British 2015 Round by Round

[Simon Brown]

Haha (to Jonathan)

Keith's game was neat though and I can imagine Andrew showing a GM missing a forced mate in three, only to spot the same mate three moves later.

[Jonathan Bryant]

Jonathan B, do you want one more day before making your prediction?

That goes for the rest of you too...

I am going to say "Howell on Saturday".

Nope after the draw on board 1 I’m going to go Gormally on Friday. He’ll have two Whites in a row now and he’s already seen off the three highest rated players in the tournament.

Of course I’m invariably wrong in these matters.

[Nick Ivell]

Well, maybe Simon displayed GM technique after all. Perhaps he was taking Capablanca's advice and making haste slowly. But was that heavy weather, or what?

[Mick Norris]

So, we have N Pert & Gormally on 6.5 with Howell, Hawkins, Arkell & Williams on 6 (are there any more on 6?)

Possibly N Pert - Hawkins, Gormally - Williams, Howell - Arkell then?

[LawrenceCooper]

So, we have N Pert & Gormally on 6.5 with Howell, Hawkins, Arkell & Williams on 6 (are there any more on 6?)

Possibly N Pert - Hawkins, Gormally - Williams, Howell - Arkell then?

Without knowing the results of boards 5, 6 and 7 which could see as many as three more players on six your guess is as good as mine

[Tim Harding]

There has been a disappointingly large number of live boards not working today - some of them important ones where we still don't know the result.
They had better fix that for the last few rounds or heads should roll (metaphorically speaking).

Along with the huge technical failure on the commentary (not blaming Andrew and Ravi) this is far below the standard of what Chess24 users have come to expect in the past few months. (This is not Chess24's fault, of course - they are just taking a relay - it is down to ECF.)

Something much more professional is needed for Bournemouth next year, including commentary of Chess24 standard starting within a few minutes of commencement of play and continuing until crucial games are decided.

A quiz for online viewers where they have the right answer would help too - see the discussion on the OTHER forum!

And does anyone yet have an explanation for Hebden's win against Cooper yesterday?

[LawrenceCooper]

And does anyone yet have an explanation for Hebden's win against Cooper yesterday?

Given his clock was showing at zero and he was better in the final position I see no reason to doubt that he lost on time. Is further explanation needed?

[Kay Joslin P]

And does anyone yet have an explanation for Hebden's win against Cooper yesterday?

Given his clock was showing at zero and he was better in the final position I see no reason to doubt that he lost on time. Is further explanation needed?

I heard from a player on a nearby board that it was indeed a loss on time.

[Tim Harding]

And does anyone yet have an explanation for Hebden's win against Cooper yesterday?

Given his clock was showing at zero and he was better in the final position I see no reason to doubt that he lost on time. Is further explanation needed?

As I wrote earlier, John Cooper's clock on Chess24 was showing not zero, nearly a minute actually, and if his time was really short (he must have had 30 seconds at least) why did he not just quickly make one of the obvious moves such as dxe4 in the final position.

It's not unusual at the end of games with auto-boards for the kings to be placed wrongly in centre-board so that the wrong result gets registered and is only corrected later. That is why several of us thought originally it must have been a draw.

Perhaps the problem was that Cooper (a very experienced international in the past) may have been unused to increments. A few moves before the end there was a period when he could have made several fairly obvious safe moves quickly (46...Rh1 for example) and built up his time again. It seems to me that Hebden (who had nearly an hour left) set a psychological trap with dubious moves so that Black was in two minds whether to play for a win or a draw, so got neither. At least that's my theory.

Stockfish on Chess24 actually reckoned Black was much better at one point: 52...d4! 53 exd4 Bd5 followed by ...Bxf3. Black will then have connected passed pawns whereas White's are split and it's close to winning for Black with best play. He certainly shouldn't lose if the clock situation had not been extreme.

Of course against a very seasoned campaigner like Hebden nothing is easy.

[LawrenceCooper]

And does anyone yet have an explanation for Hebden's win against Cooper yesterday?

Given his clock was showing at zero and he was better in the final position I see no reason to doubt that he lost on time. Is further explanation needed?

As I wrote earlier, John Cooper's clock on Chess24 was showing not zero, nearly a minute actually, and if his time was really short (he must have had 30 seconds at least) why did he not just quickly make one of the obvious moves such as dxe4 in the final position.

It's not unusual at the end of games with auto-boards for the kings to be placed wrongly in centre-board so that the wrong result gets registered and is only corrected later. That is why several of us thought originally it must have been a draw.

Perhaps the problem was that Cooper (a very experienced international in the past) may have been unused to increments. A few moves before the end there was a period when he could have made several fairly obvious safe moves quickly (46...Rh1 for example) and built up his time again. It seems to me that Hebden (who had nearly an hour left) set a psychological trap with dubious moves so that Black was in two minds whether to play for a win or a draw, so got neither. At least that's my theory.

Stockfish on Chess24 actually reckoned Black was much better at one point: 52...d4! 53 exd4 Bd5 followed by ...Bxf3. Black will then have connected passed pawns whereas White's are split and it's close to winning for Black with best play. He certainly shouldn't lose if the clock situation had not been extreme.

Of course against a very seasoned campaigner like Hebden nothing is easy.

I can't comment on what went through the player's mind but his time online was showing as zero and that, coupled with the subsequent published result seems a reasonable explanation.

[Andrew Zigmond]

There has been a disappointingly large number of live boards not working today - some of them important ones where we still don't know the result.
They had better fix that for the last few rounds or heads should roll (metaphorically speaking).

I agree. Sack the lot of them. Let's face it, we're not short of people willing to put in twelve hour days for free ...

[LawrenceCooper]

There has been a disappointingly large number of live boards not working today - some of them important ones where we still don't know the result.
They had better fix that for the last few rounds or heads should roll (metaphorically speaking).

I agree. Sack the lot of them. Let's face it, we're not short of people willing to put in twelve hour days for free ...

Some even pay for the privilege

[Carl Hibbard]

There has been a disappointingly large number of live boards not working today - some of them important ones where we still don't know the result.
They had better fix that for the last few rounds or heads should roll (metaphorically speaking).

It's bloody hard work, I really know what I am doing and I would not take the task on.

The software is crap.

We should be applauding Dave for getting anything going let alone dishing out stick.

The ECF spending some actual cash instead of wasting it on a forum then I might listen to some of the complaints

[Andrew Zigmond]

For the avoidance of confusion I was being sarcastic. I agree there is an opportunity around the live coverage but people who slag off unpaid volunteers (as Lawrence Cooper rightly says, it sometimes costs them money) really gets my goat.

[Carl Hibbard]

For the avoidance of confusion I was being sarcastic. I agree there is an opportunity around the live coverage but people who slag off unpaid volunteers (as Lawrence Cooper rightly says, it sometimes costs them money) really gets my goat.

Sorry yes that one was Tim.