Tiger Chess Analysis Training

One of the most popular features at my Tiger Chess site is the recently introduced Analysis Training feature. It is very different to tactical chess problems of the ‘White to play and win’ genre in that the positions may be tactical or strategic in nature and call for a quite different type of thinking to the usual calculation of forcing moves.

Here’s my Youtube video about it:

Nigel Davies

Share

Material advantage

One advantage of having more material than your opponent is that you have more flexibility of plans. One plan available to you that is hardly ever available to your opponent is to return some of the material to obtain a position that you can win easily.

In this week’s problem, White has a Bishop for a Pawn material advantage. The question is – how does White use that material advantage to win the game?

The solution to last week’s problem is that White plays 1 Ne5 Bh5 2 Nf7+ Kg8 3 Nh6+ Kh8 4 f7 Bxf7 5 Kxf6 c3 6 Kf8 c2 7 Nf7 mate

Steven Carr

Share

Paignton Challengers A 1974 Part 4

Going into round 5 I was on 3/4 and had white against an experienced tournament player who, back in 1962, had won the Barstow Cup, which appears to be the individual championship of the Civil Service Chess League.

He chose a passive variation of the Old Indian Defence which left him short of space and without any realistic pawn breaks.

1. c4 Nf6
2. Nc3 d6
3. d4 Nbd7
4. e4 e5
5. d5 c6
6. f3 h5

Looks rather odd: I suppose he wanted to prevent a later g4. Be7 is the usual move here.

7. Be3 Qc7
8. Qd2 Be7
9. Bd3 Nf8
10. Nge2 Ng6
11. b4 a5
12. b5 c5

Blocking the queen side, but only White has chances on the king side.

13. Ng3 b6
14. Nf5 Bf8
15. O-O-O Bd7
16. h4 O-O-O
17. Rdg1 Ne7
18. g4

The first pawn break.

18… g6
19. Nxe7+ Bxe7
20. g5 Nh7
21. f4

The second pawn break.

21… exf4
22. Bxf4 Bf8
23. Qh2 Bg4
24. e5

The third pawn break.

24… Bf3
25. exd6

Stockfish recommends the exchange sacrifice 25. Qh3+ Bg4 26. Rxg4 hxg4 27. Qxg4+ Kh8 28. Re1.

25… Qd7

Unexpectedly deciding not to take back on d6, when White would still have stood clearly better.

26. Bf1 Bg7
27. Bh3 Bg4
28. Bxg4 hxg4
29. Na4 Kb7
30. Re1 Rde8
31. Qg2

Giving Black a chance. There were several much better alternatives, for instance 31. Bd2, threatening Bxa5. Bd2 also controls e1 so there’s a second threat of Re7, followed, after two captures on e7, by Re1.

31… f5

Black misses the best try: 31… Qf5, threatening the bishop on f4 as well as infiltration with Qd3. Stockfish at first considers the position equal but eventually finds a way for White to thread his way to a win starting with 32. Bd2.

31… Qf5 32. Bd2! Qd3 33. Rxe8 Rxe8 (33… Qa3+ 34. Kc2 Rxe8 35. d7 transposes) 34. d7 and now Black can try:

A) 34… Rd8 35. d6+ Qf3 36. Qxf3+ gxf3 37. Rf1 f5 (37… Rxd7 38. Rxf3 f5 39. Bxa5 Rxd6 40. Re3 bxa5 41. Re7+ Kc8 42. Rxg7 Nf8 43. Rg8 Rd8 44. Nxc5+–) 38. Rxf3 Nf8 39. Re3 Nxd7 40. Re6 +–

B) 34… Qa3+ 35. Kc2 Qxa4+ 36. Kb1 Qa3 37. d6+ Ka7 38. Bc3 (only move) when Black’s defences are all insufficient:

B1) 38… Rg8 39. Bxg7 Qd3+ 40. Qc2 Qe3 41. Bc3 Rd8 42. Re1 Qf4 43. Qd3 g3 44. Be5 Qg4 45. Bxg3 +–

