Down Under Knight

Tribute to Ian Rogers in the Monthly Magazine

2007-11-26T19:39:00.000-08:00

For those reading this in Australia - check out the latest copy of the Monthly magazine.

My wife, Leigh Sales, has written a tribute to Ian Rogers - Australia's highest rated chess player.

The retirement of Ian Rogers was a shock to many, but as Leigh's article explains - it was a decision he made with much regret.

If doctors say the game is killing you, how are you supposed to respond to that?

Farewell to Ian Rogers - a true champion!

Another prize-winning tournament

2007-11-25T21:19:00.000-08:00

I haven't written a blog entry for a while, but I should add at least one final entry to complete the seven circles saga.

I won a tournament!

Yes, it's true. I won the U1200 division of the Gosford Open. Even if I had been competing the U1400 division I still would have won.

It's really clear to me now that tactics is all you really need to worry about up to about a 1500 rating.

I'm probably going to take a little break from tournament chess for a while, but it does feel good to go out on a high note.

Open tournaments stink

2007-10-04T00:44:00.000-07:00

I hate open tournaments.

There. I said it. I've been keeping that little thought deep inside for way too long.

For someone with a low rating like me, the first four or five rounds are an utter waste of time. It's only by the final few rounds that I'm even playing people even remotely close to my strength.

In the USA, because they had more players, they were able to split the players up into groups: U1200, U1400, U1600 and so on. That way - in a seven round tournament you at least got to play seven people that were within 200 rating points of your rating.

The only consolation for me is that at least I'm getting the hang of pacing myself and saving my best games for the last few rounds where it really counts.

Hard work pays off

2007-10-02T00:06:00.000-07:00

For all those who were dubious about the seven circles - doubt no longer.

In my last two tournaments, I finished 3rd in the Blayney U1200 division and 2nd in last weekend's Ryde-Eastwood U1400 division.

To make sure that my recent successes were due to tactics and not anything else - I purposely changed my normal openings. I switched from the French to the Sicilian and from the Queen's Gambit Accepted to the Kings Indian.

I can assure you, I know only five moves of each of my new openings - so the rest is purely down to tactical training and the confidence that comes from repeating common positions over and over again.

I've got at least two more tournaments between now and the end of the year - so I'll keep you posted on progress.

Final Round Blues

2007-09-23T18:51:00.000-07:00

I've noticed a really worrying trend in the tournaments I've played this year:

I never win in the final round.

This year's tournament record for my final games looks something like this:

Jan - Lost in 19 moves

Feb - Lost in 60 moves

June - Draw in 48 moves

July - Lost in 30 moves

Sep - Lost in 26 moves

With the Swiss paring system, by the last round or two you should be playing people that are fairly close to your ability. To lose so many late round games has two effects:

Firstly, it indicates I probably need to work on my endurance and ability to recover in between games. Given many of the games barely last 30 moves - my September last round game was decided by a tactic on move 9 - I probably need to make a special effort to continue to concentrate in the later rounds.

Secondly, it's terrible for my rating. To lose to someone rated 2000 in round one is no big deal. (In fact, it's entirely to be expected.) But in the final rounds of a Swiss tournament, when your oppenent has a rating pretty close to your own, it is devastating.

Any ideas on how to train for this situation?

How do you stay alert during the final rounds of a long tournament? What are you tricks? Care to share any advice?

Are there ways to improve your "staying power"? Perhaps a bit of chess viagra might be in order. ;)

You still have to play chess

2007-09-18T20:59:00.000-07:00

Thanks for the comment from Pale Morning Dun who read my post on the 8 ways to guarantee you finish the seven circles and also mentioned this vital piece of information:

You have to play games!

Very true. You can't make your rating go up unless you play rated games and win.

I can definitely see the standard of my chess improving - far fewer games where I blunder a piece or a pawn. And the beauty part is, I'm actually winning and drawing against people that are 400+ points above me.

Australian ratings only come out once every three months, but hopefully I'll get a chance to play in a bunch of rated games between now and the end of the year and see some fruit from my "labors of de la Maza".

Blayney Chess Open Results

2007-09-11T16:36:00.000-07:00

Last weekend I had a chance to play in the first ever Blayney Open.

The air was thick with competition, with not only the chess players ready to do battle over the board, but the local rugby union grand final was also in full swing.

For the record, the Blayney Rams defeated the Molong Magpies which sent the locals into a frenzy. The Blayney Bowling Club rapidly transformed from a quiet chess-playing venue to a rowdy pub scene. Jostling your way to the front of the bar was almost as difficult as swindling a win against the local players.

There were thirteen unrated players in the tournament, which bodes well for NSWCA membership numbers. For many people, this competition marked their return to chess after many years "taking a break".

Top seed Lee Jones took out the Premier Division with a perfect six round record. By my calculations, Gary Losh won the Major Division, with Helen Aylwin and Ramon Aich sharing the Minor Division first prize.

