|
Home
Narrative
Organisations
Events
Games
People
Graves
Buildings
Competitions
Trophies
Made in Yorkshire
Miscellaneous
Sheffield
Sub-Site
|
First session played on 12/11/1864, at Huddersfield,
second session played on 19/11/1864, at the Talbot Hotel,
Bradford,
over 12 boards, 3 games per board.
The first session
of the match was played on 12/11/1864, at Huddersfield, and only 12 games
were completed then. The second session was played on 19/11/1864, at
Bradford, when a further 20 games were completed, and the outstanding 4 games
were abandoned. The board-by-board results seem to have been published
only as the final combination of both sessions’ results.
The clearest
reporting of the match is probably that given by the Bradford Observer,
partly because the report contained more of the players’ initials, but
mostly because it included dates and venues. On Thursday 17/11/1864,
that paper had published the following interim report, here split into
paragraphs for clarity:
|
BRADFORD CHESS
CLUB.- Some of our readers will
probably recollect that this club played a home-and-home match with
Huddersfield club in April last, on which occasion our townsmen were
severely beaten. That defeat did, however, not discourage the
Bradford club; but on the contrary, they expressed immediately a desire to
meet the Huddersfield club again, and scarcely had the latter opened their
winter season when arrangements were made for another match, which is now
in progress.
The present
is a single match. Twelve players represent each club, and contend
three games each, and the aggregate score will decide the victory.
The prize is the same – a set of Staunton chess-men.
In accordance
with the arrangements made, six members of the Bradford club went last
Saturday to Huddersfield, to encounter their antagonists. Twelve
games, however, were only decided [sic – means
“However, only twelve games were decided,”] the
result of which was about even.
The next
meeting will take place, as will be seen from our advertising columns, on
Saturday next, at the Talbot Hotel. All lovers of the royal game are
invited, and as the best players of both clubs will be engaged, the meeting
will be highly interesting. It is expected that the match will be
brought to a conclusion.
|
The Bradford
Observer of Thursday 24/11/1864 gave the following:
|
BRADFORD CHESS
CLUB.- We last week alluded to a
match played in April last with the Huddersfield Chess Club, on which
occasion our townsmen suffered a severe defeat, and stated that, desirous of
an opportunity for a further encounter with their then victorious
opponents, arrangements had been entered into for another trial of strength
in this royal game. Each club on the present occasion was to be
represented by twelve players, paired according to their supposed relative
strength, who should contest three games each, and the victory to be
decided by the greatest aggregate number of games on either side. The
contest was commenced at Huddersfield, on Saturday the 12th.
Inst., by six members of the Bradford Club meeting a like number of their
opponents, when twelve games only were decided without material advantage
to either party; and according to arrangements, the friendly and
interesting encounter was resumed at the Talbot Hotel in this town on Saturday
last, terminating in favour of the Bradford Club by their winning 18 games
against 12, 2 games having been drawn, and the remaining 4 not played.-
From the fact of the Huddersfield Club having long enjoyed the reputation
of being strongest in Yorkshire, the present contest has excited a lively
interest in the neighbouring clubs as well as amongst the admirers
generally of the royal game; and our townsmen have reason to congratulate
themselves on the successful issue of their encounter, and on having been
able by their persistent determination to achieve a decided victory over
their formidable opponents, by whom they were so severely defeated on a
previous occasion. The following is a detailed statement of the
result of the score, vsz [sic]:-
|
BRADFORD.
|
|
HUDDERSFIEL.
|
|
|
Drawn
|
|
|
Aband.
|
|
G. Tegeler
|
2
|
J. Watkinson
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
E. Werner
|
1
|
J. Brook, jun.
|
2
|
|
|
|
|
|
J. Petty
|
2
|
J. Eastwood
|
0
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
T. A. Knowles
|
2
|
J.
R. Robinson
|
0
|
|
|
|
1
|
|
H. Ammelburg
|
1
|
D. Marsden
|
2
|
|
|
|
|
|
W. Fieldsend
|
2
|
Dr. Scott
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
A. Mensing
|
2
|
J. Schloesser
|
0
|
|
|
|
1
|
|
A. O. Shalders
|
1
|
J. H. Jonas
|
2
|
|
|
|
|
|
T. Fieldsend
|
2
|
W. J. Miller
|
0
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
A. Sussman
|
0
|
J. Finlinson
|
3
|
|
|
|
|
|
W. C. Ferrand
|
2
|
Senior
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
B. Broughton
|
1
|
D. A. Cooper
|
0
|
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
18
|
|
12
|
|
2
|
|
4
|
|
There followed the
text of the game Tegeler-Watkinson, as given below, concluding with
“Black resigned.”
