Organiser Ian Hunnable has kindly offered to refund my entry fee.
It is disappointing to miss such a popular Easter event, but not playing should help me feel better for Menorca, which starts on Wednesday,
Showing posts with label Southend. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Southend. Show all posts
Friday, 15 April 2022
Thursday, 14 April 2022
Busy 10 Days
AM making final preparations for two more-hectic-than-normal tournaments.
From tomorrow to Monday I have seven rounds at Southend, which I will be commuting to daily by train.
On Tuesday I fly with Joe Skielnik and Ray Kearsley to Menorca for seven more rounds, running from Wednesday to the following Sunday.
That is 14 rounds in all in what is effectively an elongated week.
Tuesday, 8 February 2022
(Chess) Life Getting Back To Normal
DETAILS of this year's Southend Easter congress have been published at SE.
Tuesday, 23 April 2019
Seven Highlights From Seven Rounds At Southend
MY seven games from the Southend Open over Easter were not without interest, even if some of the 'highlights' are staggering blunders.
Round One
The position is easily recognisable as being from an Exchange Spanish.
White has the better pawn-structure, while Black has the bishop-pair. That is why in the diagram I have just played 13.Be3-f4.
My main analysis engines, Stockfish10 and Komodo9, want Black to play 13...Bxf4!?, when Komodo9 reckons the game is equal but Stockfish10 prefers Black.
Black's alternative is to allow White to capture on d6 after, say, 13...f6 or 13...Ng6, when Black's pawns are undoubled but he gets a backward pawn on the d file.
JG must have been thinking along the latter lines, but his choice of 13...Rfe8?? was met by 14.e5 (1-0, 53 moves)
Round Two
I have already blogged about the ending in Tim Hebbes (2075/186) - Spanton (1914/171): https://beauchess.blogspot.com/2019/04/good-friday.html
Round Three
Black came up with a very interesting positional pawn sacrifice in Spanton (1914/171) - Henrik Stepanyan (2202/212).
*****
*****
*****
*****
*****
13...c4!? 14.dxc4 bxa4 15.Rxa4?
I wanted to keep some pressure on Black's passed-but-isolated pawn, but there is no way I am going to be able to bring enough pieces to bear to inconvenience Black. Correct was 15.Bxa4, when the light-square bishop has some activity, with the engines even reckoning White is better.
15...Nb7
This move would have made no sense after 15.Bxa4 as White could solve the problem of his light-square bishop with 16.Bc6.
16.Nd2 Nc5 17.Ra1 Bb7 18.f3 Nh4
Stockfish10 and Komodo9 reckon the position is equal, but I believe most people would much prefer to be Black. In any event the game saw:
19.g4?? Nf4 20.Qh2 Qh4 (0-1, 29 moves)
Round Four
Eddy Barker (no Fide/180) - Spanton (1914/171) was a London System that began 1.d4 d5 2.Bf4 e6 3.Nf3 Bd6 4.Bg3 Nc6!? 5.e3 Nf6 6.Nbd2 Qe7!?
The idea of Black's set-up with 4...Nc6!? and 6...Qe7!? is to take over the centre with a quick ...e5. White should almost certainly challenge this with 7.c4, 7.Bb5 or 7.Ne5. Instead EB played:
7.c3?!
This is Stockfish10's second choice, but the move is surely too passive and, once it has been executed on the board, Stcokfish10 flashes red (meaning mistake), eventually changing to yellow (dubious).
7...e5 8.dxe5 Nxe5 9.Nxe5 Bxe5 10.Nf3!?
I expected 10.Bxe5 Bxe5 11.Nf3, when Black may be slightly better thanks to having more space in the centre.
10...Bxg3 11.hxg3
*****
*****
*****
*****
*****
White has a half-open h file, which more than compensates for the doubled g pawns. He also has the slightly better bishop (based on Black having a central pawn fixed on a light square). Black has more space in the centre.
