Bishop's Opening | Middlegame and Endgame RUMBLE!
#bishopsopening #twoknights #italian #middlegame #endgame #tactics
I had this rather exciting game today where we had a battle in the middlegame and endgame! I had the Black pieces and White opened with the Bishop's Opening (1. e4 e5 2. Bc4). The Bishop's Opening is potentially quite a tricky opening. As I've not familiar with the tricks in this opening, I usually play conservatively in a manner that typically steers the game back into a Two Knights, Italian. This often works as if White refuses, they often end up in a significantly worse opening.
In this game, we did end up into a typical Two Knights, Italian position and in the early middlegame, I delay castling with some semi-aggressive moves to try to have some centre trades. By move 10, I get what I was hoping for - a reasonably strong centre of pawns, White has traded away their relatively strong light square bishop that was looking at f7, and I have a semi-open f-file which I can now take advantage of with kingside castling, and the evaluation is even equal [0.00].
On move 16, White strikes out with the knight (16. Kf4), which was a mistake, but I didn't see White's tactic. One move later, (17. Ng6) White had a fork of my queen and rook - oh no! This was a great move. My approach at this point was to make the best of my position: accepting that the rook on f8 was lost. So, the tactics: create as many threats as possible, and to act fast. White trades away their most active piece and I replace the rook with a previously undeveloped rook. As White's own rook on a1 has yet to be developed, the loss of material won't immediately be felt. Moreover, as we each still have 7 pawns on the board, the rooks at relatively weaker and the knights relatively stronger at this phase of the game.
In the latter part of the middlegame, I've managed to mostly bind up the position, so that it wasn't easy for White to find a way to take advantage of their rook pair. At the same time, I used threats - pawn pushes and a check to create a sense of psychological discomfort. The knight seemed to hold the position together, so this was a bait, and an invitation, for White to trade one of their rooks for my knight. And on move 34, White cracked under the pressure and decided to get rid of my pesky knight with a trade! However, this meant that I have survived a losing middlegame, and we now entered an equal rook and pawn endgame!
On move 38, it was clear to me that White's best move was probably to repeat moves, and so, I offered a draw. I personally would have been happy with a draw here. However, White refused, and this resulted in a relative concession. I say "relative" as Stockfish on high depth thinks that the position was still drawn [0.00], but at lower depth, gives an advantage to Black. The interpretation here is that the position is simply easier to play with Black. This can be understood as I have a couple of tactical advantages - my pawns are closer to promotion and my rook has cut off the White king, while my own king was developed.
What this means is that where my mistakes would potentially lead to draws, White's mistakes could result in a loss! Rook and pawn endgames are complicated! On move 51, I thought I had a winning position, but curiously, Stockfish still called it a draw. White played a completely human move (51. Rd7). On the surface, this makes sense as White needs keep vision on the d-file, where my passed pawn might promote, and keep vision on their pawn on b7, one step away from promoting. This move, however, was a blunder. That tactical resource of their king being trapped on the back rank by my rook? One of the consequences of this is the risk of back rank mate of forward movement is also restrained by a king and/or pawns! So, (51. Rb1#)! GG!
Game on chess.com: https://www.chess.com/game/live/83893828433
