Training quote of the day #67: Norbert Wiener

Below is excerpted from the Medium.com article by Alvaro Garcia "How to achieve in weeks what others don't achieve in years"

Norbert Wiener, the father of cybernetics, put forward this law in 1943:

“Every self-regulating system needs a feedback loop that translates the result of an action into a signal readable for the next decision cycle.” (Norbert Wiener, 1943)

What does this mean?

He explained it with a rocket. A rocket that does not receive continuous information about its deviation from its trajectory never reaches its destination, no matter how much fuel it carries. The same happens to you with your goals. It doesn’t matter the effort, the hours, the money, the willpower. It will all be wasted if you don’t have a signal that tells you, in time, how much you’ve deviated.

You need to study your own performance every day.

Annotated Game #357: The Leningrad Dutch is different

In this last-round tournament game, it is evident that I have little experience as Black in the Leningrad variation of the Dutch Defense. Analysis shows a series of mis-placed pieces and long-missed ideas (...Nh5) that would have given me a better game. This was based on lack of familiarity with positional characteristics and common ideas specific to the Leningrad (including not blocking the bishop on g7). My opponent shows a similar lack of familiarity with the opening, but manages to create a weakness to target, establishing a strong passed d-pawn and a strategically winning position. While my calculation was not very accurate in picking up my opponent's threats, I did at least show good judgment in some cases by deliberately complicating the situation, which (luckily) led to my opponent missing some winning opportunities. I was pleased enough to be able to legitimately clinch a draw at the end, after fighting to come back.

[Event "?"] [Site "?"] [Date "????.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "Class C"] [Black "ChessAdmin"] [Result "1/2-1/2"] [Annotator "ChessAdmin/Dragon 3.2"] [ECO "A85"] [WhiteFideId "-1"] [BlackFideId "-1"] [PlyCount "55"] [GameId "2323483478960776"] 1. d4 f5 2. Nf3 Nf6 3. c4 g6 4. Nc3 Bg7 5. Bf4 d6 6. e3 O-O 7. Bd3 Nbd7 $6 {in other Dutch variations this is more normal, but here the knight belongs on c6, not blocking the Bc8.} (7... Nh5 $5 {is also an interesting idea, taking advantage of the Bf4's lack of squares.}) 8. O-O Qe8 {again, not a great idea in this particular position. The intent is to prepare an e-pawn push. However, the queen's absence now leaves c7 vulnerable to the idea of Nb5.} (8... Nh5) (8... e5 $5 {is actually playable here without preparation.} 9. dxe5 dxe5 10. Nxe5 Nh5 {is a pawn sac in exchange for piece activity, notably the Bg7.}) 9. d5 $6 {luckily my opponent also plays a standard idea that is not appropriate here, allowing me to immediately equalize.} (9. c5 $16) 9... Nc5 $11 10. Bc2 e5 11. dxe6 Bxe6 {Black has a comfortable game here, although I am not really familiar with the position.} 12. Qe2 h6 {this is too slow, and/or premature.} (12... Nh5 $1 $17 {pressures the Bf4 and unleashes the Bg7.}) 13. Nd4 Nfe4 {I thought for a while here. This move is unnecessarily fancy.} (13... Bf7 $11 {preserving the bishop. White has no particular follow-up.}) 14. Nxe4 {obvious and best} Nxe4 15. f3 Nf6 {it's probably better to simply return the knight to its previous square, rather than obstruct the Bg7.} (15... Nc5 $11) 16. Nxe6 Qxe6 17. Bb3 {with the obvious threat of c4-c5, pinning my queen and king.} Kh7 (17... Qe7 $5 {removing the queen first from the diagonal and placing it on a better one. This also prevents White from targeting d6.} 18. c5+ d5 $11) 18. c5 Qd7 {long think, correct think (for once!) - however, I spoil it with my next move.} 19. cxd6 c6 $2 {it is correct to do an intermediate move rather than immediately recapture, but unfortunately this is the wrong one.} (19... Nh5 $1 $11 20. dxc7 Nxf4 21. exf4 Qxc7 $11 {even if Black stays a pawn down - both f4 and b2 are threatened - the structure and piece activity are such that there is still equality.}) (19... cxd6 $2 $16 {I correctly evaluated as good for White, who can pile up on the d-pawn.}) 20. Rad1 $16 {unfortunately White can easily reinforce his advanced d-pawn.} Rae8 (20... Nh5 $16) 21. Bg3 $1 $18 {the bishop decides to retreat and preserve itself, which is best, although during the game I resolutely ignored the idea of trading it off. White will have two very good bishops and an advanced passed pawn, which is enough to be strategically winning.} Nh5 {this comes far too late in the game.} 22. Bf2 Be5 {played after a long think. I thought best for inducing complications in which my opponent might go wrong.} 23. e4 $6 {this both gives up the f4 square and allows me to exchange the f-pawn and open up the file. However, I do neither of these beneficial things.} Bxd6 $2 {and we're back to a strategic win for White with this desperate grab back at the d-pawn, which lands my pieces in trouble.} (23... fxe4 24. Bxa7 Bxd6 25. Qd2 b5 $1 $14 {taking advantage of the hanging Ba7.}) (23... Nf4 $5) 24. Qd3 Rf6 {after another long think, I decide this is my best chance.} 25. Bxa7 $6 (25. e5 {is what I was expecting and would have shortly lead to resignation.} Rxe5 26. Bd4 $18) 25... Qc7 $2 {a reasonable move, but Black would do better by counterattacking.} (25... Nf4) (25... b5) 26. Bf2 $6 {concerned about evacuating his bishop, again my opponent misses} (26. e5 $1 Rxe5 27. Bd4 $18) 26... Bxh2+ $11 27. Kh1 Rd6 28. Qc4 {we are now back to complete equality and with not a lot of time on my clock, I accept my opponent's draw offer.} 1/2-1/2

