Part 2: What have I forgotten? Holes in my games.

I played three games this month at the chess club after a long absence. I went in with the intent of see where my biggest memory loss is showing up and what skills have remained. 

The first round game was an abysmal mess. I totally missed the point in QGA and played the opening all wrong and gave up e5 too easily. I managed to struggle back only to forget some simple rules of when ahead simplify. Missing some tactical errors, I allowed black to regain  some lost material.

The second round game, I was black against a Colle system. My opponent offered a piece and instead of simply taking it, I complicated matters and overlooked an in-between move which just ruined my incentive. 

When he offered the draw I jumped on it to save myself from further embarassments. 

The third game I was faced with another QGA. This time I recalled some things from the first round and managed to hold my ground and gain some good central attacking chances. I underestimated my opponent's counter attacking chances and totally missed a saving move in the heat of battle. Had I played the correct move, I might have even won this one. 

Overall, looking at these games, TACTICS is the one thing that seems to jump out. My board vision is as sharp as it had been before I took this haitus. 

What have I forgotten? Part 1: On tactics

Its been a while since I’ve really been able to devote serious attention to chess. I can say at least 9 months have passed, though I had a couple of cameo appearances back during the holidays. Back then, I was looking to see what I could retain from training and what I had lost from memory with a focus on “rust proofing” my training.  I had some marginal success and managed to not drop terribly too much in rating and performance.  So now that it’s been even longer since my last serious look at my studies, I thought I’d spend the month of May re-immersing myself back into the practice of chess improvement.

I am not so concerned about chasing the ratings than I am about learning a key concept about learned skill versus memorization. I really think that the positional studies I did with pawn formations last year really helped me develop a skill of positional understanding. I also realize I can’t escape the memory issues as certain variations and sharper lines do require this aptitude.

What are things that can be regarded as skills?

•           Tactics
•           Knowing Key positional concepts ( ex: IQP, Minority attacks)
•           Endgame techniques
•           Transitions
•           Time
•           Handling imbalances
•           Defending
•           Attacking
•           Playing out of your comfort zone
•           Knowing “your game”

I am sure there are more and I deliberately left out openings as I feel that this idea falls into the category of some memorization required.  Like coming back to a musical instrument, you may remember the scales or your old favorite song from motor memory, but that difficult piece you once played after practicing it  for hours before a single performance, doesn’t come back as easily. You only recall fragments.

So as I come back into this game, the first I look at are my tactical skills. About six years ago, I started on the MDLM journey of improvement my tactics through the seven circles of hell. I’ve completed two sets of 7 times 1200 problems  and had been on my third pass through when I realized that there was diminishing returns.  Before 2006, my tactical skills were abysmal. At the very least, the MDLM approach BURNED into my memory key patterns and underlying themes behind the tactics. 

So why do I still struggle with tactics despite being a rapid improvement “graduate” twice over?  It has to do with how I went about it.  After a certain threshold, my ability to recall and recognize patterns  were not mapped correctly. I wasn’t consciously creating my own narrative during each puzzle and most importantly during the ones I missed, not taking the time to understand why I missed it. Instead, because of the repetitious nature of the MDLM method, it was masked over with subsequent success and a false sense of security. In order for me to utilize the pattern recognition powers of my prefrontal cortex, I need to employ the correct supervised learning technique that only comes from the internal dialog when you are FIRST struggling with the problem. This process creates the right labeling that I can then use to recall the correct technique. Otherwise it falls under unsupervised learning and I take the “canned” labeling providing by the tool which doesn’t really mean anything and tend to cluster similar ideas together increasing my failure rate during recall.

In other words, even though the lower level of tactics  may seem easy to some, simply rushing through them to get to the next level without classifying each instance on your own terms  leaves you with clusters of patterns that may seem alike but require a nuance to perform correctly.

So as I started back up on tactical training to take the rust off, I was well aware that I had some patterns well mapped because I recalled the inner dialog I associated with the pattern.  For instance “ This is a geographical motif with a knight, but I need to remove the guard first and then white wins a piece.” If I don’t have this down for ALL THE BASIC THEMES, solving the higher levels becomes that much more difficult as those problems compound on top of each other.

Well it’s back to basics for me but with a new twist, “Supervised Learning”.   My blogging friend Temposchlucker at http://temposchlucker.blogspot.com/ has several posts about breaking down tactics and his own supervised learning approach.

