When I entered the slow tournament at the Marshall I did not know what to expect. I certainly didn't expect to win a lot of games. I figured with a tournament minimum rating of 1600, there weren't going to be too many people lower rated then me. I hoped I could put up a decent fight against those much higher rated, and even beat a few people within a 100 points of me.
The first round I did put up a good fight until I panicked when his knight got deep into my territory. It's just not a good feeling when you're black and there's a white knight sitting on f6. Just like the night before I got into some gambit line that I really had no idea what I was doing. My opponent had a lot of play for the pawn, but I was holding my own. In game/30 I know that I can't agonize over the position, and in less then an hour it's going to be over with one way or another. I may succumb to an overwhelming attack or I may hold on for dear life and win or draw a wild ending with little time on the clock.
When both players have 2 hours each then it's a whole different story. There's time to work out the lines of attack, and defense. In playing with so much time, I needed to adjust my thought process and my attitude. In game/30 I may find a move, look at the possibilities briefly and then just make the move with the thought "I don't know what the hell is going on, but I don't have time to figure this out." Sometimes that works but more often then not, the move loses.
When I saw that he was threatening to stick his knight on f6, I retreated my queen to d8 with the idea of if 24. Nf6+ Rxf6 25. exf6 Qxf6. I had spent a good bit of time on 23...Qd8 debating whether or not the sacrifice was sound or even necessary. Then once he played Nf6+ I had decide whether I really wanted to go through with the exchange sacrifice. I debated a long time, and then chose not to do it at that point. A few moves later I did do it. It turns out if I was going to play Rxf6, I should have done it on move 26. Waiting a few moves changed the position too much, and then it was no good. Here's the game.
jb-pw.pgn
One of the problems with slow chess is if your opponent is being somewhat annoying, you have to deal with it longer. As I mentioned in yesterday's summary this particular opponent barely acknowledged my existence at the beginning or the end of the game. After I resigned, I made the comment to the effect of "Maybe the exchange sacrifice would have been better when you first played Nf6." Most opponents would acknowledge the remark, express an opinion on the offhand analysis, and if time permitted ask if I wanted to go over the game. He ignored me and went to analyse his friend's game. I think I even posted the result on the pairing sheet.
He chewed gum the entire game. This is my own personal opinion, but I think chewing gum in certain places is kind of rude and annoying. Would you chew gum during a church service, classical music concert, at a reception or other formal occasion? I think that chewing gum during a tournament game is not appropriate. Considering the less then congenial exchange at the beginning of the game, I didn't feel very comfortable asking him not to chew gum during the game. Maybe I felt he would not respond kindly to my request. I certainly didn't want to bring the tournament director into it if he had some negative reaction. It seemed like a petty thing to fuss about. My solution was to listen to classical music on my iPod and tune him out. I pulled my cap down low so that I could keep his face out of my line of vision. It's really annoying to look up and see your opponent making faces similar to what cows do when chewing their cud.
I guess I should ask myself "Why would I want to spend any more time with the guy?"
Saturday, October 10, 2009
Friday, October 9, 2009
Train Wreck! The Slow Express Has Derailed!
Since the New York State Championship I have tried to play more slow chess, and ease up on the cracktion. Easier said then done. I have played in two tournaments with one game a week with time limits of G/75 and G/115 respectively. The Wednesday evening G/75 was at the Westchester Chess Club. The Thursday evening G/115 is at the Marshall Chess Club. Both tournaments have been exercises in frustration and at times futility. I've spent the last few weeks trying to write a post about the Marshall CC FIDE Thursdays tournament that I've been playing in lieu of "Four Rated Games Tonight!" There's one week left in the tournament, and it can't end soon enough for me. I came, I saw, I got conquered, and I've had enough.
Here's the short version:
First round: I lose to an annoying guy who barely acknowledged my presence at the start of the game, chewed gum the entire game, barely acknowledges my resignation at the end of the game, and walks off to go analyze his friend's game without saying a thing to me about our game. Sheesh! We don't have to be best buddies, but what's wrong with a being a little sociable before or after a game? Isn't that part of the charm of live chess? Social interaction. I've more enlightening conversions with Fritz!
Second round: I see the winning move, but don't play it because I think my bishop is hanging with check if I play the move. It's not hanging and the combination I saw wins his queen. The game was a draw.
Third round: I lose a piece early, and I don't feel like playing out a lost game for another three hours. I resign, go upstairs, play the last 3 rounds of the "cracktion" tournament and lose 3 more games.
Fourth round: I get a bye since I have the low score and the low rating. Since I've traveled into NYC to play chess, I play in the "cracktion" tournament upstairs and go 0-4.
Fifth round: I play an old guy sitting on an 1800 floor that he got for winning over $1,000 tying for second in the under 1800 section at the 1986 New York Open. His score in this tournament consisted of a 1/2 point from a requested 1st round bye. 3.5 hours later he now has 1.5 points. On the bright side, it was an interesting game, and he's a very pleasant person.
Sixth round: TBA. It can't get any worse at this point. Actually it could. I could get paired against somebody who decides to not bother to show up, and not tell the director he isn't coming. One player had that happen to him in the fifth round. His opponent was a no-show. People like that piss the hell out of me. Just make a phone call so the director can pair accordingly. Instead one guy gets a bye because there's an odd number, and another player sits around watching his opponent's clock run down.
In the Wednesday slow tournament my results have been just as ugly, but at least it's only a 10 minute drive from my house to the club. I posted round one from that tournament in this post. More games from the various tournaments will follow.
Here's the short version:
First round: I lose to an annoying guy who barely acknowledged my presence at the start of the game, chewed gum the entire game, barely acknowledges my resignation at the end of the game, and walks off to go analyze his friend's game without saying a thing to me about our game. Sheesh! We don't have to be best buddies, but what's wrong with a being a little sociable before or after a game? Isn't that part of the charm of live chess? Social interaction. I've more enlightening conversions with Fritz!
Second round: I see the winning move, but don't play it because I think my bishop is hanging with check if I play the move. It's not hanging and the combination I saw wins his queen. The game was a draw.
