Chess.com article - "The Rating Obsession: Why It's Ruining Your Progress"

"The Rating Obsession: Why It's Ruining Your Progress" over at Chess.com is an excellent article (and wakeup call for all improving players) about its title phenomenon. I think every serious chess improver has to grapple at least some of the time with the psychological problem of playing for rating, rather than playing for progress, which is a key point made by article author GM Gabuzyan. (One of the earliest posts here was on Ratings Fear and Loathing).

The full article is well worth the read, but this introductory excerpt really hit home:

One day, I nearly fell out of my chair during a 1-on-1 call with a new student.
The reason?
He told me, "I’m afraid to lose my rating."
I asked. "Alright. What’s your rating?"
A short silence. Then he said it.
"588."

The point is that this type of psychological affliction is common to all of us who take risks as players - something necessary to make progress - from beginners to IMs; GM Gabuzyan relates his own story about being 12 points shy of GM (2500) level and how he ultimately dealt with that. I don't think that we ever completely get rid of the rating monkey on our back, but we can certainly choose not to give our attention to it - and definitely should not listen to its advice.

Annotated Game #307: The Colle that wasn't (quite)

After an early opening blunder led to a rapid loss in the penultimate round of the tournament, the following final-round game was a welcome point of stability. Both sides dance around entering the Colle System, with Black never committing to playing ...d5, while as White I pass up some more interesting alternatives on moves 12-13 that would have led either to a small positional plus, or a more imbalanced structure with attacking chances on the kingside. I correctly avoid a tempting-looking tactic later, but in a passive and slightly cramped way. Not my best game, but the careful road to a draw was still a positive outcome after the poor showing in the previous round, guaranteeing me a plus score for the tournament.

[Event "?"] [Site "?"] [Date "????.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "ChessAdmin"] [Black "?"] [Result "1/2-1/2"] [Annotator "ChessAdmin/Dragon 3.2"] [ECO "A47"] [PlyCount "61"] [GameId "2153654822236272"] 1. d4 Nf6 2. e3 e6 3. Bd3 c5 4. c3 (4. Nf3 {would preserve some flexibility, probably leading to a Colle System after ...d5. However White retains the option of playing b3 rather than c3.}) 4... Be7 5. Nf3 {now the typical approach would be to occupy the center with ...d5, after which we have a Colle System.} (5. f4 $5 {would put the game into Stonewall Attack territory.}) 5... O-O 6. O-O (6. e4 {the thematic Colle advance is preferred already by the engine.}) 6... cxd4 7. exd4 {This exchange clears the diagonal for the Bc1, so is preferable for White.} b6 8. Qe2 {centralizes the queen and also sets up a battery to prevent ...Ba6, exchanging the Bd3.} Bb7 9. Nbd2 d6 {as I expected, my opponent preferred to refrain from occupying the center, having deferred ...d5 for so long. This Hedgehog-like structure is a little passive, but very solid.} 10. Re1 {not yet committing myself to a specific plan, but getting the rook into play on its best file.} h6 11. Ne4 {this invites exchanges on e4, which would lead to a more sterile equality.} (11. Nc4 {preserves some tension and a slight space advantage.}) 11... Nbd7 12. Bf4 (12. Nxf6+ Nxf6 13. Bf4 {again with a bit more space and pressure in the center.}) 12... Qc7 13. Nfd2 {the engine's second choice. I spent some time here thinking about the permutations, but this was made easier by the fact the Nf3 has no good other squares.} (13. Nxf6+ Nxf6 14. Qd2 $14 {now White even has a slight plus due to the imbalanced queen placements, but this leads to an unconventional position after} Bxf3 15. gxf3 Qc6 16. Kg2 {which contains some attacking chances.}) 13... e5 14. Nxf6+ Bxf6 15. dxe5 dxe5 16. Be3 Be7 {the retreat looks a little funny, but the bishop is doing more on the f8-a3 diagonal and the e-pawn does not need its support.} 17. Qg4 {with the obvious threat of Bxh6, now that the g-pawn is pinned.} Nf6 {defense by counterattack, with tempo.} 18. Qg3 {maintaining the pin on the g-file and also temporarily pinning the e-pawn.} Qc6 {more defense by counterattack, although is is a little less solid. The point being that Bxh6 does not work due to the riposte ...Qxg2+, forcing the queen trade.} 19. f3 $6 {Playing it safe, after a long think, although f2-f3 is rarely the best move on principle. Blocking the diagonal with} (19. Nf3 {is better and this occurred to me as a possibility. However, I did not like the tactical complications after} e4 20. Nd4 $14 {and was a little too lazy to follow up with real calculations.}) (19. Bf1 $5 {my opponent suggested as another improvement. I did not even see this possibility, although I was looking for a way to break away the queen from having to protect g2; I was only considering forward bishop moves, not backwards.}) 19... Bc5 20. Qf2 {this is OK but a passive placement of the queen.} (20. Nb3 Nh5 21. Qg4 Nf6 22. Qg3 $11) 20... Bxe3 21. Rxe3 Rad8 22. Bc2 {from this point I was just looking to maintain equality, which I succeed at.} (22. Rae1 {is more active.}) 22... Rfe8 23. Rae1 Qc5 24. Ne4 {I decided it was easiest to go for th exchanges on e4.} (24. Nb3 $5 Qc7 25. Qe2 Rd5 26. f4 e4 27. Bxe4 Rxe4 28. Rxe4 Nxe4 29. Qxe4 Rd8 30. Qe3 Qc4 $11 {Black's active pieces compensatie for the pawn.}) 24... Nxe4 25. Bxe4 Bxe4 26. Rxe4 $11 {now a draw is assured.} Qxf2+ 27. Kxf2 Rd2+ 28. R1e2 Rxe2+ 29. Rxe2 f6 30. Rd2 Re7 31. Ke3 1/2-1/2

