Hello all,

Not much to mention here.

Round 1 was a bye for me.  Round 2 I made the same mistake I did in previous games I have had, which is to not capitalize on mistakes made by my opponent.  So I lost.

Frisco Del Rosario giving a lecture.  I do not know

who he is, and the only thing I could find out was

that he wrote a book about Paul Morphy.  I could not

find his rating on the USCF website, but I think

he must have one, because he plays in the chess

tournaments, and I think he is the best player

at the Kolty Chess Club.

Another picture of him giving the lecture.  His topic

was about blunders, and how top players make blunders.

I do not know if that makes me feel better or not.

I try to improve with every game I play, but sometimes

I wonder whether I am actually getting worse.

My Game:

Time Control G115 [w/ 5 sec. delay]

As I said, I made a lot of mistakes and my opponent made some mistakes, and I was unable to capitalize on my opponent's mistakes, and my opponent was better able to capitalize on my mistakes.  I really like to think that I am improving with each tournament game I play, but I am currently on a 6 game losing streak I think, and so the only thing I can really show for it is that I have gotten used to losing.  It is something I almost have to expect.  I know that sounds pretty sad, but as I said in a message sent to another chess.com member, I understand that I am not good enough to where I can go into these games and expect to win.  It really depends for me on the layout of the board, and although I may have thought I had winning chances in this game, the reality is that I lost. 

One point I want to add is what my opponent said to me after the game.  He said I missed a draw.  I saw what he said and agreed with him.  However, my take on draws is that I will take a draw if it comes up in the position, but I am not looking for a draw.  So I don't think it was a mistake for me not to be trying for a draw.  I have mentioned previously that I do not mind draws, and I am not offended by draws like some players, but I am playing to win.  I am looking to win.  I am not looking to draw.  My opponent had I think more than one chance to win this game, and he won on time.  So I could have said the same type of thing to him after the game - that he could have won earlier, and instead he won on time because he was blitzing moves and I took time to think about my moves.  I do not mind losing on time.

Another point is that my opponent opened a can of diet soda and it spilled on my new chess board and my clock.  I should have stopped the clock, and had him go to the bathroom, get napkins, and clean off my board.  Instead I did that on my own time.  I am noticing that tournament chess players are not always the most respectful players to play.  I am sure there are psychological tactics that go into it, but I would like to see a player play me without having some type of psychological tactic.  Just play the game, and if you win, you win.  If you lose, you lose.  Spilling soda all over my chess board, when you could have opened your can somewhere else, is frankly disrespectful.

I will also make it a point not to talk about my games with my opponent after the game.  They will usually say "you could have won" or "you could have drawn" or "let's replay the position" to see if my opponent could have won.  After finishing a chess game, I am tired and frankly just want to go home.  I understand grandmasters often discuss their games with each other after they play them, but I am not a grandmaster, and I would prefer to analyze games I play on my own time, as opposed to analyzing the game right after I play the game.

Welcome to the Kolty!

Frisco is of course listed in uschess.org. Mike Splane has been the best player in recent years, but Frisco is on a roll lately. He won the last Club Championship.

Spilling soda over your equipment is indeed terrible. In my experience, most chessplayers are just awkward rather than rude. Still, a tournament player does have to put up with plenty of annoyances in his career. Oh, well, why do we play chess again?

You should mind losing on time! It is really part of the game. Dan Heisman has some good writings on the topic, like "The Room Full of Grandmasters". His articles are a gold mine for the improving player.

Thanks for the comment Freelix!

Thanks for the comment Tony!

@ Freelix - I just looked at the Dan Heisman article, and I think he makes some valid points on time management.  Even in an interview with Kramnik after winning the Tal, Kramnik mentioned time management.

I guess what I was saying about not caring about losing on time is that I would rather make thoughtful moves rather than blitz moves, and I would rather lose on time rather than play a bunch of blitz moves that are not good and then lose the game later.

I was not saying that one should disregard time, or that I disregard time.  I do pay attention to time, and to not pay attention to time I agree is a mistake.

A more severe issue in my games that have recently occurred comes when I make some almost "reflex" move that loses the game instantly, because I am not careful, and if a strong players saw me do that, they would say I was careless.

So I think at this stage in my game, it is more important for me to be careful and thoughtful so that I can troubleshoot my own play and make adjustments based on that play, and I think as I am more comfortable with how I play chess, the speed will come naturally.  

I am realizing that there are many factors that go into "time management" that do not always relate directly to the proper time I should give myself to choose a move.  If a player spills a drink on my chess board, and I clean it up on my time, I am losing time to do that.  If a player decides to not notate if it is mandatory to notate and he does this solely to blitz out moves, and I do not pay attention to his notation, or figure it out later, he has gained time on me.  Or if a player sitting behind me unnecessarily blocks the aisle which causes other players to have to bump into me or I have to move my chair multiple times as a result, I lose time, but this has nothing to do with the proper time I should give myself to choose a move.  All of these situations have happened to me, and all of these situations have affected my time, so I think what is termed "time management" is a little more encompassing than just the proper time I should give myself to choose a move.  At least that has been my experience up to this point in time.

Forget about time management on the clock when there are bigger time management issues on the board.

The reason Black plays 2…Nf6 in the Scandinavian/Center Counter is that they don't like to lose time to 2…Qxd5 3. Nc3. After 2…Nf6 3. Nc3 Nxd5, 4. Nxd5? is a beginner's mistake because it gives Black a free developing move in 4…Qxd5.

But then 5. Qf3 Qxf3? is exactly the same kind of mistake, giving the move right back.

When there is a materially-equal exchange — pawn for pawn, rook for rook — the side who gets the best of that is the side whose pieces improve as a result of the swap. 4. Nxd5? improved a black piece. 5…Qxf3? improved a white piece.

***

15 years ago at the Burlingame Chess Club, an opponent went to the kitchen in a critical position, came back with a cup of coffee, and dropped it on the board as he sat down.

He apologized, and scurried about frantically for towels to mop up the coffee. Then I moved, and he blundered right away to lose. My buddy at the next board said later: "You know what happened? You coldhearted motherf***er, you didn't even blink. He spilled his coffee on the board, and when you didn't budge, it backfired on him."

Thanks for the comment Frisco!

@Frisco - Looking at time in terms of "tempo" instead of "time on the clock" I think is a great way of looking at it.  

I agree with you that I gave a tempo away with my 5...Qxf3.  I thought about that when I was about to play the move, and probably should have played a more active move instead of giving him back the tempo.  

Regarding the coffee story, that is one heck of a story