How to Think in Chess - Preventing Opponent's Combinations and Prophylactic Thinking

Keres Memorial 2013, Vancouver, Highlights of my Round 5 game

How to Think in Chess - Preventing Opponent's Plan and Prophylactic Thinking

Keres Memorial 2013, Vancouver, Highlights of my Round 3 game

Chess Game against an IM - Prophylactic Thinking and Anticipating Opponent's Moves

Keres Memorial 2013, Vancouver, Highlights of my Round 2 game

Chess game analysis - Prophylactic Thinking and Anticipating Opponent's Moves

Keres Memorial 2013, Vancouver, Highlights of my Round 1 game

Feeling critical moments in a chess game

One important skill for a chess player is to feel the moment in a game when you really have to think hard and an make an important decision or two. How well do you sense such critical situations? In analysis, you or your engine can always identify the blunders, when advantage switches from one side to the other. But what about during the game? To measure your skill – I suggest recording time spent on each move on a score sheet during the game. While going through the game afterwards – it will be not hard to tell whether you spent enough time during the critical moments. You can also improve your time management by identifying moves on which you spent more time than necessary!

Looking at time spent will also reveal what of opponent’s moves came to you as a surprise…

Here is an example played with 1 hr 30 minutes per game, and 1 minute increments:
Yoos - Jiganchine, Keres Memorial 2009.
1. e4 c6
2. d4 d5
3. e5 c5
4. dxc5 e6
5. Be3 Nd7
6. Nf3 (1-24) Qc7 (1-29)
7. c4 (1-19) dxc4 (1-12)
8. Qa4 Bxc5 (1-11)
9. Bxc5 Qxc5
10. Nc3 Nh6 (59)
11. Ne4 (1-12) Qc6 (49)

Without even looking at the board or replaying the moves, this time spent after moves tells a story! Looking at the moves again, what can we see?
1. e4 c6
2. d4 d5
3. e5 c5
4. dxc5 e6
5. Be3 Nd7

The main line now is 6. Bb5
6. Nf3 (1-24)

Jack was spending several minutes here, so I was already feeling that my opening choice was not completely bad. But was he trying to remember theory, or just choosing which line to play to surprise me the most? He in fact had already played Nf3 in one of his games before!
6 ….Qc7 (1-29)
Now, the usual move is 6… Bc5, but because Black plays 6… Qc7 against 6.Bb5, I played the same move without much thinking. Clearly I did not sense an important difference between 6. Nf3 and 6. Bb5
7. c4 (1-19)
White must have either had this prepared at home and he was double checking, or it was part of his plan with Nf3. Either way, he was not spending too much time here yet.

7… dxc4 (1-12)
The almost 20 move think on move 7 shows that clearly I had not expected 7.c4, even though this is a somewhat common idea, and makes more sense with the queen on c7, rather than on d8.
8. Qa4 Bxc5 (1-11)
Only reasonable move, so makes sense to play it fast.
9. Bxc5 Qxc5
10. Nc3
 
Now Black has to choose between Nh6 and Ne7, so here comes a 10 minute think.
10… Nh6 (59)
11. Ne4 (1-12)

Again, White is playing reasonably fast, and at this point Black has to choose between 11… Qc6 and 11… b5 !?
11… Qc6 (49)
11 moves into it, I I already spent almost half of my time. I carried on in a similar fashion, got into time trouble and made a decisive blunder on move 16 already. All that could have arguably been prevented had a put a bit more thought on my critical decision on move 6, which I clearly did not!

David Bronstein had also been advocating including time spent as part of the game scores – since it is just as much part of the game as the actual moves! You can learn more about the trends in you play - going through the records of my games I noticed that in most games that I have lost – I had been spending more time than my opponent starting from the opening – this game against Yoos is a typical example.

It is a good tool for evaluating your overall understanding of the game as well. Mark Dvoretsky has an example in one of his books where he played an anti-positional move and immediately realized its flaws. He then goes on to explain that the fact that he played it very fast means to the coach that he is impulsive, whereas if he had spent a long time on it – that would have revealed poor positional understanding.

White to win – find the combination

Johnson – Jiganchine, Keres Memorial 2007, Vancouver

White to move

Watch this YouTube video to see the solution.

