Birthday Chess Game Review

They say that Birthday is a chess player's curse, so instead of risk playing a game of my own, I decided to take some time to review a game played between 2 of my chess friends ^O^

The game was composed at Singapore Chess Meetup yesterday, between William, part of the Siglap South CC Chess Quartet (other members being Seng Chin, Eric and yours truly), and Weng Chew, a long-time local chess enthusiast and facilitator of Cashew Chess Club and the Senja-Cashew Chess Club.

To give some context, Weng Chew has won all past encounters until recently, when both William and Weng Chew each won once with the White pieces. To be honest, Seng Chin and I have been giving lots of ideas and motivational talks on how William should play the game and match-up. (This is team effort in a solo-played chess at work!) In fact, I feel like I learned a lot from the discussions. In particular, because I see myself as quite a "booked-up" player (with no offence intended, I see myself quite similar to Weng Chew in this aspect), I am really curious to see how the matchup would go. William is complete opposite -- he enjoys playing sidelines, and quite honestly, I have not encountered a single player who plays like that in the local standard tournaments I played for the past 3 years. It should not come as a surprise that William has not played a maiden tourney yet ^o^

And I do have quite a bit to say about this game while reflecting on my own current play. Without further ado, here goes. In addition, I need to qualify that I am a learning player myself, so take my views with a pinch of salt, and I would be most grateful if fellow chess enthusiasts and friends can correct me where I'm wrong.

The Game Itself


Personal Views and Learning Points

• It is really important to stay flexible where possible. What I mean in particular is that if a non-development move is designed to counter a particular setup, it may be preferable to play other development moves at your disposal first. 

newbie_learner's opinion: 3...a6 is not in line with the General Opening Principles (Develop, Centre Control, King Safety). My guess why Black played this, is that he wants to fight the Queen's Gambit type of position with ...dxc4, and after White recaptures with Bxc4, play ...b5 to kick the White Bishop on c4 to gain time for ...Bb7 to develop Black's light square Bishop on the a8-h1 diagonal). But if White does not play c4, what does this move actually achieve? It's probably safer to consider something like 3...Nf6, "mirroring" White while retaining some options. 

• I actually like this Colle-Zukertort system quite a bit (consistent with my first impressions)! It does seem rather flexible. And I already foresee some opportunities to stay flexible while adjusting the move order a little. I guess it will do me good to have more side-line options in my arsenal. Also, I do look forward to more training games trying to play this opening on both sides -- I honestly have not encountered this in the tournaments I played, and I want to farm more experience on both sides!

• I would be lying if I fully understood the game positions arising throughout (my annotations are heavily assisted by the engine). What is important, which I failed to understand on my own, is that after 13...Nh5 (which the Knight doesn't seem to be threatening anything by itself - but it could be to allow for ...f6 or ...f5), the engine deemed 14.Rd1! to be the best. I can understand the desire to bring a "sleeping" piece into action, but I did not expect d-file to be the one that is going to be opened up.

How much study do I need to come to understand that the best move in this position is 14.Rd1 ?

• I missed a lot of tactical factors which White could've adopted to win earlier. Another problem I have, is identifying the pawn breaks. I need to come to terms that sometimes, it is more than okay to damage my own pawn structure for a much greater good. Otherwise, I will keep missing out chances to press/win positions. 

Overall, I enjoyed myself reviewing this game. Also, I was surprised to come across this interesting collection of games. I don't know that many chess masters, but I am surprised to identify a couple of familiar names! In case anyone else is also interested in this opening, check this out:

https://www.expert-chess-strategies.com/colle-zukertort-system.html

Your feedback would be my best birthday gift! Thank you!

Yours sincerely

Ong Yujing (Eugene)

a.k.a. newbie_learner

Siglap South CC Chess Quartet

Interesting Games at Siglap South CC Chess Club 6 Jan 2019

I'm not the type who is particularly sentimental over the "new year". Still, in this first chess session of year 2019, I suddenly feel the desire for our chess sessions to be as beneficial for all participants as far as possible. So I will be more proactive in giving basic tips to my opponents, as well as probing them for tips (esp. in the games I got outplayed)!

Of course, we have to maintain balance and respect wishes of players who just "wanna have a good time". But I would make it a conscious effort to help younger players, esp. kids I encounter, since many of them show eagerness to learn and improve in their play (some are also registered with the Singapore Chess Federation for various training and theory classes. Things like recording your games would be good for review and learning.

Below are 3 of my games played today, with learning points from all of them. Again, do take my comments with a pinch of salt. I'm just a 1499 FIDE rated player who is seeking to learn at the same time.