Welcome to Carlo Fortunati!

As I move into what I intend to be a more sustained and focused phase of chess improvement than has been possible in recent years, I've decided to update my chess-world alias to "Carlo Fortunati" - in truth, I do feel fortunate to be an amateur with more time and (hopefully) energy to devote to the cause in coming years. The original "ChessAdmin" alias was rather generic (boring?) but was created at a time (2011) that was in the last part of the golden years of independent chess blogging, when being your own "admin" meant something. It worked well enough as an internet identity, although once I did get yelled at by one site for registering there under that alias, since apparently some users confused me for an actual admin. I plan to continue to use it in the annotated games, for continuity as well as to avoid confusion with anyone actually named "Carlo Fortunati".

Currently there is an active and diverse chess blogging community, largely based on major global sites (Chess.com, lichess.org, Substack), which is a pleasure to see after some relatively lean years. Part of this content is of course related to marketing efforts by chess professionals, which is fine if not overdone, and there are a good number of sites/blogs with genuine substantive content that are enriching for the whole community. I will continue to link to selected chess improvement blogs in the sidebar and post snippets/comments on particular posts of interests as I run across them.

In the near term another change I may consider is opening up (moderated) comments to anonymous posters, at least as an experiment. When the blog was originally created, most people actually had Google accounts (for Gmail use if nothing else) and filtering permission by that status - the current setting - was not significantly exclusionary. This is no longer the case and the intermediate filter option of allowing OpenID verification for commenting is long gone as well. (I am limited to the options for the Blogger platform being used.) Past anonymous random comments largely consisted of advertising spam and were occasionally creepy (spam or not), so I did not enjoy the task of having to read and delete them all for content moderation purposes. I'm therefore not in a rush to open the gates again to anonymous posters, although I would welcome more engagement on ideas and topics that are posted. We will see how it goes. Naturally anyone with a Google account will still be able to comment, in any case.

Annotated Game #356: Cramped to death in the endgame

This next tournament game features what should have been a comfortable draw as White in a King's Indian Defense (KID) by transposition - with some opportunities for advantage passed up along the way - but which devolved into a highly cramped loss. The key error, if not the final losing one, was exchanging queens on the c-file to reach a cramped minor piece ending. This was simply unnecessary and reflects a repeated tendency I have to worry excessively about an open file with an opponent's major piece (queen/rook) on it, even if I have all the penetration squares effectively under control. My opponent does an excellent job of demonstrating how squeezes can happen in endgames, although I had opportunities to relieve the pressure with an f-pawn break. Very instructive.

