PDA

View Full Version : 2009 Tasmanian Championships Burnie March 7-9



Kevin Bonham
27-01-2009, 06:39 PM
Details as per entry form below:

---------------------------------------------------
Tasmanian Chess Championships 2009

Class One 2009 Yulgilbar-Think Big Australian Chess Grand Prix event

Hosted by Burnie Chess Club

Venue Havenview Primary School, Mariott St, Burnie

Starting times Sat 7th March 10:30 am, 2:30 pm, 6:45 pm.

Sun 8th March 9:30 am, 1:45 pm, 6:00 pm

Mon 9thMarch 9:00 am

Games may be delayed due to late finishes.



Entries

$55 waged, $45 concession, $30 U18, $25 U12, $5 discount if received by February 27. Entries on the day close 10am (subject to equipment).



Format 7 round Swiss or Accelerated Swiss. 90 minutes plus 15 seconds per move per player



Prizes

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



Arbiters: Russell Horton and TBA



Enquiries: Phone: Neville Ledger (03) 64311280; Russell Horton hortons@bigpond.com



Notes:

FIDE Laws 2005 apply – ringing mobiles will incur automatic loss of game.

Requested byes will be awarded zero points.

Entrants agree to abide by all decisions of the organisers and arbiters. The organisers reserve the right to make any changes required.

Moves to be recorded until 5 minutes remain. Juniors and novices welcome.

Entry is open to all chess players, however only players who meet TCA residency rules are eligible for the title of Tasmanian Champion. Tasmanian Women’s and Seniors’ Champions titles are also awarded subject to at least two entries meeting TCA residency rules in each category.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

ENTRY FORM


Name:



Address:



Phone: Email (optional):



Please tick here if you would like your entry acknowledged by email: ___

Please detach this form and post it with payment to Neville Ledger, P.O Box 837, Burnie 7320. Cheques and money orders to be made payable to BURNIE CHESS CLUB and will be cleared.

Tony Dowden
27-01-2009, 08:01 PM
Re Lawrence's query about the time limit: we had a 15 sec increment in last year's Tassie Championship but if memory serves me correctly, it wasn't the same in the two years before that. Maybe the TCA could move towards standardising it?

Capablanca-Fan
27-01-2009, 10:06 PM
Why no half-point byes?

Kevin Bonham
27-01-2009, 10:38 PM
Re Lawrence's query about the time limit: we had a 15 sec increment in last year's Tassie Championship but if memory serves me correctly, it wasn't the same in the two years before that.

That's right; it was 25 sec in Burnie in 2006 (the first time increments were attempted) and 10 sec in Hobart in 2007.


Maybe the TCA could move towards standardising it?

I'll put whether to standardise it on the agenda for next meeting.


Why no half-point byes?

This is something the TCA leaves to the discretion of the host club. There was also a no-half-point bye clause in Burnie's last weekender.

I'm not aware of the background for it but I think there's a lot of merit in refusing to allow half-point byes in a state title specifically. After all, there are cases where receiving a half-point bye can be advantageous and it wouldn't be ideal to have the worthiness of someone's state title under a cloud because of it. A state title should be for players who are fully committed to chess on the weekend in question.

Adamski
27-01-2009, 10:46 PM
I hope my Tassie friends enjoy the next weekend at Bernies/ Burnies.

Garvinator
28-01-2009, 01:17 AM
I'm not aware of the background for it but I think there's a lot of merit in refusing to allow half-point byes in a state title specifically. After all, there are cases where receiving a half-point bye can be advantageous and it wouldn't be ideal to have the worthiness of someone's state title under a cloud because of it. A state title should be for players who are fully committed to chess on the weekend in question.
A no half point bye rule can work more easily without causing too many arguments in a state like Tasmania where they have three distinct playing centres, so two of the playing populations have travelled quite a fair distance to reach the third centre.

So the likelihood of players wanting to take a bye because they cant make the first round or want to be home for dinner is less likely, compared to the more standard mainland experiences for 60 + 10.

Vlad
03-02-2009, 09:08 AM
I'm not aware of the background for it but I think there's a lot of merit in refusing to allow half-point byes in a state title specifically. After all, there are cases where receiving a half-point bye can be advantageous and it wouldn't be ideal to have the worthiness of someone's state title under a cloud because of it. A state title should be for players who are fully committed to chess on the weekend in question.

I am thinking about logistics and can not find any way to get to the first round unless flying a day before. Maybe we can get a half point bye for two.:)

Is not it about 350 km from Hobart? That will probably take 3.5 hour drive. Thanks.

Brian_Jones
03-02-2009, 10:57 AM
I'm not aware of the background for it but I think there's a lot of merit in refusing to allow half-point byes in a state title specifically. After all, there are cases where receiving a half-point bye can be advantageous and it wouldn't be ideal to have the worthiness of someone's state title under a cloud because of it. A state title should be for players who are fully committed to chess on the weekend in question.

Half point byes caused pairing problems at Queenstown - I think I will open a seperate thread on this subject!

Kyle
03-02-2009, 11:18 AM
I am thinking about logistics and can not find any way to get to the first round unless flying a day before. Maybe we can get a half point bye for two.:)

Is not it about 350 km from Hobart? That will probably take 3.5 hour drive. Thanks.
May depend on where you are coming from, but you could fly into Launceston which is about 1.5 hour drive or depending on airline schedules fly into Devonport or Wynyard (just down the road)

Southpaw Jim
03-02-2009, 11:21 AM
Is not it about 350 km from Hobart? That will probably take 3.5 hour drive. Thanks.
It is about 350km, but with Tasmanian roads it's closer to 4.5hrs drive. Our highways are generally narrower and there are fewer overtaking lanes/dual carraige sections, and also any towns aren't bypassed, so it's not 110km/h all the way. In addition, the highway between Hobart and Devonport is our main freight route, since rail is virtually non-existent in Tas, so there can be a lot of truck traffic.

I drove to Stanley (about an hour past Burnie) on the Friday before the Australia Day weekend and it took around 6 hours with a brief lunch stop.

Vlad
03-02-2009, 11:59 AM
May depend on where you are coming from, but you could fly into Launceston which is about 1.5 hour drive or depending on airline schedules fly into Devonport or Wynyard (just down the road)


Thanks both of you. Flying to Launceston sounds like much better option than flying to Hobart. Probably we will have to fly Friday evening anyway, so byes are not an issue. Can anybody please suggest cheap accomodation? Thanks. Also do you think we have to hire a car or there is public transport? Thanks.

Southpaw Jim
03-02-2009, 12:49 PM
Also do you think we have to hire a car or there is public transport? Thanks.
From Launceston to Burnie? For the trip from Launceston to Burnie, I'd hire a car. I'd be surprised if there was a coach in either direction more than once a day, but I've not caught coaches in Tasmania for 15+ years.

Kevin Bonham
03-02-2009, 12:59 PM
Surprisingly there are three Redline buses (http://www.tasredline.com/) from Launceston to Burnie on the Friday, leaving 1:30 pm, 4:30 pm and 6:45 pm. On the Monday there is one from Burnie to Launceston leaving 4:30 pm.

Re accommodation in Burnie, how cheap are you after? (I have to look into this myself; I often stay in a very cheap and trashy pub there but am inclined to stay somewhere a bit better this time.)

Southpaw Jim
03-02-2009, 03:05 PM
Ignore me then :rolleyes: :lol:

Vlad
03-02-2009, 03:16 PM
Re accommodation in Burnie, how cheap are you after? (I have to look into this myself; I often stay in a very cheap and trashy pub there but am inclined to stay somewhere a bit better this time.)

With a 8 year-old, I would not go for a trushy pub..:) Probably not too expensive either. Maybe somebody wants to share?:)

Kevin Bonham
03-02-2009, 03:33 PM
With a 8 year-old, I would not go for a trushy pub..:)

No, I didn't think you would. I'm not sure I'll be going there again either after someone crashed into my room while I was sleeping last time. (Was very funny as I thought they were trying to steal stuff when they weren't, and I started yelling abuse at them as they ran away in fright!)

Decent accommodation in Burnie can be quite expensive. A common place for chessplayers to stay, but no longer close to the venue, is the King Of Burnie (http://www.jasons.com/Australia/Tasmania/Burnie/King-of-Burnie-Hotel-Motel) which used to be cheap but is now at least $85/night.

Sharing a unit might be a good way to cut costs. I'll try to get an up to date Travelguide and post some other options, and see if I can find out who from Hobart is going up.

(Note: I am not involved in organising this event but as there is no-one from the BCC online here I will do what I can to help with queries. Queries about the event, how to enter etc should go to the organisers.)

Kevin Bonham
04-02-2009, 04:49 PM
I have scanned an accommodation listing for Burnie from the current Travelways (http://s170.photobucket.com/albums/u275/therealsleepycat/?action=view&current=travelways001.jpg).

As mentioned on a previous thread the current venue (Havenview) is a little out of the centre of town (about 4 km). I actually forgot this when making my previous post although I have played there three times. :(

The Top of the Town hotel/motel (03 6431 4444) is the closest accommodation; it is about 2 km walk from the venue if you walk through the Romaine Reserve (I can provide a map for anyone wishing to do this). According to Travelways listing $85/night, EAA $20, CH $15. I have not stayed there yet myself, but several players have done so without problems.

Anywhere else you really need a car (or arrange a lift with other players) unless you're one of those masochists like me who doesn't mind a 5 km walk in the morning.

There are sometimes limited billets available in Burnie - I suggest contacting the organisers to enquire if seeking one.

Vlad
05-02-2009, 05:05 PM
I have booked tickets to Launceston (still need to book tickets to Sydney) and booked a car in Launceston. Does anybody know if Airport Rd Evandale, Launceston is close to the airport? It is the place where I am supposed to pick up a car. Thanks.

I need to pay the entry fee. Is it possible to deposit money somewhere? Thanks.

And the final bit is to find accomodation.:)

Tony Dowden
05-02-2009, 06:21 PM
I have booked tickets to Launceston (still need to book tickets to Sydney) and booked a car in Launceston. Does anybody know if Airport Rd Evandale, Launceston is close to the airport? It is the place where I am supposed to pick up a car. Thanks.

Hi Vladimir,

Great to hear you (and Anton?) are coming down to the Tasmanian Championships.

The (relatively small) airport for Launceston is adjacent to Airport Road. The car hire companies which don't have a physical presence within the airport grounds - with an office and parked cars and so forth - are literally just across the road, all within 5 mins easy walk.

See you soon :P

Kevin Bonham
05-02-2009, 09:47 PM
I need to pay the entry fee. Is it possible to deposit money somewhere? Thanks.

You'll need to ask the organisers that (see Enquiries details in top post).

Kevin Bonham
07-02-2009, 12:15 AM
I have seen claims elsewhere that the Top of the Town has rooms considerably cheaper than stated in the Travelguide. I hope these claims are true but am not able to vouch for their correctness.

Kevin Bonham
07-02-2009, 07:55 PM
I hope these claims are true but am not able to vouch for their correctness.

Photographic evidence has now been posted elsewhere! ($65 single $85 double according to the sign)

Strangely, despite having a completely abysmal record on matters of fact, the source of the claims seems surprised and offended that I was unwilling to take his claims on trust without evidence in a case where his unsupported word was contradicted by a published source. :rolleyes:

Tony Dowden
17-02-2009, 07:05 PM
Here's a link to the Burnie Chess Club's list of entries to the Tasmanian Championships (11 to date):

http://members.dodo.com.au/~phild707/TasChamps2009/TC2009.htm

Unfortunately the entry form posted on the TCA website has had, up until the time of writing, a wrong link to the North-West Junior chess club based in Ulverstone instead of the Burnie Chess Club. As a consequence this has meant the information given on the ACE maintained 2009 Grand Prix 'Calendar' site has been wrong as well, but I now see that this second glitch (but not the first) has been corrected since I informed Burnie CC officials of the problem yesterday.

Tony Dowden
18-02-2009, 06:13 AM
I now see all links to the Tassie Championships on the ACE and TCA sites are accurate. Incidentally, the Donnelly-Dyer game from the Burnie Club Championships on the Burnie website is interesting.

Phil's comments implied he thought he'd been crushed but I thought White's position went from dead lost out of the (bizarre) opening to virtually winning at one point. For instance without looking at it in too much detail 17.Nxg6!? looks like a winning try.

17-year-old Alastair Dyer is one of Tasmania's most talented players but sometimes he seems to be enjoying himself too much!

Chess is about winning as boringingly as possible - just watch Kamsky take out Topalov ... ;)

Kevin Bonham
18-02-2009, 08:40 PM
I now see all links to the Tassie Championships on the ACE and TCA sites are accurate. Incidentally, the Donnelly-Dyer game from the Burnie Club Championships on the Burnie website is interesting.

I'll comment about it on the Burnie club news (http://chesschat.org/showthread.php?t=5930) thread.

Neil Markovitz may be playing in Burnie.

Tony Dowden
21-02-2009, 08:35 AM
I don't think the Burnie site has up-dated entries into the Tassie Champs since last weekend, so I'll start an unofficial list here:

Almost certain entries
Vladimir Smirnov 2324 (NSW)
Tony Dowden 1970
Kevin Bonham 1886
Alastair Dyer 1818
Vincent Horton 1491
Anton Smirnov 1440 (NSW)
Russell Horton 1437
Mason Carter 1264
Adam Carter 1161
Nina Horton 991
(Total = 10)

Likely possibilities
Neil Markovitz 2015
Marcus Bretag 1641
Phil Donnelly 1610
Lawrence Bretag 1418
Kevin Hendrey 1367
Dallas Fry 1355
Andrew Fifield 1295
Graham Richards 1294
Tony Sturges 1157
(Cumulative total both categories = 19)

My categories are based on rumour and established patterns of behaviour :)

Kevin Bonham
21-02-2009, 11:33 AM
Graham Richards is a likely possibility.

Tony Dowden
22-02-2009, 09:34 AM
'Certainties'
Vladimir Smirnov 2324 (NSW)
Tony Dowden 1970
Kevin Bonham 1886
Alastair Dyer 1818
Marcus Bretag 1641
Vincent Horton 1491
Anton Smirnov 1440 (NSW)
Russell Horton 1437
Lawrence Bretag 1418
Mason Carter 1264
Adam Carter 1161
Nina Horton 991
(Total = 12)

Rumour has it ...
Neil Markovitz 2015
Phil Donnelly 1610
Dallas Fry 1355
Graham Richards 1294

kawa
22-02-2009, 10:37 AM
Andrew Fifield is a definte non-starter.

