THIS is usually a quiet time for club chess, but the new Summer League - its inaugural season was last year - meant I played one game for Battersea this month.
By beating a 176, I finally levelled my first-season number of wins and losses for Battersea.
My updated club stats (CLL is Central London League; LL is London League; SL is Summer 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
SL...…..……….Black......163...…..176...………….…….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 +9=6-9 for a grading performance of 173.
Friday, 29 June 2018
Tuesday, 26 June 2018
Czech Mated
PLAYED at the 13th annual Teplice tournament, which finished on Sunday.
It was held in spacious conditions in the city's Culture House - the only sour note being the many sets that had pieces with different-coloured tops, eg white bishops with black mitres..
Unfortunately, I forgot to pack my laptop's charger, and I could not a buy a replacement in Teplice, so I was unable to blog.
Perhaps it was just as well: my score of +3=2-4 saw me lose 9.6 elo - my first loss of Fide rating points since Newcastle in February.
It was held in spacious conditions in the city's Culture House - the only sour note being the many sets that had pieces with different-coloured tops, eg white bishops with black mitres..
 |
| Inside the excellent playing hall |
Perhaps it was just as well: my score of +3=2-4 saw me lose 9.6 elo - my first loss of Fide rating points since Newcastle in February.
Monday, 11 June 2018
All's Well In Tunbridge Wells
WELL, I did not win the open tournament at the 2nd Tunbridge Wells Congress in memory of Southern Counties Chess Union stalwart Richard Haddrell, but I surprised quite a few people, myself included.
I drew with a 180, beat a 166, beat a 208, lost to a 243 and drew with a 182. That is a tournament performance of 205.8, although the ECF's 40pt rule means it will not count so high for grading purposes.
My best result came in round three, on Saturday evening, against Kent junior Freddie Hand.
Spanton (163) - Hand (208)
Ruy Lopez, Cozio Defence
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 Nge7 4.Nc3!?
This is an old move - it goes back to at least 1836 - but has recently been growing in popularity. Black's most popular fourth move in the Cozio is 4...g6, but in this variation there is a serious problem, as can be seen in the game J Ellis (2130) - Spanton (2054), 1996 US Open (Alexandria, Virginia), which continued, after 4.Nc3!? g6, with 5.d4 exd4 6.Nd5! (the punctuation is Grandmaster Alexey Dreev's in Anti-Spanish: The Cozio Defence) Bg7 7.Bg5! (again, Dreev's exclamation mark) h6 8.Bf6 Bxf6! (Dreev) 9.Nxf6+ Kf8 10.0-0
I played 10...Nf5, which Dreev calls dubious - he gives 10...a6! as leading to "approximately equal" chances.
My move was met by 11.Nd5, which Dreev says is good for White, and certainly I was struggling after the further moves 11...Nfe7 12.Nxd4 (1-0, 27 moves).
I tried 4...Ng6 in two more-recent games, drawing with David Littlejohns (2055) at Paignton in 2012. but losing to Kevin Roser (2409) at Gibraltar the following year.
Dreev says the big drawback to 4...Ng6 is the line Roser played against me, namely 5.d4 exd4 6.Nxd4, which looks a bit like a Scotch Four Knights, but with White having an extra tempo (Bg5) and Black's king's knight being slid from the f6 square to the less active g6.
Black could try 4...a6, but this gives White a tempo to play 5.Bc4, switching the light-square bishop to a more promising diagonal now that Black has reinforced c6 (and indirectly the protection of e5).
All of this helps explain why Dreev endorses the move Hand played against me, viz:
4...d6
Dreev says: "The idea (is) to transpose into the Old Steinitz Defence in which White has played Nc3 too early,"
5.d4
"This is the only way to fight for a slight opening edge," says Dreev, who gives Black's best as 5...a6. The game saw a line he warns against:
5...exd4 6.Nxd4 Bd7 7.0-0
Dreev leaves this line here, saying the game has transposed to "one of the positions in the Steinitz Defence in which White maintains a slight but stable positional edge."
7...Ng6?
A mistake, which I failed to exploit. Perhaps best was to initiate exchanges with the typical freeing manoeuvre 7...Nxd4, when I intended 8.Qxd4, with a pleasant game.
8.Re1?
