Weeramantry - Bisguier, USATE 2008

I have annotated the game Weeramantry - Bisguier, U.S. Amateur Team East 2008, which would be interesting enough because of the players themselves, who have been so important to the history of chess in the U.S. But it also features a very interesting theory duel from these Open Game specialists in the rare line 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4 exd4 4.Bc4 g6!?

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4 exd4 4.Bc4 g6!?

You don't see that very often, in part because theory says Black cannot afford such a slow development of the Bishop with White opening up lines so rapidly. In fact, several books recommend that White play in gambit style with 5.Bg5 or 5.c3, though (as I indicate in my notes) these are not necessarily refutations. More dangerous, perhaps, is 5.Ng5!? which I have not seen discussed before, though the existing games greatly favor White. Weeramantry played the relatively straightforward recapture 5.Nxd4 and after 5...Bg7 6.Be3 Black uncorked a novelty with 6...Na5!? I was surprised that no one had ever played this before, since the position is far from unknown. I wonder if it is something Bisguier has analyzed or if he just thought it up at the board? In any case, it makes me want to take a closer look at the whole variation.

As I mention in my Review of Dangerous Weapons 1.e4 e5, I have experimented with an Open Game system for Black built around an early ...g6. Lines might include:

• 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 g6 (The Smyslov Variation of the Ruy Lopez)
• 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Nc3 g6 (Three Knights)
• 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4 exd4 4.Nxd4 g6 (Scotch)
• 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nf6 4.d3 h6 5.O-O g6!? (Two Knights Defense, Closed Variation)
• 1.e4 e5 2.d4 exd4 3.Qxd4 Nc6 4.Qe3 g6!? (Center Game)

I actually gave it up to some extent because of the line featured in the game with an early Bc4 for White. Perhaps it's time to have another look?

If you like this system against 1.e4, you might also consider playing the King's Indian Defense as Black -- especially what some have called the Glek Variation of the Classical (1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.Nc3 Bg7 4.e4 d6 5.Nf3 O-O 6.Be2 e5 7.O-O exd4 8.Nxd4 Re8 9.f3 Nc6 10.Be3 Nh5), as seen in the game Van der Sterren - Glek, Germany 1994. After all, the two systems are not only thematically related but they can actually begin to converge on occasion, as in the line 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4 exd4 4.Nxd4 g6 5.c4!? Bg7 6.Nxc6 bxc6 7.Nc3 Nf6 8.Be2 O-O 9.Be3 Re8 etc. -- though you are not likely to see that transposition from someone who plays 1.e4. In any event, it's nice to have an opening system that feels coherent.

I saw the Weeramantry - Bisguier game in the latest issue of Atlantic Chess News, which arrived in the mail just yesterday and includes several games from the U.S. Amateur Teams East. Chess Life (May 2008) also offers several interesting USATE games, including a remarkable loss by our club champion, NM Mark Kernighan, against a rising young star... I won't go into the details since I'm sure Mark is still smarting from that loss, but it is worth a look. I'll have to take another browse through the games file at NJSCF.

February BloGGGgs

Mark Weeks of About.com does his usual monthly summary of the top stories in chess blogs by focusing on the GGGg controversy at the U.S. Amateur Team East this year -- see "Elsewhere on the Web: February BloGGGgs." His conclusion: "In the future the event should be called U.S. Amateur Team East." Hat tip: Jim West on Chess.

Mark Ginsburg's History of USATE Stacking

Dr. Mark Ginsburg offers a wonderful history of stacked teams at the U.S. Amateur Team East (see "The Fabulous 00s: Curing the GGGg Debacle at the US Amateur Team East 2008"). That history includes his own winning teams, one of which instigated the original anti-stacking rule in effect after 1994 for the four-team playoffs (that is, until the famous "Karpov exception"). Ginsburg writes of his 1994 team with Ilya Gurevich, Victor Frias, himself, and "the requisite low-rated kids": "What a trio of scum-sucking stacked opportunists. It was Karmic revenge that we forfeited in the playoffs after Frias pulled a no-show in our first match versus the South."

Though I'm not sure I like Ginsburg's "competency test" solution (to disqualify teams where the bottom board can't even put together one non-forfeit, non-bribed point), it's really wonderful to hear a famous reformed USATE team stacker discuss the GGGg case with the brilliant insight that only he can provide!

