No pain, no gain

The idea to title the post about the tournament where I just played “No pain, no gain” got quick approval after reading an excellent article

in Wikipedia about this expression.

First it was introduced by Jane Fonda in her aerobics workout videos and it was regarding

working out past of experiencing muscle aches. Bodybuilders liked it, they think (and it’s true) that muscles grow only if they suffer

and you can’t become professional if you avoid this.

And the origin goes back to the beginning of the second century.

Rabbi Ben Hei Hei said, “According to the pain is the gain.”

So, it was a big tournament, 3 days, 6 games, 40/2, SD/1.

I decided to play in U200 section and was in the bottom of the rating list.

There were 4 games for me because I had to take 2 byes on Sunday.

The result was 2 draws, 2 losses, that explains the title.

I was better or equal after all the openings, never was in the time trouble, but it wasn’t enough.

I see some things that went wrong, but I would appreciate any opinion, as well as long-term advice.

You can bypass first Fritz’s comments to get your own general view.

Game 1 –  I am White, playing with young guy, 20+.

Scandinavian. People that follow my posts know that I hate it, but I learned a few things.

He plays Qxd5, Qd6 variation and after Nf3/Bg4 I use the advice from my friend linuxguy

(given after discussion of one of my losses) and play h3/Bg5, g4/Bg6 and then Ne5.

I like my position, Fritz 11 too, but then I start to miss the good moves,

one of them – +2.79! He gradually equalizes, but his king is still in the center.

I make pawn sac to open the lines, which I thought after the game was too aggressive,

but it’s actually Fritz’s choice, though it doesn’t give any advantage.

I play the bad move, then soon another one and my position deteriorates, his kingside pawn majority becomes decisive.

I am in the bad endgame, which I step by step lose.

The idea to title the post about the tournament where I just played  ”No pain, no gain” got a quick approval after reading an excellent article in Wikipedia about this expression.

First it was introduced by Jane Fonda in her aerobics workout videos and it was regarding working out past of experiencing muscle aches. Bodybuilders liked it, they think (and it’s true) that muscles grow only if they suffer and you can’t become professional if you avoid this.  And the origin goes back to the beginning of the second century.  Rabbi Ben Hei Hei said, “According to the pain is the gain.” (The Ethics of the Fathers 5:21).

So, it was a big tournament, 3 days, 6 games, 40/2, SD/1.  I decided to play in U2000 section and was in the bottom of the rating list. There were 4 games for me because I had to take 2 byes on Sunday.  The result was 2 draws, 2 losses,  that explains the title.

I was better or equal after all the openings, never was in the time trouble, but it wasn’t enough. I see some things that went wrong, but I would appreciate any opinion, as well as long-term advice.

I posted all the games,  you can first bypass Fritz’s comments to get your own general view.

Game 1 –  I am White, playing with young guy, 20+.  Scandinavian defense. People that follow my posts know that I hate it, but I learned a few things.  He plays Qxd5, Qd6 variation and after Nf3/Bg4 I follow the advice from my friend linuxguy (given after discussion of one of my losses) to play h3/Bg5, g4/Bg6 and then Ne5.  I recently remembered it, found it in DB, it’s called Lasker variation when it’s played after Qa5, but it’s also played after Qd6 . Funny that the same variation was played afterwards in the blitz game between my opponent and Russian GM and GM played h3, g4, Ne5 too!  I liked my position, Fritz 11 too, but then I started to miss the good moves, one of them – +2.79! He gradually equalized, but his king was still in the center.  I made pawn sac to open the lines, which I thought after the game was too aggressive, but it’s actually Fritz’s choice, though it doesn’t give any advantage, just equal.  I played a bad move, then soon another one and my position deteriorated, his kingside pawn majority became decisive.

Game 2 – I am White again, playing with the old guy. I knew he will play Caro-Kann and he does. I play Tartakower (fantasy) variation that GM Bareev suggested,  I played quite a few blitz games with it, liked it and it looks to me like a less common variation. The guy confirmed that after the game,  saying it was a first time he got it. Good!  Nevertheless, he chooses the best answer e6 – 1. e4 c6 2. d4 d5 f3 e6, then in a few moves he gives me 2 bishops. I feel I am better, but can’t decide what plan I should pursue. Meanwhile he counters in the center and I get some calculation work to do. Pawns get exchanged, then queens. I am a bit underdeveloped, so I try to fix it without giving up any material or position. Still, has to give back the bishop, position becomes completely equal, he offers a draw, I agree. Fritz’s estimated this position as 0.00. Interesting, that as opposed to the first game, Fritz doesn’t find anything to criticize me for at all, “perfect game” .  

