Chess Log: Coming from Behind to a Knight Checkmate

It's been a long while since I posted one of my chess games on this blog. Years ago I switched from FICS to Lichess, and it took me this long to figure out how to cut and paste the moves from a Lichess game. 

And even now it's somewhat difficult, because this cut and paste results in a continuous stream of numbers and letters with no spaces and no periods. Spaces and periods are important sometimes. I had to put them all back in manually. 

There may well be a much easier way to do this, and I may eventually find it. People ask about this in the discussions on Lichess, and the answers typically contain 5 words of IT jargon in every 10 words. Eh. Anyway, on to the game. 5-0 blitz, I played White:

1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5 a6 4. Ba4 Nf6 5. O-O Bc5 6. c3 O-O 7. b4 Bb6 8. Bb3 h6 9. h3 d6 10. a4 Be6 11. Bxe6 fxe6 12. Qb3 Qe7 13. Nh4 Nxe4 14. Nf5 Qd7 15. Ng3 Nxg3 16. Kh2 Nxf1+ 17. Kg1 Rxf2 18. d4 Nxd4 19. Qc4 Ne2+ 20. Kh1 Nfg3+ 21. Kh2 Rf1 22. Qxe2 Bg1+ 23. Kxg3 Rxc1 24. Qd2 Rf1 25. c4 Rf2 26. Qe1 Qf7 27. Qxg1 Qg6+ 28. Kxf2 Rf8+ 29. Ke2 Qe4+ 30.Qe3 Qxc4+ 31. Qd3 Qxd3+ 32.Kxd3 Rf2 33.Nc3 Rxg2 34. Ne4 Rh2 35.b5 Rxh3+ 36. Ke2 d5 37. Nf2 Rh2 38. Kf3 g5 39.bxa6 bxa6 40. Rb1 Kg7 41.Rb7 Kf6 42. Rxc7 Rh1 43.Nxh1 e4+ 44.Ke3 Ke5 45.Ng3 d4+ 46. Ke2 g4 47. Rc5+Kf4 48. Nh5#

Another come-from-behind win for me, another illustration of why you shouldn't resign unless you and your opponent are both rated much higher than I am. And even if you don't win as I did here, the experience of fighting every move to the end is educational. 

And earlier on this bog I said that, unlike fictional depictions of chess in movies and TV, only very low-level players don't see checkmate coming on the very next move. I need to qualify that. This changes, of course, when a player is under time pressure. I don't remember how much time I had left at the end of this game, but my opponent was under 10 seconds and I was moving as fast as I could, and I wasn't sure whether the last move was checkmate. 

It has recently become more clear to me how powerful a line of Pawns on the same rank can be. I first noticed this technique about 12 years ago in a chess club, watching a chess Master destroy all comers and frequently lining up two, or three, or four Pawns next to each other on the same rank to extremely good effect. 

A mere 12 years or so later, and it occurred to me that I, too, might be able to use this technique. I'm becoming a better chess player. Very, very, very gradually.

Anyway, in this game, I was down severely, but didn't give up, and my opponent may have become overconfident toward the end. This allowed me to trap his King with a Pawn wall on one side and checkmate him with my Knight from the other side.

Chess Log: A Quick One

First off, an apology to those of my readers whose interest in this blog is mainly chess. I know, it's been years since I've posted about chess. This has to do with technical difficulties, with IT. I am old and not very good with IT. I'm more interested in chess than ever. Will I post more often about chess in the future. I don't know. I hope so. In brief, the problem is copy-and-paste: When I played at FICS, I could copy and paste my games into my blog posts. I haven't figured out how to copy the moves on lichess. Apparently I'm one a them there OK boomers.

Anyway: the following was short enough for me to easily copy out by hand. With a pen. Some of you younger readers, maybe you can ask a boomer what a pen is. This was a 5-0 blitz game, I played White:

1. e4 d5 2 exd5 Qxd5 3. Nc3 Qe6+ 4. Qe2 Nf6 5. Qxe6 g6??? 6. Qxc8!#

Advanced chess players might spot several mistakes made by Black, but surely the biggest one was not taking my Queen on his 5th move.

Chess Log: Computer Problems

Last night I was playing chess on the Free Internet Chess Server (FICS), as I have almost every day for, I believe, 12 years. Right now I can't check how long it's been. Ordinarily I'd just go the main console of the Babaschess interface, enter f and my profile would appear, with my overall record for the whole time I've been playing there, my highest official rating, and more info, including the date I joined.

But now when I go to Babaschess, instead of seeing my FICS setup, I see a screen which is grey from edge to edge. I don't know if I did that, or if there's a problem because of the Recent Big Update, or if FICS has closed up shop. I'm pretty sure I did it. More often than I'd like, I unintentionally hit a wrong key and change what's on my PC screen -- the size of a chessboard for example -- and have some difficulty changing it back. Often when I try to change things back I just make things worse.

It's possible that I have that problem unusually severely. That problem, the wetware interface, may be 100% responsible for the grey screen with no controls at my disposal.

I spent some time last night trying to fix my Babaschess connection, then trying to set up another FICs interface, and then I gave up. I said to myself that this could turn out great. For example, I told myself that I could spend all of the time I had spent on chess improving my Latin instead. (It wasn't the first time I had told myself exactly that.) Or maybe I could enjoy chess just by studying chess books.

So this morning, about 5 minutes after I turned on my computer, I looked for other online chess servers, and right away I found Lichess, which I hadn't known existed, and now I play at Lichess. The chess at Lichess is all on the Lichess website, there's no need to a player to set up his or her own interface.