Slavko Kojic was the highest scoring unrated player with an impressive score of four points from the six rounds.

Brian Jones won the after-dinner blitz competition and gave these sage words of advice: "The secret is - try not to lose games otherwise it's too tough to make up the ground and win." Hmm - thanks for the tip. I'll keep that in mind. ;)

I managed to sneak into 3rd place for my division, despite an error filled final round game against Helen Aylwin.

Big thanks to Phil Bourke for organising the event!

Hopefully I'll get an opportunity to play in Blayney next year too.

8 Steps to Guarantee You Finish the Seven Circles

2007-09-05T20:07:00.000-07:00

In the book Rapid Chess Improvement, Michael de la Maza presents a method of intensive chess tactical study that allowed him to improve 400 points in 400 days.

But a lot of people have difficulty in accomplishing such a grueling schedule of problem solving. I certainly did. It took me eight attempts before I completed it. Now I've done it twice and I'm currently doing my third.

This advice is geared to those who have tried and failed, or just need to know the best way to complete a seven circles exercise.

1. Choose the right problem set
Especially if this is your first seven circles, just pick a small set of easy problems. The CT-ART 3.0 set has 1209 exercises which end up in very difficult "mate in nine" problems towards the end. Unless you're already rated 1800, I would suggest just focussing on simpler problems that win material or checkmate in three or four moves maximum.

Some problem sets I like:
Chess Tactics for Students by John Bain with some personal modifications
Winning Chess Tactics for Juniors by Lou Hays
1001 Brilliant Ways to Checkmate by Fred Reinfeld
1001 Winning Chess Sacrifices and Combinations by Fred Reinfeld

2. Be conservative with your time
The number of problems per day doubles for each circle, so it's very easy to get yourself into a situation where you overcommit your time. Yes - eventually you get faster at solving the problems, but not for the first three circles. If you think you can dedicate 90 minutes a day doing tactics, start your first circle doing 20 minutes a day.

That way, the second circle will take 40 minutes per day and by the third circle you will be working 70 to 90 minutes per day.

3. Schedule by working backwards
It's ridiculous to say you're going to do 700 problems in 45 days unless you know how long it takes to solve them. Do a few days of the circle one first. By that stage you will know how many problems you can do in 20 minutes per day (see previous point about being conservative with your time), and then let that determine how long the first circle will take.

Once you know how many days the first circle will take, you can schedule the second, third and fourth and so on until you're doing all of the problem set in one single day.

4. Get into a habit
By now you're saying: "20 minutes of easy two-move mates? That doesn't sound like it will help at all!" Even if you don't take my word that starting short and easy is the best way to guarantee you actually finish a seven circles, think of it another way.

Just treat the first circle as getting into the habit of doing tactics every day. The fact that the commitment seems so small makes it easier to do until you're well established in the habit of doing tactics every single day.

5. Do it in one sitting
While this is easier for the early circles, it's definitely an advantage to do all the tactics in one sitting. It usually takes me a few problems to warm up and get into a groove. Once I'm there - it's better to keep on going than to stop and try to find time to start again later in the day.

6. No dates - just days
Whatever method you're using to track your progress, leave the date blank beside each row. I only fill in the day/date column after I complete the problems for the day. If you pre-print the dates and you miss a day, the dreaded guilt sets in and you feel the need to catch up and do twice as much the next day. Which is fine. But I guarantee if you miss more than one day, you'll worry about being so far behind that you'll just quit altogether.

Skip a day every so often if you have to, but don't feel under pressure to catch up. Just continue from where you left off.

7. Tell people about it
Telling people that you're embarking on a serious (and difficult) course of chess study that requires a lot of time commitment does two things. Not only does it make you more likely to finish the series but it's also important to let the people you live with know that when you're sitting on the couch with your head in "1001 Brilliant Ways to Checkmate" you're not just avoiding housework.

While I certainly endorse studying tactics as a great way to get out of doing the vacuuming, if your partner, flatmate or kids know this is an important program that does have an end date, they are likely to be more understanding.

8. Make up a fantasy to keep you going
Find a way of motivating yourself to keep going when it gets tough.

For me, I equated the seven circles with the different chess ratings classes of E, D, C, B, A, Expert and Master. In my mind I thought: "If I quit in circle two, I will never get a rating higher than class D." Circle four = class B and so on up to Master. By the time I was doing the last circle I was thinking: "Wow, this will really help me become a Master." And believe me, there is nothing that makes you feel more like a master than buzzing through an entire tactics book in a single session with 99% accuracy.

Follow those eight guidelines and you will have an excellent chance of completing one of Michael de la Maza's famed seven circle exercises.

Good luck!

Blayney Chess Open

2007-09-04T21:02:00.000-07:00

Wow.

You know you've reached minor (and I do mean minor) chess celebrity status when you phone in your entry for a chess tournament and the TD says, "Oh yeah - I know you! You're that Down Under Knight guy! I read your chess blog."