Annotated Game #306: The Stonewall Attack formula

The Stonewall Attack has an undeserved reputation as a "system" opening, although perhaps some people do play the first several moves always by rote. As with its Dutch Stonewall counterpart as Black - see Annotated Game #305 - it is important to pay attention to move-order issues and not expect the same sequence to work every time against different setups from your opponent. However, in certain circumstances there is indeed a "formula" that usually works for White, which I am able to achieve in this next tournament game. Here I demonstrate that I finally have learned the lesson of the e-pawn lever in this position-type - after which, I have at worst a pleasant game, while giving my opponent a chance to mishandle the defense, which he does on move 15.

[Event "?"] [Site "?"] [Date "????.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "ChessAdmin"] [Black "Class B"] [Result "1-0"] [Annotator "ChessAdmin/Dragon 3.2"] [ECO "D00"] [PlyCount "63"] [GameId "2153324382056515"] {[%evp 0,14,19,31,14,5,12,-7,11,-30,-31,-48,-48,-47,-33,-45,-45]} 1. d4 Nf6 2. e3 d5 3. Bd3 e6 4. f4 c5 {my opponent was evidently unfamiliar with the Stonewall Attack setup and took a fair amount of time in the opening.} 5. c3 Nc6 6. Nf3 c4 {this significantly changes the character of the position. The middlegame plan of e3-e4 should now take priority.} 7. Bc2 b5 8. O-O Be7 9. Nbd2 {the move-order for White does not matter a lot here.} O-O 10. Ne5 {while this is fine, the natural reaction by Black which follows simply helps him develop a bit. The immediate e3-e4 or preparatory Qe2 look slightly better.} Bb7 11. Qe2 {here I debated playing the immediate e3-e4 pawn lever, but decided that I wanted additional control over e4 first. I did not see how Black could exploit the extra tempo.} b4 12. e4 bxc3 $6 {this intermediate pawn exchange does not get Black much, and gives the Bc1 a potentially good square on a3.} 13. bxc3 dxe4 {this was actually the point of the pawn lever, to get a knight on e4.} (13... Nxe5 14. fxe5 Nxe4 15. Nxe4 dxe4 {is equal according to the engine, but is also a pleasant game for White.}) 14. Nxe4 $14 {now some tactical possibilities start to appear, based on the centralized pair of knights and the b1-h7 diagonal being open.} Nd5 $6 {while not immediately losing, the self-removal of the kingside defender on f6 makes things easier for White.} (14... Nxe4 {I had seen the following sequence, which gives a small advantage to White.} 15. Qxe4 {threatening mate on h7} f5 16. Nxc6 fxe4 17. Nxd8 Raxd8 18. Re1 $14) 15. Rf3 {I had a long think here and decided that the rook lift would be good to play regardless, also protecting the c3 pawn. However, there are tactical ideas in play involving d4 that make this not as desirable.