Third round: I lose a piece early, and I don't feel like playing out a lost game for another three hours. I resign, go upstairs, play the last 3 rounds of the "cracktion" tournament and lose 3 more games.
Fourth round: I get a bye since I have the low score and the low rating. Since I've traveled into NYC to play chess, I play in the "cracktion" tournament upstairs and go 0-4.
Fifth round: I play an old guy sitting on an 1800 floor that he got for winning over $1,000 tying for second in the under 1800 section at the 1986 New York Open. His score in this tournament consisted of a 1/2 point from a requested 1st round bye. 3.5 hours later he now has 1.5 points. On the bright side, it was an interesting game, and he's a very pleasant person.
Sixth round: TBA. It can't get any worse at this point. Actually it could. I could get paired against somebody who decides to not bother to show up, and not tell the director he isn't coming. One player had that happen to him in the fifth round. His opponent was a no-show. People like that piss the hell out of me. Just make a phone call so the director can pair accordingly. Instead one guy gets a bye because there's an odd number, and another player sits around watching his opponent's clock run down.
In the Wednesday slow tournament my results have been just as ugly, but at least it's only a 10 minute drive from my house to the club. I posted round one from that tournament in this post. More games from the various tournaments will follow.
Friday, October 2, 2009
Jerry Hanken (1934-2009) RIP
Last night I got home from a rough night at the Marshall. (Details at a later date.) As is my normal custom before going to bed, I checked my email and Facebook page. I was shocked to see various Facebook friends make reference to the passing of Jerry Hanken. I knew he had not been well when he missed his first US Open in decades this summer. He had played in 36 in a row, and 42 in total. However it felt strange to read his October Chess Life article about the World Open in the morning, and read of his passing that same night.
Jerry was passionate about chess. He loved to play. He loved the tournament scene. He loved the chess political scene. He loved chess people, and had a big heart. Despite knowing him for 35 years, I had no idea that he had performed in amateur productions of plays until reading the obit on the USCF website. I guess it shouldn't really surprise me, because he was just one of those energetic persons who could just overwhelm you with his outgoing personality. One did not have to see Jerry to know that he was around. His voice carried, and one would say "There's Jerry telling another one of his chess stories."
It was at my first US Open back in 1976 when I first met Jerry. It was not only my first US Open, but it was my first exposure to the US chess political scene, otherwise known as the Delegates Meeting. I was representing Vermont where I was attending college at the time. It would be the first time Vermont had been represented at the meeting. I don't remember what issues were being argued at the time. What I do remember was lots of very heated debates, and a very loud and often angry Jerry Hanken raising a point of personal privilege over some remark directed towards him. I remember at the time wondering to myself , "Who IS this guy, and what the heck is going on?" One thing about Jerry, he was never afraid to speak his mind.
I got to know Jerry better over subsequent US Opens, and under much calmer circumstances then the Delegates meeting. We spent a lot of time together at the 1978 US Open in Phoenix. Almost every night after our games were done, a group of us would go find some restaurant that stayed open past 11:00 pm. Jerry seemed to know where to find the good food and drink. I probably gained 10 pound during those two weeks in Phoenix. We had discussed plans of doing some sightseeing around the Phoenix area during the day. However when the daytime temperatures hit 100+ degrees everyday, sightseeing consisted of going to the movies or hanging out by the hotel pool.
Jerry loved the US Open and had formed a committee to try to bring back some of its glory from the earlier years. Attendance has been going down every year recently, and he wanted to come up with ideas to boost it back up. This year attendance did go back over 400 in Indianapolis. In the bulletins he wrote a column called Hanken's Corner. Sometimes it was rather mundane, at other times it had amusing stories and interesting pieces of US Open trivia.
In 2001 I played in my first US Open in 10 years. So who did I have to play in round one? You guessed it. Jerry Hanken. This was the first and last time we ever played. During our game he was furiously trying to write his "Hanken's Corner" for the first bulletin. He asked me if I would mind if he did so. I didn't mind, and perhaps it would give me a good chance for an upset if he was concentrating more on his writing more then the game itself.
Here are a couple of excerpts from that column.
"It starts again! Your Humble Reporter (henceforth known as YHR) is playing the first round of the 102nd US Open. This year we are in Framingham, Mass, near historic Boston..."
"For YHR this is landmark US Open, my 35th which is more then a third of those ever played. It's also my 29th in a row (2 behind Joel Benjamin's Uncle Marty, who has 31.) And of course, it will be - if successful - my 34th in a row with plus scores. [That streak would last until 2006.] (I know - I know - Art Bisguier has 46!)"
"As is tediously usual, this column will follow the Pilgrim's Progress of that immortal quest. Along with Ye Kindly Editor, Phil Smith (known hence forth as YKE) we will also make an attempt to amuse and entertain you Gentle Readers with anecdotes and wry stories from the tournament......" "PS. As I was writing this column at the board (with my opponent, Polly Wright's permission) I achieved a completely lost game. Not atypical for first round games for YHR. I lucked out and did win, however. Check out the game with notes by Art Bisguier, who forcefully demonstrated the win."
Here is the game with the original notes from Jerry and Art.
PW-JerryHanken080401.pgn
The last time I saw Jerry was at the 2008 US Open in Dallas. Despite a lack of mobility he managed to keep a very busy schedule of writing his columns, chairing a number of committee meetings, and playing chess. In my reports from last year's US Open I wrote about one our funny late night encounters.
I didn't always agree with Jerry, but he really had a heart of gold shared his passion for chess with anyone who would listen. You either loved him or hated him, but the US chess scene will be a little emptier without him around to share his wit and wisdom. Thanks Jerry for being a good friend all these years, and I guess I'll have to wait for the big chess tournament in the sky to get my rematch.
Jerry was passionate about chess. He loved to play. He loved the tournament scene. He loved the chess political scene. He loved chess people, and had a big heart. Despite knowing him for 35 years, I had no idea that he had performed in amateur productions of plays until reading the obit on the USCF website. I guess it shouldn't really surprise me, because he was just one of those energetic persons who could just overwhelm you with his outgoing personality. One did not have to see Jerry to know that he was around. His voice carried, and one would say "There's Jerry telling another one of his chess stories."
