Ideas to Improve Chess overall in this country.

[Lee Bullock]

Some resentment in this post?

No, just a realistic assessment of the

I got this result against that player and then s/he got this result against another player therefore logic.



Incidentally,

I drew with someone close to expert level.

I'm a little bit higher graded than the person you beat. I'm not an expert. Nor am I close to deserving that label.

For a start you can say what you want about this as people have told me this was an amazing result and shock I created. I did not once say oh because of this I am as good as Angus French or this player that I drew with. I was simply saying it was a good result and a shock which it was, and you jump down my throat?

And for you to say a 170 is not close to expert level I find that amazing. there are IMs with ECF rating of 200 odd. So where does expert level start if IMs are 200 odd? I would call players of around 160/170 close to expert. Then from 171-190 expert level. Then you have many FMs etc who are just below 200 and some above 200. No sure where I see your logic.

to call my best achievement in Chess so far nothing decent or special is very odd considering I have not seen it once on the ECF database. I agree I was well under rated but the fact was I was a 79 and had 3 months experience playing OTB.

[Lee Bullock]

I just looked up Chess expert level and what it is considered to be. They say Expert level is about 2000 fide up to 2199! Alan Sands ECF conversion is 1978. So I was kind of 100% accurate

[Roger de Coverly]

The results of a talented but inexperienced player are likely to be all over the place. Grades are an estimate of strength based on results. As an opinion, they are less reliable, the lower the standard of the players. Again opinion, but the journey from 80 to 130 is easier than from 130 to 180 and certainly less than from 180 to 230.

At least one point is that supposed "laws of chess" about development etc. are just opinions. The forum isn't adverse to discussing games, possibly in the Chess Questions area. So was the draw luck or skill? Show us the game and we will express views.

[Michael Jones]

This sort of thing means nothing. I once drew with a guy who a few weeks later beat the British Champion. I had a large advantage throughout the game too. It still doesn't make me British Champion.

You've just shattered my dreams. I always thought that my draw against a player a few weeks after he beat Kasparov was clear proof that I would have beaten Kasparov and become world champion if only I'd been given the chance.

I once drew with someone who once drew with someone who once drew with someone who once drew with Vladimir Kramnik, at a time when Kramnik was world champion and I was graded about 70. Nice fact to drop into a conversation, but certainly not an indication of my chances of becoming WC!

With all due respect, I don't think playing a GM/IM is something which should be arranged just because a player holds it as his 'dream' to do so; it's something that has to be earned on merit. Beat a load of 120s and you can start playing 150s, beat them and you can start playing 180s etc. Look at it from the titled player's point of view - what has he to gain from playing someone rated 100+ points below him? Why would he want to when he could earn more rating points and probably more money from playing opponents close to his own level? If you really want to play a GM, I suggest looking out for news of one doing a simul near you - when there are no rating points at stake and they're getting paid for giving the simul regardless of results, they're not going to mind who they play. I played in one of Korchnoi's simuls at the London Chess Classic, which will be something to tell my grandchildren about. I never supposed for a moment that I might win, but at least I lost respectably, being one of the last games to finish (unlike the first time I played an IM in a tournament game, when I got blown off the board in 20 moves).

[Lee Bullock]

The results of a talented but inexperienced player are likely to be all over the place. Grades are an estimate of strength based on results. As an opinion, they are less reliable, the lower the standard of the players. Again opinion, but the journey from 80 to 130 is easier than from 130 to 180 and certainly less than from 180 to 230.

At least one point is that supposed "laws of chess" about development etc. are just opinions. The forum isn't adverse to discussing games, possibly in the Chess Questions area. So was the draw luck or skill? Show us the game and we will express views.

I think I defended really well in this game. We were both in time trouble in the end and we both missed the win. It was a crazy position due to the position of both kings and how open we both were. I managed to get a perpetual and did a deliberate Rook sac to get it. I agree I was better than a normal 79. And my rating did shoot up to 94 and again this season I am performing much higher at around 120. After July I will play in more higher sections and Opens and I am sure my rating will go up again as if I lose a game at this low level I lose a lot of points and gain very little when I win. So the higher grade of opponents should up my grade again.

Heres the game. don't be too harsh on me I was only playing for 3 months before this and have got alot better.