Game 3 ( 5th round) – I am Black, playing with the guy 45-50 years old. He starts 1. c4 Nf6 2. d4. I decide to play Benko gambit, it resurrected in my blitz play recently after a year of absence, I found that it’s easier than Grunfeld, where there are too many variations and some of them I don’t quite like.  In total I counted ~100 Benko blitz games,  so good time to try it. I think it took him by surprise, nevertheless he accepted it, and for some time played it quite right. But the time he was spending was 1.5 times more than mine. I played all the book, then all the typical moves. He was almost suffering under pressure. Suddenly, after thinking for 20-25 minutes, he makes the move I was afraid of - 22. Qa4,  forcing the queens exchange . Yeah, they say that even after that the Black in Benko gambit still has the initiative, but I didn’t feel like that. So, I retreat, but finally queens are exchanged. He has about 12.5 minutes for 16 moves, I have about 40, but the position became pretty simple and another rook exchange is coming up with his next move. He makes that move and suddenly offers a draw. I think for 5 seconds, weighing my 2 bishops and time against his spare “a” pawn and agree. He points at his pawn with some gesture, meaning it’s not worth much and hurries away.  I realize later, that the max I could get was his “a” pawn, the rest was on the kingside where 2 bishops wouldn’t be such a big advantage.  Fritz evaluated this as – -.27, just quarter of a pawn for me. And he would probably make his moves in time in such a simple position. I don’t know.  I saw how FM whom I know very well, grinded down one guy rated 270 lower than him in completely equal R+B endgame, cornered his king – something like Kh1,  R at g2 and B on the same diagonal and made a pawn break. The guy having just 30 seconds left until end of the game to think about it simply resigned. They both agreed that the guy screwed up and it should be a draw. But my guy was rated 100 higher than me, not 270 lower. Still, here is the professional approach. Funny that at home Crafty finds that his best move was the worst one, losing a piece in 3 moves. “Meaningless” queens exchange , then my nice bishop for knight? and boom! I attack his knight and he has nowhere to go. OK, exchanges are looking absurd when I am a pawn down,  but it’s a forced line, right?  So, I have to calculate it, no matter I like it or not  and evaluate the arising position. I didn’t do it, so didn’t get rewarded for the lots of time spent for the opening preparation and for actually well played game.

Game 4 ( 6th round) – I play with an old guy, Black again, 1. e4 e6 2. Nf3 d5 3. Nc3 transpares to French, Classical. I am OK after the opening, but then chose the wrong plan 15. … f6.  I just don’t see f4 coming, which refutes my plan with Bg6. I miss the possibility to counter-attack on the queenside and don’t find the right defense against his maneuver  Nc1-d3-c5  (though I see it) with the purpose of attacking a6 and e6. I lose a pawn, but it’s not the end of it. My bishop is really bad and the pressure becomes stronger and stronger. Finally I miss his rook penetrating to the 7th line with the forced mate in a few moves. Painful loss, and I leave the tournament being pretty upset. I calm down later after running the games through Fritz and seeing that I had my chances and not everything was bad.

I feel that something important is missing from my preparation. The ability to find the right plan, to see the right move and calculate doesn’t come with blitz, so blitz will be essentually reduced. I don’t actually know how you learn it – by l0oking at GM games, playing slow games? I don’t quite like artificial exercises and don’t feel anymore that playing correspondence games gives me much. Maybe I should try to play longer games on the Web?  One of my thoughts before the tournament was that  I should play more OTB with the stronger opponents and I saw how right it was.

 

No game was ever won by resigning

The phrase in the title belongs to Savielly Tartakower.
The reason to quote him is that a few days ago in a blitz game I had a position which I considered hopeless and resigned.
Here it is, I am Black.

OK, so I decided to run the game through Crafty quickly, looked at something else, then returned to analysis when it was already done and was dumbfounded to see the estimate after the last White’s move 27. Nf5 – minus 4 something.  Hey, minus is me, Black. I looked at the line – yeah, Crafty was right. Another line was even better ( if you want, you can hide the rest and try to find the right moves).

It was funny, I laughed, but I don’t think I would be laughing if it would be a real OTB game.  So here the “magic survival”, Fritz 11 added a line with the same conclusion – White, not Black is lost.

27. … Qa4! 28. Bxg7  Qd1+ 29. Kg2 Bxd5+!  

30. cxd5 Qxd5+ 31. Kf1 Qxf5

Another Crafty’s line – 28. Nxg7 Qd1+ 29. Kg2 Qf3+ 30. Kg1 Qxf2+ 31. Kh1

31. …Qf3+ 32. Qg2 Qd1+ 33. Qg1 Bxd5+!

34. cxd5 Qxd5+ 35. Qg2 Rf1#

Here is the line from Fritz 11:  28. Qh5 Rxf5 29. Qg4 Rf7 30. Bxg7 Rxg7

31. Rg6 Qd1+ 32. Qxd1 Rxg6+ 33. Kf1 e6 with -4.79 estimate.

 

Another tactics lesson from Fritz

I just ran an OTB game that I played a year ago through Fritz 11 using “Blundercheck” mode and Fritz showed me an interesting possibility that I missed.  Here is the combination that I didn’t see.  I am White, the position arised from  Owen Defense – 1.e4 b6.

White to move,  I played 14. Qe4.  Fritz suggests better move,  quite paradoxical – 14. Rfd1! and after 14. … Bxd1 15. Rxd1 Rad8 Rad8 16. Bxh7+ getting ~1.50  advantage.

What about 15. … Rxd1 Rad8 16. Qe8 ? Then follows 16. Qe4 g6 17. Bb5

getting 2 pieces for the rook.

I just liked the combination of several tactical motifs here – discovered attack (Bh7+),  double attack ( Qe4, though literally the knight is still defended by the Queen) and pin (Bb5).  As for the weaknesses, we see:

1.  h7
2.  White occupies important b1-h7 diagonal,
3. White can occupy “d” vertical (by using sacrifice!).
4. Knight  on C6 not very stable,  can also be pinned

In the game I tried to use 1 and 2, then 4.   Fritz used all 4 at once.

