Britbase Updates

[David McAlister]

[Event "Central London Open 1st"] [Site "London, Mary Ward Centre"] [Date "1973.06.10"] [Round "5"] [White "Mabbs, David J"] [Black "Welsh, TD."] [Result "1-0"] [ECO "A43"] [BlackElo "1880"] [PlyCount "91"] [EventDate "1973.06.09"] [Source "John Saunders"] [SourceDate "2024.03.28"] {My solution suggests a different amendment to the problematic White 31st move, and then adds in an extra move each at move 35 - resulting in the game ending on move 46 rather than 45. } 1. d4 Nf6 2. Nc3 c5 3. d5 g6 4. e4 d6 5. Be2 Bg7 6. Nf3 O-O 7. O-O Na6 8. Bf4 Nc7 9. a4 a6 10. Nd2 Bd7 11. Re1 b5 12. Qc1 Rb8 13. axb5 axb5 14. Nd1 Ng4 15. Bg3 e5 16. Bxg4 Bxg4 17. Ne3 Bd7 18. f3 f5 19. Bf2 f4 20. Nef1 g5 21. g4 h5 22. h3 hxg4 23. fxg4 Qf6 24. Ra3 Kf7 25. Nh2 Rh8 26. Kg2 Kg6 27. Ndf3 Ra8 28. Rxa8 Rxa8 29. c3 Qd8 30. Qc2 Ra2 31. Rg1 { Using the descriptive - 31.R-KN1 instead of the scoresheet text 31.R-QN1. Surprising how often when a player, in seeking to make a move unambiguous, writes down the wrong letter.} 31... Qa8 32. Nd2 Kh6 33. Nhf3 c4 34. Rh1 Qc8 { Now the suggested extra moves.} 35. Qb1 Ra8 (35... Ra4 {would also work.}) 36. Qg1 Kg6 37. h4 Bxg4 38. Nxg5 Kh5 39. Bb6 Na6 40. Kh2 Nc5 41. Nf7 Nd3 42. Nxd6 Qf8 43. Nf5 Ra2 44. Qxg4+ Kxg4 45. Rg1+ Kh5 46. Rg5# 1-0

[James Pratt]

Tom Welsh.
James

[John Saunders]

[Event "Central London Open 1st"] [Site "London, Mary Ward Centre"] [Date "1973.06.10"] [Round "5"] [White "Mabbs, David J"] [Black "Welsh, TD."] [Result "1-0"] [ECO "A43"] [BlackElo "1880"] [PlyCount "91"] [EventDate "1973.06.09"] [Source "John Saunders"] [SourceDate "2024.03.28"] {My solution suggests a different amendment to the problematic White 31st move, and then adds in an extra move each at move 35 - resulting in the game ending on move 46 rather than 45. } 1. d4 Nf6 2. Nc3 c5 3. d5 g6 4. e4 d6 5. Be2 Bg7 6. Nf3 O-O 7. O-O Na6 8. Bf4 Nc7 9. a4 a6 10. Nd2 Bd7 11. Re1 b5 12. Qc1 Rb8 13. axb5 axb5 14. Nd1 Ng4 15. Bg3 e5 16. Bxg4 Bxg4 17. Ne3 Bd7 18. f3 f5 19. Bf2 f4 20. Nef1 g5 21. g4 h5 22. h3 hxg4 23. fxg4 Qf6 24. Ra3 Kf7 25. Nh2 Rh8 26. Kg2 Kg6 27. Ndf3 Ra8 28. Rxa8 Rxa8 29. c3 Qd8 30. Qc2 Ra2 31. Rg1 { Using the descriptive - 31.R-KN1 instead of the scoresheet text 31.R-QN1. Surprising how often when a player, in seeking to make a move unambiguous, writes down the wrong letter.} 31... Qa8 32. Nd2 Kh6 33. Nhf3 c4 34. Rh1 Qc8 { Now the suggested extra moves.} 35. Qb1 Ra8 (35... Ra4 {would also work.}) 36. Qg1 Kg6 37. h4 Bxg4 38. Nxg5 Kh5 39. Bb6 Na6 40. Kh2 Nc5 41. Nf7 Nd3 42. Nxd6 Qf8 43. Nf5 Ra2 44. Qxg4+ Kxg4 45. Rg1+ Kh5 46. Rg5# 1-0

Many thanks for this, David. I think you have correctly identified the problem: the omission of 35...Ra8 36 Qg1. If we look at moves 35 and 36 in descriptive notation, we get an idea of where the confusion may have arisen: 35 Q-N1 Ra8 36 Q-N1 Kg6 - in copying David Mabbs may have seen the first Q-N1 and his eye then skipped to Kg6, missing the other two half-moves. Another reason why descriptive notation was inferior to algebraic!

