Different night, different Master

Round 3

Richard “Buck” is a National Master even though his current rating is down to Expert and he doesn’t play as much these days, mostly directs.  I’ve been lucky to get mostly White against him, as I can think of three times where I was Black against him and he pretty much slaughtered me, but as White I have this winning record (mostly luck, I figure).

Okay, so normally we get into a Scotch, where he has been very unlucky, and I was more thinking of trying a Ruy Lopez (he has a King’s Gambit win as Black published in Bill Wall’s KG miniatures book from back when he played in Dayton, Ohio).  I got lucky in that he played a Caro-Kahn, probably to throw me off.  After the game, he asked me if I had ever played this line before, which made me think that he had never faced it before, OTB.

Well, I got an advantage out of the opening, but even then was dropping the ball move after move until he played 9…Qd6?  After this, I got a big advantage but was still not playing best moves.

Later (why do I keep doing this?), I got into time-pressure, and did not want to trade queens, but did once I had two and a half minutes left on my clock.  Paul pointed out that he could have pulled even with 29…BxN!, but instead played 29…Be7, whereupon I slowly began to outplay him in my time-pressure to once more establish a significant advantage.

Still, I feel that that given his skills, and given mine, it was a gift resignation, as he surely could have played on to try and find more drawing chances.  He correctly pointed out that after 37…Rc7, 38.d5! that White has a significant advantage, but White has to follow this up correctly with 38…Kd7, 39.Nd4!!.  I would have never found this move in time-pressure, and in that line I would have played 39.d6.  So, after the game I let him know that I was actually going to play the safer line 38.Kf2 followed by 39.Ke3 with ideas of playing Rc5 and trying to control the position by improving my pieces.  This line isn’t any better or worse than the 38.d5 line where I follow it up with 39.d6, according to Houdini, but my play all game had been far from spotless, so I feel really thankful that the game ended the way that it did.

I did blindfold the game as much as I could in the opening, but later it became impractical.  You can’t really blindfold it anyway, because if you try to do that all of the time, you’ll become unaware of when your opponent has made their move.  Still, in any position requiring difficult calculation it can help, but most of the time were are too nervous to do it, as humans locked in combat OTB.

 

 

Crazy Game Against A Master

Round 2

Lead intro to the game, I played the same Master tonight as I faced on Tuesday.  Oddly, I decided not to play on Thursday because it was 30/90, G/20, d/5 and as it turns out I would have faced him on Thursday as well had I shown up there.

This Master has had a tough month, since he drew a 1700, beat another Master a little higher-rated than himself, and then drew an 1800 player last night in a position that was for a long time very winning, but then he got down to seconds (5 second delay), messed up and drew.  Oddly, that is exactly why I didn’t play!  Anyhow, I figured he was probably going to be looking for blood against me tonight.  I showed up late, 19 minutes off my clock, not expecting to get paired against him.

I didn’t know he would play 1…e5 (usually plays Sicilian), nor the Marshall Attack.  I played what I made up OTB, since after g3, I was pretty much on my own.  A more standard move order would be 15.Be3, instead of 15.Qf3, followed by 16.Qd3.

I didn’t get any physical activity in today (even 10 minutes makes a big difference) as I had to rush out the door, and by the end of the game I was surprisingly very tired, almost listless for my usual level.

At the end of the game, I blundered with under a minute on my clock, but by then I suppose the tension had gotten to me, and I sort of collapsed.  It was still a good feeling to know I didn’t blunder until after the first 30 moves (in case of a second time-control).

25.Bd2  Another way to play is 25.Qxc6 Nd3, 26.RxNd3 Bf8 (to avoid 27.d5), 27.Qf3 QxR, and I have two pawns for the exchange.  Being over an hour down against my well-booked opponent, I didn’t even look past his ….Nd3 reply.

25….Ne2?  He knew this move wasn’t good, but was trying to avoid a draw.  It came as a surprise to me, as I was only seriously considering the d3 square for this knight, which is correct.

