It's so funny when its so easy to tell the replier isn't american. hehe. Anyway EVERYTHING here is a swiss tournament. Occasionally I see quads but for the most part EVERYTHING in America is a swiss tournament. Do other types even exist? Also the USCF DOES prioritize pairing rules, so there really isn't much room for fiddling at all. It goes..

1)Not playing the same person twice
2)Like score, or as like as possible

3)Top Half v Bottom Half
a)Equalization of Color
b)Due Color

If two players are within 200 pts of each other rating wise they can "switch positions" to meet equalization of colors. In other words 2 people in the bottom half of the people with 0 pts going into rd 2 can reverse spots with each other in the draw and play the opposite corresponding opponents in the top half. However if they are not within 200 pt they cant switch, even if all 4 players have the same score! Very little room for fiddling! For due color the same rule applies only the players must be within 80 pts, not 200.

As far as floats are concerned, the USCF doesn't acknowledge them. The lowest rated player in a group if odd is pretty much always paired down and highest is always paired up. (unless they can switch positions with someone for equal or due colors by being close enough in rating) I almost took absurd advantage of this loophole myself by continuing to win in an 8rdswiss and being paired down multiple times for the easiest first 4 round pairings in a very strong field ever. I was debating whether to end the tournament with 4 0.5 byes but a strong player who was absent for rd3 came back for rd 4 and ruined evrything


The only spot for fiddling is 2 players can request not to be paired against each other if they are friends or family or whatever. This is meant for those huge cash cows we have in America where two people travel a long distance enter a huge field and pay a large EF only to play each other. TDs are under no obligation to honor these requests and obviously won't when it would become a question of violating priority 1 or 2.

Also im pretty sure those utterly ridiculous pairings we had were based on the fact the TD knew the unrated person who was given a round 1 full point bye and no chance to win the tournament (or realy even another game, he knew the kid persoanlly i think, he sucked) and didn't want to put him against the 'top' players because he knew it would be a waste/ not productive etc. First of all unrated people aren't supposed to get FP byes unless absolutely neccasary (the lowest RATED person is supposed to get it) and you sure as hell can't alter the pairings because you "think you know whats gonna happen anyway" lol. In either case I was "Player D" in this tournament and got to play the unrated person instead of PlayerE (who is a friend of mine who beats me 50% of the time) so I wasn't gonna complain.

So I was thinking today, what do I enjoy most about chess?

I enjoy the feeling of "official" tournaments. I enjoy winning. I enjoy losing in unexpected and interesting ways. I enjoy training, I enjoy learning more strategy, I enjoy reading about the history of the game. I enjoy having a rating and seeing it going up. I enjoy fantasizing about how good I'll be someday.

But the one thing I enjoy more than any other is "finding a move." When I'm playing a serious game, and the result is still in the balance, and I play a move that significantly improves my position, and I know that I wouldn't have seen or chosen that move in the past. That move is the tangible result of the time I've spent studying and training.

How about you guys? I want to hear people narrow down what they enjoy most about chess to a single, concrete concept.

I enjoy how most chess players are crazy lunatics and being in their presence makes me feel more normal.

Ha! When I was in college, I briefly flirted with the Magic: The Gathering card game. I didn't play too seriously, but I went to a couple of weekly tournaments at the local card shop. I'd look around at the competition and think "I may not have spent $200 on my deck, but I'm pretty sure I'm the only person in this room who has touched a boob."

lmaooo +1

lmao wtf at bungling that ending..

57.. Ra5???? okay its still a draw but WTF just 57.. Rxe3 58. Kxe3 Kf5 and its INSTA-draw.

lmaooo

lol

This game reminds me of a game I won in 2004.



I am White and won this position. My opponent was rated 2159...

FYP

but srsly, do u have the notation for the finish?

Here is the pgn notation. The pictured position is at move 73.

[Event "Open Brno"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "2004.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Ajezz"]
[Black "ZM"]
[Result "1-0"]
[ECO "C68"]
[WhiteElo "1999"]
[BlackElo "2159"]
[PlyCount "187"]
[EventDate "2004.??.??"]

