How I won a chess tournament

Last month, I had a disastrous experience at the Dublin International Open dropping 45 rating points from 1717 to 1672. I severely under-performed and ended up losing to someone 200 points lower rated. This came after I lost 18 points at the Galway Congress, meaning I lost 63 points in a single month. To be honest, I was pretty discouraged and felt that maybe 1700 was my peak and I would never hit 1800. Worse still, with the summer break approaching, there wouldn't be any tournaments in Dublin for the next couple of months, meaning I didn't have much of a chance to improve my rating any time soon.

The only exception was the Drogheda Congress which takes place about an hour from Dublin City. I had taken part two years ago but wasn't planning on going this year. However, a friend from my local club was going and he offered me a lift so I decided to sign up. I was placed in the Fox Major section for players rated from 1550-1799 and was ranked 11th out of 34 based on rating.

Round 1 - Sacrifice everything

My first opponent was someone I hadn't played before, but I had played his brother and father. I played the Alapin Sicilian and the game soon transposed into an Advanced French. As is common in these positions Black focused on winning the d4 pawn. However, I counter-attacked on move 14 and threatened to fork both Rooks. My opponent tried to avoid this but in doing so, lined up his Rook and Queen, allowing me to win an exchange.

Black did win the d4 pawn in the end and the computer actually says the game is even, despite my material advantage. My opponent had compensation with their centre pawns, but they pushed too soon and hung a pawn on move 21. Their King was now vulnerable and bringing my Bishop to c4 seemed like a great way to control this strong diagonal. However, my opponent could easily block with their Bishop, so I decided to save the move for a more opportune time later (although I never got to play it in the end).

On move 26 I tried to set up a fork that would a win Rook but I made a mistake by allowing my opponent to trade Queens. Luckily, he didn't take it but instead blocked with his Rook. I played the winning move of Rook takes e5 which allows me to proceed with the fork and win the Rook on the next move. My opponent realised that the game was lost and went on a wild desperado attack sacrificing his remaining pieces one-by-one.

First, he sacrificed his Knight, brining my material advantage to plus 11. Afterwards he said he hoped I wouldn't take the Knight as there is a trap which actually leads to checkmate for Black. I saw this and decided it was safer to take the Knight because although Queen to f3 looks scary, I can block it with my Bishop. Surprisingly, my opponent didn't do this but instead threatened my Rook with his Bishop. Considering my massive material advantage, I was more than happy to trade, so I ignored the threat and instead took g6 with my Knight (removing another defender of the King and clearing the 7th rank for my attack).

My opponent made one last sacrifice (not sure why, but he didn't have many good options) and then I moved in to finish the game. I had a feeling there probably was a way to get mate, but I was just as happy to trade off Queens (and also win the Bishop) to make sure my opponent had no possible way to win. As my material advantage would be +17, my opponent resigned and I had started the tournament on the right note.

Round 2 - This looks like a chess puzzle

My next opponent was actually someone I had played last time I competed in Drogheda. He opened with a London and launched an early Kingside pawn storm. I felt this was a little premature especially as I hadn't decided which side I was going to castle on, so I could still easily move my King to safety. The attack ran out of steam and I safely castled Queenside.

Then the initiative shifted to me and my Knights had the potential to get dangerous on the Queenside. My opponent played b3 on move 13 to prevent my Knight from jumping in, but this only weakened his structure for my Bishop. He then played a3 which was a temporary delay, but further weakened the position. In the end, White couldn't castle either Kingside or Queenside. Seeing this weakness, I pushed my own pawns to open the position up and make the King vulnerable.

On move 17, I won a pawn and started to open up the centre. White's g-pawn was over-extended and hard to defend, so I built up pressure and won it on move 21. On move 25, I won another pawn and felt like I was dominating the game. My opponent was down on material and their King was vulnerable, soon I would move in for the kill. My opponent leaned over the board and whispered to me that the psoition reminded him of a chess.com puzzle where some tactic saves a losing position. But I didn't see a way out for him.

I had hoped my Rook could lead the attack by moving to e3 after move 28, but my opponent was able to force a Queen trade. I wasn't worried because I still had a 3 pawn lead, but unfortunately I got careless and let my lead slowly slip away. I forgot to defend the h-pawn and then White later won the f-pawn. Even though I was still up a pawn, there was no easy way to use this to my advantage.

The only plan I could come up with was to pin f-pawn to the King and then use my Knight to fork the King and the Bishop. All I needed was a waiting move from my opponent to allow me to get my Knight to f3 with a tempo attack on the Rook. My opponent openly admitted to me during the game that he didn't know what to do in the position other than just shuffle his Rook around. That was just the delay I needed for my attack. He put his Rook on h4 which seemed to save his position, but then I found g5. No matter where he moved, he would lose either the Bishop or the Rook.