It's not the first time it's happened either. Guess I didn't count on so many people reading this blog. I think readership must be into the double figures by now!

In any case - thanks to Phil Bourke for organising the Blayney Chess Open. See you (and all my dedicated readers) at Blayney.

That's what happens when you put your stuff out on the ol' internet.

Is Chess a Sport?

2007-08-30T00:01:00.000-07:00

In his blog ChessExpress, Shaun Press asks the question: Is chess a sport?

I simply can't resist a full reply.

Chess is not a sport because there is no skill in the physical execution of the moves.

By that I mean, if I want to move rook to e1 I just pick it up and move it to e1. I can do that repeatedly with 100% precision. Every time. You can do it with a mouse. If you're playing blindfolded you can even do it just by saying the words: "Rook to e1".

Contrast that with tennis. I can't just think "medium paced serve into the top left corner" and have the execution of that move go perfectly every time.

The tactics and strategy of chess and tennis certainly require plenty of skill, but the difference is in the execution of the basic moves.

It's actually one of the things I love about chess.

Once the mechanics of playing the perfect forehand or swinging the perfect nine-iron chip shot are out of the equation, the game is entirely about tactics and strategy.

Incidentally, this was the same argument I had with a friend about whether motor racing was a sport. At first my reaction was no, but then when argued that there was a great deal of skill in the physical execution of the moves, I had to concede.

So motor racing is a sport. Chess is not.

If the amount of sweating was the only criteria to classify it as a sport, I can assure you that based on my own experience, chess would definitely qualify.

How to turn enthusiasm into achievement

2007-08-15T19:55:00.000-07:00

If you're anything like me, after reading Michael de la Maza's book Rapid Chess Improvement you were probably filled with enthusiasm, energy and zeal.

400 ratings points in 400 days. That's sounds like something I could do.

And even though de la Maza is very upfront about the time commitment you nod knowingly and say to yourself, "Sure I know it will be tough - but I'm up for the challenge".

Completing seven passes through a block of 1200 chess tactics, each circle getting successively quicker until on the last day of the program you're doing all of them in one sitting seems like an achievable goal.

And then, if you're anything like me, you fail. And then you fail again, and fail again, and again, and again.

After your ninth attempt you start to get the feeling this is too difficult and you give up all hope.

Or you can do what I did, which was. Try something smaller and simpler.

Studying tactics with five, six and seven move combinations is great, but the most powerful idea of the seven circles is about developing chess memory.

Anyone serious about chess tactics needs to have between 600 and 1000 board patterns memorized "cold". Positions that:

occur with some degree of frequency in real games

form the building blocks of bigger combinations

The only two seven circles programs I've been able to complete have been based along those lines - easy problems and plenty of them.

The problem sets I used John Bain's Chess Tactics for Students (421 basic problems) and Lou Hays' Winning Chess Tactics for Juniors (534 fairly easy problems).

Doing a smaller set of easier problems is not a waste of time - I assure you.

Firstly, completing a seven circles exercise with fewer easier problems builds your confidence and gives you a sense of achievement. You can't underestimate how motivating it is to finish something to completion - no matter how small it is.

Even doing a seven circles exercise on a smaller set of easy problems is not so simple. For me, the challenge of the Bain set was about discipline. Getting into the habit of practising tactics every day.

The challenge of the Hays set was about focus and concentration. These problems were not trivial and I had to think carefully about possible refutations of the "obvious" moves.

The other great advantage is that some of the basic problems you memorized in these exercises do appear in other chess tactics books. About 15% of the tactics in the Hays book I'd seen before (and knew instantly) in the Bain book.

I'm anticipating that in the next seven circles I attempt with Fred Reinfeld's 1001 Brilliant Chess Sacrifices and Combinations I'll instantly recognise many "old friends" from the Lou Hays book.

So before you quit altogether on the grand goal of completing the seven circles as specified by Michael de la Maza, turn your enthusiasm into achievement, build your base of tactics and make things easier for yourself when you do select a more difficult problem set in the future.

What a great finish

2007-08-12T22:02:00.000-07:00

It was a pretty eventful weekend for me.

Not only did I finish the seven circles through Winning Chess Tactics for Juniors, but I also did a personal best in the City to Surf fun run. 14km in 74 minutes means I qualify to start with the front-runners in next year's event.

That's not my picture by the way - for those who were curious. I didn't dress like Superman, Batman, Papa Smurf or Borat. Just regular running gear for me.

But you don't want to hear about my mediocre running career. You want to hear about my mediocre chess playing career!

I can confirm that getting through all 534 tactical problems in one sitting was challenging, but it took less time than I thought. Two and a half hours and I was done.

For the record, my accuracy went up, mostly due to recognising the patterns and remembering what the answer was. It felt like cheating ... or is that the whole point?