I always enjoy Ginsburg's nostalgic chess blog, which offers more proof that those who do not know chess history are doomed to repeat it. As for Steve Doyle: what's his excuse?

USATE 2008 Called "An Amateur Event Sham"

"An Amateur Event Sham" is the headline of David Sands's chess column in The Washington Times. Sands writes: "this year's winner, GGGg, won all six matches employing a lineup of three grandmasters (Zviad Izoria, Eugene Perelshteyn and Roman Dzindzichashvili) and 5-year-old (yes, that's right) Stephen Fanning. Young Fanning's microscopic 178 rating helped get the squad below the mandatory maximum team average rating of 2200, but the whole setup simply is not in the spirit of such a populist event. / No one broke the rules, but it would be nice to see some changes next year (just two GMs per team, perhaps) to keep the event competitive for those without international titles." I could not agree more. Steve Doyle made a mistake in allowing this team to compete, apparently not consulting fully with the other organizers and putting the interests of GMs above those of the vast majority of amateurs who support this event each year.

USATE 2008 in New York Times

Dylan Loeb McClain discusses the GGGg controversy in his New York Times chess column today: "Team of Three Grandmasters and a 5-Year-Old Highlights the Question of Who Is an Amateur." He notes that the 5-year-old's father, John Fanning, "is an uncle of Shawn Fanning, the founder of Napster, the pioneering Web-based file-sharing company, and for a time he was a majority owner of the company. Dzindzichashvili has taught father and son." As to whether the players were paid, Izoria admits that "his expenses had been covered by John Fanning" but regarding additional payment the GM would only say, “I don’t really want to talk about that.... In European leagues, players are paid 400 to 500 euros for each game.”

The article includes an annotated game -- the last round victory of GM Eugene Perelshteyn over NM Thomas Riccardi to decide the championship. Kenilworth Chess Club members might be pleased to note that the photograph accompanying the story shows members from the Kenilworth B team.

Update: GM Joel Benjamin usefully summarizes the GGGg controversy at the New York Times's "Gambit" blog: "GGGg: A Great Idea or a Stretch?"

USATE 2008: GGGg Cannot Play in Finals

The following e-mail exchange was posted online in the comments section of another blog:

Carol Jarecki wrote:

Hi Eugene,
There is some misunderstanding, and lots of controversy, regarding your team's acceptance into the Playoff. As you said, the team members understood they could not play, as established in past years, because of it's rating configuration. Since the restriction wasn't in writing in the East's TLA Steve Doyle feels the team is allowed although others disagree, asserting the rule of not more than a 1000-point difference between boards 3 and 4 has been in place for so long that it no longer needs annual publication. This has caused such national contoversy that he has gone so far as to suggest the Playoffs be cancelled this year. This would be very unfortunate and most likely would not be agreed. I need to know if I may contact the second-place team to partipate in the Playoffs on April 12th which would satisfactorily resolve this problem in the interest, intention and tradition of the US Amateur Team tournaments.
Many thanks for a quick reply and cooperation.
Carol

Eugene Perelshteyn wrote:

Carol,
Yes, going into the event it was our understanding that we would not be eligible to play in the final in case we win 1st. I believe Steve Doyle mentioned it to Roman, and we were fine with this. Either way, we are not interested to play in the final as it will be online. Our goal was to have fun, play next to each other over-the-board, and enjoy the great atmosphere of the tournament. You can contact the 2nd place team.
Best,
Eugene

Note: The second place team "1.d4" (Dan Yeager, Victor Shen, Scott Low, and Jared Defibaugh) finished at 5.5/6 and never played GGGg.

Perelshteyn Interview on USATE 2008

GM Eugene Perelshteyn, who played Board #2 on the winning GGGg team at this year's US Amateur Team East, is interviewed at Chris Bird's Boston Blitz blog -- see "Blitz Player on Winning Team at USATE." Besides showing his nice win over Teddy Coleman, Perelshteyn says of his team's victory: "If someone thinks this win is a walk in the park, they should think again. I believe that playing with so much pressure on the top boards, needing to win in every round, is not easy. Particularly if we face a team with a GM or IM on board one. I commend Izoria for his tough wins against Schneider and Lapshun."