I had been playing at FICS since around 2004, and Lichess launched in 2010, while I was right exactly in the middle of not looking for any other places to play chess.

Maybe I'll actually look around for still other online chess options (this is a very non-autistic thing to say). Maybe FICS is still around and I'll eventually figure out the interface issue. It's not a high-tech issue, or I never would have been able to set up an interface all by myself to begin with, but it's also not as low-tech as playing on Lichess' website. (But even at Lichess, I accidentally made the board much smaller, then somehow made it big again, and haven't figured out how to change its size since then. This is what my life is like.)

Maybe I'll also study those chess books more in addition to playing on line, and also work harder on my Latin, and have a happy well-rounded life. Who knows, maybe I'll even develop friendships to the point where other people, hypothetical future friends of mine, will visit my home and not mind taking a crack at fixing my interfaces and explaining why things suddenly vanish or change because I accidentally hit a key. Maybe they would even know how to change my PC to the point that accidentally hitting a single key would no longer have such disastrous power. It would be a friggin miracle if I could just change some settings so that I can no longer do something I don't want to do by accidentally hitting one key or swiping my mouse incorrectly or whatever the $%#$%#$@#* @#$%^&#$% ^%$# it is.

Maybe -- I have no way of knowing at this moment -- I would learn all about things like that in the first day of a computer class or the first page of a computers-for-dummies type book.

Maybe life will be wonderful even before I become rich and famous. Wouldn't that be weird.

Chess Log: Two Quick Ones

I played White both games.

1. e4 c6 2. d4 d5 3. exd5 cxd5 4. ♗b5 ♘c6 5. ♘f3 ♗f5 6. ♘e5 ♕c7 7. ♘c3 a6 8. ♘xd5 ♕a5 9. ♗d2! ♕xb5?? 10. ♘c7! 1-0 {Black resigns}

I almost didn't think of 9. ♗d2. Not world-championship-level stuff here.

Even quicker:

1. e4 ♘f6 2. e5 ♘d5 3. d4 d6 4. ♘f3 ♗g4 5. ♗e2 e6 6. O-O ♗e7 7. h3 ♗xf3 8. ♗xf3 dxe5? 9. c4! 1-0 {Black resigns}

I suppose Black should have played 8. ... ♘c6.

Chess Log: 1. e4 e6 2. d4 c5 3. d5 ♕b6 4. dxe6 ♕xe6 5. ♘c3 ♕b6 6. ♗f4 ♘c6? 7. ♘d5! ♕a5+ 8. c3 ♘ge7? 9. ♘c7! ♔d8 10. ♘xa8 ♘d4? 11. ♗c7! 1-0

I don't recall having come across this one before.

What should Black have done? You're asking me? I don't know. Perhaps Black's 3rd move, moving the Queen out, should already have been marked with a ?. Little thought seems to have been put into the safety of the Black Queen.

Chess Log: 1. e4 e5 2. ♘f3 ♘c6 3. ♗b5 ♘f6 4. O-O ♘g4 5. h3 h5

5-0 blitz, I played White:

1. e4 e5 2. ♘f3 ♘c6 3. ♗b5 ♘f6 4. O-O ♘g4 5. h3 h5 6. ♘h2 d6 7. ♗e2 ♘d4 8. ♗xg4 hxg4 9. ♘xg4 ♗xg4 10. ♕xg4 ♘xc2 11. ♘a3 ♘xa1 12. b3 ♘xb3 13. axb3 ♕f6 14. d3 ♗e7 15. ♘c4 ♖h4 16. ♕g3 O-O-O 17. ♘e3 ♕g6 18. ♘f5 ♗f6 19. ♘xh4 ♕xg3 20. fxg3 g6 21. ♘f3 c6 22. ♗g5 ♗xg5 23. ♘xg5 d5 24. ♖xf7 dxe4 25. dxe4 ♖d3 26. ♖f8 ♔c7 27. ♘e6 ♔b6 28. b4 ♖xg3 29. ♔f2 ♖b3 30. ♖g8 ♖xb4 31. ♖xg6 ♖xe4 32. ♔f3 ♖c4 33. g3 a5 34. h4 a4 35. ♖g8 ♖c3 36. ♔g2 a3 37. ♖a8 ♖c2 38. ♔h3 a2 39. ♘d8 e4 40. ♘f7 e3 41. ♘g5 e2 42. ♘f3 ♔b5 43. ♘d4 ♔c4 44. ♘xc2 ♔d3 45. ♖xa2 ♔d2 46. h5 b5 47. h6 b4 48. ♘xb4 ♔d1 49. ♘c2 c5 50. h7 e1=Q 51. ♘xe1 ♔xe1 52. h8=Q 1-0 {Black resigns}

Not 6. hxg4?, because then 6. ... hxg4! opens up the h-file to both the Black Rook and the Black Queen, putting White into a world of hurt. And again, 10. ♕xg4, even though it allowed Black to trade a Knight for the Rook at a1, instead of 10. hxg4?.

My win was partly skillful use of my remaining Knight starting on my 15th move, partly a couple of blunders by Black, and partly luck. I'd like to claim that the impressive use of my Knight starting with 39. ♘d8 was pure skill, but I was just flailing on the 39th move, and it wasn't until 41. ♘g5 that I began to see how strong the Knight was going to be in the endgame -- just began to see it. And 48. ♘xb4+! is a nice move, but I didn't have it planned before my 48th move. This game was closer than it might look.

