My First Ever USCF Rating!

Well I finally played a rated over-the-board game. Four in fact. They were my first real-life, big-boy chess games with actual meaning, although I'd been to the local club many times for the Sinquefield Cup and the U.S. Championship--as a spectator, I should add ;).

That's right, my local club is in St Louis. I'm lucky and also a bit surprised it took me so long to get up the nerve to play in person there. I found out that they run a month-long tournament with games every Tuesday evening. I believe the tournament designation is 4SS, meaning four rounds of a Swiss System tournament. After four weeks, they determine the winner of each section and I think they pay out some cash prizes! After getting registered with the USCF on the night I showed up, they stuck me in the U1600 section. These games were G70; D5. Did I do that right? I'm still getting used to some of the terminology and customs. Online you just click buttons and you're playing and everything is automated. So yeah, G70; D5 meaning the game is in 70 minutes and there is a five second delay. I'd never played with a delay (or a physical clock) but with over an hour for the game, it doesn't matter that much to me. I won't use this space for deep analysis of the games so I will just provide some general observations and I hope readers can derive something from it.

Game 1 - Tuesday February 4, 2020
Soooo, it's true what they say: you're gonna play a lot of children.

In the U1600 section, there were a lot of elementary-school aged kids. Perhaps fifteen. Then maybe a few teenagers, a few guys my age (30s) and an older gentleman. I'd say something like twenty players. The 1600+ section had six or eight total. In the first round, I was black and paired with a 12xx rated player. In my entire life, I've played three casual OTB games with someone that is somewhat serious about chess (has an account at chess.com so that's something I guess). Beyond that, I've played once with my great-uncle when I was in high school and then a handful of less-serious ones more recently against friends that "just know the rules." It was helpful that I have played through games with a real board so at least I knew what it was going to be like viewing the three-dimensional pieces. Still it is something to consider and to get used to when playing your first OTB games.

When playing in person, there's a lot more going on in regards to stimulants, figuring out order of moving and recording the move, board vision, etc compared to loading up a game on your phone or laptop.

Where do I set the pieces when I capture?

Why didn't my opponent adjust his pieces BEFORE the game?

Move the piece-->Tap the clock-->Record the move ... Move the piece-->Tap the clock-->Record the move ...Move the clock-->Tap the piece--...aw shiiiit. Wait, I went to the bathroom, where the hell did he move? Fuck how did I get blood on the scoresheet?!? Do we hand these in at the end? Why is my pen in my hand while I'm trying to capture with my queen? That's awkward. Wow kids are restless. They play a move and if I don't immediately play, they're up and walking about. .... Holy shit is someone crying?!

So all that is happening but please don't read them as excuses. I actually found I was able to concentrate just fine. I don't think focus is a problem. But it's a warning to everyone else that you should prepare yourself for the unknown--I mean, I knew I'd be recording moves but didn't quite imagine the learning curve with actually doing it, getting into a groove, and remembering to hit the clock. I'd say I missed it about three times which isn't so bad for an 18-move game. Oh yeah, the game....

I lost in a Giuoco Piano Four Knights Variation--I think that's what it was at least. I basically wanted to castle as early as possible and stay simple and solid since I wanted the game to keep under control while I figured out all the little things I mentioned above. I played some slow moves to fianchetto my queenside bishop while my opponent wasn't even castled, yet he was able to get some pieces in on the kingside and sac on h6. I was going down a piece with no king safety so I resigned.

Brutal.

From the pairings list, I knew my opponent's rating was in the low 1200s. Who knows if that affected anything on my end. I know my inflated-as-fuck 1700 lichess classical rating is meaningless here but I really thought I could handle a 1200. The weeks ahead proved otherwise.

Pros - Hey I made it! I drove myself to the club, signed up, and played a game! You learn so much doing things you're not used to. I found it helpful to look at the positive things I learned from this experience to improve for next time. I liked that I took my time, unlike many of the other players. Maybe they have better opening knowledge than me, or just don't analyze so much, or don't need to, or they're bored and were forced by their parents to play so they want to get out of there in thirty minutes. I like that I could now plan ahead and develop a small routine for moving, hitting my clock, scoring the move, etc. Sometimes it's the little things. I should add that my opponent was incredibly respectful at the end. He whispered that it was a good game and that I "played very well." I didn't. Haha, anyway I'm sure it was a canned line but it really doesn't matter. It was refreshing to hear that and overall, losing a game over-the-board is far easier to digest than losing to a faceless internet stranger.

Cons - Woulda been nice to win. I put my game in a lichess study so I'll have it for later. I did for all games actually. I will analyze them further.


Game 2 - Tuesday February 11, 2020
I played somebody more my age and I was white. I think my opponent was around 1100 rating. There isn't much to talk about since I covered so much in the summary of my first week. I won a piece (thanks to a blunder) and safely consolidated down and got checkmate on the board. That actually made me wonder if most of these games at this level are played to checkmate? No idea at that point. I think that I'll try to test my opponents even if I'm in a losing position, just until I'm not having fun or I can judge that they'll be able to mate and it's pointless to play on.

Pros - I won. That's always nice. It was still stressful because even getting a knight before move ten doesn't mean that much in chess. I had to remain vigilant and I still took maybe too much time in some positions but you really don't want to give up counter-play.

Cons - None. It always helps to win. I was ready to think about playing in the 1600+ section soon to really gain experience......(riiiiight)

Game 3 - Tuesday February 18, 2020
I guessed I would be black and so I was prepping the caro-kann beforehand. More or less just cramming some ideas in my head 30 minutes prior. Naturally, she played 1. d4. I tried the King's Indian and it was actually my type of game, lotsa positional moves, few captures. Anyway I dropped a pawn and was inactive. We analyzed afterwards which was fun but not comprehensive.

Pros - Another game under my belt I guess.

Cons - Second loss, I'm guessing my provisional rating will be bad.

