Inaugural Match
Sheffield and District Chess Association v. Manchester and District Chess Association
played: 11th January 1975
(Click on individual underlined game results to see those games)
| Brd. | Sheffield | Manchester | Brd. | Sheffield | Manchester | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1. | Jones, B A | 0–1 | Lamb, H | 22. | Hunt, G A B | 1–0 | Newman, F |
| 2. | Russell, H | 1–0 | Wheeler, A A | 23 | Gough, S | 0–1 | Lingard, S |
| 3. | Smith, M D | 1–0 | Fielding, C F | 24. | Suto, J | 1–0 | Pinel, E |
| 4. | Wheatley, C J | 1–0 | Shuttleworth, D | 25. | Leach, G | 1–0 | Hulse, J |
| 5. | Williams, C C | 1–0 | Furlong, P | 26. | Stewart, G V | ½–½ | Trigg, D |
| 6. | Mann, S J | ½–½ | Harris, K | 27. | Baxter, F J | 1–0 | Chadwick, F |
| 7. | Cruz, Dr. L | 1–0 | Hamilton, M J | 28. | Pettigrew, W J | 1–0 | Furlong, Mrs S |
| 8. | Frost, G | 1–0 | Higgins, G | 29. | Green, M | 1–0 | Montgomery, W |
| 9. | Brewitt, J E | 1–0 | Slater, B | 30. | Fletcher, M | 1–0 | Caplan, D G |
| 10. | Bennett, D A | 1–0 | Holden, A J | 31. | England, B H | ½–½ | Tranter, S |
| 11. | Hogan, K M | 1–0 | Shaw, K | 32. | McGann, G | 1–0 | Unsworth, D |
| 12. | Andrews, D | ½–½ | Beach, R A | 33. | Simpson, G | 1–0 | Buckley, W |
| 13. | Simmonds, N | 1–0 | Smith, L | 34. | Orton, G A C | ½–½ | Pendlebury, S |
| 14. | Drury, S J | 1–0 | Goldblum, M I | 35. | Sheard, M | 1–0 | Coot, F |
| 15. | Lock, R J | 1–0 | Barks, J L | 36. | McGann, R | 0–1 | English, R |
| 16. | Dixon, D | 1–0 | Keeling, G | 37. | Gunston, D | 0–1 | McMahon, P |
| 17. | Hawley, D J | ½–½ | Sharpe, B | 38. | Hawley, M D | 0–1 | English, R |
| 18. | Smith, G | 0–1 | Jones, C E | 39. | Foremen, R | 1–0 | Stanfield, R |
| 19. | Brameld, K | 1–0 | Goldman, M | 40. | McGann, R | 1–0 | Stanfield, R |
| 20. | Tillbrook, P | 1–0 | Scowcroft, P | 41. | Foreman, R | 0–1 | McMahon, P |
| 21. | Oakes, B | 0–1 | O'Connor, K | 30–11 |
Sheffield's captain, Kevin Hogan, comments:- "On the day Manchester were very much below strength, and the result does not truly reflect the respective strengths of the two Associations. I must add however, that we too could have been stronger as I was unable to call upon the Sheffield Woodhouse team. Boards 32-35 and 36-41 were intended as under 16 and under 11 sections respectively, but in some cases our juniors were playing seniors, so that the 5½-4½ result on boards 32-41 was hightly creditable. Average gradings of the two sides: Sheffield 150, Manchester 132."
(Material from Bill Pettigrew)