Kevin Bonham
23-02-2009, 09:13 PM
I see there is some nonsense from recidivist U2 misquoter Phil Donnelly on his unofficial BCC website about supposedly "wild rumours" here about who may or may not be playing (to say a Tasmanian player who could play may be playing is hardly a "wild rumour"; if it was a GM or IM he might have a point). I suspect this is all in the nature of tongue-in-cheek and possibly even self-mocking trolling by Donnelly (who as far as I know has no formal role in the event) and don't intend to respond to most of his comments.

However one irony of this is that Phil's website itself listed one name as a TBC (Dallas Fry) that has now been removed from the list, even though other TBCs have now been added. So it's not clear Phil's list has been as reliable as he implies!

Another update/correction to the accommodation list from the Travelways: Regent Hotel (near the beach and hence a fair way from the venue) have converted to semi-backpackers with single rooms now @ $30 a night, cheaper than the $50 listed.

Kevin Bonham
24-02-2009, 09:01 PM
Nigel Frame now listed as confirmed.

There is some nonsense ostensibly related to this event in the other place. I remind those (ir)responsible that updates on their personality deficiencies can be now and then found on this thread here (http://chesschat.org/showthread.php?t=9190).

Phil Donnelly seems to think that the fact that people are willing to speculate, with their comments clearly marked as speculation, about possible entries to a tournament is the most dramatic and scandalous event in Tasmanian chess in the past 296 years and must be wondering why the Advocate has not yet devoted an eight-page special feature to the issue!

Hilariously amid this beat-up, Arrogant-One (6:16 pm) claims "Good thing Alastair Dyer is confirmed so he can beat [KB] again" and Phil himself (6:49 pm) also comments in a similar way.

But in the latest update to the entry list on Phil's website (5:40:06 pm) Alastair is not yet listed as an official entrant! :lol:

(FWIW, I assume he is playing and would be very surprised if he didn't.)

There is a claim in the other place that the unofficial BCC website is the official website for the tournament (!) and I have even encountered a "wild rumour" that FM Smirnov will play a simul after the event!

Also amusingly Phil has made the following comment clearly in response to my post above:


Dirt cheap accomodation is available at the Regent Hotel in the city centre but should be avoided as this is a very busy and noisy pub on Friday and Saturday night

Ooooh Phil, your raging Burnie nightlife is so terrifying!

For completion he should have also mentioned that dirt cheap accommodation is also available at Greens Hotel which is even noisier (which bothers some people but not others), where there is no fridge and where one can even, among other delights, enjoy the added pleasure of having one's room gatecrashed in the middle of the night! :D

(I do not intend staying at Greens again, but it is the lack of an adequate breakfast option rather than anything else that has driven me out!)

Tony Dowden
24-02-2009, 09:02 PM
Actually Kevin, I think Phil was just having a wry dig at my 'Rumour has it' heading which is fair enough in my book.

I've up-graded Burnie co-champion Phil Donnelly to a certainty based on his 'reliable' BCC source (which I suspect is himself!). By way of explanation: I left Phil out earlier as (1) KB had already told me he (Kevin) had himself entered, and (2) it seemed a pattern had become established in the last year or two whereby a Bonham entry in a Tasmanian event ensured a Donnelly non-entry.

The BCC website doesn't mention Burnie co-champion Alastair Dyer's intentions but he personally communicated to me some time ago that he's entering. The BCC website says Nigel Frame has entered. Therefore, if the Bonham, Donnelly and Frame entries all stay solid - and let's hope they do - it will be like a return to the 'good old days' when I first came back to Tassie back in 2005, when the Bonham-Frame-Donnelly nexus represented the toughest opposition on the Tasmanian circuit.

What the event might lack in numbers is definitely made up in quality. The old guard above (to which I suppose I belong) will be sorely tested by visiting FM Vladimir Smirnov, his son Anton and highly talented Tassie young guns: Alastair Dyer, Vincent Horton, Mason Carter, and, most likely, Marcus and Lawrence Bretag. Even without too many more entries (surely there will be more from Launceston and the North-West?) it should be a fantastic event. FM Vladimir Smirnov will be the raging favourite to win the event but the race for the Tasmanian title will be wide open :D

'Certainties'
Vladimir Smirnov 2324 (NSW)
Tony Dowden 1970
Kevin Bonham 1886
Alastair Dyer 1818
Nigel Frame 1719
Marcus Bretag 1641
Phil Donnelly 1610
Vincent Horton 1491
Anton Smirnov 1440 (NSW)
Russell Horton 1437
Lawrence Bretag 1418
Mason Carter 1264
Adam Carter 1161
Nina Horton 991
(Total = 14)

Rumour (still) has it ...
Neil Markovitz 2015
Dallas Fry 1355
Graham Richards 1294

The link to the official tournament site is http://members.dodo.com.au/~phild707/TasChamps2009/TC2009.htm

Kevin Bonham
24-02-2009, 09:13 PM
14 entries more or less confirmed with more than a week to go is really not bad; I'm hopeful there won't be any lacking of numbers.

Saragossa
24-02-2009, 09:16 PM
Has anybody heard anything from Kevin and Thomas? (I apologise if I spelt Thomas incorrectly).

Kevin Bonham
25-02-2009, 12:57 AM
Therefore, if the Bonham, Donnelly and Frame entries all stay solid - and let's hope they do - it will be like a return to the 'good old days' when I first came back to Tassie back in 2005, when the Bonham-Frame-Donnelly nexus represented the toughest opposition on the Tasmanian circuit.

There was plenty of clearly stronger opposition around than Donnelly at that time but I guess those opponents were generally not "circuiting" (several of them were only playing in weekenders in their own cities).

Phil is (or was, it's been a few years since I played him) a much tougher opponent for strong established adults than his rating indicates, but the flipside to that is his ability to lose in weekenders to pretty much anybody.


(2) it seemed a pattern had become established in the last year or two whereby a Bonham entry in a Tasmanian event ensured a Donnelly non-entry.

There have been two weekenders since the start of 2007 that I have not played in and these are the only two weekenders Phil contested in this time.

At one point he said something very strongly worded along the lines of that he wouldn't play in Hobart anymore and he didn't want me to play in Burnie but it evidently failed to have the desired effect. :D

Tony Dowden
25-02-2009, 06:35 AM
There was plenty of clearly stronger opposition around than Donnelly at that time but I guess those opponents were generally not "circuiting" (several of them were only playing in weekenders in their own cities).
Granted, there may have been potentially stronger opposition but they weren't playing. In three-and-a-half years of attending all but two Tassie cirucit events I still haven't played any of them ;)



Phil is (or was, it's been a few years since I played him) a much tougher opponent for strong established adults than his rating indicates ...
I agree, Phil has a good chess knowledge and on a good day he is way stronger than his current rating. But as we well know down here in Tassie, after a few reverses to lowly rated players (or too many draws in my case :( ) the Glicko system really clobbers one's rating.

Tony Dowden
25-02-2009, 06:37 AM
Has anybody heard anything from Kevin and Thomas? (I apologise if I spelt Thomas incorrectly).

Presumably Thomas will be back up in Melbourne at uni. I'm guessing Kevin will play but haven't heard even a rumour yet ;)

tevez
25-02-2009, 10:35 AM
will tony d retain his 'unbeaten on home soil record'??

Saragossa
25-02-2009, 03:12 PM
Out of curiosity how many games has that been Tony? Do you play in the blitz championship? If so that would probs be the best place for an upset, that or we'll be forced to do the old "WHATS THAT BEHIND YOU?!" *shuffles pieces* trick :whistle: ;)

Kevin Bonham
25-02-2009, 03:18 PM
I'd like to know how many draws he has conceded/salvaged in main-list-rateable games in that time. 15? 20? Even in good years I'll often have almost as many losses as draws. Sometimes more.

Tony Dowden
25-02-2009, 07:23 PM
will tony d retain his 'unbeaten on home soil record'??

It might take seven draws to avoid Big Vlad and keep a clean sheet :lol:

Tony Dowden
25-02-2009, 07:37 PM
I'd like to know how many draws he has conceded/salvaged in main-list-rateable games in that time. 15? 20? Even in good years I'll often have almost as many losses as draws. Sometimes more.

I don't know how many draws, I haven't kept count! Its probably at least 20. Some include games against Mainlanders such as Guy West and James Morris.

As you say, a few draws have been miracle saves (Sante Bettiol, Vincent Horton and Mason Carter spring to mind). A few have been overly generous.

Most are a combination of laziness, too many rounds in one day, exaggerated respect from my opponents and the sort of tournament tactics you might expect from a veteran player :cool:

Tony Dowden
25-02-2009, 07:50 PM
Out of curiosity how many games has that been Tony? Do you play in the blitz championship? If so that would probs be the best place for an upset, that or we'll be forced to do the old "WHATS THAT BEHIND YOU?!" *shuffles pieces* trick :whistle: ;)

I don't know how many 'Tasmanian circuit' games. Maybe 70? (I think I've played in 15 events and won 11-12 of them). Counting ACF rated Club games as well, it is probably over 100.

Unbeaten in three Tasmanian Lightning Championships as well :D Also in rapid chess - but I've only played the one rated game (a win against Minol two weeks ago).

I know I'll go down to one of the new generation of young guns eventually, so just keep playing normal chess ;) I just hope that when I do lose I get outplayed rather than blundering material - like against Mason in the last event.

I am (very) beatable though. :lol: Two Tasmanian players have beaten me several times! (At least 10 games each). Guess who they are ...

Saragossa
25-02-2009, 08:17 PM
David Small? ummm maybe Alastair?

Tony Dowden
25-02-2009, 08:42 PM
David Small? ummm maybe Alastair?

Alastair Dyer is one. :clap: He won two practice matches against me last year: one was a crushing win against a home-brew line of my Alekhine's Defence and in the other I took too many risks in a drawn ending that I had been winning at an earlier stage (a common psychological error) He's also beaten me in, oooooh, maybe 10 more off-hand blitz games. We are about even at blitz: I'm still a bit better positionally but his calculation and general sight of the board is a tad too quick for me (these days its a struggle to hold the line at 2000 on PlayChess and I rarely hit 2100 anymore).

But I've only played David Small once - a draw of course ;)

Saragossa
26-02-2009, 07:10 PM
Neil Markovitz? I'm trying to look at old tournaments in the database thingy from 2005 onwards but you don't seem to have to many games entered. But Pavicic Mile looked good but seems he stays in Burnie and I would suppose that you and Kevin Bonham have played a fair bit so perhaps he is just being modest? Other then that I wouldn't really know.

Tony Dowden
26-02-2009, 07:21 PM
Up-dated entries
Vladimir Smirnov 2324 (NSW)
Neil Markovitz 2015
Tony Dowden 1970
Kevin Bonham 1886
Alastair Dyer 1818
Nigel Frame 1719
Marcus Bretag 1641
Phil Donnelly 1610
Reg Harvey 1509
Vincent Horton 1491
Dylan Kuzmic 1470
Anton Smirnov 1440 (NSW)
Russell Horton 1437
Lawrence Bretag 1418
Nigel Lewis 1390
Kevin Hendrey 1367
Mason Carter 1264
Adam Carter 1161
Nina Horton 991
Gemma Goodwell 973
(Total = 20)

Possibles
Graham Richards 1294

The link to the official tournament site is http://members.dodo.com.au/~phild707...009/TC2009.htm

Tony Dowden
26-02-2009, 07:23 PM
Neil Markovitz? I'm trying to look at old tournaments in the database thingy from 2005 onwards but you don't seem to have to many games entered. But Pavicic Mile looked good but seems he stays in Burnie and I would suppose that you and Kevin Bonham have played a fair bit so perhaps he is just being modest? Other then that I wouldn't really know.

Nope. I've only played Neil twice: a win and a draw.

I only started playing in Tassie at the end of 2005 :P

I've played Mile once in a blitz game - I won (but he was impressively competitive considering his [advanced] age). And, nope, KB hasn't beaten me yet ;)

Kevin Bonham
26-02-2009, 08:46 PM
If Tony has played lots of quick games with Ramin Rezaie I would expect Ramin to have won some. I have not played Ramin at any speed faster than blitz but doubt I would get through any more than five or six offhand games against him without at least one loss.

Good field for the Tas Champs. The numbers are promising already and there is not the usual tail of sub-800 juniors. Should be a strong event.

Especially good to see Markovitz will be playing in Burnie because quite often the Burnie state champs events are weaker than the Hobart ones on account of strong Hobart players not travelling. Looks like not the case this year.

Tony Dowden
26-02-2009, 08:53 PM
Yep, Ramin Rezaie :lol: I must be over 90% (maybe even 95%) against Ramin in blitz but we've played several hundred games so he must have way over 10 games. Some nights he stays winless but on his better nights he will win 2 or 3.

He is great fun to play against. He's an 'honest' blitz opponent who can be relied on to be aggressive and dangerous, yet always demonstrates impeccable sportsmanship.

Tony Dowden
26-02-2009, 09:03 PM
Good field for the Tas Champs. The numbers are promising already and there is not the usual tail of sub-800 juniors. Should be a strong event.

Especially good to see Markovitz will be playing in Burnie because quite often the Burnie state champs events are weaker than the Hobart ones on account of strong Hobart players not travelling. Looks like not the case this year.

It's an excellent field! I will be absolutely rapt if I manage to retain the title.

Kevin Bonham
26-02-2009, 09:36 PM
The presence of a really strong ineligible top seed will make things interesting.

The last time this happened was in 2004 when FM Lim Yee Weng (who now has a full set of IM norms and just needs to get his rating up to be an IM) scored 6/6.

At a certain point in the last round it looked likely that the title would go to a bunch of four players on 4/6 some of whom were performing at below 1800. Thankfully that didn't happen and there was an outright second, but one reason we now typically have seven rounds is to give the field more time to sort itself properly to try to avoid this kind of logjam of dubiously worthy co-champions.

Desmond
27-02-2009, 03:12 PM
I'm guessing the field will be too small for a swiss gambit, with the gambiteer likely to play FM Smirnov towards the end anyway.

Kevin Bonham
27-02-2009, 08:08 PM
The following can also be added to the list of "wild rumours" of likely starters:

Tony Sturges 1157
James Briant 1316j
Harry Briant 501j
Owen Short 1224j

(Tony told me today that he has sent his entry and heard that the other three listed expect to play.)

Tony Dowden
28-02-2009, 07:16 AM
I'm guessing the field will be too small for a swiss gambit, with the gambiteer likely to play FM Smirnov towards the end anyway.

