Rolling Pawns

I had a dilemma before the game – to go to the club or watch the playoff hockey. I thought that I will be too upset if my team loses and I miss the club as well, so decided to play. My opponent was a father of 2 boys I played before in that club, that was funny. He chose the same Bxd7 line in Canal-Sokolsky attack in Sicilian as his son, but then played a more quiet line.

I played 9. Bd2 in an expectation that his knight will get to d4, so my hands would be free (in case I want to exchange it). This is exactly what happened, then he played b5. I decided not to play Rc1, then take on c4 with the rook as I did some time ago and just played b3. His 17… f5 was clearly not the best move and I liked the pawn structure that appeared as a result of the exchanges.

After he took on f5 with the rook I had to decide where to move my bishop. It was a critical moment, I thought that on d2 it has more attacking opportunities. It was a wrong decision, as it allowed him to activate his bishop. He could actually get better after doubling his rooks, as the f2 square was not well covered, computer evaluates it as -0.91. At the same time if I would play 21. Bg3 White would be 1.02. Luckily he played 21… Bf6.

After his 23… Qg6 I realized that he can create a battery with the bishop on e5 and queen on g3, so Bf4 was basically forced, computer approves that as well as bishops exchange. I had a small, ~0.3 advantage before the rooks exchange, then it went to zero. I tried to distract distract/push away his queen that looked too active to me with 30. c5 and 31. g3.

When he played Qe3+ I saw that the pawn endgame should be alright. He queened right after me and did it with the check. I was optimistic, maybe too much, as I played 44. Kg4 without much thinking. Then suddenly I saw 44… Qe4+, it looked very scary, like I can get mated. But when I checked the lines, my king was escaping. At that moment I told myself: “Never again I play such a move”.

Right after that moment he got both my pawns. But one I was getting back right away and my king was too close to another one and his king was far away. In a few moves I won the remaining pawn, we exchanged the queens and shook the hands.

It was a last round in the Mondays club. My opponent was a young man to whom I lost a few times, he had White in all of the games. This time I got White, we played Caro-Kann, Fantasy variation. Last time I played that variation it was more than 8 months ago. My 5. Nge2 was a second book choice, as well as computer one, the first is Bf4, they are almost equivalent.

I deviated from the book on move 9 with Be2, now I think Be3 or a3 was better. He definitely underestimated my 12. Bf2 when played 12… Nc5, it was a mistake. Of course I jumped at Nf5 idea. I expected him to play 13… Qf4, but he played 13… Qg5?. It was a big mistake. I started to look at the lines, my two motifs were catching his queen (or forcing it to go back and forth) or depraving him from castling. It looked like the first idea didn’t work, so I considered the second one. That moment reminds me driving on a nice road in a nice weather and suddenly missing the “Wrong way” sign.

My 14. Nd6+ was still keeping some advantage, but when I saw at home that I missed 14. Bh4 or almost the same strong 14. Be3 I started to swear. I missed that after 14. Bh4 the knight on f6 is basically attacked by two pieces and after Nxg7+ I eliminate one of its defenders. So after 14… Qf4 I win the knight and after 14… Qg6 the exchange with the dominating position and evaluation about +5. After 14. Be3 White wins as well, though it is not that forced as in the lines above.

The next bad idea was to take on c8, it gave up the rest of the advantage. I continued to drive the wrong way, but it was not all. My next move became a game losing mistake, I played 16. Bd3. I expected him to take on d3 and then to exchange on c3 winning a pawn. Suddenly out of the blue I saw his rook on c3. I quickly realized that things are really bad. After his 18… Bxc3+ I thought that I have Ke2, but then saw Qd2+ and had to go to f1.

I could just resign, my resistance was all to no avail. It looks like my calculation training didn’t bring the fruit yet, I have no choice but to continue and maybe intensify it.

It was a penultimate round in the Mondays club. My opponent was a young man, I drew him in King’s Gambit half a year ago. He had White and played it again. I answered with Falkbeer Countergambit, Nimzowitsch variation which I usually play.

We followed the book moves until move 9, then my 9… b6 was a step in the wrong direction. His 9. c4 somewhat surprised me, he played Bb5, Bxc6, c3 before. The right move would be 9… Bg4 10. Nc3 Nf5 12. Bxf4 Bxf3 13. Bxf3 Qxd4 14. Qxd4 Nxd4 with an equal position. Next two moves I also had an opportunity to play Bg4, instead I played moves that worsened my position.

Especially bad was my 12… f5, I had to play Ng6 instead. By move 18 I found myself in a really unpleasant position, especially bad was my knight on d8. I played 22… b5 to attack and try somehow to destroy his center. Then something happened, he started to play not the best moves. His 23. Ne5 gave back part of the advantage, then his 26. Bf3 and 26. Ra5 were mistakes too. I have to say that all the game he played very fast, almost on increment and had an hour more than me.

I was really glad to play 27… Nf7, putting my knight to a meaningful square. After he played 28. Rc5 I right away realized that it is a mistake. Then his queen check and the following exchange on d5 were crucial mistakes as he left without protection his bishop. I saw that I can create a strong threat moving my knight on g5 and played it. After his 33. Kf1 the material losses became unavoidable, then in a couple of moves there was a forced win, he played until it was a mate.

I was happy to win of course, taking into account how bad my position was before all turned to the best. Also I was glad to get the first OTB win with this variation as the score was =2, -2.

It was a 3rd round in the Thursdays club. I got White and my opponent, a young man, played Sicilian d6. In the previous round I returned to Bb5+ and despite of misplaying the opening and losing the pawn, my general impression was good. I was feeling more comfortable than playing Closed Sicilian, so I decided to go for Bb5+ again.

