King of the Spill

5/1001

2007-02-06T22:46:00.000-08:00

I have been busy lately and chess has fallen by the wayside. This post may be the last one I will do for awhile.

Even though I haven't finished 1001 I know I eventually will, and I feel like I am already coming around full circle.Whenever I look at the composed problems at the end of 1001 I go into molasses mode. They are clever, cursed little buggers, and I am still getting the solutions only fifty percent of the time. I occasionally flip back to the beginning of the book and do some normal checkmates. Nothing quite like sacrificing a piece or two for checkmate :-). Here is a great example (number 5):

I think this problem is one of the best in the book, and a clear case of simultaneous advantage. Although it is in the Queen sacrifice section, it really is a Rook sacrifice problem.

The first time I saw this problem was several years ago. I could not solve it and took me quite a while to understand the solution. I tried piecing it together by looking at c8. The c8 square appeared to be attacked twice by White and guarded three times by Black, a situation that does not usually lead to checkmate. I thought the answer had something to do with the fact that Rc8! absolutely pinned Black's Queen and simultaneously threatened Qxd8#.

Appearances were deceiving me and now I see an important advantage White has: Black's Queen is a tied down defender, unable to capture anything on c8 because of White's Qe7# checkmate threat. Rather than looking at c8 I look at d8, appreciating that Rc8! outnumbers Black's Queen with three attackers when it is protected only twice (1 of which is x-ray protection from the Black Rook on a1 after Rc8). If you still not see the answer, picture the board after Rc8! Rxc8 {maintaining protection of the Queen on d8} Rxc8 Bxc8. At this point the Black Queen is clearly outnumbered and Qxd8# is the result. Great problem, eh?

911/1001

2007-01-21T23:11:00.000-08:00

White to Move

The first time through this "checkmate" problem I made the same mistake that the author made: 1. Rf8+ Rxf8 2. Bc4+ Kg7 3. e8=N+ Rxe8 4. Qf7#. I had just seen an underpromotion and was thinking along those lines (no pun intended).

That was a month ago. I went through it again last week when I was taking a break from the composed checkmates. Seeing this problem again I was stumped. I thought Rf8+ Qxf8! busts the variation, and I was looking to sacrifice the pawn but did not see that either. Fritz confirmed it - not a checkmate problem. Something about it seemed intriguing though. Take a look at this alternate position:

White to Move

Now e8=Q+ Rxe8 Rc7 essentially forks c1 and f7, threatening mate with either the Bishop or Queen. The awful Qc1+ Rxc1 is the only reply that isn't a quick mate. I don't know of any pawn promotion/clearance sacrifices that are followed by forking two squares with a Rook.

-=-=-=-=-

Comments are not working again for me = (. Hope that gets fixed soon...

Composed Checkmates

2007-01-10T14:16:00.000-08:00

Years ago when I bought 1001 Brilliant Ways to Checkmate I had the goal of completing the book. After I learned about the circles, I figured a better approach would be to work through everything once except the composed problems, and then repeat any problems I got wrong. I specifically avoided composed problems because ~~I hated them~~ they did not seem to help my game.

Well, worse has come to worse, and I have started on that last infernal section of the book. No circles on this section - I am just going through it once and repeating it once. I am pleasantly surprised to find I truly have improved from before starting the TASC circles; rather than never getting the right answer in 5-10 minutes, I am solving them about 50% of the time in that amount of time. Unfortunately I always seem to leave out one or more defensive variations, and that tells me I have some fundamental calculation blindspots to work on.

They still strike me as unnatural and overly clever, but solving them is a chess workout.

-=-=-=-=-

In order to keep things balanced I review some ordinary checkmates fairly regularly. One thing that is hitting home stronger now is how beneficial solving "upside-down" checkmates are (i.e. normal board but with Black to move). This is what I am doing before each move anyway, so why not practice it. Before the TASC circles it was tough to do, and now I realize it is important to do.

Finished Circles 5-7

2007-01-03T14:58:00.000-08:00

Glad to be done =). Although it was getting boring towards the end, I believe it helped my chess overall. My speed with other checkmate problems in this book is up a notch.

"Which Tactic is This?" Revisited.

2006-12-30T17:06:00.000-08:00

Problem 540 from 1001 Brilliant Ways to Checkmate by Fred Reinfeld
White to Move
2k1q3/p2r1p2/P7/Q6B/8/Kp2r3/8/6R1 w - - 0 1

Note: if you want to solve this checkmate problem first, better stop reading now!

...

I was stuck on this one for awhile and still did not get it right. The two easier variations are 1.Rc1+ Rc7?? and 1.Rc1+ Rc3. I won't comment on those - they are much more forced. I never could get through the 1.Rc1+ Kb8 variation completely on my own. After looking up the answer and working through it in subsequent circles, I began to appreciate this problem more.

Seeing that White's Queen could give check on b4 was alot different than giving check b5 was pretty easy. The key to the difficulty seems to be the c8 square. First it's where Black's King is, then Black is guarding c8 more times than it is attacked, then Black is guarding c8 once as it is being attacked once. At the same time the Black King is stuck in the corner, walking into a strange sort of back rank checkmate threat.

After 1.Rc1+ Kb8 2.Qb4+ Ka8 3.Bf3!+ Rxf3

I am now beginning to think I left something out of my Simultaneous Advantage post: tying down defenders. That is similar to immobilizing defenders, although they still have some movement available to them. Here is a simplified analysis of the above position.

Preexisting advantages:

All of Black's King's flight squares have been removed.
Black's Queen is tied down to the eighth rank to defend against the back rank checkmate threat Rc8#.
Black's Rook on c7 is tied down to the seventh rank to defend against Qb7#.

On Qe4! Black gets some advantages from the move:

Moving into capture - White's Queen is unprotected on e4
Giving a King flight square - b8

White gets advantages which are terminal for Black:

Forcing with check - this also implies "preventing counterattack" on White's King
Threatening capture - Black's unprotected Queen is threatened with Qxe8+
Removing King's flight square - a8
Resulting checkmate threat - ...Kb8 Qxe8+ Rd8 Qxd8#

Defensive options:

Rook (on d7) to b7 walks into mate in one.
...Rb7 Qxb7#
Rook (on d7) to d5 walks into mate in two.
...Rd5 Qxe8+ Rd8 Qxd8#
Similarly Kb7 walks into mate in two.
...Kb7 Qxe8+ Rd8 Qxd8#
Queen takes Queen on e4 walks into the back rank mate in one.
...Qxe4 5. Rc8#

So what tactic (besides the fork aspect) is going on in the move Qe4? It seems to me as a special case of attacking the defender: a enprise attack on a tied down defender. Although Black's Queen is hanging, I believe a tied down defender essentially is equivalent to a hanging piece. Here's an example:

White to Move

Qb7! forks both Black Queens. Although they defend each other, the Black Queens cannot simultaneously defend against the back-rank mate threat and capture White's Queen.

-=-=-=-=-

I am getting a bit annoyed with this new blogger editor as it keeps adding lines, especially in bulleted sentences.**rolls eyes**. Perhaps WordPress is in my future...

Finished circle 4, and picking up some speed.

Happy New Year Everyone!

Circle 3 Complete

2006-12-30T01:36:00.000-08:00

I am sinking into shallow pattern recognition solving the circle checkmates. When I recognize it I slow myself down and deliberately calculate through it again. That is one of the problems with books: the answers don't punish incomplete variation thinking.

I have found two wrong answers, 513 and 524. The mating idea was right, it just took more moves.

-=-=-=-

For about a month I have had difficulty leaving comments on blogs. If it doesn't go to a comment page that never completely loads it asks me to login and in the process loses my comment. I find it really irritating that something that was working for years is broken.

:-(

Circle 2 Complete

2006-12-27T20:09:00.000-08:00

I am beginning to wonder about these problems. Although they highlight my weak areas, some of the themes are obscure. For instance, how many opportunities do beginning/intermediate players have to use a double sacrifice? That theme is a bit of a mind-bender.

Circle 1 Complete

2006-12-24T17:11:00.000-08:00

As I circle through my checkmate problems, I have begun to categorize the themes that come up in the checkmates that I often get wrong.

Sacrifice not on the initial move
Quiet moves, especially not on the initial move
Opening lines to take away opponent's King flight squares
Interference, forcing opponent's pieces onto his own King's flight squares, especially not on the initial move
Overworked Defenders who are not overworked on or after the initial move

This leaves out taking extra moves to achieve mate, using squares beyond a1 through h8, or instantaneously promoting all of my pieces to Queens.

-=-=-=-=-

I am working on a universal definition of the weakest part of my chess game. So far I have two possibilities: either the part of my game that I am scrutinizing at this time or the more straightforward all parts of my game are very, very weak. This definition seems to apply to the majority of chess players, players at all rating levels as well. At least how they describe themselves ;-).

-=-=-=-=-

I wanted to put in a good word for GM Eugene Perelshteyn's French Defense opening lecture on chessfm. It was immensely accessible and well thought out. Although I never play either side of that opening, it didn't matter. I have not read his related books, but I gather they are quite good for beginner through intermediate level players.

These lectures are one of the biggest reason I joined the ICC - to support them to keep doing it =). I hope to see more.

Starting Circle 1

2006-12-20T17:38:00.000-08:00

Beginning circles again is helping my thinking process. For the first time in months I played a great miniature as Black. Enjoy!

1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nf6 3. Nxe5 d6 4. Nf3 Nxe4 5. Bb5+ c6 6. Qe2 Qe7 7. Bd3 Nc5 8. Qxe7+ Bxe7 9. O-O Nxd3 10. cxd3 O-O 11. b3 Bf6 12. Nc3 Bf5 13. Ba3 Rd8 14. d4 Na6 15. Rfe1 b5 16. Bb2 Nb4 17. Rad1 Nd3 {White resigns} 0-1

Circling Around Again

2006-12-17T16:41:00.000-08:00

Years after I began it, I am approaching problem 800 in 1001 Better Ways to Checkmate (Wohoo!). I missed a mate in two and took five minutes to see a mate in one. I am consistently going for longer mates or missing crisscross attacks completely. *Sigh*

Although I still get in an occasional blitz game, it's only through blunders that I am in the 1300 range. I know playing lots of long games would help more, but in lieu of time considerations I am going to do a "holiday" 40 problem mini-circle out of medium difficulty checkmates from the book.

On a more upbeat note it is good to see so many interesting posts on other chess blogs including new Knights - I will add your links soon.

Thinking in chess

2006-12-07T21:17:00.000-08:00

What is chess thinking anyway? I don't really know. Years ago I would attribute most everything to visual pattern recognition or calculation. That seems terribly simplistic now.

Here is a parallel question. What is thinking in wrestling, like they have in the Olympics? Clearly the sport is a test of physical strength. All wrestlers are fit from training, so what determines the winner seems like a combination of things: strategy, tactics, timing, and space, especially if you consider that a wrestler can lose or gain by getting out of boundaries depending on the situation. The brain must be doing something for wrestlers.

Back to chess. I picked up an old chess book and casually reviewed some problems. I did not do much better on the "Combinations" section than I did before starting the TCT circles. I am busy and my chess is suffering. Anyway, I went back to the section on "Delivering Mate" and I quickly sailed through the easy mates. The tougher mates were a little slower. Surprisingly I didn't really recognize any of them. One just didn't make sense. I must have been too tired to calculate. Either that or lazy!

The Mammoth Book of Chess
Problem 11, page 29

White to Move

This wasn't any pattern I recognized. I put the book down for five minutes, had my mind completely elsewhere, then picked up the book again and had the answer: Qe8. Because f8 was attacked twice by White, it seems logical for Black to take the Queen, but alas that is followed by a double-check. I had to laugh, as the d6 square was attacked no less than four times by Black!

I find it peculiar that the answer quietly popped out of nowhere. It was not visual, either. It sort of seemed mechanical, like pieces moving, as if to indicate, "do this". That is the mysterious chess thinking I have no clue about. And I can't imagine anyone becoming a strong player without it in one form or another.

Caro-Kann

2006-11-23T23:32:00.000-08:00

I have been doing some reading in the Art of Logical Thinking, finishing up Ponomariov vs Conquest and getting into Vladimir Kovacevic vs Yasser Seirawan (1980). These seem like good game choices, and I can grasp the ideas in the annotations.

I don't know anything about the Caro-Kann Defense (Ponomariov vs Conquest). I have read several people discourage beginning and intermediate players from using that as Black, although it has a solid reputation. I get the impression that it is similar to the Petroff in that Black's attitude is more about not losing than it is about winning, and maybe more about getting to an endgame rather than a quick tactical miniature. Anyone have any opinions?

I Feel Good

2006-11-16T17:08:00.000-08:00

... to quote singer James Brown. I received a gift in a recent blitz game.

White to Move

I was White and boldly took the Bishop with Qxd7. Black took the sacrifice (ouch!) ...Qxd7. Fork, fork,...

Appreciation

2006-11-11T23:42:00.000-08:00

Black to Move

I have not done much with chess recently, but occasionally I get in a little blitz, checkmate problems, and some TCT review. Oh, also a couple of annotated games each month. It just isn't the same as when I was doing the circles, as my board vision is really poor now.

Although I enjoy blitz, I there isn't enough time to appreciate the endgame. I was White in this position and had not accurately calculated Black's options. I now think this is a nice little endgame problem, one path leading to a quick demise, another leading to chances.

Answer:[ ...a6! and now Black can meet b7 with ..Kc7]

570th Brilliant Way to Checkmate

2006-10-24T15:52:00.000-07:00

Black to Move

Here's another from Reinfeld's 1001 Brilliant Ways to Checkmate. I had the right idea but messed up the calculation on this one... the devil is in the details! I like when a problem puts together a couple of simple themes and makes something that is tough, so I thought I would post it.

... Rd1+ 2. Kh2 Rcc1 3. Bf4 Rh1+ 4. Kg3 Rh3+ 5. gxh3 Rg1+6. Kh2 Rh1+ 7. Kg3 Rxh3# 0-1

Indirect Threat

2006-10-19T18:39:00.000-07:00

I got in a little blitz and thought I would post one of the really nice opportunity I missed in time pressure. This one looks like it is right out of TCT.

Black to Move

.
..
...
..
.
I ended up playing the klunky ...Kd6, aiming to march the Black King over to the White Rook. I missed the wonderful ...Rf1, quietly threatening ...Rxf2+ and promotion simultaneously.

Mate in 19?

2006-10-14T22:12:00.000-07:00

I have been busy recently, and that means very little chess. One annoying thing that I spent alot of time on was problem #557 in Reinfeld's 1001 Brilliant Ways to Checkmate. I correctly came to the conclusion that if Black refused a Rook sacrifice, it wasn't checkmate anytime soon. The book was naive in its answer and didn't explore the variation. I fed it to Fritz, and it couldn't even get to the final mate without pushing pieces to quicken the pace of calculation. Ugh... and I thought I liked checkmate problems (lol).

So here is the question: is forced mate in 19 moves really a checkmate problem?

Pre-Circle Review

2006-09-27T17:59:00.000-07:00

I have been busy and had little time for chess recently. One thing I have done is review several of the Waitzkin lectures bundled in my old Chessmaster 8000. Before the "circles", I spent all my training time with that program and Silman's The Amateur's Mind. Not a bad approach, but not strong enough calculation practice (which I still need more of!).

I really enjoyed Waitzkin vs Akopyan and Waitzkin vs Frumkin which is below.

Can Black take the d1 Rook now?

[Event "Open"]
[Site "New York"]
[Date "1987.??.??"]
[EventDate "?"]
[Round "?"]
[Result "1-0"]
[White "Joshua Waitzkin"]
[Black "Edward A Frumkin"]
[ECO "B45"]
[WhiteElo "?"]
[BlackElo "?"]
[PlyCount "62"]

1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 e6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Nf6 5. Nc3 Nc6 6. Be3 Bb4 7. f3 d5 8.
Bb5 Bd7 9. Bxc6 bxc6 10. e5 Ng8 11. a3 Ba5 12. b4 Bc7 13. f4 Ne7 14. Na4
O-O 15. Nc5 a5 16. c3 Nc8 17. O-O Nb6 18. Qg4 Nc4 19. Bf2 Qe8 20. Rfe1 Bc8
21. Bh4 Kh8 22. a4 Bb6 23. Rad1 Bxc5 24. bxc5 Nb2 25. Re3 Nxd1 26. Qxg7+
Kxg7 27. Bf6+ Kg6 28. Rg3+ Kh6 29. Bg7+ Kh5 30. Rg5+ Kh4 31. Nf3# 1-0

I couldn't calculate this exhaustively before the circles and now I can. The White Queen threatens sacrifice on g7 leading to... Kg7 Bf6+ and forced mate with help from the e3 Rook, Knight, and White's back rank pawns. So taking the Rook was a blunder. Kudos to the (then) 10-year old Josh Waitzkin.

It took several minutes to get this one right, but nonetheless I did it :-). Had I continued with the training approach I was in, well... it's doubtful that I would see it completely.

Immaterial

2006-09-15T18:58:00.000-07:00

I have been frustrated recently with this blog's search capabilities. Looking for text "magnetism" in a post from last year turns up nothing. GRR.

ANYWAY...here is a fun, dynamic position that I lucked into. Enjoy.

White to Move

More Down Than Up

2006-09-05T19:01:00.000-07:00

I think it has finally happened. After months of doing 10 problems a day, some chunk of "circle" power has gone away. I am falling back into old habits, not seeing pins or assessing them wrong, not calculating Queen moves exhaustively, and occasionally even missing mate threats I was recently so keen on looking out for. I suspect this is temporary, just part of the process of getting better.

Black to Move

Here is a recent blitz loss as Black. To me it looks like my middlegame is strong but my endgame is a disaster. That's the exact opposite of how I used to be.

1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nf6 3. Nxe5 d6 4. Nf3 Nxe4 5. Qe2 Qe7 6. d3 Nf6 7. Qxe7+
Bxe7 8. Be2 O-O 9. O-O Re8 10. Re1 Bf8 11. Nc3 Nbd7 12. Bg5 h6 13. Bh4 b6
14. Nb5 Nd5 15. c4 a6 16. Nbd4 Nf4 17. Bg3 Nxe2+ 18. Nxe2 Bb7 19. Nfd4 Ne5
20. Bxe5 dxe5 21. Nc2 Rad8 22. Rad1 f5 23. Ng3 g6 24. b3 h5 25. Ne2 h4 26.
Nc3 g5 27. Ne3 Bb4 28. Ncd5 Bxd5 29. Nxd5 Bxe1 30. Nf6+ Kf7 31. Nxe8 Rxe8
32. Rxe1 e4 33. Rd1 Rd8 34. d4 f4 35. Kf1 g4 36. Ke2 Kf6 37. d5 Kf5 38. g3
hxg3 39. fxg3 fxg3 40. hxg3 Ke5 41. Ke3 c6 42. d6 Rxd6 43. Rxd6 Kxd6 44.
Kxe4 Ke6 45. Kf4 Kf6 46. Kxg4 Kg6 47. Kf4 Kf6 48. b4 c5 49. a3 a5 50. bxa5
{
Black resigns
}
1-0

In the diagram I missed the simple tactic exd3! White's Rook cannot recapture due to Rxd3 Re1#. D O H !

