Wacky Wednesday: Adventures In Cracktion Land!

As I mentioned in my high altitude post, I decided that traveling almost an hour each way to play one chess game that could last anywhere from an hour (totally stupid play) to the full four hours (thinkathon) was not worth the time and expense. As it was, three out the six weeks of the tournament I ended out playing in the cracktion den upstairs. Fear not gentle readers, I have not totally reverted to the dark side. It's just that if I'm playing at the Marshall Chess Club on Thursday it will be with the cracktion-heads upstairs, not the slow pokes downstairs.

My first trip in a month to cracktion-land was not pretty. Even though the calendar said Thursday November 12th, I felt like Friday the 13th came a day early. It started in the morning with my Tae Kwon Do master telling me after class that he thinks my technique has regressed. He said my kicks were better when I was a purple belt, and that my stamina doesn't seem to be as good. I thought I was doing okay, but I have felt like my brain has been in overload as I've been working on relearning and refining the old forms. In a future post I will discuss the overload issue because it does tie in with chess learning. ACIS of Martial Arts?

I had debated about whether I wanted to play that night, but decided I needed to get my mind off of Tae Kwon Do for awhile, and try to utilize my brain over the chess board. The train ride down to the city should have an indicator that I was not at my peak mentally. First I realized I had left my sandwich at home which meant I was going to have rush and get something before getting to the club. Then I started reading. After a few stops I found myself getting tired, so I put the book down and decided to nap. That was one hell of a nap. I fell dead asleep and the train cleaner had to wake me up at Grand Central to tell me "last stop". Good thing I was getting off at the last stop or knows where I would have ended out.

My night was Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde, or perhaps Dr. White and Ms-played Black. I played decently with White against my higher rated opponents in rounds one and three. I lost both those games, but it was a matter of an extra pawn. I didn't feel bad about those games. I can deal with losing if the games were close.

However my play with the Black pieces was just horrendous. In my second round game I reached this position after 14. Qe2 Bd7? (taking away the escape square for my knight.) 15. Be3

I saw that my queen was under attack. At the same time I realized that with his bishop on e3 he would have 16. f4 after I move my queen. My knight has nowhere to go. I was trying to find a move that would protect my queen, and give my knight an escape square. Such a move did not exist, but somehow in trying to give my knight an escape square I forgot about White's bishop and my queen. I played 15...f5?? which was met with 16. Bxb6! Oh crap! I couldn't even blame that on time pressure. I still over 15 minutes left on my clock.

I followed up that ugly game with a hard fought loss with the White pieces in round 3. Now I'm sitting at the bottom with an 0-3 score with a bye be a distinct possibility. After the two close losses with White, and the butt ugly loss with Black I was kind of hoping I'd get the bye in the last round. Put me out of my misery please!! Given how the entire day had gone, it should not have surprised me that the number of players remained even. I got to play another game with the Black pieces. This game was just about as ugly as my second round game with Black. We reached the position below after 11...Nb6 12. Be2


There are a number of moves I can make here. However, I made the insipid pawn capture of 12...cxd4. He answers with 13. Bb4 winning the exchange after 13...Qd5 14. Bxf8 Kxf8. The game continued 15. Qxd4 Qc6 16. Qb4+ Kg8 17. Rfd1. His position is strong and my development isn't even completed. At this point I look at my watch. I'm trying to figure out if I resign at that moment, whether I can make the 11:14 train. "Let's see. It's 10:50. That gives me 24 minutes to catch the subway and make it to Grand Central. The worst that will happen is if I miss the 11:14 I can take the 11:45 train. Either way it sure beats playing this out, and being on the 12:30 train."

"I'm outta here! Good night!"

For the first time all day I had played the winning combination. My timing was perfect. A subway pulled in practically the moment I arrived. The 11:14 train was on one of the track platforms closest to the subway exit. What more could I ask for? I decided no naps on the way back, otherwise I might have ended out in North White Plains. Another ugly night in cracktion Land and almost all of the rating points gained last month, down the tubes.

They All Flew Over the Marshall Nest

Apologies to Ken Kesey who wrote One Flew Over The Cuckoo's Nest, but that's the best way to describe Thursday night's Four Rated Games Tonight! Was there a full moon, or what? Chess players are often described as a little eccentric. Those who don't mince words might say we are all insane. Let's just say that some of the players who attend on Thursday night are colorful characters. It just seemed that there was a little more color then usual.

The first indication that things might be a little off was the entrance of one player who one might say had a little too much to drink before the tournament. He comes in, completely cuts the line and then asks people who have just finished entering whether they're on line or not. He must have asked about three different people, who all said no. However he ignored all the people who actually were on line. Finally somebody points out where the end of the line is, and he goes there. When he gets up to the front, he asks Steve if it takes 2.5 points to qualify for the St. John's Masters tournament. Steve says yes, and this fellow boldly proclaims he's going to qualify.

The first round pairings go up, and I'm paired against IM Jay Bonin for the second week in a row. Jay and I almost never play in this tournament because usually I'm way down in the bottom half. Last week we played because it was a Grand Prix tournament and he was only #7 in the event. This week we played because I was actually fairly high in the bottom half. Last week was the first time I played him since 2007 Last Blunder tournament in Saratoga Springs. I was 0-14 against him going into last week. Now after two straight weeks of playing him I'm 0-16. Though this week's game was probably my best game ever against him.

Long before I lost to Jay, "Mr. I'm Qualifying!" loses in about 5 minutes to his 2000 rated opponent. It made my Kassa Krush look long in comparison. Even the two kids rated 300 and 164 lasted longer against their 1000+ higher rated opponents. Nope, neither of these kids were the 114 from two weeks ago. These were two brothers that were brought to the tournament by their mother. It was obvious she did not have a clue about this tournament. When she entered them, she asked Steve what trophies they could win. I guess she figured since her kids played for trophies in Steve's New York Under 13 tournament, there would be trophies in this tournament too. Oops!