It was at my first US Open back in 1976 when I first met Jerry. It was not only my first US Open, but it was my first exposure to the US chess political scene, otherwise known as the Delegates Meeting. I was representing Vermont where I was attending college at the time. It would be the first time Vermont had been represented at the meeting. I don't remember what issues were being argued at the time. What I do remember was lots of very heated debates, and a very loud and often angry Jerry Hanken raising a point of personal privilege over some remark directed towards him. I remember at the time wondering to myself , "Who IS this guy, and what the heck is going on?" One thing about Jerry, he was never afraid to speak his mind.
I got to know Jerry better over subsequent US Opens, and under much calmer circumstances then the Delegates meeting. We spent a lot of time together at the 1978 US Open in Phoenix. Almost every night after our games were done, a group of us would go find some restaurant that stayed open past 11:00 pm. Jerry seemed to know where to find the good food and drink. I probably gained 10 pound during those two weeks in Phoenix. We had discussed plans of doing some sightseeing around the Phoenix area during the day. However when the daytime temperatures hit 100+ degrees everyday, sightseeing consisted of going to the movies or hanging out by the hotel pool.
Jerry loved the US Open and had formed a committee to try to bring back some of its glory from the earlier years. Attendance has been going down every year recently, and he wanted to come up with ideas to boost it back up. This year attendance did go back over 400 in Indianapolis. In the bulletins he wrote a column called Hanken's Corner. Sometimes it was rather mundane, at other times it had amusing stories and interesting pieces of US Open trivia.
In 2001 I played in my first US Open in 10 years. So who did I have to play in round one? You guessed it. Jerry Hanken. This was the first and last time we ever played. During our game he was furiously trying to write his "Hanken's Corner" for the first bulletin. He asked me if I would mind if he did so. I didn't mind, and perhaps it would give me a good chance for an upset if he was concentrating more on his writing more then the game itself.
Here are a couple of excerpts from that column.
"It starts again! Your Humble Reporter (henceforth known as YHR) is playing the first round of the 102nd US Open. This year we are in Framingham, Mass, near historic Boston..."
"For YHR this is landmark US Open, my 35th which is more then a third of those ever played. It's also my 29th in a row (2 behind Joel Benjamin's Uncle Marty, who has 31.) And of course, it will be - if successful - my 34th in a row with plus scores. [That streak would last until 2006.] (I know - I know - Art Bisguier has 46!)"
"As is tediously usual, this column will follow the Pilgrim's Progress of that immortal quest. Along with Ye Kindly Editor, Phil Smith (known hence forth as YKE) we will also make an attempt to amuse and entertain you Gentle Readers with anecdotes and wry stories from the tournament......" "PS. As I was writing this column at the board (with my opponent, Polly Wright's permission) I achieved a completely lost game. Not atypical for first round games for YHR. I lucked out and did win, however. Check out the game with notes by Art Bisguier, who forcefully demonstrated the win."
Here is the game with the original notes from Jerry and Art.
PW-JerryHanken080401.pgn
The last time I saw Jerry was at the 2008 US Open in Dallas. Despite a lack of mobility he managed to keep a very busy schedule of writing his columns, chairing a number of committee meetings, and playing chess. In my reports from last year's US Open I wrote about one our funny late night encounters.
I didn't always agree with Jerry, but he really had a heart of gold shared his passion for chess with anyone who would listen. You either loved him or hated him, but the US chess scene will be a little emptier without him around to share his wit and wisdom. Thanks Jerry for being a good friend all these years, and I guess I'll have to wait for the big chess tournament in the sky to get my rematch.
Receiving my 10 years of US Opens certificate from Jerry in 2006
Monday, September 21, 2009
Leaving the Dark Side....
...of "cracktion". Or I should say trying to. After my success in the slow rounds at the New York State Championships, I decided I try to play more slow chess, and cut back on the game/30. I'm playing in the one game a week tournament at the Marshall instead of "4 Cracktion Games Tonight!" Oops I mean 4 Rated Games Tonight!" Fortunately the Westchester Chess Club where I play on Wednesdays does mostly Game/75 tournaments with one game a week.
We have a new slow tournament on Wednesday that started right after Labor Day. 10 players registered so we split it into a quad and a six player Swiss. Luck would have it that I would be number four, and end out at the bottom of the quad. I have my work cut out for me. In a four player round robin number one has white against number four in the first round. My first round opponent is a new member of our club, so I had never played him before, and wasn't familiar with how he played. All I knew was that with my opponent having a rating of 1976, I was going to have use my time wisely.
One of the hardest adjustments I'm having to make, is to not be lazy with my analysis. When I'm playing game/30, I tend to go through the analysis quickly, and at times the depth of analysis is rather superficial. If I'm way behind on the clock, it may be I'm simply looking for a move that is safe, or not a blunder. Sometimes safe moves aren't the best moves, and I overlook a move that is clearly winning. Here is an example from round two of last Monday's "cracktion" tournament in White Plains. I was planning just to direct and not play. However just as I'm getting ready to make the pairings another player shows up making the number odd. I played so there would not be an odd number. (Tonight the number is even so I did not have to play. Instead I'm working on this post while the tournament is going on.)
My opponent had just played 48...Rg1? I had only 2 seconds left on my clock. I made the very safe move of 49. Bd5. It doesn't hang anything, and protects my bishop, but I totally overlooked 49. Rxd4 cxd4 50. Kxg1. Unfortunately my opponent noticed his mistake, and played 49...Re1. The game continued 50. Rg2 Be5. I lost on time. I couldn't come up with a reasonable defense to threat of h4. It's games like those, that make me want to swear off "cracktion".
So how did my first round go in the Wednesday quad? I was holding my own in a wild Trompowsky where White sac'ed a pawn for play. However despite using almost 5 minutes on one move in particular, the move was horrendous and just loses a rook that I can't even get the exchange for. Check is not always the best way to counter a threat. I had played 14...Qa5+, expecting him to interpose with either his knight or queen. I did not expect 15. b4. It's a pretty obvious move, but I was too focused on trying to get him to move his knight back. Playing 15. e5 or 15. Nxd5 would have eliminated the threats on the c7 square.
