Welcome to my noo blog!

I had to abandon the chess hobby at 14 in favour of the math career, which didn't end well because the poker addiction swallowed me, doh. As a result, I hardly remember how to beat any stage of the chess game. This year, I've watched too many Youtube videos by Mato Jelic and Daniel King as a part of the poker warmup routine and was feeling ashamed of not playing myself. That's it...

I've managed to squeeze in only one 15|10 game today - the first ever at chess.com - vs an automatically matched 1225 (was slacking and too shy to play more).

Needless to say, I'm dissatisfied with the passive position as White out of the Philidor. I was out of the (basically never existent) book at move 3 (so was trying to follow general development principles) and didn't realise that the best response to 1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 d6 3. d4 Bg4?! is 4. dxe5, approved by Wiki as giving White a bishop pair (unless Black wants to lose the castling rights) in an open position and thus a clear advantage... which would be fair enough if I were able to convert such endgames

I'm also worried about thinking slow - I had about only 6 minutes left by move 28. The opponent had spent only 5 minutes out of 15 before the final blunder.

I've fed the game to Houdini 1.5a as I want to sleep and wouldn't return to the game to analyse it manually anyway... And that's what it said...

At move 10,



I was too afraid of the rook lined with my queen, shoulda played 10. Rd1 to set up a Q+R battery on the open d-file. The thing I overlooked is that had he moved the knight out of the d-file, say, 10... Nc5, I coulda

At move 16,



after Black pushed the pawn to b6 (what for?), overlooking a crushing response, I missed it too

Comments on my play would be appreciated, thanks for reading!

Missing this variation in a 15+10 isn't bad at all. You don't have the luxury of calculating too much. If 10. Rd1 strikes you as best, though, it's sufficient to recognize that after 10.-Nc5 or 10.-Nb6, you can simply move your queen.

chesstempo.com

This one "should" be easy.

Black's strongest 25th move is Nf8, after which all of the rooks will be exchanged (26. Rxd8 Rxd8 27. Rxd8 Kxd8 is simplest).

What should you be trying to accomplish in this position?

You're selling yourself short, you are way above noob level based on the game and your comments: you have a good understanding of both concrete and positional elements of chess. Should be smashing 1600s in no time.

Are you familiar with the opera box game? Possibly the most famous chess game, in which Morphy punishes his opponents' choice of Bg4 in that position. I don't recommend spending too much time learning openings or studying the classics, though both are important - but that would be a good game to know.

Is the title censored because you can't say co*n? Lol

Thanks for reassuring!

Well, I am, but of course I hadn't learned it by heart and didn't remember which exactly variation of the Philidor it was, discovered it only when looking this opening up in the Wiki post-mortem That's certainly a classic example of attacking in an open position, but my opponents will likely be playing much better than those noble gentlemen

No, you can't, it's racist! You can say coon74, though

Thanks for reminding!

The general guideline with B+B vs N+N is to open the position up to make the bishops shine, holding and challenging pawns all around... The presence of the doubled isolated e-pawns makes me want to build pressure on e5 (it will get pinned to the g7 pawn so Black will likely choose to move the latter sometime to unpin, which can be exploited by bringing the bishop back to d2 and advancing the g-pawn), which will accomplish that goal too after the f3-f4 thrust (I have to hold the g-pawn yet unmoved to prevent the knight outpost on f4, make a positional sac g2-g3 after installing the king on e3 and break through by f3-f4 after Nxg3). Now I'm most worried about the bad position of the d-s bishop, my 28th move would be Bd2 (or Kf2, I'm not sure which is better to be played first) with the idea to bring it to c3 and the king to e3.

I've been smart enough to install the l-s bishop on the superb c4 square where it's holding the entire q-side and also pressing on the e6 weakness; Black can't make progress there, especially after the a3-a4 prophilaxis, unless he brings the king across, which will however weaken his control of the centre and k-side, where I'll be able to break through then.

