Chess Bits The Journal of the International E-mail Chess Club September 2001 IECC Websitehttp//www.geocities.com/Colosseum/Midfield/1264 In This Issue Section From the Editor’s Desk by Steve Ryan 1 Welcome to New Members by De Leeuw/Fedorko 1 Mental Domination by NM Dan Heisman 1 Miscellaneous Topics by Steve Ryan 1 Chess Maxims & Aphorisms by Steve Ryan 2 Chess Trivia by Steve Ryan 2 Good CC Etiquette by Franklin Campbell 2 Book Review by Alexander Aguiar 2 Games & Theory - Section 3. Contributors for this issue Steve Ryan, John Cashon, Michael Dunn, Roger Miller, Juan Solare, Stephane Vaillancourt, Nigel Short, Jan Timman. From the Editor’s Desk by Steve Ryan We have all heard tales of the infamous Bobby Fischer, but few of us have had up close and personal encounters with him. Not so for IECC Academy instructor John Cashon. As well as having the privilege of acting as my instructor in AM 91, John has had that very thing happen to him. Fischer, in fact, got a little too "up close". Read all about it in our article "An IECC Academy Session" by John and myself. John also maintains he "hasn’t the least idea" where Fischer has gone (and cares less). Maybe the Rumor and Gossip Section has some ideas. As always, I welcome your articles, game scores, humor, anecdotes and whatever chess-related items you care to send. I could really use someone to do regular web page reviews, as I used to do myself for Tina (The Terrible) Stanton. Literally hundreds of chess sites (if not thousands) exist out there in cyberspace. Many have unique ideas and novel approaches to the study and play of chess, but I personally do not have the time to review them. Think it over. Finally, I have often wondered if some of my opponents over the years didn’t behave ever so slightly like Krazinsky, the protagonist in Dan Heisman’s short story "Mental Domination". I don’t mean any of my current opponents of course, and, probably, not anyone in the IECC. -------------------- Welcome to New Members by Dirk de Leeuw & Andrew Fedorko The IECC welcomes the following 234 new members who have joined over the period 2001 April 16 - August 15 Pekka Aalto, Richard Acuna, Scott Adams, Rishi Agrawal, Rodrigo Albornoz, Ory Allan, Giancarlo Amadio, Bill Andersen, Jeffery Andersen, Adrian Azamfirei, Althea Barnes, Iain Barson, Slavko Bauk, Bill Belcher, Ian Belcher, Arvin Bell, Eric Benzakin, Adam Berente, David Bland, Christina Blavaki, Roman Bobrov, Bhavani Bonigala, Didier Bonneville-Roussy, Carlo Bottoni, Peter Brindle, Ralf Bruening, Todd Bryant Nick Burrows, Joe Butterworth, Keith Campbell, Jose Capco, Charles Carothers, Lorenzo Castellano, Piero Cattaneo Jose Cazeri Jr., Marius Ceteras, Zbigniew Cholojazyk, Victar Chuprys, Jasiu Cieniawka, Adam Cobb, Michel Conner, GM Jose Copie, Warner Cornelis, Nigel Cottle, Pedro Cuadra, Allan Davidson, Henk de Jongh, Juan de los Reyes, Mathias De Wachter Pauwel Deblauwe, Wick Deer, Marcelino Delgado, Lionel Dessirieix, Matheus Diego, Jonathan Dube, Franck Dussetier, Barbara Dyke, Malcolm Eden, Michel Fagherazzi, George Ferguson, Andrey Filatov, Dan Flory, Stephane Fombonne, Andrea Forgione, Alex Frew, Jose Gabaldon, James Gallagher, Lucio Garabaldi, Nikesh Garera, Nicolas Giurgiu, Mark Gleeson, Michael Goff, Luciano Gomes, Zack Gonzales, Ivars Greivulis, Peter Griffin, Yuri Grinshpun, Olivier Haet, Paul Haigh, George Hay, Jim Healey, Carl Heineman, Torsten Hellman, Pancrazio Hicks Jr., Vern Hoffman, Richard Hollenbeck, Stephen Horn, Wolfgang Hort, Justin Horton, Adrian Houghton, Dennis Janson, Damjan Japelj, Adam Jaskulski, Bill Jenner, Jeff Jensen, Marc Johnson, Davey Jones, Phil Jordan, Pete Jowett, Frank Kai, Didier Kalmus, Panayotis Karakostas, Tijs Keijzer, Don Kendall, Michael Kern, Bernd Klawitter, Franciszek Knapczyk, Johan Kneyber, Bartek Kobierzynski, Laszlo Kovari, Boleslaw Kowalski, Thomas Krysiak, Kevin Kukla, Bartosz Kyciak, Ake Lado, Tomas Laegreid, Olivier Lafleur, Olivier Laliga, Victor Laramore, Alexandre Le Corre, Christian Lepagnol, Francis Letarte-Lavoie, Hans Li Henry, Ciaran Loque, Matteo Lorenzi, Jerome Louvel, Clay Lowe, Eti Lui, Gozde Lup, Gary Lyles, Thom Mac, Oleg Maiorov, Ron Manis, Pierandrea Marati, Ken Marks, Hector Martin, Jon Martin, Rick Martin, Luis Martinez, JavierMasera, Rolandas Matutis, Stuart Mayes, Mark McMillan, Olavo Melo, Rob Merz, Henri Miller, Marc Moreau, Stephen Morgan, Scott Mosier, Lazaro Munoz, Charlie Myers, Chuck Noeth, Hans Noorda, Arkadiy Onikul, Luis Otero, Larry Owens, Remi Pach, Esteran Palonirov, Orlan Pascual, Jaroslav Pech, Steve Peters, Axel Pimentel, Hans Pleijsier, Glimmung Plowman, Mat Poade, Ronald Pohoryles, Ali Polatel, Roberto Pontes, Scott Pruit, Kamil Przybyla, Paul Redman, Ken Robbins, Bradley Roberts, Rupert Roderick, Esteban Rodriguez, Arnaud Rohmer, David Rowe, Kirk Sadler, Rogelio Sanchez, Francisco Santiago-Cortez, Paul Scardinale, Reid Schaefer, Curtis Scheschuk, Nikolaj Selijanchin, Gene Sensabaugh, Alexander Shalamanov, Mikhail Shchebenyuk, Jerzy Skonieczny, James Smallwood, Martin Smith, Richard Smith, Eric Snagard, Kevin Sookochef, Delano Stedman, Ken