The following thought is from my friend, Sam Maitz:

“There is no sudden leap to greatness.
Your success lies in doing day by day.
Your upward reach will come from working well and carefully.
 
Good work done little by little becomes great work.
The house of success is built brick by brick.
 
Adopt the pace of nature.  The secret is patience.
A bottle fills drop by drop.”

I offer the above in hopes that all players will recognize that, sooner or later, games get more difficult and the player reaches a level where the opponents are his/her equal. At this time several things occur:
First, the player’s elo bobs up and down within narrow limits,
Second, the player experiences more drawn games.
And, lastly, the player is taking as many losses as wins.

This point of growth is the plateau. This is a place where the player settles in and enjoys games with peers; with the hope that the experience will increase elo. In fact, it does. But only the right experience works, and, still, the gain is often agonizingly slow.

When a stronger player with experience enters a new chess environment, there are usually early wins. At first, the elo climbs quickly. Then the plateau occurs. The only way the player will move further upward is to improve his game, or play against lesser players. But, the elo system is designed to keep the player on a plateau by the differentiation in elo points won and lost depending on the strength of the opponent. Think of it as a thermostat. If your win ratio gets too high the elo system brings you back!

A player needs to improve in order to permanently move to a higher plateau. At this point, self-improvement is difficult. The player seldom sees the thought behaviors that hold him to that level! (O’ wha’ a gift the giftee gie us, to see oursels as others see us.” – Bobby Burns.) Chess is a game of mental skills and aptitudes. In chess memory is a primary aptitude, reason and logic are primary skills. These are in the mind, and the mind expresses them in thoughts. It is your thoughts, your thinking, that determine your degree of success. Knowledge plays an elementary part, but it must be converted to skill, and knowledge can be converted only with practice. The problem players face is that many practice the wrong thoughts! Practice does not make perfect! Practice makes permanent! Only perfect practice will make perfect. And, so, it is the quality of what you do with the board and pieces, on every occasion. So, if you slack off with an inferior opponent, you have started a limiting habit. Always play your best, regardless of who your opponent may be.

There are ways to find the limiting behaviors, of course. All of the ways require one critical element: Feedback! Feedback can come from a number of sources, the true role of a coach is to provide feedback; to help the player see what is otherwise invisible to him.

If a player seeks continuous improvement, feedback is not something that can successfully be turned off and on. It must be constant. A simple way to obtain feedback is to analyze your own games. I believe it is most productive to analyze one’s losses. A great post-game activity is analysis. It requires an open mind, lest the true reason be dismissed too quickly.

The task is complicated, because there are normally multiple errors in thinking. When encountered, the coach must focus on only one! A person can only give their focused attention to one thing at a time. Here is an example of a player who needs multiple changes. Let’s look and see how it should be handled.

White played: 10. c4
This move is bad because it creates a black passed pawn on d4.
Black makes a note to help White with pawn play. If White improves his pawn play appreciably, he will move to a higher plateau.

A few moves later:

14. … Bb7. This move threatens 15. … Be4, winning the white queen!
15. Qc2?? This bad move was made to save the queen. It loses.
15. … d3 And the fork is deadly!

White needs help in tactical play. Which should be addressed? Both pawn play and tactics are core areas of the game. The coach picks one and focuses on it, causing the player to focus. The other is not mentioned until the first is secure. The player cannot focus if there are two different issues. In an initial game, I often see four or five issues! I just pick one and let the others rest. In this instance, either improved pawn play or improved tactical awareness will improve the players’ elo. It will nudge him from the plateau. Continuous improvement means just that: Working on one thing with the entire mind until it is resolved, then moving to another issue.

The enemy of improvement is denial. When looking at an exhibited error in thinking, many players rationalize or justify the move rather than looking for the thinking that caused it. Much of the denial can be heard in the phrase: “Yes, but…“ Denial prevents gain.

When a player is beginning, or who experiences a plateau at a low level, there are two dominant reasons for losing games. The first is simply timeouts. You can never win a game that has timed out. Games time out for many ‘reasons’, but most of these are under the control of the player. One of the primary reasons is that the player has no true desire to improve, he just enjoys the social aspect and the thrill of moving the pieces around until one player serendipitously gains an advantage.

