in 2000 and 2nd in the U-18 in 2001. In 2004 he beat FIDE World Champion Rustam Kasimdzhanov and has won several strong international opens such as the Essent Open in Hogeveen in 2007, the Oslo Open and 8th place in the Gibraltar Masters in 2020, the strongest open in the world, with a score of 7/10 and a tournament performance of 2743. ”

Defence is a difficult subject to write about. What do we mean by defence, anyway? We have to defend if we have the worse position, but we also have to defend if our opponent is creating threats. If our opponent has made an unsound sacrifice for an attack, we might have to defend when in a winning position.

For these reasons there have been relatively few books written about this important aspect of chess, so it’s good to be able to welcome this new volume. Let’s take a look inside.

Chapter 1 doubles as the Introduction.

In this book I try to shed light on how to put up tenacious resistance, as well as why most defenders aren’t able to do so. There are so many books written about the attack and the initiative, not to mention opening books. But isn’t the hardest discipline in chess the defense of a weak position?

Technically speaking, one of the reasons why defense is such a difficult discipline, is that the attacker has several good moves at his disposal to choose from, whereas the defender is bound to pick one single move which enables him to ‘survive’.

Werle also discusses chess psychology, and, in general, sports psychology, subjects of particular interest to him, and with which he has personal experience.

There is an increasing understanding of the role psychology plays in chess, and, when your opponent is putting you under pressure, this is especially important. As you’ll see, this is discussed at length here.

Chapter 2 is again relatively short, looking at two forms of ‘inaccurate defence’: being too passive (and gradually getting crushed) and being too active in positions where you need to sit tight. It’s no coincidence that Werle’s examples of undue passivity come from older games: we know a lot more now about the virtues of active defence and the need to create counterplay, even at the cost of material.

Chapters 3, 4 and 5 constitute the heart of the book, each providing an in-depth look at defence in very different ways.

Chapter 3 offers The rise of defense in chess history, taking us all the way from Greco to Carlsen, with many instructive examples along the way. The author is particularly interesting when writing about Steinitz and Lasker, both of whom had much to say on the subject as well as demonstrating defensive skills in many of their games.

He then moves onto Botvinnik and Smyslov, both also giants of defensive play. I was taken by this example from a fairly well known Botvinnik (black v Liublinsky Moscow 1943/44) game.

[fen]1r1r2k1/2b1qp1p/b1p3p1/p1p1p3/2P1P3/1PN1BP2/P1Q3PP/R2R2K1 b – – 0 25[/fen]

Here, Botvinnik played what has now become a stock exchange sacrifice.

25… Rd4!?

Botvinnik gives this move an exclamation mark, citing the advantages of the repaired pawn chain and the passed pawn, as the closed nature of the position deprives the white Rooks of any activity. However, in the ensuing lines there occur many concrete ‘computerish’ breaks which gives the Rooks a (perhaps better than) level playing field compared to the minor pieces.

26. Ne2

Lyubinsky (sic) prefers to take the Rook with his Knight and to retain his Bishop. A questionable decision, since the Knight would have been well placed on the blockading square d3, according to Botvinnik.

After 26… Bc8 27. Bxd4 cxd4 28. Nc1! he would have kept a large advantage, but for the same reason after keeping the Bishop instead of the Knight on the board. In essence, White has to open the files on the queenside.

26… Bc8 27. Nxd4 cxd4 28. Bf2?

When Botvinnik mentions that his opponent is saddled with a dark squared Bishop (instead of the Knight) and thus completely without counterplay, Botvinnik missed several potential interesting and dynamic ideas to open the queenside files, assuming White was just obliged to await further developments.

White could have refuted this notion by, for example, 28. Bd2! with the idea of b3-b4. 28… c5 29. Rab1 f5 30. a3 Be6 31. Rb2! Now there is no way to stop the b3-b4 pawn break, when the files and ranks are opened, and the Rooks become ‘monsters’. 31… f4 32. b4! axb4 33. axxb4 cxb4 24. Rdb1 when White has a winning advantage.

Chapter 4, Emotions in Chess, looks at defence through the lens of sports psychology. Comparisons are made with other sports, notably tennis, with players such as McEnroe, Agassi and Federer discussed. We learn about debilitating emotions: anxiety, anger, relief and pride, how emotions might be triggered and how to cope with them.

Examples demonstrate how our emotions might affect how we play: particularly being too cautious or not sufficiently decisive.

Then Werle explains how we can control emotions by relaxation or a variety of cognitive techniques.

Any serious competitive player will find this chapter, concerning an increasingly important aspect of chess, very helpful.

Chapter 5 takes us back to the chessboard, looking at Defensive Strategies. Sometimes we can use prophylaxis: preventing our opponents from carrying out their plans. Sometimes we just have to wait to see how our opponents are going to improve their position. On other occasions, though, we need to be proactive, looking for counter-attacking moves which will turn the tide.

Back in Chapter 3, Werle discussed Korchnoi’s massive plus score with the black pieces against Tal to demonstrate what can happen when a brilliant attacker comes up against a brilliant defender. There are several examples scattered throughout the book.

Here is a striking example, from Moscow 1971.

[fen]1r3rk1/p1qbbppp/4p1n1/2p1P3/2p1B2P/5N2/PP2QPP1/R1B1R1K1 b – – 0 16[/fen]

In this position Korchnoi played:

16… Kh8!!

Fantastic prophylaxis against h4-h5! Black can take now on e5 as the discovered check on h7 is out of the question. Not good was 16… Rfd8?, as after 17. h5 Nf8 18. h6 g6 19. Qxc4 Black would have been left with weakened black squares around the King and an isolated c-pawn.

Werle goes on to demonstrate the remainder of the game, which Korchnoi won on move 40.

(Checking this with Stockfish 15, though, the engine claims that 16… Rfd8 17. h5 Nf8 18. h6 Ng6 19. hxg7 Bc6 is fine for Black.)

Alekhine was a pioneer of risk-taking in defence, as Werle demonstrates in this example (Lasker – Alekhine Moscow 1914).

[fen]r3kb1r/p1pnqppp/2p5/2P5/3QN3/5P2/PP3P1P/R1B2RK1 b kq – 0 13[/fen]

13… O-O-O!!

This unexpected, brutal move must have come as a shock to Lasker. White might have expected something like 13… Ne5 instead. White keeps an advantage with 14. Qc3 protecting f3. Black faces real issues completing his development. Or 13… Qe6 for the sake of bringing the Bishop out. 14. Re1! Bxc5 Who tricks who? 15. Qxd7+! Apparently, White tricks Black. Either way, there follows a Knight fork on f6 or c5.

