Thanks for posting this, as someone who is around 1250 (on the online games) it really helps to see what sort of things are considered. I generally don't think about those sorts of depth of tactics.

I do have one question, though.

You commented at the end of the variation (for move 34. ending on move 42) that "and the checks come to an end and the game aswell". Why would the game end? Is there some obvious checkmate I'm missing?

Thanks,

Because after the checks White is finished, he will lose. The checks were prolonging the game.

liked your analysis, I find the computer analysis pretty poor (the free member option is anyway) so I like to read these kinds of things.
It's bedtime here now but I'll  follow you and check some of your other games and videos later on.

Thanks for making the effort, appreciate it.

A good positional game. But after 18. Be7 you says that black has reached a completely equal position. I think Black can count on a pleasant advantage:-) The Knights on f5 and c4 is good placed and there is a weakness on d4 and the bishop on c1 only defend the c4 knighs squares. The rook on h8 can go to the c-file after Kf8-h7 and Rc7.

@melogibbo, thank you very much.  That's a motivation to do more.

@vill0236, another member had this similar feeling, ready my response on the first page;  it is an explanation of my evaluation.

The OP started 8 threads in 13 days, after joining the site.

Glad to see at least one of his threads has attracted a few sycophants and (apparently) some French fanatic wanna-bees.  Whatever.

I especially liked the comment about "Condescension Man." 

Thank You All, of course. 

So knock yourselves out.  Don't let me stop you.

I don't make money nor do I get paid for doing this.   If I make smiles with what I share, that is fulfillment.

Then I will continue doing it !

I just had a long post about this eaten by the Internet, so here is the short version.

• Great game, great post. Thanks especially to the OP for providing his in-game thoughts.
• White did not play particularly well. Basically, black had a plan, white didn't. Or more probably, white didn't really know the ideas or themes behind the position, so he just played "normal moves" which as you can see did not work out so well.
• See Irontiger's comments for how white could have significantly improved on the game. In particular, the position at move 18 is very good for black, most definitely not equal -- unless someone with an engine can show me otherwise. So white playing differently as Irontiger suggested, for example with 12.bxa5 is an improvement. I would have to look closer at that line to see how much better white is, but if it is significant then black would have to look at changing his earlier play.
• And a general comment: It is very dangerous to play with a single plan, and to imply that this single plan is "The Plan", and shouldn't be changed, as comments from the OP "If you read the note to my ...Bd7 move, I plan on planting ...Nc4 as soon as possible taking advantage of the pin of b4 pawn." and "25... bxc4?! goes against what I planned." show.
• Now - planning in chess is one of the early skills that beginners learn, that open their eyes to how this can help their game. Think about the book "How To Think Ahead In Chess", where they have their themes of playing the Stonewall for white, you just put this knight on e5, and then blah blah blah Bxh7+ and then basically you win. So it is pretty cool to go through this type of game where one side plays with a plan and the other doesn't, but this is not typically how games go. You got to change your plan to suit whatever your opponent is doing.

Overall, a great forum.

Ozzie, 

Greatly appreciate the feedback.  Also thank you for taking your time to do this.

I got some things to point out, not a debate, just clarifying somethings -

1. The reason of sticking to the plan in my notes was because I judged the plan to still the best plan for me at the moment, and, if not the best, still good enough to carry on and be promising.

I did go over Tiger's comments, and I just provided what I felt about the position.  I can be wrong, yes, but I think White really lost the thread and got worse once he let me open the lines on the Q-side.

My position was not perfect and had its minuses so that's was one of the reasons I was conservative in my evaluation and regarded it as completely equal since White's significant advantage in space actually means something.

Definitely felt he was playing according to impulse, my opponent.  Do you agree?

Game good.

You join here?

http://www.chess.com/groups/view/advanced-theoretical-discussion-group-where-strong-players-go-to-become-stronger

Founder banned!

BogatyrSvyatogor

Recently, I founded the Advanced Theoretical Discussion Group in order 2 provide and maintain a place where High Level players and Problemist/Theoreticians can evaluate critical lines, positions, and ideas. We are holding our 1st Tourney called Sicilian Thematic Jugoslav 9g4 in order 2 test a cutting edge "DragonSlayer" novelty currently in vogue.

Others also!!

Wow, really ?  I am new to the group.   Bocamustang is one of the leaders.  I don't know much about them besides that they let me in their group.

I agree with Ozzie! 

Bladezii obviously worked very hard on this game. My main complaint is that he doesn't really discuss White's options, but that's a stylisitic choice since he's looking at the game from Black's point of view. The drawback to this, as Irontiger and Ozzie pointed out, is that the game appears to be even more one-sided than it would have felt when the moves were being played.

The Soviets advised young players to annotate their games and publish their analysis. Flaws and mistakes do not last long in a cauldron fueled by a critical public. Today, anyone with an engine will find tactical flaws before a game gets published. But even if the analysis is tactically perfect, people here will find reasons to ridicule any earnest effort.

Thank you for risking ridicule by publishing your analysis. On this site, it's just about guaranteed that people will attack you.

This game very good!

Many, many bannings on this site!

Fezzik.

Smyslov, thank you.  

I would like to point out, if you read the comments and analysis using the tool provided, that I did give improvements for white.

What Ozzie pointed out, among other things, is that I was too optimistic, in his opinion, for White.

I don't feel ridiculed at all.  We all will have our scope at things too.  My bottom line is helping out the other players, and there has been plenty of voices making their appreciation clear as well as saying how this has helped them.

Si fuera as'i, Ivor, como se responderia a  12.Rc1 Nc4  , cuando el caballo en a4 queda atacado y se amenaza Nxb2 que ataca la reina en d1 ?

Excellent analysis I really enjoyed the comments after your critical moves.

Do you do the analysis with a computer engine or do you set it up on the board and just add your analysis to the computer at the end?

@keisierSC,

I do run checks with the computer at chess.com, the one provided by the server.

I use a Mac computer so I don't have the luxury (or the money) to run the pro engines from CHessbase and sort.

I have boards (even magnetics a la old school) and analysis boards (from the chess.com website).

Thanks very much for taking the time to help us - I'm going to learn the French after this.

You are very welcome, @gameatwork.