Game 1: newbie_learner v.s. kiddo

Thoughts and Learning Points

• I'm heartened to see the kiddo 'challenge' me to a 90 + 30 game. Most kids prefer to player faster time controls, which arguably have more limited learning value. Unfortunately, I can't oblige as we may not be able to finish  even game from 3-6pm. Hence, as the best alternative, I introduced QCD Adult Chess League's format of 30 + 30 (the fastest standard chess). 
• I thought some of the in-game comments would be beneficial for newbies and learners just like myself. For instance, it would have been great if my opponent actually plotted the "fake gambit" which I took the bait. It would also be great if he could've refuted my play winning the pawn while compromising the position. 
• In terms of choosing candidate moves, I hope some of my thoughts on my own decision making highlights some dilemma we face. For instance, both 9.c4 (challenge / weaken Black's pawn centre) and 9.e3 (support White's d4 pawn to deny Black from liberating the position easily with ...e5) are comparable, there's no need to spend too much time at the cost of compromising the thinking time remaining. Overall, I think the time management of this game was decent: White ended the game with 18 minutes and Black with 8 minutes.
• Another learning point was the demonstration of choosing between candidate moves at move 24. White chose the ordinary looking 24.Rfd1 to double Rooks instead of 24.Rxd8 Qxc2 25.Rxe8+ Bf8 which White felt was inadequate. While White deserves A for effort to at least bother to choose between the 2 candidate moves, unfortunately, White did not calculate enough to address the key issue: how to effectively double White's Rooks in the variation he rejected. To learn from this and hopefully improve in calculations (most importantly, don't be lazy and take the effort to calculate deeper!) would be something that newbie_learner would like to learn!

Position after 23...Qf5. A for newbie_learner's effort, but still not quite there yet.

• The position after 24...Rxd3 is also of interest for learning, in that White decided to play 25.Rxd3 instead of allowing for more exchanges following 25.Qxd3 Qxd3 26.Rxd3, whereby I'm uncertain whether the 1 pawn advantage is adequate for White to convert the position (Rook and Bishop of Opposite colour). This happens to steer away from the general principle: "When you are ahead in material advantage, exchange more pieces." If I followed this guideline (blindly), I fear I would reach a point whereby converting the advantage to a win becomes very difficult if not impossible. I guess it also says a little bit of the players mindset -- White is trying to maximise his winning chances. (chess psychology). 
• Of course, 26...b5?! from my opponent was unnecessary. Cannot play such obvious "baits" in a long game (Opponent was hoping for 27.Qxc5 Qxd3). I hope my kiddo opponent will learn from this and improve his future play. 

Game 2: Young Adult v.s. newbie_learner

Thoughts and Learning Points

• Again, in terms of choosing candidate moves, this time round Black abandoned the thematic idea of "Bringing out the light square Bishop before chaining the pawns with ...e6" because he saw that 6...Bg4 would fail. Yet he forgot to check another candidate move fulfilling the theme: 6...Bf5. He dropped this idea "feeling" that after 7.0-0 Black's light squared Bishop seems to be hanging, without bothering to calculate 7...e6. This highlights my current problem: lack of calculation, and allowing "feeling" to take over basic calculations. 

6...e6 which was played, really cannot be compared to 6...Bf5 followed by ...e6

• Black lost objectivity when the position looked promising. Need to learn to stay calm. Having worked so hard to get a promising position, it hurts to spoil it so easily!
• Very poor time management from Black, surviving on incremental towards the end. Will never be able to play consistently well under time pressure (human tendency). Also, my opponent never fall into the trap of playing faster to "flag me". Instead my opponent took his time to improve the quality of his moves more and more. 

Game 3: newbie_learner v.s. Young Adult

Thoughts and Learning Points

• I had my "revenge", LOL. Nah, it is good that the games did not go too one-sided. It can be rather demoralising at times, I understand. More importantly, as you better figure out your regular opponent's playing style, it should spur both to play even better in future games. For this opponent, he plays quite a wide variety of openings, so he was able to transpose here and there while keeping his options open. (This was evident in a subsequent mini series of Blitz games we played, with around 50% results on both sides.) I was prepared to see the Benko Gambit, but it became a King's Indian Defence (KID) "all of a sudden". But I'm glad I registered another win against my #1 hated opening, lol
• I know that White is spending ALOT of moves on this, but I really liked the idea of preparing for 9.Bh6 to trade off Black's thematically powerful fianchetto Bishop on g7. Based on this game, I actually feel that even without h-file open, this idea of trading off Black's fianchetto Bishop as early as possible is still decent. 

If you are playing White, would you be spending so many moves like I did just to trade off Black's fianchetto Bishop on g7, even though you are not having the h-file open? Do you opine this to be more beneficial for White or Black?

Other / Final Thoughts and Experiences

• Grats to William for also winning his for the first time against Seng Chin. This unrated player with no tourney experience has been on hot form this week! We fellow Siglap South CC Chess Quarter players are happy for you!
• The "Young Adult" has been introduced to the QCD Adults Team Chess League. So far, there are 3 players I would be helping to source for a team. I just hope I can find them all in a suitable team.
• Just a happy shout-out to 2 other chess sites which also had a great session today:
  PubXChess a record high 21(!!) player blitz tournament was held; and
  Nanyang CC Chess Club -- Happy to see many new and familiar faces. Maybe we should try to organise some tournament between these 2 Chess Clubs one day! 

That's all for now. Time to face the music in office... Will be 'dead' for a few days before my next chess resurrection (Hopefully, I can make it for Singapore Chess Meetup on this coming Wednesday!) 