B2) 38… Rb8 39. Bxg7 Qd3+ 40. Qc2 Qe3 41. Bc3 Qf3 42. Re1 Nf8 (42… Rd8 43. Kb2 Rxd7 44. Re7 Qb7 45. Qe2 Nf8 46. Rxd7 Nxd7 47. Qxg4 +-) 43. Re7 Rd8 44. Re8 Rxd7 45. Rxf8 g3 46. Be5 g2 47. Bh2 Qg3 48. Bxg3 g1Q+ 49. Qc1 Qxg3 50. Qd1 Qxd6 51. Qxd6 Rxd6 52. Rxf7+ Kb8 53. Kc2 +-

B3) 38… Qxc3 39. dxe8Q Qa1+ 40. Kc2 Qxa2+ 41. Kd3 Qxg2 42. Qxf7+ Qb7 43. Re1 Qxf7 44. Re7+ Kb8 45. Rxf7 Bd4 and now not

B3a) 46. Rxh7? g3 47. Re7 Kc8 48. Re1 (48. Re2 Bf2 49. h5 g2 50. Rxf2 g1Q) 48… g2 49. h5 g1Q 50. Rxg1 Bxg1 51. hxg6 Bd4 –+ but either

B3b) 46. Ke4! g3 47. Kf3 Nxg5+ 48. hxg5 Kc8 49. Rc7+ Kd8 50. Rb7 +- or

B3c) 46. Re7! Kc8 47. Ke4 g3 48. Kf3 g2 49. Kxg2 Nf6 50. gxf6 Bxf6 51. Rc7+ +-

Would I have found Bd2 in the game? Who knows?

Black’s actual choice, though, made it easy for me.

32. Re6 Qd8
33. Rhe1 Bd4
34. Re7+ Ka8
35. Nxb6+ Qxb6
36. Rxe8+ Rxe8
37. Rxe8+ 1-0

I was now on 4 points out of 5, playing on board 1, and, for the first time in my life, in with a chance of winning a tournament.

My opponent in Round 6 was, I think, the Allan Gardner who is still active today as a player and organiser in Bolton, and is still very much the same strength as me. I started off with the Modern Defence, but my opponent, who may well have read Ray Keene’s Flank Openings, headed for a King’s Indian Attack rather than occupying the centre. I in turn chose to transpose into a Sicilian Defence, opting for the Staunton set-up which had also been recommended by Ray Keene in various contemporary publications.

1. e4 g6
2. Nf3 Bg7
3. g3 c5
4. Bg2 Nc6
5. O-O d6
6. d3 e6

I’ve often played the Botvinnik blockade, e5, in this type of position.

7. Re1

White’s plan is familiar against the main line of the King’s Indian Attack, but not really appropriate here.

7… Nge7
8. Nbd2 O-O
9. Nf1 Rb8
10. h4 b5
11. Rb1 a5
12. Bg5 e5
13. Qd2 Be6
14. Ra1 f6
15. Bh6 d5
16. Bxg7 Kxg7
17. N3h2 dxe4
18. Bxe4 Bd5
19. Bxd5 Nxd5
20. Nf3 Qd7

At this point I chickened out and proposed a draw, which was accepted. I’m probably slightly better here and could well have played on.

Richard James

Share

Irregular Move Orders and Middle Game Blunders

My opponent in the correspondence chess game is from France and I do not know his or her real name.

I opened this chess game with 1.a3 so that I could avoid most prepared lines, prevent Black from putting a Knight or Bishop on b4 and to transpose into a reversed opening. I got an English Opening and then the Botvinnik System. Sometimes, I will open a chess game with an irregular or unusual move order so that I can confuse my opponents. I believe that Black was confused in this correspondence chess game.

Quite often, when my opponents realize that I am going to fianchetto my King’s Bishop they will put a pawn on c6 and try to clog that long diagonal with Black pawns. My opponent did that in this correspondence chess game.

I like when Black puts an under protected Knight on f6 because I can often pin it to the Black Queen and then win it. In this correspondence chess game Black broke that pin by playing 12.h6, but he or she then gave me a new target to attack.

Black fianchettoed both of his or her bishops, but then Black left the Bishop on b7 unprotected and I targeted it as well. Although the chess engines did not like it that much, I doubled my rooks on the f file. I expanded my pawns across the chess board, attacked on the Kingside and kept my eye on the unprotected Black Bishop all at the same time.

I opened the f file in order to attack the Black material that was on f6 and f7. Black moved the Knight off f6 and then back onto f6.  Then, Black removed it again from f6 and it remained on the rim for the remainder of this short correspondence chess game. There is a saying, “A Knight on the rim is grim” and Black does not seem to know or believe that saying.

Centralizing your Queen when the majority of minor pieces are still on the chess board is usually a mistake because then your Queen becomes a target for your opponent to attack. Black made that mistake in this correspondence chess game and I gained time and space by attacking the Black Queen. When Black retreated that Queen I was able to win a pawn with a Knight fork on the Black Queen and the unprotected Bishop on b7. Black resigned.

Mike Serovey

Share

Maroczy Bound

Chess players easily remember ideas and patterns taken from millions of games. — Vishwanathan Anand, lecturing on the role of memory in Chess at Accenture, June 12, 2012

The way we chessplayers generally teach openings is rather strange. The need for the beginner to  be aware of move-order traps leads us to present the openings as individual tracks whose identity is derived from the initial sequence of moves, whereas these tracks converge on positions whose significance to our understanding is greater than the significance of the move order that leads to them.

Some apply the term tabiya (“tableau”) used in Arabic chess manuscripts from the 11th century to these significant positions.

There are tabiyas that can be reached from either the Ruy Lopez or the Rossolimo Sicilian. There are many paths to the swath of tabiyas around the Neo-Grünfeld (D70-79) and the White fianchetto King’s Indian (E62, E64, &c.)

The Marozcy bind is perhaps the most central tabiya of the Chess opening. It can be reached quite reasonably from 1. e4, 1.d4, 1. c4, 1. Nf3 and rather more fancifully from other first moves.

It can also be reached with colors reversed, as in my game from the Denver Chess Club this week (below) which secured me 3rd place in this month’s DCC Tuesday Night tournament.

Incidentally, if you have not watched Anand’s excellent and entertaining lecture, it’s here.

Jacques Delaguerre

Share

Norway Chess 2015: Mistakes

Congratulations to Topalov for winning Norway Chess 2015, so far the worst ever tournament for Carlsen. In this tournament we’ve seen some mistakes which are generally not seen in top rated tournaments. Though in chess no one can win, one can only lose! Here is a list of some of them from the tournament.

(1) Hammer,J (2677) – Carlsen,M (2876)
Round 9

White has an advantageous position but it’s far from over for Black. Though Carlsen made it very simple for Hammer:

32…Rxb3??

Disastrous, but 32…Nc6 is also losing 33.Rxb7 Rxb3 34.Rxb3 Bxb3 35.Rf6.

33.Rd1

Threatening checkmate.

33…Nc6 34.Rdd7

The game is over. Carlsen resigned.

1–0

(2) Anand,V (2804) – Hammer,J (2677)
Round 8

White’s last move was Qe2. White is a pawn up but it is far from the over as opposite colour bishops are on the board.

33…g6?

This sort of mistake is normally seen at club level! It gives two extra pawns to Anand.

34.Bxg6 Qxg6 35.Qxe5+

A simple double attack.

35…Kg8 36.Qxc5

White is 3 pawn up. Black resigned.

1–0

(3) Carlsen,M (2876) – Aronian,L (2780)
Round 8


36.Rc2??

White was pressing before this move, but he had less than 2 minutes left to play next 5 moves. 36.Nh4 Qxf2 37.Rg3 was winning for White.

36…Qa1??

A Blunder. After 36…Qb8! and Black would have had a fantastic game.

37.g4 Qf1 38.Ne1

Perhaps he missed this one. If 38.Nh4 than Rd1 and now Black is winning

38…Nh5 39.gxf5 exf5 40.Qc4

Black resigned.

1–0

(4) Aronian,Levon (2780) – Caruana,Fabiano (2805)
Round 5

50.Kxa5 Kd2?

Here Black missed a drawing opportunity, which was very hard to find but you can expect such a move from super GMs! Black can hold the game with 50…Nd5!!, the idea being to dominate White’s knight. If White then chooses to sacrifice the knight (which is his best try) then f7 can hold the game: 51.b4 Ke2 52.Ng2 Kf3 53.Nh4+ Kg4 54.Ng2 Kf3 55.b5 Kxg2 56.b6 Nxb6 57.Kxb6 and Black has a bishop’s pawn and White’s king is too far away, so this is a draw.

After 50…Kd2 White won very convincingly.

1–0

(5) Hammer,Jon Ludvig (2677) – Topalov,Veselin (2798)
Round 5


First try to find the saving move for White

74.Kc6??

