PN Lee playing JH Donner in the 1966 Zonal at The Hague. Peter just played 7.h4
We wish Peter Lee all the best on his birthday.
Peter N Lee
Peter Nicholas Charles Lee was born on Sunday, November 21st in 1943 in Lambeth, London. His mother’s maiden name was Paganucci.
Peter attended Exeter College, Oxford from 1962-1966 to read mathematics followed by postgraduate statistics gaining an MA in 1969.
Some of the participants in the Paul Keres display on November 25th, 1962, at St Pancras Town Hall, London WC1. Back row : AJ. Whiteley, D, Floyer, PJ Collins, PJ Adams, RC Vaughan, KB Harman, D. Parr, DNL Levy, Front row : MV Lambshire, AE Hopkins (selector) Paul Keres, Miss D. Dobson, RE Hartley, BC Gillman, WR Hartston and PN Lee. Photograph by AM Reilly. Source : BCM, 1963, page 13
In 1963 Peter represented Oxford in the 81st Varsity Match played at the University of London Union in Malet Street on Korchnoi’s birthday (March 23rd). Peter had black on board 5 and drew with Frederick Michael Akeroyd in a King’s Gambit Declined.
Here is the winning Oxford (4-3) Team :
The winning 1963 Oxford Varsity match team : From left to right (standing): PN Lee, JWF May, GC Taylor, AIN Brodie, PD Yerbury; (sitting) JK Footner, RW Morgan. Thanks : John Saunders in Britbase.
Peter moved to top board in 1964 and had white against the son of BH Wood, FM Christopher Baruch Wood and won. The match was drawn.
1965 saw a 5.5 – 1.5 Oxford victory with Peter beating Graham Arthur Winbow.
During this period Peter found time to win the British Championship at Hastings in 1965. Peter Clarke reported in the October 1965 British Chess Magazine:
“Seventy years on from the great international tournament of 1895, which sowed the seeds of the Christmas congresses. the fifty-second in the British Chess Federation’s annual series-and this too began at Hastings, 1904 – saw victory and the national title go to the youngest player ever. Peter N. Lee, of London, a twenty-one-year-old Oxford University graduate in mathematics, made light of playing in the Championship for the first time and led from start to finish. Jonathan Penrose and Norman Littlewood vied with him all the way but in the last round had to be content with draws sharing second place 1/2 point behind with 8. ”
Peter Lee
Peter played at Hastings in 1965 and we can see him here in this silent movie at 1’40” in :
Peter’s final Varsity appearance as British Champion in 1966 saw another drawn match but Peter’s best Varsity result when he beat Bill Hartston with the white pieces in a King’s Indian Attack.
In world cup year Peter was selected by the BCF to represent England at the Havana Olympiad on board two below Peter Clarke in Group 4 and then Final B scoring a creditable +4=7-1.
Lugano 1968 saw Peter playing as first reserve and scoring an excellent +7=4-2 (Penrose on top board scored a wonderful 83.3% for the silver medal.
In another world cup year (1970) in his final Olympiad appearance Peter played on board four and recorded +4=9-2
Peter Nicholas Lee (to the left of RD Keene)
Peter played in the British Championships again in 1967, 1968, 1971 and finally in 1972 withdrawing after five rounds following a loss to David Pritchard. This is Peter’s last game recorded in Megabase2020.
With the white pieces Peter was a committed 1.e4 fan playing 8.c3 in the Lopez and open sicilians.
As the second player he played the Sicilian Najdorf and the Dragon along with the King’s Indian.
According to Wikipedia : “Later, he turned to contract bridge, at which he has also been highly successful. He has won the English Bridge Union’s National Pairs title four times, the first time in 2003, and has also been a member of the team that won the Gold Cup, the premier teams event in Britain, in 2003 and 2011. This makes him the only person who has won British championships in both chess and bridge.”
Until 1979 he worked as a statistician to the Tobacco Research Council, in Harrogate and then in London. From 1979 to 1984 he was an independent consultant in statistics and advisor in epidemiology and toxicology to a number of tobacco, pharmaceutical and chemical companies.
He formed P N Lee Statistics and Computing Ltd in 1984 to widen these activities. Peter is a Chartered Statistician who has published over 200 papers, letters and articles, and several books.
Peter is currently a director of PNLSC based in Palmers Green, London, N13.
Peter Lee
As a consultant in medical statistics and epidemiology, he has also published over 200 papers, many on the effects of tobacco on health.[2]
Peter reached a peak Elo rating of 2390 aged 47 in July 1990 according to MegaBase 2020. However, his peak playing strength was probably in or around 1971.
Peter has returned to playing for the Athenaeum in the Hamilton-Russell Cup. For those not aware : “The Hamilton-Russell Chess Tournament is a chess competition competed in by social, political, military and sports Clubs in Great Britain.”
According to Paul Littlewood currently Peter “plays Bridge for Surrey and chess for the Athenaeum in London”.
Best wishes to IM Andrew Kinsman born on this day Friday November 20, 1964 to Kenneth H and Yvonne (née Greening) Kinsman. Andrew has sisters Cassandra Suzie and Joanna Marie and a brother Graham John. His father played for Wimbledon and then retired to Kettering (thanks Richard James).
Andrew Peter Harry Kinsman was born in North East Surrey and grew up in Kingston-Upon-Thames near Kingston Hospital (thanks Richard James!). He was a member of Richmond Junior Chess Club.
IM Andrew Kinsman
Andrew was a member of the University of Sussex chess team in 1983 along with IM Byron Jacobs. Andrew became an editor of chess publisher BT Batsford Ltd. following in the footsteps of Bob Wade, Paul Lamford and others.
Andrew was Southern Counties (SCCU) champion for the 1986-87 and 1991-92 seasons.
He made his first Grandmaster norm with his victory in the 1997 Owens Corning International in Wrexham.
Crosstable from Owen Corning 1997, Wrexham
Andrew’s peak rating was 2430 in January 1998. He played for Guildford in the Four Nations Chess League and for Wimbledon in other leagues. His last ECF grading was 222D in July 2002 and highest may have been 230B in July 2000.
He left chess and turned to poker becoming a successful player and author and was married to Pauline. They lived in Ditchling Rise in Brighton.
He joined Byron Jacobs to form Chess Press which eventually morphed into First Rank Publishing.
IM Andrew Kinsman
With the white pieces Andrew was consistently a d4 player with the occasional Nf3 thrown in. He played a “slow” Queen’s Gambit (Nf3 inserted before c4) and the Trompowski Attack for variety.
As the second player Andrew played the French Winawer and the Benko Gambit.
Andrew is registered for both Wimbledon and Guildford and represented Wuppertal in the Bundesliga. Andrew’s most recent appearance in 4NCL was the final weekend of the 2001/2 season beating JA Toothill.
He has written several books on chess (and poker) as follows :
French Winawer by Andrew KinsmanThe Benko Gambit by Andrew Kinsman & Byron JacobsSpanish Exchange by Andrew KinsmanModern Benoni by Andrew KinsmanImprove Your Middlegame Play by Andrew KinsmanIM Andrew Kinsman
James Derrick Slater was born on Wednesday, March 13th, 1929. On the same day “Leon Trotsky gave his first interview to the foreign press in his apartment in Turkey, saying he was writing a book tracing the history of his opposition to Joseph Stalin and expressing a desire to go to Germany because he preferred the care of German physicians.”
He was born in Heswall, Cheshire (Wirral, Merseyside was the registration district) to Hubert Slater and Jessica Alexandra Barton.
He arrived (aged 31) in Southampton on board the Pretoria Castle as a first class passenger whilst resident in 16, Stafford Terrace, Kensington and his occupation was given as Company Director.
He died on 18th November 2015 in Cranleigh, Surrey aged 86. He had four children one of which is Mark Slater.
James Slater, Chairman Slater Walker Securities plc Director, British Leyland. (Photo by Photoshot/Getty Images)
Jim wrote his chess autobiography as follows :
(This text was retrieved using the Wayback machine via https://web.archive.org/web/20110909053137/http://www.jimslater.org.uk/views/chess/)
“As a boy Jim Slater enjoyed playing Monopoly and draughts but his main indoor hobby was chess. He stopped playing chess after leaving school as he found it took too much time and concentration while studying for accountancy.
