Kenneth Rogoff (kibitz #69135)

I am interested, do you find playing blindfold quite hard or it does come naturaly to you? I feel I'm better in noticing tactics than in raw calculation (basically blindfold play). I ask this because you was quite a player in youth and I feel like I have a massive space for improvement specially in that department of the game.

• Can you visualize the board just as easily if the position is called out in some fashion versus seeing the pieces on the board and then closing your eyes (or looking away).

• Does anybody know of a tactical site that allows blindfold playing?

I'm also wondering if a site like <ChessTempo> has accessibility for blind players.

Never given that much thought.

The second:

SCID also has a blindfold mode - where the pieces are graphically invisible. So one could play a blindfold game against the computer. But doing tactical problems is another matter...

[Involved detailed discussion follows, may be skipped on first (and last) reading!]

Given that the classical opening setup is always the same, there's no need to communicate the piece placement, if the game starts at move 1.

Clearly, for blindfold tactics, the opponent moves must be communicated somehow. I could imagine the moves being done with an audio track, or they could be done visually in blindfold fashion, i.e. by highlighting starting and finishing squares (that might be considered cheating by some, but it's a possibility).

There's the issue of specifying the starting position if it's Fischer Random, or some "random"position from a game or study.

If it's a game, one could use audio to replay all the moves, or one could call out the piece placements, or even use a FEN (audibly, or visually).

<chess.com> does have this page about blindfold tactics here:

<Blindfold Tactics Project>
https://www.chess.com/blog/Chessabl...

It's a reflection of Chessable's science teams.

https://www.chess.com/blog/Chessabl...

<chess.com> does link to 13 training problems, show here:

https://share.chessbase.com/SharedG...

It doesn't show up as blindfold when I look at it (and no blindfold piece set is available for me in the Settings -> Pieces config).

Additionally, most of the games start at move 1 with the traditional setup - avoiding the setup issue. Though Exercises #11-#13 are endgame studies, and do have a setup position (though displayed visually, in a normal GUI fashion).

.

I know all of you have been waiting with bated breath for a summary of my ICCF career to date. So here goes:

My first ICCF tournament, beginning in March 2023, was the 2023 USCF Absolute Championship. It was open to the top 13 players in the country by USCF correspondence rating who accepted their invitations. (I played USCF correspondence games for about five years until 1997, when I decided to retire when engines were getting strong. I then played in one tournament in 2020 to reactivate my rating, which was inactive. My rating was over 2400, which was good enough for No. 3 in the country. This resulted in me getting invited to play in the Absolute. I had previously played in it in 1997, getting two wins, two losses, and eight draws.) I had the highest USCF rating of those who chose to play, and was assigned a 2200 provisional ICCF rating. The USCF allows use of engines only in the Absolute, which is now - unlike in 1997 - conducted under ICCF auspices. I drew all 12 of my games, against players rated 2200 (provisional, like me) to 2414. I played three Damiano Petroffs (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.Nxe5 Nxe4!?). John Millett won the only decisive game, finishing first half a point ahead of me and 10 others. J Millett vs H Ingersol, 2023. I have no idea what his opponent, a Senior International Master who had the highest ICCF rating, 2414, was doing. He was lost after 12 moves.

In an ICCF Master Class tournament, I drew all 12 of my games, against players rated 2102 to 2367. Two players each won a game, finishing half a point ahead of me and others.

In another ICCF Master Class tournament, I won one game and drew 11. My opponents were rated 2125 to 2330. Amazingly, François Célestin Garcia-Hernando won TWO games to win the tournament. I tied for second with two other players. Here is my win, against Sasha Lipsits, an opponent rated 2283: F Rhine vs S Lipsits, 2023. It is a brilliant game, too deep for me to understand. Thanks, Stockfish!

I played in a Petroff's Defense thematic tournament, against players rated 1805 to 2405. Except for the 1805, all my opponents were rated between 2301 and 2405. I got the bright idea of playing the Stafford Gambit against the 1805, Garry Tanner, even though I though it was losing for Black. I figured with such a rating he probably wasn't using an engine. I was probably wrong about that. He won, giving me my only ICCF loss to date. I have completed 302 ICCF games to date, winning 31 of them, and losing only this one: G Tanner vs F Rhine, 2023. Since it was a thematic tournament, at least the games weren't rated. Johnny Owens beat Tanner to score +1 and win the tournament half a point ahead of him and others. I was dead last, with that one loss and seven draws. Tanner had the only two decisive games in the tournament.

