The Long Climb to National Master - Part 3

This blog post is part three of a four-part series of my journey to the National Master title. I would suggest reading part one and part two if you haven't already.

At this stage of the journey, my USCF rating peaked at 2193, just one away from the National Master title, before collapsing. I had already been a win away from the National Master title many times, none ending in my favor. Each time, I played uncharacteristically and often spent too much time attempting to play a perfect game. 

In my previous blog, I highlighted a pattern in my recent tournaments. Across four events,  I gained 53 ratings points in classical time controls, but lost 33 points in the 45/d5 quicker Gambito tournaments. The difference was evident, so I made a pivot: from that point on, I would play only classical tournaments until I reached the National Master Title.

Introduction

The United States Chess Federation (USCF) awards the title of National Master once a player has achieved a rating of 2200. The National Master title cannot be lost, even if a player goes under a rating of 2200. Unlike FIDE, there is no such thing as a "live rating," and a player must finish the tournament with a rating above 2200 to achieve the title. 

In part two of this series, my rating slowly crept towards 2200 from 2186 to 2193, before a disaster tournament that took my rating all the way back down to 2168. With my new strategy of only playing classical events, it would be a slow grind valuing quality over quantity. This blog post will cover three classical tournaments in depth, providing lessons for any player at any rating.

41st Annual Western States Open

The first tournament on my new path to the National Master title was the Western States Open held in Reno, Nevada. The tournament was extremely slow, with 2 hours to play 40 moves, and an additional hour after 40 moves had been played. I had to take a bye in the first and last rounds, but with 4 rounds, and a strong field of GMs and IMs, this tournament certainly was an opportunity to get back on track.

In round one, I faced a 1828 rated player. The middlegame was quite miserable for me, but my opponent eventually made a huge blunder. I picked up the win after winning material, putting me on a score of 1.5/2 going into day two. The next day in round 3, I faced a 2338 rated International Master in a very sharp game. 

Quite a disappointing result to only come out with a draw in such a promising position versus a higher-rated player. It was clear that in this game, I was way too materialistic, and should've immediately played 20. Bxg5. This game shows how you cannot simply consider which pieces you are trading, but you must also look at the pieces left on the board.

In the next round, I faced yet another International Master, this time rated 2315. The game was quite uneventful, and we both played at around 96% accuracy, fizzling out to a drawn endgame. In my fourth and final round, I was paired against a 2274 rated FM with the black pieces. The game could be described in one word: miserable.

The last game was obviously a major letdown, as I put up no fight and was completely squeezed on the queenside. This simply goes to show how important a single tempo is, and how it can completely affect the result of a game. This game should also teach a lesson to make sure to not be afraid of "ghosts" and only play passive defensive moves when they are completely necessary. 

41st Annual Western States Open Results

My four rounds in Reno only slightly increased my rating from 2168 to 2172, a small step to get back on track. While the tournament overall showed promise, I still needed to be more accurate and play more aggressively in order to capitalize on such advantages. 

19th Annual Los Angeles Open

The Los Angeles Open was once again a long-time control event. The tournament was five rounds and featured many Grandmasters and International Masters. At a rating of 2172 and five rounds to work with, there was certainly a chance that this could be the tournament to push me over the 2200 barrier. My main thought process going into this tournament was to take it one round at a time.

In round 1, I faced a 1920 rated player. We reached quite a drawish endgame before I eventually broke through and got the dub. From my first rounds in these two tournaments, it was quite clear that beating lower rated players was only a matter of patience and taking the opportunities at the right time. In round 2, I managed to hold a 2427 rated IM to a draw. See if you can find the equalizing resource.

A draw against a higher rated player is a fine result, and it was certainly a relief that my opponent went for the quick draw rather than trying to exhaust the endgame. With 1.5/2 points, I was then paired against a 2343 rated player, where I totally made up an opening on the board and reached quite an interesting position.

Another draw against a higher rated player, however, this game I was likely the one with the slight upper hand at the end. 33. Rxc3 certainly could've been played by me, as there is little risk in that endgame. Nonetheless, grabbing a draw versus a higher-rated player as black in an unfamiliar position was certainly a result I could not complain about. 

Going into the next day in round 4, I was paired against a 2305 rated player whom I had previously had much success against. A win in this game would've put me at a rating of 2200 or at least very near. With the white pieces, I felt that this game could very well be the one to reach the 2200 mark. Unfortunately, it did not go my way.