Yours sincerely

Ong Yujing (Eugene)

a.k.a. newbie_learner

Siglap South CC Chess Quartet

Interesting Games and Self-Reflection on 4 Jan 2018

Quite a lot of small interesting episodes on a short night of chess

• A kiddo whom I played with at Thomson Chess Club played a simple, rarely played (according to database) yet seemingly practical move against me in 1 of my frequently played opening lines. I do not claim to know the best /reasonable response yet. Would be grateful if anyone who has some experience can offer me some tips.
• William, one of the Siglap South CC Chess Quartet, has finally won against Weng Chew (Weng Chew won all previous games)
• Have received some honest feedback and criticisms about my play, and I will be responding to them honestly =)

Some of these would be inter-twined. A new writing style I'm trying out. I just hope readers won't be too "lost".

Thoughts after the Game

• It's not necessarily worth it to avoid mainstream lines for the sake of avoiding mainstream lines. I can't justify the position for White after 1.c4 c6 2.d3 d5 3.cxd5 cxd5 -- if anything, I feel Black has at least completely equalised.
• I got bluffed not accepting the gift Knight 12.Ng5+ and responded with a "turtle"-like 12..Kg8. I should have been more careful. 
• Otherwise, I like the remaining of my play. Just accept all the sacrifices! The onus is on the side having made the sacrifice to make the attack work. 

Thoughts after the Game + Response to Criticism

• Response to Criticism: "newbie_learner always wants to keep the Bishop pair". Absolutely untrue. My critic has presumably never seen these Caro Kann games I played as Black. I always offer the Bishop pair right from the start in this 2 Knights variation =) Also, everyone "knows" that Bishop pair is advantageous, especially in open positions. There is nothing wrong to formulate an entire opening approach based on seizing the Bishop pair, because it's that good! (There are even certain lines in openings like the Caro Kann Defence: Exchange variation, which is almost fully designed to play just against Black's light squared Bishop.)
  
  I think how this criticism came about is my critic was looking through a game I lost which started of with me fully engaged in this "Bishop pair hunting" right from the start. Actually, that whole strategy of Bishop hunting in that game was supported by engine's evaluation. I lost the game because of my poor continuation, not because of the part on my Bishop hunting. This (attributing losses to the correct aspects) is something I value a lot. Otherwise, I would just keep changing the way I play (keep changing whenever I lose) without actually learning anything. So no, I do not agree with the criticism, in that I am not obsessed with the Bishop pair (for the wrong reasons). In fact, there are positions which I do not mind giving up the Bishop pair right from the start, such as this one.

• Back to this specific game, what I hope to learn is how exactly does Black deal with this simple yet effectively irritating move of 6.Qg3? (1.e4 c6 2.Nf3 d5 3.Nc3 Bg4 4.h3 Bxf3 5.Qxf3 e6 6.Qg3) According to the free database I have access to, it is not played that often, but boy is it irritating! Specifically, I don't know what's the most effective way to allow me to continue to deploy my dark square Bishop on f8 effectively while the g7 pawn is being harassed by the White Queen. If anyone knows, please share with me!

For Advice: What Should Black Play to Develop Effectively?

• 2 general guidelines which showed in this game were that exchanges are never innocent (it often benefits one party more than the other) and long term weaknesses. Regardless what the engine "says", I love my move 17...dxe4 which created permanent pawn weaknesses.
• Response to Criticism: "newbie_learner always follows general principles to a T" Absolutely true. However, I'm not sure if this is doing me more good or more harm. On one hand, I feel that I don't make unforced blunder dropping pieces so easily but on the other hand, often I leave opponent's mistakes unpunished. Yet despite knowing all these general principles, I still have difficulties executing them correctly consistently in my own games (otherwise, I won't be a newbie) ^o^ But I do think that whatever the case is, tactical considerations should be given top priority most of the time, which admittedly, I neglect this from time to time. That's why I'm particularly vulnerable whenever opponent generates an attack against me, LOL.

The best is saved for the last. William went all the way to the Cashew Chess Club to play with Weng Chew and finally registered his first win. I got permission from both players to share this. But out of absolute respect (because I am not that good myself, I have concerns my "analysis" may be off, whereas I have no such obligations looking through my own games ^o^) I have done my review in quite a number of different ways, including separate one-click tactical analysis function of Chessbase 15 to look at it from a pure engine view. Interestingly, I don't fully agree with engine's suggestions! I guess the reader has to make his/her own judgement call at certain interesting moments of the game.


newbie_learner's analysis of William-Weng Chew

The Siglap South CC Chess Quartet has been trying our best to assure William that "it's all in the mind". If you start off the game not believing you can win, you never will. Everything was done right in the game (not that there's no room for improvement, but most things and decisions came out well).

