by Dan O'Dowd
December 21, 2011 in Dan's Blog, News
I have just been published on chess.com in an article by IM Jeremy Silman no less, featuring a South Tyne League game I played in October!
You can go to the article at http://www.chess.com/article/view/threats-real-amp-imagined
That just made my day 
by Dan O'Dowd
October 11, 2011 in Dan's Blog, News
On Sunday 9th October, the Carlisle Rapidplay was held in the spacious function room of the local Working Men’s club. Numbers were down a huge amount – only 26 people came along! I was most disappointed by this, mainly because I had three people not show up without bothering to tell me. To the twentyfive of you who did come, thankyou very much for your support and patience!
Due to low numbers, the Under 14s played with the Minor, making a total of eleven. This was the most keenly fought category, but the Major and Open were hotly contested too, with many tense and exciting games. This part of the blog will be written from my organiser’s perspective – a second part will include my games as a filler in the Open.
Thinking that we had forty-odd entrants last year, when we didn’t, I was a little worried about pre-tournament entry levels. Indeed, several players were missing this year who attended last, for various reasons. Had I realised the WMC was open earlier than their stated time to me of 11:00 I’d have had everything set up far earlier. I put out too many boards, thinking I was in for a lot of on-the-day entries, and cost myself some time to get the morning’s payments taken and such. Further problems came when two of my seven Open entrants summarily failed to contact me! I had no choice but to carry on without them. I had intended to play in the Open if numbers remained at 7, since it’s nearly impossible to do any sort of proper pairing with 7 for 5 rounds, but with five people, I made a very poor error. I didn’t realise that with nine in the Major, there was a golden opportunity for someone to play up, evening numbers out. (At the time I had 12 scheduled in the Minor+Juniors.) My decision to play myself was selfish in that regard and deprived five people in the Major of one round each of serious games.
With an all-play-all, we use specific pairings in what are caller Berger Tables, to work out who, by seeding, has what colour against whom. The first problem came when I managed to transpose two opponents in round 1, with pairings that shouldn’t have come until round 3 and 4. Before the second round, I frantically spent 10 minutes trying to find another unique set of pairings which gave everyone their games, and managed to arrive there, but having caused delay to the other players. We started later than scheduled and were behind by round 2, so the lunch break was about ten minutes shorter than it should have been. Normally in such circumstances I’d just extend it, but in adult tournaments it’s essential to stick to the schedule as much as possible, especially when you’re planning to give prizes at 6pm. I think next year I will either find another venue, or be assured of being able to set up in the function room the night before, giving an extra half hour and more to play with. I also intend to shift the contest back to a Saturday, which may reverse the incredibly large decline in numbers seen over the last 2 years.
The next problem came when I had an absentee from the Minor. There was probably a miscommunication there on both sides. I had a provisional entry, and didn’t receive any contact for absence. Still, by 11.30 I should have paired without this player – as it was, I gave the number 1 seed a full point bye effectively, and that should not happen (byes in first rounds go to the player in the middle of the pack). It was now too late to effect a correct transfer from Major to Minor or the other way around, and this was a serious error whose rectification would have cost only a few minutes.
Playing myself caused no real problem with regard to entering results, since Eggert, Drew, and Bill among others knew how to do it, and were graciously helping me along while my games entered the claws of time trouble. There were no major incidents to report in any section of ill feeling in games, illegal move problems, or anything else. That said, it could be that since I was playing, people didn’t feel they could come and seek me about such things. In either case, my decision to play was foolish from an arbiting viewpoint, because I should have kept an eye on proceedings in case something did happen.
Thankfully, pairings were not a hassle in any section, despite the fact that with few players, logjams can frequently occur in rounds 3 or 4. I intend to submit the results to an ECF arbiter for scrutiny, so that I can avoid any misapplication of logic I may have made. Colours presented no problem either, although one game was played with the wrong colours.
In the end, we finished after 6pm, and many patient people had understandably gone. I set myself very high standards, and although I can take positives from the event, I’d say it was pretty much a shambles despite my preparatory efforts. Because of numbers, I also reduced the first prize in each section to £60, and introduced a second prize of £20. While nobody overtly objected to this, my mistake was in setting such a high prize level on the entry form, thinking entrants would give us the required financial margin.
Finally, to the six people who got byes which could have been avoided, next time you see me, prod me for a pint 
Anyone reading who has any comments/criticisms/anything at all to say, do please contact me. The sooner I work on what I’m doing badly, the quicker things can run smoothly and get better than ever before.
