This game wasn't a success by most measures. I gained some experience playing the white side of the Catalan. I'm still learning this opening and I carelessly played what looked like a natural move only to find that it was a true gambit of a pawn. I still had reasonable Catalan-like compensation, and I thought I managed to hold things together with a key exchange sacrifice that give one or two moves to consolidate (somehow I need to consolidate to be better, not the rook, it was strange) I would've had a nice position, but my opponent found some accurate moves to put the point away. Kind of sad, I missed a few opportunities in the middlegame, but I think I got a much better feel for the position which is necessary before I can really start analyzing it intelligently on my own.
Kind of a curious point here. It's very hard to simulate the ideas you get under game-pressure at home. I've tried, but the development isn't normal. Maybe I just need to work on the exercise a little more. I've been thinking about this a little. I guess part of the problem is it becomes a little trickier when if you miss an idea for one side you will likely miss it for both, but still it seems there should be some reasonable way of trying to do this type of exercise for an hour or so a couple of times a week. Find some middle-game position in an opening I play, try to put in serious time and do some solitaire chess. Afterwards take a quick look to see if any of my ideas had interesting merit, check them out and be done with it.
Wednesday, January 31, 2007
Wednesday, January 24, 2007
Tuesday Night Marathon: Status after round 3
I decided to give the Tuesday Night Marathon another go even after my heart-breaking finish in my last attempt. I am 2/2 as white so far which is slightly out of the ordinary for me lately, but these games were both playing down so we'll see how things go in future rounds. I'm 3/3 after 3 rounds overall, this tournament is one of the few FIDE-rated events in the bay area so I figured I should be playing in it with any attempt to get more rated games, starting next round I should get a crack at some of the stronger opponents, I just need to keep winning like I did last time so I can keep playing them. I would say my nicest game so far was a quick win in round 2 where my opponent played an inaccurate move order in the opening which I responded to with the best move and then my opponent overreached a little bit by playing moves which somewhat attempted to refute my opening which was a pretty good sign I would have resources to get a better position. I did, which he followed up by letting his queen get trapped so he had to sacrifice it for a rook and knight, but being behind in development and not having a reasonable place to castle he was doomed and resigned a few moves later. Round 1 I showed an amazing ability to miss the same idea multiple times as part of a tactical sequence to only amazingly see it later when it somehow still worked, I wasn't too proud of this performance, but hey, it got the job done.
Round 3:
This game I played okay, I think I missed some early opportunities to get a very large advantage, but I did manage to go into an endgame with a large positional edge and quickly won a pawn. After this I will admit I played somewhat inaccurately, but then something happened which isn't entirely new to me, my opponent, clearly being the defender and being a pawn down offered me a draw. Now, I will admit, I'm not 100% sure the position was winning at that point, but I'm positive it was not a trivial draw either. I've seen people do this and I think once you're above 1800 it's an absolutely rude and ridiculous thing to do, especially to a higher rated opponent. I even saw my good friend offer a draw to a grandmaster in a 4 vs 3 rook ending from the defending that may have been defensible from the defensible, although I have my doubts, but was certainly no clear draw. But I think any player above 1800 should at least follow this rule: if it is clear that your opponent is even nominally better and it's clear that you have 0 chances to win, do not offer a draw, it does not show your understanding of chess, what it does show is a lack of class. I especially love when these players then after the game tell you the position "was an obvious draw" after they go on and lose the game. I mean it is known that King + Bishop + Rook vs King + Rook is a draw, I expect 99.9% of players to make the defender play it out. It doesn't matter how trivial the drawing technique is by the way for an endgame, let the attacking side offer the draw, you show you understand what's happening on the board that way.
Round 3:
This game I played okay, I think I missed some early opportunities to get a very large advantage, but I did manage to go into an endgame with a large positional edge and quickly won a pawn. After this I will admit I played somewhat inaccurately, but then something happened which isn't entirely new to me, my opponent, clearly being the defender and being a pawn down offered me a draw. Now, I will admit, I'm not 100% sure the position was winning at that point, but I'm positive it was not a trivial draw either. I've seen people do this and I think once you're above 1800 it's an absolutely rude and ridiculous thing to do, especially to a higher rated opponent. I even saw my good friend offer a draw to a grandmaster in a 4 vs 3 rook ending from the defending that may have been defensible from the defensible, although I have my doubts, but was certainly no clear draw. But I think any player above 1800 should at least follow this rule: if it is clear that your opponent is even nominally better and it's clear that you have 0 chances to win, do not offer a draw, it does not show your understanding of chess, what it does show is a lack of class. I especially love when these players then after the game tell you the position "was an obvious draw" after they go on and lose the game. I mean it is known that King + Bishop + Rook vs King + Rook is a draw, I expect 99.9% of players to make the defender play it out. It doesn't matter how trivial the drawing technique is by the way for an endgame, let the attacking side offer the draw, you show you understand what's happening on the board that way.
Thursday, January 18, 2007
Western Class Championship Results
Western Class Championship Results
The tournament got a decent turnout, GMs Yermolinsky and Khachiyan both played along with IMs Sevillano, Matikoziyan, Pruess, Mezentsev, and Stein. I started out playing okay. I had an interesting game against Robby Adamson in my first game, I had a strong advantage, but made a couple of obviously bad decisions which allowed him to complicate the position with an unclear sacrifice that was much easier to play for him regardless of the true assessment. In my second game a strong expert from Arizona in what was a complicated positional struggle where an early decision to leave the king in the center was later a deciding factor after I defended for quite a while. In the third game I faced IM Mezentsev and I unfortunately walked into a little trap in the opening that left him (with the black pieces) with a better position and me with little active play, I tried to stir things up, but the position was already too bad and I lost in short order. In my 4th game I achieved a position with an extra pawn and a better position straight from the opening, but after one missed move and a couple of serious miscalculations I achieved a position where my opponent had a lot of counterplay despite being a pawn down, in this game I was particularly upset at the various missed tactics even though I saw some reasonably tricky ideas that were necessary to keep the game in control, but ultimately I was only able to draw. In the next game I was paired down and I made several bad decisions missing my chance to get the better of the position, but fortunately my opponent missed his opportunity to put me into serious danger and then in what was at best a slightly better position for me he actively blundered a piece to give me the game. This guy says he's a reader of my blog so I give him the utmost respect. In the last round I was paired agianst a slightly higher rated expert who I've played before, this game was flawed in many ways, I "tactically" won a pawn from the opening, but it turns out the tactic was flawed in a few fairly obvious ways that we both completely missed. After a few more moves I was essentially just a pawn up, but there were aggressive possibilities for both sides. I made a bad practical decision right before the time control (which I could have delayed until after the time control by repeating moves one more time) and then quickly blundered into mate. Overall I feel like I played well, unfortunately my struggles as white continued, it's arguable that I played my toughest opposition as white, but I got good positions in two of the games and then mishandled the positions completely so I think it's fair to say I need more practice both playing an analyzing these types of positions.
How I did at my goals?
Well, I didn't finish +1, in fact I finished -1, but I was within range. I was very good at spending 10-20 seconds on early moves making sure I didn't have two positions confused, thinking about what other options I had, I think this worked quite well as I felt like I didn't catch myself not thinking on any moves, now as to the quality of my thought that was a little lower than I was hoping for. I did miss a few of my opponents moves, but it was at least a rare occurrance. This doesn't sound like a complete success, but I am pretty satisfied and if I can continue this positive trend I will have good results in the future.
The tournament got a decent turnout, GMs Yermolinsky and Khachiyan both played along with IMs Sevillano, Matikoziyan, Pruess, Mezentsev, and Stein. I started out playing okay. I had an interesting game against Robby Adamson in my first game, I had a strong advantage, but made a couple of obviously bad decisions which allowed him to complicate the position with an unclear sacrifice that was much easier to play for him regardless of the true assessment. In my second game a strong expert from Arizona in what was a complicated positional struggle where an early decision to leave the king in the center was later a deciding factor after I defended for quite a while. In the third game I faced IM Mezentsev and I unfortunately walked into a little trap in the opening that left him (with the black pieces) with a better position and me with little active play, I tried to stir things up, but the position was already too bad and I lost in short order. In my 4th game I achieved a position with an extra pawn and a better position straight from the opening, but after one missed move and a couple of serious miscalculations I achieved a position where my opponent had a lot of counterplay despite being a pawn down, in this game I was particularly upset at the various missed tactics even though I saw some reasonably tricky ideas that were necessary to keep the game in control, but ultimately I was only able to draw. In the next game I was paired down and I made several bad decisions missing my chance to get the better of the position, but fortunately my opponent missed his opportunity to put me into serious danger and then in what was at best a slightly better position for me he actively blundered a piece to give me the game. This guy says he's a reader of my blog so I give him the utmost respect. In the last round I was paired agianst a slightly higher rated expert who I've played before, this game was flawed in many ways, I "tactically" won a pawn from the opening, but it turns out the tactic was flawed in a few fairly obvious ways that we both completely missed. After a few more moves I was essentially just a pawn up, but there were aggressive possibilities for both sides. I made a bad practical decision right before the time control (which I could have delayed until after the time control by repeating moves one more time) and then quickly blundered into mate. Overall I feel like I played well, unfortunately my struggles as white continued, it's arguable that I played my toughest opposition as white, but I got good positions in two of the games and then mishandled the positions completely so I think it's fair to say I need more practice both playing an analyzing these types of positions.
How I did at my goals?
Well, I didn't finish +1, in fact I finished -1, but I was within range. I was very good at spending 10-20 seconds on early moves making sure I didn't have two positions confused, thinking about what other options I had, I think this worked quite well as I felt like I didn't catch myself not thinking on any moves, now as to the quality of my thought that was a little lower than I was hoping for. I did miss a few of my opponents moves, but it was at least a rare occurrance. This doesn't sound like a complete success, but I am pretty satisfied and if I can continue this positive trend I will have good results in the future.
Friday, January 12, 2007
Western Class Championship
I'm going down to Agoura Hills, CA this weekend to play in the Western Class Championship. This year it's back to it's glory as a 7 round event (although I can't play tonight so I'll be taking a 1st round bye) after first being reduced to 6 rounds and then 5 rounds last year it's certainly a nice change of pace. Last time it was 7 rounds it got a very strong field, this year I doubt it will have as many strong players since the prize fund has since been reduced, but I imagine it will get the usual suspects from Southern California.