Now that the doughnut was broken, all future games between this pair would be even more interesting I bet =)
I have also added a comparison analysis based on Chessbase 15's one-click tactical analysis. Open a new window from the link below:
http://view.chessbase.com/cbreader/2019/1/5/Game861860203.html

Thoughts after the Game + Response to Criticism

• Black seems to have over-prepared and delayed ...c5 pawn break for too long, to the point that it allowed White to do a complete regroup. It really does seem easier for Black to play ...c5 as early as possible. 
• The biggest learning point to me was the position arising after the move 14.Ne5. I know that not everyone agrees with me, but the way I see it, it is a very provocative move. Specifically, it will likely work against newbie like myself who follows guideline to a T: "Always fight off opponent's pieces in your turf as soon as you can." Following this guideline blindly would have picked 14...Nxe5 as the move to make. Only to face White's menacing pawn charge starting from 15.f4.  Actually, I'm still not sure how much better Black is, but the recommendations from the engines is to just trade off both the c and d pawns to minimally open up the scope of Black's Bishop pair. Because the Knight on e5 hasn't got very concrete targets yet.
• Response to Criticism: "The way newbie plays can be summarised as this: Minimise the occurrence of weaknesses, but often seemingly without any true demonstration of the point behind it"
  It depends on how you see things. On one hand, I agree to a large extent. On the other, I feel that there are certain (even if few) concepts which I understand decently well. I'm just not sure which specific concept my critic feels I don't demonstrate correct understanding over. I think it is more accurate to describe myself this way:
  
  "As a newbie who is not very good with the fundamentals, especially the appreciation of imbalances which all newbies struggle against, newbie_learner's lazy approach is to minimise weaknesses at all cost. Where there are less weaknesses in the position, it is easier to keep things in order. However, it is true that newbie_learner also let the opponent off the hook a lot, because he does not appreciate imbalances well. This leads to lots of problems in his games. For instance, opponents who know this are often allowed to take 'free attacking shots' based on newbie's desire to avoid imbalances. newbie_learner even suspects this is why his records are so terrible when facing double-edged openings like the King's Indian Defence and the Benoni Defence. "

• To improve, I do see a need for me to allow myself to play in more dynamic positions with imbalances. Minimally, it will give me more opportunities to test and improve my evaluation of positions. Shall make this a chess resolution for this year. Thanks for all the criticisms above!

Looking forward to hearing more feedback. Thanks again for your time!

Yours sincerely

Ong Yujing (Eugene)

a.k.a. newbie_learner

Siglap South CC Chess Quartet

A Couple of Interesting Games @ Siglap South CC 30 Dec 2018

Interestingly, this chess session concludes the calendar year 2018 at Siglap South CC.

Overall, it was a good "opening" training and self-exploration. I learned and hopefully will remember something from both games.

Before we start, just want to qualify that I am not advocating anything in my games review/replay exercise. Rather, I am stating how I see things. If any reader has a differing view, please share your thoughts with me for learning /sharing purpose. Thanks in advance!

Game 1: newbie_learner vs. Eric

Key Learning Points

• A rapid game condition of 15+10 is very different from a standard game (90+30). Still, I feel that it pays to spend a little bit more time to remember your own past analysis of the opening!

• Don't try a "bluff" that even you yourself are not convinced of. This is what I feel of Eric's 9...d4. 

• I should have trusted my own initial judgement and went for something like 12.h3 followed by Be3 to consolidate the extra pawn on d4. Even though it felt slow, that would've really consolidated the 1 pawn advantage with little to no repercussions. 

• I have played too quickly at some of the big exchange moves, missing out the correct way to press for more advantage.

Game 2: newbie_learner v.s. William
Key Learning Points

• The correct way of reacting to ...Bd6 in the London system: ignore the threat of ...Bxf4 and continue with development! I will cover a little bit more towards the end of this post.

• Time management is really an art in itself. Really, one plays significantly sub-par under time-pressure. White had a promising position but misplayed the defence towards the end due to severe time pressure. And of course, my Kingside defence seems rather vulnerable over a couple of games.

•  There are some positions / moments I failed to understand -- e.g. I was surprised the engine actually suggest White to ignore Black's Knight on e4 altogether, and just continue with Queenside expansion. Also, I need to calculate and not remain busy and rely on "gut feeling" That was why I did not play 19.f4 -- I was scared of 19...Ng3 but after 20.Rf3 Nh5, White is at least not worse. 

My little view on the London System against 2...Nc6

One typical position will look something like this:

1.d4 d5 2.Nf3 to take away ...e5 counter-gambit resources for good.

2...Nc6 Not recommended by mainstream "theory" . The conventional view is that Black needs to get in ...c5 to challenge White's centre control), but it has its practical value.

3.Bf4 may not be the objective best. 3.c4 seems to be preferred based on statistics, but arguably we will be playing into Black's familiar ground of the Chigorin Defence.

3...Bg4 4.Nbd2 This is to allow me to play Nxf3 in response to ...Bxf3 -- it makes way more sense for a Knight to be placed on f3 as compared to a Queen -- it helps to stop Black from achieving ...e5.

4...e6 Arguably, Black has also achieved simple development (Bring the light square Bishop out before chaining the pawns in). Black has no "bad Bishop" problem.

5.e3 I know that this "volunteers" White Knight on f3 to be pinned by the Bishop on g4, but are there very good alternative developing moves?

5...Bd6 A very irritating move -- before I learned a little bit more on the correct treatment in this position.

Position after 5...Bd6

I am nowhere near the expertise of some of my chess friends, but based on the quick light explorations I did, these are my current thoughts on how White can play the position.

• White can afford to ignore the "threat" of ...Bxf4, because (i) the damaged pawn structure after exf4 can (always) be fixed with g3, and after exf4,White has an even firmer control over the e5 square. Now, Black is surely seeing the drawbacks with the Knight placed on c6-- he has no ...c5 pawn break!

