Comments (5)

Women's World Chess Championship-2010 will be held in Antakya, Turkey, from 3rd to 24 of    December. The format is a knock-out event featuring 64 participants, including most of the female chess stars.

 Tournament grid - see who will be playing whom
 Regulations

Statistics

Rating:

2600+: 1 player
2500-2599: 12 players
2400-2499: 25 players
2300-2399: 15 players
2200-2299: 5 players
2100-2199: 2 players
2000-2099: 4 players

Countries:

Russia - 10 players
China - 8
India - 5
Georgia, Ukraine - 4
Poland - 3
France, Armenia, USA, Peru, Ecuador, Turkey (wild cards) - 2
Bulgaria, Slovenia, Sweden, Lithuania, Qatar, Germany, Hungary, Greece, England, Mongolia, Roumania, Uzbekistan, Australia, Argentina, Canada, Egypt, South Africa, Algeria - 1

Poll: vote for your favorite (see the left panel of Pogonina.com)

Official website

 

 

Comments (3)

Be first to comment this article

a) Reviewing the opening repertoire
 

Make sure you have ChessBase, Chess Assistant, or any other decent databases (Chess.com's shop should have them all in store) that can build a tree of games played by a person. First of all, you have to take a look at all the openings that your opponent has employed throughout his chess career. Even if he didn’t play something for years, there is still a chance of a comeback. Also, it offers information on what types of structures he is familiar and comfortable with. Secondly, pay more attention to recent games, e.g. played within the last two years. This will help you understand what his current opening repertoire is. By analyzing the scores in each opening and the performances, you may come to a conclusion on which systems he knows best and worst.
 

b) Pinpointing strengths and weaknesses
 

Depending on how many tournaments a year your opponent plays, you can either take a look only at the last 1-2 years (for relatively active players), or review more games (for people who compete rarely, or on whom there isn’t much information available). When going through games, pay special attention to such factors as: style, preferences in types of positions, recurring mistakes, the way he defends or attacks, tactical prowess, reaction towards unexpected positional transformations, love or hatred for endgames, etc. The more features you know, the easier it is to find your opponent’s Achilles’ heel.
 

c) Personal observations and other info
 

By watching your opponent play, you can gain much more useful information. For example, time management (does he often get into time trouble?; does he spend a lot of time in the opening, and in what cases?; how does he handle opening surprises?). If your opponent is famous enough, you may also scan the relevant media (articles, interviews, games’ reviews) to find out more.  
 

II. Your own profile – the real one as well as the public image. Of course, before creating dossiers on your opponents, one should form the correct picture about oneself. To make the evaluation fair and unbiased, you may want to ask your coach or friend to characterize you as a chess player. By enriching the dossier with some personal observations, you will reveal your weaknesses and strengths. This will help you both maximize your results in the short run and create a long-term training program aimed at eliminating the cons of your profile. Also, by asking your chess friends or studying the media, you will learn what your public image is. True masters are skillful in terms of taking advantage of the existing stereotypes about themselves.
 

Mikhail Botvinnik, one of the pioneers of the dossier-creation method, was persistent in mentioning in the media that he suffered from tactical blindness. There is a widespread belief that his goal was to convince his young and ambitious opponents to attack him at all costs. Meanwhile, more experienced colleagues of the legendary world champion pointed out wisely that Botvinnik has won many great tactical games, so his alleged “tactical blindness” was just a decoy!

The magician from Riga, Mikhail Tal, is still regarded to be one of the best tactical players ever. His contemporaries often thought that he could instantly and impeccably calculate all the variations, so there was no sense in trying to refute his combinations. On the contrary, Korchnoi and Polugaevsky didn’t fall under his charms and always used to perform a thorough check of all the options. Quite often Tal’s brilliancies turned out to be flawed…

The “dark horse” phenomenon (when a rating outsider, who enters a super tournament for the first time in his life and fares successfully), is often connected with exploiting the image of “a lower-class player.” Even experienced top grandmasters sometimes fall for this trap and start taking risks against the “weak link” in order to secure the whole point. As a result, all the “dark horse” has to do is collect easy draws and wins.  

III. Taking advantage of the dossiers. By comparing one’s own dossier with the opponent’s profile, an experienced player makes a decision on how to play. For example, in the book “How life imitates chess”, Garry Kasparov mentions that during the WC match against Nigel Short, a bright tactician, he decided to play more positionally. That is, Garry chose the type of positions he didn’t like that much, but Short simply couldn’t stand them! In other words, it was easier for Garry to outclass Short in a strategic fashion than beat him in a tactical struggle (which they both adore). On the contrary, against Karpov, one of the greatest positional players of all time, Garry tried to create dynamics positions that demand acute calculational skills and tactical prowess from both opponents. Kramnik, who won his match against Kasparov without losing a single game, has taken advantage of a few vulnerable spots of the chess legend: unlimited belief in his superiority in any type of positions; dynamic attacking style; stubbornness. By forcing Garry to play endgames with a minor advantage over and over again, he mitigated his exceptional calculational skills and made him fight on Vladimir’s home turf. As can be seen from the results of the match, the colossus fell due to the excellent strategy employed by Kramnik and his team.
 

Chess is especially attractive due to its complexity. No matter how good you are at creating dossiers and playing the game, success is never granted. The trick is that your mighty opponents are also on the look-out. They are aware of both their strengths and their weaknesses, and doing their best to come up with a strategy that will help them prevail. Modern top-level chess is not only about otb struggles, but about invisible duels of opponents’ teams. The strongest player doesn’t always win; a lot depends on the preparation against each particular opponent.
 