Stevens, Jefferson Stoddard, Toni Stojmanovski, Nick Storrs, Jerzy Suchodolski, Imre Szokol, Koi Tamas, Chris Tan, Phillip Tan, Didier Tartarin, Alberto Tavani, Pritpal Thethi, Manfred Theussl, Michael Thomas, Kevin Thorn, Ben Thun, Leandro Torre, Sergey Turko, Viktor van de Wetering, Issac Van Name, Annelies Vanquathem, Robert Vercammen, José Villa, Kartik Viswanathan, David Wagle, Kennard Warrick, Andrew Webb, Tom Weissbein, Spencer Westwood, Jay White, Dave Wilkinson, Joel Williams, Doug Wisse, Greg Wojohn, Chris Wolfe, Alice Wong, Pawel Zaskalski, Ian Zimmerman. May each of you establish and enjoy a congenial relationship with all members of the IECC. May all of you strive to complete your games in time and without defaults. May you also always accord to, and receive from, your opponents the highest degree of courtesy, consideration and good fellowship. ---------------------- Mental Domination! By NM Dan Heisman His handlers could not hold him back "You will see that I will beat all of them at once!" Krazinsky burst onto the playing floor to find the next 19 highest rated players in the world, waiting for his simultaneous exhibition. The top-rated computer was here, too, lifting the total to an even 20 opponents. The deals, money, and other favors that went into arranging the participation of all provided enough back-door drama for a best seller, but that didn't matter now. The result did. For Krazinsky the sponsor had put up $5,000,000, with an incentive of $1,000,000 for twenty wins. No one doubted that "K" was a unique player in the history of chess. His flamboyance matched his chess prowess. Fischer had claimed never to have made a mistake in analysis; with Krazinsky they were always trying to prove that he had made one over-the- board. K did not ask for all Whites. Colors were determined by a random number generator. The top players would not play K against himself on any two boards of opposite colors - what would that prove, for players of that level? Krazinsky shook hands with the Prime Minister and addressed the crowd the live ones, the TV audience, and the Internet. He said all his usual crazy things about self, dominance, and chess, but many of those watching ate it up anyway. Signs in the audience read "White-'em-out Kraz!" "Drive 'em Krazy!" and "20-0 or Bust!" The playing floor was part of a large convention hall, which was replete with chess drapings and a hundred and fifty vendors selling everything from "K Kandy" to "Chess-ready computers." The Internet commentators were ready to transmit every move instantly to all corners of the globe. The playing area itself was a slightly raised platform with 20 beautiful inlaid tables and special chairs of all sizes and shapes. Scalpers had sold the closest seats for ten times their list price - one selling on E-Bay for fifty times. K expected to win all twenty games, but any score over 10 wins and 10 draws would be sensational, considering the opposition. Fischer had won 20 games in a row (19 if you don't count a forfeit) against the best players in the world, but he hadn't been playing them all at the same time! If there was anything surer than K's dominance, it was his feeling of invincibility. After the head of the chess federation made a short and forgettable speech, he introduced a beautiful young woman, who proceeded to play a little fanfare on her flute. That signaled the start - and off went K. At first he literally ran down the line of boards, twirling pieces left and right like they were firecrackers about to go off. No crazy openings - just the usual state-of-the-art stuff that K had made so popular. The chess public was happy with this everyone wanted to play the openings that were championed by the world's best player. As each opening would reach the point of theoretical interest, the game would slow down. Either K or, more likely, the opponent, would find himself facing a new move. This signaled some real thought about the resultant new position "Is that novelty good, or just new? "What to do?" The advantage would lie with the player who had made the new move, for he had probably used computers for weeks to study the most likely replies. Sometimes K had the time advantage, for his opponent would have to move upon his arrival at the board, while he could wait as long as he wanted to reply. But of course the advantage was usually the other way around, as all 19 other opponents could think while K was thinking at each table. Three games ended relatively quickly, within the first ninety minutes. In two, K had found new ways for Black to force a draw from positions thought previously to be good for White, once by a stunning perpetual and the other through a cute type of blockade. In the third of these quick games K's novelty provided too much for the 17th ranked player, who succumbed quickly to a brilliant attack. In almost all of the remaining games K had either an even position or an advantage. The World's #2, who really hadn't been pursuing K for a match, looked especially sullen as he wondered whether he could hold his passive position. World #8 was looking at the