In short, I hoped there would be some zugzwang soon, but I'm afraid I woulda merely drawn the game OTB

After 25... Nf8, however, I think I woulda preferred 26. R6d3 OTB, keeping at least one rook to facilitate the f3-f4 thrust. I wouldn't have minded exchanging on f4 had he installed the knight there; I woulda still had one powerful bishop.

Edit: a better idea after Nf4 woulda been to exchange on d8, then play Kh2, g3 and f4. I couldn't have played this after an immediate rook exchange because then Black woulda had time to play Kd8-e7 and Nf8-g6, having not had wasted two tempos on Nh5-f4-h5.

Oh wait, 26. R6d2 was another idea, then 26... Nf4 wouldn't have forced an exchange on either f4 or d8 and I coulda just played g3 and Kh2 then.

My 25. Rd6 was a classical swindle in what I thought was a drawn position, I was counting on my opponent overlooking 25... Nf8

It seems to me (with no engine check yet) that another, possibly more solid, plan was 25. Kh2 with g2-g3 and f3-f4 coming. Black woulda had no time to bring another knight to attack f4.

I'm not sure if rei was expecting an answer of "open the position up for the bishops" or "deny him good squares in the centre for his knights".

Of course they go together a bit, if you exchange centre pawns you help both goals. But in practice I'd probably spend all my time looking for tactics to win a weak pawn.

There are a lot of good and creative ideas there (the positional sac is just creative ). I wouldn't be in a rush to play f3-f4. I'd improve the king and bishops (to e3, c3, c4 respectively) and play b2-b4.

Then, as RT suggests, go after weak pawns.

b2-b4 gives Black the potential to create an outside passer (if he initiates the trade), but that's of no consequence -- that a-pawn will drop like a ripe apple if isolated. Additional, with the c5 pawn gone, he might find it difficult to put a knight on d4 without losing material. If he lets you take on c5, of course, he'll have four targetable weak pawns.

I agree that b2-b4 is a good idea, besides, it gives more freedom to the d-s bishop.

Meanwhile I've started grinding chesstempo.com (once got into the top 10 of the leaderboard by correctly solved problems, lol). The ratings there are sucking: 1517 standard (RD 34, 188/305), 1528 blitz (RD 36, 93/141). However, only halfway through the standard grind did I realise that the timing doesn't matter at all there, unlike blitz.

I've been taught that I should do things vital for the long run just after I wake up, so I occupy myself by studying poker, then playing poker, and chess is left for the 'night' (actually, early local morning) before sleep. Blunders become inevitable, but at least they don't cost me money; it's more important to be fresh during poker sessions when money is on the line.

Here's the critical position of today's game (I was to make the 17th move as Black, try your hand at finding the best continuation):



I wanted to resign at move 18 but prolonged the agony for 15 more moves to test the opponent's conversion ability. My 32nd move was just a manifestation of exhaustion, of course I had ways to defend the knight - either 32... Kd7 or 32... Kd5 33. c4+ Kc5 - but wouldn't have liked my position then either.

As for the opening, I was out of book at move 3 again The played Sicilian variation 1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 d6 3. Bc4 doesn't even have a name. I chose to prevent the Ng5 'threat' by a theoretically passive 3... h6, but no one forced me to combat the Fried Liver setup right then because White could choose some other line; 4. Ng5 could be met by 4... e6 - the major difference with the Fried Liver is that the e-pawn is already on e5 there and can't help. As played, White's 4. c3 Nf6 5. d3 totally disoriented me, as a result, I got really cramped development and a bishop pair in a closed position ... the rest is history.

My Chesstempo blitz rating has grown to 1563, but I'm seeing less and less sense in developing it: the problems where I spew rating points are mostly those that were designed to trigger FPS in solvers and lead them the wrong way, e.g. with an evidently hanging piece that seems poisoned to solvers' instincts and a phantom fork or mate alternative that doesn't work but is likely to be chosen by them by pure intuition. Of course the real blitz chess is different - players first look for hanging pieces and mates and only then, if ever, for fancy tactics. (Btw, in what exactly order do strong blitz players check tactical opportunties?)