My next post I’ll look at the supervised learning techniques I  used for positional understanding and how it’s been impacted with my absence from play.

A letter to Caissa, my demanding mistress.

Dear Caissa,

Yes, I’ve gotten your emails, texts, voicemails and even your FB friend invite. Linked-in too? Really? I know, I’ve been distant the past few months but I just needed some “space”. Our relationship was just getting out of hand. I had other demands and other areas of myself I needed to explore.

I don’t know how to tell you this, but your intuition is probably correct. I have been tangled with another mistress called Kali ( goddess of math). She’s logical like you, not as spirited as you. It started out casual. I thought I was going to be able to manage both of you but then she just dominated me and locked me in her dungeon insisting I sing of her praises to a bunch of kids who didn’t know what was coming. Oddly enough, or perhaps a case of Stockholm Syndrome, I found her quite principled an

d actually liked our conversations. She respects me and is letting loose of her chains ( as the semester is ending).

So here’s the thing, I’ve come to realize I don’t need you to complete me. I do miss our conversations and your enchanting ways you dance on 64 squares. But I refuse to fall for your teasing and humiliation when I fall short. I can do without the demeaning annoying cackle as you throw your head back in satisfaction of destroying another dream.

Don’t get me wrong, we had some good times. I will always remember Philly, the Pillsbury Memorial and that special Tuesday night when I “bagged” the master. I’ve just had to come to terms with a few things. For instance, my rating doesn’t make me. I actually enjoy the struggle and would rather look for the lesson than just the mere increase in rating. Given what I have going on and what I am willing and not willing to give up for you, I am complete. Getting to a better place with you would be great, but it’s not my destination.

I won’t be able to take you out on Tuesday’s for our “date night”. Kali actually pays her own way and helps me now. That’s our night. I regret to tell you that a week in Philly won’t be a reality this year. You want too much caviar and I can’t afford it. Besides, it brings out the worst in both of us. I’m open to a different date night. I hear Wednesday’s in Fitchburg can be inspiring.

If you are up for a more tame plutonic relationship and some good conversations with the occasional 64 dance, maybe at the end of the month we can do a weekend locally. Keeping it low keyed is better for me these days.

I know you must be upset, but please consider my offer. Maybe we can chat over coffee and see out the month of May looks like.

With respect,

Blunderprone

2011 Harry Nelson Pillsbury Memorial Tournament

( A Preview of the Tournament report that will be published in the next issue of Chess Horizons.)

Two days before Massachusetts’s first prominent chess hero’s 139th birthday, 57 players gathered on December 3, 2011 in Leominster at the Veteran’s Center to play in the 2011 Harry Nelson Pillsbury Memorial. Why this is not listed as a Heritage event under USCF guidelines ( Tournaments Held for at least 25 years) is beyond me since I looked back on MACA’s tournament history for this event dates back to 1991 . Any records before that are archived with USCF.
In the world wide web, I have a chess blog ( blunderprone.blogspot.com and mirrored here at chess.com) that is heavy on the historical perspective of chess, it’s players and major events. When asked to do the tournament report for this event, I was honored and could not resist tying in a little colloquial historical perspective to this event.

Harry Nelson Pillsbury



Born on December 5th, 1872, he was only 22 when he went to Hastings in 1895 and turned the European chess world on its head as he won the event. He learned to play chess in 1888 at the age of 15. His first chess teacher was Addison Smith, a member of the Boston Chess Club who lived in Somerville.

He moved to Philadelphia by the time he started taking this game seriously at age 17 years old. Pillsbury creativity and resourcefulness started to show up in 1890. Pillsbury played a series of Evans Gambits with the veteran Baltimore expert, H.N. Stone. He was one of the inventors of the Stone-Ware defense in the Evans. Our Somerville native smashed him 5-2.

Like Fisher, his knowledge of openings showed his resourcefulness to garnish older variations with his own added twists. This was especially seen at Hastings 1895 where he played a couple Evans Gambits against Schiffers and Bird. He played a variation not seen in Europe since the days of Kieseritzky and Mayet ( 50 years earlier). Having trained with this variation from local American players H.N Stone and Addison Smith, he had an advantage over his European contemporaries.

