BCCF E-MAIL BULLETIN #62
 
 
To subscribe, send me an e-mail (swright2@telus.net) or sign up via the BCCF (www.chess.bc.ca) or BCCS webpages (www.chessbc.ca); if you no longer wish to receive this Bulletin, just let me know.

Stephen Wright

[Back issues of the Bulletin are available on the above webpages.]
 

DAN MACADAM MEMORIAL 
 
 
The Dan MacAdam Memorial, the third event in the current Island Grand Prix, was held at the University of Victoria on the January 22-23 weekend.  The tournament attracted a strong field: of the twenty-four players, a full third were rated over 2000.  B.C. Champion Jack Yoos took first prize with a perfect 4/4; Harry Moore also won all the games he played, but since he was forced to take a bye through accidentally oversleeping on the Saturday morning, he wound up in second place.  Dan Scoones placed third, losing only to Yoos.  H.G. Pitre, Jesse Beaudin, and Manfred Aquino tied for the U2000 prizes; Joshua Wild won the U1600 prize, and Sam Churchill was the top junior.  Lynn Stringer and Greg Churchill carried out the organizing and directing duties.
 
CFC Crosstable: http://www.chess.ca/xtable.asp?TNum=200501112
Report at the BCCF site: http://www.chess.bc.ca/reportsjan051.htm
 
Jack Yoos has submitted annotations to all his games from the MacAdam Memorial - many thanks, Jack!  Many of the other games from the tournament can be found at http://www.chess.bc.ca/macadam.htm .
 
 
Yoos,J - Wu,H [B67] Dan MacAdam mem Victoria (1), 22.1.2005
[Yoos]
 
