From: sloan@willis.cis.uab.edu (Kenneth Sloan)
Subject: Two English's
Organization: CIS, University of Alabama at Birmingham
Distribution: na
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1993 19:28:38 GMT

It was a pleasure to see a message from Phil Dorsey discussing (among
other things) Rochester Chess.  I have great memories of my years in
Rochester (1977-81), where I managed to climb from Class C to Class A.

[First...for Phil: is the Robert Joynt you mentioned the same Robert
Joynt who was a professor in the U of R Med School?  His son?]

Now.  Here's a typical game from that period, which Phil will enjoy
seeing again:

30/30 Bonanza  Round 7, Board 5 11 June 1978
White: Kenneth Sloan (1601)
Black: Philip Dorsey (1927)

1.c4 e5 2.d3 Nf6 3.Nf3 Bd6 4.g3 c6 5.Bg2 0-0 
6.0-0 Bc7 7.Nc3 d5 8.cd cd 9.Bd2 Nc6 10.Rc1 d4
11.Nb5 Bb8 12.Ng5 Nd5 13.Qb3 Nde7 14.Qc2 a6 15.Na3 h6
16.Ne4 f5 17.Qc4+ Kh8 18.Nc5 Rf6 19.f4 b6 20.Nb3 Be6
21.Qc2 Bd5 22.e4 de 23.Bxe3 Bxg2 24.Qxg2 Nd5 25.Rfe1 ef
26.Bxf4 Bxf4 27.gf Nxd4 28.Qf3 Rg6+ 29.Kh1 Qxd3(!) 30.Qxf4(?) Qd5+ 0-1

I was just then entering my craven chickenshit period.  I had just
noticed that I had a better record with Black (with the Dragon and the
Benko) than I had with White (with not much of a clue) - so I
brilliantly decided to use the Sicilian Attack, and try to play Black
with the White pieces.  It was remarkably successful against B players
and below - but has been regularly punished by A players and above.  The
game with Phil is probably typical of my profound misunderstanding of
chess at the time.  Essentially, I would regularly surrender the center,
for no particular compensation other than the fact that I could almost
always get a pawn structure, and piece placement, that I was familiar
with.  I would then settle in, play defensively, and win only when my
opponent understood less about the game than I did.  I expect that most
of my A+ opponents were very pleased to be sitting across the board from
me.

Not having been blessed by early training and success (I didn't learn
about USCF until 1975 or so, when I was already in grad school), I've
been able to live with playing at the class level. [it pains me to read
of players like Rogoff who must retire when a professional life makes it
impossible to play at World Class level].  So, I've managed to bungle
along - reaching Class A shortly after leaving Rochester for Boston.
[Boston Chess is very nice - but Rochester's was more fun, I think].
There then followed a long hiatus (sustained only by casual
correspondence chess) which seems to correspond with the first 7 years
of my first son's life...  But now - we're back!

We just returned from the very nice tournament at Fairfield Glade
(Tennessee).  I failed to finish ahead of GM Gregory Kaidanov - but
David (now age 9) managed to finish ahead of Boris Kaidanov (age 6 -
watch this boy!) - so we claim a family team draw.  David, still listed
as only 989 on the wall chart, was better placed in the Novice (U1400)
section than I was (at 1813 in the Open - with GM Kaidanov, IM Kogan,
and IM Burger on the top boards).  I had an acceptable tournament -
including one game that felt so good that I believed (immediately after
it was over) that it was the best game I've ever played [better than,
say, my simul win over Shamkovitch, back in the Rochester days].

Now, the game may not be *that* good - but it felt good to me because I
think it represents a turning point back to a willingness to fight in
the center and strive to maintain White's initial edge through the
opening, through the middlegame, and right up to the point where Black's
position crumbles under the weight of very small inaccuracies.

Compare this game with the one above:

Fairfield Glade Open   Round 2 Board 28  9 January 1993
White: Kenneth Sloan (1813)
Black: Charles Downs (1928)
40/100 30/15
1.c4 Nf6 2.Nc3 g6 3.Nf3 Bg7 4.g3 0-0 5.Bg2 d6
6.0-0 c6 7.d4 Nbd7 8.Re1 Qc7 9.e4 e5 10.b3 exd4
11.Nxd4 Re8 12.Bb2 Nf8 13.Qd2 Ne6 14.Nxe6 Bxe6 15.h3 Rad8
16.Rad1 Qc8 17.Kh2 a6 18.f3 Re7 19.e5(!) Ne8 20.exd6 Rxd6
21.Qc1 Red7 22.Rxd6 Nxd6 23.Na4(!) Bxb2 24.Qxb2 Qf8 25.Qf2 Rd8
26.Nc5 Bc8 27.f4 Nf5 28.Ne4 Qg7 29.g4 Nd4 30.Qh4 Ne6 
31.Nf6+ Kh8 32.g5(!) Rd2 33.Qg3 Qf8 34.Qc3 Rd8 35.Qe5 Qg7
36.Be4 Rd2+ 37.Kg3 Rd8 38.h4 Bd7(?) 39.Rd1(!) Bc8 40.Rxd8+ 1-0

Both clocks show 2 minutes.  Black has been in moderate time trouble for
some time.  White was never in extreme time trouble, but was feeling
just a bit like a more time would have been useful.  I'm finally
beginning to understand what people are thinking about when they go into
a half-hour trance.

Now - to a Master, this probably looks like a routine crush, aided and
abetted by Black.  I don't really know (comments and annotations are
very welcome!).  What I do know is that this game represents the
(successful!) result of a decision to stop hiding on the first three
ranks, and come out into the center to fight. 

The good news is that my son is just starting to actually look at
"openings".  Like all youngsters who read the usual instructional
material, he "naturally" plays 1.e4 e5 openings but doesn't understand
the point of 3. Bb5.  We've just started to read through the games in
Harding's book on the Evans Gambit; he likes the idea, and got a draw
against a 1253 adult (up a piece, he let all the pawns go away...) last
weekend.  

So, I get to see all of this again, and have started playing the Evans
in informal games.  What fun!  Give me a year and I might even return to
1.e4 in serious play.

Thanks to Phil for jogging my memory - and I hope that superior players
will find the time to use the games above (especially the second) as an
opportunity to make instructive comments.



-- 
Kenneth Sloan                   Computer and Information Sciences
sloan@cis.uab.edu               University of Alabama at Birmingham
(205) 934-2213                  115A Campbell Hall, UAB Station 
(205) 934-5473 FAX              Birmingham, AL 35294-1170
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess