Exeter Chess Club: One amateur's weeekend.
Best | NOT | Early | Masterly | Cheapos | Swindles | Cheapoed | Recent
Here are all my games from this year's (1996) superbly organised East Devon Congress, held in the excellent venue of St.George's Hall (big, cool, near town centre, has a bar). I scorn the idea of trying to win money in the Major and go for the Premier (my grade is 3 points too high for the Major). Five rounds later...
Round Opponent (my col) BCF ELO Result Score 1 Ian George (B) 184 2072 0.0 0.0 (A hard rain...) 2 David Hodge (W) 161 1888 0.5 0.5 (Don't count your chickens) 3 Peter Chaplin (B) 158 1864 1.0 1.5 (Beware geeks bearing gifts) 4 David Parr (W) 181 2048 0.5 2.0 (Below Parr, as usual) 5 Rob Newton (W) 177 2016 1.0 3.0 (Sweet, but not fattening)
Round 1. A Hard Rain...
Black vs. Ian George (grade 184): 1-0 (52 moves). I lose one game like this in every weekend tournament. With Black, I get an about-equal opening, which turns into a slightly worse middlegame, then a worse endgame, and then I lose. Percentage play at its best by my opponent: I never felt clearly equal and find myself on the slide.I quite fancy this opening but clearly haven't quite got the hang of it. I remember considering 21...Nxa5 but played something else, I think having forgotten that the capture was on. We played moves 34-37 quickly, then, after a while, he plays g4, the best way to keep up the pressure. Of course, if I wasn't caught up by the momentum, I could have anticipated 37. g4 and played 34/35/36 ...h5, with better chances than in the game. The final position sees Black stuck for ideas, but not for blunders. (Score: 0 out of 1).
George,IM (2070) - Regis,D (1825) [B06] East
Devon #1, 1996
1. e4 g6 2. d4 Bg7 3. Nf3 c5 4. c3 cxd4 5. cxd4 d5 6.
e5
[6. exd5]
6... Bg4 7. h3 Bxf3 8. Qxf3 e6 9. Bb5+ Nd7 10. O-O a6
[10... Ne7], or [10... Rc8]
11. Bxd7+ Qxd7 12. Qa3 h6 13. Nc3 b5 14. Qb3 Ne7 15. a4 Rb8 16. a5 b4 17. Na4 O-O 18. Nb6 Qb5 19. Be3 Nc6 20. Qa4 Qxa4 21. Nxa4 Rb5
[21... Nxa5 22. Nc5 Rb5 23. Nxa6 Nc4 looks OK]
22. Nc5
                |
[22... Rxc5 23. dxc5 Nxe5 24. b3 Rc8 with some compensation], or [22... Rxa5 23. Rxa5 Nxa5 24. Nxa6 b3 25. Nc5 Nc4 which I think is equal]
23. Nb3 Ra7 24. Rfc1 Ne7 25. Rc2 Kf8 26. Rac1 Ke8 27. Rc7 Rbb7 28. Rxb7 Rxb7 29. Nc5 Rb5 30. Nxa6 Rxa5 31. Nxb4 Rb5 32. Nd3 Rb3 33. Rc3 Rxc3 34. bxc3
  |
34... Nc6
[34... h5]
35. Kf1 Na5 36. Ke2 Nc4 37. g4 Ke7 38. h4 f5 39. exf6+ Kxf6 40. Bf4 g5 41. hxg5+ hxg5 42. Be5+ Nxe5 43. Nxe5 Ke7 44. Kd3 Kf6 45. Kc2 Ke7 46. Kb3 Bf6 47. Kb4 Kd6 48. Nd3 Bg7 49. Kb3 Bf6 50. Kc2 Bd8 51. Kd2
 |
panicked and resigned
[52. Ne5 Bc7
[52... Bd8 53. Nf7++/- ]
53. Ke3
[53. Kd3 Ke7 54. Ke3 Ke8 55. f4+/- ]
53... Ke7 54. f3 Kf6 55. f4 Ba5]
1-0
Round 2. Don't count your chickens...
White vs. David Hodge (161): 1/2-1/2 (41). I throw away one game like this in every weekend tournament. With White, I get a better opening, a winning middlegame, and then blow it.I've been playing 1.e4 recently in an attempt to sharpen my game but I always play my old favourite 1.c4 against juniors. The Queen's-side attack works like clockwork and the ...f5 move sems only to limit Black's pieces. My opponent gives up a pawn on move 15, with a straight face, only to see me hand it straight back (move 28), with rather a red one. In the post mortem he criticised the "pointless" manoeuvre Qa8+-e8 and chided me for missing Bh6+, which of course was the point. (Score: 1/2 out of 2).