Just one win away from the National Master title, I did it again. Such a great opportunity that I even spotted in the game, but for some reason ended my calculation after seeing I would lose the b4 pawn. I think this game goes to show that you need to calculate to the very end and be sure of your evaluation, as even though I lose the b4 pawn, I have immense compensation with two knights in exchange for the rook.

This ended up being my last round as I had a headache and chose not to play round 5. This capped off my Los Angeles Open with an okay score of 2/4 against an average opponent rating of 2249. This tournament certainly showed I was capable of hanging with masters and players well above 2300, but I simply needed to get the results when it actually counted.

19th Annual Los Angeles Open Results

My rating saw another small increase from 2172 to 2180, another step in the right direction. I was slowly recovering the rating I had lost, and it looked like something was finally culminating. This upward trend made me believe that my next tournament might just be the one.

2024 U.S. Masters

The 2024 U.S. Masters is certainly the biggest and highest-rated tournament that I have ever played. With an exclusive set of requirements bound to just masters and youth players with a USCF rating over 2100, no game would be easy. On top of that, even the highest rated player in U.S. history and current world #3, GM Fabiano Caruana, was a participant. 

In need of just twenty points, one or two upset wins would be enough. However, with such a strong tournament field, every player surely studied and prepared in advance for this tournament. My nine rounds kicked off with a game against a young 2483 rated IM, where I surprisingly reached a winning position. 

If you had told me before the game that I would get a draw, I would be extremely pleased with the result. However, I could have easily pushed for a win with 61. Qh1, a very human and natural move. I think this game illustrates the common issue of being hyper-fixated on rating. 

If I were to imagine that I was playing with a similar or slightly higher rating, I would've been looking for possible opportunities to win. However, knowing my opponent's rating, I was really looking to settle for a draw when there was a clear win on the board. It seems that I was punished for this in round 2, as I lost against a 2363 after a long fight.

With 0.5/2 points, my rating had likely slightly increased compared to where I had begun. With seven rounds to go, I had to look past the missed opportunities and move on. In round 3, I was paired against a 2335 rated player with the black pieces. Here is how it went!

This game was an absolutely huge win. It had been quite a while since I had last beaten a higher rated player, and this win pushed me within arm's reach of the National Master title. In this game, the key factor was patience. By being patient and making small improvements to my position, my opponent eventually made a blunder which I was able to take advantage of.

The next day, I was paired against a 2355 IM with the white pieces. Unlike any game I had played before, I would only need a draw to reach the 2200 mark. With the white pieces, I certainly believed that I would be able to hold my opponent to a draw, especially considering the many draws I had previously had against higher rated players. That exact opportunity eventually came, where I had a tactic to force a perpetual.

So there it was, I played Nxg6 and got the draw I needed, withdrew from the tournament, and got the National Master title. Right? Wrong. I completely missed the obvious Ne5+ under time pressure, and instead opted for a safer option that ultimately lost me the game. Just a single move from the National Master title, and I was not able to find it. 

The missed opportunity went on to psychologically affect me for the rest of the tournament. Even though I still tried to play my best, it was definitely in the back of my mind and distracted me from fully concentrating. However, there was actually somewhat of a silver lining to this move. If I had drawn, I likely would've withdrawn and missed out on six rounds of such a tournament. 

In the next six rounds, I played extremely poorly and lost games without even putting up a fight. I eventually ended the tournament with a depressing score of 3/9, finishing with a win in the last round. The rest of the results can be seen in the table below:

2024 U.S. Masters Results

My experience at the 2024 U.S. Masters was promising at the start, before a single loss catalyzed a poor performance in the remaining rounds. In this tournament, I learned a valuable lesson. I needed to make decisions without taking my opponent's rating into consideration; I could've pushed for a win in the first round, but instead opted for a draw due to my opponent's rating. 

I also needed to not let one loss effect the rest of my tournament, which was seen in the rounds following my missed perpetual in round four. Nonetheless, I only lost 10 points in this tournament dropping from 2180 to 2170. This tournament once again showed that I could play at the 2200 level, it was only a matter of time before my rating reflected that.

Conclusion

This run of three tournaments was certainly a step in the right direction, and a reflection that I was able to play at the 2200 level. These few tournaments featured many draws against higher-rated players, something that I previously struggled with. Overall, consistently playing slow time controls felt more relaxed, and I was certainly going to stick with this strategy.

The fourth and final part of this series is expected to be released towards the end of August, will finally complete my journey to the National Master title. I hope that you were all able to take something away from this blog post, and I am excited to share the final tournaments that took me from 2170 to 2200. I will be answering questions in the comments below and thank you for reading, and as always, see you next time.