It was not until a colleague asked Jim to teach him to improve his game in the late 1960s that his interest in chess was rekindled. For a short while Jim joined a London chess club (Richard James reveals that this is West London Chess Club as mentioned in their internal magazine) but found he preferred correspondence chess which he could play much more conveniently when he returned home in the evening. Jim did quite well in his correspondence club, going up a few grades, until he reached a level at which it became hard work.
Jim had maintained a link with Leonard Barden, who was a British Champion and a chess correspondent. With his help Jim began subsidising the annual Hastings Tournament with a view to expanding it so that leading players would have a chance to qualify as international masters. Other countries would not invite British players to play in their tournaments until they became international masters so they were in an impossible situation. The small amount of help Jim was able to give to Hastings was arranged in a very low-key way and attracted very little publicity. The World Chess Championship would prove to be a very different proposition.
British accountant, investor and business writer Jim Slater (1929 – 2015) signing documents at a desk, UK, 11th May 1965. (Photo by Reg Burkett/Daily Express/Hulton Archive/Getty Images)
For the previous two decades the Russians had dominated world chess and then the West produced two exceptional players – Bobby Fischer of the USA and Bent Larsen of Denmark. In particular, Fischer had fantastic potential but he was handicapped by being extremely temperamental.
In the final rounds of the World Chess Championship the players were playing the best of ten games. In the quarter finals Fischer won six games to nil. In the semi-final Fischer was paired with Larsen and also beat him six games to nil. This had never happened before in world chess, and for the first time it looked as if the Russians were going to get a run for their money.
Personalities, Crime, pic: 3rd December 1976, Financier Jim Slater arriving at London’s Mansion House Police Court to face fraud charges involving more than 4,000,000 (Photo by Popperfoto via Getty Images/Getty Images)
In the last qualifier Fischer came up against Petrosian, a brilliant defensive player. Fischer won the first game but lost the second. The next three games were drawn. It was said by some that Fischer had a bad cold and everyone wondered if he could regain his earlier momentum. After this relapse he won the next four games. This made Fischer challenger to Spassky. Spassky too was a brilliant attacking player and had been a chess genius since early childhood, so it promised to be an exceptional match.
While preparations were being made for the World Championship in Iceland, Fischer started to complain about the prize money which he thought should be doubled.
‘I was driving into London early one Monday morning in mid-July feeling disappointed that after all this build-up Fischer might not be taking on Spassky, when it suddenly occurred to me that I could easily afford the extra prize money personally. As well as providing me with a fascinating spectacle for the next few weeks it would give chess players throughout the world enormous pleasure for the match to proceed.’
Jim Slater
From The Complete Chess Addict (Faber&Faber, 1987) , Mike Fox & Richard James:
“Jim Slater, the financier and children’s author, was a strong schoolboy player. He gave up chess for finance. This turned out a very good thing for chess, since he was able to tempt Bobby Fischer (with a £50,000 increase in stake-money) into playing Boris Spassky for the world title in 1972. Here’s what the young Slater was capable of:”
Bobby Fischer Goes to War, Faber&Faber, 2004
From Bobby Fischer Goes to War , David Edmonds and John Eidinow, Faber & Faber, 2004 we have a fuller account as follows :
“Driving to work in London early on Monday morning, 3 July, Jim Slater was upset by a radio report on the challenger’s non-appearance in Reykjavik. Slater was a businessman who had set up his own company, Slater Walker Securities, in 1964, when he was in his mid-thirties. His partner, Peter Walker, had left the business to become a Conservative member of parliament and a government minister under Edward Heath and,later, Margaret Thatcher. At the time of the Fischer-Spassky match, the company reportedly had a controlling interest in 250 companies around the world. Supremely confident, decisive, ruthless in business, Slater had by then amassed a fortune of, in his own words,’£6 million and rising’. A gambler by nature, the one big luxury he allowed himself was to play bridge for thousands of pounds with stronger opponents.
He was also a chess fan and supporter of the game, subsidizing the annual Hastings tournament. In the years following Fischer-Spassky, he would, alongside the former British champion and journalist Leonard Barden (who provided the vision and organization), transform the state of British chess by channelling funds into junior competition. Now he decided that he could easily afford the money to send Fischer to Reykjavik – or expose the American as a coward. He would double the prize, putting an additional £50,000 ($125,000) into the pot. Arriving at his office that Monday morning, he passed on his offer through Barden, who then spoke to Marshall, giving the US attorney some background details about this championship angel. Marshall then talked to Fischer. Slater says he also telephoned his friend David Frost, who in turn rang his friend Henry Kissinger’ Kissinger then contacted Fischer. What motivated Slater?’As well as providing me with a fascinating spectacle for the next few weeks, I could give chess players throughout the world enormous pleasure’
Slater’s offer made headlines in London’s Evening Standard and his house was soon swarming with reporters. When he returned from work, he told his astonished wife,’I had a good idea on the way to the office.’The good idea was couched in challenging terms: ‘If he isn’t afraid of Spassky, then I have removed the element of money’
London Edition of the Evening Standard, July 3rd, 1972. Retrieved from https://chesshistory.com/winter/extra/spasskyfischer.html
It is not altogether clear how the British offer finally persuaded Fischer. Paul Marshall certainly had a hand, initially pushing it as the answer to all Fischer’s financial demands.’But he wouldn’t accept it; he says.’His experiences with people promising things had taught him not to believe them, particularly with money. And he wanted proof. And he said no.’Marshall tried to change his mind. Phoning Barden, the attorney took his place in the gallery of callers that saved the match.’I said if I were them I would rephrase the offer. Slater should say he didn’t think his money was at risk, because Fischer was just making excuses. He should say that deep down Fischer was frightened. I said Bobby might be piqued by that challenge – and he was. I knew Bobby was very very competitive and combative and would not like to be thought of as a chicken.’ Slater denies this version of events. He maintains it was always his idea to express his offer as a taunt. He never spoke to Fischer and never received a word of gratitude from him.’Fischer is known to be rude, graceless, possibly insane,’he says.’I didn’t do it to be thanked. I did it because it would be good for chess.'”
The match between Fischer and Spassky was a most exciting one and fully up to everyone’s expectations. Fischer won the match.
A few months later, in an endeavour to help our young players, Jim Slater offered on behalf of The Slater Foundation to give a prize of £5,000 (about £75,000 in today’s money) to the first British grand master and £2,500 to the next four. Over the next few years Great Britain went from having no grand masters to twenty and became one of the strongest teams of young chess players in the world.”
and here is his entry from chessgames.com which lists one game from 1947 : “James Derrick Slater, better known as Jim Slater, was an English accountant, investor and business writer. Slater became a well-known chess patron in the 1970s, when he stepped in to double the prize fund of the Fischer-Spassky world championship match at a time when Fischer was threatening not to play, thereby enabling the match to go forward. Afterwards he provided significant financial backing for the development of young British players, many of whom later contributed to Britain becoming one of the world’s strongest chess countries in the 1980s.”
From The Oxford Companion to Chess (OUP, 1984) by Hooper and Whyld :
“British chess patron, financier, children’s author, Slater achieved wide fame in the chess world on the occasion of the Spassky-Fischer world championship match of 1972. Fischer showed reluctance to play and apparently decided to do so when Slater added £50,000 to the prize fund. Slater has also made contributions to many other chess causes and in 1973 set-up the Slater Foundation, a charitable trust which, among other activities, pays for the coaching of young players and provides help for their families if needed. Leonard Barden advises the trust on chess matters. In the 1970s, partly owing to this patronage, junior players in Britain became as strong as those in any other country.”
From The Encyclopedia of Chess (Batsford, 1977) by Harry Golombek:
“An English financier, a great patron and benefactor of chess, both on a national and world level. Passionately devoted to chess from schooldays. He said that on leaving school he hesitated between the alternatives of become a chess master and of going into business, opting for the latter on the grounds that he was not sure of his chess-playing prowess.
It is perhaps a fortunate thing for chess that he did not become a chess-master, since he offer of a £50,000 increase to the stake at the match at Reykjavik in Iceland in 1972 may well have swayed Fischer into consenting to play. He established a Slater Foundation Fund which helps young English players to go and play abroad.”
The Zulu Principle, Jim SlaterInvestment Made Easy, Jim SlaterReturn to Go, Jim SlaterThe Tricky Troggle, James and Christopher SlaterThe Great Gulper, James and Christopher Slater
The following article was originally published on November 7th 1980 in Education magazine. The author was George Low. George may be found on LinkedIn. Education magazine was a weekly publication that started in 1903 and in 1997 was absorbed into Education Journal.
