Sunday, February 3, 2008

Patience + Hard work = A gamble worth waiting for.

I first wanted to take the time to thank those who commented on my previous post. I'm sorry I've been late to respond lately. Life is catching up to me and well, it was superbowl weekend after all. I know I promised you an annotated game, and that is what you will get. We'll get to that shortly. I first want to talk about a few things as far as progress(and even lack thereof). I have now finished 920 problems in CT-ART and I'm about halfway through Circle 1(in days). Since I've started this program, my tactical ability has been INCREDIBLE! I am now seeing things I would not have seen without the aide of CT-ART and the circles program. However, I question some of what I'm learning in a sense. I have my lucky days and I have more and more bad days. This last week's chess club meeting was certainly a very lucky day for me. I was able to see combinations like it was second nature. However, I blundered A LOT in almost every one of those games and I should have lost at least three of them. So now you can see why I say I have my "lucky days". My opponents blundered worse than I did, which allowed me to come up with some of those amazing combinations. I feel disappointed about this and don't really view it as an accomplishment. If my opponents would have played at the same strength throughout the whole game, I would have lost every game without a doubt. I have taken into account(on part of de la Maza's advice) the fact that I should now start to analyze every one of my OTB games with Fritz. I don't really know how to do this that well and would really appreciate it if one of my fellow Knights would help me out with this. The point of me wanting to learn how to use Fritz to analyze my games is so I can 'get rid of the big squiggly lines' from my play. The annotated game I'm about to provide you will have annotations from Fritz, however I don't think I did it right. Chessbase products really confuse me which doesn't help my case.

Now on to the annotated game that I promised. This game needs a little bit of an introduction: It was the last game of the night and it was against my highest rated opponent thus far in the night. He knew that I had won all my previous games but he insisted on telling everybody how horrible of a chess player I was and that I was on a huge luck streak. He asked me what my rating was and when I said "980" he proceeded to laugh in my face and said I was a joke and that he would dispose of me quickly. He showed absolute ZERO respect for me, not just as a chess player but as a person. I wanted nothing more than to show this guy what it was like to get his ass handed to him, in a very royal fashion. This game caused Fritz 10 to give me " ! " on two separate moves! All annotations were provided by Fritz 10 with the exception of the ones that start with "Nemo:". I hope you enjoy this game as much as I did. Was a nice way to end the night and to shut up a cocky chess player. Enjoy!

Sir Nemo(980 USCF) vs. Unnamed(1730 USCF)
CCC Weekly

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Qf6!? (diagram 1)
Nemo: I found this move to be insulting. It proved that my opponent had no respect for me and wished to employ ignorant opening moves in the hopes that it would throw me off.
[2...Nc6 3. Nc3= ]

[3.Nc3 Nc6]

[3...exd4!? 4.Qxd4 Nc6]

[4.Nc3 Bg4]

4...Qg6 5.Nc3 exd4

6.Qxd4 c5? (diagram 2)

7.Qe3 h6 8.Bf4 Nf6 9.Bd3
[9.0-0-0!? keeps an even further grip]

9...Ng4 10.Qe2 Be7??
Black has lost his nerve... understandable when you consider his position. This allows White to win a pawn and a piece.

11.e5 Qh5 12.exd6 0-0 13.dxe7 Re8 14.0-0-0 Nc6
Nemo: This move was a mistake in my eyes as it allowed me to come up with a nice little combination to force Black to give up a piece for two pawns and a major Kingside attack or lose his Queen.

15.h3 Rxe7 16.Qd2 Nf6 17.g4 (diagram 3)

Nemo: The point of my last comment. Black either has to deal with the loss of his Queen or sacrifice a minor piece for two pawns and a horrible position. This move deserves a " ! " if you ask me.

17...Nxg4 18.hxg4 Qxg4 19.Bxh6!
Nemo: That's right! Fritz gave me the good move! This move fell directly in my strategy of attacking the King. It's kind of a pseudo sacrifice that I thought was brilliant at the time. I'm leaving the Knight and the Bishop hanging. If Black takes on h6, then Rg1 was pretty decisive. I was proud of this move.

19...Qxf3 20.Bxg7!
Mate attack.
Nemo: Fritz gave me the good move yet again! Notice how my pieces are all pointed at Black's King and his pieces are extremely uncoordinated.

20...Kxg7 21.Qg5+ Kf8 22.Rh8# (diagram 4)

What this game came down to was me isolating the King in his own corner and never giving up the initiative. I kept creating problems for this guy and it payed off. I felt victorious after this game and a few Class A players congratulated me on my victories that night and especially my victory over this cocky player. I hope you enjoyed this game as much as I did. I hope to bring more games like this to the table. One step closer to mastery!


Glenn Wilson said...

Some wins are sweeter than others. Very nice game and attack.

The annotated game I'm about to provide you will have annotations from Fritz, however I don't think I did it right.
Looks good to me. Why do you say that? How did you use Fritz?

damourax said...

Hey Nemo, if you used Fritz like I told this is the result! =]
You showed no mercy! =P
He didn't ever thought of openings principles, disrespected you and of course enjoyed a lot this game! hahaha
Congratulations guy, hope you to continue having such success!!

In move 14 his position is completely messed up, and your pieces are almost fully developed! Nice game, Nice win! You deserved it!

Someday we will fight in the chess world cup!

Sir Nemo said...

Glen W. - I opened the game up and Fritz and did "Full Analysis". Something about it doesn't seem so 'full' lol.

Augusto - Thanks! Yes, someday we will both reign victorious at the chess World Cup! That day is soon to come! haha.

drunknknite said...

This was a nice finish. It's funny that he played Qf6, no respect. But I'm pretty sure you earned their respect so now you're going to have to tread carefully.

There are a few things that I don't like about the 'full analysis' function. First of all I never know where to put the threshold, the threshold is the difference between Fritz's recommendation and the move in the game, if it is at 50 for instance, then it will show it's recommendation if it evaluates it as half a pawn better than the move in the game. I usually end up setting it at 30-50 and getting really weird moves that don't necessarily make sense and aren't that much better than my move. Then there is the time per move, I used to just give it a minute or 90 seconds, but I know from experience of leaving it on a position that it can change its evaluation after a longer think, so I started using 300 seconds but that ends up taking at least a couple hours per game. So now I just put Fritz on infinite analysis and stop where it can point out some tactics.

A good example where Fritz gives you a retarded line is

2...Nc6 3.Nc3=

First of all, 3.Bb5 is played most frequently and this position can hardly be considered equal.

Also like we were talking about last week, 3.d4 the Scotch has enjoyed a similar reputation at times and is still played at the highest level to give White some claim to an advantage.

Fritz feels that it is necessary to comment here for some reason and can't even reference it's own opening book to find a few lines to throw out. You can actually cure this by checking the opening reference box in the full analysis function and referencing the biggest database you have. This way instead of Fritz spouting off useless moves before it knows what's going on, it will give you a line from one of those games after the first deviation. Sometimes a little more, it's a sweet function. But anyways then the very next move when it recommends:

3...exd4!? 4.Qxd4[!?] Nc6

4.Nxd4 seems much more in the spirit of the variation, if Black wants to play Qh4 here he is simply a move behind in the Scotch, and other than that, his position is just a bad version of so many e4 e5 positions.

Just a few random thoughts. I used to use this function all the time but I never really got that much out of analyzing my games. Now I just leave the computer in the background and just make moves that are interesting to me and every once in a while I pause and wait for Fritz to give me some hints. Then I try some of my ideas to see if he really even knows what he's talking about. A lot of the time if you follow the line he gives it changes all of a sudden. It's weird, play with it for a while.

Anonymous said...

Regarding Fritz analysis, I prefer to use Blundercheck with the following settings, to create an evaluation profile (histogram/graph):
Side to analyze: both
Output: annotate as variations
Depth: 13 ply
Threshold: 0 (analyze every move)
Write full variations: checked
Erase old annotations: un-checked
Training: unchecked
Store evaluation: checked
Check main line: checked
Check variations: unchecked

I like having the histogram with evaluations for every position, and then all I need to look out for are major fluctuations (something like 0.7 pawns or more). If I see a big change on any given move then I know somebody made a mistake, and if it changes back on the next move that usually means the other party overlooked a tactic that had been available but now is no longer available.

On my computer it doesn't take too long to analyze a game through at 13 ply, and that helps me to identify the "critical junctures" in the game - the turning points where leads are gained or lost or extended or diminished. Then I'll stop on those moves and use drunknknite's technique of letting "infinite analysis" run on the position up at a deeper level (up to 17-20 ply depending on when my patience runs out) in order to really get to the bottom of those critical positions.

Best regards, Hank

Anonymous said...

I've never commented on a Chess blog but I had to leave a note to say how awesome I thought it was that you beat that arrogant *&*&&%

Re: Fritz. I'm fairly new to playing Chess and I've only had Fritz for a month or so, but I've already noticed that its suggestions are worth taking with a slight pinch of salt. Not because they aren't good movies, but because computers just play Chess in a very different kind of way to humans and don't seem to see the beenfit in adventurous play or unusual moves. I was running a Fritz analysis on a game that Tal played and Fritz's moves almost never agreed with Tal's moves almost seem to dare the opponent to analyse the consequences of exchanges that a human probably couldn't do - but a compuetr could. I reckon Fritz would probably have drawn the game against Tal...but soes that mean that Fritz's moves were "correct"? I'm not so sure. Tal played the correct move in the situation to push for a win...not a draw.

That said, I think that the Fritz full analysis is very useful as you can just run it in the background, come back to it later and pinpoint immediately where you went wrong or right....its still up to you to put the work in re: what moves you should or shouldn't play and Fritz isn't always going to be right about that, but its a great starting point for looking at your play. drunknite's suggestion seems just as good, though.

Anyway, congrats on your successes. kick ass some more!