Checkmate Pattern: Two Pigs

The pattern that I call Two Pigs is usually referred to as the “Blind Swine Mate”. It is an unfortunate and illogical term that violates an unsourced quote credited to Dawid Markelowicz Janowsky (1868-1927). The unsourced quote has been in circulation at least since 1953, the original publishing date of The Art of Attack in Chess.

“The pair of rooks which “grunt out check” on the seventh rank but cannot get a sight of mate were once nicknamed ‘blind swine’ by Janowski” (Victor Vukovic, The Art of Attack in Chess [1993], 73).

If they are blind, they do not find checkmate.

I knew less about the history of this pattern name when I created my self-published A Checklist of Checkmates twenty years ago. The contents of page 15:

Edward Winter often has written about the appalling number of unsourced quotes in chess literature.* Regarding the Janowsky quote, see Chess Notes 3494, 3525, and 5160 (scroll down). The last of these was prompted by my correspondence with Winter, noting two instances when Janowsky had two rooks on the seventh rank and could manage only a draw. Although the quote is unsourced, one can imagine Janowsky grumbling about pigs that cannot see checkmate. However, in the game that I cited in A Checklist of Checkmates, his blind pigs saved an otherwise lost game.

Such was my idea in a blitz game yesterday, when blind to the advantage that I had, I set up a draw that was not forced until my opponent returned the favor.

White to move

39.Rff7??

39.Rc8+ Kd7 40.Rg8+- was the winning line.

39...b1Q??

After 39...Rxe4+, Black still gets a queen, while White's blind swine cannot force a draw.

40.Rfe7+ and the game was quickly drawn by repetition as Black cannot escape endless checks.

In another online game in July, I was on the receiving end of the Two Pigs checkmate, except that in this case another piece (knight or king) was needed, and so the pattern is not the same.

White to move

29.a6

This desperate try failed. 

29.Rxd5 was another possibility that fails.

29...b6 30.Rc1 Rg2+ 31.Kh1

31.Kf1 Ne3+ 32.Ke1 Rbe2#

This is a pattern that Raf Mesotten, The Checkmate Pattens Manual (2022) calls Vukovic's Mate (45-49). It appears to be an instructive book, but like every other book on the subject, it passes on common attributions grounded in bad history and unsourced quotes (see "Pillsbury's Mate"). To Mesotten's credit, he notes clearly that his sources for the pattern names were chessgames.com, Wikipedia, and Chess Tempo (7).

31...Rxh2+ 32.Kg1 Rbg2+ and I resigned as a knight-assisted "Ladder mate" was coming.

The Two Pigs Mate pattern appears in this game played on Internet Chess Club in 2001.

White to move

21.O-O?

White is much worse, but castling here gives Black a forced mate in three, which I promptly executed.

21...Rgxg2+ 22.Kh1 Rxh2+ 23.Kg1 Rcg2#

*I also have some articles on the topic and related topics, such as "Plagiarism and Related Crimes".

Training Log: January 2013

I posted my resolutions for 2013 on the last day of 2012. On the penultimate day of January, it is time to assess my progress thus far.

1. In 2013, I will solve correctly 300 tactics problems each month.

I met this goal last week. Most of the 300 were solved on the iPad, which has proven its value for chess training. Moreover, last week a friend at the Spokane Chess Club (I should call him an adversary, as on Thursday he handed me my fourth OTB standard rated loss since September 2011) introduced me to Chessimo--a comprehensive chess training iPad app.* I am not counting the 330 problems that I have solved in that app (120 unique) as they are all checkmate in one. When I reach the point where I am solving tactical combinations, I may count those encountered through this app.

Lev Alburt has been sitting on my desk. That is to say, Alburt's Chess Training Pocket Book II has remained on my desk unopened through the entire month. My non-use of that book and my relatively limited use of the Anthology of Chess Combinations are both sources for self-criticism.

I finished my second run through the puzzles in Shredder's iPad early in the month, but have not yet begun the third cycle. The third cycle will be completed in 2013 with the goal of 80%+ score. With eleven months remaining, that amounts to 91 problems per month.

My four sessions on Chess Tempo were short (13 correct in 25 attempts on the longest session), but I emphasized accuracy while keeping my average solving time near 100 seconds.

One of the Chess-wise exercises that I did this morning was familiar from having encountered it somewhere else a few months ago. I immediately knew the first move, but sought to calculate the whole sequence before playing the move. Chess-wise cannot tell me if this calculation was correct. If the first move played is correct, the problem is solved. Chess Tempo, Shredder, and other sources mitigate this defect in training with Chess-wise.

White to move

2. In 2013, I will study whole games and whole books.

When writing my resolutions, I anticipated that I might have finished Logical Chess: Move by Move by now. That expectation overlooked that I often spend the latter half of January focused on the games in Wijk aan Zee. Following this year's games as I did, with an emphasis upon one game each day certainly counts as studying whole games even if it will be several months before those games make their way into books.

Magnus Carlsen said that Aronian -- Anand was the best game of this year's Tata Steel Chess tournament. I watched part of the game while it was in progress, and then memorized it that evening after work. I am close to memorizing Rotlewi -- Rubinstein 1907, which Anand referenced in the post-game interview. John Donaldson and Nikolay Minev, Akiba Rubinstein: Uncrowned King (1994) compile annotations from several writers on Rubinstein's immortal game. I am going through these.

I count my January progress on this second resolution adequate.

3. In 2013, I will finish my Pawn Endgame Flash Card project.

I am continuing to use these flash cards in elementary classrooms while teaching beginners chess, and some of the positions came up in the first endgame lesson that I completed in Chessimo. Nonetheless, progress studying Dvoretsky's Endgame Manual and mastering the blue diagram positions must be rated substandard.

The bright spot in pawn endgame training this month came while watching a game in the C Group at Wijk aan Zee. I watched part of round nine at home, then part in my classroom with two groups of homeschool students. After the games in A Group finished, we watched the ending in one of the games in C Group. I thought the ending was drawn, and yet GM Robin Swinkels managed to win. At lunch, I tested my hunch that it was drawn by playing the position against Hiarcs for the iPad. Later, watching the post-game interview with Swinkels the following day, he admitted that he had won a drawn ending. I drew the ending against Hiarcs.

4. In 2013, I will lose fifteen pounds.

Not at this rate, I will not. January ends with me at the weight I carried when the month began.

Update: 10 February 2012

*We discussed iPad chess training before beginning our game, which was the last one to finish that night. Two weeks later, I clarified the iPad he had raved about. He has not used Chessimo, but was raving about Chess Quest. I have completed over 1400 problems in Chessimo--very basic problems in two weeks. The past few days, I have started exploring Chess Quest. I now understand his enthusiasm for the latter.

