I teach English at a High School here in Korea.

<Yahoo> is great now that the Java applets don't CRASH AND BURN any more.

They finally got the bugs out of the program and it only took them 15 years.

It's great if you use the "multiple table waiting method."

There are thousands and thousands of people playing at all times so the player pool is huge.

And, happily, there are a large number of people willing to play at up to 120 minutes time control- but you have to open up six or seven table and sit at them- then click back and forth till someone with a high rating sits down.

I never have to wait longer than 15 minutes or so.

Also, you may use multiple IDs. I have Bltiz IDs, practice IDs, tournament IDs, you name it.

Also, there are some really strong (in relation to me) players there.

In fact- I'm convinced that the <yahoo ratings> are DEFLATED by almost 200 points in relation to USCF ratings.

That is, a 1600 <Yahoo> rating would correspond to a 1800 <USCF> rating, or therabouts.

I make this estimation by comparing the strength of the top players at my Club back in Canada to the strength of the people I play on <Yahoo>.

The top players at my club all have USCF ratings cuz they play tournaments in the USA.

And <But for GMs, it might be argued that a difference of a pawn and a half might be enough to prompt an honorable resignation.> On principle I'd argue against it, though it is of course dependable on/dictated by the nature of the position... I remember countless games where a minus 3 or even on occasin a minus 6 score was reversed *twice* within just a few moves, because of the complexity, ie tactics, that were still there, and timetrouble; even superGMs get the jitters, too, as they say in golf...

But this is a classic example of a game, which was "completely lost" (objectively) out of the opening, and <van Wely> even increased his advantage to a plus 6.5 eval, until the "Wheels" came off, and several chances for a win evaporated and were countered with a brilliant mating attack by <Mags>. --

Van Wely vs Carlsen, 2008

I was in the gallery- unless I'm really mixed up about this- and I believe it was <acirce> who first posted that "Maybe <Magnus> would actually win" this game.

And he did.

I'm almost positive this is the game= famous example of the ravages of time.

Again from memory- wasn't just "time trouble" for <The Wheeler>, it was extreme time trouble, no?

heh

FINALLY I remembered "the facts" correctly for once.

This may be the first post in two years where my memory was actually accurate-

It was indeed <acirce> who first saw the "reversal" coming:

<Jan-23-08
acirce: Too bad Carlsen didn't resign while he had the chance - now he risks winning. >

And I was indeed in the gallery- here I am, typically ignoring the actual position in the game and bragging about how great <Bobby Fischer> was:

<Jan-23-08
jessicafischerqueen: Yes, 0 minutes on both clocks here. Thank God for increments (fischer's idea- he invented the first increment clock ever) >

And here is our now long-lost <Caissar> winner for <Best Analyst> confirming that it was indeed "extreme time pressure" for <The Wheeler>....

<Jan-24-08
Eyal: Btw, according to the times shown at http://webcast.chessclub.com/Corus0..., when 38...Bf5 was played by Carlsen - leading to Van Wely's first bad move, Qe3 - VW had 42 seconds on the clock. >

HAHAHAHA and here is where <Eyal> addreses <mateo> as "Karl" due to his <Karl Marx> avatar:

<Jan-23-08
Mateo: 40.Kg1! Bd4 41.Rh8+! Kxh8 42.Be5+! Qxe5 43.fxe5 Bxe3+ 44.Rxe3 was still better for White, although maybe not winning anymore.

Jan-23-08
Eyal: <Karl> It's not a matter of pawns and exchange now - White has to give up his queen or be mated very shortly. >

HAHAHAAH

<Niels> this is very sad also- <Eyal> and <Branko> were there and they have not posted for months now.

<Niels> this is as sharp a position as you'll find- and look at this move by <Magnus Dei>, desperate to free up his position and get some kind of counterplay-

Here he tries to sac the exchange, but <The Wheeler> is still Wheeling and Dealing on other parts of the board, and refuses to accept the exchange sac, with <Magnus'> Rook en prise for <six moves!!>

click for larger view

Yep-

<Magnus> plays

<26...Rf8xf5???!??> here

click for larger view

But only now, on move <33>, does <The Wheeler> accept- from this position

click for larger view

He finally plays

<33.Bh3xf5>

click for larger view

With BIG advantage to White....

Before the tragedy...

<The Wheeler> to play--

click for larger view

And from here, with 43 seconds on his clock, he plays...