Game 4 - Tuesday February 25, 2020
This game was last night so it's fresh in my memory. I played a 600-rated player as white and I played my normal, comfortable opening. He seemed to want to trade material and I tried to find clever ways to do this, eventually allowing lotsa trades then I won a center pawn. I didn't see incredibly far ahead and missed a check but it was innocuous and I remained up a pawn with two active rooks on the 7th. I was for sure winning but for a few reasons, I went ahead and traded way down into a pawn ending. The reasons were I was low-ish on time--I had about 20 minutes left while my opponent had over an hour on their clock. That's right. I don't think they took more than thirty seconds for any move. That's a bit crushing to your ego though, when you can't find completely winning moves in an hour of chess while your opponent is just blitzing out moves. That's chess though. I was cracking my brain figuring out advantages and he played simple moves that I couldn't find anything wrong with. The other reason for heading to a simple pawn ending is that I've been studying endgames a great deal lately so I figured I could go into a 5 vs 4 pawn endgame and figure it out. Anyway it was probably a +1 ending but he had a slightly better king and was able to gobble up some pawns where I had to use some tricks to defend. He queened while I had a pawn on the 7th with my king on the promotion square. He really should have taken 55 of his minutes if he needed it to find the win but he played quickly and let me promote then we traded. Blah blah, I was at least able to use my endgame "skills" after that to sac my rook-pawn but force the draw.

Pros - Well, I didn't lose to a 600. I sensed he wasn't incredibly serious about improvement but he played good enough moves to draw so what can I say?! I'm happy I was putting in work to calculate the last king maneuvers to ensure the draw. If it weren't for my recent endgame study, I'm almost certain I would have lost the game at the end there but I knew the technique for the draw. Drawing a 6-700 rated player instead of losing surely saved me tons of rating points so there's a direct benefit of endgame study! I'm proud that I can focus for these long games and not let my opponents speed or style of play affect my thinking too much. I'm also lucky that he didn't take some time to find his win. Probably a lot to analyze in the opening since he played some moves I hadn't seen before. I get my provisional rating after this game!


Conclusions
So I finished with a 1.5/4 score. I was getting my footing in the first one, played fine in the second, got outplayed in the third, then just had a poopy game in my fourth in which I felt I should've had better control. Fine. After four games, USCF gives you a provisional rating and I will keep that designation until 25 games. Sooooo, without further adieu.....

My rating.....

is......

973P4

(I'm pretty sure the P4 means provisional over four games. I read somewhere that sometimes it's listed as 973/4.)

10/28/2020 Update: I played two more games before the COVID-19 Pandemic cancelled OTB games for the year. I won one and lost one and my rating was finally updated again to 1096 (provisional based on 6 games). So I finally got to four digits ;)! I just wanted to add this in so people can see how much your rating can fluctuate in the lower ratings--even after going 1-1! The game I won was against a ~1200 player and my loss was against a ~1450 player, and I still gained over 100 points!

There ya go. It's way lower than I would have guessed. A fourth digit would have been nice! If you asked me four weeks ago before I played a game or saw any of my opponent's ratings, I would have said I'd be over 1200 after a month and that maybe I'd be in the 1600+ section in another month or two of playing. That's not happening. Realistically, what else could I have asked for? It's fine and actually I find plenty more to be happy about with my rating than upset. I have a rating, even if it's quite low. I'm excited that I should only go up from here. I just need more games. I hope it's true.

I'm happy that I now have a rating and a foundation on which to build. I really am excited to see how I can rise through the ranks. Moving forward, I want to shoot for at least equal scores each month, to improve my time management, to focus on game quality and analysis and not rating, and ultimately get to the 1600+ section.

Been-a-min

It's been a minute since I've posted. I've received a few notes from people that read this so that's great to know. Even if no one reads, it's still nice to plop down some chess thoughts once in a while. I will give an update on some stuff I've been doing. I'm still studying chess quite hard and I've finally taken the leap into OTB playing at my local chess club--which happens to be the St Louis Chess Club. Yepppp, I know people out there will be screaming, "How have you not been to that club yet?" Well, I technically have been but it was only to view a few of the super tournaments. Anyway I will have a post about my experience there soon.

I want to address the idea of making a study plan. I just scanned through all my posts really quickly here to reacquaint myself with this blog and I noticed there is a lot of goal-setting, planning, study routine suggestions, etc. I'm trying to steer clear of wasting mental energy and time coming up with ideas and plans and instead directly work on chess. I heard this quote on the Perpetual Chess podcast and so I want to reiterate it here:

Time spent on any challenging chess work is far better than time spent planning the "perfect" chess study schedule.

That says it better than I could. Just do something that involves active studying of the game and you're good. And that's what I will try to do here, instead of help people lay out different ways to study stuff, I'll encourage you to just do it.

Lately for me, it's been endgames. Bernd Rosen's Chess Endgame Training book has been fantastic so far. I'm nearing the end of it which feels good. Overall I'd say you should work to actually finish books because it helps morale. You can always go back a second time and re-read it to cover the more difficult parts. That is kind of how I approach chess books anyway. I can read through this book at work actually, and then play through the ideas which I've done. But I'm currently going through it a second time, taking screenshots of the positions and typing up little notes for each one. I intend to load them all up in lichess' board editor and practice them. HINT: On the mobile app, there's also an "Endgame Positions" dropdown where you can select tons of configurations, then customize each one how you want, and finally practice it against the computer or check ideas with the analysis board. This is all hugely beneficial and endgames are actually something that is more than okay to practice against a computer. It feels so good to see a position that would have confused me a year ago and know exactly what to do, or at least put together some ideas on a plan.

There have also recently been some big discussions on /r/chess on how to choose what to study. Someone was brave enough to say beginners should study openings over endgames and that blew up. It was fascinating to read. Anyway, the overall point is to carefully study something and try to finish a big chunk (like an entire book that is suited to your level) and then move on to a different aspect of the game entirely. If you are very interested in openings, then study them as long as you're not passively watching videos or trying to absorb theoretical lines with a tape you play while sleeping. Studying the strategic ideas in your favorite openings is perfectly fine. Just make sure to mix it up and move on to endgames once you reach a good stopping point in your opening study, and then when you reach that point with endgames, get a strategic book, etc. Once I wrap up this book I want to (probably need to) begin building an opening repertoire finally. I have a book on loan from the library that seems great and I can't wait to get into that. I'll surely make a post about that.

