11.27.2009

More From Saratoga

In the round of the Saratoga tournament played on November 22d I had to face David Connors. He has not done particularly well in this event in the past. This was a bit of a puzzle to me. In games against me and some others I have watched, David keeps things pretty well even up to a point against even the top contestants. There comes a moment in these games where it all goes wrong for David. Maybe he gets careless of tactics when he sees the game is equal?

After switching allegiance from 1 e4, to 1 d4, almost two years ago, it seemed to be time to roll out 1 e4, again for the surprise value if nothing else. David uses the Dutch against 1 d4, and tonight I didn’t feel like facing that opening and so the opening choice.

[Event "Saratoga Championship"]
[Site "Saratoga Springs, NY"]
[Date "2009"]
[White "Little, B"]
[Black "Connors, D"]
1. e4 c5
2. Nf3 d6
3. Bb5+ ….
Many of the big names have used this line. The most frequent user is Rublevsky, and he has big edge of wins over losses in the line.

3... Bd7
4. Bxd7+ Nxd7
5. O-O Ngf6
6. Re1 ….
The British GM’s Short and Speelman have played this move often. The Kramnik and Rublevsky types like 6 Nc3, better here. This move is like a long term investment, if the tempo used is to earn anything, it will come ’way down the line, if at all.

6.…. Qc7
Very few examples of this move are in the databases, no GM games, just a couple of games by untitled players. The GM’s usually like 6..., g6; at this point. The text move however is not without guile. Black wants to do the standard Sicilian thing and play down the c-file. If White doesn’t get goofy, he should be able to reach a position with some advantage.

7. c3? …..
But goofiness raises its ugly head. Better is 7 Nc3. Getting pieces in active play is important. On the previous move I took time to position my Rook on e1. That can be counted as development, but it is not particularly active development. There not a lot wrong with the text tactically, no sudden shot that shakes White’s plans is out there, rather, it lacks any real point unless White is willing to speculate.

7.…. Rc8
8. d3 ….
When I played 7 c3, I did not give real consideration to all the tactical possibilities in the position. As I thought about my 8th move, the natural 8 d4, began to look questionable. I could offer a pawn to obtain an open kind of position and concede Black the plus of two to one center pawns. Interesting play follows. After 8 d4, cxd4; 9 cxd4, Nxe4!; 10 Bf4, Nef6; 11 Nc3, threatening Nc3-b5, keeping Black from putting his Bishop on g7. Black and will have to play 11..., e6; leaving d6 susceptible to pressure. Just as a sample of the tricks in the position, after the line above, should Black try 11..., a6?; trying to keep the Knight out of b5, White continues 12 Rc1, Qb6; 13 Bxd6!, Qxd6; 14 Nb5, wins. After 11..., e6, White has some good activity, but is it worth a whole pawn?

Other alternatives are: Recapture on the 8th turn on d4 with the Queen, or recapture on d4 with the Knight. Both peter out into fairly equal positions. The most adventurous choice is to let go of the pawn. Frankly, I shied away from giving up the pawn because this is a game I needed to win to stay in the running for a high place in this event, and David is one of the contestants that had to be defeated to do so. Playing it safe leads to less interesting chess. Against one of my rivals for the top places, the temptation of offer the pawn with 8 d4 would have been great. My guess is the pawn would have been dangled for them. I don’t know if such is "correct" chess or not, but that is probably the way it would go.

The game move puts off any game changing action. I am waiting for the lower rated player to err. Not a good policy because they can make good moves too. Ratings are not about moves, they are about results, and a four hundred point advantage does not mean you can not lose. The best policy is to play good moves, not second or third best.

8.… g6
9. Na3 ….
Natural and good is 9 Bf4. Sending the Knight on this journey is a trip to nowhere. The Bf4, Nb1-d2, and the Queen on a4 or maybe c2, makes sense. I am playing a slow maneuvering game. Taking this kind of a path is more goofiness, not outright bad, just not having much in the way of sharpness about it.

9. a6
Black follows my lead and "swims" a little bit. Better to get on with development with 9..., Bg7.

