Wednesday, October 28, 2009

Many Rivers to Cross

I have to say that I could not think of a better song title or song for tonight's match with Arizona. The final was 3-1 for the Scorpions and they fully deserved to win the match, without any question. To make this as simple as possible for any readers who don't like to read, the Sluggers played a match in which they displayed all their short comings and very few of their strengths. Here is a quick recap:

Bd. 1 Ramirez met 1. e4 with Alekhine's defense, Nakamura chose the exchange variation. Black was willing to keep a compact and fairly solid position, Naka seemed to be making small gestures but in the end Ramirez had a liquidation that won black a pawn but left bishops of opposite color.

Bd. 2 Slava played a Grunfeld setup against the english in which Whtie had Qa4+ to h4. This is a kind of tricky bit for Black which Slava didn't handle well. He was dreadfully behind on time and lost a pawn. Altounian didn't let up and scored the full point.

Bd. 3 a Benko broke out between Milat and Adamson, a topical line with 10 Rb1 followed. For some reason Black put h6 and g5 in which afforded White a ready made idea. Marcel did his best to create an accident on the g or h files, but was unable and with both sides low on time a draw was agreed.

Bd. 4 Sinanan played the Nimzo, Mateer replied with 4. Qc2 00 5. e4. This has become a popular line, which I don't know the theory of. Josh created a really good chance based on play down the h1-a8 diagonal, but missed what I think was an excellent chance at move 20 where I thought 20...e3 was quite strong. Slowly White crawled out of trouble, offered a draw which was refused in order to play on and then Josh's boat just went over.

In a way this was a perfect storm. With Black the Sluggers were not prepared at all and got caught out for it, both blacks were way behind on time in the early opening phases. Combined with Naka's worst performance of the season, with all due credit to Ramirez, and Seattle just didn't have any umph. This is very much like matches that they played last season where they were underdogs and just seemed to accept that status. Let's hope that isn't really the case.

Next up is Chicago, a team with surprising aspirations to get into the playoffs. We know they will be coming to play, so lets hope the Sluggers do as well.

ttyl and have a nice day

19 comments:

Anonymous said...

Wasn't Chicago already eliminated from the playoffs??

HA81 said...

Yes they were. My memory failed me again as I forgot that Miami would need to lose twice.

Anonymous said...

wow, Sinanan sucks losing to a class A player and a chick as well.

Anonymous said...

Seattle should be ashamed to have whoever posted that last comment as a fan. First, Mateer is not an A-class player; although the supplement being used for this USCL match had her below 2000, she is currently an expert and has been rated as high as 2045. Second, she has beaten and drawn more than one IM--players much stronger than Sinanan. Third, "a chick as well"?? Are you honestly that ignorant? There are tons of very strong American female chess players, not to mention international phenoms like J. Polgar (made GM at age 15), K. Humpy (GM at age 15), and Hou Yifan (GM at age 14). I sincerely hope the Sluggers do not share the sentiments of this fan.

EJ said...

I believe it was on this site earlier in the year I commented on how nice it is to have Nakamura with the Black pieces on your team.

At worse you feel like you're going to get a draw on board 1 which leaves you playing best of 3 on the lower boards (and with the white pieces on 2 of those!).

Unfortunately when gets a draw with the white pieces, it has the opposite effect on the lower boards.

It was a much closer match than the 3-1 score would indicate.

EJ said...

I don't think Anon 7:12 is representative of the Seattle fan-base. The poster knew what he was saying is shameful and that was the reason he hid behind the anonymity.

Quite sad.

HA81 said...

The two things that I was hoping to come through in the post were that Seattle didn't appear ready to play and that it was a perfect cross of things happening. Checking the time used it was pretty apparent that Josh and Slava were caught unprepared and suffered because of it. I am not trying to single either or both of them out because the Sluggers have gotten this far mainly on their efforts. Both Josh and Slava have won or saved games this season that were critical in matches. So, for either of them to have an off match is ok, for both of them to have it at the same time is pretty harsh. I am thinking about a pre round 10 post with what my thoughts about the regular season, possibly including more than just the Sluggers and that would have some stuff about this topic. Second, the Scorps had a plan that involved drawing on board 1, Ramirez played well and pulled that off. Without that Naka likely wins, Josh takes a draw and the match is a tie. Again, sort of a perfect storm. One final point here; I would never criticize Josh for turning down a draw, he was trying to save the match. I hope that some of the AZ folks are reading this because I am a bit steamed over it. IM Ginsburg on ICC made the comment "she should make him pay for turning down the draw". Uh, team match? Losing 3-1 is pretty much like losing 2.5 - 1.5? Josh pulled up his socks and took one for the team. I congratulate Josh and the rest of the team for playing as hard as they have this season and to make such a demeaning comment is frankly very disappointing.
I agree with EJ that comment was meant to be inflammatory, probably made by a fan of an eastern division team. I am the one who is supposed to wrankle people and I don't like somebody trying to steal my business.
Ok, that is all for now. have a nice day

Anonymous said...