• The next issue in White's position is the pin on the f3 Knight. To address this, either challenge the Bishop on g4 with h3, or play a wimpy Be2 to get on with development. 

• In anticipation of ...Bxf4 exf4, it is preferable that White does not commit to playing c4 too early. Instead, c3 supporting the d4 pawn (in need of support as the e3 pawn may end up on f4) and opening up the small a4-d1 diagonal will give White some options like Qb3 or Qc2. If White does not place the light square Bishop on e2, another way to unpin the f3 Queen is to move the Queen along this mini diagonal.

That's it for now. Looking forward to learning more from you! Thank you.


Yours sincerely
Ong Yujing (Eugene)
newbie_learner
Siglap South CC Chess Quartet

Trivial Subject: The Chess Board!

When I first heard from a knowledgeable chess friend, that he finds that the DGT chess pieces' dimensions different from standard tournament sets, I was surprised. After all, isn't DGT the company producing the official chess sets use in high-profile events?

Now that I have some free time from work (thank you Christmas!), I did some self-reading. While DGT chess sets should be well within FIDE standards (obviously!) I think I get what my friend was trying to say. And in the process, I read up a little bit on the standards of the chess sets to be used in FIDE tournaments as well. I am just beginning to know a little more on this topic, and I have more questions than answers.

My key reference document is "Standards of Chess Equipment, venue for FIDE Tournaments, rate of play and tie-break regulations", but my focus would solely be on the chess set (pieces and board) and not on the venue and other sections of the article. Also, because I own the DGT Smart Board (I'm not privileged enough to own the other more expensive sets at present), I will be using it in my self-exploration!

Why did I put the pieces this way? Yes, I know it is not the correct starting position, LOL. It is to test whether they fulfill the recommendations stated under clauses 2.2 "Chess Pieces: Height, weight, proportions" and 3.2 "Chess boards: Size of the square and the board".

"  2.2 The size of the pieces should be proportionate to their height and form; other elements such as stability, aesthetic considerations etc., may also be taken into account. The weight of the pieces should be suitable for comfortable moving and stability. Recommended height of the pieces is as follows: King – 9.5 cm, Queen – 8.5 cm, Bishop – 7 cm, Knight – 6 cm, Rook – 5.5 cm and Pawn – 5 cm. The diameter of the piece's base should measure 40-50% of its height. These dimensions may differ up to 10% from the above recommendation, but the order (e.g. King is higher than Queen etc.) must be kept."


"  3.2 The side of the square should measure 5 to 6 cm. Referring to 2.2 the side of a square should be at least twice the diameter of a pawn’s base (it means four paws on one square). A comfortable table of suitable height may be fitted in with a chessboard. If the table and the board are separate from one another, the latter must be fastened and thus prevented from moving during play."

Being someone who is (or was, as my friends who underwent national service can vouch for me!) extremely law abiding, I would actually interpret the recommendations this way:

  (newbie_learner's personal interpretation of the recommended standards)
 
 "  When making a standard chess set meant to comply with FIDE's standards, try your best to base it on the following dimensions:

• King: Height of 9.5cm, diameter of 9.5cm X 45% = 4.3cm
• Queen: Height of 8.5cm, diameter of 8.5cm X 45% = 3.8cm
• Bishop: Height of 7.0cm, diameter of 7.0cm X 45% = 3.1cm (round down) or 3.2cm (round up)
• Knight: Height of 6.0cm, diameter of 6.0cm X 45% = 2.7cm
• Rook: Height of 5.5cm, diameter of 5.5cm X 45% = 2.5cm
• Pawn: Height of 5.0cm, diameter of 5.0cm X 45% = 2.2cm (round down) or 2.3cm (round up)
• The side of the (small) squares of the board should measure 5.5cm.

Essentially, my personal interpretation is meant to allow for maximum variance / tolerance of imperfections by choosing the middle of the range of values. How does the DGT Smart Board with the electronic plastic chess pieces fare against (i) newbie_learner's more stringent standards and (ii) FIDE's standards?

It failed newbie_learner's standards totally (understandable because I'm more stringent and prefer to err on the safe side ^o^) but it is either a borderline pass or borderline fail by FIDE's standards! How come?

First, the rough measurements. I need to qualify, that I am just using my naked eye with a typical household clear plastic ruler. I'm not using precise instruments like a Vernier caliper. Second, for the purpose of height measurement, I'm uncertain if the 1-2mm contributed by the felting needs to be included.

newbie_learner's rough measurements of the DGT Smart Board with the electronic plastic chess pieces

• King: Height of 9.5cm, diameter of 4.3cm (nice!)
• Queen: Height of 8.3cm, diameter of 3.9cm (close enough!)
• Bishop: Height of 7.5cm, diameter of 3.5cm (this measures quite differently from the recommended height of 7.0cm, but it is within the allowed difference of 10%. Also, the diameter of 3.5cm is indeed kept at 45% of its height of 7.0cm.
• Knight: Height of 6.5cm, diameter of 3.5cm (we are leaning more and more towards the "10% allowance" acceptable by FIDE's standards)
• Rook: Height of 6.0cm, diameter of 3.5cm (hmm...)
• Pawn: Height of 5.1cm, diameter of 2.7cm or 2.8cm (?!)