Against Bc4 I've always played Nc6 with Ne5 to follow Ng5. It's a bit suspect but it's a fun way to fight for the initiative in the center. Don't forget that you can also play e6 after any Ng5 move and that shuts the bishop down easily.

The center is very French by move ten, with your key break c7-c5 having already been played. Sicilians sometimes morph into Frenches. The move 10.-c4 is out of character given the pawn structure; you'd like to play on the queenside, not close it up.

12.-cxb3 13. Qxb3 Bb5! is fun times. Saddling White with a backward c-pawn is good, as is postponing the h1 rook's development, and your bishop can stay outside of the pawn chain via d3-h7 if chased away from b5. 13.-Nc6 with the idea of ...Na5 and ...Rc8 and quick pressure along the c-file might be even better, because it's harder, after that variation, for White to quickly organize a2-a4 and a trade of dark-squared bishops.

Yes, Chesstempo blitz doesn't make a lot of sense beyond easier problems -- the incentives are too wonky.

I've played a few 10|10 matches again chess.com computers today... it looks like they play too differently from a human player of the same rating. The hard (~1600) one plays well for many moves in a row (except for missing skewers that I also miss ) but then inexplicably breaks down, often just evidently giving up a piece (not even leaving it hanging, just trading it for a less valuable piece) for no compensation . Is my impression that computers' mistakes are too 'unhuman' correct? Are they good training tools at all?

Had I had more concentration and willingness to spend thinking time (not play standard chess like blitz; I just don't like clock with no increments so didn't opt in to play 5|0 instead), my score could have been better than 8-1 vs the medium (~1200) one and 3-3 vs the hard one

I don't really want to post games because they were full of mutual tactic blunders seen by a standard engine check. There was a lot of FPS, I was having tremendous fun

Not the chess.com computers. They are very entertaining, however.

Computers are very useful for endgame practice. Instead of just learning the Philidor Position by rote, for instance, taking it on faith that you've memorized it perfectly, you can defend it against an engine a half-dozen times or so as well.

The engine should be playing at full strength. If your games are any indication, Chess.com's "hard" computer might eventually play something like Re7+ here.

Great blog, wishing you well.

I concur you are no noob!

P.S. I love your handle

Thanks!

I wasn't updating because I was about to write the 4096th milestone where I'm yet to include post-mortems of the few correspondence games I've played in these few days.

I'm hesitating to enter the 27th chess.com correspondence tournament (btw, are any of you going to play there?). A slight intrigue is that my only current opponent never resigns, and I'm not sure if I'll checkmate him in the next 4.5 days (being 2 clear pawns up in the endgame with a space advantage and protected passer), which would bring my corr rating up to 1608. So I think I'll be in the 1400-1599 pool, which will likely allow me to advance past the first round and play more games there.

I would be likely over 1600 now had I not missed a great sequence in our first game... (White to move.)



In other news, I've occupied the 11th place on the 2+2 chess.com ladder as a result of this game but am feeling too weak to go for BobJoeJim yet until I gain more strength (or, rather, discipline). Meanwhile, newcomers to the ladder (as well as the two people below me) are welcome to challenge me.

(I'm going to break the mentioned games down a bit in the milestone thread, so commenting on them here might be excessive.)

Actually, he failed to see my final trap in that game and did me a favour by resigning... three moves after the previous post was written and just before getting an inevitable mate. Good times, good games! So I'm now 1603 in corr chess and shall be put in the 1600-1799 pool. Hmm, that will be quite a challenge.

Well, I shouldn't have wasted effort on the 27th tourney in particular and corr chess in general. I don't have enough stamina to play 10 games at once (several times fewer than regs usually play) without blundering or getting bored by long thinking, esp when sleepy, with no repertoire (when everyone throws me out of book).

