Just recently on Chessbase the following excerpt appeared in an article about chess myths and their plausibility:

What is the reason for the remarkable success of Chinese players in international chess? According to Prof. David H. Li it is due to the fact that they are all experienced in XiangQi, the combative and fast Chinese version of the game.

According to the professor, "When one is accustomed to playing a game with a higher manoeuvrability ratio, one has an advantage in playing a game with a lower manoeuvrability ratio. Moreover XiangQi introduces synergy into your thinking process and playing style. By broadening your horizon, you start to think more creatively; by improving your grasp of spatial relationship, you are visualizing more dynamically; and by deepening your analytical skill, you play more imaginatively." Of course, there is more. Simply check out the article about XiangQi and chess.

I also played XiangQi when I was younger, shortly before I started learning chess. I had some flair for the game and I liked to play it against my grandfather. Sometimes I played it online, but I haven't played in years and I don't recall ever playing it while I was playing "international chess". I'm planning to re-learn the game and play it online occasionally. I've always thought, having learned it before I learned the rules to international chess, that it has helped me in developing my chess skills.

Now, I have on many occasions played XiangQi (Chinese Chess) as well as other variants (like Shogi, Gothic Chess, or Berolina Chess). I've always felt that these variants offered a new kind of insight into chess.

However, I take issue with this so called expert professor Li. First of all, he is an amateur at XiangQi and simply doesn't play western chess. This to me disqualifies him to talk about the relationships between the two. I firmly believe that his points about the relationships are correct but you don't see me masquerading as an expert in the relationships of the two games.

What qualifies Mr. Li to speak on this matter? His books? There are many charlatans that publish books on chess ... that's just simply not good enough. His attitude? Mr. Li speaks with authority and that makes him no doubt a great leader in the XiangQi movement but other than that his attitude could be viewed as simple arrogance.

I think it would be better to find someone at the top of XiangQi that is at least a master in chess and get their input. I've seen Larry Kaufman talk about the relationship of chess and shogi and he made alot of sense. I guess what I'm trying to say (avoiding getting way off point) is that, even when a person has a valid point, until they obtain qualification I think it's better to stay silent.

I got a huge kick out of the Boylston Chess Club Blog article on Senior Chess. You Should definitely check this out!

I'm not quite to the point of this article myself (by about 40-50 years) but God I hope I still have the sense of humor that Mike Griffin does!

I was cruising the blogosphere (chessblogland) and John from Endgame Clothing brought this article he wrote to my attention. It first appeared on Jeremy Silman's site and I'll just give you a taste:

I have always had an amazing ability to learn. My parents told me that several teachers throughout my youth commented that I was a gifted learner. I imagine they kept this information to themselves so as to encourage me to one day become a well-adjusted adult. This ability to learn was evident in every intellectual endeavor I attempted. I was creative and mature in my understanding of language while destroying the grading curves in math and science.

To see the full article Click Here.

The 24 invited players will include:

the top 12 American players by rating, using the April rating supplement;

the top two female players by rating, using the April rating supplement;

the 2008 U.S. Champion;
the 2008 U.S. Junior Closed Champion;

the 2008 U.S. Open Champion;

the 2009 U.S. State Champion of Champions;

* a total of six wild card spots, to be determined later.

Source: Chess Life Online

The game below is probably my best game from my last event even though I lost. I played White against NM Davis Whaley:

Lexington, KY "Begin Anew" January 24, 2009 Round 2
Anton Taylor - NM Davis Whaley

1. e4 c5 2. c4 Nc6 3. Nf3 d6 4. Nc3 Bg4 5. Be2 g6 6. h3 Bxf3 7. Bxf3 Bg7 8.
d3 e6 9. O-O Nge7 10. Bg5 O-O 11. Qd2 Nd4 12. Bh6 Nxf3+ 13. gxf3 Nc6 14.
Bxg7 Kxg7 15. f4 Nd4 16. f3 Qh4 17. Kh2 Qh5 18. Qf2 a6 19. Ne2 Nxe2 20.
Qxe2 Qh6 21. Kg3 Rae8 22. e5 g5 23. exd6 Qh4+ 24. Kg2 Qxf4 25. Rae1 f6 26.
Qe4 Rf7 27. Qxf4 gxf4 28. d4 cxd4 29. b4 e5 30. a4 Rc8 31. Rc1 a5 32. c5
axb4 33. Rc4 Rd7 34. Rb1 b6 35. Rbxb4
... and the rest is a time scramble but a short glance will show Black clearly better after White's poor play.

0-1