Carlisle Rapidplay 2011 Results
OPEN
Pin Name Grade Club 1 2 3 4 5 Score Position
1 Robert Patla 213 Penrith W6+ W2+ B3+ B5+ W4+ 5 1st £60
3 Stephen Barnes 155 Carlisle B2+ W4+ W1- W6+ W5= 3.5 2nd £20
6 Daniel O'Dowd 143 Carlisle B1- W5= W4+ B3- B2+ 2.5 3rd
2 David Wrigley 172 Tynedale W3- B1- W5+ B4+ W6- 2 4th
4 Ian Stone 150 Cockermouth W5+ B3- B6- W2- B1- 1 5th
5 Lewis McAtear 146 Penrith B4- B6= B2- B1- B3= 1 6th
________________ ____ ________________ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____
MAJOR
Pin Name Grade Club 1 2 3 4 5 Score Position
5 Peter Crichton 139 Tynedale BYE B1= W9+ W2+ B3= 4 1st £60
3 Neil Jones 145 Cockermouth B8+ W2- B6+ W4+ W5= 3.5 2nd= £7
1 Eggert Früchtenicht 146 Penrith B6+ W5= B2- W7+ B9+ 3.5 2nd= £7
8 Mark Houlsby 130 Ulverston W3- BYE B4+ W6= B2+ 3.5 2nd= £7
2 Tim Wrigley 145 Tynedale W7+ B3+ W1+ B5- W8- 3 5th
6 Ian Mackay 133 Carlisle W1- B9+ W3- B8= B7+ 2.5 6th
9 Bill Hardwick 105 Carlisle B4+ W6- B5- BYE W1- 2 7th
4 Andy McAtear 141 Penrith W9- B7= W8- B3- BYE 1.5 8th=
7 Bill Henderson 131 Cockermouth B2- W4= BYE B1- W6- 1.5 8th=
________________ ____ ________________ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____
MINOR + JUNIOR U14
Pin Name Grade Club 1 2 3 4 5 Score Position
2 Jason Maxwell 110 Carlisle Juniors B8+ W5+ B1- W10+ W3+ 4 1st= £27
3 Peter Blackmore 109 Cockermouth W9+ B6+ W4+ W1+ B2- 4 1st= £27
6 Alistair Ridley 100 Penrith Juniors B12+ W3- B8+ W9+ B4+ 4 1st= £27
12 Martin Wright - Carlisle Juniors W6- BYE W5+* B4- B10+ 3 4th=
5 Drew Millar 102 Carlisle W11+ B2- B12-* W8+ W4+ 3 4th=
1 Steve Larkin 119 Tynedale W7+ DEF B4= W2+ B3- W6- 2.5 6th=
4 Camas Millar 102 Carlisle Juniors B10+ W1= B3- W12+ B5- 2.5 6th=
10 Dominic Greenup - Carlisle Juniors W4- B9+ W11+ B2- W12- 2 8th=
9 Darius Greenup - Carlisle Juniors B3- W10- BYE B6- W11+ 2 8th=
8 Peter Hanks - Ulverston W2- B11+ W6- B5- BYE 2 8th=
11 Lloyd Greenup - Carlisle Juniors B5- W8- B10- BYE B9- 1 11th
7 James Leitch 94 Carlisle Juniors B7- DEF - - - - - -
by Dan O'Dowd
October 1, 2011 in Dan's Blog, Games
This was the second game in 2010 between Bruce and me. It was my sixth game of the season, in a run that led me to 7.5/10 and a pre-Xmas performance of 163. I hadn’t got any prep in against Bruce, so wondered if I’d be facing a Collé/Torré opening. Numbers in brackets are thinking time left per side in minutes.
1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nf6 3. d3 (88)
A very common move, but unambitious. Black has the choice between …Nc6, and …d5, and I prefer the latter, because it can lead to sharper play, and gives instant equality.
3…d5 4. Nbd2
White plays it cagily, like a Philidor in reverse. The advantage of this is that Black may become arrogant and overpush. Of course, with his e-pawn now defended, White forces Black to do the same.
4…Nc6 5. g3 (87)
White wants to develop his Bishop to the longest diagonal hoping to exchange on d5 and release it later on.
5…Bc5 (85)
Apparently this isn’t a theory move, but it seems eminently logical. Black develops his Bishop to the best square. Has the seal of approval from both Houdini and Fritz. For reference, I always annotate my serious games myself deeply, before letting engines touch them. Fritz is a more tactically touchyfeely beast, whereas Houdini is another level entirely, but which prefers a very positional approach, and can see tactics on a far deeper, omg what the hell sort of level.
