In round 1 I had white against a player rated between 4 and 500 points lower than me. I got a win in reasonably clean fashion.

(show chess board)(hide chess board)

In round 2 I had a black against a player of about the same rating as me. I’ve been really tired of the Scandinavian Defense, so this was my first use of the Modern Defense in a serious tournament game. It was a total mess, though not because of the opening. To be honest, we were both lucky to get a draw in this game, but I was luckier, as I gave him many more winning chances than he gave me.

(show chess board)(hide chess board)

I’ve played 17 tournament games since coming back from my chess hiatus, and I’m finally getting back into it, but I’m missing way too many simple tactical ideas. I guess I need to do more tactics puzzles, but they’re just not as interesting as reading about strategic ideas. It’s a hobby and it’s supposed to be fun, but….is it more fun to read what I want to read and then have an unsatisfying performance, or do somewhat more boring preparation and play a better game when the time comes?

Oh, but the way I lost those games.

Wollkind – Bottini

White to play

Wollkind – Hong

White to play

The fifth round game that I lost against Ed Lafferty was a joke from start to finish. I hung a pawn, fell into two pawn forks, and ultimately miscounted and gave away a rook when I thought I was giving back the Exchange. I don’t mean any disrespect to Mr. Lafferty, but my play in that game was embarrassing, plain and simple.

I haven’t been spending any time on chess outside of the weekly games, and it’s starting to show. I learned an important lesson in round 5: when you don’t feel like going to play chess and you go anyway you will stink. My interest in chess has always waxed and waned as other ways of spending my free time rise and fall on my internal priority list. I think I should take a hint from myself and take a step back for a little while. I do still enjoy the games and the competition, but I can’t play at a level that satisfies me if I’m not working on improving between games, and I don’t have it in me right now.

So, a brief hiatus until I feel that fire again. Projects, holidays, CFA level 3 study and exam will take me to June. I could be back for a brief spell in early 2008, but suspect I won’t be back full time until the summer.

Until then, good luck everyone…

Dan Callahan (1339)    —    Steve Wollkind (1533)
MCC Trick or Treat Swiss (2008)  (1)   Natick, MA
2007.10.02     0-1     D02m

1.	d4	d5
2.	Nf3	Nf6
3.	Bf4 (D)

My second time facing the London, but apparently I didn’t learn anything after the first one (played roughly 6 weeks prior to this game). How to Beat 1. d4 by James Rizzitano suggests that black play c5 here. I thought about it, but prefered to get the light bishop outside the pawn chain and solidify with e6.

3.

…

Bf5

( 3…c5 )

Exactly the kind of move I can never resist. It’s the f pawn with white and the c pawn with black, and I love to push it to the 5th (4th) rank if I can restrict a bishop by doing so. Perhaps it creates too static a formation, but I like having the space.

7.

Bxb8

Questionable, in my mind. Giving up a developed bishop to kill my knight in its bed doesn’t make sense to me. Additionaly, this brings my rook to the B file, which helps prepare to push the b pawn to make a break.

7.	…	Rxb8
8.	Ne5

I sensed that this move might be premature, but didn’t have a great way to combat it. At the same time, I felt that it wasn’t doing much for white. I think I was wrong. It brings a second attack on my c pawn and pins the b pawn down to the defense of the forking square c6.

8.	…	Be7
9.	b3 (D)

A move I should have seen coming a mile away. By my count white can now win a pawn by force, with other dangerous moves in the air. With the c-pawn advanced, the Queen’s knight gone and the light squared bishop locked outside the pawn chain, checks on the a4-e8 diagonal are problematic. Even worse, the knight on e5 is now a serious problem since black can’t play Qd7 to block a check either. I considered just giving up a pawn to castle immediately, but decided against.

9.	…	Ne4
10.	Nxe4	Bxe4
11.	f3	f6 (D)

A mistake. Luckily, white decided to save his knight, but if he had exchanged everything off black would have had some serious problems.

12.

Ng4

( 12.fxe4 fxe5 And things get ugly. Qh5 is probably quite strong here. )

Spending another move to prevent the loss of the knight, and finally there is time to protect the c pawn and end the threats of Qa4+.

13.	…	b5
14.	e4	Bg6
15.	Be2	O-O

Finally whisking the king to safety. Someday I’ll learn to do that before sending my pawns rushing up the board.

16.	O-O	Qd6
17.	g3 (D)

White obviously worried about later threats on the h pawn, but this move seems both premature (there is no tangible threat yet) and weakening.

17.	…	Bf7
18.	b4	e5
19.	a3	Bd8
20.	Ra2

Looking ahead to needing some defense on h2 with the option to put double the rook with the queen on the d file.

20.

…

Bc7

Completing the maneuver. The threat is not subtle, but I felt that white might have trouble getting his pieces out of one another’s way to defend it. During the game I wondered if my advantage was actually on the queenside, and whether I should have been pushing the a pawn at some point.

21.

Re1

h5 (D)

My plan was to try and get at white’s king. The computer hates it and wants me to rip up the center.

22.	Bf1	h4
23.	g4

A bad mistake, giving me exactly what I wanted: an attack on h2. White had many better defensive options including dxe5.

23.

…

exd4 (D)

Now the mate threat must be addressed.

24.	e5	fxe5
25.	cxd4	exd4

The mate threat returns. The knight has to get out of the way and the c and d pawns are going to become a serious problem for white.

Black resigned here, expecting Qxh2 and some ugliness to follow.

( 27…Qxh2+ 28.Kf1 And I am forced to admit that I don’t see the obvious winning plan here. Black must be winning, but it’s the sort of position where I would make it more of a grind than it needs to be. I was sort of surprised my opponent resigned after Bg2, but thankful… )

0-1

Diagrams generated using Steve Eddins’ Chess Imagerhttp://www.eddins.net/steve/chess/chessimager

The second was worse. I missed a very simple tactic that would have won my opponent’s d pawn, making my own d pawn passed. I think that this would have given me a winning position. Instead we locked our pawns, traded everything off, and agreed to a draw. I’m disappointed with myself.

Things worked out just right such that I’m paired against the section leader next week (James P Williams, the only one with 3/3) and it looks like I’ll have white. If I win then I will have at least a share of first place. Board two in the section features two other players with 2.5 points, so it would likely be a two way tie for first.

The last few weeks have hammered home that I need to spend a lot more time on tactics. I’ve been skating my on my opening and strategic knowledge, but tactical sharpness fades a lot faster than those other parts, and I need to do my homework this week.

Always easier said than done.

Last night I played Robert Matthews (for the second time in the last 3 weeks) and the third time overall. I’m now +3 against him, but I’m not sure that I deserve a plus score against him at all. All of my games with him have featured a number of positional mistakes on my part and a larger mistake on his part. I’ll take my wins where I can get them, but it doesn’t make me feel all that confident.

So far for September I’m 2/2. If the provisional pairings hold up (and I think they should, since section leaders normally show up to play) I’ll have white against Jenshiang Hong. I’d love to win this game and give myself a chance to win this section in two weeks…

I’ve been slacking off a little lately, when it comes to chess, and it’s showing. I’m basically doing no work at home between games and relying on the knowledge I have already. It’s been working ok…I’ve won 10/12 since returning from my spring hiatus, but I can’t expect my wits to carry me through the late rounds against folks with good scores.

So, this week, back to tactics. Also, any MCC folks know what Mr. Hong plays as black? He has 3 games in the MCC game collection, but all as white (his repertoire looks a little like mine from that side of the board…). I should never quote statistics, since it only gets me in trouble and makes me under/over confident, but I’m a numbers nut, so here we go: I’m +13 in games with white against lower rated players (+13 =0 -0, in fact) so I feel that I should have a good chance next week. I need to work to make sure that I’m sharp, though….

Anyway, since I have those numbers handy and I find them kind of interesting, here’s the full set:

• Against higher rated opposition
  • As white: 50% (8.5/17)
  • As black: 26% (5/19)
  • Total: 37.5% (13.5/36)
• Against lower rated opposition:
  • As white: 100% (13/13)
  • As black: 79% (11/14)
  • Total: 89% (24/27)

Clearly my black opening play is a little shoddy, and good players are absolutely hammering me for it. Does this mean I should work more on black openings or that I have some fear of black that needs to be overcome?

Just got around to catching up on all of the other chess blogs out there and decided that I’d post my July wrapup while my wife showers. Then, it’s off to the catacombs.

First, the link to the online replay of the month’s games:
http://www.njord.org/~steve/mychess/mcc0707.htm

If you only look at one, I suggest the last. I didn’t think it was that solid a game, but a friend told me it was one of the cleanest he’s seen me play, so….

Quick round by round summary, excluding round 1 which I already discussed:

• Round 2: White vs George Goulding. He responded to e4 with e5 and we played a bishop’s opening. I have a hard time resisting the early f5 in these lines, even though it’s not book. I just love the way it restricts black’s queen bishop. The center got locked and he missed my threat to win his two central pawns. After that it was just a little defense and then it was all over.
• Round 3: White vs Calvin Hori. I played Calvin once before and knew we’d play the Sicilian. I was pretty upbeat before this game: I was +5 =1 -1 in the Closed Sicilian, I was +1 =0 -0 against Mr. Hori, I was +4 =0 -0 in rematches and +10 =1 -0 in my last 11 games with white. Well, none of that did me any good when I proceeded to hang my b pawn (both losses with the Closed Sicilian that I’ve had have now featured the hanging of the b pawn) and went on to lose a long game.
• Round 4: Black vs David Harrington. We played a Scandinavian with 2 e5. David (1535) is now the highest rated player to play e5 against me in the Scandinavian. I know it’s not a good move, but I always have trouble against it. In this game he made several pawn exchanges that developed my pieces and left me with a pair of unopposed, connected central pawns. Eventually he had to give up a piece due to this. We then traded down into an endgame that was harder for me than it should have been, but I ground it out for the win.
• Round 5: Bye

I’m still disappointed by the loss to Hori, but all in all, a good tournament for me. 3/4 vs 1075, 1615, 1650 and 1535 sent my rating over 1500 for the first time ever.

Ok, time to go look at some bones!

How long have you been playing chess? Have you played it consistently since you started, or were there lulls in your play? How did these lulls affect your performance?

I learned the rules of chess in third grade from a friend and throughout middle and high school I would occasionally play with a couple of my friends. The same persisted through college, though I would play no more than a few games per year. I’ve always been fascinated by the game, though.

Sometime in the spring of 2002, while working at my first job out of college, I got really interested in chess. At this point it more or less became a hobby. I learned about online chess, bought a few books, started reading chesscafe.com and began to actually try to improve.