Going back to move 31, there's no need to change Rb1 to Rg1 as the score as amended at move 35/36 now works as it stands. I think Rb1 is a more natural move (Nimzowitschian overprotection). So I'm sticking with 31 Rb1. Nice work, David!

Clean copy of the score as I shall publish it on BritBase in due course unless anything else occurs in the meantime...

[Event "Central London Open 1st"] [Site "London, Mary Ward Centre"] [Date "1973.06.10"] [Round "5"] [White "Mabbs, David J"] [Black "Welsh, Thomas D"] [Result "1-0"] [ECO "A43"] [WhiteElo "2064"] [BlackElo "1880"] [PlyCount "91"] [EventDate "1973.06.09"] [EventType "swiss"] [EventRounds "5"] [EventCountry "ENG"] [SourceTitle "BritBase"] [Source "John Saunders"] [SourceDate "2024.03.28"] [SourceVersion "1"] [SourceVersionDate "2024.03.28"] [SourceQuality "1"] 1. d4 Nf6 2. Nc3 c5 3. d5 g6 4. e4 d6 5. Be2 Bg7 6. Nf3 O-O 7. O-O Na6 8. Bf4 Nc7 9. a4 a6 10. Nd2 Bd7 11. Re1 b5 12. Qc1 Rb8 13. axb5 axb5 14. Nd1 Ng4 15. Bg3 e5 16. Bxg4 Bxg4 17. Ne3 Bd7 18. f3 f5 19. Bf2 f4 20. Nef1 g5 21. g4 h5 22. h3 hxg4 23. fxg4 Qf6 24. Ra3 Kf7 25. Nh2 Rh8 26. Kg2 Kg6 27. Ndf3 Ra8 28. Rxa8 Rxa8 29. c3 Qd8 30. Qc2 Ra2 31. Rb1 Qa8 32. Nd2 Kh6 33. Nhf3 c4 34. Rh1 Qc8 35. Qb1 Ra8 36. Qg1 Kg6 37. h4 Bxg4 38. Nxg5 Kh5 39. Bb6 Na6 40. Kh2 Nc5 41. Nf7 Nd3 42. Nxd6 Qf8 43. Nf5 Ra2 44. Qxg4+ Kxg4 45. Rg1+ Kh5 46. Rg5# 1-0

[John Saunders]

Can anyone help reconstruct this score? From a David Mabbs scorebook...

Many thanks to Clive Frostick who has had a go at reconstructing this game. I think he has nailed it. Here's the amended score...