Keres Memorial 2010 games - with Videos

Keres Memorial 2010 was held last weekend in Richmond, British Columbia. While last year I wrote up a summary with diagrams, this time I instead captured fresh impressions of my games into several Youtube videos:

Round 2 game - A complex middlegame in the Sicilian Dragon, with Black throwing multiple sacrifices at my position to keep his initiative going. This turns out to be an effective strategy in time trouble! Part 2 shows how the game concluded.
 

Round 3 game - White sacrificed the d4 pawn in the well known variation of the French Defence. In return he gets faster development, and soon - the material advantage. A fairly simple and somewhat instructive game (I say “simple”, but of course just like any game - took a lot of effort over the board).
 

The last round game where both players needed to win. Black's king was a bit more exposed and that allowed me to create an unexpected attack. Black overlooked a very unexpected defensive resource and soon had to resign because his queenside collapsed, and dark squares around his king were catastrophically weak.

PS. My Youtube channel now has 40 chess-related videos, feel free to watch more clips and subscribe :-)

Chess - tactics serving strategy

Jiganchine – Jack Cheng, Keres Memorial 2008

Black to move. How to best deal with the attack against the b5 pawn?
In this position, typical for Archangel-Moller variations of the Spanish opening, my opponent took an "easy" way out and just pushed the pawn forward with 15 … b5-b4 That left him with a severely weakened pawn structure on the queenside, and soon White won a pawn, and later – the game:
16. Nc4 Na5 17. Nxb6 cxb6 18. Bxb7 Nxb7 19. Qb3 a5 20. Qd5 Re7 21. Qc6  +-

The weakness of light squares leads to the loss of the pawn on b6. To paraphrase what David Bronstein said – the weakness of the light squares, manifests itself in opponent coming on those light squares and attacking your pawns and pieces that are placed on dark squares.

Did Black have a better continuation? There was a tactical solution! Black just had to ignore the threat to b5, and protect the bishop with 15 … Ra8-b8! The point reveals itself after:  17. Nxb5 Nxd4!!

White to move, he no longer has any advantage.

This quite a computer trick; my opponent must have missed it and was forced to play the weakening b5-b4; this would have allowed him to equalize, since White does not have anything better than 18. Nbxd4 Bxd5 19. exd5 Rxe1+ 20. Qxe1 Bxd4 =

This is a great example to illustrate the idea that tactics should be used to help your strategy. In this case – Black’s strategy should have been to give up the b5 pawn but actively counter attack White’s center by putting pressure on e4 and d4 with all of Black’s pieces.

Paul Keres Memorial 2002 – part 3 - combinations

To conclude posting extracts from my 7 year old En Passant article about this tournament, here are a few tactical positions:

(6) Leblanc,Paul - Spears,Nicholas [D02]
Keres mem 27th Vancouver (2.10), 18.05.2002

Black to move

16...Rh1+ 0-1

(7) Wu,Howard - Daswani,Ben [C09]
Keres mem 27th Vancouver (4.21), 19.05.2002

White to move

White is completely winning, but the finishing move is neat. 17.Qh5! 1-0

(8) Lee,Mau-Seng - Stanford,Mike [B45]
Keres mem 27th Vancouver (5.7), 19.05.2002

White played 25.Bd2 overlooking a queen sacrifice:
Black to move
25...Qxh2+ 0-1

Paul Keres Memorial 2002 – Part 2 – two bishops in the endgame

Part 1. I did not perform too well in that edition of the Keres Memorial, but the first round win was very satisfying:

(5) Jiganchine,Roman - Maheux,Pierre [B32]
Keres mem 27th Vancouver (1.9), 17.05.2002

1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 e5 5.Nb5 a6 6.Nd6+ Bxd6 7.Qxd6 Qf6 Starting a new opening is always a painful process, so I felt myself really uncomfortable about the fact that in this position I was already out of book. 8.Qxf6 [Theoretical 8.Qd1 Qg6 seemed to involve some subtleties so I decided to go for a simple solution, even though it Black might get good chances to equalize immediately.] 8...Nxf6 9.Nc3 d5 10.exd5 Nb4 11.Bd3 Nfxd5 12.Nxd5 Nxd5 13.Bd2 Diagram