bad side of a brilliancy, and wishing he could find a line which would get it to 26 moves, thus avoiding a "miniature." The world's top woman player, #11, had gotten a satisfactory opening, but a minor slip, unnoticeable to all but the all-time greats, had left her with only nebulous drawing chances. K was putting the squeeze on the computer, having avoided the sharpest lines; it was no match for his long-term positional pressure. At five hours Krazinsky took a break for a short meal and a trip to the restroom. The score at that point was +7 -0 = 3, with exactly half of the boards reset to the initial position to indicate the game's completion. All of the games mentioned above had been won by K except for the one against the computer. In that game the squeeze had worked, and the multi-gigahertz calculator was facing a very long endgame defense which looked hopeless. Before stepping back up onto the playing platform to continue, K grabbed the microphone. "I am sorry I cannot win them all, but that's the way chess is sometimes. Stick with me for another hour or two and see if anyone else can draw!" Two did. In one, K ended up with a Rook and two pawns vs. a Rook and one, but all the pawns were on the same side, and even K knew that a win was not possible (not that he didn't try for a while, to the annoyance of his opponent). The other draw was more interesting. In a position where K had two Bishops and three pawns against a Queen and two pawns, he managed to create an interested blockade where his opponent clearly could not make progress. The eight others fell. Five had been foregone conclusions since the middlegame. The World #3 looked for a long time like he might draw, but got into time trouble as K began to circle faster and faster, and finally blundered in a position where the computers later found a nifty drawing maneuver. World #6 took a sharp middlegame down to where there were only two games left, but there K actually got to take more time than he (as in the other game K was moving fast) and that was the telling factor. The final game left was a long endgame which looked winning for K, but required lots of special technique. K had it in spades. 15 wins and 5 draws against the best other 20 players in the world - well, at least the other 19, since there were lots of computers that might claim to be in the Top 20. Only K and his top supporters were disappointed - the "Over/Under" betting had been 15.5 points, and his 17.5 had beaten that easily. They would never prove that any of his positions had been positively lost. K stepped out of the playing area, gladly shaking hands with anyone within reach. He headed for the batch of microphones which had been set up for the post-event press conference. The media included The Wall Street Journal, The London Times, ESPN, CNN, and the Chess Channel. "I am the greatest!" thundered K. He looked somewhat haggard, but more than made up for it in buoyancy. No doubt he had been watching old tapes of Muhammed Ali and was hoping for similar marketing success. "Steinitz challenged God to a match with pawn and move and I could have given Steinitz the same! That makes me more than perfect. You can talk about your Capablancas, Fischers, and Kasparovs, but the name Krazinsky will live on long after everyone has forgotten about chess itself!" Reflecting his passion, the local fans exploded in applause and cheers "K!... K!...Yeah!...K!" Krazinsky in turn looked less haggard, drawing energy from the crowd to pump his fists while the cameras swiveled around to catch him mugging with some of the prettiest of the locals. He walked back to the mikes and glowed "No one can touch me...chess is life itself...superiority of the intellect...triumph of the mind..." Krazinsky ravings were nothing new, and everyone was happy to let him continue for a while. Then, finally, the media had theirs clips and sound bites and the crowd had heard enough and they began to leave, first slowly and then in bigger waves. The mass exodus finally caught Krazinsky's eye and, without an audience to feed him, he slowly wound down. Soon after, much more quietly, the men came, helped Krazinsky back into his white jacket, and led him back toward his room until next time. Copyright © September 2001 by Dan Heisman Printed in Chess Bits with permission of the author. ---------------- Miscellaneous Topics by Steve Ryan - The IECC discussion list flares up every so often with a hot topic, though things have cooled off of late. One subject (among many) that caused a bit of a kerfuffle concerned introducing new tournaments to the IECC calendar of events. I’m sure the Board would seriously consider the introduction of any type of new tournament, at least on a trial basis, ESPECIALLY if the volunteers to run it came forth as well. I, personally, would like to see an "Odds" section. In the "Odds" section, players with a high rating could engage lower rated players at odds of pawn, pawn and move, or whatever they decide on. At odds of pawn, a win by the lower rated player would earn more rating points for him/her than a win at odds of Queen. But - I put forth the above as a mere suggestion because I do not have the time to act as a TD right now, which I would feel obligated to do if I "formally" suggested an "Odds" section. - Speaking of "e-mails", such a thing does not actually (or perhaps officially) exist. You can send a message by e-mail, or even an e-mail message, but you cannot send an "e-mail" since e-mail is a SYSTEM for sending messages. Anyway, I marvel at the flexibility of language and do not doubt for a second that it will eventually take on both meanings and appear officially in some dictionary that way. - On the subject of "odds" matches, your editor will take on the 7th US CC champion, Dave Taylor, in an odds match resulting from a quite innocent post on The Correspondence Chess Message Board (www.correspondencechess.com/bbs). Dave will remove a pawn of his choice and I get first move. At this writing Dave has not yet said which pawn. He probably won’t until the match starts. I would do the same. I am not sitting idly around however and have done a "whole bunch" of theoretical studies in advance. He will walk into (and most likely straight through) a veritable avalanche of prepared variations. Franklin Campbell will carry this event "live" at The Campbell Report (address above) starting September 01. - The 1-game match section has just paired its 1000th game. According to acting TD Sagi Ganoth, this game pits Dariusz Warchol of Poland vs. Leandro Torre from the Phillipines. Congratulations to the OGM department on reaching this milestone. I will try and obtain the game score for publication in our journal. ---------------- Chess Maxims & Aphorisms by Steve Ryan I would like to start a collection of these items and have listed below those I already knew, have recently discovered, or that people have sent to me. If you know of some more, please send them in (ryansc@granite.mb.ca). I am not looking for quotes, but rather generalized sayings that you can't attribute to a known source. If, on the other hand, you know (and can prove) the source of these sayings, please let me know about that as well. Castle early, castle often. A knight on the rim is very grim. Do not play according to what you want or hope your opponent will do, rather, play according to what he CAN do. Do not attempt to impose your will on the chessboard. Instead, play from what flows "organically" from the position at hand. From The Mammoth Book of Chess, Graham Burgess, re endgames; Queen and Knight they're all right, Rook and Knight, not too bright, Bishop and Knight, takes all night! (submitted by Keith Watson) Knights before Bishops. (submitted by James Goodwin) A knight on the board is worth two in the box. A check in time saves mine. (Both submitted by Peter Huang) (And finally, the following the following gem submitted by Bob MacPherson) Once a King always a King but once a Knight's enough for any man. --------------- Chess Trivia Challenge by Steve Ryan See how many of the following questions you can answer correctly. I have rated each question with a letter indicating the degree of difficulty. You will find the answers as the last item in this issue of the journal (no peeking). Question Ratings E = Easy, M = Moderate D = Difficult 1. Who was the first man from anywhere in the Americas to play for the world championship (1907)? (M) 2. What did Siegbert Tarrasch and Jacques Mises play for as first prize in their match of 1916? (D) 3. Who won the "Immortal" game? (M) 4. Who won the "Evergreen" game? (M) And finally, not a chess trivia question but rather something that came floating by on an e-mail message from a friend . 5. Who were the first couple to be shown in bed together on prime time television? (M) -------------------- Editor's Note In the article below by Franklin Campbell, many of the tips for good CC etiquette refer to postal chess. It does not take much effort to visualize their e-mail chess equivalents. SR Good Correspondence Chess Etiquette By J. Franklin Campbell There are many motivations for playing correspondence chess. One is to play outstanding chess. Another is to experience the intense competition available through CC events. True chess enthusiasts can also enjoy the special pleasure of sharing our enthusiasm with fellow competitors. This pleasure is at its best when both players follow good rules of CC etiquette. It is important to show the proper respect and consideration for our opponents. Here are a few suggestions for the conduct of a CC game. Some are fairly obvious. A few are personal and may not find universal agreement. Use this list as a starting point and form your own conclusions about proper CC. Respect your opponent Correspondence can be interesting and stimulating. However, I suggest avoiding unpleasant subjects of correspondence. Subjects such as politics and religion may of great interest to you but can lead to bitter disagreements and unpleasantness. I really don't like it when an opponent feels it his duty to convert me to his religious view. At times it seems as though I put more effort into writing my responses to the message than to the chess