10. Nc4 e5
11. Ne3 Bg7
12. c4 O-O
13. Bd2 b5
14. b3 Nb6
15. a4 b4
16. Ra2 ….
After carrying out my plan I have achieved exactly nothing. Furniture has been moved around and all that is accomplished is the Q-side is locked up. The formation I agreed to for the Q-side pawns probably slightly favors Black. As long as Black keeps one Knight on the board I will have to worry about a possible sacrifice on a4 that could free the b-pawn for a run to the Queening square.

The text is another long term investment. My last move, at least has some "bad intensions" for my opponent. The Rook is placed to shift quickly to the K-side. That notion means I will be trying to clear a path along the 2d rank for the Ra2. This may well be the tactical feature David did not notice.

16.… a5
During the game this move looked unnecessary to me. The push of my a-pawn does not look particularly dangerous as it would require a major piece, or pieces to be on guard for as long as Black can threaten the a-pawn.

17. Rf1 ….
Admitting my play had led me to no advantage. Here I wanted e1 for possible use of my Nf3, if a sanctuary is needed. The long term investment, Rf1-e1, was wasted.

17... Qd7
Either 17..., Nh5; heading for f4, or 17..., h6; preparing an advance of the pawns on the K-side are sharper.

18. h3?! …
It does keep Black pieces out of g4, and it fits with the plan I had decided upon: trade my Bishop for the Knight if it goes to f4, put my Knight on d5 recapturing with c-pawn if Black chooses to trade Knights there, send the Nf3 through d2 to c4 when possible, and finally, find a post for my Queen somewhere on the K-side. After the foregoing is accomplished opening up the K-side with pawn sacrifice if needed just may give the chance to bring the Ra2 over to f-file or g-file.

18... Nh5
19. Nd5 Nxd5
20. cxd5 Nf4
21. Bxf4 exf4
22. Nd2 g5?!
With 22..., f5; Black could keep the game entirely level. The key flaw with the move is it opens h5 for my Queen.

23. Nc4 Ra8?
An outright error that drops material. 23..., Qc7; covers a5 adequately.

24. Nb6 ….
Going for an advantage in the element of Force. The decision required serious thought. Was David offering a "bright bauble" to eliminate the strongly posted Knight? I judged the move was an oversight and believed the Knight fork would be a shock disturbing David confidence. The decision was easy to make once I looked for alternatives. I could not find any move that promised more than collecting the material offered.

24... Qa7
Tougher resistance can be made with 25..., Qe7; keeping the Lady close to the vital targets beginning to show up around his King.

25. Nxa8 Qxa8
26. Qh5 h6
Defending g5 with 26..., Qd8; makes for a studier defense. Now opening K-side lines will be easier.

27. h4 Qd8
28. g3 fxg3?
Better 28..., Qf6; with good chances to get a Queen trade lessening danger to the King. After this move I was certain my guess about David’s shaken confidence was correct. The surprise of the missed shot put him off his game.

29. fxg3 gxh4
30. gxh4 Qd7
31. Rg2 Resigns
Rather than test my technique, David called off the battle. If he wanted to continue, then 31..., Kh7; 32 Qf5+, Qxf5; 33 Rxf5, leaves White a winning advantage but with quite a few moves to be played before all resistance is quelled. There was lot of time left on my clock. David concluded going home early was best.

Missing a simple shot like the fork that picked up the Exchange takes away most of the pleasure of the game for the player who misses it. Earlier this year I threw away a pawn against Alan Le Cours in a good position. There I experienced some of the same emotions that David felt here. Fortunately for me, against Le Cours, I was able to put aside the disappointment and disgust at my silliness and play on with some decent ideas. After some interesting chess, I pulled out the draw. Some of that result came from my great deal of experience with making goofy errors and learning how to cope. Some of the result can be attributed to the difficulty Alan had to face after taking the pawn. Getting material often cedes initiative requiring careful defense until the extra material can be consolidated. That period of careful defense is where the weaker side can very often find compensation.
 
I will have somw more to say tomorrow, another game and prehaps something to add on this one if I get to review it with Ronen's Saturday group. 
 
 

11.23.2009

North Country Chess - A report on the most recent round in the Saratoga Championship.

