There is a discussion well worth reading over on Susan Polgar's chess
discussion group at
http://www.chessdiscussion.com/phpBB...=1362&start=30

Polgar complains about a rule specifically passed to stop a repeat of
what Susan Polgar did to qualify for the 2004 Woman's World Chess
Olympiad.

In 2004, when faced with a requirement that she play 20 USCF rated
games in order to meet the activity requirement, Polgar proceeded to
play 20 rated games against Class-B and Class-C players in her own
chess club. This is why Former US Woman's Champion Anjelina
Belakovskaia wrote that Polgar was "only brave enough to face
beginners".

For this reason, the board passed the following rule for the 2006
Olympiad. This may explain why she has not even tried to qualify since
then. Polgar has since then played no games at all which meet the
current requirement. The rule, about which Susan now complains,
states:

"During the 12 month period prior to the computation of invitational
rating, players should have played at least 30 games against opponents
rated 2200 or above (2100 or above for the Women’s Olympiad) in FIDE-
rated or USCF Grand Prix events. Foreign tournaments are acceptable.
For opponents with no established USCF rating, those with a FIDE
rating of 2100 or above (2000 or above for the Women’s Olympiad) are
counted. Tournaments rated only by the USCF’s Quick Chess rating
system do not count. Unplayed games do not count."

On Jul 31, 3:41*pm, samsloan wrote:
There is a discussion well worth reading over on Susan Polgar's chess
discussion group athttp://www.chessdiscussion.com/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=1362&start=30

Polgar complains about a rule specifically passed to stop a repeat of
what Susan Polgar did to qualify for the 2004 Woman's World Chess
Olympiad.

In 2004, when faced with a requirement that she play 20 USCF rated
games in order to meet the activity requirement, Polgar proceeded to
play 20 rated games against Class-B and Class-C players in her own
chess club. This is why Former US Woman's Champion Anjelina
Belakovskaia wrote that Polgar was "only brave enough to face
beginners".

For this reason, the board passed the following rule for the 2006
Olympiad. This may explain why she has not even tried to qualify since
then. Polgar has since then played no games at all which meet the
current requirement. The rule, about which Susan now complains,
states:

"During the 12 month period prior to the computation of invitational
rating, players should have played at least 30 games against opponents
rated 2200 or above (2100 or above for the Women’s Olympiad) in FIDE-
rated or USCF Grand Prix events. Foreign tournaments are acceptable.
For opponents with no established USCF rating, those with a FIDE
rating of 2100 or above (2000 or above for the Women’s Olympiad) are
counted. Tournaments rated only by the USCF’s Quick Chess rating
system do not count. Unplayed games do not count."

The rule strikes me as a bit harsh, not so much for a Susan Polgar but
for a (potential, but AFIK mythical) non-wealthy 2300 rated female
player in a state like Montana. Still, the chutzpah of complaining
about a law you caused by evading the intent of an old law is somewhat
impressive.

Jerry Spinrad

"samsloan" wrote in message
...
There is a discussion well worth reading over on Susan Polgar's chess
discussion group at
http://www.chessdiscussion.com/phpBB...=1362&start=30

Polgar complains about a rule specifically passed to stop a repeat of
what Susan Polgar did to qualify for the 2004 Woman's World Chess
Olympiad.

In 2004, when faced with a requirement that she play 20 USCF rated
games in order to meet the activity requirement, Polgar proceeded to
play 20 rated games against Class-B and Class-C players in her own
chess club. This is why Former US Woman's Champion Anjelina
Belakovskaia wrote that Polgar was "only brave enough to face
beginners".

For this reason, the board passed the following rule for the 2006
Olympiad. This may explain why she has not even tried to qualify since
then. Polgar has since then played no games at all which meet the
current requirement. The rule, about which Susan now complains,
states:

"During the 12 month period prior to the computation of invitational
rating, players should have played at least 30 games against opponents
rated 2200 or above (2100 or above for the Women’s Olympiad) in FIDE-
rated or USCF Grand Prix events.

**And how many current participants have done that? [hint, I. Krush] and
Anna Z /will/ do that in Germany, though she ain't in the team. Instead we
understand that a 1460 blitz-rated player will represent USCF, who may never
have played even 1 game against a master player.

Foreign tournaments are acceptable.
For opponents with no established USCF rating, those with a FIDE
rating of 2100 or above (2000 or above for the Women’s Olympiad) are
counted. Tournaments rated only by the USCF’s Quick Chess rating
system do not count. Unplayed games do not count."

