Tournament Report: how I played two tournaments this weekend and stayed over 1700

Crossposted from reddit.

My previous installment in this series was about how I went 4/4 in a tournament and got over 1700. I presumed I was overrated, frankly, and would soon go back down below 1700. However, I played a couple events since then and crept up a few rating points. This weekend, I played two more events on Friday and Saturday and decided to write them up.

TL DR: played mediocre on Friday, 2/4, but stayed over 1700, then played a bit better on Saturday against a very uneven field, went 3.5/4. Still bad at chess. But the Qd8 Scandi is still OP. Study for the games: https://lichess.org/study/9inXDesO If you check out only one game, Saturday Round 3 is great. Please, don't look at Friday Round 4. I welcome any comments on the games! Because I'm mean, I turned off the engine in the study.

Longer commentary: There's a weekly tournament on Friday evenings about an hour from here. I'm unemployed this week so I thought I might as well check it out as, well, I wasn't getting off work late on Friday. I was worried about one thing: I'm not an old guy but I'm not a kid and I'm old enough that energy levels have a big effect on how well I play. Friday evening is getting kind of late. And I still have an hour to drive home after! I ended up being the second seed in the reserve section, so I'd be mostly playing down and have to win, win, win against my opponents to stay above water.

First round: black against a low 1400, I played the Scandi and he decided to play d4. Okay. I didn't really remember my Blackman Diemer prep well but I got a good position out of the opening and then just plowed through.

Second round: I had white against a high 1500. I played d4, he played e6, and I was unhappy with this choice. So we went with a 3.Bd3 French -- miserable. I was playing inaccurately so he had an edge for most of the game, but it was still mostly equal. However, he got very low on time. We simplified to a queen endgame -- a practical decision on my part since I felt I could get a draw if I needed it but there were chances to outplay him or flag him -- and my king was not easily checkable while his was and he flagged while thinking about where to go.

Third round: played a young girl I'd played and beaten before (in the tournament where I went 4/4 and got over 1600 -- different from the one where I went 4/4 and got over 1700 that I have discussed here before). She played e4, I played d5 (as one does), and she played e5. I got a great position. This is not a great way to play against the Scandi because Black gets everything a Caro or French player could ever dream of. My opponent had an Advance French-style pawn chain ending at e5, I played f6 and traded that pawn off, then got greedy and took on e5 with a piece with my King still in the center. This would've been fine, but I got a little careless after that. It would've been okay to be stuck in the center if I didn't make mistakes because a lot of pieces were traded off and White was underdeveloped, but I made mistakes! And got clobbered. Oof. One of the most painful things: she was recently nearly a 1700 player, but she's more than 100 points off her peak right now. A gentle note to my opponents: if you're going to beat me, please do it near your peak rating! Stop losing 100 points and then remembering how the horsey moves when you play me!

Fourth round: another young kid I have played before, a high 1700s who beat me in the Scandi the last time we played. He was the #1 seed but also got upset earlier. If I win, that will resurrect my tournament. A draw would also be good. He's really good, he's only been playing a year. The last time we played, we quickly played down to an equal but tricky pawn endgame which I flubbed. This round, I boomered it: early blunder. I'll blame being tired.

Result: 2/4. Stayed over 1700, though.

The TD said they were trying to organize something for Saturday and I said I'd be up for it. Unfortunately, there would be quite a disparity of ratings in the group, but I was fine with that. However, I had to be out by 5 since I had scheduled an online rapid match (for Infinite Quest, a side league of the lichess 45 45 league that evening. We had five players, so we would do a five player round robin and they would arrange it so my bye was the last round. Sweet.

Round 1: I played a guy rated just below 1200. As I said, there was quite a spread of ratings. We played 1.d4 f5 and I nearly died of happiness. Finally, a chance to play 2.g4! I had an edge but somewhere along the way my thinking was muddled and I had to fight my way back. Fortunately for me, my opponent obliged by giving back the advantage, but I was stuck in "crap, how can I get back in this" mode. In the end, I had a big advantage in the endgame but went for a repetition because I just did not see the easy winning idea. Oof. Am I still tired? Am I going to go below 1700? I'm doomed.