Attackers May Defend

I rejected the correct move here because I was looking only at my queen's attacking potential. She also guards against my worries. It is Chess Tempo problem 11926.

White to move

The problem is not difficult, but illustrates the sort of elementary oversight that holds me back. I know the basic tactics motifs well, but frequently miscalculate because I have a tendency to overlook simple stuff.

Training Log

Last March, I began posting a regular Sunday morning post that tracked my chess training over the previous week. I kept up the practice into August. This morning I woke with the impulse to resume these Sunday morning reflections. My resolutions for 2013 are similar to those for 2012, but with more emphasis on strategy.

I beefed up my expectations for tactics from fifty problems per week to three hundred per month. In addition, only problems solved correctly count. What counts as correct? For the exercises in the Shredder and Chess-Wise iPad apps, every problem completed counts. My first effort may be incorrect, but the correct answer must be executed before moving on to the next problem. If I take too long or make to many errors in Shredder, I get no points. Chess-Wise is not scored. For Chess Tempo and the Tactic Trainer iPad app, wrong answers result in a failed problem. Chess Tempo tracks my success for me, while Tactic Trainer only graphs my rating. I keep a mental note of correct answers while solving the latter.

I missed this Tactic Trainer problem this morning. I recall missing the same problem several months ago, and for the same reason.

White to move

Diagram is upside down

While busily calculating tactics involving the d-file and the c3 square, I missed the easy deflection of White's queen. This problem was my first this morning, and I missed others, too. I worked through problems until I solved ten correctly. The day ended with a rating a few points higher than it began. On 1 January, I solved five problems in five attempts. The image to the right displays my rating performance for 2013.

My pace of training during this short week puts me well on the way to the target of three hundred for the month. 86 correct problems.

There was only one session on Chess Tempo, and it was frustrating to miss several easy problems. More time could lead to greater accuracy. However, I refuse to become one of those who spend fifteen minutes and more just to get a problem correct, and yet my pace is a bit slower than needed for blitz mode. One problem took fifteen minutes, but that was consequence of clicking "next problem" then walking away from the computer to attend to some need of my puppies. The training clock kept ticking. It is heartening that my past three sessions have each produced a slight rating gain.

My tactics training takes place everywhere, thanks to resources on the iPad. I attempt problems before falling asleep at night and first thing in the morning. During a visit to the dentist this week, there were a few opportunities to solve a problem or two. I have been neglecting Uncle John's Bathroom Reader since getting my iPad, but they are fighting back by developing eBooks and a mobile app.

In addition to tactics problems, I have been working through two books involving study of complete games. This week, I went through two games in Chernev, Logical Chess: Move by Move and two in Tarrasch, Three Hundred Chess Games.

I discussed my resolution regarding my pawn endgame flash card project with two groups of third graders. I was in their classroom to teach chess. For several years I have started young players with pawn wars. This year, during the first two of my four scheduled visits to each classroom, a child picks an endgame card at random. I set up the position on the demonstration board and make the effort not only to solve it, but to explain the correct solution to beginning players.

The first class on Wednesday picked a simple card.

White / Black to move

The second class picked a problem to which I immediately knew the solution, but explaining the solution to beginning players was more difficult. Most of these children went through my chess lessons in second grade, and many of them also went through them in first. But, as most of them only play chess when I am in their classroom, some still do not get how the king moves and the intricacies of pawns moving one way and capturing another. Usually, I do not introduce en passant until the second session in third grade.

White to move

Each time I try to explain how White wins this position, my knowledge of opposition and outflanking grows.

Most days this past week, I have walked or spend time on the recumbent bike. But, the exercise has not been sufficient to drop any weight. Yesterday's exercise was a walk along the beach of Lake Coeur d'Alene with my eldest son and the puppies with emphasis upon eagle watching.

Training Log

My focus the past two weeks has been drifting away from chess. Although the U.S. Open began yesterday only a few hours from my home, I am traveling in the other direction. When I teach a six week history course, as I am doing beginning 14 August, my attention shifts almost wholly to it for a few weeks before it begins. Nevertheless, I keep up on daily chess: tactics training, correspondence games, occasional rapid and blitz games online.

After an eight hour session working on my history course on Friday morning, I played ten 3 0 games on Chess.com. Losing five of the first six games was frustrating, but then I finished with four consecutive wins. The past few weeks, I have played very little 3 0 chess, using most of my online playing time for 15 0 games.  Reducing junk is important to chess improvement.

As for tactics training, I solved a handful of problems in the Shredder iPad app, the Tactic Trainer app, and attempted 113 problems through four sessions on Chess Tempo. My two posts the past week, "Failing at Tactics" and "Tracking Failures," detail some of the challenges through which I struggled. My last session on Wednesday was ten problems with an 80% correct rate.

The graph shows steady progress upward through the end of July until I scored a mere 41% correct through 80 problems on Monday. I regained over half of the rating reduction through a mere ten problems. My average recent time per problem went up from ~75 seconds to 98.

I waffle a bit over how low I should aim to keep my average time per problem. Is speed important in training, or do I gain more from seeking a high degree of accuracy?

Stats for Standard Tactics
Problems Done: 2481 (Correct: 1316 Failed: 1165)
Percentage correct: 53.04%
Average recent per problem time spent 98 seconds

I spent a bit of time going through game three from the Spokane City Championship, but have not yet completed my annotations for posting.

Tracking Failures

As a follow-up to yesterday's "Failing at Tactics," I moved more slowly through today's training session on Chess Tempo. With each failed problem, I wrote an explanation of the cause of my error.

1. With fresh coffee in the cup, although still groggy-eyed due to working until nearly 10:00 pm, I opened the first problem, CT 78563. Immediately, I saw the checkmate threat, and then within a few seconds saw that White had prevented my threats from going anywhere. Then, I thought to remove the queen's defender. Through simple miscalculation, I failed to see that after my capture of the knight and the exchange of queens, I would be hitting two pieces. My 1...Bg4 was the fourth most popular wrong move, and wholly ineffective.

Cause: gross miscalculation

2. After solving one problem correctly, I missed CT 47952. Laurent's urging (see comments to yesterday's post) that one must ask "what can my opponent do?" led me to reject the first move that I examined. I saw the discovered attack against queen after capture of the bishop that only appears to be en prise. As it happens, that would have been the correct move. A knight fork of king and queen refutes the discovery.

Cause: missing fork

3. My fourth problem, CT 57540, was my third failure. This time, however, I failed on the second move rather than the first. I found and executed the correct idea, but executed it badly. After the forcing check by the rook, I parried the checkmate threat with a discovery on the threatening rook. But, I moved my knight to a square where it was vulnerable to capture.

White to move

Instead of gaining a clear and decisive advantage, I put myself in a rook and pawn ending with the advantage of one pawn.

