DCC February 2025 Report

Just goes to show that even in round 1, the higher rated players are not invincible.

For anyone interested in the history of Denver chess, read Todd Bardwick's History_of_Denver_Chess.pdf.  The blurry heading photo shows the well lit playing room, the spiffy new blue carpet, and a whole bunch of chess players. It was good to see a significant increase in the Tuesday night attendance. In January, we had a certainly not bad registration of 62 players. In February, 82 players played at least one game. With an average of over 50 players for each round. Always surprising to me is that quite a few players only play one or two games in the month, which likely means they are coming to the DCC not intending to win prize money, but more like in the same way they would go to the movies or some other entertainment.  Of course, that one game could win a DCC tournament Upset prize. 

Pairings have been posted, and you can see the anticipation of the player on the right. 

Also, and perhaps even more so, they are playing to increase their USCF rating. Which, for most players, matters more than winning a place prize. Since the achievement of going from one USCF rating class to the next higher level is not at all easy to do. Speaking of improving your game, along with Chris Peterson's GM level Best Game analysis, Ben DeGuire's monthly 'improve your game' articles will be, in my opinion, a great addition to these DCC reports. 

Eamon Montgomery with the Black pieces on Board 1.

So then, who improved their USCF rating and won money doing so at either or both DCC locations? In the Tuesday night Premier section, NM Eamon Montgomery took clear 1st place and won 158 dollars and 68 cents with a perfect 4-0 score, which included a Round 3 win against NM Brian Wall. NM Daniel Herman took a 1st round bye and finished with 3 points. Taking home the 2nd place prize of 95 dollars and 26 cents. Mark Brandao put 63 dollars and 51 cents in his pocket with 2.5 points, which included a huge Round 2 upset draw against Mr. Herman.  

NM Montgomery is waiting for Sikandar Baker-Nagar to move while NM Daniel Herman is plotting some deep tactics

The youngster, Kaavya Sakthisaravanan (1767) won the 30 dollar Premier section 1st Upset Prize when she won against the strong and experienced Alex Steger (2117) in Round 1. The 20 dollar 2nd Upset Prize went to Jeremy Roldan (1848) when he took the full point from Rhett Langseth (2165) also in Round 1. Just goes to show that even in round 1, the higher rated players are not invincible.

Kristopher Zelkin (w)  vs. Jeff Nohrden (b)

In the Tuesday night U1900 section, Jeff Nohrden had three upset wins as part of his 4-0 final score. This excellent chess playing won 153 dollars and 36 cents. John Schoenke, Kaleth Torrens-Martin, Carter Edwards, and Drew Clark all finished with 3 points, and each player won 38 dollars and 34 cents. Kaleth had a small last round upset win, and Carter and Drew both had significant upset wins to earn their share of the combined 2nd and 3rd place prize. The 30 dollar 1st Upset Prize was won by Shankar Parasuram (1392) when he won against Wyatt Blackhouse (1720) in the last round. Shankar also had a nice Upset win against Jack Gottlieb (1618) in Round 1. The 20 dollar 2nd Upset Prize was won by Carter Edwards for his Round 3 win against again Mr. Blackhouse, who had a rough tournament, while Mr. Edwards had a great one. 

Justin Barhite (w) vs. Alexander Kaenel (b)

In the Tuesday Night U1500 section, Justin Barhite and Arthur Taratuta both took 2nd round byes, and each player ended up with 3 points. Thus, they share the combined 1st and 2nd place prize of 245 dollars and 38 cents. Mr. Taratuta had two nice upset wins in Rounds 3 and 4 to earn his share of the money. Back at the DCC, James Lamorgese won prize money again this month. Taking home the 3rd place prize of 61 dollars and 34 cents. 