The article was reproduced in 1981 in The English Chess Explosion by Murray Chandler and Ray Keene :
Education, 7th November 1980
The school seedbed of Britain’s chess success
George Low explains why our youngsters are doing so well
“Britain’s international chess team, with an average age of under 30, is now the most formidable and talented in the world. At this month’s tournament in Malta they will be breathing down the necks of the Russians for the championship and have a high chance of coming away with a medal.
Behind the national team there is an even more promising junior squad, who have won the European championships two years’ running. Among the up and coming youngsters who are beginning to give the Russians cause for anxiety are two potential world champions – Tony Miles, now a Grandmaster and serious contender for the world championship, and Nigel Short, who at 15 is already the youngest international master ever.
The remarkable upsurge of standards and interest is a phenomenon of some educational significance. The schools have been the seedbed. The nurturing of young talent (often from the age of six or even younger) has been a tangible proof of the dedication of teachers to supervision and support outside school
hours, and there are few extra-curricular activities more time-consuming than chess.
But alongside the school clubs a network of small informal clubs have sprung up and a series of tournaments for all ages and groups. City financier Jim Slater and Lloyds Bank can take the main credit for financial sponsorship of the junior squad, and newspapers like The Sunday Times and The Evening Standard have stimulated a great deal of competitive zeal through their school and individual tournaments.
Like many educational developments in this country, the chess phenomenon has completely by-passed the Department of Education and Science, who have turned down all approaches for financial and even moral support. Officials are wont to plead that there is no mention of chess in the 1944 Education Act or its successors, This is, of course, true, but the Department, nevertheless, manages to make all sorts of direct and indirect contributions to musical and sporting activities. When set beside the intense involvement of many other nations in the development of chess the official attitude appears all the more
uninspiring.
How then has Britain managed to bound up the international league table from no. 26 to among the top three nations of the world? Mr. Leonard Barden, manager of the junior squad, traces the resurgence of interest to media coverage of the Spassky-Fischer duel eight years ago and its sequel between Korchnoi and Karpov five years later.
In about 1972-3, he recalls, the selectors started casting their nets much wider than the Home Counties grammar schools where the recruiting ground had
traditionally been. He and his colleagues looked through the results of a lot more tournaments all over the country. Those who had real talent were encouraged to go in for the National Junior Squad championships and to enter adult tournaments. They were also given the opportunity to play against Grandmaster in ‘simuls’ (simultaneous games involving 20 or 30 boards). Mr. Barden now has 500 young players on his books in whom he takes an active interest, following their tournament games and writing to suggest alternative strategies in their games. Beneath these there is a pool of 2000 to 3000 children who play in tournaments and are graded players whom the selectors have their eye on.
Julian and Nigel Short play Korchnoi in a simul. Leonard Barden observes.
Nigel Short was an early find when he won the Merseyside championship under nines. By the age of 9.5 he was developing very rapidly under special tuition and was entering simuls with Grandmasters. He was one of the children who Leonard Barden put into his training schedule and persuaded him to aim for the highest league. ‘Between the ages of nine and fourteen they can develop very rapidly and are ready to play with adults. After that they fall foul of the English exam system and that slows them down having to memorise all that largely irrelevant mass of information,’Mr. Barden says.
There is no risk of force-feeding the children in his squad, he says, they are all naturally bright and do not suffer from the competition within their age group. They are as group a perfectly normal lot. He believes that besides the technical help promising youngsters can be given such as being introduced to chess magazines, motivation is all-important. The Department of Education should do more to foster chess, he thinks, achievement in chess and success in academic subjects.
Mr. Michael Sinclair, who runs the chess club at Hampton School and organises many school tournaments, see numerous educational and personal benefits from children playing chess in schools. The older boys (Ed: this was 1980!) can help the younger ones to develop their game and they in turn learn a lot from competing with adults in congresses.
The game teaches children to concentrate for long periods of time, to observe correct etiquette and to accept adjudication decisions (Ed: I suspect this means arbiting decisions!). It also gives them an understanding of a symbolic language that can be a useful grounding in such subjects as algebra or even computer programming. in later studies. Given its undoubted educational contribution, it is surprising that few books have been written on teaching chess in schools.”
Gordon Thomas Crown with BCM Editor Julius Du Mont observing
We remember Gordon Crown who died this day (November 17th) in 1947.
Gordon Thomas Crown was born on Thursday, June 20th, 1929 to James Crown (born 18th November 1899) and Hilda M Crown (born 3rd October 1900, née Sharrott).
James was a refrigerating engineer and Hilda carried out unpaid domestic duties. The birth was registered in the district of West Derby, Lancashire.
According to the electoral register of 1939 they lived at 8 Ingledene Road, Liverpool, Liverpool C.B., Lancashire, England. (This is L18 3HJ in this day and age.)
According to Zoopla : “This 4 bed freehold semi-detached house is located at 8 Ingledene Road, Liverpool L18 3HJ and has an estimated current value of £581,000. Ingledene Road has 19 properties on it with an average current value of £492,220, compared to an average property value of £325,035 for L18. There have been 5 property sales on Ingledene Road, L18 over the last 5 years with an average house price paid of £474,900. There are currently 108 properties for sale in L18 with an average asking price of £372,163 and 59 properties to rent in L18 with an average asking rent of £408 pw.”
Jon D’Souza-Eva (Oxford) wrote to us on November 17th, 2021 to reveal:
“I always thought that Gordon Crown was an only child, but after a little searching I found that he had a younger brother, Rodney, who was born and died in 1938.
There’s also a rather mysterious redacted entry in the Crown household in the 1939 register. I can’t find evidence for any other siblings who might account for it.”
and we asked Leonard Barden about this replying:
“I can’t confirm the Rodney, but Gordon died the night after I visited him on a daily leave pass from RAF Padgate. I didn’t know about it for two weeks because of the lack of news facilities at my camp. But then when I heard I wrote to his mother and she sent back the Kotov photo with a very sad letter from which one phrase has remained in my memory:
“Our other son died nine years ago and Gordon was all we had”….”
Liverpool Echo 15 April 1946
Both Sunnucks and Hooper & Whyld are silent on GTC : surprising!
From CHESS, Volume 12 (1947), Number 138 (March), page 176:
“G. T. Crown…England’s 17.5 Year Old International
“Gordon T. Crown, who takes his place in an England team at the age of 17.5, was born at Liverpool on June 20th, 1929. He learnt the moves at the age of nine, being first made aware of chess by the match between the BBC and the listeners over the radio. Until 1944, he had few opportunities for over-the-board play and was forced to devote himself to studying books and magazines.
In 1944-5 he entered for the Lancashire Junior Championship and won it as his first attempt; he repeated his success last year and also entered for the senior event, in which he reached the semi-final, only to throw away a won game against HG Rhodes.
In April 1946, he played in the British Boys’ Championship at Hastings and came second, losing only in his final game. In August he played in the Nottingham Congress, was placed in one of the Major sections and “was quite satisfied” he reports, at finishing half-a-point outside the prize list, especially as he was the only one to defeat EG Sergeant, who topped the section.
At Hastings, the situation was curiously reversed. Here he won the section, his only loss being to EG Sergeant, who finished just outside the prize list.
He has just finished school and is waiting to enter a University where he intends to study Geography and History. For private reading, he enjoys best Military and Naval History – apart from good detective stories.
Apart from chess, he is interested in most games, both indoor and outdoor, with special preference for tennis ad table-tennis when it is a matter of playing and cricket for reading about.
He is diabetic – but so was one of the players in the Davis Cup team which recently crushed Australia! His games show the evidence of deep and extensive study of the game combined with an ever-ready imagination.
“Gordon Crown is one the sad might-have-beens of the world of chess. In his short life he had already shown himself to be of master strength and a potentially very great player when suddenly, at the age of eighteen, he died during an operation.
He learnt chess when aged nine and soon became one of the best players, first in Liverpool,, his home town, and then in Lancashire, of which county he won the Junior Championship three years in succession.
Crown first came into national prominence when he came second in the British Boys Championship in 1946. (Ed : the winner was John Fuller) In the Hastings Congress of 1946/7 he won first place in a strong Premier Reserves Section.