I played online on and off (usually life would get too busy and I’d put it on hold) for a few years. After moving back to Boston from a sojourn to Texas for grad school I decided it was time to take the leap into full chess geekery and play in a tournament. Slightly less than two years ago, in late July of 2005, I played in my first tournament. I was awful, but I was also hooked. 2 years and 57 games later I feel like I’m finally starting to understand tournament chess, but I’m still addicted.

Aside from playing games, what is your primary mode of training?

I think training would be a strong word for what I do, but I think that I spend most of my non-game playing chess time working on tactics. I’m trying to work through some game collections, but to be honest I’ve never really found out how to best make use of them. If anyone has advice….

What is the single most helpful method of improvement that you have ever used?

I think that playing slow, serious games has done more for my chess than anything else. There really is no substitute for thinking hard about a single game for 3 to 4 hours. Slow games have done a lot for my recall of positions, my thought process, concentration, patience and nerves. I think there’s no substitute for this sort of real world competition experience when it comes to improving.

What is your favorite opening to play as white? As black against e4? As black against d4?

I don’t think I’ve ever opened a chess game as white with anything other than e4. My white openings all come from John Emms’ “Attacking with 1 e4.” That makes it the Bishop’s Opening, the Closed Sicilian, the KIA vs the French, 2. c4 vs the Caro Kann and the 150 attack vs the Pirc and Modern. To be honest though I’ve only had games vs e5, c5 and e6 since picking this book up.

My black openings aren’t nearly as well thought out. Against e4 I play the Qa5 Scandinavian. Against d4….well, I’m not sure. My plan is to play the QGA at some point, but I’ve never had a good chance to learn it, so I generally end up playing some kind of vanilla QGD with d5, e6, Be7, Nf6 and O-O in whatever order seems appropriate. I usually play a very early c5 in these games, often to my own detriment. Clearly I need to work on my response to d4, but I’ve seen it in 3/57 tournament games, so there’s not much incentive yet.

Who is your favorite chess player and why?

I am somewhat embarrassed to admit that I don’t know any other players’ games well enough to pick a favorite yet.

What is your favorite chess book?

Hmm, a tough question. I have many. Too many (there are definitely days when reading about chess seems much more appealing than actually playing) and I find books about chess just plain fascinating. If pressed I might have to pick “The Amateur’s Mind” by Jeremy Silman. I’m not sure I love the style of that book, and a lot of the time he just makes fun of his students, but it has taught me that the basis of any plan I try to formulate will have to be based on differences between my position and structure and that of my opponent. I’m still useless at making plans, but I feel this book has taught me something…

What book would you recommend for a friend who knows only the rules of chess?

I recently had a friend in such a position, and I recommended that he look at Dan Heisman’s “Everyone’s Second Chess Book” and a book on tactics. He outgrew the Heisman book pretty quickly, but I think a lot of that material, while simplistic, is exactly the kind of stuff that someone who has never seriously studied the game won’t have run across.

Do you play in in-person tournaments? What is your favorite tournament experience?

I try. Lately I play in month long swiss tournaments in which there is one 40/90 G/30 game per week. It’s a lot easier for me to commit every Tuesday night to chess than it is to set aside an entire weekend for the game. Life just gets in the way. The house needs cleaning, the shopping has to be done, etc. Also, looking over some numbers that I’ve accumulated (and will post soon) I am a lot worse in weekend tournaments…

Please give us a link to what you consider your best two blog posts (on your own blog).

Meh. I’m not that good a writer, and this blog is really more for my own use than trying to acquire readers….it reminds me to work through my games, comment them and post them. There’s only about 40 entries now, so if you want to go look for a favorite, you’re welcome to

What proportion of total chess time should be spent studying openings for someone at your level?

Well, probably less than I do. I really enjoy openings, and I find it makes me feel very uncomfortable to be in an unfamiliar position before move 8 or so. I know that one of my main problems in unfamiliar opening positions is playing rote developing moves rather than being tactically aware, and I’m not sure that’s a cause or an effect of the way I feel about openings in general. That’s all I’ll say about this for now…I have some ideas lined up for a post about my internal chess psychology and it will touch on this.

An interesting question. I told him that if he put serious time into it that it wouldn’t take all that long. A few months to a year, perhaps. I was able to sow the seeds of chess interest, and he soon went from a guy who just knew the rules to someone who was spending time doing tactics problems and starting to learn some of the strategic ideas. We also started playing casual games after work. In approximately 40 games he beat me three times.

When I returned to chess after my three month break I convinced him to come with me, so for the past 6 weeks he’s been playing in the Tuesday night swiss games at the MetroWest Chess Club. He scored 1.5/4 in the first tournament, which isn’t bad for your first serious chess. It took me 6 OTB games to score a single point…

On my advice he’s been playing in the lower/mid section with me because the U1350, while technically the appropriate place for him, is so full of kids rated 500 that I feel you don’t learn a whole lot. I knew there was a chance, if things worked out just right, that we might get paired up in the first round….and that is exactly what happened this month. He was ecstatic, I was not. First, he’s given me a bit of trouble when I’ve been black lately, and second, I don’t think I enjoy playing my friends in serious chess games. It’s distracting to know your opponent, and it’s hard to play mercilessly when you know and like the person across the board from you. He thought it was pretty awesome, and had once said that his goal was to beat me in a tournament game and that if he ever did he would retire from chess. Looks like he’ll have to keep playing until our next matchup…

The game itself was ok. As usual I gave my opponent a chance to make my life really hard (a temporary piece sacrifice that lead to a two pawn advantage, but could instead have given him a chance to trap my queen). He missed the best continuation and after that I had a solid advantage. Still, I need to be more careful

Online replay version (with comments) here.

Dave Silverman (1074)    —    Steve Wollkind (1435)
MCC Independence Day Swiss  (1)   Natick, MA
2007.07.03     0-1     B01o

1.	e4	d5
2.	exd5	Qxd5

I had been playing the Nf6 version of the Scandinavian, but it hasn’t worked out that well for me. I tended to get very sterile, equal positions where it was hard for me to find a good plan. The main line of the Qa5 variant seems much more dynamic to me. I was also happy to play differently here since my opponenent has seen my Nf6 Scandinavian 10 or 20 times in casual games.

3.	Nc3	Qa5
4.	d4	Nf6
5.	Nf3	c6
6.	Bc4	Bf5
7.	O-O (D)

Out of book for me, but clearly a logical continuation and one I feel I’m likely to see a lot. I think that unless a player is already familiar with the main line of the Qa5 Scandinavian, they’re unlikely to castle on the queen side.

7.	…	e6
8.	Bf4	Nbd7
9.	Ne5	Nxe5
10.	Bxe5 (D)

10.

…

Be7

Qb4 looks interesting, but doesn’t amount to much due to threats to trap the queen.

( 10…Qb4 11.Bd3 Bxd3 12.Qxd3 O-O-O 13.a3 Qe7 )

( 12.Re1 Qb6 = Brings us, via a different move order, to a sideline evaluated as equal by Emms’ Scandinavian book. )

In retrospect, a mistake. My thinking was that the undefended nature of both the bishop and knight would assure me the return of my piece after the temporary sacrifice of bishop for two pawns. The only queen move that would defend both pieces was impossible due to the other bishop on f5….

( 12…Qd8 )

14.

Bd3?

A reasonable seeming move. Black will be up two pawns, but white can make sure that those two extra pawns are part of a tripled and isolated set. More on this idea later, but white here misses the best move: Qd2, which forces black to recapture on c4, and then white has some chances to trap the queen. I find traps difficult to see, and this one is a little tougher than most because the knight on f6 also must be traded before the trap can be sprung. I’m lucky white didn’t see it, but I count this tactic a little hard to see.

( 14.Qd2 Qxc4 15.Bxf6
( 15.Ra4 Ne4 )
15…b5 )

Taking the knight first doesn’t allow white to inflict tripled pawns.

( 15.Bxf6 Bxd3 16.cxd3 gxf6 )

White has inflicted his tripled pawns, but I think it was a mistake. Surely, blacks two pawn advantage has been somewhat blunted, but the tripled pawns on the f file are controling a lot of space. Niether the e nor g files can be effectively used by white to invade. On top of this, the white c and d pawns are extremely weak. White will be hard pressed to effectively defend the d pawn.

17.

f4?

Failing to address the impending threat to the d pawn, and

17.	…	Rfd8
18.	Qf3

Again, I think white’s chances dwindle as pieces come off the board here, so I’m happy to exchange.

18.	…	Qxf3
19.	Rxf3	Rxd4
20.	Ra5	Rd1+
21.	Rf1	Rxf1+
22.	Kxf1	Kf8

Kg7 may have been better, preventing a later Rxf6, but I wanted to be ready to head to the queenside with the king, and felt that if White took the time to go after those pawns I would be even better off.

23.

Rxf5

a5 (D)

The pawns are all conspiring against white getting his rook back to the defense.

24.

Rc5??

A blunder. It was going to be ugly in any case, but this made it much worse. White now has no possibile way to stop the a pawn.

( 24.Rxf6 a4 25.Rd6 a3 26.Rd1 a2 27.Ra1 Ke7 28.Ke2 Kd6 29.Kd2 Kd5 30.Kc3 (D)

This is perhaps better, but still lost for white. )

0-1

Diagrams generated using Steve Eddins’ Chess Imager http://www.eddins.net/steve/chess/chessimager

Today I want to talk about goals. My chess goals, specifically.

My first step into non-casual chess was taken over five years ago when I realized that people play chess online. I quickly got fed up with Yahoo! chess and I discovered FICS. I think my goal at that point was merely not to lose as much. I never gave any real thought to playing in OTB tournaments.

A few years later I met a coworker who was (and still is) far stronger than I was. He had a deep understanding and appreciation of the game, and was able to look watch other games and really understand what was going on. This became my first clear chess goal: to be able to appreciate the beauty of a well played chess game between two strong players. This still remains one of my primary chess goals.

It may seem like a modest one, but then again, chess is a strange hobby. Or maybe it’s not, but it seems so to me. The road of chess improvement will extend forever for me: I’ll never be the best. No matter how good a player I am there will be thousands of people better than I am, so it becomes a matter of personal satisfaction. At what point would I say to myself “I’m good enough.” When will I consider myself a reasonable chess player?

I’m still not sure what the answer to that is. I’ve already crossed the line where I feel that I should (and for the most part do) beat anyone who doesn’t consider himself a chess player. Great, but it’s no real accomplishment to win just because I put time into it and they don’t.

Ok, so I’ve officially crossed the line between someone who “plays chess” and “chess players.” What next?

