Category Archives: News

Finish of Adrian Hollis Memorial CC Tournament

As I predicted in June 2015 and confirmed in September the clear winner of the Adrian Hollis Memorial CC Tournament was ICCF GM Nigel Robson (ENG) with a remarkable score of 8/10 (+6, =4, -0). The final game of the tournament finished in a draw at the end of April 2016 between GM John G. Brookes (ENG) and SIM Nigel Burne (ENG). GM Richard Hall (ENG) and SIM Richard Beecham (SCO) were joint second both with 5.5/10 (+2, =7, -1). Fourth, with the same score but lower Baumbach tie break was SIM Nigel Burne who, of course, would have been second if he had won this last game.

The late Adrian Hollis was a very distinguished classical scholar, with a career mainly focused on Hellenistic and Roman poetry. He was also a strong over the board player who played in several British Championships finishing seventh equal in 1961.

We were given a small incentive to win games and it is interesting to note that nearly 31% of the games were decisive. Despite my disastrous start in 2014 by throwing away a game with a clerical error and an early loss to SIM Harvey Williamson (ENG), who was fifth with 5/10 (+2, =6, -2), I was content with my 4/10 (+1, =6, -3) and ninth place being the lowest rated player. My main ambition was not to be last and this I managed to avoid! This was possibly the strongest ever British CC tournament excluding overseas players, with an average rating of 2504 which included a World Championship silver medalist and candidate.

A cross table of the tournament can be found here: – https://www.iccf.com/event?id=41391

Here is the final game. Note that the six piece Tablebase rules apply: –

John Rhodes

ICCF Olympiad 16 Postal Final

The ICCF Olympiad 16 Postal Final, which started in 2010, has just finished. The overall winners are the Czech Republic with a high score of 69% and 33.5/48 with an average start rating of 2619. Germany are second with 59%, 28.5/48 and 2572 and France are third with 55%, 26.5/48 and 2554.  Other teams finished in the order of Poland, Brazil, Israel, Slovakia, Sweden, Italy, USA, Ukraine, England and finally Finland. The winning Czech Republic team consisted of GM Roman Chytilek (2693) on Board 1, IM Jiri Dufek (2579) on Board 2, GM David Vrkoc (2607) on Board 3 and GM Jiri Vosahlik (2600) on Board 4.

England, with myself on Board 2, scored 42% and 20.5/48 which was the same as the USA and Ukraine. Considering we had the lowest average start rating it was a good result and we avoided last place. Our team consisted of SIM Russell Pegg (2440) on Board 1, myself on Board 2, IM Julian Corfield (2395) on Board 3 and SIM Ian Pheby (2248) on Board 4 with non-playing Captain Neil Limbert. This was the strongest tournament I have played with Category 13 on Board 1, Category 12 on Board 2, Category 11 on Board 3 and Category 9 on Board 4. We are all grateful for Captain Neil Limbert’s help and guidance throughout this marathon event which could well be the last time England play in a Postal Olympiad.

Of course postal chess can be very slow when compared to server chess and the final game, between our own SIM Russell Pegg and Dr Fritz Baumbach, has only just finished after 116 moves and almost six years of play!  Congratulations must go to Russell for drawing this game and securing third place on Board 1. This game and all other games can be viewed on the ICCF website at: – https://www.iccf.com/event?id=21733

I have to admit that I found the going tough and, although I had some good games, I never won any. My team mates, however, all won a game each against higher rated opposition and I will show Russell’s game against IM Livio Olivotto below.

 

John Rhodes

No Berlin!

It was nice to see that after two games in the Women’s World Championship there have been two open games (1.e4 e5) but no Berlin endgame (2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 Nf6 4.0-0 Nxe4 5.d4 Nd6 6.Bxc6 dxc6 7.dxe5 Nf5 8.Qxd8+ Kxd8). This makes a thoroughly refreshing change as the top males are forever wheeling this line out in top level encounters.

What do I have against the Berlin? For the specialist there are a number of interesting strategic issues, especially in how White tries to advance his kingside pawns without a light square bishop and with his pawn on e5 (rather than e4). But for the general public it’s like watching paint dry.

Anyway, he’s a video of the second game which was won in fine style by Hou Yifan:

Nigel Davies

Correspondence Chess Advice From ICCF World Champion

It is good to see articles about correspondence chess published on a well known chess news website. The 28th and latest World Champion, Leonardo Ljubicic from Omis, a small village near Split, has reportedly spent about two or three hours a day, and twice as long at weekends, analysing his correspondence chess games. He has revealed what he thinks about correspondence chess and how he decides his moves.

Leonardo thinks it is impossible to achieve any significant result without engines and databases and that the player, not the engine, should choose a suitable opening and steer the engine toward or away from certain types of position. He thinks you should only play a certain set of openings because you dare not make one weak move. He says that today’s engines are very strong, but do make mistakes when judging positions, and that you should feed the computer with more good ideas than your opponent. He goes on to say that you should not let the engine do all the work and blindly make its move without you too watching the thinking process. He says that the “next best” function is the “main tool for correspondence play”. He uses a standard GUI and several databases. He also uses the ICCF archive database, MegaDatabase and the Playchess games database, but only for getting new ideas as he thinks human games are too unreliable. He forms opening trees in these databases, but does not rely on statistics, and all variations are analysed for all worst case scenarios. He has used all the major chess engines and works out their weaknesses. I show one of Leonardo’s win’s below.

So to do well at the top level of correspondence chess you obviously have to play better than any engine and have to have done more analysis work than your opponent. I know that many over-the-board players are prejudiced against modern day correspondence chess when strong engines and powerful hardware are easily available. I sympathise with them and can only say that correspondence chess is now really only analysing chess rather than playing it live on a board sitting in front of your opponent, which we all know is the real challenge. I know that there are correspondence chess players who do not use engines and dislike playing against them, but it seems that to beat them you have to join them!

