Pyrenees Gambit

The Pyreneese Gambit has been played against and then beat Kasporov. It's no slouch in capable hands. So guys, help me find where I went wrong, or a better line.

It should be noted that my opponent was my best friend in real life, we know each others styles quite well, he's often a cautious, more passive player whereas I like to play gambits and other attacking lines. 

At start, it seems you are not care about your pawn and at the end they (pawns) defeat you. you should imagine any pawn as a queen at the end.

And additionall, in 26... Ra6 you are right. Bb6 was better.

Let me give an overview of my thought process through the game.

Now I have played the Queen's Gambit many times and I have never played against Pb5. I generally lose the game if I move my QS pawns up too fast enabling the opponent to attack my king round the side. On the other hand I wouldn't like b5xc4 so I took. After E6 I wanted to get my knight out, but you would be able to pin it to my king so I played A3. My pawns look a tad messy but the theory was that I still had the KS to castle to. Also the pawn on B5 stopped the black knight from developing. Which was a nice bonus.

Bb7 was to be expected I suppose and I wanted to be able to move my white bishop at some point without you taking pawns from my KS. So I decided to start trying to push E4 to block the bishops attack on G7.

I had no interest in that pawn down on B5 so I left you to waste turns dealing with it. I pinned the knight on turn 6 so that E4 can be played.

Turn 7 BxN is very rare for me, but I really wanted to stop the pin on G7 so that I could develope the KS. I considered it nessicary.

By turn 9 I was trying to get myself into a more normal position. I am more onto the beaten track now.

I know I said that I had no interest in that pawn on turn 10, but I was looking for somewhere to move my bishop anyway and it was offered by you :).

I considered 11. Qa4, but it didn't really lead anywhere and it is sort of risky putting my queen in the middle of your attack. Also moving the bishop wasn't an option because I wanted O-O.

13. You had a useless knight on the edge and I wanted to keep that going for as long as possible. (I actually thought you would take my bishop with your rook instead.) I didn't really move the queen there for your suggested reason. It was actually to guard the knight on c3 from being taken by your bishop, thus isolating the pawn on a2. Furthermore the queen guarded the pawn on b2 which was very undefended.

Good move btw with 13... d5. I quite liked my centre and it looked nasty.

15. Na4 was to attack c5. I noticed that knight was no longer doing anything so I gave it a job. I was still keeping your knight on the board edge.

19. NF3, "Not sure if my opponent intended to do that." I sure did. I know how much you like sac'ing pieces against my King.

!19. Bd6 was a mistake and I think that it lost you the game. Otherwise I think that it was drawish (I had the small advantage of the a and b pawns but there were to many of your pieces to force them through.

23. I was getting my knight to help get my a and b pawns queened.

24. Ra2 was a big mistake by me. The theory was that I could charge my a pawn up and my b pawn would still be defended no matter what. When Rd8 I thought I had lost the knight, but I tried anyway.

Why not 28... Bb3? That was what I was expecting.

I agree it was a mistake to move F5. But not the worst mistake ever. It put you in a worse position, but that only added slightly to the terrible position to start off with. As a percentage decrease of your positional score it was low.

Resigning against most decent players in that senario would be advisable. But you were playing me. I can't do endgames :(.

Anyway, it was intriuging to see some of your views on it. Like move 13. Qd2, I haven't even thought of it as a step closer to doubling up.

Hah, you might not be able to do endgames too well, but even you could win when you're a rook up and my king is at the other side of the board.

I put the game through Chessmaster analysis, and it pretty much agreed with my what I thought were my mistakes, though it did give a few good combinations which would win me a pawn back.

And at the comment about 'how I love sac'ing pieces against your king' yeah, I guess we do know each others playing styles too well :p

We should really analyse our games together more often :p 

What's an opening that Kasparov hasn't lost against?  I've seen that game and I don't think it's a very convincing win for Black (especially since it was a simul).

After cxb5 a6 is good