For all the macho talk coming out of Nakas mouth about how great Seattle is , its a pleasant sight to see Seattle getting slapped by an average team. Sinanan, is too good a player to be losing to a 1990 rated chick. Funniest comment, "She was rated as high as 2045" ,someone said hahahaaaaaaaaaa. Thats a 300 point upset if I am not mistaken.

Anonymous said...

I was surprised that Milat took the draw. Is it certain that he didn't have any chances to make something happen versus Adamson?

Mark said...

I wrote,

"When all was said and done, we had won the match 3-1! Quite an upset! And nobody was happier than Amanda Mateer, who found a nice Bd6! move to finish her game! To his credit, her opponent NM Sinanan refused a draw in a drawn position (forced repetition) to battle on for his team a piece down."

But when he refused a draw a draw was really the only way to go (look at the board at the moment of the draw offer which occured during the forced knight perpetual check and check my conclusion). These half points matter in the USCL tiebreak schemes.

Another point: Ramirez missed serious winning chances at the very end, which is a quiz position you can try (click on the above link).

HA81 said...

Mark, the comment I refer to you made in game 16 on ICC live. I want to be completely clear here, this is entirely my own feeling and opinion. Making such a comment as "she should make him pay for turning down the draw" is uncalled for and poor judgement. To your own team or fans such a comment has been made by all of us, I would imagine, but on a public forum such as ICC you fail to express any reason Josh would play on and offer nothing but disrespect to Josh and the Sluggers as a team. Perhaps it would have been "wiser" for Josh to accept and move on, but if roles had been reversed and I announce on a public forum that your player "should be made to pay" how would you react? I said it after the previous match with Arizona, things that happen over the board are beyond my domain, but I will not sit passively by while someone from another team takes a shot at one of the Sluggers.
At this point I am done and will leave you to the final word if you wish. Hope the weather has improved down there and have a nice day

Anonymous said...

Taking ICC comments seriously is never advisable. The comment is quite innocent and I doubt Josh considered it insulting either

IlyaKrasik said...

You have to be a complete moron to take ICC kibitz seriously,and demand those who made them realize how upset they have made you. I would probably have shot myself long ago if I did that. ICC is a crazy and fun place, get used to it buddy and loosen up a bit.

schen said...

Yes, chess is a gentlemen's game but the quality of todays players have deteriorated. The comments of these mere NMs explains why chess will never be popular in America. The real intelligent people stay away from it. Sad.

HA81 said...

Wow, this just keeps getting better. Where to begin, oh yeah that's right. As I remember Ilya was of the opinion that "only 5 to 10 people" read my stuff and not any of the players, then I suggested that he not read this blog. He must have been in some kind of haze to accidentally fall back onto my material. Or perhaps it has to do with Mark's reply? Yes, Mark has two letters next to his name , IM , and it must be like pixie dust to Ilya to get into a thread with an "IM"! Congrats dude, you did it. One thing Ilya, we aren't buddies and please do not suggest that we are. Also, does this mean that there are now 11 readers? Very Curious.

Ilya said...

You are an idiot of tou don't realize that I am the only reason you have more than 2-3 comments on your blog. I just can't believe that you take buddy comment seriously, at least he has I'm next to his name what do you have next to yours ?

schen said...

Be civil !
rest assured that this blog is read by many as is ICC so please post your comments with discrete.

Mark said...

I don't know what HA81 is talking about. The comment was based on the position at the moment of the knight perpetual. I would make the same comment if looking at a game between any two players of any two teams. Observe the position at the moment of the knight perpetual for yourself and judge.

Refer to the prior comment - every half point matters in the USCL tiebreaking scheme. 1-3 is not the same as 1.5 - 2.5 In fact the USCL tiebreaking scheme is very severe and gives higher seeds draw odds in playoff matches.

Anyway, more astounding to me than this game was the premature termination of Board 3's game with our guy in severe time trouble.

Anonymous said...

Whats your rating HA81 anyway? And I mean a chess rating, not a rating in blog ranting? Why does an eminent IM Ginsburg even bother responding to some guy who for all we know doesnt even know how a horsie moves.