14. Qa4

As storm clouds gather above Black’s position, Alekhine finds a creative solution for the problem of his king’s position. He could have played 14… Kb8 here to defend the pawn on a7, but then the game wouldn’t last for long after White plays simple developing moves: Bf4, Rd1-d3-b3/a3.

14… Ne5

This move is not approved by the commentators, but nonetheless it achieves its intended effect in the game. The point is that Alekhine places his knight as actively as possible, directed towards the enemy’s king.

15. Kg2 Qe6

16. Qa7?!

And here is the mistake: White is seduced into taking the pawn. Annotators, starting with the players’ contemporary Siegbert Tarrasch, indicated that a much safer move was 16. Bf4 initiating a strong positional idea. 16… Kb7 17. Bxe5 – after taking the strong knight on e5 White will develop a quick attack against black’s King with Re1 (threatening Nd6+) – Re3-Rb3, meanwhile Black has issues developing his bishop on f8.

16… Qf5!!

The ‘standard’ 16… Qg6+ fails without a fight after 17. Bg5! White will prevent the King’s escape via d7 on the next move. 17… f6 18. Rad1 And there is not much to do against the mating threat on a8.

With this beautiful queen move, Alekhine is not only threatening to take on f3, but also at the same time vacating the escape route c8-d7-e6 for his King!

The game resulted in a draw by perpetual check a few moves later.

This extract (I’ve omitted another three diagrams) gives you some idea of the flavour of the annotations here.

Chapter 6 offers what is these days the almost obligatory quiz to test your defensive skills, with 22 questions where the defender has to make a critical decision.

All in all, this is an excellent book which will interest all serious competitive players. If you have an interest in sports psychology you may well consider it an essential read. The book is exceptionally well researched and the examples are well chosen, although, as they’re mostly taken from grandmaster practice you might consider them more suitable for stronger players. The book itself looks good. It’s illustrated with many photographs, some of only tangential relevance, and important sentences and quotes are highlighted in callout boxes.

My one problem – and this might not annoy you as it does me – is that, as with so many chess books, the proofreading is well below the standard I’d expect from books on other subjects. You can perhaps tell from some of the extracts above that the text isn’t always fluent and sometimes the meaning isn’t entirely clear at first reading. But beyond that there are many other minor issues: inconsistent spellings (Tal is Mikhail and Mihail on the same page), inconsistent use of capitalisation of names of chess pieces, even in the same sentence, and so on. I appreciate (in part from being on the other end at the moment) that this process takes time and costs money: perhaps omitting it is a necessary sacrifice to make books like this economically viable.

If you don’t find this an insurmountable problem, I’d recommend this book as a brave and original take on a complex and difficult aspect of chess.

Richard James, Twickenham 25th May 2022

Book Details :

Softcover: 340 pages
Publisher: Thinkers Publishing; 1st edition (11 Jan. 2022)
Language: English
ISBN-10:946420141X
ISBN-13:978-9464201413
Product Dimensions: 16.76 x 2.03 x 23.37 cm

Official web site of Thinkers Publishing

2022, Biographies, History, Journalism, Minor Pieces, Player, Richard James

Minor Pieces 32: James D’Arcy

May 16, 2022 Richard James Leave a comment

It’s time to continue the story of Richmond Chess Club through the 1890s.

The club, as we’ve seen, was young and ambitious, and decided to enter the Beaumont Cup, run by the Surrey County Chess Association.

The Surrey League (except that it never seems to be called that) started in the 1883-84 season. It seems like only a few matches were played, probably on a knock-out basis, and taking place at central London venues rather than club venues.

By the 1895-96 season there was a demand for a second competition for less strong clubs, and a trophy named the Beaumont Cup was presented by the county President, Captain Alex Beaumont. The second division of the Surrey League is still, a century and a quarter later, the Beaumont Cup.

Some more information:

Beaumont, Alexander ‘Alex’ Spink 1843-4 Sep 1913 England, Manchester Deansgate – Kent, Beckenham amateur musician, 1872 captain of the 23rd Royal Welsh Fusiliers, 21 Feb 1874 in Pembroke he was tried and acquitted for attempt to commit sodomy, 20 Sep 1910 made Freeman of the City of London in the presence of musicians, at time of death residing at Crossland, 28 Southend Road in Beckenham; son of Colonel Richard Henry John Beaumont; 24 Jan 1872 at Christ Church in London Paddington he married the widow Caroline Savage (Marlborough 1826-13 Apr 1907 Croydon), daughter of baronet Sir Erasmus Griffies-Williams. (Source: http://composers-classical-music.com/b/BeaumontAlexanderSpink.htm)

Here’s what happened in the second year of the Beaumont Cup’s existence.

Well played, Richmond! Sadly I don’t at present have a record of the names of the players in this historic match.

The club also continued to play friendly matches. As we’ve already seen, they played regular home and away matches against Windsor and, in this period, narrow defeats against both Thames Valley (formerly Twickenham) and West London were recorded.

And then, in April 1900, Richmond Chess Club hit the headlines across the country for a tragic reason. Here are a couple of examples.

Who was the unfortunate (or perhaps fortunate to have died suddenly and painlessly doing something he enjoyed) James D’Arcy? It appears he was just a social player as I haven’t yet been able to find any information about him competing in matches or solving problems. Sub-postmaster sounds like a relatively humble occupation (unlike, for instance, club president George Oliver Richards, who was a dentist), but can we discover more about him?

His name is variously spelt D’Arcy, Darcy and Darcey in records, and most of the family trees he’s on give incorrect parentage, all copied from each other.

James’s birth was registered in the first quarter of 1840 in Boston, Lincolnshire: his parents, it seems, were John Darcey a farmer from the village of Wigtoft, between Boston and Spalding, and Elizabeth Brackenbury, although the 1841 census gives her name as Jane.

Sadly James senior died in 1847 and Elizabeth married Thomas Millhouse, a cottager (no, not THAT sort of cottager: just someone who owned a cottage and a small amount of land). By 1851 Thomas and Elizabeth had started their own family as well as bringing up James’s three younger siblings, while James himself was living in the nearby village of Swineshead with his grandparents James, an innkeeper, and Eleanor Brackenbury.

