8. ...Qc7 was more accurate than 0-0 as it develops the Queen with tempo on the f4 pawn, forcing 9. g3 (weakens whites position).
anyway, to move 22.
Rules:
Trade when up in material (heeded)
Don't trade your active pieces for the opponents inactive ones.
Rook on 7th rank
Bishops love long diagonals
For this reason, trading down with only a small material advantage is not as meaningful as the other rules. So 22. ... Rd2 or 22. ... Bb5 (with a view to move Bc6) achieve strategic goals in timely way, given the f4 pawn is still under threat.
move 28. was also meaninful, as it represents who gets the endgame advantage of King in the centre. 28. Bf4 would have forced Kg1 keeping white innactive.
around move 32, now the board is open, the 2 bishops can do a better job of attack and defense than the rook can, so locking down the a-file pawn (with pawn+bishop) and targeting it (via other bishop) will tie white to the defense, upon which THEN blacks kingside pawn advantage can start rolling and white will not be able to handle 2 weaknesses (isolated pawn on one side / and material minority on the other).
Bishop Pair vs Rook; I'm clueless..
Nice game, Just a few general technique tips like you asked:
In any rook + ____ vs two rooks + _____ the two rooks are diminished in power due to being slightly redundant (compared to your 1 rook). There is actually a general rule that the side with the two rooks wants to trade a pair off so that now it's your ____ vs their rook + _____. So your move 22 is a small victory for your opponent...
but having said that, two bishops are definitely better than a rook, so you were still winning, not a big deal. Seems you weren't aware of this rule of thumb though.
---
You criticize your 33rd move, but I like it. If you can get the configuration a4 Bb3 then white's a pawn is as good as dead. If for some reason white decides to defend it with Ra1, well, he's down a rook lol.
So I didn't like it when you allowed the queenside pawns to be traded. Also this is part of the reason your opponent got a draw... I'm sure you've heard the side ahead wants to trade pieces, and the side behind wants to trade pawns. Pawns are the lifeblood of your endgame winning chances.
---
Just clicking through the game, 52...f3 definitely looked like it was about to queen, I have to admit white's 53rd move surprised me, that sneaky wrong color bishop draw.
Having said that, just general technique when you have endgame bishop and king supporting a passed pawn, it's not ideal to let the pawn get ahead of everyone. It tends to block the king and/or the bishop. Ideally the king and/or bishop get ahead of the pawn and clear a path. In this endgame you were up a lot of material so it seemed safe, but in more equal endgames this can also be a way to stumble into a draw.
"The general rule is to trade down when you're up material, and that's what I was thinking of. "
There is another "rule" that you "broke": "Do not trade of active pieces for passive ones".
In general, for every chess "rule" or "proverb" there is another that contradicts it. There are no rules that automatically tell you what to do. he best that these so-called "rules" can do is to suggest what moves you ought to be looking at. But you have to use your intelligence, intuition, tactical skill, calculating ability and judgement to decide which rule "applies" in any specific position.
Thanks for the tips. Yeah I probably gave a slightly skewed impression of what I was thinking with the trade; it was more along the lines of "this probably isn't best but it makes the position simpler and it's generally good to do this when up material". I recognised while playing it that I should be looking for more/better options, but even in 30|0 I don't find I have lots of time to really think and construct plans (I am slow..). I did realise that the position was still better for me, and I know the bishop pair is considered superior to a lone rook, and certainly knew I should be the one pushing for a win (which eventually went quite well before f3).
At the guy with the binary string name, I did think about possibly fixing the pawn and going after it with my bishop, neglected to mention that I believe.
So I stuck this game into the computer and something very funny happened. The first 21 moves, it loves everything. Well, I think it was something like 18 "excellent" and 3 "good". And it wasn't a boring opening/early middlegame , it was reasonably complex stuff. Then move 22 I make an inaccuracy, and suddenly after seemingly every move for a while it's screaming "inaccuracy", "inaccuracy", "inaccuracy". What happened? Well, I traded into a bishop pair vs rook (with me having in addition an extra pawn, 6 vs 5, but weaker pawn structure). Now, trading into this endgame was probably a poor decision to begin with, but even so, I'd like to know how I could have played this better. Especially during the earlier portion of the endgame, when I don't really have a plan, I don't really know what the point of computer moves is. Later on in the endgame I was clearly pushing my pawns, and seemed to be getting somewhere, but blundered into a drawn endgame from a massive winning advantage (I simply forgot that the configuration was drawn lol).
Note that I know computer analysis is not God so forgive me for talking about it so much.
Since I got a winning position for a long time in this endgame, maybe it is hasty of me to be so critical of my play during the majority of it, and I should instead focus on the ridiculous drawing blunder, but I would still prefer to improve my technique.
Forgot to label. I am black, this is a Rapid 30|0 game, I was around 1640 and my opponent around 1600.