Cause: hasty failure to calculate alternative moves

4. Although I correctly solved CT 57744 and CT 48156, I made moves that were "not the computer's first choice." In 57744, I missed seeing the full mobility of my queen, finding a win of material but not the checkmate. In 48156, my second move was to check with the bishop rather than the queen. Again, I was winning material but not finding checkmate.

Cause: shallow calculation

So far today, 4/7 correct, but errors in five of seven problems. Yesterday, I had a terrible run of 31 problems in which only six were solved correctly, but then finished the day with seven correct. Starting today with 4/7 correct suggests that slowing down between problems might lead to greater success. Instead of frantic solving one problem after another, a few moments to reflect on my thinking processes after each problem might be the prescription for yesterday's malady.

5. In CT 49766, I chased illusions.* When my initial move was rejected as "not the computer's top choice," I attempted to drive the Black queen to a square where it no longer threatened my bishop. That my own queen was en prise failed to lead me to calculate variations.

White to move

It is interesting that the eye instantly catches the check on f7, and almost as instantly rejects it due to the knight on d8. Yet, in this idea is the kernel of the double attack that wins.

Cause: gross miscalculation, inflexibility

6. CT 91892 put me under 50% for the day so far.

White to move

Winning the exchange is easy, but it is important to look for more. I correctly identified White's threats along the a3-f8 diagonal, but failed to use the b-file. Instead, I sought to bring both queen and rook to the d-file.

Cause: shallow calculation

I managed to finish the day's ten problems at 50% because CT 59114 offered the resource that I missed in CT 47952. Perhaps slowly working through problems, writing down the cause of each failure, is a practice more akin to deliberate practice than trying to solve as many problems as possible in the allotted time. More likely, there is good reason to do both sorts of solving sessions.


*There was a break in my Chess Tempo session in which I took care of some morning business. During this break, I worked four problems on the Shredder iPad app. The problems in this app often call for simpler resolution than problems at the level where I'm working on CT. Could an easy problem set lead to failure when moving to harder problems? I am reminded of something that Valeri Beim wrote in Paul Morphy: A Modern Perspective (see "Beware of Weak Opponents").

Flexibility

Anatomy of a Failure

In Elements of Positional Evaluation: How the Pieces Get Their Power (2010), Dan Heisman defines flexibility as one of seven positional concepts. Zwischenzug (an in-between move) often reveals flexibility in action. I failed a tactics problem by overlooking a zwischenzug. First, examining one plan that failed, I rejected it and found another plan. The second plan was correct, but a part of the first plan remained valuable. My wholesale rejection of the failed plan led to inflexibility in my thought process. This inflexibilty, when faced with an unexpected response, was the source of a blunder.

Black to move

Problem 77164 on Chess Tempo

Instantly, the check 1...Rc1+ bears examination. This move leads nowhere and must be rejected. Chasing pawns seems futile as well, but the knight is trapped.

I found the line 1...Re8 2.Nxd4 Rd8 when White wins a piece.

Playing 1...Re8, CT then confronted me with the unexpected 2.Rxd4. I proceeded with the original plan to win the knight and blundered. This game losing blunder (and tactics training failure) took me five seconds. Even 2...Rxd4 3.Nxd4 Rxe5 was superior too my horrid 2...Re6??

The correct move was 2...Rc1+, the first move that I examined, but played one move later. Such bull-headed pursuit of one idea when new unexamined circumstances appear on the board have been the cause of more than one failure in tournament play. The antidote to this failure is to create a problem set of zwischenzug problems on CT and spend several hours of deliberate practice solving them.

Importance of Feedback

Tactic Trainer vs. Chess Tempo

My former student and friend recommended Tactic Trainer for my iPad, and I have been using it steadily the past few weeks. It is simple to use. Not mentioned in my review posted last week, however, is the occasional frustration when I get a problem wrong. Using the arrows below the board, I can play through the correct solution. It is up to me to comprehend why my answer is wrong. Often a moment's study looking at my solution in light of the correct sequence of moves reveals my oversight, but not always.

This morning I erred in this position.

White to move

1.d6 Rc4

I found as much, but then rejected 2.d7 in light of 2...Bf6 3.d8Q+ Bxd8 4.Rxd8+ Kg7 and I missed that 5.Rd1 gets my rook back in time to stop Black's c-pawn. Eyeing c8 as a better square for my rook, I played

2.Bd5?

I thought Black would play 2...Ra4, but putting the position into Fritz 11 reveals two superior ideas 2...Rc5 and 2...Rb4.

It is a useful problem, but Tactic Trainer needed supplementation in order to complete the lesson. Contrast that need with Chess Tempo. In Chess Tempo, there are comments left by other users that explain certain wrong answers. For paying members, there is even more: the full game score and source, the top several computer lines, and the option of playing the position against the computer.

Moreover, Chess Tempo works great in Safari on the iPad. Tactic Trainer costs $2.99 once. Unlocking the full resources of Chess Tempo costs more, which can be paid monthly ($3.00 to $4.00, depending on level) or annually ($20.00 to $35.00). Chess Tempo also requires a web connection, while Tactic Trainer is fully resident on the iPad.

I have been paying for CT monthly, but plan to renew for the full year soon. Meanwhile, I will continue using Tactic Trainer as well. CT is a much stronger resource, but Tactic Trainer has its merits.

Training Log

Preparing for Camp

Dragon Chess Camp starts tomorrow and runs all week. It is a chess camp  for youth going into grades K-6.  In the camp, the kids will solve chess problems, practice endgames, learn tactical motifs, and compete against each other. Each day, I will take them through at least one game between strong players. Their workbook contains ten annotated games. I wrote this workbook. Its preparation occupied the bulk of my chess time the past two weeks.

I prepared the following games:

Szen -- Falkbeer, Vienna 1852 (endgame only)
Loewenthal -- Szen, Budapest 1842
Lichtenhein -- Morphy, New York 1857
Morphy -- Loewenthal, London 1858 (game 8 of match)
Morphy -- Loewenthal, London 1858 (Game 12 of match)
Tal -- Uhlmann, Moscow 1971
Botvinnik -- Tal, Moscow 1960 (game 2 of match)
Chernin -- Yudasin, Sverdlovsk 1984
Seirawan -- Bisguier, San Diego 1975
Seirawan -- Karpov, Saint Louis 2012 (game 1 of match)

In addition, the workbook contains an annotated fragment of Pillsbury -- Lasker, Nuremberg 1896. I annotated this game in 2004 and it has become a standard in my summer camp workbooks. Because the same opening as Lichtenhein -- Morphy appeared, the workbook includes the unannotated game score of Botvinnik -- Tal, Moscow 1960 (game 12 of match). My annotations were enhanced through study of several printed texts: Emanuel Lasker, Lasker's Manual of Chess; Valeri Beim, Paul Morphy: A Modern Perspective; John Nunn, 101 Brilliant Chess Miniatures; Mikhail Tal, Tal Botvinnik 1960: Match for the World Championship; Vincent McCambridge, The Games of Yasser Seirawan.