**Therefore, if this is the standard, who actually is currently eligible?
The way Sam Sloan writes is to exclude Susan Polgar alone, whereas, does the
current rule not exclude 5 or 6 players?

**Sam Sloan calls this an 'anti-Polgar' rule, and he is right, but as usual
does not mention the 1466 player who USCF chose instead who maybe /did/ play
30 games against masters in the past 12 months, [but likely?] and LOST them
all. This is the idiocy of what he represents as his and USCF's alternative
to selecting a 2600+ player.

Phil Innes

On Jul 31, 4:04 pm, "
wrote:
On Jul 31, 3:41 pm, samsloan wrote:



There is a discussion well worth reading over on Susan Polgar's chess
discussion group athttp://www.chessdiscussion.com/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=1362&start=30

Polgar complains about a rule specifically passed to stop a repeat of
what Susan Polgar did to qualify for the 2004 Woman's World Chess
Olympiad.

In 2004, when faced with a requirement that she play 20 USCF rated
games in order to meet the activity requirement, Polgar proceeded to
play 20 rated games against Class-B and Class-C players in her own
chess club. This is why Former US Woman's Champion Anjelina
Belakovskaia wrote that Polgar was "only brave enough to face
beginners".

For this reason, the board passed the following rule for the 2006
Olympiad. This may explain why she has not even tried to qualify since
then. Polgar has since then played no games at all which meet the
current requirement. The rule, about which Susan now complains,
states:

"During the 12 month period prior to the computation of invitational
rating, players should have played at least 30 games against opponents
rated 2200 or above (2100 or above for the Women’s Olympiad) in FIDE-
rated or USCF Grand Prix events. Foreign tournaments are acceptable.
For opponents with no established USCF rating, those with a FIDE
rating of 2100 or above (2000 or above for the Women’s Olympiad) are
counted. Tournaments rated only by the USCF’s Quick Chess rating
system do not count. Unplayed games do not count."

The rule strikes me as a bit harsh, not so much for a Susan Polgar but
for a (potential, but AFIK mythical) non-wealthy 2300 rated female
player in a state like Montana. Still, the chutzpah of complaining
about a law you caused by evading the intent of an old law is somewhat
impressive.

Jerry Spinrad

I agree that the rule is severe and basically forces a player to play
in Goichberg tournaments, because where else can you get 30 games
against players rated over 2200? Most grandmasters do not play 30
games a year.

So, the complaint by Susan has some validity, but in her case where
she has played NO games against any masters at all at regular
tournament speed in the last three years, she does not have a case.

I just checked: The last time Susan played a master was in the 2005 US
Amateur Team East. It was in that tournament that she lost to a player
rated 1796. She played two masters but most of her opponents were
Class-B players. Her score of only 4.5 - 1.5 caused her to lose a lot
of rating points.

http://www.uschess.org/msa/XtblMain....13881-12452240

Before that, in the 2004 Oklahoma Dream Team Challenge she played
three masters. This was an exhibition event, not a normal tournament.
It was arranged by Jim and Frank Berry so that members of the Polgar
"Dream Team" could play against local Oklahoma players, but not
against each other.

Other than those total of five games in those two events, Polgar has
played no games against masters since 1995 and even before 1995 she
rarely played a game against a master.

Why she would even want to play in Beijing, assuming that she really
wants to play, is a mystery.

Sam Sloan

samsloan wrote:
On Jul 31, 4:04 pm, "
wrote:
On Jul 31, 3:41 pm, samsloan wrote:



There is a discussion well worth reading over on Susan Polgar's chess
discussion group athttp://www.chessdiscussion.com/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=1362&start=30
Polgar complains about a rule specifically passed to stop a repeat of
what Susan Polgar did to qualify for the 2004 Woman's World Chess
Olympiad.
In 2004, when faced with a requirement that she play 20 USCF rated
games in order to meet the activity requirement, Polgar proceeded to
play 20 rated games against Class-B and Class-C players in her own
chess club. This is why Former US Woman's Champion Anjelina
Belakovskaia wrote that Polgar was "only brave enough to face
beginners".
For this reason, the board passed the following rule for the 2006
Olympiad. This may explain why she has not even tried to qualify since
then. Polgar has since then played no games at all which meet the
current requirement. The rule, about which Susan now complains,
states:
"During the 12 month period prior to the computation of invitational
rating, players should have played at least 30 games against opponents
rated 2200 or above (2100 or above for the Women’s Olympiad) in FIDE-
rated or USCF Grand Prix events. Foreign tournaments are acceptable.
For opponents with no established USCF rating, those with a FIDE
rating of 2100 or above (2000 or above for the Women’s Olympiad) are
counted. Tournaments rated only by the USCF’s Quick Chess rating
system do not count. Unplayed games do not count."
The rule strikes me as a bit harsh, not so much for a Susan Polgar but
for a (potential, but AFIK mythical) non-wealthy 2300 rated female
player in a state like Montana. Still, the chutzpah of complaining
about a law you caused by evading the intent of an old law is somewhat
impressive.

