This game (played OTB at my club) unraveled when my opponent played a defensive exchange sac that destroyed my attack and gave him a won endgame.  (He then won with a Knight SAC that got oohs and ahas from the spectators.)  Perhaps the most depressing part of this game was I never saw the exchange coming ... so darn typical.

I am sure I screwed up the opening lines.  But having gone over this game, I have decided that my most serious planning mistake was that I focused on the wrong side of the Board.  Once I got my Knight placed well on e5, I shouldn't have played h4 and tried to open the king side.  I now believe I should have played a4, trade one pair of Knights, get my Rook onto the open C file, and then penetrate Black's position on the Queen side.  My IQP would have been ok and I would have controlled the open file with a well placed Knight on E5. Instead, I rushed forward with a king side attack that fell apart, and with it the game. 

The game took over 2 hours and I sure needed a stiff drink when I got home.  Comments/analysis welcome.  Cheers.

I wouldn't call that a sacrifice, but a nice combination. You both ended up with the same material but your panw structure is a mess and he had his bishop very well placed on g7!

I just recently started playing, but I also noticed that pawn structure is really important. My current opening game is a bit like yours and we ended up having the same pieces, but his pawns were in way better positions than mine.. it's hard to force something then.

A few comment of the game:

5.Bb5+? Is a useless move. Better is to play 5.e5 and begin to secure the center. The light bishop can be placed later on on d3.

7.exd5??? another mistake. 7.e5 was better. Later in the game this cost you to play with (and defend) an isolated pawn.

13.Bh4 doesn't look good. I would have played 13.Be3. If black changes his Knight for your bishop you will have opened lines for your rook and also you have protection for you isolated pawn.

17.h4?????  that was definitely a mistake. You have no pieces to continue the attack. All you pieces aren't coordinated for neither a king side nor queen side attack.

21.Qxg5 was premature. First you should have played Rad1

23.Re5??? was your blunder and that's the move that allow the great combination of your opponent. 23.Qa5 switching back to the queen side would have been a good.

After the combination your opponent made, there is not much to comment...

Orejano,

Thank you for the comments.  The only one I disagree with is that Bb5+ is useless.  I had a plan, I just didn't follow through.  My idea was to exchange the light square bishop and when Black took with the Queen, to push e5, hoping to bury Black's other bishop for a while.  I think that was an ok plan (and I note at least a few games on the database played that way).

But then my opponent took with the Knight, giving me the chance to take the pawn and develop while Black moves around to take the pawn back.  I do not understand why I changed horses midstream.  That was a mistake, as you note.  Particularly bad idea in hindsight having just exchanged the light-square bishop, which I would need to contest the d5 square.

Yeah, this wasn't really a sacrifice so much as an exchanging combinaation which got him into the better endgame. I wanted to note that I think Orejano's comments are a bit harsh in their excess of '?'s - really, 3 '?'s should be reserved for something which really obviously walks into mate or just drops a queen - even then in many situations it isn't worse then 2.

As for the point on Bb5+ and exd5, this is not actually good for you - e5 is better, it limits the scope of his bishop and secures a nice spacial advantage with good possibilities of kingside attack (I may have looked at playing 0-0-0 rather than 0-0 in this game, but this is only cursory and I'm not too familiar with the Alapin, especially as white). Your comment is that black wastes time retaking the pawn, but this in fact goes well with his development, and since you can't really do all that much with your time, it isn't really a problem for him.

Just my $.02

I reviewed this game in some depth and, surprise ...we had totally misjudged the final position.

How about 60Kf3 iso of 60.Ke1? Will check with tablebases, but agree Knight sac was a silly stunt unless absolutely sure won.

No your right Kf3 makes no difference completely drawn.