PDA

View Full Version : Hobart Weekender Aug 14-15



Kevin Bonham
05-07-2010, 11:53 PM
Hobart Weekender 2010


Class One Yulgilbar-Think Big Australian Chess Grand Prix event
Hosted by Hobart International Chess Club for the TCA


VENUE: Migrant Resource Centre, 49 Molle St, Hobart

FORMAT: 6 round Swiss or Accelerated Swiss. 60 minutes plus 10 seconds per move per player.

ROUNDS START: Saturday 14th August 10:30 am, 1:30 pm, 4:00 pm, 7:15 pm
Sunday 15th August 9:30 am, 12:45 pm.

ENTRY FEES: $50 waged, $45 conc, $30 U18, $25 U12, $5 discount if entry received by 6th Aug. Entries on day close 10 am. If considering entering on day, please let us know.

PRIZES: 1st c. 40%, 2nd c. 20%, 3rd, U1700, U1400 c. 10% of prize pool (subject to at least three entries per division), U18 prize $60, U12 prize $50. Prize pool is entry fees less running costs and levies.

ARBITERS: Kevin Bonham, Graham Richards and assistants.

ENQUIRIES: Kevin Bonham ph. 0421 428 775 email k_bonham@tassie.net.au

HALF POINT BYES: One per player maximum, Saturday only, if requested in writing with entry or before the day for round 1, or before the start of previous round for rounds 2-4. Not available if player has already received a bye or forfeit.

NOTES: FIDE Laws 2009 apply –mobile phones making any noise will incur automatic default. Entrants agree to abide by all decisions of the organisers and arbiters. The organisers reserve the right to make any changes required.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ENTRY FORM
Name:
Address:
Phone: Email (optional):
DOB if under 18:
Tick here if you would like your entry acknowledged by email: ____
(NB: Entries received by post in week Aug 2-6 will be acknowledged on Aug 8)

Please detach this form and post it with payment to Kevin Bonham, 410 Macquarie Street, South Hobart, Tas 7004. Cheques and money orders to be made payable to HOBART INTERNATIONAL CHESS CLUB.

Kevin Bonham
15-07-2010, 09:23 PM
If any 1900+ (or thereabouts) players who think they might be playing could let me know via PM that would be very helpful. We have a couple of potential interstate entrants who may be able to make it but only if the field is strong enough. (At this stage I am the leading cannon-fodder.)

Tony Dowden
22-07-2010, 09:25 PM
I'm likely to play :D

(I think I'm still 1900+ but you never know with these yoyo ratings)

Clever of you not to clash with the Federal election this time ;)

Tony Dowden
06-08-2010, 08:54 PM
How about dispensing with Round 4 in the evening and holding an Olympiad appeal simul instead? (If the visiting FM isn't available to conduct the simul I'd be happy to stand in)

Saragossa
06-08-2010, 10:03 PM
Is there an entry list for the tournament?

Capablanca-Fan
07-08-2010, 01:32 AM
How about dispensing with Round 4 in the evening and holding an Olympiad appeal simul instead? (If the visiting FM isn't available to conduct the simul I'd be happy to stand in)
For which country? ;)

Kevin Bonham
07-08-2010, 02:51 PM
Known confirmed paid (etc) entries:

Vladimir Smirnov (FM)
Anton Smirnov
me
Nigel Frame
Russell Horton
Vincent Horton
Tony Sturges
Mason Carter

hopefully there will be several more otherwise we should add a round and make it a round robin! (Usually I find out about the Hobart junior entries on Monday night).

Vlad
08-08-2010, 06:49 PM
How about dispensing with Round 4 in the evening and holding an Olympiad appeal simul instead? (If the visiting FM isn't available to conduct the simul I'd be happy to stand in)

I am happy to give an Olympiad appeal simul. I can even give one with clocks to improve chances of the opposition.

I would prefer the simul organized after the event, say at 3 pm on Sunday. My plane is at 7.30 pm, so there is plenty of time.

Tony Dowden
10-08-2010, 11:38 AM
I am happy to give an Olympiad appeal simul. I can even give one with clocks to improve chances of the opposition.

I would prefer the simul organized after the event, say at 3 pm on Sunday. My plane is at 7.30 pm, so there is plenty of time.

Great, now is HICC able to turn this idea into a reality?

Kevin Bonham
10-08-2010, 06:10 PM
Great, now is HICC able to turn this idea into a reality?

Absolutely! Although someone other than me may have to run it as I need to head up to Launceston in order to run an interschool on the Monday, and as yet have not worked out how I will be doing that. (The fallback option is the bus.) I will send out some emails to likely suspects this evening to see if we can get some numbers, whether they are people playing in the weekender or not.

Milutin Ivkovic has entered the weekender. I am not absolutely certain if Graham Richards is playing but believe so.

Kevin Bonham
11-08-2010, 01:48 AM
OK, if necessary I can stay til about 5:30 on the Sunday so there will be no problem with there being someone there to pack up and so on. Thanks very much Vlad for the offer - much appreciated - and Tony for the suggestion.

By the way while I don't currently intend cutting the number of rounds for the tournament for this year since it has been advertised as six rounds, I am thinking that some of the minor weekenders should be cut back to five rounds in the future. There are counter-balancing considerations - we want the juniors to get lots of chess for their money, but at the same time four (or even three!) rounds in a day can scare off some of the stronger adults. Field sizes have declined a little in weekenders in the last year or two and we don't need six rounds to sort the field in some of them. So I think for next year we might cut back to five rounds a year, space them out a bit more, maybe increase the time limit slightly, etc. (This is just me thinking aloud here, it will depend on what the club thinks of course!)

I'm also thinking we might move this weekender to a different time of year as the interest level at this time of year seems to be very up and down, some years we get quite large fields and other years small ones.

Tony Dowden
11-08-2010, 03:56 PM
OK, if necessary I can stay til about 5:30 on the Sunday so there will be no problem with there being someone there to pack up and so on. Thanks very much Vlad for the offer - much appreciated - and Tony for the suggestion.
You are welcome Kevin. I'll scour my library and see if I can find some suitable donations for book prizes for best players in the simul.


By the way while I don't currently intend cutting the number of rounds for the tournament for this year since it has been advertised as six rounds, I am thinking that some of the minor weekenders should be cut back to five rounds in the future. There are counter-balancing considerations - we want the juniors to get lots of chess for their money, but at the same time four (or even three!) rounds in a day can scare off some of the stronger adults. Field sizes have declined a little in weekenders in the last year or two and we don't need six rounds to sort the field in some of them. So I think for next year we might cut back to five rounds a year, space them out a bit more, maybe increase the time limit slightly, etc. (This is just me thinking aloud here, it will depend on what the club thinks of course!)
One round a day is best at my age ;) More seriously, I agree we'd probably find more support for two-day weekenders than we're getting at present by making Saturdays three rounds and Sundays two rounds at, say, 60 mins plus 15 (or 20) secs increment.


I'm also thinking we might move this weekender to a different time of year as the interest level at this time of year seems to be very up and down, some years we get quite large fields and other years small ones.
Yes, I have to admit I'm feeling very unmotivated at present! Late winter is not the most inspiring time to travel to six rounds of intense chess packed into one-and-a-half days.

Garrett
11-08-2010, 04:35 PM
One round a day is best at my age ;)

Me too ;) and a second time control so I don't stuff my lovely endgames too :wall:

Best of luck with the tourney guys ! When I can convince myself to stuff my knees into the back of someones else's plane seat for a full three and a half hours I'll come down for a game.

cheers Garrett.

Saragossa
11-08-2010, 05:15 PM
I think Marcus will be playing, or at least he intends to. I cannot play as I have to IP's due rather soon, sorry.

Tony Dowden
11-08-2010, 09:43 PM
I'm in too KB. Please confirm this an entry. I'll also give you a ride back to Launceston.

Maurcus said he was in as well at Club tonight as did Dallas.

