Here is a 5 minute game against a slightly higher rated opponent that I played rather poorly in and one that I was worse in for the entire game. I find it interesting because I made a losing sacrifice that turned out to net me the win, and it just goes to show how powerful force is in blitz chess. I will hardly be detailed, but I am just posting this out of interest.
1.e4 c6 2.d3 d5 3. Nd2 e5 4.Be2 Nf6 5.Ngf3 Bd6 6.c3 Bg4 7.O-O Nbd7- Black has equalized comfortably.
8.Qc2 h5 9.h3 Bxf3 10.Bxf3 h4 11.Rd1 dxe4 12.dxe4- Allowing this is just bad for Black, but I liked the looks of my pieces. I decided here that I would kill the king or die trying.
Bc7 13.Nf1 Qe7 14.Ne3 g6 15.a4 O-O-O 16.a5 a6 17.b4 Rdf8 18.c4 Nxe4?!
Ignore the co-ordinates, I messed up... In this position I saw that Bxe4 f5 Nxf5 gxf5 Bxf5 was best leaving white with a material advantage, but I doubted that my opponent would play this way.
19.Qxe4 f5 20.Qc2 e4 21.Be2 Qe5 22.Bb2??- White must let the rook hang with 22.Nf1 Qxa1 23.Bb2 with advantage.
22...Qh2+ 0-1
I didn't know I had that in me. Sure I played poorly, but it was a fun sacrifice and one of the few I have ever uncorked. I'm glad it worked.
Friday, August 13, 2010
I
Wednesday, July 7, 2010
Patrick O'Sullivan (1856) vs Yelizaveta Orlova (2040)
This is my first round game at the Hart House Summer Open last weekend, and as the tournament turned out rather unfortunately for me, it happened to be my only well played game from beginning to end. I wanted to steer the game into a positional battle because I know it is quite common of young chess players to attack viciously.
Patrick O'Sullivan (1856) vs Yelizaveta Orlova (2040)
1.e4 c5- A solemn reminder that I will not get away with my positional intentions without grappling with the fighting spirit of my opponent. I always hate to see the Sicilian, but I believe my results against it are pretty good.
2.Nf3 Nc6- I saw this system a lot on the weekend, not only on my board. I guess there may be a trend of Sicilian players using the line to cut down opponents in the early stages of the game based on an offbeat move stemming from the move 2...Nc6.
3.d4- I very slightly considered the Rossolimo, but I need to do a lot more work on it before I can play it; especially against this caliber of opponent.
3...cxd4 4.Nxd4 Qb6!?- Though I have not played a lot of tournament chess, I assume this is rarely seen. I was especially wary of this move because of the way IM Noritsyn crushed me with an opening tactic in the Accelerated Dragon based on his queen sitting on b6.
5.Nb3 g6- Looks like it's an Accelerated Dragon, and huge pressure will come now on b2 because my knight no longer stands bravely on d4.
6.c3!?- Certainly offbeat and out of book. I played this partly to begin a positional game- even at the cost of initiative, but I was also terrified of a line like 6.Nc3 Bg7 7.Be2 Qb4 with the idea of taking off my knight and grabbing the e4 pawn, but it turns out white is much better because the queen move is wasted in view of 8.Bd2 Bxc3? 9.Bxc3 Qxe4 10.Bxh8. I suppose I was just not ready to actually calculate things, but in retrospect I would still rather play an equal position with c3 than one that holds a slight edge for white while allowing a lot of tactics to hang in the air. I know it is wrong to look at player ratings when choosing a plan, but chances are that a 2040 has a significant edge over me in the calculation department.
6...Bg7 7.Be3 Qc7 8.f3- I want to play my knight to a3, but I can't decide if I should play a4 first in order to discourage the a6 and b5 plan thematic of most Sicilian positions. Instead of choosing a path, I played 8.f3 which is a solid move in all Sicilian structures. I am going to wait and see what direction my opponent takes.
8...Nf6 9.Na3- Of course, she plays nothing radical and I have really gotten no extra information, but I decide that my knight must be developed and that a4 instead could potentially leave me vulnerable to pins on the long diagonal with moves like ...Nb4 or ...b4 and my b2 pawn would be under fire by the g7-bishop should I choose to capture on b4. 9.Na3 forces 9...a6 and it could soon be headed to d4 via c2. I felt this was a better plan than 9.Nd2, because on a3 the knight has more prospects.
9...a6 10.Qd2 d6- Now I can relax just a bit, knowing that it will be a while before the pawn is pushed to d5.
11.Be2 b5 12.Nc2- Stopping any dream of an immediate ...b4 whilst keeping the position closed. I had no intention of playing 12.c4, even though 12...bxc4 13.Nxc4 looks very impressive for white. I am starting to think that I am too timid, as already twice in this game I have been satisfied to show black equality for the mere prospect of a maneuvering game.
12...Ne5 13.Nbd4- Getting out of the way of the b-pawn (c-pawn?) early before 13...Nc4 14.Bxc4 bxc4.
13...Bb7 14.O-O d5- Stable equality has been reached for black now, and her piece activity could push the game from equal to advantageous for her.
15.exd5 Nxd5
Looks like it will be difficult for white to prove any advantage. His only winning chance is on the queenside in the endgame, while black can still try for a middlegame victory.
16.Bh6 O-O 17.Bxg7 Kxg7 18.f4!- I award this an exclamation mark because I have finally amassed the courage to step past the third rank to try to bend the initiative back in my direction. This move initiates a forcing sequence of exchanges that takes most of the danger out of white's game.
18...Nc4 19.Bxc4 Qxc4- I thought 19...bxc4 was better to put long term pressure on b2. The idea I thought black should use is to remove the minor pieces and pile up on the b-file, while white would be effectively defaulted into piling up on the c4 pawn. A b-for-c trade would leave black with the only chances because white's queenside would be unsalvageable.
20.Ne3 Qc5 21.Nxd5 Qxd5 22.Nf3?- It was unwise to hand the d-file to black uncontested, as now I have a lot of central problems to negotiate with before I can march my queenside.
22...Rfd8 23.Qxd5 Rxd5 24.Rfe1- A strong move, setting up a 2nd rank+e-file defense with the king and rooks that may be impenetrable.
24...e6- Not 24...Rf5 25.Nd4 Rxf4 26.Rxe7 with advantage to white.
25.Kf2 Rad8 26.Re3 Rf5 27.g3 Bxf3 28.Kxf3 g5- The problem with this line is that the isolated f-pawn created cannot ever be attacked more than once, while it can be perpetually defended by white's king.