Round 2: Playing against the one stronger player, an 1850 I played the week before who just crushed me. I was hoping for a draw at least. If I lost, I think I would be doomed to be less than 1700. Not that rating matters, but it helps you think about your results. I had Black and I played the Qd8 Scandi, as one does. Somewhere along there he made a miscalculation and didn't see that letting me exploit a pin would go poorly for him. However, I didn't prosecute that mistake completely accurately. But then he missed that opening the h-file would lead to bad things for him, and I did prosecute and convict him of negligence. 1.5/2! I'm back in this! Now I just have to not mess up and I'm good. I think this is my highest rated OTB win.

Round 3: Playing against a floored 1600 that I've played several times before. I played d4, he played d6, I played e4, we're going modern. I played a little inaccurately in the opening but got the elements for a good attack going on the kingside. And then... the h-file opened. I knew I was winning then. There's no way to survive. And then... a mistake. This is it. It is time to offer to sac my queen. There is no other way. My opponent declined the sacrifice but in a way that allows a mate in 6 (which I saw). Glorious. If you check out one game, check this one out.

Round 4: played a young girl rated just under 1000. I played, one does, the Qd8 Scandi. I won a pawn and had a better position, and then I just crushed some more. I didn't find too much to say about this game. Seriously, though, she plays like she'll be very good very soon, just needs a couple things to click and then she'll be a monster. We'll see what she's like next year. 3.5/4, I win the round robin! Gained most of my rating points back.

Epilogue: I was tired so I blitzed things in my rapid match when I got home, lost 2.5-1.5. Threw a win for a draw, threw a draw for a loss. Had a great swindle, though, into an interesting Q + P vs R + B endgame that I converted. I've now played 4 tournaments since first getting over 1700 without dipping below. I've lost a net of 7 points, but I'm still solidly over the line. Maybe I really am a 1700+ USCF player instead of a 1600 player who's slightly overrated. I have a few things to work on -- odd positional decisions, mindset when recovering from bad positions, bad tactical and positional vision, managing fatigue, not flubbing opening prep. I'm starting a new jorb next week, so I'm not sure if I'll make it on Friday, so it was very good to get this in now.

Another tournament

I played a 3-player 25+5 double round robin yesterday against two 1600 players. I went 3-1 to increase my rating another 10 points to 1740. All four games were a little sloppy; I really need to be more careful in the Qd8 Scandi. And CALCULATE AND THINK more. Still, if I'm doing this well against 1600s, maybe I really am playing at a 1700+ level?

Lichess study of the games with very minimal commentary.

Game statistics over the last year

I should perhaps wait until July, because at that point I would have been playing OTB again for a year, but here is a chart of my performance by rating level over the last 12 months (using post-tournament ratings).

As can be clearly seen, I need to lose more games. I am perhaps overrated at 1730, but there is no way to know that if I am playing only groups that I can score 75% against. It would be nice if I could play more tournaments, since 25 rated games in 12 months is not very much. I have gone on about it before, but one thing rapidly improving young juniors (and presumably other improvers) have in common is that they play a lot of rated games. Some of them play a tournament every weekend. Some can manage more than that, even. As for me, if you go back to when I was rated 1230, I have played eleven events to go up 500 points since then. And that is over the course of 20 years. In the graph, green indicates a period of inactivity greater than 3 months. Also note that I probably had not yet caught up to my actual strength in the 2011 spike.

Granted, in the last year I've played over 6000 games on lichess including an average of at least one 45+45 or longer game per week. However, I just cannot or do not take online games as seriously as OTB games. But I think they're helpful even if I don't do that. Both graphs courtesy of my USCF page.

Tournament report: how I went 4/4 and got over 1700

Crossposted to reddit:

TL DR: I went 4/4 in a tournament and got my rating over 1700. Games with comments here: Lichess Study of May Tournament Games Recaps below.

Recap: I played in a tournament in INDIANA this weekend. Four rounds of 60+10, my section would be the 1401-1800 section. If I had good performance, I'd make it over 1700, which is my goal for the year. Realistically, I hoped to play some people higher rated than me and get some good games in. I was the 9th seed out of 24 according to the signup sheet, so there was a good shot of at least that much. I was kind of surprised at the relatively low turnout to the event -- past events from this organizer had over 100 participants while this one was just short of 90. I suspect the conflict with the National Elementary Championship had something to do with it, but some of the missing usual suspects are older than that. Still a good turnout.