Regis,D (1820) - Hodge,D (1890) [A25] East Devon #2, 1996
1. c4 e5 2. Nc3 Nc6 3. g3 g6 4. Bg2 Bg7 5. e3 Nge7 6. Nge2 O-O 7. O-O d6 8. d4 f5?[8... exd4]
9. Rb1 Qe8 10. b4 a6 11. a4 Nd8 12. b5 c6 13. Ba3 Rf6
    |
[14... Ndxc6 15. Bxc6 bxc6 16. dxe5 dxe5 17. Bxe7 Qxe7 18. Nd5], or [14... Nexc6 15. Nd5]
15. c5 d5!?
[15... dxc5 16. dxe5 Re6 17. Bxc5 Bxe5 18. Nd4+- ]
16. dxe5 Rf7 17. f4 Ne6 18. Nd4 Nxd4 19. exd4
[19. Qxd4]
19... Kh8 20. Qd3 Be6 21. Rb6 Qc8 22. a5 Ng8 23. Rfb1 Rfa7 24. Na4
[24. Na2!? e.g. 24... Ne7 25. Nb4 h6 26. Bf1 Qd7 27. Rxa6 Rxa6 28. Nxa6 Qa7 29. Rb6 Bc8 30. Bb4+- ]
24... g5 25. Bc1 Bf8 26. Qb3 gxf4 27. Bxf4 Qc7
 |
[28. Bd2] [28. Qb4] [28. Nb2]
28... Qxa5 29. Rxa7
[29. Rb6 threatening to round up the Queen 29... Bh6]
29... Rxa7 30. Qb6 Qxa4 31. Qxa7 Qxd4+ 32. Kh1 Bxc5 33. Qxa6 Ne7 34. Qa8+ Kg7
 |
[35. Bh6+ Kxh6 36. Qf8+ Kh5 37. Bf3+ Qg4
[37... Kg6 38. Qf6#]
38. Bxg4+ fxg4+- ]
35... Qd3 36. Rf1
[36. Rc1!?]
36... d4 37. Bg5
[37. Bh6+ Kxh6 38. Qf8+ Kh5
[38... Kg5 39. Qf6+ Kh5 40. Bf3+ Qxf3++- 41. Rxf3 Bd5]
39. Bf3+ Qxf3+ 40. Rxf3 Bd5 41. Kg2 d3 42. h3 d2 43. g4+ fxg4 44. hxg4+ Kxg4 45. Qf4+ Kh5 46. Qxd2 Nf5+- ]
37... Bd5 38. Bf6+ Kh6 39. Rg1
[39. Qf8+!? Kh5 40. g4+! e.g. 40... fxg4 41. Bxe7 Bxe7 42. Qf5+ Qxf5 43. Rxf5+ Kg6 44. Rf4+- ]
39... Bxg2+ 40. Kxg2 Qe4+ 41. Kh3 1/2-1/2
Round 3. Beware geeks bearing gifts.
Black vs. Peter Chaplin (159): 0-1 (29). I win a game like this one in every weekend tournament: an impatient opponent sacrifices in an essentially level position, and I hang on to win. A shame really, he was playing probably the only other player in the tournament that had read Van Geet's book on the opening and knew the suggestion of 5. Rxh5. Not that I knew what to do about it, but having read about it I could regard the move with some outward appearance of cool, which I think helped.Despite some anxieties at about move 20, when I thought a central break would have been embarrassing, I am able to force a decision without ever using the extra Rook! (Score : 1 1/2 out of 3).
Chaplin,P (1865) - Regis,D (1820) [A00] East Devon #3, 1996
1. Nc3 d6 2. e4 g6 3. h4 Nf6
|
[9... Qe7 10. Ng5 Bg7]
10. Bg5 Be7 11. Bxd7+ Qxd7 12. Bxe7!? Kxe7
[12... Qxe7?! 13. Qb5+ Nc6 14. Qxb7]
13. Qg5+ Kf8 14. Qh6+ Ke7 15. Qg5+ Kf8 16. Qh6+ Ke8 17. Qg7 Rf8 18. O-O-O f6
this wall of little Pawns keeps out the Knights
19. Qg4 Qf7
|
20. e5?!
[20. d5!? f5!?]