The second reason is blunders. Blunders are not always easy to stop, they can result from the mind going on vacation (or, in my case: A senior moment) during the game, but they are caused by the player not seeing the position. Seeing the board on every move is not as easy as it sounds. A basic reason for a blunder is not taking time enough to study the position before moving. Sometimes the time is limited by having too many games. Patience is truly a virtue, in chess as in all else.

Once the time outs and blunders are under control, it is time to study candidates. In any position there are multiple candidates for any move. It is important to recognize probable successful candidates and look at their individual impacts on the position and on the plan. To do this successfully, the player needs not only to see the board; but also to have a plan.

Here is an example of a player missing the right candidate, the game is a French Tarrash:

White Black
1. e4 e6
2. d4 d5
3. Nd2 c5
4. Ngf3 cxd4
5. Nxd4 …

This is a common position in the Tarrasch. There are a number of candidates for Black’s fifth move: He must develop his minor pieces, he must respect b5, he must consider the center. 5. … Nc6 or Nd7 both keep the white pawn from advancing, and close the diagonal a4-e8. 5. … Nf6 challenges the pawn and can retake on e5, and can move to d4 if the white pawn comes forward. 5. … a6 holds b5. Even 5. … dxe4 can be considered. (The knight moves are probably the best candidates).

But Black “sees” a way to “attack” something:

5. … Qb6 This move is positionally bad. White now has a distinct advantage. 5. … Bc5 is also bad, for the same reason. Black cannot win a battle on d4! He is not well enough developed. The attack on b2 is an illusion. His plan is bad, and so his candidates are weak.

6. c3 Bc5 Persisting, without counting. (“Count who come for the broken meats before thou makest a feast.”- Kipling)
7. Ndb3 … This move blocks b2 and protects d4, it also attacks c5.
7. … Nc6 Still attacking d4. (This move, however has some beneficial features in that it does block the a4-e8 diagonal, and it does contest the center. But it comes too late.)
8. Nxc5 Qxc5 Black should have seen, by now, that he cannot successfully win d4.
9. Be3 Nxd4 Black is still focused on the exchange. The Black queen cannot recapture on d4, so one defender is immobile.
10. Bxd4 … Now the flaw in exchanging on d4 is clear. The bishop is well posted on d4, forking the Queen and the pawn on g7.
11. Qc6.

Now, the hand of white leaps to the bishop! He has won a rook! Quickly, laughingly, seize the g7 pawn! Bxg7! And follow with the rook capture: Bxh8!!

Right?

WRONG! One of the ways we go wrong is when we see a winning move. In this position, capturing the pawn will still win; but it is not the best move. Engage brain before putting hand in gear… Stay away from the bishop, don’t touch it.

Instead, make the zwischenzug:

11. exd5 … Now, with the queen threatened, Black has Hobson’s choice: Lose or move the queen, or take the pawn. Either way, White still gets the rook, but now White also has an improved position.

If you shrug it off by saying: “So what?, I still win.” You will chose the inferior move at a time when you will not still win!!
Remember: When you see a good move, always look for a better one. Even a winning move can be a mistake! We fail to make the best moves when we have tunnel vision, when we rush, when we are following a flawed plan, and when we fail to consider candidates.

For players at this stage, I suggest the player start with simple plans and intense observation. There are a couple of good ways to develop more powerful observation; one is simply to work chess problems every day! It will be frustrating missing the solutions, at first; but by persevering the player will see the patterns in the solutions. And the study will result in improved observation with a consequent improvement in the game.

To improve planning skills, the player can start with simple plans and adhere to them. Follow basic opening rules, make them the plan. It can simply be: I will occupy and fight for a place in the center, I will mobilize my minor pieces, I will get my rooks to open files, or those I believe will open. I will avoid exposing my queen. I will castle before the opponent can prevent it. This simple plan will get a player through even complicated openings. Plan to play an opening with which you are very familiar, so you know what the pawn structure will probably become, and you know which pieces are likely to be exchanged, and you know which lines will probably be open and which will probably be shut. Keep in mind that if you do not know the next move in an opening, you are automatically in the middle game, whether you know it or not! Whether you want to be or not! If you truly know your opening you may still be in the opening when your opponent is facing emerging tactical and positional problems. He may not see the right candidate! I suspect that is exactly what happened in the game above. White was not familiar with his own opening, perhaps being familiar only so far, or only on the main line. You have a great advantage when you know the opening better than your opponent does, and you do not need a vast repertoire. Start with one white opening, one black defense against e4 and one against e5. Just learn these three one at a time. Focus on your White opening first, then when you know that opening well and are consistently winning with it against equals, you are ready to add a Black defense to your repertoire. Each time you truly learn one, your elo will move upward, this is continuous improvement. No great leaps forward, just steady progress in one element of the game at a time.