 

Don’t mess with the Marshall attack, even the old one

This is a sequel to my old post “Are you afraid of the Marshall attack”.   I am looking at the pretty rare ( according to 365chess.com usual 9. … Nd5 was played in  94% of the games) old variation, named after Herman Steiner, US chess player, 1948 US champion, who belonged to Romantic School of chess, succeeding Morphy, Pillsbury and Marshall.  Though he first used it in the tournament in 1930, it was played in friendly game Walter Frere vs Frank Marshall in 1917 and before that in the game K. Walbrodt vs. consultants in 1893.

The guy played it on FICS against me,  I barely survived, so as always it got me interested. Right after I learned it a bit the 2nd round of the thematic Ruy Lopez correspondence tournament on chess.com finally started. So I decided to play it against the guy with 2400+ rating (mine was ~2000). There is nothing to lose I thought. If I’ll try it with this high rated guy, at least I will go down fighting.  The guy soon went along the wrong path, following (not knowing that) the game, played in Argentina some time ago. I took it right from the point where the Argentinian guy resigned and as one guy at work said – “you just finished him off”.

So, here is the game, I am Black:

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 a6 4.Ba4 Nf6 5.O-O Be7 6.Re1 b5 7.Bb3 O-O 8.c3 d5 9.exd5 e4!? – this is a Steiner variation 

 

10.dxc6 exf3 11.d4 fxg2 12.Qe2 – start of the troubles, Fritz – -0.93, the book move is 12. Qf3 (Fritz – 0.42).

12…. Bd6 13.Bg5 h6 14.Bxf6 Qxf6 15.Nd2?? - Fritz, -4.34, suggests Qe4 – -0.78

15…. Qf4 16.Nf3 Bg4 17.Kxg2 – another bad move – Fritz – -7.68

17…. Rae8 18.Qd3 Bf5- here Argentinian guy resigned, you will see why (the rest is mine):

19.Qd1 – forced mate after that, anyway Fritz suggests giving up the queen for the rook- 21. Qe3.  19….Rxe1 20.Qxe1 Bh3+! 

 White resigned – 21. Kxh3 Qxf3+ 22. Kh4 g5#

Here is Frere vs. Marshall game, pure classic:

1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5 a6 4. Ba4 Nf6 5. O-O Be7 6. Re1 b5 7. Bb3 O-O 8. c3 d5 9. exd5 e4 10. dxc6 exf3 11. d4 fxg2 12. Bf4 Bg4 13. Qd3 Nh5

14. Bxc7 ?? – trying to win a pawn. Fritz 11  – -3.44 (14. Be5 – -0.19 ) 14. … Qxc7 15. Qe4 Nf4 16. Qxe7 ?

16. … Qxe7! 17. Rxe7  Bf3!

White resigned – 18. h3 Nxh3+ 19. Kh2 g1Q+

20. Kxh3 Qg4+ 21. Kh2 Qg2#

 

Two little tactics lessons from Fritz

I run some of my online blitz games through Fritz, using “Blundercheck” mode.

It finds not blunders, but also any missing tactics, actually anything that’s worse

than Fritz’s preferable move by 0.75 pawn ( of course you can change that range).

Here is the combination, that I didn’t see, the position is from Caro-Kann defense,

fantasy variation that was suggested by GM Bareev in his lecture.

Pic 2

White to move, computer suggests Bh6. OK, but why the reply is Rf8?

Strange, right? What if, let’s say, Nc6? Fritz says – Rxf7!

Pic 3

If Kxf7, then Rf1+, Kg8, Qxe6+ and Bg7#.

So, after Rf1+, Black has to give up on f6 first his bishop, then his queen,

leaving Black with 2R+N vs. Q+B+N+P and score 7.45.

The second example is easier, I hope you find the solution ( just in case it’s in the comment).

I run some of my online blitz games through Fritz using “Blundercheck” mode.  It finds not only blunders, but also any missing tactics,  actually anything at all that’s worse than Fritz’s preferable move by 0.75 pawn ( of course you can change that range).

Here is the combination that I didn’t see.  I am White, the position is from Caro-Kann defense, fantasy variation that was suggested by GM Bareev in his lecture – 1.e4 c6 2. d4 d5 3. f3.

White to move, computer suggests Bh6.  OK, but why the reply is Rf8? Strange, right? What if black plays,  let’s say,  Nc6?  Fritz says – Rxf7!

If Kxf7, then Rf1+  Kg8, Qxe6+

Kh8, Bg7#.

So, after Rf1+ Black has to give up on f6 first his bishop, then his queen, leaving Black with 2R+N vs. Q+B+N+P and score 7.45.

The second example is easier,  White to move and win material, just in case the solution is in the comment.

 

Knight endings

I recently had a blitz, where having a knight + pawns vs. pawns, I drew in time trouble.

The dissapointing result attracted my attention to knight endings.

I found a section about that in the book “Theory and practice of of chess endings” by A.N. Panchenko.

Here I want to show a few examples from this book and from the game Alexander Grishuk vs. Judit Polgar.

One of the principles – knight is a very bad fighter against rook pawn.

The reason is that knight controls essentually less squares being on the rim.

In the case of K+N+RP vs. K+N the weaker side can’t survive without help of the king.

Pic 1

1. Nd4+ – fork, very typical for knight endings. 1. …Nxd4 2. Kf6 – deflection!

Pic 2

2. … Nc2 3. h5 Ne3 4. Kg5 – deflection again!

Pic 3

Nc4 5. h6

I recently had a blitz game where having a knight + pawns vs. pawns  I drew in the time trouble.  The dissapointing result attracted my attention to knight endings.

I found a section about that in the book “Theory and practice of the chess endings” by A.N. Panchenko,  great book with very easy explanations.