A number of schedule conflicts gave us a smaller than usual turnout this Sunday. Sells- Alguire, Hrebenach - Magat and Little - Connors were played as scheduled. Peter Sparagna and Lee Battes played off their postponed game to round out the evening’s roster because their opponents were not available. With no clashes among the leaders, any excitement would be in the form of a good sized upset. Such was not to be.

It looks like the higher rated players made a clean sweep. Sparagna and Battes had not finished when I left the club rooms, but Battes had an Exchange to the good along with the Bishop pair and was pushing back Peter’s pieces. It must be said Sparagna had made the Expert work hard even after the Exchange was lost. The game had passed move forty-four when I headed South. Peter had two strong pawns on e5 and d5 in the middle game that appeared well supported. This pawn bulwark kept the Bishops from running wild. Peter could not find the moves to cement his center. Lee came up with some threats and Peter began retreating. Once Peter’s pieces fell back, the Expert’s winning chances went up big time.
Boris Spassky once said chess is a terribly negative game. He further explained that losses and errors stay with us for a very long time, while victories tend to be forgotten quickly. The game Sells - Alguire was a negative experience for Ray Alguire. After keeping the game fairly even against Sells, who is more than 300 points above him in rating, Ray had a momentary lapse, saw a mirage and made a hasty decision all in a single move, resigning while there was a chance to keep playing. Similar things have happened to all of us in chess, but there is no denying it is about as negative event as can be imagined, at least for a little while. I hung my Queen against Glen Gausewitz two or three years ago in the Saratoga Championship. That took a day or two to get over. It is hoped Ray can recover from the disappointment quickly.

[Event "Saratoga Championship"]
[Site "Saratoga Springs, NY"]
[Date "2009"]
[White "Sell, P"]
[Black "Alguire, R"]

1. e4 c5
2. Nf3 d6
3. d4 cxd4
4. Nxd4 Nf6
5. Nc3 a6
6. Be2 e6
7. O-O Be7
The game has traversed the Sozin to the Najdorf to the Scheveningin Variation. A quick look in my databases shows the majority of the very top 2700+ players and World Champions happy to play these moves from either side.

8. Be3 ….
Now we are getting away from the really big guns preferences and into the moves used by more ordinary GM types.

8... Bd7
And this move is played by non-masters according to the database. Black usually has the aim of putting this cleric on b7 and debates internally where to place the b8N, c6 or d7.

9. Qe1 …
An early decision about where to use the Queen. More normal is to push the f-pawn to the fourth rank. We will see Phil has a more restrained plan in mind. I am not sure his plan has a lot of "bite" in it.

9.… e5
Using a two-step process to put this pawn on e5 can’t be the best here when the Nb8 lingers at home. It is worthwhile going to the TWIC web site and playing over the games from the recently completed World Blitz event. I did and was impressed how these 2600-2800 players always made certain ALL their pieces got out early on. Better is 9..., 0-0; and 10..., Nc6; when we are in a position that looks typical of the Sicilian. I am not enough of an openings maven to point out just where this position differs from theory and standard GM practice but does I am sure.

10. Nb3 ….
The principled move is 10 Nf5. Black then pretty much has to give up the Bishop pair, and we have a debate about whether the two central Black pawns are sufficient compensation.

10.… Be6
Again, castling and putting the Knight on c6 are much more in the spirit of the position.

11. f3 ….
Could it be that Ray’s slow playing the position has convinced Phil that anything goes? The push of the f-pawn to f4 is best. There is no need to fear 11 f4, Ng4? For then 12 Bxg4, Bxg4; 13 Qg3, and White is getting close to winning. The justification for Queen going to e1 is for it to go on to g3 and to attack the Black K-side. If 11 f4, Black probably has to try 11..., exf4; leaving White with the preferable position, after 12 Bxf4. True enough the d-pawn is weak on an open file, but White’s e-pawn is a target also and counter-play can be found for Black.

11.… O-O
12. a4 Nbd7
Black passes on the chance to secure theoretical equality with 12..., d5. The game enters a brief period of tactical equilibrium.