[Event "Hastings Challengers 1973/74"] [Site "Hastings"] [Date "1973.12.30"] [Round "4"] [White "Suradiradja, Herman"] [Black "Mabbs, David J"] [Result "1-0"] [ECO "C69"] [WhiteElo "2280"] [BlackElo "2192"] [PlyCount "107"] [EventDate "1973.12.27"] [EventType "swiss"] [EventRounds "10"] [EventCountry "ENG"] [SourceTitle "BritBase"] [Source "John Saunders"] [SourceDate "2024.07.04"] [SourceVersion "1"] [SourceVersionDate "2024.07.04"] [SourceQuality "1"] 1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5 a6 4. Bxc6 dxc6 5. O-O f6 6. d4 exd4 7. Nxd4 Ne7 8. Be3 Ng6 9. Nd2 Qe7 10. Nf5 Qf7 11. Nb3 b6 12. Re1 c5 13. Qd2 Bb7 14. Rad1 Ne5 15. Bf4 g6 16. Bxe5 fxe5 17. Ne3 Bg7 18. f3 h5 19. Qc3 O-O 20. Qc4 Rad8 21. Qxf7+ Kxf7 22. Nc1 Ke6 23. b3 Bc6 24. Rxd8 Rxd8 25. Nd3 Bb5 26. Rd1 Bxd3 27. Rxd3 Rd4 28. Nd5 Kd6 29. Kf2 b5 30. Ke2 c6 31. Ne3 Bh6 32. c3 Rxd3 33. Kxd3 a5 34. c4 a4 35. g3 Ke6 36. Ng2 {At this point the original score reads 36...P-N4 37 PxNP RPxP but it looks probable that these moves have been given in the wrong order - more likely is 36...PxNP 37 RPxP P-N4. JS} axb3 37. axb3 g5 38. Ne3 Kf6 39. Nf5 Bf8 40. Ke3 Ke6 41. f4 g4 42. h3 gxh3 43. Kf2 Kd7 44. Kg1 Kc7 45. Kh2 Kb6 46. fxe5 Ka5 47. e6 Kb4 48. cxb5 cxb5 49. e7 Bxe7 50. Nxe7 Kxb3 51. e5 b4 52. e6 c4 53. Nc6 c3 54. e7 {Source: David Mabbs. Help with reconstruction: Clive Frostick.} 1-0

[Christopher Kreuzer]

It has been fascinating to see two of these three David Mabbs games get reconstructed, which what looks like very plausible sequences of moves that make much more sense than the existing scoresheets (well, the only extant records of the moves as I assume the original scoresheets are gone?).

I have had a look at the second one (the 1973 Central London Open loss to L.P. Burnett here), and while I have not been able to reconstruct it in full, surely the key lies in whether you accept that the final move (that led to David resigning) was "bishop takes rook". So you need to work out which bishop and which rook is more likely (and where on the board) and work back from there. Some sequences (like the pawn move with check, followed by the capture of a pawn by the rook) appear to have been succesfully reconstructed), it is nearly there, just needs a moment of inspiration for somethig plausible (though whether and how John would decide how to put a 'possible' reconstruction on BritBase, one that might be correct but is a bit uncertain, I don't know).

It is interesting to see that game from the 1973/4 Hastings Challengers (and the future Indonesian GM Herman Suradiradja). Are there any other games from this event available on BritBase? I may be looking in the wrong place...

https://www.britbase.co.uk/britbase/hastings.htm

After some poking around, I found a full listing of the results and players in the 1973/4 Hastings Challengers here:

https://www.saund.org.uk/britbase/pgn/l ... iewer.html

I suppose it would be too much to hope for that a similar level of detail is available for the 1973 Central London Open? Was this event reported in the chess magazines of the time?

[John Saunders]

I've had another go at the Burnett game, without success. As regards how to display a game such as this on BritBase: good question. Usually, when I'm confident that a reconstruction is convincing, I put in some text to indicate which of the game moves have been reconstructed and show the full score. But in the case of Burnett game, where the reconstruction is little more than a rough guess, I think the best plan is to show the game moves only up to the point where the score seems to go wrong and then put the remaining moves exactly as set down in the source as a text comment, with perhaps some reconstruction ideas as variations from that point. That way you give subsequent investigators the fullest information available for them to work on (much in the way that archaeologists record digs for future investigations). This is better than putting in questionable reconstructions as game moves with accompanying text because it is all too easy for another database editor (maybe one whose English is not too good) to come along and strip all the explanatory text out, leaving all the moves as if they were played.

As regards games from the 1973/74 Hastings Challengers, as it happens I've been putting together a collection of around 50 of these which will go on BritBase very soon. What I'd really like for that tournament is a crosstable but so far I've not been lucky. It's just possible that one appeared in NewsFlash (the old BCF official bulletin) but I don't have access to it at the moment. Maybe a forum member could help to find one.

I looked up the 1973 Central London Open in old mags and slotted some details into the score of Mabbs-Welsh game upthread. There were 9(!) joint winners. BCM, July 1973, p285: (1-9) GH Bennett, PV Byway, A Helman (ISR), GH James, M Macdonald-Ross, D Parr, A Pope (AUS), M W J Thompson, D Wright 4/5 (69 competitors). It was just a weekender and I wouldn't expect to find more details anywhere. Maybe Newsflash provided more details but I don't have access.