James Lamorgese(w) vs. Greg Richardson (b) 

The 30 dollar 1st Upset prize was won by David McFarland-Porter (860) for his Round 1 win against long time DCC player, Joseph Aragon (1300). The 20 dollar 2nd Upset prize went to Jivitesh Sasikumar (432) when he won his Round 2 game against Cameron  McCanless (803). Mr. Sasikumar had another big upset win when he played Jacob Halle (777) in Round 4. 

 Thursday night continues to attract new players to DCC USCF rated tournament games

In the Thursday night Premier section, is anyone surprised that NM Daniel Herman took 1st place with 3.5 points? His score included a small Upset draw against NM Brian Wall in Round 2 and a small last round Upset win against Rhett Langseth. Mr. Herman's fine play earned 153 dollars and 42 cents. 

Rhett Langseth (b) vs. Daniel Herman. two of Colorado's best players. 

After being held to a last round draw by John Schoenke, Mr. Wall took home the 2nd place prize of 115 dollars and 17 cents with 3 points. Mr. Schoenke and Forrest Lundstrom both ended up with 2.5 points and they share the 3rd place prize of 116 dollars and 16 cents. Mr. Schoenke also won the 20 dollar Premier Upset Prize.

 John Schoenke (w) vs. NM Brian Wall (b)

In the Thursday night U1600 and Unrated section, I guess it's no surprise that Nick Hvizda once again took 1st place with a perfect 4-0 score. Which put 153 dollars and 42 cents in his wallet. Johan Freed won the 2nd place prize of 115 dollars and 7 cents with 3.5 points. Shirley Herman took home the 3rd place prize of 57 dollars and 53 cents with 3 points. 

Nick Hvizda (w) vs. Isaac Richardson (b)...

...and here is Caleb Knedlik (b) vs. Jonah Freed (w)

In the Thursday night U1300 section Caleb Knedlik, Don Henry, and Cameron McCanless all finished with 2.5 points, and each player won 19 dollars and 18 cents. Mr. McCanless (803) also won the 20 dollar Upset Prize for his round 1 win over Carter Edwards (1452) The 20 dollar Unrated Prize was shared by Brandon Gryboski, Carlos Robles, Jeremy Chambers, Maxwell Norby, and Parker Barouch. Nobody can say the DCC doesn't pay out prize money to as many players as possible.  Note: There is some dispute as to whether the Prizes in this section are correct. Changes will be made if necessary. 

TD Shirley Herman (w) in a battle with TD Weston Taylor (b) 

As always, thanks to everyone who is making the DCC a great chess club. The TD's of course, but especially the players at both locations. Thanks also to Chris Peterson for taking the time to select a Best Game.  Thanks again to all, J.C. MacNeil

Games Section

Best Game

by NM Christofer Peterson

With the Colorado Closed just a week away, the state's top players are making their final preparations for what promises to be an exciting and hard-fought championship. This year’s field is stacked with talent (in no particular order): Brian Wall, Matthew Wofford, Eamon Montgomery, Rhett Langseth, Griffin McConnell, and Sullivan McConnell—each bringing a unique and dangerous style to the board. Every game in the Closed will be a battle, and with so much at stake, we can expect bold sacrifices, deep strategic play, and thrilling endgame duels.

For this month’s Best Game Prize, we highlight a spectacular clash between two of this year's Colorado Closed competitors: Matthew Wofford as White and Eamon Montgomery as Black. Eamon, the reigning Colorado Open Champion, has already cemented himself as one of the top players in the state and will be looking to add the 2025 Colorado Closed title to his growing list of accomplishments. Meanwhile, Matthew, a newly minted master, is still proving himself at the championship level. His fiercely aggressive and creative style makes him a dangerous opponent—if he can maintain consistency and finish his attacks, he could emerge as the next Colorado Closed champion.

This game serves as a preview of the battles to come, featuring dynamic play from both sides. Below is my analysis of this exciting encounter — an early glimpse at two players looking to make their mark in the upcoming Colorado Closed.

