Eliminating/discouraging draws

[Andrew Stone]

but here is the live games link http://www.members.aon.at/schach1/live/bundesliga.htm

The top board game featured a GM named Petrov. A draw was agreed in 8 moves. Appropriate somehow for a thread about discouraging draws.

He also supports Arsenal which may be appropriate if you are as old as me and remember the "boring, boring Arsenal " chants! He doesn't play the Petroff. I know cause I asked him. I didn't know who he was when I was talking to him on the city tour trip organised by the event organisers. I asked him what his rating was and when he replied 2537, I said "oh, so you know the en passant rule then"
Sorry, I seemed to have hijacked this thread. Oh well, that's the innerweb and it's inhabitants for you

[Ian Kingston]

Greg Shahade also has some suggestions. But it's all nonsense - the only significant problem is the short draw between players who are being paid an appearance fee, and Sofia Rules deal with that quite nicely.

It deals with it in the sense that players can't agree a quick draw but it doesn't, as far as I'm aware, do anything to stop a quick draw by repetition. It would probably effect the player's future invitations though.

I think it helps to deter the early repetitions, but that's just a subjective impression.

I notice that the Kosintseva sisters have stopped even pretending to play a real game with each other. Their last two games (at Hangzhou and Rostov) have gone:

1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5 a6 4. Bxc6 dxc6 5. O-O Bg4 6. h3 h5 7. c3 Qd3 8.
hxg4 hxg4 9. Nxe5 Bd6 10. Nxd3 Bh2+ 11. Kh1 Bg3+ 12. Kg1 Bh2+ 13. Kh1 Bg3+
1/2-1/2

(with one more move at Hangzhou).

Fun the first time you see it; not so convincing thereafter.

[Paul Cooksey]

I'm on 32 but don't look! It could get nasty!

Well, doesn't look like a massacre . But facing a 2500 GM with a ropey structure no obvious counterplay is a bit ominous . (move 17)

Speaking for spectators; nice, simple website.

[Paul Cooksey]

I notice that the Kosintseva sisters have stopped even pretending to play a real game with each other.

Repetitions between siblings not really an issue for me. Playing a theoretical draw variation like this seems sensible. As Loz says, a tournament sponsor might not invite them both. Or might think the publicity of having them both was worth one dull game.

[Ian Kingston]

I notice that the Kosintseva sisters have stopped even pretending to play a real game with each other.

Repetitions between siblings not really an issue for me. Playing a theoretical draw variation like this seems sensible. As Loz says, a tournament sponsor might not invite them both. Or might think the publicity of having them both was worth one dull game.

Indeed. At least it's clear why the game was drawn.

[Stewart Reuben]

c)The Shipov proposal - a hybrid Kasimdzhanov proposal and modified football scoring system, where winner of the classical game gets 3 pts (and loser 0 pts) or, if drawn, the ensuing blitz play-off results in 2 pts for winner and 1 pt for loser.

That was exactly what was used in Rumania at an event where I was chief arbiter. Obviouly Sergei had the idea independently of me. It had the disadvantage that there were about 20% quick draws in the last round.

I think a 'game' like that between the Kosintseva sisters should be 1 draw agreed. I really dislike concocted draws. If you must, insist one move by each side, and then a draw. But why make them come to the tournamen hall? The article in the 1984 Olympiad bulletin headed my article on this matter, 'Saving shoe leather'. The Kosintseva draw brought the game of chess into disrepute and thus could have been given a double default.
The well known twin bothers who play professional tennis used simply to alternate who would win the match when they got paired together.
In Swisses I used to try to avoid such pairings. That type of fiddling with the pairings has gone out of fashion because FIDE have stricter regulations than before.
Stewart Reuben

[Geoff Chandler]

Entralling game Andrew.

Here (White to play - Andrew is Black v GM Hera.)



