Saturday, November 21, 2009
Game of the Year Wildcards
So with only the Championship Match left to be played in this USCL season, it's once again also time to look forward towards the Game of the Year (GOTY) contest for this year. For the most part, we plan to run this contest in the same basic fashion as last year, the contest running about the same amount of overall time (one month) and once again with twenty games in contention: the thirteen Game of the Weeks (which can be seen here) along with seven Wildcard games, which will be picked by the GOTW Judges right after the season ends.
We have considered making a slight increase in the number of judges we have for this season's contest though (please vote in the poll at the right so we know how you feel), and aside from knowing your views on that, we'd naturally also like your input on which games you think should be the Wildcards! So please let us know your view on what you think the proper number of judges is and what games definitely deserve to be in the GOTY contest which did not already win GOTW.
Friday, November 20, 2009
Semifinals Game of the Week
This year we have five judges for Game of the Week, each ranking their top five games. The games are then given from one to five points, based on these rankings, and whichever game receives the most total points wins the award. First place each week will receive a $150 bonus prize, second place $75, and third place $50. Our five judges are: IM Greg Shahade, FM Jim Dean, NM Michael Aigner, NM Jeff Ashton, and NM Arun Sharma. Click here for more details.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1st Place: GM Pascal Charbonneau (NY) vs IM Dean Ippolito (NJ) 1/2-1/2
In an already wild position, GM Charbonneau threw the spectators for another loop with a very interesting Queen sacrifice, 13. Nxd4!?, creating a severely unbalanced position which eventually, after many more interesting moments, ended in a draw.
Michael Aigner: The Semifinal round saw two thrilling matches, both won by the lower seeded team against draw odds. Unfortunately, there was no obvious Game of the Week, certainly no aesthetic win by sacrificial attack. Pruess and Charbonneau both tried to play entertaining chess, yet neither was able to win. In fact, I believe the two most exciting games both ended in draws (Boards One and Two of New Jersey vs New York).
I selected the wild, yet imperfect, draw between Charbonneau and Ippolito for the Semifinals' Game of the Week. Black stirred the pot in the Four Knight's with 4... Nd4, 7... d5, and the Knight sacrifice 10... Nxe4. Not to be outdone, White raised the stakes with a Queen sacrifice on move thirteen! When the dust settled, White had a pair of Bishops and two Pawns against a Black Queen. White liquidated into an endgame of Rook and Bishop against Queen which he held without adventure. This was a great back-and-forth battle that allowed both combatants to show off their chess skill.
I thought for a long time about how to rank the draw between Benjamin and Kacheishvili and the miniature by Moreno Roman. It came down to the shocking result of the latter's King's Gambit game, with White completely busted after move twelve. Black simply offered up a piece to develop quickly and castle, then found the efficient move order 10... Bxf3, 11... Re8+, and the quiet move 12... Qh5. Bravo to Moreno Roman for being prepared to do battle in such an aggressive opening. Unfortunately, White's lack of resistance (9. Qe1 instead of 9. cxb7+) contrasts starkly to the battle between Charbonneau and Ippolito.
I considered the Benjamin vs Kacheishvili game as well, but to me it lacked a signature move such as Charbonneau's Queen sacrifice. Either player may have earned GOTW by finding a single tactic: 30. Be6 for White and 55... R6c5+ for Black. Finally, Bhat scored a nice win against Lugo, but I could not justify recognizing a player on the losing side in the playoffs. (1st place: 2 points)
Jim Dean: Although this game ended in a draw, it seemed like it was definitely the most interesting game played this week. The opening variation was entertaining, both players played well, and the material imbalance made the game difficult to evaluate at times. Congrats to both players. (1st place: 2 points)
Greg Shahade: Definitely the most interesting game of the week, with a shocking queen sacrifice by Charbonneau. Incredible that both times that these two players faced off, the game ended up winning Game of the Week! (1st place: 2 points)
Jeff Ashton: It is hard for me to select a draw as GOTW. This was by far the most interesting and hard fought game. I did not expect this game to end up in a draw.
On Pruess losing in three moves:
It is inexcusable for Pruess to lose a game like this. In a team tournament, in the Semifinals, with the White pieces, against a lower rated player, seeing the final position is just nauseating.
Of course hindsight is 20/20, but if I were on the team I'd be irritated by my teammate's play while watching it, outraged if he loses, and if he wins I'd tell Pruess "Whew! Don't scare us again like that again!"
And yes, I know that White got a better position that was marred by his own error, but I still don't really like what Pruess did. It's not practical.
I feel bad for Pruess since he's one of the nicest junior players I grew up with and I like to see the beloved San Francisco team win games.
I know Pruess occasionally likes have "fun" with his openings (I remember sitting next to him and seeing him play the Latvian Gambit), but I think he should save it for the World Open or perhaps take up bungee jumping. (1st place: 2 points)
Arun Sharma: This to me was definitely the most interesting game played this week, with some very daring and creative play by both sides in the opening. I considered ranking this first like the other judges, but as often is the case, this creativity also came with some errors (Black playing 14... Bg4 instead of 14... Bxc2!, and White choosing 28. Bf4 instead of 28. Rd8+!). In the end, it was a close decision, but I chose the Moreno Roman game as first simply because even though it was much shorter than I like my choices to generally be, it still managed to be a very interesting game - after every move there was a myriad of possible variations, and it also seemed like the victor really didn't make any mistakes, accurately punishing his opponent's errors. (2nd place: 1 point)
Total Score of Charbonneau vs Ippolito: 9 points
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Other Considered Games (judges' scores in parenthesis)
5 points (Arun 2, Michael 1, Jim 1, Greg 1): IM David Pruess (SF) vs IM Alejandro Moreno Roman (MIA) 0-1
1 point (Jeff 1): IM Blas Lugo (MIA) vs GM Vinay Bhat (SF) 0-1
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1st Place: GM Pascal Charbonneau (NY) vs IM Dean Ippolito (NJ) 1/2-1/2
In an already wild position, GM Charbonneau threw the spectators for another loop with a very interesting Queen sacrifice, 13. Nxd4!?, creating a severely unbalanced position which eventually, after many more interesting moments, ended in a draw.
Michael Aigner: The Semifinal round saw two thrilling matches, both won by the lower seeded team against draw odds. Unfortunately, there was no obvious Game of the Week, certainly no aesthetic win by sacrificial attack. Pruess and Charbonneau both tried to play entertaining chess, yet neither was able to win. In fact, I believe the two most exciting games both ended in draws (Boards One and Two of New Jersey vs New York).
I selected the wild, yet imperfect, draw between Charbonneau and Ippolito for the Semifinals' Game of the Week. Black stirred the pot in the Four Knight's with 4... Nd4, 7... d5, and the Knight sacrifice 10... Nxe4. Not to be outdone, White raised the stakes with a Queen sacrifice on move thirteen! When the dust settled, White had a pair of Bishops and two Pawns against a Black Queen. White liquidated into an endgame of Rook and Bishop against Queen which he held without adventure. This was a great back-and-forth battle that allowed both combatants to show off their chess skill.
I thought for a long time about how to rank the draw between Benjamin and Kacheishvili and the miniature by Moreno Roman. It came down to the shocking result of the latter's King's Gambit game, with White completely busted after move twelve. Black simply offered up a piece to develop quickly and castle, then found the efficient move order 10... Bxf3, 11... Re8+, and the quiet move 12... Qh5. Bravo to Moreno Roman for being prepared to do battle in such an aggressive opening. Unfortunately, White's lack of resistance (9. Qe1 instead of 9. cxb7+) contrasts starkly to the battle between Charbonneau and Ippolito.
I considered the Benjamin vs Kacheishvili game as well, but to me it lacked a signature move such as Charbonneau's Queen sacrifice. Either player may have earned GOTW by finding a single tactic: 30. Be6 for White and 55... R6c5+ for Black. Finally, Bhat scored a nice win against Lugo, but I could not justify recognizing a player on the losing side in the playoffs. (1st place: 2 points)
Jim Dean: Although this game ended in a draw, it seemed like it was definitely the most interesting game played this week. The opening variation was entertaining, both players played well, and the material imbalance made the game difficult to evaluate at times. Congrats to both players. (1st place: 2 points)
Greg Shahade: Definitely the most interesting game of the week, with a shocking queen sacrifice by Charbonneau. Incredible that both times that these two players faced off, the game ended up winning Game of the Week! (1st place: 2 points)
Jeff Ashton: It is hard for me to select a draw as GOTW. This was by far the most interesting and hard fought game. I did not expect this game to end up in a draw.
On Pruess losing in three moves:
It is inexcusable for Pruess to lose a game like this. In a team tournament, in the Semifinals, with the White pieces, against a lower rated player, seeing the final position is just nauseating.
Of course hindsight is 20/20, but if I were on the team I'd be irritated by my teammate's play while watching it, outraged if he loses, and if he wins I'd tell Pruess "Whew! Don't scare us again like that again!"
And yes, I know that White got a better position that was marred by his own error, but I still don't really like what Pruess did. It's not practical.
I feel bad for Pruess since he's one of the nicest junior players I grew up with and I like to see the beloved San Francisco team win games.
I know Pruess occasionally likes have "fun" with his openings (I remember sitting next to him and seeing him play the Latvian Gambit), but I think he should save it for the World Open or perhaps take up bungee jumping. (1st place: 2 points)
Arun Sharma: This to me was definitely the most interesting game played this week, with some very daring and creative play by both sides in the opening. I considered ranking this first like the other judges, but as often is the case, this creativity also came with some errors (Black playing 14... Bg4 instead of 14... Bxc2!, and White choosing 28. Bf4 instead of 28. Rd8+!). In the end, it was a close decision, but I chose the Moreno Roman game as first simply because even though it was much shorter than I like my choices to generally be, it still managed to be a very interesting game - after every move there was a myriad of possible variations, and it also seemed like the victor really didn't make any mistakes, accurately punishing his opponent's errors. (2nd place: 1 point)
Total Score of Charbonneau vs Ippolito: 9 points
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Other Considered Games (judges' scores in parenthesis)
5 points (Arun 2, Michael 1, Jim 1, Greg 1): IM David Pruess (SF) vs IM Alejandro Moreno Roman (MIA) 0-1
1 point (Jeff 1): IM Blas Lugo (MIA) vs GM Vinay Bhat (SF) 0-1
Friday, November 13, 2009
Quarterfinals Game of the Week
This year we have five judges for Game of the Week, each ranking their top five games. The games are then given from one to five points, based on these rankings, and whichever game receives the most total points wins the award. First place each week will receive a $150 bonus prize, second place $75, and third place $50. Our five judges are: IM Greg Shahade, FM Jim Dean, NM Michael Aigner, NM Jeff Ashton, and NM Arun Sharma. Click here for more details.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
*Due to the lower number of games played, in the Quarterfinals only the first and second place prizes mentioned above will be given out, and in the Semifinals and Championship only the first place prize will be.
1st Place: GM Giorgi Kacheishvili (NY) vs GM Larry Christiansen (BOS) 1-0
GM Kacheishvili had played a very strong game, yet GM Christiansen had done a remarkable job in creating counter chances, but wound up missing his only real chance to save the game with 50... Rbd8!!
Michael Aigner: Heading into the playoffs, the intensity of each game increases. A single poor move on one board can change the course of all four games in the match. To some extent, I feel this stifled the creativity of the players in the Quarterfinal round; few games rose to the level of previous weeks.
One player, however, tried his best to be brilliant, even if a bit too aggressive. New York's top board GM Kacheishvili faced the legendary Bostonian ace GM Christiansen in by far the tightest match of the week. For the first forty moves, Kacheishvili maneuvered his Rooks and Bishop pair to steadily increase his opening advantage, but alas, time pressure changed the course of the game. Bonus points to Kacheishvili for trying to play sharp and exciting chess with few minutes on the clock, even if his bold Rook sacrifice 48. Rxg6 failed to the stunning 50... Rbd8!. It wasn't perfect, but the tight match made it all the more thrilling.
I ranked this game slightly ahead of Perelshteyn vs Charbonneau (Board Two in the same match) only because it was the sharper middlegame. Frankly, it might have been proper to split the top honors between teammates Kacheishvili and Charbonneau, but the Commissioner won't let me. I also seriously considered Benjamin vs Erenburg, but Benjamin clearly took his foot off the gas pedal after an exciting opening for team-based strategic reasons.
Finally, I need to add a few words about the Becerra vs Nakamura non-contest, which I ranked third. No doubt this was the most shocking twelve move game in League History! However, as a fan of both players, I must express my disappointment that we were not treated to a more worthy battle. It is obvious that Nakamura simply did not come mentally ready to play a game. And while Becerra pushed wood, any young student of Morphy could have found his moves.
Throughout the season, I have consistently refused to rank highly a game where the loser self-destructed (unforced errors) more than the winner playing creatively. I ranked the game as third mostly because of the lack of other exciting games played at a reasonably high level. (1st place: 3 points)
Greg Shahade: The game wasn't perfect as some mistakes were made in time trouble (with White missing 47. Rxg6! mainly,) but it seemed like it was by far the most exciting game of the round, and was relatively well played on top of this. (1st place: 3 points)
Arun Sharma: I admit the dual mistakes late (White missing 47. Rxg6+!! and Black missing 50... Rbd8!!) did give me pause as to whether this game should be ranked first. But on the whole, I felt this game was still definitely the best of the week. Both sides played quite well in totality; Kacheishvili slowly but surely building on a small edge with one strong move after another, and Christiansen fighting back tenaciously in the only real opportunity he was given. Considering the extreme time pressure also and the rather difficult nature of the position, it would have been fairly unrealistic to not expect a couple of strong moves to be overlooked and given how many strong moves were still found, I had to rank this game first. (1st place: 3 points)
Jim Dean: This was a pretty exciting game that I gave consideration to, though it seemed less accurate than some of Kacheishvili's other USCL gems. What a find 50... Rbd8 would have been, which appears to force a draw in a wild position. (NR: 0 points)
Jeff Ashton: This is the first game that I saw this week. I assumed that I would probably end up ranking it first. After thinking about it, I'm surprised that it ended up getting bumped down to fourth. I think Kacheishvili played very well (like he usually does when he has White,) and LarryC put up some good resistance but eventually cracked. Nice game. Also this was an important game; maybe I will regret not voting it higher later? (NR: 0 points)
Total Score of Kacheishvili vs Christiansen: 9 points
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2nd Place: GM Eugene Perelshteyn (BOS) vs GM Pascal Charbonneau (NY) 0-1
GM Charbonneau played the very strange looking, but powerful 35... Rf8!, nicely utilizing the pin on the White Rook to force the game into a winning ending.
