PDA

View Full Version : MCC obliterates Hobson's Bay 8-3



ER
04-04-2009, 09:49 PM
The following is a Press release by MCC President Grant Szuveges:

Melbourne Chess Club vs Hobson's Bay Chess Club Match

MCC won the match 8-3, although we fielded a much stronger team than Hobson's Bay. The event was a huge success with both clubs satisfied with the result. The individuals results are as follows. The MCC players name is on the left, regardless of the colours:



Mirko RUJEVIC (IM) 1-0 Dean HOGG
Bill JORDAN (FM) 1-0 Damien CARON
Carl GORKA 0.5 -0.5 Tony DAVIS
Pano SKIOTIS 1-0 Goran VELJANOVSKI
David BEAUMONT 0.5 -0.5 Jake KOSTRZEWA
Gary LYCETT 1-0 Milan ILIC
Milan BRKLJAC 1-0 Calvin BENNETT
Paul KOVACEVIC 0-1 Timothy TROTT
Roger McCART 0-1 Mark SALANOWSKI
Paul CAVEZZA 1-0 Endre SIMON
Nick IVANOV 1-0 Antonio RAMOS

The individual encounters:

RUJEVIC - HOGG

This was vintage Rujevic at his scintillating best! Hogg didnt seem to do anything wrong, but Rujevic initiated and won a tactical skirmish in an open position and produced a very nice win...

CARON - JORDAN

Jordan equalised with black after playing aggressively, and probably had a slight initiative. Caron then sacrificed a piece which didnt pay off...

GORKA - DAVIS

The game which (quite literally) won the chocolates! This game was absolutely berko!!! Both sides attacked in a French with kings and other pieces flying around the board everywhere. No-one seems to know what was actually happening in the game, let alone in the final position. A very interesting game by both players, who had to share the box of chocolates...

VELJANOVSKI - SKIOTIS

I didnt see a lot of this game, but I saw that Mr Reliable (Skiotis) equalised as black in a Sicilian and then gained a positional edge...

BEAUMONT - KOSTRZEWA

Beaumont wanted to play against Jake after losing to him at Ballarat. Jake was more than up to the challenge. Beaumont planned badly in the early middle game and got a worse position. When he lost a pawn, followed by another pawn, things looked very bad for him. He then sacrificed a piece which had Jake taken, he would 've won the game easily. Instead Jake went for a safer win which he didnt quite find - it was a hard position to win...

ILIC - LYCETT

The easiest time in chess to make a mistake is straight after you have just made one. And mistakes usually come in groups of three. This game is the perfect example of this. Ilic was crushing Lycett early in the game. He had a position where he could've simply won a pawn, yet he decided not to. He then went on to lose a pawn, followed by another, followed by a rook...

BRKLJAC - BENNETT

Milan Brkljac is the ultimate coffee-house player! He understands piece activity well and plays endgames well too - I can vouch for this as I play blitz with him regularly. When he was a pawn down in the ending, I had a strong feeling that he would wouldnt lose - I didnt expect him to win though!!! He got the pieces active and came up with a mating net swindle...

TROTT - KOVACEVIC

Timothy Trott didnt seem to think that he played this game so well, though I thought that he played really well. He played aggressively and seemed to find lots of 'best moves' and some 'only moves'. I really couldnt fault what he did. I think he had this game under control from the opening, despite aggressive play by black...

McCART - SALANOWSKI

Good game by black. Mark Salanowski equalised and then pushed on for a positional advantage. Built up well and won a pawn...

SIMON - CAVEZZA

Cavezza played this game really really well. Simon made some errors in the opening, and Cavezza took full advantage of them, playing aggressive positional moves to produce a nice thematic victory. I think that every move Cavezza made was probably the 'best' move in the position after the game left theory...

IVANOV - RAMOS

Ivanov was all over his opponent like a rash early, but Ramos made it tricky and fought back to be an exchange up. Ivanov had enough to stay in it and then his opponent blundered the exchange back...

All in all a very competitive match, with the scoreline not revealing how close most of the games really were. The players of both clubs enjoyed the night and MCC is looking forward to more matches in the future. If your club would like to play a match against the MCC, please contact Grant on 0401-925-075"

Metro
05-04-2009, 02:13 AM
The following is a Press release by MCC President Grant Szuveges:

Melbourne Chess Club vs Hobson's Bay Chess Club Match

MCC won the match 8-3, although we fielded a much stronger team than Hobson's Bay. The event was a huge success with both clubs satisfied with the result. The individuals results are as follows. The MCC players name is on the left, regardless of the colours:



Mirko RUJEVIC (IM) 1-0 Dean HOGG
Bill JORDAN (FM) 1-0 Damien CARON
Carl GORKA 0.5 -0.5 Tony DAVIS
Pano SKIOTIS 1-0 Goran VELJANOVSKI
David BEAUMONT 0.5 -0.5 Jake KOSTRZEWA
Gary LYCETT 1-0 Milan ILIC
Milan BRKLJAC 1-0 Calvin BENNETT
Paul KOVACEVIC 0-1 Timothy TROTT
Roger McCART 0-1 Mark SALANOWSKI
Paul CAVEZZA 1-0 Endre SIMON
Nick IVANOV 1-0 Antonio RAMOS

The individual encounters:

RUJEVIC - HOGG

This was vintage Rujevic at his scintillating best! Hogg didnt seem to do anything wrong, but Rujevic initiated and won a tactical skirmish in an open position and produced a very nice win...

CARON - JORDAN

Jordan equalised with black after playing aggressively, and probably had a slight initiative. Caron then sacrificed a piece which didnt pay off...

GORKA - DAVIS

The game which (quite literally) won the chocolates! This game was absolutely berko!!! Both sides attacked in a French with kings and other pieces flying around the board everywhere. No-one seems to know what was actually happening in the game, let alone in the final position. A very interesting game by both players, who had to share the box of chocolates...

VELJANOVSKI - SKIOTIS

I didnt see a lot of this game, but I saw that Mr Reliable (Skiotis) equalised as black in a Sicilian and then gained a positional edge...

BEAUMONT - KOSTRZEWA

Beaumont wanted to play against Jake after losing to him at Ballarat. Jake was more than up to the challenge. Beaumont planned badly in the early middle game and got a worse position. When he lost a pawn, followed by another pawn, things looked very bad for him. He then sacrificed a piece which had Jake taken, he would 've won the game easily. Instead Jake went for a safer win which he didnt quite find - it was a hard position to win...

ILIC - LYCETT

The easiest time in chess to make a mistake is straight after you have just made one. And mistakes usually come in groups of three. This game is the perfect example of this. Ilic was crushing Lycett early in the game. He had a position where he could've simply won a pawn, yet he decided not to. He then went on to lose a pawn, followed by another, followed by a rook...

BRKLJAC - BENNETT

Milan Brkljac is the ultimate coffee-house player! He understands piece activity well and plays endgames well too - I can vouch for this as I play blitz with him regularly. When he was a pawn down in the ending, I had a strong feeling that he would wouldnt lose - I didnt expect him to win though!!! He got the pieces active and came up with a mating net swindle...

TROTT - KOVACEVIC

Timothy Trott didnt seem to think that he played this game so well, though I thought that he played really well. He played aggressively and seemed to find lots of 'best moves' and some 'only moves'. I really couldnt fault what he did. I think he had this game under control from the opening, despite aggressive play by black...

McCART - SALANOWSKI

Good game by black. Mark Salanowski equalised and then pushed on for a positional advantage. Built up well and won a pawn...

SIMON - CAVEZZA

Cavezza played this game really really well. Simon made some errors in the opening, and Cavezza took full advantage of them, playing aggressive positional moves to produce a nice thematic victory. I think that every move Cavezza made was probably the 'best' move in the position after the game left theory...

IVANOV - RAMOS

Ivanov was all over his opponent like a rash early, but Ramos made it tricky and fought back to be an exchange up. Ivanov had enough to stay in it and then his opponent blundered the exchange back...

All in all a very competitive match, with the scoreline not revealing how close most of the games really were. The players of both clubs enjoyed the night and MCC is looking forward to more matches in the future. If your club would like to play a match against the MCC, please contact Grant on 0401-925-075"
Thanks for the report JK.You might like to remove the word "obliterates" from the report as it is likely to cause bad feeling in the HBCC.
I am interested in these interclubs from the point of view of rating gaps in the pairings.
MCC has a rating total of 19,934 although Cavezza has an unreliable ACF1151.
HBCC has a rating total of 17,992.I have given the unrated Endre Simon a rating of 1400.The difference in rating total is 1942 (or an average of 176 per board)in favour of MCC.