1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 d6 6.Bg5 e6 7.Qd2 a6 8.0-0-0 Bd7 9.f4 Qb6!? I have been very impressed by Howard in this opening lately.  He came up with a very interesting theoretical improvement in this opening in our last game at last year's B.C. Championship.  The text, while all of the fashion lately, has been rarely played in this exact position and certainly not in a modern context.  I don't think it is quite as challenging as Howard's last invention, but it certainly posed some tough questions which I was unable to solve over the board. [9...b5 was my game against Howard in last year's B.C. Championship.] 10.Nxc6?! I was incorrectly recalling a motif from an article on Qb6 in the Rauzer from New in Chess Yearbook.  The idea of the theme of Qb6 in the Rauzer is to deactivate the knight to the queenside with tempo, where it is out of the action.  Allowing Black to exchange everything off on d4 is a little bit better for White, but Black will have excellent chances of holding the position. [10.Nf3! is in my opinion the most natural challenge.  This move is a part of one of the archetypal plans for White in the Rauzer.  White repositions the knight toward the kingside and prepares e5.  At the time I was concerned about ...Ng4.  But in hindsight, I think my concerns were exaggerated: 10...Ng4 11.Bh4 (11.Re1!?) 11...Qe3 12.h3 Qxd2+ 13.Rxd2 Nf6 and White has a big lead in development.  Also better than what was played in the game is the solid 10.Bxf6 gxf6 11.Nb3+= 0-0-0 12.Be2 h5 13.Rhf1 Na5.] 10...Bxc6 I must confess I somehow did not even consider this recapture.  I had been fixated on ensuring the validity of 10...bxc6 11.Bc4 which was the aforementioned New in Chess Yearbook motif.  After this recapture Black's pieces are free and easy. 11.Qe1 Trying to make something of my disappointing position.  Ideas of Nd5 are in the air. 11...0-0-0 [11...Ng4 12.Nd5!? (12.Bh4) 12...Bxd5 13.exd5 Nf2 14.dxe6 f6 15.Bh4 Nxh1 16.Bd3 Be7 17.Qe2 with compensation.] 12.Bxf6 Realizing that my one lame theme just got shut down and my opening was a failure, I decided to play for some quieter Rauzer themes.  White's plan now is to try to work over Black's awkward light squares in the centre with f5, then hit f7 and e6 with pieces. 12...gxf6 13.Qh4 Consistent with the aforementioned theme and wanting to force the bishop to e7 - inside the pawn cage.  You have to be careful about playing f5 too quickly in these positions as it provides a nice square on e5 for Black's pieces. 13...Rg8!? Risky - Howard is refusing the cage.  I had expected that he would play more solidly and try to hold the squares. [13...Be7 14.Bc4! (14.Qh5 Qe3+ 15.Kb1 Qxf4 16.Qxf7 Qe5!) 14...Qc5 (14...Qb4 15.Bb3 Bxe4?? 16.a3; 14...Rdg8 15.f5) 15.Bb3 Rdg8! 16.f5 unclear (16.Rd2 h5 17.h3 Rg7 18.f5 Qe5) ] 14.Qxh7 Bg7 15.f5 In this pawn structure, when the bishop goes to g7 you must shut it out. 15...Qe3+ 16.Kb1 Bxe4 17.Nxe4 Qxe4 18.Bd3 Qg4! Caging my queen. 19.h3 Qg5 20.fxe6 fxe6 21.Rhe1 e5? With opposite-coloured bishops the activity of the bishop is far more important than material. [21...Rge8 unclear.  We looked at this move in depth in the post mortem.  The position is very complex and so I apologize but due to time constraints I am going to pass on trying to work out the details.  During the post mortem Ian Martinovsky stole the show by demonstrating some very clever attacking ideas for White.  However, intuitively I remain unconvinced that White can prove any advantage after this move.] 22.h4! A key tempo to misplace the queen. 22...Qg3 23.Be4 Activating my bishop to prepare an opposite-coloured bishop attack.  I also must hold back the pawns at all cost.  The most important aspect of this is that if they start rolling, then Howard's bishop will become activated and my bishop will become passive. 23...Kb8 Removing the tempo of a check on f5. 24.c4 By locking the square with the pawn, my bishop won't be overworked.  But by securing the d5 square I had to accept giving up a pawn. 24...Rh8 25.Qf5 Rxh4 26.Qe6 My advantage is based on my more active pieces and so I need to avoid an exchange of queens to pursue my attack. 26...Qg4 27.Qd5 Qc8 28.g3! It was critical to deactivate the rook which was a distraction to my attacking plans. 28...Rhh8?! [Black should have resisted deactivation with - 28...Rg4.  Now I have to retreat to keep control over the centre, but this control ensures me the initiative: 29.Qd3 Rg5 30.Rf1 Qc5 31.Rf3] 29.g4 Bh6? A fatal mistake.  Black needs to address the battery aimed at b7 as soon as possible. [29...Qc6 30.Qd3 with the initiative.] 30.Rd3 Qc6 31.Qf7 [31.Qe6 d5] 31...Qd7 32.Qxf6 Qxg4? This ends things quickly. [32...Bg7 33.Qf2 and though Black is still alive, it will be very hard to both defend his king and pay attention to the passed g-pawn.] 33.Rb3 b5 34.cxb5 a5 35.Qf2 d5 36.Qb6+ Ka8 37.Qxa5+ Kb8 38.Qb6+ 1-0
 
Pitre,H - Yoos,J [B07] Dan MacAdam mem Victoria (2), 22.1.2005
[Yoos]