And here I got really happy about my two bishops. In this pawn structure the control of the 'd' file is what each player strives for to get an advantage, but for now it is blocked by 3 minor pieces, and I decided that my chance is instead to put pressure on the e5 pawn.13...Be6 14.0-0 [14.0-0-0!?] 14...0-0-0 15.Ba5 Rde8 [15...Rd7!] 16.Rfe1 f6 17.g3 Diagram

preventing ...Nf4. Depriving opponent's knight of outposts is a common strategy when possessing two bishops.17...Ne7 18.c3 Kb8 19.Bb6 Nc8 20.Be3 Rd8 21.Bf1 Bd5 22.f4 Diagram

Hoping to open up the position for the bishops22...exf4? Black cooperates... 23.Bxf4+ Ka8 24.c4 Bc6 25.b4 Now White has a large advantage: I managed to get my pawns advance, and Black's pieces are pushed back to the last ranks. 25...Rhe8 26.b5 axb5 27.cxb5 Be4 28.Bc7 Diagram

With a very tempting idea to set up a mating net: now White just has to get a rook on the 'a' file. 28...Rd4 29.Rad1 Rxd1 30.Rxd1 Re7 31.b6 Bc6 The threat was 32. Rd8 Bf5 33.Rd5 and Ra5. 32.Bh3 Re8 33.Rd3 Bb5 34.Ra3+ Ba6 Diagram

35.Rxa6+ I was really pleased that the game ended with this mini-combination: the advantage of two bishops was converted in its pure form: [35.Rxa6+ bxa6 36.Bg2+ White uses only his bishops to deliver mate.] 1-0
You can replay this game in a viewer:

Paul Keres Memorial 2002 – part 1 – 3 wins by Bobby Meng

In 2002 Keres memorial - Bobby Meng was provided a sensation result, tying for first place with Georgi Orlov and Jack Yoos among others, beating the new Canadian Champion Pascal Charbonneau in the process. I wrote a report about the tournament for En Passant, so here is the selection of Bobby`s games. I analysed 3 games in that article:
Meng-Wu
Pupols – Meng
Adam - Meng

(1) Meng,Fanhao - Wu,Howard [D42]
Keres mem 27th Vancouver (1.10), 17.05.2002

1.e4 c5 2.c3 Bobby is a loyal supporter of this move and it does bring him good results. 2...Nf6 3.e5 Nd5 4.d4 cxd4 5.cxd4 Nc6 6.Nf3 d6 7.exd6 e6 8.Nc3 Bxd6 9.Bd3 0-0 10.0-0 Diagram

10...Be7 [10...Nce7!?] 11.a3 [I prefer 11.Re1 , but Bobby usually goes for queenside play in these IQP positions] 11...Bf6 suddenly the game transposed into the major theoretical QGD line. White is doing well in this line, so I don't think Black's two move manoeuvre Bd6-e7-f6 was really worth the time investment 12.Be3 [Again, Bobby ignores main lines: 12.Be4 scores well for White] 12...g6 13.Rc1 Nxc3 14.bxc3 e5 [14...b6 15.Bh6 Bg7 16.Bg5 Qc7 17.c4 Bb7 18.d5 Ne5 19.Be4 Qd6 was Gelfand-Van Wely, 1998. The position soon simplified to a draw: 20.Bf4 exd5 21.Bxd5 Bxd5 22.Bxe5 Bxe5 23.Nxe5 Qxe5 24.Qxd5 Qxd5 25.cxd5 Rfd8 26.Rfd1 Rac8=] 15.Bb5 Bg4 16.d5 e4? a miscalculation [>=16...Ne7+/=] 17.dxc6 exf3 18.Qxd8 Raxd8 Diagram

19.Bc5? Now Black is doing ok again [19.cxb7!+-] 19...fxg2 20.Kxg2 bxc6 21.Bxf8 [21.Bxc6!? Rd3 22.Bxf8 (22.f3 Rc8 23.Be4 Rxc3 24.Rxc3 Bxc3 25.fxg4 Rxc5 26.Rc1 Bd4=) 22...Bh3+ 23.Kg1 Bxf1 24.Bc5! Bh3 25.Bxa7 Bxc3 26.Be4 Rd7 and Black is ok] 21...cxb5 22.Bc5 Rd3?! [>=22...a6] 23.f3 Be6 24.Rfd1 Rxd1 25.Rxd1 Bxc3 26.Rd8+ Kg7 27.Bxa7 Bb2?! [27...b4!? 28.axb4 Bxb4 29.Bd4+ Kh6; 27...Kf6] 28.Bd4+! Bxd4 29.Rxd4 Diagram