My goal for this tournament is to finish with a plus score, it won't be easy, but it shouldn't be impossible either. I guess in keeping with the spirit of my new year's resolution one of my other goals for the tournament is to reduce the number of moves where I spot critical variations only AFTER I move. So I guess wording it in an affirmative manner is make sure I'm actually calculating and not making superficial judgements. I know this may seem strange coming from a player of my rating, but I'm really not sure if I calculate more than like 2 or 3 moves deep in the deeper variations of my calculation except for when that is extended by forcing moves like checks, captures, or mate threats. I mean the latter part makes sense as those are the easiest variations to calculate. At the same time I don't want to start to become one of those players who spends ridiculous amounts of time on simple moves. Another goal for this tournament is to spend a little more time thinking in the opening. This doesn't mean I'm going to try to innovate significantly at the board, but I think spending 15-20 seconds at least on each move should help me get my wheels turning a little bit so I don't wake up in a middlegame position without having "warmed up". Should be nice to get a full 2 hours for the first 40 moves after my TNM game on Tuesday with only 90 minutes for the first 30 moves (believe me, although the ratio is the same it's a big difference).
Anyways, wish me luck.
My goal for this tournament is to finish with a plus score, it won't be easy, but it shouldn't be impossible either. I guess in keeping with the spirit of my new year's resolution one of my other goals for the tournament is to reduce the number of moves where I spot critical variations only AFTER I move. So I guess wording it in an affirmative manner is make sure I'm actually calculating and not making superficial judgements. I know this may seem strange coming from a player of my rating, but I'm really not sure if I calculate more than like 2 or 3 moves deep in the deeper variations of my calculation except for when that is extended by forcing moves like checks, captures, or mate threats. I mean the latter part makes sense as those are the easiest variations to calculate. At the same time I don't want to start to become one of those players who spends ridiculous amounts of time on simple moves. Another goal for this tournament is to spend a little more time thinking in the opening. This doesn't mean I'm going to try to innovate significantly at the board, but I think spending 15-20 seconds at least on each move should help me get my wheels turning a little bit so I don't wake up in a middlegame position without having "warmed up". Should be nice to get a full 2 hours for the first 40 moves after my TNM game on Tuesday with only 90 minutes for the first 30 moves (believe me, although the ratio is the same it's a big difference).
Anyways, wish me luck.
Sunday, January 07, 2007
2006 Review / Goals for 2007
2006 Review / Goals for 2007:
The year 2006 was a good year overall for me. Chess did not go as well as I had hoped. I figured I should reflect on my goals from last year, see where I hit and where I missed and make some new goals for 2007.
My goals last year were to:
1) Break 2200 USCF, preferably by the end of National Open
2) Reduce the frequency of offering/taking draws from superior positions.
Well on #1 I would say I failed, but I don't think I appreciated the difficulty I would face in trying to break this mark. So after the last tournament of 2005 (North American Open 2005) my rating was 2094 coming off of 2 strong results. This year started with some solid showings. I failed to show good form in a couple of rounds in last year's Western Class Championship, but then followed it with a strong 5.5/6 (4.5/5 played) at Amateur Team West to help my team win and with the 4th board prize. I followed that up with some reasonable results including a tournament I was quite happy with at Western Pacific Open where I think I showed some good chess, but had one game which I lost a totally dominating position due to missing the critical moment in the game. Probably due to a lack of confidence I had some bad results following that and lost most of my progress.
Then came my move to San Francisco which I started with a particularly lucky result to get a 4.5/5 in a g/45 tournament up here which was immediately followed with a heartbreaking Southern California state championships candidate tournament which went beautifully with a draw against my friends (as solid master) as black round 2 and a win over a strong expert in round 3 just to carelessly blunder a piece in round 4 and barely miss qualification. Again I saw a some mixed results in g/45 tournaments which doesn't particularly bother me so much as the results in such quick time controls can be somewhat random, but I had very bad showings in both the Northern California State Championships and the Western States Open in Reno while simultaneously having an amazing result in the Tuesday night marathon which I spoiled when I blundered execessively to get miniatured in the last round as white. Still though even through these bad results I luckily managed not to lose FIDE rating points in any of them while my USCF rating did a little very temporary dip below 2100. Lately I feel like I've been playing quite solidly with real chances to have breakthrough results, but I've kept coming short. American Open I managed to show a very sad quality of poor technique in winning my won positions which I was very disappointed with. I played the strong East Bay FIDE Swiss and had a solid performance there, but again missed some key opportunities in some of my games both where I could have failed to win a won game and where I failed to be as resourceful as I could in some of the other games. Then recently in Las Vegas I saw laziness in quite a few of my moves. I'm hoping this was just due to fatigue after just having finished a long tournament, but I will be very aware when I play in my upcoming event in 2 weeks.
Why didn't I break 2200?
I don't think I was working as hard and specifically on the right areas as I should have been. I've been making a serious effort to improve my calculation lately, I still feel like this is one area I'm significantly lacking in and I will continue to work on. Right now I have two problems in that I'm both a lazy calculator (I miss opportunities for both sides) and my calculations are a little slow, but there are instances where I've seen some improvement lately. I also think I underestimated the difficulty of this goal, but I feel confident that I'm closing in on this barrier.
What about the other goal?
I think I did a better job of declining draws in positions where I felt I was the one with more to play for, possibly a few slips from this, but for the most part I showed a good killer instinct in this respect. On the other hand I saw that I was having a lot of trouble winning won positions which I feel I should be able to win a very high proportion of the time.
Goals for 2007:
1) Break 2200 USCF (currently ~2128): I'm hoping this won't be as hard as it's seemed lately, I need to continue to work on my calculation.
2) Break 2200 FIDE (as it stands approximately 85 points to go): This will have the nice benefit of enabling me to play in such events as the Las Vegas Masters more easily, I think I need to fix some of the problems I have where I make bad decisions to lose the games in simple situations. This is particularly bad against lower rated players where I should win more often than not.
3) IM or GM scalp. I had more than a few good shots in 2006, the older and wiser me should be better at carrying through.
If anybody thinks of some more good ones that I should have I'd be more than willing to consider them.
The year 2006 was a good year overall for me. Chess did not go as well as I had hoped. I figured I should reflect on my goals from last year, see where I hit and where I missed and make some new goals for 2007.
My goals last year were to:
1) Break 2200 USCF, preferably by the end of National Open
2) Reduce the frequency of offering/taking draws from superior positions.
Well on #1 I would say I failed, but I don't think I appreciated the difficulty I would face in trying to break this mark. So after the last tournament of 2005 (North American Open 2005) my rating was 2094 coming off of 2 strong results. This year started with some solid showings. I failed to show good form in a couple of rounds in last year's Western Class Championship, but then followed it with a strong 5.5/6 (4.5/5 played) at Amateur Team West to help my team win and with the 4th board prize. I followed that up with some reasonable results including a tournament I was quite happy with at Western Pacific Open where I think I showed some good chess, but had one game which I lost a totally dominating position due to missing the critical moment in the game. Probably due to a lack of confidence I had some bad results following that and lost most of my progress.
Then came my move to San Francisco which I started with a particularly lucky result to get a 4.5/5 in a g/45 tournament up here which was immediately followed with a heartbreaking Southern California state championships candidate tournament which went beautifully with a draw against my friends (as solid master) as black round 2 and a win over a strong expert in round 3 just to carelessly blunder a piece in round 4 and barely miss qualification. Again I saw a some mixed results in g/45 tournaments which doesn't particularly bother me so much as the results in such quick time controls can be somewhat random, but I had very bad showings in both the Northern California State Championships and the Western States Open in Reno while simultaneously having an amazing result in the Tuesday night marathon which I spoiled when I blundered execessively to get miniatured in the last round as white. Still though even through these bad results I luckily managed not to lose FIDE rating points in any of them while my USCF rating did a little very temporary dip below 2100. Lately I feel like I've been playing quite solidly with real chances to have breakthrough results, but I've kept coming short. American Open I managed to show a very sad quality of poor technique in winning my won positions which I was very disappointed with. I played the strong East Bay FIDE Swiss and had a solid performance there, but again missed some key opportunities in some of my games both where I could have failed to win a won game and where I failed to be as resourceful as I could in some of the other games. Then recently in Las Vegas I saw laziness in quite a few of my moves. I'm hoping this was just due to fatigue after just having finished a long tournament, but I will be very aware when I play in my upcoming event in 2 weeks.
Why didn't I break 2200?
I don't think I was working as hard and specifically on the right areas as I should have been. I've been making a serious effort to improve my calculation lately, I still feel like this is one area I'm significantly lacking in and I will continue to work on. Right now I have two problems in that I'm both a lazy calculator (I miss opportunities for both sides) and my calculations are a little slow, but there are instances where I've seen some improvement lately. I also think I underestimated the difficulty of this goal, but I feel confident that I'm closing in on this barrier.
What about the other goal?
I think I did a better job of declining draws in positions where I felt I was the one with more to play for, possibly a few slips from this, but for the most part I showed a good killer instinct in this respect. On the other hand I saw that I was having a lot of trouble winning won positions which I feel I should be able to win a very high proportion of the time.
Goals for 2007:
1) Break 2200 USCF (currently ~2128): I'm hoping this won't be as hard as it's seemed lately, I need to continue to work on my calculation.
2) Break 2200 FIDE (as it stands approximately 85 points to go): This will have the nice benefit of enabling me to play in such events as the Las Vegas Masters more easily, I think I need to fix some of the problems I have where I make bad decisions to lose the games in simple situations. This is particularly bad against lower rated players where I should win more often than not.
3) IM or GM scalp. I had more than a few good shots in 2006, the older and wiser me should be better at carrying through.
If anybody thinks of some more good ones that I should have I'd be more than willing to consider them.
Wednesday, January 03, 2007
Game of the Year 12th Place
Game of the Year 12th Place
Privman vs Krasik
This game contained mistakes yes, but it was not as if it was blunder-filled and the move Rxe4 was a very nice move to have on the board, I really think this really deserved some more credit in the voting. Imagine the match situation: Boston only won this match 3-1 so a loss for Krasik would have meant only a tie for the Blitz and Krasik still has the confidence to play the fantastic move Rxe4 when the consequences of a miscalculation would completely change the outcome of the match. I think it's a little strange not to take the situation in the match into serious consideration. I think Arun's ranking is probably more appropriate, a few other games were mostly given game of the week due to a few surprising moves and the comment "the technique was less than perfect, but good enough to win."
As for the lack of comments, this seems strange. How does nobody mention the importance that this game took place on board 4 in a close match between a gigantic sports rival. In the regular season the matches don't get much more exciting than New York - Boston unless San Francisco is involved and it seems overly criticizing the quality of the moves in a real game in a complex position is a little uncalled for. And where is the comment for the Shabalov + Vicary team vote? Here are a few of my (very serious) theories on what happened here:
1) Clint Ballard paid off the judges to make sure Krasik would not finish near the top, but unfortunately this was included in the comment.
2) Shahade didn't get the vote from Vicary and Shabalov in time and and decided to vote for two and figured voting for another team was enough, no need to put words in their mouth too.
3) Vicary and Shabalov decided to make genital jokes about Rxe4 and Shahade was trying to keep the comments at least PG-13.