<39.Qe4-e3???>

click for larger view

And here what we often talk about- how "natural" it might have seemed for <The Wheeler> to retreat his Queen here, seeing as he has to get it out of <en prise> and his <e-5> pawn is going to fall with tempo-

But this Queen retreat allows for instant ferocious counterplay by <Magnum 44 Short Barrel Revolver> with a series of King AND Queen checks that amounts to a forced line- resulting in <The Wheeler> having to give up material and then worse....

Better would have been

<39.Qe4-e7!!> here...

click for larger view

Where Black's checks run out quickly because there is no way to deliver Queen checks as well...

But this is my point about "visual psychology," which affects GMs as well, though in this case of course due to time pressure surely-

It's counterintuitive to realize that moving the Queen forward- away from her King- is safer than retreating her back where she is still near her King. When you have zero time, you can't afford to do the calculation necessary to realize that moving the Queen forward, rather than backwards, is in fact safer for White.

heh

Hope to be back tomorrow; my connection is dreadful at home, got to by a new modem, and lots faster, heh, to boot my baby back up again.

ARRIGHT then!

Again great points on the psychology and OTB tension -- one would almost get the notion you might have very good teaching qualities...

Well, I say that jokingly, but you are very good at explaining complex matters.

There you go!

"got to <buy> a new modem"

And indeed excellent memory of acirce's remark, <Jess>, all the more considering this was from Corus January 2008, no?

Thought I'd just run this quick search, and following this stat: http://www.chessgames.com/perl/ches... - it seems clear that that was Carlsen's last "Benko" - and with good reason; his position after 18 moves already was dreadful...

Also goes to show how "wrong-footing" the <OE> percentages are, or can be, rather, if you do not play through the games in a lesser played line, and do some research into the opening positions that may arise- and look at them fresh.

0-1 does not equate to "Black's Opening play is trustworthy" -- a we know already, but the rap is lurking...

Well yes- especially a full on Benko Gambit (A58) like in this game.

There was a recent <Kingscrusher> video that mentioned how the <Benko Gambit> should be considered "controversial," as he likes to say, in Correspondence-

So should be the <Halloween gambit>, which offers a whole piece for an attack. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=roz1...

Thing is- today's GMs- not just the Super ones either-- are so accurate in an "absolute sense"- at least in the Openings- that any gambit is suspect.

I've fallen prey to the <Smith Morra> before in long games, but I got sick of that so I booked up on the defence which is not even difficult to understand-learn-memorize even-

When you are doing it as home prep.

On the <Fischer page> a while back there seemed to be somewhat of a consensus that the "Computer age" GMs are almost invincible in the openings- in terms of accuracy-- but that they have lost endgame mastery-- due to the demise of adjournments and the creeping rot of "quicker time controls" in some of the major tournaments.

In <Blitz> obviously it's a whole different story- at least for the Patzer or even strong player.

In his 5/0 games <Kingscrusher> constantly sacs and gambits for initiative- I think he's actually addicted to this style-

But man is he strong with it.

Did you know he finished joint second in a 5/0 OTB tournament in England in July? Against IMs and a few GMs as well.

When I "gambit" or "sac" in a game, it's usually by accident.

Embarrassingly enough.

HAHAHAAH

From here:

click for larger view

After
<14...Kd4-e3> Black is already finished

This game looks like it was composed- the entire line from the puzzle position, however is forced.

It looks more like both players were drunk actually.

Needless to say this is not the "main line" in the <1.e4 d5 2.exd5 Nf6 3.Nc3> variation-

Interestingly, in an OTB game White can try to hold on to the pawn with the improbable <3.c4???!!!??????????????????> which leads to a very, very, sharp game.

Not as sharp as this game here though.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHA

I see the regular Puzzle Kibbitzers enjoyed this one as well they might.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAH

What a great game.

#####################

<H> BTW= Do you know the main line from here?

NO PEEKING!! The prize will be one medium sized Burrito.

1.e4 d5
2.e5??!????

click for larger view

On FICS in my "price range," this is actually played second most after the main line.

Oddly enough- since it is so exceedingly rare in "real chess"

It is not even mentioned in <GM Emms'> book.

- I will accept either of the two top choices for the burrito prize- the game instantly transforms into one of three extremely well known openings.

The two main line responses from Black is yet another example of how the "wierd" can suddenly become the "familiar" in the opening,and it shows how easy it is for the White <1.e4> player to avoid the main lines in almost every opening, if she feels like it.

Yes, that's what I remembered, the tie break against Onishuk, which has a video on youtube, camera on the board, quite spectacular finish, if memory serves. But it was prior to 2008.

