As season three of the US Chess League is nearly upon us, I will once again attempt to predict the course of the season.  There isn’t a doubt in my mind that this season will be more exciting than ever if for no other reason than the large increase of 2600+ players in the league (from four to ten).  Meanwhile the competition should be fierce as most teams are able to field lineups very near to the 2400 rating cap leaving many factors aside from simply having a strong team on paper to decide which team will emerge victorious in the end.  Some of these factors include:

Strength of strongest lineups:  This is the most basic criteria of course.  Being able to field a team of close to maximum allowed rating (which nearly every team can do) is only part of this.  There are also certain other edges here such as the ability to field a team with two GMs, a team with an IM on board three, or a team with a master on board four (or even a 2300 player there).  When two similarly rated teams face off, if one team has the ability to effectively use a variety of these options whereas the other team’s doesn't, having a choice of which rating lineup is best suited to face the opposition could definitely be an edge.  Granted it is rather difficult to find a team which can field a lineup where all three of these above conditions are simultaneously true, but the ability to do any of these three (or even two of the three) as needed could definitely pay dividends in the long term (and those little advantages are what a team really needs to take the regular season crown). 

Flexibility:    How many different lineups which are very close to your strongest can you put forth and in particular are you able to wield a lineup which is reasonably close in strength to your strongest even in the absence of any one of your players?  This can be important not only in the event one of your players is unavailable for a given match, but also for preparation reasons as the ability to have your lineup for a given week harder to guess is a definite advantage. 

Underrated Players:  This usually helps the younger players, as the league allows you to use ratings from nearly a year ago, and these players have improved quite a long in this time.  Of course, the more underrated players you have, the more your actual team rating can end up exceeding the 2400 rating cap in a legal way.  Teams can also gain an edge here, as the highest rating anyone counts towards the 2400 rating cap, is 2580. Thus if you have a player rated 2650, they only count as 2580, and this clearly helps your team's overall strength.

Dedication:  It seems certain that some teams will put more effort forward than others to prepare for their matches. The teams who work together best to make sure each person is appropriately prepared for each match can count on some dividends in the end.

Other Factors:  There are many other small things which can add advantages to certain teams in the league.  Two issues are:  having female players who increase the rating cap as well as a team’s strength of schedule..  Also important is how active current team members are (with several players coming out of semi-retirement to play in the league) and how well team members historically have performed over the internet compared to their strength over the board.  Each team can also have a variety of unique strengths that might play a role under the appropriate circumstances.

So based on these five criteria I have listed, I will estimate each team’s approximate strength in each category, with a ranking from 1 to 10 (1 being lowest) and will use these estimations to determine where I feel each team is most likely to finish in their division this season.  The teams may seem relatively equal on paper, but it's become clear in the first two seasons of the league that having the best team on paper definitely does not guarantee victory, and I feel the above issues are really a large part of what ends up setting the teams apart.

One minor note:  When I list a team’s strongest lineups, I will not list any of the possible lineups using a team’s alternates as while the alternates are definitely relevant, given how little they can play in entirety (especially the fact that they can’t compete in the playoffs), I don’t feel they should be a huge factor in any team’s overall makeup.

East:
 

1^st Place:  New York Knights

Strongest Lineups: 

1^st:  Nakamura

2^nd:  Charbonneau

3^rd:  Bonin / Arnold

4^th:  Zenyuk / Vicary

1^st:  Nakamura / Charbonneau

2^nd:  Krush

3^rd:  Hess

4^th:  Zenyuk / Vicary

1^st:  Charbonneau

2^nd:  Krush

3^rd:  Bonin

4^th:  Arnold

Strength of strongest lineups:  New York has a wide variety of very strong lineups all of which fall just under the rating cap and basically allows them to plan a lineup which can be especially strong on any of the lower three boards as needed.  Being one of the few teams which can sport a 2300+ player on board four in an otherwise still very strong lineup could be a giant asset.  Score:  9.