[GrahamStuart]

I checked NewsFlash for the Hastings Challengers and it just mentions the winners. I have attached the information below from a quick picture. The HCA Archives have a number of NewsFlash and I may look to scan in the future unless anyone else is thinking to do this? I probably have more Hampshire Chess related activities to look at first.

[John Saunders]

Many thanks for posting those items from Newsflash, Graham - very useful. I have a bit more info about the 1973/74 Hastings which I shall publish shortly. I already had the Diesen-Rol score which was published in both BCM and CHESS but the prize-winning game from the 1973 Scunthorpe Congress was new to me. As a snapper-up of unconsidered chess trifles, I've now added it to my collection. Here are the two scores should anyone else want to play through...

[Event "Hastings Challengers 1973/74"] [Site "Hastings"] [Date "1974.01.05"] [Round "10"] [White "Diesen, Mark C"] [Black "Rol, G"] [Result "1-0"] [ECO "B19"] [WhiteElo "2400"] [PlyCount "57"] [EventDate "1973.12.27"] [EventType "swiss"] [EventRounds "10"] [EventCountry "ENG"] [SourceTitle "BritBase"] [Source "John Saunders"] [SourceDate "2024.07.04"] [SourceVersion "1"] [SourceVersionDate "2024.07.04"] [SourceQuality "1"] 1. e4 c6 2. d4 d5 3. Nc3 dxe4 4. Nxe4 Bf5 5. Ng3 Bg6 6. Nf3 Nd7 7. h4 h6 8. h5 Bh7 9. Bd3 Bxd3 10. Qxd3 Qc7 11. Qe2 e6 12. Bd2 Ngf6 13. O-O-O O-O-O 14. Kb1 Bd6 15. Ne4 Nxe4 16. Qxe4 c5 17. c4 Nf6 18. Qe2 cxd4 19. Nxd4 a6 20. c5 Bf4 21. Be3 Rd5 22. c6 Bxe3 23. cxb7+ Qxb7 24. fxe3 Rd7 25. Nc6 Nd5 26. Rc1 Rc7 27. e4 Nf6 28. Rh3 Nd7 29. Rhc3 {Sources: BCM, February 1974, p52; CHESS, April 1974, Vol.39/695-6, p217 (annotated by Diesen); BCF Newsflash, March 1974} 1-0

[Event "Scunthorpe op 21st"] [Site "Scunthorpe"] [Date "1973.05.26"] [Round "?"] [White "Read, CM"] [Black "Goll, M"] [Result "1-0"] [ECO "E14"] [PlyCount "33"] [EventDate "1973.05.25"] [EventType "swiss"] [EventRounds "6"] [EventCountry "ENG"] 1. Nf3 Nf6 2. c4 e6 3. d4 b6 4. Nc3 Bb7 5. e3 Be7 6. Bd3 d5 7. cxd5 exd5 8. O-O O-O 9. b3 Re8 10. Qc2 Nbd7 11. Ng5 h6 12. Bh7+ Kf8 13. f4 hxg5 14. fxg5 Ne4 15. Nxe4 dxe4 16. Rxf7+ Kxf7 17. Qc4+ {Source: BCF Newsflash, March 1974. BCF Best Game Prize, Grade 166-180 Category.} 1-0

[John Saunders]

I've now uploaded games and details of the 1973/74 Hastings to BritBase, but please note I haven't finished editing some of the results text, so it's more of a sneak preview. All 120 games from the Premier plus 51 from other sections.

https://www.saund.org.uk/britbase/pgn/1 ... iewer.html

[John Saunders]

I've now updated the text of the 1973/74 Hastings page referenced above, so the file is now 'live'.

Does anyone have a complete crosstable for the 1973/74 Hastings Challengers? I don't have the tournament bulletin for that event and I'm wondering if it might include a better record of the Challengers than the results table I've created.

[Kevin Thurlow]

I don't see any "Christmas Special" info - I have an idea I played in it..