Jim Dean: I enjoyed this game a lot as Charbonneau really made nice use of his Queenside Pawn mass. Cutting off the King at the last minute so that the "wrong" colored Bishop doesn't matter was a nice finish to an impressive win with the Black pieces. (1st place: 3 points)
Michael Aigner: In typical USCL fashion, the action went back and forth, with Black finally picking up the point. Charbonneau won the opening battle and later converted an elegant endgame of Bishop against Pawns, but in between Perelshteyn had his chances after the seizing the initiative with a temporary sacrifice 18. Nxf7. The highlight was watching Charbonneau calmly pick off the White pawns with his Bishop in the endgame. Most significantly, all of this happened in the context of a super tight match that came down to this board and the top board. (2nd place: 2 points)
Jeff Ashton: Black had many ways to defend although White maintained pressure for a large part of the game. Charbonneau showed great defensive skills in a critical game. It seems like Perelshteyn took risks which we didn't see in his other USCL wins. (2nd place: 2 points)
Greg Shahade: I ranked this game in third but barely. Charbonneau played quite a good game, but his technique at the end was actually quite poor. Black could have won very easily by not rushing tp Queen the b-pawn and instead keeping it on b3 and playing 39... Bf7 and Kg7 first, leaving White totally helpless and avoiding the final rhity or so moves of the game in which it seemed as if White at least had some chance to draw. Despite that the first forty or so moves were very interesting by both sides, and so I have no real qualms with this finishing in second place. (3rd place: 1 point)
Arun Sharma: I did consider this game as it certainly was one of the more interesting ones of the week along with being the ultimate difference maker in the match result. However, quality wise it just didn't seem to quite have it to me as it seemed that White got in some trouble in the opening for no real reason, and that Black nearly managed to let White escape much later into a drawn ending (39... b2? where instead, 39... Bf7! 40. Bf5 Kg7!, and Black wins immediately).
However, there is no question that White played some strong ideas like 18. Nxf7! after what seemed to be a dubious opening, and that Black played the later part of the middlegame very well, especially the way he used the pin in tandem with the powerful b-pawn to achieve the victory so I definitely can understand why the other judges found this game appealing.
Personally I found the Benjamin vs Erenburg and Adamson vs Naroditsky games a bit more appealing than this one. The Naroditsky game might not have been particularly exciting but seemed very well played by the victor. The Benjamin game, I have a feeling the other judges were rather turned off by the way the game ended, with Black ending up taking a suicidal King march. But looking at that game from the beginning to the point where Black declined the perpetual in the ending, it seemed like a really great game to me, very interesting and creative play from both sides with no seeming huge errors, honestly exactly what I look for in GOTW. The fact that Black had to decline the perpetual solely because he HAD to try to win for the team at that point and then wound up losing because of it, should not, imo, detract too much from that game's overall appeal which is why I ranked it second. (NR: 0 points)
Total Score of Perelshteyn vs Charbonneau: 8 points
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Other Considered Games (judges' scores in parenthesis)
4 points (Jeff 3, Michael 1): GM Julio Becerra (MIA) vs GM Hikaru Nakamura (SEA) 1-0
4 points (Greg 2, Arun 1, Jim 1): FM Robby Adamson (ARZ) vs FM Daniel Naroditsky (SF) 0-1
3 points (Arun 2, Jeff 1): GM Joel Benjamin (NJ) vs GM Sergey Erenburg (BAL) 1-0
2 points (Jim 2): WIM Tsagaan Batsettseg (BAL) vs Sean Finn (NJ) 0-1
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
*Due to the lower number of games played, in the Quarterfinals only the first and second place prizes mentioned above will be given out, and in the Semifinals and Championship only the first place prize will be.
1st Place: GM Giorgi Kacheishvili (NY) vs GM Larry Christiansen (BOS) 1-0
GM Kacheishvili had played a very strong game, yet GM Christiansen had done a remarkable job in creating counter chances, but wound up missing his only real chance to save the game with 50... Rbd8!!
Michael Aigner: Heading into the playoffs, the intensity of each game increases. A single poor move on one board can change the course of all four games in the match. To some extent, I feel this stifled the creativity of the players in the Quarterfinal round; few games rose to the level of previous weeks.
One player, however, tried his best to be brilliant, even if a bit too aggressive. New York's top board GM Kacheishvili faced the legendary Bostonian ace GM Christiansen in by far the tightest match of the week. For the first forty moves, Kacheishvili maneuvered his Rooks and Bishop pair to steadily increase his opening advantage, but alas, time pressure changed the course of the game. Bonus points to Kacheishvili for trying to play sharp and exciting chess with few minutes on the clock, even if his bold Rook sacrifice 48. Rxg6 failed to the stunning 50... Rbd8!. It wasn't perfect, but the tight match made it all the more thrilling.
I ranked this game slightly ahead of Perelshteyn vs Charbonneau (Board Two in the same match) only because it was the sharper middlegame. Frankly, it might have been proper to split the top honors between teammates Kacheishvili and Charbonneau, but the Commissioner won't let me. I also seriously considered Benjamin vs Erenburg, but Benjamin clearly took his foot off the gas pedal after an exciting opening for team-based strategic reasons.
Finally, I need to add a few words about the Becerra vs Nakamura non-contest, which I ranked third. No doubt this was the most shocking twelve move game in League History! However, as a fan of both players, I must express my disappointment that we were not treated to a more worthy battle. It is obvious that Nakamura simply did not come mentally ready to play a game. And while Becerra pushed wood, any young student of Morphy could have found his moves.
Throughout the season, I have consistently refused to rank highly a game where the loser self-destructed (unforced errors) more than the winner playing creatively. I ranked the game as third mostly because of the lack of other exciting games played at a reasonably high level. (1st place: 3 points)
Greg Shahade: The game wasn't perfect as some mistakes were made in time trouble (with White missing 47. Rxg6! mainly,) but it seemed like it was by far the most exciting game of the round, and was relatively well played on top of this. (1st place: 3 points)
Arun Sharma: I admit the dual mistakes late (White missing 47. Rxg6+!! and Black missing 50... Rbd8!!) did give me pause as to whether this game should be ranked first. But on the whole, I felt this game was still definitely the best of the week. Both sides played quite well in totality; Kacheishvili slowly but surely building on a small edge with one strong move after another, and Christiansen fighting back tenaciously in the only real opportunity he was given. Considering the extreme time pressure also and the rather difficult nature of the position, it would have been fairly unrealistic to not expect a couple of strong moves to be overlooked and given how many strong moves were still found, I had to rank this game first. (1st place: 3 points)
Jim Dean: This was a pretty exciting game that I gave consideration to, though it seemed less accurate than some of Kacheishvili's other USCL gems. What a find 50... Rbd8 would have been, which appears to force a draw in a wild position. (NR: 0 points)
Jeff Ashton: This is the first game that I saw this week. I assumed that I would probably end up ranking it first. After thinking about it, I'm surprised that it ended up getting bumped down to fourth. I think Kacheishvili played very well (like he usually does when he has White,) and LarryC put up some good resistance but eventually cracked. Nice game. Also this was an important game; maybe I will regret not voting it higher later? (NR: 0 points)
Total Score of Kacheishvili vs Christiansen: 9 points
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2nd Place: GM Eugene Perelshteyn (BOS) vs GM Pascal Charbonneau (NY) 0-1
GM Charbonneau played the very strange looking, but powerful 35... Rf8!, nicely utilizing the pin on the White Rook to force the game into a winning ending.
Jim Dean: I enjoyed this game a lot as Charbonneau really made nice use of his Queenside Pawn mass. Cutting off the King at the last minute so that the "wrong" colored Bishop doesn't matter was a nice finish to an impressive win with the Black pieces. (1st place: 3 points)
Michael Aigner: In typical USCL fashion, the action went back and forth, with Black finally picking up the point. Charbonneau won the opening battle and later converted an elegant endgame of Bishop against Pawns, but in between Perelshteyn had his chances after the seizing the initiative with a temporary sacrifice 18. Nxf7. The highlight was watching Charbonneau calmly pick off the White pawns with his Bishop in the endgame. Most significantly, all of this happened in the context of a super tight match that came down to this board and the top board. (2nd place: 2 points)
Jeff Ashton: Black had many ways to defend although White maintained pressure for a large part of the game. Charbonneau showed great defensive skills in a critical game. It seems like Perelshteyn took risks which we didn't see in his other USCL wins. (2nd place: 2 points)
Greg Shahade: I ranked this game in third but barely. Charbonneau played quite a good game, but his technique at the end was actually quite poor. Black could have won very easily by not rushing tp Queen the b-pawn and instead keeping it on b3 and playing 39... Bf7 and Kg7 first, leaving White totally helpless and avoiding the final rhity or so moves of the game in which it seemed as if White at least had some chance to draw. Despite that the first forty or so moves were very interesting by both sides, and so I have no real qualms with this finishing in second place. (3rd place: 1 point)
Arun Sharma: I did consider this game as it certainly was one of the more interesting ones of the week along with being the ultimate difference maker in the match result. However, quality wise it just didn't seem to quite have it to me as it seemed that White got in some trouble in the opening for no real reason, and that Black nearly managed to let White escape much later into a drawn ending (39... b2? where instead, 39... Bf7! 40. Bf5 Kg7!, and Black wins immediately).
However, there is no question that White played some strong ideas like 18. Nxf7! after what seemed to be a dubious opening, and that Black played the later part of the middlegame very well, especially the way he used the pin in tandem with the powerful b-pawn to achieve the victory so I definitely can understand why the other judges found this game appealing.
Personally I found the Benjamin vs Erenburg and Adamson vs Naroditsky games a bit more appealing than this one. The Naroditsky game might not have been particularly exciting but seemed very well played by the victor. The Benjamin game, I have a feeling the other judges were rather turned off by the way the game ended, with Black ending up taking a suicidal King march. But looking at that game from the beginning to the point where Black declined the perpetual in the ending, it seemed like a really great game to me, very interesting and creative play from both sides with no seeming huge errors, honestly exactly what I look for in GOTW. The fact that Black had to decline the perpetual solely because he HAD to try to win for the team at that point and then wound up losing because of it, should not, imo, detract too much from that game's overall appeal which is why I ranked it second. (NR: 0 points)
Total Score of Perelshteyn vs Charbonneau: 8 points
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Other Considered Games (judges' scores in parenthesis)
4 points (Jeff 3, Michael 1): GM Julio Becerra (MIA) vs GM Hikaru Nakamura (SEA) 1-0
4 points (Greg 2, Arun 1, Jim 1): FM Robby Adamson (ARZ) vs FM Daniel Naroditsky (SF) 0-1
3 points (Arun 2, Jeff 1): GM Joel Benjamin (NJ) vs GM Sergey Erenburg (BAL) 1-0
2 points (Jim 2): WIM Tsagaan Batsettseg (BAL) vs Sean Finn (NJ) 0-1
Friday, November 6, 2009
Week 10 Game of the Week
This year we have five judges for Game of the Week, each ranking their top five games. The games are then given from one to five points, based on these rankings, and whichever game receives the most total points wins the award. First place each week will receive a $150 bonus prize, second place $75, and third place $50. Our five judges are: IM Greg Shahade, FM Jim Dean, NM Michael Aigner, NM Jeff Ashton, and NM Arun Sharma. Click here for more details.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
*Due to Michael Aigner currently being on vacation, for this week again we will have only four judges.
1st Place: GM Gregory Serper (SEA) vs IM Jan van de Mortel (CHC) 1-0
GM Serper played the clever Rook lift 26. Rb4!, and the multiple threats compelled IM Van de Mortel to significantly weaken his structure with 26... e5, after which White soon won a clear Pawn that he skillfully converted in an endgame.
Jeff Ashton: It seems like it's impossible for Serper to lose with White when he gets these set-ups. I don't really get it ... it seems like White just moves back and forth and next thing you know it he's winning. Is 15... f5 bad? By the way, does anyone else detect the pattern? Will someone beat Serper next week to win GOTW? (1st place: 5 points)
Jim Dean: A really nice game by Serper who created pressure all over the board before finally transitioning into a winning ending. I liked the Rook swings along the fourth rank, and Serper's technique once the game simplified looked excellent. Extra credit for taking out Jan, who had the "hot hand" in the USCL recently. (1st place: 5 points)
Arun Sharma: Being one of the league's most successful players every season, it's rather amazing that it took Serper nearly four full seasons to win GOTW, but I'm glad that he finally managed to do so!
I suppose Serper's typical style of slowly outplaying his opponent and often winning in an endgame (just like this game!) isn't the most conducive style for garnering GOTW votes, but I think this game was definitely a worthy winner. As usual, Serper just played one strong move after another, never allowing any counterplay, continually forcing his opponent into making concessions, and eventually grinding his opponent down. It's always impressive to beat such a strong player in a fashion where it's not really clear where the opponent went wrong and yet still seemed to lose without much of a fight, never garnering any play of their own. (1st place: 5 points)
Greg Shahade: Amazing that this is the first time Serper wins Game of the Week, especially since I think it's far from his best league game. Serper made it look easy, and we continue the trend of the previous week's GOTW winner being the loser the following week! Seattle may want to consider resting Serper in the first round of the postseason! (4th place: 2 points)
Total Score of Serper vs Van de Mortel: 17 points
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2nd Place: IM Bryan Smith (PHI) vs IM Jonathan Schroer (CAR) 1-0
IM Smith played the simple 38. Nh4!, leaving IM Schroer no satisfactory way to defend his g-pawn, winning White a Pawn and soon after the game.
