Circle 4.2 Finished, and new rating high
I just passed 1400 at ICC, finally, in a crazy game. I was black and it was the Two Knights defense. The game is here. I totally bungled the opening, going down the exchange and two pawns! I got really pissed off at myself, and used it to fuel a desperate attack, throwing everything at his kingside, attacking like a mad dog. I missed a couple of tactics (and I initially missed a mate-in-two at the end), but overall my insane rage helped. That's why I like to listen to Pantera's Walk before games I guess. I know 1400 at ICC isn't impressive: almost everyone reading this is much higher. But I feel very happy, as my goal when I started this (rated in the 900s) was to reach 1200.
Also, finished Circle 4.2, continuing to build up to what will be my tactical baseline.
Also, finished Circle 4.2, continuing to build up to what will be my tactical baseline.
| # Circles | Percent Correct | |
| Problem Set 1 | 14 | 98-99-100-100-100-100-100 100-100-100-99-100-99-98 |
| Problem Set 2 | 15 | 90-93-96-99-99-99-99-99 99-99-99-99-99-99-100 |
| Problem Set 3 | 8 | 85-93-97-99-99-99-99-100 |
| Problem Set 4 | 2 | 73-87 |
| Problem Set 5 | 0 |
NOTE: Circles undertaken with CTB.
posted by Blue Devil Knight at 6/06/2007 09:18:00 PM
24 Comments:
What do you mean by circle 4.2? I thought the circles was doing a set of 1000+ problems seven times. So what do all the percentages mean? Have you modified the program some how or is there something very obvious that I am missing? Please explain as my head hurts now...
Congratulations!
Aggression = ELO growth. It is becoming quite clear. Errors will shed with time, training and experience. And Aggression will remain, and growth will continue.
Woo Hoo.
If Black plays correctly, 8.Ba4 is losing. It wins a piece after 8...h6 (unless you're willing to move the Knight to an un-natural square after which your position will become a disaster area). 8.Be2 is the best move in my opinion. I like playing "Two Knights" myself occasionally :-)
But hey, you won! And that is all that matters. Congrats with your 1400+ ICC rating. That is a pretty big improvement considering you was aiming at 1200.
Wang: I explain it all here. I have broken up the problems into subsets of 300 which I do until I can get them all right very fast (so circle 4.2 is my second time through the fourth set of 300 or so problems).
Thanks hisbestfriend: I am definitely entering a new more agressive phase.
Congratulations with your rating.
Nice game. That is the style you have to adopt in order to learn some serious chess!
[chess mom on]
BTW I notice you are still addicted to pawnmoves in the opening. 6 out of 10 moves!
[chess mom off]
Tempo: I should have played more! h6 needs to be played earlier. Two Knights, all the rules are off for pawns, at least for the main line, which I played up until Bb7. Partly this is all justified by the fact that white is moving his knight and bishop multiple times, so black, with good play, ends up with better development despite all his pawn moves (they grab space and usually place white's pieces on bad squares, though black's knight on the edge is not exactly strong).
Stubborn, eh?
Maybe you should consider a gambit where you don't need these grotesque pawnmoves. I'm not familiar with this gambit, but there are two kinds of gambits: positional gambits and gambits based on piece play. This opening seems to me to fall into the latter. I only tend to play positional gambits since they give you a long lasting advantage.
But it is more a matter of mentality. If you want to play gambits, your moves MUST be efficient. You can't afford to play slow. Only if pawnmoves in the opening give you the creeps, you can expect to become a good gambiteer.
You have to ask yourself the following question: is it possible to be NOT well developed if you make only 2 pawnmoves in the first 10 moves? It makes you more opening-independent.
BTW 8. ... Bb7 isn't a blunder, 12. ... Nc4 is. 12. ... Bxb4 and black is still in the game.
Now, wasn't that fun.
Here is an interesting alternative in this line the Ulstead which is sharp as well. People are most likely less booked on this one.
http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=1224863
I see the traxler as well in your future.
8)
The traxler IS the consequent continuation here to avoid sissy pawnmoves. The matter is: who wants to be consequent?:)
Tempo: we'll see. I want to try out the main line gambit two knights in response to Ng5. While the first ten moves or so are slow, it pretty quickly becomes very fun and tactical.
I put the Traxler in the same category as the Riga. Insane!!
Nice game. I would give 21. f4 an '!' and 9. c3 a '?'. White's queenside just sits and sits for the rest of the game after c3.