Things got crazy for me in the second round. I got paired down against a provisionally rated 1156. Nothing overly spectacular about the game. I got some good play out of the opening. After 17 moves we reach the following position after 17...Nc6.



At first glance I looked at 18. Ne6+ Kh8 19. Nxd8 Nxd4 20. Rxd4 Rbxd8. That was just a bunch of even trades. Then I noticed that the knight on c6 was en prise so I simply played 18. Bxc6. What I neglected to look at deeper was 18. Ne6+ Kh8 19. Bxc6. Black's queen and rook are still forked, so I still pick up the rook after 19...Qe7 20. Nxf8. A minor hiccup in my analysis.

Around the 44th move I notice that he has stopped keeping score. I have about 6:30 left on my clock, and he has around 13 minutes. This is the position.



At this point I tell my opponent that he needs to continue keeping score until one of us is under 5 minutes. He tells me. "I messed up my score." I tell him it doesn't matter. He needs to continue from the move we left off on. He repeats to me that he's messed up and can't keep score. I stop the clock to get Steve so that he can explain the rule to him. He starts my clock, and says "It's your turn." I stop the clock again and tell him I'm getting the director. When I leave the room he's started my clock again.

Steve comes in and explains to him that he needs to keep score. He starts arguing with Steve. I'm arguing with him because he started my clock again. The players around us are getting annoyed, so Steve has us come out of the playing room so that we don't cause more of a disturbance then we already have. I must admit, I've totally lost my patience and cool at this point. Steve tells him if he wants he doesn't have to keep score but he's going to reduce his time down to 5 minutes. He also tells my opponent he's going to add 2 minutes to my time since he (opponent) had started my clock when I got the director. My opponent is going on about how it was my move. He didn't seem to get the idea that a player may stop the clock to get the director.
Now my opponent goes off on me, and tells me I'm taking this game way too seriously. He tells me this is supposed to be fun, and now I've ruined his fun. After Steve makes the various adjustments to the clock my opponent says to me. "I hope you're happy now. You better win this game." That comment ticked me off because he didn't have to play on if he thought he was so lost. I went back to the board, and went into hyper focus mode. Instead of grabbing more pawns, I forced the rooks off the board. I wasn't going to give him any chance to get some cheap shot in with his rook. Eventually I promoted and mated him on c2. One of my friends who was watching the end, said I looked so intense and totally focused.

I kind of felt bad that I had made such a big deal about the score keeping thing, but I felt I was going to lose more time on the clock if I kept keep score and he didn't. I've had too many "won games" get tossed because my opponent has a big edge on the clock. I could have chosen to stop keeping score when he did, but I like getting as many of the moves as possible. I had no idea that he was going get so agitated over having to keep score. I also don't think he realized what he agreed to when Steve gave him the option of not keeping score but having his time knocked down to 5 minutes.

After the game I apologized for coming across as too hardcore. I tried to explain myself, but he went off about how I serious I take chess because I have a nice clock and a Mon Roi. He goes on about how chess is supposed to be fun, and so on and so forth. What can I say? Some women like to spend their extra money on designer clothes and shoes. I like spending mine on chess toys.

It's funny because there had been a very lively discussion about this topic in the USCF Forums. In the thread I had cited an incident that I had in one of the Parents & Friends in Florida a few years ago. One of the posters complemented me on my cool in that situation. This time I wasn't so cool. Part of it may have been the fear of losing a won game. The night before I had a tough time fighting my demons as I was attempting to win a game up a rook and bishop for three pawns with queens still on the board. More about that game in another post.

Could things get any stranger? Yes. After having lost a tough game to Larry Tamarkin in round three, I get paired down against an unrated who beat an 1850 in the first round. A funny thing always happens a few months before the World Open. Unrateds or players with provisional ratings come out the woodwork, and conveniently start tossing games. Did my last round opponent dump this game? I am White. Look at the position below, and you be the judge.

Position after 26...Nf3+. The game continued 27. Kg3 Rxe1 28. Rxe1 Qd6+?? Did he really miss 28. Rxe1? At this point I figure the dump is on. 29. Kxf3 Qc6+ 30. Kg3 Qd6+ 31. Kg2 Qc6+ 32. Kg1 Qf3 33. Qb2 This is my test move. Is he going to allow me 34. Re8#? 33...Qxh3??? 34. Re8#

I alerted Steve about the game. My opponent would have ended out with a rating around 1850 if he had won this game along with his first round win against Gabor Schnitzler. Yep, that same Mr. Schnitzler that I lost to a few weeks ago. Yes the same Mr. Schnitzler who owns me with a record of 30 wins, 4 draws and 8 losses.

However I was not the only one receiving a gift in the last round. Remember the two brothers who were looking for trophies in this tournament? The 164 rated player was playing my second round opponent, "Mr. I Play Chess For Fun". What is the probability of player who is outrated by 1000 points winning? Normally around .001. However when somebody wants to lose badly enough the probability goes up substantially. Though it was kind of iffy whether "Mr. Fun" could actually escape with a loss. The kid had two queens, but it took him awhile to execute the mate. There was a good chance he'd stalemate first. Though if your opponent is determined to lose, you'll probably stumble over the mate sooner or later.

I have a couple of questions. Is this guy trying to sandbag his way down to the under 900 section at the World Open where he can win the walloping $300 and a trophy for first place? My other question is; Why do people trying to sandbag at "Four Rated Games Tonight" where the tournament director also works the World Open and will remember you, and there are so many high rated players?

As to "Mr. I'm Qualifying!", he went 1-3 with his one win against the 164. Better luck next time. Try again for next month. Maybe one of these days I can get that elusive 2.5 and qualify. I'm a little more realistic about my chances. I also don't like making predictions. Predictions usually get me in trouble.

Wacky Wednesday!: The Korley Krush.