I haven’t yet been able to find him in the 1861 census but at some point he moved to London where, in 1866, he married Jemima Bond in Greenwich. The 1871 census located them in Hackney with their first child, a son named Robert. James had found employment as a solicitor’s clerk. He must have been doing pretty well for himself as the family residence was a fairly large 4 storey house. They were able to afford a servant, although having three boarders (all young men with clerical jobs) would have helped financially.

By 1881 they’d moved down the road to Islington, now with four children (Robert had been joined by Annie, Kate and Arthur), a servant, and a visitor, perhaps boarding there, David Reid, who was an East India Merchant born in New Brunswick. James’s job was now a Law Stationer.

Ten years on, and they’d moved to a different address in North London, not all that far from Hampstead Heath, and young Alfred had joined the family. James was still a Law Stationer, David Reid was still boarding there, and they still employed a servant. He might have come from a fairly modest family background in a small Lincolnshire village, but he’d prospered in London: something quite typical for the times, I think.

At some point in the 1890s, then, James and his family moved to 9 Mortlake Road, Kew and changed his job to that of a sub-postmaster. 9 Mortlake Road was, and still is, a large and impressive house near Kew Green: being a sub-postmaster must have paid well. The 1901 census records Jemima and all 5 of her surviving children (they had lost three children in infancy), along with Kate’s husband Maurice White and a servant. Maurice had been at Harrow with Winston Churchill, became a journalist and publisher, and later a picture dealer, being declared bankrupt on at least two occasions.

By 1911 Jemima had moved round the corner to Ennerdale Road, very convenient for Kew Gardens. The only one of her children at home was Annie, whose husband, Aubrey O’Brien was on leave from his job: he was a Major in the Indian Army in civil employ in the Punjab Commission as Deputy Commissioner. Their two young sons, Turlough and Edward, were there, along with three servants. Jemima died in Kew three years later, in 1914. All three sons became bank clerks or cashiers, but Alfred joined the Canadian Army, fought in World War 1, dying in hospital in Boulogne of wounds sustained in battle in 1916.

So our social player, then, was, like most of the other players we’ve met at Twickenham and Richmond Chess Clubs in the 1880s and 1890s, a fairly prosperous chap. Perhaps he wasn’t a strong player, but he must have enjoyed his chess and, as a result, died happy. I guess that’s the most important thing.

Sources:

ancestry.co.uk

findmypast.co.uk

Other online sources referenced above

2022, Books, Correspondence, Games Analysis, Games Collection, Opening Theory, Reviews, Richard James

110 Instructive Chess Annotations

May 10, 2022 Richard James 1 Comment

From the back cover:

Senior International Master Mike Read competed 115 times for the England and Great Britain teams at correspondence chess, including playing on board one for England in the 13th Olympiad.

In this, his fourth book, he aims to instruct his readers by dissecting 110 games played by local players at all levels of chess. In doing so, he isolates typical mistakes and explains the methods of taking advantage of them.

Philidor wrote that pawns are the soul of chess. In one sense, yes, but in another sense the soul of chess is the mass of club and tournament players, without whom the chess world wouldn’t function. Yes, it might be inspirational to look at games played by top grandmasters, but it’s always been my view that club standard players will learn more from games played at their level than from GM games.

Mike Read shares my opinion. Here’s how he starts his introduction.

One of the surest ways for a club player to improve his playing ability is to study annotated games featuring players of similar strength to themselves. The mistakes, and the instructive methods of taking advantage of them, will be familiar to them from similar happenings in their own games. Meanwhile the notes to such moves will educate the aspiring player in both how to avoid typical errors, and also how to take advantage of them when it is his opponent who is unfortunate enough to err.

Mike was a strong junior in the 1970s who graduated to correspondence chess which he played with great success up to the year 2000, playing on top board for England and obtaining the title of Senior International Master. You don’t get to that level without being an excellent analyst.

He continues:

It is reasonable for the reader to enquire as to why my correspondence chess career ended at a time when I was still being reasonably successful. The truth is that, during the 1990s, I suffered three nervous breakdowns. I managed to continue to keep on competing during the first two of these and, in fact, had my most successful chess years during the second of them, even though I was barely capable of coping with even the simplest aspects of day to day life. However my third breakdown, which occurred in the period 1999 to 2000 was too much for me to deal with and I was forced to abruptly retire from the game that I love at the beginning of the new millennium.

I was in an absolutely desperate situation at this time, but chess was to prove to be a major factor in my eventual recovery. A number of local players, recognising the severity of the predicament that I was in, made a great effort to assist me and get me out of the house where I had been languishing alone for several months. I do not feel I would ever have recovered, had it not been for the support of the Norfolk chess community.

And again:

Contained within these pages are 110 games, played by Norfolk players of all strengths from superstars of local chess such as John Emms, Owen Hindle and Robert Bellin down to some of the county’s lower graded (but still very talented as you will see!) enthusiasts. All of the games I have included feature top quality opportunities for the aspiring player to learn a lot, and all also feature some very fine chess!

The book is published through Amazon: Mike Read is selling it as cost price as he has no interest in collecting royalties from its sales.

The games are presented, unusually, in ECO code order, so you get all the Sicilian Defence games, for example, together. The annotations, which were produced without computer assistance, are excellent, scoring highly for both clarity and accuracy as well as instructive value. Many readers will, like me, appreciate the human touch. If you look at the sample pages on Amazon you’ll get some idea of their flavour.

Most of them are tactical, often involving spectacular sacrifices, which will delight anyone (and that probably means all of us) who enjoys combinative play.

This was the first game Mike analysed. He witnessed it taking place and decided to annotate it to thank his friend Grant Turner, who had helped and supported him during his breakdown. (If you click on any move you’ll be able to play through the games in this review on a pop-up board.)

[pgn]

[Event “Norwich Dons Club Championship”]
[Site “?”]
[Date “2004.??.??”]
[Round “?”]
[White “Turner, Grant”]
[Black “Osborne, Keith”]
[Result “1-0”]
[ECO “B21”]
[PlyCount “63”]
[EventDate “2004.??.??”]
[SourceVersionDate “2022.05.10”]

1. e4 c5 2. d4 cxd4 3. c3 dxc3 4. Bc4 cxb2 5. Bxb2 e6 6. Nf3 Nc6 7. O-O d6 8.
Nbd2 Nf6 9. Qe2 Qc7 10. Rac1 h6 11. Bb3 e5 12. Nh4 Be7 13. f4 Qb6+ 14. Kh1 O-O
15. fxe5 dxe5 16. Nf5 Bd7 17. Nc4 Qd8 18. Nxe5 Nxe5 19. Bxe5 Bxf5 20. Rxf5 Qb6
21. h3 Rac8 22. Rcf1 Rfd8 23. Bxf6 Bxf6 24. Qg4 Rc6 25. e5 Bg5 26. Rxf7 Kh8 27.
h4 Rg6 28. hxg5 Rxg5 29. Rf8+ Rxf8 30. Rxf8+ Kh7 31. Bc2+ g6 32. Qd7# 1-0

[/pgn]

Another of Mike’s friends, Brian Cunningham, was responsible for the production of this book. In this game he demonstrates that the Stonewall Attack can be a potent weapon at lower club level.

