<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>How to Think and Win at Chess &#187; Chessiq&#8217;s Games</title>
	<atom:link href="http://chessthinking.com/category/chessiqs-games/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://chessthinking.com</link>
	<description>Self-Actualization Through Chess</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 13 Oct 2009 03:04:04 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4</generator>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
			<item>
		<title>17th Annual Chicago Open &#8211; Round 5 &#8211; Fourth win</title>
		<link>http://chessthinking.com/2009/08/30/17th-annual-chicago-open-round-5-fourth-win/</link>
		<comments>http://chessthinking.com/2009/08/30/17th-annual-chicago-open-round-5-fourth-win/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 30 Aug 2009 09:38:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Chessiq</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Chessiq's Games]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.chessthinking.com/2009/08/30/17th-annual-chicago-open-round-5-fourth-win/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[[I previously posted this at chess.com on 5/30/2008]
After winning 3 games in a row, I knew that maintaining the wins would be very hard as the opponents would get stronger. I also knew it would be fun playing higher rated players. So, the self-talk began. I suspected that the rest of players I would play [...]


Related posts:<ol><li><a href='http://chessthinking.com/2009/08/30/17th-annual-chicago-open-round-1-loss/' rel='bookmark' title='Permanent Link: 17th Annual Chicago Open &#8211; Round 1 &#8211; Loss'>17th Annual Chicago Open &#8211; Round 1 &#8211; Loss</a> <small>[I previously posted this at chess.com on 5/27/08] Here is...</small></li><li><a href='http://chessthinking.com/2009/08/30/17th-annual-chicago-open-round-2-first-win/' rel='bookmark' title='Permanent Link: 17th Annual Chicago Open &#8211; Round 2 &#8211; First win'>17th Annual Chicago Open &#8211; Round 2 &#8211; First win</a> <small>[I previously posted this at chess.com on 5/28/08]After losing the...</small></li><li><a href='http://chessthinking.com/2009/08/30/17th-annual-chicago-open-round-3-second-win/' rel='bookmark' title='Permanent Link: 17th Annual Chicago Open &#8211; Round 3 &#8211; Second win'>17th Annual Chicago Open &#8211; Round 3 &#8211; Second win</a> <small>[I previously posted this at chess.com on 5/29/2008]The first two...</small></li></ol>

Related posts brought to you by <a href='http://mitcho.com/code/yarpp/'>Yet Another Related Posts Plugin</a>.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<!- Advanced AdSense by Jim Gaudet -><!- google_ad_section_start -><p>[I previously posted this at chess.com on 5/30/2008]<br />
After winning 3 games in a row, I knew that maintaining the wins would be very hard as the opponents would get stronger. I also knew it would be fun playing higher rated players. So, the self-talk began. I suspected that the rest of players I would play would be higher rated than me. I have always believed that I am stronger than my rating (shows). If in truth, I am not stronger than my rating, then I believe I have the potential to go a lot higher than my rating. You cannot argue against potential. So, I kept telling myself that in truth, I am higher rated than I am now, so I had at least equal chances. I also had to fight my doubts about my lack of preparation for this tournament. I told myself that I had won tournaments before without much preparation. I just had to believe that I would do well, and focus during my games. The last thing was a practical thing. When I go through Alekhine&#8217;s and Fischer&#8217;s games, I see a lot of things. I think I understand a lot of what happens. That being the case, I would be able to see and understand what was happening on the board with people rated 20xx! At the end of the day, each player gets a turn to contribute on what happens on the board.</p>
<p>So, that was the self talk.</p>
<p>I was a few minutes late for my earlier games because I came out of my room late as I don&#8217;t like to &#8220;fight&#8221; with people to see who I am paired with. It messes up my &#8220;flow&#8221;/rythm. So, I let the games begin, and then peacefully walk to the pairing board to see what board and who I am going to play. The couple of lost minutes are worth it for me.</p>