Re prizes for Vlad's Olympiad Appeal simul there's only slim pickings in my library at present. I can donate two DVDs: 'The Scandanavian the Easy Way' and '1.e4 for the Creative Player' but that's about it.

Garvinator
11-08-2010, 09:45 PM
I know this may not matter, but as an interstater, I would be less likely to travel to a tournament that offered 5 rounds in a weekend than 6. Especially if the 5 rounds was at 60 + 10 or similar.

Kevin Bonham
11-08-2010, 10:22 PM
I'm in too KB. Please confirm this an entry. I'll also give you a ride back to Launceston.

Maurcus said he was in as well at Club tonight as did Dallas.

Noted with thanks. Excellent. Hopefully we can get a few more and at least beat the 2008 low water-mark for this event!

ER
12-08-2010, 12:39 AM
I know this may not matter, but as an interstater, I would be less likely to travel to a tournament that offered 5 rounds in a weekend than 6. Especially if the 5 rounds was at 60 + 10 or similar.
I would tend to agree with you, however, as a future frequent visitor to Tassie, I would hate to travel to the most beautiful part of the planet and lock myself in a chess tournament venue without havign a look at the magnificent sights!
But then again I am not sure of the technicalities, I presume you are talking about the possibility of many people sharing prizes???

Garvinator
12-08-2010, 12:51 AM
I would tend to agree with you, however, as a future frequent visitor to Tassie, I would hate to travel to the most beautiful part of the planet and lock myself in a chess tournament venue without havign a look at the magnificent sights!
But then again I am not sure of the technicalities, I presume you are talking about the possibility of many people sharing prizes???
Nope, very simply about the number of rounds. I think if a person was travelling all the way to Hobart and wanted to do sight seeing and all that stuff, they would have to arrive early on the Friday (if you can) and do the tourist stuff then.

For us here in Brisbane, we would have to arrive on the Friday and then travel back on the Monday. So I would rather do the sight seeing on the Friday and then have two solid days of chess.

ER
12-08-2010, 12:55 AM
Nope, very simply about the number of rounds. I think if a person was travelling all the way to Hobart and wanted to do sight seeing and all that stuff, they would have to arrive early on the Friday (if you can) and do the tourist stuff then.

For us here in Brisbane, we would have to arrive on the Friday and then travel back on the Monday. So I would rather do the sight seeing on the Friday and then have two solid days of chess.

Makes sense, I forgot that Tassie is like a remote Melbourne suburb to us! :lol:

Kevin Bonham
12-08-2010, 12:57 AM
Nope, very simply about the number of rounds. I think if a person was travelling all the way to Hobart and wanted to do sight seeing and all that stuff, they would have to arrive early on the Friday (if you can) and do the tourist stuff then.

Exactly. No-one's going to see too many sights in their spare time in a Hobart winter weekender anyway. We usually find people interested in chess and sightseeing down here will come for a few days outside of the tournament.

ER
12-08-2010, 01:10 AM
Exactly. No-one's going to see too many sights in their spare time in a Hobart winter weekender anyway.... (!!!) :doh: :hmm:

Mount Wellington??? I have it in my must see before you ... see something else?? list!

Kevin Bonham
12-08-2010, 01:14 AM
You can see it from the city on a good day (ie unlike yesterday). As for driving to the top, in August you'd be taking your chances!

ER
12-08-2010, 01:21 AM
You can see it from the city on a good day (ie unlike yesterday). As for driving to the top, in August you'd be taking your chances!

lol didn't think of that! BTW I missed the chance of coming to Tassie for this one by just a phone call which came a bit too late! Next time. But I think I will take the whole week off so I come by boat and enjoy the trip as well as the sights!

Garvinator
12-08-2010, 02:49 AM
But I think I will take the whole week off so I come by boat and enjoy the trip as well as the sights!Come by boat and the only sights you will see are Nauru or similar facilities :P

Tony Dowden
12-08-2010, 08:09 AM
Noted with thanks. Excellent. Hopefully we can get a few more and at least beat the 2008 low water-mark for this event!

Good, see you on Saturday morning :cool:

Tony Dowden
12-08-2010, 07:44 PM
What is the latest re the expected/entered field?

Kevin Bonham
12-08-2010, 08:19 PM
What is the latest re the expected/entered field?

Still around 12-13 unfortunately. No more confirmed or known to be likely beyond those mentioned here; hopefully we will get some on the day.

Tony Dowden
12-08-2010, 09:17 PM
Still around 12-13 unfortunately. No more confirmed or known to be likely beyond those mentioned here; hopefully we will get some on the day.
Thanks KB

Kevin Bonham
13-08-2010, 06:09 PM
Tasmanian Champion Alastair Dyer has entered!

Kevin Bonham
13-08-2010, 06:48 PM
Current field

Vladimir Smirnov (2290)
Tony Dowden (1948)
Alastair Dyer (1929)
Anton Smirnov (1862)
Kevin Bonham (1837)
Nigel Frame (1762)
Marcus Bretag (1642)
Vincent Horton (1545)
Russell Horton (1455)
Graham Richards (1333)
Mason Carter (1324)
Dallas Fry (1306)
Milutin Ivkovic (1302)
Tony Sturges (1123)

Perennial Possible: Michael Midson (1519)

Tony Dowden
13-08-2010, 09:06 PM
Thanks for the up-date Kevin

Garvinator
13-08-2010, 09:27 PM
KB's almost in the bottom half of the field :eek:

Kevin Bonham
13-08-2010, 09:49 PM
KB's almost in the bottom half of the field :eek:

Yes; a few years back there was a strange Tas Open pairing where I ended up playing Tony in round two; in this case it wouldn't be surprising!

Kevin Bonham
14-08-2010, 11:58 AM
We have 16 entrants with Janice Martin and Adam Carter added to the 14 listed above.

Round 1 is currently underway, no upsets yet though I had a bad position for much of the game against Milutin.

Kevin Bonham
14-08-2010, 01:30 PM
No Name Result Name

1 Horton, R (9) 0:1 Smirnov, V (1)
2 Dowden, T (2) 1:0 Richards, G (10)
3 Carter, M (11) 0:1 Dyer, A (3)
4 Smirnov, A (4) 1:0 Fry, D (12)
5 Ivkovic, M (13) 0:1 Bonham, K (5)
6 Frame, N (6) 1:0 Carter, A (14)
7 Martin, J (15) 0:1 Bretag, M (7)
8 Horton, V (8) 1:0 Sturges, T (16)

M Carter - Dyer went the distance in terms of time but was still only 24 moves.


No Name Total Result Name Total

1 Smirnov, V (1) [1] : Frame, N (6) [1]
2 Bonham, K (5) [1] : Dowden, T (2) [1]
3 Dyer, A (3) [1] : Horton, V (8) [1]
4 Bretag, M (7) [1] : Smirnov, A (4) [1]
5 Carter, A (14) [0] : Horton, R (9) [0]
6 Richards, G (10) [0] : Ivkovic, M (13) [0]
7 Sturges, T (16) [0] : Carter, M (11) [0]
8 Fry, D (12) [0] : Martin, J (15) [0]

Kevin Bonham
14-08-2010, 03:53 PM
No Name Total Result Name Total

1 Smirnov, V (1) [1] 1:0 Frame, N (6) [1]
2 Bonham, K (5) [1] 0:1 Dowden, T (2) [1]
3 Dyer, A (3) [1] 1:0 Horton, V (8) [1]
4 Bretag, M (7) [1] 0:1 Smirnov, A (4) [1]
5 Carter, A (14) [0] .5:.5 Horton, R (9) [0]
6 Richards, G (10) [0] 1:0 Ivkovic, M (13) [0]
7 Sturges, T (16) [0] 1:0 Carter, M (11) [0]
8 Fry, D (12) [0] .5:.5 Martin, J (15) [0]

No Name Total Result Name Total

1 Smirnov, A (4) [2] : Smirnov, V (1) [2]
2 Dowden, T (2) [2] : Dyer, A (3) [2]
3 Horton, V (8) [1] : Bonham, K (5) [1]
4 Frame, N (6) [1] : Richards, G (10) [1]
5 Sturges, T (16) [1] : Bretag, M (7) [1]
6 Horton, R (9) [.5] : Fry, D (12) [.5]
7 Martin, J (15) [.5] : Carter, A (14) [.5]
8 Carter, M (11) [0] : Ivkovic, M (13) [0]


Note to self: keeping half an eye on h7 in this game might be desirable. :lol:

(see avatar for further information)

Adamski
14-08-2010, 03:56 PM
I see KB was pretty good at prophesy here. He did play Tony in Round 2 and I see my Kiwi mate won. But why does White need to keep an eye on h7? Not much likelihood of mating attack for Black emanating from such a square.