I felt these factors added up to a slight edge for Black. Stockfish10 has Black about three-fifths of a pawn up after 11...0-0!? or 11...h5!?, whereas Komodo9 reckons the position is dead equal (½–½, 35 moves)
Round Five
*****
*****
*****
*****
*****
Objectively Black should have probably got on with development by 16...Be6, when the engines prefer White thanks to White's pressure in the centre. But I would annotate the move MC played as 16...d4!? because it sets a trap that I promptly fell into:
17.cxd4
The engines much prefer White after 17.Ne4! dxe3 18.Bc4+ Kh8 19.Rxd6 exf2+ 20.Nxf2, presumably mainly due to Black's lagging development.
17...cxd4 18.Bc4+ Kh8 19.Bxd4?
White is still better after 19.Bd2 (Stockfish10) or 19.Ne4 (Komodo9).
19...Nxd4 20.Rxd4 Bc5
Black gains the exchange and has good winning chances (but ½–½, 31 moves)
Round Six
White is a (doubled) pawn up but has weaknesses and it is not clear where his king will find safety.
The engines reckon the game is dynamically balanced if Black either castles long or adds to the pressure on the kingside by playing 16...h5.
Instead I hatched a plan for capturing White's e5 pawn by playing …Ra5, but first I wanted to prevent White from interposing his c pawn by replying c5.
16...b6??
Weakening the long light-square diagonal is fatal.
17.Qf3
Not the only move, but good enough for an advantage.
17...Ra5 18.Nd6+??
The correct way to sac the knight was 18.Nf6+, when the more-or-less forced line 18...gxf6 19.exf6 Bxf6 20.Bd2! (attacking Black pieces at a5 and f6 simultaneously) Bg5 21.Qxc6 Bxd2+ 22.Kxd2 leaves White still a pawn up but with a much freer position.
18...cxd6 19.Qxc6 Qxc6??
I rejected 19...dxe5 because of 20.Qxb6??, but that loses to 20...Bd8. So White would have to retreat his dark-square bishop, after which Black is better.
20.Bxc6+ Bd7 21.Bxd7+?
Better is 21.Bd5 as then 21...dxe5? would be bad because of 22.Bxe5 and Black can only avoid going a second pawn down by allowing 22...Bf6 23.Bxf6 gxf6, when Black has multiple weaknesses (as well as still being a pawn down).
21...Kxd7 22.exd6 Bxd6 23.Bxd6 Kxd6
The smoke has cleared and White remains a pawn to the good (1-0, 61 moves)
Round Seven
I was two pawns up from out of the opening in Spanton (1914/171) - Viktor Jamroz (1746/162).
*****
*****
*****
*****
*****
16.Kb1??
A 'safety-first' move that is anything but.
16...Nc3+ 17.Bxc3 dxc3 18.b3 Nb4 19.a3
The only saving move, but good enough.
19...Nd5 20.Rxd5??
As VJ pointed out afterwards, this exchange sac was completely unnecessary. I should have gone with my other main thought of 20.Rd4.
20...exd5 21.Qd4
Certainly not 21.Qxd5?? as Black replies 21...Be6, with ...Rd1+ to come.
21...Qh6?!
Probably not best, although it works out swimmingly in the game. The engines like 21...Qa5, with an unclear position.
22.Qxc3 Rc8 23.Qd2??
I should have avoided an exchange of queens with 23.Qd3 or 23.Qb4, when the engines prefer White.
23...Qxd2 24.Nxd2 Bf5
I had seen this, but missed the strength of it.
25.Bd3?!
The engines suggest 25.Nf3, but still regard Black as comfortably winning.
25...Bxd3 26.cxd3 Rxg2
White has two pawns for the exchange, but too many of the White pawns are weak (0-1, 48 moves)
Round One
 |
| Spanton (1914 Fide/171 ECF) - James Golding (2137/196) |
White has the better pawn-structure, while Black has the bishop-pair. That is why in the diagram I have just played 13.Be3-f4.
My main analysis engines, Stockfish10 and Komodo9, want Black to play 13...Bxf4!?, when Komodo9 reckons the game is equal but Stockfish10 prefers Black.
