Southampton League
Division 3 2000/2001 Analysis
Ringwood gained promotion to Division two, due in no uncertain terms to Martin Clancy, who won all eight games on board One. Although with Fair Oak folding nobody strictly has to be relegated from Division Three, it seems that Southampton D will play Division Four chess next season. This is as Southampton C have been relegated from Division Two, having two teams in Division Three would cause problems for Southampton.
| Team | P | W | D | L | GS | Pts |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ringwood | 8 | 6 | 1 | 1 | 27 | 13 |
| Southern Water B | 8 | 5 | 1 | 2 | 25½ | 11 |
| University B | 8 | 3 | 1 | 4 | 15 | 7 |
| Eastleigh BR B | 8 | 1 | 4 | 3 | 20 | 6 |
| Southampton D | 8 | 1 | 1 | 6 | 12½ | 3 |
| Fair Oak | - | - | - | - | - | - |
Ringwood
Ringwood had a consistent team all season, with the main five players only missing three games between them. Martin Clancy had the fantastic result of 8 out of 8 on board One. It is very rare for a player to go through a season winning all their games, let alone when the play in all eight games. He was ably supported by his team mates, with both D.King and R.Davenport scoring heavily. It will be interesting to see how Ringwood do in Division Two next season, with the tougher competition.
| Name | Grade | Played | Won | Drawn | Lost | Points Scored | Percentage |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| M.Clancy | 166 | 8 | 8 | 0 | 0 | 8 | 100.00 |
| C.Madge | u | 2 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1½ | 75.00 |
| D.King | 96 | 7 | 5 | 0 | 2 | 5 | 71.43 |
| R.Davenport | 104 | 7 | 4 | 2 | 1 | 5 | 71.43 |
| P.Fowler | 114 | 7 | 4 | 1 | 2 | 4½ | 64.29 |
| N.Zachariades | 108 | 8 | 2 | 2 | 4 | 3 | 37.50 |
| B.Langley | u | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0.00 |
Southern Water B
Southern Water were definitely the second best team in Division Three, apart from losing both games to Ringwood, Southern only dropped ½ point in their other matches. Although they only played three games, R.Casey and R.Short had excellent results in scoring two wins and a draw. M.Grandsen performed well in excess of his grade, with 4 wins out of 5 games.
| Name | Grade | Played | Won | Drawn | Lost | Points Scored | Percentage |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| G.Payne | 110 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 100.00 |
| I.Willis | 133 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 100.00 |
| T.Trant | u | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 100.00 |
| R.Casey | 115 | 3 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 2½ | 83.33 |
| R.Short | 134 | 3 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 2½ | 83.33 |
| M.Grandsen | 86 | 5 | 4 | 0 | 1 | 4 | 80.00 |
| G.Derbyshire | u | 2 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1½ | 75.00 |
| D.Fields | 113 | 4 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 50.00 |
| P.Farr | 79 | 5 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 50.00 |
| J.Sorby | 89 | 5 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 40.00 |
| P.Sidaway | 115 | 4 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 1½ | 37.50 |
| M.Avery | u | 3 | 1 | 0 | 2 | 1 | 33.33 |
| A.Dacombe | 80 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0.00 |
| P.Chambers | u | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0.00 |
University B
University struggled to field a regular team and probably suffered for this in some of their matches. When they had their best team out they did very well; as can be seen in that they were the only team to beat Ringwood. But on the other hand they were the only team to lose to Southampton D (although they did default two boards in this game). No-one had a great season in their B team, but the two players that played 7 games both scored 50%
| Name | Grade | Played | Won | Drawn | Lost | Points Scored | Percentage |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| J.Foster | u | 3 | 2 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 66.67 |
| N.Missoulis | 108 | 3 | 2 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 66.67 |
| S.Ridden | 94 | 4 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 2½ | 62.50 |
| A.Syed | u | 7 | 3 | 1 | 3 | 3½ | 50.00 |
| P.Lawson | 71 | 7 | 3 | 1 | 3 | 3½ | 50.00 |
| S.Gonem | 120 | 4 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 1½ | 37.50 |
| A.Price | 101 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0.00 |
| D.Koch | u | 3 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 0 | 0.00 |
| J.Alberola | u | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0.00 |
| P.Mudge | u | 2 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 0.00 |
| R.Stuart | u | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0.00 |
| W.Richards | u | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0.00 |
| Whitteington | u | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0.00 |
Eastleigh BR B
Again, Eastleigh BR B were a team that played an awful lot of players, with the team struggling to field a consistent one during the season. With only two players scoring over 50% they were always going to struggle to challenge for the top places, but did avoid the relegation spot, by drawing four of their games (and winning one).
| Name | Grade | Played | Won | Drawn | Lost | Points Scored | Percentage |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| R.Rezel | 37 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 100.00 |
| J.Kooner | 95 | 3 | 2 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 66.67 |
| G.Burkett | 67 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 50.00 |
| A.Dacombe | 80 | 4 | 2 | 0 | 2 | 2 | 50.00 |
| G.Payne | 110 | 4 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 50.00 |
| I.Wilis | 133 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 50.00 |
| P.Chambers | u | 3 | 1 | 0 | 2 | 1 | 33.33 |
| T.Aldrirge | u | 3 | 0 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 33.33 |
| E.Tregris | 87 | 7 | 1 | 2 | 4 | 2 | 28.57 |
| D.Clark | 124 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0.00 |
| P.Boulton | u | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0.00 |
Southampton D
The good news for Southampton D was that three players managed to score 100%, the bad news was that they only played one game each. All the other players were below the 50% mark, which will see Southampton D play Division Four chess next season. Although, with Fair Oak folding no team has to be relegated, Southampton D would prefer to play Division Four chess, as Southampton C were relegated from Division Three.
| Name | Grade | Played | Won | Drawn | Lost | Points Scored | Percentage |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| D.Murchie | 65 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 100.00 |
| L.Stables | u | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 100.00 |
| P.Clifton | 64 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 100.00 |
| E.Lacey | u | 5 | 0 | 4 | 1 | 2 | 40.00 |
| P.Chamberlain | u | 2 | 0 | 1 | 1 | ½ | 25.00 |
| A.C.Summers | 118 | 4 | 1 | 0 | 3 | 1 | 25.00 |
| T.Hutchins | 99 | 5 | 1 | 0 | 4 | 1 | 25.00 |
| L.Walters | 125 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0.00 |
| M.Rickard | 68 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0.00 |
| R.Bryce | u | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0.00 |
| D.Clifton | 64 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 0.00 |
For the complete match results see the Division Three Results page.