So overall, I hope to have a few posts coming in soon. One regarding my three trips to the STLCC for my first OTB games. I'll do some game analysis on that too. And I'll have a post about how I intend on trying to build an opening repertoire, too. Maybe I'll finally get a post showing off my new chess board...well new as of last summer. ;)

Lichess4545 Game Analysis 7

Summary
I finally turned in something besides a loss to my 4545 team! Hoo. Ray. I was black and opted for a Sicilian defense, something I don't really play but I'm trying to keep my opponents from doing any prep work--maybe not the best idea. I briefly looked at the najdorf and dragon, openings I'm vaguely familiar with just because I watch a fair amount of the Super-GM tournaments and I've at least seen some of the general ideas play out in those games. The problem with just "trying stuff" in my opening is that I don't really have a reliable opening repertoire. I think so far in almost all my 4545 and Lonewolf games this season, I've got out of the opening down a pawn or in an awkward position. I can't recall a feeling of "I'm solid here" at all.

In this one, my opponent played an unexpected bishop move pretty early and we never went down any kind of classical open Sicilian type game I was thinking. I ended up castling pretty late because my opponent rightly opened the position while my king was in the center. Then I got a weak c-pawn that I ended up losing. After some trades I then lost another pawn to some intermezzo tactics and then the endgame I had to chase down two outside connected passed pawns with my king. I'm sure that was completely losing but I gave it a go because we both had one knight and I knew if I could collect the outside pawns and get my king and knight back over without losing too many of my pawns, there were promises of getting it down to rook-pawns which are very hard to promote. That's what happened and we ended up drawing after a nearly 3-hour game.

I think the most telling fun fact of this game was that 8 of my first 9 moves were pawn moves. After 9 moves I had 3 pawns out, my structure was weird and all my pieces were on their original squares. White had one piece out, they were castled, and their structure was better. A totally winning opening for white I think. My 4th, 6th, and 7th moves were the most careless.

My annotations without engine assistance:
Copy and Paste this into a lichess study or the ChessTempo PGN Viewer. My opponent also informed me they added a lot of "whisper" notes into the spectator room so I'll try to track those down when I'm home and add them in!

1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 d6 3. Bb5+ { B51 Sicilian Defense: Canal-Sokolsky Attack } Nc6 {I'm okay with doubled c-pawns, it'll help with my center. Plus I didn't want to allow bishop trade with Bd7} 4. O-O {Safe king. I wouldn't castle until move 16, lol} a6 {I should've developed a kingside piece instead. If 4. ...Nf6 I didn't like 5. e5 dxe5 6. Nxe5 hitting c6 twice but 6. ...Qc7 should work there, and if Qf3, I have Bd7 if I need more support.} 5. Bxc6+ bxc6 6. c3 e5 {Not sure why I played this, I don't think e5 from white would hurt, and my move only delayed my kingside development. At this point, AKA move 6, I have five pawns off their original squares and no pieces developed (one traded off)} 7. d4 {probably correct from white to open up the center} exd4 {Bg4 might be best here. I shouldn't let the center open up. Bg4 gets a piece out, slows white down some, and protects the queen in case a queen trade ever happens.} 8. cxd4 cxd4 9. Nxd4 c5 10. Nf3 Ne7 {10. ...Nf6 11. e5 dxe5 12. Qxd8+ Kxd8 13. Nxe5 with a good knight for white and Nxf7 threat} 11. Nbd2 {I didn't see 12. Nc4 idea} g6 {11. ...Be6 12. Ng5 so perhaps Nc6 is okay with Be7 and 0-0 to come} 12. Nc4 d5 {12. ...Nc6 protects d6. I feel like I'm just reacting with no attack of my own but I think d5 isn't the right move. I recall being worried about e5 at some point but d5 would work in response I think.} 13. exd5 Qxd5 {Trying to take off some attacking pieces to get my king safe} 14. b3 {Unexpected. I was expecting the queen trade and calculating, I like black's position if 14. Qxd5 Nxd5 15. Rd1 Bb7 16. Ne3 Rd8 or 0-0-0. so maybe that's why white didn't go down that. Black's c-pawn is a weakness though.} Bg7 {Trading queens just gives white the d-file and I didn't see another move that'd prevent Bb2 from white which would be sadness.} 15. Bb2 Bxb2 {15. ...0-0 16. Bxg7 Kxg7 17. Re1 Qxd1 18. Rxd1 and that must be losing for black.} 16. Nxb2 O-O 17. Rc1 {Simply attacking the weakness. I didn't give white much trouble in the opening. They dictated play well and I mis-played a few moves. It's equal material but white is centralizing rooks and has targets whereas I am not fully developed and my pawn structure is bad. Seeing how the game played out and the c-pawn weakness, I think one of my biggest errors was 12. ...d5} Rd8 {I don't see how to save the pawn so my strategy will be to get pieces off the board and trade off pawns. I'm playing for a draw at this moment.} 18. Rxc5 Qxd1 19. Rxd1 Rxd1+ 20. Nxd1 {Here is the endgame. The obvious imbalance is material, white has two connected queenside pawns to my one. White's rook is also more active but I do like that I have a bishop. I feel okay about holding this.} Nf5 {if Be6 21. Nd4} 21. Nc3 Be6 {Looks like a good square. I missed the next simple move though. I guess ...h6 was better} 22. Ng5 {Oh. Shit.} Rc8 23. Nxe6 {Missing tactics now.} Re8 {I felt I was getting clever, noticing the knight is pinned to stop back-rank mate. I am, however, not looking ahead to 1 and 2 move tactics.} 24. Rc6 Nd4 {Played quickly, thinking I had cool tactics with the back-rank mate issue. I attack a pinned piece a second time, but I was getting too cutesy with trying to just get the piece back. Best is Rxe6 which trades rooks or 25. Rc8+ Kg7 26. f3} 25. Rxa6 {Another missed intermezzo} Nxe6 {Rxe6 forces the rook trade but I'm now down two pawns so I play to keep the Re1# threat open. It is hope chess though, a good player will see that in a long time-control game.} 26. Ne4 Nc5 27. Nf6+ {This forces consolidation and was completely missed by me. My goal was to get pieces off the board and hopefully draw a pawn-down endgame but I dropped a second pawn and this should be losing.} Kf8 28. Nxe8 Nxa6 29. Nf6 {A bumpy road to get to a losing endgame. I have to corrall the connected passers. White likewise should have raced his king over there.} h5 30. Nd7+ Ke7 31. Nb6 Kd6 32. f3 Kc5 33. Nd7+ Kb4 {I'm getting close to gobbling} 34. Ne5 Ka3 {I have to sac the f-pawn for these two pawns, they were white's big threat.} 35. Nxf7 Kxa2 36. g4 {White must find some maneuver to capture black's two pawns while black's king and knight are so far away: 36. h4 (one pawn freezes two) Kxb3 37. Ne5} Kxb3 37. g5 Nc5 38. Ne5 Ne6 39. f4 Nxf4 40. Kf2 Nh3+ 41. Kg3 Nxg5 42. Nxg6 Kc4 {42. ...Ne4+ 43. Kh4 Nf6+? 44. Kg5 losing the pawn} 43. h4 {white did well not to play Kh4 here. This must be a draw.} Nh7 44. Kf4 Kd5 45. Kf5 Kd6 46. Nf4 Ke7 47. Nxh5 Kf7 48. Ng3 Nf6 {If black can keep his knight here, white can never play h5} 49. Kg5 Nh7+ {Still drawn, but there is no need for me to move my knight. I can just hover with my king to keep it protected and white never can safely advance the pawn. These plans are hard to come up with in time pressure but they're essential in endagmes.} 50. Kh6 Nf6 51. Nh5  Nxh5 52. Kxh5 Kg7 53. Kg5 Kh7 54. h5 Kh8 55. Kg6 Kg8 56. h6 Kh8 57. h7 { Draw by stalemate. } 1/2-1/2



