Rust, old age, conditioning and a dilemma

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Rust, old age, conditioning and a dilemma

    I played in the Michigan Masters and Experts tournament last weekend. I lost about ten points in USCF rating and probably a few points from my FIDE rating. The tournament featured a fairly aggressive schedule with three rounds in a day on the first day and a time control of 90 minutes with a 30 second increment. The schedule did not really allow for a break between rounds if your games went the limit.

    These type of tournaments are a good reality check for those of us who rely too much on online blitz and actrive chess to get into practice.

    In the best of circumstances much has to go right for me to be able to play decent chess these days. I need a good night's sleep and I have to strike a balance on keeping my blood sugar within a good range.

    I drove up to Lansing in the morning meaning that I had to go quite early to allow for any border glitches that might delay me. Scratch the sleep.

    My best game was in the first round when I played a young player who was about 250 points higher than me. I got into a difficult position and into a position where I was in a bit of a bind but possibly defendable with the right amount of patience. Alas my patience ran out and my opponent broke through.

    In the fourth round, after taking a bye in the third round and third game of the day, I played a FIDE master and he taught me a lesson which I have learned many times before which is that you shouldn't rely on ten year old memories of obsolete theory and hope it will all work out. It was quite brutal.

    The second round was interesting in the way that a car wreck can be interesting. I was playing someone that was a little higher rated than me. At the beginning of the game he had a special request. For religious reasons, he could not press his clock and asked me to do it for him. I did not understand that he would also not be keeping score. He offered to give me six minutes or give himself a six minute penalty as compensation. I told him that he would have to remind me when I forgot to press his clock as it was a bit of an unnatural situation not encountered in my 50+ tournament career. I did a poor job of it. He did not remind me but just stared at the clock when I forgot to press on the completion of his move.

    He played some weird opening moves and in response I played some weird opening moves and then I got into trouble and fell under a withering attack. To make a long story short, I did not realize how unnatural pressing my opponents clock would be. In theory, I won on time but did not claim it because I felt bad about my inability to remember to press his clock. To be fair, I often forget to press my own clock so it was not malicious but the second problem revealed itself in relying too much on blitz and 15/10 games. My clock had an hour and ten minutes left when he overstepped the time.

    It looked like he might checkmate me for a while but somehow I managed to liquidate into an opposite coloured bishops ending and move my pawns from his bishop's colour to my bishops colour and we got into a theoretically drawn ending.

    I don't know that I would agree to such an arrangement again given that I now realize the difficulty of acting against more than fifty years of conditioning. Remembering to press his clock probably disrupted my concentration enough to contribute to my poor play. I did recover but am sure that there must have been a way for him to have won. Not having to keep score or press your clock is probably worth a bit more than six minutes which I didn't actually require him to provide in any case.

    Had I claimed the win on time, I would have gained a few points on the tournament rather than losing a few points but in the end it doesn't make much of a difference because my U.S.C.F. floor is 2000 which while I have flirted with a bit having dropped 180 points or so from my peak, bad tournaments are usually followed by good tournaments and my rating goes up and down.

  • #2
    I played a couple of casual games against a man at the downtown library, a few years ago. He was - as I remember - an orthodox Jew, and their religious code forbids unneessary work on the Sabbath. Like you, I found it very hard to remember to press the clock after his moves, and eventually we just decided to play with no clock.

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by Vlad Drkulec View Post
      a fairly aggressive schedule with three rounds in a day on the first day and a time control of 90 minutes with a 30 second increment. .
      During and after organizing 20 this kind of tournaments I have never thought about the schedule as aggressive. Tough - yes. Demanding - yes Aggressive - never.
      Anyway, you went the senior's path by taking a R3 bye :)

      How was a border crossing?

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by Vlad Drkulec View Post
        I played in the Michigan Masters and Experts tournament last weekend.

        ...some background clipped for the reply

        The second round was interesting in the way that a car wreck can be interesting. I was playing someone that was a little higher rated than me. At the beginning of the game he had a special request. For religious reasons, he could not press his clock and asked me to do it for him. I did not understand that he would also not be keeping score. He offered to give me six minutes or give himself a six minute penalty as compensation. I told him that he would have to remind me when I forgot to press his clock as it was a bit of an unnatural situation not encountered in my 50+ tournament career. I did a poor job of it. He did not remind me but just stared at the clock when I forgot to press on the completion of his move.

