Annotated Game #179: An IQP lesson

This game is almost completely characterized by my strategic struggle against Black's isolated queen pawn (IQP), a normal result of the Tarrasch Defense.  The notes speak for themselves, with the key (wrong) choice made by me on move 24, thanks to a deflection tactic that makes my chosen sequence of moves lead to a very drawish position, rather than maintaining my positional advantage.  I could also have done a bit more with my knights, but that was the key strategic error and another (IQP) lesson learned.

[Event "?"] [Site "?"] [Date "????.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "ChessAdmin"] [Black "Class C"] [Result "0-1"] [ECO "A13"] [Annotator "ChessAdmin/Komodo 8"] [PlyCount "56"] [EventDate "2016.10.10"] [EventType "schev"] [EventRounds "5"] {[%mdl 8192] A13: English Opening: 1...e6} 1. c4 e6 2. Nf3 d5 3. e3 Nf6 4. b3 Be7 {now in a standard QGD type setup for Black.} 5. Bb2 Nbd7 6. Be2 b6 7. O-O Bb7 8. Nc3 (8. d3 {is an option, with the idea of Nbd2.}) (8. cxd5 $5 { immediately is more common than the text move.}) 8... O-O 9. cxd5 {this seemed the logical follow-up. I've previously had bad experiences with Black building a strong pawn center and this takes care of that problem.} Nxd5 (9... exd5 10. Rc1 Re8 11. Qc2 Bf8 12. Rfd1 c6 13. d4 Bd6 14. Bd3 Qe7 15. Ne2 g6 16. Ng3 Ng4 17. Re1 f5 18. Bxf5 gxf5 19. Nxf5 Qf8 20. e4 Bf4 21. e5 Re6 22. Rcd1 Kh8 23. g3 Qg8 24. Kh1 {Gunina,V (2529)-Kriebel,T (2461) Novy Bor 2015 1/2-1/2 (157)}) 10. Rc1 (10. Nxd5 {is more common. The Nc3 isn't a great piece and it's better to exchange it, also opening up the long diagonal for the Bb2 (and the c-file for a rook).} Bxd5 11. Qc2 c5 12. Rad1 Rc8 13. Qb1 Qc7 14. d4 Qb7 15. Rc1 cxd4 16. Bxd4 Bf6 17. Qb2 Bxd4 18. Qxd4 Nf6 19. h3 h6 20. Qa4 a5 21. Qd4 Rc7 22. Qe5 Rfc8 23. Ba6 {1-0 (23) Alekseev,E (2679)-Rusanov,M (2440) St Petersburg 2014}) 10... Bf6 11. d4 {here I decided the benefits of the pawn advance outweighed shutting off the Bb2. First of all, Black's Bf6 is also shut out, and I also get a strong central pawn that influences e5 and c5. The a3-f8 diagonal also looks like a good one for my bishop.} Rc8 $146 {a slow move and one that allows the following sequence, giving me a measurable edge.} (11... Nxc3 12. Bxc3 c5 $11) 12. Nxd5 $14 Bxd5 (12... exd5 13. Ne5 Nxe5 14. dxe5 Be7 15. Bg4 Ra8 16. Qc2 c6 17. f4 $14) 13. Ba6 {this is the problem with the earlier rook move, Black loses a tempo and his queenside is looking awkward.} Rb8 14. Bd3 { I had been worried about a possible future ...b5, blocking the bishop in. Another square might have been better, though.} (14. Bb5) (14. Qe2 {is another option the engine likes, controlling the diagonal (and b5) while connecting the rooks and protecting the Bb2, which is otherwise loose.