MY win streak for Battersea has reached four games, considerably boosting my first-season numbers for the club (CLL is Central London League; LL is London League):
Event..............Colour...Grade...Opponent's Grade...Result
CLL................White.....169.........183............................L
CLL................White.....169.........197............................L
LL...................Black.....169.........158............................W
CLL................White.....169.........158............................W
LL....................Black.....169........204............................L
CLL................White......169........203.............................L
CLL..................Black.....169........180............................L
Eastman Cup...Black......169........199...........................D
CLL.................Black.....163.........172*...........................L
CLL.................White.....163.........153...........................W
LL...................White.....163.........188............................D
CLL.................Black.....163.........166............................L
LL...................White.....163.........150............................D
CLL.................Black.....163.........175............................D
CLL.................White.....163.........174............................L
LL....................White.....163.........169............................D
CLL.................White......163........159............................D
LL....................Black......163........165............................W
LL....................Black......163........172............................L
CLL.................White......163........161............................W
LL....................White......163........177............................W
LL....................White......163........167............................W
CLL....…….…..Black...…163...….148...…..…………….W
*Opponent has no official grade. Last published grade was 172 in 1997, which was pre-recalibration, and he was in the 180s before then.
Overall for Battersea I am +8=6-9 for a grading performance of 171.
Wednesday 30 May 2018
Tuesday 29 May 2018
Six Of The Best
PLAYED in the six-round open section of the 50th Cotswold Congress, held at King's School, Gloucester, over the Whitsun bank-holiday weekend.
The tournament turned out to be one of my best ever; I drew with a 192, drew with a 171, beat a 187, drew with a 188, beat a 180 and drew with a 188. That adds up to a 201 performance.
I have not yet gone over the games in depth, but am already aware I was missing a lot tactically. Fortunately for me, my opponents were generally missing more.
Can you find a good move for Black in this round-three game?
***
***
***
***
***
***
***
***
If you came up with 28...Bc3?, you can console yourself with the thought that this was also the choice of my 187 opponent.
Black needed to play something like 28..Qb7.
The trouble with the move played is, as I had foreseen, it allows White's queen to enter Black's position unopposed. The game continued:
29.Rxa8 Rxa8 30.Qh3 Bb4 This seems to be as good as any other try. 31.Qe6+ Kg7 32.Qd7 Kg8 32.Kh8 was more resilient, but White still has a strong attack after, say, 32...Rd3 Qc5 33.Rf3. 33.h5 Qc5 34.h6 Qf8 35.Qxc6 (1-0, 56 moves).
 |
| King's School was founded by Henry VIII in 1541 in the shadow of Gloucester Cathedral |
I have not yet gone over the games in depth, but am already aware I was missing a lot tactically. Fortunately for me, my opponents were generally missing more.
 |
| Position after 28.Re1-d1 in Spanton (163) - Peter Martin (187) |
***
***
***
***
***
***
***
***
If you came up with 28...Bc3?, you can console yourself with the thought that this was also the choice of my 187 opponent.
Black needed to play something like 28..Qb7.
The trouble with the move played is, as I had foreseen, it allows White's queen to enter Black's position unopposed. The game continued:
29.Rxa8 Rxa8 30.Qh3 Bb4 This seems to be as good as any other try. 31.Qe6+ Kg7 32.Qd7 Kg8 32.Kh8 was more resilient, but White still has a strong attack after, say, 32...Rd3 Qc5 33.Rf3. 33.h5 Qc5 34.h6 Qf8 35.Qxc6 (1-0, 56 moves).
Saturday 19 May 2018
Revival or Coincidence?
BEFORE this month, the position after 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 g6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nc6 had occurred 70 times in my games.
Just one of those 70 games saw White playing 5.Nxc6!?
This month, the diagrammed position has, so far, occurred twice in my games, and in both of those White played 5.Nxc6!?
It is the type of move books often warn against in the Sicilian, as the recapture 5...bxc6 strengthens Black's centre.
But you might be surprised, as I was, to learn it has a respectable pedigree, having been a favourite in simuls of Pillsbury.
Lasker used it to beat Bird in their 1892 match, and it was also played by Albin, Blackburne, Schlechter and von Bardeleben.
In more modern times it was occasionally the choice of Mikenas, Yanofsky, Pilnik, Szabo, Alburt and Beliavsky.
So the move has a respectable history, which leads me to ask the question: Revival or Coincidence?
