Keith showed a total lack of ambition in the last round, despite having the white pieces. This will hardly endear him to future organisers. It was virtually certain he had a draw in hand. The Dane was unlikely to refuse a draw offer, which gave him first place outright. Instead Keith chose a totally insipid variation which offers little hope of an advantage.

It seemed to me Karjakin and Barsov agreed a draw in a totally engrossing position. The audience were looking forward to more bloodletting.

Glenn said his game was rather one-sided. The younger Indian must be delighted to have outscored his board 1 in a close tournament. Luke basically made a bad miscalculation and lost huge quantities of material. Sasikiran gained a pawn and this led to a rook and 4 versus rook and 3 endgame with all the pawns on the same side. This is a familiar situation. I started writing this before they finished. In the end, it finished as it should. They drew.

Rating change

Nielsen 6 - 1.2
Arkell 5½ +17.2
Harikrishna 5½  +10.9
Barsov, 5 + 2.3
Karjakin 5  + 3.2
McShane, 4½ +16.2
Sasikiran 4½- 8.1
Flear 4 - 5.0
Kosteniuk 3 - 7.8
Tseshkovsky 2 - 27.7

Premier Round 8 4. 1. 2003

Nielsen (4½) 1-0 Harikrishna (4½)
Barsov (4) ½ Arkell (4½)
McShane (3½) 1-0 Sasikiran (4)
Tseshkovsky (1½) 0-1 Karjakin (3½)
Flear (3) 1-0 Kosteniuk (2)

A lot of blood was spilt on the carpet today. 4 wins from 5 games is a large number for such an event as this. There was also the manner of the carnage.

Alexandra Kosteniuk was a whole rook down before the game commentary began. Was this really a prepared variation? This seems hardly credible. Yet Black had already drifted into an awful position before losing material. As usual she fought bravely but, as so often in this event, to no avail. Her opening preparation has let her down sadly here.

Barsov and Arkell by contrast had an accurate reasonable draw. This is the type of chess often thought of as boring by the spectators. However it is technically precise and brilliant in its own way.

Luke McShane tore Sasikiran apart in a way that is unfamiliar to us. Usually Krishnan is extremely precise and tries to play essentially risk-free chess. Hastings 2002-3 has not been his finest hour.

Peter Nielsen expressed surprise that, despite losing two games in a row, he was able to regain the sole lead. So far he has only drawn one game in 8 rounds.

Tseshkovsky – Karjakin confused the spectators. However Chris Ward felt Black’s central pawn mass outweighed White’s kingside initiative. This indeed proved the case and eventually the Russian blundered, allowing the youngster a simple combination.

Alexandra Kosteniuk has been totally unable to stem the tide of disaster. After a good start, she has lost 4 games in a row. That is the problem of being the lowest rated player in a round robin. You may be mugged day after day.

It is interesting that the 8 players other than Kosteniuk and Tseshkovsky all have 50% or better. It has been an extremely closely fought 8-player tournament. Going into the last round, only Keith Arkell remains unbeaten. Who would have predicted that on 27 December?

Premier Round 7 3. 1. 2003

Harikrishna (3½) 1-0 Barsov (4)
Arkell (4) ½ Karjakin (3)
Sasikiran (3½) ½ Flear (2½)
Kosteniuk (2) 0-1 Nielsen (3½)
McShane (3) Tseshkovsky (1)

It came as no surprise that Keith Arkell was happy to have an early draw with the young Ukrainian. It was his second game of the day and he was probably still weak after yesterday’s stomach problems. Store it up in your memory for a trivial pursuits question. In which Hastings Premier did Keith Arkell score 1½ points in one day?

Sasikiran and Flear made valiant attempts to gain the advantage. They played on to the bitter end and afforded me the opportunity to fulfil a long-held ambition. I stepped in before they had shaken hands and declared the game drawn. As one does, when there are only two kings left on the board.

Alexei Barsov often gets into time-trouble and fights his way out of it. This was not to be today and the younger Indian notched up the full point in a carefully executed endgame.

After losing two games in row, many players would welcome a quick draw with the Black pieces. I do not know what Alexandra’s thoughts were on this subject, but the Dane eventually ground down the young Russian in a Queen and Pawn endgame. Thus Peter showed considerable resilience to recover from two disastrous losses.

One must admire Tseshkovsky’s spirit in undertaking two games in one day. However, one must question the wisdom of his actions. He and Luke had a ding-dong battle which first went one way and then the other. At the end of the game White had such chances as there were.

Premier Round 6 2. 1. 2003

Nielsen (3½) 0-1 Sasikiran (2½)
Barsov (3) 1-0 Kosteniuk (2)
Karjakin (2½) ½ Harikrishna (3)
Flear (2) ½ McShane (2½)
Tseshkovsky (1) Arkell (3) postponed 0-1 eventually.

Sadly the big news of the day is that Keith Arkell was too ill to play. This is ironic as he has never previously had problems here. For that matter, he has had no real problems in any of the many tournaments in which he played. Tseshkovsky kindly agreed to play Friday morning. Personally I would not have agreed to two games the same day. Had he stuck to his guns, Keith said he would have played rather than default. They are playing all the moves in 2 hours in order to avoid the problem of having to adjourn after 4 hours play. It is interesting that we used to be experienced in organizing adjourned games. Now they only occur when players fall sick or in local league games on weekday evenings.

Keith won the game in the end. The Russian had a winning position and blundered becoming confused that his rook on d3 was masking the mate on h7.

Two rounds ago it looked as if Peter Nielsen had already locked up first place. He has not had a good start to 2003. Thus Sasikiran sprung to life after five rather unexciting games where he took no chances.

Alexei Barsov won, thus taking the lead, jointly with Keith.

Luke managed to win a pawn against the older Englishman, but it was not enough to win.

Premier Round 5 1. 1. 2003

Poker players always want to win their first hand of he year. This can be advantageous when playing. Anything which causes an illogical impulse in poker by one’s opponent can be advantageous.

However I have never notice any such irrational syndrome among chessplayers. But New Year’s Day has definitely led to some odd results.

Danny Gormally and Nick Pert with 4/4 had an instant draw in their game on top board in the Challengers. Danny felt rather pensive about this as he felt he was on a roll. However, the same can be said of his opponent.

The game of the round in the Challengers had to be the encounter between the experienced Peter Wells and the 18 year old Canadian, Eric Lawton, rated 2230. Peter got into his habitual time trouble and really left himself so short of time that it was impossible to make the moves in time. Now the youngster has 4½/5.

McShane (1½) 1-0 Nielsen (3½)
Harikrishna (2½) ½ Arkell (2½)
Sasikiran (2) ½ Barsov (2½)
Kosteniuk (2) 0-1 Karjakin (1½)
Flear (1) 1-0 Tseshkovsky (1)

Luke was delighted with his 20 move win today which has opened up the tournament. Really the Danish player did not play well and his position was in tatters when he resigned.

Krishnan had another draw, but the game was most double-edged with an odd pawn structure.

Glenn Flear gained an enormous advantage just out of the opening and the result never looked in doubt.

In the match of the media stars, Alexandra sacrificed material for inadequate compensation and the Ukrainian boy won handily enough.

The game between Harikrishna and Arkell puzzled everybody mightily. Basically Keith agreed a draw in a won position. He could have played Kh6 and then White cannot force perpetual check. In one line Keith could give up his queen and be a rook down but win with his central pawns. Keith said apart from that hiccup the game was a typical one where both players made errors and the advantage swung back and forth.

Thus it was an odd day’s play, perhaps occasioned by the New Year syndrome.

Premier Round 4 31. 12. 2002

Nielsen (2½) 1-0 Flear (1)
Arkell (2) ½ Kosteniuk (1½)
Tseshkovsky (½) ½ Harikrishna (2)
Barsov (1½) 1-0 McShane (1½)
Karjakin (1) ½ Sasikiran (1½)

It seemed to me the veteran Russian played without ambition in this game. Having lost two in a row, he was content to draw.

Keith offered Alexandra a draw. This she turned down, but it preyed on her mind. A couple of moves later, she offered a draw and Keith gratefully accepted. It seems she could have won a pawn a few moves on.

The young Ukrainian had a fair enough draw with the pre-tournament favourite. Krishnan has made little impression on the event so far. His solid, no risk chess can sometimes have this type of effect.

The young Dane seems to be heading for the title of Great Dane. He won rather readily against Glenn Flear.

Luke said his play against the Uzbek left a great deal to be desired. Well, in truth, he expressed it more strongly than that. Not a good way for the World Junior Silver Medallist to finish the year.

Premier Round 3 30. 12. 2002

Nielsen (1½) 1-0 Tseshkovsky (½)
Sasikiran (1) ½ Arkell (1½)
Kosteniuk (1½) 0 Harikrishna (1)
McShane (½) 1 Karjakin (1)
Flear (½) ½ Barsov (1)

For the third time, Tseshkovsky had difficulty in handling his clock. As in the last round, he was completely lost by the end of the time scramble. This time he actually lost on time. Thus the young Dane took the sole lead with 2½/3.

It was satisfying to me that I understood the crux moment of truth for the Flear – Barsov game. Glenn had a little combination with Bd5 that netted a pawn. However this left him a little weak on the white squares. Although the Uzbek was very short of time, this provided him with adequate compensation to draw.

Sasikiran and Arkell had a fairly risk-free game. Keith said they agreed a draw at the point where the young Indian feared he was drifting into a marginally inferior position.

It is now becoming commonplace for Luke McShane to play opponents younger than himself. For the past 20 years I have seldom met opponents older than myself. This has changed dramatically since I started to compete in senior tournaments. Luke gained the upper hand and converted this into an exchange advantage where the result was never in doubt.