Up and Down

2006-08-25T15:19:00.000-07:00

I got a draw as White with a 1700 blitz player, a first for me:

1. d4 Nf6 2. Nf3 g6 3. g3 Bg7 4. Bg2 O-O 5. O-O d6 6. Nbd2 Nbd7 7. b3 e5 8.
dxe5 Nxe5 9. Bb2 Re8 10. Nxe5 dxe5 11. Nc4 Nd7 12. e4 Rb8 13. Qe2 b5 14.
Ne3 Bb7 15. Rfd1 a6 16. Rd2 Qe7 17. Nd5 Bxd5 18. exd5 Nb6 19. Rad1 Rbd8 20.
Qe3 h5 21. d6 Qd7 22. dxc7 Qxc7 23. Rxd8 Rxd8 24. Qe2 Kh7 25. Rxd8 Qxd8 26.
Bxe5 Bxe5 27. Qxe5 Qd1+ 28. Bf1 Qxc2 29. Qf6 Qc7 30. Bg2 Qc1+ 31. Bf1 Qc7
32. Bg2 Qc1+ 33. Bf1 Qc7 34. Bg2 {Game drawn by repetition} 1/2-1/2

I certainly wasn't perfect but very solid.

-=-=-=-

I got positionally crushed as Black in my last slow game by a 1500 player. He knows his openings!

1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nf6 3. Nxe5 d6 4. Nf3 Nxe4 5. Nc3 Nxc3 6. dxc3 Nc6 7. Be3
Be6 8. Qd2 Be7 9. O-O-O Qd7 10. Kb1 O-O-O 11. Nd4 Ne5 12. b3 Kb8 13. Bb5 c6
14. Nxe6 fxe6 15. Be2 h6 16. Bd4 Bf6 17. Qe3 c5 18. Bxc5 Qc6 19. Bxa7+ Kc7
20. Bd4 Ra8 21. f4 Rxa2 22. Kxa2 Ra8+ 23. Kb2 Nc4+ 24. Bxc4 e5 25. fxe5
dxe5 26. Bxe5+ {Black resigns} 1-0

-=-=-=-

All in all I am spending much less time with chess, and there probably is no big improvement this way *roll eyes*. I don't miss the circles though.

Not So Bad

2006-08-17T13:38:00.000-07:00

Black to Move

After years of collecting post-mortem conundrums I looked at some of them. And you know, it wasn't so bad! Rather than feeling inundated by the amount, which is around 200 positions, I just looked at a few for the sake of looking at a few. I suppose that this collection no longer seems like an impossible encumbrance, just more chess problems that I can improve on :-).

Here's a tough position I wanted to share. I'm curious what people think about what they would play in the above position, and let's say you are playing a slow game and have plenty of time.

...

Back when I played this I thought, "I don't see forced mate so the clearest idea is ...Qg6, threatening a back rank check and double attack on the b2 Rook. I see the pin I have is helpful, but not exactly winning."

While ...Qg6 is completely winning, I never even looked at ...Rf8. That threatens ...Rxf2+ 38. Kxf2 Qf5+ 39. Ke1 Rg1+ 40. Kd2 Qd3#. The threat is so strong it practically forces White to exchange his Queen for the f8 Rook. Pretty cool, huh?

Fritz also has ...Qe4 as a nearly equal threat to ...Rf8, so kudos if you saw that one.

Review

2006-08-12T21:04:00.000-07:00

I am keeping up review, doing roughly 10 problems per day. I was very rusty with the Mammoth Book of Chess review, though not too bad with Seirawan's tactics book.

I have not played any long games recently but I am still having fun with 5/12. Here's a finish from one where I couldn't help but indulge my tendency to liquidate with Qxe8+ Kxe8 Nc7+ Kd7 Nxa6 :).

White to Move

Winning Combination

2006-07-28T23:07:00.000-07:00

Black to Move

I got in some more solid blitz games of (5/12) and in a rare occurrence I sacrificed my Queen to win! Finding Queen to a2 to reach the above positioned was extremely difficult. I think following this position all the way through is a treat. The continuation is 36...Qxb1!+ 37.Qxb1 Ra1 38.Qxa1 bxa1=Q+ 39.Bxa1 Rb1+, forking the King and Bishop.

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.Nc3 Bb4 4.d3 Bxc3+ 5.bxc3 d6 6.Bg5 O-O 7.Be2 c5 8.O-O Nc6 9.Nd2
b5 10.Re1 a5 11.Nf1 b4 12.c4 Nd4 13.Ne3 h6 14.Bh4 g5 15.Bg3 h5 16.Bxh5 Kg7 17.Nd5
Nxh5 18.Qxh5 Nxc2 19.Ne3 Rh8 20.Qd1 Nxa1 21.Qxa1 Be6 22.f4 f6 23.f5 Bf7 24.Rf1 a4
25.Nd5 Bxd5 26.cxd5 b3 27.axb3 axb3 28.Qc3 Rb8 29.Rb1 Qb6 30.Bf2 Qb4 31.Qc1 b2 32.Qc2
Qb3 33.Qe2 Qa2 34.Qc2 Rb7 35.Be1 Ra8 36.Bc3 Qxb1+ 37.Qxb1 Ra1 38.Qxa1 bxa1=Q+ 39.Bxa1
Rb1+ {White resigns} 0-1

-=-=-=-=-

I just went through the Seirawan v. Ivanchuk game in the McDonald book The Art of Logical Thinking and I think it is one of the best in the book. It is a KID gone really bad for Black, over in 22 moves!

-=-=-=-=-

I just lost a 45/45 game to a 1700 + 10 year old. I played well, and it was extremely even through most of it, but I lost to a miscalculation in the late middlegame (24). I really didn't think about prophylactic moves, just tactics, and it cost me. Hopefully lessened learned!

Anyone know the KID?

2006-07-28T14:08:00.000-07:00

I have been avoiding this opening for awhile, putting time into improving my tactics. More than any other opening that I play as White, this one seemed to be the most complex. I opted for the Four Pawns attack (which seemed easy to remember) or KIA (which always secured a plausible game).

It seems like a few years ago the Bayonet variation (1. d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.Nc3 Bg7 4.e4 d6 5.Nf3 0-0 6.Be2 e5 7.0-0 Nc6 8.d5 Ne7 9.b4 ) became viewed best for White at the professional level, and soon after scores of amateurs started using it. Of all the books I own and have checked out of my local library, not one had that variation except Batsford Chess Openings, and that book was over my head.
I have to questions that I am puzzling through. First, Black's option of 7...Nd7 would appear to change the situation, avoiding that line. With 7...Nd7 Black is no longer losing a tempo to the d5 push, yet the move does not seem as popular according to my database. I am guessing that the advantage of 7...Nc6 8.d5 Ne7 is that it supports the f5 push?

My second question is about other lines where White starts improvising out of book but then throws in the b4 early, should Black be considering ...a5 early or other ideas as prevention?

edit: I have been directed to read Bronstein's Zurich 1953. I imagine 350 pages gone through 7 circles would serve as a nice introduction...

Good Game

2006-07-26T18:27:00.000-07:00

I finally got my Circles pay off in a standard game! I was extra focused on every threat on every move, both mine and my opponents, which helped. Too many times in the past I have been surprised by my opponents response. Anyway, t was nice to win and play well, and this may be my best of the year :).

My opponent played the opening ok (he lost a tempo) and then he got into an early attack before castling. I defended really well, countered with 12...d5, then White's position fell apart and he resigned, down 3 pawns in a passive position. I actually was hazy on his response of 13. d4, but as much as I could calculate 12...d5 was the best, especially in view of his wing attack potential.

-=-=-=-=-

Back to normal mistakes... I have been not playing blitz very well, probably it doesn't matter :). Here my opponent had a good move:

Black to Move

Bxb4! and White cannot recapture without getting forked with discovery with axb4 Nxb4.

Tasc Chess Tutor Errata

2006-07-25T18:59:00.000-07:00

First I would like to say thanks to Sancho and Tempo for recommending this program. It was much more of what I needed to study. It does have a few quirks, like occasionally throwing in weak defensive moves for you to feast on. I think it would be better to have 10% more defense problems, and some very basic variation quizzes. The most maddening part was the occasionally mistake of theirs, and a list of them follows.

Analysis by Crafty 19.01 and Fritz 8

Step 2, exercise 8b, #2: 1. f4 is better but marked incorrect. 1. Qa3 is met by this:
1...Rfxf2 2.Nf7+ Kg8 3.Qf8+ Kxf8 4.Nxg5 Rxf1+ 5.Rxf1+ Nf5 6.a5 Ra2 7.Ne6+ Ke7 8.Re1 Rxa5 9.Kf2

Step 2, exercise 12h, #10 NOTE: 1... Ne3 is best but it is certainly not mate:
1... Ne3 2. Bf4! Rxf4 3. Rg1+ Kf8 4. Qxd5 Nxd5

------------------------------------------------------------------
Step 3, exercise 10d, #5: 1. Rg5+, 1. Rg4+, and 1. Rg3+ are equal but marked incorrect

Step 3, exercise 17f, #9: 2. Qf8# is equal but marked incorrect

------------------------------------------------------------------
Step 4, exercise 3d, #2: 1. Qc4+ and 1. h3 are better but marked incorrect
1. +- (9.70): 1.h3 Qg6 2.Nh4 Qe8 3.Nf5 Nc5 4.Qd6 Rxd6 5.Nxd6+ Kd7 6.Nxe8 Kxe8
2. +- (9.20): 1.Qf7 Bc5 2.Bd5 Rf8 3.Bxb7+ Kd8 4.Qc4 Ke7 5.Rfd1 Rd8
3. +- (8.55): 1.Qc4+ Kb8 2.Qb4 Rc8 3.a5
4. +- (7.96): 1.Rxb6 Nxb6 2.Qc5+ Kb8 3.Qxb6 Qd7 4.Bd5 Qc7 5.Rb1 Qxb6 6.Rxb6 Rd7 7.a5

Step 4, exercise 7b, #4 NOTE: 1. Re8 Ra8!! draws
1. = (0.00): 2...h2 3.Rh8+ Nh7 4.Rg8 Ng5 5.Rh8+
2. = (0.00): 2...Kh7 3.Ra7+ Kh6

Step 4, exercise 14a, #5: 1. Rab2 is worse but marked as correct (it draws)

Step 4, exercise 16e, #5: 1. Nxc4 is equal but marked incorrect,
also 1. Ne5 is almost equal but marked incorrect
1. (-0.79): 1...Rxf3 2.Qxf3 Ne5 3.Bxe6+ Bxe6 4.Qg3 Rf8 5.Red1 h6 6.Bf4
2. (-0.79): 1...Nxc4 2.Qxc4 Rxf3 3.hxg4 Rf7 4.Qd3 Bd7 5.Be3 Be5 6.g5 Bc6 7.Red1
3. (-0.65): 1...Ne5 2.Nxe5 Bxe5 3.Rf1 Nxc4 4.Qxc4 b5 5.Qd3 c4 6.Qe3 b4 7.f4

------------------------------------------------------------------
Step 5, exercise 2c, #8: 2. Nce6+ is equal but is marked incorrect

Step 5, exercise 3a, #6: 1. a5 draws but is marked incorrect

Step 5, exercise 5b, #5: 1...Ka3 draws but is marked incorrect

Step 5, exercise 6a, #5: 2. c5 is better but is marked incorrect

Step 5, exercise 7a, #10: 1... d5 is slightly better but marked it as incorrect.

Step 5, exercise 7b, #7: deep computer analysis marks Nf3+ as best:
1. -+ (-3.33): 1...Nf3+ 2.Bxf3 Be5+ 3.Kg2 Qxe3 4.Qxg8+ Kxg8 5.Bxa8 Bd4 6.Kh2+ Kf8 7.Rgf1 Qe5+ 8.Rf4 Be3 9.Kg3 Bxf4+ 10.Rxf4
2. -+ (-2.93): 1...Ng4+ 2.hxg4 Be5+ 3.Kh3 Rxg5 4.Bxg5 Qxc2 5.Rgf1 f6 6.Bh6 Qxa2 7.Bf3 Qb3 8.Bf8

Step 5, exercise 7c, #10: 2... Ncxd4 is better but is marked incorrect (gets an additional pawn)

Step 5, exercise 9a, #9: 3. Rb8 is equal but marked incorrect

Step 5, exercise 9b, #5: 1. Rc7+ is equal but marked incorrect

Step 5, exercise 11c, #6: 4. Qh7# is equal but marked incorrect

Step 5, exercise 17e, #2: 1. Nh5 is equal but marked incorrect,
also 1.f6 exf6 Nh5 is equal but marked incorrect

Step 5, exercise 17e, #9: 1. Ne3 is better but marked "not bad"

Call for TCT Glitches

2006-07-20T09:24:00.000-07:00

I am in the process of creating a post with everything wrong in TCT. I think some of you found many of the same bugs, but just in case I missed something I would appreciate it if you would add them to the comments of this post.

-=-=-=-=-

I wanted to report in that I have yet to get my standard under control, but I am occasionally putting together really tough 5/12 blitz games. This isn't like the sloppy wins over 1400 + blitz folks, and I hope I can continue to solidify my play.

Here is one where I accidentally opened e4. (d4 or Nf3 is what I usually play).
1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 d6 3. Nc3 c6 4. d4 exd4 5. Nxd4 Nf6 6. Be2 Be7 7. O-O O-O
8. Re1 Nbd7 9. a4 c5 10. Ndb5 a6 11. Nxd6 Ne5 12. Nxc8 Qxc8 13. Bf4 Neg4
14. h3 Rd8 15. Qc1 Nh6 16. Bxh6 gxh6 17. Qxh6 Rd6 18. e5
{Black resigns} 1-0

White to Move

....

...

.
Here I missed Nd5! threatening two forks with Nb6 and Nxe7. Nd5 Nxd5 Bxg4 threatens Black's Queen with Black's d5 Knight under the threat of Qxd5 or even exd5, getting a passed pawn. Not taking with Nd5 Re8 leads to Nb6, ensnaring at least a Rook.

And Chess Marches On...

2006-07-13T17:03:00.000-07:00

I have to chuckle. I am reviewing TCT at 100-200 problems per week, and I just got a problem wrong that I got right on the 7th Circle. At this point it seems humorous. I see that I will forever be a student of chess, Circles or not. I find that my review focus is more like a real game, taking the time that I need and not rushing. I find that solving 10 TCT problems before playing a game is a good warm-up.

I must say I enjoy not be so intense about solving problems. I have already gotten into a more balanced mindset, looking at annotated games, a bit of endgame stuff, and openings every week. Speaking of openings, after getting the suggestion from Dr. Munky, I looked into the Cunningham defense in the King's Gambit Accepted. I think it is a sharp and intriguing line, but slightly over my level. I think I will play around with it in blitz and rely on the prosaic 2..Bc5 for standard. I can imagine going into the Cunningham defense when faced with a lower rated opponent for some reason.

I would be curious if anyone else used the Cunningham defense. I imagine Tempo and Takchess would play that style very well.

Done! Circle 7 Step 5 Complete

2006-07-10T11:50:00.000-07:00

At last. I finished with 93% which just tells me more review is needed *roll eyes*.

What now? Probably a brief rest, and then I hope to keep my chess studies going, albeit in a more balanced format with opening and endgame material. I actually feel like the new information I have taken in from TCT is more knowledge rather than chess ability. Perhaps over time this will shift. I believe TCT was addressed the weakest part of my game, and because of improvements there I hope to someday I hit ICC 1600. Oh, and pull off some combinations :-).

As far as this blog: I don't plan on going away completely, but I do seem to be heading in other directions and already seem to be posting much less. Reading and writing blogs does take time. Anyway, I wanted to say thanks for the encouragement and for reading, and in the words of Pete Tamburro,"Wishing you good chess wherever you may be".

-=-=-=-=-

TCT Results	Circle 1	Circle 2	Circle 3	Circle 4	Circle 5	Circle 6	Circle 7
Step 1	97%	99%	99%	100%r
Step 2	93%	96%	95%	97%	96%	99%	100%
Step 3	93%	97%	97%	96%	96%	98%	99%
Step 4	80%	86%	90%	92%	89%	94%	95%
Step 5	74%	77%	83%	87%	88%	91%	93%

The Vicissitudes of Amateur Chess

2006-07-06T14:44:00.000-07:00

It's all about the mistakes, isn't it? Through a big mistake in the endgame I managed a win in my last 45/45 Team game. My big mistake was on 8...Ng4 not seeing my opponent's natural protection response of 9. d4. Remember how your not moving your pawns twice in the opening? Well I think this qualifies as an exception ;-). I went down fighting until his big mistake on 37. There Rc3 would have sealed the win.

I am half finished with the last mighty circle...

-=-=-=-=-

TCT Results	Circle 1	Circle 2	Circle 3	Circle 4	Circle 5	Circle 6	Circle 7
Step 1	97%	99%	99%	100%r
Step 2	93%	96%	95%	97%	96%	99%	100%
Step 3	93%	97%	97%	96%	96%	98%	99%
Step 4	80%	86%	90%	92%	89%	94%	95%
Step 5	74%	77%	83%	87%	88%	91%	94%*

Circle 7, Step 4 Complete

2006-06-29T11:42:00.000-07:00

I still have more review to do on TCT Step 4, but for now I am feeling good :-). Looking for Trouble awaits a bit reviewing before tackling this last circle (might be a good one to check out Blue Devil!). As strange as it might sound to other people, I am pleased that I have less than 600 problems to go!

-=-=-=-=-

Here is another installment of "Then What?". I think shows how all my focusing on TCT has left me weaker at spotting novel stuff. I saw that Re4 pretty much forced Kf8 but didn't see further and I didn't play it. That's blitz for you :-\. See if any of you spot White's best reasoning for Re4.

.
..
...
..
.
It turns out Re4 Kf8 Be5! threatens Bd6+ and (if ...Ke8) Bxg7. On my own I could see trade down possibilities with Be5 (something) Rf4, but this is not as strong.

