KAMSKY, KRUSH REPEAT AS U.S. CHESS CHAMPIONS

GMs Gata Kamsky and Irina Krush each turned in undefeated performances to win their respective U.S. Championship events.

By Brian Jerauld,(FROM SOURCE (HTTP://WWW.USCHESSCHAMPS.COM/NODE/464)

You were expecting someone else?

The tight drama of the 2014 U.S. Championships turned out to be all for show. Several of the nation’s top 22 players took turns stealing headlines and taking their shots at the top, but when the dust of the near two-week long fight cleared, the two champions left standing were the same two champions as before.

Grandmaster Gata Kamsky has repeated as the U.S. Chess Champion, his fifth time holding the title, after defeating GM Varuzhan Akobian 1.5-0.5 in a playoff on Tuesday evening. As well, GM Irina Krush turned in a three-peat as the U.S. Women’s Champion, her sixth year as title holder, after knocking out WGM Tatev Abrahayam 1.5-0.5 in their own playoff on Tuesday. Though both champions admit struggling with the 2014 fields, Kamsky and Krush were the only players to finish undefeated.

“It has been a tough tournament for me, I can feel all these guys: They have been preparing and playing really well,” Kamsky said of his 11 challengers. “Of course, there were a lot of blunders because they wanted to win, but that made everything very competitive. It was nice to win this event.”

Kamsky was fortunate to even be playing chess in Tuesday’s playoff, after struggling to tally decisions for the entire tournament. With only three wins across 11 rounds, a scattering of uninspired draws left even Kamsky himself predicting a new national champion in the tournament’s earlygoing.

But Akobian and GM Aleksandr Lenderman, tied in first place entering the final round, fought each other to a draw when a win would have earned the title outright. It opened up the extra playoff day, which turned out to be a three-way playoff, as Kamsky finally caught pace with a final-round win over Josh Friedel on Monday. It was the first time all tournament Kamsky had appeared on the top of the leaderboard.

“I felt (the three-way playoff) was really exciting, it was really good for me,” Kamsky said. “Considering the game (Monday) that they played where Akobian could have won, I feel very lucky.”

Krush also left her sixth title in doubt, falling sick mid-event and suffering through a stretch of draws that left her a full point behind the leader with two rounds to go. But she caught pace with a win over rival IM Anna Zatonskih in round 8, then was fortunate that another draw in the final round was good enough to keep her up top - though not alone. The women’s competition also featured a three-way playoff.

Krush admitted the national championship is never easy, despite her consistent results.

“All of these championships are hard - it’s not like what people think ‘oh, she wins every year,’” Krush said. “But the thing is, they are always difficult. Maybe last year was my smoothest victory, but a year before that I had a playoff with Anna (Zatonskih), and now I had a playoff with Tatev.

“But this one was definitely hard, I felt like I had one obstacle after another. The fact that I had a mild fever in the middle of the tournament, and then I was drawing these games and found myself so far behind Anna - it just felt like so many obstacles. It’s like: ‘Where is the sun? Where is it? I couldn’t see it.”

Tuesday’s three-way playoff first began with a single Armageddon match designed to knock one player from each race. Kamsky and Krush had earned advantage due to tiebreaks, setting up Akobian and Lenderman, as well as Abrahamyan and Zatonskih, to square off in an Armageddon game. In the specialized match, the player with the black pieces receives draw-odds and only has to avoid losing to advance. Abrahamyan had black and knocked out Zatonskih with a perpetual check; Akobian passed over his draw odds and just brought Lenderman down by checkmate.

It set up the finals, which was two rapid games - 25 minutes with a 5-second-per-move increment - to declare the champion. Akobian drew the first game with the white pieces, while Kamsky won in the second game as white. In the women’s final, Krush took the full point in her first game as white, then played Abrahamyan to a draw in the second game.

“One thing I know is that in a rapid game you need good nerves and a fresh mind,” Krush said. “It’s not really decided by opening preparation.”

News

2014 U.S. Championships

2014 U.S. Chess Championship

By Edward Scimia,(from http://chess.about.com/od/chesshistory/fl/2014-US-Chess-Championship.htm?nl=1)

 The 2014 U.S. Chess Championship was held from May 7 to May 20 at the Chess Club and Scholastic Center of Saint Louis. It was the sixth consecutive year that the tournament was held at this venue. The U.S. Chess Championship was held simultaneously with the U.S. Women's Chess Championship. Both tournaments were round-robin events featuring most of the top players in the country. There was also a $64,000 Fischer Prize for any player who could replicate Bobby Fischer's perfect score in the 1964 U.S. Championship – the first time that that opportunity was also presented in the Women's Championship. However, no player made a serious run at the bonus in either tournament.