and White managed to win this endgame29...Kf6 30.Kf2 Ke5 31.Ke3 Bb3 32.Rd7 Ke6 33.Rb7 Bc4 34.Kd4 g5 35.Kc5 h5 36.Kd4 [36.Rxb5 Bxb5 37.Kxb5 is not more than a draw for White 37...Kd6 38.Kb6 g4 39.fxg4 hxg4 40.a4 f5] 36...f6 37.Rc7? [37.a4 Be2 38.Ke3 Bc4 39.axb5 was winning on a spot] 37...Kf5 38.Ke3 Kg6 39.Rc5 Kh6 40.Ke4 Kg6 Diagram

41.h4 [Bobby's calculation (or intuition?) is precise: 41.Rxc4 here (and earlier) does not win: 41...bxc4 42.a4 f5+ 43.Kd4 g4 44.fxg4 fxg4 45.a5 h4 46.a6 g3 47.hxg3 hxg3 and Black queens with check] 41...gxh4 [41...Be2 42.hxg5 fxg5 43.Rc6+ Kg7 44.Kf5 Bxf3] 42.f4 h3 43.Kf3 Bf1 44.Kg3 Be2(.) [44...Kh6 45.Kh4 h2 46.Rxh5+ Kg6 47.f5+! Kf7 48.Kg3] 45.Kxh3 Kf7 46.Kh4 Ke6 47.Rc2 Bd3 48.Rc3 Bf1 49.Kxh5 Kf5 50.Rc2 Bd3 51.Rf2 Ke4 52.Kg4 f5+ [52...Ke3 53.Rf3+ Ke4 54.Rh3] 53.Kg5 Ke3 54.Rb2 Ke4 55.Rb4+ Kd5 56.Kf6 Kc6 57.Ke5 Kc5 58.Rd4 Bb1 59.Rd5+ Kc4 60.Ke6 Bd3 61.Rxd3 1-0

(2) Pupols,Viktors - Meng,Fanhao [D12]
Keres mem 27th Vancouver (5.5), 19.05.2002

27...Kf7 In this game Bobby got lucky: having been outplayed, he is now receiving a couple of strong blows: [27...Kd8!?] 28.g5 fxg5 29.Nxd5!? exd5 30.Bxd5+ Kg7 Diagram

31.Rc6!? [31.Bxa8] 31...Qd8 32.Rg1 Re8 Diagram

33.Qc1? A strange decision, having conducted the attack with great energy White suddenly retreats. [Winning was 33.Qf3! Rf8 34.Qh5 Rf6 35.Rxf6 Nxf6 36.Qxg5 Nxd5 37.Qxg6+ Kf8 38.Rf1++-] 33...Rc8 34.Rxg5 Ndf8 35.Rxc8 Qxc8 36.Qxc8 Rxc8 37.Bb7 Rd8 38.Rg4 Rd6 Diagram

Black consolidated and went on to win this endgame with an extra piece. 0-1

(3) Adam,Valerian - Meng,Fanhao [C50]
Keres mem 27th Vancouver (3.4), 18.05.2002

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.0-0 Nf6 5.d3 d6 6.Be3 Bb6 7.h3 0-0 8.Nc3 Be6 9.Bxb6 axb6 10.Bxe6 fxe6 11.d4 Nd7 12.d5 exd5 13.Nxd5 Nc5 Diagram

I think this is Bobby's best game in the tournament: he manages to play around the White knight on d5 and his own knights start an impressive tango: the semi-open 'f' file, and the h2-h3 advance provide Black with good chances on the kingside.14.c3 Kh8 15.Qe2 Ne7 16.a3 Ng6 17.g3 White covered both d4 and f4, but now the Nf3 lacks support 17...Ne6 18.Qe3 h6 Bobby makes sure that White can never play Ng5, trading off a badly placed N 19.Rad1 Qd7 20.Kh2 Rf7 21.h4 Qb5 Diagram

playing on both flanks reveals a rather mature positional player22.h5 Raf8!? [22...Ne7?! 23.Nxe7 Rxe7 24.Nh4 would have allowed the White N to get to better squares, now he has to go down..] 23.Ng1?! [23.Nd2!?] 23...Ne7 24.b4 Nxd5 25.exd5 Diagram

