Hello all,

Here is my latest post for this tournament.  If you would like more information about the Mechanics Institute, please see my post I did for round 3 of the tournament.

As was the case last week, there was a lecture before the tournament.  As was not the case last week, we actually had a guest speaker.  His name was Ben Finegold, the new director for the St. Louis Chess Club.  Many of you might have heard about this famous chess center, as it has held both the US Championships and the US Women's Championships.

GM Ben Finegold (blue shirt) with IM John Donaldson.  

I spoke about Donaldson in my previous post.

Finegold said he recently attained his GM title,

not because he was not good before, but simply

because he did not participate in enough 

tournaments with GM norms.  I do not know

the details of how GM norms work, but

apparently there are a lot of rules associated

with attaining GM norms, as he was saying,

and so if all of these rules are not in place,

then you cannot get a GM norm.  I believe

you need at least 3 GM norms to become

a GM.

Finegold lectured on 3 of his games, I believe.  

The one that stood out was probably his most famous

win, against current top GM Boris Gelfand.  This was

back in the 80s or 90s, so it was a while ago.  Apparently

GM Victor Korchnoi had spoken to Finegold before the

start of the game and basically thought Finegold 

would lose the game.  However, Gelfand basically

underestimated Finegold's ability, and played

over-aggressively in the hedgehog, castling to the

opposite side where his king was immediately 

exposed, thinking he would be able to launch an

attack on the opposite side, but Finegold punished

Gelfand for his action.

 

My Game: Time Control 30/85 [w/ 5 sec. delay] G/30 [w/ 5 sec. delay.]

I will not mention too much about this game, aside from saying I lost and I take responsibility for the loss.  However, there is an important factor that I believe contributed to my loss, and I would like to speak about this, because I do not think this is something you would traditionally find in a chess book.

It is the concept of a player's space.  During the game, I was sitting in a place where I had to move my chair at least 20 times, and probably more, because I was in a place where other players had to get through in order to use the restroom.  Now this was extremely distracting for me, and I was even inadvertently hit when one individual tried to get past me.

Why is this important?  Well, if I am uncomfortable in my space, then I cannot play well.  I did not claim my space.  How could I have claimed my space?  Well the reason I had to keep moving my chair was not because of me.  It was not because I was blocking the aisle.  It was because the player who was seated in back of me, who also took up space in the aisle, had his backpack on the back of his chair, protruding into the aisle, and that player should not have had his backpack there, since the aisle was not that big.

So what could I have done?  What should I have done?  I should have inspected my space before my game started, noticed that this may potentially be a problem and affect my game, and notify the tournament director to instruct the player seated behind me to move his backpack off of the back of his chair.  

Instead, I just let the backpack sit there, had to move my chair over and over and over again, taking away precious time and focus I needed to be directed towards my game.

So I am telling this story not only as a reminder to myself, but also as something that new tournament players I think should be aware of.  Claiming one's space is something that seems so subtle, but is so important.  

 

Thanks for your comment on my blog. Interesting story about your space, but I'm sure it greatly irrirated you. Instead of your h6, I think Bf5 (or even Bg4?) or else just e6 would have been better.  You also could have played g6 followed by a fianchetto.

i disagree with your analysis with 4...Bf5 or 4...Bg4.  Moving the bishop too early can sometimes get it kicked around by the knight in this particular position.

 4...e6 makes it a semi-slav, and I looked at that, but decided i did not want to play a semi-slav.  

the point of 4...h6 was that if I were to move my bishop out later, then it would have a place to retreat to.  as was the case in the game, the bishop probably would have been better not coming out, but on blocking the pin.

Rybka recommends 4...dxc4 or 4...g6 in the position - but it does not advocate an immediate fianchetto. 

Personally, I do not think 4...h6 was the losing move here.  According to Rybka, and I agree with Rybka's analysis, 18...Qd7 was the losing move.

Thanks for the comment Tony!