Nova Daily - 28 February 2025

Hi!

Today's already the last day of February. The month has gone by even quicker than it'd normally seem. And yet a lot has happened this month. I'll get into it when I'll be writing this month's recap. Probably tomorrow.

Acclaim

I've always been clear that I'm writing my blog primarily for myself, and for no-one else. I'll keep doing so, because I write them with a clear goal in mind. I've mentioned this in several other blogs, so I don't feel the need to repeat myself here. In two short phrases: this is my open journal in which I track my games, structure my thoughts, and force myself to learn from the experiences that I draw from my games.

Sometimes I have a thought that I like to explore based on something that I see, and I think it useful or interesting to share these thoughts with others. There might be something interesting even in seemingly insignificant lines of text; I love to explore these ideas and follow them wherever they may lead.

I'm not writing to gain attention, although I won't pretend that I'm insensitive to other people's opinions: a quick word such as "Hey, I like this" can make my day as much as it can make anyone else's. I'm not fishing for compliments for my work; however, should you find a blog that you like, just let the author know. It costs nothing and makes someone else's day a little bit better.

My journey so far has been something of a trial and error path. I'm exploring, I'm curious, and I'm happy to present what my findings are. When I find something that works for me, I stick to it. And my way of analysing my games and writing my text works for me.

If what I do can inspire someone else in any capacity, I think that that's a beautiful side-benefit to what I'm doing. But I have no ambition to set any standard. I'm writing my own story, I'm following my own path, and so should anyone else. This falls in line nicely with a line from Robert Greene's The Daily Laws which I read recently and which struck a chord immediately:

Follow the master's example. Not his path.

- Robert Greene, The Daily Laws, 27 February

The game

Today's game was a very lovely game with the English. I was somewhat surprised by my opponent's early f7-f5 move, but I think I navigated the waters quite well. At some point I obtained a pawn, and the game became smooth sailing from that point on. I feel very good about the way I've played.

My thoughts:

Model games:

The defining move of this game was 9...f5. During the game I thought of it to be a bit early, for such a pawn break. But even though I wasn't scared of it, the move didn't look that crazy to me.

So what to make of this push? I can see it be played in response to white playing f2-f4 because in those situations the move can work well to close the position down. It could also work well in conjunction with a black pawn on e5, so the pawns can work together as an attacking force.

When looking this move up, I had expected there to be more games involving this move. But it's a relatively rare one, with no games played by black players over 2300. This confirms my suspicion that this pawn push is played too early.

There's one reasonably high-rated game in the chesscom database between Sergey Zablotsky and Evgeny Kolpakov. In this game, white chose to immediately accept black's challenge and blasted open the centre right away. The game only lasted for 23 moves, and unsurprisingly black lost precisely because of the weaknesses that the push of the f-pawn left in its wake: https://www.chess.com/games/view/1195947 

Although I'm happy with the way I played my game, Zablotsky's treatment and quick victory was impressive. It might be a good new go-to.

The analysis:

All in all a pretty straightforward game. My play wasn't perfect but it was good enough to work my opponent off the board.

What can I take away from this game?

1. Against the Anti-King's Indian setup that I play, the manoeuvre 8...Ne8 has its logic in connecting the knight with the d4-square. However, black isn't fully developed yet, and this manoeuvre is rather slow: it takes three moves to place the knight on e6. White can use this time to organise play around the d3-d4 push, which would translate into a nagging space advantage akin to Maroczy Bind positions. This battle of wits would require its own study.
2. Black had no justification for the antipositional 9...f5. There was no defensive purpose to play this as white hadn't played f2-f4 at that moment, nor were there any attacking prospects because black had no chance to make an e5/f5 pawn duo, and the state of development wasn't such that black could develop a kingside initiative any time soon. It only left light-square weaknesses behind. Even though my own plan worked well, I must say I like Zablotsky's approach with 10.exf5 Bxf5 11.d4 to immediately open up the centre.
3. Be on the lookout for tactics: 14...Qd7 could have been punished by 15.Nxf6+ followed by 16.f4 and 17.Bxc5.
4. In this version of the structure, it was better to recapture on d5 with the e-pawn, because this would open up the e-file against black's backward e-pawn.
5. An engine paints a very one-sided picture of the game. A practical player, especially one that's higher rated, would go for moves that provide some chances for activity and counterplay rather than the passive moves that might hold a position together by a thread. Fortune favours the bold, and so it is in chess: the question mark that the engine gave 20...Rae8 is too harsh for how humans play a game. However, the best chances for complications were in the pawn thrust b7-b5, which was missed until the very end of the game.
6. As for practical choices, I firmly stand behind trading queens on move 32. My opponent had less chances for activity, and the game was winning either way.