Match 2: 2022 Australia Day Tournament final round - Vienna Game Giraffe Attack!

#ViennaGame #GiraffeAttack 

I managed to make it to the third and final round of the Team Australia, 2022 Australia Day Tournament (Division 3) on chess.com!  This is match 2 of 8 and I managed to win match 1!

I entered the final round with the lowest rating.  The contestants:

• vitualis (the chess noob!) - 1158
• @gothedogs - 1159
• @KnightBeatsAll - 1186
• @edwardsl - 1229
• @flylikeaD6 - 1266

I'm really excited that I'll have a good chance of coming within the top three and getting a (virtual) medal!  I'm going to covering each of my matches, win or lose, in this round.

Match 2 (https://www.chess.com/game/daily/426285963) was against @flylikeaD6 where I had the white pieces.  I play the Vienna Game (1. e4 e5 2. Nc3) and my opponent responds with an early bishop move, the Anderssen Defense (2... Bc5).  I'd only very recently created a video and article on the unsound but very fun Giraffe Attack (https://www.chess.com/blog/vitualis/win-with-the-giraffe-attack-in-the-vienna-game) (3. Qg4) that's available in this position.  Do I dare?! Yes!

My opponent responds with the second most common response to the Giraffe Attack by pushing forward their g-pawn (3... g6) and I smiled.  This represents a permanent weakness to my opponent's king-side defence that can, and will, be exploited!  Stockfish's evaluation is [+0.57] favouring White.

A few moves later on move 9, I lost my nerve.  This was the same feeling I had in the first match where doubt gnawed at me, and not able to see a winning attack, I play a conservative backwards queen move (9. Qe2) to allow my knight on g1 the square to develop.  Stockfish calls this an inaccuracy [-0.47], preferring an immediate aggressive attack with the dark square bishop to h6, taking advantage of the weakened dark squares in front of the castled Black king - the consequence of playing g6 against the Giraffe Attack.

Nonetheless, chess continues.  My opponent brings their queen to f6 (9... Qf6), lining up a potentially double-attack with their own dark square bishop on c5 on my weak f-pawn.  However, this attack is illusory and can simply be blocked with natural development of the knight (10. Nf3) which was my next planned move.

The next series of move demonstrate the geometric problem with the pawn on g6, and why Black's attempted and aborted counterattack with their queen on f6 was a mistake.  I develop my bishop normally (11. Bg5) and it comes with an attack on the Black queen.  It has almost nowhere good to go and so retreats to the "fianchetto" position (11... Qg7) of g7!  Next, I slide my queen over to form a battery with that dark square bishop (12. Qd2) and my opponent has one final chance to block the bishop's attack on h6, which will skewer Black's queen and king.  They miss and blunder, and their position collapses with Stockfish giving the evaluation at almost [+5].

My opponent now lashes out with a desperate bishop sacrifice with check (13... Bxf2+), but this doesn't work.  My king is safe.  Now up a piece, my goal was to force simplification.  First the queen, then the light square bishop, and then, the knight.  My opponent could have saved that knight with a backwards knight move, but their forward progression allowed me to "trap" it, insofar that their only good option was to trade knights.

On move 25, I managed to critically exploit Black's undeveloped queen-side knight and rook by getting one of my rooks to their back rank (25. Re8).  This pinned their pieces in place.  A little manoeuvring later, Black lost their rook without compensation and checkmate of imminent.  They resigned and I won my second match in the final round!