The Huddersfield
Chronicle of Saturday 26/11/1864 carried on page 6 the following article:
|
MATCH AT CHESS BETWEEN THE BRADFORD
AND
HUDDERSFIELD CHESS CLUBS.
Those of our
readers who take an interest in the noble game of chess will probably
recollect that a match between these clubs was played in April last, and
that the Huddersfield club gained on that occasion a signal victory. The
Bradford gentlemen felt disappointed, but they were by no means
discouraged; they felt convinced that the result of that match was no
criterion of the relative strengths of the two clubs, and they were anxious
to have an opportunity to prove that their club is at least equal to that
of Huddersfield. As soon as the later had opened their winter season,
arrangement were made for another match, and the following conditions were
agreed upon:- Twelve players to represent each club, and to contest three
games each, and the aggregate score to decide the victory; the prize to be
the same as last – a set of Staunton chessmen. This match has
now been played [when?! where?!], and has terminated in a decided victory
for Bradford. It will be seen from the subjoined score that Bradford
won 18 and Huddersfield 12 games; two games were drawn. Of the
remaining four games only one was commenced, between Messrs. Broughton and
Cooper, and when broken off it stood in favour of the Bradford gentleman;
as, however, the result of these four games could not possibly alter the
result of the match they have been abandoned, in order to save the
gentlemen interested the inconvenience of meeting again. All the
players on this occasion were specially paired, according to their relative
strength, and the result of this match is therefore a better criterion than
that of the former, because on that occasion the players were paired by
ballot. We also give the moves of the concluding game between the
secretaries, Messrs. G. Tegeler, of Bradford, and J. Watkinson, of
Huddersfield, which will be found interesting:-
King’s
gambit declined.
White (Mr.
Tegeler), Black (Mr. Watkinson)
[game here rewritten in algebraic notation etc, to save
space etc]
1. e4 e5 2. f4
Bc5 3. Nf3 d6 4. Nc3 Nf6 5. Bc4 O-O 6. f5 c6 7. d3 d5 8. Bb3 dxe4 9. Nxe4
Bxf5 10. Nxc5 Qa5+ 11. Bd2 Qxc5 12. Qe2 e4 13. dxe4 Nxe4 14. Be3 Qa5+ 15.
Nd2 Rd8 16. O-O-O Nxd2 17. Bxd2 Qc7 18. g4 Bg6 19. h4 Na6 20. Rde1 Qd7 21.
h5 Re8 (a) 22. Qf3 Bxc2 23. Bxc2 Nc5 24. h6 g6 25. Qf6 Ne6 26. Rxe6 fxe6
27. Bc3 [Black] resigned.
(a) This move
costs black a piece and the game, but even with correct play we think that
white ought to win, having a considerable advantage in position.
SCORE OF THE GAMES PLAYED.
|
Bradford
|
|
Huddersfield
|
|
|
Drawn
|
|
|
Aband.
|
|
G. Tegeler
|
2
|
J. Watkinson
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
E. Werner
|
1
|
J. Brook, jun.
|
2
|
|
|
|
|
|
J. Petty
|
2
|
Eastwood
|
0
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
T. A. Knowles
|
2
|
R. Robinson
|
0
|
|
|
|
1
|
|
H. Ammelburg
|
1
|
D. Marsden
|
2
|
|
|
|
|
|
W. Fieldsend
|
2
|
Dr. Scott
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mensing
|
2
|
Schloesser
|
0
|
|
|
|
1
|
|
A. O. Shalders
|
1
|
Jonas
|
2
|
|
|
|
|
|
T. Fieldsend
|
2
|
Miller
|
0
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
A. Sussman
|
0
|
Finlinson
|
3
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ferrand
|
2
|
Senior
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
B. Broughton
|
1
|
Cooper
|
0
|
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
18
|
|
12
|
|
2
|
|
4
|
|
This report was seemingly
by a Bradford writer, as initials were supplied with most Bradford surnames,
whereas much less knowledge of the Huddersfield players’ initials is
shown by more omissions and some errors. Then of course there is the
general tone of the description of how Huddersfield’s previous victory
was no true measure of the two clubs’ relative strength, and so
on. The writer might have been Gottfried Tegeler, the secretary of the
Bradford club. The same report was given by the Leeds Mercury of
Tuesday 22/11/1864, on page 3.
The players name
above are interpreted by the writer as being more specifically as follows:
(Click
here for the previous match, in April 1864. Click here for a similar
series in 1865.)
|