Circle 1 - 65% correct

Circle 2 - 69% correct

Circle 3 - 83% correct

Circle 4 - 91% correct

Circle 5 - 95% correct

Circle 6 - 98% correct

Circle 7 - 99% correct

I'll write a few blogs a bit later on some insights I've gained out of completing my second successful "Seven Circles" exercise, but for now I'm just relaxing and steadying myself for the next challenge.

Fifth circle complete

2007-08-07T16:37:00.000-07:00

Only two circles left so now I just have to dig in and get ready for a few days of really long tactics sessions.

It takes me between 60 and 90 minutes to do 130 problems, which means I could be looking down the barrel of at least a few three hour sessions.

Should be fun.

Again, my accuracy keeps going up:

Circle 1 - 65% correct

Circle 2 - 69% correct

Circle 3 - 83% correct

Circle 4 - 91% correct

Circle 5 - 95% correct

If I was a gambling man, I'd say the number of tactics I get right in the next two circles will probably go down, but in these last two circles I'm just going for speed and pattern recognition.

Patterns emerge

2007-08-06T17:04:00.000-07:00

After so many days of practising this set of tactics, it's amazing to see these patterns just leap off the page.

It literally takes no more than a couple of seconds before you think, "Hm, a lot of pawns there. What if I push one to bump the knight away. Oh wait! Removal of the guard!"

It's like lines appear on the board directing traffic and the correct flow of pieces.

"The h6 square is unprotected, I wonder can I drop my queen in there. Oh wait! He can't protect g7 if I distract his queen!"

Just that sort of "aha" moment is making the practice itself very enjoyable.

I've still got a lot of hard work left, but it's seeming less like work and more like fun!

Fourth circle is complete

2007-08-03T21:53:00.000-07:00

The fourth circle is now complete.

Here comes the hard part, the final three circles, each completed in four days, two days and finally one day.

My accuracy is increasing, but unless I want to spend two hours each morning on tactics I'm going to need to blitz through the problems as quickly as I can.

Circle 1 - 65% correct

Circle 2 - 69% correct

Circle 3 - 83% correct

Circle 4 - 91% correct

Once I'm done with Winning Chess Tactics for Juniors I think I'll move on to 1001 Winning Chess Sacrifices and Combinations by Fred Reinfeld.

Going back to club games

2007-08-02T20:29:00.000-07:00

I'm nearly through the fourth circle and everything is progressing well.

The one thing that struck me the other day though, is not really related to studying tactics, but is more about getting good practice at long games.

One thing I'm concerned about is in a typical open swiss-paired tournament run in Sydney where there are only 60 players, I always have:

two rounds where I have not much chance of winning,

two rounds where I'm paired against very easy opposition and

only a few rounds of "equal" games.

So I've decided to go back to playing in club tournaments, because there are more opportunities to play people of your rating.

In order to see results from practising tactics, it would be better to play nine rounds against 1300's than to play in a tournament of people with mixed ratings.

Anyhow - that's the theory. I'll see how it works out.

Third circle is complete

2007-07-25T14:49:00.000-07:00

Just a quick post to announce that I've finished the third circle of the Lou Hays tactics book.

Powered through the 534 problems in nine days and actually increased my accuracy.

Circle 1 - 65% correct

Circle 2 - 69% correct

Circle 3 - 83% correct

Next circle will have me completing the whole book in six days. So speed and recognition are going to be critical.

Wish me luck!

NSWCA July Weekender

2007-07-23T04:56:00.000-07:00

Another tournament, another kick in the pants.

Even though the score didn't reflect it, I think played better in this tournament than the last one.

Not too many drastic blunders, but still the result was that I got beaten by the people rated higher than me and held my own against people rated lower.

But still - that's no way to improve.

Results went something like this:

Round 1 - 1611 player (lost) although at least one person watching from the sidelines thought it might have been a draw

Round 2 - 1449 player (lost)

Round 3 - 990 player (draw - bishops of opposites colour)

Round 4 - unrated player (won) mostly because my opponent didn't see a way to sacrifice his rook to allow him to queen his pawn on the 7th rank

Round 5 - 1420 player (lost) we actually saw an endgame and a pawn promotion race in this one

Round 6 - 860 player (draw) after being down two pawns, then up a pawn, then equal, this rollercoaster ended when all the pieces came off the board with our pawns locked together

Round 7 - 1374 player (lost) this was pretty dreadful and involved missing one of his checks and later dropping a piece on move 24

2/7 is not something to write home about, but I think I'm playing more careful considered chess.

A couple of learnings:

Now that I'm making a conscious decision to slow down my thought process and consider all checks, candidates and threats I think I was playing a bit slow for the time control. In all but the last game I stopped writing my moves down because I was low on time.

After doing so many hundreds of chess exercises where each position had a chance to win material or mate, I was surprised to see how many of the positions had no tactics in them.

It's making me reconsider my approach to training and think that maybe the pendulum does need to swing back to general principles and some positional play.

Perhaps I should put this question out there:

When you look at a position and there are no tactics - what do you do? Once you've exhausted all the checks, captures and threats, is there any algorithm or thought process people use to come up with candidate moves?