Good chessing! Al (alfredjwood)

When a new player begins chess openings, I recommend that whatever opening is chosen is one that the player will use every time! I want the player to become accustomed to the positions this opening leads into. My reasoning is that chess is learned in one of two ways:

First, we learn the placement of the pieces at the start of the game, then we learn the moves. Teaching chess by moves is not difficult, and learning the moves themselves is not difficult. This is what I think of as a scientific method. It is the way games are recorded.

But some players are blessed with a special talent; the ability to unify sensations into meaningful composites. They see the patterns, not the moves. This is more difficult to teach, it depends on the artistic or imaginative power of the player. This is what I think of as the Artistic method.

I believe it is necessary to begin with the first method, because there is lots of incidental learning that initially takes place, and because it can be digested by anyone. Starting with the artistic method would quickly discourage someone without the imaginative ability.

But, for those few who may have the talent for treating the game as an art, I believe that, as soon as the basics of the game are learned, the player can address pattern recognition. Instead of memorizing the moves in the opening, the player simply has pictures in his/her mind of the positions created by the opening, and plays to and from these positions.

If we know what we want from the opening in terms of these pictures, we can see the current picture and know whether we are on course, or whether we must change course to reach another familiar picture. If the performer can “see” the positions in his/her mind, a library of still pictures is created.

Of course, if the player insists on experimenting with a number of openings, the task can be much more difficult, or impossible. I believe it is easier to start with a solid “trunk” and add “branches” later. That’s why I stress the One Opening idea.

I offer this so that the reader can better understand the importance of playing by position, not by move. Pattern recognition is the key. If we were learning pattern recognition, we should start with pawn structures and build from that point. Pawn patterns are easy to recognize and often control the course of the game. The pawn structure is a key element in planning.

Patterns exist in opening, middle game and endings. However patterns are best learned in the endgame. There are known results- win/loss/draw- with endgame patterns. Think of an end game pattern as a “technique”. When an author says: “The rest is a matter of technique.” He is saying that this is a well-known endgame pattern.

Studying endgames is done with patterns, and the student normally has to repeat the move sequence a number of times before the “pictures” of the pattern form. When I began learning chess, I began with endgames. I needed a partner in order to have some fun working the endgame from a given position until mate, over and over, until it was memorized. Today, we have the computer as an opponent! We can test our understanding of the endgame pattern against the computer, which never tires of repetition!

This leads us to transpositions. Let’s look at transposing an opening. When we
are working to become expert in one opening, we may be able to play that opening with White only 20% of the time! That means we may need five games to get one where we can use “our” opening. (With Black, it gets easier; but I think that a White opening should be the first a player learns.) Fortunately, on Chessmaniac we can challenge with either Black or White and practice our white opening in every game where the opponent does not take us astray.

Now, if I am an inexperienced player and have put some time and effort into learning an opening, I have probably subconsciously developed a pattern recognition of this opening, which becomes greater, deeper and clearer as I continue to play this one opening. When this occurs, my win/loss ratio should improve; after all, my opponent is playing MY opening.

Now, in our opening, many transpositional possibilities may be seen. This is a game currently in progress on Chessmaniac, #6349512:

White Black
1. e4 e5
2. Nf3 Nc6. Black envisions a Berlin defense or a Two Knights, but there are many openings possible from these two opening moves.
3. d4 … White announces his preference: The Scotch Game.

3. … exd4.

This same position exists in the Scotch, in the Two Knights, in The Italian Game, in the Four Knights, and others.
4. Bc4 … This position exists in all the above openings, plus the Evans Gambit! (It is déjà vu all over again! – Yogi Berra)
4. … Nf6 Black prefers the Two Knights Defense and assays a transposition.

5. e5 d5 Still, this same position exists in all of the above openings, except that Black has ruled out the Evans Gambit.
6. Bb5 Ne4
7. Nxd4 Bc5 Now, this is also a position found in the Berlin Defense. So, we have a common position in the Scotch, the Two Knights, the Two Knights Defense, and The Berlin Defense.