-=-=-=-=-

TCT Results	Circle 1	Circle 2	Circle 3	Circle 4	Circle 5	Circle 6	Circle 7
Step 1	97%	99%	99%	100%r
Step 2	93%	96%	95%	97%	96%	99%	100%
Step 3	93%	97%	97%	96%	96%	98%	99%
Step 4	80%	86%	90%	92%	89%	94%	95%
Step 5	74%	77%	83%	87%	88%	91%

Sir Lazy Brain

2006-06-23T22:53:00.000-07:00

I am working through 60-80 problems per 30-40 minutes a day with TCT Step 4 and 5. On the good side I continually think that this stuff is worth reviewing and I don't mind an 8th Circle. The bad news is I seem to be sliding back into more beginner calculation errors. I have noticed this happening to me in both problems and games. I am seeing tactical possibilities but not accurately calculating my opponent's defensive resources, and am making bad moves as a result. I must have a lazy brain, or perhaps part of it went on vacation. Maybe this is one of the dangers doing too many problems, problems that are typically setup as an "spot the unanswerable tactically winning move".

-=-=-=-=-

TCT Results	Circle 1	Circle 2	Circle 3	Circle 4	Circle 5	Circle 6	Circle 7
Step 1	97%	99%	99%	100%r
Step 2	93%	96%	95%	97%	96%	99%	100%
Step 3	93%	97%	97%	96%	96%	98%	99%
Step 4	80%	86%	90%	92%	89%	94%	96%*
Step 5	74%	77%	83%	87%	88%	91%

Finished Circle 6

2006-06-20T18:07:00.000-07:00

What a relief. I am proud of getting 91%. I certainly am not getting overconfident as I just took a look at my latest mistake :-\.

After some blunders on both sides I got to this winning position. I quickly played Ba2 and my opponent resigned. This would have made me happy in the past. Now I am just focusing on the mistakes, mulling over the fact that I didn't even consider the best move, Bf4. It's a pretty move, threatening mate or a discovered attack along the seventh rank as in ..Bh8 Bd6+ Kg7 Bd5+ attacking Black's Rook.

I suppose it is on to Circle 7 for me...

-=-=-=-=-

TCT Results	Circle 1	Circle 2	Circle 3	Circle 4	Circle 5	Circle 6	Circle 7
Step 1	97%	99%	99%	100%r
Step 2	93%	96%	95%	97%	96%	99%	100%
Step 3	93%	97%	97%	96%	96%	98%	99%
Step 4	80%	86%	90%	92%	89%	94%
Step 5	74%	77%	83%	87%	88%	91%

"Are we there yet?"

2006-06-16T17:27:00.000-07:00

"No, and don't make me turn this car around!"

230 more to go this circle...

-=-=-=-=-

TCT Results	Circle 1	Circle 2	Circle 3	Circle 4	Circle 5	Circle 6	Circle 7
Step 1	97%	99%	99%	100%r
Step 2	93%	96%	95%	97%	96%	99%	100%
Step 3	93%	97%	97%	96%	96%	98%	99%
Step 4	80%	86%	90%	92%	89%	94%
Step 5	74%	77%	83%	87%	88%	91%*

7 is not enough...

2006-06-11T14:00:00.000-07:00

I can tell already that I will have to do more work on Step 4 and 5. I am picking up the pace to 30 problems per day, and I can see that this is just going to take more time to master. This seems very parallel to what some of the Knight Errant graduates have written about, reporting that continued work with CT-Art bolsters their skills significantly.

Back to solving...

-=-=-=-=-

TCT Results	Circle 1	Circle 2	Circle 3	Circle 4	Circle 5	Circle 6	Circle 7
Step 1	97%	99%	99%	100%r
Step 2	93%	96%	95%	97%	96%	99%	100%
Step 3	93%	97%	97%	96%	96%	98%	99%
Step 4	80%	86%	90%	92%	89%	94%
Step 5	74%	77%	83%	87%	88%	93%*

Slow Start

2006-05-26T01:10:00.000-07:00

I have lagging behind in starting this sixth circle, getting in on average 10 problems in 10 minutes a day. It is hard to stay focused. At some point soon I hope to have both sharp mental focus and spare time, and then I will knock down these last circles...

-=-=-=-=-

I just ran into this opening link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Chess_openings
It seems obvious that that site would have good chess info... I wonder why I never looked there before.

-=-=-=-=-

Here's a position from an ICC blitz game between two over 2000 players:
White to Move

This is one of those then what situations for me, the kind of crucial decision points that I have routinely miscalculated. This time I did better. Rather than simply rescue White's threatened b4 Knight I was thinking Nxd5 was the winning move. Black's natural taking with ..cxd5 Bxd5+ would fork the King and a8 Rook. I couldn't see anything wrong with the move, and then White played Nd3. I couldn't stand it, so I copied the game locally and fed it to Fritz. It turns out that Nxd5 was winning and much better than Nd3, but slightly better was Nxc6! giving an even stronger attack along the h1- a8 diagonal. Sigh. I didn't even consider that.

-=-=-=-=-

TCT Results	Circle 1	Circle 2	Circle 3	Circle 4	Circle 5	Circle 6	Circle 7
Step 1	97%	99%	99%	100%r
Step 2	93%	96%	95%	97%	96%	99%	100%
Step 3	93%	97%	97%	96%	96%	98%	99%
Step 4	80%	86%	90%	92%	89%	94%
Step 5	74%	77%	83%	87%	88%	96%*

Circle 6, Step 4 Complete

2006-05-22T17:19:00.000-07:00

I finished this circle with 94%. At this point I have done so many circles on getting dizzy! Forward and onward...

-=-=-=-=-

My ICC standard rating just broke 1550. I would like to credit the circles, but frankly this had more to do with my opponents running out of time. Still, something that DLM wrote about has been borne out consistently; alot of my wins were gifts from my opponents.

There was one situation where the circles seemed to pay off.

I was Black here and had just played ...Re7 as a last-ditch effort to win. White saw the most natural move and played Nd5??, forking both the e7 Rook and the b4 pawn. It continued ...Rea7! threatening checkmate, c3 trying to get some luft (Fritz has c4 as best), ...b3 hemming in the King, Kc1 avoiding checkmate, ...Ra1+ skewering the Black King and the h1 Rook. To add insult to injury, White loses a tempo because after Kd2 Rxh1, Black threatens another skewer along the second rank with ...Rh2+, attacking the b2 pawn through the King on d2.

-=-=-=-=-

TCT Results	Circle 1	Circle 2	Circle 3	Circle 4	Circle 5	Circle 6	Circle 7
Step 1	97%	99%	99%	100%r
Step 2	93%	96%	95%	97%	96%	99%	100%
Step 3	93%	97%	97%	96%	96%	98%	99%
Step 4	80%	86%	90%	92%	89%	94%
Step 5	74%	77%	83%	87%	88%

Next 45/45

2006-05-21T14:03:00.000-07:00

I am putting my hat into the teamchess ring again. I haven't played any OTB for awhile and I think I need to commit to something to keep the improvement process going.

I just played my first ICC rapid tournament and scored 2/4 with sloppy play. I don't really like 15 0 as it is neither blitz nor standard in my opinion, but I wanted to see what it was like.

Past halfway in TCT Step 4...

-=-=-=-=-

TCT Results	Circle 1	Circle 2	Circle 3	Circle 4	Circle 5	Circle 6	Circle 7
Step 1	97%	99%	99%	100%r
Step 2	93%	96%	95%	97%	96%	99%	100%
Step 3	93%	97%	97%	96%	96%	98%	99%
Step 4	80%	86%	90%	92%	89%	95*%
Step 5	74%	77%	83%	87%	88%

Pay Off

2006-05-12T23:12:00.000-07:00

Black to Move

.
.h
..m
...m
..m
.m
.

This position could have been right out of TCT. White just played b4. On the surface Black's Bishop and Queen are enprise, which makes his e3 Rook's protection shaky. My hard work paid off as I realized that ..Rxf3+ Ke1 Qf2 was mate. This is one of the sweetest finishes I have had in a long time :-).

-=-=-=-=-

White to Move

Here is a instructive little blitz mistake I ran into. I thought "it's just Rxc8 Rxc8 36. Rxa3", right? This leads to ... Rc6 and the loss of a pawn. I didn't see it at the time, but it still looks winning for White. Chessmaster suggested immediately taking with Rxa3! DOH! I sure did not look at that. If Black takes either Rook, White captures the other Black Rook and gets to the back rank, possibly leading to a trade of minor pieces which White actually wants, not to mention it's much harder for Black to get the hanging e6 pawn.

-=-=-=-=-

TCT Results	Circle 1	Circle 2	Circle 3	Circle 4	Circle 5	Circle 6	Circle 7
Step 1	97%	99%	99%	100%r
Step 2	93%	96%	95%	97%	96%	99%	100%
Step 3	93%	97%	97%	96%	96%	98%	99%
Step 4	80%	86%	90%	92%	89%	95*%
Step 5	74%	77%	83%	87%	88%

Enter the Panther

2006-05-11T18:51:00.000-07:00

Michael Goeller has done a nice series on this uncommon opening. I have always been keen on solid alternatives to familiar openings, especially if it has some shock value to the unwary. This line can lead to cramped positions for Black who must seek the right counterattack in the middlegame, so it's not for everyone. It reminds me of the KID.
http://www.kenilworthchessclub.org/kenilworthian/2006/02/panther-part-one.html

http://www.kenilworthchessclub.org/kenilworthian/2006/02/panther-part-two.html

http://www.kenilworthchessclub.org/kenilworthian/2006/03/panther-part-three.html

Note that after 1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 Nc6 3. Nc3 d6 4. Nf3 e5 White does have the choice to head towards a drawish position with 5. dxe5 Nxe5 6. Nxe5 dxe5 7. Qxd8+ Kxd8 8. Bg5. Definitely something one would want to be aware of.

I recommend Joel Benjamin's series before considering the Panther, as he covers White's choices of lines that lead to related lines.
http://www.jeremysilman.com/chess_opng_shrtcts/01_black_knights_tango.html
others here:http://www.jeremysilman.com/chess_opng_shrtcts/archive.html

-=-=-=-=-

Here's a 2/12 win I had with Black starting with it, although I headed towards a KID. I don't think my opponent had ever seen this line... mission accomplished :-).

1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 Nc6 3. Nf3 d6 4. e3 e5 5. d5 Ne7 6. Nc3 g6 7. e4 Bg7 8. Bd3 O-O 9. O-O Nh5 10. Bg5 h6 11. Bh4 g5 12. Bg3 Nxg3 13. fxg3 f5 14. Qd2 f4 15. Ne2 Ng6 16. Qe1 Bg4 17. h3 Bxf3 18. Rxf3 c6 19. g4 Nh4 20. Rf2 Qb6 21.Kh2 f3 22. gxf3 Nxf3+ 23. Rxf3 Rxf3 24. Qd2 Qf2+ 25. Kh1 Rxh3# 0-1
Pgn Viewer

-=-=-=-=-

TCT is going along fine, and I am doing 40 problems in 40 minutes 5 or 6 days a week.

-=-=-=-=-

TCT Results	Circle 1	Circle 2	Circle 3	Circle 4	Circle 5	Circle 6	Circle 7
Step 1	97%	99%	99%	100%r
Step 2	93%	96%	95%	97%	96%	99%	100%
Step 3	93%	97%	97%	96%	96%	98%	99%
Step 4	80%	86%	90%	92%	89%	95*%
Step 5	74%	77%	83%	87%	88%

Circle 5, Step 5 Complete

2006-05-08T19:56:00.000-07:00

Hooray! The end is near :-)...

-=-=-=-=-

TCT Results	Circle 1	Circle 2	Circle 3	Circle 4	Circle 5	Circle 6	Circle 7
Step 1	97%	99%	99%	100%r
Step 2	93%	96%	95%	97%	96%	99%	100%
Step 3	93%	97%	97%	96%	96%	98%	99%
Step 4	80%	86%	90%	92%	89%
Step 5	74%	77%	83%	87%	88%

Considerations

2006-05-03T00:37:00.000-07:00

White to Move

1.Nf3 Nc6 2.g3 e5 3.d3 d5 4.e4 d4 5.Bg2 Bg4 6.O-O Bd6 7.h3 Bh5 8.Kh2 Nf6 9.Nbd2 h6
10.Qe1 O-O 11.Nc4 Bc5 12.Nfxe5 Nxe5 13.Nxe5 Nd7 14.Nxd7 Qxd7 15.f4 Rfe8 16.Bd2 c6
17.Bb4 Bd6 18.e5 Bxb4 19.Qxb4 f6 20.Rae1 fxe5 21.fxe5 Bf7 22.Rf4 Rad8 23.Ree4 Qc7
24.Rxd4 Rxd4 25.Rxd4 Rxe5 26.Qd6 Qxd6 27.Rxd6 Bxa2 28.Rd8+ Kh7 29.Be4+ g6 30.Rd7+
Kg8 31.Rxb7 Bb1 32.c4 a5 33.Ra7 Rc5 34.Bxg6 Bc2 35.d4 Rxc4 36.Bf7+ Kf8 37.Bxc4
1-0

This is one of my best 2/12 blitz games this year. I had the White pieces and played a kind of Barcza opening which my opponent countered rather well. There are a couple of mistakes that I made in the middlegame under time pressure, but quite a few solid moves I am proud of, too. Anyway, I guess I am posting it in part as evidence that the circles have helped my game, in part to show an idea about thinking process.

Although I consider blitz to be just for fun, I do think it is instructive in revealing what you don't think of. By the time I reached the position (above), I felt that I was sitting pretty and there wasn't much potential for Black unless I screwed up. My attitude was to just play solid and grind it out, perhaps finding a conversion to a more simple endgame. I saw my Bishop taking the hanging g6 pawn and absolutely nothing else. In fact, I felt that the Bishop was cemented to the protection of the d3 pawn which really was keeping the c4 pawn safe. The discovered double attack on the Black Bishop and Rook with d4 just didn't occur to me. It was like the opposite of having a tactic pop-out. Perhaps having the Black Bishop behind the White pawns was so unusual I ignored the possibility, not remembering that tactics can happen in the endgame. I don't really like d4 better than Bxg6; d4 makes for many pawn losses/trades and opens lines to the White King. It certainly was worth considering, though.

Since chess is a mistake oriented activity, my opponent had the decency to also not fully consider his next move, and after 34.Bxg6 Bc2?? I first saw the f7 check, then the decoy/discovered attack idea, and finally played 35.d4. After Rxc4 Black had protected both of his pieces from the immediate threats, but this walked into the fork 36.Bf7+ Kf8 37.Bxc4.

-=-=-=-=-

TCT Results	Circle 1	Circle 2	Circle 3	Circle 4	Circle 5	Circle 6	Circle 7
Step 1	97%	99%	99%	100%r
Step 2	93%	96%	95%	97%	96%	99%	100%
Step 3	93%	97%	97%	96%	96%	98%	99%
Step 4	80%	86%	90%	92%	89%
Step 5	74%	77%	83%	87%	87%*

Andersen

2006-05-02T21:50:00.000-07:00

I decided to switch from the McDonald book back to Seirawan's tactics book to review those annotated games. I got through both the "Immortal" and "Evergreen" games, which has inadvertently confirmed what I was struggling with in the last post. These are highly tactical in style, and even with annotations many of the moves are beyond my thought process. I find the opening in the "Immortal" especially unattractive, and Fritz 8 says it is filled with "??"s for both sides. I can follow the tactical conclusion at the end of them a better than the last time I went through them, so that is a "+" for the circles. Still, I am questioning just how useful it is to go through games like this, rather than games that are going to actually be parallel to my opening tendencies and style.

I would be curious if anyone else had some opinions about these two games.

-=-=-=-=-

TCT Results	Circle 1	Circle 2	Circle 3	Circle 4	Circle 5	Circle 6	Circle 7
Step 1	97%	99%	99%	100%r
Step 2	93%	96%	95%	97%	96%	99%	100%
Step 3	93%	97%	97%	96%	96%	98%	99%
Step 4	80%	86%	90%	92%	89%
Step 5	74%	77%	83%	87%	87%*

Still Working on Circle 5

2006-04-28T22:25:00.000-07:00

The problem solving is going along fairly well. I hope to have some extra time this weekend to review some annotated games. Speaking a which I wanted to post something about Varuzhan Akobian. Like many players struggling to improve, I have been following his instructional game reviews on Chess.FM, gleaning as much as I could through the rapid, heavily Eastern-European tones. Repeatedly I have guided my mouse to the pause button, reflected on what he was saying, and concluded that each idea was reasonable.

His approach seems simple, solid, and logical. He plays well-known openings, ones that lead towards a natural middlegame that even I can understand. I find this perplexing, as he is a GM. Long ago I incorrectly suspected that he only showed his simpler games on Chess.FM for the sake of the beginning and intermediate viewers, but since then I have seem him play on the ICC and that is his style. There are countless lower rated experts and masters who I cannot follow worth a darn. This seems to be a bit of a puzzle. Anyway, I think that compared with other GMs, Varuzhan's approach is closer to what a intermediate player could realistically hope to emulate.

-=-=-=-=-

TCT Results	Circle 1	Circle 2	Circle 3	Circle 4	Circle 5	Circle 6	Circle 7
Step 1	97%	99%	99%	100%r
Step 2	93%	96%	95%	97%	96%	99%	100%
Step 3	93%	97%	97%	96%	96%	98%	99%
Step 4	80%	86%	90%	92%	89%
Step 5	74%	77%	83%	87%	89%*

Update

2006-04-22T12:06:00.000-07:00

The mixture schedule is still going well. It is difficult to keep everything going on that list each week. I have been lax about reviewing openings, which as an activity that has paid off in the past. I hardly have time to read blogs, too.

A part of what I rusty on last month was checkmate problems. Since then I have made it a point to go through both the Polgar 5334 brick and the 1001 Reinfeld book, doing 6 or 18 mate in two problems several days a week in addition to TCT. It has helped tremendously, and now I enjoy a 30% faster solving speed on average (compared to what they were when I started these circles). I credit pattern recognition recognition, as my calculation speed and accuracy unfortunately seem about the same. The gut feeling I used to get that pieces were being pulled one way or another is pretty much completely gone, but I still seem to benefit from the approach of ruling out the suicidal-looking moves first.

The speed increase coincides my experience in recent standard games. I still am at 1500, and as easy as it was to get to that rating, it is extremely tough to get higher. I haven't beaten any 1700 + players in standard time controls on the ICC. I know that it is premature to make any conclusions about the circles, as my idea was to play/post-mortem 100 standard games after the circles before passing judgment. I do want to say for the record I am playing the kind of game I played last year but faster. Obviously circle-time will become game-time later. Still, I am concerned that I haven't truly addressed my middlegame calculation weakness due to focusing on TCT; I bet CT-Art users are forming better depth calculation skills. Ah, well, I guess it's better to attempt walking before running.

Referring back to checkmate problems, once in awhile I disassemble one of these positions, putting it in terms of simultaneous advantage. I think I have been underestimating how complex these problems are, as even in the easy mate in two problems that there typically is alot going on in the position. Often if you take away even one little advantage, it no longer is checkmate. This has led me to a deeper appreciation of what it will take to get through 5334, cover to cover. For those of you who completed it, my hat is off to you!

