The Quest of the Chess Novice

Boston University Open -- November 2011 -- Round 1-4

2011-11-06T22:22:00.000-05:00

http://blog.chess.com/view/reed-welling----1-0----bu-open----november-2011----round-1-4

Moving to Chess.com

2011-10-09T20:38:00.002-04:00

I'm moving my ACIS activity to Chess.com at:
http://www.chess.com/groups/home/acis

Thoughts on these chess exercises?

2011-09-23T22:28:00.000-04:00

http://www.chess.com/article/view/the-legendary-15-minute-drill

I'd appreciate any thoughts you may have on this set of chess exercises...

ACIS Notes 008 -- MetroWest CC June 2011 -- Round 2

2011-06-19T14:33:00.000-04:00

After Eastern Class earlier this year, OTB chess took a backseat, while work ramped up. I still did my correspondence chess praxis as per usual.

Correspondence Chess Praxis

Below are a couple of miniatures from a correspondence chess CCLA section played on the ICCF server. You can view the section here. I have one loss, four wins, and one game still in progress (I'm about to win an exchange). For the record, my loss was a great example of lazy, sloppy play on my part. I "woke up" in my other games.

The first example is a rout of the opponents King in the center:

The second is opponent hesitation punished with a Queenside attack. I'm still analyzing this game. I have some comments from other players at MetroWest CC. If you have comments, please send them in:

MetroWest CC June 2011 -- Round 2

The object of this post however is to get back in the saddle with my OTB play. I will be playing at the Continental Open in Sturbridge MA, and would like to have an even better performance than at Eastern Class earlier this year. Below is my June 2011 Round 2 game played at MetroWest CC:

Here is the un-annotated game, followed by:

My thoughts during the game
My home analysis
What Fritz said...

Please note that the game was "reconstructed" from approximately move 64 on. The major piece movements are there, but there is a mystery on 68.Rd7, why didn't the White King capture the pawn?

My Thoughts During The Game

Since I have been reading a ton of Silman, plus doing tactics when I can (skills and drills), I was in good spirits, a bit of good nervous energy, and looking forward to the game. I hadn't been to the MetroWest CC in a while (although still doing my volunteer activities in the background), and I looked forward to a good old fashioned chess battle! I found my opponent, Clark Ewer. We used to play each other a while ago, and during the late 90's we sometimes rode the commuter rail together. I'll highlight the points in the game where I thought I had to make a major decision. As opposed to the points where I really needed to make a decision - which are hopefully highlighted in my home analysis and with Fritz assistance below this section. As usual, your comments are welcome:

2.Nf3 - "Either (a) he does not know the French and is trying to throw me off, or; (b) he does know the French and this is some killer line". Of course this is all crap. I should just play what I think should be played to the best of my ability. I played 2...d5 seeking a French, knowing it'll likely go into an Exchange Variation.
5. Bd3 - "Hmmm... now we can break symmetry, and possibly I'll be a fraction of a tempo to the better", and played 5...Bg4 prompting 6. Be2. I get a tempo back.
10.Ne5 - "Gees, I mentally prepared for this, but why does a Knight on e5 feel so oppressive?". Of course more crap. Brush it off, and start exchanging to relieve the cramp.
15. Qd2 - "Feels quiescent. I think I've heard that word used before in chess books". The "pawn chain" indicates I should play on the King-side. I decided to try and induce a weakness with 15...Qc7.
19. g3 - "I'm conflicted. Am I in a better position (because of the pressure on e-file) or can he blockade, and maybe this is a draw?". You don't win by resigning, so I continued to put maximum pressure down the e-file with 19...Rae8.
23.Kh2 - "Hmmm, so I contradict myself (lose focus on the e-file pressure) and find out I'm making no progress with direct action against the King". I think here I'm losing the plot, and can't figure out how to assess the position and formulate a coherent plan. Then I follow-up with 23...f5 thinking "if my opponent exchanges, I get a passed pawn". This line of reasoning is faulty and violates Silman's guidelines. Never wish that your opponent will make a good move for you! Each move must be judged on it's merit for what it does for your position.
27.Rxe4 - "Wow, my opponent did exchange, and now I get a passed pawn! But... with which pawn should I capture?". DOH. I mentally debated between taking with the d-pawn (which I thought made me vulnerable to a d-pawn push), and the f-pawn which concedes a King-side pawn majority to my opponent. I decided to take with the f-pawn to reduce counter play with the d-pawn. 27...fxe4.
30.f5 - "Am I going to regret taking with the f-pawn and leaving White with a King-side pawn majority?". Such are decisions in the rear-view mirror. I decide to not mull on the past, but look ahead. 30...Rf6.
36.Rh1 - "Why am I still fooling around with direct action on the King, when I should be nursing my protected passed pawn?". Re-deploy. 36...Qe7.
42.Re3 - "I'm thoroughly blocked. I need to either go around (attack from behind) which is not practical, or open up another file to assist.". 42...Qg5.
46.Qe5 - "I now have an open file adjacent to the file my protected passed pawn is on. If I trade Queens am I in a superior endgame? Or is this yet another Rook/Pawn endgame that is drawn?". Without answering that basic question in detail, I played 46...Qf6.
49.Ke3 - "Hmmm... Should I super-activate my Rook with 49...Rf1?". Nah. Play on. 49...h6.
57.Rc3 - "Wow, I wish I activated my Rook earlier. I'm getting more passive each move". 57...Rc6.
63.Ke3 - "I need to try to activate my Rook, clear the King out a blockade position of my protected passed pawn". 63...Rc6.
67.Ke5 - "White's King blocks any attack by his Rook on my e-pawn. It's now or never...". 67...e3.
73.d5 - "One Rook vs. two pawns. No I need to work for a draw". 73...Rc3+
74.Kb7 - "Gift! Now I can get a draw". 74...Rc5

My Home Analysis

The game viewer below has my game analysis, with comments and variations in the viewer. Variations are in blue, and comments are displayed in the comment window, directly below the board, in the game viewer. In the comment viewer, you can see forward/backward VCR controls. Use those to quickly scan where I made comments. The current move is highlighted in yellow.

What Fritz Said...

Fritz analysis highlights are in the list below, tactical comments in red:

Game is even up to 10...Bxe2
Black has advantage starting at 16...Nf6
Black's advantage continues through 27.Rxe4
28.g4?? blunder, allowing 28...Bxf4
28...Qf5? Black still has advantage, but missed tactical opportunity
29.Bg3 Black still has advantage
42...Qg5 Black has slight advantage
46.Qe5 Black still has slight advantage. Instead of 46...Qf6 (game) Fritz suggests 46...Re8 keeping the Queens on the board, and maintaining a Black advantage
47.Qxf6, game is equal (same as home analysis)
51...Kg5, Black has advantage, due to 51.Re3
After 53.Re3, Black had an opportunity for 53...b5 for a major advantage
54.gxh5 Black still has slight advantage, dwindling to equal
65...Rc3?? Blunder. Fritz suggests 65...Rb6 as keeping equal game
66.Kf4 White has big advantage
68.Rd7 Black should capture pawn with King. I'm not sure if this is an error in reconstructing the game
68.Kg3, Fritz suggests 68...e2, Black with a big advantage
70...e2, Black has big advantage
71...e=Q?? equalizes. Blunder, Fritz suggests 71...Re3 preserving a small advantage
72.Rxe1 Equal

Closing

My thoughts during the game, home analysis and Fritz all highlight gaps in my understanding, as well as momentary tactical lapses. My goal is to continue to use this as a praxis technique, and to show improvement over time. As usual comments and critiques are welcome!

ACIS Notes 007 -- Eastern Class Tournament 2011 -- Round 1

2011-03-27T20:37:00.000-04:00

CCA Eastern Class 2011 Round 1
This tournament is 5 rounds, starting Friday night for round 1. I took the day off so my roommate and I arrived with plenty of time, ate early,no stress and so on. I am re-energized this year to actually make progress in my chess, as opposed to "dithering around" as the media recently likes to describe such behavior.

Synopsis:
White opened 1.d4 as per usual. With Blacks reply 1...b5 I knew my opponent liked "off beat" openings, and mentally went on alert for traps. This preoccupation with traps held White back. It took a while to feel comfortable with the tensions enough to start asserting my plans. Key points in the game:

6...Be7 -- After this move White is searching for a plan, but gets overly concerned about the Black Bishop on b7. This restrains White from pursuing the Black King, who delayed castling until it was too late.
10...Qc7 -- White really needs to pursue the Black King by restraining the King from castling Queenside, then opening the center. Instead White tries to get a Kingside attack going. The issue is(a) that Black could simply castle Queenside then what?, and; (b) in order to coordinate the Knights, White goes through an awkward maneuvering and it isn't until much later that the Knights become useful. In the meantime, a Fritz analysis keeps telling White (six times!) that he needs to consider the simple d5 push...
14...Qf8? -- White clumsily pushed the Black Queen back to an unproductive square. Then, White finally realized that he needs to create some Queenside action in order to give Black multiple problems to solve, and plays 15.a4.
17...Bc8 -- White has spent a lot of effort to displace the Black light square Bishop from the long diagonal. Now White feels bold enough to try 18.d5 and open up the position to go after the Black King.
19...Bb7 -- Now White has to continue the plan of pursuing the Black King. Does he push 20.d6, or try to crack open the Black King defenses with 20.dxe6? Or some other move? 20.d6 will restrain the Black dark square Bishop (good). 20.dxe6 begins to chip away at the Black King defense, but is there something quicker? Fritz suggests 20.cxb4, but I'm not sure why this is good. The engine doesn't reveal an immediate tactic, so there is something positional that I do not understand.
29...Rxg6 -- After missed tactics on both sides, and a rushed exchange of Queens on White's part, we have a position where Black has a huge weakness on the d7 square, White has a Rook on the d-file, and two Knights trained on d6 in front of the d7-pawn. White initiates operations against the last defense of the Black King with 30.Ncd6.
33...cxb4 -- White can choose to maintain or increase the tension if he wishes. Fritz recommends 34.a5 to maintain tension, while Goldowsky ("ChessWriter") recommends 34.h4. White played 34.Nxe7 releasing the tension, likely lengthening the game.
35...a5 -- Allowing White to exchange Bishops with 36.Bb5, and the rest of the game is inevitable.