[David McAlister]

It has been fascinating to see two of these three David Mabbs games get reconstructed, which what looks like very plausible sequences of moves that make much more sense than the existing scoresheets (well, the only extant records of the moves as I assume the original scoresheets are gone?).

I have had a look at the second one (the 1973 Central London Open loss to L.P. Burnett here), and while I have not been able to reconstruct it in full, surely the key lies in whether you accept that the final move (that led to David resigning) was "bishop takes rook". So you need to work out which bishop and which rook is more likely (and where on the board) and work back from there. Some sequences (like the pawn move with check, followed by the capture of a pawn by the rook) appear to have been succesfully reconstructed), it is nearly there, just needs a moment of inspiration for somethig plausible (though whether and how John would decide how to put a 'possible' reconstruction on BritBase, one that might be correct but is a bit uncertain, I don't know).

So, taking Christopher's suggestion about the game ending (BxR) and working back, I made my umteenth attempt at reconstruction - and found, I think, a workable (if perhaps not perfect) solution. In my version BxR could have been played a move earlier, but maybe that's believable enough in a time scramble. Anyway here it is, warts and all.
[Event "Central London Open 1st"] [Site "London, Mary Ward Centre"] [Date "1973.06.09"] [Round "3"] [White "Burnett, Leon P"] [Black "Mabbs, David J"] [Result "1-0"] [ECO "A10"] [WhiteElo "2152"] [PlyCount "95"] [EventDate "1973.06.09"] [Source "John Saunders"] [SourceDate "2024.03.28"] 1. c4 f5 2. g3 e5 3. d4 Bb4+ 4. Nc3 Nc6 5. dxe5 Nxe5 6. Qd4 d6 7. b3 Nf6 8. Bg2 O-O 9. Bb2 Re8 10. O-O-O Bc5 11. Qxc5 dxc5 12. Rxd8 Rxd8 13. Nb5 Neg4 14. Nxc7 Rb8 15. Nh3 h6 16. Nd5 Kf7 17. Nxf6 Nxf6 18. Nf4 Re8 19. Re1 b6 20. Nd3 Bb7 21. Ne5+ Ke6 22. f3 Bc8 23. Bh3 Kd6 24. Rd1+ Kc7 25. Rd2 Nd7 26. Nxd7 Bxd7 27. Bxg7 h5 28. Bh6 Rb7 29. e4 Kc8 30. exf5 Re1+ 31. Kb2 a5 32. Bf4 a4 33. bxa4 Ra7 34. a3 Re8 35. g4 Rxa4 36. Bf1 b5 37. Bd6 Re1 38. Be2 hxg4 39. Bxc5 bxc4 40. fxg4 c3+ 41. Kxc3 Re4 42. Ba6+ Kc7 43. Bb4 Rxg4 44. f6 Be6 45. Kb2 Rh4 46. Ba5+ Kc6 47. Rc2+ Kd6 48. Bxe1 1-0

[John Saunders]

So, taking Christopher's suggestion about the game ending (BxR) and working back, I made my umteenth attempt at reconstruction - and found, I think, a workable (if perhaps not perfect) solution. In my version BxR could have been played a move earlier, but maybe that's believable enough in a time scramble. Anyway here it is, warts and all.

Very good, David. That's the most plausible reconstruction I've seen to date. I'm tempted to tweak it slightly - 39 fxg4 bxc4 40 Bxc5, as I think after 39 Bxc5 Black would automatically reply 39...gxf3, though the move order you suggest is more in keeping with the score. The denouement fits the recorded moves better than anything else I've attempted. Black missing a threat from a bishop in reverse gear is a believable time trouble blunder.

[David McAlister]

I'm tempted to tweak it slightly - 39 fxg4 bxc4 40 Bxc5, as I think after 39 Bxc5 Black would automatically reply 39...gxf3, though the move order you suggest is more in keeping with the score.

I was tempted too!

[MJMcCready]

Once upon a time a congress held in Luton in 1975 entered into the press for, perhaps all the wrong reasons, with the final round accredited with the shortest game of chess ever played.

Can you name the competitors of that Round 5 game, reproduce the scoresheet, and if you don't mind, inform us how much the winner of the tournament took home with him?