        He played some weird opening moves and in response I played some weird opening moves and then I got into trouble and fell under a withering attack. To make a long story short, I did not realize how unnatural pressing my opponents clock would be. In theory, I won on time but did not claim it because I felt bad about my inability to remember to press his clock. To be fair, I often forget to press my own clock so it was not malicious but the second problem revealed itself in relying too much on blitz and 15/10 games. My clock had an hour and ten minutes left when he overstepped the time.

        It looked like he might checkmate me for a while but somehow I managed to liquidate into an opposite coloured bishops ending and move my pawns from his bishop's colour to my bishops colour and we got into a theoretically drawn ending.

        I don't know that I would agree to such an arrangement again given that I now realize the difficulty of acting against more than fifty years of conditioning. Remembering to press his clock probably disrupted my concentration enough to contribute to my poor play. I did recover but am sure that there must have been a way for him to have won. Not having to keep score or press your clock is probably worth a bit more than six minutes which I didn't actually require him to provide in any case.

        Had I claimed the win on time, I would have gained a few points on the tournament rather than losing a few points but in the end it doesn't make much of a difference because my U.S.C.F. floor is 2000 which while I have flirted with a bit having dropped 180 points or so from my peak, bad tournaments are usually followed by good tournaments and my rating goes up and down.
        I must admit when I first read about your encounter I thought accommodating such a request seemed way over the top for me.
        I assume after reading John Coleman's reply that this religious restriction had to do with the Jewish Sabbath?
        In any case, I think it places far too much pressure on the opponent and perhaps that person should instead have arranged to take a bye.

        Once the game is paired, you almost have no choice but to agree to what I would say is an onerous situation.
        I'm glad I wasn't the arbiter that had to decide what to do in that situation - even the arbiter would be limited in figuring out an alternative solution - maybe there is no alternative.

        Good on you for being so accommodating and I'm glad it ended up a reasonable outcome (I guess!)
        I really don't know what I would do faced with a similar dilemma - I might have asked if there was someone who could sit there and press his clock for him...
        ...Mike Pence: the Lord of the fly.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by Kerry Liles View Post
          even the arbiter would be limited in figuring out an alternative solution - maybe there is no alternative.
          FIDE rules expected these situations, and the onus is on the player to provide an assistant.

          Can not move pieces:
          "4.9 If a player is unable to move the pieces, an assistant, who shall be acceptable to the arbiter, may be provided by the player to perform this operation."

          Can not use the clock:
          "6.2.6 If a player is unable to use the clock, an assistant, who must be acceptable to the arbiter, may be provided by the player to perform this operation. His/Her clock shall be adjusted by the arbiter in an equitable way. This adjustment of the clock shall not apply to the clock of a player with a disability."

          Can not record moves:
          "8.1.6 If a player is unable to keep score, an assistant, who must be acceptable to the arbiter, may be provided by the player to record the moves. His/Her clock shall be adjusted by the arbiter in an equitable way. This adjustment of the clock shall not apply to a player with a disability."

          Definitely the opponent shall not be involved in these operations. Kudos to Vlad accepting the task but seems it was too much for him.

          Comment


          • #6
            It is my thought, and it's been 20 years since I read the rules or ran a chess tournament, that the arbiter might apply the same rules as for blind or handicapped players: an assistant can record the moves, press the clock, and even move the pieces. The non-handicapped player can also have an assistant, if he wishes. Don't know if those are the current rules.

            edit: cross post

            Comment


            • #7
              Interesting post, Vlad. Could you share some games from this event?

              Comment


              • #8
                It is certainly unfair to ask the opponent to do anything other than what is normal. The player who cannot perform normal functions should be permitted an assistant.

                Comment


                • #9
                  I think you did well for such a tough tournament result to shed only a few rating points, and also because of your age and health conditions. I can really relate to your fourth sentence. By the way in the non-chess discussion forum I really enjoyed your Leonard Cohen post. I would have commented there but I have made a rule not to post in the non chess forum.
                  As for your game assisting on the clock I have encountered that in the past and politely refused and agree with others that the player needs assistance form a third party and that should be arranged by the arbiter.

                  Comment

                  Working...
                  X