27 October 2009

Pawn Wars

In Breaking Through: How the Polgar Sisters Changed the Game of Chess (2005), Susan Polgar mentions a game she played with her father when she was starting to learn chess.
After introducing the chess board and the pieces, for some time we only played "pawn wars". That means games where only the pawns participate without the rest of the army. The goal of the game was whoever queens a pawn first wins. Then later we added the kings and playing all the way to checkmate.
Polgar, 6-7
I had found that young children enjoy what we had been calling the pawn game a few years before this book came out. After reading that passage a few years ago, I've increased my investment in pawn wars as a teaching tool. It is a central element in my private lessons with young students. In classrooms full of seven year old children, I start with pawns.

The game can be modified easily. Last spring, a kindergarten student that had been playing chess one month with his grandfather showed some promise, and his father made arrangements for me to offer some instruction. We played pawn wars with the kings. He started with eight pawns to my six--my rook pawns were missing. It took him perhaps two or three games to learn that he could lure my king to one side of the board by creating a passed pawn there, then create one on the other side that was outside my reach. After several victories, we played eight against seven.

One need not use all the pawns.

The classic Szén Position is a challenge even to strong players that still need work on the endgame. The player to move has a theoretical win, but precision is necessary to keep the win in hand.



According to David Hooper and Kenneth Whyld, The Oxford Companion to Chess (1996), the three pawn problem--a king against three connected passed pawns--had been studied for over two hundred years without success until Jószef Szén solved it in 1836.

Another variation of pawn wars that I've been using the past few weeks appears to be a theoretical draw. Remove the kings, and the player on move should win.


19 October 2009

Monday Tactics

This position originates in Stocek-Cifka, Pardubice 2008, and was published as Chess Informant 103/302. I played it against Hiarcs 12 beginning with a move given in the annotations. It required twenty-four moves and two take-backs to force the machine's resignation. Then I let the engine run for two hours. It favored the move played by Stocek, but slightly.

White to move

13 October 2009

Tactics Training

Here's a dirty little secret: I have not been doing my tactics training the past few months. Summer was busy, and the constant activity has not let up. I attempted six problems on Chess.com's Tactics Trainer this morning, failing three.

Here are two. The first originates from a correspondence game, Hayami-Rittenhouse, 1989. The second from Gheorghiu-Ljubojevic, Manila 1973.

Black to move



Black to move

10 October 2009

Transpositions

In round three of the Spokane Chess Club's Fall Championship, I had Black against Nikolay Bulakh. Nikolay is a rapidly improving high school player. He has been coming to chess club since last spring, and he plays on Chess.com. Although we have played a few casual games, and some blitz, this was our first rated game.

I learned after the game that he had done some preparation, looking at perhaps my best game ever--a French I played in the City Championship Match in 2008. He did not prepare for the course our game took. Indeed, I had only a general opening plan before we sat down to play: play something that puts him in unfamiliar terrain.


Bulakh,N (1479) - Stripes,J (1823) [B43]
Spokane, 2009

1.e4 e6

Everyone in Spokane plays the French. At least that's what I've heard asserted by some players from Seattle, "if you can beat the French, you'll do well in Spokane." Several of Spokane's top players have certainly developed a reputation for playing the French. Our top player, FIDE Master David Sprenkle does not like playing against it. When he came to my board during a club simul this summer, he said, "you play the French," then played 1.c4. I said, "But, I was planning to play the Sicilian!" For many years, I always replied 1...c5 to 1.e4. The past few years, 1.e4 e6 has been just as automatic. The past year, I have aimed at flexibility and choice. I favor the French, but hold the Sicilian as a possible surprise weapon.

2.d4 c5

The Franco-Benoni often catches players by surprise. I like it because 1.e4 players are often uncomfortable going into queen pawn openings. I have had some good results with the Benoni, and have been known to play the Benko on occasion, although rarely from the Franco-Benoni.

3.Nf3 cxd4 4.Nxd4

Nickolay opts for the Sicilian. I could play the Scheveningen, a solid opening choice.

4...a6

But, the Taimanov is sufficiently offbeat that most club players are not well prepared with a plan.

5.Nc3 Qc7

The Kan, or Paulsen, puts most players on their own.

