Sam Sloan finishes Dead Last In World Open

Yes. It is true. Sam Sloan finished in Last place in the Open Section
of the World Open Chess Championship in Philadelphia, held June 30 to
July 4, 2006.

Take a look at:
http://www.worldopen.com/2006Results/open.html

The way this happened was that due to a pairing error, an
International Master was left out of the pairings. He had received a
half-point bye the round previously and had been left out of the
pairings this round.

The tournament director had a choice: Either give him a full point bye
or find a real opponent to play him.

Since I am always available to play filler games, I was summoned to
the board.

My problem was that I have a baby with me to take care of.
Fortunately, a lady was there who was the girlfriend of a Nigerian
player, Chikwere G. Onyekwere. She had two daughters with her who were
about the same age as my daughter. My daughter always likes to play
with kids her own age, so this lady agreed to take care of my daughter
while I was playing the game.

My opponent was an International Master from Kazakstan, with a FIDE
rating of 2411. He had just arrived in America one week before. Only
18 years old, he had competed in the World Youth Championships in
Greece. This was his first USCF rated tournament.

I figured that I had a good chance to beat him, in spite of the fact
that he was rated 600 points higher than me. The reason I felt this
way was that he did not know me. All of the strong US players now know
the way I play and are prepared for it. However, this player with no
knowledge of me or of how I play or of the strengths and weaknesses of
US players, would be thrown off because of my style.

I have two powerful openings. With white I play 1. g4. With black, I
play my trusty Damiano's Defense, which goes 1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 f6 3.
Nxe5 fxe5 4. Qh5+ Ke7 5. Qxe5+ Kf7 6. Bc4+ d5 7. Bxd5 Kg6 and now
Black wins due to his material advantage.

I figured that with these two openings, he would never know what hit
him and I would wipe him out in no time.

His FIDE Rating card is at
http://fide.com/ratings/card.phtml?event=13703102

Unfortunately, perhaps somebody had tipped him off about me. (I wonder
if Bill Goichberg said anything.) So, fearing my Damianos Defense, he
played the insipid Vienna Game. I was deeply disappointed. Actually, I
have not been able to get anybody to play 3. Nxe5 in a long time, as
they are so utterly terrified of my strong defense.

He seemed to be playing weakly, so I started my attack almost
immediately with 5. . . . Ng4. After 6. O-O, perhaps I should have
continued my attack with 6 . . . h5. However, that might run in
trouble with 7. Na4, grabbing my active bishop.

I think the move I played, 6. . . . Be6, was weak, as the bishop does
almost nothing there. Perhaps, I should have played 6. . . . Nc6
instead.

After 7. h3, I should have just retreated my knight. Taking a rook and
pawn for two pieces did not turn out well.

Although material remained even, this gave him a slight advantage.
After that, he just slowly ground me down. I do not think I made any
mistakes after that.

Since this is a new player in America, naturally the other strong
players will be interested in learning about him. My impression was
that he did not seem to be grandmaster strength. However, I showed
this game to two grandmasters and they felt that he had not done
anything wrong, so perhaps he is that strong after all.

Sam Sloan

[Event "World Open Championship, Open Section"]
[Site "Philadelphia, Pennsylvania"]
[Date "2006.07.03"]
[Round "07"]
[White "Iskakov, Albek"]
[Black "Sloan, Sam"]
[Result "1-0"]
[ECO "C26"]
[WhiteElo "2511"]
[BlackElo "1920"]