Greg Shahade: I liked Smith's c4, creating a new weakness on c6. It felt like he displayed a great deal of patience and skill in the endgame, with lots of subtle maneuvers that eventually led to Schroer cracking. Please note that this was one of the weakest overall weeks for GOTW in my opinion. I think Bryan's earlier game against Vovsha, which I didn't even rank, was probably a better GOTW candidate than this one even though I gave it first place! Also let me state that if Irina Krush didn't blunder at the end of her loss to Shmelov, I think she would have won the prize easily. (1st place: 5 points)
Jim Dean: This game didn't look like much fun for the Black side, as White slowly improved his position once the Queens came off. Smith never allowed much counterplay, and basically just played really well the entire game. (2nd place: 4 points)
Jeff Ashton: White played nicely. The more I look at this game, I can't believe it did so well in GOTW. Pretty dry for GOTW if you ask me. But what can I say, I voted for it. Also, Bryan Smith did play incredibly well. See previous GOTW comments for my thoughts about Smith's play. (3rd place: 3 points)
Arun Sharma: I admit I probably underestimated this game, and even though I didn't rank it, it seems like a definite worthy game for second place. My first impression when I looked at it was that it was headed towards a lifeless draw but that Black went astray in the endgame, and White punished him for it.
However, that likely was a bit of a superficial assessment, as Smith really did play the ending well, making very life very tough for Schroer, and I think White definitely did more to win this game than Black did to lose it - which was quite contrary to my initial impression.
As I mentioned the combination of slightly misjudging why this game had the result that it did, and it simply not seeming particularly inspiring to me when I looked at it, caused me not to rank it. But again, I do think it was quite deserving, and congrats to Smith on a very strong season.
In regards to Greg's comment about the Krush vs Shmelov game, I essentially agree that that game (and also perhaps the Zaikov vs Bartell game) would likely have won had they not each been marred by a huge blunder near the end. While the debate for how much one big blunder at the end should detract from a good game in this contest has never really been resolved, I typically am not in favor of ranking such games highly. But since I felt the collection of games this week was not especially inspiring, and both of those games were very interesting and quite well played (aside from the ending blunders!), I thought they were the best choices for those top spots. (NR: 0 points)
Total Score of Smith vs Schroer: 12 points
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
3rd Place: SM Jorge Sammour-Hasbun (BOS) vs GM Giorgi Kacheishvili (NY) 0-1
GM Kacheishvili nicely liquidated with 27... Ne3!, forcing the game into an ending at the cost of an exchange, and the multiple extra Black Pawns quickly proved to be too much there.
Jeff Ashton: I was impressed by how much play Sammour-Hasbun got for the Pawn. I assumed his initiative would have ended earlier. Kacheishvili defended well. Nice game for Black. When Kacheishvili wins, he makes it look easy. (2nd place: 4 points)
Greg Shahade: Nice defense from Kacheishvili after some interesting sacrifices from Sammour-Hasbun. The fans thought that Jorge went nuts, but he definitely did have reasonable compensation, and this game was a real tough fight from beginning to end. Jorge's time trouble really hurt him once the game reached its final stages though. (3rd place: 3 points)
Arun Sharma: Really was not sure what to think about this game. Like most of the observers, I assumed Jorge had gone badly astray in the opening rather than it being prepared by him. I certainly can't say that I felt this double Pawn sac gave White sufficient compensation, but Jorge has played many a masterpiece under this general idea, i.e. sacrificing material for long term compensation while continually putting his opponent to tough decisions so it's hard to question his decision too much.
It mostly seemed to work out the way he probably had planned, before he went a bit astray in time pressure. I thought Kacheishvili played that portion of the game very well, especially the giving up of an exchange to enter the endgame - an ending which at first glance I felt was not really clear. But the fact that he won it so quickly and with such seeming ease was a nice demonstration of how well he'd assessed the position and had played to reach it. (4th place: 2 points)
Jim Dean: I strongly considered this game but eventually decided that I liked a handful of other games better. Not surprisingly, Kaceishvili plays another good game in this one though. It seemed like White got a questionable opening position by playing 9. Bxf6 rather than 9. e5. Even so, it seemed like White had some decent compensation for a while, but just wasn't able to maintain it thanks to some nice maneuvering by Black. (NR: 0 points)
Total Score of Sammour-Hasbun vs Kacheishvili: 9 points
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Other Considered Games (judges' scores in parenthesis)
8 points (Arun 4, Greg 4): FM Oleg Zaikov (CAR) vs FM Tom Bartell (PHI) 1-0
4 points (Jim 3, Arun 1): FM Peter Bereolos (TEN) vs FM Ralph Zimmer (BAL) 0-1
3 points (Arun 3): IM Irina Krush (NY) vs SM Denys Shmelov (BOS) 0-1
2 points (Jeff 2): IM Alejandro Moreno Roman (MIA) vs FM Robby Adamson (ARZ) 1-0
2 points (Jim 2): IM Daniel Ludwig (DAL) vs GM Patrick Wolff (SF) 1-0
2 point (Jeff 1, Jim 1): John Timmel (CAR) vs NM Elvin Wilson (PHI) 0-1
1 point (Greg 1): Jared Defibaugh (BAL) vs David Justice (TEN) 1/2-1/2
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
*Due to Michael Aigner currently being on vacation, for this week again we will have only four judges.
1st Place: GM Gregory Serper (SEA) vs IM Jan van de Mortel (CHC) 1-0
GM Serper played the clever Rook lift 26. Rb4!, and the multiple threats compelled IM Van de Mortel to significantly weaken his structure with 26... e5, after which White soon won a clear Pawn that he skillfully converted in an endgame.
Jeff Ashton: It seems like it's impossible for Serper to lose with White when he gets these set-ups. I don't really get it ... it seems like White just moves back and forth and next thing you know it he's winning. Is 15... f5 bad? By the way, does anyone else detect the pattern? Will someone beat Serper next week to win GOTW? (1st place: 5 points)
Jim Dean: A really nice game by Serper who created pressure all over the board before finally transitioning into a winning ending. I liked the Rook swings along the fourth rank, and Serper's technique once the game simplified looked excellent. Extra credit for taking out Jan, who had the "hot hand" in the USCL recently. (1st place: 5 points)
Arun Sharma: Being one of the league's most successful players every season, it's rather amazing that it took Serper nearly four full seasons to win GOTW, but I'm glad that he finally managed to do so!
I suppose Serper's typical style of slowly outplaying his opponent and often winning in an endgame (just like this game!) isn't the most conducive style for garnering GOTW votes, but I think this game was definitely a worthy winner. As usual, Serper just played one strong move after another, never allowing any counterplay, continually forcing his opponent into making concessions, and eventually grinding his opponent down. It's always impressive to beat such a strong player in a fashion where it's not really clear where the opponent went wrong and yet still seemed to lose without much of a fight, never garnering any play of their own. (1st place: 5 points)
Greg Shahade: Amazing that this is the first time Serper wins Game of the Week, especially since I think it's far from his best league game. Serper made it look easy, and we continue the trend of the previous week's GOTW winner being the loser the following week! Seattle may want to consider resting Serper in the first round of the postseason! (4th place: 2 points)
Total Score of Serper vs Van de Mortel: 17 points
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2nd Place: IM Bryan Smith (PHI) vs IM Jonathan Schroer (CAR) 1-0
IM Smith played the simple 38. Nh4!, leaving IM Schroer no satisfactory way to defend his g-pawn, winning White a Pawn and soon after the game.
Greg Shahade: I liked Smith's c4, creating a new weakness on c6. It felt like he displayed a great deal of patience and skill in the endgame, with lots of subtle maneuvers that eventually led to Schroer cracking. Please note that this was one of the weakest overall weeks for GOTW in my opinion. I think Bryan's earlier game against Vovsha, which I didn't even rank, was probably a better GOTW candidate than this one even though I gave it first place! Also let me state that if Irina Krush didn't blunder at the end of her loss to Shmelov, I think she would have won the prize easily. (1st place: 5 points)
Jim Dean: This game didn't look like much fun for the Black side, as White slowly improved his position once the Queens came off. Smith never allowed much counterplay, and basically just played really well the entire game. (2nd place: 4 points)
Jeff Ashton: White played nicely. The more I look at this game, I can't believe it did so well in GOTW. Pretty dry for GOTW if you ask me. But what can I say, I voted for it. Also, Bryan Smith did play incredibly well. See previous GOTW comments for my thoughts about Smith's play. (3rd place: 3 points)
Arun Sharma: I admit I probably underestimated this game, and even though I didn't rank it, it seems like a definite worthy game for second place. My first impression when I looked at it was that it was headed towards a lifeless draw but that Black went astray in the endgame, and White punished him for it.
However, that likely was a bit of a superficial assessment, as Smith really did play the ending well, making very life very tough for Schroer, and I think White definitely did more to win this game than Black did to lose it - which was quite contrary to my initial impression.
As I mentioned the combination of slightly misjudging why this game had the result that it did, and it simply not seeming particularly inspiring to me when I looked at it, caused me not to rank it. But again, I do think it was quite deserving, and congrats to Smith on a very strong season.
In regards to Greg's comment about the Krush vs Shmelov game, I essentially agree that that game (and also perhaps the Zaikov vs Bartell game) would likely have won had they not each been marred by a huge blunder near the end. While the debate for how much one big blunder at the end should detract from a good game in this contest has never really been resolved, I typically am not in favor of ranking such games highly. But since I felt the collection of games this week was not especially inspiring, and both of those games were very interesting and quite well played (aside from the ending blunders!), I thought they were the best choices for those top spots. (NR: 0 points)
Total Score of Smith vs Schroer: 12 points
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
3rd Place: SM Jorge Sammour-Hasbun (BOS) vs GM Giorgi Kacheishvili (NY) 0-1
GM Kacheishvili nicely liquidated with 27... Ne3!, forcing the game into an ending at the cost of an exchange, and the multiple extra Black Pawns quickly proved to be too much there.
Jeff Ashton: I was impressed by how much play Sammour-Hasbun got for the Pawn. I assumed his initiative would have ended earlier. Kacheishvili defended well. Nice game for Black. When Kacheishvili wins, he makes it look easy. (2nd place: 4 points)
Greg Shahade: Nice defense from Kacheishvili after some interesting sacrifices from Sammour-Hasbun. The fans thought that Jorge went nuts, but he definitely did have reasonable compensation, and this game was a real tough fight from beginning to end. Jorge's time trouble really hurt him once the game reached its final stages though. (3rd place: 3 points)
Arun Sharma: Really was not sure what to think about this game. Like most of the observers, I assumed Jorge had gone badly astray in the opening rather than it being prepared by him. I certainly can't say that I felt this double Pawn sac gave White sufficient compensation, but Jorge has played many a masterpiece under this general idea, i.e. sacrificing material for long term compensation while continually putting his opponent to tough decisions so it's hard to question his decision too much.
It mostly seemed to work out the way he probably had planned, before he went a bit astray in time pressure. I thought Kacheishvili played that portion of the game very well, especially the giving up of an exchange to enter the endgame - an ending which at first glance I felt was not really clear. But the fact that he won it so quickly and with such seeming ease was a nice demonstration of how well he'd assessed the position and had played to reach it. (4th place: 2 points)
Jim Dean: I strongly considered this game but eventually decided that I liked a handful of other games better. Not surprisingly, Kaceishvili plays another good game in this one though. It seemed like White got a questionable opening position by playing 9. Bxf6 rather than 9. e5. Even so, it seemed like White had some decent compensation for a while, but just wasn't able to maintain it thanks to some nice maneuvering by Black. (NR: 0 points)
Total Score of Sammour-Hasbun vs Kacheishvili: 9 points
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Other Considered Games (judges' scores in parenthesis)
8 points (Arun 4, Greg 4): FM Oleg Zaikov (CAR) vs FM Tom Bartell (PHI) 1-0
4 points (Jim 3, Arun 1): FM Peter Bereolos (TEN) vs FM Ralph Zimmer (BAL) 0-1
3 points (Arun 3): IM Irina Krush (NY) vs SM Denys Shmelov (BOS) 0-1
2 points (Jeff 2): IM Alejandro Moreno Roman (MIA) vs FM Robby Adamson (ARZ) 1-0
2 points (Jim 2): IM Daniel Ludwig (DAL) vs GM Patrick Wolff (SF) 1-0
2 point (Jeff 1, Jim 1): John Timmel (CAR) vs NM Elvin Wilson (PHI) 0-1
1 point (Greg 1): Jared Defibaugh (BAL) vs David Justice (TEN) 1/2-1/2
Friday, October 30, 2009
Week 9 Game of the Week
This year we have five judges for Game of the Week, each ranking their top five games. The games are then given from one to five points, based on these rankings, and whichever game receives the most total points wins the award. First place each week will receive a $150 bonus prize, second place $75, and third place $50. Our five judges are: IM Greg Shahade, FM Jim Dean, NM Michael Aigner, NM Jeff Ashton, and NM Arun Sharma. Click here for more details.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
*Due to Michael Aigner currently being on vacation, for this week and the next we will have only four judges.
1st Place: IM John Bartholomew (DAL) vs IM Jan van de Mortel (CHC) 0-1
IM Van de Mortel played the interesting novelty 17... Rc5!? and eventually utilized it to good effect, gaining great pressure brought about by this sac which IM Bartholomew was unable to withstand.
Jeff Ashton: Another exciting Dragon (the other one that comes to mind is Bryan Smith's win a few weeks ago). Jan really heated up in his last few games. Bonus points for "GOTWing" last week's GOTW winner. (1st place: 5 points)
Greg Shahade: I felt that this was the most interesting game this week. While 17... Rc5 might not be great for Black, it's certainly very interesting and posed White some peculiar problems. I suspect it was the kind of move where White just sat there thinking "This can't be good, I must be crushing him", but it was never quite as easy as he wanted it to be. And after trying to figure out how to crack this strange exchange up position, things slowly started drifting away, and Black developed a dangerous counterattack. What can I say, I just liked this game.
