The U 2000 Canadian Open Blog

[Robert Song]

Re: Day 6, Thursday, July 15: The U 2000 Can. Open Blog Pt. II

Dear Robert,

Thanks again to collect so many game information, especially the paring/list for U2000 and SCC players. It makes players and parents more clear where they are now and try harder next round. I have the same feeling that the event passed so fast with only three rounds left. Cannot image the long waited tournament is almost over.

I was so sorry to hear your lost of yesterday's game. You are right, lost game itself is not problem, but the way to lost does counts more. I understood your frustration. If because of my yesterday's reply made you too confident in yesterday's game, I apologize for it. :)

Go for it, with still 1/3 remaining games. I hope your rating can catch up to 1850-1900 soon.

Robert

[Bob Armstrong]

Re: Day 6, Thursday, July 15: The U 2000 Can. Open Blog Pt. II

The U 2000 Canadian Open Blog - Pt. II

Day6/Rd. 6 – Thursday, July 15

The 8 Scarborough Chess Club U 2000 Results:

3.5 points - Michael Song ( 1866 )
3 points - Robert Bzikot (1984 ); Alex Rapoport ( 1838 ); Ferdinand Cale ( 1806 ); Pino Verde ( 1800 )
2.5 points –Bob Armstrong ( 1800 )
2 points –Jim Paterson ( 1889 ).
1.5 points – Pepin Manalo ( 1932 )

My Game

I think I can say that I probably played one of my worst games in recent years against Master Bill Doubleday. Odd, since I felt quite good, and comfortable playing Bill. But I made 2 terrible blunders consecutively on the opening moves 12 & 13, losing an N for a P, and my game was a disaster, though I played 4 more moves before I resigned. As one of my friends said though : “ you lose the game, but you gain the night ! “. So, admittedly a bit discouraged ( I don’t mind losing, but playing just badly is frustrating ), I tried to decide what would now be the most enjoyable use of the evening. I decided on doing some analysis of my earlier round games ( not so much this round 6 game! ), since I had only had time so far to analyze my first game, and post it. So home I went, got myself a big bowl of butterscotch ripple ice cream ( comfort food ), and settled in for a few enjoyable hours of analyzing.

Some Random Thoughts After Day 6

I know I am repeating myself, but it is amazing how fast the time is flying – we are now through 2/3 of the tournament – only 3 rounds left to garner glory ! I have thoroughly enjoyed this “ chess holiday “ ( though Rd. 6 not as much ), and I will be sorry to see it come to an end ( though I don’t think I’m saying I’d like a 15 round swiss! ).

I do enjoy reviewing Constitutions ( might have something to do with me being a retired lawyer – not always good to disclose that though – lots of jokes you know ). It’s sort of like a chess game – there are lots of moving parts, and you have to make the individual units make sense, but then they’ve got to coordinate well with all your other pieces. I like to think of a good, revised Constitution, as something like a work of art – sigh! ( what? This doesn’t excite many of you? Can’t understand that! ).

I admit I have not been following the standings very closely, because my schedule has been a bit tight for the first 2/3 of the tournament. But I had a bit of time yesterday. I was interested in finding out how my fellow SCC members were doing in other class groups. Here are their pairings and results for Rd. 6, with their point totals after 5 rounds ( there are 30 of us in this tournament, including the 8 of us in the U 2000 class ! ):

36 David Southam (2165 : W : 3.0) 1-0 Ralph Deline (1869 : B : 3.0)
39 Erwin Casareno (2105 : W : 3.0) 1-0 Pino Verde (1800 : B : 3.0)
41 Alex Rapoport (1838 : w : 3.0) 0-1 Alexandru Florea (2076 : B : 3.0)
44 Michael Rogers (1576 : W : 3.0) 0-1 Ismail Ibrahim (2062 : B : 3.0)
45 Alex T. Ferreira (2054 : W : 3.0) 1-0 Mei Chen Lee (1552 : BB : 3.0)
47 Aaron Wu (2030 : w : 3.0) 0-1 Matthew Scott (1506 : B : 3.0)
51 William G. Doubleday (2206 : W : 2.5) 0-1 Robert J. Armstrong (1800 : B : 2.5)
55 Roy Posaratnanathan (1731 : W : 2.5) 0-1 Elias Oussedik (2154 : B : 2.5)
57 Mario Moran-Venegas (1704 : W : 2.5) 0-1 Andrew Picana (2117 : b : 2.5)
59 Ralph Gregorz (2048 : W : 2.5) 1/2 Juliaan Posaratnanathan (1768 : B : 2.5)
68 Rod Hill (1934 : W : 2.5) 1-0 Michael Perez (1716 : B : 2.5)
69 Mike Ivanov (1928 : W : 2.5) 1-0 Nathan Farrant-Diaz (1716 : b : 2.5)
74 Michael Song (1866 : W : 2.5) 1-0 Jiaxin Liu (1460 : B : 2.5)
76 David Poirier (1855 : W : 2.5) 1-0 Joe Bellomo (1715 : B : 2.5)
78 Bill Peng (2254 : W : 2.0) 1-0 Bryan Morgan (1700 : B : 2.0)
80 Yevgeni Nahutin (2083 : W : 2.0) 1-0 Peter Xie (1629 : B : 2.0)
82 Doug Gillis (1680 : W : 2.0) 0-1 Peter Bokhout (1992 : B : 2.0)
90 Pierre Maheux (1897 : W : 2.0) 1-0 Andrew Philip (1556 : b : 2.0)
91 Ken Kurkowski (1616 : W : 2.0) 1-0 John W Chidley-Hill (1897 : B : 2.0)
92 Jim Paterson (1889 : WW : 2.0) 0-1 Patrick Yu (1572 : B : 2.0)
96 Ferdinand Cale (1806 : W : 2.0) 1-0 Steven Sokalsky (0 : B : 2.0)
101 James Mourgelas (1436 : W : 2.0) 0-1 Michael D. Sharpe (1726 : B : 2.0)
102 Vilas Karmalkar (1716 : W : 2.0) 0-1 Zhanna Sametova (1428 : b : 2.0)
115 Ted Termeer (1546 : W : 1.0) 0-1 Stephen Yu (1314 : B : 1.0)
118 Claudio Sottile (1516 : W : 1.0) 1/2 Eric Wang (992 : b : 1.0)
120 Pepin Manalo (1932 : w : 0.5) 1-0 Michael Gomes (964 : B : 1.0)
½ Robert Bzikot (1984 : W : 2.5) BYE