ACIS Notes 006 -- Periodic Update

2011-02-20T21:03:00.000-05:00

I'll make an effort to give a terse periodic update of where I am at in "The Hills of Sisyphus"... maybe every few weeks? We'll see how long I can keep this up :-)

chess.com -- 1471
chess.emrald.net -- 1260
chesstempo.com -- 1536
CT-ART 4.0 -- 1835

MetroWest CC play resumes March, Tuesday nights 40/90, SD30
Eastern Class March 4-6, 2011
Three(3) chess.com games
Five(5) CCLA games

Silman, Reassess v4, finishing up Part 3 Rooks

My goal obviously is to improve my play. A big test will be the Eastern Class tournament. I'm 1399 in Class D (1200-1399). Although I'm the highest rated, there are always a few scholastic stars who shoot up in those sections, so I'm not expecting a perfect score. However, I am determined to get a competitive result.

Am I boning up on openings? No. Tactics? Yes. Strategy? A bit, via Silman. Endgames? No.

I'll give an update late in March after the Eastern Class.

ACIS Notes 005 -- Three Hills of Sisyphus

2011-02-19T17:16:00.002-05:00

Fans of chess improvement have no doubt heard on "The Seven Circles", a term coined by MDLM and used by Knights Errant extensively. If you are not familiar, then I recommend the blog by Blunderprone (see "My Blog List" on the right) for history and humor of the "movement". The Seven Circles is a method to improve your chess via practicing tactics. There have been plenty of anecdotes pro/con, and some quantitative evidence in its favor. I've even tried, but I can't get completely through even the first circle - I get jammed midway around level five of CT-ART.

So I stall, give up, come back to it, realize I truly suck in the openings, fret about that, but never formulated a plan I could stick with for any period of time. I'd like to stick to a plan for a while, so I can measure and see if the plan is working. For as much as some people say "don't worry about your rating", what other measure is there really, to say that you are improving? I think rather the statement should be "play and practice as hard as you can, and while doing so, don't think about your rating". But you still need to step back periodically and see if what you are doing works.

Recently I got tired of my free fall in USCF rating, and decided to do something about it. Was it my intense work schedule making me tired for night games at MetroWest CC? Am I truly incapable of learning openings? Is age a factor? Am I capable of the willpower chess demands? I thought about my chess and work and decided to be a bit more disciplined and systematic about how I approach chess. It helps in work, and who knows, maybe in chess as well. I've been developing this method, and gradually formalizing it in my head. Most recently I'm trying to put some real structure around it, so when I get 15-30 min free time I can exercise a bit of the method. Part of the method is getting away from the notion that the only way I can improve is if I can grab several hours at a time. That is simply too unrealistic and has held me back.

I've been down this new path just a couple of months and already regained ~100 USCF ELO points. That's not very impressive if you note that I am all the way back to 1399... but still. The chart is below, and you'll have to squint to see the up tick in the last couple of months...

So what is going on? Is this last up tick significant, or just another fluctuation on my slow but sure spiral downward to my floor of 1000? I'd like to think that I am at an inflection point of steady improvement. I'll show below how I am trying to think a bit more holistically about my chess improvement, and have grouped my activities into the "Three Hills of Sisyphus", take-off on the phrase "Seven Circles"...

Hill One - Drills

This hill of Sisyphus is all about tactical drills. The pure MDLM method is CT-ART, but I've found that no matter what packaged set of drills you use, there are biases, so why not rotate? People criticize CT-ART for too many queen sacrifices, Emrald for too fast time controls, etc. I forced myself (yes, unpleasant at first) to learn how to use and appreciate four tools. There are many others but here is what I am using, and how:

This hill is the best when I just have a few open minutes. The ideal is to start with a few chess.com tactics. I am a "Gold" member, so I get 30/day. The time control is relaxed, and you get partial credit for making it part way through a sequence. This is good for warm up, so my rating on this one is probably artificially low (~1300). The next is chess.emrald.net for the Chess Tactics Server. This experience is like a series of flash cards, and to get full credit, you need to answer within three(3) seconds. A lot of "remove the defender" and "king hunt", and after a while you try to get "an eye" for hanging pieces and such. My Emrald rating is ~1200-1250. Next is chesstempo.com tactics training, and this one allows for much more time, and the problems are harder. My rating is >1500. Last is CT-ART v4 and I alternate between theme and difficulty. Current I'm sorting by difficulty and doing all the counterplay examples too, but in practice (untimed) mode. My rating on this is >1800. Sample screen shots of ratings below. I'm starting to get in a groove, and I expect my tactical performance to increase substantially over the next few months.

Hill Two - Praxis

This hill of Sisyphus is all about practice. Since I have a crazy work/travel schedule, I use a combination of OTB and correspondence chess games. The OTB games are usually long, and primarily via MetroWestChess.org, and CCA (chesstour.com) weekend tournaments. The correspondence chess is both casual as in chess.com, and also official such as CCLA (chessbymail.com).

I'm trying to overcome some bad habits with this new approach to praxis. For example in my CCLA (or ICCF) games, I would obsess over moves, sometimes looking at 20-30 variations at each move, which gave me a good rating (ICCF >1700), but I never got a feel for the overall game, and thus I never really improved much. So in my recent CCLA games, I'm trying to move quicker and think overall themes. My CCLA rating is ~1550. In my chess.com games I'm trying to get better at my annotation, which is aided by the fact that the games are already online and easily accessible. I still have a mental hurdle with my other OTB games because my CB database is such a mess. I am thinking about simply starting a new DB for my Eastern Class games (Mar 2011) and make a fresh start. My MetroWest CC games will follow suit.

Hill Three - Skills

This hill of Sisyphus is all about putting everything together into a balanced set of skills. This is still emerging but is roughly divided into book knowledge, multimedia DVD training, reviewing master games, and recording what I want to play as a repertoire.

The current incarnation of this hill of Sisyphus is as follows:

For book knowledge I am going through the Silman Reassess v4. This is a great improvement over v3 which I found tiresome because of the obsession with Bishop v. Knight. That is important but there are many other imbalances, and that is exactly where my games fall apart. In v4 Reassess the #1 great feature are his exercises in which he assigns a rating band, and tells you why (similar to his rating bands in his endgame book). I can now see some curious gaps in my knowledge. For example, in a number of exercises, I can "see" a move for a "2000" rated player but will miss some features of that position he expects a 1600-1800 player to get - and some of these features will determine whether the "2000" level move would work or not in a real game. As I worked through more of these, I realized that where I was going wrong is in not "seeing" the whole board, and that there can be multiple themes of activity, competing activity, going on simultaneously. This incomplete board vision surfaces in tactics exercises too...

For training DVDs, I am currently working through some opening Fritz trainer DVDs for openings (General ABCs, Queen's opening, French Defense, etc.). I am not trying to memorize lines. I am trying to continue picking up on structure and theme ideas (continuation of my earlier ACIS Notes blog entries). I was surprised to learn that the most important thing I am picking up in my first pass is what really is and is not "scary". I'm learning how Masters evaluate positions, and just hearing them speak about various positions, and what is most important to them is invaluable. All without memorizing any lines.

For game collections, this varies between looking at a player's games (like a Petrosian collection), and looking at a tournament book (like Zurich '53, or Curacao '62). Currently I'm going through a Curacao book, but that is on hold right now.

For repertoire, this is my true missing link. I recently downloaded the latest in Bookup, and once I get done with Eastern Class, my pledge to myself is to annotate my games, and start building an e-book of White and Black repertoires.

The Hills Are Alive With The Rocks of Sisyphus

I don't have a lot of time, so the way I work my way through the Hills of Sisyphus is as follows:

At least every other night spend 30 minutes pushing rocks up the Drill Hill. I try to get through chess.com and Emrald at a minimum , usually some chesstempo.com, and on the weekends toss in some CT-ART. Most nights I push rocks up the Praxis Hill (30 min) checking moves in a few correspondence games (< 10 at any given time). At night, spend ~30 min with a book. On travel days, maybe every other weekend try some chapters out of the DVDs. The repertoire, well that's still a twinkle in my eye.

So I have boiled this down to about an hour a day, which is too much for some, way too little for others. I'll see over time if it is the right amount for me.

ACIS Notes 004 -- First thoughts on pawn chains

2010-03-13T20:46:00.002-05:00

'm starting to go through Colin's Pawn Chains book (see previous post), and making mental notes about what I think I need to learn. Colin's book is about pawn chains, which is just a subset of all pawn structures, and then focuses on central chains. As focused as the topic is, it is very important and these structures come up in a lot of openings.

NOTE to readers. I am a chess novice. I am not an expert. In this blog I am trying to see if I can explain concepts in simple language, so that I might actually learn it. I need all the smart people out there to let me know where I get confused, and what I need to correct it. If I get something right, let me know :-)

The first few moves of the French opening are 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5. This is the quintessential fight for the center, and now White has to decide what to do next:

The decision making process is repeated for every move until the chain is fully formed. Do we keep the tension or release it? If we release the tension, do we use pawn exchange or pawn advancement? The diagram below is a schematic of the considerations at every move:

For each move prior to the completion of the chain White can maintain or release tension. All the while, Black has a clear shot at exchanging on d4, and looks for the right time (if ever) to liquidate.

Quite often, the White pawns on d4 and e5 are attacked and exchanged, by the Black pawns on c5 and f6. When that happens Black has three pawn islands, to White's two pawn islands. Further, the Black d5-e6 pawn chain constitute "hanging pawns". If Black can get the pawns moving they will be a powerful force. White's job is to stop them in their tracks. The strategy is to block the pawns by attacking or occupying the d4 and e5 squares (red squares).

Finally, as is typical in a hanging pawn situation, Black can take full advantage of the half-open files on the c-file and f-file (red arrows).

ACIS Notes 003 -- I'm Back & positional vs. strategic? & quick update

2010-03-13T15:41:00.001-05:00

I'm Back From the Caribbean

Yes, the Caribbean, quite awesome. We've been going for years, and this was the first time we had a flight disruption that resulted in us staying an extra day. It was during the wicked strong snowstorms that hit the mid-Atlantic. But no, it wasn't a snow cancellation, it was because of a nearby volcanic eruption (Monserrat)! Yes, we were "forced" to stay an extra day on the beach, listening to the waves pound the shore...

However, the place on the beach for this extra day was literally right next to the airport - LOL!

While we were there, in our usual place on the other side of the island from the airport, we did the usual sun, beach, pool, hot tub, pool, etc. And I got plenty of reading in. Great news, I finally broke my mental block concerning tactics. I made it all the way past "deflection" and completed John Nunn's "Learn Chess Tactics". I don't know why, but the last time I tried his book, I failed at deflections. Now I made it with ~80% success. Now I am in the last chapter of "Miscellaneous" grinding along, also using Pocket Fritz 4 (much better than Pocket Fritz 3) and CT-ART 4 (much better than CT ART 3) for tactics. The mental block of tactics has been lifted, now it is "just" practice, practice, practice...

Bottom line, I feel much more confident in tactics (not over confident). I know that doesn't necessarily translate to anything positive unless other good things happen...

