Colorado Springs Chess News

The Knights Are Better Here!

Newsletters

Game Of The Year X

Posted by Paul Anderson on August 11, 2013 at 10:55 PM

End Of The Season

Monday, August 12, 2013

 

Well, another chess season has come to a close for me. It is time for me to move on to managing the website for my other hobby (http://spamfootball.webs.com/), but I will return after the football season ends. Before I go, I wanted to clean up some loose ends.


Of course, you can still send in news items or articles during the off-season, and I will email them along to the subscribers. Any games I receive will be stored at the Colorado Springs Chess News’ Yahoo! group (http://games.groups.yahoo.com/group/cs_chess/). You can also join the group to keep receiving chess games all year round.


So, before I finish typing my chess thoughts for another year, I want to thank all the people who sent in games and articles, all the people who took the time to tell me something nice about the newsletter, and all the people who take the time to read this.

 

Game Of The Year

 

Wow!  It has been 10 years of the Colorado Springs Chess Newsletter.  I didn't notice until the Game Of The Year, which is now the tenth one.  Usually at this time, I look over the past year's statistics to see if it was a good or bad year for me.  With completing my 10th year, one would think it was good, but I don't always feel that way.


Looking over the statistics helps me get past the bad feelings that linger from my losses (and I had a bunch of them).  They bring me back into balance and force me to look at what I did right and what I did wrong.  This year, they gave me mostly good news:


  • Same number of upsets as last year (2)
  • 81.88% overall winning percentage (record: 2012 - 78.48%)
  • 2116 peak CLUB rating (record: 2012 - 2067)
  • 89.02% CLUB winning percentage (record: 2011 - 83.33%)
  • 2058 peak USCF rating (record: 2012 - 2029)
  • 48.5 most USCF-rated wins (record: 2012 - 46.0)
  • 4.5 fewest CLUB-rated losses (record: 2011 - 7.5)
  • 9 prizes won (record: 2001 - 12)


In addition to the statistics, I also earned my 1st invitation to the Colorado Closed Challenger and tied for 1st place, just missing out on tie breaks for an automatic invitation to the 2014 Colorado Closed.  It was my best tournament ever, and I selected my best game from the event as the Game Of The Year, which I wrote about for the Colorado Chess Informant earlier this year.

  

2013 Colorado Chess Informant Articles: 

 

 

When I started playing tournament chess, I read a pamphlet from GM Arthur Bisguier about how to improve at chess.  Since I had been crushed by him in a simul, I was more than willing to take his advice, even though I knew little about what a GM was.  He had a list of 10 principles to keep in mind when playing.  I thought that was a little too complicated for me to remember.

 

So, I condensed those ideas into what I considered the 3 strategies of chess.  I also wanted something easy to remember so I decided to use the trick of alliteration to make them even more unforgettable.   I called them the 3 Ms of chess:

 

  1. Mate
  2. Material
  3. Mobility

 

The idea was that every chess move was an attempt to accomplish one of these three strategies and provided an ordered thought process in choosing a move.

 

The 1st priority chess strategy (Mate) was to protect your King from checkmate.  Once you decide your King is not in harm, you can plan to get your opponents King.  However, in most chess positions checkmate is a long way off.  So, now what do you do?

 

The 2nd priority chess strategy (Material) was to gain a more powerful army than your opponent.  This idea involved not only a simple piece count, but also the understanding that each piece has a different value.  Learning tactics was the key tool to implementing this strategy.  However, in most chess positions you cannot capture a more valuable piece.  So, now what do you do?

 

The 3rd priority chess strategy (Mobility) was to gain more territory for your army and make it faster than your opponent.  This strategy was far harder to understand than the others as it involved both the ideas of space and time.  Understanding how to maximize the movement of different pieces was not easy, but it was all there was left.  If I wasn’t moving a piece to Mate my opponent’s King or capture Material, then the move should have been improving its Mobility.

 

I soon began to notice that the different Material value of the pieces was directly related to their level of Mobility.  The fastest piece, the Queen, was worth far more than the slowest, the Pawn.  However, there was no Mobility Value Chart that told me how to maximize each piece.

 

Of course, many games and the lessons from losses gave me the feeling that the different pieces liked different things in regards to Mobility.  So, I created my own chart:

 

Mobility Preferences Of The Pieces:

 

  • King likes Endgames
  • Pawns like being Passed
  • Rooks like Open Files
  • Bishops like Open Diagonals
  • Knights like Outposts
  • Queens dislike Openings

 

As I began to understand these preferences, I realized that a lot of creating Mobility is related to the Pawn structure.  A Pawn is Passed when it has no opposing Pawns in its path and the adjacent files. Similarly, a Knight has an outpost when it is supported by a Pawn and has no opposing Pawns in the adjacent files which can attack it.  Open Files and Open Diagonals are a line of squares that contain no Pawns.