Jerry Spinrad

I agree that the rule is severe and basically forces a player to play
in Goichberg tournaments, because where else can you get 30 games
against players rated over 2200? Most grandmasters do not play 30
games a year.

So, the complaint by Susan has some validity, but in her case where
she has played NO games against any masters at all at regular
tournament speed in the last three years, she does not have a case.

I just checked: The last time Susan played a master was in the 2005 US
Amateur Team East. It was in that tournament that she lost to a player
rated 1796. She played two masters but most of her opponents were
Class-B players. Her score of only 4.5 - 1.5 caused her to lose a lot
of rating points.

http://www.uschess.org/msa/XtblMain....13881-12452240

Before that, in the 2004 Oklahoma Dream Team Challenge she played
three masters. This was an exhibition event, not a normal tournament.
It was arranged by Jim and Frank Berry so that members of the Polgar
"Dream Team" could play against local Oklahoma players, but not
against each other.

Other than those total of five games in those two events, Polgar has
played no games against masters since 1995 and even before 1995 she
rarely played a game against a master.

Why she would even want to play in Beijing, assuming that she really
wants to play, is a mystery.

Sam Sloan

For the curious...

Roberto Jose (1796)
GM Susan Polgar (2561)
USATE 2005, TL 40/2 SD/1, Feb. 19, 2005,ECO A87
Dutch Defense – Leningrad System 5)Nf3

1.Nf3 f5 2.g3 Nf6 3.Bg2 g6 4.d4 Bg7 5.0–0 0–0 6.c4 d6 7.Nc3 Qe8
8.Re1 Qf7 9.Qb3 h6 10.Bd2 Ne4 11.Rad1 Nxd2 12.Rxd2 e5 13.dxe5
dxe5 14.Red1 Nc6 15.Nd5 e4 16.Ne1 Ne5 17.Qb4 Re8 18.Nc2 c6
19.Nde3 Be6 20.Nd4 Bxc4 21.b3 Ba6 22.Qa5 Re7 23.Bh3 Rd7 24.Ndc2
Rxd2 25.Rxd2 Bf6 26.Nd4 Kh8 27.Ng2 Rd8 28.Nf4 Rd7 29.Kf1 h5
30.Nfe6 Ng4?! 31.Bxg4 hxg4 32.Qc5 b6? 33.Qxc6 Bb7 34.Qa4! Qh7?
35.Kg1 e3 36.fxe3 Qh3?? 37.Nf4 Qh7 38.Nxg6+ Kg8 39.Nxf5 1–0

[ http://njoychess.com/ACN/2005%20A.pdf ]
--

"Do that which is right..."

Rev. J.D. Walker

samsloan wrote:
On Jul 31, 4:04 pm, "
wrote:
On Jul 31, 3:41 pm, samsloan wrote:



There is a discussion well worth reading over on Susan Polgar's chess
discussion group athttp://www.chessdiscussion.com/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=1362&start=30

Polgar complains about a rule specifically passed to stop a repeat of
what Susan Polgar did to qualify for the 2004 Woman's World Chess
Olympiad.

In 2004, when faced with a requirement that she play 20 USCF rated
games in order to meet the activity requirement, Polgar proceeded to
play 20 rated games against Class-B and Class-C players in her own
chess club. This is why Former US Woman's Champion Anjelina
Belakovskaia wrote that Polgar was "only brave enough to face
beginners".