I also finished Grooten's book (see previous posts) and I have to say it is an awesome inventory of techniques. But how to put it all together? For this I read Stean's "Simple Chess". This book is small, not too many variations, and an awesome read. At the end I understood the main point which is that the pawn structure determines your game. Duh. I intellectually knew that when I started my "adult onset" chess in the 90's, but I didn't have a visceral feel like I got when I read Stean's book. Not that I can replicate his genius, but I am slowly getting it.

And part of the "getting it" is the linkage between tactics, pawn structure and openings. I frequently complain about folks who "just study openings", yet at the same time drool at how they can get great positions using 3 minutes on their clock and without breaking a sweat (arg!). Yet I still struggle mightily in the opening. So who is the chump?

How can I "study openings" (even better, understand them!) without all of the apparent memorization? Well, perhaps I can treat it like tactics, something like:

If I can learn tactics by going through drills of particulars, but try to memorize only the patterns...
Then maybe, just maybe, I can learn openings by studying lots of pawn structures and transformations (such as in in Soltis' "Pawn Structure Chess") and doing an OODA loop such as...:

Study a pawn structure
Review a number of GM games
Then look at a few related opening "book" sequences
And (drum roll...) what are the typical tactical motifs for each opening sequence?

Perhaps this will help me avoid the "why the heck am I just memorizing stupid opening lines??" feeling. Maybe. So now I start the quest of pawn structure knowledge. Curiously, years ago Igor Foygel dropped by my house to give me a lesson while he was on the way to a scholastic tournament where he had some students playing. The lesson was to go through all my books and pick out two or three to study. He basically said all the books are useless (to me, the chess novice) except for two or three. In addition to tactics (of course!) which I am finally making progress on, he shoved a copy of a book by Colin Crouch "Pawn Chains". I can't find it in Amazon, Powells, and so forth so here is a snapshot:

I'll be using this as I finally try to figure out pawns...

Positional vs. Strategic?

In the introduction of Soltis' "Pawn Structure Chess" there is a game in which Soltis makes a seemingly innocuous remark, perhaps obvious to all the readers, but was shocking to me, then I had a realization. First the game:

At 11.Ne1, the game (to my chess novice eyes) appears to be a typical French. Soltis says that with White's last move, he is preparing for a Kingside advance. This certainly makes sense (moving the Knight out of the way), but I would wonder if that is too slow (compared to what?). Black responds with 11...f5 successfully blocking White's advance with the f-pawn, and locks the Kingside. Soltis says while it is "structurally sound", it is "dynamically bad". Hmmm... Then White moves 12.b4 and Black takes en passant 12...cxb3. Soltis again makes a confusing statement (to my chess novice eyes) when he says Black's move was "positionally desirable" and "strategically awful". Whew! What am I to make of this? Can any reader please tell me their thoughts?

Quick Update

Of course if you play the rest of the above game out, you'll see that White wins, but is this proof of anything? I don't know, but it did make me think, and try to relate to a discussion with a fellow MetroWest Chess Club member while we were eating a meal before a round at the recent CCA Eastern Class Championship tournament. For the voyeuristic reader, I played four games (skipped the last round), and won one game, close in two others, and wiped out in my first game to the lowest rating player I played. Despite the paucity of points, I was generally pretty happy with my performance considering the crushing work schedule I keep. I am working to ameliorate that, but it won't subside till summer.

Back to the dinner conversation The fellow MetroWest CC player is Robert Harvey and he is playing in the MetroWest CC Championships (Class level) this month so he is very strong. He goes on to tell me that his decision making strategy is guided by "I.M.P.L.O.D.E.S.". Honestly when I heard him say that, I thought "dang it I do that all the time over the board, why do I need help on that??"... Here is how he explains himself:

(I) - initiative
(M) - material
(P) - pawn islands (not necessarily all pawn structural aspects)
(L) - [I'll update if I remember]
(O) - officers, what is the relationship between his minor pieces (Knights, Bishops)?
(D) - [I'll update if I remember]
(E) - [I'll update if I remember]
(S) - space - oddly he puts space last. I think because he includes some of this in how he explained initiative (he counts how many times his pieces "invaded" his opponents territory)

He then went on to say that from an opening/pawn structure perspective, he concentrates 80% of his energy on the Colle as White, and Modern as Black. I won't go into the specifics of his preparation (some of it home grown), but suffice it to say he has a routine, a groove, that he uses 80% of the time, and takes the time to improve his body of knowledge. Me on the other hand am grasping in the dark for a decent opening, and then I find myself opting for moves that Soltis calls "positionally great" and "strategically awful" all at the same time. Arg!!

That's it for now. I'm still sorting my thoughts out, doing tactics daily (finally) and beginning my personal pawn structure/GM games/openings study journey...

Just do it!

2010-01-03T23:44:00.004-05:00

I caught this in a recent "Lifehacker" post.

The philosophy makes sense and is in the spirit of ACIS in general, and my personal program specifically. I've given up trying to figure out a "perfect" curriculum for me. But I have embraced full-on "just do it", to the max. Right now I'm focusing on Grooten's book and I'll be going back to play at MetroWest CC this week. What if I "fail" in something? That'll put me one step closer to improving. While I go through the Grooten book, I try to work out the tactics in the examples so I haven't ignored that part too much :-)

I'm up to Chapter 16 of "Chess Strategy for Club Players" by Grooten. I can't say this enough -- this book:

has not invented anything new,
is "merely" recycling material from back in the Steinitz days (old!),
and this material was rehashed by Nimzowitsch in the 1920's (old and rehashed!)

and still... many authors have tried to be a compendium of middlegame strategy, for example Euwe (I have it but have not read his two volume set), and Silman (especially his Reassess book which I have read - almost - twice). The Silman book makes intellectual sense (at some level) to me, but I can't internalize it, or put it into practice.

So why the heck am I still reading Grooten?? And why is it practically a page-turner-suspense novel for me? I put in all (except the most trivial) positions, game fragments or complete games either into Fritz 12 (thank you Santa this year!), or PocketFritz3 (thank you Santa last year!). I play through it all, comparing what the book says, vs what Fritz says, vs what I was thinking. Very time consuming, and yet (compared to other chess books) I am flying through it, and up to p. 240, and zooming along.

Why is the book so compelling? I can't really explain except to say that it is teaching me about all the pieces, all the pawns, and more importantly all the muscle movements. In contrast, Silman's book is relatively one-dimensional, constantly focusing on whether the bishop or knight is stronger. But why the heck would one be stronger than another? That - is what the Grooten book teaches me, and the examples are perfect (for me) in illustrating principles in action. Then there are four(4) quiz problems after each (short) chapter to get the reader to participate. All the examples and quizes are from real games, IM to super-GM strength.

I guess the best way to sum it up is that Grooten breaks down the concepts into the right bite size pieces, in the right order, and then focuses on the muscle movements (active, process) to do in various situations, with excellent examples. And then frequently puts emphasis on what the decision making process is, tradeoffs, and so on.

I've never been this enthusiastic about a chess book before, maybe that is a good sign in and of itself...

Winter Storm Crimps ACIS Notes

2009-12-20T22:07:00.000-05:00

The "Blizzard of 2009" put a big crimp in my ACIS activities this weekend. For example, I wanted to respond to Phaedrus' comments on my ACIS-Notes-002, but a snow storm that left way over a foot (~35cm) of snow had me shoveling for over four hours... Ugh. I think Blunderprone had a similar fate...

Next weekend...

ACIS Notes 002 -- Strong and Weak Squares

2009-12-12T17:01:00.000-05:00

I am still making my way through Grooten's Chess Strategy for Club Players. In Chapter 9, Strong and Weak Squares, there is another idea that startled me concerning strong squares. The idea is to use a strong square not only for an outpost (like a Knight on d5), but also to use it like conveyor belt to bring more pieces through that strong square and into the game. I have already been introduced to a related notion of echanging. When you exchange, you give your opponent the opportunity to bring their pieces forward. Here we will see White using a square to cycle his pieces through a strong square, and not necessarily as a result of exchanges. Also, while exploring these ideas, I try to make special note as to the reasoning behind which pieces you want to keep, and which pieces you want to exchange. Please comment if you think I am incorrect, since I need to learn what is correct.

Below is a position from Grooten-Hazewindus, Eindhoven 1982 (Chapter 9, p.137, Grooten):

We start by noticing White's control of d5 and e4, Black's isolated pawn on e5, and the opposing bishops, White on e4, Black on f5. According to Nimzowitsch, in order to control a pawn, you must first blockade. The owner of the pawn wants to advance it, and to do that you need control of the square in front of it, thus Black wants to keep the light Bishop, and White will want to exchange it. In addition to the Bishop struggle over e4, White's Knight on d5 is very strong.

1...Qc5 2. Nc3 is a dual purpose maneuver: (1) for the White Bishop to attack b7; (2) for the Knight to control d5. This allows another White piece to occupy d5. 2...Rc7 3. Rd5 Qc4 4. Re1. The White Rook moves to d5 with tempo, and the second White Rook comes up to relieve the White Queen. At first, this looked like a lot of meandering, until I played it through a few times and was able to "see" the masterful maneuvering (not that I would be able to create this myself yet - but then again, that is the purpose of ACIS, to improve...). 4...Kh8 5. Qd2 Be6 6. Rd8 Qc5 7. Rd1 Note how all of White's heavy pieces are lined up on the d-file in a formidable battery. The pressure is a bit much for Black, but there are not many choices. Here the alternatives that Fritz11 found:

(0.57): 7...Rcf7 8.Rxf8+ Bxf8 9.Bd5 Bxd5 10.Nxd5 Kg8
(0.64): 7...b6 8.Rxf8+ Qxf8 9.Bd5 Rd7 10.Qe2 Qe7
(0.68): 7...Bf6 8.Rxf8+ Qxf8 9.Bd5 Bf5 10.a3 Bg7

7...Rf7 8. Rxf8 Qxf8 (Fritz likes ...Bxf8 better) 9. Qe3 (keep the pressure on, and the White Bishop on e4 to prevent ...e4, thus freeing the Black Bishop). 9...b6 10. Bd5 (Qe2 prevents ...e4) and here we see the third White piece cycling through the d5 strong point. Before I read Grooten's explanation, I would have never understood all the "meandering". Now I can see that it is "maneuvering", and not just to shuffle pieces. The movements are designed to double attack, or threaten double attack and put the opponent on the defensive, gradually weakening his position and making it more passive. The d5 conveyor belt is a great way to get pieces in the enemy camp safely, while tying up Black in defense. 10...Bxd5 11. Rxd5 (piece number four on d5) 11...e4. At this point Black has a choice. To leave the pawn on e4 where it will remain weak and eventually fall, or try to get some activity for his Bishop. 12. Nxe4 Re7 13. b3 h6 14. Qd3 Qf4 15. Rd8+ Kh7 16. Qd5 h5 17. Ng5+ Kh6 18. Nf3 Rc7. Black tries to stir things up, but White maintains an iron grip on the center, and soon it proves to much for Black. 19. g3 Qc1+ 20. Kg2 Rc5 21. Qe4 (1-0).

