CHESS

Dominion, Volume 23, Issue 80, 28 December 1929, Page 4

CHESS

DOMINION TOURNAMENT SECOND AND THIRD ROUNDS By Telegraph.—Press Association. Wanganui, December 27. The Dominion Chess Congress was continued at Wanganui to-day. Results of play in the second round are as follow : — , r , , Jeffreys (Auckland) v. Purdy (Sydney) .—Jeffreys opened with the Zukertort game, in which the early exchanges made by Purdy gave him a very free attacking position. Jeffreys pushed forward his king side pawns, leaving his. king somewhat open. Purdy did not take time to castle, but pushed forward his king rook’s pawn. His attack seemed overwhelming, but he had shut in his queen, which Jeffreys was able to win for a bishop. Purdy then attacked with rooks and bishops, but Jeffreys, playing well, counter-attacked with queen and rook on the queen’s wing, forcing a checkmate upon bls opponent on the 3Ctli move. Gundersen (Melbourne) v. Rutherford (Stratford).— The early exchanges in this king’s pawn game forced Gundersen to capture with his king, thus preventing castling. He gained some compensation from his fine well advanced pawn centre, and subsequent play left him with a pawn at knight’s seventh. Rutherfurd defended well, but should have won Gundersen’s bishop’for the sacrifice of a pawn. There being no chance of forcing an advantage on either side, a draw was agreed upon.

adopted the Alekon defence, Beyer getting a fine centre pawn position. Steady development by Beyer gave him an increased advantage, and although Fairburn defended well, he could not prevent the loss of two important pawns. At the 35th move Fairburn’s game was hopeless, so he resigned. Pleasants (Wanganui) v. Topp (Wellington).—Pleasants opened with the Buy Lopez, which Topp was hardly familiar with. His defence was not sound, aud Pleasants was able to win the exchange. This advantage Was maintained. until the exchanges left Topp without hope of avoiding defeat, whereupon fie resigned. Kelliug (Wellington) v. Erskine (Melbourne). —This was a very steady Sicilian game, in which Erskine ciiriy developed a strong attack upon Kclling’s knight at king 2. Kelliug provided an adequate defence and made a useful counterattack, hoping to win the exchange. A series of intricate moves involving (he changing oft’ of rooks left Kelliug in a critical position, but fortunately for him ho had in reserve a perpetunl check should Erskine make a capture of the unprotected bishop. Erskine gained nothing by his series of checks, so was forced to accept a draw. Sev’erne (Nelson) v. Scott CWnngaiiui). —The French defence adopted by Scott gave very even positions, and the early exchanges and those of the middle game all tended towards a draw. Correct play could produce only a draw, and this Sevcrne offered. Scott refused to accept the offer, and later, making a weak move, suffered defeat. Anderson (Wellington) v. Hicks (Wellington.—This Guaoco Piano game proved the longest in the tournament so far, reaching sixty-seven moves. Both players manoeuvred their pieces most carefully and soundly until the midday adjournment, when Hicks sealed a weak niove. Anderson saw his advantage and won a pawn nnd built up a strong attack down the open king’s file. Hicks defended nobly, but was gradually worn down by

diseases, mnlnutrition, etc. Anderson’s skilful exchanges and was forced to resign on the sixly-seventh move. THIRD ROUND. The first game finished in the third round was that between Severne (Nelson) and Purdy (Sydney), and it proved a short exciting encounter. Purdy replied with the Sicilian defence to Scverne’s opening and allowed Severne to develop a series of threats, instead of changing off pieces. Purdy weakly attacked Sevcrne’s well-posted knight at queen’s fourth, but a series of cheeks drove Purdy’s king to knight square, locking up his rook. The latter’s qtlcen side pieces were undeveloped, and Severne threatened to win queen for rook ns ah alternative to checkmate. Purdy's reply was not sufficient, and .Severne brought off a verv pretty checkmate. PlcasanV (Wanganui) v. Rutherfurd (Strafford).—Rutherfurd played the Sicilian defence. Pleasants playing queen s to knight’s fourth to hamper his opponent's development. Ruthcrlurd, playing Carefully, made some good exchanges, leaving hint witli a well-advanced passed pawn on the rook's file. In his search for adequate defence Pleasants exceeded his time and lost the game. Anderson v. Topp.—This was a kuy Lopez gflnie in the development of which Anderson seemed to get the better position. Topp. however, made a good recoverv bv forcing the exchange of queens at a'eri'tical stage. A draw resulted, (hough Topp pcrliaps had the better chances of forcing a win. However, he did well to accept n draw from so seasoned a player as Anderson.