Page 4 of 4

Re: National Stages 2019

Posted: Thu May 16, 2019 8:26 am
by Mick Norris
Michael Farthing wrote:
Wed May 15, 2019 8:17 pm
Ah thanks Christopher - that gives me in the u140 a pretty good endorsement :-)
It's Essex again though, who knocked Lancs out in the U160 and U120 :wink:

Re: National Stages 2019

Posted: Thu May 16, 2019 9:08 am
by Michael Farthing
Well time will tell!

Re: National Stages 2019

Posted: Fri May 17, 2019 9:49 pm
by Nick Grey
Andrew z - thank you for the apology.

another county chess dispute has gone on a lot longer - since when a started secondary school

Michael - best wishes but I think your u140s will struggle. :)

Re: National Stages 2019

Posted: Sat May 18, 2019 8:38 am
by Michael Farthing
Thanks for the good wishes Nick - much appreciated

Re: National Stages 2019

Posted: Sat May 18, 2019 8:17 pm
by Neil Graham
I see that Yorkshire defaulted to Warwickshire in both the U180 & U100 competitions. In addition Berkshire defaulted to Lancashire in the U100.

Re: National Stages 2019

Posted: Sat May 18, 2019 11:09 pm
by Michael Farthing
Well how did Nick's good wishes work for me?

From an unconventional anti-Nimzo (by me) I was left discouraged by an awkward-feeling position which magically transformed into a rather promising kingside assault on some hemmed-in black minor pieces. But a careless pawn move blew that apart and we both juggled a rook and bishop about until I was offered a draw after 2 1/2 repetitions. Inspecting the score line (we needed 2 1/2 from 3 games in progress) persuaded me to continue and I watched my earlier advantage disintegrate as black's position strrengthened. But (I suspect) my opponent grew a little impatient and his bishop grabbed a pawn that I thought was ably defended. But there were pins and skewers all over the shop! Oh dear - death awaits - but hey, there are so many different captures to continue with and sure enough at least two work: his bishop is chopped and cannot be redeemed. In for the kill now with mate in sight - but lo a sneaky pawn advance of two squares puts it all in doubt. The offered en passant would open up a catastophic capture for him, but the pawn is blocking my queen from the action. But sneaky check with a knight (that is actually a sacrifice as it can simply be taken) opens up a nice checking square for my bishop. The bishop move produces a discovered attack by my rook on his rook though his rook can take the checking bishop (though still doomed to recapture). But then my rook can fork king and queen. Q x R and Q x Q + and after the king move I pick up his still en prise rook. Well that was my plan, but my opponent forbore to accept the knight sacrifice and his king nobly accepted mate instead, sparing his loyal (but doomed) troops. An exciting finish but a disappointment for my worthy opponent for whom a momentary miscalcutation had cost all.

So now, the sceme has chamged and the teams are level pegging. Rapid calculation from a rather messy scoresheet (a last minute Lancs missing player has led to the inclusion of the observing son of a team member, a changed board order and lots of amendments to the score sheet) revealed that we needed only a draw from the final game to win on tie break. The Lancs man was short of time but with a good position. Steadily and securely he began to reap pawns and victory looked promising - queens were about to come off but his opponent managed to extricate his lady to a remote square - attacking a rook pawn. The pawn advances two squares to be defended by its neigbour and boom - in jumps the queen to check the king and supported by a conveniently placed knight can do the final deed! Another miscalculation - this time by Lancs - has brought defeat from victory.

So Nick, your wish to see Lancs vanquished has been realised and I am gutted that Finals Day (with its shirt competition with Mike Truran) will not be for me this year. But your good wishes were appreciated and I hope our recent frosty relationship might thereby be greatly improved.

Re: National Stages 2019

Posted: Sun May 19, 2019 9:21 am
by Mick Norris
Hard luck Michael, Essex do seem to be a problem to Lancs

Re: National Stages 2019

Posted: Sun May 19, 2019 9:32 am
by Mick Norris
Mick Norris wrote:
Sat May 11, 2019 5:15 pm
Surrey have beaten Lancs in the Open 10 - 6 and will play G Man in the semi final, who beat Sussex 7 - 5

Minor: Devon beat Notts 8.5 - 7.5

U160: Devon 8 - 8 with Notts and level on board count but I think Notts go through; Essex beat Lancs 10 - 6

U120: Yorks beat Derbys 8 - 4, Essex beat Lancs on board count
Open: Middlesex beat Leics 10 - 6

Minor: Norfolk beat Essex 10 - 6

U180: Warks beat Yorks by default

U160: Middlesex beat Yorks on board count; Suffolk beat G Man 9 - 7

U140: Kent beat Notts 8.5 - 7.5; Essex beat Lancs 8.5 - 7.5; Yorks beat Hants 10.5 - 5.5

U120: Notts beat kent 5.5 - 4.5

U100: Staffs beat Norfolk 7.5 - 4.5: Lancs beat Berks by default; Warks beat Yorks by default

Re: National Stages 2019

Posted: Sun May 19, 2019 7:32 pm
by Nick Grey
Michael most of the best matches go either way and why not publish as chess is exciting at all levels.
No ill feelings on my part to you, only some gentle ribbing on this site. So 2 more to come in for my accumulator.
Not aware of a shirt prize - not encouraging the other half of the population.
Now we have north, south, west, east, and mccu incl Manchester so what more can we want from the national stages of county chess?

Re: National Stages 2019

Posted: Mon May 20, 2019 12:18 pm
by Mick Norris
U100: Notts beat Essex 6 - 4

U120: Staffs beat Norfolk 7 - 5

U140: Worcs beat Herts 10 - 6; Essex beat Lancs 9 - 7

U180: Essex beat Cornwall 10.5 - 5.5

Re: National Stages 2019

Posted: Mon May 27, 2019 3:05 pm
by John Reyes
Roger de Coverly wrote:
Sun May 12, 2019 11:12 pm
Kevin Thurlow wrote:
Sun May 12, 2019 10:57 pm
Obviously, eligibility rules are important, but if you can't get enough players out in your county, what do you do?
If the Competition is sufficiently prestigious, players will find ways of bending the rules. In recent years there were a couple of Oxford players with dual eligibility who turned out for Lancashire in the final stages. "bussed in" as a Greater Manchester commentator would have it.

I doubt it's something that the ECF would contemplate, but if 4NCL squads were deemed to have a home county, that would or could open up a lot more flexibility in eligibility. But perhaps it's a lost cause. I noted that the board 7 for the Manchester Manticores 4NCL team in Telford reappeared at board 3 in the Greater Manchester county team a week later. The Manticores team sets aside the ancient dispute and is formed of Lancs players as well.
Lancashire are anti Manchester (I won't used the word greater)
I personal offered to captain the Manchester open team, as you can see on the MCF website, that we only have a u160 team, but Lancashire like to pinch players from us to play for them. I don't blame them as they have a bigger pool of players to play. I have had personal issues with the Lancashire President and now NCCU president Bill O'Rourke, and I can go around, but at the end of the day, my skills set for chess, can be used with the MCF and I'm glad I can help.

Lancashire Don't wanted Manchester and personal I feel that they fear changes. chess has move on, but people hold grudges and I personal think that the NCCU either invites Manchester back or you might see that an New Union forming (maybe the Northern chess Federation)