Chess Log: Playing With Reckless Abandon Has Been Paying Off For Me Lately

I played White. Going into the game I was rated 1293 and my opponent was rated 1859. 5-0 blitz:

1. e4 e5 2. ♘f3 ♘c6 3. ♗b5 f5 4. ♗xc6 dxc6 5. ♘xe5 ♕f6 6. ♘f3 fxe4 7. ♕e2 ♕e7 8. ♘d4 ♘f6 9. O-O ♕e5 10. ♘f3 ♕h5 11. ♘d4 ♗g4 12. f3 ♗c5 13. fxg4 ♗xd4 14. ♔h1 ♕xg4 15. ♕xg4 ♘xg4 16. h3 h5 17. d3 exd3 18. cxd3 O-O-O 19. ♗g5 ♖df8 20. ♘d2 ♘f2 21. ♔h2 ♘xd3 22. ♖ab1 ♗xb2 23. ♖xf8 ♖xf8 24. ♘c4 ♗e5 25. g3 ♖f2 26. ♔g1 ♗f6 27. ♗xf6 ♖xf6 28. ♖d1 ♘b4 29. a4 ♘d5 30. ♖e1 b6 31. ♖e8 ♔b7 32. ♘e5 c5 33. ♘d7 ♖d6 34. ♖b8 ♔c6 35. ♘e5 1-0 {Black checkmated}

At the end of the game Black had 1 minute and 28 seconds left on his clock and I had less than 1.3 seconds. Perhaps Black got a little careless because he assumed he was coasting toward a win on time. We each ended the game with one Rook and one Knight. Black had 6 Pawns left to my three. However, I was able to mate with my Knight because because Black's King was surrounded by his Rook, Knight and 3 of his Pawns, leaving him 3 squares where he could move his King, and when I attacked with the Knight those 3 squares were covered, 1 each, by my Knight, my Rook and 1 of my Pawns. 34. ... ♔a6 instead of the game move 34. ... ♔c6 would've won easily on time for Black.

The Ruy Lopez is my preferred opening with White. I haven't seen 3. ... f5 very often. The MCO-13 calls 3. ... f5 the Schliemann Defense or Jaenisch Gambit, devotes 5 columns to it and says it is "probably not quite sound" but "frequently employed by players looking for a real slugfest." I suppose a slugfest might naturally appeal to a player who's rated 566 points above his opponent. My 4. ♗xc6 might have been an unexpectedly aggressive counter. It's not in the book. Black was immediately able to make my position very cramped, and was on the offensive for most of the game, but I managed to hang on. Honestly, the checkmate was a lot more luck than skill.

My overall approach lately has been very aggressive, and it's been working well for me, it seems to fit my personalty better to charge in and bash holes than to than play positionally and lay patiently in wait for a crack to develop in my opponent's wall. As I mentioned before in this blog, the Queen's Gambit Declined has recently been discovered by my group, and is very popular with us currently. But just a little while ago I've switched to the Queen's Gambit Accepted, which is a very reckless defense, not approved of very much at all by the MCO-13, but it's been working well for me -- partly out of surprise, no doubt, and also because I've been able to use it create chaotic positions, and then cope with the chaos better than my opponents.

It's a game. And I do better when I have more fun, and I have more fun when I play more recklessly, perhaps because I'm overly-cautious in some other areas of my life, causing frustration to build up which I can safely release over the chessboard, because -- it's only a game.

Chess Log: If You Want to Improve, Play Stronger Opponents

I played White:

1. e4 c5 2. ♘f3 ♘c6 3. d4 cxd4 4. ♘xd4 ♘e5 5. ♗f4 ♘g6 6. ♗g3 e5 7. ♘f3 f6 8. ♗c4 ♘8e7 9. ♕d5 ♘xd5 10. ♗xd5 ♗b4 11. c3 ♗a5 12. O-O ♕b6 13. b4 ♗xb4 14. cxb4 ♕xb4 15. ♘bd2 ♘e7 16. a3 ♕a4 17. ♗b3 ♕c6 18. ♖fc1 ♕b6 19. ♘c4 ♕xb3 20. ♘d6 ♔f8 21. ♖cb1 ♕e6 22. ♘b5 ♘c6 23. ♘c7 ♕e7 24. ♘xa8 b6 25. ♘c7 ♗b7 26. ♘d5 ♕f7 27. h3 ♘d4 28. ♘xd4 exd4 29. ♗d6 ♔e8 30. ♘c7 ♔d8 31. ♘b5 ♗xe4 32. ♗c7 ♔e7 33. ♖e1 ♕d5 34. a4 ♖c8 35. f3 ♖xc7 36. ♖xe4 ♔f7 37. ♘xc7 ♕c4 38. ♘b5 a6 39. ♘d6 1-0 {Black resigns}

For several months now I've been taking the advice given by the chess master in Guy Ritchie's magnificent, greatly-underrated movie Revolver: if you want to improve, play opponents who are better than you. Presumably there's some different advice for whoever happens to be the best chess player in the world at any given time. But this does not directly affect me. It's been some years since I've had any hope that I would ever become such a good chess player that it would be difficult to find stronger opponents.

But there is no question at all anymore that I am becoming a better player by playing opponents stronger than I am. Not all of my games are against higher-rated opponents, but I no longer limit the rating of opponents against whom I will play.

And I'm somewhat conscious now, because of watching that movie, of the huge role of the ego in the game of chess. The huge, negative role. Just today I played someone rated 700 points higher than I. 700 is a huge difference. So big that when he beat me it didn't change our ratings. Now, the thing is, I experienced the entire game as an unpleasant humiliation, when in fact it could have been a great learning experience, for the simplest conceivable reason: a player rated 700 points higher than I am presumably has some skills and insights into chess which I lack. But even after months of consciously battling my own ego at the chessboard I had great difficulty learning from the game, because my ego was objecting to my being trounced.

