“There is no flag large enough to cover the shame of killing innocent people.”
― Howard Zinn
The stupidly named St.George Defence, is a better defence to play than most people think. It’s not that I play it because I am English by birth but rather its obscurity.
I have played it on and off for five years, sometimes against titled players, and can win with it quite easily. Last night I played on-line someone rated 2032, about 100 points higher than mine. See below for how it went.
I am black of course.
A slightly innocuous setup by white.
The two things you need to understand about playing 1. …a6 is not to develop your queen’s knight too early, and that if the centre becomes blocked its often better not to castle. White should proceed with 8. e5 here. The point with an early b5 by black is that the knight can come to d5 and remain unchallenged if that happens. But here white plays 8. d5 for some odd reason.
White has just played 11. Nc6 with no advantage.
The opening was a success owing to the fact that my opponent didn’t quite know what to do then made a slip.
Black has just played 17. …Nb4, which is, I think, winning.
…getting messy
26. … Rd1#.
I was half-watching the tv too as I played this out on my phone…
“If a man does not keep pace with his companions, perhaps it is because he hears a different drummer. Let him step to the music he hears, however measured or far away.”
― Henry David Thoreau
Before I returned to chess I did play in a tournament in Kuwait once. I remember that I enjoyed it very much despite being so rusty.
I found evidence in the video below, at around the 3.50 mark, that despite such a long hiatus I still played 1. f4 [and Rachel, the picture of me @ the 02.50 mark shows me wearing the green cardigan that Al bought me, may he rest in peace].
“Unlike simple stress, trauma changes your view of your life and yourself. It shatters your most basic assumptions about yourself and your world — “Life is good,” “I’m safe,” “People are kind,” “I can trust others,” “The future is likely to be good” — and replaces them with feelings like “The world is dangerous,” “I can’t win,” “I can’t trust other people,” or “There’s no hope.”
― Mark Goulston, Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder For Dummies
Having survived two near-fatal accidents, I learnt recently that I am a long way off recovery still since the self-inflicted damage to my nervous system has finally been correctly diagnosed; thankfully, the paralysis which initiated that is long since gone but the effects are to remain in play until I die. Physical ailments aside, the psychological impact of such blood-curdling impacts is harder to gauge. I am diagnosed with disinhibition, that which, amongst other things, really helps my chess.
After all, when a stone is dropped into a pond, the water continues quivering even after the stone has sunk to the bottom.
― Arthur Golden, Memoirs of a Geisha
I rarely play yet have become much better. Mostly because I now disregard all theory and play more directly in positions I alone chose rather than adhering to positional motives that were at best only ever half-learnt. Here’s an example which I find remarkable because it’s 15 minute game I played on-line. I didn’t concentrate on the game much yet on auto-pilot I found a very sharp tactic which won the game straight away. I would never have done that before my accidents.
Old habits die hard but in recent years I have had players 2200, 2300 and 2400+ in all sorts of problems with 1. f4 during quickplay games.
I’m assuming black’s set up is an importation of a preference, namely, the Caro-Kann. 4. c4 c6 has just been played. Larsen used to play like this. I always had admiration for him. Please see below for one reason why.
After 8. Ne5 Nge7. I didn’t like black’s last move.
After 11. fxe5. Black now plays 11. … Nc6. I am happy with my position, even though I have not emerged with a real advantage.
Here black plays 14. … O-O, which I found to be suspicious. 15. Bd2 b5 follows.
I just played 18. Qg3, black replied with Kh7. I was barely thinking here yet the game is almost won already
Black has just played 22. … Qe6. Admittedly I find it strange that the answer just came without any thought, definitely indicative of a change in style. So how does white force a win from here? My opponent resigned four moves later.
I will leave you with Caliban’s best track, beyond its relevance to the post lies one almighty rhythm change at the 2.50 mark. It really is quite something, the video is intriguing too.
“All of man’s unhappiness comes from his inability to stay peacefully alone in his room.” – Blaise Pascal
The Sicilian Defence is great but it does have its flaws, the main one being that the King can become stuck in the centre of the board if black is not careful enough; with some players moving every queenside pawn they have before castling becomes an option, problems may arise.
It’s 1973. Spassky just lost his title as world champion and had the Soviet government take almost all of his prize money off him also but neither misfortune stopped him from becoming the Soviet champion that year. Here he shows how in a main line, where black plays natural developing moves, king safety or lack thereof, can cost him the game in the opening. His victim that day was a certain Nukhim Rashkovsky, a man still very active in the Russian chess scene.
The Sicilian: flank play in favour of centralised piece development. The position after 7….Qc7. Since its 1973, white now plays 8. Bd3.
Black has just played 11. …Bb7. His position looks quite normal but is as so often the case with the Sicilian, white attempts to open the centre and plays 12. e5.
Play went 12. e5 dxe5 13. fxe5 Nd5 14. Bxe7 Nxc3. It’s best to stop and think what white plays next. The move itself is very sharp indeed.
During what became a rather bumpy flight for both myself and my -soon to become slightly damaged- bicycle, I reverted to one of my favourite books, that being The Soviet Championships by Bernard Cafferty and Mark Taimanov.
In the late 1940’s Alexander Tolush won several brilliancy prizes in his quests to become the Soviet Champion. Whether he was, as so often described ‘cavalier’ or ‘gung ho’, it is difficult to be sure without a formative study of his career. But one thing we can be sure of is that he did not mess about over the board…oh and in case you didn’t know, he went on to be Spassky’s trainer and played a decisive role in him becoming world champion.
So, 1947 it is. Tolush plays with white, his victim on this occasion was Vladimir Alatortsev, the result being another brilliancy prize for what was a brutal kingside attack. I won’t show the whole game, just a few diagramatic motives with the linked game to follow…oh and before I forget, Tolush finished a mere fifth that year with a ‘rehabilitated’ Keres back in the fold and finishing first.
Looks like a fairly standard slav from the 1940’s to me. Tolush just played 8. Qc2 which is followed by 8. … dxc4
Both players have placed their better bishop on its best diagonal but as ridiculous as it may seem, where the queen’s knights are placed respectively, makes a more crucial difference in the position. Black has just played 10. …Qe7, and here white now plays 11. Ne2!? Anticipating black’s e-pawn break, the knight wants to go to f5 via g3. To stop that black must make a concession which will cost him dearly.
Both players pushed their e-pawns but black had to play g6 too, to stop that knight hoping into f5. White plays 15. Rae1!, threating to push his e-pawn on again, black replies with 15. …Ne5.
After 15. …Ne5, 16. Nxe5 Bxe5, 17. f4 was played with 17. …Bc7 to follow. I will stop here and suggest you play through the game linked below. Rest assured, Tolush won the brilliancy prize for a reason (his next four moves are all pawn-moves!).
…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 