29.Rae1 gxf4 30.gxf4 Rd2 31.R1e2
How does black break the coordination of the white rooks?
31...Rd1 32.Re1 Rdd5 33.Re5 Kf6 34.R5e4 Ke7- In order to keep the game alive, black has to pursue a queenside rush.
35.Re5- I offered a draw here, but it was declined because black has one more idea.
35...Kd6 36.Rxf5- Now that the king cannot capture on f5, I can get a pair of rooks off in order to reduce black's activity.
36...Rxf5 37.Re2 Kd5 38.Rd2+ Kc5 39.Rd8- Maybe inaccurate because I have to waste time getting back to protect h2 if ...Rh5 is played.
39...a5- Black begins to threaten the queenside. This is the downside of 22.Nf3 as I had no initiative left to pursue my own queenside plans.
40.Ke4 Rh5 41.Rd2 b4- My opponent suggested after the game that 41...a4 is a better try as it prompts 42.a3 Kc4 with ...Kb3 coming, but the reality may be that nothing can be done to the b2 pawn as long as the white rook stands on the 2nd rank.
42.cxb4+ axb4 1/2-1/2- The draw was offered by black and agreed upon here because all the white pawns are defended. I successfully achieved my goal of a positional game, but some slight timidity cost me a chance at advantage. With a few improvements to my play I really could have put some endgame heat on black.
The final position. 1/2-1/2.
Patrick O'Sullivan (1856) vs Yelizaveta Orlova (2040)
1.e4 c5- A solemn reminder that I will not get away with my positional intentions without grappling with the fighting spirit of my opponent. I always hate to see the Sicilian, but I believe my results against it are pretty good.
2.Nf3 Nc6- I saw this system a lot on the weekend, not only on my board. I guess there may be a trend of Sicilian players using the line to cut down opponents in the early stages of the game based on an offbeat move stemming from the move 2...Nc6.
3.d4- I very slightly considered the Rossolimo, but I need to do a lot more work on it before I can play it; especially against this caliber of opponent.
3...cxd4 4.Nxd4 Qb6!?- Though I have not played a lot of tournament chess, I assume this is rarely seen. I was especially wary of this move because of the way IM Noritsyn crushed me with an opening tactic in the Accelerated Dragon based on his queen sitting on b6.
5.Nb3 g6- Looks like it's an Accelerated Dragon, and huge pressure will come now on b2 because my knight no longer stands bravely on d4.
6.c3!?- Certainly offbeat and out of book. I played this partly to begin a positional game- even at the cost of initiative, but I was also terrified of a line like 6.Nc3 Bg7 7.Be2 Qb4 with the idea of taking off my knight and grabbing the e4 pawn, but it turns out white is much better because the queen move is wasted in view of 8.Bd2 Bxc3? 9.Bxc3 Qxe4 10.Bxh8. I suppose I was just not ready to actually calculate things, but in retrospect I would still rather play an equal position with c3 than one that holds a slight edge for white while allowing a lot of tactics to hang in the air. I know it is wrong to look at player ratings when choosing a plan, but chances are that a 2040 has a significant edge over me in the calculation department.
6...Bg7 7.Be3 Qc7 8.f3- I want to play my knight to a3, but I can't decide if I should play a4 first in order to discourage the a6 and b5 plan thematic of most Sicilian positions. Instead of choosing a path, I played 8.f3 which is a solid move in all Sicilian structures. I am going to wait and see what direction my opponent takes.
8...Nf6 9.Na3- Of course, she plays nothing radical and I have really gotten no extra information, but I decide that my knight must be developed and that a4 instead could potentially leave me vulnerable to pins on the long diagonal with moves like ...Nb4 or ...b4 and my b2 pawn would be under fire by the g7-bishop should I choose to capture on b4. 9.Na3 forces 9...a6 and it could soon be headed to d4 via c2. I felt this was a better plan than 9.Nd2, because on a3 the knight has more prospects.
9...a6 10.Qd2 d6- Now I can relax just a bit, knowing that it will be a while before the pawn is pushed to d5.
11.Be2 b5 12.Nc2- Stopping any dream of an immediate ...b4 whilst keeping the position closed. I had no intention of playing 12.c4, even though 12...bxc4 13.Nxc4 looks very impressive for white. I am starting to think that I am too timid, as already twice in this game I have been satisfied to show black equality for the mere prospect of a maneuvering game.
12...Ne5 13.Nbd4- Getting out of the way of the b-pawn (c-pawn?) early before 13...Nc4 14.Bxc4 bxc4.
13...Bb7 14.O-O d5- Stable equality has been reached for black now, and her piece activity could push the game from equal to advantageous for her.
15.exd5 Nxd5
16.Bh6 O-O 17.Bxg7 Kxg7 18.f4!- I award this an exclamation mark because I have finally amassed the courage to step past the third rank to try to bend the initiative back in my direction. This move initiates a forcing sequence of exchanges that takes most of the danger out of white's game.
18...Nc4 19.Bxc4 Qxc4- I thought 19...bxc4 was better to put long term pressure on b2. The idea I thought black should use is to remove the minor pieces and pile up on the b-file, while white would be effectively defaulted into piling up on the c4 pawn. A b-for-c trade would leave black with the only chances because white's queenside would be unsalvageable.
20.Ne3 Qc5 21.Nxd5 Qxd5 22.Nf3?- It was unwise to hand the d-file to black uncontested, as now I have a lot of central problems to negotiate with before I can march my queenside.
22...Rfd8 23.Qxd5 Rxd5 24.Rfe1- A strong move, setting up a 2nd rank+e-file defense with the king and rooks that may be impenetrable.
24...e6- Not 24...Rf5 25.Nd4 Rxf4 26.Rxe7 with advantage to white.
25.Kf2 Rad8 26.Re3 Rf5 27.g3 Bxf3 28.Kxf3 g5- The problem with this line is that the isolated f-pawn created cannot ever be attacked more than once, while it can be perpetually defended by white's king.
29.Rae1 gxf4 30.gxf4 Rd2 31.R1e2
How does black break the coordination of the white rooks?
H31...Rd1 32.Re1 Rdd5 33.Re5 Kf6 34.R5e4 Ke7- In order to keep the game alive, black has to pursue a queenside rush.
35.Re5- I offered a draw here, but it was declined because black has one more idea.
35...Kd6 36.Rxf5- Now that the king cannot capture on f5, I can get a pair of rooks off in order to reduce black's activity.