1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5 a6 4. Bxc6 dxc6 5. O-O Bg4 6. h3 h5 7. d3 Qf6 8. Nbd2 Bc5 9. Re1 Ne7 10. Nf1 Bxf3 11. Qxf3 Qxf3 12. gxf3 g5 13. Be3 Bb6 14. Ng3 h4 15. Ne2 c5 16. Kh2 f6 17. Nc3 Kd7 18. Na4 Kc6 19. Rab1 Rhd8 20. Red1 Ba7 21. b4 cxb4 22. Rxb4 b5 23. Nc3 Bc5 24. Rb3 Kd6 25. Rdb1 c6 26. a4 Ng6 27. Ne2 Nf8 28. d4 exd4 29. Nxd4 Bxd4 30. Bxd4 Ke6 31. Be3 Ng6 32. Rc3 Rac8 33. Rc5 Ne5 34. Kg2 Nc4 35. Re1 Nxe3+ 36. Rxe3 bxa4 37. Ra5 Rd4 38. Rxa6 Rc4 39. Ra3 Rxc2 40. R3xa4 Rd8 41. Ra2 Rxa2 42. Rxa2 Rc8 43. f4 gxf4 44. Kf3 Ke5 45. Rd2 Ra8 46. Rd3 Ra5 47. Rc3 c5 48. Rc4 Rb5 49. Kg4 Rb2 50. Rxc5+ Kxe4 51. Rc4+ Ke5 52. Rxf4 Ra2 53. Rf5+ Ke6 54. Rf3 Kf7 55. Kxh4 Kg6 56. Kg4 Ra4+ 57. Rf4 Ra1 58. Rb4 Rg1+ 59. Kf4 Ra1 60. Ke4 Re1+ 61. Kd5 Re5+ 62. Kd6 Re2 63. Rf4 Kg5 64. Rf3 Re4 65. Rg3+ Kh4 66. Kd5 Re2 67. Rf3 Kg5 68. h4+ Kxh4 69. Rxf6 Kg5 70. Rf8 Kg6 71. f4 Kg7 72. Rf5 Ra2 73. Ke5 Ra5+ 74. Ke6 Ra6+ 75. Ke5 Ra5+ 76. Ke4 Ra4+ 77. Kf3 Kg6 78. Rb5 Ra1 79. Ke4 Kf6 80. Rb6+ Kf7 81. Kf5 Ra5+ 82. Kg4 Ra1 83. Kg5 Rg1+ 84. Kf5 Ra1 85. Rb7+ Kf8 86. Kg6 Ra6+ 87. Kg5 Ra5+ 88. f5 Ra1 89. Kg6 Ra2 90. Rb8+ Ke7 91. f6+ Ke6 92. Re8+ Kd7 93. f7 Rg2+ 94. Kh5 1-0

It actually was dead drawn until move 89 but not knowing any basic endgame positions or techniques makes this somewhat hard to defend.

If people get that high rated and cant finish that endgame they must be seriously crushing middle games.

Not as outrageus as this example, but i managed to lose the 3 vs 4 pawns on one wing rook endgame with the doubled f-pawn (f+f+h vs e+f+g+h) which is theoretically drawn and quite a bit easier to defend than the version without the doubled pawns.


the 2 vs 3 pawns rook endgame i drew twice though, once against an IM and once against an FM. Funny, i never get the good side of such endgames...

lmao dear lord just 88.. Ra6 , cut the king off.

He should be banned from tournaments not knowing this theory and being 2159 rated.

sandbags rock.

Dang it, I really thought I had this guy this time. He's the highest rated player I've seen on the 45 45 pool at ICC.

http://www.chessvideos.tv/chess-game...r.php?id=40788

[Event "ICC"]
[Site "Internet Chess Club"]
[Date "2011.02.12"]
[White "KyleMayhugh"]
[Black "Ecuadorian"]
[Result "0-1"]
[WhiteElo "1576"]
[BlackElo "1913"]
[ECO "B01"]
[Opening "Scandinavian defense"]
[TimeControl "2700+45"]