Note that according to Jan's analysis, I supposedly analyzed this opening with him about ten years ago! I've never played this line myself so it probably had to do with preparing him for one of his opponents. In any case I cannot remember it, and while watching the game one of the kibitzers was strongly in favor of Rc5, and I remember thinking he had lost some marbles, but then a few minutes later it was played on the board! (1st place: 5 points)
Jim Dean: It seems like we've had several interesting Dragon games in the League this season, and this one was played well on both sides. Unfortunately for White, it felt a lot easier to play Black's position during the critical stages of the game. Mating with a Bishop and Knight was a nice final touch. Congrats to Jan on another top GOTW finish. (3rd place: 3 points)
Arun Sharma: Although I didn't rank this game, I wasn't surprised to see it get ranked by the others as it definitely was one of the more interesting games played this week, though I'm still surprised it wound up winning. While Van de Mortel's novelty 17... Rc5 was very interesting, I had a hard time being able to ascribe it as a strong novelty as despite the result of the game, it seemed that Bartholomew was doing very well for the majority of the game.
However, Black did play quite well, putting White under tremendous pressure which he understandably was not able to endure, especially when getting in time trouble. But despite that, the combination of the novelty seeming somewhat dubious along with White self destructing a bit more than I feel the games which finish high in this contest ought to generally allow, I ended up not ranking this game.
But whatever way I happened to judge this game, congratulations to Van de Mortel on his second consecutive very strong GOTW finish and for his third victory in a row. Even if it's too late for his team this season, it's nice to see him get some recognition for his fine play. (NR: 0 points)
Total Score of Bartholomew vs Van de Mortel: 13 points
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2nd Place: GM Eugene Perelshteyn (BOS) vs FM Bruci Lopez (MIA) 1-0
GM Perelshteyn struck with 34. Ne6! Rf6 35. Bh5, putting FM Lopez in a virtual zugzwang, compelling him to bite the bullet and snatch the d5 Pawn, after which White nicely infiltrated with his Rook and soon finished the game with a strong attack, mating with a paucity of material.
Jim Dean: I felt Perelshteyn played extremely well in this game and really never let Lopez have any fun throughout. Lopez has shown in previous USCL matches that he can handle the Black side of the King's Indian Defense quite well, but could not have been happy with his position virtually at any point in this game. Cute minor piece mate to finish it off. (1st place: 5 points)
Arun Sharma: This, along with the Bhat game, I felt were definitely the two highest quality games played this week which is why I chose to rank them in the top two spots. In both I felt that the winner played very well, winning in very clean fashion, without any huge errors from their opponent.
What impressed me most about this game was the nice endgame technique. Perelshteyn really made it look so easy, winning in such short order when it seemed likely that it would be a very long grind in order to reach victory. (2nd place: 4 points)
Jeff Ashton: An example of why the King's Indian Defense is the hardest opening to play in chess. Black's game seemed difficult, and White sat comfortably throughout. Nice precise play by Perelshteyn. Perelshteyn is definitely one of my favorites this season, and I'm glad that his games are getting recognition. (3rd place: 3 points)
Greg Shahade: This game seemed a bit too easy to me, and also when Lopez simply hangs mate in two at the end, it was hard for me to get too excited. Admittedly, Black is already lost there, but this is just not the type of game I'm generally ranking highly in GOTW. (NR: 0 points)
Total Score of Perelshteyn vs Lopez: 12 points
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
3rd Place: FM Todd Andrews (TEN) vs GM Vinay Bhat (SF) 0-1
GM Bhat broke through with 40... e3!, utilizing his pressure on the g-file to deadly effect and ending the game in short order.
Arun Sharma: As mentioned above, this was one of those games which, in addition to being well played by the victor, had them winning without any obvious errors by the opponent. I know I often rank these types of games a bit higher than the other judges who mostly tend to prefer games with a bit more flash, even if they come with some fair errors. As such, it wasn't a big shock that I appreciated this and the Perelshteyn game a bit more than the other judges on the whole.
Like the Perelshteyn game, I was impressed by how easy Bhat made this game look, drumming up his strong attack with seeming ease and then conducting it very efficiently, never allowing any real counterplay and again managing to do this without any obvious errors by Andrews.
Personally, I felt the two most interesting games this week were the Charbonneau game and the Herman game (in that order). The Charbonneau game contained a ton of creative play and interesting moments, and but for a few very critical errors late, I definitely would have ranked it higher (likely first). In the Herman game, Black seemed to play very well, building up his attack well and then conducting it precisely, but like the Van de Mortel game (which I did not rank), I felt the losing side self destructed a bit too much to rank the game above the high quality efforts of Bhat and Perelshteyn. (1st place: 5 points)
Jeff Ashton: These "slow build-up" attacks are fun to watch. I really like the way Black handled the opening and middle game and then transitioned into a Kingside attack. (2nd place: 4 points)
Jim Dean: Bhat played a really nice game here and was constantly improving his position and making progress on both sides of the board. My biggest knock against this game was that I didn't understand White's plan at any point during it, and I'm not sure if White ever really managed to make even a single threat. Todd is an excellent player and a former teammate of mine, but this just wasn't a good game on his end. (NR: 0 points)
Greg Shahade: Yet another game that didn't inspire me. Bhat played well of course, but sometimes a game simply doesn't grab my attention, and this was one of those games. (NR: 0 points)
Total Score of Andrews vs Bhat: 9 points
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Other Considered Games (judges' scores in parenthesis)
7 points (Greg 3, Jim 2, Arun 2): GM Pascal Charbonneau (NY) vs IM Tegshsuren Enkhbat (BAL) 1-0
6 points (Arun 3, Greg 2, Jeff 1): WGM Sabina Foisor (BAL) vs NM Matt Herman (NY) 0-1
4 points (Jim 4): FM Marcel Martinez (MIA) vs SM Denys Shmelov (BOS) 1-0
4 points (Greg 4): GM Patrick Wolff (SF) vs IM Ron Burnett (TEN) 1-0
2 points (Jeff 2): IM Levon Altounian (ARZ) vs FM Slava Mikhailuk (SEA) 1-0
1 point (Jim 1): FM Oleg Zaikov (CAR) vs IM Yury Lapshun (QNS) 1-0
1 point (Greg 1): David Justice (TEN) vs NM Yian Liou (SF) 1-0
1 point (Arun 1): GM Hikaru Nakamura (SEA) vs GM Alejandro Ramirez (ARZ) 1/2-1/2
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
*Due to Michael Aigner currently being on vacation, for this week and the next we will have only four judges.
1st Place: IM John Bartholomew (DAL) vs IM Jan van de Mortel (CHC) 0-1
IM Van de Mortel played the interesting novelty 17... Rc5!? and eventually utilized it to good effect, gaining great pressure brought about by this sac which IM Bartholomew was unable to withstand.
Jeff Ashton: Another exciting Dragon (the other one that comes to mind is Bryan Smith's win a few weeks ago). Jan really heated up in his last few games. Bonus points for "GOTWing" last week's GOTW winner. (1st place: 5 points)
Greg Shahade: I felt that this was the most interesting game this week. While 17... Rc5 might not be great for Black, it's certainly very interesting and posed White some peculiar problems. I suspect it was the kind of move where White just sat there thinking "This can't be good, I must be crushing him", but it was never quite as easy as he wanted it to be. And after trying to figure out how to crack this strange exchange up position, things slowly started drifting away, and Black developed a dangerous counterattack. What can I say, I just liked this game.
Note that according to Jan's analysis, I supposedly analyzed this opening with him about ten years ago! I've never played this line myself so it probably had to do with preparing him for one of his opponents. In any case I cannot remember it, and while watching the game one of the kibitzers was strongly in favor of Rc5, and I remember thinking he had lost some marbles, but then a few minutes later it was played on the board! (1st place: 5 points)
Jim Dean: It seems like we've had several interesting Dragon games in the League this season, and this one was played well on both sides. Unfortunately for White, it felt a lot easier to play Black's position during the critical stages of the game. Mating with a Bishop and Knight was a nice final touch. Congrats to Jan on another top GOTW finish. (3rd place: 3 points)
Arun Sharma: Although I didn't rank this game, I wasn't surprised to see it get ranked by the others as it definitely was one of the more interesting games played this week, though I'm still surprised it wound up winning. While Van de Mortel's novelty 17... Rc5 was very interesting, I had a hard time being able to ascribe it as a strong novelty as despite the result of the game, it seemed that Bartholomew was doing very well for the majority of the game.
However, Black did play quite well, putting White under tremendous pressure which he understandably was not able to endure, especially when getting in time trouble. But despite that, the combination of the novelty seeming somewhat dubious along with White self destructing a bit more than I feel the games which finish high in this contest ought to generally allow, I ended up not ranking this game.
But whatever way I happened to judge this game, congratulations to Van de Mortel on his second consecutive very strong GOTW finish and for his third victory in a row. Even if it's too late for his team this season, it's nice to see him get some recognition for his fine play. (NR: 0 points)
Total Score of Bartholomew vs Van de Mortel: 13 points
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2nd Place: GM Eugene Perelshteyn (BOS) vs FM Bruci Lopez (MIA) 1-0
GM Perelshteyn struck with 34. Ne6! Rf6 35. Bh5, putting FM Lopez in a virtual zugzwang, compelling him to bite the bullet and snatch the d5 Pawn, after which White nicely infiltrated with his Rook and soon finished the game with a strong attack, mating with a paucity of material.
Jim Dean: I felt Perelshteyn played extremely well in this game and really never let Lopez have any fun throughout. Lopez has shown in previous USCL matches that he can handle the Black side of the King's Indian Defense quite well, but could not have been happy with his position virtually at any point in this game. Cute minor piece mate to finish it off. (1st place: 5 points)
Arun Sharma: This, along with the Bhat game, I felt were definitely the two highest quality games played this week which is why I chose to rank them in the top two spots. In both I felt that the winner played very well, winning in very clean fashion, without any huge errors from their opponent.
What impressed me most about this game was the nice endgame technique. Perelshteyn really made it look so easy, winning in such short order when it seemed likely that it would be a very long grind in order to reach victory. (2nd place: 4 points)
Jeff Ashton: An example of why the King's Indian Defense is the hardest opening to play in chess. Black's game seemed difficult, and White sat comfortably throughout. Nice precise play by Perelshteyn. Perelshteyn is definitely one of my favorites this season, and I'm glad that his games are getting recognition. (3rd place: 3 points)
Greg Shahade: This game seemed a bit too easy to me, and also when Lopez simply hangs mate in two at the end, it was hard for me to get too excited. Admittedly, Black is already lost there, but this is just not the type of game I'm generally ranking highly in GOTW. (NR: 0 points)
Total Score of Perelshteyn vs Lopez: 12 points
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
3rd Place: FM Todd Andrews (TEN) vs GM Vinay Bhat (SF) 0-1
GM Bhat broke through with 40... e3!, utilizing his pressure on the g-file to deadly effect and ending the game in short order.
Arun Sharma: As mentioned above, this was one of those games which, in addition to being well played by the victor, had them winning without any obvious errors by the opponent. I know I often rank these types of games a bit higher than the other judges who mostly tend to prefer games with a bit more flash, even if they come with some fair errors. As such, it wasn't a big shock that I appreciated this and the Perelshteyn game a bit more than the other judges on the whole.
Like the Perelshteyn game, I was impressed by how easy Bhat made this game look, drumming up his strong attack with seeming ease and then conducting it very efficiently, never allowing any real counterplay and again managing to do this without any obvious errors by Andrews.
Personally, I felt the two most interesting games this week were the Charbonneau game and the Herman game (in that order). The Charbonneau game contained a ton of creative play and interesting moments, and but for a few very critical errors late, I definitely would have ranked it higher (likely first). In the Herman game, Black seemed to play very well, building up his attack well and then conducting it precisely, but like the Van de Mortel game (which I did not rank), I felt the losing side self destructed a bit too much to rank the game above the high quality efforts of Bhat and Perelshteyn. (1st place: 5 points)
Jeff Ashton: These "slow build-up" attacks are fun to watch. I really like the way Black handled the opening and middle game and then transitioned into a Kingside attack. (2nd place: 4 points)
Jim Dean: Bhat played a really nice game here and was constantly improving his position and making progress on both sides of the board. My biggest knock against this game was that I didn't understand White's plan at any point during it, and I'm not sure if White ever really managed to make even a single threat. Todd is an excellent player and a former teammate of mine, but this just wasn't a good game on his end. (NR: 0 points)
Greg Shahade: Yet another game that didn't inspire me. Bhat played well of course, but sometimes a game simply doesn't grab my attention, and this was one of those games. (NR: 0 points)
Total Score of Andrews vs Bhat: 9 points
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Other Considered Games (judges' scores in parenthesis)
7 points (Greg 3, Jim 2, Arun 2): GM Pascal Charbonneau (NY) vs IM Tegshsuren Enkhbat (BAL) 1-0
6 points (Arun 3, Greg 2, Jeff 1): WGM Sabina Foisor (BAL) vs NM Matt Herman (NY) 0-1
4 points (Jim 4): FM Marcel Martinez (MIA) vs SM Denys Shmelov (BOS) 1-0
4 points (Greg 4): GM Patrick Wolff (SF) vs IM Ron Burnett (TEN) 1-0
2 points (Jeff 2): IM Levon Altounian (ARZ) vs FM Slava Mikhailuk (SEA) 1-0
1 point (Jim 1): FM Oleg Zaikov (CAR) vs IM Yury Lapshun (QNS) 1-0
1 point (Greg 1): David Justice (TEN) vs NM Yian Liou (SF) 1-0
1 point (Arun 1): GM Hikaru Nakamura (SEA) vs GM Alejandro Ramirez (ARZ) 1/2-1/2
Friday, October 23, 2009
Week 8 Game of the Week
This year we have five judges for Game of the Week, each ranking their top five games. The games are then given from one to five points, based on these rankings, and whichever game receives the most total points wins the award. First place each week will receive a $150 bonus prize, second place $75, and third place $50. Our five judges are: IM Greg Shahade, FM Jim Dean, NM Michael Aigner, NM Jeff Ashton, and NM Arun Sharma. Click here for more details.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1st Place: IM John Bartholomew (DAL) vs GM Julio Becerra (MIA) 1-0
IM Bartholomew played the strong 30. d5!, after which the variety of potential threats against e6 (d5 x e6, e5-e6, and N to f4-e6) compelled GM Becerra to sac the exchange. Even so, White still managed to invade on f7 soon after to compel resignation.