36...Rxf5 37.Re2 Kd5 38.Rd2+ Kc5 39.Rd8- Maybe inaccurate because I have to waste time getting back to protect h2 if ...Rh5 is played.
39...a5- Black begins to threaten the queenside. This is the downside of 22.Nf3 as I had no initiative left to pursue my own queenside plans.
40.Ke4 Rh5 41.Rd2 b4- My opponent suggested after the game that 41...a4 is a better try as it prompts 42.a3 Kc4 with ...Kb3 coming, but the reality may be that nothing can be done to the b2 pawn as long as the white rook stands on the 2nd rank.
42.cxb4+ axb4 1/2-1/2- The draw was offered by black and agreed upon here because all the white pawns are defended. I successfully achieved my goal of a positional game, but some slight timidity cost me a chance at advantage. With a few improvements to my play I really could have put some endgame heat on black.
Tuesday, July 6, 2010
Hart House Summer Open Results
Just before I begin, I would like to say that I am going to continue with the Bg5 after ...Bd6 article soon, but I felt I should talk about the Hart House Summer Open. It was a fun tournament and a good environment, and the only real drawback was the fact that the chairs provided in the playing hall were creaky and uncomfortable. This gave me slight back discomfort, but I kept it under control with some Tylenol.
In terms of results, the tournament was my first real setback, as I finished a very scary -3, with 2 draws and 3 losses. I should say that I was facing some difficult competition though, as all but one of my opponents were rated higher than me, and the lower rated opponent, Ferdinand Cale, was rated at 1829, and from looking at his rating history, he seems to be consistently on the rise. However, I had a very legitimate chance to win each of the games that I lost and even one that I drew. I know that is a foolish thing to say at my level because the evaluation often swings between white's favour and black's, but aside from a few foolish mistakes, I could have held a comfortable advantage in each of the games but the first. Interestingly, the first game proved to be my only promising result as I drew the #2 seed Yelizaveta Orlova (2040) with the white pieces in a tricky Sicilian that I did my best to shift from a tactical affair into a positional one. I like this approach in Sicilian games because my opponents are often looking for quick knockouts, and I can really frustrate them with some slow stuff. I don't have time to show the game right now, but I will surely get it posted soon.
I expect that the experience that I received from being beaten up in this tournament will encourage me to keep my head on straight all the way to the end of the games and to take a more aggressive approach when choosing moves. I am writing this before the results of the tournament are being published, so when I post my game against Yelizaveta Orlova I will also announce the results.
In terms of results, the tournament was my first real setback, as I finished a very scary -3, with 2 draws and 3 losses. I should say that I was facing some difficult competition though, as all but one of my opponents were rated higher than me, and the lower rated opponent, Ferdinand Cale, was rated at 1829, and from looking at his rating history, he seems to be consistently on the rise. However, I had a very legitimate chance to win each of the games that I lost and even one that I drew. I know that is a foolish thing to say at my level because the evaluation often swings between white's favour and black's, but aside from a few foolish mistakes, I could have held a comfortable advantage in each of the games but the first. Interestingly, the first game proved to be my only promising result as I drew the #2 seed Yelizaveta Orlova (2040) with the white pieces in a tricky Sicilian that I did my best to shift from a tactical affair into a positional one. I like this approach in Sicilian games because my opponents are often looking for quick knockouts, and I can really frustrate them with some slow stuff. I don't have time to show the game right now, but I will surely get it posted soon.
I expect that the experience that I received from being beaten up in this tournament will encourage me to keep my head on straight all the way to the end of the games and to take a more aggressive approach when choosing moves. I am writing this before the results of the tournament are being published, so when I post my game against Yelizaveta Orlova I will also announce the results.
Friday, June 11, 2010
Bf4-g5 After ...Bd6
Before I get to the topic that I would like to discuss, I should announce that I am finally going to enter another chess tournament because it fortunately falls on a weekend on which I do not have a baseball tournament. I will be playing in the Hart House Summer Open on Canada Day weekend. I am very excited that I will finally get to play chess again and going in my expectations will be high based on my strong performance at the Kitchener Rapid Tournament. I will still be nervous though, as I am far removed from a standard rated event, and my most recent one in Hamilton was far from successful.
Today I intend to touch upon the discomfort that I feel when playing the Black pieces against a White Bishop on f4. This sort of formation usually occurs from the London System after 1.d4 d5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.Bf4, where after 3...e6 4.e3, when Black's 4...Bd6 runs into the 5.Bg5 pin. I know that after 5...Be7 it is as if White has just played the Torre Attack instead of the London system, but I feel that Black deserves better due to White's greedy Bishop.
I will begin the topic by showing Hugo Ortiz (1493 Active, 1516 Standard) vs Patrick O'Sullivan (1750 Active, 1856 Standard). In this game the theme of ...Bd6 with immediate Bg5 arises but I am able to handle it and eventually win the game. This game was played at the Kitchener Waterloo Spring Active, so I do not remember the game and as such I do not remember all of the themes. As a result, my annotations may be a bit bare, but I hope to explore in detail the Bg5 pin. I am not sure if I won this game on purely strong play, or if I was aided by the fact that I was playing a weaker opponent. I will explore my idea in handling Bg5 and any improvements that White could make following Bg5.
Hugo Ortiz (1493) vs Patrick O'Sullivan (1750)- Active
1.d4 c6 2.c4 d5 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.Bf4 e6- I have no problem with locking in the light-square Bishop here because it will be an effective defender of the a4-e8 diagonal should White choose to exchange on d5.
5.e3 Bd6!? 6.Bg5- According to Rybka Bg5 surrenders a minuscule edge to Black; however I feel that if Bg5 is left alone, White's initiative will grow.
6...Nbd7- The first order of business is to hold the Knight to potentially free the Queen. Rybka evaluates castling here as a fine move, but I once again disagree as I feel it is necessary to keep the option of jostling that Bishop at will. You will see that I never castle here when my Kingside pawns may be more effective when advanced.
7.c5- This is a positional mistake. In my opinion, 7.c5 is a waste of a tempo, and it gives my bishop the choice of 2 good squares, both of which are better than d6. It also allows me to later peel open the Queenside which, if I'm not mistaken, I did twice in that tournament; once in this game and once in another.
7...Be7- I now have an extra protector for my Knight, and I am prepared to now hunt down the White dark-square Bishop.
Though cramped, Black has a fine game as White's most effective resource is the target of Black's assault.