As I mentioned in my last post, I was one to talk about being over matched. I rant about a 118 playing 1500 - 2000 points over his head yet I have a 12 move game in that same tournament in round one. I played Kassa Korley. Even though I've yet to beat him, I should not have lost the way I did last Thursday's game. It was a case of overreacting to an attack that wasn't all that it was cracked up to be.

Probably most annoying was overlooking the pin of my f2 pawn. I can't begin to count how may times I've had my g pawn captured because the f pawn was pinned to my king by Black's bishop on the g1-a6 diagonal. Usually when that happens my king side falls apart quickly, and Black gets a vicious attack. I think this the earliest in game that I've fallen into this pin.

Here's the game. Analsysis is not deep. Probably the 118 could have found a better move then 11. h4.


Polly-Kassa043009.pgn


I can delay mate for 6 more moves, by sac'ing pieces. However I couldn't see it. The mate in one looked bad enough. How does White prolong the agony? [13. Bf4 Qxf4 14. Qd6 Bxd6 15. Rfd1 Qxf2+ 16. Kh1 Ne3 17. Rg1 Qxh4+ 18. Bh3 Qxh3#] Answer in the brackets. The only bright side to losing that horribly is; the remaing games , could not be any worse.

Saturday Sadistics (Statistics)!!

The original title for this post was "Rant of the Week: Is this parent nuts?" However after going off on one of my mad statistical hunts to answer the question I posed in my original title, I decided the post needed a more fitting title. I'll let you you answer the question yourself after looking at my data.

Sometimes I think after 35 plus years in chess that I've seen everything. Then something happens makes me scratch my head and think to myself "WTF??" I thought April Fools was on the first day of April not on the last day. I guess since I didn't play on April 1st, Caissa decided to have a little fun on April 30th. Last night I played in my 203rd "Four Rated Games Tonight!" tournament at the Marshall Chess Club. Don't be overwhelmingly impressed with that number. Gabor Schnitzler hasn't missed a Thursday night tournament in several years. Jay Bonin misses maybe one or two in a year. I can't even begin to tell you how many Thursday nights those two played. They both could stop now, never play again, and I probably wouldn't catch up with them.

It's a very strong tournament. With a time limit of Game/30 it's not for the faint of heart. There have been nights where half the field has been rated over 2200. I've had my share of nights where at 1700 I've been last on the wall chart, and have to try to dodge the annoying early round bye. (Note: The linked post has been edited to include a game that had vanished in Chess Publisher's black hole. I reposted in Chess Flash and I've added new analysis to it.) The lowest class prize the organizer gives out is Under 2000. Some nights it takes 2.5 to 3 points to win win that prize. With a prize structure like that sometimes one is tempted to ask; "Why would anyone rated under 1800 want to play in a tournament like that?"

Why? Because it's an fairly inexpensive way ($20-$40 entry fee) to get some an opportunity to play stronger players. That's why I play in the tournament. I know I'm going to get at least two if not more games against higher rated players. Any serious kid from the New York City area plays in the tournament to get the experience against strong competition, and the opportunity to pick up rating points. There are kids that used to play in scholastic tournaments that I directed that move to playing in this tournament. They may get hammered when they first start playing in this tournament as a 1400. Those who stick with it eventually work their way up, and break 1900. I know I've contributed numerous rating points over the years to those rising kids.

I've played 790 games in this particular tournament between July 1997 and April 2009. Wayne Zimmerle's MSA data program and an Excel spreadsheet made it possible to figure this stuff out. I'm an Excel addict. I love putting data in an Excel spreadsheet, manipulating it by doing different sorts and coming up with statistics about win-loss records against various players, average rating, and the different range of people and ratings I've played over the years. The MSA data program takes all of a player's rating history and generates different reports. These reports are in text file format but can be imported into Excel. I sorted my history by tournament and then took all the Thursday cracktion data and put it on a separate page and then played with it. To borrow from Paul Simon, there must be "50 Ways to Sort This Data."

My record in Thursday night "cracktion" is 124 wins, 86 draws and 580 losses. Yes that looks pretty bad. However the average rating of my opponents is 1810. That average includes treating unrated players as having a rating of zero. If I throw out the unrated players the average goes up to 1850. My highest rated opponent was 2470. My lowest rated opponent was 629. (I don't count the 501 rated house player I played when I got a bye in the first round.) The 629 was a visitor from New Mexico who thought it would be a fun thing for his son and him to play at the Marshall Chess Club while visiting New York. His son was rated 1200 at the time. They had no idea how strong the event Now his son is 1756. Dad's rating has dropped to 550.

After seeing how bad the overall record was I decided I would break it down by rating ranges and see just how bad it really was. I played 505 games with players rated 1800 and above. 105 games were against B players. 180 games were against players rated under 1600. The interesting, but somewhat depressing thing was noticing the number of players who I lost to in the 1400 - 1599 range that have beaten me again when their rating went up.

2200+: 1 win 2 draws 77 losses = 80
2000 - 2199: 9 wins 0 draws 178 losses = 187 (No draws? What is that all about?)
1800 - 1999: 19 wins 28 draws 191 losses = 238
1600 - 1799: 25 wins 16 draws 65 losses = 105 (Yes this indicates that I'm playing below my floor in these tournament.)
1400 - 1599: 32 wins 26 draws 48 losses = 106
Under 1400: 31 wins 10 draws 16 losses = 57

Unrated: 7 wins 5 draws 5 losses = 17 (Box of chocolates. You never know what you're going to get.)

What got me started on this silly exercise was the WTF? moment of Thursday night. I've only played 5 games against people with ratings under 1000 in this tournament. One was the unsuspecting father from New Mexico. Two were against the same low rated player acting as a house player in an early round so I wouldn't have a bye. One game was against a kid rated 982 who was in over his head. He stopped playing in 2005. My most recent game against a three digit rated player was the teenage kid who started out 0-9 in this tournament and was much better then the rating indicated. He's now rated 1487.

