Dramatic and unnecessary sacrifices with a generous portion of blunders.

A friend and I finished this nearly 50-move game yesterday and I wanted to go over it again.  I thought it was interesting as there was a time when he seemed to have thought I had the upperhand whereas during the game, I was constantly struggling for equilibrium, which I successfully avoided.  Constructive comments welcome.

You said early on that you were loath to make so many pawn moves, then proceed to make two more in as many moves. I don't see the reasoning behind 8...d6, when 8...Be7 was better.

I think you could have got away with 11...hxg5 12. fxg5 Nd7 when the king is probably safer in the middle for the time being.

• i hear that one should, as a general rule, only move two pawns in the first 10 moves... something like this, no?  recently, i keep making more and more pawn moves even though i really didn't feel comfortable doing it.
• 8. ... d6 was a precaution to counter a potential pawn attack to the knight at f6, unnecessary if the knight has a safe square to retreat to.  maybe a habit i've picked up, a bad one.
  
• capturing at g5 was what the computer analysis insisted was the preferred move (about 15 moves until i actually did it!  also, i know the rules for these forums state no computer analysis, but i posted before i read that.)  i was worried about the advanced pawn coming down that was which was protected by the rook.  and you were right, the king was safer in the middle at that time.  as a beginner, i think castling sooner is better... not always true.

thank you for your comment!

There are a lot of options after 1. e4 c5 2.f4, and the 2. ... Nc6 that you played, opting for a more standard Sicilian, is fine. 2. ... d5 and g6 score well also.

3. ... a6 looks okay, if possibly a bit suboptimal and premature. Since you haven't pushed the d-pawn yet, Bb5 isn't such a big deal. Again, 3. ... d5 might be an interesting idea to respond to 3. c3.

4. ... b5 doesn't seem thrilling, I guess it does keep the Bishop out of c4 and facilitiate playing d5, but since you didn't seem to be planning to push d5 at any point, b5 seems a bit pointless.

I also prefer 8. ... Be7 rather than d6.

At first glance, it seems like accepting the Knight sacrifice on move 11 is defensible enough because White's pieces aren't co-ordinated to follow up the attack, and you haven't committed to a kingside castle. By the time you do make the capture 9 moves later, White's pieces are co-ordinated to attack your weakened Kingside, where you've also castled, which is how I think that built up into an inaccurate move.

Move 21, I took a quick glance for what a good alternative to the mistake ou made there. I'm thinkng perhaps Rfe8. White's threat of an e5 push looks dangerous by opening the scope of his light squared bishop. Mobilizing some heavy pieces on the e-file and giving the king an escape on f8 seems decent.

I'm glad you're finding the game instructive, which I think it is for a player of your level.

Yes, you played well for someone rated 1448, and if you were (unnecessarily) wary of accepting the knight sacrifice, at least it shows a healthy awareness of the dangers of such a move. With practice and experience you'll more naturally be able to appraise positions like that, and probably see that there's little danger in just taking the knight.

Besides, even if it is dangerous, at least then you get an opportunity to practice defending against a strong attack. If you can't see a reason not to win material, then do it. If there is a reason, you'll probably find out what it is shortly.

coordination of pieces, something you alluded to in the other points, especially about opening moves, is something that i'm grateful to have when i'm in a bind, but was just lucky if it already happened to be like that.  it's hard for me to see how to create harmony between my pieces from the beginning.

i posted this game because not only would i like to improve (first time to annotate a game) and it was a recent loss, but also because both my opponent and the computer said i had initiative (right word?) at some point... but i didn't realize it.  and the ending was quite grueling for me.

nice... it's too complicated for me to think like that on my own: moving the knight to d5 where it's guarded by a pawn, but of course, white won't worry about that and can't capture the attacking bishop as that is protected by the knight.  perfect.

Truthfully I'll sacrafice any piece according to the situation. If my opponent have less power pieces; such as the bishop, knight or rook. I'll sacrafice a bishop to open up the pawn attack. I don't like to let my opponent get to close with them pawns and have that queen lerkin' in the back. So my sacrafice matters the situation.

@ChessMasterShiva: yeah, i make lots of sacrifices, more often unintentionally. 

@matalino: thanks for taking time to look at this game and even coming up with a winning line after my blunder of castling when i did.  despite the moves being what they are, i'm not sure if i understand them clearly.  i'm reposting the moves you made and annotating those as much as i can understand them.  (my ignorance will ring through, i'm sure!)

and here's the first variation that matalino made so that black would have won... i need to see it in picture form.