38 Rxe6 will haunt me for years to come as I did consider playing it ;(


[Event "CROYDON LEAGUE (CROYDON SHIELD)"]
[Site "West Wickham Crricket Club Crystal Palace"]
[Date "26/1/12"]
[Round "- D"]
[White "Lee Bullock (79E)"]
[Black "Alan Sands (166B)"]
[WhiteElo "79E"]
[BlackElo "166B"]
[Result "1/2-1/2"]

1. Nf3 d5 2. c4 d4 3. e3 c5 4. exd4 cxd4 5. d3 Nc6 6. g3
Bg4 7. Bg2 e6 8. O-O h5 9. h3 Bf5 10. Bg5 (10. Qb3)
10... f6 11. Bf4 g5 12. Bc1 Be7 13. a3 a5 14. b3 Qd7
15. Nh2 e5 16. g4 hxg4 17. Nxg4 Rh4 18. f3 Nh6 19. Re1 Be6
20. Nd2 Nf5 21. Ne4 Kf7 22. Bd2 Ng7 23. Nef2 Nh5 24. Ne4
Rg8 25. Nh6+ Kg7 26. Nxg8 Kxg8 27. Nf2 f5 28. Qc1 Qd8
29. b4 Nf4 30. Bf1 (30. b5 Nb8 31. Rxe5 Bf7 32. Bxa5)
30... Kf7 31. b5 Nb8 32. Rxe5 Bd6 33. Bxf4 Rxf4 34. Re1
Rxf3 35. Bg2 Rg3 36. Qd1 (36. Qb2) 36... Qh8 37. Kf1 f4
38. Qe2 (38. Rxe6 Kxe6 39. Ne4 Re3 40. Qg4+ Ke7 41. Qxg5+
Kd7 42. Qf5+ Ke7 43. Nxd6) 38... Re3 39. Qd2 (39. Qb2)
39... f3 40. Bxf3 Rxf3 41. Rxe6 Qxh3+ 42. Ke2 Rxf2+
43. Kxf2 Bg3+ 44. Ke2 Qxe6+ 45. Kd1 b6 46. Qxg5 Qe1+
47. Kc2 Qxa1 (47... Qc3+) 48. Qh5+ (48. Qf5+) 48... Kf6
49. Qh8+ Kg5 50. Qg7+ Kf4 51. Qf6+ Kg4 52. Qg6+ Kh3
53. Qh5+ Kg2 54. Qe2+ Bf2 55. Qg4+ Kf1 56. Qh3+ Ke2
57. Qg4+ 1/2-1/2

The Brackets in the notation are much better possible moves, but if you copy and paste this into an engine it will play the game normally.

[Roger de Coverly]

With pgn tags


[Event "CROYDON LEAGUE (CROYDON SHIELD)"] [Site "West Wickham Crricket Club Crystal Palace"] [Date "26/1/12"] [Round "- D"] [White "Lee Bullock (79E)"] [Black "Alan Sands (166B)"] [WhiteElo "79E"] [BlackElo "166B"] [Result "1/2-1/2"] 1. Nf3 d5 2. c4 d4 3. e3 c5 4. exd4 cxd4 5. d3 Nc6 6. g3 Bg4 7. Bg2 e6 8. O-O h5 9. h3 Bf5 10. Bg5 (10. Qb3) 10... f6 11. Bf4 g5 12. Bc1 Be7 13. a3 a5 14. b3 Qd7 15. Nh2 e5 16. g4 hxg4 17. Nxg4 Rh4 18. f3 Nh6 19. Re1 Be6 20. Nd2 Nf5 21. Ne4 Kf7 22. Bd2 Ng7 23. Nef2 Nh5 24. Ne4 Rg8 25. Nh6+ Kg7 26. Nxg8 Kxg8 27. Nf2 f5 28. Qc1 Qd8 29. b4 Nf4 30. Bf1 (30. b5 Nb8 31. Rxe5 Bf7 32. Bxa5) 30... Kf7 31. b5 Nb8 32. Rxe5 Bd6 33. Bxf4 Rxf4 34. Re1 Rxf3 35. Bg2 Rg3 36. Qd1 (36. Qb2) 36... Qh8 37. Kf1 f4 38. Qe2 (38. Rxe6 Kxe6 39. Ne4 Re3 40. Qg4+ Ke7 41. Qxg5+ Kd7 42. Qf5+ Ke7 43. Nxd6) 38... Re3 39. Qd2 (39. Qb2) 39... f3 40. Bxf3 Rxf3 41. Rxe6 Qxh3+ 42. Ke2 Rxf2+ 43. Kxf2 Bg3+ 44. Ke2 Qxe6+ 45. Kd1 b6 46. Qxg5 Qe1+ 47. Kc2 Qxa1 (47... Qc3+) 48. Qh5+ (48. Qf5+) 48... Kf6 49. Qh8+ Kg5 50. Qg7+ Kf4 51. Qf6+ Kg4 52. Qg6+ Kh3 53. Qh5+ Kg2 54. Qe2+ Bf2 55. Qg4+ Kf1 56. Qh3+ Ke2 57. Qg4+ 1/2-1/2