-=-=-=-=-

TCT Results	Circle 1	Circle 2	Circle 3	Circle 4	Circle 5	Circle 6	Circle 7
Step 1	97%	99%	99%	100%r
Step 2	93%	96%	95%	97%	96%	99%	100%
Step 3	93%	97%	97%	96%	96%	98%	99%
Step 4	80%	86%	90%	92%	89%
Step 5	74%	77%	83%	87%	90%*

A Couple More

2006-04-15T00:37:00.000-07:00

TCT Step 5 is hard but I am chipping away at it. I even had several groups of problems > 95%, which is somewhat misleading. These are quite challenging for me.

-=-=-=-=-

I have a ever increasing list of positions that I need to work on if I ever hope to improve. These are positions that I either did not understand or did not play correctly but can understand later. Here is a pair of puzzle-like situations that I recently added, and the first one is a beauty:

Black to Move (both)

Rfxf3+ 32. Bxf3 {Kd2?! Qg5+ leads to Rxg1+} Bf1+! {discovers an attack on White's Queen}

Rfxf3+ {either Rook can sacrifice first and it works out the same} 32. Bxf3 {Kd2?! elicits Qg5+ which pushes the King back to his first rank, setting up the skewer Rg1+} Rxf3+ 33. Ke2 Bg4! {the hanging Bishop can be pinned but the King is under a discovered attack. Now 34. Qg2 is met by Rg3+, and 34. Rg1 is met with Qg5 which in turn threatens to once again Black can use his Rook to chase the Queen with a discovered check or, depending on what White does, even play Qe3+ Kd1 leaving White with a lost position. Moving the King back doesn't work either because of similar discoveries and the threat of Qa5 attacking e1.}

The whole game if anyone was curious, mistakes and all:

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.Nc3 Bb4 4.Bc4 Bxc3 5.dxc3 O-O 6.Bg5 d6 7.Nd2 Be6 8.Bd3 Nbd7 9.h3
h6 10.Bh4 c5 11.b3 Qa5 12.c4 Nh7 13.O-O f5 14.f3 g5 15.Bf2 f4 16.g4 fxg3 17.Bxg3
Bxh3 18.Rf2 Nhf6 19.Nf1 Rf7 20.Ne3 Nh5 21.Bh2 Raf8 22.Nd5 Qd8 23.Be2 Ndf6 24.Ne3
Nf4 25.Bxf4 gxf4 26.Rh2 Rg7+ 27.Kf2 fxe3+ 28.Kxe3 Rg3 29.Qh1 Ng4+ 30.Kd3 Nxh2 31.Qxh2
Qh4 32.Rg1 Rxg1 33.Qxg1+ Kh7 34.Qe3 Qe1 35.a4 Bf1 36.Bxf1 Qxf1+ 37.Kc3 Rxf3 38.Qxf3
{White resigns} 0-1

-=-=-=-=-

TCT Results	Circle 1	Circle 2	Circle 3	Circle 4	Circle 5	Circle 6	Circle 7
Step 1	97%	99%	99%	100%r
Step 2	93%	96%	95%	97%	96%	99%	100%
Step 3	93%	97%	97%	96%	96%	98%	99%
Step 4	80%	86%	90%	92%	89%
Step 5	74%	77%	83%	87%	93%*

Plenty to Work On

2006-04-13T00:56:00.000-07:00

I started Step 5 of TCT - it's challenging. I haven't focused on pawn breakthrough tactics for awhile and it shows. I really worked on those heavily over a year ago... something else to review I guess. I also worked a little in the old 1001 checkmate book and ran into a wall on #399. Thud. I just don't have an instinct for that type of position. Solving longer mate problems seems like its own thing, as my work on 2 and 3 move mates does not seem to help much for mate in 6 or 7.

-=-=-=-=-

White to Move

This happened in a blitz game where I was White. If you forget about the huge winning advantage and just focus on what's the strongest way to finish this one off, you probably will see what I missed. With the subtlety of a bulldozer I pushed with e6, simply clearing the way for the White King to go munch on the Black Kingside pawns. I suppose there was time-pressure in that move. The point is that I missed the beautiful move Kc6. Kc6 immobilizes Black's King and leaves Black's dark-squared Bishop with no good moves. Black can push the h pawn, but so can White, square for square. If Black tries to push his g or f pawn, White can capture it with impunity because the Black Bishop is stuck preventing Bb6 followed by b5#. Nice, eh?

-=-=-=-=-

TCT Results	Circle 1	Circle 2	Circle 3	Circle 4	Circle 5	Circle 6	Circle 7
Step 1	97%	99%	99%	100%r
Step 2	93%	96%	95%	97%	96%	99%	100%
Step 3	93%	97%	97%	96%	96%	98%	99%
Step 4	80%	86%	90%	92%	89%
Step 5	74%	77%	83%	87%	89%*

Circle 5, Step 4 Complete

2006-04-09T11:31:00.000-07:00

I spent some extra time this weekend to get to the end. I am really getting the sense that I will need circle 8 or at least some review on the ~500 problems in this Step.

I want to mention a funny thing I saw on the ICC. I was observing two 2100+ players in a 15/0 game. It was a perpetual draw position that Black (who was behind a pawn) had gotten into, but he left that perpetual to go into another type of perpetual where if his opponent defended wrong, it would turn into checkmate. With 4 minutes left, White got into a "quick move" mode, moved into this other perpetual position with chances, and then failed to see that Black blundered into a mate in 5 and achieved his draw. DOH!

This type of thing is fundamentally something that I never think of; when I am down materially and see a perpetual, I will go for it and offer a draw. At first I thought not heading towards the unambiguous draw would be ungentlemanly, but I now think that it is demanding that your opponent bring his "A" defense to the board.

Ok, it is devious too :-).

-=-=-=-=-

TCT Results	Circle 1	Circle 2	Circle 3	Circle 4	Circle 5	Circle 6	Circle 7
Step 1	97%	99%	99%	100%r
Step 2	93%	96%	95%	97%	96%	99%	100%
Step 3	93%	97%	97%	96%	96%	98%	99%
Step 4	80%	86%	90%	92%	89%
Step 5	74%	77%	83%	87%

He Who Promotes Last...

2006-04-02T23:33:00.000-07:00

... laughs last?!

Black to Move

Here is a neat little position that came up in a blitz game. It starts out with Black's King at the corner of the square of the passed c pawn. Can Black win, or is this just a draw?
.....
....
...
..
.
It turns out yes, he can, as long as he is willing to sacrifice a pawn and not get overly upset that White gets to promote first: 50...Kg4! 51. c6 h3+ 52. Kg1 (no other square is better, and f1and then e1 opens the way for both Black pawns to promote) Kf3 53. c7 h2+ 54. Kh1 Kf2 55. c8=Q g2+ 56. Kxh2 g1=Q+ 57. Kh3 Qg3# 0-1

-=-=-=-=-

I seem to be reorganizing how I think about positions. This is my guess why I am scoring clearly worse this circle than last time around. I find that I am going through problems more slowly, turning them around a little differently now. Another thing I notice is that it's a little bit easier to calculate bad variations and reason them out.

I just finished the "Elimination of the Defense" section in TCT, Step 4. Although I think the problems are good in this section, it is kind of weak in its organization. They use the themes of threatening and capturing a defender, and they even show capturing a indirectly defending piece, which I thought was quite instructive. Unfortunately, other themes are thrown in, like positions where your not beating up on defense but rather achieving material gains via forks or sacrifices like decoy and deflection. I just organize information differently.

-=-=-=-=-

TCT Results	Circle 1	Circle 2	Circle 3	Circle 4	Circle 5	Circle 6	Circle 7
Step 1	97%	99%	99%	100%r
Step 2	93%	96%	95%	97%	96%	99%	100%
Step 3	93%	97%	97%	96%	96%	98%	99%
Step 4	80%	86%	90%	92%	88%*
Step 5	74%	77%	83%	87%

Rolling Along

2006-04-01T13:58:00.000-08:00

The new schedule is working out better. I must still be feeling a bit lazy, and I seem almost resistant to reviewing the Queen fork/pin circle drills and openings. It's as if I want chess to somehow play on its own. I realize how absolutely ridiculous that is of course, but apparently I have a wishful thinking brain part that cannot help itself.

-=-=-=-=-

White to Move

Tasc Chess Tutor: Step 4, 12a #4

There are several bumps along the TCT Step 4 path, but none so difficult for me as this one. This pothole has to be one the most forcing, least ambiguous problem in Step 4 (once I you know the answer that is). Still, seeing it the fifth time around its clear that I just don't think this way. Not yet, at least. The answer is a forcing Rook check and sacrifice: Rc6+ Kh7 Rc5! threatening mate if Black takes the a7 pawn, or similarly Rc6+ Kh5 Rc5+! forking the King and Rook. Either way the a-pawn promotes, or worse things occur.

-=-=-=-=-

TCT Results	Circle 1	Circle 2	Circle 3	Circle 4	Circle 5	Circle 6	Circle 7
Step 1	97%	99%	99%	100%r
Step 2	93%	96%	95%	97%	96%	99%	100%
Step 3	93%	97%	97%	96%	96%	98%	99%
Step 4	80%	86%	90%	92%	87%*
Step 5	74%	77%	83%	87%

Space Factor

2006-03-28T16:33:00.000-08:00

Continuing with the discussion started by our own Blue Devil Knight, I have been thinking more about Heisman's comment about space being a pseudo-factor. I think I understand his idea there, but I don't think I would phrase it the same way, especially explaining it to a beginner. If you view space as something that could lead to a real advantage, couldn't the same argument be made for territory, mobility, or pawn structure?

Is space a real factor? I say yes. Although what I posted here certainly brings up the double-edged quality of pushing a pawn, it's generally more of a plus than the minus. Summarizing I think the big plus an overall space advantage typically gives one is less options for your opponent's pieces in his own territory and more options for you to perform exchanges, simple tactics, sacrifices for promotion, or other combinations in his territory. That seems real. And I know that tactics can happen anywhere, but I think it's much more annoying to threaten things deep in the other half of the board.

In an even, symmetrical position (especially with the center pawns locked), I often think to go for space. You could argue that that a move isn't so much about space, but rather a plan to control certain advanced squares while simultaneously blocking your opponent from pushing his pawn forward. That's simply a matter of semantics, and I think it's simpler to call it "space".

I read a bit in my old copy of My System, looking for space discussion. Nimzovich doesn't focus on space much but rather the center and development, emphatically so.

Tying this in, think how chess engines work. Every pawn push that doesn't compromise King safety adds a little bonus to the position, and the center pawns get bigger bonuses as they advance. As pawns near promotion, the positional bonus increases. Engines do pretty well with this approach, which pretty much seems like treating space as a real factor.

-=-=-=-=-

TCT Results	Circle 1	Circle 2	Circle 3	Circle 4	Circle 5	Circle 6	Circle 7
Step 1	97%	99%	99%	100%r
Step 2	93%	96%	95%	97%	96%	99%	100%
Step 3	93%	97%	97%	96%	96%	98%	99%
Step 4	80%	86%	90%	92%	88%*
Step 5	74%	77%	83%	87%

Review Rust

2006-03-22T16:15:00.000-08:00

My brain just is not in gear for chess these days. I have been in comparatively lazy review mode and have been scoring less than 100% with the TCT Step 2 problems. About 4% I honestly didn't remember seeing before. It wasn't all that long ago that I had those down. It's like I had to drop 500 problems to learn another 500 problems.

*Sigh*

This has been a bit disappointing, but I just take it as feedback that if I really want to know those problems better, more circles or review is required. I am pretty much tired of spending most of my chess time solving problems, too. After seeing how much review I am going to need to be more consistent, I have decided to drop down to 4-5 days a week for TCT. I am aiming at getting in some opening review once a week, continue with looking at parts of annotated games at least once a week, and every now and then toss in checkmates, Knight drills, Micro drills, review, and of course some form of play. This actually isn't different from when I started the circles, but that shifted into months chiefly solving problems from TCT. It's time to start putting it all together.

Also, I am going to bring TCT problems into Fritz more regularly to see what I missed in the position.

-=-=-=-=-

As I get into TCT Step 4, I find that in many of the solutions you end up with material advantage in a sharp position. It's the kind of thing that I am weak in, i.e. getting an advantage and not being able to cling to it. I expect I will need more slow game experience to improve that. Another struggle is the more academic question of what is the best line when there are many winning lines available. Here's an example:

White to Move
Tasc Chess Tutor: Step 4, 3D, #2

White - Black, Tasc Chess Tutor 2006
2kr3p/1p1n2p1/pb3p2/3Qp2p/P3P1q1/2P2N2/B4PPP/1R3RK1 w - - 0 1

Analysis by Fritz 8:

1. +- (9.70): 1.h3 Qg6 2.Nh4 Qe8 3.Nf5 Nc5 4.Qd6 Rxd6 5.Nxd6+ Kd7 6.Nxe8 Kxe8
2. +- (9.20): 1.Qf7 Bc5 2.Bd5 Rf8 3.Bxb7+ Kd8 4.Qc4 Ke7 5.Rfd1 Rd8
3. +- (8.55): 1.Qc4+ Kb8 2.Qb4 Rc8 3.a5
4. +- (7.96): 1.Rxb6 Nxb6 2.Qc5+ Kb8 3.Qxb6 Qd7 4.Bd5 Qc7 5.Rb1 Qxb6 6.Rxb6 Rd7 7.a5
5. +- (7.75): 1.Rfd1 Nc5 2.Qc4 Qxe4 3.Rxd8+ Kxd8 4.Rxb6 Qxc4 5.Bxc4 Nxa4 6.Rxb7 Kc8
6. +- (6.96): 1.a5 Nc5 2.Qc4 Ba7 3.Rfd1 Rd7 4.Qg8+ Kc7 5.Rxd7+ Qxd7 6.Bd5
7. +- (6.81): 1.Qe6 Qxe6 2.Bxe6 Ba5 3.Rfd1 Kc7 4.Bxd7 Rxd7 5.Rxd7+ Kxd7 6.Rxb7+ Kc8 7.Rb3 Kc7
8. +- (6.68): 1.Rbd1

Knowing TCT, I expected sacrificing the exchange to set up a fork to be the answer with Rxb6 which is their answer. I felt certain that a5 was strong, perhaps stronger than Rxb6, but was wrong. I couldn't see how to do better than those moves, although I thought there might be some Queen move that set up threats of Be6. Consulting Fritz it turns out everything is winning. Fritz's 1. Qf7 was a huge surprise, something I probably wouldn't ever consider, though in retrospect it makes Be6 a reality in a very simple way. Fritz's 1. h3 was a little bit of a surprise, too.

One bad habit that I have gotten into is focusing so much on solving the problem that I forget about defense. In the above position I forgot that by moving White's Queen (1.Rxb6 Nxb6 2.Qc5+ Kb8 3.Qxb6 ) the e4 pawn can be captured by Black Queen.

-=-=-=-=-

Black to Move

In a blitz game this position came up. I thought there were some possibilities down the h file, but I couldn't figure it out and went with what was popping up in my mind as an obvious combination: ...Qxg2+ Kxg2 Rg6+ Kh1 Bxd7, netting a pawn. This move goes under the heading "kind of funny, kind of painful". The incredibly simple ...Rg6 threatens mate in 1 and discovers the attack on the Queen simultaneously.

-=-=-=-=-

TCT Results	Circle 1	Circle 2	Circle 3	Circle 4	Circle 5	Circle 6	Circle 7
Step 1	97%	99%	99%	100%r
Step 2	93%	96%	95%	97%	96%	99%	100%
Step 3	93%	97%	97%	96%	96%	98%	99%
Step 4	80%	86%	90%	92%	89%*
Step 5	74%	77%	83%	87%

Step 3 Complete!

2006-03-13T18:37:00.000-08:00

Circles 5-7 DONE! Most of the time I gave the problems proper consideration, and I admit I occasionally saw some new aspects in some positions on the seventh circle. I think another bit of review time is upon me.

I went through another annotated game in The Art of Logical Thinking. In Nunn vs Solokov on move 18 (p. 49), I wonder why McDonald didn't analyze White sacrificing the exchange.

18. Rxf6 gxf6 19. Nxf6+!

seems worth considering, where the Black King will be forced onto either the d or f file, thus allowing the a-1 Rook to essentially develop with tempo. Black's Bishop and Rooks are not developed and White is more active. The resulting position is a bit beyond me, and I would have appreciated some master help.
This book continues to drive home how frequently GMs are doing 2 or even 3 things in a turn. This is exactly what I am not doing, which seems to be indicated in my blitz play and rating. I am not seeing alot of what is on the board, and on average I am having less ideas, especially as compared to last month. After thinking about it awhile, I have concluded that the boost in blitz performance last month was due to working on the "Simultaneous Advantage" document. I worked on it for three months, and, combined with the circles, I must have been in a better tactical state of mind. Soon after I finished it, I stopped thinking about it (as it was done), and now something has faded from my play. For me, learning tactics is the opposite of learning how to ride a bike; any tactical theme can be forgotten, sometimes rather quickly.

Anyway, as a remedy I am going to review my own darn post and post-mortem my games more from a simultaneous advantage point of view.

-=-=-=-=-

TCT Results	Circle 1	Circle 2	Circle 3	Circle 4	Circle 5	Circle 6	Circle 7
Step 1	97%	99%	99%	100%r
Step 2	93%	96%	95%	97%	96%	99%	100%
Step 3	93%	97%	97%	96%	96%	98%	99%
Step 4	80%	86%	90%	92%
Step 5	74%	77%	83%	87%

US Chess Championship

2006-03-09T19:58:00.000-08:00

I have been looking a little at the games of the ongoing U.S. championship tournament. I really don't have time to get a get feel for the whole field, and I honestly can't really follow much of it. Of the parts I can follow, I found a couple of nice positions, ones right where I am working on improving.

White to Move

12.Nxf7! threatens the Black Queen, making the Black King take and netting a pawn.

[Event "United States Championship 2006"]
[Site "San Diego USA"]
[Date "2006.03.08"]
[Round "6"]
[White "Ibragimov, I."]
[Black "Fernandez, D."]
[Result "1-0"]
[WhiteElo "2635"]
[BlackElo "2423"]
[ECO "E15"]

1.c4 Nf6 2.d4 e6 3.Nf3 b6 4.g3 Ba6 5.Nbd2 c5 6.Bg2 Bb7 7.e4 cxd4 8.e5 Ng4 9.O-O d6
10.h3 Nxe5 11.Nxe5 Bxg2 12.Nxf7 Kxf7 13.Kxg2 Nd7 14.Ne4 Be7 15.Qxd4 Nc5 16.Re1 d5
17.Nxc5 Bxc5 18.Qf4+ Qf6 19.cxd5 exd5 20.Qc7+ Kg6 21.Bf4 Rhe8 22.Qd7 Rad8 23.Qg4+
Kf7 24.Rxe8 Rxe8 25.Rd1 Kg8 26.Qf3 Kh8 27.Rxd5 Rf8 28.b3 h6 29.h4 Qb2 30.Rd2 Qb1
31.Qd3 Qa1 32.Re2 Qf6 33.h5 Qf7 34.Re5 Qb7+ 35.Qd5 1-0

White to Move

Under time pressure 53. Kg5?! was played, and White missed his big winning chance. 53. Rd7! threatens mate and the Knight, with ...fxg6 being met with fxg6.