8.Bd3 h6- Getting the pawn off of the light square and starting the pressure on the White Bishop.
9.Bh4 e5- Perhaps white has put too many eggs in one basket and is too committed to hanging on to his investment, so I strike in the weakly contested center. The light-square Bishop will soon come to life. Every one of Black's moves after the first few has been centered around evicting the Bishop and White's efforts to preserve it are costing him too much time.
10.f3- Stopping ...e4 and ...Ne4, but perhaps the other intent is to pull the dark-square Bishop back.
10...exd4- Once again a move to exploit the Bishop; this time indirectly. Now that the e-pawn is off of the board ...Nf8 is possible to prepare to threaten the Bg4.
11.exd4 Nf8 12.Nge2 Ne6- I chose 12...Ne6 instead of 12...Ng6 because I wanted to keep the Bishop sitting on h4 where its precarious position can be exploited. 12...Ne6 also pressures d4 which is especially weak now because of 10...exd4.
13.Qc2 Bd7 14.b4 Nh5- I decided that since my opponent has left the Kingside for the moment there would be no danger in placing my Knight on the edge of the board, and loosening the cramp. Instead of 14.b4 my opponent should have tried 14.O-O when the abstract idea of 14...Nh5 15.Be1 is possible, which better prepares b4.
15.Bxe7 Qxe7- The only thing all of those wasted moves on the White Bishop has caused me is a "poor" Knight, which can be reconciled immediately with ...Nhf4 or ...Nf6. It turns out that my Knight does not have to move from its post for a long time in this game, so the White Bishop really turned out to be a liability. With that said, 15.Bf2 deserved consideration to support the center, as in that case I would be tripping over my own dark-square Bishop.
Black has achieved a fine position here and will look to exploit the extended Queenside.
16.g3? Qf6?- I completely missed 16...Nxd4, but I am still significantly better here. I will not annotate the remainder of the game because it lacks significance with regard to the concept.
17.f4 Nxd4 18.Nxd4 Qxd4 19.O-O-O Qxb4 20.Re1+ Kd8 21.Na4 b5 22.cxb6 axb6 23.Nc3 Ra5 24.Kd2 Rc5 25.Rb1 Qa5 26.Qb2 d4 27.Qxb6+ Qxb6 28.Rxb6 dxc3+ 29.Kc2 Kc7 30.Ra6 Kd6 31.Ra7 Rb8 32.Rd1 Rb2+ 33.Kc1 Rd5 34.Ra3 c2 35.Bxc2 Rxd1+ 36.Bxd1 Rxh2 37.Rd3+ Kc7 38.Kb1 Rg2 39.Bb3 Rxg3 40.Rd2 f6 41.Rh2 Nxf4 0-1
This game shows that Black does not have to worry about Bg5 if White is not coordinated on the Kingside. Instead of 7.c5 a move like 7.Nf3 should be tried instead in order to make something of the Kingside that White has invested so much time in. Other than that, my opponent played solidly out of the opening and I was simply able to prove that Bg5 is not always scary. In my next post I will show a game where I thought it would be scary and as a result preceded ...Bd6 with ...h6. Interesting to note is that during my game against Hugo Ortiz a fire alarm disrupted play for approximately 10 minutes. That is the first time I have experienced that.
Today I intend to touch upon the discomfort that I feel when playing the Black pieces against a White Bishop on f4. This sort of formation usually occurs from the London System after 1.d4 d5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.Bf4, where after 3...e6 4.e3, when Black's 4...Bd6 runs into the 5.Bg5 pin. I know that after 5...Be7 it is as if White has just played the Torre Attack instead of the London system, but I feel that Black deserves better due to White's greedy Bishop.
I will begin the topic by showing Hugo Ortiz (1493 Active, 1516 Standard) vs Patrick O'Sullivan (1750 Active, 1856 Standard). In this game the theme of ...Bd6 with immediate Bg5 arises but I am able to handle it and eventually win the game. This game was played at the Kitchener Waterloo Spring Active, so I do not remember the game and as such I do not remember all of the themes. As a result, my annotations may be a bit bare, but I hope to explore in detail the Bg5 pin. I am not sure if I won this game on purely strong play, or if I was aided by the fact that I was playing a weaker opponent. I will explore my idea in handling Bg5 and any improvements that White could make following Bg5.
Hugo Ortiz (1493) vs Patrick O'Sullivan (1750)- Active
1.d4 c6 2.c4 d5 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.Bf4 e6- I have no problem with locking in the light-square Bishop here because it will be an effective defender of the a4-e8 diagonal should White choose to exchange on d5.
5.e3 Bd6!? 6.Bg5- According to Rybka Bg5 surrenders a minuscule edge to Black; however I feel that if Bg5 is left alone, White's initiative will grow.
6...Nbd7- The first order of business is to hold the Knight to potentially free the Queen. Rybka evaluates castling here as a fine move, but I once again disagree as I feel it is necessary to keep the option of jostling that Bishop at will. You will see that I never castle here when my Kingside pawns may be more effective when advanced.
7.c5- This is a positional mistake. In my opinion, 7.c5 is a waste of a tempo, and it gives my bishop the choice of 2 good squares, both of which are better than d6. It also allows me to later peel open the Queenside which, if I'm not mistaken, I did twice in that tournament; once in this game and once in another.
7...Be7- I now have an extra protector for my Knight, and I am prepared to now hunt down the White dark-square Bishop.
8.Bd3 h6- Getting the pawn off of the light square and starting the pressure on the White Bishop.
9.Bh4 e5- Perhaps white has put too many eggs in one basket and is too committed to hanging on to his investment, so I strike in the weakly contested center. The light-square Bishop will soon come to life. Every one of Black's moves after the first few has been centered around evicting the Bishop and White's efforts to preserve it are costing him too much time.
10.f3- Stopping ...e4 and ...Ne4, but perhaps the other intent is to pull the dark-square Bishop back.
10...exd4- Once again a move to exploit the Bishop; this time indirectly. Now that the e-pawn is off of the board ...Nf8 is possible to prepare to threaten the Bg4.
11.exd4 Nf8 12.Nge2 Ne6- I chose 12...Ne6 instead of 12...Ng6 because I wanted to keep the Bishop sitting on h4 where its precarious position can be exploited. 12...Ne6 also pressures d4 which is especially weak now because of 10...exd4.