He answered with Nc6 and the game transformed into one of the lines of the Rossolimo variation. Computer criticizes his 14… h5 as well as his 18… Qa5. After his 24… Nf5 I missed 25. b4! winning the knight. Interesting that when I played 26. Qe2 I had a feeling that he might play Rce8 and he did. I saw that I can safely take on c6 after the queen check on c4, as after 28. Qxc6 Rc8 I have Qd5. He made another mistake playing 27… d5.

On move 31 he blundered, I quickly checked that I have Bg1 defense after Rc1+ and took on f5. He continued to play and resigned only after I pinned his bishop.

In the both games that I played this week my opponents created a backward pawn. After my applied pressure they both weren’t happy with it and tried to counterattack. So it was logical to put these 2 games in one post.

Game 1. It was a 3rd round in the Mondays club, my opponent was a boy to whom I lost recently in Closed Sicilian. He got White and we played Budapest Gambit. The 1st line on move 7 was 7… O-O 8. Bb2 Re8. I had a difficult choice on move 12, finally I played d6. After his 13. Ne4 I spent quite some time calculating the consequences of 13… Nxc4. I eventually found that after 13… Nxc4 14. Bxg7 Kxg7 15. Nxc5 dxc5 16. bxc4 I don’t quite like my position and it was right, but there was 15… Nxe3! and Black is better. But White has 14. Nf6+ gxf6 15. Bxc4 with an equality.

Computer thinks that my doubled pawns are OK, I actually saw that evaluation before, so went for that line. When he played 21. f4 all I was worried about was a safe retreat for my knight. But I missed a nice 21… Nd3! with an interference motif. On move 27 there was another nice combination, 27… Bc2! and if 28. Qxc2 then 28… Qxe3+ 29. Kh2 Qxf4+ 30. Kg1 Qxf1+ 31. Kxf1 Ne3+ 32. Ke2 Nxc2 with an advantage.

After he played 33. g4 I played Bd7 thinking that bishop is more useful there, it was a mistake. He quickly attacked my knight, forced its retreat and played releasing e4. I got a bad feeling at that moment. He developed an attack on the kingside, I desperately defended unless my queen penetrated into his territory. I made all the right moves, but we didn’t have much time, I had about 4 minutes and he about 6. Then on move 51 I made a crucial mistake. Any of these 3 moves, Nf7, Kf8 or Kf7 was leading to an equal position, my Nd3 was losing. Then I missed a mate in 2 and resigned.

Game 2. It was a 2nd round in the Thursdays club. It is funny that looking at the pairings I thought that my opponent is a high rated boy, to whom I lost 3 month ago, but I didn’t recognize him and suspected that it is his brother, who is younger and lower rated. Then I noticed a correction in the pairings confirming that, they have one different letter in their first names.

I got White, Sicilian, this time I decided to play Maroczy bind, I played quickly and confidently, as a result I lost a pawn on move 12. The book move was 10. Nde2. After the bishops exchange I thought that I have some compensation. Then I missed 16. Qd4+, I saw the check, but didn’t notice that I could win a7 pawn. I got a good feeling after his 16… e5 and tried to organize a pressure on d6 pawn. My several queen moves were not necessary and didn’t improve my position, he tried to counterattack moving his “e” and “f” pawns.

I regretted playing 29. Qe4 after his 29… b5, but it was a wrong perception. I somehow missed that if after 31. cxb5 he plays 31… Qc1+ then I have 32. Rd1. That was a serious miss, as in shootouts White wins half of the games with other half being draws. As a result I had to sacrifice a pawn on c4. He advanced his “e” pawn and got a passer. I saw that I have Rxc5 strike and after his Kh7 played it. I have to say that he was in a serious time trouble having 1 minute left vs my 10.

After I took his rook on e6 he offered a draw, I agreed. After the game I thought that openness of his king or possibility of queens exchange with a drawn rook endgame should have allowed me to hold a draw. Computer confirmed that, 6 shootouts with a different depth ended up =5, -1.

On one chess site I read that if you have a backward pawn the best way to play is not to devote yourself to defending this pawn the whole game, but to try to counterattack, this is exactly what both my opponents did.

It was a second round of a new tournament in Mondays club, I missed the first one. My opponent was a young man, never played him before. I got White, he played Sicilian. I went for Canal-Sokolsky attack, but after bishops exchange didn’t follow with c4 and d4, choosing quiet d3. I was OK after the first 15 moves.

I preferred 17. Rxc4 to bxc4 thinking that I wouldn’t give him the “b” vertical that way, as well as would keep my rook on the semi-open vertical across his queen. I developed some kind of initiative on the kingside, computer considers the position equal. A crucial moment came on move 23, when I played Nh6+. I was tempted with an idea of capturing his dark-colored bishop. It was a serious mistake, as the knight went to e5 right away and the Black king stayed completely safe. As an alternative computer offers 23. Qf2 f6 24. Qc2 with an equal position.

Similar thing happened with me recently, also in Sicilian, I exchanged my knight for Black’s dark-colored bishop and got worse. His knight bothered me, so I played 26. Bf4. Suddenly he played 26… Qd4+ and I realized that I am losing a pawn. That was a consequence of forgetting a principle of looking for checks, captures and threats. It is strange, but computer doesn’t see it as a serious mistake, saying that it worsened my position by only 0.5.

Then I made another mistake by playing 27. Kh2 because 27. Be3 would force the queens exchange after 27… Qxd3 28. Qxd3 Nxd3. I am still not sure I would hold this endgame against 2000+ rated player. My attempts to get to his king were futile and in the lost position I resigned.