For this reason, the board passed the following rule for the 2006
Olympiad. This may explain why she has not even tried to qualify since
then. Polgar has since then played no games at all which meet the
current requirement. The rule, about which Susan now complains,
states:

"During the 12 month period prior to the computation of invitational
rating, players should have played at least 30 games against opponents
rated 2200 or above (2100 or above for the Women�s Olympiad) in FIDE-
rated or USCF Grand Prix events. Foreign tournaments are acceptable.
For opponents with no established USCF rating, those with a FIDE
rating of 2100 or above (2000 or above for the Women�s Olympiad) are
counted. Tournaments rated only by the USCF�s Quick Chess rating
system do not count. Unplayed games do not count."

The rule strikes me as a bit harsh, not so much for a Susan Polgar but
for a (potential, but AFIK mythical) non-wealthy 2300 rated female
player in a state like Montana. Still, the chutzpah of complaining
about a law you caused by evading the intent of an old law is somewhat
impressive.

Jerry Spinrad

I agree that the rule is severe and basically forces a player to play
in Goichberg tournaments, because where else can you get 30 games
against players rated over 2200? Most grandmasters do not play 30
games a year.

So, the complaint by Susan has some validity, but in her case where
she has played NO games against any masters at all at regular
tournament speed in the last three years, she does not have a case.

I just checked: The last time Susan played a master was in the 2005 US
Amateur Team East. It was in that tournament that she lost to a player
rated 1796. She played two masters but most of her opponents were
Class-B players. Her score of only 4.5 - 1.5 caused her to lose a lot
of rating points.

http://www.uschess.org/msa/XtblMain....13881-12452240

Before that, in the 2004 Oklahoma Dream Team Challenge she played
three masters. This was an exhibition event, not a normal tournament.
It was arranged by Jim and Frank Berry so that members of the Polgar
"Dream Team" could play against local Oklahoma players, but not
against each other.

Other than those total of five games in those two events, Polgar has
played no games against masters since 1995 and even before 1995 she
rarely played a game against a master.

Why she would even want to play in Beijing, assuming that she really
wants to play, is a mystery.

Sam Sloan


You are again ignoring the "Mayor's Cup," which was rated under the
regular rating system whether you like it or not. (I don't, but that's
another argument.) You are also overlooking the the 2004 Olympiad,
which _you_ claimed should be USCF rated. Multiple-choice question,
Sam: Are you a) disingenuous, b) stupid, of c) all of the above?

On Jul 31, 5:15 pm, wrote:

You are again ignoring the "Mayor's Cup," which was rated under the
regular rating system whether you like it or not. (I don't, but that's
another argument.) You are also overlooking the the 2004 Olympiad,
which _you_ claimed should be USCF rated. Multiple-choice question,
Sam: Are you a) disingenuous, b) stupid, of c) all of the above?

I see your point. The NY Mayor's Cup is a dual rated system. As a
tournament with a 30 minutes sudden time control, it is simultaneously
rated under both systems.

However, as I recall, back in 2006 when the rule Polgar complains
about was passed it was not dual rated. However, I am not sure. I am
sure that the rule was changed about this.

The 2004 World Chess Olympiad was not USCF rated. However, you are
correct that during my one year on the board I repeatedly made motions
that it be rated. Unfortunately, I could not get enough votes from the
other board members.

Sam Sloan

TJ.D. Walker wrote:
samsloan wrote:
On Jul 31, 4:04 pm, "
wrote:
On Jul 31, 3:41 pm, samsloan wrote:



There is a discussion well worth reading over on Susan Polgar's chess
discussion group
athttp://www.chessdiscussion.com/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=1362&start=30

Polgar complains about a rule specifically passed to stop a repeat of
what Susan Polgar did to qualify for the 2004 Woman's World Chess
Olympiad.
In 2004, when faced with a requirement that she play 20 USCF rated
games in order to meet the activity requirement, Polgar proceeded to
play 20 rated games against Class-B and Class-C players in her own
chess club. This is why Former US Woman's Champion Anjelina
Belakovskaia wrote that Polgar was "only brave enough to face
beginners".
For this reason, the board passed the following rule for the 2006
Olympiad. This may explain why she has not even tried to qualify since
then. Polgar has since then played no games at all which meet the
current requirement. The rule, about which Susan now complains,
states:
"During the 12 month period prior to the computation of invitational
rating, players should have played at least 30 games against opponents
rated 2200 or above (2100 or above for the Women’s Olympiad) in FIDE-
rated or USCF Grand Prix events. Foreign tournaments are acceptable.
For opponents with no established USCF rating, those with a FIDE
rating of 2100 or above (2000 or above for the Women’s Olympiad) are
counted. Tournaments rated only by the USCF’s Quick Chess rating
system do not count. Unplayed games do not count."
The rule strikes me as a bit harsh, not so much for a Susan Polgar but
for a (potential, but AFIK mythical) non-wealthy 2300 rated female
player in a state like Montana. Still, the chutzpah of complaining
about a law you caused by evading the intent of an old law is somewhat
impressive.

