Kevin Gafni, an up-and-coming player with a pleasing style, has entered the chess blogging universe with drunknknite. That makes five of our Reno Chess Club members who are blogging; I don't know what the leading chess blogging club in the U.S. or the World might be, but whoever it is watch out because we will catch and pass you!
Kevin has played several riveting games that I've seen parts of (while strolling between moves from my board) and I look forward to seeing some of his efforts on the blog.
Tuesday, November 06, 2007
How Good (or Lame) is the New USCF Site?
Over at BCC, a post about Jack Le Moine's experiences at the recent USCF Executive Board meeting produces an extended run of comments about how bad the USCF's new website sucks. I noticed the other day that when I tried to link to USCF player pages it didn't work, and now I know why.
Luckily, "Dan" provides a link to the old pages at http://www.uschess.org/msa/MbrLst.php. Hope it lasts, because I loved to link to my and my opponent's tournament records when talking about a game or event, and they managed to screw that feature up by putting it all inside a "wrapper." Otherwise, I don't have anything against the new page, but it doesn't really seem like an improvement, either, so why make the change?
Luckily, "Dan" provides a link to the old pages at http://www.uschess.org/msa/MbrLst.php. Hope it lasts, because I loved to link to my and my opponent's tournament records when talking about a game or event, and they managed to screw that feature up by putting it all inside a "wrapper." Otherwise, I don't have anything against the new page, but it doesn't really seem like an improvement, either, so why make the change?
Monday, November 05, 2007
Chess Publisher Version 2
I've noticed this in use at a couple of my favorite blogs now, including dk's Chess Improvement and Liquid Egg Product, and finally got around to working with it.
It looks like a nice upgrade from v. 1 that I used previously, but anyway both are available here. Having the annotations in the same window is a step forward. In order to test it out I put in a game that I'd had trouble getting to work with the older version, and found out that the tricky part is that Blogger removes "unnecessary" spaces, which fouls up the cut-and-paste.
Anyway, let's take it for a test drive...
(Later--well that didn't work out so well, diagram too wide for the column and you cannot edit the post after it's published--a blank screen shows in the editing box. Hmmm. Okay, I'll try changing the height and width in the image!)
(Even Later--no I had to change the dimensions of the main column and sidebar--please tell me in the comments if anything looks wrong to funny, or if the new viewer seems good, bad or indifferent to you)
It looks like a nice upgrade from v. 1 that I used previously, but anyway both are available here. Having the annotations in the same window is a step forward. In order to test it out I put in a game that I'd had trouble getting to work with the older version, and found out that the tricky part is that Blogger removes "unnecessary" spaces, which fouls up the cut-and-paste.
Anyway, let's take it for a test drive...
(Later--well that didn't work out so well, diagram too wide for the column and you cannot edit the post after it's published--a blank screen shows in the editing box. Hmmm. Okay, I'll try changing the height and width in the image!)
(Even Later--no I had to change the dimensions of the main column and sidebar--please tell me in the comments if anything looks wrong to funny, or if the new viewer seems good, bad or indifferent to you)
Friday, November 02, 2007
Postmortem
Having subjected you, the reader, to all kinds of reportage on the 2007 Western States Open held in beautiful Reno, NV October 12-14, let me sum up and move on.
I had my best results in five years (since the 2002 Alaska State Championship) in terms of tournament performance (1800) and general quality of play. After a blunder in the first game, I managed to play three consecutive games against players rated above me and score of 2.5 with (as far as I can tell) no major blunders (I could certainly use any constructive criticism you might care to offer: Game 1, Game 2, Game 3, Game 4). This represented a definite step forward, and I'm attributing it partly to work on my game, but also I'd like to give some credit to my study of Jonathan Rowson's book Chess for Zebras and its inscrutable Eastern Mysticism...well, not exactly that, but I believe that some of the concepts and ideas I read there in the weeks before the tournament really helped with mental preparation and attitude.
Specifically: "Style? I have no style" (Karpov), I'm just playing good moves as I see them. I used to believe there was usually a "best" move in the position, and sometimes there is, like a mate-in-one, but I normally see that; I now am on board with the concept that chess is just too hard to worry about perfection, so I'm happily imperfect.
I've gotten better at just playing the position in front of me and pretty much forgetting what has gone before; errors earlier in the game don't sap my confidence as much. Another interesting note is that I used to think about winning many times during a game, but the beautiful paradox of chess is that thinking about winning less leads to more wins. Just try to play decent moves and let their resignation come almost as a surprise! Also, be surprised when they play a bad move--I'm getting better at looking for the opponent's good moves rather than the ones that allow me to realize my plans.