The next game is from the same chapter on Stong and Weak Squares, Botvinnik-Szilagyi, Amsterdam 1966:

The action starts with 15. Be2. Despite White's Bishop as being "bad" it can certainly be active, since Black has no opposing Bishop. The best diagonal for pressure on the Black King will be a2-f7, and therefore White wants to place this Bishop on c4. Here Fritz suggests 15...a5, ...a6 and ...Bc7, which mobilizes Black's Queen-side, and attacks White's Queen-side. Also I believe that Black will want to keep his c-pawn glued to c6 in order to oppose the White pawn on e4, over control of the d5 square. 15...c5. I believe Szilagyi is motivated to attack White's Queen-side, but ...a5 is probably better, because with the text move, Black blocks his own Bishop.

Now, at this point, we see what separates me from a really strong player. My fist instinct (actually just a blind following of a rule of thumb) is to say "open the position up, I have the 'two bishops'!". Botvinnik on the other hand says "hey I have the light squares, we can close thing s up for a while then I will penetrate my opponent's position along the light squares...". That is a defining difference between me a strong players (hopefully not for long) in that a strong player will think of advantages along a whole color complex, and for me I'm just starting to see that such a thing exists.

Back to the game, 16. b5 Ne8 17. Nc4 (entombing Black's dark Bishop) 17...Nd6 18. Bg5. This move would make no sense to me, if I didn't understand Botvinnik's strategy of total domination of the light squares. So now Black has a choice - (a) allow a further weakening of light squares with ...f6, or take the Bishop and allow further disruption deep inside his territory with Nxd6, threatening Nxc8. 17...f6 18. Be3 Nxc4 This activates another "change of the guard" or conveyor belt as we saw in the previous example. The Knight is traded away, but now the White Bishop can come in with force, and together with the Queen invade along the light squares, which was Botvinnik's plan from his 15th move. 20. Bxc4+ Kh8 21. a5 Bc7 Here Botvinnik decides to trade off the Rooks, and start the invasion on the light squares. 22. Rfd1 Nf8 23. Qa2 The Rooks are ready to be traded, and the Bishop-Queen battery is established. 23...Rxd1+ 24. Rxd1 Rd8 (through this whole exchange of Rooks, Fritz slightly favors keeping them on the board with ...b6) 25. Rxd8 Bxd8 26. a6 (more light square domination, and locking in Back's dark Bishop) 26...b6 27. Kg2 Qd7 28. Qe2 (this begins maneuvering to change the Bishop-Queen battery into a Queen-Bishop battery without allowing a Queen exchange) 28...Ng6 (essentially a 'pass') 29. Bb3 Ne7 30. Qc4 Done! 30...h6 (more weakening, but what else?) 31. Qf7 Kh7 32. Bc4 Qd6 Here it is worth noting the difference between methodical following of a plan, and catching the occasional opportunity. At this point, there is a King-side attack opportunity, starting with 33. g4, threatening 34. Bxh6 see below.

(8.23): 33.g4 f5 34.exf5 Qf6 35.Qe8 Bc7
(2.85): 33.Kh2 Bc7 34.g4 Kh8 35.Be6 Qd8
(2.71): 33.h4 Bc7 34.Be6 Qd8 35.g4 Bd6

Botvinnik stuck with his guns, and played 33. h4. 33...Qd1, trying to get some action to no avail. 34. Qe8 f5 35. exf5 Nxf5 36. Bg8+ Kh8 Black resigned here, in the face of 37. Bf7+ Kh7 38. Qg8# (1-0).

ACIS -- Google Group started

2009-12-05T15:24:00.000-05:00

http://groups.google.com/group/acis---chess-improvement

It's restricted to ACIS members, go to the group and ask to join if you want to contribute. You will be asked for your ACIS blog URL, motivation to contribute, etc.

This group was started by Blunderprone and myself. It is for the hard core ACIS members who want to have a place to store links to resources (like wikis and Exeter CC, etc.), as well as kibbitz on discussion groups to help you prepare to make your own blog posts.

Remember, the ACIS method is yours. You are tailoring general ideas into a method that works for you...

ACIS Notes 001 -- Passed Pawns

2009-12-05T14:12:00.001-05:00

Valery Frenlakh used to tell me "chess is a game of squares, not pieces!" Unfortunately all the good things he told me sunk long after I was done taking lessons from him. He also used to tell me "make copies of positions you need to remember!". Now it seems, that is a major cornerstone to the ACIS "tailored" method started by Blunderprone.

So I will log my ACIS journey in the form of notes. These notes will be of any topic, in chronological order of discovery or reflection, on my part. As I mentioned earlier I have an index in a Word file. If the notes are interesting to people, I could publish the index.

Back to "chess is a game of squares, not pieces!"...

I am reading Herman Grootens "Chess Strategy for Club Players", and I have to say, the material is similar to Ar on Nimzowitsch's My System, but somehow, much more readable. I'm actually able to plow through it and get reinforcement, and sometimes surprise out of the concepts. In Chapter 6 "Passed Pawns" (a Nimzowitsch favorite) I came across something that startled me. I always knew Aron said "passed pawns must be pushed", but how do you create passed pawns? And what about the fact that creating a passed pawn (an advantage for you), can sometimes allow an advantage of a different sort for your opponent.

Consider the case of the "small center" out of the Semi-Tarrasch. A schematic of the position is here (diagram C4 from Exeter CC).

The basic point is the potential for a passed pawn in the center for White, balanced against the wing pawn majority for Black. What was never obvious to me (at all!) is how these imbalances of pawn structure affect choices of what pieces to keep on the board - and the choice of what pieces to keep on the board influence their placement. For example, in the diagram on the left, I've always wondered, "where should I put my Rooks?".

My typical response would be to observe: (a) the open c-file, and then; (b) possible potential passed pawn in the center, means; (c) put my a-Rook on c1 and f-Rook on d1.

What I did not consider is that (a) Black wants to exchange Rooks, and keep his minor pieces, to exploit his pawn advantage on the Queen-side; (b) White wants to exchange minor pieces, and keep his Rooks to exploit his advantage in the center (push passed pawn), and; (c) placing Rooks on an open file is practically guaranteeing that the Rook(s) will be exchanged. This is covered in detail in Chapter 6 of Grooten's "Chess Strategy for Club Players". Once it sunk it, I was startled how I missed a pretty basic chunk of chess logic all these years:

What does your pawn structure tell you about your strengths and weaknesses relative to your opponent?
What piece play, relative to the pawn structure is warranted/advised?
What does this mean in terms of which pieces you want to keep vs. exchange?
Only then devise means to exchange/keep pieces, and post the ones you want to keep on the right (strong) squares.
NOTE: I know that Silman tries to drum in the "imbalance" concept, but it seems like he focuses on Knight vs. Bishop. What I totally missed was pawn structure imbalances that inform you of whether to keep major pieces on board or not, and if so don't exchange, even if it means not trying to "claim" an open file! For me (chess novice) this is revolutionary...

Below is a good example of White properly taking advantage of the "small center".

The big decision for White is on his 13th move. This is when he decides to put his f-Rook on e1. Followed by the a-Rook on d1 on his 14th move, and the thematic d-pawn push to d5 on his 15th move. This creates the much written about isolated d-pawn. Petrosian is a master of trading advantages, and he trades this passed d-pawn into a passed c-pawn on c6 on his 19th move. This passed pawn, so deep in his opponents position is defended masterfully by Kortschnoj. Petrosian takes advantage of Kortschnoj's passive position on his 27th move with 27. h4, starting a King-side attack. Petrosian induces weaknesses in Kortschnoj's King-side, and wins a few moves later with 37. Qxh5#.

The second example is where White reaches too far, and Black profits.

After Black's 17th move, we have a similar setup (d4, e4 pawns vs e6 pawn), however, White's King-side Rook is on d1, and the Queen-side Rook is still on a1. By White's 21st move, White has a connected passed pawn on d5, which is good, while Black contests the c-file with his Queen-side Rook, leaving White with an offside, passive Rook. However with 21...Nc4, Black pushes White's only active Rook off course, and with 22...Ne6 starts a multi-piece pileup on the e4 pawn. The initiative passes to Black. With 25...Rd1+ he forces an exchange of Rooks, which Black wants, and White does not. After 29. f3, we have a good Knight (Black) vs. bad Bishop (White) ending, however White does still have the protected passed pawn on d5. The challenge for White after 37. Bxa4 is that now White has to block Black's passed outside a-pawn with the Bishop. That is just enough of a distraction to turn the game in Black's favor. I may be oversimplifying a bit (maybe a lot - I'm a chess novice remember), nonetheless, from my perspective, White had no heavy pieces to convert the advantage of the protected passed d-pawn, and he left himself open to Black gaining the initiative. From there, the rest is technique (LOL - I've always wanted to say that but honestly I have no idea what that means).

ACIS Notes - Introduction

2009-12-05T14:01:00.000-05:00

In the spirit of chunking my improvement to bite size doable pieces, I'll blog about my "ACIS Notes". Part of my (personalized) is to make notes of things to remember. The steps are:

Make a note in a Word file in my ACIS chess folder, in reverse chronological order, so that all I have to do is open the file, make a note and I'm done
In the note, I specify the original source materials that inspired me. Was it an example ina book, a complete game, position, tactic, opening sequence?
If the note includes a game, I find and make a blog entry in chess.com so I can grab a replayable game to insert in this blog. This takes approx 1 min after finding the game. Finding the game can be quick, or take a long time if the player has a name with a lot of different spellings (grrrr...) like "Kortchnoj", "Kortchoi", etc.
Then make the blog entry, embedding the playable games. This makes it easire for the readers, and it takes up less space than jamming the PGN into the text.

I am anticipating then, that my blog entries will make a good place for me to periodically review, and with my Word file being an index, I'll be able to find examples later on...

ACIS Method Observations so far...

2009-12-05T13:23:00.000-05:00

Blunderprone's challenge for each of us to devise an improvement method is:

Much harder than I thought it would be, and;
The right thing to do

I've decided that I need to keep my improvements in bite size chunks due to generally heavy work loads. In addition I'll categorize my chunks into a prioritized list:

Tactics - I'm muddling through this with no clear direction
Positions - I need to figure out what the heck Blunderprone is suggesting we do. I agree on keeping positions (Valery used to chastise me about that), but I haven't figured out the Chessbase muscle movements yet. Maybe Blunderprone can put the position/database technique into a step-by-step single blog/document (hint).
Strategy - I am going through Grooten's "Club Strategy" book, and it is awesome. A lot of it is reinforcement in clear language and examples. Some topics startle and amaze me, and I will cover those in blog entries.

