Chess vs Life

An excellent recent article in Chess Life Online by FM Alisa Melekhina highlights some of the contradictions and conflicts that bedevil the life of a serious chessplayer.  Hers is only one example among many, but if you look around the chess community, it reflects some common truths - the most important one for improving players being that mastery requires time-intensive practice, which means dedicating a large part of your life to it.

For example, she relates how she spent four hours a day in high school in training, while now she is lucky to get four hours a week - which is not enough to maintain her edge for tournaments.  If you look at other up-and-coming masters such as Justus Williams and James Black (just to name recent American examples) you can see the same dogged work ethic and massive time commitment during their rise from Class levels to the master-level 2200 rating and beyond.  This is a useful reality check for those who think "talent" is some sort of magic carpet ride to mastery, or that significant progress can come without sustained, focused effort.

This simple but sometimes elusive truth I believe is the core of the problem - or challenge, depending on how you view it - of adult chess improvement.  How many people can possibly devote four hours a day to chess once out of their school years and in the working world?  Two hours a day?  Even just one hour a day on average, consistently?  In reality, very few people who work for a living have the combination of available time, energy and desire.  (Many of those who do not have to work for a living also lack these things, it is true, but at least they are not constrained by life responsibilities.)

The oft-quoted figure of 10,000 hours of practice required for mastery of a complex skill such as chess is simply an approximation, but the structural implications of it still hold for how you organize your life.  If you devote two hours a day to chess, that means you will reach your goal twice as fast as if you devoted one hour.  Four hours a day, four times as fast.  (No hours a day, never!)  The arithmetic in this sense is simple.

The learning process, however, is not strictly arithmetic in nature.  The more you become immersed in a subject, the more you tend to retain and make new breakthroughs in understanding, while you may not retain much at all if you only learn a particular subject in small doses and infrequently.  (This phenomenon is well known by anyone who halfheartedly studied a foreign language and can no longer speak more than a few words of it.)  Every person will have a certain threshold for effective study, then, which is necessary to pass on a frequent basis.  Distribution of time therefore becomes important, not just your total hours.  For example, doing intensive training for a half-hour a day, six days a week is more likely to result in sustained progress than 3 hours a day, once a week.

As an adult with the objective of improving my chess game, it is nice to have mastery as a goal, but one of the realizations that I have had on my journey since starting this blog is that, short of having the (rare) opportunity to take a year or two off from work to devote to training and studying, I am unlikely to achieve the master title.  Does that make progress pointless?  If you define the sum total of chess' worth to you as 2200 Elo or above, then it would be.  For me that is not the case, for a variety of reasons, ranging from simple enjoyment to competitive instincts to proven neurological benefits.

Returning to the idea of "chess versus life", one can view the two as mutually exclusive: life has demands and distractions that take away from your chess, while on the flip side studying a game for hours on end by definition means that you aren't doing anything else with your life.  This can be considered both an inconvenient truth and a negative way of looking at both sides of the chess/life coin.

I will end this meditation on the subject by offering the counter-argument and observation that integrating chess training and study into your life, by balancing both sides as best as you can and not succumbing to negativity about the fact that there are only 24 hours in a day, may just make you both a better person and chessplayer.  Perhaps Alisa would agree.

Annotated Game #119: A slashing victory in the English

This fourth-round tournament game was played against an obviously aggressive opponent.  As early as his second move (2...f5) it was clear that he would be looking for a kingside attack as soon as possible.  Although I was more cautious and solid, my focus on play in the center and on development gave me a good game without allowing my opponent any significant threats; he did miss the idea of playing ...Ne4 at some point, however, which would have given him better play.

The position around move 14 illustrates the importance of positional factors and ease of play, especially at the Class level.  White does not have a significant advantage, but the advantages he does have (the two bishops, open diagonals, more queenside space) make the game much easier to play.  All it takes for Black to lose is one bad idea - the slow transfer of his queen to the kingside - and White is able to shift to tactical play, taking advantage of Black's light-square weaknesses to slash open the position.  Black in response stakes everything on an unprepared kingside attack, which fizzles when I carefully calculate to a safe (and winning) position.

While my opening play here was not necessarily optimal, it got me to a comfortable middlegame position with latent threats and easy play.  After that, it was simply a matter of recognizing opportunities in the position and keeping mentally focused.  Overall, this was a good example of how your positional advantages can be turned into concrete ones, after your opponent ignores them and simply tries to execute his own plan.