Here I want to show a few examples from this book and from the game Alexander Grishuk vs. Judit Polgar.

One of the principles – knight is a very bad fighter against rook pawn.  The reason is that knight controls essentually less squares being on the rim.  In the case of K+N+RP vs. K+N the weaker side can’t survive without help of the king.

1. Nd4+ – fork, very typical for knight endings. 1. …Nxd4 2. Kf6 – deflection!

2. … Nc2 3. h5 Ne3 4. Kg5 – deflection again!

Nc4 5. h6

Another principle – quickness of the knight. It  helps to survive in the following, looking hopeless,  position

1. Ne6 g4 2. Ng7 f4 3. Nh5

3. … f3 4. Nf6 g3 5. Ne4 g2

6. Nd2+ Kd3 7. Nxf3

And here is a nice swindle from the game A.Grishuk vs. J.Polgar

1. … Ng4 !!

Now 61. … Nxg4 is stalemate, all other variations lead to draw, see comment here:

http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=1468281

In the game happened:

2. Nd3 Nh2+ 3. Ke4 Ng4 4. Ne5 Nf6+ 5. Kf3 Ng4 6. Nc4 Nh2+ 7. Ke4 Nf1

8. Ne3 Nxg3+ 9. Ke5 Kh2 10. Kd6 Nh5 11. f5 Ng7 12. f6 1/2-1/2

 

Another milestone

I played in the big tournament last Friday-Sunday, in U1800 category, with time control 30/90, SD/60.

Did some preparation before, got the games from the online DB played in 2008/2009 in the country -

most of the players in my category were present there. Made some kind of matrix for the openings.

Friday evening, Game 1 – I play with the guy from the local club, rated ~1525, I am White.

I played with his brother, won twice in Sicilian.

Surely enough, the boy plays Sicilian, same 2. Nc6. I play same Bb5, we get the same line as with the brother.

The guy starts to think heavily. Move by move it looks like on FICS when your opponent is behind by time more and more

and you know he will be in trouble. I have initiative, he is behind by an hour at some point. On 18th move he loses a pawn,

and then has to blitz. He exchanges queens, then loses another pawn, and while thinking on 30th move his time expires.

The endgame is lost anyway.

Saturday – I wake up at 6am, think about my possible future opponents, can’t sleep anymore.

Not that I am not accustomed to sleep 5 hours, but to play 2 possibly 5-hour games?

Game 2 – 10am, I play with the boy whom I know – though didn’t play before, rated ~1500.

He was the country champion U8 in 2008.

I saw his games, he played once against French – chose Advanced variation, Milner-Barry gambit.

I know his coach too, he is a French expert. We start, of course he plays the same gambit.

I suddenly decide that I am not in the mood to defend, maybe just don’t feel very fresh or feel not ready  -

I played it before only couple of times blitz online.

Ok, I decline and chose the line that actually has stats – +2 (White), =1.

But I don’t know that, so I get rid of my “bad” bishop and slowly develop.

Suddenly he makes a mistake – I see a combination and funnily enough win that pawn that he offered

for free in the opening. But the situation is completely different. I get strong pawns in the center,

but he gets a pawn on f6 (h7,g6,f7), which I don’t like. Each of us has a queen and 2 rooks.

So, I move my central pawns and he tries to create some counterplay on the kingside.

Suddenly he makes a move Rh3 and I just shake my head. This move  creates the threat of queen moving to h6

with Qxh7/Qg7 mate. I look and look, and in order to defend give up one of my central pawns.

The queens get exchanged, then 2R vs. 2R endgame looks even worse for me, but I make a good counter-attacking move

by rook. One couple of rooks will be exchanged, equal rook endgame – he offers a draw, I agree.

I am  a bit upset, though find some consolation in the fact that drawing with the boy champion not that bad -

considering how one our fellow blogger does against these boy/girl champions .

These kids can be really good, quite a few of them beat the crap out of some 1700+ in our category.

After I came home I found out that I didn’t have to give up the pawn, after his queen was moving on h6

my queen was taking pawn f6 and liquidating the threat Qg7#.

I saw it in one of the lines, but since I wanted to put one of the rooks on 4th-5th line,

I thought that I will lose another rook after Qh8+ …. The thing is I didn’t have to take the rook from 8th.

Then that threat of double mate again hypnotized me and I forgot about all this.

There is a lot of time remains until 3rd round, I look at the games that others play and

see how one master tries to mate another with knight and bishop.

It’s not easy, the king escapes and I lose patience. Later I check the result, it’s a win.

Game 3 – 4pm, I slept 15 minutes in the chair and feel better than in the morning, this time I am in the fighting mood.

Again, the guy from the local club, I won twice against him. I am White, he plays the same Sicilian 2. …d6 we played before,

I play the same Moscow variation, Bb5. He develops, then suddenly plays d5. That’s what Black supposed to

do, but not now ! The plan is different from the 1st game, but also wrong.

I had one similar correspondence game, where after d5 the play opened up, but it was to my advantage

since I was better developed. Here happens the same thing.

“c”, d”, “e” verticals open and I create a pressure along them. He defends, pressure gets stronger,

he blinders a piece and resigns.

2.5/3 after first 2 days, I start to get some high hopes.

Sunday – I sleep better, learn about my opponent still being at home, rated same as me, he plays White.

The last game he played was 1. c4, 2. Nc3, I quickly learn how I can play here my much rehearsed Grunfeld.

It’s called Anglo-Grunfeld defense.