}) 14... c5 { the logical reaction by Black, taking advantage of the unprotected Bb2 to rule out capture on c5.} 15. Ne5 {a somewhat risky and aggressive decision that was not the best. I didn't mind the exchange on e5, and it is evaluated by the engine as equal.} (15. Qe2 cxd4 16. Nxd4 Rc8 $14) 15... Bxe5 $6 {a case where the standard rule of not exchanging bishops for knights applies.} (15... cxd4 $5 16. exd4 Nxe5 17. dxe5 Be7 $11) (15... Nxe5 16. dxe5 Be7 $11) 16. dxe5 $14 { White has the pair of bishops, but also the Nd7 has no useful squares at the moment.} Qg5 {this surprised me, but I was able to find an effective countermove.} 17. e4 {now I have the initiative.} Bc6 18. f4 {the queen's location becomes a problem for Black.} Qh4 19. Rc2 (19. Rc3 $5 {is probably a better version of the idea of transferring the rook to the kingside (after Bc2) and one that I considered for a while. In the end I rejected a plan of a piece attack on the kingside for one based on a pawn advance.} Qe7) 19... Rbd8 20. g3 (20. Qe2 $16 {getting off the d-file and overprotecting e4 was an excellent idea.}) 20... Qh3 $6 {this over-optimistic move justified my play to this point.} (20... Qe7) 21. Rd2 $16 {screening the Qd1 and protecting the Bd3 again.} f6 $2 {causes even greater problems, in part because the Qh3 now has no safe retreat. It also weakens e6, which I take advantage of (but not well enough).} (21... Nb8 $16 {looks sad, but otherwise Black has serious problems.} ) 22. f5 {I thought for a while here and felt good about the move, which presses the attack, but is rather complicated given the various captures on e5, f5 and e6.} (22. Be2 {is found by the engine the threat being to play Bg4 with a fork on e6.} f5 (22... h5 23. exf6 Bxe4 24. Rf2 gxf6 25. Bxh5 $18) 23. Bc4 Rfe8 24. Rd6 Bxe4 25. Rf2 Qh6 26. Rfd2 $18) 22... Kh8 $2 (22... Qh6 23. Bb1 Qe3+ 24. Rff2 $18) 23. Rf4 $1 {this should be sufficient to win. The threat of course is Rh4, trapping the queen.} Qh6 24. Rh4 $4 {here I moved too quickly and had a major thinking process foul. I had assumed that the queen was trapped, but of course it now has e3 to go to, with devastating effect. This was a case of the actual piece placement (Rf4) interfering with my mental visualization of the future board (Rh4, Qh6), where the diagonal is no longer blocked. Naturally if I had followed my thinking process, I could have corrected for this.} (24. fxe6 $1 {and wins.} fxe5 25. Rxf8+ Nxf8 26. e7 $18 { I had in fact looked at this variation, but was tired and having trouble visualizing. And then it occurred to me (mistakenly) that I could just play Rh4.}) 24... Qe3+ $19 {after this it is game over, although I fight on for a few moves in the vain hope for a swindle.} 25. Kf1 Nxe5 26. Qh5 Qf3+ 27. Ke1 Qxh5 28. Rxh5 Nxd3+ 0-1