20... fxe5 21. Rd2 Qf5
Black has escaped
22. Qg7 Qf7 23. Qg4 Qg6 24. Qh3 e4 25. Nh4 Qh6 26. Kd1 Rd8 27. Re2 d5 28. f3 Rf4 29. Qg3 Rxh4 0-1
Round 4. Below Parr, as usual.
White vs. David Parr (180): 1/2-1/2 (17). With White, I play the English again and I get a slightly better opening, but am so paranoid about blowing it once more that I use all the first hour over sixteen moves, and offer a draw for fear of time trouble. Not impressive. I would have fancied his chances of outplaying me even if the position was objectively inferior. (Score: 2 out of 4).Regis,D (1820) - Parr,D (2040) [A25] East Devon #4, 1996
1. c4 e5 2. Nc3 Nc6 3. g3 g6 4. Bg2 Bg7 5. e3 d6 6. Nge2 f5?! 7. d3 Nf6 8. Rb1 O-O 9. b4 a6 10. a4 h6 11. O-O g5 12. f4 Qe8 13. b5 axb5 14. axb5 Ne7 15. fxe5 dxe5 16. Na4[16. c5 Ng6]
16... Ra7 17. Nec3
|
[17... Qd8 18. Ba3
[18. Qb3 Ng6 19. Qc2 Qe7 20. Bb2+/= ]
18... Re8 19. Ra1 e4 +=], or [17... Ng6 18. Ba3 Rf7 19. Bc5 Ra8+/= ], or [17... Qf718. Bb2 e4 19. Nc5 exd3 20. Qxd3+/=], or [17... Nd7 18. Nd5 Nxd5 19. Bxd5+ Kh8 20. Ba3 Rf6+/= ]
18. c5 bxc5 19. Nxc5 Kh8 20. N3a4 Ra5 = 0.00 Fritz
[20... Nd7], or [20... Ng6 21. Qb3 Nd7 22. Bc6 Qe7 23. Ba3]
]
1/2-1/2
Round 5. Sweet, but not fattening.
White vs. Rob Newton (179): 1-0 (30). This was a bonus: a second win through a higher-graded opponent pushing their luck. The critical phase of the game seemed to be to be around move 17. Shortly after we had one of those typical situations where you should think just one more move after the end of a line of analysis. My opponent had caned me over 10 years ago in the National Club Championships, and this was my revenge... although I had forgotten him, and he had to remind me afterwards. (Score: 3 out of 5).Regis,D (1825) - Newton,R (2015) [A16] East Devon #5, 1996
1. c4 Nf6 2. Nc3 g6 3. g3 Bg7 4. Bg2 O-O 5. e4 e5 6. Nge2 c6 7. O-O
|
Arrogant?
8. cxb5 cxb5 9. Nxb5 Qb6 10. Nbc3 Nc6 11. d3 Ba6 12. Be3
|
[12... Qb7 13. b3 Rfc8 14. f4 Rab8 15. fxe5 Nxe5+/- ], or [12... Qb8 13. Qd2 Qd6 14. Rfd1 Rfc8 15. d4+/- ], or [12... Qa5 13. Qd2 Rab8 14. Rfc1 Rfc8 15. f4+/- ], or [12... Qb4!? 13. a3 Qd6 14. b4+/- ], or [12... Qxb2? 13. Bc5]
13. Nxd4 exd4 14. Na4 Qd6 15. Bf4 Qb4 16. a3
Stodgy
[16. e5!? Nh5
[16... Ng4 17. Qxg4 Qxa4 18. b3 Qb5 19. Bxa8 Rxa8+- ]
17. Bd2 Qe7 18. Bxa8 when White has the exchange but may get mated on g2 later]
16... Qb5 17. Bd6
|
17... Rac8?
[17... Rfc8 18. Re1
[18. e5 Nd5 19. b3 Rc6 20. b4 Qxd3]
18... Ne8 19. e5 Bb7 20. Bxb7 Qxb7+/= ], or [17... Rfd8 18. Nc5 Rac8 19. Nxa6 Qxa6 20. Be5+- ], or [17... Rfe8 18. Nc5 Rac8 19. Rc1 Qb6+/- ]
18. e5 Nd5 19. Bxf8 Kxf8 20. Re1 Ne7 21. b4
|
this is how far Black looked
26. Bb7
that's how far he should have looked!