Good point Boris. Besides, I'm not afraid of losing any more. I lost my first ACF rated game in Tasmania in a club event last night (againt former Tassie champion Michael Lucht). Great prep for Burnie next week :lol:

Tony Dowden
28-02-2009, 07:28 AM
Likely entry list one week out
Vladimir Smirnov 2324 (NSW)
Neil Markovitz 2015
Tony Dowden 1970
Kevin Bonham 1886
Alastair Dyer 1818 j
Nigel Frame 1719
Marcus Bretag 1641
Phil Donnelly 1610
Reg Harvey 1509
Vincent Horton 1491 j
Dylan Kuzmic 1470
Anton Smirnov 1440 j (NSW)
Russell Horton 1437
Lawrence Bretag 1418 j
Nigel Lewis 1390
Kevin Hendrey 1367 j
James Briant 1316 j
Mason Carter 1264 j
Owen Short 1224 j
Adam Carter 1161
Tony Sturges 1157
Nina Horton 991 j
Gemma Goodwell 973 j
Harry Briant 501 j
(Total = 24)

Thanks for the up-date KB. Not bad with one week to go :P

Unfortunately none of the 'semi-regulars' from Launceston are planning to enter (with the exception of myself - although I hope I count as a 'regular' by now).

Kevin Bonham
28-02-2009, 04:45 PM
To save Phil the effort of "going back to [his] record books" (they exist??) I can advise him that records for the Tas Champs and other state titles are found here (http://chesschat.org/showthread.php?t=6034). The record turnout for the Tas Champs thus far is 32, but records of this sort are meant to be broken!

I also noticed that AO made a typically lame and clueless trolling post trying to give Phil the credit for this tournament and link it into general trolling about conflicts between Phil and nameless others, when the names on the entry form as organisers of the event are Russell Horton and Neville Ledger. While Phil has made a contribution by advertising details and lists of entries via his unofficial club website, and a negligible one via a silly forum that currently has no active Tasmanian posters except himself, it was remiss of him to take all the credit for himself in simply thanking AO for his nonsense thus failing to give credit where it is due.

Basil
28-02-2009, 04:58 PM
and a negligible one via a silly forum that currently has no active Tasmanian posters except himself...

http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y105/scene66/smilies/withstupid.gif http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y105/scene66/smilies/hug.gif

Tony Dowden
28-02-2009, 10:29 PM
While Phil has made a contribution by advertising details and lists of entries via his unofficial club website, and ... via a .. forum that currently has no active Tasmanian posters except himself

What 'forum' are you referring to KB?

Garvinator
28-02-2009, 10:37 PM
What 'forum' are you referring to KB?
:silenced:

Kevin Bonham
28-02-2009, 10:39 PM
What 'forum' are you referring to KB?

The one we call "the Toolbox", run by people who got themselves banned from here. I can't post its URL here as we blocked it to stop them from spamming for it (and therefore no one can link to it from here), but I'll email you the URL.

Tony Dowden
01-03-2009, 08:53 AM
Thanks KB. I should have realised you meant another special interst website or something.

Tony Dowden
01-03-2009, 09:10 AM
Likely entrants (March 2009 ratings)
Vladimir Smirnov 2324 fm (NSW)
Tony Dowden 1986
Neil Markovitz 1948
Kevin Bonham 1880
Alastair Dyer 1830 j
Marcus Bretag 1749 j
Nigel Frame 1719
Phil Donnelly 1610
Reg Harvey 1509
Anton Smirnov 1495 j (NSW)
Russell Horton 1470
Dylan Kuzmic 1470
Vincent Horton 1444 j
Kevin Hendrey 1421 j
Lawrence Bretag 1408 j
Nigel Lewis 1390
Mason Carter 1325 j
James Briant 1316 j
Owen Short 1224 j
Tony Sturges 1154
Adam Carter 1039
Gemma Goodwell 973 j w
Nina Horton 888 j w
Harry Briant 648 j

(Total = 24)

Tony Dowden
03-03-2009, 07:03 PM
No further updates on the Burnie CC website so I shall bravely speculate there might be up to half a dozen more players (its not too difficult to think of some who have regularly appeared in the past) thus bringing the field up to 30.

We shall see on Saturday I suppose :)

Kevin Bonham
03-03-2009, 08:48 PM
Graham Richards has told me he'll be playing, so he's one more who is at least likely.

Garvinator
03-03-2009, 09:38 PM
Vladimir Smirnov 2324 fm (NSW)
Tony Dowden 1986
Neil Markovitz 1948
Kevin Bonham 1880
Alastair Dyer 1830 j
Marcus Bretag 1749 j
Nigel Frame 1719
Phil Donnelly 1610
Reg Harvey 1509
Anton Smirnov 1495 j (NSW)
Russell Horton 1470
Dylan Kuzmic 1470
Vincent Horton 1444 j
Kevin Hendrey 1421 j
Lawrence Bretag 1408 j
Nigel Lewis 1390
Mason Carter 1325 j
James Briant 1316 j
Richards, Graham 1294
Owen Short 1224 j
Tony Sturges 1154
Adam Carter 1039
Gemma Goodwell 973 j w
Nina Horton 888 j w
Harry Briant 648 j

Kevin Bonham
03-03-2009, 09:50 PM
I'll be interested to see what kind of score the bottom half manage in round one. I doubt it will be zero; there are a lot of dangerous players in the second half of the field. For instance at the moment I would be paired with Nigel Lewis who I am only +3-2 against. Actually in that field I'd say most of the bottom half are dangerous!

Tony Dowden
04-03-2009, 07:03 AM
:hmm: I agree its a dangerous field! I'm concentrating on Rd 1 - as I have an indifferent record in that respect of late!

Burnie webmaster Phil Donnelly has kindly contacted me to say as of late yesterday there were no new entries. So the list supplied by ggrayggray - which includes intending entrant Graham Richards - is as good as it gets at present. Maybe getting to 30 players will be tricky after all.

Postscript: Lawrence and Marcus Bretag are certainties now. So only Southern juniors Owen Short, James and Harry Briant are unconfirmed.

Saragossa
04-03-2009, 02:54 PM
So do I get to play against Neil Markovitz in the first round? So the bottom half is kind of like a mirror of the top?

Kevin Bonham
04-03-2009, 07:08 PM
So do I get to play against Neil Markovitz in the first round? So the bottom half is kind of like a mirror of the top?

If there were no changes then in round 1 Harry Briant would get the bye, and the rest of the field would split in two halves 1-12 and 13-24 which play each other in that order. So if there were no changes then yes, you would play Markovitz.

However with entries on the day allowed, it's possible who you play in round 1 will move up or down a board or two depending on who else (if anyone) enters.

ER
04-03-2009, 07:43 PM
Are we going to have any online coverage of the event?

Kevin Bonham
04-03-2009, 07:45 PM
Are we going to have any online coverage of the event?

Only after the event in my case as I will be offline the whole time.

Not sure if anyone else will be posting updates anywhere.

ER
04-03-2009, 07:55 PM
I would encourage organisers to do something about it! We are talking about a State Championship here!
The event is very interesting and I am sure I am not the only one who would expect round to round results, standings, news, etc!

Kevin Bonham
04-03-2009, 08:07 PM
The organisers don't post on, or as far as I'm aware follow, this site.

Posting results round by round as they happen is pretty unrealistic when you have only a 1 hr break between rounds, unless you can get a net connection arranged at the venue.

Tony Dowden
04-03-2009, 08:17 PM
Posting results round by round as they happen is pretty unrealistic

:hmm: Yes, sorry, it is unrealistic.

I'll do what I can to help KB and Sargossa and the crew up-date afterwards though :cool:

Kevin Bonham
04-03-2009, 11:02 PM
It may be Phil will put results up day by day on his unofficial BCC website but I'm reluctant to even discuss the possibility until Phil gets rid of all the idiosyncratic personal attack garbage from parts of his site.

David Hughes 1372 and Ashton Fitzallen 812 now listed as confirmed additions. This shows what I mean about how the draw changes with further additions, because both of those are in the bottom half meaning that V Horton would move into the top half and all of K Hendrey, L Bretag, Lewis play an opponent one further up than before. That's assuming no further changes.

I never try to prepare for a specific round 1 opponent in advance since my experience is it changes most of the time.

Bereaved
04-03-2009, 11:22 PM
I never try to prepare for a specific round 1 opponent in advance since my experience is it changes most of the time.


Hi Kevin, do you ever just think of what rating range they might be in? ie who was the shortlist of possibilities, because I think it is unlikely in all save a very small very strong tournament that you could ever be in the bottom half of the draw, please tell me if this is incorrect in your opinion; I am only considering Tasmanian players.

I have done this when I am quite sure I will be in the top half of the pairings

Take care and God Bless, Macavity

Kevin Bonham
05-03-2009, 12:31 AM
Hi Kevin, do you ever just think of what rating range they might be in?

Not really because with the Tassie players in the range 1250-1550 (which is the sort of range I play in round 1 unless the draw is accelerated) there's not much correlation between the rating and how much care I think I need when playing them. It comes down more to the playing styles of individuals. I find some of the 1300s more dangerous than some of the 1500s.

Later in a tournament I will often think about the shortlist, especially to try to prepare myself for the possibility of a difficult opponent at a certain stage.


ie who was the shortlist of possibilities, because I think it is unlikely in all save a very small very strong tournament that you could ever be in the bottom half of the draw, please tell me if this is incorrect in your opinion; I am only considering Tasmanian players.

Yes, I think I've always been in the top 1/4 in round 1 since the Tassie ratings were fixed up in 1997.

Speaking of Phil's site there is a piece up there at the moment speculating (yep, that same thing he doesn't like other people doing about the entry list) about the chances of, and what happens in the case of, a tie for the title.

Phil writes:


In any case it will be interesting to see how events unfold but for my money, in the case of a tie, the title should be awarded on tie-breaking.

(It is not clear whether or not this will be the case from the entry form).

The entry form doesn't need to say anything as there is a longstanding tradition that tiebreaks aren't imposed for the title. Ties were split by playoff up until 1956 but since then every tie that has occurred (there have been five - the first in 1974 and the most recent in 2007) has stood. Certainly as there is no TCA resolution allowing for any particular tiebreak or playoff to be imposed on players against their will, there is no way a tiebreak or playoff could occur unless all the players tied for the title wanted it. A TCA motion would need to be passed for a tiebreak to be imposed, and it is certainly too late to do this for this year.

(I think it's a tricky one with arguments either way. It would be cruel to deny a worthy recipient of a share of the title on a mathematical tiebreak, especially as these are sometimes thrown out of kilter by withdrawals and so on, but at the same time I have a lingering dread that someday there will be a 5+ way tie for the title with some of the recipients having clearly just got lucky from out of midfield in the last two rounds.)

Incidentally I mentioned the 2004 situation in a post above (#52). What I didn't mention was that had there been a four-way tie for the title that year it could well have been a four-way tie for third place in the tournament with ineligible players first and second.

I guess New Zealanders would be more used to this sort of scenario.

Kevin Bonham
05-03-2009, 12:42 AM
I should have also noted that the option of accelerating the draw is available, although I see no reason why it would need to be used.

It's a real shame for some of our shorter tournaments that the SP acceleration module bears so little relation to how it is supposed to be done.

eclectic
05-03-2009, 04:54 PM
i was wondering if you have ever considered holding the tasmanian championships on the hobart regatta long weekend in february so that tasmanian players are then free to come over in march for the begonia

(ok factors of which i am not aware might preclude this possibility)

just a thought

:)

Vlad
05-03-2009, 05:24 PM
Before we decided to play in Tasmania, we seriously considered the option of playing in Begonia (which would cost us significantly more). However, at the time when it was almost too late to book airtickets, there was no official information about the Begonia tournament. :doh:

The point I am trying to make is that it is always easy to ask somebody else to do something for you. Usually it requires zero effort. Why not first fix the tournament to make it the same level of organization as Doerbel and SIO and possibly after that expect people to help you.

Tony Dowden
05-03-2009, 07:47 PM
Likely entrants (up-dated Thursday)
Vladimir Smirnov 2324 fm (NSW)
Tony Dowden 1986
Neil Markovitz 1948
Kevin Bonham 1880
Alastair Dyer 1830 j
Marcus Bretag 1749 j
Nigel Frame 1719
Phil Donnelly 1610
Reg Harvey 1509
Anton Smirnov 1495 j (NSW)
Russell Horton 1470
Dylan Kuzmic 1470
Vincent Horton 1444 j
Kevin Hendrey 1421 j
Lawrence Bretag 1408 j
Nigel Lewis 1390
David Hughes 1372
Mason Carter 1325 j
James Briant 1316 j
Graham Richards 1294
Owen Short 1224 j
Tony Sturges 1154
Adam Carter 1039
Gemma Goodwell 973 j w
Nina Horton 888 j w
Ashton Fitzallen 812 j
Harry Briant 648 j

(Total = 27)

Kevin Bonham
05-03-2009, 09:47 PM
i was wondering if you have ever considered holding the tasmanian championships on the hobart regatta long weekend in february so that tasmanian players are then free to come over in march for the begonia

Hobart Regatta day is only a public holiday in the south of the state and not in the north so holding the tournament on that weekend would be grossly disadvantageous to players in the north and northwest. It is therefore not an option.

We have been approached a large number of times about the clash between the Tas Champs and Begonia but there does not appear to be any remotely practical solution.

Tony Dowden
06-03-2009, 09:16 PM
Likely entrants (up-dated Friday - with corrected ratings)

Vladimir Smirnov 2324 fm (NSW)
Tony Dowden 1986
Neil Markovitz 1948
Kevin Bonham 1880
Alastair Dyer 1830 j
Marcus Bretag 1749 j
Nigel Frame 1719
Phil Donnelly 1610
Henry Sheerwater 1596
Reg Harvey 1509
Anton Smirnov 1495 j (NSW)
Russell Horton 1470
Dylan Kuzmic 1470
Vincent Horton 1444 j
Kevin Hendrey 1421 j
Lawrence Bretag 1408 j
Nigel Lewis 1390
David Hughes 1376
Mason Carter 1325 j
James Briant 1316 j
Graham Richards 1294
Owen Short 1224 j
Tony Sturges 1154
Adam Carter 1039
Gemma Goodwell 973 j w
Nina Horton 888 j w
Ashton Fitzallen 812
Harry Briant 648 j

(Total = 28)

Tournament webpage: http://members.dodo.com.au/~phild707/TasChamps2009/TC2009.htm

Garvinator
07-03-2009, 09:12 AM
Any updates? :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

Garvinator
08-03-2009, 02:22 AM
Any information at all????