Hide game details

Wofford, Matthew (2165) - Montgomery, Eamon (2244)

Round 2 of DCC Feburary Tuesdays 2025 [ 2025.02.?? ]

2.??.??

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

8

8

7

7

6

6

5

5

4

4

3

3

2

2

1

1

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

FEN

Next weekend is the Colorado Closed. It features some of the strongest players in Colorado who will be competing for the state championship. It is a difficult tournament because every opponent is a monster. Typically, a high rated player in a Colorado tournament will face 1-2 experts and masters in a weekend event. In the Closed, they will each face 5 strong expert-master opponents. A difficult task for anyone. This game is a bit of a preview of the rounds from the upcoming Closed. 1. e4Matthew Wofford is a formidable opponent. He plays with a fiercely aggressive style as White and an unforgiving counterattacking approach as Black. I have been on the receiving end of his counterattacks twice, and his resourcefulness in difficult, even losing positions makes him a constant challenge to defeat. Anyone facing him must remain vigilant, as he is always searching for counterattacking opportunities. I highly recommend keeping your king as safe as possible because when he attacks, he does so with relentless force. The best way to beat Matt seems to be with accurate, confident calculation in the face of his aggression. He has a tendency to launch attacks that, at first glance, appear devastating but, upon deeper scrutiny, are often unsound. However, recognizing and refuting them requires confidence in your calculations, as his moves can be deceptively dangerous. His relentless volley of tactical complications can be exhausting, making endurance and focus just as critical as calculation. If you lose your vigilance for even a moment, his counterplay can quickly turn the tables. 1... c5Eamon is another formidable opponent, but for entirely different reasons. His solid yet dynamic style is incredibly difficult to break down. He is unflinching and uncompromising, maintaining a firm grip on the position with precise, risk-free play. His secure openings usually grant him an advantage as White and solid equality as Black, making it tough to gain an edge. Any mistake — even the slightest misstep — and he will capitalize without hesitation. The key to beating Eamon lies in accurate, patient play and an acceptance that the game will likely be a long, grueling battle. 2. Nf3 e6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 a6The Kan variation of the Sicilian has grown in popularity over the last few years. It is a solid approach that gives black easy development and attacking potential. There are many lines where, if white is not careful, black can win an easy game. The downside is that white can force black into passivity if he can keep black's counterplay in check. Crushing attacks against the black king can sometimes manifest out of thin air. Black needs to be always be on guard for sacrifices. 5. Bd3 Nf6 6. O-O Qc7 7. Nc3A more modern approach is to place a pawn on c4 to restrict the d5 break. A similar idea was used by Indian phenom Praggnanandha to defeat Carlsen in the 2024 Norway Chess tournament less than a year ago.( 7. c4 d6 8. Nc3 Nbd7 9. Qe2That game went something like this with slightly different move orders. ) 7... Bc5 8. Nb3 Be7 9. f4 d6 10. Kh1Up until here, the game has been following games played by some of the greats: Svidler, Topalov, Grischuck, Navara, and many, many more. While Kh1 is not a novelty, per se, other moves seem to provide white with a stronger grip on the position or begin to seize the initiative.( 10. a4This was used by GM Guseinov to defeat Svidler in 2011. )( 10. Qf3Has been tried by many Russian GMs with varying success )( 10. e5Was the choice of Topalov to defeat Svidler in the 2012 World Rapid Finals 10... dxe5 11. fxe5 Nfd7( 11... Qxe5!? 12. Bf4 Qh5 13. Be2 Qh4 14. g3 Qh3 15. Ne4! ) 12. Qg4 g6 13. Qg3 Nxe5 14. Bf4 f6White gives up a pawn but has a massive lead in developmen,t and black is already making serious kingside concessions with g6 and f6. ) 10... b5?!It is a natural reaction to strike aggressively after your opponent makes a passive move. Black is in the middle of a delicate balancing act. He wants to aggressively pursue counterattacks and punish white's out-of-place passivity, but he also needs to beware that his position is very fragile. The right strike from white can fracture the whole setup. 