CHESS CHAMPIONSHIP

Dominion, Volume 23, Issue 85, 4 January 1930, Page 4

CHESS CHAMPIONSHIP

TOURNAMENT AT WANGANUI POSITION OF THE PLAYERS By Telegraph.—Press Association. Wanganui, January. 3. The Dominion chess championship was continued at Wanganui to-day. The following are the results of round ten - Topp v. Hicks. —Topp played the Buy Lopez opening. Hicks gained the better position and immediately forced the bishop’s file and brought up pieces for the attack. Not being successful in his attempt, he was satisfied to make a drawn game by giving a perpetual check. Purdy v. Fairburn. —Fairburn offered the Petroff defence, but Purdy followed with pawn to queen 4, and Fairburn gave up a knight for two pawns. Purdy took advantage of Fairburn’s undeveloped position and, attacking _in the centre, won a bishop and established a rook on the seventh rank. Queen and. knight now took up the battle, and Fairburn’s king was forced into checkmate on the rook’s square. Butherfurd v. Beyer.—The latter adopted the French defence, the variation providing a bright free development. Beyer was able to capture a centre pawn, and with queen, bishop and knight launched a strong attack. Rutherfurd’s defence was weak and, seeing that Beyer threatened checkmate in three moves, he resigned. .... Kelling v. Anderson. —A lively game came out of the Sicilian defence offered by Anderson. Exchanges were numerous, the queens leaving the game nt the eighteenth move. At the close of the middle game Kelling held an extra pawn, and later won a second pawn in. the pawn and rook ending. However, he missed the winning variation and AndA’son managed to make a drawn game. Scott v. Erskine—ln this Sicilian game pieces and positions were very even till the fifteenth move, when Erskine attacked along the open knight file. In the late middle game exchanges. Scott obtained the superior pawn position and by skilful knight play was able to obtain a queening position for bis pawn, whereupon Erskine resigned. ' Jeffreys v. Pleasants.—The Zukertort opening was adopted by Jeffreys. Pleasants was the first player to develop the attack. Jeffreys carelessly lost a knight for a pawn, and Pleasants, with doubled rooks and two knights, held a strong centre and king side position. Pleasants now j missed a brilliant combination, but was able to wear down Jeffreys’s forces and compel his resignation on the fiftyninth move. Gundersen v, Severnc. —Tlie latter player’s favourite four knights game was adopted, giving Gundersen good attacking chanced. Severne’s king was forced across in front of his queen and he was able to relieve the strain upon his position bv taking a dangerous bishop and by giving a cheek in the exchanges. Gundersen gained two pawns and. although his pawns were on each rook file, he was able to force a win. The position of players at tlie end of (lie tenth round is as follows: —

ELEVENTH ROUND. - Results of the eleventh round-are as follow; — Fairburn v. Topp.—The favourite Queen Bishop’s Gambit was played and produced quite mi interesting-game. The positions appeared very even, but there was more in Fairburn’s combination than I Topp saw, and he was surprised when the J former launched an attack that wife one move short of checkmate. There was no chance of recovery, so Topp resigned. Pleasants v. Gundersen. —Gundersen adopted a variation of the Sicilian Defence. Pleasants lost a pawn in the middle game and he was not able to withstand the attack set up by Gundersen. The exchanges leading to the end game strengthened Guildersen's position, and Pleasants, realising the hopelessness of ■his game, resigned. . Hicks v. Scott.—Hicks played the Rcti game and throughout the opening and middle game very even positions were the rule. In the exchanges leading to the end game Scott played weakly. He captured Hicks’s centre pawn, but allowed his own pawns to fall. With rook and

two passed pawns Hicks was able to win.

Severne v. Kelling.—This four knights game proved most interesting. Attack and counter-attack alternated until Severne seemed to have forces arranged to win. Kelling had to let a bishop go, but had provided for perpetual check, which was not. met by Severne. The' game ended in a dravj, Erskine v. Jeffreys.—Another queen’s bishop gambit played with sparkle ami freedom. Positions were even until Erskine massed an offensive in the centre, threatening to win a rook. To relieve his position Jeffreys gave up the exchange. Erskine had a telling reply, which won the rook, and he later forced the exchange of queens, whereupon Jeffreys resigned. Beyer v. Purdy. —In this queen bishop gambit Purdy won a pawn in the opening and changed offensive and two minor pieces, Beyer’s counter-attack wou back a pawn, but Purdy was left with a passedpawn on the queen’s side. A great end game with rooks and knight versus rooks and bishop took place. Beyer captured another pawn and held the winning position, but allowed Purdy to shut off the rooks’ attack upon the pawn at rooks seventh, Purdy being able to queen. Beyer resigned.. Anderson v. Butherfurd. — The favourite queen bishop’s gambit was adopted and a very even game was the outcome. Anderson’s attack with queen and bishop was met, and Butherfurd seemed like holding a draw. Anderson was not to be denied and pressed the nttack with queen bishop and pawn against, queen knight and pawn. Butherfurd got into a cramped position and Anderson, changing off queens, was able to

w. L. D. Pts. Gunderscu s 1 1 Severne 7 1 2 s Anderson 1 4 I 0 Erskine 5 3 *> 6 Kelling 4 o 4 6 Pleasants t> 0 Scott .... 4 1 44 Jeffreys «» 5 o 4 Hntherfurd 2 4 4 4 Beyer •» G 1 1 ticks .... 0 4 (i •« 1 *> Fairburn 0 7 ij

win by queening a pawn. The position of players is as follow: — W. r L. D. Pts. Gunderson .. . 9 1 1 Severne . 7 1 3 8} Anderson .. •. . 6 1 4 Purdy . 8 3 0 8 Erskine . (» 3 . 4 2 GJ > Pleasants .... . 5 6 0 . 4 6 1 41 Hicks . 1 4 (i 4 Jeffreys . 3 G 4 Rutherfurd ... 4 4 Beyer . i. ‘ 7 < 1 3} 21 Tonp ; 1 8 2 -