On 22 January we travelled to Harrow for a second division Middlesex match. Like us, they are hoping for a top two finish thereby securing a promotion spot. Unfortunately a communication misunderstanding did not help their cause, as they defaulted on board three.
The first actual game to finish involved Alastair who has been on sparkling form for us this season with three wins out of three. However, this was not to be his night. He reports: “This was a frustrating loss. I emerged from the opening, a Scandinavian, with both a space and development advantage plus an incipient passed pawn on c5. On move 15, I played Nd4, a sharp move intended to evict Black’s bishop from f5. After Clive’s Be5 it seemed that I lost a piece but this was not so, due to Black’s retarded queenside development. In fact, there was an opportunity for an exchange sac, which would have given White a winning advantage. Instead, material equality was restored. The second flex point came when I sacrificed a bishop to release my c6-pawn for a run to the line. Sadly, I made this play a move too late.”
On board two it was pleasing to see John return to the team. Playing the white side of a Benko Gambit, he comments: “In the early middle game my opponent defended a threat against e6 with the passive Nf8.This allowed me to sacrifice a pawn to open lines for my pieces and establish a knight on e4. With double isolated e-pawns, two other weak pawns, and behind in development, it was difficult for my opponent to defend everything. I eventually won an exchange to reach a completely winning position. I then made several doubtful moves allowing counterplay and was fortunate that when he sacrificed a bishop and a rook for what looked like a mating attack, I had a resource that gave back a rook to reach an easily winning endgame a rook up.”
After playing the fianchettoed variation against the King’s Indian, I basked in the warm glow of feeling my position was better. Subsequently the engine delivered a cold dose of reality by taking a somewhat different view. However, my opponent made a couple of questionable pawn moves (24…b5 and 26…bxc4) which allowed me to infiltrate his position and win.
On board one, Andrew reflects on his game thus: “In a main line French Tarrasch with Qxd5, Bodhana played the fourth most common move on move 12 in a mainline position which got me out of my comfort zone. I didn’t counter accurately and she got a slight edge and then forced an IQP on me by swapping bishop for knight on d5. I accidentally lost that d5-pawn but that freed up play for my light-squared bishop. We reached a knight v bishop ending where my bishop and king were very well-placed in the centre and I didn’t see how she could make progress. It was dead drawn if I had seen and avoided the little tactical trick she set which forced my king to retreat, allowed her king to advance, and an easy win followed.”
Devina’s was the last game to finish. As Black, she played the Caro-Kann which eventually morphed into a rook and pawn endgame. One could not help but be impressed by her efforts to win but, to me at least, the endgame looked drawn. Splitting the point was in fact most welcome, as it meant we emerged the match winner. Indeed, this was a good team performance given that, with one exception, we were out-rated across all boards.
| Harrow One | Rating | Result | Ealing One | Rating |
| WIM Bodhana Sivanandan | 2254 | 1-0 | FM Andrew Harley | 2166 |
| Thomas Sharp | 1936 | 0-1 | John Quinn | 2053 |
| Default | 0-1(def) | Alejandro Lopez-Martinez | 1912 | |
| Jagdeep Dhemrait | 1949 | 0-1 | Simon Healeas | 1830 |
| Atreya Mandnikar | 1839 | 0.5-0.5 | Devina Bedi | 1718 |
| Clive Heidrich | 1816 | 1-0 | Alastair Johnstone | 1635 |
| 2.5–3.5 |