A sad example of autopiloting: 1. Nf3 Nc6 2. d4 e6 3. e4 Nf6 4. Nc3 Bb4 5. Bd3 d5 6. O-O Bxc3



The other games aren't going well either - the positions are either equal or slightly worse, except one where the opponent hung a pawn very early; in one of the games, I blundered a pawn and then had to find a miracle tactic to unpin a knight. It's hard to calculate all the plausible lines in some positions in less than 15 minutes, and with 9-10 games going, I'm getting tired.

I finally got into a somewhat interesting endgame... or rather, I was afraid of getting smashed by a strong opponent (~1750) there and was trying to equalise and trade pieces whenever possible... The opening was chosen to be a dull Chesstempo-induced variation of Nimzo-Indian with a really early queen trade, and I thought it would be deadly drawn, even at move 25 when I was ready to draw by repetition to avoid potential engame blunders. I couldn't imagine that the opponent would resign just 7 moves after that!

Please feel free to comment on the game if it entertains or helps you.

One of its most critical moments is perhaps the one after White's 22nd move.



Having dreamed about creating a passed pawn (stuffing the c-file with rooks and making profilactic moves to prevent penetration of the knight into my camp) for 6 moves already, I was too impatient to make the push (I guess).

22... b5 (the c-pawn is of course pinned and drops, but the pawn that will take it will soon be surrounded by White's pieces) 23. Ke2 bxc4 24. Rhc1 c3 25. Nb1.

And here I was rather disappointed, as the c-pawn was apparently about to fall after 26. Kd3 (which seemed to be White's plan), so I played 25... Ne8, preparing to repeat moves - 26. Kd3 Nb2+ 27. Ke2 Na4 28. Kd3 Nb2+ 29. Ke2 Na4.

Of course I could have chosen among many kinds of endgames to simplify to, most notably a pure pawn one after Nf6-d7-c5+ and exchanges on c5 and then c3. But I thought I'd have few winning chances. I was quite sure I would successfuly keep opposition to the White king and not let him reach my k-side pawns, but still didn't want to give myself extra opportunities to mess up.

Instead, my opponent chose 26. Bf2?, likely planning Be1 to add pressure on the c-pawn, but he must have noticed that my knight was going to b5, and his minor pieces were too passive already... Plus he chose a strange rook manoeuvre for no clear (to me) purpose - 26... Nd6 27. Rd1 Nb5 28. Rd5 a6 29. Kd3. I wonder what his thought process was.



And certainly now I saw an opportunity to penetrate onto d4 to challenge the c2 rook and move the pawn further, but still it was all over surprisingly fast.

29... Rc4 30. h3 (White can't improve his position significantly) Nb2+ 31. Ke2 Nd4+ 32. Bxd4 exd4 0-1.

For some reason the engine prefers some kingside activity for a change - 29... f5, to abuse the fact that White has no good moves and add pressure on the e-pawn (to be taken by my rook soon after the pawn exchange).

I didn't go for 29... Nxb2+ because I didn't realise that after 30. Ke2 Rc4 31. Nd2? cxd2 32. Rxb2 I wouldn't need to hold on to the pawn but could have won by just forking (Nc3+) and grabbing an extra pawn during the exchange on d5.

I guess it doesn't really matter for the outcome, as well as White's best defence lines featuring g2-g4; the main plan is still Rc4 and Nb2+ to throw the king away and then put the other knight on d4.

Any thoughts? What kind of endgame should I have simplified to for a better result EV?

Have zero fear. The correspondence ratings aren't on the same scale as USCF / FIDE / chess.com standard / chess.com blitz / etc.; they are markedly inflated. Any random 1600–1800 you encounter probably isn't as strong as what those ratings might signify in the wider chess world.

Chess! Great game, I think I am like 1500 or 1600 uscf on the strength of my Russian nationality.

But I traded it in for poker, best of luck to you in this endeavor!

I would have traded it in for poker totally too if I were good at poker... as is, I thought I could have fun in chess without losing money... well, I haven't lost it, but blundering isn't fun anyway, so I'm going nowhere.

If not for two unexplainable grave mistakes, the 1st round group in the 27th chess.com tourney would be beatable; not 100% crushable, though - I think there are two guys as decent as me, two relative patzers and one guy playing too slow for me to assess him yet. As played, I'm definitely not advancing, but have lit mini-fireworks in most games.

