Old Heraclitus once said ‘You can never step into the same river twice for it’s not the same river and it’s not the same man’. When I bought and read IM Littlewood’s publication ‘Chess Tactics’, I did so voraciously at school; therefore, I was a mere teen and not a man. That book was one of many my small school bag was stuffed with, often read in T. D. (Technical Drawing), on the bus too, and wherever else whilst uniformed. How would it read upon rediscovery some 37 years on?
The cover was green, now it’s orange. The song does not remain the same. It’s a book for beginners and I don’t recall any of the puzzles, just that I found it challenging… .
Why does the song not remain the same? The reasons are multifarious, primarily however, reading it is of no benefit anymore thus of no interest: it retains a certain sentimental value, perhaps, but no more really… except that it may be helpful if teaching chess… .
Type O’ Negative have a song called ‘Everything Dies’. In death I will now become known as one who once read Littlewood’s ‘Chess Tactics’…what else have I got to hope for?
This is rather unimpressive and untypical too because of white’s early d5 push and several sub-optimal moves played by white. But I do like that I did play in the spirit of the Dutch and siught counterplay to grab the draw.
I really am not a fan of online chess but it does help alieviate boredom I suppose. Anyway, here’s four wins which show how badly I play online and how bad my opponents usually are. Not anything to be proud of but rather ashamed of instead yet still I post! It remders my play quick fire and impulsive. If you do have to watch any of them then only the last game is worth looking at as my opponent is not so terrible… .
In order to have a break from 1. c4, I vary with a return to 1. f4, which goes wrong immediately.
2. No thought needed here, another example of poor opening play by my opponent.
Here is a game which exemplifies I am a mere club & county player, and both challenges the widely held belief that 1. c4 is a quiet move often leading to postional struggles as well as that I am playing for a win still, despite having stopped playing sacrifical chess against computer engines. It’s far from brilliant, like most ad hoc online games are, but looks like the right way forwards for someone wnting to move away from 1. e4.
Opponent Monarch 1.7 ELO 2100 (ECF184). I am white, have the better game but let it slip at the end. Good game: I am implenting what I told myself now but more time is needed.
Playing for pleasure and playing to win are two different things altogether.
I have upped the engine on Lucas Chess to Monarch 1.7 (ELO2100/ECF184).
I have not yet fully absorbed the advice I previously posted from Rowson’s The Seven Deadly Sins of Chess. Because of this, I lost the second game against it when I should really have won. But for the first time I also did the other thing required, to look at my games and learn from my mistakes (more on this to come).
Now there are conditions too:
Firstly, play with a clear head.
Secondly, make sure I am ready to play and want to play.
Thirdly, allocate more time to the games, as this will help.
From the harrowing loss, I have learnt I am missessing the position and not spending enough time on that. I also need a broader approach and play with more caution. By this I mean give less emphasis to wanting to seize the initiative all the time, which I tend to do. I really couldn’t believe I lost.
Clearly winning but misassessed.
Here I went a bit wrong. The correct move is 27. …. h5 and not 27. …. Qxh1. I should have eased off grabbing material and seen that my knights were controlling the position and essential to retaining control of it. I should have made more effort to assesss the position and not thought more in terms of the result. /
32. Ka4 Kh8 22. Bh2 Nc4?? That move lost me the game whenI thought I had it won. Nd7 is better. The position is not won, it’s marginally worse. I just thought he’s bound to get mated when in fact the king is safe there.
3-6 months it stays. About right for someone so out of practice. On we go.
For the all the right reasons, I have abandonded online chess for once and for all. Now I only play Lucas Chess, against the engine Cinammon 12.c (ELO1930). Here’s how easy beating it can be.
Opening remarks, I hope you enjoy the oginiality you are about to encounter, an approach opposed to conservatism too, and a sense of pride in my working class upbringing despite it being antithetical to what usually consitutes chess writings. It’s not part of the norm and rather unnerving I suspect. Good if it is. Finding your voice is an aim all writers hope to achieve and is of much greater value than and the opinions of those I have never met, will never know nothing of and have no interest in whatsoever, courtesy of their anonymity which will forever condemn their comments to not worth reading. However, I am willing to concede this post isn’t really worth reading as my account of myself and comments on the world are a little too playful to be believed…ah well, I’ll try to do better next time. Would it help if I said I am by far the baddest, meanest, toughest, most fearsome 1600 player on the planet, capable of finding any mate in one on the board provided I’ve still got a good 25 minutes on the clock still, and have never blundered more than 15 times in a game. I even know how to set the pieces up correctly and can get it done in less than half an hour usually, and if you gave me a pencil to write my name on the scoresheet, it usually take me less than an hour to work out which end you write with, not that I ever write the moves down though, I was told only trannys do that.
Having always been rubbish at chess, it’s very pleasing to redefine my approach and adopt a style of play hyper-aggressive when the intitiative is often seized by sacrifical attacks. I so very nearly beat my electronic friend tonight. I had the game completely won and was spoilt for choice on how to finish him off. But because I am not only rubbish at chess, I’m also a useless bastard, I went and bollocked it up, much to my disappointment. It was my every intention to really stick it to my electronic friend tonight and beat it for the first time. I almost wiped it off the board but got exited and forgot how rubbish I am and bound to mess it up. Which I did, as expected. Go have a look at the game and ask, how on earth could anyone throw that away? Don’t ask me, I don’t even know. It will be quite sometime before I can overcome the disbelief, I estimate about 25 years. It’s killed my interest in redefining my approach to chess completly, I’ll never believe I had it so easily won then blew it, my confidence in myself hasn’t just been sledgehammered, it’s been completely obilterated But to end on a positive note, I do have a chance I can succeed, and it’s only a 10,000,000-1 shot,so wish me luck. Lamentably, If I ever do play chess devoid of confidence, I am usually proper fucked and get massacred always.
To conclude, I sincerely apologize for not having the writing skills required to describe the absolutely appalling way in which I threw the game away. But I do accept in life there are sometimes things we experience we will never be able to understand or believe, I just suppose who are completely rubbish at something should expect this infrequently. But to inspire those who have read this, if like myself disbelief in how crap you are will remain ever present in your life, it is still possible to gain pleasure from playing. It happened to me once 30 years ago, and it’s safe to assume you will experience the same thing at some point in the next 40 years or so, like one of my best friends did. So it’s not all doom and gloom. But I should warn you when he walked into the car park after the match, he got a smack in the mouth and a kick in the bollocks for winning, and when questioned his opponent refused to say the name of the mental home he’d just been let out of too. So be sure you opponent is the amiable type and hasn’t just been let out of a mental home.
Most unexpectedly, I am redefing how I play chess. Rather than faff about and not do veyr much, Against Lucas I have developed a style based on sacrificial attacks and relentless attacks on the king. I like it very much because when I gain the intiative I dominant the game and really stick it to it. I’ve already had many won positions but get a bit excited and fail to convert them. The intentional is to now reduce the risk in my play and opt for gentle pressure rather than all out attack all if I can’t find it, as I sometimes push too hard. Wish me luck for today’s game. I am going to stick it to my electronic friend I can assure you. Victory is not too far from being within my reach. You can see the second drw in the link below.
…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. 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 