Tony Dowden
08-03-2009, 07:44 AM
Progress at end of Day 1

V. Smirnov 3/3; Dowden, Dyer, Bonham, Markovitz 2.5; Frame, Donnelly, R. Horton, A. Smirnov, Harvey, Kuzmic 2; V. Horton, J. Briant, H. Briant, Lewis 1.5; M. Bretag, L. Bretag, Hendrey, A. Carter, Sturges, Richards, Hughes, Short 1; Fitzallen, M. Carter 0.5, Woodwell, N. Horton 0.

I've played a bunch of under-rated juniors :( I had Lawrence Bretag (Saragossa) in Rd 1, Anton Smirnov in Rd 2 and Alastair Dyer in Rd 3. Lawrence seemed over-awed and will probably prefer to forget the game. Anton (8 years old, I had to keep reminding myself) lost material but fought like crazy deep into the ending. What a talent!! I played a dodgy combo against Alastair and only just held a worse rook and pawn ending ending.

This morning I have white against Big Vlad :P

charleschadwick
09-03-2009, 02:57 PM
What news?

Ivanchuk_Fan
09-03-2009, 03:42 PM
According to the tournament website, Vladimir Smirnov finished in clear 1st place with a score of 6.5/7. In equal 2nd place and sharing the title of Tasmanian Champion were Neil Markovitz, Tony Dowden and Alistair Dyer, who scored 5/7. Vlad was held to a draw by Kevin Bonham, who finished =5th with 4.5/7.

Garvinator
09-03-2009, 04:07 PM
Name 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Score

1 Smirnov, Vladimir W15+ B10+ W11+ B 4+ W 5= B 3+ W 6+ 6.5
2 Dyer, Alastair W23+ B17+ W 4= B 3= W11+ B 5- W 9+ 5
3 Markovitz, Neil W 8= B 6+ B 9+ W 2= B18+ W 1- W10+ 5
4 Dowden, Tony B 7+ W14+ B 2= W 1- B 9= W13+ W 5+ 5
5 Bonham, Kevin B12= W16+ B24+ W 9= B 1= W 2+ B 4- 4.5
6 Horton, Vincent B24= W 3- B19+ W16+ W10+ B11+ B 1- 4.5
7 Bretag, Lawrence W 4- B26+ W10- B 8+ W22= B15+ W18+ 4.5
8 Lewis, Nigel B 3= W24- B27+ W 7- B16+ B22+ W17+ 4.5
9 Frame, Nigel W21+ B25+ W 3- B 5= W 4= B17+ B 2- 4
10 Harvey, Reg B19+ W 1- B 7+ W13+ B 6- W18+ B 3- 4
11 Donnelly, Phil B20+ W13+ B 1- W14+ B 2- W 6- B19+ 4
12 Hughes, David W 5= B22= W17- B25- W21+ B24+ W23+ 4
13 Kuzmic, Dylan W26+ B11- W22+ B10- W25+ B 4- W15= 3.5
14 Smirnov, Anton W28+ B 4- W25+ B11- W15- B23= W22+ 3.5
15 Hendrey, Kevin B 1- W20+ B18- W19+ B14+ W 7- B13= 3.5
16 Briant, James W22= B 5- W23+ B 6- W 8- B26+ W25+ 3.5
17 Horton, Russell B27+ W 2- B12+ W18- B20+ W 9- B 8- 3
18 Sheerwater, Henry W25- B28+ W15+ B17+ W 3- B10- B 7- 3
19 Carter, Adam W10- B21+ W 6- B15- W26+ B28+ W11- 3
20 Short, Owen W11- B15- W26+ B21+ W17- B25+ 3
21 Richards, Graham B 9- W19- B28+ W20- B12- bye+ W24+ 3
22 Bretag, Marcus B16= W12= B13- W24+ B 7= W 8- B14- 2.5
23 Carter, Mason B 2- W27= B16- W28+ B24= W14= B12- 2.5
24 Briant, Harrison W 6= B 8+ W 5- B22- W23= W12- B21- 2
25 Sturges, Tony B18+ W 9- B14- W12+ B13- W20- B16- 2
26 Horton, Nina B13- W 7- B20- W27+ B19- W16- W28+ 2
27 Fitzallen, Ashton W17- B23= W 8- B26- W28- bye+ 1.5
28 WoodWell, Gemma B14- W18- W21- B23- B27+ W19- B26- 1

Saragossa
09-03-2009, 04:56 PM
Yeah tournament was pretty awesome I found it better with a second room for analysis compared to the Burnie shines last time which only had one room.

Yeah round one (scratch that! day one!) was a little bit dissapointing however I do enjoy going over games with Tony afterwards and feel I learn alot even if I played a shocking game (I think thats the third game ended between Tony and I in under 20 moves.)

Then my third round game against Reg was bad, I had a fairly won position but did nothing with it and the hung a rook only then to trade into a drawn (I think anyway) to blunder again and lose anyway.

Nina played a really good game in the second round against me seemed we both had slipped into a passive position, I definately didn't want a draw so played a kingside march and built pressure on the f-pawn until the position finally cracked which was unfortunate because she fought the entire time.

Second day had a good self loathing session after missing a winning move against marcus in the second game after he declined my draw offer only to then draw later.

6th round against Kevin Hendry was really tough aswell. I played the pirc and he rushed a kingside attack by giving up his H-pawn. I thought I defended well however with 20-20 hindsight white was winning until he dropped a knight in time pressure to a fork tactic and after three hours of play that has to be dissapointing but he was a very good sport about it.

Apart from this a few congratulations are definately at hand for Tony Dowden for winning again, Alastair Dyer for winning especially against such a strong field, Neil which I think deserved it watching some of his games where he fought so hard for wins, Kevin Bonham for drawing Vladimir ( I thought he was defs for the championship) and of course Vladimir for winning the tournament!

Capablanca-Fan
09-03-2009, 05:09 PM
Looks like a pretty convincing win by Vladimir Petrovich.

Tony Dowden
09-03-2009, 05:16 PM
According to the tournament website, Vladimir Smirnov finished in clear 1st place with a score of 6.5/7. In equal 2nd place and sharing the title of Tasmanian Champion were Neil Markovitz, Tony Dowden and Alistair Dyer, who scored 5/7. Vlad was held to a draw by Kevin Bonham, who finished =5th with 4.5/7.
Yes, its all true :cool: Here's a quick potted snapshot of the fortunes of some the players which probably leaves out many important bits.

Kevin Bonham got better as the event went on and, after outplaying Dyer in the penultimate round, deserved another (shared) Tasmanian title but lost an exciting game against me in the last round.

Phil Donnelly played some good chess too (especially against Smirnov) but rather faded towards the end. At one stage on Sunday I thought Donnelly-Bonham might be last round match-up with the state title on the line. Now that would have been interesting ;)

Vincent Horton (12) - lest we forget how young he is - won three games in a row on Sunday (the last against Donnelly) to be one round from a state title but then had to play Big Vlad in the last round.

Vladimir Smirnov was generally too strong for the rest of the field. His positional understanding and endgame technique was especially good (around 2400 standard). As mentioned above, Kevin held Vladimir to a draw in a N & P ending a pawn down. I also had a fleeting chance in a good attacking position. Congratulations on winning 'drug', aka Vladimir Nikolaevich :clap: :clap: :clap:

Alastair Dyer (17) won his first Tasmanian title - the first of many, I suspect. He took me to the wire in a R & P ending which I somehow drew and generally played some impressive chess. :clap: :clap: :clap:

Neil Markovitz also won his first Tassie title. I thought his play was a little under par - Vladimir truly crushed him - but, falling back on his experience and patience, he just kept winning when he needed to. :clap: :clap: :clap:

Tony Dowden (yes me, TonyD) did indeed find it very, very tough to defend his Tassie title. Like Neil I won when I really needed to. I found it extremely hard to concentrate with the punishing three games per day schedule and Saturday and Sunday ('over forty-itis'). :lol: I'm not the only one who can use that excuse though. ;) Yet somehow I managed to play some nice attacking chess. I found a stunning 'bomb' against Dylan Kuzmic. I also could have played a fantastic piece and double rook sac combination - recommended by Fritz in the critical position against Vladimir - but I'm not a GM, so I didn't see it. My last round 'must win' game against Kevin was a classic attacking game I'll probably tell my grandchildren about one day :P

Anton Smirnov (8) Watch this kid!! Sydneysiders already know how talented he is and that he usually takes about 3 minutes for the entire game but actually playing against him and finding that he consistently played the right move 95% of the time was hardly believeable. Imagine what he'll do once he slows down :eek:

Over to KB now (or when he gets back to Hobart). I'll post some annotated games/key positions over the next few days or so.

Tony Dowden
09-03-2009, 05:19 PM
Yeah round one (scratch that! day one!) was a little bit dissapointing however I do enjoy going over games with Tony afterwards and feel I learn alot even if I played a shocking game (I think thats the third game ended between Tony and I in under 20 moves.) ... Apart from this a few congratulations are definately at hand for Tony Dowden for winning again, Alastair Dyer for winning especially against such a strong field, Neil which I think deserved it watching some of his games where he fought so hard for wins, Kevin Bonham for drawing Vladimir ( I thought he was defs for the championship) and of course Vladimir for winning the tournament!

Thanks for the kind words Lawrence. You'll learn plenty from this event. Now, how about annotating and posting your best game?

Tony Dowden
09-03-2009, 05:20 PM
Looks like a pretty convincing win by Vladimir Petrovich.

Very ;)

Saragossa
09-03-2009, 05:24 PM
Yeah Anton was amazing! his game against Marcus was (from what I understood in analysis) a book trap gaining two pieces for the rook keeping in mind that this was memorised by Anton perfectly! I suspect the swiss gambit will be extremely popula in early rounds if he comes to Tas playing like he is now :)

Saragossa
09-03-2009, 05:29 PM
Thanks for the kind words Lawrence. You'll learn plenty from this event. Now, how about annotating and posting your best game?

Well I got off pretty easy on the swiss draw only having to play you and Marcus as 1700+ players, however Marcus was off form due to him and I not getting to play eachother as often when he wasn't in college and especially with all the extra study he has to take on.

I'll post up the kevin hendry game not because I am especially proud of it but simply because of it being quite an interesting middle game as soon as I can.

Saragossa
09-03-2009, 07:08 PM
1. e4 d6 {First time playing the Pirc but wanted to avoid a closed sicilian or any of the other dull openings that I play} 2. d4 Nf6 3. Nc3 g6 4. Nf3 Bg7 {devo because I had actually done some preparation on the Austrian} 5. Be3 O-O 6. h3 b6?! {I definately think that this is inaccurate because it plays on the queenside when I should be thinking about the center! I think c6 would have been better} 7. Qd2 Bb7?! {too soon to be commiting the light squared bishop anywhere. Nbd7 being better} 8. Bd3 Nbd7 9. Bh6 e5 {thinking that perhaps play would have been easier to find with c5} 10. Bxg7 Kxg7 11. d5 Nc5 12. h4 c6 {I feel that h4 was Kevin's first mistake in the fact that it is slightly too commital, however it seemed to work out alright in the game. c6 I believe was one of my better moves by giving him his center to worry about} 13. h5 Nxh5 {I think I assesed the positon correctly taking the dangerous pawn. Noting that not taking is worse} 14. Ne2! Qf6! {Looking dangerous for black however Qf6 holds it together on the kingside with still lots of play on the queenside} 15. Qe3?! Nf4 {I wondered the purpose of Qe3 besides defending the knight on f3 for a possible g-pawn push but he didn't go through with that plan so it seems to waste a vital tempo in a good attacking position} 16. Rh2 Rh8 17. Bc4 cxd5 18. exd5 h5?! {Getting rid of the mate threat pinning my knight but leaves some gaping hole on the kingside h6 is better IMO} 19. Nc3 h4 {realised my knight was getting trapped but this becomes weak later} 20. O-O-O a6? {Do not know what I was thinking besides OMG so little time so complex aswell as being too slow it hands over the vital initiative I also offered a draw here because...I was so afraid I had just spent three or so hours playing to lose} 21. b4 Nd7 {I thought that g3 was better then b4} 22. Rdh1 b5? 23. Bb3 Rac8 24. Nxh4 Rxc3 25. Qe4?! Qg5 {rather then Qe4 Qa7 got more conterplay but white should be lost besides blunders but we were both ridiculously low on time} 26. Kb2 Nf6 27. Qe1 Rhc8 28. Nf3 Qf5 29. Rg1 Bxd5 30. Nh4 Rxc2+ {after Ka1 the game ended fairly quickly because of trade downs into a easily winning endgame}

The game is complex and the notes are only brief however I am fully up for discussion of the game questions commentry etc. It's all good however a dissapointing blunder due to time troubles. Seems I have fudged the PGN but cannot see where sorry. Help! Thank you fixing that whoever fixed it. Silly me not seeing that it was Qe3.

Vlad
09-03-2009, 07:58 PM
Thanks for congratularions! Just before everybody starts using it, my name is Vladimir Nikolaevich...:) Please do not take it as an attack on your Russian, which is very good..:)



Looks like a pretty convincing win by Vladimir Petrovich.

Capablanca-Fan
09-03-2009, 08:26 PM
Thanks for congratularions! Just before everybody starts using it, my name is Vladimir Nikolaevich...:) Please do not take it as an attack on your Russian, which is very good..:)
Oops sorry, I think I saw it on a website somewhere. I stand corrected.:eek:

Tony Dowden
09-03-2009, 08:32 PM
Thanks for congratulations! Just before everybody starts using it, my name is Vladimir Nikolaevich...:) Please do not take it as an attack on your Russian, which is very good..:)

Vladimir Nikolaevich thanks again for coming down to Tassie for a second event. We are nearly ready to make you and Anton honorary Tasmanian citizens. One more tournament should do it ;)

But nyet you are too kind, I suspect in most cases our Russian language ability is almost non existent! :hmm: Das vadanya

Kevin Bonham
10-03-2009, 01:12 AM
Three tie for Tas Champs

For only the second time Tasmania has three champions after Tony Dowden, Alastair Dyer and Neil Markovitz tied for second on 5/7 behind tournament winner Vladimir Smirnov (6.5/7), who was ineligible for the title.

The tournament (directed by Russell Horton with assistance especially from Neville Ledger, Nigel Lewis and David Hughes) was hosted by the Burnie Chess Club at Havenview Primary School and attracted a large, and by Tasmanian standards quite strong, field of 28 entrants. The games were played in a combative spirit with several spectacular and/or dramatic encounters and the modest number of draws that occurred on the higher boards were without exception hard-fought.

The presence of FM Smirnov not only enabled Tasmanian players to test their skills against a much stronger opponent than usual but also added interest to the event in the form of a mobile zero-point bye for title contenders. There was some speculation that this might lead to an unjust result but the three-way tie was fitting as there was no one standout player among the Tasmanian contenders. Although one of the three co-champions (Dyer) did not play Smirnov, Dyer's play was clearly worthy of a share of the title.

