Just a game against GM Sergey Kudrin from the 2013 Cleveland Open that I thought I'd share. Comments and analysis are welcome!
nice game it was very interesting
Ne7+ was your downfall, throwing gasoline on the fire. You might have been better just moving your Q and playing for Nc7. Maybe. Thanks for the game!
Isn't 22. Ne7+ forced? If I move the queen, he can just take the knight I believe...I still get the fixed pawn structure and open bishop as compensation, but with the Bishop off of e6 the recapture doesn't come with tempo anymore...hmm...
Nice game. Thanks for posting it, it's always instructive to see just how ruthless very strong players are with punishing inaccuracies / positional play. I'm nowhere near as strong a player as you are, but I remember my first game against a master. I was fine up until about move 12 (theory), I played a (somewhat) inaccurate rook move and got my ass handed to me from then on out. Looking back, I couldn't even pinpoint where it all went wrong until he told me. A real insight into their thought process.
Hmm, Na4 does look better. What alternatives do you see on move 16 though? Bc2 seemed natural, targetting a4, defending the weak b3 square, and opening my rook on the file - but I missed how annoying ...Bxe3 would be
Yeah, ItsEoin, I still don't know exactly where I lost the game, even with Houdini's help! He just slowly punished my slightly inferior moves, with the help of a couple clear mistakes by me
Yeah, he played it almost immediately, haha
It's just me, but in the opening since your avantage looks to be on the Queenside, instead of 12.Rc1 I would prefer 12.Rb1 with the aim of a b4 push (supported with a eventual a3). A b5 breaktrough in the future may looks prosperous for White and would had given the c4-pawn a bigger role than it has served at the actual game. But again, it 's just me so...
Very Interesting game, thanks for sharing:)
Changing my answer. Preventing his ...a4 with a4 or Na4 as mentioned (why do patzers like myself see knight-to-the-rim moves immediately... and LIKE them? ) would have negated the Nd5 business altogether. Hence, no forced checks or sacs (Nxf6+??) were needed. Let's hear it for Houdini with its line. Better to complicate than to capitulate. Anyway, thanks again.
I'm guessing 15...a4 was also fairly immediate by GM Kudrin. The "one pawn holding up two" structure is common and strong, so much so that you needed 15. Na4 to prevent that. After that you could still even play for b4.
After 17. fxe3, white is positionally lost (since black is a GM). No b4, d4 or f4 available, black has c5 and can target e4 and c4. Better to sac a pawn for some compensation than to sac structure for no compensation.
To my untrained eye, it looks like you overlooked/underestimated black's positional (structural) advantages, and allowed him to get them with no compensation in terms of piece activity or usable lines.
Quick EDIT: If you want alternatives, I looked at the somewhat mental 15. Bxc5 (avoiding ...Bxe3) Nxc5 16. b4 axb4 (16...Nxd3 17. Qxd3 Rfd8 18. Qe2 and white tries to use the c-file; and if ...c5, the d5-square) 17. axb4 Nb3 18. Rb1 Ra3 19. b5.
is 14. Nd5 any good?
Nice game, deep thinking.
Did you have the opportunity to ask him for advice after the game ?
Unfortunately not; he disappeared as I was packing up my set!
That's a really cool game. Gotta be proud that you were able to launch an attack against a GMs king, even if it was fruitless. I mean, I would have just been mowed down. I don't think anything needs to necessarily "go wrong" in order to lose to a GM, it's more like you need a lot of things to go very right, and you didn't have enough in the tank. I loved 21. Nd5! and 28...g5!