(edit) Having played through the game, your opponent fell into the trap of playing the supposed grade rather than the position, in other words some of his moves starting with 8 .. h5 were nonsense.
White has a reasonable reversed Benoni from the opening, so mad hacks down the h file lack justification. (/edit)

[Lee Bullock]

This sort of thing means nothing. I once drew with a guy who a few weeks later beat the British Champion. I had a large advantage throughout the game too. It still doesn't make me British Champion.

You've just shattered my dreams. I always thought that my draw against a player a few weeks after he beat Kasparov was clear proof that I would have beaten Kasparov and become world champion if only I'd been given the chance.

I once drew with someone who once drew with someone who once drew with someone who once drew with Vladimir Kramnik, at a time when Kramnik was world champion and I was graded about 70. Nice fact to drop into a conversation, but certainly not an indication of my chances of becoming WC!

With all due respect, I don't think playing a GM/IM is something which should be arranged just because a player holds it as his 'dream' to do so; it's something that has to be earned on merit. Beat a load of 120s and you can start playing 150s, beat them and you can start playing 180s etc. Look at it from the titled player's point of view - what has he to gain from playing someone rated 100+ points below him? Why would he want to when he could earn more rating points and probably more money from playing opponents close to his own level? If you really want to play a GM, I suggest looking out for news of one doing a simul near you - when there are no rating points at stake and they're getting paid for giving the simul regardless of results, they're not going to mind who they play. I played in one of Korchnoi's simuls at the London Chess Classic, which will be something to tell my grandchildren about. I never supposed for a moment that I might win, but at least I lost respectably, being one of the last games to finish (unlike the first time I played an IM in a tournament game, when I got blown off the board in 20 moves).

Sigh,,,,,, Someone else who has not read the posts or my original post properly

To be quick what they would gain is the knowledge they was helping Chess in this country, If in theory it was a big success I am assuming! If it was bringing in lots of new players or creating interest eg I can imagine big fliers with qualify to play a super GM being given out at tournaments all over the country. Surely it would bring in money and if it did then the money could go to the GMs for participating in this idea. Most of the top GMs main problem is funds and finances! and not getting paid enough. This could be the answer or at least help towards it.

[Lee Bullock]

With pgn tags


[Event "CROYDON LEAGUE (CROYDON SHIELD)"] [Site "West Wickham Crricket Club Crystal Palace"] [Date "26/1/12"] [Round "- D"] [White "Lee Bullock (79E)"] [Black "Alan Sands (166B)"] [WhiteElo "79E"] [BlackElo "166B"] [Result "1/2-1/2"] 1. Nf3 d5 2. c4 d4 3. e3 c5 4. exd4 cxd4 5. d3 Nc6 6. g3 Bg4 7. Bg2 e6 8. O-O h5 9. h3 Bf5 10. Bg5 (10. Qb3) 10... f6 11. Bf4 g5 12. Bc1 Be7 13. a3 a5 14. b3 Qd7 15. Nh2 e5 16. g4 hxg4 17. Nxg4 Rh4 18. f3 Nh6 19. Re1 Be6 20. Nd2 Nf5 21. Ne4 Kf7 22. Bd2 Ng7 23. Nef2 Nh5 24. Ne4 Rg8 25. Nh6+ Kg7 26. Nxg8 Kxg8 27. Nf2 f5 28. Qc1 Qd8 29. b4 Nf4 30. Bf1 (30. b5 Nb8 31. Rxe5 Bf7 32. Bxa5) 30... Kf7 31. b5 Nb8 32. Rxe5 Bd6 33. Bxf4 Rxf4 34. Re1 Rxf3 35. Bg2 Rg3 36. Qd1 (36. Qb2) 36... Qh8 37. Kf1 f4 38. Qe2 (38. Rxe6 Kxe6 39. Ne4 Re3 40. Qg4+ Ke7 41. Qxg5+ Kd7 42. Qf5+ Ke7 43. Nxd6) 38... Re3 39. Qd2 (39. Qb2) 39... f3 40. Bxf3 Rxf3 41. Rxe6 Qxh3+ 42. Ke2 Rxf2+ 43. Kxf2 Bg3+ 44. Ke2 Qxe6+ 45. Kd1 b6 46. Qxg5 Qe1+ 47. Kc2 Qxa1 (47... Qc3+) 48. Qh5+ (48. Qf5+) 48... Kf6 49. Qh8+ Kg5 50. Qg7+ Kf4 51. Qf6+ Kg4 52. Qg6+ Kh3 53. Qh5+ Kg2 54. Qe2+ Bf2 55. Qg4+ Kf1 56. Qh3+ Ke2 57. Qg4+ 1/2-1/2

Ah thanks Roger. How do you do that?