1.e4 d6 2.d4 Nf6 3.Nc3 g6 4.Be3 Bg7 More popular is to play 4...c6 so that Bh6 can be met with Bxh6 without the loss of a tempo.  Still many players continue to play 4...Bg7, since with 4...c6 White can still switch plans and play for f4 where c6 is not an ideal move to have in.  I had a completely different plan in mind. 5.f3 Known as the 150 Attack, which Dan Scoones tells me is named after a 150 rating in England equivalent to somewhere below expert.  Apparently this is because it is so easy and straightforward to play that even these 150 rated players can make it look good.  I have played this line from both sides for many years and I can attest that it is a very dangerous line.  [The 150 Attack is Be3 in conjunction with Nf3; 150 BCF rating = 1800 Elo - ed.]  5...0-0 6.Qd2 White's plan in this system is much like that in a Yugoslav Attack Dragon - pry open the h-file, trade off the defending fianchetto bishop and then sac - sac - mate. 6...e5 This is my plan - to strike back immediately in the centre before White gets to generate his kingside attack.  This is still very dangerous and the outcome will depend on whether Black has sufficient resources to counter in the open centre. 7.Nge2 Closing the centre with 7.d5 is not as threatening since White's attack is not so dangerous with Black having some space on the kingside.  One important theme is that Black can then defend across the 7th rank with a queen or rook. 7...exd4 8.Nxd4 d5 Consistent with the theme of trying to force the action away from kingside attack and toward the centre of the board. 9.e5 [9.exd5 Nxd5 10.0-0-0 Nb6 and I think that Black should be okay.] 9...Nfd7 10.Bg5! This move is new to me, I didn't find a single game with it in my database. [10.f4 Nb6 unclear is the main line of the known theory.] 10...Qe8 11.f4 [11.Nxd5? Qxe5+ 12.Ne2 Qxb2 13.Rd1 Re8-+ 14.Nxc7 Bc3; 11.0-0-0 c6 12.f4 transposes] 11...c6 12.0-0-0 Nc5 [In hindsight, maybe 12...f6 is Black's best defence.  I considered it during the game, but was afraid that with my queenside still undeveloped I would have trouble defending an onslaught on the g6-h7 structure on the kingside. 13.exf6 Nxf6] 13.h3! Preparing g4 and taking squares on the kingside. 13...Nba6 I really wanted to play b5-b4, but I was too concerned about a piece sacrifice on d5 or b5.  So I decided to play Na6-c7 first for some support. 14.Bxa6! When I first saw this I didn't think much of it.  Now after seeing what happened I am very impressed by this move.  It goes against common sense to trade the "good" bishop for a barely activated knight, but the time gained in the race to attack is critical. 14...Nxa6 15.Rhe1 White plays his attack patiently.  Patience can a very underappreciated attribute among attacking players. 15...Nc7 16.g4 Ne6 No time for counterattacking anymore.  I conceded that my position was awful and decided to just bear down and suffer.  This move was intended to try to remove an attacker - please let me remove any attacker! 17.Bf6! This was a pain in my neck for many moves.  It paralyzes me because if I ever capture I will have to deal with a mate threat on g7 for the rest of the game.  After this White is extremely close to winning. 17...Bh6 Trying to provoke g5 so that f5 is not an option also, but I missed a zwischenzug. 18.g5 Bg7 19.Qf2 Nxd4 20.Rxd4 Bf5 21.Qh4? This move was not so bad in itself, but the whole plan resulting from it is.  The attacking theme that White plays for here was just not effective. The culprit is that White does not use all of his pieces in the attack.  Instead White should play for h4-h5 and then bring every single piece into the attack. 21...Qe6 Threatening h5! 22.Rg1 Rfc8 with the intention of Rc7, defending across the seventh rank in case he wants to open the h-file. [22...h5!] 23.Rg4 I saw this theme, but I kept thinking that as White got closer he would see it didn't work and regroup to play h4-h5. 23...h5 [23...Bxg4? 24.hxg4 Bxf6 25.gxf6 Qe8 26.Rd1 Kh8 27.Ne2 Qg8 28.Nd4 -Nf3-Ng5] 24.gxh6 Bxf6 25.exf6 [25.h7+ Kg7] 25...Kh7-/+ 26.Rg3 Re8 27.Rd1 Rad8 I am reminded of that kids' game where you try to slap the other person's hands while they try to dodge.  He missed and so now it's my turn to attack. 28.b3? It's always hard to switch gears when the game turns around. [28.Nb1] 28...d4 29.Nb1 Qe2 30.Nd2 [30.Rd2 Qf1+ 31.Rd1 Qf2 32.Rd2 Re1+ 33.Kb2 Rxb1+] 30...Re3 31.Rgg1 Rc3 0-1

