Mon, 17 Jun 2013 23:19:18 -0600WeeblyTue, 06 Mar 2012 21:52:12 GMThttp://www.springfieldparkboardchessclub.com/1/post/2012/03/i-like-the-moment-when-i-break-a-mans-ego-fischer.htmlWe are in the midst of the club's annual chess tournament to determine the 2012 champion.  The player who earns that title is not necessarily the best player in the area, but he or she is the best player in the tournament. But like any sport, sometimes the "best" player is also the luckiest player.  In this year's tournament, for instance, one game saw an illegal move made, but neither player saw that the piece was placed on the wrong square.  Per the rules of chess, if neither player "sees" this move within two moves of play or ten moves of play, then the move stands and play continues.  It isn't necessarily the case in this game that the outcome was determined by this illegal move, but, of course the entire course of the game would have been altered.  The player who made the illegal move also happened to be the player who won the game.  Thus, "luck" played a part in who won or lost that game.  In another game, a draw was envitable as both players had blocked pawns and opposite colour bishops and in this case one player offered a draw and the other player continued to play because there were two pawns both protected by the bishops but on separate files. The hope had to be that his opponent would make a fatal error and a fatal error is just what happened.  The player that lost, moved his bishop to the only square that would lose the game and as his hand hovered over the piece realized this would lose the game and immediately moved it to another square.  The other player claimed the move was final as he believed the hand had come off the piece.  The player that moved the piece acquiesced and went on to lose the game.  Luck? or sophisticated cunning--who knows?  And finally, so far, anyway, another game was declared a draw by another via three-move repetition.  During play that was denied and it was later discoverd that in fact there was a three-move repetition.  The error being found and acknowledge by the winning player.  This isn't luck, but rather a display of sportsmanship.  So, why did I use a quote from Fischer to discuss "luck" and "sportsmanship", because the players at our club and in our tournament are not Fischers, but perhaps some play to "break a man's ego".  I don't know, but I do know I do not play to break anyone's ego, though I would be the first to admit winning and losing affects my ego and it is an ugly thing to see (if you are unfortunate to have to view it) and feel (if you happen to lose for whatever reason it can affect you for days after) and (if you happen to win--that, too, affects you but creates an arrogance and self-worth that is not justified).  For Fischer and others like him, chess is their life and it provides them meaning and dignity.  For others, chess is a recreation to get away from the anxieties of the world and the funny thing is, the game ends up creating anxieties all of its own making. ]]>Wed, 16 Nov 2011 18:44:05 GMThttp://www.springfieldparkboardchessclub.com/1/post/2011/11/reshevsky.htmlThis month Chess Life published a wonderful article on Sammy Reshevsky. Becoming aware of chess in the early 1970's and all eyes focused on Fischer, I did not discover the power of Reshevsky until recently.  Of course, in my youth the chess bible was IA Horowitz's "Chess Openings: Theory and Practice" and I was unaware of Reshevsky or Rueben Fine or any of what essentially made up American Chess. And while the major intent of this website is dedicated to the historical existence of the Chess Club in Springfield, it is also dedicated to the historical context that lead up to the formation of the Club and those who played an intregal part in its founding. 

 With that said, I would like to make a brief comment on the Chess Life article or at least a comment about the incident that lead to Reshevsky claiming the US Championship in 1942.  Apparently, in a game against Arnold Denker in round six, Reshevsky's time had expired but the referee some how turned the clock in the wrong direction and declared a time forfeit on Denker.  Amongst protests and the like the decision stood.  Quoting Chess Life, "Reshevsky remained notably aloof from the debate. 'Sammy took what he could get,' as Arthur Bisguier told me."

It is this "aloofness" that somewhat disturbs me.  Of course, this was/is high level chess on a level most of us will never experience so it is hard to say how we would have behaved under the circumstances.  If Reshevsky had lost this game then our 1942 champion most likely would have been Isaac Kashdan as there would not have been a tie for first and there would not have been a playoff between Kashdan and Reshevsky.  But why did Reshevsky remain aloof?  Surely Reshevsky knew his time had expired and it is not clear if Denker had made a claim of a win based on time as the article in Chess Life indicates that Stephens, the Tournament Director, grabbed the clock and turned it around so as to misread the faces.  And Bisguier's comment that Sammy took what he could get does not suggest a fondness for the man, but does suggest winning supercedes moral or ethical behavior.

