Thanks Paul.
I will go over Tyson's annotations of this game first. Then I will play
against Shredder at its new strength.
This time I will keep score myself, and I will also keep time.
I'm looking forward.
Evan
-----Original Message-----
From: Paul Benson
Sent: Monday, June 01, 2020 4:41 PM
To: US BCA
Subject: [usbca_chess] Re: Reese vs Shredder
Hi Evan and all,
Please, I suspect the 1400 rating Shredder announced is the approximate
strength it will play at the next time you meet.
If you win again, it will raise the strength again, stepwise refinement
until a level of rough equality is found.
Paul Benson.
-----Original Message-----
From: Evan Reese - Email Address: mentat1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent On: 01/06/2020 21:19
Sent To: usbca_chess@xxxxxxxxxxxxx - Email Address:
usbca_chess@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [usbca_chess] Re: Reese vs Shredder
Hello Tyson,
Thank you very much for this!
Obviously, I haven't had time to look at it in detail yet, having only just
received it.
But I can respond to a couple of things you wrote at the end.
There were no time limits. I did not have a clock running. Shredder made its
moves nearly instantly, whereas I moved without regard to time. I did finish
the game that evening, but I have no idea how long I took.
The second thing is that Shredder played that game at what it said was an
ELO of 1200. I set it there before I started. After it resigned, it adjusted
its rating up to 1400, and it adjusted my playing strength up to 1600. As I
think I mentioned when I posted the game, I don't know what it thought my
playing strength was. I had had it set at 1250, but it changed its own
rating, apparently after an update, so it may have changed mine as well.
Whatever the case, it played its game at 1200.
I will look this over in detail as soon as I can. It is not every day that
one gets one of their games analyzed by a Master; I will not waste the
opportunity to learn as much as I can.
Thanks again.
Evan
From: mordue andrew (Redacted sender "tyson.mordue" for DMARC)
Sent: Monday, June 01, 2020 4:00 PM
To: usbca_chess
Subject: [usbca_chess] Reese vs Shredder
Hello everyone,
Some observations on Reese vs Shredder. The engine has played a very poor
positional game and is getting well stuffed before Evan makes his only
serious error. However, the engine then makes a huge blunder of its own and
drops two pieces.
[White "REESE, E."]
[Black "SHREDDER"]
[Result "1-0"]
[ECO "B50"]
[Annotator "Mordue,Tyson"]
[PlyCount "69"]
[EventDate "2020.??.??"]
1. e4 c5
2. Nf3 d6
3. Bc4
{This is okay but if you play this against the Sicilian Defence then you
must follow up with d2-d4 shortly afterwards. Playing d2-d3 allows Black to
embarrass the Bishop with ...e7-e6 and d6 (d7) -d5, and I have done this on
countless occasions. Do not be afraid to play open Sicilians!}
3...Nc6
4. d3 Bg4
5. O-O Nf6
6. Be3 a5?
{A dreadful move that loses control of b5 so Black will never have play on
the Queenside.}
7. Nbd2 a4
8. Bb5
{I might have played 8 a3 just to halt the further advance of the Black
a-Pawn. Yes, you just saw Tyson advocate a Pawn to Rook Three. However,
Evan's move is okay even though it moves a piece twice in the opening. It's
on a better square where it pins an enemy piece and it also allows Nc4 on
the next move.}
8...e5?
{And now a permanent weakening of d5 as well.
9. Nc4 h5?
(And a weakening og g5 that White promptly exploits. Deep Rybka says White
is +0.65.}
10. Bg5 Qc7?
{Another error allowing the shattering of the Kingside Pawns with 11 Bxf6
gxf6, and then play for control of f5 or d5 by going 12 h3 now that Black
can't maintain the pin with12...Bh5.}
11. Re1 Be7
12. c3 Rg8?
