The chess games played in the series to the extent that they can be followed have been analyzed on YouTube. Most of them are based on real games played by Grandmasters. I recognized the final position from a famous Paul Morphy game from around 1859. One difference is that Paul Morphy played the brilliant game while blindfolded.
At one point in the show someone presents Beth Harmon with a 3 move chess problem. This problem appeared online somewhere. This particular problem should have been at least somewhat difficult, but I just happened to pick up on the answer within a few seconds.
Composed chess problems have a rule where the first move can't be a capture or a check. This sometimes means that the losing side is placed in zugzwang, which means that it is unfavorable for him to have to make a move. These problems are much more subtle than positions from real games.
Because these problems are often very difficult, I have a technique where I imagine a couple of moves for the losing side and then given those moves I look for a way to win. If I can't solve it then I know that the solution involves preventing those moves from happening.
I have some thoughts on what the possible symbolism of the ending of the show might mean. I would like to discuss it with somebody who has seen it.
Best wishes,
John Coffey
2020-12-28
2020-12-20
Queen's Gambit
So I resisted at first watching Queen's Gambit, but as a drama about chess, it is good. There is also a major theme about substance abuse. These together make a pretty good story.
Obviously, there is also a theme of female empowerment. This is interesting because during the 1950s and 1960s in which this story takes place, there weren't that many women chess players and none at the higher levels. Things have improved quite a bit since then, first with the Polgar sisters becoming top tier players, and more recently with Chinese star Hou Yifan. Yet, chess is still a game dominated by men, maybe because women find it less interesting. Men more than women prefer competitive sports, especially one as egotistical as chess.
--
Best wishes,
John Coffey
http://www.entertainmentjourney.com
--
Best wishes,
John Coffey
http://www.entertainmentjourney.com
2020-12-11
My Only Game vs. Magnus Carlsen - YouTube
I think that this is a very interesting game worth studying.
The ending is a draw as stated, but I think that if the pawns are on f4 and f5 instead of g4 and g5, then it is a win for White. (After putting the pawn on a7 and the rook on a8 then the Black King can't go to f7 because Rh8! wins for White, because after Rxa7 White has Rh7+.) So White eventually wins the f5 pawn with his King, and then White marches the f pawn up to f6 throwing the Black King off his g7 and h7 defensive squares. I just confirmed this with endgame tablebases.
What I have a hard time wrapping my head around, is why doesn't this same strategy work with a G pawn? The answer is that Black can set his king on g7 and give checks with the rook. With an F pawn then the Black King either ends up on f7 which loses to Rh8, or it ends up h7 allowing White to play f7 threatening to queen.
However, I am just assuming that the Black King just goes between g7 and h7. There are other possibilities, but these are winning for White as well. https://syzygy-tables.info/?fen=8/6k1/R7/P4p2/5P2/r7/6K1/8_w_-_-_0_1
How I Surprised A Grandmaster On The 2nd Move... - YouTube
This game is interesting, along with the nervous emotion of the presenter.
2020-11-30
Dinesh D'Souza: Netflix’s New Feminist Series “The Queen’s Gambit” Needs a Heavy Dose of Reality
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZFy4VzhWtEw
I find the name Dinesh D'Souza on the U.S. Chess Federation website. I don't know if this is the same person because it could be a common Indian name, and a great many people from India play chess. The membership of the person on the USCF website expired in 2005 and he lived in California where Dinesh D'Souza also lived at the time so it could be the same person.
http://www.uschess.org/msa/MbrDtlMain.php?12659594
In response to the video I wrote the following comment:
"Speaking as someone who is barely ranked at the Expert level, I think that men and women have different inclinations toward competitive sports, where chess is a somewhat ego-driven sport. Women by their nature prefer activities that are more cooperative. Studies have shown that women are less inclined to engage in analytical thinking even though they are equally capable of it.
I haven't watched the show yet, but my concern is that Hollywood movies are full of heroes who rise to the top with little or no effort. This is not reality, and chess is an incredibly difficult game to master."
I find the name Dinesh D'Souza on the U.S. Chess Federation website. I don't know if this is the same person because it could be a common Indian name, and a great many people from India play chess. The membership of the person on the USCF website expired in 2005 and he lived in California where Dinesh D'Souza also lived at the time so it could be the same person.
http://www.uschess.org/msa/MbrDtlMain.php?12659594
In response to the video I wrote the following comment:
"Speaking as someone who is barely ranked at the Expert level, I think that men and women have different inclinations toward competitive sports, where chess is a somewhat ego-driven sport. Women by their nature prefer activities that are more cooperative. Studies have shown that women are less inclined to engage in analytical thinking even though they are equally capable of it.
I haven't watched the show yet, but my concern is that Hollywood movies are full of heroes who rise to the top with little or no effort. This is not reality, and chess is an incredibly difficult game to master."
2020-11-24
Mate in 3 chess problem from the Netflix series "The Queen's Gambit".
Composed mate in 3 problems can be quite difficult to solve, but I've solved this one faster than any composed mate in 3 that I have solved before. Like 20 seconds. The Black pieces have few moves available making the puzzle easier. I asked myself, what would happen if the Black King ran away to h6 or f8, or what if the Black King just ended up on its original square?
Some really difficult composed chess problems have taken me 30 to 60 minutes to solve. I have a knack for Mate in 2 problems, but Mate in 3's can be exponentially more complicated.
--
Some really difficult composed chess problems have taken me 30 to 60 minutes to solve. I have a knack for Mate in 2 problems, but Mate in 3's can be exponentially more complicated.
2020-11-19
2020-11-18
2020-11-17
2020-11-12
KQvKR Philidor Posiiton
This is the Philidor Position in the Queen versus Rook ending, not to be confused with the Rook and Pawn ending by the same name.
It is possible to play the ending out on this website, which tells you the best moves on the righthand side.
This ending is normally thought to be quite difficult, but this is one of the critical positions and it is fairly easy if you know what to do. (The other critical position is called the 3rd rank defense, and it is harder.)
White easily wins is with a triangulation after 1. Qe5+ Ka7 2. Qa1+ Kb8 3. Qa5 arriving at the starting position with it being Black to move instead of White to move. Now Black is forced to move his rook away from the king. Then White can check the king until he is able to fork the rook.
2020-10-30
2020-10-28
"WOW! He is FIGHTING So Well!" | Magnus Carlsen vs Narayanan | Banter Series
For those interested in these things, Mangus Carlsen explains his thinking. As I entered the game into the computer, the analysis indicated that Magnus had the advantage but threw it away, and then his opponent gave it back to him.
