Report – 28 March 2008
Flood Cup
Results:
Tony Howes ½ Ray Adams ½
Kieran Lyons v Andrew Robinson – postponed to April 4
Brian Willcock ½ Brendan Griffen ½
Greg Colwell v Russell Lyons – postponed to April 4
Garvin Gray 1 Mark Taylor 0
Peter Ford 0 Nathan Shaw 1
Nick Kospartov v James Hiller – postponed to April 4
Josh Ford 0 John Roper 1
Five matches were played tonight. Tony lost a piece for two pawns early on, however his forward position of his pawns combined with Ray’s pieces being tied up compensated for this. Tony had arrived about 30 minutes late which didn’t help his cause but managed a knight fork on two rooks and despite time trouble (he was under four minutes on the clock) managed to scramble a draw. Ray’s account of the game:
It was a French Winawer. I was beginning to get a good position when Tony perpetrated a combination in which he gained a rook & 2 pawns for the investment of a Bishop & Knight. It began with his white squared Bishop sacking onto my c4 pawn. The resulting position had traps for both sides, it was hard fought. Careful defence on black's part avoided some material incentives which would have compromised the defensive position against white's dangerous central pawn majority. For a while I had 45 minutes but this soon reduced to 34, while he was still managing well, holding his approx 3 minutes. With N, B and 4 pawns against R & 6 pawns, I offerred the draw for a second time around 11-30 pm. I didn't want to make a tired mistake here. He then thought, running his clock down to about 30 sec, and then shook hands on the draw.
Two other players also drew to maintain unbeaten records. Brendan’s summary of the game below is so comprehensive that nothing needs to be added, other than to say that Brian’s exact time of arrival at the board was 8:51pm.
After starting the clock at 8pm I waited half-an-hour for Brian to arrive. After such time I asked Andrew for his home phone number and called him up. Being on my mobile I was expecting a quick yes/no answer and that would be the end of it. He put my on hold and went to his computer to check the dates and see whether he was playing or not. After 3 or so minutes (and a few of my $$ later) he returned and said 'Ohh - I thought that the Good Friday break was for two weeks - I guess I can drive in now - see you in half-an-hour'. His clock still running Brian wildly came in and played e4.
I normally play the Sicilian against e4 but I had seen a game on the website where Brian played the Scotch as white and thought I would play into his pet opening and catch him out. But after 7. Be2 and not the theoretical Bc4 I could only see equality with a massive exchange ahead. Brian never allowed for complications and just did a massive trade off to a knight and 6 pawns each endgame. He then blundered the game with a miscalculated pawn push allowing me to win a pawn with check. I had the game in the bag then I simply got too aggressive and tried to promote my pawn with the vision that it was unstoppable. Brian placed his knight calmly on e1 and I lost the pawn a few moves later (his king was closer). I then turned my attention to the b file where we had our two remaining pawns standing off - I captured his pawn a few moves later because his pieces were occupied with my g-file pawn.
Trying to win a knight-pawn v knight endgame is theoretically drawn but I thought I would try and slip Brian up once again (by now I knew endgame wasn't his strongest area). However after much fiddling around with knights and heading into about 12.30am I got the one pawn push (to b4) that I was hoping for - even through it happened at move 88!. Though this reset my 50 moves it was still going to be another 20 moves before I could enable such a thing to happen again. Ray, Josh and Peter were all bleary eyed and I had a headache from calculating knight moves so many times. I could have pushed on until sunrise with those stupid time controls (we both had about 30 minutes left (and growing)) but because I came with Peter it was only fair that I just draw the game so he and Josh could go home. The game was drawn at 12.48am after 96 moves. I congratulate Brian for his determination and will-to-(draw) :).
A few points of the game:
1. Brian made an illegal move in the endgame (not realising he was in check and moved a pawn) and I (stupidly) tried to claim it until I realised you can't in these time controls.
2. Towards the end were talking about the position and he said almost everything is a 'stigmatism' for him! I said 'It's not much easier from where I'm looking either!'
3. Ray broke into cheer after I played 92. ... Ka2 (forcing a draw).
4. Brian forgot to hit his clock on several occasions and asked if it was his move even though he had been at the table the whole time. However with the ridiculous time controls (I mean + 1 minute - no-one in the world plays this) it didn't matter.
5. After analysis on the computer (Rybka) the only blunder by either player was Brian’s endgame pawn push. Every other move see no advantage bigger than +-0.3 for either side.