} (15. Bd2 {is the engine recommendation, reinforcing c3 while connecting the rooks.}) 15... Nf6 $2 {this is the losing move, although I did not calculate the best follow-up. The defender, while back on f6, can be removed with tempo.} (15... f5 16. Ng5 {White no longer has a breakthrough opportunity, while Black has various equalizing moves, including the tactical sequence} Nxc3 17. Rxc3 Qxd4+ 18. Qe3 Bc5 19. Kf1 Nxe5 20. fxe5 Qd5 $11) 16. Rh3 $18 (16. Nxf6+ $1 Bxf6 17. Bxh7+ {I was not looking for this sacrificial idea at the time, as I was too focused on achieving a normal ("safe") capture on h7. However, the best tactical point of Rf3 is the rook lift threat, which comes into play in exactly these types of situations.} Kxh7 18. Rh3+ Bh4 {I had also seen a version of this blocking idea earlier, but now} (18... Kg8 19. Qh5 $18) 19. Qh5+ $1 Kg8 20. Rxh4 $18) 16... Nxe4 {this loses a piece, as the Nc6 is underprotected.} (16... g6 {is the best try and would have required much more effort to win.} 17. Rb1 Rb8 18. Nxf6+ Bxf6 19. Qe3 $18 {with threats on the dark squares (Qh6, Ba3), along with the current threat of Rxb7 getting two pieces for the rook.}) 17. Bxe4 {now the Nc6 is double attacked and h7 is also forked, so Black cannot parry both threats.} ({Not} 17. Qxe4 $2 f5 $11) (17. Qh5 {the engine validates this as the number 2 choice, but I could not make it work in my calculations, so chose the (superior) text move.} h6 18. Ng4 $1 {I missed this idea.} Nxd4 19. Nxh6+ gxh6 20. Qxh6 Bh4 21. Rxh4 Qxh4 22. Qxh4 Nxc2 23. Qg4+ Kh8 24. Rb1 $18) 17... f5 18. Bxc6 (18. Nxc6 {also works, but is more complicated and I was satisfied with the bishop capture leading to an easily winning position.}) 18... Bxc6 19. Nxc6 {played after first checking the immediate Qh5 possibilities, which are not decisive. I therefore left the queen on e2 as a superior square. Being a piece up and with no counterplay for Black, as long as I was careful, the win should be assured.} Qd6 20. Nxe7+ {no reason not to exchange down, while up material.} Qxe7 21. a4 {played to activate my extra piece.} Rab8 $2 {moving the wrong rook.} 22. Ba3 {it seems my opponent missed the long-distance bishop skewer. Now there is truly no doubt of the outcome, although I was still careful to avoid any back-rank threats.} Qb7 23. Bxf8 Kxf8 24. Qxe6 Re8 25. Qxf5+ Kg8 26. Qxh7+ Kf8 27. Rb1 {this activates my remaining passive piece, to good effect.} (27. Qg6 {leads to mate in 7 according to the engine, but I was not worried about the game outcome at this point, as just getting to the win worry-free was good enough.} Re4 28. Rh8+ Ke7 29. Qxg7+ Kd6 30. Qxb7 $18) 27... Qe7 {evidently hoping for a back-rank blunder on my part.} 28. Qh8+ Kf7 29. Qh5+ Kf8 30. Qc5 {the triangulation maneuver with the queen forces the trade, and was easiest on my brain.} Qxc5 31. dxc5 Rd8 32. Rh8+ 1-0

