Varsity Match 2017

Details of upcoming UK events, please provide working links if possible.
User avatar
Christopher Kreuzer
Posts: 8806
Joined: Fri Aug 06, 2010 2:34 am
Location: London

Re: Varsity Match 2017

Post by Christopher Kreuzer » Tue Mar 14, 2017 1:31 pm

Board 7 was a bit of a waste, and maybe a different board order would have improved Cambridge's score. Good draws from them on boards 3 and 5. Maybe the board order was a ploy to allow/disrupt preparation? Not that board two followed mainline theory... A draw on board 8, and Cambridge would have drawn the match and (partially) justified their board order.

Nick Burrows
Posts: 1705
Joined: Sat Aug 14, 2010 12:15 pm

Re: Varsity Match 2017

Post by Nick Burrows » Tue Mar 14, 2017 2:31 pm

I heard a whisper that they were deciding the team with a blitz qualification?!

Jonathan Rogers
Posts: 4640
Joined: Tue Nov 18, 2008 9:26 pm

Re: Varsity Match 2017

Post by Jonathan Rogers » Tue Mar 14, 2017 2:46 pm

I am just as amazed that Daniel didn't win that!

DFernandez
Posts: 11
Joined: Fri Jul 29, 2016 1:10 pm

Re: Varsity Match 2017

Post by DFernandez » Wed Mar 15, 2017 11:23 am

A quick check of Adam Scibior's FIDE profile will reveal he has played no rated games at long time controls in years. Hence board 7- and in fact he was quite lucky to win it in my view.

I allowed without protest our President to field Ryan on top board in deference to his personal score against me. His judgment was nearly proved correct as I quickly acheived a bad position, whereas Ryan had good early chances to win (e.g. with Qe8 instead of Nb4)

In my own game, once the piece was lost the position was objectively quite bad, but practically in fact easier for me; only latterly did it become clear that Nd8 was better than Nd6, and once Nd6 was played the computer never gives him more than +1. The various back-rank mate tricks, trap motifs on his two minor pieces and the weakness of c2 and f5 add up to a bit of a nightmare with the clock ticking. Definitely giving up the piece was the best practical decision.

It was a tiny bit frustrating that we didn't make anything of our rating advantage on bottom board, which would have allowed us to at least draw, but then again nothing in this match has ever been determined by ratings, and furthermore Cambridge could be said to have been favoured by luck on the other 7 boards.

John Swain
Posts: 412
Joined: Sun Jun 20, 2010 10:35 pm
Location: Nottingham

Re: Varsity Match 2017

Post by John Swain » Wed Mar 15, 2017 11:33 am

DFernandez wrote:A quick check of Adam Scibior's FIDE profile will reveal he has played no rated games at long time controls in years. Hence board 7- and in fact he was quite lucky to win it in my view.

I allowed without protest our President to field Ryan on top board in deference to his personal score against me. His judgment was nearly proved correct as I quickly acheived a bad position, whereas Ryan had good early chances to win (e.g. with Qe8 instead of Nb4)

In my own game, once the piece was lost the position was objectively quite bad, but practically in fact easier for me; only latterly did it become clear that Nd8 was better than Nd6, and once Nd6 was played the computer never gives him more than +1. The various back-rank mate tricks, trap motifs on his two minor pieces and the weakness of c2 and f5 add up to a bit of a nightmare with the clock ticking. Definitely giving up the piece was the best practical decision.

It was a tiny bit frustrating that we didn't make anything of our rating advantage on bottom board, which would have allowed us to at least draw, but then again nothing in this match has ever been determined by ratings, and furthermore Cambridge could be said to have been favoured by luck on the other 7 boards.
Thanks for the detailed and helpful explanation! Board order decisions are easy to criticise with hindsight, especially at a distance.