I was wondering what White was going to do. Black looks OK.
The cheapo 27.Qf3 came to mind (undefended Queen on d5) and he played it!
He has switched into hack mode. He can see he needs to mess things up.

Then here. (Black to play).



31...f5
The White hack has worked. You could almost hear the sigh of relief from White.

There must be some kind of rule of thumb about not opening up lines
when there is an unprotected bit on the board (The Rook on c8).
A guideline to assist one when OTB analyse starts to get blotchy.
The sudden change of circumstances (All is going tickety boo, suddenly
White sets a cheapo and things go haywire.)

After 31...f5 there are just too many tricks,traps now for Black to handle.
If the game can still be saved then so be it.

And if one of the Borg comes on and says; "Fritz says......."

I'm not at all interestd in what a computer thinks.
Stone is a good player, I am more interested to see what a good human
did play in this position OTB not what an electronic gadget 'thinks'.

(put yourself in Andrew's shoes and do it without a box).

Black obviously missed the coming 34.Re5



In the end, (the final position.)



That c8 Rook goes with check, the Queen goes next move.
The play appears to be all forced after 31...f5

Today's lesson.
If a GM offers you a draw (not the case here.)
Then he is most likley losing. (accept it)

When they go for a double-edged hack then they are not losing
but can see no other way to win it. Switch into eyes-wide mode
the fun is just about to start.
It can very hard to adjust OTB, it's important you know and
appreciate what has just happened.
Keep things off unprotected squares if you can and dig in.
He has fired his bolt, your job is too duck it, catch it and fire it back.

Good Game.

[Paul Cooksey]

I am riled by being compared to the Borg because I see beauty in truth, so I am going to disagree with Geoff on everything:

The cheapo 27.Qf3 came to mind (undefended Queen on d5) and he played it!
He has switched into hack mode. He can see he needs to mess things up.

Not convinced. I would not have played e4 in that position. But White has been playing consistently for activity, central control and k-side weaknesses. I don't imagine White expected to win with the cheapo, he is using a tactical nuance for a tempo to improve his piece placement.

31...f5 The White hack has worked. You could almost hear the sigh of relief from White.

True enough. I imagine White understood he was not better, and black ought to be able to defend. But in time trouble he might have misjudged that the Rook ending following hg4 is difficult, and thought it was risk free liquidation with a chance of Black going wrong.

Black obviously missed the coming 34.Re5

Andrew might tell us if he is not too traumatised. But I'll disagree with obvious; I guess it is possible to miss qg3 qg5 (swapping Q's and ending atttack) Re6 1-0 in time trouble too

If a GM offers you a draw (not the case here.)Then he is most likley losing. (accept it)

I've only ever been offered draws by GMs in clearly dead drawn positions. Strong players generally don't make trick offers.

Keep things off unprotected squares if you can and dig in.

Nope, just calculate normally. You don't know if it is a hack until you've calculated it as far as you can.

Hera (2538) - Stone (2231) 1.d4 e6 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.c4 Bb4+ 4.Bd2 c5 5.Bxb4 cxb4 6.g3 b6 7.Bg2 Bb7 8.0-0 0-0 9.a3 Qe7 10.Nbd2 bxa3 11.Rxa3 d5 12.cxd5 Bxd5 13.Re1 Ne4 14.Ne5 Nxd2 15.Bxd5 exd5 16.Qxd2 f6 17.Nd3 Nc6 18.Nf4 Qd6 19.h4 Rfc8 20.e4 dxe4 21.Rxe4 Ne5 22.Rc3 Ng6 23.Nxg6 hxg6 24.Rce3 Rc7 25.Qd3 Qd5 26.Re1 Rac8 27.Qf3 Kh7 28.Kg2 Rd7 29.h5 gxh5 30.Rh1 Kg6 31.g4 f5 32.gxf5+ Qxf5 33.Qg3+ Kh7 34.Re5 Qc2 35.Rexh5+ Kg8 36.Rh8+ Kf7 37.Qf4+ Ke6 38.Re1+ Kd5 39.Qe5+ 1-0

[Geoff Chandler]

Hi Paul.