Arun Sharma: Very strong, creative game by Bartholomew. What I liked most about this game was how Bartholomew just relentlessly applied pressure, refusing to quit on his attack, even though at a few points it definitely seemed like his Kingside attack would amount to nothing, and that he would wind up getting steamrolled on the Queenside or in the center. But again, Bartholomew kept putting Becerra to tough decisions, and not surprisingly he could not meet all of them adequately, and White eventually broke through. Ok, sure if Black had defended perfectly, he would have probably defused the attack, but obviously it's ridiculous to expect anyone to play perfectly, and White's strong, daring play, especially 30. d5!, was a big reason as to why. (1st place: 5 points)
Michael Aigner: In this week's top game, White demonstrates what it takes to beat a strong GM: center control, open lines, weaknesses to attack, strong desire to play aggressively, and some luck. While watching the game, I truly got the impression that White simply wanted to win really badly. He kept probing the holes on the Kingside until Black cracked on move twenty nine.
To be fair, Black could have defended better. Both Rybka and Fritz 12 give a decisive advantage to Black with Queenside pawn play, e.g. b7-b5 or a7-a5 on move twenty seven. White also missed a spectacular mate in five on move thirty five that would have put an exclamation mark on this game. These criticisms led me to select this game as second instead of first. (2nd place: 4 points)
Greg Shahade: A nice game by Bartholomew against the two time MVP. It would have been nicer if Bartholomew had played 35. Rxg6+ instead of 35. R2f2, leading to a much more beautiful and quicker win (although the line he chose is totally winning also). There also seemed to be some real theoretical relevance to this game as I've never before seen the line that Becerra chose, although it has been played by Morozevich recently. (2nd place: 4 points)
Jeff Ashton: Nice game. Black defended relatively well, and Bartholomew maintained pressure. (3rd place: 3 points)
Jim Dean: I guess I probably underestimated this game as White did play creatively for a nice win against a very strong player. I thought Black was doing fine for quite a while during the game, but it is definitely challenging for Black to find a constructive plan throughout. Congratulations to Bartholomew for winning during a week of many well played games. (NR: 0 points)
Total Score of Bartholomew vs Becerra: 16 points
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2nd Place: GM Boris Gulko (NJ) vs GM Eugene Perelshteyn (BOS) 1-0
GM Gulko played the strong 31. Rxe7! following it up with 32. Ne5!, after which the dual threats against c6 and g6 compelled GM Perelshteyn to return the exchange at the cost of a pawn, and White converted without much difficulty.
Jeff Ashton: Gulko is showing his positional versatility this season. 31. Rxe7 was clever. It is such a strange move and very easy to overlook or underestimate. It is hard to find obvious fault in Perelshteyn's play. (1st place: 5 points)
Jim Dean: This game was my favorite of the week, as I thought Gulko played another gem here. I enjoyed his handling of the entire middlegame, and the temporary exchange sacrifice on e7 seemed like a nice practical decision. Perelshteyn couldn't keep everything together in the transition to the endgame, and Gulko converted without allowing any tricks. (1st place: 5 points)
Michael Aigner: GM Gulko improved his record to 4-0 this season and 7-0 lifetime in the USCL by defeating a third straight GM opponent! There was never much doubt in this one. Black was slightly worse from the opening and, with maybe the exception of move thirty two, never had a chance to get back into the game. Despite such a glowing review, I ranked this game only fourth because the win was less spectacular than games against Zaikov (Week 3) and Charbonneau (Week 4).
Amazingly, after eight weeks of reading my commentaries, it appears that my fellow judges developed a good taste for positional grinds! I like! (Ironically, after weeks of promoting positional masterpieces, I ranked this game below a violent knockout by Seattle teenager Howard Chen against John Bick). (4th place: 2 points)
Greg Shahade: An impressive display by Gulko although I didn't rank it as highly due to the lack of flashy tactics and violent Kingside attacks that usually get me going. However, I couldn't overlook Gulko's impressive technique from beginning to end, with special attention paid to the temporary exchange sacrifice, 31. Rxe7. (4th place: 2 points)
Arun Sharma: Another very strong performance by Gulko, winning in his usual League fashion, mercilessly grinding his opponent down from a small opening edge without ever really allowing any counterplay. The exchange sac was also a nice touch, definitely not something that seems immediately clear to be good for White, but unsurprisingly Gulko demonstrated why it was so strong, converting in short order. I definitely could have ranked this game higher as the other judges did, just the games I did rank higher I personally found to be a bit more exciting generally, containing more interesting moments than I felt this one did. (5th place: 1 point)
Total Score of Gulko vs Perelshteyn: 15 points
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
3rd Place: FM Victor Shen (NJ) vs IM Marc Esserman (BOS) 1-0
FM Shen struck with the nice tactic 19. Bxh6!, where the potential of 20. Qc1+ compelled IM Esserman to play 19... Bxe1 instead of Kxh6, and after some liquidation, White strongly took advantage of the dual edges of Black's weakened King and undeveloped Queenside.
Michael Aigner: This impressive attacking game was my top choice for Week Eight. Moves such as the well-timed 15. d4, 19. Bxh6, 23. Qe5, 25. d6, 30. g4, and 38. Nf6 left zero doubt who was the better player this week. The game felt smooth and convincing, despite facing a newly minted and successful IM. I plan to incorporate this game in my future classes on how to conduct an attack as White against 1. e4 e5. (1st place: 5 points)
Greg Shahade: I was really pulling for this game. It was a long fight in which White showed constant energy and put endless pressure on his strong opponent while facing stiff resistance throughout. It was an especially impressive display from someone rated just barely above 2300 and perhaps was one of the most complete USCL games in history by someone of Shen's rating level. (1st place: 5 points)
Arun Sharma: Very strong game by Shen all around. It seemed that he developed a nice edge in the opening, then played a strong tactical sequence to gain a large advantage when Esserman tried to mix it up, and finally finished up the game quite efficiently, not allowing any real counterplay after tying down his opponent. A nice upset also considering that it didn't seem like Black made any obvious mistakes, making White's victory that much more impressive. (2nd place: 4 points)
Jeff Ashton: Pretty nice, I guess. I considered ranking it, and it most likely makes my top ten list. After Esserman made some tactical errors, Shen was alert tactically. Other than that, I will probably forget this game's existence within a few hours of hitting the 'send' button ... now. (NR: 0 points)
Jim Dean: I was surprised this game made the Top Three. Shen did play well, but I felt Black picked a very dubious plan early on starting with 13... Kh7, and after Shen appropriately opened up the center Black was left to scrape and claw to try to and keep things somewhat interesting. A nice performance by Shen, but there were a handful of games this week that I felt were stronger candidates. (NR: 0 points)
Total Score of Shen vs Esserman: 14 points
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Other Considered Games (judges' scores in parenthesis)
8 points (Jeff 4, Jim 4): IM Ron Burnett (TEN) vs GM Hikaru Nakamura (SEA) 0-1
6 points (Michael 3, Jim 3): NM Howard Chen (SEA) vs FM John Bick (TEN) 1-0
3 points (Arun 3): IM Richard Costigan (PHI) vs FM Ralph Zimmer (BAL) 0-1
3 points (Greg 3): IM Dionisio Aldama (ARZ) vs IM Florin Felecan (CHC) 1-0
3 points (Arun 2, Greg 1): IM Angelo Young (CHC) vs IM Rogelio Barcenilla (ARZ) 1-0
3 points (Jim 2, Michael 1): IM Lev Milman (QNS) vs IM John Donaldson (SF) 0-1
2 points (Jeff 2): GM Pascal Charbonneau (NY) vs IM Jonathan Schroer (CAR) 1-0
1 point (Jeff 1): GM Vinay Bhat (SF) vs GM Alex Stripunsky (QNS) 0-1
1 point (Jim 1): FM Oleg Zaikov (CAR) vs IM Irina Krush (NY) 1-0
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1st Place: IM John Bartholomew (DAL) vs GM Julio Becerra (MIA) 1-0
IM Bartholomew played the strong 30. d5!, after which the variety of potential threats against e6 (d5 x e6, e5-e6, and N to f4-e6) compelled GM Becerra to sac the exchange. Even so, White still managed to invade on f7 soon after to compel resignation.
Arun Sharma: Very strong, creative game by Bartholomew. What I liked most about this game was how Bartholomew just relentlessly applied pressure, refusing to quit on his attack, even though at a few points it definitely seemed like his Kingside attack would amount to nothing, and that he would wind up getting steamrolled on the Queenside or in the center. But again, Bartholomew kept putting Becerra to tough decisions, and not surprisingly he could not meet all of them adequately, and White eventually broke through. Ok, sure if Black had defended perfectly, he would have probably defused the attack, but obviously it's ridiculous to expect anyone to play perfectly, and White's strong, daring play, especially 30. d5!, was a big reason as to why. (1st place: 5 points)
Michael Aigner: In this week's top game, White demonstrates what it takes to beat a strong GM: center control, open lines, weaknesses to attack, strong desire to play aggressively, and some luck. While watching the game, I truly got the impression that White simply wanted to win really badly. He kept probing the holes on the Kingside until Black cracked on move twenty nine.
To be fair, Black could have defended better. Both Rybka and Fritz 12 give a decisive advantage to Black with Queenside pawn play, e.g. b7-b5 or a7-a5 on move twenty seven. White also missed a spectacular mate in five on move thirty five that would have put an exclamation mark on this game. These criticisms led me to select this game as second instead of first. (2nd place: 4 points)
Greg Shahade: A nice game by Bartholomew against the two time MVP. It would have been nicer if Bartholomew had played 35. Rxg6+ instead of 35. R2f2, leading to a much more beautiful and quicker win (although the line he chose is totally winning also). There also seemed to be some real theoretical relevance to this game as I've never before seen the line that Becerra chose, although it has been played by Morozevich recently. (2nd place: 4 points)
Jeff Ashton: Nice game. Black defended relatively well, and Bartholomew maintained pressure. (3rd place: 3 points)
Jim Dean: I guess I probably underestimated this game as White did play creatively for a nice win against a very strong player. I thought Black was doing fine for quite a while during the game, but it is definitely challenging for Black to find a constructive plan throughout. Congratulations to Bartholomew for winning during a week of many well played games. (NR: 0 points)
Total Score of Bartholomew vs Becerra: 16 points
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2nd Place: GM Boris Gulko (NJ) vs GM Eugene Perelshteyn (BOS) 1-0
GM Gulko played the strong 31. Rxe7! following it up with 32. Ne5!, after which the dual threats against c6 and g6 compelled GM Perelshteyn to return the exchange at the cost of a pawn, and White converted without much difficulty.
Jeff Ashton: Gulko is showing his positional versatility this season. 31. Rxe7 was clever. It is such a strange move and very easy to overlook or underestimate. It is hard to find obvious fault in Perelshteyn's play. (1st place: 5 points)
Jim Dean: This game was my favorite of the week, as I thought Gulko played another gem here. I enjoyed his handling of the entire middlegame, and the temporary exchange sacrifice on e7 seemed like a nice practical decision. Perelshteyn couldn't keep everything together in the transition to the endgame, and Gulko converted without allowing any tricks. (1st place: 5 points)
Michael Aigner: GM Gulko improved his record to 4-0 this season and 7-0 lifetime in the USCL by defeating a third straight GM opponent! There was never much doubt in this one. Black was slightly worse from the opening and, with maybe the exception of move thirty two, never had a chance to get back into the game. Despite such a glowing review, I ranked this game only fourth because the win was less spectacular than games against Zaikov (Week 3) and Charbonneau (Week 4).
Amazingly, after eight weeks of reading my commentaries, it appears that my fellow judges developed a good taste for positional grinds! I like! (Ironically, after weeks of promoting positional masterpieces, I ranked this game below a violent knockout by Seattle teenager Howard Chen against John Bick). (4th place: 2 points)
Greg Shahade: An impressive display by Gulko although I didn't rank it as highly due to the lack of flashy tactics and violent Kingside attacks that usually get me going. However, I couldn't overlook Gulko's impressive technique from beginning to end, with special attention paid to the temporary exchange sacrifice, 31. Rxe7. (4th place: 2 points)
Arun Sharma: Another very strong performance by Gulko, winning in his usual League fashion, mercilessly grinding his opponent down from a small opening edge without ever really allowing any counterplay. The exchange sac was also a nice touch, definitely not something that seems immediately clear to be good for White, but unsurprisingly Gulko demonstrated why it was so strong, converting in short order. I definitely could have ranked this game higher as the other judges did, just the games I did rank higher I personally found to be a bit more exciting generally, containing more interesting moments than I felt this one did. (5th place: 1 point)
Total Score of Gulko vs Perelshteyn: 15 points
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
3rd Place: FM Victor Shen (NJ) vs IM Marc Esserman (BOS) 1-0
FM Shen struck with the nice tactic 19. Bxh6!, where the potential of 20. Qc1+ compelled IM Esserman to play 19... Bxe1 instead of Kxh6, and after some liquidation, White strongly took advantage of the dual edges of Black's weakened King and undeveloped Queenside.