4) To counter-act and east-coast bias in the geographical location of the judges Vicary and Shabalov decided to tank their vote on this game and explicitly mentioned this in their comment and to prevent controversy this was censored.
5) The comment reveled that it indeed takes exactly 43 licks to get to the center of a tootsie pop and Shahade decided to keep this secret to himself to try to raise money for the league with this ultra-sensitive information.
6) ???
7) Profit!
Anyways, I'd like to give a shout-out to Krasik who I met at last week's North American Open. It's always nice to meet more US Chess League personalities in real life, I hope those of you that read this blog ever will let me know what you think if you catch me at a tournament, at least those of you I don't already know are readers.
Privman vs Krasik
This game contained mistakes yes, but it was not as if it was blunder-filled and the move Rxe4 was a very nice move to have on the board, I really think this really deserved some more credit in the voting. Imagine the match situation: Boston only won this match 3-1 so a loss for Krasik would have meant only a tie for the Blitz and Krasik still has the confidence to play the fantastic move Rxe4 when the consequences of a miscalculation would completely change the outcome of the match. I think it's a little strange not to take the situation in the match into serious consideration. I think Arun's ranking is probably more appropriate, a few other games were mostly given game of the week due to a few surprising moves and the comment "the technique was less than perfect, but good enough to win."
As for the lack of comments, this seems strange. How does nobody mention the importance that this game took place on board 4 in a close match between a gigantic sports rival. In the regular season the matches don't get much more exciting than New York - Boston unless San Francisco is involved and it seems overly criticizing the quality of the moves in a real game in a complex position is a little uncalled for. And where is the comment for the Shabalov + Vicary team vote? Here are a few of my (very serious) theories on what happened here:
1) Clint Ballard paid off the judges to make sure Krasik would not finish near the top, but unfortunately this was included in the comment.
2) Shahade didn't get the vote from Vicary and Shabalov in time and and decided to vote for two and figured voting for another team was enough, no need to put words in their mouth too.
3) Vicary and Shabalov decided to make genital jokes about Rxe4 and Shahade was trying to keep the comments at least PG-13.
4) To counter-act and east-coast bias in the geographical location of the judges Vicary and Shabalov decided to tank their vote on this game and explicitly mentioned this in their comment and to prevent controversy this was censored.
5) The comment reveled that it indeed takes exactly 43 licks to get to the center of a tootsie pop and Shahade decided to keep this secret to himself to try to raise money for the league with this ultra-sensitive information.
6) ???
7) Profit!
Anyways, I'd like to give a shout-out to Krasik who I met at last week's North American Open. It's always nice to meet more US Chess League personalities in real life, I hope those of you that read this blog ever will let me know what you think if you catch me at a tournament, at least those of you I don't already know are readers.
Monday, January 01, 2007
North American Open Result / New Year's Resolution
I'm pretty tired right now and I have work tomorrow, but I figured I'd post some brief results. I went 4/4 with black and 0.5/3 with white, this could be considered coincidental, but I think in all 3 games as white I had real opening problems in some sense. In my last 9 games as black I'm 6.5/9 with the only 2 losses coming against GMs. This is a solid result. I'd like to make my white results equally as good.
Chess New Year's Resolutions:
1) Improve my calculation and try to play fewer superficial moves at the board.
2) Improve my calculation.
3) Improve my calculation.
Chess New Year's Resolutions:
1) Improve my calculation and try to play fewer superficial moves at the board.
2) Improve my calculation.
3) Improve my calculation.
Monday, December 25, 2006
EBCC FIDE "swiss" result
The event finished without any spectacular or disasterous results. I beat NM Andy Lee in round 6 after I achieved a much better position, blundered it away in one move, and then had the favor significantly returned to me. In round 7 I lost to IM Pruess after chances were missed for both sides during the complications. In round 8 I recieved a forfeit due to some incidents. In round 9 I lost unfortunately smoothly to IM Sarkar after playing too aggressively in the opening. In round 10 I achieved a nice position from the opening against GM Panchanathan, then I played a few inaccurate moves to give him the advantage which followed him winning a second pawn but giving me real counter-play. He blundered allowing me to win a piece, but I was playing quickly as not trying to drag on the game and I thought I chose between two moves that were equally good, but he had a shot against my choice that didn't work against the other so he won the game quickly from there. All in all I feel what this tournament let me know the most was that I need to work harder on my calculations at the board and that I still have a few minor holes in my opening preparation that need some work. I need to slow down some of my decisions and calculate more thoroughly, but I believe if I can achieve this I can improve my results quickly.
Rating Change: 2119->2125
Rating Change: 2119->2125
Tuesday, December 19, 2006
EBCC FIDE "swiss" half-way
So far I'm 1.5/5 for traditional scoring and 4/13 for BAP. I missed a forced draw in round one against IM Roussell-Roozmon, in round 2 I beat Mr. BAP himself, in round 3 I lost to FM Rensch who roughed me up. In round 4 I continue this losing to Sharavdorj as black although he's known for being particularly tough as white. In round 5 I got paired against Shankland, I missed on my guess for his prep and didn't know the line I played too well, but I defended pretty well and he rushed through the endgame so I managed to hold. Strange thing is in round 6 I'm paired against Andy Lee who is having a stellar tournament now with 3 wins in a row with the last two over IMs as black. Now I get him as black. THIS WILL BE MY 3RD BLACK IN A ROW! Oh well, I shouldn't mind, all my points so far are as black.
Monday, December 11, 2006
EBCC FIDE "Swiss"
EBCC FIDE "Swiss"
I guess the name of this tournament stuck even after it was changed from a swiss event to a BAP event. Maybe it should just be EBCC Norm tournament or maybe it should now be the EBCC FIDE Tournament, EBCC FIDE BAP, granted that last one is a little acronymn-packed. Of course the name is not so important, the tentative field so far (minus me) might be more important:
1) No opening disasters, that is no lost positions right from the opening carried through for the rest of the game.
2) AT LEAST 2.5/10, this is not an easy goal, but I don't want to pretend like I'll be "happy enough" with 4/10 either, I will be trying to win all of my games (at the beginning of them) this tournament.
3) Practice reasonably good time management (don't play too fast or too slow).
4) Don't miss any good tactical shots my opponents give me.
5) Don't play any scared chess, be looking to punish moves I believe are "wrong".
6) Avoid getting taught "lessons" at the board, but make sure to have most opportunity to learn from each game.
Now some other possible, but not easy goals:
1) Beat an IM
2) Finish better than 2nd to last.
I guess the name of this tournament stuck even after it was changed from a swiss event to a BAP event. Maybe it should just be EBCC Norm tournament or maybe it should now be the EBCC FIDE Tournament, EBCC FIDE BAP, granted that last one is a little acronymn-packed. Of course the name is not so important, the tentative field so far (minus me) might be more important:
Name Title FIDE USCF Fed
Magesh Panchanathan GM 2485 2526 IND
Jesse Kraai IM 2473 2545 USA
John Fedorowicz GM 2469 2517 USA
Dashzegve Sharavdorj GM 2463 2523 MGL
Lev Milman IM 2463 2504 USA
Josh Friedel IM 2460 2535 USA
Thomas Roussel-Roozmon IM 2446 2572 CAN
Vladimir Mezentsev IM 2409 2488 RUS
David Pruess IM 2404 2461 USA
Justin Sarkar IM 2380 2390 USA
Danny Rensch FM 2369 2428 USA
Andy Lee NM 2259 2257 USA
Batchimeg Tuvshintugs WIM 2237 2278 USA
Sam Shankland NM 2208 USA
Clint Ballard 2062 1914 USA
(from http://www.eastbaychess.com/tourney/06/masters.php)
The tournament is a 10-rounder so presuming the field doesn't change (which is probably likely as it's less than a week before the start of the event)I will face a minimum of 5 IMs/GMs. That's a minimum of 5 cracks at doing what I've failed to do so far, secure a point (or fraction thereof) against an IM or higher. I'm not sure what my goal should be for this tournament, it might be that if I don't get on the board early it might be hard to make a comeback in this field. But I'll make some practical goals for this tournament:
1) No opening disasters, that is no lost positions right from the opening carried through for the rest of the game.
2) AT LEAST 2.5/10, this is not an easy goal, but I don't want to pretend like I'll be "happy enough" with 4/10 either, I will be trying to win all of my games (at the beginning of them) this tournament.
3) Practice reasonably good time management (don't play too fast or too slow).
4) Don't miss any good tactical shots my opponents give me.
5) Don't play any scared chess, be looking to punish moves I believe are "wrong".
6) Avoid getting taught "lessons" at the board, but make sure to have most opportunity to learn from each game.
Now some other possible, but not easy goals:
1) Beat an IM
2) Finish better than 2nd to last.
Friday, December 08, 2006
Guthrie McClain Memorial
Guthrie McClain Memorial
Okay, I was a little slow about writing this one up, sorry to my loyal fans. First round I won pretty smoothly. Second round I got a gigantic advantage out of the opening only to blow it away and I eventually won some same color bishop endgame after missing many wins in it where it may have even been drawn at some point (although I'm not 100% sure). Third round I played a low expert, I was careless in the opening and allowed a check to displace my king where I still stood well, but needed to play some active moves as despite my exposed king I was still ahead in development, I failed to do so and got an inferior position. I did create tricks in the position however which allowed me to come back and I even missed a simple win. I was still pushing in an opposition color bishop + rook endgame where in time trouble I blundered to allow a simplification into a dead-drawn opposite color bishop endgame, but the original endgame may have been drawn anyways. In the fourth round I faced the talented kid Nicholas Nip. As a note, in the current rating list I have now played (and gotten at least a draw) against the #1 age 8, age 10, age 11, and age 16. Nicholas surprised me in the opening being very well prepared after last time when he carelessly dropped a piece in the same opening. I got a tough position and tried to sacrifice an exchange to stay alive, but I played a few inaccurate moves and he collapsed my position. In the last round I played my friend Chad Salinas who I knew when we were both in Southern California. I actually misplayed the opening and he was probably already ok, but then he blundered away a crucial center pawn and resigned.
What can I say about this tournament? My score of 3.5/5 isn't great, but it's not terrible either. I wasn't too happy with my technique in round 2, and I shouldn't have missed simple stuff in round 3, in round 4 I wasn't happy, but my opponent played well, of course I'd prefer to "school" these grade-school prodigies, but g/45 is tough. In round 5 I need to study this opening line a little better (which I have some now and am even considering adding it as a possible defense as black), but at least I didn't miss my opportunities.