13. Rd1 b6
14. Kh1 ….
White is rearranging furniture and thinking about pawn advances on the K-side.

14... Qc7
15. g4 Nc5
16. Nxc5 dxc5
17. Bd3 ….

My game with Connors was finished and I was watching this contest fairly closely. My suspicion was Phil had decided to test Ray’s tactical alertness. Phil has just gotten his Bishops into Lasker’s formation for crashing through with sacrifices. My thought was he planned something involving shoving the g-pawn forward and then the f-pawn and finally the e-pawn would go forward one "box’ heedless of the Be3 hanging. All he really requires to make this sort of an attack is to put the Queen on h4, then those aggressive pawn moves become dangerous to Black.

17.… Bd6
Possibly best is 17..., c4; disturbing White’s plan.

18. Qh4 ….
The Queen appears stage right! Now I was sure my guess about Phil’s intentions was correct.

18.… g6?
And Black resigns?! The last move gives White the edge is an accurate statement, but the candle shouldn’t be snuffed right away. Ray made the move, saw the Knight hanging and called it quits in the space of maybe ten seconds. Had he taken a moment he would have found 19 Qxf6??, Be7; wins the Queen for two minor pieces. I am certain Phil, who maintains his sangfroid always at the board, would not have snatched off the Nf6. Probably he would have played the very correct 19 Bh6!, and if Black saves the Exchange he loses the piece because defending both g6 and g7 is not possible: 19 Bh6, Rd8; 20 Qxf6, Be7; 21 Qg7Mate. Or, 19 Bh6, Be7; 20 Bxf8, fearlessly and so on.

Black could have tried 19..., Ne8; then 20 Bxf8, Bxf8; 21 Nd5, Bxd5; 22 exd5, c4, to be followed by 23..., Nd6. White is better, but the win is not clear. The Black Knight has a great blockading post at d6, and the White Bishop, posted either at e2 or e4, is not particularly strong.

Superior to 18..., g6; is 18..., c4; forceing the Bishop back to e2 because sacrificial tries such as 19 g5, fail. After 19 Be2, Black can try 19..., Bc5; and the struggle is unresolved.

A great deal of drama in a single move!

Gordon Magat played the Dutch against Jeff Hrebenach and took advantage of an oversight to carry off a piece and then the full point.. Jeff had some ideas but just did not calculated accurately enough to hold one of the very strong players in the area.

Facing David Connors my play was not particularly sparkling. In kind of an odd Closed Sicilian arising from the Alapin Variation, David was holding his own and even may have had the better long term chances. A moment’s inattention and a fork by my Knight picked off the Exchange. Such mistakes have a bad effect on some players. David lost heart a bit. Had he worked hard after the loss of material there were certainly chances to hold and perhaps win this game. I debated long with myself about taking the Exchange. My Knight was well posted on c4 and in no danger of being pushed off the strong point. Trading it for a Rook not doing much at a8 except guarding a pawn on a5 was at least doubtful. My internal debate was about whether David was tempting y me with the Exchange offer, or did he just overlook something. David apparently did not realize his strong Bg7 and its domination of the a1-h8 diagonal, if used ambitiously, could balance the material minus. A couple less than good moves by David following the Exchange loss allowed me to break open the K-side. The extra material then permitted a brutal frontal attack on his King that won the game.

Next week Feinberg with the White pieces faces Taylor. This battle between the highest rated players will have a good deal to say about who wins the championship. Another interesting match up is Ray Alguire versus Lee Battes, his coach. Games between coaches and students are interesting because they know each other very well. The game will test Ray to see if he has recovered his spirits from this week’s disappointment. Lee likely will win, three hundred and fifty rating points have meaning if the system is at all accurate. If Ray can play some sound chess and avoid any big errors, it will restore his confidence and taste for the game.
The Schenectady Club is dark for the holiday Thursday. I have in hand a couple of local games to analyze and will post them to fill-in during this week.

The party for Norma took place as planned Sunday. There was a good crowd in attendance, speeches of apprciation for her tireless work and refreshments. I think Phil Ferguson will have something posted with greater detail soon.

11.20.2009

A Quick Update on the Schenectady Championship

On Thursday November 19th the one game between leaders, LeCours versus Howard was postponed. The other scheduled games were played and went pretty much as the ratings predicted.

