Ep. 78: Cheating at Local Chess Clubs feat. NM Nick Panico (Chess Coffee Talk #2)

Neal: 0:00

Okay, everyone don't panic because we have Nick Panico. I was sitting on that one for a while. I don't know it sounded better on my head Anyway. That's a good one yeah we are with National Master Nick Panico, a chess angle regular contributor. This is his third appearance on the podcast.

Nick: 0:22

That's right, yeah.

Neal: 0:23

Yeah, his first coffee talk episode. What I do with these coffee talk episodes it's largely unedited. There's minimal to no editing. We just kind of record it and just post it. In other words, we do what a lot of other podcasts do, like every week Okay. But well, maybe I shouldn't say that, but anyway. So his first coffee talk episode was episode 68, so I'm glad to have Nick back. He's a Long Island chess club semi-regular. We're trying to get him to come more often, but that's okay.

Nick: 0:59

That may happen. That's possible. You may see me more often possibly.

Neal: 1:02

Oh good.

Nick: 1:03

We'll go into that later on, why that is.

Neal: 1:05

Oh, awesome, All right, so let me kind of run this down. So I figured we would start with a recap of the Krytner tournament. Is that cool?

Nick: 1:14

Yes.

Neal: 1:15

And then the big story at the Marshall Chess Club. That's a very, very famous club here in New York City. Most of you know that Nick tied for second in the under 2400, but you suspect your opponent may have cheated, right, We'll get into that.

Nick: 1:36

Yeah, yeah, and there's other cases that I think I may have spoken on about another podcast about this, but a different tournament, and, yeah, we'll cover that more in the next episode.

Neal: 1:47

And then I know you have some thoughts on chess etiquette among kids. Oh, yeah, all right, and then some thoughts on hitting your rating floor.

Nick: 1:57

Yeah, back to 2000.

Neal: 1:59

And then I know that there is some rumors about Nick Panickel possibly going into chess retirement. That's possible, Possible well, you have some thoughts on that though, right?

Nick: 2:12

Yeah, yeah.

Neal: 2:14

Okay, so let's do it All right. So let's start with the Krytner tournament. That's our major tournament at the Long Island Chess Club. We had almost 50 people. It was a great turnout. So why don't you tell us about that, nick?

Nick: 2:28

Yeah, no, I really enjoyed it and I think that on the previous podcast, I think I don't know if we were I believe we were one to two rounds into that tournament when I was last on and it was an excellent tournament and I think you had close to what 55 entries.

Neal: 2:48

Something like that, yeah.

Nick: 2:50

And it was, I know, six rounds. I know most of your regular tournaments are five rounds and so this is an extra round compared to the normal tournament schedule. I was curious if you ever considered making it maybe seven rounds or even extending it with only because of the number of entries that you're getting now. If that was maybe something you would consider in the future.

Neal: 3:13

That's a good idea. We could even do something almost like a club championship. Let me get 10 rounds even.

Nick: 3:20

Well, that 10 rounds is a long right yeah.

Neal: 3:24

Maybe 10 is too much, but like, yeah, seven or eight, that's not a bad idea.

Nick: 3:29

It's not a bad idea, right and so yeah, and I definitely enjoyed the tournament and it was different than what I've been experiencing, you know, lately playing a lot of tournaments where it's mostly scholastic play is now, but they're making up most of the tournaments and this was mostly adults. So it was nice to, you know, to be in that environment. The one game a week, the game 90, with a 10 second delay, you know in the evening, and I guess you can say kind of sometimes being able to prepare. I know that you do the random pairings right. So it's Swiss but it's the random format and obviously I think in the beginning, I know with that number of people you really can't prepare. But if you kind of know with the sport group, you know, as you get close to, you know, after the second half of the tournament, you can, you know, kind of prepare a little bit for your opponents and like I knew I would be playing Timorabali at some point, most likely, and then Xilin Chen as well, and so you know it was, you know I did very well. I think the first round was my shakiest game, I would say overall, you know, and then I kind of settled down and played pretty well for rounds two, three and four against lower rated opponents. But of course these days, as we talked about another podcast due to the rating deflation, you know you have to take everybody seriously, which I did, especially after my kind of first round scare. And then in you know, round five, I wasn't really feeling well. I was actually thinking of taking a bye and I decided not to because I knew I was gonna get the white pieces against Timorabali. And over the years, of course you know I've played Tim probably I don't know maybe a dozen times if you include the action stuff, the quicker stuff. So you know I've won some games, lost some. You know some draws. Sure, he has a plus score against me when I was kind of a little bit weaker. I'm sure he was getting the better of me because you know he's been playing. I think he's maybe 10 to 14 years older than I am, so you know he started before I did and so I knew I was gonna play him and I didn't wanna take a bye. I wanted to play. If I lose, I lose, and so I was white, I had to buy pieces and kind of he, I prepared the opening but then he played something that I wasn't expecting and he just got a much better position and I tried to just, you know, make it complicated a little bit because I'm gonna lose and I have to have some chances. I can't just let him grind me out and just like a losing positional game. I think that's good and also good advice for anyone, that if you know that your game that you're preparing or a structure that maybe you're familiar with, you didn't go into it now you just know that you're clearly worse, you know, rather than positionally getting, you know, grind it out from a player that's, you know, similar strength as you are, it's just better to take some chances and mix it up. I think, and that's what I did. And, sure enough, the position, the evaluation after I went over the game went from where Tim was winning to equal and then I guess he, maybe with the time or the situation where he realized that the nature of the position changed, he made some inaccuracies and then I actually could have probably had a winning working pulling game. There was a lot of pawns on the board but I often to draw rather than even attempting to try to win it, and I figured, okay, it was a good result. You know, considering I wasn't feeling well and you know I was going for the last round. Still, I think, you know, maybe leading the tournament or with a half a point, half a point, maybe a head of the field, I forgot exactly. And then the last round I was black, against Xilin Chen, and you know he's much younger than I am, he's in his early 20s and he kind of reminds me of myself when I was his age, when I was in college. You know, expert 2100 level player, you know, but making some advancements, even if it's not rating wise, you know, at that age it's probably still if you're playing a lot. He plays out of state, often in some of the CCA events, so he takes it seriously. So you know he's probably making some progress and I figured that, okay, I'm gonna be black, it's gonna be a tough game. I wanted to have some winning chances in the game. You know he's very prepared in what he plays. He knows it very well, his openings, I would say, and the structures that he gets. So I decided, as black, to play a Blumenfeld Gambit and that was the first time I've ever played it. Actually I don't even think I played it in Blitz games, I think it's just the first time ever I played it. I did have some experience with the structure because when I was much younger I used to play the Banco Gambit, so there's a somewhat similar point structure. I never really got into the Bononi so I figured, okay, the Blumenfeld would be a good thing for me to try. So that week I did some studying. I watched him I have a fridge trainer by, I think it's Andrew Martin that did it on the Blumenfeld it was Andrew Martin and then, looking at some other videos and stuff, it kind of really learned it pretty good within a week. I would say you know it was just at night, but it's been like two hours and go over some games and look at it. I felt comfortable but it just really made some good sense to it. And the Gambit got very popular with a game where I believe Alakyne is black, played Taroche and Taroche with the white pieces kind of just developed naturally, and then Black took over the center and got a big king side attack and Alakyne won a nice game and that's like the model game of the opening. Of course, since then a lot of developments and players who are prepared as white won't go in that route as Alaska did I'm sorry as Taroche did. So sure enough, when I played Gillian he wasn't familiar with it at all, so he kind of went the way that Taroche did and I had a much better game. I was pretty much in control and better throughout the whole way. And then it got down to a situation where I think I had 12 minutes on the clock and he had 10. And it was equal material and I just knew okay, it was fish chips of off as a color, but there was a lot of horns still on the board and both of us still had the queens on the board, with a pair of rooks as well, and I knew that it was probably a winning position for me, just based positionally. He had some queen side weaknesses and any regular tournament situation I would play on because there's not much to risk. But with the last round of the tournament I figured that you know what? Because his light squared fish could actually become pretty strong if I was to open a position and make one inaccuracy and with the time pressure situation I didn't feel like for the entire six weeks of the tournament that it made sense for me to try to win this where the risk is very high in terms of the reward. So I offered a drawer and he accepted and, sure enough, when I went over to game, the engine said I was like minus. I was black, so minus means it's better for black. It was like minus 2.2 or something like that. Basically, again, not material. Material was even, but the position was just so much better that he probably couldn't defend it. So it's kind of what I expected when I offered the drawer. But again I felt like I made the best decision and that concluded the tournament. And I think there was a three-way tie for first between myself, xillian and Tim. If I'm correct. I think the three of us tied for first. I don't know if there was anybody else. I don't think that was the case. Do you remember the results?