Annotated Game #178: Patience is a virtue...which I lack

Analysis of this next tournament game, along with the previous ones, helps highlight one recurring flaw in my play: lack of patience.  This is a common fault in Class players, often reflected in the idea that each single move has to "do something" big.  Here, as in Annotated Game #176, when there is no obvious immediate breakthrough, I get frustrated and acquiesce to a draw.  Fixing this conceptual flaw in my play should bring better results over time.

The game itself contains some interesting ideas (not just psychological ones), including alternatives for Black on move 9 and move 12.  As part of the analysis process, it's very useful to see how modern engines (Komodo 10 in this case) help evaluate plans, not just individual moves; for example, it consistently highlighted the value of the b8-h2 diagonal and building up pressure on it through the variations on moves 12 and 15.  I also like the idea of the knight retreat on move 19, getting out of the way of the pawns and playing a more maneuvering type of game.  Finally, it was worth looking at the different options towards the end of the game, for both dynamic and maneuvering play, to continue working my positional advantage.

[Event "?"] [Site "?"] [Date "????.??.??"] [Round "4"] [White "Class C"] [Black "ChessAdmin"] [Result "1/2-1/2"] [ECO "D00"] [Annotator "ChessAdmin/Komodo 10"] [PlyCount "47"] [EventType "simul"] [EventRounds "5"] 1. d4 d5 2. e3 {usually an indicator that White is heading for a Stonewall formation.} Nf6 3. Bd3 c5 4. c3 Nc6 5. f4 Bg4 {getting the bishop to an active square before playing ...e6} 6. Nf3 e6 7. Nbd2 Be7 8. O-O O-O 9. Qe1 cxd4 { Normally it's a good idea to exchange c-pawn for d-pawn, and it isn't bad here. But there may be a more effective path forward for Black.} (9... Bf5 {is a more sophisticated positional idea, which is both the database and engine favorite. After} 10. Bxf5 exf5 {Black has a lock on e4 and White's e3 pawn will be weak on the half-open file.}) 10. exd4 Rc8 11. Ne5 Bf5 {I'll give myself credit for recognizing this idea, even if a bit later than optimal.} 12. Qe2 a6 {this was perhaps a waste of time. My idea was to play follow up with .. .b5 and prevent White from advancing the c-pawn to exchange off my d5 pawn. However, this is not a real threat as long as the Nc6 is there (due to the d4 pawn then being unprotected). If White exchanges on c6, then a subsequent pawn swap on d5 would just leave d4 isolated and weak.} (12... Qc7 $5 {would develop the queen and connect the rooks. It also starts to build pressure up on the b8-h2 diagonal.}) 13. Qf3 b5 {sticking with the original idea.} 14. a3 $6 {done to prevent b5-b4, but this is too weakening.} Na5 $15 {now having a pawn on b5 is actually helpful, thanks to my opponent making holes on the queenside.} 15. Re1 Re8 {not really necessary. Komodo still favors the plan of building pressure on the b8-h2 diagonal with ...Bd6 and ...Qc7.} 16. g4 Bxd3 17. Nxd3 Nc4 18. Nxc4 bxc4 {now I enjoy a significant space advantage in the center and on the queenside.} 19. Nf2 g6 (19... Nd7 $5 {would activate the Be7 and give White fewer kingside targets for the pawns.}) 20. Qh3 (20. f5 exf5 21. gxf5 Rb8 $15) 20... Bf8 {rather too cautious.} (20... Rb8 {with the idea of pressuring the b-pawn and forcing White to tie down a piece to its protection.} ) 21. Bd2 $6 {White will just have to move this back next move.} Rb8 $17 22. Bc1 Qb6 {here either more patience was called for in a largely closed position, or some more dynamic play.} (22... h5 $5 {is the dynamic option.} 23. gxh5 Nxh5 $15) (22... Re7 {is a more slow maneuvering approach, clearing the e8 square for the knight to go to d6 and perhaps to double rooks on the b-file.}) 23. Qg3 Bd6 24. Qf3 {at this point I saw no obvious breakthroughs for Black, so took the draw. Basically a lack of energy and patience was the reason, along with not really understanding the needs of the position. These include the importance of the b8-h2 diagonal and activating the bishop, the possible ...h5 advance, better and earlier development of the queen and rooks, etc.} 1/2-1/2

Annotated Game #177: How could I not win this?

While it's always disappointing to lose a game, there's another - sometimes just as poignant - feeling of disappointment at not winning a game.  This next tournament game falls into that category.  I build up excellent attacking prospects on the kingside, with open lines and an overwhelming local superiority of pieces (4-0), but at the crucial point I failed to actually execute an attack.  My opponent started to do a good job of defending while making threats and turned the game around as a result; what happens after move 27 is an excellent illustration of the importance of the initiative, both on the board and psychologically.  I almost had the full disappointment of losing the game, as things went rapidly downhill, but after an error by my opponent I managed to calculate the drawing sequence and wrapped the game up.