I have good experiences with both sides of the Smith Morra on CC level, and felt more at ease with the side up in development, not really much worry there, and when a pawn, or two up, if the lag in development is too big, it plays hard and psychologically straining, as all you are doing is worrying about the many attacking motifs coming at you from all angles, and the sicilian wing gambit I practised against my comp, and got wonderful play as white, with good piece placement, and the material, even in the form of the exchange, is bound to be returned at some point after 20-25 moves, max.

But that's me - the amateur player - and looking up the stats of eg a Sicilian/Wing gambit fom a large CC database, I would be very interested in, the strategies and plans.

<Sometimes you even win though- a hung pawn can open up a line or give you initiative even if you didn't hang it on purpose.>

Even at the highest level; I was live at the Youth v Experience, where our then boy Carlsen (2006}, bludered, as he said in the press conference, a pawn, and went on to win against Andersson, who let his clock run out for over ten minutes, and thus flagged, in what Carlen described as Dynamic Equality...

It's exactly the kind of move that can "freeze an Ulf in the headlights" because it's really unclear what to do- the Black king is exposed, lines are open and if Black takes the Bishop

<22...fxg6>

click for larger view

Then White gets a ton of counterplay- surely with advantage-

With

<23.Nxe6>

But Black can't just let his <f-pawn> fall for nothing either, since the whole point of the move was to deflect the <f-6> pawn from defending the center in the first place.

So Black is left with really dull choices- Defend with the <f-6> pawn with the one of the Rooks?

It would be DEPRESSING to play that- and again- which rook? Maybe <Magnus> has calculated a line that proves that only one of the Rooks could defend safely-

Faced with too many choices that SEEM equally obnoxious, one might understand <Ulf> freezing.

It would be easy to get the illusion that all of the choices might be bad for Black here- this has to do with the concentration of White heavy pieces in the center with open lines and the Black King on a very unfortunate square- He is temporarily exposed here and Black wants just one tempo to get him off of the <d-file>- I think the "anxiety of the position"- too many things on the mental "to do list" maybe-- best explains what happened.

What a great "human move" by <Magnus> here.

I did the same thing as you, only with the Kings Indian, which has given me many many headaches as White.

I got the World Champions Guide to the Kings Indian by Rustam Kazimdjhanov and it helped me out lots.

I didn't realize that there would be people on yahoo willing to play longer games. I had it in mind as a sort of coffee break site.

The playchess and FICS server ratings seem to be under-valued as well compared to their FIDE/USCF/ECF equivalents. I never understood why that was tbh.

Well I'm no "expert" either. I mean literally- I'm a "Class B" Club player on my best day, at the moment.

The great thing about <yahoo> is how many people are there in the pool for such different reasons.

There's a whole subset of people in the <1400-1500> range who play long games all the time- they are solid tacticians but they never study and they stay in this ratings range forever.

You can confirm this by clicking on their player profile and seeing that they have played several thousand games.

The "gold mine" for me is the players rated <1600-2000> who are willing to sit for a long game- and they are out there, you just have to open a bunch of tables at once and then click back and forth till you catch one of these fish.

Although they are far from fish.

There are expert and even stronger players in this ratings range- who are very tough to beat (for me anyways).

The over 2000 crowd at Yahoo plays only Bullet chess.

In fact maybe 90 percent of all games on Yahoo are 5/0 or shorter.

But there are so many people logged in at all times that I've never had trouble getting a long game against someone who could thump me.

The only drawback- and it was a HUGE drawback- was the bloody Java applets that kept crashing- and kept getting hacked by people.

But for six months- since the last of the updates and security tweaks- the applets have been super stable- not one problem for me, no crashing tables or lost connections.

So <Yahoo> is as good as any site for finding good long games against good players on the internet, IMNSHO.

<Yahoo> also doesn't use the "Glicko" rating system- so I think that's one of the reasons the numbers are so deflated.

On FICS, the numbers are SEVERELY DEFLATED in the Blitz pool- but not so much in the long game pool.

What you wrote here kind of reminds me a lot of myself.

<There's a whole subset of people in the <1400-1500> range who play long games all the time- they are solid tacticians but they never study and they stay in this ratings range forever.>

I have been in that range for years on blitz chess and always kept playing more trying to improve but never did.

Only just recently I have decided to study more than play, but as yet there is still no noticeable improvement.

crawfb5-NN 1. e4 d5 2. exd5 Qxd5 3. Nc3 Qd8 4. d4 Nf6 5. Nf3 Bg4 6. h3 Bh5 7. g4 Bg6 8. Ne5 Be4 9. Nxe4 Nxe4 10. Bg2 Nf6? 11. Bxb7 Nbd7?? 12. Nc6 <ouch>

click for larger view