The following link will take you to this game on Chessgames.com:
Reshevsky v Denker US Championship 1942 Round 6

]]>Mon, 10 Oct 2011 14:11:58 GMThttp://www.springfieldparkboardchessclub.com/1/post/2011/10/clarence-townsend-obituary.html
Clarence C. Townsend, age 72, of Springfield, was welcomed home to heaven, by his parents and Jesus on Monday, September 19, 2011. He was born January 21, 1939 in Lane Oklahoma, the sixth of eleven children of Argene and Ruby Juanita (Cason) Townsend. He served his country in the Army National Guard. He attended Okmulgee State Technical College and Electronics School in St. Louis. He retired as an accountant for O’Reilly Automotive. In 1955 Clarence was involved in an accident putting him in a wheelchair for the rest of his life, however his spirit for life endured. He wholeheartedly believed that everyone should live and enjoy life to the fullest. This is reflected in the legacy he has left behind for his family and friends. Clarence enjoyed basketball, tennis, chess club, traveling, and above all his family and friends. He was patient and kind, a rock to his family, and will be remembered and missed by each one. He was a member of Riverdale Baptist Church. Survivors include: Two sisters, Carolyn Sipes and husband Darryl, Billings, and Jimmie Lou Townsend, Springfield; a brother, Clinton Edge and wife Mae, Austin, Texas; three nieces Clarence loved as his own daughters, Ruby, Lisa and Amber; many other loving nieces and nephews, a host of other relatives and many friends. He was preceded in death by his parents, five sisters, Mary Jo, Maureen, Juanita, Evelyn, and Helen, and two brothers, Ralph and Edmond. A memorial service will be 2:00 PM Friday, September 23, at Riverdale Baptist Church with Pastor Jamie Bilyeu officiating. Burial will be in Glenn Cemetery. Arrangements are under the direction of Adams Funeral Home, Nixa.


Clarence is featured throughout the website and was a driving force for the success of the Springfield Park Board Chess Club for many years.  He served as treasurer for endless years and made the Chess Club ladder a major success for the club by calling every member every week for years which made members want to participate.  Clarence was also known as a "giant killer" with his many victories over much higher rated opponents throughout the years.   The above obit was sadly received by the club and is posted here in memoriam. ]]>Wed, 14 Sep 2011 15:11:59 GMThttp://www.springfieldparkboardchessclub.com/1/post/2011/09/st-louis-scholastic-center-and-chess-club.htmlThis past spring, due to my employer, I found myself in St Louis and having a Sunday off I was able to drive to 4657 Maryland Avenue St Louis, MO 63108 to visit this fabulous chess club.
The club for lack of a better word is world class and if you play 

chess or are interested in the game you owe it to yourself to visit this fantastic 
place or at least visit their website to get a feel for the facility.  And now across the 
street from the club is the Chess Museum.  Enough can not be said for the 
contribution of Rex Sinquefield and his wife Jeanne for not only chess in the St Louis
area but for chess in American and the world.  Thank you.  ]]>Sat, 12 Feb 2011 23:46:40 GMThttp://www.springfieldparkboardchessclub.com/1/post/2011/02/ad-hominem.htmlThe title of this blog is from Latin:  translation, "to the man".  In logic, a branch of Philosophy,  it is generally related to a fallacious attempt to attack an argument someone is making by attacking the person making the argument, not the argument itself.  The expression usually refers to a personal attack or a personal abuse of a person in the way of insults or belittlement. One would think an ad hominem  would have no place in chess, but unfortunately, we see it all too often.  We especially see it in Missouri chess for some reason.  Most chess websites, unless they are highly professional,  seem to dedicate themselves to either explaining a personal attack or publish attacks on others. Perhaps chess creates an over inflated sense of ego in those who play the game and somehow if you play this game your views on the world supercede everyone elses, who knows?
 
