CHESS

Evening Star, Issue 17710, 11 July 1921, Page 3

CHESS

OTAGO LEADS AGAINST AUCKLAND

The telegraphic match between Auckland and Otago was resumed on Saturday evening. Only four out of the sixteen games were actually finished, eight positions wore decided by tho captains at the close of play, and tho remaining four positions go for independent decision, ns there was no time for further consideration. The present score is to 51 in favor of the local club. The final result, therefore, depends upon the award of the Wellington Adjudication Board. A review of each game is appended, the Auckland player being mentioned first;

Board I.—Moir v. Dunlop : Moir played iiidilferently in the opening, allowing Dunlop to gain two pawns. These enabled the latter to score on the thirty-fifth move. The game was the first to finish; otherwise it was devoid of interest.

Board 2.-—Grierson (captain) v. Balk: A very interesting encounter between two old opponents, resulting in a drawn game by agreement at close of play. These players were competitors for the X.Z. championship as far back as 1902, when Mr Grierson obtained the championship, with Mr Balk second, only half a point behind.

Board 3.—Stewart v, Davies (captain): An uneventful game, in which the material forces are equal, but the local player has positional advantage. V hether it is sufficient to obtain more than a draw is left’ for the Adjudication Board in Wellington to decide. Board 4.—Pickett v. Coombs: Tho local player is pins a pawn, but viiivns a bishop. As against this, however, there is some attack, which is left over to be looked into. Board 5.- Coulthard v. Stenhouso: A strong attack by the local player, culminatintr fa the winning of a rook, brought about the Aucklander’s resignation just before the close of play. A forcefullyplayed game on the part of Air Stcnhonse. Board 6,—Smith v. Edwards: The Otago player obtained a strong game early. Tho Auckland representative at move 25 misplaced one of his pieces, and three moves later this cost him the exchange. The blunder hastened the win for Otago. Board 7.—Roberts v. Ellis: A very even struggle, tho Auckland players obtaining a slight advantage, but not enough to win ; so the players agreed to draw at a late hour. Board B.—Little v. Myers: A game full of pretty combinations, the local player, however, making a slip just before tho close of play whereby be the exchange. The game is left for Wellington to settle. Board 9-—Arapoff v. Marlow: A very interesting game until -Mr Marlow overlooked a' strong move, which _ gave the Aucklander much advantage. The oversight cost ns the game. Board 10.—Adams v. Wright: Full of possibilities, this game continued until tho close of play, when it was apparent that Otago was getting the worst of it, so the local captain conceded a win to Auckland. Board 11.— Black v. Betting: An exchange and a pawn gained by the local player early in the game resulted in a win for Otago. Board 12.—Hemus v. Fulton: On resumption of play this game looked bine for us, but now the game goes to Wellington with prospects of at least a draw. Board 13.—Barker v. Allen: What was a certain local win was gradually dwindled away, until at the close of play a win for Auckland was awarded. Board 14.—Jeffries v. Penrose : An energetic and linoly-played game; the second to finish ; a win for Otago. Board 15.—Sullivan v. Hastings: The local player had a certain draw just before tho close, but some weak play at the end gave the advantage and the game to Auckland.

Board 16.—M’Kenzie v. Johnson : A stubborn game, in which the local player appears to have the better position. Left for adjudication. Thus a very interesting and enjoyable match with the .Queen City of the North was concluded.

The players are greatly indebted to Mrs T. M. Gillies for providing refreshments on both evenings.

This evening, at 7,30. the Otago Chess Club will commence a lightning handicap tourney open to all members.