25...Ng5

Very nice! Black traded off White's strong Nd5, and White is now left out with a passive Ng1 26.f3 Qd7 27.Kg2 Rf6! 28.Qe2 Qf7 29.g4 Rf4 30.c4 Qd7 31.Rde1 Kg8 32.Kg3 Kh8 33.Kg2 e4! Diagram

Now White's pawn structure collapses34.fxe4 Qxg4+ [34...Rxg4+ 35.Kh2 Rxf1 36.Rxf1 Rxe4 was probably an easier way to win - perhaps a bit typical for Bobby: if he sees a good continuation, he sometimes does not stop to look for anything better] 35.Qxg4 Rxg4+ 36.Kh2 Rxf1 37.Rxf1 Rxe4 38.Rf8+ Kh7 39.c5 bxc5 40.bxc5 dxc5 41.Rc8 Re7 42.Kg2 g6 43.hxg6+ Kxg6 Diagram

and having centralized his K, Black won without any difficulties 0-1

Paul Keres Memorial 2009 - overview

Jack Yoos had a great tournament this year, only a month after moving to Vancouver from Montreal. Welcome back, Jack!

Just like I gave an overview of my BC Closed games last October, here are some little notes with quick impressions of my play.

Round 1: LeBlanc – Jiganchine (0-1)

Black to move.

White is a bit better: 16… Rxd6 is not good due to 17. c5 and the knight on d6 is strong.. Since my bishop is also attacked, I decided to move it with a gain of tempo, playing 16… Bg4. White responded with a big blunder – 17.f3??. After Qxd4+, black picks up up two pawns, so the game ended pretty quickly: 17… Qxd4+ 18. Kh1 Bxf3 19. Rad1 Qxd1 20. Qxd1 Bxd1 21. Rxd1 Ne8 0-1

This surely reminded me of my game against Paul from last year’s Keres where after my blunder he had a winning position, but blundered back and lost.

Round 2: Jiganchine – Orlov (1-0)

If you live in BC, Canada then - basically Georgi Orlov is the strongest player you get to regularly see. And after playing in Keres Memorial 6 times – I never actually got to play him – until the 7th tournament. Jack Yoos and Sergei Sokourinski used to have an argument about whether Orlov and Spraggett were of similar strength, and while Jack was convinced (based on his own score against each) that Spraggett is stronger, the very fact of comparison being made speaks volumes.

Black risked a bit more than he should have in the opening, and the ‘star’ move definitely came here, after Black played … c5.

White to move

19. Bc6!

No, this is not me drawing the arrow on the diagram incorrectly - the bishop actually did stop one square short from taking the rook. The rook is not running away (taking it would give Black compensation), instead White totally dominates central squares and increases pressure against c5 pawn with Qd5 coming. After the game Georgi admitted having missed this move. He then had to give a rook for a dark squared bishop, and my light squared bishop live to tell the tale, the game ended after some complications in this position:

White to move

38. Rbf7! and Black resigned since Bf3 mate can’t be prevented without giving up the queen.

After this game – the tournament kind of ended for me – I took a bye, and then still could not play normally since the feeling of having done something special overwhelmed me. This was the first time I played an International Master in my entire life, so to score a win from the first attempt felt quite extraordinary. I realized that Georgi was rusty, and that he comes to Keres Memorial to play risky chess against local amateurs like myself which does mean he loses a game like this once every couple of years, but I still could to get back to my senses (I did try quite hard).

Round 3:  bye (1/2) I was quite exhausted after the previous game, and having been tired before the tournament (this programmer’s been very busy at work recently) – I had planned to take a bye anyway, so this seemed like a good moment for that.

Round 4: Jiganchine – Gentes (1/2-1/2)

24… Qb6

After some manoeuvring by both sides, in this position Kevin offered me a draw, which I accepted. During previous few moves I was mostly focused on keeping positional balance.

Round 5: Pechisker – Jiganchine (1/2 – 1/2)

This was the game that really threw me off balance and probably had to do with my dismal play the next day. Alfred has a style that I find hard to adjust to, so every game against him is usually hard for me. Just like in our last game in the BC Closed, I got a great position out of the opening (Slav defence), but failed to convert.