I'm sure White did not expect the trick 27.Qf3 to work.
(though when I go for such things, on averge about about 4th move,
I always expect my opponent to fall for it.)

The funny thing is the trick v the undefended Queen did work!
Black to play.



How about 28...Rc1 playing v an IQP you swap pieces.
(says I trying to sound I know what I am talking about)

Andrew played 28...Rd7 protecting the Queen to stop anymore nasty
surprises with Rook checks anticpating the run of the h-pawn.
The trouble was 28...Rd7 left the c8 Rook undefended and that
was a telling factor in how the game ended.



Ha -Ha. That last is straight from the Fred Reinfeld School of writing.
Look to see who won, find a move like 28...Rd7 leaving a Rook hanging
and write around it as if the player (usually Capablanca) had seen it coming.
Sorry.

But the only idea I could see there was Qf3, Kg2 to get a
Rook to h1, run up the h-pawn and see what happens.
I'm a caveman, such ideas is all I can ever see.
I was surprised to see it happening.

Watching is not the same as playing (and rooting for a player - Andrew).

OTB as White it would have been head down and charge trusting
in one my one ability that if a trick appears I'll spot it and pot it.

Seeing it unfold as a spectator I did not quite believe in it.

White's attack needed a blunder. (31...f5) If it failed White has no afters.
GM's don't play like that unless they have to.
It's a tribute to Andrew's preceeding play that a GM chose to roll to the bones.

"I've only ever been offered draws by GMs in clearly dead drawn positions.
Strong players generally don't make trick offers."

Then the lesson for today is clearly not you, you can sit this one out.
(mentioning draws was my feeble attempt to get the thread back on topic,
I have the sword of Carl hanging over my head with every post.)

"But in time trouble he might have misjudged...."

As a reason perhaps but TT is never an excuse. (Andrew was ahead on time.)

Good to talk chess with you. Hope Andrew comes on.

Did you see the game Georgiadis (2328) - Ootes (2376)
just a few boards up from Andrew's?

White's play was so simple and instructive.
Black's was setting himself up for every trick in the book.

Any coach looking for a fresh game to show juniors how
simple chess can win games then they need look no further.

A well timed exchange creating a target. 11.Bxb6 and Black cannot swap Queens.

The bog standard double attack 16.Qe3

Looking just that wee bit deeper. 18.Rxf7 which
Black thought he had prevented with 18...d5

Finally a 2376 grade does always mean a 2376 level of chess.
Not one for the Ootes family scrap book.

1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5 Nd4 4. Bc4 Nxf3+ 5. Qxf3 Qf6 6. Qg3 Bc5 7. Nc3
c6 8. d3 d6 9. Be3 Bb6 10. O-O Qg6 11. Bxb6 axb6 12. Qe3 Nf6 13. f4 exf4
14. Qxf4 Bh3 15. Rf2 O-O-O 16. Qe3 Bd7 17. Qxb6 Ng4 18. Rxf7 d5 19. exd5
Qxf7 20. dxc6

[Andrew Stone]

