Greetings players and fellow patzers 🙂

Only 1 week after my appalling 1/5 result in the Manchester Under165, I played an Under170.
My goal is to be a top contender at this level within a year.
I would also like a rating above 160... so better results are needed!

Time controls were 1hr 50 mins + 10secs gained per move.
I noticed last weekend that I was moving too quickly, which contributed to my mistakes.

So, take your time, sit on your hands, look for threats, look for weaknesses...
Check all checks!

-------------------


Game 1 - Zak Tomlinson (149) vs John Wareing (166)

John is the third seed in this strong tournament.
I was determined to start well and shake off the poor form shown in Manchester.

I also hoped to end my streak of 1st round defeats (3 out of the last 4 tournaments)
Will I manage?

Game 2 - Richard Desmedt (141) vs Zak Tomlinson (149)

I play an old friend in round 2.
Richard plays in the same local league as me, where I have faced him a couple times.
This was actually our 4th encounter OTB.
Up to now, he has one win with two draws.

A funny prelude to this game, me and Richard had actually had a brief conversation about lines in the King's Gambit,
shortly before the round 2 pairings were done.

Then I see he has White against me, where he played 1.e4
I usually play 1...e5 but on this occasion opted for something else, surprising everyone.

Game 3 - Zak Tomlinson (149) vs Martin Worrall (148)

On Sunday morning I was scheduled to play the only unrated player in the section.
His name was down as T. Kirwan... I had planned to ask him what the "T" stood for.
But he never showed up... I guess we can call him Tardy.

So I played Martin instead, who was originally down to have a full-point bye.

Usually, I would also have received a full point after my opponent's no show.
However, myself and Martin are in the same section, so we got re-paired and the game counts.

Game 4 - Martin Burns (163) vs Zak Tomlinson (149)

"It's him! That guy from the Minor!"

Martin is part of this group of players from Lancashire that I see everywhere.
They are all good players and regularly win prizes between them in Major sections.

I fancied showing them that I wasn't just "that shark from the shallow pool".

Game 5 - Zak Tomlinson (149) vs Tim Hilton (169)

Another member of the Lancashire group, Tim was the top seed in the section.
The night before, I did some research on his games with Black.

I found he mostly plays the French, so I looked at a couple sharp 3.Nc3 variations:
1 - The Winawer (1 e4 e6 2 d4 d5 3 Nc3 Bb4 4 e5 c5 5 a3 Bxc3+ 6 bxc3)



2 - The Alekhine-Chatard Attack (1. e4 e6 2. d4 d5 3. Nc3 Nf6 4. Bg5 Be7 5. e5 Nfd7 6. h4)



I played through a bunch of GM games in both of these lines to get a good feel for them.
Eventually I was convinced and ready to give them a whirl.

The problem is... my opponent did his research, too!

Game 6 - David Patrick (161) vs Zak Tomlinson (149)

Due to Manchester's poor showing, I had set myself a lofty goal of scoring at least 4.5/6.
This was now unreachable, but still a win would bring a satisfactory finish.

Dave has consistently been rated around the high 150's or 160's for the last 10 years.

Let's see how the tournament concluded.

@64squaresofpain
Am I right about conversion to USCF talk, your 149 is about 1892 USCF? The conversion says ECF times 8 plus 700. Does that sound about right? and the 166 clocks in as expert, 2090 or so?

Wow you really drew all the strong players in this one! Three 160's in an u170 tournie, that's a tough run!

I love these tournament reports. It's so great to see moves and thoughts that I can hope to understand. Great performance in this tournament!

@sonhouse

I've also seen that formula used before, yes. A similar formula is used for FIDE conversions too.

@Marinkatomb

FOUR 160+ players! It really was a tough one, I'm just happy to finish above 50%.

@byedidia

Thanks! 🙂

@64squaresofpain
What is a 2700 player in your system? FIDE or USCF.

@sonhouse
To be honest ECF grades for IMs and above aren't particularly relevant - FIDE rating seems to be much more accurate for those players.

Having said that, in my experience some grandmasters might fall below 230 ECF, but generally you'd expect them to be 240+. The very strongest English players (Adams, Howell) might get a little above 270 and the best foreigners (Caruana, Kramnik) perhaps 285. I don't think I've ever seen an ECF grade above 290.

The highest graded player I ever played was Jon Speciman, who was, if I recall correctly, graded about 250 when he duffed me up 25 odd years ago.

I believe the formula used for ECF grades is such that if two players have a grading difference of 40 (and if the difference is greater than 40 then 40 is used), then the higher graded player should outscore the lower one 9-1 if the two were to play a ten game match.