Yoos,J - Scoones,D [C02] Dan MacAdam mem Victoria (3), 22.1.2005
[Yoos]

1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.e5 c5 4.c3 Nc6 5.Nf3 Qb6 6.a3 Nh6 After Dan's success with this opening in November he decides to give it another go. 7.Bd3!? It's funny, but this common-sense move is generally not covered in the books.  However, it is a common theme in this type of position and transpositions to known lines are likely.  In my opinion this is quite likely the best move in this position. [7.b4 was what I played against Dan last time.] 7...a5 [7...Bd7 8.Bc2 cxd4 9.cxd4 Nf5 10.Bxf5 exf5 11.Nc3 Be6 is very comparable to known lines.] 8.b3 [8.0-0 a4!] 8...Nf5 [8...Bd7 9.Bc2 Nf5 10.0-0 cxd4 11.Bxf5 exf5 12.cxd4 Be7 13.Nc3 Be6 transposes to the game.] 9.0-0 cxd4 10.Bxf5 exf5 11.cxd4 [11.Nxd4 Nxd4 12.cxd4 and Black's bad bishop has more range to roam.] 11...Be6 12.Nc3 Be7 13.Na4 Qa7 [13...Qc7? 14.Bg5!; 13...Qd8!?] 14.Qd3 Spying b5 and f5 while opening a square for the rook. 14...0-0 15.Rd1 Freeing up my minor pieces.  This also anticipates g5 as my rooks are locked before Ne1. 15...Rab8? This is a big mistake because it allows me to trade off the dark-squared bishops, which makes Black's light-squared bishop problem more acute. [15...Rfb8 16.Bg5 Bf8; 15...h6] 16.Bg5 Bxg5 17.Nxg5 b6 To better defend the queenside squares. 18.Nc3 The knight was no longer functioning to its potential on a4. 18...Qe7 19.Nh3 Going to greener pastures. 19...Rfc8 [19...g5 20.f4 g4 21.Nf2 And white can consider Nh1-g3.] 20.Nb5 Na7 Trading off another minor piece was tempting as it further isolates Black's bad bishop, but my knight is so much better than his that I decided to keep it. 21.Nd6 Rc7 22.Nf4 [22.Nxf5 Bxf5 23.Qxf5 Rc3 is good for White, but Black would be happy to just be rid of the bad bishop.] 22...g6 23.Qf3 Nc8 24.Nb5 [Again White can try to grab a pawn if he allows Black to give up his bishop. This time it would truly backfire: 24.Nxc8 Rbxc8 25.Nxd5 Bxd5 26.Qxd5 Rd7 27.Qf3 Rcd8 28.Qe3 Qc5 29.dxc5 Rxd1+ 30.Qe1 Rxe1+ 31.Rxe1 bxc5; 24.Nxd5 Bxd5 25.Qxd5 Rd7 26.Nxc8 Rxc8 is the same thing as 24.Nxc8.] 24...Rd7 25.Rdc1 Qd8 26.Rc6 Qe7 27.Rc2 Avoiding the exchange of knights by ...Na7. 27...Kg7 28.h3 Probably not neccesary, but I did not feel in a hurry and I didn't want any surprises later on. 28...Na7 29.Nd6 Rc7 30.Rxc7?! [Dan pointed out that I could take the d-pawn safely with 30.Nxd5 Bxd5 31.Rxc7 Qxc7 32.Qxd5+-.  This time I think it would have been well worth it.] 30...Qxc7 31.Qg3 Qe7 32.Nh5+? As Ian Martinovsky pointed out, I missed a shot that easily won [32.Nxd5!+-]. 32...Kh8 33.Nf6 Nc8 34.Qh4 h5 35.Qg5 Qf8 36.Nb5? [Another shot I missed which Ian pointed out is... 36.Nxf7+! Kg7 (36...Bxf7 37.Nd7+-) 37.Nxh5+ Kh7 (37...Kxf7 38.Qf6++-) 38.Nf6+ Kg7 39.Nd8!+-] 36...Ne7 37.Rc1 Ng8 38.Rc6 Ne7 39.Rc7?! [And there is another missed shot.  LOL!  In my defence, I wasn't looking that hard for tactics as I wanted to stay ahead on the clock and I figured that Dan's bishop problem wasn't going away.  39.Rxe6 fxe6 40.Nd7+-] 39...Ng8 40.Nd6 [And another shot! :) 40.Qxg6 ] 40...Qh6? Allowing a final finishing combo.  In all fairness to Dan, after he made his move, I could tell that Dan saw right away the shot that was coming.  Dan chose not to resign on purpose.  I think that Dan just played it out for aesthetic purposes and also to be a nice guy by giving me the pleasure of making the moves. 41.Nxf7+ Bxf7 42.Rxf7 Qxg5 43.Rh7# 1-0