Flexibility:  They also are clearly able to submit multiple lineups which are still close to optimal even in the absence of any player, and certainly they have some other lineups not even amongst their probable best which would still be very competitive.  

Score:  8.

Underrated Players:  This is one area where I feel New York really has an edge as Nakamura is by far the highest rated player in the league, Charbonneau’s results from the past two years clearly place him as someone who would be deserving of being at the 2580 rating cap, Krush  couns as 2442 despite having surpassed the 2500 mark, and Hess/Arnold are the last two US Junior Champions both of whom are also now quite a bit higher than their league ratings indicate.  Also, Zenyuk having recently surpassed the 2200 mark is also an asset.  From top to bottom New York has this category owned.  Score:  10.

Dedication:  Krush has certainly showed from her off-season work in recruiting Nakamura to play for the team amongst other things that she intends to win the league championship.  However, with Nakamura living a good distance from the team it doesn’t seem likely he’ll be able to contribute to the preparation of the other team members or participate in the team meetings as much.  Score:  7.

Other Factors:  New York definitely has a big edge in being the only team with three females on the regular roster and with Nakamura being an unparalleled blitz player he could pay a big dividend should they wind up in a blitz playoff for the Championship like last season.  They do however have a rather tough schedule to contend with though facing both San Francisco and Seattle from the West.  Score:  8.

Total Score:  42

Projected Record:  7.5 – 2.5

2^nd Place:  Boston Blitz

Strongest Lineups: 

1^st : Christiansen

2^nd: Perelshteyn

3^rd:  Shmelov

4^th:  Krasik / Williams

1^st : Christiansen/Perelshteyn

2^nd: Sammour-Hasbun

3^rd:  Shmelov/Martirosov

4^th:  Krasik / Williams

1^st:  Christiansen / Perelshteyn / Sammour-Hasbun

2^nd:  Kelleher

3^rd:  Martirosov

4^th:  Shmelov

Strength of strongest lineups:   Boston is very strong up top as they are the only team in the league which fields three players who are all basically at the rating cap.  This however does seem to leave them a bit weaker on board three and are likely to be out rated there in most matches.  However based on Shmelov’s current rating, which is 150 points higher than his league rating, it seems likely that he’ll be equal to the task.  Score:  8.

Flexibility:  As stated above, Boston having three players so near the top gives them some nice options on the top two boards but at the same time somewhat cramps who they can place on board three.  It’s hard for them to match up with the ability to use players like Hess of New York or Kaufman of Baltimore in that slot.  Score:  7.

Underrated Players:  Certainly having two 2600s+ along with the vastly underrated Shmelov (currently 2391, but only counts as 2240 towards the team rating), they have some marks in this category but not to the vast extent that the Knights have.  Score:  8.

Dedication:  Undoubtedly one of the areas where the Blitz excel and likely a big reason for their regular season dominance in 2006.  Their team often gathered prior to matches for a training session under the tutelage of Christiansen along with the overall team spirit displayed by both the non-playing members of the team often coming to the matches anyway along with the after match drinking celebrations.  Score:  9.

Other Factors:  Boston definitely has two players who have displayed their prowess online in Christiansen and Sammour-Hasbun (the surprising winner of Dos Hermanos).  It still does remain to be seen if Sammour-Hasbun has completely overcome the rustiness from his long layover though, and Boston, like New York, also has a very tough inter-league schedule facing San Francisco and Seattle.  Score:  7.

Total Score:  39

Projected Record:  6.5 – 3.5

3^rd Place:  Queens Pioneers

Strongest Lineups: 

1^st:  Ibragimov

2^nd:  Stripunsky

3^rd:  Kleiman / Critelli / Coleman

4^th:  Thaler

1^st:  Ibragimov / Stripunsky

2^nd:  Vovsha

3^rd:  Kleiman / Critelli / Coleman

4^th:  Zhao / Thaler

(Can’t use Kleiman and Zhao together here)

1^st:  Ibragimov / Stripunsky / Vovsha

2^nd:  Kleiman

3^rd:  Critelli

4^th:  Coleman

Strength of strongest lineups:  These lineups are all very good no doubt, but like Boston they don’t quite have the flexibility to allow them to have the strength they might wish to have on board three.  They like New York though do have the nice option of putting a roughly 2300 player on board four, but that does, unlike New York, seem to weaken them on board two.  Score:  7.