This past Thursday was a fairly small field with only 23 players. However it was a strong field. You know it's a strong field when a 2014 gets paired up against Alex Lenderman in round 1. I played Kassa Korley on board 7 in round 1. When I'm on a lower board with an opponent like that I know I'm going to play I'm going to play up again in round two. I don't mind missing the cut. It beats just making the cut and having to play a random unrated or a kid rated 1100.

Kassa crushed me quickly. It's Wacky Wednesday worthy, so look for it next week. When somebody said there was a player with a rating of 118 playing in the tournament, I said "No he's 1118." That's what I had thought I saw on the wallchart. I went out and looked at the wallchart again, and sure enough #23 is rated 118. He lost to a WFM from Estonia. I'm sure she was just thrilled to play a 7 year old kid with a 118 rating. I know Josh and his dad Guy were not thrilled to play him in rounds two and three.

I was sure I was going to play him in round three because the colors were right and it looked like I was just making the break. That was going to totally tick me off. Fortunately somebody took a bye in round three so Steve put Guy back into the tournament as a house player. Guy ended out playing him. I got paired "down" against somebody who was rated 1670, but is actually over 1700.

It's none of my business what a father opts to do with his 7 year old kid. However it begs the question, "What? Is he totally out of his mind?" How can anyone in their right mind put a kid with 118 rating in a tournament like this? The lowest possible rating a player can have is 101. It used to be 100, but the powers that be decided it wasn't good to have a bunch of players at 100. They decided that a player would get 1 point for each tournament they played in. Even my husband who doesn't play chess said "Him playing in that tournament is like a beginning musician going to audition for a Broadway show."

This particular player has played a total of 14 tournament games. His lone win came in an under 600 section where he beat a kid who went 0-4 and ended out with a rating of 101. It's not like the father doesn't know how strong the tournament is. Last week he and his son both played. I don't see any benefit to a 7 year old playing against adults who out rate him by 1500 points. Even me who likes to play stronger competition knows that there is limit to how beneficial it is to play up. Last summer, I had a very lively discussion in the the comments section of Rhode Trip: Winning the Battle. Losing the War about the subject of playing up. I took some heat for wanting to play up when I'm playing below my floor, but most agreed that playing up can be helpful.

Maybe I shouldn't say anything considering how quickly I lost against Kassa. Though I did resign and not play out to mate. Even though I'm 0-7 against him, I've had some decent games with him. This last one was not! That being said, I still contend that to subject a player to such large mismatches is unfair both to him and his opponent. I think players expect a challenge when they come to the Marshall Chess Club on Thursday nights. I don't think they expect to play somebody 1500 points lower then them. Is there any challenge to playing somebody that much lower? Blunders happen, and sometimes we don't give or get the challenge we want. Stuff happens. However I don't think stuff is going to happen when there is a 1500 point difference in rating.

On the plus side, the kid handled losing very well. There was no crying or dropping out after losing a game. He seemed to be happy to be at the club, and his father would calmly go over the games with him after the round. Personally his father would have been better off bring him on Sunday when Steve has the New York Under 13. There's an under 1000 section in that tournament. There he'd get more appropriate match ups and probably would win a couple of games. Hopefully his father will realize that "Four Rated Games Tonight!" is not the tournament for a 7 year old with a 118 rating.

Wacky Wednesday - My Brain Was .....

...hijacked by aliens from out space. Or I'm that or I'm turning into a koala bear by round 4. Those guys don't seem to do anything, but sleep through life. Maybe while nobody is looking they come alive at night and become wild party animals.

Zzzzzzzz When's the next round of sleep begin?

I guess for me the sleep round came at 10:50 pm. I just can't explain what had happened. I went into round 4 with a 1-2 score against higher rated opposition. Two experts and and a 1950. I lost to the experts and beat the 1950 in a very nice rook and pawn ending. In the last round I'm playing an 1854. His results have been rather ragged lately, and he's been picked off by some lower rated players. Maybe I thought I got pick hom off too. However when one is totally oblivious to where the opponent's pieces are, and where they're going, trouble is brewing.

Here it is. Given the ugly nature of the game, I've changed my color scheme. Go ahead, have a good laugh. I think it set a record for time elapsed. Less the 12 minutes for the entire game.


Polly - FrankP111308.pgn


Don't ask because I really can't explain it. My mind was not there,

Me and My Big Mouth! - Edited

Last night was the the Chess Center of New York's 21st Annual Thursday Night Action Championship. This tournament is different from the regular Thursday night tournament in that there are two sections instead of the normal one section. The sections are Open and Under 2200. Not counting the re-entries and house players there were 57 players. The Open section had 23 players alone, including 6 Grandmasters. There are many Thursdays where the one section doesn't even have 23 players. This is one of those tournaments where playing up is an invitation to a first or second round bye to a patzer like me. Can anyone say "Shark bait"?

Since it's such a large tournament for a Thursday night Steve always has someone assist him. This time Andre Harding was helping him. Andre often subs for Steve when he's directing another tournament or inputting 300 kids' names into his computer for the Greater NY Scholastics. Andre sees me come in and he asks "Under 2200"? I tell him yes. I should have stopped at yes, but instead I go on to say "I don't want to deal with bye issues. In this section I shouldn't get the bye. If I'm getting a bye in this section, then I deserve it."

"You figuring 2-2 or maybe 2.5?" Andre asks.

"Yes. 2-2 is about right." The last two years I've had two wins and two losses, so that seemed like a reasonable score to reach.

The typical pairing sequence in this tournament for me has been I get paired up in the first round, and then make the break and get paired down in the second round. In 2006 I lost round 1, won in round 2, pulled an upset in round 3 and then lost in round 4. I actually gained a few rating points. Last year I got paired up in round 1 and lost, but in round two had the misfortune of getting paired down against Robert Hess' brother Peter who was rated 1450 at the time. It was one of those games where I was actually up a pawn but an insipid knight retreat on my part lead to serious ugliness. Being 0-2 lead to getting paired down the next two rounds against lower rated kids. I managed to beat the two kids and maintain a bit of dignity though I did toss ratings points since I was not sitting on my floor for a change.

