Saving nigel short | thearticle

My column last week about Jonathan Penrose’s near brush with death at my hands, has elicited some noteworthy responses. Soon after reading my account of Penrose’s rescue at Siegen 1970,

Britain’s most famous chess player, Nigel Short, having tested positive for Covid 19, Omicron variant, felt the blood draining from his head. Having read my column, Short knew that the

correct antidote was to lie horizontally on the floor, after which he swiftly recovered. On Twitter he kindly credited my piece with his rapid recovery from this particular hazard. In any

case, it’s reassuring to know that, even from his hospital bed, Nigel has retained his sense of humour and penchant for logophilia. Nevertheless, Nigel remains in hospital on breathing

assistance and of course we all wish him a full recovery before Christmas. Next, the doyen of U.K. chess journalists, Leonard Barden, of _The Guardian_, _The FT_ and the _Evening Standard_,

has contacted me, pointing out that his own obituary of Penrose correctly emphasised that the Grandmaster title awarded to Penrose was neither of the Emeritus nor the Honorary variety, but

the fully fledged accolade. I now summarise the correction which he was kind enough to send me: Penrose in fact became a full Grandmaster, and not the inferior honorary version. How it

happened was through one of Bob Wade’s many services to English chess. In the late 1970s, when Jonathan Penrose had virtually finished his over the board career, Barden thought that his

friend and contemporary was worthy of the GM title. This was round about the time when, for a year or two, Barden had been British Chess Federation international grader, so he had some

standing in putting Penrose forward. Barden thought that Penrose’s performances in the 1961 Enschede Zonal and in the 1968 Lugano Olympiad were of norm level and would satisfy the

regulations. Harry Golombek was FIDÉ delegate at that time, so Barden put the matter to him. FIDÉ were then revising their archives and awarding some titles based on events from 10-25 years

previously. Jonathan Penrose Thinking that Jonathan‘s case was slightly marginal, Barden conceived the cunning plan: it would improve Penrose’s chances if a second English candidate were put

up for the retrospective title. Barden’s crafty strategy was to appeal to Golombek’s ego , by suggesting that he also propose himself , on the basis of his result at Venice 1950. This was

probably close to a Grandmaster norm, and the Dutch Master Prins , who was half a point in front of Golombek in Venice, did get the title, using that as one of his norms. For Golombek there

was also the 1951 Bad Pyrmont zonal, and one or two other successes to take into account, such as a victory at Paignton 1951 against former world champion Max Euwe, share of first prize

(with Penrose) at Hastings 1952/53 and three British Championship titles. Harry Golombek (BNA Photographic/Alamy) Alas, the members of the qualification committee were in a mean title-giving

mood at that time, were offended by England‘s presumptuous act of putting up two candidates, and turned both applications down, adding cynically that Penrose (by then in his mid-40s and

with the fainting episode at Siegen in 1970 and his poor result at Nice 1974 in his history) should to try to earn it by future achievements. There the matter rested for some 15 years. For

part of that time I was FIDÉ (World Chess Federation) delegate and Barden, believing that I did not rate Jonathan highly, felt it was pointless to put Penrose forward again. From 1990 to

1993 Barden visited Bob Wade on other matters and found out in the course of conversation that he was then on the FIDÉ qualifications committee. Barden then suggested he put forward Penrose

again. “Bob agreed at once, and was emphatic that he would only go for the proper title and not for the Honorary version which he regarded as inferior and not for players of true GM

strength. I mentioned Enschede and Lugano and Bob immediately went to his tournament collection and picked out the tournament bulletins for both events. We made our application between us

there and then, and Bob took it to the next qualifications committee meeting.” “As he told me later, almost all of these eminent people, chosen presumably for their supposed expertise, had

not heard of Penrose, knew little or nothing of his achievements, or were unsure whether Enschede and Lugano were sufficient.” “So they turned to Lothar Schmid, who was present and whom they

regarded as a fount of knowledge and asked what his opinion was. As a direct contemporary who knew of Jonathan‘s achievements, a friend of English chess and of Bob, Lothar gave the

application lavish praise and it was granted.” I am delighted to publish this correction, more or less in Leonard Barden’s own words. Wikipedia and other sources continue to call Jonathan

Penrose Honorary or GM emeritus, but they are wrong. In fact, in 1985 I did apply for and acquire the Grandmaster emeritus title for Golombek himself while I was FIDÉ delegate. If the BCF

had asked me to put forward Penrose while I was delegate 1979-1986, I would certainly have obeyed orders. The same goes even for Bill Hartston , who achieved three results at Hastings

1972/73, Sarajevo 1976 and Buenos Aires 1980, as well as twice winning the British championship, which should have been sufficient , when combined with a display of silver tongued oratory.

If I deserved the GM title, then Bill certainly had a strong case. As for Penrose, winning the British ten times should in itself have been sufficient, but this was in the days before Elo

ratings had gained traction and all sorts of pin-headed bureaucratic pedantry meant that those results didn’t count. Now to the world championship match between Carlsen and Nepomniachtchi

(“Nepo”) which finished earlier this month in Dubai. As it turned out, my suggestions in a previous column to counteract the effect of too many draws proved unnecessary. After draws in games

one to five , during which Nepo had somewhat the better of things, the defending champion went into overdrive from game six onwards, winning the longest game in the history of world

championship matches. Carlsen then took games eight, nine and eleven with great ease. As Henry McWatters, the new chairman of the chess circle of the RAC, perhaps the most active in chess

terms amongst the London clubs, put it to me: the Russian tanker was crushed by the huge Norwegian iceberg. Nepo was doubtless demoralised by his grinding defeat in the 136 move game six.

However, Nepo’s errors in the subsequent three defeats were, frankly, unworthy of a world championship match. The final score of 7.5 to 3.5, with no losses for the champion, was one of the

most devastatingly one-sided in the history of the world championship. One has to go back to the days of Emanuel Lasker to find anything comparable. Here is the games link to all games from

the world championship. _Raymond Keene ’ s latest book “ Fifty Shades of Ray: Chess in the year of the Coronavirus”, containing some of his best pieces from TheArticle, is now available from

Blackwell’s._ A MESSAGE FROM THEARTICLE _We are the only publication that’s committed to covering every angle. We have an important contribution to make, one that’s needed now more than

ever, and we need your help to continue publishing throughout the pandemic. So please, make a donation._