Round 1: I predicted that the top half of the field would not have it their own way and thus it proved to be. The only upset win was an impressive game by Tony Sturges against Henry Sheerwater, although Tony felt lucky as he was intending to force a draw when Henry resigned! There were also four draws - Nigel Lewis (who is often dangerous against strong adults) with Neil Markovitz, David Hughes against Kevin Bonham (Hughes resisted impressively despite being a pawn down from the opening and eventually Bonham fell for the kind of swindle he normally inflicts on others and was lucky not to lose), Jamie Briant against Marcus Bretag, and remarkably the improving Harry Briant (648) holding Vincent Horton (1444).

Round 2: The top board games went as expected, although Bonham tripped over his own attack in an awful fashion against Jamie Briant and spent most of the game piece for pawn down before Jamie unwisely decided to return material and play for an endgame draw (he didn't get it). An even better result for Harry Briant this round defeating Nigel Lewis, and another low-rated junior giving a star junior trouble was Ashton Fitzallen (812) drawing with Mason Carter (1325).

Round 3: The games of this round, both going beyond three hours, were Dyer-Dowden (just held by the latter in a very unpleasant looking rook ending) and Lawrence Bretag-Harvey (as would be expected from the styles of both players an incredible tactical mess with Lawrence at one stage a rook or so down before recovering the material bit by bit leaving Harvey to dodge draws in an unclear queen ending - with this as the third game of the day both players must have been exhausted. Not sure if a verdict has been reached on whether the position in which Lawrence finally resigned was actually objectively lost though Reg's pawn was looking nasty.) Markovitz outplayed Nigel Frame, winning a piece with some endgame tactics, and Marcus Bretag (not having such a good tournament after his brilliant Launceston Weekender =1st) lost to Dylan Kuzmic. In the mismatch of the tournament (on paper) Harry Briant played Kevin Bonham across a 1200+ point rating gap and played more like a 1400s than a 600s player before succumbing to pin tactics.

FM Smirnov now led on 3/3 with Dowden, Dyer, Markovitz and Bonham on 2.5/3

Round 4: The first outright contender to visit top board was Tony Dowden, who launched a big attack with an early Nxf7! in a spectacular game; it appears the attack was sound but the moves to make it work were extremely hard to see after Smirnov cleverly locked the knight on f7; Smirnov went on to win after a long struggle. Markovitz may have been slightly better against Dyer and declined a draw offer but eventually had to settle, as did Bonham against Frame after Frame's "bad" bishop escaped in a sharp Moscow Sicilian.

Round 5: The "zero-point bye" script was disrupted unexpectedly when Bonham somehow saved a knight ending a pawn down against Smirnov. Frame held Dowden to a draw and Alastair Dyer won a very interesting game against Phil Donnelly, with his rook and two outside passed pawns in the endgame too much for two minor pieces. Vincent Horton moved into the title picture by defeating Reg Harvey after Reg, who gives living meaning to the Fritz expression "contempt for draw", turned down three (!) draw offers. Kevin Hendrey starred in a remarkable (even by Hendrey family standards) display of clock brinksmanship against Anton Smirnov - at one stage down to three seconds against over an hour, Kevin managed to surf the increment all the way to victory. Smirnov (4.5) now led Markovitz and Dyer (4) and Bonham and Vincent Horton (3.5).

Ashton Fitzallen was absent ill for rounds 5 and 6, and his absence created a serious pairings headache for the organisers trying to avoid affecting the integrity of the Tasmanian Women's Champion title. The danger was that Nina Horton would receive a free point on account of Fitzallen's absence, having already defeated him, while Gemma Woodwell would be unable to gain a bye herself as Owen Short's notified absence from round 7 would return the number of players to even if Fitzallen was still absent. Eventually this problem was resolved by Graham Richards agreeing to take the bye instead of Nina, and with a further minor tweak it was possible to arrange for Nina and Gemma to play off for the Women's title in the final round.

Round 6: Markovitz really got a zero-point bye against FM Smirnov, self-destructing in just 19 moves! Alastair Dyer looked like winning or at least not losing against Bonham before messing up a bishop-vs-knight ending by failing to exploit Bonham's bad pawns and making his own pawns bad instead. Vincent Horton had another of his characteristically gritty wins, this time against Phil Donnelly. Russell Horton repeated Jamie Briant's mistake of simplifying from material up against a stronger player (in this case Frame) only to find that he had gone into a lost ending in the process.

Partway through this round the silence was shattered by a good-natured cry of "you bastard!". Several players left their games and drifted to the board in question in time to see Reg Harvey (who thereby secured the Seniors Champion title) demonstrate the queen-sac smothered mate he had just delivered OTB against Henry Sheerwater!

Smirnov was now guaranteed outright first unless he lost to Vincent Horton. With one round to go, Vicent Horton and Bonham (4.5) were leading the title race, but had tough assignments with black against Smirnov and Dowden respectively. The others in contention for the title were Dowden, Markovitz, Dyer, Frame and Reg Harvey (all on 4).

Round 7: Smirnov won a pawn against Vincent Horton and easily prevailed. First to get a hand on the cup was Markovitz, who was two pawns up pretty quickly against Harvey and went on to win. Dowden-Bonham (which white had to win to retain his title, while black only needed to draw) was a showy opposite-sides castling game where Bonham's attack never really got going because of positional errors and Dowden crashed through with tactics and mating threats to simplify to an easily won position. Dyer had looked better against Frame early on but the game seemed to be drifting to a draw when Frame, presumably figuring this would do neither of them the slightest good, tried to win and ended up losing. Thus Tasmania had three champions - and both overnight leaders in the title race had been leapfrogged in the final round.

Moving up to join Bonham and Vincent Horton on 4.5 were Lawrence Bretag with a win over Sheerwater, and Nigel Lewis, who had promised "revenge!" on Russell Horton for a recent Burnie Club game when their pairing was announced and duly delivered. Meanwhile in the Women's Champion decider, Nina Horton offered a draw, which Gemma Woodwell declined, but Gemma dropped a rook a few moves later and thus Nina retained her title alone.

Anton Smirnov saved his best result for last defeating Marcus Bretag and easily winning the Under 12 prize; Vincent Horton won the U1700 on countback from Lawrence Bretag while Nigel Lewis won the U1400.

Games to follow as they become available.

Note: This report, such as it is, is copyright Kevin Bonham 2009. Republication or quoting of any part for any purpose in any medium without specific and clear attribution of authorship is unauthorised and expressly forbidden and will be treated as plagiarism.

Basil
10-03-2009, 08:46 AM
Good report Kev. Thanks. I note your 'final hurdle' inconvenience such was mine at Aust Minor in Parra - there's always next year for both of us.

Kevin Bonham
10-03-2009, 10:02 AM
Tas Champs Trivia 2009

There's quite a lot of it!

* The only previous three-way tie for the title was in 1983 and involved a player called Markovic, whereas this one involves a player called Markovitz! (No connection between the two apart from similarity in surname). It also, like this one, involved a defending multiple champion and two first-time winners. The 1983 three-way tie was in an eight player top division round robin. Markovic received some flak in the 30 page (!!) 1983 tournament booklet produced by Derek Roebuck, Richard Hills and Adrian Flitney for causing the tie by taking a grandmaster draw with his friend Mato Grgurevic, Grgurevic's only non-loss of the tournament.

* Tony Dowden wins the title for the fourth time in a row (two shared). The only other players to do so were Edwin Ingledew (1924-27, the first four times the title had been held) and Otto Weber (six in a row 1953-58).

* At the same time Kevin Bonham has won the Open title four times in a row (three shared). One of those was shared with Dowden, but Bonham has not won the Tasmanian Championships in that time. Indeed Bonham has scored 4.5 points in the last five state championships in a row, although one of these (2006) was out of six rather than seven.

* The true performance ratings for the three co-champions were Dowden 1952, Dyer 1929 and Markovitz 1888.

* The last-round leapfrog of the two leaders for the title race has a precedent in 1993, when Michael Stubbs and Fredrik Sandegard entered the final round tied for first and were beaten by Bradley Stansfield and Simon Browne respectively. Of course in this case, one of the title leaders (V Horton) having to play an ineligible tournament leader made this event much more likely.

Copyright and plagiarism note applies as per post 102.

Kevin Bonham
10-03-2009, 11:37 AM
Good report Kev. Thanks. I note your 'final hurdle' inconvenience such was mine at Aust Minor in Parra - there's always next year for both of us.

Yep. Alas my record for converting when tied for the lead into the final round in this event is disastrous (just one win from four such situations, although the one I did convert was to an outright.)

Dowden - Bonham

1.e4 e6 2.Nc3 d5 3.Nf3 Nf6 4.e5 Nfd7 5.d4 c5 6.dxc5 Bxc5 [Normal move order is 6...Nc6 7.Bf4 Bxc5 8.Bd3 f6] 7.Bd3 Nc6 8.Bf4 f6 9.exf6 Nxf6 10.Qe2! A good choice by Tony as this was a must-win game for him. 10...0-0 11.0-0-0 Bd7 [11...Qa5 12.Kb1 a6 13.Ne5 Nd4 14.Qd2 b5 15.h4 b4 16.Ne2 Nb5 17.h5 Qb6 18.h6 g6 19.Bxg6 Ra7 20.Bg5 Na3+ 21.Ka1 Bd6 22.Bxf6 Rxf6 23.Bd3 Kh8 24.Qg5 Rxf2 25.Rhf1 Re7 26.Ng4 Rxf1 27.Rxf1 Rb7 28.Bxh7 Qc7 29.Qg8# Smerdon-Lukey Queenstown 2009 was the game that inspired Tony to play this line.] 12.h4!? [12.Ne5;
12.Kb1 are both commonly played.] 12...a6 13.h5 b5 [13...Ng4!?] 14.Ne5 Nd4?! In the post-mortem Tony suggested this as a critical error because white's Ne5 (which black could have taken instead) becomes too strong. [14...Nxe5 15.Bxe5 b4 16.Nb1 Qb6 17.h6 g6 18.Bxg6 hxg6 19.h7+ Kh8 20.Qf3 Be7 21.g4 d4 22.g5 Qc6 23.Qd3 Qd5 24.Qxd4 Qxd4 25.Rxd4 Bc6 26.Rhh4 Rf7 27.gxf6 Bc5 28.Rdg4 Bxf2 29.Rh3 Rd8 30.Rxg6 Be4 31.Rg7 Rdf8 32.Nd2 Bf5 33.Rh2 Be3 34.Kd1 Bb6 35.Nf3 Bd8 36.Rh6 1-0 Sambuev {2391} - Potkin {2512} St Petersburg {2001}] 15.Qe1 I thought this was more accurate than Qd2 at the time but this too is less clear to me now. 15...b4?! [Tentatively the point at which black becomes lost but that depends on assessment of 15...Ng4!? which I failed to consider here, eg 16.Nxg4 Rxf4 17.f3 Qg5 18.Kb1 Nc6 and Fritz says black is at least OK at a quick look but a lot more work would be needed to evaluate this line confidently. Note that 15.Qd2 prevents ...Ng4 and therefore may have been objectively more accurate than Qe1.] 16.Ne2! [16.Nb1?? Ne4 would have been disastrous for white.] 16...Qb6 [16...Nxe2+ 17.Qxe2 Ne4 an idea I considered many times which never quite worked and doesn't work here either 18.g3!] 17.h6 Bb5 [In recognition that after 17...g6 18.Bxg6! the bishop is immune and white must win.(or just 18.Nxd4 Bxd4 19.Bg3) ] 18.hxg7 Rfc8 19.Bxh7+!! [Or just 19.Nxd4 Bxd4 20.Kb1 and white has too much ammo.] 19...Nxh7 20.Nxd4 [20.Rxh7 first works too since if 20...Nxe2+ 21.Kb1!! and white is a piece down with a rook en prise but black is absolutely smashed.] 20...Bxd4 21.Rxh7! Qc5 [21...Kxh7 22.Qh1+ with mate in 3.] 22.Rh8+ Kxg7 23.Rxc8 Rxc8 24.Rd2 Ba4 25.Qd1! Qxc2+ [25...Bxe5 26.Bxe5+ leaves black a pawn down with a very exposed king. I thought that a series of queen checks in this position would win the e-pawn but overlooked that in those lines I would be able to interpose my queen on d7. Nonetheless the line is hopeless.] 26.Rxc2 Rxc2+ 27.Qxc2 Bxc2 28.Kxc2 Bxf2 29.Nd3 Bb6 30.Nxb4 a5 It would be fun (for me at least!) if I could get white's pawns off the board and make Tony win KBN v K but he is alert to the danger and the remaining moves are only useful as a demonstration of the excellent technique with which he completely snuffs it out: 31.Nc6 Kf6 32.g4! a4 33.Kc3 Bc5 34.Ne5 Be7 35.Nd7+ Kg6 36.Kd4 Bd8 37.Ne5+ Kg7 38.Kc5 Be7+ 39.Kb5 1-0 Another great win by Tony and a worthy way in which to retain his title.

Annotations copyright Kevin Bonham 2009 and may not be reproduced without due attribution

Basil
10-03-2009, 12:22 PM
I note your 'final hurdle' inconvenience such was mine at Aust Minor in Parra - there's always next year for both of us.


Yep. Alas my record for converting when tied for the lead into the final round in this event is disastrous (just one win from four such situations, although the one I did convert was to an outright.)
Or in your case, you already have previous years :doh:

Kevin Bonham
10-03-2009, 02:35 PM
V Smirnov (FM) - Bonham.

The great escape. I love knight endings. :D

I've only had about eight previous rated games against 2200+ players and lost all of them except for one 13-move last-rounder against FM Lim Yee Weng (who needed a draw for outright first in that event and offered it once I got out of the opening alive).

