Who would win in a fight between a lion and a bear? (endgame fortresses)

My young colleague Leif enjoys endgames, and has an endless curiosity about unbalanced endgames. So he asks:
can you win with three pawns against a Bishop?
how about a Knight?
what about two Knights?

A pattern we kept running into was:
united pawns on their start squares don’t win against a piece (a)
united and *advanced* pawns win against a piece (b)
but
there are some special cases where the side with the piece can set up a blockade or fortressagainst advanced pawns (c)



So it’s less like that famous Internet question
who would win in a fight between a lion and a bear?
but
who would win in a fight between a fox and a hedgehog?

Anyhow, we ended up looking at a few fortresses, some I knew, some I had
to look up, and some I found out more about.

There are cases where a lone King can be a ‘toad in a stone’, wedged in and impossible to shift.

The Japanese might say a ‘bear in the hole’… Notice that these cases
are all in the corner of the board. Edges and corners are friends of the defending side.

With a pawn to help, the King can resist near a corner without being in
it:

It’s perfectly possible to draw when you are the exchange behind, if you
can keep out the enemy King. That’s another theme: keeping out the
attacking King.

The mighty Queen can be kept at bay, as long as the attacking King can’t
get in:

We played around with variations on that last fortress, and then looked
it up. It’s sort of interesting: if the pawn is advanced, the Queen can
get behind your defences and you lose, but if the pawn is advanced and
on the edge, you are able to hold again.

To break down the defence, you have to use zugzwang to make the Rook
abandon the King.

The same ideas occur in the ‘simple’ Q vs R endgame, which six-times US
champion GM Walter Browne failed to win against a computer in the 1970s,
before looking up the right technique… Try it against your own
computer!

Fortresses in practice

Here’s one from a game I had a year or two ago: I got through, but I
think I shouldn’t have been allowed to.

A couple of well-known ones at GM level: a great swindle by Zsuzsa
Polgar:

Another sad tale of the wrong Rook’s Pawn!

And a spectacular save:

P.S. Foxes are said to eat hedgehogs by rolling them into water, when the hedgehog will unroll to swim, and loses its life.

Jokes

I usually have about my person some positions to amuse young players at the end of an evening.

Here are some of my favourites:

Problems
Hints
Solutions

Problems.

White to play and…

1. Mate in half a move (?)

2. Mate in 6 (Halumbirek)

3. Mate in 2 (?)

The board is the right way around — those are eight pawns ready to promote!

4. Mate Black without taking a pawn (Brown)

5. Mate in 2 (Loyd)

6. Mate in…14!

Hints.

1. Is there a move in chess that you make in two halves?

2. Seriously, if you can’t solve this one, you should give up chess!

3. Two piece moves will give mate — but which piece do you move first?

4. A puzzle inspired by the Iron Cage of Tamerlane.

5. A puzzle called ‘Organ Pipes’: imagine it’s Black to move?

6. With the White King on g6, and Black to move…

Solutions.

1. 1.Ra1-d1 completes Queen’s-side castling.

2. All moves are forced: 1. d4 b5 2. d5 b4 3. axb4 a3 4. b5 a2 5. b6 a1=Q 6. b7# 1-0

3. 1. Nc6! and now e.g. 1…a1=Q 2. Ba6# by discovered check.

Also:
(1… f1=Q 2. Bf5#)
(1… e1=Q 2. Be6#)
(1… d1=Q 2. Bd7#)
(1… b1=Q 2. Bb7#)
(1… c1=Q 2. Be6#)
(1… f1=Q 2. Bf5#)
(1… g1=Q 2. Bg4#)
(1… h1=Q+ 2. Bh3#)

4. 1. Nec6+ dxc6 2. dxe3+ fxe3 3. Rh4+ Be4 4. Rhxe4+ dxe4 5. Be5+ dxe5 6. Rxd8+
Nd5+ 7. Rxd5+ cxd5 8. Nc6# 1-0