Analyzing this game was helpful in highlighting certain clusters of turning points and strategic choices, for example around moves 17-19 and again on moves 27-31.  Hopefully I can make better future decisions as a result.

[Event "?"] [Site "?"] [Date "????.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "ChessAdmin"] [Black "Class C"] [Result "1/2-1/2"] [ECO "A28"] [Annotator "ChessAdmin/Komodo 10"] [PlyCount "81"] [EventType "simul"] [EventRounds "5"] 1. c4 e5 2. Nc3 Nf6 3. Nf3 Nc6 4. e3 d5 5. cxd5 Nxd5 6. Bb5 Nxc3 7. bxc3 Bd7 8. d4 Bd6 9. O-O O-O 10. Be2 Re8 11. Qc2 e4 12. Nd2 {now e4 becomes an easy target to focus on, although the position is still equal.} Re6 $2 13. f4 { here I believed my opponent a little too much, when he failed to defend e4, although the text move is also good for White.} (13. Nxe4 {I correctly saw there was a threat for Black involving ...Qh4, which made me avoid this line. However the engine shows that this is unnecessary, since Black's attack just looks scary rather than being effective.} Qh4 (13... Bxh2+ 14. Kxh2 Qh4+ 15. Kg1 Qxe4 16. Qxe4 Rxe4 17. f3 Ree8 18. Kf2 $16) 14. f4 Rh6 15. h3 Rg6 16. Bf3 Bxh3 17. Nxd6 cxd6 $16 {and White is fine.}) 13... exf3 14. Nxf3 $16 {here Komodo considers White to be about the equivalent of a pawn ahead. The central pawns are quite powerful and I have some nice open lines on the kingside.} Re8 15. Bd3 h6 16. e4 {mobilizing the central pawn majority} Bg4 17. e5 {this is premature; I should bring more pieces into play first, or (as shown by the engine) challenge the Bg4, which is Black's only good piece on the kingside at the moment.} (17. h3 {would help get the pesky bishop out of the way. For example} Bh5 18. e5 {now this pawn advance has more bite, since g4 is threatened and the bishop has no good square to go to. So} Bxf3 19. Rxf3 $18 { and White is rolling on the kingside with four pieces (queen, two bishops and rook) currently versus zero for Black.}) (17. Rb1 $5 {is a simple move that gets the rook in play and makes life more awkward for Black.}) 17... Be7 $2 { an obvious retreat but not a good one.} (17... Bf8) 18. Rb1 {a good move but not great.} (18. Bc4 $1 $18 {pinning the f-pawn causes major problems for Black, as now Qg6 is threatened.}) 18... Rb8 19. Be4 {right piece to move, but not the best square for it (per above). I thought for a while here on where the best spot for the bishop would be, but ultimately was too focused on queenside play, when in fact the big payoff is on the kingside.} Qd7 20. h3 Bxf3 (20... Be6 {is more solid.}) 21. Rxf3 $18 {with the f-file now open and two strong bishops pointing towards the king, along with the dominating central pawns, I have a major advantage.} Bd8 22. Rg3 {going for the somewhat cheap-looking, but still effective, threat of Bxh6.} (22. Qf2 $5) 22... Nxd4 23. Qd3 {seeking to avoid having to take on d4 with the pawn and then give Black ...Qxd4+. However, that would in fact be fine for White as well.} (23. cxd4 Qxd4+ 24. Kh1 Rxe5 {here I was too materialistic and thought that the three pawns for a piece wasn't a good deal for me.} 25. Bh7+ Kh8 26. Bb2 $18) 23... Rxe5 24. cxd4 Rh5 25. Bb2 {lining up against g7.} (25. Rxb7 $5 {would pursue a simpler winning strategy, based on my material advantage.} Rxb7 26. Bxb7 Bf6 27. d5 $18) 25... Bg5 26. Rf1 {now all pieces are in on the attack and the engine evaluates this as the equivalent of White having an extra piece and then some.} Re8 27. Qf3 $6 {a significant slip, since it would be much better to double the rooks on the f-file rather than leading with the queen. Also, the lack of a battery on the b1-h7 diagonal leaves me with fewer options for the bishop and allows Black's next move. I did not in fact have a concrete plan here.} (27. Rgf3 Bf6 28. Rxf6 $1 gxf6 29. d5 $18 {and Black's king is stripped of cover.}) 27... Rh4 {well played. Black now starts taking back some of the initiative by making his own threats, the first in a while.} 28. Bf5 Qb5 29. Qc3 {now I am responding more to Black's threats than looking for my own.} (29. Bd3 {would take advantage of the weakness on f7.} Qd7 30. Qxb7 $18) 29... Rf4 30. Rxf4 Bxf4 31. Rf3 $2 {missing the way to keep an advantage. The position is now equal.} (31. Bd3 $1 $18 {extracts the bishop with tempo, also saving the Rg3.}) 31... Qxf5 {by this point the game has fully turned around and Black is the one with all the threats. Psychologically this was a blow and I was tired of calculating variations, prompting the next error.} 32. g3 $4 { this in fact should now lose.} (32. Bc1 {is in fact the only move to preserve the draw, as it blocks Black's next.}) 32... Qb1+ 33. Rf1 Qxa2 $2 {allowing me to draw.} (33... Be3+ {should win for Black.}) 34. Rxf4 {at least I was able to correctly calculate the next sequence.} Re2 35. Rf2 Qb1+ 36. Bc1 Rxf2 37. Kxf2 $11 {now the engine evaluates the position as dead drawn.} Qf5+ 38. Kg2 Qe4+ 39. Kf2 Qf5+ 40. Kg2 Qe4+ 41. Kf2 1/2-1/2