In other words, has 5.Nxc6!? taken on a new lease of life, perhaps as the result of being recommended in a book, in a magazine or online? Or do my two recent experiences just add up to a statistical freak?
After 5...bxc6, by far the commonest continuation is 6.Qd4, and this was indeed played against me when I first met the line 13 years ago.
But analysis engines tend not to be particularly impressed by this move, which struggles to get into Stockfish9's top ten choices.
Instead, Stockfish9 likes 6.Nc3 and 6.Bc4.
The former was played against me at a tournament earlier this month in Bamberg, Bavaria, and the game was effectively over inside 10 moves.
Daniel Wiemann (1591) - Spanton (1878) continued: 6...Bg7 7.Be3 d6 8.Qd2 Qa5 I had no intention of playing ...Bxc3, but I hoped the threat might induce Black to interrupt his natural plan of development. 9.Bd3 Rb8 I now expected 10.Nd1. Instead there came catastrophic loss of material: 10.Qc1?? Rxb2 11.Bd2 Bxc3 12.Qxb2 Bxb2 (0-1, 38 moves).
The move 6.Bc4 was played against me in a Central London League match on Thursday.
Matthew JD Baker (148ECF) - Spanton (163ECF) continued: 6...Bg7 7.0-0 7.Qf3 was played at least twice by Bellon Lopez. One point is that after 7...Nf6, White can try 8.e5!? (Bellon Lopez, in the two games featured in ChessBase's 2018 Mega database, once chose 8.0-0 and the other time plumped for 8.Nc3) as 8...Qa5+ does not win the e5 pawn, since White has 9.Qc3. 7...d6 8.Nc3 Nf6!? More solid was 8...Qc7. 9.Qe2 Black has a comfortable game after this. More challenging was 9.e5 dxe5 10.Qxd8+ Kxd8 11.Re1 (not 11.Bxf7?? as the bishop is trapped by 11...e6), when White will recover his pawn, leaving a position in which Black has the only central pawn, but also has two isolated queenside pawns. 9...0-0 10.Rb1 Qb6 Threatening a nasty skewer with 11...Bg4. 11.h3 a5 12.a4?! This is a little weakening. Stockfish9 reckons the game is even after 12.Rb1 a4 13.Be3. 12...Ba6 12...Nd7 was probably even stronger. 13.Bxa6 Qxa6 14.Qxa6 Rxa6 My main analysis engines, Stockfish9 and Komodo9, reckon the position is equal, but it is easier for Black to play, thanks to having the simple plan of queenside pressure (0-1, 39 moves).
So, Revival or Coincidence? My verdict (for now): Coincidence, but watch this space.
 |
| White has tried numerous continuations, but overwhelmingly most popular are 5.Nc3 and 5.c4 |
This month, the diagrammed position has, so far, occurred twice in my games, and in both of those White played 5.Nxc6!?
It is the type of move books often warn against in the Sicilian, as the recapture 5...bxc6 strengthens Black's centre.
But you might be surprised, as I was, to learn it has a respectable pedigree, having been a favourite in simuls of Pillsbury.
Lasker used it to beat Bird in their 1892 match, and it was also played by Albin, Blackburne, Schlechter and von Bardeleben.
In more modern times it was occasionally the choice of Mikenas, Yanofsky, Pilnik, Szabo, Alburt and Beliavsky.
So the move has a respectable history, which leads me to ask the question: Revival or Coincidence?
In other words, has 5.Nxc6!? taken on a new lease of life, perhaps as the result of being recommended in a book, in a magazine or online? Or do my two recent experiences just add up to a statistical freak?
After 5...bxc6, by far the commonest continuation is 6.Qd4, and this was indeed played against me when I first met the line 13 years ago.
But analysis engines tend not to be particularly impressed by this move, which struggles to get into Stockfish9's top ten choices.
Instead, Stockfish9 likes 6.Nc3 and 6.Bc4.
The former was played against me at a tournament earlier this month in Bamberg, Bavaria, and the game was effectively over inside 10 moves.
Daniel Wiemann (1591) - Spanton (1878) continued: 6...Bg7 7.Be3 d6 8.Qd2 Qa5 I had no intention of playing ...Bxc3, but I hoped the threat might induce Black to interrupt his natural plan of development. 9.Bd3 Rb8 I now expected 10.Nd1. Instead there came catastrophic loss of material: 10.Qc1?? Rxb2 11.Bd2 Bxc3 12.Qxb2 Bxb2 (0-1, 38 moves).