Rating Change: 2125 -> 2119
Okay, I was a little slow about writing this one up, sorry to my loyal fans. First round I won pretty smoothly. Second round I got a gigantic advantage out of the opening only to blow it away and I eventually won some same color bishop endgame after missing many wins in it where it may have even been drawn at some point (although I'm not 100% sure). Third round I played a low expert, I was careless in the opening and allowed a check to displace my king where I still stood well, but needed to play some active moves as despite my exposed king I was still ahead in development, I failed to do so and got an inferior position. I did create tricks in the position however which allowed me to come back and I even missed a simple win. I was still pushing in an opposition color bishop + rook endgame where in time trouble I blundered to allow a simplification into a dead-drawn opposite color bishop endgame, but the original endgame may have been drawn anyways. In the fourth round I faced the talented kid Nicholas Nip. As a note, in the current rating list I have now played (and gotten at least a draw) against the #1 age 8, age 10, age 11, and age 16. Nicholas surprised me in the opening being very well prepared after last time when he carelessly dropped a piece in the same opening. I got a tough position and tried to sacrifice an exchange to stay alive, but I played a few inaccurate moves and he collapsed my position. In the last round I played my friend Chad Salinas who I knew when we were both in Southern California. I actually misplayed the opening and he was probably already ok, but then he blundered away a crucial center pawn and resigned.
What can I say about this tournament? My score of 3.5/5 isn't great, but it's not terrible either. I wasn't too happy with my technique in round 2, and I shouldn't have missed simple stuff in round 3, in round 4 I wasn't happy, but my opponent played well, of course I'd prefer to "school" these grade-school prodigies, but g/45 is tough. In round 5 I need to study this opening line a little better (which I have some now and am even considering adding it as a possible defense as black), but at least I didn't miss my opportunities.
Rating Change: 2125 -> 2119
Tuesday, November 28, 2006
US Chess League Championships!!! My completely biased predictions
Okay, for the 2nd week in a row, I will be writing completely biased predictions which will be criticized and then end up being criticized for being biased even though I never claimed otherwise.
Board 1: IM Friedel - GM Charbonneau
Friedel has been untouchable this season as white except one game where he was defending and probably lost, but saved a draw after some middlegame inaccuracies. Will Charbonneau dare repeat this line with Josh having another chance to prepare? My guess is he'll probably play another 2.. e6 sicilian, but maybe a different setup this time, that one he played last time is actually one I faced this weekend and I have the feeling the very early d5 might be a little dubious. Edge still goes to Friedel who is always tough as white.
Board 2: IM Krush - IM Pruess
Krush has done quite well this season whereas Pruess' season hasn't been as good as he's hoped, but he came off a very strong result this weekend at the American Open and will come in with good confindence. I think stylistically this matchup should be very interesting, both players are strong calculators, I give Pruess the edge due to his strong recent results.
Board 3: IM Zilberstein - FM Hess
Hess has managed to save some tough positions this season, but Zilberstein is probably the second toughest opponent he's faced all season and Zilberstein is also coming off a strong showing at the American Open. Also Zilberstein has been quite strong this season, his only loss was to Vavrak who has been incredibly tough in the US Chess League. This is also only Zilberstein's 2nd game as white this season. My guess is Hess will put up a good fight, but Zilberstein will grind out the "W".
Board 4: Herman - NM Shankland
I think this time control works well for Shankland, he's capable of putting his opponents under pressure without suffering from the lack of time. As long as Shankland is well prepared I expect he'll have good chances, but Herman has also been tough, I'll rule this one a toss-up.
Okay, so we'll assume somehow NY gets their best possible result:
San Francisco over NY 3-1.
Board 1: IM Friedel - GM Charbonneau
Friedel has been untouchable this season as white except one game where he was defending and probably lost, but saved a draw after some middlegame inaccuracies. Will Charbonneau dare repeat this line with Josh having another chance to prepare? My guess is he'll probably play another 2.. e6 sicilian, but maybe a different setup this time, that one he played last time is actually one I faced this weekend and I have the feeling the very early d5 might be a little dubious. Edge still goes to Friedel who is always tough as white.
Board 2: IM Krush - IM Pruess
Krush has done quite well this season whereas Pruess' season hasn't been as good as he's hoped, but he came off a very strong result this weekend at the American Open and will come in with good confindence. I think stylistically this matchup should be very interesting, both players are strong calculators, I give Pruess the edge due to his strong recent results.
Board 3: IM Zilberstein - FM Hess
Hess has managed to save some tough positions this season, but Zilberstein is probably the second toughest opponent he's faced all season and Zilberstein is also coming off a strong showing at the American Open. Also Zilberstein has been quite strong this season, his only loss was to Vavrak who has been incredibly tough in the US Chess League. This is also only Zilberstein's 2nd game as white this season. My guess is Hess will put up a good fight, but Zilberstein will grind out the "W".
Board 4: Herman - NM Shankland
I think this time control works well for Shankland, he's capable of putting his opponents under pressure without suffering from the lack of time. As long as Shankland is well prepared I expect he'll have good chances, but Herman has also been tough, I'll rule this one a toss-up.
Okay, so we'll assume somehow NY gets their best possible result:
San Francisco over NY 3-1.
American Open Results
American Open Results:
Well, as I seem to spend a good deal of time here writing about the Mechanics, I might as well congratulate IM Pruess and IM Zilberstein for their performances this weekend. I would also like to congratulate my former (due to geographical restrictions) coach GM Khachiyan on his victory and his very nice win over GM Perelshteyn (who led almost the entire way). Pruess tied for 1st place in the tournament with Khachiyan. Zilberstein took clear first U2450, I talked to both of them after their games, both seemed very unhappy that they didn't do better! Apparently BOTH were upset about not scoring more, I invite them to take out their frustration with having each of their most recent games being a draw to turning their most recent games into wins on Wednesday in the US Chess League championships against New York.
[Update: I forgot to mention when I originally wrote this that not only did Pruess and Khachiyan win the event, their victories also qualified them for the 2007 US Championship. An additional congratulations to these two for this accomplishment.]
My result:
Well, my result I can't really call "bad", but in many ways I was unhappy with my play. I'll cover round by round. The first four rounds were game in 1 hour. In round 1 I played IM Matikozyan as black. He played a bad move against the french and I opted out of the most natural (and best!) reply to play a move over which I completely overlooked his response. I could accept a very depressing position, but instead I decided to sacrifice a pawn. This actually was probably not the correct decision, but anyways, he held onto his pawn and won the game although we were both under 1 minute at the end of the game and he had to find a fairly easy breakthrough to win, but still, not a great way to lose.
In round 2 I faced my friend NM Julian Landaw as black. A little history in this pairing: we've played 4 times now, I've had black in all 3 encounters. I collapsed quickly in our first meeting, but in the 2nd one I basically refuted his opening and in the 3rd game I again refuted the same opening, but failed to convert and drew the game. After this game, he entirely changed lines against the french and this time played a King's Indian Attack against it. We got an interesting position from the opening and after a few inaccuracies on my part he had a slightly better position, but I defended well and in the time scramble even developed an initiative after finding a series of accurate moves. In fact, at one point I had FORCED MATE! but it was tricky and I missed one move in the continuation that wasn't too hard to find. I'm quite upset about this as I saw the key idea just missed the simple continuation, quite sad. Even though I only had 1:30 on my clock I still believe I should find this win, I actually offered him a draw before he blundered not wanting a game between friends to be decided by a zeitnot blunder, and I guess it wasn't unfortunately. Eventually we drew although even in the final position (although under a minute + delay) I actually was still winning. If this were an isolated incident I could live with it.
Due to the small 3-day schedule in the open section I received a full point bye in round 3. Normally I much prefer to play, but after 2 games that went the full 2 hours I hadn't had any time to eat and was starving so I got to spectate in round 3. In round 4 I played 6. f4 against the Najdorf playing NM Paul Gallegos as white when I played a series of inaccurate moves in the opening which I was relatively unfamiliar with only to get an inferior position. I fought hard to defend in the middle game and eventually he went wrong by allowing some unfavorable exchanges and already I had a better position. At some point when we were both under 5 minutes he had a chance to just remain a pawn down in a R+ minor piece ending or to sacrifice his bishop for my 2 remaining pawns and defend R+N vs R+P which would have been unpleasant. Instead he let me trade into what is probably a winning R+P ending, but with less than a minute on my clock I reached for a pawn, grabbed it and immediately realized I had given up a draw. He decided not to take it and we played a few moves in this dead drawn position, but I defended with ease and we shook hands shortly afterwards.
So I had survived day one of what some were dubbing "the dead zone" due to the tough field (in fact, IM Zilberstein played UP in round 1. In round 5 I played a master from Austrailia a good piece of preparation netted me a winning position, but I failed to play some simple moves and got myself in trouble at which point I was relieved by my opponents draw offer. I was probably not worse in the position, but I certainly wouldn't mind playing the black side.
In round 6 I played my friend NM Ilya Serpik whom I have a very good record against. On move 23 I won a pawn, but I somehow moved my queen from an absolutely beautiful square on c3 and allowed counter-play and took a draw.
In round 7 I played NM Aigner who I had played recently played. He surprised me by playing the Sveshnikov and I got a good position, but it was complicated and I got myself into time trouble and played some bad moves to throw away my advantage and give my opponent a strong attacker, a good attack. He easily wiped me away and gave me my second loss of the tournament.
I should talk about my feelings going into the last day. I had played 6 rounds (okay, only actually played 5) and still hadn't put a win on the board, I was quite upset as at this point I had 4 games where I had winning positions. So in round 8 I prepared for a Caltech grad student Cedric Pahud who is from Switzerland. I had prepared for about 30 minutes the 6. f4 line against the Najdorf that I played in round 4, but when the position arose on the board I flippantly decided that I would play Be3 instead. My opponent played a side line that isn't supposed to be good, but I played some inaccurate moves and I did not get as big of an advantage as I think I could have. Anyways, we played on and I got a strong attack eventually, but allowed the position to complicate near time control (where I got in time trouble along with my opponent trying to find the strongest continuations. Eventually i won a pawn, but the position was very wild, but I found a strong continuation but my opponent eventually buckled under the pressure and allowed me to force mate. Finally a win!
Rating change: 2110-> 2125
Well, as I seem to spend a good deal of time here writing about the Mechanics, I might as well congratulate IM Pruess and IM Zilberstein for their performances this weekend. I would also like to congratulate my former (due to geographical restrictions) coach GM Khachiyan on his victory and his very nice win over GM Perelshteyn (who led almost the entire way). Pruess tied for 1st place in the tournament with Khachiyan. Zilberstein took clear first U2450, I talked to both of them after their games, both seemed very unhappy that they didn't do better! Apparently BOTH were upset about not scoring more, I invite them to take out their frustration with having each of their most recent games being a draw to turning their most recent games into wins on Wednesday in the US Chess League championships against New York.
[Update: I forgot to mention when I originally wrote this that not only did Pruess and Khachiyan win the event, their victories also qualified them for the 2007 US Championship. An additional congratulations to these two for this accomplishment.]