Let me know what you think.

Ready for Saturday's tournament

2007-07-19T16:49:00.000-07:00

Last day before the July weekender tournament in Sydney.

Here comes the part where we see whether all the tactics I've been doing is merely an amusing theoretical exercise, or whether it addresses the critical question:

Does the reptition of tactical puzzles help in winning games?

Brushed up on some openings last night (just so I don't get caught out in the first eight moves), so now I should be just a matter of having a red wine, getting some sleep and waking up fresh for Saturday.

Time to put Michael de la Maza to the test.

I destroyed my copy of Bain

2007-07-17T17:09:00.000-07:00

A while ago, as penance for (yet another) dreadful tournament in Philadelphia, I took my copy of Bain and destroyed it.

Dan Heisman, my chess coach at the time, said that Chess Tactics for Students by John Bain was a good book to drill basic tactics, but he made two additional points:

Don't look at any of the supporting material for each diagram (other than White to Move). Otherwise the problems are just too easy.

The tactics in Bain are laid out by chapter headings like Knight Fork, Pin and Back Rank Mate - which also makes it too easy.

The solution? Destroy the book!

Or more accurately, I took the book to Kinkos and asked the guy to chop the book up so that all I had by the end was 421 little diagrams with nothing more than "White to Move" and the problem number written on them.

I shuffled up all the diagrams, and then photocopied them so they fit nine to a page.

Slap them in a binder, stick the answers in the back and presto!

Now I have a neat, random, easy problem set which is actually thinner and more useful than the original book.

And that's what I used to do my first ever successful "seven circles" exercise!

I've been tagged!

2007-07-16T00:41:00.000-07:00

Image credits: turtblu

What is your blogger name and URL?
My real name is Phil Willis, but I blog as Down Under Knight at downunderknight.blogspot.com

How did you learn about the circles?
I saw Rapid Chess Improvement in the Barnes and Noble just near Rittenhouse Square in Philadelphia.

It was just over the street from where I used to play some of the locals in the park. I don't think I won any money, but I did have a lot of fun.

When did you learn about the circles?
My history of attempting the seven circles of chess tactics looks something like this:

Nov 2003 - Seven Circles using CT-ART (failed)

Dec 2004 - Seven Circles using Bain (failed)

Apr 2005 - Seven Circles using Hays (failed)

Feb 2006 - Seven Circles using CT-ART (failed)

Jan 2007 - Seven Circles using Bain (success)

Jun 2007 - Seven Circles using Hays (in progress)

How long have you been going through the circles or how long did it take if you finished?
It took me 34 days to work through the 400+ relatively easy problems in Bain. By the last circle, I could do the entire problem set in about an hour.

How is your progress?
I've been pretty consistent (surprising for me!) and I haven't missed a day. Although now I am venturing in to the territory where the urge to quit is strong.

Does working with the circles alone work for chess improvement, or is it more helpful to join the Knights?
Joining the Knights and blogging about it means that I have more reason not to give up, but having said that - I was able to finish one series of seven circles without their help. All I needed was four failed attempts. ;)

Are you a scholastic player?
No - but I've been beaten by plenty of them. ;)

Would you recommend the circles to a scholastic player?
Sure, but I'd make two points.

Firstly, scholastic players probably have more time available to devote to chess study than middle-aged working guys with wives and families and lives (and all that jazz). So the time commitment required might be easier for them.

Secondly, practice needs to be fun, otherwise it's just another chore a kid needs to do - like making the bed and stacking the dishwasher. If they can get past those issues - it would be great for a young person learning chess to do.

Do you use other training methods to supplement the circles?
I don't do too much other chess specific training - other than play in OTB tournaments regularly to practice what I've learned. For me the other essential training comes from meditation, running and playing other games like poker, Scrabble and video games.

Any general comments about chess training or the circles?
I can't claim any credit for naming these elements, but I have to thank my former chess coach Dan Heisman for listing what he calls the "big five":

Safety - (in other words "tactics")

Piece Activity - use all your pieces

Thought Process - play real chess

Time Management - use all your time every game

General Guidelines

Heisman believes if you don't do all of those reasonably well, then you're automatically making improvement much harder for yourself.

For example, if you are tactically brilliant, but your thought process doesn't include looking for unstoppable threats from your opponent then obviously doing an extra 100 hours of tactical study will not cure that problem.

Check out the whole article here.

Who is next to be tagged?
I tag The Retired Pawn.

Finished the second circle

2007-07-15T20:39:00.000-07:00

Good news: Finished the second circle through the Lou Hays tactics book today!

Bad news: Not only are there five circles to go, but my accuracy didn't really improve that much.

I'm up to 69% correct as opposed to 65% the first time through.

I think I might just go through the book again and either just focus on the ones I got wrong or do the second circle again at the same pace, but this time paying closer attention to accuracy.