My main analysis engines, Stockfish9 and Komodo9, scream out for 8.Nf5, which they are so enthusiastic about that at first they reckon White is winning. They sober down after considering the position for a while, but still believe White is much better after 8...Nce7 9.Re1 (Stockfish9) or 8...Nge7!? 9.Bg5 (Komodo9).
I rejected 8.Nf5 because I was not sure White was better after 8...Bxf5, but 9.exf5 Nge7 (9...Nge5 10.Re1) 10.Bg5 Qd7 (10...f6 11.Qh5+) 11.f6 gxf6 12.Bxf6 Rg8 13.Re1 0-0-0 14.Nd5, as given by Stockfish9, looks crushing.
8...Be7 9.Be3 Bf6 10.Qd2 Nxd4 11.Bxd4 Bxd4 12.Qxd4 Bxb5 13.Nxb5 0-0
The mass exchanges begun on move 10 have freed Black's game, although White has a lead in development and more central space.
14.c4!?
Not 14.Nxa7?? c5.
I thought the text gave me a pleasant bind, but the engines do not like the move, preferring 14.Qc3, 14.Nc3 or even 14.f3.
14...a6 15.Nc3 Qg5
Perhaps this is the problem with my 14th move - Black gets a small but annoying initiative on the kingside.
16.Qe3 Qe5 17.Rad1 Rfd8?!
This looks like the wrong rook, but possibly FH thought his queenside would be vulnerable to a queen invasion if he moved the a8 rook.
18.Rd5 Qf6 19.b3 c6!?
Komodo9's choice, but it clearly weakens the d6 pawn.
20.Rdd1 Nf4 21.g3? Ne6?
The fast time control (all moves in 80 minutes, with a 10-second increment) may have saved me here, as otherwise FH would surely have found 21...Nh3+ 22.Kg2 Nxf2!
22.Kg2 g5!?
Presumably an anti-rabbit move.
23.h3 Qe5 24.Ne2 Kh8 25.Nd4
Forcing exchanges, as Black can hardly allow a White knight to (at last!) occupy the f5 square.
25...Nxd4 26.Qxd4 Qxd4?
The analysis engines aren't too harsh about this, but to me it seems a clear mistake, more-or-less condemning Black to passive defence of the d6 weakness.
27.Rxd4 Rd7 28.Red1 Rad8 29.Kf3 Kg7 30.Kg4 Kg6 31.f4 gxf4 32.gxf4
This gives Black a drawing resource. Better was 32.Kxf4, eg 32...Kf6 33.Rxd6+ Rxd6 34.Rxd6+ Rxd6 35.e5+ Ke6 36.exd6 Kxd6, leaving a king-and-pawn ending that looks very good for White. Stockfish9 suggests 32...c5!?, but White is clearly much better after 33.Rd5.
32...f6
The engines give 32...f5!, the point being that 33.exf5+ Kf6 takes much of the pressure off d6. It is still White for choice, but difficult to make progress.
33.f5+! Kh6 34.c5 d5 35.Kf4 Kg7 36.h4 Kf7 37.h5 Ke7?
This eases White's task.
The engines prefer 37..Kg7, but after, say, 38.exd5 cxd5 39.b4, Black can do nothing but wait for White to slowly make progress, as an attempt at counterplay by 39...Kh6 could end in tears, eg 40.a3 Kxh6?? 41.Rh1#.
38.Rg1
Simpler, and stronger, was 38.exd5 cxd5 39.b4, with mounting pressure on Black's position.
But 38.h6?! would have allowed 38...dxe4, when 39.Rxd7+ Rxd7 40.Rxd7 Kxd7 leaves White's king with no way into Black's position. White's best would probably be 40.Rg1 Kf8 41.Kxe4, but Black has some drawing chances.
38...Kf8 39.Rgd1?
Giving Black a second chance to find the best defence of ...Kg7.
I should have continued switching my attack to the g file. The engines give 39.Rd2 Re7 40.Rgd2! Rxe4+ 41.Kf3 Rde8 42.Rg8+ Ke7 43.R1g7+ Kd8 44.Rxe8+ Kxe8 45.Rxh7, when White's dominant rook gives excellent winning chances.
39...Kf7? 40.h6
This is good, now that Black cannot reply ...dxe4.
