Sooner or later we all do it playing chess online: You are just about to complete an exchange of queens that is going to take you into a won endgame, you pick up the bishop to re-capture the queen on d4, and you release the mouse button a fraction of a second too soon. The piece ends up on c3 and the game is over for you! We had two incidents of this in Round 4. In this way John (@hodjon) very cunningly sidestepped Joe's (@SonicFalcon) opening preparation by playing 1.d3!! Despite the misstep and the persistent advantage that it gave Joe, John was able to make it into an endgame with drawing chances. The initiative however was with Joe both on the board, and more importantly perhaps, psychologically, and so the point went to SonicFalcon. The second case was of a queen hung in Orn (@stocknok) v Andrew (@perryand1971) though I am not sure of the circumstances. In that game Andrew offered a take-back on the move that he might have regretted as that game was lost in only fourteen moves.
There has been lot of debate over the years around mouse-click errors, take-backs and how to handle them. Despite being a victim on more than one occasion, I am of the view that they are something that we have to accept as part of the online game just as we all respect the 'touch-move' rule when playing over the board. It is possible to reduce both the chances of making these errors and to choose how take-back requests are managed by modifying your lichess preferences on this page: lichess.org/account/preferences/game-behavior Forcing yourself to click both start and end squares or requiring a confirmation of each move will pretty much eliminate the errors. Of course these options are not practical if you play at faster time controls or when you are in time pressure. Disallowing take-back requests, at least in rated games, means you won't need to wrestle with the moral dilemma of deciding whether to allow a take-back in the heat of battle.
The mouse-click errors seemed to set the tone for the evening as both David (@datasmith) v Patrick (@vger) and Denis (@denisbouchard) v Jacques (@jcss64) were decided by blunders. In the case of Denis and Jacques in a pretty heartbreaking way as the debate around how to break through in a almost completely closed position was very interesting until first Denis gave the game to Jacques (40.Qd6??) and then had the favour returned (41...Kg8??). Patrick was inspired by this generosity and offered David a free piece on move 17. Unfortunately for Patrick this writer's poor understanding of the need for reciprocity in social relations meant that he never returned the gift.
Codie (@clons87) and Daniel (@danieljames-dj) played a long game in which first Codie and then Daniel had a large advantage. W called it a night when the position had simplified and he found himself a full rook down without compensation. Pablo (@roflcopter) took on young Julian (@sausjulian) who never quite recovered from an error on move 15.
On the top board Ron (@BigData1969) and Jonathan (@jpmunz) split the point in a Closed Sicilian that was very precisely played on both sides. The game came down to a bishop ending in which the twelve pawns on the board reduced the mobility of the bishops but did not offer any useful breaks to either side. A moral victory for each player as Jonathan can still claim to be undefeated at classical time controls while Ron gets credit for ending Jonathan's perfect string of victories.
You have all been remarkably committed to this tournament and we have had fewer no-shows than I have ever seen. Sadly, last night Joaquin showed up for the beginning of the round but seems to have ghosted his opponent. Very unfortunate as the whole point of doing the pairings at the last minute is to avoid precisely this situation. Thanks for your patience with that Paul (@E3Engineer) and I promise you a game next week.
Next Thursday is the final round in what has turned out to be a very successful event. We will certainly plan others but as I mentioned in the chat last night, managing reminders, tournament announcements/reports etc becomes more complicated as the group grows. I have created a new lichess team called Online Classical News (lichess.org/team/online-classical-news) to make it easier for me to get news to you (and for you to avoid being spammed by me). I am hoping the name will help people find us when they look for classical chess on the platform. Please join the team if you want to receive news of classical chess events and tournaments in your lichess inbox. If you prefer to receive this information by email contact me at echecs.hemmingford.chess@gmail.com and I will put you on the list.
@jpmunz v @BigData1969 lichess.org/vfNylcC6
@nacraf18 v @E3Engineer FORFEIT nacraf18
@datasmith v @vger lichess.org/SRZJRQma
@denisbouchard v @jcss64 lichess.org/04YAsY18
@stocknok v @perryand1971 lichess.org/oX404LjR
@hodjon v @SonicFalcon lichess.org/UI9AVLUe
@clons87 v @danieljames-dj lichess.org/PbTBTisj
@roflcopter11 v @sausjulian lichess.org/gicOXg1I
Current standings:
3 1⁄2 @jpmunz (1929)
3 @E3Engineer (1953)
3 @datasmith (1753)
2 1⁄2 @bigdata1969 (1946)
2 1⁄2 @denisbouchard (1860)
2 1⁄2 @stocknok (1500?)