moves. Do not create a situation where your opponent dreads receiving your messages (it's OK if he reads receiving your powerful moves). Respond to correspondence When an opponent asks a question, respond with an answer. However, there is nothing wrong with playing without regular correspondence. Respect an opponent's desire to simply play without (what some competitors have described as) the distraction of correspondence. Personally, I love to chat with my opponents and find it a significant part of my pleasure in CC. Play strictly by the rules It is not bad sportsmanship to expect your opponents to play strictly by the rules, and you should do the same without question. If your opponent oversteps the time limit, do not hesitate to follow the specified procedure and report the overstep. If an error occurs that calls for a time penalty (such as sending an illegal move) record the extra time, whether for you or your opponent. Such an action should be a non-issue. If there is a dispute about a violation then submit it to the proper authority, such as the Tournament Secretary (TS) or Controller. This is not an insult to either player. Remember this if your opponent reports your violation. Write clearly and be complete It's frustrating to receive a reply with difficult to read information. It should not be necessary for an opponent to resort to using a magnifying glass and consulting friends to decipher your writing. This seems obvious, but bad writing is not unusual in my experience. Record proper dates Do not cheat on recording dates. Part of the skill required for success in CC is the discipline of playing within the time limits. Record all required information It is often a requirement that you record information (your opponent's last move[s], postmark, dates received and replied and time used by both players). A surprising number of my opponents do not go to the trouble, though. Taking advantage of mistakes There is absolutely nothing improper about taking full advantage of an opponent's mistake. CC measures not only pure chess skill but also consistency, accurate record keeping, developing and following a good methodology and other skills. Notation errors, oversights, ill-advised "if" moves, recording errors, etc. are all the responsibility of the players. An example I started a game with 1. d4. My opponent replied 1...g6 if "any" then 2...Bg7. After 1. d4 g6 2. Bh6 Bg7 3. Bxg7 he resigned gracefully. Mistakes are a big part of chess competition. If you are on the wrong end of an error, accept it without complaint. If you make a bad move, even one based on a notation error, do not ask your opponent to let you take it back. Avoid excessive "gamesmanship" One example a player wrote an opponent claiming to be his own wife. "She" said her husband was dying and his last wish was to obtain a Master rating, which would occur if he won this game. Would he resign? Though he did not resign he was quite distracted and lost the game. I believe "gamesmanship" of this type is bad CC etiquette indeed! Send a final message When an opponent resigns or agrees to a draw, send a final "good-bye" message to furnish some closure. After playing for months or years it is not very nice to just "take the point and run". Leave off the Question Marks If your opponent makes a terrible move he will suffer enough in the play of the game. Do not embarrass him further by applying a question mark (or exclaims to your own moves). I see nothing wrong with giving your own move a "?" or an opponent's move an "!" when appropriate. Of course, it is possible that your opponent may take offense if you blame all of his successes on your bad moves! Do not ask your opponent to resign Although it is sometimes annoying when an opponent plays on in a lost position, it is never appropriate to ask an opponent to resign. In this case you should let your chess moves do your talking. Playing on in a bad position If you are totally busted then it may be best to resign. If you feel that you can still learn something, still have a defensive resource, the position is complex or can be made complex (inviting a mistake by your opponent) or you are unsure that your opponent really has a won game, you need make no excuses for playing on. Avoid analyzing the current game I dislike it when an opponent discusses the details of our current game position. General remarks such as "the attack begins!" or "it looks like you've won a pawn" do not bother me. Listing possible lines of play or giving detailed evaluations of positions seems inappropriate. Leave such comments till after the game has finished. Silent withdrawal scum The worse thing a CC player can do, in my opinion, is to disappear without trace. If you choose to quit for any reason you must notify your opponents and tournament secretaries. For those who violate this simple rule of etiquette all sorts of reasonable punishments come to mind. I shall not repeat them here. You know what I mean! Never be a "withdrawal scum"! Remember the "Golden Rule" In your correspondence, treat your opponent as you would like to be treated. We are all