So back to 2008's event. The top half seemed a little stronger this year. Last year the break was around 1750. This year a 1900 got paired up in round one. In the first round I'm paired against Nagib Gebran rated 2042. Despite my 0-5 record against him I usually give him a fight. Not this night. My game was just butt ass ugly. I got crushed with White. Ouch! I hate when that happens. We were one of the first games done. That gave me plenty of time to stare at the pairings and wall chart and try to figure out whether I was going to make the break or not. I fell smack into the middle so it was possible to go either way depending on number of draws, round 1/2 point byes and upsets. I decided I wasn't even going to try to figure it out. I didn't want to know. I wasn't thrilled with the prospect of just making the break and getting paired against a kid with a published rating of 960 who was actually high 1100s.

I had nothing to worry about. I got paired up against Moshe Uminer, rated 2039. He's another one of those players on my usual suspects list who clearly has my number. I have 1 win, 1 draw and 13 losses against the guy. We have pretty close games that often result in a time scramble, however this was not the night I'd double my number of wins or draws against him. Chalk up loss number 14. At least it lasted longer then the first round, and wasn't so ugly.

Okay, so I've started off the same way as last year, 0-2. No need to panic. Also I knew I won't play the 900 since I was the top of the score group and he was the bottom. There was a possibility I would end out with the lowest 1/2 pointer, but no I ended out with a fellow no pointer, Eric Hecht.

There are times when it does not pay to be the higher ranked player. When you and your opponent are both due the same color and all other things being equal, the higher ranked gets the due color. This is great when you're due white. It sucks when you're due black and you have a crappy record with the black pieces against your lower rated opponent. I knew what was in store for me. I'd see him offer up his c3 pawn. At the moment I'm refusing the gambit. I'm not overly happy with the positions I'm getting, but sure beats getting crushed out of the opening. This game was more like the games we used to have when it would come down to somebody being short on time. I was one the one fighting the clock, and a difficult position.

Note: When I first published this article I seemed to have had some technical issues with Chess Flash. On my Explorer browser I was getting nothing showing, and all my Mac Safari browser I was getting a game of LikeForests. I think I got it fixed so there should be my round three game. Sorry for the confusion. If anyone came across this post after I wrote that note they'd find no game at all. It seemed to have gone into a black hole. Here it is almost a year later, and I notice. Here is the game. Really!

EricH-Polly W062608.pgn


After the game was over I saw Andre and he asked how I was doing in the tournament. I held up my hand in the shape of a zero. He asked "What happened?" I told him about getting paired up twice and then getting paired down against Eric. His reaction was "Oh no! He's the worst possible player to get paired down against. I hate having to play him." Andre has also been victimized by his wild attacking style, and also feels he's under rated.

So then I'm looking at the wall chart to see whether my words of bravado at the beginning would come back to haunt me. Any other zeros lower rated then me? Yes, but taking requested last round 1/2 point bye. Odd or even number of drop outs and last round 1/2 point byes? At the same time the quirky 1100 player who always arrives around this time looking to be a house player comes in and asks if he'll be needed as a filler. I told him if there was going to be a bye needing an opponent, it was going to be me, and no he would not be needed because I was not waiting around, but was going to make the 11:14 train instead.

I have my Thursday night routine worked out precisely. I know exactly what time I need to leave the Marshall in order to make to Union Square in time to catch the subway back to Grand Central. I know what time the subway is pulling into Union Square. I even know whether it's an express or a local. Whether I'm going to catch the 12:30 train (Yessss! No byes!) or the the 11:14 train (Oh crap, I sucked!) I've got the timing down to a science.

With the rounds running a few minutes late I had to be ready to race out the door if I had the dreaded "Please Wait". It would suck to get the bye, miss the 11:14, and have to wait for the 11:45. Knock on wood, I've never missed the train at 11:14 or 12:30. I try not to hover over tournament directors when they're doing the pairings. I hate it when players do it to me when I'm directing. However once Steve started printing the pairings I asked "odd or even?" He knew what I meant by the question and said "please wait." I said good night to him and told Andre "It says please wait, but I'm not waiting. Oh and by the way. I guess I was right when I said if i get the bye in this section then I deserved it!" Note to self: Next year keep your mouth shut about projected score.

If being a NYC pedestrian ever became an Olympic sport, I'd probably win a medal. The object of a NYC pedestrian is to make it from point A to point B without getting hit by a car or bike messenger going the wrong way on a one way street, and being able to cross a street or avenue without having to wait for a light. It's this precise timing at intersections that makes it possible for me to walk from W 10th St and Fifth Avenue to 14th St. and Broadway in five minutes. It also helps that I can walk fast. That's a good thing because the express was pulling into Union Square just as I walked down the stairs to the subway platform. For the first time that night I wasn't in time trouble.

Thursday the 13th

It doesn't quite have the same ominous ring as Friday the 13th, but I had a bad feeling about tonight's tournament. It was a small field to start with. Only 12 players for the first round. I was number 11 out of 12, and actually that was a mistake since #12 has a FIDE rating of 1974. The first round got paired with me as #11. Almost every Thursday night this year I've played either Vladimir Polyakin or Yevgeni Margulis in the first round. If I haven't gotten one of them in the first round I've gotten one of them in third round when they're having a crappy night. Tonight it was Margulis.

I am really getting frustrated playing Black against random queen pawn openings. I just find myself full of dread after 1. d4 Nf6, 2. Nf3. I keep getting really crappy positions where it takes me 15 moves or more to get the bishop off of c8. This game was no different. We reach this position after he plays the questionable 20. Nd5.