Kevin Bonham
14-08-2010, 05:35 PM
I see KB was pretty good at prophesy here. He did play Tony in Round 2 and I see my Kiwi mate won. But why does White need to keep an eye on h7? Not much likelihood of mating attack for Black emanating from such a square.

I'm referring to my round 3 game, black against Vincent Horton, since the last time I played Vincent I overlooked the small matter of mate in 1. (See shockers thread for further gory details).

This time I defeated him quite comfortably. My game against Tony was hopeless, messed up the opening and was decidedly worse with white after about a dozen moves.

Top two boards were grandmaster draws this round in 9 and 16 moves respectively. I don't blame people for taking short draws in these four-games-a-day events.

Milutin has withdrawn after round 3.

ER
14-08-2010, 05:48 PM
Come by boat and the only sights you will see are Nauru or similar facilities :P

hehe, then I might win the Nauru Chess championship! :P:P:P or at least the facilities centre championship! :P



Top two boards were grandmaster draws this round in 9 and 16 moves respectively. I don't blame people for taking short draws in these four-games-a-day events.

I can't remember now but is this for or against my previous argument about rounds per day events? I 'll check it out!


Milutin has withdrawn after round 3. does Milutin have a history of early withdrawals, or am I confusing him with someone else?

Kevin Bonham
14-08-2010, 06:03 PM
does Milutin have a history of early withdrawals, or am I confusing him with someone else?

Not a big history; I remember him doing it in a blitz event following a first-round incident just after king capture became a loss, and in a club round-robin event once. Withdrawals from club round robin events are pretty common.

Kevin Bonham
14-08-2010, 06:54 PM
No Name Total Result Name Total

1 Smirnov, A (4) [2] .5:.5 Smirnov, V (1) [2]
2 Dowden, T (2) [2] .5:.5 Dyer, A (3) [2]
3 Horton, V (8) [1] 0:1 Bonham, K (5) [1]
4 Frame, N (6) [1] 1:0 Richards, G (10) [1]
5 Sturges, T (16) [1] 0:1 Bretag, M (7) [1]
6 Horton, R (9) [.5] 0:1 Fry, D (12) [.5]
7 Martin, J (15) [.5] 0:1 Carter, A (14) [.5]
8 Carter, M (11) [0] 1:0 Ivkovic, M (13) [0]


R Horton - Fry was the last game to finish, a crazy time scramble with Q+3P vs Q+N with numerous chances for either to claim a draw. Eventually white blundered bringing the game to a premature end after about 102 moves; it could have gone for 150+ without that.


No Name Total Result Name Total

1 Smirnov, V (1) [2.5] : Dowden, T (2) [2.5]
2 Dyer, A (3) [2.5] : Smirnov, A (4) [2.5]
3 Bonham, K (5) [2] : Frame, N (6) [2]
4 Bretag, M (7) [2] : Fry, D (12) [1.5]
5 Carter, A (14) [1.5] : Sturges, T (16) [1]
6 Carter, M (11) [1] : Horton, V (8) [1]
7 Martin, J (15) [.5] : Horton, R (9) [.5]
8 Richards, G (10) [1] .5:.5 BYE

Kevin Bonham
14-08-2010, 09:05 PM
No Name Total Result Name Total

1 Smirnov, V (1) [2.5] 1:0 Dowden, T (2) [2.5]
2 Dyer, A (3) [2.5] 1:0 Smirnov, A (4) [2.5]
3 Bonham, K (5) [2] 1:0 Frame, N (6) [2]
4 Bretag, M (7) [2] 1:0 Fry, D (12) [1.5]
5 Carter, A (14) [1.5] 1:0 Sturges, T (16) [1]
6 Carter, M (11) [1] 1:0 Horton, V (8) [1]
7 Martin, J (15) [.5] .5:.5 Horton, R (9) [.5]
8 Richards, G (10) [1] .5:.5 BYE


No Name Total Result Name Total

1 Dyer, A (3) [3.5] : Smirnov, V (1) [3.5]
2 Bretag, M (7) [3] : Bonham, K (5) [3]
3 Dowden, T (2) [2.5] : Carter, A (14) [2.5]
4 Smirnov, A (4) [2.5] : Carter, M (11) [2]
5 Fry, D (12) [1.5] : Frame, N (6) [2]
6 Richards, G (10) [1.5] : Horton, R (9) [1]
7 Horton, V (8) [1] : Martin, J (15) [1]
8 Sturges, T (16) [1] 1:0 BYE

Kevin Bonham
14-08-2010, 09:10 PM
No Name Feder Loc Total 1 2 3 4 5

1 Smirnov, Vladimir NSW 2290 3.5 14:W 8:W 6:D 5:W 2:
2 Dyer, Alastair TAS 1929 3.5 10:W 13:W 5:D 6:W 1:
3 Bonham, Kevin TAS 1837 3 16:W 5:L 13:W 8:W 4:
4 Bretag, Marcus TAS 1642 3 15:W 6:L 9:W 11:W 3:
5 Dowden, Tony TAS 1948 2.5 12:W 3:W 2:D 1:L 7:
6 Smirnov, Anton NSW 1862 2.5 11:W 4:W 1:D 2:L 10:
7 Carter, Adam TAS 1246 2.5 8:L 14:D 15:W 9:W 5:
8 Frame, Nigel TAS 1762 2 7:W 1:L 12:W 3:L 11:
9 Sturges, Tony (Thelston) TAS 1123 2 13:L 10:W 4:L 7:L 0:W
10 Carter, Mason TAS 1324 2 2:L 9:L 16:W 13:W 6:
11 Fry, Dallas TAS 1306 1.5 6:L 15:D 14:W 4:L 8:
12 Richards, Graham TAS 1333 1.5 5:L 16:W 8:L 0:D 14:
13 Horton, Vincent TAS 1545 1 9:W 2:L 3:L 10:L 15:
14 Horton, Russell TAS 1455 1 1:L 7:D 11:L 15:D 12:
15 Martin, Janice TAS 1192 1 4:L 11:D 7:L 14:D 13:
16 Ivkovic, Milutin TAS 1302 0 3:L 12:L 10:L 0: 0:

ER
14-08-2010, 09:22 PM
It's nice to have two pairs of son+dad playing in the same competition. We often have that at Box Hill Chess Club. If you managed to convince Warren to play (I 've tried it in the interview but he chickened out :P) you might be able to claim a world record in Tassie. Particularly, if you can get Lawrence playing too, you 'd have Dad + two sons, followed by the two pairs of son+dad provided Vlad and Anton coincide in the same tournament!
BTW I didn't know dad Horton was as strong. I thought he was around 1250 - 1300 for some reason. I played Vincent in Adelaide last year, he is a great kid!

Saragossa
14-08-2010, 09:33 PM
Warren is in Darwin, thus it is hard for him to get to tournaments in Tasmania.

Kevin Bonham
14-08-2010, 09:39 PM
It's nice to have two pairs of son+dad playing in the same competition.

Actually we have three:

Vladimir and Anton Smirnov
Russell and Vincent Horton
Adam and Mason Carter

The same three also played together in the 2009 Tasmanian Championship. I don't have a case of four parent-offspring pairs in the same Tassie tournament readily to hand but I suspect there could have been one.

