Post by arf on Feb 11, 2014 19:18:52 GMT
Before commenting on the match and Round4 in general your author begs your indulgence as he would like to acknowledge a personal milestone.
Having led the u175 team to the National title in his inaugural year of captaincy (2006-07) it was agreed at the 2007 MCCA AGM that he would also take on the captaincy of the Open team for the 20...07-08 Cycle.
When assembling the team to face Hertfordshire it saw him captain the team for the 50th time, a feat he did not envisage occurring when he took up the position and assembled the team to face Essex (13th October 2007) in their first match on return to top flight chess.
During his tenure the team has played against 13 counties(5xSCCU; 8xnon-SCCU: 1xEACU; 4xMCCU; 1xNCCU; & 2xWECU) and their performance (including Hertfordshire match) is: Played 50: +33 =1 -16; Performance: 67%; Points For: 444.5 Points Against: 352.5; Team Average Grade: 187; Average result: 9-7; Average SCCU Position: 3rd; Titles (2): 1xNational (Open 2011-12) 1xSCCU (2012-13); National Finals Appearances (4): 3xOpen (2007-08; 2011-12; 2012-13) &1xMinor (2009-10). Considering that from 1996 Middlesex had no team for the best part of a decade bar the 2 cycles under the captaincy of Paul McKeown (1999-2001) this is a great performance.
It is a rare thing for a captain of any Middlesex team to reach the milestone of 50games and even rarer for Open/1st team as average tenure for it is 2.5 terms; certainly milestone has been achieved by one or two captains of the graded limited teams but it can be definitively said that this feat had yet to be achieved for the Open/1st team until your author did it in their match against Hertfordshire. Prior to this John Poole in his two tenures as captain (1953-58 & 1968-70) came nearest with 45 (+35 =1 -9 79% Points For: 568.5 Points Against: 319.5; Average SCCU Position 2nd; Titles (5) 2xNational & 3xSCCU; Final (6): 3xNational Final; 3xSCCU Final).
‘With the angst a captain experiences including getting teams together – a number can be mentioned! – monitoring development of match, bureaucracy involved, etc, why continue to do it for such a long time (7cycles and counting)?” In your author’s case it is apt to paraphrase Conrad Veit, “For me, half the joy of captaining Middlesex is the struggle and the fight, pitting us against the other counties and all their competition - and winning.” Apart from re-establishing a team in top flight chess, a driver of your author’s tenure as captain has been to ensure Middlesex return to the pinnacle of the county scene and this has and will continue to require a lot of struggle and fight.
Proof of Middlesex’s dominance of the County Championship is this forgotten fact namely, until 1955-56 in the then 37years of the County Championship Middlesex had consistently won more titles than all the other counties put together (Middlesex: 19; The Rest 18: Kent x1; Lancashire x9; Oxfordshire x2; Surrey x5; and Yorkshire x1)! Warwickshire’s maiden win in 1956-57 meant the other counties drew level and Essex’s maiden win in 1957-58 meant the other counties gained a lead which they have never relinquished. Wouldn’t it be great if Middlesex at least drew level once again? Wouldn’t it be better if they once again exceeded! If your author’s tenure as captain allows Middlesex to potentially (eventually?) achieve either then he for one would be extremely humble in his part played in reasserting Middlesex’s pre-eminence in the County Championship.
It is hoped that those of you who have been involved with the current incarnation of the Open team have likewise revelled in the ‘struggling, fighting and winning’ to get Middlesex back to the top! There is a sense now that when Middlesex play a match they don’t simply want to win they expect to win! Whilst your author enjoys the struggle he will continue to captain the team – so long as you want him of course – if so he looks forward to leading the team for another 50matches and reaching the century milestone!