5. 1. Qa5 Bb7 2. Nf5# or…

(1… Bd7 2. Qd5#)
(1… Be6 2. Qe5#)
(1… Bf5 2. Nxf5#)
(1… Rd6 2. Qxb4#)
(1… Rd5 2. Qxd5#)
(1… Re5 2. Qxe5#)
(1… Bc5 2. Qa1#)
(1… Bb7 2. Nf5#)

6. 1. Kg7 Qh3 2. Kf8 Qh4 (2… h4 3. Kg7 Ne5 4. Nxe5#) 3. Ke7 Qh3 4. Kd8 Qh4
5. Kc7 Qh3 6. Kc8 Qh4 7. Kd8 Qh3 8. Ke7 Qh4 9. Kf8 Qh3 10. Kg7 Qh4 11. Kg6 Qh3
12. Kxg5 Qh4+ 13. Kxh4 Nc3 14. Nd4# 1-0

Opening Workshop 2015

[A Q&A at a coaching session]

A bit of perspective

Your opening choices are determined by:

  1. Your style: are you a Steady Eddie or a Bonkers Billie?
  2. Your memory: can you commit the key traps and variations to memory?
  3. Your study time: can you find and absorb what you need to play this system well?
  4. Your aims: are you trying to get a playable position? are you trying to
    set your opponent problems, so they make a mistake? are you inviting
    your opponent to waltz with you blindfold on the edge of a cliff? are
    you trying to lure them into unfamiliar territory, or a trap?

Trouble with b6

“I’m having trouble getting …b6 to work against 1.e4”

1.e4 b6

“I’m not surprised!”

Any opening is only as good as the ideas you bring to it. I don’t think
I heard much from you about what your ideas were in playing …b6: what
sort of position do you hope to get to play?

The ideas behind some systems can be pretty straightforward – for
example, I think the Evans Gambit and the French Defence and the Colle
System can be picked up pretty quickly by club players, and the extra
ideas you need as your opponents get better at meeting your new opening
can be added fairly easily. The French Defence in particular often
leads to the same sort of pawn structure (white Pd4 Pe5 vs black Pd5
Pe6), so, even if you don’t recognise the exact variation, you can still
have a good idea about the best plans for both sides.

1…b6 is a rarity – you will struggle to find many books to read, or
games to follow. If you look it up in the books, you will find most of
the lines end in +=. The ideas behind the opening are hard to find or
understand: I think it can be best interpreted as a hypermodern defence,
letting White occupy the centre then hoping to get play later, either by
deciding on your own central setup once you have seen what White has
done, or using the centre as a target. I think it ends up as += because
that is hard to do! Also, you aren’t going to get the same structures
and ideas in each game, and you are going to lose games that you don’t
understand.

My advice: pick something else!

Philidor for Beginners

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 d6

In some ways, the Philidor is a risky opening to try: there are dozens
of traps that Black can fall into in the first few moves.

*[ http://exeterchessclub.org.uk/content/lessons-philidors-defence ]

But if you learn the right order for your first few moves (especially
3…Nf6), you can usually get to a solid position from which you can
play the middlegame. Yes, White gets a space advantage, but it’s not a
huge one, and space advantages are not so easy to make use of. An extra
piece, or a doubled pawn, or a bare King’s-side, all tell you what to do
next. A space advantage just tells you that, whatever you want to do,
you will probably be able to do it more easily than your opponent.

Philidor inspiration:

The (Hyper)-Accelerated Dragon

Anyone who plays the main line Sicilian Dragon will have met the deadly Yugolav Attack.

White is going to castle long then push the h-pawn.

Maybe it’s not as deadly these days, as Black players have learned how
to fight back, but it’s the most important line in the Dragon and there
are whole books written about it.

If you like the Dragon setup, but are unwilling to take on the task of
learning how to defend against the Yugoslav, then you can try a cunning
move order to head White off.