Jerry Spinrad

I agree that the rule is severe and basically forces a player to play
in Goichberg tournaments, because where else can you get 30 games
against players rated over 2200? Most grandmasters do not play 30
games a year.

So, the complaint by Susan has some validity, but in her case where
she has played NO games against any masters at all at regular
tournament speed in the last three years, she does not have a case.

I just checked: The last time Susan played a master was in the 2005 US
Amateur Team East. It was in that tournament that she lost to a player
rated 1796. She played two masters but most of her opponents were
Class-B players. Her score of only 4.5 - 1.5 caused her to lose a lot
of rating points.

http://www.uschess.org/msa/XtblMain....13881-12452240

Before that, in the 2004 Oklahoma Dream Team Challenge she played
three masters. This was an exhibition event, not a normal tournament.
It was arranged by Jim and Frank Berry so that members of the Polgar
"Dream Team" could play against local Oklahoma players, but not
against each other.

Other than those total of five games in those two events, Polgar has
played no games against masters since 1995 and even before 1995 she
rarely played a game against a master.

Why she would even want to play in Beijing, assuming that she really
wants to play, is a mystery.

Sam Sloan

For the curious...

Roberto Jose (1796)
GM Susan Polgar (2561)
USATE 2005, TL 40/2 SD/1, Feb. 19, 2005,ECO A87
Dutch Defense – Leningrad System 5)Nf3

1.Nf3 f5 2.g3 Nf6 3.Bg2 g6 4.d4 Bg7 5.0–0 0–0 6.c4 d6 7.Nc3 Qe8
8.Re1 Qf7 9.Qb3 h6 10.Bd2 Ne4 11.Rad1 Nxd2 12.Rxd2 e5 13.dxe5
dxe5 14.Red1 Nc6 15.Nd5 e4 16.Ne1 Ne5 17.Qb4 Re8 18.Nc2 c6
19.Nde3 Be6 20.Nd4 Bxc4 21.b3 Ba6 22.Qa5 Re7 23.Bh3 Rd7 24.Ndc2
Rxd2 25.Rxd2 Bf6 26.Nd4 Kh8 27.Ng2 Rd8 28.Nf4 Rd7 29.Kf1 h5
30.Nfe6 Ng4?! 31.Bxg4 hxg4 32.Qc5 b6? 33.Qxc6 Bb7 34.Qa4! Qh7?
35.Kg1 e3 36.fxe3 Qh3?? 37.Nf4 Qh7 38.Nxg6+ Kg8 39.Nxf5 1–0

[ http://njoychess.com/ACN/2005%20A.pdf ]
Thanks JD.

On Jul 31, 5:12 pm, "J.D. Walker" wrote:
samsloan wrote:
On Jul 31, 4:04 pm, "
wrote:
On Jul 31, 3:41 pm, samsloan wrote:

There is a discussion well worth reading over on Susan Polgar's chess
discussion group athttp://www.chessdiscussion.com/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=1362&start=30
Polgar complains about a rule specifically passed to stop a repeat of
what Susan Polgar did to qualify for the 2004 Woman's World Chess
Olympiad.
In 2004, when faced with a requirement that she play 20 USCF rated
games in order to meet the activity requirement, Polgar proceeded to
play 20 rated games against Class-B and Class-C players in her own
chess club. This is why Former US Woman's Champion Anjelina
Belakovskaia wrote that Polgar was "only brave enough to face
beginners".
For this reason, the board passed the following rule for the 2006
Olympiad. This may explain why she has not even tried to qualify since
then. Polgar has since then played no games at all which meet the
current requirement. The rule, about which Susan now complains,
states:
"During the 12 month period prior to the computation of invitational
rating, players should have played at least 30 games against opponents
rated 2200 or above (2100 or above for the Women’s Olympiad) in FIDE-
rated or USCF Grand Prix events. Foreign tournaments are acceptable.
For opponents with no established USCF rating, those with a FIDE
rating of 2100 or above (2000 or above for the Women’s Olympiad) are
counted. Tournaments rated only by the USCF’s Quick Chess rating
system do not count. Unplayed games do not count."
The rule strikes me as a bit harsh, not so much for a Susan Polgar but
for a (potential, but AFIK mythical) non-wealthy 2300 rated female
player in a state like Montana. Still, the chutzpah of complaining
about a law you caused by evading the intent of an old law is somewhat
impressive.