Though our event held in 2011, didn’t attract the European power houses of the day, we did have local GM Alexander Ivanov and two prominent local IM’s David Vigorito and Igor Foygel among the notable players in attendance in the open section. It was a quick draw in the final round of the 21 player open section that ended with GM Ivanov and IM Vigorito tied for first place with 3.5 points. Masters Vadim Martirosov and Avraam PIsmennyy followed with a 3.0 score. I was hard pressed to collect any score sheets from these games as IM David Vigorito commented that he stopped recording the last 15 moves of one of his games because of the time control.

One game I collected was from a friend and fellow blogger on chess.com. Although local Expert, Robert King had not finished with any prize money, his final score of 2.5 points came after 1 win and 3 draws, one being against IM Foygel in Round 3. Below is the game he annotated. It appears, that IM Foygel has the spirit of Pillsbury as he plays an older line of the Benoni ( 3…e5) against Mr. King, transposing it to an old Indian defense.

The Under 1900 section had the largest attendance with 27 players. This was my rust breaker event as I had personal matters taking priority over my chess board. Lately, with life in all its complications, the only time I get to play chess is on a one day event. I used to loath such events because of the G60 time controls and how I needed all the time in the world against a much younger opponent brought up on bullet and lightning internet chess. But I have acclimated since my love for the game versus my time for the game are on two separate and seemingly opposing axis’s.

Given the G60 time control, it comes as no surprise then that an eleven year old, Nithin Kavi, was undefeated and won first place in the U1900 section. Yours truly came in a clear second, playing only the last three rounds. My last round game was a raucous Central variation of the Slav defense where Black chose to play a minor piece exchange for 3 pawns. Here is that game with my annotations.

The Under 1500 section had a total of 9 players and a three-way tie for first place from the Granite State as James Benway, Robert B Walton Jr, and Anson O’young all from New Hampshire, finished with 3 points each. I didn’t get a chance to collect any of these games from that section.

Playing 5.f3 against the Benko against an Expert

I mentioned back in June how I was searching for a new way to handle the Benko Gambit and essayed an alternative that played 5.f3. Not preparing for this since June, I was able to play a decent and fun game against an opponent who was a strong class A/ Expert hovering around 2000 USCF.

My long term mnemonic recalled the dialog of not allowing Black’s queen Bishop to head to a6 with the line 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 c5 3.d5 b5 4.cxb5 a6 5.bxa6 and instead play 5.f3 to immediately reinforce e4. What I forgot was that playing 6.e4 is the strongest line following 5…e6. Here I mixed ideas up and decided to “spike” Black’s position with 6.d6!?

I remember watching a video on pawn formations with advanced d-chains and the cramping effect d6 could have if allowed. So I went for it. It created a series of forced moves and an early Q exchange as I scrambled to equalize development.

The middle game quickly transposed to an endgame. Before that could happen I wanted to make sure he couldn’t castle and allow my kind to get to the Queenside before he could. I entered into an endgame with a pawn deficit and N versus Bishop. I had a plan to blockade with my King and knight, get my pawns and pieces on dark squares and keep him busy.

It almost worked… but I fell for an exchange and ended up losing a drawn endgame.

What I learned:

1. 1) 5.f3 against the Benko ( Volga) Gambit is fun. I reviewed a few of Max Dlugy’s games (Dlugy Versus Lev Albert 1986; Dlugy vs Zofia Polgar, 1987 and Dlugy versus Gurevich in 1988) realized that following up with 6.e4 is the critical line. Nakamura versus Vachier in 2008 also shows up on the data base.
2. 2) Though the spike line is interesting and sort of in tune with a d-pawn chain, the game really is about e4 and setting up a tactical king side attack.
3. 3) Develop with a vengeance
4. 4) Big Endgame lesson with N Vs B:

a. Had the right approach in blocking with the opposite color of his Bishop

b. Wrong Passed pawn ( Queening square wrong color)

c. K and knight can hold against the extra bishop. If opposite King waltzes toward other pawns, knight can block passed pawn while king defends.

d. Don’t exchange pieces when down a pawn.

Game Mnemonics learned:

On all of the games mentioned in 1 above, Allowing Black to get his Queen bishop to b7 ( a8-h1 diagonal) comes at a price to Black with a weakened queenside and a brick pawn fortress at e4 f3 and g2. White gets lots of space on the Queen side. The games are less about subtle maneuvering, which I attempted, and more about sharp tactics with a space advantage. I am going to spend some time going over these games in more detail for my own sake. I hope next time I encounter the Benko, I can explore a little deeper beyond the 6.e4 line.