From the pure consideration of meeting FIDE's standards, I feel that the set is really stretching the permissible limits. The most important consideration is that a small square must be able to at least fit 4 pawns. 

This is really a very tight fit for 4 pawns in one square.

I can't quite decide whether this is a borderline pass or borderline fail by FIDE's standards. But as someone who prefers to err on the safe side, I'd say that this set is really not very well-designed, if the intention or key consideration is to comply with FIDE's standards. Also, from a pure reading / interpretation of FIDE's standards, it seems to suggest that the square (of say 5.5cm X 5.5cm) should fit at least 4 pawns -- meaning to say there should still be some allowance. In this case, it is clear to me that there is no such allowance built in.

This is the first time that I come across FIDE's standards on the chess set. If any reader is aware that I am misinterpreting the recommendations (e.g. the guideline of having 4 pawns housed in a square is not hard and fast), please do drop me a comment so that I can learn the correct things. I do apologise in advance as this is my first time seeing it out of nowhere, and would also be happy to update my corrected knowledge here.

Whatever the case on the correct understanding of FIDE's standards, do I mean to say that the DGT Smart Board and the electronic plastic chess pieces are badly designed? Not at all! I love them very much. Even though fellow chess friends and enthusiasts never acknowledge this publicly, A LOT of them (be it fellow players in the QCD SG Chess League, or "sleeping members" in various chess chat groups) have been asking me questions in private on this budget electronic chess set, many intending to buy the same or a more functional / aesthetically pleasing set for their own use. Since there are so many people in my chess circle so interested, I shall share a little bit of my experience buying and using this budget electronic chess set. 

Some Personal Experience with the Budget Electronic Chess Set

• Initially, I bought it with the intention to record my blitz games. Because I have been enjoying face-to-face games so much, I can't bring myself going back to online chess games anymore. Yet I acknowledge the value of playing blitz games and reviewing them. Hence, the decision to get this to record my blitz games.
• However, there are still practical difficulties to address. For this set with no internal battery, I need to provide external electrical power to the set, so that it can record the moves made during the games. It actually consumes quite a bit of power, so my cheap power bank is not enough to do the job.
• If one bases decision on pure functionality alone, the best series to buy is actually the Bluetooth e-board. Because it comes with an internal battery. Provided the battery is charged, it can serve as the power source when you are playing a game. For instance, in an outdoor setting, where external power supplies are unavailable.
• For my case, because I want to work within a budget of around SGD $500, I only bought the bare minimum (the smart board + electronic plastic chess pieces but without the DGT 3000 or DGT Pi which allows the user to also capture and record the move-by-move time situation. I also waited for the seasonal "free shipping" offer before purchasing. Otherwise, the shipping charges could be hefty.
• It turned out to be a small investment which paid off. The last thing I want is that it becomes a White Elephant collecting dust. I do bring it out regularly for chess events (e.g. weekly at Siglap South CC Chess sessions, or any other special chess occasions) to make sure it gets used regularly. But I have deviated from my original intent of recording my blitz games. Rather, I just invite different players to try out playing with the set -- which is aesthetically quite pleasing indeed!

This is how the chess pieces look like on the DGT Smart Board. Usually, I will always put my 2 Knights looking towards my opponent, but I'm turned the g1 Knight turn around to greet the camera ^o^ Also, it is much easier to see the White pieces as compared to the Black pieces. I will share my further thoughts on this in the conclusion of this post.

A close-up on the White pieces to better appreciate its aesthetics.

Do be aware that "DGT" is written on the Rooks, although you may not see it from your usual "playing" position.

The set does come with an extra Queen. For its price, I wish it offered many more extra pieces ^o^

And this is the full set-up, connected to my laptop.

Some of the support information on DGT's website is obsolete. To get your electronic chess set up and running immediately upon receiving, just download the software "DGT LiveChess". You do not need to install any drivers or whatsoever.

Just a very minor point on my current views of "Chess Boards". Because it is harder to spot the Black pieces on a dark square (esp. in a photograph, esp. when the photographer is as terrible as myself), I think it is much better to get Chess Boards with the colour scheme of "White + Green", whereby the Black pieces are placed on the green squares, rather than the colour scheme of "White + Brown", whereby the Black pieces are much better camouflaged on the brown squares!

Merry Christmas, my dear reader!

Yours sincerely

Ong Yujing (Eugene)

a.k.a. newbie_learner

Siglap South CC chess quartet

An Informal Recruitment Drive for QCD SG Chess League 2019

First and foremost, this post is largely dedicated to adult chess players (aged 20 and above as of 1 Jan 2019) who has yet to come across the Adults Team Chess League sponsored by the QCD Group.

How did the league come about?
(newbie_learner's view)

If you are an adult chess enthusiast like myself, you may come to the (same) opinion that there are not that many local tournaments available for adult players. For standard chess, there are only 2 major ones I participate in religiously, namely the SG City Open (some time in June, open to all players) and SG Amateurs (some time in December, for players rated within 2,000 FIDE Elo points). If your FIDE Elo points is higher than 2,000 you can play in the National Championship (some time in December). Adults are excluded from local tournaments such as the "National Age Group", which is meant for kids / teenagers to compete within their own cohort.

