This seems like a grandmaster game to me.
Draw with Magnus 10. Did I blow a chance to win?
Sort:
I think that is my first game with the Semi Tarrasch. I liked it and I'll be sure to study it since I couldn't find really any counterplay it seemed. Maybe Qa5 was worse than Qc7 but I was kind of thinking in terms of some Grunfeld lines after 4...Nxd5 as it seemed really similar to me and I wasn't sure where the queen would belong so I tried it.
Kramnik is probably my favorite player of all time but I haven't studied any of his Semi Tarrasch games as I had never even heard of this line (only the Tarrasch). That's a shame. It seems that Kramnik's play is just so accurate and that is what really appeals to me.
Sorry about all the undefined spam in the computer analysis, chess.com doesn't recognize some standard symbols that fritz 15 uses in the analysis. The analysis is by Houdini 6 and most of the lines are way over my head. The only things I really gathered were that 7..Qa5 was indeed not that great and 7...cxd4 or 7...Be7 are book moves and better. Another thing is that I could of went for the bishop trade that I kind of wanted on move 25 with 25...Bb5. I didn't do this because I didn't realize that 26.Rxc7 was forced and I thought that 26.Bxb5 was coming first and I didn't necessarily like that line. The move that I played instead (25...Rd8 just planning on doubling on the d-file) loses brilliantly to 26.Bxa6 which I should of seen...
There is a lot of crazy stuff like 31...Bxe4 ,which I was keeping tabs on the idea, that I had no chance of evaluating correctly. I could see the line given but I had no idea if this was good for me or not and I wasn't comfortable with such a big commitment. I didn't make it through all the variations yet (they're crazy) and there is a lot more analysis work needed for me to get a grasp on this game.
SugaR XPrO:
____________________________________________________________________________________________________
Another take by Stockfish from lichess:
Please take a look at my final analysis of the game and feel free to give lines and ideas I might of missed. I think that this game was particularly instructive compared to most of my games.
I have added this to the edited OP and will make further changes there as they come.
Thank you for your time!
In the 7...cxd4 then 11...Nc6 is the traditional line. Lots of classic games for white, especially by Spassky. Nowdays top players, including Kramnik, are playing 11...Nd7. Probably something to do with dealing with the d5 break.
I felt like I could of got more out of the opening but the only move I felt was probably bad was 50...a4? where 50...Kh6 was probably the right move or at least better. My opening seemed quite passive and I spent a lot of time responding to my opponent well into the middlegame but I'm not sure how I could of got more out of it. It almost felt like I tried a bad attempt at a Grunfeld like position that is clearly way worse than a normal one and maybe g7 followed by Bg7 was way better and I would be willing to bet it was. I thought about it, but I'm not a huge fan of the fianchetto and maybe I need to get over this. I also know that the Grunfeld is very theoretical and so I tried to keep my position "safer" in a sense because if I'm not mistaking the Grunfeld is a very sharp opening. At around move 26 I was feeling like I had equalized and I almost thought that I had the initiative even but I don't think I was able to generate anything. 29...Kf8 was just a waiting move because I had no idea what to do and I was very happy when 30.g3 was played. The knight maneuver starting with 32...Ng8 was a plan to put the knight where my light-squared bishop is and then press b5 but it didn't work out and probably was a dubious plan to begin with. 39...e5 was the hardest move of the game for me. I really didn't like 40.d5 in response to it but I also really didn't like the thought of my opponent playing e5 first. I had actually been planning on a bishop for knight trade for a while but I didn't think that it would work any more. Then again, after d5 white's pawns are on the same color as my bishop so this was probably the best move and I would still play it as of now. On 41.Rb1 I got kind of scared again and I think white was probably better here. I was really worried that I was going to lose my b-pawn and then I started thinking about a possible b6 move but I couldn't get that variation to work. I lucked out that my rook was on the 6th rank or 43.Bxa6 would of been devastating. I was fairly happy that I got to use my knight to make my long anticipated 46...b5 move. Here we get to 50...a4? which I feel is the worse move of the game as far as I can see. I could see the rook check from here and I couldn't stop it, the rook is penetrating and white looks good here. I didn't see that I also lose a pawn though with 53.Nxe5 (I think 53.Nxg5 is interesting too, I would play this move if I saw this idea, but I can't really tell which is better and I bet the Magnus 10 computer played the better move) and I thought I was losing for sure here but maybe not. I can't find a win for white after winning a pawn but that isn't saying much. The rest of the game was straight-forward in my opinion.
This game was played with no time limit and with no takebacks. Magnus 10 didn't accept a draw and I had to play it all the way out but I clipped that since it had no value. It took me a little over 3 hours to play this game and the computer moves instantly.
You're thoughts and feedback are welcome. Thank you in advance for your help.
____________________________________________________________________________________________________
Up to date edited analysis: