Decisions, decisions

I'm about to enter a weekend chess tournament, the Bournemouth Chess Congress. Now, chess tournaments usually have at least three levels of entry, so you don't end up playing and (most likely) losing miserably to people who are far better at the game than you are. For tournaments in England it's all done based on your English Chess Federation grade. My grade is currently 118, which means for the Bournemouth Congress I can enter the lower level of the competition. But do I want to...?

In my last tournament I deliberately played in the middle section, hoping to pit my wits against really strong players and maybe learn a bit from them. They say that's how you improve at any game or sport; find the strongest opponents you can and try to learn from how they play (i.e. how they thrash you!) as long as your ego can withstand the inevitable battering. I did take a bit of punishment but I really felt that playing tough opponents sharpened my game up, and I'm tempted to do the same again in Bournemouth.

What's giving me pause for thought is that the lower level in the Bournemouth Congress is for people whose grade is below 125, meaning that I'd be one of the favourites. I've never won a chess tournament (although I've had a handful of second and third places) so I'm tempted to give this one a go and enter the lower tier of the competition. There's no way I'll finish anywhere near the top of the intermediate competition; an even score would be fantastic.

So do I man up and put in my entry form for the intermediate tournament or do I go for glory in the lower level? Place your bets now! Or give me advice in the comments, as you wish...

The bitter pill of relegation

As regular readers will know, I play chess fairly seriously. I'm a member of Southampton Chess Club and we're involved in a league with other nearby clubs. The league season is just about finished now and sadly my team has supped the bitter gall of relegation. It's funny how things have worked out, as last year we finished comfortably in mid-table. The problem is that our two top teams were both in Division 1 of the league this year so they couldn't share players. Once someone had played for either our A or B team, they were no longer eligible for the other. So the C team lost our strongest two regular players from last season and the rest of us couldn't make up for it.

You get a grade from the English Chess Federation once you've been playing club chess for a season and I think in every league match this season our opponents outgraded us, often by quite a wide margin. So we were always likely to be in danger of relegation, unless two or three team members had really good seasons. No-one did terribly, but none of us did that well either. Still, chin up lads; we ought to get on much better in Division 4 next season!

In other chess-related news, Norwegian chess genius and part-time fashion model Magnus Carlsen was featured in the Independent earlier this week...

Holy anticipation

I'm off to Cheltenham for a few days on the last residential teaching block for my theology course. I have a sense that it's going to be a good time. The staff at the theology college and our local 'hub director' (the lady who makes it all happen here in Hampshire, basically) have all been praying for us students and they've sent us much encouragement over the last few days.

The sessions for my group will mostly be split between a module on Christian spirituality and a doctrine module. I'm really looking forward to both, but in quite different ways. The spirituality sessions promise to teach me many new things – or rather many old things that I'm not yet aware of! We'll be looking at and trying to learn from contemplative, mystical practices and writings from the whole history of Christianity. And I expect the doctrine module will force me to confront a few issues with my own thinking about a few different points of theology. How close am I to embracing what some might describe as heresy, especially regarding open theism and simple / organic church? And what if I am close to embracing 'heresy'; does that matter?

Just in closing, a quick word on the chess tournament. I did pretty well, finishing with a win, two draws and two losses. All my opponents were higher graded than me so my score of 2.5 out of 6 was slightly better than par. A good weekend then. It was really hard work though! It felt like my opponents just didn't make any mistakes. But that's the thing about people graded higher than you; they don't make many mistakes. Or at least the mistakes they do make are subtle enough for you not to notice them. The upshot of it all is that I'm pretty tired as I write this, so if you're a praying sort then please pray that God would help me to stay focused and sharp this week. Thanks!

Chess and tightrope walking

I played chess on Tuesday evening as I usually do, at Southampton Chess Club. All was going very well for me, I was playing at pretty much the top of my game, and then a moment of blindness. I gave away my Queen. Nothing in return, no excuse either. I just completely missed that my Queen was under threat. And it had to happen when I was about to win, didn't it?! Well over an hour of good work totally spoilt by one shocking mistake.

It struck me that playing chess is a lot like tightrope walking in this regard. In both, you can be moments away from triumph and one error means it all goes to waste. Clearly, the stakes are rather higher (ha ha) in tightrope walking than in chess but, hey, no analogy is perfect!

And I hope I've got all the terrible moves out of my system as I'm playing in a chess tournament this weekend, starting tonight. I'm feeling okay about the great Queen giveaway but it's a bit worrying that my last game of chess was decided by a hideous mistake of mine. Still, things can only improve and I should comfort myself with the knowledge that even chess world champions sometimes make such mistakes...