[Event "Banter Chess Series"]
[Site "?"] [Date "2020.10.28"] [Round "1"] [White "Carlsen, Mangus"] [Black "Narayana, S.L.."] [Result "1-0"] [WhiteElo "2863"] [BlackElo "2618"] [PlyCount "97"] [EventType "schev (blitz)"] [TimeControl "180"] 1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 e6 3. Nf3 d5 4. Nc3 Bb4 5. Bg5 h6 6. Bxf6 Qxf6 7. Qa4+ Nc6 8. e3 O-O 9. Rc1 Rd8 10. a3 Bf8 11. Be2 a6 12. O-O Rb8 13. Rfd1 dxc4 14. Qxc4 Bd7 15. Ne4 Qf5 16. Nc5 Be8 17. Bd3 Qd5 18. Qc2 Bxc5 19. Be4 Qd6 20. Qxc5 Rbc8 21. h4 f5 22. Bb1 Bh5 23. Ba2 Bxf3 24. gxf3 Kh8 25. Qxd6 Rxd6 26. Rc5 g6 27. Rdc1 Kg7 28. Bb3 Kf6 29. Ba4 Rb8 30. b4 g5 31. hxg5+ hxg5 32. Bxc6 bxc6 33. Rxc6 a5 34. bxa5 Ra8 35. Rxc7 Rxa5 36. Rh7 Kg6 37. Rcc7 Rxa3 38. Rcg7+ Kf6 39. Rg8 f4 40. e4 Rxd4 41. Kg2 Rdd3 42. Rh6+ Kf7 43. Rxg5 Rxf3 44. Rgg6 Rfd3 45. Rf6+ Kg7 46. Rhg6+ Kh7 47. Rxe6 Rd4 48. Rgf6 Kg7 49. Rxf4 1-0
2020-10-27
Puzzle 79094 - ChessPuzzle.net
This puzzle is way too much fun, so I have to share it. It is not particularly difficult.
2020-10-16
Tricky Ending
Most King and Pawn endings are relatively simple to play, but there are exceptions called "corresponding square" positions that are technically very complicated. Most players below the level of Expert wouldn't even know that these endings exist. I have had a couple of these kinds of endings memorized for around 25 years, but this particular ending I did not know. My first impression looking at the position is that the game would be a draw. As White, Grandmaster Firouzja lost to the world champion Magnus Carlsen because he did not find the correct move here. The right move is counterintuitive. However, I would assume that most professional players would know these positions by heart.
2020-10-10
A bad opening goes very bad
[Event "Casual Game"]
[Site "https://itsyourturn.com"]
[Date "2020.09.22"]
[Round "?"]
[White "John Coffey"]
[Black "francishenryd"]
[Result "1-0"]
[ECO "D07"]
[WhiteElo "2016"]
[PlyCount "33"]
[EventDate "2020.09.22"]
1. Nf3 d5 2. d4 Nc6 3. c4 Nf6 4. cxd5 Qxd5 5. Nc3 Qd8 6. d5 Nb4 7. Qa4+ Bd7 8.
Qxb4 b6 9. Qb3 e6 10. e4 exd5 11. e5 Ne4 12. Qxd5 Nxc3 13. bxc3 Be6 14. Bb5+
Bd7 15. Bxd7+ Ke7 16. Ba3+ c5 17. Qd6# 1-0
[Site "https://itsyourturn.com"]
[Date "2020.09.22"]
[Round "?"]
[White "John Coffey"]
[Black "francishenryd"]
[Result "1-0"]
[ECO "D07"]
[WhiteElo "2016"]
[PlyCount "33"]
[EventDate "2020.09.22"]
1. Nf3 d5 2. d4 Nc6 3. c4 Nf6 4. cxd5 Qxd5 5. Nc3 Qd8 6. d5 Nb4 7. Qa4+ Bd7 8.
Qxb4 b6 9. Qb3 e6 10. e4 exd5 11. e5 Ne4 12. Qxd5 Nxc3 13. bxc3 Be6 14. Bb5+
Bd7 15. Bxd7+ Ke7 16. Ba3+ c5 17. Qd6# 1-0
2020-09-29
Knowledge4IT - Entwurf, Implementierung, Weiterbildung.
I think that this is an easier to understand version of the endgame tablebases.
2020-09-27
Chessmaster, The (NES) - Online Game | OldGameShelf.com
From 1984 to mid-1990's I owned 3 chess-playing computers. I sold them when I switched over to desktop computers, but I kind of regret not having them any more. Part of me wonders if they would still beat me today like they did back then? I am wondering if I could now give them a better game?
The 1984 Novag Super Constellation was pretty impressive considering that it was running on just a 4 MhZ 6502 8-bit processor. The USCF assigned it a rating of 2000, which is likely a little high. It is my understanding that the program only looked at 500 moves per second Compare that to my 64 bit 3.4 GHZ iMac with 4 cores. Stockfish on this computer looks at around 5 million moves per second.
Nevertheless, I had trouble beating the Super Constellation at level 1 which was 5 seconds per move. At the time, I was rated in the 1700's. I could win most of the time, but the higher levels game me trouble.
I am surprised to find my name on a webpage about the Super Constellation. https://www.chessprogramming.org/Super_Constellation Apparently in 1998 I made a forum post where I was wondering the exact same things that I am wondering now. Even then I referred to this as an old chess computer.
The 1988 Fidelity Designer 2100 (http://www.spacious-mind.com/html/designer_2100.html) series running an 8-bit 6502 at 5 MHZ was a slight improvement over the Super Constellation. The USCF gave it a rating of 2100 which some claim is too high. I certainly found it a challenge, but I wasn't content to stop there. Later got the 16-bit Fidelity Designer Mach III 2265. For its time, this thing was a beast. I played it a ton of games at G/30 and only won once. At the time I was rated 1800.
I can't go back play these old chess computers, but I can run some older videogame software through emulation.
I found a website that runs The Chessmaster program from 19991 for the Nintendo Entertainment System. This is emulating a 1.79 MHZ 8 bit 6502 processor. This should be a little weaker than the Novag Super Constellation.
First of all, I am surprised that a website can emulate an old videogame system. I also found this fun to play. The controls take a little getting used to. You have to press "Select" (shift key) to get to the options where you can control the difficulty. There is also an option to make it full screen. The graphics aren't the best, but are okay.
As as I said, I found this fun to play. There are a couple of beginner levels, and then level 1, 2, 3 etc. After beating level 1 at 5 seconds per move, I only barely beat level 2 at 7.5 seconds per move. I had to outsmart it in the endgame to win.
I am able to run the SNES version of this program through emulation on my NES Classic videogame system and on the PC. The SNES 65816 processor is twice as fast and a little more sophisticated, so the SNES version should be as good as the Novag Super Constellation. At the time that these Chess Master programs were released for the videogame consoles, which was around 1991, the version of Chess Master for computers was called Chess Master 2100. I later owned a copy of Chess Master 3000 which seems extremely crude now.
In the 1990's I programmed SNES videogames for a living.
John Coffey
2020-09-23
This Happens To All of Us || Morphy vs Löwenthal (1858)
I find the endgame interesting. There is also a very interesting pawn sacrifice by Morphy that his opponent wisely doesn't accept.
2020-09-16
Two Can Play that Game | Alekhine vs Capablanca | Savorin Cup (1913) | Game 2
I'm starting to become a fan of Capablanca. There is an interesting combination 10 minutes into the video ...
2020-09-10
chess.com changes to their rating system today
Earlier today I noticed that my chess.com bullet rating was 1900. This could not be correct, and later it showed up as 1649. However, my bullet rating had been at a record low of 1499. Chess.com decided to add 150 points to all bullet ratings to make the average match the average of their blitz ratings. I still think that their ratings are too low, but this is a welcome improvement.
Prior to the adjustment, my highest bullet rating was over 1700.
In addition, chess.com has decided to start counting G/10 as Rapid instead of Blitz. This would have affected how some of the games I played tonight were rated. I thought that the USCF considered G/10 to be Quick and not Blitz, but I was wrong. It appears that the USCF considers G/10 to be Blitz and maybe Quick as well, although I personally think that Blitz should be considered less than 10 minutes.
Chess.com considers anything longer than 9 minutes to be "Rapid", except for "turn based" postal like games.