What to think about on your opponent's time

While the Simplified Thought Process (that works) I think is a good practical framework, there are some aspects of it that could use more depth.  One aspect that can have a major impact on play - since on average it will occupy half of your time during a game - is what to think about on your opponent's time. The famous Botvinnik quote, which I paraphrased in the above-linked comments section, is a good place to start:

When my opponent's clock is going I discuss general considerations in an internal dialogue with myself. When my own clock is going I analyse concrete variations.

(From http://chess-quotes.blogspot.com/2014/07/botvinnik.html)

I've been participating in more tournaments recently, and the experience has reminded me of the importance of efficient clock use.  Not just to avoid time trouble, but to really make the most of your limited available time and get the best result you can.  The idea of not analyzing concrete variations on your opponent's time is indeed very efficient, since unless time is short or there are obvious forcing moves on the board, mathematically speaking you will inevitably spend the majority of your thinking time on variations that will never get played.  This process may not be a complete waste of time, as you should be spotting available ideas for both you and your opponent.  However, I think there are much more efficient (and less mentally tiring) ways of identifying key ideas and even concrete sequences, than to be constantly calculating speculative variations.

So that still leaves us with what to think about when it's your opponent's move.  "General considerations" per the above quote is quite vague, and I've often seen it paraphrased as "positional considerations" - but I would argue that is misleading.  "Positional" characteristics or general considerations about the board position can (and should) in fact encompass things like tactical ideas, including up to short sequences.  These often will not be playable ideas - yet - and therefore cannot be calculated like true variations, but they help uncover the potential of the position and also offer strategic goals to work towards.

(Important! It's always necessary to think about your opponent's ideas as well as your own - so do this for both sides. This should come naturally when it's your opponent's move, as you are looking for his threats and trying to identify his plans in order to stop them.)

