The fine form continues!

[Nicky Chorley]

I played the 100th Richmond Rapidplay today and finished on 3/6 . I haven't perfected my game yet, but I feel like I'm playing better. Here are my wins from the day. I've spotted mistakes, so I'll need to make sure I don't do that again. Enjoy (well, I'm sure they're not the most exciting games, but I enjoyed them )!

Round 2:

This was a bye match against one of the parents of a kid who was in the tournament. Susan said it would go for grading, so I'm pleased with that.

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 f6 4.O-O Nd4 5.c3 Nxf3+ 6.Qxf3 b6 7.d4 d5 8.Bxd5 Rb8 9.dxe5 Bb7 10.Bf4 Bxd5 11.exd5 Qxd5 12.Qxd5 Rd8 13.Qe6+ Ne7 14.exf6 c5 15.f7#

Round 4:

One of the guys from my club pointed out 27. Rxh7 Kg5 28. Qg4#. Oops. I know my opponent missed forking queen and rook earlier on too. He also thought the final position was stalemate :/.

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.Nc3 Bb4 4.Nxe5 O-O 5.Bc4 d6 6.Nf3 Re8 7.d3 Bxc3+ 8.bxc3 Nc6 9.O-O Bg4 10.Be3 Na5 11.Bb3 Nxb3 12.axb3 d5 13.h3 Bxf3 14.Qxf3 dxe4 15.dxe4 Nxe4 16.Bd4 c5 17.Rfe1 cxd4 18.Rxe4 Qd5 19.Rxe8+ Rxe8 20.Qxd5 dxc3 21.Rxa7 Re1+ 22.Kh2 g6 23.Ra8+ Kg7 24.Qd4+ f6 25.Qd7+ Kh6 26.Rh8 Re2 27.Qxh7+ Kg5 28.Qh4+ Kf5 29.Qg4+ Ke5 30.Qxe2+ Kf5 31.g4+ Kg5 32.Qe3#

Round 5:

Ah, this one was against someone from my club. 7. ... e5 was all I could see at the time, but I think he could have just taken the pawn. Stockfish suggests Bb4+. Ah well, I won because he made mistakes .

1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.cxd5 cxd5 4.Nc3 Nc6 5.Bf4 Bf5 6.Qa4 e6 7.Nb5 e5 8.Bd2 Bd6 9.Nxd6+ Qxd6 10.Bb4 Qxb4+ 11.Qxb4 Nxb4 12.Rc1 Nc2+ 13.Kd2 exd4 14.Rxc2 Bxc2 15.Kxc2 Rc8+ 16.Kd2 Nf6 17.e3 Ne4+ 18.Ke2 Rc2+ 19.Kd3 Rd2#

Round 6:

A loss, but I was pleased with how I played. I gave a piece up early on because I miscalculated. 12. Qxb3 looks wrong; 12. axb3 was better since it didn't allow Nd3+. Still, I played on and managed to do quite well I think. I lost on time, but should have been able to draw. It looks like a few more moves would have gotten the draw, but my flag fell .

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nf6 4.Nc3 d6 5.d3 Be6 6.Bb3 d5 7.exd5 Nxd5 8.Nxd5 Bxd5 9.c3 Bc5 10.Nxe5 Nxe5 11.d4 Bxb3 12.Qxb3 Nd3+ 13.Ke2 Nxc1+ 14.Raxc1 Qe7+ 15.Kd2 O-O-O 16.Rhe1 Qg5+ 17.Kc2 Bd6 18.Qxf7 Qg6+ 19.Qxg6 hxg6 20.h3 Rde8 21.Rxe8+ Rxe8 22.Kd3 Kd7 23.Rc2 Kc6 24.c4 b6 25.d5+ Kc5 26.a3 b5 27.b4+ Kb6 28.c5+ Bxc5 29.Rxc5 Rd8 30.Rc6+ Kb7 31.Kd4 Rd6 32.Rxd6 cxd6 33.g4 Kc7 34.f4 Kd7 35.f5 gxf5 36.gxf5 Ke7 37.Ke4 Kf6 38.h4 g5 39.hxg5+ Kxg5 40.f6 Kxf6 41.Kd4 Ke7 42.Ke4 Kd7 43.Kd4 Kc7 44.Ke4 Kb6 45.Kd4 a5 46.bxa5+ Kxa5 47.Kc3 Ka4 48.Kb2 b4 49.axb4 Kxb4 50.Kc2 Kc4 51.Kd2 Kxd5 52.Kd3 Kc5 53.Ke4 d5+ 54.Kd3 d4 55.Kd2 Kc4 56.Kc2 Kd5 57.Kd2 Ke4 58.Ke2 d3+ 59.Kd2 Kd4