Another milestone down in the journey and one step closer to finishing Michael de la Maza's seven circles of chess tactics idea.

Time constraints

2007-07-12T18:35:00.000-07:00

So I'm nearly at the end of the second circle, and I'm worried that the next circle will be the toughest.

Even though I'm getting better, I don't really feel like I'm recognising the tactical patterns by sight.

I'm spending about an hour each morning to go through 38 tactical problems, and I have concerns that in the third circle I won't be that much faster than I am now. Which means I'll look forward to more like 90 minutes of tactics a day.

Maybe it's too early to judge. Or maybe I should just repeat the second circle using the same time constraints.

Or maybe I should stop whining and do some more tactics?

Why did the pawn cross the road?

2007-07-12T00:22:00.000-07:00

This morning I watch a parent with their small child crossing the road.

The parent told the little girl, "Now we look both ways before crossing the street. Then where there are no cars, off we go."

It was a classic example of needing a process to do something simple when you are still learning.

My own weakness in chess tournaments at the moment is getting hit by the bus when I forget to look both ways before crossing.

If you were to ask an adult, "Do you actively think about looking both ways before you cross the road?" most would (hopefully) say, "No not really - but I'm definitely aware of what's going on when I cross."

If you were to ask most grandmasters, "Do you actively look for checks, captures and threats from your opponents before and after you decide on your move?" most would probably respond in the same way.

I'm sure they're probably unconsciously aware of what is happening when they are deciding on their move.

But for the chess equivalent of small children (like me) an explicit thought process is definitely going to be useful until I stop venturing haphazardly into heavy traffic.

Jennifer Shahade Simultaneous Game

2007-07-09T20:54:00.000-07:00

In October 2005, I went to Philadelphia to attend a lecture and book signing by International Master Jennifer Shahade.

Jennifer is two-time US Women's Chess Champion and her latest book Chess Bitch is a look at a pursuit dominated by men. As well as profiling female chess pioneers throughout history it poses the question: "Why don't more girls play chess?"

As part of the promotion, forty lucky people who bought her book were able to play a game against her. I signed up and prepared to get my ass whooped.

By a girl.

I'd never even played a titled Fide Master before, let alone an International Master (the one rank below the coveted and glorious Grand Master title).

I was super-keen!

All I prayed for was that I wouldn't be eliminated first.

The cast of characters that show up to play chess at tournaments is so varied and peculiar that it probably warrants its own dedicated story, but let me tell you about Al who cornered me before the book reading.

Al and I began with some small talk. For chess players that inevitably concerns your official chess rating.

Your chess rating is your badge, your identity, your rank and your status in the chess world.

Every social group has a phrase to determine pecking order and how to act.

Kids in a playground ask "How old are you?"
Prisoners ask "What're you in for?"
Republicans ask "What does your father do for a living?"

Tournament chess players ask "What's your rating?".

"My rating is in the basement at the moment I'm afraid," I ventured.

Al's response was to tell me he was reading Dostoyevsky and that I should try reading him for inspiration. It wasn't until later that I realized he thought I said my writing was in the basement.

Fortunately the conversation was over as quickly as it started when Al produced the second non-sequitur in as many minutes: "OK - there are such things as a full bladder" and left.

The lecture was interesting. Jennifer read from a portion of her book where she discussed Reuben Fine's provocative theories of gender in chess from his book The Psychology of the Chess Player.

"The profuse phallic symbolism of chess provides some fantasy gratification of the homosexual wish, particularly the desire for mutual masturbation. This is, of course, completely repressed."

Um yeah. Completely repressed. Thanks Reuben. Pretty racy stuff for 1956 though.

Fine had reduced the game of chess to an oedipal struggle between a boy and his father. The psycho-sexual symbolism of "mating" the king, the most impotent (yet important) piece on the board was not lost on him.

Fine even ventured to suggest that even the rule about not touching your piece until you're ready to move was a veiled warning against *ahem* self-abuse.

Or maybe he just had a dirty mind.

Listening to Jennifer expound on this topic fraught with sexual overtones and double entendres was made only the more fascinating by the presence of about half a dozen pre-teen children in the audience.

I was sitting next to eight-year-old Odette Moolten (and before you ask: yes I've played her before and yes she has beaten me) and I don't know what was more priceless - the confused glances she shot her father or the squirming he did in his chair.

After the Q&A I waited in line to get my book signed and said when it was my turn to approach the author's official book signing chair and book signing desk:

"Jen - thanks for coming out!"

I cringed at my unoriginality.

Star struck, I had just blurted out the first thing that came into my head. Even worse, after her gender defying choice of career and explicitly Freudian book reading, the phrase "coming out" was even more inappropriate.

Jennifer asked my name then autographed my copy of Chess Bitch: "Phil - thanks for coming out! Jen"

Wait a second. That was my line to you! And that's what you wrote in my copy of your book?

I was at least expecting a droll chess witticism, such as:

"Castle early, castle often!"