Along with the great advice about playing stronger opponents, I would add: don't resign. Don't give up. I don't always follow my own advice here. But I followed it in the game shown above, against an opponent rated about the same as I am. After 8 moves we each still had all of our pieces and 7 of our 8 Pawns. Then I made the simplest possible blunder on my 9th move: 9. ♕d5 gave my Queen away in exchange for a Knight.

But I didn't resign.

By the 14th move I had exchanged 2 Pawns for his black Bishop, on my 24th move I took one of his Rooks without exchanging anything for it, on my 33rd move I pinned his White Bishop, and on my 39th move, when he was down to his Queen and 7 Pawns against both Rooks, a Knight and 4 Pawns for me, after having chased his Queen all over the board for most of the game, I finally forked his King and Queen with my Knight, and, perhaps with ego-involved anger outweighing whatever else this game might have been able to teach him -- possibly, for instance: stay focused if your opponent blunders away his Queen on the 9th move of a game which had been pretty even until then, instead of letting it make you over-confident -- he resigned.

Chess Log: I'm Improving, Because I Watched Guy Ritchie's Film Revolver

The film has some very sound advice for the chess player hoping to go from poor to mediocre: play stronger players, and don't let your ego interfere with your progress. In the film, the stuff about the ego is said to apply to all areas in life. Tangible progress is much easier to measure in chess than in some other things.

5-0 blitz, I played White:

1. e4 e5 2. ♘f3 ♘c6 3. ♗b5 ♘ge7 4. d4 exd4 5. ♘xd4 a6 6. ♘xc6 bxc6 7. ♗a4 ♗b7 8. O-O h6 9. ♘c3 ♖b8 10. ♗f4 ♘g6 11. ♗g3 ♗d6 12. e5 ♗b4 13. e6 dxe6 14. ♕xd8 ♖xd8 15. ♗xc7 ♖d7 16. ♗g3 ♗xc3 17. bxc3 O-O 18. ♖fd1 ♖fd8 19. ♖xd7 ♖xd7 20. h3 ♖d2 21. ♖b1 ♗c8 22. ♖b8 ♘e7 23. ♗xc6 ♖xc2 24. ♗d7 ♖xc3 25. ♗d6 ♔f8 26. ♗xc8 ♖c6 27. ♗d7 ♖c8 28. ♗xc8 ♔e8 29. ♗xe6 ♘c8 30. ♖xc8 1-0 {Black checkmated}

Black's fatal mistake in this game was 21. [...] ♗c8. up until then, as far as I can see, the game was pretty even.

Another 5-0 blitz with me playing White:

1. e4 c6 2. d4 d5 3. e5 c5 4. ♘f3 cxd4 5. ♘xd4 a6 6. h3 ♘c6 7. a3 ♕a5 8. ♗d2 ♕c5 9. ♘xc6 bxc6 10. ♗b4 ♕b6 11. ♗d3 c5 12. ♗d2 e6 13. ♘c3 ♗b7 14. ♘a4 ♕c6 15. b3 d4 16. ♘b2 ♕xg2 17. ♖f1 ♕xh3 18. ♕e2 ♘h6 19. O-O-O ♘f5 20. ♗e4 ♗xe4 21. ♕xe4 ♖c8 22. ♕b7 ♘e7 23. ♘c4 d3 24. ♘d6 ♔d8 25. ♘xc8 ♘xc8 26. ♕xa6 dxc2 27. ♗a5 ♔e8 28. ♕xc8 ♔e7 29. ♖d7 1-0 {Black checkmated}

As early as 12. [...] e6 Black was cramping me with a strong Pawn storm, and by 16. [...] ♕xg2 I felt I was in some serious trouble. however, by my 22nd move I had achieved a strong counteratack. 26. [...] dxc2?? was a serious error on black's part, allowing me to begin the winning combination with double check on 27. ♗a5!

And yes, I'm aware that I'm continuing to let my ego interfere with my progress by continuing to focus on games I've won, which are flattering to my ego, rather than games I've lost, which might show me weaknesses in my play and allow me to improve tremendously. Grappling with the ego can be very difficult, even after you've become aware that that's what you're doing.

Chess Log: What?!

5-0 blitz, I played White:

1. e4 c5 2. ♘f3 ♘c6 3. d4 ♕b6 4. d5 ♘b8 5. b3 d6 6. ♗e3 g6 7. ♘bd2 ♘d7 8. ♘c4 ♕c7 9. ♗f4 ♗g7 10. e5 ♘xe5 11. ♘cxe5 dxe5 12. ♗g3 ♕a5 13. ♘d2 e4 14. ♗e2 ♗xa1 15. ♕xa1 ♘f6 16. c3 O-O 17. ♘c4 ♕d8 18. O-O b5 19. ♘e5 a6 20. ♖d1 ♗b7 21. c4 b4 22. ♘c6 ♗xc6 23. dxc6 ♕c8 24. c7 ♖a7 25. ♕e5 ♖e8 26. ♕xc5 ♘h5 27. ♕xa7 ♘xg3 28. fxg3 e5 29. c5 ♖e7 30. ♖d8 1-0 {Black resigns}

Black's strongest move would have been to move the King and allow White to capture the Black Queen, and continue on with 1 Rook and 7 Pawns against White's Queen, 1 Rook, 1 Bishop and 7 Pawns. If Black captures the Rook, White re-takes with the Pawn, gets a 2nd Queen and takes Black's Rook as well, leaving Black with no pieces and 7 Pawns against White's 2 Queens, 1 Bishop and 6 Pawns.