Michael Aigner: This impressive attacking game was my top choice for Week Eight. Moves such as the well-timed 15. d4, 19. Bxh6, 23. Qe5, 25. d6, 30. g4, and 38. Nf6 left zero doubt who was the better player this week. The game felt smooth and convincing, despite facing a newly minted and successful IM. I plan to incorporate this game in my future classes on how to conduct an attack as White against 1. e4 e5. (1st place: 5 points)
Greg Shahade: I was really pulling for this game. It was a long fight in which White showed constant energy and put endless pressure on his strong opponent while facing stiff resistance throughout. It was an especially impressive display from someone rated just barely above 2300 and perhaps was one of the most complete USCL games in history by someone of Shen's rating level. (1st place: 5 points)
Arun Sharma: Very strong game by Shen all around. It seemed that he developed a nice edge in the opening, then played a strong tactical sequence to gain a large advantage when Esserman tried to mix it up, and finally finished up the game quite efficiently, not allowing any real counterplay after tying down his opponent. A nice upset also considering that it didn't seem like Black made any obvious mistakes, making White's victory that much more impressive. (2nd place: 4 points)
Jeff Ashton: Pretty nice, I guess. I considered ranking it, and it most likely makes my top ten list. After Esserman made some tactical errors, Shen was alert tactically. Other than that, I will probably forget this game's existence within a few hours of hitting the 'send' button ... now. (NR: 0 points)
Jim Dean: I was surprised this game made the Top Three. Shen did play well, but I felt Black picked a very dubious plan early on starting with 13... Kh7, and after Shen appropriately opened up the center Black was left to scrape and claw to try to and keep things somewhat interesting. A nice performance by Shen, but there were a handful of games this week that I felt were stronger candidates. (NR: 0 points)
Total Score of Shen vs Esserman: 14 points
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Other Considered Games (judges' scores in parenthesis)
8 points (Jeff 4, Jim 4): IM Ron Burnett (TEN) vs GM Hikaru Nakamura (SEA) 0-1
6 points (Michael 3, Jim 3): NM Howard Chen (SEA) vs FM John Bick (TEN) 1-0
3 points (Arun 3): IM Richard Costigan (PHI) vs FM Ralph Zimmer (BAL) 0-1
3 points (Greg 3): IM Dionisio Aldama (ARZ) vs IM Florin Felecan (CHC) 1-0
3 points (Arun 2, Greg 1): IM Angelo Young (CHC) vs IM Rogelio Barcenilla (ARZ) 1-0
3 points (Jim 2, Michael 1): IM Lev Milman (QNS) vs IM John Donaldson (SF) 0-1
2 points (Jeff 2): GM Pascal Charbonneau (NY) vs IM Jonathan Schroer (CAR) 1-0
1 point (Jeff 1): GM Vinay Bhat (SF) vs GM Alex Stripunsky (QNS) 0-1
1 point (Jim 1): FM Oleg Zaikov (CAR) vs IM Irina Krush (NY) 1-0
Friday, October 16, 2009
Week 7 Game of the Week
This year we have five judges for Game of the Week, each ranking their top five games. The games are then given from one to five points, based on these rankings, and whichever game receives the most total points wins the award. First place each week will receive a $150 bonus prize, second place $75, and third place $50. Our five judges are: IM Greg Shahade, FM Jim Dean, NM Michael Aigner, NM Jeff Ashton, and NM Arun Sharma. Click here for more details.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1st Place: IM Daniel Fernandez (DAL) vs FM Oleg Zaikov (CAR) 0-1
FM Zaikov essentially finished off the wild game with 28... Bf3!, after which the mating threat beginning with Rb8+ allowed him to easily liquidate into a winning ending.
Jim Dean: It is nice to see Zaikov on the winning side of a GOTW winner as he has played the victim in some highly ranked games lately. This was a wild one that followed Kohlweyer vs Tomczak 1987 for twenty two moves ... though I'd be a bit surprised if these two were familiar with that game. It turns out that taking on c3 is probably incorrect after 22... Nc3, and Zaikov pounces nicely with some accurate play. (1st place: 5 points)
Arun Sharma: Very entertaining game as these Nd5 sacrifices in Najdorf positions always create interesting play. As always, I'm certainly not qualified to determine how sound any of this really was, but as he's seemed to become accustomed to doing, with only a slight material edge, Zaikov very coolly defended a very tough looking position and then pounced with a nice counterattack when the time was right. (1st place: 5 points)
Greg Shahade: A fun game by both sides. Honestly I wasn't familiar with the theory, I just liked the energy displayed by both players, and Black's defensive efforts, which showed that passive defense isn't always best when up material as he viciously counterattacked the White King instead. (1st place: 5 points)
Jeff Ashton: Daniel Fernandez has a style that is perfect for winning GOTW, unfortunately it didn't end so well for him.
Both players should be commended. Daniel for his risky and exciting efforts, and Zaikov for his precise defense. Although the winner and loser don't share GOTW prize money, I think Zaikov should buy Daniel a steak dinner. (NR: 0 points)
Michael Aigner: The game followed mainstream Najdorf theory for fifteen moves and followed Alekseev vs Najer 2004 to move eighteen. The novelty 18... Kc8 was approved by computer engines, and five moves later, White blundered away the entire game with 23. bxc3, albeit in a very sharp position. Finally, Black simply had an extra piece in the endgame after the flashy (but unnecessary) tactic 28... Bf3.
Between moves fifteen and twenty three, White sacrificed two pieces. After that, Black made three critical moves: walking away with Kc8, giving back material on h8, and finally sacrificing the Knight on c3. Very nicely done! Still, none of these moves are terribly shocking; sacrifices, especially on c3, are a trademark for this opening.
I admit that I underestimated this game a little and would have ranked it as high as third or fourth if I had another chance. However, compared to a truly competitive Najdorf game like Herman vs Naroditsky, this week seemed way too one-sided. There's just no way that a game like Fernandez vs Zaikov should take top honors when two judges didn't even vote for Herman in Week 5! (NR: 0 points)
Total Score of Fernandez vs Zaikov: 15 points
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2nd Place: IM Jan van de Mortel (CHC) vs GM Jaan Ehlvest (TEN) 1-0
Following an exchange sac, IM Van de Mortel continued strongly with 23. Bxe5!, after which the numerous threats against the Black King were too much for Black to handle, allowing White to enter an ending up a whopping three pawns.
Jim Dean: While this was probably not a performance Ehlvest was proud of, I think a win versus such a strong player in an opening that he authored a book on deserves a lot of credit. White gets a fantastic opening position before Black goes a bit nutty with 19... Bh3, but even without this mistake Black could not have been pleased with his position. White used a lot more clock time and was careful not to allow too much counterplay, helping to secure a victory for the Blaze. (2nd place: 4 points)
Arun Sharma: Like Jim, I feel a win against a major authority on this opening deserves some great credit, even if it was not Ehlvest's best day. I feel it's too easy in these kinds of games to claim that the winner did nothing special, that the result was more due to the loser self destructing. While of course that is true in any decisive game to some extent, in this case, against an authority on this opening who had not lost in fifteen USCL games prior and also had a more than two hundred point rating advantage in this game, I don't feel viewing the game in that way is giving the winner his due credit. Those latter factors, along with the flashiness of the game, forced me to give it a high ranking. (2nd place: 4 points)
Jeff Ashton: I liked this game very much. Van de Mortel is such a strong player and a class act. He had a bumpy start this season so it was a pleasure to see this nice win. Ehlvest is one of my favorite US players that happens to be playing well lately so it was sad for me to see him on the losing end though. Ehlvest made mistakes in a tough position, but I look forward to watching him come back strong for the rest of the USCL. (2nd place: 4 points)
Greg Shahade: I gave this game three points mainly due to the fact that it was a huge upset that swung the match to Chicago because in all honesty White won this game very easily with not much resistance from his higher rated and previously undefeated opponent. Congratulations to Van de Mortel on being able to do something (beat Ehlvest in the USCL) that no one was able to do in Ehlvest's first fifteen games in the league and also for playing such a fine attacking game. (3rd place: 3 points)
Michael Aigner: As a longtime Leningrad Dutch player, watching this deeply saddened me. White earned a tie for Game of the Week because Black self-destructed! I always found 11... g5 to be suspicious, yet still people seem to play it. But jean puhleeze, what in Caissa's name was 19... Bh3??? Black simply hangs the c6 pawn, plus e7 to boot! Of course, the fact that Black spent all of seven minutes (plus the thirty second increment) for the first nineteen moves (and thirteen minutes for the entire game) troubles me as well.
I will give White credit for playing smoothly and efficiently. However, he can't take credit for much more, as the plan of 12. e4, 18. Bb1 and 19. f4 is hardly anything new. Depending on your philosophy, I can see this game earning some fourth or fifth place votes for GOTW, but no way should it be tied for first! (NR: 0 points)
Total Score of Van de Mortel vs Ehlvest: 15 points
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
3rd Place: GM Giorgi Kacheishvili (NY) vs IM Bryan Smith (PHI) 0-1
In a game that had mostly been dictated by Pawn tensions, IM Smith made a strong addition to them with 19... e5!, after which the threats on the long diagonal forced White to liquidate the exchange.
Jeff Ashton: Finally Bryan Smith gets some recognition. He is one of the biggest "sleepers" in US chess. For those who don't know that expression, it basically means he doesn't get the respect and recognition that he deserves from the public.
He is a strong player and he contributes much to the chess community. I have officially joined the Bryan Smith fan club.
And finally, I would like to apologize for unintentionally jinxing Kacheishvili with my "always wins with White" comment last week. (1st place: 5 points)
Jim Dean: In my experience, playing against an opening system like the one White employs here is rarely tons of fun, but Smith was able to create an enjoyable position for himself here. Black appears to get the upper hand around move sixteen, and never really lets up. After winning the exchange, Smith cruises in a fairly easy endgame. (3rd place: 3 points)
Arun Sharma: Another game where, like Van de Mortel, the upset factor really stood out and caused this game to be something special in my mind. While again some might be tempted to attribute this result to GM Kacheishvili having an off day, IM Smith really deserves credit for mixing it up well with such a strong player with the Black pieces, really going for the jugular right out of the opening with both 15... b4! and 19... e5! (4th place: 2 points)
Greg Shahade: A very nice game from Smith as Kacheishvili is very hard to defeat, especially with the Black pieces. I ranked this behind the Van de Mortel game only because that one was a bit more flashy, but it's hard to ignore anyone who pulls off such an upset with Black against such a solid player. (4th place: 2 points)
Michael Aigner: Thank you to Mr. Smith for demonstrating proper technique to embarrass these bizarre looking openings. In a week with so many games decided on blunders, I was glad to see one sensible game! While I can't imagine it was that hard to play, it was nonetheless a nice win against a GM with the Black pieces. (4th place: 2 points)
Total Score of Kacheishvili vs Smith: 14 points
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Other Considered Games (judges' scores in parenthesis)
12 points (Michael 5, Greg 4, Arun 3): IM Angelo Young (CHC) vs FM John Bick (TEN) 1-0
6 points (Michael 4, Jim 1, Arun 1): IM Rogelio Barcenilla (ARZ) vs GM Vinay Bhat (SF) 1-0
5 points (Michael 3, Jeff 2): GM Hikaru Nakamura (SEA) vs GM Julio Becerra (MIA) 1-0
4 points (Jeff 3, Michael 1): GM Larry Christiansen (BOS) vs IM Eli Vovsha (QNS) 0-1
3 points (Jim 2, Greg 1): Miguel Recio (MIA) vs NM Joshua Sinanan (SEA) 0-1
1 point (Jeff 1): GM Alex Shabalov (TEN) vs FM Florin Felecan (CHC) 1-0
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1st Place: IM Daniel Fernandez (DAL) vs FM Oleg Zaikov (CAR) 0-1
FM Zaikov essentially finished off the wild game with 28... Bf3!, after which the mating threat beginning with Rb8+ allowed him to easily liquidate into a winning ending.
Jim Dean: It is nice to see Zaikov on the winning side of a GOTW winner as he has played the victim in some highly ranked games lately. This was a wild one that followed Kohlweyer vs Tomczak 1987 for twenty two moves ... though I'd be a bit surprised if these two were familiar with that game. It turns out that taking on c3 is probably incorrect after 22... Nc3, and Zaikov pounces nicely with some accurate play. (1st place: 5 points)
Arun Sharma: Very entertaining game as these Nd5 sacrifices in Najdorf positions always create interesting play. As always, I'm certainly not qualified to determine how sound any of this really was, but as he's seemed to become accustomed to doing, with only a slight material edge, Zaikov very coolly defended a very tough looking position and then pounced with a nice counterattack when the time was right. (1st place: 5 points)
Greg Shahade: A fun game by both sides. Honestly I wasn't familiar with the theory, I just liked the energy displayed by both players, and Black's defensive efforts, which showed that passive defense isn't always best when up material as he viciously counterattacked the White King instead. (1st place: 5 points)
Jeff Ashton: Daniel Fernandez has a style that is perfect for winning GOTW, unfortunately it didn't end so well for him.
Both players should be commended. Daniel for his risky and exciting efforts, and Zaikov for his precise defense. Although the winner and loser don't share GOTW prize money, I think Zaikov should buy Daniel a steak dinner. (NR: 0 points)
Michael Aigner: The game followed mainstream Najdorf theory for fifteen moves and followed Alekseev vs Najer 2004 to move eighteen. The novelty 18... Kc8 was approved by computer engines, and five moves later, White blundered away the entire game with 23. bxc3, albeit in a very sharp position. Finally, Black simply had an extra piece in the endgame after the flashy (but unnecessary) tactic 28... Bf3.
Between moves fifteen and twenty three, White sacrificed two pieces. After that, Black made three critical moves: walking away with Kc8, giving back material on h8, and finally sacrificing the Knight on c3. Very nicely done! Still, none of these moves are terribly shocking; sacrifices, especially on c3, are a trademark for this opening.
I admit that I underestimated this game a little and would have ranked it as high as third or fourth if I had another chance. However, compared to a truly competitive Najdorf game like Herman vs Naroditsky, this week seemed way too one-sided. There's just no way that a game like Fernandez vs Zaikov should take top honors when two judges didn't even vote for Herman in Week 5! (NR: 0 points)
Total Score of Fernandez vs Zaikov: 15 points
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2nd Place: IM Jan van de Mortel (CHC) vs GM Jaan Ehlvest (TEN) 1-0
Following an exchange sac, IM Van de Mortel continued strongly with 23. Bxe5!, after which the numerous threats against the Black King were too much for Black to handle, allowing White to enter an ending up a whopping three pawns.