Kevin Bonham
14-08-2010, 10:52 PM
My games thus far such as they are. Three of my opponents were very kind to take pity on my somewhat sleepy condition and give me pieces.

Ivkovic - Bonham (which I could well have lost)

1.b4 e6 2.Bb2 Nf6 3.a3 d5 4.e3 c5 5.b5 Bd7?! Retards the QN's development 6.c4 a6 7.a4 Bd6 8.Nf3 0-0 9.Be2 Re8 10.d4?! [10.Nc3!] 10...cxd4 11.exd4 Bb4+ [11...dxc4 12.Bxc4 Nd5] 12.Nbd2 dxc4 13.Bxc4 Ne4?! [13...axb5 14.axb5 Rxa1 15.Bxa1 Qa5 16.0-0 Bxb5 gets the pawn] 14.0-0 Nd6 15.Qb3! Bxd2 16.Nxd2 axb5 17.axb5 Rxa1 18.Rxa1 Qb6? [18...Qg5] 19.d5!? e5 [19...exd5 20.Bxd5 Qxb5 21.Qc3 Nf5 may just hang together] 20.Re1 [20.Ra8 Nxc4 21.Nxc4 Qc5 22.Na5 is very strong] 20...f6 21.Ba3 Kh8 22.Bxd6 Qxd6 23.Ne4 Qb6 24.h3 [24.Qe3 is probably winning] 24...Bf5 25.Qd3? A very odd self-pin. 25...Nd7 26.Re2?? Nc5 27.Qe3 Bxe4 28.f3 Bf5 29.Kh2 Nd7 30.Qb3 Qd4 31.Qb4 Another self-pin 31...Bd3 [31...Nb6 is more accurate] 32.Qd6! Qxc4 33.Qxd7 Qc8 34.Qxc8 Rxc8 35.Rb2 Rc5 36.b6 h6 37.Kg3 Rxd5 38.Kf2 Kg8 39.Ke3 Bg6 40.Rb3 Rd6 41.g4 Kf7 42.h4 Ke6 43.f4 exf4+ 44.Kxf4 Rd4+ 0-1

Bonham - Dowden.

1.Nf3 c5 2.e4 e6 3.c3 d5 4.Bb5+? This is rubbish. 4...Bd7 5.Bxd7+ Qxd7 6.exd5 Qxd5 7.0-0 Nc6 8.Qe2 0-0-0 9.Na3 Be7 10.Nc2?! [10.d4 here is fine since after 10...cxd4 11.cxd4 Black doesn't have 11...Nxd4 since 12.Nxd4 Qxd4 13.Be3] 10...Qd3 11.Qxd3 Rxd3 12.Rd1 Nf6 13.Nce1 Rd7 14.b3 [Correct plan as noted by Vlad is 14.d3 but it's an awful position anyway] 14...h6 [14...e5 intending e4 is suggested by Fritz.] 15.Bb2 e5 16.d4!? Rhd8 17.Rdc1?! [17.Nc2 cxd4 18.cxd4 e4 19.Nd2 etc would be better] 17...e4! Very strong [17...exd4 18.cxd4 cxd4 19.Ne5 was enough to scare Tony off the pawn captures but black can still play 19...Rc7!] 18.Ne5 Nxe5 19.dxe5 Ng4! 20.c4 Bg5 21.Rc2 Rd2 22.Rxd2 Rxd2 23.Bc1 Re2 24.Bxg5 hxg5 25.f3 Nxe5 26.fxe4 Rxe4 27.h3 [27.Kf2 and if 27...Ng4+ 28.Kg3 is better] 27...Re2 28.Kh2 f5 29.Rd1 b6 30.a3 f4 31.Kg1 g4 32.hxg4 Nxg4 33.Rb1 Ne3 34.Rc1 g5 35.b4 Kd7 36.bxc5 bxc5 and here very short of time I played 37.Rd1+!! took my hand off the rook on this square momentarily and therefore resigned. 0-1

V Horton - Bonham

1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 Bb4 4.e5 c5 5.a3 Bxc3+ 6.bxc3 Qc7 7.Qg4 f5 8.Qd1 It is usual to throw in the check and force a concession before this retreat. 8...Bd7 9.Nf3 Nc6 10.Be3 Rc8 11.Qd2 cxd4 12.cxd4 Na5 13.Ra2 Nc4 14.Bxc4 Qxc4 15.Rb2 b6 16.Qb4 I think this is a good try for some counterplay. 16...Ne7 17.Nd2 Qxb4 18.axb4 Ba4 19.Ke2 0-0 20.Ra1?? Bb5+ 21.Ke1 f4 The benefits of castling! 22.Bxf4 Rxf4 23.Nf3 a6 24.Kd2 Nf5 25.c3 Nh4! 26.Nxh4 Rxf2+ White resigns. 0-1

Bonham - Frame

1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.Bb5+ Bd7 4.Bxd7+ Qxd7 5.0-0 Nf6 6.Re1 Nc6 7.c3 e5 8.d4 Be7 9.h3 0-0 10.Bg5 Qc7 11.Na3 a6 12.Nc2 Nd7?? 13.d5 Wins a piece no matter what. 13...Bxg5 14.dxc6 Qxc6 15.Nxg5 f5 16.Qd5+ Qxd5 17.exd5 Nb6 18.Na3 h6 [18...Nxd5 19.Rad1] 19.Nf3 [19.Ne6 might be better but I thought it was too much commitment.] 19...Rf6 20.c4 g5 21.b3 g4 22.Nd2 Kg7 23.hxg4 fxg4 24.Ne4 Rg6 25.Nc2 Rf8 26.Re3 h5 27.Rf1 Nd7 28.g3 b5 29.f3 bxc4 30.bxc4 Nb6 31.Na3 h4? Just not quite thought through. 32.fxg4 Rxf1+ 33.Kxf1 Rxg4 34.Nxd6 hxg3 35.Rxg3 Rxg3 36.Nf5+ Kf6 37.Nxg3 e4!? 38.Nxe4+ Ke5 39.Nd2! [and not 39.Nxc5 Nxc4 40.Nxc4+ Kxd5 41.Nxa6 Kxc4 which is still won but white needs to be extremely careful.] 39...Nxd5 Making it easy now. 40.cxd5 Kxd5 41.Ke2 Kd4 42.Kd1 Kc3 43.Kc1 a5 44.Nab1+ Kb4 45.Kb2 a4 46.a3+ Ka5 47.Kc3 c4 48.Nxc4+ Ka6 49.Kb4 Ka7 50.Kxa4 Ka6 51.Kb4 Ka7 52.Kb5 Kb7 53.Nd6+ Kb8 54.Kb6 Ka8 55.a4 Kb8 56.a5 Ka8 57.a6 Kb8 58.Nb5 1-0

ER
15-08-2010, 05:10 AM
If you managed to convince Warren to play (I 've tried it in the interview but he chickened out ) you might be able to claim a world record in Tassie. Particularly, if you can get Lawrence playing too, you 'd have Dad + two sons, followed by the two pairs of son+dad provided Vlad and Anton coincide in the same tournament!


Warren is in Darwin, thus it is hard for him to get to tournaments in Tasmania.

LOL I know that doesn't mean we can't provoke him a little! :lol:



It's nice to have two pairs of son+dad playing in the same competition. We often have that at Box Hill Chess Club.



Actually we have three:

Vladimir and Anton Smirnov
Russell and Vincent Horton
Adam and Mason Carter

The same three also played together in the 2009 Tasmanian Championship. I don't have a case of four parent-offspring pairs in the same Tassie tournament readily to hand but I suspect there could have been one.

And before I had time to read your note, BUZZ goes the phone with that imperative tone denoting that someone on the other end of the line was very upset!!!


You (add accurate explicits of your choice here) still are a member of BHCC and don't you know that we already have not two but FOUR parent - offspring pairs) playing in our competitions?