Black to move

23… Bd5! White has to give up a pawn with 24. e4 just to rescue his tied up pieces.

However a few moves later, the game was somewhere between winning for Black, and a draw and I made a humongous error:

35… a6? allowed 36. Nc5, and suddenly my pawns are weak, pieces are passive, and I am low on time.

That kind of move is hard to explain, but I think, I had planned c6-c5, and was concerned about a5-a6, and Nb3-a5-b7 with counter play. Fortunately this time my desperate measures worked, and in the complications Alfred offered a draw, which I accepted. I was terrified however that I allowed such massive counter play in a technical position.

Round 6: Jiganchine - ChangeHe Li (1/2 – 1/2)

White to move

Another Sicilian Scheveningen, just like in round 4, and again my understanding of position was lacking.
In my quick preparation the morning before the game I had anticipated something similar (an early e4-e5 break), but did not look deep enough.
Here apparently 12.Bxb7 Qxb7 13.Qh5! scores around 90%. I instead played 12. Bf4 and after 12…Nc6 took the knight and offered a draw. I was uncomfortable playing a young improving player, but also getting increasingly worried that I misplayed something (which was kind of true). I also wanted to get some rest before the final round (but had I known that after a draw I would get to play Jack, I would have re-considered).

Round 7: Yoos – Jiganchine (1–0)

I had not lost to Jack Yoos since 1999, but I still remembered the feeling of getting blown off the board before the opening was over. I really wanted to avoid that, so instead of my main opening as Black – I played the line in the Caro-Kann, which I believed to be passive but solid.
Jack played very energetically and still had a very dangerous initiative:

Black to move

Being tired from defending for the last couple of hours - I missed the most obvious threat created by 19.Nc2 – which is Bxc4, and knight has to keep guarding d7, so White gets his pawn back with great position. Trying to get Nh6 into the game - I played 19…f7-f6? (instead Rd8 was better) and after 20.exf6 gxf6 21.Bxc4! and Rhe1 – I made a few more blunders and lost fairly soon (but things were really going downhill at that point). I was very impressed by the way Jack treated this opening variation (and wished I had put up a better resistance).

Keres Memorial 2009

I am planning to play in the Paul Keres Memorial 2009 Open chess tournament this coming weekend. It is a nice annual tournament ran by BC chess enthusiasts to commemorate the fact that Paul Keres’ last tournament win was held in Vancouver in 1975. Even though my last year’s preparation for the tournament was far from perfect, this year it was even worse as in the last couple of months I barely looked at chess. I hope to write a mini-report similar to the one I did last year, but for now I decided to please myself with the collection of little combinations from my own games that I played over the years in the Keres Memorial tournament. In a couple of the diagrams I don't give the solution so you can try to figure out the answer (not very difficult).

Fullbrook – Jiganchine, 2000

Black to move – full details here - http://roman-chess.blogspot.com/2007/09/game-against-nigel-fullbrook.html

Jiganchine – Huber, 2001
  White to move. 26. Ng4 (with a double attack on h6 and e6) was enough for White to break through.

Jiganchine – Maheux, 2002

White to move. White gives forced checkmate, I let you figure out this one yourself.

Jiganchine – Erichsen, 2007

  White to move. 28. Nxh6 gave White a winning advantage, which I later managed to spoil and the game was drawn.

Jiganchine – Poitras, 2008

White to move. 28. g4 traps the queen – Black has to sacrifice a piece to rescue the royal lady.

Keres Memorial 2008 - game over

Keres Memorial 2008 is over, Georgi Orlov and Bindi Cheng tied for 1st place with 5.5/7. These were the two strongest players in the tournament, so this is obviously not a surprpise. Bindi managed to revenge for last year's loss, and defeated Georgi in a complicated game, but himself lost to Vicente Lee. I myself tied for 4th place with 4.5 points out of 7, same as last year, and as in 2006. I am satisfied with the result, but the quality of my play in some of the games was awful. I did not take any byes this year, so in the middle of the tournament I lost concentration and started to make blunders. Here is the brief breakdown, in a diary form:

Round 1 - Jiganchine-Jack Cheng (1981) - 1:0

I was not too familiar with this line in Ruy Lopez, but soon after the opening got a large advantage. I won a pawn, but Black got some counterplay on the kingside. Fortunately Black had his knight stuck on b7 without any moves for most of the game, so when the position opened up I won with the decisive attack against Black's king. I was happy with my play in this game.