There was one contest that I thought could be an upset, Chu - Mockler. I tend to wander around the tournament room while waiting for my opponent to make a move. On my first pass by the Chu Mockler game I noted Richard Chu had a reasonable position. Some mintes later, wandering again, it seemed Chu had pushed Mockler back, he had not one piece off the back rank. As I returned to my game I was thinking of a number of occasions over the years that Richard had defeated top ranked players in previous championships. It had happened so often that we sometimes called him Richard the Giant Killer. Were we going to see an upset nearly as big as Northrup over Lack in the B Section? The third time my between-move wanderings took me by thier board, I stopped and did what should have been done at the first look - counted the material. Richard, who'd developed his forces very well,was actually down a full piece. So much for snap judgments about chess positions in passing by. Such judgments are often mistaken, especially if you don't check the spimple things like who's got more pieces. With the scales lifted it also was clear that Mike was opening lines towards Richard's King. Not a good thing for Richard. I had to leave before the game finished. My guess is Mike won.

To follow up on the Mockler - LeCours game from the previous week. Mockler won. I guess Alan was not able to hold off the attack Mike was brewing up when I left the scene. In a short email exchage Mike and I had during the week, he said he believed there was no way for Alan to defend successfully. If I can get the game score, we will take a look to see if Mike is right. And, if we are lucky the game will be the subject of discussion at GM Har-Zvi's Saturday session soon. That discussion will be even more interesting if both of the guys are there.

Mockler's win from LeCours opens a small gap among the leaders in Section A. Mockler is leading. Howard, Little and Rotter are bit back, and LeCours is trailing just slightly.

More to follow later this weekend: Norma's party, the Saratoga Championship and whatever else comes to mind.

11.19.2009

A New and Dangerous Opponent for Local Players and a Summary Update of NYS Quick and Action Events

For the last few years Karl Heck has staged the NYS Action and Quick tournament in Latham, NY in November. I can’t say the turnouts have been record setting. This year’s edition had only eight contestants in the Open section, but some interesting and tough chess was played. Patrick Chi, a Schenectady Club member had a very good result. He tied for first with another scholastic star, Deepak Aaron also of Schenectady. Neither went undefeated. Chi defeated Deepak and lost to Lenny Chipkin, an Expert from Long Island. Both Chi and Aaron defeated Gordon Magat of the Saratoga Club who only recently slipped below the Expert rating he held for some time.

This result certainly sets Patrick out a new dangerous opponent for aspiring local Experts to treat carefully in future events. Here is his game with Gordon Magat.

NYS Action
Game in 25
Latham, NY
Date: 11-13-2009
White: Magat, G
Black: Chi, P
 
1. c4 c6
2. Nf3 d5
3. b3 Nf6
4. Bb2 Bf5
Tisdal, Ftacnik, Seirawan and Matulovic are some GM’s that have play so with the Black pieces.

5. g3 e6
6. Bg2 Nbd7
7. O-O Bd6
8. d3 O-O
Tal as Black, lost (!) this position to the Bulgarian IM Toshkov in Yumala in 1987! While not exactly main lines, these guys are somewhere in theory so far.

9. Nh4?! ….
The natural 9 Nc3, is the logical continuation here. White used quite a bit of his allotted 25 minutes to get here. Gordon probably used the time to work out the coming aggression towards the Black King. The way the game goes he came to regret using the time to create the attack. The lack of development of his Q-side pieces causes heartache later.

9.… Bg4
10. Qe1 ….
More fiddling I think. The direct 10 h3, suggests itself as more to the point.

10.… e5
11. f4? ….
The point of Gordon’s plan which gives Black a significant edge! The urge to bowl over one’s opponent must be tempered with recognition of the facts on the board. White has not mustered all of his forces yet. Attacking is premature, and so it is natural that pushing forward should give Black an advantage.

11... exf4
12. gxf4 Re8
Getting more pieces into action. I rather like 12..., Qb6+; then a move such as 23 d4?, is risky for White: 23..., Rae8!; 24 c5?, Nxc5; 25 dxc5, Bxc5+; with the e-pawn to be gathered in also, now Black has two pawns for the piece along and lots of play for his other forces. After either the game move or my preference Black has a solid edge.

