PREMIER ROUND 9

Rowson (5)     1-0  Epishin (5½)
Kotronias (5½) ½-½  Kunte (4½)
Hebden (3½)    ½-½  Nielsen (4)
Gormally (2½)  ½-½  Lahno (3½)
Cherniaev (2½) 1-0  Conquest (3½)

It is quite amusing to see the pairings look almost as if they are a Swiss, with a number of top meets.

The last round of a congress often takes on something of the atmosphere of an end-of-term school. The players may not even want to beat their mates. The three draws were all relatively uneventful. Vasilios Kotronias felt he took the professional approach with an early draw because he believed Vladimir Epishin stood much worse from an early stage. The Russian had a quite different attitude and felt he stood much better. I am not qualified to judge who was correct. Most people seemed to think the young Scot had played a good game and, in due course, it became quite clear the ultimate result was inevitable.

Alexander Cherniaev was quite determined not to come last and his game against Stuart Conquest was the last to finish. Would it were that all the games were so spirited.

1-2  Vasilios Kotronias, Jonathan Rowson 6/9 £1025 each
3    Vladimir Epishin 5½ £500
4    Abhijit Kunte 5 £300
5    Peter Nielsen 4½ £250
6-7  Mark Hebden, Kateryna Lahno 4 £175 each
8-9  Alexander Cherniaev, Stuart Conquest 3½ £115 each
10   Danny Gormally 3 £75

Thus this was one of the most evenly balanced Premiers for some years. It would have been no surprise had any player beaten another. The two winners both went through unbeaten. There was some speculation that perhaps this was the best-ever result by a Scottish player. Paul Motwani won the World Cadet many years ago, but that was a different type of triumph.

You will be able to see all the Scots in action at the GibTelecom Masters 27 January to 5 February. I will be there, but first stop for me is the Commonwealth Championship in Mumbai.

CHALLENGERS ROUND

Lalic (6½)    ½-½  Socko (6½)
Efimenko (6½) 1-0  Shaw (6)

That Bogdan Lalic drew with the Pole came as no surprise. The young Ukrainian took the first prize in a spirited fashion. A score of 7½/9, including a loss, is a very big result indeed.

Sadly David Howell had to be deprived of his opportunity to gain his final im norm, as he had to be paired with an untitled opponent. The only title result was that of Gottschlich. Practically all the players seeking a FIDE Rating achieved at least a partial rating.

Next year, who knows? You should have read that the Hastings Council is cutting back on its grant this coming year. Why not join The Friends of Hastings International Chess Congress and ensure the continuing viability of this venerable event?

PREMIER ROUND 8

Epishin (5)   ½-½  Hebden (3)
Nielsen (4)   0-1  Kotronias (4½)
Lahno (3)     ½-½  Rowson (4½)
Kunte (3½)    ½-½  Cherniaev (2½)
Conquest (2½) 1-0  Gormally (2½)

Vasilios Kotronias was very proud of his win. It was a quintessential kingside attack against an opponent who provided great resistance.

The game between the two bottom placed players was a big mess and a big fight. Stuart Conquest at one time stood much worse. The result was a great relief to the Englishman as it looked like he might not win a game.

Alexander Cherniaev stood much better against the British Champion; indeed he was winning at one stage. He should have exchanged queens.

Mark Hebden showed inner fortitude, drawing against the tournament leader without too much difficulty.

Kateryna Lahno also gave Jonathan Rowson few opportunities to join the leaders.

CHALLENGERS ROUND 8

Socko (6)         ½-½  Pert (5½)
Gwaze (5½)        0-1  Efimenko (5½)
Lalic (5½)        1-0  Howell (5)
McNab (5)         1-0  Kuzmin (5)
Hinks-Edwards (5) 0-1  Shaw (5)
Crouch (5)        ½-½  Gottschlich (5)
Houska (5)        ½-½  Cobb (5)

There were no surprises in this round. A careful draw was to be expected from the tournament leader. The younger Ukrainian managed to take the full point to rejoin the leader. It was not to be expected that 13 year-old David Howell would hold Bogdan Lalic with the black pieces when the grandmaster was in a determined mood. Colin McNab seems to be making a pleasant return to form after some dispiriting results.

