Welcome back to Chess in Small Doses. Today I’m analyzing game #3 from my MLK Day Classic Tournament. Each game was 90min + 30 sec increment, so lots of time to think. You can find Game #1 (White, 1-0) here and Game #2 (Black, 0-1) here.
This was a long game so for the hardy you can read to the end. For everyone else here’s what I learned:
I still need to work on recognizing tactics and accurate calculation in games. I missed so many opportunities.
I thought I was ahead when I wasn’t. My regret over mentally settling for a draw made me fight this game out longer than I needed to.
However, stubbornness is just another name for being resilient. I was the more resilient player in this game. It got me a win.
I also give myself credit for seeing the win and taking it when it happened.
OK, onto the game. I went into game#3 of the tournament having played two games against adults, going 1-0-1. This game I finally faced a kid. I walked away with the win, but only because I was more stubborn and found a winning tactic in the end. Honestly I thought I was ahead the whole time because of a better bishop, but turns out we were dead even after I missed a winning move. I feel bad that I turned down the draw offers but hey… after Game #2… no playing for draws! Let’s get into it.
White Accuracy: 93% (1 blunder) Black Accuracy: 84% (2 blunders)
As I said previously, I’ve switched to playing the 1.d4 London because the pawn structure mirrors the Caro Kann and Slav that I play as Black. So I stayed consistent this game.
1.d4 f5?!
Surprise #1! The Dutch!?!
OK, first time for everything I guess. I had never faced it (OTB or online) and wasn’t 100% the exact move order. Guess this is why one plays the London, because the opening principles can help you find your way through surprises.
2.Bf4 Nf6 3.Nf3 (e3 was more accurate)
I messed up the move order a tad, with 3.e3 being the better line. I imagine it’s to prevent hunting the Dark Squared Bishop. Black now has a choice between one of three moves here: g6, d6, or e6. The decision is fairly important as some lines heavily favor White and some Black. White wins 53% of the time after 3…e6, but only 37% for d6, and only 28% for g6. Black appears to have the advantage after g6 now. Luckily for me, he played e6.
3…e6 4.e3 b6!?
OK, surprise #2. It almost feels like a reverse Sicilian Dragon now. Seems the battle will be over the e4 square. My opponent was playing fast so I assume he’s comfortable with this position.
5.Nbd2 Bb7 6.c3 d6?!
This is where we left theory. Right now, Stockfish says White is +1 but the suggested line included Bc4 and Qa5+ trying to induce pawn weaknesses. My goal however was to finish development and get castled instead.
7.Bd3 Nbd7 8. Qe2? (better was Qc2 aiming at e4) Ne5! 9.Ba6
I can’t take the knight without getting forked. I looked at 9.Bxe4 fxe 10.Ng5 but didn't like it if Black played Qf5 and then h6 pushing the knight back to h3 and off to the side. I found an alternative thought by putting pressure on my opponent here. Instead I thought I’d try and trade off his good bishop. After that I intended to take the knight. Ball is now in his court, how to proceed? Bxa6, Qc8, Bc6, or Bd4.
9…Qc8? 10.Bxb7 Qxb7 11.Nxe4 fxe4
I had seen this position ahead of time and noticed the pawns on e4 and e6 were undefended. I strongly considered Ng5 here. However I calculated Ng5 Qd5 c4 Qa5+ Kf1 (or Qd2) and didn’t like it. I feared my knight would be hit with h6 and have to retreat to h3. So I played Nd2. However, later I saw Ng5 was correct:
Ng5 Qd5 O-O and c4 to follow (simple)
Ng5 Qd5 Qh5+ g6 Qg4 (attacking the e6 pawn again) seems tempting. If Ke7 then Nxe4! which cannot be taken since Qxe4 Bg5+ wins the Queen. However Black has the simple Qf5 instead of Ke7 to equalize.
Point is this was a critical moment and I mis-calculated. My top two weaknesses identified from game reviews are tactics and calculation and here’s another example. Missed opportunity #1.
12.Nd2 Nf6 13.O-O Be7 14.f3 O-O? 15.fxe Nxe4 16.Nxe4?
Why is this a mistake? Because I missed a tactical possibility. Playing Qf3 was better, creating a pin on the knight as the Queen on b7 is undefended. Didn’t even consider this OTB. Missed opportunity #2.
16…Qxe4 17.Rf2 e5 18.Bg3 Rxf2 19.Bxf2 c5 (trying to open the center) 20.Re1
Believe it or not we are dead even here (SF 0.0). It’s worth noting that several times after this position my opponent offered draws. I was mistaken and I thought I was still better. I feel bad for not seeing it was even, but I guess stubborn wins sometimes.
I’m going to fast forward now to the next critical position where I almost won the game but had Missed Opportunity #3. Then we’ll skip ahead onto the last opportunity to win, which I didn’t miss.
20…Bf6 21.a3 Re8 22. Qd1 Qc6? 23.d5 Qb5 24.Qc2 c4 25.e4 Qd7 26.a4 Rf8 27.Be3 Qe7 28.Qe2 Qc7 29.Rf1 Be7 30.Rxf8+ Bxf8 31.Qg4? ( g3 was probably better) Kh8 32.h4 h6 33.g3 Qd8 34.Qe6 Qf6??
This is a blunder from my opponent, quickly followed by a blunder from myself. All my play had been with the idea that my DSB was better than his DSB. I wanted to infiltrate with the Queen and then bring in my King. Plan mostly accomplished! However, right here… right here I need to trade Queens. He’ll be left with a bad bishop and I’ll have moves like either h5 or a4 next. White will be winning if we trade queens. Missed Opportunity #3.
However I mis-evaluated. That led to counter play and eventually we traded queens, but it remained even until my opponent blundered.
35.Qg4?? Qd8 36.Kg2 Qe8 37.Qd1 Qg6 38.Qc2 Be7 39.Kh3 Kg8 40.g4 Qf6 41.Qf2 Qxf2 (finally the Queen trade) 42.Bxf2 Kf7 43.Be3 g5 44.h5 Ke8 45.Kg3 Kd7 46.a5 Bd8 47.a6 Kc8 48.Kf3 Kb8 49.Ke2 b5 50.Kd1 (critical to allow the bishop space) Bb6 51.Bd2 Bc5??
My opponent said he was clearing the b6 square for the king to take the a6 pawn. However, you’ll notice the h5 pawn is 3 squares from Queening. The bishop on c5 can no longer get to cover the h8 square. The king on b8 can’t get there either. The game is won by a simple tactical sacrifice.
52.Bxg5! 1-0 (Black resigned)
If hxg then the h pawn will promote and Black can’t stop it. If not hxg, say maybe Bb6, then Bxh6 wins for White as well. It was game over.
So what did I learn?
I learned that I still am struggling with tactics and calculation. I have a long way to go in order to play more accurately. Accuracy for this game was officially 93% according to Lichess analysis. Not too bad, but I could have done better. There were too many missed opportunities.
I also learned that being stubborn is just another way of saying “resilient.” I was the more resilient player this game, declining multiple draw offers from my opponent. After Game #2, I wasn’t playing for draws. Being resilient meant my opponent had to come up with a plan and that’s where he made mistakes.
Lastly, I give myself credit for finding the win when it happened. It could have ended earlier, but still I was able to see the pattern and take advantage of it. Credit goes where credit is due.
Thanks again for reading. This was long, but I hope helpful. Next week we go over game #4. Please share if you enjoy it.
You've put in a good bit of work for this analysis, have you looked at any games in the dutch from a master? I find that if you find 1 master game to look at afterward that reaches a similar position that you can learn about ideas that hadn't occurred to you before.