With the formation of the Southern Chess Counties Union (SCCU) in 1892 the second season of this competition was held (see the first here) where Hampshire played county matches against Sussex and Surrey. In addition the annual friendly with Wiltshire returned after a one year absence (or I cannot locate the match if it was held).
- Hampshire v Sussex 3 Nov 1894
- Hampshire v Surrey 8 Feb 1985
- Hampshire v Wiltshire 6 July 1985
- Hampshire v Kent – scratch
- Player Performance
- Summary
- Gallery
- Acknowledgements and Sources
For the record of Hampshire County matches and links to any articles I have written the table on the Hampshire County Chess Matches page will detail these. The Hampshire County Chess History page summaries the leagues Hampshire have played in and the successes Hampshire have achieved. Both of these are available from the menu at the top of the site as well.
Hampshire v Sussex 3 Nov 1894 – Landport
Hampshire were playing in the South East section of the SCCU Shannon Competition, where their opponents for the 1894/95 season were planned to be Sussex, Surrey and Kent.
The first match of the season was against Sussex, this was played in Landport which is in Portsmouth. In the early matches against Sussex, Hampshire seemed to have the stronger team, but the tables were starting to turn now with Sussex winning for the third year in a row. Even though this was played in Hampshire the Sussex team were comfortable 9½ – 6½ winners. Hampshire winners were Blake, Elwell, Crassweller, Deal and Balshaw. The two adjourned games mentioned in the report below went Hampshire’s way.
Sussex were the current holders of the Southern Counties Championship and this win put them in a good place to retain the title. Leaping ahead though it seems this was won by Surrey
The Portsmouth Evening News reported the match as below.
Board | Hampshire | Hants Result | Sussex | Sussex Result |
---|---|---|---|---|
1 | JH Blake | 1 | HW Butler | 0 |
2 | FJH Elwell | 1 | HF Cheshire | 0 |
3 | EL Raymond | ½ | W Mead | ½ |
4 | A Asher | 0 | JW Bridger | 1 |
5 | WC Kenny | 0 | FW Comber | 1 |
6 | HD Osborn | 0 | A Emery | 1 |
7 | T Crassweller | 1 | FW Womersley | 0 |
8 | E Clayton | 0 | W Bridger | 1 |
9 | JS Flower | 0 | J Chandler | 1 |
10 | G Deal | 1 | Field | 0 |
11 | Col White | ½ | JV Elsden | ½ |
12 | GI Gribble | 0 | Revd WH Cooper | 1 |
13 | PT Balshaw | 1 | Revd EA Adams | 0 |
14 | GR Sloper | 0 | HW Shoosmith | 1 |
15 | GH Barclay | ½ | Rev E I Crosse | ½ |
16 | WR Larminie | 0 | Shaw | 1 |
Total | 6½ | Total | 9½ |
Hampshire v Surrey – 9 Feb 1895 – Basingstoke
Hampshire met Surrey in February 1895 and if the loss against Sussex was disappointing this match was a disaster, with Surrey winning by a crushing 12 points to 3. At the close of play the result was 11 to 2 with two games sent for adjudication. The Hampshire team was noticeably weaker than the match against Sussex, with a number of players who played in both on much higher boards in the Surrey match.
Before the match result we pick up the pre match details from the Croydon Observer, which includes travel information. One thing which is different to matches today is the later start, which can be seen as the team were leaving on the 3:10 pm Waterloo train.
It seems that playing in Basingstoke was not favourable for the Portsmouth players and only one played. In addition this was AW Wheatstone who was normally seen on the lower boards. Board two for Hampshire (PEJ Talbot) was a reserve and would would have been outmatched by his opponent. I have been unable to locate the results of the adjourned games and as the final result was given as 12 – 3, this could have been one win each or two draws, and for this reason will have to be left as unknown.
The report in the Hampshire Advertiser highlighted some of the issues for Hampshire.
Apart from the adjourned games which may have included a win, the sole Hampshire winner was WC Kenny, is what was one of Hampshire’s biggest losses. The previous two seasons the match had also been played in Basingstoke when Hampshire had held Surrey to an eight all draw and beaten them 9½ – 7½.
Why then did Hampshire lose so heavily? Probably the combined reasons of the missing Portsmouth players, the above strength Surrey team and just the fact that on the day the Surrey team outplayed the Hampshire team.