1. e4 d5 2. exd5 Nf6 3. Bb5+ Bd7 4. Bxd7+ Qxd7 5. c4 c6
6. Nc3 cxd5 7. cxd5 Nxd5 8. Nxd5 Qxd5 9. Qf3 Qe5+ 10. Ne2 Nc6
11. O-O e6 12. d4 Qf6 13. Qxf6 gxf6 14. Bd2 Rg8 15. f3 O-O-O
16. Rac1 Kb8 17. Bf4+ Ka8 18. Rfd1 Rd5 19. a3 Bg7 20. b4 Rgd8
21. g4 f5 22. gxf5 Rxf5 23. Kg2 Rg8 24. Bg3 h5 25. h4 Bf6
26. d5 exd5 27. Rc5 Bxh4 28. Rdxd5 Rxd5 29. Rxd5 Bxg3 30. Nxg3 h4
31. Rd7 f5 32. Rf7 Nd4 33. Kh3 hxg3 34. f4
0-1

I've finally decided to start trying out 1. e4. I've seen enough of it from the black side that it's begun to intrigue me more. I didn't know the opening at all and it got crazy exchange-y really fast.

I haven't had a chance to do a computer analysis yet, but I think I was fine until 21. g4. I was trying to figure out a way to steer play away from just him piling up on the d-pawn and me just trying to defend it, and this seemed kinda clever and I spent forever trying to figure it out, but it just didn't work.

http://www.chessvideos.tv/chess-game...r.php?id=40788

[Event "ICC"]
[Site "Internet Chess Club"]
[Date "2011.02.12"]
[White "KyleMayhugh"]
[Black "Ecuadorian"]
[Result "0-1"]
[WhiteElo "1576"]
[BlackElo "1913"]
[ECO "B01"]
[Opening "Scandinavian defense"]
[TimeControl "2700+45"]

1. e4 d5 2. exd5 Nf6 3. Bb5+ Bd7 4. Bxd7+

I prefer the opening system with 4. Be2 (the point being that it stops Black from playing Bg4 himself) then play usually goes 4.. Bf5 5. Nf3 Nxd5 6. d4 and White will castle, play c2-c4, Nc3, h3 (to prevent a later Bf5-g4, which would undermine White's center control of d4), Be3, Rfd1, Qd2, Rac1 with a space advantage. Perhaps White can also play b2-b4 and Qb3 (instead of Qd1-d2).

It's a fairly simple way to play vs 2.. Nf6 Scandinavian and I also like it because it goes for a straightforward space advantage.

4.. Qxd7 5. c4

Probably just 5. d4, then develop your knights and castle. After 5. c4 c6 it's probably too risky to take on c6, as Black gets a nice development lead with 6.. Nxc6 and pressure on the d-file. I could see Black putting his pawn on e5, a rook on d8, and it being troublesome for White. Meanwhile there would be full compensation for the pawn for Black.

5.. c6 6. Nc3 cxd5 7. cxd5 Nxd5 8. Nxd5

I'm not a fan of 8. Nxd5, although I'm guessing you were eager to trade pieces with him since he was higher rated. All 8. Nxd5 does is bring his queen to d5, where it can't be kicked out except for offering a trade of Queens yourself. This would not be an opening success for White here. I would much prefer 8. Nf3 and then castling kingside.

However, I wish White's light square bishop was still on the board. White is a bit tender on the light squares and the weaknesses could become more of a reality as the game progresses. The lack of White's light square bishop also greatly reduces his kingside attacking chances, and eases Black's position as he has one less minor piece and is less cramped because of that.

That's another reason I'd prefer to play 4. Be2, a good rule of thumb in chess is to avoid trading pieces without good reason to when you have more space. This concept would fall under Capacity, just imagine a clown car with 10 people crammed into it. Now imagine the same car with only 2 people in it, much less congested and those 2 people can probably travel somewhat comfortably now.

Trading pieces frees your opponents position and allows it to become less cramped/congested. A common problem when defending a position with less space is that one's pieces are tripping over each other and the uncoordinated group causes a break down in defense.

This ultimately leads to the loss of the game. Meanwhile the space advantage you have with your center is now hampered with weaknesses behind it that can be exploited. Your position now has less pieces to support the center, making it weaker, and thus generally reducing your attacking chances. Successful attacks naturally arise from positions of strength. This makes perfect sense as chess is the quintessential logical game.