I played in my first USCF rated tournament just over 2 years ago. It was a G/30, 4 rounder on a Saturday at the Boylston Chess Club. I got completely destroyed by a 1700, 1800, 1200 and 1500 and came out of it all with a rating of 810 and wondering what I was doing wrong. I’ve come a long way since then (54 games and 650 rating points).

It’s clear to me now that I was never truly an 800 or even 1000 player. Not really. I’ve played a wide range of players now and I’m starting to get a sense of what each class level really means. What I lacked in those first few tournaments wasn’t chess knowledge (though my knowledge has grown in important ways in the last 2 years, to be sure) but experience. Playing in serious tournaments is just plain different.

After a few tournaments I took some time off, and then started playing in the various weekly tournaments in the area, both at the BCC and the MCC. Over the course of the fall and winter months I turned a corner with my tournament experience and my ability to play to my true level, and my rating has been climbing (mostly) since. I’ve hesitated setting any real goals since I’m sort of waiting for the inevitable plateau: at some point I will reach the point where I am using my current knowledge and experience to its fullest and no further rating improvement will be possible without doing real work. I’m still not there yet, and I have no idea when that will happen, but I suspect I’m close. From discussions with other players and my games I instinctively feel that I’m a mid to high class C player, but who can say? 58 games really isn’t that many, and once I got some things figured out I haven’t spent very many games at any class level:

Sub 1000 – 17 games
Class E – 18 games
Class D – 12 games
Class C – 11+ games

I’ve got two more rounds in the current MCC swiss tournament (I’ll be taking a bye in the last round) and unless I think it’s basically impossible to reach class B in this one, so there’ll be at least 6 more games added to that class C number, at a minimum.

I’m rambling a bit, but I’m trying to get somewhere here. The question is: what should my goals be? When I talk to non chess players I normally reference this idea of wanting to be able to look over great games of the past and understand them. This is in part because it is true, and in part because ratings thresholds will have no meaning to non players. My personal goal at each class level has been to reach the next one, but those goals have been coming pretty quickly, as you can see. I guess I’m a little more goal oriented than some, but I feel the need to have a long term plan.

What should it be?

Some of you know me (and have even played against me [I'm 0-2 against the chess blogging community, that I'm aware of]) and some of you don’t, but I’ll ask anyway: where should I set my goal?

I’m sure that I’ll never be a GM, and I’m sure I’ll never be an IM. Even plain old vanilla master seems a long shot. Expert? I’d like to think I could make 2000 some day, but….is it possible? What are the limits of the chess skill of a player who got serious about the game at the age of 26 and has somewhere in the range of 10 hours per week to put into it?

For now I’ll set my same old short term goal: I want to make class B. But to be honest, I’ll be disappointed if I don’t do it soon, and in my heart I silently append “by 2008.” and wonder what my long term plan should really be?

So, this has been nice and long, and not too taxing to read either! I have two games from July that need a little analysis and posting, and I’m a bit of a stat nut, so I have some insights about my own performance to post and muse about. There’s time to write 3 posts in the next week, right?!

What do you think?

Zweiblumen (1753)    —    smallblackcat (1949)
FICS
rated standard game  (-)   FICS, San Jose, California USA

2007.06.29     1/2-1/2

1.e4 c6 2.c4 e5 3.Nf3 d6 4.d4 Bg4 5.dxe5 Bxf3 6.gxf3 dxe5 7.Qxd8+ Kxd8
8.f4 f6 9.Nc3 Bb4 10.Bd2 Nd7 11.a3 Bxc3 12.Bxc3 exf4 13.O-O-O Kc7 14.Bh3 Rd8
15.Rxd7+ Rxd7 16.Bxd7 Kxd7 17.Rg1 g6 18.Rg4 g5 19.e5 h5 20.Rg1 Rh6 21.exf6 Nxf6
22.Bxf6 Rxf6 23.Rxg5 Ke6 24.Rxh5 Rf7 (D)

Can white win?
25.Kd2 a6 26.b4 Kf6

Game drawn by mutual agreement

1/2-1/2

In round 1 I played a QGD against James Jaillet (1086). I got myself in trouble and lost a pawn early, but got it back late. My opponent was in serious time trouble leading up to the 40 move time control, and fortunately missed it when I offered him mate in 2 and mate in 3 on consecutive moves. While I was busy ignoring his mate threats I managed to get a winning attack (go figure). He flagged on move 39 in a lost position. I’m pretty unhappy about missing the mate threats, but my play was not so bad for my first serious game in 3 months.

Round 2 was a bishop’s opening against Danny Angermeier (1133). A pretty straightforward game which can be summed up as: Bishop’s Opening => KGD => pawn storm => win. At the end I threw in a defensive move before starting the final attack, but it turned out to be totally unnecessary and actually would have let him avoid mate. He didn’t find the one saving move and the win was easy from that point.

In Round 3 I had black against Dan Lang (1553). I played the Scandinavian, but decided to give the older Qxd5 line a try. I find that I get rather sterile positions when I play Nf6. The opening went well and it all fell apart when I miscalculated on a series of moves I thought were forcing and I dropped a knight. This game could have been much more interesting than it was. I was pretty happy with the more dynamic middlegame I got out of Qxd5 and will probably continue to play that variation.

Round 4 is below, with detailed comments. It was a Closed Sicilian against Robert Matthews (1417) and another win. I’ll let the game and comments below speak for themselves.

Overall, +2 for the tournament, a 4 way tie for 3rd place and my rating moves up to 1435. (It dropped to 1408 after the Eastern Class Championships). I look forward to next week and the start of the July tournament.

Steve Wollkind (1408)    —    Robert J Matthews (1417)
MCC Summer Solstice Swiss (2007)  (4)   Natick, MA
2007.06.26     1-0     B26c

1.	e4	c5
2.	Nc3

Ah, the closed sicilian, my old friend. I’ve met c5 7 times since adopting the closed and after this game I’m +5 =1 -1 with it. The only loss coming against Joshua Haunstrup who was rated 700 points higher than I was at the time the game was played. All in all, I’ve stopped fearing the sicilian.

2.	…	g6
3.	g3	Nc6
4.	Bg2	Bg7
5.	d3	d6
6.	Be3 (D)

With the idea of Qd2 and eventually trading off the dark squared bishop and weakening black’s kingside.

6.	…	Nf6
7.	h3

When the knight comes to f6 in the Be3 closed sicilian, h3 is required to prevent the annoying Ng4 which interrupts white’s plan and threatens to trade off the bishop.

7.

…

Nd4

Officially out of book for me, at this point. Emms’ Attacking with e4 (my white rep sourcebook) gives e5 and O-O as the primary moves for black here.

( 7…e5 8.Nge2 O-O 9.O-O )

( 7…O-O 8.f4 Rb8 9.Nf3 )

I spent a while thinking about whether Qd2, continuing my closed sicilian plan, or trying to kick out the knight would be better. I decided to kick the knight. I do end up a bit cramped on the kingside after c3 removes a square for the knight on e2. I think next time I reach this position I’ll try Qd2.

( 8.Qd2 )

Protecting the pawn and getting ready for a later Bh6.

10.	…	O-O
11.	b4 (D)

Perhaps a bit overzealous. The immediate Bh6 fails to Bxh6 Qxh6 Qxb2. I felt that b4 would give me a good chance to blow up the center a little and get an open file to work with. I think that O-O-O might have been an interesting way to protect the pawn.

( 11.O-O-O )

b4 made c3 somewhat weak, so black repositions his knight to hit c3 with the bishop and pin the pawn to the rook.

12.

bxc5

dxc5

( 12…Nxc5 13.d4 Qb2 )

Perhaps a bit early for this. My center is somewhat weak and the king can’t castle that soon.

13.	…	Bxh6
14.	Qxh6	Nde5
15.	Qd2? (D)

I didn’t know it at the time, but it turns out this move is a big mistake. It allows for the rather crushing Rd8, which seems to cost white a piece, at least.

15.

…

Be6??

Luckily my opponent didn’t decide to play Rd8. He mentioned having thought about it after the game, but said he wanted to connect his rooks first. This turned out to be a major mistake.

( 15…Rd8 16.Nf4 Nxd3+ 17.Nxd3 Ne5 +- )

I think this move is probably just plain bad, but I’ll give it ?! for surprising me and making me endure a little pressure before I got the initiative back. Nd7 is almost certainly better. f5 gxf Qg5 looks scary, but has no real bite. After Kh8 white has no good follow up before Rg8 kicks the queen away and puts some uncomfortable pressure on g3.

17.	Qxd3	Rad8
18.	Qc2 (D)

I considered Qb1 here, trying to trade off queens, but I wasn’t sure I liked the complications that would arise afterwards. Also, it’s not clear that black will even bother to exchange, and after Qc7 white’s Queen seems awkwardly placed.

( 18.Qb1 Qxb1+
( 18…Qc7 )
19.Rxb1 Bxa2 20.Rxb7 )

Planning to bring the knight to c4, which should be obvious to me, and I guess it was. What I didn’t consider were the threats that would arise from the knight being in that position. I was somewhat lucky to have the defensive resources that I did, I feel.

19.

Nf3

Simply trying to finish my development and have a hope of castling.

19.

…

Nc4 (D)

c4 is an excellent square for the knight, and probably a this is another drawback of my earlier b4. The immediate threat of Ne3 is somewhat annoying, and castling doesn’t help since after O-O Ne3 forks the queen and rook.

20.

Kf2

This move looks a little odd, giving the king few retreat squares and setting up a future discovered check, but if that pawn moves forward then I have d4 for my knight. This also connects my rooks and prevents Ne3. I considered Qc1 but worried about a potential rook invasion on d3. I’m not sure that there are any real threats there, but it just looked annoying. Terrible reasoning for a chess player, but I’m not that good a chess player!

20.

…

Nd6

Perparing the discovered check. One other aspect of Kf2 that made it feel safe: I have at least one move to prepare for the discovery since the knight was blocking c4 at the time. c4 was an excellent post for black’s knight, and after he pushes his pawn to that square he will open d4 for my knights and lose his own outpost. I believe white’s game is much easier after this pawn push, even if it comes with a check.

21.	Rhd1	c4+
22.	Ned4

Willingly accepting the pin, but I think this is a fine post for the knight, and white has plenty of time to break the pin before black can threaten to win the pinned piece.

22.	…	f5
23.	Ng5	Nxe4+? (D)

I think my opponent may have missed that he doesn’t have time to recapture on e4 with the pawn.

24.	Bxe4	fxe4
25.	Nxe6	Rxd4

The best move in a bad position. I’m forced to replace one pin with another, but the material advantage, even should the pinned piece fall, is crushing.

26.

Nxd4

e5 (D)

I had overlooked this continuation in my calculations. I missed the fact that my f pawn is pinned, along with my knight. With all the pins floating around, I feel lucky that I didn’t get in serious trouble here. I missed the best continuation at this point, too.

