In the game you posted I'd definitely go for the ugly looking 11. .. h6. White's entire game is centered around your d5 pawn. If you can nullify that, he will have little to no play. Without Bg5 it's unclear how white continues. For instance:

11. .. h6 12. Qe1 Bg4 13. Qe4 Bxf3 14. Rxf3 Rxf3 15. gxf3 (15. Qxf3 Nd4 16. Qd1 b5 -+) c4 16. Qe6+ Kh7 17. dxc4 Nd4 18. Qf7 dxc4 19. Qxc4 Ne5 -+ with a deadly attack.

on 13. Qg3 you transpose into the 15. Qxf3 line with: 13. Qg3 Bxf3 14. Rxf3 Rxf3 15. Qxf3.

Also, two random things.

You may want to post the entire games. While analyzing random endings is really interesting, I think you'll find most of your games could/should have been decided well before the ending.

Any reason for picking the dragon as your opening of choice? I'm not fond of it since so many games are decided 100% by theory. Even in this game which was super quiet for a dragon, the game was decided almost directly out of the opening. Well, at least it was decided that black would have very little in the way of practical winning chances.

Games played by Class players (USCF <2000) are rarely decided by opening theory.

The Dragon is a good choice because it's a defense in which Black has active play with all his pieces. After Black's 5...g6, it's not uncommon for Black to have no pawn moves for quite some time.

For learning purposes, I think it's wise for Allen to choice openings which allow him to use all his pieces actively (not the French Defense because of the problem light-squared bishop). I'd also encourage him not to choose anything which has an early Queen exchange (Ruy Lopez Berlin Defense).

Good point Dire, 11...h6 indeed looks very nice for Black, maybe even better than my suggestion of 8...d5.

Thanks for the comments guys.

Dire - The rest of the games are coming. I just didn't want to put too much in one post. I thought you were supposed to chose your opening based on the coolest sounding name? Honestly, I haven't studied openings much and have just been playing with the recommendation I saw in a random video a few months back where against 1.e4...c5 2.Nf3...g6 3.d4...Bg7!? then sometimes Qa5, Qc7, 4. d5 d6, etc. Lots of times they try to trap your Queen but put their pieces on funny squares doing so. Then recently, browsing the bookstore, I saw Chess Openings for Black Explained was very well laid out and recommended the accelerated dragon which seemed to have a lot of similar position to those I had been playing so I picked it up. So, before delving into the book I just jumped right into 3... cxd4 in Reno (obviously I didn't have the option in that grand prix attack game but I might have tried 5...d6 then Nf6 in the past).

Here are my two winning games with the white pieces. Both of these were pretty much experimental openings as well and I obviously floundered around a bit in the first, closed game. In the second, my mean little girl opponent lost a piece in the opening but I still had some trouble later on when I got stuck defending my weak pawns and felt like I should have found better opportunity to attack her queenside pawns instead. Both games I had some psychological problems of letting my guard down in a completely winning position and made some harmless blunders in the first and a catastrophic one in the second (but won anyway because she apparently agrees it's just too hard to go an entire game without going braindead a couple times).

[Event "Reno"]
[Site "Reno"]
[Date "2010.04.03"]
[Round "2"]
[White "Allen"]
[Black "August Piper"]
[ECO "B23"]
[Result "1-0"]

1.e4 c5 2.Nc3 a6 3.f4 d6 4.Nf3 e6 5.d3 b5 6.g3 Bb7 7.Bg2 Nd7
8.Bd2 Qc7 9.O-O Ngf6 10.Qe2 Be7 11.e5 Nd5 12.Nxd5 Bxd5 13.c4
Bc6 14.b3 h6 15.Rae1 d5 16.g4 b4 17.f5 O-O-O 18.fxe6 fxe6 19.Bf4
g5 20.Bc1 d4 21.Nd2 Rdf8 22.Bxc6 Qxc6 23.Qg2 Kc7 24.Qxc6+ Kxc6
25.Nf3 Bd8 26.Kg2 Bc7 27.Re2 Rh7 28.Bd2 Rhf7 29.Be1 Nb6 30.h4
Bd8 31.hxg5 hxg5 32.Ref2 Nd7 33.Bd2 Rxf3 34.Rxf3 Rxf3 35.Rxf3
Nxe5 36.Rg3 Ng6 37.Kf2 Bc7 38.Rg1 Bf4 39.Bxf4 Nxf4 40.Rg3 e5
41.Ke1 Kd6 42.Kd2 e4 43.dxe4 Ke5 44.Rg1 Kxe4 45.Re1+ Kf3 46.Re5
Kxg4 47.Rxc5 Kh4 48.Re5 g4 49.Re4 Kg5 50.c5 g3 51.c6 g2 52.Re1
Nd5 53.Kd3 Kf6 54.Kxd4 Nc3 55.c7 Nb5+ 56.Kc4 Nxc7 57.Rg1 Ke5
58.Rxg2 Nd5 1-0