 In the late 1970's thru the 1990's, it was done through mailings (which I received all too frequently) and I assume the person making the mailings got names and addresses from chess membership lists.  These mailings usually attacked one particular person for things not related to chess, but the intent as far as I could discern was to get the person out of the chess community.  It also appears, that politics have a lot to do with these attacks in that one person or group of people think the people in "chess power" have too much power.  We see this not only in Missouri chess, but on the national scene as well.  I vowed this site would not be a party to such bickerings, no exceptions, and thus the reason for this blog, and the hope is, that if this is read, other sites will remove such commentary.  I feel it is harmful to the promotion of chess and the community at large. I do not have any pretenses:  I know these chess websites are not viewed by that many people. But the few that do read them,  see an ugliness that is not the beauty of the game.  It seems when the stakes are low, people want  power; afterall, we are talking about chess here and we all know how much money and influence are up for grabs in the most lucrative world of chess, particularly at the local level!  Let the game speak for itself and let's remove the behind the scenes personal vendettas from our chess websites. If and when an unpleasantness rears its head, the game and its culture demand an appropriate response, but not one of a personal nature.
]]>Mon, 20 Dec 2010 22:10:17 GMThttp://www.springfieldparkboardchessclub.com/1/post/2010/12/fischers-60-memorable-games.htmlBelow see the dust jacket first edition of Fischer's 60 Memorable Games printed 1969.  Thanks goes to Mark Trevor Smith, the original owner, and Will Starnes, for passing the edition onto me.  I will cherish the book and while it does not offer anything in the way of chess knowledge that we cannot get from the newer edition (I have that, too, with algebraic notation) it does represent why this chess club was founded and what people hoped to get out of the game.  While I do not know all that many people I would call accomplished chess players (unless you've reached some sort of titled status) there is nonetheless a plethura of people who think they are accomplished. So, if nothing else, read and go over 4 or 5 of the games and ask yourself:  could I have come up with such splendid plans, defenses and attacks against the world elite?  If not, perhaps it is time to be humble, sit back and enjoy the game, your opponent and dream of one day understanding the game and all its complexities.


In the next few days I will add a game or two from this publication and you can view them here or in the Games section.  Please check back for the selected games.

]]>Mon, 06 Dec 2010 16:19:34 GMThttp://www.springfieldparkboardchessclub.com/1/post/2010/12/chess-in-schools-scholastic-chess.htmlThe links below take you to chess happenings in the schools and the efforts being made to promulgate chess not only as a game but a game that has benefits far beyond the game itself.


America's Foundation for Chess
Teacher's Guide: Research and Benefits of Chess

Additional links and information regarding Scholastic or Youth Chess will be posted here and the Springfield Park Board Chess Club invites players of all ages to attend our Friday night meetings.  Chess is a game for all ages and our Club is open to anyone who wishes to learn and play chess.  The following is taken from an interview with Yasser Seirawan.

 Many beginning players get depressed when they are outgunned. How did you deal with early losses as you learned your stuff?

I never learned to deal with my losses. I hated to lose! At one point, I was certainly convinced that chess was not for me. This probably happened after 80 consecutive losses and I’m not exaggerating. I was really awful. At the time, as a 12 year old, it was just nice to be involved in an “adult” activity. I was getting a lot of attention from folks who were much older than me and I had an excuse to be in their presence.

Additionally, from the same interview:

Does chess have a future and, if so, what visionary insight can you share?

Chess has a great future. It is a marvelous tool of the mind that transfers skills such as reasoning, planning, strategic thinking, responsibility and discipline to everyday life. Chess players are more aware of when their brains are working and whether they are having productive mental storms or not. Chess players understand the need to invest their time to improve their game and when they don’t put in the required work their results will suffer. This is true for all things, whether building a house or a business. Planning is key. Things don’t just happen. An idea is conceived, nurtured and brought into being. Theory and practice go hand in glove. As teachers become more aware of how chess can positively impact the lives of children, chess will become an elective class for schools.


