The aspirant versus the master. Game 1 Slav defence. (Alehkines variation)

The story of an aspirant

We have all heard it before. In order to become strong players, we must fight even stronger players. Our losses should be carefully investigated and learned from. Because I wish to learn and since I have been granted the pleasure of meeting a strong chess player named Mohamad, I am today investigating a 17 move loss!

How did things go so wrong? Let us take a look.

So, the game was lost because of a calculation oversight.

We did however learn other things while analysing the game though.

For example we learned that:

1: Sidelines can be very good, but requires a strong player behind them, so stick to the principled moves first. That's why when Mohamad played a side-line he could win, while me playing the a5 move did not wield good results.

2: In the slav defence, there is a huge difference betwen playing Be7 and c5 if e4 has not yet been pushed. Since e4 should be stopped at high costs, it makes sense to take notice if the opponent is ready to play e4. If that is the case, then c5 should put a halt to it.

(Because of the queen bishop, not the pawn push itself)

3: When we are out of our comfort zone, we play poorly.

After some poor moves from me and it was clear white had a decent position, this resulted in an imminent lose.