Game 4 – 10am, we start and I get that Anglo-Grunfeld. I play the trappy line (which is the best too),

he doesn’t bite, but plays the line with worse stats for White. I try to play positionally and get some advantage.

Move by move, he manages to equalize. I have less than 40 minutes for 13-14 moves and don’t quite like it.

He offers a bishop exchange, it’s unavoidable, but I don’t want to follow with possible queen exchange,

so after Qc4+ I don’t move Qf7, but quickly go Kh8 and suddenly to my horror he skewers me with Bc5 and I lose exchange.

I had this square under control before, but his queen gets to c4 with the check and then controls it too…

I am devastated, needlessly lose another 2 pawns and after forced queen exchange resign.

Again lots of time, even more than yesterday , so I watch the game between Russian GM and

IM, 2008 Canadian champion.

GM’s attack looks very strong, he sacked the knight on g6 and IM doesn’t take it.

Another few attacking/defending moves, suddenly I see that GM can sac the queen for the rook on g7 and then

fork queen and king with the kight, winning exchange. It doesn’t look very obvious since

the “fork” square is controlled by Black’s knight, but the knight is pinned.

The fact of finding combination consoles me, I share this idea with another guy, he confirms that I am right.

I say – “Why don’t I see this stuff in my own games?” He laughs.

GM thinks and makes another move, I am surprised. Suddenly IM starts giving checks,

GM is in the time trouble, he has less than 2 minutes, though they have 30 seconds increment.

Another check and it’s a mate! GM shakes his head, he can’t believe it.

They start to look at the game, it’s still after that possible sac.

I tell them in Russian about that sac, they don’t pay attention.

When they finally reach that point, I tell it to GM again, he says something like he knows (knew) that.

I think maybe he thought the mate is here, that’s why he didn’t do it.

OK, I realize that I got too excited about it and leave.

3pm – 5th round is in an hour, I am still mad at myself.

Looking at the table I decide that my opponent will be 1400+ rated boy,

who already beat one 1700+ and drew with another.

I don’t care, I want to tear him apart and since I should be White even think about playing Smith-Morra

(most of the kids play Sicilian).

Game 5 – pairings come and I see that I play against the leader, 20-something guy, rated a bit higher than me, with Black.

Change of plans . Saw him playing French, so supposedly he knows this shit, even from other side.

Also, I feel that intermittency is better for me, so I decide if 1. e4 e5.

Sure, 1. e4, Scotch. I never had it OTB before and don’t like it when get it online.

Anyway, first book moves, then he suddenly offers a queen exchange.

He is ahead by 0.5 of a point, and as the following shows wants to play safely (not necessarily wanting a draw).

I exchange the queens. At home I find out, that Qf3 it’s a novelty and a bad one.

Crafty says, that White should give up a pawn or go into a crazy line, where Black gets 3 pieces for a queen and White

king goes to d3! Crafty evaluates it as -3.00. I try to attack on the queenside after his O-O-O,

but without queens it doesn’t look very dangerous. We exchange both rooks, and the position becomes drawish.

I make a move and offer a draw. He looks somewhat confused and refuses after some thinking.

I am surprized a bit, but say OK and continue, after a few moves offering another knight exchange.

After that the position looks even more drawish. He looks at me with another type of confusion,

says something confirming that and we agree to a draw.

I quickly learn that my shared 3rd place with 3 points out of 5 doesn’t equal to 3rd by people

(there are at least 4 people that will have/have 3.5/4 points ) and I won’t get any money.

OK, it’s not that I make a living doing this.

I kind of hoped for more, still 3/5 and performance rating ~1700 is not that bad.

I clearly see that in order to progress I should play more with the people of my rating (and higher).

Also I see that dynamic evaluation (which is done at the end of each analysis line,

after you have tried to determine a potential sequence of moves) still remains my Achilles tendon.

I played in the big tournament last Friday-Sunday, in U1800 category, with time control 30/90, SD/60.  Here is the story,  red titles are the links to the chessflash games.

Did some preparation before, got from the online DB the games played in the country in 2008/2009  - most of the players in my category were present there.

Friday evening, Game 1 – I play with the guy from the local club, rated ~1525, I am White.  I played with his brother, won twice in Sicilian.  Surely enough, the boy plays Sicilian, same 2. Nc6. I play same Bb5, we get the same line as with the brother.  The guy starts to think heavily. Move by move it looks like on FICS when your opponent is behind by time more and more and you know he will be in trouble. I have the initiative, he is behind by an hour at some point. On 18th move he loses a pawn, and then has to blitz. He exchanges queens, then loses another pawn, and while thinking on 30th move his time expires.  The endgame is lost anyway.

Saturday – I wake up at 6am, think about my possible future opponents, can’t sleep anymore.  Not that I am not accustomed to sleep 5 hours, but to play 2 possibly 5-hour games?

Game 2 - 10am, I play with the boy whom I know – though didn’t play before, rated ~1500.  He was the country champion U8 in 2008.  I saw his games, he played once against French – chose Advanced variation, Milner-Barry gambit.  I know his coach too, he is an expert in French . We start, of course he plays the same gambit.  I suddenly decide that I am not in the mood to defend, maybe just don’t feel very fresh or feel not ready  - I played it before only couple of times blitz online.  Ok, I decline and chose the line that actually has stats – +2 (White), =1. But I don’t know that, so I get rid of my “bad” bishop and slowly develop. Suddenly he makes a mistake – I see a combination and funnily enough win that pawn that he offered for free in the opening. But the situation is completely different. I get strong pawns in the center, but he gets a pawn on f6 (h7,g6,f7), which I don’t like. Each of us has a queen and 2 rooks.  So, I move my central pawns and he tries to create some counterplay on the kingside. Suddenly he makes a move Rh3 and I just shake my head. This move  creates the threat of queen moving to h6 with Qxh7 or Qg7 mate. I look and look, and in order to defend give up one of my central pawns.  The queens get exchanged, then 2R vs. 2R endgame looks even worse for me, but I make a good counter-attacking move by rook. One couple of rooks will be exchanged, equal rook endgame – he offers a draw, I agree.