Round 1: since I'm in the top half of the pool, I knew I'd be playing down in at least the first round. It was an Indian kid in the 1500s, very nice. His live rating was actually higher than mine, but the pairings are based on the published ratings. This made me wary, since that's a sign of rapid improvement that might not be captured in the ratings. We played a semi-Slav, I got a little tricked in the opening into a slightly worse position. I sacrificed a pawn for some activity which the computer liked but didn't follow up right, then made a big mistake which my opponent missed too, instead deciding to give up a piece for three pawns. I then coasted to victory.

Round 2: there were enough upsets and draws that I ended up getting paired down again, this time against another Indian kid in the 1500s. Again, another very nice kid. I had Black and played the Qd8 Scandi, as one does. My opponent didn't really fight for the center at first, which is a mistake. Against the Qd8 Scandi, just be aggressive. Get your pieces out and take the center. We ended up trading all the minor pieces and, while I had a bad pawn structure, my opponent had open lines and a king in the center. He decided not to castle presumably because I would immediately attack, but getting stuck in the center was also bad. We traded queens and I got both rooks to the 7th. Done and dusted. 2-0.

Round 3: because of more upsets and draws, I played down again against... an Indian kid in the 1500s. Very nice kid, we had time to analyze after and he's really going to go far. We got a Trompowsky with g6 and I managed execute a typical plan: play on the light squares, expand on the queenside, limit the scope of the opponent's minor pieces particularly the g7 bishop. I had an edge but no clear victory in sight for a while until my opponent tried to counterattack with a pawn break on the queenside which just didn't work. I got a rook to the 7th, won a pawn, made an outside passer, and then just finished it off. 3-0. Man, I'm going to get picked up by CPS for beating all these kids.

Round 4: there were only two people with a 3-0 score at this point: Me and an adult 1500 who took the path I wanted. He played an 1800 and two 1700s and dispatched them all. Granted, the 1800 and one of the 1700s were floored, so perhaps not truly at that strength. I wouldn't be unhappy with a draw -- my energy level dictates how well I play and the fourth round of 60+10 in a day is a stretch for me -- but I'm not going to just give it away. We played a Qd8 Scandi, he seemed to know what he was doing, and I deviated from what I should play, instead going for opposite sides castling with the idea of dumping a box of pieces on his king before he could dump a box of pieces on my king. I saw something where it looked like I could bail out to a draw but gave opportunities for him to mess up and went for it. Unfortunately, I flubbed it after he did indeed make a mistake, so I was down a piece but his king was in the open and I had some initiative. Still, a few accurate moves and I'd be dead. And then... my opponent made a huge blunder and I mated him. He was stunned. 4-0! And I made it over 1700. My opponent also made it pretty close to 1700 based on his 3-1 performance, a draw probably would have bumped him over the threshold. Well, there's always next tournament!

Aftermath: got some cake, some bubbly, and boasted online. Next goal: 1800, but I'm not going to make it part of my goals this year. It's kind of funny that I made my goal of hitting 1700 by playing 4 people in the 1500s, but, that's the way the cookie crumbles. I'd say my best game was the third, I'm pretty happy with it apart from a couple minor points. The fourth shows I really need to work on my calculation and then I will never ever look at that game again. The first suggests the same and that I need to look at that line in the semi-Slav. The second, I don't know, there are just a few points in the game where I need to look at my decision-making.

And, man, I really need to play something besides the Qd8 Scandi but I keep winning with it.

Finally, a recap of the last 10 years of my chess playing.

When I went to grad school, I pretty much stopped studying and playing chess. Frankly, I probably should have picked it back up at some point, there's an active university chess club and no need to play rated games if I did not want to risk things while not in shape. It would've been a good social outlet.

At some point during the pandemic, I picked chess up again to play casually, then I decided to join the lichess 45 45 league, then I started studying again, and finally hopped back into tournament play. I think I started by watching Naroditsky's speed run series around December 2020. After that, I was watching other streamers playing chess, mostly smaller ones and not the big ones like Levy or Hikaru, but I quickly realized that... streaming isn't educational. I still hang out in these smaller streams occasionally, but it's more background noise in the evening and parasocial entertainment.