Several days later I received a very nice email from him. He had attached a pgn file with his his analysis of the game. He has stronger engines then me, and he provided a lot of analysis. What follows is his analysis aided by Shredder and Fritz.
Souvik R vs Polly W.pgn
Stay tuned for more on my transition to slow chess.
We have a new slow tournament on Wednesday that started right after Labor Day. 10 players registered so we split it into a quad and a six player Swiss. Luck would have it that I would be number four, and end out at the bottom of the quad. I have my work cut out for me. In a four player round robin number one has white against number four in the first round. My first round opponent is a new member of our club, so I had never played him before, and wasn't familiar with how he played. All I knew was that with my opponent having a rating of 1976, I was going to have use my time wisely.
One of the hardest adjustments I'm having to make, is to not be lazy with my analysis. When I'm playing game/30, I tend to go through the analysis quickly, and at times the depth of analysis is rather superficial. If I'm way behind on the clock, it may be I'm simply looking for a move that is safe, or not a blunder. Sometimes safe moves aren't the best moves, and I overlook a move that is clearly winning. Here is an example from round two of last Monday's "cracktion" tournament in White Plains. I was planning just to direct and not play. However just as I'm getting ready to make the pairings another player shows up making the number odd. I played so there would not be an odd number. (Tonight the number is even so I did not have to play. Instead I'm working on this post while the tournament is going on.)
My opponent had just played 48...Rg1? I had only 2 seconds left on my clock. I made the very safe move of 49. Bd5. It doesn't hang anything, and protects my bishop, but I totally overlooked 49. Rxd4 cxd4 50. Kxg1. Unfortunately my opponent noticed his mistake, and played 49...Re1. The game continued 50. Rg2 Be5. I lost on time. I couldn't come up with a reasonable defense to threat of h4. It's games like those, that make me want to swear off "cracktion".
So how did my first round go in the Wednesday quad? I was holding my own in a wild Trompowsky where White sac'ed a pawn for play. However despite using almost 5 minutes on one move in particular, the move was horrendous and just loses a rook that I can't even get the exchange for. Check is not always the best way to counter a threat. I had played 14...Qa5+, expecting him to interpose with either his knight or queen. I did not expect 15. b4. It's a pretty obvious move, but I was too focused on trying to get him to move his knight back. Playing 15. e5 or 15. Nxd5 would have eliminated the threats on the c7 square.
Several days later I received a very nice email from him. He had attached a pgn file with his his analysis of the game. He has stronger engines then me, and he provided a lot of analysis. What follows is his analysis aided by Shredder and Fritz.
Souvik R vs Polly W.pgn
Stay tuned for more on my transition to slow chess.
Friday, September 18, 2009
2009 New York State Championship - Part 2
After a long game on Sunday night, I didn't know what to expect on Monday. There were several different possibilities, and depending on what happened in round 5 I had all my bases covered. If I had some horribly short loss in round 5, I would go back to my sister's house, get my stuff, beat the traffic, and go to a Labor Day barbecue that I had been invited to. The hosts of the barbecue are chess parents, so they understood that I would not make it if I had a long game. If I had a long game, win or lose I would stick around for round 6, and then decide after that game what I would do.
In the past two state championships of been a victim of Murphy's Law. If there was something fun to do outside of chess, I would have a long drawn out game that would cause me to miss the fun. Also it was likely I would lose the game. If no one was around, I would either get a bye or lose quickly. Winning quickly was never part of the equation. I had kept my "buddy" Murphy at bay on Sunday. The Murphyisms of Sunday were minor. Two Blacks in a row? Big deal! Playing someone from the Marshall that I've played seven times already? It could be worse. I could be playing Silvio for the 101st time.
Monday was a new day, so what could happen? If I thought I was through with playing people I face at the Marshall, I was wrong. Not only did I face another one of my Marshall opponents in round 5, but she was one who I had just played this past Thursday. I was play White against Shernaz Kennedy again. Yes the same Shernaz who delivered mate as featured in my last Wacky Wednesday post. We were both annoyed that we traveled up to Albany to play each other for the second time in five days. Also what were the chances I play females in two straight rounds?
This was the first time I was playing Shernaz at normal time control since the 1992 New York State Woman's Championship. That was back when I was in the mid 1800s and she was close to 2100. I actually beat her in that game, finished the tournament at 3-1 and won the A prize. Would playing her at a slow time control be the thing that would snap my current losing streak against her? I've had really good games against her, but time pressure implosions typically have done me in.
The opening was the same as Thursday's game, however she didn't let me get e4 in right away or get my knight into d5, and I made sure I castled before trying any sort of attack. It was actually a quiet game. We played for over three hours. We had the same number of pawns going into the rook and pawns ending, but my two passed pawns on the queen side were the difference. Here's the game.
pw-skennedy090709.pgn
This was certainly a change for me. I went into the last round with an opportunity to get a plus score if I won, and an even score if I drew. There was also the third possibility, but most years a minus score has been the default going into the last round. I already had as many wins as 2005 - 2008 added together. Given the opportunity to go for a plus score meant I would be a no show at the barbecue. I was not going to drop out now.
After lunch with a few of my long time chess friends it was back to business. Somehow I managed to make the break and get paired down a little bit. I say a little bit because my opponent was rated 1637. A 63 point rating difference has hardly any statistical significance in terms of predicting results. Anything could happen, and I was Black. I had played this particular opponent in this event a number of years ago, and we drew. This was my fourth opponent out of six that I've played at least once before. At least he wasn't another NYC player!
I had to wonder if I would have my typical last round game that would drag on forever causing me to miss whatever Labor Day fun my sister had in mind. She had left me a voice mail saying that she was planning to go to a barbecue, and that I could join her there when I was done. The last time that had happened I had a game that went on for 5 hours, and I missed everything! Last year it was dinner and a movie that was the attractive alternative to playing out a miserable lost game in round four.