The last year of his life even saw him reaching out to international success, Playing on board 9 for Britain against The Netherlands he scored 1.5 out of 2 against L.J. Tummers. Then he won third prize in the British Championship at Harrogate. As a result of this success he was promoted to board 4 for Britain against Australia in a radio match when he beat Dr. M. Gellis.
Harry Golombek and Gordon Crown in around 1946-47.
In September 1947 he was hurried to hospital suffering from peritonitis and, being a diabetic, succumbed under the operation.
As a player he excelled in both the opening and endgame phases and possessed a style of play that stamped him as a future grandmaster. As a person he was modest, clever and a very agreeable companion. This was great loss for British and, almost certainly, world chess.”
We have reproduced his obituary from British Chess Magazine, Volume LXVII (1947), Number 12 (December), Page 387-8 and we assume that this was written by TJ Beach:
“The tragic death of Gordon on November 17th after an operation, will be felt keenly-by chess players throughout the country. Although only l8 years of age he had risen to a high place in British chess circles. Learning the elements of the game in 1938, he had won the Lancashire Junior Championship in three successive years, was champion of the Liverpool Chess Club and Merseyside champion with 100 per cent scores last season, headed his section of the Premier Tournament at the last Hastings Christmas Congress, and, filling the vacancy caused by the late withdrawal of R. F. Combe the 1946 champion, took third prize in the British Championship played at Harrogate in August of this year.
In three international team matches he scored l.5 points on Board 9 against Tummers, of Holland; was one of the two British players to score a full point against the visiting U.S.S.R. team, sharing honours with Kotov in two finely played games on Board 4; and followed this with a win over Dr. Gellis, of Victoria, in the recent radio match with Australia, despite the earlier loss of the exchange through an oversight. His full match record for the past twelve months in international, county, and club matches read: won 16, drawn 2, and lost l. (to Kotov).
His play was notable for his exceptional knowledge of opening and end-game strategy, but his prowess was not by any means confined to “book” knowledge. Possessing deep positional insight, real combinational ability, and chess experience beyond his years, his concentration, tenacity, and determination to win had already made him one of the most formidable match and tournament players in the country. Many of us felt that he would become a worthy British champion within the next few years, and possibly reach even greater heights in the international sphere, and it is, perhaps, not too much to say that many chess players were already looking forward to the day when Gordon Crown would lead British chess to a high place in international esteem: Now those dreams have been rudely shattered, and the loss to British chess is great indeed.
Gordon Crown was not merely a youthful chess prodigy. Although suffering for many years from the physical disability which has now caused his premature death, he had a distinguished record at the Holt High School, Liverpool, and had entered Liverpool University only a month ago to read for the degree of B.A. Unable to play football and cricket, in which latter he was deeply interested, he became a tennis and table-tennis player of well above average ability and was an excellent exponent of billiards and snooker. Among other interests were cycling, and military history and strategy, in which he had read and studied widely.
No study of Gordon Crown would be complete without reference to his personality quite apart from his ability. Possessed of a quiet assurance and confidence in matters pertaining to chess, he was modest in victory, generous in his rare defeats, and ever ready to help small clubs by means of a lecture or simultaneous display.
Never too busy to play the humblest novice, he gave untold pleasure and a new interest in life to many men who had suffered during the war by introducing them to the
fascination of chess, and by this means helped materially in the vital task of rehabilitation. With charm and dignity Gordon Crown won a warm place in the hearts and affections of those who were fortunate enough to be counted among his friends, and whilst our deepest sympathy goes out to his parents in their tragic loss, they may well ae proud that their son achieved so much that was really worth while within so few years, for we shall remember Gordon with affection long after his chess exploits are but a dim memory.-T. J. B.”
The following is one of the last games, if not the last; played by Crown in competitive chess. Score and notes from “The Field”
and here is the scan of the original article:
Obituary of Gordon Thomas Crown, part one
and
Obituary of Gordon Thomas Crown, Part Two
We are grateful to Leonard Barden on the identity of T.J.B. :
“Thomas John Beach, wartime RAF navigator with Distinguished Flying Cross, leading light of Liverpool chess, regular British championship player for many years, chairman of BCF junior selectors, father of a leading Midlands expert, a good and dedicated man” TJB was the father of Richard Beach who won the British Boys Under 18 title in 1961.
According to the British Chess Magazine, 1943, March, page 56 GTC lived at 8 Ingledene Road, Calderstones, Liverpool 18, England.
Gordon Thomas Crown, from CHESS, 1948, January, page 86
On 17 November 1947 he was admitted to hospital, complaining of a stomach upset. Diagnosed too late with appendicitis, complicated by his diabetes, he died in the operating theatre.
His friend (and former British champion) Leonard Barden speculates that had he lived, Crown would have become at least a strong Grandmaster, further noting that he was ” … open, friendly and modest as well as a clear and enthusiastic explainer of his chess ideas; I think he would have been like Keres or Gligoric in their countries, a model for our young players.”
Harry Golombek was similarly impressed with Crown’s play, stating that “In his short life, he had already shown himself to be of master strength and was potentially a very great player.”
We are grateful to be able to use comments from long time friend, Leonard Barden posted under the nom de plume of Roberts Partner on chessgames.com :
“As to the circumstances of Crown’s death. The finger of blame must be pointed at the family doctor for failing to make a timely correct diagnosis. On Sunday 16 November 1947 a chess friend visited the Crown home at Ingledene Road, Liverpool, and found Crown in bed. He explained that his doctor had diagnosed a stomach upset and had recommended rest. The friend and Crown played and analysed together for several hours, and Crown did not appear in any physical discomfort. But that night after the friend left his condition deteriorated and he was rushed to hospital where he died in the early morning hours of 17 November. There was also a belief among some Liverpool chess players that the hospital procedures could have been better.”
and
“On another thread some CG posters expressed surprise at the Ritson Morry v Crown game where Morry fell into a well-known opening trap.
The British championship at Harrogate in August 1947 was played in a spa building where the underfloor heating was still switched on. This coincided with one of the warmest summers on record (it was the year in which Compton and Edrich made their memorable cricket achievements for Middlesex). By the second week of the BCF congress older and overweight players (the latter group including Ritson Morry) were wilting. Ritson also had some long adjourned games, and by the time of his game with Crown in the final round was exhausted. The game finished in 15-20 minutes so by the time other players went to spectate after their opening moves there was just a reset board with no sign of the players and no indication of what had transpired. Other final round results went Crown’s way so that he finished third outright and thus got selected on a high board for the USSR match.”
Western Daily Press 22 September 1947
and here is an article by ddtru (?) in chess.com : full article
We are grateful to renowned chess historian, Taylor Kingston for supplying these scans of an article from Chess Life in 1947 about Gordon Crown written by Reuben Fine :
Chess Life article about Gordon Thomas Crown, Part One
and
Chess Life article about Gordon Thomas Crown, Part Two
From Wikipedia:
“Gordon Thomas Crown (20 June 1929 – 17 November 1947) was a promising British chess player who died of appendicitis at the age of eighteen. He is best known for his win against the Russian Grandmaster Alexander Kotov shortly before his death.
Crown was born in Liverpool in 1929. He finished second in the British under 18 championship in 1946 and improved rapidly, winning the Premier Reserve section of the 1946/7 Hastings International Chess Congress. This led to his being placed on the reserve list for the 1947 British Chess Championship. Following the withdrawal of the defending champion Robert Forbes Combe, he was allowed to play in the championship, where he finished third (Harry Golombek won).
Consequently, he was selected to play for the British team in the 1947 Britain-USSR match, where he caused a sensation by defeating the Soviet Grandmaster Alexander Kotov, though he lost the return game. He also defeated Max Gellis in a Britain-Australia radio match.”
Interestingly, via the EC Forum, Geoff Chandler pointed out a note by Edward Winter in which Bill Hartston recounts advice from David Bronstein : “Look at the games of Gordon Crown. He really understood chess”. From NOW! magazine, (6-12 February 1981, page 80.): thanks Geoff !
Decision Making In Major Piece Endings : Boris Gelfand
Decision Making In Major Piece Endings, Boris Gelfand, Quality Chess, 2020
From the Publisher’s Foreword:
“This is the fourth book in the Decision Making In Chess series. It was written over the last couple of years. A lot of work has gone into this book and the accompanying volume Technical Decision Making In Chess, which deals with a wider range of technical topics, whereas this book focuses on positions without minor pieces.
