QGD Tarrasch Game

I have been trying out the Tarrasch Defense in daily games recently. Results so far have not been encouraging. Trying to win the game using an isolated Queen pawn as black seems more challenging than just trying to trade down and then capture the weak pawn as White.

This game was against a higher rated opponent, so that could be the reason I lost rather than my choice of opening. The CAPS says 87% for me (better than my average) and 95% for my opponent (the kind of number I normally associate with Grandmasters).

Did my opponent play well or did I play badly? Should I keep going with the Tarrasch Defense and learn to get better at the middlegames? I am considering switching to the Nimzo-Indian but that is probably a more complicated opening than the Tarrasch. I find the standard QGD games a bit boring and only played the Slav and QGA openings once or twice.

its a good game, though yea, in ur middlegame, opponent played excellent, ur pawn structure was quite mismatched on queen side, and maybe you might have pushed the d pawn a bit early, openings not bad, havent faced it or played it ever yet, so cant say for certain, but seems like a solid and good opening. =)))

There’s nothing wrong with the Tarrasch. You played well your opponent just had a better game. Honestly I’d go with the nimzo Indian. It’s a much more flexible opening and it equalizes for black much easier

You had nothing to complain about from the opening 11Bxf6 , and 12Nxc6 isn't very good and gave you two nice bishops and a centre.  You threw away your advantages with 17....BxN and subsequent exchanges.

Yes that's the point. The game followed the main line and I have learned the best opening moves, but after the game went out of book I started to make mistakes and got outplayed.

those are the games that you learn the most from

I think you played well until you miscalculated and dropped a pawn. There are a number of points where I'd play a different move but your moves were also good (until you gave up your dark square bishop).  For me, I'd play Re8 early since its clear it belongs there & not so clear where your other pieces go. Then you'd need to decide what your general plan should be. 1: play to advance the hanging pawns or 2. Play for pressure on e2 and the kingside attack. For #2 I'd follow with Bg4 Q-d7-f5 then h5-h4 etc or, if you play Bg4 & white plays h3, Bf5-e4 and doubling rooks on king file. But your idea of Qa5 is also good. Ba6 maybe less so, you could play Bg4 and Qa6 for example. Overall, you played well & had the better game for a long time and made an incorrect exchange then dropped a pawn thru miscalculation.  [of course, all just my opinion]

Very tough game, which all came down to a few crucial moments. 

I think if I had to say one thing, it seemed like you were too focussed on making something happen, to the detriment of your position. 

I don't think you ever had any more than a slight advantage with best play from White, but when you have long term advantages such as extra material or the bishop pair, it goes a long way to simply defend your weaknesses, and make your opponent work to find counterplay. The position before ...Bxc3? is either better for Black or equal, but you did the work for your opponent by giving away your trump card - he didn't have to prove anything.

Hope this helped. 

Thank you for your help.

I can see now that the key mistake was on move 17. Here it was not that I thought it was a great move, just that I could see that it simplified the position, and could not see any other strong candidate moves. The alternatives 17...Rbc8 and Be7 it is hard to see what they will achieve as it is not clear to me what white will do next. So perhaps the root problem is not being able to properly evaluate those more quiet moves.

I think in the majority of my middlegames I am focused on creating an attack of some sort. In these Tarrasch middlegames I see now that this is often not the right approach. Sometimes it is not the right approach in many other types of games either and I always struggle in those positions.

So either this is the type of game that does not suit my style of play, or it is an opening that presents an opportunity to make big improvements to my middlegame skills. I don't usually play 1.d4 as white but even if I did I doubt I would come across the Tarrasch Defense at my level, so I don't have any experience of playing from the White side, but to me the positions generally tend to look simpler for White.

Similarly I have played some Panov-Botvinnik games where white is up a pawn but there are so many areas for black to attack which is very hard for white to defend.

"Did my opponent play well or did I play badly?"
++ You were doing well. 17...Bxc3? cedes your advantage of the bishop's pair for no reason.
Tarrasch Defence is sound. It was played exclusively by young Kasparov.

https://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=1070105 

„He who fears an isolated Queen's Pawn should give up Chess.“ - Tarrasch

The dynamic piece activity compensates the static weakness of the isolated pawn.

"Should I keep going with the Tarrasch Defense and learn to get better at the middlegames?"
++ Yes, definitely.

"I am considering switching to the Nimzo-Indian but that is probably a more complicated opening than the Tarrasch."
++ That is jumping from the frying pan into the fire. In the Nimzovich Indian Defence you often have to part with the bishop's pair early on and then prove you can survive.

https://en.chessbase.com/post/tata-steel-chess-2022-r13 

"I find the standard QGD games a bit boring and only played the Slav and QGA openings once or twice." Queen's Gambit Declined is not boring at all. Slav and Queen's Gambit Accepted have their own fine points. Just pick one defence and stick to it so as to accumulate experience. Tarrasch is a fine choice, so are the other.

To paraphrase Bruce Lee:
I do not fear the man who has played 1000 openings;
I fear the man who has played 1 opening 1000 times.

It's easy to search for a very long time for a repertoire that gets you the positions you want or are comfortable in every single game, without ever reaching a satisfactory result. 

Sadly, I did this for a lot of my improvement journey, and still I sometimes instinctively blame my opening repertoire when I lose a game.

I tend to change my openings regularly - though I find this is an enjoyable process and one through which I can learn about a wide range of positions, it sometimes means my knowledge lacks depth in any one area. 

You can't get a good attacking position in every game - and as long as your middlegame skills are limited to either attacking things or trading things, you will always run into problems when your opponent guides the game into a positions where other considerations are required. 
Attacking is a great skill and gives you good candidate moves, but it is not the only important skill. 

I'd suggest at the moment that you just stick with the openings you've put the most time into and take each game like this one as an opportunity to learn a wider range of skills and adapt your approach to future games. 

I also recommend working on patience. In the words of Tarrasch: 
"When you don't know what to do, wait for your opponent to get an idea - it is sure to be bad."
While this comment is a bit cynical and tongue in cheek, sometimes it really is the best approach  

queen' gambit must be accepted