As a traditional follow-up, here is the annotation to a recent game of mine vs GM Monika Socko at the European Club Cup:


After getting a large advantage in the endgame, I started playing unconfidently and ended up in serious time trouble. My advantage kept shrinking and at some point had finally evaporated completely. As a result, I had to switch to a defensive mode and secure a draw.

Comments (2)

Photo courtesy of Anna Burtasova, russiachess.org

The first game to finish during the final round was the critical match-up between Alisa Galliamova and Tatiana Kosintseva -

it ended in a draw in 19 moves, leaving both players with 7 points out of 11. Nazi Paikidze (she had 6.5/10) couldn't handle the

pressure and self-destructed with White shortly after that. Now a lot depended on Natalia Pogonina - she has sacrificed a piece

for two pawns and initiative vs Tatiana Shadrina and desperately needed a win to join the leaders. In a few hours the game

has transposed into a tricky endgame where Natalia had a chance to create a small rook endgame masterpiece (see move 53

of the game Shadrina-Pogonina in r.11).
 

Black got a queen vs White's pawn + rook. This endgame is very hard to win for Black, and many grandmasters have failed to

do it before. However, eventually Natalia managed to trick her opponent and get the whole point. By that time the tie-break scores

have been calculated. Natalia came 1st (37.75), Alisa Galliamova - 2nd (37.5), Tatiana Kosintseva - 3rd (35.5).

Final Standings (Russian Superfinal)

According to the Regulations, the 1st and 2nd players were to compete in a mini-match (two 15m+10s) games an hour after the

end of the round. Being extremely exhausted after nearly 6 hours of play, Natalia couldn't withstand the pressure of her fresh

opponent: after having escaped in the 1st game, she lost the 2nd one with White. Therefore, Alisa Galliamova retained the title,

while Natalia got silver and Tatiana - bronze. Congrats to the winners!

Report by Anna Burtasova (story, nice pics)

Photo album by Maria Bolshakova

Comments (6)

Comments (2)

Comments (1)

 

Round 8 results:

Nebolsina Vera (2377) - Girya Olga (2435) 1/2-1/2
Gunina Valentina (2479) - Shadrina Tatiana (2384) 0-1
Kosintseva Tatiana (2581) - Kosteniuk Alexandra (2507) 1-0
Matveeva Svetlana (2389) - Pogonina Natalia (2472) 1/2-1/2
Kosintseva Nadezhda (2576) - Bodnaruk Anastasia (2407) 0-1
Paikidze Nazi (2401) - Galliamova Alisa (2487) 0-1

After a hard-fought battle the reigning Women's Russian Chess Champion Alisa Galliamova took the lead at the Russian Superfinal. As you can see from the table below and the games, the finish is going to be very exciting.



View the games

 

Comments (4)

Let’s say you have looked up the pairings for the next day and found out who your opponent is. Different people have different approaches to the preparation stage. Let’s review the main ones.  
 

1. Preparing in the evening
 

After returning from the game, you continue the chess work by preparing for the next game. The next morning you will only refresh and memorize the variations you have chosen in advance. Pros: your head won’t get too tired before the game. Cons: preparation requires a lot of energy. In the evening you are likely to be tired and miss something. Moreover, it will prevent you from taking a proper rest, which can affect your performance in the rounds to come.
 

2. Preparing in the morning
 

Most of the preparation is performed in the morning, while during the evening before the game you take a quick look at your opponent’s profile. Pros: you can rest well after the game. Cons: your head may get tired in the morning and crack during the game. Also, sometimes just before the round you realize that a certain variation doesn’t work (is flawed), and have no time to fix it.
 

3. Mixed preparation: in the evening & in the morning
 

This option works best for chessoholics with an excellent physical shape. Pros: by spending a lot of time preparing you get to know your opponent well and can choose the optimal variation. Cons: anyone may get tired all of a sudden, and that can affect your overall result in a negative way.
 

There is one more “secret” option – consciously give up on preparing before a game. This can be done for a number of reasons: when your opponent is well-known for playing all sorts of lines (unpredictable opponent); when you are sick/tired and can’t waste precious energy on anything. No matter what the reason, the aim is usually the same – to have a “fresh head” during the game.
 

It is important to note that the timing and intensity of preparation depend on your general wellbeing. If you are fit, motivated and willing to study, go ahead. When you are tired, disappointed, ill, it is vital not to be too hard on yourself.
 

After having played a few tournaments, people usually get a feel for what suits them best. For example, my personal choice is option #2. Also, due to being rather fragile, I try not to spend over two hours on preparing, otherwise it harms my play.
 

The next question that jumps to mind is “how do I prepare for a game?” Here is a brief overview:
 

1. Scan the opponent’s games using a chess database or (at least) the games from the tournament – usually available online. Pay a lot of attention to his/her openings. Try to understand what positions he/she prefers, and which he/she plays badly. If you have enough time, try to compile a complete dossier on him/her – psychology, weaknesses and strengths in chess, current chess shape, physical shape, motivation, time management, etc.
2. Depending on a variety of factors (tournament situation, opponent’s style, your own wellbeing) you can choose an opening variation (or a few of them, depending on how broad your opponent’s opening repertoire is).
3. If necessary, study the variation in more detail, try to find new ideas.
4. Rehearse the lines before the game (normally the higher the level of a player, the longer it takes).

Of course, the better you are prepared for the tournament, the less time you need to spend on your homework during the event itself. However, many pros are either lazy or too busy travelling from one tournament to another, so they have to catch up on chess theory between rounds.
 

Now let's take a look at another game of mine from the recent European Club Cup:
 

White didn’t get anything out of the opening. Feeling too relaxed about this, at some point I started playing rather carelessly and could have ended up in trouble. Luckily for me, my opponent missed that opportunity, and the game ended in a draw.


 
 

Be first to comment this article