friends sharing this wonderful experience that is called correspondence chess. copyright (c) 1998 by J. Franklin Campbell J. Franklin Campbell lives in Mason, Michigan and is a member of the Chess Journalists of America, APCT, CCLA, ASPCC and USCF. He has been playing chess since 1959 and CC since 1964, has written the regular column "The Campbell Report" in the USA CC publication APCT News Bulletin since 1989 and has contributed articles to many other USA chess publications. He can be reached on the Internet at franklin@voyager.net ---------------- Book Review by Alexandre Aguiar "Pawn Power in Chess" by Hans Kmoch (ISBN 0-486-26486-6) Every now and then a discussion on chess books sweeps lists and news groups and hundreds of conflicting opinions pour on our mailboxes. I remember having seen a comment on John Watson's "Secrets of Modern Chess Strategy" (ISBN 1-901983-08-0) that stressed the pawn-centered approach. I confess, I like that book a lot. And a thorough knowledge on pawn play is not easy to accomplish. In a quest for books on pawn play I found Mr. Kmoch's book, a republication of de 1959 edition. The book, classified as immortal by Chess Magazine, has an extensive overview of pawn general theory but most of the text is dedicated to a wide multitude of specific themes typical pawn formations that arise from several commonly used openings, pawn play with different arrangements of pieces and several useful tricks. Although the word "law" (the name of Nimzo comes to my mind) does not appear a single time in the book, the style is frequently authoritative but one can extract several useful guidelines. More than 120 games and 182 diagrams ilustrate all situations focused in the text. The index of games is smartly organized indicating which example games are complete and which are not and includes references to games within the text. The main drawback (indeed, a minor one) is the jargon the author created. It is reasonably extensive and sometimes it becomes cumbersome. I also noticed something amazing a large majority of the positions taken from games and presented as puzzles in John Nunn's "Chess Puzzle Book" (ISBN 1-901983-07-2) have pawns positions and formations analyzed by Mr. Kmoch and in most cases good pawn positions for the winning side and bad pawn positions for the losing side of the puzzles! ------------------------- Games & Theory Editor's Note While I always try to bring you games without clerical errors, impossible/illegal moves and similar mistakes, sometimes they sneak through anyway. Well, something did indeed "sneak through" in the May edition and even went undetected by ECTOOL. The game "Sicilian Poisoned Pawn" by Gideon Mishnaevsky actually contains two errors 19...O-O (the K crosses an attacked square) and 20...Bxd6 (an impossible move). ECTOOL allowed the 19th move but stopped at the 20th. ECTOOL's author, Andres Valverde, knows about this deficiency in his reader and will try to fix it for future versions. -------------------------- An IECC Academy Session by Steve Ryan & John Cashon Introduction I (SR) had wanted to try a session with an IECC academy tutor for some time now. The opportunity finally arose after I finished some matches, thereby allowing the time to do so. Toshi assigned me John Cashon, who, like myself, also does tutoring for the New Member Program. At the start of our lessons John had a rating of 1944 compared to my own 1419. As you can see, one of us had a lot to learn. Ever on the lookout for interesting articles for CHESS BITS, I thought the members might enjoy following this session and, fortunately, John did not object. As we still have both games in progress at this writing, I will present game 1 in a series of installments, the ultimate number of which will depend on how long I last. For my part, I have had a very interesting time of it to date and, I hope, have given John at least some token resistance. You will read nearly verbatim transcripts of our discussions (except for corrections in spelling and grammar) along with the game score. I will preface my comments in the game score by using {SR} and John's by {JC} so you can (I hope) follow who said what and download the game into a PGN reader if you wish. AM 92-1 (Cashon - Ryan) goes to the 13th move in this issue. As an interesting side topic, John describes some person- to-person encounters during his TD days in the USCF with the one-and-only Robert J. Fischer. (JC) Hi Steve I have been doing this for a while now. I am 57 and a retired professor. Please ask any questions and I will let you know if you make any fatal errors or whether you are thumping me. Sometime, if in critical parts of the, games I may critique and you may find my opinions too critical. Don't please get angry and you may have an answer different than mine and it may be correct. Please don't space your moves too far apart. I find you can lose your train of thought that way. Good luck. (SR) Hello John I would like to play the Sicilian Defense in game 1 and the Reti in game 2, if you agree. I am 52 by the way, and a retired chemist, formerly employed by Atomic Energy of Canada ltd. [Event "AM-92.1"] [Site "IECC"] [White "Cashon, John J."] [Black "Ryan, Steve"] [Result "*"] 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 {JC I am a retired chemistry professor. I was at Murray State University. I don't mind being in the journal. Three months is plenty of time for these games. We can discuss strategy and tactics but ought to keep it going at a good pace. There is no rating and to learn what you'll need we'll need the game to stay fresh and long delays will only cause confusion. I was an international arbiter and TD for USCF. I have taught chess on the scholastic level grades K 0-12. I also had a 1 hour Chess class at Murray which was the same as the college team coach.