October 29th, 2008 
Chris Bird | Board | White | Result | Black |
| 1. | GM Larry Christiansen (2670) | 1-0 | IM Dmitry Schneider (2508) |
| 2. | IM Eli Vovsha (2532) | 0-1 | GM Eugene Perelshteyn (2619) |
| 3. | Marc Esserman (2307) | ½-½ | IM Alex Lenderman (2528) |
| 4. | Benjamin Katz (2108) | 0-1 | Ilya Krasik (2144) |
| Boston Blitz | 3½-½ | Queens Pioneers |
The Boston Blitz could not have asked for a better finish to the regular season as they trounced an unsuspecting Queens Pioneers team 3½-½. Thanks to this mauling, Carolina Cobras ended up winning the Eastern Division on tie-breaks, with just half a game point separating them and Queens. It also means that there will be an immediate rematch in the quarter finals as Queens finished 2nd while Boston finished 3rd.
The night started off very brightly for the Blitz as up on board 1, GM Larry Christiansen made short work of IM Dmitry Schneider. Schneider spent a lot of time in the opening but quickly ended up in an inferior position, both on the board and the clock. Blitz Manager Matt Phelps commented at about move 10 that the game was over as Christiansen had the bishop pair. How true to form that was as Christiansen managed to quickly get all of his pieces developed and a magnificent sacrificial finish from the attacking genius brought a swift end to the game and a Boston 1-0 lead.
The next game to finish was the long awaited and much anticipated match up between MVP candidates Marc Esserman and IM Alex Lenderman. Unfortunately there was no Smith-Morra Gambit with Lenderman playing the Caro-Kann but an interesting and unusual position arose out of the opening. Lenderman’s play seemed more obvious and he soon built a time advantage as Esserman found himself having to work his way through some tough complications. Eventually a draw was agreed, somewhat surprisingly in my view as Lenderman still had a time advantage and a position that would have been hard for him to lose. It was probably even more surprising given the Boston edge on the remaining boards but I guess we’ll wait to read Lenderman’s blog for his reasons (or excuses) for not playing on.
Ilya Krasik was next to finish, at last gathering up the full point with the black pieces, something that had eluded him all year. His opponent, Benjamin Katz, made it fairly easy for Krasik to obtain an edge out of the opening with an eventual dubious pawn sacrifice. However, to his credit, Katz found an interesting attack that should have eventually netted him a perpetual and a draw but at the crucial moment, and in severe time trouble, he couldn’t find the saving grace. Krasik’s win left Boston up 2½-½ and in a position to decide their own destiny in the play-offs.
On board 2 the last game to finish was GM Eugene Perelshteyn against IM Eli Vovsha. Given that the Carolina result was already known, the Blitz staff quickly worked out that a draw in the last game would give them Carolina in the play-offs (and Queens the Eastern Division crown) while a win would give them Queens. Oh no, what to do?! Should we be allowed to tell Perelshteyn the play-off situation and possibly try to get a more favorable match-up in the quarter final or do we let Perelshteyn play on, in a totally winning position, and potentially give ourselves a tougher game (at least on paper but Carolina have proved they are no pushovers) in the quarters? It was tough to hold back but the decision was made to not inform Perelshteyn of the situation and allow him to continue his game, which he eventually won in a very convincing fashion, his first win in the USCL since the 2006 season.
So there you have it. The Blitz finished 3rd in the East with a +6 =0 -4 record and will now play Queens in the quarter-finals, although Queens will receive draw odds. The Blitz do at least get to choose what boards they would like white/black on and so the brains behind the scenes are quickly calculating all the possible match-up scenarios. The match will be played at 7:00 pm on Monday, November 10th.
Posted in 
Tags: 
Just a note, but in Week 10, any team that would have intentionally soft played an opponent for the sole purpose of helping that team while at the same time hurting an team that wasn’t involved in the match, could have faced strict penalties.
This of course doesn’t stand if someone happens to blunder or offers a draw in a better but not obviously winning position (this type of thing happens all the time), it’s only if there is clear intent to manipulate the standings of other teams.
Well I guess we did quite a bit of manipulating by trouncing Queens, and btw whats this BS of not allowing us to know the scores of other matches? Also Greg, whats this I hear about threatening us with disqualification if you didn’t like the way Eugene’s game ended, I mean are you gonna then give them a simul instead?
Ilya, Greg didn’t threaten us with disqualification, I think he thought a gentle reminder about how the league would frown upon a Perelshteyn draw offer at that particular point of the game was appropriate. People were already asking at that point what the Carolina score was and what scores we would need to direct our play-off situation as per the scenarios I listed in my last match report.
It does however bring up an interesting point about what you should be allowed to do when you have your own play-off destiny in your hands. I can definitely attest to the fact that absolutely none of the conversations we had were regarding not wanting Queens to win the Eastern Division and everything to do with our respective opponent in the quarter-final. I personally think that in a team event a captain/manager should be allowed to inform his player whether the team needs a win or whether a draw will suffice. (Not tell him to offer a draw, but provide him with his own thoughts on what is best for the team.) It’s just part of the game.
However, considering how badly Queens were beaten, I don’t think that they’ll be personally looking forward to playing the Blitz again, even with draw odds.
Well, I was told Greg said he would disqualify us if Eugene drew….maybe I heard wrong but it really bothered me.
Personally, I think every player should try to win every game. Of course that’s not realistic, especially in team chess where draws in better positions are common (e.g. to guarantee a match victory). In fact, earlier in the match, after Larry had won, Lenderman offered Esserman a draw and he consulted me as captain on what to do. I responded, “It’s up to you.” He chose to play on, even in time pressure.
I never considered anything but letting Eugene win the good game he played. So what if we face Queens in the quarters or the semis? We’ll kill them (again) anyway.
BTW, there’s no rule against the players knowing the results of other matches (Greg confirmed this to me in an email).
-Matt
If I wanted to draw the game I would I and couldn’t care less what peanut gallery will say about my motives, it is my game and it is my right, you cant prove or disprove anything, yes maybe I wanted to play Carolina or maybe I was tired or maybe my cat was hungry at home and I wanted to feed him.. the bottom line is that its very arbitrary…to say you are gonna punish this team by disqualifying them from playoffs or through some other means is a very dangerous and destructive idea.