27.

Qxe4

Figuring that black’s two central pawns were a potential source of counterplay, I decided that it was ok to lose the knight in exchange for the pair of them. Better was Rab1 followed by Rb5 if black tried to hang on to the pin with Qc5.

( 27.Rab1 Qc5 28.Rb5 And the knight is saved. )

Black has accomplished nothing here aside from bringing about the same position as after his 26th move, only this time he is down a pawn. Also, this time around I saw the way to save the pinned piece!

29.

Rab1 (D)

29.

…

Qc7??

Oops.

30.

Ne6

Black resigned.

1-0

Diagrams generated using Steve Eddins’ Chess Imager http://www.eddins.net/steve/chess/chessimager

Black to play and be dominated?!

Check this position in your favorite tract on the Bishop’s Opening or the Vienna Game and you’ll find the authors universally agree that white has an edge here. The databases seem to bear this out. White is scoring 68% from this position in my TWIC database and 72% from this position in the ChessBase 2007 Big Database.

Sources would seem to agree that this is a nice position to have as white, if you can get it. White seems to develop a strong attack after 4 … Qf6 5. Nd5 Qxf2 6. Kd8, and while 4 … g6 seems the safer route, the books and databases still seem to prefer white. (Blue Devil, I know you were working from Emms’ Attacking with 1 e4 at some point…did you run across this line there?)

Fritz however, isn’t too impressed. He gives a slight edge to black after 4 … Nd4!? 5. Qxg7 Qf6 6. Qxf6 Nxf6 7. Bd3. Of the 200 games I have that reach the position after 4 Qg4 only one continues with Nd4. White (rated 300 points higher than his opponent) goes on to win it.

Has black equalized?

So what gives? More importantly: can I effectively use Fritz to work on openings? Many of the lines that are recommended in sub variations and notes in the books that I have are evaluated differently by Fritz than by the authors. Now, I’m not playing against Fritz or even strong masters at the club, but it makes me feel a little lost.

Anyway, any advice that folks can give on how you make use of computer engines in your understanding of the openings that you play would be most appreciated!

In other news, I’ve recently had time and the desire to play some chess again after having burned out and gotten too busy. Hopefully I’ll have the time to write a couple of posts I’ve had on my mind regarding my recent games and some issues I’ve encountered trying to use Fritz to help me work on my openings.

The game against Mr. Harvey wasn’t without its exciting moments, however. It was pretty tight until my opponent made a series of tactical blunders between moves 29 and 35 that resulted in my being a rook up. He had a pair of passed pawns, though, and I didn’t show them enough respect and it almost cost me. Here’s the position after black’s 44th move (I’m now up two rooks after he sacrificed one to advance his pawns further):

Wollkind – Harvey
White to play

The game continued with 45. Rh7+ Kb6 46. Rhxa7 b2 47. R2a6+ Kb5.

Wollkind – Harvey

White to play

All in all, a fun tournament, and a five way tie for second place, to boot. I look forward to next month.

At least I should have white. I’ve now played 46 USCF rated games, and am +24 =2 -20 overall, but the black white split is a bit severe:

White: +14 =0 -7
Black: +10 =2 -13

That’s 66.6% as white and 44% as black.

A brief side note that will flow back into the discussion here: I’ve gotten one of my coworkers hooked on chess. He had some familiarity with the game beforehand, in that he knew the rules, but he had no chess knowledge. He’s a bright guy, though, and while he still makes a lot of mistakes he’s also starting to play some tricky and insightful moves. I was lamenting to him that I didn’t really have a plan for chess improvement, and his immediate response was that I should look for weaknesses in my game and work on those. My game with Mr. Wang reminded me of a weakness that I’ve been aware of for a while, but sort of ignored. That weakness? 1. d4

In fact, against me, 1.d4 might as well read 1. d4! I’ve only met it OTB 3 times, and I’m +0 =1 -2, but that doesn’t tell the whole story. I’m totally unnerved by it, and have no feeling for the sorts of positions that arise from it. Regardless of whether that is really true, d4 is in my head. My feeling is that if you play d4 against me, I’m not going to beat you, and that’s bad enough. I know that I shouldn’t spend much time on openings, but I now feel that what little time I do spend on openings really ought to be spent on my black response to d4.

One of my problems with d4 has been that I’ve spent basically no time on it. Since the dawn of my chess playing (roughly 5 years ago) I’ve never felt comfortable with it. In fact, I’ve never played it as white. Not once. Not online, not OTB. Never. I know that one way to get comfortable against openings that you don’t like is to play them, but I can’t bring myself to do it. On the flip side, I don’t see d4 much, so I have never had to get used to playing against it, and have never been able to justify spending time on it since it has come up so rarely in my games. I think that one of the reasons I saw it so little was that I was playing a lot of beginners, and by and large, beginners don’t play d4. I’m pretty sure I’m going to see a lot more of it as I play in the U1700 sections at the MetroWest Chess Club. So, time to work on d4. My old plan against d4 was extremely simple: play d5, e6, Nf6, Be7 and O-O in whatever order I felt like and then wing it. I own James Rizzitano’s “Beating 1 d4″ which presents a repertoire based on the QGA, but I haven’t learned it enough to actually try busting it out. Unfortunately, the more I look at his book, the less I like it. As opposed to Emms’ “Attacking with 1 e4″ and other opening books I have, this one does very little to tell you what your general strategic plans are. I have no idea what black’s main ideas in the QGA are. At a philosophical level, the QGA appeals to me greatly: almost all my openings are slightly less common, which gives me a confidence boost, and as black I far prefer an opening that lets me make some choices about where the game is going. I like to be in control.

In other news, my wife is going to fund a few chess lessons for me for my birthday, so I think it’s time to call around to some local coaches and find one that fits with my schedule and get going. Hopefully the coach will also be able to highlight my weaknesses and help me develop a plan so that I can use what little time I have for chess as effectively as possible.

I’m two weeks into the four week Groundhog Day Swiss tournament at the MetroWest Chess Club. I’m playing in the U1700 section and am currently +2!

In round 1 I again played Timothy Lung, and again beat him. I had black in a Scandinavian defense. It was an odd little game that saw his light squared bishop get locked into a corner of the board. I made some bad moves towards the end, and gave him a nice chance to win the game with an unsound sacrifice, but he played a terrible move that gave the game right back to me. I’m now +2 against him and have won our last 3 encounters. I’m hoping for a psychological edge the next time we face one another….

In round 2 I played Calvin Hori, 1653. I had white and we played a closed Sicilian. I’m really starting to like this opening. I feel like I understand it pretty well, and it lends itself to positions that are comfortable to me. I got a fairly good position before I started to play some poor moves. I walked into a fork that I’d been aware of and carefully avoiding for a few moves, but managed to turn it into losing the Exchange rather than losing a full piece. My attack was still fairly strong and my opponent was in extreme time trouble. He had about 10 minutes left on his clock at move 25 and needed to make it to move 40. He made a few too many mistakes under the pressure from the clock and the win was mine.

After the game he wanted to discuss it a little, but didn’t have much time. He spent what time he had telling be about how bad some of my moves were (and they were) but (while I didn’t say this) I don’t feel too bad about it since, as bad as they were, they weren’t bad enough to let him win.

I’m planning to post these games later tonight, after I learn a little more about Fritz’s html export options. I’m pretty excited about beating Tim Lung (again) and transferring the yoke of “highest rated player I’ve beaten” from him to Mr. Hori.

I’m one of 5 players in the U1700 with 2 points, so I’ll be paired down in the coming week. If the provisional pairings hold, I’ll get a 1300 with 1.5 points. The two wins that are already in the bank seem certain to push me over 1400, and I think that if I can manage to grab another point from a 1300+ player that I might even reach 1500 by the end of this.

All very exciting, but I’m still waiting for that time when my rating reaches its plateau for my current level of chess knowledge. I don’t want to say I’m not learning much from the weekly games: I am…but I’m not doing much aside from that to improve right now. At some point I’ll hit a wall and more improvement will take real work. I’m still not sure where that’s going to be. I don’t see myself as a 1600 level player yet, but I think I’m every bit as good as Mr. Hori, and his rating has been at 1650 for quite a while.

In the final round I played Travis Nilsson, rated 1427. He played the French against me and I tried my KIA for the first time in an OTB game. I made some mistakes, but his were worse. I hope to put some notes in this game and stick it online later. At any rate, he got his pieces all twisted up and had to give one up (though he had chances to avoid it). He ultimately resigned about 40 moves in, down a piece and having used only 15 minutes. I think if he’d played a little slower he could have made this a better game.

So, I went 2.5/5 (with a half point bye) in the U1800 section and raised my rating to 1354. Thanks again to Mr. Frymer for prodding me to play up a section. In spite of the beatings I took I think I played reasonably well, and I’m learning that those 14, 15 and 16oo players aren’t really so scary after all.

In the first round I had black against Alexander Hu, rated somewhere around 1550 (my “unofficial” rating after the last tournament is 1291, by the way). He opened with 1. b4 and I found myself immediately regretting my hubris. I lost a pawn about 3 moves in to a simple tactic, but went on to play a reasonable game before losing a bishop to a check intermezzo around move 30. b4 isn’t even in my MCO and I don’t expect to see it very often, so I don’t think I’ll worry about getting ready for it too much.

In round 2 I took a bye as my wife and I both had the Martian Death Flu that’s been making the rounds in the Boston area.

Round 3 found me with white against Mr. Timothy Lung (1459). He’s the first opponent I’ve met over the board 3 times. We were 1-1 in the prior two games, and I managed to win this one. The prior two games were published in Mig Greengard’s Whitebelt newsletter, and I was hoping to get another interesting game and keep the streak up, but Tim disappointed me this time. He played exf on move 5 in the Bishop’s opening (which seems not favorable for black) and then his real downfall was 14 … Qb6+?? which just loses a piece. Lung is still the highest rated player I’ve ever beaten, and now that I’ve beaten him twice in a row I’m starting to feel like maybe I shouldn’t be so afraid of 14 and 1500’s. Still, if a 1450 is going to make a mistake like Qb6, how good will I have to get before I don’t make errors that really bother me? Even though the game wasn’t that interesting, I was pleased. This is 2 out of 3 games (the other being my round 4 game against V. Vutukuri) in which I didn’t make a move which I regretted. When I play carefully and don’t make foolish mistakes, I think I can be tough to beat.

Tonight, if the preliminary pairings hold (which they will unless unexpected byes are taken) I’ll have white again against Michelle Chen (1633). She’s lost a few games recently to people in the 1300 range, so I think if I play carefully I should have a chance.

