CHESS

Evening Post, Volume C, Issue 88, 11 October 1920, Page 2

CHESS

AUCKLAND v. WELLINGTON

A STUBBORNLY CONTESTED

MATCH.

The telegraphic match between the Auckland and Wellington Clubs was resumed on. Saturday evening, when, owing to the stubborn nature of the play and the fact that the two sides are exceedingly well matched, only seven of the twenty games were completed. Arrangements are accordingly being made for a third evening's play to take place on Saturday next. The run oi the play was as follows, ths Wellington name being given first in each instance : —'

Board I.—W. E. Mason (New Zealand champion) v. J. A. Moir (Auckland champion). Even all the way. A draw was agreed to at move 34. Board 2.—-X. J. Barnes (captain) v. J. C. Grierson (captain). Barnes having previously won a bishop for a. pawn, continued strongly, and obtained a graceful resignation at 8.30 p.m., this being the first game finished. Board 3.—A. W. Gyles .v. P. N. Stewart. Gyles, who had won the exchange and two pawns on the previous evening, scored at move 30, Wellington's second win being registered at 9 p.m. Board 4.— W. Mackay v. Freeman. Incomplete. The forces are even, but the Wellington president has the preferable game, and he therefore did not accept the offer of a draw.

Boatd 5 Kelling v. Pickett. Incomplete. Kelling is a pawn ahead, and has the better prospects. Board 6.— H. L. James v. H. N. Evans. Incomplete. A very interesting and seemingly even contest. Board 7.— G. P. Anderson v. F. W. Smith. Incomplete. Even. Board B.—-Fouhy v. F. Harvey. Fouhy played fine chess, and won three more pawns, the Auckland president resigning at move 39. This was Wellington's third win.

Board 9 W. C. White v. Coyne. The former won a rook and a. pawn, Coyne resigning at 11 p.m. This was Wellington's fourth win.

Board 10.— S. Gyles v. Layland. Incomplete. Gyles is two.pawns ahead with a< fine game. Board .11.— E. S. Taylor v. Little. Incomplete. Forces even. Little is attacking. The issue is doubtful.

$oarri 12.— H. G. Lee v. Sim. Incomplete. Forces even, but Lee's position offers the better prospects. Board 13.— S. Faulknor v. Adams. Incomplete. Faulknor now has knight and seven pawns against knight and six pawns.

Board 14.— F. J. Brooker v. R. Barker. Incomplete. Brooker has three passed pawns against a minor piece, a good equivalent. This finish should be very interesting. Board 15. —H. Jessup v. Senior. Jessup lost two pieces through moving to wron^ squares. This double mishap, due doubtless to over anxiety, left him with a hopeless game, and he.resigned at move 26 (Auckland's only win so far). Board 16.— H. a. Ward v. H. Hemus. Incomplete. Ward recovered his lost ground and is now a pawn ahead with a fine game. Board 17.—C. W. Tanner v. Arapoff. Incomplete. The Aucklander is a pawn to the good. Board 18.— G. H. Clutten v. J. P. Sullivan. A draw was agreed to at a late hour, neither player being able to "break through" in a pawn ending. Board 19 Rev. Mr. Braddock v. E. M'Kenzie. Incomplete. Another very even bout.

Board 20.— T. A. Fletcher v. PullenBurry. Incomplete. Fletcher has a decided^ advantage, having won. two minor pieces for three pawns. To sum up, Wellington has four wins, one loss, two draws, a pronounced advantage at two boards (10 and 20), and-a one-pawn advantage at three boards (5, 13, and 16), while Auckland is a pawn ahead at board 17. Tho remaining seven games are in a fairly even state. The Northern club was again greatly inconvenienced by the absence of trams and gas in Auckland. The two clubs are greatly indebted to the operators, umpires and scrutineers mentioned in our last week's report. There was a gratifying increase in the number of spectators on Saturday evening, when tho progress of the various games was followed with keen interest. There should be further instructive and interesting play at the final sitting on Saturday evening.