Gansvind,V - Yoos,J [D02] Dan MacAdam mem Victoria (4), 22.1.2005
[Yoos]

1.d4 d5 2.Nf3 [2.Bg5 h6 3.Bh4 c6 was our game against each from last year's Keres. She got an advantage out of the opening, but I was ready with something different this time.] 2...Nc6 3.Bf4 This move was also the choice of both Georgi Orlov and Juan Bellon against me. 3...Bg4 4.c3?! This is unusual and I think it is a concession as White has to recapture on f3 with a pawn. 4...Bxf3 5.gxf3 [5.exf3 is also reasonable and will lead to a much different game.  Though I don't think that it is very threatening as White does not have any tension in the centre to take advantage of the open lines and quick development.] 5...e6 I have to live with e4 and so I decided to treat the structure à la French Defence. 6.Rg1 Nge7 7.Qb3 Rb8 [I thought a bit about Na5, but because of White's crippled pawn structure and potential space advantage I decided that I didn't want to get into any action early on. 7...Na5 ] 8.h3?! This did not turn out to be a useful move. 8...Ng6 9.Bg3 Be7 10.e4 a6 This not only keeps the bishop off b5: it is natural to assume that White will castle queenside, in which case Black can launch an attack with b5, Na5, Nc4 & b4. 11.Be2 Valeria is not playing very actively so far.  After the game I felt like I had not beaten the same player that I had faced on other occasions.  Later I got an idea of why as Lynn told me that Valeria was still recovering from jet lag. 11...0-0 12.Nd2 Bg5! Now White is in trouble as the bishop on this diagonal paralyzes White's position. 13.Nf1 Threatening Bxc7 [13.0-0-0 b5] 13...Nf4 14.Bxf4 Bxf4 15.Rg4 Bh6 16.e5 I thought for some time after this move as I was at risk of falling into a dangerous attack.  White is threatening Qc2 & Bd3 when it will be awkward to defend my h7 square.  Defending h7 with g6 will likely run into h4-h5 and possible a piece sacrifice on g6. 16...f5! [Similarily 16...f6! is also a consideration.] 17.Rg1 [17.exf6 Qxf6 18.Ng3 Ne7 19.Qc2 e5-/+] 17...Qh4! Taking control of the weak squares on the kingside. 18.Qc2 Ne7 19.Nd2 Ng6 [19...Be3 20.0-0-0 Qxf2 21.Rde1 c5 is also extremely good for Black.] 20.Bf1 c5! Opening a second front. 21.Nb3 cxd4 22.cxd4 [22.Nxd4 Rfe8 23.Rd1 Nxe5-+] 22...Rfc8 23.Qd1 Rc6 Anticipating Nc5 and preparing to double rooks. 24.Rxg6 Valeria was in terrible time pressure at this point.  She seemed to be having trouble finding a move and so this was probably just a rushed decision to try to take some of the pressure off. 24...hxg6 25.Bd3 Be3 [25...Rbc8 is also quite strong.] 26.Qe2 Bxd4 27.Rd1 Bb6 28.Qf1 Qf4 29.Qe2 And Valeria fell on time. 0-1

 

UBC TEAM TOURNAMENT by Bruce Harper

On January 15 and 16, 2005, the University of British Columbia Chess Club hosted a Team Tournament.

The event tested no less than four innovative approaches:

1. UBC as a site. As reflected in the poll on the BCCF website, peoples opinions on whether UBC was a good site vary (presumably according to where they live). The Student Union Building site was rent-free, readily accessible by car and bus and fine as far as space, lighting, noise and food services was concerned. 

[The use of UBC as a site for chess tournaments is not exactly innovative: events have been played there for a long time, at least as far back as Vancouver 1975 - ed.]

2. Team Tournament format. Each team consisted of five players, of different rating levels (U1500, 1500-1800, 1800-2000, 2000-2200, 2200+). This meant players were paired against comparably rated opponents, which led to more interesting and hard-fought games (at least in most cases). Poll results indicate a high level of support for this format, including expanding it into a regular league.

3. Sponsorship. Five people each donated $140 to guarantee a $1,000 prize fund. The standard 30 players showed up for the event. Poll results indicate that prizes don t seem to be considered all that important by players (at least not in Vancouver), so there would seem to be little point in making efforts to obtain sponsorship for future events.

This means that increasing the number of players at Vancouver events depends other factors, such as the event location, date, format, publicity and, perhaps most of all, the size of the pool of players who play in organized chess events.

4. Anti-draw rules. The event also tested an anti-draw rule, in which each player had two hours at the start of the first game. If the first game was drawn, each player received 1/3 of a point, then a second game was played with colours reversed, using the remaining time. This continued until one player won, with the winner getting the other 1/3 of a point.

Polls results are split on this format, with those who played in the event and those who didn t both being roughly equally divided in their opinions.

I liked the anti-draw rules, although I think they could be improved. I have a feeling that some people don t understand the object of the rules, which were discussed at length on ChessTalk some months ago. They are not aimed at the players who contest an ultimately drawn game in a spirited and sporting manner, but rather at players who don t make any effort to win, either tacitly or expressly agreeing to make a fast draw. Most of us have been in both categories at different times. The idea is to make a peaceful splitting of a point impossible, therefore removing the temptation from players to play for a draw.

I think exhortations to fight hard are a bit silly, especially at the higher levels of competitive chess. There are just too many reasons to draw. It will be interesting to see how the big money tournament in Minnesota in May turns out (all participants apparently have to sign a pledge not to make quick draws). I think such efforts are doomed to failure.

The 1/3 anti-draw system takes a different approach - you keep playing until someone wins. The only problem with the system as we tested it, in my view, was that the "playoff" games became too short. In one playoff game, one player had something like one minute and the other player had 30 seconds.

One obvious alternative is increments, but the problem is that two players who are determined not to play can then just go on forever.

I think the system might work better with a hybrid time control. Each player gets (say) one and a half hours to start, with or without increments. If the game is drawn, each player receives an additional five minutes and a second game is played, with no increments. If a third game is required, each player receives an additional four minutes. Eventually (if the players get to a seventh game), the players fight it out with whatever time they have left, and so one player might just run out of time.

There is always a balance between the length of the round and giving the players enough time to play more than one game. In the above example, a 40-move draw which went to the wire would take about three hours, with 10 minutes for the second game, 8 minutes for the third game, and so on. Each round would therefore take a maximum of four hours.

In the Team Tournament, around 20 games went to a second game. Only a handful went to a third. In part this was because players ran out of time, but I think in practice no more than two or three games would be required because with less time, someone usually wins.

In any case, a modified version of the anti-drawing system is worth trying again, as anything is preferable to the five-move draws that are ruining chess.