Geez they were right too! :doh: :lol: Sorry! :) ooooooooooops!!!! Actually they were wrong too! In fact we have 5 possible parent - offsrping pairs, including one trio!!! WOW, this must be close to a world record!!!

Now let's go back to the Hobart Weekender because the way it goes we are about to turn this thread into a chessic geneology research network! :P

Kevin Bonham
15-08-2010, 12:43 PM
No Name Total Result Name Total

1 Dyer, Alastair [3.5] 0:1 Smirnov, Vladimir [3.5]
2 Bretag, Marcus [3] .5:.5 Bonham, Kevin [3]
3 Dowden, Tony [2.5] 1:0 Carter, Adam [2.5]
4 Smirnov, Anton [2.5] 1:0 Carter, Mason [2]
5 Fry, Dallas [1.5] 0:1 Frame, Nigel [2]
6 Richards, Graham [1.5] 0:1 Horton, Russell [1]
7 Horton, Vincent [1] 1:0 Martin, Janice [1]
8 Sturges, Tony (Thelston) [1] 1:0 BYE


I very nearly lost to Marcus who played an excellent positional game against me, just hung on for a draw in bad time trouble a pawn down in an OCB ending.

Final round ...


No Name Total Result Name Total

1 Smirnov, Vladimir [4.5] : Bretag, Marcus [3.5]
2 Smirnov, Anton [3.5] : Dowden, Tony [3.5]
3 Bonham, Kevin [3.5] : Dyer, Alastair [3.5]
4 Frame, Nigel [3] : Sturges, Tony (Thelston) [2]
5 Carter, Adam [2.5] : Horton, Vincent [2]
6 Horton, Russell [2] : Carter, Mason [2]
7 Fry, Dallas [1.5] : Richards, Graham [1.5]
8 Martin, Janice [1] 1:0 BYE

Garvinator
15-08-2010, 01:08 PM
Do you know how many are playing in the simul?

Kevin Bonham
15-08-2010, 03:33 PM
Simul was cancelled due to a relatively low expected turnout and replaced with a lucky draw for all who had donated over $10 and were hanging around for the simul. The draw was evidently rigged because I won the DVD donated by Tony Dowden. We also picked up lots of donations thanks to Tony's fantastic work over the weekend and over $200 is on the way!


No Name Total Result Name Total

1 Smirnov, Vladimir [4.5] .5:.5 Bretag, Marcus [3.5]
2 Smirnov, Anton [3.5] 0:1 Dowden, Tony [3.5]
3 Bonham, Kevin [3.5] .5:.5 Dyer, Alastair [3.5]
4 Frame, Nigel [3] 1:0 Sturges, Tony (Thelston) [2]
5 Carter, Adam [2.5] 0:1 Horton, Vincent [2]
6 Horton, Russell [2] 1:0 Carter, Mason [2]
7 Fry, Dallas [1.5] 0:1 Richards, Graham [1.5]
8 Martin, Janice [1] 1:0 BYE


Place Name Feder Rtg Loc Score M-Buch. Buch. Progr.

1 Smirnov, Vladimir NSW 2290 5 15.5 23.0 18.5
2 Dowden, Tony TAS 1948 4.5 14.0 21.5 16.0
3-6 Dyer, Alastair TAS 1929 4 15.0 22.0 16.5
Bonham, Kevin TAS 1837 4 15.0 21.0 14.5
Bretag, Marcus TAS 1642 4 10.5 17.0 14.5
Frame, Nigel TAS 1762 4 10.5 17.0 13.0
7 Smirnov, Anton NSW 1862 3.5 14.5 21.0 15.0
8-9 Horton, Vincent TAS 1545 3 10.0 15.5 9.0
Horton, Russell TAS 1455 3 8.5 15.0 7.0
10-11 Carter, Adam TAS 1246 2.5 11.5 17.5 9.5
Richards, Graham TAS 1333 2.5 11.5 17.5 7.5
12-14 Sturges, Tony (Thelston) TAS 1123 2 12.5 18.5 7.0
Martin, Janice TAS 1192 2 11.5 17.0 5.0
Carter, Mason TAS 1324 2 11.0 16.5 7.0
15 Fry, Dallas TAS 1306 1.5 13.0 18.5 6.5
16 Ivkovic, Milutin TAS 1302 0 2.5 8.5 0.0


Third prize abolished. U1700 M Bretag U1400 = A Carter, G Richards, U18 A Dyer, U12 A Smirnov.

I again survived a pawn down in the endgame and Marcus just managed to hold a rook ending against Vlad (4 vs 4 on same side but Vlad had an outside pawn.)

Saragossa
15-08-2010, 04:35 PM
Bam! Well done, Marcus! I am pumped to see the game.

Kevin Bonham
15-08-2010, 09:58 PM
A spiffing $245.00 has just gone into the ACF Olympiad Appeal from this event! Thanks to Tony Dowden for his fantastic donation-soliciting efforts. :clap: :clap: :clap:

Tony Dowden
15-08-2010, 10:24 PM
A spiffing $245.00 has just gone into the ACF Olympiad Appeal from this event! Thanks to Tony Dowden for his fantastic donation-soliciting efforts. :clap: :clap: :clap:

Thanks Kevin (enough about 'soliciting' already). But it's the least I could do considering I've benefitted from a couple of (Kiwi) Olympiad appeals myself over the years.

The generosity of the Tasmanian community is impressive - especially since few players would know many of the current Olympiad squad :clap: :clap:

Capablanca-Fan
16-08-2010, 12:28 AM
Excellent all round: Olympiad appeal, Vlad's victory, and that he didn't have it all his way this time.

Adamski
16-08-2010, 05:57 AM
Well done, Tony! Especially considering it looks like you were doing much more than just playing!:clap:

ER
16-08-2010, 06:57 AM
Excellent all round: Olympiad appeal, Vlad's victory, and that he didn't have it all his way this time

... and thanks to you Jono, since, bar your nice note, none of the rest of us had congratulated the actual winner! Good on you Vlad!:clap:

Tony Dowden
16-08-2010, 11:09 AM
Well done, Tony! Especially considering it looks like you were doing much more than just playing!:clap:

Thanks Jonathan, actually I have to say I was playing with little in the way of any distraction. I just nabbed players between rounds and invite dthenm to support the cause.

In contrast Vlad won despite being quite preoccupied by his coaching duties and Kevin still did quite well (er, he wasn't happyw ith his Rd 2 game against me) despite all the energy he put into running the event with hsi customary efficiency.

We really appreciated the vist from Team Smirnov :clap: :clap: Overall it was a smooth and impressive performance from Vladimir (despite conceding two half points) and a very promising performance from 9-year-old Anton (who had both Alastair Dyer at his mercy and me in some discomfort before losing concentration at vital moments).

Vlad
16-08-2010, 01:33 PM
We really appreciated the vist from Team Smirnov :clap: :clap:


Thanks Tony, it was a nice weekend. We had a couple month break from chess, so needed to get some rust off.



Overall it was a smooth and impressive performance from Vladimir (despite conceding two half points) and a very promising performance from 9-year-old Anton (who had both Alastair Dyer at his mercy and me in some discomfort before losing concentration at vital moments).

My first draw was pretty much forced. If I would not take that vital break before the 4-th round game, it would not be very likely that I win in the 4-th round, which I thought was more important.

I should congratulate Marcus for a very strong performance in the last round. A few moves he made in critical moments were quite strong and they were the first lines by rybka. It looks like Tasmania will get another 1800+ player soon.

As I said we both were pretty rusty, which was easier to see on the younger one. Against Alistair Anton had easily winning position (+5 by rybka). Instead he made a couple of average moves and blundered mate in a few moves himself.

Against Tony I think it was partly my strategic mistake. I knew Tony is good in positional chess, I did not know he could be so good.:) At no point black was worse in that game. It was a good illustration of how to play closed positions.

Tony Dowden
16-08-2010, 05:12 PM
I knew Tony is good in positional chess, I did not know he could be so good.:) At no point black was worse in that game. It was a good illustration of how to play closed positions.