This year I would not have any of those last round of the day dilemmas. This game could be Wacky Wednesday material. My opponent told me at the start of the game that he would leave the board a lot. I could tell that he smoked, and that would probably take him away from the board frequently. I'm not sure what got into my opponent, but he had no idea what to do with my "anti-Yugoslav" move of 7...Qa5. The correct response is simply 8. 0-0, but often players try to play the Yugoslav anyway by responding 8. f3. Shortly after I had played 8...Qb4 he got up left the room on his time. I figured he needed a cigarette before trying to figure out what to do next. Sure enough when I left the room he was standing outside smoking. I went outside and was talking to the other smoker and my opponent. He says to me "Afterward can you tell me something about the Accelerated Dragon?" I said sure and went back inside.
The line is not all scary for White if he simply plays 9. Nxc6. After Black plays Bxc6, White simply moves his Bishop back to b3. Both players castle king side and it's pretty much equal. However at times players don't seem to quite know what to do with the line, and get themselves into all sorts of trouble. My opponent came back into the room, and started thinking about his move. He played 9. Qd3 which allows me the fork his queen and bishop with Ne5.
After 10. Bxf7+ Kxf7 I'm up a bishop for a pawn. It was quite apparent that he had no idea what he was doing with the line, and was visibly shaken by losing the piece. However it's at times like this that I have to be very careful not to get over confident or lose focus. Sometimes when I'm winning, my mind wanders off and thinks about how many rating points I will gain in the tournament, or whether or not I will win class money. I had already thrown away one game this tournament when I was up a piece. I did not want it to happen again.
I wasn't going to take unnecessary chances so instead of immediately taking the hanging pawn, and attacked his queen first, then took it. The did get the queens off the board. Even with the queens off the board, I made sure to stay focused on the position. When he went on his next smoke break it was tempting to go into the other room and look at the wall charts to figure if I could win money or not. I kept telling myself, "Concentrate on the position. Win the game first. It's not over until he resigns or you mate him."
He seemed to be having more trouble concentrating on the position because he ended out making another terrible move which allows me to go up a full rook. Shortly after that he resigned. Here's the game.
RAlguire-pw090709.pgn
This was certainly a unique thing for me. A long time control game that I win in under two hours. It was actually more like an hour and half. Now I could go look at the wall chart and see what the chances of winning Under 1800 money were. There was Benjamin Ascherman, the recipient of my second round "gift" at 3.5 points going into round six, but he was playing way up. There were five players in the 1700s that had 3 points going into round six. There were also some 2.5s who could win and tie with me. So for me to have any decent shot at any sort of Under 1800 prize money, I needed Ascherman to lose and the five 3 pointers to lose or draw. What were the odds of all of that happening? Even though all the 3s had gotten paired up, in many cases the rating difference was only around 100 points which really could go either way. All it would take to knock me out of the running would be for a couple of the 3s to win, and Ascherman to draw or win.
I figured I would hang around for awhile and see how things unfolded in my section. It wasn't even 5:00 pm, and our dinner reservation was until 7:00 pm. I kept going in and seeing what was happening in the crucial games. One thing that was very mysterious was there was no game occurring on one the boards where the 3s were playing, but there was no result posted either. This was one of the games that mattered to me. It seems like neither player had shown up, and eventually it was posted as a double forfeit.
I was making myself crazy watching the various games, so instead I went into the skittles room and watched some kids play bughouse. Another kid wanted to join in, but didn't have a partner, so I offered to be his partner. We were a pretty good team, though it took us awhile to click. He kept forgetting to pass the captured pieces to me. I'd look over, and see he had all these white pieces. Once we worked out this glitch we didn't lose many games. We didn't have to get up very often, so I got to play lots of bughouse. The inner child comes out when I'm playing bughouse. I get loud and silly just like the kids.
Finally the parents of some of the kids wanted to leave so the games broke up. I went back into the playing room to see what was happening. The 3.5 had lost, but a number of 3s were still playing. One of the 3s was up a piece against his higher rated opponent. I figured the best I could do was end out in some massive tie for 2nd place and if I was lucky maybe win half my entry fee back. At that pointed I decided I would head back to my sister's house. Everything was out of my control at this point. If I won something, I'd get the organizer to mail me my check.
I was pleasantly surprised later when I looked at the results, and saw that I tied for 1st Under 1800. I was amazed that everything happened that I needed to occur to have a chance. The 3 who was up a piece when I left, only managed a draw. Instead of being in 4 way tie for 2nd. I was in a 5 way tie for 1st.
Looking at my results at this tournament convinced me that I need to play more slow chess. I scored .5 - 2.5 in the fast games on the two day schedule, and scored 3 - 0 in the slow games. This convinced me that I would play the one game a week tournament on Thursdays at the Marshall and take a break from Thursday night "cracktion". It will be hard to avoid "cracktion" all together unless I can get some players on Mondays to play a slow tournament over 3-4 weeks.
In the past two state championships of been a victim of Murphy's Law. If there was something fun to do outside of chess, I would have a long drawn out game that would cause me to miss the fun. Also it was likely I would lose the game. If no one was around, I would either get a bye or lose quickly. Winning quickly was never part of the equation. I had kept my "buddy" Murphy at bay on Sunday. The Murphyisms of Sunday were minor. Two Blacks in a row? Big deal! Playing someone from the Marshall that I've played seven times already? It could be worse. I could be playing Silvio for the 101st time.
Monday was a new day, so what could happen? If I thought I was through with playing people I face at the Marshall, I was wrong. Not only did I face another one of my Marshall opponents in round 5, but she was one who I had just played this past Thursday. I was play White against Shernaz Kennedy again. Yes the same Shernaz who delivered mate as featured in my last Wacky Wednesday post. We were both annoyed that we traveled up to Albany to play each other for the second time in five days. Also what were the chances I play females in two straight rounds?
This was the first time I was playing Shernaz at normal time control since the 1992 New York State Woman's Championship. That was back when I was in the mid 1800s and she was close to 2100. I actually beat her in that game, finished the tournament at 3-1 and won the A prize. Would playing her at a slow time control be the thing that would snap my current losing streak against her? I've had really good games against her, but time pressure implosions typically have done me in.