The move 6.Bc4 was played against me in a Central London League match on Thursday.
Matthew JD Baker (148ECF) - Spanton (163ECF) continued: 6...Bg7 7.0-0 7.Qf3 was played at least twice by Bellon Lopez. One point is that after 7...Nf6, White can try 8.e5!? (Bellon Lopez, in the two games featured in ChessBase's 2018 Mega database, once chose 8.0-0 and the other time plumped for 8.Nc3) as 8...Qa5+ does not win the e5 pawn, since White has 9.Qc3. 7...d6 8.Nc3 Nf6!? More solid was 8...Qc7. 9.Qe2 Black has a comfortable game after this. More challenging was 9.e5 dxe5 10.Qxd8+ Kxd8 11.Re1 (not 11.Bxf7?? as the bishop is trapped by 11...e6), when White will recover his pawn, leaving a position in which Black has the only central pawn, but also has two isolated queenside pawns. 9...0-0 10.Rb1 Qb6 Threatening a nasty skewer with 11...Bg4. 11.h3 a5 12.a4?! This is a little weakening. Stockfish9 reckons the game is even after 12.Rb1 a4 13.Be3. 12...Ba6 12...Nd7 was probably even stronger. 13.Bxa6 Qxa6 14.Qxa6 Rxa6 My main analysis engines, Stockfish9 and Komodo9, reckon the position is equal, but it is easier for Black to play, thanks to having the simple plan of queenside pressure (0-1, 39 moves).
So, Revival or Coincidence? My verdict (for now): Coincidence, but watch this space.
Wednesday 16 May 2018
Battersea Stats - Mid-May Update
PLAYED on board three last night for Battersea 2 v Wimbledon 2 in division three of the London League, beating a 167.
My updated first-season Battersea stats (CLL is Central London League; LL is London League):
Event..............Colour...Grade...Opponent's Grade...Result
CLL................White.....169.........183............................L
CLL................White.....169.........197............................L
LL...................Black.....169.........158............................W
CLL................White.....169.........158............................W
LL....................Black.....169........204............................L
CLL................White......169........203.............................L
CLL..................Black.....169........180............................L
Eastman Cup...Black......169........199...........................D
CLL.................Black.....163.........172*...........................L
CLL.................White.....163.........153...........................W
LL...................White.....163.........188............................D
CLL.................Black.....163.........166............................L
LL...................White.....163.........150............................D
CLL.................Black.....163.........175............................D
CLL.................White.....163.........174............................L
LL....................White.....163.........169............................D
CLL.................White......163........159............................D
LL....................Black......163........165............................W
LL....................Black......163........172............................L
CLL.................White......163........161............................W
LL....................White......163........177............................W
LL....................White......163........167............................W
*Opponent has no official grade. Last published grade was 172 in 1997, which was pre-recalibration, and he was in the 180s before then.
Overall for Battersea I am +7=6-9 for a grading performance of 167.
My updated first-season Battersea stats (CLL is Central London League; LL is London League):
Event..............Colour...Grade...Opponent's Grade...Result
CLL................White.....169.........183............................L
CLL................White.....169.........197............................L
LL...................Black.....169.........158............................W
CLL................White.....169.........158............................W
LL....................Black.....169........204............................L
CLL................White......169........203.............................L
CLL..................Black.....169........180............................L
Eastman Cup...Black......169........199...........................D
CLL.................Black.....163.........172*...........................L
CLL.................White.....163.........153...........................W
LL...................White.....163.........188............................D
CLL.................Black.....163.........166............................L
LL...................White.....163.........150............................D
CLL.................Black.....163.........175............................D
CLL.................White.....163.........174............................L
LL....................White.....163.........169............................D
CLL.................White......163........159............................D
LL....................Black......163........165............................W
LL....................Black......163........172............................L
CLL.................White......163........161............................W
LL....................White......163........177............................W
LL....................White......163........167............................W
*Opponent has no official grade. Last published grade was 172 in 1997, which was pre-recalibration, and he was in the 180s before then.
Overall for Battersea I am +7=6-9 for a grading performance of 167.
Sunday 13 May 2018
Beautiful Bamberg (final part)
THERE was very little that was beautiful in the rest of my tournament, which finished today.
I drew with a 1723 in the Friday evening game, beat a 1591 and drew with a 1790 on Saturday, and lost today to a 1740.
My final score of +2=2-2 (plus a default win), ie four points out of seven, was very poor, considering I was the fourth seed.