8. Be3 Bd7 This position rules out all but the Scotch Game. White held to his opening of choice.

Voila! The Scotch Game! Here is the position that may have guided White:

White was expert in his opening, or Black could have taken the game into another opening.

Is it easier to memorize (mentally picture) the positions than to try to construct from the moves? Would you find it easier to memorize all of the first eight moves of all seven of these openings shown above, or would it be easier to remember not more than three significant positions? If you work from mental pictures of the position, you will see the possibilities from that position in the opening.

The endgame requires pattern recognition. If you aspire to Expert or Master status, it is essential to be able to recognize positions in the end game, even if you cannot do it well, yet, in the opening.

When you know your opening well, you can steer a transformation into a favorable position. Here is an opportunity seized in the early opening of game #6001387, on Gameknot:

White Black
1. e4 c4
2. d4 cxd4
3. c3 … The first three moves of the Morra Gambit.

3. … g6 The Morra declined. Black is transposing “out of the Morra” into a more familiar Sicilian, perhaps with the Dragon variation in mind.
4. cxd4 … Now, after … Bg7, White will have a familiar variation of the Alapin Sicilian.

Black has transformed into this Sicilian, although he may not have had the Alapin in mind.

In his book: *”The Chess Advantage in Black and White”, Larry Kaufman gives a sample of avoiding transpositions in the Semi-Slav defense. Here are some of his observations:
“The first decision for Black is whether to play … c6 or … e6 first.” “Playing … c6 first avoids the Catalan and the Marshall Gambit.” “Playing …e6 first avoids the Slav Exchange; as well as an early e3 without Nc3.”
Next, he shows how to avoid Black transpositions in the first four moves. Then, he shows the nine plausible move orders to reach the Semi-Slav. He explains that there are only four rules to follow to avoid the Queens Gambit Exchange version that favors White, to avoid allowing White to develop his bishop to g5 without paying a price, etc. By following his rules, you keep your opponent from transposing in this opening. You get to play your opening, not your opponents opening. I cannot show too much of the book without the permission of the author (Plagiarism). You’ll have to either get his book or look at my Black games where my opponent plays 1. e4, 1. c4, or 1. Nf3. You will find that some of my games are the Semi-Slav, where I instinctively follow Kaufman’s rules. Here is the starting position of the Semi-Slav:

A good exercise is to see if you can find the nine plausible ways of reaching this position. Here is the most direct route, where white has no preference beyond playing a queenside opening:

White Black
1. d4 d5
2. c4 e6
3. Nc3 c6
4. Nf3 Nf6

Now, let’s look at the first five moves of a game where I played Black, and White evidently had a move order, not a position, in mind. I will transpose into the Semi-Slav:

White Black
1. c4 … White seems to be trying for an English, or a Reti, or a Catalan.
1. … e6 We’re headed in White’s direction. Or are we?
2. Nf3 Nf6 White can still get his English or Catalan, but now we see the possibility that Black is playing for a Queen’s Indian.

3. d4 … The Catalan still looks OK, but now there is a hint of a Queens’ Gambit.
3. … d5 We now have a Queens Gambit Declined, but it could be a Ragozin variation, a Tartakower system, a Semi-Tarrash, an Orthodox, or even a Semi-Slav.
4. Nc3 c6 We have definitely transposed to a Semi-Slav!

(We have reached the same position by a different move order. Our moves were in concert with White’s moves, keeping him from [perhaps] his specific desired opening.)

The next moves were:
5. e3 Nbd7. And, suddenly White is playing Blacks’ Game!

When your opponent opens d4, c4, or Nf3; and you want a Semi-Slav, this is the picture you should have on the first move. Notice that if I wanted a Queens Indian, I could have played for that on the third move, or for a number of different Queen’s Gambits on the following moves. As you play, you will see yourself taken into strange territory a number of times. When you analyze the game afterward, look at the key positions and put the pictures you want in your head. Just be careful not to put in the pictures into your head that you DON’T want to create on the board!

I believe that players that move too quickly cannot get the pictures into their heads unless it is done in post-game analysis. I always analyze every loss, to try to find where I can improve.

*(In his book, Kaufman does not speak of transpositions directly, the book is basically his personal repertoire. He simply avoids transpositions in order to play his preferred openings.)

