The Long & Winding Road (to expert)

Two weeks ago I got back from my favorite chess tournament, the Larry Evans Memorial in Reno. It was a lot of fun as always, and was quite a good tournament for me. I unexpectedly became an expert (unofficially) with a live rating of 2002! I played my first tournament a little over seven years ago, where I got wiped out by a 1100 player in my first game. It's been a long and strange journey since then.

The following posts are my games from the tournament in Reno. Please feel free to analyze them and pick them apart! That's why I'm posting in this forum- public scrutiny and analysis will force me to work harder at annotating, and fresh perspectives will expose me to new ideas. So please- don't hold back!

My first game was against a junior player who I've known for a little while. He's rapidly improving and nearly beat me in our other game. This time I got a bit lucky in the early middlegame and played very carefully the rest of the way. This game was a great start to the tournament!

On Friday evening I found myself on board 1 against the top seed, a former National Master. This is a wonderful tournament that really goes the extra mile- the top three boards of the class sections have the state flags of the players next to them. The top section has country flags and signs with each player's name and rating. The staff are very quick to help and have been running this tournament for many years (it used to be the Far West Open).

My opponent started by grabbing his d-pawn and moving it forward... and leaving it on d3. I don't know if it was on purpose, but it totally threw me off and I used tons of time trying to figure out how I wanted to place my pieces against his unusual system. By move 10 I was way behind on the clock.

My opponent outmaneuvered me in the middlegame. But why did that happen? I don't think his moves were THAT much better than mine. I think the reason I lost this game was psychological. I spent the first three hours of the game telling myself over and over that I could beat my opponent. I tried to convince myself that I could win... and I never believed it. My opponent believed that he was going to win the game, and I didn't. That's why he pressed on, and that's why I couldn't pull the trigger and play ...f5.

I couldn't bring myself to open the game and implement my plan, so I tried to shuffle and wanted to offer a draw. This is a defect in my thinking, caused by lack of belief. It's not an easy problem to solve, and it cost me a game against a great player in round 2. I left the tournament hall after midnight and tried to get some sleep so I could focus on the second day.

This is why I like annotating my games publicly- so that stronger players (and weaker players!) can weigh in and set me straight if necessary. I definitely agree that his quality was higher than mine, so you'll hear no arguments from me about his "better moves"- they were indeed better moves. What bothered me about my play was the following: it wasn't like I never saw ...f5; I considered it on several occasions and talked myself out of it each time. Then I forgot about defending h6 and my opponent again found the right moves. These don't seem like easy problems to fix to me, but I would much rather have these problems than the ones I had in past months and years (getting killed because I missed easy tactics and imploding in time trouble). As always, the solution is to play better! Fortunately, I did that over the next four rounds. Now my challenge is to play better all the time...

(had my opponent played 50 Qxf6+, I would have resigned on the spot. I wish I had resigned on the spot anyway. This is an easy problem to fix!)

I got to sleep around 1:30 AM on Saturday morning. Round 3 was at 10 on Saturday morning. When you're tired the only thing to do is toughen up, double check tactics, and keep going. The last two times I played this tournament, I won two games, lost one, and drew the rest. Obviously I wanted to do better and was definitely playing for a win as white against a lower rated player, even though I was again a little uncomfortable with the opening.

So I got my tournament back on track. I was particularly happy with the final queen maneuver that won me the game. I felt that my position was better throughout the game due to my better development and pawn structure. Winning from a better position is a good indicator of form and an important skill to have. While I failed to predict almost all of my opponent's moves, I was optimistic about my chances in the tournament again after the third round.

lol indeed, translation: "I've screwed up so many promising positions that if you saw all my games you would wonder how I ever broke 1800" :)

I think you're at least partially right, even in sports I've always been inside my own head. I use tons of time and I'm an awful blitz player because I don't trust my instincts. Unfortunately it's really the only way I know how to play! I thought I wouldn't be able to break 1800 and I still seem to be winning plenty, but I don't feel like a very complete player. I've made some progress but you're the master here and I've never even beaten an expert. I may as well just ask- have you any suggestions? After these games I'll post a couple painful losses from last year... oh and thanks for telling it to me straight!

Very Instructive for me atleast. Please keep them coming! What happened in the rest of the games?

For the rest of his amazing story you will have to buy his upcoming book "Believe yourself to victory: How to win by believing in yourself, in chess and in life"

HAHAHA that's solid gold, I would give you a share of the book money but my first book will be called "My 60 Forgettable Cheapos"... stay tuned for my next game which has one of those cheapos!

I baldly solicited advice from a stronger player (you) and I think you would have been totally justified had you blown me off... really appreciate the perspective. I agree that a lot of it is psychological. I'm already seeing it in my games (both wins and losses); concepts that I didn't know about are starting to feel more comfortable these days. But there's always so much more to learn.

I'll be honest, I love winning and I love feeling like I understand a position. But the great thing about chess (like golf) is that every time I get on a good streak someone better comes along to set me in my place. I had won 5 straight games before getting dismantled by a master in 19 moves last night! That game will eventually make its way online when I'm done crying about it :) I'd like to get more confident and become a better attacker at the board. But progress is gradual...

Anyway the other Reno games are on their way, followed by some big games that I've lost and won over the last three years. (Everybody) please feel free to weigh in!

Here's my fourth round game, played against a tough veteran player who I've seen in several other tournaments. Again I felt my opponent was more comfortable than I was out of the opening, which seems to happen to me almost every time! Everybody seems to have their pet lines, and I guess I'm no different- I'm just not as good at actually getting those positions.