I am  a bit upset, though find some consolation in the fact that drawing with the boy champion is not that bad.  These kids can be really good, quite a few of them beat the crap out of some 1700+ in our category.

After I came home I found out that I didn’t have to give up the pawn, after his queen was moving on h6  my queen was taking pawn f6 and liquidating the threat Qg7#.  I saw it in one of the lines, but since I wanted to put one of the rooks on 4th-5th line, I thought that I will lose another rook after Qh8+ …. The thing is I didn’t have to take the rook from 8th.  That threat of double mate again hypnotized me and I forgot about all this.

There is a lot of time remaining until 3rd round, I look at the games that others play and see how one master tries to mate another with knight and bishop. It’s not easy, the king escapes and I lose patience. Later I check the result, it’s a win.

Game 3 - 4pm, I slept 15 minutes in the chair and feel better than in the morning, this time I am in the fighting mood. Again, the man from the local club, rated a bit higher than 1500,  I won twice against him. I am White, he plays the same Sicilian 2. …d6 he played before, I play the same Moscow variation, Bb5. He develops, then suddenly plays d5. Yes, that’s what Black is supposed to do, but not now !  I had one similar correspondence game, where after d5 the play opened up, but it was to my advantage since I was better developed. Here happens the same thing.  ”c”, d”, “e” verticals open and I create a pressure along them. He defends, pressure gets stronger, he blunders a piece and resigns. 2.5/3 after first 2 days, I am starting to get some high hopes.

Sunday – I sleep better, get pairings from the Web,  my opponent is rated same as me, he plays White. He played 1.e4 in the past , then the last game was 1. c4, 2. Nc3.  I quickly learn if I can play here my much rehearsed  (never played OTB) Grunfeld. I can, it’s called Anglo-Grunfeld defense.

Game 4 – 10am, we start and I get that Anglo-Grunfeld. I play the trappy line (which is the best too), he doesn’t bite, but still plays the line with worse stats for White. I try to play positionally and get some advantage. Move by move, he manages to equalize. I have less than 40 minutes for 13-14 moves and don’t quite like it.He offers a bishop exchange, it’s unavoidable, but I don’t want to follow with possible queen exchange, so after Qc4+ I don’t move Qf7, but quickly go Kh8 and suddenly to my horror he skewers me with Bc5 and I lose exchange. I had this square under control before, but his queen gets to c4 with the check and then controls it too… I am devastated, needlessly lose another 2 pawns and after forced queen exchange resign.

Again lots of time, even more than yesterday , so I watch the game between Russian GM and IM, 2008 Canadian champion (speaks Russian too).  GM’s attack looks very strong, he sacked the knight on g6 and IM doesn’t take it.   Another few attacking/defending moves, suddenly I see that GM can sac the queen for the rook on g7 and then fork queen and king with the knight, winning exchange. It doesn’t look very obvious since the “fork” square is controlled by Black’s knight, but the knight is pinned. The fact of finding combination consoles me, I share this idea with another guy, he confirms that I am right.  I say: “Why don’t I see this stuff in my own games?”  He laughs.

GM thinks and makes another move, I am surprised. A few more moves, suddenly IM starts giving checks. GM is in time trouble, he has less than 2 minutes, though they have 30 seconds increment.  Another check and it’s a mate! GM shakes his head, he can’t believe it, he had him on the ropes. They start to look at the game, it’s still after that possible sac. I tell them in Russian about that sac, they don’t pay attention. When they finally reach that point, I tell it to GM again, he says something like he knows (knew) that. I think maybe he thought the mate was there, that’s why he didn’t do it.

OK, I realize that I got too excited about it and leave.  3pm – 5th round is in an hour, I am still mad at myself. Looking at the table I decide that my opponent will be that 1400+ rated boy who already beat one 1700+ and drew with another. I don’t care, I want to tear him apart and since I should be White  I even think about playing Smith-Morra (most of the kids play Sicilian).

Game 5 – pairings come and I see that I play against the leader, 20-something guy, rated a bit higher than me, with Black. Change of plans .  Saw him playing French, so supposedly he knows this shit, even from the other side.  Also, I feel that intermittency is better for me, so I decide if 1. e4 then 1. … e5.

1. e4, Scotch. I never had it OTB before and don’t like it when get it online. Anyway, first book moves, then he suddenly offers a queen exchange. He is ahead by 0.5 of a point, and looks like wants to play safely (not necessarily wanting a draw). I exchange the queens. At home I find out, that Qf3 is a novelty and a bad one. Crafty says, that White should give up a pawn or go into a crazy line, where Black gets 3 pieces for a queen and White King goes to d3! Crafty evaluates it as -3.00. I try to attack on the queenside after his O-O-O, but without queens it doesn’t look very dangerous. We exchange both rooks and the position becomes drawish. I make a move and offer a draw. He looks somewhat confused and refuses after some thinking. I am surprized a bit, but say OK and continue, after a few moves offering/forcing another knight exchange. After that the position looks even more drawish. He looks at me with another type of confusion,  says something confirming my position estimation and we agree to a draw.