Next, I will offer some of my thoughts on Continuous Improvement.

Transposingly, Al (alfredjwood)

Attacks against the castled king have some different criteria than attacks while the king is still in the center of the board. First, in the castled position, a defense already exists and the mobility of the king is constrained. However before he castles, the King may attain good mobility; and a moving target is always more difficult to hit. Second, the opponent can mobilize pieces more quickly to the center than to one side of the board. Third, pawn structure differs in that the center is usually demolished when the successful attack begins. Fourth, the attacker needs a greater force in the attack and that force must be centralized.

Let’s look at these things individually:
First, the question of King mobility. Here is a well-known position used in teaching endgame play:

Queen and knight are often enough to succeed against the king in the castled position. Here, it is Black to move, he is in check and his mobility is limited to one square, h8;

1.Kh8 Nf7+ Again, the king has only one square.
2.Kg8 Nh6+ Again, only one square.
3.Kh8 Qg8+ Again, there is only one move.
4.Rxg8 Nf7++

I learned this as the Closed Coffin mate, 63 years ago. It has been around for centuries.
Common themes against a castled king also include back rank mates, where the back rank is insufficiently defended and the mobility of the king is limited, and Queen and pawn mates against a fianchettoed position where the defending bishop is missing.
All of these themes can be successful when the mobility of the attacked king is limited.

In the foregoing, two tactical maneuvers resulted in mate: Discovered double attack and smothering. This is most easily accomplished in the corner of the board. But, in the center it is usually different. We will examine this in a moment, but first let’s look at pawn structure.

For an attack one either wing, the attacker must keep the defender from launching an attack in the center. This means keeping the defender from getting control of the center. For an attack on the center, however, it is most easily accomplished when the pawn center is demolished. This happens mostly in open games.

Now. Let’s look at how a little King mobility can effect a center attack.

This is a common position in the Berlin defense. White sees an opportunity to keep the Black king in the center of the board, where it can be localized and attacked, and where it will interfere with connecting rooks.

6. Bxc6 dxc6
7. dxe5 Nf5
8.Qxd8+ Kxd8

Whites’ wish is granted. The black king is in the middle of the board, and can never castle. The target is fixed. White’s rooks can seize the center files.

But! “Count who come for the broken meats before thou makest a feast.” The black king is in a better position for the endgame and will gain mobility with the movement of the bishops, black has the bishop pair, and the potential attacking force is diminished with the absence of queens and the exchanged bishop. With the attack against his center, Black must stabilize and then attack the White King.

The game Socko (2577) vs Krasenkow (2609), played in Poland in 2004 came out of the opening in this position:

White will now seize the open d-file with Rfd1. White looks better, yet the game is a draw. Black will restrict the white pieces with his pawns, there is no target at the end of the d-file, and blacks pieces firmly hold d6, d7 and d8. Black will attack on the kingside with a rook already in position. The game was drawn after 22 moves.

Let’s look at a successful attack and see the differences. This is a demonstrative game between Roselli and Tereshchencho by correspondence in 1972:

This is the position after 10 moves:

In this position, white has fully developed his pieces toward the center, his rooks can enter an attack quickly, blacks’ king cannot immediately castle, white may be able to hold him in the center – in front of the locomotive. Blacks’ knight on e5 is the one piece in position for defense.

11. Bxe5 So much for the defender!
11. dxe5 Opening the file for the White rook.
12. Bb5+ Kf8
13. Rac1 seizing the c-file.
13. axb5 accepting the sacrifice.
It’s not the number of pieces you have, it’s the force of the pieces in action! (liberally translated from: “It ain’t the size of the dog in the fight, it’s the size of the fight in the dog!”)

The attacking potential is now very apparent. The c3 knight comes into range with a discovered attack, onto a protected square:

14. Nxb5 Qa5
15 Rc7! … White threatens Qc4. Notice that white’s moves are with threats, keeping black from continuing development of his pieces.
15 … b6
16. Nxe5 f6 This may not be the best move, but there is no adequate move. The game is already lost.
17. Rd8+ … Let’s look at the position, Black to move:

The black king has limited mobility, the black pieces cannot come to his aid, White has used the highway c and d files, and has more than enough power concentrated in the attack. The end comes quickly:

17. … Bxd8
18.Rf7+ Ke8
19.Nd6++

Next, I hope to share some ideas on transpositions. A note to commenters:
Thank you, I sincerely appreciate your comments, concepts, and ideas. Unfortunately, I cannot reply to some because I need either your Chessmaniac name, or your email address. I am unable to locate you by any other name.