You are very kind Vlad ;) Although I was very pleased with how I played against Anton after he saddled me with an isolated pawn, don't forget I displayed some relatively poor positional understanding against you the night before (in the dreaded fourth game of the day). I guess I'll take the compliment though - I don't get praised by Russian masters very often :D

Kevin Bonham
16-08-2010, 09:56 PM
My second-day scramble collection:

M Bretag - Bonham.

1.e4 e6 2.d3 c5 3.Nf3 d5 4.Nbd2 Nc6 5.g3 Nf6 6.Qe2 [6.Bg2 is commonest here] 6...Be7 7.Bg2 b6 8.0-0 Bb7 9.c3 Qc7 10.Re1 dxe4 11.Nxe4 Nxe4 12.dxe4 Rd8 13.Bf4 e5 14.Be3 0-0 15.Ng5 h6 16.Nh3 Qd7 [16...Qc8 is better.] 17.Rad1 Qe6 18.b3 Rxd1 19.Rxd1 Rd8 20.Rxd8+ Nxd8 21.f3 Qd6 22.Nf2 Bc8 23.Bh3 Bb7 I should probably have just taken it but was getting worried about the badness of my other bishop. Worse was to come. 24.Qd3 Bc6 25.Kf1 Kh7 26.Ke2 g6 27.Ng4!? h5 28.Qxd6 Bxd6 29.Nf6+ Kg7 30.Bg5 Ne6 [30...Be7 31.Nxh5+ Kf8! I missed this idea. 32.Nf6 Kg7 33.Ne8+ Kf8 34.Bxe7+ Kxe7 35.Nc7 Kd6 36.Nd5 Bxd5 37.exd5 Kxd5 and white is slightly better but it should be a draw.] 31.Bxe6 fxe6 32.h4 Kf7 33.Kd3 Bb5+ 34.c4 Bc6 35.g4! hxg4? [35...Be7! 36.Nh7 forced 36...Bd6! 37.Bd8 Ke8 38.Bf6 and it doesn't seem like white can do anything.] 36.fxg4? [White's biggest chance here: 36.Nxg4 will certainly win the front e-pawn.] 36...Bf8 37.h5 Bg7 38.Nh7 gxh5 39.gxh5 Kg8 40.Nf6+ Bxf6 41.Bxf6 Kh7 42.Bxe5 Kh6 43.Bb8 a6 44.e5 Kxh5 45.Ba7 b5 46.Bxc5 Kg4 47.Kd4 Kf5 48.Bd6 bxc4 49.Kxc4 Kg6 50.Kc5 Bb5 51.a4 Be2 52.Kb6 Kf7 53.b4 Ke8 54.b5 axb5 55.a5! A good try but doesn't quite do it! 55...Kd7 56.a6 Kc8 57.a7 Draw agreed since after 57...Bf3 there is nothing. ˝-˝

Bonham - Dyer. I wasted what should have been a really good position out of the opening (startled by having to actually think on move 7 I played too quickly and unambitiously), then got outplayed and in trouble, and in the endgame Alastair seems to have missed a win when extremely short of time.

1.Nf3 c5 2.e4 e6 3.Nc3 a6 4.g3 d6 5.Bg2 Nf6 6.0-0 b5? 7.e5 Nfd7 8.exd6 Bb7 [8...Bxd6 9.Ng5 Ra7 10.Nce4 etc looks good] 9.d4 Bxd6 10.Re1 [I briefly considered 10.d5! I thought he would just play 10...e5 but after 11.Nh4 white is dominating] 10...0-0 11.Ne4 Be7 12.Nxc5? This ? is cumulative for the last three moves; I've pretty much thrown away what should have been a big advantage 12...Nxc5 13.dxc5 Bxc5 14.Be3 Qb6 15.Bxc5 Qxc5 16.Qe2 Another insipid move. [16.Qd4!? Qxc2 17.Rac1 Qa4 18.Qxa4 bxa4 19.Rc7] 16...Nd7 17.Rad1 Nf6 18.Rd2 Rac8 19.c3 Bd5! 20.a3 Perhaps unnecessary 20...Ne4 21.Rd4 Nd6 22.Nd2 [22.Ne5!] 22...Bxg2 23.Kxg2 Rfd8 24.Qd3 Nb7 25.Nb3 Rxd4 26.Nxd4 Rd8 27.Qf3 Qd5 28.Qxd5 Rxd5 29.f4 Nd6 30.Re2 Kf8 31.Nc6 Nc4 32.Nb4? Rd6! 33.b3 Desperation, because I'd wrongly concluded he is threatening ...a5 forcing Na2 (to save the b-pawn) followed by rook exchange and a won knight ending. In fact my knight can go to c2 if kicked since after he takes on b2, I have Nd4. 33...Nxa3 34.Ra2 Nb1 35.c4 Rd2+ 36.Rxd2 Nxd2 37.Nxa6 bxc4 38.bxc4 Nxc4 39.Nc5 Ke7 40.Kf3 h6 41.h3 Nd6 42.Nd3 f6 43.Nc5 e5 44.g4 g5 45.fxe5 fxe5 46.Ke3 Kf7 47.Nd7 Ke6 48.Nc5+ Kd5 49.Nd7 Nc4+ 50.Ke2 Nd6 51.Nf6+ Ke6 52.Nh5 [Not 52.Ng8?? Kf7 53.Nxh6+ Kg7 54.Nf5+ Nxf5 55.gxf5 Kf6 winning, which I saw] 52...e4 53.Ng3 Ke5 54.Ke3 Nc4+ 55.Ke2 Nb6 56.Ke3? [56.Nf5 h5 57.Nh6] 56...Nd5+! 57.Kf2 Nf4 [57...Kd4! appears to win] 58.Ke3 Nxh3 59.Nxe4 Nf4 60.Ng3 Nd5+ 61.Kf3 Nf6 62.Ne2 [62.Nf5 is fine - 62...h5 63.Nh6 h4 64.Nf7+] 62...Ke6 63.Nd4+ Ke5 64.Ne2 Nd7 65.Ng3 Kf6 66.Ne4+ Kg6 67.Kg3 Nf6 68.Nf2 h5 69.gxh5+ Nxh5+ 70.Kg4 Nf6+ 71.Kg3 Kf5 72.Kf3 g4+ Drawn.

Kevin Bonham
17-08-2010, 12:24 AM
Final crosstable:


No Name Feder Loc Total 1 2 3 4 5 6

1 Smirnov, Vladimir NSW 2290 5 9:W 6:W 7:D 2:W 3:W 5:D
2 Dowden, Tony TAS 1948 4.5 11:W 4:W 3:D 1:L 10:W 7:W
3 Dyer, Alastair TAS 1929 4 14:W 8:W 2:D 7:W 1:L 4:D
4 Bonham, Kevin TAS 1837 4 16:W 2:L 8:W 6:W 5:D 3:D
5 Bretag, Marcus TAS 1642 4 13:W 7:L 12:W 15:W 4:D 1:D
6 Frame, Nigel TAS 1762 4 10:W 1:L 11:W 4:L 15:W 12:W
7 Smirnov, Anton NSW 1862 3.5 15:W 5:W 1:D 3:L 14:W 2:L
8 Horton, Vincent TAS 1545 3 12:W 3:L 4:L 14:L 13:W 10:W
9 Horton, Russell TAS 1455 3 1:L 10:D 15:L 13:D 11:W 14:W
10 Carter, Adam TAS 1246 2.5 6:L 9:D 13:W 12:W 2:L 8:L
11 Richards, Graham TAS 1333 2.5 2:L 16:W 6:L 0:D 9:L 15:W
12 Sturges, Tony (Thelston) TAS 1123 2 8:L 14:W 5:L 10:L 0:W 6:L
13 Martin, Janice TAS 1192 2 5:L 15:D 10:L 9:D 8:L 0:W
14 Carter, Mason TAS 1324 2 3:L 12:L 16:W 8:W 7:L 9:L
15 Fry, Dallas TAS 1306 1.5 7:L 13:D 9:W 5:L 6:L 11:L
16 Ivkovic, Milutin TAS 1302 0 4:L 11:L 14:L 0: 0: 0:

Rather unlike many Tassie tournaments in that all the top players performed reasonably well; couldn't really say anyone from the top seven seeds had a shocker (unlike the state champs where most of the top seeds imploded!)

