Lavandero tops Cebu School of Chess Scholastics tournament
CEBU CITY, Philippines — John Dave Lavandero ruled the Cebu School of Chess Scholastics Tournament at the Cebu Chess Hub in the SM Seaside City Cebu over the weekend.
Lavandero finished his campaign with 8.0 points after nine-rounds of competition. He tied with eventual second placer Khent Delig, but his higher tie-break points him on top of the tournament.
Rounding off the top three woodpushers in the tournament was Gyldel Janine Rodrigo who scored 6.5 points.
Lavendero pocketed P3,000 for topping the competition, while Delig earned P2,000, and Rodrigo with P1,000.
The fifth to 10th placers of the tournament were Kristina Belano (6.0), Aaron Resma (6.0), Apple Ruben (6.0), Nicole Mae Mangubat (6.0), and Luke Lozada (6.0), respectively. They were ranked according to their tie break points.
A total of 33 woodpushers competed in the tournament organized by Cebu School of Chess headed by International Master (IM) Kim Steven Yap.
The tournament also featured a one-round Infinitum Chess. This unique chess variant utilizes a semi-10×10 board with standard chess pieces which has six pawns on each side while it has a special piece, the wizard.
RELATED STORIES
GM Antonio settles for draw in Italy chess
Eric Idio Labog Jr. earns International Master title
Voltaire Sevillano Memorial Chess Tournament set
Natividad tops Cebu Chess Infinitum Tournament
Cebu School of Chess to hold 16 under tournament this month
Kiddie Chess: 63 young woodpushers to play in Cebu tourney
Toledo City Trojans resume campaign in PCAP online chess Oct. 8
NM Velarde tops Nat’l Youth and School Chess Championships
Cebu Chess Hub: 120 woodpushers to compete in open chess tourney
IM Nadera wins Sept. 4 Cepca online chess, snaps NM Enriquez’s win streak
Eugene Torre officially inducted into World Chess Hall of Fame
/dbs
Disclaimer: The comments uploaded on this site do not necessarily represent or reflect the views of management and owner of Cebudailynews. We reserve the right to exclude comments that we deem to be inconsistent with our editorial standards.