A big blunder. Instead, Hammer could have saved the game with f5.

74…Ke6

White resigned.

0–1

(6) Nakamura,Hikaru (2802) – Caruana,Fabiano (2805)
Round 3


The position looks equal on the board.

40…g5??

The simplest move to draw was 40… h5. But the text move allows White to take very active position with his rook via h file.

41.hxg5 hxg5 42.Rh1

White went on win as follows:

42…Ra7 43.Rh7 f4 44.gxf4 gxf4 45.e4! a4 46.bxa4+ Rxa4 47.Rxf7 Ra3+ 48.Kd2 Ra2+ 49.Ke1 Ra3 50.Ke2 Ra2+ 51.Kf3 Rd2 52.Rd7 Kc6 53.Rd5 Kb6 54.e5 Kc6 55.Rd8 Kc7 56.Rd6

1–0

(7) Carlsen,M (2876) – Topalov,V (2798) [D43]
Round 1


60.Qg5+

White already has a winning position.

60…Kf7

And White lost on time! Carlsen had the impression that he would have an extra 15 minutes, but it was just an illusion.

0–1

Ashvin Chauhan

Share

The Polgar Variant

This new film by the Israeli film-maker Yossi Aviram looks interesting. Meanwhile it’s interesting to reflect that all three sisters are now retired from tournament play.

Nigel Davies

Share

Paignton Challengers A 1974 Part 3

So, going into Round 4 I was on 2½/3 with the black pieces against one of the stronger players in my section. My opponent gave me the opportunity to try out a line recommended by Keene and Botterill in their book on the Modern Defence. The game would, like my first round game, eventually reach an ending with rook and 4 pawns against rook and 3 pawns on the same side.

1. e4 g6
2. d4 Bg7
3. Nc3 d6
4. f4 c6

Not so fashionable these days when a6, under the influence of Tiger Hillarp Persson, is often preferred. Keene and Botterill recommended a6 against an early Be3, but a6 in this position was relegated to their final chapter on the Avant Garde.

5. Nf3 Bg4
6. Be3 Qb6
7. Qd2 Bxf3
8. gxf3 Nd7
9. O-O-O Qa5

So far both players are following the book. Keene and Botterill gave three variations here, f5!?, Kb1 (the move almost always played today) and Bc4, my opponent’s choice.

10. Bc4 b5
11. Bb3 Nb6
12. Nb1

Rather craven. Keene and Botterill quoted a 1971 game between Adorjan and Jansa in which f5 was played. Qd3 and Kb1 have also been tried here.

12… Qxd2+
13. Nxd2 d5
14. c3 Nf6
15. Bc2 Nfd7

Not a very impressive choice. 15… Bh6 to pin the f-pawn, possibly followed by a later Nh5 (a sort of left-handed Nimzo-Indian plan) would have been more to the point.

16. b3 e6
17. h4 f5
18. Rdg1 Nf6?

Simply leaving a pawn en prise. I should have played Kf7 instead.

19. exf5 exf5
20. Bxf5 Kf7
21. Bd3 Bh6
22. Nf1 Nh5
23. f5 Bxe3+
24. Nxe3 Nf4
25. Kd2 Nxd3
26. Kxd3 Nd7
27. Rh2 Rhg8
28. Rhg2 Nf6
29. fxg6+ Rxg6
30. Rxg6 hxg6
31. Ng4 Nxg4
32. fxg4

Reaching a rook ending where White has a good extra pawn and every expectation of winning.

32… Rh8
33. Rh1 Re8
34. h5 gxh5
35. gxh5 Kg7
36. h6+ Kh7
37. Rh5 Re6
38. Re5

At this point both players had to calculate the pawn ending after the rook exchange. I guess we both just assumed it was an easy win for White. White is indeed winning quite easily, but he’ll have to negotiate a queen ending to score the full point.

38… Rxe5 39. dxe5 Kxh6 40. Kd4 Kg6 41. Kc5 Kf5 42. Kd6 b4 43. c4 d4 44. e6 d3 45. e7 d2 46. e8=Q d1=Q+ 47. Kxc6 and White should win.

Instead I preferred to keep the rooks on the board, heading for rook and 4 against rook and 3, although, with the black king badly placed, White should still win.

38… Rxh6

Reaching the first time control.