13. e3 Qc7?
The text hands back all of the advantage and is a mistake. Now 13..., Qb6; keeps up the pressure. It is the natural continuation. By this point in the game White has used fourteen minutes and Black only four minutes.

14. h3? ….
Magat makes a return gift. Gordon missed that 14 Qf2, strengthening f4 and e3, getting out of the pin on the e-file and covering the Bb2, was just about the only move to play.

14.…. Bxf4
Neatly taking advantage of the vulnerable situation of the Nh4 and the pin on the e-file to win material. This sort of possibility was no doubt in Chi’s thoughts when putting the Queen on c7.

15. hxg4 Bg3
16. Qe2 Bxh4
17. Rf5 …
Down a pawn and trailing on time, White is trying to make every immediately available piece maximally active. The trouble with his game is the QR and QN are sitting at home and not readily available. An under-funded attack should not work. Patrick challenge is to find the correct move to refute White’s ambitions.

17.… dxc4?
This move is not it. The simple 17..., Qg3; attacking e3 and g4 wins one more pawn.

The time difference had now become; eight minutes remaining for White and fourteen for Black. The time difference had narrowed and that maybe buoyed Gordon’s spirits some. The advantage is not swinging back to White, but Patrick’s pace of play slowed leaving the difference five minutes to eight minutes.

18. g5 …..
White follows a mirage thinking unbridled aggression will cause young Patrick to fold.

18.… cxd3
19. Qxd3 Nh5?
Gordon’s mirage may just become real. This inaccuracy gives up most, if not all of Black’s advantage. By not taking the simpler path with 17..., Qg3; Chi pays a price-a small error loses the advantage. Best and perhaps the only way to keep the advantage is 19... Ng4; then if 20 Rf4, Bf2+; 21 Rxf2, and Black has at least two ways drive home the win: a) 21..., Rxe3+; b) 21..., Nc5. The keys are the Black Queen will check on h2 and the Ng4 will capture with check on e3 Both moves drive the White King into more and more trouble. Then either White gives up the ruinous material or his King will be left bare in the middle of the board. In all fairness it must be noted that very few players would be confident of finding these ideas in the almost blitz conditions that will soon prevail.

20. Qc4 Bf2+
Shaken by the sudden turn of fortune Patrick gives up the Bishop. With a bit more time in hand he might have found 20..., Rxe3; then if 21 Qxh4, Ng3; and the tactical winds are roaring. But if 21 Qxf7+, Kh8; 22 Qxh5, Re1+; 23 Rf1, Qg3; leaves White well ahead. Also, the move 21 Rxf7, leaves White headaches after 21..., Ne5; and Black just might draw in this line. With just under five minutes on the clock Gordon would have been hard pressed to make a choice among the three options mentioned.

21. Rxf2 Ne5
22. Qh4 g6
23. Bf3? …..
Neither player wants to take the simpler path. That is not good for great results but it does make for interesting chess. Why not either 23 Rd2, or 23 Bc3, avoiding any tricks?

23.… Nxf3+
24. Rxf3 Rad8
Now Black has all of his forces active. White has a chance to do something with his Q-side pieces at long last.

25. Qe1? ….
Covering the back rank with 25 Na3, is more reasonable. The game move has just about finished off any claim White had to the advantage. The clock now is a serious problem for Gordon. There are only a few ticks left for him, and the mirage has faded away completely.

25.… Qc8
With a bit more time to think, Patrick makes a threat. True enough it is not too serious a threat but it is concrete, the Queen would like to go to g4 and maybe take off the g-pawn.

26. Rf2 ….
White reacts to the simple threat. This move is wrong, but such a reaction is common when time is short. Either 26 Na3, getting more forces into the fray, or even 26 Qb4, covering g4 make more sense.

26.… Rd3
27. Bd4 ….
For the final time Gordon fails to make a move to get some pieces in play. In fairness it has to be said it is too late for moves such as 27 Nc3, to make much of a difference. The advantage has gone to Black.