Good luck to all my fellow ( & 1 female ) members in Rd. 7.

Round 7 – Friday, July 16

So who are our top 4 U 2000 players playing tonight? Here are the pairings and they face some stiff opposition :

15 GM Joshua Friedel (2527 : w : 4.0) David Itkin (1966 : B : 4.5)
21 James Fu (1978 : w : 4.0) Yuri Aronov (2301 : b : 4.0)
26 Arjun Bharat (1841 : w : 4.0) David Southam (2165 : b : 4.0)
27 Felix Barrios (2162 : w : 4.0) David Miller (1871 : b : 4.0)


As a result of my three losses in a row now ( to a 2100 expert, and 2 2200 masters ), I got paired down again for Rd. 7, having only 2.5 pts.. Here is my pairing:

88 Robert J. Armstrong (1800 : WW : 2.5) - Jatinder Dhaliwal (1577 : B : 2.5)

Invitation

Finally, I'd like again to invite everyone to join into the discussion - any comments, suggestions, criticisms of the blog are welcome - and of anything to do with the Can. Open. I will try to respond if that seems appropriate.

Bob

[Bob Armstrong]

Day 6, Thursday, July 15: The U 2000 Can. Open Blog - Pt. I

The U 2000 Canadian Open Blog - Pt. I

Day6/Rd. 6 – Thursday, July 15

Starting the Day Off Right

Wednesday night, OCA President, Michael von Keitz, who is also a tournament arbiter, and I made plans to go for a beer after Rd. 5. It finished at 11:00 PM, and so Michael said he just had to help Hal Bond, the head arbiter, and Aris Marghetis, another arbiter, to do the Rd. 6 pairings. We also found out that Hal and Aris would like to join us. So they started work – well, there are behind the scenes issues that arise that really slow the process down, and which we, as the public, don’t often hear about. First one of the results cards had not been handed in – so what do they do? Pair as if it was a draw? Give both a 0 pt. result? Fortunately, one of the players was a member of my Scarborough Chess Club in Toronto, with whom I am good friends – and I had his phone number on me! I think there was a visible sigh of relief when I announced I could call him, and that he’d likely have gotten home by then. We reached him and got the result and in it went into the computer. Then they found 2 results sheets where no result had been marked in ( something the arbiter taking the sheet is supposed to have checked for – mistakes happen, despite the best of intentions ). Fortunately one of the one pair was staying in the hotel. So up went a call to the room to find out the result – successful! Whew ! As to the other pair, I knew the one gentleman, but didn’t have a clue how to reach him. One smart arbiter came up with 411 information, since his name was a bit unusual, and we hoped there would not be too many hits. We got a number and called and he answered – he gave the result, but also decided he wanted to chat a bit about the round and his game ! I thought the arbiter was genuinely considerate with this older gentleman, and patiently listened, though he had to get back to helping with the pairings. The things arbiters do ! Also, because of the glitch in Rd. 3, once the Rd. 6 pairings were up, Hal wanted them visually monitored more than once, to see if there were any obvious anomalies. Finally, about 12:15 AM this morning, Hal authorized their physical posting in the playing hall, and on MonRoi. All I can say is that the computer program may have thrown a spanner into the works in Rd. 3, but the arbiters are trying desperately to compensate for that, and to have the rest run perfectly. From what I can see, and talking to the arbiters informally from time to time ( another arbiter who was there for part of last night is Bryan Lamb, a well-known Toronto TD, and a member of my SCC club ), the arbiters are earning their keep. Steer the ship through to Rd. 9 guys!

Problem: my beer ! By the time we left the playing hall, and the arbiters changed into casual clothes, it was 12:30 AM – the problem – the subway closed sometime after 1:00 AM. The guys didn’t know where the Irish pub was that they had heard about, but I said I knew, since the new CFC President and I had had dinner there the night before. On the way, we tried to get GM Luke McShane ( England ) to join us, but he had to admit he had likely already, earlier, imbibed a bit more than he should have, and so begged off on this outing. So I guided them to the pub, and they went to drink beer, and I didn’t ( sigh ), and I headed back to the subway. At least I can say that the time was well-spent ( did talk to a number of different stragglers in the playing hall while waiting though ) in that I was able to help them solve one of the pairing issues with my phone call. Hope you guys enjoyed your beer !

When I got home, I completed my Day 5 Blog, and posted it. Then I messed around with some computer stuff, and went to bed at 3:30 AM – up of course after my unusually long sleep of 5 hours yesterday morning !

