BRITBASE - British Chess Game Archive
Event: Netherlands-England Match • Venue: Vlissingen, NED • Date: 3-4 November 1962 • 12 games of possible 22
Download PGN • last edited:
Tuesday September 12, 2023 6:52 PM
1962 Netherlands vs Great Britain Match, played at Vlissingen [Flushing], 3-4 November
| Bd | Netherlands | Round 1 | Round 2 | Great Britain |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1w | Max Euwe |
0-1 | Jonathan Penrose | |
| 1b | Theo van Scheltinga | 1-0 | ||
| 2b | Lod Prins | ½-½ | ½-½ | Cenek Kottnauer |
| 3w | Carel van den Berg | ½-½ | ½-½ | Peter H Clarke |
| 4b | Nicolaas Cortlever | 1-0 | ½-½ | C Hugh O'D Alexander |
| 5w | Kick Langeweg | ½-½ | ½-½ | Harry Golombek |
| 6b | Eduard Spanjaard | 0-1 | ½-½ | Michael J Haygarth |
| 7w | Frans Henneberke | ½-½ | 0-1 | Robert G Wade |
| 8b | Frans Kuijpers | 1-0 | ½-½ | Adrian S Hollis |
| 9w | Alexander Jongsma | 0-1 | ½-½ | Michael J Franklin |
| 10b | Henny van Oosterom | 0-1 | 0-1 | Owen M Hindle |
| 4-6 | 4½-5½ | |||
| Overall score | 8½-11½ | |||
| Corry Vreeken | 1-0 | ½-½ | Rowena M Bruce | |
[CHESS, Vol.28, No.420-21, 29 November 1962, ppps 21-22] England beat Holland 11½-8½ [the women's board appears not to have counted towards the overall match score - JS] in the annual match held this year in Flushing, Nov. 2-3 [I think this should be Saturday-Sunday 3-4 November 1962, according to the Times report - JS]. Having won by 13 to 7 at Cheltenham last year, England may equal the Dutch feat of three successive inscriptions, from 1958-1960, on the beautiful trophy, a replica of the ship of the famous Admiral de Ruyter.
Although stronger than last year, the Dutch team was again not fully representative. Donner, Bouwmeester, Kramer, Barendregt and Roessel were all missing while the England team lacked only two leading players, Barden and Littlewood.
Conditions for players and spectators alike were ideal in the luxurious canteen of the “de Schelde” shipping company. At least a hundred spectators followed every game on large demonstration boards throughout.
There were few surprises, England winning by about the margin one would have expected on paper. Van Scheltinga was not available the first day and the England captain, Mr. V. J. Soanes, agreed to the Dutch request that the former World Champion Dr. Euwe should substitute in the first round only. The “reserve”, although looking fit, is not quite the force he was and found himself outplayed in a complicated middle game by Jonathan Penrose. Pitted against the fresh van Scheltinga in the second round, the British Champion soon won a pawn but blundered, losing the exchange in time-pressure and van Scheltinga made no mistake in the ending.
Prins with typically imaginative play, made Kottnauer fight doggedly to draw both games. Alexander lost his first round game principally through overlooking a back rank combination that cost him several tempi. Next round, he and Cortlever showed the futility of the “no draw in under thirty moves rule” by agreeing on move ten, to repeat the position three times, thus drawing by repetition. It was aptly remarked that nowadays one does not ask "would you like a draw?” but “shall we repeat moves?”
Langeweg built up a commanding position in his second round encounter with Golombek only to blunder away a bishop for two pawns. The ensuing ending, while not without its difficulties, was clearly won for Golombek but on learning that at that stage of the match, half-a-point was needed to make certain of victory for England, he sportingly offered a draw.
In the Ladies’ match, Mrs. Bruce was outplayed in the first game but fought spiritedly to draw the second, despite losing a pawn in the opening.
Through shortage of ’plane accommodation, the England party had to be split, one group flying via Rotterdam, the other going by rail to Southend, by air to Ostend, then by train again to Bruges, by coach to Breskens and finally by ferry to Flushing— a seven hours’ journey in all, finishing at 9 p.m. Luckily, the match did not start until 2 p.m. the next day.
The presence of the effervescent Spanjaard in the chair ensured the success of the closing dinner. The specialty “Fantasie Echec" turned out to be a mammoth cake in the form of the chess pieces. The player who, against all the rules, captured the king looked very uncomfortable.
[BCM, December 1962, p361-362 - report by Peter H Clarke] It was a case of third time lucky for us at Flushing on November 3rd and 4th. Both in 1958 and 1960 we only just failed to beat the Dutch on their home ground; this year, after an equally hard-fought match, we succeeded, finishing with the score 11½-8½. Thus the challenge trophy presented by the sponsors of the event in Holland, the shipbuilding firm of “de Schelde,” has been retained for another year.
Victory by 3 points is certainly sound enough. But had it been by anything less, I think our captain, Mr. V. J. Soanes, would have been disappointed, for the Dutch side was far less representative of their full strength than ours was. For various reasons several of their leading players were unable to take part, and even in the final line-up there had to be an arrangement whereby van Scheltinga was “understudied” in the first round by Dr. Euwe, who was originally unavailable.
In the first couple of hours of play the general impression was that the Dutch had the edge; this was particularly so on Board 2, where Prins had sacrificed a piece for a terrific attack against Kottnauer, and on Board 8, where Hollis had lost a pawn by an oversight in the opening. As the session wore on, however, there was a gradual swing in our favour. Golombek, Wade, and I provided a steady beginning by drawing with Black and then, though Hollis finally went down, Hindle made up for it by forcing through a mating attack. He could not have wished for a finer debut for England than this.