Say, here with White, I tricked the opponent out of an equal (though with a spatial advantage for me) position.



In another game, I suddenly found some defensive skills in myself In the below position,



instead of playing the calm 1. Rg3, my White opponent sacrificed the l-s bishop - 1. Bg5!? dxe4 2. Rh3? It looked like my king was in trouble, e.g. White was going to threaten mate on h7 by Bxf6. How to defend with Black here?

Continuation of the previous spoiler:

Continuation of the previous spoiler:

Returning to the first diagram of this game, what was the best 2nd move for White (after 1. Bg5!? dxe4) that would have held the position at least for a while? (You can try to find it, but I have to warn you that the sequence is hardly human, only a couple of engines, and maybe not even they, would play that right.)

As always, feel free to criticise any of my moves in the posted games

14. Rac1 is > 14. Rad1; the rooks belong on the c- and d-files.

Yes Nd5, named the Marco Hop, is a thematic move in Maroczy Bind structures.

Black implodes concretely before you can err too much strategically, so there isn't much more I can say.

That's a valid point, thanks for improving my understanding of this pawn structure! At that time in the game, I took a couple of days to decide what to do next, but didn't come up with a good plan. I made a waiting move just to press the clock, was thinking about an f-file advance in case my opponent played perfectly (which I didn't expect him to do). I missed the fact that c5 was hardly controlled (much weaker than e5) and was the right square to strike on (or wasn't it?); thought that Black was controlling the c-file enough to prevent my operations there.

Edit: oh well, I understood the plan wrongly; it looks as thought White indeed has to sit, not open the position up but gradually squeeze Black by pawns. It's safe to say that, before watching this YT video, I didn't know how the Maroczy Bind works (which was suicidal as I end up there with White all the time as a consequence of 1. Nf3 ; another option is certainly the KIA, but I'm even farther from understanding it); I kinda knew what it is, but couldn't tell why it scores so well for White.

As I'm afraid my rants aren't really BBV-worthy, I'll keep them here.

I've just played the first blitz against a human in a while and managed to bink a nice mating attack, though I by no means played any part of the game perfectly, which is partly forgivable because I had ~1.5 minutes on the clock and the opponent had ~2.5, which was a sizeable advantage despite the 2-second increment (5 | 2).

Here's the position where the evaluation took a leap from slightly better to favourable for Black (to move).



Stockfish suggests a winning line that I probably couldn't have seen within the given time anyway (or could I?):

Instead, we played 25... Rg8 26. Rd6?? (now White is getting crushed; after Rf2, Black proceeds to get a passed c-pawn and is still better, but the eval is only -0.7) Rxg2+ 27. Kh1 Rg7+? (there's mate in 6 : Rd2+ Kg1 Rg8+ etc.; but the game move still wins a ton of material) 28. Kh2? (Bf3 Qh4 wins the queen but doesn't mate immediately) Qb2+ 29. Rd2 Qc3? (I didn't see mate in 6 - Rg2+) 30. Qxg7+ Kxg7 31. Rd7+? (this rook was necessary in defence - Re2; now it's mate in 11) Kh8 32. Rg1 Qc2+ 33. Kg3 Rg8+ 34. Kh4 Qf2+ 0-1.

One more thing to note is that I started making mistakes at move 2 - the best reply to 1. e4 c5 2. c4?! is not the Alekhine-style 2... Nf6!? (after e5 the knight has to go back), but the simple Nc6 (though I'm not so sure - White still has enough time to set the Maroczy Bind up - 3. Nf3 g6 4. d4 cxd4 5. Nd4 - or a Benoni-like position after 3. Nf3 d6 4. d4 Bg4 5. d5 Nd4 6. Be2(e3) if he wants). What a shame, this 2. c4 is a move typical for Easy and Medium computers on chess.com (alternated with the Nakamura-style 1. e4 c5 2. Qh5), I should have studied it.