My result:
Well, my result I can't really call "bad", but in many ways I was unhappy with my play. I'll cover round by round. The first four rounds were game in 1 hour. In round 1 I played IM Matikozyan as black. He played a bad move against the french and I opted out of the most natural (and best!) reply to play a move over which I completely overlooked his response. I could accept a very depressing position, but instead I decided to sacrifice a pawn. This actually was probably not the correct decision, but anyways, he held onto his pawn and won the game although we were both under 1 minute at the end of the game and he had to find a fairly easy breakthrough to win, but still, not a great way to lose.
In round 2 I faced my friend NM Julian Landaw as black. A little history in this pairing: we've played 4 times now, I've had black in all 3 encounters. I collapsed quickly in our first meeting, but in the 2nd one I basically refuted his opening and in the 3rd game I again refuted the same opening, but failed to convert and drew the game. After this game, he entirely changed lines against the french and this time played a King's Indian Attack against it. We got an interesting position from the opening and after a few inaccuracies on my part he had a slightly better position, but I defended well and in the time scramble even developed an initiative after finding a series of accurate moves. In fact, at one point I had FORCED MATE! but it was tricky and I missed one move in the continuation that wasn't too hard to find. I'm quite upset about this as I saw the key idea just missed the simple continuation, quite sad. Even though I only had 1:30 on my clock I still believe I should find this win, I actually offered him a draw before he blundered not wanting a game between friends to be decided by a zeitnot blunder, and I guess it wasn't unfortunately. Eventually we drew although even in the final position (although under a minute + delay) I actually was still winning. If this were an isolated incident I could live with it.
Due to the small 3-day schedule in the open section I received a full point bye in round 3. Normally I much prefer to play, but after 2 games that went the full 2 hours I hadn't had any time to eat and was starving so I got to spectate in round 3. In round 4 I played 6. f4 against the Najdorf playing NM Paul Gallegos as white when I played a series of inaccurate moves in the opening which I was relatively unfamiliar with only to get an inferior position. I fought hard to defend in the middle game and eventually he went wrong by allowing some unfavorable exchanges and already I had a better position. At some point when we were both under 5 minutes he had a chance to just remain a pawn down in a R+ minor piece ending or to sacrifice his bishop for my 2 remaining pawns and defend R+N vs R+P which would have been unpleasant. Instead he let me trade into what is probably a winning R+P ending, but with less than a minute on my clock I reached for a pawn, grabbed it and immediately realized I had given up a draw. He decided not to take it and we played a few moves in this dead drawn position, but I defended with ease and we shook hands shortly afterwards.
So I had survived day one of what some were dubbing "the dead zone" due to the tough field (in fact, IM Zilberstein played UP in round 1. In round 5 I played a master from Austrailia a good piece of preparation netted me a winning position, but I failed to play some simple moves and got myself in trouble at which point I was relieved by my opponents draw offer. I was probably not worse in the position, but I certainly wouldn't mind playing the black side.
In round 6 I played my friend NM Ilya Serpik whom I have a very good record against. On move 23 I won a pawn, but I somehow moved my queen from an absolutely beautiful square on c3 and allowed counter-play and took a draw.
In round 7 I played NM Aigner who I had played recently played. He surprised me by playing the Sveshnikov and I got a good position, but it was complicated and I got myself into time trouble and played some bad moves to throw away my advantage and give my opponent a strong attacker, a good attack. He easily wiped me away and gave me my second loss of the tournament.
I should talk about my feelings going into the last day. I had played 6 rounds (okay, only actually played 5) and still hadn't put a win on the board, I was quite upset as at this point I had 4 games where I had winning positions. So in round 8 I prepared for a Caltech grad student Cedric Pahud who is from Switzerland. I had prepared for about 30 minutes the 6. f4 line against the Najdorf that I played in round 4, but when the position arose on the board I flippantly decided that I would play Be3 instead. My opponent played a side line that isn't supposed to be good, but I played some inaccurate moves and I did not get as big of an advantage as I think I could have. Anyways, we played on and I got a strong attack eventually, but allowed the position to complicate near time control (where I got in time trouble along with my opponent trying to find the strongest continuations. Eventually i won a pawn, but the position was very wild, but I found a strong continuation but my opponent eventually buckled under the pressure and allowed me to force mate. Finally a win!
Rating change: 2110-> 2125
Tuesday, November 14, 2006
USCL Division Championships Predictions
USCL Division Championships Predictions:
There are two exciting match-ups tomorrow night on ICC as part of the US Chess League. In the eastern division the Boston Blitz face off against the New York Knights in a classic sports rivalry while in the western division the San Francisco Mechanics take on the Seattle Sluggers of whom one of the biggest season rivalries took place with. Here's the breakdown of each match:
Boston Blitz vs New York Knights (Boston has draw odds)
These two teams met up just a few weeks ago with very similar lineups, the only differences on each side were board 1 for Boston and board 3 for New York, and the two games with the same players have colors reversed. Last time it ended in a 2-2 tie, this isn't good enough for New York this time around (although it wasn't ideal last time around either), which team has improved their chances more?
Board 1:
GM Christiansen - GM Charbonneau
These two have a colorful history in the USCL. In 2 encounters, both times Christiansen having the white pieces, he has failed get on the scoreboard and was posterized in the USCL game of the season from season 1 when Charbonneau managed to come back from a piece down (albeit complicated) position to win. I'm sure Christiansen is eager not to let his score drop to 0-3 with the white pieces and I expect him to have a slight edge in this encounter.
Board 2:
IM Krush - IM Foygel
The last time these two met up was just a few weeks ago with colors reversed. Foygel got the better end of that fight in a line he seemed to know better than Krush it seems unlikely the same thing will happen this week when Krush has the white pieces. Seems like the one thing you should be able to guarantee with the white pieces is getting a position you're comfortable with. Krush should have a slight edge in this match-up, probably similar to the one Christiansen has on board 1.
Board 3:
NM Riordan - FM Hess
This is in my opinion one of the truly tough games to try to say something useful about. I think Riordan having the white pieces should negate any rating edge Hess has, but all 3 results are possible, I think this one is pretty even but a decisive result is likely, could be an important game to the match.
Board 4:
Herman - NM Krasik
It would be easy to think about the encounter these two had a few weeks ago and say "If Herman won with black, he can certainly win with white", well things never work out so easily in practice. Krasik has been tough all season and seems to deserve the edge on board 4.
The key to this match is going to be the Riordan - Hess game. If Hess can win, New York will have very real chances to upset New York, but I think without a full point there they could be without much hope and a loss would all but put the nail in the coffin. I think Boston moves on to the league championships about 75% of the time.
Boston over New York 2.5-1.5
San Francisco Mechanics vs Seattle Sluggers (SF has draw odds)
Certainly for me, the self-proclaimed biggest fan of the Mechanics, this is the match I'll be looking forward to on Wednesday. I won't pretend to be the most objective analyst in this battle, but at the same time, San Francisco already has had an impressive season with 10 straight weeks without a loss which is good news since all they have to do is not lose to move on to the league championships. In my 9 weeks as a prognosticator (I didn't start until week 2) I predicted San Francisco to win 8 times and draw only in the final week of the season when their playoff outcome was crystal clear. I will as I have been almost every Wednesday (except when it was the Monday Night game) be watching the Mechanics live. If you want to see them in action, I highly suggest you stop by this Wednesday.
Board 1:
IM Friedel - IM Serper
So far in their season encounter white has won both games which would bodes well for Friedel who in my opinion is much tougher to face when he's holding the white pieces. I also believe that Friedel has a positive lifetime score against Serper. I think Friedel has got a slight edge in this confrontation.
Board 2:
IM Orlov - IM Bhat
A few weeks ago these two were pitted in what was dubbed a match between two players undefeated in the USCL. Thanks to Bhat's nice victory in that game we don't have to worry that it will be given the same title this time around. I'm guessing it will be a semi-slav which would seem too theoretical compared to much of what Orlov plays which I think should give the edge to the generally well-prepared Bhat. I'm also expecting a somewhat wild encounter as Seattle needs to try to stir things up to give themselves the best chance to make it.
Board 3:
IM Pruess - FM Milat
Milat joined the Sluggers late into the season and played just the minimum two matches to make him eligible for post-season play. Seattle sends in a cold player to try to defend against the Mechanics? I'm guess this will be an Alekine's defense which already spells bad news for the Sluggers, edge to Pruess.
Board 4:
Lee - NM Shankland
This is another match-up we've seen a couple of times this season already. Both times white won, will it be a threepeat for the white pieces? I'm not as confident here. Last time black got a very reasonable position from the opening and just played one misstep to get into some real trouble. After this incident the young Shankland has been under the "nanny cam" having to sit in between two players so he will feel pressured not to move so impulsively. So far this has worked well as Sam has won all other encounters this season. I'm not feeling mean enough to outright claim an edge for SF on all 4 boards so I'll just call this one an "interesting" encounter.
All the Mechanics have to do to move on is not lose, shouldn't be too tough, they've been doing exactly that all season long. I won't even give a % for SF to move on because likely the number I would write down would be illogical (how can you win more than all the encounters anyways??).
San Francisco advances over Seattle 3-1
Boston Blitz vs New York Knights (Boston has draw odds)
These two teams met up just a few weeks ago with very similar lineups, the only differences on each side were board 1 for Boston and board 3 for New York, and the two games with the same players have colors reversed. Last time it ended in a 2-2 tie, this isn't good enough for New York this time around (although it wasn't ideal last time around either), which team has improved their chances more?
Board 1:
GM Christiansen - GM Charbonneau
These two have a colorful history in the USCL. In 2 encounters, both times Christiansen having the white pieces, he has failed get on the scoreboard and was posterized in the USCL game of the season from season 1 when Charbonneau managed to come back from a piece down (albeit complicated) position to win. I'm sure Christiansen is eager not to let his score drop to 0-3 with the white pieces and I expect him to have a slight edge in this encounter.
Board 2:
IM Krush - IM Foygel
The last time these two met up was just a few weeks ago with colors reversed. Foygel got the better end of that fight in a line he seemed to know better than Krush it seems unlikely the same thing will happen this week when Krush has the white pieces. Seems like the one thing you should be able to guarantee with the white pieces is getting a position you're comfortable with. Krush should have a slight edge in this match-up, probably similar to the one Christiansen has on board 1.
Board 3:
NM Riordan - FM Hess
This is in my opinion one of the truly tough games to try to say something useful about. I think Riordan having the white pieces should negate any rating edge Hess has, but all 3 results are possible, I think this one is pretty even but a decisive result is likely, could be an important game to the match.
Board 4:
Herman - NM Krasik
It would be easy to think about the encounter these two had a few weeks ago and say "If Herman won with black, he can certainly win with white", well things never work out so easily in practice. Krasik has been tough all season and seems to deserve the edge on board 4.