Apart from Mrs. Bruce’s game, which had ended in a sharp defeat for the British Lady Champion, the rest were adjourned. Franklin was a clear piece up, and his opponent resigned without resuming. That left four positions, each of which held promise of further interesting play. On the top board Dr. Euwe had given up the exchange in the middle-game to try to reduce the pressure Black was working up; he now had two pawns for it, but with the enemy Queen behind his lines he could not find a defence and so Penrose scored a valuable and well-deserved win. After looking lost for hours, Kottnauer had wriggled out of trouble at the very end of the session. He was confident of holding the ending and he duly did so by exact play. Alexander was not so lucky. He had had a good game at one time, but an error had changed the situation and now he was faced with a passed pawn on the seventh rank. There was no way of saving it. Finally, Haygarth, having reached one of his favourite endings with two Bishops, broke through Spanjaard’s defences to win material. Thus we ended the first day leading 6-4.
Past experience has taught us to beware these first-round leads—they can so easily be reversed. On this occasion we carefully consolidated our gains. First there came a very quick draw on Board 4—another blow to the 30-move rule—and after some three hours’ play a second on Board 3. These were soon followed by good wins by Hindle and Wade, bringing our total to 9 and making almost certain of victory. However, the Dutch far from gave up. All the remaining games were most stubbornly contested and provided the spectators with a fair share of excitement.
Hollis got into difficulties, fought his way out with a piece sacrifice and finally missed a probable win in time-trouble, taking a perpetual check instead; similarly, Franklin resisted hard in a bad position and earnt his escape. Meanwhile there was an even more up-and-down struggle going on on Board 5; it was Langeweg who made the last mistake, as a result of which he had to try an ending with two pawns for a piece. This was won for White, but as it would have been a long technical business and the match was no longer in doubt, Golombek generously settled for a draw. Peaceful agreements were also reached by the two ladies and by Spanjaard and Haygarth, in both cases after exhaustive fights. At this late stage the home side was still without a success in the second round. It came where it was perhaps least expected—on Board 1. The British Champion conducted most of the game with his customary skill but in seeking the simplest way to clinch his advantage when short of time he blundered and lost the exchange; van Scheltinga accordingly added another worthy point to his considerable list of successes in these events. Last to finish were Prins and Kottnauer. The Dutch master tried everything he knew in the ending but could not overcome the defence.
This win, even if it was not against the full Dutch side, must have done a lot to restore our fallen fortunes of the Olympiad. The success of our “reserves” and the fact that we made a clean sweep on Board 10 for the third year running shows that we have strength in depth now. All this suggests that the time is coming for us to enter the European Championships. In that way more players, especially the good young ones, would have the chance to experience and benefit from the sort of competition that at present only the top six or so get. Moreover, additional opportunities would lead to even greater rivalry for team places, and this in its turn would inevitably raise standards.
[The Times, 5 November 1962] BRITISH CHESS WIN OVER DUTCH - FROM OUR CHESS CORRESPONDENT - VLISSINGEN, Nov. 4 - The annual Anglo-Dutch match was held at Vlissingen over the weekend. After some extremely hard games the British team won the match by 11 to 8 with one game adjourned. Two rounds were played yesterday and today, one of the features being Penrose’s victory over Dr. Euwe, a former world champion. He outplayed Dr. Euwe in the middle game and though it is probable that the resulting ending should have been drawn he took good advantage of mistakes to force the win. Another notable performance was put up by Hindle, a young player who won both his games in impressive style. In the second round Penrose looked like repeating his success, but played some bad moves in time trouble. Van Scheltinga made no mistake in winning the ending.
Openings of games NOT included in the download: Round 1 - Clarke-vd Berg, French defence; Golombek-Langweg, Nimzo-Indian; Wade=Henneberke, QP Bogoljubow Defence (presumably Bogo-Indian?). Round 2 - Kottnauer-Prins, QP Richter variation; Clarke-vd Berg, Grunfeld; Alexander-Cortlever, Four Knights Def; Golombek-Langeweg, Catalan; Haygarth-Spanjaard, QP Bogoljubow def; Franklin-Jongsma, King's Indian def; Bruce-Vreeken, not known. (source: The Times)
[Manchester Guardian, 5 November 1962, p2] England’s fine win over Holland in chess match - From a Chess Correspondent - Flushing, November 4 - In the annual chess match held over the weekend at Flushing, England had a good win over Holland by 11 to 8, with one game unfinished, and so retained the challenge trophy won last year at Cheltenham.
The foundation for victory was laid in the first round when England gained a lead of two points. Penrose, in particular, played finely to beat the former world champion. Dr Euwe, while, on the last board, Hindle made an excellent debut, winning with a sacrificial attack in 25 moves.
In the second round, the Dutch made a determined effort to recover ground but were unable to do so. Their only consolation was that van Scheltinga, who replaced Dr Euwe on top board, beat Penrose after the British champion went wrong in time pressure. The unfinished game between Prins and Kottnauer should end in a draw.
File Updated
| Date | Notes |
|---|---|
| 9 April 2019 | First uploaded to BritBase with 11 complete games and 11 stubs, plus reports, etc. |
| 10 April 2019 | Added a further game score: Kuijpers-Hollis (Rd 2, ½-½), found in CHESS Magazine, Dec 1962. |