This is where one needs to step back from the negative thoughts that abound in situations like this. My mindset was "My position sucks. White's pieces are active, and mine are all sitting on my first-third ranks doing nothing." With this mindset when the opponent plays a crazy move like Nd5, one assumes the worst. I'm looking at the pins on the h3-c8 diagonal and c file, and I'm looking at my queen being attacked. All I can see is I'm losing material. What I don't see is my counter play with 20...Nxe4. If he plays 21. Nxc7 Nf2+, 22. Kg1 Nh3#. I didn't find this on my own either. Fritz showed me. Instead I played 20...Bxd5. The game continued 21. cxd5 Qd7?, 22. dxe6 Qe8?? 23. exf7. At that point I was totally disgusted and resigned.

In the meantime 5 more people have entered bring the total up to 17. I'm no longer at the bottom of the wall chart, but the people below me have 1/2 point byes, and the former #12 now has his FIDE rating on the wall chart. So do I take the preemptive last round bye to avoid a second round bye or look for a decent house player? Had Steve been running the tournament I would have ended out doing the preemptive bye because there were no house players and it looked like we were only going to have 17 players. Fortunately Steve's substitute isn't quite as speedy as Steve, and he was running a little late. He also delayed pairing while I looked around for a house player. In the meantime an 18th player showed up. I was saved from having to make that decision.

Round two wasn't much better then round one. I lasted a few more moves, but the game ended when I hung my queen. I never even saw that his knight was attacking my queen, so I made some defensive bishop move. After I made the move, my opponent shakes his head and points at my queen. It's then I notice that his knight can take her. He didn't actually make the move. It was almost as though he wanted me take the bishop move back, and play the queen to a safe square. I wasn't going to try to figure out what he wanted. I had made the bishop move, and as far I was concerned that was it. I stopped the clock and shook hands.

In round three I played another one of the usual suspects. He asked me if I minded playing at a different table. He didn't want to play at the table were assigned to because it's close to the window. It didn't matter to me. He wanted to use his clock even though he was white. We both have Chronos clocks. He has the one with the regular buttons, I have the touch sensor one. If I was feeling snarky I could have insisted on my clock even though I know he doesn't like the touch sensor buttons. At that point I didn't give a crap, and didn't feel like getting into a pissing match over which clock to use. I've seen him fuss over other people's Chronos that rocked on the table. I didn't feel like dealing with his fussing if I opted to use mine.

I'm not sure what was going on in my head tonight. I didn't have much fight in me after the first two games. The problem is when I get in that mindset, it's almost impossible to find good moves. The inner pessimist thinks there are no good moves and plays accordingly.

The problem with playing somebody a lot of times is they know a lot about how you play and think. He knows I'm prone to time trouble. The last time we played I tossed away a winning position in the throes of a time scramble. Though in that game I had a big time advantage that I pissed away, and then imploded. In tonight's game he was playing some rather cautious moves instead of playing a few brutal attacking moves. When I asked him why he had not played f5 and gone for the attack he admitted that he figured he'd run me out of time.

That strategy could have blown up in his face. Unfortunately with the inner pessimist working overtime I missed trapping his queen. Later we simplified, and the ending was drawish. I didn't offer a draw. I knew he wouldn't take it anyway. Besides given my luck with draw offers lately I decided not to even bother. Being short of time I let his knight in and dropped two pawns. At this point any fight I had to hold on as long as I did went with the second lost pawn.

Mercifully somebody had dropped out. Why take a preemptive last round 1/2 point bye when you can wait around and get a full point bye for the same round? Though the difference between a 1/2 and 1 point doesn't really matter except for a place or two on the final standings.

So off to Saratoga Springs for the NY State Scholastics this weekend. Hopefully the kids on our team won't catch whatever seems to be going on in my head right now. Maybe I should have stopped with Monday when I went 2-1.

Marshall's Lonely Hearts Chess Club

I had wanted to title this post the St. Valentine's Day Massacre, but in light of the tragic events in Illinois yesterday I thought better of it. My heart and prayers go out to the students and families. Such a senseless thing to happen.

What do chess loving women do on Valentine's Day? I guess not many of them chose to be playing chess. I was the only woman in "Four Heartfelt and Many Splendid Games Tonight!" That was Steve's holiday name for his weekly "Four Rated games Tonight!" In 2004 when the tournament fell on April 1st he titled the event "Four Foolish Games Tonight!" I think that title applied more to how my Valentine's night went. My heart was in every game I played, but there was nothing splendid about any of them.

The tournament started out with 14 players, and I was #14. That was going to make it hard to avoid the dreaded "please wait" in future rounds unless somehow I could win round one, or that the number of players stayed even through out the entire tournament. What were the odds of either of those things happening? I have no control over how many players enter for the second round, so all I could try to control was my first round result. Unfortunately Mr. Polyakin did not cooperate in my quest to win the first round and avoid the bye issue all together. This was game #21 between us, and like 18 out of the first 20 encounters I found myself looking at a butt ugly position with no redeeming features whatsoever. I was down the exchange, and after his 30th move I had the following choices:

a. Move my queen and lose a bishop.
b. Take the rook and give up my queen.
c. Capture the rook after it takes my bishop, and get back rank mated.
d. Stare at the position until my time runs out.
e. Resign.

I opted for e. This gave me time to plot my bye stratagy. One needs to commit to requested byes by round two. I asked Steve whether we got an odd or even number of late entries. He told me we were up to 17. I told him if that did not change I would take a 1/2 point bye for round 4. That's what I call the pre-emptive bye. Take a 1/2 pointer later to avoid the 1 pointer earlier. I didn't want to sit around for an hour. Despite some bad luck I've had requesting a 4th round bye, I decided I would resort to that tactic for this tournament. I would get to make the 11:14 train, hubby would wait up for me, and we'd open up the Rose wine that we received Thursday from the wine club we joined when we were in California.