The key to this match is going to be the Riordan - Hess game. If Hess can win, New York will have very real chances to upset New York, but I think without a full point there they could be without much hope and a loss would all but put the nail in the coffin. I think Boston moves on to the league championships about 75% of the time.
Boston over New York 2.5-1.5
San Francisco Mechanics vs Seattle Sluggers (SF has draw odds)
Certainly for me, the self-proclaimed biggest fan of the Mechanics, this is the match I'll be looking forward to on Wednesday. I won't pretend to be the most objective analyst in this battle, but at the same time, San Francisco already has had an impressive season with 10 straight weeks without a loss which is good news since all they have to do is not lose to move on to the league championships. In my 9 weeks as a prognosticator (I didn't start until week 2) I predicted San Francisco to win 8 times and draw only in the final week of the season when their playoff outcome was crystal clear. I will as I have been almost every Wednesday (except when it was the Monday Night game) be watching the Mechanics live. If you want to see them in action, I highly suggest you stop by this Wednesday.
Board 1:
IM Friedel - IM Serper
So far in their season encounter white has won both games which would bodes well for Friedel who in my opinion is much tougher to face when he's holding the white pieces. I also believe that Friedel has a positive lifetime score against Serper. I think Friedel has got a slight edge in this confrontation.
Board 2:
IM Orlov - IM Bhat
A few weeks ago these two were pitted in what was dubbed a match between two players undefeated in the USCL. Thanks to Bhat's nice victory in that game we don't have to worry that it will be given the same title this time around. I'm guessing it will be a semi-slav which would seem too theoretical compared to much of what Orlov plays which I think should give the edge to the generally well-prepared Bhat. I'm also expecting a somewhat wild encounter as Seattle needs to try to stir things up to give themselves the best chance to make it.
Board 3:
IM Pruess - FM Milat
Milat joined the Sluggers late into the season and played just the minimum two matches to make him eligible for post-season play. Seattle sends in a cold player to try to defend against the Mechanics? I'm guess this will be an Alekine's defense which already spells bad news for the Sluggers, edge to Pruess.
Board 4:
Lee - NM Shankland
This is another match-up we've seen a couple of times this season already. Both times white won, will it be a threepeat for the white pieces? I'm not as confident here. Last time black got a very reasonable position from the opening and just played one misstep to get into some real trouble. After this incident the young Shankland has been under the "nanny cam" having to sit in between two players so he will feel pressured not to move so impulsively. So far this has worked well as Sam has won all other encounters this season. I'm not feeling mean enough to outright claim an edge for SF on all 4 boards so I'll just call this one an "interesting" encounter.
All the Mechanics have to do to move on is not lose, shouldn't be too tough, they've been doing exactly that all season long. I won't even give a % for SF to move on because likely the number I would write down would be illogical (how can you win more than all the encounters anyways??).
San Francisco advances over Seattle 3-1
Monday, November 13, 2006
Carroll Capps Memorial
In past years this was a relatively strong event, it wasn't quite as strong this year, but there were a few masters I wanted to get a crack at. The tournament started well, in the first round I got my warm-up by slowly outplaying a B-player to get the win as black. In the second round I played a young (and hence dangerous) 1800 as white and got a nice King's Indianesque mating attack on the white side of the open Sicilian strangely enough. In round 3 disaster struck. My opponent played a move I knew from previous preparation to be dubious, but I didn't take the time to calculate moves I "knew" to be theory when in fact I was confusing two similar lines that would have been easy to check if I had calculated so I ended up just dropping a pawn then followed it up by blundering and exchange. I fought back tough and at some point was even up a pawn for the exchange I blundered so early, but my opponent held on for the win. In round 4 (the last g/1) I faced an unrated guy from Germany who was reasonably strong and had a provisional (but still unpublished) rating of 179x. He played a tricky opening line and I made one mistake to give back his sacrificed pawn and go into an endgame that was slightly better for black. My opponent seemed eager just to draw, but I was not ready for this result so I played on despite my slightly inferior position and I was rewarded later by being able to play a nice tactic on the board that won 2 pawns (it offered a rook sacrifice that could not be accepted do to a somewhat strange looking mate) and after that I won easily. So finally I got to go home and rest and prepare for an opponent I had played not too long ago. This time he chose to play the advanced variation against "my" french defense and played 2 or arguably 3 horrific positional moves the the opening when I got what I thought was close to a winning advantage. Unfortunately I played one move based on miscalculation which gave him the moves h3 and g4 for free which really put me under a bind. I thought my position was close to lost when I realized that I had a nice resource which he needed to avoid as it won on the spot following a strong attack I had for the exchange. I eventually ended up in a 3 pawn up R+N endgame where my technique was far from optimal but more than good enough to win. In the last round I finally got to play NM Michael Aigner. This was my first game against a player 2200-2450 since reno (i.e. a stronger player, but one I could be reasonably expected to score some points against too). I played very strangely in the opening (he played the bird's opening which is famous for with the nickname fpawn on ICC) and we reached a complicated middlegame which just favored white in all variations unfortunately, I tried to generate some tricks, but it was to no avail and he wrapped up the point cleanly. Overall even though the result was similar, I can be much happier with my play this weekend, I feel my tactics getting better, I just need to continue to practice before American Open in 2 weeks.
Estimated Rating Change: 2116 ->2110
Estimated Rating Change: 2116 ->2110
EBCC Nov Swiss
I was quite lazy reporting on this disappointing result. Sam Shankland convinced me to play in this tournament at the East Bay Chess Club when normally I avoid tournaments with no or little chance of playing stronger opponents (yes I realize the paradox in this, but I'm not strong enough where I feel this is a real issue yet). He told me I would be the 5th seed in what is normally a small event so this looked like a good chance to play "up" in 2/4 rounds or more. However, when I arrived that Saturday (a little over a week ago now) I found out this was not the case at all and in fact I was the 2nd seed. So I started the tournament against a mid-A player who surprised me with a move that is probably objectively bad, but was quite difficult to find the best response to over the board. Fortunately, he soon when awry and played a sacrifice that I proved unsound due to a counter-sacrifice. I achieved an endgame that should be won with 2 Knights versus a rook, but the technical task was quite difficult and I messed it up a little bit an failed to win. Quite sad. The next round I played one inaccurate move in the opening in a Petroff and already a very sterile position was reached and after only slightly more than 20 moves the position was near dead so we shook hands. This wasn't quite as bad as the opponent was also an expert. I came back the next day looking to finally get a W on the board when I faced Adarsh Konda for the 3rd time in about 2 months as black. This time he again chose a different line against the Slav, I didn't choose the best reaction, but still got a very comfortable position from the opening. I held a slight advantage for a long time, but then near time control (due to missing my B.A.R.T train and also missing the first bus from the BART station I showed up 30 minutes late to the game) I played some inaccurate moves and I was on the slightly worse side of an endgame which I held without too much difficulty. In the last game I was playing another A-player looking for some blood after 3 draws in a row. After some opening inaccuracies on my part I already felt under pressure as white, but fortunately my opponent let me back in the game and at some point I traded into an endgame that I was almost positive would be winning or at least in practice winning for me, and after missing like 5 wins (but to be fair, they weren't trivial 1-move wins or anything, they required very concrete calculation, which is no excuse, but at least not as pathetic) I only managed to draw. So 4 draws in 4 rounds, incredibly disappointing and 2/4 is definitely my worst "undefeated" result ever.
Rating change: 2129 -> 2116
Rating change: 2129 -> 2116
Tuesday, November 07, 2006
USCL Playoffs Wildcard Round
Playoffs Wildcard Round
After the insane finish in the USCL East, this should be an intense final. I don't know if the prediction competition ended with the regular season, I still have a hefty lead and there probably aren't really enough matches left for the official prognosticators to catch up without a Carolina-style miracle to occur anyways. But I will make traditional score predictions and give you what I think the percentage of the time each team moves on is just for some extra information during this exciting time of the season.
New York Knights vs Carolina Cobras (NY has draw odds)
Board 1: GM Charbonneau - IM Milman
These two already have an interesting history this season alone. In their first encounter Milman looked quite lame as white losing quickly and getting mated in the middle of the board. In their second encounter Milman turned the tables unexpectedly winning as black. Now these two face off in the playoffs with the same color as their second encounter. The edge I'll give to Charonneau, even as white. (Note that in the regular season black won the season match 100.5-99.5)
Board 2: FM Hoekstra - IM Krush
In their last encounter with these colors Krush played a QGA and went into one of the symmetrical pawn-structure lines where white usually has a very nagging edge. Not in this particular game though. Hoekstra didn't play in the spirit of the position it seems and quickly got a passive position which Krush finished off easily. As Carolina picked their colors for this match, I'm thinking he'll have some improvements prepared, but Krush is a versatile player who can play many different openings, I think she has the edge in this matchup.
Board 3: FM Hess - FM Zaikov
Zaikov started the season very hot this year, and still finished the season with his only loss being against IM Costigan. Hess on the other hand started the season struggling with board 2 duties, but since his move down to board 3 he has been quite successful. This should definitely be a close game, both players are young and confident, my guess is a small edge to Hess with the white pieces.
Board 4: NM Jones - Herman
At the end of the season Herman managed to hold his own against some tough opposition, but Jones finished the season 5.5/6, that cannot be ignored, especially when he has white for this game. Jones is favored by a bit.
So it seems that NY has a very real edge on a bunch of boards, but Carolina always has an X-factor by having an incredibly young lineup where they're behind. The edge has to go to NY, but Carolina should have good chances for an upset, that being said, I'm not sure they deserve any more luck after last week.
NY over Car 2.5-1.5
NY has draw odds, I predict they move on roughly 75% of the time.
Dallas Destiny vs Seattle Sluggers (Seattle has draw odds)
Dallas failed to win just last week with the same colors, this week Seattle has draw odds. We are seeing some different faces than last week though. The seemingly untouchable IM Vavrak sits out for the Destiny this week and FM Zaremba also steps down to let IM Kuljasevic and FM Igor Schneider try to step it up this week.
Board 1:
IM Stopa - GM Serper
Last week Serper played some sideline of the semi-slav, strangely declining to go into the semi-slav as black. I'm not sure if he'll be willing to try this again as it seemed as though white was never in serious trouble and will probably have an improvement prepared. However, Serper is not one to be afraid of a fight, I think this matchup is fairly balanced, maybe a slight edge to Serper.
Board 2:
FM Mikhailuk - IM Kuljasevic
Kuljasevic has sat out more than a few weeks this season, this is only his 4th match in the USCL. He's had reasonably results, going 2.5/3 beating Pruess as white and drawing the struggling Roman with black. Mikhailuk on the other hand has struggled late in the season and is probably hoping to get some footing so the team knows he can be depended on, especially as white. I think Kuljasevic has the edge here.