Good chessing! Al
alfredjwood

Today we can explore mating attempts earlier than traditional endgames, and (perhaps) see the features of the board that allow the mating attack to be successful and the features that make it unsuccessful.

There are two clues that the pawns give us. First, the pawns tell us on which side of the board an attack is most likely to succeed. Let’s look at an early sign. Here is the position in the Steinitz variation of the French defense after White’s fourth move:

In this position the pawns tell us that White will more easily attack on the kingside, and Black will more easily attack on the queenside. This is determined by the side toward which the pawns “point”. Simply look at the advanced pawns in echelon and consider them a pointer.

The second clue the pawns give us is control of the center. In this position, white has more space, but neither side controls the center.

The center is a major consideration in an attack on a wing. An attack on either wing must be met by an attack on the center. In this position, if white begins a Kingside attack, Blacks’ best defense is an attack! If Black has withdrawn his f6 Knight to d7, the center attack begins with c5.

In a tertiary role a pawn is a lever, often employed on the a-file or the h-file to dislodge a defender.

Let’s take a moment and look at the effectiveness of the outside pawn in this role.

This is from game #6160217, on chessmaniac, a Morra Gambit Declined:

The conditions are right for an attack on Blacks’ castled position. The white pawn formation is right and the center can be held. The h-pawn is poised and White’s pieces all aim at the Kingside. The strongest defender of a castled position is the Knight. Here, Black has his knight in position, for the attack to succeed, White needs to remove the knight.

White Black
15. Nd5 Nxd5 White plays to remove the best defender of the black kingside, and to strengthen the pawn center. Often it can cost a rook, but in this case White can exchange for a knight. The knight is stronger in defense than in offense, so White happily exchanges.
16. exd5 Nb8 The pawns now show the direction of attack clearly.
17. Nd4 a6 a5 may be better for Black. Black needs counterplay, and the center cannot be easily attacked, so he will go for a queenside attack.
18. a4 a5 White plays to hold b5, Black creates a home for his Knight on b4.
19. Rfe1 Na6 White’s rooks will participate in the attack on the Black king, the Black Knight comes to his home.
20. Bh6 Bf6 Now, White moves to remove another defender. Black wants to free his position by recapturing with the e7 pawn.
21. Re3 Qb6 White brings his rook into the attack, overprotecting b3 to allow the knight to attack. Black brings his Queen into the game, putting pressure on the queenside.

As Whites’ kingside attack jells, Black’s inability to stir up an attack on the center forces queenside play, creating a distraction on the queenside for White. Space and time are on the side of White.

22. Nb5 Nc5 Blacks’ knight reaches his best post.
23. Bc2 Bxb5 White again overprotects b3, Black plays to reduce Whites’ forces.
24. axb5 Be5 Black threatens Bf4.
25. h4 Ra8 The time is right for White’s attack, Black persists on the queenside.

26. h5 a4 Both attacks continue.
27. Rf3 Nxb3
28. Qg5 Nd4 Forking Bishop and Rook.
29. Rxf7 Bf6 The rest is straight forward. The Black King is fragile.

30. Qg4 Kxf7
31. Bxg6 Kg8
32. Bb1+ Kf7
33. Rxd4 e5
34. Qf5 Ke7

35. Rg4 Kd8
36. Qxf6+ Kc8
37. Qf7 Rd8
38. Rg7 a3
39. Be3 resigns

The conditions for an attack on the King were right: White was developed, the attack would go to the side on which White had strength and mobility, the primary defender could be removed, and White could bring enough force to the attack to assure success. In “The Fragile King II” we will look at attacks with the enemy king in the center. Al (alfredjwood)

Alexandra Kosteniuk, an International Woman Grandmaster (WGM) (1998) and an International Master among men (IM) (2000). During the FIDE Congress in Calvia (2004) awarded the title of Grandmaster (Men), becoming the 10th woman in the whole history of chess to get this title. Kosteniuk is the Women’s Vice Champion of the World, a title earned at the World Championships in Moscow in December 2001. Kosteniuk earned the European Champion 2004 and Russian Champion 2005.
Born in the Russian city of Perm on April 23, 1984. In July 2003 she graduated from the Russian State Academy of Physical Education and now is a certified professional chess trainer. In 1994 she became the European Champion among girls under the age of 10, and a month later shared first and second places at the World Championship under the age of 10. Read ChessManiac.com interview with Alexandra.