27.… c5
Both players are feeling the pangs of time trouble. The game move appears tempting; a direct threat, but better is 27..., Qg4+; then any legal move, and 28...,Qxd4; wins.

28. Qf1 Qg4+ ?
Black can keep his attack going with 28..., Rxd4; or 28.…, exd4. The move played hands Gordon one last chance to salvage the game.

29. Rg2 Qe4
30. Nc3? ….
Finally White’s Q-side pieces enter the game. Ironically the Knight move is wrong. Better is 30 Bxc5, and White just might be OK after 30..., b6; 31 Nd2, and things are leveling out. Now Black finishes up strongly.

30.… Rxc3
31. Bxc3 Qxe3+
32. Rf2 Qxc3
Having three pawns for the Exchange is plenty of compensation. If there were lots of time on the clocks, it might take many moves for Black to actually collect the full point. This is a "Sudden Death" time control and neither side will have to wait long for the finish.

33. Rxf7 ….
Better 33 Rd1. Black still retains the edge, but White has gotten all pieces out where they can be used. There is no time to think, and I believe this move an instinctive reaction; grab back one pawn and hope. The problem is not that it is a bad thing to recover a pawn, it is the Rf7 requires the Qf1 to stay in contact with it limiting White’s defensive choices.

33.… Qg3+
And this move puts "a finger on the bruise" so to speak. Black will pick off the g-pawn with check, and when all is right; his Queen on the g-file and the White King on the h-file, the Re8 comes to e4 threatening mate that can’t be stopped short of giving up the White Queen.

34. Kh1 0-1
White lost on time.

If I were writing a Sherlock Holmes type mystery story about this game it could be titled the Case of the Forgotten Development. Gordon is a strong player with bunches of experience. How can you explain him passing repeatedly on opportunities to bring out his Q-side pieces? Interestingly, right after the game finished Gordon and I were talking about the play and why he lost. My focus was on all the time he used in the early going. Gordon was a bit mystified saying: "I was seeing all the moves, but…". Only when I ran through the game the next day did the forgotten development of the Q-side hit home. Were we both hypnotized by the direct K-side attack?

At a fast time control reading too much into this victory for Patrick is a mistake. However, taken together with his win from Deepak Aaron in the preceding round, it surely tells us Patrick is rapidly improving. Given another year of development and the great tuition he gets from GM Har-Zvi, he can certainly expect to follow the path Deepak blazed into appearances at some national events. Who knows, there maybe even a chance to play internationally for the United States. Tying for first place honors was well deserved. Good job, Patrick!

The day Saturday wrapped up with a very fast tourney; the NYS Quick, games in ten minutes. Long ago I used to enjoy speed chess even more than games at more reasonable time controls. But now my head doesn’t work quite so well any more and watching such activity is pretty much my involvement with fast chess. This event had its own share of surprises. In a field of pretty strong players, Phil Thomas of the Uncle Sam Club in Troy came first ahead of Deepak Aaron, Ashok Aaron, Peter Henner, Lenny Chipkin, Jon Leisner and others. Phil had a 5-1 score. Deepak and his father tied for second at 4 ½ - 1 ½. Phil was well down the seeding list with a pre-tournament rating in the 1700s, a B-Class player. Coming out ahead of the group mentioned above, all rated right around 2000, has to count as a very big success indeed. Phil got to that fine result by going undefeated, drawing with Henner and Ashok Aaron and winning from Deepak Aaron and Lenny Chipkin. A terrific job Phil. Congratulations!
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

Schenectady CC Championships 2009-10

Results include games of 11/12/2009 Preliminary Section A

# 

Name 

ID # 

Rat 

1 

2 

3

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

0 

1

Tot 

1 

Howard, Dean

10126797 

2000

n

    

1

   

½

1

2.5/3

2 

Mockler, Mike 

12778344 

1929

 

n

  

1

½

1

1

 

½

 

4/5

3 

Eson, Charles

12840766 

818

  

n

0

0

0

1

1

0

  

2/6

4 

Chu, Richard C

12491089 

1558

  

1

n

0

0

1

1

   

3/5

5

Le Cours, Alan

10125472 

1859

 

0

1

1

n

1

     

