Upset - Round 4 - Lansing City Championship

Tony Nichols reluctantly submitted his game against Ray Garrison. Before last round, he was the clear favorite, the only player with a perfect score. After his loss to Ray, he is tied for first place once again.

Ray, having lost to Seth Homa in round 1, has won all his games since then. No other players have 3 points going into round 5. However, Seth Homa and Jacob Fortuna, both with 2.5 points, are close behind.

Here is Ray's win against Tony. A nice rook sacrifice finishes the game.

Vandenburg Cup

Here are the crosstables for the Vandenburg Cup.

                    Open Section
----------------------------------------------------------
Pair | Player Name         |Total|Round|Round|Round|Round|
Num  |    Rtg              | Pts |  1  |  2  |  3  |  4  |
----------------------------------------------------------
1 | SETH HOMA             |4.0  |W  12|W   3|W   2|W   4|
MI |   2277                |     |     |     |     |     |
----------------------------------------------------------
2 | KEVIN CZUHAI          |3.0  |W   7|W   6|L   1|W   5|
MI |   2200                |     |     |     |     |     |
----------------------------------------------------------
3 | ANDREW CATLIN         |3.0  |W  10|L   1|W   7|W   6|
MI |   1982                |     |     |     |     |     |
----------------------------------------------------------
4 | JIM MARFIA            |2.0  |W   9|H   0|D   5|L   1|
MI |   2210                |     |     |     |     |     |
----------------------------------------------------------
5 | JACOB FORTUNA         |2.0  |D  11|W  12|D   4|L   2|
MI |   1852                |     |     |     |     |     |
----------------------------------------------------------
6 | RAYMOND GARRISON      |2.0  |W   8|L   2|W  11|L   3|
MI |   1840                |     |     |     |     |     |
----------------------------------------------------------
7 | WILLIAM GREEN         |2.0  |L   2|W  10|L   3|W   9|
MI |   1735P18             |     |     |     |     |     |
----------------------------------------------------------
8 | MICHAEL DANG          |2.0  |L   6|B   0|L   9|X   0|
MI |   1406                |     |     |     |     |     |
----------------------------------------------------------
9 | HEATHER SWAN          |1.5  |L   4|D  11|W   8|L   7|
MI |   1725                |     |     |     |     |     |
----------------------------------------------------------
10 | JEFFREY GUILFOYLE     |1.5  |L   3|L   7|W  12|D  11|
MI |   1661                |     |     |     |     |     |
----------------------------------------------------------
11 | PETER CHEN            |1.5  |D   5|D   9|L   6|D  10|
MI |   1558                |     |     |     |     |     |
----------------------------------------------------------
12 | FRAZIER SPARKS        |0.0  |L   1|L   5|L  10|F   0|
MI |   1778                |     |     |     |     |     |
----------------------------------------------------------