The opening was the same as Thursday's game, however she didn't let me get e4 in right away or get my knight into d5, and I made sure I castled before trying any sort of attack. It was actually a quiet game. We played for over three hours. We had the same number of pawns going into the rook and pawns ending, but my two passed pawns on the queen side were the difference. Here's the game.
pw-skennedy090709.pgn
This was certainly a change for me. I went into the last round with an opportunity to get a plus score if I won, and an even score if I drew. There was also the third possibility, but most years a minus score has been the default going into the last round. I already had as many wins as 2005 - 2008 added together. Given the opportunity to go for a plus score meant I would be a no show at the barbecue. I was not going to drop out now.
After lunch with a few of my long time chess friends it was back to business. Somehow I managed to make the break and get paired down a little bit. I say a little bit because my opponent was rated 1637. A 63 point rating difference has hardly any statistical significance in terms of predicting results. Anything could happen, and I was Black. I had played this particular opponent in this event a number of years ago, and we drew. This was my fourth opponent out of six that I've played at least once before. At least he wasn't another NYC player!
I had to wonder if I would have my typical last round game that would drag on forever causing me to miss whatever Labor Day fun my sister had in mind. She had left me a voice mail saying that she was planning to go to a barbecue, and that I could join her there when I was done. The last time that had happened I had a game that went on for 5 hours, and I missed everything! Last year it was dinner and a movie that was the attractive alternative to playing out a miserable lost game in round four.
This year I would not have any of those last round of the day dilemmas. This game could be Wacky Wednesday material. My opponent told me at the start of the game that he would leave the board a lot. I could tell that he smoked, and that would probably take him away from the board frequently. I'm not sure what got into my opponent, but he had no idea what to do with my "anti-Yugoslav" move of 7...Qa5. The correct response is simply 8. 0-0, but often players try to play the Yugoslav anyway by responding 8. f3. Shortly after I had played 8...Qb4 he got up left the room on his time. I figured he needed a cigarette before trying to figure out what to do next. Sure enough when I left the room he was standing outside smoking. I went outside and was talking to the other smoker and my opponent. He says to me "Afterward can you tell me something about the Accelerated Dragon?" I said sure and went back inside.
The line is not all scary for White if he simply plays 9. Nxc6. After Black plays Bxc6, White simply moves his Bishop back to b3. Both players castle king side and it's pretty much equal. However at times players don't seem to quite know what to do with the line, and get themselves into all sorts of trouble. My opponent came back into the room, and started thinking about his move. He played 9. Qd3 which allows me the fork his queen and bishop with Ne5.
After 10. Bxf7+ Kxf7 I'm up a bishop for a pawn. It was quite apparent that he had no idea what he was doing with the line, and was visibly shaken by losing the piece. However it's at times like this that I have to be very careful not to get over confident or lose focus. Sometimes when I'm winning, my mind wanders off and thinks about how many rating points I will gain in the tournament, or whether or not I will win class money. I had already thrown away one game this tournament when I was up a piece. I did not want it to happen again.
I wasn't going to take unnecessary chances so instead of immediately taking the hanging pawn, and attacked his queen first, then took it. The did get the queens off the board. Even with the queens off the board, I made sure to stay focused on the position. When he went on his next smoke break it was tempting to go into the other room and look at the wall charts to figure if I could win money or not. I kept telling myself, "Concentrate on the position. Win the game first. It's not over until he resigns or you mate him."
He seemed to be having more trouble concentrating on the position because he ended out making another terrible move which allows me to go up a full rook. Shortly after that he resigned. Here's the game.
RAlguire-pw090709.pgn
This was certainly a unique thing for me. A long time control game that I win in under two hours. It was actually more like an hour and half. Now I could go look at the wall chart and see what the chances of winning Under 1800 money were. There was Benjamin Ascherman, the recipient of my second round "gift" at 3.5 points going into round six, but he was playing way up. There were five players in the 1700s that had 3 points going into round six. There were also some 2.5s who could win and tie with me. So for me to have any decent shot at any sort of Under 1800 prize money, I needed Ascherman to lose and the five 3 pointers to lose or draw. What were the odds of all of that happening? Even though all the 3s had gotten paired up, in many cases the rating difference was only around 100 points which really could go either way. All it would take to knock me out of the running would be for a couple of the 3s to win, and Ascherman to draw or win.
I figured I would hang around for awhile and see how things unfolded in my section. It wasn't even 5:00 pm, and our dinner reservation was until 7:00 pm. I kept going in and seeing what was happening in the crucial games. One thing that was very mysterious was there was no game occurring on one the boards where the 3s were playing, but there was no result posted either. This was one of the games that mattered to me. It seems like neither player had shown up, and eventually it was posted as a double forfeit.
I was making myself crazy watching the various games, so instead I went into the skittles room and watched some kids play bughouse. Another kid wanted to join in, but didn't have a partner, so I offered to be his partner. We were a pretty good team, though it took us awhile to click. He kept forgetting to pass the captured pieces to me. I'd look over, and see he had all these white pieces. Once we worked out this glitch we didn't lose many games. We didn't have to get up very often, so I got to play lots of bughouse. The inner child comes out when I'm playing bughouse. I get loud and silly just like the kids.
Finally the parents of some of the kids wanted to leave so the games broke up. I went back into the playing room to see what was happening. The 3.5 had lost, but a number of 3s were still playing. One of the 3s was up a piece against his higher rated opponent. I figured the best I could do was end out in some massive tie for 2nd place and if I was lucky maybe win half my entry fee back. At that pointed I decided I would head back to my sister's house. Everything was out of my control at this point. If I won something, I'd get the organizer to mail me my check.
I was pleasantly surprised later when I looked at the results, and saw that I tied for 1st Under 1800. I was amazed that everything happened that I needed to occur to have a chance. The 3 who was up a piece when I left, only managed a draw. Instead of being in 4 way tie for 2nd. I was in a 5 way tie for 1st.
Looking at my results at this tournament convinced me that I need to play more slow chess. I scored .5 - 2.5 in the fast games on the two day schedule, and scored 3 - 0 in the slow games. This convinced me that I would play the one game a week tournament on Thursdays at the Marshall and take a break from Thursday night "cracktion". It will be hard to avoid "cracktion" all together unless I can get some players on Mondays to play a slow tournament over 3-4 weeks.