From what I can tell, the USCF considers 10 to 29 minutes to be "Quick". Anything from 30 to 59 minutes was traditionally called "Action Chess", although the USCF now rates 30 to 60 minutes as dual rated both Quick and Regular. The USCF considers anything over 59 minutes as "Regular."
2020-08-25
chess.com and cheating
So chess.com has some sophisticated method of detecting people who cheat, and they are kicking 500 people a day off their site for cheating. So far they have kicked off 400,000 people. https://www.chess.com/article/view/online-chess-cheating
2020-08-22
2020-08-14
Automated Chess board - Losing to a Ghost
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AQLOj-TylGg
This automated chess board has a feature where you can play other humans on the internet. Or you can play against a computer. However, this is far easier on a computer screen. Even a phone or tablet is not so bad, and you have to use a phone app anyway to drive the board.
I saw something in the video that made it looked like the app is integrated with the chess.com website.
The presenter is a pretty terrible chess player. He was getting crushed by a computer at "level 1". This was most likely Stockfish at level 1. Both the websites chess.com and lichess.org let you play Stockfish at multiple levels if you don't want to be humiliated by a human being, so I just now tested this out. Levels 1 to 4 played so poorly that I couldn't stand to play them. I had to get up to level 6 just to be a little bit challenged but won anyway.
2020-08-12
2020-08-09
2020-08-05
Get Free Coffee at Panera Bread
I've been getting free coffee for about 3 weeks. I need to cancel the coffee subscription by the end of September in order not to be charged.
2020-08-02
George R.R. Martin
On this day in 1996, George R.R. Martin published A Game of Thrones. Did you know he is a USCF life member and earned his living as a tournament director in the early 70s? Working on weekends 2 days a week gave him 5 days a week to write!
--
2020-07-30
Interesting endgame followed by interesting Queen's Gambit Declined kingside attack.
Early in the video, he played Kh3??? when he meant to play Kh1. He mentions this in the comments.
2020-07-29
Magnus Carlsen is back in the ring | Titled Arena
This is really fun to watch.
The world champion plays this online tournament as "Dr. Nykterstein". This is an "arena" tournament, which is like a "Battle Royal" to see who can get the most points over a two hour period. The tournament is mostly Grandmasters, making the level of play high. It looks like Magnus Carlsen may have started late but then slowly moved up the standings until he was on top.
What is amazing is that this is a "bullet" tournament, where each player only has 1 minute to make all their moves. The players are averaging 1 to 2 seconds per move. It is all I can do to keep up the games. I get the impression that Magnus Carlsen's moves are at least equal to what I can do with two hours at my disposal. It is amazing and instructive to watch.
The video gets off to a slow start but gets really entertaining 3 to 4 minutes into it.
2020-07-23
King and Pawn endgame
The following is a drawn endgame.
However, if White plays it wrong, Black has a very interesting way to win ...
2020-07-01
Dr Gregory House PLAYS CHESS!
I thought that the House M.D. TV series was awesome.
2020-06-15
I had to share this crazy and funny chess problem.
Much to my surprise, Stockfish gets it right away. I figured that it would be too deep or too obscure.
2020-06-07
Cheaters on chess.com
I got a notice from chess.com that one of my opponents had violated the Fair Play Policy, and therefore they were adding 16 points to my rating, which doesn't matter that much because chess.com ratings are always changing. They didn't tell me which opponent was the culprit, but I was extremely curious as to who it was, so I looked to see which one of my previous opponents had his account suspended.
It was from an online tournament that I was playing, which makes me wonder if they only check tournaments for cheating. It seems to me that it would take way too much computer power to check the millions of games that are played daily on chess.com.
Oddly enough, this was a game that I lost because my Comcast Internet went down in the middle of my game and stayed down for a couple of hours. What I heard was that the service was down for the entire midwest. This was particularly painful because my opponent was only rated 600.
One way they determine if someone is cheating is to look at the accuracy of their moves with computer analysis. Anything over 98% is probably suspicious, especially if a low rated player does it on multiple games.
The accuracy of my games tends to vary from 60% to 99%, with many games over 90% and the vast majority over 80%. I have a few occasional games that are 98 to 99% accurate and I am sure that chess masters do too. I hope that if I were to have a really good day that they would not think that I was cheating.
I read that cheating on backgammon web sites has mostly been eliminated by checking the games with computer analysis.
Maybe ideally they would use webcams to watch everyone as they play. It is pretty hard to cheat if they are watching you, or even if just your opponent can see you. It's not very private, but they do this for some online matches with top-level players.
2020-06-01
Greenwood chess club five year anniversary today. Online play tonight. Future reopen date.
I started the Greenwood Chess Club five years ago today.
On Monday, February 1st, 2016 we moved the club to the Kroger on South Emmerson.
Meanwhile, on Mondays, I will be available from 5 to 9:30 to play online at this page on chess .com: https://www.chess.com/club/greenwood-chess-club23
This is a page that you can join.
We usually get between 2 to 5 players. I suggest trying to rotate players. You can use the "Members" link to see who is online and challenge them. It is helpful to become friends with other members so as to see their games and more easily challenge them.
On Thursday nights a few of us meet here: https://www.chess.com/club/columbus-chess-club
I hope that everyone is healthy and safe.
2020-05-18
Happy with my accuracy on chess.com in ten minute games
Overall I am pleased with my accuracy on 5+5 (or G/10) games. I played 17 games tonight. I lost two. According to the chess.com analysis feature,
I had 9 games with over 90% accuracy, with my best two games scoring 99%. I have five games in the '80s. Two games in the '70s and my worst game was 61.%
I feel like I am playing more accurately than I have in the past. I'm obviously not perfect, and I do have some bad games. However, the games are almost speed chess. I would be happy to get these percentages in longer games.
I think that the chess.com accuracy numbers might be arbitrary. I also think that if I played tougher competition that I would be more likely to make mistakes because really strong players have ways of pressuring their opponents into making errors. (Imagine playing a pro football team. No matter how good you are, they are going to make you look bad.)
My rating on chess.com has been hovering in the 1900's when it was previously in the mid to high 1800's. Compared to US Chess Federation ratings, I think that this would be equal to somewhere between 2000 and 2150 (Expert) because I have always thought that chess.com ratings were low. I can't be sure though.
2020-05-17
2020-05-07
2020-05-02
English Analysis
Somebody on Facebook was looking for advice on how to play against the English. The first 9 moves is pretty much what I play, and everything after that is very speculative using computer analysis that I just did.
[Event "?"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "2020.05.02"]
[Round "?"]
[White "English"]
[Black "Analysis"]
[Result "*"]
[PlyCount "40"]
[TimeControl "720+3"]
1. c4 e5 2. Nc3 Nf6 3. g3 c6 4. Bg2 d5 5. cxd5
cxd5 {Black might be slightly better. Now if ...} 6. Qb3 Nc6 7. Nxd5 (7. Bxd5 Nd4 8. Bxf7+
Ke7 9. Qc4 b5 10. Nxb5 Nxb5 11. Qxb5 Kxf7) 7... Nd4 8. Nxf6+ Qxf6 9. Qd3 {
Black has slight compensation for his pawn. For example, we can get into some
wild lines after...} Be7 10. e3 (10. Qc3 Bd7 11. Bxb7 Rb8 12. Bd5 Rc8 13. Bc4
O-O 14. b3 Bc6 15. f3 Bb4 16. Qb2 e4) 10... Nc6 11. Ne2 Nb4 12. Qb1 Qa6 13. Be4
f5 14. a3 fxe4 15. axb4 Qc4 16. b3 Qf7 17. Qxe4 O-O 18. f4 (18. O-O Bh3) 18...
exf4 19. Nxf4 (19. Qxf4 Bf6 (19... Qxb3) 20. Ra2 Bh3 (20... b5) (20... Qxb3)) (
19. Rf1 f3 20. Nd4 f2+ 21. Ke2 Bh3) 19... g5 20. Nd5 Bd6 *
[Site "?"]
[Date "2020.05.02"]
[Round "?"]
[White "English"]
[Black "Analysis"]
[Result "*"]
[PlyCount "40"]
[TimeControl "720+3"]
1. c4 e5 2. Nc3 Nf6 3. g3 c6 4. Bg2 d5 5. cxd5
cxd5 {Black might be slightly better. Now if ...} 6. Qb3 Nc6 7. Nxd5 (7. Bxd5 Nd4 8. Bxf7+
Ke7 9. Qc4 b5 10. Nxb5 Nxb5 11. Qxb5 Kxf7) 7... Nd4 8. Nxf6+ Qxf6 9. Qd3 {
Black has slight compensation for his pawn. For example, we can get into some
wild lines after...} Be7 10. e3 (10. Qc3 Bd7 11. Bxb7 Rb8 12. Bd5 Rc8 13. Bc4
O-O 14. b3 Bc6 15. f3 Bb4 16. Qb2 e4) 10... Nc6 11. Ne2 Nb4 12. Qb1 Qa6 13. Be4
f5 14. a3 fxe4 15. axb4 Qc4 16. b3 Qf7 17. Qxe4 O-O 18. f4 (18. O-O Bh3) 18...
exf4 19. Nxf4 (19. Qxf4 Bf6 (19... Qxb3) 20. Ra2 Bh3 (20... b5) (20... Qxb3)) (
19. Rf1 f3 20. Nd4 f2+ 21. Ke2 Bh3) 19... g5 20. Nd5 Bd6 *
2020-04-18
2020-02-28
2020-01-26
P vs. NP - The Biggest Unsolved Problem in Computer Science
https://youtu.be/EHp4FPyajKQ
A crude chess program in order to look 10 half moves ahead would take the hypothetical 25 moves possible and do roughly 25 to the 10nth power calculations, which would take a very long time. However, the alpha-beta algorithm eliminates mathematically unnecessary calculations making this more like 5 or 6 to the tenth power, which is a huge difference.
What surprises me is that program Stockfish reduces this to more like 2 to the N power, which is considerably less. Exactly how it does this I'm not sure, although I have some idea.
I would contend that looking deeper in chess will always involve an exponential increase, by definition. To not be exponential means that we could look infinitely far ahead and completely solve chess. This is kind of the point of the video.
A crude chess program in order to look 10 half moves ahead would take the hypothetical 25 moves possible and do roughly 25 to the 10nth power calculations, which would take a very long time. However, the alpha-beta algorithm eliminates mathematically unnecessary calculations making this more like 5 or 6 to the tenth power, which is a huge difference.
What surprises me is that program Stockfish reduces this to more like 2 to the N power, which is considerably less. Exactly how it does this I'm not sure, although I have some idea.
I would contend that looking deeper in chess will always involve an exponential increase, by definition. To not be exponential means that we could look infinitely far ahead and completely solve chess. This is kind of the point of the video.
2020-01-24
2020-01-11
Chess Level 05: Black to play and win
This ending seems technically very challenging, or at least tactically very challenging.
2020-01-05
Judit Polgár
Many years ago I had the privilege of seeing all three Polgar sisters walking together at the National Open. Almost 20 years ago I played Susan Polgar in a blitz tournament and got creamed.
I noticed that none of the Polgar sisters are on the top Woman players list, even though they really should be. https://ratings.fide.com/top.phtml?list=women
Old joke
A joke I heard maybe 30 to 40 years ago in the
pages of Chess Life:
There are 4 types of chess players:
1. Jewish players.
2. Russian Players.
3. Jewish and Russian players.
4. Everyone else.
During the 13 years I went to the National Open in Vegas, I have lost to people in all 4 categories. I knew that when my 1900+ rated opponent was named Kasparov that I was in trouble.
Best wishes,
John Coffey
pages of Chess Life:
There are 4 types of chess players:
1. Jewish players.
2. Russian Players.
3. Jewish and Russian players.
4. Everyone else.
During the 13 years I went to the National Open in Vegas, I have lost to people in all 4 categories. I knew that when my 1900+ rated opponent was named Kasparov that I was in trouble.
Best wishes,
John Coffey
2020-01-02
2019-12-31
2019-12-28
Chess Analysis Blog: What is the strongest continuation for Black?
From my analysis of my chess games, I think this position is exceptionally interesting ...
2019-12-24
Don't Memorize Moves! Understand your Openings | Road to 2000
This lecture is interesting. I noticed right away a couple of tactical errors on his part, but fortunately, his audience pointed them out.
Since this is a lecture to an audience, he often asks obvious questions and then waits awhile for the audience to answer. Youtube has a feature where you can skip ahead by 10 or more seconds. On the PC it is done with the right arrow key. On the iPhone, it is done by multiple-tapping the right side of the screen.
2019-12-09
2019-11-17
I tried to Master Chess in 30 Days
This guy wanted to see if he could master chess in 30 days. He improved, maybe going from beginner to 1000 or 1100 in 30 days. On day 30 he has a rematch with a 1500 player that does not go well. I had much to say about that game in the comments section of the video.
To really master chess you might want to learn 1. d4. The book "Logical Chess Move by Move" is useful in this regard.
The en-passant rule has to do with the fact that pawns used to only move one square from the start. Moving two squares was a way to speed up the game (and so is castling), so enemy pawns can normally capture your pawn if you move up one square and this is important for allowing pawns to blockade other pawns. En-passant allows a capture as if the pawn had only moved up one square, which maintains the ability to blockade.
My experience is that you are unlikely to reach a memorized opening past move 11. There are some exceptions where certain openings, like the Dragon, don't really get started until around move 10. Everything up to that point frequently follows the same sequence.
In the last game, I don't like 5. Bd3. It is not a great spot for the Bishop, which is serving the purpose of a pawn. The move b2-b4 creates weakness on the C file with a backward pawn on c2. Here your pawn is well guarded but there is a big hole on c3 creating a weak spot that your opponent should try to occupy. Your pieces (bishops and knights) are somewhat passive and in defensive positions, and eventually you will want to get them to better spots. (Grandmasters really like to have active pieces.) Ouch, you got skewered with Ba6! The game is technically lost at that point. The Bb6 response is probably bad. I think that he should respond with Qb7 and try to pin your b6 bishop. He didn't have to capture the queen immediately. Instead of Nb3, the knight taking on e4 makes more sense to me because material is important. When you played Nf6+ (check) you had two attackers on the square and he had two defenders on the square, but you moved one of your attackers to the square meaning that he was going to win the piece. You really need more attackers than defenders on that square to make that move. After he captured the knight it is better not to trade your bishop because you should not trade when you are down material, because your percentage of the total material becomes worse. Likewise, you should not have traded your last piece, but the game is pretty much over by that point. (Overall, you were too anxious to trade pieces. Many beginners do this, but I only trade when I think that it is to my advantage.)