It has been four years since the publication of Dynamic Decision Making in Chess and certainly there will be one person out there wondering what happened to us and why the third volume was taking so long to complete. I hope that the content alone of these two books will answer that question.”
From the back cover:
“In Decision Making in Major Piece Endings former World Championship Challenger Boris Gelfand discusses his path to decision making in endgames involving rooks or queens, as well as the neglected “4th phase”. Countless games are decided by good or bad technique in such endgames, so readers are certain to benefit from the insights of a word-class Grandmaster on this vital topic.
Grandmaster Boris Gelfand has been an elite player for over 30 years, winning the World Cup, Olympiad Gold, the Candidates and many other top tournaments. Grandmaster Jacob Aagaard is the only chess writer to have won all the major awards for chess writing. ”
Boris Gelfand, FIDE Grand Prix, London, 2013, Courtesy of John Upham Photography
Reaction to previous volumes in the series:
In 2015 Positional Decision Making In Chess won the ECF Book of the Year award.
“The most interesting chess book I have read in the last quarter-century.” Mikhail Shereshevsky on Positional Decision Making in Chess.
This new Quality Chess publication Decision Making In Major Piece Endings uses high quality paper and the printing is clear. The book can easily be laid flat next to the board and does not require weights to prevent it from “self-closing” (a particular bugbear of ours !). Each diagram is clear and the instructional text is typeset in two column format, which, we find, enables the reader to maintain their place easily. Figurine algebraic notation is used throughout and the diagrams are placed adjacent to the relevant text and each major diagram has a “to move” indicator. Where a “to move” indicator is not present, it is obvious which colour is to move from the accompanying moves in a variation.
Each chapter is introduced with a contemporary photograph of a player or players or a tournament scene which launches each chapter in a engaging manner. This is followed by a Diagram Preview page which shows the critical analytical diagrams in the following chapter and invites the reader to practise their analysis and decision making! If you can work out most of the variations you are a world champion.
The introduction of this book makes it clear that this book is not an endgame primer or manual on basic major piece endgames as there are plenty of these theoretical works already in existence. Knowledge of very basic rook and pawn endgames such as the Lucena and Vancura positions is assumed. This book is “about decision making at the board and learning from your games – and those of others. In this book I will discuss topics that have arisen in some of the most interesting games without minor pieces during my career. We will encounter rook endings, queen endgames and games in what Romanovsky called the fourth phase, which is essentially later middlegames/early endings where only major pieces remain.”
The introduction also guides the reader on how to study the endgame: 1. knowledge of basic positions and their key variations and ideas must be known; 2. improving deep analytical skills; 3. development of intuition. This book concentrates on improving items 2 & 3 above. The author suggests how to best use the book by first analysing the endgames without a chess engine and/or tablebases to prevent lazy thinking by relying too heavily on engine assessments without understanding.
Despite the fact that the introduction claims that this book is not an endgame primer, there are a couple of excellent chapters on theoretical endgames. They are covered from a practical point of view and Gelfand draws out the key defensive ideas by concentrating on patterns and key positions. More on these chapters later. There are other basic endgame positions interspersed in other chapters which are reached from long variations but are nevertheless didactic as the theoretical endgames are shown in context within the whole endgame and the reader is clearly shown how these positions can be reached in practice.
Here is an critical position from the game Julian Hodgson – Boris Gelfand played at Groningen 1996. Both players misevaluated this ending as they both thought that black was easily winning. At the time, endgame theory agreed with them. Modern tablebases give this as a clear draw as black cannot hide his king from the checks with accurate defensive play from white.
Hodgson-Gelfand 1996
The game continued 86.Qe8+? The losing mistake. The black king escapes the checks by stepping in front of the pawns. 86.Qe6!, the most natural waiting move was still drawing. (86.Qd7! also draws). 86…Qf8 87. Qe2+ g4 88. Qe5+ Kh6 89. Qe6+ Kg5 90. Qe5+ Qf5 91.Qg7+ Kf4 92. Qc7+ Qe5 93. Qf7+ with a draw. 86… Kg4 87. Qe6+ Qf5 88.Qc4+ Kg3 89. Qc7+ Qf4 0-1
The author makes the point that if white had known that the endgame was a draw, and knew a few general ideas, he would have probably drawn the game. But when you think it is lost, psychologically it is impossible to hold it, particularly in an increment finish. A lot of the top players do not think in terms of lost or not: they concentrate on looking for ideas (to make life difficult for the opponent).
Chapter 1 – The Importance of Analysis
The title of the chapter is self explanatory and Gelfand stresses the need to study complicated endgames in depth and understand all the nuances. There are some superb examples of brilliant analysis. Here is one such position where Gelfand did not discover the right idea until 2018:
Suetin-Portisch 1973 (variation)
It is black to play, clearly 60…d1=Q 61. Rxd1 Kxd1 62. Kf3 is not good enough to win. Black to play can win with 60…Rc4!! 61. Rb1 Rc1 62. Rb2 Rf1!! cutting the king off from the e-file (62…Ke3? 63. Rxd2 Kxd2 64.Kf4 draws shouldering the black king) 63. Kg4 Ke3 64. Rxd2 Kxd2 65. Kg5 Ke3 wins as black’s king is now available to hunt the pawns down.
Chapter 2 Do Not Hurry
The “Do not hurry” concept is a key concept that I first encountered in Shereshevsky’s classic Endgame Strategy. In the position below, this principle can be demonstrated aptly.
Giberto Hernandez Guerrero-Gelfand
Converting this position is covered in detail with a key discussion on exchanges which is enlightening.
This rook ending could have occurred and black’s winning’s manoeuvre is instructive:
Gilberto Hernandez Guerrero-Gelfand Variation
63…Rc5 64. Rc7 Rc3+ 65. Kf2 Rc4 66.Kg3 Now the black rook has been optimally placed, it is time to improve the king to the maximum, while keeping the best possible pawn structure, which is to keep the pawn on g7 and play …f6, so that White does not have Rc8 followed by c6-c7. If the pawn would be on g6 in that position, Rg8 would eventually come and save a draw. The best black would achieve is f- and h- pawns, but not in favourable circumstances. With the pawn on g7, …Rxc7 will always come as a response to Rg8 and black wins trivially. 66…Kf6 67.Kh3 Kg6 68.Kg3 f6 And black wins after either 69.Kh3 Kh6! followed by the advance of the g-pawn, or 69.Rc8 Kf5! and the advance of the king.
Chapter 3 – Three Surprisingly Complicated Rook Endgames
This is a variation from an interesting rook and pawn endgame Boris Gelfand – Lars Bo Hansen Wijk aan Zee 1993:
Gelfand-Hansen (variation)
White wins with the instructive 64.Rc7!! preparing to cut black’s king off along the fifth rank 64…Rh1 65.Rc5! and if 65…Kd6 66.Rc6+, white can then simply queen the b pawn winning black’s rook whilst black’s king is unable to support his own pawn.
Here is another common type of position taken from a variation in the game Gelfand-Vladimir Kramnik Zurich 2017. White is clearly much better as his king supports his pawn and black’s king is not in the game. But how does white win?
Gelfand-Kramnik Variation
The answer is simple once you see it. 48.Rc3!! Kf6 49. Rc2! and wins
Chapter 4 Two Defensive Methods in Rook Endings
This chapter is one of the theoretical chapters which covers rook and four against three all on one side and rook against three connected passed pawns. This section is well constructed with coverage of all the major positions and ideas in the 4 v 3 ending.
Some famous games are included which must be present in every treatise on rook endings. Here is one such ending from: Mikhail Botvinnik v Miguel Najdorf Moscow 1956:
Botvinnik-Najdorf Moscow 1956
White is winning here because he can create a passed e-pawn and he has fixed the pawn structure with h5 leaving an entry point for the king on g6. The game continued 61…Kf7 62. Ra5 Rc7 63. Rd5 Ra7 64. e5 fxe5 65. fxe5 Ke7 66.e6 Ra4 67. g5! providing cover for the king 67…hxg5 68.Rd7+ Kf8 69.Rf7+ Kg8 70.Kg6 g4 71.h6! gxh6 72.e7 Ra8 73.Rf6 There is no defence to Rd6 and Rd8 with mate.
The celebrated endgame Capablanca-Yates Hastings 1930 is of course covered in great detail. The analysis of the famous position is covered in great depth showing the defender’s best defence which is tricky to crack. It is revealing to note that even the great Cuban World Champion let the win slip at one point. I suggest that the reader buys the book to study this superb analysis.