[Event "?"] [Site "?"] [Date "????.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "ChessAdmin"] [Black "Class A"] [Result "0-1"] [Annotator "ChessAdmin/Dragon 3.2"] [ECO "E61"] [WhiteFideId "-1"] [BlackFideId "-1"] [PlyCount "78"] [GameId "2323483478960775"] 1. d4 Nf6 2. Nf3 g6 3. e3 Bg7 4. Be2 O-O 5. O-O d6 6. c4 Nbd7 7. Nc3 e5 8. Qc2 c6 9. b3 Re8 10. Re1 $6 $11 {this is simply an unnecessary precaution. White can do several other useful and more urgent things here.} (10. Ba3) (10. dxe5) (10. h3) 10... h6 11. Ba3 {now this is less effective.} (11. Bb2) (11. a4 $5) 11... Qc7 $6 {it looks perfectly reasonable to defend d6 in this way, but it gives White a freer hand in the center.} (11... e4 12. Nd2 Qe7 $11) 12. Rac1 (12. Rad1 {I also considered and the engine prefers. Instead of opposing the queen on the c-file, the rook's influence down the d-file can be felt more quickly.}) (12. h3 $5 {it's not a bad idea to get some luft for the king and take away the g4 square from Black.}) 12... a6 {now White has multiple strategic options available.} 13. d5 (13. dxe5 {there is often a tension between playing this and the text move in the KID setup. Here the engine prefers to exchange.} dxe5 (13... Nxe5 $6 14. Red1 $16) 14. c5 $14 {this is one pleasant possibility for White, constraining Black and controlling d6 and b6.}) 13... c5 $6 {this essentially justifies White's choice to advance, as now the d5 pawn is much stronger.} 14. Nd2 $14 {not a bad move, but} (14. e4 {is stronger. I've noticed a pattern in which I am reluctant to play e3-e4 when it is favorable.}) 14... Nh7 $6 {this is too passive.} 15. b4 {no pawn break, no plan. Although my edge is still small, I have the initiative on the queenside.} f5 $6 {consistent with how KID players normally want to advance on the kingside, but the action is currently on the queenside.} 16. bxc5 $16 Nxc5 17. Nb3 $6 {at the time, it seemed reasonable to bring the knight over to increase the pressure, but it is easily negated by Black's next move. I needed to strike immediately with} (17. Bxc5 Qxc5 (17... dxc5 18. e4 $16) 18. Na4 $1 $18 {with follow-up ideas like Qb3, Rb1 and c4-c5 to keep things rolling and dominate Black's backward queenside.}) 17... b6 $1 $11 18. Nxc5 {the point of bringing the knight over, but after} bxc5 {White's initiative on the queenside is gone and we are back to equality.} 19. Rb1 (19. e4 $5) 19... Bd7 20. Rb3 Rab8 21. Reb1 e4 22. Rxb8 {White has no prospect for obtaining an advantage, so I decided to head for a drawn endgame.} Rxb8 23. Rxb8+ Qxb8 24. Qb1 $6 {while not disastrous, this still gives Black more play than I should allow. I have made similar types of mistakes with heavy pieces on open files before, when my opponent stands better after the (unnecessary) exchange.} (24. Bc1 $11) 24... Qxb1+ 25. Nxb1 Ba4 {objectively Black is not really better, but certainly has the easier game, while I am cramped.} 26. Bc1 Ng5 27. Bd2 (27. f4 $5 $11 {this was probably a good time to make my position a little more flexible.} exf3 28. gxf3 $11) 27... Nf7 28. Ba5 (28. f4) 28... Kf8 29. Kf1 Ne5 30. Ke1 $6 {now my refusal to use the f-pawn lever is starting to make things worse.} (30. f3) 30... Bc2 $15 31. Nd2 $2 {unfortunately I am too cramped after Black's next, and he gains a winning advantage.} (31. Na3 $1 {this "only move" would leave the d2 square open for the king, after ...Nd3+}) 31... Nd3+ $1 $19 32. Bxd3 Bxd3 {the correct choice. Now I cannot do anything about the bishop on the d3 outpost and Black has a strategically won game.} 33. f3 Ke7 {good enough to maintain the advantage.} (33... exf3 $1 {my opponent probably thought that} 34. gxf3 Ke7 35. e4 {looked good for White, but now Black's kingside pawn majority will eventually win.}) 34. f4 g5 35. g3 gxf4 36. gxf4 Bf6 {unfortuantely, I have nothing left to do that can improve my position, while Black can further infiiltrate with his dark-square bishop. Eventually the c- or e-pawns will fall.} 37. Kd1 {this speeds up the loss a bit.} (37. Kf2 Bb2 $19 {and Black threatens to either exchange off the Ba4 and gain a 2v1 queenside majority, or exchange the Nd2 and then capture on c4.}) 37... Bh4 38. Bc3 Bf2 39. Nxe4 {pure desperation.} fxe4 0-1

Annotated Game #355: The Stonewall does its job

After an unfortunate loss in the first round of the tournament and barely escaping with a draw in the second, in this next game I was satisfied enough with a relatively easy and clean draw against a higher-rated player. I transposed into a Modern Stonewall as Black and achieved equality early on, which was the job of the opening to accomplish, but I missed a couple of chances to press for a clear strategic advantage. My opponent did well to disrupt my plans with 12. Qb3! and this lesson should help me keep a better eye on tactics along the g8-h2 diagonal in the future.