Jerry Spinrad

I agree that the rule is severe and basically forces a player to play
in Goichberg tournaments, because where else can you get 30 games
against players rated over 2200? Most grandmasters do not play 30
games a year.

So, the complaint by Susan has some validity, but in her case where
she has played NO games against any masters at all at regular
tournament speed in the last three years, she does not have a case.

I just checked: The last time Susan played a master was in the 2005 US
Amateur Team East. It was in that tournament that she lost to a player
rated 1796. She played two masters but most of her opponents were
Class-B players. Her score of only 4.5 - 1.5 caused her to lose a lot
of rating points.

http://www.uschess.org/msa/XtblMain....13881-12452240

Before that, in the 2004 Oklahoma Dream Team Challenge she played
three masters. This was an exhibition event, not a normal tournament.
It was arranged by Jim and Frank Berry so that members of the Polgar
"Dream Team" could play against local Oklahoma players, but not
against each other.

Other than those total of five games in those two events, Polgar has
played no games against masters since 1995 and even before 1995 she
rarely played a game against a master.

Why she would even want to play in Beijing, assuming that she really
wants to play, is a mystery.

Sam Sloan

For the curious...

Roberto Jose (1796)
GM Susan Polgar (2561)
USATE 2005, TL 40/2 SD/1, Feb. 19, 2005,ECO A87
Dutch Defense – Leningrad System 5)Nf3

1.Nf3 f5 2.g3 Nf6 3.Bg2 g6 4.d4 Bg7 5.0–0 0–0 6.c4 d6 7.Nc3 Qe8
8.Re1 Qf7 9.Qb3 h6 10.Bd2 Ne4 11.Rad1 Nxd2 12.Rxd2 e5 13.dxe5
dxe5 14.Red1 Nc6 15.Nd5 e4 16.Ne1 Ne5 17.Qb4 Re8 18.Nc2 c6
19.Nde3 Be6 20.Nd4 Bxc4 21.b3 Ba6 22.Qa5 Re7 23.Bh3 Rd7 24.Ndc2
Rxd2 25.Rxd2 Bf6 26.Nd4 Kh8 27.Ng2 Rd8 28.Nf4 Rd7 29.Kf1 h5
30.Nfe6 Ng4?! 31.Bxg4 hxg4 32.Qc5 b6? 33.Qxc6 Bb7 34.Qa4! Qh7?
35.Kg1 e3 36.fxe3 Qh3?? 37.Nf4 Qh7 38.Nxg6+ Kg8 39.Nxf5 1–0

[http://njoychess.com/ACN/2005%20A.pdf]
--

"Do that which is right..."

Rev. J.D. Walker

Thank you. The Roberto Jose- Susan Polgar is on page 16.

Polgar as black played extremely aggressively, apparently figuring
that since her opponent was a Class-B player he would collapse. Then,
she played an incredible series of bad moves. She lost on time but it
was just as well as she was getting mated on the back rank in a few
more moves.

I think she missed a win. There could have been a cute mate after
30. ... Nf3 31. Rd1 Qxe6 32. Nxe6 Rd1+ 33. Kg2 Rg1# checkmate.

Of course, White would probably not have played 31. Rd1 but I think
Black would have had a winning position anyway.

This extremely bad game certainly explains why Susan Polgar has never
played in an open Swiss tournament since then.

Perhaps after a few warm-up tournaments she would be readily to play
in serious competition again.