Here's the raw PGN:
1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 d6 3. Bb5+ { B51 Sicilian Defense: Canal-Sokolsky Attack } Nc6 4. O-O a6 5. Bxc6+ bxc6 6. c3 e5 7. d4 exd4 8. cxd4 cxd4 9. Nxd4 c5 10. Nf3 Ne7 11. Nbd2 g6 12. Nc4 d5 13. exd5 Qxd5 14. b3 Bg7 15. Bb2 Bxb2 16. Nxb2 O-O 17. Rc1 Rd8 18. Rxc5 Qxd1 19. Rxd1 Rxd1+ 20. Nxd1 Nf5 21. Nc3 Be6 22. Ng5 Rc8 23. Nxe6 Re8 24. Rc6 Nd4 25. Rxa6 Nxe6 26. Ne4 Nc5 27. Nf6+ Kf8 28. Nxe8 Nxa6 29. Nf6 h5 30. Nd7+ Ke7 31. Nb6 Kd6 32. f3 Kc5 33. Nd7+ Kb4 34. Ne5 Ka3 35. Nxf7 Kxa2 36. g4 Kxb3 37. g5 Nc5 38. Ne5 Ne6 39. f4 Nxf4 40. Kf2 Nh3+ 41. Kg3 Nxg5 42. Nxg6 Kc4 43. h4 Nh7 44. Kf4 Kd5 45. Kf5 Kd6 46. Nf4 Ke7 47. Nxh5 Kf7 48. Ng3 Nf6 49. Kg5 Nh7+ 50. Kh6 Nf6 51. Nh5  Nxh5 52. Kxh5 Kg7 53. Kg5 Kh7 54. h5 Kh8 55. Kg6 Kg8 56. h6 Kh8 57. h7 { Draw by stalemate. } 1/2-1/2

Lichess4545 Game Analysis 6

Hey I won another Lonewolf 30|30 game! I'm on 3.5 out of 4 so I'm doing well in the U1800 division. This was an Italian Opening where I played a few slow pawn moves and had to end up dropping a piece in less than 10 moves and my king was still in the center, ugh. But right as I was saying goodnight to my girlfriend and saying it'd probably be a quick game, (the game started at 10pm local time), my opponent developed his pieces and I was able to get his bishop trapped ad things got interesting. There were some tactical fireworks, probably mis-played, and then I ended up a pawn up. Endgame went okay. I'll be the first to admit that I benefited from some big blunders from my opponent and it wasn't perfect by any means on my end but I played better than my opponent and took the win.

https://lichess.org/qr4dEy8b

I was the black pieces. Please note that these are all my thoughts sans engine and sans analysis board. So i'm evaluating on my own and with my own visualization. I go through the whole game like this and write down my thoughts and lines I see. Then I go back a second time with an engine on and with the ability to play out lines on the board and add notes in. So anytime you see "The engine/stockfish/SF says...." that's only my notes after I've seen the engine eval and lines.

(4) Evans Gambit. Pretty sure it's okay to take the pawn. If 4. ...Bb6, white can play for c3 and d4 and have a big center. If 4. ...Bb6 5. c3 Nf6 6. Qe2 maybe then d4 coming for white.

If 4. ...Bb6 5. b5 Na5 and white has to address the bishop attack and also the lonesome b-pawn. As an aside, just because I used to have problems with this line, if 4. d3 Nf6 5. Ng5 d5 6. exd5 Na5 is the move to play here!

(5) ...Ba5 is only move yeah? If 5. ...Bc5 then 6. d4 is strong, giving white a big center. I think black is okay so far.

(6) White is castled and black plays a slow ...d6. I was paranoid about the fried liver attack coming, and now that a5 was occupied by my bishop I didn't have that important Na5 move. I wanted my light-squared bishop handy and ...d5 just loses a pawn. But ...d6 must be bad too. I wanted my kingside knight out and to castle, but the line I was fearing was 6. ...Nf6 7. Ng5 d5 8. exd5 and here I don't have the Na5 move-ENGINE SAYS SIMPLY CASTLING. Hmm but after 8. exd5 I do have Nxd5 which blocks the bishop's action. Granted, that d5 knight is now pinned by the bishop to the weak f7 square but the important distinction is that 9. Nc3 is not possible. Therefore, 6. ...Nf6 is probably best move here to help me castle. I played ...d6 to hope for Be6 bailout if necessary to trade off white's light-squared bishop and I had time for it because Ng5 wasn't playable yet. I over-looked the d4 push, giving white a big center. 6. ...Nf6 7. Re1 0-0 8. d4 isn't as potent for white because the c-pawn is pinned to the rook. So 7. d3 is probably necessary. NO, ENGINE SAYS D6 IS GOOD!