Board | Hampshire | Hants Result | Surrey | Surrey Result |
---|---|---|---|---|
1 | JH Blake | a | A Howell | a |
2 | PEJ Talbot (res) | 0 | JH Taylor | 1 |
3 | FJH Elwell | 0 | LP Rees | 1 |
4 | WC Kenny | 1 | WL Varse | 0 |
5 | A Asher | ½ | WG Ingoldsby | ½ |
6 | H Clarke | 0 | HS Leonard | 1 |
7 | CT Ansbey | a | WP Plummer | a |
8 | GR Sloper | 0 | HW Peachey | 1 |
9 | GH Barclay | 0 | AW Lemon | 1 |
10 | H Seymour (abs) | 0 | J Sargent (abs) | 0 |
11 | AW Wheatstone | ½ | SB Baxter | ½ |
12 | J Fewings | 0 | HH Cole | 1 |
13 | M Eagen (abs) | 0 | HS Ward | 1 |
14 | S Leonard | 0 | HA Jacobs | 1 |
15 | WJ Taylor | 0 | EB Schevann | 1 |
16 | H Keane | 0 | APC Kirp | 1 |
Total | 3 | Total | 12 |
Hampshire v Wiltshire – 6 July 1985 – Salisbury
The final match of the season was against Wiltshire, which as per the previous year was held in Salisbury. I originally thought Hampshire managed their only match win of the season, but on checking it seems that Wiltshire won the match 8 – ). Hampshire winners were Blake, Elwell, Burns, Chipperfield and Talbot who was playing on board sixteen rather than board two as he was against Surrey (when he was the reserve).
The Swindon Advertiser and North Wilts Chronicle reported the match as follows.
Board | Hampshire | Hants Result | Wiltshire | Wiltshire Result |
---|---|---|---|---|
1 | JH Blake | 1 | Colonel Law | 0 |
2 | FJH Elwell | 1 | Revd JF Welsh | 0 |
3 | CH Sherrard | ½ | HJ King | ½ |
4 | HD Osborn | ½ | CJ Woodrow | ½ |
5 | T Crassweller | 0 | A Schomberg | 1 |
6 | E Clayton | 0 | Dr Manning | 1 |
7 | TA Thompson | ½ | Revd RE Coles | ½ |
8 | GR Sloper | 0 | F Sutton | 1 |
9 | EC Clarke | 0 | Revd A Law | 1 |
10 | CT Anstey | 0 | WH Jackson | 1 |
11 | GW Taylor | ½ | T Patton | ½ |
12 | A Burns | 1 | HW Beaven | 0 |
13 | R Chipperfield | 1 | J Sargent | 0 |
14 | ER Nillett | 0 | Capt Martin | 1 |
15 | PEJ Talbot | 1 | O Gummer | 0 |
Total | 7 | Total | 8 |
Hampshire v Kent – Scratch
The match against Kent only seems to have been played when the result would affect who would progress out of the Division. As Hampshire could not qualify for the final stages this season the match did not happen.
Hampshire Player Performance
Three matches were played in 1894/95. The results below are affected by the adjourned games e.g. Blake shows as 100% but one of his game was adjourned. Only three players played in all three matches Blake, Elwell and GR Sloper. Blake and Elwell both won two games with the result of the third Blake unknown and Elwell losing to LP Rees (future BCF Secretary).
There were no other results which stood out, compared to previous seasons.
Hants Player | Win Percentage | Points Scored | Games Played |
---|---|---|---|
JH Blake | 100.0% | 2 | 3 |
FJH Elwell | 66.7% | 2 | 3 |
A Burns | 100.0% | 1 | 1 |
G Deal | 100.0% | 1 | 1 |
PT Balshaw | 100.0% | 1 | 1 |
R Chipperfield | 100.0% | 1 | 1 |
PEJ Talbot | 50.0% | 1 | 2 |
T Crassweller | 50.0% | 1 | 2 |
WC Kenny | 50.0% | 1 | 2 |
AW Wheatstone | 50.0% | 0.5 | 1 |
CH Sherrard | 50.0% | 0.5 | 1 |
Col White | 50.0% | 0.5 | 1 |
EL Raymond | 50.0% | 0.5 | 1 |
GW Taylor | 50.0% | 0.5 | 1 |
TA Thompson | 50.0% | 0.5 | 1 |
A Asher | 25.0% | 0.5 | 2 |
GH Barclay | 25.0% | 0.5 | 2 |
HD Osborn | 25.0% | 0.5 | 2 |
GR Sloper | 0.0% | 0 | 3 |
E Clayton | 0.0% | 0 | 2 |
EC Clarke | 0.0% | 0 | 1 |
ER Nillett | 0.0% | 0 | 1 |
GI Gribble | 0.0% | 0 | 1 |
H Clarke | 0.0% | 0 | 1 |
H Keane | 0.0% | 0 | 1 |
J Fewings | 0.0% | 0 | 1 |
JS Flower | 0.0% | 0 | 1 |
S Leonard | 0.0% | 0 | 1 |
WJ Taylor | 0.0% | 0 | 1 |
WR Larminie | 0.0% | 0 | 1 |
CT Anstey | 100.0% | 0 | 2 |
Summary
It was a disappointing season for Hampshire with the one heavy defeat against Surrey standing out among the three results. Hampshire’s excellent start to their county career now seems to have hit a bit of a roadblock now that an official competition was in place. Other counties would start to dominate the SCCU and Hampshire would struggle to qualify from their tough division. With Surrey, Sussex and Kent as their division rivals these were now opponents who would enter the match as favourites.
Gallery
A number of newspaper cuttings on the various matches.
Acknowledgements and Sources
- British Newspaper Archives
- Hampshire Independent
- Hampshire Telegraph
- Tunbridge Wells Journal
- London Evening Standard
- Croydon Observer
- SCCU Archives