[Event "United States Championship 2006"]
[Site "San Diego USA"]
[Date "2006.03.05"]
[Round "3"]
[White "Benjamin, J."]
[Black "Friedel, J."]
[Result "1/2-1/2"]
[ECO "C91"]
[WhiteElo "2576"]
[BlackElo "2455"]
[PlyCount "121"]
[EventDate "2006.??.??"]
[WhiteTeam "United States"]
[BlackTeam "United States"]
[WhiteTeamCountry "USA"]
[BlackTeamCountry "USA"]

1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5 a6 4. Ba4 Nf6 5. O-O Be7 6. Re1 b5 7. Bb3 d6 8. c3
O-O 9. d4 Bg4 10. d5 Na5 11. Bc2 c6 12. h3 Bc8 13. dxc6 Qc7 14. Nbd2 Qxc6 15.
Nf1 Re8 16. a4 Be6 17. Ng5 Bd7 18. Ne3 h6 19. Nf3 Be6 20. Nd2 g6 21. Qf3 Nb7
22. a5 Qc7 23. Nf5 gxf5 24. exf5 Bd5 25. Ne4 Bxe4 26. Bxe4 d5 27. Bxd5 Nxd5 28.
Qxd5 Bg5 29. Bxg5 hxg5 30. h4 Rad8 31. Qf3 Nd6 32. hxg5 e4 33. Qf4 Qc5 34. g4
Qe5 35. Qxe5 Rxe5 36. Rad1 Ree8 37. b4 Kf8 38. Rd5 Nc4 39. Rxd8 Rxd8 40. Rxe4
Rd3 41. f6 Rxc3 42. Re7 Nd6 43. Ra7 Rc6 44. Kg2 Ke8 45. f4 Nc8 46. Rb7 Rc4 47.
Kg3 Rxb4 48. f5 Nd6 49. Re7+ Kf8 50. g6 Kg8 51. Kh3 Rb3+ 52. Kh4 Rb1 53. Kg5
53... Rf1 54. Kh5 Rh1+ 55. Kg5 Rf1 56. gxf7+ Nxf7+ 57. Kh4 Rh1+ 58. Kg3 Ra1
59. Re8+ Kh7 60. Re7 Kg8 61. Re8+ 1/2-1/2

-=-=-=-=-

TCT Results	Circle 1	Circle 2	Circle 3	Circle 4	Circle 5	Circle 6	Circle 7
Step 1	97%	99%	99%	100%r
Step 2	93%	96%	95%	97%	96%	99%	100%
Step 3	93%	97%	97%	96%	96%*	98%*	99%*
Step 4	80%	86%	90%	92%
Step 5	74%	77%	83%	87%

Little to Report

2006-03-03T00:35:00.000-08:00

The fifth Circle is taking more time than I expected, but it's moving along. I am still fighting the memorization/quick-answer tendency.

Hellos go out to new and returning Knights.

-=-=-=-=-

Black to Move

Here is another interesting mistake from a blitz game. In a rush I played ...Bxc4?, but afterwards I saw that putting the Black Knight on the edge with ...Na5! gangs up on the pinned White Knight. The b1-Rook cannot help as ...Na5 Rb4 c5 causes problems for White.

-=-=-=-=-

TCT Results	Circle 1	Circle 2	Circle 3	Circle 4	Circle 5	Circle 6	Circle 7
Step 1	97%	99%	99%	100%r
Step 2	93%	96%	95%	97%	96%	99%	100%
Step 3	93%	97%	97%	96%	96%*	98%*	100%*
Step 4	80%	86%	90%	92%
Step 5	74%	77%	83%	87%

Skittles Part 2

2006-02-26T12:36:00.000-08:00

I am getting back into the circles groove/grind. For some reason blitz is helping, keeping things fun.

In my last game, I had a sloppy opening as Black but then played the longest combination of my career. Under the time pressure I miscalculated - I thought I had either checkmate or was going to be up a major piece. Sigh. I will take longer, slower win, especially considering that my opponent could have earned a draw via perpetual check earlier!

1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nf6 3. d3 b6 4. Nxe5 Bb7 5. Bg5 Be7 6. g3 O-O 7. Bg2 d5
8. Nd2 h6 9. Bxf6 Bxf6 10. Ng4 Bxb2 11. Rb1 Bc3 12. O-O Bxd2 13. Qxd2 dxe4
14. Nxh6+ gxh6 15. Qxh6 f5 16. Qg6+ Kh8 17. Bh3 Qf6 18. Qh5+ Kg7 19. Qe2 Nd7
20. Rb5 c5 21. dxe4 Bxe4 22. f4 Rh8 23. Bg2 Qd4+ 24. Kh1

24...Rxh2+! {sacrifice to open the h file}
25. Kxh2 {forced}
25...Rh8+ {White's King is immobilized}
26. Bh3 {forcing the White Bishop into yet another absolute pin}
26...Nf6 {threatening check}
27. Rd1 {threatening the Black Queen - the best move for White}
27...Ng4+

28. Qxg4+ {a forced sacrifice}
28...fxg4 {doubly attacking the pinned Bishop}
29. Rxd4 {gaining back some material, but leaving that Rook enprise}
29...Rxh3+
30. Kg1

30...Rxg3+ {netting another pawn before taking the hanging White Rook}
31. Kf2
31...Rf3+ {protecting the Black Rook with tempo}
32. Ke2
32...cxd4

{Now White can get a pawn back, but his second rank weakness
ultimately concedes two more pawns.}
33. Rg5+

33...Kf6 34. Rxg4
{Here it would have been stronger to push the d4 pawn, but
I found a simpler trade-down plan along Black's seventh rank}
34...Rc3 35. Rg8 Rxc2+ 36. Kd1 Rxa2

37. Rf8+ Ke7 {chasing away the Rook} 38. Rh8 b5 39. Rb8 a6
{White resigns} 0-1

Not bad for blitz.

-=-=-=-=-

TCT Results	Circle 1	Circle 2	Circle 3	Circle 4	Circle 5	Circle 6	Circle 7
Step 1	97%	99%	99%	100%r
Step 2	93%	96%	95%	97%	96%	99%	100%
Step 3	93%	97%	97%	96%	96%*	99%*	100%*
Step 4	80%	86%	90%	92%
Step 5	74%	77%	83%	87%

Skittles

2006-02-22T22:20:00.000-08:00

My blitz rating just hit 1450, and I credit the circles. It doesn't seem all that long ago that I thought hitting 1200 blitz was an accomplishment.

I don't consider blitz to be real chess, but it's fun. Surviving the time-pressured, mistake filled, frenzied play can really give me a high, when I win that is. Looking at blitz games afterwards continues to highlight BIG gaps in my play, as well as putting things into perspective. Take this position for example:

Black to Move: is c1=Queen good?

It's actually horrible, and that's just what I did. To prove the point that chess is all about mistakes, my opponent ignored the perpetual check:
41.Qe8+ Kg7 42.Qe7+! Kh6 43.Qh4+ Kg7 44.Qe7+ etc. 1/2-1/2

2b3k1/7p/2Q3p1/4bp2/4p3/4q1P1/6KP/2q2B2 w - - 0 1

I guess a win is a win.

-=-=-=-=-

I am starting circles 5 through 7 on TCT Step 3. My focus is on keeping a "game-like" mental approach throughout, which is more difficult than it might sound.

I wanted to say I have noticed that there are many and interesting games and discussions posted recently in the chess blog-o-sphere. Very cool :-D.

Step 2 Complete

2006-02-18T12:45:00.000-08:00

That's a relief. The last 200 problems were the slowest. I gave each problem more real-game type consideration, hoping to get more out of this last bit of the process than I would relying purely on memorization or CTS blitz-like mentality.

I am taking a short break before Step 3.

-=-=-=-=-

I ran into this game recently and was baffled attempting to follow it. The first surprise was that up to move 17 it follows book. Here is the game, followed by Fritz's analysis:

pgn player

[Event "Aeroflot Open"]
[Site "Moscow RUS"]
[Date "2006.02.12"]
[EventDate "2006.02.08"]
[Round "5"]
[Result "1-0"]
[White "TL Petrosian"]
[Black "P Smirnov"]
[ECO "B85"]
[WhiteElo "2558"]
[BlackElo "2614"]
[PlyCount "62"]

1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 d6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Nf6 5. Nc3 a6 6. Be3 e6 7. a4 Nc6 8.Be2 Be7 9. O-O O-O 10. f4 Qc7 11. Kh1 Re8 12. a5 Nxa5 13. e5 dxe5 14. fxe5 Qxe5 15. Bf4 Qc5 16. Na4 Qa7 17. Be3 Nd5 18. Bg1 b5 19. Bd3 Bf6 20. Nxb5 Qd7 21. Nbc3 Bd8 22. Nc5 Qc7 23. Nxd5 exd5 24. Rxa5 Qxa5 25. Bxh7+ Kf8 26.Qxd5 Ra7 27. b4 Qb5 28. c4 Qxb4 29. Qd6+ Be7 30. Rxf7+ Kxf7 31. Qd5+ 1-0

Fritz:

{B85: Sicilian Scheveningen: 6 Be2 a6, lines with early Be3} 1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 d6
3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Nf6 5. Nc3 a6 6. Be3 e6 7. a4 Nc6 8. Be2 Be7 9. O-O O-O 10.
f4 Qc7 11. Kh1 Re8 12. a5 Nxa5 13. e5 dxe5 14. fxe5 Qxe5 15. Bf4 Qc5 16. Na4
Qa7 17. Be3 {last book move} Nd5 18. Bg1 b5 (18... b6 $5 19. c4 Nb4 $15) 19.
Bd3 $11 Bf6 (19... Qd7 $5 {is worth consideration} 20. Bxh7+ {
Demolition of pawn structure} Kxh7 21. Qh5+ Kg8 22. Qxf7+ Kh7 23. Qh5+ Kg8 24.
Qf7+ Kh7 25. Qh5+ Kg8 26. Qf7+ $11) (19... bxa4 $2 20. Bxh7+ Kf8 21. Nxe6+ Bxe6
22. Bxa7 Rxa7 23. Bf5 Bf6 24. Bxe6 fxe6 25. Rxa4 Nc6 $18) 20. Nxb5 $16 {
Clearance to allow g1-d4} Qd7 (20... axb5 21. Rxf6 gxf6 22. Qg4+ Kf8 23. Bc5+
Re7 24. Bxh7 Ke8 25. Qg8+ Kd7 26. Bxa7 Rxa7 27. Nc5+ Kc7 28. Be4 Kb8) 21. Nbc3
Bd8 $2 (21... Nxc3 $142 {and your king hangs on} 22. bxc3 Bd8 $14)
22. Nc5 $18 Qc7 $4 {your bishop has lost his nerve...
understandable when you consider his position}(22... Qe7 23. Nxd5 exd5 $18)
23. Nxd5 exd5 24. Rxa5 $1 {the end, the rest is history}
Qxa5 {Decoy theme: a5} (24... Re5 {doesn't change the outcome of the game}
25. Qf3 $18) 25. Bxh7+ $1 {Demolition of pawn structure}
Kf8 (25... Kxh7 {Decoy to h7} 26. Qh5+)
26. Qxd5 Ra7 27. b4 $1 {leaving no more doubts}
Qb5 (27... Qxb4 {Decoy to b4} 28. Nd3 {Discovered attack}
Qe7 29. Ne5 g5 30. Ng6+ Kg7 31. Nxe7 Rexe7 32. Qxd8 Kxh7 33. Qxc8)
28. c4 Qxb4 (28... Qb6 {the last chance for counterplay} 29. Nd3 Be6 $18)
29. Qd6+ Be7 30. Rxf7+ $3 {Demolishes the pawn shield.} Kxf7 {Decoy theme: f7}
31. Qd5+ {A classical mating theme} (31. Qd5+ Be6 32. Qxe6+ Kf8 33. Qg8#) {
Fritz 8: 1)} 31... Be6 ({Fritz 8: 2)} 31... Kf8 32. Qg8# {[%eval 32766,0]}) ({
Fritz 8: 3)} 31... Kf6 32. Ne4# {[%eval 32766,0]}) 32. Qxe6+ Kf8 33. Qg8# {
[%eval 32765,0]} 1-0

-=-=-=-=-

Through no fault of my own I won an incredibly inaccurate Cochrane Gambit blitz game as Black. If you look at the main line of this opening, you might conclude that it was concocted by space aliens. Granted, it can be a real test of Black's defensive skills, and even more so in blitz.

Luckily, my opponent gave me an almost obvious checkmate opportunity, an opportunity which I squandered by offering up my Queen instead of my Rook. Not to be outdone, my opponent let me keep my Queen, continuing on embarrassingly until he finally handed me a checkmate so obvious I couldn't refuse. This last blunder was avoided a position where he was materially behind but had a big pawn center, i.e. objectively lost but still with promotion threats. Here is the checkmate position and solution right underneath:

Black to Move

Rg6+! (not Qg6+?? as I played) seals the deal:
Rg6+! fxg6 (as Rg2 Rxg2+ or Kh1 Qh8+ Rh2 Qxh2! Kxh2 Rh8#)
Qxg6+ (as Rg2 Qxg2#) Kh1 Rh8+ Rh2 Qg2!#
Computer analysis of Qg6+:
26. fxg6 Rxg6+ 27. Kh1 Rh8+ 28. Rh2 Rxh2+ 29. Kxh2 Nf3+
30. Kh3 Ng5+ 31. Kg3 Nxe4+ 32. Kf4 Nxc5 33. Kxe3
This leaves White up two pawns and a good position

Here is the full game:
1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nf6 3. Nxe5 d6 4. Nxf7 Kxf7 5. d4 c5 6. Bc4+ Be6 7. Bxe6+
Kxe6 8. d5+ Kf7 9. Nc3 Be7 10. O-O Rf8 11. f4 Nbd7 12. Qf3 Kg8 13. g4 g5
14. f5 Ne5 15. Qh3 Nfxg4 16. Qh5 h6 17. h4 Nf6 18. Qxh6 Nfg4 19. Qe6+ Kg7
20. hxg5 Bxg5 21. Nb5 Qe8 22. Qxd6 Bxc1 23. Raxc1 Ne3 24. Rf2 Rf6 25. Qxc5
Qg6+ 26. Kh1 Qh5+ 27. Rh2 Qf3+ 28. Kg1 Qg3+ 29. Kh1 Nf3 30. Qe7+ Rf7
31. Rh7+ Kxh7 32. Qxf7+ Kh8 33. Qf6+ Qg7 34. Qxg7+ Kxg7 35. Re1 Rh8# 0-1

I hope to work through my unsound Queen sacrifice propensity. May its siren lure call me no more :-).

-=-=-=-=-

TCT Results	Circle 1	Circle 2	Circle 3	Circle 4	Circle 5	Circle 6	Circle 7
Step 1	97%	99%	99%	100%r
Step 2	93%	96%	95%	97%	96%	99%	100%
Step 3	93%	97%	97%	96%
Step 4	80%	86%	90%	92%
Step 5	74%	77%	83%	87%

Nearly Through TCT Step 2

2006-02-11T11:19:00.000-08:00

It's approaching the finish line on this circle stuff. At this stage I have shifted into taking my time with each problem so I burn in the most useful aspects of each position.

For fun I have been sneaking in some blitz, tried to make heads or tails of handling the Blackmar-Diemer Gambit as Black, and finally finished the third game in the McDonald book. In that game between Kasparov and Bacrot, Black gets into an incredibly passive situation for awhile before crumbling. I hate that! In a manner that seems very parallel to what Pawn Sensei recently posted about when GMs blunder, I'll say that seeing one of today's top players suffer this way puts my own experiences into a more positive perspective.

-=-=-=-=-

TCT Results	Circle 1	Circle 2	Circle 3	Circle 4	Circle 5	Circle 6	Circle 7
Step 1	97%	99%	99%	100%r
Step 2	93%	96%	95%	97%	97%*	98%*	100%*
Step 3	93%	97%	97%	96%
Step 4	80%	86%	90%	92%
Step 5	74%	77%	83%	87%*

Simultaneous Advantage

2006-02-02T12:01:00.000-08:00

Introduction

Tactical Terminology

Since reading The Mammoth Book of Chess I have been using Burgess' tactical terminology in puzzling through difficult chess positions. This helps when I cannot understand an answer to a tactics problems, or when get stumped reading annotations comprised of variations with no supporting text. I hope that explaining these to myself "verbally" I will grasp the idea better.

Along the way, I have become somewhat non-standard in my tactical language. Naming tactics differently and seeing multiple tactics where others don't are my two biggest deviations from the norm. I have investigated both of these issues deeper, and this has led me to developing a new system for describing tactics.

Part I

Which Tactic is This?

White to Move

Tasc Chess Tutor, Step 2 Exercise 5b, #9
Answer: Bxf7+

What you call the Bxf7+ sacrifice depends on how you were taught. I seems ambiguous that might be called one or more of the following:

Decoy
Chasing
Overworked defender
Overloaded defender
Deflection/Distraction

The most common response is that this is a decoy. This is like saying, "Moving the Black King to capture the Bishop is fatal for Black's Queen." I view this as a deflection, which is like saying, "The Black King's most important duty is to defend the Queen, and yet he moves away.". If the Black King was a Queen, it would look more like an overworked piece. I could see how someone could view these as chasing or overloading.

Aspects of Multiple Tactics

Another ambiguous area of is multiple tactics. I see this everywhere, or perhaps more accurately aspects of multiple tactics, although it's rarely described that way. Take this obvious checkmate in two for example:

White to Move

Rxh3+ gxh3 Rh3#

Four aspects seem to stand out in this position:

Rxh3+ gets the g3 Rook out of the way of the d3 Rook, getting White ready for the final checkmate move
Rxh3+ sacrifices a Rook for a pawn, a pawn that block's part of the h-file
gxh3 draws a defender away from protecting the h3 square
gxh3 turns a defender into a target on the h3 square

What do you call this kind of sacrifice for checkmate? Putting that question aside, is this multiple tactics? There is no hard and fast rule on what qualifies as multiple tactics, and few would give it that label. I personally like calling this outnumbering. Still, using a more common name for the initial Rook sacrifice leaves out those four aspects.

Part II

Simultaneous Advantage

Because of the two above ambiguities, I was at an impasse. My tactical descriptions were going to differ from the norm, and labeling many moves as multiple tactics would make things worse. As well, using other umbrella terms wasn't a satisfying solution, and that approach seemed too broad. I needed something else.