(7) My failure to play ...Nf6 last move and castle my king lets white strikeout in the center, correctly opening lines while my king isn't safe. Shoulda been calculating this. I can't take on d4 and allow that pawn duo which will be annoying to develop around. White is threatening d5 and if I move my knight, Qa4+ will come. Unfortunately, I was still paranoid about the fried liver attack and so my reply is egregiously slow. Taking on d4 doesn't look good: 7. ...exd4 8. Nxd4 Nxd4 9. Qxd4 hitting g7 and also threatening Qa4+. I think 7. ...exd4 8. Nxd4 Nge7 might hold for black, but if 7. ...exd4 8. cxd4 and then 9. d5 is coming. Perhaps the bailout move for black is 7. ...b6 to protect the bishop, then 8. d5 Nce7 and it's probably better for white but I'm not dropping a piece.

(8) the threat I didn't see. 8. ...Nce7 9. Qa4+ picking up the bishop. I save it the best way I can find by trying to get a good square for my bishop and now i'm considering castling long. ENGINE SAYS THIS IS NOT A THREAT, I KEP MISSING THAT PUSHING C6 WOULDA BLOCKED THE CHECK AND GUARDED A5

(10) White is up a piece, but because of the gambit line, he is down two pawns. He proceeds by trying to trade and threaten Qa4 (If I allow 11. Bxc6 bxc6 12. Qa4 I don't see how I save the a5 bishop and c6). I like my tenth move but I'm still not castled, sheesh. 10. ...Ne7 may have been better so I can castle next move hopefully, and if bishops are traded, Nxc6 guards a5. My game move preps castling long, guards f7 and if trading bishops, I'll take back with queen and hit c3 twice. There's also a Ba4 follow-up idea maybe. I considered 10. ...Bb5 as black here to hit the rook, but I see a line in which white gives the piece back but gains a pawn and makes black's king very exposed. 10. ...Bb5 11. c4 Ba6 (idea 12. ...c6 bishop trap) 12. c5 dxc5 13. Bxf7+ Kxf7 14. Nxe5+ and there are some trouble squares for black's king. I didn't see that in-game. Hard to see and not sure if that's best for black to go down that line because of king safety.

There's also this easier-to-see line: 10. ...Bb5 11. Bxb7 Bxf1 12. Bxa8 Qxa8 13. Qxf1 and black loses a pawn in that exchange because 13. ...Qxe4? 14. Qb5+ will lose the bishop.

(11) Ahh, missed this move from white. He's developing with tempo and I'm behind because my king in the middle. A principle violated! I now can't castle long

(12) ...0-0 praise the lord! I saw the queen and rook on the same diagonal immediately but c4 shuts that down. I tried calculating for tactics for a bit but decided to finally castle. ENGINE SAYS I MISSED A TACTIC HERE. QUEEN AND KNIGHT ARE FORK-ABLE BY THE PAWN SO IF BXD5 EXD5 E4 WINS A PIECE

(13) I go for some active play. I was actually close to resigning here, expecting c4 but maybe there's some complications with that after c6 from black to trap the bishop. There's also 13. ...Ng4 hitting the other bishop

(14) White pins the knight. I was expecting either c4 or Bc4.

(15) White takes some time here, I was deeply calculating a desperado 15. Bxf7+ Qxf7 16. Nxd6 Bxd3 17. Nxf7 Bxf1 18. Kxf1 Rxf7. I saw that in-game, The trick is to continue on and take the rook at the end! I somehow forget or look past that while this combo plays out. White plays Nxe5, importantly leaving his bishop under attack. So white attacks my queen but willingly chooses to open up the attack on his queen and also leave his bishop hanging. So I'm on move and I should see we each take the other's queen, then we each take the other's rook  but then once again I'm on move and there are two of white's pieces hanging. I can take the bishop and his knight is actually trapped. The line after white's in-game move is: 15. ...Bxd3 16. Nxd7 Bxf1 17. Nxf8 cxd5 and white can't save his knight.

(16) I don't play the rook capture for whatever reason. I think I see that I can take the knight and white will have two pieces hanging still but that's not the case.

(17) Ahh right, white finds the move. 17. ...Bxc3 18. Rc1 and I think white's losing one of the bishops and I'd actually be giving him a choice. So I'm now one pawn ahead when I shoulda been slightly more but okay. At least I turned it around but not as much as I could. I see 17. ...Be2 is interesting, if complicated. ENGINE SAYS 17. ...BE2 IS THE IMPORTANT MOVE TO SEE!

(20) I saw this whole line from move 18, getting the c-pawn all the way to f3 and I thought it was fine in my head, white is getting a rook on the 7th though, and I didn't see that it was hitting b7 until it was played in-game. I recall being low on time and this gave me some minutes back at least. I did know that white would have 4 pawn islands after it, whereas mine would be strong. I was worried it wasn't as good for me as I thought, see notes on move 21

(21) I was expecting 21. gxf3 Bxc3 22. Rc1 Rc8.

(22) After Kxg2, white indeed has 4 isolated pawns while black has 2 solid pawn groupings

(24) I was somewhat close to playing 24. ...Bd2 forcing a bishop trade but I'd cry with 25. Rd1. I think 24. ...Bb4 was played with Bc5 in mind

(25) Get king over to help with white's dangerous-ish pawns

(26) Strong move from white. If ...Bc5 27. Bxc5 bxc5 28. Rb5. Maybe I wasted my time on move 25 and I should have played ...Bc5 then. Instead my 26th move is a blunder because 27. Rd1 as mentioned before. Tears.

(28) Yay for mutual blunders. White misses it too.

(29) a5 comes from white, probaly not good to just give me a pawn, even though he gets a passed c-pawn.

(30) white gets behind his passer but my rook should shut his king off and my king will march over. I start to feel better at this point finally.



Conclusions

I'm happy I fought back after dropping a piece in yet another bad opening. I have to be WAY more vigilant in my openings. I'm not getting good positions.

Weekly Chess Schedule

In a recent Perpetual Chess podcast, J.J. Lang mentioned an example of a 15 hour per week schedule for chess study for the 1500 rated-player.