David Howell will have to win in the last round in order to secure his last im norm. He will still need to get his rating to 2400 before he would be awarded the title. He had something of a meltdown in international junior tournaments last autumn and lost rating points. One must question whether playing in such tournaments is best for his development as a player.

PREMIER ROUND 7

Kotronias (4)  ½-½  Epishin (4½)
Hebden (3)     0-1  Rowson (3½)
Cherniaev (2½) 0-1  Nielsen (3)
Gormally (2)   ½-½  Kunte (3)
Conquest (2)   ½-½  Lahno (2½)

Vasilios Kotronias and Vladimir Epishin played an uncompromising double-edged opening of great intricacy. The Cypriot grandmaster felt he was lucky to draw. Stuart Conquest felt he was lucky against Kateryna Lahno. He was a pawn down but recovered it.

I am dubious about the whole concept of ‘luck’ in chess. This I take to mean, ‘fortuitous happenings beyond one’s control’. As a poker player I am used to this - but in chess…

Danny Gormally achieved a nominal material advantage of queen for rook and bishop. In the end the Indian gave up his bishop in order to secure a fortress position of rook against queen.

Peter Nielsen took a so-called ‘poison pawn’ on b2. However, in this case it was White who died. Black had to be very careful not to lose his queen, but the Dane had calculated accurately.

Mark Hebden got as close to being in time trouble as I have seen him. This is a sure sign there was something wrong with his position.

CHALLENGERS ROUND 7

David Howell (5)     0-1  Bartosz Socko (5)
John Shaw (4½)       ½-½  Bogdan Lalic (5)
Zahar Efimenko (4½)  1-0  Henrik Rudolf (4½)
Nicholas Pert (4½)   1-0  Andrew Muir (4½)
Simon Williams (4½)  0-1  Robert Gwaze (4½)
T Hinks-Edwards (4½) ½-½  Colin McNab (4½)

The 13 year-old David Howell went wrong in the opening. Bd3 is inaccurate. Possibly he had inadequate experience in the variation he chose, which was a departure from his normal practice.

It came as no surprise that John Shaw drew with Bogdan Lalic. However, the game was by no means a premature draw.

On the next few boards, basically it was cleaning up time in preparation for the final assault on the main prizes.

PREMIER ROUND 6

Rowson (3)   ½-½  Kotronias (3½)
Epishin (3½) 1-0  Cherniaev (2½)
Lahno (1½)   1-0  Hebden (3)
Nielsen (2½) ½-½  Gormally (1½)
Kunte (2½)   ½-½  Conquest (1½)

Three of the games were drawn this round, but that did not stop there being a great deal of interest for the spectators. In a way, the electronic boards scored a palpable hit over the organisers. It was not until quite late in the game, that it was realised the moves actually played were not identical to the moves being transmitted in the Epishin - Cherniaev game. There are more spectators around the world than are present in the playing hall and commentary room. They must have been mightily puzzled as to what was going on. It is not clear why the boards malfunctioned. Some said it must have been because the players moved too quickly and the board could not keep pace. As arbiter, I was not aware of any ridiculous blitzing. The younger Russian had a difficult game, but he became appallingly and totally impractically short of time. When he resigned with three moves to make before the time control, there was no way he could have avoided losing on time. By then he had blundered a second pawn anyway.

Nothing much happened in the Kunte - Conquest game.

Peter Nielsen stood much better from the opening against Danny Gormally. His decision to play f4 was unwise. He probably stood worse in the final position.

Rowson - Kotronias was an interesting theoretical discussion. Black’s gambited pawns seem to ensure equality for Black.

Mark sacced a piece against the teenager. She seemed to be pleased to take it and then repulsed all boarders. Thus only Stuart Conquest remains without a win in the tournament. Yet, he is the most enterprising player of all the contestants.

CHALLENGERS ROUND 6

I suspect we were all expecting Bogdan Lalic to have a quiet draw with the older Ukrainian teenager. The long-time resident, English registered, Croatian draws a large number of games just out of the opening. On this occasion, he made a determined effort to become one of the joint leaders.