[pgn]

[Event “Norfolk League”]
[Site “?”]
[Date “2005.??.??”]
[Round “?”]
[White “Cunningham, Brian”]
[Black “Carter, Bruce”]
[Result “1-0”]
[ECO “D00”]
[PlyCount “45”]
[EventDate “2005.??.??”]
[SourceVersionDate “2022.05.10”]

1. d4 d5 2. f4 e6 3. Nf3 c5 4. e3 Nc6 5. c3 Nf6 6. Bd3 Be7 7. Nbd2 c4 8. Bc2 b5
9. O-O Bb7 10. Ne5 Nxe5 11. fxe5 Nd7 12. Qf3 O-O 13. e4 Qc7 14. Qg3 f6 15. exd5
Bxd5 16. Ne4 fxe5 17. Bh6 Rxf1+ 18. Rxf1 g6 19. Qf3 Nf6 20. Nxf6+ Bxf6 21. Qxf6
exd4 22. Qf8+ Rxf8 23. Rxf8# 1-0

[/pgn]

At the other end of the spectrum, here’s a game played by Norfolk born GM John Emms.

[pgn]

[Event “World Open Philadelphia”]
[Site “?”]
[Date “1991.??.??”]
[Round “?”]
[White “Yudasin, Leonid”]
[Black “Emms, John”]
[Result “0-1”]
[ECO “C77”]
[PlyCount “44”]
[EventDate “1991.??.??”]
[SourceVersionDate “2022.05.10”]

1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5 a6 4. Ba4 Nf6 5. Qe2 b5 6. Bb3 Bc5 7. a4 Rb8 8. axb5
axb5 9. Nc3 O-O 10. Nxb5 d5 11. exd5 e4 12. Ng5 Ne5 13. Nc3 Bg4 14. Qa6 Rxb3
15. cxb3 Nd3+ 16. Kf1 Nxf2 17. Rg1 Nd3 18. Qc4 Qd6 19. Ncxe4 Qf4+ 20. Nf3 Bxf3
21. Nxc5 Be4+ 22. Ke2 Qf2+ 0-1

[/pgn]

I know many readers enjoy collections of games played at amateur level, finding them both more entertaining and more instructive than higher level encounters. If you’re one of these you’ll be entranced by this book.

There are also many readers who like to support authors who prefer to self-publish their books. An admirable sentiment, I think, and if you fall into this category, again you certainly won’t be disappointed.

The word that first comes to my mind when considering this book is ‘generous’. Mike Read generously offers this book at cost price. The size is generous, his tributes to his friends who saved his life after his third breakdown, scattered within the introductions to these games, are also generous. The annotations are also generous in every respect. Mike is generous in his comments about the winners’ play, and also, very often, about the losers’ play as well. You might think that a more critical approach might have made the annotations even more instructive, but this would have been out of place given that they were originally written for a local chess magazine.

Anyone rated between, say, 1000 and 2000 will certainly learn a lot from this book, but stronger players will also benefit. And anyone who just enjoys playing through entertaining games will, like me, fall in love with this book. Don’t be put off by the title, which makes it sound rather dull and didactic (didactic, perhaps, but certainly never dull), or the lack of an illustration on the front cover. It’s what’s inside the book that really matters.

At another level, the book is also a wonderful tribute to all Mike Read’s friends within the Norfolk chess community (a few of whom, sadly, are no longer with us), who helped him when he was going through a very difficult time. Many will find Mike’s story inspirational, and that, again, is a powerful reason why you should buy this book.

It’s my view, and I’m sure Mike, even though he was a chess champion himself, would agree, that, ultimately, chess is less about prodigies, champions and grandmasters, but about forging friendships and building communities of like-minded people who enjoy the excitement, beauty and cerebral challenge of chess.

I’d urge all readers of this review to do themselves a favour, and do Mike a favour as well, by buying a copy. I really enjoyed this book, and I’m sure you will too. The Amazon link is here.

From https://mikereadsim.weebly.com/photos.html

Richard James, Twickenham 11th May 2022

Book Details:

ASIN ‏ : ‎ B09M791556
Publisher ‏ : ‎ Independently published (25 Nov. 2021)
Language ‏ : ‎ English
Paperback ‏ : ‎ 551 pages
ISBN-13 ‏ : ‎ 979-8466415964
Dimensions ‏ : ‎ 12.85 x 3.18 x 19.84 cm

Official web site of Amazon Publishing

110 Instructive Chess Annotations, SIM Mike Read, Independently published (25 Jan. 2020), ISBN-13 ‏ : ‎ 978-1708364748

2022, Biographies, History, Minor Pieces, Player, Problems, Richard James

Minor Pieces 31: Edward Bagehot Schwann

May 7, 2022 Richard James 1 Comment

Here’s something you might have seen before: Twickenham Chess Club’s 1896 victory over Metropolitan.

Regular readers will have met several of these players already, but not Twickenham’s Board 6: E B Schwann.

Illustrated Sporting and Dramatic News 04 April 1896

Edward Bagehot Schwann was born in Hampstead in 1872, probably towards the end of September. Edward came from a privileged background. His father, Frederick Sigismund Schwann, himself the son of a German born merchant, had been born in Huddersfield, famed in Hampshire for a while before moving to London and working as a Commission Merchant. His mother, Mary Watson Halton Bagehot, was a first cousin of Walter Bagehot, best remembered as the author of The British Constitution.

Source: https://www.schachbund.de/news/genug-des-stumpfsinns-remis-richard-der-fuenfte-kam-aus-altenburg.html

The 1881 census found Frederick and Mary living in West Heath Lodge, Branch Hall Park, Hampstead, with five children, two cousins, a governess and six servants.

Young Edward was educated at Bromsgrove School where he excelled at cricket. A brother, Henry Sigismund, would go on to represent Oxford University at cricket. An uncle, Charles Ernest Schwann, was a prominent Liberal politician, noted for his radical views, and MP for Manchester North between 1886 and 1918.