[Event "?"] [Site "?"] [Date "????.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "ChessAdmin"] [Black "Class C"] [Result "1-0"] [ECO "A21"] [Annotator "ChessAdmin/Houdini"] [PlyCount "53"] {A1: English Opening: 1...e5 2 Nc3} 1. c4 e5 2. Nc3 f5 {an aggressive move by Black, although he can get away with it in the English. Perhaps it is better to be less committal this early, however, since White as of move 2 now knows what Black's overall strategy will be (kingside expansion/attack).} 3. e3 { this is a slower, more solid option for White.} (3. d4 {scores the best (over 60 percent in the database) and immediately attacks Black's central pawn duo. However, at this point in my career I didn't even consider transposing to a queen pawn opening in this manner.}) 3... Nf6 4. d4 Bb4 $146 {a novel and somewhat dubious gambit offer, although accepting it would not give White a major plus.} (4... e4 {is a standard idea to try and cramp White's game, being the most played option in this position.}) 5. Qb3 {the gambit is declined. The idea is to drive off or get rid of the Bb4 and also eye the a2-g8 diagonal. However, this is a rather committal move for the queen, which becomes vulnerable to harrassment.} (5. dxe5 Ne4 {I had seen this idea, reminiscent of the Budapest Defense, and was worried about the threat of a queen sortie to h4, although this in fact does not do anything useful for Black.} 6. Bd2 (6. Nge2 Qh4 7. g3 $16) 6... Nxc3 (6... Qh4 $4 {here even drops a piece to} 7. Nxe4) 7. Bxc3 Bxc3+ 8. bxc3) (5. Bd2 {is a simple and solid way to decline the pawn.}) 5... exd4 $11 {the best move for Black, breaking up White's center.} 6. Qxb4 dxc3 (6... Na6 {it seems better to harrass the queen and develop a piece rather than immediately allow her a good outpost on c3. The knight could then go to c5 later, the benefit of developing to a6 rather than c6.}) 7. Qxc3 { White now has a comfortable and easy position to play, with great diagonals available aimed at Black's kingside.} O-O 8. Bd3 d6 9. Nf3 (9. b3 {immediately would be more flexible, reserving placement of the knight.}) (9. Ne2 {would be a better square for the knight, as f4 looks like an excellent outpost.}) 9... Nc6 10. a3 (10. b4 {could also be played immediately.}) 10... a5 11. b3 { although Black stopped the b4 advance, White is still happy to get his bishop to b2 eventually.} Qe7 (11... Ne4 {is an idea for Black that would at least temporarily disrupt White's setup.}) 12. O-O Ne5 $6 {this results in White having additional pressure against Black's center and on the long diagonal. Again ...Ne4 was possible, as well as the simple developing move ...Bd7.} 13. Nxe5 dxe5 14. Bb2 {White's two bishops and the battery on the long diagonal look very nice.} Re8 15. b4 {White intends c5, perceptively notes Houdini via the Fritz interface.} b6 16. Rfd1 {an essential preparatory move, activating the rook.} Qf7 $6 {this exacerbates Black's vulnerability on the a2-g8 diagonal. Black intends to transfer his queen to the kingside, but this is too slow of a plan, given White's imminent threats.} (16... e4 17. Be2 Be6 $14) 17. c5 $16 {this point of this move is to open the c4 and b5 squares to possible occupation by the bishop. Tactics are now in the air, given Black's vulnerabilities and White's well-placed pieces.} Qh5 $2 (17... Kh8 $142 $14 { is the best option Black has, says Houdini.}) 18. Bb5 {and now Black's light-square weakness and lack of development is fatal for him, as White has too many active threats. Worth noting is the important role of the Rd1 in dominating the d-file.} Ne4 $2 {played after a good deal of thought, my opponent was evidently relying on his next move to put me away. While it doesn't work, it's at least a good practical try in a losing position.} (18... axb4 19. Qxb4 Bb7 (19... Rf8 20. cxb6 {with the threat of winning the Rf8 after Bc4+}) 20. Bxe8 Rxe8 $18) 19. Bxe8 {I spent enough time calculating here to make sure that this was safe.} Qe2 {played relatively quickly, indicating that my opponent had intended to reach this position.} 20. Qe1 {I had found this defense and thought it the only move for White. It is a sure win, although Houdini finds a more spectacular one by threatening mate in turn.} ( 20. Qxe5 Qxf2+ 21. Kh1 Qxb2 {necessary to stop the mate threats.} 22. Qxb2) 20... Qxb2 21. Bc6 {I had calculated this far on move 19, seeing that Black could not avoid the multiple threats to the Ra8 and Bc8, with Rd8+ availabile as a follow-up.} axb4 (21... Ra7 22. Bxe4 fxe4 23. Rd8+ Kf7 24. Rxc8) (21... Rb8 22. Rd8+ Kf7 23. cxb6 cxb6 24. Bxe4 fxe4 25. Qc1 $18) 22. Bxa8 Ba6 23. Bxe4 {this was focused on eliminating any possible counterplay by Black, who could now resign, although he plays on for a few more moves.} fxe4 24. axb4 Bd3 25. Qd2 Qb3 26. Qa2 Qxa2 27. Rxa2 1-0