I'll have to figure out how to get on an even keel in all those areas, but for right now, just making progress, anywhere, will be huge.

For those (very few who read my blog) who wonder about me always complaining of not having enough time, due to heavy workload, suffice it to say I am a system engineer in an FFRDC non-profit who helps the fed gov't try to use IT/computer/software/SOA/cloud (you name it) in a reasonable way. As you can imagine, it's sort of like herding cats...

Reflection, and a New Start

2009-11-22T21:23:00.000-05:00

Update - after my success at Foxwoods, my chess went to the crapper. In August, at Sturbridge, I had my worst performance ever (1.0/6.0). I've been recovering somewhat recently at MetroWest CC, and enjoyed myself at the B.U. Open a few weekends ago. At the BU Open I achieved 1.0/3.0 which on paper is not great, but my two losses were to the 1st and 2nd place winners.

I am now earnestly going through Chess Strategy for Club Players" (Grooten) to make sure I file off my rough edges, and knowledge gaps in strategy. In parallel I still seek to improve my tactical ability. I am recently re-energized by Heisman's 4th post at ChessCafe:

http://www.chesscafe.com/text/heisman04.pdf

I also dug up my old copy of Averbach's "Tactics for Advanced Players" and will pledge to run through it end to end.

Last but not least, I will throw my hat in the ring of the new ACIS, organized by the intrepid BlunderProne. I want to learn how to make my own "blunder-rep" database and so on. The method sounds practical and (hopefully) effective. Actually part of his method reminds me of what Valery Frenklakh always told me - "make copies of positions from your own games...".

BlunderProne's blog can be found in my blog list on the right column of this blog.

I'll report back in a few weeks with my perspectives on the method.

Tournament Report :: Foxwoods 2009 :: Prize Money!

2009-05-04T20:52:00.000-04:00

I just got my prize money check of $33.29 for 10th-16th place at Foxwoods! Of course winning my last game would have put me in big money :-)

Analysis :: Foxwoods 2009 (round 2)

2009-04-21T21:41:00.000-04:00

[Event "Foxwoods"]
[Site "Preston CT"]
[Date "2009.04.10"]
[Round "2"]
[White "Reed, Harvey"]
[Black "Chen, Jeremy"]
[Result "1-0"]
[ECO "D55"]
[WhiteElo "1429"]
[BlackElo "1274"]
[PlyCount "45"]
[EventDate "2009.??.??"]
[SourceDate "2007.01.03"]

1. d4 e6 2. c4 d5 3. Nc3 Nf6 4. Nf3 Be7 5. Bg5 O-O 6. e3 c6 7. Bd3 c5 8. Bxf6 Bxf6 9. cxd5 cxd4 10. Nxd4 exd5 11. O-O Nc6 12. Nxc6 bxc6 13. Rc1 c5 14. Nxd5 Bxb2 15. Rxc5 Be6 16. Nc7 Qd6 17. Bxh7+ Kxh7 18. Qxd6 Rad8 19. Rh5+ Kg6 20. Qc5 Bf6 21. Nxe6 fxe6 22. Rh3 Rf7 23. Qh5# 1-0

Reed,Harvey (1429) - Chen,Jeremy (1274) [D55]

Foxwoods Preston CT (2), 10.04.2009

1.d4 e6 2.c4 d5 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.Nf3 Be7 5.Bg5 Even though Black has already played ...Be7, White intends 6.e3 and wants to get his dark bishop outside the pawn chain. 5...0–0 6.e3 White prepares to develop his light bishop. 6...c6 [6...h6 is stronger.] 7.Bd3 Prepare to castle.

7...c5 8.Bxf6 White wanted to give Black an isolani without the possiblity of Black's knight recapturing. [Fritz suggests 8.cxd5 cxd4 9.Nxd4 exd5 which gives Black an isolani, but 8...Nxd5 is possible.] 8...Bxf6 9.cxd5 cxd4 10.Nxd4 exd5 Black has two bishops, and an isolani. It's up to White to prove that the isolani is more of a liability than the benefit of two bishops.

11.0–0 White is playing tough but conservative. As a result he missed a simple combination to pick up a pawn. [Perhaps 11.Qh5 could be considered for the power of double attack (mate and double attack on d5). 11...g6 only 12.Qxd5] 11...Nc6 White has a choice, retreat the d4 knight (say to f3), and risk creating an isolani, or exchange knights, and help Black create hanging pawns. In the judgement of White, creating the hanging pawns was the more profitable choice because he is confident that he can keep them from advancing, which means that they then become a target and a liability. In fact, immediately after the bxc recapture, the c-pawn is backward, and White thinks he can put pressure on it quickly. Black won't be able to immediately advance to c5 because of the Bxh7+ tactic. 12.Nxc6 bxc6 13.Rc1 White starts to apply pressure on the c6 pawn.

13...c5? Black wants to get his hanging pawns moving, but this fails to tactics. 14.Nxd5 Black cannot recapture. Black also has an isolani again. White is attacking c5, while Black is attacking b2. 14...Bxb2 Black wants to trade off his isolani. However, with White's Rxc5 recapture, this attacks the c7 square twice. 15.Rxc5 Be6 16.Nc7 White feels he has an advantage. 16...Qd6?? Black is double attacking White's rook and knight, trying to force them back. [16...Rc8 Doesn't work 17.Nxe6 Rxc5?? (17...fxe6 18.Rxc8 Qxc8 19.Qc2) 18.Nxc5; 16...Rb8 A little better 17.Nxe6 fxe6 but still results in an isolani. 18.Rb5] 17.Bxh7+ White didn't see this tactic twice in one game (also on Black's 13th move).

17...Kxh7 18.Qxd6 Rad8 19.Rh5+ Black still has two bishops, so White still has to be very careful, and keep Black on the run. 19...Kg6 [19...Kg8 Holds out longer.] 20.Qc5 Threatens 21.Qg5#.

20...Bf6 only. 21.Nxe6 [White missed 21.Qc2+ Kxh5 22.Qh7+ Kg5 (22...Kg4 23.f3+ Kg5 24.h4#) 23.f4+ Kg4 24.Qh3#] 21...fxe6 22.Rh3 White prepares mate, expecting Black's king to run to f7. 22...Rf7 Oops. 23.Qh5# 1–0

Analysis :: Foxwoods 2009 (round 1)

2009-04-19T19:16:00.000-04:00

[Event "Foxwoods"]

[Site "Preston CT"]

[Date "2009.04.09"]

[Round "1"]

[White "Grossman, Kurt"]

[Black "Reed, Harvey"]

[Result "0-1"]

[ECO "D51"]

[WhiteElo "1332"]

[BlackElo "1429"]

[PlyCount "73"]

[EventDate "2009.??.??"]

[SourceDate "2007.01.03"]

1. d4 d5 2. c4 e6 3. Nc3 Nf6 4. Bg5 Nbd7 5. cxd5 exd5 6. Qb3 c6 7. g3 Bd6 8. Bg2 h6 9. Bd2 O-O 10. Nh3 Nb6 11. Qc2 Bg4 12. O-O Qd7 13. Nf4 Nc4 14. e4 dxe4 15. Nxe4 Nxe4 16. Bxe4 Nxd2 17. Qxd2 Rfe8 18. Bg2 Bxf4 19. Qxf4 Re2 20. b3 Rae8 21. Bf3 Bxf3 22. Qxf3 R8e4 23. Qc3 Rxd4 24. Rfe1 Rde4 25. Rad1 Qf5 26. Rxe2 Rxe2 27. Qd4 Rxa2 28. Ra1 Rxa1+ 29. Qxa1 a6 30. Qe1 Qe6 31. Kf1 Qxe1+ 32. Kxe1 Kf8 33. Kd2 Ke7 34. Kc3 Kd6 35. Kb4 b6 36. f4 Kd5 37. f5 0-1

Grossman,Kurt (1332) - Reed,Harvey (1429) [D51]

Foxwoods Preston CT (1), 09.04.2009

1.d4 Black was hoping to get some Queen pawn openings in this tournament, so this was a welcome sight. 1...d5 2.c4 e6 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.Bg5 Nbd7 Leaving open the possibility of ...Bd6 later. 5.cxd5 exd5 White exchanges, signalling to Black he is seeking to avoid complications. 6.Qb3 Black is anticipating playing ...c6 and is expecting White to play e3. If so White would be right to aim for queensdie play, and Black should aim for kingside play. However, with this move, White's queen is in an awkward position for a minority attack. White's double attack on d5 is easily met with a move that Black wanted to play. 6...c6 7.g3 White signals to Black that he will fianchetto his light bishop. Black anticipates an e4 break by White, but that can be easily met with dxe, leaving White with an isolani on d4, and a bishop with no targets. [Perhaps 7.e3 is more solid. ] 7...Bd6 Black feels he has a shot at equality in a few more moves. 8.Bg2 h6 Put the question to White's bishop. 9.Bd2 0–0 10.Nh3 Black thinks that White is preparing to exchange his dark bishop on f4 without risking doubled pawns. 10...Nb6 Eyeing c4. 11.Qc2 [Perhaps 11.Bf4 is better for White, seeking to exchange Black's good bishop.] 11...Bg4 Black wants to (a) develop his light bishop, and (b) prepare to create a bishop-queen battery to double attack Whites h3 knight, or White's g2 bishop, giving White a weak light color complex, which will be important if White castles kingside. 12.0–0 Qd7 13.Nf4 Nc4 14.e4 dxe4

White now has an isolani. 15.Nxe4 Nxe4 16.Bxe4 Nxd2 Black now has the two bishops. 17.Qxd2 Rfe8 18.Bg2 Bxf4 Black exchanges in order to: (a) pull off minor pieces off the board, favorable in an isolani endgame, and (b) divert White's queen from guarding the e2 square. 19.Qxf4 Re2

Now Black has a rook on the 7th. 20.b3 Rae8 [Black considered 20...g5 and saw 21.Qf6 (The likely response is 21.Qc1 Qxd4 which wins a pawn.) but didn't see the continuation 21...Re6 such is tournament chess. 22.Qxe6 Bxe6] 21.Bf3 Anticipated. This just hastens the queen and rook endgame where White has an isolani, and Black has a rook on the 7th. 21...Bxf3 22.Qxf3 R8e4 Now Black aims to win the d4 pawn. 23.Qc3 Rxd4 Black is estimating that the endgame favors Black, especially as the heavy pieces get traded. 24.Rfe1 Rde4 25.Rad1 Qf5 Increasing pressure on f2. This was a theme for the game for a few moves, and makes double attack easier. 26.Rxe2 Rxe2 27.Qd4 White can't defend the f2 pawn and the rook pawn at the same time. 27...Rxa2 Black captures second pawn up, and defends the a7 pawn. [Fritz likes 27...c5 28.Qd8+ Kh7 29.Rf1 forced 29...Rxa2 Black captures the rook pawn in any case. 30.Qe7 b6] 28.Ra1 Rxa1+ 29.Qxa1

29...a6 Black is playing it safe. [29...Qc2 30.Qxa7 (30.Qa3 a5 Provoking White. 31.Qxa5 Qb1+ 32.Kg2 Qxb3 33.Qd8+ Kh7 34.Qe7 Winning.) 30...Qxb3 Winning.] 30.Qe1 Qe6 Black is interested in exchanging queens. [30...a5 is probably better, preparing to create a protected passed pawn.] 31.Kf1 Qxe1+ 32.Kxe1 Kf8 Now the game is a matter of endgame technique. 33.Kd2 Ke7 34.Kc3 Kd6 35.Kb4 b6 36.f4 [36.Kc4 Ke5] 36...Kd5 37.f5 0–1

Tournament Report :: Foxwoods 2009

2009-04-13T21:46:00.000-04:00

[NOTE: To see the pictures full-size, click once]

I played in U1500 section the Foxwoods 2009 tournament last week Thursday 9 April to Sunday 12 April. The crosstable is here.