11. a3?Missing a huge opportunity.( 11. e5! dxe5 12. fxe5 Nfd7( 12... Qxe5?? 13. Bf4 Qh5 14. Be2 Qf5 15. Bxb8 Rxb8 16. Rxf5+− )( 12... Nd5?? 13. Rxf7!!See what I mean about attacks coming out of nowhere? 13... Kxf7 14. Qh5+ g6 15. Bxg6+!! hxg6 16. Qxh8 Nxc3?? 17. Bg5!! ) 13. Qh5 g6 14. Qh6 Bb7 15. Qg7 Rf8 16. Bf4 Nc6 17. Bg3 Ncxe5 18. Rae1+−The position is still wildly complicated, but white, for the price of a pawn, has tremendous activity. Meanwhile, black is scrambling to keep his king safe. White must be much better here if not outright winning. ) 11... Bb7 12. Qf3 Nbd7 13. Bd2 O-O 14. Rae1 Rfd8 15. Qh3 Nf8 16. e5?!( 16. f5Is a better approach to the position. It entices black to play the classic Sicilian break of d5. If black is not careful with his timing, white can quickly get a winning position. 16... e5 17. Re3 d5?!it looks good but it is too early. Since there are no other great improving moves it is easy to see how black can fall into this trap. 18. Nxd5 Nxd5 19. exd5 Bxd5( 19... Rxd5 20. Qg3 f6 21. Na5+−White will end up with the two bishops, which will be a distinct advantage as the knight will have no decent squares, or at least a difficult time finding a decent square. ) ) 16... Nd5?( 16... dxe5 17. fxe5 N6d7 ) 17. Nxd5Not a bad move as it wins an exchange, but there may have been better.( 17. Ne4This is a classic maneuver in these types of positions. The knight is menacingly placed on e4 and can quickly cause havoc on the kingside or the center. My general recommendation for these types of positions is to avoid trading. Black's position is a little cramped, awkward, and his king may quickly come under fire. Trading pieces will help black alleviate all three of those unfavorable positional characteristics. There is also the possibility of winning the two bishops with the pressure on d6. It is also a little hidden but there is a threat of Ba5 as well. 17... Rdc8 18. Na5 dxe5 19. fxe5 Ng6 20. Nxb7 Qxb7 21. Rxf7! Kxf7 22. Qxh7 Nxe5 23. Qh5+ Kg8 24. Qxe5+−Another attack that comes out of nowhere. Suddenly black's king is feeling extra vulnerable. The threats on e6, down the h-file and down the f-file give white a decisive advantage. ) 17... Bxd5 18. Ba5 Qb7 19. Bxd8 Rxd8White has won an exchange , but it was a costly victory. White is obviously much better in this position , but suddenly, black's position seems much easier to play. One of the most difficult things about chess is the comparison between the tangible and intangible. White had a number of intangible advantages in the position just a few moves ago. He has traded those advantages for the concrete advantage of an extra exchange. Having that clear, material advantage gives players peace of mind, but now black has a much easier game. Had white maintained the pressure just a few moves longer, he would likely have a crushing attack, an even larger material advantage, and kept black's pay difficult and awkward. 20. Nd2 a5This move is a little baffling to me. Either black wants to pay b4 at some point or discourage b4 from white. Neither of these options seem to be great for black. All this move seemed to do was weaken the b5 pawn, which could be hanging in many lines. It makes it seem like black was unsure of how to proceed in the position and wanted to see white's plan before committing to trades in the center. 21. Ne4?!( 21. exd6 Bxd6 22. Be4Black's greatest asset is the powerful battery on the h1-a8 diagonal. Challenging it will significantly impair black's ability to counterattack. ) 21... dxe5 22. fxe5 Ng6 23. Nd2It is clear from this move that white is unsure of the right plan. White's plan should be to get rid of black's bishop pair, the greatest source of counterplay. The easiest way is to give up a pawn to do so.( 23. Nd6 Bxd6 24. exd6 Rxd6While not as ideal as trading off the light squared bishops, white now has targets down the E and F files to work with and less diagonals to worry about. ) 23... Bg5 24. Nf3 Bh6 25. Bxg6?!Understandable considering the threat of Nf4, but it essentially eliminates white's material advantage. The two bishops are well-known to be worth a rook and knight in these types of open positions.( 25. Rf2This is an interesting line found by the computer: 25... Nf4 26. Qg3 b4 27. axb4 axb4 28. Ref1 b3 29. Ng5 Nxg2 30. c4I can't see any human playing like this. The discovered checks are so terrifying through the fog of calculation. 