Finally, I've always been a player who tried to do something "constructive" with every move, going forward, attacking something, gaining space etc etc. I think I'm getting a little better at knowing when defensive, consolidating, prophylactic, "little," even "nothing" moves are called for. "Holding" the position, "tacking" and so forth have their place--but that doesn't mean I won't go for the throat when called for, either.
I'm not trying to overdo it here, as I well realize I have plenty of flaws and weak spots as a chess player, and one good tournament doesn't make me a psychological chess guru or anything close to that! I'm going to have losses and disappointments in the future, no doubt.
Yet, I feel like I'm going to be enjoying chess more than ever, and that's really the point of it all.
I had my best results in five years (since the 2002 Alaska State Championship) in terms of tournament performance (1800) and general quality of play. After a blunder in the first game, I managed to play three consecutive games against players rated above me and score of 2.5 with (as far as I can tell) no major blunders (I could certainly use any constructive criticism you might care to offer: Game 1, Game 2, Game 3, Game 4). This represented a definite step forward, and I'm attributing it partly to work on my game, but also I'd like to give some credit to my study of Jonathan Rowson's book Chess for Zebras and its inscrutable Eastern Mysticism...well, not exactly that, but I believe that some of the concepts and ideas I read there in the weeks before the tournament really helped with mental preparation and attitude.
Specifically: "Style? I have no style" (Karpov), I'm just playing good moves as I see them. I used to believe there was usually a "best" move in the position, and sometimes there is, like a mate-in-one, but I normally see that; I now am on board with the concept that chess is just too hard to worry about perfection, so I'm happily imperfect.
I've gotten better at just playing the position in front of me and pretty much forgetting what has gone before; errors earlier in the game don't sap my confidence as much. Another interesting note is that I used to think about winning many times during a game, but the beautiful paradox of chess is that thinking about winning less leads to more wins. Just try to play decent moves and let their resignation come almost as a surprise! Also, be surprised when they play a bad move--I'm getting better at looking for the opponent's good moves rather than the ones that allow me to realize my plans.
Finally, I've always been a player who tried to do something "constructive" with every move, going forward, attacking something, gaining space etc etc. I think I'm getting a little better at knowing when defensive, consolidating, prophylactic, "little," even "nothing" moves are called for. "Holding" the position, "tacking" and so forth have their place--but that doesn't mean I won't go for the throat when called for, either.
I'm not trying to overdo it here, as I well realize I have plenty of flaws and weak spots as a chess player, and one good tournament doesn't make me a psychological chess guru or anything close to that! I'm going to have losses and disappointments in the future, no doubt.
Yet, I feel like I'm going to be enjoying chess more than ever, and that's really the point of it all.
Thursday, November 01, 2007
Western States Open, Game 4 (Rd. 6)
A draw with a 1753-rated guy from Texas finished up a very good tournament for me.
[Event "Western States Open (B)"]
[Site "Reno, NV"]
[Date "2007.10.14"]
[Round "6"]
[White "Anderson, Bradley "]
[Black "Pearson, Robert"]
[Result "*"]
[WhiteElo "1753"]
[BlackElo "1607"]
[ECO "A48"]
[Annotator "RLP"]
1. d4 Nf6 2. Nf3 g6 { Aiming for the King's Indian } 3. Nc3 { I haven't seen this move for a long time; now 3. ... d6 4. e4 and I'm playing the Pirc, which I'm all right with, but given the opportunity why not d5? } d5 4. Bf4 Bg7 5. e3 O-O 6. Be2 { Okay, we're in the "Barry Attack" but I didn't remember the name at the time. There was a guy who played this against me in a couple of Alaska tournaments so I wasn't really shocked by it. } Bg4 { In Beating the Anti-King's Indians Joe Gallagher recommends c5, breaking up White's center with a temporary pawn sacrifice. But I'm out of "book" now and Bg4 seemed very natural--it's been played by masters many times in this position. } 7. h3 Bxf3 8. Bxf3 c6 9. h4 { Okay, NOW I get it. Well, a