Interesting Middlegame. Enough Compensation for the Pawn?

This is the 1st long game I've played in a while against someone a lot lower rated which ended in a loss or a draw and I couldn't see anything I obviously did wrong even when analyzing it afterwards.

I would have tried 34.Ke4 since you have the threat of Rg7+ and on Re6+, 35.Kf6, leading to pawn move, exchange or Bf8, in which case 36.Bxg7,Bxg7,37.Rxg7+,Kxg7,38.Kxe6. Well I'm not sure at all, I don't know much about the endgame...

Thanks for commenting. I don't really like 34.Ke4 because of 34...Bf6 35.Bxf6 (35. Rf4 Rd1 36.Bxf6 gxf6 with a similar problem to the other variation) 35...Kxf6 and his Rook will get too much activity for my liking. I don't like 34... Re6+ 35.Kf5 either because it doesn't seem to have a point to it and just loses, 35...g6+ 36.Kf4 Bd6+ winning my Bishop.

EDIT: You shouldn't just stop your analysis of a line at "leading to a pawn move, exchange etc". You should calculate all of those possibilities out like you did with Bf8.

Yes, you're right, didn't see that, it's probably a draw then at this stage...

I thought that 22...Bxf3 was bad. Why go to the endgame so soon?. Black could have tried something like 22...Bc6 or 22...Qg6 to keep the bishop pair. I even prefer black after any one of those moves, despite the material deficit. The bishop pair + open f file should give black a lasting initiative IMHO.

Yeah, that's what I thought. I was rather relieved when he did it!

Interesting game, I enjoyed it quite a bit.  Here's my analysis (over lunch time at work so forgive any glaring errors ).

After 13. Qxe4 I actually prefer black's position.  At that point, black has the two bishops and no weaknesses.  While black has a space disadvantage I believe he makes up for it with the weakness of white's d-pawn.  I think the exchange of light-squared bishop for knight benefitted black.  White now has very little attacking potential (due to the lack of that bishop) and black is very comfortable.  Black can safely castle kingside and build up against the d-pawn using his dark-squared bishop, rooks along the d-file, and queen on b6.  If white does try to advance the pawn to get rid of it, black can simply capture and open the position for his two bishops.  To make a long story short, I used to play the Colle and always tried to avoid losing my light-squared bishop.  That piece is the crux of white's setup so exchanging it takes quite a bit of steam out of white's system.

I don't think Black will really have enough time to build up meaningful pressure against d4, and probably won't be able to keep the Bishop pair. For instance: 14...0-0 15.Bg5 Qc7 (15...Qd7 16.Ne5 Bxe5 17.dxe5 Bd3 doesn't win material due to 18.Rd1) 16.Nh4. 

I didn't want to lose my Light-Square-Bishop if I could help it. I know how powerful an attacker it is, but how could I have kept it? If 12.Bd3 Bxf3 13.gxf3 Bb4+ loses a pawn.

EDIT: Also, that's not a Colle I was playing btw, if that's what you were saying.

Black could play 14...h6 to keep the bishop pair. 

I agree with TexAg06. I think that the loss of the light squared bishop for the Knight was helpfull for black. Notice that after 9.e4 and the exchanges white (on move 12) had to choose between keeping the pawn structure intact or keeping the bishop pair. If the queen were on e2 instead of c2 white wouldn't have to have made that choice:

8.Qe2 Nbd7 9.e4 dxe4 10.Nxe4 Nxe4 11.Qxe4

Still I think white has no advantage, because black can trade bishops: 11...Bg6 12.Qe2 Bxd3 13.Qxd3 and then 13...0-0 14.0-0 e5!? should be about even.

And Black shouldn't be worried about 15.d5?

Thanks for your analysis btw.

 "There was no choice. As I've said, if 12.Bd3 I lose a pawn."

He realizes that, as do I.  The reason we mentioned/suggested those lines is because as white you should try to play a setup that doesn't end in you using your light squared bishop, as it is detrimental to white.  His line with 8. Qe2 is better.

And Black shouldn't be worried about 15.d5?

No, black shouldn't be worried about 15. d5 in that line.  What's to be worried about?  After 15...cxd5, 16. Qxd5 runs into 16...Nf6 followed by 17...e4 and 16. cxd5 leaves white with an isolated, blockaded d-pawn.  In addition, white has no light-squared bishop so there really isn't any attack.  Black has the advantage.

EDIT: Also, that's not a Colle I was playing btw, if that's what you were saying.

Whether or not this is defined as a typical Colle doesn't really matter (even though this might fall into a Colle variation), the ideas are the same.  Quiet development followed by an e4 push and activating the light-squared bishop is the main idea here.  Losing the light-squared bishop goes against the theme of this opening and should be avoided in future games.

On a side note, we're trying to help and you seem quite defensive.  If you don't want to hear constructive criticism and just want to argue with our points, perhaps you shouldn't post your game and ask for comments.

Please can you point out when I've been defensive and why you think that? It seems to me just an exchange of ideas. I absolutely welcome constructive criticism and nothing anyone has said so far has annoyed me. But if I disagree with something I'll say it. Sorry if that doesn't sit well with you.

I think the move 15.d5 looks better than it is. Even after white wins the pawn, I think the position is balanced with black having the more comfortable game (or maybe I just say this because of my particular style).

The opening was kind of confusing. Maybe it's just better either to play with c3 and go for the normal Cole positions, or play c4 earlier and Nc3. But I am no 1.d4 player so what can I say... =P

Except I play the Zukertort with b3, and I thought either a normal Colle with c3 or a Zukertort would pack less punch with Black's Light Square Bishop out of the pawn chain. Looking in databases and listening to Masters talking about that opening playing c4 generally even for Colle players seems to be the standard plan when the Bishop's developed early like that... I'll ask my coach (A FIDE Master), and also go through this game with him. 

theres no reason to give up bishop so early u could of saved it with a move like bd3

Have you read any of the other posts?

I think I know what you're getting at with c4.  Typically when black develops the bishop outside the pawn chain and white plays c4, white will follow up with a move like Qb3 and try to exploit the absence of the light squared bishop on the queenside as well as the usual weakness of black's d5 pawn.

Yeah, I know. In this case though I don't think that move would have achieved anything.

 So if you know c4 is typically followed by Qb3, why did you play c4 in this position knowing Qb3 wouldn't lead anywhere?

Well since a Colle wouldn't be too effective, I figured going into a QG sort of position instead would be more prudent. It's a typical thing to do for people who play these type of systems (I play the Torre Attack as well). That structure doesn't need Qb3 to justify it.