The Accelerated Dragon goes

1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 g6

One of Black’s ideas is that …d7-d5 can be played in one move.

For example,

5.Nc3 Bg7 6.Be3 Nf6 7.Be2 0-0 8.Qd2? d5!

or

8.0-0 d5!

Now, if White tries to set up the Yugoslav Attack, it all goes wrong

5.Nc3 Bg7 6.Be3 Nf6 7.Qd2?! Ng4!

5.Nc3 Bg7 6.Be3 Nf6 7.f3?! 0-0! 8.Qd2 d5!

5.Nc3 Bg7 6.Be3 Nf6 7.Bc4! Qa5! 8.f3? Qb4! 9.Bb3 Nxe4!

an amazing move, but it works!

if 10.Nxc6, Qxc3!

and Black comes out ahead

After 7…Qa5, 8.0-0

must be tried, and then Black has successfully
avoided the Yugoslav. These positions are not ever so promising for
Black – perfectly solid, but perhaps the Qa5 is misplaced, vulnerable
to Nb3 Qc7 and a later Nd5

Black can try one other line to make use of the omission of …d6:

7…0-0

Uogele’s Variation.[

Now Black has the usual bunch of tricks waiting for Qd2 and f3

8.Qd2 Ng4!
or 8…Nxe4 9.Nxe4 d5!

8.f3 Qb6!?
(or 8…e6!?, maybe even 8…d5!?)

So White should play

8.Bb3!

Now Black has one last chance to keep White from setting up a
Yugoslav-style attack:

8…a5!? 9. f3!? d5!?

Black gambits the d-pawn to get active play.

White’s not worse here and may have chances of advantage, but there is
no chance of the standard Yugslav Attack. (I expect White’s best try on
move 9 is 9.0-0, when 9…d6 is OK for Black and 9…a4 is
“interesting”.)

So, Black’s extra pressure against d4 means that White cannot get into the
Yugoslav. You don’t get anything for free in chess, so Black’s missing
pressure against e4 means that White can omit Nc3 and play c4, the
dreaded Maroczy Bind, also a bit less dreaded these days.

The Hyper-accelerated Dragon is the move order with 2…g6.

This avoids problems with 3.Bb5 and also gives you some extra options
against the Maroczy Bind, for example,

1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 g6 3.d4 Bg7 4.c4 Qb6!?

Anti-Sicilians for the Dragon player

Charlie was suspicious about his White opponents who want to play around
with their own move order tricks, avoiding the main lines of the
Accelerated Dragon to play, e.g.

1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 g6 3.Nc3

or

1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 g6 3.c3

or even

1.e4 c5 2.c3

I think
1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 g6 3.Nc3
is not much of a problem: after 3…Bg7
or 3…Nc6, White doesn’t have any clever ways of delaying d4.

If you like to meet

1.e4 c5 2.c3

with

1.e4 c5 2.c3 Nf6

or

1.e4 c5 2.c3 d5 3.exd5 Qxd5 4.d4 e6

then White’s move order with

1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 g6 3.c3

means that you can’t play your preferred line.

The good news is that you can get a perfectly playable game after

1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 g6 3.c3 d5 4.exd5 Qxd5

or perhaps even better

1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 g6 3.c3 Bg7 4.d4 cxd4 5.cxd4 d5!

Now

6.e5 Bg4!
(intending e6, Nge7, and either Qb6 or f6,exf6,Qxf6) gives you an excellent game.

6.exd5

is OK:

6…Nf6 7.Nc3 Nxd5?! 8.Bc4 Nxc3 9.Qb3!

is awkward, but

8…Nb6

is fine, while

6.exd5 Nf6 7.Bb5+ Nbd7

should recover the d-pawn without too much pain, but it’s worth looking up the theory.

Trouble with b3

Ah, since El Presidente’s pursuit of 1.b3, we have all wondered what we should do against it.