I played in a Gruenfeld thematic tournament against two rated players (2301 and 2128) and three unrated players. I drew all 10 games. Are you seeing a pattern here? The only decisive game that was won on the board was by one of the Unrateds, who beat the 2128. But the winner of the tournament was another Unrated, Dara Murphy, who won two games on time against the third Unrated, who drew every other game! Murphy also drew all the rest of his games. That is one of the chief ways of winning ICCF games and tournaments: wait for your opponents to die, withdraw, or get bored and quit playing! That and ridiculous clerical errors.

I played Board 10 for the US in a match against Norway, drawing both my games against Anniken Vestby. My game as Black featured the only Tartakower Caro-Kann (5...exf6) I've ever played to date. A Vestby vs F Rhine, 2023. I've played the Caro-Kann in two other correspondence games, but my other opponents played 3.e5, considered best these days.

I now had a 2310 rating, and played in a master norm tournament against 12 other 2300+ players. Shockingly, I drew every game and got a Correspondence Chess Master norm. Three players each won a game and drew the rest to tie for first.

I played Board 8 for the US in a match against Mexico. I drew both of my games against Jorge Esquivel Leon.

I played in a King's Indian thematic tournament against two other 2300+ players, a 2238 (Manfred Welti), and two low-rated players. I won my four games against the weakies (=players who use their brains instead of engines), and managed to win my game as White against the 2238! He sacked a piece, didn't get quite enough for it, and I won. F Rhine vs M Welti, 2023. It looks like I will probably only finish second to Oswaldo Olivo in the tournament.

I began 2024 playing in another master norm tournament. In this one, I actually won a game, tied for first with one other player, and finished first on tiebreak! This also gave me the Correspondence Chess Master title. This title, like other ICCF titles, including world champion, only proves that I know how to use an engine competently. I achieved my win when my opponent somehow thought I had played ...Qd1+ rather than ...Qe1+ (which I'd actually played). His reply Kh2?? hung a pawn with check. I took it, and he immediately resigned. B Garau vs F Rhine, 2024. Such "brilliancies" are how one beats other high-rated players in ICCF play.

I played in another Petroff's thematic tournament so I could play more Damiano Petroffs for Cyrus Lakdawala 's book. I also won this tournament, once again in a ridiculous way. I won my four games against the two 1300s. I drew all my games against the high-rated players. Except this one: F Rhine vs J Owens, 2024. In a Petroff Three Knights Game, I had no advantage, as usual. I played h3 attacking Johnny Owens' knight on g4. I expected him to move it. Instead, he shocked me with Rad8??, hanging the knight. I took it, remarking, "That's either a mouseslip or the most brilliant move ever played!" Occam's Razor suggested the former. He explained that he had unknowingly had two windows open on his computer, and thought he was playing ....Rad8 in the other game!! It helps to look at the position, Johnny . . .

Another round robin against 12 other 2300+ players. Believe it or not, I drew every game! Oliver Thau managed to win two games, and the tournament. One of his wins went 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 Nd4 4.Nxd4 exd4 5.O-O c6 6.Bc4 d5 7.d3 dxc4 0-1. That one was against a well-known correspondence IM who lost three games in the tournament. But not to me, alas.

I then played Board 4 for my team, Knight Watchmen (har har!), in the "Champions League." Most of my opponents were rated between 2100-something and 2300-something. The other two were rated 1689 and 1032. I beat those two with 1.b3, and drew the rest. https://www.chessgames.com/perl/che... In F Rhine vs J Farinas Lucas, 2024 I let my opponent advance his pawn to the seventh rank and take my rook on f1 with check, à la Spassky vs Bronstein, 1960. All the 2100+ guys drew each other, except for this six-mover: H Schwenk vs R Calvo, 2024. That enabled the winner, Heinrich Schwenk, to win the tournament a half point ahead of nine of us. The loser was Ricardo Calvo. Not the dead IM of the same name. I asked him about that, and he said he'd once played in a Swiss system tournament with his namesake.

I then played in an Anti-Moscow Gambit tournament. Every game had to begin 1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.Nf3 Nf6 4.Nc3 e6 5.Bg5 h6 6.Bh4. I managed to win with both colors against Michel Aymard (2042). https://www.chessgames.com/perl/che... Two games are left in the tournament. The most likely result is that I will tie for first and finish first on tiebreak.

Filling in my final placings in the unfinished tournaments I mentioned:

Oswaldo Olivo indeed won the King's Indian thematic tournament, scoring an impressive 8.5/10. I was second with 7.5, a point ahead of Johnny Owens. Olivo had three wins and a draw against Owens and Manfred Welti, while I had one win and three draws against them. Unusually, the game scores in this tournament are secret, so unfortunately I can't see how Olivo achieved his wins.

In the Anti-Moscow Gambit tournament, as expected I tied for first with correspondence IM Emil Ackermann, and won on tiebreak. This qualifies me for the tournament final.