That’s what would I do (though with the different purpose than Jesus) if somebody would tell on the move 10-12 of this game that I would lose it.

I was 200+ km out of the city the day before, didn’t sleep enough, was very busy at work all Monday and didn’t prepare at all, not even warmed up. It’s not to defend my loss, but to explain why, for example, all the game I thought that I play with 1650+ rated, and after the game found he was 1855. I mixed him up with another guy.

I had White, here is the game. He played Caro-Kann, I chose Fantasy variation again.
He missed Bxf7 combination, his king lost a right to castle and I thought I got a big advantage, even bigger according to Fritz. I saw 12. Be3, but decided that I can do without Qxb2 and following complications, wrong.
Then after a few inaccurate moves I lost almost all my advantage. On move 24 I saw “removing the defender” combination and went for it. I wasn’t sure 28. Qxe5 is OK, still played it and soon started to think that I made a decisive mistake and will lose a piece.  I didn’t see any of the lines Fritz gives to prove that it was alright.
The character of the game changed after I lost the piece, though he gave me quite a few chances to almost equalize. My mood wasn’t good, I suddenly felt fatigue and I got into the time trouble, he had a few minutes more. When I had less than a 2 minutes I missed a mate in 2.

I  had White in this game, played against 1666 rated player. He didn’t play well the last half year, had before 1800+ rating. It was Caro-Kann, Fantasy variation, here is the game.  After I played 6. Bd3 I noticed that I can lose a pawn after 6.  …  dxe4 7.  fxe4 Nxe4 8. Bxe4 Qh4+, though Fritz says that Black’s advantage is minimal here . He didn’t see it.

I didn’t play e5 after his c5 and it lead to exchanges. Then I had a plan with moving “f” pawn, but his Rd6 kind of prevented it because on my f5 he could play e5 and I couldn’t play f6.

After 29 moves I got annoyed with this boring, half-defensive play and decided to play f5. I planned to play Qe8+ and Re1 if exf5, and gxf5 just seemed risky for him. We both had about 25 minutes left. Nevertheless he played gxf5. His Qd5 took the square e5 from my queen and I noticed that Qe3 is answered by e5 and then rook goes to g6. I had to move my queen to avoid exchange after Qe1+and played Qa6. In a few moves the rooks were exchanged and he, probably seeing perpetual Qd8+, Qg5+,  played f4. After I took h7 pawn he decided to go for perpetual himself and offered a draw. We both had about 15 minutes left.

Not a very good play, but I think not as bad as I played before.

It was a first round in the new club and I got a “C” class player, young guy. I had White, he played Caro-Kann, here is the game. I went, of course, for Fantasy variation, having +1, =1 with higher rated. His 3rd move was a surprise and my answer Ne2 was played just once, with a draw. Crafty said something  about losing a pawn after 7. Be2, with his pieces attacking pinned knight on c3, but Fritz says that I am better in all the lines. He made a couple of slow moves and I realized that I can attack his pawn on g7. It provoked f6, and I started to think that my position is better. I decided that opening the position a bit won’t hurt and played exd5. After exchanges I missed 12. Bb5+ (instead of Bf4), he pointed at it after the game. He criticized his move Ng6 too, me and Fritz agree, but I don’t like how Fritz plays O-O-O, I would destroy the guy after him castling queenside.

His king got stuck in the center and then after 18… Nge7  I  found Bxe7, winning on the spot. He quickly took it by knight and after my fork shook his head with some expressions about his “quality” of play. The game ended after a few moves, I felt a bit uncomfortable and decided to do a post-mortem to explain a few things to the guy, it was useful for me too as I already mentioned above.

It is not a fantasy :),  I defeated an expert in Caro-Kann,  fantasy variation, delivering a Boden’s mate after rook sacrifice on move 23. Here is the game, I was White. It was the same guy a drew a few months ago with him having 30 seconds left on the clock. After some struggle where I never was worse, we came to a position, where I had some pressure and two bishops. After 21. Rxd6 I noticed that if the knight won’t be on e5, there is a possibility of Boden’s mate (mate with two bishops, I remembered the pattern, not the name at that moment).  Still it was a bit of shock when he played 22…Nf7. I checked again and played 22. Rxc6+, he resigned. He was very nice afterwards (as during/after our first game), not only doing post-mortem, but also showing a few guys how he got mated. If not this combination, I planned to use my two bishops (don’t know if I would succeed), Fritz gave me half a pawn advantage.
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.