A Nice Morning and Afternoon

Don’t know whether I mentioned it, but my wife is away for this week – when I play in a Canadian Open, she usually hightails it to our recreational property about 3 hours outside of Toronto. So I am sort of “ bach’ing “ it – even in marriage, it is nice sometimes to get a short extended time to yourself ! Allows me to just float and do what I want, when I feel like it, without having to deal with mutual priorities intervening.

Yesterday morning I did a draft of this blog, to finish this morning. The rest of the day, I again got to spend analyzing my games – fun to do currently, because my games have been interesting, and not too bad. Always enjoy trying to learn from my mistakes though – I like to think of Fritz as a mini-coach, for an aging 65 year old ( well, I will be at the end of the month ).

Just as an aside, I’ve been getting very positive feedback and encouragement for this blog, both by posts and personally at the Open. I’m glad if people are enjoying it, and vicariously getting a taste of what the Canadian Open experience is like. I noted that by about 1:00 PM yesterday, we passed 2000 “ views “ of this blog, and all the reply posts. That seems to be good evidence the blog is being read, and that people are returning for subsequent installments. Doing a blog is a bit of work, but it is fun, and I enjoy writing ( I am the editor, for 11 years now, of the Scarborough Community of Toronto Chess News & Views, the newsletter of the SCC ). I hope it is interesting, a bit entertaining, and a worthwhile read.

For the late afternoon, a funny coincidence happened. OCA President, Michael von Keitz, asked me a few months ago, if I would volunteer to review the OCA Constitution and update it ( I had done this with a committee earlier in the year for the Greater Toronto Chess League, though they were not particularly happy with our somewhat radical re-working of their constitution ). Michael asked Ottawa master, and CFC Rating auditor, Bill Doubleday, if he would sit on the committee with me, and he agreed. So we’ve been progressing, slowly, by e-mail. Well, since we were both going to be at this Open, we decided we’d get together to hash over some stuff, over sushi yesterday afternoon. So we were meeting at 4:00 PM to go for dinner. Well, after Rd. 5 on Wednesday night, in the playing hall, Bill and I bumped into each other, and I asked how many points he had, and he had 2.5, just like me. I quipped that maybe we’d be paired in Rd. 6………..You guessed it! When I saw the pairings early yesterday morning when the arbiters finished it, who am I playing? - my second master in a row ( in Rd. 5 I played David Filipovich ), Bill Doubleday. Good thing we’re friends – the dinner was enjoyable; the game I have to tell you about..

Some of My Games from Prior Rounds

I like to think class games have some interest. I believe in some ways they are more educational to class players than GM games, if properly annotated. They are understandable, because we all think similarly – GM moves are many times incomprehensible to us class players. For years now, I’ve used a chess website, Chess5 ( http://www.chess5.com ), as my own personal chess games blog – I have gotten to know the owner/administrator Eydun, quite well over the years. I introduced Canada to his website, after I first saw it. Canada is now one of the main posters to this on-line databank. I post all my games, using what I call my “ Comprehensive Annotation System “, hoping that this makes them even more helpful to viewers.

So on the website now ( click on the heading link “ public games “. and you get a list of games posted this month so far ). I have posted my second game ( my first one was posted Wednesday ):

Rd. 2 – Yves Ber ( 1914 ) 1/2 Armstrong, Robert ( 1800 )

If you have some time, go play it over – it’s sort of interesting, though nothing dramatic.

The U 2000 Group

There are 56 players in our prize group. Going into Rd. 6, our top 4 players were: Derick John Twesigye, Robert Roller, David Itkin, and Ferdinand Supsup. These players faced tough opposition in Rd. 5. Here is what happened:


21 Derick Joshua Twesigye (1990 : W : 3.5) 0-1 Keith MacKinnon (2280 : B : 3.5)
22 Kevin Chung (2280 : b : 3.5) 1-0 Robert Roller (1937 : B : 3.5)
24 David Itkin (1966 : w : 3.5) 1-0 David Filipovich (2218 : B : 3.5)
26 Ferdinand Supsup (1851 : W : 3.5) 0-1 Mikhail Egorov (2179 : B : 3.5)

As a result, the standings in our group have shifted somewhat after 6 rounds. Here are the new leaders:

4.5 pts. – David Itkin ( 1966 )
4 pts. – James Fu ( 1978 ); David Miller ( 1871 ); Arjun Baharat ( 1841 )

I lost my game against Bill….miserably, as I explain below. This left me with 2.5/6 pts., slightly below 50 %. I am a little off target for my goal of exceeding 50%.

[ Continued in Pt. II below ]

[Bob Armstrong]

Re: Day 5, Wednesday, July 14: The U 2000 Canadian Open Blog

Hi Robert:

Thanks for the encouragement on the blog.

I don't know if you noticed, but I mentioned Michael's draw against Lawrence in my blog for that round.

Michael is steadily progressing. As you know, he has a plus score against me ( we both play in the Scarborough Chess Club, and often have been paired in weekend tournaments ), and it is going to get better as time goes on. In fact, I predict it won't be long before he'll have his first win against a master.

I wish him luck in his chess.

Bob

[Robert Song]

Re: Day 5, Wednesday, July 14: The U 2000 Canadian Open Blog

Dear Bob,

Thank you for tracking so mush games information, especially for the U2000 top players pairing. My son Michael Song is playing U2000 as well. His biggest achievement is draw with IM Lawrence Day(Michael's first game against Master in rated tournament) in round 4. In round 5 Michael lost to FM Alex Betaneli. Round 6 he is going to play with well known Canadian girl Jiaxin(Dora) Liu. Hope he can increase his point to 3.5.