J.J. Lang's Recommendation

6 Hours on Openings - Lang says don't spend six hours memorizing things. For the 1500-rated player, you moreso want to get a grasp on general ideas, plans and resulting pawn structures.

3 Hours on Endgames - This will be some memorizing of certain endgame techniques but also some study of techniques new to you.

3 Hours on Hard Tactics - The problems that you spend ten to twenty minutes per tactic!

3 Hours on Easy/Medium Tactics - Better for pattern recognition and morale as well.

* * * * * * * * * *

This got me thinking that I need a slightly more structured approach. I don't do well with extreme structure but I came up with a generalized plan that'll still allow for my own customization depending on what I feel I need to work on any given day. My plan at least serves as a guideline to ensure I'm covering the main areas of study every week.

My Plan
I'm fortunate enough to have some free time at work to tackle a lot of this stuff. I like to spend time with my partner during the evening so it's hard for me to spend hours and hours at night studying. I think having a defined schedule will help me better fill out my free time at work. I'm not good at following extremely specific schedules like "Do 1000-1200 tactics for 45 minutes on Wednesdays" and "Practice 2 pawns vs 1 endgames for 75 minutes on days beginning with a T." Instead, I'll set it up so each weekday gets a different area of study and I can choose on that day how to fill the time.

Monday - Openings

• Review my chess openings spreadsheet. Find some I haven't studied yet and learn about the general plans. Find youtube videos/articles on any given opening and take notes.
• Find 10 exemplary master games in those openings (use Lichess) and study them.
• Chess Structures by Flores.
• Pawn Structure Chess by Soltis.

Tuesday - Endgames

• Go over notes from Silman's Endgame Course and practice those things on a board. Do tests at the end of the chapters.
• Chess Endgame Training by Rosen.
• Capablanca's Best Chess Endings by Chernev.
• Practice endgame positions on Lichess's board editor. 
• Review my excel spreadsheet of pawn opposition positions (see "Building Blocks for Opposition" blog entry). 
• Use the Chess Endgame Training mobile app.

Wednesday - Tactics

• Work to mix in tactics nearly every day.
• For 'hard' tactics, complete the five free chess.com tactics every day. Minimum 10 min/puzzle.
• One hour of ChessTempo puzzles. 
• Winning Chess Exercises for Kids by Coakley.
• Woodpecker Method by Smith and Tikkanen. 
• Practical Chess Exercises by Chang. This supposedly has tactical and positional puzzles.
• 5334 Chess Problems by Polgar.

Thursday - Strategy

• Review notes on Amateur's Mind by Silman. Work on the 25 tests in the back of that book. 
• Reassess your Chess by Silman. 
• My System by Nimzowitsch.
• Can you be a Positional Chess Genius? by Dunnington. 
• Annotated Master Games--play through books. 
• Chess Structures by Flores.
• Pawn Structure Chess by Soltis.
• World's Most Instructive Amateur Game Book by Heisman.

Friday - Game Analysis

• Analyze my games from the week.
• Play through master games with annotations. 
• Kasparov v Karpov
• Games of the Young Grandmasters
• Understanding Chess Move by Move by Nunn
• Any other books recommended in this blog entry.

Lichess4545 Game Analysis 5

This is game three from the 4545 League. My team is doing well despite my best efforts. Yep, another loss. Yeesh. My team had won the match at this point so the pressure was off. I still tried to win but ended up resigning in under 25 moves. I dropped a pawn (yet again, I saw it 10 seconds after I played it...) and then missed a tactic and mis-played another thing. Rough. Just not seeing stuff really well and I'm not being completely careful.

https://lichess.org/Odq3HLPv

I was the black pieces and my engine-less comments follow.

My Comments

(1) I decided to play the sicilian. I almost never play it so I decided to go for it in case my opponent had any prep for me.

(2) d4? what the hell...oh yeah the smith-morra gambit. Didn't expect this in game. So I take the center pawn with my c-pawn.

(3) White plays natural move, I try to defend the pawn although it has 2 attackers on it. Nc6 seems like best move though.

(4) We trade, which I obviously saw, and white has his queen in the middle of the board which I thought wasn't great since I could set up so I could develop with tempo on it

(5) Qxd4 and white's best piece is in the middle. 5. ...Nf6 6. e5 so I play slow with d6 to set up e5

(6) Nc3 makes sense. Black plays e5 but what about Nf6. It develops and helps guard d5 which is made very weak after my game-move of 6. ...e5. My pawn move allows more development from white with a check.

(8) Qd5 threatening b7. I remember seeing some bad lines for black like 8. ...b6? 9. Bxd7 Kxd7 (Qxd7 10. Qxa8+) 10. Qxf7+. If 8. ...Nf6 9. Qxb7  As for ...a6, well, maybe a6 is the move here.

(9) I don't remember if I spot the very simple 10. Bxa7 threat yet but I get tempo on the queen for a move...finally. I thought Qxd4 was bad for white on move 5 but I couldn't get tempo on it until move 9.

(10) I play Be7 and immediately see the dropped pawn. Not seeing stuff well. At least it's only an a-pawn so it could be worse but I don't play well the rest of the game. I don't think my mind was in it.

(11) Annoying that Bxa7 comes with tempo too. Makes 8. ...a6 seem like the better move even moreso, since my rook would have still been on a8. I try to get my rook slightly more active at least and maybe I have a b6 bishop trap later...

(13) Rd8 and I play Qa5 figuring he'd just move his bishop back to e3 but I miss the intermezzo

(15) ...Bd8 saves? It's passive but it's something.

(16) ...Bd8 again woulda been "okay", but instead, I don't really calculate the simplest intermezzo tactic ever. I was just thinking very straightforward to trade on e3: 16. ...Bxe3 17. Bxe3, then I can defend Ne7+ with Re8 or something. But I miss it.

(17) Duh. White simply inserts Ne7+. Oh well.

(18) Missed a small tactic which I saw right after yet again. I could at least do the desperado tactic and give up my bishop for a pawn with 18. ...Bxf2+ 19. Kxf2 Qc5+ and play for f5 trying to break it open and see what happens for a few more moves.

(19) I'm down the exchange and a pawn. I play on slightly longer but it's resignable.