I'm sorry I can't bring myself to recommend other local standard tournaments which are played under non-incremental formats. I personally HATE non-incremental formats, but that's another story to blog about ^o^

For adults who are keen for blitz games, you can also consider playing at the PubXChess meetup, held on Sunday afternoons. They hold weekly free-to-play blitz tournaments, and introduce different features and initiatives from time to time to keep the format fresh and interesting.

Identifying this lack of chess avenues for adults in the local chess scene, and perhaps inspired by the great success enjoyed by the Singapore Chess Meetup initiative founded by Mr Bradley Loh, dr_chess_dad created the Adults Team Chess League (by adults for adults!)


The gist of the league format
While there may be changes introduced in the next run in 2019, which I will update once known, the format and experience should be comparable to the previous 2 runs in 2017 and 2018, especially the latest run in 2018). You can consider referring to last-year's rules and regulations, as well as the entry form on your own.

• This is an UNRATED tournament. This means that if you are an inactive player seeking to de-rust, your rating points are intact. Registration-wise, this also means that you do NOT need a FIDE ID to play in this tournament. I'm sharing this in advance because this was enquired by the new teams in the 2018 run.
• Form a team between 4 to 8 players. (This is how my team name, 8.c4! came about. It's about the mathematical nCr, "out of 8 players we have, choose 4 to play in each round", but stylised to mimic a chess move notation ^o^)
• On scheduled Friday evenings (7:30pm), field 4 players to play in the round.
• Depending on the number of teams, there will be 8-10 rounds. There were 17 teams playing 10 rounds in 2018.
• Time control is 30+30, i.e. we have the initial time of 30 minutes. With each move played, our time will be increased by 30 seconds. This qualifies the format as the quickest standard chess.
• The captain holds several important admin roles. There will be a what's app group created with just the Chief Arbiter for the tournament and the Captains. All important communications and updates are done through the Captain's Chat group, and the captains are expected to keep their team mates updated. Some specific roles include the following:
• Captains shall submit the team's lineup (i.e. who is playing on which board) by 6:30pm, 1 hour before the commencement of the round. Please submit this to the Chief Arbiter in a private message and do NOT submit it in the Captains' Chat group! Do note that you can field any player to play on any board, regardless of the players rating or playing strength (i.e. Board #1 need NOT be the strongest, and Board #4 need NOT be the weakest). The board pairings will then be published on chess results. This makes it much more difficult for any pre-game preparations as you won't know the exact opponent you are playing against.
• Captains need to update everyone in the Captains' Chat group should the team be adding players along the league. Based on last-year's convention, a newly added player can only start playing for the team after 7-days from this update. So the Captain should try to make the update of new players asap. This is to be fair to teams who are concerned with "pre-round preparation" of sorts.
•  Captains will also be representing their team to vote whenever there are any issues / disputes arising, brought up in the Captain's Chat group.

• This is not really a concern for the more "social / recreation" teams, but for teams with high rated players, the current rules is that the average rating points for the 4 players fielded in any round cannot exceed 2200.
• Another important house rule is that players are not required to record moves, but if a player choose not to record moves, he/she cannot make certain claims (e.g. draw by same position occurring for the 3rd time, 50 moves made with neither captures nor pawn advancement). However, the house rules also allows players to start recording moves for such purposes at any point in the game.

On management of expectations

Do take a look at the teams composition last year. There are titled players, high-rated players (2,000 and above) playing in the tournament. Personally, I don't see this as any deterrence at all. In fact, I am always looking forward to playing them and try to learn from the games afterwards. If you are aware, we often have to pay to play titled opponents on chess servers like the Internet Chess Club (ICC). Nevertheless, I can understand that some (new) teams or players unaware of this may be in for a rude awakening. Hence, it'll be better that one manages his/her own expectations upfront.

Overall, I have made many new friends over the League, and some of my friends whom I helped to form a new team with thanked me for their wonderful experiences. Although I have received largely positive feedback, there are also chess friends / players who candidly shared that they were not placed in a team with team mates of similar playing level. All these are truthful, valuable feedback to me to reflect and improve! Ideally, I really hope that all interested players can find team mates they enjoy playing with on their own. By all means, I hope you can form a team with your own friends, or identify some of the existing teams and offer to join them.

For any "lone wolves" out there, these are my personal suggestions:

• Consider seeking out your chess friends, even the "retired" ones as early as possible. This tournament is unrated, so they don't need to be concerned about losing their rating points.
• Consider playing at one of the chess sites I'd listed on "Where to play chess in Singapore 2019". Make your intention known that you are keen to join the league when playing at these sites. The biggest source of players for the league are, without a doubt, the Singapore Chess Meetup and PubXChess. I know of Captains who immediately offered a slot for players who demonstrate good play at these sites, as well as enthusiasts who simply gather enough players to make their own team.
• Similar to last year, I don't mind playing the role of the facilitator to help any lone wolves find a team as a last resort. Based on the feedback from last year, other than providing basic information required in the application form (as well as basic contact information), I think I will also add a required information on the players expectations of their (potential) team mates. Also, I can't guarantee that I can help each and every lone wolf, as there are some very last minute ones whom I could not help. Furthermore, not all the existing team Captains are keen to take up new players, and some teams prefer to keep their membership low so that all the players get to play more games. Hence, despite offering to help, I also need to qualify that I may not always be successful (I will try my best, of course, since I am very supportive of the league, and I hope as many adult chess enthusiasts get to enjoy playing in it.)

