Sicilian Defense (2), room for improvement

Today’s game is the first round of our chess club’s annual championship tournament. Using accelerated pairing, my opponent was a class A player and last year’s club Player of the Year. My downward trend began early when I didn’t exchange my Bishop for his Queen-Knight on my 5th move.. From there it was a slow positional demise until I made a game-losing blunder on the 25th move.

In addition to my regular studies, I am re-taking the Chess Exam and Training Guide, by Igor Khmelnitsky to find where I have improved and where I need additional work. After the first 40 questions, I have interim scores that show that my over-the-board play is two full class levels below my chess knowledge. Both interesting and discouraging.

To summarize, a list of the most important things that I need to improve:

Opening studies – 2.Nf3 in response to 1...c5 does not follow my opening studies, need to review my tabiyas more frequently. I am also deleting from my tabiya the Sicilian Defense lines and changing to one that is more Bird-like.

Positional play – after exchanging my light-colored Bishop, I kept putting my pawns on the dark squares, turning my dark-colored Bishop into a tall Pawn. Later my opponent also had a space advantage and my Knight was back on my second rank. I know better, but I do not apply that knowledge during the game. 

Blunders -  26.Rd1??, which caused the loss, was moved  in under 15 sec and without adequate blunder-checking.  Need to work on blunder-checking all moves, especially when responding to threats.

Today's endgame study: FEN "8/8/4N3/8/7p/3K1k2/7P/8 w - -"

Sicilian Defense, against my 1.f4

Today’s game is an online turn-based game. Black plays the Sicilian/Grand Prix Attack against my f4. 1...c5 allows me to establish an early d4/c4 duo. Black moves both e6 and g6 creating a weak dark-squared color complex on the King-side. The fireworks start soon after, before either side is fully developed. A 20-move win for White.

This week will be busy. Thursday night is the first round of the chess club’s annual championship tournament; played at G75 with a 30 sec. increment and using accelerated pairings. Saturday is the initial tournament of the Lowry Grand Prix, a 3-round G65/3, the first of six tournaments being rotated between Columbia, SC and Augusta, GA.

Bird’s Opening (5), a surprise opportunity

Today’s game is an online turn-based game in round 3 of the tournament. Black allows me to establish my ideal Bird setup. The early middlegame is dominated by maneuvering for position. I make a pair of poor moves, permitting my opponent to establish a Rook battery on the a-file. I was able to trade off one of the Rooks when Black got the ‘pigs on the 7th’, so my position was defensible.

Black went for a mating attack, but this left his King vulnerable. I was lucky to see the opportunity to attack as I almost defended instead.

My reviewing goal is to identify my mistakes and determine the steps that are necessary to take to minimize or eliminate those mistakes. I also try to highlight those rare good moves so that my readers can see the progress in my studies. Thus, the notes emphasize my good and bad moves and gloss over those of my opponents. The variations are Houdini’s (1.5 32-bit), diagnosed with ‘Scid vs PC’ at 15 seconds per ply and a 0.6 error threshold. Most move evaluations are also Houdini’s, but any ‘!’ evaluations are mine. The verbal comments are my thoughts during the game and my interpretations of the analysis provided by Houdini.

 

Today’s endgame study: This endgame is both simple and complex. Initially it looks impossible to win.

Take the endgame FEN and paste it into your favorite engine and try to repeat the win. My opponent was Houdini set at full strength.

FEN "8/8/8/2p5/2Pp4/3K2Pk/7P/8 w - - 0 1"

Pirc Defense, Philidor denied

Instead of today’s endgame, a list of the chess books that I am currently reading to help with my chess studies is substituted.

Today’s game is an online turn-based game in which I attempt to establish my standard Philidor setup using the initial Pirc move-order against White. White blunders a center pawn and with White’s pressure on e5, I fianchetto the Bishop as in the Pirc Defense.

White later found a very pretty Queen sacrifice, but did not gain from it. Instead the benefit was mine as I was ahead in material. The game concluded with the pushing of passed center pawns.