 

The King and Queen were a little different, as their very high Material values discouraged their Mobility in the Opening.  However, the Queen becomes useful in the Middle Game as it can activate like a Rook or Bishop.  The King almost always waits until the Endgame.

 

I also noticed that the different phases of the game favor different pieces.  The Middle Game is the time to activate the more mobile pieces (Rooks & Bishops).  While the Endgame is the time to activate the less mobile pieces (King & Pawns).

 

Of course, I realized that I could also move a piece to reduce my opponent’s Mobility too.

 

"Though most people love to look at the games of the great attacking masters, some of the most successful players in history have been the quiet positional players. They slowly grind you down by taking away your space, tying up your pieces, and leaving you with virtually nothing to do!"

(Yasser Seirawan)


Here is an example:

 

Hartsook,David (2077) -Anderson,Paul (1999) [B06]

Colorado Closed Challenger Colorado Springs (4.3), 21.04.2013

 

1.e4 c6 2.d4 g6 3.Nc3 Bg7 4.Bc4 d6 5.Be3 Nd7 6.Qd2 b5 7.Bb3 Bb7 8.f3 a5 9.a4 b4 10.Nd1 Ba6 11.Ne2 c5 12.dxc5 Nxc5 13.Bd5 Rc8 14.Nd4 Qb6 15.Nb3 e6 16.Nxc5 dxc5 17.Ba2 Qc6 18.Bb1 Nf6 19.c3 0–0 20.Kf2 b3 21.Re1 Rfd8 22.Qc1 Nd7 23.Bg5 f6 24.Bh6 Ne5 25.Bxg7 Kxg7 26.Kg1 c4

 

“I noticed a long time ago that Josh Bloomer has an uncanny knack for keeping his opponent's pieces restricted.  Magnus Carlsen described that as his style on Charlie Rose.  There are many terms for keeping your opponent's pieces on the back rank.”

(Brian Wall)

 



  • “The Sheep Pen” – LM Brian Wall
  • “The Couch” – NM Josh Bloomer
  • “The Police Lineup” – Paul Anderson

 

“Paul shackled all of David's pieces to the back rank- they looked like seated prisoners in a police transport van.

 

Paul asked me for advice for the 2013 Colorado Adult Challenger tournament.

 

‘Look at all their games and try not to be terrified when you play them,’ - Brian to Paul.

 

Tim Brennan gave Paul hundreds of database games to look at.

 

I didn't know if my advice would help, maybe Paul would get slaughtered tactically every game like his game against Chris Peterson.  Paul ended up surprising everyone by tying for first.” (Brian Wall)

 

27.Qe3 Rd7 28.Nf2 Rcd8 29.f4 Nf7 30.h4 e5 31.h5 Qd6 32.Re2 exf4 33.Qh3 Qe5 34.hxg6 hxg6 35.Ng4 Qc5+ 0–1

 

Game Of The Year X

http://www.chessvideos.tv/chess-game-replayer.php?id=83049

 

[Event "Colorado Closed Challenger"]

[Site "http://cschess.webs.com/"]

[Date "2013.04.21"]

[Round "4.3"]

[White "Hartsook, David"]

[Black "Anderson, Paul"]

[Result "0-1"]

[ECO "B06"]

[WhiteElo "2077"]

[BlackElo "1999"]

[PlyCount "70"]

[EventDate "2013.04.19"]

[TimeControl "5400+30"]

 

1. e4 c6 2. d4 g6 3. Nc3 Bg7 4. Bc4 d6 5. Be3 Nd7

6. Qd2 b5 7. Bb3 Bb7 8. f3 a5 9. a4 b4 10. Nd1 Ba6 11. Ne2 c5 12. dxc5 Nxc5 13.

Bd5 Rc8 14. Nd4 Qb6 15. Nb3 e6 16. Nxc5 dxc5 17. Ba2 Qc6 18. Bb1 Nf6 19. c3 O-O

20. Kf2 b3 21. Re1 Rfd8 22. Qc1 Nd7 23. Bg5 f6 24. Bh6 Ne5 25. Bxg7 Kxg7 26.

Kg1 c4 27. Qe3 Rd7 28. Nf2 Rcd8 29. f4 Nf7 30. h4 e5 31. h5 Qd6 32. Re2 exf4

33. Qh3 Qe5 34. hxg6 hxg6 35. Ng4 Qc5+ 0-1

 

This Week In Chess

 

On August 6th, the Colorado Springs Chess Club held a Speed event (2RR, G3d2).  Eight players joined this unrated tournament.