Edward must have excelled at chess as well as cricket at school, as he first came to the attention of the chess world in 1886 as a problem solver. Perhaps solving chess problems was popular with the cool kids back in the day.

It wasn’t long before Edward started composing problems himself: direct mates mostly in 2 or 3 moves. Here’s an early example.

Problem 1 #3 Morning Post 16 September 1889

A typical problem by a novice composer of the day, I’d say, but he would soon add more complexity to his compositions. (You’ll find the solutions to the problems at the end of the article.)

In 1890 Edward completed his education at Bromsgrove School, achieving a Higher Certificate in Latin, Elementary and Additional Mathematics, English and History, and, rather than proceeding to Oxford or Cambridge, returned home to his family in London.

By this point they’d moved from Hampstead to Wimbledon, living in Park House, Inner Park Road. The house itself no longer exists, but it was just off the A219 across the road from Putney Heath. The 1891 census records Frederick and Mary along with six of their children, including Edward, described as a Scholar (perhaps he was at London University) and no less than eight servants. They were clearly living in some style.

By the following year, Edward had joined the City of London Chess Club. The first mention of him I can find is from July 1892, where, described as ‘the rising young problem composer’, he won a game in a simul given by the strong amateur Percy Howell.

In January 1893 he had a game from the City of London Club Championship published in the Morning Post, although it must be admitted that White’s opening play was pretty feeble and that his queen sacrifice, while attractive, was not the only way to win. As a problemist, though, he might have had no choice. (You can click on any move in any game in this article and a pop-up window will appear enabling you to play it through.)

[pgn]

[Event “City of London Chess Club”]
[Site “?”]
[Date “1892.??.??”]
[Round “?”]
[White “Ray, H J.”]
[Black “Schwann, Edward Bagehot”]
[Result “0-1”]
[ECO “D02”]
[Annotator “Tactical Analysis 5.2 (1s)”]
[PlyCount “42”]
[EventDate “1897.??.??”]
[SourceVersionDate “2022.05.05”]

1. d4 c5 2. Nf3 d5 3. e3 Nc6 {[#]
} 4. Be2 $146 ({Predecessor:} 4. b3 Bg4 5. Be2 Nf6 6. Nbd2 e6 7. Bb2 h6 8. Ne5
Nxe5 9. dxe5 Bxe2 10. Qxe2 Nd7 11. f4 Qh4+ 12. g3 Qh3 13. O-O-O a6 14. Rdg1 Qf5
15. g4 {1-0 (35) Prusse,T-Morling,J corr 1890 Myers [Fraser]}) 4… Bf5 5. a3
e6 6. O-O {D02: 1 d4 d5 2 Nf3 sidelines, including 2…Nf6 3 g3 and 2…Nf6 3
Bf4.} Nf6 7. h3 g5 {[%cal Bg7g5,Bg5g4,Bg4h3][%mdl 32] Hoping for …Rg8.} 8.
dxc5 {The position is equal.} Bxc5 9. b4 Bb6 {& Black is more active.} 10. Bb2
Rg8 {[%cal Bh8g8,Bg8g3,Bg3g2,Bg2f2][%mdl 32] White must now prevent …g4.} 11.
Bb5 g4 12. Ne5 {White does not recover from this.} (12. hxg4 $17 {only move.}
Nxg4 13. Bd3) 12… gxh3 $19 13. g3 Qc7 {[%cal Ob6e3] …Bxe3! is the strong
threat.} 14. Nxc6 $2 {[#]} (14. Nd2) 14… Rxg3+ $1 {[%mdl 512]} 15. Kh1 Be4+
16. f3 bxc6 17. Bxf6 {[#]} Rg2 $1 {[%csl Gg2][%cal Rc7h2] Black mates.} 18.
Bxc6+ Kf8 {[%csl Gg2][%cal Rc7h2]} 19. f4 Rf2+ 20. Kg1 {[#]} Qxf4 $3 {[%mdl
512]} 21. exf4 (21. Bg7+ Kg8) 21… h2# {Weighted Error Value: White=1.14/
Black=0.15 (very precise)} 0-1

[/pgn]

By 1893 he was playing in matches for his club: here he is in a match against Oxford University. (I suspect A F Fox is a typo for A M Fox.)

Illustrated Sporting and Dramatic News 25 February 1893

In October that year Blackburne visited the City of London Club to play an 8-board blindfold simul: the only winner was ‘a rising talented player and problem composer’ – E B Schwann. (One of the three players who drew was recorded as Dr J K Leeson: this may have been a typo for Dr J R Leeson, who will feature in a future Minor Piece.) By now Edward was playing for the Metropolitan club as well as City of London.

In 1894 he represented the winning team, Surrey, in the final of the inter-county championship against Gloucestershire – but his affiliation is given as S.C.A. (Surrey Chess Association), suggesting he wasn’t, at that point, a member of any Surrey club.

In October 1894 a 50 board match took place between the Metropolitan and City of London clubs. Edward played as a reserve for City of London, finding himself faced with W H Gunston, a player of genuine master strength.

[pgn]

[Event “Metropolitan v City of London”]
[Site “?”]
[Date “1894.10.20”]
[Round “?”]
[White “Gunston, William Hewison”]
[Black “Schwann, Edward Bagehot”]
[Result “1-0”]
[ECO “C67”]
[Annotator “Tactical Analysis 5.2 (1s)”]
[PlyCount “51”]
[EventDate “1897.??.??”]
[SourceVersionDate “2022.05.05”]

1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5
Nf6 4. O-O Nxe4 5. d4 Be7 6. Qe2 Nd6 7. Bxc6 bxc6 8. dxe5 Nb7 9. Nc3 Nc5 10.
Nd4 O-O 11. Rd1 Qe8 12. Be3 {[#] C67: Ruy Lopez: Berlin Defence: 4 0-0 Nxe4.}
f6 $146 (12… d6 $14) ({Predecessor:} 12… d5 13. Qf3 Bd7 14. Qg3 f6 15. Bf4
Qf7 16. exf6 Bxf6 17. Bxc7 Bxd4 18. Rxd4 Ne6 19. Rd2 Nxc7 20. Qxc7 {1/2-1/2
(30) Gunston,W-Trenchard,H England 1890}) 13. exf6 Rxf6 {[#]} (13… Bxf6 $16
14. Qc4+ Ne6) 14. Bg5 $1 $18 {White has a decisive advantage.} Ba6 {[#]} 15.
Qe5 (15. Qe3 $1 $18 {is the precise move to win.}) 15… d6 $16 16. Qe3 Rf7 17.
Re1 Qd7 {[%cal Oh7h6]} 18. b4 Bxg5 19. Qxg5 Nb7 20. Re3 {Rae1 is the strong
threat. 0x0.001a09becf6cdp-1022s more active pieces. The black rooks are badly
placed.} Bc4 21. Rae1 Raf8 $2 (21… h6 22. Qh4 a5) 22. Re7 $18 h6 23. Rxd7
hxg5 24. Rxf7 Kxf7 25. Nxc6 {And now Re7+ would win.} a6 (25… Rc8 $142 26.
Re4 Re8 27. Rxe8 (27. Nxa7 Rxe4 28. Nxe4 Bxa2 $18) 27… Kxe8 28. Nxa7 Kd7) 26.
Re7+ {Weighted Error Value: White=0.37/Black=0.69} 1-0

