2017 RA Club Championship January 19 to March 2

[Kevin Pacey]

Re: modern odds matches

Chess seems to have the best starting position for the given pieces and their movements, IMHO. Some Chess960 starting positions are definitely worse than others, I've read long ago. Other drawbacks of Chess960 are that there would be no opening books to sell, and that merchandising and movie representation of such a board game seems harder since there is no starting position to display (the same is true for Go). A way around this is to have one set starting position for, say, 100 years (or 1 year, as Kasparov has suggested), but that would kind of negate the original major aim of Chess960.

[John Upper]

Re: modern odds matches

...simply have to start thinking from move one?

That's exactly why some players like Fischer Random/Chess 960.

And why some players hate Fischer Random/Chess 960.

[Kevin Pacey]

Re: modern odds matches

Maybe there was money involved in the GM vs. computer at odds games. :) For a long time I've felt that by even 'looking' at more than one chessboard at a time, 'moving' the pieces around, etc., computers were in effect 'cheating', even though it is unavoidable for them. Banning computers from playing in events doesn't do anything about computer-assisted cheating, though.

[Brad Thomson]

Re: modern odds matches

Why do they ever allow computers to play with the knowledge of opening book that humans have developed over the years? Should not the computer simply have to start thinking from move one?

[John Upper]

modern odds matches

It is curious that play at odds has fallen out of popularity....

Some GMs are not too proud to receive material odds matches against computers...

The Komodo team ran a few of them last year, as this was thought to be the only way of making humans competitive with their monster program. The games had various handicaps -- material, moves, moves and material --- and the results were interesting, and much more interesting than they would have been in a straight-up man vs machine match.

Nakamura vs Komodo:
https://www.chess.com/news/komodo-be...al-battle-1331

Mikhalevski vs Komodo:
https://www.chess.com/news/view/komo...ura-match-5456

2015 matches
https://en.chessbase.com/post/komodo...es-against-gms

Handicap: less time and no opening book
there was a match in 2016 where Komodo played with 3 minutes +1 sec vs 90 + 30, and had an opening book of only 3 moves... but somehow played the first 20 moves of a Sicilian Sveshnikov and drew with GM Sergey Erenburg:

[Event "Blitz 90m+30s-3m+1s"]
[Site "Bethesda"]
[Date "2016.06.26"]
[Round "3"]
[White "Erenburg, Sergey"]
[Black "Komodo 1660.00 64-bit"]
[Result "1/2-1/2"]
[ECO "B33"]
[Annotator "Kaufman,Larry"]
[PlyCount "124"]
[EventDate "2016.??.??"]
[EventType "blitz"]