I drew with a 1723 in the Friday evening game, beat a 1591 and drew with a 1790 on Saturday, and lost today to a 1740.
My final score of +2=2-2 (plus a default win), ie four points out of seven, was very poor, considering I was the fourth seed.
Thursday 10 May 2018
Beautiful Bamberg (part two)
TODAY was a double-round day - or, at least, was supposed to be.
In the morning I beat a junior with a German rating of 1500 (no Fide). He played a Veresov, and in the post-mortem we both thought I had probably been better from an early stage.
But my analysis engines (Stockfish9 and Komodo9) rate White as winning, or at least much better, for much of the opening.
Massively behind on development, I was reduced to making vague threats against White's king.
White is much better after a consolidating move such as 15.Kb1 or 15.a3.
Instead, PS played 15.Qb5?, one point being that 15...Rxd4?? loses on the spot to 16.Qe8+.
But I played 15...Qxb5, which wins a pawn after 16.Nxb5 Rd5 17.Nc3 Rxf5.
My afternoon opponent failed to show, perhaps put off by a hailstorm followed by torrential rain that fell for about half an hour around the start time.
That gave me more time to admire the beauties of Bamberg.
 |
| The playing venue is a priests' seminary on the outskirts of Bamberg |
But my analysis engines (Stockfish9 and Komodo9) rate White as winning, or at least much better, for much of the opening.
Massively behind on development, I was reduced to making vague threats against White's king.
 |
| White to make his 15th move in Pawel Strawa (1500) - Spanton (1878), Bamberg U1900 round 2 |
Instead, PS played 15.Qb5?, one point being that 15...Rxd4?? loses on the spot to 16.Qe8+.
But I played 15...Qxb5, which wins a pawn after 16.Nxb5 Rd5 17.Nc3 Rxf5.
My afternoon opponent failed to show, perhaps put off by a hailstorm followed by torrential rain that fell for about half an hour around the start time.
That gave me more time to admire the beauties of Bamberg.
 |
| River-view of Bamberg's former town hall |
Wednesday 9 May 2018
Beautiful Bamberg
AM playing at a special congress to mark the 150th anniversary of the chess club in Bamberg, Upper Franconia, which is in the north of Bavaria.
Much of the town centre is a Unesco world heritage site.
It is very beautiful, but unfortunately there was nothing beautiful about my performance in round one of the U1900 tournament.
I was winning for most of the game against a player with a Fide rating of 1638. Admittedly, his German rating is a more respectable 1755, but that was no reason for me to blunder a piece and, with it, the game.
Much of the town centre is a Unesco world heritage site.
 |
| Bamberg's old town hall |
I was winning for most of the game against a player with a Fide rating of 1638. Admittedly, his German rating is a more respectable 1755, but that was no reason for me to blunder a piece and, with it, the game.
Saturday 5 May 2018
Find The Winning Move
I WAS on board nine for Battersea's latest London League Division One match, against Hackney.
White's two-pawn edge gives a large advantage, but there is only one move that preserves it; other continuations largely dissipate the advantage or even lead to a loss.
Can you find the winning move?
***
***
***
***
***
***
The greedy 27.Rxc6?? loses a piece to 27...Bf5+ 28.Kb2 Rd2+ 29.Ka3 Bxc3, when analysis engines reckon Black is clearly winning despite White having three pawns for the missing piece.
A passive move such as 27.Re3 is also problematic. Black's best line is not clear, but something like 27...Bh6 (27...Bf5+ is also good) 28.Re2 Bg4 (again, the immediate 28...Bf5+ is a promising alternative) 29.Rf2 (29.Bb6!?) Bf5+ 30.Kb2 Bg7, makes it difficult for White to coordinate his pieces and get the queenside pawns moving. In many of the lines I investigated with Stockfish9 and Komodo9, White had to give up the exchange to push home his advantage (not an easy thing to correctly time over the board).
Other retreats are even worse, eg 27.Re2? Bf5+ 28.Kb2 (28.Ne4?? Ra8 wins for Black) Rd3 29.Rc2 Rd1, with a position the engines calculate as dead equal, although both sides can carry on.
In the game, I played the correct 27.Bb6! One point is that swopping into opposite-coloured bishops by 27...Bxe6 28.Bxd8 Bxc3 does not give realistic drawing chances as Black's king is too far from the queenside. White quickly creates a pair of passed pawns and wins without much trouble.