At least this time when I wiggled out the second round bye, I didn't get paired down. However I did get paired against another one of the usual suspects, Moshe Uminer. This would be our 14th encounter. The first time I had played him he was unrated, and I lost. He was one of those strong unrateds, not a chess newbie. We always have interesting games with somebody having clock issues. This game was no different.

Moshe-Polly 021408.pgn


In round three I get paired against the player who got the bye because of my pre-emptive strike. Steve had found a house player for Andre to play. I think Andre suffered from a case of Polly's House Player Syndrome. He hung a piece on the 13th move against him. It figures that the night I opt not to take my chances on getting a decent house player, the house player is rated around 2000. Usually when I need the house player he's rated 1100-1300.

This is the first time I've played Andre. (Are rare occurance on Thursday! Playing somebody for the very first time.) He has just started playing again, but I've known him from directing together at the NYC scholastics. Andre is also Steve's substitute TD when Steve's out of town or when he's putting in 800 kids' names into his computer.

I had a funny moment in the game. In the previous round Andre had hung his knight by pushing the b pawn that was guarding it. On the 14th move I my game I also pushed my b pawn leaving my knight on c6 unguarded by the b pawn. It was guarded by the queen, but several times I almost moved the queen which would have left my knight to the same fate as Andre's. But why hang a knight when I can let my opponent offer his in exchange for my king?

andre-polly 021408.pgn


There went my 12 rating points from the last two weeks! But now I can look forward to 6 games of slow chess in Parsippany. If you're at the USATE look for me. I'm board two on "Rook Around the Clock Tonight".

Off The Board Strategies: Playing The Pairing Game

An outsider might think that all the maneuvering and strategical planning happens over the board. Those who play in a lot of tournaments knows there's a whole other game going on at the same time. Depending on one's rating or position in the tournament the end result may be different but the objective is the same. The object of this inner game is to try to out guess the pairing program in order to achieve a certain result. The result isn't a win, loss or draw of the game. The result is trying to get the most favorable pairing as possible.

There are different ways to play this game. A master rated 2200 - 2300 may look at the potential next round pairings and realize barring no upsets he's going to play a grandmaster in either that round, or the round after. Based on his calculations he'll choose to take a 1/2 point bye for the round that he anticipates playing the GM. This way he plays a "Swiss Gambit" deferred and avoids the GM and still slips into the money. Another variation on this theme is the player anticipates that 3 points will win money. He knows he'll get two easy pairings, and the next two rounds will be a crapshoot. He takes his two 1/2 point byes, and barring any upsets he has his 3 points and a piece of the action.

Along with strategic byes one has the reentry gambit. The reentry gambit is usually played by class players who get off to a lousy start and want to reposition themselves to have another crack at the class prize. However I've seen a few different objectives for the reentry gambit. One kid I knew used to re-enter when he anticipated that he would get the full point bye in the next round. This way he'd avoid getting the bye along with a chance to contend for the class prize. Sometimes I felt like he did it just to annoy me because when he'd reenter, usually I'd be the one getting the bye.

I won't play the reentry gambit for any reason. I see no point in spending more money to attempt to have a better shot at winning a prize, or to avoid getting a bye in a middle round. I also have sworn off the preemptive last round 1/2 bye to avoid middle round full point byes. I tried that in one tournament and it blew up in my face. I was forced to take the last round bye that I didn't need. Now I take my chances and hope that I can avoid byes or that at least a decent house player is floating around if I get a middle round bye.

Last night was the second week in a row I was the second lowest on the wall chart in 4 Rated Games Tonight! When one is that low there's a very good chance that a bye can't be avoided. Last week it came in the first round because the lowest rated player was taking a 1/2 point bye. I was given the option of playing an 1150 house player. There's always the risk that one may lose to the lower rated house player, and then get crappy pairings for the rest of night based on scoring zero in round 1. I wasn't thrilled by having to play someone that low, but I didn't feel like sitting around an hour for round two. It almost blew up in my face. He played much better then his rating, but in a very drawish position he let his time run out. Apparently the guy had never used a digital clock before. He didn't know what time delay was, and had no idea how to read the display on my Chronos. I dodged a serious bullet that round!

I would not have had to think about bye possibilities last night if I had managed not to lose that round two game where I declined a draw offer while up a rook. So I started looking at the wall chart and figuring out whether I'd end out with a bye in round 4, or be able to avoid it all together. One scenario had the bottom player and me both losing in round 3. That was possibility since we were both going to get paired up again. Though the rating differences amongst the zero score group wasn't significant so anything could have happened. If that happened then even if there were an odd number he'd get the bye, not me.

What I didn't take into account was one of the zeros playing the reentry gambit. I'm not sure why he reentered. If was to avoid playing down it didn't help. He still played the highest rated in the zero score group. He won, and then got paired up in the last round so it didn't improve his chances at the class prize. $15 down the tubes. His money, not mine. However his maneuvering caused me to play the lowest rated player. Playing the lowest rated player in this tournament is not a slam dunk win considering that he's only 70 points lower then me. What resulted was a totally bizarre game where I should have ignored the advice I give my students. Castle to keep your king safe. I would have been better off taking my chances in the center.


Polly-TomM110107.pgn



I lost on time because I just couldn't figure about what to do about all the threats along the b1-h2 diagonal. I let Fritz take a whack at the position, and it came up with 28. Rh6 Rad8 29. Rxg6+ Qxg6 30. g3 e5 31. Qc2 Qxc2+ 32. Kxc2 Ra6. Fritz rates it plus over equal for white. The two pawns for the exchange gives white a slight advantage. That's all well and good but when black has a 5 minute time advantage and white has very little time, all the numeric evaluations of the position go out the window. Unfortunately my brain doesn't work as fast as Fritz. I had not even considered that move. I was freaking out over the threat of 28...Bxc3, and didn't even consider that 28. Rh6 takes care of that threat. All I was looking at as a defense was 28. Bxd4 which doesn't work because of 28... cxd4 29. Rh6 Rc8 30. Rxg6+ Qxg6 31. Rd1 Rd5.