There will not be sufficient time to go through all of these games. The camp participants get to keep their 82 page workbook at the end of camp. My hope is that some of them will find time later in the summer to study some of the other games.

My workbook contains an important section on pawn endgames. Naturally, I reviewed these while writing this year's workbook. This is my fifth year of a one-week chess camp the week after school let out for the summer. The past four years, the camp was called Black Knights Chess Camp, as it was held in Deer Park, where I coach the Black Knights Chess Team. This past year was my first as coach of the Saint George's School Dragons chess team, and I moved my camp to the new school. Funding for the Deer Park program remains uncertain for next year. The old source of funding was eliminated by the state in budget cuts more than one year ago, but the district found a source of temporary funding for the year that just ended.


Routine Training

In addition to reviewing elementary pawn endgames, I continued with frequent tactics exercises.

I attempted 47 problems in three sessions on Chess Tempo. Having watched my percentage drop the past couple of weeks, I slowed down in the third session. The slowing kicked up my average recent per problem time by 20 seconds, but gave me one session with 63% over 16 problems.

I spent 4:48 correctly solving Problem 77240. That was my longest time on a single problem.

White to move

Problems Done: 1941 (Correct: 1052 Failed: 889)
Percentage correct: 54.2%
Average recent per problem time spent 89 seconds

Perhaps a dozen or so problems with Shredder's iPad app.

1695 puzzles: 13289/16950 points 78%
last 10 puzzles: 73/100 73%

Thanks to the recommendation of fellow blogger AoxomoxoA, I tried a new site for training: Chessity. See
"Chessity: New Tactics Server "from" the developer of the Steps (Stappen) method" at AoxomoxoA's blog. The problems there seem to differ from Chess Tempo in the skill sets that they develop. More will be written concerning the nuances of tactical skills in problem solving. I solved 137 problems.

Counting Pieces

Profiting from Chess Tempo Training

Chess Tempo performance statistics give me percentage scores for my performance on each of the tactical motifs it recognizes. My lowest percentage after the first several hundred problems was in Counting, which CT defines as, "a tactic occurring due to a mistake in evaluating the material balance arising after a series of takes." After identifying this weakness, I created a problem set consisting of all the Counting problems rated 1600-2000. A portion of my training each week has been with this problem set.

This work paid off in a critical position yesterday. I was playing David Griffin in the Spokane City Championship Contenders Tournament. Griffin organizes and funds this remarkable event. Participants must be invited. The participants are selected through a grand prix points system after those winning local weekend tournaments and twice annual club championships have taken the first slots. It is a six player round-robin event. The winner becomes the challenger in a four game City Championship match.

In 2008, I won this event and then lost to FM David Sprenkle 2 1/2 - 1/2 in the championship. In 2010, I tied John Julian in the Contenders Tournament, but he had better tie-breaks. Julian played Sprenkle, losing. Sprenkle then moved out of state due to employment opportunities elsewhere, and in 2011, Julian played Michael Cambareri in the championship match. Julian is the current city champion.

This year's Contenders includes Griffin, the lowest rated player; Tim Moroney, an Expert and the highest rated player at present in our fair city; Cambareri, Jeremy Krasin, Nikolay Bulakh, and me, all in the 1900s USCF. Although ostensibly the weakest player, Griffin is well-experienced and capable of beating any of the rest. He drew Moroney in their encounter.

We left the main traveled paths rather quickly, as both players opted for uncommon moves. My seventh move rendered the game unique in the annals of chess history, but already by that point we had departed from the play of anyone over 2100.


Griffin,David (1611) - Stripes,James (1933) [A31]
City Championship Contenders Spokane, 08.06.2012

1.d4 Nf6 2.Nf3 c5 3.c4 g6 4.Nc3 cxd4 5.Nxd4 Bg7 6.Bf4?! d6 7.Nf3 Qc7N

7...0–0

White to move

8.e4 Nbd7 9.Qd2 Nc5 10.e5 dxe5?!

10...Nfe4 11.Nxe4 Nxe4 12.Qd5 Nc5 =

11.Bxe5 Qd7 12.Qxd7+

12.Qe3 +/=

12...Bxd7 13.Nd5 Rc8 14.Nc7+?! 

14.Rd1

14...Kf8 15.b4?

Defining Counting as an error in calculation, Griffin's assault on this knight was a critical error in the game. It led to a position that I spent four minutes studying before making my move, my second longest think in the game. I was playing relatively fast, using a total of forty minutes for the whole game. Griffin used eighty.

Black to move

15...Ng4! -/+

I played the strongest move, which was the result of confident calculation of a series of exchanges. Confidence during the game stemmed from the hours of training on Chess Tempo. Also of concern was that moving my knight to safety permits white to start rolling his queenside pawn majority, and thereby freeing his light-squared bishop for action. I had a clear advantage from this point on in the game. Even so, Griffin found a way to make things interesting, and one or two inaccuracies on my part gave him opportunities, the most important of which he kindly failed to exploit. In the end, he overlooked a checkmate threat.

16.Bxg7+ Kxg7 17.bxc5

During my calculation for move 15, I had to examine 17.Nb5 Bxb5 18.cxb5 Ne4 19.Be2 Nexf2–+. I did not continue my calculations to consider 20.0–0 Ne4.

17...Rxc7 18.h3

18.Rb1 Nf6–+

18...Nf6–+ 19.Rb1

Black to move

19...Bf5?!-/+

19...Ne4-+

20.Rb5 Nd7 21.Nd4

Nothing can be done to save the bishop, but my knight is better than his bishop even in this relatively open position. However, the doubled pawns and open g-file gave my opponent play that easily could have been prevented. Black still has a clear advantage.

21...Nxc5 22.Nxf5+ gxf5 23.h4 Rd8 24.Rh3 b6 25.Rg3+ Kf6 26.Rg5 e6 27.Be2 

Black to move

27...Ne4

I spent about three minutes considering the relative merits of the text move and 27...Rcd7. Possible the latter was more accurate. Rybka prefers the move that I played.

28.Rh5 Kg6 29.g4 Nc3? 

I failed to even consider 29...fxg4, the correct move.

White to move

30.gxf5+ Kg7! 31.Re5 Rcd7? 32.fxe6?? 

We spent some time after the game examining the rook endgame after 32.f4 Nxe2 33.Kxe2 Rd2+. Black is better. White could have played 32.Kf1! when Black's advantage is slight.

32...Rd1+  0–1

Next move is checkmate.