Now let's look at it in general terms.I want to point out here that my thoughts are based on my experience at Elwood Chess Club.Elwood would often lose to a weaker Club because the pairings were designed to be as even as possible ie.small gap.
Is the advantage to MCC too great?Why should the stronger Club be penalised?
If the stronger Club continues to win these matches,the weaker Club will either want to discontinue them or alter the pairing conditions.Why should the weaker Club continue to play under conditions whereby they are continually losing?Of course the match conditions are subject to agreement by the 2 Clubs.
These are some personal thoughts not to be seen as a criticism of a particular Club.

ER
05-04-2009, 03:02 AM
Thanks for the report JK.You might like to remove the word "obliterates" from the report as it is likely to cause bad feeling in the HBCC.
Thanks I' ll do that!

Paul Cavezza
05-04-2009, 04:59 AM
Hobsons bay were great across the board and all the games (maybe excepting Bill's) were competitive despite the final score. And even still, I don't think anybody was displeased with having to play a higher rated opponent. As I said Hobson's bay were great but MCC are lucky enough to have a lot of very active +2000 players 4 or 5 of which played that night. How can you make it more even anyway? Rujevic and Bill play at board 11 & 12?

Here is my game from the match:

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 a6 4.Ba4 Nf6 5.O-O Be7 6.Re1 b5 7.Bb3 d6 8.h3 Na5 9.c3 Nxb3 10.axb3 Bb7 11.d3 O-O 12.Na3 Re8 13.Bg5 Nd7 14.Bxe7 Qxe7 15.b4 d5 16.Nd2 dxe4 17.Nxe4 f5 18.Ng3 Qg5 19.Nc2 Nf6 20.Qc1 f4 21.Ne4 Nxe4 22.dxe4 Re6 23.Qd1 Rg6 24.Qf3 Bc8 25.Red1 Rh6 26.Kh2 Bg4 27.Qd3 Re8 28.f3 Bxh3 29.g4 Bf1+

Watto
05-04-2009, 08:23 AM
Thanks for the report JK.You might like to remove the word "obliterates" from the report as it is likely to cause bad feeling in the HBCC.
I am interested in these interclubs from the point of view of rating gaps in the pairings.
MCC has a rating total of 19,934 although Cavezza has an unreliable ACF1151.
HBCC has a rating total of 17,992.I have given the unrated Endre Simon a rating of 1400.The difference in rating total is 1942 (or an average of 176 per board)in favour of MCC.

Now let's look at it in general terms.I want to point out here that my thoughts are based on my experience at Elwood Chess Club.Elwood would often lose to a weaker Club because the pairings were designed to be as even as possible ie.small gap.
Is the advantage to MCC too great?Why should the stronger Club be penalised?
If the stronger Club continues to win these matches,the weaker Club will either want to discontinue them or alter the pairing conditions.Why should the weaker Club continue to play under conditions whereby they are continually losing?Of course the match conditions are subject to agreement by the 2 Clubs.
These are some personal thoughts not to be seen as a criticism of a particular Club.
lol. Glad the word 'obliterates' got removed. I doubt whether that was in Grant's report. I suspect it was JAK's sense of drama... ;)

As for the rest, it sounds like a very interesting, worthwhile match to me. I would suspect that Hobson's Bay would be keen to get strong opposition from the MCC and be well satisfied with that result, rather than unhappy about losing. Personally I wouldn't be all that interested to play a deliberately weakened version of a strong club. It's not like the MCC were fielding GMs vs 1500ers. They looked to be competitive. Also, my preferences aside (;)), I seem to recall that Hobson's Bay asked for the MCC to not water down their team.

Obviously it's up to the teams involved. Should they wish to adjust the strength of the teams in future, I'm sure they'll talk about it and arrange it that way.

Anyway, I'd be interested to hear what Hobson's Bay feel.

ER
05-04-2009, 08:51 AM
I doubt whether that was in Grant's report.
It wasn't, this is one of the reasons Grant insists on "a word to word" publishing of his statements!!! :) :whistle:

I suspect it was JAK's sense of drama... ;)
Yes, I can sense that we are going to have a very hot Interclub Competition in Victoria this coming winter and I am creating some ambience! :owned:

Metro
05-04-2009, 03:35 PM
How can you make it more even anyway? Rujevic and Bill play at board 11 & 12?

It's easy if both Clubs agree to it.It depends on the pairing conditions eg.in this case Beaumont v Davis or Beaumont v Caron,Kovacevic v Veljanovski,Ivanov v Kostrzewa etc.So some players don't play but this can be determined before match day.The point is do both Clubs agree to these conditions?

Metro
05-04-2009, 03:41 PM
As for the rest, it sounds like a very interesting, worthwhile match to me. I would suspect that Hobson's Bay would be keen to get strong opposition from the MCC and be well satisfied with that result, rather than unhappy about losing. Personally I wouldn't be all that interested to play a deliberately weakened version of a strong club. It's not like the MCC were fielding GMs vs 1500ers. They looked to be competitive. Also, my preferences aside (;)), I seem to recall that Hobson's Bay asked for the MCC to not water down their team.

Anyway, I'd be interested to hear what Hobson's Bay feel.
Again,if both Clubs want strongest team v strongest team then so be it.Some Clubs however want to win so they dont want these conditions.They want even pairings.I would be interested to hear Deans view.

Metro
05-04-2009, 03:56 PM
Yes, I can sense that we are going to have a very hot Interclub Competition in Victoria this coming winter and I am creating some ambience! :owned:
I think CV needs MCC in the Western Zone so that they have HBCC,MCC,
perhaps Geelong, Serbia or Elwood.Four Clubs may be sufficient to make it viable.Eastern Zone has an adequate number of Clubs/teams.

DogLover
05-04-2009, 07:38 PM
I spoke to Dean about the match this afternoon and he indicated that HBYCC were very happy about all aspects of the match including the strength of their opponents.Thanks goes to MCC and Grant.
However next time we will obliterate you!!

Metro
05-04-2009, 07:47 PM
I spoke to Dean about the match this afternoon and he indicated that HBYCC were very happy about all aspects of the match including the strength of their opponents.Thanks goes to MCC and Grant.
However next time we will obliterate you!!
Uh oh:uhoh: Now you've done it,JK! Watch out for those HB boys next time:lol:

ER
05-04-2009, 09:10 PM
It's easy if both Clubs agree to it.It depends on the pairing conditions eg.in this case Beaumont v Davis or Beaumont v Caron,Kovacevic v Veljanovski,Ivanov v Kostrzewa etc.So some players don't play but this can be determined before match day.The point is do both Clubs agree to these conditions?

That's all hogwash!
The Clubs agreed to a match, they presented their best available teams. The match was held, the result was published, see you all at the Interclub!

ER
05-04-2009, 09:15 PM
I think CV needs MCC in the Western Zone so that they have HBCC,MCC,perhaps Geelong, Serbia or Elwood.Four Clubs may be sufficient to make it viable.Eastern Zone has an adequate number of Clubs/teams.

That doesn't mean that Clubs have to go out of their way to accommodate CV's "needs"!

ER
05-04-2009, 09:17 PM
Uh oh:uhoh: Now you've done it,JK! Watch out for those HB boys next time:lol:
I 've done nothing! MCC obliterated them in the first match, now HB threatens to obliterate MCC in the next round, which Club are you playing for? By the way are you member of either?

eclectic
05-04-2009, 09:19 PM
if 8-3 equals obliteration i shudder to think what word would describe 11-0 :uhoh:

ER
05-04-2009, 09:22 PM
lol you have to wait a little for that, apparently there are talks for a revenge match!

ER
05-04-2009, 09:36 PM
"In response to the thread about the MCC vs Hobson's Bay match, I want to clear up a few things... Firstly, the word 'obliterates' was absolutely NOT put in the report by me or by the MCC - in fact the report I sent to Elliot did not even have a heading!!! As mentioned earlier, it is just Elliot's way of stirring the pot a bit! (we didn't encourage it either...) As for the strength of the teams fielded, MCC simply gave games to players who wanted to play. Of course we were happy to field a strong team, and were happy to win - that goes without saying. But if we fielded a weaker team and lost, that would still be a success. The idea of the match was for us (MCC) to get involved and proactive in Victorian chess again and to give our players some extra chess to play - thus making their memberships effectively better value... When I started talking to Tony Davis about the idea of having this match, he said that his club wanted to play against strong opponents - so we were happy to accomodate that...