In the summer of 2021, being fully vaccinated and optimistic about how things were going, I got back into tournament play. My first two tournaments, I had mediocre results but gained rating, sitting in the upper 1400s, though I felt like I was on the cusp of doing better. Still, I was hoping to crack 1500, which I thought might be my skill level. In my third tournament, in December, I "popped off": 4/4, gained over 130 points, landing at a 1627 rating. I thought at this point that I had surely overshot my skill level. I beat a floored 1600, two 1500s, and a 1400 to get there, which may be consistent with a 1600 level performance, but it's odd to end up at a higher rating than anybody you beat. My goal for 2022, then: stay above 1600, hopefully get to 1700! I used the prize money to buy some courses on Chessable, picking up a d4 repertoire and some courses by Andras Toth.

My first tournament of 2022, I struggled a bit: I blew a win against an 1100 (taking a draw), completely blew a game against a 1470 who graciously offered a draw (wow!), swindled a 1300 who was stomping me in time trouble, and then stumbled into a draw against an underrated player who had me tricked in the opening. I ended up at 1601, so at least I had that going for me. My next tournament was a bit better: easy win against a 1300, winning position against an 1850 that I allowed to draw by repetition because of time trouble, dumb loss in a pawn endgame against a 1770 kid, weird tactical victory against an 1400. Gained a few points, 1700 performance rating, so maybe I really am at a 1600 level.

I went into the tournament this weekend with modest goals: play good games, play against some higher-rated opponents, stay above 1600. It was a U1801 section and I was the 9th seed out of 24, so there was a good shot of that. The result was only partially true: I did not play anybody higher rated than me. Because of upsets and draws, even though I was the 9th seed, I ended up being paired down each round while going 4/4. Final rating: 1730. Here I think I definitely overshot my mark. I'm not going to avoid playing to protect my rating or anything, but I definitely think this shows that, okay, I'm definitely at least a 1600 if I can dispatch people rated around 1600 reliably.

I haven't been playing much chess lately!

I have, unfortunately, not been playing much chess lately. I quit my job and went back to school for a PhD in statistics, but I haven't really gotten in touch with the chess scene here in town yet. Nor do I really have the time! I will eventually, though.

So I've decided to go to a school in Iowa

And, fortunately, I'm quite familiar with the chess scene there: there is one. It's not quite as active as Chicago, but it's better than one would expect, frankly, in a town of that size. A university chess club, regular tournaments, regular tournaments in nearby towns, some strong players available, etc.

Our company is having its last match of the year tomorrow, but I think I'm too far behind in everything right now to represent our team. However, I will definitely try to hit up a couple tournaments over the summer before my departure for academia. It would be a shame to waste my last few months in such a great city for chess as Chicago without exploiting it in some way.

A game a couple weeks ago.

I was playing poorly, I was down a pawn but it was kind of drawish. I played what I thought was an objectively good move that laid the seeds for a trap. The opponent fell into the trap, losing a rook. I didn't feel so bad about it, but it was a cheap victory. Still, a win in CICL play is good.

I'll be moving in the fall to some university to get a PhD in statistics, hopefully whatever school I'm at has a decent chess scene. I know one of the options does, not sure about the others.

Ugh, that was terrible.

My CICL game last night was terrible. I had a combination where I was going to win the exchange, but I lost the thread. My opponent was threatening to win a piece and I could not calculate the way out. I sat there for 15 minutes and couldn't see a way through, so I resigned. My opponent was surprised, so I said, "I can't get out of losing a piece, so I'm resigning. My opponent was like, "Well, okay, but I think Nd5 works." I wasn't sure what line had led me to discount that move, but it appeared not to work when I calculated it and it appeared to work when I saw it on the board. Drat. Rybka later confirmed that Nd5 was okay and kept things at about White's typical advantage. Not as good as things were earlier, but definitely okay. Frig. But, you know, if you're not in a position to fight for and find the best moves in the position, you might as well resign. If I had been asked to make a move at the exact instant I resigned instead of playing on, anyway, it would not have been Nd5.

The most annoying part was seeing when I got home that, yes, indeed, I had correctly seen that I was supposed to win an exchange. I played the move from the wrong line, though.

Thoughts on playing blitz chess on chess.com

I've been playing blitz occasionally on chess.com since my wife got an iPod Touch and I can use it to play blitz while killing time. I've never been much of one for playing blitz on the internet. I have some thoughts on it. My rating is pretty sucky, somewhere in the mid-1400s.

1. I'm better on the computer than on the iPod. Fewer mouse slips and using the mouse is quicker, so I get in time trouble less often. I also see better. The difference is on the order of 100 points.
   