Best wishes,
John Coffey (rated 2016)
My free online chess lessons: http://www.entertainmentjourney.com/index1.htm
Pattern recognition is a huge factor in this game, and on my website I stress doing tactical exercises to improve pattern recognition.
P.S. Your hypothetical example of where trading pawns might be favorable to Black is really bad because after 1. e4 g6 2. d3?! f5? White can play 3. exf5 and then if 3... gxf5???? 4. Qh5# (checkmate), which is a variation on "Fools Mate."
2019-11-16
Won the ICC tournament
I did something that I rarely do, which is win the ICC USCF Online rated tournament.
>uscf You won!!! Congratulations! This is your 11 1st place finish
> During the 5 rounds, you collected 4.5 points
>uscf
> 4.5 john2001plus
> 4.0 pawninthegrass Kausy trivialpursuit BillietheKid
> 3.0 ROWLAND tenchess CL123789 Lo eeec1
> 2.5 mrneale BotanicalKnight
> 2.0 IAlwaysWin Easy-Win fisherino kaps-ak
> 1.5 edwin9015 rjp1888 A4-H5 BIRDSMAN aslan777
> 1.0 eeec2 weakfish
> 0.0 alonzob
>
> __________ __ ______ _ __________ __ ____ _ ____________
> /_ __/ __ \/ / / / __ \/ | / / ____/\ \/ / / __ \ | / / ____/ __ \
> / / / / / / / / / /_/ / |/ / __/ \ / / / / / | / / __/ / /_/ /
> / / / /_/ / /_/ / _ _/ /| / /___ / / / /_/ /| |/ / /___/ _ _/
> /_/ \____/\____/_/ |_/_/ |_/_____/ /_/ \____/ |___/_____/_/ |_|
>
> Congratulations john2001plus and Thanks to all :-)
AlonzoB(TM)(231): john2001plus Congratulations! Thanks to all for playing and I hope you enjoyed the tournament. :-)
john2001plus(231): Thanks to all. Good games!
> During the 5 rounds, you collected 4.5 points
>uscf
> 4.5 john2001plus
> 4.0 pawninthegrass Kausy trivialpursuit BillietheKid
> 3.0 ROWLAND tenchess CL123789 Lo eeec1
> 2.5 mrneale BotanicalKnight
> 2.0 IAlwaysWin Easy-Win fisherino kaps-ak
> 1.5 edwin9015 rjp1888 A4-H5 BIRDSMAN aslan777
> 1.0 eeec2 weakfish
> 0.0 alonzob
>
> __________ __ ______ _ __________ __ ____ _ ____________
> /_ __/ __ \/ / / / __ \/ | / / ____/\ \/ / / __ \ | / / ____/ __ \
> / / / / / / / / / /_/ / |/ / __/ \ / / / / / | / / __/ / /_/ /
> / / / /_/ / /_/ / _ _/ /| / /___ / / / /_/ /| |/ / /___/ _ _/
> /_/ \____/\____/_/ |_/_/ |_/_____/ /_/ \____/ |___/_____/_/ |_|
>
> Congratulations john2001plus and Thanks to all :-)
AlonzoB(TM)(231): john2001plus Congratulations! Thanks to all for playing and I hope you enjoyed the tournament. :-)
john2001plus(231): Thanks to all. Good games!
The time control was 12+3.
Against potentially my toughest opponent (USCF OTB 2100+) I tried to play sharp. However, my record is pretty positive against this guy.
[Event "ICC tourney 1751 (12 3)"]
[Site "Internet Chess Club"]
[Date "2019.11.16"]
[Round "4"]
[White "john2001plus"]
[Black "IAlwaysWin"]
[Result "1-0"]
[ECO "D25"]
[WhiteElo "1719"]
[BlackElo "1654"]
[PlyCount "63"]
[EventDate "2019.??.??"]
[TimeControl "720+3"]
1. Nf3 d5 2. d4 Nf6 3. c4 dxc4 4. e3 b5 5. a4 b4 6. Bxc4 e6 7. O-O Bb7 8. Nbd2
Be7 9. a5 O-O 10. a6 Bd5 11. Ne5 c5 12. Qa4 Bxc4 13. Ndxc4 cxd4 14. exd4 Qd5
15. Be3 Nbd7 16. Nc6 Qxc4 17. Rac1 Qe2 18. Rfe1 Qxb2 19. Nxe7+ Kh8 20. Rb1 Qa3
21. Ra1 Qxa4 22. Rxa4 b3 23. Rb1 Rab8 24. Nc6 Rb6 25. d5 Rb5 26. dxe6 fxe6 27.
Nxa7 Rbb8 28. Nc6 Rbc8 29. a7 Nc5 30. Bxc5 Rxc6 31. Bxf8 b2 32. Ba3 {
Black resigns} 1-0
[Site "Internet Chess Club"]
[Date "2019.11.16"]
[Round "4"]
[White "john2001plus"]
[Black "IAlwaysWin"]
[Result "1-0"]
[ECO "D25"]
[WhiteElo "1719"]
[BlackElo "1654"]
[PlyCount "63"]
[EventDate "2019.??.??"]
[TimeControl "720+3"]
1. Nf3 d5 2. d4 Nf6 3. c4 dxc4 4. e3 b5 5. a4 b4 6. Bxc4 e6 7. O-O Bb7 8. Nbd2
Be7 9. a5 O-O 10. a6 Bd5 11. Ne5 c5 12. Qa4 Bxc4 13. Ndxc4 cxd4 14. exd4 Qd5
15. Be3 Nbd7 16. Nc6 Qxc4 17. Rac1 Qe2 18. Rfe1 Qxb2 19. Nxe7+ Kh8 20. Rb1 Qa3
21. Ra1 Qxa4 22. Rxa4 b3 23. Rb1 Rab8 24. Nc6 Rb6 25. d5 Rb5 26. dxe6 fxe6 27.
Nxa7 Rbb8 28. Nc6 Rbc8 29. a7 Nc5 30. Bxc5 Rxc6 31. Bxf8 b2 32. Ba3 {
Black resigns} 1-0
I had one draw against a lower-rated player. I was winning that game but blew it somehow.
I appeared to be losing my last round game. I was in a "must-win" situation to win the tournament. I thought that if I simplify the ending that I might outfox my opponent.
[Event "ICC tourney 1751 (12 3)"]
[Site "Internet Chess Club"]
[Date "2019.11.16"]
[Round "5"]
[White "pawninthegrass"]
[Black "john2001plus"]
[Result "0-1"]
[ECO "A00"]
[WhiteElo "1528"]
[BlackElo "1727"]
[PlyCount "138"]
[EventDate "2019.??.??"]
[TimeControl "720+3"]
1. g3 e5 2. Bg2 d5 3. d3 Nf6 4. Bg5 Bc5 5. e3 c6 6. d4 exd4 7. exd4 Bd6 8. Ne2
O-O 9. O-O h6 10. Bf4 Bg4 11. f3 Bf5 12. g4 Bg6 13. Qd2 Re8 14. Nbc3 Qc7 15.