Round 2 - Bindi Cheng (2360)-Jiganchine- 1:0

This one was a true disaster. I played a line in Slav defense that I last time looked at about 9 years ago. Ever since Bindi came to BC 3 year ago I had a hard time in my games against him (a few difficult draws and a loss), but this time I did not even get out of the opening. What I vaguely remembered to be a book line, contained a few calculational problems for Black to solve, but I just could not decide which move was safe and which one was not, so by move 20 I was dead lost (down a pawn and in a terribly passive position). That does happen to me with Black pieces every once in a while against strong chess players (2300+) - they just play natural moves, and I am scrambling to remember something, ending up playing weak moves...

Round 3 - Jiganchine-John Niksic(1950) - 1/2:1/2

I played a passive line in Open Sicilian, and Black was better around move 30. John got a typical good Sicilian endgame, but misplayed it at some point (it was not obvious) and I got some initiative (strong passed pawn supported by a bishop). I was however down to 10 minutes on the clock (with increments), so I started to repeat when the opportunity arose. I had a feeling my technique did let me down - it is my goal, after all, to grind down lower rated players in slightly better endgames. Given that I don't study openings and play only one tournament a year - sacrificial attacks are not exactly what I should play for.

Round 4 - Andrei Kostin (2060)- Jiganchine - 1/2:1/2

I had some difficult choices in the opening as Black, but very soon Andrei made a couple of passive moves, and got a position with bad IQP. Again I was hoping to grind down my opponent, but instead I allowed lots of counterplay (all starting with White knight arriving on c5, never a good sign in IQP positions). Again, I got a better endgame (again - strong passed pawn supported by a bishop), but could not convert. I turned down a repetition, but a few moves later was glad that the position simplified to a draw.

Round 5 - Jiganchine-Dan Erichsen (2056) - 1/2:1/2

Ruy Lopez as White was a good sign, but in a Chigorin with ..cd my opponent seemed about equally familiar with the plans. I wasted a tempo on Bc2-b1-d3, but then he gave up the 'c' file, so there was hope for a complex struggle, but I made a terrible move Kh2, and with the Black queen on b8 that gave Black a chance to open up a diagonal against my king with d6-d5, winning at least a pawn. However, my opponent used that opportunity to ... offer to me a draw 3 moves later, despite him having a winning position. Draw by reputation, as John Emms calls it!

Round 6 - Paul Leblanc (1950) - Jiganchine - 0:1

I used to win lots of games like this when I was a junior: White plays d4 opening, followed by passive middlegame, trades into inferior endgame, putting all pawns on same color as a bishop. Should be an easy win, but it was not. I thought I found a plan with the pawn breakthrough; it seemed like it would work. However I missed a very simple defensive move, and my own rook was trapped on g4, surrounded by White pieces and pawns. Paul had to sacrifice an exchange which would leave me in total zugzwang, but instead he dropped a piece to a one move combination. Very lucky escape for me!

Round 7 - Jiganchine - Luc Poitras (2192)- 1:0

I was disgusted with my play in previous game and considered withdrawing, but decided to play since it was too late to worry about my performance. This game actually went very well for me, where in Kalashnikov Sicilian, Luc mistakenly simplified to a position where not only his d5 was a weakness, but also the d6 pawn was very hard to hold. He tried to create a kingside counter attack with knight and queen, but that only lead to his queen getting trapped via a tactical shot. This is what happens when luck is on your side - beating stronger opponents does not involve so much effort (or we were just both very tired and barely cared about the outcome).



The conclusion for me is that opening play was taking a lot of my effort, and combined with generally being in bad shape that led to missing more chances later in the games. Blunders like the ones in rounds 5 and 6 are also a very serious warning sign, as they did not happen to me in Keres'06 or Keres'07 as much.