13.Qc2 Bd7 14.b4 Nh5- I decided that since my opponent has left the Kingside for the moment there would be no danger in placing my Knight on the edge of the board, and loosening the cramp. Instead of 14.b4 my opponent should have tried 14.O-O when the abstract idea of 14...Nh5 15.Be1 is possible, which better prepares b4.
15.Bxe7 Qxe7- The only thing all of those wasted moves on the White Bishop has caused me is a "poor" Knight, which can be reconciled immediately with ...Nhf4 or ...Nf6. It turns out that my Knight does not have to move from its post for a long time in this game, so the White Bishop really turned out to be a liability. With that said, 15.Bf2 deserved consideration to support the center, as in that case I would be tripping over my own dark-square Bishop.
16.g3? Qf6?- I completely missed 16...Nxd4, but I am still significantly better here. I will not annotate the remainder of the game because it lacks significance with regard to the concept.
17.f4 Nxd4 18.Nxd4 Qxd4 19.O-O-O Qxb4 20.Re1+ Kd8 21.Na4 b5 22.cxb6 axb6 23.Nc3 Ra5 24.Kd2 Rc5 25.Rb1 Qa5 26.Qb2 d4 27.Qxb6+ Qxb6 28.Rxb6 dxc3+ 29.Kc2 Kc7 30.Ra6 Kd6 31.Ra7 Rb8 32.Rd1 Rb2+ 33.Kc1 Rd5 34.Ra3 c2 35.Bxc2 Rxd1+ 36.Bxd1 Rxh2 37.Rd3+ Kc7 38.Kb1 Rg2 39.Bb3 Rxg3 40.Rd2 f6 41.Rh2 Nxf4 0-1
This game shows that Black does not have to worry about Bg5 if White is not coordinated on the Kingside. Instead of 7.c5 a move like 7.Nf3 should be tried instead in order to make something of the Kingside that White has invested so much time in. Other than that, my opponent played solidly out of the opening and I was simply able to prove that Bg5 is not always scary. In my next post I will show a game where I thought it would be scary and as a result preceded ...Bd6 with ...h6. Interesting to note is that during my game against Hugo Ortiz a fire alarm disrupted play for approximately 10 minutes. That is the first time I have experienced that.
Monday, April 26, 2010
Patrick O'Sullivan (1750) vs Dan Raats (1822) (Active)
This game was played in the first round of the Kitchener-Waterloo Spring Active tournament. It is particularly notable because I was offered a draw by my expert-level opponent (standard rating 2034) which I declined because there was no possibility of losing for me if the position hadn't changed character. My plan was to slowly build my position and if I could break through, I would, and if I couldn't, I would have offered the draw back. I ended up losing this game by playing a bold Knight sacrifice that didn't work over the board, but actually turns out to draw. I blundered in the follow-up because I was still committed to winning the game.
Patrick O'Sullivan (1750) vs Dan Raats (1822)
1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.e5 Nfd7 5.f4 c5 6.Nf3 Nc6 7.Be3 cxd4- An odd choice. I am sure this is the most familiar system for my opponent, but he is a higher rated player than me and this system leads to a very even slow game. However, with that said, I would not deviate from my Caro-Kann based on my opponent's rating.
8.Nxd4 Bc5 9.Qd2 Nxd4 10.Bxd4 Bxd4 11.Qxd4 Qb6 12.O-O-O- I should point out that 12.Nb5 is the main line because the Knight seems better on d4 than the Rook, but my d4 Rook allows for a tactic later that I unfortunately failed to capitalize on.
12...Qxd4 13.Rxd4 a6 14.g3 Ke7 15.Bg2 Nb8 16.Rhd1 Nc6 17.R4d2 b5?- There has not been much to writ about in this slow positional battle until now. The Queenside thrust 17...b5 is a blunder because it allows me the shot 18.Bxd5!. During the game, I looked at this possibility and concluded that I was winning the a8-Rook if 18...exd5 19.Nxd5+ and king anywhere but f8. When I looked at 19...Kf8 I glanced at 20.Nb6 Rb8 21.Rd8+ but saw that the black Knight covers the square. However, I did not look deeply enough, as 21...Nxd8 is met by 22.Rxd8+ Ke7 23.Rxh8 Rxb6 24.Rxc8 and white is winning as he is up two pawns with more to come. It is interesting that at the critical moment I failed to look deeply enough into the position, just like in the game below when I considered the line "ending" with 36.g4. In both cases had I looked one move deeper, I would have avoided a serious oversight. I am not too upset though, as these games were played under active time control; discouraging a re-checking of calculations.
Position after 18.Bxd5! (Analysis Diagram)
18.Ne2- 18.Bxd5! is much better as explained above. The game now enters a maneuvering phase.
18...Bb7 19.Nd4 Rac8 20.a3- Stopping the Queenside attack that begins with b4.
20...g6 21.g4 h5 22.g5 Rc7 23.h4- Always fix the opponent's pawns on the same colour of his bishop.
23...Rhc8 24.c3 Na5 25.Bf1 Nc4 26.Bxc4- The Knights are much better than the Bishops in this position.
26...Rxc4- bxc4 is better because the long-term pressure on b2 would be hard to handle. The black Rooks have no play because of the white pawn on c3.
27.Kc2- Beginning a King walk that seals white's advantage
27...R8c7 28.Kd3 Bc8 29.Ke3 Bd7 30.Nb3?- I thought that this stops the Queenside pawns, but Black is now slightly better after 30...b4! 31.axb4 Ba4 and black wins the exchange. I did not see this possibility over the board.
30...Re4+ 31.Kf3 Rcc4 32.Rd4 Rexd4 33.Rxd4 Rxd4 34.Nxd4- I survived my mistake and now hold an edge because my Knight is much better than the Bishop.
34...Kd8 35.b4- Now the King can never penetrate my position.
35...Kc7 36.Nb3 Kb6- This move came with a draw offer which I did not accept because there is no threat to my position. However, I had a strong feeling that the game was drawn. I did not know that my opponent was such a strong player, so I felt I could trudge on and take the draw in the later stages.
37. Ke3 Be8 38.Kd4 Bd7 39.Nc5 Bc6 40.Nxa6?!- The computer is harsh with this move, giving the position -1.10 but white turns out to be fine. My real mistake came later on in the game. The plan behind Nxa6 was to crash through with the King and destroy the Black Kingside pawns. I did not see that the bishop was in time to defend.
Position after 40.Nxa6?!. The game is still a draw here, as the black King cannot enter the white camp.