What I would love to see at some point soon, is the MCC field a team of players under 1500 - because we need more of those sorts of players at our club. A good club has lots of players under 1500 and builds itself from these players - but they dont stay under 1500 for long! Our club has been a bit top heavy for a while, and while we are very proud to have strong players playing at our club, we also need more under 1500s playing there too. Without players of this level, 1600-1700 players finish tournaments on 2/9 and get disheartened - they need players too feed off. The under 1500s usually improve and make it into that next 1500-1800 bracket where they are scoring enough wins to stay enthusiastic about their chess, and thus more under 1500s are needed. A healthy club ALWAYS needs to have new players coming through at all times. This is what has been a big problem at MCC for too long. But it is changing now and we are gradually developing a core group of under 1500s, who hopefully will continue at MCC, improve their chess and then start teaching the new under 1500s who play at the club in 2012 - 2020 etc..... Its like the eco-system of a forest..... To help this process, we have started NOVICE'S NIGHT on Tuesday nights, so if you are under 1500, please come down and play at the MCC on Tuesday evenings and enjoy your chess in an environment where you can be competitive every game.... Rumour has it that through the year there will be a few strong MCC committee members down there on Tuesdays giving some free pointers and tips to players wanting to improve.... Anyway, I hope that this gives some insight into the workings of MCC in relation to matches with other clubs and our ideas about creating a healthier club....

Metro
05-04-2009, 09:49 PM
That's all hogwash!

Not so! Everything I said is correct.

Metro
05-04-2009, 09:55 PM
I 've done nothing! MCC obliterated them in the first match, now HB threatens to obliterate MCC in the next round, which Club are you playing for? By the way are you member of either?
My post#11 is tongue in cheek.

kjenhager
05-04-2009, 10:11 PM
if 8-3 equals obliteration i shudder to think what word would describe 11-0 :uhoh:
I think you'll find in that case that the phrase " glass car parked" is used.

MichaelBaron
06-04-2009, 01:23 PM
Well done, MCC! :clap:

Saragossa
06-04-2009, 03:53 PM
Is the gorka game available ( sorry if games have been mentioned elsewhere I kinda gave up reading through all the randomness within).

Desmond
07-04-2009, 06:53 PM
if 8-3 equals obliteration i shudder to think what word would describe 11-0 :uhoh:Yeah, I was thinking the same thing. Maybe there is a verb form of armageddon. MCC armageddifies HB.

Kevin Bonham
07-04-2009, 07:47 PM
8-3 is about what you would expect for the rating difference. Nothing wrong with having unequal matches so long as you realise that the stronger side will almost certainly win them and the most interest will be in the margin. An option is to have an outright winner of the match, but also set each team a target to be declared winner on handicap, and leave a bit of slack in the middle for a draw because ratings aren't always reliable. I haven't checked the board-by-board matchups but 8-3 between these two teams would probably be a handicap draw, or close enough. 9-2 might be a handicap win to MCC, 7-4 a handicap win to Hobson's Bay.

Carl Gorka
07-04-2009, 10:01 PM
okedoke, all you French fans can sort through this barrel of laughs. I enjoyed this game, thanks to Tony as it takes 2 players to make a game this exciting:) If you're looking for perfect moves, then look elsewhere:P

Event: MCC-HBCC
Site: ?
Date: 2009.04.03
Round: ?
White: Gorka, C.
Black: Davis, T.
Result: 1/2-1/2
ECO: C16
PlyCount: 67
EventDate: 2009.02.03
SourceDate: 2009.02.03

1. e4 e6 2. d4 d5 3. Nc3 Bb4 4. e5 Qd7 5. a3 Bxc3+ 6. bxc3 b6 7. a4 Ba6 8. Bxa6
Nxa6 9. a5 Nb8 10. Qg4 f5 11. Qh5+ Qf7 12. Qe2 Ne7 13. Nf3 h6 14. h4 Qh5 15.
axb6 cxb6 16. Qb5+ Kf7 17. Rh3 Rc8 18. Ba3 Ng6 19. Bd6 Nc6 20. c4 Nf4 21. cxd5
Nxh3 22. dxc6 Qg4 23. c7 Qxg2 24. Qd7+ Kg8 25. Qxe6+ Kh8 26. Ra3 Qxf2+ 27. Kd1
Ng1 28. Qxf5 Nxf3 29. Rxf3 Qxd4+ 30. Kc1 Qxh4 31. Rh3 Qe1+ 32. Kb2 Qd2 33. Qd7
Qd4+ 34. Kb1 1/2-1/2