I quickly learn that my shared 3rd place with 3 points out of 5 doesn’t equal to 3rd by people (there are at least 4 people that will have/have 3.5/4 points ) and I won’t get any 1st-3rd place prize  money. OK, it’s not that I make a living doing this.

Well, I kind of hoped for more,  still 3/5 and performance rating ~1700 is not that bad. I clearly see that in order to progress I should play more with the people of my rating (and higher).  Also I see that dynamic evaluation (which is done at the end of each analysis line, after you have tried to determine a potential sequence of moves) still remains my Achilles tendon. And always think before making an obvious move, sometimes it’s the worst one, like mine in the 4th game or GMs before he got mated ( at least he was in the time trouble). I will try to post my games today/tomorrow,  too many pictures for 5 games, looks like will have to use the chessflash that linuxguyonfics uses.

 

Meeting with GM Bareev

Last Thursday I was able to attend lecture and simul given by GM Evgeny Bareev. He is an elite GM,  in October 2003 he was in fourth place in the world rankings, with an Elo rating of 2739.  He reached the quarterfinals in the FIDE World Championships in 1999 and 2001,  and was a semifinalist in the Candidates Tournament for the classical world championship at Dortmund 2002. Also he was a second to Kramnik in his matches with Kasparov and Leko. He wrote a book  ”From London to Elista” which became a winner of the English chess federation 2008 Book-of-the-Year Award, the most prestigious chess book prize in the world.

The lecture was about Caro-Kann, which he is playing, also he answered some questions. I was impressed how easy he was throwing variations and lines, at the same time showing the whole picture of the opening. By the way, the “hot” line now is 1.e4 c6 2. d4 d5 3. f3 – never saw it.  I already tried it blitz and started also correspondence game with it.  He talked about World Championship match, said that there is a chance that it will be in Sofia if there will be an additional 500,000 – 700,000.  He said that there are tough times now, with the sponsors disappearing one after another. I asked him, what about Carlsen or Aronian becoming World Champion in the next 3 years and he said – definitely.  He has a great sense of humor and the audience was really enjoing the conversation.

Then the simul started,  there were 24 people playing. I was glad to get  1. e4,  but his second move 2. Bc4 got me thinking.

Here is the game:

1. e4 e5 2. Bc4 Nf6 3. d3 Be7 4. f4

Crafty says I had to play 4….d5 here,  I agree, I played 4 . … Nc6.  5. Nf3 d6 6. O-O O-O 7. Nc3 Bd7 8. a3 h6 9. f5 – this is for playing too passively.

5. Nf3 d6 6. O-O O-O 7. Nc3 Bd7 8. a3

h6 9. f5

9. f5 Re8 10. Kh1 Na5 11. Ba2 c5 12. Rg1 Rc8 13. g4 c4 14. g5 – Crafty still estimates it only as 0.18, but I already had a bad feeling.

14. … hxg5 15. Bxg5 Nh7 – I didn’t like this move almost as soon as I did it, Crafty – 1.62 . 16. Bxe7 Qxe7 17. Nd5 Qd8

17. Nd5 Qd8 18. Qd2 Kh8 – threatened  Qh6 19. Rg3 f6 – another bad move, Crafty offers - 19. … cxd3 20. Qxd3 Nc6 21. Rag1 Bxf5 22. exf5 e4 23. Qc4 exf3 24. Rxg7 with 1.6 estimate.

20. Rag1 Rg8 – Crafty again recommends cxd3 and Bxf5. 21. Nh4 Ng5 – I saw coming sacrifice, but g5 just prolonged the agony, so I decided what the hell! He thought max 2 seconds, then 22. Qxg5! – Black resigned  (22. … Qe8 23. Rh3 fxg5 24. Ng6# or  22. … fxg5 23. Ng6+ Kh7 24. Rh3# ).

I asked for his autograph and he signed the score sheet. I was consoled by the organizer that one of the participating masters lost at the same time. The total was – +19, =3, -2, there were a few masters and experts, the rest I think – “A” and “B”.

 

French, Tarrasch – spoiling for a fight

It was a last game of my regular tourney in the local club.  For the first time in OTB game I got French with White. Good, that’s  what I am trying to learn the last half year. My opponent was rated ~250 lower than me,  I learned that after the game as well as the fact that he overperformed and recently shared the first place in the big tournament  in U1600 category.  It took more than 30 moves and long maneuvering unless he finally opened up, that explains the title. The result was my best ever combination.  Here is the game:

1. e4 e6 2. d4 d5 3. Nd2 Nf6 4. e5 Nfd7 5. Bd3 c5 6. c3 Nc6 7. Ne2 Qg5 – not a book move and by my opinion not a good one.

8. O-O

Qh4 9. Nf3 Qd8 10. Be3 c4 11. Bc2 Nb6 12. Qd2 h6 13. Ng3 Be7 14. Nh5 Bf8

8. O-O Qh4 9. Nf3 Qd8 10. Be3 c4 11. Bc2 Nb6 12. Qd2 h6 13. Ng3 Be7 14. Nh5 Bf8 – White is ahead in development, but the position is closed – Crafty’s estimate  - 0.90.