Turning to the event itself, here were the final standings:

Team Captain

1

2

3

4

5

6

Total

1 Nick Paleveda

 

2/3 

2 1/3 

1 2/3

----

1 1/3

6

2 Jack Yoos

4 1/3 

 

2

----

1 2/3

1 1/3

9 1/3

3 Lucas Davies

2 2/3

 

2 2/3

4

----

12 1/3

4 Paul Brown

3 1/3 

----

2 1/3

 

3

4

12 2/3

5 Alfred Pechisker

----

3 1/3

1

2

 

3 1/3 

9 2/3

6 Bruce Harper

3 2/3

3 1/3

----

1

1 2/3

 

9 2/3

The winning team was captained by Paul Brown. His teammates were Tyler Johnson, Vas Sladek, Louie Jiang and Donovan Zhao. Louie and Donovan were the anchors of the team, constantly racking up victories when needed. Tyler Johnson came through in the clutch, however, defeating Len Molden in their second (3-minute) playoff game, to give his team the lead by exactly 1/3 of a point.

The second place team was captained by Lucas Davies. His teammates were Noam Davies, Travis Lane, Jamie Harper and Aviv Milner.

Tied for third place were Alfred Pechisker s team and Bruce Harper s all-girl team, which was in contention until it collapsed in the last round.

Individual results:

Thanks to everyone for volunteering for this experimental event, which saw a lot of good chess!

Games and photographs from the Team Tournament are available on the BCCF website - many thanks to Paul Brown for his customary timely and efficient delivery of information via the website.

http://www.chess.bc.ca/team.html
 
 

VANCOUVER CLASS CHAMPIONSHIPS
 
Dates: January 28 - 30, 2005
Place: Vancouver Bridge Centre, 2776 East Broadway (at Kaslo), Vancouver
Rounds: 5
Times: January 28th, 6 pm; January 29th and 30th, 10 am and 3 pm
Type: Regular Swiss
Time Controls: 30/90, SD/60
Byes: Rds. 1-4
Entry Fee: Adults $30, Juniors $20 (non-CFC members add $10 for tournament membership)
Prizes: By class, based on entries; the overall winner will also receive the designation of Vancouver Champion for 2005
Registration: In advance or at site 5:15 - 5:45 pm
Tournament Director: Stephen Wright
Miscellaneous: One or two sections, depending upon numbers, but for the last two rounds players will be paired within their own class
For more information please contact the organizers:
 
Katherine Davies 604-266-5842, e-mail: mail-for-katherine@telus.net
Stephen Wright: 604-221-7148, e-mail: swright2@telus.net
 

30TH PAUL KERES MEMORIAL TOURNAMENT
 
Dates Friday, May 20 to Monday, May 23, 2005
 
Location Hungarian Cultural Centre, 728 Kingsway, Vancouver BC
 
Sections Open, Under 2000, Under 1600
 
Time Control 40/120, SD/60
 
Rounds Open: 7 Rounds ; U2000, U1600: 6 Rounds
 
Round Times Friday 5:30 (Open Section only); 10, 4 / 10, 4 / 9, 3 or ASAP
 
Prizes Guaranteed first prizes of $1000, $600 and $400 in the respective sections, other prizes $$BEN
 
Entry Fees                                              (Open / U2000 / U1600)
                    Before or on April 1, 2005        $99 / $66 / $49
                    Before or on May 13, 2005    $120 / $80 / $60       
                    At site                                      $150 / $100 / $75
 
Discounts Born after May 20, 1985: 50% (proof of date of birth required)
                    Born before May 20, 1940: 50% (proof of date of birth required)
                    FIDE rated players w/o Titles 25%
                    FIDE Titled Players Free entry

Surcharge $25 extra for those players who wish to play in the Open Section, but who have a lifetime highest rating under 2000

Registration please mail cheques (payable to BCCF) to:

            British Columbia Chess Federation, PO Box 15548, Vancouver, BC V6B 5B3

On-site Open Section: Friday, May 20, 3:00 to 5:00 pm
              U2000 and U1600: Friday, May 20, 3:00 to 10:00 pm, Saturday, May 21, 9:00 to 9:30 am

Those registering after the respective deadlines (5:00 pm Friday for the Open, 9:30 am Saturday for the other sections) will receive pot-luck pairings or a half-point bye in the first round

Miscellaneous CFC rated, Open Section also FIDE rated; half-point byes may be requested for all but the last round; sets and boards provided, please bring clocks

Contact Stephen Wright, swright2@telus.net , (604) 221-7148

 

BCBASE UPDATE
 
An updated version of the B.C. games database, BCBASE, is now available for download.  The database now has 11,500 games, with very few (if any) doubles.  Included are all the games with B.C. content from British Columbia Chess Reports, Counterplay, and the CFC Bulletin/Chess Canada Echecs/En Passant.  A special thank you to Paul Brown for submitting many of his own games.
 
