The Glen Rock Quads Chess tournament, held yesterday, was characterized by a blend of competitive fervor and mutual support among participants. Notably, Nicholas Mccahey, a frequent contender, seized the opportunity to seek guidance from National Master Yefim Treger (more from him later) regarding the Borg opening. Despite the perceived intimidation surrounding Yefim, he proved to be approachable and eager to share his wealth of knowledge, fostering a supportive environment conducive to learning and growth.
Adding to the familial atmosphere of the tournament, Nick's grandfather, Edward Baurin, took on an unofficial role as the tournament director, operating under the guidance of Alan and Noreen. Edward's dedication to the event was unmistakable, evident in his commitment to studying the USCF rules book, as captured in a photo. His proactive approach highlights the grassroots passion that drives events like the Glen Rock Quads Chess tournament, where players and organizers alike contribute to the rich tapestry of the chess community.
For our post-tournament report contest, there was an exciting mix of participants, including two regular entrants, one of whom was none other than Yefim himself. Alongside these seasoned writers, the contest welcomed a new entrant, Jody, injecting fresh energy into the competition. As a result, we will begin with Jody’s entry!
I’ve waited for a long time to write a chess report, and finally it is the day. As I sat down before the chessboard after a brief intermission from the previous round, my heart raced with anticipation. With 1.5 points under my belt, I knew that victory was within reach, yet nerves gripped me tightly. Melanie Liang, a formidable opponent, possessed strong playing skills, and I knew that this match would demand a great deal of concentration.
In the opening, playing the London System as white led to me a favorable position. I decisively maneuvered my knight to c6, where it forked both Melanie's queen and rook while setting the stage for an early advantage. Nevertheless, following the exchange of my bishop for a knight on move 24, Melanie retained her bishop pair which posed significant threats to my weak King side. Soon, the vulnerability of my King and pawns were unmistakably evident. Despite this precarious situation, I was lucky in the sense that Melanie was unable to capitalize on many of my crucial errors, giving me a narrow escape from several attacks. Afterwards, I concluded that the only way to transition the match to an endgame was by exchanging my rook for her bishop and pawn, thus opening up the position and providing more trade opportunities. As the game progressed, we exchanged rooks and bishops, enabling my king to seize two pawns and establish a passed pawn, ultimately leading to Melanie’s resignation. This is one of the most interesting and memorable games I played recently at Saturday Quads – a very close battle with twists and turns, fueling my adrenaline to the peak. However, with resilience and mental fortitude, I’m excited to claim my long-awaited triumph.
As a chess player for many years, I keep asking myself “How do I improve my rating? What is the right path towards mastering this challenging game?” This question is harder and more intricate than it seems at first blush. Although studying is the key to success, it also must be followed by practice in chess tournaments, where a player duels with opponents, gets to try out strategies, and can see how strong he/she really is while identifying the weaker areas. I believe that ICA provides a calm yet competitive environment, where one can really play quality chess. The 3 rounds of quads provide the perfect opportunity for me to become a better play and eventually move up the ranks. This was the case in Saturday's quads, in which after obtaining a 2.5/3 points, I broke my peak rating, and reached 1562. Let’s dive deep into my last game!
After two rounds, I had 1.5 points, and was leading the 6 player Swiss, sharing the 1st place with Jody Chen, who also had 1.5 points. In my last round, I was paired with the chess veteran Andrew Goldfarb, who was playing with the white pieces. A win would guarantee 1st place, and so I decided to push hard with the black army. The game opened with the advancement of the queen pawns, and transposed into a London System. Andrew’s powerful, attacking style showed in the game. He advanced his kingside pawns with no fear. At one point, I found a mini tactic in which I traded my powerful light-squared bishop so that I could defend easier, and to get a protected passed pawn on d3 (see move 18). To block my pawn, Andrew courageously put his king on d2, neglecting the safety of castling. I felt like I was in a worse position. As an interesting choice, Andrew struck with an interesting knight sacrifice on f3.
Although the computer did not approve of the sacrifice, it was very dangerous, as my king was open. I immediately sacrificed my knight back, so that I would be up a pawn, with defending chances. After a series of tense moves, in which I tried to defend, and Andrew pressed hard on my position, Andrew ultimately sacrificed a rook.
When I saw the move, I was surprised. I sat seven minutes in my chair, calculating each and every variation until my head hurt. Finally, I accepted his sacrifice. His attack became even more gruesome, but I brought my king to the center, where it was safer. At one point, I made an inaccuracy, in that I sacrificed my rook to gain a queen and pawn endgame (see move 35), in which I was up two pawns. However, Andrew could have resorted to a forced perpetual check, which would result in a draw. Luckily for me, he missed it (and so did I at the time), and the game continued. However on move 44, it was my turn to find a brilliant move.
I slid my queen to h5, where it defended the f7 pawn, and threatened Qe2+, which was undefendable. The point was that, regardless of Andrew’s next move, I would sacrifice a pawn to enter a king and pawn endgame, in which I was up a pawn. After the exchange, I formed two outside passed pawns, and was able to stop his attack. I promoted and I was able to finish the game soon thereafter.
Andrew’s resilience, attack, and defensive skills shown at the end were the reasons why my experience at this Saturday quads was memorable. I had the most fun playing my favorite game of chess, and my experience was heart-racing, challenging, and simply incredible. I hope to attend more ICA quads in the future, and consequently gain more rating points and “experience points”
In my first April quad I played with Aiden the same variation which I played with him in August 2023. At some moment it seemed like Déjà vu (the phenomenon of feeling as though one has lived through the present situation before). Just look at the picture. Can you spot two differences between left and right photographs of us taken in August and April? An answer is at the end of this post. Now back to the game.
I specially chose a slightly different order of moves to sacrifice a piece for 3 (not 2) pawns. Please compare two diagrams below two photographs. What are the best moves in them (moves which save the bishop)? In the first diagram Black may play Be7 which after Qf7 and Qg7 leads to “2 pawns for the piece”. However in the right diagram Black at first has to play d5 to create an escape d7-square for his king after Be7. It leads to “3 pawns for the piece” and that is what I wanted to play. But it is strangely enough that Aiden did not play d5 and simply gave up his bishop immediately. Another strange moment occurred little bit later when Aiden gave up his queen for two pieces (see the comments in the game below). It looked as he was afraid of my tactical skills… So my advice to him is “Do not be afraid of opponent, in particular, in tactic combinations be creative as much as possible!” Before you look at my game I am giving you the answer about 2 differences in photographs. The first difference is Aiden’s hands which support his head (in 6 month he has become much heavier!). The second difference is that we play with the different types of a chess clock… I hope Aiden and I will play again!
Section 3 Report Part 1: By Jody Chen
Section 3 Report Part 2: By Bryan Andrei
Section 1 Report: by Yefim Treger
Visitors: 157