Bob, you played very well in first couple of rounds. Good luck in round 6.

Robert

The U 2000 Canadian Open Blog

Day5/Rd. 5 – Wednesday, July 14

Starting the Day Off Right

I started Wednesday off with doing the right thing – I apologized for a significant ambiguity in my writing, which Matthew Scott had brought to my attention. I had used the title for a section – “ Predictions “. But I was not really trying to predict the outcomes of the three matches I set out. I just meant that in my blog, I was then going to move on from Rd. 2, to Rd. 3. But clearly it could be read otherwise. That’s one thing about doing a blog – you sort of put yourself out there, and then have to take responsibility for any mistakes. It just comes with the territory, and a good apology sometimes cleanses the spirit ! Anyway, I got it all sorted out.

A Relaxing Day

Also, a good thing – I got 5 hours sleep on Wednesday morning, rather than my standard 4 hours. Left me in good shape to do a first draft of this Day 5 Blog in the morning. The day today was a lazy one, after 2 back to back, pretty intensive , CFC AGM meetings – especially the Monday one, where I was trying to shepherd through 16 of my motions ( they sort of piled up during the year, because I wanted them all voted on at the AGM for technical reasons )! I had some nice time to start analyzing my games – I’ve had no time to even look at them in the first 4 days. So it was a very enjoyable and relaxing ( seeing some of my boners is always a bit distressing though ) afternoon, and at 5:00 PM, I headed down to play round 5.

Some of My Games from Prior Rounds

I like to think class games have some interest. I believe in some ways they are more educational to class players than GM games, if properly annotated. They are understandable, because we all think similarly – GM moves are many times incomprehensible to us class players. For years now, I’ve used a chess website, Chess5 ( http://www.chess5.com ), as my own personal chess games blog – I have gotten to know the owner/administrator Eydun, quite well over the years. I introduced Canada to his website, after I first saw it. Canada is now one of the main posters to this on-line databank. I post all my games, using what I call my “ Comprehensive Annotation System “, hoping that this makes them even more helpful to viewers.

So on the website now ( click on the heading link “ public games “. and you get a list of games posted this month so far ). I have posted my first game:

Rd. 1 – Armstrong, Robert ( 1800 ) 1 -0 Shafkat, Ali ( 1688 )

If you have some time, go play it over – it’s sort of interesting, though nothing dramatic.

The U 2000 Group

There are 56 players in our prize group. Going into Rd. 5, our top players faced tough opposition. Here is what happened:

8 GM Vladimir Malaniuk (2551 : w : 3.0) 1-0 Ferdinand Supsup (1851 : b : 3.5)
10 IM David Cummings (2482 : w : 3.0) 1/2 Derick Joshua Twesigye (1990 : b : 3.0)
14 Dmitry Chernik (1855 : w : 3.0) 0-1 Alexander Martchenko (2382 : b : 3.0)
15 Arjun Bharat (1841 : w : 3.0) 0-1 Laszlo Bekefi (2376 : b : 3.0)
16 Pino Verde (1800 : w : 3.0) 0-1 FM Dale Haessel (2316 : b : 3.0)


As a result, the standings in our group have shifted after 5 rounds. Here are the new leaders:

1 / 4 – 3.5 pts. – Derick Joshua Twesigye ( 1990 )
David Itkin ( 1966 )
Robert Roller ( 1937 )
Ferdinand Supsup ( 1855 )

I lost to national master David Filipovich, so I then had 2.5/5 points ( 50 %. ). Though I lost this game, I’m still quite satisfied with my standing at this time, and my play overall.

The 8 Scarborough Chess Club U 2000 Results:

3 points - Alex Rapoport ( 1838 ); Pino Verde ( 1800 )
2.5 points – Robert Bzikot (1984 ); Michael Song ( 1866 ); Bob Armstrong ( 1800 )
2 points – Ferdinand Cale ( 1806 ); Jim Paterson ( 1889 ).
½ point – Pepin Manalo ( 1932 )

My Game

I played Black against national master, David Filipovich ( 2218 ). He fianchettoed on the K-side, and I am not used to playing against that, so I had to improvise. It kind of went like a traditional Kings’ Indian Defence, with me trying to push pawns on the K-side to attack his K, and him pushing c5 to get an advantage on the Q-side. He got there first – he had too much pressure in the centre, and eventually he won my dP. The game then got complicated, and he simply had the superior position. He went up an N then, and I really could not hold on. We did a post-mortem together afterwards, and he showed me a number of options I really hadn’t considered – but the consensus was that W pretty much dominated. So this left me with 2.5/5 pts..

Some Random Thoughts After Day 5

As I mentioned in a previous blog, I am somewhat shocked ! We are now past the half way point in the tournament ! I thought time was flying when we were at the 1/3 mark on Monday night, and now on Wednesday, the situation hasn’t changed – as I said before, chess is fun, and the saying is “ Time flies when you are having fun ! “ This tournament is going to be over, and I’m going to be still standing at the starting gate !