The final wall chart from the tournament is available from the NJSCF website.

USATE 2008 Concludes

I got a nice win in Round 6 of the USATE 2008 with the Nimzovich Defense (see Briones-Goeller, USATE 2008) to help our team finish 5-1 and thus give us a good shot at taking the Best New Jersey Team title. That cheered me up a bit and changed my outlook on the tournament -- which had not been helped by a forfeit win in Round 5 followed by a very long wait for Round 6. I had been in a very gloomy mood all day until the end, but the win helped me go home happy.

I think our whole team had been feeling down following our loss to the Three-Gs, which basically meant that our chances of winning the title were completely sunk in Round 3. In fact, one of our players was so upset about it that (in my opinion) it caused the medical condition that made it impossible for him to continue. That meant that Bob Rose and I would have to play two games on the last day.

At least Bob and I actually got to meet each other after over two years of playing on the same team! "Yeah, it had been sort of like that movie Ladyhawke with you two," Stoyko joked; "you played in the morning and he played in the evening and you were doomed to never meet."

As predicted, the Three-Gs finished 6-0, taking the title with never a doubt.

According to Steve Doyle, I was mistaken regarding the 1000-point rule. The USATE has never disallowed stacked teams, even when the national event imposed an anti-stacking rule from 1994-1998. So the Grandmasters will play for the championship. I wonder how the other three teams will feel about that?

I engaged a lot of people in conversation about the Three-Gs, especially during my hours of waiting around after my forfeit win in Round 5. I encountered a surprising diversity of opinion on some matters, and was shocked that many people saw little wrong with the idea of three GMs playing on the same team. Here are some things people said:

• Rather universally, people thought the Three-Gs made it impossible for ordinary master and expert teams to challenge for the title, but this only diminished the morale of those who held onto "the dream of glory." While some play for no other reason than that they have a chance to win a national championship, most go to "the Teams" just to have fun. And even those out to win the championship were generally philosophical about it, saying "there's always next year" or "these stacked teams come and go." Only a couple people were "outraged" by the Three-Gs.
  
  
• Everyone I spoke to believed that the three GMs had been paid off (Three-Gs plus room and board was the standard estimate) so that the youngster could take home a share of the title. But they generally added "it's a free country" or "his Napster-rich parents are welcome to buy a title if they want to do that -- it's their money." Several thought it was nice that the GMs got a pay day.
  
  
• When I suggested to people that this was an "amateur" event, and a paid team had no place there, I rarely found much support for my view, to be perfectly honest. One player, whose team had won before, thought that the word "amateur" should be stricken from the event's title since he thought it had really diminished his achievement in the eyes of his friends and co-workers when he had won. In fact, he said, some people had even teased him about his "amateur" status. When I mentioned this to other players, they agreed and said that it was about time that we just called it the "World Team." One even suggested that it be modeled it after the World Open, with lots of cash prizes, though he balked at raising the entry fee to pay for that. The meaning of the word "amateur" in the event's title seemed completely lost on most people I spoke to, especially anyone under 40.
  
  
• The organizers suggested that something might be done to address the issue of stacked teams in future events. But they did not think the 1000-point rule was workable, especially since they want to encourage both GMs and juniors to play. The strongest recommendation I heard mentioned was that there should be no more than two GMs per team. One proposal I heard batted around was that individual scores could be factored more strongly into the results, so that any team that regularly lost on bottom board might suffer when compared to teams with more uniform results. I didn't much care for this proposal, since there are many occasions when players might want to take a draw once a match had pretty much been decided, and it struck me as onerous and hardly fun to always have to play for the win.
  

With so much complacency among chess players, I don't think there is much sense in complaining about the Three-Gs. No doubt they will go on to win the national title (who could possibly stand in their way?) and get their pictures on the cover of Chess Life.

For the rest of us, there's always next year.