I think after 1.b3,1…e5 is generally accepted as the most challenging move. (When Nimzowitsch himself used to play this system now known as the Nimzo-Larsen Attack, he used to start with 1.Nf3 Nf6 2.b3 to avoid …e5.)

After

1.b3 e5,

play can continue

2.Bb2 Nc6 3.e3 d5 4.Bb5 Bd6,

when White has two ways of nibbling the centre, 5.f4 and 5.c4 (with one
idea 5…Nf6 6.c5!?). I expect Black is doing OK in most of these
lines, but I think we can see the Hypermodern approach working well:
Black has set up a big centre, and White is having fun making threats
against it.

A more solid approach is

1.b3 e5 2.Bb2 Nc6 3.e3 d6,

occupying a smaller portion of the centre for a lower cost.

One game from here that created a lot of interest was Minasian-Adams:

4.Bb5 Bd7

When I tried angling for this against Tim, he was happy to play into the
line

4.d4 exd4 5.exd4 d5.

Black can claim that White’s position doesn’t make a lot of sense, with
the Bb2 having a very poor view, but it’s very early days in the game
and Tim has more experience in this line than I do.
I expect the best line in this position for White is

4.Nf3.

after which Black can happily challenge on the long diagonal with

4…g6,

as 5.d4 Bg7 6.dxe5 Nge7! allows Black to get a bit more sorted
before recapturing on e5.

Approaching the Sicilian

Jeremy has discarded the Caro-Kann (quite right too…) in favour of the
Sicilian. He has decided that 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 makes sense, but
is still making up his mind about what to do after 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4
Nf6 5.Nc3.

Options include:

5…g6 Dragon Variation

5…a6 Najdorf Variation

5…Nc6 Classical Variation

These are some of the most interesting and theoretical variations in
chess. They are also a bit of a challenge to take on: White has some
razor-sharp options like the Sozin, Richter-Rauser and Velimirovic
variations.

6.Bc4

6.Bg5 7.Qd2

6.Be3 7.Bc4 8.Qe2

5…e6 Scheveningen Variation

This is a good deal less hair-raising than the three alternatives above,
and a steady option for Black. I wrote a booklet on this for the
juniors, so let me know if you would like a copy.

I’m going to put in a word for 5…e5, heading for the Sveshnikov (or
Lasker-Pelikan) Variation. It also has a fair amount of theory, but
as some of the structural decisions have been made, you can plan your
approach for development with more certainty. Its reputation as a sharp
and theory-laden line has been balanced by a respect for how solid it
is. Black’s pawn structure maybe looks weak and hard to handle, but
White’s Na3 is out of play and Black has a very solid stake in the
centre, so any of those ‘mad axeman’ attacks with f4/g4/h4 are just
going to bounce. Moreover, most of Black’s strategy for coping with the
messy pawns is ‘lots of activity’ and ‘dump the bad bishop’, which
shouldn’t be too hard for anyone!

Sveshnikov inspiration:

English, Reti, Dutch

Sean ponders moving from the Reti to the English The key challenge to the English Opening is 1.c4 e5; the big plus to approaching the English with 1.Nf3 is that White avoids this line. There are also advantages in leaving the Ng1 at home: the long diagonal is kept open and in particular White can adopt the popular Botvinnik set-up, recomended repeatedly in repertoire books (Soltis 1980, Kosten 1998, Marin 2004). These three books also recommend leaving the Nb1 at home at first, thus:

1.c4 e5 2.g3 Nf6 3.Bg2

as this doesn’t allow Black the well-known equalising lines with

1.c4 e5 2.Nc3 Nf6 3.g3 c6

1.c4 e5 2.Nc3 Nf6 3.g3 Bb4

(White is perhaps best advised to throw in 1.c4 e5 2.Nc3 Nf6 3.Nf3 Nc6 before 4.g3).
Black may take advantage of White’s slow approach by setting up a big
centre. …d5 is restrained, but what about …f5?