Jim Dean: While this was probably not a performance Ehlvest was proud of, I think a win versus such a strong player in an opening that he authored a book on deserves a lot of credit. White gets a fantastic opening position before Black goes a bit nutty with 19... Bh3, but even without this mistake Black could not have been pleased with his position. White used a lot more clock time and was careful not to allow too much counterplay, helping to secure a victory for the Blaze. (2nd place: 4 points)
Arun Sharma: Like Jim, I feel a win against a major authority on this opening deserves some great credit, even if it was not Ehlvest's best day. I feel it's too easy in these kinds of games to claim that the winner did nothing special, that the result was more due to the loser self destructing. While of course that is true in any decisive game to some extent, in this case, against an authority on this opening who had not lost in fifteen USCL games prior and also had a more than two hundred point rating advantage in this game, I don't feel viewing the game in that way is giving the winner his due credit. Those latter factors, along with the flashiness of the game, forced me to give it a high ranking. (2nd place: 4 points)
Jeff Ashton: I liked this game very much. Van de Mortel is such a strong player and a class act. He had a bumpy start this season so it was a pleasure to see this nice win. Ehlvest is one of my favorite US players that happens to be playing well lately so it was sad for me to see him on the losing end though. Ehlvest made mistakes in a tough position, but I look forward to watching him come back strong for the rest of the USCL. (2nd place: 4 points)
Greg Shahade: I gave this game three points mainly due to the fact that it was a huge upset that swung the match to Chicago because in all honesty White won this game very easily with not much resistance from his higher rated and previously undefeated opponent. Congratulations to Van de Mortel on being able to do something (beat Ehlvest in the USCL) that no one was able to do in Ehlvest's first fifteen games in the league and also for playing such a fine attacking game. (3rd place: 3 points)
Michael Aigner: As a longtime Leningrad Dutch player, watching this deeply saddened me. White earned a tie for Game of the Week because Black self-destructed! I always found 11... g5 to be suspicious, yet still people seem to play it. But jean puhleeze, what in Caissa's name was 19... Bh3??? Black simply hangs the c6 pawn, plus e7 to boot! Of course, the fact that Black spent all of seven minutes (plus the thirty second increment) for the first nineteen moves (and thirteen minutes for the entire game) troubles me as well.
I will give White credit for playing smoothly and efficiently. However, he can't take credit for much more, as the plan of 12. e4, 18. Bb1 and 19. f4 is hardly anything new. Depending on your philosophy, I can see this game earning some fourth or fifth place votes for GOTW, but no way should it be tied for first! (NR: 0 points)
Total Score of Van de Mortel vs Ehlvest: 15 points
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
3rd Place: GM Giorgi Kacheishvili (NY) vs IM Bryan Smith (PHI) 0-1
In a game that had mostly been dictated by Pawn tensions, IM Smith made a strong addition to them with 19... e5!, after which the threats on the long diagonal forced White to liquidate the exchange.
Jeff Ashton: Finally Bryan Smith gets some recognition. He is one of the biggest "sleepers" in US chess. For those who don't know that expression, it basically means he doesn't get the respect and recognition that he deserves from the public.
He is a strong player and he contributes much to the chess community. I have officially joined the Bryan Smith fan club.
And finally, I would like to apologize for unintentionally jinxing Kacheishvili with my "always wins with White" comment last week. (1st place: 5 points)
Jim Dean: In my experience, playing against an opening system like the one White employs here is rarely tons of fun, but Smith was able to create an enjoyable position for himself here. Black appears to get the upper hand around move sixteen, and never really lets up. After winning the exchange, Smith cruises in a fairly easy endgame. (3rd place: 3 points)
Arun Sharma: Another game where, like Van de Mortel, the upset factor really stood out and caused this game to be something special in my mind. While again some might be tempted to attribute this result to GM Kacheishvili having an off day, IM Smith really deserves credit for mixing it up well with such a strong player with the Black pieces, really going for the jugular right out of the opening with both 15... b4! and 19... e5! (4th place: 2 points)
Greg Shahade: A very nice game from Smith as Kacheishvili is very hard to defeat, especially with the Black pieces. I ranked this behind the Van de Mortel game only because that one was a bit more flashy, but it's hard to ignore anyone who pulls off such an upset with Black against such a solid player. (4th place: 2 points)
Michael Aigner: Thank you to Mr. Smith for demonstrating proper technique to embarrass these bizarre looking openings. In a week with so many games decided on blunders, I was glad to see one sensible game! While I can't imagine it was that hard to play, it was nonetheless a nice win against a GM with the Black pieces. (4th place: 2 points)
Total Score of Kacheishvili vs Smith: 14 points
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Other Considered Games (judges' scores in parenthesis)
12 points (Michael 5, Greg 4, Arun 3): IM Angelo Young (CHC) vs FM John Bick (TEN) 1-0
6 points (Michael 4, Jim 1, Arun 1): IM Rogelio Barcenilla (ARZ) vs GM Vinay Bhat (SF) 1-0
5 points (Michael 3, Jeff 2): GM Hikaru Nakamura (SEA) vs GM Julio Becerra (MIA) 1-0
4 points (Jeff 3, Michael 1): GM Larry Christiansen (BOS) vs IM Eli Vovsha (QNS) 0-1
3 points (Jim 2, Greg 1): Miguel Recio (MIA) vs NM Joshua Sinanan (SEA) 0-1
1 point (Jeff 1): GM Alex Shabalov (TEN) vs FM Florin Felecan (CHC) 1-0
Sunday, October 11, 2009
Week 6 Game of the Week
This year we have five judges for Game of the Week, each ranking their top five games. The games are then given from one to five points, based on these rankings, and whichever game receives the most total points wins the award. First place each week will receive a $150 bonus prize, second place $75, and third place $50. Our five judges are: IM Greg Shahade, FM Jim Dean, NM Michael Aigner, NM Jeff Ashton, and NM Arun Sharma. Click here for more details.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1st Place: GM Alejandro Ramirez (ARZ) vs GM Joel Benjamin (NJ) 1-0
GM Ramirez played the deflecting 35. f5!!, after which the swift h-pawn in tandem with the threat of Bd4 and b3 winning the Black Knight were enough to bring home the full point.
Michael Aigner: Surprise! A sweet quiet game becomes the run-away winner of Game of the Week. No doubt a big part of the decision was the crushing endgame tactic 35. f5, making way for the h-pawn to run down the board. Bonus points for the key role of this game in Arizona's victory and for taking down one of this season's top performers.
I must, however, complain about the lack of good games this week. Many games were marred by blunders and missed opportunities. Others were too one-sided where the loser self-destructed more than the winner playing a nice combination. On my spreadsheet, this week was the lowest score for my top game over all six weeks! (1st place: 5 points)
Greg Shahade: Before I comment on this game, I want to make a few comments about my judging this week. In past weeks I have tried to choose games that I felt were played well and exciting. This week there were a lot of well played games, but many of them had no flash or excitement that drew me to them. I also notice that in past weeks judges have been mercilessly criticized for their selections. So this week, due to my lack of overall inspiration by many of the games, I decided to use a different judging criteria than I usually did.
Instead of picking all of the best games, I picked two games that I felt stood out, and then the other three games were simply the games that I felt were the most exciting and interesting to the fans. My point is that this is a subjective contest in which there are no set rules or guidelines to determine what a "Game of the Week" is. It's simply the combined opinion of five people as to what games they enjoyed the most. I am well aware that the games I ranked from third to fifth place contained numerous errors from both players, but they were also extremely exciting for the fans.
Anyway, Alejandro's game got the nod this week almost solely due to the final endgame combination with 35. f5!. It also didn't hurt that he dealt Joel Benjamin his first loss of the season and helped the Knockouts to lose their undefeated record. (1st place: 5 points)
Jim Dean: Ramirez puts on a really nice performance here and shows impressive technique. White plays very logically throughout and gets to exploit a superior Bishop versus a Knight before finding a clever way to create an outside passer to seal the deal. White managed to put this win together despite no major blunders from Black, and such a victory over such a strong opponent makes this a very deserving Game of the Week. (2nd place: 4 points)
Arun Sharma: This, in my view, was not a super inspiring week for Game of the Week so I'm not surprised that other than on this game, our opinions differed so much (however, as I've commented below, I still really do not agree with the games that wound up getting second and third being that high, even if this was a below average week).
However, I'm quite glad that this game at least managed to win as I feel it was definitely one of the few very good games played this week. It clearly was a fairly high quality game (something that really seemed to be lacking this week), and the endgame play by Ramirez, starting with 34. Rxg6, undoubtedly seeing at the time the long term winning idea of marching the h-pawn along with the threat to win the Black Knight with Bd4 and b3, was very impressive. (2nd place: 4 points)
Jeff Ashton: I liked this game quite a bit, but at first I was surprised to see it get first place. I considered ranking it higher, but I eventually decided that very few fans might be able to appreciate this game, and some other games were just more "fun" for everyone, including myself. It pains me to say this, but for the first time in USCL history I might have made a mistake. If I were to vote again I would probably rank it third place instead of fourth! I apologize for making my first and last ever judgment error.
This game is educational and entertaining (maybe) for players of all levels (those who have an attention span greater than a fly). I kind of wonder if other people gave it "cool points" because it involves such a young GM grinding down an older more experienced GM in a Queen-less game. Some might say "Oh it looks like the tables have turned!" If Benjamin had White and Ramirez had Black, would it have dominated in GOTW? Benjamin has consistently been grinding down players in technical positions in USCL so it's a bit ironic to see him lose to young Ramirez this way (and also to be on the losing end of GOTW). Although Benjamin rejected my compliments for his strong play last week, I still think he is one of this season's MVPs, and his play is inspiring. It's a shame to see his first GOTW appearance on the losing end as I thought he would have placed several times in the past.
Overall, Ramirez played very nicely in a game where Benjamin showed strong resistance. USCL has helped me gain great respect for both Ramirez's and Benjamin's positional and endgame skills. (4th place: 2 points)
Total Score of Ramirez vs Benjamin: 20 points
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2nd Place: SM Marc Esserman (BOS) vs FM Oleg Zaikov (CAR) 1-0
SM Esserman finished off the game with the aesthetically pleasing interference tactic, 20. Be6+!!
Jeff Ashton: One hundred years from now I won't be surprised if these games are listed as "Esserman-NN", and people will debate whether or not these games were played in competition or simply home analysis. In Mega Database 3009, Esserman's games will be listed among other great games such as Zaremba-NN from earlier this season.
Are Esserman's games scripted? Is there some elaborate conspiracy designed for him and Boston to win GOTW every week? Am I saying this to encourage Boston fans to leave interesting comments when in fact I am 100% kidding? Honestly, Esserman is just very good, and now we know that it is not just a short term fluke.
As of October 2009 I have officially joined the Esserman bandwagon. His aggressive play with consistent results is a joy to watch. I, like Michael, experience some deja vu when I see his games, but I can't hold it against him. Esserman is still playing aggressive, high risk, attacking chess, and his wins are very convincing.
If Esserman keeps this up, he will soon be giving blindfold simuls and playing without his Queen's Rook. (2nd place: 4 points)
Michael Aigner: Marc Esserman was at it again, knocking out the ever dangerous Zaikov. I ranked this game third behind wins by Ramirez and Bick because of how unsoundly the opponent played. At least Esserman had to work a bit for the win this week though, finishing off with the crushing yet non-obvious interference sacrifice 20. Be6+! (3rd place: 3 points)
Greg Shahade: Obviously not the greatest game ever, but it certainly excited the fans. Zaikov's opening was terrible, and I think that Esserman did a relatively poor job of cleaning up from there. Also Zaikov blundered one move before the end of the game, when 19... Bd6 would have been quite playable. I only ranked this game because of it's excitement factor and my lack of inspiration from the other games. (5th place: 1 point)
Jim Dean: This game was a tough one to rank for me. I was loving the game, right up until the big blunder at the end. I thought both sides had played well and certainly in an exciting fashion before the fatal mistake. I wish 19... Bd6 had been played, where it appears the result is still very much in the air. (5th place: 1 point)
Arun Sharma: I didn't rank this game, and frankly I was very surprised to see it make the Top Three. The game did contain a lot of interesting moments and tactical ideas, especially the one which forced instant resignation so I do understand why the other judges found it attractive. But when the losing side mixes up the opening (or something of that general nature) and as a result winds up in a dead lost position on move six, I'm sorry, but I just cannot rank a game like that.
However, some credit is definitely due to White for mostly playing the attack well and to Black for tenaciously defending such a hopeless looking position after a disastrous opening, but again mainly for the reason mentioned above and the fact that White nearly managed to let him escape before Black lost the game instantly with 19... Bg7?? (after 19... Bd6, White still seems to have a very long road to victory), I could not justify ranking this game. (NR: 0 points)
Total Score of Esserman vs Zaikov: 9 points
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
3rd Place: GM Giorgi Kacheishvili (NY) vs GM Leonid Kritz (BAL) 1-0
GM Kacheishivli played the clever 24. Ra1!, tactically justifying his snatching of a Pawn three moves earlier, which soon liquidated him into a solid Exchange up position that he had no trouble converting.
Jeff Ashton: Has anyone else noticed that in his whole career, Kacheishvili has never lost or drawn a game with the White pieces? Maybe I'm wrong, but it kind of seems that way. We rarely get to see such a one-sided Hedgehog among such strong players, but then again, who had White in this game? (1st place: 5 points)
Jim Dean: This was another game that reminded me to pass when I get the opportunity to face a GM as Black in a Maroczy Bind structure. The main knock against it I felt, was that it almost looked too easy. It seems to me like White has a much easier position to play as they enter the middlegame, and Kacheishvili plays one good move after another to prove it. (4th place: 2 points)
Michael Aigner: I have to say that Kacheishvili gets an A+ for homework! For the second week in a row, he makes an opponent crumble with a sharp line (not technically a novelty, but off the beaten track). It did seem a bit too easy this week, compared to the extended combination (three sacrifices) against Friedel last week. That's why I didn't rank this game, although perhaps it still deserved honorable mention. (NR: 0 points)
Greg Shahade: This one I didn't rank for two main reasons:
(a) It was way too easy for White, and there were no really difficult moves to find.
(b) Kritz basically blitzed the whole game, giving the impression that he wasn't taking it seriously.
