Originally posted by danilop
That's what you did from the very beginning of the game, not just in the ending. The decisive mistake was probably 42. bxc4, indeed, but your opponent already has a clear advantage in that position, thanks to your passive play early on. 33. dxc5, for example, gives him space, control of the center and allows the creation of a strong passed pawn.
Okay; I'll admit I was playing for the draw from move 1. I often do that when I am playing against better players (my opponent in that game was rated about 200 points above me when the game started). I guess I need to work on that, but I'm too tentative when playing better players.
Sometimes playing for the draw works, like in
Sometimes it doesn't, as in the game cited above and in
Sometimes, however, sitting back and playing for a draw and waiting for a mistake by one's opponent can work. Take Game 5598868
against the same opponent
I played 20. Nxe5, figuring he'd play 21. Qe3. I was then prepared to play 21. ... Nf3+ 22. gxf3 (not 22. Qxf3 Bxd4+ and white is in trouble) Qg3+ 23. Kh1 or Kf1 Qxh3 check and I have a perpetual check. I don't think he can play Ke2 because of ... Qg2+, in which case Qf2 loses the bishop and white is down 2 pawns and moving the King to the d file allows me to pin and probably win the bishop by moving a rook to d8. I haven't calculated all the variations, but I was pretty confident I'd have at least a draw.
In any case, he played what I think was a weaker move 21. Bxe5 and then followed it up by 22. Nd5 overlooking 22. ... Qc5+! winning the exchange and eventually the game.
As long as you're playing against a human being, sitting back and waiting for a mistake can be a good strategy.