Conclusions
I think I was losing sight of "what my opponent might play" in this game, I would look one move ahead but not really analyze the position after that. I have to take the extra 5 seconds to envision the board right after my moves, my candidate moves, what I should do to save a pawn, what's being attacked, etc. It only requires a few extra seconds of double-checking the board and taking stock of things. Even if things seem dangerous for my opponent (like them having their queen in the middle) I can't stop calculating and analyzing and assuming things are where I think they are. White was able to stay safe and develop with threats throughout the game.


ANALYSIS WITH ENGINE HELP

(4) I guess this is a bit of a "trap" without actually winning a piece or pawn but my natural Nxd4 gives white a big advantage of +0.1 to +0.7. So that's a must-know in the smith-morra. Play 4. ...Nf6 and allow white to trade knights on c6 if they want since black will take back bxc6 with lotsa center pawns.

(6) My analysis was correct that Nf6 is best here.

(8) Engine likes Rb8. 8. ...a6 is bad because 9. Bc4 Be6 10. Qxb7 Bxc4? 11. Qc6+

(10) ...a6 now is fine. (only a +1.5 adv)

(13) I saw the b6 idea earlier (see analysis) but didn't play it. I think because I saw 13. ...b6 14. Bxd7 Qxd7 15. Bxb6. Buuut 14. ...Nxd7 works. I don't think I saw the backwards knight move that'd allow my queen to continue guarding b6. 13. ...b6 14. Bxd7 Nxd7 15. Nd5 Ra8 and eval still only says ~+1.1

As expected, this game was all white. I never had an initiative then dropped the pawn and white had an easy straightforward game as I couldn't find any good complications. Not a good effort.

Lichess4545 Game Analysis 4

This was game 3 of the Lonewolf League (30+30). I was quite bummed at this one. Even though it was a draw and a half-point is a half-point, I think there are several reasons why it felt lame:

• I am doing well in the league (2/2) and thought it'd be a good chance to remain undefeated--which I guess I technically still am? I'm in the U1800 category and I'd like to place in the top three.
• My opponent this week was rated 250 points lower than me. I even knew going in to not let that bother me but I'm sure it did. I remember thinking I SHOULD WIN THIS and when I felt like it was even or I didn't have a plan it bothered me more than it should have.
• I didn't like my position out of the opening. I knew it was a closed strategical position but I struggled to find the right plan (like what pieces to try to trade, or whether to trade at all), then I panicked and couldn't find a plan at all. I recall thinking I wasn't worse, just that I wasn't used to this position.
• After a weird blunder/dubious trade, I was in what seemed like a winning endgame but again I was inactive and couldn't find a plan, then got low on time and had to settle for a draw in time pressure. I hate not converting an endgame, but it's much worse when I'm up a piece for a pawn.
• My opponent ended up with more than 30 minutes on their clock which shouldn't matter but it only makes me assume they were barely thinking and I should have been able to come up with plans throughout the game that were better than theirs on which they never spent more than a minute or so. I took long thinks and didn't find the right moves.

https://lichess.org/I7dHbXmf

My Analysis (no engine or analysis board, i.e. all visualization)

(2) My brief "prep"--if you could call it that--for my opponent showed that he has played the Old Benoni before. Not always but enough times that I thought I should get a handle on what to do. I saw the computer recommended to push past so that's what I did. Probably without that knowledge, I would have taken and not tried too hard to hold onto the pawn. 2. dxc5 e5 3. e4 Bxc5 4. Nf3 or Nc3 (and white can consider castling long), or another line I didn't consider: 2. dxc5 e5 3. b4 (prepping Bb2 for a nice diagonal) a5 4. bxa5 Qxa5+ 5. Nd2 Qxc5 and black is even material and white has bad queenside structure. If white plays 4. a3 instead they might be okay, with Bb2 coming as long as they get castled kingside quickly.
Black blocks the pawn.

(4) ...h6 is slow from black. Bd7 and b5 look more obvious.

(6) Nd2, dunno about this move from me. I wanted e4 but I'm violating opening principles to try to get it (moving same piece twice is one of them). Probably something like e3 to prep Bd3 and try to trade my piece that's gonna become very bad (the light-squared bishop) is the better idea. I must have seen this but I didn't like my queen out there on d3...it looks like it'd be just fine though.

(7) I play e4, and now I have a lot of center pawns on light squares which makes my light-squared bishop bad. The remedy for a bad bishop is to try to trade it off hopefully for your opponent's best minor piece, get the center pawns off that color, or get the bishop outside the chain. I actually recall thinking to trade it off but I didn't stick with that plan well. ERROR! I also should have had a better follow-up to black simply retreating via Bg6, which he did.

(10) Bf3? I think I wanted to protect e4 and play Ne2-f4 to try to get that bishop. But again, he can just play Bh7 if he wants (probably should have done that on move 7.) Many piece moves that don't accomplish much. 10. Re1 is better which still protects e4 so I can sort my pieces out. 10. ...e5 and my bishop is awful. I think at this point I should kick off Operation: Trade Bishops. That's another reason why Re1 would be nice. It frees up the square for Nf1-g3 maneuver.

(11) Again, just Re1 here, instead I play on the wing where black has his pawns pointing.

(12) If I'm going to go forth with this plan, I think Rb1 would be a nice touch in some lines.

(13) I just take, don't know what else to do, just seeing how he'll take back. Not really good chess and I think I was taking a lot of time here.

(14) So many single-square bishop moves. I was watching c4 in case of Nb6 I guess? But that's ghosts. I remember wanting f4 break too so that's probably what this was for. Best plan I see though, is 14. Ne2 and then Ng3 threatening either Bh5 to trade, and if ...Bh7 from black to save, then Nf5 threatening the dark-squared bishop

(17) ? Not sure what this was...looks bad. I gotta get my pieces more active, they're so sad! 17. a4 allowed Qb4 and my pieces would have started to look weird. Probably I'd have to play Qb3. I think I still need to play 17. Re1 here then Nf1 to g3. I had f4 on my mind and that's why I was struggling to play Re1. I should have found a solid plan and stuck to it but I was panicking a small amount.

(18) That light-squared bishop! Such a confused and bad piece. I guess this was giving a space for Ne2 now in case Ba5 comes from white. But, geez, if I want to try the Bh5 move, I'd have to play Ne2-g3 and THEN play Be2 again which is laugh-ably slow, all just to try to trade off my bad bishop for black's better one. Yet again Re1 I like more, with Nf1-g3 and Bh5 coming.

