We have all been told time after time just how great the Soviets were at chess and having read almost every publication translated into English about them, I have more than a few ideas why. The following list shows how dominant the Soviet players were at the Olympiads they played in, but bear in mind for political reasons the Soviets only began participating from the 1950s onwards.
Courtesy of the English Chess Forum here is the list of players who beat a Soviet at the Olympiads.
Did he cheat or violate the rules unintentionally? At the recent Baku Olympiad the untitled Japanese player Tang Tang, who defeated Turkmenistan GM Handszar Odeev in Round 3 was given a loss by the arbiters after they discovered he was in possession of an electronic device, even though it was established it (the player’s phone) had not been used during the game.
In doing so, you may have noticed in the player stats that black has a rating advantage of around 300 points but comes out of the opening slightly worse only to equalize in the middlegame. On move 26 the following position is reached.
White (Tang Tang) now plays 27. f4, at which point had black played either Qxa2 (suggested by Leonard Barden on the ECF Forum) or Qxd6 (my suggestion) the game would probably have been drawn but instead black plays for the win with 27. …exf3 28. Rd2 f2?!+. Perhaps unhappy not to be winning against his much lower rated player, he tries to mate white, only to find himself being mated. The difficulty here is that if black’s mating attack works then of course its justified, so is the result of the match due to black’s miscalculations? If so, isn’t it unfair to accuse white (Tang Tang) of cheating? He has hasn’t really won the game himself, black has lost it through a choice of incorrect plan. I’m not sure whether white’s play is strong enough to suggest he has been cheating and of course we hope that whenever an untitled player beats a Grandmaster they don’t automatically fall under suspicion. If anything the game looks like a classic example of a higher rated opponent dropping his game and the lower rated opponent upping his so that they meet somewhere in the middle.
The case was brought to light on the following site http://www.alexcolovic.com/2016/09/anti-cheating-in-baku.html?showComment=1474162440310#c1755736041471003299. The captain of the Japanese team GM Mihajlo Stojanovic, has defended his player in the comments below and clarified one or two points (though it would have helped if the player had done so as well). It appears that Tang Tang was given a loss for possession of an electronic device rather than use…well according to his captain he was.
Unfortunately FIDE has attracted a lot of criticism over the anti-cheating measures enforced, which were considered to be draconian and, as we see here, ineffective. Players were forced to go through scanners and body searches before entering the playing venue and could be stopped and searched during play, much to the frustration of England’s Nigel Short. Of course, FIDE want to send the message that cheating is unacceptable, and rightly so, but this is not the way to do it surely. Chess is a gentleman’s game, such heavy-handedness has no place in it. No wonder so many players felt aggrieved. It is a great shame that the majority have to suffer because of the actions of a few, and in turn, the governing body’s inability to deal with the issue effectively.
One final point, given the attention the incident attained, I wonder if Tang Tang is now big in Japan, because ‘when you’re big in Japan…’
Despise the enemy strategically, but take him seriously tactically.
Passivity is fatal to us. Our goal is to make the enemy passive.
Mao Zedong
Communist China, the somewhat unpopular champions of the 2014 Olympiad, lost their title yesterday, failing to find a top ten place in fact, losing to Ukraine, England, and Hungary mid-tournament. For the first time since the 70s, the Americans and their distinctly migrant team are now champions.
The Chinese are a curious bunch, don’t you think? Little has been said about their meteoric rise over the last ten years irrespective of their successes. When participating in tournaments they often keep themselves to themselves and you wonder whether they are discouraged to interact with their foreign counterparts. Having known some of their top players before, being fortunate to have met Hou Yifan on more than one occasion, it is undoubtedly the case the the top players are, to some degree, subject to governmental demands. At the time I knew her, she could not decide herself which international tournaments she was allowed to play in. We do not yet know why the Chinese under-performed so in this Olympiad, I suspect it will not be reported on internationally if at all.
The Americans, comprising of an Italian, a Japanese, a Filipino and a player from California on the bottom board, are now the more popular champions. Perhaps the opportunism the country embodies both historically and in the present day appeals to a wider audience, its allure a success story in itself, irrespective of where its players are really from. I personally predicted they would win the event, and so they did, looking strong throughout with notable performances from Caruana and So in particular. As we know, the Americans are investing heavily in chess at the moment, pronouncing St. Louis, Missouri as the world chess capital and New York as home to the upcoming World Championship match between Carlsen and Karjakin. An early return on their investment is, most likely, much to the liking of the upper echelons within the game.