Neal: 11:54

It sounds about right. I don't have it pulled up in front of me.

Nick: 11:57

Right. I think it was a three-way tie Okay. So overall I definitely enjoyed the tournament. The time control I, as I said on other podcasts, I have experience with game 90. That's why I played regularly for years at the Long Island Industrial Chess Club. So it's one of my favorite time controls for classical chess and I think the tournament was a success. I think a lot of people enjoyed it. The turnout kind of speaks for itself. It's possible. I'm wondering next year if you get even more entries, maybe you go over 60. Maybe you will need that stage at some point.

Neal: 12:38

Yeah, that's it. We're going to use the stage and we're going to have like monitors. We'll put the moves for the top two boards. Yeah, it's doing really well, so, all right, very good, let's change gears a little bit. I want to hear about your experience at the Marshall Chess Club. You tied for a second in the end of 2400. And even though you beat your opponent in this particular game, we're going to talk about you have some suspicions that he may have cheated, so I'm very curious to hear about that.

Nick: 13:12

Yeah, that's actually interesting. They have the Marshall Chess Club. They have a under 2400 tournament. It's once a month. It's a five round tournament. The first round is Friday night, two games on Saturday, two games on Sunday. The time control is game 30 with the 30 second increment. Okay, so slightly different than your control. It's a one-to-one-to-one-to-one-to-one-to-one-to-one play. It has 30 second increment. Okay, it's a once-a-month tournament. Actually, there's one this month. One actually starts this evening. A lot of people take buys for Friday night because they can't make it in. I've always played the Friday nights. So I'm actually thinking, I'm actually debating if I should play this weekend or not, but I've been playing since I started playing Chess again in April. I played in each one so far April, may, june and July. I played in four of them. Yeah, I like it. I like the time control. They get a huge turnout. It's always competitive. So with this one, yeah, I tried. In the first one I played in April, I tried for first and then in the May or June, from one of them where I tried for second, I was playing in round. I believe it was round four and I was black and I was playing. A scholastic player, a teenager probably, maybe, probably about 14 years old, I would estimate, and he was getting up a lot and I think you know, leaving the playing hall and you know it seemed like he was going to the bathroom because you could tell that's the way he was going. You could hear the door opening and closing to the bathroom and you know it was a tough position. I was black and he was making a lot of moves. It kind of seemed like hard to find for a player at his rating Maybe it was 1800, 1900. You know, it's even some of the moves might be hard for someone 21 to 2200 maybe to play. So I kind of had some suspicion. You know that. Maybe you know something was going on. I wasn't sure because it's the middle of the game and then at one point I made a night sacrifice in the center for two pawns and it gets very tricky and black's okay, it's kind of a thematic peace sacrifice. And when I made the move, you know he wasn't at the board and then he came back to the board and I guess that he thought that maybe it was a mistake or you know again, because if you're thinking about your moves throughout the game then you see, like someone make a sacrifice, like you're probably going to think for a bit. And he kind of didn't. He made the move like very automatic, which gave me the belief that maybe he was thinking that oh, this is just not good, this is just you know, this is just what you know, what I have to do. Because if you're you know, if you're someone, you know, if you're following computer lines, you know, then you see something that wasn't on the computer line. You take it like non salon, you don't take it seriously. And I think that's why I kind of had an inkling during the game like he may have been cheating, because when he made that move, when he came back to that move to the board and he made a move, he made his move. I was kind of shocked. I believe it was actually after he captured my night, it was a follow up move and he made it very fast and I was very surprised because I just thought that it was losing and sure enough, it looked like. You know that was the case. A couple of moves later, you know, he just completely fell apart and he just resigned. And then when I went over the game, sure enough, you know, stockfish was picking those tough moves of his. You know he played G4, then he played his Bishop to H5. And you know it was just kind of you know, right along with all the computer moves, and then all of a sudden he's just lost. So it kind of makes me believe that, you know, he may have been possibly cheating. You know, because when you see a game like that, with those type of moves for that many in a row, where they're, you know, kind of hard to see in their first lying computer moves, and then somebody comes back and they just kind of fall apart, it's like, well, what happened? How come, how could you be so strong to understand all of these moves that came before to lead you to this position? And all of a sudden you just kind of you know kind of blunder, like in a way that doesn't make too much sense, because everyone blunders, but it's the type of blunder that you know kind of you know raises alarms. So that's why I believe that you know that it's possible and you know it is an issue at the club, I believe, and at a lot of local clubs, again, I'm sure 95%, 98% of the players there's no cheating going on. But you don't know, because there's so many people. There's a lot of people moving around, going into the bathrooms, the players have the phones on them. You know, supposedly now the rule is that the phones have to be kept in a bag. You can have like a knapsack bag or something like right below your chair, but the phone should be in there. The phone should not be on you during the game, and I believe that that's a feed, a rule now, and I think they're implementing that. I always take my phone. I don't, I don't. I mean, I do have a bag sometimes that I use. You know, have like my pens, pencils. Sometimes if I bring my own digital clock, I put my score sheets in there. I wear contact lenses, so sometimes I'll bring extras just in case I need to adjust it or use eye drops. So sometimes I do, and if I do have my phone, I'll put it in the bag or I'll even put the phone. I just I always shut my phone off completely and I'll put it on silent. I just shut it off, power down and I'll put it on top of the table, like next to the clock. So I'll do that and maybe that's a rule that's going to have to be implemented into the future. Some people do leave their phones in the office. I know I certainly would never do that. I'm surprised that they even let the management even allows that option for liability issues, because with so many you know players you know 70, 80 people, I mean it's very easy that somebody could go in grab your phone by accident, take the wrong phone. So that doesn't seem like a viable solution for me, or I don't think management either. So I think it's, you know it should be up to the players. You know where they can leave the phones out visible, you know, on the table, you know as I do. Or you know. Again, if the management says, okay, they can put them in their bags, I think that's a fine measure, but then there has to be some type of. If you're enacting that law, then there has to be some type of management of that law, right? So if you're, you know, and unfortunately the thing is going to be that if somebody gets caught with a phone on them in their pocket, if they are leaving the playing hall and they're just looking at something, checking something, then you know they probably should be forfeited for that round. Now, that that's my opinion. Some people may say it's a bit harsh, or maybe that the first time that they you know there's a time penalty, but I don't think so. You know, first, classical game or game 90, you know what are you going to do. You're going to deduct 10, 20 minutes or fair cloth, like you know that might be fine. And then you know somebody's still going to win the game because they had access to to, to the computer, on the phone. You know what. 20 minutes doesn't matter if you've reached a winning position, like pretty convincingly. So I think I think they have to, you know they have to really make sure that they're enacting that and you know, punishing any, any violators. And once that happens, then you know players will realize that this is a serious thing. And you know we can't, you know we have to, you know can't have the phones in our pants pocket, you know. So I think I think that's the thing I. You know I've had other instances, you know those that didn't listen to a previous podcast. My first thought of playing in April. I was playing in a game 30, an action tournament, and a critical position was reached and I noticed my opponent too. That made a move, you know. He left his clock running and he went running to the bathroom with his hand in his sweater, like you know, because he had his phone in his sweater. I said something to the director because you know who's going to just give up, you know, a couple of minutes in a game 20, okay, game 30, now with the lights, actually game 25, with the five seconds light, who's just going to go lose a couple of minutes? You know, just because they have to. You know, run to the bathroom. The way he ran it was like kind of, kind of suspicious and then he came like running back and you know I went on to win the game. But you know it's possible, you know, maybe you know, I don't know. What I do know is that that the technology is definitely and I see it because I see it there that you know, immediately, immediately after a game is over and some adults are doing this, but I would say it's definitely predominantly the kids that they're in the hallway with the phone on and they're going over the game on stockfish, like right away, and then they're talking to their opponent and you know, sometimes it's, you know, kids that are playing kids, and then both of the kids are in the hallway on their phones, like you know, on stockfish and this is where this is where it's gotten to. You know, rather than sitting down in a Skittles room, you know where you used to. You know have your score sheet and you know you go over the game and you look at lines, you move pieces on the board, you put them back. Sometimes that process of going over a game, you know you might be there for a half hour with your phone in. Now it's just you know you're in the hallway, in the lobby and you're on your phones, like so that interaction between the players after a game is kind of lost if they decide to go that option and want to go over the game. You know, at a table, at a board, I know when I was playing when I was a teenager in the mid-90s, that sometimes that's what I used to do at the club I would go, the games were downstairs, I would go upstairs and go over the game with my opponent, if they wanted to do it. Of course. If they were a stronger opponent, of course I definitely would, because I want to see what they were thinking during the game, regardless of the result. So, but now it seems like a lot of that is lost because of the technology and you know, it's. You know, it's just the way. I guess you know things are trending In terms of development as a chess player. You know, I don't know, because, okay, you see a lot of things now quickly with computers as to when you know, maybe decades ago, you might not even even going over the game, even going over the game with a strong player, maybe even someone like at 24, 25 hundred level, they're not going to see the things that the computers do these days. So maybe you never really get to the truth of a position decades ago. But still, what does that process mean? If you're, you know at, you know, for your development as a chess player. So I think that there's some give and take, you know, with the technology. But again, you know, in terms of cheating, I think that you know management at clubs definitely have to really think about how do you want to go about this? Right, because if you're in an environment where it's just one big playing hole, okay, you know what happens to. The bathrooms are downstairs or the bathrooms are away from the hole. Now you know you can't see those, those plays. You know what they're doing. And then you know they come back, they have their phone on them. You know, you don't know. But if they went on on stock fish or not, you just don't know, and that you know a couple of minutes can make the difference if someone's going to win a game or not. So you know. I would like to see definitely more punishment involved for plays that you know are, are, you know, have the phones in their pockets, and maybe it'll happen where you know what, that somebody got penalized that shouldn't have. Maybe you know they weren't, they just. But I think that unfortunately we're a point where we have to do this as directors and management and then people will slowly evolve and you know what, it'll just become normal protocol that when you're sitting down at the tournament you're playing the game, your phone is on the table so your opponent can see it, or it's, you know, in your bag. You know, like below the table. You know something of that nature, just not on you in your pants pocket, because if you're walking around, you know, you just don't know. So you know, we'll see. We'll see where it goes in the future. But I think that measures are being taken. So I think it's just going to take some time for it to get to where it should, where everybody feels comfortable.