I focused on breaking things down further. I originally set out to categorize everything I knew about tactics: material gain, tempo related tactics like zugzwang and zwischenzug, forced mates, etc.. Just talking about forced moves brought up essentially forced moves, and so on. Unfortunately this list was too vast.

I finally focused exclusively on forced checkmates that start with a sacrifice. I set out to make an unambiguous vocabulary that was capable of tracking all of the tactical aspects in these positions.

I ended up with a simple 2x2 grid and viola all the parts began fitting together. I started with this:

Simultaneous Advantage When Sacrificing for Checkmate

move	away from a square	onto a square
attacking piece	advantage(s)	advantage(s)
defending piece	advantage(s)	advantage(s)

This grid combines the attacker's plusses and the defender's minusses. An advantage is anything in the position that changes beneficially for the attacking side:

the attacker's liability becomes a neutrality
the attacker's liability becomes an asset
the attacker's neutrality becomes an asset
the defender's asset becomes a neutrality
the defender's asset becomes a liability
the defender's neutrality becomes a liability

The grid pinpoints the exact moment that an advantage is obtained. Each box has zero to many advantages written in it.

Here is my current draft of the advantages list and three detailed examples using it:

move

away from a square

onto a square

attacking
piece

clearing a square
evading a threat
discovering:
- forcing with check
- forcing with zugzwang
- mobilizing attackers
- outnumbering to attack
- outnumbering to block
- pinning - absolute
- preventing counterattack
- removing all of the
  King's flight squares
- removing some of the
  King's flight squares
- threatening captures
- threatening check

resulting checkmate threat

blocking a line
blocking a square
breaking a pin
capturing a defender
capturing cover
forcing with check
forcing with zugzwang
mobilizing attackers
outnumbering to attack
outnumbering to block
pinning - absolute
preventing counterattack
removing all of the
King's flight squares
removing some of the
King's flight squares
threatening captures
threatening check

resulting checkmate threat

defending
piece

clearing a square
discovering:

mobilizing attackers
outnumbering to attack
outnumbering to block
pinning - absolute
preventing counterattack
removing all of the
King's flight squares
removing some of the
King's flight squares
threatening captures
threatening check

swapping a threat
threatening check
withdrawing counterattack
withdrawing defense:

outnumbering to attack
outnumbering to block

resulting checkmate threat

blocking a line
blocking a square
capturing the masking
piece
moving into capture
moving into an
absolute pin
moving King onto a
more vulnerable square
removing all of
the King's flight squares
removing one of
the King's flight squares
swapping a threat

resulting checkmate threat

Notes:

It is assumed that the best offense and defense is used.

"Discovering" means a blocking (or masking) piece is moved, increasing the influence and mobility of one or more long-range attacking pieces. When this action occurs, one or more advantages are ascribed to it. "Discovering" is being used broadly here, as it includes situations where two long range pieces that form a battery move away from one another and where a Rook or Queen is behind a pawn that advances forward.

"Moving into an absolute pin" inherently implies that the piece has also moved into a capture that gives check, and this is treated differently from "moving into capture". Having both of those in a box means that in addition to the pinning threat, one or more other pieces are threatening to capture.

"Outnumbering" is similar to winning material by outnumbering an opponent's piece with more attackers than defenders. Here it means an attack on a square, so capturing is not required. The idea is that with more attackers than defenders trained on that square, an attack or interfering block from that square will succeed. This happen at any point, on either the attacker's move or the defender's move. If outnumbering happens on the defender's side, it might be thought of as overloading.

"Preventing counterattack" could be broken down further: preventing checkmate, check, perpetual check, perpetual chase, threats to capture pieces necessary for the final checkmate position, and threats to block pieces necessary for the final checkmate position. That list also applies to "withdrawing counterattack" advantage, which additionally includes unpinning one of the attacker's pieces, meaning both relative and absolute pins.

In "threatening check", the term "check" means threatening the defender's King with check or checkmate. When it occurs, further calculation is required to determine if it truly is a checkmate threat.

-=-=-=-=-

White to Move

Rxh3+ gxh3 Rh3#

Initial Advantages:

Outnumbering to attack on h3
Black King is on a vulnerable square for checkmate
Black King only has the h7 flight square
White threatens check on d8 and h3

move	away from a square	onto a square
White: Rxh3+	discovering: mobilizing attackers - allowing the Rook on d3 access to h3	capturing cover - pawn on h3 forcing with check removing all of the King's flight squares -h7 is not available
Black: gxh3	withdrawing defense: outnumbering to attack - moving the pawn on g4 stops it from defending h3	moving into capture - the defending g4 pawn has become a target on h3 threatening check - Rh3 resulting checkmate threat: Rxh3#
White: Rxh3+		capturing cover - pawn on h3 removing all of the King's flight squares - h7 is not available #

-=-=-=-=-

White to Move

Bxg7+ Qxg7 Rh6#

Initial Advantages:

Black King is on a vulnerable square for checkmate
Black King has no flight squares
White threatens check with Bxg7+ and Nf7+

move

away from a square

onto a square

White:

Bxg7+

discovering:

mobilizing attackers
- the pinned Rook on
has an open path to h6

capturing cover
- the g7 pawn
forcing with check
- the Black Queen must
capture on g7

Black:

Qxg7

threatening check
- Rh6
withdrawing counterattack
- unpinning the Rook
on d6

resulting checkmate threat: Rh6#

capturing the masking piece
- the Bishop on g7 was
blocking the White Queen
moving into an absolute pin
- the White Queen half-pins
the Black Queen along the
a1-h8 diagonal, threatening
check Qxg7

White:

Rh6#

-=-=-=-=-

White to Move

Rxc6 Rxc6 b5/Rxc6 Bxa4 Qxa4

Initial Advantages:

Black King is on a vulnerable square for checkmate
Black King has no flight squares
White threatens to capture on c6, d1, and e2
White threatens check with b5

move

away from a square

onto a square

White:

Rxc6

capturing a defender
- the c6 pawn was
defending b5
pinning - absolute
-the b6 Knight is
immobilized
threatening check
- b5

resulting checkmate threat: b5#

Black:

Rxc6

------

Bxa4

------

capturing the masking piece
- the a4 pawn was blocking
the White Queen
moving into an absolute pin
swapping a threat
- The capture on a4 gives
the Black King a flight
square and prevents b5#,
but in the process Black
has created another
checkmate threat from the
White Queen on the a-file
threatening check
- Qxa4

resulting checkmate threat: Qxa4#

White:

b5#

------

Qxa4#

discovering:

removing all of the
King's flight squares
- the Bishop on d2
keeps the Black
King immobilized

------

#
------

capturing cover
removing all of the
King's flight squares

-=-=-=-=-

I find it striking that the first example has something in each of the first four boxes, something that it shares with the second example. Also striking is how few advantages were in boxes the third example, ...Rxc6 variation; most of the required advantages for checkmate were there to begin with, so this makes sense.

Part III

Common Knowledge

A well-disciplined player will typically do several things each turn:

Determine if he can checkmate is opponent
Determine if he must stop a checkmate threat
Play for advantages appropriate to the position and stage of the game

In checkmate situations material superiority is meaningless, and as such it really isn't discussed in depth in chess books. Nonetheless, I think it deserves consideration. It seems that (at least) two modes of thinking are employed each turn, which I will call "checkmate thinking" and "non-checkmate thinking". These modes are very different, and confusion usually spells disaster. Not using checkmate thinking when it's an important part the position leads to mistakes: miscalculating checkmate threats because it looks like it loses material, ignoring checkmate threats for one side, etc.

Material

Material advantage is the biggest winning factor in non-checkmate thinking because it often leads to a win. The relative values of each piece is well known in its most simplistic form:

Material Values

I think the other mode of thinking deserves its own table:

Material Values in Forced Checkmates

It's almost simpler to consider checkmate-thinking values, as it's a specific all-or-nothing ordeal (the "8" symbol on it's side means infinity). Having some material be worth 0 implies alot of things. Gain and loss have no meaning, and there is no way to sacrifice material per se, leaving only participants in the final checkmate position as having value.

Rewording

I started this investigation out mapping out all the different possible sacrifices for checkmate. I thought I was getting to the conclusion that all of these appear to be sacrifices for position, a well known idea.

Based on material devaluation in checkmates, I thought of changing the conclusion and call them exchanges for position. This would make the overall idea akin to even trades in non-checkmate situations, so giving up a full Queen potentially could be considered equal to getting a Queen for a pawn.

Next I thought, "What if the attacker doesn't sacrifice to start with, or maybe simply never sacrifices to achieve checkmate?" The grid still worked. Perhaps these all were forced checkmates.

Finally, allowing for the possibility that the defense could make an unforced blunder, it seems like these are simply checkmates. So here is the same grid, different title, now without the requirement to sacrifice or trade material:

Simultaneous Advantage in Checkmates

move

away from a square

onto a square

attacking
piece

clearing a square
evading a threat
discovering:
- forcing with check
- forcing with zugzwang
- mobilizing attackers
- outnumbering to attack
- outnumbering to block
- pinning - absolute
- preventing counterattack
- removing all of the
  King's flight squares
- removing some of the
  King's flight squares
- threatening captures
- threatening check

resulting checkmate threat

blocking a line
blocking a square
breaking a pin
capturing a defender
capturing cover
forcing with check
forcing with zugzwang
mobilizing attackers
outnumbering to attack
outnumbering to block
pinning - absolute
preventing counterattack
removing all of the
King's flight squares
removing some of the
King's flight squares
threatening captures
threatening check

resulting checkmate threat

defending
piece

clearing a square
discovering:

mobilizing attackers
outnumbering to attack
outnumbering to block
pinning - absolute
preventing counterattack
removing all of the
King's flight squares
removing some of the
King's flight squares
threatening captures
threatening check

swapping a threat
threatening check
withdrawing counterattack
withdrawing defense:

outnumbering to attack
outnumbering to block

resulting checkmate threat

blocking a line
blocking a square
capturing the masking
piece
moving into capture
moving into an
absolute pin
moving King onto a
more vulnerable square
removing all of
the King's flight squares
removing one of
the King's flight squares
swapping a threat

resulting checkmate threat

Addendum

The name "Theory of Simultaneous Advantage" came out of the realization that the most difficult tactical moves frequently involve multiple things happening on just one move. It is still under development, and it currently appears to be more like a vocabulary system than a theory. One thing that I am stating that does appear to constitute a theory is this:

The only way to achieve checkmate is through Simultaneous Advantage

For the most part, this system constitutes a reorganization of well-known chess principles. I believe this theory could be expanded to cover other parts of the game beside checkmate, perhaps with different grids to cover other types of advantages that occur in other sections of the game. The grids would serve as a reference, setting out a baseline of all the plusses one might encounter. In a complete treatment of a line, two grids and two corresponding advantage lists would be needed.

In terms of the opening, the most instructive games are filled with moves that fit right into this kind of theory. Just think about the typical annotated game after 1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5 . Authors rave about White's castling preparation while threatening to inflict doubled pawns upon Black and hang the e5 pawn. This has been exhaustively studied, and it turns out that the 5. Nxe5 threat can be dealt with. Usually the prospect of handing Black a two Bishop advantage usually makes White choose not to capture on c6 on the next turn. Viewing the position in an immediate sense, the two Bishop advantage wouldn't immediately become a meaningful plus in the postion for Black if White trades his Bishop for the c6 Knight, so I can see it argued that White has achieved at least two if not three simultaneous advantages on move 3.

Normal Checkmates in the Theory of Simultaneous Advantage

To achieve checkmate the advantages all of these advantages must be accrued by the mating side before the last move:

The mating side has

1. the move
2. mobility to move the mating piece to the the mating square or, in the case of a discovered mate, has the mating piece on the mating square and has mobility to move masking piece off the mating line (i.e. it's not trapped)
3. a way out of check if he is in check. This move will deliver a discovered mate by having the mating side's King either capture the checking piece or move safely away leaving the defending side's checking piece, leaving that piece unable to stop the checkmate because of an absolute pin. This is here for completeness, as the situation is extremely unlikely to occur naturally:

White to move, and Black cannot interpose his pinned Queen to stop mate in 1.

Returning to the list of advantages...

The defending side has

1. a King must on a vulnerable square
2. either all of his King's critical flight squares eliminated by his own pieces, the edge of the board, or being controlled by a mating side piece or is about to have them completely removed as a result of the upcoming mating move
3. no effective attack on the mating square
4. no available piece that can interpose between the mating square and the King in long-range checkmates

Tactics

In closing, here is a rough mapping of where common tactics fit on the grid:

Move	... away from a square	... onto a square
my piece	discovered attacks line opening square clearance windmill	chasing destruction double attack fettering fork offensive interference offensive interposition overloading overworking pin prophylaxis removing the defender sacrifice skewer trapping x-ray zugzwang zwischenzug
his piece	chasing away deflection/distraction unpinning	decoy interference interposition self blockade

Sources:

Tasc Chess Tutor version 2.01,Tasc B. V. Holland 1995-1999
The Mammoth Book of Chess by Graham Burgess, Carroll And Graf 1997, 2000

-=-=-=-=-

I done my best to make this accessible and understandable.

If you think anything has been unclear or want to leave feedback,
please leave a comment.

Comments and Feedback for Non-Bloggers: mailto:bens@hevanet.com

Circle 4 Complete

2006-01-21T16:41:00.000-08:00

Yes! Enough said.

New look, new attitude. I have been considering changing the look of the blog for awhile, and, after many hours of trial and air playing around with hexadecimal color conversions, you have what you see before you. It fits with the diagrams nicely, but I suspect a few readers won't find it that easy to look at. I even think it takes getting used to. I need to fine tune it a little, like coloring of links in the posts, but I don't have the time right now.

After over a year of daily problem-solving I am loosening up about the scheduling. It will be more like 4-7 days a week, 20 minutes or more if I can. Some of this will have to be opening and other types of study/review. Hopefully this will help get me over the GAG factor which returned a little after subsiding during the recent review circles. Also I am shifting into memorization mode with TCT, and the final circles will be more like mini-circles.

After all these months, I still cannot really tell anyone whether or not going the long route with TCT has forced me to learn it better. Seeing a 1900 player go over a game with someone brought home how incredibly minuscule my improvement is the larger scheme of things, that is when compared with most 1800 + folks. In that light, avoiding early memorization by not doing mini-circles seems a little like nitpicking.

The other big attitude change, or perhaps insistence, is that my chess time be more fun this year.

Lastly, last year Tempo asked me if I had a theory of tactics. I had ideas at the time, but nothing useful or substantive. Now I have something which may be the beginnings of one. It is going to be long, collecting bits of this and that from many months of tactical pondering, put together in typical Spill fashion. Stay tuned for further developments.
;-).

-=-=-=-=-

TCT Results	Circle 1	Circle 2	Circle 3	Circle 4
Step 1	97%	99%	99%	100%r
Step 2	93%	96%	95%	97%
Step 3	93%	97%	97%	96%
Step 4	80%	86%	90%	92%
Step 5	74%	77%	83%	86%

Single Line Interference

2006-01-17T13:44:00.000-08:00

White to Move

Interference seems much less common than other types of tactics. In the Polgar brick I noticed that when I find interference it usually is when one piece moves onto an intersection line of 2 defenders, simultaneously blocking both lines and making recapture a problem either way (624/5334 for example). I don't know if anyone calls this double line or multiple line interference, but that seems to be a logical term for it.

This tactic has been difficult for me to spot in games, as I expect it is for many beginning and intermediate players. Repeatedly working through examples may be adequate preparation to spot it more regularly in-game, but I wanted to form a better understanding of it. I played around with it, composing some easy examples, breaking it down into simpler parts. This led me to think single line interference was a better starting place than double line interference. It still is messy! I made a less obvious, more complicated example (above). I hope this example shows that just blocking 1 line alone is enough to throw one out of typical move considerations into unnatural but strong sacrifice moves.

Answer: 1.Qd5! Threatening the smothered mate with 2. Nf7#

(1.Nf7+ is more of a mess as in Bxf7 2.gxf7 Nd7 3.Ng6+ Kh7 4.Qxe4 Kh6 5.Bc1+ Bf4 6.Bxf4+ Kh7 7.Nf8+ Kh8 8.Qh7#)

1...Bxd5 A peculiar result of 1.Qd5! is that Black's Rook and c6 pawn can't occupy the d5 square without creating a f7 vulnerability.

2.Rxd5 Threatening again the smothered mate with 3. Nf7#

2...Nd6 Defending f7 at all costs

(2...Rf8 leads to a quicker mate with the clearance move 3.Nf7+ Rxf7 4.Rh5#)

3.Bxd6 this is the fastest way to get rid of the defender and also keep the Rh5# idea going, which is pretty much now unstoppable

3...Rf8 averting mate for just another move

4.Nf7+ Rxf7 5.Rh5#

[Site "?"]
[Date "????.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "New game"]
[Black "Fritz 8"]
[Result "1-0"]
[SetUp "1"]
[FEN "1n1r3k/1nb1N1p1/1pp3P1/6N1/3Qp2P/Bb6/5P2/3R3K w - - 0 1"]

1. Qd5 (1. Nf7+ Bxf7 2. gxf7 Nd7 3. Ng6+ Kh7 4. Qxe4 Kh6 5. Bc1+ Bf4 6. Bxf4+
Kh7 7. Nf8+ Kh8 8. Qh7#) 1... Bxd5 2. Rxd5 Nd6 (2... Rf8 3. Nf7+ Rxf7 4. Rh5#)
3. Bxd6 Rf8 4. Nf7+ Rxf7 5. Rh5# 1-0

Working on this helped me clarify a detail that I never saw fully discussed in any chess book: outnumbering the long-range pieces on a line and perpendicular. Thinking this way, Black could have stopped the Qd5 interference idea by having one more diagonal protector either along the a2-g8 diagonal or a8-h1 diagonal.

I suppose this kind of outnumbering rarely comes up, as it's extremely unlikely to have more than a Queen and Bishop on a diagonal. Another limiting thing for the defender is the difficulty of using pawns; obviously that only works if the square it's protecting is exactly 1 "forward" diagonal square away. Suffice it to say the attacker has a huge advantage, as he can throw pieces onto the interference square from any direction.

-=-=-=-=-

I am still reading the McDonald book incrementally, and I think it's helping. The continuity of moves and plans he describes continues to impress me. In "Game Two" though, his analysis of 28... f6 seemed a little weak, and Fritz confirmed it (thanks PMD for the file). It just shows that Masters are human, as I think he fell out of a vigilant doubting approach and simply argued for Black's move choice.

Back to solving problems. TCT Circle 4's days are numbered...