Bartosz Socko from Poland put on another sparkling show to join the leaders. Since his wife and Joanna Dworakowska are also Polish, that federation is very well-represented here.

However, attention centred on David Howell who ground out a win against the extremely experienced Ukrainian grandmaster, Gennadi Kuzmin, who won the Premier before his compatriots were born. Thus 1/3 for The Ukraine, Kateryna thus saved what would have been an extremely disappointing day for the group.

PREMIER ROUND 5

Kotronias (3  ½-½  Hebden (2½)
Gormally (1)  ½-½  Epishin (3)
Cherniaev (2) ½-½  Rowson (2½)
Conquest (1)  ½-½  Nielsen (2)
Kunte (2)     ½-½  Lahno (1)

There is a tendency for plays to coast on New Year’s Day after late night celebrations. When finances have been less stringent, we have sometimes had a rest day on 1 January. For the most part, the games were hard fought, with few life-threatening errors.

Danny Gormally turned up 30 minutes late for his game against Vladimir Epishin. This is bad manners. You are allowed by the regulations to be up to one hour late, but keeping your opponent and the spectators waiting is unacceptable. He has not volunteered an explanation. With the white pieces, a poor score and playing against the tournament leader, no doubt he was content with a draw. Even so, it was an interesting and sharp encounter.

Stuart Conquest gave us plenty to chew upon as usual. He gave up his queen for rook, knight and pawn. There were too few structural weaknesses in the position for the game to be other than drawn. I always like games with heterogeneous piece imbalance. These were seen more frequently when Mikhail Tal reigned, simply because he made them fashionable. As so often, it was difficult to predict Stuart’s moves.

PREMIER ROUND 4

Lahno (½)   ½-½  Kotronias (2½
Hebden (2)  ½-½  Cherniaev (1½
Nielsen (2) 0-1  Kunte (1)
Epishin (2) 1-0  Conquest (1)
Rowson (1½) 1-0  Gormally (1)

This was a rousing end to the year, with three of the games providing us with rousing spectacle.

Hebden - Cherniaev saw 2 Bg5, an old line against the Dutch. 4 e4 is always thought to be the most critical continuation. The game promised so much, but led to so little.

Perhaps the game between the tournament tail-ender and leader was a little dull, but it provided a valuable half point for the young Ukrainian girl.

Jonathan Rowson played an elegant game after Danny Gormally quickly drifted into a textbook inferior position in the Exchange Ruy.

Initially Peter Nielsen had a reasonable position, but Black gradually assumed control of the centre and kingside. His knight absolutely dominated White’s bishop.

CHALLENGERS ROUND 4

Wells (2½)  0-1  Efimenko (3)
Socko (2½)  1-0  Wohl (2½)
Lalic (2½)  1-0  Gwaze (2½)
Houska (2½) ½-½  Shaw 2½)
Muir (2)    1-0  Williams (2½)

Once again Peter Wells got into time trouble. Thus the young Ukrainian increased his grip on the lead, with now only two players half a point behind him. No less than 15 players have 3/4, as there were so many wins on the next boards.

PREMIER ROUND 3

Gormally (0)   1-0  Hebden (2)
Cherniaev (1½) 0-1  Kotronias (1½)
Kunte (½)      ½-½  Epishin (1½
Conquest (½)   ½-½  Rowson (1½)
Nielsen (1)    1-0  Lahno (½)

The young Indian British Champion and older Russian had a non-game. This spineless draw hardly encourages the public to think of chess as a spectator sport. The Linares solution of fining the players is not the answer. This only encourages them to concoct exciting, but manufactured draws. In a tournament in the US the entrants were contractually committed to playing at least 40 moves. This could lead to some very silly games. Using the system of 3 for a win, 1 for a draw and 0 for a loss could be effective. Events in the past that have flirted with this method of scoring have not been successful. The method of only inviting players who try hard is the only certain one. Still, the other games made up for it in entertainment value.