I must work on endgames, continue with tactics and play lots and lots of games .

[Christopher Kreuzer]

Congratulations on getting those three wins, Nicky. Last night I played through the four games you posted, and I thought a couple of comments might help (I'm posting the comments this morning, after saving the draft last night).

The Round 2 bye game you had, to be brutally honest, is of no real use in improving as a chess player. Your opponent just threw away his or her queen.

The round 4 game has a couple of interesting points: after you took the pawn your opponent offered (or failed to protect), you carried on developing normally, which is good. After 11...Nxb3, you recaptured with the a-pawn. Was there a reason for this and did you consider recapturing with the c-pawn? After 16.Bd4, you say that your opponent missed 16...Nd2, forking queen and rook, but in fact this doesn't work - can you see what White should play after 16...Nd2? The only other thing to say about that game is that 18...Qd5 is an atrocious blunder. You were alert enough to spot it, but after you had won his queen, the win was trivial.

Round 5, your opponent did indeed make mistakes. As well as gifting you a whole piece, he or she failed to develop their kingside and got mated rather comically. Nice finish, and under 20 moves as well, which makes it an example of a miniature.

In round 6, there may be other reasons your imaginative knight sacrifice doesn't work. After 11.d4, can you see another move Black can play that would destroy White's position? Much stronger than 11...Bxb3. Later on in the game, did you see the threat you created with 26.a3? That would have been a nice finish! Also, the two pawns, plus the doubled Black pawns, are probably almost full compensation for the piece, and once you won the piece back you were winning, not just drawing! What you should have done, in the K+P endgame, instead of pushing the kingside pawns, was to use your King to attack and take the doubled g-pawn, with a much simpler win.

There were lots of mistakes in that K+P endgame. It is worth studying it in some detail to see what was missed by both players there (you were mostly winning). As you say, the final position should be drawn. Did you consider making a 10.2 claim to the arbiter before your flag fell, remembering that you need to leave enough time to demonstrate to them that you know how to hold the draw, or was this a rejected 10.2 claim?

[Giulio Simeone]

Dear Nicky,
you did well to post your games, analyzing one own's games together with other players is one of the best ways to improve. I wonder why in chess discussion boards it happens so seldom that users post their games. I'm a 1982 FIDE rated player (but during the last year I gained 113 points!), I took a look at your games without the computer, I will try to shortly give you some tips, mostly I will try to underline the strategical ideas that are beyond the positions.

The most interesting game is the last one, in the opening you gave your opponent a big advantage, but you didn't give up, you made him fell in a trap and you almost managed to win!! But let's start from the beginning, in my opinion Bb3 is a mistake. You moved the bishop for the second time, it seems that you were afraid to exchange the bishops on e6, but in my opinion that exchange is good for white for many reasons:

1) Your central pawns were on white squares, his central pawns were on black squares, so at the moment his bishop was the "good" one, and your bishop was the "bad" one as the d3 and e4 pawns limit his activity range.