1.d4 e6 2.e4 d5 3.exd5 exd5 4.Bd3 Nc6 In our previous game I played ...Bd6 but didn't play that line very well; this time I wanted to try something more interesting. 5.c3 Bd6 6.Qf3 Be6 7.Ne2 Qf6 8.Qxf6 Nxf6 9.Bg5 Ne4 10.Bxe4 dxe4 11.Nd2 f5 12.f3!? exf3 13.Nxf3 Bc4 14.Kf2 Bxe2 Perhaps I underestimated my position here in deciding to return the minor exchange. 15.Kxe2 [I would not have been surprised by 15.Rhe1 here] 15...Kd7 16.Kd3! Rae8 17.Rae1 Be7? As soon as I played this I saw immediately that he would just play 18.d5! Nd8 19.Rxe7+ Rxe7 20.Bxe7 Kxe7 21.Re1+ Kf6?! Another error and now white's position is very strong. [21...Kd6 is safer.] 22.Nd4 a6 23.Rf1 [23.c4 intending c5 could get nasty.] 23...g6 24.g4 [24.Re1] It looks like white just drops a pawn here but I had found a nice resource to save it. 24...Ke5! [24...f4!? may also be tenable.] 25.gxf5 Kxd5! [I spent close to twenty minutes tossing up between the move I played and 25...Rf8?? before noticing that after the latter, 26.Ne6 (26.fxg6!! Rxf1 27.g7 Rg1 28.Nf3+ Kf6 29.Nxg1 Kxg7 reaches a won knight ending for white but I did not see that) 26...Nxe6 27.fxe6! wins since 27...Rxf1 28.e7 queens. ] 26.Nc2 Here black is OK but after correctly calculating the first save I now proceed to mess it up again! 26...gxf5?! There is no need to activate white's rook for him. [26...Nc6] 27.Rxf5+ Kd6 28.Rh5 Ne6 29.Rh6 Ke7 Why here and not e5? 30.Ne3 c6 31.Nf5+ Kd7 32.Kc2 Ng5? [32...Nc5] 33.Nd6! b5 34.h4 Ne6 35.Nf7 Rg8 Best of a bad bunch. 36.Ne5+! Kd6 37.Nxc6! Ouch. 37...Rg2+?! This needed more thought as I end up just improving his king position for the N ending. 38.Kb3 Rg6 [38...Kxc6 39.Rxe6+ Kb7 40.Re7+ is dead lost.] 39.Rxg6 hxg6 40.Nd4 Nf4 41.a4?! [41.Kb4 Kc7 (41...Nd3+ 42.Ka5 gets two for the price of one.) 42.Ka5 Kb7 43.b3 creates a passed pawn quickly, presumably winning] 41...Kc5! The most important thing here I thought is to not let white create a passed pawn while I still have any pawns left on the queenside. White can always run me out of knight moves on the kingside and could then win any queenside pawn I have by threatening to advance his own passed pawn, reducing me to king moves. 42.Nf3 Ng2 43.Ka3 Nf4 44.Ne1 Kc4 45.Nf3 Kc5 46.axb5 axb5 47.Kb3 Ng2 48.Kc2 Nf4 49.Kd2 Kd5 50.Ke3 Ng2+ 51.Kf2 Nf4 52.Ne1 Kc4 53.Ke3 Nd5+ 54.Kd2?! [I'm not confident black can survive here after 54.Ke4! . At least the move gives white more practical chances with black short-ish of time but it could even be a forced win.] 54...b4 55.cxb4 Kxb4 56.Kd3 Clearly drawn now, if it wasn't already. [A cute try which I saw is 56.Nd3+ Kb3 57.Kc1! but with no remaining loose black pawns to mop on the queenside I am not sure if white can acheive anything by pushing black's king up the board all that far.] 56...Kb3 57.Ke4 Ne7! 58.Nd3 Nf5 59.Kf4 [59.h5 doesn't work because 59...Ng3+ is check.] 59...Nxh4 60.Kg5 Nf3+ 61.Kxg6 Ne5+ Draw offered. 62.Nxe5 Kxb2 ˝-˝

Annotations copyright Kevin Bonham 2009 and may not be reproduced without clear attribution.

Adamski
10-03-2009, 03:22 PM
Congratulations to several folks here:
Tony D for 4 out of 4 titles, :clap:
Drug for winning the tournament,
Kevin B for drawing with drug.
Juniors galore for good performances (notably Alastair but also including my mate Anton).

Leonid Sandler
10-03-2009, 04:05 PM
Could you please announce the cash prizes for Tasmanian Championship 2009

Kevin Bonham
10-03-2009, 04:20 PM
Could you please announce the cash prizes for Tasmanian Championship 2009

I don't know exactly but I know the total was announced as $1000 - I think 1st outright was something like $380 (drug can correct this if it's wrong!) The U18 prize was pooled into 2nd-3rd. There were also U1400 and U1700 ratings prizes, U12 and Women's prizes.

Kevin Bonham
10-03-2009, 04:43 PM
Bonham - Dyer. Many people were curious as to how I managed to win this one and some were even more surprised by it than my draw the previous round!

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.Bb5 Nd4! The Rubenstein suits Alastair's flashy style especially as it is full of juicy theory and nasty gambits. Surprisingly this was the first time it had been played against me since 2000. 5.Ba4 Bc5 6.0-0 [The main line here goes 6.Nxe5 According to Pinski's "The Four Knights" (Everyman) white has to accept the pawn or else renounce the advantage. According to Bonham, don't accept gambits against Alastair Dyer especially not if you haven't played the line for many years! The main gambit line continues 6...0-0 (6...Qe7?! 7.Nd3 Nxe4 8.0-0 Nxc3 9.dxc3 Ne6 10.Nxc5 Qxc5 11.Be3 "White's position is more than slightly better" - Pinski.) 7.Nd3 Bb6 8.e5 Ne8 9.Nd5 d6 10.Ne3] 6...0-0 7.d3 d6 8.Nxd4 Bxd4 9.Bg5?! Mixing up ideas from different 4 Knights variations. In Spanish Four Knights lines where both sides' QBs have been given up for knights the pin can be a nuisance. But here Black doesn't care since white will have a bad bishop left on the board which more than cancels out any pawn structure issues black might have. [9.Be3 is OK but nothing more] 9...c6! [9...h6 10.Bxf6 Qxf6 11.Nd5 Qg5!? (11...Qd8 12.c3 Bb6=) 12.Nxc7 Bxb2 13.Rb1 Bg4 and black has some attacking chances.(not 13...Bh3?? 14.Qf3) ] 10.Qf3 h6 11.Bxf6 Qxf6 12.Qxf6 gxf6 13.Rab1 I want to be able to play c3 but it has somehow escaped me that with Nd1 I can do that in one move and get my knight towards better squares in the process! 13...f5 14.Ne2 Bb6 15.exf5 Bxf5 16.Ng3 Be6 17.Bb3 Bxb3 [I expected him to treat my bad bishop's desire to be excused from the game with contempt and just play 17...d5!? ] 18.axb3 f5 19.Kh1 f4 20.Ne4 d5 21.Nd2 Rae8 22.Rbe1 Rf7 23.Re2 Kh7 24.Rfe1 Rfe7 [I expected the very solid move 24...Bc7! here] 25.g3!? This freeing idea is not as clearly strong as either of us thought, but at least white is doing something active! 25...fxg3 [25...Rf7!? 26.Kg2 (26.Rxe5?? Rxe5 27.Rxe5 fxg3 28.fxg3 Rf2 and white's queenside gets destroyed) 26...Ref8 27.f3 Bc7 28.g4 Kg6 29.h4 is possible] 26.hxg3 Alastair expected fxg3 but this is better. 26...Kg6 27.f4?! Objectively an error and I knew it was very risky. Psychologically it is possible to see how I got away with it, as after pressing with a massive space advantage, trying to win a strange and tricky minor piece ending is probably not what Alastair wanted on the third game of the day! [27.Kg2 is solid. White can obtain activity on the h-file.] 27...Kf6! 28.fxe5+ Rxe5 29.Rxe5 Rxe5 30.Rxe5 Kxe5 31.Nf3+ Kf5 32.Kg2 Be3 Black will clean up my back b-pawn from behind if I don't stop him, therefore 33.b4 b6?! Bad firstly because it puts a pawn on the same colour square as his bishop, and secondly because it weakens the c-pawn. [33...Bc1 must win - eg 34.b3 Bb2 (34...Ba3?! makes it trickier 35.b5! ) 35.c4 dxc4 36.dxc4 Ke4] 34.b3 a5 35.bxa5 bxa5 36.Nh4+ Ke5 37.Nf3+ Here I was happy to draw. It looks like Alastair wasn't. 37...Kd6 38.Kf1 c5 39.c4 dxc4 [39...d4] 40.dxc4 With the locking of the kingside in this manner, black's winning chances are absolutely gone. 40...h5 41.Ke2 Bh6 Fritz thinks this is still drawn for black. I don't. 42.Kd3 Kc6? Black's king's acheiving nothing over here. Perhaps pushing the h-pawn to get around and grab c4 was intended but it's way too slow. 43.Ke4 Bc1 44.Ne1 Bh6 45.Nd3 Kd6 46.Nf4 Kc6 47.Nxh5 Kd7 48.Kf5 Be3 49.Nf4 Black Resigns. 1-0

Annotations copyright Kevin Bonham 2009 and may not be reproduced without clear attribution.

While Alastair is in no way responsible for hotheads and dimwits elsewhere who take his name in vain as part of their trolling campaigns (and who would if they had an ounce of sense cease doing so as it is (a) despicable and (b) possibly counterproductive to Alastair's chances against me) I would like to point out that Alex (Arrogant-One) falsely and unequivocally predicted Dyer would defeat me in this tournament, while Phil Donnelly wrote:


So I suppose that the entrants to the coming Tas Champs must gird their loins to face the sorry sight of [vulgar abuse deleted] once more being given the treatment at the Alastair Dyer Chess Clinic.

At least Alex was right about me getting my knights out before my bishops this time, but given that I have played the Four Knights in almost all 1.e4 e5 games where given the chance in the last 16 years I don't think he can take any credit for that!

Capablanca-Fan
10-03-2009, 08:11 PM
Interesting to see how two known Francophiles (Smurf and TonyD) play against their own defence.

Kevin Bonham
10-03-2009, 09:00 PM
There's been some speculation about my little copyright/plagiarism notices at the bottom of my reports and annotations elsewhere. I can confirm that what AO has done so far (copied and pasted one report and one annotated game from here with clear attribution) is fine and is not the sort of thing that is the reason for the notice.

Here's the rest of my games for anyone interested.

First round throwaway of half a point (and it could have been a full point) against David Hughes. Up til move 39 I was fine although David was resisting well but I played awfully in the rest until being let off with a draw. The closest I have ever come to losing in a game arising from a Closed Tarrasch but clearly not the fault of the opening.

1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nd2 Nf6 4.e5 Nfd7 5.Bd3 c5 6.c3 Nc6 7.Ne2 cxd4 8.cxd4 f6 9.f4 [9.exf6 is the main line;
9.Nf4 is the only other serious line] 9...fxe5 10.0-0 [10.fxe5 Nxd4 11.Nxd4 Qh4+ 12.Kf1 Qxd4 13.Nf3 Qg4 White lacks serious compensation] 10...e4 11.Bc2 Nf6 12.Nb3 Bd6 13.Ng3 0-0 14.a3 Bd7 15.Nc5 Qc7 16.Be3 b6 17.Nxd7 Qxd7 18.Ba4 Qb7 [18...a6 looks better] 19.Qe2 Na5 20.Bb5?! a6 21.Ba4 b5 22.Bc2 Rac8 23.Rac1 Nc4 24.Bb3 Nxe3 25.Qxe3 Rxc1 26.Rxc1 Rc8 [I examined 26...Ng4! 27.Qe2 Bxf4 28.Qxg4 Bxc1 29.Qxe6+ but thought white might have play for the exchange. He doesn't; after 29...Kh8 30.Qxd5 (30.Bxd5 Be3+ 31.Kh1 Qc7 winning) 30...Qxd5 31.Bxd5 Bxb2 black wins easily] 27.Rxc8+ Qxc8 28.h3 Qc7 29.Ne2 Qa5 30.Nc3 b4 31.axb4 Bxb4 [31...Qxb4] 32.Qc1 Bxc3 33.bxc3 Qb5 34.Qd1 Qd3 35.Qc1 [35.Qxd3 exd3 36.Kf2 Ne4+ 37.Ke3 Nxc3 38.Kxd3 Ne4 looked pretty easy to win] 35...e3 36.Bc2 Qe2! 37.Qb1 Qf2+ 38.Kh1 Qxf4 [38...g6 is fine. There is no 39.Bxg6 as 39...e2 wins before white can do anything] 39.Qb6 Ne4? The first big mistake but this does not completely throw away winning chances. [39...Qf1+ 40.Kh2 Kh8 41.Qb8+ Ng8 wins easily] 40.Qxe6+ Qf7?? And another one [40...Kf8 41.Qc8+ Kf7 42.Qb7+ Kf6 43.Qxa6+ Kg5 44.Bxe4 Qxe4 45.Qe2 Qf4 46.Kg1 and it's hard work but black may win] 41.Qc8+ Qf8 42.Qe6+ Kh8? Time to take the draw instead of playing on into a worse queen ending. 43.Bxe4 dxe4 Looking several moves ahead I had forgotten that since my knight is off the board here my back rank is vulnerable and therefore I lose both my e-pawns. 44.Qxe4 h6 [44...a5 45.d5 a4 46.d6 a3 47.Qxe3 a2 48.Qe1] 45.Qxe3 a5 46.Qc1?! Qf2? [46...a4 47.d5 a3 48.Qd1 a2 49.d6 Qf7 50.d7 Qxd7 51.Qxd7 a1=Q+ draws] 47.d5 a4 48.d6 Qc5?? Now black is totally lost. [48...Qb6 49.Qd2 a3 50.d7 Qb1+ 51.Kh2 Qb8+ 52.g3 Qd8 53.c4 a2 54.Qxa2 Qxd7 is similar to the final position the game reached] 49.Qd2 Qb6 50.d7 Qb1+ 51.Kh2 Qb8+ 52.g3? [52.Kg1 Qb1+ (52...Qd8 53.Qd5 a3 54.Qe6 winning) 53.Kf2 Qb6+ 54.Qe3 and black can resign] 52...Qd8 53.c4 [53.Qd5 a3 54.Qe6 Kh7 55.Qe8 Qf6 is not straightforward] 53...a3 54.c5 a2 55.Qxa2 Qxd7 56.Qc2 White cashed in his position for the draw against a much higher rated opponent here but he really may as well play on as even I couldn't swindle a win out of this. 1/2-1/2

Even worse ... round two ... I was looking forward to playing Jamie Briant in a rated game for the first time as I thought it could be a fun game; unfortunately the game was painfully bad (albeit instructive for both players).

