Bexhill 2 —-0-4 —-Haywards Heath 1

Division 1 Fri 13th Mar 2026 00:00 Winner: Away   

Result from Sussex League LMS

Board	Rating	Bexhill 2	V	Haywards Heath 1	Rating
1	1921	Lumsden, JamesG	0 – 1	G Kwiatkowski, Feliks J	2226
2	1909	Hubbard, MichaelG	0 – 1	G Boardman, Jeffrey	2104
3	1780	Blewitt, Stephen DG	0 – 1	B Cole, Vivian J	1974
4	1623	Tracey, William FG	0 – 1	G Clark, Julian	1768
Average	1809		0 – 4		2018

It was another tough night for our 2nd team, in Division 1 for the first time this year, playing at home against one of the strongest teams in the League. I only had time to see the complicated struggles which were still in the balance as I left near 10.00pm, so the overall result belies the intensity of the games.

James played a Scandinavian defence with …Qd6, which I have seen James play before, inviting White’s Q-side expansion with Nb5, c4, a3, b4 and pressure on the centre with doubled rooks behind the d4 pawn. Meanwhile , in a complex opening with few exchanges to relieve the pressure, Black attempted restraint in the early middlegame with a ‘hedgehog’ formation ..a6,b6. It looked as though James would have problems with lack of space to manoevre.

Michael played a Q’s gambit v Black’s Slav formation. It resolved into a symmetrical structure with open d and c files, with confusing possibilities of tactics based on respective double-rooks batteries and threats of pins, skewers. on both sides Perhaps it was the subtle differences in piece position, which gave Black the edge, e.g. Black’s N better protected on d7, whereas Michael’s N was on c3 and pinned. The position looked to favour Black as I left, with Michael a pawn down.

Steve played a Philidor formation …c6,d6,e5against a double- fianchetto of White’s bishops.. There was an intense positional struggle in the centre against Black’s dark-square strongpoint on e5 supported by d6. White created a powerful pawn chain on the white squares, a2,b3,c4, d5. By threatening a skewer of major pieces by Ba5, White caused Steve to block the threat with the advance ..a5, b5-b4, which left White with two monster passed pawns on c4,d5 after White’s f4 exchanged the e5 pawn. Black’s unopposed pawns on the f and e files did not look as threatening enough to compensate at the point I left.

I saw Bill’s game to its conclusion. Out of a drawish symmetrical pawn structure with one shared open e-file. with all the major pieces and just one N each left. I didn’t observe how Bill came to lose his N but it looked like there were some tactics based on N’s being pinned on e5 and e4 respectively, which could have been exploited successfully by Black.

The result does leave our 2nd team vulnerable, with just one match left to play against East Grinstead 1 on 27 March.

East Grinstead 2	8	2	1	5	14	18	5	0	0	0
Bexhill 2	9	1	1	7	11½	24½	3	0	0	0
Crowborough	8	1	1	6	9	23	3	0	0	0

Meanwhile our 4th team, against currently 2nd placed Uckfield 1 achieved a creditable score, which again had potential for a little more.

Bexhill 4 —- 1.5 -2.5— Uckfield 1

Division 3 Fri 13th Mar 2026 00:00 Winner: Away   

Result from Sussex League LMS

Board	Rating	Bexhill 4	V	Uckfield 1	Rating
1	1547	Balp, OliverG	0 – 1	B Airlie, Arran	1923
2	1731	Veale, GeoffreyE	1 – 0	G Wright, Joseph	1795
3	1307	James, JonathanG	0 – 1	B Stockham, Michael	1732
4	0000	Skerritt, Ashton N	½ – ½	B Stockham, Brian	1619
Average	1147		1½ – 2½		1768

A sound result against the rating odds. Again I was unable to watch all of the games to a conclusion but here’s what I observed until about 10 pm…

Jon lost a pawn early on when an Exchange of White’s B for N on f6 destroyed the one defender of a central pawn. White had a protected passed pawn on c5. Jon played actively with the 2 bishops but White managed the rooks on the open files well to penetrate and pick up more pawns.

Geoff played cannily in an English opening, with a3 and e3. For what seemed a long time he left his King in the centre behind the e3,f2,d2 pawn wedge, leaving his d-pawn unmoved while Black advanced in the centre with …f5,e5-e4 – which wedge was not being used flexibly to break up the shell around the White King. Geoff played on from the flanks into the middlegame where he managed to snaffle Black’s Q for 2 minor pieces and withstood Black’s attempts to counter-attack with both rooks and minor pieces, even while White’s rooks remained on their original squares.

As a welcome new team player, I’m sure Geoff will enjoy much further success with his asymmetric approach. Congratulations, Geoff!

Ashton, a talented , rapidly-progressing junior who has only recently joined the team achieved an impressive draw against a highly experienced opponent. Black tried to throw Ashton out of any possible comfort zone, with a questionable very early 2nd move of a pawn from d6 to d5 – a pawn sacrifice- in an Open Sicilian, followed immediately by a further dubious Queen sortie inviting further loss of tempi as Ashton calmly completed his development. Black created doubled White c-pawns, hoping they would be targets, but Ashton used the open files for his rooks well and eventually advanced from c4-c5 restraining any b5 break by Black. Throughout, Ashton’s pieces kept active, not passively defending against any counter-threats. His king was fully centralised in the endgame, then shepherded the pawn to promote , after it had captured on the b-file, forcing Black to give up his N. Black had to defend with his lone King, plus 4 pawns in a connected island on the King side, against Whites’ 3 connected pawns opposite and a N. Black’s e-pawn was a protected passer on e5, which tied Ashton to covering that pawn making a dash to promote. Ashton could not find a way to push the Black King back through use of the opposition to get at the base of Black’s pawn chain on ..g7. After his attempts to break in were successfully foiled, Ashton eventually offered the draw, which Black, relieved after taking all the pressure throughout the game, instantly accepted.

This was an excellent achievement, Ashton! I think ( though stand to be corrected) the position, though tricky, was won for you, if perhaps you could have aimed at playing g4-g5 earlier, to fracture the pawn chain with the support of your N, with the h-pawn on h4, rather than fixing the pawns with h5? Have a good look at it again . The final position was something like this which for some time had been through various permutations of King and N moves:

Oli’s game, which I didn’t see to a conclusion involved Oli exchanging B for N ( conceding the 2 bishops to saddle White with an isolated d-pawn.) That is always a double-edged strategy, as it seemed to me, White was gaining greater piece activity in the middlegame.

The result leaves our 4th team still looking fairly safe from relegation with 2 games still to play, both at home , Haywards Heath 2 on 27 March and Eastbourne 4 at home on 24 April – both of which on current performance appear to be winnable for our 4th team

Horsham 5	9	2	2	5	14½	21½	6	0	0	0
Bexhill 4	8	2	2	4	13½	18½	6	0	0	0
East Grinstead 3	6	2	1	3	12	12	5	0	0	0
Haywards Heath 2	7	1	2	4	10	18	4	0	0	0
Eastbourne 4	7	2	0	5	8½	19½	4	0	0	0