"Chess players do it with queens!"

"Future pawn star!"

Bitch indeed!

Almost game time and even the flagrantly Freudian Fine knows: You can't play chess on an empty stomach. I went downstairs to the Temple University cafeteria for a hoagie.

The charming lady behind the sandwich bar loaded half a pound of ham onto a long roll and asked without apparent irony, "Is that enough sweetie?". I tried not to laugh and said that was plenty.

She asked if I was from Philly.

"Not originally. I'm from Australia, but I've been living here for four years."

"I thought so! I could tell by your accent. Plus, you look like a cowboy."

It's moments like these that make me love this country so much.

Game time! The tables were corralled in a circle and the exhibition match began.

The rules for this simultaneous match were:

Jennifer would play the white pieces on all the boards

When Jen arrived at your board, you would make your move in front of her, then she would make her move

If you are not ready to move when Jennifer reaches your table, you may pass - but you can only pass twice in the game

Handshakes were exchanged. The games started.

What struck me was how Jennifer was demonstrably delighted with the whole process. She was beaming.

She had good-hearted giggles at some of the more bizarre opening moves people played. I honestly don't think Jen was laughing at the players but genuinely finding humor in the board itself.

The more you play, the more you see. It might sound strange but chess games can be beautiful, aggressive, funny, chaotic or even poetic.

To see someone at the top of their game truly enjoying what they did for a living was an absolute treat.

She was generous to the kids. To the little African-American kid who seemed only interested in moving his pawns she spun the board around and told him it was mate in one, but that he should try to find the winning move by the time she came back.

To his credit he found the killer move, but then Jen added: "Good job! But that still counts as a win for me!" She grinned and kept moving. At least I wasn't the first person eliminated.

"Are those for me?" Jen pointed at the open packet of M&Ms I'd laid out on the table.

"Sure," I said, but how do you know I haven't poisoned them? Bwa hah hah haaah!

Jen grabbed a handful, made a move and scurried to the next table. So far I'd survived the first ten moves but I thought it wouldn't be long before I'd join the ranks of the vanquished.

Now 35 people are left.
Now 30 people are left.
Now 20 people are left.

Novices and club champions alike are one-by-one being defeated by this International Master who is not spending any more than about five seconds per move at each board.

Now 15 people are left.

A wild rumor goes around the room that Jennifer has agreed to a draw with a player. So she's not invincible!

A little while later, twelve-year-old Matthew Slesinski (and before you ask: yes I've played him before and yes he has beaten me) shakes Jennifer's hand. He quietly smiles, asks Jen to sign his scorepad and starts calmly packing up his pieces.

He beat her! For the first time in the game I can see that Jen is not a god. She's a human being. I can win this game!

Now 10 people are left.

It's 11pm and even though I'm up a pawn my greatest concern is whether I'll make the last Amtrak train back to Washington DC. I'm thinking of options: maybe I can go to a pub until closing time, then sleep at the train station with the other homeless people until the first train of the morning.

Three hours sleeping on a bench next to a toothless, homeless black guy named Leo (and before you ask: yes I've played him before and yes he has beaten me) seemed like a small price to pay if I had a chance to beat Jennifer Shahade.

Now 5 people are left.

I'm up two pawns, my king is in great position and my rook completely locks Jennifer out of the game. Jen reaches over the board, shakes my hand and resigns.

I actually won!

Jen's record that night was 36 wins, 1 draw and 3 losses. An incredible result for playing forty people at the same time.

Since it was an exhibition match, nobody's rating is affected. Pity. That would really have launched mine out of the basement. No Dostoyevsky inspiration required.

I managed to catch a train that would get me in DC at 3am. I was exhausted but couldn't sleep. I had just beaten an International Master. I had beaten the two-time US Women's Chess Champion. I felt on top of the world.

Okay. To be fair - I gave the game my undivided attention for nearly four hours while Jen was playing thirty-nine other people at the same time, but a win is a win.

At my rating, you have to take what you can get.

On the train back to Washington DC, I opened my copy of Chess Bitch and re-read Jennifer's crummy autograph "Phil - Thanks for coming out. Jen."

Underneath I wrote my own reply:

"Who's your daddy now, bitch?! Phil".

Quitting in the third circle

2007-07-05T21:41:00.000-07:00

In my previous attempts to complete a seven circles of tactics exercise, I've almost always stopped somewhere in the third circle.

I think the biggest problem comes there for a couple of reasons:

By the third circle, you really don't have enough of them memorized to go quickly. You're still having to manually search, find and check your solution.
I normally spend between 30 and 60 minutes a day doing tactics, which means the first circle is good, the second circle tends to go over the hour, and the third circle is rarely finished before 90 minutes.

The combination of the two, means that by the third circle I give up.

In future seven circles exercises (including this one) I'll have to be pretty conservative with the number of puzzles I try to do per day - especially in the early circles - because by the third circle you don't want it to get so difficult that you feel like quitting.