40...Kxa6 41.Kc5 Kb7 42.Kd6 d4 43.cxd4 Be4 44.Kc5 Bd3 45.d5??- The losing move. The black King has no way in if the white King swings back and forth between d6 and d7, because the Bishop cannot hinder the King's movements. Now the Bishop has the key e6 square, which decides the game.
45...exd5 46.Kxd5 Kb6 47.Kd6 Bc4 48.Kd7 Bd5 49.Kd6 Be6- No more d7, so the game is lost.
50.Ke7 Kc6 51.Kf6 Kd5 52.f5 gxf5 53.g6 fxg6 54.Kxg6 f4 55.Kxh5 f3 0-1
This game demonstrates the importance of re-checking all variations and of devising endgame "schemes". I found the Kd6 Kd7 Kd6 idea one move too late, when I really should have seen it as a fallback option on 40.Nxa6. Even in benign positions, you must be mindful of your opponent's threats to avoid catastrophe. Both of us missed chances to grab an edge, but that is the nature of active chess. The goal is not always to see the deepest into things, but to find the best ideas.
Patrick O'Sullivan (1750) vs Dan Raats (1822)
1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.e5 Nfd7 5.f4 c5 6.Nf3 Nc6 7.Be3 cxd4- An odd choice. I am sure this is the most familiar system for my opponent, but he is a higher rated player than me and this system leads to a very even slow game. However, with that said, I would not deviate from my Caro-Kann based on my opponent's rating.
8.Nxd4 Bc5 9.Qd2 Nxd4 10.Bxd4 Bxd4 11.Qxd4 Qb6 12.O-O-O- I should point out that 12.Nb5 is the main line because the Knight seems better on d4 than the Rook, but my d4 Rook allows for a tactic later that I unfortunately failed to capitalize on.
12...Qxd4 13.Rxd4 a6 14.g3 Ke7 15.Bg2 Nb8 16.Rhd1 Nc6 17.R4d2 b5?- There has not been much to writ about in this slow positional battle until now. The Queenside thrust 17...b5 is a blunder because it allows me the shot 18.Bxd5!. During the game, I looked at this possibility and concluded that I was winning the a8-Rook if 18...exd5 19.Nxd5+ and king anywhere but f8. When I looked at 19...Kf8 I glanced at 20.Nb6 Rb8 21.Rd8+ but saw that the black Knight covers the square. However, I did not look deeply enough, as 21...Nxd8 is met by 22.Rxd8+ Ke7 23.Rxh8 Rxb6 24.Rxc8 and white is winning as he is up two pawns with more to come. It is interesting that at the critical moment I failed to look deeply enough into the position, just like in the game below when I considered the line "ending" with 36.g4. In both cases had I looked one move deeper, I would have avoided a serious oversight. I am not too upset though, as these games were played under active time control; discouraging a re-checking of calculations.
Position after 18.Bxd5! (Analysis Diagram)
P18.Ne2- 18.Bxd5! is much better as explained above. The game now enters a maneuvering phase.
18...Bb7 19.Nd4 Rac8 20.a3- Stopping the Queenside attack that begins with b4.
20...g6 21.g4 h5 22.g5 Rc7 23.h4- Always fix the opponent's pawns on the same colour of his bishop.
23...Rhc8 24.c3 Na5 25.Bf1 Nc4 26.Bxc4- The Knights are much better than the Bishops in this position.
26...Rxc4- bxc4 is better because the long-term pressure on b2 would be hard to handle. The black Rooks have no play because of the white pawn on c3.
27.Kc2- Beginning a King walk that seals white's advantage
27...R8c7 28.Kd3 Bc8 29.Ke3 Bd7 30.Nb3?- I thought that this stops the Queenside pawns, but Black is now slightly better after 30...b4! 31.axb4 Ba4 and black wins the exchange. I did not see this possibility over the board.
30...Re4+ 31.Kf3 Rcc4 32.Rd4 Rexd4 33.Rxd4 Rxd4 34.Nxd4- I survived my mistake and now hold an edge because my Knight is much better than the Bishop.
34...Kd8 35.b4- Now the King can never penetrate my position.
35...Kc7 36.Nb3 Kb6- This move came with a draw offer which I did not accept because there is no threat to my position. However, I had a strong feeling that the game was drawn. I did not know that my opponent was such a strong player, so I felt I could trudge on and take the draw in the later stages.
37. Ke3 Be8 38.Kd4 Bd7 39.Nc5 Bc6 40.Nxa6?!- The computer is harsh with this move, giving the position -1.10 but white turns out to be fine. My real mistake came later on in the game. The plan behind Nxa6 was to crash through with the King and destroy the Black Kingside pawns. I did not see that the bishop was in time to defend.
40...Kxa6 41.Kc5 Kb7 42.Kd6 d4 43.cxd4 Be4 44.Kc5 Bd3 45.d5??- The losing move. The black King has no way in if the white King swings back and forth between d6 and d7, because the Bishop cannot hinder the King's movements. Now the Bishop has the key e6 square, which decides the game.
45...exd5 46.Kxd5 Kb6 47.Kd6 Bc4 48.Kd7 Bd5 49.Kd6 Be6- No more d7, so the game is lost.
50.Ke7 Kc6 51.Kf6 Kd5 52.f5 gxf5 53.g6 fxg6 54.Kxg6 f4 55.Kxh5 f3 0-1
This game demonstrates the importance of re-checking all variations and of devising endgame "schemes". I found the Kd6 Kd7 Kd6 idea one move too late, when I really should have seen it as a fallback option on 40.Nxa6. Even in benign positions, you must be mindful of your opponent's threats to avoid catastrophe. Both of us missed chances to grab an edge, but that is the nature of active chess. The goal is not always to see the deepest into things, but to find the best ideas.
Sunday, April 25, 2010
Patrick O'Sullivan (1750) vs FM Michael Dougherty (2324) (Active)
This game was played in the third round of the event with a time control of 25 minutes plus ten seconds per move under the Bronstein system. I had one win and one loss coming into the game and upon reading my opponent's name I had no expectations of winning. Nevertheless, I sat down hoping to give my opponent trouble on his way to victory.
Patrick O'Sullivan (1750) vs FM Michael Dougherty (2324)
1.e4 c5- Sicilian Defense. I immediately began remembering my 13 move loss to IM Nikolay Noritsyn, vowing not to repeat that catastrophe.
2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 Nc6- I do not have any over-the-board experience with this system so I hesitated a bit before choosing the Sozin variation.