40...Kf8 41.b4 Kf7 42.exd5 cxd5 43.a4 Kf8 44.Re1 Re7 45.Rdd1 Rxe1 46.Rxe1 Rd7 47.Re6 Kf7 48.Ke3 d4+ 49.Kd3 a5 50.b5 Rd5. 51.c6 bxc6 52.b6
Black cannot stop this pawn, except by allowing a lost king-and-pawn ending. The game finished:
52...Rd7 53.Rxc6 Ke7 54.Rc7 Rxc7 55.bxc7 Kd7 56.Kxd4 Kxc7 57.Kc5 Kd7 58.Kb5 Kd6 59.Kxa5 Ke5
59...Kc5 60.Ka6 Kc6 61.a5 is no improvement.
60.Kb6 1-0
I drew with a 180, beat a 166, beat a 208, lost to a 243 and drew with a 182. That is a tournament performance of 205.8, although the ECF's 40pt rule means it will not count so high for grading purposes.
My best result came in round three, on Saturday evening, against Kent junior Freddie Hand.
Spanton (163) - Hand (208)
Ruy Lopez, Cozio Defence
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 Nge7 4.Nc3!?
This is an old move - it goes back to at least 1836 - but has recently been growing in popularity. Black's most popular fourth move in the Cozio is 4...g6, but in this variation there is a serious problem, as can be seen in the game J Ellis (2130) - Spanton (2054), 1996 US Open (Alexandria, Virginia), which continued, after 4.Nc3!? g6, with 5.d4 exd4 6.Nd5! (the punctuation is Grandmaster Alexey Dreev's in Anti-Spanish: The Cozio Defence) Bg7 7.Bg5! (again, Dreev's exclamation mark) h6 8.Bf6 Bxf6! (Dreev) 9.Nxf6+ Kf8 10.0-0
 |
| Black is temporarily a pawn up, but I cannot imagine anyone preferring Black's position over White's |
My move was met by 11.Nd5, which Dreev says is good for White, and certainly I was struggling after the further moves 11...Nfe7 12.Nxd4 (1-0, 27 moves).
I tried 4...Ng6 in two more-recent games, drawing with David Littlejohns (2055) at Paignton in 2012. but losing to Kevin Roser (2409) at Gibraltar the following year.
Dreev says the big drawback to 4...Ng6 is the line Roser played against me, namely 5.d4 exd4 6.Nxd4, which looks a bit like a Scotch Four Knights, but with White having an extra tempo (Bg5) and Black's king's knight being slid from the f6 square to the less active g6.
Black could try 4...a6, but this gives White a tempo to play 5.Bc4, switching the light-square bishop to a more promising diagonal now that Black has reinforced c6 (and indirectly the protection of e5).
All of this helps explain why Dreev endorses the move Hand played against me, viz:
4...d6
Dreev says: "The idea (is) to transpose into the Old Steinitz Defence in which White has played Nc3 too early,"
5.d4
"This is the only way to fight for a slight opening edge," says Dreev, who gives Black's best as 5...a6. The game saw a line he warns against:
5...exd4 6.Nxd4 Bd7 7.0-0
Dreev leaves this line here, saying the game has transposed to "one of the positions in the Steinitz Defence in which White maintains a slight but stable positional edge."
7...Ng6?
A mistake, which I failed to exploit. Perhaps best was to initiate exchanges with the typical freeing manoeuvre 7...Nxd4, when I intended 8.Qxd4, with a pleasant game.
8.Re1?
My main analysis engines, Stockfish9 and Komodo9, scream out for 8.Nf5, which they are so enthusiastic about that at first they reckon White is winning. They sober down after considering the position for a while, but still believe White is much better after 8...Nce7 9.Re1 (Stockfish9) or 8...Nge7!? 9.Bg5 (Komodo9).
I rejected 8.Nf5 because I was not sure White was better after 8...Bxf5, but 9.exf5 Nge7 (9...Nge5 10.Re1) 10.Bg5 Qd7 (10...f6 11.Qh5+) 11.f6 gxf6 12.Bxf6 Rg8 13.Re1 0-0-0 14.Nd5, as given by Stockfish9, looks crushing.
8...Be7 9.Be3 Bf6 10.Qd2 Nxd4 11.Bxd4 Bxd4 12.Qxd4 Bxb5 13.Nxb5 0-0
The mass exchanges begun on move 10 have freed Black's game, although White has a lead in development and more central space.