[/pgn]

The newspaper report rather unhelpfully reported the match in alphabetical order of the Metropolitan players rather than in board order.

Meanwhile Edward’s problem career was continuing to grow: this problem was a first prize winner.

Problem 2 #3 1st Prize Weekblad Voor Nederland, 1895

He seemed to be present in almost every club or county match going, as well as composing prolifically. He was particularly successful over the board in the 1895-6 season: maybe one of his friends, Arthur Makinson Fox, perhaps, suggested that he might be prepared to make the journey from Wimbledon to Twickenham to join the local club, with the result that you saw at the top of this article.

In 1897 Frederick Richard Gittins published his book The Chess Bouquet. Here’s what he had to say about Edward Bagehot Schwann.

His improved form had come to the notice of the selectors and, in a match against Cambridge University, he found himself on board 2, where he lost to a most interesting opponent, E A Crowley.

Illustrated Sporting and Dramatic News 27 February 1897

Yes, this was Edward Alexander, better known as Aleister Crowley, star of The (Even More) Complete Chess Addict. You can read more about his chess career here.

Soon after this match, Edward disappeared from the London chess scene, spending a year in Munich learning more about the German School of chess composition from the experts there, and also visiting Prague, where he played this game.

[pgn]

[Event “Prague”]
[Site “?”]
[Date “1897.??.??”]
[Round “?”]
[White “Schwann, Edward Bagehot”]
[Black “Moucka, Frantisek”]
[Result “0-1”]
[ECO “C56”]
[Annotator “Tactical Analysis 5.2 (1s)”]
[PlyCount “70”]
[EventDate “1897.??.??”]

1. e4 e5 2. Nf3
Nc6 3. Bc4 Nf6 4. d4 exd4 5. O-O Bc5 6. e5 d5 7. exf6 dxc4 8. Re1+ Be6 9. Ng5
Qd5 10. Nc3 Qf5 11. Nce4 Bb6 (11… gxf6 12. g4 $1 Qg6 13. Nxe6 fxe6 14. Nxc5
$16) 12. g4 $2 {C56: Two Knights: 4 d4 exd4 5 0-0 Nxe4.} (12. fxg7 $16 Rg8 13.
Ng3) 12… Qg6 $1 $11 13. fxg7 Rg8 {[#]} (13… Qxg7 $19 14. Nxe6 fxe6) 14.
Nxe6 $146 {The position is equal.} ({Predecessor:} 14. Nxh7 O-O-O 15. Nhf6 Qxg7
16. Bg5 d3 17. Kg2 Nb4 18. c3 Nc2 19. Nxg8 Rxg8 20. f3 f5 {1-0 (35) Norlin,
A-Schallopp,E corr 1894}) 14… fxe6 {[%cal Bf7e6,Be6e5][%mdl 32]} 15. Bg5 (15.
Ng5 e5 16. Kh1 d3 $17) 15… Rxg7 16. Nf6+ $2 (16. Qf3 $11 e5 17. Nf6+ Ke7 18.
Bh4) 16… Ke7 $2 ({Black should play} 16… Kf7 $1 $19 17. h4 (17. Qf3 $2 Qxg5
18. Nh5+ Qf5 $19) 17… d3) 17. h4 Rf7 {[%mdl 8192]} (17… h6 $11 18. Nd5+ Kd7
) 18. Qe2 $4 {[%mdl 8192]} (18. f4 $18 Rxf6 19. f5) 18… e5 $19 19. Ne4+ Kd7
$2 (19… Kf8 $1 $19 {[%cal Od4d3] Strongly threatening …d3!} 20. Kh1 (20.
Qxc4 $2 h6 $19) 20… Qe6) 20. Qxc4 $11 Raf8 21. h5 Qe6 {Dancing on a razor
blade.} (21… Qg8 $5 {[%cal Rd7c8]}) 22. Qxe6+ Kxe6 23. Bh4 $2 {[%mdl 8192]} (
23. Kg2 $16 {and life is bright.}) 23… h6 $19 {And now …Rf4 would win.} (
23… Rf4 24. f3 $17) 24. Kg2 Rf4 25. Kh3 Kd5 $2 (25… Nb4 $19 26. Re2 Nxc2 $1
{[%mdl 512]} 27. Rxc2 Rxe4) 26. Nd2 $2 (26. Rad1 $15) 26… d3 $2 (26… Ba5
$19 27. Rad1 Rg8) 27. cxd3 $15 {Hoping for Bg3.} Bxf2 28. Re4 Bxh4 29. Kxh4 Rf2
30. Nc4 R8f3 $36 {[%cal Rf2h2][%mdl 2048] White is under strong pressure.} 31.
Ne3+ Ke6 {[%cal Rf2h2]} 32. g5 Nd4 {White must now prevent …Nf5+.} (32…
Rxb2 33. Rh1 $15 (33. gxh6 Rh2+ 34. Kg5 Rfh3 $15)) 33. gxh6 $2 {[#]} (33. Re1
Nf5+ 34. Nxf5 Rh2+ 35. Kg4 Rxf5 36. gxh6 Rfxh5 37. d4 Rxh6 38. Rxe5+ Kd6 39.
R5e2 (39. Kg5 R6h5+ 40. Kf4 R5h4+ 41. Kg3 R4h3+ 42. Kg4 Rh7 $17)) 33… Rxe3 $1
$19 {[%mdl 576] Remove Defender, Decoy. Black is clearly winning.} 34. Rxe3
Nf5+ 35. Kg4 (35. Kh3 $142 Nxe3 36. Rg1 Rf3+ 37. Kh4 Nf5+ 38. Kg4 Rxd3 39. h7)
35… Nxe3+ {Weighted Error Value: White=1.04/Black=0.91} 0-1

[/pgn]

Problem 3 #3 2nd Prize Brighton Society, 1898

Here’s another prizewinning mate in 3. Was it influenced by his time in Germany?