Capablanca-Fan
17-08-2010, 12:24 AM
Against Tony I think it was partly my strategic mistake. I knew Tony is good in positional chess, I did not know he could be so good.:) At no point black was worse in that game. It was a good illustration of how to play closed positions.
I don't get it; didn't you win that game? This entails a time or mobile phone loss, or an unjustified resignation.

Bill Gletsos
17-08-2010, 12:29 AM
I don't get it; didn't you win that game? This entails a time or mobile phone loss, or an unjustified resignation.I think Vlad is talking about Anton's game against Tony.

Tony Dowden
17-08-2010, 07:48 AM
I think Vlad is talking about Anton's game against Tony.

Bill is correct. Vlad was writing from his point of view as a coach!

Like I wrote earlier, he was fairly preoccupied with coaching duties during the event - seemingly looking at Anton's postions more often than his own ;)

Tony Dowden
17-08-2010, 08:46 PM
Here's the last round Anton Smirnov (9) - Tony Dowden (49) game. Yes, 40 years difference bewteen us :eek:

I had a dose of Kings Indian Attack amnesia so I adopted a cagey home-baked approach at first to see if he would go for Re1, Nf1, h4 attack or central play with c3. Once he played 9.Ne1 and 10.f4 I realised he wasn't relying on either telepathy from Dad on Board 1 or a surfeit of theoretical knowledge.

I wasn't totally happy with my position after 15.d4 (and half my time gone!) but then realised saccing a pawn for the long diagonal (h1-a8) with 16...d5!? looked interesting. Anton didn't grab the pawn - youthful wisdom - but then didn't seem too sure what to do next. The next phase with the IQP position went very well for me as I was able to improve all my pieces whereas he failed to pause properly to work out how to untangle.

Moving at warp speed (at move 25 Anton had used 12 minutes compared to my 44 minutes) he inevitably missed a key tactic (27...Qxc3!) but was perhaps unlucky that various tactical themes kept rolling - meaning that his bishop was eventually doomed. He went for a snap mate but I defended with my own mating attack.

Of course Anton is an incredible talent for a nine-year-old (unbelievable really - I was barely pushing the pieces at that age) but he probably needs to be more patient when tackling 1800+ players.

1.e4 e6 2.d3 c5 3.Nf3 Nc6 4.g3 g6 5.Bg2 Bg7 6.0-0 Nge7 7.Nbd2 d6 8.c3 Qc7 9.Ne1 b6 10.f4 Bb7 11.Ndf3 Rd8 12.Nc2 Ba6 13.Rf2 0-0 14.Be3 Rd7 15.d4 cxd4 16.Nfxd4 d5 17.Nxc6 Nxc6 18.exd5 exd5 19.Nd4 Re8 20.Qd2 Na5 21.b3 Rde7 22.Rf3 Nb7 23.h3 Nd6 24.Bf2 Ne4 25.Qb2 Nxf2 26.Rxf2 Re3 27.Rf3 Qxc3 28.Qxc3 Rxc3 29.Rd1 Bxd4+ 30. Rxd4 Rc1+ 31.Kh2 Re2 32.g4 Rxa2 33.Rg3 Bf1 34.f5 R1c2 35.f6 Bxg2 36.Re3 Be4+ 37.Kg3 g5 38.Rxd5 Rg2 mate

Capablanca-Fan
18-08-2010, 02:03 AM
A.V. Smirnov – Dr R.A. Dowden, NM

1.e4 e6 2.d3 c5 3.Nf3 Nc6 4.g3 g6 5.Bg2 Bg7 6.0-0 Nge7 {I think this is an excellent system which takes a lot of sting out of the KIA} 7.Nbd2 d6 [7... d5] {looks natural, staking out the centre and hindering White's regrouping} 8.c3 Qc7 9.Ne1 b6 10.f4 Bb7 [10... 0-0] {move 12 suggests that it was too early to determine the best spot for the B, while castling is certainly the best place for the K} 11.Ndf3 Rd8 12.Nc2 Ba6 13.Rf2 0-0 14.Be3 Rd7 15.d4 cxd4 16.Nfxd4 d5 [16... Na5] {aiming at c4; that Nc2 would seem to qualify as a ‘superfluous piece’ to use Dvoretsky's term. I don't see the hurry for ...d5} 17.Nxc6 Nxc6 18.exd5 exd5 [18... Ne7] 19.Nd4 [19.Rd2] {or 19. f5. The very young talented White player knows the book advice to blockade the IQP with a N. But unfortunately, this advice is highly misleading. The blockader shields the P from frontal assault, and the N doesn't really do that much on its own half of the board. The Be3 is also short of squares, so the Nc2's protection is useful. If the Nc6 moves, then the B can blockade on d4 instead, likely forcing an exchange of the Bg7.} 19... Re8 20.Qd2 Na5 {the start of an excellent manoeuvre, which weakens the Pc3 as well} 21.b3 Rde7 {well timed; now 22. loses the Pc3, so White is forced to block the diagonal pressure on the Pd5} 22.Rf3 Nb7 23.h3 Nd6 24.Bf2 Ne4 25.Qb2 Nxf2 26.Rxf2 [26.Qxf2 Be2! 27.Nxe2 Rxe2 28.Qf1 d4! {even better than 28... Bxc3} and the passed P will win] 26...Re3 {Black is winning now; he got all the good squares, because White never tied him down to defending the IQP.} 27.Rf3 Qxc3! {this shows how wrong it can be to rely on the Nd4 blockade; Black gets all the good squares then undermines it.} 28.Qxc3 Rxc3 29.Rd1 Bxd4+ 30. Rxd4 Rc1+ 31.Kh2 Re2 32.g4 Rxa2 [32... Rcc2] {to force 33. and avoid any unpinning possibility} 33.Rg3 [33.Kg3] {would unpin, but Black is still two Ps up with a much better position besides} 33...Bf1! 34.f5 R1c2 35.f6 Bxg2 36.Re3 Be4+ 37.Kg3 g5 38.Rxd5 Rg2 mate

Some notes above; I have no idea why it's not playing through.

Garvinator
18-08-2010, 12:23 PM
I can not play through the game.

Capablanca-Fan
19-08-2010, 08:15 AM
Looks like KB has tried to fix; thanx for trying.

Desmond
19-08-2010, 12:10 PM
1.e4 e6 2.d3 c5 3.Nf3 Nc6 4.g3 g6 5.Bg2 Bg7 6.0-0 Nge7 {I think this is an excellent system which takes a lot of sting out of the KIA} 7.Nbd2 d6 [7... d5] {looks natural, staking out the centre and hindering White's regrouping} 8.c3 Qc7 9.Ne1 b6 10.f4 Bb7 [10... 0-0] {move 12 suggests that it was too early to determine the best spot for the B, while castling is certainly the best place for the K} 11.Ndf3 Rd8 12.Nc2 Ba6 13.Rf2 0-0 14.Be3 Rd7 15.d4 cxd4 16.Nfxd4 d5 [16... Na5] {aiming at c4; that Nc2 would seem to qualify as a ‘superfluous piece’ to use Dvoretsky's term. I don't see the hurry for ...d5} 17.Nxc6 Nxc6 18.exd5 exd5 [18... Ne7] 19.Nd4 [19.Rd2] {or 19. f5. The very young talented White player knows the book advice to blockade the IQP with a N. But unfortunately, this advice is highly misleading. The blockader shields the P from frontal assault, and the N doesn't really do that much on its own half of the board. The Be3 is also short of squares, so the Nc2's protection is useful. If the Nc6 moves, then the B can blockade on d4 instead, likely forcing an exchange of the Bg7.} 19... Re8 20.Qd2 Na5 {the start of an excellent manoeuvre, which weakens the Pc3 as well} 21.b3 Rde7 {well timed; now 22. loses the Pc3, so White is forced to block the diagonal pressure on the Pd5} 22.Rf3 Nb7 23.h3 Nd6 24.Bf2 Ne4 25.Qb2 Nxf2 26.Rxf2 [26.Qxf2 Be2! 27.Nxe2 Rxe2 28.Qf1 d4! {even better than 28... Bxc3} and the passed P will win] 26...Re3 {Black is winning now; he got all the good squares, because White never tied him down to defending the IQP.} 27.Rf3 Qxc3! {this shows how wrong it can be to rely on the Nd4 blockade; Black gets all the good squares then undermines it.} 28.Qxc3 Rxc3 29.Rd1 Bxd4+ 30. Rxd4 Rc1+ 31.Kh2 Re2 32.g4 Rxa2 [32... Rcc2] {to force 33. and avoid any unpinning possibility} 33.Rg3 [33.Kg3] {would unpin, but Black is still two Ps up with a much better position besides} 33...Bf1! 34.f5 R1c2 35.f6 Bxg2 36.Re3 Be4+ 37.Kg3 g5 38.Rxd5 Rg2