[Removing the possibility of castling Kingside. Deep Rybka' evaluation goes
from 0.65 up to 1.45 for just this one error. I do have a recent precedent
in my own praxis but I'm not going to put it here.}
13. d4 cxd4
14. cxd4 Bxf3
15.Qxf3
{There's nothing wrong with 15 gxf3 either in this particular scenario, but
after Black's next move his position is shattered and Deep Rybka has White
at +2.57.} . ..
15...exd4?
16. Rad1
This is a good centralising move. However, with the Black King stuck in the
centre Deep Rybka says White should play 16 e5! blasting the middle open and
a plus of 4.44! Notice the effect of pinning the Knight on c6 and the
possible pin on the e7 Bishop allowing captures on f6.
16...Kf8
{Unpinning is always good but this would have been better last move. Note
also that this square is a cul-de-sac. The Rook and the g7 Pawn deny the
Black King any flight squares. See later on.
17. Qg3 b6?
{Another awful Pawn move unhinging the c6 Knight. Evan decides to regroup
the c4 Knight and has the incidental threat of 19 Rc1 pinning and winning
the c6 steed.}
18. Nd2 Qb7
19. Nf3 Ra5
20. Bc4?
{Simpler was 20 Bxc6 Qxc6 21 Nxd4 regaining the Pawn and heading for the
lovely f5 square. Now Black keeps his extra pawn and improves his position
by pushing the Bishop around.}
20...Rc5
21. b3 b5
22. Bd3 axb3
23. axb3 Qc7
24. Nh4
{The Knight heads off to the f5 square anyway. Deep Rybka evaluates the
position as +0.56 to White (a large drop since move 16) and suggests
24...Rc3, while I pondered 24...g6 stopping the Knight in its tracks,
although 25 Bh6+ forces the King back into the centre.}
24...Qc8
{Trying to head to g4 to swap Queens. White's next move just happens to
prevent this, and I have to query whether the Queen is any better on c8 than
it was on c7.}
25. Nf5 Qd7
{A loss of a tempo, but White might have been threatening 26 Nxe7 Kxe7 (to
defend d6) 27 Bxf6+ inflicting more damage on Black's Pawns because
27...Kxf6 loses the c5 Rook after 28 Qxd6+. Note that 27...gxf6 doesn't lose
the g8 Rook because it's defended laterally by the Black Queen. However, the
f5 Knight and g5 Bishop are clearly better pieces than their counterparts on
f6 and e7 so White didn't have to play this.}
26. Ra1
{Occupying an open file and White's plus goes nearly all the way back up to
+2. Evan has been playing simple positional chess while Black is messing
around with his Queen.}
26...Qe8
27. Nxe7
{This move is not an error by itself but in conjunction with White's next it
is. If 27 Nxd6 Rxg5 is worth analysing.}
27...Nxe7
28. Qxd6!?
{Overlooking that the Bishop is now en prise with no defender. Instead 28
Bf4 forces a complete collapse now that the e7 Bishop has gone.}
28...Rxg5
{However, Evan's positional plus is so great that Deep Rybka suggest both 29
e5 and 29 Ra7 and still has White at +3 or so. Note that the g8 Rook does
nothing constructive but it does stop the Black King going to g8 to unpin
the e7 Knight.}
29. Qxd4?
{Releasing some of the pressure and Deep Rybka says the position is now
equal ... for the first time since move 1? Cue theoretical debate!}
29...Qd7??
{A crashing blunder that loses a Knight and a Rook. 29...Qb8 stops 30 Ra7.
After White's reply the evaluation goes from equal to over +8.}
30. Ra8+ Nc8
31. Qxd7 Nxd7
32. Rxc8+
{To lose one piece may be considered unfortunate ...}
32...Ke7
33. Rxg8
{But to lose two is just carelessness. The inactive Rook perishes having
done nothing all game.}
33...h4
34.Rh8 Rc5
35. Rxh4 1-0
Conclusion: An awful game by the engine and in no way representaive of a
1400 player. Evan's positional play is good apart from a backwards sequence
from moves 17-23. It would be useful to know what the time limits were.
Further comment is invited. More games by anyone are definitely encouraged!
Regards,
Tyson