Brian also had something to say:
…the game with Brendan lasted until about 12.50. The game had evolved into a P + N (Brendan) v. N, with as you had surmised me in front on time. At last Brendan made a move that allowed me to win the pawn – great shout of relief from Ray. I made full use of the late hour to urge reform of Flood Cup Rules – though to be fair the game itself only lasted four hours.
Ray’s account:
Anyway this game was at about move 50 or more, Brian had about 40 min and Brendan about 21 min in a Knight & 'b' Pawn vs Knight endgame. Brendan had got his pawn to b4. It was about 12-30 am. Although both players were tired, they were beginning to lose patience (Brendan more than Brian). Both players were actually beginning to gain time. Thus Brendan allowed Brian's King to get his Knight at d5, while Brians Knight was at d3 and Brendan's King at about b3. Thus even if Brendan's king attacked the knight next move, it coud retreat to a square such as c5, to control the square in front of the pawn, and if necessary, Brian could protect the Knight with his King. Thus it also ended as a draw.
Further from Brian:
What amused me was his description of his mistake at the end as forcing a draw – sounds more positive than conceding one. From memory he also was unsure during the game whether or not N+P v N was a draw. I am also surprised that his computer approved of all but one move – I thought he had stronger moves during the game and I made a N move in the late game based on an astigmatic view of the board that allowed him to advance his pawn without my getting the fork of K and P that I thought I had seen.
I suppose it is also a bit odd that if he was suffering from headaches and guilt and knew that the position was drawn he did not accept the draw, After all I made it plain that there was no way I could win with only a Knight.
Still it seems there will be one other determined opponent of the time control rules at the AGM.
I would in defence of my late arrival repeat that I thought there was a catch up week as has been allowed I think for past present and future rounds – and thought that at the farewells before Easter that there would be a three week break before the next round. I would also add that because of my delusion I had made no preparations for the game.
And even further:
Just reread his account – he did not make a draw to help everyone – he conceded a draw as a result of a blunder that he would have liked to retract! Of course I sympathise with his belief that he might swindle a win against such a player.
The match itself: 20080328_bwillcock_bgriffen.pgn
Mark looked like he meant business in his game with Garvin and seemed quite focussed pre-match, although this could have been because he is very busy at work just now. Garvin and Mark played in the SW corner of B7 and had a close game with Garvin a pawn up for most of it. However Mark chance of a kingside attack collapsed with a complete exchange of queen and rooks, meaning that his bishop was trapped and allowed Garvin’s unchallenged knight a quick mopping up exercise.
Peter looked like he had some chance against Nathan, but managed to come worse off after a series of exchanges that left him a piece down and two rooks stuck on the back row (R+R vs R+B+N). Once Nathan’s minor pieces became active the game was over as a contest. Nathan’s brief report as follows:
I beat Peter, but when we went over the game later we realised that my move which seemed to avoid Peter's knight fork actually did nothing of the sort, so Peter could have been up the exchange early on.
The final game of the night was won comfortably by John, however it was notable in that the game was played with colours reversed and this was only reported well after the game had ended. Thus, the result stands.
The Lyons games will be played next Friday night, as will the Kospartov-Hiller clash, thanks to Nick’s generosity.
Flood Cup 2008: Current standings
All players to play 7 games
|
No. |
NAME |
POINTS |
PLAYED |
|
1 |
Tony Howes |
2.5 |
3 |
|
2 |
Ray Adams |
2.5 |
3 |
|
3 |
Brian Willcock |
2 |
3 |
|
4 |
Garvin Gray |
2 |
3 |
|
5 |
Nathan Shaw |
2 |
3 |
|
6 |
Brendan Griffen |
2 |
3 |
|
7 |
Andrew Robinson |
1.5 |
2 |
|
8 |
Kieran Lyons |
1.5 |
2 |
|
9 |
Russell Lyons |
1 |
2 |
|
10 |
Greg Colwell |
1 |
2 |
|
11 |
Mark Taylor |
1 |
3 |
|
12 |
John Roper |
1 |
3 |
|
13 |
Peter Ford |
1 |
3 |
|
14 |
Nick Kospartov |
0 |
2 |
|
15 |
James Hiller |
0 |
2 |
|
16 |
Josh Ford |
0 |
3 |
Flood Cup 2008 results in detail
Quote of the night
“So, you wouldn’t recommend chesschat as a dating website?” – Andrew sussing out new poster Brendan on the nature of this chess website, the hottest place to get up-to-date information and opinions on Australian chess.
“How did you end up drawing with Brian last week?” – Brendan querying Andrew in a derisory tone about his dropping (rather than gaining) a half-point in round 2.