} {SR - Since we have a common background in Chemistry, perhaps you can help me work out a formula for playing better chess (ha ha). I believe I do not really appreciate the difference between positional and tactical play. I know you must keep your pieces as active as possible and it seems that if you can possibly attack something without unduly weakening your position, you should do it. Yes? No?} {JC - YES! You take advantage of anything your opponent gives you. I play tactical chess using common strategies. I am fond of Fischer although we were enemies when I knew him.} 3.Nc3 Nf6 {An aggressive opening the Kopec variation probably changing to the Najdorf or Najdorf Poison pawn both popular Sicilian openings. The Sicilian is largely symmetrical and aggressive.} {I prefer the Kopec because it delays d4 and develops faster.} {SR Can't say I have ever heard of this variation nor can I find it in MCO 13. Do you think Black cannot now castle Q's side due to the pawns on d6 and c5 no longer providing adequate coverage?} 4.d4 cxd4 5.Bb5+ Bd7 {JC -The move d4 is a common move so their is movement in the pawns. You are still in good shape and should be able to castle soon. Not too fast, develop more. Why castle Queenside. A castle Kingside would be much stronger.} {SR - Granted, I am just curious whether you consider Q side castling entirely out of the question because of the "missing" pawns.} {JC - It's not out of the question but would change the strategy of the Sicilian. I wouldn't do it. You're right it would be weak.} 6.Bxd7+ Qxd7 {SR - You mentioned something earlier about knowing Fischer and considered him an "enemy'. How did that come about?} {JC - When I first started playing, I played Bobby a few times but he was much better than I. Later on I was a pretty well known TD. I still get requests to do tournaments. I got a call once and asked if I wanted to assist at the US open. They wanted someone to work the floors who wasn't in awe of the Grandmasters. Fischer remembered me and called me patzer which was okay and probably true only his tone wasn't friendly. He hated certain nationalities and ethnic groups (His mother came from one of them). He was particularity hard on Mikhail Tal and Petrosian. I told him, he was to stop it and he went off on me. Three times he claimed his opponent made either an extra move or an illegal move and I would have to go through an entire game. He then would swear up and down I was helping them. Finally I was in the middle of redoing a game and he started yelling at me. I told him to shut up as I was working. I thought the police would have to be called. He called me communist and worse. He at one point put his hands on me and the main TD (I forgot his name...Harry somebody) pulled him aside and he came back and said he was sorry I was such a poor TD. I am 6'6" but I couldn't do anything. That was the last time I did any really big tournaments for several years. His paranoia causes him to play single people and he became world champion. I think he was mentally ill several years before that. He sure played a good chess game though. I study his games a lot. Some of my friends still call me commie. I got a email from one of them about a month ago.} 7.Qxd4 e5 {SR - Here I consider myself as really only having 2 moves 7...e5 or 7...Nc6. Both attack your Q but e5 seems to continue development.} {JC - Either move has merits. Both attack the Queen but e5 is a developing move I agree. Wrong would have been to allow the queen to have her way.} {SR - Just as a matter of interest, how much attention do you pay to sayings such as "A N on the rim is very grim" or "Castle early, castle often" or "never move the same piece twice in the opening"?} {JC - Basically these are fundamental rules. Most players play these concepts. Sometime though a Nh3 or Na6 are better moves than Nf3 Nc6.Bc4 can be moved by Na6. Generally f3,c3,c6,f6 are better because they cover more spaces but don't neglect the others if some advantage can be gained. Castling early is okay but as long as I am gaining position and can keep my tempo I hold off until I can assure myself that I won't lose that tempo. Many times I don't castle at all. Moving twice is only if I want the move or my opponent causes me to move. In the latter case I am being manipulated and losing tempo. I don't usually move the same piece twice but if I see a mistake and moving twice helps I use it. I think these rules of thumb are to help new player keep from making fatal errors. Once you see beyond the basic concepts and can use your own ideas they don't mean a lot. The only thing is make sure you have reached that point.