Monday, September 7, 2009

Round 5 and 6 and the Summary

Round 5

I played white against Frilles rated about 2140 I think. I was able to play my Bb5 Siclian but he played Nd4. I took and castled when I should play c3. I played it as if I had some sort of kingside attack and then tried to play c3 but was going to lose pawn but instead lost the exchange. He gave it back but he had the two bishops and my position was shaky. I tried to advance my pawns and find a way to exchange queens to have some chance in the endgame but instead almost got mated since I resigned. He was good and funny when we were playing. I guess I need more theory.

Round 6
I had black against Tyler Longo (1991). We had a symmetrical position since we played my Queen Indian set-up with a queen indian set-up as well! He was able to establish a knight on e5 and was forced to find ways to remove or trade it in my favour. I had to close position and had a stonewall pawn centre (d5, e6, f5). I took his knight and weaken his pawn structure and made it more inflexible. I soon played Bg5 just like in a Sveshnikov to make my dark-squared bishop more active. I doubled up on the f-file before he did and played Qe7 so that every move he makes has a counter. Since his position is more natural in a way and had his pieces centralized with me not having any attack yet, he decided to place his rook on g3. This allowed me to play f4 and get the better position since every move he makes will the pawn and/or open the position for my "indian" bishop. He thought for about half an hour and decided that if his rook went to h3 or f3, he will lose a pawn and if he ever gets in back, his pieces will be misplaced which would more likely give me the win. So, he sac the exchange and sac his bishop for two pawns and had a strong attack. He missed R4d7! which safeguards my king without little or no any material. He soon resigned after commenting on my scoresheet which he said what I was doing was illegal. I don't know if it is but that would just too cheap if it worked and can't be boasted as win.

I have 3.5 out of 6. I won thrice, lost twice, and drawn once. I can say it is a learning experience and my performance is at least about 2050 I think since I didn't lose to anyone lower than me. My games have shown me I'm don't know enough theory and a lot of players play d4 and know the nimzo and queen indian defenses. If I have to rely on my endgame skill to win, then it might not be enough. Well, that's that for now. I'll be annotating all of my games to learn more where I went wrong and where I was right. For now, I have to sleep.

Sunday, September 6, 2009

Toronto Labour Day Open

Sorry guys for not blogging about my games. I forgot to and was so tired. Anyway, for now, I'll describe the my games a bit. After a few days after the tournament, I'll be annotating all of the games regardless of how horrible or beautiful they are.

Round 1
I was white against Ben Olden- cooligan (1800). I can't believe he had the guts to play in this section with such a rating. Anyway, he played the French Defense so as always, I play the Advance Variation (3. e5) and push my pawns to gain more space and have an attack. He played the Qb6 line with an early Bd7. I played the Na3 which is said to aim for an advantage going for Nc2 overprotecting the important d4 pawn. After pushing my g and f pawns to the 4th rank, he started retreating. Fritz said that I could have trapped his dark-squared bishop but I didn't see far enough. I pushed my b pawn and he fought back with a5 and soon he had three pawns for the piece but I had the iniative. I soon got his queen and pawn for my rooks and got him in a zugswang. When that happened, I had a king march and soon won. I wasn't able to do the mate though cause he resigned.

Round 2
I had white again. This time, I was against David Southam (2146). It was a c3 sicilian but I completely forgot what to do since he played the what i call the Scandinavian line, Qxd5 (!). I was so clueless so I went passive. I had the better development but my key pieces are misplaced (light-squared bishop) He offered a draw maybe because of that or that he was tired. I'm not sure. I declined and soon had a worse position. I offered a draw and surprisingly he accepted.

Round 3
Finally I had Black. Unfortunately, the players here all like to play d4 (dang) so I had to stick with what I know best, Nimzo/Queen Indian Defense. I was against Sheldon Pimentel (2059 i think). It was a Classical Nimzo and he played Bg5 after d5. I forgot what to do here so I just played h6 and after Bxf6 Qxf6 a3 Bxc3 Qxc3, I played c6 and went for a semi-slav position. He played g3 and so after we developed our pieces, he exchanged pawns and later exchanged the all our major pieces. He tried to provoke weakenings by played Ne5 after i played Nb8 and soon i had my pawns on h6, g7, f6, e6, d5. In other words, my position is a bit shaky. Soon, he had nothing else constuctive to do and decided to move the king to f1. I played g5 and pinned his knight with Bb5. I exchanged it off with his knight and so now got a knight vs. bishop ending. I don't know what Fritz or Rybka would say but i could be worse with perfect play on both sides. I'm not sure yet. Back to the game, he pushed his pawns and soon I had a perfectly placed knight on d4. He had an isolated pawn on d5 but an active king on e4. I forced an exchange of pawns in my favour on the queenside and later chopped his a3 pawn which decided the game. he resigned before i can even get my knight.

Round 4
The most critical and important game in this section. I would say that this game would decide who will win or just have the higher chances for the first prize. This is a must-win game but ended in horrible loss due to a natural move. It's a Queen Indian with me as Black (what an opening for a must-win situation). We played the classical lines with g3 and latter Ne4 for me exchanging knights, until I think we varied when he moved his queen to d3. I took his d pawn, exchanged bishops and played d5 so I would have no major weaknesses since he has his rook, queen, and knight on the d-file. I was surprised he played Be3 in that position. I just don't know why. So, I pushed my center pawns to e5 and d4 making them all retreat and played Nd7 planning Nc5. His queen went to g4 (makes sense if he wants to exchange bishops or have tricks on the g-file. More importantly, it's the only logical move if the queen is on e4 which is was. After Qg4, I played a5 trying to establish the knight on c5 but he fought back with b4 reasoning out that he need to b4 square for the knight to go to d5. So, I went back to b7 and after Rab1 Qc7 bxa5 bxa5 Rcd1 Ne6! Na3, I calculated that if Qc5, White has no good reply. I instead moved way too fast and touched the f8 rook and soon got crushed with c5. I had no sacs good enough to compensate for my material loss. I lost too many pawns and resigned. Horrible...truly horrible. I wonder what Fritz would say because it looked to me i was better in that position had i played Qc5! i could just take the pawn and check on d5. Well, one move decided the game but it had to be the 1st prize as well. Oh well...

Round 5 and 6 is 10 hrs from now. I hope i can play Bb5 sicilian and my Scandinavian defense.Ok, I have to go and sleep and eat.