Capablanca-Yates Hastings 1930
The position below is the celebrated game Piket-Kasparov Internet 2000 because Kasparov misplayed a drawn endgame so badly. We must not be too hard on the former World Champion as it was a rapid game and Kasparov is a superb endgame player.
Piket-Kasparov Move 42 Internet 2000
The game continued: 42.Kh3 Re3 43.Kh4 Kg7?! Black does not have to let the white king into g5. 43…Kh6! 44.Rc7 Re2! 45h3
Piket-Kasparov Variation 1
Now, 45…Rxe5! 46.Rxf7 Re4 47.g4 Rxf4! forces a quick draw.
The game continued: 44.Kg5 Re1? (The final mistake: black can hold with 44…Ra3 45.Rc7 Ra5 and white is stymied) 45.Rc7 Re2 46.Re7 Ra2 The following variation is the key to why white is winning: 46…Re1
Piket-Kasparov Variation 2
47.e6! Rxe6 48.Rxe6 fxe6 49.h3 Despite material equality, black is lost as he is in zugzwang. 49…Kf7 50.Kh6 Kf6 51.g4 h4 52.g5+ Kf5 53.Kg7 Kxf4 54.Kxg6 e5 55.Kf6 e4 56.g6 e3 57.g7 e2 58.g8=Q e1=Q 59.Qg4+ Ke3 60.Qe6+ exchanging queens and winning
In the game, black lost in a similar manner to Botvinnik-Najdorf:
47.f5! gxf5 48.e6 h4 49.Rxf7+ Kg8 50. Kf6 1-0
Piket-Kasparov Move 47
The final two positions in this chapter concern Rook v 3 connected passed pawns.
Rook v 3 pawns (1)
White to move wins with 1.Rf8, black to move draws only with 1…Kg7! preventing the rook from moving behind the base of the chain.
Similarly in the mirror position, white to move wins with 1.Rh8, black to move draws with 1…Kg7!
The core of the book (chapters 5 to 8) is a series of four chapters deeply analysing three rook and pawn endgames of Gelfand’s against world class opposition. The games are shown in their entirety which is the modern way to study endgames in relation to the opening and middlegame.
Gelfand-Kasimdzhanov Variation
This position from a variation in the game Gelfand-Kasimdzhanov from Baku 2014 caught my eye. Black to play – what should he do? 59…Kf5!! The obvious move is to push the pawns with 59…g4. Let’s see what happens: 60.Rc6! f5 61.Rxa6 Kg5 62.Rb6 h3 63.Kg3 f4+ 64.Kh2 Kf4 65.Rh6+ Kg5
Gelfand-Kasimdzhanov Variation2
66.Rh8! Kf5 67. Rg8! Black is in zugzwang and loses all the pawns.
60.Rc6 a5 61. Rc5+ Kg6 62.Rxa5 f5 and black prevents the rook from reaching f8. This is obvious when one has knowledge of the basic endgame rook v 3 connected pawns shown above! The author has shown an excellent example of knowing your basics being applied to a real live game.
Chapter 9 Queen Endings with a g- or h- pawn
This is one of the reviewer’s favourite chapters as it combines endgame theory with practical examples showing that even strong GMs do not know how to defend these endings correctly. Even when players know where to put their defending king, choosing the correct check to draw is not obvious!
Here is a position from Gelfand-Jobava from Dortmund 2006.
The reviewer loves this endgame.
Gelfand-Jobava (Move 50)
This king and pawn ending is clearly drawn but white is pressing with a more advanced king. White played 50.h4 setting a subtle trap. 50…h5?? losing, incredible to believe but it is true. 50…Kd7 draws, for example 51.g4 f6+ 52.Kd5 e6+ 53.Kc5 h6 54. e5 fxe5 55.fxe5 Kc7 seizing the opposition and drawing 51.f5! f6+ 52.Ke6 gxf5
Gelfand-Jobava (Move 53)
Now white played 53. e5!! which had been completed missed by black (automatic recapture syndrome) fxe5 54.Kxe5 Kd7 55.Kxf5 Kd6 56.Kg5 Ke5 57.Kxh5 Kf4
Gelfand-Jobava (Move 57)
Now white can enter a winning queen endgame with 58.Kg6!
White did not play the endgame perfectly, and after many adventures this position was reached at move 87. Black is drawing here if he places his king in the drawing zone which is the far corner diagonally opposite where the g pawn is hoping to queen i.e. a1.
Gelfand-Jobava (Move 87)
87… Ka5? was played which loses. I am surprised that a strong GM moved his king the wrong way. 87…Ka3 draws but the draw is not simple. 88.g7 and now black can draw with an accurate sequence of moves that are not obvious. 87… Qe5+ (the obvious 87… Qg3+ loses in 41 moves) 89.Kg6 Qe6+ 90.Kh7 reaching the drawn position below.
Gelfand-Jobava (Variation Move 90)
90…Qf5+ 91.Kg8 Qf4! (only move) draws, 90…Qh3+ 91.Kg8 Qf5! (91…Qe6+ loses) also draws
The game continued 88.g7 Qe5+ 89.Kg6 Qe6+ 90.Kh7 Qf5+ 91.Kg8 Ka4 92. Qh1 Qc8+ 93. Kh7 Qf5+ 94. Kh8 Qe5 reaching the position below:
Gelfand-Jobava (Move 95)
Now 95.Qh3! wins cutting off he black king from the drawing zone. Gelfand won the game easily after another 18 moves. The best defence involves white winning by transitioning through the two diagrams below exploiting black’s king position to misplace the black queen. Absolutely fascinating stuff.
This section is entertaining with some really exciting and amusing positions. Here is one such position:
David Anton Guijaro-Alejandro Franco Alonso
This looks like a fairly standard queen and pawn ending. Black is a pawn down but is to play and played the obvious capture 55…Qxb2? which is simply too slow. 55…b4! was the drawing move. White has two tries: 56.axb4 is the only real winning attempt but falls short: 56…Qxb2 57. Qh7+ Ke6 58. Qxh6 a3 59. Qg6 a2 60.h6 a1=Q 61.h7 Qe2! forcing white to take a perpetual. Or 56. Qh7+ Ke6 57. Qxh6 Qxe4+ 58. Kh2 Qe2 with sufficient counterplay against the white king to draw. The game continued: 56.Qh7+ Ke6 57. Qxh6 b4 58. Qg6 bxa3 59. h6 a2 60. h7 a1=Q reaching the position below.
Two queens each
61. Qf5+? Driving the king towards safety: 61.h8=Q wins instantly, with a quick mate.) Kd6 62. h8=Q Kc5! 63. Qf8+ Kc4 64. Qe6+ Kd3 65. Qfxf6 Qd4 66.Qf3+ Kd2 67. Qh6+ Kc2 68.Qc6+ (the computer prefers 68.Qe2+ Kc3 69.Qc6+ Kb4 70. Qb7+ Ka3 71. Qe7+ Kb3 72. Qf7+ Kb4 73.g4 and white is winning) Kb1 69. g4 Qab2 70.g5 a3 71. g6 a2 72. g7 a1=Q 73. g8=Q Qaa3 74. Qgg3 ? (74. Qcf6 keeps the advantage) reaching this position:
3 queens each
This is the beautiful but sad moment of the game. Black played 74…Qxf3+? and went on to lose quickly. 74…Qdxf2+!! draws by sacrificing all three queens for stalemate, for example 75. Qfxf2 Qxg3+ 76. Kxg3 Qc3+ 77. Qxc3 stalemate. Fantastic! Who says there is no humour in chess ?
Stalemate
Chapter 11 – Full Circle
This chapter covers the famous game Botvinnik-Minev Amsterdam 1954 which goes into a celebrated Q + g pawn v Q ending which Botvinnik won from a drawn position. As Boris Gelfand points out, once we know that an article written by Paul Keres in the 1947-1949 Soviet Yearbook recommended that black place the king on a4, black’s moves become completely understandable.
Botvinnik-Minev
56.Qg4+ Ka5? This is still a draw but modern knowledge recommends Ka3 heading towards the opposite corner. 57.Qxe6 Qh8+ 58.Kg6 Qc3 59.g4 Qd2 60.g5 Qd4? Centralisation looks good, but in fact loses. 60…Ka4! was best, several other moves also draw.
