Chicago Open (5) -- Happy to Draw

The game that I am most pleased with is the draw I achieved from the following position in the last round. I tend to think that the superior position of the Black king and rook offer my opponent winning chances, but I am not really sure. I suspect that I am going to learn a lot about rook endings by analyzing the game.

White (Me) to move.

Chicago Open (4) -- Who Needs Opening Theory?

As I had done very little opening preparation before this tournament, I figured at some point I would get crushed by some high school kid who was up on the latest theory of the Sicilian. I thought that point might have come in the fourth round when Davis Whaley opened with 1.e4, but after 1...c5, he went with 2. Nc3 Nc6 and then suprised me with the virtually unknown 3.g4!?






After the game he told me that he just wanted to get away from book openings, obviously not realizing how happy that made me. The game wound up in a closed Sicilian sort of position which suited me fine although I could not find a way to punish his agressiveness and wound up with a draw.

My luck ran out in the sixth round, although it was not the Sicilian that did me in. Gauri Shankar played a fairly new idea in the Classical Nimzo-Indian. After 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3. Nc3 Bb4 4.Qc2 0-0 5.a3 Bxc3+ 6.Qxc3 b6 7.Bg5 Ba6 8.Qf3!?

I was actually aware of this move and had a vague idea of the idea behind it, but that did not help me much. I got out of the opening alive, but then let him penetrate my position with his queen after which the game was over quickly. I would think that I would have learned my lesson having gotten beat that way in the past, but somehow I always think that I am going to be able to get away with it.

Whaley v. Hart & Shankar v. Hart


My rating after the Chicago Open is 2049. It was the ninth tournament in a row in which my rating has increased dating from March 2006 when my rating stood at 1948. Over those 45 games, I have won 32, lost 9 and drawn 4. I think that the biggest factor in my increase has been my ability to handle lower rated players. In the 32 games in which I outrated my opponent by more than 15 points, I have yield only a single loss and a single draw. However, if I am going to improve on my 2 wins, 7 losses, and 2 draws against higher rated players, I think I am going to have to work on some openings.

Chicago Open (3) -- I Don't Deserve Such Respect

In the third round, I played Michigan's 2006 representative to the national Denker tournament, Timothy Moroney. After sacrificing a knight for two connected passed central, I had reached the following position.

I thought my position was fine, but I was not at all sure how I was going to break Black's blockade. As a result, I was shocked when my opponent tipped over his king. Hart v. Moroney

After the game, I asked whether he really thought that his position wasn't worth playing. He said he felt that there was nothing he could do but wait to be squeezed to death. I suggested that he might feel differently if he had seen some of my other games.

Tim also scored finished 5-2 and we chatted after the tournament while waiting for our $40 checks. As luck would have it, his last round opponent had played a similar sacrifice to achieve passed central pawns. Taking my advice to heart, he fought that one out and won.

Chicago Open (2) -- There is No Justice in Chess

In the second round, Tom Friske outplayed me as White in the middlegame to win a pawn and reach the following ending.



Not wanting to let me have the knight check on d1, Tom decided on 42.Kf3?? which loses to 43.Nc2! Regardless of how White takes the pawn, he loses his rook for Black's knight after which Black picks up the knight with ...Re7+. Friske v. Hart.

Chicago Open (1)

After mediocre results in three previous tries, I finally finished in the money at the Chicago Open. Four wins, one loss, and two draws put me in a fifteen-way tie for 9th and 10th place in the U2100 section and a fat check for $40. WooHoo! I was actually tied for 1st after five rounds with 4 1/2 points, but the competition was stiffer on the last day.

I was expecting my typical mediocre Chicago Open result since I had not practiced or studied much recently, but there were a couple of good omens. First was the fact that my wife suggested that I play. Years ago, I made the imprudent decision to get married on the Saturday of Memorial Day weekend so the Chicago Open usually coincides with our anniversary. Theresa is really quite tolerant of my obsession with chess, but I try to pick tournaments that don't try her patience any more than necessary. The second good omen was the lousy weather. My disappointment at past Chicago Opens had been compounded by the feeling that I had wasted the first nice weekend of the summer indoors, but rain on Friday and Saturday made me good about playing chess regardless of the result.

I did not feel like I was playing all that well, but things seemed to break my way. In the second round, my opponent outplayed me in the middlegame but misjudged my counterplay and dropped a rook in the ending. In the third round, I had the better middlegame and misjudged my opponent's counterplay, but he overplayed his attack and I hung on to win. In the fifth round, my opponent resigned in a position that I was not sure how to win. I was probably luckiest in that only one opponent punished my poor opening preparation by playing a theoretical line.

The game I am happiest about is one that only netted me a half point. Despite being down two pawns in the last round, I did everything I could to make my opponent's life difficult and I pulled out a draw after eighty moves. Once I have analysed it, I hope that game will be able to provide my students some lessons in fighting for a draw from a bad position.