6.Be2 Nf6 7.0–0



We are still in mainline opening theory, at least it is a mainline if that term applies to any line found in the tables of the Encyclopedia of Chess Openings, and not yet relegated to the footnotes. My opponent has used twelve minutes getting to this position; I've used three.

Black's normal move here is 7...Bb4, which generally leads to positions described in the books as unclear. I have played it in online games, but more often have thrown out an offbeat move that first appeared in Chess Informant 63/148 in Perez-Garcia, 1995 from the Cuban Championship. This game is found in the footnotes of ECO.

7...Bc5 8.Nb3

Perez-Garcia continued 8.Be3

8...Ba7

8...Bb4 may be better. I've used four minutes to my opponent's twenty-two. Tucked back on a7, my bishop will force my opponent to think about it for the rest of the game.

9.Kh1 h5



9...Nc6 has been played, but this move does not appear in my database. I spent five minutes considering this risky move, and decided that it gave my opponent more problems to solve than it was likely to generate for me.

10.h3

10.f4! is nearly always a useful move against the Sicilian. Moreover, when a player has delayed castling, the king must be punished.

10...b5 11.Bg5

White wants to take advantage of the difficulty Black will have to castle.

11...b4 12.Bxf6 gxf6 13.Nb1



13.Na4 loses the knight.

13...Bb7

13...Nc6 also attracted attention. I have used seventeen minutes; Nikolay spent forty-five. We've been at the board a bit over an hour, and I am hapy with my position because I think my pieces are coordinated much better than his.

14.N1d2 Nc6 15.Nc4 Ke7

I did think about 15...O-O-O, but saw no benefits to giving up the exchange. My plan is to create some tactics, possibly with a rook sacrifice, then swing the other rook over for the coup de grace. Before playing 15...Ke7, it was necessary to be certain my opponent could not wrest open the center. It seems, however, that my attack is coming faster, my pieces are better coordinated, and any action in the center can be met with superior force. I spent eight minutes thinking about this move--my longest think of the game.

16.Bxh5??



It is always tempting to be ahead a pawn, but this error helps Black launch an attack against the White king. 16.Qd2 at least threatens to start a fight in the center. My opponent has used half of his allotted two hours.

16... Ne5

This move is not the computer's choice. According to my chess software, my next several moves reveal my failure to press the attack with the most precise and accurate moves.

17.Nxe5

17...Ncd2 makes Black's job more difficult.

17...Qxe5 18.Bg4 Bxe4

18...Qxe4 forces concessions in the pawn structure, and wins a piece.

19.Qd2??



19... f5

Again, Rag8 is superior to my moves.

20.f4??

White's string of blunders testify to the difficulty of the position in which he has found himself, perhaps due to having been lured into an unfamiliar opening. At least, I am tempted to give myself credit for creative transpositions.

20... fxg4!



It took me two or three minutes to realize there was no reason to move the queen.

