Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde
After I scored my fourth consecutive point at the Western States last October I lost a game in 12 moves cause I dropped a piece. Someone who had been watching the fourth game asked me how I did in the fifth round and when I told him what happened he said "You're a freak!"
Check out the first two rounds of the Club Championship Qualifier.
There's this weird side of me that comes out sometimes and I don't really know why or how but I miss the most obvious things. Luckily in this tournament I have managed to salvage 1.5/2 points and I am tied for third with Simanis. If I continue to play like this I may not even earn a spot in the finals.
Check out the first two rounds of the Club Championship Qualifier.
There's this weird side of me that comes out sometimes and I don't really know why or how but I miss the most obvious things. Luckily in this tournament I have managed to salvage 1.5/2 points and I am tied for third with Simanis. If I continue to play like this I may not even earn a spot in the finals.
I agree with this assessment, especially if you're below 2200 as there are better things to be studying.
But, I think you should know it at some point. I got this ending several years ago and only knew the first part and as a result, only got a draw. So I know how Simanis feels. After that game, I made sure I knew the second part.
Weikel said, he knew how, but hadn't looked at it in a long time.
It was a gutsy call by Kevin to enter into that, not knowing whether Simanis knew it or not.
I almost achieved a study-like stalemate (which I was playing for) after I was three pawns down in Rook Ending. Sheryka's technique was none to good and I was very close. So there's hard fought battles in this one. It's kind of brutal, almost barbaric. See everyone there tomorrow.
chris - i'm not really frustrated, i mean i have nothing to complain about. i played badly and somehow managed to get rewarded for it. so, next game is a new story. i was frustrated during the games but now as you say i have put it behind me.
shoemaker - that comment gives me even more reason to detest this silman endgame course. fundamental chess endings is all you need. but if you like prose i guess silman is the man. awkwardly enough when my coach was evaluating my endgame knowledge he started by giving me 2 bishops against a lone king, then knight and bishop against lone king and after we went through that he said 'don't embarrass me by drawing this ending' so that's what made me think of it during the game.
I haven't found the Silman book to be too bad, but even a lousy math person like myself knows that with each game I play, the chances of this endgame coming up improves. I would have included it. But I understand his "economical approach" to things.