1. Subscriber64squaresofpain
    The drunk knight
    Stuck on g1
    Joined
    02 Sep '12
    Moves
    59186
    01 Sep '19 17:07
    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?



    Once again, I'll share the "Accuracy Score" for each game.

    Zak Tomlinson
    Inaccuracies - 5
    Mistakes - 0
    Blunders - 1
    Average centipawn loss - 28

    John Wareing
    Inaccuracies - 1
    Mistakes - 0
    Blunders - 0
    Average centipawn loss - 14
  2. Subscriber64squaresofpain
    The drunk knight
    Stuck on g1
    Joined
    02 Sep '12
    Moves
    59186
    01 Sep '19 17:12
    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.



    Richard Desmedt
    Inaccuracies - 5
    Mistakes - 0
    Blunders - 1
    Average centipawn loss - 37

    Zak Tomlinson
    Inaccuracies - 1
    Mistakes - 1
    Blunders - 0
    Average centipawn loss - 17
  3. Subscriber64squaresofpain
    The drunk knight
    Stuck on g1
    Joined
    02 Sep '12
    Moves
    59186
    01 Sep '19 17:15
    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.



    Not a high quality game, but in our defense, we each started with 20 mins less on the clock.

    Zak Tomlinson
    Inaccuracies - 5
    Mistakes - 2
    Blunders - 1
    Average centipawn loss - 40

    Martin Worrall
    Inaccuracies - 7
    Mistakes - 1
    Blunders - 3
    Average centipawn loss - 64
  4. Subscriber64squaresofpain
    The drunk knight
    Stuck on g1
    Joined
    02 Sep '12
    Moves
    59186
    01 Sep '19 17:19
    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".



    I was surprised by these accuracy scores, I'd have given White at least one inaccuracy.

    Martin Burns
    Inaccuracies - 0
    Mistakes - 0
    Blunders - 0
    Average centipawn loss - 11

    Zak Tomlinson
    Inaccuracies - 1
    Mistakes - 1
    Blunders - 0
    Average centipawn loss - 12
  5. Subscriber64squaresofpain
    The drunk knight
    Stuck on g1
    Joined
    02 Sep '12
    Moves
    59186
    01 Sep '19 17:25
    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!



    Zak Tomlinson
    Inaccuracies - 2
    Mistakes - 2
    Blunders - 2
    Average centipawn loss - 59

    Tim Hilton
    Inaccuracies - 3
    Mistakes - 0
    Blunders - 2
    Average centipawn loss - 36
  6. Subscriber64squaresofpain
    The drunk knight
    Stuck on g1
    Joined
    02 Sep '12
    Moves
    59186
    01 Sep '19 17:27
    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.



    David Patrick
    Inaccuracies - 11
    Mistakes - 1
    Blunders - 1
    Average centipawn loss - 38

    Zak Tomlinson
    Inaccuracies - 3
    Mistakes - 1
    Blunders - 0
    Average centipawn loss - 19

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

    A finish on 3.5/6 isn't so bad, considering my opponent average rating was 158.
    My TPR was 167.

    Here's the cross-table for those interested:
    http://chess-results.com/tnr466283.aspx?lan=1&art=4

    I shared the U150 grading prize with two other players, we got £17 each 🙂

    As always, I hope you got something out of this, it certainly helps me along the way.
    All criticisms welcomed!

    Cheers,
    Zak
  7. Subscribersonhouse
    Fast and Curious
    slatington, pa, usa
    Joined
    28 Dec '04
    Moves
    53223
    02 Sep '19 01:09
    @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?
  8. Standard memberMarinkatomb
    wotagr8game
    tbc
    Joined
    18 Feb '04
    Moves
    61941
    02 Sep '19 12:22
    Wow you really drew all the strong players in this one! Three 160's in an u170 tournie, that's a tough run!
  9. Standard memberbyedidia
    Mister Why
    San Carlos, CA
    Joined
    21 Feb '12
    Moves
    6039
    02 Sep '19 18:43
    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!
  10. Subscriber64squaresofpain
    The drunk knight
    Stuck on g1
    Joined
    02 Sep '12
    Moves
    59186
    02 Sep '19 21:38
    @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! 🙂
  11. Subscribersonhouse
    Fast and Curious
    slatington, pa, usa
    Joined
    28 Dec '04
    Moves
    53223
    02 Sep '19 22:35
    @64squaresofpain
    What is a 2700 player in your system? FIDE or USCF.
  12. Joined
    09 Jul '16
    Moves
    0
    03 Sep '19 22:37
    @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.
Back to Top

Cookies help us deliver our Services. By using our Services or clicking I agree, you agree to our use of cookies. Learn More.I Agree