 

EARLY JUNIOR CHESS 
 
The following two excerpts are taken from the "Chess News" section of the B.C. Chess Magazine from early 1919.  The column was written by F. MacLachlan, at that time Honorary Secretary-Treasurer of the B.C.C.F. and president of the North Vancouver Chess Club.
 
 
The other evening we were wandering quietly (as is our wont since prohibition has been introduced) along a secluded street in North Vancouver, our mind quietly ruminating over the material for this column, when a most hopeful line of thought was rudely disturbed by a tremendous crash of noise. Startled, we stopped, and that inquisitive part of our nature prompted us to seek the cause. We had just passed a large outhouse and, a little way from the road we beheld the dimly lighted windows of a building from whence, decidedly, the noise did come. With cautious step we approached. The noise, if anything, increased. The thought that it might be a Bolsheviki meeting with the Reds in control, chilled our heart, but we resolutely continued to approach the building. At length, peeping through the uncurtained window, no blood-curdling sight dismayed us, for it was only the Boys' Chess Club in full session.

It came out afterwards at an inquest held on the furniture, that two of the members had mated each other simultaneously, and the remaining members joined battle to decide which had been first.

But the most hopeful line of thought which would have made this column of entrancing interest has been lost for ever.

It would not be fair to leave the topic of the North Vancouver Boys' Chess Club without making mention of their top board, Mr. Leslie Buckley. Leslie is doing meritorious service for the cause of chess. He is a hard and enthusiastic worker, and, although the results of his work are not shown by the method of keeping match scores, they are nevertheless there. The boys are getting excellent practice in the Second Division of the Greater Vancouver League. As for Buckley himself, it needs no prophetic eye to see for him a brilliant chess future. [January 1919]
 
 
In the Chess Club which acquires merit by permitting us to attend, there happened the other evening an interesting and not unamusing incident.  Play is in full swing, when word is whispered around to take a glance at a certain game.  It is a match game, and one of the players is at that age with which home lessons are more intimately than pleasantly connected.  He is busily engaged killing two birds with one stone for a book of algebraic mysteries claims his attention between moves.  We believe he killed the bird whose slaughter we were witnessing.  As for the other, his schoolmaster would probably classify it as "slightly wounded." [February 1919]
 

UPCOMING EVENTS
To save space, from now on I will only give basic information for events - date, place, and type.  Full details for all the events listed here may be found on the BCCF site, www.chess.bc.ca.
 
Junior Events
 
Jan 29  School Team Event, Vancouver
Feb 6    BCIT Warmup
Feb 6    Regional CYCC, Victoria
Feb 19 School Team Finals, Vancouver
Feb 26-27  BCYCC, Vancouver
 
Vancouver Class Championships
 
Dates: January 28-30
Place: Vancouver Bridge Centre
Type: 5-round Swiss
 
Winter Open (Seasonal Grand Prix)
 
Dates: February 12, 13
Place: tba
Type: 4-round Swiss
 
Daffodil Open
 
Date: April 23-24
Place: University of Victoria
Type: 5-round Swiss 
 
Spring Open (Seasonal Grand Prix)
 
Dates: May 7, 8
Place: tba
Type: 4-round Swiss
 
Paul Keres Memorial
 
Dates: May 20-23
Place: Hungarian Cultural Centre, 728 Kingsway, Vancouver
Type 6- or 7-round Swiss
 
Island Open
 
Date: June 11-12
Place: University of Victoria
Type: 5-round Swiss
 
Summer Open (Seasonal Grand Prix)
 
Dates: June 25, 26
Place: tba
Type: 4-round Swiss