Not sure what else to say. (NR: 0 points)
Arun Sharma: This was another game that I didn't really agree with being in the Top Three, but I suppose it really comes down to what context you put it in. On the plus side, the victor played very well, coming up with a nice tactical sequence which won him the game instantly.
On the other hand, this certainly was not a very hard game for the winner, using only about twenty minutes total for the entire game. But the main thing that soured me on it was that that Black basically blitzed out the first fifteen or so moves (spending only about five minutes total on them) and seemed to be in a really bad looking position already at that point. Then, instead of trying to defend like he probably should have (who knows, maybe it was too late even for that by then), he then blitzed out into a tactical sequence, which as shown above, ended up being essentially instantly winning for White.
On the whole it's psychologically very difficult to consider a game which lasted less than an hour (especially on Board One) to be a reasonable candidate for GOTW, unless it was a ridiculous brilliancy by the winner (and while the winner played well, I don't think it rose to the level of that). But again, the winner did play very well so I can't rightly dispute this game being here too much. (NR: 0 points)
(NOTE: We again had to bring in a tiebreaker judge because this game and Mitkov vs Lenderman were tied on points and on all tiebreakers for third place. Thanks this time to FM Jake Kleiman for assisting us in this regard)
Tiebreaker Judge, FM Jake Kleiman: The Mitkov vs Lenderman game was very exciting, but Lenderman's position is so suspect. I am certain Mitkov missed many opportunities which is understandable due to his time pressure. However, the Kacheishvili vs Kritz game showed very nice domination by Kacheishvili where Black's counter chances were always one step too slow.
Total Score of Kacheishvili vs Kritz: 7 points
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Other Considered Games (judges' scores in parenthesis)
7 points (Jim 5, Greg 2): GM Nikola Mitkov (CHC) vs IM Alex Lenderman (PHI) 0-1
5 points (Arun 5): GM Sergey Erenburg (BAL) vs GM Pascal Charbonneau (NY) 1-0
5 points (Greg 4, Arun 1): GM Patrick Wolff (SF) vs GM Julio Becerra (MIA) 1-0
5 points (Jim 3, Arun 2): IM Lev Milman (QNS) vs GM Gregory Serper (SEA) 0-1
4 points (Michael 4): FM John Bick (TEN) vs FM Keaton Kiewra (DAL) 1-0
4 points (Greg 3, Michael 1): IM Salvijus Bercys (DAL) vs GM Alex Shabalov (TEN) 1-0
3 points (Jeff 3): IM Dean Ippolito (NJ) vs IM Rogelio Barcenilla (ARZ) 0-1
3 points (Arun 3): NM Ilya Krasik (BOS) vs NM Udayan Bapat (CAR) 1-0
2 points (Michael 2): FM Marcel Martinez (MIA) vs GM Jesse Kraai (SF) 1-0
1 point (Jeff 1): NM Matt Herman (NY) vs FM Shinsaku Uesugi (BAL) 0-1
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1st Place: GM Alejandro Ramirez (ARZ) vs GM Joel Benjamin (NJ) 1-0
GM Ramirez played the deflecting 35. f5!!, after which the swift h-pawn in tandem with the threat of Bd4 and b3 winning the Black Knight were enough to bring home the full point.
Michael Aigner: Surprise! A sweet quiet game becomes the run-away winner of Game of the Week. No doubt a big part of the decision was the crushing endgame tactic 35. f5, making way for the h-pawn to run down the board. Bonus points for the key role of this game in Arizona's victory and for taking down one of this season's top performers.
I must, however, complain about the lack of good games this week. Many games were marred by blunders and missed opportunities. Others were too one-sided where the loser self-destructed more than the winner playing a nice combination. On my spreadsheet, this week was the lowest score for my top game over all six weeks! (1st place: 5 points)
Greg Shahade: Before I comment on this game, I want to make a few comments about my judging this week. In past weeks I have tried to choose games that I felt were played well and exciting. This week there were a lot of well played games, but many of them had no flash or excitement that drew me to them. I also notice that in past weeks judges have been mercilessly criticized for their selections. So this week, due to my lack of overall inspiration by many of the games, I decided to use a different judging criteria than I usually did.
Instead of picking all of the best games, I picked two games that I felt stood out, and then the other three games were simply the games that I felt were the most exciting and interesting to the fans. My point is that this is a subjective contest in which there are no set rules or guidelines to determine what a "Game of the Week" is. It's simply the combined opinion of five people as to what games they enjoyed the most. I am well aware that the games I ranked from third to fifth place contained numerous errors from both players, but they were also extremely exciting for the fans.
Anyway, Alejandro's game got the nod this week almost solely due to the final endgame combination with 35. f5!. It also didn't hurt that he dealt Joel Benjamin his first loss of the season and helped the Knockouts to lose their undefeated record. (1st place: 5 points)
Jim Dean: Ramirez puts on a really nice performance here and shows impressive technique. White plays very logically throughout and gets to exploit a superior Bishop versus a Knight before finding a clever way to create an outside passer to seal the deal. White managed to put this win together despite no major blunders from Black, and such a victory over such a strong opponent makes this a very deserving Game of the Week. (2nd place: 4 points)
Arun Sharma: This, in my view, was not a super inspiring week for Game of the Week so I'm not surprised that other than on this game, our opinions differed so much (however, as I've commented below, I still really do not agree with the games that wound up getting second and third being that high, even if this was a below average week).
However, I'm quite glad that this game at least managed to win as I feel it was definitely one of the few very good games played this week. It clearly was a fairly high quality game (something that really seemed to be lacking this week), and the endgame play by Ramirez, starting with 34. Rxg6, undoubtedly seeing at the time the long term winning idea of marching the h-pawn along with the threat to win the Black Knight with Bd4 and b3, was very impressive. (2nd place: 4 points)
Jeff Ashton: I liked this game quite a bit, but at first I was surprised to see it get first place. I considered ranking it higher, but I eventually decided that very few fans might be able to appreciate this game, and some other games were just more "fun" for everyone, including myself. It pains me to say this, but for the first time in USCL history I might have made a mistake. If I were to vote again I would probably rank it third place instead of fourth! I apologize for making my first and last ever judgment error.
This game is educational and entertaining (maybe) for players of all levels (those who have an attention span greater than a fly). I kind of wonder if other people gave it "cool points" because it involves such a young GM grinding down an older more experienced GM in a Queen-less game. Some might say "Oh it looks like the tables have turned!" If Benjamin had White and Ramirez had Black, would it have dominated in GOTW? Benjamin has consistently been grinding down players in technical positions in USCL so it's a bit ironic to see him lose to young Ramirez this way (and also to be on the losing end of GOTW). Although Benjamin rejected my compliments for his strong play last week, I still think he is one of this season's MVPs, and his play is inspiring. It's a shame to see his first GOTW appearance on the losing end as I thought he would have placed several times in the past.
Overall, Ramirez played very nicely in a game where Benjamin showed strong resistance. USCL has helped me gain great respect for both Ramirez's and Benjamin's positional and endgame skills. (4th place: 2 points)
Total Score of Ramirez vs Benjamin: 20 points
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2nd Place: SM Marc Esserman (BOS) vs FM Oleg Zaikov (CAR) 1-0
SM Esserman finished off the game with the aesthetically pleasing interference tactic, 20. Be6+!!
Jeff Ashton: One hundred years from now I won't be surprised if these games are listed as "Esserman-NN", and people will debate whether or not these games were played in competition or simply home analysis. In Mega Database 3009, Esserman's games will be listed among other great games such as Zaremba-NN from earlier this season.
Are Esserman's games scripted? Is there some elaborate conspiracy designed for him and Boston to win GOTW every week? Am I saying this to encourage Boston fans to leave interesting comments when in fact I am 100% kidding? Honestly, Esserman is just very good, and now we know that it is not just a short term fluke.
As of October 2009 I have officially joined the Esserman bandwagon. His aggressive play with consistent results is a joy to watch. I, like Michael, experience some deja vu when I see his games, but I can't hold it against him. Esserman is still playing aggressive, high risk, attacking chess, and his wins are very convincing.
If Esserman keeps this up, he will soon be giving blindfold simuls and playing without his Queen's Rook. (2nd place: 4 points)
Michael Aigner: Marc Esserman was at it again, knocking out the ever dangerous Zaikov. I ranked this game third behind wins by Ramirez and Bick because of how unsoundly the opponent played. At least Esserman had to work a bit for the win this week though, finishing off with the crushing yet non-obvious interference sacrifice 20. Be6+! (3rd place: 3 points)
Greg Shahade: Obviously not the greatest game ever, but it certainly excited the fans. Zaikov's opening was terrible, and I think that Esserman did a relatively poor job of cleaning up from there. Also Zaikov blundered one move before the end of the game, when 19... Bd6 would have been quite playable. I only ranked this game because of it's excitement factor and my lack of inspiration from the other games. (5th place: 1 point)
Jim Dean: This game was a tough one to rank for me. I was loving the game, right up until the big blunder at the end. I thought both sides had played well and certainly in an exciting fashion before the fatal mistake. I wish 19... Bd6 had been played, where it appears the result is still very much in the air. (5th place: 1 point)
Arun Sharma: I didn't rank this game, and frankly I was very surprised to see it make the Top Three. The game did contain a lot of interesting moments and tactical ideas, especially the one which forced instant resignation so I do understand why the other judges found it attractive. But when the losing side mixes up the opening (or something of that general nature) and as a result winds up in a dead lost position on move six, I'm sorry, but I just cannot rank a game like that.
However, some credit is definitely due to White for mostly playing the attack well and to Black for tenaciously defending such a hopeless looking position after a disastrous opening, but again mainly for the reason mentioned above and the fact that White nearly managed to let him escape before Black lost the game instantly with 19... Bg7?? (after 19... Bd6, White still seems to have a very long road to victory), I could not justify ranking this game. (NR: 0 points)
Total Score of Esserman vs Zaikov: 9 points
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
3rd Place: GM Giorgi Kacheishvili (NY) vs GM Leonid Kritz (BAL) 1-0
GM Kacheishivli played the clever 24. Ra1!, tactically justifying his snatching of a Pawn three moves earlier, which soon liquidated him into a solid Exchange up position that he had no trouble converting.
Jeff Ashton: Has anyone else noticed that in his whole career, Kacheishvili has never lost or drawn a game with the White pieces? Maybe I'm wrong, but it kind of seems that way. We rarely get to see such a one-sided Hedgehog among such strong players, but then again, who had White in this game? (1st place: 5 points)
Jim Dean: This was another game that reminded me to pass when I get the opportunity to face a GM as Black in a Maroczy Bind structure. The main knock against it I felt, was that it almost looked too easy. It seems to me like White has a much easier position to play as they enter the middlegame, and Kacheishvili plays one good move after another to prove it. (4th place: 2 points)
Michael Aigner: I have to say that Kacheishvili gets an A+ for homework! For the second week in a row, he makes an opponent crumble with a sharp line (not technically a novelty, but off the beaten track). It did seem a bit too easy this week, compared to the extended combination (three sacrifices) against Friedel last week. That's why I didn't rank this game, although perhaps it still deserved honorable mention. (NR: 0 points)
Greg Shahade: This one I didn't rank for two main reasons:
(a) It was way too easy for White, and there were no really difficult moves to find.
(b) Kritz basically blitzed the whole game, giving the impression that he wasn't taking it seriously.
Not sure what else to say. (NR: 0 points)
Arun Sharma: This was another game that I didn't really agree with being in the Top Three, but I suppose it really comes down to what context you put it in. On the plus side, the victor played very well, coming up with a nice tactical sequence which won him the game instantly.
On the other hand, this certainly was not a very hard game for the winner, using only about twenty minutes total for the entire game. But the main thing that soured me on it was that that Black basically blitzed out the first fifteen or so moves (spending only about five minutes total on them) and seemed to be in a really bad looking position already at that point. Then, instead of trying to defend like he probably should have (who knows, maybe it was too late even for that by then), he then blitzed out into a tactical sequence, which as shown above, ended up being essentially instantly winning for White.
On the whole it's psychologically very difficult to consider a game which lasted less than an hour (especially on Board One) to be a reasonable candidate for GOTW, unless it was a ridiculous brilliancy by the winner (and while the winner played well, I don't think it rose to the level of that). But again, the winner did play very well so I can't rightly dispute this game being here too much. (NR: 0 points)
(NOTE: We again had to bring in a tiebreaker judge because this game and Mitkov vs Lenderman were tied on points and on all tiebreakers for third place. Thanks this time to FM Jake Kleiman for assisting us in this regard)
Tiebreaker Judge, FM Jake Kleiman: The Mitkov vs Lenderman game was very exciting, but Lenderman's position is so suspect. I am certain Mitkov missed many opportunities which is understandable due to his time pressure. However, the Kacheishvili vs Kritz game showed very nice domination by Kacheishvili where Black's counter chances were always one step too slow.
Total Score of Kacheishvili vs Kritz: 7 points
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Other Considered Games (judges' scores in parenthesis)
7 points (Jim 5, Greg 2): GM Nikola Mitkov (CHC) vs IM Alex Lenderman (PHI) 0-1
5 points (Arun 5): GM Sergey Erenburg (BAL) vs GM Pascal Charbonneau (NY) 1-0
5 points (Greg 4, Arun 1): GM Patrick Wolff (SF) vs GM Julio Becerra (MIA) 1-0
5 points (Jim 3, Arun 2): IM Lev Milman (QNS) vs GM Gregory Serper (SEA) 0-1
4 points (Michael 4): FM John Bick (TEN) vs FM Keaton Kiewra (DAL) 1-0
4 points (Greg 3, Michael 1): IM Salvijus Bercys (DAL) vs GM Alex Shabalov (TEN) 1-0
3 points (Jeff 3): IM Dean Ippolito (NJ) vs IM Rogelio Barcenilla (ARZ) 0-1
3 points (Arun 3): NM Ilya Krasik (BOS) vs NM Udayan Bapat (CAR) 1-0
2 points (Michael 2): FM Marcel Martinez (MIA) vs GM Jesse Kraai (SF) 1-0
1 point (Jeff 1): NM Matt Herman (NY) vs FM Shinsaku Uesugi (BAL) 0-1
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)