2) After the bishops' exchange, the e6 black pawn is blocked and unprotected, that means you can attack it quite easily (for example with Ne2, c3 and Qb3). Moreover, let me observe that, should black castle either side, until he moves his king from c8 or g8 the queen would take this pawn with check, and that makes his capture more valuable.

3) You surely know that in general it is more common and safe to castle kingside than to castle queenside. The ...fxe6 capture weakens black's kingside a bit, and consider that black may then need to play also ...h6, because a white knight in g5 would attack the weak black pawn. After ...fxe6, then, we can say that for the black king is more difficult to found a safe place.

Then, you could realize that 10. Nxe5 was a serious mistake without bothering to calculate. Look at the position just after black retakes the knight. Black has three pieces very well centered, and white has none; how many probabilites there are that white can win the piece back? In fact, white's position could have got much worse: as Christopher pointed out, black had a move that completely demolishes white's position!!

Black's 14th move doesn't convince me very much, after that white threatens a lot of things, black nicely avoids all the threatens with 15. ...000, but perhaps it would have been safer to play 14. ...Bb6 and then castle kingside: the king goes in a safer position and in this way black protects the f7 pawn twice. I think that 18. ...Qg6+ was also not very good, it's true, the queens' exchange sensitively reduces the material on the board making things easier for the winning side, but in this way he loses another pawn. Moreover, white's king is in an unsafe position, so keeping queens on the board may have been a good thing.

Then, with 25. ...Kc5 he practically puts himself in the opponent's mouth, it is easy to see that after that move black's king is seriously in danger as it is surrounded by white pawns. 31. Kd4 was a smart move, in that way he either loses a second pawn or has to exchange rooks, entering on a losing endgame. Both options are losing, he chose the second one, in order to win this game you had only to play 33. Ke4 or 34. Ke4, and in a few moves you capture the g6 pawn. Then, as Cristopher pointed out, you should appeal to rule 10.2 before your flag fell down: if in a certain position your opponent can't win/ is not making any effort to win, you can claim the draw. In fact, I think that QPF should be abolished, even in rapidplay tournaments should always be given some seconds of increment, so it can never happen that a player with a clear advantage loses the game.

Obviously some of the things I wrote may be incorrect, my rating is only 1982 and I analyzed without a computer. I may have made also some english mistakes as I am italian.

[IM Jack Rudd]

I think I'm going to disagree with Giulio on the subject of a bishop exchange on e6 (which is a possibility that crops up plenty of times in the Giuoco Pianissimo). The ...fxe6 exchange will actually favour black, because:

1) His castling kingside will then immediately put his rook onto a useful open file.
2) The thematic ...d5 pawn break will be supported by the e6 pawn.
3) With d5 and f5 under lock and key, white has far fewer useful places to put his knights.

[Christopher Kreuzer]

I wonder why in chess discussion boards it happens so seldom that users post their games.

Possibly because chess analysis can be adversarial, rather than educational. Trying to get at the truth of a position is different from disparaging (or praising) someone's play, but sometimes the two get conflated. And sometimes they need to be if you are going to show someone why they should change they way they are playing or thinking. Having said that, I'm prepared to (later, in the evening) post some of my games from yesterday, but it probably won't be very educational!

(It might be more educational to do a group analysis of a game between grandmasters)

[Roger de Coverly]

It's by no means unusual to drop the Bishop back to b3 in such positions. Jack suggests reasons why you would not want to exchange on e6 and you might not want to allow the exchange on c4. After Black had played d5 himself, the position is similar to those you get when defending the Scotch or Italian as Black. So only take on d5 once and then castle. The follow up is Re1 or even the Nxe5 fork trick as in the game.

Supposed rules about moving pieces twice in the opening are no more than guidelines if you cannot find a more concrete reason for a move.

[Giulio Simeone]

I think I'm going to disagree with Giulio on the subject of a bishop exchange on e6 (which is a possibility that crops up plenty of times in the Giuoco Pianissimo). The ...fxe6 exchange will actually favour black, because:

1) His castling kingside will then immediately put his rook onto a useful open file.
2) The thematic ...d5 pawn break will be supported by the e6 pawn.
3) With d5 and f5 under lock and key, white has far fewer useful places to put his knights.

