This was quite possibly a title-decider, as prior to last night we trailed the University by 1 point, with a match in hand - and a better game points difference. In losing 1-3, we now find ourselves 3 points behind with a game in hand - and an inferior game points difference! With the University having only 1 game to play, the chances of any slip-ups on their part are low to zero, so it looks like we have managed to blow the healthy lead we built up before Christmas, when we had a 100% record. But then, of course, I returned to the team....
It was a very close match last night, with all boards being very tough struggles, but in the end we were just pot-muscled. Keatan finished first on Board 1, after a valiant attempt to overcome a rather disastrous opening, which left him a pawn down and with doubled isolated c pawns to boot. He fought hard in a rook and same coloured bishop ending against the University's WFM, but there was a sense of inevitability about the result for most of the night. Surprisingly, I finished next and succeeded in equalising the match score after a second win in a row. Maybe my mojo is back?! I didn't play a great game against my opponent from Kazakhstan, but after scoring just 0.5/2 against him last season, a win was not to be sniffed at. I was on the back foot after a slightly insipid opening (with White!), but Black got a bit carried away and sacked a piece for a couple of pawns to expose my king. However, I had virtually my whole army defending it, and the attack was repulsed relatively easily, with me quickly taking over the initiative and the game was over (when my opponent had around 5 seconds on his clock) just as I was about to deliver mate.
Paul seemed to have established a drawn rook and knight ending against Tom Brown on Board 4, but unfortunately a loose pawn fell off. The rooks were then exchanged and it came down to knight and 3 v knight and 2, but with all pawns on the kingside. It looked a dead draw to me, as Black had no passed pawns and I assumed at some point that all but one of the pawns would be swapped off and Paul's knight would sacrifice itself for the last remaining Black foot soldier. However, he went on a strange king advance up the queenside which left his forces split, and an unfortunate knight check forced the minor pieces off to leave an easily winning king and pawn ending for Tom.
So it all came down to Mike's game on Board 3. |It was very exciting in the middle game, with both players on the attack against slightly weak kings, but by the time I came to focus on the game it was rook, bishop and 2 against Mike's rook, knight and one. But it soon became a two pawn advantage, and White unfortunately knew not to swap the minor pieces off as Rook + f and h pawns v rook is a theoretical draw, despite two extra pawns for the attacking side. (And for those who don't believe me, take a look at the 2023 British Championship game between Jude and Jacob Connor Boswell which reached this very conclusion.) But then Mike lost his knight to a pin anyway, and despite a serious time issue and some slight dangers of delivering stalemate, White was able to make the extra material count decisively.
So, back to my original question. I used to pontificate from my moral high horse that if your own result was more important than the team's result, you were probably playing for the wrong team. But now that I have been through a period when I thought I might never play, let alone win, another game of chess, I don't feel as though I am standing on such firm ground. I felt distinctly chipper (great word!) after winning last night, and the fact that the league title disappeared out the door with our match loss didn't upset me as much as it should. If at all. Sorry about that, but sometimes you've just got to own up to your own selfishness.
I'm in the mood for some good music, and as I've recently seen the excellent new Bob Dylan bio-pic A Complete Unknown, how about one of those early masterpieces from the only rocker ever to win a Nobel prize?
No comments:
Post a Comment