1.c4 e5 2.Nc3 f5 3.d4!

is promising for White, but

1.c4 e5 2.g3 Nc6 3.Nc3 f5

is playable

Kosten points out

1.c4 e5 2.g3 Nc6 3.Nc3 f5 4.Bg2 Nf6 5.e3 d5!? 6.cxd5 Nb4!

but is content with

1.c4 e5 2.g3 Nc6 3.Nc3 f5 4.Bg2 Nf6 5.a3 Bc5 6.e3

(I wonder if Black can then escape the Botvinnik with d6/g6.)

Marin has a new approach:

1.c4 e5 2.g3 Nc6 3.Nc3 f5 4.Nf3!

with the idea

4…e4 5.Nh4!

hitting the f-pawn and preparing to go to f4 via g2. It has some links with the Hyper-Accelerated Dragon approach we saw above.

4…Nf6 5.d4 e4 6.Nh4 has the same ideas.

Preparation in club play

Do you prepare to play into your opponent’s main opening system or try
to dodge? Does it even matter at club level?

a. Done badly

“I think Dave knows his openings pretty well, and I don’t really like
playing against the French… I know, I’ll play 1.d4, that will surprise
him! Against 1.d4, he plays some rubbish with …b6, and I can beat that
easily!”

1.d4 f5

“Oh. I forgot he sometimes plays the Dutch. Now what do I do?”

b. Done well

“I think Dave knows his openings pretty well, and he nearly always plays
the French these days. In particular, he plays the Euwe Variation
against the Advance French, and I have a recent book on how to play
that line for White.”

Blunder-proofing your chess

Three quite shocking examples from junior chess.



[I will say I was most impressed by the group’s ability to find the
blunders almost instantly! It’s as though we have a special instinct
for such moves…]

There are three sorts of blunder, it seems to me, and we have seen examples of each:

A. you overlook your opponent’s threat (you are asleep)
B. you overlook your own threat (you are lazy)
C. you overlook your opponent’s reply to your threat (you are over-excited)

Some fairly shocking examples from the club championship of recent years… One of each type, again.

It is hard to know which is most common, and it may be that you
specialise in a particular type. Let us try to find out… The cure for
type B is the tactical awareness discussed with the group by Tim last
week, so see how you get on with these, which feature errors of types A
and C.

(see attached PDF, side 1)

Blunder-proofing your game

Three treatments may be recommended, each suited to curing you of a particular sort of blunder:

a. suspicious minds — look before you leap!
b. tactical awareness — practise doing puzzles — add speed to accuracy
c. hesitation — check it before you move it — finish your line of thought with the best move for your opponent

The first and last thing to do

…is check for your opponent’s threats.

First, when your opponent moves, look at everything the move does.
Then choose a move.

Lastly, before making your chosen move, check every forcing reply. If
you can, do the same for the position at the end of your analysis.

So, let’s try that again, from the top:

*[Turn over!]

When you don’t have time for all this…

What about when you are in time trouble, or playing in a rapidplay?
There may not be time to do a proper analysis, in which case you will
have to settle for a ‘good enough’ move. If you rehearse good thinking
habits when playing slowly, I hope you develop some intuition for when
you don’t have proper thinking time.

[There are also strategical blunders, overlooking what is going on positionally, which
are equivalent:

  • overlooking your opponent’s best plan
  • overlooking your best plan
  • overlooking your opponent’s best counter to your plan]

Blunder15.pdf

What are the odds?

We discussed odds-giving last Friday – that is, starting without one or more of your pieces.

I mentioned one of my favourite Lasker stories, where he teased a player who didn’t know hime, which I quote from Chernev (1948):

Lasker `I think the odds of a Knight is an advantage to the odds-giver. You can get your Queen Rook into play quickly, and work up a strong attack. Let me try to give you a Knight odds.’ Lasker’s adversary assured him that at Knight odds, he (Lasker) would not have a chance. They tried a game though, and Lasker won. `You see,’ said
Lasker, `that proves my statement. Now give me a Knight.’ They played again, and Lasker lost. Now Lasker gave the odds-and won. After a few more games where they alternated in giving up a Knight, with the result that the side without a knight always won, Lasker’s opponent, bewildered by the `proof,’ got up and said, `I guess you’re right after all. It does seem to be an advantage to give a Knight!'”