I love to see Canadians playing great chess. Here we were at Rd. 5, and what do we see on the top boards:

Bd Res White Res Black
1 GM Luke McShane (2624 : w : 4.0) 0 - GM Harikrishna Pentala (2678 : b : 3.5)
2 GM Eduardas Rozentalis (2631 : w : 3.5) - FM Vladimir Pechenkin (2432 : b : 3.5) - Canadian
3 GM Joshua Friedel (2527 : w : 3.5) - IM Leonid Gerzhoy (2630 : b : 3.5) - Canadian
4 IM Michael Mulyar (2405 : w : 3.5) - IM Artiom Samsonkin (2609 : b : 3.5) - Canadian
5 FM Vinny Puri (2326 : w : 3.5) - Canadian - GM Merab Gagunashvili (2596 : BB : 3.5)
6 Razvan Preotu (1606 : w : 3.5) - Canadian - GM Alexander Shabalov (2578 : b : 3.5)
7 Wayne Siu (1449 : W : 3.5) - Canadian - IM Nikolay Noritsyn (2536 : b : 3.5) - Canadian
8 GM Vladimir Malaniuk (2551 : w : 3.0) - Ferdinand Supsup (1851 : b : 3.5) - Canadian
9 Felix Barrios (2162 : w : 3.0) - Canadian - IM Tomas Krnan (2484 : b : 3.0) Canadian
10 IM David Cummings (2482 : w - 3.0) Canadian:Derick Joshua Twesigye (1990 : b : 3.0) - Canadian

60% of the top 10 boards are Canadians ( 12/20 ) !! And this despite, unfortunately, Canada having a quite weak chess culture in the mainstream. We can play chess! And it looks like our strength at the top increases year by year. And with our ever strengthening junior programs across the country, I think Canada has a bright chess future. We have assembled good Olympiad teams, in relation to their peers, and they are quite young. I think we can hope for some good results there too.

Round 6 – Thursday, July 15

So who are our top 4 U 2000 players playing tonight? Here are the pairings and they face some stiff opposition even though they have been moving down to somewhat lower boards::

21 Derick Joshua Twesigye (1990 : W : 3.5) - Keith MacKinnon (2280 : B : 3.5)
22 Kevin Chung (2280 : b : 3.5) - Robert Roller (1937 : B : 3.5)
24 David Itkin (1966 : w : 3.5) - David Filipovich (2218 : B : 3.5)
26 Ferdinand Supsup (1851 : W : 3.5) - Mikhail Egorov (2179 : B : 3.5)

Go get’em guys !!

In my Rd. 6 game, on Bd. # 51, I again play a national master: William Doubleday ( 2206 ) – who I just happen to be going out for dinner with before the round !. Wish me luck !

Finally, I'd like again to invite everyone to join into the discussion - any comments, suggestions, criticisms of the blog are welcome - and of anything to do with the Can. Open. I will try to respond if that seems appropriate.

Bob

[Bob Armstrong]

Day 5, Wednesday, July 14: The U 2000 Canadian Open Blog

The U 2000 Canadian Open Blog

Day5/Rd. 5 – Wednesday, July 14

Starting the Day Off Right

I started Wednesday off with doing the right thing – I apologized for a significant ambiguity in my writing, which Matthew Scott had brought to my attention. I had used the title for a section – “ Predictions “. But I was not really trying to predict the outcomes of the three matches I set out. I just meant that in my blog, I was then going to move on from Rd. 2, to Rd. 3. But clearly it could be read otherwise. That’s one thing about doing a blog – you sort of put yourself out there, and then have to take responsibility for any mistakes. It just comes with the territory, and a good apology sometimes cleanses the spirit ! Anyway, I got it all sorted out.

A Relaxing Day

Also, a good thing – I got 5 hours sleep on Wednesday morning, rather than my standard 4 hours. Left me in good shape to do a first draft of this Day 5 Blog in the morning. The day today was a lazy one, after 2 back to back, pretty intensive , CFC AGM meetings – especially the Monday one, where I was trying to shepherd through 16 of my motions ( they sort of piled up during the year, because I wanted them all voted on at the AGM for technical reasons )! I had some nice time to start analyzing my games – I’ve had no time to even look at them in the first 4 days. So it was a very enjoyable and relaxing ( seeing some of my boners is always a bit distressing though ) afternoon, and at 5:00 PM, I headed down to play round 5.

Some of My Games from Prior Rounds

I like to think class games have some interest. I believe in some ways they are more educational to class players than GM games, if properly annotated. They are understandable, because we all think similarly – GM moves are many times incomprehensible to us class players. For years now, I’ve used a chess website, Chess5 ( http://www.chess5.com ), as my own personal chess games blog – I have gotten to know the owner/administrator Eydun, quite well over the years. I introduced Canada to his website, after I first saw it. Canada is now one of the main posters to this on-line databank. I post all my games, using what I call my “ Comprehensive Annotation System “, hoping that this makes them even more helpful to viewers.

So on the website now ( click on the heading link “ public games “. and you get a list of games posted this month so far ). I have posted my first game:

Rd. 1 – Armstrong, Robert ( 1800 ) 1 -0 Shafkat, Ali ( 1688 )

If you have some time, go play it over – it’s sort of interesting, though nothing dramatic.

The U 2000 Group

There are 56 players in our prize group. Going into Rd. 5, our top players faced tough opposition. Here is what happened:

8 GM Vladimir Malaniuk (2551 : w : 3.0) 1-0 Ferdinand Supsup (1851 : b : 3.5)
10 IM David Cummings (2482 : w : 3.0) 1/2 Derick Joshua Twesigye (1990 : b : 3.0)
14 Dmitry Chernik (1855 : w : 3.0) 0-1 Alexander Martchenko (2382 : b : 3.0)
15 Arjun Bharat (1841 : w : 3.0) 0-1 Laszlo Bekefi (2376 : b : 3.0)
16 Pino Verde (1800 : w : 3.0) 0-1 FM Dale Haessel (2316 : b : 3.0)


As a result, the standings in our group have shifted after 5 rounds. Here are the new leaders:

1 / 4 – 3.5 pts. – Derick Joshua Twesigye ( 1990 )
David Itkin ( 1966 )
Robert Roller ( 1937 )
Ferdinand Supsup ( 1855 )

I lost to national master David Filipovich, so I then had 2.5/5 points ( 50 %. ). Though I lost this game, I’m still quite satisfied with my standing at this time, and my play overall.

The 8 Scarborough Chess Club U 2000 Results:

3 points - Alex Rapoport ( 1838 ); Pino Verde ( 1800 )
2.5 points – Robert Bzikot (1984 ); Michael Song ( 1866 ); Bob Armstrong ( 1800 )
2 points – Ferdinand Cale ( 1806 ); Jim Paterson ( 1889 ).
½ point – Pepin Manalo ( 1932 )

My Game

I played Black against national master, David Filipovich ( 2218 ). He fianchettoed on the K-side, and I am not used to playing against that, so I had to improvise. It kind of went like a traditional Kings’ Indian Defence, with me trying to push pawns on the K-side to attack his K, and him pushing c5 to get an advantage on the Q-side. He got there first – he had too much pressure in the centre, and eventually he won my dP. The game then got complicated, and he simply had the superior position. He went up an N then, and I really could not hold on. We did a post-mortem together afterwards, and he showed me a number of options I really hadn’t considered – but the consensus was that W pretty much dominated. So this left me with 2.5/5 pts..

Some Random Thoughts After Day 5

As I mentioned in a previous blog, I am somewhat shocked ! We are now past the half way point in the tournament ! I thought time was flying when we were at the 1/3 mark on Monday night, and now on Wednesday, the situation hasn’t changed – as I said before, chess is fun, and the saying is “ Time flies when you are having fun ! “ This tournament is going to be over, and I’m going to be still standing at the starting gate !

I love to see Canadians playing great chess. Here we were at Rd. 5, and what do we see on the top boards:

Bd Res White Res Black
1 GM Luke McShane (2624 : w : 4.0) 0 - GM Harikrishna Pentala (2678 : b : 3.5)
2 GM Eduardas Rozentalis (2631 : w : 3.5) - FM Vladimir Pechenkin (2432 : b : 3.5) - Canadian
3 GM Joshua Friedel (2527 : w : 3.5) - IM Leonid Gerzhoy (2630 : b : 3.5) - Canadian
4 IM Michael Mulyar (2405 : w : 3.5) - IM Artiom Samsonkin (2609 : b : 3.5) - Canadian
5 FM Vinny Puri (2326 : w : 3.5) - Canadian - GM Merab Gagunashvili (2596 : BB : 3.5)
6 Razvan Preotu (1606 : w : 3.5) - Canadian - GM Alexander Shabalov (2578 : b : 3.5)
7 Wayne Siu (1449 : W : 3.5) - Canadian - IM Nikolay Noritsyn (2536 : b : 3.5) - Canadian
8 GM Vladimir Malaniuk (2551 : w : 3.0) - Ferdinand Supsup (1851 : b : 3.5) - Canadian
9 Felix Barrios (2162 : w : 3.0) - Canadian - IM Tomas Krnan (2484 : b : 3.0) Canadian
10 IM David Cummings (2482 : w - 3.0) Canadian:Derick Joshua Twesigye (1990 : b : 3.0) - Canadian

60% of the top 10 boards are Canadians ( 12/20 ) !! And this despite, unfortunately, Canada having a quite weak chess culture in the mainstream. We can play chess! And it looks like our strength at the top increases year by year. And with our ever strengthening junior programs across the country, I think Canada has a bright chess future. We have assembled good Olympiad teams, in relation to their peers, and they are quite young. I think we can hope for some good results there too.

Round 6 – Thursday, July 15

So who are our top 4 U 2000 players playing tonight? Here are the pairings and they face some stiff opposition even though they have been moving down to somewhat lower boards::

21 Derick Joshua Twesigye (1990 : W : 3.5) - Keith MacKinnon (2280 : B : 3.5)
22 Kevin Chung (2280 : b : 3.5) - Robert Roller (1937 : B : 3.5)
24 David Itkin (1966 : w : 3.5) - David Filipovich (2218 : B : 3.5)
26 Ferdinand Supsup (1851 : W : 3.5) - Mikhail Egorov (2179 : B : 3.5)

Go get’em guys !!

In my Rd. 6 game, on Bd. # 51, I again play a national master: William Doubleday ( 2206 ) – who I just happen to be going out for dinner with before the round !. Wish me luck !

Finally, I'd like again to invite everyone to join into the discussion - any comments, suggestions, criticisms of the blog are welcome - and of anything to do with the Can. Open. I will try to respond if that seems appropriate.

Bob

[Bob Armstrong]

Re: Day 4 - Tuesday, July 13: The U 2000 Can. Open Blog

Hi Jonathan:

Sorry you couldn't play - it is really quite a good tournament.

Nope - no side bets this time ( how could I , ranked # 56/56 !! ).

Bob

[Jonathan Farine]

Re: Day 4 - Tuesday, July 13: The U 2000 Can. Open Blog

Good luck in the rest of your games Bob, wish I was able to play the CO this year. Do you have an Edmonton-style wager going on with anyone else in the section?

[Laurentiu Grigorescu]

Re: Day 4 - Tuesday, July 13: The U 2000 Can. Open Blog

Bob,
Good blog, keep going! Good to have a scoop from the event(s)

[Bob Armstrong]

Re: The U 2000 Canadian Open Blog

Hi Dave:

It was nice to see you.

