I've never been so depressed by a game as I was by Game 3124053, simply because, my opponent's superior play aside, it seems to epitomize how static and retarded my positional game has become over the last six months.
I'm still not quite sure where I went wrong, one minor inaccuracy aside - was I wrong to waste the knight on the exchange, or was my real mistake to use my king over-aggressively on the kingside? I was surprised by his initial variation on the English (I haven't encountered this before, surprisingly, and I couldn't find a line), and I felt I had a lot of pressure with my central rook, but not clever pressure - it felt like hope chess at its worst. Even so, I can't help but feel I should have been able to salvage a draw in the endgame, even one pawn down - on the other hand, maybe I'm being delusional: with those connected pawns of his, would you say the knight or the bishop is the superior minor piece? At the time I thought range would tell in favour of a draw, but the outcome indicates I was absolutely wrong. Feedback at this point would be very much appreciated.
6. Nf3 is with tempo.
What is the point of 8.Qb3? until he can reasonably hope
18. Nxc8 is a terrible move. Your knight was beautifully placed.
Bh3+ seemed like the right move, the timing just felt wrong. allowing Rxh4 was bad but probably the best move once you got to that point.
61. Ba4 I don't like. bxc4+, Kxc4, h3 should draw.
Many thanks, all - particularly zebano, for some reason my sixth move blunder passed me by completely. Generally it looks like I was too materialistic and defensive. As for 37, I was evidently too gung-ho about creating isolani - Bg2 does look good as Briscoe says, but surely c5 hangs the pawn to 37...Na5+ ?
Originally posted by Amauroteyes, i am just a 1350, but I also agree that Bg2 was better...
Many thanks, all - particularly zebano, for some reason my sixth move blunder passed me by completely. Generally it looks like I was too materialistic and defensive. As for 37, I was evidently too gung-ho about creating isolani - Bg2 does look good as Briscoe says, but surely c5 hangs the pawn to 37...Na5+ ?
black wouldn't take your pawn, as you take back with king, and his isolated a-pawn wouldn't be too hard to pick off...
meaning that you could simply take the pawn next move....
when he forced the doubling of your h pawns, you were hurting, but...
yeah....
Aside from agreeing with the above comments (especially move 18), I'm pretty sure that 34. b4 is an improvement over your 34. Kb4. Exchanging rooks with 34...Rxc4 would lead to a losing endgame for Black and 34..axb3 35 Kxb3 may not be winning for White, but the position is much more pleasant for White than for Black, because White's bishop is much more active than Black's Knight.
Another possible improvement is 39. Bf1 and if Rxh2 then either 40. Kb4 or 40. Bd3 (intending 41. Bc2) look like White is still somewhat better.
Looking at it, you played the opening okay, just a bit passive for my liking but nothing wrong. 3. ... nf6 is a bit of a novelty I suppose but doesn't look bad. I would maybe have let the pawn hang and developed 4. nc3 instead.
6. bg2 - again a somewhat passive move. When faced with a number of candidate moves like here, I ask myself "What forces (or threatens), what develops and what grabs space?" In this case I would have chosen 6. nf3 over bf4 because knights before bishops. And also helps clear the decks for castling. Yours would be my last choice - it's not bad, though, just the lesser of three.
As it was, Black went after the White c4 pawn anyway.
At move 8, rather 8. a3 which forces the B-N exchange and if Black insists on snaffling the c4 pawn, 10. bxnf6 messes his pawn structure, weakens the King and you're likely to get back the pawn plus.
16. nd6 was a lovely place for your Knight which gives him all sorts of development headaches.
17. ... nc7. See what a tangle he's getting into in order to try to get his pieces out? He desperately needs to get his d7 pawn out of the way. Your two minor pieces are effectively tying up three minors and a major. And then you go throw away your most active piece. What's happening to your development in the meantime?
Thereafter, you played too passively to let him grab space and greater control of the centre. More play with your pawns would have been appropriate. Notably, f4 and e4. Also, his d4 pawn is weak. 20. rd6 followed by bh3 would have given him headaches and continued to tie his pieces up.
Skimming through, it was fine to mobilise your King but 34. Kb4 was unnecessary when it should be close to the center in this case. 34. Kd3 was miles better in protecting the e2 square without becoming committed.