21.Qxb4+ d6 22.Kh2 g3+ 23.Kxg3 Qg7+ 24.Kh2 Qxg2# 0–1

09 October 2009

Many are Stronger

US Chess Federation Washington State Rankings


8512758357
2012-05-31
DANIEL R COPELAND
1835
2009-08-01
8612829747
2010-05-31
DAVID MARX
1832
2009-07-01
8712694020
2010-10-31
HALUK BEYENAL
1829
2008-11-01
8811188303
2099-12-31
MARVIN Y HAYAMI
1828
2009-07-01
8912417220
2099-12-31
RANDY A WALTHER
1828
2009-07-01
9012524238
2010-02-28
PETER J O'GORMAN
1827
2009-10-01
9112705642
2011-05-31
EDDIE CHENG-HO CHANG
1824
2009-04-01
9212970386
2009-12-31
SAMIR SEN
1824
2009-10-01
9312677638
2010-09-30
JAMES D STRIPES
1824
2009-09-01
9420012139
2010-05-31
HILLEL SHIRMAN
1819
2009-08-01
9513099265
2011-02-28
CASEY XING
1818
2009-10-01
9612852335
2010-12-31
DAVID INGLIS
1816
2009-10-01
9711062563
2010-05-31
RONALD B KIRSCH
1814
2009-03-01
9812707145
2012-04-30
MICHAEL EDWARD CAMBARERI
1807
2009-08-01
9911495699
2011-05-31
VERNON L VANPOUCKE
1803
2009-05-01
10012837312
2009-11-30
KRISHNAN V WARRIER
1801
2009-09-01
10110137071
2099-12-31
RICHARD LI BANNER
1800
2009-10-01
10213293145
2011-11-30
FRANK QU
1791
2009-10-01
10312958635
2009-10-31
YUN TENG
1790
2009-09-01
10412581979
2009-11-30
BRIAN KAISER
1784
2009-04-01
10513388598
2010-04-30
NILES DESMARAIS
1775
2009-04-01
10610508606
2009-12-31
BRUCE W GREGG
1768
2009-02-01
10713631615
2010-03-31
ROLAND FENG
1767
2009-10-01
10812810674
2012-02-29
LARRY HUBBELL
1764
2009-09-01
10913432771
2010-04-30
RYAN SCOTT ACKERMAN
1764
2009-10-01

05 October 2009

Vulnerability

Every Wednesday afternoon during the school year, I have an appointment with a group of elementary age children. I run their after school chess club. Each club meeting begins with a problem on the demo board, where we will gather and talk chess for five minutes, usually, but sometimes longer. Then they play chess with each other, ending the one hour session with another problem or lesson on the board.

The second lesson gives their parents a chance to come into the library where we meet, and I get to talk with them too. Some like to learn a few chess skills, but the purpose is to talk about sportsmanship, appropriate and inappropriate behaviors at tournaments, and other things that parents and competitive chess playing children need to know.

I build my lessons before and after the playing time around themes. Last year, I stressed mobility. Many of the lessons--not all--were designed to teach the opening principle usually termed development. That word development is a little abstract for second graders. Some get it; some don't. When chess players use the term development, they often mean mobilization, or improving the mobility of one's army. I find that there are concrete ways of illustrating mobility so that second graders can understand the concept. For example, set each piece on a center square of an empty board and count the legal moves. Set the same piece on the edge and count again. This exercise, it seems to me, is better than a point system for teaching why the rook is better than the bishop or the knight, and why the knight and bishop seem close in value despite their clear differences. It also helps players understand why minor pieces should be deployed to the center.

This fall, my theme is vulnerability. We are looking at checkmate threats, pieces that are en prise, the reasons one should castle, and so on.

This week's lesson will include an endgame that I watched yesterday at the Eastern Washington Open.

White to move


This position was reached in Kirlin - Baker during round five. Pat Kirlin is my age, and we first played each other in high school. Ted Baker is a couple of years older than we are, and has been active in the Spokane Chess Club seven or eight years. He beat me on Saturday.

White has an advantage, but Black has threats. The White king is vulnerable. If Kirlin had taken precautions to guard his king and remove his threats, he would have had good winning chances.

He played 1.b3?

Now, White should draw.

1...Ne1+

Alas, Kirlin blundered with 2.Kf1?? and resigned after Black's next move. Ted had a good tournament.

04 October 2009

Mate Threats

I lost yesterday. My participation in the Eastern Washington Open is cut short this year to facilitate a college visit to my alma mater for two high school seniors--son and nephew. Yesterday, I played only round two. Today, I'm playing the last two rounds, but will not be paired against the strong players I long to play in these events. And this year's Eastern Washington Open is among the strongest in recent memory.

My pairings will be against weaker players because yesterday I lost to a C player--an improving middle-aged friend who has given me plenty of scares the past few years, and finally achieved a deserved win.

As my position was in its final stages of deterioration, I gave up another piece to expose his king. Had he panicked, I might have gotten a string of checks--though I didn't think I had a perpetual or any other chance of repeating the position. I had nothing else. My sacrifice gave him a powerful passed pawn. So, we reached this position.

White to move


I was prepared to resign if my opponent played 36.Rxf8 in light of the checkmate threats. Instead, Ted played 36.b8Q and I played on a couple moves more.

This morning, I sought solace in a few online blitz games. Again I am losing badly.

White to move


My opponent played 32.Qxc8??

This move threw away the win. Why?