15.Rae1 and 19.Bf4 seem kind of pointless in retrospect. After 26. Kg2 I at first planned to play Rh1 but then saw ..Rxf3 Kxf3 ..Nxe5+ looks sucky so I decided to bring my bishop to g3 instead. Then he moved his knight so I just played h4 right away. I was also thinking maybe 27. a3. Then he played the inexplicable 33...Rxf3 and it wasn't as hard to figure out what to do any more. Also, I didn't see why he should ever let up on my e5 pawn.


[Event ""]
[Site ""]
[Date "2010.04.05"]
[Round ""]
[White "Player N.N."]
[Black "dour faced girl"]
[ECO "C44"]
[Result "1-0"]

1.e4 Nc6 2.Nf3 e5 3.d4 exd4 4.Bc4 Bb4+ 5.c3 dxc3 6.bxc3 Be7 7.Qd5
Nh6 8.Bxh6 O-O 9.Bg5 d6 10.Bxe7 Nxe7 11.Qd2 h6 12.O-O Kh8 13.Re1
Ng6 14.Na3 a6 15.Nc2 Bg4 16.Nfd4 Ne5 17.Bb3 Qf6 18.Ne3 Bd7 19.f3
Qg6 20.Nc4 Bh3 21.Nxe5 dxe5 22.Nc2 Rad8 23.Qe2 Rd6 24.Kh1 Be6
25.Rad1 Rfd8 26.Ne3 Qf6 27.Rxd6 Rxd6 28.Rd1 Rc6 29.Bxe6 Qxe6
30.Nd5 Rc5 31.Qd3 c6 32.Qe3 Ra5 33.Nb4 Ra4 34.a3 Qb3 35.Rd8+
Kh7 36.h3 Rxa3 37.Qc5 Ra1+ 38.Kh2 Qb1 39.Qxe5 Qh1+ 40.Kg3 Qe1+
41.Kg4 Ra5 42.Qxa5 g6 43.Qe5 h5+ 44.Kg5 Qe3+ 45.Qf4 f6+ 46.Kxf6
Qxf4+ 47.Ke6 Qg5 48.Rd7+ Kh6 49.Rxb7 Qd2 50.Nxc6 Qxc3 51.Nd8
Qc4+ 52.Kd7 Qd4+ 53.Ke8 Qe5+ 54.Kd7 Qg7+ 55.Ke8 Qe5+ 56.Kd7 Qd4+
57.Ke8 Qa4+ 58.Kf7 Kg5 59.g3 Qc4+ 60.Ke7 Qc5+ 61.Ke6 Qc8+ 62.Ke7
Qc5+ 63.Ke6 Me: "draw?" Her: "..." Me one minute later: "I mean would you like a draw?" Her: "..." Me two minutes later: "so that's a no?" Her: <makes miniscule negative head movement> Me: <hits clock> ...h4 64.Nf7+ Kh5 65.g4# 1-0

I must have made countless mistakes but 45. Qf4 is particularly weird because I did something similar in my first ever tournament game and decided to specifically always be careful when blocking a check with a queen. Then did a hundred puzzles on exactly that theme far more difficult than the one in the game. The reason I played it was I saw she couldn't make any Queen move that didn't lose almost instantly and I thought it was about time the game be over already. Kh4 obviously wins even instantlier.

I don't have time (or skills? ) to look at the games, but I can comment on this part. Unless things have changed, you're supposed to move your piece, offer a draw verbally, and then hit your clock. Your opponent then thinks about the draw offer on his/her own time.

Good thing I didn't know how to do it since my lack of protocol must have shaken her to blunder the game.

Err, I mean, that was my plan all along.

You got Pokertracker, now you need Chessbase!

It is important that you play through master games, especially the classics because they show how to execute plans against less than optimal resistance.

You should replay games by Rubinstein and look for the following key motives:
1. Isolating the d-pawn and winning it
2. Acquiring the bishop pair
3. Acquiring Q+N tandem vs. Q+B
4. Acquiring R+B tandom vs. R+N

Once you know what he is trying to accomplish you see how he is doing it.