-=-=-=-=-

TCT Results	Circle 1	Circle 2	Circle 3	Circle 4
Step 1	97%	99%	99%	100%r
Step 2	93%	96%	95%	97%
Step 3	93%	97%	97%	96%
Step 4	80%	86%	90%	92%
Step 5	74%	77%	83%	87%*

45/45

2006-01-14T18:38:00.000-08:00

I won a hard fought team game today. Rating means nothing as my 1200 opponent could have won just as easily (meaning we both had mistakes). Definitely a challenging for me, though one with moments of good defense and tactics on my part.

-=-=-=-=-

Here are some other highlights from the current 45/45 tournament (ICC teams) voted by participants:

http://www.teamchess.org/pgnplayer/pgnplayer.php?ID=2949&Board=4

http://teamchess.org/pgnplayer/pgnplayer.php?ID=3096&Board=3

If you have done the circles you probably will find a faster mate just screaming out to be played on this next one:
http://teamchess.org/pgnplayer/pgnplayer.php?ID=3028&Board=4

http://teamchess.org/pgnplayer/pgnplayer.php?ID=2990&Board=2

http://teamchess.org/pgnplayer/pgnplayer.php?ID=3112&Board=4

-=-=-=-=-

Once again things have gotten busy for me, and I am making adjustments. Blog reading is a luxury that I can't much afford, but I hope to still post regularly.

I plan on reading a few pages a week in the McDonald annotated game book. It is clear just how much more GMs have going on in their games than us amateurs. And sometimes GMs don't have to do very much wrong to earn a '?' from him.

I am going slightly backwards in TCT performance, and I now just hope to end this next section at least 1% greater than last time. Maybe this section warrants a eighth Circle?! Arg.

-=-=-=-=-

TCT Results	Circle 1	Circle 2	Circle 3	Circle 4
Step 1	97%	99%	99%	100%r
Step 2	93%	96%	95%	97%
Step 3	93%	97%	97%	96%
Step 4	80%	86%	90%	92%
Step 5	74%	77%	83%	87%*

Blitz/Books

2006-01-12T17:32:00.000-08:00

I had a interesting loss against a 1470 blitz player. I got into a 2 Rooks and Knight v. Queen and Bishop middlegame with better pawn structure, but that type of an advantage requires more experience than I have. Add some time pressure and oh well. The encouraging moves I made in this game make me think that the circles are starting to paying off in certain moments, but I still need to pull everything together.

1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nf6 3. Nxe5 d6 4. Nf3 Nxe4 5. d3 Nf6 6. Bg5 Be7 7. Nc3 O-O
8. h3 h6 9. Bh4 Nc6 10. Be2 Be6 11. d4 Nd5 12. Bxe7 Qxe7 13. Nxd5 Bxd5 14.
O-O Qf6 15. c3 Rae8 16. Re1 Re7 17. Nh2 Rfe8 18. Qd2 Qe6 19. Bf1 Qxe1 20.
Rxe1 Rxe1 21. Nf3 Bxf3 22. gxf3 R8e6 23. Qd3 Rg6+ 24. Kh2 Ree6 25. f4 Ref6
26. Qe3 d5 27. Qe8+ Kh7 28. Bd3 Re6 29. Qxf7 Rf6 30. Bxg6+ Rxg6 31. Qxc7
Na5 32. Qxa5
{Black resigns} 1-0 (pgnviewer.html)

I have been meaning to post something about The Middlegame in Chess by Fine. First is a warning: it has horrible diagram errors! It's obvious that nobody proofread the modern algebraic notation closely, and combined with some pieces out of place it's screwy. I have figured out what moves it was supposed to describe, and it's not a huge problem if I get stumped as most examples are taken from the games of world famous players. The section on mate combinations is vast and much more difficult than I anticipated. This section is organized by kinds of weakened pawns around your opponent's King patterns, and the master games where they capitalize on that in different ways.

I chose to skim over those more difficult parts this time through the book in order to get to the non-mate tactics. I did this because I really help in strengthening my middlegame. I haven't gotten far in this section, but it looks to covers beginner to advanced situations, with some pages taking 15-30 minutes to understand. I almost think of this as a 1950s book version of what CT-Art is for computers today (roughly). All in all, this is a book I expect I will read multiple times.

-=-=-=-=-

TCT Results	Circle 1	Circle 2	Circle 3	Circle 4
Step 1	97%	99%	99%	100%r
Step 2	93%	96%	95%	97%
Step 3	93%	97%	97%	96%
Step 4	80%	86%	90%	92%
Step 5	74%	77%	83%	87%*

Multiple Theme Sacrifice

2006-01-10T04:09:00.000-08:00

White to Move

Sacrifices are one of the most intriguing and yet difficult parts of chess I have run across. They appear so rarely in a typical chess game that it's easy to miss, and even when handed a problem where you kind of expect to be going that route it's still often challenging to calculate. I see another complicating factor as multiple tactics which my composition above hopefully illustrates.

Using Burgess's tactical semantics (which seems to differ from others') I see the best line as follows:

Bxg7+

Clearance along the sixth rank giving the White Rook access to the h6 square
Destruction of both the Black King's cover and the h6 defender

forcing ...Qxg7

Deflection of the Black Queen away from its absolute pinning of the White Rook
Decoy of the Black Queen onto a square that both keeps the Black King hemmed in and puts the Black Queen into an absolute half-pin. (I think "Half-pin" comes from Nimzovich's terminology - means that the pinned piece can move towards the pinning piece.)

Rh6#

This position obviously is artificial, but I found it really difficult to put all 4 of these themes in an example of any kind.

-=-=-=-=-

TCT is going along ok, but I really look forward to being done. I look forward to being in a more balanced study mode, but for now I aim to average 15 minutes a weak opening review.

A blog related thing - Following the trend I have added a RSS feedburner page, although I'm not sure if it was needed. What Druss has going looks nice.

-=-=-=-=-

TCT Results	Circle 1	Circle 2	Circle 3	Circle 4
Step 1	97%	99%	99%	100%r
Step 2	93%	96%	95%	97%
Step 3	93%	97%	97%	96%
Step 4	80%	86%	90%	92%
Step 5	74%	77%	83%	88%*

Checkmate Calculation Conundrum

2006-01-07T14:13:00.000-08:00

From: Tasc Chess Tutor v2.01, Copyright 1995-1999 Tasc B.V. Holland
Step 5, section 9c, #5
White to Move

This is from a "Test" section, so I had no hint that it was a mate problem. I am down to 4 minutes per problem, though I didn't even use all my time before I started guessing (bad!). Perhaps I was a little tired, but that's not much of an excuse. After not seeing any way to stop both pawns, I just started making lazy mate threats which FINALLY yielded the quiet answer of Rg56. Tricky, huh?

Qxh7 just posted about this, namely how is it that it's difficult to see mate in 2 when you can see easy mates in 3, 4, or even more. In spite of individual differences, I think players experience a similar phenomenon early in there career. To share my take on the whole issue, I have created some relatively simple forced mate examples, all White to move and all with a weak wrong move(s) possible.

Outnumbering: when cautious middlegame mentality gets in the way. If I ever get good enough to write a tactics book, outnumbering would be the largest chapter. Here are two positions with this theme that seem essentially equivalent to me, the only difference is the second one is difficult for more people to see right away.

Same answer for both positions
Weak move: Rd8+
Answer: Rxh3+ gxh3 Rxh3#
Option Limiting: failing to see a quiet move, prophylaxis, or zugzwang. The second example is a test of finding the absolute best moves for both sides.

Top postion
Weak move: Rb8+
Answer: Ra7 any Rb8#

Bottom position
Taking the Queen is obvious, so after Bxc7
Weak move: ...Nxc7
Answer: ...Nd6
Now after Bxc7 Nd6 we get
Weak move: Bxd6?? or Nf7? or Kg3?
Answer: Several moves will work-Kh1, a6, Bb8, etc.
Uncommon Final Pattern. The TCT at the top certainly seems uncommon to me.
Uncommon Tactic: destruction, clearance sacrifice, unusual looking absolute pins, multiple Tactics.

Weak move: just about anything other than the answer.
Answer: Rxc6!. Now ...Bxa4 is the only way to avoid b5#, but leads to Qxa4#

Remedy

I'm not all that experienced like a trainer, but I can speak to what I do. After I follow the forcing checks and moves and not finding the answer, I attempt a few things which have helped me to shift towards the solution in the past:

Review it. I still make mistakes calculated, so I can tend to go over it again to see if I have messed anything up.
Break visual attention/move around (like for 30+ seconds). Actually this one has been more helpful than trying to think tactically.
Look for any possible absolute pin, no matter how unlikely it looks.
Break the rules. Calculate if you could move on top of or even through your own pieces, or make two moves to achieve mate. This is known as "null move" thinking, and is a powerful optimization in computer chess engines.
Finally review the "Fundamental Checkmates" and attempt to apply it to the position.

-=-=-=-=-

TCT Results	Circle 1	Circle 2	Circle 3	Circle 4
Step 1	97%	99%	99%	100%r
Step 2	93%	96%	95%	97%
Step 3	93%	97%	97%	96%
Step 4	80%	86%	90%	92%
Step 5	74%	77%	83%	88%*

45/45, Round 3 (ding!)

2006-01-06T10:21:00.000-08:00

I won my recent 45/45 Team game (link), albeit in ragged fashion. I was more accurate in my OTB games last year, and I think it's an indication that I have switched in not seeing OTB as well to not seeing computer screen boards as well. I certainly give my opponent credit for coming up with challenging ideas, some of which threw me off a bit.

5. h3 essentially allowed Black to equalize early. 5... c5 would have even been stronger.

I thought 19... e5 (threatening e4) was a great move, but unfortunately White's Knight to b6-e5 gains the d pawn.

I thought about 27...Rd4 but didn't play it fearing mate, but it really was stronger.

28...Here I totally was blind to the open 6th rank mate. I really think I would have seen this OTB as last year I adjusted towards playing long games that way. Another semi-horrible thing to note was that haste was a factor at this point, even with 20 + minutes available on my clock. Having this be a team game made for more pressure, which I really need to set aside. I also need to really follow my own darn advice of "give each position a fresh look".

-=-=-=-=-

TCT Results	Circle 1	Circle 2	Circle 3	Circle 4
Step 1	97%	99%	99%	100%r
Step 2	93%	96%	95%	97%
Step 3	93%	97%	97%	96%
Step 4	80%	86%	90%	92%
Step 5	74%	77%	83%	89%*

You make the call

2006-01-03T03:07:00.000-08:00

White to move: is Rfc1 strong?

hmmmmmm.........

If you said yes, don't feel bad because I did too! Lucky for me my opponent didn't see the interposing x-ray defense as in 1. Rfc1?? Nxg3 2. Rc8+ Re8!. This is exactly why I need to study tactics. Back to TCT...

-=-=-=-=-

I just finished the first game in the McDonald book and see why it's recommended. This is the second purely annotated games book I have read, and it would appear an excellent follow up to my first book which was Logical Chess, Move by Move. That was one of the first books I ever read on chess, which was several years ago. McDonald chose dynamic, tension filled games, and describes the plans and threats so that an intermediate player can readily understand. My games seem to contain shallow, half-semi-plans in comparison. I can see why so many people recommend going through Master games for improvement.

P.S. I decided to post more about the first annotated game in McDonald's book.

link

Ok. Here we go. At position I can see 26... Re7 27. Qa8+ Re8 28. Rd8 but then what?
[FEN "4rk2/2pR1prp/pq2b2N/1p6/8/2P2Q2/PP4PP/5R1K b - - 0 26"]

28...Rxg2 was the only thing I could come up with, awful though it appears. It turns out that the best line is 28...Bd7 29.Re1!, which was an eye opener. It would have been nice if he included that little extra bit as the text move is not stronger than this line.

-=-=-=-=-

TCT Results	Circle 1	Circle 2	Circle 3	Circle 4
Step 1	97%	99%	99%	100%r
Step 2	93%	96%	95%	97%
Step 3	93%	97%	97%	96%
Step 4	80%	86%	90%	92%
Step 5	74%	77%	83%	89%*

New Books

2006-01-01T22:25:00.000-08:00

I just went on a odd book buying spree. Wanting to get a book on the Cochrane gambit and something on Marshall, I ended up getting three books and a book clip/holder, only one of which was on my list - McDonald's The Art of Logical Thinking. Haha! I sure showed them(ch-ching...$)! The Ideas Behind the Chess Openings appears quite similar to Seirawan's opening book. It doesn't hurt to have another general opening reference, but ultimately it may not be all that helpful OTB. Lastly I got The Middlegame in Chess by Fine. This and the McDonald book will have to suffice as my middlegame manuals since they didn't have The Art of the Middlegame. Already I see the Fine book as a possible alternative for readers who find Nimzovich undigestible or have developed Silman-intolerance. Browsing through it, Fine's book looks to have plenty of nuts and bolts stuff, plus themes that are echoed later in Seirawan's and Silman's writing. It probably will take a very long time to get through the nearly 400 pages of it, though I suspect the mating attacks chapter might go faster than the rest of it.

Addendum: Silman's "Rules of Recognition" seems to be largely lifted out of The Middlegame in Chess, pg. 18.

-=-=-=-=-

Here is a humorous chess definitions link I found: :http://alaskachessleague.com/Pages/Chess%20Glossary.htm.

I think the author was just a wee bit frustrated when he wrote it :-).

-=-=-=-=-

TCT Results	Circle 1	Circle 2	Circle 3	Circle 4
Step 1	97%	99%	99%	100%r
Step 2	93%	96%	95%	97%
Step 3	93%	97%	97%	96%
Step 4	80%	86%	90%	92%
Step 5	74%	77%	83%	90%*

A long time ago...

2005-12-31T16:01:00.000-08:00

...in a galaxy not real far away, I made a mistakes list to use in post-mortem analysis. My post-mortems consist of me spending 30+ minutes going over the game alone and then with Chessmaster, jotting down the worst of it. I was spotting about a third of the mistakes and Chessmaster was filling in the rest. In doing this it was obvious that tactics were the biggest hurdle, and I pretty much stopped using this list and started on the circles.

The mistakes list was intended to see how someone's performance in standard games was progressing over time. One difficulty in using it is it does not track your opponent's level of play. Even if you are improving, playing someone who is way over your head will likely push you into more mistakes, and those games make the list look like you are slipping backwards.

I present this as freely usable for personal or educational purposes only. Email me if you want to publish this or any parts of this. It may prove useful to someone out there, especially under 1500 folks. Modify to suit your own needs.

-=-=-=-=-

Mistakes List

Mistake	Explanation
Haste	Acting like under time pressure when not
Time Pressure	Need to manage time better
Mouse Slip	OTB - Didn't write down the move first with plenty of time
Opening Error	Neglecting development breaking from principals
Questionable/Weak Move
Easy Positional Error	Weak center or squares inaccurate defense Knight on edge etc.
Medium Positional Error	When 2 or 3 factors needed to be considered
Difficult Positional Error	When 4+ factors needed to be considered
King Safety Error	Unforced loosening of King's defenders or bad King moves
Back and 7th Rank Problems	Both offense and defense
Lost Tempo	When other moves were better
Lost Initiative	When it could have been preserved
Bad Plan or Tunnel Vision	When you failed to fully examine what was called for
No Plan
After the Move Problem	Blocking your defenders, accidentally opening or closing lines, etc.
Forgot What I Saw Earlier	Could be anything, like abandoning defense of other pieces
Weak/Inferior Pawn Structure
Failed To Retreat	When there were other alternatives
Moved Into Mate	Calculating inaccuracies
Missed Mate
Stalemate Problems	Allowed perpetual check thoughtless promotion etc.
Bad Trade	When a trade of loses advantage
In Over Your Head	Getting into positions beyond your ability to play
Easy Endgame Blunder	When a won/drawn game becomes drawn/lost
Medium Endgame Blunder	When a won/drawn game becomes drawn/lost
Difficult Endgame Blunder	When a won/drawn game becomes drawn/lost
Easy Endgame Mistake	When only some advantage is lost
Medium Endgame Mistake	When only some advantage is lost
Difficult Endgame Mistake	When only some advantage is lost
Tactical Level of Error	Simple clear and forced tactics are as below
(Include Missed Mate)	Add 1-6 for unclear positions 1-4 for many variations 2-8 for combinations
0	Blunder of not immediately taking
1
2	Your opponent takes your hanging piece
3
4	You miss a pin fork skewer or unstoppable threat
5
6	You give your opponent a pin fork skewer or unstoppable threat
7
8	You miss a 2 move threat or tactic
9
10	You give your opponent a 2 move threat or tactic
11
12	You miss a 3 move threat or tactic
13
14	You give your opponent a 3 move threat or tactic
15
16	You miss a 4 move threat or tactic
17
18	You give your opponent a 4 move threat or tactic
19
20	You miss a 5 move threat or tactic
21
22+

-=-=-=-=-

Example game:

[Event "?"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "2004.11.05"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Chessmaster"]
[Black "kingofthespill"]
[Result "1-0"]
[PlyCount "57"]
[EventDate "2004.??.??"]

1. Nf3 d5 2. d4 Nf6 3. c4 e6 4. Bg5 Bb4+ 5. Nc3 O-O 6. e3 Nbd7 7. Bd3 Bxc3+ 8.
bxc3 b6 9. cxd5 exd5 10. O-O h6 11. Bh4 g5 12. Bg3 Re8 13. Qc2 Ne4 14. c4 Nxg3
15. hxg3 Nf6 16. cxd5 Bb7 17. e4 Qe7 18. Rfe1 Rac8 19. Ne5 c5 20. dxc6 Qb4 21.
Bc4 Rxe5 22. Rab1 Rxe4 23. Rxe4 Qxb1+ 24. Qxb1 Bxc6 25. Re7 Bd5 26. Qf5 Rxc4
27. Qxf6 Rc6 28. Re8+ Kh7 29. Rh8# 1-0 paste below game into this link:

Mistake	11/5/04, Black
Haste	26
Time Pressure
Mouse Slip
Opening Error
Questionable/Weak Move	7
Easy Positional Error
Medium Positional Error	17
Difficult Positional Error
King Safety Error	11
Back and 7th Rank Problems
Lost Tempo
Lost Initiative
Bad Plan or Tunnel Vision	16, 19, 20
No Plan
After the Move Problem	16
Forgot What I Saw Earlier
Weak/Inferior Pawn Structure
Failed To Retreat
Moved Into Mate
Missed Mate
Stalemate Problems
Bad Trade
In Over Your Head	22
Easy Endgame Blunder
Medium Endgame Blunder
Difficult Endgame Blunder
Easy Endgame Mistake
Medium Endgame Mistake
Difficult Endgame Mistake
Tactical Level of Error
(Include Missed Mate)
0	16
1
2
3	19
4
5
6
7
8
9
10	27
11
12
13	22
14
15
16
17
18
19
20	23
21
22+

2005+1

2005-12-24T03:04:00.000-08:00

I just lost my team 45/45 game. After a decent opening which I memorized through move 5, I went with a weakish Queenside castling and just wasn't finding good moves after that. My opponent's performance was rated as 93% agreement and 0 pawns worth of error according to Chessmaster, which essentially is Expert to Master strength.