And here is a startling odds game: Potter starts without a Queen, plays six moves, then announces mate in eight! That is, his combination was longer than the game.

Openings workshop 2014

Work in progress…

How to decide if the Dutch Defence is good for you
————————————————–
Just taking the Dutch Defence as an example…

Do you think it suits you? (Do your friends think it suits you?)
Do the ideas you read about go into your memory?
Do the ideas you remember actually turn up in your games?
Do you get good results with it?
Do the results in your games have anything to do with the opening?
Can your opponents avoid the lines you like to play?

Philidor’s Defence — see recent post
————————————-
http://exeterchessclub.org.uk/content/lessons-philidors-defence-live-act…

London System
————-
Some opening systems are ‘good’: they are played by Grandmasters and
have enough point to give other Grandmasters some problems in getting
equality as Black.

Some opening systems are not so good: they are rarely played by GMs and
don’t have enough about them to give other GMs problems.

What does all this have to do with club players?

A good opening for a club player is one that gives your opponents problems.

And the London System? It’s not generally considered to set enough
problems to be played against GMs, although some GMs will use it as a
‘rabbit-bashing’ system, keeping out of theory and known equalising and
simplifying lines.

In amateur play, it may be possible to learn a a defence against the
London System which is enough to put White off playing it. If your
opponents don’t know any such defence, your greater familiarity with the
system may give you great practical chances.

A good example of White’s practical chances:


A good example of Black’s strongest defence:


But can White avoid this defence by a clever move order?!

Does it matter if Black can equalise with …Bd6?

Scheveningen Sicilian for Black: move order issues
——————————-

Scheveningen
Paulsen/Taimanov
Nadforf

The original Scheveningen was

Approaching via Najdorf move order
avoid g4, allow Bb5+

Approaching via Taimanov move order
take sting out of g4, allow c4

Rook and Pawn endgames strike back 2014

I’ve done more than one session on this topic in the past, so the
examples are all already on the website, but some pointers for newcomers
might be helpful:

A. Many Rook and Pawns endgames can be judged as win or drawn at a
glance, some are more critical. Some basic cases with one side a pawn
up have been worked out and must be learned:

1. Philidor’s position shows how to draw when your King has control of
the Queening square.

2. Lucena’s positions shows how to win when the defending King does not
have control of the Queening square.

3. With the defending King distant, you can draw against an advanced a-pawn.

4. If you know the basic positions, you can use them to guide your play,
combined with a bit of general endgame science:

a. Regis-Walker shows White a pawn down but drawing without trouble when
focussed on swapping pawns and reducing to Philidor’s position.

b. Smyslov-Botvinnik is tough, but we know from (3) that an a-pawn may
not be enough, and indeed an extra a- and g-pawn may not be enough.
What you need to go with an a-pawn is an f-pawn. Euwe’s analysis shows
that Black can wangle a position with locked f-pawns, win the f-pawn,
and call House.

B. There are some recurring tactics in Rook endgames:

1. Skewering the defending Rook (examples: (a) Lasker’s study, and (b)
the case with a- and f-pawns)

2. Stalemate (Bernstein-Smyslov)

C. General endgame principles can be seen in classic endgames by
Capablanca and Tartakower:

1. Attacking weaknesses
2. Rook on the seventh
3. Probing and stretching defences across the whole board
4. Limiting counterplay

See, in particular, Capa’s games against Kreymbourg, Janowski and Kupchik
[LINK]

Could you take on one of those endgames against another member of the
club, or against your computer, and get the right result?