Championship Results

The Championship event was a 12 player round-robin featuring a field composed entirely of grandmasters. With Hikaru Nakamura not present,Gata Kamsky was the clear favorite – though he was expected to be challenged by players like Alexander Onischuk, Timur Gareev, and Varuzhan Akobian.

While Kamsky got off to a slow start, he ultimately managed to tie for first place with Akobian and Aleksandr Lenderman, with all three players posting 7/11 scores. That led to a tiebreaker round in which Kamsky was given a bye to the final, while Lenderman and Akobain (on the basis of having weaker tiebreakers) were forced to play a single Armageddon game in order to face Kamsky.

In the Armageddon game, Akobian took the black pieces and checkmated Lenderman – far better than the draw he needed to advance. That led to a final mini-match of rapid games between Akobian and Kamsky.

In the first game of the playoff, Akobian was held to a draw with the white pieces, giving Kamsky the chance to clinch the title with a win in the second game. Kamsky was able to build a strong position, going up three pawns before forcing the win of a queen for a rook, causing Akobian to resign on the 38th move.

It was the 5th U.S. Chess Championship title for Kamsky, and his second consecutive win in the event. Kamsky won a prize of $45,000 for first place; all 12 players in the tournament were guaranteed a prize of at least $4,000, with a total prize fund of $172,000.

Women's Championship Results

The U.S. Women's Chess Championship was widely expected to be a two horse race. Grandmaster Irina Krush and International Master Anna Zatonskih were clearly the two strongest players in the field, and had been dueling for the championship on an annual basis for several years. The tournament format was again a round-robin, though with a slightly smaller ten-player field.

Heading into the last round, Krush and Zatonskih shared first place by a half-point. But when both only secured draws in their games, that allowed Tatev Abrahamyan to claw her way back into the race with a win over Camilla Baginskaite, leaving the top three players with identical 6.5/9 scores.

That meant that the women were required to play an Armageddon tiebreak as well. Krush had the best tiebreaks, forcing Zatonskih and Abrahamyan to take their chances in the qualifying round. Zatonskih was the favorite here, but Abrahamyan was able to secure a draw with the black pieces – and under Armageddon rules, that was sufficient to see her through to the final.

That set up a David and Goliath final, where five-time champion Krush was taking on the relatively unheralded Abrahamyan – though many, including Zatonskih, were quick to point out that she was a very strong rapid player, giving her a reasonable shot at taking her first U.S. Women's Championship.

But it was not to be. Krush won the first game with White after converting a two rooks and pawn vs. two rooks endgame. Abrahamyan had the chance to strike back with the white pieces in the second game, and did manage to create a position that gave her some chances. But any advantage she might have had slipped away, and in the end, she was forced to accept a draw in a losing position, handing Krush her sixth title.

The Women's Championship had a prize pool of $72,000, with $20,000 of that amount going to Krush as the winner. All players were guaranteed to win at least $2,000. 

Clash of Clans Level 50 - Sherbet Towers (No PEKKA)

Tutorial and cheat

Cyberspace 2025: Today's Decisions, Tomorrow's Terrain

Visible to the public NSF SaTC CyberSpace 2025 Workshop (Cyber2025)

Welcome to the Home Page of the NSF SaTC CyberSpace 2025 Workshop (Cyber2025)

The NSF Cyber2025 Workshop will be held on Tuesday-Wednesday, 22-23 April 2014 at the Waterview Conference Center, located at 1919 North Lynn Street in Arlington, Virginia, 22209. This is an invitation-only workshop, co-chaired by Karl Levitt of UC-Davis and Pat Lincoln of SRI International.

The workshop will foster discussions toward a roadmap for foundational research in cybersecurity and cyberspace over the next 10 - 15 years with a broad perspective, taking into consideration relevant science, technology, and policy issues, and with an emphasis on the social sciences and education.

We are motivated by the far-reaching possibilities of cyber-enabled systems in society that advances in science and technology may enable. We seek a discussion on what is possible and the foundational research challenges over the next decade towards addressing those challenges while mitigating undesirable consequences. Examples of questions to motivate and set the stage for the workshop include:

• What cyber-future scenarios make you hopeful or not hopeful?
• What convergences of technologies and events make some scenarios more likely?
• What new multi-spectrum threats might challenge a highly cyber-enabled society?
• What social, behavioral, economic, and policy challenges do the scenarios pose?
• What strategies and incentives may accelerate research and transition?