Reloader tactic: Candidates 2014 - Round 2

I could not pass up the chance to highlight the following reloader tactic, which I think is an outstanding example of the concept, in this game from Round 2 of the ongoing Candidates tournament.  Conceptually, one can see that the Black queen has very few squares and is nearly trapped; it just requires understanding how to trap it, which in this case means moving a knight to e4 - twice in a row.  Also another useful example in a broader sense of the importance of CCT, in this case the threat being to trap the queen, regardless of the fact that the first knight can be taken.

Video analysis of the game by Kingcrusher

Annotated Game #118: A slip in the Slav; or, the case of the missing pawn capture

Two main features of this third-round tournament game stand out for me.  First is the seeming slip of 6...b4? which is a creatively bad pawn sacrifice in the opening.  Even though my opponent did not directly punish it, the decision led to problems in the initial phase of the game.  Second is the mutual blindness of myself and my opponent, lasting for a large chunk of the game, over the possibility of Black's pawn capture (bxa3) on the queenside.  At a number of points it would have given me a significant, perhaps decisive, advantage.  It is an interesting example of the importance of not dismissing CCT options, especially obvious ones.  I can say that this was primarily a thinking process failure on my part, since I failed to re-examine the possibilities in the position as the game went on, after dismissing the idea to begin with.

