Why So Many Draws Milliern?; Or a Tribute to Schlechter
I think I posted the wrong games that ended in draws, because I caught some comments, as if I am just looking for draws. Not true. I'm so bad at openings that many of my games can be described as me making a few random, but reasonable looking moves, and then trying to hold the position together, whilst at no time ever having anything resembling winning chances.
Here's an example from tonight's 2nd round game in the World Open Warmup. After screwing up early, I just hung back, tried to improve while looking to trade into an ending; and then I'm 100% confident I can draw an endgame a pawn down (in terms of evaluation) vs players 1900-2200, win such an endgame against U1900's, and win in cases where I get an edge against a 2200-2400... but I've never been able to get there, except in my sparring endgames with my 2250-ish sparring partners. I was probably down more than a pawn in evaluation going into this ending.
This is a draw in which I had a mind toward creating an imbalance moving toward the ending, in which I would have an outside passer, but advancing it proved tough. GM Christiansen said all the play had dried up, though I was trying to get my K out in front of the pawn.
This last one is another example of never having much of anything, at all, and then holding my craft together, basically, with zip ties and caffeine.
So yeah. I suck at openings. I'm so much better at so many other aspects of the game that openings will be my point of attention, once I get back to Cambridge. Thanks to an opening research wizard A-Class player and my coaches' program --and near eidetic memory--, I'll have my opening problem close to resolved within a few months. It's a nice problem to have, since there's no blind guessing in the diagnostics department, and there's a range of easily suggested remedies.