6. Bg2 (86) 0-0 (83)
While I rejected 6…dxe4 7. dxe4 (7. Nxe4 Nxe4 8. dxe4 is much the same but drier), Houdini seems to like it more, on the logic that it permanently blunts White’s Bishop. I disagree with this however, since removing tension assumes one has a technical skill that I certainly don’t possess. It has been shown in similar Philidori/Lion endgames that the side with the Bishop in fianchetto can easily exchange or activate it as well.
7. 0-0 (85) Re8 (76)
If White does exchange on d5, I will want to be able to push e4, using my Kingside majority. He might also play Nc4, so we keep our pawn safely defended.
8. exd5 (78) Nxd5 9. Ne4 (77) Bb6 (66)
White opens up to use his Knight on the strong square e4, chasing my Bishop. This gave me a question to answer! I rejected Be7 on the grounds that this would lose tempo. Keeping the Bishop with an eye on d4 seemed also to tempt a potentially weakening a4.
10. a3 (72) Bf5 (63)
Black is denied the use of b4 for his Knight; which can only mean White wants to play the normally positional lemon, c4. Interestingly though, when I looked this over with Houdini, it thinks c4 is perhaps playable!
Houdini suggests the following odd line: 10. c4 Ndb4 11. c5 Ba5 12. a3 Nxd3 13. b4 which represents a case of complicating before the position gets any worse, and which would create an imbalance to work with.
11. Nh4 (68) Bxe4 (60) 12. Bxe4 (66) g6 (55)
White improves the vision of his Bishop and forces me to exchange my own. This didn’t make me uncomfortable though, since his Knight is now offside, and his Bishop is very blunted indeed. Black can keep his light Bishop instead, but he remains in control here anyways.
13. c4 (55) Nf4! (49)
I see c4 so often! Black obtains a permanent outpost on d4, a permanent target on d3, and probably intended that I play 13…Nf6 14. Bg5, when White has some pressure to speak of. Nf4 however is a lovely little wet move, winning a pawn. White’s options are none too pleasant.
a) 14. gxf4?? Qxh4 gives Black a commanding position, White’s King fractured and defenceless, and an attack swiftly coming.
b) 14. Nf3 Nxd3 gets very tactical and obtuse indeed, although I didn’t look as far as Houdini has shown me. 15. Qxd3 Qxe3 16. Bxd3 e4 17. b4 Nd4 18. c5 Nxf3+ 19. Kg2 Nxh2, which I think we can adequately sum up by saying oh dear God…
So, White bailed out with option 3, but quickly found himself in some sticky bananas.
14. Bxf4 (39) exf4 (48) 15. Bxc6 (37) bxc6 16. Qf3 (33)
To the untrained eye, this might look playable for White. Black has weakness on c6, and his Bishop doesn’t look so active. However, the asymmetry of the pawn structure (favouring the Bishop), the total passivity of the White Knight, and the outpost on d4 (again favouring the Bishop – someone promote him!) make this a rout. Black’s plan is as follows:
1. Restrain White’s pieces by tying them to the defence of b2 then d3 (since if White plays b4 he has some chances).
2. Manoeuvre so as to win the d3 pawn.
3. Exchange Queens, to reach a Rook+Bishop v Rook+Knight ending.
16…fxg3 (47) 17. hxg3 (32) Bd4 (42)
Black immediately sees that the exchange of b2-pawn for c6-pawn benefits him greatly, so he forces White onto the defensive while preventing the freeing d4 from ever being played.
18. Rab1 (30) Qd6! (28)
The exclam is just for the accuracy of this compared with the alternative Qd7, which fails to control c5 and b4. This is important later on.
19. Kg2 (27) Rad8 (26) 20. Qd1
Tricky and strong. He wants to come to a4, gaining play against my isolated pawn still, while suporting his Queenside pawns.
20…Bb6 (18.16)
This looks odd because the Bishop might become entombed, but that isn’t a problem. From here we ensure he has no point of entry for counterplay attacking a7, or by opening up the Queenside.
21. b4 (25) c5 (18.14)
Another paradoxical looking move! My Bishop is still better than his Knight, supporting my pawns which quell his counterplay.
22. Re1 (19.14) Rxe1 (17.03) 23. Qxe1 (19.04) Qxd3 (16.19)
Pawn number one has been eaten.
