This game was played in a team match called "GALACTIC MATCH 2 (for 1-250 members team)". It is a 25 board match between La Belle France and BULGARIA. I played on board 5 for La Belle France and in addition to this loss, I won my other game against paci_golfa. The current score in the match is 30.5 - 13.5 in favor of La Belle France and therefore we will win the match as soon as all of the games have finished.
This was again a time when I thought that I should experiment with a different move against the Najdorf. In the game I shared yesterday, I played 6.Bg5, but in this game I went for 6.Be3. It is too early to say much about either try because there is only one example of each move, but based on these examples, I might continue experimenting with 6.Be3, even though I lost with both moves. The losses were obviously not due to either move I chose on move six, the games were lost later on. I think the game was played in a reasonable way by both players until my opponent played 13...Bxb3, I did not really understand the reason behind that decision. I guess paci_golfa wanted to react to the threat of Rd1 with an aggressive move rather than with a more passive move, like moving either the bishop back or move the queen somewhere out of the d-file. Despite of that decision, the game was far from over. The doubled pawns actually became actually a problem for me after 16.c3 Na5 and for quite some time my bishop had to defend the pawn on b3. I did not like to face the move Nc4 after b4, so I avoided playing that move as long as possible. After 18...g6, I could not see anything better than moving my bishop to h6, so that is what I did. I did consider 19...Be7 as a possible reply with the idea of bringing the bishop to g7. Of course after the queen would have moved somewhere, my opponent would have needed to move the rook regardless, so moving it immediately maybe did not change the situation all that much.
I also considered playing Qf6 instead of Bh6, but quickly realised that it would be a really bad move in view of Be7. I also thought about Qf6 after 19...Rfe8, but as it does not accomplish much either, I did not play 20.Qf6 in view of the reply 20...Bf8 and paci_golfa would have hold the position. I played the move 20.Rfd1 instead, with the idea that if 20...Qb6+ 21.Kh1 Nxb3 22.Bxb3 Qxb3 23.Rxd6 and I would end up having a piece for two pawns because of 23...Qxb2. I should have played 20.Kh1 instead of 20.Rfd1 in order to get away from the annoying checks. Paci_golfa replied with 20...Bf8 with the intention of trading the bishops, but I thought it best to avoid the trade, so I moved the bishop to e3, fully aware of the possibility of Bc5. For some reason I did not mind the trading of the bishops on e3. I should have of course played Kh1 earlier, so that Bc5 would not have been a possible reply to Be3 because I could have played Bxc5 Qxc5, followed up with b4, forking the knight and the queen. After the bishops were off the board, the game seemed to go more towards a draw, but I kept playing and tried to get something done. I was even able to get into a favorable position after paci_golfa sacrificed a pawn with the move 30...Qd2, at that point I was more comfortable of my winning chances again. My optimism towards the position was destroyed by one huge blunder I made on move 32. The silly thing is, I think I saw the reply Nd3, but thought when I played 30.Qxe5 that it is not a big problem. This was another position where my brain malfunctioned again, causing me to lose the game. I have added two mate in three and three mate in four puzzles today.
No comments:
Post a Comment