28.f4?  I know this move looks foolish, and I nearly played the correct 28.Be3 here, but by now I was in severe time-pressure, and I began to realize I was blundering just as fast as I was making the moves.  The brilliancy line here is 28.d5!!, completely winning, but as you can guess this was never on the radar here for me.  In fact, if you saw this line 28. d5!! cxd5 29. Be3 Rg6 30. Bxd4 Rg6 31. f3 Rge6 32.Be3 Rxe3 33. Rxd6 Nxg3+ 34. Qxg3 Rxe1 35. Qxe1 Qxf3+ 36. Kg1 Qg4+ 37. Qg3, then you should possibly be in contention for the chess world championship.

28.Be3! Rg6, 29.Qxc6 Kf8, 30.Qg2 and here I thought that Black could play …Nf4??, which is laughable, since after 31.BxNf4 BxB I don’t have to take back, and am simply up two pawns.  Not only that, but White is winning that bishop anyway, after all, after 32.RxR+ KxR, 33.Re1+ Re6, 34.Qa8+ Ke7, gxBf4 ++-.

Oddly enough, instead of the correct move 29…Kf8 in that line above, he was planning to play 29…Bf8?! (which Expert Daniel immediately said he also would have played).  It’s funny how often the higher rated player will choose an inferior line, but one which is far more tricky to analyze or not as clear.  In this case, it’s simply a matter of depth.  So, after 28.Be3! Rg6, 29.Qxc6 Bf8, 30.Qg2 Bd6, 31.Rd2 Nf4, 32.BxNf4 RxR, 33.BxBd6 RxNf1, 34.QxRf1 RxBd6 and White is simply up two pawns (I thought that 31.Rd2 was losing at first in the post-mortem – we both did).

He may also in this line above have played 30…h6, 31.f3 RxBe3, 32.g4! (not 32.NxRe3?? Nxg3+, 33.QxNg3 RxQg3 wins the queen) Ng3+, 33.NxNg3 RxRe1, 34.RxRe1 and once again White is simply up two pawns.

29.g4?  As soon as I played this move, I realized I had mistakenly just given his queen the h4 square.  White’s should now play the the thematic, but strange-looking move 29.d5! cxd, followed by 30.Be3  This gives White a solid advantage because after 30…RxB?, 31.NxR RxN, 32.g4 the queen cannot now go to d5 to trade herself off with the opposing queen, and thus after 32…Qg6, 33.RxNe2 RxR, 34.QxRe2 White would be up the exchange +-.  After 30…Bxf4, White can go up two pawns for piece with only h2 pawn as king cover after 31.gxf4, or can go for the easier to play queen ending up a pawn after 31.Rxd5 f5, 32.RxNe2 BxBe3, 33.NxBe3 RxNe3, 34.RxR RxR, 35.Rd8+ Re8, 36.Qd5+! Kf8, 37.RxR QxR, 38.Qxf5 or 37…KxR, 38.Qg8+ Ke7, 39.Qxg7+ and White is up a pawn.  The funny thing about this game, is that if you are looking at the right reply, which is admittedly tricky or takes some patience to find, then you really only need to look at the line deeply enough to evaluate it properly.  This game is a case where depth matters, versus simply finding the moves.

31.Bd1??  I had wanted to play the correct 31.Be3, but after …Nf4, I simply didn’t spot 32.Qf3?, which actually loses to 32…Nh3, but 32.Qg3! is a drawn eval after 32…Qe7 33.Qf3.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Blindfold Chess Training

Question: Andy asks (on Chess Book Collectors on Facebook), “Did you use a book or article to teach yourself the best way to go about learning blindfold chess ?”

Well, I didn’t really find anything too helpful, which is strange, other than to memorize the board.  Magnus said in an interview that you just have to do it to get good at it (i.e., practice, as in “How do you get to Carnegie Hall?”), and that he thinks about positions all the time.

Here is an exercise for you, a perfect example.  I was looking at this classic game this evening (Rotlewi vs Rubenstein, Lodz 1907):

http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=1119679

Now, in the game, after 21…Qh4, White played 22.g3.  So the immediate question that came to my mind was what to do after 22.h3(?).  I was looking at this position when all of a sudden my monitor when dark, so I continued to think about the position blindfold.