Botvinnik-Minev Move 60
Now 61. Qf5+? allowing black to draw. 61. Kh7! Qh4+ 62.Qh6 followed by g6, the black king is too far from the a1 corner 61…Ka4 62. Kh5 Qh8+ 63. Kg4 Qh1? The final mistake, after this Botvinnik wins with no slip-ups. Buy the book to find out how. 63…Ka3! was correct.
Chapter 12 – Conversion in the 4th Phase
This chapter covers a complex Q and double rook late middlegame which reveals the complexities of such positions. The game clearly shows that a sustained initiative is so potent.
This is a critical position from the game Gelfand-Edouard. Black is under the cosh but can defend with 35…Qxe5! 36. Qxa7 Rg6! 35.Qb7 Rxg3+! 36.fxg3 Qe3+! 37. Kh2 Qh6+ with a perpetual check.
Gelfand-Edouard
The penultimate chapter is a series of studies which are elegant and instructive. There is a particularly beautiful study by Darko Hlebec. Buy the book to appreciate the beauty of chess.
The final chapter is a series of rook exercises which are extremely didactic. If you can solve all of these, you are a World Champion.
I heartily recommend this superb book on major piece endgames which is a labour of love and hard work. It combines practical examples with coverage of basic endgame positions.
FM Richard Webb, Chineham, Hampshire, 16th November 2020
Edward G Sergeant in Hastings 1929/30, found in De Sumatra 02.01.1930. Retrieved by Richard James from https://www.chess.com/blog/introuble2/100-years-ago-chess-in-london-during-world-war-i
We remember Edward Sergeant OBE (3-xii-1881 16-xi-1961)
Edward Guthlac Sergeant was born on Saturday, December 3rd 1881 : in the same year British Chess Magazine was founded by John Watkinson.
He was born in Crowland, South Holland, Lincolnshire. The registration district was Peterborough and the inferred county was Northamptonshire. His father was William R Sergeant (aged 27) and his mother was Frances E Sergeant (aged 25). He had a sister, Hilda who was one year older. William was a registered general medical practitioner.
He was named Guthlac after a monk who “came to what was then an island in the Fens to live the life of a hermit.”
Signature of EG Sergeant from a Brian Reilly “after dinner” postcard from Margate 1936.
According to the 1891 census EGS was aged 9 and living with his father, mother, sister and their domestic servant Margaret A George who was their general domestic servant who hailed from Scotland. They lived at 2, Gladstone Terrace, Gateshead, NE8 4DY. This was in the Ecclesiastical parish of Christchurch.
2, Gladstone Terrace, Gateshead, NE8 4DY
In the 1911 census aged 29 as nephew to the head of the household (5 St Peters Terrace, Cambridge) EGS is listed as a solicitor who is single. The size of the household in 1911 was relatively modest at 12. He was living with George Edward Wherry (59, surgeon university professor) and his wife Albinia Lucy Wherry (53). Albinia Lucy Wherry was a nurse and also writer. During WWI she was stationed in Paris at the Gare du Nord where she supported British forces from 1915-18. the sub-registration district was St Andrew the Great.
According to Edward Winter in Where did they live? in April 1916 EGS was living at 39 Chichele Road, Cricklewood, London NW2 3AN, England. EGWs source for this is : Chess Amateur, April 1916, page 202.
39 Chichele Road, Cricklewood, London NW2 3AN
1918 was an important year for Edward when he married Dorothy Frances Carter (born 1887) in Gravesend. In the same year Dorothy and Edward had a son Richard who passed away in 2014
Two years later Dorothy and Edward had a son Lewis Carter Sergeant born on January 30th 1920. The birth was registered in Paddington. Lewis lived at 3 Woodhill Court, 175 Woodhill, London, SE18 5HSL and passed away in 2004 the death being registered in Greenwich.
On the 1920 Electoral Roll, EGS was now living with Dorothy Frances Sergeant at St. Stephen’s Mansions, 5, Monmouth Road, Edmonton.
In 1923 they upped sticks and moved to 27. King Edward’s Grove, Teddington.
Sadly Dorothy passed away in 1926 at the modest age of 39.
Coventry Evening Telegraph 10 October 1933
According to the 1939 census EGS was listed as a widowed, civil servant living at 24, Gloucester Road, Kingston Upon Thames, KT2 7DX. This would be the address that Edward saw out the rest of his life.
24, Gloucester Road, Kingston Upon Thames, KT2 7DX
He shared this address with Edith Carter (born 4th May 1878) who is described as being of “Private Means” and Ada M Wenman (6th August 1881) who is described as being a “domestic”.
In 1949 he was awarded the OBE in the Birthday Honours in recognition of his 39 years’ service in the office of the Solicitor to the Board of Inland Revenue.
According to John Saunders : EGS died in the New Victoria Hospital, New Malden, Surrey, on 16 November 1961. His residence at death had been 24 Gloucester Road, Kingston Hill. Probate (26 Jan 1962) granted to Lewis Carter Sergeant, a Lieutenant-Colonel in HM Army. Effects £6,586.
E.G. Sergeant in characteristic pose v. Miss Vera Menchik at Margate, 1939
From The Encyclopedia of Chess (Batsford, 1977), Harry Golombek OBE :
A British master who had a long and solidly distinguished career in British chess but never quite succeeded in breaking through the barrier to international success. A civil servant by profession, he was awarded the OBE for his services in the Inland Revenue and Sergeant on Stamp Duties was regarded as an authoritative work.
Sergeant’s earliest performance in the British Championship, at the Crystal Palace in London 1907, was one of his best. He came =2nd with JH Blackburne. RP Michell and GE Wainwright with 6.5 points, a point below the winner of the title, HE Atkins.
He was 3rd at Edinburgh in 1920 and his best result in the competition came in Brighton 1938, where he came equal second with H. Golombek, a 1/2 point below the winner, CHO’D Alexander.
A stalwart supporter of the City of London Chess Club, he won its championship in two successive years, 1916 and 1917. He played for Britain against the USA in the 1908 and 1909 cable matches and also played on a high board for London against various American cities in the Insull Trophy matches in the years 1926-31.
As a player he was strongly influenced by the scientific principles of Siegbert Tarrasch and did well during the period when the Tarrasch school enjoyed its heyday. But he was at a loss when confronted with more modern methods.”
Both Sunnucks and Hooper & Whyld are silent on EGS : surprising!
We asked Leonard Barden of his memories of EGS and he was kind enough to reply :
“People have different ways of expressing satisfaction with their position. Botvinnik adjusted his tie, Kasparov put his watch back on, Sergeant rubbed his hands together….He liked to counter the Queen’s Gambit Declined in the classical way with a kind of Lasker Defence.”
From British Chess Magazine, Volume LXXXII, March, 1962, Number 3, pages 76 -80 we reproduce an obituary from Bruce Hayden entitled “E.G. Sergeant – An Appreciation” as follows :
(note the incorrect birth location presumably based on the 1891 census information)
Edward Guthlac Sergeant, part oneEdward Guthlac Sergeant, part two
Leonard Barden has asked us to point out :
“The 1948 game against Wallis was not in the British championship but in the Premier, a one-off 12-player selected group used to address the problem of too many good players for an all-play-all championship. In 1949 the two all-play-alls were replaced by a 32-player Swiss.
Chess in Art : History of Chess in Paintings 1100 – 1900 : Peter Herel Raabenstein
Chess in Art : History of Chess in Paintings 1100 – 1900, Peter Herel Raabenstein
From the publisher :
“Chess has been very important skill of human mind, part of many intellectual arguments, and a vital part of social life, for more than 1000 years. It has also mesmerized Peter Herel Raabenstein, who around 2003 craved to immerse himself deep into the story of chess. On that occasion, he was looking for a gift for his uncle, who shared the same passion for chess, art and history. He was aiming to buy a special book focused on chess and art. Unfortunately, he found out there was no such book. He decided to create the gift himself. After collecting 12 paintings with chess theme, he used them to create a calendar.
Peter’s uncle was amazed by the gift and proposed making a whole book with chess as a main theme. Later whilst living in Amsterdam and studying at local art school to master painting skills, Peter kept his interest in chess. He regularly visited chess museums and cafes. He was persistent in pursuit of creation of his own book, all thanks to his dedication and passion for art and chess, and also his uncle’s excitement about the idea. The book that was also finished as a result of many coincidences.