My reviewing goal is to identify my mistakes and determine the steps that are necessary to take to minimize or eliminate those mistakes. I also try to highlight those rare good moves so that my readers can see the progress in my studies. Thus, the notes emphasize my good and bad moves and gloss over those of my opponents. The variations are Houdini’s (1.5 32-bit), diagnosed with ‘Scid vs PC’ at 15 seconds per ply and a 0.6 error threshold. Most move evaluations are also Houdini’s, but any ‘!’ evaluations are mine. The verbal comments are my thoughts during the game and my interpretations of the analysis provided by Houdini. The score chart is at the bottom of this entry.

My best move: 31...Rc1!
My worst move: 14...Re8?!

These are the books I am currently reading:
- Pawn Power in Chess by Hans Kmoch (2nd reading), for the strategic handling of pawns.
- Chess Strategy for Club Players by Herman Grooten, primarily for reviewing games but any strategy absorbed is a bonus.
- A First Book of Morphy by Frisco Del Rosario, for reviewing games and the illustration of Reuben Fine’s 30 rules of chess.
- Chess Exam and Training Guide by Igor Khmelnitsky (2nd reading), to see what changes have been made by my last few years of study and to find where my studies concentrate on next.

Philidor Defense (12), saved by Kmoch

Today’s game is an online turn-based game in which I use my standard Philidor setup using the initial Pirc move-order against White, who deviates from book early.

This game contains my second-best move ever in chess, thanks to my recent study of Kmoch’s Pawn Power in Chess. This move, 30...b4 sacrifices a pawn to change a losing game into a draw, which I subsequently offered. My opponent didn’t believe it as he attempted to force a win and lost the game trying.

My reviewing goal is to identify my mistakes and determine the steps that are necessary to take to minimize or eliminate those mistakes. I also try to highlight those rare good moves so that my readers can see the progress in my studies. Thus, the notes emphasize my good and bad moves and gloss over those of my opponents.

The variations and move evaluations are Houdini’s (1.5 32-bit), diagnosed with ‘Scid vs PC’ at 15 seconds per ply and a 0.6 error threshold. The verbal comments are my thoughts during the game and my interpretations of the analysis provided by Houdini. The score chart is at the bottom of this entry.

My judging criteria is simple: A book must be worth reading multiple times and what the book teaches must help me win. Kmoch’s Pawn Power in Chess met both criteria early. I have added it to my list of recommended chess books at the bottom of this blog.

Today’s endgame study: This endgame has a surprising sacrifice. A good chess engine will try different defenses on each attempt, so repeat this exercise until winning is consistent.

Take the endgame FEN and paste it into your favorite engine and try to repeat the win. My opponent was Houdini set at full strength.

FEN "8/5k2/5p2/p7/2P1K1P1/8/8/8 w - - 0 1

Bird's Opening (4), defensive trading

Today’s game is a USCF rated game at the club played at G75 with a 30 second increment. My opponent is high school player who plays a good tactical game. The game opened with the mainline version of Bird’s Opening. 

When y’all see a sharp rise (or fall) in the graph followed immediately by a sharp fall (or rise), it indicates that the first player blundered and the second player missed the response. There are several in this game, showing that both players didn’t see as deeply into the possibilities as Houdini’s analysis.

The majority of my tactical missteps occur in the early middlegame after the pieces are fully deployed. The level of my tactical problems will be increased to address this problem, trading off complexity for quantity. On the plus side, the endgame technique was reasonable for the level of play.

The variations and move evaluations are Houdini’s (1.5 32-bit), diagnosed with ‘Scid vs PC’ at 15 seconds per ply and a 0.6 error threshold. The verbal comments are my thoughts during the game and my interpretations of the analysis provided by Houdini. The score chart is at the bottom of this entry.

My first tournament of the year is now finished, scoring 3 draws and 2 losses. This year I intend to play in the section that my rating decides. In prior years I always played up as there was a large gap between my rating and either the top or bottom section. I am enjoying the game more now and find that my deficiencies are easier to find and maybe correct.

Today’s endgame study: the initial position was taken from Chernev’s Practical Chess Endgames.  This endgame has a lot of tricks in it and it is well worth the effort to learn the technique. Take the endgame FEN and paste it into your favorite engine and try to repeat the win. My opponent was Houdini set at full strength.

FEN "8/8/8/8/1k6/4p1P1/6P1/6K1 w - - 0 1