30... Ne3+ 31. cxd5 Nxf1 32. Bxf1 Bxg5 33. Qxg5 Rxd5 34. Qg2 ) 25... hxg6 26. Rd1 Rc8 27. Nd4 b4Black has consolidated; his pieces are well placed and he has a clear plan to break down the queenside. It is very difficult at this point to come up with a coherent plan for white. The best course of action may be to try and keep the queenside closed and play for pressure down the f-file. That is much easier said than done, of course. 28. axb4( 28. a4 Rc4 29. Qg3 Qa7 30. Qf2There will be a lot of subtle maneuvering in the moves ahead, but white's slight, on-paper material advantage keeps him in the game. Any result can happen here. ) 28... Qxb4 29. b3 a4 30. c4A nice attempt to break down black's defenses. Matthew Wofford is a very resourceful player. 30... Bb7? 31. Rxf7! axb3( 31... Kxf7Of course it cannot be taken. 32. Qxe6+ Kf8 33. Rf1+ Bf3 34. Rxf3+ Bf4 35. Rxf4# ) 32. Qxe6This looks strong but there is a move that gives white a winning attack. The lines are absolutely insane.( 32. Nc6!!This devastating move interrupts black's defenses. White is hanging a knight to two pieces and a rook to the king, but none of them can be captured. This is the power of the initiative. 32... Qxc4( 32... Bxc6 33. Qxe6 Qxc4! 34. Rf8+ Kxf8 35. Qxc8+ Kf7 36. Rd7+ Bxd7 37. Qxc4+ Be6 38. Qc7+It should be a straightforward win for white ,although some careful planning is needed to get the king and pawns involved. )( 32... Rxc6 33. Rd8+ Kh7( 33... Kxf7leads to a quick checkmate 34. Qf3+ Ke7 35. Qf8# ) 34. Qh4!!A very difficult move to see. The threat is Rxg7+, Qf6+, and Rh8#. The precarious state of white's back rank makes it understandable how this was overlooked. Anyone who can see this sequence before Nc6 is a calculation genius. 34... b2These lines are long, but bear with me. I want to prove that white is winning.( 34... Rc7 35. Rxc7 g5 36. Rxb7 Qxb7 37. Qh3 Qb4( 37... b2?? 38. Qd3+ g6 39. Rd7+Easily winning ) 38. Qd3+ g6 39. Rd7+ Bg7 40. Qh3+ Kg8 41. Qxe6+ Kh7 42. Qh3+ Kg8 43. Rd8+And now it is clear that black's king is too exposed. ) 35. Rxg7+ Kxg7 36. Qf6+ )( 32... Kxf7 33. Nxb4Obviously. ) 33. Rxb7 Qxc6 34. Qxb3+−With the threat of the passed b-pawn, and the two bishops gone, white must be winning. ) 32... Kh7 33. Qd7 Rxc4( 33... Qxc4 34. Qxb7 Qxd4 35. Rff1 Qc4+−White has good control over the passed b-pawn and a passed pawn on e5 that will be difficult for black to deal with. This should be winning for white. ) 34. Ne6 Bxg2+A last-ditch effort for counter play. With accurate calculation, white should come out unscathed. 35. Kxg2??It is not obvious, but white needs to get black's queen on a worse square before taking the bishop. Here, black's pieces are too close to the action with too many avenues for attack.( 35. Kg1! Qb6+The queen is not misplaced on b6. Without access to e4, c3 or c4, black's attack will quickly fizzle out. 36. Kxg2 Rc2+ 37. Kf1 Qa6+ 38. Kg1 Qb6+ 39. Kh1 Qc6+ 40. Qxc6 Rxc6 41. Nd4Up a rook should be easily winning for white. ) 35... Rc2+ 36. Kf3( 36. Kf1Does not change anything except that black may need to settle for a draw. 36... Qc4+ 37. Rd3 Rc1+ 38. Kg2 Qg4+ 39. Rg3 Rc2+ 40. Kh1 Qe4+ 41. Rgf3 Rc1+ 42. Kg2 Qg4+ 43. Rg3And there will eventually be a repetition. ) 36... Qc3+ 37. Rd3?( 37. Qd3 Qxe5 38. Nf8+ Kg8 39. Rxg7+ Qxg7 40. Qxb3+ Qf7+ 41. Qxf7+ Kxf7 42. Nd7Should lead to a draw. ) 37... Qxe5 38. Rxg7+ Bxg7 39. Qxg7+( 39. Nxg7 Qe2+ 40. Kf4 Rc4+ 41. Kg5 Rg4+ 42. Qxg4 Qxd3 43. Qb4A complicated queen endgame that black should be winning although white has many chances to draw. ) 39... Qxg7 40. Nxg7 b2 41. Rb3 Kxg7Black eventually secured the win, as the position was a straightforward conversion. A heartbreaking loss for White, who played well but struggled to find the right ideas at critical moments. Despite making all the right moves leading up to the decisive phase, White could not navigate the complexities when it mattered most. This game serves as a valuable lesson in attacking chess, demonstrating how quickly seemingly solid positions can be pried open with timely sacrifices and precise calculation. Matthew Wofford’s play was bold and fearless, teetering on the brink of victory, while Eamon showcased exceptional resilience, surviving the complications with well-timed counterplay and ensuring that the winning lines remained too obscure or complex for his opponent to exploit. These two are set to face off again in the closed tournament, and it promises to be an epic battle. Anyone who appreciates fighting chess should tune in and follow the games closely.0-1