If you want to know how to approach a position on expert level, then get this book: http://www.amazon.de/Zurich-Internat...549893&sr=8-15

Finally, I see that you got the opening manuals by Dzindzi and Alburt which is usually a good way to start. Nevertheless, there are some conceptional problems with it. The black repertoire especially in the Maroczy (which is the variation most likely to appear in practice) is very drawish and doesn't have much upside against weaker players. The white repertoire on the other hand is very speculative to say at least. They leave out many critical lines and some of their stuff is just simply questionable. While you may be able score some cheapos with these openings, this do not qualify as a sound repertoire. Roman is a great teacher, but this book didn't really impress me.

For a very long review by John Watson: http://www.chess.co.uk/twic/jwatsonbkrev77.html

AC are you an ICC member?

This is one of the best chess books ever written. However, it's a book for advanced players and shouldn't be recommended for a player rated 1400. I think one shouldn't read it until they are at least 2000 FIDE.

One good way of learning when you have an unsuccessful opening is to look up games of strong players to see how they handled the position. Here are two grandmaster games in the Sicilian variation from your game 1. In both cases White played the plan of h3,g4,Ne2-g3, which I think is the best plan in that variation.
Krapivin, Alexander - Sorokin, Maxim 1-0
B23 Moscow op
1. e4 c5 2. Nc3 e6 3. g3 a6 4. Bg2 b5 5. d3 Bb7 6. f4 Nf6 7. Nf3 d6 8. O-O Nbd7 9. h3 Qc7 10. g4 h6 11. Ne2 Be7 12. Ng3 Nh7 13. Qe2 d5 14. e5 d4 15. Ne4 O-O 16. Bd2 Rae8 17. g5 Kh8 18. h4 Rg8 19. Rf2 f5 20. Nd6 Bxd6 21. exd6 Qxd6 22. Ne5 Nxe5 23. fxe5 Qe7 24. Bxb7 Qxb7 25. g6 Nf8 26. Qh5 Rd8 27. Rg2 Rd5 28. Bf4 Rd7 29. Kh2 Qc7 30. Rag1 Re7 31. Kh3 Qb7 32. Bg5 1-0
Spraggett, Kevin - Gelfand, Boris 1-0
B23 Moscow ol (Men)
1. e4 c5 2. Nc3 d6 3. f4 a6 4. Nf3 b5 5. g3 Bb7 6. d3 e6 7. Bg2 Nd7 8. O-O b4 9. Ne2 Ngf6 10. h3 Be7 11. g4 O-O 12. Ng3 d5 13. e5 Ne8 14. Qe2 a5 15. c4 bxc3 16. bxc3 Nc7 17. f5 Ra6 18. Rb1 Bc6 19. Bd2 a4 20. Nh5 Ne8 21. f6 gxf6 22. Bh6 Nxe5 23. Nxe5 fxe5 24. Qxe5 Qd6 25. Qxd6 Bxd6 26. c4 Be5 27. Bxf8 Kxf8 28. Nf4 dxc4 29. Bxc6 Rxc6 30. dxc4 Nf6 31. Rb7 Ne4 32. Nd3 Bd4+ 33. Kg2 Nd6 34. Ra7 Rb6 35. Rxa4 e5 36. Re1 e4 37. Nf4 Be5 38. Ra8+ Kg7 39. Nh5+ Kh6 40. Ng3 Bd4 41. Rg8 1-0

For the second game, I would recommend playing out the position after about move 30 against a computer. Take the Black side to see how the computer wins it and then take the White side and try to beat the computer. This should give you good practice in the technique of converting a material advantage.

'


Good idea. I haven't been doing that lately. I'll also play the ending of the first one (and winning positions from other games) to try and win against stiffer resistance. I was really just sucking there after around move 30.

Actually, I just looked at the sicilian section for a couple hours at the bookstore because I had been already been playing the grand prix setup, then looked up that very review and didn't buy the book. I had already noticed how, in one instance, they wrote something like "so and so is probably the best try for black but we'll just show one line against that move and five pages against this inferior move which is our main line." It's also funny how every other page has a box with a quote from the text such as "AND WHITE HAS A CRUSHING ATTACK!" or "BLACK CAN'T DO JACK SH*T!"

I only found good reviews of the black book and went ahead and bought that one. What do you think of (are you aware of?) their recommendation against d4? Would it be a waste of time starting with an easy book like this and tweaking the repertoire as I got better and run into problems? I mean, the first several moves and basic ideas of any opening can't be bad, can they?