<p>This game was different. I was a little late, yes, but when I went to the board position, my opponent was not there! Mmnnn! Interesting. I set up the board, waited a few seconds, and made my move and started the clock. My opponent showed up 5 minutes later. He took his time making the first move &#8211; (something that I do when I am late &#8211; just to compose myself) &#8211; I understood that. Then he took time taking off his jacket, getting a pen, etc. So I decided to wait until he was done and ready to sit down and play the game for me to make my second. I just wanted to say: &#8220;I know you are not worried about the time, neither am I.&#8221; May be it was just my &#8220;twisted psychology&#8221;, but that is a little background to the game.</p>
<p>The game itself was very interesting. I think this was my second best performance of the tournament. (I think the next game, round 6, was my best game of the tournament).</p>
<p>Without further ado, here is my fourth win&#8230;. two more to come&#8230;</p>
<p><iframe border="0" frameborder="0" allowtransparency="true" width="574" height="519" src="http://www.chess.com/emboard.html?id=206170"></iframe></p>
<!- Advanced AdSense by Jim Gaudet -><!- google_ad_section_end -><div style='clear:both'></div>

<p>Related posts:<ol><li><a href='http://chessthinking.com/2009/08/30/17th-annual-chicago-open-round-1-loss/' rel='bookmark' title='Permanent Link: 17th Annual Chicago Open &#8211; Round 1 &#8211; Loss'>17th Annual Chicago Open &#8211; Round 1 &#8211; Loss</a> <small>[I previously posted this at chess.com on 5/27/08] Here is...</small></li><li><a href='http://chessthinking.com/2009/08/30/17th-annual-chicago-open-round-2-first-win/' rel='bookmark' title='Permanent Link: 17th Annual Chicago Open &#8211; Round 2 &#8211; First win'>17th Annual Chicago Open &#8211; Round 2 &#8211; First win</a> <small>[I previously posted this at chess.com on 5/28/08]After losing the...</small></li><li><a href='http://chessthinking.com/2009/08/30/17th-annual-chicago-open-round-3-second-win/' rel='bookmark' title='Permanent Link: 17th Annual Chicago Open &#8211; Round 3 &#8211; Second win'>17th Annual Chicago Open &#8211; Round 3 &#8211; Second win</a> <small>[I previously posted this at chess.com on 5/29/2008]The first two...</small></li></ol></p>
<p>Related posts brought to you by <a href='http://mitcho.com/code/yarpp/'>Yet Another Related Posts Plugin</a>.</p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://chessthinking.com/2009/08/30/17th-annual-chicago-open-round-5-fourth-win/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>17th Annual Chicago Open &#8211; Round 4 &#8211; Third win</title>
		<link>http://chessthinking.com/2009/08/30/17th-annual-chicago-open-round-4-third-win/</link>
		<comments>http://chessthinking.com/2009/08/30/17th-annual-chicago-open-round-4-third-win/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 30 Aug 2009 09:36:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Chessiq</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Chessiq's Games]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.chessthinking.com/2009/08/30/17th-annual-chicago-open-round-4-third-win/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[[I previously posted this at chess.com on 5/30/2008]I went into my 4th game wanting to maintain the momentum I had (gained) after winning both my games the day before. I am looking at the scoresheet to see what I remember about this game, and it appears it was a pretty quick game. We had 6 [...]


Related posts:<ol><li><a href='http://chessthinking.com/2009/08/30/17th-annual-chicago-open-round-2-first-win/' rel='bookmark' title='Permanent Link: 17th Annual Chicago Open &#8211; Round 2 &#8211; First win'>17th Annual Chicago Open &#8211; Round 2 &#8211; First win</a> <small>[I previously posted this at chess.com on 5/28/08]After losing the...</small></li><li><a href='http://chessthinking.com/2009/08/30/17th-annual-chicago-open-round-3-second-win/' rel='bookmark' title='Permanent Link: 17th Annual Chicago Open &#8211; Round 3 &#8211; Second win'>17th Annual Chicago Open &#8211; Round 3 &#8211; Second win</a> <small>[I previously posted this at chess.com on 5/29/2008]The first two...</small></li><li><a href='http://chessthinking.com/2009/08/30/17th-annual-chicago-open-round-1-loss/' rel='bookmark' title='Permanent Link: 17th Annual Chicago Open &#8211; Round 1 &#8211; Loss'>17th Annual Chicago Open &#8211; Round 1 &#8211; Loss</a> <small>[I previously posted this at chess.com on 5/27/08] Here is...</small></li></ol>