Sam Sloan

samsloan wrote:
On Jul 31, 5:12 pm, "J.D. Walker" wrote:
samsloan wrote:
On Jul 31, 4:04 pm, "
wrote:
On Jul 31, 3:41 pm, samsloan wrote:
There is a discussion well worth reading over on Susan Polgar's chess
discussion group athttp://www.chessdiscussion.com/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=1362&start=30
Polgar complains about a rule specifically passed to stop a repeat of
what Susan Polgar did to qualify for the 2004 Woman's World Chess
Olympiad.
In 2004, when faced with a requirement that she play 20 USCF rated
games in order to meet the activity requirement, Polgar proceeded to
play 20 rated games against Class-B and Class-C players in her own
chess club. This is why Former US Woman's Champion Anjelina
Belakovskaia wrote that Polgar was "only brave enough to face
beginners".
For this reason, the board passed the following rule for the 2006
Olympiad. This may explain why she has not even tried to qualify since
then. Polgar has since then played no games at all which meet the
current requirement. The rule, about which Susan now complains,
states:
"During the 12 month period prior to the computation of invitational
rating, players should have played at least 30 games against opponents
rated 2200 or above (2100 or above for the Women’s Olympiad) in FIDE-
rated or USCF Grand Prix events. Foreign tournaments are acceptable.
For opponents with no established USCF rating, those with a FIDE
rating of 2100 or above (2000 or above for the Women’s Olympiad) are
counted. Tournaments rated only by the USCF’s Quick Chess rating
system do not count. Unplayed games do not count."
The rule strikes me as a bit harsh, not so much for a Susan Polgar but
for a (potential, but AFIK mythical) non-wealthy 2300 rated female
player in a state like Montana. Still, the chutzpah of complaining
about a law you caused by evading the intent of an old law is somewhat
impressive.
Jerry Spinrad
I agree that the rule is severe and basically forces a player to play
in Goichberg tournaments, because where else can you get 30 games
against players rated over 2200? Most grandmasters do not play 30
games a year.
So, the complaint by Susan has some validity, but in her case where
she has played NO games against any masters at all at regular
tournament speed in the last three years, she does not have a case.
I just checked: The last time Susan played a master was in the 2005 US
Amateur Team East. It was in that tournament that she lost to a player
rated 1796. She played two masters but most of her opponents were
Class-B players. Her score of only 4.5 - 1.5 caused her to lose a lot
of rating points.
http://www.uschess.org/msa/XtblMain....13881-12452240
Before that, in the 2004 Oklahoma Dream Team Challenge she played
three masters. This was an exhibition event, not a normal tournament.
It was arranged by Jim and Frank Berry so that members of the Polgar
"Dream Team" could play against local Oklahoma players, but not
against each other.
Other than those total of five games in those two events, Polgar has
played no games against masters since 1995 and even before 1995 she
rarely played a game against a master.
Why she would even want to play in Beijing, assuming that she really
wants to play, is a mystery.
Sam Sloan
For the curious...

Roberto Jose (1796)
GM Susan Polgar (2561)
USATE 2005, TL 40/2 SD/1, Feb. 19, 2005,ECO A87
Dutch Defense – Leningrad System 5)Nf3

1.Nf3 f5 2.g3 Nf6 3.Bg2 g6 4.d4 Bg7 5.0–0 0–0 6.c4 d6 7.Nc3 Qe8
8.Re1 Qf7 9.Qb3 h6 10.Bd2 Ne4 11.Rad1 Nxd2 12.Rxd2 e5 13.dxe5
dxe5 14.Red1 Nc6 15.Nd5 e4 16.Ne1 Ne5 17.Qb4 Re8 18.Nc2 c6
19.Nde3 Be6 20.Nd4 Bxc4 21.b3 Ba6 22.Qa5 Re7 23.Bh3 Rd7 24.Ndc2
Rxd2 25.Rxd2 Bf6 26.Nd4 Kh8 27.Ng2 Rd8 28.Nf4 Rd7 29.Kf1 h5
30.Nfe6 Ng4?! 31.Bxg4 hxg4 32.Qc5 b6? 33.Qxc6 Bb7 34.Qa4! Qh7?
35.Kg1 e3 36.fxe3 Qh3?? 37.Nf4 Qh7 38.Nxg6+ Kg8 39.Nxf5 1–0

[http://njoychess.com/ACN/2005%20A.pdf]
--

"Do that which is right..."

Rev. J.D. Walker

Thank you. The Roberto Jose- Susan Polgar is on page 16.

Polgar as black played extremely aggressively, apparently figuring
that since her opponent was a Class-B player he would collapse. Then,
she played an incredible series of bad moves. She lost on time but it
was just as well as she was getting mated on the back rank in a few
more moves.

I think she missed a win. There could have been a cute mate after
30. ... Nf3 31. Rd1 Qxe6 32. Nxe6 Rd1+ 33. Kg2 Rg1# checkmate.

Of course, White would probably not have played 31. Rd1 but I think
Black would have had a winning position anyway.

This extremely bad game certainly explains why Susan Polgar has never
played in an open Swiss tournament since then.

Perhaps after a few warm-up tournaments she would be readily to play
in serious competition again.