1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 e6 3. d4 cxd4 {At this point Komodo was out of its limited
match book.} 4. Nxd4 Nf6 5. Nc3 Nc6 6. Ndb5 d6 7. Bf4 e5 8. Bg5 a6 9. Na3 b5
10. Nd5 Be7 11. Bxf6 Bxf6 12. c4 (12. c3) 12... b4 13. Nc2 Rb8 (13... a5) 14.
b3 Bg5 15. g3 Bh6 (15... O-O 16. Bg2 a5 (16... Be6 $11) 17. O-O Ne7 18. h4 Bh6
19. Nxe7+ Qxe7 20. Qd5 Qc7 21. Rad1 Rd8 22. Kh2 Bg4 23. Rde1 {1-0 (55)
Nakamura,H (2759)-Van Wely,L (2692) Wijk aan Zee 2012}) 16. h4 O-O 17. Bh3 Be6
{Rogozenco,D: 'A typical answer. Black agrees to trade the bishops (which
would favor White), but ... on square e6 (which would favor Black, solving the
problem of square d5).'} 18. Kf1 a5 19. Kg2 Rb7 {Rogozenco,D: 'Leko
demonstrates the resources of Black's position. It will become clear soon that
besides preparing the transfer of the rook to the kingside, the last move also
prepares a maneuver for the knight.'} (19... Kh8 20. Qd3 Qd7 21. Bf5 g6 22. Bh3
Bxh3+ 23. Rxh3 f5 24. f3 fxe4 25. Qxe4 Qf5 26. Re1 Rb7 27. g4 Qxe4 28. Rxe4 $11
{1/2-1/2 Marcetic,M (2258)-Maksimovic,S (2267)/Vrnjacka Banja 2005 (33)}) (
19... Ne7 $5 20. Nxe7+ Qxe7 21. Qd3 $14) 20. Qd3 (20. Bf5 {Rogozenco,D: 'A
curious case when both sides are trying to trade a piece and at the same time
create double-pawns in their own pawn structure.'} Kh8 21. Qd3 Nb8 {Rogozenco,
D: '!' Rogozenco,D: 'The knight goes to c5.'} 22. Rad1 Na6 23. Qf3 {Rogozenco,
D: 'A provokative move. Morozevich believes that as long as his pieces are on
the light squares, there is little danger for White.'} g6 24. Bh3 f5 25. h5
fxe4 26. Qxe4 Nc5 27. Qe2 Bxd5+ 28. Rxd5 Rbf7 {Rogozenco,D: 'White succeeded
to implement his "light-squared strategy", but he obviously underestimated
Black's dynamic resources.'} 29. Rf1 gxh5 30. Qxh5 Qf6 31. Bg4 Ne4 {Rogozenco,
D: '!' Rogozenco,D: 'Provoking the advance of the f-pawn, which will create
another target - pawn g3. Notice that Black can find targets for attack only
on the dark squares and from this point of view Morozevich was right. The
problem is that Black's active pieces are too strong and inevitably cooperate
much better. This dynamic factor always secures Black enough counterplay.'} 32.
f3 Qg7 33. Rdd1 Nf6 {Rogozenco,D: 'Not bad, but Black had much more
perspective ideas.'} ({Interesting was} 33... Nxg3 $5 34. Kxg3 Rf6 {followed
by Bf4 and Rh6.}) ({The simplest way to achieve a big advantage was} 33... Nd2
34. Rf2 Rf6 {This move, which practically wins the game, escaped Leko's
attention. Black threatens 34...Ne4 35.Rf1 Nxg3 36.Kxg3 Bf4+ followed by ...
Rh6 - which would have been the complete failure of Morozevich's strategical
concept.} ({Leko saw} 34... Ne4 {which makes a draw, but he correctly was
seeking for more.})) 34. Qh3 Nxg4 35. Qxg4 Qf6 ({The endgame after} 35... Qxg4
36. fxg4 Rxf1 37. Rxf1 Rxf1 38. Kxf1 Kg7 39. Ke2 e4 {is probably a draw:} 40.
Nd4 Kf6 {and White cannot win pawn a5:} 41. Nc6 Ke6 42. Nxa5 $2 Kd7 43. c5 d5
$1 $19) 36. Qe4 Bf4 {Rogozenco,D: 'Finally Leko can use his bishop for attack.
The Hungarian must have been fascinated by this idea and he lost too much time
making it work.'} 37. Kf2 {Rogozenco,D: '!'} (37. gxf4 Qh4 $1 38. Rf2 Rxf4 {
followed by 38...e4 secures Black a strong attack.}) 37... Qh6 38. gxf4 Rxf4
39. Rh1 Qg7 40. Qd5 e4 {Rogozenco,D: '?' Rogozenco,D: 'The fatal mistake in
time trouble.'} ({Black makes a draw with} 40... Rxf3+ 41. Qxf3 e4 $1 42. Qxf8+
Qxf8+ 43. Ke1 ({or} 43. Ke3 Qf3+ 44. Kd2 Qf4+) 43... Qf3 $11) 41. Rdg1 {
Rogozenco,D: '!'} Rxf3+ 42. Ke2 Rf2+ 43. Kd1 {Rogozenco,D: 'The knight on c2
turns out to be a great defender.'} Qe5 (43... Qc3 44. Rxh7+ Kxh7 45. Qh5#) 44.
Rh5 {Rogozenco,D: '+-'} Rf1+ 45. Rxf1 Rxf1+ 46. Ke2 Qf4 47. Qd4+ Kg8 48. Rg5+
Qxg5 49. Kxf1 Qc1+ 50. Ne1 Qf4+ 51. Kg1 Qg5+ 52. Ng2 Qc1+ 53. Kh2 Qh6+ 54. Kg3
Qg5+ 55. Kf2 {1-0 (54) Morozevich,A (2707)-Leko,P (2763) San Luis 2005 CBM 110
[Rogozenco,D]}) 20... Nb8 21. Rad1 Nd7 $146 {Upper: just to reinforce an
interesting point: Komodo had been playing this position on its own -- with no
opening book database to refer to -- since move 3, and only here deviates from
high-level GM theory.... despite playing at 3 min + 1 sec per move.} (21... Na6
22. f4 (22. Qf3 Nc5 23. Ne1 Na6 24. Qh5 Nc5 25. Qe2 Na6 (25... Qc8 26. Nd3
Bxh3+ 27. Rxh3 Ne6 28. Ne1 Nd4 29. Rxd4 exd4 30. Nc2 Re8 31. g4 Bc1 32. Nxd4
$16 {1-0 (45) Ismagambetov,A (2451)-Kozlov,R (2350) Astana 2007}) 26. Qf3 Ra7
27. Nc2 Nc5 28. a3 Rb7 29. axb4 axb4 30. Rb1 Bxd5 31. cxd5 Qb6 32. Qe2 Ra8 $15
{0-1 (53) Kosintseva,N (2493)-Kovalevskaya,E (2434) Gorodets 2006}) 22... Nc5
23. Qf3 exf4 24. Nxf4 Bxh3+ $2 (24... Bxf4 $142 $15) 25. Nxh3 Re8 26. Rhe1 Rbe7
27. Nf2 Qb6 28. Ng4 Nxe4 29. Nd4 Kf8 30. Nxh6 gxh6 31. Qf4 d5 32. Nf5 Re5 33.
Rxd5 Qf6 34. Rxe5 Qxe5 35. Rxe4 Qxe4+ {0-1 (34) Golubev,R (2361)-Erzhanov,A
(2240) Moscow 2015}) 22. Qe2 Ra7 23. Ne1 Nc5 24. Nd3 Bxd5 25. Nxc5 Bc6 26. Nd3
Qe7 27. Bg4 Raa8 28. Bf3 g6 29. h5 Bg5 30. Kg1 Kg7 31. Bg2 Rad8 32. Ne1 Qa7 33.
Qg4 $6 h6 34. Qe2 Rh8 35. Nf3 Be7 36. Ne1 Bg5 37. Nf3 Bf6 38. Ne1 Be7 39. Nc2
Bg5 40. Ne1 Rhg8 41. Nf3 Bf6 42. Ne1 Kh7 43. Kf1 Rgf8 44. Kg1 Bb7 45. Nc2 Bg5
46. Ne1 Kg7 47. Nf3 Bf6 48. Ne1 Qb6 49. Nc2 Bg5 50. Ne1 Be7 51. Nc2 Ra8 52. Ne3
a4 53. Kh2 axb3 54. axb3 Ra3 55. Rd3 Qa7 56. Rhd1 Ra5 57. Qg4 Bc8 58. Qe2 Ra2
59. R1d2 Ra5 60. Rd1 Ra2 61. R1d2 Ra5 62. Rd1 Ra2 1/2-1/2

