It was a second round and I got a boy with whom I played before, +1, -1 score. He had White and played Vienna game.  As I see the game now, I had to play d5 early to open the center and prevent any kind of pawn storm.

Houdini thinks that exchange of f5 on move 22 or 23 was keeping the balance. I didn’t like exf5, but didn’t see that after Rd4 my rook is very active.  25. g6 was a serious mistake, of course I saw Nh6, but underestimated it. 29. Rc8 was a game losing mistake, I wanted to play Rcc7, but didn’t notice Qf6+.



It was a second round, I played with a boy, couple of months ago he didn’t want a perpetual and lost to me. This time I had Black and he played Vienna Game.  I was happy with how the game developed and he really was behind on time.  Then on move 27 I made the first bad decision – to exchange queens, thinking that even without queens  I will still be much better. Fritz says that after 27. Re4 I had about +2 advantage, +1  after Qe4.

It was a moment when I had 30 minutes and he had one, but then he started to play fast. I couldn’t find a good plan and was probably hoping that he will flag or make a decisive mistake. I had perpetual after 41. Rd2+, but did not pay attention, exactly like he did in the previous game.  Then I got less than 5 minutes left and stopped writing the moves, the rules in our club allow that.

So, eventually we got into a rook endgame.  He managed to win my “b” pawn, I won his “c” one and also I lost “f” pawn on the kingside  and exchanged “g” pawns.  My king was cut off and with the passed “b” pawn he had an easy win. No need to say that I was really disappointed.

I played yesterday against the guy with whom I had a score 0.5:1.5, both games with White in my favorite Fantasy variation of Caro-Kann. I lost to him recently pretty equal game. So, the fact that I came a bit angry and tense (for non-chess related reason) helped me, I think. He had White, Vienna game, here it is. He went into the same variation (d3, f4) I played in simul against GM Bareev 1.5 year ago. After f4 Bareev played f5,  I got under strong attack on the kingside, couldn’t get counterplay and lost in 20+ moves. So, in this game I decided to take on f4 and just develop. Then I saw a possibility to get 2 bishops with Na5, he played a novelty – 9. exf6, a bad one. Fritz suggests that I could do better with 10… Qxf6, but I saw Bg5 with both pieces under attack and didn’t see that I can just take the bishop and then fork him.

Anyway I was feeling that I have initiative. He started to think a lot. Then after a few moves I got an idea of exchange sacrifice on e3 to get control over the white squares. I saw that I have compensation – I could get one or two pawns back + two bishops, so I did it. Fritz approved it, it was in his lines.

On move 26 he sacrificed the knight on h7. At all times I watched his threats and felt that my defense is good enough, so it was kind of unexpected. I saw his idea of Rxh7 with perpetual, then saw that after Qxd4 I take one of the “perpetual” squares under control. In his place I would resign after 28… Bxh7, having an absolutely hopeless endgame, but he continued to play.

He was also in a huge time trouble, having about 15 minutes vs 45. It was a matter of technique and with a hanging flag he resigned after 42 moves. I felt a great satisfaction with a win, not only getting revenge and breaking a “complex”, but also feeling that I played well, which I couldn’t say often recently.