Anyway enough of this sentimentality, tell us what happened against Hertfordshire? On returning to top flight chess in 2007-08 this fixture threw up an unusual statistic namely the away team always won! This was surprising since in all bar one match Middlesex were clear if not overwhelming favourites so would have expected to win all matches played especially home ones. Middlesex finally broke this trend in 2011-12 as they eventually won at home and were looking forward to once again recording another home win especially considering the fact that Hertfordshire had attained an undesired record of 13 defeats on the trot – no point of any kind accrued since their draw at the end of 2010-11Cycle. Could Middlesex heap more misery onto Hertfordshire’s shoulders? Certainly at the very least they wanted to avoid the ‘accolade’ of being the team against whom Hertfordshire’s dire record ended!
With the scene set and anticipation of an exciting match in prospect it transpires that the 50th match of you author’s tenure was anti-climatic. Hertfordshire were forced to default 6 boards prior to the match due to difficulty raising team. He was advised on Tuesday of the problems his counterpart was having in raising a team – 9 players in total and this included u160 squad players consequently he was considering defaulting match. He had launched a desperate ‘Hail Mary’ request but clearly not responded to. With Hertfordshire having no chance of qualifying for the National Stage – even for the Minor; on a record of P13 L13 and travelling to the current SCCU Champions who field teams with average of 190+ at home as compared to Hertfordshire’s average of 178 on the road (minimum par score Middlesex win 10-6) it is understandable why individuals would be reluctant to play as they would seem to think they would be on a hiding to nothing despite the previous trend. It must be noted that over a cycle Hertfordshire consistently field teams cycle averaging below 180 – yes there is the odd occasion when they exceed 180 but rarely if ever 185 – and with them defaulting so many boards it must be wondered if for a short time they jettison the idea of being an Open team and enter u180 Division. Or would they contemplate a move to EACU? Or is it just a case of where the match fell in the cycle since teams usually become weaker when nothing left to play for? We shall see.
Notwithstanding the problems experienced by and the future of Hertfordshire’s Open team Middlesex could only play against those in front of them and with a 6-0 lead at the onset of the contest so long as complacency did not settle in it was a question of when not if Middlesex would secure the win and when attained would maintain their prospects of retaining the Shannon Trophy.
Your author will spare additional blushes for Hertfordshire as the team they did field (Team average over 10 boards: 181; Par score: Middlesex win 6.5-3.5) would have required a tremendous effort to have won the 8games needed to avoid defeat. In fact it would have had to exceed the effort Middlesex put in when playing Sussex earlier in the cycle. Middlesex were 0-6 down then put up a rearguard action to almost pull off the unthinkable. Parity between the teams meant this could have been achieved however was it really feasible that Hertfordshire could do it against a determined Middlesex? Quite simply no, as they were comprehensively thumped 15.5-0.5, Rick’s draw apart the team were on fire as they recorded 9 wins from 10boards! It makes you wonder then whether, would it have been better then to default the match?
The match was effectively over as a contest within 3hours of play as wins by Simon (Spivack) and Carsten ensured Middlesex could not be beaten. Once Albert attained a successive win Middlesex had won match the question then was what would the final score be? With score standing 0-9 Hertfordshire must have been worried that they would achieve a ‘bagel’ however they avoided this fate when Rick agreed a draw in a dead level position. The draw was a minor reprieve for Hertfordshire as the rest of the team all went on to win thereby giving Middlesex their greatest margin of victory 15.5-0.5! Okay when seen over 10boards the 9.5-0.5 is second best result just behind Middlesex’s 11.5-0.5 1962-63 QF win over East Glamorgan! Hertfordshire’s self-destruction combined with Middlesex’s professional play meant more misery is indeed heaped on Hertfordshire's shoulders; their poor run now stands at P14 L14.
Well done guys!