24. Nf3 (16.34) Qxc4 (14.46) 25. Qe7 (15.57) Qd5 (13.48)
White sensibly brings his pieces back into action and tries for an attack, so that if I go wrong he can reap maximum reward. Remember stage 2 of our plan though.
26. Re1 (14.24) c4 (12.47) 27. Re5 (13.21) Qd6 (12.29) 28. Ng5 (7.50) Qxe7 (10.04)
Second objective achieved, we now have the perfect endgame, and that c-pawn will accelerate the doom with a pretty sequence.
29. Rxe7 (7.46) c3 (8.11) 30. Re4 (6.09) Rd2 (7.25) 31. Kf1 (5.27) Rxf2+ (6.44) 32. Ke1 (5.14) c2 (6.26) 33. Rc4 (5.04) Be3! (5.55)
The killer returns from his holiday in the tropics.
34. Ne4 (4.33) Rh2 (5.18) 35. Rxc7 c1Q+ 36. Rxc1 (3.00) Bxc1 (5.02)
and Bruce graciously resigned. 0-1
Some pretty odd stuff in that game! …Nf4 is not the sort of move you can plan; a tactical radar is essential for seeing the initial idea, and then calculation power verifies the possible outcomes. White had no positive imbalances in the technical phase after this which helped. Note the usefulness of …Bb6 and …c5! Not the sort of thing you’d see in elementary positional textbooks, but quite often a concrete style, preventing counterplay and basing decisions on computer like logic (the Bb6 was still better than the Nh4, since it was doing more in the important area of the board) can work wonders on your game.
If you have any comments/questions/criticisms of any of this, do get in touch! Coming soon, a saunter through some of my games at the British Championships, including two ridiculous Rook endgame saves, a Petroff that actually turns interesting (get the medication!), and an extremely tense Collé-Zukertort against that most dreaded of creatures..the junior!
by Dan O'Dowd
October 1, 2011 in Dan's Blog
Hi all!
Welcome to O’Dowd’s Diary – the ongoing blog of a hopefully still improving club player.
Of course, most of you reading will be my fellow Cumbrian players, but perhaps some of you are outside our rainy realm. Perhaps an intro is in order!
I learned to play first at the age of 6 up in my home of Carlisle. Embarrassingly, I used to think that Queen+King were placed opposing ways around 
I toyed only casually with the game with my father for many years, and only started to take more interest when Trinity School used to play matches against Austin Friars. I read a few library books on the subject over one summer, and suddenly started winning games in the school league. That year in 1999 I became school champion. A nice feeling! I managed a 0/4 though in my first junior congress. More summer reading followed, and I was hooked ever since.
Early highlights for me included sharing 1st place in the Cumbria U15 Championship in 2000, and trips to the Gigafinal stage of the UK Chess Challenge. I was plodding along at a 55 grade, and read a book by Bill Hartston – Teach Yourself Better Chess. (I thoroughly recommend this book!) Suddenly I found I was playing half-decently in some positions, and got to a grade of 107 the following year. A lot of learning followed, a lot of blunders, and in 2009 I found myself with a shiny new grade of 129, having performed at about 120 old money the season before, though annoyingly missing out on potentially winning the Cumbria U130 Championship, by blundering a piece in a position from the Opera Game. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Morphy_versus_the_Duke_of_Brunswick_and_Count_Isouard
In the last couple of years I’ve been fighting really hard to win the City Championship. Second place in two consecutive years is starting to feel a little, Jimmy White? So I really don’t want it to happen a third time. I’ve got to about 143 last season, and I take an annual chess holiday in summer, to an international tournament in Chambéry, France – http://chambechecs.unblog.fr/ – and this summer made a pilgrimage to the British Chess Championships in Sheffield. 3/5 in the PM Open and U160 sections, and 2.5/5 in the U150 were pretty pleasing! It’s in Newcastle next year, so I’m going to kidnap a bunch of Cumbrians, and ransack their prize money 
I am not strong enough to speak of having a style, but I try to achieve positional ends by allegedly strong tactical means, throwing a nice wet move in whenever I can. Suffice it to say the clock is not my best friend!
This blog will contain full annotations of all my games. This is potentially rather a foolish thing to do: it enables those eager players around here to prepare more easily against me. That however in itself can only force me to strengthen my repertoire and general skills. I’d be really grateful for all the criticism in the world on my annotations; constructive, derisory, I want the whole kitchen sink. Before I submit to you my coming atrocities for consideration, let me present what I consider my favourite game from last year, against one of Carlisle’s most reliable players, Bruce Wallace. All comments very welcome!