Board 3:
FM Schneider - FM Readey
Schneider hasn't looked too imppressive in his matches so far going just 1/3, but he's young and this is only the second time he takes the white pieces this season. I don't know if he has some concrete idea in mind against Readey who's been reasonably solid this season, but he might need something. I'm guessing this game will be a draw, but probably slightly better chances for Schneider.
Board 4:
NM Koons - NM Kiewra
Dallas and Seattle send out the same board 4s this week with the same colors. This makes a lot of sense for Seattle, but probably not as much for Dallas. Their last week's game was messy, but it seemed that white got a nice initiative which he held for most of the game. I'm guessing Kiewra is going to have some concrete ideas in mind playing the same player with the same color for the second week in a row, still these things don't always go so well.
Overall I'd say it's a pretty even match, no boards with a particularly huge edge to either side and with Seattle having draw odds for this match, that will likely be good enough. Probably the key matchup in my mind is the rematch on board 4, if Kiewra can bring in a full point there it could mean victory for the Destiny. So if we say that'll happen roughly 30-35% of the time, we probably almost get their odds in the match.
Seatle ties Dallas 2-2 (to move on)
Roughly 70% chance of Seattle moving on to the next round.
After the insane finish in the USCL East, this should be an intense final. I don't know if the prediction competition ended with the regular season, I still have a hefty lead and there probably aren't really enough matches left for the official prognosticators to catch up without a Carolina-style miracle to occur anyways. But I will make traditional score predictions and give you what I think the percentage of the time each team moves on is just for some extra information during this exciting time of the season.
New York Knights vs Carolina Cobras (NY has draw odds)
Board 1: GM Charbonneau - IM Milman
These two already have an interesting history this season alone. In their first encounter Milman looked quite lame as white losing quickly and getting mated in the middle of the board. In their second encounter Milman turned the tables unexpectedly winning as black. Now these two face off in the playoffs with the same color as their second encounter. The edge I'll give to Charonneau, even as white. (Note that in the regular season black won the season match 100.5-99.5)
Board 2: FM Hoekstra - IM Krush
In their last encounter with these colors Krush played a QGA and went into one of the symmetrical pawn-structure lines where white usually has a very nagging edge. Not in this particular game though. Hoekstra didn't play in the spirit of the position it seems and quickly got a passive position which Krush finished off easily. As Carolina picked their colors for this match, I'm thinking he'll have some improvements prepared, but Krush is a versatile player who can play many different openings, I think she has the edge in this matchup.
Board 3: FM Hess - FM Zaikov
Zaikov started the season very hot this year, and still finished the season with his only loss being against IM Costigan. Hess on the other hand started the season struggling with board 2 duties, but since his move down to board 3 he has been quite successful. This should definitely be a close game, both players are young and confident, my guess is a small edge to Hess with the white pieces.
Board 4: NM Jones - Herman
At the end of the season Herman managed to hold his own against some tough opposition, but Jones finished the season 5.5/6, that cannot be ignored, especially when he has white for this game. Jones is favored by a bit.
So it seems that NY has a very real edge on a bunch of boards, but Carolina always has an X-factor by having an incredibly young lineup where they're behind. The edge has to go to NY, but Carolina should have good chances for an upset, that being said, I'm not sure they deserve any more luck after last week.
NY over Car 2.5-1.5
NY has draw odds, I predict they move on roughly 75% of the time.
Dallas Destiny vs Seattle Sluggers (Seattle has draw odds)
Dallas failed to win just last week with the same colors, this week Seattle has draw odds. We are seeing some different faces than last week though. The seemingly untouchable IM Vavrak sits out for the Destiny this week and FM Zaremba also steps down to let IM Kuljasevic and FM Igor Schneider try to step it up this week.
Board 1:
IM Stopa - GM Serper
Last week Serper played some sideline of the semi-slav, strangely declining to go into the semi-slav as black. I'm not sure if he'll be willing to try this again as it seemed as though white was never in serious trouble and will probably have an improvement prepared. However, Serper is not one to be afraid of a fight, I think this matchup is fairly balanced, maybe a slight edge to Serper.
Board 2:
FM Mikhailuk - IM Kuljasevic
Kuljasevic has sat out more than a few weeks this season, this is only his 4th match in the USCL. He's had reasonably results, going 2.5/3 beating Pruess as white and drawing the struggling Roman with black. Mikhailuk on the other hand has struggled late in the season and is probably hoping to get some footing so the team knows he can be depended on, especially as white. I think Kuljasevic has the edge here.
Board 3:
FM Schneider - FM Readey
Schneider hasn't looked too imppressive in his matches so far going just 1/3, but he's young and this is only the second time he takes the white pieces this season. I don't know if he has some concrete idea in mind against Readey who's been reasonably solid this season, but he might need something. I'm guessing this game will be a draw, but probably slightly better chances for Schneider.
Board 4:
NM Koons - NM Kiewra
Dallas and Seattle send out the same board 4s this week with the same colors. This makes a lot of sense for Seattle, but probably not as much for Dallas. Their last week's game was messy, but it seemed that white got a nice initiative which he held for most of the game. I'm guessing Kiewra is going to have some concrete ideas in mind playing the same player with the same color for the second week in a row, still these things don't always go so well.
Overall I'd say it's a pretty even match, no boards with a particularly huge edge to either side and with Seattle having draw odds for this match, that will likely be good enough. Probably the key matchup in my mind is the rematch on board 4, if Kiewra can bring in a full point there it could mean victory for the Destiny. So if we say that'll happen roughly 30-35% of the time, we probably almost get their odds in the match.
Seatle ties Dallas 2-2 (to move on)
Roughly 70% chance of Seattle moving on to the next round.
Friday, November 03, 2006
Lack of Scandal in the USCL?
First I would like to preface this, I honestly don't believe that anybody did anything to intentionally alter the results in this final week of play in the US Chess League, but when the line is margins and funny things that would normally be dismissed happen they make a big difference.
So I was watching at the Mechanics the San Francisco - Miami match when the whole series of mouseslips occurred. As I witness McCambridge was having trouble with his mouse, he accidentally picked up the rook on b1 and then was trying to set it back down which he was struggling with and for some reason tried to then move the knight without having let go of the rook at which point he accidentally dropped the rook on d1 at which point he immediately claimed a mouseslip. Of course it's quite obvious that an IM would not just simply undefend a pawn on b4, it's not even a typical blunder as his move relaly had no additive purpose (his position was already quite bad). Then there was a the Lugo - Zilberstein game where Lugo played 17. Re5 which didn't really surprise me as I was watching the game and had considered this move thinking that black couldn't take due to dxe5 Bxe5 as played (temporarily) in the game, of course I missed 18... Bd6 which wins the game. So all of this was played on the board during this incident in the McCambridge - Becerra while McCambridge was asking for his takeback. So I'm very confused about the Miami side of the Lugo incident. I don't know if he legitimately played Re4, I would say it's less obvious that this move is a mouseslip of course I can't say for sure that it wasn't except it seems strange, especially due to the timing of this incident that Lugo played a SECOND move after Re5, like if it was a mouseslip the time to stop was after fxe5. I've also heard (unconfirmed) that Miami uses relayers to make moves in which case takebacks are explicitly allowed by the league rules if the correct move was made on the physical board. Anyways, both the games were won by the non mouse-slippers so it didn't end up making a difference in the end.
However, we're not done with strange incidents that had playoff implications. New York tied Philadelphia and Baltimore lost to Boston which actually opened the door for Carolina to make the playoffs with a 4-0 sweep on Tennessee ONLY. This is a pretty tall order against any team, but as the season has gone if you have to do this against some team, it might as well be Tennessee. However as things finished in the final position on board 2 Hoekstra stood in a trivially lost pawn endgame while his opponent had a 30 second increment to make his moves yet somehow he allowed time to run out. I don't know what caused this, relayer problems, a huge brawl in the Tempo clubhouse, but somehow they lost this game which had little meaning to them where even a draw would have eliminated Carolina from the playoffs. Certainly Philadelphia had other ways of not making the playoffs in this final week of play, but I would say this scenario was quite rare and the way it finished probably left a sour taste in their mouthes.
Anyways, it's all meaningless anyways, time for Mechanics to crush! It's playoff time and there's nothing more exciting than that. Games start next wednesday with Carolina taking black on board 1 and 3 and giving up draw odds against New York while Dallas takes white on boards 1 and 3 against Seattle and gives up draw odds. Dallas made a draw in that exact scenario this week which won't be good enough next week should be exciting to see where they're looking to improve.
So I was watching at the Mechanics the San Francisco - Miami match when the whole series of mouseslips occurred. As I witness McCambridge was having trouble with his mouse, he accidentally picked up the rook on b1 and then was trying to set it back down which he was struggling with and for some reason tried to then move the knight without having let go of the rook at which point he accidentally dropped the rook on d1 at which point he immediately claimed a mouseslip. Of course it's quite obvious that an IM would not just simply undefend a pawn on b4, it's not even a typical blunder as his move relaly had no additive purpose (his position was already quite bad). Then there was a the Lugo - Zilberstein game where Lugo played 17. Re5 which didn't really surprise me as I was watching the game and had considered this move thinking that black couldn't take due to dxe5 Bxe5 as played (temporarily) in the game, of course I missed 18... Bd6 which wins the game. So all of this was played on the board during this incident in the McCambridge - Becerra while McCambridge was asking for his takeback. So I'm very confused about the Miami side of the Lugo incident. I don't know if he legitimately played Re4, I would say it's less obvious that this move is a mouseslip of course I can't say for sure that it wasn't except it seems strange, especially due to the timing of this incident that Lugo played a SECOND move after Re5, like if it was a mouseslip the time to stop was after fxe5. I've also heard (unconfirmed) that Miami uses relayers to make moves in which case takebacks are explicitly allowed by the league rules if the correct move was made on the physical board. Anyways, both the games were won by the non mouse-slippers so it didn't end up making a difference in the end.
However, we're not done with strange incidents that had playoff implications. New York tied Philadelphia and Baltimore lost to Boston which actually opened the door for Carolina to make the playoffs with a 4-0 sweep on Tennessee ONLY. This is a pretty tall order against any team, but as the season has gone if you have to do this against some team, it might as well be Tennessee. However as things finished in the final position on board 2 Hoekstra stood in a trivially lost pawn endgame while his opponent had a 30 second increment to make his moves yet somehow he allowed time to run out. I don't know what caused this, relayer problems, a huge brawl in the Tempo clubhouse, but somehow they lost this game which had little meaning to them where even a draw would have eliminated Carolina from the playoffs. Certainly Philadelphia had other ways of not making the playoffs in this final week of play, but I would say this scenario was quite rare and the way it finished probably left a sour taste in their mouthes.