Three Steps Backward, Two Forward

Training Log

Yesterday's Valley, Today's Climb

There's an old figure of speech concerning progress amid adversity: three steps forward, two steps backward. However, sometimes we fail to make progress. So it was with my marathon training session yesterday. I did not intend to spend more than four hours on Chess Tempo. My failure was grounded in initial success. My standard tactics rating had been hovering near +25 relative to the interim goal I was just under when I wrote "Getting Angry." My objective since crossing that mark was to achieve the next line at +50. I reached +45 after a relatively short session, then crashed. I ended the day at -46. By the end of the day I had correctly solved 125 problems in 273 attempts, an abysmal 46%. I must say that I was not enjoying the training. At least I had some solace in knowing that deliberate practice is not inherently pleasurable, but rather often painful. This morning, I refused to write my weekly training log until I had crossed back to the positive relative to mid-April's interim goal. I correctly solved 47 in 83 attempts for 57%. My rating is now +1. I have spent more than twenty-seven hours working Chess Tempo problems in the past six weeks.

For the week that ended yesterday, I solved 155/336 on Chess Tempo.

I continued working with Shredder's iPad app, but only ten problems.

1657 puzzles: 12987/16570 points 78%
last 10 puzzles: 97/100 97%

I also continued solving problems from the set of 300 that come with Chess-wise Pro, another iPad app. These problems are good quality positions, but only the first move is part of the puzzle. The first 110 offer a verbal clue upon request, but no other assistance. I have not been tracking these week-by-week, but have completed the first 134 since beginning in early March.

For the first time in several weeks, I spent more than one-half hour working problems from Lev Alburt, Chess Training Pocket Book II. Thus, two of my three resolutions were met this week.

Yesterday's slide began Thursday night. I played two of three rounds in an unrated thematic tournament at the Spokane Chess Club. Due to scheduling issues that others faced, I was asked to say a few words about the Dutch Defense before we began a tournament in which all games began after 1.d4 f5. It was enjoyable looking through some games to highlight for the club. Then, in the event, I played awful in the first game against Ron, dodging a bullet when he stepped into checkmate in one. Then, I made a simple opening blunder against Nikolay, giving him the initiative with Black. I defended well, and created some counterplay. At the end, he erred in giving me a choice of rooks to capture. The correct capture would have left me one pawn ahead, but I took the wrong one and had a minor piece for a queen. I left for home, while Nikolay went on to tie for second in the event with a draw in the final round. On Friday, I squandered some time playing online blitz in the quest for elusive redemption.

Shifting Targets

In Chess Tempo 57373, I found the first move and then missed the second. I was focused on how to get the king and missed another vulnerability.

Black to move

Happily, several problems later, I did not remain obsessed with attacking the king when such threats made possible shifting the attack to another piece. Chess Tempo 47151.

White to move

Training Log

View from our room at Cambell's Resort

Last week was terrific, but little time was spent with chess.

With Shredder, I managed a mere 17 puzzles.

1639 puzzles: 12829/16390 points 78%
last 10 puzzles: 76/100 76%

Through three sessions, I attempted 118 problems on Chess Tempo.

Problems Done: 1195 (Correct: 673 Failed: 522)
Percentage correct: 56.32%

Even through a week in which chess takes a back seat to life, I managed to fulfill the first of my three New Year's Resolutions.

1. Solve a minimum of 50 tactics problems per week.

The others were neglected.

Training Log

This past week, I have been battling my old nemesis: blitz addiction. A major part of what drives the addiction is easy to understand. I lose. I must play again when I lose a game that I feel I should have won because I outplayed my opponent, but failed to watch the time, or because I was outplayed by an opponent who lacks rudimentary skills, or a host of other reasons. When I wake up at four in the morning after eight hours of sleep because I woke up at four the previous morning and went to bed early, I lie in bed with my iPad and play three minutes games with the Internet Chess Club iPad app. At that hour, it takes me four games before I can see the screen. My rating plummets, and so I must play on to restore my own dignity. This illness cuts into tactics training, but is not always a complete waste.

This game was played early yesterday morning in the 3 0 pool. I was a bit too cavalier concerning the loss of my queenside pawns in the opening, but managed to create some pressure in the center.


Stripes -- ICC Player [D11]
ICC 3 0 Internet Chess Club, 28.04.2012

1.d4 c6 2.c4 d5 3.Nf3 Nf6 4.g3 a6 5.Bg2 dxc4 6.0–0 b5 7.a4 Bb7 8.b3 cxb3 9.Qxb3 Nbd7

White to move

10.Bf4

A silly move.

10...Nd5

The correct response.

11.Bd2 e6 12.e4 N5b6 13.a5 Nc4 14.Bc3 Nf6 15.Re1 Be7 16.Nbd2 Nxd2 17.Nxd2 0–0 18.Rad1 c5 19.d5

Black to move

Black has two connected passed pawns. These shall become a thorn in my side, but the puss that develops around the wound will strengthen me for attacking elsewhere.

19...c4 20.Qb2 exd5 21.e5

Now, three passers are coming at me. Yet, somehow I was less worried than when I had four pawns coming down the middle when Elston sacrificed two knights to get his pawns moving in the opening round of the 2005 Collyer Memorial in Spokane. I missed an opportunity in that game, and then survived with a draw because we were using my old analog clock and Elston ran out of time eight moves before checkmating me.

21...Ne8 22.Qa1 b4 23.Bd4 c3 24.Nf3 Nc7 25.Bb6 Qd7 26.Nd4 Ne6 27.Nf5 Bc5 28.Bxc5 Nxc5 29.Nd4 Ne6 30.Nf5 d4

White to move

I have the opportunity to dispatch one of the pesky pawns.

31.Bxb7 Qxb7 32.Nxd4 Nxd4 33.Rxd4 Rad8 34.Rde4 Rd2 35.Qa4 Rb8 36.e6 fxe6 37.Rxe6

Black to move

37...Rdd8??

Despite his or her clear advantage, my opponent panics. 37...Rf8 applies pressure to a White position already in dire straits.

38.Qb3??

38.Rb6 keeps some chances for equality.

38... Kh8 39.Re7??

White's idea of playing Qf7 is easily refuted by 39...Qf3

39... h6??

And, now, finally, White gets to have some fun in this blunderfest. The errors in this game should reveal why blitz does not strengthen one's game. When many hours of online blitz cut into useful activity, such as tactics training, then ambitions to achieve new levels of chess performance in serious play are deferred.

White to move

40.Rxb7 Rxb7 41.Kg2 Rc8 42.Rc1 Rb5 43.Qe6 Rcb8 44.Qxa6 b3?

Black makes White's game easier with this move.

White to move

45.Rxc3 b2 46.Rc8+

It seems that I spent quite a bit of time working out the variations before playing this move. I did not want to deal with a Black queen again. This "long think" was probably ten seconds.