8.. Qxd5 9. Qf3 Qe5+ 10. Ne2 Nc6
11. O-O e6 12. d4 Qf6 13. Qxf6

I'd probably keep the queens on the board and opt for 13. Qb3 hitting at b7 gaining a tempo. 13.. Nxd4 14. Nxd4 Qxd4 15. Qxb7 is favorable for White as Black hasn't developed his kingside bishop and his king is temporarily stuck in the center. 13. Qb3 Rb8 14. Be3 with maybe a plan of Rf-d1 and d5 to liquidate that isolated pawn.

13.. gxf6 14. Bd2

A more natural move would be 14. Be3, defending d4.

14.. Rg8 15. f3

Playing 15. g3 makes a little more sense to me as the Rg8 is looking at the g2 pawn. Although, there is nothing objectively wrong with 15. f3

15.. O-O-O 16. Rac1 Kb8 17. Bf4+ Ka8 18. Rfd1 Rd5 19. a3

I'm not a fan of this move even though it's not a true mistake. Simply leave the queenside pawns where they are and play 19. Be3 with your plan being 20. Nd5 and d4-d5 to liquidate that isolated pawn. If 19. Be3 Bb4 then 20. Nf4 and then d4-d5 seems good enough. 19.. Bb4 20. a3?! instead would allow Black to go Bb4-a5-b6 and hit at the d4 pawn.

19.. Bg7 20. b4

Somewhat irrelevant queenside play, you should be shoring up the d4 pawn and/or looking for a way to trade it off the board.

20.. Rgd8 21. g4

Again 21. Be3 is called for. If 21.. f5 then 22. Kf2 and the d4 pawn can't be taken yet because of Black's weak bank rank:

22.. Nxd4 23. Rxd4! (23. Nxd4 f4 24. Bxf4 Bxd4+ and now its about equal) Bxd4 24. Bxd4 e5 (24.. Rxd4?? 25. Nxd4 Rxd4?? 26. Rc8#) 25. Bc3 f4 26. g3 and White has some advantage +1.80~

So 21. Be3 f5 22. Kf2 a6 and it's about equal.

21.. f5 22. gxf5 Rxf5 23. Kg2 Rg8 24. Bg3 h5 25. h4

I don't like this move, it just creates a target on h4 and you weaken your bishop on g3 (which is going to be pinned after Black moves his Bg7). Step off the g-file with 25. Kf2 instead.

25.. Bf6 26. d5

Also play 26. Kf2 here and Black's advantage is only -1.00 so you have some hopes to hold for a draw.

26.. exd5 27. Rc5

It's lost now.

27.. Bxh4 28. Rdxd5 Rxd5 29. Rxd5 Bxg3 30. Nxg3 h4
31. Rd7 f5 32. Rf7 Nd4 33. Kh3 hxg3 34. f4
0-1

Please forgive me if I made a typo or something, it is 3:28am.

I have a rating floor according to the uscf website, presumably for winning a prize as mentioned. It happened in 1999 though, so they may have changed who does what exactly.

Nice mclovin.

Kyle: What are your general thoughts on icc? I'm thinking of signing up there.

Not sure if its an open questions, or just for Kyle, but I think ICC is great. The live coverage of GM events throughout the year (most in conjunction with chess.fm) are great & more than make up for the membership fee. Add in the general server numbers, training bots, number of titled players, tournaments, etc & its great value for money.
The interface is a bit dodgy, but if you're used to FICS, its fine. By comparisson, Playchess looks much better visually, but I'm not sure that the other features of the site make it better than ICC (although I haven't played there myself for a few years).

I agree totally with all of that. I think the membership fee is worth it for the live coverage and videos every week alone.

How do the vids and coverage compare to that on chess.com where a similar product is offered?

Thanks so much AiMc! It seems no matter how many times I remind myself not to trade mindlessly, I have a game here and there where I can't help myself. And even though I know from both the books I'm working on that the plan you describe (shoring up the isolated pawn and then pushing it at an opportune moment) is what I should have been doing, I spent too much time on other ideas.

I absolutely love it. I think the video content is dead useful to class players and the live coverage is entertaining for anyone. The chat is occasionally interesting. The master simuls are kinda fun, but I suspect some of the masters are throwing a few of their games in those.

The biggest thing is that I feel like the quality of competition is better than at any other place I've played, and just the feeling that paying a small cover charge means everyone there is taking the game more seriously. I don't like playing anything free on the net for that reason.

Just started the trial. Do you use the Blitzin interface?

I think I use Dasher.