[Event "?"] [Site "?"] [Date "????.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "Class C"] [Black "ChessAdmin"] [Result "1-0"] [ECO "D15"] [Annotator "ChessAdmin/Houdini"] [PlyCount "91"] [EventDate "2012.01.??"] [EventType "swiss"] [EventRounds "7"] {D15: Slav Defence: 4 Nc3 a6 and gambit lines after 4 Nc3 dxc4} 1. d4 d5 2. c4 c6 3. Nf3 Nf6 4. Nc3 dxc4 5. e3 b5 6. a3 {a quite passive move.} (6. Ne5 { is an aggressive try, for example:} Bb7 7. a4 a6 8. b3 cxb3 9. Qxb3 e6 10. axb5 axb5 11. Rxa8 Bxa8 12. Nxb5 cxb5 13. Bxb5+ Nfd7 14. O-O Bd5 15. Qa4 f6 16. Nxd7 Nxd7 17. Bd2 Bd6 18. Rc1 Ke7 19. Qa7 Bxh2+ 20. Kxh2 Qb8+ {Ricardi,P (2470) -Ginzburg,M (2400) Buenos Aires 1994 1-0}) (6. a4 {is standard here, though.} b4 {and Black plays ...a5 after the Nc3 retreats.}) 6... b4 $146 {Black scores extremely well from this position with just about any other reasonable move. Here my newfound creativity, based on examining the standard idea of ...b4 regardless of White played, was unsound.} (6... Bb7 7. g3 e6 8. Bg2 a6 9. O-O Be7 10. b3 cxb3 11. Qxb3 Nbd7 12. a4 O-O 13. axb5 cxb5 14. Ba3 Rc8 15. Bxe7 Qxe7 16. Ne2 Nb6 17. Kh1 Nc4 18. Rfc1 Bxf3 19. Bxf3 Nd2 20. Qd3 Nxf3 21. e4 { Le,T-Nguyen Thi Hanh (1969) Da Lat VIE 2011 0-1 (39)}) (6... Bf5 7. Nh4 Bg6 8. Be2 e6 9. Nxg6 hxg6 10. Bf3 Nd5 11. e4 Nxc3 12. bxc3 Nd7 13. Bf4 Qa5 14. Qc1 Be7 15. h3 Rc8 16. Bd1 g5 17. Bd2 c5 18. Qb2 cxd4 19. cxd4 c3 20. Qa2 cxd2+ 21. Kf1 {Kovalenko,S (2300)-Zubashev,V Kharkov 2004 0-1}) (6... g6 7. e4 $11) 7. Na2 {White decides not to take the pawn on offer, trusting too much that Black knew what he was doing.} (7. axb4 e6 8. Bxc4 Bxb4 $16 {and although material is equal, White now has a lead in development, superior piece activity, and only one weak isolated pawn versus two for Black.}) 7... a5 8. Bxc4 e6 9. O-O Nbd7 {Black is behind in development, says Houdini via the Fritz interface.} 10. b3 {this allows Black to immediately equalize.} (10. Bd2 {would have both developed a piece and forced a resolution of the queenside pawn structure.} bxa3 11. bxa3 Bxa3) 10... Be7 11. Qc2 Bb7 {defending the c-pawn and moving to a future potentially useful diagonal.} 12. Bb2 {better to do this after the pawns are exchanged.} (12. axb4 axb4 13. Bb2 O-O $11) 12... O-O {here I didn't even consider the pawn capture as a candidate move, thinking it was more important to move along with development.} (12... bxa3 {is simple and annoying for White.} 13. Bc1 $15 {Black's weak a3 pawn will eventually fall, but in the meantime it's at least helped retard White's development and restricted his dark-square bishop.}) 13. Nc1 {White needs to get the knight back in the game.} c5 {this pawn break is eventually needed in all variations.} 14. Qe2 Rc8 { played on the general principle of activating your rooks in the middlegame. However, this rook could be useful on the a-file and did not need to move.} ( 14... cxd4 15. Nxd4 Nb6 16. axb4 (16. Bd3 bxa3 17. Bxa3 Bxa3 18. Rxa3 e5 $15) 16... Nxc4 17. bxc4 axb4 {for example would give Black the two bishops and somewhat better prospects for his pieces.}) 15. Nd3 cxd4 16. Bxd4 $6 (16. axb4 dxe3 17. bxa5 exf2+ 18. Nxf2 Bd5 $11) (16. Nxd4 {also works fine for White.}) 16... Nb6 $6 (16... bxa3 $17 {continues to be resolutely ignored by Black, who could obtain a significant advantage.}) 17. Nde5 (17. axb4 Nxc4 18. bxc4 axb4 $11) 17... Nxc4 18. Nxc4 Ba6 {the double pin (against queen and rook) here is annoying but not decisive.} (18... a4 {with a pawn sacrifice is a better version of the idea, the point being if} 19. bxa4 $2 {then} (19. axb4 axb3 20. Na5 $11) 19... Ba6 {comes with much more bite against the underprotected knight.} 20. Rfc1 bxa3 21. Nfe5 Qd5 $19) 19. Rac1 $2 {White is obviously concerned about protecting the Nc4 sufficiently, but this is a mistake.} (19. Rfd1 {is an improved rook development, lining up against Black's queen and moving away one of the pieces behind the pinned knight.}) 19... Qd5 $6 { here I wanted to get the queen into the action and had more desire to attack than calculate.} (19... a4 {now interestingly is much stronger for Black, due to the White rook having moved off the key a-file.} 20. axb4 axb3 21. Rfd1 Bxb4 22. Nfe5 Qd5 23. Ba1 Bxc4 24. Nxc4 Qb5 $19) (19... bxa3 {is simple and very good for Black.}) 20. Nfe5 {both White and Black continue to ignore the queenside pawn threats.} (20. Rfd1) 20... Qe4 21. Qb2 {moving one piece out of the pin, but this still allows Black to grab the a3 pawn if he wants.