ESV 3 – Kempen Combinatie 2
Coverage by Albert Coenen
Kempen Combinatie is a fusion of the chessclubs Veldhoven, Kemppion Eersel and EVS (Valkenswaard). They are together for a few years now and apparently the fusion has worked well. Paul van Zon and Morris Schobben play with Kempen Combinatie 1. They also play internal competition with ESV on mondayevening.
On board 1 our teamcaptain Jan Toorman played against Fred van Empel (1979). This was a big surprise, because this was Fred’s first chessgame for Kempen Combinatie 2 this season.
His comment: My opponent told me, that he lost against me in a ugly way a long time ago. But now he had more then hundred elopoints more then me. We both were very careful in the opening and when only the big pieces were left in the game with six pawns for each and with a weakness in my pawnstructure he didn’t give it another thought, although all his pieces were aiming at c6 but I had two rooks on a open b-line, both of us agreed with a draw.
On board 2 Ivan Ponomarev played against Walter Smits (1878). Walter Smits was in the past the first boardplayer for Kemppion Eersel and I was glad, that I didn’t have to play against him. My chessgame with Walter – 10 years ago – ended in a defeat for me.
Ivan played a wonderful strategical game. With gradually increasing pressure against the pawn on e7 he neutralised every counterplay. In the end Walter Smits advanced his e-pawn and Ivan had the better position. In the last part of the game Walter forgot to protect a pawn in his defense and Ivan quickly won.
On board 3 I played against Hans Brave (1838). I played against him in a cup-match between ESV and Veldhoven several years ago in “de Burghplan” and I managed to win, but I was playing with white then and now I had the black pieces.
Hans played a very good game; he launched an attack in the centre and posted a knight on e5 protected by a pawn on d4. My biggest problem was a very weak knight, that I had to place on e7. It took me a lot of time to replace it on a proper square. It moved from e7 to g8 to f6 and then to g4 where it attacked white’s very strong knight on e5. Hans exchanged the knights and by doing that he created a little weakness in my pawnstructure. A few moves later, both players had a queen and a rook, he offered me a draw, which I accepted.
I believed to have played a reasonable game, but Fritz disagreed. According to Fritz, my position – throughout the game – was lost, although in the end the advantage for white had reduced to 0.6 and that is just about on the edge of a lost and a draw position.
Together with Hans and Jochem the three of us analysed the game afterwards and Jochem thought of a plan, that maybe winning for my opponent, so I was glad to have got away with a draw.
On board 4 Arda Cayonlu (1826) played with white against Jan Peters (1823), a former Veldhoven player. Here is his comment:
On board 5 Jos Rensen played with black. This is his comment (in Dutch):
Board 5: Jeroen Beerens (1690) -Jos Rensen (1763)
Ik wist al een week dat ik vandaag de zwarte stukken mocht aanvoeren en ik had me thuis goed voorbereid op mijn favoriete openingen, het Konings-Indisch en de Pirc. Het werd een Pirc en nog wel de meest aantrekkelijke variant.
In de wetenschap dat ik gewonnen heb gestaan, was ik enorm teleurgesteld met dit resultaat. Temeer omdat het de enige verliespartij van het team was.
On the sixth board Dennis (1783) played with white against Philip van Gils (1763):
His comment: dullest game ever… a closed Sicilian, whereon c6 the whitesquared bishop from white was exchanged against a black knight. Further on all pieces remained in the game. Both the queenside and the kingside were completely closed. The balance was never disturbed. Computerestimate varied between -0,3 and + 0,3. I believe that the beginning position was the most exciting.😉
On board 7 Eugen Burlea played against Louis Sommen (1662). Eugen advanced his pawns on the kingside of the board with the moves h6 en g5. This was too ambitious and his opponent got the winning endgame. However, Louis made a mistake and therefore Eugen won a piece and achieved a very nice checkmate-position.
On board 8 Ostap(1802) played against Jan van de Munckhof (1701). In spite of the advice of teamleader JanToorman, Ostap played quickly. He ended up in an endgame with both players a rook, but one pawn less for Ostap.This endgame was lost for Ostap. Later on Ostap managed to achieve an endgame where he had a pawn on f2 and his opponent pawns on e4 and f3. I thought that a draw was likely because Ostap had a very active rook. It wasn’t played flawless by both players, but fortunately for us, Jan played his king to the wrong place. Ostap managed to capture both pawns and apparently Jan – with his king in the wrong position – couldn’t stop Ostaps f-pawn.