46...Kh7 47.Rxb8 Rxb8 48.Qd3+ Kg8 49.Qb1 Black forfeits on time 1–0

Despite an excessive amount of time playing blitz this past week, I did find time for 14 Shredder puzzles on the iPad.


1622 puzzles: 12690/16220 points 78%
last 10 puzzles: 63/100 63%

Nothing impressive there. However, I also continued to work the problems at Chess Tempo. Not only did I complete 138 standard rated problems, but also worked through 6 problems in a new set that I created to address an area of weakness (getting five correct).


Problems Done: 1077 (Correct: 613 Failed: 464)
Percentage correct: 56.92%

I do plan to visit Lev Alburt's Chess Training Pocket Book II this week. My wife and I are spending a couple of days at a beautiful resort where she has a professional conference. Although I will attend a few of the conference social activities, I have ample time in the hotel for a bit of tactics training unless I decide to spend the time fishing. And there are some nice small lakes near here as well as the mammoth one a few feet from the patio where I am typing this post. Balancing chess training with fishing, exercise, and a bit of wine tasting is essential to my long-term progress.

I do have my endgame flash cards with me, and am scheduled to do a bit of driving for one conference excursion, so will keep the cards handy should there be some idle moments.

Tactical Motifs: A List

What are the tactical ideas that chess writers and teachers use to classify practice positions? Where can the aspiring chess player find a definitive list? In this post, I compile several lists for comparison purposes.

Jonathan Tisdall, Improve Your Chess Now (1997) offers two useful appendices: "Mating Patterns" and "Common Tactical Themes." His words describing "Double Attack/Check" echo a statement that  recall from Yuri Averbakh, Chess Tactics for Advanced Players (1992).

Double Attack is the essence of any successful operation. It would be more accurate to say Multiple Attack, since there is often a presence of, or a need for, more. I imagine the wording has arisen because a double is the limit on checking. Almost all the other themes have some element of multiple attack contained in them.
Tisdall, Improve Your Chess Now, 204.

In his largely successful effort to advance middlegame theory, Averbakh highlights the centrality of the double attack.

If we regard the term "double attack" in a broader sense than has been done up to now by theoreticians, namely not merely as a two-pronged attack, but as a combination of attacks and threats, we notice that the double attack in one form or another in the basis of most intricate tactical operations.
Averbakh, Chess Tactics for Advanced Players, 6.

Averbakh's brilliant discussion of how the elementary checkmate of a lone king through the coordinated actions of a queen and king illustrates the double attack in practice is sufficient reason for paying the price to acquire a copy of this classic text. Averbakh's clear discussion of contacts also informs, it seems to me, the thought-provoking efforts of Momir Radovic to challenge the way chess is ordinarily taught to beginners, and to offer a system grounded in sound pedagogy.

It is almost possible to extract a list from Averbakh's text through examination of subheadings. However, most of his terms are better described as meta-motifs, efforts to make a theoretical contribution in the understanding of types of contacts. It is not Averbakh's central purpose to develop a practical list of motifs. Here's a sample of his headings.

Fork
Discovered check
Double check
Two-fold attack on a defended piece
Two-fold attack on two targets
Two-fold attack in conjunction with a pin
Mutual two-fold attack
Double attack
Zugzwang
Exchange
Sacrifice
Decoy attack
Two-fold double attack

Tisdall offers an abbreviated theoretical discussion in the process of defining the terms in his list.

Double attack/check
Discovered attack/check
Pinning
Skewer
Deflection
Decoying
Interference
Destruction
Clearance
Blocking
Brinkmate
X-Ray
Overloading
Zwischenzug
Pawn promotion
Pursuit (Perpetual)
Stalemate
Demolition of Pawn structure
Trapped pieces

The index to Lev Alburt and Al Lawrence, Chess Training Pocket Book II (2008) offers another list. Some of the motifs are better described as positional, rather than tactical.

Battery
Blockade
Blocking
Decoy
Deflection
Desperado
Discovered attack
Discovered check
Double attack
Double check
In-between move
Interference
Line clearance
Loose piece
Overloading
Pawn promotion
Perpetual check
Pin
Removing the defender
Skewer
Stalemate
X-ray
Zugzwang

The training website Chess Tempo uses a tagging system whereby users identify the motifs in problems, or can vote motifs others have identified up or down. The CT list currently has 34 tactical motif tags.

Advanced Pawn
Attraction
Avoiding Perpetual
Avoiding Stalemate
Back Rank Mate
Blocking
Capturing Defender
Clearance
Coercion
Counting
Defensive Move
Desperado
Discovered Attack
Distraction
Double Check
Exposed King
Fork/Double Attack
Hanging Piece
Interference
Overloading
Mate Threat
Pin
Quiet Move
Sacrifice
Simplification
Skewer
Smother
Trapped Piece
Unpinning
Unsound Sacrifice
Weak Back Rank
X-Ray Attack
Zugzwang
Zwischenzug

I have previously compiled a practical list in the creation of workbooks for my chess summer camps. The list is far from complete, but highlights those that I easily find in historic games from which I extract training positions for youth players to solve.

Pin
Skewer
Fork
Discovery
Double check
Removal of the guard
Deflection
Decoy
Clearance
Interference
Trapped Piece
Zugzwang


Edit 24 June 2014:
This year's camp workbook added zwischenzug, as well as discovered check as a separate entry.

Training Log

Peaks and Valleys Show Upward Trend

My training lacked balance this past week as I focused almost exclusively on Chess Tempo tactics. In "Hanging Pieces" I highlighted a new element in my training that Chess Tempo facilitates: intensive practice in particular tactical motifs. CT permits me to track my performance by motif, identify areas of weakness, and design exercises for transforming weaknesses into strengths.

Over the course of the week, I solved 231 problems in 442 attempts.

Chess Tempo Totals

Problems Done: 939 (Correct: 541 Failed: 398)
Percentage correct: 57.61%

Over the course of the week, I attempted a small number (39) of the problems on the Shredder iPad app.

Shredder Totals

1608 puzzles: 12593/16080 points 78%
last 10 puzzles: 89/100 89%

I attempted nearly 500 tactics problems for the week, correctly solving more than 250.

Hanging Pieces

Deliberate practice includes activities that have been specially designed to improve the current level of performance.
K. A. Ericsson, R. Th. Krampe, and C.  Tesch-Römer, "The Role of Deliberate Practice in the Acquisition of Expert Performance," 368. 

[D]eliberate practice requires that one identify certain sharply defined elements of performance that need to be improved, and then work intently on them.
Geoff Colvin, Talent is Overrated, 68.*

Having spent more than a decade coaching elementary school age beginning chess players, I have observed the pattern that pieces are frequently left undefended. These pieces are ripe for plucking. Those who learn to spot the fruit of error enjoy a bountiful harvest. Observing the strengths and weaknesses of beginning players is one thing, but learning that tactics involving hanging pieces was my own weakness was quite another.