One of the great things about an Olympiad is that you often see unusual pairings and results. I find this Olympiad to be fascinating, especially when we now have so many options to follow the action, and some great commentary too. The quality of the play was very high and there were many great games to play through. Roll on Georgia 2018.
Gawain Jones is having a great Olympiad in Baku. In Round 9 he saved England from certain defeat against a lower rated Iran. The ending is both interesting and instructional. With white Gawain shows great piece coordination in the endgame in his attempt to expose and capture his opponent’s king, saving the day for his teammates.
The position after 43. …Kf7. It’s often a sign of a great player when they are able to exchange one advantage for another. White plays 44. Bb4, allowing black to capture his passed pawn but after 44. …Rxa6 45 Rf8+ black now has the difficult decision of finding shelter for his monarch. The king wanders to b3 before being caught in the center and prompting black’s resignation.
The often described ‘eccentric’ GM Vasilly Ivanchuk, who the entire chess once world took note of when he began playing losing chess after a mid-game meltdown has chosen not to represent his country at the current Olympiad, he’s snuck off to Poland to play in some draughts tournament instead! What a strange fellow! More details can be found in the following link https://en.chessbase.com/post/where-is-vassily-ivanchuk
Of course how could we forget his missed mate in one? Go to 7.40 for the missed mate in one.
For a quality interview with Ivanchuk, the following link makes a good read.
Dr. Marion Tinsley, the greatest draughts player the world has ever seen. A person who my friend Nick McBride had the pleasure of meeting when he came to England.
In round 9 of the current Olympiad Hungary met Georgia. This meant that the world’s two most creative and original super Grandmasters clashed with one another. Rapport had the white pieces, Jobava played with the black. It was, perhaps, inevitable that the game would depart from theory quickly and that it did. With only 4 moves on the board, Rapport’s fondness for classical attacking chess which suits his tactical acumen showed once more as he steered the game towards a King’s Gambit type position but with Jobava in fine form he capitalized on some minor inaccuracies in the middle game and won with the black pieces after some clever endgame maneuvers. The game was quite entertaining and played curiously by black in places. It’s worth taking a look at if you have time. Highlights of it appear in Jan’s entertaining show at about the 4.30 minute mark.
In round 5 of the current 2016 Baku Olympiad, played out in my former home-from-home Baku, England’s GM Gawain Jones beat his Vietnamese opponent with a queen sacrifice to help England win the match yet the commentators and those involved in producing highlights of the day’s play have not said anything about it. What do you have to do to become noticed I wonder? Unfortunately for Gawain, if ever there was a day not to win with a queen sacrifice, day 5 was it as there were many hair-raising encounters in matches of greater significance.
Black plays 15. … fxe3. Is this home-prep? Is it sound even? I suspect not but his opponent is 200 points or so below him, so its not easy to find the right moves over the board. But well done Gawain nice to see him pull one off. I seem to recall his position deteriorated pretty rapidly when he played one against a certain M. Carlsen once upon a time.
…on what this site initially became…on what this site is now becoming…on what this site cannot become…
On what this site initially became…
…once upon a time, the chess-related musings of an adrift academic were bound playfully and electronically in this online journal of sorts. They grew and grew as the decade did too. I kept on because I love to write whether I had much to say or not; therefore, being read by others was usually of little or no importance, comparatively speaking. Content was based on personal thoughts and experience on various topics with no intended audience borne in mind. With topics broadening, my own take on things always shaped the narrative I constructed: I often thought I was insightful but never that I was right. Sometimes imagination gave rise to originality: and of that I have always remained proud. I often introduced humour, believing that I am funnier than I really am. Sometimes, I found my own style antithetical to the conservatism I believe chess is plagued by -oftentimes that has put a gracious smile on my face… .
On what this site is now becoming…
…this site is now becoming a collaboration of chess in Bedfordshire: much more so of the past than the present -that has become the dominant trend. I document the history of chess in Bedfordshire as much as I can, and as time has passed I have become more thorough and resourceful. However, I am not a trained historian as my background lies principally in philosophy but yes it is true I did study some modules on history as both an undergraduate and a post-graduate too; furthermore, I have trained myself up, particularly in terms of postmodern history. Since 2015, I have only read history and historiography as well as those philosophers who have been so influential on postmodern history, such as Nietzsche (whom I once wrote a 19,000 word dissertation on, entitled: Can the Will to Power be Found in The Birth of Tragedy?), also Richard Rorty and Foucault and I suppose certain structualists such as Claude Levi-Strauss too. Regarding postmodernism, mostly I keep to Hayden White, Keith Jenkins and Alan Muslow.
