On 3 November we welcomed Hendon’s second team to the Actonians. Having lost heavily to them earlier in the season, we were hoping to avenge that defeat.
It was pleasing to welcome Duncan to the team. He writes: “As Black, my opponent played an unusual 4th move, potentially burdening himself with an isolated queen’s pawn. In response, I focussed on keeping his queen boxed in on the queenside whilst gaining an initiative on the kingside. My 19th move, Ne7+, was a mistake which spooked me and, in the ensuing time trouble, I accepted a three-fold repetition.”
Our top board, Andrew, notes: “I got a clear advantage out of a Pirc Austrian, with him having backward pawns on e6 and d6 and a queen offside on a6. I failed to calculate how best to extend that advantage, and some slower natural developing moves gave him time to regroup and put pressure on my pawns on f4, b2 and c3. With 5 minutes left on the clock (and him having more time), I threw caution to the wind and played e4-e5 blowing open the position. He won my pawns on b2 and c3 whilst I won his pawns on e6 and d6, and established connected (but vulnerable) passed pawns on d6 and e5. He captured both those pawns and seemed to be heading to a pawn up endgame when a short tactical sequence enabled me to pick up a rook via a check and skewer. A lucky escape!”
Jonathan was embroiled in a game shaped by its ebb and flow. He states: “I played the Black side of a Two Knights Defence (1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nf6 3. Bc4 Nc6 4. d4 …) and my opponent sacrificed two pawns for considerable initiative. Though my king was detained in the centre of the board, my position stabilised fairly quickly and I had a decent advantage. I then proceeded to lose the game twice, first by letting my queen be exchanged off for a rook and bishop, and then – having rallied – by blundering a piece under time pressure. My opponent played the last section of the game very precisely, extinguishing my last hopes of guiding a pawn to promotion with my rook.”
Mark, in his own words, “had a strange game where each time one player had the advantage they gave it away almost immediately. I was lucky not to be beaten in the middlegame; at the end I was the exchange up but let him close the position, so the rook for knight advantage couldn’t be exploited, hence a draw was agreed.”
New member, Alejandro, continues to play in all our matches. Reflecting on his game, he observes: “My opponent played a Scotch Gambit and I had to nervously defend a worse position. Some poor trades from my opponent allowed me to equalise and in time trouble, my endgame knowledge prevailed and I was three pawns up in an easily won position when he resigned.”
Finally, as White, my opponent opened with the Vienna played in the style of the King’s Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nc3 Nf6 3.f4). On move 10, he attacked with the Greek gift sacrifice (Bxh7+) which turned out be unsound, leading eventually to an untenable endgame. Although I made heavy weather of winning it, I got there in the end.
So the match ended in a 4-2 victory, thereby contributing to a strong start to the season in which we have won four out of five encounters.
| Ealing One | Rating | Result | Hendon Two | Rating | |
| FM Andrew Harley | 2151 | 1-0 | Elliott Macneil | 1995 | |
| Jonathan White | 2029 | 0-1 | Jonathan Rubeck | 1993 | |
| Duncan Grassie | 1996 | 0.5-0.5 | Avinash Reddy | 1929 | |
| Alejandro Lopez-Martinez | 1868 | 1-0 | Robert Alster | 1877 | |
| Mark Winterbotham | 1830 | 0.5-0.5 | David Ben-Nathan | 1773 | |
| Simon Healeas | 1820 | 1-0 | Andreas Bohnacker | 1774 | |
| 4-2 |