Here's the game again with a few comments for discussion:
[Event "Open invite"]
[Site "http://www.redhotpawn.com"]
[Date "2010.09.09"]
[EndDate "2010.09.18"]
[Round "?"]
[White "PBE6"]
[Black "hrast"]
[WhiteRating "1591"]
[BlackRating "1755"]
[WhiteELO "1591"]
[BlackELO "1755"]
[Result "0-1"]
[GameId "7752642"]
1. d4 d5 2. c4 e6 3. Ng1f3 Ng8f6 4. Nb1c3 Nb8d7 5. Bc1g5 c6 6. e3 {The Queen's Gambit Declined with a semi-Slav slant to it. For better or for worse, I usually try a Queen's Gambit-type opening against higher-rated opponents in the hopes of not getting crushed right off the bat in a more tactical opening.} dxc4 7. Bf1xc4 {With this typical move, my last minor piece has been developed and my kingside has been prepared for castling. Black is still two moves away from castling and must ponder what to do with his light-squared bishop. I believe I have a slight advantage here, but black's position is fairly solid so it will be up to me to prove it.} Nd7b6 8. Bc4b3 {In response to the attack on my light-squared bishop, I retreated to b3. While not terrible, in retrospect this move looks awkward. I think a better square would have been d3, where the bishop would have been on the more useful d3-h7 diagonal and would have interacted more favourably with the queen on her future post at c2.} Bf8e7 9. O-O Nf6d5 {Swapping off the dark-square bishops. I didn't mind this exchange, as the dark-square bishop is more useful in black's hands as a defensive piece considering his light-square bishop is still undeveloped.} 10. Bg5xe7 Nd5xe7 {I think this move was a mistake. 10. ... Qxe7 would have been better, activating the queen along the dark a3-e7 diagonal where the dark-squared bishops are conspicuously absent. This move also seems to waste a bit of time, as the kingside knight has now moved three times while black's light-square bishop and queen have yet to be developed.} 11. Qd1c2 {11. Qd3 would have harmonized better with the bishop on b3.} O-O 12. Nf3g5 {I played this lark hoping to induce a weakness in black's kingside pawn structure with 12. ... h6. At the very least, it exploits the kingside knight's absence from its defensive post and threatens mate in one, so it can't be all bad. Funnily enough, my mobile version of Shredder doesn't seem to mind this move so much, although it still prefers 12. Ne2 by a hair or two. Obviously it has no sense of adventure.} Ne7f5 {Tricky, but now the knight has moved four times and lands on a less than ideal post. I think 12. ... h6 would have been better.} 13. Nc3e4 {Instead of retreating my knight like I would normally do, I decided to reinforce my knight with its twin, still holding out hope for 13. ... h6.} h6 {Yay!} 14. Ng5f3 {Now that I'd got my wish, I was honestly a little unsure as to what to do with it. 8. Bb3 instead of 8. Bd3 made its exploitation a little awkward, but I decided that even minor victory is a victory after a fashion, and decided to retreat my knight to look for greener pastures in the centre (specifically the hole on d6, or the attractive looking posts on c5 and e5).} Nf5d6 {Yes, that one.} 15. Ne4c5 {I preferred this over the exchange, as c5 seemed a relatively attractive post attacking e6 and restricting movement behind enemy lines.} Nb6d7 16. Rf1d1 {I felt good about this move, as the rook helps cement my knight's position. After 16. ... Nxc5 17. dxc5 the black knight on d6 is pinned to the queen. Getting another piece into the game to cement previous gains is standard fare, but this move is PROGRESS for me!} Qd8e7 17. Nf3e5 {Two nice posts are better than one. The capture of either knight would allow me to support a post on d6 with the d- (soon to be e-) pawn, so doubling up seemed natural.} Nd7xe5 18. dxe5 Nd6b5 19. a4 {I considered playing 19. Ne4 right away, but thought that leaving black's knight in a square that challenged my occupation of d6 would be a mistake. Mobile Shredder likes the direct route better, considering 19. a4 to be a waste of time. Shredder should have been an accountant instead.} Nb5c7 20. Nc5e4 Rf8d8 21. Ne4d6 {My original thinking was that although this move allows the knight to be exchanged off (as demonstrated in the game), I get a dangerous passed pawn that also chokes off enemy movement in return. Finally taking the direct route, now mobile Shredder starts giving me grief about not being boring enough. It prefers 21. Rxe8 Qxd8 22. Rd1 Nd5 and only now 23. Nd6, cementing the white knight more firmly in place. I wonder if it ever gets tired of being right? It certainly never gets tired of being smug.} Nc7e8 22. Rd1d2 Ne8xd6 23. Ra1d1 f6 24. exd6 Qe7e8 25. Qc2d3 {Tripling up the heavy artillery and shuffling the queen/bishop partnership to take advantage of the c2-h7 diagonal.} Bc8d7 26. Bb3c2 f5 {This defensive move is possible only because I finally moved the b3 bishop to c2. The irony was palpable. On the bright side, this move weakens e6 and contributes to the Swiss-cheese look of black's kingside. However, despite the holes black's position is far from cracked.} 27. e4 g6 28. exf5 gxf5 {Finally creating a clear avenue of attack. I was hoping to let the queen in the side door and prance around the place like a bull in a china shop, but it wasn't going to be that easy.} 29. Qd3g3 Kg8h7 {Here I ran out of time, and had to relinquish the game to my opponent fair and square. I was originally intending 30. Re1 as a follow-up to try and exploit a pin along the e-file while opening up a light-square diagonal to increase my bishop's mobility, but kethcuplover's suggestion of 30. Qh4 seems decent as well. At this point in the game I was hoping the result would come down to my control of the light squares and greater mobility, with that passed pawn quickly becoming a thorn in black's side. Anyone see a clear win?}
20 Sep '10 19:51
Half-finished or half-baked?
Back to Top