} 8.Qd3 Na6 {SR - and eventually to c5 attacking your Q. You will note I now have a "Knight on the Rim".} 9.Bg5 Be7 {JC - Don't tell me everything. Yes I am noticing.;-)} 10.O-O-O Nc5 {SR - Lots of possibilities here for my 10th move, Qe6, Qc6, Nc5, O-O, Nf4,Rc8, Qg4, Ng4 etc. For most of them I sense danger as I think I have a "hole" or perhaps a positional weakness at d5. For 10...Ng4 for example, 11.Qd2 with nowhere for the N to go if W h3 eventually. Similarly, 10...Qg4 11.Qb5+. Herein lies my greatest source of "trouble" John, as I mentioned earlier. I have no choice but to track down each reasonable variation and build an "analysis tree" , as I've heard it called, which consumes much time. Other players, or at least I think so, can "intuitively recognize" the best continuation and pick it out. My choice of 10...Nc5 stems from our earlier discussion "attack something" and your Q looks tempting.} {JC - All the other moves do have holes. I knew from earlier comments you wanted to attack my Queen. Was I stuck in an untenable position or was my intention to draw you in with your Knight? You made a choice for whatever reason and I believe it was your best line. Other players may intuitively know the best continuation but they must be very good players indeed. All of us regular players must do what you did form an analysis tree. The difference in the higher rated and/or hard working serious players is we have played enough games to have seen so many variations we can discount many of these variations because we have seen them before. My own motto "patzer softly and carry a big stick". Good move!} {SR - I would also like to discuss the difference between "positional" and "tactical" play. In my estimation a "positional" move does not attack an anything directly but sets the stage for a possible future attack along that diagonal. A "tactical" move, on the other hand, directly attacks something and requires a response [defense]. Yes? No?} {JC - NO, In my opinion. I can give you my opinion which may not match some books so I'll give my reasons for certain moves and plans. STRATEGY A foreseeable plan of attack or defensive plan using an opening as it's blue print. TACTICS The corresponding moves that enable you to complete your strategy. Each move is part of your tactics. Captures, pins, Open files and exchanges are a few of the tactical moves. Some of these moves form the position play that in combination controls the largest amount of territory with the least amount of pieces.} 11.Qe2 Qe6 {SR - Also considered 11...O-O but then 12.Nxe5} {JC - That is a very good observation. Yes I would take e5.} 12.Bxf6 Bxf6 13.Qb5+ Qd7 {if 14.Qxd7 Kxd7} {SR - And in the true "Perils of Pauline" style cliffhangers, John and I will continue this game in the next edition. What would you do here?} ------------- A short (but not so sweet) one for Roger. [Event "M-3153.2"] [Site "IECC"] [Date "2000.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "Dunn, Michael"] [Black "Miller, Roger"] [Result "1-0"] [ECO "A50/01"] 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 Nc6 3.Nc3 e6 4.e4 d5 5.e5 Ne4 6.Nf3 Bb4 7.Qc2 f6 8.Bd3 fxe5 9.dxe5 Nxc3 10.bxc3 dxc4 11.Bxc4 Be7 12.O-O O-O 13.Bd3 g6 14.Bxg6 hxg6 15.Qxg6+ Kh8 16.Ng5 Bxg5 17.Bxg5 Ne7 18.Qh6+ Kg8 19.Bf6 Rxf6 20.exf6 1-0 -------------- Submitted by Juan Solare [Event "CL3-2001.12.10"] [Site "IECC"] [Date "2001.03.19"] [Round "?"] [White "Solare, Juan"] [Black "Vaillancourt, Stephane"] [Result "1-0"] [ECO "C66"] 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nd2 Nf6 4.e5 Nfd7 5.Bd3 c5 6.c3 Nc6 7.Ne2 cxd4 8.cxd4 f6 9.exf6 Nxf6 10.O-O Bd6 11.Nf3 Qc7 12.Bg5 O-O 13.Nc3 a6 14.Bh4 Nh5 15.Rc1 h6 16.Re1 g5 17.Nxg5 hxg5 18.Qxh5 gxh4 19.Nxd5 exd5 20.Qxd5+ Qf7 21.Qxd6 Qxf2+ 22.Kh1 Qf6 23.Qd5+ Kg7 24.Rf1 Qh6 25.Rxf8 Be6 26.Qxe6 Qxe6 27.Rxa8 Qxa2 28.Rc8 Qxb2 29.Rc7+ Kh6 30.Rh7+ Kg5 31.Rf1 Nxd4 32.Rg7+ Kh5 33.g4+ hxg3 34.Rxg3 Ne6 35.Rh3+ Kg5 36.Re3 Nf4 37.Rg3+ Kf6 38.Rxf4+ Ke5 39.Re4+ 1-0 ------------------------- A Nice Combination by Steve Ryan Every once in a while I encounter a game or a nice sequence of moves in reading through chess literature that even a patzer such as myself can appreciate. I present 1 of them below. Since I don't know how to send out a chess diagram in a text format (or even if you can do such a thing), just place all the pieces on the squares indicated and follow through the moves given. You will find it well worth while. 1. Short-Timman, Tilburg, 1991 (White forces a win by moving his K only) Black R's on c8/f8, K/g8, B/b7, Q/c6, P's/c7/f7/b6/e6/g6/a5/h5 White R's/d7/d4, Q/f6, N/f3, K/h2, P's/e5/a4/c4/h4/c2/f2/g2 1.Kg3! Rce8 2.Kf4! Bc8 3.Kg5! Resigns -------------------- Answers to Trivia Quiz 1.Frank Marshall 2.A half-pound of butter 3.Adolf Anderssen 4.Adolf Anderssen 5.Fred and Wilma Flintstone Next Edition of Chess Bits December 2001