John Rhodes

Zurich Chess Challenge

Although I’m not a big fan of blitz for those who want to improve because the clock is so much more important than the moves. On the other hand Grandmaster blitz tournaments can be entertaining and instructive.

The recent Zurich Chess Challenge adopted a superior incremental time limit of 4 minutes plus 2 seconds per move which means that there’s always a couple of seconds to make a move. It means that the clock has a marginally reduced influence.

Nigel Davies

Kids and Chess, Part One

A few years ago one of the chess coaches in the Tampa area had an annoying habit of telling his students that I hated little kids. Because I got tired of that, I decided to make a sarcastic reply if I heard him say that again. He did during one of his group lessons, so I replied with, “Actually, they taste quite good with a little peanut oil and basil”! I got a laugh from that. So, now I am including a few quotes by W. C. Fields about kids.

W. C. Fields quotes about kids

I do not actually hate or eat kids, but I may want them to think that I do! Considering that I have been playing rated chess off and on for 41 years, I really do dislike losing to someone who has been alive less than 20 years! In this case, I lost to someone who has been alive about one third as long as I have been playing chess!

My opponent is this Wednesday night tournament round is a thirteen-year-old girl. Her mother was the TD for this event. I lost the previous round to a gentleman that is older than I am. I told both Sara and her mother, Shirley, that I had a lousy tack record in OTB chess against human females regardless of age or rating. That is true, but I need to correct a few things. Prior to this loss, my last loss in an OTB chess game to a human female was to a 17-year-old Dutch girl who later became the under 21 female champion of the Netherlands. She was not exactly a patzer! Sara, my opponent is this loss, is the number five ranked female of any age in the state of Colorado. Again, not exactly a patzer!

The correction is that I beat and drew Sara’s sister, Rebecca, and I beat some female beginners in Tampa prior to moving to Colorado. However, Sara is one of three teenage girls that I have lost to in OTB chess in the past 20 years or so. Prior to getting out of the US Army in 1986, I never lost an OTB chess game to a human female! Now, that record is shattered.

Also, prior to my discharge from the Army, I rarely lost to a kid that was lower rated than I was. Since then, I have had only one loss to a lower rated kid that I can remember. However, that rating difference was over 800 points! I have also barely escaped losses to lower rated kids on at least two occasions in the past five years.

Across the range of ratings that my opponents have had and the time that I have been playing chess, my losses to kids after I graduated from high school have numbered less than the number of wins against them. However, I do not know the exact numbers.

Mike Serovey

One Good Blunder Deservers Another One

This chess game is from the first round of a chess tournament that is being played on Wednesday nights in Colorado Springs, Colorado. There is one round each Wednesday night and I have completed two rounds so far. I have lost both rounds, and there are only eight players in this section! I should have an easy time with Black in the third round.

This event is being played in a restaurant that is called Smashburger. The food is OK, but the playing conditions are poor. The lighting there is not good and I have to wear a hat to keep the overhead lights out of my eyes. The noise level is too high for me to play good chess. Some of the players are wearing headphones and drowning out the noise with music. However, I have yet to try that. With my hearing problems the music may become just as distracting as the ambient noise there. I doubt that I will play there again after I complete this event.

My opponent in this chess game is older than I am and owns his own computer business that he works with his son. Paul misplayed the opening and I ended up two passed pawns on the queenside. However, I blundered on move number 51 and the game was lost for me after that.

Mike Serovey

New Correspondence Chess World Champion!

With just five results to come there is a new correspondence chess world champion from the 17 player World Championship 28 Final.  GM Ing. Leonardo Ljubicic (ICCF 2604) from Croatia leads with an unassailable 10 / 17 (4 wins, 12 draws and 0 losses).

The average ICCF rating of the 17 players was 2582. Second and third places are likely to be between GM Horácio Neto (2617) of Portugal, SIM Petr Boukal (2473) of the Czech Republic and Dr Hans-Dieter Wunderlich (2629) of Germany depending on final results.

You can view the finished games at www.iccf.com/event?id=37632 .  He is one of his shorter wins with attacks on opposite wings: –

John Rhodes

London Chess Classic

I arrived in London yesterday to do some commentary at the London Chess Classic. I don’t usually make predictions but I’m going to stick my neck out for this one. Although Magnus Carlsen hasn’t played well this year I feel sure that he will have noticed and figured out how to do something about it.

Watching top class tournaments is a good way to improve, especially if you try to guess the moves without any technological assistance!

Nigel Davies

Update on 3rd British Webserver Team Tournament Division One

I was beginning to think that every game was going to be drawn in Division 1 of the 3rd British Webserver Team Tournament. I suppose that, because there can be quite a difference in gradings between the players on each board, E.G. 200 to 300 points or more, then the stronger players play carefully and the weaker players are only too happy to draw against a higher rated player. Fortunately, someone had a win at last, which happened to be me on Board 3 for the ‘Pawn Star’ Team, who had won the 1st Tournament and came runners up in the 2nd! A few others have followed my example and have also won their games, although the percentage of draws is still about 81% as I write which includes 2 games which were lost on time. How can you lose on time in a CC game? Well it does happen.

It is difficult to see the leaders at this stage, even with 75% of the games completed, as some teams have finished more games than others. Probably the best indicator is to quote the percentage scores of each team. Last year’s winners, ‘ICCF Warriors’, have 60%, ‘Pawn Stars’ have 58% and ‘BCCA Kings’ have 53% but there is still a lot to play for. The latest news can be found here www.iccf.com/event?id=53439

Here is my first win, hopefully, not my last: –

John Rhodes