Sunday, September 13, 2009
2009 New York State Championship - Part I
I'm a week late with this report, and news of my performance spreads fast. If you've been reading this blog since its inception you know I've had some crazy scores in the 2007 and 2008 Championships. I never know what to expect when I show up at this tournament. However when I dropped a pawn in my first round game, I thought "Here we go again!" Fortunately my opponent was in worst time trouble then me and offered me a draw in the following position after playing 43...Re7.
I didn't even hesitate. I accepted the draw almost immediately. It's funny because, I had considered offering him a draw several moves earlier. I had a big time edge, and didn't see an easy win for him. However I always feel weird offering a much higher rated player a draw when I'm down a pawn.
In the second round I get paired against Benjamin Ascherman. I've played him seven times at the Marshall Chess Club. One thing I find annoying is when I travel two and half hours to play in a tournament, and getting paired against players who I play at the Marshall or at other local events down by me. I don't need to pay for gas and tolls to play someone from New York City! We could have stayed home and played at the Sunday G/30 at the Marshall. However events in Albany and Saratoga Springs draw a lot of NYC and Westchester based players, so I tend to get paired against at least one person each tournament from my neck of the woods.
There are three Ascherman brothers, and a younger sister who all play chess. I've never played the younger sister, but I've had varying degrees of success against the three boys. I having an even record against one, a winning record against another, and losing record against the other. Guess which one I had to play in round two? Yep, the one I have a 1-6 record against. I wasn't overly concerned about my score against him since, one I wasn't really sure if he was really the brother that I had the lousy record against, and two, I didn't even know how bad my record was. I had to look it up when I started writing this post. Most of our games are close positional battles and it's usually some time pressure induced horror that decides the game.
This was a typical game for us, except that on move 35 he out right hung a knight. Didn't get a pawn for it and didn't get play. He almost looked like he wanted to resign on the spot. However no such luck! Easy win for me? Nope! I got sloppy and played passively. I eventually ended out giving him two pawns, and lots of play. Then in a moment of stupidity I allowed my bishop to get trapped. I only got one pawn for it, and went into a knight versus bishop pawn ending down a pawn. At that point the position played itself. Here's the game.
BAscherman-pw090609.pgn
It's very frustrating for me when I'm up material and should be able to win, but some how manage to screw it up. I either get over confident, lose focus, and just play moves without considering all the possibilities. The other extreme is I have this feeling of doom, that somehow I'm going to find a way to totally screw up and lose, because I'm just destined to lose. Sometimes I feel like I suffer from what I refer to as the "Great American Beat Me Complex." I have this annoying habit of "snatching defeat from the jaws of victory." Since I was playing the two day schedule the time limit was G/40, but my mistakes were not clock induced.
My third round was against a 1962 who after a lousy start in the three day schedule decided to re-enter the two day schedule. I got Black for a second straight round. There wasn't anything spectacular about the game. It was dead even until I missed a simple combination after pushing my pawn to a5. Two moves later I lose the pawn. I dropped another pawn and eventually he trades down to a simple king and pawn ending.
At this point I'm wondering if I'm going to have a repeat of my 2007 score of 1 draw and 5 losses. Blowing the second round game was upsetting, but I didn't let it bother me too much. I think I've just gotten used to bad things happening to me at this tournament. Since I had a half point I was safe from round four bye threats, though I would not have been devastated by a bye since I could go have dinner with my niece and her boyfriend. A bye was not on the horizon. Instead I made the cut and got paired way down to a 9 year old girl with 1392 rating. Oh joy! I guess I couldn't dodge the little underrated kids forever.
Now I have to make the transition from G/40 to 40/2 G/60. I was determined to make sure I slowed down. Too often I can't slow down enough. I end out making some stupid move that I would not have made if I spent a few more minutes on it. My young opponent was taking her time. Often I get antsy when my opponent is taking a lot of time, but I was determined not have another meltdown against a little girl. There were times during the game where I felt we were having a stare down contest. I would be sitting up on my chair leaning over the board, and I'd look up and she would looking right at me. Her expression would be very serious and intense. I'd go back to looking at the board. This occurred a number of times during the game.
I won a pawn on move 15, however it wasn't like I had a clear cut win. We had only traded light squared bishops. All the rest of the pieces were still on the board. It still was not easy for me. I would have liked to trade everything off and win the king and pawn ending. She wasn't cooperating. At one point she offered me a draw before making her move. I had no intention of taking a draw at that point, but I still asked her to move first before I gave an answer. After she moved, she asked again. I guess she wanted to make sure that I remembered that she did offer a draw. I declined it. I wasn't ready to concede a half point.
She certainly wasn't ready to concede a full point to me. She would not trade queens. Every time I tried to get the queens off the board, she would move her queen away. We did trade off a lot of pieces. On move 38 she offered me another draw. We both had a queen and a rook. However I still the extra pawn. I still wasn't sure how I was going to convert my edge, however I still wasn't ready to take a draw. I knew that was her objective, and that if I didn't say something she would be asking me again. I told her if I wanted a draw I would offer one myself.
When we made 40 moves she had 3 minutes left from the first time control, and I had 44 minutes. I was beginning to wonder if I was going to have grind out this game, and win on time. Finally on move 50 I was able to get the queen trade I wanted. That still didn't make things easy because we both still had rooks on the board. We traded some pawns and went for a pawn race. 68 moves and four and half hours later the game came to an abrupt end when she allowed mate. At that point it was inevitable. She can hang on for another 9 moves with correct play. At that point it's way past her bedtime, and round five is at 9:00 AM the next day.
It's tough playing these young kids. They feel like they have nothing to lose, and a lot to gain. The 1386 rating on the wall chart was a lie. Her October rating is 1522. I never make assumptions about playing strength when playing kids like her. Like many of the talented young kids, she works hard and has a good coach.
Here is the game.
pw-rsingh090609.pgn
Stay tuned for part two when Polly shows Murphy who's the boss!