I now had a winning position and was able to force a Rook trade on move 55, leaving my pawn too far advanced that he couldn't be stopped, causing my opponent to resign.

A crowd gathers as they wait for the last game to end

Round 3 - No defence for the King

After my two wins, I was now placed on board 1 against the player seeded number 1, so I knew this would be a tough game. The next four games were played on live boards, so you can see how long both players took on every move. My opponent opened with the Kings Indian Attack which allowed me plenty of space in the centre. I thought there might be potential to win a pawn on move 6, but further examination showed White could win a pawn back and the more open position would help his Bishop.

On move 12, my opponent started pushing his Kingside pawns, which left his King exposed but I had no way to take advantage of it. Instead his pawns boxed me in and cleared spaces for his pieces to attack. However, I was hopeful that I could withstand his attack and when he traded his Bishop on move 18, I felt I could hold the line. By move 19, the engine analysis drops the advantage from +4 to 0.0 if I take the Knight. But I missed my chance and White's advantage began to creep back up again.

White picked off my Kingside pawns one-by-one until my King was left very vulnerable in the corner. I was just about hanging on when White's Bishop attacked my Queen on move 23. I had two squares to choose from: e6 or d5. Both would keep my Queen close by to help defend but e6 also attacked White's pieces. However, this was a blunder as d5 would have prevented White from bringing the Queen to h5. At this point, the game is effectively lost, because my King is too vulnerable and White has too many attackers.

My opponent missed forced checkmate, but they were still completely winning as I have to sacrifice a Rook or trade my Queen for a Rook to stay in the game. I thought I might as well resign, but I paused when I saw I could win White's Queen if they took my Bishop. Their lead was so large that I was probably still losing, but it was enough for me to play on. Sure enough, on move 30, I pinned the Queen to the King, but I was still down 3 points of material. My opponent had such a strong lead that he even sacrificed his Rook for my Knight on move 35. Even though my opponent was up by only a pawn, there was no way to stop it and defend my Queenside pawns, so I had no choice but to resign.

Round 4 - The unstoppable march of the d-pawn

My opponent in this round was a young kid, which is one of the most dangerous types of opponent because they're often under-rated. I opened with the Alapin in response to his Sicilian and ended up with an isolated d-pawn giving me some control in the centre. On move 7, the engine says it's winning if I push the pawn to d5. I considered this move but didn't see any major advantage other than forcing the Knight to retreat. For the next three moves, I considered but declined to push the pawn as I instead developed my pieces in preparation for the pawn push. By the time I did play the move, the computer says I waited too long and only have an advantage of +1.5 instead of +3.

Nonetheless, my plan was to use the pawn to tear open Black's defences and leave the King vulnerable. If Black takes the pawn on move 12, I'll take back with the Bishop and my opponent won't be able to castle. He tried to avoid this by castling instead of taking the pawn but this allowed me to win an exchange by skewering the Queen. My d-pawn had marched almost the length of the board still in the opening and almost single handledly won me the game.

Not only did this give me a material advantage, but I could tell I gained a psychological advantage. My opponent seemed visibly deflated for the rest of the game and seemed to be just moving pieces instead of creating a plan. Although I had a clear advantage, the game wasn't over, so after trading pieces, I hunted down the Queenside pawns. A nice fork on move 23 allowed me to win a pawn and left me with a passed Queenside pawn that could prove dangerous.

I felt the time had come to attack the King, knowing that if this led to more trades, the endgame would be winning for me. So on move 26, I brought my Rook to the 7th rank and planned to bring my Knight and Queen to follow and target f7. My opponent's Knight danced around the board, but it didn't seem to have a clear target. On move 31, my opponent moved their Knight but then hesitated before hitting the clock. He realised that he had hung his Knight and resigned.

Round 5 - Double Knight danger

My opponent in this round was another familiar face who I had beaten in a wild and chaotic game in Gonzaga earlier this year. I opened with the Sicilian and he responded with a Kingside fianchetto, which I haven't seen many times before. After both sides finsihed development, we faced each other down across a pretty solid position. I decided the best way to advance was to lock down the centre with e5 and then play f5 to try and break through. When discussing the game afterwards, my opponent said that was the decisive move of the game because if I hadn't done that, he felt he could have broken through with f4.