See full interview here:

Yasser Seirawan full interview




]]>Wed, 20 Oct 2010 15:19:57 GMThttp://www.springfieldparkboardchessclub.com/1/post/2010/10/2010-springfield-chess-open-5th-round-controversy.htmlIn the final round of the 2010 Springfield Park Board Open it appeared, as I was viewing the game, that Orgil Batsaikhan playing the white pieces clearly had a winning position against Ron Luther, playing the black pieces.  While I am no where near an expert at chess, Orgil had two Queens and a rook against Ron's Queen and Bishop in the latter part of the game and it appeared if Orgil checked on the 7th with his rook, mate would soon follow (at this time I do not have the game score, but the photo below is part of that game).  However, Orgil touched his second Queen near his King with the intent of checking on the 7th and then from what I observed Orgil saw that Ron's Queen guarded the checking square.  Per the rules of chess Orgil was now obligated to move his Queen.  Orgil's Queen was preventing a boxed in mate from Ron, and therefore, Orgil had but two squares to prevent mate, but either square, it appeared, then lead to perpetual check and Ron thus staved off losing.  It became clear from Orgil's reaction when Ron kept putting his bishop en prise while checking the white King that if he took the Bishop perpetual followed and not taking the Bishop leads to perpetual check as well.  Thus, as I observed personally, Orgil stood up and flip his hand across his King knocking it over without saying a word and then he left the room.  Ron stood up and said not to me but towards me and I paraphrase, "Is he resigning?"  I then said again paraphrasing, "No, I think he is just disgusted with himself for throwing away a win."  Ron then said something to the effect, "I don't know.  I think knocking over the King is resigning."


Nothing more was made of this game until it was time to award the prize money.  If Orgil had won, he would have shared first and second place money with a 4.5/5 score or a split of $800.  If he draws then he shares 2nd-3rd with 2 other players and Ron wins nothing.  If Ron draws then he shares 2nd-3rd with 2 other players.  Once Orgil realized his game was recorded as a loss he protested and it lasted for over 30 minutes at which time I had to leave the playing hall for another obligation.  I, of course, have nothing to do with the ruling or the outcome, nor was I needed for any consultation in what transpired.  Later, I learned Orgil continued his protest and even took it out into the parking lot.  He also made claim, while I was there, that how did the TD know whether or not he intentionally or accidently knocked over his King.  From what I witnessed, it was  not accidental.  His intent may have been something other than resignation but he said nothing and it appears he did not record the score with the TD as is required.  (see USCF rule: 15H "When a game is completed, the result must be immediately reported in the manner required by the  director.  Both players, not just the winner, are responsible for registering the result.")  Since Orgil did not make a fuss until it was time to make the rewards, I must assume he did not record the result. Though he may have and the result was reversed based on his action of knocking over the King and that appeared to be very intentional.  Thus, see USCF rule: 13B "The player whose opponent resigns wins the game.  This immediately ends the game.  Saying "I resign" or tipping over the King are relatively clear ways to resign."


While I feel for Orgil and given the position on the board it clearly looks as if Ron would continue to check as he has no winning chances, knocking over the King and walking away can only be interpreted as a resignation.  Ron, for instance, did not have to continue to check even though that appears to be his best course of action.  Orgil made an assumption without making clear  he was agreeing to a draw and he further complicated the matter by knocking over his King which is a sign of resignation, not one of agreeing to a draw.  Note, Ron had not repeated the position 3 times at the time Orgil walked away and tipped over his King.  So, while I viewed it as disgust on Orgil part, further reflection tells me all his actions are those of resignation.  Ron may not have continued to perpetually check, we can only guess he would have just as I guessed Orgil would have checked with his Rook on the 7th which lead to mate as I saw it, but instead he touched his Queen and then saw he could not safely check with the Queen and thus moved it to a square allowing the possibility of perpetual check.  He made a mistake and thus Ron, too, could have made a mistake.  Initially I thought Ron should have agreed it was a draw, but Orgil's lack of understanding the rules, his bad sportsmanship (not for his protest after, but rather his tipping the King and walking away without agreeing to the draw) and for not completing the game in essence all support the TD's decision, not that my opinion matters here.  Rather, I write this blog to remind us all that not only is chess competitive, it can be highly emotional and can get the best of us at times.  It is best we understand the rules, remain civil and learn from our mistake lest we repeat them again and again. 