This was a truly fascinating game. The battle between Matthew Wofford and Eamon Montgomery was filled with tactical complexity, strategic depth, and a relentless fight for victory. Both players showed why they are among Colorado’s top competitors, making this an excellent preview of what we can expect in the upcoming Colorado Closed.

Congratulations to Eamon Montgomery for having his game selected as the best game. His ability to navigate the complications, capitalize on key moments, and survive the relentless attack made this game a well-deserved winner.

With the March tournaments approaching, I am once again accepting Best Game submissions. The rating of the participants does not matter—what matters is the quality of the struggle and the lessons the game provides. Every game is considered on its own merit. Here is what I am looking for:

1. The game must be decisive — draws, no matter how interesting, will not be considered.
2. Tactical complexity is key — a game with sharp calculation, sacrifices, or creative counterplay is more likely to be selected.
3. Teachable moments matter — games that inspire others to improve and offer valuable insights will stand out.
4. Accuracy is not a deciding factor — engines expose mistakes in even the strongest human games. The spirit of the game is more important than perfection.
5. A real fight must be present — games where both players put everything on the board and truly battle for the win will be prioritized.

If you played a game that fits these criteria or saw one worth analyzing, I encourage you to submit it. The best games are not always played by the highest-rated players—they are played by those who seize the moment, fight for every move, and leave us with something to learn. Every game, regardless of the ratings of the players will be considered. I look forward to reviewing the games from March’s events.

And of course, the Games Section has some Brian Wall games. Also, thanks to Andrew Robichaud for posting his game.