Hi Paul - thanks for your insights.
My thinking around 10. a3 was to shut down a possible ..b4 push. This may not have happened, but I didn't want to have my pawn chain attacked further or the white bishop shut down completely. I wanted to keep the queenside quite while I worked on the centre. Slow, I know, but that was the reasoning.
Honestly, I didn't even see 15 Bxc6 - upon review this would definately have been a more solid approach. Once again blind to all but my centre build up.
I didn't consider 24. Qg2! either. As you point out, if he takes the Queen it reduces quickly into a good endgame.
18. g4?! illustrates a lesson in chess for me I have not experienced before - the emotion of the moment and not allowing this to affect one's thought process. I didn't want to draw, and was actually slightly enraged by the early draw offer (not that I made this obvious to my opponent). I did sit for a good 10 minutes working out the consequences to g4, and I acknowledge in the notes it was dubious at best as my Kingside cover promptly fell apart in the crossfire. But it did produce some useful counterplay that gained a winning advantage, so I guess it did the job I wanted it do.
Now, my time situation - this is a painful subject, as I am aware of my own weaknesses in composure on this topic. I had a decent amount of time available around move 25 (about 55 minutes while Brian was floundering at around 12 minutes if I recall correctly). This is a sore point - I know I can and do rush into moves with plenty of time up, and can get drawn into errors this way. This will be a subject of a future article where I will show some truely dreadful losses I've experienced as a direct result of this awful habit.
As you say, it's hard to be calm under fire, but the best in the game do exactly that. I will continue working on that skill...
Hi all,
As mentioned in my first article An Opening Plan, I’m venturing from the comfort of internet chess into the world of over-the-board play for the first time. I aim to share key events in the ongoing experience in these articles for information and entertainment value.
I started off by taking part in some Street Chess tournaments as a warm up. Street Chess is a regular 7 round, 15 minute time control per player Rapid Tournament, which is run pretty much every week here in Canberra. Canberra’s chess scene is small but strong, with a few Candidate Masters, FIDE Masters and International Masters occasionally showing up to these events, as well as decent representation of 1400-1800 rated players.
My performance over three of these Street Chess tournaments was very, very ordinary, with scores of 2.5, 2 and 2 respectively – unfortunately I have never been able to demonstrate any level of skill at the faster versions of the game. However, it was a worthwhile experience. I got to meet many players in the local chess community and it showed me that the level of competition that I was used to had just increased significantly. With this in mind, I needed to step up a gear for standard play.
This signals the start of what I call my “Unrated Campaign”. I will use the first two tournaments I enter to gain a rating (remembering I’m shooting for a modest 1300-1400 ACF rating in my first year) as well as develop and settle on a repertoire of 2-3 openings for each colour.
My first standard tournament was the Canberra Cup, a seven round event. After three rounds, I was sitting in the bottom half of the field on a score of 1/3. A brief summary of the games and openings used follows:
Round 1
Lost as Black using a Nimzo/Queen’s Indian Defence in a long 5 pawns and knight vs 5 pawns and knight endgame. I left that night with no points and a screaming headache for my efforts – welcome to over the board play, Patzer!
Round 2
Drew as White playing 1. e4 (against Alekhine’s Defence) in a fast and furious game that really should have ended in a result for someone, but ultimately came out of combat strangely even!
Round 3
Drew as Black using the Dutch Defence (Stonewall Variation). I went a pawn up off a blunder by my opponent, but couldn’t take advantage of a blockaded position with opposite-coloured bishops.
Needless to say that going into Round 4, I was desperate for my first standard-play win.
In the week leading up to the match, I thought about what I would play. I am a student of Bobby Fischer’s games, so 1.e4 openings have formed my preferred choice as White for a very long time. During my initiation in the Rapids, however, I found that many players were well booked-up against 1.e4 and had lots of nasty traps ready. This recall shook my confidence going into the standard games.
To work against this, I decided a stable d4 system was in order to get me through the opening and well into a middle game to give me a chance at earning a much-needed win. One of my fellow players recommended the London System to meet this goal, and he plays it regularly to good effect. I had never even heard of the London System at this point, so I started researching online for games to study in preparation for the upcoming battle.
Now, I know from my readings on this and other sites that the London System is either highly praised or bitterly hated and criticised, depending on your point of view. In my daze of ignorance, I had no opinion, other than to not suffer disadvantage or surprise in the opening and to have a fighting chance in the middle game. So the Patzer takes a “Patzer’s” opening into Round 4!
What happened next is enclosed for your viewing pleasure. My sincere thanks goes to my opponent, Brian Mengelkamp, who really forced out the best of me and gave this game a desperate, hard-hitting feel after a slow start.
Well, there it is. Ugly, bloody and flawed in execution – but a win is a win nonetheless, and this was my first official chess victory in real time.
As usual , all comments welcome.
Next Time: Get Out of Jail Free