Taking off the Rust at the Pillsbury Memorial.

Lately, with life in all its complications, the only time I get to play chess is on a one day event. I used to loath such events because of the G60 time controls and how I needed all the time in the world against a much younger opponent brought up on bullet and lightning internet chess. But I have acclimated since my love for the game versus my time for the game are on two separate and seemingly opposing axis’s. Time for two or three day events doesn’t fit in well with my busy schedule during school season as I teach part time.

That’s why the mnemonic memory training is important. With a little effort, I can now recall the basic tabias of my repertoire as well as some key middle game ideas based on the themes from pawn structures. This way, during a G60 gamer, I am not wasting time doubting my short term memory’s recall of move orders during the opening. I visualize a tabia I would like to reach, and prepare for the first branch away from that. Then when I am faced with the first branch, the ideas behind the pawn formations are handy to finding candidate moves. Its very efficient and maximizes my time for complex middle game positions. I found I had on average a 10 minute surplus over my opponent going into the middle game which afforded me the opportunity to complicate things on his time.

Now, where the rust was show was my tactical calculations and depth of analysis during the games. The following two games are embarrassments that I managed to get lucky. The first two games won’t go in for publication when I do the report. My last round game might.

The first game is an advanced C-K I played as Black against a teenager. He played a passive line that allowed me to free up the position. I took an unnecessary risk move 17…Nxd4. What I saw was the potential for pinning his knight ( after he recaptures) and winning back the piece with interest. Where my rust came in was that I missed the fact that White covered a key square (c5) as long as the knight on e4 remained. On a side note, IM Igor Foygel, walked by my game right when I made that move and winced. By the time he circled back around, my opponent didn’t play the strongest continuation and I was able to get what I had intended , my ROI of the material. Igor had that look of surprise. Two days later, he asked me “ Did you plan 17…Nxd4 ?” I knew I was busted, I remarked that I had chose the complicated line to take off some rust as I miscalculated White’s best move. Then he told me how some masters choose difficult lines on purpose in the first round to “wake up”. I like Igor, he’s a nice guy and very much encouraging for even us mortals.

The following round, the teenager’s dad was seeking to avenge his son’s demise at the hands of Blunderprone! Let me just comment that even at a USCF rating of 1890, he was 16 years out of practice in events. I had White and took him into a Botvinik line ( 6Bg5) of the Saemish variation of the KID with ease. This is a pawn structure I seem to be really comfortable with. Though I missed a subtle weakness on Black’s early e5 advance and could have played for a significant advantage had I played dxe4. But the long term memory KNEW the nuances of the more positional game of an advanced d-pawn chain formation over an open center with more tactical requirements. I think I chose correctly given the G60 event, and better recall of positional ideas of this variation. Black then proceeded to not challenge the Bishop on g5 and made a slow plan to advance f5. This allowed for White to complete development, castle long, and open the game up on the kingside. By this time I had a growing time surplus of 20 minutes and decided to complicate the game. Here I allowed myself to experiment with the idea of a temporal advantage ( two more pieces developed than my opponent) and sacrifice a couple pawns for a power play with pieces. One pawn opened up the King side for my pieces and the other deflected his strongest defending piece. He resigned after I snared his rook.

The last round, I was warmed up and played White against another minor. He played the slav, I challenged him into the central variation that puts the question to Black on giving up a Bishop for three pawns. I’ve had good success in the past with this line and its actually fun… as long as my tactical skills aren’t too rusty… so this was a big risk going into the last round. No guts no glory. Sure enough, my opponent remembered his moves right up until he was supposed to capture with the Bishop. Instead he captures with the knight. This avoided the other complications int eh main line. Black was able toe recover the 3 pawns for the knight but I was able to freeze his king in the center. I gave up a rook to gain initiative while I had the double bishops bearing on the centralized king, a centralized knight and Queen ready for action. Black was trying desperately to exchange Queens off the board, but I wanted it on my terms. I got my rook back which equalized material but gave me more active pieces going into a tricky endgame. Black suffered from cramps towards the last few moves as my boa constrictor started to squeeze in.

I am still working on the tournament report for the Pillsbury Memorial. I am collected some annotated games from some players in the top section. This will take some time. MY publication deadline is early January. I will post the article here on line. Until then, I am renewing my games studies with emphasis on expanding the mnemonic process. I will post on my first attempts next time.