First, ask yourself which squares the pawns are on, and what color of squares are those.  Next, do the same thing for the pieces.  You’ll find that regardless of whether you solve this problem blindfold or not, it’s just as difficult to find the ideas; the pure calculation part of it is actually easier to do via blindfold, and you can switch back between blindfold and the board from time to time if you like.  Looking at the board doesn’t make it any easier, although switching from one to the other can take the pressure off from finding the answer by looking at the board or vice-versa (it’s really just psychological, once you become proficient enough at blindfold).

To blindfold well, don’t try to visualize or memorize up-front.  As you ask yourself where the pawns and pieces are, which squares and colors of squares.  A visual will automatically be created in your mind of those squares, although you may have to consciously do this the first time you try it, but later it will be more automatic.  Blindfold chess takes time, so start out slow.  The people who do this, like GM Gareyev, should tell you (I’m thinking of a Chess Life article on him, although I’ve also hung out with him personally before as well, very friendly, generous, and surprisingly outgoing young man) that when they first did a small blindfold simul that it took many hours, far more hours than it would have had they seen the board.  Later, these guys can play blitz blindfold, and can play against even more boards and stronger players.

So, the upshot of this exercise was that I spent perhaps 45 minutes on this puzzle, after 22.h3, of what to do next, and I did nail the answer, came up with the same answer that Schlecter gave in the game-score comments on that link.  It’s not a deep line, but it’s “wide”.  IOW, you need to see a few side “ideas” or tactical devices on the side, which make the solution work.

My own thoughts on tactics are take your time, don’t make it into a blitz thing, and if you do make it into a blitz thing then simply look up the answers after a couple of minutes.  I feel it’s wrong to turn tactics into a pure pattern-recognition thing, as in Michael De La Maza’s seven circles, but I’ve never done that and to each their own (although I have done similar tactics cramming).  From a cognitive viewpoint, cramming means you are less likely to retain the material over time anyway, it’s mostly for a short-term performance gain.  And the problem with that is that most things in chess, cramming included, help you later on down the road when you less expect it to kick in.  So just focus on whatever you are focusing on, and try to really understand whatever it is you are learning, so that it will be locked in subconsciously for much later on.

One important side-note is that you want to do any long blindfold calculation with your eyes open.  In my last game, I wandered off and looked toward the ceiling at one point to do some calculation.  If you close your eyes, it will generally make you tired because that’s what your body thinks you are telling it to do, so only do that on short-thinks.  So, in recap, blindfold chess is neither blindfold, creative visualization, nor memorization, by mechanical nature.

One thing this training may help you to come away with is the realization that chess is more a logic exercise than a visualization exercise.  Nevertheless, you do visualize the lines blindfold, and the important part of that is to see the position in your “minds-eye” rather than straining to visualize first (rather than to know the position first, and visualize second).

A reason why it’s difficult to visualize chess blindfold at first is that our mind naturally wants to see the chessboard as an analog substance rather than a digital substance, which it is.  Simple checkmates are often the most surprising thing in chess because subconsciously we probably want the king to tiptoe around the pieces on the squares and thus “find a way out” – i.e, using anthropomorphis.

Nevertheless, if you want to visualize a set, you can visualize the set you typically play on at  a tournament, or even the chessgames.com board, etc, but you may ultimately find that you are not visualizing any particular board so much as the relationship between the squares and pieces themselves.

 

 

Endgame time-pressure with a Master

Round 2 game click here

You should probably go through this game first before reading my commentary, so that it is not a spoiler.  I spoil most of my blogs by giving away the result.

I played the opening and early middlegame alright, but once I got the feeling I could draw this game, I went into draw-mode (neither of us ever offered one, though) and kept throwing away possible advantages because A) I sensed that I had the chance to draw a Master, and B) I knew that I had mismanaged my clock, and he was up on time.

Time-pressure affected both of our performances, I feel confident of even if he didn’t mention so.  First, I played myself into an ever deeper defensive hole, which Houdini says I had active ways out of, but then you simply don’t have time to calculate those things at the board.  He had a win in the king and knight endgame, if only he had triangulated my king with his to gain a tempo, but he got down to around 4 1/2 minutes, so he didn’t have time to work that out apparently.

