European Team Chs in Warsaw

[IM Jack Rudd]

So far so good: Ok as Black and we must have some advantage on the White boards.

Not looking so good in the Women's. Anya on board 2 seemed to have got something wrong inside the first ten moves. The engine is giving a plus 2 assessment in a position with queen and pawns against three minor pieces.

Well, I suppose it's better in practice than a +2 assessment in a position without a material imbalance of that nature.

[IM Jack Rudd]

I think the open team could perform well. Mickey looks as solid as ever and Nigel on 3 should pick up some points and he is cool about playing below Luke (though I think he should be on 2)

I think I disagree with you about Nigel: having watched his performances in recent years at Gibraltar and the London Chess Classic, it's clear where his strength lies - he's a great person to have low down your board order to pick up huge plus scores against slightly weaker opposition, rather than high up to try to get points against stronger players.

[Christopher Kreuzer]

5.4 GM HOWELL, David W L 2644 - GM GDANSKI, Jacek 2518

Although ENG is next to POL in the rankings based on the top 10, I don't think we could put out a third team of players above 2500. Leaving out players not willing or unlikely to be selected, an ENG 3 might look something like:-

Conquest, Stuart C g ENG 2490
Zhou, Yang-Fan m ENG 2486
Wells, Peter K g ENG 2479
Ghasi, Ameet K m ENG 2466
Williams, Simon K g ENG 2455

You might put Simon on 1 for his ability to take out on occasion the world's best.

ENG2 might be

Hebden, Mark L g ENG 2556
Pert, Nicholas g ENG 2555
Haslinger, Stewart G g ENG 2548
Gordon, Stephen J g ENG 2518
Hawkins, Jonathan m ENG 2511

So that team at least would meet the 2500 test.

I couldn't work out what this was all about, but I've just realised England are playing the Poland III team. The little number '3' was in the pairings that Loz posted, but easily missed. I thought the 'Poland' team looked a little weak, but having said that, many of the matches look close so far. Does this competition have more strength in depth than something like the Olympiad, i.e. no easy matches here?

[Simon Brown]

Jack, I agree that Nigel's strengths are there, but the reason I would prefer him on 2 is that I often fear for Luke against really top-class players. I know he is capable of incredible results, but I tend to think that he will get "found out" sooner or later. Hopefully not this week.

[LawrenceCooper]

5.4 GM HOWELL, David W L 2644 - GM GDANSKI, Jacek 2518

Although ENG is next to POL in the rankings based on the top 10, I don't think we could put out a third team of players above 2500. Leaving out players not willing or unlikely to be selected, an ENG 3 might look something like:-

Conquest, Stuart C g ENG 2490
Zhou, Yang-Fan m ENG 2486
Wells, Peter K g ENG 2479
Ghasi, Ameet K m ENG 2466
Williams, Simon K g ENG 2455

You might put Simon on 1 for his ability to take out on occasion the world's best.

ENG2 might be

Hebden, Mark L g ENG 2556
Pert, Nicholas g ENG 2555
Haslinger, Stewart G g ENG 2548
Gordon, Stephen J g ENG 2518
Hawkins, Jonathan m ENG 2511

So that team at least would meet the 2500 test.

I couldn't work out what this was all about, but I've just realised England are playing the Poland III team. The little number '3' was in the pairings that Loz posted, but easily missed. I thought the 'Poland' team looked a little weak, but having said that, many of the matches look close so far. Does this competition have more strength in depth than something like the Olympiad, i.e. no easy matches here?

There's a lot less teams in the European event and therefore far less of a tail.

[LawrenceCooper]

Jack, I agree that Nigel's strengths are there, but the reason I would prefer him on 2 is that I often fear for Luke against really top-class players. I know he is capable of incredible results, but I tend to think that he will get "found out" sooner or later. Hopefully not this week.

He certainly didn't get found out in the Tal Memorial or previous London Chess Classics and they were a far more severe examination where the top players in the world had a long time in advance for preparation and the potential to catch him out.

[MartinCarpenter]

Also if they consider pushing Gawain up to 2 so that Nigel can play 3 worthwhile (as, iirc, they did last time out) then playing Luke on 2 isn't precisely a difficult decision

[Roger de Coverly]

Does this competition have more strength in depth than something like the Olympiad, i.e. no easy matches here?

Very much so. Admittedly neither Wales nor Scotland are at full strength, but they are usually good enough for a position above halfway in Olympiads and are the two lowest seeds in Poland. If the Open team perform to their seeding, the current match where they face 4*2500 will be their easiest on paper.

Although teams like Guernsey, Jersey, Monaco, Andorra, San Marino etc. would be eligible, in practice they don't enter. One major difference is that in Olympiads, the hosts supply board and lodging, whilst in the Euro, the teams or Federations have to finance it.

[Christopher Kreuzer]

Just noticed Adams is not playing today. Any news on that, or is it just a team/strategy thing? And on the England II and England III debate (well, suggestions by Roger), why are Gormally and Arkell not there?? Not that we are ever likely to see such teams unless England host an international team event...

[Matthew Peat]

Luke McShane looks a bit rusty after presumably missing 20...Nb4 which appears to fully equalize for Black. White seemed to have a very healthy plus out of the opening.

[Simon Brown]

Loz, Luke didn't do too well in last year's Classic; -4 if I recall. I got the impression that everyne was ready for him. I agree that this week's opponents will have less time to prepare for him, so let's keep everything crossed.

[LawrenceCooper]

Loz, Luke didn't do too well in last year's Classic; -4 if I recall. I got the impression that everyne was ready for him. I agree that this week's opponents will have less time to prepare for him, so let's keep everything crossed.

Bear in mind that Nigel stopped playing the Classic though for some of the fears you had about Luke. I think the current order is ideal (albeit I had no involvement), Luke has some amazing results against the top players and Nigel is very at home in scoring heavily against those below the elite eg Gibraltar and he did very well on board 3 last year until he fell ill. Ultimately though I suspect that form will prove more important.

[Nick Burrows]

Looks like a lot is riding on Gawain winning..

[Christopher Kreuzer]

Looks like a lot is riding on Gawain winning..

Indeed. Should be an interesting endgame.

(initially posted in wrong thread, can the other one be renamed otherwise it will get confusing)

[Roger de Coverly]

In the Jones game, the online coverage calls the opening the Golombek defence to the English, which is new to me as a description of the line 1. c4 Nf6 2. Nc3 d5. There are however a number of Golombek games featuring this line.

Also at move 8, taking on c6 with the white square Bishop from g2 is not something that you do without knowledge of the consequences. Nigel played it in the UAE team tournament last Christmas and Gawain himself played it at Hastings. Looking at the history, it was also played in the 1970s by Petrosian, Smyslov and Keene.