Flexibility:  Assuming Queens’ doesn’t use the last listed lineup too often (which seems likely as Kleiman and Coleman live in Memphis and Boston respectively) Queens’s lineup is probably going to have similar shape each week.  Though this might hurt them in keeping the opposition guessing, they do have multiple people who can fill the appropriate roles in that scenario which should give them a wide variety of options.  Score:  9.

Underrated Players: Queens has two 2600s+ players which is a natural asset, but they also have Coleman who just came off a stellar performance at the World Open along with Zhao who has long since passed the 2200 mark..  Score:  8.

Dedication:  As several of the lower players are students of the two GMs, there is a natural team unity intrinsically present.  However, as an expansion team the overall team spirit and camaraderie may take a little time to come through.  Score:  7.

Other Factors:  Vovsha, though very strong, is a bit out of practice so rustiness could be an issue for him.  Also, with Kleiman mostly residing in Tennessee, and Coleman just starting at Harvard, they might not have quite the choice in lineups every week most other teams will have.  Score:  6.

Total Score:  37

Projected Record:  5.5 – 4.5

4^th Place:  Baltimore Kingfishers

Strongest Lineups: 

1^st:  Blehm / Erenburg

2^nd:  Lopez / Enkhbat

3^rd:  Kaufman / Rohonyan / Rouleau

4^th:  Batsettseg

1^st:  Blehm / Erenburg

2^nd:  Enkhbat / Kaufman

3^rd:  Rohonyan

4^th:  Rouleau

1^st:  Lopez

2^nd:  Enkbhat

3^rd:  Kaufman

4^th:  Rohonyan / Rouleau

Strength of strongest lineups:  Although sporting a double GM roster, Baltimore cannot use a lineup with both somewhat hindering their overall strength on board two.  Though Enkbhat has more than capably filled the role of board two in the first two seasons, he will likely find the competition a bit tougher this go around as the Board 2 competition in the East is expected to be stronger.  Baltimore does still have the nice asset of being able to use Kaufman on board three as well as strong masters Rouleau and Batsettseg for board four.  Score:  6.

Flexibility:  Like many other teams East teams, the flexibility seems to hinge on who is available in the best lineups to man board three.  For Baltimore one of their huge assets (and likely a big reason they took the 2005 crown) was the ability to use someone like Kaufman on this board.  However, they do seem likely to lose this edge should they use anyone else in that slot so that doesn’t leave them that much room to maneuver.  Score:  6.

Underrated Players:  Baltimore’s two main pluses in this regard are Kaufman who has been rated over 2500 on more than one occasion as well as both Rohonyan and Tsaagan whose recent performances at the US Women’s Championship makes it seem unlikely that their league ratings are really accurate:  Score:  7.

Dedication:  This may be one place where Baltimore is a tad lacking as with each GM likely only playing half of the matches, it seems somewhat unlikely an overall team spirit for preparation will really form along with the fact that the team doesn’t have quite the family element it had in previous years with the younger Kaufman not being on the main roster this year.  Score:  6.

Other Factors:  I expect the Kingfishers to be hungry for a good comeback after disappointing 2006 where their rock Enkbhat was unable to play for most of the season.  That combined with the fact that he just tied for first in the U2400 section of the World Open suggests he’s likely capable of leading the Kingfishers back this season.  They also do have the bonus of being only one of two teams with more than one female on the main roster and one consolation of their disappointing 2006 season is that they have a favorable Inter-Conference schedule  Score:  9.

Total Score:  34.