I didn't even hesitate. I accepted the draw almost immediately. It's funny because, I had considered offering him a draw several moves earlier. I had a big time edge, and didn't see an easy win for him. However I always feel weird offering a much higher rated player a draw when I'm down a pawn.
In the second round I get paired against Benjamin Ascherman. I've played him seven times at the Marshall Chess Club. One thing I find annoying is when I travel two and half hours to play in a tournament, and getting paired against players who I play at the Marshall or at other local events down by me. I don't need to pay for gas and tolls to play someone from New York City! We could have stayed home and played at the Sunday G/30 at the Marshall. However events in Albany and Saratoga Springs draw a lot of NYC and Westchester based players, so I tend to get paired against at least one person each tournament from my neck of the woods.
There are three Ascherman brothers, and a younger sister who all play chess. I've never played the younger sister, but I've had varying degrees of success against the three boys. I having an even record against one, a winning record against another, and losing record against the other. Guess which one I had to play in round two? Yep, the one I have a 1-6 record against. I wasn't overly concerned about my score against him since, one I wasn't really sure if he was really the brother that I had the lousy record against, and two, I didn't even know how bad my record was. I had to look it up when I started writing this post. Most of our games are close positional battles and it's usually some time pressure induced horror that decides the game.
This was a typical game for us, except that on move 35 he out right hung a knight. Didn't get a pawn for it and didn't get play. He almost looked like he wanted to resign on the spot. However no such luck! Easy win for me? Nope! I got sloppy and played passively. I eventually ended out giving him two pawns, and lots of play. Then in a moment of stupidity I allowed my bishop to get trapped. I only got one pawn for it, and went into a knight versus bishop pawn ending down a pawn. At that point the position played itself. Here's the game.
BAscherman-pw090609.pgn
It's very frustrating for me when I'm up material and should be able to win, but some how manage to screw it up. I either get over confident, lose focus, and just play moves without considering all the possibilities. The other extreme is I have this feeling of doom, that somehow I'm going to find a way to totally screw up and lose, because I'm just destined to lose. Sometimes I feel like I suffer from what I refer to as the "Great American Beat Me Complex." I have this annoying habit of "snatching defeat from the jaws of victory." Since I was playing the two day schedule the time limit was G/40, but my mistakes were not clock induced.
My third round was against a 1962 who after a lousy start in the three day schedule decided to re-enter the two day schedule. I got Black for a second straight round. There wasn't anything spectacular about the game. It was dead even until I missed a simple combination after pushing my pawn to a5. Two moves later I lose the pawn. I dropped another pawn and eventually he trades down to a simple king and pawn ending.
At this point I'm wondering if I'm going to have a repeat of my 2007 score of 1 draw and 5 losses. Blowing the second round game was upsetting, but I didn't let it bother me too much. I think I've just gotten used to bad things happening to me at this tournament. Since I had a half point I was safe from round four bye threats, though I would not have been devastated by a bye since I could go have dinner with my niece and her boyfriend. A bye was not on the horizon. Instead I made the cut and got paired way down to a 9 year old girl with 1392 rating. Oh joy! I guess I couldn't dodge the little underrated kids forever.
Now I have to make the transition from G/40 to 40/2 G/60. I was determined to make sure I slowed down. Too often I can't slow down enough. I end out making some stupid move that I would not have made if I spent a few more minutes on it. My young opponent was taking her time. Often I get antsy when my opponent is taking a lot of time, but I was determined not have another meltdown against a little girl. There were times during the game where I felt we were having a stare down contest. I would be sitting up on my chair leaning over the board, and I'd look up and she would looking right at me. Her expression would be very serious and intense. I'd go back to looking at the board. This occurred a number of times during the game.
I won a pawn on move 15, however it wasn't like I had a clear cut win. We had only traded light squared bishops. All the rest of the pieces were still on the board. It still was not easy for me. I would have liked to trade everything off and win the king and pawn ending. She wasn't cooperating. At one point she offered me a draw before making her move. I had no intention of taking a draw at that point, but I still asked her to move first before I gave an answer. After she moved, she asked again. I guess she wanted to make sure that I remembered that she did offer a draw. I declined it. I wasn't ready to concede a half point.
She certainly wasn't ready to concede a full point to me. She would not trade queens. Every time I tried to get the queens off the board, she would move her queen away. We did trade off a lot of pieces. On move 38 she offered me another draw. We both had a queen and a rook. However I still the extra pawn. I still wasn't sure how I was going to convert my edge, however I still wasn't ready to take a draw. I knew that was her objective, and that if I didn't say something she would be asking me again. I told her if I wanted a draw I would offer one myself.
When we made 40 moves she had 3 minutes left from the first time control, and I had 44 minutes. I was beginning to wonder if I was going to have grind out this game, and win on time. Finally on move 50 I was able to get the queen trade I wanted. That still didn't make things easy because we both still had rooks on the board. We traded some pawns and went for a pawn race. 68 moves and four and half hours later the game came to an abrupt end when she allowed mate. At that point it was inevitable. She can hang on for another 9 moves with correct play. At that point it's way past her bedtime, and round five is at 9:00 AM the next day.
It's tough playing these young kids. They feel like they have nothing to lose, and a lot to gain. The 1386 rating on the wall chart was a lie. Her October rating is 1522. I never make assumptions about playing strength when playing kids like her. Like many of the talented young kids, she works hard and has a good coach.
Here is the game.
pw-rsingh090609.pgn
Stay tuned for part two when Polly shows Murphy who's the boss!
Thursday, September 10, 2009
One Rated Game Tonight!
It's Thursday, and I'm heading down to the Marshall to play tonight. However I will be ignoring the cracktion sirens, and playing in the Marshall FIDE Thursday tournament. One game a week at a civilized time limit of Game/2. I've had a number of people suggest that I play more slow chess. After my performance at the NY State Championship this past weekend where I won the three games played at the 40/2 G/60 time limit, I decided I was time to take the advice of many of my readers and other friends to play more slow chess.
A report regarding the NY State Championship is coming up. Murphy stayed home. :-)
A report regarding the NY State Championship is coming up. Murphy stayed home. :-)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)