CHESS CONGRESS

Dominion, Volume 28, Issue 83, 2 January 1935, Page 4

CHESS CONGRESS

Erskine Still in Lead FINAL ROUNDS BEGUN By Telegraph.—Press Association. Christchurch, January 1. The first three final rounds of the New Zealand chess championship were played during the last two days. At the end o£ the third final round J. A. Erskiqfi (Southland) is leading with 54 points, K. Beyer (Wellington) being next with 44 points. H. R. Abbott, the young Canterbury player, and A. W. Gyles (Wellington) have each four points. Abbott met Erskine to-day and suffered his first defeat. Results are as follow: — First final round: Gyles beat Darwin. Erskine beat Le Petit. Scott drew with Severne. Beyer beat Watt, Abbott beat Dunlop, Kelling beat Hicks. Second final round : Gyles beat Scott. L<? Petit beat Kelling, Beyer drew with Erskine, Severne drew with Abbott, Hicks beat Darwin, Dunlop beat Watt.

Third final round: Beyer beat Kelling. Erskine beat Abbott, Scott beat Hieks, Dunlop beat Gyles, Watt drew with Severne. The match Le Petit v. Darwin was not finished. Following are notes on the games, white names mentioned first: — First Final Round. Gyles v.. Darwin (Sicilian): Darwin exchanged knights on the fourth move, leaving Gyles with a very free game. Gyles prevented Darwin from castling, and he in defending the knight allowed Gyles to fork a rook. Darwin received no compensation for this, and resigned on the eighteenth move. Erskine v. Le Petit (English opening) : Black lost time in opening by an unnecessary pawn move, and as a result had a difficult game. He lost a piece on the twentieth move, and immediately resigned. Scott v. Severne (Queen’s Pawn game) : Severne defended with the Budapest counter-gambit, which Scott accepted. The game was marked by rapid exchanges, and by attacking the queen Scott won a pawn but failed to bold it. The players agreed to a draw on the thirty-first move. Beyer v. Watt (Queen’s Pawn game) : Watt adopted the King's Franchetto defence. Though black was fairly cramped, the game was even. At the twentythird move Watt exchanged a bishop for a knight, giving white a commanding position oh the queen’s side and control of the queen’s bishop file. Trying to free the game black lost his king’s pawn. This was a weak move as the pawn exchange gave white the advantage. Watt resigned on the thirtieth move. Abbott v. Dunlop (Queen’s Gambit declined) : The game developed on usual lines. Dunlop’s eighth move confined his queen’s bishop and his sixteenth allowed Abbott to break up black’s king side pawns. With this advantage Abbott played decisively to force Dunlop’s resignation on the thirty-ninth move. It was a very interesting game with Dunlop setting a neat trap on his twenty-eighth move with which Abbott took no chances. Hicks v. Kelling (King’s Franchetto opening) : This long bout ran into three sittings. It was even till a late stage of the end game, when Kelling obtained a slight positional advantage which enabled him to force a win at move 80. Second Final Round. Gyles v. Scott (Nimzowitsch defence): Gyles early obtained the freer game. At the twenty-third move he missed an opportunity of winning Scott’s queen for two pieces, but won a pawn instead. Scott made a great fight for a draw, but missed his way when pressed for time. Through taking a pawn to equalise, he left himself in a waiting net and resigned. Le Petit v. Kelling (Queen’s Gambit declined) : The game opened on orthodox lines.. The attack soon passed into Ls Petit’s hands and he gained a pawn at move 22. Heavy exchanges x followed, leaving Le. Petit with the king and five pawns against the king and four pawns Correct handling of a tricky ending enabled him to score an instructive win at move 53. •,

Beyer v. Erskine (Queen’s Pawn Game and Slave Defence): On move 21 Beyer began a violent attack which resulted in heavy exchanges gaining him a pawn. The game finally resolved itself in a draw at move 42 with bishops of opposite colours.

Severne v. Abbott (Four Knights Game) : Severne very early had Abbott in difficulties through winning a pawn for which black received no recompense. Abbott regained the pawn on the twentyfifth move and a draw was agreed to. Hicks v. Darwin (Caro Kann) : This was an even game with a good deal of exchanging till move 24, when an oversight by Darwin lost him a rook for a pawn. He then resigned. Dunlop v. Watt (Sicilian Defence) ; White attacked strongly and on tlie fbrty-fifth move pieces were even, with Dunlop having a passed pawn. At this stage Watt could have forced a draw, but missed, his opportunity, letting Dunlop win with the passed pawn. Third Final Round.

Kelling v. Beyer (French Defence): Kelling did not follow up, the Nimzowitsch attack to the best advantage and bis club mate was thus able to work up a very strong counter-attack which carried all before it. Kelling resigned a hopeless game at move 25. Erskine v. Abbott (English Opening) : The game resolved itself into a Sicilian with colours revers’ed, a line of play recommended by the Australian Chess Review. Abbott had a difficult game and lost a piece. He resigned at move 44.

Dunlap v. Gyles (Sicilian defence). — This developed normally. Dunlop gradually took command of the centre and brought his knights into action, which enagled him to win at move 25. Gyles’s game quickly fell away and he resigned at move 36, a mate being imminent. Scott v. Hieks.—Hicks played an irregular defence to Scott’s queen’s pawn opening. Both sides played very carefully. Scott used the pinning motive in winning a knight, but Hicks had some compensation in two united pawns on the queen's side. Scott offered exchanges of rook and queen, which Hicks accepted, thereby losing a certain draw. ScDtt stepped Hicks’s three pawn on the king’s side and Hieks then resigned. ■ Watt v. Severne.—Severne played the Morphy defence. At move 18 Severne had a chnnee of winning a pawn, which he overlooked. Thereafter a very even struggle took place; pieces were exchanged and as there seemed no possibility of a break through by either player, a draw was agreed to at move 52.