A L Carpinter versus P W Stuart

Position after Black's 35th move

click for larger view

36.Nb3 f4
37.gxf4 gxf4
38.Kd3 fxe3
39.fxe3 h5
40.h3 Ke5
41.Nd4 Bc7
42.Nf3+ Kf5
43.Nh4+ Ke5
44.Ng2 Bd8
45.e4 Bb6
46.Ne3 Bd8
47.Nc4+ Kf4
48.e5 h4
49.Kd4 Kg3
50.e6 Kxh3
51.Nxa5 Kg3
52.Nc4 h3
53.Ne3 Kf3
54.Nf1 Kg2

1/2-1/2

Instead of 49.Kd4 White might have tried 49.Nxa5 Bxa5 50.e6 Bd8 51.a5 Ke5 52.a6 should win.

At move 50 an alternative 50.Ke3 only draws e.g. 50... Kxh3 51.Kf3 Kh2 52.e6 h3 53.Kf2 Bh4+ 54.Kf1 Kg3 55.Kg1 Kf4 56.Nxa5 Kf5 1/2-1/2.

52.Nc4 is good. If for example 52.Nc6 then 52...Bf6+ 53.Ke3 h3 and Black wins.

- Analysis from the New Zealand Chess Magazine.

I think he was or had been an accountant.

Murray's (and Helen Milligan's accounts of his achievements are very good). The last game I played against him was a draw. I had tried to attack his Taimanov but there was no way through and Black was starting to look dangerous so I offered a draw.

He mostly played 1 c4 as White and as Black I think he steered for the Taimanov-Bastrikov against 1 e4 (if he could) and also one other staple he had was the Nimzo.

As Richard has noted, he ran the NZ Chess Magazine better than anyone before or since but I remember that he also took over Ortvin Sarapu's column in the Herald and ran that for a few years as well.

He had a strongly disciplined mind and used that in both chess itself and all of the above. Like Richard, I feared getting into an ending with him. Only when we got into a complicated middle game did I occasionally have a chance.

In the admin field, his grasp of detail was excellent. It was almost as though he was the "headmaster" of the "school of chess administration" and would sometimes correct mistakes with what we might call an "affectionate telling off" - but always delivered with a friendly smile.

A passing of an era which myself and others such as Wayne knew. Graham Mears (and others of the 'The Old Codgers 60s to 80s Mostly Auckland and NZ Chess Eccentrics Club' which Wayne and I are founding members of, these aren't necessarily good chess players, being good at chess can in fact debar some from joining the Nutters or Eccentrics Club...

Peter qualified as he had enough quirks and ticks (and despite the fact he WAS pretty good at chess...) I think is still around. He was one of the stalwarts of ACC in the good old days and knew Peter also at North Shore. I played at the North Shore Club myself one year. It was about the time my wife started complaining I was spending too much time on chess. In fact I felt that was true and curtailed chess almost completely for a number of years.

But the year I played at the North Shore I played some interesting games (again not necessarily "good" games! but they were often pretty crazy and or I played interesting people one or two became friends (or acquaintances )in different fields...e.g. Richard Poor who later ran the earlier Jason's Second Hand Book Shop) at North Shore which was in a Church. It was much better than their present place.

We only had the one face-to-face meeting - a pretty brief one, in London in the mid-70s, at the home of a guy called Bob Pentecost, who was one of a SE London chess circle based around the Lewisham and Charlton clubs. (Murray Chandler's sort-of-adopted family the Hannans were in this group; Murray himself and Australian master Max Fuller were occasional hangers-on rather than full members, even though Max boarded with Bob for a time.)

Peter struck me then as a quiet, level-headed type (and he had to be, given the sometimes volatile temperaments of our associates!).

After emigrating to NZ a few years later, I played in a couple of Upper Hutt 40-40 tournaments. I recognised Peter's name among the other competitors, but thought it unlikely he'd remember me from London, so didn't bother to say Hi.

Then a year or so after that, I went on NZ's version of the BBC quiz show "Mastermind", taking as special subject the history of chess (natch). I still don't know if that jogged Peter's memory, but even if it did, there were no favours granted when he was asked to compile the questions I'd be facing. Tough stuff every time! At least two other contenders had a go at that subject as well, and no doubt Peter did the honours for them too. Setting quiz questions, for TV in particular, is a very tricky and exacting business, one I've certainly never been attracted to myself. Good on ya, Peter, for handling the job so well.

We never met in the studio; instead Bob Gibbons was there to provide help with any potential dispute resolution. This may have been deliberate policy on the part of the show's producers.