RESULT: 4.5/7.0

If I won my last game I’d be in line for about $500-1000 in prize money. The pairing sheet for the last round is below. I have White on the 4th board.

Even so, I’m thrilled with 4.5 points. I will be analyzing games and will post analysis shortly. For now, here is a qualitative summary:

Overall the environment, hotel, food, people, and of course chess(!) was great.
My two losses were completely the result of my head not being “in the game”, and trying to push the game too much, one the result of eating poorly and quickly right before my last round.
The draw was hard fought – first I was down a pawn, then picked up two pawns to be a pawn up in a knight/pawn endgame
The four wins were pretty smooth. Of course I usually found the much longer but comprehensible (to me) path to victory (other people pointed out shorter wins), but practice will help.

Thursday I worked until 2:00 pm, before leaving to pick up Kappy. We arrived a bit before the tournament started and had a chance to walk around and take in the venue, minus players, organizers, and spectators. Here is what we found, two huge empty playing halls:

with lots and lots of boards:

and when the rounds started, the venue was full of chess players, ready, willing and able to rip into their opponent's chess positions!

Round 1, Thursday PM, I played Black, win:

Grossman-Reed (0-1)

This game started as a QGD (Queen's Gambit Declined), then White exchanged cxd, opening the position a bit. The middlegame featured mostly play in the center with many exchanges. Eventually Black doubled his Rooks, and planted one on the 7th. This was a turning point since White was a bit awkwardly placed, and couldn't answer an additional double attack on his d4 pawn, then ultimately lost it. This motivated White to muster an attack against Black's doubled rooks, which forced an exchange of one pair, but one Black rook remained, on the 7th again, this time picking up the a-pawn. White allowed the exchange of queens, which shifted play into a king and pawn endgame, where Black is up two pawns. The rest was technique. White resigned a few moves later.

Round 2, Friday AM, I played White, win:

Reed-Chen (1-0)

This game started as a QGD with an early 5.Bg5. Black challenged White's center with 7...c5 which left Black with an isolated pawn on d5 after exchanges. White tried to keep the iso blocked, but Black challenged White's blocking knight with a c6 knight, so White exchanged, aiming to trade advantages (iso, for a backward pawn on c6). Before White had a chance to put pressure on the c6 pawn, Black pushed the c6 pawn to c5 thinking this will become a strong "hanging pawn" pair. The truth was that Black committed a tactical error, allowing White to pick up the c5 and d5 pawns in exchange for giving Black the b2 pawn. This rattled Black, and two moves later he committed a similar (motif) tactical error, and lost his Queen. He continued to fight valiantly, but was checkmated on move 23.

I felt good about the round, so I walked over to see the top boards. It was great to see so many top players, but a bummer that I couldn't understand their positions LOL:

Round 3, Friday PM, I played White, loss:

Reed-Shefton (0-1)

White opened 1.d4 and ended up in a Grunfeld/King's Indian. Pawn structure-wise it also had a Benko like feature with the c and d pawns. When I post my analysis I'll figure it out more exactly. The bottom line is that the position was very unfamiliar, and White quickly got into a defensive posture. This is ok, if White would have stuck to defense. Instead, White engaged in dubious exchanges, and lost a piece outright. And if that wasn't enough, White then launched into a completely unwarranted adventure with his a-file rook, and then promptly lost control of the a-file. Black penetrated with all three of his pieces, against White's queen and rook, and White was overpowered. This loss was constructive though because it showed me the difference between having my head in the game, for each and every move, and what happens if you don't.

Round 4, Saturday AM, I played Black, draw:

Parrish-Reed (1/2-1/2)

White opened 1.e3?! Wow, Black was taken aback, and the rest of the opening was White waiting for Black to overextend, and Black trying to figure out when he might be overextending. As you can imagine, the position became very closed, with the first pawn exchange happening on move 15. This pawn exchange was the result of Black trying to get a break in. The break allowed Black to put pressure on f2, starting on move 17, which was significant because White isn't castled yet. Meanwhile Black has an isolated pawn on h6 that is under attack but can't be taken due to the threats on f2. However, Black spaces a bit and ends up losing the pawn on move 23. However, Black did have some positional compensation and managed to double rooks, with one of them on the 7th on g2, increasing the persistent pressure on f2, and allowing an exchange of rooks on h2, in order to take support away from pushing the now passed White pawn on h5. The queens were exchanged directly after, and now it's a rook/knight/pawn endgame. White soon lost his h-pawn, as well as traded down to a knight/pawn endgame. Black was very comfortable in this type of endgame, and was soon a pawn up, with the remaining pawns on the a. b, c-files. Draw. And I forgot to take a picture. Darn it.

The organizers open the partitions between the two playing halls for Saturday PM. Prior to this, the lower sections (me) play in the hall that have latecomers play fast games to catch up. This is a noisy process, hence the partition, so as not to disturb higher rated players. After opening the partition, it's cool to see how big the venue really is:

Round 5, Saturday PM, I played White, win:

Reed-Fisher (1-0)

Black played a Slav but played his bishop to f5 before playing ...e6. White decided to play conservative and played e3, keeping his dark bishop on c1 without first moving it on g5. Early in the opening, Black moved his knight to e4, and White prepared for the knight being there a long time, first by challenging the Black e4 knight with a bishop on d3. Rather than have the tension build, Black immediately exchanges his e4 knight for White's c3 knight, opening the b-file and strengthening the center after 10.bxc3. At this point White realizes he needs to play on the queenside, and start immediately before Black can muster any center or kingside action. By move 23, White has a rook-queen-rook b-file battery staring down at Black's b7 pawn, with a pawn on a6 in reserve. Black is defending with a rook on b8 and a rook-queen battery on the 7th. White led the combination with Rxb7 and ended up a pawn up with a rook on the 7th. The rook on b8 couldn't take because axb7 promotes, so after Black's rook steps aside, White's rook picks up the g7 pawn. Two pawns up in a rook and pawn endgame is a decisive advantage, and White won 10 moves later.

Round 6, Sunday AM, I played Black, win:

Desmond-Reed (0-1)

Black plays QGD, White plays exchange variation. This signals to Black that White will be conservative. On move 11 Black exchanges his g4 bishop for White's f3 knight, seeking to remove a defender of h2, since Black thinks he will be able to muster a kingside attack faster than White can start a minority queenside attack. Both Black and White vigorously attack, White with queenside minority attack, White with a kingside attack. On move 17 White takes his eye off the queenside attack, which stops, and begins responding to Black's kingside attack. On move 21 White allows his g3 bishop to be exchanged by a bishop-queen battery, thus losing a pawn after fxg recapture, and leaving a Black queen on g3. This gets Black's attention, who promptly moves resources from the queenside attack to the kingside. In a few moves White's other bishop on g4 is exchanged for Black's remaining knight, and White gains another pawn after the hxg recapture. At this point, White's only king cover is the g2 pawn, with Black's queen on g4, and Black's rooks moving into kingside attack position, so White brings his rooks and queen into position. For the next 16 moves Black and White maneuver their rooks and queens in order to attack and defend White's king respectively. On move 42 Black forces an exchange of rooks, which decreases the amount of force on the board, and increases the scope of heavy pieces. On move 49 Black's h-pawn is now advanced to h4, and forces a trade of queens, down to a winning rook and pawn endgame for Black. Black won 7 moves later.

Round 7, Sunday PM, I played Black, loss:

Reed-Rajendran (0-1)

White opened 1.d4 and Black played a Nimzo-Indian defense. By move 9 there is a massive exchange of pawns (c and d-file) and soon White's queen on c2 is opposed by a Black rook on c8. Rather than be conservative and move the queen off of the c-file, White plays for an edge, and loses the queen for two pieces and a pawn on move 16. White resigned immediately. No picture. There is no excuse for this poor result, but two reasons are (a) shortly before the round, I was actually contemplating withdrawing from the last round (heavy work schedule the following day), and worse yet (b) eating poorly right before the round, plus fatigue set White up for massive headaches. The lesson is that chess is a sport and White needs to make sure both mind and body are fit.

All in all this was a great tournament!

Analysis :: Eastern Class 2009 (Round 1)

2009-04-05T21:11:00.001-04:00

[Event "Eastern Class"]

[Site "Sturbridge MA"]

[Date "2009.03.06"]

[Round "1"]

[White "Jackson, Dane"]

[Black "Reed, Harvey"]

[Result "0-1"]

[ECO "D03"]

[WhiteElo "1546"]

[BlackElo "1436"]

1. d4 d5 2. Nf3 Nf6 3. Bg5 e6 4. e3 Be7 5. Bd3 Nbd7 6. Nbd2 O-O 7. c3 b6 8. Qc2 c5 9. dxc5 bxc5 10. O-O c4 11. Be2 Rb8 12. Bf4 Rb6 13. a4 a5 14. h3 Nc5 15. Nd4 Bd7 16. N2f3 Nd3 17. Bxd3 cxd3 18. Qxd3 Rxb2 19. Rfb1 Rxb1+ 20. Qxb1 Qc8 21. Be5 Ne4 22. Nb5 f6 23. Bh2 Nxc3 24. Qd3 Bb4 25. Nfd4 e5 26. Na7 Qb7 27. Ndb5 Rb8 28. Nxc3 Qxa7 29. Qxd5+ Kh8 30. Ne4 Be7 31. g4 Qb7 32. Qd3 Bc6 33. Nd2 Rd8 34. Qe2 Bb4 35. Nb3 Bh1 36. Qf1 Rd3 37. Rb1 Qd5 38. Bg3 Bf3 39. Kh2 Rxb3 40. Rxb3 Qxb3 41. Qb5 Qg8 42. g5 Qc8 43. Qd3 e4 44. Qd5 fxg5 45. Qxg5 Qe8 46. h4 Bd1 47. Bc7 Qf8 48. Bf4 Bxa4 49. Qe5 Bc2 50. Qb8 Qxb8 51. Bxb8 g6 52. Kg3 Kg7 53. Be5+ Kf7 54. f3 Ke6 55. Bh8 exf3 56. Kxf3 Bd6 57. Bb2 Be5 58. Ba3 Kd5 59. Ke2 Bc3 0-1

Jackson,Dane (1546) - Reed,Harvey (1436) [D03]

Eastern Class Sturbridge MA (1), 06.03.2009
[Reed, Harvey]

1.d4 d5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.Bg5 This is the Torre Attack (Tartakower Variation) (D03) 3...e6 4.e3 Be7 5.Bd3 Nbd7 6.Nbd2 0–0 7.c3 b6 Black is anticipating 8.Qc2 which is not the most popular move in CB, but probably the most obvious to class players. 8...c5 The plan is to expand the Queenside, and in the process to displace White's d3 Bishop, thus disrupting the Queen/Bishop battery. 9.dxc5 Black was fully expecting White to play 9. b3 in order to put up more resistance. Black does not want to exchange on d4, which will not only release pawn tension, it won't displace the Bishop either. Rather, Black wants to get a c4 push in, and although it releases pawn tension, it displaces the White Bishop on d3. Then Black can think about a Queenside attack starting with ...Rb8, ...b5, ...b4, etc. 9...bxc5 [‹9...Bxc5? In addition to allowing a tactic for White, capturing with the Bishop stops the planned Queenside expansion. 10.Bxh7+ Kh8 11.Bd3] 10.0–0 This was White's last chance to stop 10...c4 with 10. b3.

10...c4 11.Be2 Rb8 Black puts pressure on b2, first step to securing the hole on b3 12.Bf4 Rb6 13.a4 The hole is becoming a reality, and the text move is easily parried with 13...a5 14.h3 Black considers this a pass, and with Black's next move, begins to get the initiative 14...Nc5 15.Nd4 Bd7 Black continues development, with the thought of tying White down to defense whenever possible 16.N2f3 Nd3 Black trades in his pressure on b2 for a Rook on the seventh, converting one advantage into another 17.Bxd3 cxd3 18.Qxd3 Rxb2 19.Rfb1 Rxb1+ 20.Qxb1 Qc8

Black trades the Rook on seventh for awkward White pieces, now White will find it hard to defend the c3 pawn 21.Be5? White is thinking that the Bishop will indirectly protect the c3 pawn, but the Bishop is easily attacked 21...Ne4 22.Nb5 f6 23.Bh2 Nxc3 Now Black has a clear one pawn advantage 24.Qd3 Bb4 25.Nfd4 e5 In the spirit of maintaining pressure and tension, Black did not liquidate with ...Nxb5. It's not clear how to hang on to the d5 pawn without liquidating though 26.Na7 Qb7 27.Ndb5 Rb8 28.Nxc3 Qxa7 29.Qxd5+ Kh8 At this point, Black realizes he botched the last segment in the game, but he does still have the two Bishops and a more active Rook. There are also vague back-rank mate ideas 30.Ne4 Be7 31.g4 Qb7 32.Qd3 Bc6 33.Nd2 Rd8 34.Qe2 Bb4 35.Nb3 Bh1 36.Qf1

Black is tying down a Queen with a Bishop, and has the initiative 36...Rd3 37.Rb1 Qd5 Due to threats, Black is forcing White to think longer and longer on less and less time, and White drops a piece 38.Bg3 Bf3 39.Kh2? White drops a piece right before time control 39...Rxb3 40.Rxb3 Qxb3 41.Qb5 Qg8 Consolidate 42.g5 Qc8 43.Qd3 e4 The rest of the game consists of Black taking squares away from White 44.Qd5 fxg5 45.Qxg5 Qe8 [It's late at night, so we both start missing continuations. Better is 45...h6 to open air for Black King, and threaten ...Qc1 and ...Qh1#] 46.h4 Bd1 Black conserves mental energy and goes after easy and significant targets. Capturing White's a4 pawn gives White a huge new problem, a passed pawn on a5 47.Bc7 White tries to force an exchange of Queens 47...Qf8 48.Bf4 Bxa4 49.Qe5 White again tries to force the exchange of Queens. White the a5 passed pawn prepared, Black does not avoid the exchange 49...Bc2 50.Qb8 Qxb8 51.Bxb8 g6 The two Black Bishops should be able to restrain the White King. The Black King's job is to protect the kingside from unseemly advances by the White King 52.Kg3 Kg7 53.Be5+ Kf7 54.f3 Ke6 55.Bh8 exf3 56.Kxf3 Bd6 Prepare to exchange dark Bishops 57.Bb2 Be5

58.Ba3 Black's Bishop now owns the a1–h8 diagonal, needed for queening. The Black King can restrain the e3 pawn 58...Kd5 59.Ke2 Bc3 0–1

Tournament Report :: Eastern Class 2009

2009-03-15T13:12:00.000-04:00

I played in the Eastern Class chess tournament last weekend, Friday 6 March to Sun 8 March. The crosstable is here, and I played in the C section. Out of five games, I played four, leaving early on Sunday to spend the evening with my S.O. Shortly before the tournament, my rating spiked (see earlier posts about coming back to OTB from hiatus), pushing me from the D to C section, so I was low guy on the totem pole. This is a good place to be... if you want good competition...

I am analyzing my games now, and will post analysis shortly. For now, here is a qualitative summary:

Round 1, Friday PM, I played Black, win:

I got to the playing hall in Sturbridge MA with just minutes to spare. I was working all day on analytical products and my brain was cooking, so all I needed to do was chill a bit, and shift gears to chess. My opponent played 1.d4 to which I am starting to learn the 1...d5 response. I was channeling Silman and worked hard to impose my will on the game, and overcome fears of Bd3 and Qc2 battery staring down my hapless h7 pawn, by using fast Queenside action to take my opponent off balance. After that I was channeling Petrosian (*) and spent time thinking mostly about taking away my opponents squares, even at the expense of perhaps a quicker win. Several people commented on my game, some noting how I shut down all my opponents' counterplay, some noting I missed quicker wins.

I am happy with the game. My heart and soul were in the game the whole time and not wavering. My opponent re-entered, played the fast games Saturday morning, and ended with a respectable 3.0/5.0 result.

(*) Or so I thought. Some people have pointed out that I am not at the level where I can really comprehend Petrosian, so let's say that I focused on his "prevent my opponent's plans" part of his style. I have yet to really understand his subtle maneuvering...

Round 2, Saturday AM, I played White, lose:

I faced a familiar opponent with whom I've played off-beat openings with in the distant past, and this game was no exception. I later learned I experienced the joys of the Budapest Defense and I was on my own wits starting on my opponent's second move. I took the pawn and battened down the hatches, bracing for an attack, giving back the pawn when doing so allowed me an opportunity to consolidate. I went on to defend against a relentless attack on my Kingside, through move 20, and even starting some Queenside counterplay on move 21. We both burned up plenty of time on the clocks, since I was not just defending, but also giving my opponent a few problems to solve. Around move 25 my opponent had about 1 minute left on his analogue clock. I had four minutes. All I had to do was wait him out. My position was fine. But like all the previous twenty-some-odd moves, I needed to be on the lookout for one move mates, cheapos, etc. On move 27, it looked like the Kingside tension was subsiding, and the Queenside was heating up (which it was), but... there was still one more cheapo to defend against. In this transition moment of shifting tension, I took my eye of the ball for just a second, and missed a mate-in-one. Doh!

I am disappointed in the loss, but am pleased with my play prior to move 27... My opponent went on to win the section with a 4.5/5.0 result.

Round 3, Saturday PM, I played Black, draw:

I faced an up and coming, and very well mannered junior, who plays 1.e4, so I played the Caro-Kann, despite still being rusty with it. Of course he enters into a line that I am unfamiliar with 1.e4 c6 2. d4 d5 3. e5 Bf5 4. Nf3 e6 5.Be3. Hmmm... I proceed to burn up time, because I knew I needed to push ...c5, but kept thinking I needed to prepare more. Meanwhile he already played c3. Then I think I need to prepare more, and so on. I never end up doing the ...c5 break I wanted to do. In the end, I 'm not sure he had any more clues as to what was going on because I was pressuring him in ways that was not called for in the position. This culminates in a combination which looks favorable to him (win the exchange), but a few moves later I can force the exchange back, and worse for him, now we are in a drawn endgame. He was very gracious, and we agreed to a draw.

I really need to practice being flexible (like Round 1) and when one plan doesn't work out (like waiting too long for the ...c5 push), formulate a new plan and move on. My opponent went on to a very good 3.5/5.0 result.

Round 4, Sunday AM, I played White, lose:

I faced an opponent who is a nice chap, but whose play for some reason, brought out bad habits in me which I thought I had overcome. First bad habit was assuming that Sunday's games are going to be easy. In fact, going into Sunday AM with 1.5 points practically guarantees that your opponent will be gunning extra hard for a win. And they should be. That's the point. The second bad habit is not respecting your opponent's moves. I can't verbalize this precisely, but that's what was going on in my head. Why, I can't tell you. In Round 1 I was busy trying to get into my opponent's head and shutting down his plans. In this game I wasn't respecting his moves, only to get annoyed when his moves start to add up to serious pressure. As early as move six I start to be adventurous in ways that are unwarranted. Followed by an over-reaction on move 10 that led to a permanent and debilitating weakness. My opponent rightfully picked on this weakness until he had a severe cramping effect on my game, snuffing out any/all maneuvering, ultimately forcing severe material loss.

My opponent played well, I certainly didn't. My opponent went on to get a reasonable 2.0/5.0 score.

I will post analysis of my games shortly. All in all, of the four games I played I am pleased with three of them, and my last was a big warning that bad habits never really die, they just lay in wait. My best good-bad habit ratio was Round 1, my worst good-bad habit ratio was Round 4. My job as a chess novice is to keep my bad habits down so my good ones can thrive.