Another pop culture chess fail, this time by Lady Gaga

 (Original Source: Raync910's blog at https://www.chess.com/blog/raync910/lady-gaga-coachella-poker-face-chess-dance-battle)

What's wrong with this picture? From Lady Gaga's performance at the Coachella festival:

The first thing I noticed was that the bottom side's colors were reversed. Then I noticed the top side's were correct. Then I started counting squares...

That said, powerful use of the chess metaphor in dance and song.

(See also: Chess imagery in popular culture)

Annotated Game #305: An endgame escape

This first-round tournament game had two big lessons. First, it highlighted a hole in my repertoire involving the move-order used to reach a Dutch Stonewall; I'll have to fix that for the future. Second, it demonstrated why at the Class level one should always keep yourself alive with practical chances in an endgame. Here I reached a situation where my opponent was up the exchange and could have sacrificed it back to lock in a win, but instead I exploited the opening he gave me to threaten mate and collect most of his pieces, forcing a resignation. A good illustration of why materialism can lead to bad outcomes in all phases of the game.

[Event "?"] [Site "?"] [Date "????.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "Class B"] [Black "ChessAdmin"] [Result "0-1"] [Annotator "ChessAdmin/Dragon 3.2"] [ECO "D31"] [PlyCount "84"] [GameId "2156548021522499"] 1. d4 d5 2. c4 c6 3. Nf3 e6 {the Triangle/Wedge formation.} 4. Nc3 Bd6 {I think I have to abandon this particular move-order to reach the Dutch Stonewall, since there are too many potential exploits by White to reach an easy and just better position.} (4... f5 {is the other route to the Stonewall, but again offers White better options such as 5. Bg5}) (4... Nf6 {is a Semi-Slav.}) (4... dxc4 {scores the best in the database.}) 5. Qc2 f5 6. Bg5 $16 {the engine now gives a significant plus to White. As we'll see, that does not immediately translate to a winning game in practical terms.} Nf6 7. e3 O-O 8. Bd3 h6 {so far a standard sequence and expected.} 9. Bf4 Ne4 (9... Bxf4 $5 10. exf4 Qd6 $14 {followed by ...dxc4 limits White's advantage, giving him an isolated d-pawn.}) 10. O-O {White is perfectly fine here, but I was pleased during the game that I could use a normal expansionary Stonewall strategy on the kingside now.} Be7 {played after long thought about my middlegame strategy.} (10... Bxf4 {is still the engine recommendation.} 11. exf4 Nd7) (10... a5 {was an idea I contemplated here and other times, but it seemed here like an unnecessary distraction from the kingside plan.}) (10... Nd7 {immediately is another choice.} 11. Bxd6 Nxd6 12. Ne2 Qf6 $16) 11. h3 {clearly aimed at preserving the bishop on the h2-b8 diagonal.} Nd7 {I wanted to get some more development in before advancing the g-pawn.} 12. Rac1 g5 13. Bh2 Qe8 {a standard idea in the Dutch, to move the queen to g6 or h5 for the attack. Also helps cover these otherwise weak squares, against penetration by White's pieces.} 14. Ne5 Nxe5 {no reason not to exchange.} 15. Bxe5 Bd7 {played to connect the rooks and get the bishop at least slightly more developed.} (15... Bf6 {immediately was my other option.}) 16. Qd1 {while this covers the h5 square and prevents my queen from going there, it seems a little slow.