6.Bc4 Qb6 7.Nb3 e6 8.Be3- Upon reviewing the game I was surprised to see that this move is not in Rybka's opening book, as it looks like a logical time-gaining move. I suppose the point is that c7 is a better square for the Queen anyways, and my bishop is not exerting any pressure on the enemy camp here. The main choices are 8.Bf4 and 8.O-O, which both keep the game sharper.
8...Qc7 9.f3 a6 10.a4!?- Stopping all Queenside play, but allowing the shot 10...d5 with equality. I glanced at the possibility of d5 but I quickly dismissed it as unplayable as I thought it was losing a pawn. After 10...d5 11.exd5 Nb4! the pawn is regained and black has gotten the better of the opening phase.
10...Ne5- A fine move. My opponent did not spend much time making this move, probably reasoning that the move 10...d5 was not worth creating a disadvantage on the clock. Against a lesser opponent, the clock can be a great equalizer.
11.Be2 Nc4 12.Bxc4 Qxc4 13.Qd4- My opponent felt that I should have kept more complications in the position by not offering the trade, but I saw that my pieces were more readily active than his and felt that I would be able to consolidate all holes in the time he would take getting his development completed.
13...Qxd4 14.Bxd4 Bd7 15.e5!?- According to the computer castling is slightly better but I chose to simplify the center, keeping faith in my better development.
15...dxe5 16.Bxe5 Bc6- This Bishop has no prospects so improving it makes sense, but I feel that 16...Bb4 is more productive because as the position stands there is currently no pressure on me.
17.Nd4 Rc8 18.Nxc6 Rxc6- Taking the Bishop was fine for me, but the c6 Rook is perfectly placed to eventually thwart all of my play.
position after 18...Rxc6
19.O-O-O Nd7- An interesting decision. The plan is to put the Knight on c5 and recapture with the Bishop if I take it. I think that 19...Bb4 is better just because I have no intention to open the g-file and it allows castling.
20.Bd4 Be7- 20...Nc5 straight away is one tempo better, but maybe my opponent intended to wait for my Rook to get to d3.
21.Rd3 e5 22.Bf2 Nc5 23.Bxc5 Bxc5 24.Ne4- Perhaps I should have taken the time to develop my other Rook with Re1 or Rd1, but to be honest I missed the simple 24...Bd4. I expected 24...Be7 where I can continue comfortably.
24...Bd4 25.c3 f5 26.Ng3 O-O 27.Kb1 Bf2-My opponent has manufactured his first threat of the game- The idea being Bxg3 and Rg6 winning the pawn on g3.
28.Rd7 b6 28.Re7 Rc5 30.Rf1 Be3 31.Rd1 Bg5 32.Rb7- After making this move I scribbled a mark on my scorecard beside it indicating to myself that I had missed 32.Re6! after which the evaluation jumps to 0.92 according to Rybka. This game is memorable for me because I held a slight edge against an FM for the entire game and I had an opportunity to go way ahead at this juncture. I know I was not in the right "chess mindset" during this part of the game because my goal was to prove an edge to my opponent to pave the way for an attractive draw offer. I should have been thinking of winning, but a 2324 rating is very scary even when you control the game.
32...Rc6 33.Rdd7- In the post-mortem some strong players including my fifth round opponent Gordon Olheiser (2142) were looking at the board exclaiming "This makes no sense, white must be winning here". These were my feelings as well, because all of my pieces were better than their black counterparts. Even so, I had no way to break through.
Position after 33.Rdd7. How is this not winning?
33...Rg6 34.Nh5?!- Over-zealous. Attacking here is the wrong plan. I should instead re-route my knight to d5 by Ne2, c4, Nc3, Nd5. I had calculated one move too few before playing Nh5, seeing 34...Bh6 35.g3 f4 36.g4. I thought this position would be fine for me as the e-pawn is backwards and I have long-term pressure on the black King..
34...Bh6 35.g3 f4 36.g4? e4!- The only move to punish g4. After anything else white stands considerably better with Re7. The pawn cannot be captured because g4 falls and the game is lost. An alternative to 36.g4 was 36.gxf4 but I did not consider it because I thought my horrid pawn structure was surely losing. According to the computer gxf4 leads to an even game.
37.h3 exf3 38.Rd3 Re6- I stopped recording moves here because we were both on three minutes and I reasoned that I would need all of my time if I wanted the chance to find a miracle save. The next moves I will show are from memory, but I will stop when I am unclear about the next move.
39.Rxf3? Re3?-Back to back mistakes. We both missed that 39...g6 traps the white Knight.
40.Rxe3 fxe3 41.Re7 Rf3 42.h4 g6 43.g5 Bf8 44.Nf6+ Rxf6 45.gxf6 Bxe7 46.fxe7 Kf7 47.Kc2?-a poor oversight. 47.e8=Q+ would win me a tempo. Here is where the fact that he is an FM really becomes clear.
47...Kxe7 48.Kd3 h6 49.Kxe3 Kd6 50.Ke4 Ke6 51.Kf4 Kd5 52.b3- The computer shows -0.18 here but I know white is lost. I cannot remember the rest of the game, but White cannot defend because g5 is coming when white steps away from the Kingside.
0-1
I am very happy about how this game was played. I kept the game in my slow positional style and managed to avoid getting thrashed by the Sicilian in the hands of a much stronger player than myself. I may still play 10.a4 because I do not mind the position after 10...d5, but I will not make that decision now. I saw the board very clearly during this entire tournament, and there was not a single point in this game where I was scared. This is my best game ever so far and one that will remain in memory for a long time to come.
Patrick O'Sullivan (1750) vs FM Michael Dougherty (2324)
1.e4 c5- Sicilian Defense. I immediately began remembering my 13 move loss to IM Nikolay Noritsyn, vowing not to repeat that catastrophe.
2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 Nc6- I do not have any over-the-board experience with this system so I hesitated a bit before choosing the Sozin variation.
6.Bc4 Qb6 7.Nb3 e6 8.Be3- Upon reviewing the game I was surprised to see that this move is not in Rybka's opening book, as it looks like a logical time-gaining move. I suppose the point is that c7 is a better square for the Queen anyways, and my bishop is not exerting any pressure on the enemy camp here. The main choices are 8.Bf4 and 8.O-O, which both keep the game sharper.
8...Qc7 9.f3 a6 10.a4!?- Stopping all Queenside play, but allowing the shot 10...d5 with equality. I glanced at the possibility of d5 but I quickly dismissed it as unplayable as I thought it was losing a pawn. After 10...d5 11.exd5 Nb4! the pawn is regained and black has gotten the better of the opening phase.