Back to the pairing sub-plots of bye evasion and improving one's class prize chances. My loss positioned me for a last round bye if there was an odd number. A last round bye allows me to make the 11:12 train home as opposed to the 12:30 train if I play the last round. It does have its merits, but I won't do a preemptive drop out to make the earlier train. As it turned out the number was even so I avoided byes all together. Unfortunately avoiding byes also afforded me another opportunity to lose which I did. As for our reentry player, he got paired up to a 2100 and lost. So much for improving one's chances at the class prize.

The Gorilla On My Back

One would think that playing at a chess club like the Marshall I'd get to play lots of different players from week to week. It's not necessarily so. Just like my little 10 member club in White Plains, the usual suspects show up each week for the 4 Rated Games Tonight! , and the one day weekend events that I tend to play in at the Marshall. According to my MSA records I've played 1054 different players from 11/10/91 to today. That will go up to 1055 after the results from the WCC Summer Swiss gets submitted later this week.

Of those 1054 players, 32 of them I have played 10 or more times. Of those players that I've played 10 or more times, 4 of them have a perfect record against me. I guess there is no shame in being 0-13 against IM Jay Bonin, but 0-11 against Ilya Logunov? There was a stretch of time I'd play him in the first round almost every week in the 4 Rated Games Tonight! tournament. He'd always call in his entry, and show up anywhere from 5 to 15 minutes late. Yet despite his always giving me time odds, I'd find a way to piss away the time advantage. He stopped playing over a year ago, so who knows if I'll ever get a chance to raise my winning percentage against him above .000.

The three players I've played the most since 1991 I have a winning record against all them. I racked up a lot the wins when these players were lower rated then me. As our ratings have gotten closer, my win percentage has slipped closer to .500. Number three on the list is Steve Chernick. We played each at the Manhattan Chess Club quite a few times, and after the Manhattan folded we continued our rivalry at the Marshall Chess Club. From 1998 to 2005, my record against him had been 15 wins, 5 draws, and 4 losses.

Then a funny thing started happening. From 01/06 to the present my record has been 4 wins, 4 draws and 11 losses! This year in February I played him 3 times in 2 weeks and I lost every single game. Not just the 3 games to him, but in all three tournaments I went into the last round against him having an 0-3 or 0-2 record. I was starting to think I'd never win another game of chess at the Marshall again. I was winning games at other clubs and tournaments, but I had that stretch at the Marshall where I could not win. I should have not played there during the month of February. I had a record of 1 win, 1 draw and 17 losses.

Steve seems to bring the worst out in me. We'll have some totally boring position where nothing is happening and I'll find some bizarre move that makes the position totally disintegrate. Here's game number 1 of Polly's February from Hell:

White just played 29. dxe6. What should Black play? 29...fxe6 is the right move. So do I play that move? Noooo! I'm trying to keep my nice pawn structure intact, or at least get the queens and a pair of rooks off the board before playing fxe6. I play 29...Qxe6?? As soon as I make the move I realize he is not going to play 30. Qxe6.

Suddenly I have that "Oh crap, I just blundered big time!" sensation. That's where you hope and pray that your opponent doesn't see it. Steve saw it, and played 30. Qf1. The game went all to hell after that. 30... Qd6 31. Rxe8+ Bf8 32. Bh6 Rd8 33. Rxd8 Qxd834. Bxf8 Qxf8 35. Qd3 Qc5+ 36. Kh1 Qc8 37. Rd1 Kg7 38. Qd4+ Kf8 39. Qd8+ Qxd840. Rxd8+ Ke7 41. Ra8 Kf6 42. Rxa7 Kf5 43. Rxf7+ 1-0

Four days later later I play him again. Once again I have Black, and once again my position goes all to hell. This game is truly a comedy of errors especially the last 5 moves or so. So here is game number two.

SteveC-Polly021509.pgn


Nine days later, I'm playing him again. It's the third round of a three round tournament so it's a toss for color, and guess what color I get? Yep, Black again. I'm thinking to myself "Will I ever get white against this guy again?" It's also not helping that I'm on this major losing streak at the Marshall. All of this is wrecking havoc on my mind, so I approach the game fairly cautiously.



Once again we reach one of those positions where I feel I have better pawn structure, a knight on the outpost square d5,he has a do nothing bishop and his threats are easy enough to defend.

He just played 27. f5 with the annoying little threat of Qb8+. Annoying yes, but crushing no. I play 27...Qc7 28. Qxc7 Nxc7 29. fxe6. Now I have a decision to make. Which way do I want to recapture? Do I keep the kingside pawn structure intact, bring the knight back into play, but give him a passed pawn? Option number two is recapture with the f pawn giving me an isolated e pawn, stopping his d pawn, and having the option of bringing the knight back to d5.

Sometimes we can get overly fixated on pawn structure. I'm thinking to myself, "I want to keep my kingside pawns intact, and besides that stupid isolated d pawn isn't going anywhere." I made the very natural looking 29...Nxe6. Guess what? That stupid isolated d pawn became a royal pain as it made its little march down the board. 30.d5 Nc7 31.d6 Ne6 32.d7 f6 33.Bb6 Kf7 34.d8Q Nxd8 35.Bxd8 b5 36.Kf2 Ke6 37.Ke3 Ke5 1-0

I suppose I could have placed my pawns on light squares and fiddled around with my king, but having chucked another decent position against the same player for the 3rd time in two weeks I just had no desire to try for some time scramble funny business. I had less then a minute, and think he had 3 minutes. There have been times I've played on positions like that, and suckered my opponent into trying to out blitz me, and have pulled a rabbit out of my hat. In this case about the only thing pulling I was out was my hair.

I feel like I may be finally getting the gorilla off my back. I've beaten him two out of three in our last few games. I even beat him with black last weekend, despite getting ahead of myself and outright hanging a rook. Maybe I'll give it another shot this weekend.