Neal: 26:25

All right, nick, I want to go back to your opponent at the Marshall, where you felt he was cheating. I just want to make sure I'm following, so he leaves for a while and he comes back plays almost after, almost after every move.

Nick: 26:44

right, he was getting up. Okay, so he's getting up.

Neal: 26:46

He's getting up several times and he's coming back and he's playing these very, very good moves, difficult moves, hard to find moves, very quickly correct.

Nick: 26:58

Yeah, somewhat, not not, not like not automatically, not right away, but you know. But you know he's finding all of these moves Because you know and then and then he comes back and kind of so in a way, yes, it was kind of fast and you know he and you know he's playing. So maybe when I play to move that he thought just didn't make any sense for me. Maybe he didn't really even think about it too much or even have a chance to leave and look it up If he was cheating. Maybe he didn't have a chance to actually see what the best recommendation was, because maybe he's a little good enough player to just know okay, okay, this doesn't look right, this is what I'm going to do. I'm just much better. But that wasn't the case.

Neal: 27:50

Now what happened that he lost. In other words, you think he was checking the computer for a while, but then he lost because then he stopped. Yes, exactly. That's what I'm confused about. So you think, just so I'm understanding, after looking at it in the computer, because sometimes during the game your opponent will make a move that you think wow, that's a difficult move. And then you put it in the computer and then you're like you know what that's kind of. But even after computer checking it, these are definitely hard to find moves. Is that right?

Nick: 28:19

Yes.

Neal: 28:19

Okay, so he's doing this, but then after a while it's like somebody flipped a switch and he couldn't find these great moves and he lost the game. And you think it was because, for whatever reason, he stopped, like maybe he was worried he was checking.

Nick: 28:35

Well, I think maybe he thought he was winning because I sacrificed the piece. Maybe he thought I was winning. Yes, all right. Yeah, yeah, exactly.

Neal: 28:45

But you definitely think. You definitely think there might have been something going on there.

Nick: 28:48

Yeah, I think that's a pretty strong indication. Yeah, I would say yep, yep, and it was a late around in the tournament, so, yeah, it definitely seems a little suspicious for sure.

Neal: 29:00

Yeah, okay, yeah. Fortunately we really haven't had much of an issue at the club, the only major incident we had. I did a podcast about this. I think it's the second episode of this podcast. It was one of the early ones where we had a sandbagger and it was egregiously obvious that he was doing it, I had to file a complaint with the USCF. They unanimously agreed with my decision. But yeah, he was basically, I guess, trying to knock down his ratings so that he could enter a major tournament in a lower section, I guess, but other than that it's been pretty good, so fortunate in that regard, all right. So I would like to move on to speaking of, like kids or younger opponents. You have some thoughts on chess etiquette. I know this is something that comes up a lot in the discourse about chess the way that some kids behave but I know you have some thoughts you want to share with us.

Nick: 30:06

Yeah, I mean just my experiences alone. You know, I've seen, unfortunately, you know, okay, there are a lot of great kids and I've seen that because I've played the last couple of months. It's mostly, you know, scholastic plays, mostly kids, that I'm playing, and there's plenty of great kids out there and parents and you know, I mean some kids as young as seven years old and they're very respectful, they know how to conduct themselves during a tournament game.