                  Reserve Section
----------------------------------------------------------
 Pair | Player Name        |Total|Round|Round|Round|Round|
Num  |     Rtg             | Pts |  1  |  2  |  3  |  4  |
----------------------------------------------------------
1 | MARSHALL QUANDER      |3.5  |W  14|W   4|W  13|D   5|
MI |    1752               |     |     |     |     |     |
----------------------------------------------------------
2 | RICHARD WILSON        |3.5  |D  19|W  16|W   7|W   8|
MI |    1596               |     |     |     |     |     |
----------------------------------------------------------
3 | DAVID SUNDEEN         |3.0  |W   6|L   8|W  19|W   9|
MI |    1603               |     |     |     |     |     |
----------------------------------------------------------
4 | ANDREW ELENBOGEN      |3.0  |W  23|L   1|W  20|W  15|
MI |    1540               |     |     |     |     |     |
----------------------------------------------------------
5 | SCOTT FAUST           |3.0  |D  16|W  17|W  10|D   1|
MI |    1527               |     |     |     |     |     |
----------------------------------------------------------
6 | LARRY HODGE           |3.0  |L   3|W  24|W  12|W  13|
MI |    1353               |     |     |     |     |     |
----------------------------------------------------------
7 | ERIK ROBINSON         |2.5  |W  21|H   0|L   2|W  17|
MI |    1545               |     |     |     |     |     |
----------------------------------------------------------
8 | CHRIS IRWIN           |2.5  |W  24|W   3|D   9|L   2|
MI |    1459               |     |     |     |     |     |
----------------------------------------------------------
9 | JERRY CRYSLER         |2.5  |W  22|W  12|D   8|L   3|
MI |    1442               |     |     |     |     |     |
----------------------------------------------------------
10 | MICHAEL CHEN          |2.0  |D  17|D  19|L   5|W  22|
MI |    1686               |     |     |     |     |     |
----------------------------------------------------------
11 | JOHN GRIFFIN          |2.0  |W  18|L  13|L  15|W  19|
MI |    1500               |     |     |     |     |     |
----------------------------------------------------------
12 | MICHAEL LIUBAKKA      |2.0  |W  15|L   9|L   6|W  20|
MI |    1458P20            |     |     |     |     |     |
----------------------------------------------------------
13 | NATHAN METCALF        |2.0  |W  20|W  11|L   1|L   6|
MI |    1417               |     |     |     |     |     |
----------------------------------------------------------
14 | TOSHIO IMAI           |2.0  |L   1|D  18|W  23|D  16|
MI |    1400               |     |     |     |     |     |
----------------------------------------------------------
15 | JOEL HALLORAN         |2.0  |L  12|W  22|W  11|L   4|
MI |    1130P23            |     |     |     |     |     |
----------------------------------------------------------
16 | THIERRY LAURENS       |2.0  |D   5|L   2|W  21|D  14|
MI |    1027               |     |     |     |     |     |
----------------------------------------------------------
17 | RICHARD SPANGLER      |1.5  |D  10|L   5|W  18|L   7|
MI |    1442               |     |     |     |     |     |
----------------------------------------------------------
18 | MARCO LORENZON        |1.5  |L  11|D  14|L  17|W  23|
MI |    1066               |     |     |     |     |     |
----------------------------------------------------------
19 | ALEXANDER DEATRICK    |1.0  |D   2|D  10|L   3|L  11|
MI |    1341               |     |     |     |     |     |
----------------------------------------------------------
20 | JOSEPH TIMMER         |1.0  |L  13|W  21|L   4|L  12|
MI |    1173P4             |     |     |     |     |     |
----------------------------------------------------------
21 | KEVIN HOYT            |1.0  |L   7|L  20|L  16|W  24|
MI |    1095               |     |     |     |     |     |
----------------------------------------------------------
22 | CARRIE RANKIN         |1.0  |L   9|L  15|W  24|L  10|
MI |    966P4              |     |     |     |     |     |
----------------------------------------------------------
23 | PHILIPPE LAURENS      |1.0  |L   4|B   0|L  14|L  18|
MI |    856                |     |     |     |     |     |
----------------------------------------------------------
24 | TIMOTHY QUINLAN       |0.0  |L   8|L   6|L  22|L  21|
MI |    778                |     |     |     |     |     |
----------------------------------------------------------

Vandenburg Cup - Homa vs Czuhai

Seth is right back at it. Here's his impressive game against Kevin Czuhai:

Upset - Round 3 - Lansing City Championships

Jacob Fortuna, in an impressive show of courage, despite a first round loss, held a draw as black against the number five player in Michigan, Seth Homa.

Here's the game:

2 Upsets - Round 2 - Lansing City Championship

Tony Nichols, expert, defeated Seth Homa, master, in 43 moves last night. I also scored a point in my game against Frazier Sparks. See below for the games:

Mate in 2

White to play and mate in 2 moves

I came across this puzzle recently. This is the first mate in 2 puzzle I couldn't solve in quite a long time. The solution actually made me laugh. I thought it was worth posting. Have fun solving!

Michigan Top 100

Thanks to Tony Nichols and Jacob Fortuna, we have a new source for the top Michigan top 100 rating list. We are now using the tournament director's USCF rating list, directly from the US Chess Federation.

We filtered out all other states in the list, where the supplement year is 2008, and ordered by rating.