So JT felt obliged to move his rook from the e file by 27...Rf8. There followed the cold-blooded 28.Rxc6 Bf5+ 29.Kd2, when White's king may look exposed at first glance, but is quite safe. The game saw 29...Bh6+ 30.Be3 Bg7 (or 30...Rd8+ 31.Nd5) 31.Nd5 Ra8 32.a4 (1-0, 41 moves).
 |
| Position after 26...Ba6-c8 in Spanton (163) - John Tennyson (177) |
Can you find the winning move?
***
***
***
***
***
***
The greedy 27.Rxc6?? loses a piece to 27...Bf5+ 28.Kb2 Rd2+ 29.Ka3 Bxc3, when analysis engines reckon Black is clearly winning despite White having three pawns for the missing piece.
A passive move such as 27.Re3 is also problematic. Black's best line is not clear, but something like 27...Bh6 (27...Bf5+ is also good) 28.Re2 Bg4 (again, the immediate 28...Bf5+ is a promising alternative) 29.Rf2 (29.Bb6!?) Bf5+ 30.Kb2 Bg7, makes it difficult for White to coordinate his pieces and get the queenside pawns moving. In many of the lines I investigated with Stockfish9 and Komodo9, White had to give up the exchange to push home his advantage (not an easy thing to correctly time over the board).
Other retreats are even worse, eg 27.Re2? Bf5+ 28.Kb2 (28.Ne4?? Ra8 wins for Black) Rd3 29.Rc2 Rd1, with a position the engines calculate as dead equal, although both sides can carry on.
In the game, I played the correct 27.Bb6! One point is that swopping into opposite-coloured bishops by 27...Bxe6 28.Bxd8 Bxc3 does not give realistic drawing chances as Black's king is too far from the queenside. White quickly creates a pair of passed pawns and wins without much trouble.
So JT felt obliged to move his rook from the e file by 27...Rf8. There followed the cold-blooded 28.Rxc6 Bf5+ 29.Kd2, when White's king may look exposed at first glance, but is quite safe. The game saw 29...Bh6+ 30.Be3 Bg7 (or 30...Rd8+ 31.Nd5) 31.Nd5 Ra8 32.a4 (1-0, 41 moves).
Tuesday 1 May 2018
Battersea Stats - end-of-April update
TURNED out twice for Battersea last month, losing to a 172 and beating a 161.
My updated first-season Battersea stats (CLL is Central London League; LL is London League):
Event..............Colour...Grade...Opponent's Grade...Result
CLL................White.....169.........183............................L
CLL................White.....169.........197............................L
LL...................Black.....169.........158............................W
CLL................White.....169.........158............................W
LL....................Black.....169........204............................L
CLL................White......169........203.............................L
CLL..................Black.....169........180............................L
Eastman Cup...Black......169........199...........................D
CLL.................Black.....163.........172*...........................L
CLL.................White.....163.........153...........................W
LL...................White.....163.........188............................D
CLL.................Black.....163.........166............................L
LL...................White.....163.........150............................D
CLL.................Black.....163.........175............................D
CLL.................White.....163.........174............................L
LL....................White.....163.........169............................D
CLL.................White......163........159............................D
LL....................Black......163........165............................W
LL....................Black......163........172............................L
CLL.................White......163........161............................W
*Opponent has no official grade. Last published grade was 172 in 1997, which was pre-recalibration, and he was in the 180s before then.
Overall for Battersea I am +5=6-9 for a grading performance of 164.
My updated first-season Battersea stats (CLL is Central London League; LL is London League):
Event..............Colour...Grade...Opponent's Grade...Result
CLL................White.....169.........183............................L
CLL................White.....169.........197............................L
LL...................Black.....169.........158............................W
CLL................White.....169.........158............................W
LL....................Black.....169........204............................L
CLL................White......169........203.............................L
CLL..................Black.....169........180............................L
Eastman Cup...Black......169........199...........................D
CLL.................Black.....163.........172*...........................L
CLL.................White.....163.........153...........................W
LL...................White.....163.........188............................D
CLL.................Black.....163.........166............................L
LL...................White.....163.........150............................D
CLL.................Black.....163.........175............................D
CLL.................White.....163.........174............................L
LL....................White.....163.........169............................D
CLL.................White......163........159............................D
LL....................Black......163........165............................W
LL....................Black......163........172............................L
CLL.................White......163........161............................W
*Opponent has no official grade. Last published grade was 172 in 1997, which was pre-recalibration, and he was in the 180s before then.
Overall for Battersea I am +5=6-9 for a grading performance of 164.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)