[Event "?"] [Site "?"] [Date "????.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "Class A"] [Black "ChessAdmin"] [Result "1/2-1/2"] [Annotator "ChessAdmin/Dragon 3.2"] [ECO "A90"] [WhiteFideId "-1"] [BlackFideId "-1"] [PlyCount "43"] [GameId "2323483478960774"] 1. Nf3 d5 2. d4 c6 3. c4 e6 {while the Triangle/Wedge pawn formation can be played as an independent line, I normally use it to head for a Slav Stonewall. Another option of course is to enter a Slav Defense with ...Nf6.} 4. Nc3 f5 5. g3 Nf6 6. Bg2 Bd6 {now Black has a full Modern Stonewall formation.} 7. O-O O-O 8. cxd5 exd5 {the rule with this pawn exchange is normally for Black to retake on d5 with the e-pawn, since it opens up the diagonal for the Bc8.} 9. Qc2 Ne4 {the most played move in the position, according to the database, but not the only option.} (9... Kh8 {is a common prophylactic move, preventing future tactical threats by White on the g8-a2 diagonal. This would avoid a problem that we will see shortly in the game.}) 10. Nxe4 fxe4 11. Ng5 $6 {White I expect intended this with the Qb3 follow-up, which unfortunately I did not consider.} Bf5 $6 {of course I thought about ...h6, but played this on the general principle that developing a piece would be more valuable than immediately kicking the knight. The bishop lines up on the Qc2 and threatens ...e3, with a discovered attack. However, White can immediately dodge this.} (11... h6 $1 {simplest and best.} 12. Nh3 {the knight only has one square, and now after} Bf5 $1 $17 {the e4 pawn is no longer tactically under threat, while Black has superior pieces and the initiative on the kingside.}) 12. Qb3 $1 {I only saw this after I moved. The queen is out of danger and attacking b7, while the d5 pawn is now pinned, meaning the e4 pawn is effectively hanging. An effective double attack.} Qb6 {the best response - immediately challenging the pinning Qb3, screening b7 and attacking d4.} 13. Qxb6 axb6 {the doubled pawns here are not a problem, plus the a-file is now opened for the Ra8.} 14. Rd1 $2 {this doesn't really do anything for White, as the d4 pawn is not threatened yet.} (14. f3 {would attack the spearhead of Black's pawn formation.}) 14... Nd7 $17 {again played on general developing principles. Good but not best.} (14... h6 $1 15. Nh3 $19 {and Black has no immediate breakthrough, but possesses a major strategic/positional advantage, with superior pieces and open lines for pressure.}) 15. Bh3 {a goodl decision to trade by my opponent, since the Bg2 was mostly buried. However, my light-square bishop was not so great either, so I was fine with the exchange.} Bxh3 16. Nxh3 Nf6 (16... b5 $5 {would restrict ideas of counterplay based on a2-a4.}) 17. Bf4 {evidently my opponent had a similar idea with this exchange.} Bxf4 (17... Ne8 {this move is preferred by the engine and occurred to me at the time, but I thought it looked a bit silly putting the knight back on the 8th rank. The point however is to reposition the knight on d6 after a bishop trade, either on d6 or f4.}) 18. Nxf4 Rae8 $6 $11 {not a bad move, but it essentially settles for equality. At this point, with reduced material and no obvious ways to break through, we are heading for a draw. Previous ideas might be used to fight a bit harder for a (small) advantage.} (18... Ne8) (18... b5) 19. e3 Rf7 (19... g5 {should be played first to rule out h2-h4.}) 20. Rd2 g5 21. Nh3 h6 22. Rc1 {here my opponent offered a draw and I accepted. I did not feel up to trying to grind a way to victory in a balanced double-rook endgame. One way to try for something more would be to move the rook back to a8, play ...b5 and reposition the knight to d6 for a small positional plus.} 1/2-1/2