Prasanna and Kalugampitiya finished 3rd and 4th respectively after winning their last round games.
With the tournament reaching its conclusion at the end of the 13th round, let’s see how we at chesslife.lk saw the performance of all the players
Chamika Perera (1st place, ELO change +20.85)
Played the tournament of his life. Recovered brilliantly from a first round loss, never lost another game & became the youngest ever National Champion. What more can you ask for? But real challenges are yet to come. There is no doubt his opponents will be highly motivated in the future because they are playing against a National Champion. It’s going to be very interesting to see whether he can dominate the Sri Lankan chess scene like Athula Russel did. We’ll be watching his career progress with our fingers crossed.
G C Anuruddha (2nd place, ELO change +4.8)
Was at his fighting best (as usual) throughout the tournament. Anuruddha is someone who gives 110 percent every single game & his consistent results throughout the last decade speak volumes for his talent & desire to win. But for a player who is usually prepared to do anything & everything possible to achieve the desired result, six drawn games out of thirteen is bit unusual. He was the clear favourite with last four rounds remaining but ‘that loss’ in the 10th round against a ‘tail ender’ will probably haunt him for some time to come. But one can confidently predict Anuruddha to bounce back from this & always be there & thereabouts at future National championships.
Prasanna Kurukulasuriya (3rd place, ELO change +12.45)
After several disappointing National A campaigns finally Prasanna managed to show some of his National B form in the main event as well. He has always been one of the better prepared players in Sri Lanka but somehow failed to make his superior preparation count in his previous trips to the National A. But this time he managed to fulfill some his rich potential. He scored an impressive 5.5/7 (4 wins & 3 draws) against rest of the players in the top 8 & could have mounted a serious challenge for the title had it not been for some untimely losses against players in the bottom half of the table.
Rajeendra Kalugampitiya (4th place, ELO change -13.2)
Fourth place in the National A can’t be all that bad but still in Kalu’s case it can be considered a disappointing outcome. He was never really in the hunt for a tilt at the title at any stage during the tournament. May be he’s going through a transitional stage in terms of his chess style. With all his talent, experience & hard work we expect him to do much better next year.
A M C B Alahakoon (5th place, ELO change +51.9)
Won most number of games (seven – along with the Chamika & Prasanna) & had the least number of draws (one!). Alahakoon had a marvelous time with the bottom six of the table scoring 5.5/6 but lost all four games against the top four. Ended the tournament in fifth place but could have finished as high as second if he had won the last round game. All in all he probably had the time of his life in his first ever National A. But he might just find it a bit tough next year now that he is not an unknown quantity anymore.
Chandana Wijekoon (6th place, ELO change +15.15)
Chandana played quite well to achieve his highest ever rank in a National A. He will have to combine his usually extensive opening preparation with some consistent middle game play if he wants to make the next step up & be a member of the team to the next Olympiads, which is a definite possibility because he is a hard working individual who puts a big pressure on himself to succeed.
Yasas Lamawansa ( 7th place, ELO change +26.7)
His overall result surprised many observers (including the author of this article, dare I say it) who expected him to be a ‘punching bag’ in this tournament. National A is a cruel tournament at the best of times and for a 16 year old it can be a demoralizing experience if you start losing games on the trot. Yasas showed immense potential & wonderful temperament to finish in the top half which is a tremendous achievement. But the difference in his record against the top five (0.5/5) & the bottom five (5/5) showed that he is still a work in progress. But considering the fact that he gained nearly 150 ELO points in the last 12 months we can confidently expect him to get better.
Romesh Weerawardena (8th place, ELO change -34.05)
Romesh was probably the biggest disappointment of the tournament. Started as the top seed & had a nightmarish start, drawing quite a few winnable games. His misery was compounded in Round 5 when he became a victim of the ‘Zero tolerance policy’. For his credit Romesh recovered midway through the tournament to post some good results. Expect him to brush this disappointment away & come back stronger next year.
Udith Jayasundara (9th place, ELO change +3.6)
Along with Chamika & Yasas, Udith carried the flag for the young brigade in the National A. He showed many glimpses of his undoubted talent & probably would be bitterly disappointed with his final result as he was hovering among the top 6 for the most parts of the tournament. Another one for the future.
Vidura Koggala (10th place, ELO change -9.6)
Koggala could not replicate the form that took him to the Olympiads last year & probably was hit by the ‘second season syndrome’ which consumed many players in the past as well. Next year would be a crucial one with regard to his career progress.
Viman Bhagya (11th place, ELO change -27.15)
Viman’s overall result was bit surprising because we expected him to finish much higher. 1.5/8 with the top eight (3 draws) probably sums up his disappointing tournament. A player of his talent should improve on this next year.
Ruchira Dissanayake (12th place, ELO change -14.85)
Ruchira had a bright enough start but fell away as the tournament progressed. He too would be disappointed because he has played several National championships before & knew what to expect.
Gihan De Silva ( 13th place, ELO change -25.2)
Gihan too has played the Nationals before & probably be disappointed by the fact that he finished along with the other also-rans. On the other hand Gihan played some of the most exciting & fearless chess of the whole tournament. He needs to find the perfect balance between his naturally aggressive playing style & sensible decision making if he wants to make a bigger impact in the future.
P D Senanayake (14th place, ELO change -11.4)
PD had a tough time during the tournament but played better than what the points table suggests. He was definitely unlucky not to get few more points on the board as he let several promising positions slip away. I’m sure he’d be better for the experience.
Thoughts & Impressions
All in all, the entire tournament was a rousing success. It was encouraging to see the enthusiasm from the players even though this was a non-Olympiad year.
However some questions still remain unanswered. Even though players were well equipped with the latest software and databases, the level of opening preparation still left a great deal to be desired. Avoiding your opponent’s preparation rather than relying on your own seems to be the motto throughout the whole tournament. Sharp openings that require extensive preparation were avoided almost exclusively by most of the players. It is debatable whether such an approach is appropriate for the betterment of Sri Lankan chess, particularly when one considers long term goals that we crave so much for.
It was also bit disturbing to see some players choose to reach a draw by playing a game from their database (usually a classic game from yesteryear). Players can agree for a draw whenever the wish during the game but memorizing & then playing a game played by two grandmasters is not really what we expect from our national players.
Chamika’s victory also brought the value of having a proper coach/second into focus. The support & guidance of Chatura Rajapakse who represented Sri Lanka in 2006 & 2008 chess Olympiads helped the champion a great deal. It is about time all top level players think about having a top coach to help with their preparation
No comments:
Post a Comment