I always recommend Stuart Conquest to organisers who are looking for blood on the board, if not the carpet. Of course Stuart ran desperately short of time in the first session, so what’s new? The Scottish number 1 eventually used up his time allocation. Moves 30-40 were by no means random and would require a great deal of home analysis in order to reach a conclusion. A draw was a fair result. Those commentators who castigate all draws probably never had any marbles to lose. Splitting the point is the most natural result for a chess game between players of similar strength. It is the route we must question.

Danny Gormally was after to a poor start and it says much for his resilience that he bounced back and beat Mark Hebden, the tournament leader. Mark made a very serious tactical error and there was little hope of recovery.

Alexander Cherniaev did not have a good day at the office against Vasilios Kotronias. The originator of that figure of speech was the late, much lamented, Tony Miles.

Peter Nielsen finally got into a winning mode against the young Ukrainian girl. He had a vastly superior position in the bishops of opposite colour endgame when he decided to finish the game off with an elegant exchange sacrifice. In this case, virtually all routes led home. One grandmaster recently told me he had a choice of winning either with a queen or rook sacrifice. He chose the former because he knew it would be more likely to win the Best Game Prize. In due course he pocketed the cash. Sadly, there is no such prize here.

CHALLENGERS ROUND 3

Efimenko (2) 1-0  Hendriks (2)
Shaw (2)     ½-½  Socko (2)
Williams (2) ½-½  Lalic (2)
Gwaze (2)    ½-½  Wells (2)

There are 24 federations represented in the congress. Some are new to us. As far as I know, we have never had players from the Faeroe Islands or Panama before.

I have not had much time to view the Challengers so far. Surprisingly there have been few surprises so far. Also it is a little odd that, in the early stages of a Swiss, 3 of the top 4 games resulted in draws, indeed 9 of the top 12. Perhaps this points to the effectiveness of the Accelerated Pairing system, which brings the leaders together rapidly. Thus Zahar Efimenko, the young Ukrainian who is one of Kateryna’s seconds, took the sole lead. All 5 players in the bottom half who, had reached 1½/2, lost. People have said to me that the system renders the whole tournament unnecessary. Why not let people enter and then divide up the prize money? This might be attractive to certain administrators. But, then where would I spend New Year’s Eve?

PREMIER ROUND 2

Hebden (1)    1-0  Conquest (½)
Epishin (1)   ½-½  Nielsen (½) 
Lahno (0)     ½-½  Cherniaev (1)
Kotronias (½) 1-0  Gormally (0)
Rowson (½)    ½-½  Kunte (0) 

After the exertions of yesterday, perhaps it is hardly surprising most of the games were over within the first session. The older Russian had a quiet draw with the great Dane.

Some spectators were disappointed that Kunte did not try any fire-breathing tactics. But surely the first job of the players is rack up the biggest score they can. A draw was a fair result.

Mark Hebden strode into the sole lead. It may look at first sight as if Stuart Conquest blundered a piece on his last move. Indeed this was so, but his position was desperate anyway. Probably Rf6 was best and then his a pawn and also d5 pawn would tumble in due course.

Danny Gormally’s position was full of holes when he resigned. However, Bent Larsen has said that, if you want chess to be a spectator sport, you should not resign until all the spectators understand why you have done so. This is hardly a rousing contentious issue. But, were chess to be treated as a true spectator sport, I think there would be a strong argument for all such games to be played to mate. For this event, there are more spectators on the Internet than in the hall. But most games are looked at after the event. Ray Keene in the Times is still giving games from Hastings 1895 in his column. Let me make it clear, he has covered more contemporary events as well!

The game between Kateryna, the young Ukrainian woman player and Alexander Cherniaev was the last to finish, and voted by the audience as being the most entertaining of the round. I thought at first the rooks and pawn endgame, each with two passed pawns, was drawn. Then I thought she was losing. Petr Marusenko, also a Ukrainian, who is now a fixture here, said she had to find the most accurate moves over a long series to secure the half point.