1.e4 e5 2.Nc3 Nf6 3.g3 Bc5 4.Bg2 d6 5.Nge2 Ng4 6.O-O Be6 7.h3
Nxf2 8.Rxf2 Bxf2+ 9.Kxf2 O-O 10.Kg1 Nc6 11.d4 exd4 12.Nxd4 Nxd4
13.Qxd4 Qd7 14.Kh2 Rae8 15.Bf4 f5 16.Re1 fxe4 17.Rxe4 Bf5 18.Qd5+
Kh8 19.Rxe8 Rxe8 20.Ne4 h6 21.c4 b6 22.b4 Be6 23.Qd4 Kg8 24.Bxh6
c5 25.bxc5 dxc5 26.Qxd7 Bxd7 27.Bf4 Bc6 28.Nc3 Bxg2 29.Kxg2 Re1
30.Kf2 Rh1 31.h4 Kf7 32.Ke3 Ke6 33.Bb8 Rg1 34.Ne2 Ra1 35.Bxa7
Rxa2 36.Bxb6 Kd6 37.Nc3 Ra3 38.Kd3 Rb3 39.Bd8 Kc6 40.Bg5 Ra3
41.Kc2 Ra1 42.Be3 Re1 43.Kd2 Ra1 44.Kd3 Ra3 45.Bc1 Ra1 46.Kc2 Ra8
47.Ne4 Ra7 48.Kd3 Ra1 49.Bb2 Rd1+ 50.Ke2 Rd7 51.h5 Ra7 52.Kf3 Re7
53.g4 Rf7+ 54.Ke3 Rb7 55.Bc3 Re7 56.g5 Ra7 57.h6 gxh6 58.gxh6 Re7
59.Bg7 1-0

Sam Sloan wrote:

"With black, I play my trusty Damiano's Defense,
which goes 1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 f6 3. Nxe5 fxe5 4. Qh5+
Ke7 5. Qxe5+ Kf7 6. Bc4+ d5 7. Bxd5 Kg6 and now
Black wins due to his material advantage."

Sam,

It may be time for you to refresh your repertoire.

White has three pawns for the piece and a winning
advantage according to Fritz which now continues:
8.h4 h5 9.Bxb7 Bd6 (if 9...Bxb7 10 Qf5 mate) 10 Qa5.

On 6 Jul 2006 06:58:24 -0700, "jr" wrote:


Sam Sloan wrote:

"With black, I play my trusty Damiano's Defense,
which goes 1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 f6 3. Nxe5 fxe5 4. Qh5+
Ke7 5. Qxe5+ Kf7 6. Bc4+ d5 7. Bxd5 Kg6 and now
Black wins due to his material advantage."

Sam,

It may be time for you to refresh your repertoire.

White has three pawns for the piece and a winning
advantage according to Fritz which now continues:
8.h4 h5 9.Bxb7 Bd6 (if 9...Bxb7 10 Qf5 mate) 10 Qa5.

I am indeed thankful to my dear friend Mr. Fritz, who keeps playing
blunders for Black, thereby leading almost everybody to think that my
Damiano's Defense for Black can be easily defeated.

8. ... h5 is a blunder that loses immediately.

I was greatly disappointed that this game would have been my first
chance to play Damiano's Defense against a Grandmaster strength
player, to see what he would do about it. Since he did not know me, he
probably would have immediately grabbed the pawn with 3. Nxe5 and then
we would have seen what he was going to to do when he got into
difficulties.

For example, I played my Damiano's Defense against USCF rated Master
James West. I was beating him and had at least a forced draw, but he
came up with a fantastic swindle and won.

In a later tournament, he was paired against me again and again had
white.

This time, he started the game with 1. b3, not willing to risk playing
against the power of my Damiano's Defence.

Sam Sloan

Sam, how about writing a general view of the event, apart from your own
games? I would like to publish something on it, but apart from pictures and
the crosstable the site doesn't say much. Write something up I can use by
end of day tomorrow? Phil

"Sam Sloan" wrote

I have two powerful openings. With white I play 1. g4. With black, I
play my trusty Damiano's Defense, which goes 1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 f6 3.
Nxe5 fxe5 4. Qh5+ Ke7 5. Qxe5+ Kf7 6. Bc4+ d5 7. Bxd5 Kg6 and now
Black wins due to his material advantage.

These openings are also known as "White to play and lose" and "Black to play
and lose."


Actually, I
have not been able to get anybody to play 3. Nxe5 in a long time, as
they are so utterly terrified of my strong defense.

You are correct, but only because you chickened out of our match.

Angelo DePalma

"Sam Sloan" wrote

In a later tournament, he was paired against me again and again had
white.

This time, he started the game with 1. b3, not willing to risk playing
against the power of my Damiano's Defence.

Evidently West has played Steve Ferrero one too many times.