Well, you are an International Master, indeed your strategical comprehension is better than mine. Indeed, with ...fxe6 black puts an extra pawn on the centre, and this means fewer good places for the white pieces, especially for the knights. It's also true that doubled pawns mean an extra open file, which in the earlier stages of the game can be an advantage. So do you think that these aspects are more important of the weakness of the e6 pawn, which can be attacked by a queen in b3, by a queen in h3, by a knight in g5? Sometimes, as I pointed out, white can also threaten the capture with check. Indeed black can push in d5, but I observe that in that case black's options maybe a bit restrained, because a capture ...dxe4 would leave black with two isolated doubled pawns in e5 and in e6. Finally, it has to be considered that Bb3 loses a tempo, and in fact in this game black's pieces developed more quickly, that's also why Nicky's tactical attempt didn't work

Probably in these considerations I'm giving too much importance to the pawn structure, some time ago I myself won a game with pawns in c3, c4 and c5, and at the end of the game my opponent couldn't realize why he lost

[Nicky Chorley]

Thanks everyone for the invaluable comments as usual . Congrats to Chris on his 4.5/6 yesterday too .

I've not had too much time to look at everything yet as I've only just got in from work and want to do some other things right now. I'll probably look at this during the week, or over the weekend (whenever I get time!). However, a few things:

Heh, I didn't know about rule 10.2. I once tried to read through the Laws of Chess, but didn't commit anything to memory, obviously.

I didn't want to exchange bishops with Bxe6 because I didn't want my opponent to have another pawn supporting the centre (d5), as Jack suggests.

After 26. a3, b4 was mate, so b5 was forced.

Despite my mistakes, I'm still pleased with my improvement .

[James Coleman]

In the final game 5.Ng5 would have been pretty awkward for Black for meet, which is why they don't normally go 4...d6 there. Instead either 4...Nxe4 (if 5.Nxe4 d5) would be normal, or the more routine ...Bc5 when Ng5 would make no sense due to 0-0.

[Richard Bates]

Thanks everyone for the invaluable comments as usual . Congrats to Chris on his 4.5/6 yesterday too .

I've not had too much time to look at everything yet as I've only just got in from work and want to do some other things right now. I'll probably look at this during the week, or over the weekend (whenever I get time!). However, a few things:

Heh, I didn't know about rule 10.2. I once tried to read through the Laws of Chess, but didn't commit anything to memory, obviously.

I didn't want to exchange bishops with Bxe6 because I didn't want my opponent to have another pawn supporting the centre (d5), as Jack suggests.

After 26. a3, b4 was mate, so b5 was forced.

Despite my mistakes, I'm still pleased with my improvement .

I think you should definitely buy a basic endgame book (I doubt a 10.2 should have had much chance of success - even from the final position i suspect earning a draw would have been down to luck). Apart from giving you some sort of idea about how to play the endgame, working on positions with limited numbers of pawns/pieces would probably be a good way to go. Practise some standard ones against computers. Endgames don't have to be devoid of tactics, and are much better for developing powers of calculation. Probably the best you can hope for from the opening and middlegame at the moment is avoiding dropping material. If you can't do that then any sort of basic positional knowledge is pretty useless.

(BTW about the only good thing to be said about 26...b5 is that it avoids mate - 26...a5, and Bishop moves are all better, and winning, options)

[Paul Cooksey]

Wise words from Richard; Silman's book has a good reputation

[Michele Clack]

The Silman endgame book is excellent. I like the way it is split into sections of what is necessary at each level of play. Nicky would have all the work of selecting what to look at done for him. A big time saver.

[Giulio Simeone]

I wonder why in chess discussion boards it happens so seldom that users post their games.

Possibly because chess analysis can be adversarial, rather than educational. Trying to get at the truth of a position is different from disparaging (or praising) someone's play, but sometimes the two get conflated. And sometimes they need to be if you are going to show someone why they should change they way they are playing or thinking. Having said that, I'm prepared to (later, in the evening) post some of my games from yesterday, but it probably won't be very educational!
(It might be more educational to do a group analysis of a game between grandmasters)

Well, I certainly don't get hurt when someone stronger than me criticizes my way of thinking, like IM Jack Rudd did in this thread. Instead, I see it as a chance to improve, I think that showing one own's games to other people is one of the best ways to improve. Sometimes other people can show you things that you didn't even think about, and unlike the computer they can show you ideas, not only variations. Indeed games between grandmasters are played much better than our games, but in my opinion analyzing our own games is a bit more useful as we have already thought about the positions during the game and as we may have some wrong strategical ideas that others can point out. Soon I also will post some interesting game that I played recently.

[Geoff Chandler]

Hi Nick

I'm surprised. I'm very surprised.

99 times out of a 100 when a lad post in a chess forum asking for advice
they are bombarded with advice. Mostly good.

But when the poster realises there may be a bit of work involved
and there is no quick fix you never hear from them again.

You are back, Good for you

So the first thing that caught my eye was:

“The Round 2 bye game you had, to be brutally honest, is of no real use in
improving as a chess player.”

I beg to differ. We have to look at everything and I can see room for improvement.

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 f6 4.0–0 Nd4 5.c3 {This lad has weakened his King and is moving the same pieces piece about in the opening. 5.Nxd4 wins a safe centre pawn. 5.Nxd4 exd4 6.Qh5+ and 7.Qd5. Did you speak the b1 Knight about 5.c3. It never made a move in this game. } 5...Nxf3+ 6.Qxf3 b6 7.d4 d5 8.Bxd5 Rb8 9.dxe5 Bb7 {Now you played 10.Bf4. A snack move. A complete drift. You protected a pawn he cannot take. 10...fxe5 11.Qf7 mate. You were not to know he was going to hang his Queen. Let's us look at the line you rejected defending a pawn.} 10.Bxb7 Rxb7 {Putting the Rook on unprotected square open to a discovered attack. (e4-e5 a back pocket threat.)} 11.Rd1 {Snatch a file with tempo. You are flooding the board with snares. If that pawn was not on c3 the Knight would be joining in as well.} 11...Qe7 12.exf6 {12...Nxf6 and e5 hello b7 Rook. 12…gxf6 losses the Queen. 13.Qh5+} 12...Qxf6 13.Qg4 {What a darling move. threats. Qd7 mate. Qc8+, Bg5, e5 and if I had a Knight on c3 I'd be threatening Nd5. Now how difficult was that to see.}

But it was a bye game?
No such thing as a friendly game of chess. You should use every game,
especially those played under tournament conditions, to master your trade.

It’s your job to play your best and hammer weak moves.
In some games your will be the pupil, in others the teacher.

And whilst I’m on the topic of attitude don’t start walking about
with a rule book in your back pocket trying to claim ½ a point draw.
I was never involved in an OTB dispute in my life.

If you cannot do it at the board because you have miss-handled your time
then don’t call across a TC and use a nanny rule to get you out of a hole.
Take the loss and hold your head up high.

The ½ point lost will be gained 10 fold in your future OTB play.
You will never again get into a position where you never left yourself
enough time to win or draw.

The Round 4 game.