37. Rh4 was an option to consider or the bishop on h3 must pull back.
39. bg4 followed by bd1 is an alternative to the doubled and isolated pawns that you got landed with.
42. Kxa4 - obvious but in this case it loses the game. The Black knight gets free and goes to play. Meanwhile the White bishop is still too passive. With the benefit of hindsight, I would say that now is the time to play for the draw with 42. Kc3. It's tough to pass up the pawn, though, but it's better than his passed pawns.
I haven't the time to look further but hope this helps.
EDIT: Interesting game, though and I've enjoyed looking at it. I should do more of the same with my own!
Originally posted by buffalobillMany thanks for that, Bill, always good to see your analysis here, I'm sorry to say I missed this one until just now: excellent advice, clearly it's time for me to throw the opening books out of the window and start revising Silman again...I think I've become horribly materialistic lately and it's a habit from which I've got to extricate myself. I'm particularly pleased with your analysis of move 39, although the embarrassing truth is that there's probably even more in there to regret - even at the time I felt that 25.Rd6 was an poor move (it doesn't apply any more pressure on the hinge of Black's army and would probably do a lot better on the second rank). I think I evacuated the knight from the sixth rank out of sheer timidity: I incorrectly felt that his Bishop would escape to the a-file and then without a sustainable support point my outpost would simply fold at the first offer of an exchange - I didn't really factor in the time he would lose offering it.
Looking at it, you played the opening okay, just a bit passive for my liking but nothing wrong. 3. ... nf6 is a bit of a novelty I suppose but doesn't look bad. I would maybe have let the pawn hang and developed 4. nc3 instead.
6. bg2 - again a somewhat passive move. When faced with a number of candidate moves like here, I ask myself "What forces (or th ame, though and I've enjoyed looking at it. I should do more of the same with my own!
Originally posted by AmauroteI dunno. It looks okay to me, because it keeps the d pawn at bay. Logical to me would be to keep pressurising the pawn with 27. Ne5. Thereafter, there's some interesting possibilities with Bxd6 to keep in mind, depending on how he defends.
even at the time I felt that 25.Rd6 was an poor move (it doesn't apply any more pressure on the hinge of Black's army and would probably do a lot better on the second rank).
You needed to keep the position complicated. Simplifying just helped him when he was in a difficult situation.
I took some time and did a little work on the position before move 18 since I think the knight there was so nice (shouldn't have exchanged it). The lines I came up with were:
18. Nf3 b5 19. cxb5 {19..Nxb5 or cxb5 wins the exchange}
18. Nf3 f6 19. b4 Ba6 {now 20. a4 bottles up the queenside completely} 20. a4 Ne6 21. Nd4 Nxd4
18. Nf3 f6 19. b4 {Black is bottled up}
18. Nf3 Na6 19. b4 {Black is bottled up}
18. Nf3 Ne6 20. Nd4 a5 21. h4 {playing with the advantage on the kingside, which should be decisive}
18. Nf3 a5 19. Nd4 Ba6
My idea on this position is that you had almost a complete blockade of the black queenside (and most of his pieces). He has no power in the center on so you could actually start a flank attack directly with h4, g4 etc (the kingside is also totally yours). But, before that make sure to blockade him to max first so to prevent his play. If black at any time plays Ne6 I think Nd4 seems to fit, followed with pawn advance and/or Nf5 + Bh3. (the advantage on the kingside also helps). I could also find no really good pawn breaks for black on the queenside (a5 looks good, but it should give white enough time on the kingside). If you can reach the fifth with those kingside pawns, you can also play Bh3 to put more pressure on d7 and there is nothing he can do. Also, the white squares are extra weak on the kingside (actually all squares are "weak" since he has no pieces to defend there). The point d6 seems to me like a classical "pivot" around which the battle turns (yes, I'm a Nimzowitschian). Perhaps black was more or less forced to sac the d7 pawn to even get some play, but even then, white should have good chances.
In my opinion it was a totally winning position (of course, it is easier when you have no pressure from a clock while you analyse, but still). Somehow not stopping up and thinking what kind of position you had, you must have just "played on". Perhaps it was a move you did hastily?