[Roger de Coverly]

You highlight the game and click the pgn box below the boxes that go B i u Quote etc.

Or you just type [pgn and [/pgn around the game, but you need a ] to be added to each. If I had typed and it would have confused the software into thinking there was a game.

[Lee Bullock]

Ah cool just did a preview text and I did it. I know how to do that in future then if I need to show a game.

What do you think then Roger? I was actually playing around 4/5 Months for this game as just realized it was in January. Thought it was back in November. Still extra 2 months not massive difference.

Also in this game I got into this variation for the very first time. I was on my own from move 3. Had never faced 2.d4 to my 1st 2 moves and only knew I had to play e3 and didn't know much more after that.

[Roger de Coverly]

What do you think then Roger?

I dare say the tactics could be improved, but Black made an unjustified attempt to play the grade rather than the position. I didn't notice any obvious positional howlers, but that type of position is mostly about kicking the opponent before they kick you.

It's been suggested to me that at the 120 level, it's easier to understand what 160 opposition are trying to do than 100 or below, because their play is more consistent. But if it comes to a tactical slugfest and calculations are OK, relative experience doesn't matter. I would assume that winning U 120 tournaments relies more on a tactical eye than abstract positional judgement.

[Lee Bullock]

What do you think then Roger?

I dare say the tactics could be improved, but Black made an unjustified attempt to play the grade rather than the position. I didn't notice any obvious positional howlers, but that type of position is mostly about kicking the opponent before they kick you.

It's been suggested to me that at the 120 level, it's easier to understand what 160 opposition are trying to do than 100 or below, because their play is more consistent. But if it comes to a tactical slugfest and calculations are OK, relative experience doesn't matter. I would assume that winning U 120 tournaments relies more on a tactical eye than abstract positional judgement.

lol, not many games are perfect Roger. or do you mean hes tactics? If you mean me I was a 79 and no experience at all really. I was totally in awe of hes rating and just wanted to last more than 20 moves. I admit he probably thought just by pushing pawns he could crush me and he nearly did. I have lost many games as black with white pushing pawns but this was the first time I had faced this as white. I only played in this game as about 10 players were asked before me but could not attend. I was then put on this board as we tryed to win the other game going on that night so our weakest players were in theory up against there strongest. I was given no hope and I was the only person on our team to get a draw and it was the biggest rating gap by about 40 points

Still this was a slow play game and that does make it a lot more special. He knew up to a certain point I was playing well so he had tie to shift tactics and play properly and I think he did. I just had one of those days.

This was my best result ever bar maybe beating Hardwick a 156.

[Jonathan Bryant]

For a start you can say what you want about this as people have told me this was an amazing result and shock I created ... and you jump down my throat?

I didn't say anything about your result. Clearly, somebody drawing with somebody else who is graded 80 points above them is exceptional. Probably not quite as exceptional as you suggest, but still very very rare.

What I was doing was querying the fluff that you added around it.

Here's another example: last year I beat somebody who ended up playing Michael Adams at the Sheffield British Championships. What does it mean? It was a good result for me, certainly not with the grading gap of your game, but a good result nonetheless. Still, it doesn't mean anything over and above the fact that I won that particular game.


I would also suggest that you have your 'jumping down throat' detector set a little low.

[Sean Hewitt]

For a start you can say what you want about this as people have told me this was an amazing result and shock I created ... and you jump down my throat?

I didn't say anything about your result. Clearly, somebody drawing with somebody else who is graded 80 points above them is exceptional. Probably not quite as exceptional as you suggest, but still very very rare.

Indeed. I've even done it! http://www.ecfgrading.org.uk/?listid=25 ... ef=112575J

[Matthew Turner]

Is Black winning at the end?
Something like

.....Kf1
Qh3 Kg1
Qg4 Kh2
Qh5 Kg2
Qg4 Bg3
Qe2 Kg1
Qe3 Bf2
Qg5 Kf1

I think White was a bit lucky to get away with a draw, but that it why it is a game. Great result Lee.