I haven't analyzed the game yet, but you may have seen my g6 push, attacking the f7R and the h7P. Totally wrong decision, as I said, due to a lapse in analysis, which a beginner shouldn't make.

I had a very good game ( even Tanraj agreed ), and I likely could have made more of it. Opening lines like you suggest is an option. I'll look at your suggestion when I analyze.

Bob

[Dave Broughton]

Re: The U 2000 Canadian Open Blog

Hi Bob - saw your round 4 game - thought your motto for the game was - "dark squares - I don't need any stinking dark squares" ! You did have the light squares sewn up though! Thought you might have sacked the d pawn for open lines at one point. Of course, this might be just hot air on my part!

Good luck the rest of the way!

Dave

[Matthew Scott]

Re: The U 2000 Canadian Open Blog

Hi Matthew:

I just went to look at the day 2 blog, and now see what you are referring to - it is the Rd. 3 pairings for the top three in the U 2000 group. I see the bolded names. The bolding was not meant to be a projection of the potential winner - I was merely bolding their names because they were the one's from my U 2000 group. I guess my title of " Projections " was a bad one - sorry about that. I was not making " projections " re their Rd. 3 matches - just presenting the pairings and highlighting our own group members. I'll make sure I don't use that title again. I can see why you read it the way you did.

Bob

Appreciated. I do enjoy your posts, and I think they add value. It's also not that I have anything against projections when they are intended either, I don't... I just thought it was sort of unfair to the players who already are playing w/ very low odds to "project" they lose, but as you've said that isn't what you intended, it's cool.

Congrats, by the way, on 2.5/4. Very impressive.

[Bob Gillanders]

Re: The U 2000 Canadian Open Blog

Bob, thank you for the kind words.

I see you are up rather late also with your blog entries. I just concluded my 3am blog to the new cfc executive team with my thoughts on the AGM, then of course, wrapping up the day with your blog.

I thought the AGM meetings were very productive. A very good sign.

Good luck to your group tomorrow. :)

[Bob Armstrong]

Day 4 - Tuesday, July 13: The U 2000 Can. Open Blog

The U 2000 Canadian Open Blog

Day 4/Rd. 4 – Tuesday, July 13

Starting the Day Off Right ?

I got home late on Tuesday night, and didn’t get to starting my blog ‘til 12:45 AM today. But before then, I did check the ChessTalk website new posts, and read Matthew Scott’s comments on my Day 2 blog, specifically my section “ Projections “. I have to apologize, because the title is totally misleading. I was not making projections as to who would win their 3rd round games, among the games involving the top 3 U 2000 players. I was just presenting the pairings. I bolded the names of the U 2000 players, to highlight that they were in our U 2000 group, not that I was predicting they would win the game. But I can see that would be a legitimate interpretation of what I wrote. I just meant “ Projections “ as referring to the fact that I was going to discuss then moving “ forward, to round 3 “. I’ll not use that title again, since it can easily be understood differently than I intended. I don’t just assume that the higher players always win – as an 1800 player, I’d certainly be shooting myself in the foot to view things that way – I always harbour hopes of an upset !!

The CFC AGM

After finalizing my Day 3 blog this morning between 8-9 AM, I headed downtown for the 10:00 AM Incoming Governors’ CFC AGM. The meeting went well and we elected our new slate of officers. I congratulate Bob Gillanders on his acclamation as president, and thank him for being willing to take on this sometimes rather thankless task – lots of criticisms and not a lot of bouquets. I am hopeful of a good year for the CFC. There were a lot of discussions on current issues going forward, and David Cohen, the recording secretary, has posted here on ChessTalk in another thread, an AGM executive summary.

A Quiet Afternoon

After the AGM concluded in mid-afternoon, I spent some time with outgoing GTCL Governor, Bill Evans. As some of you may know, he has produced an anthology of chess problems on-line, which are available for purchase. His problems have been used on Kevin Spraggett’s blog from time to time. I had not seen it before, and was impressed with the format – seems easy to use. I think Bill is going to be selling them at the CMA table, so you might take a look.

Dinner with the President

I went out to get a coffee a bit before the round 4, and ran into Bob Gillanders, and another organizer from his very successful Mississauga club. So we went out for dinner. Bob confirmed that lots of people were “ bending his ear “ yesterday after his election. I think this may be one of Bob’s strong suits – he’s very approachable, a good communicator, and willing to listen, even when he may not agree. So he seemed to be surviving his first hours as the new CFC President. We had a pleasant dinner and chat – so much so that I forgot I had Rd. 4 to go to !! I checked my watch and it was 6:10 PM, and I had a few blocks to go to get back to the playing hall. Like I can afford to give my young opponent, the U 14 Canadian Champion, expert Tanraj Sohal, a time handicap??

The U 2000 Group

There are 56 players in our prize group. Going into Rd. 4, our 2 leaders, with perfect scores, had to play national masters. Ferdinand Supsup was able to get a draw with David Filipovich. Pino Verde lost to Paul Gelis.
So here are the leaders in our group after 4 rounds:

1 – 3.5 pts. – Ferdinand Supsup ( 1851 )
2/5 – 3 pts. – Derick John Twesigye ( 1990 )
Dmitry Chernik ( 1855 )
Arjun Baharat ( 1841 )
Pino Verde ( 1800 )

I ( 1800 ) have 2.5 pts., and am tied 6/18. As I’ve mentioned before, I am ranked last of the 56.

