1951 Britain v Yugoslavia, University College, London, 12-13 September (adjournments played on 14 September)

	Great Britain	Rd 1	Rd 2	Yugoslavia	Opening Rd 1	Opening Rd 2
1	Ernst Ludwig Klein	0-1	½-½	Svetozar Gligoric	King's Indian	Sicilian
2	(Conel) Hugh O'Donel Alexander	½-½	1-0	Aleksandar Matanovic	Ruy Lopez	Petroff
3	Harry Golombek	½-½	½-½	Vasja Pirc	Réti	Catalan
4	Reginald Joseph Broadbent	½-½	0-1	Petar Trifunovic	Ruy Lopez	QGD
5	(Philip) Stuart Milner-Barry	0-1	½-½	Stojan Puc	Petroff	Sicilian
6	Theodore Henry Tylor	0-1	1-0	Braslav Rabar	Catalan	King's Indian
7	William Ritson Morry	0-1	½-½	Borislav Milic	Scandinavian	Grünfeld
8	Dr. James Macrae Aitken	1-0	0-1	Srecko Nedeljkovic	Sicilian	QGD
9	Leonard William Barden	½-½	½-½	Borislav Ivkov	Sicilian	Sicilian
10	Jonathan Penrose	0-1	0-1	Andrija Fuderer	Sicilian	King's Indian
Great Britain had Black on odds in round 1		3-7	4½-5½
		7½-12½

CHESS, October 1951, Vol.17/193, ppn 3-5 (writer not credited - probably BH Wood)

British chess faced its stiffest task since 1947 (when we lost 5-15 to the Soviet Union) on September 12th at University College, London, when the formidable Yugoslav team arrived to play a match on ten boards. In the last year, they have administered decisive defeats to the leading chess countries of the West, including the U.S.A. (11½-8½), Holland (14½-5½), and West Germany (11-9) ; they won the four-a-side Dubrovnik team tournament; they are now generally recognised as the strongest team in the world outside the Soviet Union.

With all this in mind, the final British score is nothing to be ashamed about, and the score on the top four boards of gives grounds for hoping that we may finish among the top six teams in the Helsinki team tournament next year.

The first day’s play did not foreshadow a total of 7½. Although the first game to finish, between Alexander and Matanovic, ended in a quick draw after heavy woodchopping, Yugoslavia soon went ahead when 21-year-old Andrea Fuderer, who will be remembered for his fine wins against Najdorf, O’Kelly and Tartakover at Bled last year, scored a crushing win against Jonathan Penrose. It was a surprise to see Fuderer, who besides finishing fourth at Bled tied for second in a strong tournament at Dortmund this year, on the bottom board, but the team order, like the British, was selected mainly on the results of the last national championship in which he did badly.

The Yugoslav lead increased when Milic brought off a fine sacrificial finish. Morry had got a cramped game from his favourite Centre Counter [see game viewer for analysis].

The next to fall was Milner-Barry, whose opponent Puc produced a new move in the Petroff, gained control of the long black diagonal, won a pawn, and evaluated it systematically. Soon afterwards Tylor, who had been gradually worn down by Rabar, was forced into a hopeless ending. Golombek seemed at first sight to have the worse of the. opening against Pirc, who had a knight at Q5 supported by a fianchettoed bishop, but from the position in the diagram (Diag. 2) the British player began undermining the knight [game moves] and it was Pirc who had to play carefully to draw.

Trifunovic, playing against Broadbent’s favourite Ruy Lopez, tried for too much as Black and left himself with weaknesses on the diagonals which Broadbent’s bishops could exploit. Broadbent forced further weaknesses until he reached the position in Diagram 3. [game analysis - see viewer]

The final result in a bad day for Britain was Klein’s loss to Gligoric. The Yugoslav master played the whole game in his best style, gradually exploiting the positional advantages which accrued to him as a result of Klein’s cramped opening.

The score of 1½-6½ against them did not dishearten the British team, and it soon became clear during the second round that they would do much better—in fact at one time it even seemed that they might win the round. The first result, most unexpectedly, was Tylor’s win from Rabar. Rabar had forced terrible weaknesses on the black squares, and in the position in Diagram 4 he played [see game viewer] after which White should win owing to the black-square weaknesses, Rabar played [game viewer].

Golombek and Pirc agreed an early draw, but Yugoslavia led 8-3 when Fuderer scored another good win against Penrose. Penrose’s mistake in the game given below was chiefly in assisting White’s development on move 14, instead of which the manoeuvre Bd7-e8 followed by the exchange of all the rooks should draw. There is no doubt that Penrose in this match was not the player who beat Bogolyubow and Tartakower at Southsea, 1950. I think he is suffering from temporary loss of confidence—not uncommon in young players before their style, and more particularly, their defensive technique, has solidified.

Steadily played draws between Klein and Gligoric and Morry and Milic were the next results, and then Alexander delighted us all by winning a fine game against Matanovic. Matanovic tried the same variation as in the first Puc-Milner-Barry game, but Alexander introduced a new idea for the defence with his sixth move. Alexander suggested after the game that his opponent’s defeat was due to his unfortunate handling of his KB, on move 7 (where 7 d4 followed by Bd3 was correct), move 14 (where f4 is essential to keep a playable game) and move 15 (where d5 is the only hope).

Barden frittered away an enormous advantage against the World Junior Champion, Bora Ivkov. The Yugoslav had mismanaged the opening, and in the diagrammed position (Diagram 6) played [game analysis - see viewer] and the game was soon agreed drawn. Ivkov immediately afterwards offered a draw in the adjourned first round game—Barden had defended a difficult ending well.

With the score 10-6 in their favour Yugoslavia needed only half a point more for the match, and this was forthcoming when Milner-Barry failed to clinch his won knight ending against Puc. The lead was increased when Aitken, who had lost the exchange quite early on, resigned his untenable ending to Nedeljkovic without resuming play. However, he then proceeded to win his adjourned first round game in good positional style—Nedeljkovic had saddled himself with weaknesses on the black squares and among his queen-side pawns. Only one game now remained, and this ended when Broadbent, who had put up a grim resistance in a rook ending with two pawns to the bad, finally blundered at the beginning of the third session against the inexorable Trifunovic.

The Yugoslav superiority was not especially marked in any one department of the game, not even in opening theory. This was the most encouraging conclusion to be drawn from the match—that the difference between the two countries is one of the degree of mass participation and government support, not of differences in talent. The most alarming conclusion from our point of view comes from the difference between the average age of the two teams (the British 39, the Yugoslav 28). Only two of the British players, Barden and Penrose, were not prominent in pre-war chess. On the other hand, there are a number of other young players in England who are capable of reaching international standard. It is up to players like Denis Mardle, Neil McKelvie, Malcolm Barker, and John Alexander to study to improve their strength, and to tournament and match selectors to give them their chance.

---

File Updated

Date	Notes
7 November 2024	First upload. 9 games plus 4 part-games. Note that the first 12 moves of Barden-Ivkov (rd 2.9) are a reconstruction. My thanks to Vladica Andrejic of perpetualcheck.com for providing a complete score of the Milic-Morry game.