Bonham - J Briant

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Nc3 Bc5 4.Nxe5 This more or less refutes black's previous but in the lines arising from 4...Bxf2+? the position is messy enough that white can still go astray if not careful. Like here! [4...Nxe5 5.d4 Bd6 6.dxe5 Bxe5 7.Bd3 with clear advantage to white] 5.Kxf2 Nxe5 6.d4 Nc6 7.Be3 [7.Bf4!] 7...Nge7 8.Bc4 f5 9.Qh5+ g6 10.Qh4 fxe4 11.Nxe4?? [White should complete artificial castling by 11.Rhf1 when black's best is 11...d5 but after 12.Nxd5 Nxd5 13.Qxd8+ Kxd8 14.Bxd5 Bf5 15.Kg1 white is much better] 11...d5! 12.Nf6+ Kf7 13.Bd3 Nf5 14.Bxf5 Bxf5 15.Bg5?? [I didn't see 15.g4! Bxc2 16.g5 h6 17.Qg3 hxg5 18.Bxg5 and white is a pawn down but it's messy enough that anything could happen.] 15...h6 16.Ne4 hxg5 17.Nxg5+ Kg7 18.Qg3 Rf8 19.Kg1 Nxd4 20.Qe5+ Qf6 21.Qxc7+ Kh6 22.h4 Qg7 23.Qd6? At this stage I was still fishing for some complication that might allow me to be better than just a whole piece down. 23...Ne2+! 24.Kf2 Rae8 [24...Qd4+ 25.Kf1 Bxc2+ mates] 25.c3 Qf6 26.Qxf6 Rxf6 27.Rhe1 Bd7+ [27...Be4+ 28.Nf3 Nf4 is more dangerous.] 28.Nf3 Nf4 29.Rxe8 Bxe8 30.Rd1 Bc6 31.Rd4 Ne6 32.Rg4 Rf4 33.Rxf4 Nxf4 34.Ne5 My main idea here is that if I can get all the k-side pawns off it might be hard for black to win with all pawns on one side, or at least I might get KBN vs K which I don't think Jamie would know. 34...g5 35.g3 Ng6? [35...Ne6 protecting g5] 36.Nf7+ Kh5 37.Nxg5 Well, I've recovered one pawn but black is still winning. I was very surprised to get 37...Nxh4? When playing a strong player in a superior position be very careful of liquidating to try to get a draw- you might not get it! 38.gxh4 Kxh4 39.Nf3+ Kg4 Draw offered, but although it should be drawn I couldn't lose this in a million years, so no. 40.Ke3 Kf5 41.Kd4 Ke6 42.Ne1 Kd6 43.Nd3 a6 44.b4 b6 45.Ne5 [45.Nf4] 45...Kc7?? Always use as much time as you need to analyse any line that allows a pure pawn ending and if you're not sure, play something else. It is still drawn if the bishop stays on. I made sure I saw all the way to the end before I took it. 46.Nxc6 Kxc6 47.Ke5 a5 48.a3 Kb5 49.Kxd5! [Move order matters here. 49.bxa5?? Kxa5 50.Kxd5 Ka4 only draws] 49...Ka4 50.bxa5! Only this wins 50...bxa5 51.c4 Kxa3 52.c5 Kb3 53.c6 a4 54.c7 a3 55.c8=Q a2 Rook pawn on the seventh rank vs queen isn't always a draw! 56.Qh8 covers the queening square so black resigns. 1-0

H Briant - Bonham

For a player outrated by 1200 points I thought Harry did very well in this game although the jaded attitude of his opponent after the two previous shockers may have helped him.

1.e3 e5 2.Nc3 d5 3.d3 c5 4.Nf3 Nc6 5.d4 cxd4 6.exd4 e4 7.Nd2 [I expected 7.Ne5 ] 7...Nxd4? 8.Nb5 [8.Nb3 Nxb3 9.axb3 Nf6 10.Bb5+ (10.Bg5) 10...Bd7 11.Bxd7+ Qxd7 12.Bg5 Be7 and white looks OK] 8...Nxb5 9.Bxb5+ Bd7 10.Bxd7+ Qxd7 11.Nb3 Nf6 12.c3 Bd6 13.Nd4 0-0 14.Bg5 Be7 [14...Ng4 is fine.] 15.0-0 Rfd8 16.Qb3 Ne8 17.Bxe7 Qxe7 18.Rfe1 Qc7 19.Nf5 [19.Nb5] 19...Nf6 20.Rad1 Ng4 21.g3 g6 22.Ne3! Nxe3 23.Rxe3 Harry's done a great job, aided by some iffy moves from me, to reach this heavy piece ending where he has a realistic chance of holding on. 23...Qc6 24.Qc2 f5 I wanted to push ...d4 but needed to try to prepare it. 25.f3 Qc5 This pin requires accurate defence. 26.Qf2 Rac8 27.b4?! Weakening. 27...Qb6 28.a4 exf3?! 29.Qxf3?? [Wrong piece, alas for Harry! I wasn't in a very sharp frame of mind so after 29.Rxf3 I would have just played 29...Qxf2+ 30.Kxf2 and trusted my endgame skills to be enough.] 29...Rxc3! 30.Rde1 Rxe3 31.Rxe3 Re8 32.Qxd5+ Kf8 White resigns. 0-1

Bonham - Frame. Our 47th rated game.

1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.Bb5+ Bd7 4.Bxd7+ Qxd7 5.0-0 Nc6 6.Re1 e6 7.b3 Nf6 8.c3?! Bit slow and a bit of mixing up plans here as well. 8...Be7 9.d4 0-0 10.d5 Nd8 11.c4? e5 [Luckily for me Nigel did not see 11...Nxe4 12.Rxe4 Bf6 - a tactic I'd looked at earlier in the game and then forgotten.] 12.Nc3 Ne8 13.Ne2 f5 14.exf5 Qxf5 15.Ng3 Qg6 16.Qe2 Nf7 17.Qe4 I wanted queens off thinking the ending would be highly favourable but maybe it is not as good as I expected. 17...Qxe4 18.Nxe4 Nf6 19.Bg5 Rae8 20.Bxf6?! Another misjudgement. 20...gxf6 21.a3?! [21.g4!?] 21...f5 22.Ng3 Ng5 23.Nxg5 Bxg5 24.Ra2 Bd8 I've completely wasted my advantage here by exchanging off too much stuff and Nigel's once bad bishop has become quite good. It's hard for either side to do anything constructive and if anything black's slightly better so I decided to accept Nigel's draw offer. 1/2-1/2

Annotations copyright Kevin Bonham 2009 and may not be reproduced without clear attribution.

Kevin Bonham
10-03-2009, 09:05 PM
Interesting to see how two known Francophiles (Smurf and TonyD) play against their own defence.

Yes, although Tony's choice of this particular violent line was because it was a must-win game for him.

He previously played this Two Knights line but with the commoner 10.0-0 against me once, and probably would have done so again in another game but I deviated early (and then blundered massively!). Also one Advanced and one Winawer with 5.Qg4 (the latter in a situation where it suited both players to go for a win) so it's really a case of expect the unexpected, although I might unexpectedly get the expected instead!

Tony Dowden
11-03-2009, 08:44 PM
Congratulations to ...
Tony D for 4 out of 4 titles, :clap: .

Thanks Jonathan :P

Tony Dowden
11-03-2009, 09:00 PM
The U18 prize was pooled into 2nd-3rd.
I can confirm this amount was $102 - I was most surprised to find a $2 coin in my envelope. :lol: I reckon it could have gone towards biscuits etc but for several Burnie events in a row the organising committees seem to have been very serious in their determination to return all entry monies as prizes.

And whatever Anton Smirnov received ($50 or $60?) it was in lots of $5 notes. It was very funny watching him trying to hold onto all the cash at once - presumably trying to count it. :D Eventually he gave up and to his Dad's mild consternation laid all the notes out on the floor. ;)

eclectic
11-03-2009, 09:03 PM
were there any photos taken at this event?

Tony Dowden
11-03-2009, 09:05 PM
Interesting to see how two known Francophiles (Smurf and TonyD) play against their own defence.

Yes, you are on to me Jono. I took my inspiration from the game Smerdon-Lukey played in the 2009 Queenstown Classic. I'll annotate the our (Dowden-Bonham) game some time in the weekend
[Thursday: oops, just realised that KB has already annoated our last round game! Kevin's comments are generally astute (and most magnanimous). I didn't consider ...Ng4 after my Qe1 move. And maybe ...Nd4 by Black was OK after all but during the game I thought Black should have taken the White Ne5.]

:lol: Actually I bet Kevin tries the same system as white against my French some time. I shall expect the expected and play an Alekhine's Def instead ;) (well ... I doubt if I'm that brave).

Kevin Bonham
11-03-2009, 09:41 PM
I see that elsewhere Phil has written:


Vladimir seemed to be pretty annoyed with himself for conceding the draw to Kevin. He was a pawn up (I think) and expected to win easily but like most other players, fatigue was a factor on the 3rd round of the second day.

Actually my game against drug was in the second round of the second day, not the third. But he did make some comment in his victory speech about the very challenging game with Tony in the morning round having affected his energy levels. Speaking of which, here it is:

Dowden - V Smirnov (FM):

1.e4 c5 2.Nc3 Nc6 3.g3 g6 4.Bg2 Bg7 5.d3 d6 6.f4 Nf6 7.Nf3 Nd7 8.0-0 Nf8 9.f5 gxf5 10.exf5 Bxf5 11.Ng5 Bg6 12.Bxc6+ bxc6 13.Qf3 Qd7 14.Nxf7 Rg8 15.Bh6 Bd4+ 16.Kh1 Ne6 17.Rae1 Bf6 18.Nxd6+ Qxd6 19.Nb5 cxb5 20.Qxa8+ Kf7 21.Qb7 Bh5 22.Qe4 Rg6 23.Bf4 Qd7 24.c3 Nxf4 25.Rxf4 Bg4 26.d4 cxd4 27.cxd4 Be6 28.Kg1 Bxa2 29.Ra1 Bd5 30.Qe2 Bc6 31.Qh5 Kg7 32.Ra6 Rg5 33.Qe2 Bxd4+ 34.Kf1 Qh3+ 0-1

Somewhere in the mess around move 18 there's an incredible line Neil showed me the following morning where the black knight is off e3 and there is an amazing ...Rxe2 diversion combo. But I'm not sure of the move order and Fritz isn't flagging anything involving it as best play at the moment; it is flagging 18.Ng5 Bxg5 19.Bxg5 as a touch better for white with a somewhat larger advantage (but not decisive) in lines after 17.Ne4.

Phil put up an excellent fight against FM Smirnov in round three:

V Smirnov (FM) - Donnelly

1.d4 Nf6 2.Bg5 c5 3.Bxf6 gxf6 4.d5 Qa5+ 5.c3 d6 6.Nd2 f5 7.Nc4 Qc7 8.a4 Nd7 9.g3 Ne5 10.e3 Bd7 11.Nf3 Nxc4 12.Bxc4 Bg7 13.Nh4 Bf6 14.Qh5 Qb6 15.Ra2 0-0-0 16.a5 Bxc3+ 17.Kf1 Qb4 18.Qe2 Bf6 19.Nf3 a6 20.Kg2 h5 21.h4 Rdg8 22.b3 Bb5 23.Rc1 Rg4 24.Qc2 Bd7 25.Ne1 b5 26.axb6 Rxc4 27.bxc4 Qxb6 28.Rb1 Qa7 29.Qd2 Kd8 30.Qa5+ Ke8 31.Qxa6 Qxa6 32.Rxa6 e6 33.Rxd6 Ke7 34.Ra6 Rc8 35.Rb7 Kd8 36.Nd3 Bg7 37.Nf4 Be5 38.dxe6 Bc6+ 39.Rxc6 Rxc6 40.exf7 Bd6 41.Rb8+ 1-0

Oh, and as for accommodation, the comments about noise at the Regent in edition 1 of Donnelly's Accommodation Guide (;) ) seemed overstated to me at least in this case. On the Friday night there was some music audible from upstairs (at about 3% of the volume usually encountered in the other cheap pub, Greens) but that ended around 11:20pm. On the Saturday by the time I got back (around 11) it was completely quiet. As with anywhere that's very cheap it has its little imperfections but I found it very pleasant + relaxing and will most likely stay there again. The Beach Hotel which is not too expensive also received the thumbs up from at least one player staying there, but again, the TOTT is the only realistic option for those who want a <30 mins walk to the venue.

Desmond
12-03-2009, 09:01 AM
Interesting to see how two known Francophiles (Smurf and TonyD) play against their own defence.Pretty sure someone of Smurf's strength could play whatever system he wanted quite comfortably. Can remember one game I had with him where he was white and it was an Open Tarrasch. I got crushed (of course).

Kevin Bonham
12-03-2009, 09:43 PM
I should have realised Tony had something up his sleeve and deviated from the main line in our game but just couldn't figure out why he was playing the two knights line. I remembered that sometime after I beat Thomas Hendrey following a line from Watson, Tony and I had agreed that the main two knights line with 10.0-0 isn't really much chop for white. So I couldn't work out what he was up to in the early moves. I was thinking "does he think he'll outplay me anyway? does he hope I'm not expecting him to play it yet again and will therefore mix up lines as I am prone to do sometimes?" As it happened I had prepared the main 10.0-0 lines briefly just in case he had another go at them, but had completely forgotten that I meant to have a look sometime at that line Smurf played against Lukey, despite making some comment that I needed to study it in the shoutbox at the time. :rolleyes:

Tony Dowden
13-03-2009, 07:40 PM
I should have realised Tony had something up his sleeve and deviated from the main line in our game but just couldn't figure out why he was playing the two knights line. I remembered that sometime after I beat Thomas Hendrey following a line from Watson, Tony and I had agreed that the main two knights line with 10.0-0 isn't really much chop for white. So I couldn't work out what he was up to in the early moves. I was thinking "does he think he'll outplay me anyway? does he hope I'm not expecting him to play it yet again and will therefore mix up lines as I am prone to do sometimes?" As it happened I had prepared the main 10.0-0 lines briefly just in case he had another go at them, but had completely forgotten that I meant to have a look sometime at that line Smurf played against Lukey, despite making some comment that I needed to study it in the shoutbox at the time. :rolleyes:

Its a tough life KB! I reckon I well and truly won the prep battle then ;)

And re your (excellent) annotations:
(1) 12.h4 is very aggressive but probably risky. Now I'm inclined to think 12.Kb1 might be the move
(2) I agree that 15.Qe1 must be judged as dubious due to the Fritz's 15...Ng4! Earlier I had discounted knight moves to h5 or g4 because Bxh7+ is devastating but this isn't so after my queen steps backwards.
(3) I saw 19.Nxd4 but I didn't want you to play 19...Bxd3 thus preventing me from saccing on h7.
(4) I also saw 20.Rxh7(!) Nxe2+ 21.Kb1 but didn't think it made much difference as I hadn't seen 22...Ba4(!) at that stage.
(5) I was very pleased with 25.Qd1! - it was hard to believe that a 'creeping move' (Kotov) can do so much damage, but I think it does the business. During the game I now remember that I had wondered if you saw a ...Qd7 interposing move in lines where I start a series of checks with Qg4+

Better luck with your prep next time mate :P

Tony Dowden
13-03-2009, 08:05 PM
... Somewhere around move 18 there's an incredible line Neil [Markovitz] showed me the following morning where the black knight is off e6 and there is an amazing Rxe7 diversion combo ...