2. I was a little rusty and blitz knocked the rust off a little, but once that is done, I find blitz has no redeeming qualities except as entertainment. Which is important.
   
3. There are a lot of people playing the Philidor and 1.e4 2.Nf3 3.Bc4 openings. Sicilian variations involving ...e5 are also popular.
   
4. Sometimes people fall for amazingly transparent swindles. Including me.
   
5. When you're in the 1400s, going into the random pool usually means you're playing somebody rated beneath you.
   
6. It's a great way to blow off steam while waiting for responses from grad schools. There will be a lot of residual tension to blow off over the next couple months or so.

I might pull out some nice problems Rybka found from my games and post them here. Or things I successfully found. Or just interesting positions. There's no point in seriously analyzing blitz games, but sometimes the computer finds something interesting that is worth looking at. I've played approx. 100 games so far.

One other thing I'm doing with the iPod is playing skat against the computer. Not on the internets, as I usually don't have enough time to play more than a couple hands. The ProSkat app is very nice for that.

Won my game last night.

Finally, a victory. Unfortunately, it was against much weaker opposition. I didn't use even 10 minutes of my time. We played the Dragon - he didn't play it quite right and I had a little room for improvement, but that much didn't take too long. Then he made a mistake that dropped a pawn with a second pawn falling soon after (no thought for those, very simple calculation), but he had a little counterplay that got him a pawn back. We were, at that point, simplified down to a two rooks vs two rooks endgame with my rooks a bit more active, but that is still fairly drawish. I was preparing to burn through a lot of time grinding it out. But... my opponent agreed to trade off one of the rooks and it left him in the unenviable position of either leaving me free to terrorize the 7th rank with my rook - he'd get his rook over to my side as well, though I'd get the best of the situation - or trade the last pair of rooks into a dead lost pawn endgame. If I were him, I'd choose to keep the rooks on the board even though it doesn't look pretty at all. He chose to trade rooks into the pawn endgame either of us could probably play in our sleep. So I ended up not having to think much. I could tell by the way he went into the pawn endgame that he definitely thought he had better chances there than in the rook endgame. 3+2 vs 2+2 just isn't going to work, though.

BONUS: I delivered a pawn checkmate.

That was a rather horrible game.

I played the other day. It was a terrible game. I walked into a well-telegraphed trap which lost an exchange. Prior to that, I had made a few rather unhelpful positional moves, but I would have had easy equality as Black if I hadn't dropped the exchange. Oh well. Next time. I will try to play in a tournament next month, as I'll be free every Sunday and might have some spare change.

I'm getting back into the swing of things a little now that I'm done with statistics/applied math grad school applications. I just have to wait for results. I presume I may have less time for chess if I get in. Or more. Hard to tell.

In other news, I'm also playing skat a little bit again. Not in person, though, which is unfortunate. I've never played in person. I'm also a rather indifferent player, but it's fun to do on the Ipod.

I have not been playing much lately.

I have been busy. I'm allegedly working a lot and I've decided that I might go back to school for a PhD in statistics (at a good school, of course) rather than stopping at a masters from this crummy school, so I've been spending a lot of time over the past couple months researching stuff, filling out applications, etc. And then there were the holidays and then some travel to a school. It's been a good time, though I do regret not playing much chess. Still, I did manage to play a little over the holidays. I've also been low on money, which makes going to tournaments a little tougher. Well, it's easy enough to justify spending $20 on a tournament once per month, really, so that's lowest on my list of excuses.

I think once I am done with applications - next week - I will have time to start playing again. I (or, rather, my wife) got an Ipod Touch, which means I have an easy way to play on the train now, too. I think the difficulties in playing on the train was the biggest thing.

Lunch chess!

I brought my chess set to work and I am now going to make it a point to try to be there for chess at lunch on Mondays, Wednesdays, and Fridays. Probably 2/3 of those each week. They're typically 10 minute games, so nothing too serious, but something good to keep the blood flowing. I have been too busy, personally, to devote much time to chess over the past couple months and my quality of play has definitely suffered.

Anyway, I lost horribly. It was a Dragon and I forgot to play f3. D'oh! If I had, apparently he was going to play the 'Dragdorf'. Later, he got some cheap tricks in. It was rough. Next time!