 

Daniel Herman destroyed the field only losing one game to claim the 1st place tour points.

 

Here are the results:

     

Score, Player

   

13.0 Daniel Herman

10.0 Paul Anderson

10.0 Alex Torres

9.0 Mark McGough

8.0 Mike Madsen

4.0 Kevin Kaaoush

2.0 Dean Brown

0.0 Shirley Herman

    

Tuesday Night Chess Tour Cumulative and 3rd Quarter Standings

   

Current Standings (rank, name, total, quarter): 

 

MAX POSSIBLE    104.00    24.00

1    Paul Anderson    76.00    15.50

2    Mark McGough    45.00    11.75

3    Isaac Martinez    42.00    4.50

4    Mike Madsen    27.50    3.00

5    Alex Torres    24.75    9.75

6    Daniel Herman    23.00    4.00

7    Dean Brown    17.75    3.25

8    Jeff Fox    17.25    2.50

9    Joe Pahk    17.00    4.00

10    Shirley Herman    15.50    1.00

11    Koji DelConte    14.75    1.25

12    Gunnar Andersen    14.50    7.50

13    Tim Brennan    14.00    2.00

14    Kevin Kaaoush    13.25    6.25

15    Peter Grigg    12.00    0.00

16    Richard Buchanan    11.75    2.00

17    Josh Divine    10.75    6.50

18    Josh Bloomer    10.50    0.00

19    Eugin Pahk    9.50    2.50

20    Tom Richardson    9.00    2.00

21    Alex Freeman    8.50    0.00

22    Sara Herman    7.00    0.00

23    Randy Canton    6.00    0.00

24    Brian Rountree    6.00    0.00

25    Scott Williams    4.00    0.00

26    Kathy Schneider    4.00    0.00

27    Nick Curott    4.00    4.00

28    Peter Barlay    3.50    0.00

29    Joe Polanco    3.00    0.00

30    Anthea Carson    2.00    0.00

31    Mike Wanek    2.00    0.00

32    James Powers    2.00    0.00

33    Wes Smith    2.00    0.00

34    William Wilken    2.00    0.00

35    Imre Barlay    2.00    0.00

36    Laurence Wutt    2.00    2.00

37    Rebecca Herman    1.50    0.00

38    Mike Toth    1.00    0.00

39    Buddy Diamond    1.00    0.00

40    Curits Holsinger    1.00    0.00

41    Evan Baron    1.00    0.00

42    Teppei Monjiyama    1.00    0.00

43    Nicholas Wyle    1.00    0.00

44    Katie Wise    1.00    0.00

45    Joseph Stafford    1.00    1.00

46    Istvan Hornyak    1.00    1.00


Pikes Peak Open Standings

By Buck Buchanan

 

4.5    Brian Wall

4.0    Jackson Chen

4.0    Kevin Seidler

4.0    Tim Brennan

4.0    Mark Schlagenhauf

3.5    Chris Peterson

3.5    Timothy Sage

3.5    Karl Irons

3.5    Mark Krowczyk

3.5    DuWayne Langseth

3.5    Ron Rossi

3.0    Joshua Samuel

3.0    Katie Wise

3.0    Jeff Baffo

3.0    Brady Barkemeyer

3.0    Victor Huang

3.0    Eric Barkemeyer

3.0    Andrew Lin

3.0    Isaac Martinez

3.0    Spencer Shook

2.5    Rhett Langseth

2.5    Justin Alter

2.5    Brian Rountree

2.5    Alex Freeman

2.5    John Krue

2.5    Lennon Gashwazra

2.5    Joe Pahk

2.0    Andy Wu

2.0    Daniel Herman

2.0    Cory Foster

2.0    Mihaly Toth

2.0    Ken MacRae

2.0    Rebecca Herman

2.0    Mike Madsen

2.0    Eugin Pahk

1.5    Alex Cacas

1.5    Kathy Schneider

1.5    Dean Brown

1.5    Victor Creazzi

1.5    Tara Martinez

1.0    Anthea Carson

1.0    Sara Herman

1.0    Tom Richardson

1.0    Shirley Herman

0.5    Trevor Sotosanti

0.5    Dustin Hoppe

Categories: 2013, Game Of The Year

Post a Comment

Oops!

Oops, you forgot something.

Oops!

The words you entered did not match the given text. Please try again.

You must be a member to comment on this page. Sign In or Register

0 Comments