By the time he returned in early 1898 Twickenham Chess Club had transitioned into Thames Valley Chess Club, and, while rejoining his now Teddington based colleagues he also decided to join the new Richmond Chess Club, which was, as we’ll see in future articles, becoming more ambitious.

Windsor and Eton Express 02 December 1899

Here he is, in late 1899, in one of Richmond’s regular matches against Windsor, where he met another famous opponent who could hardly have been further removed from Crowley: Sir Walter Parratt.

In this game from a county match in January 1900, he preferred 9… g6 to the more popular 9… Qd5 in the famous Max Lange Attack. Today’s engines agree with him, preferring Black after this move.

[pgn]

[Event “Sussex v Surrey”]
[Site “?”]
[Date “1900.01.13”]
[Round “?”]
[White “Durant, Thomas”]
[Black “Schwann, Edward Bagehot”]
[Result “0-1”]
[ECO “C56”]
[Annotator “Tactical Analysis 5.2 (1s)”]
[PlyCount “48”]
[SourceVersionDate “2022.05.04”]

1. e4 {[%cal Be2e4,Be4e5,Be5f6][%mdl 32]}
e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bc4 Nf6 4. d4 exd4 5. O-O Bc5 6. e5 d5 7. exf6 dxc4 8. Re1+
Be6 9. Ng5 g6 {C56: Two Knights: 4 d4 exd4 5 0-0 Nxe4.} (9… Qxf6 $2 10. Nxe6
fxe6 11. Qh5+ Kd7 12. Qxc5 $18) 10. Qg4 $2 (10. Nxe6 fxe6 11. Rxe6+ Kf7 $15) (
10. Qf3 $16 O-O 11. Rxe6 (11. Nxe6 fxe6 12. Bg5 Qd5 $17) 11… fxe6 12. f7+ Kh8
13. Nxe6) 10… Qd5 $17 {[#] Hoping for …0-0.} 11. Nxe6 $146 ({Predecessor:}
11. Nd2 Kd7 12. Nxe6 fxe6 13. Ne4 Bd6 14. Nxd6 cxd6 15. Bh6 Ne5 16. Qg5 Rhe8
17. Rxe5 Qxe5 {0-1 (26) Dimer,J-Van Foreest,A Amsterdam 1899}) 11… fxe6 {
Black is better.} 12. Rxe6+ $2 {[%mdl 8192]} (12. Nd2 $17) 12… Kf7 $19 13.
Re4 Rae8 14. f3 (14. Nd2 Kxf6 15. Rxe8 (15. b4 $2 Bxb4 16. Re2 Kg7 $19) 15…
Rxe8 16. Nf3 (16. Qf4+ $2 Qf5 $19)) 14… Nb4 {[#] White must now prevent …
d3+.} 15. Na3 d3+ {[%cal Bd4d3,Bd3c2][%mdl 32]} 16. Kh1 dxc2 {( -> …Qd1+)}
17. h4 Qd1+ 18. Kh2 Bg1+ 19. Kh3 {Strongly threatening Rxe8.} h5 ({Wrong is}
19… Qd6 $2 20. Bf4 h5 21. Bxd6 $19 (21. Qg5 $2 Qd7+ 22. Kg3 Rxe4 $19)) 20.
Qf4 Nd5 21. Qg5 Rxe4 {Active counter play!} 22. fxe4 Qd3+ 23. Qg3 {[#]} Nf4+ $1
{[%mdl 512]} 24. Bxf4 Qd7+ {White did not feel at home in the position after
the opening. Weighted Error Value: White=2.15/Black=0.68} 0-1

[/pgn]

From the same period, here’s a loss against tinned milk pioneer Arthur James Maas from the Surrey Challenge Cup. The game seemed to feature a lot of rather inconsequential manoeuvring typical of those days of limited positional understanding before Black came out on top.

[pgn]

[Event “Surrey Challenge Cup”]
[Site “?”]
[Date “1900.??.??”]
[Round “?”]
[White “Schwann, Edward Bagehot”]
[Black “Maas, Arthur James”]
[Result “0-1”]
[ECO “C54”]
[Annotator “Tactical Analysis 5.2 (1s)”]
[PlyCount “82”]
[SourceVersionDate “2020.10.20”]

1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bc4 Bc5
4. c3 Nf6 5. d3 d6 6. Nbd2 O-O 7. O-O {[#]} Ne7 $146 {C54: Giuoco Piano: 4 c3
Nf6, main lines with 5 d4 and 5 d3.} ({Predecessor:} 7… Bb6 8. Bb3 Bg4 9. Re1
Ne7 10. Nf1 Ng6 11. h3 Be6 12. Bc2 h6 13. Be3 Qd7 14. Ng3 Bxe3 15. Rxe3 Nf4 16.
Nd2 Bxh3 17. gxh3 Qxh3 {0-1 (39) Hanham,J-Showalter,J New York 1894}) 8. d4
exd4 9. cxd4 Bb6 {[%cal Of6e4] White is slightly better.} 10. Re1 Bg4 {[%cal
Ob6d4]} 11. Qb3 d5 12. exd5 Nexd5 13. Ne5 {And now Bxd5 would win.} Be6 14.
Ndf3 {Hoping for Ng5.} h6 {Prevents Ng5.} 15. Qd3 c6 16. Bd2 Rc8 17. Bb3 Ba5
18. Bc2 Bxd2 (18… Re8 {with more complications.} 19. a3 Bxd2 20. Qxd2 Rc7)
19. Qxd2 Qd6 20. Nd3 b6 21. Nh4 Rcd8 22. Rad1 Ne7 {[%cal Bd5e7,Be7f5,Bf5g7,
Bg7e6][%mdl 32]} 23. Nc1 Rd7 24. h3 {Prevents Bg4.} Rfd8 {[%cal Rd6d4]} 25. Qe2
g5 26. Nf3 Nf5 {Inhibits h4.} 27. g4 (27. Qf1 $5 {[%cal Rf3e5]}) 27… Ng7 28.
b3 Bd5 $36 {[%mdl 2048] Black has strong initiative.} 29. Ne5 Re7 {…c5 is
the strong threat.} 30. Qd2 Ne6 {Strongly threatening …Nf4.} 31. Ne2 $2 {
Against Nf4} (31. Bf5 $17) 31… c5 $19 32. Qc3 (32. Qe3 Rde8 33. Qg3 (33. dxc5
$2 Nxc5 34. Nc4 Qc6 $19) 33… Nxd4 34. Nxd4 cxd4) 32… cxd4 ({And not} 32…
Nxd4 33. Nxd4 cxd4 34. Qxd4 $17) 33. Nxd4 Rc7 $2 (33… Nxd4 $19 34. Qxd4 Rde8)
34. Qb2 {[%mdl 8192] [#]} (34. Nc4 $16 {is forced if you want to stay better.}
Nxd4 35. Qxd4) 34… Nxd4 35. Rxd4 Re7 36. Rd3 Rde8 37. Rde3 Bb7 38. Rd1 {
Against Qd5} (38. Bd3 b5 39. Bf1 (39. f3 $2 Nd5 $19)) 38… Qc7 {[%cal Re7e5]
Black is clearly winning.} 39. Rde1 (39. Rc1 $142 Qd6 40. Rce1 (40. Rd1 $2 Nd5
$19)) 39… Nd5 40. Re4 Nc3 41. Rc4 {[#]} Rxe5 $1 {[%mdl 512] Weighted Error
Value: White=0.75/Black=0.39} 0-1