15. h3 Nd7 16. Nh2 g6 17. Ng3 b6 18. Ng4 h5 19. Nh2 Bb7 20. f4 –  ( Crafty likes  20. Bg5 Be7 21. Nf3 Bxg5 22. Nxg5 h4 23. Ne2 Qe7 24. Rad1 Rh5 25. Nf3 O-O-O with 0.81 estimate ), here – 0.08

20. … Qh4 21. Rf3 Qe7 22. b4 Bg7 23. a4 Nd8 24. Rff1 a6 25. Nf3 Nf8 26. Ne2 Nh7 27. Bf2 O-O 28. Bh4 – trying to penetrate deep  defense ( Crafty likes it too, estimate – 0.83)

28. … Qd7 29. Ng5 Qe8 30. Nxh7 Kxh7 31. Ng3 Kg8 32. Qe2 f5 – beginning of the end, Crafty doesn’t like it at all

33. exf6 Bxf6 34. Bxf6 Rxf6 35. f5!

35. … h4 – I didn’t like Nh1, so I started to think and soon saw fxg3.  I looked and looked and  almost gave up to find a forced win. But it was impossible to pass on this nice knight sacrifice, so it made me to find the decisive quiet  move . I spent 16-18 minutes calculating it all and then:

36. fxg6!! – forgive me if I am too generous, it’s actually the first time in my life I put 2 exclamation marks to my own move

36. … Rxf1+ 37. Rxf1 hxg3 38. Qh5 Qe7

39. g7! – this is a move I had to see before playing 36. fxg6. I also found here that I can play 39. Rf7 Qxf7 40. gxf7+ Nxf7, but it’s just material,  there was something better - 39. … Qxg7 40. Qe8+ – Black resigned – 41.  … Qf8 42. Qxf8#

Funny, that Crafty as usual spoiled a bit my euphoria,  noticing that  there was a mate in 2 earlier. Instead of 39. g7 - 39. Rf8+ Kxf8 40. Qh8# . So,  I could also sacrifice  a rook, almost  ”evergreen”  :).

Anyway, I was happy with this win giving me the first place, best ever result in any tournament  - 4 out of 5  (3 wins, 1 draw, 1 bye) and performance rating about 1800, which hopefully should bring my rating to ~1750.

 

French, another Steinitz

French, another Steinitz

After some break (I didn’t post my last OTB game from 2 weeks ago since, though won, I played too bad

and was ashamed to publish it), I am posting the game I played this Sunday, regular G/90.

My opponent was a boy, rated 200+ lower, I had a win against him before.

So I play French, third time. It’s probably good that I can try it against lower rated

opponents, where I can compensate later for my opening/transition to middlegame mistakes,

being still able to win/draw and getting a valuable experience at the same time.

I should admit they all played decent opening lines, as opposed to freaking FICS, where 25% play

C00, i.e. something like 1.e4 e6 2. Nf3, 30% Exchange, and another 25% – Advanced variation.

My opponents followed the Canadian (and general) OTB stats with 3. Nc3 being the most popular,

followed by 3. Nd2.

OK, here is the game.

1. e4 e6 2. d4 d5 3. Nc3 Nf6 4. e5 Nfd7 5. f4 a6 6. Nf3 c5 7. Ne2 Nc6 8. c3

Pic 1

8. … cxd4 9. cxd4 f6 10. Nc3 Be7 11. Be2 O-O 12. O-O fxe5 13. fxe5 Nb6 14. Be3 Nc4

Pic 2

After some break  (I didn’t post my last OTB game from 2 weeks ago since, though won, I played too bad and was ashamed to publish it),  I am posting the game I played this Sunday, regular G/90.

My opponent was a boy, rated 200+ lower, I had a win against him before.  So I played French,  third time.  It’s probably good that I can try it against lower rated opponents, where I can compensate later for my opening/transition to middlegame mistakes,  being still able to win/draw and getting a valuable experience at the same time.  I should admit they all played decent opening lines, as opposed to freaking FICS, where 25% play C00,  i.e. something like 1.e4 e6 2. Nf3, 30% Exchange, and another 25% – Advanced variation.  My opponents followed the Canadian (and general) OTB stats with 3. Nc3 being the most popular,  followed by 3. Nd2.

OK, here is the game.

1. e4 e6 2. d4 d5 3. Nc3 Nf6 4. e5 Nfd7 5. f4 a6 6. Nf3 c5 7. Ne2 Nc6 8. c3

8. … cxd4 9. cxd4 f6 10. Nc3 Be7 11. Be2 O-O 12. O-O fxe5 13. fxe5 Nb6 14. Be3 Nc4 – it was tempting to get a bishop pair, but later in the game I realized it wasn’t a good idea – leaving e4 square undefended.

15. Bxc4 dxc4 16. Ne4 b5 17. a3 Rb8 18. Qc2 h6 19. Nfd2 Qb6?  I miss here 19. … Nxd4,  also it allows 20. Nf6+!  Bxf6 21. exf6 Qd8 22. fxg7 Kxg7 23. Qe4 Bd7 24. Qg4+ Kh7 25. Qh5 Rf6 26. Ne4 Rg6 – with Crafty’s estimate – 2.03.  Accepting sacrifice  -  20. … gxf6 leads to checkmate – 21. Qg6+ Kh8 22. Qxh6+ Kg8 23. Qg6+ Kh8 24. Rf3 fxe5 25. Rh3+ Bh4 26. Rxh4#

20. Rxf8+ Bxf8 21. Rf1? Nxe5

22. dxe5 Qxe3+ 23. Kh1 Bb7 – the “bad” French bishop becomes a very good one.

24. Rf3?? Bxe4! White resigned (because of  losing a piece or getting checkmate after 25.  Nxe4 Qe1+ ).