Black's alternative is to allow White to capture on d6 after, say, 13...f6 or 13...Ng6, when Black's pawns are undoubled but he gets a backward pawn on the d file.
JG must have been thinking along the latter lines, but his choice of 13...Rfe8?? was met by 14.e5 (1-0, 53 moves)
Round Two
I have already blogged about the ending in Tim Hebbes (2075/186) - Spanton (1914/171): https://beauchess.blogspot.com/2019/04/good-friday.html
Round Three
Black came up with a very interesting positional pawn sacrifice in Spanton (1914/171) - Henrik Stepanyan (2202/212).
 |
| White has just played 13.a2-a4 |
*****
*****
*****
*****
13...c4!? 14.dxc4 bxa4 15.Rxa4?
I wanted to keep some pressure on Black's passed-but-isolated pawn, but there is no way I am going to be able to bring enough pieces to bear to inconvenience Black. Correct was 15.Bxa4, when the light-square bishop has some activity, with the engines even reckoning White is better.
15...Nb7
This move would have made no sense after 15.Bxa4 as White could solve the problem of his light-square bishop with 16.Bc6.
16.Nd2 Nc5 17.Ra1 Bb7 18.f3 Nh4
Stockfish10 and Komodo9 reckon the position is equal, but I believe most people would much prefer to be Black. In any event the game saw:
19.g4?? Nf4 20.Qh2 Qh4 (0-1, 29 moves)
Round Four
Eddy Barker (no Fide/180) - Spanton (1914/171) was a London System that began 1.d4 d5 2.Bf4 e6 3.Nf3 Bd6 4.Bg3 Nc6!? 5.e3 Nf6 6.Nbd2 Qe7!?
The idea of Black's set-up with 4...Nc6!? and 6...Qe7!? is to take over the centre with a quick ...e5. White should almost certainly challenge this with 7.c4, 7.Bb5 or 7.Ne5. Instead EB played:
7.c3?!
This is Stockfish10's second choice, but the move is surely too passive and, once it has been executed on the board, Stcokfish10 flashes red (meaning mistake), eventually changing to yellow (dubious).
7...e5 8.dxe5 Nxe5 9.Nxe5 Bxe5 10.Nf3!?
I expected 10.Bxe5 Bxe5 11.Nf3, when Black may be slightly better thanks to having more space in the centre.
10...Bxg3 11.hxg3
 |
| Who stands better, and why? |
*****
*****
*****
*****
White has a half-open h file, which more than compensates for the doubled g pawns. He also has the slightly better bishop (based on Black having a central pawn fixed on a light square). Black has more space in the centre.
I felt these factors added up to a slight edge for Black. Stockfish10 has Black about three-fifths of a pawn up after 11...0-0!? or 11...h5!?, whereas Komodo9 reckons the position is dead equal (½–½, 35 moves)
Round Five
 |
| How would you punctuate Black's last move of 16...d5-d4 in Spanton (1914/171) - Michael Catabay (no Fide/177), and why? |
*****
*****
*****
*****
Objectively Black should have probably got on with development by 16...Be6, when the engines prefer White thanks to White's pressure in the centre. But I would annotate the move MC played as 16...d4!? because it sets a trap that I promptly fell into:
17.cxd4
The engines much prefer White after 17.Ne4! dxe3 18.Bc4+ Kh8 19.Rxd6 exf2+ 20.Nxf2, presumably mainly due to Black's lagging development.
17...cxd4 18.Bc4+ Kh8 19.Bxd4?
White is still better after 19.Bd2 (Stockfish10) or 19.Ne4 (Komodo9).
19...Nxd4 20.Rxd4 Bc5
Black gains the exchange and has good winning chances (but ½–½, 31 moves)
Round Six
 |
| White has just played 16.Qd3 in Andrew Talbot (2096/no ECF) - Spanton (1914/171) |
The engines reckon the game is dynamically balanced if Black either castles long or adds to the pressure on the kingside by playing 16...h5.