The overriding question for this workshop is - what innovative, foundational, and long-range research is needed to address the significant cyber threats to an ever cyber-dependent society.

http://cps-vo.org/group/CyberSpace2025

Spain's King Juan Carlos signs a document in the Zarzuela Palace opening the way for his abdication

In this photo released by the Royal Palace on Monday, June 2, 2014, Spain's King Juan Carlos signs a document in the Zarzuela Palace opening the way for his abdication. Spain's King Juan Carlos plans to abdicate and pave the way for his son, Crown Prince Felipe, to take over, Spanish Prime Minister Mariano Rajoy told the country Monday in an announcement broadcast nationwide. The 76-year-old Juan Carlos oversaw his country's transition from dictatorship to democracy but has had repeated health problems in recent years. (AP Photo/Spanish Royal Palace)

Good or Bad Square? Part II

   Inopov, Apr 2, 2014

Last month, I ended with examining the third element of good positional play: good and bad squares. This week I would like to show how to effectively make the most of good squares for one's pieces, in the context of all three elements we have examined thus far. In addition, here are two True or False questions I would like you to consider:

T/F?: "Having a piece on a stronger/better square always means a superior/better position."

T/F?: "To obtain a good position, one should never give up control of weak squares to an enemy piece."

I will reveal the answers to these questions through another positional game from the recent European Individual Championship. As you go through the game, also pay attention to which squares both sides direct their pieces towards, particularly the knights and rooks.

Korobov, Anton - Alekseenko, Kirill 0-1

15th ch-EUR Indiv 2014 2014.03.03

1.c4 e5 2.Nc3 d6 3.Nf3 f5 4.d4 e4 5.Ng5 Be7 6.Nh3 Nf6 7.Nf4 O-O 8.e3 c5 9.d5 Na6 10.Be2 Nc7

a closed, yet complex middlegame position has arisen from the English Opening.

11.h4! 

Diagram #1

White secures the f4 square as an outpost for his knight, where it eyes a potential strong square on e6.

11... Nd7! 

Diagram #2

Black's knight relocating to a central square.

12.Nb5!?

Diagram #3

Taking out one of the defenders of the e6 square

12... Ne5 not 12... Nxb5? due to the intermediate move 13.Ne6! 13... Qe8 (13... Qa5+ 14.Bd2) 14.Nxf8 winning material.

13.Nxc7 Qxc7 after some forcing play, both sides continue with development and improving their pieces.

14.Bd2 Qd8 eyeing h4

15.h5

15.g3?! is inaccurate and less desirable

Diagram #4

because it only creates weak squares (or strong squares for Black) around the kingside especially f3, once the light-squared bishops get exchanged.

15... Bf6 16.Bc3 Qe7 17.Qb3 trying to make it difficult for Black to complete development with Bc8-d7

17... Rb8 but Black will eventually make it happen

18.a4 preventing any future queenside break with b7-b5

18... Bd7 19.g3?!

Diagram #5

It was better to refrain any kingside weakening with castling or 19.Kf1 Nf7 20.Bxf6 Qxf6 21.Rh3!? 21... Ne5 22.Kg1 = keeping a solid position. Here, White only has one potential weak square to take care of and his h3-rook will act as a defender to any kingside play Black will make in the future.

19... b6 20.Kf1 Nf7!? planning to make his e5-knight "eternal" on the good e5-square, and gaining more room for his pieces on the kingside.

21.Kg2

21.Bxf6 leads to equal play Qxf6 22.Kg2 Ne5 23.Qc3 a5 preventing b4 and achieving an almost deadlock position. Both sides cannot make much progress but who knows, Black may be able to make something work on the kingside later...

21... Be5 22.Qc2 Qf6 the position is still equal, but in the following moves White provokes Black to change the nature of the game

23.a5 b5! a somewhat difficult decision to make during the game because Black will be forced to give up his light-squared B which will cause e6 to become a "weak square." While it will also give White weak squares on f3 and d3, White's knight is more ready to jump on e6. But as we will see later on it's not necessarily always bad to give our opponent control of our "weak" squares...

24.cxb5 Bxb5 25.Ra3?! this is actually a bad move, because it leaves the rook passively placed soon as the position opens up--a3 is a bad square for the rook!

25...Bxe2 26.Qxe2 Bxc3 27.bxc3 after the exchanges, the situation clarifies and Black's next move will set the tone for the rest of the game

27... Rb7!

Diagram #6

Taking over the initiative because White cannot stop Black's plan to conquer the b-file and invade via his 7th or 8th rank. "Double the rooks, double the power!"

28.Ne6

Diagram #7

White's knight has a strong on e6, but he doesn't have a clear way to use it to his advantage.