The good habits I want are:

Keep my heart and mind in the game at all times, don't let up even for one move
Be flexible. Look for short plans that are doable
Respect your opponents moves, figure out his plans, and act to shut them down
For goodness sake, I need to learn openings out to at least 5-7 moves (with ideas)!
Keep up the analysis routine

The bad habits I need to suppress are:

Not paying attention (not respecting) your opponents moves, plans, etc.
Being OCD about plans whose time has come and gone
Being a slacker regarding opening preparation and analysis

This is going to be a long journey.

The Beginnings of an Improvement Plan

2009-02-22T21:33:00.000-05:00

I just got back from vacation which was the perfect opportunity to try out a new improvement plan regiment. Nothing fancy, just a few solid books and my rationale holding them together:

Understanding Chess Move by Move, Nunn
Learn Chess Tactics, Nunn
The Amateur's Mind, Silman
Chess Visualization Course, General Tactics, Anderson
(finished prior to vacation) Logical Chess Move by Move, Chernev

I generally did a little from each book in chunks of chapters, then moved to the next book. The theme was to alternate between games and tactics. "Move by Move" is full games of course, while "Amateur's Mind" featured parts of games where big plans are (or should be) formed. "Chess Tactics" is divided by theme, based on real games and built up quickly in difficulty. "Chess Visualization" requires the reader to visualize a position after a prescribed sequence of tactical moves. So you didn't have to find the move, but you had to correctly answer questions about the resulting position.

In the past, I'd be blasting through CT-ART 3, or reading some theory book, or some "evaluate this position" book. What I was missing was seeing the whole game, and watching the factors that decide the game be employed by the players, and wax and wane and why.

Of course I was also reviewing some of my past games played at MetroWest CC and Boston University Open. Periodically after going through a few books, I'd play through a game just to see if I could look at the game differently. Indeed, some games I can see through different eyes. Here is a good example (hold your nose):

[Event "MCC Jan 2007"]

[Site "Natick MA"]

[Date "2007.01.02"]

[Round "1"]

[White "Reed, Harvey"]

[Black "Michael, William"]

[Result "0-1"]

[ECO "C68"]

[WhiteElo "1484"]

[BlackElo "1735"]

1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5 a6 4. Bxc6 dxc6 5. O-O Bg4 6. Re1 Qf6 7. d3 Bxf3 8. Qxf3 Qxf3 9. gxf3 O-O-O 10. Be3 g6 11. Nc3 Bh6 12. Kf1 Bxe3 13. fxe3 Ne7 14. Ke2 Rd7 15. Rad1 Rhd8 16. Rf1 c5 17. a4 c6 18. a5 c4 19. dxc4 Rxd1 20. Rxd1 Rxd1 21. Kxd1 Kc7 22. c5 f5 23. Ke2 Kd7 24. Kf2 Ke6 25. exf5+ gxf5 26. e4 f4 27. Na4 Ng8 28. Nb6 Nf6 29. Nc4 Ne8 30. b4 Kf6 31. Kg2 Ke6 32. Kh3 Kf6 33. Kg4 Nc7 34. Nd6 Ne6 35. c3 Ng5

One would expect the simple 36. Nxb7. In fact this was White's (me) goal for many moves, since 22. c5 to be exact. So why on earth would White all of a sudden make a U-turn, which ultimately backfires in a humiliating mess? I think because deep down White didn't trust his own analysis. Probably because he is analytically lazy and therefore doesn't trust himself. The rest of the game continues to disappoint, meeting the predictably bad end in another 12 moves:

36. Ne8+?? Kg6 37. Ng7 {offer draw} Nxe4 38. fxe4 Kxg7 39. Kf3 Kg6 40. Kg4 Kh6 41. Kh4 f3 42. Kg3 Kh5 43. Kxf3 Kh4 44. Kg2 Kg4 45. h3+ Kf4 46. Kf2 Kxe4 47. Ke2 h6 48. Kd2 Kf3 0-1

Several things struck me as I was going through the book regiment:

Reviewing whole games is something that I've needed to do for years, but I've always avoided. Starting with the simple Chernev book was the best thing I have done since I started adult onset of chess. I have Howard Goldowsky to thank. He claims to have gotten the "unlearn before you learn" religion from Heisman, and passed it on to me.
Tactics are always important, and there is life beyond CT-ART, although I must admit CT-ART 3.0 is the reason I don't drop pieces left and right anymore.
Analysis is hard work. It took me three days to work through game 7 (Kasparov-Karpov) in Nunn's "Move by Move". I feel like I have a lot more patience with analysis, and will start doing deep analysis on my games.
Mental toughness can frequently make up for intermitent weaknesses in analysis during a game.
The whole imbalance theory of Silman's was starting to make sense by the time I hit the chapter on Initiative. That was a scary feeling.

And then it hit me. Valery Frenklahk, from whom I took half a dozen lessons from in the late 90's, was right: Chess is a game of squares! Just play chess!

Why was I remembering chess lessons from the past decade? I think because he had a style that made a big impression on me, plus he said incomprehensible things to me, and I was determined to somehow figure it out, even if I forgot about it first.

Things are still confusing for me, which is ok. I still need to do analysis of my MetroWest CC game from last Tuesday, but I avoided second guessing, did a little more on the job analysis, and kept my mental toughness, not getting despondent when my opponent made an unanticipated (and aggravating) move. You don't even have to hold your nose...

[Event "MCC Feb 2009"]

[Site "Natick MA"]

[Date "2009.02.17"]

[Round "3"]

[White "Reed, Harvey"]

[Black "Callahan, Daniel"]

[Result "1-0"]

[ECO "E61"]

[WhiteElo "1373"]

[BlackElo "1232"]

1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 g6 3. Nc3 Bg7 4. e3 O-O 5. Nf3 d6 6. Bd3 b6 7. O-O Bb7 8. Qe2 c5 9. d5 e6 10. e4 h6

With Black's last move he weakened his pawn structure. Previously White had plans focused on a strong center first, then Kingside pressure later. With 10... h6, White can think about breaking up Black's Kingside:

11. dxe6 fxe6 12. e5 Nh5 13. Bxg6 Nf4 14. Bxf4 Rxf4 15. exd6 Bxf3 16. Qxe6+ Kh8 17. d7 Bc6 18. Rad1 Bxd7 19. Qd5 Nc6 20. Qxd7 Qxd7 21. Rxd7 Ne5 22. Nd5 Rg4 23. Bf5 Rg5 24. f4 Rxf5 25. fxe5 Rxf1+ 26. Kxf1 Bxe5

With White's next move, he nullifies Black's dark Bishop. Next is a plan to exchange the Kingside pawns, leaving all the pawns on side (favorible to White's Knight), which is frustrating to Black's Bishop. As they say, it's now just a "matter of technique". Of course my technique is still simple and crude, so it takes me another 42 moves...

27. b3 Rf8+ 28. Ke2 Bxh2 29. Rxa7 Re8+ 30. Kf3 Bb8 31. Rb7 Rf8+ 32. Kg4 Rg8+ 33. Kf3 Be5 34. g4 Bg7 35. Nxb6 Rf8+ 36. Kg2 Bd4 37. Nd5 Rf2+ 38. Kh3 Rxa2 39. Kg3 Ra8 40. Kf3 Rf8+ 41. Ke4 Re8+ 42. Kf5 Rf8+ 43. Kg6 Rg8+ 44. Kxh6 Rxg4 45. Rb8+ Rg8 46. Rb7 Bg7+ 47. Kg6 Bd4+ 48. Kh5 Rg1 49. Nf4 Rh1+ 50. Kg6 Rg1+ 51. Kh6 Bg7+ 52. Kh5 Rh1+ 53. Kg6 Rg1+ 54. Kf5 Rf1 55. Ke4 Re1+ 56. Kd5 Re5+ 57. Kc6 Rg5 58. Ne6 Rg6 59. Rxg7 Rxe6+ 60. Kd5 Rb6 61. Kxc5 Rxb3 62. Rg4 Rf3 63. Kd4 Rf7 64. c5 Kh7 65. Kc4 Rd7 66. c6 Rc7 67. Kc5 Kh6 68. Kb6 Rc8 69. c7 Kh7 1-0

...and The Quest continues...

I'm back...

2009-02-16T22:39:00.000-05:00

Just got back from 2 weeks of vacation in the Caribbean. Fun in the sun and chess improvement too. I'll blog later this week to detail the scoop on my improvement plan.

The Structure of My Struggle

2009-01-25T19:24:00.000-05:00

I am approaching my personal improvement in this way:

Un-learning:
I have spent years trying to learn stuff way too fancy for my own good. Right now I am working on unlearning that stuff a la Heisman (home page), as channeled by Goldowsky (Mongoose Times). I started with "Logical Chess Move by Move" (Chernev) [done] and "The Most Instructive Games of Chess Ever Played" (Chernev) [in progress]. I will follow this up with "Understanding Chess Move by Move" (Nunn), "Learn Chess Tactics" (Nunn), "The Amateur's Mind" (Silman), and "Chess Visualization Course" (Anderson).
Praxis:
I'm back to regular Tuesday night play at MetroWest Chess Club, when not traveling for work. Also, I play the occasional game on ICC (Internet Chess Club), but no blitz. In the ICC games my goal is to develop properly to enter a decent middlegame.
Analysis:
Take each of my weekly MetroWest CC games and seek advice, let Fritz run through it, and give it it my own blood sweat and tears. My goal will be to analyze all games somewhat, and analyze some of them deeply, with a post to this blog.
Attitude:
This video of Josh Waitzkin giving a talk at Google sums up what I aspire to. Everyone needs to have their personal mountain to climb.
Competition:
In addition to Club tournaments at MetroWest CC, I will play in two or three big tournaments during the year. Right now I am entered in the Eastern Class and Foxwoods CCA tournaments.

My goal is to use this blog to keep me on the path to improvment.

I have Adult Onset of Chess

2009-01-24T21:32:00.000-05:00

I am a recovering chess novice.

I dabbled in chess starting in school, and "got serious" in the '90s when I started playing rated chess. I thought I would get better by reading theory and fancy books, and never progressed very far. Sure I've occasionally bagged an 1800 USCF ELO player, but for the most part, I've vacillated between 1100 and 1500 USCF ELO. My correspondence varies between 1300 and 1700.

Aside from competition, I have contributed to several chess organizations and this has been very fulfilling. If you have never volunteered for your chess organization, you should consider it. It is usually hard work, necessary work, and it improves the lives of many including children, the future of our country. Please consider volunteering.

The last couple of years I traveled extensively and pulled back on OTB chess. Now that I can start playing somewhat consistently again, I want to actually get better.

This blog is my quest.

Harvey Reed

Clerk and Marketing Director, MetroWest Chess Club

Director, Correspondence Chess League of America