Chess Tempo's "Rated Tactical Motif Performance" lists the tactical motifs identified by users of that site for each problem. For each motif, information is given concerning the number of problems that I have attempted, the number correct, a percentage, and a rating performance. After 637 problem attempts, hanging pieces appeared as as one of my worst percentages, and my lowest performance rating: 37/72 problems, 51.39% correct, performance >200 below current target.

In order to improve through practice, exercises must address those areas where I fail. Failure, thus, becomes not a cause for anger, but data to diagnose. Through the problem search on Chess Tempo, I found those problems that involve hanging pieces, limiting the search to those above a target rating (higher than my current performance). I then set my training to solve only problems from this set. Chess Tempo creates a new rating based only on solving problems in this user created set. The rating offers one index for tracking improvement over the new few days and week. Because I set a minimum rating, the problems were difficult. In my first session with this set, I solved 4/16 for 25%. My performance was 4.8 over the initial target.

That was yesterday. Today, before solving another set, I reviewed my errors. Chess Tempo offers Silver and Gold members access to the source game, which is already in my reference database in ChessBase 11. Yesterday, I opted for a one-month trial of Gold membership ($4). So far, it seems money well-spent.


De la Riva Aguado,Oscar (2515) - Hassan,Abdul (2296) [C14]
Bled ol (Men) Bled (12.1), 07.11.2002

1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.Bg5 Be7 5.e5 Nfd7 6.Bxe7 Qxe7 7.f4 a6 8.Nf3 c5 9.dxc5 Nxc5 10.Bd3 Nc6 11.0–0 Bd7 12.Qd2 f5 13.exf6 Qxf6 14.Rae1 0–0 15.Ne5 Nxe5 16.Rxe5 Rac8 17.g3 Be8 18.Rfe1 Bf7 19.Bf1 Nd7 20.R5e3 Nc5 21.Bg2 Rfe8 22.R3e2 Nd7 23.Nd1

White's last move is interesting. In this game, it precedes Black's decisive error.

Black to move

23...Bh5?? 24.Rxe6 Rxe6 25.Rxe6 Rxc2

And now we have the position that appears as Problem 48544 on Chess Tempo.

White to move

26.Bxd5

I played 26.Rxf6, the third most common wrong move. My move actually loses by force, as I have now hung both my rook and my knight.

26...Bf7 27.Re8+ Nf8 28.Bxf7+ 1–0

The Chess Tempo problem carries the combination another two moves.


*Geoff Colvin. Talent is Overrated: What Really Separates World-Class Performers from Everybody Else. New York: Portfolio, 2008.

K. Anders Ericsson, Ralf Th. Krampe, and Clemens  Tesch-Römer. "The Role of Deliberate Practice in the Acquisition of Expert Performance." Psychological Review, 100, no. 3 (1993): 363-406.

Dealing with Frustration

In "Getting Angry" I mentioned the effort to transform anger into a productive resource. That post was intended to end on a positive note as I achieved the day's objective that had been set after initial unsuccessful efforts with Chess Tempo tactics training. Instead, the day ended not with the tactics rating goal met, but seventy points below (some twenty-five Elo lower than I had begun the day). Initial frustration gave way to despair as I realized that my skill is far below my self-assessment.

Sunday morning's tactics session began much as Saturday's: I missed five of the first ten problems. As a result my tactics rating went from -52.2 (relative to Saturday's goal) to -52.3.* I went back through the problems that I had missed, including a few from Saturday. Then, I created a new database in ChessBase 11: Chess Tempo Fails. When I fail a problem, I do not immediately move on to the next, but save the position into this database. After missing five of the first ten, my results improved. After thirty problems, I had missed ten total. My rating improved to -23.7.

I felt robbed on my forty-second problem. I found the first two moves easily, and then had an elementary checkmate in three. Fail! It was checkmate in two. Rating drops to -18.9. The Chess Tempo Fails database now contains fifteen positions for review later.

Black to move

I played 3...Bg2+, seeing 4.Kg1 Bf3+ 5.Kf1 Qg2#

The correct answer was 3...Qh3+ 4.Ke2 Qd3#. It is an elegant checkmate.

After fifty problems, my rating has risen to -9.3. I remain short of Saturday's goal, but cannot deem the day a failure. The vertical gray bar on the graph to the right marks the beginning of Sunday's set of fifty problems.

*I am too embarrassed to mention my actual Chess Tempo rating not only because the number is far below my USCF rating, but because the percentile score places me well below a level that I judge to be in the class of skilled chess players. Of course, only serious chess enthusiasts use Chess Tempo with any consistency, and it is not inconceivable that the overall pool may reflect a subset of the upper percentiles of other rating pools. It is not reasonable to comparing ratings on one site to those on another, nor to official ratings achieved through tournament play.

Getting Angry

My performance on any given day can vary. One day I easily clobber 1800 players on Chess.com Live Chess, but the next I lose to 1400s. Similar differences in ability manifest themselves in training sessions, as with Chess Tempo. One day I'm solving most of the problems set before me, and steadily climbing to the point where I get to try harder problems. The next day, I'm missing things that are so obvious that I am punished with lower rated problems that hardly merit consideration as training. I must again prove myself capable of elementary skills in order to gain access to problems requiring calculation.

During failures, it can be helpful to get angry. Frustration with myself provokes better concentration, focus, motivation. But, unchecked anger can blind as well. It is important to cultivate moderate anger, but not let it become controlling. Too much anger, and the performance gets even worse.

This morning's tactics session began in failure. First I erred in an elementary rook endgame. Then I missed five of the first ten tactics problems. My rating dropped below a certain point. I became determined to cross back over that line, and push the rating fifty points higher. I solved a few problems successfully, then missed one and Chess Tempo crashed (or my browser did). Ten minutes later, I was able to resume with the previous problem. I missed four of ten, then three of ten. I made progress, then another crash. Again I missed three of ten, as I was getting within fifteen points of my target.

Then I missed five of ten, and followed that with six of ten, and my tactics rating was back where it had been at the start of the day. After ninety problems, the best I had done was seven correct in ten, and five correct in a row. Four crashes aggravated my efforts to cultivate useful anger.

Graph of Today's Performance

I took some time out to do some household chores, returned with determination, solved five of ten, then seven of ten. My rating climbed to a new peak, but still eight short of the goal. Then the fifth crash. Then eight wrong out of twelve. The anger is winning.

I can do this! I will end the day above my target. I have been as close as six points below--that's two correct problems from the objective.

Training Log: Day by Day

It was Spring Break this past week, which accorded me more time to work on a few things. I increased the time spent on my daily training. I solved over three hundred tactics problems, worked on pawn endings, practiced against Rybka 4, and cultivated my memory of whole games. I neglected my training with Lev Alburt, Chess Training Pocket Book II.