Grandmaster Preparation ...Not

How do you prepare for a chess tournament, give that time available and resolve to win are in limited amounts? In 2006 I decided that I need to play at least one serious tournament a year. Since Keres Memorial is the only regular open tournament held in Vancouver, BC, the choice is clear. So that's why I am planning to play in Keres Memorial 2008 in less than a week. The process of preparing for it will be however quite different from what Lev Polugaevsky described in his classic book "Grandmaster Preparation"

Polugaevsky (1934-1995) was known for spending countless hours analyzing positions from his opening repertoire to great depth and preparing forced variations where he would foresee arising positions up to the point where his attack would give a clear win. Here is what a human mortal like me is more likely to do for a preparation for a given tournament:

1) Go over my file of openings and decide on what I actually want to play. For White I have been sticking to 1.e4 for nearly all my games since year 2000, but for Black there are definitely some decisions to be made.

2) Play some games on ICC to at least remember how the pieces move. Normally I take this to the next level, and go through the online games I played in more depth later (as in this example)- usually to see if I made any crucial mistakes in the opening. This time the goal is just to get back into shape as soon as possible. Ideally I would play a couple of training games with the same time control as the real tournament, but I have not done this for a very long time, and won't have time for it this time either. Last time I did this before a big tournament was before Keres 2001, and not surprisingly I did quite well that year (2280 performance). Practicing for a specific time control really helps to manage time better, especially during the first couple of rounds.

3) Do some tactics, either on a computer, or from a printed sheet. Tactics tend to decide most of the games at most levels, beginner or grandmaster. So being able to calculate well and efficiently is crucial, and a tactical trick can always save a game that has gone wrong otherwise (because of opening or whatever).

Like a real "chess pro", I took two days of vacation from my day job to take care of these steps, just so that I am less likely to hang a piece in round 1. Will I get to play Orlov this year? Otherwise, I don't think this tournament will be very different for me from 2006 or 2007.

Keres Memorial 2007 - decisive game

Georgi Orlov (2497) - Bindi Cheng (2215) [D13]

Keres mem 32nd/Vancouver (6) 2007

Keres memorial 2008 is less than two months away, so here is the most interesting and important game from last year's open. Georgi Orlov won the tournament yet again, with this game against Bindi Cheng being clearly the decisive battle.

1. d4 Nf6 2. Nf3 d5 3. c4 c6 4. Nc3 a6 5. cxd5 cxd5 6. Bf4 Nc6 7. Rc1 Bf5 8. Ne5 e6 9. e3 Nxe5 10. Bxe5 Nd7 11. Bf4 Qb6 12. Bd3 Bxd3 13. Qxd3 Qxb2 14. O-O Qa3

15. e4 White logically opens up the center - Black king is still in the center. 15... Bd6 16. Bxd6 Qxd6 17. exd5 exd5 18. Rfe1+ # 18... Kf8 Black's rooks are disconnected and can't be developed easily, so it's obvious that white has quite sufficient compensation for the pawn. 19. Qf5 Nb6 20. Rb1 h5

21. Na4!? This sacrifi ce is a logical conclusion of White's play, but is far from easy to calculate all the consequences. 21... Nxa4 22. Rxb7 Qf6 22... Qg6 23. Ra7! 23. Qxd5 The idea is that White has several excellent targets - f7, loose rook on a8 (Rf7+ is the threat), unprotected knight on a4, and in some variations - even the rook on h8 can be a target. 23... Kg8

24. Qb3! 24. Rxf7 Nb6!? 25. Qxa8+ Nxa8 26. Rxf6 gxf6 27. Re6 Nc7 28. Rxf6 24... Rd8 Taking on d4 is impossible: 24... Qxd4 25. Qxf7+ Kh7 26. Qxh5+

26... Kg8 27. Re8+ Rxe8 28. Qxe8+ Kh7 29. Qh5+ Kg8 30. Rb8+

30... Qd8 31. Rxd8# 25. Qxa4 Rxd4 26. Qe8+ Kh7

27. Qxf7 White regains material with dividents. 27... Qxf7 28. Rxf7 Ra4 29. Re2 Kg6 30. Rd7 Rf8

31. g3 The win now is the matter of technique! 31... Kh6 32. Kg2 Rf6

33. h4 g5 34. hxg5+ Kxg5 35. f4+ Kg6 36. Kh3

36... Ra5 37. Rde7 Rc5 38. R7e5 Rc1 39. Rg5+ Kh6

40. Re8 A classical example of attacking a king that stayed in the center for too long. 1-0