When my opponent advanced his Knight on move 11, this worked with the move I had already planned to make and the Knight ended up stuck on the rim of the board and played no further part in the game. Instead I was able to open up the f-file and build a strong position, even if it did mean temporarily moving some of pieces back to the 8th rank. However, White seized the initiative by planting their Knight onto d5 which created the potential for some danger on f6. To clear this danger, I traded my Bishop for it on move 22.

Usually, it's best to try and keep the Bishop pair but I was willing to make the trade because I saw the potential for doubling my Knights. Moving a Knight to g4 would fork the King and the Queen, but get taken by the pawn. So, how about two Knights to g4? It's such an unexpected move that my opponent didn't see it coming. In the end, I only won a pawn because both Queens were hanging, but I had a far stronger position to attack my opponent's King.

All I needed was two moves and I would get checkmate. Although I didn't realise it at the time, on move 28, that's exactly what my opponent gave me. However, I didn't see the line all the way to the end and thought the King could escape, so instead I moved my Rook to safety. I expected my opponent to keep chasing my Rook with their Queen, but instead they gave me an opening that I quickly seized. I spent a long time considering the exact winning move but it turns out my position is so strong that there's multiple. My instinct was to keep giving check, but I realised that I take a pawn on move 30 and White can't prevent mate. They can take my Bishop but because it's not check, it doesn't matter.

Myself and my round 5 opponent

Round 6 - We're not playing for a draw

I had initially signed up for this tournament just to play chess, without any intention of even considering winning it. It wasn't until the final day when I was 3/4 and playing on the top boards, that I began to think I could be a contender. Even still, it felt like a long shot and not something I should over-think. However, after winning round 5, I was placed on board 1 and realised I had a good chance of getting a podium finish. There were 3 of us tied on 4/5 while my opponent had a perfect 5/5. This meant she only needed a draw to win the tournament and before the final game, the players on board 2 jokingly asked me not to take any quick draw offers.

To my surprise, instead of playing for a safe draw, my opponent played aggressively. On move 6, I traded my Knight for their Bishop which opened the h-file for their Rook. This might have influenced her decision to delay castling on the Kingside and instead look to the Queenside. Anticipating this, I started pushing my pawns and to my surprise, my opponent still castled Queenside on move 12.

Although it was still early days, I felt like I had a good advantage. Black had the open h-file, but couldn't bring any more pieces into the attack or even push her pawns. Worse still, her Queen was stuck on the wrong side of the board. Whereas I could easily push my pawns towards her King and have lots of space for my Rooks to attack. I had a feeling this game wouldn't end in a draw and the winner might just be me.

I kept building up my attack which only grew more dangerous while my opponent's attack seemed to run out of steam. Then on move 18, she moved her Knight, leaving her Rook exposed to my Bishop. Was this some sort of trap? Could she somehow turn this to her advantage? What was she seeing that I wasn't? I looked at it from every angle but I couldn't see why I shouldn't take the Rook. Although I planned to use the Bishop in my attack, it wasn't essential, whereas I didn't see how she could attack without the doubled Rooks. After the game she told me she simply blundered from tiredness.

If that move surprised me, then move 20 when my opponent sacrificed her Knight left me baffled. What possible advantage could there be? Had my opponent given up and was going out in a bang, or was there some incredible tactic that I couldn't see? I felt like the game would be over soon, either my opponent would score a devastating checkmate or her loss of material would give me the win.

As it turns out, there was no winning tactic. My opponent threatened mate, but it was easily blocked. Afterwards, she said she thought she could find a line where she forked my Rook, but there was nothing there. Instead, I lined up my Rooks and went in for the kill. By move 28, I had lined up my Bishop so that my opponent would have to sacrifice her Queen to avoid mate. She tried to delay the inevitable my chasing my Queen, but as long as I kept it on the g-file, there was no danger. Eventaully, with mate coming next move, she resigned.

Final result

After I won my game, I joked to the players on board 2 that I had done my part, so now it was up to them if they wanted to get 1st place. In the end, there were 3 players joint on 5/6, myself, Beril (my opponent from round 6) and Owen (the opponent I lost to in round 3). In a previous round, Beril had beaten Owen so our tie-breaks scores were even. In the end, Beril had the best performance rating, so she got to keep the trophy, though I did at least get a photo holding it.

The prize money was split evenly so we each received €180. Even better reward, was the rating boost I received. With a performance rating of 1936 (my best ever), I gained 74 points, taking my rating to an all time high of 1773. This means that I lost 63 points in April but won 101 points in June and I went from thinking I had peaked at 1700 to possibly hitting 1800. My FIDE rating gain was less dramatic, but I still gained 35 points, taking me to 1697. All in all, a very good performance that boosted me when I was feeling somewhat discouraged.

The three joint winners flanked on either side by organisers and sponsors