USATE 2008: "Speak of the Devil"

Steve Stoyko sits down to play Zviad Izoria

As I mentioned in my USATE 2008 Preview, there is a three-GM team this year at the World Amateur Team and U.S. Amateur Team East featuring Izoria, Perelshteyn, and Dzindzi. They call themselves "GGGg" (and not "The Three Tenors," as I had suggested). Obviously this team goes against the spirit of amateurism that the event intends to promote, and in previous years the organizers have explicitly forbidden such imbalances. It's clear that the rule that no teams field players with more than a 1000 point difference between any board needs to be re-instated. While we all love seeing the GMs come out, it's simply unfair to use them to stack the deck against truly "amateur teams."

I was not so angry about the Three-Gs while their existence was still a rumor and the chances of actually meeting them seemed remote. But now that we were paired against them in Round Three, I naturally take the whole thing more personally. As I took piece after piece from my 101-rated opponent on Board 4 (whom I mated in under 10 minutes), I felt a bit cheated out of my usual experience of competitive team play. This was not why I came to USATE.

The Kenilworth Chess Club again sponsored three teams for the event:

• Kenilworth A: FM Steve Stoyko (captain), NM Scott Massey, NM Ed Allen, Bob Rose, and Michael Goeller (alternate)
  
  
• Kenilworth B: NM Mark Kernighan, Geoff McAuliffe, Greg Tomkovich, and Joe Demetrick
  
  
• Kenilworth Rookies: John Moldovan, Joe Renna, Gordon Agress, and Jim Cole
  

Kenilworth B

Our A and B teams had the pleasure in Round One of sitting next to each other on Boards 14 and 15 (with the A-Team playing down and the B-Team playing up). Fortunately, the organizers saw fit not to pair us, though that was likely an option for them...

Kenilworth Rookies: Cole, Renna, and Agress

The Rookies were started last year by team captain Jim Cole and feature players relatively new to competitive play. This year they include our new club president, John Moldovan, who at 1800+ seems hardly a "rookie," except that this is his first USATE!

Kenilworth Rookies T-shirt

Long-time Kenilworth Chess Club regular Mike Wojcio fielded six teams playing under the "Chessaholics" banner, including many of the scholastic players he coaches. And a number of our club members are on other teams. So the KCC has come out in force to support the USATE and I'm sure that most of us will enjoy the long weekend. But the Three-Gs have really spoiled my fun this year...

USATE 2008 Preview

The World Amateur Team & U.S. Team East is set to begin February 16-18 at the Parsippany Hilton (same as last year). You have until February 5th to send in your $140 for your team, otherwise it is $170 at the door. See the complete announcement at NJSCF and USCF for details. All teams must be under 2200 average rating.

The Three Tenors?

Rumor has it that there will be a three-GM team this year featuring GM Izoria (2705), GM Perelshteyn (2615), GM Dzindzichashvili (2586), and an unnamed youngster (max 894). If the rumor is true, that team's composition seems against the spirit of amateurism that the event intends to promote. But I guess Dzindzi was disappointed last year when his team with Perelshteyn kept losing on the two bottom boards (as they did against our Kenilworth B Team). If they don't have a team name yet, I suggest "The Three Tenors."

The Kenilworth A Team will be back in action, with the same players as last year: FM Steve Stoyko (2245), Scott Massey (2217), Ed Allen (2200), myself (2027) and Bob Rose (2052) as alternate, with an average rating of either 2178 or 2172, depending on how they calculate. Both Steve (in 1978 on The Westfield Winners) and Ed (in 1973 on The Independents) have been on winning teams before.

I'm told that last year's winning team Beavis and Butt-vinnik (featured on the cover of Chess Life) will also return, with James Critelli (2386), Evan Turtel (2205), Nick Panico, III (2120), Evan Rabin (2066), and Alan Kantor (2013) as alternate, giving them a very strong team average of 2194. We played a tough match with them last year in Round 5 on Board 1. Maybe we will get a second chance this year? A team has not repeated since the 1970s, when the GSCA four--featuring Ken Regan, John Fedorowicz, and Tyler Cowen--managed to do it. A team called "Mahko Ornst" won twice, but not back to back and not with any of the same players. If Beavis and Butt-vinnik repeat, that will be the second chess record in as many years that Tyler Cowen will have seen tied or surpassed.

No doubt Fedorowicz's team and teams from the University Texas, Dallas will also be in close contention. That is, if "The Three Tenors" don't just blow us all away!