Alexandra survived her poor opening play yesterday and, indeed, emerged victorious. She found the very young Indian a tougher nut to crack.

So far we are receiving value for money. The games are long and hard-fought. It is quite normal for a 12 year old to play rapidly. Today’s game against Luke was no exception. However, this was probably also his best chance as his only real hope was that Luke would blunder.

Premier Round 2 29. 12. 2002

Arkell (½) 1-0 McShane (½)
Harikrishna (½) ½ Sasikiran (½)
Tseshkovsky (½) 0-1 Kosteniuk (½)
Karjakin (0) 1-0 Flear (½)
Barsov (½) ½ Nielsen (1)

The five games started off placidly enough. It seemed likely they would all be wars of attrition. Indeed the two Indians had a boring, rather technical draw. I am sure they play real chess against each other, but with the greatest respect. Alexei Barsov and Peter Nielsen agreed the draw in a tense situation where, under other circumstances, either might have played riskily in order to try to win.

Vitaly Tseshkovsky had much the better of the opening against the Russian girl. Again he ran short of time. Move 40 was reached and his flag fell. He then muttered something to Alexandra and she had won. Apparently, he went to give up because of the flag fall, but Alexandra told him they had made 40 moves. All this took about 10 seconds so that I was unable to intervene. The senior Russian then congratulated the teenager. Alexandra felt he resigned somewhat prematurely because he was so disappointed. If so, that is something a professional should not do. You should never act prematurely after a time scramble. There is no doubt Alexandra stands better in the final position. The White knight is trapped, but he does not have to lose it.

Glenn said his position was lost for some time. It is the longest game he has ever had where he lost. The young Ukrainian played so rapidly that the whole encounter was over before the game between the two Englishmen. Once upon a time, you could assume children would be lacking in technique. Gone are those days. In case you are wondering, Glenn resigned because he was about to transpose in to a lost king and pawn endgame. Where White has the opposition and the pawn is on the fifth, the position is always lost.

Keith played his patent ‘Speckled Egg’ against the King’s Indian. He has no faith in the variation with an early b4. However, he has won five games against strong grandmasters with it this year. So why change? To most of us Black got much the better of the opening. Keith’s white’s squared bishop was particularly lamentable. Luke lost his way and a pawn in time trouble. Keith complained that he was renowned for playing boring rook and pawn endgames. This game was fascinating. But the spectators only showed an interest in the game of the 12 year old.

Premier Round 1 28. 12. 2002

They’re off and running. But it was touch and go. Visas had only been obtained for Sergey Karjakin and his coach Vladislav Borovikov on Monday 23 December. Had there been any hold up at all, it would have been impossible to make a special approach during the Christmas period. Krishnan Sasikiran was due to leave Delhi late on 26 December. The weather was extremely bad and the flight did not take off until 3am local time on the 28th. I was just about to announce at the beginning of the game that the young Indian was delayed, when I noticed he had slipped in to his seat. To my mind, professional players are extremely foolish not to give themselves time to acclimatise after long-haul flights. They think it is jut a matter of whether they feel tired. The reality is that your judgement is deficient due to jetlag.

Keith Arkell has been trying to get into the Premier for many years. Prior to the game he displayed a rather slapdash attitude towards the experience. He failed to turn up to the Drawing of Lots ceremony on the evening of the 27th and did not find out even what colour he had until just before the first game. He even missed the photo-call on the morning of the 28th. I suspect this showed nerves rather than insouciance.

Peter Nielsen won rapidly against the 12 year old Sergey Karjakin. He caught him with an innovation in a sharp line of the Queen’s Gambit Accepted. Thus effectively the game was decided on the computer at the Cinque Ports Hotel the night before. It took me a few moments to realise why Black had resigned. The final combination that would have occurred, 1…Qb6 2 Rb1, is unusual. Bent Larsen has said that the players should not resign until all the spectators understand why. People have told me they feel the games are sometimes concluded halfway through, from their viewpoint. Socially we are not used to the players continuing until the bitter end. Perhaps, when chess is played as a spectator sport, there should be a different attitude.

The other four games were all drawn. Many people seem to this must mean the encounters were turgid. This would have been absolute nonsense for this round. Keith Arkell and Glenn Flear had a fair, hard fought draw that ended in repetition. Luke McShane gained an edge against Pentala Harikrishna. He won a pawn and they battled it out there was no mating material left. Alexei Barsov and Vitaly Tseshkovsky ran ridiculously short of time. The Uzbekistani had an unclear edge when they decided to stop gambling and agree a draw. Krishnan Sasikiran had a structurally unusual double-edged position against the young Russian female star. Alexandra Kosteniuk clung on determinedly and the final rook and pawn endgame left him with no hope of securing the full point.

Challengers Round 1 28. 12. 2002-12-29