Sam Sloan wrote:
1.e4 e5 2.Nc3 Nf6 3.g3 Bc5 4.Bg2 d6 5.Nge2 Ng4 6.O-O Be6 7.h3
Nxf2 8.Rxf2 Bxf2+ 9.Kxf2 O-O

This exchange hurts you. In the middlegame, a bishop and knight are
stronger than a rook and pawn. They only become equal in the endgame.
At least, that's what I learned when studying the Two Knights Defense.

10.Kg1 Nc6 11.d4 exd4 12.Nxd4 Nxd4 13.Qxd4 Qd7

These exchanges, then, should not be harmful.

14.Kh2 Rae8

You hang a pawn. White declines the a7 pawn?

15.Bf4 f5 16.Re1 fxe4 17.Rxe4 Bf5

White builds a space advantage, and Black made a tactical mistake.

18.Qd5+ Kh8 19.Rxe8 Rxe8 20.Ne4

White declines the b7 and a7 pawns?

20. ... h6 21.c4 b6 22.b4 Be6 23.Qd4 Kg8 24.Bxh6

Black hangs a pawn. This time, White accepts the h6 pawn.

c5 25.bxc5 dxc5 26.Qxd7 Bxd7

Black is behind. He has a rook for a bishop pair.

27.Bf4 Bc6 28.Nc3 Bxg2

Black is still behind. He has a rook for a knight and bishop.

29.Kxg2 Re1 30.Kf2 Rh1 31.h4 Kf7 32.Ke3 Ke6 33.Bb8 Rg1 34.Ne2 Ra1
35.Bxa7 Rxa2 36.Bxb6 Kd6 37.Nc3 Ra3 38.Kd3 Rb3 39.Bd8 Kc6 40.Bg5 Ra3
41.Kc2 Ra1 42.Be3 Re1 43.Kd2 Ra1 44.Kd3 Ra3 45.Bc1 Ra1 46.Kc2 Ra8
47.Ne4 Ra7 48.Kd3 Ra1 49.Bb2 Rd1+ 50.Ke2 Rd7 51.h5 Ra7 52.Kf3 Re7
53.g4 Rf7+ 54.Ke3 Rb7 55.Bc3 Re7 56.g5 Ra7 57.h6 gxh6 58.gxh6 Re7
59.Bg7 1-0

Your opponent knows minor piece vs rook endings. I wonder why you hung
some pawns, and why he passed some up. At 1900 and 2500, respectively,
I thought the days of hanging pawns would be long gone. You held a
close game with someone rated 600 points higher than you. That's cool.

Sam Sloan wrote:
He seemed to be playing weakly, so I started my attack almost
immediately with 5. . . . Ng4.

A misevaluation.

I checked an openings database. 1. e4 e5 2. Nc3 Nf6 3. g3 Bc5 4. Bg2 d6
5. Nge2 scores 50% win, 26.5% draw, and 23.5% loss for White.

After 6. O-O, perhaps I should have
continued my attack with 6 . . . h5. However, that might run in
trouble with 7. Na4, grabbing my active bishop.

I think the move I played, 6. . . . Be6, was weak, as the bishop does
almost nothing there. Perhaps, I should have played 6. . . . Nc6
instead.

I found a game where the Scottish champion William Fairhurst played
this position as Black. Play continued 5. ... Ng4 6. O-O Nc6 and
Fairhurst managed a draw.

Rybka (depth=15) says 6. ... O-O (-.17) is Black's best move. 6. ...
Nc6 (+.16) and 6. ... h5 (+.16) are better than 6. .... Be6 (+.37).

U¿ytkownik "Chess One" napisa³ w wiadomo¶ci
news:5gcrg.4653$0V1.2623@trndny06...
Sam, how about writing a general view of the event, apart from your own
games? I would like to publish something on it, but apart from pictures
and the crosstable the site doesn't say much. Write something up I can use
by end of day tomorrow? Phil

Yes, it would be interesting to read e.g. about Yoshiharu Habu results from
Sam`s point of view. However I understand that usually players while playing
are interested only in their own play ;-)

Sam Sloan wrote:
Sam Sloan finishes Dead Last In World Open

And Gata Kamsky is still very strong. I thought that someone said a few
days ago that he's done with chess?