15.Rae1 is a standard move with the idea of 16.f5 which should have been played instead of 16.g4. Even without calculating any variations it's obvious that black can't take the pawn: 16...exf5 17.e6 with a very strong attack for white. So 16.g4 is just wasting a tempo.
20.Bc1 is very passive. I would play 20.Bg3 or 20.cxd5 Bxd5 21.Bg3 and then Nd2-c4(or e4).
I think the rest of the game white played very well.
27.a3 can't be good. 27...bxa3 28.Bxa3 (28.b4 is interesting, but after cxb4 Nxd4+ Kb7 I prefer black) 28...a5 (preventing b4) and white has another weak pawn (b3) to defend.
I think black should have played 28...a5, then a4 trying to open "a" file for his rook.

You could write a novel about the late opening / early middle game in the game you posted against August Piper, particularly around move 8. There are just so many really interesting and neat ways to play that position. Instead of rambling on about everything I'll just ask you. Can you elaborate on why you played 8. Bd2, what you were planning (in the long term particularly) and why you chose it over say - Be3 or O-O?

That helps alot, thanks. Now I can see obviously 16. g4 was a waste especially after Rae1. Also, just now running it through the computer, I see I missed 33. Nxd4+. I'd like to always spot that kind of stuff even if I'm having trouble coming up with a plan.

Shandrax,

Some of your advice is awful. You seem to have no concept of what a class player needs to do to improve. You don't seem to appreciate that they aren't going to grasp master level concepts quickly.

Allen just scored 2/5 in a Class C tournament. Why would he study something like this? You don't beat a ~1500 player because you've got the bishop pair or have isolated your opponent's d-pawn.

Like d2d4 pointed out, Zurich International Chess Tournament, 1953 by David Bronstein is simply over Allen's head right now.

Getting lessons from Grandmaster Roman Dzindzichasvili would be a waste of both players' time. If Allen's is going to get a coach, he should get somebody who has lots of experience with class players. Usually, that's somebody who teaches kids.

I really didn't have any experience with that setup but because I was hoping to play e5 and/or f5 I thought it might be useful later on the a1-h8. Maybe a bad idea because I wasn't sure where it belonged yet, I might have been able to play Bb2 at some point instead, or maybe that diagonal would end up closed.

Later I was going to put it on g3 but after 19...g5 I didn't notice d2d4's idea of cxd5 Bxd5 Bg3 and bring the Knight to c4 and thought I would now just use it to watch the King pawns instead. I also didn't notice that 20...d4 would hamper it a bit.

Its a good book, but badly outdated. Today, with superstrong computers, I think there is more efficient ways to study chess.

11.Qd2 is ok but I prefer Qh5, which is more active and doesn't allow Ng6 (after 11...h6 12.0-0).
Instead of 19.f3 better is 19.Nd5 Qd8 20.f4.
I don't like Nc4xe5 idea, as white is losing his space advantage after dxe5. Still 20.f4 and 21.Nd5 (or 20.Nd5 and 21.f4) was the most logical choice.
30.Nd5 is not a mistake but there are better moves. White dominates on "d" file, so it shouldn't be closed. 30.c4 or 30.Rd8+ Kh7 31.Qd2 are better options.
31.Qd3 isn't good. 31.c4 and 32.Ne3. The seemingly active knight doesn't do anything on d5 except defending c3 pawn and closing "d" file for his own rook.
Unless I'm missing something, instead of 33.Nb4 there is 33.Qb6 Rxa2 34.Qd8+ Kh7 35.Ne7 f6 36.Qe8 winning.
34.a3 is weird. 34.Qc5 maybe?
The rest of the game was very strange.

What do you mean exactly? The only thing that can be called "outdated" in this book is openings theory. Even this isn't entirely true, as many opening ideas from 50s are still up-to-date.

Allan doesn't have the time to develop as a player moving through the ranks slowly. He needs to make progress fast and he has a high IQ, so all he needs is information and practice.

Do you have a trainer license and over a decade of experience in working with players of all levels up to FM strength? Did you coach a child that won the german U-12 championship and played in a world championship? What is your qualification to judge my advice?

You can certainly learn a lot of things in this book, but its still full of errors, wrong analyses and incorrect ideas.
Keres or Bronstein wont stand a chance vs Rybkas analyses from year 2010.
Todays 2700+ champions never work with anything else than computers.

They recommend the Nimzo/Bogo Indian for Black against 1.d4.
I think that book is fine for you.

From Rybka you can't learn anything. It can't tell you which piece is weak, which square should be protected, which pawn structure is better, etc. Such programs are very useful for pros and semi-pros, but not for amateur players.