If 28.Qc2 Rfb8 29.Ra2 Rb3

Diagram #8

Black is better because it's easy for him to pressure targets on White's position and White actually has to retreat with 30.Ne2 to avoid losing material, but after Ne5 -/+ Black's pieces are much better placed.

28... Rfb8 29.Qa6 creating some counterplay and keeping Black's rook tied down to a7-pawn

29... Qe7 30.Raa1 Qd7?! giving White time to improve a piece and increase his defensive chances

More energetic and accurate was to immediately play 30... Rb2! 31.Rh4 Ne5 -/+

Diagram #9

Heading to the strong squares g4, f3 or d3, and create mating threats with the rooks! This line underlines the disparity between the effectiveness of the Black and White knight. Even though White's knight is deeper in the the enemy camp, Black is better because he can use his central knight and his strong squares to attack White's king.

31.Rh4 Rb2 32.Rf4

Diagram #10

White now has not only defended his weak f2 pawn but also created pressure on Black's f5 pawn. Unfortunately, it's still somewhat difficult to play White not only due to his more weak squares, but also a weak king and uncoordinated pieces.

32... Nh6 33.Re1 anticipating the fork tactic after Nh6-g4

If 33.Qf1? Ng4 (33... Qf7 34.Qh1 Ng4) 34.Rxf5 Nxe3+ -+ wins.

33... Ra2

Diagram #11

Planning to double up horizontally.

It was actually better to improve the placement of the queen, to prevent any counter-ideas from White: 33... Qe7 34.Kg1 Rc2

34.Qc6?! White could've escaped from Black's bind with the unexpected resource 34.g4! 34... Nxg4 (34... fxg4 35.Rb1! 35... Rxb1? 36.Rf8#) 35.Rxf5 not only has White relieved pressure, he also gained good counterplay on the kingside!

34... Qe7 35.a6?

This shows how tough it can be to play White's position in a pactical game. White to use a radical approach to his position, and achieve drawing chances with the tactical shot 35.Rb1!! 35... Rxb1 36.Qc8+ Kf7 37.Nd8+ Kf8 ( Kf6? 38.Nc6 Qb7 39.Qf8+ Nf7 40.g4!! with the idea of mate Rxf5 next move e.g.40... g6 41.hxg6 hxg6 42.Ne7! another resource made possible by g4!42... Qxe7 43.g5+ Kxg5 44.Qxe7+ +- ) 38.Ne6+ Kf7 39.Nd8+ Kf8 =.

35... Rab2! kicking out White's active and annoying queen, that gives White some counterplay.

36.Kg1

Diagram #12

36... R2b6 37.Qa4 Qf7 Now Black starts to gradually improve his pieces and subjects White to passive defending of his weaknesses

38.Kg2 Rb2! placing it back to its active b2-square and instantly threatening Ng4, now that f7 is defended

38... Qxh5? only gives White unnecessary counterplay or more defensive possibilities 39.Rh1 Qg6 ( Qf7 40.Rfh4) 40.Rhh4! 40... Ng4? 41.Rhxg4 fxg4 42.Qd7 and White is even winning because Black cannot stop White's mating threats! 42... h5 (42... Rxa6 43.Qe7 h5 44.Rf8+ Rxf8 45.Qxf8+ Kh7 46.Qc8 +- ) 43.Qxa7 Rb2 44.Qe7 +-.

39.Qd1 Ng4

Diagram #13

Finally, the Black's knight takes hold of a strong square, and to great effect because it works well with the rest of Black's pieces.

40.h6 Qh5! the threats just keeps coming, thanks to Black's playmaker: g4-knight!

Diagram #14

White is forced to give up material to avoid mate

41.Rxg4 ( 41.Rh1 Nxe3+ -+ )

41... Qxg4 42.Qxg4 fxg4 -+ the rest was easy because Black can mop up White's weak pawn with his rooks

43.Rh1 Rd2 44.Ng5 Rxd5 45.Nxe4 Re8 46.f3 Rxe4

White resigned here, because Black will transpose into a winning king ending e.g. 47.fxe4 Rd2+ 48.Kg1 Rd1+ 49.Kg2 Rxh1 50.Kxh1 gxh6 -+.

Therefore, the answer to both questions is False! So be warned, having a piece on a strong square does not equate to a better position! It follows that one can obtain a better position while allowing an enemy piece to take hold of a weak square, so long as the enemy does not obtain anything more than a well-placed piece.

To obtain the advantage with a piece on a "good square," one has to use it with the rest of the army to execute a plan, say attacking the enemy king, putting pressure on a weak pawn, etc. Essentially, obtaining a "good" square for one's piece is not an end in itself, but a means to an end.