Anyways, it's all meaningless anyways, time for Mechanics to crush! It's playoff time and there's nothing more exciting than that. Games start next wednesday with Carolina taking black on board 1 and 3 and giving up draw odds against New York while Dallas takes white on boards 1 and 3 against Seattle and gives up draw odds. Dallas made a draw in that exact scenario this week which won't be good enough next week should be exciting to see where they're looking to improve.
Monday, October 30, 2006
USCL Week 10 predictions
Philadelphia Masterminds vs New York Knights
Unfortunately for this hot playoff race in the east Jan Ehlvest is unavailable it seems for Philly this week so it looks like they'll be in a tough position trying to get that final playoff spot with their late season rally. I definitely would rule them out just because of their rating trouble, they have dangerous players on their bottom 2 boards and a very solid player on board 2. Still I think New York has a solid edge on boards 1 and 2 and probably board 3 is a close one. My prediction gives New York the edge.
New York over Philadelphia 2.5-1.5
Baltimore Kingfishers vs Boston Blitz
This is an interesting situation, Baltimore still needs to defend their season to make the playoffs in their own control whereas Boston is sending out a lineup without a GM for the first time I can remember this season. On board 1 Baltimore should have a slight edge, but i wouldn't oversell the title. On board 2 it should be a fairly close game, Kelleher looked strong last week, but Enkhbat would be in MVP contention had he actually been playing this season. On board 3 Kaufman should have a pretty good edge over Riordan, but on board 4 I think I would pick Martirosov over the struggling Rohonyan.
Baltimore over Boston 2.5-1.5
Carolina Cobras vs Tennessee Tempo
Likely Carolina's playoff destiny will not be in their own hands, but if they want to give themselves real chances they have to win this one big and as they've been struggling all season I'm sure they're looking to give themselves every chance to make it. The lineup Carolina is bringing out tihs week looks like it should give them a chance to win on all 4 boards, but don't expect Tennessee to lay down after being excited after their first ever USCL victory. Still, I expect Carolina to take this match by a solid margin.
Carolina over Tennessee 3.5-0.5
San Francisco Mechanics vs Miami Sharks
San Francisco pulled a huge win last week to clinch the division over the division-rival sluggers and this week they're giving a few of their regular guns a rest (they'll also have week 1 in the playoffs off). For Miami however they can't hold back anything in this match. Dallas has a tough match against Seattle, but due to tie-break issues Miami MUST WIN this match in order to advance to the playoffs and they need Dallas to lose to Seattle. I expect Becerra to come out firing with black, but McCambridge has been really tough to beat in the USCL, especially this season. I think Becerra has the edge, but I wouldn't be surprised to see McCambridge put him away in the clean style we've seen from him earlier this season. On board 2 Zilberstein is seeing some time higher in the lineup than he's used to and he's looking at some tough competition so I'll have to give Lugo a slight edge with the white pieces. On board three Mark Pinto, another "Trusty Trustee" as Donaldson put it, is playign against NM Espino, but mark has the white pieces and has been deadly even in his 2 games as black this year, I expect Pinto to show up ready to do some damage, I'd give him the slight edge. On board 4 Sam Shankland faces off against Luis Barredo, on paper he's the lower-rated player, but only due to some old supplements used for the US Chess League to help teams set lineups, I expect Sam will be eager to show his form and I give him the edge here even with the black pieces. Overall I think it will be a close match that could easily go all 3 ways, but I think there's a lot more danger on the Mechanics side as Miami has a lot more to fear in this match. I'd say all 3 results are about equal so I'll be nice to the official USCL prognosticators and pick the relatively dangerous draw. (I can predict Mechanics to not win when all they have to protect right now is an undefeated season)
Mechanics tie Sharks 2-2
Dallas Destiny vs Seattle Sluggers
Seattle doesn't have too much they can gain from this match other than getting to pick their colors in the finals under some rare scenarios, but they're still bringing out one of their tougher lineups for the final week proving they really are playing to win every week. Also I doubt they want to go into the playoffs with consecutive losses. Still it might not be unreasonable not to give away too much against Dallas, if Seattle loses this week they'll likely see the same lineup in week 1 of the playoffs. On board one Stopa faces off against Serper, I think Serper should have an edge even with black, but definitely wouldn't rule Stopa out, he's been solid for Dallas all season. On board 2 Vavrak, who according the USCL page, is undefeated in 2 seasons of play and holds a perfect record this season faces off against Mikhailuk. Vavrak has black, but has been incredibly dangerous so far in the USCL so I have to give him the edge on board 2. On board 3 Zaremba faces Milat, it's a pretty close pairing, but I think Zaremba should have a slight edge as white. On board 4 Kiewra faces Koons in a battle of relatively young masters. This match has huge playoff implications in some sense for both teams, Seattle looking not to give up any psychological edge and Dallas wanting to score to make the playoffs. A draw would suit both teams quite nicely, clinching a playoff spot for Dallas and proving Seattle can do what it takes to move onto the Division Championship next week. I expect no love lost in the match.
Dallas ties Seattle 2-2
Overview:
NY over Phi 2.5-1.5
Bal over Bos 2.5-1.5
Car over Ten 3.5-0.5
SF tie Mia 2-2
Dal tie Sea 2-2
Unfortunately for this hot playoff race in the east Jan Ehlvest is unavailable it seems for Philly this week so it looks like they'll be in a tough position trying to get that final playoff spot with their late season rally. I definitely would rule them out just because of their rating trouble, they have dangerous players on their bottom 2 boards and a very solid player on board 2. Still I think New York has a solid edge on boards 1 and 2 and probably board 3 is a close one. My prediction gives New York the edge.
New York over Philadelphia 2.5-1.5
Baltimore Kingfishers vs Boston Blitz
This is an interesting situation, Baltimore still needs to defend their season to make the playoffs in their own control whereas Boston is sending out a lineup without a GM for the first time I can remember this season. On board 1 Baltimore should have a slight edge, but i wouldn't oversell the title. On board 2 it should be a fairly close game, Kelleher looked strong last week, but Enkhbat would be in MVP contention had he actually been playing this season. On board 3 Kaufman should have a pretty good edge over Riordan, but on board 4 I think I would pick Martirosov over the struggling Rohonyan.
Baltimore over Boston 2.5-1.5
Carolina Cobras vs Tennessee Tempo
Likely Carolina's playoff destiny will not be in their own hands, but if they want to give themselves real chances they have to win this one big and as they've been struggling all season I'm sure they're looking to give themselves every chance to make it. The lineup Carolina is bringing out tihs week looks like it should give them a chance to win on all 4 boards, but don't expect Tennessee to lay down after being excited after their first ever USCL victory. Still, I expect Carolina to take this match by a solid margin.
Carolina over Tennessee 3.5-0.5
San Francisco Mechanics vs Miami Sharks
San Francisco pulled a huge win last week to clinch the division over the division-rival sluggers and this week they're giving a few of their regular guns a rest (they'll also have week 1 in the playoffs off). For Miami however they can't hold back anything in this match. Dallas has a tough match against Seattle, but due to tie-break issues Miami MUST WIN this match in order to advance to the playoffs and they need Dallas to lose to Seattle. I expect Becerra to come out firing with black, but McCambridge has been really tough to beat in the USCL, especially this season. I think Becerra has the edge, but I wouldn't be surprised to see McCambridge put him away in the clean style we've seen from him earlier this season. On board 2 Zilberstein is seeing some time higher in the lineup than he's used to and he's looking at some tough competition so I'll have to give Lugo a slight edge with the white pieces. On board three Mark Pinto, another "Trusty Trustee" as Donaldson put it, is playign against NM Espino, but mark has the white pieces and has been deadly even in his 2 games as black this year, I expect Pinto to show up ready to do some damage, I'd give him the slight edge. On board 4 Sam Shankland faces off against Luis Barredo, on paper he's the lower-rated player, but only due to some old supplements used for the US Chess League to help teams set lineups, I expect Sam will be eager to show his form and I give him the edge here even with the black pieces. Overall I think it will be a close match that could easily go all 3 ways, but I think there's a lot more danger on the Mechanics side as Miami has a lot more to fear in this match. I'd say all 3 results are about equal so I'll be nice to the official USCL prognosticators and pick the relatively dangerous draw. (I can predict Mechanics to not win when all they have to protect right now is an undefeated season)
Mechanics tie Sharks 2-2
Dallas Destiny vs Seattle Sluggers
Seattle doesn't have too much they can gain from this match other than getting to pick their colors in the finals under some rare scenarios, but they're still bringing out one of their tougher lineups for the final week proving they really are playing to win every week. Also I doubt they want to go into the playoffs with consecutive losses. Still it might not be unreasonable not to give away too much against Dallas, if Seattle loses this week they'll likely see the same lineup in week 1 of the playoffs. On board one Stopa faces off against Serper, I think Serper should have an edge even with black, but definitely wouldn't rule Stopa out, he's been solid for Dallas all season. On board 2 Vavrak, who according the USCL page, is undefeated in 2 seasons of play and holds a perfect record this season faces off against Mikhailuk. Vavrak has black, but has been incredibly dangerous so far in the USCL so I have to give him the edge on board 2. On board 3 Zaremba faces Milat, it's a pretty close pairing, but I think Zaremba should have a slight edge as white. On board 4 Kiewra faces Koons in a battle of relatively young masters. This match has huge playoff implications in some sense for both teams, Seattle looking not to give up any psychological edge and Dallas wanting to score to make the playoffs. A draw would suit both teams quite nicely, clinching a playoff spot for Dallas and proving Seattle can do what it takes to move onto the Division Championship next week. I expect no love lost in the match.
Dallas ties Seattle 2-2
Overview:
NY over Phi 2.5-1.5
Bal over Bos 2.5-1.5
Car over Ten 3.5-0.5
SF tie Mia 2-2
Dal tie Sea 2-2
JJ Dolan Memorial
So I had an interesting tournament in this g/45 event. I was definitely not adequately considering my opponents moves in all games which is why I blundered material in 3 different games, luckily I was playing down far enough that I had chances to recover except in my 4th round game against De Guzman where I actually missed a chance to continue, but still in serious trouble. Just a sign I need to slow down when thinking about my moves and also work on my tactics some more. My 3rd round game against an opponent who will remain nameless I managed to win an exchange with a nice opening novelty that Donaldson and I discovered during a lesson and he had negative compensation, but I played a few bad moves and then a terrible move which allowed my queen to get trapped. I was forced to sacrifice the queen and I had just a rook and 2 pawns for the queen, but some very light threats that could be stopped right away which my opponent managed not to do and instead opted for "safer" moves which kept threats for me, but to be fair was still completely winning for him, but I had continual mating threats and finally he made some mistakes and was in serious trouble and lost in short order, was one of my favorite re-swindles ever.
Estimated rating change: 2121->2130
A decent rating recover, time to continue hard work and not depending on incredible luck.
Estimated rating change: 2121->2130
A decent rating recover, time to continue hard work and not depending on incredible luck.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)