I am getting back into TCT. No push towards finishing, just daily practice. I hope this next year brings more accurate combinations and brilliancies to me and all of my fellow Knight Errants.

-=-=-=-=-

Happy Holidays!

-=-=-=-=-

TCT Results	Circle 1	Circle 2	Circle 3	Circle 4
Step 1	97%	99%	99%	100%r
Step 2	93%	96%	95%	97%
Step 3	93%	97%	97%	96%
Step 4	80%	86%	90%	92%
Step 5	74%	77%	83%	92%*

Then What? II

2005-12-24T00:49:00.000-08:00

From here what would be best after 32 Nde5+ fxe5 33 Nxe5+ Kg8?

Let's face it, to me this is it, the then what that loses or wins games at crucial moments. I'm not talking about combinations, just simple checks, threats, and captures. The day after my last post I was still working on the above problem because of this unclear sub-variation. I'll tell you in advance that I didn't get it right. Mind you I worked through this problem about 9 months ago 7 times, and even reviewed it twice. Lesson learned: never grow old!

Back to the story. Starting from the the above question, I worked through a variety of Knight moves just to prove they were bad, although something in the back of my mind signaled "mate threat" on the right side of the board. All I could see after 32 Nde5+ fxe5 33 Nxe5+ Kg8 was Ng6, threatening the Rook when the White Queen hangs. I filed it away for later. I couldn't see much difference in the remaining obvious choices 34. Qxa5 or Rxb8. In my mind they were close, both eventually leaving White with a positional advantage and an extra pawn, and Black suffering with a difficult to promote a6 pawn and a backward e6 pawn. I did attempt a long, complete evaluation of both, posted below interspersed with Fritz corrections. I worked through the e6 pawn capture below, also. I went back and thought about adding the Knight to g6 idea, but I couldn't see it do anything good for the position, and therefore didn't change my opinion of either one.

I had a clue, though; 33... Kc8 wasn't chosen by a chess computer. Neither line was as bad as 33... Kf6, so I figured I did something wrong. After some frustration I plugged it into Fritz to find out why. Arrrrg. If you can see which of these choices for 34 is overwhelmingly better, you probably do have the potential to become a master. I just have difficulty realizing there was a line opened along the b1-h7 diagonal, a4-d1 diagonal, and that the King can be forced to move to a vulnerable square. Silly me.

I may be nitpicking, but I think Seirawan did this problem a disservice by leaving this out of his analysis in Winning Chess Tactics, not to mention he had marked this as intermediate as opposed to professional level difficulty. Bad GM!

-=-=-=-=-

Fritz's best in bold, all White +- winning lines, but only one clear best one for White. rn5r/2p2kp1/p1n1pp1p/q1PpN3/Q2P4/PR2PN2/5PPP/1R5K b - - 0 1

1. Nde5+ fxe5 2. Nxe5+ Kg8 3. Rxb8+

(3. Qxa5 Nxa5 4. Rxb8+ Rxb8 5. Rxb8+ Kh7 6.Rxh8+ Kxh8)

3... Rxb8 4. Rxb8+ Kh7?? {This is my idea. I was thinking the Rooks could x-ray protect each other. Strangely 4...Nxb8 Qxa5 +13.00 is marked as best. Urp.} 5. Qc2+ {this line is open !? *smack forehead*} 5...g6 6.Qxg6#

$1 (5. Rxh8+ Kxh8 6. Qxa5 Nxa5 7.Nf7+ Kg8 8. Nd8 e5 9. dxe5 Nc4 10. e6 Kf8 11. Nc6 Nxa3 12. Nb4 Ke7 13. Nxd5+Kxe6 14. Nxc7+ Kd7 15. Nxa6)

(5. Qxa5 Nxa5 6. Nd7

(6. Rxh8+ Kxh8 7. Nf7+ Kg8 8.Nd8 e5 9. dxe5 Nc4 10. e6 Kf8 11. Nc6 Nxa3)

6... Rxb8 7. Nxb8 Kg6 8. Nxa6 c6 9.Nb8 Kf5 10. Nd7 Nc4 11. a4 Ke4 12. Ne5 Nxe5 13. dxe5 d4 14. exd4 Kxd4 15. a5Kxc5 16. f4 g6 17. g4 Kb5 18. f5 gxf5 19. gxf5 exf5 20. e6) *

-=-=-=-=-

TCT is on vacation.

Reviewing all book circles.

Then What?

2005-12-21T14:56:00.000-08:00

Edit correction: this is move 32, not 35.
(32.) White to move.

Deep Thought vs Mephisto
21st North American Computer Chess Championship
New York, Nov 11-14, 1990

1 Nf3 d5 2 e3 Nf6 3 c4 e6 4 Be2 Nc6 5 d4 Bb4+ 6 Bd2 O-O 7
Bxb4 Nxb4 8 a3 Nc6 9 O-O Na5 10 c5 b6 11 b4 Nc6 12 Nc3 bxc5
13 bxc5 Qe7 14 Rb1 Bd7 15 Bb5 Rfb8 16 Qa4 Nd8 17 Bxd7 Nxd7
18 Qa5 Rc8 19 Nb5 a6 20 Nc3 Qf6 21 Rb3 Qg6 22 Rfb1 f6 23
R1b2 h6 24 Kh1 Qd3 25 Ne2 Qd1+ 26 Nfg1 Nc6 27 Qa4 Ndb8 28
Nf4 Kf7 29 Nd3 Rh8 30 Rb1 Qd2 31 Nf3 Qa5 32 Nde5+ fxe5 33
Nxe5+ Kf6 34 Qxa5 Nxa5 35 Rxb8 Rhxb8 36 Rxb8 Rxb8 37 Nd7+
Ke7 38 Nxb8 Nc4 39 Nxa6 Kd8 40 a4 Nb2 41 Kg1 Nxa4 42 Kf1 Kd7
43 f3 Nc3 44 Nb8+ Kc8 45 Nc6 Kd7 46 Ne5+ Ke7 47 Ke1 g5 48
Kd2 Nb5 49 Kc2 Kf6 50 Kb3 Na7 51 Kb4 h5 52 Ka5 Nc8 53 g4
hxg4 54 fxg4 Ne7 55 Ka6 Ng8 56 Kb7 Ke7 57 Kxc7 Nf6 58 c6
Ne8+ 59 Kc8 Kd6 60 Kb7 1-0

It's easy to see the Knight sacrifice/Knight forking the overworked Black Knight and Black King idea, but then what? It's usually one of the weaker variations that I will have difficulty calculating, and sometimes not seeing that a square is going to be clear like the f6 square here.

I bumped into this "then what" difficulty in reviewing my book circles. My habit seems to have been to first get a very accurate hunch about a combination being in a position, correctly find the first move, then screw it up somewhere later. This calculation difficulty is still a problem, and it's as if the circles have only chipped away at the edges of it. Part of this problem is software. TCT isn't all that strong in its determining whether you know every continuation or not, although it occasionally does play some weaker continuation moves that forces you down some of those paths.

I haven't thought about "then what" for quite awhile. It was a one of things that made me seriously study tactics. Back a couple of years ago, I could usually work my opponent ( i.e. beginner) into some sort of tactical position that I rarely played right. Nowadays I find my opponents are usually more accurate and give away less tactical opportunities. The over 1800 crowd seems to be much better at creating those situations, that's for sure. I need to get my positional knowledge beefed up after these cirles are done so I can deal with it better on both offense and defense.

P.S. I just had this happen again as White. Sloppy game...arg.

White to Move.

The pawn "sacrifice" e6+ seemed almost obvious, though later I found it was not the strongest. Unfortunately, I couldn't see the best moves after he (inaccurately) took it even with plenty of time.

11.e6+ Kxe6 12.Qg4+ f5 13.Qe2+ Kd7 14.Bxg5 Nf6 15.Bxf6?! exf6 16.Nd2

Fritz has this:

1. +- (5.00): 12.Qe2+ Kd7 13.Bg4+ Ke8 14.Be6 h5 15.Qb5+ c6 16.Qd3 Rh6 17.Bxb8 Qxb8 18.Bxg8

2. +- (3.41): 12.Qg4+ f5 13.Qe2+ Kd7 14.Be5 Nf6 15.Bf7 e6 16.Bxe6+ Kc6 17.Nc3 Ba8 18.Nxd5 Nxd5

1.Nf3 Nc6 2.g3 b6 3.Bg2 Bb7 4.d3 Nd4 5.e4 Nxf3+ 6.Bxf3 d5 7.e5 Rb8 8.d4 f6 9.Bf4 g510.Bh5+ Kd7 11.e6+ Kxe6 12.Qg4+ f5 13.Qe2+ Kd7 14.Bxg5 Nf6 15.Bxf6 exf6 16.Nd2 Bb417.O-O-O Bxd2+ 18.Rxd2 c6 19.Re1 Kc8 20.Qe6+ Qd7 21.Qxf6 Rd8 22.Re7 Qd6 23.Qxf5+Rd7 24.Rde2 Kc7 25.Qxh7 Bc8 26.Rxd7+ Bxd7 27.Bg4 Rd8 28.Re7 a5 29.Rxd7+ Rxd7 30.Qxd7+Qxd7 31.Bxd7 Kxd7 32.a4 Ke6 33.Kd2 Kf5 34.Ke3 Kg4 35.f3+ Kg5 36.h4+ Kh5 37.f4 Kg438.c3 c5 39.dxc5 bxc5 40.b3 Kf5 41.h5 Kf6 42.g4 Kg7 43.g5 Kf7 44.f5 Kg7 45.h6+ Kh746.Kf4 d4 47.cxd4 cxd4 48.Ke4 {Black resigns} 1-0

-=-=-=-=-

TCT is on vacation.

Reviewing all book circles.

More 5334 Talk

2005-12-16T18:18:00.000-08:00

I have been reviewing my old book circle material. I feel rusty, so it seems must a good time to review. I am backing off of trying to get to some specific completion point with TCT, too. It just was extra pressure I don't need.

-=-=-=-=-

When it comes to real chess, I am still pretty clueless. You know, the exclamation mark moves, like those you find in CT-Art. I sometimes refer to this as the other game of chess.

When I got into regular reading of 5334 before the TCT circles, I was aware of the clear demarcation between the doable natural mates and endgames verses the non-doable other game of chess composed problems and combinations. Urp. I clearly needed to improve.

I figured that I was weak in the middlegame, so why not attack the combination section? Unfortunately that section of the book equally abstract as the rest of it, with no text or even x capture indications. Simply visualizing most of the continuations was so hard I had no free brain cells to then understand it, that is unless it was one of those few "mate in 2" ones. Still, I wanted to get into sacrifices, which I found to be one of the most intriguing part of chess, so I started wading through it. I now think I have grossly underestimated how difficult it would be to learn to regularly create winning sacrifice threats.

Anyway, I was and still am convinced that if you never even look at these weird moves, your likely to lose to them OTB. I made a note of those combinations that were the easiest to understand, given plenty of time that is. If you find the combination section daunting in 5334, you might try these first.

Medium: 4793, 4809, 4812, 4831, 4851
All involve attacks on either the f2 or f7 pawn.

Harder: 4899, 4901, 4904, 4954, 4957
All involve attacks on either the g2 or g7 pawn.

They have a known thematic move to be played in the diagram, so calculating is actually simpler than in real life. Some are forced mate, others are simply getting a winning advantage. They all look like fairly weird moves but with work, sometimes alot of work, they make sense.

-=-=-=-=-

TCT Results	Circle 1	Circle 2	Circle 3	Circle 4
Step 1	97%	99%	99%	100%r
Step 2	93%	96%	95%	97%
Step 3	93%	97%	97%	96%
Step 4	80%	86%	90%	92%
Step 5	74%	77%	83%	??%

Congratulations Tempo

2005-12-14T19:39:00.000-08:00

I just happen to look on the CTS server and lo and behold, Tempo, you are the King of CTS. You may not consider yourself graduated, but this is an equivalent achievement to me and definitely worth celebrating.

-=-=-=-=-

I am happy to say that I have just finished Circle 4 of Step 4, and it's cool to be done with that one. The 92% seems high, especially considering how many positions I got stuck on.

I now study 40+ minutes daily with TCT. I am doing my best to just focus on the problem in front of me and forget about finishing any particular circle. A part of me certainly does want to be done. Based on other people's experience, that quality of the circles wearing on me seems like par for the course.

-=-=-=-=-

TCT Results	Circle 1	Circle 2	Circle 3	Circle 4
Step 1	97%	99%	99%	100%r
Step 2	93%	96%	95%	97%
Step 3	93%	97%	97%	96%
Step 4	80%	86%	90%	92%
Step 5	74%	77%	83%	??%

Stupidity Repellent

2005-12-07T21:33:00.000-08:00

Just spray it on and it keeps you blunder free! Never fall for another trap again! Play more actively in no time!

Wouldn't that be great?! You could charge a pretty penny for it, too. To some degree, that's what I hope to get from all this chess study. As of yet, I have not found any appropriate repellent in liquid or tablet form, so I suppose the circles will have to do.

-=-=-=-

I think that many good points about CTS have been made on J'adoube's latest post, both pro and con.

I have used CTS more since my last post, maybe 10-15 problems several days a week. I certainly don't think I have used it enough to draw any new conclusions, but I agree with Tempo that the major weakness is lack of integrated mechanism for problem repetition. It obviously isn't a panacea, I agree with J'adoube's points on the importance of good opening and middlegame play. Nonetheless, I like CTS for what it is, and use it to find where my tactical blind spots are.

I want to add that I do not like to guess using CTS. I attempt to really see the essential idea before playing any move. I could care less about the timer, but if my percentage falls below 80 percent, that's the signal to me that I am guessing. If my rating drops on the server, I take it to mean that I am tired. No big deal.

One cool CTS interface idea I thought of was a vision mode - i.e. rather than seeing your opponent's move they just put in the text move.

-=-=-=-=-

TCT Results	Circle 1	Circle 2	Circle 3	Circle 4
Step 1	97%	99%	99%	100%r
Step 2	93%	96%	95%	97%
Step 3	93%	97%	97%	96%
Step 4	80%	86%	90%	92%*
Step 5	74%	77%	83%	??%

Black Knights

2005-12-03T17:40:00.000-08:00

I have joined the ranks of the Black Knights for the upcoming ICC 45/45 team tournament. I hope we fare better than the Black Knight in the "Holy Grail".

Although I am doing ok with the problems, I feel myself lagging. I am really getting to the point of just wanting to be done with these circles. I think I will at least aim for using some holiday time to eliminate Step 2 and perhaps even Step 3 once and for all.

-=-=-=-=-

Here's a pin-breaking tactic that came up recently. White to move.

-=-=-=-=-

TCT Results	Circle 1	Circle 2	Circle 3	Circle 4
Step 1	97%	99%	99%	100%r
Step 2	93%	96%	95%	97%
Step 3	93%	97%	97%	96%
Step 4	80%	86%	90%	91%*
Step 5	74%	77%	83%	??%

Forming ICC 45/45 Team

2005-11-30T23:02:00.000-08:00

I am putting together a U1600 45/45 on the team. I don't think there is enough of us active on the ICC to make a full team, so I am open to anyone who can play. To play you have to have played a number of standard games and sign up on http://www.teamchess.org/ as interested in playing this round.

Leave me a message if your interested.

-=-=-=-=-

TCT Results	Circle 1	Circle 2	Circle 3	Circle 4
Step 1	97%	99%	99%	100%r
Step 2	93%	96%	95%	97%
Step 3	93%	97%	97%	96%
Step 4	80%	86%	90%	91%*
Step 5	74%	77%	83%	??%

Slow Down

2005-11-27T12:03:00.000-08:00

I'm running into some difficulties on Step 4. Ostensibly I am supposed to be spending up to 4 minutes per problem (cough, cough), but I just seem to rush ahead like it's CTS. I need to remember that they love to throw in ringers, which really discourages lazy calculation.

I am thinking in advance that I will need to break up the 1 minute/30sec circles for these 2000 + problems. I probably will resort to mini-circles since they have worked fine in the past.

-=-=-=-=-

J'adoube "...tactics play a much smaller role now than I previously thought."

MDLM graduate J'adoude has recently posted some is reflections on chess improvement. I wonder about this, and I am curious as to what other Knights think. I think more than any other factor poor tactical assessment loses chess games. That's pretty simple, quite accurate for me certainly, and fundamentally seems to be the reason De La Maza changed his chess study.

Before starting this chess training I imagined I would end up with combination(s) in most of my games, either played by me or my opponent. I guess that was a pipe dream, as I rarely see genuine combinations. I have noticed that whenever there is a combination in an annotated game, there usually is some earlier mistake that sets it up, almost like you need collusion to have it all work out.

On the other hand, it seems like simpler threats occur on all the time, and seem to play a huge role for anyone who ignores them.

-=-=-=-=-

Here's something that I missed in a recent blitz game:

Black to Move

-=-=-=-=-

I just looked at one of the World Cup Games, and it looks like amateur vs. professional. I like the straightforward tactics that occur, much like in TCT problems.

-=-=-=-=-

TCT Results	Circle 1	Circle 2	Circle 3	Circle 4
Step 1	97%	99%	99%	100%r
Step 2	93%	96%	95%	97%
Step 3	93%	97%	97%	96%
Step 4	80%	86%	90%	90%*
Step 5	74%	77%	83%	??%

Circle 4, Step 3 Complete

2005-11-26T22:20:00.000-08:00

Down a percentage point but happy to complete it nonetheless. Setting the time limit to 2 minutes really made it difficult, but I hope to get to 99% + by circle 6.

Sancho's opening post has encouraged me to learn a little about the Benko Gambit. After several days I have gotten a general sense of the most common ideas, focusing mainly on when the gambit is accepted and noting some rudimentary responses if White declines. I have no idea how to turn the Queenside pressure into equality in the middlegame/endgame with this puppy, but it seems like a fun challenge.

My goal is to eventually know 2 or 3 defenses as Black in the Queen's pawn opening. I like the Black side of the Queen's Gambit Declined and Grünfeld. There is plenty of reason to look at others, but so far none of the others have stuck with me. I have seen Queen's Gambit Accepted players do well with the Black pieces, either leaving White with the typical isolated Queen pawn or exchanging Queens early and ruining White's castling. As far as simplicity is concerned, that might be the best.

-=-=-=-=-

TCT Results	Circle 1	Circle 2	Circle 3	Circle 4
Step 1	97%	99%	99%	100%r
Step 2	93%	96%	95%	97%
Step 3	93%	97%	97%	96%
Step 4	80%	86%	90%	??%
Step 5	74%	77%	83%	??%