I got down to 36 seconds on my clock, when I played “with the hands” (with hands-shaking) the move 48…Kd5??  At first, I didn’t know what was going on since he was moving quickly, probably because he knew it was a draw when I played 45…Ke5 (he let out a groan), but I still hadn’t found the draw, only sensed it.  Then I had the funny feeling that perhaps I should be playing for a win (first time all game I had that thought).  So my first instinct was to play 48…e5??, but then I wanted to “cut off his king” and played the blunder Kd5.  I asked myself why I played that move so quickly (a brief moment of irrational exhuberance).  I had thought we might get into a pawn race, but after 5 seconds it hit me that he could play 49.Kb6! and his a-pawn was simply going to be way faster.   I never saw his 49.Nxb7 because I have almost exclusively been studying middlegame tactics rather than endgame tactics.

On a five second delay, I feel I would likely have blundered again or flagged, but had I played the obvious 48…Kc7 on the 30 second increment, I feel confident that I would have drawn this game because I would have easily built up minutes on my clock.  Curiously, after the game, Josh let me know that he didn’t think he could play 49.Kb6 because he thought my e-pawn was too fast!  This just goes to show the outright magnitude of how time-pressure spoils the results of chess game.

In the future, I’ll have to play stronger in the endgame, keep enough time for reasonable drawing chances, and study some endgame tactics.  I should be studying endgames more as that’s where I’ve been not so much losing rating points as missing out on rating points – even missing the draw against Jason last month (1550 rated) had cost me about 25 points, though.

Also, these five second delay time-controls are really not for me, as I really need the chance to build time in simple(r) endgames.  I had all but said I would be willing to play at 30/90, G/30 to the TD on Thursdays, but at 30/90, G/20, which it is going to be, that really spells (continual) disaster for my rating.  I’ve been playing like crazy for ten years, mostly on the 5 second delay, so by now I know that I can’t take liberties by playing at some new time-control like that (G/90, d/5 has also been a disaster, and it only worked because I played so many miniatures against lower-rated players).

Hopefully, this game will give the reader a sense of which liberties you can and can’t take when playing against a Master.  This game didn’t make it seem there was a nearly 500 rating point difference between the two of us, and it didn’t feel like it OTB either until the very end, when I started getting nervous.  The reason I played as well as I did was because A) I had studied some theory on the Catalan in the last few months, B) I have been getting lots of Catalans against Expert and above players (won my Catalan as Black in that last big tournament against an Expert), and C) I stayed remarkably calm all game until the very end, when I lost my composure for a brief moment.  Alex said he played well against Imre by not being result-oriented (i.e., nervous?), and here it’s when I got result-oriented in my game as well, that my brain went into that a tizzy when it did.

If Mitch had shown up, I would have been paired with a different opponent, was not expecting to get paired with Josh, but that’s how it goes in Colorado, you learn to expect nothing, and that actually helps.

All in all, I’m glad that my blunder was well after move 40 (move 48), which is a victory for my argument of bringing back 40/2hr (SD half an hour or more) time controls, at least for serious weekend tournaments, as it was after move 40 that I needed the extra time.  Perfect example of this was move 41…Kf7?  I knew this was a time-pressure move.  I did want to play the correct 41…b6, feeling that after 42.Nxa6 Kd7 I could win the center pawn, but I saw 43.Ke5, and only saw 43…Nc6+ sometime after I had moved.  When my opponent sped up in my time-pressure, that turned out to be the end for me.

A cool note about the 49.Nxb7 pawn sac.  Josh said you have to look at all forcing moves in endgames.  I commented to him that I had looked at it earlier but stopped thinking about it, since there were fewer pawns left in that side of the board.  Then I realized after his sac that it is with fewer pawns on the board that this sac becomes stronger, I mentioned to him.