1 2613 Finegold,B
2 2314 Calton,B
3 2284 Kahn,A
4 2272 Wang,L
5 2261 Homa,S
6 2220 Obukhov,D
7 2214 Pereira,S
8 2200 Czuhai,K
9 2200 Finegold,M
10 2162 Levi,A
11 2153 Brooks,J
12 2130 Canty iii,J
13 2122 Fernandez,A
14 2114 Hartwig,T
15 2112 O'donnell,R
16 2109 Ghobrial,A
17 2108 Davidovich,M
18 2100 Ciaffone,R
19 2091 Brumley,E
20 2090 Ferenti,C
21 2089 Maloy,M
22 2071 Nestorovski,C
23 2032 Nichols,A
24 2018 Moroney,T
25 2014 Fuller,W
26 2009 Rojas-suarez,R
27 2007 Sudharsan,K
28 2006 Palmer,T
29 2005 Rogers,B
30 2003 Finegold,R
31 2002 Baze,L
32 2000 Endsley,B
33 2000 Everett,M
34 2000 Santiago,R
35 1974 Catlin,A
36 1957 Carter,A
37 1954 Pratt,G
38 1947 Matyszewska,M
39 1943 Shetty,A
40 1937 Schilleman,A
41 1931 Kitts,G
42 1923 Jarosz jr,S
43 1922 Wilson,V
44 1917 Hickey,W
45 1910 Brereton,J
46 1910 Lehmann,A
47 1910 West,T
48 1903 Smith,M
49 1902 Evans sr,T
50 1900 Aldrich,J
51 1891 Bale,S
52 1888 Lehotzky,A
53 1888 Rhee,W
54 1884 Vandivier,D
55 1881 Gattinger,J
56 1869 Selitsky,B
57 1866 Brandt,B
58 1859 Amarasinghe,P
59 1855 Bojanovic,R
60 1850 Brooks,R
61 1847 Werhnyak,R
62 1844 Fortuna,J
63 1844 Nikolovski,O
64 1835 Garrison,R
65 1834 Lahr,F
66 1832 Kotman,S
67 1832 Thach,S
68 1827 Drake,R
69 1827 Henke,R
70 1820 Skidmore,J
71 1815 Manion,T
72 1813 Decker,D
73 1810 Matias,I
74 1810 Richardson,W
75 1810 Semerciyan,M
76 1806 Ghiata,G
77 1804 Skidmore,M
78 1801 Finegold,C
79 1800 Brady,L
80 1800 Smith,L
81 1784 Morabito,C
82 1778 King,N
83 1778 Lewis,D
84 1777 Payne,C
85 1771 Elias,M
86 1769 Budzenski,J
87 1765 Fick,D
88 1762 Taylor,P
89 1761 Aoufa,M
90 1751 Ziemak,K
91 1746 Quander,M
92 1744 Aldrich,J
93 1744 Nguyen,V
94 1743 Swan,H
95 1740 Larson,E
96 1739 Haakonstad,O
97 1736 Edgerle,I
98 1734 Schulte,M
99 1721 Gentry,L
100 1720 Vu,T

Upset - Round 1 - Lansing City Championship

Jacob Fortuna and I played our second rated game against each other last night, in round 1 of the Lansing City Championship. I think I surprised him with my choice of the Modern Benoni, but we played a tough game, fraught with minor mistakes, and a few major ones.



White: Jacob Fortuna (1844)
Black: Chris Irwin (1443)
4.4.2008

1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 e6 3. a3

This move is the fourth most popular move for white from the position after 2... e6. Kasparov, Kramnik, and Anand all prefer other moves. But, in Jacob's defense, Hikaru Nakamura played 3. a3 in 2004. However after black's next move, he diverges from this game, not advancing the d-pawn.

3... c5 4. d5

Nakamura played 4. Nf3, not allowing black to enter a Benoni a tempo ahead.