Neal: 30:31

Yeah, and I have to say not to interrupt, and I sincerely mean this I'm very blessed at the Long Island Chess Club because the kids that come, they're just great kids. They're great kids, great families. You know, because you have maybe I shouldn't say this, but you know you have like kids who play chess and then you have these, like, almost like these bratty chess kids you know what I mean and we don't have. We don't have bratty chess kids at the Long Island Chess Club. I'm very fortunate, even last night this is true Even last night we had the club last night. I had these two kids come, two boys, you know, cute kids like 70 years old. They both entered round three with a one point by each. It turns out they ended up being paired against each other and they played. Of course the game was over in four minutes, because that's what happens when you get, you know, two seven year olds play sometimes. I mean they were relative beginners, but then what I did was I set up a table for them in the corner of the room, like one of you guys just play for fun, for a little bit quietly, and it was great. Great kids, great families. I love to see the youth getting involved, but we do have more and more kids come into the club and just great people, great families, great attitude. Not some of the type of kids that you see in the major tournaments or the types of parents that you see. Really really good group, really really good families. I'm just very fortunate. So I just wanted to put that in there, that a lot of what I presume you're going to talk about. Some of these behaviors we're really not seeing at the club and I'm very, very blessed and fortunate that that's the situation. But go ahead and tell me your experiences.

Nick: 32:18

Yes, I would agree. You know everything that you said because you know I have experienced at all the local clubs on Long Island and I would say that's definitely the case that I've encountered as well at the local clubs. So you know really kids that take it seriously well, you know very respectful conduct, those very well and it's really good to see. Oh, yeah, oh yeah, there's a lot more for the future of chess. But you know, sometimes, okay, when I'm playing in the city again, there's a lot right because it's predominantly kids. In some tournaments that have 60, 70 entries. A lot of these kids know each other. You know they're 10, 11, 12, you know all different ages and during in between, when the rounds are over, they're playing bug house. They're loud. Some people don't like that. I get it, though they're kids, right, they're playing with each other, they're having a good time. So they're loud and you know that's what kids do and I can't really fault anyone for that, and that's good to see too sometimes.

Neal: 33:23

Yeah, and sometimes the adults are more. You know they're louder than the kids are sometimes. Yeah yeah, this is it, this is it.

Nick: 33:30

I remember cases of that too. That's true, some of the local clubs have some funny stories or some of the characters, but you know. So some of the conduct that I've been seeing with the kids is that they may not know the rule of offering a drawer. You know they'll offer a drawer, like when they're thinking, when it's their move. Some of them don't know that you have to make them move first and offer the drawer. That's an honest thing, you know, and sometimes they'll repeat it several times in a game. But there's other kids that certainly know the rule and they're just worse and they're just doing it to be distracting or annoying. So there's that which is kind of a problem. Sometimes I've seen games where it could come down to like a low, like a time scramble, and they're in a worse situation and their opponent is thinking and then they'll stick their hand out and say drawer, and their hand is kind of like going towards the clock where their opponent can't see how much time they have remaining. So that's kind of very like. You know, it's like street chess, you know. But you know to see kids doing this, you know that's not good conduct and I've had some cases. I've had a case where one of a game 54 rounds game 50, it's a one day tournament. I was three and oh, in the last round playing. Now he's an international master. He's probably going to turn 14 years old pretty soon. You know he's won many scholastic titles, you know for, you know at his level and you know no reason why he can't become a GM, right, because he's only 14. So I'm playing him in the last round with black and I sacrificed the rook for kind of a thematic sack. I set the rook on F8 for a knight on F3, double his king side points. I get a pawn back and then I also win a second point. So it's like you know, black is full compensation. He played positionally well for his two rooks to make him active. Keep my pieces back Towards the end game. I was able to win the third point for the exchange. So, but again, you would think, three points plus the minor pieces better than the rook. But it's not because of his activity and it's hard for me to make progress. But it's one of the positions where it's like statically equal but like black has the better of it and we, you know we had like five minutes each. It was coming down to like to blitz and what happened is, I'm thinking, you know, towards the end, and then my opponent from round three who I won, I won comes up to me while I'm thinking. He sees at my clock ticking that I'm thinking, and he comes up to me and says can I have your score sheet from the round before? I'm like you know, I'm like you know, like I got distracted. I'm like, no, I'll get away, you know.

Neal: 36:35

And yeah, that's not good.

Nick: 36:37

Right. So he, I lost the game. You know, I ended up making blundering, I lost the game, I resigned and that was it. And then, like um, I think that then the dad came up to me and I think the kid's like 11 years old or might have been a dad. So, you know, can I have? I know what he was going to ask, right away I'm like no, you know, because you know the, the, the, the, the, the player I won in round three. He's like you must be 11, 11, 12 years old, right, but he's like 18, 1900. He know, like he's good enough to know that. You know you shouldn't be doing this, you know distracting your opponent. So I didn't know, because he wanted to. I guess he didn't write down all the moves, so he wanted to complete the sports. And I said no, you know, because on any circumstance, of course, I would give it to him. Some people ask me to take nowadays they take, you know, screenshots of the phone rather than writing it down, if they yeah, but if it needs to complete it. The fact that he interrupted me during my game. I'm like no, I'm not giving it to you, because you know he has to learn not to, not to. You know to do this.

Neal: 37:38

And that distracted you, I'm starting to jump in. Oh yeah, that distracted you so much that you lost the game.

Nick: 37:44

Yeah, in the blunder yeah.

Neal: 37:46

Okay, wow.

Nick: 37:47

Yeah, yeah so.

Neal: 37:52

See, the rule is if you want, you can ask your opponent for his or her score sheet. If you made a mistake. But the rule is you have to wait till your clock is running. So if I'm playing you and I realized I messed up my score sheet when my clock is running on my time, I can say you know, nick, do you mind if I look at your score sheet and the ruling is you're supposed to you? know, give it to him Like that's, that's generally, but it's on your time, so that's okay. But I can't ask you for your score sheet while your time is running. That's just, yeah, that's just. You just can't do that.

Nick: 38:28

Right, right. An example would be like locally at your club, for example, let's say you're playing and let's say you're playing Timorably, and let's say you know he makes a mistake and now you have a much better position, maybe you're winning, but it's coming down to the end of the game and I come up to you and say, neil, you know, can I have your score sheet from around before? Like you know what I mean. Like now you get distracted, you're playing Tim, and now you're getting distracted because I'm asking for you know. So that's kind of, you know, that was kind of upsetting to see. And now what I noticed is my last tournament there. I think it was the, was it? The last month was at the end of 2400. I think it may have been, or maybe it was the FIDE premiere. It was definitely a classical weekend tournament and a lot of these kids, like I said, they know each other, their friends, and now it's to the point where they're showing off, like as the game is going on, they're like laughing, like if they play each other, I think at the same, at the same table where they're having, you know, there's three boards, the table has three boards on it and if they're all playing each other. They're passing the exchange pieces around, they're laughing, very distracting. They get up from their board, they walk next to each other. They, they like, raise themselves up off their feet to like, like, pretend who's taller. And really distracting.

Neal: 39:46

Where's the? Where's the TV Up there?

Nick: 39:50

Well, they're upstairs and there's actually cameras. See, they have cameras there at the club. So what happened with the last tournament is that it got so bad that I was on board for the last round. I was on board for the rate there's 15 boards in the room. I was on board three and there was one kid that was holding up. He was writing something on the back of a score sheet and turning it over and holding it up. So the kids, like in the other in the room, you know, a couple of boards away, could see it start laughing. And I was looking at the you know people sitting the adults are, you know, the people sitting next to me and like they just knew, like it was just so frustrating. So I went upstairs, you know, I got the tournament. They said listen, like you know you have the cameras, like look what these kids are doing, like so, short of he came down there, he got the kid and told to him, I guess for 10 minutes, and and that was it, you know, and because they need, they need they, the kids are old enough there, you know when, when you have, you know 11, 12 year olds acting like this and then at the same time you have a seven year old and a seven year old is a lot more respectful and knows the conduct. So if the seven year olds know it, there's no excuses for the 10, 11, 12 year olds to be acting like this, showing off, and you know it's causing a distraction and you know, I don't know, maybe that's why and I and I know I've spoken to some adult players and I could tell you that there's some adult players that are not playing because of the environment. Okay, I had I had someone.

Neal: 41:16

This is a funny story. If I could jump in one of my old, stodgy regulars from the club, okay, the pairings go up. He's probably he's got to be pushing 80. He might be over 80. And he's paired against a seven year old. This is a true story. I'm not making this up, I'm not dramatizing this because it's a podcast. This is exactly how it went down and it comes up to me totally deadpan, dead serious. He's like. He's like yeah, I'm playing a little kid, can you change it? I just, I'd rather play an adult, thanks, and walks away.

Nick: 41:53

Wow.

Neal: 41:54

Like, no, but not nasty Like, and I'm like okay you know his name. I'll call him Mike. That wasn't his name. I'm using a sooner. I'm like Mike, you can't request that. I change your pairing just cause you don't want to play a child, and meanwhile I'm trying not to just bust out laughing because I thought it was more fun. I wasn't annoyed by it, I was, it was just cause he was dead. He's asking me. Oh, you know, you gave me regular. I meant I meant to ask for decad.

Nick: 42:24

Like you know, it was like oh yeah, no problem Can you, can you just change my opponent?

Neal: 42:27

I don't want to play kid Thanks and walks away and I'm like, I'm like Mike, I can't change the pairings. Like you know a lot of kids playing tournaments. It goes by. You know the score and, and, and.

Nick: 42:40

I can't change and then.

Neal: 42:42

So I explained to see he's like, oh okay, and then he goes back. But, like you know, this is the stuff I deal with. And then, as far as draws, you're talking about kids, even for adults, the two rules that are the most butchered by adults even strong players like over 2000 are draw offers and the threefold repetition rule. Now, with draw offers, the way to do a draw offer, you're supposed to wait until it's your turn to move. So your clock is running, you make your move first. You make your move first, you say I offer a draw and you hit your clock. But of course see the rule books mixed up because they say that's the way to offer a draw. But it's really the suggested way. It's not a rule, because if you just blurred out, I want to draw any time, even if your clock is running, even if your opponent's clock is running, rather, it still counts. So that's the thing you would think if that's the rule. Right, the rule is, do it that way, that if you do it another way it's not valid. But it is. So if your opponent's clock is running and you just blurred out, I offer a draw, it counts. And I've had one incident at the club where I think he was trying to get a read on his opponent and I happen to be right there and he goes it looks like a draw. He said something like I think it's a draw. And the guy's like okay, and shook his hand and he's like, well, wait a minute, I wasn't offering a draw. And I said, yeah, you did. I go, you said the word draw. So that's how I do it as a TD. There's some discretion, but as far as I'm concerned, if you say the word draw, then you just offer to draw. So if you say, oh, it looks like a draw, I think it's a draw, it might be a draw, that's a draw offer, because otherwise it allows for like this sort of like sneaky. You know what I'm saying. It's kind of like a poker player when he wants to get a reaction on his opponent, so he sort of like flicks his cards like he's going to fold them, but then he pulls them back just to kind of see the reaction Like in a lot, of, a lot of card rooms you can't, you know, yeah right, you can't have any.

Nick: 44:58

you gotta take away any attempts at on the you know, on an, I can't pronounce the word unambiguity.

Neal: 45:07

Yeah, it can't be ambiguous, it has to be unambiguous. Yeah. Exactly, exactly so if you say so I was right there and he didn't fight me on it I go. You said the word draw, that's a draw offer, and I believe I made the correct ruling there, because then it just gets things get really sketchy. But you know, I see adults do this all the time, where they offer a draw improperly all the time, but it still counts. And I also tell people if your opponent offers a draw, if it's his turn to move and he goes I offer a draw, you have every right to say make your move first and I'll consider it. And let's say he finds a winning move, he can't take it back, right? If he ends up playing a winning move that even he didn't see, you can just shake hands and say okay, I'll take that draw right, cause you can't. So you should do that, cause that's a strategic thing. You could say make your move first and I'll consider it. Now if you say the only thing is if he says I offer a draw and you say make your move first and I'll consider it, if his move is checkmate, then you lost, cause it's what happens first mate trumps everything. But if his move is just a winning move, you can then accept the draw offer, like his draw offers are irrevocable until, like, a move is made, like if your opponent says I offer a draw, he can't take it back. Now, once you make a move or touch a piece, then it's over. And now let's talk about touch move. If your opponent offers a draw and you simply touch a piece, that's a declination of the draw offer, because touching a piece is a requirement to move, right? So if I'm playing you, nick, and you say Neil, I offer a draw and I think about it and I touch my night. I just declined the draw offer because touching the piece is a requirement to move. You follow what I'm saying. So, there's a lot of subtleties with these draw offers. But I mean, yeah, kids mess it up. But I see adults do this all the time because people don't really read the rule book. They'll spend $3, $400 to go to a major tournament hotel. They don't want to spend the 15 or 16 bucks to get the rule book Now you don't have to read it cover to cover. But some of the more common scenarios that come up, as far as threefold repetition, as far as draw offers, people should at least be aware of that because in some cases people have lost games because they weren't aware of the threefold repetition rule. A lot of beginners and adult improvers, they don't even know about the threefold repetition rule and I've seen games where you know they're trying to get a draw and they had it, they could claim it, but you know they didn't know about it. You know they don't know. Oh really, if the position's about to appear for the third time and it doesn't have to be in a row, it could be non-consecutively right, but it basically.

Nick: 48:12

Yeah, I've noticed that too where there's opponents that do know, like players that do know, like the threefold repetition, where, okay, it's, you know, like green in a row, but they don't realize that it doesn't have to be like reoccurring, like you can have this if you have the same position three times, that's right, with the moves that are in between, then it's still a draw, right, yeah, and sometimes it's hard you know it's hard because they don't recognize, like in their memory, they just don't recognize that the position was reached. You know three different times. You know, okay, three. You know when three moves in a row that most people grasp and can follow and understand. But sometimes when it's you know, maybe you know there's like let's say the position comes up three times but let's say it's been over a span of 12 moves, right, they might not recall all three appearances of that position.

Neal: 49:01

Yeah, so yeah, basically yeah for the first time, yeah for those of you listening. In other words, when the entire board, when all 64 squares, when that exact position appears for the third time and it doesn't have to be consecutively you can declare a draw by three-fold repetition. Technically that's what it is Like. We use the term perpetual chess, like, oh, it's a draw by perpetual chess because you repeat, technically that's not in the rulebook, it's technically a draw by three-fold repetition. Right, perpetual is just kind of an offshoot of that. Like, that's a term we use, but that's not technically what it is. It's really, if you get a perpetual, it's really a draw by three-fold repetition. But yeah, I know, I mean, believe me, I could nerd out about the rules all day, but it is kind of fascinating to see how it plays out, you know, at the actual club, and how a lot of people, even strong players I've had players 2100, 2200, who were confused about the three-fold rule. I've had players 2100 or higher who were confused about draw offers. Right, it's not just something that's reserved for, let's say, scholastic players and beginners. So, very fascinating, it's kind of a cool discussion but a lot of people just aren't aware of, you know, these procedures.

Nick: 50:23

Right. And you know, again, with the etiquette with the kids, where, yeah, I get there's a lot of them that don't know that. But you know, again, when it comes to the conduct, sometimes it's where the kids are just offering drawers like in, like just to do like kind of distracting. You know, where they know they're in a lost position, like they're good enough. They're good enough where you know let's, if they're good enough to like if the tables were like turned and they had the position like, let's say, I had, they wouldn't offer me a drawer in that position. So sometimes they're just doing it to be distracting, unfortunately, you know, and that's some of the things. Again, you know, sometimes some of the kids they adjust pieces on when your opponent is thinking, you know, and again, the rule is that you know you have to adjust your pieces on. You know you can't not just your pieces but your opponent's pieces. If you want to adjust them, you can adjust the pieces, unless it's on your time. And then you know, some of the kids don't know that rule, honestly, and there's nothing wrong with that and okay, they have to learn it and it's not so much of a distraction. But then there are kids that will do it intentionally to cause a distraction.

Neal: 51:32

Oh yeah, a lot of it. A lot of it's gamesmanship, yeah, a lot of it's gamesmanship, yeah yeah.

Nick: 51:36

Yeah and I've seen that, I've seen, I've seen, you know, time scramble games where one kid is playing somebody but let's say he has a bunch of other friends that have done with their games and now they're hovering around the board. As you know, the game comes down to the wire and the some the kid may hover his hand over a piece and then he'll like he won't touch it but he'll hover it over it and then he'll look at his friends and the friends will kind of like give these facial gestures as like oh, it's a good move, or or it's not a good move, based on and he and they look at their face reactions to try to figure out, you know, if it's good or not.

Neal: 52:17

You've seen this. You've seen this.

Nick: 52:19

Yeah, I've seen this.

Neal: 52:21

Wow.

Nick: 52:22

And, and some of these kids are you know okay where, maybe it's like a 1700, and then he's looking to the crowd and some of his friends at 2000,. 2200. Yeah, I've seen this, yeah, I've seen that, and that's just again. That's, that's an issue, because it's like you know that that could be a form of cheating, you know, because you know it's. It's like, it's like a signaling right, that is, that is yeah. Non, it's a nonverbal sign signaling. You know I've seen that, I've seen again. You know, clubs, nowadays they have the digital screens for pairings and you know I've seen kids go on there and they touch it and they and they're fooling around, they're changing names of. You know it's, it's, it's the, you know it's the wall charts. The wall charts and the pairings are digital and they're going on there, they're changing ratings or they're changing.

Neal: 53:12

Well, how would wait? Hold on a second? How? Are they, you lost me there.

Nick: 53:16

How would they, how would?

Neal: 53:16

they able? How are they able to change it?

Nick: 53:19

Because the software, I guess the software, the way that it's set up, is that it's touch screen, because normally what happens is when your game is done you have to enter the results. So you touch the screen and you put either white wins or draw or black wins. You know, you hit, you hit one of those little bullet points and then you hit submit and then it'll post, okay, the one zero or the half half or zero one, but for some reason, like you're able to like, you know, touch, like the name and you could change, like somebody's name or you know, or you could change the rating that they're listed at for the tournament. And they're doing it to fool around. And I had to go get the director, like a couple of months ago, and say, hey, look, these kids are downstairs and they're fooling around.

Neal: 54:03

I can't believe I'm here. Wait, and this is this. Is that? This is at the Marshall chess club? Yeah, this is at the the Marshall chess club in Lower Manhattan, the famous. This is happening. Yes, I can't. I listen. I'm not looking to criticize, or but I that that's really disturbing.

Nick: 54:24

I know, I know.

Neal: 54:25

Wow.

Nick: 54:26

And that's why I got the director and, short enough, the director came down stairs and he, you know, told the kids, so they all hanging out, like you know, at the bottom of the stairs and and then that's supposed to, because the director, every tournament director, say you know, please don't block the stairs. You know there's a lot of people coming and going upstairs to. Now they're using both upstairs and downstairs.

Neal: 54:43

No wait, I have another question. Hold on, nick, I'm sorry to jump in. Huh, is so these, these Marshall tournaments generally? How many, how many rooms are going on like this, two rooms going on at the same time?

Nick: 54:57

Well, there's the downstairs room that holds 15 boards, so that that could hold 30 players.

Neal: 55:03

All right.

Nick: 55:03

And as the upstairs, the upstairs tournament, all I believe has close to 20, 20 boards, so that's 40 participants, and so the tournaments will always know you can register online now and both, both. Well, the side room, the side room upstairs, there's no games. They'll reserve that as the Skittles room and that's basically where the parents are. You know with it, you know just, it's basically the waiting lobby for the parents. You know the parents go on their notebook, computers and whatnot, and after the game, you know the kids will go in there and eat snacks and you know things of that nature. But the main, the main playing, the main ballroom upstairs is, yeah, 20 boards, that's 40 players, 30 downstairs for 15 boards. So that's why the tournaments will always close out like after 70, 70 entries. That's when they close out.

Neal: 56:01

And these, these two rooms, in other words, they're, they're happening concurrently, right?

Nick: 56:08

Not, it depends, you know, it depends on the night, on the type of tournament on the night. You know, the weekend you know you may have one tournament where you know, like this weekend it's the under 2400 and I don't think they have anything else.

Neal: 56:20

So is there? Is there normally like?

Nick: 56:22

last night they have the Thursday night, the one game a week that those those play downstairs. And then they for the Thursday night action, the four game, four round, game thirties. They play those upstairs.

Neal: 56:36

Okay, right, is there normal? I'm sorry, nick, is there normally a TD in each room, or you're telling me they're usually just upstairs, like I just want to well, usually they're just upstairs, mostly, you know, in the office, because they're taking care of duties or you know they have whatnot Now.

Nick: 56:52

now it's getting so busy, but now and I know, on the weekends they often have two tournaments. Right now, Okay.

Neal: 56:58

Because it's just so busy, you know, so Cause like when those kids were sort of like you said, the situation where, like he would hover his hand over the piece and then look at his friends. I mean, was there a TD in the room noticing this?

Nick: 57:11

No, no, but that's the other issue is that you know I had a friend who had an issue with a I believe I don't know if it was, I think it was a Tuesday mass. This tournament for round game 30 was an action one, or it was a Thursday or yeah where you know he claimed you know he, because he had some, he had some argument or some issue, and then you know he was claiming that you know he was telling the director, you know you have to be out here, you know, at the end of the round. And now they are, they're getting more right, because that's when a lot of the, of course, that's when a lot of the situations arise, right Regarding regarding, you know, rule and fractions, or you know things of that nature. So you know, and it's just you know, I guess it's becoming, you know it has to become more adopted now that right, the director should be at the you know, in a whole, as the games are, you know, coming to a conclusion. So, but sometimes, no, you know, sometimes, in terms of the kid, you know the kid hovering, you know, a hand over a piece and then trying to look to the crowd to see, like you know, if, if, if his friends approve of the move or not. I guess you know, you know it does happen occasionally. Again, this isn't happening every time, this isn't every kid, you know this is, you know, probably an isolated incident or two where this is happening, but you know, generally it is towards the end of the round. But it may not be, you know, because sometimes, you know it depends on the type of tournament. If an action tournament, you know you could have a situation where something like this could happen, where it's not exactly towards the end of the round, but you know it might just be because one player has a lot less time than the other one, which doesn't take too much for that to happen. So you know, so it all, you know, it all, I guess, you know comes down to it. But you know, when you have 70 players, you know it's, you know, sometimes now, you know you're going to need more than you know, especially when there's two levels, two floors. You know you're going to need more than one director and I noticed now on the weekends that's what they're doing. You know there's like pretty much two directors all the time now.

Neal: 59:22

Yeah, one is a lot for I mean I should say there's a lot. One is not I mean meaning 70 is a lot for one person. So, all right, let's change gears a little bit. Very interesting conversation there about that, but let's move on. So you had some thoughts on hitting your rating floor. I don't know if you meant yourself personally or just generally.

Nick: 59:46

Yeah, well, I did. I think right now if I was to go on MSA. I think I'm pretty sure I'm 2,000 now for the if I can't go any lower and I think that that's for the August supplement and I think I'm 2,711. I kind of been slowing down playing and that's normal this time of year because, for those of you listeners that aren't aware, I think we might have mentioned this maybe on the first podcast, but I'm very much into weather and hurricane season and here we are. It's getting towards the second half, we're in the second half of August now, and this is the time of year when I start following the models very closely and because it's possible I don't even know, it's possible 10 days from when this podcast is released, that I could be heading down to the Gulf of Mexico to intercept a hurricane. So generally this time of year, yeah, kind of.

Neal: 1:00:47

I'm just laughing, I'm reminded. Are you one of those like the storm cheesers on TV? Who's like?

Nick: 1:00:55

they're like 100?.

Neal: 1:00:56

We're here in the middle of the hurricane. This is awesome, is that you.

Nick: 1:01:01

I just want to experience it and document it and I take some weather observations I can send it into the National Weather Service. I'm not like that. Unfortunately it's become with social media content creating, it's become very like that over the top it's a lot of hyperbole, it's a lot of things that are not really representative of the science or how people should prepare. So I'm not like that. I don't get psyched up like that. Right OK. I do get very like when it's OK, when I'm about to leave, I'm preparing. I do get excited, but I'm excited because I'm looking forward to the chase, because of the suspense. Because the suspense is like in a couple of days you don't know where the hurricane is exactly going. You have an idea but you don't know exactly where. You don't know exactly the intensity. These are all things that the weather, the forecast, will determine and that's what I find interesting in getting excited about. But once I'm actually there, I'm actually pretty calm and I'm just very relaxed. It's kind of strange in a way. So in terms of chess, I don't know, I mean again, like I said, I did hit my rating floor for August and basically I'm not surprised by it when I started playing Because I know the rating deflation and I was pretty much playing in everything. I really wasn't concerned about my rating. If it was, there was a lot of terms I wouldn't play in Because there was just so many low rated opponents. Of course they're kids, they're much better than their rating, so it's just a matter of time before your rating goes down. So I knew that that would happen, that that was a possibility. But in some tournaments I played in maybe I shouldn't have because I was tired. Commuting to the city Multiple days a Friday, saturday, sunday it takes a toll on you. Most of the players live in New York City and the traveling isn't as much of an issue and especially if you're younger, you have more energy and again, it's mostly scholastic. Play is now, and so that's the other issue. I think too. And just I'm 46 years old now, I'm not 23. Where the traveling maybe didn't affect me or the amount of sleep maybe didn't affect me for my performances. So it's a whole combination of reasons and I've always taken chess and tried to look at it for other things in life and I kind of noticed that recently with Les Chess playing that for the last month or so and trying to go back to the gym. I'm playing basketball and I played basketball pretty much my whole life and I just noticed that I need a lot of young kids like 18, 19, 20 years old, very athletic, very quick, very fast. I play the LA Fitness, I enjoy it. It's a good social commitment. You play regularly, you get to know a lot of the players, the people and, again, people, even I, even though one guy he's 75 years old and this guy's playing basketball with people my age and even younger and he does it. He lost his wife and it's just something. He's keeping himself in shape, and so, with what I was saying is that now, through this stuff, like my age, I'm like I need to lose 15 pounds, right, not that I'm heavy or super overweight, but if I want to be able to keep up, like you know, defending these 20 year olds that are so quick, like moving laterally, like I need to get, I need to get a lot faster, and so it's like a good goal for me, right. So, but you know, I'm recognizing, okay, because I'm not 20, 23 years old anymore, 25 or even 30. So, kind of you know, you lose a little bit and so I can still do it, you know, if I get back to that things back to that form, so just like chess, is that you know. I have to recognize too that you know some of these tournaments, especially the action tournaments, playing kids, they're very fast, they're very resourceful and you know, if you're not matching that energy, you know you're not going to perform as well. Now, right, there's a big difference between performance and knowledge. Right, I haven't lost any knowledge, even though, okay, I'm technically a whole class lower than what, than my peak right of being a national master over to 2200. Now I'm 2000, at the bottom. I mean, if anything, I think my knowledge is probably higher than when I was maybe 2200, maybe at least the same, at least the same, definitely not lower. I haven't lost any knowledge, or, you know, I think I've gained it. To be honest, I think I've learned more, maybe a few more different openings than different. You know porn, structures and fundamentals, things of that nature, but it's just my performance that's lacking. You know decisions, right, playing if you're tired, playing certain tournaments where it's low rated play is playing certain tournaments where you know it's more traveling for you. So all of those things come in and affect the performance. So that's partly why I think that I hit you know I've gotten to, you know, 2000 over, you know, last couple of months, right, kind of like a gradual decline. Can I, can I get back to what I once was in terms of rating, in terms of performance? I don't know, I don't know if it is because, right, because it's like, okay, I'm 46. I'm not in my right. When I went over 2200, I was 30, 34 years old, 2000. I was, no, it's actually 36 years old, I think. Yeah, 36 years old or 37, when I hit over 2200. So so I mean, I think that I could write it, but I think that, you know, I would just have to take it more seriously in terms of, like, what I'm playing in, you know, not playing as much. I haven't gone over my games and, like I said, I'll go over them pretty, you know half hour each game and you know, I think I've learned from them. But again, you know, getting to in terms of a rating level which is just, you know, people say ratings don't mean anything or to some extent I agree with that because I think, like, for knowledge, and I know Brian Karen has talked about this and I'm sure Brian Karen, he'll love it. He's a huge basketball fan, so the stuff I was talking about basketball I'm sure you're going to enjoy that. But you know, even like Brian, I think, has a good understanding you know there's two big differences between knowledge and performance. You know, there's a lot of players right that have so much knowledge and we've talked about this in the past but how come they don't make it to a certain rating level which is based on, you know, statistical performances over time? You know, for a number of games right so, and there's a difference between the two right so you know, getting back to a certain performance level, you know what are some of the things that I'm going to have to change. You know, and I think of reflection of the last couple of months, now that I'm at my rating floor, I think that some of those changes would be again to be more selective. On the tournaments that I'm playing in, I could tell you right now that my performances at Game 25 are nearly not as good as my classical chess. The last couple of months I've had some pretty good results, you know, okay, tied for first at the Kretna Memorial tournament, which was, you know, a very good one. I tied for first in an under-2400, which was a Game 90. I tied for second in two of those under-2400s and then the other under-2400, I was a half a point out of under-22nd place. So I played in their five games, five rounds. I played in four of them, one for the last each month. That's 20 games and I've not lost a single game out of those 20. But at time, control some game, there was three different Game 50 tournaments one day. Three different one day, three different Game 50 tournaments that I tied for first place as well at the Marshall. So I've had some, really you know good results, but a lot of my bad results have been at the Game 25. And someone would say, hey, nick, you're losing rating points, like playing this Game 25. Like, maybe you should stop doing it. If I was just looking at it as a rating and yes, it's true that I don't perform at that as classical and maybe I but I enjoy playing. I enjoy the couple of games each night and it's a different type of. I enjoy the slow chess. I enjoy the one game a week. I enjoy that, I enjoy, I just enjoy. I've just enjoyed playing and maybe it's just a representation because I haven't played, you know, previous to starting again in April. You know I was away from chess tournaments for seven to eight years, so maybe I'm just taking it all in and just enjoying it and not really thinking about the performance at a ratings and and, and you know, and here I am so, and so you know, like a good good, a good like experiment, would be to say, okay, maybe if I just didn't do game 25, like with my rating go over 2000,. I'm willing, I'm willing to bet a large amount of money If I do that, that my rating will go above 2000.

