Alas, will no one comment?
Bath Chess Club Game #2
Sort:
I don't think the Bg5-xf6 maneouvre was fundamentally flawed, but it's not something I'd play. I would have developed with Be3 (after all, that was the point of playing f3 in the first place; you needn't have wasted a tempo otherwise).
I also don't think the ...Qh4+ was a flaw in your plan - really it depends on what your plan is. Perhaps you should have developed a more concrete plan of attack, rather than just controlling the d5 square.
13. Nd5 was premature, in my opinion. Better to play 13. Kb1, when you're free to develop your queen to g2 or f2.
Either 16. or 17. Rg1 would have been very strong, attacking the king on the open g-file. I think you're right that the queen tactic you went for in the game was kind of beside the point of the position.
The queen on d4 is very strong, and after 17. Rg1, 17...Bf6 18. Nxf6 Qxf6?? 19. Qxf6 Kh1 20. Qxg7#, while 17...f6 forces a weakness in black's position, while also trapping the bishop on h4, rendering it near useless. You would then dominate the kingside and the centre of the board, and should win from there.
Hi Folks. This is my second game played at the Bath chess club, against a player ECF105. Although I lost the game, it was a cracker; 50 moves of swashbuckling sicilian.
I would really appreciate some comments here. I either made a strategic blunder, or my strategy was good but my middlegame technique was inadequate to carry out my plan. Basically, after my opponant had played ...e5, I figured that success in the game would depend on controlling the d5 square. I therefore gambled: I gave up my dark-squared bishop to remove the Knight that was defending d5, and tried to take control of it. Unfortunately, black's dark-squared bishop managed to casue structural damage, due to my castling too late, and ended up being very powerful in the endgame. Should I have kept the bishop pair? Or was my control of d5 strageically sound, but let down by poor tactics? I'd appreciate thoughts.