Originally posted by morgski
Haha, these are harsh words 😉
I like the idea of grovelling for a draw, sums up how one feels at that stage of a game. For my part, I don't see that Bg4 is too bad a move, but in hindsight Bxf3 was. A case of playing not playing the position, I wanted simplification as soon as I could.
We all make mistakes...
When I take both sides of the board I think their are plans for black that actually lend to blacks choice. I'm not sure its the best continuation, but I don't think its bad. To me black chose to trade off two pieces of relatively little importance at this stage in the game. Its difficult to call such a decision a "mistake" because I think each side is still flexible enough to make his current pieces better.
1. c4 Nf6 2. Nc3 g6 3. d4 Bg7 4. Nf3 d6 5. Bg5 h6 6. Bd2 O-O 7. e3 c6 8. Bd3 Bg4 9. h3 Bxf3 { This is the move that is subject to scrutiny } 10. Qxf3 Re8 11. O-O Nbd7 { e5 is important to black. Black wants to open up his g7 a1 diagonal asap. }12. Rad1 e5 { Black has small accomplishment that I don't think white can stop accurately } 13. b3 { As black I'd be looking to open that dark diagonal and keep the light squares as locked up as possible. I like Nh7 to hop the f6 Knight to g5. This is how I think black should proceed. }
To me black is just fine. I think black can play on with relative equality. Their may indeed be winning chances for black if he opens the dark diagonal and keeps those light squares unimportant as long as possible.
As white, I'd be looking to trade off the dark squared bishops, and then blow the center open with my rooks on the center files. I'd play the waiting game until my light squared bishop becomes more and more active. This is why Mr. Pawn was right in his analysis. White likes the center opening up, it hands him the board.
Black is fine in my mind, he has counterplay.
Q