Your 32... variation broke it (Ree2 instead of Rcc2)

Bill Gletsos
19-08-2010, 01:28 PM
Looks like KB has tried to fix; thanx for trying.It is working now after I changed the move 32 variation of Rcc2 instead of Ree2 as noted by Boris.

Capablanca-Fan
19-08-2010, 01:33 PM
It is working now after I changed the move 32 variation of Rcc2 instead of Ree2 as noted by Boris.
Thanks Boris and Bill.:clap: :owned: Must be very delicate if one 32nd move type seized the whole game up.

Vlad
19-08-2010, 03:17 PM
A.V. Smirnov – Dr R.A. Dowden, NM

1.e4 e6 2.d3 c5 3.Nf3 Nc6 4.g3 g6 5.Bg2 Bg7 6.0-0 Nge7 {I think this is an excellent system which takes a lot of sting out of the KIA} 7.Nbd2 d6 [7... d5] {looks natural, staking out the centre and hindering White's regrouping} 8.c3 Qc7 9.Ne1 b6 10.f4 Bb7 [10... 0-0] {move 12 suggests that it was too early to determine the best spot for the B, while castling is certainly the best place for the K} 11.Ndf3 Rd8 12.Nc2 Ba6 13.Rf2 0-0 14.Be3 Rd7 15.d4 cxd4 16.Nfxd4 d5 [16... Na5] {aiming at c4; that Nc2 would seem to qualify as a ‘superfluous piece’ to use Dvoretsky's term. I don't see the hurry for ...d5} 17.Nxc6 Nxc6 18.exd5 exd5 [18... Ne7] 19.Nd4 [19.Rd2] {or 19. f5. The very young talented White player knows the book advice to blockade the IQP with a N. But unfortunately, this advice is highly misleading. The blockader shields the P from frontal assault, and the N doesn't really do that much on its own half of the board. The Be3 is also short of squares, so the Nc2's protection is useful. If the Nc6 moves, then the B can blockade on d4 instead, likely forcing an exchange of the Bg7.} 19... Re8 20.Qd2 Na5 {the start of an excellent manoeuvre, which weakens the Pc3 as well} 21.b3 Rde7 {well timed; now 22. loses the Pc3, so White is forced to block the diagonal pressure on the Pd5} 22.Rf3 Nb7 23.h3 Nd6 24.Bf2 Ne4 25.Qb2 Nxf2 26.Rxf2 [26.Qxf2 Be2! 27.Nxe2 Rxe2 28.Qf1 d4! {even better than 28... Bxc3} and the passed P will win] 26...Re3 {Black is winning now; he got all the good squares, because White never tied him down to defending the IQP.} 27.Rf3 Qxc3! {this shows how wrong it can be to rely on the Nd4 blockade; Black gets all the good squares then undermines it.} 28.Qxc3 Rxc3 29.Rd1 Bxd4+ 30. Rxd4 Rc1+ 31.Kh2 Re2 32.g4 Rxa2 [32... Rcc2] {to force 33. and avoid any unpinning possibility} 33.Rg3 [33.Kg3] {would unpin, but Black is still two Ps up with a much better position besides} 33...Bf1! 34.f5 R1c2 35.f6 Bxg2 36.Re3 Be4+ 37.Kg3 g5 38.Rxd5 Rg2 mate

Some notes above; I have no idea why it's not playing through.

I do agree with some of the comments and I will highlight them below. However, the analysis was done by somebody who is clearly bised toward black. Now it is time for the analysis by somebody who is biased toward white.:)

Two main comments which I think Jono is right about:
1) 16. Nfd4... is not a natural move, should have taken by the other knight.
2) 19. Nd4... is the critical human error, should have played either 19. f5... or 19.Rd2... After 19. Nd4... Tony gets too much initiative, which as this game shows could be dangerous. However, from the computer point of view there is no big difference among these 3 moves. The critical "computer" mistake was 22. Rf3?... Instead if Anton played 22. Re1... the position would be just equal. But it is a unpleasant type of position, so chances of him making a mistake were quite high.
3) Probably the last mistake before it become nondefendable was 23. h3?... Instead he should have played 23. Bf1.. and just try to hold it tight.
4) 26. Q:f2 was another try to keep the position together. Tony would be required to find a few good moves to win from there.
5) After 19. Nd4... as I mentioned before, Tony did play quite well. However, he could finish quicker if he played 27... R:c3! and also he could give Anton no chances with 30... Re1+! By playing 30...Rc1 and later 32...R:a2 he was risking to end up after 33. Kg3 in the ending two pawns up. Well, it is true that he would have a very high chance of winning this position against Anton. I am not so confident he would win against a stronger opponent though.:)

Capablanca-Fan
24-08-2010, 05:24 PM
I do agree with some of the comments and I will highlight them below. However, the analysis was done by somebody who is clearly bised toward black. Now it is time for the analysis by somebody who is biased toward white.:)
Quite possibly; I've known the black player for over 30 years and naturally would like him to win. All the same, I was critical about some black moves too.


Two main comments which I think Jono is right about:
1) 16. Nfd4... is not a natural move, should have taken by the other knight.
2) 19. Nd4... is the critical human error, should have played either 19. f5... or 19.Rd2... After 19. Nd4... Tony gets too much initiative, which as this game shows could be dangerous. However, from the computer point of view there is no big difference among these 3 moves.
I don't always trust computer evaluations of a strategic nature. Another example is the Steadman v West game from the Trundle Masters in NZ discussed in this thread (http://chesschat.org/showthread.php?t=12033&page=8).


The critical "computer" mistake was 22. Rf3?... Instead if Anton played 22. Re1... the position would be just equal. But it is a unpleasant type of position, so chances of him making a mistake were quite high.
A self-pinning move, but it does seem better, as you say.


3) Probably the last mistake before it become nondefendable was 23. h3?... Instead he should have played 23. Bf1.. and just try to hold it tight.
Not very pleasant with such weak light squares, but better an unpleasant position than a lost one.


4) 26. Q:f2 was another try to keep the position together. Tony would be required to find a few good moves to win from there.
I would presume that he planned 26... Be2, otherwise it would be hard to justify that exchange of the strong N.


5) After 19. Nd4... as I mentioned before, Tony did play quite well. However, he could finish quicker if he played 27... R:c3! and also he could give Anton no chances with 30... Re1+!
Yes, you're right. I suspect that Tony found a clear win and saw no need to look for another.


By playing 30...Rc1 and later 32...R:a2 he was risking to end up after 33. Kg3 in the ending two pawns up. Well, it is true that he would have a very high chance of winning this position against Anton. I am not so confident he would win against a stronger opponent though.:)
I would back him against anyone from that position, with two pawns more and a more active position besides.