Dr.Dave’s Adventures at East Devon, 2014

I still don’t understand why anyone plays the Exchange, except that I
keep getting worse positions against it! Giles has been working on his
chess and is now a serious danger to anyone… I was lucky to find the
cheapo on move 32.

Another much-improved player, Oliver had embarrassed me by winning with
the French Exchange in a previous event, so I was out for revenge. On
the day, he stranded a piece and it was easy enough.

I’m sure I could have defended better but I was set problems throughout
that were beyond my powers of anticipation or solution.

An interesting encounter! I won a piece but Theo made it as awkward as
he could for me… I guess it was fitting that our only OTB encounter
ends in a draw. Next time, I don’t think I will be so lucky!

I have the same experience as I do playing against the French Exchange;
I have no respect for my opponent’s opening system, but he takes his
task seriously, creates problems, takes his chances, and shows how
simple it is to beat me with the right approach.

Approaching coaching

Featured

Do you need a chess coach?

I think, if you want to improve, you should be

  1. Playing often, including a good slice of slow-play games
  2. Writing down all your slow-play games (and others if you can) or storing them in a database
  3. Going over your games, (a) by yourself, (b) with another player, and/or (c) with a computer
  4. Checking your opening moves against a book or database – who made the last ‘book’ move?
  5. Doing a bit of study of (a) tactics, (b) openings, and (c) endgames

If you aren’t doing any or all of those things, you won’t improve as fast as you could.  None of that needs a coach, but a coach might be able to give you pointers about your games (#2) or what you might look at to study (#4).  There’s a terrific amount of free instructional material online these days, so be sure you’re making the best use of your time and money before you hire a coach.  Here are some starting places:

https://exeterchessclub.org.uk/content/getting-started-coaching-stuff
http://exeterchessclub.org.uk/content/u14-training-day-1st-february-2014

Hiring Dr.Dave

If you want to talk to me about coaching, I usually offer a free first consultation, to decide (a) if we like each other enough to spend more time talking,
(b) if I think I can do you any good, and
(c) if so, how and how often.
I’d like to do the consultation after having looked at your last dozen chess games – not your best dozen, or your last dozen wins, but your last dozen games, preferably with at least 30 minutes each on the clock.

The easiest thing, if you play online, is to point me to your chess profiles, where I can see your games for myself.  Lichess.org I think is one of the best places to play and is entirely free.

You can send games to me as scoresheets, photocopies or scans of scoresheets, transcribed typed moves, read to me over the ‘phone, or best of all as a PGN file.

Portable Game Notation (PGN) is a way of swapping games between computers, and any chess software worthy of the name should be able to read and write PGN files. A PGN file looks like this:

[Event "Game for stakes"]
[Site "London, Simpson's"]
[Date "1879"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Schilling,PDQ"]
[Black "Blackburne,JH"]
[Result "0-1"]
[ECO "C50"]

1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bc4 Nd4 4. Nxe5 Qg5 5. Nxf7 Qxg2 
6. Rf1 Qxe4+ 7. Be2 Nf3# 0-1

Usually, a programme will give you a board to make the moves and a little form to fill in the game information.  To enter and email chess games in PGN format you can use:

If you play chess online, your server or software should be storing your games somewhere, and you should be able to find the games and send them along.  However, I never find ‘should’ much of a guarantee in life, so best of luck with that.

ALSO:

I am also interested to know about chess books, DVDs and software that you have in the house and also about any chess books that you may have devoured in the past and websites you may have plundered.

I can work face-to-face, over the ‘phone, or over the Internet using something like Google Meet and/or a chess server like Lichess .  Depending on your telephone contract and Internet speed, either may be the best option for us, but happy to discuss and experiment.

Fees vary depending on how much work you want me to do between sessions: if you can analyse your own games, do your own homework and we meet online, I’ll charge a minimum; if you want me to analyse your games, mark your homework and travel to your house, it will be for a higher rate.

[Contact email in sidebar.]

Mastodon verification