39. Re7+ Kg8
40. Rxa7 Rh3+
41. Kc2 Rh2+
42. Kb1 Kf8
43. a4 bxa4
44. bxa4 Ke8
45. Rc7 Rh6
46. Kb2 Kd8
47. Rg7 c5

Losing another pawn, but there was nothing any better.

48. Rg5 Rh2+
49. Ka3 cxd4
50. Rxd5+ Kc7

At this point time was called at the end of the first session. White had to decide which way to capture on d4. Every Russian schoolboy (or girl) knows that rook, a and c pawns against rook is very often a draw, and the tablebases confirm that is indeed the case here. Taking with the pawn should win, though. The difference becomes clear later on.

51. cxd4 Kc6
52. Rc5+ Kd6
53. Kb3 Rh1
54. a5 Rb1+
55. Kc4 Rc1+

The second time control.

56. Kb5 Rb1+
57. Ka6 Rb4
58. Rb5 Rxd4

White has followed a winning plan, giving up his d-pawn, and now, because Black’s pieces are further away, White can promote his a-pawn.

59. Ka7?

But instead White makes an inexplicable error. He was winning easily with either Kb6 or Kb7, but now the black king can get close enough to draw.

59… Kc6
60. Rb7 Rd8
61. a6 Rh8
62. Rb8 Rh7+

Another sealed move after time was called at the end of the second session (which must have been a short session after dinner). I guess we continued the following morning.

63. Ka8 Rg7
64. Rh8 Kb6
65. Rh6+ Kc7
66. Ka7 Rg8
67. Rf6 Rh8
68. Rf1

At this point the tablebases tell me Black has five moves which draw: Kc6, Rc8, Rh4, Rh3 and Rh2. It’s interesting to see why other moves lose. Fortunately for me I managed to find one of the drawing options.

68… Kc6
69. Rc1+ Kb5
70. Rc7 Rh6

The only move to draw.

1/2-1/2

I’d scored 1½ points from two rook endings in which I could easily have scored only ½. I was starting to agree with Ken Norman that endings were far from boring, and that playing them well reaps its reward.

Richard James

Share

The King’s Gambit

There was a time, not so long ago, when chess was played in a daring and romantic way. During the 19th Century, Gambits were King and swashbuckling sacrifices were the order of the day! One opening, the King’s Gambit, was commonly played and led to some of the most exciting chess games of this period. I teach it to my students because many good lessons can be found within this opening. So let’s travel back in time, to a world in which chess players didn’t depend on computers to aid them in their positional decision making. This was a era when a game of chess was truly a battle of two minds, a form of mental Kung Fu if you will!

For those of you who are new to the game, let me start by defining a gambit. When employing a gambit, one player (usually white) will offer a pawn (or even two) during the opening in exchange for a positional advantage. This means that the player giving up the pawn will not get material back. Instead, our Gambiteer (as gambit players are called) will gain an advantage in position, such as the ability to get all of his or her minor pieces into the game quickly due to a lack of pawns blocking in those pieces. An advantage in position during the game’s opening gives the player with the advantage greater opportunities such as the ability to launch a strong attack or gain greater control of the board. More opportunities for one player means fewer opportunities for the other player. Greater opportunities lead to winning games!

The King’s Gambit starts with the moves 1. e4…e5 followed by 2. f4. White’s second move is the gambit. Why would White simply offer up the f pawn, one of the three pawns that form a wall in front of the King when castling short (King-side Castling)? Well, if black plays 2…exf4, then white has two pawns on central files, the d and e file, while black has only has one pawn on a central file, the d pawn. White therefore has a two to one pawn majority in the center. This would give white an advantage when it comes to controlling the center during the opening. However, if white plays 3. d4, Black would provide a nasty response in the form of 3…Qh4+, a check that has some weight to it because of the black pawn on f4! This consequence of an early d pawn push helps to teach students to build up a position slowly and carefully!

