It was a last round and I really wanted to do well. My opponent was a young man. He replied with Nc6 to my e4, it was a first time I encountered Nimzowitch Defence. I didn’t want to go into Scotch, so chose a quiet positional line. Then we exchanged queens and light pieces. Eventually he got some pressure on e5.
I do not agree with computer that 22… g6 wasn’t a bad move, it seems me that 22… Nc5 or Nb6 was better keeping alive his bishop. You will see later how important it was. Anyway, he had to play 23… Bc6 and I felt a relieve after 24. Nxc6. Then I saw e5. I calculated it deep enough to see that I probably win a pawn and so it happened. Then I didn’t use his Kf6 move to get an essential advantage after Rf3+ and Rfe1. 33… g5 was a bad move creating a weak pawn. Then I implemented the idea with doubling rooks on “f” vertical, but instead of that 36. Re5 was simply winning.
Anyway after 40 moves the position became technical. 49… Ne4 was a mistake that accelerated the end. Interesting that he played fast all the game and only after he got into real trouble started to think more, but it was already late. In the end I managed to “catch” his rook and after a few moves he resigned.
It was a first round in the Thursday’s club and my opponent was a young man with whom I played before several times and had a positive score though his rating was higher than now. I got White and he played Caro-Kann. It was really funny moment after his 9… Nd7 when I thought that he blundered a bishop, didn’t know what to do and eventually took it. To my surprise he made a check on a5. I got under pressure soon after the opening and was holding up, though computer didn’t think that my position was too bad.
After the game he said that he considered queen sacrifice 21… Qxf3 22. gxf3 Bh2, but after spending a lot of time on it found defense 23. Bg5. Then just two moves after he makes a serious mistake playing 23… Bf4. First I saw it as a possibility to defend by exchanging rooks. Then thinking on 25. c4 Bxd2 I noticed that I can play not trivial 26. Qxd2, but 26. cxd5. I played then 27. dxe6, though dxc6 was better. I saw 27. dxc6 cxd6 28. Qc4, then Qxe6, but didn’t see that I can get another pawn too. He was in the time trouble already and played on increment. Then I almost missed my advantage after 38. g3, but he made a decisive mistake by playing 38… f4. He was losing his bishop by force after that. He decided to continue to play for some reason and we played another 30+ moves, in the end he got mated.
Rolling Pawns 