Blimey! Never had so much discussion about one of my games. Even though it was against a GM it was one where I would still have won nothing if I'd won, apart from tremendous self-satisfaction of course. Anyway was glad to get a "safe" opening. As said am always terrified of getting thrashed quickly. Fortunately 2 boards above me white won in 21 moves with 2 minutes more on his clock than he started with. Beat that Jack Rudd! Actually I'm sure he has beaten that! Anyway surprisingly I was always ahead on the clock, sometimes by 20 minutes or so. I missed a tactic after 13 Re1. Was intending Qb7, but of course this doesn't hold up e4 as at the end he moves the N and Bg2 takes Ra8. Knew I had a get out move in Ne4. Could see that I would be worse but bit surprised it wasn't as bad as I feared. He then started to open the game up but I held reasonably solid and on move 25 I did offer a draw. Never expected him to accept but he did have 5 mins to my 20 so I thought it might be worth a try. His clock then started running down ...4, 3, 2 mins. Can he really use so much of his time on 1 move? Well yes he could as he then moved. Rd8 was played as I wanted to threaten the d pawn as the queens could have been exchanged and then Rxd4. I was concerned without this, the d pawn would have turned into a monster, supported by his king, although he felt it was not quite enough to win. Sharpening up still further now down to under a minute (plus 30 second increments) he went for h5. He said he missed Kg6 and that I was now close to/maybe winning. I now had 5 minutes left. Clearly I should have invested more of this time in 31...hxg4 where he is struggling a pawn down in a double rook ending. f5 was clearly a blunder though and I had missed Re6. Oh well..very pleased with my play all tournament although felt could have ended with a better than small positive rating performance.
Just seen the Georgiadis game Geoff. I actually lost to him earlier in the tournament. Super strong kid (about 16) who I felt was going places. That feeling was strengthened when in the post mortem his trainer turned up...........Yusupov!! Next round he then beat Gleizerov (2590) with black, but then tailed off a bit. Still watch this space!

[Andrew Stone]

Relating back to Mr Petroff, he ended up winning the tournament with a great win over the highest rated Khenkin in the last round. I told him about the Petroff/boring Arsenal comment and he found it pretty funny (glad someone did). At the end I escorted him 100m to the underground station and explained several times how to go one stop, change onto the orange line in the direction of Ottakring and get off after 3 stops. Chess players eh? Clearly all their brain power is used up in defeating a field of several hundred including a load of GMs

[Geoff Chandler]

Hi Andrew

Thanks for comonig back.
The experienced gained is worth more than the handful of GP's you would have won.
And the memories, well they are there forever.

I will some time later this week look at other Georgiadis games.
That's the gift of these promising and very good players.
They make it look so simple and their opponents are there just to get a free lesson.
I will be using that game to fill a space in a future article.
I call games like that three chord games.
The best songs ever written are simple three chord songs.
Easy to play, easy to note up, hard to do.

So he has Yusupov as a coach.
Behind every succesful man there is a woman.
Behind every succesful player there is a GM.
(there is a clever pun hiding in there but I cannot drag it out...perhaps just as well).

Chin up. You don't need a Yusupov.
You now have Chandler & Cooksey.

I know all about chess players and a poor sense of direction.
I'm not too hot myself. Once I ended up in Newcastle trying
to get to an allegro in Motherwell.

A friend of mine is totally hopeless.
At one time his day job, when not getting lost going to and from
chess matches, was working on the guidance system for military missiles.
Apparently his nickname at work was The Wanderer because he kept getting
lost in the building complex.

The Wanderer. That's a good three chord song.

[Paul Cooksey]

Chin up. You don't need a Yusupov. You now have Chandler & Cooksey.

I'd just like to disassociate myself from this statement.

[Geoff Chandler]

Hi Andrew.

First opening TN from team Chandler & Cooksey.

The Evans Gambit. You play Black,
After 1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bc4 Bc5 4. b4 Bxb4 5. c3



You do not move the Bishop but instead play 5...f5!



It's an old idea from the Blackburne era which I introduced the RHP players too.
Taking the Bishop is very dodgy. Recently a 1300 beat a 2100 player with it.

Examples here:

http://www.redhotpawn.com/blog/blogread ... gpostid=60

Good Luck. Let us know how you get on.

[Paul Cooksey]

First opening TN from team Chandler & Cooksey.

The Evans Gambit. You play Black,After 1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bc4 Bc5 4. b4 Bxb4 5. c3 You do not move the Bishop but instead play 5...f5!

I should just clarify; our analytical efforts are aimed at finding gambits so unsound that there is no possibility of a draw.