[/pgn]

In September 1900 Edward decided the time had come to take part in a tournament against stronger oppostion. He entered the top section of the Southern Counties Chess Union championship in Bath, but found the event tough going, eventually finishing in 12th place on 3½/14. The great Henry Ernest Atkins was the winner on 12½/14, a point ahead of Herbert Levi Jacobs. Although a decent county standard player, he was no match for those of master strength. Undaunted, he entered the City of London Championship, but was again unsuccessful.

The 1901 census recorded Edward as still living with his parents, three sisters and eight servants in Wimbledon, and working as a Publisher’s Clerk. By now he was very much respected not just as a composer of problems, but as a leading authority called upon to act as a judge in composing competitions.

He was also continuing to play in club and county matches: clearly a true chess addict, and, given that he was still in his 20s, there was every chance that he would add to his reputation over the next few decades.

He had also, at round about this time, fallen in love, and would soon announce his engagement to Miss Rita Fox (apparently no relation to A M Fox) of the Ladies’ Chess Club (also here and here) a lady of rather mysterious origins. I hope to write a series of articles about some of the Ladies’ Chess Club members when time permits.

But then, on 7 September 1902, at the age of only 30, his life came to a very premature end when he died suddenly of heart failure.

He had made a will a couple of months earlier so perhaps he knew he was ill. The value of his estate was £20370, about £2.67 million today, and he ensured his fiancée was well provided for. He also left a bequest to the celebrated master Richard Teichmann, who was struggling with both financial and health matters, and was, as a result, able to afford an operation. I haven’t yet been able to identify Russell Scott junior: can anyone help?

There are some more stories to be told. Due to the prevalence of anti-German sentiments during the 1910s, many possessors of German surnames chose to change them. Several members of the Schwann family simply dropped the ‘ch’, becoming Swann. Edward’s brother Ernest, however, preferred to use his mother’s maiden name: Bagehot. Ernest married Ethel Caroline Pollock, whose mother, Amy Menella Dodgson, was a first cousin of Charles Lutwidge Dodgson, better known today as Lewis Carroll. Carroll was himself a keen chess player and used the game in Through the Looking Glass. Ethel’s second cousin once removed, Algernon Pollock Aris, married Janet Alicia Elford, my third cousin once removed (here‘s their oldest son). So, if my tree is correct, Edward Bagehot Schwann, one of the first members of Richmond Chess Club, is the brother-in-law of the 2nd cousin 1x removed of the husband of my 3rd cousin 1x removed!

Another coincidence: some years ago I taught a boy named Adam Swann, whose parents were, and still are, family friends. His 7-year-old son is now an enthusiastic player. His name, of course, is Edward Swann.

Perhaps he’ll follow in the footsteps of his near namesake, a true chess enthusiast who, in his tragically short life, became a pretty useful player, and, more importantly, a leading authority on and composer of chess problems.

Come back soon for more stories of the early members of Richmond Chess Club.

Acknowledgements and sources:

ancestry.co.uk
findmypast.co.uk
edochess.ca
chessgames.com
chess.com
BritBase
Yet Another Chess Problem Database
Wikipedia
The Chess Bouquet (thanks to Tim Harding)
Various other online resources linked in the text

Solutions:

Problem 1:
1. Qf6! Kd5 2. Nf5! Ke4 (2… e4 3. Ne3#) (2… Kc4 3. Qxf7#) 3. Qc6#

Problem 2:
1. Qb7!
1… Ke5 2. Bf6+ ♔e4 3. Nd2#
1… Kd4 2. Nd2 2… Ke5 3. Bf6# 2… e5 3. Be3# 2… e×d5 3. Qg7# 2… e×f5 3. Bf6#
1… Kf3 2. Ne3+ d5 3. Nd2#
1…e5 2. Nd2+ Kd4 3. Be3#
1… e×d5 2. Nd2+ 2… Kd4 3. Qg7# 2… Ke5 3. Qg7# 1… e×f5 2. Ne3+ 2… Kd4 3. Bf6# 2… Ke5 3. Qd5# 2… d5 3. Q×d5#

Problem 3:

1. Nc3! threat 2. Qd5+ 2… Kf4 3. Bh6# 2… Kf6 3. Ng4# 1… Be4 2. Q×e4+ Kf6 3. Qf5# 3. Qe7# 3. Qf4#
1… Ba2 2. Qe4+ Kf6 3. Qf5#/3. Qe7#/3. Qf4#
1… N×f2 2. Qg7+ Kf4 3. Qg3#
1… Kd4 2. Ne2+ 2… Ke3 3. Bh6# 2… Ke5 3. Ng4# 2… Kc4 3. Qg8#
1… Kf4 2. Ne2+ 2… Ke3 3. Bh6# 2… Ke5 3. Ng4#

British Chess News

Minor Pieces 35: William Ward Part 2

Tata Steel Chess Tournament 2021

Dynamic Defence

Minor Pieces 34: William Ward Part 1

Attacking Strategies for Club Players: How to Create a Deadly Attack on the Enemy King

Minor Pieces 33: Charles Redway

Unbeatable!: The Art of Defense

Minor Pieces 32: James D’Arcy

110 Instructive Chess Annotations

Minor Pieces 31: Edward Bagehot Schwann

We focus on the British Chess Scene Past & Present!