Neal: 1:10:45

If I just play classical, yeah, I was going to say those dual rated games where it's both for those of you who may not be familiar dual rated, meaning that it's it affects both your classical, your rating, your regular rating and your quick rating. So if the initial time control and the increment adds up to 30 or more, I believe that's the rule. So if it's game 25 with a five second delay, that adds up to 30, so that would affect your regular rating and quick rating. But yeah, purely from a math point of view, from a ratings point of view, I think those dual rated time controls unless you really excel playing that quickly, it is the best way to sort of torch rating points for a lot of people.

Nick: 1:11:28

Yeah, and I used to when I was younger, I used to do really pretty good in them. So I don't know, I mean, but I feel like I'm definitely like my knowledge is like, and this was like I mean when I say playing action tournaments like I mean I'm talking like decades ago, like when I was like 1900, 2000. Well before I, even, you know, hit national master. So I mean, my knowledge is obviously definitely increased a lot since then, but for some reason back then, I don't know, maybe I was carefree right, I'm younger, I was carefree and I just played like rapid chess. Maybe I just I was just playing for tricks, very resourceful, and maybe that was, you know, maybe that was a good recipe for the action chess where now maybe it's hard for me to think like, that's like a different mode, right, it's like you're playing a different style of chess and maybe maybe that's what it is and my style, my style, isn't good for game 25. And that's, you know, and I think that our play is. Even adults, where I've noticed that have a lot of experience, they play certain openings in action chess and they play certain openings in classical chess, and I don't mean that they're playing like, okay, you know they're playing. You know Berlin Walls in classical chess or London System in classical chess and then in action chess they're playing like the England Gambit or the Black Mar-Dima Gambit. I'm not saying it's not a big noticeable change where you look at it and say, wow, it's totally two different styles. But I think that the very experience play is that play a lot of different controls. They just have a certain type of a different type of strategy that they're playing for. I'm sure the classical it's more they're playing for slower games, where they're playing for the end game. And I think that in the action chess it's not about the end game, it's more about dynamic play, about unclear, unclear positions that may get very tactical very quickly. You know things along those lines and I think that for me I think that's my problem where I, the path that I took to National Master, was very positional, end game, concrete thinking, where I'm just I'm just not adapting it, I just can't, I just can't, I can't, I can't just take that same style and expect the same results in game 25. Just because that, to be honest, I'm just not a good enough player. You know, I'm not, I'm not. You know, I'm not. You know, at the Alex Lenderman level, or you know, I'm not, you know, at that level where I can beat players of similar ratings as myself in in a much quicker or even lower rated than myself in a much quicker time control. And a good thing that one of my friends told me okay, frank Cicciulli, who most of us know. He even said that you know, as the time controls get narrower, meaning less time, you're giving up your edge being a stronger player, and I think that I think there's some truth to that.

Neal: 1:14:54

That's a very good point. I agree with that. I agree with that. Yeah, all right.

Nick: 1:15:01

Yeah, I think that you know that. You know people that hit rating floors. I think that they shouldn't get discouraged. I know I'm certainly not discouraged and you know just because I hit a rating floor, like you know. I could play good games. You know I could play. I know I've been winning tournaments, yeah.

Neal: 1:15:19

I mean a lot of, a lot of people are going through it now and you know, even if it's not a floor for a lot of people, that 150 to 200 point range decrease is common. But anyway, nick, just because of time, I just want to go go to our last segment. No, this is all great stuff. So real quickly, just maybe like five, 10 minutes. What is your deal? As far as I don't know if I should call a chess retirement, but taking a break or, I guess, sort of hibernating for a while. I don't want to put words in your mouth, but I know you had some some thoughts, so go ahead.

Nick: 1:15:56

Yeah, I don't think that I'm going to. I don't want to go into like retirement mode, like I did years ago, where I didn't play anything at all for like seven to eight years, like I don't. I don't see my. I hope I don't do that. I don't want to do that. You know, so I do. I do enjoy playing, but I think that you know, maybe it's just you know playing a little bit less, you know playing a little bit less, and then you know it's hard right, because it's like when I do play, like I want to have like a certain goal, a certain goal that I'm working to and that's just anything right. When I play basketball, or years ago, when I used to weight lift, you know, school education, going for a certain degree, going for another certification, anything along those lines always some, some type of goal. I would say. You know, even when I do a lot of hiking, I try to increase mileage, but at different locations. So for most chess players the goal is well, I want to, I want to become this level, right, I want to become an A player, I want to become an expert, I want to become a national master, and it goes up and up. You know, maybe a P-day master or whatnot. So you know, realistically, you know I don't have any goals where I'm saying, okay, I want to become an FM or I am because I think I'm too old for it. I notice players that make titles FM's, and I am 40s and 50 years old. So I shouldn't just say, if I'm too old, you know, I don't know. I do know is that the investment in time that it would take is something I don't want to do. Okay, so that that I kind of am like realistic with my expectations. Could I get back to national master to 2200 level? I probably could. And I do think that over the next couple of years the rating deflation is going to start to trickle down and a lot of these low rated players that play regularly, their rating is going to go up to where they should be If they just stop playing now they're not in the rating pool just because they're not playing anymore. So I think that the rating system will stabilize and I think that you know, if I did play, you know seriously, you know, try to play a little less, take it the way I used to. You know, just playing the slow tournament that I could get to 2200. I think that's possible. We take some work because I am getting older and some things like that. It might be some physical training or things of that nature, but you know it's okay. But I made national master, so do I need to devote all of this time into getting back to that Like I don't know? I don't feel like it's very rewarding, but I think that a good goal, if I want to keep playing, I feel like a good goal would be okay. Well, let's play some certain tournaments and let's see how you know if I could keep, like you know, trying to every now and then you know tie for first place, you know which I've been doing recently. And or you know how many games am I losing you know at again certain players. So things that add nature. So a different type of metric than just a straight out rating. You know in Brian Karen, you know we've talked about the rating system and a lot of the problems with it, and you know recommendations as to what could be done. Probably, to be truth be told, nothing is going to be done in terms of the USCF on there, and so you know, my goals are just to be a little bit different, maybe to expand my openings a little bit, kind of like some experimentation, but still try to expect decent results for certain tournaments. I would say I think that that's some of my goals and that'll probably why I keep playing.

Neal: 1:19:31

Excellent. All right, nick, I think I'm going to end it there. Great conversation, some great stories from the actual tournament scene. So, national Master Nick Panico, thanks so much for coming on today. I appreciate it.

Nick: 1:19:46

Thank you, neil, I appreciate it, as always.

Neal: 1:19:48

Of course, and, like I said, you'll be back. You are officially a chess angle regular contributor, which means that and a dollar won't get you a cup of coffee.

Nick: 1:20:00

But anyway.

Neal: 1:20:01

I always yeah, always a pleasure to have you on and for those of you at home. Thanks so much for listening and I hope you win your next game. Have a great day, everybody.