Instead I hatched a plan for capturing White's e5 pawn by playing …Ra5, but first I wanted to prevent White from interposing his c pawn by replying c5.
16...b6??
Weakening the long light-square diagonal is fatal.
17.Qf3
Not the only move, but good enough for an advantage.
17...Ra5 18.Nd6+??
The correct way to sac the knight was 18.Nf6+, when the more-or-less forced line 18...gxf6 19.exf6 Bxf6 20.Bd2! (attacking Black pieces at a5 and f6 simultaneously) Bg5 21.Qxc6 Bxd2+ 22.Kxd2 leaves White still a pawn up but with a much freer position.
18...cxd6 19.Qxc6 Qxc6??
I rejected 19...dxe5 because of 20.Qxb6??, but that loses to 20...Bd8. So White would have to retreat his dark-square bishop, after which Black is better.
20.Bxc6+ Bd7 21.Bxd7+?
Better is 21.Bd5 as then 21...dxe5? would be bad because of 22.Bxe5 and Black can only avoid going a second pawn down by allowing 22...Bf6 23.Bxf6 gxf6, when Black has multiple weaknesses (as well as still being a pawn down).
21...Kxd7 22.exd6 Bxd6 23.Bxd6 Kxd6
The smoke has cleared and White remains a pawn to the good (1-0, 61 moves)
Round Seven
I was two pawns up from out of the opening in Spanton (1914/171) - Viktor Jamroz (1746/162).
 |
| White to make his 16th move |
*****
*****
*****
*****
16.Kb1??
A 'safety-first' move that is anything but.
16...Nc3+ 17.Bxc3 dxc3 18.b3 Nb4 19.a3
The only saving move, but good enough.
19...Nd5 20.Rxd5??
As VJ pointed out afterwards, this exchange sac was completely unnecessary. I should have gone with my other main thought of 20.Rd4.
20...exd5 21.Qd4
Certainly not 21.Qxd5?? as Black replies 21...Be6, with ...Rd1+ to come.
21...Qh6?!
Probably not best, although it works out swimmingly in the game. The engines like 21...Qa5, with an unclear position.
22.Qxc3 Rc8 23.Qd2??
I should have avoided an exchange of queens with 23.Qd3 or 23.Qb4, when the engines prefer White.
23...Qxd2 24.Nxd2 Bf5
I had seen this, but missed the strength of it.
25.Bd3?!
The engines suggest 25.Nf3, but still regard Black as comfortably winning.
25...Bxd3 26.cxd3 Rxg2
White has two pawns for the exchange, but too many of the White pawns are weak (0-1, 48 moves)
Monday, 22 April 2019
Southend - The End
LOST in the last round today to a 1746 junior, meaning I finished on +1=3-3 for a Fide rating loss of 3 elo and an ECF grading performance of 171.1.
Sunday, 21 April 2019
Southend Open - Day Three
THIS morning, for the second-round running, I drew against an opponent with no Fide rating but with an ECF higher than mine (in today's case higher by six points). This afternoon I lost in 61 moves to a 2096.
Saturday, 20 April 2019
Southend Open - Day Two
LOST this morning as White against a 2202 in a game in which I was first outplayed positionally and then fell apart tactically.
This afternoon I drew as Black against a player without a Fide rating but who has an ECF of 180 - nine points higher than mine.
This afternoon I drew as Black against a player without a Fide rating but who has an ECF of 180 - nine points higher than mine.
Friday, 19 April 2019
Good Friday
I AM seeded 25th out of a final total of 44 entries in the Southend Open, which is being run as seven rounds over four days.
This morning I beat a 2137 after he allowed me me to trap his bishop on move 14. He played on but was unable to conjure a swindle.
This afternoon I reached the following position after 34 moves against another opponent rated quite a bit higher than I am.
34...Nxe5 35.Re3 Rf5 36.Kg2?
The analysis engines Komodo9 and Stockfish10 strongly prefer 36.Nd2 or 36.h3, but note that going after the a4 pawn with 36.Nc3?? is a dreadful blunder because of 36...d4.