I'm used to playing opponents rated hundreds of points higher than I and being stunned by the finish. But up until now it was always the higher-rated opponent who provided the stunning finish. Honestly, I cannot account for how I did this. I'm stunned.

Chess Log: Several Short Games Showing The Risks Of Moving The F-Pawn Too Early

First, two very short games demonstrating that NOT capturing the Knight at e5 after 1. e4 e5 2. ♘f3 f6? 3. ♘xe5! will not necessarily improve things for Black:

1. e4 e5 2. ♘f3 f6 3. ♘xe5 ♗d6 4. ♕h5 ♔e7 5. ♕f7 1-0 {Black checkmated}

1. e4 e5 2. ♘f3 f6 3. ♘xe5 d6 4. ♕h5 ♔e7 5. ♕f7 1-0 {Black checkmated}

Next, a game showing that Black can also benefit when White moves the f-Pawn too early -- or actually, in this case, not Castling Queenside soon enough after the standard, by-the-book 7. f4:

1. e4 c5 2. ♘f3 d6 3. d4 cxd4 4. ♘xd4 ♘f6 5. ♘c3 a6 6. ♗g5 e6 7. f4 ♗e7 8. ♕f3 ♘bd7 9. ♗d3 e5 10. fxe5 ♘xe5 11. ♕g3 ♘h5 12. ♗xe7 ♕xe7 13. ♕e3 ♘g4 14. ♕e2 ♕h4 15. g3 ♘xg3 16. O-O-O ♘xe2 17. ♗xe2 0-1 {White resigns}

Chess Log: 2 More Games From My Hot Streak

As I mentioned in my previous Chess Log post, one of the delightful things about a hot streak in chess is how effortless it feels: I make strong moves and it's as if they were just handed to me, rather than my having had to work.

Note: most of the games I play are 5-0 blitz: 5 minutes allowed per side for the entire game before one forfeits on time. So there's not a lot of time during the game for strenuous mental work. And let's face it: if I spent a lot time working these things out between games, I'd be a much stronger chess player than I am.

We should also keep in mind, especially from the perspective of a weaker player against a stronger one, that it's not always clear whether the weaker player has played uncharacteristically strongly, or whether he has merely been the beneficiary of an uncharacteristic blunder by the stronger player. Which was it in this game? I played Black, White was rated more than 250 points higher than I:

1. e4 c5 2. d4 cxd4 3. ♘f3 e5 4. ♘xe5? ♕a5! 5. c3 ♕xe5 6. ♕xd4 ♕xd4 7. cxd4 ♘c6 8. d5 ♘e5 9. ♗f4 d6 10. ♘c3 ♘f6 11. ♗e2 a6 12. O-O ♗e7 13. ♘a4 ♗d7 14. ♘b6 ♖b8 15. ♖ac1 O-O 16. ♖c7 ♗d8 17. ♗xe5 ♗xc7 18. ♗xf6 ♗xb6 0-1 {White resigns}

Was 4. ♘xe5? an out-and-out blunder, or was 4. ... ♕a5! an especially strong move on my part? (Again, keeping in mind that this was a 5-0 blitz game. In a standard game, instead of 5 minutes, each side has 2 1/2 hours. Assuming an average game is 40 moves long, that's 3 3/4 minutes allotted for an average move. In a 5-0 game, 40 moves comes down to 7 1/2 seconds per move.) In any case, this put me a piece up, and apparently after the 18th move Black decided that I wasn't going to give that advantage back easily, and resigned.

In the following game my opponent and I were ranked about equally. I've played this opponent many times, and to the best of my recollection our record is pretty even. I played White:

1. e4 e5 2. ♘f3 d6 3. d4 f6 4. dxe5 dxe5 5. ♕xd8 ♔xd8 6. ♘xe5 fxe5 7. ♗g5 ♗e7 8. ♗xe7 ♘xe7 9. ♘c3 ♗d7 10. O-O-O ♘bc6 11. ♘b5 a6 12. ♘c3 ♔e8 13. ♗e2 ♖d8 14. g3 ♗e6 15. f4 ♘d4 16. ♗d3 ♘ec6 17. f5 ♗f7 18. g4 ♔d7 19. ♗f1 ♔c8 20. ♗h3 ♖he8 21. g5 h6 22. f6 ♔b8 23. fxg7 ♖g8 24. gxh6 ♗g6 25. ♘d5 ♘e2 26. ♔b1 ♘f4 27. ♘f6 ♖xd1 28. ♖xd1 ♘e7 29. ♗f1 ♖c8 30. ♗c4 ♗h7 31. ♘xh7 ♘g8 32. ♗xg8 ♖xg8 33. ♘f6 1-0 {Black resigns}

After we traded Queens on the 5th move I sacrificed a Knight with 6. ♘xe5, taking that f-Pawn out of the way, as I learned to do from Wikipedia, although usually White still has the Queen when making this sacrifice. In my opinion the key move in this win was 24. gxh6, supporting my Pawn at g7. 9 moves later black apparently thought there was no way left to stop that Pawn, and resigned.

One thing I'm wondering about is: if a player rated 200 or 300 points higher than I had taken over Black's position after my 24th move, would I still have won?

Chess Log: How Did I do This?

When you're in a slump in chess it's awful, it feels as if you've never seen the game before and players you usually beat are constantly baffling you with their brilliance. Your mind feels sluggish and full of sand and debris. Absolutely awful.

