Where did I go wrong?

 

I think the most bewlidering experience in Chess is not knowing where you went wrong. This is what I've encountered in the following game where I was White and lost.

 

Admittedly I played a weak move 28. f4, not seeing my opponent's reply. They say that with one inaccuracy you stand worse but not lost. It takes just two inaccuracies to lose.

 

In saying that, I'm trying to figure out if I'm actually lost after 28 moves. I had a choice of either going into an opposite coloured bishop ending (with Rooks) where he had a passed pawn, or same coloured Bishop ending where I have a weak pawn. I chose the later. Was this the decisive mistake?

 

 

 

I'm trying to make a policy to alternate with 1. e4 and 1. d4 to broaden my play. I have little experiene with 1. d4

 

I could have reached the above position but couldn't assess this as better for White. I felt Black can blockade the passed pawn easily, giving him advantage.

 

This is what I think is the improvement to Avrukh-Pelletier, Biel 1997 where instead Black played 18. ... Rfe8 rather than 18. ... Bf6 which I think is better.

 

 

 

White has just played 28. f4. Can you find Black's best reply?

 

 

 

I was hopeful to reach this endgame position which I think is drawn for White. My plan was to give up my Bishop for his passed Queenside pawn, upon which I'd capture the f-pawn and enter a Bishop with wrong coloured Rook pawn ending.

 

My opponent played well to avoid this and did not rush.