Time gaining pawn moves like h6, e4, c6, bxc6 are fine because your opponent is not developing in the meantime. Pawn moves that allow your opponent a lead in development or don't fit your own development (e.g. 9. c3 in your game) are the bad pawn moves. All rules are meant to be broken!
In fact, black only makes I think 3 pawn moves the entire game that didn't make direct threats -- typically attacking pieces -- and black enjoys a lead in development the whole game. I would go so far as to say black has the initiative the entire game, even when white is trading his only developed pieces for a small material advantage.
Thanks for the helpful comments loomis.
Tak: The Ulstead looks pretty crazy. Where do you find this stuff? I may have to give it a shot in some blitz games. I bet I'll throw quite a few people off with it, which is always fun :) I don't think I'm ready for the Traxler :)
BDK,
You understand more about chess than I. Remember, I come to your site to learn from you even though my playchess rating is over 1400 for blitz and almost 1700 for 20 minute plus games. Don't worry about the rating. It isn't a true indicator of actually playing strength or chess knowledge. It is just a tool so organizers of tournaments and chess federation have an idea how to pair people. You may be stronger or weaker than that number value. I would say you are stronger in knowledge than your results suggest, meaning that you have some habit(bad)during your play, which needs to be objectively found and then eliminated. We all have them, even GM's. See Jon Rowson's interview on chessvibes...or read his book "Chess Zebras" and you will see what I mean.
Good jobe dude, keep up the good work.
Ugh, Bb7 rightly deserves that question mark. IMO, the bishop was better placed on c8. You played with urgency after you thought you were busted. Imagine if you played with that attitude from the first move. ie, caveman chess
The Marin book cover shows Chigorin line of ruy lopez. So there's the proof.
Thx for the hall of fame induction.
Other great songs for chess violence:
Dimmu Borgir - "Blessings Upon the Throne of Tyranny"
Slayer - "Angel of Death" "Raining Blood"
etc....
You should write a book called "Caveman Chess." That would be sweet.
Blue Devil Knight said: "Hopefully Circle 4.2 won't take two months."
Congratulations on taking just under 3 weeks for circle 4.2. Everything gets better with practice, eh?
Where did I get this stuff. Mostly from books and chessgames.com. The game I sent you Estrin vs Berliner is considered by some to be one of the most beautiful games ever played. It is a correspondance game by two who were correspondance world champions. I have never played the Ulstead but it does look interesting. it has the thematic black response the threat by pawn capturing whites most forward piece. This is common in alot of 2 knight,guico and scotch gambit lines.
I own the 5 dollar book listed in collection 6. Beliavsky played 2 of the highest rated traxlers played one against anand and one in a practice game against Karpov.
http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chesscollection?user=tak+traxler
This book is where I learned about this game. If you want to delve deeper into the two knights I suggest that you look into the games in this collection as well as some of Chigorins games . The 2 knights is the main reason I still continue to want to play 1...e5. Black has great chances and always a fighting game. I would always much rather play black than white in the two knights.
As for the Traxler, I would not call it crazy just wild. In fact it is quite sensible for me to play this line against a higher level opponents who are not booked up against it.
btw is the Riga the Latvian?
I just got Pinski's book on the Two Knight's. I'm going to add the Ulvestad to my repertoire. It seems like a great weapon: it seems to give more activity, better placed Knight, and only a slightly weaker pawn structure (you end up with 3 pawn islands rather than 2).
My opponent tomorrow plays the Ng5 version. I am starting to think I've just started to understand the main line a little bit.
The only real chess mom thing on this game I am going to give you, you simply cannot leave a mate hanging on the board like that.
Other than that. One of the sicko attraction of the two knights defense is that it often becomes anti-maxim. Often the ugly moves are the right moves, and the pretty moves are the wrong one.
Classically, black stands with extraordinary piece comparative piece mobility, and poor pawn structure, and white looks right, but has a difficult time during the second round of battles.
It is the two knights that tends to maximize the value of time and mobility, over structure and material.
The games are the exception that help prove the rule. And even if you are not playing the two knights, you will find it's lessons in other systems.
HBF: Hmmm, I guess I can sometimes.
Screw you mom!
:P
HBF: that game was a very good lesson in how important initiative and timing can be, as opposed to merely material factors, for attacking. Very instructive for me.
hearty congratulations!
you have worked hard, and with a good solid intelect, and fun all together with sharing your world here.
thank you for all that you do for the chess blog environment.
warmly, dk
finally got to look at your 1400 game. a real path of destruction. how sweet the joy. thank you. dk
Post a Comment
<< Home