You missed a quicker mate (pointed out by a club mate.)
“I know my opponent missed forking queen and rook earlier on too.”
Did he? Here Black to play.

r2qr1k1/ppp2ppp/8/8/3Bn3/1PP2Q1P/2P2PP1/R4RK1 b - - 0 1
He played 16…c5. The Knight fork 16…Nd2 and the Queen moves to g3/g4
and threatens mate. That is what he saw and what you appear to have missed.
( that Knight on d2 now looks in trouble - it cannot get out. )

In the opening to that game. Black to play.

rnbqr1k1/ppp2ppp/3p1n2/8/1bB1P3/2NP1N2/PPP2PPP/R1BQK2R b KQ - 0 1
Black played 7…Bxc3+
You have a Knight and a pawn pinned to the King.
Things pinned then always look for ways to apply the pressure. 7…d5!
That throws White a wobbly. Missed because the player had played d6 already.
It never entered his skull to push the pawn again. That is ‘rule of thumb’ thinking.

The last game attracted a lot of attention, It went to a badly miss-played ending.

That just opened flood gates for those who think throwing books on endgames at novices
is the solution to all their problems.

That game like 99% of games between under 2000 players should never have seen
an ending.

As was pointed out you missed a good chance to put Black into blunderland
with 5.Ng5 you played 5.d3. That again is ‘rule of thumb’ thinking.
Why did you play 3.Bc4. Just to get a piece off the back rank?

Tactics Nick. Tactics.
Start thinking that every move these guys make is a blunder and look for a tactical
way to bounce them. If they were any good you would not be playing them....yet ( )

Look at this.

If Black had played 11.Bxg2 here.

r2qk2r/ppp2ppp/8/2bbn3/3P4/1BP5/PP3PPP/R1BQK2R b KQkq - 0 11

White could have resigned with a clear conscience.

You got into that mess with your pawn-fork ‘combination.’ 10.Nxe5.
You are always on dodgy ground playing tricks against a better developed opponent.
10 0-0. Castle first, philosophies later (A rule of thumb that in that case works.)

Same game. Here:

[FEN "8/p5p1/3p1k2/1p1P1P2/1P2K2P/P7/8/8 b - - 0 39"] 39... g5 {You must spot the shots. They happen in endings as well as the opening. You don't need an ending book to see obvious wins.} 40. h5 g4 {What else?} 41. h6 {Store that pattern. The King cannot approach the h-pawn nor can Black take the f-pawn.} 41... g3 42. Kf3 g2 43. Kxg2 Kf7 44. Kg3 Kg8 45. Kg4 Kh7 46. Kg5 {A win. I’m glad you lost. Feel the Burn.}
More work needed mate. Spotting shots and getting your sense of danger built up.

Here:

http://www.redhotpawn.com/blog/blogindex.php

I mainly use games involving novice players. (I'm not fishing for a hit some
of these post have over 1,000, the average is about 800.).

There you will find blunders and shots played by players in your class.
Learning the game by soley looking at GM games is pointless.
You are still ground crew, these GM guys are the pilots.

There are some incredible misses. See the positions that players in your class stumble in.
Get ideas, store patterns.Learn from the bad play of others. You will meet it.

And it works. I get feedback from lads showing me their games where they picked
up the winning shot from something they have seen.

------------------------------------------

What else caught my eye…Oh yeah…this:

"It might be more educational to do a group analysis of a game between grandmasters"

I shudder to think what conclusions this lot would come too.

"This GM needs a book on endings."

[Roger de Coverly]

Geoff makes a number of valid points. In terms of what's important, and what isn't, you can make progress at the expense of effort by using chess engine. What you are looking for are the turning points of a game. So you just lost or won material. Is there compensation? Ask for the engine's value of the resulting position. Work through the game until you find where you or your opponent drastically changed the evaluation. In my experience, choosing between Bb3 or Bxe6 seldom matters a great deal.

By the standards of even the lowest section of a typical Congress, some of the play at the redhotpawn site is completely bizarre. There's a game starting 1 d4 d5 2 e3 g5 3 g4. I suppose it leads to original positions. Perhaps they are scared of being accused of computer cheating, that they don't switch on their engines even after the game, or their databases during it, or even open a book for suggestions after 1 d4 d5. Actually I've figured the point of ...g5, it's to prevent the Stonewall system with 3 f4.