When things are going well, on the other hand, wins seem to fall right into your lap. Like this one. 5-0 blitz as usual for me. I played Black:

1. c4 e5 2. d3 d5 3. cxd5 ♕xd5 4. ♘c3 ♕d8 5. g3 ♘c6 6. ♗g2 ♘f6 7. ♘f3 ♗b4 8. ♕c2 O-O 9. O-O ♖e8 10. ♗d2 ♘d4 11. ♘xd4 exd4 12. ♘d1 ♖xe2! 0-1 {White resigns}

Don't ask me how I did that. I don't know.

Chess Log: Did I Play A Good Game?

As I have repeatedly assured the readers of this blog, really good chess players, pros, are so much better than I am that I really don't know what they're doing.

Games of the Grandmasters are freely distributed for the public to see, and I've studied some of those games. Can't say I've really understood those games. I'm constantly thinking: why that move and not this one?! And these are annotated games, with notes either by one of the participants or by some other Grandmaster, notes explaining why this move and not that, and I'm talking about being puzzled by moves which are so obvious -- TO GRANDMASTERS -- that it hasn't occurred to the one making notes that someone somewhere might not understand the rationale behind them.

There is one partial exception to this incomprehension of mine: one game which I have been studying and studying and studying, to see whether it's just a matter of time before I understand why those moves were chosen. I've spent far more time looking at this game than any other world-class game, just to see if I can understand it. I feel that I now VAGUELY understand PARTS of this one Grandmaster game. One of 110,000 or 120,000 games published and analyzed in Chess Informant since 1966.

It's game 120 in volume 20 of Chess Informant, Kovács -- Benkő, Debrecen 1975, with notes by Benkő. I chose it in part because it's one of the games in that volume which comes with a diagram, so that partway through the game I could check to make sure I'd moved the pieces correctly until then.



(Yes, "Chess Informant" sounds strange, sort of like "Chess Snitch," but that's the the way the publishers of "Šahovski Informator" in Belgrade printed the periodical's title in English on the cover when they started in the mid-60's, along with translations of the title into Russian, German, French, Spanish, Italian and Swedish, and it's still published today and it's one of the world's most highly-regarded chess publications, and its name is translated into even more languages on the cover now. It pioneered a universal, language-free system of chess notation, and everyone in the English-speaking chess world has gotten used to calling it "Chess Informant," even though "Chess Information" might've been more of a spot-on translation. Hey, their English has always been much better than my Serbo-Croatian.)

All of that by way of introduction to this game, a 5-0 blitz, which I played today, playing Black, and won, against a player rated much higher than I:

1. e4 c5 2. ♘c3 d6 3. g3 ♘c6 4. ♗g2 e5 5. d3 h6 6. f4 exf4 7. ♗xf4 ♘f6 8. ♘ge2 ♗g4 9. h3 ♗xe2 10. ♘xe2 ♕a5 11. ♘c3 ♗e7 12. O-O O-O 13. ♕d2 ♕b6 14. b3 ♘d4 15. a4 a5 16. ♗e3 ♘h7 17. ♗xd4 cxd4 18. ♘b5 ♗g5 19. ♕e2 ♗e3 20. ♔h2 ♘f6 21. ♖f5 ♖fc8 22. ♘a3 ♖c5 23. ♖f3 ♕b4 24. ♘c4 b5 25. ♘xd6 bxa4 26. ♖xa4 ♕d2 27. ♕xd2 ♗xd2 28. ♘c4 ♗c3 29. ♖f1 ♘d7 30. ♖f2 ♘e5 31. ♘b6 ♖a6 32. ♘d5 f6 33. h4 ♘g4 34. ♔g1 ♘xf2 35. ♔xf2 ♗d2 36. ♔f3 ♗e3 37. ♖a2 a4 38. ♘xe3 dxe3 39. ♔xe3 ♖e5 40. b4 g5 41. hxg5 hxg5 42. c4 ♔f8 43. d4 ♖e7 44. d5 ♔e8 45. c5 ♔d8 46. b5 ♖a5 47. ♗f1 f5 48. ♗d3 fxe4 49. ♗xe4 ♖xb5 50. ♖xa4 ♖xc5 51. ♖a8 ♖c8 52. ♖a5 ♖c4 53. d6 ♖exe4 54. ♔d3 ♖ed4 0-1 {White resigns}

The title of this blog post is not a rhetorical question. I don't know whether I played an exceptionally good game or if my opponent played far under his or her usual level, or some of both, or what. We played online. For all I know, my opponent might have been interrupted by other things while playing game or have had to deal with some other hardship. (I hope he or she wasn't driving or something like that. DON'T CHESS AND DRIVE! IT CAN WAIT!)

Somewhere, I read a comment by a Grandmaster about weak players playing "as if they were hyptnotized" when playing someone rated much higher: that is, the weak players often play even substantially worse than they usually do. I knew right away when I read that that it applied to me, and it's one of the solid pieces of advice I've tried to keep in mind: basically, advice just to keep my head, not to panic, and to play my best regardless of my opponent's rating. Used to be, I always looked at my opponent's rating before the game began. Now, sometimes I make a point of not looking at that rating until the game is well underway.

About all I can think of to say about this game, as far as blow-by-blow commentary goes, is that White's Pawn storm beginning in the early 40's intimidated me quite a bit at first, but I told myself to be calm and still play my best game. A chess game ain't over til it's over.

Maybe if I spend many hours analyzing this game I'll understand it about as well as Kovács -- Benkő, Debrecen 1975, haha.