Anyone from the MCC know what she plays against 1 e4?

Anyway, I’ll annotate the first two games from this tournament at some point, but for now, if you want to take a quick look, you can find them in all their unannotated glory at http://njord.org/~steve/mychess/mcc0107.htm or http://njord.org/~steve/mychess/mcc0107.pgn.

Also, the Fritz documentation is kind of awful. What’s your favorite online tutorial for how to learn about/take advantage of the features of Fritz? ChessBase Cafe looks ok, but it’s less a comprehensive tutorial than what I’m looking for.

In other news, the MCC Winter Swiss is going well. 3 rounds in I have an = score (though I took a bye in round 2). I’ll be posting those games later today or this weekend.

Finally, since the cutoff has passed, I can say that my February 1st official rating will be 1291 and will no longer be provisional. I’m finally getting into the ‘moderately respectable’ range. It feels good.

Once again I was victorious in second meetings (+4 =0 -0 now) and I won my U1300 section. Sadly, given that many of the other U1300 players in my skill range played up this month, it’s not that much of an accomplishment. As I said 3 weeks ago, I would have been a little upset if I _didn’t_ win this section. But still, it is an accomplishment and I’m proud of it.

I think with the winnings ($40) I’ll become a member of the MetroWest Chess Club.

Next week: Adventures in U1450 Land.

Venkata Vutukuri    —    Steve Wollkind (1120)
MCC Holiday Swiss (2006)  (4)   MetroWest Chess Club
2006.12.26     0-1     B01t

1.e4 d5 2.exd5 Nf6 3.c4 c6 (D)

I haven’t yet learned enough about the Icelandic gambit to play it, but someday I will. For now I play it safe with c6 and let white choose whether I’ll be playing a gambit line or not.

( 3…e6 The Icelandic gambit. On my short list of “unsound openings I plan to learn.” )

4.dxc6

The Scandinavian gambit accepted. White’s other primary option is to transpose into the Panov-Botvinnik Attack line in the Caro Kann. I’m glad no one tends to do this against me since I haven’t learned anything about it yet.

( 4.d4 Transposing to the Panov-Botvinnik 4…cxd5 5.Nf3 e6 6.Nc3 Bb4 )

4…Nxc6

Black’s plan here is to clamp down on the d4 square with moves like e5 and Bc5 and to prevent white from ever playing d4. The d pawn becomes weak and a target of attack.

5.Nf3 e5 6.Nc3 Bc5

( 6…e4!? )

7.Na4 (D)

With Na4 I’m officially out of my “book’ such as it is, though I don’t even know what white’s typical moves are in this line. My plan, such as it is, has been accomplished.

7…b6

This looks reasonable to me. After the exchange it will allow me to continue to control d4, at the cost of the bishop pair and an isolated pawn. This may be too much to give up, and it seems clear to me that after the exchange on c5 white’s plan must be to attack my weak a and c pawns and push his majority up the board.

8.Nxc5 bxc5 9.d3 O-O 10.Bg5 (D)

Here I considered h6 to force the issue with the bishop, but decided there was no reason: if he wants to exchange, he’ll exchange. No need to weaken my pawn structure in the process. I also considered Qd6 to break the pin, continue to defend f6 and bring defense to my hanging pieces on c5 and c6. I opted against this, however, as on d6 the queen has very limited mobility and I’m asking her to do an awful lot of work there as well.

10…Re8

I opted for the safe, developing Re8. In my recent games I’ve started to notice that if you put rooks on lines with enemy kings and queens, good things just seem to happen.

11.Be2

Getting another piece between my rook and his king, and preparing to castle.

11…Bf5

Developing and attacking the weak d3 pawn.

12.O-O

( 12.Nh4 Nd4 )

12…Nb4

Adding a 3rd attack to d3. White can bring no more defense to the square unless he plays Ne1, which looks a little awkward. His only other option is to exchange on f6 and then kick the knight.

13.Bxf6 Qxf6 14.a3 Nc6 15.h3 (D)

My opponent told me that he made this move because he didn’t want my bishop going to g4, but that was never in my plan. I’m still going after the d3 pawn with everything I have, with added threats of Qg6 and Bh3.

15…Rad8

Again, just getting a rook on a line with an enemy queen. Now the threat is e4, forcing an awkward knight retreat to d2 or h2.

16.Qc2

Sensibly moving the queen off of the d file.

16…Nd4

The white knight on f3 is preventing moves that I would like to make, specifically Qg6. This move more or less forces Nxd4.

17.Nxd4 Rxd4 (D)

I’m not sure if this is the right recapture, but I liked it a lot. The rook is impossible to dislodge now that white’s only minor piece is the light squared bishop. This keeps the pressure on d3, with the possibility of two more attackers being piled on, and opens new threats for rook moves along the 4th rank as part of an attack on white’s king. The downside is that I pass up an option to shore up my pawns on the queenside with exd4. Still, I think the rook move is the stronger option.

18.b4

My opponent told me that he felt b4 was a blunder. He thinks that he should have played Rad8, and after Qg6 Kh2. I think he is still in trouble as after Red8 the d3 pawn still falls.

18…Qg6

I wasn’t particularly worried about the b pawn going anywhere. Yes, I’m giving him the chance to just pick off my c pawn, but this would significantly weaken his structure and I think that I wouldn’t have too much trouble winning one or both of his c pawns, especially once the pawn on d3 is gone.

19.g4

My opponent again labeled this as a blunder, saying that even here he should have preferred Kh2. The d pawn still falls, though.

19…Bxd3 20.Bxd3 Rxd3 (D)

White has several ways to go wrong here. My opponent played f3, preventing the rook check and indirectly guarding h3. Stronger seems to be Rac1, defending the queen.

21.f3

( 21.bxc5?? Rg3+! )

( 21.Qe2 Rxh3 )

( 21.Rac1 e4 22.Kg2 f5 )

21…e4

My opponent told me after the game that on this move “I was terrified, because nothing happened. I expected f5 or h5, but when I saw e4 I just thought ‘well, there goes the game’”

I was highly entertained.

22.Qe2 h5 23.Rad1 Rxa3 24.Kh2 (D)

24…hxg4 25.hxg4 cxb4 26.Kg3 f5 27.c5 (D)

Every remaining black move in the game is a check.

27…Qxg4+ 28.Kf2

( 28.Kh2 Kh2 fares no better. 28…Qh5+ 29.Kg1 exf3 30.Qc4+ Kh7 31.Rf2 Re4 32.Qd5 Rg4+ 33.Rg2 Rxg2+ 34.Kf1 Qh1# )

28…Rxf3+ 29.Ke1 Qg3+ 30.Kd2 Rd8+ 31.Kc1 Rc3+ 32.Kb1 Rb3+ (D)

Here white must give up his queen to avoid mate, but is lost in any case.

33.Kc1

This and Ka1 lose fastest. Qb2 prolongs it a bit.

( 33.Ka1 Qc3+ 34.Ka2 Ra3+ 35.Kb1 Ra1# )

( 33.Qb2 Rxb2+ 34.Kxb2 Qc3+ 35.Kb1 Rxd1+ 36.Rxd1 b3 )

33…Qc3+

With mate in 2 staring him in the face, my opponent resigned.

( 33…Qc3+ 34.Qc2 Qa1+ 35.Qb1 Qxb1# )

0-1

Diagrams generated using Steve Eddins’ Chess Imager http://www.eddins.net/steve/chess/chessimager

Now I’m sitting on +3, half a point ahead of the field. There are two people at 2.5, but one is taking a bye next week, so I’ll be playing Venkata Vutukuri, whom I defeated at the Harold Nelson Pillsbury Memorial tournament a few weeks ago, but he’s dangerous, and will definitely be the toughest game of this tournament. I hope I keep my perfect record in second meetings (+3 =0 -0 as of this writing) and win this U1300 section.

Steve Wollkind (1120)    —    Sabrina Zhang (747)
MCC Holiday Swiss (2006)  (3)   MetroWest Chess Club
2006.12.19     1-0     C24
1.e4 e5 2.Bc4 Nf6 3.d3 d5!? (D)

“Just about playable, but
probably a bit too ambitious,” says Emms.

4.exd5 Nxd5 5.Nf3 Nc6 6.O-O
Bc5 (D)

With this move, black leaves the main lines as they
are described in Emms’ book. He gives Be7 and Bg4 as likely moves at this
point, instead of Bc5.

( 6…Be7 7.Re1 )

( 6…Bg4 )

7.Re1 Bg4 8.h3 Be6 9.Nxe5 Nxe5 10.Rxe5 Qf6 (D)

I had thought this far ahead, and knew that I had
moves that would protect both f2 and the R on e5. However, my brain wasn’t
working at all, as I didn’t even consider the possibility of Bxf2. I was
totally focused on Qxf2 ideas.

11.Qe1?

( 11.d4! I never even looked at this move, but it’s clearly the
best on the board here. Attacks the bishop and cuts the connection to f2 as
well as defending the rook. )

11…Bxf2+

Oops. Now I realized my folly and started the mental
process of telling myself that being down the exchange here didn’t mean I had
to lose.

12.Qxf2 Qxf2+?

An undeserved gift. For some reason
she didn’t take my hanging rook.

( 12…Qxe5 )

13.Kxf2 (D)

It seems that castling long here would
have been the better call, as that would save the knight.

( 13…O-O-O )

14.Bxd5 Bxd5 15.Rxd5 +/-

The game is basically over at this point,
I just have to figure out how to win it. Winning simply and efficiently once I
have a winning position is not my strong suit (as will become quite clear at
the end of this game).

15…c6 16.Rd7 Rfe8 17.Rxb7 Re5 18.Bf4
(D)

I think this may have been a mistake. The bishop
needed to be developed, and developing with the attack was good, but setting
myself up for a pin was dangerous, and is asking for trouble.

18…Re6
19.Nc3 Rf6 20.Ke3 (D)

Escaping the pin and inviting the check, but I
wasn’t worried.

20…Re8+ 21.Ne4 a5 22.Rb8 (D)

Over the board I thought this was a strong move and
forced the game continuation. Now I see that black had a better move at her
disposal in Re6.

22…Rxb8

( 22…Re6 )

23.Nxf6+ gxf6 24.Bxb8 Kg7 25.a4 (D)

Freezing the pawn on black for later collection by
my bishop.

25…h5 26.Bc7 Kg6 27.Bxa5 Kg5 28.Bc7 (D)

A mistake…I had meant to play Bd8 to attack the
f6 pawn and strike at the king on g5. At this point I found myself thinking “Am
I really going to have to play this out to mate?” and wasn’t playing as
precisely as I could have.