The 8 Scarborough Chess Club U 2000 Results:

3 points - Pino Verde ( 1800 )
2.5 points – Michael Song ( 1866 ) [ who got a Rd. 4 Draw with Lawrence Day ! ]; Alex Rapoport ( 1838 ); Bob Armstrong ( 1800 )
2 points – Ferdinand Cale ( 1806 )
1.5 points – Robert Bzikot (1984 ); Jim Paterson ( 1889 );
1 point –
½ point –
0 points – Pepin Manalo ( 1932 )

My Game

As I mentioned above, Tanraj just won the U 14 Can. Championship at the recently concluded CYCC in Windsor, Ontario. I apologized for being late coming, and we settled in to the opening – I was white. Amazingly, I got a space advantage, and started to develop a K-side attack against his K. He thought it was dangerous, and ran his K from g8 all the way over to a7 ! So I still had good play on the K-side for a breakthrough. Tanraj ventured the opinion afterwards that I was likely winning much of the game to here. But then I had a lapse. I pushed my gP; I wanted to exchange P’s, and recapture with my R, which would have kept my initiative. But after I made the move, I realized his N covered the recapture square, and so I had to recapture with my P. There went my whole game plan, though material was still equal. Tanraj seized upon my error, got the initiative, and tied me right down. I was desperate ! So I came up with a possible Q-sac for a R + N, with good play thereafter. Tanraj looked at it for a while, and then decided not to go into the Q-sac line, since he thought I got too much out of it. I now felt I was lost, and so decided my only hope was to open some lines to his K, now on the Q-side, even if it cost me a pawn or two. But Tanraj saw my “ cheapo “ threats, and nicely defended at the same time as mating me ( with him having 9 minutes left, and me having 47 minutes ) ! A loss, but a very fun game to play.

Some Random Thoughts After Day 4

Another good AGM meeting of “ new “ ( and returning ) incoming governors. I am hopeful that if the new governors participate on an increased basis over last year, the CFC should be able to move forward, supporting the new executive. As I mentioned in my Day 3 Blog, instituting Governors’ Quarterly On-line Meetings goes a long way toward increasing the efficiency of governor decision-making, and will encourage stronger participation among the governors. I will go out on a limb, and predict a good year coming up for CFC ( though we do have some immediate clouds on the horizon, that will required some tough problem-solving ).

Who will Canada support in the upcoming FIDE Election this September – Kirsan Ilyumzhinov, the incumbent, or Anatoly Karpov, the challenger, former 12th World Champion? Although the AGM discussions on this were confidential, I think it is OK to say the governors are divided, and there is a strong undercurrent of not being too happy with either candidate. So the issue was handed off to the new executive to instruct our FIDE Representative, Hal Bond ( our Can. Open Arbiter ), how to vote.

Our current crop of juniors have to be a solid hope for Canadian chess in the future. Kids these days are just so good ! They are starting at a young age ( we have at least one 7 year old in my club, the Scarborough Chess Club, in Toronto ). And they have the advantage of coaching, something seldom seen when I started playing. And credit has to be given to the effective chess promotion programs for youth of the Chess’n Math Association, the Chess Institute of Canada, the Chess In the Library program ( started by one of our SCC juniors, WIM Yuanling Yuan ), chess junior clubs being run by a number of Can. chess clubs, among others. We see more and more juniors at our clubs ( they are likely between 30-35 % of our SCC now ), and in weekend tournaments. Some say, yes, but they quit after high school. That is a reality – but in the meantime they help fill our playing halls, give us stronger opposition than we can often handle, and often return to chess later in adult life. And the more we get playing chess, the more we will retain.

Round 5 – Wednesday, July 14

So who are our top 5 U 2000 players playing tonight? Here are the pairings and they face stiff opposition:

8 GM Vladimir Malaniuk (2551 : w : 3.0) Ferdinand Supsup (1851 : b : 3.5)
10 IM David Cummings (2482 : w : 3.0) Derick Joshua Twesigye (1990 : b : 3.0)
14 Dmitry Chernik (1855 : w : 3.0) Alexander Martchenko (2382 : b : 3.0)
15 Arjun Bharat (1841 : w : 3.0) Laszlo Bekefi (2376 : b : 3.0)
16 Pino Verde (1800 : w : 3.0) FM Dale Haessel (2316 : b : 3.0)

Go get’em guys !!

My Round 5 pairing is also tough - I play a national master:

32 David Filipovich (2218 : w : 2.5) Robert J. Armstrong (1800 : BB : 2.5)

But that's why I came - to try to get strong opposition, and players who I would not normally ever get to play. My chess has been pretty sound so far for the most part. As I said in one of my earlier blogs - I always harbour dreams of upsets ( as do most of us class players ).

Finally, I'd like again to invite everyone to join into the discussion - any comments, suggestions, criticisms of the blog are welcome - and of anything to do with the Can. Open. I will try to respond if that seems appropriate.

Bob

[Bob Armstrong]

Re: The U 2000 Canadian Open Blog

Hi Matthew:

I just went to look at the day 2 blog, and now see what you are referring to - it is the Rd. 3 pairings for the top three in the U 2000 group. I see the bolded names. The bolding was not meant to be a projection of the potential winner - I was merely bolding their names because they were the one's from my U 2000 group. I guess my title of " Projections " was a bad one - sorry about that. I was not making " projections " re their Rd. 3 matches - just presenting the pairings and highlighting our own group members. I'll make sure I don't use that title again. I can see why you read it the way you did.

Bob