[Brad Thomson]

Re: 2017 RA Club Championship January 19 to March 2

The only way to encourage more odds games may be to play them for money.

Exactly.

For example, Kevin, I might offer to play you for $100 with odds of two pawns. You might offer to play Bator for $100 if he gives you whatever. Then all of the spectators could wager on who wins!

[Brad Thomson]

Re: 2017 RA Club Championship January 19 to March 2

Your ingenious, or do I mean to say, disingenuous, creativity has never ceased to amaze me, Grandmasterov. :)

[Neil Frarey]

Re: 2017 RA Club Championship January 19 to March 2

It might be quite instructive to have an evening of chess where club members are paired with such a large difference in ratings equalized by the giving of odds.

Followed by the instruction of an IM, or whomever (perhaps me), as to why the player that received the odds lost, or rather how they could have conducted a stronger game.

[Kevin Pacey]

Re: 2017 RA Club Championship January 19 to March 2

I've gotten the feeling that for a long time people have been too proud to take material odds, even against a much stronger player. Possibly they just hope to kick a supposedly stronger player's butt in a normal game without odds, rather than face the chance of losing even more ignominiously than they would otherwise, and/or serve as potential bragging fodder for the stronger player, who has a built-in excuse if he loses. It may also be thanks to brilliancy books that show odds games. The only way to encourage more odds games may be to play them for money.