Sunday, 1 April 2012

Worked 34 puzzles in the Shredder iPad app over several sessions.

Using the solving feature in Chess Informant Expert, I attempted all nine combinations in Chess Informant 112. Six had been tried before, one of which managed to give me trouble yet again. I located the game in ChessBase Big Database 2011 and reviewed the whole. It was an instructive attack against the Caro-Kann Defense. The CI combination comes on the heels of two successive errors by Black (see "Conditions for Tactical Combinations"). One of the three new positions gave me difficulties. Then I moved on the the combinations in CI 111, where I struggled with the first three problems.

Monday, 2 April 2012

Monday morning began with a humbling session of tactics on Chess Tempo. My excuses are lined up: still suffering from a cold; too late to bed and up too early this morning; small, gray board and relatively unfamiliar environment. I had tried Chess Tactics Server several years ago, and opted to use other resources. The CTS board is too small for me, and the emphasis seemed to be on instant recognition of motifs. I prefer to seek accuracy first, then speed. The board at Chess Tempo looks to be twice as large as CTS, and training options vary. I used it for the first time last week. Even so, the board is less than half the size of the Tactics Trainer at Chess.com. Excuses, of course, are garbage. Once I began to concentrate, my results improved. At one point, I had nine correct and twelve incorrect. When I quit, I had thirty-five correct, and twenty incorrect. Even so, I continued to miss some easy problems.

Tuesday, 3 April 2012

Several hours were spent playing against Rybka 4 from the position after 19.Bxh6 (a computer suggested improvement in Della Morte -- Mayorga, Villa Martelli 2011, featured in "Conditions for Tactical Combinations"). Repeated failures were addressed by backing the game up and playing Rybka's expected move. It is possible that such training develops my attacking and defensive skills. The sacrifice creates an attack, but Black is able to organize defensive resources. Rybka returned the sacrificed material to halt all mating threats, but White ended up a pawn ahead.

After breakfast, I worked half a dozen or so tactics exercises in the Shredder app, bringing the total up to 1522. Then, I sat down at the table for a solid hour and one-half of pawn endgame study. When mastery is the object, review has a place. I read through the first two sections of Dvoretsky's Endgame Manual (13-17) and correctly solved the first two exercises. There were a few bumps as I sought to play through the positions in advance of reading the text. In the first exercise, I missed a key resource for White, leaving my solution incomplete. I worked out the rest for myself before reading the rest of the solution.

Wednesday, 4 April 2012

There was not to be much time for chess today, but that changed. Then, I got pulled into playing blitz on the Internet Chess Club. I did work a few tactics problems using Chess Tempo, Chess Informant 111, and the Shredder iPad app. The CI combinations led me to spend some time with Carlsen -- Wang Hao, Wijk aan Zee 2011.

Chess Tempo frustrates me. My results suggest that I am missing half of the board.
Problems Done: 195 (Correct: 123 Failed: 72)
Percentage correct: 63.08%

Thursday, 5 April 2012

During my morning coffee, and between Slotomania spins on Facebook, I solved a handful of problems on the Shredder iPad app (total now at 1557). Then, with grim determination I set out to improve my Chess Tempo performance. I am solving in standard mode. CT's blitz mode is more akin to solving with Shredder, where every second counts in the score. In CT standard mode, accuracy is the key element.

Problems Done: 218 (Correct: 143 Failed: 75)
Percentage correct: 65.60%

Clear improvement! Twenty correct, and three wrong. The errors continue to reveal a tendency to miss obvious tactics. For instance, moving the wrong knight in this problem.

White to move

In order to move memorized games into long-term memory, review is needed. Frequently, I have been able to play through an entire game for a week or a month, or even longer. But, if a few weeks go by and I do not show the game to someone, the memory dissipates.

I created a list of games that I have memorized. The first page of the document lists just the players and ratings. After a page break, the entire game scores are reproduced. Page one appears thus:


Memory Games

(1) De Kemur,Sire de Legal - Saint Brie
(2) Zimmer - Hans Bruening
(3) Taylor,I.O. Howard - N,N
(4) Blake,Joseph Henry - Hook,William
(5) Spassky,Boris V - Evans,Larry Melvyn
(6) Mayet,Carl - Anderssen,Adolf
(7) Stripes,James (1879) - Moroney,Timothy (2076)
(8) Grabovetz,Vladimir (1850) - Stripes,James (1999)
(9) Carlsen,Magnus (2814) - Wang Hao (2731)
(10) Auberonk (1827) - Stripes,James (1784)

Mayet - Anderssen is one of my forgotten games. I knew it when I posted "Understanding Mayet's Thinking" two years ago, but have not reviewed it recently. This morning I played through it several times until I was able to do so without looking at the game score. I intend to continue working on Carlsen - Wang Hao today. Auberonk - Stripes ends in the position in my banner, and it took me ten minutes or so to locate the game in my game archive on Chess.com (I didn't want N.N. as the name of White).

Once these ten are secure in my mind, I plan to work on a Kasparov game that I knew for a week in February: Kasparov - Pribyl, Skara 1980. The game is discussed in Garry Kasparov on Garry Kasparov, Part I: 1973-1985 and in Kasparov, My Story, Part 5 and Part 6.

Friday, 6 April 2012

Started the day with three quick Shredder puzzles while taking care of business. I missed the first because I missed the queen's diagonal route out of self-danger to defend the rook, and thereby the back rank. One drawback to the Shredder iPad app: I cannot go back two problems to show you the one that I missed. It should come up again after I do 999 more. The other two were solved correctly in an instant.

Turning to the last three combinations in Chess Informant 111, I solved this problem easily.

Black to move (diagram upside down--Black on bottom)

Jeans in the wash, towels in the dryer. A few minutes working on the move sequence in Carlsen - Wang Hao, and then a short Chess Tempo session.

Problems Done: 231 (Correct: 154 Failed: 77)
Percentage correct: 66.67%

The logic underneath Wang Hao's play defies me, making the moves harder to remember, but I'm also struggling with some of the nuances of Carlsen's play. As it happens, the lecturer who was to speak at chess club last night had car problems and did not show. But, I had taken my memory list, so a friend was able to test my knowledge of the ten games. I knew all the moves in nine of them. We spent some time working out the Carlsen's finish if Wang Hao had not resigned. Checks that drive the king to the queenside leave Black's monarch secure and with a larger army. One key idea seems to be reversing the order of White's pieces on the h-file (rook to h7 and queen to h5 via g6).

Saturday, 7 April 2012

Due to a road trip to a Sandpoint, Idaho, where I run a small annual community tournament, my training today was limited to a few problems on the iPad, and one in Alburt, Chess Training Pocket Book II.

Shredder Totals

1569 puzzles: 12284/15690 points 78%
last 10 puzzles: 91/100 91%