Gender and Chess : : Harriet in the Hunt

Gender and Chess - The Ever-Changing, Never-Ending Question...

"Queen One", Harriet in the Hunt

by Susan Lalic

From The Chess Cafe, Archives, 1998

When I was asked if I would like to write the odd article on "women and chess", it was not at all difficult to think of the first topic.

I suddenly realised that I have no idea of the situation for the American Women's Championship, but let me enlighten you about our latest British Championships that incidentally always incorporate the Women's title in order to let the top females meet stronger opposition, rather than have a separate tournament alongside. It is no mean event either, as it takes place over 11 rounds with a rest day in between, which basically involves a two- week stay away from home.

Sadly the whole event lost all of its sponsorship about eight years ago and most of the top players stayed away from that moment. However, rumours began that the 1997 summer Championships, to be sponsored by Smith and Williamson Accountants, would have huge sponsorship in the form of increased prize money. The sum of œ10,000 was confirmed in the press as top overall prize, while second place would receive œ5000, third œ2,500, fourth œ1,500, fifth œ1000 with seven additional prizes, for a total of twelve. I was advised that the women's share would also be worthwhile.

Assuming that œ2000 would be a fair comparison, I arranged a babysitter and accommodation in the seaside town of Hove and smugly waited for the entry form to drop through the post.

Well, imagine my surprise when the official papers revealed thousands of pounds for the top ten men and a meager œ100 (oh, I musn't forget the extra bonus of the Lander prize that guarantees an additional œ60 to the winner) for the top woman. I immediately phoned the Director to inform him of the printing error (surely at least an extra "0"?) and I still have to remind myself that I wasn't dreaming when I recall his opinion that he thought it was in fact "not at all bad". It does not take a mathematician to work out that our first place offering was about 1.5% of the men's prize and that made it all the more curious to hear that the men were allotted a further œ500 for a play off when four of them tied for first place (which incidentally was called off when it got down to the last two; there are still questions being raised about that!).

Unfortunately I cannot give exact details of the entry form (I gave it to my young son who was becoming quite expert at shredding with his paper scissors) but I remember that it did have some small print about an extra œ50 of prize money for each woman who entered, perhaps enabling a second prize to be considered. However, as it was limited to 6 women due to a minimum Elo requirement, I would still be forced to take a loss on the event if I were to become British Ladies Champion.

To make a long story short I was not present during the event, but I am interested to hear any readers' views on positive discrimination.

Maybe the Director was trying to tell us that we should not have our own prize at all but compete on equal terms with the men?

Given that there is a separate chess Olympiad for women, it seems sensible to encourage women and I do believe there are enough differences between the sexes to justify separate competitions on occasions. All I know is that it is absolutely certain that I would have given up chess by the age of 14 if there was no positive discrimination and it was especially the tournaments abroad that kept my motivation alive.

Anyway, let me end on a lighter note as one of the results in the British Championships caused me a certain amount of delight. I was proud of my English team-mate Harriet Hunt when she became the World Girls U-20 champion in 1997, but not as impressed as when she dealt my ex-husband a humiliating defeat last summer during the big event.

Let me explain further that my ex's favourite joke was "romance starts when she sinks in your arms and it ends with her arms in your sink"! Since the arrival of the Polgar sisters there should be no male chauvinists in chess, but who knows - women, let's hear your stories!

British Championships, Hove 1997.

White: WGM Harriet Hunt

Black: GM Keith Arkell

1 e4 e6 2 d4 d5 3 Nd2 dxe4 4 Nxe4 Bd7

A slightly passive defence known as the Fort Knox variation, which is favoured by technicians such as Anatoly Karpov.

5 Nf3 Bc6 6 Bd3 Nd7

Necessary in order to prepare 7...Ngf6 with a solid position. On the contrary, 6...Nf6?! 7 Nxf6+ Qxf6 8 Bg5 Bxf3 9 Qd2 drops the queen in spectacular fashion.

The alternative 6...Bxe4 7 Bxe4 c6 is occasionally played but is not particularly ambitious for Black who is content to saddle himself with a small but lasting disadvantage due to White's bishop pair.

7 0-0 Ngf6 8 Ng3 Be7 9 b3 0-0 10 Bb2 Re8 11 c4 Bxf3 12 Qxf3 c6

This position reminds me of one that can arise from the Slav defence (Schlechter's variation). One plan for White is to strive for the breakthrough d5 in order to activate her bishop duo while Black has no real counterplay.

13 Rfd1 Bf8 14 a3!

This shows excellent positional understanding as White prepares to expand on the queenside.

14...g6 15 Rab1 Bg7 16 Ne2 Qe7 17 Bc2 Rad8?

Black misses a chance to obtain some activity with 17...e5.

18 Nc3 Nb6

Now it is too late as 18...e5?! does not bring the desired effect after the strong 19 d5!.

19 h3 Rd7 20 a4! (See Diagram) 20...a5

Black must watch this pawn as it will be a permanent weakness, but it would have been difficult to stand by and watch as White intended with 21 a5 and 22 a6 to create weaknesses on the queenside.

21 Ne2 Qd8 22 Nf4 Nc8 23 Nd3 Nd6 24 Ne5 Rde7 25 Bc3 Qc7 26 c5 Nf5 27 Nc4 Ra8 28 Nb6 Ra6 29 Bd3 Ra7 30 Bxf5 gxf5

Black must capture this way to maintain control over the d5- square, but it is the poor situation of the black rook on a7 that highlights White's advantage.

31 Bd2 Nd5 32 Nxd5 cxd5 33 Bf4 Qd8 34 Bg5! (See Diagram)

In response to this excellent manoeuvre Black is obliged to shut in his bishop and weaken his pawn on e6 and therefore the move killed two birds with one stone.

34...f6 35 Bf4 Ra8 36 Bd6 Re8 37 b4!

Heading toward Black's key weakness - the b7-pawn.

37...Bf8 38 Bxf8 Rxf8 39 bxa5 Qd7 40 Rb5 Rec8 41 Rd3 Kh8 42 Kh1 Rc7 43 Qf4 Re8 44 Re3 Rc6 45 g4 Qe7 46 gxf5 e5

In a lost position Black manages to prolong the battle as long as possible but two extra pawns will prove decisive. The game concluded:

47 Qf3 Qf7 48 Rb1 Rc7 49 Rd1 e4 50 Qf4 Rg8 51 Rg3 Rxg3 52 Qxg3 Rc8 53 Rg1 Re8 54 Kh2 Qd7 55 Qg4 Qf7 56 Rg3 Ra8 57 Qf4 Rd8 58 h4 Qe8 59 Qc7 Rd7 60 Qb6 Rf7 61 a6! bxa6 62 Qxa6 e3 63 Rxe3 Qb8+ 64 Rg3 Rf8 65 Qd6 Qxd6 66 cxd6 Rd8 67 Re3 Kg7 68 Re6 Kf7 69 Re7+ Kf8 70 Rxh7 Rxd6 71 Ra7 Rb6 72 a5 Rb2 73 Kg3 Rb3+ 74 f3 1-0.