King's Indian player can't be too afraid of this move, I've seen this before...keep the kingside closed and you'll be fine. } h5 10. Qe2 Nbd7 11. O-O-O Qa5 { ?! With the idea of b5, b4 and Qxa2, keeping him busy on the queenside. All my other pieces are where I want them in anticipation of his g4 push. But more precise was b5, keeping the queen flexible. } 12. g4 hxg4 13. Bxg4 Nxg4 14. Qxg4 Nf6 15. Qg2 { I don't think Qg5 is anything special for him either; my plan is still to play Nh5 and push the b-pawn, with a roughly level game. } Nh5 16. Be5 b5 17. Bxg7 Kxg7 18. Ne2 { ?! Daring me to take the pawn! After 10 minutes thought I couldn't see a clear refuatation of it, but decided to "play it safe." however, 18. ... Qxa2 19. c3 Rab8 20. Ng3 Nxg3 21. Qxg3 b4 seems good for Black. I don't know why that should be beyond my horizon, but anyway... } Qc7 19. f4 e6 20. Rdg1 Rh8 { I don't know if any individual move of mine in this game deserves a (! ) but I think I did have a good plan to meet his unusual and aggressive set-up. } 21. Qg5 Kf8 { To free the queen from guarding e7, but a5 was more conducive to trying for an advanatage. } 22. Ng3 Qe7 { Rc8 winding up for c5 would again have been more assertive. } 23. Qg4 Nxg3 24. Rxg3 Rh5 25. Rgh3 { He offered a draw. I spent a few minutes looking at c5 as a winning attempt, but thought any edge I'd get was pretty small. Objectively, it's worth playing on for Black, though. Kg7 and Rah8 ties him to the weak h-pawn, then Black can probe the queenside. To be honest, I was a little worn from the events of the previous few days, I was satisfied with my play in the game so far and a draw with a player 150 points above me would complete a very good result; so... } 1/2-1/2
[Event "Western States Open (B)"]
[Site "Reno, NV"]
[Date "2007.10.14"]
[Round "6"]
[White "Anderson, Bradley "]
[Black "Pearson, Robert"]
[Result "*"]
[WhiteElo "1753"]
[BlackElo "1607"]
[ECO "A48"]
[Annotator "RLP"]
1. d4 Nf6 2. Nf3 g6 { Aiming for the King's Indian } 3. Nc3 { I haven't seen this move for a long time; now 3. ... d6 4. e4 and I'm playing the Pirc, which I'm all right with, but given the opportunity why not d5? } d5 4. Bf4 Bg7 5. e3 O-O 6. Be2 { Okay, we're in the "Barry Attack" but I didn't remember the name at the time. There was a guy who played this against me in a couple of Alaska tournaments so I wasn't really shocked by it. } Bg4 { In Beating the Anti-King's Indians Joe Gallagher recommends c5, breaking up White's center with a temporary pawn sacrifice. But I'm out of "book" now and Bg4 seemed very natural--it's been played by masters many times in this position. } 7. h3 Bxf3 8. Bxf3 c6 9. h4 { Okay, NOW I get it. Well, a King's Indian player can't be too afraid of this move, I've seen this before...keep the kingside closed and you'll be fine. } h5 10. Qe2 Nbd7 11. O-O-O Qa5 { ?! With the idea of b5, b4 and Qxa2, keeping him busy on the queenside. All my other pieces are where I want them in anticipation of his g4 push. But more precise was b5, keeping the queen flexible. } 12. g4 hxg4 13. Bxg4 Nxg4 14. Qxg4 Nf6 15. Qg2 { I don't think Qg5 is anything special for him either; my plan is still to play Nh5 and push the b-pawn, with a roughly level game. } Nh5 16. Be5 b5 17. Bxg7 Kxg7 18. Ne2 { ?! Daring me to take the pawn! After 10 minutes thought I couldn't see a clear refuatation of it, but decided to "play it safe." however, 18. ... Qxa2 19. c3 Rab8 20. Ng3 Nxg3 21. Qxg3 b4 seems good for Black. I don't know why that should be beyond my horizon, but anyway... } Qc7 19. f4 e6 20. Rdg1 Rh8 { I don't know if any individual move of mine in this game deserves a (! ) but I think I did have a good plan to meet his unusual and aggressive set-up. } 21. Qg5 Kf8 { To free the queen from guarding e7, but a5 was more conducive to trying for an advanatage. } 22. Ng3 Qe7 { Rc8 winding up for c5 would again have been more assertive. } 23. Qg4 Nxg3 24. Rxg3 Rh5 25. Rgh3 { He offered a draw. I spent a few minutes looking at c5 as a winning attempt, but thought any edge I'd get was pretty small. Objectively, it's worth playing on for Black, though. Kg7 and Rah8 ties him to the weak h-pawn, then Black can probe the queenside. To be honest, I was a little worn from the events of the previous few days, I was satisfied with my play in the game so far and a draw with a player 150 points above me would complete a very good result; so... } 1/2-1/2
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)