As a practical approach, I would suggest starting by recognizing important general positional features, followed by identifying more specific ideas involving individual pieces.  One outline for this process would be:

• Explicit recognition of the open lines - diagonals and files - available for use, and possibilities for opening additional lines (including via sacrifices)
• Visualizing the pieces' "power projection" along both open and closed lines.  Another way this idea can be expressed is as perceiving "lines of force" that emanate from each of your pieces along their movement axes; knights have an "arc" of force around them.  Being able to constantly perceive the pieces' power in this manner is very helpful for spotting latent tactics, for example those involving discovered attacks and backward movements, and I would say is another indicator that you are becoming a stronger chess player.
• Noting all loose pieces, including ones that are pressured and could become underprotected. One of the most basic mantras for tactical sight is "Loose Pieces Drop Off" (LPDO)
• Pawn levers / breaks that will open up the position and change it significantly (as in Annotated Game #176)

To get at the full potential of your pieces, the idea of conducting a piece "status examination" as presented in Understanding Chess Tactics is a valuable one and can quite profitably be done by you on your opponent's time.  This goes beyond "LPDO" and forces you to evaluate the status of each piece - what is it doing right now?  Is it vulnerable to a threat by my opponent?  Can it threaten anything? etc.  These lead to tactical ideas, but also strategic goals, as one of the most important ideas in general with chess strategy is to improve the position of your worst pieces; this will naturally result in a stronger position and give you more options.  Some specific considerations:

• What is your worst piece - in other words, which piece is "not playing" for you right now? How can you best improve it? Common options include moving it towards the center (which automatically increases the "power projection" of all pieces except rooks); opening lines (via pawn moves, moving other pieces out of the way, etc.); or simply maneuvering the piece to a new square where it has more activity (for example on an open line), especially when it can directly influence key squares in the enemy camp.
• Be on the lookout for potential near-term forks / double attacks that can be conducted by each piece, as the most common tactic.
• Examine potential pawn advances, especially by passed pawns, for both their tactical and strategic power.
• Evaluate where you currently have the best prospects for active play on the board: queenside, center or kingside.  This can change based on your pieces' status and tactical possibilities.

As with the original Simplified Thought Process description, the above isn't intended to be 100% comprehensive, but should help fill in some of the more important "general considerations" when thinking on your opponent's time.

Annotated Game #176: Follow the mental toughness rule

This next first-round tournament game is a Classical Caro-Kann that goes into uncharted territory relatively early on (move 8). I am unable to correctly take advantage of my opponent's opening deviations, and more importantly miss - consciously reject, actually - a major idea of the position (the ...c5 break, which at various times ranged in potency from advantageous to devastating). However, I still manage to execute some good ideas and my opponent eventually goes seriously astray.

Despite the relatively low number of moves, I took quite a lot of time in making decisions move after move, which resulted in mental tiredness. My lack of board vision clarity lead to missing an advantageous tactic (in this case, a tactical defense of the e6 pawn, preventing a knight fork). As a result, as you'll see, the evaluation of the position goes up and down in rapid succession. In the end position, I still have an advantage, but I was low on the clock and mentally not prepared to continue after such a disappointment, although I should have.

First-round games in tournaments are often mental "warm-ups", so we shouldn't be too hard on ourselves too early, but I think I can and should do better. Taking less thinking time because I already know effective ideas in a position will help (...c5!), as will better energy management. Finally, it's all-important to follow the mental toughness rule of not taking a draw unless the position on the board is, in fact, known to be drawn. This rule has given me great success when I have followed it, and I only have myself to blame for the results when I don't.