Apologies must be given for the brevity of match highlights which seems to denigrate performances such as Peter’s positional win against Simon Knott; the aggressive play of Colin (Crouch) after he had blundered pawn in opening; the sharp game executed by Bob and so on but a 6-0 score-line at the beginning of a match does have a sense of inevitability. It is clearly unsatisfying a match (one that is a personal milestone so would like to be memorable for other reasons) is so heavily influenced by defaults but that’s the rub. Apologies must also be given to those players who were unable to get a game – Steve Coles; Mat Dydak; Mike Tasker; Nevil Chan; Guy Batchelor and Trevor Dunmore – along to those who were willing to turn up as substitutes on the day – hope you enjoyed your day off instead. It was extremely frustrating for Guy as his chances of keeping up his challenge to win the Martin Blaine Best Performance Cup were scuppered.
In the scheme of things what does Middlesex’s victory mean? This can only be viewed in light of the outcome of the other results of Round4 – Essex vs. Surrey and Kent vs. Sussex. From a Middlesex perspective the match they were most keen on was the result of the Kent vs. Sussex match as apart from the fact that both teams harboured hopes of winning SCCU title, the outcome would determine whether Middlesex would qualify as of right to the Open Section of the National Stage before the final round of games played. Surprisingly having lost to Sussex earlier in the cycle the ideal result for Middlesex is a Sussex win.
Essex vs. Surrey – Essex had an outside chance of lifting title but an unlikely set of results would have had to transpire in order for that to happen so realistically they were playing for a qualifying berth to National Stage. Surrey on the other hand was looking to bounce back from their unexpected home defeat to Kent a result that threw the division wide open as it left 4 teams on 2pts each after 3 rounds. Knowing that they played Middlesex in final round (albeit at home) Surrey wanted victory so they could set up a title-decider but in order to do so had to overcome their susceptibility of fielding weak away teams. Surrey Captain Owen Phillips writes:
“Headline result- Surrey won a Very close match played as usual in a great sporting spirit and hosted very well as always by Essex and Ivor Smith... With 7 to play it looked decidedly dodgy for Surrey-an 8-8 draw at best I thought, but we just turned it round enough.”
Surrey’s successive 8.5-7.5 victory means they guarantee their place in the Open Section in the National Stage and maintains their prospects of lifting Shannon Trophy however in order to do so they will have to defeat Middlesex in final round – see below. Essex on the other hand has to settle for a place in the Minor the question is whether it will be S1 or S2?
Kent vs. Sussex – subject to results in both Rounds 4&5 this match was effectively a decider as to who secured the final qualifying berth for the Open section of the National Stage. Sussex’s run-in sees them play Essex in final round which would be no ‘give me’ so a win against Kent was imperative because it would not only mean qualification but would maintain their prospects of lifting Shannon Trophy. However if Sussex have an Achilles heel it is how strong they are on their travels and they had to travel to Kent who themselves harboured hopes of lifting SCCU title after their unexpected victory at Surrey in previous round. Kent having lost to Middlesex knew they had to attain 4pts to ensure qualification to Open Section of National Stage, so game on! As expected Kent scored a resounding 10-6 win which from a Middlesex perspective is unfortunate – see below.
League Table Round 4:
1. Middlesex 3/4 (41.5 Game points)
2. Surrey 3/4 (36.5)
3. Kent 3/4 (33.5)
4. Sussex 2/4 (31)
5. Essex 1/4 (33)
6. Hertfordshire 0/4 (16.5)
What are we to make of the results going into the Final Round of the Cycle?
Surrey’s and Kent’s wins, when combined with Middlesex’s win:
1) Ensures Middlesex maintain prospects of retaining SCCU title in order to do this they need to win their last match against Surrey. With both Middlesex and Surrey on 3pts their match in March is effectively a title-decider. However Kent will be looking to Surrey to do them a favour as in the event they and Surrey both finish on 4pts Kent’s victory over Surrey means they and not Surrey are SCCU Champions – usually your author wouldn’t care if a team other than Middlesex wins a title but it is reflected upon as your author being Kent-born does still have a soft for them.