Anyhow - I'm about halfway through my second circle of Lou Hays' book and I'm already having concerns about the time it takes.

Here's hoping.

Day 1 of Circle 2

2007-07-02T17:03:00.000-07:00

First day of the second circle of Hays, and I was very interested to see if I would remember any of the positions that I had seen nearly a month ago.

As it turns out - I did!

It's amazing. I was looking at tactical problems that I had answered incorrectly in the first circle, recognising them and knowing what to do next.

"I think this one was about pushing a pawn to shift his bishop." Correct!

"I think this one needs his pawn out of the way so I have an open line to his undefended queen." Correct!

When I got to the end of the seven circles of John Bain's book I could instantly recognise each of the positions and select the correct tactic. I'm hoping I can do the same for this problem set - because they are quite a bit harder.

First Circle of Hays Complete

2007-07-01T20:18:00.000-07:00

Today I finished the first circle of the Lou Hays book Winning Chess Tactics for Juniors.

534 problems in 24 days!

Best chapters were knight forks and discovery, but the worst ones for me were some of the more vague ones like "attraction" and "clearance".

Now the next circle is the same set in 14 days. (The idea is to do the seven circles in 60 days.)

Hopefully I should recognise at least some of them or work through the second circle a little quicker than the first time.

Safety First

2007-07-01T00:11:00.000-07:00

I think my mantra going into the next tournament in July will need to be "safety first".

After reviewing each of the games from my previous tournament in Chessmaster, the most common mistake was missing the final safety check to see if my opponent had a killer reply to my last move.

My thought process is something along these lines.

1. What did he just do? If he had a free move, what checks, captures and threats do I need to be aware of? This sets up the constraints of the next steps.
2. Based on step 1, I need to either:
a) prevent something
b) look for an offensive tactic using checks, captures and threats and if nothing comes up
c) develop my pieces to give me more activity
3. Once I decide on the move, I need to give my opponent another "free move" to see what checks, captures and threats he could do. Can he just take my piece off the board?

It's the step 3 that I have been most consistently missing in my previous tournaments.

It seems like a simple thing to fix, but I will need to try really hard to do it every move to prevent some of the disasters from recent games.

Nothing new under the sun

2007-06-29T17:06:00.000-07:00

I'm a newbie.

There - I said it.

Within seconds of posting my last blog on thought process and Dan Heisman's concept of real chess I stopped by Confessions of a Chess Novice and found myself firmly in the category of "newbie".

True - I was not the first person to discover it (and I'm glad), but now might be a good time to make some disclosures.

While I was living in Philadelphia I had Dan Heisman as a chess coach for about two years and I can't speak highly enough of him. He's a good friend and a brilliant coach with a real knack of getting to the core of the problem. So that's where I heard of "real chess" for the first time - from the horses mouth.

If I do anything well as a result of his coaching it is time management. Dan's is still the voice inside my head telling me to "use all your time".

Yes - it does bring to mind the voice of Obi-wan in Luke Skywalker's ear: "Use the force, Luke".

But next post - some more on my new thought process. I promise.

Thought process is even more important than tactics

2007-06-28T00:29:00.000-07:00

Maybe I'm speaking blasphemy, but I think there is something even more important than tactics:

Thought process.

I'm still a firm believer that studying tactics is the number one thing someone at my rating can do to improve their chess rating away from the board.

But once I'm at the board, the best thing I can do is apply a rigorous thought process every single move.

This is something that Dan Heisman refers to frequently in his columns and books. He calls it playing Real Chess.

Two games from my last tournament games I lost pieces - not to tricky four-move combinations, but just by simply hanging a piece!

So my new quest involves two points to focus on:
1. The best thing to do away from the board = tactics.
2. The best thing to do at the board = thought process.

Seven Circles are Hard

2007-06-26T14:38:00.000-07:00

Let me say upfront. Doing Michael De La Maza's ideas of seven circles of chess tactics is hard.

Very hard.

In the past I've tried to complete seven circles of CT-ART 3.0 (twice), seven circles of Winning Chess Tactics for Juniors by Lou Hays and seven circles of Chess Tactics for Students by John Bain. And with all, I've never gone past the third circle.

Until just recently, that is.

Last month I took 28 days to go through the 450+ relatively easy positions in Bain, first in seven days, then six, then five, four, three, two, one.

I must say - by the time you're on the fourth circle, you really are flying through them and recognising them by sight and memory.

I'm currently on my first circle of the Lou Hays book, so it's probably too early to celebrate, but at least I can say I have finished one complete seven circles exercise - even if it was with the simplest tactics book I own.

Sometimes a small victory is all you need to get yourself over your past failures.

First step in the journey

2007-06-25T20:13:00.001-07:00

This is the first in what I hope will be an ongoing series of blogs tracking the ups and downs of my chess career.

I probably need to state upfront that I am a big fan of Michael De La Maza and I'm using his "7 Circles" approach to getting better at recognising chess tactics.