Beginners who are taught to gain control of the board’s center quickly during the opening, often prematurely push the white d pawn to d4, thinking that two pawns on central squares are better than one pawn on a central square. Combine this with the discovered attack by the c1 Bishop on the black pawn on f4 and you can see why the novice player might opt for this often disastrous move. The correct move for beginners is 3.Nf3. Moving the Knight to f3 stops the black Queen from checking on h4, keeps her from loitering on g5 and puts pressure on d4 and e5. Once the white Knight is placed on f3, the Black pawn on f4 is locked in place and a later pawn push can be made, d2-d4. The immediate lesson here is that you have to build up a position carefully, considering your opponent’s best response. Black has been known to play 3…g5, using the g pawn to protect the f4 pawn. Already, black’s King-side pawn structure is messy. Here, further development by white is in order, such as 4.Bc4. Black might counter with 4…g4, attacking the Knight on f3. At this point, I’ll ask my students to suggest two possible moves. One move that is suggested more often than not is 5.Ne5 which moves the Knight out of danger and allows it to attack the black g4 pawn. It seems reasonable, the Knight going from being attacked by a pawn to attacking that very same pawn. When I suggest castling, many students will cry out in horror that I’m about to give up my well placed Knight! The problem with 5.Ne5 is 5…Qh4+, which checks the white King. Let’s not forget that the black Queen has a few useful pawns to aid her in this attack! Beginners have the bad habit of not considering what their opponent’s best response is to the move they’re about to make. This example of black’s Queen check on h4 (after 5.Ne5) helps reinforce the idea of considering how your opponent might respond to your potential move. To help teach this idea regarding your opponent’s best response, only after they understand the basic moves of the King’s Gambit, I have them switch sides back and forth during this opening. So, after move two for black, 2…exf4, the student playing the white pieces trades places with the student playing the black pieces. They continue to do so throughout the next ten moves.

This brings us to another key point of the lesson, giving up material in exchange for a strong attack. To the beginner, it appears as if castling King-side loses the Knight on f3 because they’re not looking ahead. They see a minor piece about to be captured by a lowly pawn. Beginners tend only to see only a single move ahead. By this, I mean that they see the g4 pawn attacking the Knight and, if the Knight doesn’t move, it will be captured. They’re not seeing that if (after white castles) the black pawn on g4 takes the Knight (5…gxf3), the white Queen can capture that pawn and suddenly, the Bishop on c4, the Rook on f1 and the Queen on f3 are all aimed at Black’s weak f7 square. Of course, there is still a black pawn on f4 standing in the way of checkmate but that little pawn is undefended! This is a very clear example of giving up material in exchange for attacking chances. White has a strong potential attack with only a pawn standing in the way of checkmate.

Of course, in the above example, it’s black to move, so the black Queen can move to f6 to stop the potential checkmate. However, black is on the defensive and has to play carefully to avoid checkmate. There are a few moves that black can make to stop white’s mating attempt, so I’ll ask my students to find them.

I have young students who interpret my enthusiasm for this swashbuckling opening as a guaranteed way to win the game as white. This means that they think playing black against the King’s Gambit means a painful loss. We have to remember that these are very young players who are new to the game and see things in a very black and white manner (pun intended). To cure them of this way of thinking, the first full King’s Gambit game I show is one in which Boris Spassky, as black, pummels his opponent who plays the gambit against him. I show them this game, which I’ve posted below, to warn them of the dangers of thinking a specific opening is a sure thing. It helps to demonstrate the folly of not using sound principles, such as building up a position before launching an attack. It also goes to show that employing a gambit doesn’t guarantee success. Of course, playing a gambit against the likes of Boris Spassky, a tactical genius, may not be the brightest of ideas. Enjoy!

Hugh Patterson

Share

Good Luck Chuck Leached This Chess Game from Me

My opponent in this chess game is Charlie K. Leach. He signed every card and letter that he sent to me during our two correspondence chess games with “Good Luck! Chuck”, so I started calling him “Good Luck Chuck” after the movie that starred Jessica Alba. He didn’t get joke at first, but he did after I explained it to him.

Charlie has a brother named Jeff who has the same birthday as I do, but he is five years older than I am.

Charlie played an odd variation as White against the Sicilian Defense and he moved one of his bishops three times in the opening. However, I got too fancy for my own good and I blundered on move number 14. The move before was a bad idea for Black. From move number 15 on I was losing.

I was down a Knight and I was hoping for a draw if I could get all of the White pawns off the board without losing any more of my material. I failed to do that and I resigned on move number 50.

This event was a trophy quad that I won and this chess game was my only loss. I finished this section with three wins, one loss, and two draws giving me a final score of 4 – 2. I finished a full point ahead of the second place finisher.

 

Photograph of my correspondence chess trophy

Photograph of my correspondence chess trophy

Mike Serovey

Share