Here's a link that includes discussion of the rating equivalent of pawn or knight odds for a game of chess (may be useful):

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chess_...ing_equivalent

[Gordon Ritchie]

Re: 2017 RA Club Championship January 19 to March 2

It is curious that play at odds has fallen out of popularity---pawn and move, knight, etc. It used to be quite commonplace in the 19th and early 20th centuries. When Morphy came home to the USA he would only play at odds, for example. It was one---perhaps the only---way of permitting a weaker player to take on a strong player with a chance of winning. Even in the 60s, I seem to recall the occasional game or even tournament at odds.

[Kevin Pacey]

Re: Pairings for Round 4 of 2017 RA Club Championship January 19 to March 2

I've had some difficulties against Garland before... in any case I don't think the CFC rates games with any sort of odds given (except if one shows up a little late and loses some time on the clock).

Fwiw, I think I am usually lucky when I play chess on St. Patrick's Day. Groundhog Day seems to be the opposite way for me lately.

[Neil Frarey]

Re: Pairings for Round 4 of 2017 RA Club Championship January 19 to March 2

Some interesting pairings in there ... Pacey should give Best pawn odds.

[Halldor P. Palsson]

Pairings for Round 4 of 2017 RA Club Championship January 19 to March 2

If there are no more bye requests :) then this is a possible pairing for round 4.

Pairings for Round 4. 2017 RA Club Ch: 

Bd	#	Res	White	#	Res	Black
1	2		David Gordon (2310 3.0)	16		David Fei (2022 3.0)
2	15		Zachary Dukic (2078 3.0)	23		Dan Kearnan (1878 3.0)
3	7		Stijn De Kerpel (2196 2.5)	8		Sam Marin (2155 2.5)
4	5		Ramon J. Cova (2222 2.0)	19		Ray Kuryliw (1993 2.5)
5	24		Alex Danilov (1843 2.0)	6		John Upper (2212 2.0)
6	27		Gordon Ritchie (1808 2.0)	10		William G. Doubleday (2136 2.0)
7	11		Francesco Dunne (2118 2.0)	17		Sasha Solunac (2010 2.0)
8	41		Romy Peters (1501 2.0)	12		Ben Kellar (2115 2.0)
9	13		Dusan Simic (2100 2.0)	37		Denis Lemieux (1563 2.0)
10	46		Noah Marchildon (1360 2.0)	14		Svitlana Demchenko (2086 2.0)
11	48		David Brock (1280 2.0)	4		Kevin Pacey (2225 1.5)
12	34		Garland Best (1676 1.5)	20		Jeff Groot-Lipman (1928 1.5)
13	26		Peter Arseneau (1822 1.5)	49		Jeremy Sztuka (1264 1.5)
14	50		Daniel Wang (1133 1.5)	33		Simon Perkins (1728 1.5)
15	38		Gerard Felderhof (1555 1.0)	21		Abdelaziz Mahdjoubi (1912 1.0)
16	39		Yves Arsenault (1546 1.0)	22		Stefan Lanceman (1880 1.0)
17	25		Amos Kuttner (1828 1.0)	42		Keven Eyre (1418 1.0)
18	40		Drew Metcalfe (1511 1.0)	28		Konstantin Vlasenko (1784 1.0)
19	29		Jan Huus (1779 1.0)	47		Alexander Stopic (1353 1.0)
20	30		Daniel Xu (1753 1.0)	51		Daniel Labib (1117 1.0)
21	43		Xu Rong [Caroline] Chen (1418 1.0)	31		Eric Van Dusen (1742 1.0)
22	36		Vikram Mallur (1628 1.0)	53		Michaell Tan (1072 1.0)
23	45		Yaorui Xu (1377 0.5)	35		Michael Abt (1668 0.5)
24	54		Dave Westbury (1054 0.5)	44		Victor Samuel (1377 0.5)
25	52		Rami Labib (1080 0.5)	32		Paul St. Pierre (1731 0.0)
26	55		Jonathan Levine (1005 0.0)	56		Emil Wang (982 0.0)
 	57	½ 	Samer Hockayem (unr. 1.0)	 	 	BYE
 	3	½ 	Mate Marinkovic (2269 2.0)	 	 	BYE
 	9	½ 	Saeid Sadeghi (2149 2.5)	 	 	BYE
 	18	½ 	Halldor P Palsson (2004 1.5)	 	 	BYE
 	1	½ 	Qiyu Zhou (2326 2.0)	 	 	BYE

[Halldor P. Palsson]