He shared his idea with a friend during a chess tournament in Wijk aan Zee in 2009. Peter’s friend was so passionate about the idea that he immediately wrote a prologue for the book and motivated Peter even more. Soon after they parted their ways Peter sadly realized that he has not got his friends contact details. However, he continued writing and collecting materials remembering his uncle’s and his friend’s supportive words.
Now, after 10 long years, Peter can offer his collection of chess themed paintings by more than 700 artists during 1000 year long period, including 20th century. Peter hopes to meet his Greek friend again to thank him for motivation to finish the book. He would also like to thank everyone who supports his art projects and follows his work. ”
Peter Herel Raabenstein
When Chess in Art arrived at the BCN office it was clear we needed one thing to go with it : a coffee table! Together with The Thinkers by David Llada this is not a book you would fail to notice or ignore. You are drawn to pick it up and leaf through the pages.
Weighing in at an impressive 1.8 pounds this is a beautiful volume. One thing we cannot possibly convey via this review is another (generally ignored) dimension : its olfactory qualities! The smell is absolutely wonderful, it lingers and combined with the additional high qualities of paper, production and printing it is a simply a gorgeous book. Eat your heart out Mr. Kindle or any pdf scan and upload merchants.
For your amusement you might like to guess how many chess books include the word “Art” in their title. As usual with this type of question the answer is larger than you might think…Try it! Apart from that books on the same subject as this one are few and far between so this title makes a welcome appearance.
For those interested in perusing this subject then
Marcel Duchamp: The Art of Chess Hardcover, May 2009
may be of interest. Prices are high for this volume.
Despite binge watching BBC One’s excellent Fake or Fortune? (our knowledge of art is superficial) we felt a strong degree of fear and trepidation in starting this review. We could not possibly review this book from an art perspective and so we settled on a chess player’s point of view.
The book is divided into eight main sections / chapters with five main sections covering eras from 1100 AD onwards :
Prologue
1100 – 1500
38 colour plates
1500 – 1600
17 plates
1600 – 1700
21 plates
1700 – 1800
38 plates
1800 – 1900
186 plates
Artists
Epilogue
which is a total of around 300 plates most of which are in full colour. These five sections are followed by a listing of all of the artists with brief biographical details. Finally there is an index to all the artist’s works to be found in this book.
The prologue may well be (for chess enthusiasts) the most interesting section of the book. For example we have (page 9) “The lack of chess paintings in the beginning of the sixteenth century is attributed to the difficulty of establishing chess rules.” Quite how true this is we are not sure but it is worth considering. Maybe a more detailed study of HJR Murray is in order?
Here is an example of a double page layout from the 1100 – 1500 era section :
From pages 42 and 43 : Israhel van Meckenem (1445 – 1503)
To whet your appetite further from page 55 we have this work by Caravaggio :
(By a strange coincidence in the BCN office we had recently watched Caravaggio via Amazon Prime!)
and there is this famous work depicting Faust on page 102 by Friedrich Moritz August Retzsch 1779-1857 :
Friedrich Moritz August Retzsch 1779-1857
and finally (but not least) this work from 1818 by Johann Erdmann Hummel :
HUMMEL Johann Erdmann (1769 – 1852) Die Schachpartie. 1818
We found ourselves becoming engrossed in the book wanting to know more about the individual art works. Indeed, this was the most frustrating and disappointing aspect. For almost all of the images we did not need the skills of Anthony Blunt (can we mention this name?) or Tom Keating to discover the chess background via Wikipedia or other online sources. So why not provide even a few lines of description for each or most of the images. These extras would have made reading this book even more of a joy. Perhaps space reasons provided a restriction? Surely both the art and chess lover would like to read more.
There were a couple of trivial typos : “editrorial” but nothing substantive. Almost certainly not caused by the author.
The book has been widely reviewed : one of our favourites is from Carl “Chess in Prisons” Portman who hits the nail neatly on the head with an enjoyable piece.
If you are still not convinced then see this ChessBase review by André Schulz.
Finally we come to the price of €111. You might, at first, baulk at this: “I could buy five books on the Sveshnikov instead”.
However, this book is a real beauty, definitely a collectors item with a volume to cover 1900 to the present day in the pipeline. If you have a coffee table and want to cheer it up at Christmas then this book is for it and you!
We’d recommend you visit the Chess in Art web site If this review does not convince you then their web site just might.
BCN sends Birthday greetings to David Howell on this day.
David Wei Lang Howell was born in Eastbourne, East Sussex on Wednesday 14th of November 1990. His parents are Martin and Angeline Howell (née Choo).
David Howell faces Andrew Whiteley whilst Jimmy Adams records the moves, photograph courtesy of Mark Huba
An unknown jumble sale (Eastbourne?) provided the Howell family with a chess set.
David learnt the moves from Martin, his father and rapidly improved and he joined Sussex Junior Chess Association and he began representing his county in EPSCA matches and other competitions.
In Torquay in 1998 whilst Nigel Short and Susan Lalic were busy winning the main championships David made his mark by winning the British Under-8 Championship, an event that had started only ten years beforehand.
A trip to Scarborough in 1999 yielded both the Under-9 and Under-10 championships.
Barry Martin, David Howell and Julian Hodgson unveil a blue plaque in honour of Howard Staunton
Sponsorship from now dissolved software company JEB (Hove) enabled David to be coached by Glenn Flear.
David Howell, London Chess Classic, 2013, courtesy of John Upham Photography
David became a FIDE Master at the age of ten years, nine months and 26 days. He became an International Master aged 13 years, 2 months and 22 days.
Finally the Grandmaster title came at 16 years, 1 month and 22 days.
The FIDE rating profile for David Howell according to MegaBase 2020
David’s rise has been well documented both here and here and therefore we will not attempt to improve on these sources.
David Howell, British Championships, 2013, Round 11, courtesy of John Upham Photography
With the white pieces David is a firm believer in 1.e4 but he has played (and continues to do so) 1.Nf3, 1.c4 and 1.d4 and he has scored 89% over nineteen games with. 1.g3
Like Sheila Jackson and Susan Lalic David was a big fan of the Sicilian Alapin but nowadays the Moscow and Rossolimo variations.
As the second player David prefers open games and has played the closed Ruy Lopez and the Marshall Attack. David also employs the Berlin Defence.
Defending against the Queen’s pawn David is less varied and plumps for the Grünfeld defence most of the time. On critical occasions David will use the Caro-Kann as a winning weapon.
So, a wide repertoire with both the white and black pieces and therefore not easy to prepare for: a very modern player!
David started his 4NCL career with Invicta Knights with a FIDE rating of 1432 in May 1999. By 2001 he was playing for Nigel Johnson and his Slough team. In 2004 the inevitable occurred and David transferred (as is common) to either cash rich Wood Green or Guildford. In fact it was Guildford on this occasion. In 2009 David moved to Pride & Prejudice. 2012 saw David playing for Wood Green Hillsmark. In 2015 he switched to Cheddleton and remained with them until 2019 finally returning to Guildford in 2020.
David Howell at the 2014 London Chess Classic, Courtesy of John Upham Photography
In November 2021 David took part in the 108-player FIDE Grand Prix event in Riga and after nine round he lying equal third on 6.5 with with Alireza Firouja and Fabiano Caruana. He eventually finished on 7/11 with a TPR of 2764.
Here is a tough struggle from that event:
David regularly hosts chess24 commentary of major tournaments, such as the 2020/21 Candidates.
GM David Howell vs IM Eddie Dearing, Drunken Knights vs Wood Green, June 2014, Courtesy of John Upham Photography
We focus on the British Chess Scene Past & Present !
This website uses cookies to improve your experience. We'll assume you're ok with this, but you can opt-out if you wish. Cookie settingsACCEPT
Privacy & Cookies Policy
Privacy Overview
This website uses cookies to improve your experience while you navigate through the website. Out of these cookies, the cookies that are categorized as necessary are stored on your browser as they are as essential for the working of basic functionalities of the website. We also use third-party cookies that help us analyze and understand how you use this website. These cookies will be stored in your browser only with your consent. You also have the option to opt-out of these cookies. But opting out of some of these cookies may have an effect on your browsing experience.
Necessary cookies are absolutely essential for the website to function properly. This category only includes cookies that ensures basic functionalities and security features of the website. These cookies do not store any personal information.
Save as PDF