Rae1 Nbd7 16. Bxd6 Qxd6 17. h3 b5 18. Nd1 Re7 19. Nf2 Rae8 20. c3 a5 21. Nd3
Bxd3 22. Qxd3 Re3 23. Qd2 Qe7 24. Kf2 Nh7 25. Ng3 Rxe1 26. Rxe1 Qxe1+ 27. Qxe1
Rxe1 28. Kxe1 g6 29. f4 Nhf6 30. Ke2 Kf8 31. Ke3 Ke7 32. g5 hxg5 33. fxg5 Nh7
34. h4 f6 35. gxf6+ Nhxf6 36. Kf4 Nh7 37. Bh3 Nb6 38. b3 Kf6 39. h5 Ng5 40. Bg4
gxh5 41. Nxh5+ Kg6 42. Ng3 Kf6 43. Bf5 Nf7 44. Nh5+ Ke7 45. Bg6 Nd6 46. Ng3 a4
47. Nf5+ Nxf5 48. Bxf5 Kd6 49. Kg5 axb3 50. axb3 c5 51. Bd3 c4 52. bxc4 dxc4
53. Be4 Na4 54. Kf4 Nxc3 55. Bf3 b4 56. Ke3 b3 57. Bh5 b2 58. Bg6 b1=Q 59. Bxb1
Nxb1 60. Ke4 Kc6 61. Ke5 c3 62. Ke6 c2 63. d5+ Kc5 64. d6 c1=Q 65. d7 Qe3+ 66.
Kf7 Qf4+ 67. Ke8 Qe5+ 68. Kd8 Kc6 69. Kc8 Qc7# {White checkmated} 0-1
[Site "Internet Chess Club"]
[Date "2019.11.16"]
[Round "5"]
[White "pawninthegrass"]
[Black "john2001plus"]
[Result "0-1"]
[ECO "A00"]
[WhiteElo "1528"]
[BlackElo "1727"]
[PlyCount "138"]
[EventDate "2019.??.??"]
[TimeControl "720+3"]
1. g3 e5 2. Bg2 d5 3. d3 Nf6 4. Bg5 Bc5 5. e3 c6 6. d4 exd4 7. exd4 Bd6 8. Ne2
O-O 9. O-O h6 10. Bf4 Bg4 11. f3 Bf5 12. g4 Bg6 13. Qd2 Re8 14. Nbc3 Qc7 15.
Rae1 Nbd7 16. Bxd6 Qxd6 17. h3 b5 18. Nd1 Re7 19. Nf2 Rae8 20. c3 a5 21. Nd3
Bxd3 22. Qxd3 Re3 23. Qd2 Qe7 24. Kf2 Nh7 25. Ng3 Rxe1 26. Rxe1 Qxe1+ 27. Qxe1
Rxe1 28. Kxe1 g6 29. f4 Nhf6 30. Ke2 Kf8 31. Ke3 Ke7 32. g5 hxg5 33. fxg5 Nh7
34. h4 f6 35. gxf6+ Nhxf6 36. Kf4 Nh7 37. Bh3 Nb6 38. b3 Kf6 39. h5 Ng5 40. Bg4
gxh5 41. Nxh5+ Kg6 42. Ng3 Kf6 43. Bf5 Nf7 44. Nh5+ Ke7 45. Bg6 Nd6 46. Ng3 a4
47. Nf5+ Nxf5 48. Bxf5 Kd6 49. Kg5 axb3 50. axb3 c5 51. Bd3 c4 52. bxc4 dxc4
53. Be4 Na4 54. Kf4 Nxc3 55. Bf3 b4 56. Ke3 b3 57. Bh5 b2 58. Bg6 b1=Q 59. Bxb1
Nxb1 60. Ke4 Kc6 61. Ke5 c3 62. Ke6 c2 63. d5+ Kc5 64. d6 c1=Q 65. d7 Qe3+ 66.
Kf7 Qf4+ 67. Ke8 Qe5+ 68. Kd8 Kc6 69. Kc8 Qc7# {White checkmated} 0-1
Perhaps the most important thing is that I didn't make any losing blunders that I know of. I haven't analyzed the games yet. I did fail to win a game that I should have won against a lower rated player and I will be examining how I messed that up.
2019-10-24
Mad Queen Chess
Between the years 1475 and 1500, a new variant of chess arose called "Mad Queen Chess." The previously weak queen suddenly became the most powerful piece on the board. This made games more exciting and allowed them to finish faster. This is the version of chess we play today, with only minor differences.
I thought that "Mad Queen Chess" originated in England during the reign of Queen Mary I during the 1500s, but it actually originated in Spain in the late 1400s because Queen Isabella was a very powerful Queen.
I think that chess is being played now more than ever, but it has shifted to online. When I first got on the board of the Utah Chess Association around the year 2000, the membership was down to 500's, compared to the heyday of around 800 to 900. By the time I left Utah, it was 350. Some of this decline happened while I was President of the Utah Chess Association. If it wasn't for the kid's tournaments it would have less than 100.
--
Best wishes,
John Coffey
http://www.entertainmentjourney.com
I thought that "Mad Queen Chess" originated in England during the reign of Queen Mary I during the 1500s, but it actually originated in Spain in the late 1400s because Queen Isabella was a very powerful Queen.
I think that chess is being played now more than ever, but it has shifted to online. When I first got on the board of the Utah Chess Association around the year 2000, the membership was down to 500's, compared to the heyday of around 800 to 900. By the time I left Utah, it was 350. Some of this decline happened while I was President of the Utah Chess Association. If it wasn't for the kid's tournaments it would have less than 100.
--
Best wishes,
John Coffey
http://www.entertainmentjourney.com
2019-10-01
2019-09-15
Checkmate in 4 moves
For those who might be interested, this is a unique mate in 4. I know that some people will say to not focus on the trivial, but I find it interesting because this produces a pattern that I never would have predicted.
2019-09-14
Victory
Play online chess
Click here for 6.Bd2.Click here for 8... c6.
Click here for 13. O-O.
Click here for 22... e5.
Click here for 24... e5.
Click here for 25. Rxd1.
Click here for 25... e5.
Click here for 29. d6.
Click here for 29... Be8.
Click here for 31. d6.
Click here for 31... Re8+.
Click here for 41... Bb6.
Click here for 45... Rg8.
Click here for 52... Bxa4.
Click here for 55. d6.
2019-09-03
4 Year Old Chess Prodigy Misha vs 95 Year Old GM Yuri Averbakh
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=slLUZVqRuOY
The game starts pretty good but has some really big mistakes from both players. I'm not sure how to evaluate the play of the 4-year-old, but it is a good starting point.
Around 2007 or 2008, eight-year-old Kayden Troff had a draw against me in a major Utah tournament. Actually, I was down at least a pawn but figured out how to get to a book drawn ending. Two years later he won the Utah state speed chess championship beating a life master twice. Six years after that he earned the Grandmaster title.
Utah produced a few prodigies, so I was used to losing to kids.
Tonight I had a couple of interesting games against ten-year-old Evan, who has an impressive 1500 rating. The first game I won without too much problem, but the second game was a difficult struggle. Evan plays with a maturity way beyond his years.
Best wishes,
John Coffey
2019-09-02
3 Year Old Chess Prodigy Misha vs Anatoly Karpov
Although a couple of moves are inaccurate, this is still an amazing short game by a 3-year-old against a former world champion. Just the fact that he didn't do anything really bad is an accomplishment.
2019-08-17
Chess Level 0: White to play
I present this for your consideration only because my opponent thought that he had me in checkmate, which I found amusing.