 

[Event “Tuesday Swiss”]
[Site “CSCC”]
[Date “2017.02.07”]
[Round “2”]
[White “Josh Bloomer”]
[Black “Brian Rountree”]
[Result “1-0”]
[BlackElo “1802”]
[GameNo “-1”]
[WhiteElo “2286”]

1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 e6 3. g3 d5 4. Nf3 Be7 5. Bg2 dxc4 6. O-O O-O 7. Qc2 a6 8. a4
Nc6 9. Qxc4 Qd5 10. Qd3 Nb4 11. Qd1 Qf5 12. Nc3 Rd8 13. e4 Qh5 14. e5 Nd7 15.
Qe2 c5 16. Be3 cxd4 17. Bxd4 Nc5 18. Rad1 Bd7 19. b3 Bc6 20. Bxc5 Bxc5 21. Ne4
Be7 22. h3 Qf5 23. Nc3 Qc2 24. Qxc2 Nxc2 25. Rc1 Nb4 26. Rfd1 Rxd1+ 27. Rxd1
Rd8 28. Rxd8+ Bxd8 29. Nd2 Bxg2 30. Kxg2 Kf8 31. Nc4 Nc6 32. f4 Bc7 33. Ne4
Ke7 34. Nc5 Nd8 35. Kf3 f6 36. Ke4 fxe5 37. fxe5 Bb8 38. Nb6 Bc7 39. Nc8+ Ke8
40. Nd6+ Bxd6 41. exd6 Kf7 42. a5 Ke8 43. Kd3 Kf7 44. Kc4 Kf6 45. b4 Ke5 46.
d7 Kd6 47. b5 axb5+ 48. Kxb5 Kd5 49. Nxb7 Nxb7 50. a6 Nd6+ 51. Kb4 Nf7 52. a7
Kc6 53. a8=Q+ Kxd7 54. Kc5 Ne5 55. Qb7+ Ke8 56. Qb8+ 1-0

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

End Of Week Games

Round 1 Fridays

I spent 46 of my allotted minutes on this game, so it’s good to know I don’t waste all my time even when it’s something I’ve faced before, a straightforward attacking system.

I was out of book as soon as I played 6…Nbd7.  If I can win against this opening without even playing a book line, then it’s probably not worth recommending itself against Class A players, granted he probably could have saved a tempo playing h3 instead of Be2, etc, but really I was just going to react to whatever he played.

Tomorrow, I play Imre the first game of our four-game match.  I’ll start out with the Black pieces.

Tuesday’s Game

Round 1

New opponent, (there are over 200 Mike Smith(s)).  He said he hadn’t played in seven years, and before that it was before the records show, which sounds strange because he looks so young.  In any event, he said he was once rated as high as 1900 a very long time ago, and this is his first tournament in many years.  I beat him in two blitz games last month, but just barely.  He plays King’s Gambit as White and Latvian Gambit as Black, so I know he ain’t no weakie, and thus I was playing for the quietest line possible.

Well, he is listed as Unrated now, so apparently he got a new USCF id.  In any case, leave it to me to get no ratings points credit against an unrated.  If I could remove all of my time-pressure losses, etc, I believe I’d surely be an Expert by now.

After 8…h5, I was out of book, and managed my time horribly, although this very much reminded me of the opening that Mitch Anderson played against me, possibly the same exact line to this point.  There is only one game in the DB and Black apparently won that one.

By move 19.Bd1, I was already down to two or three minutes, saw 19.Be4, but just wasn’t sure whether he might knock my bishop off that diagonal (which protects my king) with a rook, so I decided to let him eat my b2 pawn, and I played Bd1.  Curiously, he was playing quickly, probably had an hour or so left by games end, and didn’t take the bait this time – incidentally, I was happy when he took my pawn on d4 earlier, and missed a shot there.

 

 

 

 

Last Round Games

Thursday’s Round 2

There is still one more round of this Thursday’s tournament, but I have dropped out of it.

I figured that 48.Kh4 was a blunder, but actually I simply didn’t know the drawing technique.  If I keep checking his king with my rook in front of his pawn, then it’s only a draw, but I was playing on the 30 second delay with well under half a minute on my clock.

Friday’s Last Round

My blitz rating on FICS is at 1500.  It’s funny how many years it took for me to get it to 1500.  By the time I got it to 1500, which was just a couple minutes ago, it feelt like nothing, like I could try to make 1600 now.  That’s the thing, if it’s hard you’ll never make it, it only comes easy.