Related posts brought to you by <a href='http://mitcho.com/code/yarpp/'>Yet Another Related Posts Plugin</a>.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<!- Advanced AdSense by Jim Gaudet -><!- google_ad_section_start -><p>[I previously posted this at chess.com on 5/30/2008]<br />I went into my 4th game wanting to maintain the momentum I had (gained) after winning both my games the day before. I am looking at the scoresheet to see what I remember about this game, and it appears it was a pretty quick game. We had 6 hours to finish hour game, and it seems we used less than 2 hours of it. At move 16, I have marked that I had 1hr 26min while my opponent had 1hr 36min. However, it was about that time that I played the move that won me the game, think: 16&#8230;f3.</p>
<p>It was a relatively short game, 34 moves.</p>
<p>I do not know what opening I played. I will have to look it up. My first four moves were pawn moves: &#8230;c5, &#8230;d6, &#8230;e5,&#8230;f5. I just wanted to attack.</p>
<p>After winning this game, my record was one loss, and three wins; three more wins to come&#8230;</p>
<p>Your comments and suggestions are welcome.</p>
<p><iframe border="0" frameborder="0" allowtransparency="true" width="574" height="519" src="http://www.chess.com/emboard.html?id=206144"></iframe></p>
<p><!-- ChessViewer Section Start --><br /><script id="oChessViewer" type="text/javascript">/*<br />[Date "2008.05.25"]<br />[Result "0-1"]<br />[FEN "rnbqkbnr/pppppppp/8/8/8/8/PPPPPPPP/RNBQKBNR w KQkq - 0 1"]<br />[White "John Gurczak"]<br />[WhiteElo "1844"]<br />[Black "Steve Saidi"]<br />[BlackElo "1995"]<br />[Event "17th Annual Chicago Open"]<br />[Site "Wheeling, IL"]<br />[Round "4"]</p>
<p>1.d4 c5 { Thanks to the first game I lost, I had found my response to 1.d4. Like I said, I was trying to get rid of those demons, and to get over the pain of losing to that defense by beating other people with that same defense. I am sure the cure will come when somebody plays ...c5 against me and I kick their butt! } 2.d5 d6 3.c4 e5 { I decided to test White and see if he would take on e6 allowing me to bring out my Bishop attacking c4, and also facing the possibility of an early ...d5 by Black. If he doesn't take, then I have a grip on d4 with both hands. I had not decided whether to fianchetto the dark-squared Bishop, but it seemed like a great idea to fianchetto it and push the King side pawns with both ...c5 and ...e5 already played. } 4.Nc3 f5 { I don't know why, but after White decided not to take on e6, I decided to make this an attacking game. I rarely play all pawn moves in the opening 4 moves, and I am taking Black. (Smiles inside!) } 5.e4 Nf6 { I am not a fan of the Dutch Defense - (is this what it is?) - but I felt comfortable playing this position. There was a time when I leisurely played the King's Gambit and this took me back to that time (Of course, here we have the colors reversed, and it would is a little delayed). } 6.Bd3 f4 { I thought it would take longer for White's light-squared Bishop to get into the game than my dark-squared Bishop. Since I am going for the King side attack, I thought this move allowed me to carry out my plans without risking counter-attacks by White on the King side (which could happen if I took on e4 or if I allowed White to take on f5. } 7.a3 a5 { Just like in the other games, I have to control what the other guy is doing before I carry on with my own plans. So, I am just delaying or holding off White's Queen side (counter-)attack. } 8.Bd2 { Interesting. That's all I thought about that move. } 8...Bd7 { To Stop the Knight from going to b5 if White wants to play b4. I am not sure if I was going to capture the Knight if it went to b5. Also, if the Knight goes to a4, then it ties up the Queen along the d1-a4 diagonal as the Knight is attacked by the Bishop. I am not sure if I considered playing a4 myself so that this Bishop move is to double protect the pawn (from the N &#038; Q attack). } 9.Qb3 { Attacking b7 which the Bishop left unattended on the last move. } 9...b6 { Interesting defense of the attacked pawn... I thought. } 10.Na4 Ra6 { My Q-Rook is no stranger to this square. I think it came here in at least one other game that I played. } 11.Qc2 { hhmmnnn! } 11...Be7 12.Ne2 { I am not sure if Nf3 is any better in light of a later ...g5, ...g4 by Black. With this move, may be White intends to play Nec3 and Nb5? But he has to watch for ...f3 