Play chess online
2019-07-26
Simple but fun
[Event "January 2019 Member Main #1 Tournament"]
[Site "https://itsyourturn.com"]
[Date "2019.07.16"]
[Round "3"]
[White "badnite"]
[Black "John Coffey"]
[Result "0-1"]
[Ply "22"]
1. d4 Nf6 2. Nf3 e6 3. Bf4 c5 4. c3 Nc6 5. h3 cxd4
6. cxd4 Qb6 7. b3 Bb4+ 8. Nbd2 Nxd4 9. Ne5 Ne4 10. Nc4
Nf3+ 11. exf3 Qxf2# 0-1
[Site "https://itsyourturn.com"]
[Date "2019.07.16"]
[Round "3"]
[White "badnite"]
[Black "John Coffey"]
[Result "0-1"]
[Ply "22"]
1. d4 Nf6 2. Nf3 e6 3. Bf4 c5 4. c3 Nc6 5. h3 cxd4
6. cxd4 Qb6 7. b3 Bb4+ 8. Nbd2 Nxd4 9. Ne5 Ne4 10. Nc4
Nf3+ 11. exf3 Qxf2# 0-1
2019-06-26
Avoiding simple mistakes (in chess)
My friend was in Utah was asking me how to avoid obvious blunders.
Not meaning to sound like a broken record, this is what I said...
I think that my chess strength varies from about 1800 to 2100. I have a friend, Steve, who likely varies from 1700 to 2000. If you can avoid making simple mistakes then you can probably add a hundred points to your overall strength.
The way that you avoid simple mistakes is pattern recognition. In the 23 years that I have had 1, 2 and 3 move tactics on my website, I have done both the Black and White problems a minimum of 200 times, and possibly much more. I believe in doing simple tactics repeatedly as a way of avoiding mistakes.
--
Best wishes,
John Coffey
http://www.entertainmentjourney.com
Not meaning to sound like a broken record, this is what I said...
I think that my chess strength varies from about 1800 to 2100. I have a friend, Steve, who likely varies from 1700 to 2000. If you can avoid making simple mistakes then you can probably add a hundred points to your overall strength.
The way that you avoid simple mistakes is pattern recognition. In the 23 years that I have had 1, 2 and 3 move tactics on my website, I have done both the Black and White problems a minimum of 200 times, and possibly much more. I believe in doing simple tactics repeatedly as a way of avoiding mistakes.
--
Best wishes,
John Coffey
http://www.entertainmentjourney.com
2019-06-17
Chess game
[Event "Greenwood Chess Club"]
[Site "Kroger"]
[Date "Jun 17, 2019"]
[Round "2"]
[White "Nate Bush"]
[Black "John Coffey"]
[Result "0-1"]
1. d4 d5 2. c4 c6 3. Nc3 Nf6 4. Nf3 dxc4 5. g3 Bf5 6. Ne5 Nbd7 7. Nxc4 Nb6 8.
Ne5 e6 9. Bg2 Bb4 10. O-O Bxc3 11. bxc3 O-O 12. Re1 Nfd7 13. e4 Nxe5 14. exf5
Nec4 15. fxe6 fxe6 16. Rxe6 Nd5 17. Qe2 Qd7 18. Bh3 Rae8 19. Rxe8 Rxe8 20. Qh5
Re1+ 21. Kg2 Qf7 22. Qg5 h6 23. Qd8+ Kh7 24. Qc8 Nde3+ 25. Bxe3 Nxe3+
1-0
Best wishes,
John Coffey
[Site "Kroger"]
[Date "Jun 17, 2019"]
[Round "2"]
[White "Nate Bush"]
[Black "John Coffey"]
[Result "0-1"]
1. d4 d5 2. c4 c6 3. Nc3 Nf6 4. Nf3 dxc4 5. g3 Bf5 6. Ne5 Nbd7 7. Nxc4 Nb6 8.
Ne5 e6 9. Bg2 Bb4 10. O-O Bxc3 11. bxc3 O-O 12. Re1 Nfd7 13. e4 Nxe5 14. exf5
Nec4 15. fxe6 fxe6 16. Rxe6 Nd5 17. Qe2 Qd7 18. Bh3 Rae8 19. Rxe8 Rxe8 20. Qh5
Re1+ 21. Kg2 Qf7 22. Qg5 h6 23. Qd8+ Kh7 24. Qc8 Nde3+ 25. Bxe3 Nxe3+
1-0
Best wishes,
John Coffey
2019-06-04
Anniversaries.
I first went to the Columbus Chess Club 44 years ago *today*. The club started in either 1972 or 1973.
Yesterday, at the Greenwood Chess Club, we celebrated our 4th anniversary.
Best wishes,
John Coffey
Yesterday, at the Greenwood Chess Club, we celebrated our 4th anniversary.
Best wishes,
John Coffey
2019-05-31
McCutcheon Variation
One website spells it "MacCutchoen Variation", but this looked wrong to me, so I did some research and found the person who invented the opening. It was a 19nth century master. His win against the world champion in a simultaneous exhibition brought the opening to the public attention.
[Event "New York simul"]
[Site "New York simul"]
[Date "1885.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Wilhelm Steinitz"]
[Black "John Lindsay McCutcheon"]
[Result "0-1"]
[ECO "C12"]
[PlyCount "99"]
[EventDate "1885.??.??"]
1. e4 e6 2. d4 d5 3. Nc3 Nf6 4. Bg5 Bb4 5. e5 h6 6. Bxf6 gxf6 7. Nf3 f5 8. Bd3
c5 9. dxc5 Bxc5 10. O-O Nc6 11. Qd2 Qe7 12. Qf4 Bd7 13. Nb5 O-O-O 14. c4 Be8
15. Rfc1 Kb8 16. a3 a6 17. Nc3 dxc4 18. Bxc4 Nd4 19. Ne2 Nxf3+ 20. Qxf3 Bc6 21.
Qh3 Ka7 22. b4 Bb6 23. Nc3 Rhg8 24. Bf1 Rd2 25. Nd1 Qg5 26. Rxc6 bxc6 27. Qc3
Qf4 28. Qxc6 Rxd1 29. Qxb6+ Kxb6 30. Rxd1 Qxe5 31. a4 Qf4 32. a5+ Kc7 33. g3
Qxb4 34. Bxa6 Qxa5 35. Be2 Rd8 36. Rc1+ Kd6 37. Rd1+ Ke7 38. Rxd8 Qxd8 39. Kg2
Qd5+ 40. Bf3 Qd3 41. Bb7 Qb5 42. Bf3 Qa5 43. h3 Qb5 44. g4 Qd3 45. Bb7 Kd6 46.
Ba8 Kc7 47. Bf3 fxg4 48. Bxg4 Qd5+ 49. Bf3 Qf5 50. Be2 0-1
[Site "New York simul"]
[Date "1885.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Wilhelm Steinitz"]
[Black "John Lindsay McCutcheon"]
[Result "0-1"]
[ECO "C12"]
[PlyCount "99"]
[EventDate "1885.??.??"]
1. e4 e6 2. d4 d5 3. Nc3 Nf6 4. Bg5 Bb4 5. e5 h6 6. Bxf6 gxf6 7. Nf3 f5 8. Bd3
c5 9. dxc5 Bxc5 10. O-O Nc6 11. Qd2 Qe7 12. Qf4 Bd7 13. Nb5 O-O-O 14. c4 Be8
15. Rfc1 Kb8 16. a3 a6 17. Nc3 dxc4 18. Bxc4 Nd4 19. Ne2 Nxf3+ 20. Qxf3 Bc6 21.
Qh3 Ka7 22. b4 Bb6 23. Nc3 Rhg8 24. Bf1 Rd2 25. Nd1 Qg5 26. Rxc6 bxc6 27. Qc3
Qf4 28. Qxc6 Rxd1 29. Qxb6+ Kxb6 30. Rxd1 Qxe5 31. a4 Qf4 32. a5+ Kc7 33. g3
Qxb4 34. Bxa6 Qxa5 35. Be2 Rd8 36. Rc1+ Kd6 37. Rd1+ Ke7 38. Rxd8 Qxd8 39. Kg2
Qd5+ 40. Bf3 Qd3 41. Bb7 Qb5 42. Bf3 Qa5 43. h3 Qb5 44. g4 Qd3 45. Bb7 Kd6 46.