Chess Grandmaster Alexandra Kosteniuk comments her rapid game from Mainz against GM Hracek.

Richard Phillips Feynman May 11, 1918 – February 15, 1988 was an American physicist known for the path integral formulation of quantum mechanics, the theory of quantum electrodynamics, the physics of the superfluidity of supercooled liquid helium, as well as work in particle physics (the parton model was proposed by him). For his contributions to the development of quantum electrodynamics, Feynman was a joint recipient of the Nobel Prize in Physics in 1965, together with Julian Schwinger and Sin-Itiro Tomonaga. Feynman developed a widely-used pictorial representation scheme for the mathematical expressions governing the behavior of subatomic particles, which later became known as Feynman diagrams.
He assisted in the development of the atomic bomb and was a member of the panel that investigated the Space Shuttle Challenger disaster. In addition to his work in theoretical physics, Feynman has been credited with pioneering the field of quantum computing, and introducing the concept of nanotechnology (creation of devices at the molecular scale). He held the Richard Chace Tolman professorship in theoretical physics at Caltech.
Feynman was a keen popularizer of physics in both his books and lectures, notably a 1959 talk on top-down nanotechnology called There’s Plenty of Room at the Bottom, and The Feynman Lectures on Physics. Feynman is also known for his semi-autobiographical books Surely You’re Joking, Mr. Feynman! and What Do You Care What Other People Think?, and through books about him, such as Tuva or Bust! He was also known as a prankster, juggler, a proud amateur painter, and a bongo player. Richard Feynman was regarded as an eccentric and a free spirit. He liked to pursue multiple seemingly independent paths, such as biology, art, percussion, Maya hieroglyphs, and lock picking.
Richard Feynman’s interest in biology was more than casual. He was a friend of Esther Lederberg, the geneticist and microbiologist who developed replica plating and discovered bacteriophage lambda (though often others received credit for her work). It is not surprising that both these engaging people should be friends, as they also shared other scientists as friends. These included physicists in nuclear research who for moral reasons switched to genetics (such as Leó Szilárd, Guido Pontecorvo, Aaron Novick, and Carl Sagan).
Freeman Dyson once wrote that Feynman was “half-genius, half-buffoon”, but later revised this to “all-genius, all-buffoon”. During his lifetime and after his death, Feynman became one of the most publicly known scientists in the world.

In this video he relates the laws of physics with the rules of chess. Give it a watch you should find very interesting.

As we continue our chess video exploration we found this interesting chess video. D from the HBO series Wire is teaching Wallace and Bodie about chess and how it relates to their world around them. “One of television’s most critically acclaimed programs, the Peabody Award-winning drama series ‘The Wire’ continues to challenge viewers with a “cop show” unlike anything on air.” HBO.com

Former world chess champion and outspoken Kremlin critic Garry Kasparov called for a monument in honour of the journalist Anna Politkovskaya and draw attention to what they claimed was a lack of freedom of speech that led to her death. This video is not about Anna but rather about making mistakes in chess.

Founded by award wining Lecturer and Author, Adisa Banjoko, the HHCF is dedicated to providing an inclusive setting for individuals to interact, play and develop life strategy skills with people they perceive as mentors.
“Despite the school system’s best efforts and intentions, and the efforts of overworked parents, the past generations have suffered from lack of suitable education and essential resources required for a successful life,” states co-founder Adisa Banjoko. “We recognize that chess, martial arts and hip-hop unify people from multiple cultural, religious and social backgrounds. These black and white squares do not care what color you are or if you are rich or poor. The only thing they ask is that you come with your strategy, your patience and your skills…” Hip-Hop Chess Federation

Learn about this great federation that is helping bring to chess to more people.
UPCOMING - ANNUAL CHESS KINGS & SCHOLARSHIP INVITATIONAL
October 11, 2008
Galleria @ The San Francisco Design Center

Part 1

Part 2

Part 3

Part 4

Part 5

Part 6