Slowly recovering

I played my third game of the season and drew it. My second game was very uneventful and very bad. I played against an 1800-ish player and lost terribly. Nothing to remark on. The game last night went poorly, but I eked out a draw as there was no way to penetrate the closed position. I feel like I made some positional errors in the middlegame that left me needlessly cramped, but my opponent was not quite strong enough to take advantage of my weaknesses. It was the sort of position I've seen Alekhine rip apart. I am most proud of my time-management skills, as I used up all my time in the first time control. That's the only real victory. I haven't run it through Rybka yet, one or the other of us probably missed some tactical blow at some point. My opponent definitely had some resources somewhere he could have used.

EDIT: I had initially not planned on playing since I have a test tomorrow in that data mining class and wanted to review the finer points of a couple of the algorithms. As an aside: the kernel trick for support vector machines is cool.

I played terrible chess last night.

It was the first match of the CICL season. I had a rough game, but I was ahead for most of it and I was in a position that was winning, although a bit technical (Rybka confirms). I hadn't played flawlessly, but I had done okay up to this point. I gave my opponent a gift. Instead of playing a winning move, I played a losing move that I had seen, on the previous move, as immediately losing. I immediately lost.

Well, it's a start. Good game, well played, etc. I'm definitely going to learn some lessons from this.

EDIT: I suppose I should always remember that I'm only one step away from defeat.

Why I have not been blogging.

I've been reading the A Song of Ice and Fire series on the train instead of chess for the past couple weeks, so I've been thinking about that instead of chess. Accordingly, I don't have much chess content to share. I've also been too busy on weekends - I moved, I've been traveling, I've been going to weddings, I'm short on cash - to go to tournaments. The summer tournament is also over. I don't have anything to write about on this web-log if I'm not playing chess on the train or playing in tournaments.

Unfortunately, my daily commute is much less chess friendly now. Instead of 5 minutes of walking and 45 minutes of sitting around, it's 20 minutes of walking and 25 minutes of probably standing on the train. I gain five minutes, but I have so much less possibly productive chess time. I can't arrange my chess wallet and my chess book while standing.

Been busy lately.

I won a copy of Rybka 4 and the Rybka opening book for winning my section of the CIG chess tournament. That is pretty awesome. I have not yet had a chance to play around with it much.

I just moved, so I have been fairly busy and still do not have internet access at home. I have had to skip chess tournaments and have not had a chance to write much because I would have to write at work.

I need to not screw up so bad at endgames.

I need to get better at this. I'm in a dead drawn rook endgame. I might have the slight advantage. I just played a move and offered a draw, the opponent said he wanted to play a couple more moves. Here we are:

He played 1. ...a4. Okay, I still have a draw in hand. But I play the wrong move: 2.a3?! . This doesn't lose just yet. However, after 2. ...b4!? 3.Rc4?! (better is f4!? first, which definitely holds the draw) ... bxa3 4. bxa3 and my opponent said it was a draw, so I was very happy.

After ...f5+ and ....Rb3 I'd be fighting rather hard for the draw. It's possible if he plays imprecisely, since I can get the rook behind the passed pawn, but I am not optimistic.

I really need to avoid taking these things from "drawn in my sleep - no chance of losing" to "probably lost, very hard to draw and easy to lose".

So, with that draw, I finished off the summer tournament and won my section with a score of 7.5/8 (two forfeit victories, also two extra games, one win and one draw). The regular season for CICL is starting soon. I'm the co-captain of my team. I'm looking forward to it. I don't know if I'll play in any tournaments in the next few weeks, I'm moving to a larger apartment soon and will be quite busy.

Reviewing my playing history.

Upon reviewing my tournament history, I was surprised to discover how few events I played in where I could be expected to face people rated significantly higher than me. Most of the events I played in were scholastic tournaments where there were one or two players rated 1500+, a couple 12-1300, and the rest in the scholastic abyss. There were a few tournaments I played where they had classes and I was near the cap on my class. Unless I'm miscounting, the four events I've played in since coming back to chess this year matches the number of "real" events I played in as a scholastic player. No wonder I didn't get very strong! And no wonder my rating jumped up 200 points when I started playing in "real" events (it may jump further, of course, but it's at +200 so far). When I look at the playing history of successful scholastic players (either my contemporaries or current successes), I note that they are playing frequently in "real" tournaments - if not "open", at least having a ceiling such that they will play people stronger than them.