Please turn on javascript in your browser to play chess.
Only Chess Forum

Only Chess Forum

  1. 11 Aug '12 22:21 / 2 edits
    Playing a strong GM (2500+) in a simul tomorrow. Not worried about 1.e4 but against 1.d4 should I go for the solid slav or a tricky kid, or show some proper balls and try for a benoni or nimzo (if I get the chance)..

    Any thoughts appreciated.
  2. 11 Aug '12 23:33 / 2 edits
    Ray Keene is obviously not as strong as he once was, but he's still good enough to beat most club players easily as he is very good at punishing positional inaccuracies.

    The trouble with playing something like the Slav is that if the game goes on a long time then you may well find that you are one of only a few boards left and he will able to commit much more time and energy to your board.

    Personally I would go for a King's Indian and hope that he plays passively or carelessly early on.

    One other tip - try to play on the board next to a strong player (e.g. Mark Littleton, if he's playing) as Keene may be thinking of the move he is about to play on their board (or the move he's just played) and so may be more likely to miss something on yours.

    Just checked the games of R. D. Kobe on chessgames.com and it looks like he might sometimes play the Trompovsky in simuls:
    http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=1555016
    Make sure you have a backup plan in case he does this against you.
  3. 12 Aug '12 06:48
    I would just enjoy the game and play like you normally do against OTB opponents. What is the point of trying some trick line against the GM unless you are trying to learn something/build your game up?

    Good luck though!
  4. 13 Aug '12 21:03 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by plopzilla
    Playing a strong GM (2500+) in a simul tomorrow. Not worried about 1.e4 but against 1.d4 should I go for the solid slav or a tricky kid, or show some proper balls and try for a benoni or nimzo (if I get the chance)..

    Any thoughts appreciated.
    On a pedantic note, I think that a 'strong GM' refers to a GM who's rated at least
    about 2600 FIDE, not 2500 FIDE. If I recall correctly, 2500 FIDE is the minimum
    rating required, in addition to GM norms, to earn a GM title in the first place.

    If I were in your place, I would play something in my normal opening repertoire.
    If the GM finds a weakness in your opening and therefore wins the game, then
    you will have learned something useful.

    My first game against a GM (who had won the Hastings premier tournament)
    was in a simul of 15 players. Unfortunately, I had a moderate cold, yet I did
    not wish to miss the opportunity of playing with the GM. Fortunately for me,
    the GM played an opening variation that I recently had studied. He sacrificed
    one pawn (which I accepted) in order to attack and offered another pawn (which
    I declined) to strengthen his attack. I defended accurately enough for about
    ten moves, and his initiative ran out of steam. Given that he would have to
    defend a pawn down endgame against me, the GM (unhappily) offered a draw.
    If I had been feeling better, I would have liked to explore my winning chances
    in the endgame, but I was feeling tired and so I accepted the draw. Unfortunately,
    then the GM made a disparaging remark toward me. I told him that in my
    previous game in a simul, I had won against a FIDE 2400+ player, so, while
    acknowledging that the GM was a much stronger player, I was not astonished
    that I could draw a game against him.
  5. 13 Aug '12 21:56
    I've played only one game against a GM (John Federowicz) in a simul, and I managed to get a draw! Also drew IM Jon Schroer in a simul. Unfortunately, my one encounter with an IM OTB didn't end so well...
  6. Standard member TimmyBx
    TacticsTime.com
    13 Aug '12 22:27
    I would get out of "theory" as soon as possible. Otherwise the GM doesn't have to "think". It is the same idea as when GMs play against computers. Don't let them use their "opening book".

    I drew GM Alex Fishbein last year in a simul with the Budapest (1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 e5?!), and a couple years ago my buddy Francisco (AKA Zonagrad on RHP) beat 6 time US champ Walter Browne in 15 moves with the Fishing Pole (1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5 Nf6 4. 0-0 Ng4?!)
  7. Standard member ChessPraxis
    Cowboy From Hell
    14 Aug '12 00:09
    Originally posted by TimmyBx
    I would get out of "theory" as soon as possible. Otherwise the GM doesn't have to "think". It is the same idea as when GMs play against computers. Don't let them use their "opening book".

    I drew GM Alex Fishbein last year in a simul with the Budapest (1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 e5?!), and a couple years ago my buddy Francisco (AKA Zonagrad on RHP) beat 6 time US ...[text shortened]... r Browne in 15 moves with the Fishing Pole (1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5 Nf6 4. 0-0 Ng4?!)
    Alex is a great player and one of the nicest people I've ever met. Congrats Timmy.
  8. 14 Aug '12 08:00
    Originally posted by TimmyBx
    I would get out of "theory" as soon as possible. Otherwise the GM doesn't have to "think". It is the same idea as when GMs play against computers. Don't let them use their "opening book".
    On the other hand: the GM is probably far better at 'thinking' than you are yourself. So I'm not sure that really helps...
  9. 14 Aug '12 11:39 / 2 edits


    This was the position (keene is white).

    There were only 3 of us left and moves were coming thick and fast. He played Kf1 and I almost instantly replied with the natural looking Raf1 but Be3! wins easily.



    Totally gutted..

    I then proceeded to blunder a possibly drawish endgame away.
  10. Standard member hedonist
    peacedog's keeper
    14 Aug '12 16:50
    Originally posted by plopzilla
    [fen]r5k1/6p1/1p3r1p/p1b5/8/P5B1/1P1R1PPP/2R3K1 w - - 0 1[/fen]

    This was the position (keene is white).