This was a really lucky game for me. I'd love to hear if anyone has ideas on how I could have avoided the suspicious position I drifted into before I got lucky...

Black to play and win in the final position- my next post will have the puzzle.

On top of being a really good guy, Lawrence is a quality chess player.  Hes one of those guys im honored to have a good score against.  He and his boys travel together to tournaments, and enjoy quality father/son time.  He had the whole family with him this time.

Upon looking at game 1, it became apparently that you have a preferred opening and might need to prepare main lines as well as you face stiffer competition. On move 11. b3, you were "in prep" and probably overlooked the following idea: preventing Nh5 with Nd2. The ideas behind Nh5 are playing Nf4, when black has a knight on an outpost and black's pieces are better placed after f5 is played. (White's pawns are pointing towards the queenside and black's towards the kingside. A general rule is that play follows the pawns, or that white's play is on the queenside and black's on the kingside.) Your opponent overlooked that option and picked the right piece, wrong square. As for the DSB situation after 15. f3, black has the nice Bf6! (Bh6 Bg7 and Be3 is forced to avoid the trade) and instead picked f4. Qc3 either picks up the a5 pawn or further restricts the knights. Also, please try to punish your opponent's mistakes out of the opening. One of my OTB games went 1. d4 Nf6 2. Nf3 d5 3. c4 e6 4. Nc3 Bb4 5. Qb3 c5 6. Bg5 Nc6 7. Rd1 Na5 8. Qc2 Nxc4 9. dxc5 Qa5 10. Bxf6 gxf6 11. e3 Nxb2 12. Rc1 Qxa2?? (12...Na4! and the 1425 rated white has a piece advantage against the 1690 rated black player.)

Rxf4

I'm really getting a lot of great advice and analysis, which I'll dig into shortly... keep it coming please! I'm learning a lot here.

Here's the end of the 4th game as promised:

awesome, congrats on the master rating, even if it is unofficial!

One of my favorite things about chess is that I've met some really nice and interesting people. Many times at the Mechanics Institute I've lost to a better player and basically begged for a free lesson afterwards. Almost all of these players took time out of their evenings to walk me through the entire game and were quite pleasant about it (e.g. last week, when I lost in 19 moves and got a fantastic lesson on the Budapest Gambit). Just another reason I look forward to playing tournaments so much!

@pfren and @HueyWilliams I'm not even sure I looked at 19...Bxf3 (shouldn't I have learned to analyze all captures by now???) but I wish I had taken a closer look in the game. I had this strange sense that I was losing the thread of the game and I was worried that the position might open up. Even with the possibility of putting my knight on f5, I didn't want to let my opponent have a bishop pair for reasons that are no longer too clear to me. That 15 ...e5 idea was surprising to me. I knew I wanted to play it, but talked myself out of it. Very interesting analysis!

I need to read my grandfather's copy of Botvinnik's 100 Selected Games! He's been recommended to me for studying Dutch positions before, since my current anti-Dutch plan is "fianchetto the LSB and don't let him play ...g5/...f4". Facing systems like this is forcing me to broaden my skills... and it's always helpful when masters stop by to share their thoughts.

The Mechanics' is still a charming place (with those same old rickety tables). I always look forward to playing there and have gotten so much free instruction between and during games that I feel like I should pay rent! Definitely the highlight of my Tuesday nights :)

I would definitely like to explore the library too! The whole club is a great bargain, $50 for eight tournament games/postgame lessons and eight pregame lectures. Somehow I've been looking for libraries in SF without realizing that I have one a few blocks from my office. Time to get some reading material for my next road trip...

Here's my 5th round game. It was played against another Sacramento veteran who is a former expert and has played in the open section. I was enjoying the tournament and looked forward to playing such a skilled player. My family went to Easter brunch in Reno during this game, and after about ten moves in a complicated position I wished I was with them!

One note about this game: I almost never launch kingside attacks. It's not so much that this is my best kingside attack as that it's one of my only kingside attacks because I so rarely play for mate. To be honest, I only attacked because I was afraid that my opponent would blast me off the board if I let him regroup. Most of my ideas in this game came from The Art of Attack, by Vladimir Vukovic, which I read on the bus to work last year and was nearly completely over my head.

These are all interesting suggestions, which I wish I had seen before my last Budapest game (alas, the Warriors and Game of Thrones have taken a toll on my chess). 17 Bd3 is a move I didn't even consider, and I don't really know why! Maybe I just thought I wasn't obligated to attack with the bishop on f3. Or maybe I was afraid of ...Nb4 18 Bb1 shutting my a1 rook out of the game.

I've never been an attacking player, but I also didn't consider playing 18 f5 immediately. I'm sensing a theme from pfren's and your comments- I need to consider more forcing moves. And I totally agree about engines stealing our fun! When analyzing with my opponent I try to talk about ideas and plans as much as possible. I always think that since I'm not playing an engine, I should work on my visualization and planning instead of plugging everything into my computer... but sometimes a blunder check is nice.

If I remember correctly, I began to fall behind on the clock as I contemplated 25 Nxg8. I tried to calculate an improvement, but I figured I shouldn't be suffering on the clock in such a crushing position. On principle I really wanted to continue the attack, but I'm one competitive guy and decided to throw principle out the window!

One last note- I think in general his bishop is good on c5. When I post my next game from the same opening, it will become apparent that that bishop can be a real monster. However, I felt that it was a weak piece in this game because Black was compelled to play ...g6 weakening the dark squares and had nothing to defend them. Of course, I tried the same plan in the other game and got the worst beating of my life without so much as making my opponent glance at his kingside. Chess is difficult!