28…h4 29.a5 Kf5 30.a6 Ke6 31.Bd8
(D)

Maybe a waste of time, but I wanted to be able to
do something useful with the bishop once the king came closer. Really the
bishop doesn’t matter at this point, but why not?

31…Kd7 32.Bxf6 Kc8
33.a7 Kb7 34.a8=Q+ Kb6 35.Ra4

( 35.Qb8+ Kc5 36.Ra5# )

35…Kb5 (D)

Oops! I was all excited about my mate in 2
threats (c5 Qa6# or Kb6 Ab8#) that I completely missed mate in 1.

( 36.Qa5# )

36…c5

( 36…Kb6 37.Qb8# )

37.Qa6# 1-0

Maybe I should be a prophet.

Online replay game at http://www.njord.org/~steve/mychess/mcc1206.htm

Jack Hulton (509)    —    Steve Wollkind (1120)
MCC
Holiday Swiss (2006)  (2)   MetroWest Chess Club
2006.12.12
    0-1     B01


1.e4 d5 2.e5

I have a feeling I’m going to see e5 a lot at the lower levels. I know
that it is better for black, but I’m not yet comfortable against it.

2…c5 3.Nc3

( 3.d4 I think this is my least favorite move to play against
here. )

3…Bf5 (D)

After e5, black can pretty much get this position if he wants it, though
the question of how to proceed is one I haven’t solved yet.

4.Bb5+ Nc6 5.Na4?!

I don’t understand this move. Any simple developing move would be better.

5…e6 (D)

6.Nxc5?? Bxc5 7.g4 (D)

I thought for a while about Qh4 here, but it ultimately didn’t seem worth
it to complicate the position. I’m already a piece ahead, so why play it
sharper than I have to?

7…Bg6

( 7…Qh4 8.d4 Bxg4 9.Qd3 )

8.h4 h6 9.h5 Bh7 10.Ba4 (D)

I wasn’t really sure what the point of this move was…it prevents Qb6 with
a double attack on the bishop and the f2 pawn. I’m not sure if that was
his plan or if he had a plan at all…

10…Ne7 11.b3 Qb6 12.Rb1 O-O 13.b4 (D)

13…Nxb4

I looked at Bxf2 but didn’t see where to go with it. Turns out it wins a
piece!

( 13…Bxf2+ 14.Kf1 Bxg1 15.Rxg1 Qa6+ Snagging the bishop on a4
)

14.Ba3 Qa5 15.Bxb4 Bxb4 (D)

16.Bd7??

Losing a bishop.

( 16.Bb3 )

16…Rfd8 17.Bb5 Qxb5 18.a3 Bxd2+ 19.Kxd2 Qc6 20.Ke1? (D)

Leaving only one defender on c2 and allowing the fork.

20…Bxc2 21.Rc1 Bxd1 22.Rxc6 bxc6 23.Kxd1 (D)

23…Rab8 24.Kc1 c5 25.g5 Nc6 26.gxh6 (D)

26…gxh6 27.Nf3 Rb3 28.Rg1+ Kh7 29.Rg3 (D)

29…Rxa3?

Oops. I’d like to say that I meant to drop the exchange here in a
simplifying move, but that’s not how it went down. I just didn’t see the
knight move to give check with a discovered attack on my rook. Fortunately
I am so far ahead that dropping an exchange doesn’t hurt, and the
simplification is actually ok.

( 29…c4 )

30.Ng5+ hxg5 31.Rxa3 d4 (D)

White has no way to defend the e pawn.

32.Rf3 Nxe5 0-1

Diagrams generated using Steve Eddins’ Chess Imager http://www.eddins.net/steve/chess/chessimager

After 2 rounds of the MCC Holiday Swiss, I’m sitting on 2 points, tied with two other players. One of those other players is listed as having byes for the rest of the tournament, so he basically doesn’t count. This Tuesday I’ll be playing Sabrina Zhang for sole possession of 1st. I haven’t seen any of her games, so I don’t really know what to expect. She’s rated in the 7 or 800 range and has beaten a few 1050’s in the past couple of months.

In other news, a player that I beat and a player that I drew in the Thanksgiving Swiss both have perfect scores in the U1600 section at this point, so I’m still kicking myself for not playing up. On the bright side, after this game (#37 in my USCF career) I finally have a plus score overall (+18 =2 -17). I’m actually +3 with white and -2 with black. Hopefully I can close out the month with another pair of wins and get to +3 overall. I guess it’s only going to get harder as the weeks go by.

In round 1 I was paired against Laurie Chen, rated 707, but you never can tell with these kids. I ended up winning easily, but wasted a number of moves screwing around rather than making any good use of my opening setup. She eventually blundered and in the process handed me some moves to pry her kingside wide open. Online replay at http://www.njord.org/~steve/mychess/mcc1206.htm

In other news it turns out that I am definitely playing in the wrong section this month. The section breaks at the MCC vary slightly from month to month to keep the player pools from getting too stagnant. This month has the lowest low section (U1300). Most of the other players rated under 1300 that are of a similar strength to me played up into the U1600 section (and are doing quite well there). I look at them knocking off these 1300 and 1400 level players and think that should be me. Now I’m down here in this U1300 section with no one within 100 official rating points of me, but it’s worse than that since I’m unofficially 1231 after the Pillsbury Memorial tournament (more on that later). At this point I’ll be a little disappointed if I _don’t_ win this section, but I’m fearing it’s going to be a lost month in terms of playing any games that are actually teaching me something.

Steve Wollkind (1120)    —    Laurie Chen (707)
MCC Holiday Swiss (2006)  (1)   MetroWest Chess Club
2006.12.05     1-0     C28i
1.e4 e5 2.Bc4 Nf6 3.d3 Bc5 4.Nc3 Nc6 5.f4 O-O 6.Nf3 d6 (D)

7.f5 b6

( 7…h6 8.Nd5 Nd4 9.Nxf6+ Qxf6 10.Nxd4 Bxd4 11.c3 Bb6 12.Qh5 John Emms, Attacking with 1 e4 )

8.Na4

Following white’s normal plan of exchanging off the dark squared bishop to castle, but I think that I should have played Nd5 and planned to not castle. Nd5 helps get rid of the annoying knight on f6. Bg5 is also an option, as black hasn’t yet played h6.

( 8.Nd5 )

8…Bb7 9.Nxc5 dxc5 10.O-O Re8 (D)

11.h3

Trying to start my pawn storm, but it is premature. Again, Bg5 to exchange off the f6 knight would have been better.

11…h6 12.a4

To prevent an annoying b5 and to give the bishop a flight square if black tries to exchange it with Na5. Probably the wrong idea here, but seems ok to try to prevent annoyances on the queenside before proceeding elsewhere.

12…Qe7 13.Nh2 (D)

My third iffy move in a row. I’m wasting a lot of time here and getting away with it since black isn’t doing much of anything. The idea was to get the knight to help out with the pawn pushes so that a pawn on g4 will be defended and allow h4 to be played. If there is any use to this move, it probably lies in Ng4 to exchange away the f6 knight.

13…Rad8

Pinning the d pawn.

14.Qe2

( 14.g4? Nxe4! )

14…Nd4 15.Qf2 Ne6?? (D)

I don’t know what black’s plan was here. This move just drops a knight.

16.fxe6 fxe6 17.Bxh6 gxh6 18.Qxf6 Qd6?? (D)

This allows a forced mate. Better, but still losing, is Qxf6 Rxf6 Kg7

( 18…Qxf6 19.Rxf6 Kg7 20.Raf1 +/- )

19.Qg6+ Kh8 20.Rf7 Qd4+ 21.Kh1 Rg8 22.Qh7# 1-0

Diagrams generated using Steve Eddins’ Chess Imager http://www.eddins.net/steve/chess/chessimager

Shane’s Chess Information Database, or SCID, is a freeware program that lets you store games, do analysis, etc. It has a feature that will export a game with comments to HTML, but makes diagrams that refer to a couple of bitmap image sets the program comes with. This is fine, but means that you must post the game html files in a directory with those bitmaps. This isn’t very handy if I want to post those games in this space.

So, I made some minor changes to the source code to make SCID export its HTML games using Steve Eddins’ Chess Imager. It’s going to make my life easier and allow me to post games right here instead of having to link to them.

If anyone else uses SCID and wants this feature, I can help you, unless you use it on Windows and downloaded your own binary, because I don’t have access to a way to compile on a Windows box. My solution will work for Linux and Mac users.

Maybe I’ll have time later today to comment and post my last few games, about which I’ve been kind of lazy.

Now, however, I must go bake.

I’m getting ahead of myself though.

First, the games so far:
http://www.njord.org/~steve/mychess/mcc1106.htm

Ok, in round 1 I had black against young Jack Hulton. I’m not good at figuring the ages of small children, but I’d guess he’s sub 10. He’s rated somewhere in the 400 to 500 range, and the outcome of the game was about what you might expect. I wasted some moves with my bishop in the late middle game, but I wasn’t thinking as hard as I would have been in a tighter game.

Round 2 had me paired against Dan Callahan, 1180 (and top seed in the U1350 section for this tournament). I’d been looking forward to the game all day, and felt pretty confident that, as long as I was careful, I had a good chance to win. Imagine my shock, sadness and disgust when I got my queen and rook forked on move 9. If I’m going to keep playing the bishop’s opening with an early f4, I’m going to have to get a little better at protecting my kingside….

I did my best not to get despondent, but for a few minutes I sort of sat there and told myself that maybe I’m not as much better than the 871 that sits by my name as I’d like to think. I pulled it together and set about trying to make sure that my opponent’s knight (now sitting at h1) wouldn’t get away, and telling myself that being down the exchange means almost nothing in a game between class E players.

10 moves after I dropped my rook, my opponent dropped his to discovered check after playing an ill advised f6. Still, I wasn’t on my game, as I should have taken his bishop at b6 rather than the pawn at c7 when discovering the attack on the king, but I was so full of thanks for whatever power caused black to find nearly the worst move on the board that I didn’t think for very long about how I was going to exploit it.

For my opponent, having a won game fall back to something more even was clearly a psychological blow. His body language definitely looked bad at that point. We exchanged a ton of material off and ended up in a fairly locked up endgame that was, I think, better for white, though black still had some chances. He spent a lot of time harassing my king and rook with his nearly-trapped knight, giving me plenty of chances to get forked again, but as so often happens my senses were much sharper after having been down for a while. I kept his threats in mind and played along with the rook-king-knight dance until it was exhausted and set about trying to think about promoting some pawns. That turned out not to be necessary as black played the losing Nh3 and saved me the trouble.