36...Kg6 37.Nd2 Ng4 38.Re2 Re5 39.Kf3
Or 39.Rxe5 Nxe5, when the black king and knight are better than their white counterparts, and Black has a protected passed pawn.
39...Rxe2 40.Kxe2 Kf5?
Over-sophistication. Black has big winning chances after the obvious 40...Nxh2. The engines give the main line as 41.b3 Ng4! 42.bxa4 Nf6, when it is hard to believe White can survive with all his pawns isolated and half of them doubled.
After the text, the game is equal.
41.h3 Nf6 42.Ke3 h5 43.Kd4 Ke6 44.b3 axb3 45.Nxb3 Ne4 46.Na5 Nxg3 47.Nxb7 Ne2+
This seems to draw, but maybe 47...Nf5+ was simpler.
48.Ke3 Nc3 49.Na5 Kd7 50.Nb3 Ke6?!
Again this may not be the most accurate. The engines prefer 50...Na4, eg 51.Kf4 Ke6 52.Kg5 Ke5 53.Kxh5, when Black is a pawn down but apparently draws with 53...d4.
51.Na5
The engines reckon White is slightly better after 51.Kd3 or, according to Komodo9, 51.Nd4+.
51...Kd7 ½–½
So, my Friday results were good, but I cannot say the same for my endgame technique.
This morning I beat a 2137 after he allowed me me to trap his bishop on move 14. He played on but was unable to conjure a swindle.
This afternoon I reached the following position after 34 moves against another opponent rated quite a bit higher than I am.
 |
| White has just captured my queen on e5 and offered a draw in Tim Hebbes (2075) - Spanton (1914) |
The analysis engines Komodo9 and Stockfish10 strongly prefer 36.Nd2 or 36.h3, but note that going after the a4 pawn with 36.Nc3?? is a dreadful blunder because of 36...d4.
36...Kg6 37.Nd2 Ng4 38.Re2 Re5 39.Kf3
Or 39.Rxe5 Nxe5, when the black king and knight are better than their white counterparts, and Black has a protected passed pawn.
39...Rxe2 40.Kxe2 Kf5?
Over-sophistication. Black has big winning chances after the obvious 40...Nxh2. The engines give the main line as 41.b3 Ng4! 42.bxa4 Nf6, when it is hard to believe White can survive with all his pawns isolated and half of them doubled.
After the text, the game is equal.
41.h3 Nf6 42.Ke3 h5 43.Kd4 Ke6 44.b3 axb3 45.Nxb3 Ne4 46.Na5 Nxg3 47.Nxb7 Ne2+
This seems to draw, but maybe 47...Nf5+ was simpler.
48.Ke3 Nc3 49.Na5 Kd7 50.Nb3 Ke6?!
Again this may not be the most accurate. The engines prefer 50...Na4, eg 51.Kf4 Ke6 52.Kg5 Ke5 53.Kxh5, when Black is a pawn down but apparently draws with 53...d4.
51.Na5
The engines reckon White is slightly better after 51.Kd3 or, according to Komodo9, 51.Nd4+.
51...Kd7 ½–½
So, my Friday results were good, but I cannot say the same for my endgame technique.
Thursday, 18 April 2019
Magnificent Seven?
EASTER is traditionally a popular time for congresses around the country.
The ECF website lists four in south England alone: Coulsdon, Exmouth, Southend and Stevenage.
I have entered Southend, which has seven sections: masters (12 entries), open (40), U1900&U160 (28), U145 (8), U120 (21), U95 (10) and rapid (23).
That is 142 entries in all - a mean average of 20.3 per section. I am in the open, which starts tomorrow.
The ECF website lists four in south England alone: Coulsdon, Exmouth, Southend and Stevenage.
I have entered Southend, which has seven sections: masters (12 entries), open (40), U1900&U160 (28), U145 (8), U120 (21), U95 (10) and rapid (23).
That is 142 entries in all - a mean average of 20.3 per section. I am in the open, which starts tomorrow.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)