Sam Sloan
Here's a quick Fritz X analysis:

[Event "120'+15"/40+60'/20+30'"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "2008.07.31"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Jose, Roberto"]
[Black "Polgar, Susan"]
[Result "1-0"]
[ECO "A87"]
[WhiteElo "1796"]
[BlackElo "2561"]
[Annotator "Fritz 10 (4s)"]
[PlyCount "77"]

{A87: Dutch Defence: Leningrad System: 5 Nf3} 1. Nf3 f5 2. g3 Nf6 3. Bg2
g6 4.
d4 Bg7 5. O-O O-O 6. c4 d6 7. Nc3 Qe8 8. Re1 Qf7 {last book move} 9. Qb3
h6 {
Controls g5} 10. Bd2 Ne4 11. Rad1 (11. Be3 c6 $11) 11... Nxd2 12. Rxd2 (12.
Nxd2 c6 13. d5 f4 $11) 12... e5 $15 13. dxe5 dxe5 14. Red1 Nc6 15. Nd5 e4 {
Black gets more space} 16. Ne1 Ne5 17. Qb4 (17. f4 exf3 18. exf3 c6 $15)
17...
Re8 18. Nc2 (18. Qa4 $5 Be6 19. b3 $17) 18... c6 $17 19. Nde3 Be6 (19...
g5 20.
g4 Bf8 21. Qc3 $19) 20. Nd4 (20. b3 $142 $5 $15 {is worth
consideration}) 20...
Bxc4 $19 21. b3 Ba6 22. Qa5 (22. Ndc2 Rf8 $19) 22... Re7 (22... Rf8 23.
Rc2 $19
) 23. Bh3 (23. h3 Rf8 24. Qb4 Ree8 $19) 23... Rd7 24. Ndc2 Rxd2 25. Rxd2
(25.
Qxd2 b6 $19) 25... Bf6 (25... Rf8 26. Nd4 $19) 26. Nd4 Kh8 27. Ng2 Rd8
28. Nf4
(28. Nc2 Rxd2 29. Qxd2 Bg7 $19) 28... Rd7 (28... Bxe2 {
keeps an even firmer grip} 29. Nfxe2 b6 30. Qa4 $19) 29. Kf1 $6 {
puts up no strong fight} (29. Bg2 g5 30. Nxf5 gxf4 31. gxf4 Qh5 32. Rxd7
Nxd7
33. Bxe4 Qxe2 $19 (33... Bxe2 $6 34. Qxa7 Qg4+ 35. Ng3 $17)) 29... h5
(29... g5
$142 {might be the shorter path} 30. Nfe6 Nf3 31. Nxf3 exf3 32. Bxf5
fxe2+ 33.
Ke1 $19) 30. Nfe6 $2 (30. Kg1 Bxe2 $1 {Deflection: e2} 31. Nfxe2 b6 $19)
30...
Ng4 (30... Nf3 $142 $1 {makes it even easier for Black} 31. Nxf3 exf3
32. Nf4
$19) 31. Bxg4 $6 {instead of fighting back} (31. Qc5 Nxf2 $1 {
Double attack: c5/f2} 32. Kxf2 Rd5 33. Qxa7 Bxd4+ 34. Nxd4 c5 $17) 31...
hxg4 (
{Instead of} 31... fxg4 32. Qc3 c5 33. Qxc5 $19) 32. Qc5 b6 (32... Qe7
$142 $5
33. Qxa7 Kg8 $19) 33. Qxc6 $17 Bb7 34. Qa4 Qh7 $4 {
Black threatens to win material: Qh7xh2. a transit from better to worse}
(34...
Re7 $142 $19 {would have given Black the upper hand}) 35. Kg1 $11 e3 36.
fxe3
Qh3 $4 {throws away a nice position} (36... b5 $142 {the only rescuing move}
37. Qxa7 Qxh2+ 38. Kxh2 Rh7+ 39. Kg1 Rh1+ 40. Kf2 Rh2+ 41. Kg1 Rh1+ 42. Kf2
Rh2+ 43. Kf1 Rh1+ 44. Kf2 $11) 37. Nf4 $18 Qh7 38. Nxg6+ $1 {Deflection: g6}
Kg8 (38... Qxg6 39. Qxd7 {Deflection} (39. Qxd7 {Overloading})) 39. Nxf5
(39.
Nxf5 Qxg6 40. Qxd7 $18) 1-0