PREMIER ROUND 1

The Hastings International Series started in 1919-20 and here we are with the 79th. They have run continuously, apart from the war years and the event is much the longest-running international event in the world. Bob Wade told me that, in the early days, sometimes Hastings was the only international chess event that year. Our nearest rival is Wijk an Zee in the Netherlands, now sponsored by Corus. That event attracts over 1000 entries and many play in both. Some players come to Hastings every year. We have just learnt that Frank Parr, winner of the Premier in 1939 died in hospital as the event started. He came second in the 1956 British Championship. He played in the Challengers in 2002-3, as did his son David, who also died this year. Our condolences to the family.

Chris Ward explains the moves in the Commentary Room, as he has done now for several years. Some expressed puzzlement as to the dating of the event, since it spreads over two years. This one will be referred to as Hastings 2003. We have already celebrated one Centenary of Hastings chess. The first major Hastings Tournament was in 1895. The next we can celebrate in 2020 and the actual 100th in 2024. I intend to be around to complete the hat trick.

The Premier, being a round robin always gives us anxious moments until all 10 players have arrived. Abhijit Kunte missed his flight from India. How could he do that? It is not exactly like missing your bus! Perhaps he was dreaming of his new fiancée... CONGRATULATIONS Abhijit. The wedding date has been set for 14 March, an extremely auspicious start as it coincides with my birthday. Kateryna Lahno spent her 14th birthday travelling to England with her two grandmaster seconds. It must have been a long and tedious day. First by train from the Ukraine to Moscow, then the flight to Heathrow, a bus to Gatwick, train to Hastings and then taxi to the hotel.

Vladimir Epishin 1-0  Kateryna Lahno
Peter Nielsen    ½-½  Jonathan Rowson
Abhijit Kunte    0-1  Mark Hebden
Stuart Conquest  ½-½  Vasilios Kotronias 
Danny Gormally   0-1  Alexander Cherniaev

Is it any wonder then that she lost in round 1? The reality is that the extremely experienced Russian Vladimir Epishin outplayed her in a fine game.

Our other ‘veteran’, Mark Hebden had a most peculiar game against Kunte. It was strategically complex, with heavy piece manoeuvres.

Danny Gormally played Alexander Cherniaev. Both have been promoted from the Challengers this year. Since Alexander plays so regularly in England, they must have had dozens of encounters in the last few years. The young Englishman secured a favourable position, but this time the Russian came out on top.

Peter Heine Nielsen is last year’s winner. Committee Chairman Paul Smith pointed out that he is the only player who played in the last Premier. In fact, for Epishin, Kotronias, Kunte. Lahno and Rowson this is their first visit to the congress. His game against Jonathan Rowson went on for 6½ hours. He always had a slight edge, but the Scottish number 1 defended very accurately.

Stuart Conquest seems to enjoy getting into time trouble. In the first session, both he and Vasilios Kotronias had seven seconds left for four moves. Thus it is hardly surprising that the Commentary Room pointed out that Black could have won at one stage with Qa7, forking White’s bishop and f2 pawn.

CHALLENGERS Round 1

The numbers are down on last year. This may be because the event finishes on a Monday. Thus working player may have to take an extra day off work. It could be caused by competition from the new Welsh International, which is taking place in Newport 7-15 January. But relatively few players have entered for this excellent new initiative so far. Also surely some long-distance travellers may have decided to come with the intention of playing in both.

It is clear the market for players seeking title norms has diminished over the past few years. This may simply because there are now so many events in the chess calendar with which the Challengers must compete.

As usual the use of Accelerated Pairings meant that there were no tremendous mismatches in the first round. The new Title Regulations, introduced in July 2003, mean that it is unlikely players will be dreadfully handicapped in their quest for title norms by the pairing system. Even so, you must get off to a good start. Alexander Cherniaev did not do so last year. Thus, although he finished second, he could not have gained his elusive last norm. The field he met was too weak.

After two rounds of the event, all 8 players with 100% are either grandmasters or international masters. Robert Gwaze of Zimbabwe is the lowest rated in the group. Interestingly, he secured the Gold medal on top board in the 2002 Olympiad, despite strong competition from Kasparov. His score of 9/9 of course reflects the fact that he met very weak opposition. This was due to the fact that the overall result of his team was poor. As you would expect, there are a few weaker players left on 1½/2. They should be chopped up by poorer scoring, but stronger, opposition in the third round.

Complete pairings