Projected Record:  5 - 5

5^th Place:  New Jersey Knockouts

 
Strongest Lineups: 
 

1^st:  Benjamin

2^nd:  Ippolito / Zlotnikov / Bartell

3^rd:  Molner / Ju

4^th:  Shen

1^st:  Benjamin

2^nd / 3^rd:  Two of Ippolito / Zlotnikov / Bartell

4^th:  Shen / Lian

(Can’t use Ippolito and Shen together here)

1^st:  Benjamin

2^nd:  Zlotnikov / Bartell

3^rd:  Molner

4^th:  Ju

Strength of strongest lineups:  New Jersey has strong lineups which are capable of beating any team in the league, but they don’t have the overall raw power at the top of most of the above teams as they only have one person close to the rating cap, and it seems (especially in the playoffs) the option to have that could be important.  Score:  6.

Flexibility:  Lacking a bit here as they are the only team thus far in the East which is absolutely forced to have a particular person on board one to be competitive rating wise.  They do have reasonable flexibility on the bottom two boards but the lineups still mostly have similar shape.  The lineup with Ju on board four is a nice option, but its success will also hinge on Molner’s ability to perform better in that situation than he did last season.  Score:  6.

Underrated Players:  The two juniors Ju and Shen probably fall in this category as both are quite a bit higher now than their league ratings show as well as having the 2650+ rated Benjamin.  Score:  7.

Dedication:  Like Queens, being an expansion team it may take a bit of time for the team camaraderie to sink in, but these players are fairly familiar with each other as shown for one by the large number of them who competed in the recently completed New Jersey Futurity International.  This knowledge of each other can allow themselves to help each other prepare for matches, but it still remains to be seen if they will take advantage of this edge.  Score:  7.

Other Factors:  Molner, the only team member to have previously competed in the league, had a very rough initial season in the league performing well below expectation.  Whether this was due to pressures of being a freshman at NYU or simply like many not playing as well online as over the board remains to be seen, but it does seem to be a concern to the team.  The Knockouts have the advantage of having relatively easier inter-league opponents than their competition.  Score:  7.

Total Score:  33.

Projected Record:  4.5 – 5.5.

6^th Place:  Philadelphia Inventors

Strongest Lineups: 

1^st:  Kudrin

2^nd:  Smith

3^rd:  Costigan

4^th:  Yeager / Shahade / Wilson / Bengtston / Baczynskj

1^st:  Kudrin

2^nd:  Smith

3^rd:  Yeager

4^th:  Shahade / Wilson / Bengtston / Baczynskj

Strength of strongest lineups:  Relatively strong compared to the past two seasons but not a whole lot of variety as the top two are virtually forced to play every match to avoid a team that will fall quite a bit below the rating cap.  Score:  6.

Flexibility:  Philadelphia has plenty of people who can play board four, but unfortunately other than that board, they have very little in the way of choices.  Plus, as mentioned, they would have to put forth a fairly significantly weaker lineup should either of their top two players be absent.  Score:  5.

Underrated Players:  If the first two seasons have shown us anything it’s that Costigan and Wilson almost certainly are a big help in this regard as both have been very impressive in both seasons, performing well above what their ratings would suggest. Also Philadelphia has Yeager who is well over the 2300 mark at this point.  Score:  7.

Dedication:  Another team where the GM, due to living a good distance away, will likely be unable to participate in the preparations for any given match.  Though the rest of the team, as shown in the first two seasons, is likely to put forth quite a bit of collective effort, it’s just not the same with your top gun not in the mix.  Score:  6.

Other Factors:  I have a feeling after the heartbreak of last season the Inventors will be especially eager to qualify for the playoffs this year.  However, Smith had a rather disappointing 2006, performing below expectation until he impressively defeated Charbonneau in the final week.  His performance on board two may be what makes or breaks the Inventors.  Score:  7.

Total Score:  31.

Projected Record:  3.5 – 6.5.

New York: 7.5-2.5
Boston: 6.5-3.5
Queens: 5.5-4.5
Baltimore: 5-5
New Jersey: 4.5-5.5
Philadelphia: 3.5-6.5

Stay tuned for Part 2 and Part 3 of this feature.....