Ba8 Kc7 47. Bf3 fxg4 48. Bxg4 Qd5+ 49. Bf3 Qf5 50. Be2 0-1
"I have no respect for a man who can spell a word only one way." - Mark Twain.
2019-05-25
john2001plus vs karre1234
Started the ICC USCF Online rated tournament in 3rd place, but finished first. It helped that the one higher rated player fell for a trap in the opening.
I played about as well as I ever have in this time control of 12+3. I was more focussed on positional ideas and I wasn't making tactical blunders that I know of. At that speed, there are going to be inaccurate moves. Most of the games I was in time trouble.
This game below is fun for tactical reasons.
[Site "Internet Chess Club"]
[Date "2019.05.25"]
[Round "2"]
[White "john2001plus"]
[Black "karre1234"]
[Result "1-0"]
[ICCResult "Black checkmated"]
[WhiteElo "1728"]
[BlackElo "1162"]
[Opening "QGD semi-Slav: 5.e3"]
[ECO "D45"]
[NIC "SL.08"]
[Time "17:30:08"]
[TimeControl "720+3"]
1. Nf3 d5 2. d4 Nf6 3. c4 c6 4. e3 e6 5. Nc3 Bb4 6. Bd3 O-O 7. O-O Re8 8.
Bd2 Nbd7 9. Nxd5 Nxd5 10. cxd5 Bxd2 11. dxc6 Ba5 12. cxd7 Bxd7 13. Ne5 Bc8
14. Bxh7+ Kxh7 15. Qh5+ Kg8 16. Qxf7+ Kh8 17. f4 Kh7 18. Rf3 Be1 19. Rxe1
Qh4 20. Rh3 Qxh3 21. gxh3 Rd8 22. Ng4 Bd7 23. Nf6+ Kh8 24. Qh5#
{Black checkmated}
1-0
Although technically I should have won this, I was low on time, so I was glad to get the draw. My opponent is pretty strong, with an OTB rating in the 2100's, so I was somewhat fearful that this game go south on me.
My 15. Ba6 move was very dubious, so I regrouped and tried to find a different plan.
[Event "ICC tourney 1651 (12 3)"]
[Date "2019.05.25"]
[Round "4"]
[White "john2001plus"]
[Black "lagarto300"]
[Result "1/2-1/2"]
[ICCResult "Game drawn by repetition"]
[WhiteElo "1740"]
[BlackElo "1830"]
[Opening "King's Indian: Andersson variation"]
[ECO "E92"]
[NIC "KI.18"]
[Time "18:31:05"]
[TimeControl "720+3"]
1. Nf3 Nf6 2. d4 d6 3. c4 g6 4. Nc3 Bg7 5. e4 O-O 6. Be2 e5 7. dxe5 dxe5 8.
Bg5 h6 9. Qxd8 Rxd8 10. Bxf6 Bxf6 11. Nd5 Rxd5 12. cxd5 c6 13. Rc1 Bg4 14.
dxc6 Nxc6 15. Ba6 Nb4 16. Bc4 Bxf3 17. gxf3 Nc6 18. Rg1 g5 19. Bd5 Nd4 20.
Rg3 Bd8 21. h4 Kg7 22. hxg5 hxg5 23. Kd2 Kf6 24. Rh1 Ba5+ 25. Kd3 Rc8 26.
Rh7 Rc2 27. Rxf7+ Kg6 28. Rxb7 Rd2+ 29. Kc4 Rc2+ 30. Kd3 Rd2+ 31. Kc4 Rc2+
32. Kd3 Rd2+ {Game drawn by repetition} 1/2-1/2
2019-05-24
I wrote this on Facebook
Of all the chess players that I have known, the name that sticks out the most is "Steve". I have known so many Steves who play chess, in both Indiana and Utah.
Best wishes,
John Coffey
2019-05-22
2019-05-21
2019-05-06
Chess Game
[Event "Greenwood Chess Club"]
[Site "Kroger"]
[Date "May 6, 2019"]
[Round "2"]
[White "Brayden"]
[Black "John Coffey"]
[Result "0-1"]
1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 d6 3. Bb5+ Nd7 4. O-O a6 5. Bd3 g6 6. c3 Bg7 7. Bc2 e5 8. d4
Ne7 9. d5 O-O 10. Bg5 f6 11. Be3 f5 12. Ng5 Nf6 13. exf5 Nxf5 14. Ne6 Bxe6 15.
dxe6 Qe7 16. Bb3 b5 17. Bd5 Nxd5 18. Qxd5 Nxe3 19. fxe3 Rxf1+ 20. Kxf1 Rf8+ 21.
Kg1 Re8 22. Qc6 Bh6 23. e4 Be3+ 24. Kh1 Bc1 25. a4 Rf8 26. h3 Qf6 27. Na3 Qf1+
28. Kh2 Bf4+ 29. g3 Bxg3+ 30. Kxg3 Qf2+ 31. Kg4 Qf4#
0-1
[Site "Kroger"]
[Date "May 6, 2019"]
[Round "2"]
[White "Brayden"]
[Black "John Coffey"]
[Result "0-1"]
1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 d6 3. Bb5+ Nd7 4. O-O a6 5. Bd3 g6 6. c3 Bg7 7. Bc2 e5 8. d4
Ne7 9. d5 O-O 10. Bg5 f6 11. Be3 f5 12. Ng5 Nf6 13. exf5 Nxf5 14. Ne6 Bxe6 15.
dxe6 Qe7 16. Bb3 b5 17. Bd5 Nxd5 18. Qxd5 Nxe3 19. fxe3 Rxf1+ 20. Kxf1 Rf8+ 21.
Kg1 Re8 22. Qc6 Bh6 23. e4 Be3+ 24. Kh1 Bc1 25. a4 Rf8 26. h3 Qf6 27. Na3 Qf1+
28. Kh2 Bf4+ 29. g3 Bxg3+ 30. Kxg3 Qf2+ 31. Kg4 Qf4#
0-1
2019-04-24
Online chess and cheating.
Online chess is more popular than ever. However, it is fairly easy to cheat. For example, my phone plays better chess than most, if not all, professionals. For this reason, chess servers crack down on this kind of behavior with sophisticated cheat detection methods, and chess.com is probably the best at this.
I played a chess.com USCF Online Rated tournament Friday night where I was doing pretty well until the final round where I lost to a lower rated player. As a result, I got 4th place. However, chess.com has analysis tools that show how well a player played. My opponent who beat me played 99.6% accurate against me, which is unlikely that anything less than a computer could achieve this result. His other games showed similar accuracy, so I reported my opponent to chess.com and they agreed that he was cheating. They not only deleted his account, but it is my understanding that my loss will be reversed which will put me in first place.
This is about the 5th time that this has happened to me. Cheating seems to be rampant, despite the servers attempts to crack down on it.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)