Chess Log: Another Example Of Why Beginners Shouldn't Move The F Pawn Early

Leave that to the pros. (And don't get overly-egotistical about whether or not you're a pro.) For example:

1. e4 e6 2. d4 d5 3. e5 f6? 4. ♘f3 fxe5?? 5. ♘xe5 ♘f6 6. ♗g5 ♗d6 7. ♗b5 ♗d7 8. ♗xf6 gxf6??? 9. ♕h5 1-0 {Black resigns}

For us regular folks, moving the f-Pawn too early spells disaster. Not every single time, if we're playing against other regular folks, but often enough.

Like many important things I know -- perhaps like every single important thing I know, and I'm not just talking about chess -- I did not figure this out on my own. Someone smarter pointed it out to me, and I was just bright enough to appreciate the advice. There was, and I hope there still is, a Wikipedia page showing opening moves, and instead of showing the best openings as I've usually seen in chess instruction for beginners, this one showed bad early moves often made by beginners and explained why they should be avoided. Unfortunately, right now when I want to link this very helpful Wiki page, I can't find it. I thought it was titled something like "Example of a Chess Game." Anyway, among many other things, it showed why Black shouldn't play 1. e4 e5 2. ♘f3 f6???

This game was somewhat different, but the unsound early 3. ... f6 still caught my eye. Black's 4th move made a bad situation worse. I'm not claiming I played White's best possible opening game here, or that an expert couldn't have still beaten me taking over for Black after the fourth move, not by any stretch of the imagination; still, in this game I managed to capitalize on the hole where black's f Pawn should have been, and after 9. ♕h5+, Black had only two possible moves: either 9. ... ♔f8 or 9. ... ♔e7. Against either one, 10. ♕f7 is checkmate.

Chess Log: Sometimes Success Is As Easy As Remembering 1 Simple Thing

In this case: reminding myself to go fast, fast, fast in 5-0 blitz games. Things to remember don't get much simpler than that. Just a little over 24 hours ago I posted my last Chess Log post, and at the time, as I remarked,

"I haven't been playing very well at all lately."

I'd lost over 100 rating points in just a day or 2. Then I remarked that I'd been losing lots of games on time while having the better position. So I just told myself: "Go fast, fast, fast," and for the past 24 hours, for the most part, I haven't forgotten to do so, and I've gone 12-8 against highly-rated opposition and gained 70 points.

Oh, actually, I've reminded myself to do 2 very simple things, actually: go fast, and not assume that I've won until I actually have. The two things often go together: I gain an early advantage and get smug, assuming the game is already won, and before I know it, a tough opponent has been playing so much faster than me that I've got 10 seconds or so left against mt opponents 1 1/2 minutes... and I lose on time. Because I got smug and assumed I'd won before I actually had.

PS, 2:33 PM: And sure enough, as soon as I posted about how great I am at chess, I started another losing streak. Overconfidence messes you up in chess, every time.

Chess Log: Countering A Bishop Sacrifice

5-0 blitz, I played Black.

1. d4 d5 2. ♗f4 e6 3. ♘f3 ♗d6 4. ♘e5 ♘d7 5. e3 ♘gf6 6. h3 O-O 7. ♗e2 h6 8. O-O ♘h7 9. ♗xh6 gxh6 10. ♘g4 ♘df6 11. ♘xh6 ♔h8 12. ♗h5 ♔g7 13. ♘g4 ♘xg4 14. ♕xg4 ♕g5 15. ♕f3 ♘f6 16. ♗g4 ♘xg4 17. hxg4 c6 18. ♘d2 e5 19. e4 ♕xg4 20. ♕c3 exd4 21. ♕xd4 ♔g8 22. f3 ♕g7 23. ♕e3 ♗c7 24. exd5 ♗b6 25. ♖ae1 ♗xe3 26. ♖xe3 cxd5 27. f4 f5 28. ♖ff3 ♕d4 29. ♔h1 ♕xd2 30. ♖g3 ♔f7 31. ♖e5 ♕xf4 32. ♖ee3 ♖h8 33. ♔g1 ♕d4 34. ♔f1 ♗d7 35. ♖d3 ♗b5 0-1 {White resigns}

I haven't been playing very well at all lately, but this time I managed to counter an attack which doesn't seem to have been very well thought out. If there's a chess term for when Black castles King-side and White takes out the Pawns protecting the King with a Bishop sacrifice capturing the h6 Pawn, I should learn that term, because when I play Black I'm attacked that way a lot. I don't really know what I'm doing wrong that makes me susceptible to that attack; on the other hand, it has happened to me often enough that it's no longer a traumatic surprise when it happens, and I've gotten pretty good at counter-attacking it. I have a feeling that Black didn't see my 12th move coming. My 14th move may have come as a surprise as well. I think it's safe to say that my 24th move was a surprise.

Chess Log: 1. e4 e5 2. ♘f3 ♘f6 3. ♘xe5 ♘xe4 4. d4 c5 5. ♗d3 ♘xf2!

1. e4 e5 2. ♘f3 ♘f6 3. ♘xe5 ♘xe4 4. d4 c5 5. ♗d3 ♘xf2! 6. ♔xf2 ♕h4 7. g3 ♕xd4 8. ♔f1 ♕xe5 9. ♘c3 d6 10. ♗f4 ♕f6 11. ♘d5! ♕xb2? [11. ...♕d8] 12. ♘c7! ♔d7 13. ♘xa8 ♘c6 14. ♗f5 ♔d8 15. ♖b1 ♕xa2 16. ♖a1 ♕c4 17. ♗d3 ♕e6 18. ♕e2 ♕xe2 19. ♗xe2 ♗d7 20. ♖d1 ♔c8 21. ♗xd6 ♗xd6 22. ♖xd6 ♖d8 23. ♗g4 ♗xg4 24. ♖xd8 ♔xd8 25. h3 ♗e6 26. ♔f2 ♔c8 27. ♖d1 ♔b8 28. g4 ♔xa8 29. ♔f3 ♘d4 30. ♔e4 ♘xc2?? 31. ♖d8! 1-0 {Black resigns}

I played White. 3. [...♘xe4] is not considered the best line by MCO-13, which favors 3. [...d6]. 4. d4 took us out of the book entirely.