4... exd5 5. cxd5 d6 6. Nc3 g6 7. g3

7. e4 is slightly better

7... Bg7 8. Bg2 O-O 9. Nf3 Nbd7 10. O-O a6 11. a4

Here we reach a theoretical position, occurring almost 900 times in my database. But, in these games, white did not waste a tempo playing a2-a3-a4. So from those positions it is white to move. Unfortunately, I was inexperienced in the Modern Benoni, this being my first rated game with it, and I failed to take advantage of this extra tempo immediately. Instead I wasted time trying to decide where my queen belonged.

11... Qa5? =

11... Re8 an 12... Qc7 would have kept the slight advantage.

12. Bf4 Qb6 13. Qc2 Re8 14. a5

only wastes a tempo, forcing black to move the queen back where she belongs, on c7. 14. Nd2 with the threat of Nc4 was much stronger.

14... Qc7 15. h3

Preventing black's hopes of Ng4-e5

15... b5 16. axb6 Nxb6 17. Rad1

17. e4 was required

17... Bf5 18. Qc1 Ne4 19. Rfe1 Nxc3 20. bxc3 a5

The surprising 20... Na4!? was found in computer analysis. This is an interesting plan, and keeps black's pieces much more active than what occurred in the game.

21. Nd2 a4 22. Qa3 Be5 23. e4

23. Bxe5 Rxe5 24. e4 keeps white's pawn structure in tact.

23... Bxf4 24. gxf4

24. exf5 is not possible. White drops a piece after Rxe1+ 25. Rxe1 Bxd2

24... Bd7 25.c4 f6

to hold the e5 square as long as possible

26. Ra1

26. Qc3 Kf7 27. e5 was better

26... Kf7 27. Qc3 Rab8 28. Ra3

I thought for a long time what course of action to take. I wanted to take full control of the b file, and tie white's pieces down to defending against my passed pawn and a break-through on the queen side. Knowing the position would remain at least partially closed, I knew I could take my time, and played

28... Na8 29. Nf3 Rb4 30. e5 Bf5 31. e6+ Ke7 32. Kh2?

32. Nd4!

32... Reb8 33. Nd2



By now, I saw white's attention diverted to the queen side, and noticed his king side weaknesses: doubled pawns, isolated pawn, somewhat open king. So I played another unusual-looking move

33... Qd8 34. Rea1

I expected 34. Be4 which is actually winning: 34...Bxe4 35. Nxe4 Qf8 36. f5

34... Nb6 35. Bf3 Qf8 36. Bd1 Ra8 37. Bc2?

This drops a pawn.

37... Qh6 38. Bxf5 Qxf4+ 39. Kg1 Qxf5 40. Re1

So now black has a critical decision to make. He has a won endgame, but also a possible king side attack, if he can open some lines for a rook. Honestly, I didn't notice or consider the fact that if I traded down, I could win this end game rather easily. This is my own inexperience and rating
showing.

40... g5 41. f3

hanging another pawn. I decided not to take it rather quickly, because I noticed the b1-a7 diagonal could be dangerous if I lost control of it. I was still determined to open a file to activate my a8 rook.

41... h5 42. Kg2 g4 43. fxg4 hxg4 44. h4 Rb8

I missed 44... Nxc4 45. Nxc4 Qxd5+ 46. Kg3 Rxc4

45. Rf1 Qe5

finally seeing the won endgame

46. Qd3 Qh5 47. Rh1?

Having no way to prevent ...Rb2, white needed to be able to play Rf2 in response.

47... Rb2 48. Rc3 a3?

48... Nxc4 and white can resign

49. Rxa3 Nxc4 50. Ra7+ Ke8 51. Qxc4??


Black can mate in 6 moves

The final mistake: 51. Rb1 Qh6 (51... Qxh4?? and black is getting mated: 52. Qg6+) 52. Kg3 Rxb1 53. Rh7 Qe3+ 54. Qxe3 Nxe3 55. Nxb1 Rxb1 and now white is certainly losing, but he hasn't lost yet.

51... Rxd2+ 52. Kg3 Qe5+ 53. Kxg4 Rd4+

I missed an immediate win, which was forced from move 51. See if you can find it, from the diagram above.

54. Qxd4 Qxd4+

and white resigned.