Some friends and former playing partners back home describe me as the ‘go to guy’ for the history of chess in Bedfordshire. This compliment says more about the lack of interest in the subject than my own endeavour. As mentioned, I am too adrift from academia to feel chuffed by it. Rather, I tend to lament that my historical research, like my chess, just isn’t what it should be. Even though I may well have a broad understanding of Bedfordshire chess history courtesy of the volume of research put into it, all of which began in 2014, this is not something I am particularly proud of. Nonetheless, out of courtesy compliments are graciously received. If the truth be told, I just see it as my job and only that – after all someone’s got to do it and no one else is that interested!
Amongst the many others, I have created three categories: ‘Bedfordshire Chess’ and ‘History of Bedfordshire Chess’ and ‘Luton Chess Club’. This website is slowly moving towards a consolidation of those (all of which can be found in one of the toolbars to the right).
On what this site cannot become…
…I like to be both creative and amusing when I can be, factor in that playfulness has been an ever-present factor, the content of this site should be thought of as multifarious. It could be said I continue to enjoy undermining the conservatism I believe chess is underpinned by even after all these years, and often try to use humour to do it still, believing I have got better at it. Consequently, despite the general direction its going in, this site cannot only be about Chess in Bedfordshire and nor will it be. It may become noted for that yes -in fact that’s been the case for years already even by established historians, archivists, and whoever else. External factors aside, this site is titled McCreadyandChess. I cannot, nor will I not, remove my own personal thoughts and experiences of chess from the posts of this site -especially if I think they are funny or original for they constitute my writing at its very, very best. In addition, the number of categories alone tells you that breadth of content is important to me. I am proud of my site, it is identity conferring and that is how it shall stay -end of story. All you really have are: ‘Some thoughts on the beautiful game’, which, incidentally, just happen to be my very own; nothing more, nothing less, take of it whatever you please… .
A side note on how to read old Tom Sweby's columns
Not perhaps, but quintessentially, Old Tom Sweby is best thought of as a passionate devotee to the newspapers he wrote for. He was well read and knowledgeable of the Bedfordshire chess scene and well beyond, given that he was the president of the S.C.C.U. once upon a time. He was generally well-respected and rubbed shoulders with many, if not all, of those eminent within British chess circles. It would, however, be a critical mistake to see his column is primary source material entirely. That it is not. You will also find secondary source material quoted too, and the reliability of that is not quite as Tom hoped. Given that he wrote for decades, this is to some degree inevitable, and after all we are all prone to error whether we realize it or not. Thankfully, with regards to old Tom Sweby, they are infrequent and for the most part old Tom continued to document events and developments in the Bedfordshire league from the get go as best he could but, of course, everything lies open to interpretation. Despite this, and generally speaking. this does indeed make him informative and thus worth reading. Dare I say his columns constitute a narrative describing the latest developments, match reports and changing nature of the Beds league...he knew his audience and wrote according. This manifested itself over decades but brevity was always in play courtesy of the restictions imposed by writing a column. Should you wish to read a in instrumental figure of the Beds' league post WW2, you are quite welcome to peruse what has been posted here... . :-) I should, however, point out that as the decades wore on he gradually moved on away from narratives concerning the Bedfordshire league towards affairs both historical and international. The reasons for this are multifarous, old age was a predominante factor presumably, however, the bottom line is with regards to how the Bedfordshire chess scene developed post WW2: old Tom Sweby is your go to guy. He wrote more about chess in Bedforshire than anyone else did but given he was a Lutonian and writing for a Luton newspaper there is both bias and greater coverage of his hometown than the rest of the county.
Gallery
I’m either 10 or 11 here
1982, myself versus Brian from Sunderland.
At the Thai Junior chess championships. My daughter of course.
Pattaya 2011
2011
Thai Junior Championships
2008
2011
Around 2011
2011
Pattaya 2009
2011
Kuwait 2008
2012
2012
2011 BKK Chess club
2011
2011 Thai Open
2011 Thai Open
2013 approx
Around 2014
2010
2012
Around 2011
2011
2011
2013
Around 2011
Around 2011
2020
2011
2008
2011
2013 or thereabouts
2010
2017
2014?
2010
2024
2024
2024
To add comments, please see the bell at the top of the page.
McCreadyandChess 