Ian Wells and David Bronstein, Defenders of the Truth!

Recently, Simaginfan published a nice blog post about Alexander Kotov. 
https://www.chess.com/blog/simaginfan/alexander-kotov-some-games-just-because-i-like-them 

One of the photos has Kotov playing against a young British prodigy, Ian Wells. Simaginfan also wrote a wonderful post about Wells:

https://www.chess.com/blog/simaginfan/ian-wells-only-the-good-die-young-a-personal-memory   

In the comments section Simaginfan shared with us a game in which Wells, playing Black, demonstrates the truth about a position. Here is a position from that game (with comments by Simaginfan):

Now, two things happened when I saw this game. First of all, it reminded immediately of a game in which Bronstein, playing Black, defended a similar position, and won, against Tal in 1961! In the Wells game, the position arose from a Caro-Kann (Panov Attack), but in the Tal-Bronstein game, the position arose from a Scandinavian Defense! Now, in 1961 Tal was not exactly a patzer!

Bronstein played the Scandinavian 19 times in his chess career, with a score of 5 wins, 4 losses and 10 draws!

Second of all, the second thing is that I noticed some differences between the two games. In the Tal-Bronstein game, White played his bishop to c4, trying to protect the d5-pawn with a battery that included Qb3, Bc4 and Nc3. This failed. One of Black's maneuvers was to play Bf5 and Ne4, activating his pieces and putting a question mark to the knight at c3.

In the Wells game, played 20 years after the Tal-Bronstein game, White had improved on his idea of trying to keep the d5-pawn by playing his bishop to f3, therefore maintaining control over the e4-square and making it a bit harder for Black to activate his pieces. 

To his credit, Wells was able to neutralize White's formation, therefore teaming up with Bronstein in demonstrating the Truth about this position: that it is not so easy for White to keep the extra pawn and his space advantage. Black has enough counterplay!