(19) Even here I could have played Be2 to see if they'll trade on their own accord.

(20) A break move, finally. Bb2 might be better so if black takes (which they do in-game), I can take back with the bishop. But in the game, black trades his bad bishop for a (inactive) piece of mine. I never considered black giving his bishop up and so I didn't pay attention to the 21. ... Qb4 move which allows a passed pawn for black.

(23) fxe5? and dxe5?, giving me two connected passed pawns. Looks like 23. ...Nxe5 is better for black because it forces Bc2 (or Bb1). Pretty inactive for white and black has a great central knight. I think fxe5 is bad for white. What's better? The light-squared bishop is still bad and black's is good so trading them off is a good idea. 22. Rf2? Ng4. So 22. Nf3 with ideas of Bb2?

(24) Nb3 opening my bishop finally (hasn't moved all game!). Seems like that's the tale of the opening and middlegame for me, a tale of a bad bishop making tiny moves that don't improve it at all and waste tempos while my better bishop--as defined by general rules of bishops--sits on its home square until the 28th move! My 24th move blockades the pawn and stops a5 to defend it. I wonder if 24. Bb2 is better, and swing rook over to c1. Rook on f1 isn't doing as much as I thought it would be

(26) a5 was to stop Nb6 which is what I thought black's plan was. Don't think a5 is important anyway since if I let black play Nb6 I can play Na5.

(30) After 29 moves, I have two connected passers while black has one. I have the bishop pair too. I saw this Bd6 move hitting the backwards pawn. Black can defend it but plays a move that surprised me so I had to make sure it wasn't some tactic. Black just hands me the advantage as far as I can see.

(36) Rxe4 Rxa6. Some odd plays by black then a simplification and white is up a piece for one pawn

(37) Re8+? Converting endgames.... Hmm. Do I save the bishop or check first? I play Re8+ and I think this is my first poor move. It lets the king move and get active. It forces the king out. Where to move the bishop though? Bd4 keeps an eye on the a1 square I like that, bishops in the middle of the board make sense.

(38) Now I play the centralizing Bd4, but the key difference is that my rook is on the back-rank, doing nothing. Except maybe black will blunder into a mate in one with g6....unlikely. Ra2 from black, nice, restricts my king and it's on a light-square.

(39) Rf8? Not sure what that is. I remember thinking they'd play f6 but even that is okay for black I think. Better is to keep my rook more active (it's so passive now!) and play Kf1 and threaten Re2 to trade and go into a winning endgame. I have a bishop and I should be able to get my king active and try to force my h-pawn to get passed since it'd promote on a dark square.

(40) h3 to get some space, maybe I bring my king to h2 to get it out.

(41) g4? Not sure again, I was not getting a plan ready. Perhaps Kh2 is better here. I'm reaching out with my pawns and making it easier for black to trade them off. I think the pawns are my insurance here because if I can trade rooks and still have pawns that can promote with the help of my bishop, I win. As he trades off pawns, it's more likely to draw. g4 is bad.

(42) I take because I see a rook check, yay! Doesn't do much really though. I feel like in endgames I often just play right into the opponent's hand. It's weird and annoying. I lose command of the game.

(45) Rh5+ is a good try to get the rook back in the game. If Ke4 then Bc5 I think works to start to threaten the pawns from behind. I don't think I can trade rooks now though with the lack of pawns. Anyway I play an inactive move that lets him get closer to my pawn.

(46) Rg8? I guess trade pawns now... I think I was very low on time. No idea what's going on.

(47) I missed the check so I was getting nervous about some major error into a checkmate.

(49) Black is threatening to take the h-pawn and hit my bishop. Perhaps h5 is a good try? 49. h5 Rxh5 50. Rxg7. It's something at least, and if my opponent was playing so fast (they averaged just under 30 seconds per move) maybe some complications would have worked. Instead I take on g7 and they take.

(50) Bxf6 lets black take a draw. Some other bishop moves could have pro-longed the game but I imagine it's a computer-draw at this point.

Conclusion

So there were plenty of questionable moves by me, including several in the endgame. 37 Re8+ isn't great but it's not the worst. I think 39. Rf8? and 41. g4? are worst. The opening and middlegame were mis-played in that I never was able to trade off my bad bishop and even worse, I wasted a lot of time with trying to figure out where it goes.

COMMENTS WITH ENGINE ANALYSIS

(2) Indeed, after my second move, I have a +0.7 advantage. Although my suggested lines for if i try dxc5 aren't really great. Black will play e6 to stay solid and attack the bishop.

(3) c4 is maybe a little slow from me. It solidifies my space in the center I guess but closes down the pawns. It wasn't one of the top 3 suggested moves. e4 makes sense here and it's teh second recommended move. c4 isn't a really big loss in advantage anyway.

(4) ...h6 is bad, but SF recommends a6 to prep b5 which also makes sense. My Bd7 and b5 idea for black is't good because the obvious Nc3 covers that square.

(6) my e3 and Nd2 ideas are both okay. Nd2 isn't as bad as I thought in analysis.

(7) My idea for e4 (as I played in-game) was a good one!

(10) Yep my analysis that Bf3 is a dubious move is correct. Went from a +1.1 to 0 eval.

(11) Re1 is okay, also h4 to start prying on blacks' light-sqaured bishop. But yeah, Re1 followed by Nf1 is good.

(13) Yeah just a bad move. No real idea behind it.

(18) Re1 in this case like I was thinking is bad after Ba5. Bd3 is a sad looking move but it keeps the advantage at 0 at least.

(23) SF wants me to play Nb3 immediately. Makes sense to blbockade, but I thought I had time.

(30) I played well through here, 23. ...dxe5 was not a good move for black and I held the advantage up through this point. 30. ...Bxe4 was actually black's best move.

(37) Re8+ isn't super-bad actually. I was at +2.8 here and Re8+ is fine

(39) Again, the rook move is fine but it comes with no real plan and that's why i don't like it. Kf1 I like more and SF says it's good with no real advantage difference from my less-active rook move I played.

(40) g4 is indeed the first really bad move from me. It's a mistake