26... Qa5 27. Bxc8 Nxc8 28. Qc1
Not the only try, but in my stodgy style
[28. Rb5 Qa6
[28... Qd8 29. Rb7 Bg7 30. Qf3 f5+- ]
29. Rb8 Kg7 30. a5], or [28. f4 Bg7 29. Rb7 d5 30. h3+- ], or [28. Rb7 Nb6 29. f4 Bf6 30. Rb8+ Kg7+- ], or [28. Rb8 Qc7 29. Qb3 Kg7 30. Rb1+- ]
28... Nb6 29. Qh6+ Bg7 30. Qf4 Be5 31. Qh6+ Bg7 32. Qf4 Be5 33. Qg5 Qxa4
[33... Kg7], or [33... Qa6 34. a5 Qxa5 35.
f4 f6 36. Qh6+ Kg8 37. fxe5 dxe5+- ]
34. f4
[34. Qd8+ Kg7 35. Ra1 Qb4 36. Reb1 Qd2 37. Rxa7+- ]
34... f6 35. Qh6+ Kg8 36. fxe5 dxe5
 |
37. Rbc1 Qd7 38. Qd2 Nd5 39. Qa2 Kg7 40. Qa5 Kh6 41. Qc5 Nf4!?
[41... Kg7 42. Rc2
[42. Rc4 Qf7 43. Ra1 Nb6 44. Rcc1 Qd7+- ]
42... Nb6 43. Ra1 h6 44. Qc7], or [41... Qb7 42. Ra1 a6 43. Qf8+ Kh5 44. Qd6 Nb4+- ], or [41... Kh5 42. Ra1 Nb6 43. Rf1 Na4 44. Qf8+- ], or [41... a6 42. Qf8+ Kh5 43. Ra1 Qc6 44. Rec1 Nc3+- ]
42. Qf8+ Kg5 43. h4+ Kh5 44. Qxf6 Nh3+ 45. Kh2 g5 46. Rxe5 h6 47. Qf3+
[47. Qf3+ Kg6 48. Rc6+ Kg7 49. Qf6+ Kg8 50. Qg6+ Kh8 51. Qxh6+ Kg8 52. Rg6+ Qg7 53. Qxg7#]
1-0
Towards a conclusion:
- In each game I felt I knew the opening better than my opponent. (Did they think the same?) Whatever the feeling, the practical outcomes of the openings were good. This suggests that I should stop studying openings, since they aren't a problem, but do I have the courage?
- In both the first two games I overlooked one-move wins of pawns. This suggests that refining my grasp of the theory of doubled pawn complexes has only limited point.
- I have been losing games like that one to Ian all my life, (although I used to lose them to 130-grade opposition). How do you repair that weakness (or collection of weaknesses)? I suppose, because there will always be players better than me, and with better technique, to choose an opening where Black has more obvious counterplay is best. At least then I have something to attempt on my own behalf, which might worry my opponent. So, although I quite fancy the opening, I might have been better off in more conventional Modern territory which might be more dynamic (although I expect Ian would have met this too with a solid and straight bat).
- Perhaps the most revealing game was round 4: I have been drawing games like this all my life. Until I also have the courage to try and win from positions like that, I'll never develop the technique of doing so, and will never raise myself out of the slough of 150-grade chess in which I currently reside.
Overall:
I suppose the two games where I didn't make the most of my position (rounds 2 and 4) are amply compensated by the two where I was given an advantage for free (3 and 5). I scored 60% against an average opposition grade of 172, which is a grading performance of 182. This obviously flatters my actual grade of 153. A one-off? By no means - I usually get good grading results in Open/Premier tournaments, it's my league chess that drags me back to reality. I have a theory that chess favours the underdog (which is to say, I might make only a 40% score against 140-strength opposition!). I never know why: I do try harder, but I suspect my opponents have some complacency to answer for. Which suggests I too am complacent facing lower-graded players during the league. Oh, and having 3 Whites helped, I never lose with White.Meanwhile, at the other end of the room, Jack Rudd stormed home with 5/5 including this brisk win in the last round...
Rudd,Jack - Greet, Andrew 1.e4 c5 2.Nc3 e6 3.Nf3 d5 4.exd5 exd5 5.Bb5+ Nc6 6.Ne5 Nge7 7.0-0 g6 8.Re1 Be6 9.d4 Bg7 10.Bg5 cxd4 11.Nxc6 bxc6 12.Bxc6+ Kf8 13.Nxd5 f6 14.Rxe6 Nxd5 15.Qf3 Rc8 16.Bxd5 Rc5 17.Rae1 h6 18.Bxf6 Qxd5 19.Re8+ 1-0
Back to Dr. Dave's Chess Career
This document (weekend.html) was last modified on 22 Nov 96 by
![[cool blue cat]](../GIFs/cool_cat.gif)