2 @vger (1911)
2 @sonicfalcon (1903)
2 @danieljames-dj (1845)
2 @jcss64 (1822)
2 @nacraf18 (1500?)
1 1⁄2 @perryand1971 (1724)
1 @roflcopter11 (1515)
1 @hodjon (1501)
1 @clons87 (1418)
1⁄2 @sausjulian (1438)
There has been lot of debate over the years around mouse-click errors, take-backs and how to handle them. Despite being a victim on more than one occasion, I am of the view that they are something that we have to accept as part of the online game just as we all respect the 'touch-move' rule when playing over the board. It is possible to reduce both the chances of making these errors and to choose how take-back requests are managed by modifying your lichess preferences on this page: lichess.org/account/preferences/game-behavior Forcing yourself to click both start and end squares or requiring a confirmation of each move will pretty much eliminate the errors. Of course these options are not practical if you play at faster time controls or when you are in time pressure. Disallowing take-back requests, at least in rated games, means you won't need to wrestle with the moral dilemma of deciding whether to allow a take-back in the heat of battle.
The mouse-click errors seemed to set the tone for the evening as both David (@datasmith) v Patrick (@vger) and Denis (@denisbouchard) v Jacques (@jcss64) were decided by blunders. In the case of Denis and Jacques in a pretty heartbreaking way as the debate around how to break through in a almost completely closed position was very interesting until first Denis gave the game to Jacques (40.Qd6??) and then had the favour returned (41...Kg8??). Patrick was inspired by this generosity and offered David a free piece on move 17. Unfortunately for Patrick this writer's poor understanding of the need for reciprocity in social relations meant that he never returned the gift.
Codie (@clons87) and Daniel (@danieljames-dj) played a long game in which first Codie and then Daniel had a large advantage. W called it a night when the position had simplified and he found himself a full rook down without compensation. Pablo (@roflcopter) took on young Julian (@sausjulian) who never quite recovered from an error on move 15.
On the top board Ron (@BigData1969) and Jonathan (@jpmunz) split the point in a Closed Sicilian that was very precisely played on both sides. The game came down to a bishop ending in which the twelve pawns on the board reduced the mobility of the bishops but did not offer any useful breaks to either side. A moral victory for each player as Jonathan can still claim to be undefeated at classical time controls while Ron gets credit for ending Jonathan's perfect string of victories.
You have all been remarkably committed to this tournament and we have had fewer no-shows than I have ever seen. Sadly, last night Joaquin showed up for the beginning of the round but seems to have ghosted his opponent. Very unfortunate as the whole point of doing the pairings at the last minute is to avoid precisely this situation. Thanks for your patience with that Paul (@E3Engineer) and I promise you a game next week.
Next Thursday is the final round in what has turned out to be a very successful event. We will certainly plan others but as I mentioned in the chat last night, managing reminders, tournament announcements/reports etc becomes more complicated as the group grows. I have created a new lichess team called Online Classical News (lichess.org/team/online-classical-news) to make it easier for me to get news to you (and for you to avoid being spammed by me). I am hoping the name will help people find us when they look for classical chess on the platform. Please join the team if you want to receive news of classical chess events and tournaments in your lichess inbox. If you prefer to receive this information by email contact me at echecs.hemmingford.chess@gmail.com and I will put you on the list.
@jpmunz v @BigData1969 lichess.org/vfNylcC6
@nacraf18 v @E3Engineer FORFEIT nacraf18
@datasmith v @vger lichess.org/SRZJRQma
@denisbouchard v @jcss64 lichess.org/04YAsY18
@stocknok v @perryand1971 lichess.org/oX404LjR
@hodjon v @SonicFalcon lichess.org/UI9AVLUe
@clons87 v @danieljames-dj lichess.org/PbTBTisj
@roflcopter11 v @sausjulian lichess.org/gicOXg1I
Current standings:
3 1⁄2 @jpmunz (1929)
3 @E3Engineer (1953)
3 @datasmith (1753)
2 1⁄2 @bigdata1969 (1946)
2 1⁄2 @denisbouchard (1860)
2 1⁄2 @stocknok (1500?)
2 @vger (1911)
2 @sonicfalcon (1903)
2 @danieljames-dj (1845)
2 @jcss64 (1822)
2 @nacraf18 (1500?)
1 1⁄2 @perryand1971 (1724)
1 @roflcopter11 (1515)
1 @hodjon (1501)
1 @clons87 (1418)
1⁄2 @sausjulian (1438)