2) Guarantees Middlesex a qualifying berth to the National Stage the question though is whether it is Open or Minor stage.
i) Middlesex qualifies for Open if:
a) Middlesex defeat Surrey they qualify for the Open as Champions; their superior record over Kent means that if both Kent and Middlesex finish on 4pts Middlesex are Champions.
b) Middlesex, Kent and Sussex all finish on 3pts each because game points come into play; the mini-league cannot separate the teams as they have all beaten each other: Thus when looking at game points between the teams the standings are:1. Middlesex 17 Game points; Kent 15.5; Sussex 15.5, meaning Middlesex finishes second to Surrey.
ii) Middlesex qualifies for Minor if:
On the assumption Kent defeats Hertfordshire (since Kent are chasing title and have accrued 2.5/3 in last 3 Hertfordshire vs. Kent fixture so it perhaps a safe assumption to make!) a Middlesex loss to Surrey coupled with a Sussex win over Essex means both Sussex and Middlesex finish on 3pts and Sussex’s superior record over Middlesex pushes us into 4th place and a berth in the Minor. Thus Middlesex could do with a favour from their East Saxon neighbours. An Essex win means both Essex and Middlesex finish on 3pts and Middlesex finish 3rd due to their superior record over Essex. So put simply, ‘Go on the Essex!’ It must be noted though that it may be a tough ask on Essex as their last two trips to Sussex have seen comprehensive Sussex wins (2011-12 11.5-4.5 and 2009-10 11-5). Notwithstanding we keep our fingers crossed as Essex will want to finish S1 in order to facilitate a good draw in the Minor Section at National Stages, a first placed finish theoretically gives an easier draw and beating Sussex will assure this. Otherwise we look to Hertfordshire to break their record and defeat Kent.
Phew! Let’s keep it simple and put Surrey to the sword!
Fixtures Round 5: Surrey vs. Middlesex; Hertfordshire vs. Kent; Sussex vs. Essex
So the competition reaches its denouement and with the exception of Surrey, Essex and Hertfordshire the other teams are still jockeying for position. Of Middlesex; Kent; and Sussex which two will join Surrey in Open Section of the National Stage? Who will have heartbreak and just miss out? Further of Middlesex, Kent and Surrey, who will be finally crowned SCCU Champions and lift the Shannon Trophy?
Martin Blaine Best Performance Cup
Each cycle the MCCA awards the Martin Blaine Cup to the best performing Open team player. After 4 rounds the leading positions are:
1= R. McMichael 23pts
2= G. Batchelor 22pts
2= C. Mackenzie 22pts
4= Z. Topel 18pts
4= N. Chan 18pts
Next Match: Surrey vs. Middlesex
Date: 15th March 2014
Venue: Coulsdon Chess Fellowship 84-90 Chipstead Valley Road, Coulsdon, Surrey. CR5 3BA
Start time: 2pm
Over the past two cycles matches between these two teams have determined which lift silverware – certainly the last three occasions the silverware has literally been handed from one team to the other. The final match of the current cycle once again determines who will lift silverware, this time the Shannon Trophy. However there is added spice to the match in that Surrey could be pipped to the trophy as aforementioned it could go to Kent. Wow what an end to the cycle!
Anyway Surrey have pulled out the stops when their backs are against the wall and when looking at who's turned out for them in these situations over the past few cycles they have been able to field their best possible line-up starting with Bogdan Lalic on Bd1. Clearly their match against us will see them once again pull out all the stops which means we will have do to likewise and field our strongest team of the cycle namely aim to meet/exceed a team average of 200+.
Notwithstanding the team fielded, as always, will be competitive and will be seeking to attain victory. In the event any further incentive is needed to achieve victory if it is attained it will mean that Middlesex retain a title of any kind for the first time since 1986-87 (Lowënthal Trophy) and it would be the first time since 1979-80 that Middlesex have retained SCCU trophy.
Go on the Middlesex!