This is definitely a game that I didn’t deserve to win, but he deserved to win less. I’m not sure now which section I belong in….when I don’t drop pieces I think I’m not out of place in the 1300-1600 section, but when I can’t see 1 move tactics I play like an 800 or worse. Still, I stand to learn more if I play against higher rated players and avoid the kids down in the 500 range.

I have to take a bye next week (wife’s birthday) so I’ll be off until the final round of this tournament on the 28th. At that point I should get paired against the winner of the top matchup this week, and play for a share of first place. Maybe that game will help me figure out where I belong.

Until then, I clearly need to get back to the tactics. I really haven’t been making progress with CTB lately. Life keeps getting in the way. I can find time to play chess, but have a hard time finding the time to really study, and if I don’t actually work at it I’m not going to improve. Games are important, but don’t seem to be helping me train out my bad habits.

Second, a warning:
Only game 2 is really worth looking at.

I played in the U1600 section, which is really where I belong at this point, but since it was the bottom section for the tournament there were a ton of small children who were at their first tournaments. I played first timers in rounds 1 and 3 and destroyed them. I didn’t really learn much from these games and both ended with my having used between 5 and 10 minutes of clock time.

In round 4 I took a bye as my wife and I had a dinner party to attend, but in round 2 I played Nicholas Lesieur. Nicholas is rated 1440 or so. I didn’t play badly, but I didn’t play interestingly either. Ultimately I lost a piece to a pin I didn’t see coming, but I think I was strategically worse for most of the game. This was my first use of the Scandinavian in a serious game. I want to learn it because I’m tired of trying to be ready for all the different white tries after 1 … e5. I really want to be driving the direction of the game, and e5 doesn’t let me do that. I also think that the Nf6 Scandinavian is likely to be something that my opponents aren’t particularly ready to face. Clearly, though, I need to spend more time figuring out how to see tactics coming my direction than I need to spend booking up on e4 d5.

Anyone have a clue on what the performance rating is for 2/3 vs unr-unr-1440? [Edit: it turns out to be something like 1000, and I actually lost ground with my +1 score here!]

Also, I’ve been busy.

Last night I played in round 2 of the MCC Thanksgiving Swiss tournament, and last weekend I played in the BU Open. I’ll give each of these events their own post, I think, to keep this one from getting too long.

The cutoff for the December USCF ratings supplement was before either of these events started, however, so I now know that my next official rating will be 1120. Much more respectable than the 871 I’ve been playing with for the past few months, but I’ll be sorry to lose some of the element of surprise when playing 11 and 1200 players.

In other news, the October Thursday Night Swiss at the BCC concluded this week. I played Greg Hager, who is unfortunately homebound, and defeated him with black in a KGA miniature. I kept the win/lose alternation streak alive and finished 2-2 in this tournament as well. This was good enough to tie me for the U1700 prize, so I took $30 home last night.

I never expected to win anything, and I don’t play for the prizes, but it was a nice encouragement. Chess prizes are a little weird. Winning them at my level is a function of being better than my rating for the time being. Once I improve I’ll move into the bottom of the next section and prizes will be a thing of the past Sadly, the game I blew in the second round of the Sudbury tournament cost me around $200 dollars, as 3 points would have put me in first place, or at least in a tie for it.

Speaking of rating, those two events will bring me up to somewhere near 1120. 1200 is in sight!

No chess this coming week, as I’m shifting to the MetroWest club, which plays on Tuesdays, and this coming Tuesday is not yet November. Saturday the 11th is the BU open, which was a lot of fun last year and I’m looking forward to going again, though I’m a little tempted by the NH Amateur Championship, since there’s an U1300 section there and BU only has U1600, but BU is closer to home, it was fun last year, and I’m not afraid of the slightly stronger competition.

I’m still having a lot of problems seeing tactics that are coming at me, and I think the only thing that’ll help that is more games, more tactical puzzles, and a greater focus on asking myself what the opponent’s last move accomplished and what his threats are.

All in all, I’m happy with my performance. The October Swiss tournament brings me up to 25 USCF games, so the BU tournament will finally let me pull that (P) off of my rating, for what that’s worth. It’s definitely time to stop playing at the BCC for now though…the four games I played there this month were all blowouts, and while I learned more from the losses than the wins, I didn’t learn a whole lot. MetroWest, here I come. I hope to begin terrorizing the lower section in Natick on election day

Finally, if you want to take a look at the games from either tournament, you can find them at
http://www.njord.org/~steve/mychess/sudbury.htm
http://www.njord.org/~steve/mychess/otns.htm

In brief: I had the black side of a two knights’ defense, defended against 8. Qf3 for the first time (played 8 … Bb7, which is not good, instead of the main line moves of 8 … h6 or 8 … Rb8), made some questionable moves, dropped a piece to a removal of the guard tactic, played on because my attack was looking strongish and his pieces were uncoordinated, had my attack fizzle, and resigned after I dropped a rook to a knight fork.

So, two bad tactical errors, one much worse than the other, but the rest of my play was mostly ok. After going over the game with me, Ruben pointed to my rating and asked if I had just started playing, because he thought I played better than 800. I said that, after September’s tournament my rating actually went up to 1036. He chuckled and said that I had played a good deal better than 1036 as well, which is nice to hear, if not actually helpful for winning games or getting better.

On the bright side, I’m over 1000 for the first time, and I think I’m playing fairly well, for me. Still having a hard time seeing tactics that are coming at me, but I think that some of that has to do with my thought process.

Sudbury tournament starts tomorrow ( the 2 day section, anyway) and I’ll have two G/55’s and one G/155. I’ve gotten used to the 40/90 G/25 at the club, so I’m a little worried about the G/55 games, but I think I’ll be ok. I’m looking forward to potentially tearing up the U1300 section, but I don’t want to get ahead of myself. I think I’d be satisfied with a + score, which would be a first. I’m going to set my goals low though, and say that I want to at least win 1 game out of the 3 I have tomorrow. I went 0-3 on the first day of the Eastern Chess Congress back in March, and that was a little depressing (though it put me in a position to get some very weak opponents for rounds 4 and 5).

Any advice out there for the best food to take with you for a long day of playing?

You can see this game and my first round game at http://www.njord.org/~steve/mychess/otns.htm

I’m certainly happy to be on the winning side again, and it was nice to play a game where the computer says I was better from wire to wire.

One moment of hesitation: I’ve been working from Emms’ “Attack with 1 e4″ book, and I know that after 1. e4 e5 2. Bc4 Nc6 3. Nc3 Bc5 he suggests 4. Qg4 with some trappy, crazy looking stuff coming after that, but I haven’t learned it yet and chickened out and went for the much safer looking 4. d3. Blue Devil (if you’re reading this) I know you play the BO…have you ventured into the 4. Qg4 lines at all?

In other news, I’ve recently crested 800 tries at CTS. My accuracy continues to plummet (around 78.8% now) and my rating continues to hover. I’m just not very fast when it comes to digesting positions, and most of the 1450+ problems take me forever to solve, when I manage to solve them. Also annoying are the problems that, even after I look at the solution, don’t seem to result in any tactical gain. Hmm.

Finally, I’m very much looking forward to the two larger tournaments I’m going to be playing in the next couple of weeks. I think I’m quite a bit better than my rating at the moment and hope to do very well in the U1300 section at the Sudbury River Fall Classic (formerly the Fall NorthEast Chess Getaway) next weekend, and perhaps slightly less well in the U1600 section at the BU Open in 4 weeks.

Sadly, the New York Stock Exchange is open today, so I have to be at work. That’s ok, I got free donuts in the bargain…

In other news, I determined last night that I’m really awful at chess when I’m tired. Like, tremendously bad. I couldn’t sleep, so I logged on to FICS and played some blitz. Wow. I hung pieces left and right, I missed my opponents doing the same, I generally didn’t fare well at all. I’d say that being tired effectively drops my FICS blitz rating by 100 to 200 points. This shouldn’t be that surprising, but it’s an important revelation to me: sometimes, I just shouldn’t play chess, and as a corollary, all that stuff about getting a good night’s sleep the night before should probably be paid some heed when I go to all day tournaments.

Maybe I’ll do better tonight.

In other news, I’m stagnating at CTS. I’m up to almost 700 tries, but my success rate has dropped from 80+ to just over 79. I feel like I can’t get any problems right anymore, and the ones I do get right take me forever. I think I crossed some threshold where the problems I’m getting are suddenly much harder. A few weeks ago I did a lot of problems and very quickly shot up to 1350, but ever since I’ve been getting hammered and have drifted back down to 1319. I know that solving the problems is good for me, even if I’m not that fast, but it really irks me to get a problem right and lose points since it took me 30 seconds.

Finally, I got to play my first Legal sacrifice in a game today on FICS, only to find out later I’d screwed it up, and if the guy didn’t take the queen bait I’d have been fish bait. It worked out, and I am still somewhat happy about recalling the themes and how it works, but next time I’ll remember that it doesn’t actually work with a knight on c6….

I was pretty sure that I was capable of beating him, but knew it wouldn’t be easy either. This game was just as tense as I expected it to be. Once again, if you believe the chess engine, I probably should have lost. It occurs to me that, until I’m better than crafty, I’ll probably make at least one move that it considers “game losing” in every game I play. This makes me wonder how to get my mind around that. I think I played an ok game, and came out on top against an opponent that pushed and pushed, but the computer says I was lucky to win.

How do the rest of you deal with this, mentally? Can I take satisfaction in this game? In any game? Are games of chess at my level always going to be lost, rather than won?

Angst aside, I’m pretty happy with this game and the tournament as a whole. I scored 2 points against a field of (roughly) 1250,1550,1920,1390 for a performance near 1500. I’ll probably bring my embarrassing 871 up to a more respectable 1000 or so, if you believe the calculator on the USCF site. I’ve also pretty much answered my question about the general worth of participating in this tournament: I can complete with these people, or enough of them to put up a reasonable score.

So anyway, here is the round four game. My Qh3 move is cover-your-eyes awful, but I didn’t give up, even when I was certain he was about to smash me. A friend of mine (who is a much stronger player) looked over my games from this tournament and after telling me a lot of the things I did wrong said that I have “much better nerves” than some of the players I faced. My two victories definitely contained positions and moments where I was on the edge: but is it a strength or weakness to be able to play your plan in the face of a strong attack by your opponent? I guess if it works out in your favor then it’s a strength.

This Thursday I get to start all over again in the October Thursday Night Swiss tournament. I think I’ll be a while before I’m coming out with plus scores, but at least maybe I have a chance of putting up an even zero again.

Perhaps someone who has done many more CTS puzzles can enlighten me, but some of the puzzles I find hardest are the ones where the right answer is a simple recapture with no obvious tactic. Are those thrown in just to ‘keep us honest’ or am I totally missing the point there? In many cases I wish the solutions went a few ply deeper so I could understand what’s going on….little makes me feel like I got less out of a problem than to solve it correctly with a move that appears to accomplish nothing.