3/4

6

Qu, Chen

13940256 

1683

0

½

1

1

0 

n

     

2.5/5

7

Connors, David

12455331 

1533

 

0

0

0

  

n

   

1

1/4

8

Kanakamedala, Yogi

13848008 

1023

 

0

0

0

   

n

  

0

0/4

9

Little, William 

10121795 

1894

  

1

     

n

½

1

2.5/3

10

Rotter, Robert

12734684 

1929

½

½

      

½

n

1

2.5/4

11

Capitummino, Jeff

12525780 

1273

0

     

0

1

0

0 

n

1/5

12

BYE

              


 


 

Round 

Date 

Pairings 

1

Oct. 8 

6-12, 7-5, 8-4, 9-3, 10-2, 11-1 

2 

Oct. 15 

12-11, 1-10, 2-9, 3-8, 4-7, 5-6 

3 

Oct. 22 

5-12, 6-4, 7-3, 8-2, 9-1, 10-11 

4 

Oct. 29 

12-10, 11-9, 1-8, 2-7, 3-6, 4-5 

5 

Nov. 5 

4-12, 5-3, 6-2, 7-1, 8-11, 9-10 

6 

Nov. 12 

12-9, 10-8, 11-7, 1-6, 2-5, 3-4 

7

Nov. 19 

3-12, 4-2, 5-1, 6-11, 7-10, 8-9 

8 

Dec. 3 

12-8, 9-7, 10-6, 11-5, 1-4, 2-3 

9  

Dec. 10 

2-12, 3-1, 4-11, 5-10, 6-9, 7-8 

10 

Dec. 17 

12-7, 8-6, 9-5, 10-4, 11-3, 1-2 

11 

Jan. 7 

1-12, 2-11, 3-10,4-9, 5-8, 6-7 

No meetings on Nov. 26, Dec. 24 and Dec. 31

All games must be finished by Feb. 10, 2010

Schenectady CC Championships 2009-10

Preliminary Section B

    Results include games of 11/12/2009


 

# 

Name 

ID # 

Rat 

1 

2 

3

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

0 

Tot 

1 

Chi, Patrick

13031541 

1933

n

  

1

1

½

1

 

½

 

4/5

2 

Barnes, John

11444326

1857

 

n

 

1

  

1

0

  

2/3

3 

Saran, Brij 

12475742 

1617

  

n

0

 

0

1

  

1

2/4

4 

Dipre, George 

12622902 

1430

0

0

1

n

0

0

   

0

1/6

5 

Aaron, Dilip 

12921644 

1303

0

  

1

n

   

0

1

2/4

6 

Sells, Philip 

12496329 

1994

½

 

1

1

 

n

 

1

  

3.5/4

7 

Northrup, Cory

12760541 

932

0

0

0

   

n

0

1

1

2/6

8 

Phillips, John 

10121353 

1903

 

1

   

0

1

n

1

 

¾

9 

Lack, Jonathan 

12464139 

1912

½

   

1

 

0

0

n

½

2/5

10 

Stanley, Michael

12910553 

993

  

0

1

0

 

0

 

½

n

1.5/5


 


 

Round 

Date 

Pairings 

1 

Oct. 8

5-10, 6-4, 7-3, 8-2, 9-1 

2 

Oct. 15

10-9, 1-8, 2-7, 3-6, 4-5

3 

Oct. 22

4-10, 5-3, 6-2, 7-1, 8-9 

4 

Oct. 29

10-8, 9-7, 1-6, 2-5, 3-4 

5 

Nov. 5

3-10, 4-2, 5-1, 6-9, 7-8 

6 

Nov. 12

10-7, 8-6, 9-5, 1-4, 2-3 

7 

Nov. 19

2-10, 3-1, 4-9, 5-8, 6-7 

8 

Dec. 3

10-6, 7-5, 8-4, 9-3, 1-2 

9  

Dec. 10

1-10, 2-9, 3-8, 4-7, 5-6

No meetings on Nov. 26, Dec. 24 and Dec. 31

All games must be finished by Jan. 20, 2010


 


 

Clocks start at 7:45 p.m. – please call your opponent or the tournament director if you can't make a game.