[Event "?"] [Site "?"] [Date "????.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "Class B"] [Black "ChessAdmin"] [Result "1/2-1/2"] [ECO "B19"] [Annotator "ChessAdmin/Komodo 10"] [PlyCount "60"] [EventType "simul"] [EventRounds "5"] 1. e4 c6 2. d4 d5 3. Nd2 dxe4 4. Nxe4 Bf5 5. Ng3 Bg6 6. h4 h6 7. Nf3 Nf6 8. Bf4 {not in the database. My opponent had evidently not seen the previous move before and was looking to try to take advantage of it.} Nd5 {choosing to immediately challenge the bishop. I wanted to try to take advantage of my opponent's opening deviation - a commendable goal, but this is probably not the best way to do it.} (8... e6 $5 {with straightforward development is simpler.}) 9. Bxb8 Qxb8 {this is the wrong recapture. The engine points out the below variation.} 10. a3 (10. Ne5 {targeting the Bg6 and f7 square, awkwardly for Black.} Qc7 11. Bc4 e6 12. Nxg6 fxg6 $14 {and it looks pretty ugly.}) 10... e6 {unlike earlier, I should now have taken advantage of the Nd5's placement, rather than play "normal" moves.} (10... Ne3 {is the computer line. I had actually thought about this possibility during the game, but wrongly turned it down as too "gimmicky".} 11. fxe3 Qxg3+ 12. Kd2 O-O-O $15) 11. h5 {while this is a standard idea in the mainline Caro-Kann, here White has less to back it up, in terms of putting together a kingside attack.} Bh7 12. Qd2 $6 {this is in fact a very problematic move for White. I'm assuming that he originally wanted to prepare to castle queenside.} (12. Bd3 Bxd3 13. Qxd3 $11) 12... Bd6 $17 {develops and threatens to win a pawn by exchanging on g3.} 13. Ne2 O-O {at this point I have a significant advantage in development, thanks to my castled king, good piece placement, and my opponent's blocked-in Bf1.} 14. g3 {smart, to take away the f4 square from me and blunt the h2-b8 diagonal.} b5 {played to restrain c4 and maintain the Nd5.} (14... c5 $5 { is evaluated as slightly better by the engine. It would more quickly open lines in the center, an important consideration with White still not being castled. I rejected it at the time, thinking that it would free up White's minor pieces by giving him the d4 square to occupy with a knight.}) 15. c3 a5 { the idea being to target and break up the queenside pawns, giving White's king even less cover.} 16. Bg2 Qc7 {a bit of a wasted move.} (16... Be4 $5 {would be annoying for White.}) (16... Rd8 {would get the rook in the game, lining up on the Qd2.}) 17. b3 b4 {not a bad move, but I'm focusing too much on pawn play on the a/b files and not considering the c-pawn break, or bringing in other pieces.} 18. c4 Nf6 {not the logical follow-up. This would have been a logical choice earlier, to reposition the knight, but now there is more pressing business.} (18... bxa3 {would maintain the advantage, given the threat of ...Bb4.} 19. c5 Be7 20. Rxa3 Bf6 $17) 19. a4 $5 (19. c5 $5 $11 { closing off the c-pawn break permanently.}) 19... Rad8 {now I really should be well-placed for a central breakthrough. However, the mental block I have on the c-pawn lever prevents me from accomplishing it.} 20. Qb2 Be4 $17 {not a bad move, but I'm still refusing to play the c5 break.} (20... c5 $1 $19 { and White now has to think about getting his king to safety, while having weaknesses in the center and on h5.}) 21. Rc1 Ng4 $15 22. Rh4 f5 $19 { maintaining the Ng4 on its outpost.} 23. c5 {now this doesn't help White nearly as much as it would have previously.} Be7 24. Nf4 {targeting the e6 pawn with a triple fork, which I was very worried about during the game; however, this should not be effective for him tactically. If I get the two bishops off of the file, then I can simply pin the knight on e6. I did not realize this at the time, unfortunately.} Bxh4 {good but not best.} (24... Bxf3 25. Bxf3 Bxh4 $19) 25. Nxh4 Bd5 $2 $11 {far too conservative, and still missing the e-file pin which tactically protects e6. This position is now equal.} (25... Bxg2 26. Nhxg2 Rfe8 $19) 26. Kf1 Rde8 27. Re1 Qd7 28. f3 Nf6 29. Nhg6 Qf7 30. Nxf8 Rxf8 $17 {at this point I took a draw as I did not see any way to make real progress and (the real reason) I was also very disappointed at missing a win. But of course the h5 pawn is hanging and the draw outcome was quite premature. So the moral of the story is that nothing good comes of violating the "no draws unless the position is actually drawn" rule.} 1/2-1/2

>