Tomorrow is the last round of the September Thursday Night Swiss tournament at the Boylston Chess Club. I don’t know who I’m playing, but I imagine that my opponent will be rated 1200+. I know I can beat people in the low end of that range if I play carefully and get a position I feel comfortable with, but we’ll see what happens. Though I don’t like thinking this way, getting 1 point out of the 1250, 1550 and 1900 I already played (given that I’m an 870) means that I’ve already had a “successful” tournament, I suppose.

This brings me to an important question though. Given that these tournaments are small and tend to be full of people rated at least 400 points higher than I am, is it worth playing in more? I love that it forces me to play at least one slow game per week, but in most of these games I’ll be fairly over my head. I know you improve by playing stronger players, but how much do you gain from a game against someone rated 1000 points higher than you?

As for the World Championship Match, I have little to say aside from I enjoy reading others’ commentary, would love to see a real championship cycle return, and that one of my primary goals in chess is to get strong enough to be able to understand these games and their commentary. At least a little bit….

Oh. One last thing. For some reason I no longer seem to get emailed when you folks comment, so I’m sorry if you feel ignored. I’m going to check my settings, and failing finding a fix there, visit more frequently.

Worst OTB game I’ve played. Period. There’s no excuse for dropping a piece on move 8 in a 40/90 G/25 time control game. Sure, the guy was a 1900 and likely would have beaten me anyway, but I didn’t have to hand him the game. A 1100 or 500 would have found Qa5+ with my piece hanging on b5.

It’s stuff like this, things that are so simple but I overlook anyway, that make me wonder how I’ll ever improve. When I don’t drop pieces I’m a lot better than my rating, and when I do, I’m as bad or worse.

More tactics, I guess, but I don’t know about that either. I’m seeing pretty good tactics for myself, but I still have a hard time seeing even simple tactics for the opponent. I guess the problem is not that I can’t find them, but I don’t make looking for them part of my normal routine.

Another problem I have is that when I feel like I’m in ‘the opening’ my mind doesn’t look for tactics as much, so I am much more vulnerable in the first 10 moves than the next 10, especially in positions that I’m not familiar with. Perhaps I need to play more blitz just to get comfortable in the openings I play?

Sigh. -1 now on the tournament, final round a week from today. At -1 I should get someone I have some sort of shot of playing a reasonable game against, I hope. Between now and then, hopefully I can find some time to play.

In other news, haven’t spent much time on chess this week. I did go to IM Husari’s Monday night chess class/shindig at the Medford library. The attendees were mostly small children, their parents, and a few older folks. I strongly suspect that my 15 USCF games were more than anyone in the room aside from the IM himself, and I had to explain to the woman playing to my right that castling involves the king and rook, rather than the king and knight. To be fair, she was a bit flustered because the child she was playing had brought his Harry Potter novelty set, and it was both 1) difficult to tell the pieces apart and 2) difficult to keep them from falling over in domino style chain reactions. I did have a reasonably interesting game against and older fellow that I got paired against. He asked me my rating, and when I told him he started to tell me all about how e4 c5 is the Sicilian defense…eventually IM Husari came around and said he didn’t want discussion during the game, for which I’m thankful since it was going to get a little annoying. Anyway, I played my standard closed Sicilian and got some helpful hints on the general plan from the IM as he visted each board in turn giving pointers to whomever was on the move.

My opponent eventually played an exchange sacrifice that didn’t work out so well for him, and although I had to offer it back on several occasions, he didn’t take me up on it. 8:30 came and his position was evaluated as losing, but he was a little cranky about it. If I go back I’ll probably play him again.

But is it worth going back? The two or three nuggets of information I got from the instructor probably made the trip worth it, but the crowd was overwhelmingly sub 10 years old…

Oh well. Chess is chess, and I suppose I shouldn’t pass up free hints from an IM twice a month.

My opponent and I both developed fairly strong attacks, and both of us wasted a lot of tempos (is that even a little grammatical?) in the process. His attack should probably have prevailed, but in the end I got there first.

I’m not sure how to feel about this game, and it makes me wonder about the psychological effect of post-game computer analysis. I think I played, what for me, was a good game, but crafty is pretty sure that I spent most of it in a losing position and should have lost. How good can I feel about a game that I won only because my opponent missed his best move (the same move) on numerous turns? I made some rash decisions because I was impatient and wanted to press my attack, and he could have punished me for it, and didn’t.

So, should I take my win over a player rated ~375 points higher than me and run with it, or should I fret over all the things I did in this game that will come back to haunt me in the future?

Hopefully this weekend I’ll have time to annotate it some and stick it up on one of these crazy chess viewer applets.

In other news, I managed to stick to my plan of doing at least some chess work every day. I did about 50 CTS problems on Tuesday night, and on Wednesday I really had no time, so I did 3. 3 is better than zero, I think. My rating there is up to 1310 or so. But the rating isn’t as important to me as the success rate and the number of tries, which are both on their way up.

Happy Friday, everyone.

http://www.boston.com/news/local/Massachusetts/articles/2006/09/14/teacher_accused_of_sex_assaults/

I’ve never met the man, so I know nothing about him, but I kind of hope that someone steps in to take over for him and that the fall NorthEast Chess getaway still happens…I was planning to attend.

In other news, I have my second game of the Boylston Chess Club’s September Thursday Night Swiss tournament tonight. Hopefully it will be more interesting than the last game, in which I played the black side of an anti-Marshall against a guy rated 700 points higher than I am. Note that I wasn’t attempting to play the Marshall, it’s just where I ended up by playing moves that seemed ok. Anyway, I played reasonably for 20 moves or so, and then got my self twisted up in some tactical badness and lost a piece. I’d play on down a piece against anyone rated under, oh, 1100 or so, but against a 1570? I didn’t feel like it….

Tactics books I have:
303 Tactical Chess Puzzles
Bain’s Chess Tactics for Students
Seirawan’s Winning Chess Tactics
Papa Polgar’s Brick

I’ve done at most 200 puzzles from the Polgar book. I’ve done about 200 from the 303 book. I’ve done pretty much all from Seirawan and Bain’s books, but that’s not more than 300 between them, if that. I don’t feel like counting. Let’s throw in another 100 to be safe to cover puzzles I’ve printed from various sources. All told that’s somewhere less than 800 printed chess puzzles in my life.

Moving online, at current count I have done 331 puzzles at the CTS (80% success, 1280 rating), and about 150 from Chess Tactics for Beginners.

I’ve done very few of these problems more than once, so that means that in my entire life I’ve solved fewer than 1200 to 1300 chess puzzles. Given the numbers some of you other people are putting up I’m not surprised that I’m missing tactics, especially ones that my opponent is about to play.

Speaking of the CTS, I find the time limits there somewhat infuriating. As you can tell from my rating and success rate, I work sort of slowly. It’s never fun to lose points on a puzzle you get right just because you didn’t do it fast enough, but I guess that’s what pattern recognition is all about.

At any rate, I’m setting a goal for the next week or so. I’m tempted to say something like “100 puzzles a day” but I know, given the constraints of my life that that would be difficult. I’m going to set a goal that I have a chance of meeting. My goal for now is simply this: do some tactical puzzles every day. That’s it. Lame, I know, but you have to start somewhere. I think that if I keep a slow and steady pace I can get to 1000 at CTS by the end of the month, but I don’t want to set my expectations too high.

The next such session is a week from today at 7PM. Those of you out there who are in the Boston area should join me for the joint purposes of 1) meeting one another and 2) playing some chess. IM Husari said in these sessions he tries to pair people with others of similar strength and will comment on the games and give you ideas about what you might be doing differently.

I don’t know how useful it’ll be, but I’m not going to pass up a free opportunity to get some ideas and find out if I like this guy’s teaching style…

No offence, but this is probably more “for me” than “for you.” I figure if I write about what’s going on, especially the games that I’m playing and my study progress, that it’ll help keep me on track. Having the occasional reader (and hopefully commenter) along for the ride is just a bonus.

So, for starters, let’s make this post about where I currently am, and where I hope to go.

I’ve known how to play chess since I was quite young, but just played occasionally with my friends. I never tried to make chess a serious hobby until about 5 years ago. At that point I got tired of playing my old chess computer and decided to check out online chess. I started at Yahoo! and quickly grew tired of the lack of seriousness there, and moved on to FICS, where I have played on and off since. More off than I’d like.

Time for a quick aside: I find that my chess interest waxes and wanes, and I’ll be bitten by the chess bug for a few months here and there, and then tire of it. I’m not sure what drives this, but I do know that so far this hasn’t been a recipe for success. I’ve learned some things over the past few years, but I feel ready to get more serious.

I joined the USCF a little over a year ago, and have played in only 3 OTB events in that time. A one day rapid tournament at my local club back in July of ‘05 (The Boylston Chess Club in Davis Square, Somerville, MA), the BU open in November of ‘05 (where I apparently split the U1200 prize with three other folks but didn’t know that until very recently) and the Eastern Class Championship in Sturbridge earlier this year. My record in that time is +4 =0 -9 for a shiny USCF rating of 871.

Bleh.

Now, I’m sure many sub 1000 players say this, but I think I’m a little better than that. Of course, it’s now up to me to prove it.

My plan isn’t as fancy as some who are out here, but I’m keeping it simple for now: I’m going to do lots of tactics puzzles and play in more events.

I made progress towards the latter of those goals this past week. I entered the BCC Thursday Night Swiss tournament for the month of September. This’ll get me one 40/90 G/25 game per week for the month. I led off with a loss this week to drop my all time tournament record to -6 overall, but given that the guy was rated about 700 points higher than I was I guess I couldn’t have expected to win. I don’t think I acquitted myself too poorly, and that game will be the subject of an upcoming post.

Oh, right, the title. So all of you other chess bloggers have these nifty titles. I couldn’t think of a good one, so I stole one from an acquaintance of mine. “Strong Among the Weak” is a phrase that Chad Ellis once used to describe his Magic: The Gathering skills, and in particular he was discussing trying to break into a higher class of play. Now, you may rightly say to yourself that an 871 isn’t strong among anyone. Fair and not fair. Sure, I’m rated below the vast majority of rated chess players (I know I can find the percentiles on USCF’s website somewhere, but I’m too lazy right now), but I tend to beat anyone who doesn’t actually consider himself a ‘chess player.’

So, I find myself straddling that line between someone who plays chess, and chess players, and I’d like to move from the former group to the latter. We’ll see how it goes.

I’ll keep you up to date. The next couple of posts will discuss my tactics situation in more detail and look at last week’s game.