} (21. axb4 Bxb4 22. Rfd1 $11) 21... Rfd8 (21... bxa3 22. Qa1 Qh4 $17) 22. Rfe1 (22. axb4 Bxb4 23. Bb6 Re8 {and White has a space advantage plus threats to the a5 pawn, although Black is not without resources. For example:} 24. Ra1 Qf5 25. Rfc1 Ng4 26. Nxg4 Qxg4 27. Bxa5 Bxc4 28. bxc4 Bxa5 29. Rxa5 Rxc4 $11) 22... Nd7 {in my first quick review of the game, I blamed this move for the loss. In fact, it's just fine, although at first glance it denudes Black's kingside of defenders and loses the g7 pawn.} 23. Nxd7 Rxd7 24. Bxg7 $2 Bxc4 {this is the good idea for continuing the attack, although psychologically at this point I felt I was under heavy pressure to justify the loss of the g-pawn and did not play optimally.} (24... bxa3 $1) 25. Rxc4 (25. bxc4 $5 bxa3 26. Qa1 Rxc4 $17) 25... Rxc4 26. bxc4 Qg4 $2 {blindness to the queenside pawn capture continues. This is the final turning point in the game, as psychologically I become negative about my remaining chances.} (26... bxa3 27. Qa1 Rd2 $19) 27. Bd4 $14 {I had spotted this defense earlier but could not see anything better for Black.} h5 {an attempt at an attack, played out of feelings of desperation.} ( 27... e5 {I had seen this as a possibility but could not see the most effective continuation, so rejected it.} 28. h3 (28. Bxe5 Rd1 $11) 28... Qe6 29. Bxe5 bxa3 30. Qb5 $14 {and Black has decent if not full compensation for the pawn, as his passed a-pawn is more advanced, with another one behind it.}) 28. h3 $16 Qh4 29. Rc1 {White plans c5, notes Houdini.} (29. axb4 {is an improved version of the idea.} Bxb4 30. Rc1 $16) 29... f6 $2 {this loses more quickly, but I had been concerned about the threat of Bh8 followed by Qg7.} ( 29... e5 30. Bxe5 bxa3 $16 {puts up a bit more resistance}) (29... bxa3 { is no good because of} 30. Qb8+ Rd8 (30... Bf8 31. c5 $18) 31. Qe5 $18) 30. c5 $18 Kf7 31. c6 Rd8 32. c7 Rc8 33. Qe2 Bd6 34. Bb6 (34. Qd3 {is subtle but very effective, lining up against the hanging Bd6.} Qg5 35. Bc5 Rxc7 36. Qxd6 $18) 34... Qe4 35. Qa6 Rg8 {my opponent had obviously missed this mate threat, by his reaction. This is defense by swindle threat.} 36. Qf1 (36. Kf1 {is what the computer recommends, but it is psychologically difficult for a human under pressure to play.} Qxg2+ 37. Ke2 $18 Bg3 38. Rf1 {and White holds, with Black having to lose material to stop the pawn promotion.}) 36... Qb7 (36... b3 { immediately is what Houdini prefers, but I was under some time pressure and wanted to have a lock on c8 first.} 37. f3 Qb7 38. Qd3 $16) 37. Bxa5 (37. g3 $5 {would remove the mate threat on g2.} Qxb6 38. c8=Q Rxc8 39. Rxc8 $18) 37... b3 $16 38. Rb1 Bxc7 {this unnecessarily loses a pawn.} (38... Qd5) 39. Bxc7 Qxc7 40. Rxb3 $18 {now it's hard to see White being unable to win, with the position simplified.} Qc6 {with the idea of keeping the threat against g2 active.} 41. Rb5 (41. a4 Rg5 42. Rb5 Rg8 $18) 41... Qe4 $2 {this misses a very useful deflection tactic:} (41... Rxg2+ 42. Qxg2 Qxb5 $16 {and this is now, in practical terms, a difficult endgame for White to win at the Class level.}) 42. a4 $18 Rd8 {by this point it was late in the evening and I had stopped checking for my opponent's threats, missing his next move.} (42... Qc6 43. f3 Rc8 44. a5 $18) 43. Qe2 {now the h-pawn will fall to White's queen and Black's position along with it. I could have resigned here.} f5 44. Qxh5+ Kf6 45. Qh6+ Ke7 46. Qg7+ (46. Qg7+ Ke8 47. Rb7 Qxb7 48. Qxb7 $18) 1-0

A stress-free Slav Defense?

I found fascinating the idea presented in this Chess Improver post, which highlights a little-known and analyzed main line variation (5...a5) for Black.

In general, it's something of a Holy Grail for opening study to find sidelines - especially as early as move 5 - that are easy to learn and give good results, allowing you to avoid lots of complex theory to have to understand and memorize.  Even if such lines aren't technically the best, if they're sound and give you a good, easily playable position heading into the middlegame, then it's still a net plus for your chess study and practice; you can then spend your time and energy on other weaknesses in your game (and there always will be more weaknesses than you can comfortably tackle, at the amateur level).

In this particular case it's clear you still have to understand what's going on in the resulting position, but with relatively simple play it seems that Black can do well.  Perhaps I'll try it out the line myself later on.