]]>Thu, 01 Apr 2010 00:54:41 GMThttp://www.springfieldparkboardchessclub.com/1/post/2010/03/uscf-posts-additions-to-the-rules.htmlRecently I came across new rules added to the USCF website and are to be added to the Official Rules governing United States Chess. And, I would hope as members and officers of our Club we understand them to apply to our Club since we are a USCF Affiliate.

 Two rules that stood out to me are:  21E. The Playing Director.  Essentially this rule states that the TD must not only be absolutely objective, but he/she "should not direct and play in the same tournament."  Of course the USCF notes that club events are a different animal, but notes that even in a club event one should not direct and play if it involves substantial prizes.  Further, though, a "player/director" who must devote time to a dispute in another game may stop his or her own clock during this period.  It is pretty clear that the clock is only to be stopped when the "player" who is also a "director" can stop the clock, but only and only if he or she is devoting time to resolving a dispute in another game.  There must be a dispute in another game in the same tournament for the "player" to stop the clock when that "player" is acting as a "director".  There are no other times the clock should be stopped, unless, of course there is a dispute in the game the "player/TD" is involved in, but then there must be another person who acts as a TD to resolve that dispute.  In all my years of playing, and that is over 30 years, rated games are to be taken seriously and should seriously follow these rules as it concerns the clock.  It would seem to me if the clock is stopped for any other reason during a rated game, that game should be void as a rated game.  There is no rule to that effect and I am not purposing it, but rather I am expressing my opinion on the matter.  In other words, if you don't want to play by the rules, don't start a game that you want to be rated and make sure everyone involved in the game understands the seriousness of the game being played.

This brings us to a second point on tampering with clocks which is to be found on the USCF site under the Code of Ethics: Standards of Conduct 6b:  Cheating in a game of chess is illegal.....(and consists of) tampering with clocks.  This, of course, has a lot to do with purposely slowing or speeding up the clock to one player's advantage over the other, but also includes removing the clock from the playing area, stopping the clock when there is no dispute as Rule 21E points out and also applies to those who are only players in a rated game.  The clock is to "run" unless there is a formal dispute.  Stopping it once the game starts and the clock is punched signifying the start of the game, it is not to be stopped unless there is a formal dispute.  Keep this in mind the next time you want to play a rated game and don't take a rated game as a trivial matter. To those outside the chess world/culture this is a trivial matter, but to those who take the game very seriously and are concerned with its integrity, it is not a trivial matter. However, if you just want to play for fun and it does not involve rating the game, then have fun and play chess under the spirit of the game and good sportmanship and you need not worry about my rants as if you would anyway.

A final note, of course, this blog like the others are intended only as food for thought and does not reflect the viewpoints of every member of the Club or its officers.


]]>Mon, 08 Mar 2010 15:48:45 GMThttp://www.springfieldparkboardchessclub.com/1/post/2010/03/world-chess-champion.htmlThe world chess Championship lost much of its luster during the 1990's because of a dispute with governing bodies.  As in many sports when competing organizations try to gain control of a sport, chaos for the fan usually ensues.  And for those who do not follow a particular sport the stars of that sport fade from the public eye.  When Robert J. Fischer put chess in the spotlight for many in the United States, everyone, even those who did not play chess knew who he was or at least knew his name and still do mainly for his chess and hopefully, not for his political views. But now, how many people in the United States know or have even heard of Viswanathan Anand?  But, then, again, who knows who Vitali Klitschko is or what is his sport?  Or who is Cadel Evans and what is his sport?
 World Chess Champion History]]>