14.c4!?
Not 14.Nxa7?? c5.
I thought the text gave me a pleasant bind, but the engines do not like the move, preferring 14.Qc3, 14.Nc3 or even 14.f3.
14...a6 15.Nc3 Qg5
Perhaps this is the problem with my 14th move - Black gets a small but annoying initiative on the kingside.
16.Qe3 Qe5 17.Rad1 Rfd8?!
This looks like the wrong rook, but possibly FH thought his queenside would be vulnerable to a queen invasion if he moved the a8 rook.
18.Rd5 Qf6 19.b3 c6!?
Komodo9's choice, but it clearly weakens the d6 pawn.
20.Rdd1 Nf4 21.g3? Ne6?
The fast time control (all moves in 80 minutes, with a 10-second increment) may have saved me here, as otherwise FH would surely have found 21...Nh3+ 22.Kg2 Nxf2!
22.Kg2 g5!?
Presumably an anti-rabbit move.
23.h3 Qe5 24.Ne2 Kh8 25.Nd4
Forcing exchanges, as Black can hardly allow a White knight to (at last!) occupy the f5 square.
25...Nxd4 26.Qxd4 Qxd4?
The analysis engines aren't too harsh about this, but to me it seems a clear mistake, more-or-less condemning Black to passive defence of the d6 weakness.
27.Rxd4 Rd7 28.Red1 Rad8 29.Kf3 Kg7 30.Kg4 Kg6 31.f4 gxf4 32.gxf4
This gives Black a drawing resource. Better was 32.Kxf4, eg 32...Kf6 33.Rxd6+ Rxd6 34.Rxd6+ Rxd6 35.e5+ Ke6 36.exd6 Kxd6, leaving a king-and-pawn ending that looks very good for White. Stockfish9 suggests 32...c5!?, but White is clearly much better after 33.Rd5.
 |
| Position after the seemingly natural 32.gxf4 |
The engines give 32...f5!, the point being that 33.exf5+ Kf6 takes much of the pressure off d6. It is still White for choice, but difficult to make progress.
33.f5+! Kh6 34.c5 d5 35.Kf4 Kg7 36.h4 Kf7 37.h5 Ke7?
This eases White's task.
The engines prefer 37..Kg7, but after, say, 38.exd5 cxd5 39.b4, Black can do nothing but wait for White to slowly make progress, as an attempt at counterplay by 39...Kh6 could end in tears, eg 40.a3 Kxh6?? 41.Rh1#.
38.Rg1
Simpler, and stronger, was 38.exd5 cxd5 39.b4, with mounting pressure on Black's position.
But 38.h6?! would have allowed 38...dxe4, when 39.Rxd7+ Rxd7 40.Rxd7 Kxd7 leaves White's king with no way into Black's position. White's best would probably be 40.Rg1 Kf8 41.Kxe4, but Black has some drawing chances.
38...Kf8 39.Rgd1?
Giving Black a second chance to find the best defence of ...Kg7.
I should have continued switching my attack to the g file. The engines give 39.Rd2 Re7 40.Rgd2! Rxe4+ 41.Kf3 Rde8 42.Rg8+ Ke7 43.R1g7+ Kd8 44.Rxe8+ Kxe8 45.Rxh7, when White's dominant rook gives excellent winning chances.
39...Kf7? 40.h6
This is good, now that Black cannot reply ...dxe4.
40...Kf8 41.b4 Kf7 42.exd5 cxd5 43.a4 Kf8 44.Re1 Re7 45.Rdd1 Rxe1 46.Rxe1 Rd7 47.Re6 Kf7 48.Ke3 d4+ 49.Kd3 a5 50.b5 Rd5. 51.c6 bxc6 52.b6
Black cannot stop this pawn, except by allowing a lost king-and-pawn ending. The game finished:
52...Rd7 53.Rxc6 Ke7 54.Rc7 Rxc7 55.bxc7 Kd7 56.Kxd4 Kxc7 57.Kc5 Kd7 58.Kb5 Kd6 59.Kxa5 Ke5
59...Kc5 60.Ka6 Kc6 61.a5 is no improvement.
60.Kb6 1-0
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)