Here's my annotations of Dowden - V. Smirnov:

1.e4 c5 2.Nc3 Nc6 3.g3 g6 4.Bg2 Bg7 5.d3 d6 6.f4 Nf6 7.Nf3 Nd7 8.0-0 Nf8 [This seemed like a rather extravagant manoeuvre so it wasn't too hard to sac a pawn] 9.f5 gxf5 10.exf5 Bxf5 11.Ng5 Bg6 [11...Qd7 12.Nxf7! Kxf7 13.Qh5+] 12.Bxc6+ bxc6 13.Qf3 Qd7 14.Nxf7 Rg8 15.Bh6 [15.Nh6 is less ambitious - and, with hindsight, might have been a better option] 15...Bd4+ 16.Kh1 Ne6 17.Rae1!? [Trying for a win] 17...Bf6 [Ouch, I totally missed the bishop switch-back until I saw it played on the board which meant I wasn't in the best state of mind for clear-headed analysis in this absolutely critical position! Still, I would never ever have found Neil's stunning combination] 18.Nxd6+? [18.Ng5! Bxg5 19.Rxe6 Bxh6 which, since White seemed dead lost, was the end of this branch of my analysis but White has the astonishing 20.Rxe7!! and either Black recapture loses out of hand. Postscript And as Kevin says below, after 20...Kd8 21.Rxd7+ Kxd7 22.Qg4+ Kc7 23.Qh4 is good for White. Black's best line after 18.Ng5! Bxg5 19.Rxe6 therefore appears to be 19...0-0-0! 20.Qxc6+ leading to perpetual check. Funnily enough, we both saw this line during the game but avoided it because 19...Bxh6 looked like it won out of hand] 18...Qxd6 19.Nb5 cxb5 [Here Vladimir said he looked at 19...Qd5? 20.Rxe6? Qxf3+ 21.Rxf3 cxb5 22.Rfxf6 Kd7! for several minutes until suddenly realising 19...Qd5? 20.Qxd5! is OK for White] 20.Qxa8+ Kf7 21.Qb7 Bh5! [Stops any Rxf6+ ideas. White is dead in the water] 22.Qe4 Rg6 23.Bf4 Qd7! [Nice technique] 24.c3 Nxf4 25.Rxf4 Bg4 26.d4 [It seemed too early to resign] 26...cxd4 27.cxd4 Be6 28.Kg1 Bxa2 29.Ra1 Bd5 30.Qe2 Bc6 31.Qh5 Kg7 32.Ra6 Rg5 33.Qe2 Bxd4+ 34.Kf1 Qh3+ 0-1

Sorry, I can't get this functional :( KB can you help? Postscript All fixed now. Thanks a lot Kevin :clap: :clap:

Kevin Bonham
13-03-2009, 08:18 PM
Fritz11 reckons that after 19.Rxe6 in that line Black should ...0-0-0 leading to perpetual after 20.Bxg5 Qxe6 21.Qxc6+. However as white has knight and pawn for rook I would not be too surprised if white is not obliged to take the draw.

Tony Dowden
13-03-2009, 08:25 PM
Fritz11 reckons that after 19.Rxe6 in that line Black should ...0-0-0 leading to perpetual after 20.Bxg5 Qxe6 21.Qxc6+. However as white has knight and pawn for rook I would not be too surprised if white is not obliged to take the draw.

:hmm: Interesting. And what does Fritz11 say after 19.Rxe6 Qxe6 20.Rxe7 Kd8

Kevin Bonham
13-03-2009, 08:27 PM
:hmm: Interesting. And what does Fritz11 say after 19.Rxe6 Qxe6 20.Rxe7 Kd8

It says the rook is off the board after the queen takes it so 20.Rxe7 isn't possible.

(Just to hopefully clarify, by "that line" I meant 18.Ng5 Bxg5).

Tony Dowden
13-03-2009, 08:34 PM
It says the rook is off the board after the queen takes it so 20.Rxe7 isn't possible.

(Just to hopefully clarify, by "that line" I meant 18.Ng5 Bxg5).

Sorry, I meant (instead of 18.Nxd6?! in Dowden-V. Smirnov) what does Fritz11 say after 18.Ng5 Bxg5 19.Rxe6 Bxh6 20.Rxe7+ and now 20...Kd8 - when it looks messy to the (lazy) human eye?

Kevin Bonham
13-03-2009, 09:23 PM
Sorry, I meant (instead of 18.Nxd6?! in Dowden-V. Smirnov) what does Fritz11 say after 18.Ng5 Bxg5 19.Rxe6 Bxh6 20.Rxe7+ and now 20...Kd8 - when it looks messy to the (lazy) human eye?

It says white is winning easily (+4) after taking the queen. Actually I formed the same general conclusion (white is winning) looking at that same line with Neil because I have seen so many positions where a side without a queen gets hammered because of poor king position despite having a reasonable material balance. But the specific reason it says white is winning by that much is 21.Rxd7 Kxd7 22.Qg4+ Kc7 (best) 23.Qh4 threatening the h6-bishop. Now if ...Bf8 24.Rxf8! with Qe7+ to follow (and otherwise just Qe7+ right away). White cleans up lots of pawns around black's king and ends up with queen and four or so pawns for two rooks, and can also keep hassling black's king with the dangerous queen/knight combination.

Tony Dowden
13-03-2009, 09:29 PM
Thanks Kevin

Kevin Bonham
13-03-2009, 09:37 PM
Sorry, I can't get this functional :( KB can you help?

Fixed it eventually ( I hope) although it doesn't read quite as well as it did! At first I thought the problem was having variations that were before the text move (variations need to go in brackets after the move played to show up as sidelines on the board) but then I found something else - you had the line

"17...0-0-0 18.Rxe6 Qxe6 19.Qxc6+ with perpetual check." but 17...0-0-0 is illegal in that position because it is castling over check (untaken N on f7!)

Tony Dowden
13-03-2009, 09:51 PM
Fixed it eventually ( I hope) although it doesn't read quite as well as it did! At first I thought the problem was having variations that were before the text move (variations need to go in brackets after the move played to show up as sidelines on the board) but then I found something else - you had the line

"17...0-0-0 18.Rxe6 Qxe6 19.Qxc6+ with perpetual check." but 17...0-0-0 is illegal in that position because it is castling over check (untaken N on f7!)

Thanks! Illegal move :rolleyes: Sorry, I should have used a real chess set as well instead of trying to only use the ChesChat ones.

Saragossa
13-03-2009, 09:58 PM
Wow Rxe7+ is just amazing...wow the entire combo just gets solved with one move.

Kevin Bonham
13-03-2009, 10:10 PM
It also works (not crushingly, but well enough - white gets three pawns and a continued initiative for a piece) in the line 18.Ng5 Bxg5 19.Bxg5 Nxg5.

Tony Dowden
13-03-2009, 10:16 PM
Wow Rxe7+ is just amazing...wow the entire combo just gets solved with one move.
I wish I'd seen it :lol:

Garvinator
13-03-2009, 10:18 PM
Hey TonyD,

With the Shak attack still continuing, how many of your moves in your latest game with KB were first choice engine moves, lest it be claimed you got engine assistance during the game :whistle: :lol: :lol: :lol:

Tony Dowden
13-03-2009, 10:24 PM
Fritz11 reckons that after 19.Rxe6 in that line Black should ...0-0-0 leading to perpetual after 20.Bxg5 Qxe6 21.Qxc6+. However as white has knight and pawn for rook I would not be too surprised if white is not obliged to take the draw.

Yes, we both saw this line during the game but, as explained in the (now fixed up) annotations we avoided it because we both mistakenly thought Black had a stronger line.

Tony Dowden
13-03-2009, 10:27 PM
It also works (not crushingly, but well enough - white gets three pawns and a continued initiative for a piece) in the line 18.Ng5 Bxg5 19.Bxg5 Nxg5.
It does! Sigh ...

Tony Dowden
13-03-2009, 10:29 PM
Hey TonyD,

With the Shak attack still continuing, how many of your moves in your latest game with KB were first choice engine moves, lest it be claimed you got engine assistance during the game :whistle: :lol: :lol: :lol:
:lol: I don't have an engine ;)

Kevin Bonham
13-03-2009, 10:30 PM
It also works (not crushingly, but well enough - white gets three pawns and a continued initiative for a piece) in the line 18.Ng5 Bxg5 19.Bxg5 Nxg5.

And this is actually the key line in which it matters, because 19.Bxg5 gives white a positional edge if black doesn't take, while 19.Rxe6 appears to allow black to draw after ...0-0-0. So it looks like in the position on move 18, to avoid being worse, white has to calculate that 18.Ng5!! Bxg5 19.Bxg5 Nxg5 20.Rxe7!! works.

I was watching the game (my own having fizzled) and I didn't see it either. I would have done the same thing Tony did.

Saragossa
13-03-2009, 10:40 PM
It does! Sigh ... Thats alright Tony, you got into a winning position against Vlad!:clap: :clap: :clap: Not an easy task to achieve but you did it and all you did was miss a combination that I'm sure 99% of chess players would miss without 24 hours on the clock! :P

Kevin Bonham
13-03-2009, 10:50 PM
Not quite winning, as such. With perfect play by black (don't win the piece on g5 by taking twice, just take once then play something boring like 19...Rf8) it is +/=.

Probably 17.Ng5 is rather more of a problem for black.

Great effort by Tony all the same!

Kevin Bonham
14-03-2009, 04:03 PM
From memory this was the final position after three and a half hours of chessthermonuclear war between Saragossa and Reg McAllister "No Draw" Harvey.

8/8/8/6p1/1p4P1/1k5P/5Q2/q6K w - - 0 1

The vultures immediately pounced on the board after this finished because while it looks like black wins trivially by forcing a queen swap, it actually doesn't necessarily work.

The truth of the position (if this is indeed the right position) is as follows:

* If white plays 1.Kh2 then 1...Qb2 only draws after 2.Qxb2 Kxb2 3.h4. However 1...Qa2 wins.

* If white plays 1.Kg2 then neither 1...Qa2 nor 1...Qb2 win, however against 1...Qa2 white has only one drawing move, which is 2.h4

* However if white plays 1.Kg2 then black can win reasonably easily by keeping queens on the board.

I have calculated TPRs for those who finished above 3.5/7.

6.5/7 V Smirnov 2247
5/7 T. Dowden 1952, A Dyer 1929 N Markovitz 1888
4.5/7 K. Bonham 1855, V Horton 1707, L Bretag 1673, N Lewis 1605
4/7 R. Harvey 1645, P. Donnelly 1579, N Frame 1768, D Hughes 1642

Harry Briant (648) performed at 1280 and played like it too. :clap:

Saragossa
14-03-2009, 06:20 PM
My queen was on e2 not f2.

Wow props to Harry! Yeah are the performance ratings calculated upon everybody eles performance ratings? or simply off current ratings?

Kevin Bonham
14-03-2009, 06:38 PM
My queen was on e2 not f2.

Ah, in that case it's much simpler - wherever the king goes 1...Qa2! wins easily but 1...Qb2?? draws.


Wow props to Harry! Yeah are the performance ratings calculated upon everybody eles performance ratings? or simply off current ratings?

They're just off current ratings. The actual rating system uses intermediate ratings which take the players' performances into account as well as their current ratings, and then puts those through the wringer a number of times, so you're not just assessed against someone's current rating, but also how they have played in that period makes a difference.

Tony Dowden
15-03-2009, 07:56 AM
The finish of my game as White against Burnie regular Dylan Kuzmic in Round 6 featured a nice combination. Early in the middlegame I had sacced a pawn for a bind but then as tiredness set in my brain turned to mush and I slowly frittered away a massive advantage. Realising the game could slip away I managed to pull myself together and line up this 'bomb':

1.Nxf5! Qf6 2.Qxh6+ Kg8 3.Rxg6 1-0 [Commiserations to my opponent for falling into my elephant trap. We were so exhausted after three rounds for the second day in a row that in the final position perhaps he could have tried] 3...Nc3+ 4.Kb2? Na4+ 5.Ka3?? Qb2+ 6.Kxa4 Qb4#

ER
15-03-2009, 12:32 PM
Hi guys! What I have noticed prevailing throughout your comments, analysis, statistics etc in this thread is the great spirit and enthusiasm about the sport!
It shows in the fighting nature of your published games and the way you all show respect for your opponents.:clap:
I am sure you have all enjoyed the Champs and I wish you all the best for even higher participation and better quality of matches next year!

Kevin Bonham
15-03-2009, 10:39 PM
Hi guys! What I have noticed prevailing throughout your comments, analysis, statistics etc in this thread is the great spirit and enthusiasm about the sport!

Well I think it was an exciting running of the event in terms of the nature and in some cases quality of chess played. In 2007 we had an even larger field and another very close finish for the title but hardly any of the games were interesting or memorable; everyone just went into draw-mode on the second day. Some other years recently a single player has completely dominated the tournament or the title has been determined by blunders rather than good play.

Also we do generally have an enthusiastic chess scene here for our population. A few times Tony has compared it to the NZ South Island which has about twice the population but very little tournament activity.

Tony Dowden
18-03-2009, 07:28 AM
A few times Tony has compared it to the NZ South Island which has about twice the population but very little tournament activity.

Yes, I have said things along these lines as more and more regional tournaments in the South Island have terminated (and clubs have folded). But perhap I should qualify this a little.

At least the South Island still has its long running annual championship. Traditionally an 8 round event, this year it runs in my old home town of Dunedin (pop 110,000) over July 10-14 (Sat-Tues). As it will be a FIDE rated event :clap: :clap: it has a mere two round per day :P (but in any case, unlike Tassie, for the locals would it would be unthinkable to have three rounds :eek: in one day). The entry fee is NZ$60 adults and NZ$35 juniors with a 'projected minimum' prizefund of NZ$700.

I might just enter - and sample some more of my mother's cooking :cool:

More info: http://home.clear.net.nz/pages/otagochess/

Capablanca-Fan
18-03-2009, 08:09 AM
For sure. 25 years ago, its two main clubs, Canterbury and Otago, had both strength and numbers. The latter had several regular players comparable to Vladimir Nikolayevich in strength. The South Island Champs regularly attracted some of NZ's best players.