    There were only 3 of us left and moves were coming thick and fast. He played Kf1 and I almost instantly replied with the natural looking Raf1 but Be3! wins easily.

    [fen]r5k1/6p1/1p3r1p/p7/8/P3b1B1/1P1R1PPP/2R2K2 b - - 1 1[/fen]

    Totally gutted..

    I then proceeded to blunder a possibly drawish endgame away.
    Thats an easy move to miss( even the GM missed it!).

    The painful thing about chess is that you will never forget that bit of tactics, and be looking for it in every single game from now on. You probably will never find it.

    Chess is hard.
  11. 14 Aug '12 17:05 / 1 edit
    The trouble with simuls is that they start off very slowly - you might be playing one move every three moves, which is excruciatingly slow if you know the opening well, and then towards the end you're expected to play faster and faster, just at the point where you want to slow down and try to work out what's happening.

    It's not at all unusual for the simul-giver to win drawn positions and draw lost positions towards the end of the session, probably more because his opponents are under pressure to move faster rather than the simul-giver having fewer boards to concentrate on.

    I've given a few simuls in my time and the worst by far are "clock simuls" - it's amazing how quickly 30 minutes passes when you're trying to play ten people at once!

    Anyway plopzilla, showing the critical position is all well and good, but I want to see the whole game!
  12. 15 Aug '12 18:43
    Originally posted by plopzilla
    [fen]r5k1/6p1/1p3r1p/p1b5/8/P5B1/1P1R1PPP/2R3K1 w - - 0 1[/fen]

    This was the position (keene is white).

    There were only 3 of us left and moves were coming thick and fast. He played Kf1 and I almost instantly replied with the natural looking Raf1 but Be3! wins easily.

    [fen]r5k1/6p1/1p3r1p/p7/8/P3b1B1/1P1R1PPP/2R2K2 b - - 1 1[/fen]

    Totally gutted..

    I then proceeded to blunder a possibly drawish endgame away.
    "I almost instantly replied with the natural looking Raf1 but Be3! wins easily."
    --plopzilla

    'Raf1' would be an illegal move for Black; you meant Raf8 instead.

    But would Be3 win as 'easily' as you assume? White would have an extra pawn
    as partial compensation for his loss of the exchange. Are you (over)confident
    that you could win *easily* against GM Raymond Keene, who's presumably a
    much stronger endgame player? Given that you say that you blundered in the
    actual game and lost it, why do you seem to expect that you could not have
    blundered in your alternative-reality game and therefore not have won it?
  13. Standard member RJHinds
    The Near Genius
    16 Aug '12 05:30
    Originally posted by plopzilla
    Playing a strong GM (2500+) in a simul tomorrow. Not worried about 1.e4 but against 1.d4 should I go for the solid slav or a tricky kid, or show some proper balls and try for a benoni or nimzo (if I get the chance)..

    Any thoughts appreciated.
    I played in some simuls back in the late 60's and 70's and felt rushed to move every time because they moved like they were playing speed chess and came around too fast for me. I only played against one GM and that was Larry Evans. The only thing I learned is that I should not be playing simuls against Grandmasters.
  14. 16 Aug '12 19:49
    Originally posted by Duchess64
    "I almost instantly replied with the natural looking Raf1 but Be3! wins easily."
    --plopzilla

    'Raf1' would be an illegal move for Black; you meant Raf8 instead.

    But would Be3 win as 'easily' as you assume? White would have an extra pawn
    as partial compensation for his loss of the exchange. Are you (over)confident
    that you could win *easily* agai ...[text shortened]... could not have
    blundered in your alternative-reality game and therefore not have won it?
    You only confirm what complete and utter clueless patzer you are by nit-picking at every thread. No one cares about your pedantic details and you obviously are not normal to have so much time on your hands to research such drival. So why don't you just jog on back to bunglerville.
  15. 16 Aug '12 21:04 / 3 edits
    Originally posted by plopzilla
    You only confirm what complete and utter clueless patzer you are by nit-picking at every thread. No one cares about your pedantic details and you obviously are not normal to have so much time on your hands to research such drival. So why don't you just jog on back to bunglerville.
    First of all, it's obvious to me (I needed no time 'to research it' that 'Raf1' as
    written by Plopzilla was an illegal move. Yes, I know that anyone can make a
    mistake, and Plopzilla has taken it as a much more serious criticism than I had
    intended. That said, I note that Plopzilla arrogantly seems to regard keeping
    an accurate record of his moves as a mere 'pedantic detail'.

    I also note with disdain that Plopzilla has completely ignored my questioning
    (I was attempting to get him to examine the position more objectively rather
    than to make into a personal confrontation, which now Plopzilla has made it.)
    his arrogant assertion that he would have won 'easily' (his term) a hypothetical
    endgame against GM Raymond Keene. That endgame (with GM Keene having
    an extra pawn as partial compensation for having lost the exchange) could be
    winning for Black, but Plopzilla seems determined to ignore the reality that
    GM Keene's a much stronger player in the endgame.

    Plopzilla is not the first weaker player to ignore the factual substance of what
    I write and to respond by making an abusive personal attack against me.
    If Plopzilla were less of an arrogant ****, he might 'think' better of calling me,
    who's now rated 277 points higher (2089 > 1812) than he at RHP, a 'complete
    and utter clueless patzer'. An IM (who was then rated FIDE 2500) did not call me
    so after he lost to me (he seemed far too overconfident) in a one-on-one game.
    Plopzilla warrants no response beyond absolute disdain.

    And why has Plopzilla not yet replied to Fat Lady and posted his complete game
    against GM Raymond Keene? Was there something embarrassing about it?