} Bf6 17. Bh2 {consistently preserving the bishop on the diagonal, also as a kingside defender with the possibility of reoccupying a central square.} Qg6 {Again a long think. I want to pursue pressure on the kingside. However, I underestimated White's next move in response.} (17... Nxc3 {it may now be time to liquidate the knights.} 18. Rxc3 Qe7 $16) 18. Ne2 Be7 {best according to the engine. The problem is that the Ne4 has no good retreat squares in response to f2-f3, now that it cannot exchange itself on c3.} 19. f3 Nf6 (19... dxc4 {this idea, played later in the game, may be a little more effective if executed now.}) 20. g4 {I found this unnecessarily provocative, although White still retains an edge. The point is that the f-pawn is pinned against the Qg6 and cannot capture on g4.} Rf7 $6 {played with the idea of dissolving the center and not having a bishop on c4 moving there with check in some variations, since the rook is blocking the diagonal. However, this ends up making the situation worse later, not better.} (20... dxc4 21. Bxc4 Nd5 22. Qd2 Rad8 $16) 21. Be5 dxc4 22. Bxc4 Nd5 {this move, threatening a fork on e3, appeared to be a surprise to my opponent, who nonetheless found the best response.} 23. Qd3 {protecting e3 while re-establishing the pin on the f-pawn.} Raf8 {getting the rook into play.} 24. Ng3 {I also underestimated the effectiveness of this move.} Qh7 $6 {played after a good deal of thought. This resolves the problem of the hanging queen, but allows White's next sequence.} (24... Kh7 $5 {may be simplest.}) (24... b5 {going after the bishop does not resolve the problem.} 25. Bb3 a5 26. a3 a4 27. Ba2 $18) 25. gxf5 $18 exf5 26. e4 {White's central pawn duo is now very strong, along with his centralized pieces.} f4 {Black is losing now, but this counterattack is still the best chance.} 27. exd5 Qxd3 28. Bxd3 fxg3 29. dxc6 Bxc6 30. Bc4 {and now the pin on the rook should win for White.} Kh7 31. Bxf7 Rxf7 {I'm now significant material down, with the only hope being to leverage the power of the two bishops.} 32. Kg2 h5 33. Kxg3 Kg6 (33... h4+ {I looked at this, which was objectively best according to the engine; however, I did not see any real practical benefit, since it fixed my pawns and reduced the potential threats they could make.} 34. Kh2 $18) 34. Kh2 (34. Rxc6+ {this exchange sacrifice, preferred by the engine, would give White a fully won endgame.} bxc6 35. Rc1) 34... Bxf3 35. Rc7 {my opponent played this as if it were crushing - and it mostly is - but I still can improve my position by} g4 {now things are stable on the kingside and the bishop on f3 also holds b7. White should still win, but there is no immediate knockout.} 36. hxg4 $6 {there is no reason to reduce the tension by the exchange, but my opponent evidently thought it would help simplify the situation.} hxg4 $14 {now the advanced passed g-pawn, coupled with the two bishops, gives me significantly more drawing chances. The newly opened h-file was ignored by my opponent, who tried to go for a knockout blow with} 37. d5 $2 {but after} Rh7+ {the king has only two squares, one of which loses:} 38. Kg1 $4 (38. Kg3 {this looks more risky, but White escapes at the end of the sequence.} Bh4+ 39. Kf4 Bg5+ 40. Kg3 Rh3+ 41. Kf2 Bh4+ (41... Bxd5 {may pose a few more problems for White but also draws.}) 42. Ke3 Bg2+ 43. Ke2 Bxf1+ 44. Kxf1 {with a draw.}) 38... Rh1+ $19 39. Kf2 Bh4+ 40. Ke3 Rxf1 41. d6 Re1+ 42. Kd2 Rxe5 {and my opponent resigned.} 0-1