Lone wolves who would like my help to source for a team may contact me via ongyujingAToutlookDOTcom. 

Thank you for your time and consideration!

Yours sincerely

Ong Yujing (Eugene)

a.k.a. newbie_learner

Siglap South CC Chess Quartet

Where to Play Chess in Singapore 2019

Better early than late! I feel obliged to quickly update the information on "where to play chess in Singapore" after seeing Weng Chew's recent update of the new chess site which he will be facilitating with effect from 2019. That's manning a chess club 3 days a week! I wonder if I will have such spirits when I hit 65 myself...

This time round, I will try to write down only the factual information, and leave my personal narrative to a minimum. I wonder if this would be more useful to information-seeking readers.

Rules:

• I will only list down chess sites that are generally open to the public. This includes any place that allows for chess to be played freely, as well as CCs that charge a very nominal fee. For CCs that charge a nominal membership fee, they usually also allows you to have a trial session to see if you like the club before joining.

• Specifically excluded are chess schools or institutions for obvious reasons -- I do not wish to compare one against another, neither am I qualified to do so.
• Clubs / chess sites that are not known to be seeking new members actively will not be listed. This is to ensure that (potential) new members seeking out the Clubs / sites listed below will feel welcomed. Hence, please alert me if there are chess sites that I am not aware of as I'd love to add them here from time to time!

Mondays
No chess site known at present.


Tuesdays
NUS Intellectual Games Club (NUS IGC)
Where: National University of Singapore (NUS), Kent Ridge Campus, Multi Purpose Sports Hall (MPSH4)
When: 6:30pm to 9pm
Follow their latest updates on Instagram
For queries, you may contact NUS IGC (igcDOTnusATgmailDOTcom).

Senja-Cashew CC Chess Club *new*

Shout-out: Just want to thank Weng Chew for choosing Tuesdays and Thursdays as the days for Club Activities, so that chess enthusiasts can still go to the best chess site on Wednesdays ^o^


Wednesdays
The Singapore Chess Meetup
Where: Asia Square Tower One (nearest MRT station is downtown station, downtown "blue" line)
When: 6:30pm to 9:30pm

The best chess site in Singapore for having the biggest number of active players (around 60 during school holidays). All interested persons (be it complete beginners or otherwise) are welcomed.

• While there are a couple of chess equipment (chess sets and clocks) available, do consider bringing your own to avoid waiting time. Also, you can continue your game(s) after 9:30pm if you are using your own chess equipment.
• The founder, Mr Bradley Loh, strongly encourages everyone to RSVP on the meetup page, so that people new to the meetup group is assured that this is an "active" group to consider joining.
• You can check the photo updates on the facebook page to see how well the meetup is doing =)

Thursdays
Senja-Cashew CC Chess Club *new*
(as stated above on "Tuesday")


Fridays
Thomson CC Chess Club
Where: Thomson CC, level 3
When: 7:30pm to 9pm
Note: Due to renovations, the last session at Thomson CC will be 29 March 2019. From April 2019 onwards, the sessions shall be at Classroom 4 in Bishan East CC (the same CC which the Singapore Chess Federation is located).


Cashew Chess Club
Where: Cashew RC Zone 5 (opposite Bukit Panjang Plaza McDonald's)
When: 8pm onwards


Saturdays
Chess Interest Group

Where: Kent Ridge Guild House, Lobby / Activity Room

When: 1st Saturday of each month

Sundays

Cafe X Chess (new w.e.f. 15 Dec 2019!)

As a spin-off from PubXChess to cater to a different target group (kids and casual players who are early risers),

Where: Cafe location location announced on the meetup page
When: 10am - 1pm

Pub X Chess

Where: Different Pub locations across Singapore. The venue is determined only the week / days before. There are also some varying formats and challenges, so as to keep the experience fresh and interesting for everyone. Updates can be read on PubXchess' facebook page or Instagram. ).
When: The weekly blitz tournament usually starts at 3:30pm sharp. Please RSVP on the meetup page to facilitate organising.

New: With effect from 15 Dec 2019, the session is specially catered for adults and minors with FIDE or in-house rating above 1700.

Nanyang CC Chess Club
Where: Nanyang CC, ground floor, "glass room"
When: 3pm to 5pm

Queenstown CC Chess Club
Where: Queenstown CC (nearest MRT station is Queenstown, East-West "green" line)
When: 3pm to 7pm

Siglap South CC Chess Club
Where: Siglap South CC, Room #02-07
When: 3pm to 6pm, or until whatever time newbie_learner or the Siglap South CC Chess Quartet can stay to

Hope you will find this useful!


Yours sincerely
Ong Yujing (newbie_learner)
Siglap South CC Chess Quartet