Black was rated 100 points higher than I, and played like it, keeping me off-balance for most of the game with a steady, aggressive attack. Perhaps Black felt a little over-confident, leading to the decisive blunder of 30. [...]♘xc2??. Moving either the a or b Pawn instead, or 30. [...]f5+, might have wrapped things up for all practical purposes.

Chess Log: I Got Lucky And Spotted A Couple Of My Opponent's Mistakes

5-0 blitz, I played Black:

1. c4 e5 2. ♘c3 a6 3. g3 ♘f6 4. ♗g2 h6 5. d3 ♗b4 6. ♘f3 O-O 7. O-O ♘c6 8. ♗d2 ♗xc3 9. ♗xc3 ♖e8 10. a3 d5 11. cxd5 ♘xd5 12. ♖c1 ♘xc3 13. ♖xc3 ♘d4 14. ♘xd4 exd4 15. ♖c4 ♖b8 16. ♕c2 c6 17. ♖c1 ♗e6 18. ♖c5 ♗g4 19. f3 ♗f5 20. g4 ♗g6 21. h4? ♕xh4! 22. ♕b3?? ♖xe2! 23. ♖1c2 ♕f2 24. ♔h2 ♕xg2 0-1 {White checkmated}

I felt my opponent had the upper hand until 21. h4?, which allowed me to get my Queen into attacking position. And 22. ♕b3?? ended White's chances. (Did White play ♕b3 because he or she was stunned by my previous move? Or was there a strategy in there which I as yet haven't been able to see?)

Most of the games which I've seen in annotation have been Grandmaster games, world-class games. I can't claim that I've understood very much at all of what is going on those games. I wonder if a chess pro ever sees any of these games which I played and then recorded on my blog, and if so, what his or her reaction has been. I always think of Tyrone Slothrop and Sir Stephen Dodson-Truck in Thomas Pynchon's novel Gravity's Rainbow, with myself in the role of the well-meaning bumpkin Slothrop and the chess pro analogous to Sir Stephen:

"At certain hours the harbor blue will be reflected up on the whitewashed sea-facade, and the tall windows will be shuttered again. Wave images will flicker there in a luminous net. By then Slothrop will be up, in British uniform, gobbling down croissants and coffee, already busy at a refresher course in technical German, or trying to dope out the theory of arrow-stable trajectories, or tracing nearly with the end of his nose some German circuit schematic whose resistors look like coils, and the coils like resistors-"What bizarre shit," once he got hep to it, "why would they go and switch it around like that? Trying to camouflage it, or what?"

"Recall your ancient German runes," suggests Sir Stephen Dodson-Truck, who is from the Foreign Office P.I.D. and speaks 33 languages including English with a strong Oxonian blither to it.

"My what?"

"Oh," lips compressing, some kind of brain nausea here, "that coil symbol there happens to be very like the Old Norse rune for 'S,' sol, which means 'sun.' The Old High German name for it is sigil."

"Funny way to draw that sun," it seems to Slothrop.

"Indeed. The Goths, much earlier, had used a circle with a dot in the center. This broken line evidently dates from a time of discontinuities, tribal fragmenting perhaps, alienation-whatever's analogous, in a social sense, to the development of an independent ego by the very young child, you see…"

Well, no, Slothrop doesn't see, not exactly. He hears this sort of thing from Dodson-Truck nearly every time they get together."

I always imagine that I'm giving the chess pro brain nausea, and like Tyrone, I'm sorry.

So why do I do this chess log? Two reasons. One: because, although I've seen a few games on or near my humble level of sophistication recorded now and then in places like periodical entirely devoted to chess, I've never seen a whole series of them published anywhere. And so I think possibly the Wrong Monkey Chess Log might be interesting simply because it's different. Two: players on my level, who look at Grandmaster games, annotated by Grandmasters, and scratch their heads and say, Well, okay, if you say so. If it's clear to you that it's time for White to retire because everybody on your level can see that Black will checkmate him in 12 more moves or less -- players on my level may see these games and actually understand what's going on.

Chess Log: A Horrendous Mess

Your eyes do not deceive you, readers: it's the 2nd Wrong Monkey Chess Log post of the day. I don't know if I've ever posted 2 of these on the same day before. As in the previous one, an opponent rated significantly lower stunned me with a quick checkmate. 5-0 blitz, I played Black.

1. e4 c5 2. ♘f3 d6 3. ♗c4 a6 4. O-O e6 5. d4 b5 6. ♗d3 c4 7. ♗e2 h6 8. ♘c3 ♗b7 9. d5 e5 10. ♖e1 ♘f6 11. ♗f1 ♗e7 12. ♘h4 ♘fd7 13. ♘f5 ♗f6? 14. ♘xd6! ♔e7 15. ♘xb7 ♕c7?? 16. d6!! ♕xd6 17. ♕xd6 ♔e8 18. ♘d5 h5 19. ♘c7 1-0 {Black checkmated}

What a horrendous mess. And up until the 10th move or so, it seemed like an easy win for me. Where did it all go wrong? At 13. ... ♗f6? at the latest. 13. ... O-O would have been better, definitely. It was pretty much all over by 16. d6!!.