10...Ne5- A fine move. My opponent did not spend much time making this move, probably reasoning that the move 10...d5 was not worth creating a disadvantage on the clock. Against a lesser opponent, the clock can be a great equalizer.
11.Be2 Nc4 12.Bxc4 Qxc4 13.Qd4- My opponent felt that I should have kept more complications in the position by not offering the trade, but I saw that my pieces were more readily active than his and felt that I would be able to consolidate all holes in the time he would take getting his development completed.
13...Qxd4 14.Bxd4 Bd7 15.e5!?- According to the computer castling is slightly better but I chose to simplify the center, keeping faith in my better development.
15...dxe5 16.Bxe5 Bc6- This Bishop has no prospects so improving it makes sense, but I feel that 16...Bb4 is more productive because as the position stands there is currently no pressure on me.
17.Nd4 Rc8 18.Nxc6 Rxc6- Taking the Bishop was fine for me, but the c6 Rook is perfectly placed to eventually thwart all of my play.
19.O-O-O Nd7- An interesting decision. The plan is to put the Knight on c5 and recapture with the Bishop if I take it. I think that 19...Bb4 is better just because I have no intention to open the g-file and it allows castling.
20.Bd4 Be7- 20...Nc5 straight away is one tempo better, but maybe my opponent intended to wait for my Rook to get to d3.
21.Rd3 e5 22.Bf2 Nc5 23.Bxc5 Bxc5 24.Ne4- Perhaps I should have taken the time to develop my other Rook with Re1 or Rd1, but to be honest I missed the simple 24...Bd4. I expected 24...Be7 where I can continue comfortably.
24...Bd4 25.c3 f5 26.Ng3 O-O 27.Kb1 Bf2-My opponent has manufactured his first threat of the game- The idea being Bxg3 and Rg6 winning the pawn on g3.
28.Rd7 b6 28.Re7 Rc5 30.Rf1 Be3 31.Rd1 Bg5 32.Rb7- After making this move I scribbled a mark on my scorecard beside it indicating to myself that I had missed 32.Re6! after which the evaluation jumps to 0.92 according to Rybka. This game is memorable for me because I held a slight edge against an FM for the entire game and I had an opportunity to go way ahead at this juncture. I know I was not in the right "chess mindset" during this part of the game because my goal was to prove an edge to my opponent to pave the way for an attractive draw offer. I should have been thinking of winning, but a 2324 rating is very scary even when you control the game.
32...Rc6 33.Rdd7- In the post-mortem some strong players including my fifth round opponent Gordon Olheiser (2142) were looking at the board exclaiming "This makes no sense, white must be winning here". These were my feelings as well, because all of my pieces were better than their black counterparts. Even so, I had no way to break through.
Position after 33.Rdd7. How is this not winning?
P33...Rg6 34.Nh5?!- Over-zealous. Attacking here is the wrong plan. I should instead re-route my knight to d5 by Ne2, c4, Nc3, Nd5. I had calculated one move too few before playing Nh5, seeing 34...Bh6 35.g3 f4 36.g4. I thought this position would be fine for me as the e-pawn is backwards and I have long-term pressure on the black King..
34...Bh6 35.g3 f4 36.g4? e4!- The only move to punish g4. After anything else white stands considerably better with Re7. The pawn cannot be captured because g4 falls and the game is lost. An alternative to 36.g4 was 36.gxf4 but I did not consider it because I thought my horrid pawn structure was surely losing. According to the computer gxf4 leads to an even game.
37.h3 exf3 38.Rd3 Re6- I stopped recording moves here because we were both on three minutes and I reasoned that I would need all of my time if I wanted the chance to find a miracle save. The next moves I will show are from memory, but I will stop when I am unclear about the next move.
39.Rxf3? Re3?-Back to back mistakes. We both missed that 39...g6 traps the white Knight.
40.Rxe3 fxe3 41.Re7 Rf3 42.h4 g6 43.g5 Bf8 44.Nf6+ Rxf6 45.gxf6 Bxe7 46.fxe7 Kf7 47.Kc2?-a poor oversight. 47.e8=Q+ would win me a tempo. Here is where the fact that he is an FM really becomes clear.
47...Kxe7 48.Kd3 h6 49.Kxe3 Kd6 50.Ke4 Ke6 51.Kf4 Kd5 52.b3- The computer shows -0.18 here but I know white is lost. I cannot remember the rest of the game, but White cannot defend because g5 is coming when white steps away from the Kingside.
0-1
I am very happy about how this game was played. I kept the game in my slow positional style and managed to avoid getting thrashed by the Sicilian in the hands of a much stronger player than myself. I may still play 10.a4 because I do not mind the position after 10...d5, but I will not make that decision now. I saw the board very clearly during this entire tournament, and there was not a single point in this game where I was scared. This is my best game ever so far and one that will remain in memory for a long time to come.
Kitchener-Waterloo Spring Active
I did not announce that I was going to Kitchener on Saturday April 24 because it was kind of an impromptu thing. The day started unexpectedly as the address of the City Hall that I got was wrong, forcing me to run a kilometer to arrive at the venue on time. There were not as many players there as I had expected there to be and as a result the tournament was condensed to just an Open Section. Of the 18 players there I was the youngest (quite a surprise after attending other events) but I was not intimidated by the crowd. I had no active rating heading into the event but I was assigned a 1750 rating by the organizer before even playing a game.
I finished the event on minus 1 but I won both games that I was expected to. My three losses were all very exciting and I could have extracted some points out of them. This was by far the best chess I have ever played; highlighted by my third round loss against FM Michael Dougherty in which I held the advantage right up until the end.
I believe the tournament was won by FM Hans Jung, but I did not stay to see the conclusion of his last round game. I will annotate at least two games from this event as I am very proud of my play. I will not be posting here in quite a long time after I finish my annotations here though because I cannot play in any events for quite a long time due to personal scheduling conflicts.
I finished the event on minus 1 but I won both games that I was expected to. My three losses were all very exciting and I could have extracted some points out of them. This was by far the best chess I have ever played; highlighted by my third round loss against FM Michael Dougherty in which I held the advantage right up until the end.
I believe the tournament was won by FM Hans Jung, but I did not stay to see the conclusion of his last round game. I will annotate at least two games from this event as I am very proud of my play. I will not be posting here in quite a long time after I finish my annotations here though because I cannot play in any events for quite a long time due to personal scheduling conflicts.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