which would  force him to capture or open up his position. May be he can play f3 himself to prevent that. } 12...O-O { I cannot play ...f3 yet because gxf3 would open the g-file to my King. I wondered how my Queen side attack would go if Black castled long - (i.e. Queen side). } 13.b4 { This tells me White is not going to castle long. I guess this move explains Bd2 and Qc2. The moves I found interesting earlier. } 13...axb4 14.axb4 Qe8 { Putting pressure on the Knight on a4 and forcing b5. Of course White can play Nec3 to defend the other Knight. } 15.b5 Ra7 { Looking at the possibility of doubling Rooks on the a-file, so this Rook should not go all the way back. In addition, if I need to shift the Rook to the Kingside, it is easier to do it on the 7th rank than on the 8th. } 16.O-O { To connect Rooks? but I thought f3 should have been played here (first). } 16...f3 { I thought this was my only chance to open up the White position. See note to White's 12th move. I feel that if I won this game, I won it because of this move. The move suggests itself, so it is something I pat myself on the back for. Similarly, if White lost the game, he lost it because of the three moves: 0-0, gxf3, Ng3. } 17.gxf3 Bh3 18.Ng3 { ?! Is it necessary to sac the exchange? I didn't think so, but I went ahead and took the Rook. } 18...Bxf1 19.Rxf1 { I thought White's chances on the Queen side were better with the two Rooks - if he could find a way to double them. I am not sure about this capture... I would probably have captured with the Bishop so as to get it to h3 and f5 or e6. } 19...Nbd7 20.Kh1 { For the Rook to get to g1... } 20...Nh5 { Trying to exchange pieces and also eyeing f4 and f3. } 21.Nf5 Kh8 { Taking care of the possible pin of the g pawn by a Rook on g1. This also diffuses any surprise Knight checks. } 22.Rg1 Qf7 { So that after playing ...f6 the Queen can capture on f3 with check (something the Rook will not do. I also wanted to get my K-Rook to the a-file. I saw that it is not easy to win by mating the King with a direct King side attack. So, I had to mix it up with some activity on the Queen side. } 23.Be2 Rfa8 24.Nc3 Bf8 { Shoring up the defense of the g7-pawn, but also releasing the Queen to do other things without worrying about the Knight on f5 capturing the Bishop. This move also covers h6 - where the Knight on f5 can go if attacked by ...g6. } 25.Qd1 Nf4 { If the Knight on f4 is captured, ...exf4 clears the e5 square for my other Knight. } 26.Qf1 g6 27.Ng3 Bh6 28.Bd1 { Preventing another loss of the exchange after ... ...Nxe2, Bxh6 Nxg1. But this allows ... Ra1 } 28...Ra1 29.Bxf4 exf4 30.Nge2 Ne5 31.Qh3 { Defending f3 and attacking h6. } 31...Bg7 32.Rg2 { ?? Loses a piece. Not sure what White was trying to accomplish. May be he was in zugzwang? } 32...Nxc4 33.Qh4 Bxc3 34.Nxc3 Rc1 { Resigns as one of the minor pieces is lost and he will be a full Rook down. I think this was one of my easiest wins at the tournament. } <br />0-1*/ makeChessApplet ( null );</script><br /><!-- ChessViewer Section End --></p>
<!- Advanced AdSense by Jim Gaudet -><!- google_ad_section_end -><div style='clear:both'></div>

<p>Related posts:<ol><li><a href='http://chessthinking.com/2009/08/30/17th-annual-chicago-open-round-2-first-win/' rel='bookmark' title='Permanent Link: 17th Annual Chicago Open &#8211; Round 2 &#8211; First win'>17th Annual Chicago Open &#8211; Round 2 &#8211; First win</a> <small>[I previously posted this at chess.com on 5/28/08]After losing the...</small></li><li><a href='http://chessthinking.com/2009/08/30/17th-annual-chicago-open-round-3-second-win/' rel='bookmark' title='Permanent Link: 17th Annual Chicago Open &#8211; Round 3 &#8211; Second win'>17th Annual Chicago Open &#8211; Round 3 &#8211; Second win</a> <small>[I previously posted this at chess.com on 5/29/2008]The first two...</small></li><li><a href='http://chessthinking.com/2009/08/30/17th-annual-chicago-open-round-1-loss/' rel='bookmark' title='Permanent Link: 17th Annual Chicago Open &#8211; Round 1 &#8211; Loss'>17th Annual Chicago Open &#8211; Round 1 &#8211; Loss</a> <small>[I previously posted this at chess.com on 5/27/08] Here is...</small></li></ol></p>
<p>Related posts brought to you by <a href='http://mitcho.com/code/yarpp/'>Yet Another Related Posts Plugin</a>.</p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://chessthinking.com/2009/08/30/17th-annual-chicago-open-round-4-third-win/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