Standingss after Round 3 of 2017 RA Club Championship January 19 to March 2

2017 RA Club Ch

#	Place	Name	Rtng	Rd 1	Rd 2	Rd 3	Tot
1	1-4	David Gordon	2310	W55	W17	W15	3.0
2	 	Zachary Dukic	2078	W46	W10	W9	3.0
3	 	David Fei	2022	W24	W11	W14	3.0
4	 	Dan Kearnan	1878	W54	W13	W25	3.0
5	5-8	Stijn De Kerpel	2196	W41	D8	W27	2.5
6	 	Sam Marin	2155	W42	D27	W28	2.5
7	 	Saeid Sadeghi	2149	W43	W33	H---	2.5
8	 	Ray Kuryliw	1993	W32	D5	W30	2.5
9	9-24	Qiyu Zhou	2326	W38	W16	L2	2.0
10	 	Mate Marinkovic	2269	W29	L2	W37	2.0
11	 	Ramon J. Cova	2222	W50	L3	W39	2.0
12	 	John Upper	2212	L40	W45	W38	2.0
13	 	William G. Doubleday	2136	W22	L4	W40	2.0
14	 	Francesco Dunne	2118	W44	W37	L3	2.0
15	 	Ben Kellar	2115	W45	W40	L1	2.0
16	 	Dusan Simic	2100	W51	L9	W41	2.0
17	 	Svitlana Demchenko	2086	W52	L1	W43	2.0
18	 	Sasha Solunac	2010	W31	H---	D20	2.0
19	 	Alex Danilov	1843	H---	D39	W44	2.0
20	 	Gordon Ritchie	1808	H---	W48	D18	2.0
21	 	Denis Lemieux	1563	H---	H---	W49	2.0
22	 	Romy Peters	1501	L13	W57	W33	2.0
23	 	Noah Marchildon	1360	H---	H---	W34	2.0
24	 	David Brock	1280	L3	W55	W50	2.0
25	25-32	Kevin Pacey	2225	H---	W36	L4	1.5
26	 	Halldor P Palsson	2004	H---	H---	H---	1.5
27	 	Jeff Groot-Lipman	1928	W47	D6	L5	1.5
28	 	Peter Arseneau	1822	W56	H---	L6	1.5
29	 	Simon Perkins	1728	L10	W46	H---	1.5
30	 	Garland Best	1676	H---	W35	L8	1.5
31	 	Jeremy Sztuka	1264	L18	H---	W54	1.5
32	 	Daniel Wang	1133	L8	D50	W52	1.5
33	33-49	Abdelaziz Mahdjoubi	1912	W53	L7	L22	1.0
34	 	Stefan Lanceman	1880	H---	H---	L23	1.0
35	 	Amos Kuttner	1828	H---	L30	H---	1.0
36	 	Konstantin Vlasenko	1784	H---	L25	H---	1.0
37	 	Jan Huus	1779	W57	L14	L10	1.0
38	 	Daniel Xu	1753	L9	W51	L12	1.0
39	 	Eric Van Dusen	1742	H---	D19	L11	1.0
40	 	Vikram Mallur	1628	W12	L15	L13	1.0
41	 	Gerard Felderhof	1555	L5	W47	L16	1.0
42	 	Yves Arsenault	1546	L6	D54	D48	1.0
43	 	Drew Metcalfe	1511	L7	W53	L17	1.0
44	 	Keven Eyre	1418	L14	W56	L19	1.0
45	 	Xu Rong [Caroline] Chen	1418	L15	L12	W57	1.0
46	 	Alexander Stopic	1353	L2	L29	W56	1.0
47	 	Daniel Labib	1117	L27	L41	W55	1.0
48	 	Michaell Tan	1072	H---	L20	D42	1.0
49	 	Samer Hockayem	unr.	H---	H---	L21	1.0
50	50-54	Michael Abt	1668	L11	D32	L24	0.5
51	 	Victor Samuel	1377	L16	L38	D53	0.5
52	 	Yaorui Xu	1377	L17	H---	L32	0.5
53	 	Rami Labib	1080	L33	L43	D51	0.5
54	 	Dave Westbury	1054	L4	D42	L31	0.5
55	55-57	Paul St. Pierre	1731	L1	L24	L47	0.0
56	 	Jonathan Levine	1005	L28	L44	L46	0.0
57	 	Emil Wang	982	L37	L22	L45	0.0

[David Fei]

Re: Round 3 of 2017 RA Club Championship January 19 to March 2

Hi Halldor, could you post the current standings, please?